AN INTRODUCTION TO
THE OLD TESTAMENT IN GREEK
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS
C. ]". CLAY, Mana<;kr
1ianl5on: FETTER LANV:, E.C
Etimlnirglj : loo PRINCES STREET
^
i.'i
^
I*i
M
|sf
i^
5&'^-
lierlhf. A. ASHER AND CO.
Ufipjig: F A. IJkOCKHAUS
f.fto ijoil;: <;. P. PUTNAM'S SONS
Liamlms) nut) enhtida; MACMII.T.AN AND Cj , Ltd.
rorouto: J. M. DENT AND SONS, Ltd.
rohuo: THE MARUZEN-KAliUSHlKI-KAISHA
First Edition, ujoo. Revised, 1902. Seeond Edition, 1914.
>4// ri splits reserved
IN PIAM MEMORIAM
EBERHARDI NESTLE
Vu. ET Tn.FX
VI Rf, SI QVIS ALIVS, DE HIS STUDIIS
OPriME MERiri
HVIVS Ol'ERIS ADlVTORiS HVMANISSIMl
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.
WHEN some two years ago it became clear that
a reprint of this Introduction would shortly be
required, the Syndics of the Press at my request put the
revision, which I was unable to undertake, into the
hands of a scholar already known to students of the
Greek Old Testament by his Book of Isaiah according
to the Septuagint. Mr Ottley, while leaving intact the
form and even the pagination of the Introduction, has
made every endeavour to bring the contents up to the
present state of knowledge. This has been done partly
by a careful revision of the text and the occasional
rewriting of a paragraph, partly by writing new footnotes
and a large number of valuable additional notes, and
by expanding the bibliographical lists that follow each
chapter, which after the lapse of so many years were
necessarily defective.
I cannot sufficiently express my gratitude to Mr Ottley
for the unremitting labour which he has expended on my
book, and I am confident that future readers will share
my sense of obligation. I venture to hope that, thus
revised, the Introduction may continue for some years to
be of service to those who are entering on the study of
the Greek Old Testament.
H. B. S.
Camrridoe,
May II, r9i4.
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDmON.
THIS book is an endeavour to supply a want wliich
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 iorerunner 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
IX
to tlie 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 foim 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 which 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 reter-
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
end.
H. B. S.
Camtiridge,
CONTENTS.
PART I.
THE HISTORY OF THE GREEK OLD TESTAMENT
AND OF ITS TRANSMISSION.
PAGES
CHAPTER I.
_, The Alexandrian Greek Version i — 28
f
CHAPTER II.
Later Orctk Versions 29 — 58
CHAPTER III.
The Hexapla, and the Hexaphirir and otlier Recensions
of the Septuagint 59 — 86
CHAI^TER IV.
Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint . . 87 — 121
CHAPTER V.
Manuscripts of the Septuagint 122 — 170
CHAPTER \I.
I'rinted Texts of tlie Septuagint . . . , 171 — 194
^•j Contents.
TART 11.
THE CONTENTS OF THE ALEXANDRIAN OT.D
TESTAMENT.
PACER
CHAPTER I.
Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of the Books . 197—230
CHAPTER H.
Books of the Hebrew Canon 231—264
CHAPTER HI.
y Books not included in the Hebrew Canon . . 265 — 28S
CHAPTER IV.
The Greek of the Septuagint 2S9--314
CHAPTER V.
The Septuagint as a Version 315 — 341
CHAPTER VI.
Text divisions: .S7/</;/, Chapters, Lections, Gi'/<?;;.7(',&c. 342 — 366
PART III.
LITERARY USE, VALUE, AND TEXTUAL CONDITION OF
THE GREEK- OLD TESTAMENT.
CHAPTER I.
Literary use of the Septuagint by non-Christian Hel-
lenists 369— 3S0
CHAPTER II.
Quotations from the Soptiiagint in the New Testninent 381 — 405
Contents. xiii
CHAPTER 111.
ADDITIONAL NOTES.
pp. 498-530
I' AGES
.Quotations from the Scpluagint in early (Jluibtian
writings 406 — 432
CHAPTER IV.
riie Cretl< Veisions as aids to Biblical Study . • 433 — 461
CHAPTER V.
inllucnce of the Septuagint on Christian Liltraliire . 402 — 477
CHAPTER VI.
Textual condition of the Scptuayint, and problems
arising out of it . 478 — 497
ArPENDlX.
The Letter of Pseudo-Aristkas.
Introduction ';33 — 55^
Te.M 551—606
INDICES.
i. Index of Biblical references ..... 609— 616
ii. index ol bubjetl-matter 617-626
PART I.
THE HISTORY OF THE GREEK OLD TESTAMENT
AND OE IJS TRANSMISSION.
PART I.
CHAPTER I.
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 teacliing to a source of this kind^
Thus Aristobulus {ap. Clem. Al. strovi. i. 22; cf Eus. praep.
ev. xiii. 12) writes: KarrjKoXovO-qKe 8e Kal 6 IlAaTwv TT7 KaO'
1 Individual cases, such as that of the Jew mentioned by Clearchus
{a/>. Jos. c. Ap. I, 22), who was EX\7;ct(cdy oi) t^ diaX^KTcp ndfov dXXa Kal rrj
f'''XV> 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, Phryi^ia i. ii. p. 667 fT.
* This belief was inherited by the Chrislian school of Alexandria; see
Clcni. Strom, v. 2y, Orig. c. Cels. iv. jy, vi. 19; and cf. Lact. ins/, iv. 2.
S. S. I
The Alexandrian Greek Version.
)]ixa<; vofioOea-La, kol <fiavep6<; ecm Trcptcpyao-aju-cvos CKaora twi'
iv OLVTrj Xeyojxevwv. ^LrjpfxrjvevTat Sc -rrpb ArjfirjTpLov vcf> crepou',
Trpo Trjs 'AXe^dvBpov kol Hepawv lTn.KpaTrj(T€w<;, ra T€ Kara tt]v
i^ AiyuTTTOu i^aywyijv twv 'E^patwv Twi' rffxiripoiv ttoXltw koX
rj Ttov yeyovoTwv aTraVTwv avTOi<i CTrtcjiaveia Kai KparrjCTLS Trjs
;(wpas Kttt T^s oA?7s vo/xodecria^ iTrt^rjyrjcn'; — 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-Aiisteas to Demetrius of Phalerum : tov vofiov
Tcov 'lovSatcoi/ /3L/3Xia...ov)(^ ws vTrap)(€t (reaypiavTaL, Ka6o)<; vtto twv
dSoTOiv 7rpocrava(/)ep6rat*. But no 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 ^
2. The earliest and most important of the extant Greek
versions of the Old Testament was an offspring of the 'Greek
Dispersion ' (?/ Siao-Tropo. twv 'EXkrjvwv, Jo. vii. 35), which began
with the conquests of Alexander the Greats
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
haa-TTopd (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. X*), 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
1 5t' er^pwi', Ens.
2 See Tischendorf, V. T. Gr. (I'i'ig) prolegg. p. xiii. n.
* Cf. Walton (ed. Wiangliam), p. 18; Frankel, I'ors/iidien, p. i4f. ;
Jjiihl, Kanon u. Text, p. 108 f.
^ See art. Diaspora in sup[>l. vol. of Hastings' D.B.
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 ff., xxv. 11 f.,
21 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. i4flf., 4 Esdr. xiii. 39 ff.,
Philo ad Cai. 36, Acts ii. 9, Joseph. Atit. 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 (|On-inp) 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 1
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
* The later Hel)rew term was TOM^ 'exile'; see Dr Hurt on i Pet. /. r.
' The ' P.ahylonian ' Targum is of Palestinian origin (Buhl, p. 173).
On early Aramaic translations arising out of the synagogue interpretations,
see ib., p. i6Sf. ; and for the traditional account of the origin of the Syriac
O. T. see Nestle, Urlext 11. Vbersetzungen der Bibel (Leipzig, 1897),
p. 229.
Professor Driver in U. G. Hogarth's Authority and Anhaeoh^y, p. 87 f.
a
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, wliile he endeavoured
to check the policy which led Judah to seek refuge from
Assyrian aggression in an Egyptian alliance (xxx. i ff.). Jewish
mercenaries are said to have fought in the expedition of
Psammetichus I. against Ethiopia c. B.C. 650 (cf Ps.-Arist. :
irepow ^vfXfjia^Lwv i^aTreaTaX/xevbiv 7rp6? tov twv AWlottwv (iaatXia
ixa.)((.<j6ai a-vv "^afXfjuTixw). The panic which followed the
murder of Gedaliah drove a host of Jewish fugitives to Egypt,
where they settled at Migdol (MaySwXo?), Tahpanhes (Ta^ms
= Ad(f>i'riy, Noph (Memphis), and Pathros {UaOovprj)^, 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 (ijSr] fxev koL Trporepov iKavwv elae\r]Xv66T(Dv
avv Tw Hipa-y). 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, /iiO: to /sa/a/i, p. 105.
^ Cf. Authori/y and Archaeology, p. 117.
^ Jer. li. = xliv. i ff. airaaLv tois 'Ioi;5a^ocs tois KaroiKomiv ei> yrj AlyijirTov
ktX. Many of these refugees, however, were afterwards taken prisoners l)y
Nebuchadnezzar and transported to Babylon (Joseph. af7/. x. o. 7).
"* AnL xi. 8. 4 f. The story is rejected by Ev\ald and Grjitz, and the
details are doubtless unhistorical : cf. Droysen, Vhisioire de V Hrll.iiisvie,
i. p. 300.
I
Tlie Alexandrian Greek Version. 5
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 hi -^^ ixrjv ort
Kat AXe^avSpo) rw f^aaiXel (rvveuT par ever avTO kol fxcTO. ravra toi?
8ta8o;^o(,s avTov fj.e/xaf)Tvpi]K€y); and such was his sense of their
loyalty and courage that when Alexandria was founded
(b.c. 332), 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. anL xix. 5. 2 tmyvovs dveKadev tovs iv 'AK(^av8peiq
lov8aiovs...'i(rT]s TToXirftas napa tcov (iaaCKiav rer6i/;(dras' : C. Ap.
W. 4 ov yap anopia yf tuiv olKJjrrovTuv ttjv pera awovSrjs vtt' avTov
KTi^opevrjv AXf^uvSpos rav Tjperepmv rivas e'/cet (Tvvrjdpoicrfv, dWa
ndvras 8oKipd^o)v empeXas aper^y Kcii niarfois tovto tois rjpfTepois
TO yepas eSoiKtv. B. J. ii. 1 8. 7 ■)(^pr\adpivoi TrpodvpoTurois kcitu
Toiv AiyvnTLOiv hw^alois AXe^avbpoi yepas Trjs (rvppa^Lus i'doiKtv to
p(T0iK(7v Kara Tt]v rroXiv f'^ laov poipiis npos tovs "EXXrjvas.
Monimsen indeed {Provinces, E. T. ii. p. 162 n.) 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. Lag!, or Soter (B.C. 322
—285). II. Philaddphus (B.C. 285—247). III. Euergctes I.
(B.C. 247— 222). IV. Philopator I. (B.C. 222— 205). V. Epiphanes
' Plutarch Alex. 26 i^ovXero ir6\it> ptydXiju kuI iroKvaudpuirov 'ViKK-qviSa
(TvvotKlaai iirwvv/j.oi' iavrou KaTaKnrilv.
- See Maliaffy, Empire of I he P/olemies, p. &6.
•' On the relations in which the Jews stood to Alexander and his succes-
sors see Wellhausen, /sr. u. jiid. Geschichle, c. xvi.
The Alexandrian 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 6 Se nroXf/ialoy ttoXXov? aXwiakoiTovi
Xa^av diro re Trjs opeivrjs louSatar Kai ratv nepi lepocroKvpa TOTTOtv
Koi rT]s ^afiapeiTiBos Koi twv iv Tapi^eiv, KarMKiafv anavras fls
A'lyvTTTov ayayoov (TTfyvcoKcos 8e rovs otto tcov 'lfpoa'oXvpa)v -mpt
TrjV TOiV OpK<i>V <pvXaKT]V KOI TCIS TricTTfLS (^fjSaiOTaTOVS VTrUp)(OVTaS .
noXXovs avTcov toIs MaKf^oaiv iv ^AXe^avdpeia ■jroiTjcras laonoXiras-
ovK oXiyoi 8f ov8i TUiv iiXXu>v lovbaiuiv els rfjv AlyvnTov napt-
yiyvovTO, r^s re apeTtjs tcov tottcov uvtovs Koi rrjs tov UroXefiaiov
cf)iXoTt.pius TrpoKaXovpfvrjs.
A separate quarter of the city was assigned to the colony
(Stral:)0 aj>. Joseph. a?it xiv. 7. 2 tt/s ' AXe$ai'8pua<; TroXew?
ac^wpiorai fxtya /ac/oos t(5 e^^ei Toi^rw'); 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
^ In Philo's time the Jews occupied two districts out of five {in
Flacc. 8). Droysen, iii. p. 59.
- Strabo ap. Jos. atit. xiv. 7. 1 ; cf. Schiirer Gesch. d.jiid. Volkes^, iii. 40;
Lumbioso, Necherches, Tp. 218; Droysen, iii. p. 40 n. On the dXa^dpxv^
(dpa^ddpxv^) who is sometimes identified with the ethnarch see Schiirer iii. 88.
The Alexandrian Greek Version.
(Philo dil Cai. 20, in 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 Jewisli rite was
celebrated there until after the fall of the Holy City, when the
Romans put a stop to it (Joseph, ant. xii. 9. 7, xiii. 3. i, B. /.
vii. 10. 4)'. Under these circumstances it is not surprising
that shortly after the Christian era tlie Jewish colony in Egypt
exceeded a million, constituting an eighth part of the popu-
lation (Philo in 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, ant.
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
' On the mafrnificeiice of tlio princijial synagogue see Edersheim,
History of I lie Jiwiih Xaticii (cd. W'liitc), p. 67.
■^ 'remjiorary checks seem to have bcL'n sustained by the Alexandrian
Jews under I'liilopator Land I'hyscon; see 3 Mace. ii. 31, and cf. .Mahally,
pp. ■267 ff., 381, 390.
' See Mahafly, Empire, (5r'r., p. 86 n.; cf. Thil.) tie sept. 6.
* Where Blass (/'/ti/o/oij' oj the Gospels, p. 69 f.) proposes to read
Si^varivwv for Xi^epTifuu.
^ I'hilo act Ctii. 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) ; the Temple tribute was collected in
Egypt with no less punctuality than in Palestine (Philo de
1 monarch, 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
j/sufificed to accustom the Alexandrian Jews to the use of the
■^jf 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
^ See Schlirer", 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. ; Caspaii, Quellen ziir Gesch. d. Tanfsyinbols,
iii. p. 268 fF. ; Deissmann, Bibehtudien, p. 61 ff. ; Kennedy, Sowces of
N. T. Gk., p. 21 ff.
* 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.
The 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 Oreek
• tongue was a tribute gladly paid by the Alexandrian Jews to
the great Cientile community which sheltered and cherished
them.
The Greek which they learnt was the Koivr] as colloquially '
used in Alexandria : based on the less elevated kind of Attic,
with some loss of the niceties ; but less exclusive in its
vocabulary, retaining many old Ionic and Homeric words, and
adopting, but less freely, others of foreign origin. When the
^ Jews employed this tongue, now common to the regions of
Greek life and Greek conquest, to translate the Old Testa-
ment, they naturally used forms of expression which matched
the original as closely as possible ; though many of them were
more or less prevalent, or paralleled, in the koivt]. Their
ingrained habits of thought, and their native speech, even if
partly forgotten, led them to give constant prominence to these
expressions, which correspond with Semitisms, as well as, to
some extent, with the current Greek speech and colloquial
writings,
7. The 'SeptuagintV or the Greek version of the Old
Testament which was on the whole the work of Alexandrian
Jews, is, written in full, the hiterpretatio septuaginta virorutn or
seniorum, 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
* Irenaeus (iii. i\. 3) spe.iks of the seniorum iiiterpretatio', Tertullian
(Apol. 18) of the sepiUiiginta ct duo iulerpreles \ Jerome, of the I. XX.
interprets, or translatores {praeff. in Esdr., Isai.), LXX. editio (praef. in
Job, ep. ad Pammach.), cdiiio LXX. {praef. in Piira/ipp.). Autjustine, de
civ. Dei, xviii. 42, rcni;irks: "quorum interpretalio ut Hcpluagima vucetur
iam obtimiit consueludo."
lO The Alexandrimi Greek Version.
Testament it is described as the version ' according to the
LXX. ' (KaTOL TOii? ifSSofXTQKOVTa, Trapo. i/SSoixrjKOVTa, O. T. tn Greek,
i. p. 103, ii. p. 479), and quoted by the formula 01 o or ol o^.
All fojms 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 'Apio-rtas ^ikoKpdrci. See App.
Literature. The text of ilie letter of Aristeas is printed
in the Appendix to this volume. It will be found also in Hody
de Bibl. text. orig. (Oxon. 1705), and in Constantinus Oeconomus
TTfpi roji/ o' ep/j.rjvfVTOM' jSi^Xla S' (Athens, 1S49) ; a better text was
given by M. Schinidt in Merx, Archiv f. wissensch. Erforschung
a. A. T. i. p. 241 ff.; the latest separate edition appeared in 1900
under the title: Aristeae ad Philocratcm epistula cum ceteris de
origine versionis LXX. iiiterprettivi tesiiniotiiis. Lttdovici Men-
delssohn schcdis ustis ed. Pauliis \Ve7tdlaiid. A trans, by Mr H. St J.
Thackeray appeared in J-QR- Ap. 1903 (since reprinted). For
the earlier editions see P^abricius-Harles, iii. 660 ff. ; the editio
pri}iceps 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 'Ro^^xwavW^r, Handbuch f. d.
Liieratur d. bibl. Kritik u. Exegesej Dahne, gesch. Darstellung
d. jUdisch Alex. Religions-Philosophie, ii. p. 205 ff. ; Papageor-
gius, Uber den Aristeasbriefj Lumbroso, Recherches siir I'^co-
nomie politique de PEgypte, p. 351 f and in Atti di R. Accademia
delta Sciensa di Torino, iv. (1868 — 9). Fuller lists will be found
in Schiirer^, iii. 472 f, and in Nestle {Real-encyklopddie f. p. Th.
u. K.^ 3, p. 2), and Hastings {D.B. iv. 438 f, where much interest-
ing information is collected); cf 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
' From the mention of Cyprus as 'the island' (§ 5) it has been inferred
that Aristeas was a Cypriot. The name occurs freely in inscriptions from
the islr.ids of the Aegean and the coast ofCaria (C.I. G. iid^, 2266, 2349,
•2399, 24O4, 2655, 2693, 2694, 2723, 2727, 2781, 2892), and was bonie by
a Cyprian sculptor (see D. G. mid R. B., i. 293). Wendland, however,
thinks 'the island' is Pharos, as certainly in § 301. The Aristeas who
wrote irepl 'lovbaiwv (Euseb. praep. ev. ix. 25) was doubtless an Alexandrian
Jew who, as a Hellenist, assumed a Greek name.
'^ See Ostermann, de Deinetrii Ph. vita (1857); Susemihl, Gesch. d. gr.
TJie A lexatidrian 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 library a translation of the Jewish laws (to.
Twv lovbamv vofjufj-a ixer ay pacfiij^ a^ia /cai t^s Trapo, ctol ySi/SXto-
Or]Kir)<i etvat). 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 roUs^ composed of skins (avv . . .TaL<;
oia(f)opOL<; 8t(/)^€'pats ev at? tj vofx-ou^aio. yeypafifjievr] )(pvcroypa(}>La
Tois 'lowSaiKois ypdfjLfj.aai). A 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 it 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 oi their leaders ; and
Li'U. in if. Alexandrinerzeit, i. p. i.^^fT. On the royal library at Alexandria
see .Susemihl, i. y. 335 ff., and llic art. Biblioiheken in Pauly-Wissowa,
Rcal-Iiticyclopiuiie, v. 409 f.
^ See Hilt, Die Hiiciu-olle in cUr Kiiiist (Lcipzi;^, 1907), p. 21 f.
' Tile mole wiiicli cunnectetl llie Pliaios with tlie city: see art.
Alexandria in Smith's Diet, of Gr. and Kom. 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 (Trpoo-Kui'T/o-as), and desired that it should be preserved
with scrupulous care (e/ccAcucrc fxeydkqv (.nLfxiXeiav iroulaOai rdv
9. The story of Aristeas is repeated more or less fully
by the Alexandrian writers Aristobulus and Philo, and by
Josephus.
Aristobulus ap. Y.\xs. praep. ev. xiii. 12. 2 : 17 Se oX?; epfirivfia
T(bv 81a. Tov vofxov TTUvTav iirl Tov ■rrpo(rayopev6evTos ^i\a8eX(j)ov
/3acnXfco? crov 8e irpoyovov [he is addressing Philometor] irpoaivey-
Kapivov pfl^ova (piKoTLpiav, Ar^prjrpiov tov '^aXrjpeciJS Tvpayparev-
aapevov ra mpX tovt(ov^. Philo, 7///. Moys. ii. 5 ff • • nroAe/xaioy o
^tXaSfXc^oy iTTiK\r]6i\^...^-<]Kov Kcil irodov Xaf:iu>v Tijs vopodfaias rjpuiv
fls 'EXXaSa yXwrrav ttjv \aX8aiKr]v peOappo^ecrdai huvoelro, k.u\
TTpea^eis (vdiis f^tTrepTre npos tov Trjs ^Iov8aias dp^upea. . 6 be, cos
fiKoy, ijade'is koi vopicras ovk (ivev de'uis eirKfipoavvrji Ttepi to toiovtov
epyov iairovbaKivai tov ^a(ri\€a...d(rpiva)s dTro(rTeX\€i..,KadL(TavTfs
S ev anoKpvcpip koi ptjSevus TrapovTos . . .Kaddnep evdovaioiVTes enpo-
(ptjTevov, OVK. (iWa aXXot, ret Se avTO. navTes ovupaTa Kul prjpara
SiO'TTep iiTTo/SoXetos eKacTTOLs dopuTtos evii^ovvTos kt\. Josephus,
ant. i. prooem. 3 : YiTokepaiaiv pev 6 Sevrepos /xaXtcrra Sij jSacrLXevs
TvepX TraiSeiav koi (Si^Xicov avvaycayfjv aTT0v8daas e^aipeTios ecJiiKori-
prj6rj TOV TjpeTepov vopov Kal tijv kut avTOv SiUTCi^iv Tiis TToXtTeius
els TTjv 'EXXaSa (pcovrjv peTaXa(3eiv ktX. In ant. xii. 2. I — 1 5
Josephus gives a full account obviously based on Aristeas (whom
he calls ' Apia-Tciios), 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. J^. V.^
iii. 384 — 392. On the other hand cf. L. Cohn in Ncjie Jahrbiicher f. d.
Klass. Alierthtiin i. 8 (1895), and Wendland in Byzantinische Zeitschrift
vii. (1898), 447 — -149. For Aristobulus see Susemihl, p. 630 f.
The Alexandriaii Greek Version. 13
states {I.e.) 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 (fJ-^XP'- *'^'' '^''^ ^"'^ ^""""^ eoprr) Kal Travt]yvpi<;
ayeraL Kara t^v ^dpov vrjaov, cts rjv ovk lovSaiot fxovov aXXot Koi
TrafxirXrjOe'i'i Ircpot SiaTr\eov<Ti, to t€ \<3ipiov aefjivvvovTe? iv w Trpoirov
TO T17S ipfirjveiaq i^i\ap\j/e ktA.). A popular anniversary of this
kind can scarcely have grown out of a literary work 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 (/.<:.) and by.
Clement' {s/rom. i. 22) with Philometor. Whether Aristobulus
derived his information from Aristeas is uncertain, but his
words, if we admit their genuineness, establish 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 Ciiristian 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, apo/. i. 31, (//ti/. 68, 71, ''cohort, ad Graecos' 13 ff. ;
Iren. iii. 21. 2 f. ; Clem. Alex, slroni. i. 22, 148 f . ; TcituUian,
apol. 18 ; Anatolius ap. Eus. H. E. vii. 32 ; Eusebius, praep. ev.
viii. I — 9, ix. 38 ; Cyril of Jerusalem, catech. iv. 34 ; Hilary, /r^/.
ad Psa/»ios, tract, in /'ss. ii., cxviii. ; EpiphaniiiSj^/t.' )nc)is. ct pond.
§§ 3) 6 ; Philastrius de haer. 138 ; ]&xom&^ pracf. in Gen.., praef.
in libr. quaest. Hebr. ; Augustine, de civ. Dei xvii. 42 f., de doctr.
Clir. ii. 22 : Theodore of Mopsucstia /« Hahalck. li., in Zcph. i. ;
Chiysosiom, or. i. adv. Jud.^ c. 6, honi. iv. in Gen., c. 4; Theo-
' Clement of Alexaiulria idciililies this Aristnhulns with the person
named in 2 Mace. i. 10 ' iKpia to jiovXi^} SidaTKaXcfi llro\e/.i.uiov tov fiaaiX^ws.
Sec Valckenacr dialrilie dc .Aristobulo (printed at the end of Gaisford's
edition of Kus. pracp. cv. iv.).
14 The Alexandrian Greek Version.
ioret, praef. in Psalmosj Cyril of Alexandria, adv. Julian, or.
I ; Pseudo-Athanasius, synops. scr. sacr. § 77 ; the anonymous
dialogue of TimotJn and Aqtiila (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 {a.vjo\ iv rfj 'AAef-
avSpeta yevojxevOL Kal to. iX^V '^'^^ oIkl(tk(dv iv rfj <J>apa) iMpaK6T€<;
£Ti crw^Ojaeva, kol irapa twv e/<et w? to, woLTpia 7rap€tX.r](f)0T(x)v aKrjKO-
oVe? ravra aTrayyeWofiev). 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 {t,vyrf
t,vy7) KaT oIkictkov). Jerome is an honourable exception; he
l-ealises 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-
pretem")^
^ On the date of this treatise, which is commonly ascribed to Justin,
see Krliger, Hist. 0/ Chr. Literafure {\L. T.), p. 112 f., and cf. Harnack-
Preuschen, p. 107.
* Cf. ib. ovx epix-qveh eKeivovs dXX' iepo(pdvTa'5 kuI Trpo^iiTas wpocrayo-
peiiovTes.
" The story of the cells is not pecuHar to Cliristian writers ; it is
echoed by the Talmud (Bab. Talm. Mcgillah 9", Jevus. Talm. I\lfg. c. i. ;
cf. Sopheritn, c. i.).
The Alexandrian Greek Version. 15
II. Doubts as to the genuineness of the Aristeas-Ietter
were first expressed by Ludovicus de Vives in his commentary
on Aug. de civ. Dei, xviii. 4 (published in 1522), and after him
by Joseph ScaUger. Ussher and Voss defended the letter, but
its claim to be the work of a contemporary of Philadelphus
was finally demolished 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 Aristeas 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 Philadel[)hus and Elcazar are of the same stamp as the con-
fessedly fictitious correspondence between the Egyptian and
the Palestinian Jews in 2 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 diffu.se 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 historiain I. XX. interpteium Arisleae nomine inscrip-
lam liissiilatio, originally puhlislicd in 1684, and afterwards included in
De Bihlwrum lextibus origiiialibus, vcrsionibus Graccis, it Laliua 7'ulgala
lihri iv. (Oxon. 1705). For other writers on both sides cf. Buhl, p. 117
(K.T. p. .15).
- On the Rahl.inical partiality for this number, cf. Ewakl, IJist. 0/ Tsracl,
V 252n. (K. T.J; Schiir.r it. i. p. 174; Buhl, p. [17 (=116, K. T.).
^ Or the letters of I'liilopalor in 3 Maccabees.
1 6 The Alexandrian Greek Version.
demonstrated by the knowledge which he displays of life
at the Alexandrian Court'. 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-
/rtients. The personal tastes of Philadelphus, if by no means
Z' 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
^ ■'>ee the remarks of Wilcken in Philologus liii. {1894), p. 11 1 f., and
cf. Lumbroso, p. xiii. ^ See Schiirer-', iii. p. 468 f.
^ See Mr I. Abrahams m J.Q.R. xiv. 3, pp. 321 ff., Kaeiit Crilicisms
of the Letter of Afisteas.
* TertulHan exaggerates his literary merits {afoL 18 Ftolemaeorum eru-
ditissimus...et omnis litteraturae sagacissimus).
■'"' Cf. Mahaffy, Empire of the Ptolemies, p. 164 IT. On tlie cliaracter of
Philadelphus see also Droy.sen, iii., p. ■2,54 f. " Mahaffy, pp. 163 f., 170.
The Alexandrian Greek Verswu. 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
I'hilometor, partly on internal grounds. Under the hitter head
he insisted on the translation in Lev. xxiii. 11 of the phrase ri'insp
nZiyri by r^ f'lraiipiov rrjs TrpaTrjs. The Pharisees understood the
word n3K' in ihnt 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'^.
Hut 7A 15 renders the same words by drro ttjs (Travpwv tov
cratii-iaTov, and as it is not likely that a translator who had of set
purpose written r^y irpwrrji in v. 11 would have let tov (ra^,iaTov
escape him a little further down, we must suppose that tov a.
stood originally in both verses and that ttjs np. 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 which 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 Uepl Tajv cV
' GfK-h. Jiiili-n^, iii. p. 615 IT.
- He also notes the rciulcrinf; a/^X;'*"' in neiU. xvii. \.\ — 20.
' See Expositu/j Times, ii. pi>. 2oy, 277 1.
S. S. ^
1 8 The Alexandrian Gt'eek Version.
TTJ 'lovSaia f^amXewv a.ve preserved by Clement {strom. i. 21)
and Eusebius {praep. ev. ix. 21, 29). Tlie following specimens
may suffice to prove this assertion.
Demetrius. Genesis (lxx.).
avri tG>v \i.i]\(j>v Tov [i.a\'bpa.- ivptv firjXa [xavSpayopov . . .
yopov. uvTt Ttov fxavSpayopwv (xxx.
ayyeXov tov 6eov iraXataai 4TrdXaiev . . . kol r/\j/aTO tov
Koi a\pn(jBaL tov TrXaTOv; rov TrXdrov; tov firjpov 'laKcu'^
fjLtjpov TOV laKw/3. (xxxii. 25).
XeyeLv Krr;i'OTpd</)ovs avTows epctrc ''Av8p£9 KTrjvoTpo^oi
eivai. ia-fxev (xlvi. 34).
As Demetrius carries his chronology no further than the
reign of Pliilopator, 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 end of the third
century B.C. 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 ' (^TrpayfjiaTevcrafJLivov to, irepl tovtoh'), but Aristeas
states that he did so (i) in the capacity of head of the royal
library (/carao-ra^ei? ctti tt^s tov /JacrtA-cws /St/SAio^Ty/crjs), 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 ofifice of librarian was
^ Cf. Freudenthal, Jiellen. Studien, p. 41.
- The Dialogue of Timothy and Aqiiila strangely says : ^v hk oiVos 6
Arjfj,rjTpio5 ri2 yivet. 'EjSpaios.
'^ De hihlioihecariis Alcxaiidriftis (18S4), p. iff.; cf. Droysen, iii.
p. 256; Mahaffy, p. 115.
I
The Alexandrian 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 e.g. 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 yciwpas, eii/, aa^^ara^, when such Greek
equivalents as ■n-poarjXvTO';, 8i;!(ou>', dmTrauo-ts, 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
' nioj;. Laort. v. 78. The statement rests on the autliority of Hermippus
Callimachus [tevip. Ptolemy III.).
* Cf. Plutarch, Apophthegin. viii. Ar)firjTpios 6 <l>a\ijpei>s UroXefialif) ti^
^aaiKti irapyftt rd nepl [3aTi\(lai Kal T)ye/jLoi'lat ^i/3\ia KTaaOai Kal dca-
yivuxTKeii/.
• Frankel, Vorstwiicit, p. 8 f.
20 The Alexandrian 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 Methiirgeman, 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 (Trapa-
yevrjOeL<; ets AtyvTrrov kol avyxpovtaa?) ; but the clumsy Greek
of the prologue, and the stiff artificiality of the book, offer a
^ Cf. Philo ap. Eus. praep. ev. viii. 7 tCov iepiwv 8^ ris vapdiv, 7} tQv
yepdvTWv eh, duayivibaKeL tovs iepotjs vofxovs aiirois Kal Kaff 'iKaarov i^riye'iTai.
But ^iTj-jeiVat is ambiguous.
■^ 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: oii fibvov aiirovs roiis dvayiviixTKovras 5iov iarlv
fTrKXTrj/xovas yiveadai, dXXa Kai toIs eKrbs SivaaOat. toi)s (piKoixaOovvTa^
XpytolfJ-ovs elvai Kal X^yovras Kai ypd(poi'Tas—wheve however the influence of
the Jewish Scriptures on pagans is regarded as indirect, and not immediate.
* Cf. Monimsen, 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 {^<pa(rat'...€p/j.r]i'euK^vai Avalfiaxov
UroXenalov t<Sv ev 'lepovcraK'qfx).
i
Tlie Alexandrian Greek Version. 2i
-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 Biblical
scholars pointed to the occurrence in the Lxx., and especially in
the Pentateuch, of such words of Egyptian origin as ayt-i (Gen.
xli. 2 ff.), KovZv (Gen. xliv. 2 ff.), t/Sis (Lev. xi. 17 ; Deut. xiv. 16),
^vara-o<s (Exod. XXV. — xxxix. passivi) and such characteristically
Egyptian terms as BiSpaxft-ov, akijOeia (= D''^PI), dp)^ifLdyeLpo^,
ap)(^toLvox6o<; and the like. The argument is not conclusive,
since after the time of Alexander the kolv>] 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. A. A. Kennedy, Sources of
N. T. Greek, p. 24 f. ; on the other hand.cf. Frankel, Vorstudien, p. 40 ff.
* Exp. 7'imes, iii. p. 291 ; cf. Mahatly, Greek life, p. iy8 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 lor the Biblical student who will be at the
pains to explore them.
* See however Buhl, p. 124.
22
Tlie Alexa)idrian 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 earlier Ptolemies. Yet the legend may be intended
to represent the loyalty of the colony towards the /u.ijrpoTroXts,
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 TertuUian's scarcely trustworthy
statement, "Hodieapud Serapeum Ptolemaei bibliothecae cum
ipsis Hebraicis htteris exhibentur^"'
^ According to Epiphanius {de mens, et pond. lo f.) 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, 1. ii. p. 195.
^ Apol. i8; cf. Justin, apol. i. 31, Chrys. or. i adv. Jud., and Epiph.
The Alexandrian Greek Version.
15. It has been stated (p. 1 1 ) that the letter of Aristeas does
not profess to describe the origin of any part of the Alexandrian
Bible except the Pentateuch 1. This was evident to Josephus :
ant. \. prooem. 3 ovh\ ydp Trdcrav e/ceivos (sc. nroAe/xaios d Sevn-
pos) e(f)6r} Aa/3eii/ tt^c dvaypacf>^v, uXXtl /xovu rd tov vo/jlov wapeSo-
o-av ol 7r€/A</)^€ires tVt tt^v ii-rj-yrjanv €is ' AXe^dvSpetav. 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 Hbros
Moysis a lxx. translates asseruntV' 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 H. (219 — 1998.0.)^.
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 jjosition 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 l)ore the stamp
(A- Diens. et pond. § ii. Tlie 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.
' See, e.p., §§ 3, 10, 46, 171, 176.
* In Ezcih. v.; cf. /// Gcii. xxxi., in Mich. ii. See the 'Palmudical
passages cited by ilody, )>. igrt. =' de nuns, cl pond. 3 sfj.
* Ryle, Can^'n 0/ Clu O. V., p. 113. Cf. liuhl, p. 12.
24 TJie 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 thai name — incidentally
uses words which imply that " the Law, the Prophets, and the
rest of the books " were already current in a translation (ov
yap icro8wa/Act avra ev eawrots 'E^patcrrt Aeyo/x€i/a, koX orav
ln,€Ta^Orj £ts erepav yXwacrav' ov fxovov 8c raura, dkXa Koi auros
vo/Aos Ktti at TrpocfyrjTeiai Kai ra XoiTra riSv /3iy3A.icov ov fxiKpav
Trjv Sta(f)opav e^ei iv lavrois Xcyd/Aeva). 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
DU-in? or Hagiographa. Since the author of the prologue was
a Palestinian Jew, we may perhaps assume that under at
Trpo(f)r]TeLaL and to. XotTra tcov /Si/SXlwv 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
1 Mace. viii. 17, wrote about the middle of the second century,
makes use of the Greek Chronicles, as Freudenthal has
^ Cf. /;W. supra : toO y6/J.ov /cai tUv TrporprjTwv Kal ti2v aXXw;' Tva-Tpiuv
llie 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 Trtpi 'louSatW) 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 — <?).
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
ihe 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
century.
piy. 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 iinportant evidence of Phiio, 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, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Esther, Lamen-
tations, Ezekiel, Daniel ^ But, as Professor Ryle points out,
' Pp. 108, 119; cf. p. 185. - //>. p. i38f.
' Cf. Cheyne, Ori}^n of the Psalter, pp. 12, S3.
* Kyle, riiilo and Holy Scripture, \>. xxxi. f.
26 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 V niay 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, {p) 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
^ Kyle, Philo ami Holy Scripture, p. xxxiii.
" Ryle, Canon, p. 151. ■* //'■. p. 163.
The Alexandnati Greek Version. 27
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 wliich 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. Cappellus, <r/7//Va J(J'i."r(;, 165 1 ; J. Vc^rson^ praefatio parae-
netica, 1655; Ussher, Syntagma, 1655; \Na\\oi-\, prolegomena,
1657; Hottinger, disertationum fascicuhis, 1660; I. Voss, de
LXX. hiterpretibus, 1661 — 1663; J. Morinus, Exercitatioftes,
1669; R. Simon, hisioire critique du Vicux Testament"^, 1685;
H. Hody, de Bibl. tcxtibus origiftalibus, 1705 ; H. Owen, Enquiry
into (he text of the LXX., 1769; Brief account of the LXX.,
1787; Stroth, in Eichhorn's Repertorium, v. ff., 1779 if. ; White,
Letter to the Bp of London, 1779; Fabricius-Harles, iii. 658 ff.,
'793; ^^- Holmes, Episcopo Dunelm. epistola, iji)^\ praefatio
ad Pentateuchum, 1798; Schleusncr, opuscula critica, 1812;
Topler, de Pcntatcuchi interpretat. Alex, indole, 1830; Dahne,
jiid.-alexandr. Philosophic, 1834; Grin field. Apology for the
LXX., 1850; Frankel, Vorstudien zu dcr LXX., 1841; iiber
den Einjluss d. paldst. Exegese anf die alexandr. Hermeneutik,
1851; do., iiber paldst. u. alexandr. Schriftforschung, 1854;
Thiersch, de /'cn/atcuchi Tcrs. Alexandr., 1841 ; Constantinus
Occonomus, rcf^n rwv 0' fpfirjvfvTuv, 1 849 ; Churton, The Injlucnce
of the LXX. upon the progress of Lliristianity, 1861; Ewald,
Gesch. des V'olhrs Israel\ 1868; E. Nestle, Septuaginla-Studien,
i. 1886, ii. 1896, iii. 1899, iv. 1903, v. 1907 ; S. R. Driver, Notes on
Samuel {/ntrod.^ it), 1890; P. de L^mdidc, Septuaginta-Studien,
28 The Alexandrian Greek Version.
i. 1891,11. 1892; A. Rahlfs, Septiiagifita-Studien, 1. 1904, 11. 1907,
111. 191 1 ; Buhl, Kanon u. Textder A. 7"., 1891 ; A. Loisy, histoire
critique du texte et des versions de la 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. Ubersetziingen der Bibe.l, 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), Konlg (1893); and the Ency-
clopedias and Bible Dictionaries, especially the articles on the
Septuagint In Smith's D. B. Hi. (Selwyn), the Encyclopadia
Britannicd^ (Wellhausen), the Real-Encykl. f. prot. Thcologie
t(. Kirche^ (Nestle ; also published in a separate form, under the
title Urtext u. tJbersetzungen, &^c.), and Nestle's art. Septuagint
in Hastings' D.B. iv. ; the arts. Scptuaginta (Hoberg) in Wetzer-
Welte's Encyklopaedie'^ xi. (1899), 147 — 159, and Text and
Versions (Burkitt) in Chevne and Black's Eticyclop. Biblica.
CHAPTER II.
Later Greek Versions.
I. At Alexandria and in Egypt generally the Alexandrian
version was regarded, as Philo plainly says, with a reverence
scarcely less than that which belonged to the original. It was
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 Apostolic age and in the next generation.
On the question of the use of the LXX. in the synaj,^ogues see
Hody iii. I. i, Frankel, Vorstiidiett, p. 56 ff., Konitj, Einleiiuno;,
p. 105 iL ; 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 wc have the evidence of Justin {fipol. i. 31
ffidvav al fiifikoi [the translated books] kuX nap' AlyvnTinis f^e^pi
Tov !i(Vj)(> K(u Trai'Ta)(ov napii nacr'iv (liriv 'lovSm'ot? : {fial. y2 avri]
rj nepiKOTTT] rj (k twv Xdyaic Toii 'ifpfpiov en <(TTii' fyyfy pa fifxevi)
(V Tiaiv dvTiyptl(j>()i<i tu)v (v (rvvayuyrni 'invi^dicoi'), I ertullian
{npo/. 18 "Judaci palam lectitant"), I'scudo-Juslin {cohort, ad
Cr. 13 TO ht nctp' Ioi;8«toiv ert Koi vvv tus ttj fjpfTfpa 6(0<T(fi(ia
30 Later Greek Versions.
tia(f)€ povaas crui^fadiu /3i/3Xouy, 6fias irpovoias epyov virep fifimp
yiyovfv ...airb Trj^ rcov 'lonSa/coi/ (rvvaywytjs ravras d^iovp-fv npOKO-
pL(((T6ai).
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, d/a/. 68 toX/acScti Aeyeiv rrji' i^y'iyrjO-LV ■^v e^qytj-
aavTO ol ifSSo/JirjKOVTa vjjlwv TrpecrfSvTepOL napa nroAc/Aaia) to) T(3v
AiyDTTTiitDV ySacrtXei yevo/xei'ot ^rj etrat ev tlctlv dXrjdrj). The
crucial instance was the rendering of ^P/^ by TvapOiva in Isa.
vii. 14, where veavts, it was contended, would have given the
true meaning of the Hebrew word {ib. 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 provid
something better for Greek-speaking Israelites (Justin, dial. 71
avTol i^TjyelcrOaL ireipwvTai). Of two such fresh translations
Irenaeus speaks in terms of reprehension {/.c. ov^ ws e-vcot (f>aaLv
Tm' rvv fxeOepiJirjviveU' ToXfiwvrwv rrjv ypafjiijv. . .w<; ®eoSoTiwv...o
'E^e'crtos kol 'A/cvXas o EIovtiko?, aytK^orepot 'Ioi;8aroi ■n-poa-^X.vTOL).
Origen, who realised the importance of these translations, was
able to add to those of Aquila and Theodotion the version of
Syr^imachus and three others which were anonymous^ Of the |
anonymous versions little remains, but Aquila, Theodotion, and
Symmaclius are represented by numerous and in some cases
important fragments.
1 Robertson Smith, Tke 0. T. in the J. Ch., p. 64 ; cf. ib. p. 87 f. ;
Kirkpatrick, Divine Library, p. 63 ff. ; cf. Buhl, p. iiSf. •
"^ Eus. //. E. vi. 16.
2d
de
Later Greek Versions. 31
3. Aquila. The name had been borne in the Apostolic
age by a native of Pontus who was of Jewish birth (Acts xviii. 2
'lovSatov ovo/u,aTt 'A/cuXar, IIoj/TtKov tw ycVct). Aquila the trans-
lator was also of Pontus, from the famous sea-port' Sinope,
which had been constituted by Julius 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 [irevOepL-
8r)<;, Epiph., D/a/. of Tiniot/iy and Aquila ; irevOepos, Ps.-Ath.,
Chron. Pasch.). Hadrian employed his relative to superintend
the building of Aelia 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 metis, et pond. 14 sq. :
\a^<t>v [so. 6 'Adpiavos] tov 'Akl'A(i;' tovtov... 'EWrjva ovtu t:a\ avTOv
TTfvdfpi^irjv, (iTTu Su'ojttt;? 8e Tiji rToiTou oppuipei'ov, KaBldTrjcrii'
aiiTuv eKflae €Tri(TTaT(l.v to'is epyoij ktX — TriKpav0f\s fie...7rpocrr;Xi'-
Tfvfi Ktii TTfpiTfpvfTiu ^lov8alos ' Ka\ ennruvois (piXoriprjcrdpfvos
f^f'SojKf I' iavTuv pade'tv rrjv Elipnitov ?iiu\eKTov Koi ra avTu>v (rTOL)(f'in.
T(ivTT]v 8f uKpoTara ndi^fvdels i)ppiii'(v(T(v ovk opdo) Xoyicrpa ^prjcra-
pfVOS, dXX' OTTCOS bui<TTp(y\fl] Tiva TO)V pl]TCiiV, (VaK1]\l/<lS TIJ TWV ol^
fppTjvda Iva tu nepi \pi(TTov iv Tins ypiKpais pepapTvprjpevn (lAXws
e(cfia)a-fi). The same tale is told in substance by the Pseudo-
Alhanasian author of .S'yiiopsis script, sacr., c. jj, and in the
I'idlogue between Timothy and Aqidla printed in Anecdota
Oxon., class, scr. pt viii. Accordin<( 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. Conybearc, 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. llort, Commentary
oil I Peter, p. 172 IT.
32 Later Greek Versions.
which he believes to have been ultimately the history of Ariston
of Pella {pp. cit. p. xxvi. ff.). An Aquila figures in the Clement-
ine romance [Jwin. ii. sqq., recogn. ii. sqq.) ; the name and
character were perhaps suggested by some tioating memories of
the translator. Cf. Lagarde, Clementina, 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 "i|n, 6 Trpoo-?; Autos'. After his conversion
to Judaism, Aquila became a pupil of R. Eliezer and R. Joshua
{Meg. f. ']\ c) or, according to another authority, of R. Akiba
{Kiddush. f. 59 «). 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, quem magistruni Aquilae proselyti autumant"), andj
it derives some confirmation from the character of the version.
According to Epiphanius the floruit of Aquila is to be '
placed in the i3th year of Hadrian (Epiph. de tnens. et pond. 13
'ASpiavos €T7^ Ktt', ouTtvos Tw SojScKaTW €r£t 'AkuAos iyvwpiQeTO. ..(a<;\
civai airo tov \p6vov Trj<; ep/Aiy^etas twv o^ ipixrjvevTwv €W9 AxvAal
TOi) kpfJi-qvevTOv, rjyovv ccos SwSeKCiTOu €toi>s 'ASpiavov, i.Tq vX kul
firjvas 8'. The 12th 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
coi'ld hardly have been completed before the fourth decade of
the second century. When Irenaeus wrote his third book, in
1 The name is written o'^^pj?. d'?^"?N. d'?''P, or obvpV, and in the
Bab. Tahiiud, D1?p3X. On the identity of Aquila with Onkelos see Anger
de Onkelo Chaldaico (before 1845), Friedmann Onkdos ii. Akylas (Wien,
1896); or the brief statement in Buhl, p. 173.
^ Field, Hexapla, prolegg. p. xviii.
Later Greek Versions. 33
the ninth decade, Aquila's translation might still be regarded
as comparatively recent (toJv vvv /ic^ep/xT^vcv'eiv toA/aojvtojv trfv
ypa<f>y]v...ws. . .'AKu'Aas).
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. 3, D^N *?.3P n''PJS^'.
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 {e/>. ad African. 2 (pLXori/xoTepov TrcTrio-Tcu/Aevo? irapa
lovoatoi? . . . w /xaXtcTTa eiwOaaiv oi dyvoouvre? t^v 'EySpoiwi' 8ta-
XcKTOv ^(^prjaOai, ols Travrwv p.d\Xov iTnTeTcvyfiiiw) ; 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 {noveil. 146: "at vero ii qui Graeca Hngua
legunt i.xx. interpretum utentur translatione. . . verum . . .licentiam
concedimus etiam Aquilae versione utendi "). It was equally
natural that the proselyte's version should 1)6 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' (SouAcu'w t^ ^EfipaiK-g
Xe'fci); whatever was wanting in the Hebrew text was not to be
• A/ejir7//<i I. 9: in n"'2''D^ there is a play upon DD* (cf. Gen. ix. 27).
" See Dr C. Taylor in the preface to Prof. Burkitt's Fragments of Aquila,
p. vi. : "Aquila in a .sense was not the sole or independent author of the
version, its unconipronii^ing literalism being the nccussary outcome of his
Jewish teachers' system of exegesis."
34 Later Greek Versions.
found in Aquila (ou Keirat Trapo. Toiv 'EjSpatois, SioTrep ovSe irapot
r<3 'AkuXu). So Origen confesses'; and Jerome, though when
in a censorious mood he does not spare the proselyte (e.g.
praef. in Job ^ ep. ad. Fammach.), elsewhere admits his honesty
and diligence {ep. ad Damns. 12 "non contentiosius, ut quidam
putant, sed studiosius verbum interpretatur ad verbum " ; ep.
ad Marcell. " 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. fif.) and Dr C Taylor {D. C. B. art. Hexapla)
to illustrate the purpose and style of Aquila's work. But an
unexpected discovery has since 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 brought to Cambridge in 1897 through the efforts of
Dr Taylor and Dr Schechter, Professor Burkitt was so fortu-
nate 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 — 27^ From the same treasure Dr Taylor recovered
portions of Pss. xc. — ciii., and a Hexaplar fragment of Ps. xxii."*
^ Ep. ad Afric. 3. Cf. Aug. I.e. '" See p. 31.
' Fragments of the Books of Kings according to the translation of
Aquila (Cambridge, 1897).
* Hebretv- Greek Cairo Genizah Palimpsests (Camb. 1900). See also
Amherst Papyri, i. p. 30 f. (London, 1900).
f
Later Greek Versions. .^5
The student will find below specimens of these discoveries,
placed for the purpose of comparison in parallel columns with
ihe version of the LXX.
3 Regn. xxi. (i Kings xx.) lo — 13.
LXX. (Cod. B*). Aquila.
"*KaI aTrecTTCiXei' tt/jos ainov '°Kai aTreoTCiAev Trpo? avrov
vios 'A8cp Atycov TaSe Troirjcrai vios'ASaS Kai €i7^e^'Ta8e7^ot•>Jo"at-
/i,ot 6 ^€Os Kai TttSc npoadeir], orav fiOL Oeol koi raSc TrpoaOetrj-
€1 €K7roir;(r€t 6 ^ous %ajxapua% (rav, el i^apKecret ^ovs 2a//,api'a5
rats dA.oj7r£^iv Travrl t<5 Xao) tois Ai;(ao-tv*Tov7rai'TOSTOv A.aoS
TOi? 7r€^ots fiov. " Koi a.Trf.Kpidy] os Iv irocriv fiov. " Kat aireKpiOrj
I3aat\ev<; I(rpar]\ xai ciTrev ySao-tXevs 'IrrparyX Kai cittci'
'l/cavovo'^o)* /xr) Kav\acr9o) o AaXj^trarc M'^ Kav^^daOu) t,<i)vvv-
KvpT6<i ws o opOo'i. "Kai /xei'o? o)S o TrepiXvojaevo?. '^/ca'i
iyevero ore aireKpidrj avrw tov Xo- iyerero oJs •^Kovcrei' (rue to prjp-n
yov TOiTov, irivoiv rjv auros Kai tovto, koi auTOS Ittivvci' auros
TravTCs ^acrtXci? /xer' aiVoS ci' Kat ot /3acrL\ets ii' crv(TKLacrfioi<;'
<jKy]iai<;- Kai elnev tois 7rai(TU' Kai tiTrci' Trpo? SovAous avroC
avTov OlKoSofi-qaare )((ipaKa' Kul 0€T€' Kat eOrjKay ivl tijv ttoAiv.
e^evTO )(dpaKa iirl ttjv TrdAif. '^Kai iSov Trpoc/)?/-!-*;? et? irpoa-
''>cat i<5ov) Trpo<f>r)Tri^ et? irpoa- rjyyiaev Trpos Aa^ /3a<Ti\ea
rjKdev Tw /JaCTiAti IcrpayX. Kai IrrfxiyX Kai cnrtv TaSe Ae'yei
eiTTCf TaSt Ae'yei Kvpios Ei ^^^T EiSc? (rvv Trai-Ta Tor'
eopOKas Toi' o;(Aoi' tov fxiyav o-)(Xov toi' jxtyav tovtov ; l8ov
rovTOV ; iSov iyw 8i8oj/ii avroi' eyw 8i'Soj;u,i avrbv tis X'^^P'^ ^°^
(rrjfxipov eis X^'-P'^^ ^"^» '^"^ <rrjii(pov, Kai yviHarj otl iyw
yvuxjri oTi €yw Kupio?. ^T^ i
' Cod. A is nearer to Aquila, as the following variants shew: 10 woiriaai-
aav fioi 01 Oioi Kai raSf TTfioadti-qaap A 12 orf ) oi? .A | Tratrts oi ji. A
13 TW ^air. ] pr ra> Ax^afi A | tov oxXov] pr iravra A | eis x- <^*5 ci]p.€pov A.
-■ MS. xe['^']''*c[iN]; see Burkitt, op.cit. p. «.
3— ^
36
Later Greek Versions.
4 Regn. (2 Kings) xxiii. 21 — 24.
Lxx. (Cod. B'). Aquila.
"*cai €V€TctAaTo o ^acrtXcvs "Kai evcTetXaro 6 fBaaiXevs,
TravTL TW Xaw Xeywi' notijcraTC o"vi' iravri tw Xaw tw Xeyctv
yiypaiTTai iirl jSt^Xi'ov t^s 8ta- v/awv Kara to yeypajx/jievov ctti
67]Krj<; TavTTjs. "otl ovk iyevijOr) fii.pXCov Tr}<; (rvv6i]Kr]s TavTr)<;,
TO Trdcr^a tovto a<fi ijficpoiv rwv "on ovk liroirjOr} Kara ro <]>iaa
KpiTWV 01 i.KpiVOV TOV IfTpaTjX, TOVTO AtTO yfJi€pWV TWV KpiTCJV Ol
Kol Tracras Tas rip.cpa<; ^aatXeoiv iKpivav tov ^laparjX koI Tratrcov
'Icrpa'^X KOL ftacriXewv lovoa* ijfjiepwv ^acrtXccov 'Icrpar/X Koi
ySaciXctov 'louSa- "^oti dXXa iv
OKTwffaiScKaTO) cTct tou /Saai-
Xcoi? 'Iwcriaou iTroirjurj to cf>€cra
as
OTt dXX' l^ T(5 OKTWKaiScKaTO)
cTct TOV )8aaiXew? Iwo-€ia eyc-
i/y^'^r^ TO 7rao";(a tw Kvpiw iv Ic-
povfTaXrifJL. '^Kai ye tovs ^eXr/TOts toBto tw '^■^^^ ir 'lepovaaXTJfj..
Kol Tovs yi'o)pto'Ta9 Kai Ta uepa- ^^kol Kai ye a^vv tovs fJidyov9 Koi.
(fjelv KOI TO, eiScoXa kul Trai'Ttt Ta crvr tovs yi/wpicTTas Kai <tvv to.
TTpoa^o^ia-fiaTa to. yeyovora iv fx.op<f>u> p.aTa kcu <tvv to, KaOdp-
yrj 'lovSa «ai iv 'IcpoucraXr/iu. p,aTa /cat (riiv Trai^Ta irpoo-oxOl-
i^pev Io)o-6tas, iva aTriari tovs (r/xaTa a wpaOrjcrav ev yiy lovSa
Xoyovs TOV vOjU.ov tovs yeypap,- koi iv lepovcraXrjfx. iiriXe^eu 'Iw-
fievov; iirl tw )8tj8Xta) ov evpev
XeXxeias 6 lepevs £V otKo) Kv-
piov.
crioov, OTTWS avao'T-qarj to. prj-
fxaTa TOV vofiov to. yeypafjufxeva
€7rt TOV ySi/3Xtov [ov evpev]
EXKiaov o lepevs otKcp Kvpi'ov'.
* The following variants in Cod. A agree with Aquila: 22 waffuv'
ijHepwi' A 23 TO Tracrx"] + tovto A
" MS. KY> at the end of a line: see Burkitt, p. 16.
Later Greek Versions.
17
Ps. xc. (xci.) 63 — 13.
Lxx. (Cod. B).
d.7ro avfxTTTWfiaTO^ kol 8at-
fj-oviov fiearjfxf^pivov.
"'TricrfXTai £*c tov kAitous crov
KOL fJivpLO.^ e/c Se^itSv o"ou,
Trpos (re 8c ov/c eyytei-
*7rA.^r Toi? 6(f)0aXfxol^ aov icara-
voT^'creis,
Ktti dvTa7roSoo"iv a/xapTwXwv
6x}/y.
'oTt au, Kvpie, 7^ cAttis ftou*
TOV vipLcrrov e6ov KaTaffivyijv
aov.
'°ov TTpoaeXevatTat Trpo? ctc KaKo.,
KoX fj.d(TTi$ oiiK iyyiil t<2 (tkij-
v(DfiaTt aov
"oTt Toi? dyye'Aot? avrov eiTC-
Aetrai irepl aov,
TOV 8ia<})v\d^aL ae Iv Tats
oSoiS* (TOW.
"CTTI T^ClpoIv dpoOo'tl' 0"€,
/XT^ TTOTC irpoaK6^ij<i Trpos XtPov
TOV TToSa crow
'^tV dcTTTiSa Kul l^aatXuTKOv
Aquila.
aTTO Srjyfxov 8aifj.[ovi^ovTO^ fx.e-
aiqp.Ppl.a'i].
^Treaetrat. drro TrXayiov a^ov
XiAtas],
Ktti fxvpia<; airb Sc^l^wv aov^
7rpo9 ere ou 7rpoa€yy[i(r€i]"
*€KTOs iv 6(f>9aXfji.OL<; ^aov Ittl-
/SAeji/^ets,
Koi airoTLaiv daefiiav oij/rj.
CTi av, ^^^^, eATTi's /xou*
vxpLOTov i6r]Ka<i oIktqtijplov
aov.
'°ov fieraxOijaiTaL Trpb<; ak KaKta,
KOL d(f)rj ovK iyyiacL iv aKiirrj
aov
"oTL ayycAot? avrov evreAetTat
o-c,
TOV <f>vXd$ai a€ iv Trdaais
oSots aov
"cTTi rapawv dpovaiv ae,
fiTjiroTe TTpoaKoij/r] iv Xluw
[ttovs aovj '
'^iirl Acaii'a[»']' Koi dairiSa rrar^-
o-€is.
* 11 Tttij oSois] pr vaaais A(R)T
" MS. AeeNA.
38
Later Greek Versions.
Ps. xci. (xcii.) 5 — lo.
Lxx (Cod. B^).
^oTt €v<f>pavds fJie, Kvpic, ev tw
7roL7}f/.aTL aov,
KOL €V TOtS epyOtS TWl/ )(€l.pu)V
crov ayaXkLaaofxai.
*ws ifJicyaXwOr] to. epya crou,
Kupte,
(T(f>68pa i/Sapyvdrjaav oi 8ta-
Xoyt<TfXOL (TOV.
''avrjp acjipijiv ov yvwcreTai,
Koi daw^TO'i oi awTjaei ravra.
^ev T(3 avaretAai rows dfiapTwXov^
cos )(OpTOV
Koi SuKVij/av TravTcs oi ipya-
^o/xevot rrjv avofxiav,
OTTCos av i^oXidpevOwcriv cis
TOV aiwva tov atcovos.
'crv 8e "Yij/ LOTTO'S eis tov atwva,
Kvptc.
"OTI IBoi) ol i^OpoC (70V ttTTO-
XovvTai,
KOI ^LaaKopTTiuB-qaovrai irdv-
res 01 ipya^o/xevoi rijv
avofXMv.
Aquila.
^[ort r]vcf)pavd<i fxe, ^^]^^, ev
Karepyw aov,
[cv TToiT^jLiacrt] ^cipwv trou
aiv€(7a).
*[<ji5s e/AcyaXvv^r;] TroLT/jfiaTa aov,
a(f>6Spa [^£(3a0iji'9^r](Tav Xoyi-
CTflOl (TOV.
'[av^p] ao-uv£Tos ov yvcocrerai,
Ktti avoi^Tos ou avvr](rei (rvi
Tavrrjv.
®€V T(Z fiXacTTrjcrai. ao-e/Jeis 6/iotcos
Kat rjvdy](Tav Travrcs Karepya-
tflft€VOL avw^eXe?,
iKTpijSrjvai. avTOvs ews en-
'(cai o"i) 'Yi/'to'TOs eis atwva,
'°iSou Ol i)^6poC (TOV, ^^^^, tSoii
Ol i)(0pOL (TOV d-TToXoVV-
Tttt,
[o-Kop7ri]o-^?;o"ovTai Travres /car-
€pya^o[/x.€voi avcj^eXes].
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
* The following variants deserve attention: 6 e^a9vpd. Ba^KcaRT
10 pr oTi idov 01 exdpoi <rov Ke t^A^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
OS €V TTOaiv fJLOV= f?*!? '^V'^ (LXX. TOIS TTC^OtS /XOll) J 12 deTC Koi
idrjKav = -ID^k'M •ID^U' (lXX. oi/coSoju.-)70-aT€ ;^apa/ca, koL iOevro
XapaKo) ; 2 Kings xxiii. 2i tw Xeycii' = ""2X? (lxx. A-eywj/) ; 24
a (jipa.Or]crav = 'ii^y.'^'f^. (hxx. TayeyovoTo). (2) Under certain
circumstances' (tuV is employed to represent the Hebrew ^^,
when it is the sign of the accusative^; e.g. i Kings xx. 12 crw
TO piy/xa = 12"in"nNj i^ crvv iravra rov o;(Xov = P'2\!i^~^3"nXj
2 Kings xxiii. 2 1 avv Travrt tw Aaw (where the dat. is governed
by the preceding verb), 24 avv tous ixdyov<s ktA. (3) The same
Hebrew words are scrupulously rendered by the same Greek,
e.g. Kol Katyc = D5l. occurs thrice in one context (2 Kings xxiii.
15, 19, 24) ; and in Ps. xcii. 8, 10 *caT£pya^d/u,€vot dfox^cAes twice
represents J.}^5 ''/'y.3. (4) The transliterations adhere with
greater closeness to the Hebrew than in the lxx.*; thus HpS
becomes </)£(ra, -injc'K' 'Iwo-iaov, -injp^n 'EXKiaov. (5) The Tetra-
grammaton is not transliterated, but written in Hebrew letters,
and the characters are of the archaic type C^^^^, not nin^) ; cf
Orig. in Ps. ii., koX iv rots dKpt(3€crTdT0L<; Sk tc3v dpTLypdcfuDv
'FjftpaioL<; •)(apaKTrjp(TLv Keirat to ovojjuol, 'E^patKots Se ov tois vvv
dAAa Tot? d/JxiioTciTots — 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 o »ci or « for niH''*. (6) That the crudities of Aquila's
' For these see Burkitt, Aquila, p. 12.
* This singular use of aiiv appe.irs also in the LXX., but only in Eccle-
siastes and the Song of Songs, which Freudenthal is disposed to assign to
Aquila (p. ^5); cf. Konig, Einleitung, p. loSn., and M<=Neile, httrod. to
EccUsiastes. * .\(1. does not transhterate Xnny (see Hurkitt, p. 14).
* In a few Ilexaplaric Mss. (e.g. Q, 86, 88, 243'"*-', 264) the Greek letters
Illfll are written for niiT, but (with the exception of tiie Genizah I'alim-
psest, Taylor, p. 27) the Greek mss. use it solely in their e.xcerpts from the
non-Septuagintal columns of the Ilexapla, and only the Ilexaplaric Syriac
admits IIIIII into the text of the LXX., using it freely for Kupioi, even with
a preposition (as » ^'°^ ' ). Oxyrli. Tap. 1007 (vol. viL), late 3rd cent.,
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. iK-rroirjaei, Aq. i^ap-
KeaeL; LXX. ak<aireitv, Aq. XtxpLaiv' ; 12 LXX. o-K:r;vats, Aq.
avcTKiaafJiOLS ; 2 Kings xxiii. 2 1 lxx. Sta^iyxT^s, Aq. awBijKrj'i ;
24 LXX. dcpacfieiv, Aq. iJLOp(li(i)fjiaTa ; LXX. elSwXa, Aq. KaOap-
yuara; Ps. xc. 8 LXX. avTairohoa-LV, Aq. auroTiCTLV \ ib. lO LXX.
Tr/aocreAcuo-ETat, Aq. p^TayB-qaerai ; LXX. p.daTi$, Aq. acfirj ; xci.
5 LXX. TTonqpaTi, Aq. Kttrepyu.
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 Pammach. 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 ^^eu/ia, oiraipKTpjov, (TTiX.Tri'6TrjTa
for criTov, olvov, tXaiov in order to reflect more exactly the
Hebrew ]^\ K'T'J?, "inV! — as though, adds Jerome humorously,
we were to use in Latin /?^jr/^, pomatio, splendentia. Similarly,
has EZ, representing doubled j^^af, in Gen. ii., iii. Ceriani expresses the
opinion that the use of IIIIII is due either to Origen or Eusebius, i.e. one
of those fathers substituted IIIIII for ^"1^"1 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,
Moiiuiitenta sacra et prof ana, ii. p. 106 ff.; Schleusner, s.v. TrLiri, Field,
Hexapla ad Esa. i. 2; Hatch and Red path, Concordance, p. 11 35; Driver
in Studia Biblia, i. p. 12, n. 3 ; Z. D. M. G. (1878), 465 ff., 501, 506.
Prof. Buikitt acutely points out (p. 16) that '^'^^■1 (and doubtless also
nini) was read as Kt'ptos, since in one place in the Aquila fragments where
there was no room to write the Hebrew characters "instead of oiVoj ^-1^-1
we find o'Iku} ki}." On the orthography see Burkitt, p. 15, par. 4.
1 Even Jerome speaks of Aquila as "eruditissimus linguae Graecae"
(in Isa. xlix. 5). ^ See Prof. Burkitt's note (p. 26).
Later Greek Versions. 41
Aquila represented DiVV by octt^ovv, and 'P'SEJ'n by iiruTTrjfUh
vL^€Lv or iTTiaTrjixovovv, and even coined the impossible form
auf)r}fj.€vo<; to correspond with yiJ^. (2) An attempt is made
to represent Hebrew particles, even such as defy translation ;
thus n local becomes the enclitic Se (e. g. vorovSe = '^^^'3,
Gen. xii. 9, KvprjvrjvSe = nn''i7j 2 Kings xvi. 9) ; and similarly
prepositions are accumulated in a manner quite alien from
Greek usage (e.g. eis aTrd /i,a«po^ev = pin-)D^, 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. ^\i^;V is converted into rpayos d-n-uXvofjievo^ and
''V?V into cTKia a-KLu; a Hebrew word is replaced by a Greek
word somewhat similar in sound, e.g. for l'i'?i< (Deut. xi. 30)
Aquila gives auAcJv, and for D"'?"iJ;i (i Sam. xv. 23) dtpairuaK
Enough has been said to shew the absurdity of Aquila's
method when it is regarded from the standi)oint 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 wliose loyalty to their faith was stronger than their sense
of the niceties of the Greek tongue. For ourselves the work of
* The student who wislies to pursue the subject may refer to Field,
FioUgii^ p. xxi. sqq., aud Dr Taylor's article Hcxapla in Smith and Wace's
Diet. Chr. Biog. iii. p. 17 ff. Jerome speaks more than once of a second
edition of Aquila "quam Hehraei Kixr aKpipeiav nominant." The question
is discu'iscd by l'"ield {p>oleg)r. xxiv. tf. ).
- See I'rof. HuikilL's article Aquila in the Jewish (^umtcity Review,
Jan. iSyS, p. 211 ff.
42 Later Greek Versions.
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. With Aquila Irenaeus couples Theo-
dotion of Ephesus, as another Jewish proselyte who translated
the Old Testament into Greek (©eoSortW T^pfXTJv^va-ev 6
E(^€(rtos /cat AKv\a<;...afj.(j)6Tepoi 'louSaioi Trpoa-tjXvToi). 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. His J?or?/if is fixed by Epiphanius in the reign of
the second Commodus, i.e. of the Emperor Commodus, so
called to distinguish him from L. Ceionius Commodus, better
known as L. Aurelius Verus.
Epiph. ds mens, et pond. IJ vepl rffv rov Bevrepov Kop68ov ^acn-
\eiav Toil jSaaiXevcravTos pera tov TTpofipr/pevov Kopodov Aovkiov
AvpTjXiov fTTj ty', Qeo8nTio)v ris JIovtikos otto rrjs 8ta8o)^rjs MapKicovos
TOV aipecridpxov tov ^ivtoiriTov, prjvlcov Koi aiiTos ttj aiiTov alpicrei
KOL els 'lov8aia-p6v diroKXivas nal irepiTprjOeis <ai ttjv tuiv Ej3paici>v
(})(i)VT]v Koi Ta avTcbv (TT0L)(e2a iraLdevdets, ISii^iS koX uvtos e^e'ScoKe.
Hieron. ep. ad Augttstin.: "hominis Judaei atque blasphemi";
* Dr Taylor, pref. to Fragments of Aquila, p. vii
11
I
Later Greek Versions. 43
praef. in Job: "ludaeus Aquila, et Symmachus et Theodotio
Judaizantes haeretici"; de virr. ill. 54 "editiones...Aquilae...
Pontic! proselyti et Theodotionis Hebionaei"; praef . ad Daniel. :
"Theodotionem, qui utique post adventum Christ! incredulus fuit,
licet eum quidam dicant Hebionitam qui altero genere ludaeus
esti."
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 office 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
scrmonis a Lxx. interpretibus non discordat " (/r^^ in Fss.);
"Septuaginta et Theodotio... in plurimis locis concordant" {in
Ecd. ii.) — such is Jerome's judgement; and Epiphanius agrees
with this estimate {de tmns. et pond. 17: ra TrAeio-Ta tois o//
<TW(xh6vrui% i^iSwKiv). 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., Wxtxon. praef . ad Joby, and in Daniel, on
' Marcion flourished c. A.D. 150; Commodus was Emperor from 180—
191. The Paschal Chronicle, following Epiphanius, dates the work of
Theodotion a. n. 184.
"^ See Field, Hexapla, p. xxxix. ; Hatch, Essays, p. lis ; iMargoliouth,
art. ' Job ' in Smith's Bii>le Diet. (ed. ■»).
44 Later Greek Versions.
the other hand, the Midrashic expansions which characterise
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 Job',
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 Maichalianus, will serve as an example'*^
Jeremiah xl. (xxxiii.) 14 — 26.
'* *l8ov T^fiipai ep)(ovTai, (f>r](Ti Kupios, kol avatrTT/cro) tov
Xoyov fxov TOV ayaOov ov iXdXrjaa iirl tov oTkov 'Icrpai^X koI
iiri TOV oTkov Iov8a. '* iv rats yfjiepais CKCivai? Koi iv to!
Kaip(S iK€LV(a avareXw toJ AauiS avaToX.r)v 8tKaiav, ttokZv Kpifia
Koi SiKaioavvrjv iv rfj yfj. '* iv rats 7j^ipaL<; cKcii^ats crwOijcreTui
7] louSata KoX 'lepovaaXrjp. KaTao"Kr;vo)cr€t Treirotdvla' Kal tovto
TO ovoiw. o KaXio-CL avT-qv Kypioc Aikaiocy'nh hmoon. '' ort
TttSe Xeyci Kvpios, Ovk i^oXoOptvOrjcr^Tai t<o Aau(8 dvrjp KaO'^-
)u.evo9 cTTi Opovov OLKOV 'I(rpai]X' '® kol tois iepevat rots AeuiVais
OVK i$oXoOp€vOy](TeTaL dvrjp €K TrpocrwTrov p-ov, dva<f>ipwv oXoKav-
T(i)/i.aTa KOL Ovwv uvcriav. '' koX eyevcTO Xoyos Kvpiov ■jrpos
'lepe/xiav Ae'ywv ^ Ta8e X€y€t Kvpios Ei StaaKeSdcreTe tt^v
^taO'jKrjv fiov rrjv tjfxepav koL rqv StaOiJKYjv fiov tt^v vvktu, tov
p.rj ctvai yjp.ipav koL vvktu iv Kaipu> avToiv' " /caiyc rj SLaOjjKi]
/xov 8La<TKe8aa6y(riTai p,€Ta AautS tov SovXov fjiov, toO p-rj
1 Orig. e/i. ad Afric. 3.
* On Baruch see Nestle's remarks in Hastings' D. B. iv. (art. Septua-
gint).
'^ O. T. in Greek, iii. pp. vii. fF., 320 f.
II
Later Greek Versions. 45
civai auTw v\ov j3a(TL\evovTa iirl rbv Opovov avTov, koX -q 7rpo<s
Tous AeutVas tov9 lepets tovs XeLTOvpyovvrds fJ-ou " w? ov/c
i$api6ixT]6r](T€Tai 17 8wa/iis TOV ovpavou, ovSe kKfifTprjOrjcrerai tj
afXfJLOs Trj<; 6a\a(Tar]s, ovrtos ttXtjOvvw to cnripixa AaviS toS
SovXov /xou Ktti TOVS AcuiVas roiis ActTovpyovvTa? /xoi. "^ /cal
eyevcTO Xoyos Kvptou Trpos 'lepc/xtav Xe'ywv ** 'Apa ye ouk tSes
Tt o Xao'i ovTO<; iXdXrjcrav AcyovTes Ai 8vo TraTpiai as i^cXe^aro
Kupios €V avTttis, *cai iSov diruxraro auTovs ; koi rov Xaov ulov
Trapw^wav rov /x?^ euai ert c^vos cvojTriov /xou. 'S T,i^^ Aeyet
Kvptos El /XT/ TTiv SiaOTJKriv fiov ly/xepas kui vuktos, dKpi/3da-/j.aTa
ovpavov Koi. yrj<;, ovk Ira^a, ** Katyc to <nvepfJLa 'laK(o/3 Koi
AauiS TOV SovXov /xov aTroSoKifitS, tov fx-q Xafio-v Ik rov cnrep-
fiaros avTOv dp^ovra Trpos to (Tiripfxa 'A)8paa/i, koX 'lo-aa/c koX
laKwft- on. eVio-Tpei/'w tt^v (.inaTpo^rjv avT<2v, koX oiKmprjfTOi
» '1
avrovs .
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 Aqiiila 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. d/cpi;3aor/xaTa = nipn)'^ or a reminiscence
of Aquila ; on the other hand Theodotion agrees with the lxx.
against Aquila in translating H^n^ by haOyjKrj. 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. *' 'Iheodolionis stylus simplex et gravis
est." LXX. of Jer. xxiii. 5, 6 may be set beside O of xl. 14, 1.5.
^ C()<1. A employs dKpijia<T/x6i in this sense (Jud. v. 15, 3 Kcgn. xi. 34,
4 Kegn. xvii. 15), hut under the influence of rheodotion, at least in the last
two passages; see Field ad loc.
46 Later Greek Versions.
Theodotion is more obscure than Aquila {jy]v ^LaOtJKrjv rrjv
•qfLipav . . .Tr]v vvKTa, Aq. t^s 7J/ji€pa<;...T7J<; vvktos), 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 ^X (which is represented
by rj\ 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 indiligeniior, but only "scrupulosior
quam operis sui instituto 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 Slromafa 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. in
Dan. : " Danielem prophetam iuxta lxx. interpretes ecclesiae
^ Op. cit. p. xl. sq.
2 D. C. B. art. Hexapla (iii. p. ^.^). Cf. ih. iv. p. 978.
^ Thus in Mai. /. c. he was perhaps unwilling to use Ot.o'i in connexion
with the phrase *1p^ ?N.
* Jerome on Dan. iv. : " Origenes in nono Stromatum volumine asserit
se quae sequuntur ab hoc loco in propheta Daniele non iuxta lxx. inter-
pretes... sed iuxta Theodotionis editionem disserere."
* Dr Gwynn in D. C. B. (iv. p. 974).
I
Later Greek Versions. 47
non legunt, utentes Theodotionis editione"; cf. c. Rnfin. ii.
33). 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, strom. i. 4, 21). In North
Africa both versions seem to have influenced the Latin text of
Daniel. The subject has been carefully investigated by Prof
F. C. Burkitt', who shews that Tertullian 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 {%ns. 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,
» The Chigi MS. known as Cod. 87 (H. P. 88) ; see 0. T. in Greek,
iii. pp. vi., xii., and cf. the subscription printed H>. p. 574.
^ Dili Latin and I/ala, p. iS ff.
* An excci)tion in i. 19. ^ (Dan. xii. 9 f.) is due to a Marcosian source.
* See .Salmon, /it/r. to the N. 7'.' p. 639.
* On the trustworthiness of Justin's text here see Burkitt, op. eit. p. ■25 n.
(against Hatch, Essays, p. 190).
48 Later Greek Versions.
with a Theodotionic reading (cXctToupyow, lxx. iOepdwevov).
Barnabas {ep. iv. 5) also refers to Dan. vii., and, though his
citation is too loose to be pressed, the words i^avaarqcrovTai
oirurdev avrcov are more likely to be a reminiscence of oiriVsu
avTwv avao-T7;or£Tai ( Th.) than of fi^ra rovrovs o-T-ycrerat (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. 20), 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 (/xtTo. tSv ve^eXwi/) occurs as well as the lxx.
cTTi Twv v.; couip. 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 dmjpcicraTo
avTo. iv T<2 el8o}X.€Lw avToi in I Esdr. ii. 9 and Dan. i. 2 (lxx.)
^ Heb. /. c. ?4>pa^av ffTd/xara XedvTwv (Dan. Th., ivitppa^eu to. crSuo.ra
T&v XedvTUv : LXX., aiaujKi fie dTrb rdv Xeovrwv).
* The references are from Dr Salmon's /«/r. 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." See Bludau in T/i. Q. 1897 (p. i if-).
* 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 Schiirer*, 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 ff. Dr Salmon {Intr. p. 547) is
disposed to accept this vievjr.
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
which 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. SvMMACHus. 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
Judaism*.
Kus. H. E. vi. 17 TUiv ye fif]v ipfiTjvevTcov avrayv 8f) tovtoiv lareov
'E^KOvalov rov ^v^fia\ov y(y()vivai...Ka\ vTrofivijfiara 8e tov 'Svfifj.d-
\ov etaiTi vvv (f)€pfTai ev ois 8ok(7 npos t6 Kara Mardalov aTTOTfivo-
fifvos fvayyiKiov ti)v bf^rfKoifxtvriv aipeaiv KpaTweif. ravra Se 6
QpiyevrjS pera Ka\ aXXcov els ras ypacpas fpprjveiaiv tov ^vppd^ov
crrfpaivti irapa 'louXtai'^s tivos flXr](pevai, rjv Kai (f)r)(ri Trap' avTOv
"^vppd^ov Tus ^ii3\ovs ^lude^aadai. Hicron. i^e inrr. ill. 54
"Theodotionis Hebionaei et Symmachi eiusdem dogniatis" (of.
in Hub. iii. 13); praef. in Job : "Symmachus et Theodotion
ludaizantes haerelici." Epiph. de tucns. ei pontl. 15 iv rotj tov
^(vTjpov )(p()V(ai ^vppa)(6s Tis 'Sapapdrrjs to)v Trap avrols (ro(f)MV pff
Ttprjdfls iiTTO TOV oiKtiov edvovs. . .TT poaijXvTfvfi Kai TTfpiTepvfTai
ifVTtpav 7rfpiTopTjv,.,ovTOS Toivvv 6 "Zvppaxos Trpiis ^lacrT po(^)i^v tu)x>
' D. C. B. iv. p. 977 n.; cf. Hastings* D. B., i. p. 761.
' On the whole question of the date of Theodotion, see Schiirer,
G.J. y.^ iii. 313 f., where liie literature of the subject is given.
' The name D12D1D occurs in the Talmud as lliat of a disciple of
R. Meir, who flourished towards the end of the second or bcL;inning of the
third century. Geiger desires to identify our translator with this Sym-
machus; see Field, prolegg. ad Hex. p. x.xix.
S. S. 4
50 Later Greek Versions.
irapa ^fiapeircus ipiiijvei&u €pnr}v€iiaas ttjp rpirrjv e^ebtoKev
ipp,t)Vfiav.
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.in Gal., prolegg.) and Augustine {c.Fausi.x\x. 4, c. Crescon.
i. 36)*. Yi\s 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 Lausiaca, c. 147,
Palladius says that Juliana sheltered Origan during a persecution,
i.e. probably during the persecution of the Emperor Maximius
(a.d. 238 — 241). If this was so, the Hterary 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
Alexandria.
II. The aim of Symmachus, as Jerome perceived, was
to express the sense of his Hebrew text rather than to attempt
^ Euseb. /. c.
* Philastrius, who represents the Symmachiani as holding other views,
says (c. 145): "sunt haeretici alii qui Theodotionis et Symmachi itidem
interpretationem diverso modo expositam sequuntur." See Harnack, Gesch.
d. edtchr. Lift., i. i. p. 212.
' D. C. B. iv. p. 971 fF. '2,i\ri\pov in de pond, et mens. 16 is on this
hypothesis a corruption of Ov'/ipov. Cf. Lagarde's Symmicta, ii. p. 168.
* The Gospel of Peter, which cannot l)e 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 I
decisive. * Cf. D, C. B. iv. p. 103. ]
Later Greek Versions. 51
a verbal rendering : " non solet vcrborum KUKo^-qXCav sed 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 (Trpos Biaa-Tpocfirjv twv
irapa 2a/Aap€tTats kpiirjveiwv ipfxrjvevaa^). But if Symmachus
had any antagonist in view, it was probably the literalisni and
violation of the Greek idiom which made the work of Aquila
I 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
i efforts to recast it made free use of both the lxx. and Theo-
jdotion. The following extracts will serve to illustrate this view
of his relation to his predecessors.
MALACHI II. I3».
LXX. Aq.
Koi ravra a ffiiaow (cat tovto bevrepov
(iroidrf (KoXvirrfTe eiroielrf eKuXinrTfTf
baKpvcTiv t6 6vcna- 8itKpv(o to 6vaia-
CTTTjpiov Kvplov Koi aTTjplOV
KXavdp(o Koi OTTfuaypa KXav6p(0 Koi olpcoyjj,
(K KOTTOJV. fTl (i^lOV UTTU TOV pTj flval €Tl
(TT i^Xf yj/^ai fls Bvaiav vtvaai Trpos to 8a>pov
f) Xa^fiv 8(KTov fK Koi \a^e7v fvBoKiav
tS»v )((ipS)v vpcov ; OTTO ^fipos VpU)V.
Th. Symm.
Kat TOVTO bfVTfpov Koi TiwTa htvTepov
tiroiTjcraTf fKuXvirTeTt eVotftrf, KuXvnTovTfs
daKpvaiv TO 6vaiu- iv duKpvcTiv to BviTia-
arqpiov, (TTijpiov,
KXaiovTft Kai <rT(V()i>T(S, icXaioi/rfj nai olpunraovTfi^
anb TOV pi] (ivai «ri dno tov pr] tiviu (ti
rrpofTfyyi^nvTa to oXoKavrapa vtvom-a irpoi to 8<opov
Ka\ Xafidv rAfiov Kiii 8e^a(r0ai to (v8oKr]p('voi'
<K xdpoiv vpuiv. uno )(€ip6s vpS)v.
* The Hexaplaric renderings are trom Cod. 86 (Cod. Barberinus) :
Field, Hexapla, ii. p. 1033.
52 Later Greek Versions.
1 But it must not be supposed that Syramachus 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 Travra
avOpwTTov d.TraLTwv BiKaiOTrpayeiv, OLKpLTw; fXYf Troirjays tovto ; Job
xxvi. 1 4 Tt Sc {l/LOvpicrfxa Tajv Xoycjv airrov aKovaofxef, orrov Ppovrr^v
SuvacTTctias avTov ouSeis evroT^crci ; Ps. xliii. 16 81' oXr]<; tjixepas
1] a<T)(r}fx6vqa is fxov avTiKpvs pov, /cat 6 KaTaio-^D//,)u,os tov Trpoo-wTrov
fxov KaXvirrei p.e. Ps. Ixviii. 3 i/SairriaOrfv eis aTrcpavrous KaraSwets,
Koi ovK eiTTLV o"Ta(ris ' elcrrjkOov €19 to. /3d6r) twv v8dT(i>v, koI
piWpov liriKXva-iv p.€. Eccl. iv. 9 eicrlv dp.uvov<; 8vo evos" e)(^ovcriv
yap KepSo<; dyadov. Isa. xxix. 4 viro yrjv iSacftLadijaeTai -q AaXta
(TOV, Kttt Icrrai oj5 iyya(rTpLfivOo<i ij cfxavr) crov koi diro t^s y^s
•q XaXta aov potVcrat.
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. y^S"7?, Symm. dvaiTtws, 11^? PJ?, Symm. d^^aX/xo^avws,
n33 'J'^">'?, Symm. aKpoywvtaios) ; he converts into a participle
the first of two finite verbs connected by a copula (Exod. v. 7
a7r€pp(0/A€voi KoXap-da-Odiaav, 4 Regn. i. 2 o-(/)aA.eVT€s cTrecroi') ; he
has at his command a large supply of Greek particles (e.g.
he renders "^I^ by dpa, ovtws, to-us, 81' o\ov, fiovov, ovtws, dW'
of
vei
jfro,
ler;
an:
i
Later Greek Versions. 53
o/Aw?)'. 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, eKxia-ev 6 ^cos
Tov av9p(DTT0v iv eiKOVL Sia<^opa)^" opdtov 6 ^eos (.kti<j€v avTov.
Exod. xxiv. 10, cTSov opdfxaTL tov 6e6v 'IcrpaijX. Jud. ix.
13 TOV OLVOV...T7JI' €vcf)po(Tvvr]v Twv avdpioTTwv. P.s. xliii. 24
Lva Tt COS vTrrwi/ ct, ^icrirora; 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; ^rt. in D. C. B. (W. J. Dickson);
M. Friedmann, Onkelos u. Akylas, 1896; Lagarde, Clementina^
p. 12 ff.; Krauss, Akylas der Proselyt (Festschrift), 1896; F. C.
Burkitt, Frai^ments of Aquila, 1897; C. Taylor, Sayings of the
Jewish Fathers"-, 1897 (p. viii.); Schiirer^, ill. p. 317 ff. On Sym-
machus, C. H. Thieme, pro puritate Sy?nmachi dissert., 1755;
art. in D. C. B. (J. Gwynn); Giov. Mercati, P eta^di Simmaco
interprete, 1892. On Theodotion, Credner, Beitrdge, ii. p. 253 ff. ;
art. in D. C. B. (J. Gwynn); G. Salmon, Intr. to the N. 77, 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 Literature of the Hexapla.
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 Septima (tj) respectively. The following are the chief
authorities :
Eus. H. E. vi. 16 TOKTavTT) be flirfiyfTo rw 'QptyeVft tcov dei'wv
Xoytof dnrjKiyifitJififVT] f'^fTucris coy... (cat rivas (Tfpns napa ras Kudr]-
pa^fVfievas fpprjveias (vaWaTTOixTai. . ., f(f>fvp('iv, i\i oi/K oTS' odtv (k
Tii/o)!/ pv)(mv TOV TTtiAat \avdavovcras ;^poi'oi' fir (^(uf iivi^ytvcrai
nporjyay(v...Tipoi up' €ifv ovk ddias avTo tovto ^di/ov firarrjprji'aTo
* For other examples see Field, protege^, p. xxx. ff. ; D. C. B. iv.
P- '9f- ILL
" Reading, perhaps, D\17N Q/Vni D7^'3 ; cf. Nestle, Marginalien,
pp. 3- '5- ^ St-i^ ^- f- B. iii. p. 20.
54 Later Greek Versions.
as apa ttjv fiev evpoi ev rfj irpos 'AKTia NtK07roXfi,..e7r« fiias avdis
aecrrjuelaTai as ev lepi)^oi evprfp.ivqs ev Tridco Kara tovs xP^vovs
^AvTa>vivov Toil vlov 2fj3ripov. Epiph. (/g 7nens. et pond. l8 /itra
Tov duoypov Tov ^acriXecos ^evrjpov Tjiipidrj rj 7rep,iTTT] ev iridois tv
'lepi^ci KeKpvppevi] ev ;^p(ji'ots' rov vlov ^evrjpov tov eTriKXrjdevTOs
KapaKoXkov Te kol T€Ta.,,ev 8e rw e^Sofico avTov eTei rjvpedrjaav Koi
/3t'/3Xot r^y TrepirTrjs enSocrecos ev ttiOois ev *Iepi;^c5 KeKpvppevtjs fieTa
aXKonv ^ifSXlcov E^paiKwv koi 'EXKvjvlkwv. tov 8e KapuKaXkov
SiabexeTM 'Avravlvos eTepos...p.eTa tovtov e^aaiXeva-ev^AXei^avdpos...
eTTf ly • ev peered tS)V xpovav tovtoov rjipidr] eKTij eK8o(ris, Koi avTrj
ev TTiBois KeKpvppevrj, ev NtKOTrdXet t^ npoi 'Aktico. Pseudo-Ath.
syn. scr. sacr. 77 irep-rvTr] eppr\ve'ia evTiv ?; ev iridots evpedelaa Kf-
Kpvp,pevT) enl AvTcovivov (SacriXeas tov KapaKciWa ev 'lepi^ai irapa
Ttvos T(ov ev lepocroXvpois (TTrovdaioiv. eKTTj epprjveca eariv rf iv
iridois evpedelaa, kui avTTj KeKpvppevrj, eVi AXe^dvdpov tov Mapalas
iraidbs ev NifcoTrdXfi tij jrpos Aktiov vtto Slpiyevovs yvapipcov.
Hieron. de virr. ill. 54 "quintam et sextam et septimam edi-
tionem, quas etiam nos de eius bibliotheca habemus, miro labore
reppeiit et cum ceteris editionibus conparavit": in ep. ad Tit.
"nonnuUi vero libri, et maxime hi qui apud Hebraeos versa
compositi sunt, tres alias editiones additas habent quam 'quin-
tam' et 'sextam' et 'septimam' translationem vocant, auctori-
tatem sine nominibus interpretum consecutas." Cf. in Hab. ii. 11,
iii. 13.
It appears from the statement of Eusebius' that Origen found
the Quinta at Nicopolis near Actium, and that either the Sexta
or the Septima 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 at Nicopolis under Severus Alexander (a.d. 222-— 235)^
According to Epiphanius both the Quinta and the Sexta,
according to Eusebius the Sexta only, lay buried in a m^os
{dolium), one of the earthenware jars, pitched internally, and
pa-tly sunk in the ground, in which the mustum was usually
stored while it underwent the process of fermentation^. Since
^ Jerome {f>i-ot. in Orig. exp. Cant.) confirms Eusebius, on whose words
see Dr Mercati, Shidi e Testi 5, v. p. 47 (1901).
"^ The Dialogue of Timothy and Aquila identifies Nicopolis with
Emmaus Nicopolis in Palestine. .;
^ D. of Gk and Lat. Ant. p. 1202. These iriBoi are said to have been "
sometimes used instead of cistae or capsae for preserving books. In 1906
five Greek documents were found in an earthenware jar at Elephantine; see
Dr F. G. Kenyon in Egypt Exploration Fund Archaeological Report forll •
1907-8, p. 50.
AcV,
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 the vague statements
of Eusebius (jov vdXat XavOavovcra'i xp^'t^^v). 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 Septima 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'.
[There is no conclusive evidence to shew that any of these
versions covered the whole of the Old Testament*. Renderings
from Quintet d,XQ. 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 Quinta and Sexia,
the style of Quinta 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. ^7,2.
'' Cl. Eus. //. E. vi. 7 ; Spartian. in Sev. 17.
3 Piolegg. ad Hexapla, p. xlvi; see however R. Sinker, Psalm of
Uabakkiik (Camb. 1890), p. 41. Ps.-Athanasius calls Lucian the seventh
version : i^bbfir) irdXti koX reXivrala ipfirjveia ij rod ayluv AovKiavoO.
* According to Ilamack-Prcuschen (i. p. 340) the opposite is ini]>lied
by P2usebius' use of ivaXKarToOcrai in reference to these versions: "d. h.
die eine war nur fiir diese, die andcre nur fiir jene Riicher vorlianden."
' On Quitt/a see Mercati, Studi e Testi 5, iv. p. 28; and Burkitt in
Proc. Hoc. Bibl. Archaeology, June 190a.
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
S"' renders, YXhov d(ref3rj kol avaiSrj dvTnroiovfx.€vov iv aKXrjporrjri
KoX kiyovra Et/ti w? avTO^Owv TreptTraTwv €V SiKaioavvy. Jerome'
attributes both versions to 'Jewish translators,' but the Chris-
tian origin of Sexta betrays itself* at Hab. iii. 13 i$rjkOi'i tov
awcrai, tov Xaov <rov 8ia Irjcrovv tov xpicTTov crou .
'The Greek fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries quotes
non-Septuagintal renderings from an interpreter who is styled
o 'E/Spaios. 'O Svpos is also cited, frequently as agreeing with
o 'E/Jpaios. Nothing is known of these translators (if such they
were), but an elaborate discussion of all the facts may be seen
in Field*.
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. vii.)'. 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.,
* adv. Rtifi^i.
2 "Prodens manifestissime sacramentum," as Jerome himself remarks.
No doubt the primary reference is to Joshua (Field), but the purport of the
glosr is unmistakable.
* leg. fors. 'Irjcyov tov xP'-'^'''^^ <^ov.
* Prolegg. pp. Ixxv. — Ixxxii. See also Lagarde, Ueber den Hebrder
Ephraims von Edessa. On t6 Xa/napeiTiKdv see Field, p. Ixxii. ff., and
Nestle, Uriext, p. 206. For sonie ambiguous references to other (?) ver-
sions see Philostr. haer. cc. 143, £44.
^ See Eichhorn, p. 421 ff.; De Wette-Schrader, p. 122 f.
^ Graecus Venetus Pentateuchi &^c. versio Graeca. Ex unico biblioth.
S. Marci Venetae codict nunc primum una volnmifie comprchensam atqtie
apparatu critico et philologico instructam edidit O, G. Praejatus est Fr.
Delitzsch.
Later Greek Versions. S7
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 d^ptpn tov ovtwtt/v^
so. nini). 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
century.
The style of this remarkable version will be best illustrated
by a few specimens :
Gen. vi. 2 f.
' TiOeavrai yovv ol viets tov 0eov ras Ovyarepas tov avOpw-
irov OTi /caXat ireXovv, kol eXafSov cavrois ywatKas oltto Traacov
<ov clXovto. ^ e(f>r] tolvvv 6 ovTwrT^s Ov Kpivu 7rv€t'yu,a tov/xov
iv T<3 ai/OptDTTO) e's attova, i(j> ois en irip coTi adp^- reXecrovaL
o at r/ixepat avTov eKarov koI eiKoaiv errj.
Prov. viii. 22 ff.
"" o ovTojTjys e/CTTjO-aTo /xe a.p)(^v 68ov ol, irpo roiv epytov aurov
€K Tore. "3 fijj. aiwi'os Ke^v/xai, diro KpaT6<;, diro ■n-poXrjp.p.aTO';
yrj<;. ^ ev ovk a/3wo-ois TreTrXaafxaL, iv ov 7rr]yaL<; ScSo^ao-yne-
vo)V voaTO>v "5 Ti-plv op-q ifxirayrji'ai, irpo raJv /3owwv wSivrj/j.ai'
a-Xpi': OVK iiroir)(T( yyjv, 8to8ous koX Ki(f>aXr]v Kovetav Trj<;
olKOVp.(.V7]%.
Daniel vii. 13.
'' opati)v iKvprjcra Iv 6i)dcrf<Tiv evcftpova^, avriVa tc $w Tat?
' Gebhardt, p. Ivii. ff.
'^ /d. p. Ixii.
• 'OvTwr^s, dvTovpydt, o^<rcamJj are his usual renderings of niH*.
58 Later Greek Versions.
ve<f>eXai^ rtov iroXwv (Js vlev<; avOptairta a.^iKvovjxf.vo<i tqv, fx^expi
T€ T<3 iraXatw rais a/xcpais €(f>0a(re Kavwiriov njvw Trpotn/yayov
€. ** TT^vo) t' ihodrj dp)^a rt/xa tc koi /Sao-iXcia, Travres t€ Aaoi
eOvea kol yXwTTat tt/vw Xarpcvo-cioi'Tf d dpx*^ ^^ ^^PX''^ aiwvos
OS ov TrapeXeucreuTai, a T€ ^acriXcia ev avrep ouk oi^^jcrcteTai.
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 {Ana/ec/a 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 {Kara rrfv vvv
KoivT)v tS)v TpaiKav (f)(ov{]v). A 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 version
Neo-grecque du Pentateuche Polyglotte...re7narques du Dr Lazare
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). A Greek
version of Job (1576) is mentioned by Neubauer in J. Q. R. iv.
p. 18 f.
CHAPTER III.
The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other
Recensions of the Septuagint.
I. The century which produced the versions of Aquila,
Theodotion, and Symmachus saw also the birth of the great
Christian scholar who conceived the idea of using them for
the revision of the Alexandrian Greek Bible.
Origen was in his 17th 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.
Jius. H. K. vi. 16 TocraiiTr] 8i (UTrjyero to) ^ilpiyfvei twv Ofiiov
Xoycoi/ dnriKpLiiwufvrj f^draa-is, wy Ka\ rfjv 'E/ii/j«iSa ■yXcorrai' fKfxa-
of'iv Tas T( Tvapa Ton lovbuiois eyn<^e/jo)neVa$' TrpcoTOTVTrovs avrols
'E^paiav (rToi.\('iois ypa(f)as KTrjpn 'idiotf Tronja-arrOac. Hioron. ^e
virr. ill. 54 ''quis autcm ignorat quod tantiim in scripturis
divinis habiicril studii ut cliam Hebraeam linguam contra
aetatis gentisque suae nalurani ediscerct^?"
The feat was perhaps without precedent, in the third century,
among Christian scholars not of Jewish origin*; in one so
' Eus. H. E. vi. 1.
* Hieron. dt virr. ill. 54.
* Cf. ep. ad Paulam.
* See D. C. B. art. Hebrew Learning Mi. p. 35 1 (T.).
6o The Hexapla, and the 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 Oiigen's period of literary
productivity began, and between the years 220 and 250 he
gave to the world a succession of commentaries, homilies, 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 text 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) ^
Orig. ad Afric. 5 '• fat ravra hi (f>^fJ'i t'l'x'' okvco tov ipevvav Ka\
ras Kara lov8aiovs ypa(f)as koi vdaas ras rjufrepas rals (Kfivwv
avyKplveiv koi opav ras ev aiirais 8ia<jiopds, ei fJ-rj ^opTLKOv yovv
flirdv, eni ttoXv tovto {oarj 8vvapis) irfTTOirjKapfv, yvpLvd^ovres
avTav TOV vovv iv TTiKTais rats eKSotrfcrt koi rals 8ta(j)opais avTotP
fifTci TOV 7rd(rcof pdWov daKeiv t^v (pprjveiav TOiv f^8op.T]KOVTa,,.
aaKovjXfv 8e pr] ayvoflv koi tcis trap e'/cftVois, iva Trpos ^Iov8aiovs
SiaXeyopevoi prj Trpo(r(f)€pu>ptv avTols to pr) Kfipfva iv tois dvTiypd-
(pois avTwv, Ka\ iva crvyxprjaruipfda toIs ipipopivnis Trap' eKeivois, fl
Koi iv To'is rjp.eT€pois ov Kfirai /3i/3Xiots. In Matt. xv. 14 : Ty]v pev
oiiv iv Tols dvTtypd(pois TJjs TraXaias 8iadi]KT]s 8ia(f>a>viav, 6to\i
8i86vTos, ivpopev IdaacrOai, KpiTrjpLCO ^prjadpevoi Tois XoiTrais €k-
86<re(riv Tav yap dpcpi^aXXopivcov irapd tois o 8ia ttjv tS)v
dvTiypd(p(t)v 8ia(f)coviav, ttjv Kplcriv iroirja-dpevoi drro tS>v XoittSiv
CKSocrecoi', to (Tvva8ov iKeivais icf^vXd^apev • kul Tiva pev a^eXiaaptv
fv Tco 'EfipaiKO) pi) Kfipfva, ov ToXpavTes avTo. irdvTT] TrepieXelv, Tivd
de p(T da-repLO-Kcov TrpoaedrjKapev • iva SrjXov jy oti prj Keipfva irnph
Tols o e/c Tajv XoiirStv iK86(T€cov (rvp(j>d)va)s roS 'Kj3paiKci Trpoaedj]-
Kapev, Koi 6 p,ev ^ovX6p,evos rrporJTai avTa- d> 8e Trpoa-KOiTTfi to
ToiovTov, o ^ovXeTai irepX Tijs irapa8o)(TJs avTwv tj p-rf noLrfcrr},
^ See D. C. B. art. Origenes, iv. p. 129 flf.
* 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 other Recensions. 61
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 {LB^tCiv to. Iv rats €»c/cA7ycriats <f>ep6iJieva
avTtyfiac^a Kai vofjioOeT-^aat, t^ dSeXcpoTTjTL diroOiadaL fiiv ras irap
avrots CTTK^epo/xevas /3i/?Aoi»s, KoXaKtvuv 8e 'lovSac'ois Kat ireWetp
Lva fj.€Ta8<jjaiv ijfuv TtSv KaOapwv). 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 frankly 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 TJie Hexapla, and tlie Hcxaplaric and other Recensions
Ps.
xlv. (xlvi.)
I 3
I
•
Hebrew.
He
B. TRANSLITERATED.
Aquila.
nvjob]
\afjLava<r(rq
TW I/tKOTTOtW*
mp "'32'?
[Xja^i/ijfcop
Twv vlS>v Kope
nioby hv
aX • aXfi(o6
tVl vfavtorqTOiv
TCJ'
(Tip
uapa.
wt> D^^^x
fXaetfi • Xavov
*
[6 6ebs fjplv (?)]
tyi HDHD
ftacre • ovo^
AttI? (cal Kparos,
n-iry
^Cp
^OTjdfia
nnv3
^crap(od
(P 6\iy^t(Tiv
nXD K^fDJ
vefiaa fiad
fiipidr]* a(fi68pa.
p ^y
aX . xfy
fir\ Tovra
N->^3 nV
Xco . vipa
ov <f)o^r]6r)(T6pe6a
TDnn
^aaptp
iv rm avTdhXa(T<Tf(7da
pK
aaps
yjjv.
D^D2^
ov^apcoT
(cat iv T« (T<pakkea6a
Dnn
apip,
Spr}
a^a
^X./3
(V Kap8ia
[D^D»
lapip
OaXaaaStv.
* In the MS. \avov
appears in the third
column, where it has dis-
placed Aquila's render-
ing.
* MS. ivpie-qs.
* Cf. Un palimpsest Avibrosiano dei Salmi Esapli (Giov. Mercati) in
Atti d. R. Accademia d. Scienze di Torino, lo Apr. 1896; and E. Kloster-
mann, die Alaildtider Fragvunte der Hexapla. The MS. does not supply
the Hebrew column.
Th£ Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and otiier Recensions. 63
Symmachus.
fTTlVlKlOS'
tS)v v'lSyv Koyje
virep tS>v alaviwv
6 ^60? fjfMlV
ire7roidr)(ris koI lax^s,
^OTjdeia
fvpitTKoyLevos <T(f>6dpa.
dia TOVTO
oi (f>o^r}di](T6pfda
fv ra* <Tvyx(1<T6ai
iprj
fv Kapbii}
6dX.a(T<TS)v.
* MS. reus.
Ps. xlv. (xlvi.) I — 3.
LXX.
(IS TO TeXos'
VTrep tS)v vimv* Kopf
VTrep tS)v Kpv(f)i<ov
6 deos fjpmp f
KUTciCpvyrj Koi 8vvapis,
^orjOos
Tois fiipovaais fjpas'l.
(T(f)68pa.
8ia TOVTO
ov (f>o^T)dr}(r6pfda
(V TO) Tapd(r(Tea0ai
Trjv yrjv
Koi pfTaTtdfadai
Spri
(V Kapbla
BoKacraStv.
* With interlinear
variant toij \ildi% (Tli.).
t MS. 1" manu rifuv
{?Aq. Sym.).
X With interlinear
Theodotion'.
T^ VlKOTTOia*-
Tols viols K6p(
VTTfp tS)v Kpvcbimv
(p8f]*.
f /J ^ t ^
o aeos Tjp<ov
KaTa(pvyfi koi dvvapis,
^orjdos
iv dXiyfrfa-iv
(vpeBrjf (T(f)68pa.
8ia
la TOVTO
ov (Po^Tjdr](r6peda
fv ro) Tapuaaeadai
TTjv yfjv
Koi aaXevfcrdai^
ipn
iv Kapbia
daKacracov.
* With marginal
variants, eh t6 riXos,
^aV6s (lxx.).
t Witli interlinear
variant toxs eiipovtxais
variant eiipeOi^jeTai Tifiif. j ^/xaj (LXX.).
t With interlinear
variant fxtTariOeaOai
(LXX.).
^ Or Quinta? Cf. H. Lietzmann in G. G. A. 1902, v., p. 332: "'die
letzte Colunine ist nicht, wic man anfangs glaubte, Theoduliun, sondern
die Quinta mit Inlerlinearvarianlcn."
64 The Hexapla, and the 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 explicit but less trustworthy.
Eus. H. E. vi. l6 : ravras 8e iTrd<Tas [sc. ras eKboaeis] fVi
TavTov avvayayoiv SieXcov re irpos Ka)kov Kai avmrapadels aXkrj'KaLS
fiera koi avriis rrjs ''EjSpaiiov a-rjfieiuxTfcos rarav Xeyopevcov 'E^aTrXcof
rjfuv dvriypa(jm KaraXiXonrfv, I8l.ais rrjv AkvXov koi 'Svpp.dxov Koi
OeodoTicjvos i'K8ocnv afia rrj rmv e^8ofiT]K.ovTa ev rois TerpaTrXoIs eiri-
KaracTKfvdcras. Hieron. in ep. ad Tit. iii. 9: "nobis curae fuit
omnes veteris legis libros quos vir doctus Adamantius in Hexapla
digesserat de Caesariensi bibliotheca descriptos ex ipsis authen-
ticis emendare, in quibus at ipsa Hebraea propriis sunt charac-
teribus verba descripta et Graecis Uteris tramite expressa vicino ;
Aquila etiam et Symmachus, LXX. quoque et Theodotio suum
ordinem tenant ; nonnulli vero libri et maxime hi qui apud
Habraeos versu compositi sunt tres abas editionas additas habuit."
Cf. his latter to Sunnias and Fretala {ep. 106) and to Augustine {ep.
1 12) and the preface to the Book of Chronicles. Epiph. de mens, et
pond. 7 : riis yap e^ ippTjveias koi Trjv 'E^paiKTjv ypa^fjv 'E^paiKciis
OTOix^eiois K.a\ pi)pa(Tiv avrois ev treXi'Si^ p,iq (TwredeiKUis, aWrjv creXida
dpTiTTapaderov St' 'EXXrjviKav pev ypap-pdrcoi' 'EjSpaiKCdv 8e Xe^fcov
Trpos KaTdXrj\jnv rmv pfj (186t(ov 'ElipaiKo. <TTOi)(fia,,,icai ovtcos toIs
Xfyoptvois vtt' avTov e^airXois r) OKTOTrXoLS rds pev 8vo E^paiKus
creXi8as koi rds f^ twv epprjvfvTcov e'/c TrapaXXrjXov avmrapadeis
pfydXtjv ci)(peXeiav yvdxrecos i'booKe to2s (f)iXoKdXois. lb. 19 Tas 8vo
'E^paiKus TT paras Keipevas, perd ravras 8i rrjv rov AKvXa reraypevrjv,
pf6^ fjv Kal rijv rov ^vppdxov, eVetra rfjv tS>v o/3', ped' as rj rov
Oeo8oricovos crvvreraKrai, koi f^fjs t] irfpirrr] re Kal eurr]^.
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 KwXa^ 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 aeXls, cf. Sir E. Maunde Thompson, Handbook of Greek and Latin
Palaeography, p. 58.
^ See also ib. 18 sq. ; Hieron. Praef. in Paral., and in ep. ad Tit., c. iii.
' Used here loosely iis = K6p./j.ara, the k&Xov 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, Stichometry, p. 23 f.
!
The Hexapla, mid the HexapLaric and other Recensions. 6$
untenable hypothesis that Origen regarded the Lxx. as the
standard of accuracy {de mens, et pond. 19: 'flpiyeV?/? ttvQo-
lx€vo<; rrjv iwv o(i (.Khoaiv aKpi^rf ftvat jxearjv ravTrjv avvWrjKCv,
OTTOJS Ttts ivrevdev Kai ivreWev ep/u,7ji/etas BLcXeyxj}). As 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 KwXa, 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 Hexapla, 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. t.C. tSiws Trjv AkvXov Kai 2v/i./x,a^ot) koI ©eoSoraovos CK^oaiv afxa
rfj Twi' o' eV Tots TCTpaTrAois eVi/caTacr/ctudcras". Epiph. de /nens. et
pond. 19 TiTpuTrXa yap eicrt ra 'EWtj^ikcl orav ai rov AkvXov koi
^vp.fj,d)(Ov Koi Tiuv 0/3' Kai ©eoSoTiwvos epfjLTjvetaL crvvTerayfievat wctl.
The Tetrapla is occasionally mentioned along with the Hexa-
pla in scholia attached to MSS. of the lxx. Thus in the
' In the earlier Cairo palimpsest even such words as ?X and /utJ had
each a line to itself; see Nesile in Haslinjjs' /?.//. iv. 443.
* 'ETnKaTa<TKevd^(ti' is insnpcr t>el postea n'tuinnare {Field, prolc^'i^. p.
xii.); cf. Dio Cass. 1. 23 tA aKdrpr] KarcaKevaat ..Kai iv' aura irupyovz iire-
KaTKjKivaae, Oecononuis (iv. 873), who regards the Tctrapl.i as tlic e.irlicr
woik, understands l^iisehiiis to mean only that Origen added to the LXX.
the three columns containing A'S'O'.
s. s. 5
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 :
iypdc})r] ck tov e^a-rrXov, i^ ov kol TrapirtOr)- dvTef^Xijdr] Se Koi
TT/aos TOV TerpairXovv. Cod. Q Still contains two similar
references to the Tetrapla (O. T. in Greek, 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 Quinta
and Sexta. Eusebius appears to support the latter view, for
he speaks of the Hexapla of the Psalms as including the
Quinta and Sexta {II. E. vi. 16 eV ye \xriv rot? e^aTrXois twv
vt'aX/xwv jixcTa ras iTTLarrjfjLovs Teaarapa<; eK8oo-«is ov fiovov TrefjLTrTrjv
dWa KOL €KTr]v Kat ijSBo/xrjv TrapaOeis ipfjirjveLav). Epiphanius,
on the other hand, seems to limit the Hexapla to the six
columns (/. C. tc3v rea-crapoyv 8e tovtojv <rcA.tSa)v rais Svcrl rats
'E^paiKais avva(}}$ei(rwv e^aTrXd KaXelrai • idv 8e kol tj Tre/xTrTr]
Koi yj eKTT) €pp.r)v€La (rvi'a<ji6<ji)(rtv...6KTa7rXd /caXeirat,. 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 cicon'
TO p Kara TrpocrOijKrjv Ikcito €1? Trjv ruiv o iv tw TerpaaeXiBo) (the |i
Tetrapla), iv Se t<S oKraaeXtSw (the Octapla), mh th cicon, rjyow
St'x^ Tou p. 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 of the
Hexapla where a seventh column appeared, but not an eighth ^
1 Field, Hexapla, ii. ad loc. ; cf. Hieron. in Psabnos (ed. Morin.), p. 66.
3 It occurs (e.g.) in the Hexaplaric .Syriac at 2 Kings xvi. 2.
H
The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 6y
' Pentapla' is cited by J. Curterius from cod. Q at Isa. iii. 24,
and Field's suspicion that Curterius had read his MS. incorrectly
is not confirmed by a reference to the photograph, which ex-
hibits ev T(5 Trei/Tao-eXtSo). Origen's work, then, existed (as
Eusebius implies) in two forms: (i) the Hexapla, which con-
tained, as a rule, six columns, but sometimes five or seven or
eight, when it was more accurately denominated the Pentapla,
Heptapla, or Octapla ; and (2) the Tetrapla, which contained
only four columns answering to the four great Greek versions,
excluding the Hebrew and Gieek-Hebrew texts on the one
hand, and the Qjiinta 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 D=x,
p = /f, and D, ^•, tj' = 0-, and that y n n N 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. 15 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 tiie 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. with the current
Hebrew text and the versions based uj^on it must soon have
' Cf. the practice of .\quila (liurkitt, Fragments 0/ t/ie Hooks of Kingi
(ICC. 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. {r\ kolvij, or
vulgata edtiio, 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 v/hich
Origen was led appeared to him to be little short of an in-
spiration (6t.ov StSdvTOS evpofxev).
Origen began by assuming (i) the purity of the Hebrew
text, and (2) the corruption of the kolvi] 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/ntiel, p. xlvi. : "he assumed that the original Septua-
gint was that which agreeil most closely with the Hebrew text as he knew
it... a step in the wrong direction."
The Hexapla, and the Hcxaplaric 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 koivt;, 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 -l See Add. Notes.
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 ' Apia-TapxeLa a-tjfxara 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 obelus ; see below, p. 71.
' E.g. at Exod. vi. 16, Tt/po-wj' was substituted by Origen for VeSadv.
Whether liis practice in this respect was uniform has not been definitely
ascertained.
' Ilieron. Praef. ad Chron.: "fjuod maioris audaciae est, in editione
I. .XX. Theodotionis editionem niiscuit, asteriscis designans quae minus ante
fuerant, et virgulis quae ex sui)crfluo vi(lcl)antur app(jsita." I'he liook
of Job offered the largest field for interpolation: a scholion in cod. i6i
says, 'Iw/< arixoi a-x X^pij iffreplffKuv, ^erd 8i tQv iartplffKuv ,PS''.
70 The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions.
222 — 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
Se o^cAos Trpos to, a^€TOu/x€va €7ri rov iroLrjTov 7;yow vevoOevfxeva r;
virofie^\yilJiiva' 6 St daTepi(rKO<;. ■ ■u)<; KaXwv elprjfjLevwv twv eTrwv.
Similarly, in connexion with Platonic dicta, Diogenes Laertius
(p/aton. iii. 657) used the obelus Trpo? ttjv dOerrja-iv and the
asterisk irpos T-ijv avfXffiCDVLav T(3v BoyixaTwv. 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 metobelus.
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. de mens, et pond. 2, 3 6 d(rT€picrKos...(Tr]fiaivfi to
eix(pfp6p.fvov prjfia iv tw 'E/3paiK<» Ke'i(T6ai,...ol Se o/3' epfi-qvevToi
naprjKav Koi oi^^ r]piJ.rivfVKav...6l3f\6s 8€...7rapeT!.dr)...Ta.'is Trjs 6eias
ypacpfjS \e^«nv Tais napa rols o/3' epprjvevTals Kfipevms, irapii 8e
rots TTfpi 'AkvXoi' Koi 'S.vppa^ov pf] epcpepoptvais. Schol. ap. Tisch.
not. ed. cod. Sin. p. 76 oaois ol o/3eXot Trpoa-Keivrai prjTols, ovroi ovk
fKdVTo ovT€ Trapa rols Xoiirols eppr]vevTals ovre iv roi E/3/3atKO),
dXXa Trapa popois to7s o' • (cat oaoii ol acrrfpicTKOi TrpoaKeivrai prjrols,
ovToi iv pev rw 'E/3patKW Kal rols Xoiirols ipprjvevrals i(f)epovTO, iv
8e Tols o' OVKiTl.
1 See a complete list of these in Gardthausen, Griech. Paldographie,
p. 288 f.
^ On an exceptional case in which he obelised words which stood in
the Hebrew text, see Cornill, Ezechiel, p. 3S6 (on xxxii. 17).
The Hexapla, a?id tlie Hexaplaric and other Recensions, j i
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 8e ao-repto-Kos n-evo. S/SeXov,
ws ovTtt /x£v TO, €Trr) Tov TTOtrjTOv, 11.7] KoAws 8e Kci/xeva : schol. ap.
Tisch. not. ed. Sin. 1. c. (f>epovTai fjikv irapd TOLS o, (fiipovrai 8e eV
TO) E^pULKw Kttt Trapa. Tois AotTTOis ipfJir/vevTais, ttjv Oiaiv Se p.6vr}v
TrapaXXaaa-oviTiv oi AotTrot kol to 'E/3patK0i' Trapa roiis o'* o^ev
(o^eAto-Tai eV raurw /<at TJarepia-Tai, o>s Trapa ttSo-i /acv (jiep6p.eva,
ovK iv Tois ttuToi? Se TOTTots : also ap. z//^;?. sacr. t'ned. iii.
p. xvii. Ttt 8e TjCTTipKTfJLiva iv ravrQ koI w/ieXia-piva p?;ra...(09
Trapa ttScti fxev (fyepo/xeva, ovk iv tois atiTois Sc ToVots). 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 i.ssue, 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 -^ inpuuTLyp.ivov); the form H^ occurs but
seldom, and only, as it seems, in the Syro-Hexaplar. The
6/3fX6% 'spit' or 'spear,' is represented in Epiphanius by ^i, but
in the MSS. of the lxx. a horizontal straight line ( — )^ has
taken the place of the original form, with or without occupying
dot or dots (— — -4-) ; the form -i- was known as a temuiscus, and
the form -r- as a hypoletnnisais. Epiphanius indeed (pp. cit., c. 8)
fancies that each dot represents a pair of translators, so that the
lemniscus means that the word or clause which the lxx. adds
to the Hebrew had the supjjort of two out of the thirty-six
pairs which composed the whole body, whilst the hypolemniscus
' A somewhat different view of Oiigcn's practice is siig;^cstccl by II.
Lietzinann {Gott. gel. Aiiz. iyo2, 5) and (). .Mucati (A(U d. R. Ace. tt.
Sii. di Torino, 10 Ajir. i8(;6: vol. 31, p. 656 Cf.
- This sonielinies becomes a liook (y>).
72 The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions.
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
metobelus is usually represented by two dots arranged per-
pendicularly (:), hke a colon ; other forms are a sloping line
with a dot before it or on either side (/., •/■)) ^"d 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
Septuagint.
Certain other signs found in Hexaplaric MSS. are mentioned
in the following scholion (Eiiaypiou o-^-, one of the cr;(oXia eiV ra^
Trapoinlas printed in the Notitia ed. cod. Sin., p. 76, from a
Patmos MS.; see Robinson, Philocalia, pp. xiii., xvii. ii.):el(T\v'^
oaa TrporeTayfxevov e'x^ovai tov apidfibv wSf ocra ^Qpiyevrji' eVi-
ytypapfievov e_Y^' Tovray ra> povoavWa^ai, tp...!)(ra 8e irepi dia(f}ci>vias
prjTuiv Tivwv Tcbv tv tS f8a<f)i(o t] €K86afo)v eariv (r)(6Xia, drrep koi.
KctTO} VfvevKv'iav nepiecrTiypevrjv ep^et n poTfTayp.lvr}v, rav dvTi^e^Xrj-
KOTwv TO ^ijiXiov iijTLV o<Ta 8e dixcfii^oKcos f^co Ki'ip-iva prjrd e^u>
vevivKvlav TTepcfcrTi.yp.(vqv e;^et n poTeraypevrjv, 8ia to. cr^oXia irpoae-
redrjaav kot avra tov p^fyakov elprjKOTOs 8i8a(TKdXov, iva pfj 86^rj kutu
Kivov TO (TxoXiov (pfpeadai, iv ttoXXoIs pev Tav dvTLypd({)o)v to)v
pT]T(bv ovTcos e)(6vToov, iv TovTcp 8e prj ovTuis Kftpevmi' r/ fiTjS' oXcoy
(Pfpopevoov, Koi 8id tovto npoaTeBivTmv.
The following extract from the great Hexaplaric MS. known
as G will enable the student, to whom the subject may be new, to
prictise 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. B (printed in the Cambridge lxx.)
on the other 3.
^ Pfolegg. p. lix. sq.
" Lietzmann proposes to read : 'Eivayplov (rxiXia elcrlv, 8a-a...&pi0p6v, 'Up.
oi, oaa 'Qipiyivniv k.t.X.
^ 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.
TJie Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. "^^
Joshua xi. 10—14 (Cod. Sarravianus).
mil e7rta-Tpe\j/ei> is fv \ tw k<u/)co eKfivm (j | KarfXa/3fro * rrjv
: aaa>p \ kul tov ^aaiKea avrrjs \ * aneKTeivfv ev pofx\ -x- (paia :
r)v Se acraip to Trpo\T€pov ap)(ovcra naaco \ tcov ^acnXeioyv TOv\Ttov Kai
cnj-fKTdvn I wav fvnvfov x o : ev \ avrrj ev crTopuTi ^icpovs | (cat
e^a>Xe6p€V(Tav : | — TravTas : Kai ov KaT€Xi\(j)6ri ev avrrj (VTTVf\ov Kai
rrjv aacop €Vf\7rpT](T{v ev irvpi KUi Tra\(ras Tas TrdXftj rcov | ^aaiXeiaiv ■>!■■
TovTcS : I Kai •>:■ Travras : rovs l3acn\Xfis avraiv eXajSev Is \ Kai
avfiXfv avTovs \ fv aropari ^i(povs (5 | e^uikedpevcrev avTovs \ ov
rpoTTov (TvveTa^e \ Muxttjs o nais kv- aWa \ Tracras ras TroXdS ras \\
Ke-)(U)p.aTi(Tp.fvas \ '>!■• avTcov : ovk (vfTTpr]\(T€V irjX ttXtjv ■'><■■ ttjv : a\cr(>)p
povrjv - avTTjv : (veTrprjaev is Kai wara ra crKvXa avTTjs * »j | '^- ra
KTTjvrj : €Tr povop(v\(rav eavrois 01 v'ioi ifjX | * Kara to prjpa kv o ei/ej
'^ TdXaTO TO) o) : avTOvs I 8e -rrai'Tas e^(oXedp€v\crev ev crTopaTi ^Kpovs \
fios ancoXecrev avTovs \ ov KaTiXnrov 7 avTcS : \ ovSe ev evirveov * * *
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 Siop^wTT^s, and the two Hebrew columns and the lxx.
column of the Hexapla were probably written by his own
hand.
Eusebius in a well-known passage describes the costly and
laborious process by which Origen's commentaries on Scripture
were given to the world : H.E. vi. 23 ra;^uypo0oi yap avTu> jrXtiovs
rj (TTTti TOV dpidfiov naprjcrav vwayopevovTi, x^pdvon TfTayptvois nXXij-
Xovs apftfinvTfS, ^i^Xwypdcfjoi Tf ovx tjTTOvs apa Ka\ Kopan eVt to
KaXXiypacpflv rjaKTjpevaii:- ^v inuvTwu ttjv hiovcrav tcov fTriTrjHfiaiv
a<j)dovot> irepiovcriav 6 'A/i^pocrtos napfO-TTjcraTo. Two of tliese
classes of workers, the l3ii:iXtoypd(j)oi and KaXXiypacjioi (of. Gardt-
hausen, Gr. Palaeo}^rapliie., 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 wliich may be attributed to the second
( cntury, " 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
* Sec the rnnfused and inexact statement of liiji[)hanii:.s, d<- mens, ci
pond. 18.
74 ^he Hexapla, and the Hexaplnric 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 {ep. 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 corruptam...in membranis instaurare
conati sunt")'. According to Tischendorf {pi'olegg. in cod. Frid.
■A^^K- § cod. N was written on skins of antelopes, each of
which supplied only two leaves of the MS. The Hcxapla, if
copied in so costly a way, would have taxed the resources even of
Origen's generous epyobiujKTTjs.
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, ^ts 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 Quitita 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
edi*^ions 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 {in Psalmos comm. ed. Morin., p. 5 : "e^uTrXous Origenis
in Caesariensi bibliotheca relegens"; ib. p. 12 : "cum vetustum
Origenis hexaplum psalterium revolverem, quod ipsius manu
^ See Birt, das antike Buchwesen, pp. 100, 107 ff.
^ If the Hexapla was written in lines consisting of only one word like
the Cairo palimpsest, this estimate is far too low ; see Nestle in Hastings,
D. B. iv. p. 443.
The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 75
fuerat emendatum " ; in 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. N : dvTeftXrjBr] Trpos TraXatoVaTov Xt'av dvTiypa<f>ov
o€0Lop6(j)fxevov X^'-P'' ''^^^ ajLOv fidftTvpo'? Tla/xcfiiXov Trpos 8e Tw
TcXet Tov avTOv TraXaiOTarov j3i/3X.LOv...VTro(Tr]ixei(i>(TL<; tov avrov
fidpTvpos uTTe/cciTO €;^ouora ovrtos' MeTeAHMct)9H kaI AiopGcoGH
npoc T<i el&nAA 'npireNoyc ytt* aytoy AiopBcoMCNA (6>. T. in
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 T&yta MeTeAH4)eH kuo toon kata tag eKAoceic
e^AnAcoN, kaI AiopGooGH And t(on TlpireNOYC aytoy rerpAnAcGN
Stina ka) aytoy X^iP' Aio'pecoTO kai ecKoAiorpA(t)HTO (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:
<ivT€l3X.rjdr] Se t^ ^i/SXoi; Trpos to iv Kacaapui avTiypatfiov t^<;
^i(3\ui67]Kr)^ TOV dyiov YLajxf^iXov xapi yeypap-jxevov avTov. 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 12th'. 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 I'loverbs printed in the
Notitia I. c: fi(T(\r)<f)dTqaa.v 6.<f> u>i> evpofief i^airXQv, Kal irdXiv aiiTOxapt
IId/i(/>i\o! Acai Kva^fiio^ biopO^aavro.
^ =IIi'-'"', Gregory, p. 449, Scrivener-Miller, i. p. 183 f.
' See G. A. Smith, J/ist. Gcoi^r. ojratestiitc, p. 143 I.
']6 The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions.
Literature. Fragments of the Hexapla were printed by
Peter Moriniis in his notes to the Roman edition of the Septua-
gint (1587). Separate collections have since been published by
J. Drusius (^Vet. iiiterpretum Graecorujn. ..fragmenta collecta...a
Jo. Driisto, Arnheim, 1622), Bernard Montfaucon {Origenis
Hexaplorum quae supcrsiint, 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,
Analecta zur... Hexapla (Leipzig, 1895), G. Morin, Anecdota
Marcdsolana iii. i (Mareds., 1895; ^'^- Expositor, June 1895,
p. 424 ff.), and the Oxford Concordance. Among helps to the
study of the Hexapla, besides the introductions already specified,
the following may be mentioned : the Prolegomena in Field's
Hexapla, the art. Hexapla in D. C. B. by Dr C. Taylor; the
introduction to Dr Drivei-'s Notes on Samuel (p. xliii. ff.), and
Harnack-Pieuschen, Gesch. d. altchristt. Litt. i. p. 339 ff. For
the literature of the Syro- Hexaplaric version see c. iv.
8. The Hexapla as a whole was perhaps too vast to be
copied', and copies even of particular books were rarely 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 kolvtjv
(id est communem) appellant atque vulgatam..., aliam lxx.
interpretum quae in e|a7rAots codicibus reperitur . . et lerosoly-
^ Hieron. />rai-f. hi 'Yos.: " et sumptu et labore maximo indigent."
3 Ep. ad Siniii. et Fret. 2.
The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions, jy
mae atque in orientis ecclesia decantatur." The Hexaplaric
text receives his unhesitating support: "ea autem quae
iiabetur in €^a7rXor?...ipsa est quae in eruditorum libris incor-
rupta et immaculata Lxx. interpretura translatio reservatur'."
This edition, sometimes described as to Ewe/Siou or to XlaAat-
TTtvatov, or simply 'Op[iyeV7js], is mentioned with great respect
in the scholia 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
:od. N at the end of 2 Esdras says, 'Avtcdvivos dvTefSaXev,
na/x(^tA.os Stop^wcra. The subscription to Esther ends 'Ai^tw-
vLvos 6/xo\oyijTr]<i avrifiaXiv, lidiJ.ffuXos SLopOojcraTO [to] t£v^o<; ev
r^ (fivkaKYJ. The scholion prefixed to Ezekiel in Q introduces
:he name of Eusebius, assigning him another function : Eio-e-
3tos eyo) TO. cr;(oA,ia TrapedrjKa' nayu,<^tA.o? Kat Evcre^ios Siopdw-
ravTo. In its subscription to i Kings the Syro-Hexaplar quotes
I note which runs : Euo-e'^io? ^iopObXTdfjirjv w? aKpt^ScGs 7]8vva.fir)v.
ft would seem as tliough the work of comparing the copy with
he original was committed to the otherwise unknown"^ Anto-
linus, whilst the more responsible task of making corrections
Aras reserved for Pamphilus and Eusebius^ Part of the work
It least was done while Pamphilus lay in prison, i.e. between
\.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
mdertaken in absolute good faith ; Pamphilus and Eusebius
jclieved (as did even Jerome nearly a century afterwards) that
Drigen had succeeded in restoring the old Greek version to its
primitive purity, and they were moved by the desire to com-
nunicate ihis treasure to the whole Church. It was impos-
* Ai/v. Riijlit. ii. 27.
* Identified by some with an Aiiloninus martyred three months liefore
Pamphilus (Lake).
" On o.vTi^6.\\uv and diopOouffOai, see .Seriveiiei-Miller, i. p. 55.
78 The Hexapla, and tlie 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 ihe 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 cuisives
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 MSS. 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 n
Caesarea for the use of Palestine, Hesychius was engaged in 1'
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 ot/ter Recensions. 79
Hieron. ifi praef. ad Paralipp. : "Alexandria et Aegyptus in
Septuaginta suis Hesychium laudat auctorem"; cf. adv. Rufin. ii.
where the statement is repeated^, 2LXi6. praef . 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 Decretum
Gelasii, which even denounces them as apocryphal ("evangelia
quae Ailsavit 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 was more probably* the
martyr Bishop who is mentioned by Eusebius in connexion
with Phileas Bishop of Thmuis, Pachymius, and Theodorus
\H.E. viii. 13 ^i\ka% re kux 'HoT;;(tos kcli Y\.a)(yixio<; kol ©eoSwpo'i
TWX' afxtfyi- Tqv Puyvinov iKKXrjdiuiv iiritrKoiroL). The four names
appear together again in a letter addressed to Meletius (Routh,
rell. sacr. iv. p. 91 ff.); and Eusebius has preserved a pastoral
written by Phileas in prison in view of his approaching martyr-
dom {H. E. viii. 10). Phileas was a distinguished scholar
(ZT. K. viii. 9 SiuTrpei/zas. . ev . .rots Kara (f)iXo(TO(f>iai' Aoyot?, id. lo
TiHy €^w6€i' fxa6r]fid.T0}v €V€Ka ttoXAov Xoyov a$LOv...TOv ojs d\r)Ow<;
(f>iX.o(T64>ov . . fia.pTVf)o<;), and the association of his name with
that of Hesychius suggests that he may have shared in the
work, oi 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 (in Esa. Iviii. 11) of " exemplaria Alexan-
drina."
* Fabricius-Harles, vii. p. 547 (cf. vi. p. 205).
^ This is however mere conjecture ; see Hariiack-Pieuschen, i. p. 442 :
" dass dieser Hesychius. ..idcntisch ist mit ticiu etwa glcichzeitigtn Hihel-
kriliker gleichen Namens, isl nicbt zu erwcisen."
8o The 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 E/ekiel, 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 Koivri had in Jerome's time come to be known
by the name of its supposed author, the martyr Lucian^
Y{\&rox\. praef. in Paralipp.: "Constantinopolis usque Antio-
chiam Luciani martyris exemplaria probat." Cf. (Ep. cvi.) ad
Snnn. et Fret. 2 "[17 Koivii\...2L plerisque nunc AovKiai'dy dicitur."
Ps.-Athan. syn. sacr. sc7'ipt. ilSSofirj TrdXiv Kal reXeurat'a fpfiTjixla tov
aylov AovKiavov tov fieyaXov da-Krjrov Kai fidprvpos, ocrris Koi avTos
Tois TTpoyeypafxufvais eKdocrfcri Ka\ rots 'E^paiKols evTV)(0}v koi eVoTr-
revaas ptr aKpijSeias ra Xfinovra r] kol TrepiTTO. r^s aXrjdeias prjpura
1 Das Btich des Propheten Ezcchiel, p. 66 ft". ; the Hesychian group in
Ezekiel is ^^K^fKpf, i.e. codd. 49, 68, 87, 90, 91, 228, 238 (Parsons). See
also Ceriani in Rendiconti (Feb. 18, i886j.
* For the Octateuch Mr M<=Lean {J. Th. Si. ii. 306) quotes as Hesy-
chian or Egyptian MSS. H.-P. 44, 74, 76, 84, J06, 134, &c.
* Cf. the scholion in cod. M at 3 Regn. iii. 46 ivrevQev 8ia(p6pu}S ^x^'
TO. AvaToXiKo. (SijBKia. The Lucianic text was also known as the (kkXtj-
aiaaTLKi] ^/cSotrts (Oeconomus, iv. 548).
The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 8i
«at 8iop&co(rafievos iv rois oiKeiois rav ypa(f)S)v roirnis f^eSoro tois
^piariapols d8f\(f)ols- /Jrts' 8i] kuI epfiijvfui p-era ttjv (WXijitlp koI
pupTvpLuv Tov iivTov AyLov AovKKivov TT]v jfyovviav en\ AiOKXrjriavov
Kal Ma^ipuivov tcov Tvpdvvcov, I'jyovv to ISw^fipou avTov Tijs e/cSotrewj
/3t/3X{Oi', fvpiOrj fv 'NiKoprjdfia eVt KaixTTavTivov ^atrtXeois tov peyaXov
napa 'lovbalon iv toI^co TTVpyicTKCO ■7TfpiKe)(pL(Tp.fvu> nopidpaTi els
BuKJivXa^iv (cf. the Acts of Lucian in BoUand. i. p. 363). Suidas s.v.
ovTos Tas lepds idij3Xovs Oeaadpevos ttoXv to v66ov ei<rde^ap,fvas, tov
ye \p6vov Xvp.i]vapevov ivoXXd tu>v ev avTois K(ii ri;? avvexovs acf)
eTepa>v els eTepa peTuBicreas . . .aiiTos airdcras avaXaliiav eK ttjs 'Ejdpaidos
eTTiivfi'fwa-aTo y\o)(r(Tr]s. Cf. also Cyr. Alex, z'n Psalmos p7-aef.
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 toi? icpots fiadTjfiacrL avy-
KeKpuTrjixevos, Suid. S.V. avTrjv [sc. Trjv 'EjSpaiSa yA-cSo-crav] (Js to,
fxakicna rjv i^Kpi(3wKojs). From some cause not clearly explained
Lucian was under a cloud for several years between a.d. 270
and 299 (Theodoret', Jd. E. i. 3 aTrorrwaywyos efieive TpiMv
lirLo-KOTTOiv iroX.verov<; xpo'^ov). 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. Jd. E. vii.
32 (^lAoKoAo? 8 ovTO'i Tvepi TO. Beta ypap-ixara koX T17? Fj/3paio}V
€irefjLeXr]6r} y\o)TTr}<;, ws Koi aurats rat? E/?^at/cats ypa(l)ai.<i eiriaTrj-
fx6vu)<; ifTvy^dveLV yv Se owto? tiZv /xaAiora iXevdeptoii', irpoTrai-
8cia9 T€ 7-175 KuO' "FAXrjva^ ovk ap.oipo?). As Pamphilus was
assisted by Eusebius, as Phileas and others wore 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 lo identify this person vviili the ni.u tyr and saint
(iv. p. 498 n.).
"^ lulrodiiction to the N. 7". /;/ Greek, p. 138; c. the Oxford Debate on
the Textual Criticism 0/ the N. 7'., p. ay.
S. S. 6
82 The Hcxapla, 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
elusive 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 e/SSofxi] kpfx-qviia, placing it on a level with
the Greek versions of the Hexapla. But Jerome's identification
of ' Lucian ' with the Koivq presents quite another view of its
character and one whicii is probably nearer to ihe truth. It
was doubtless an attempt to revise the kou'j? in accordance
with the principles of criticism which were accepted at Antioch,
In the New Testament (to use the words of Dr Hort') "the
qualities 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 o
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 ^ (L) was said
■^ Introduction, p. 134 f.
" Cf. F. C. Burkitt, Old Latin and Itala, p. 91, " Lucian's recension I
in fact corresponds in a way to the Antiochian text of the N. T. Both
are texts composed out of ancient elements welded together and polished
down."
^ Prolegg. p. Ixxxiv. f.
* See c. V.
The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. '^'^^
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. 33, 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. m 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 the
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. IJ and A.
3 Regn. xviii. 22 — 28.
"(cai (iTTfv HXuiy irpua tov \iwv 'Kyw vno\iK(iiiiMU Trfjofpt'iTiji
Kvpiov, npocfirjTTjs jJ-ovuiTaTds, Kul ni tt f>o([)f]TaL tov ticutX TfTpuKuaioi
Kui TrfVTTjKiivTa (ii/f^pfs, Koi oi 7rpof/>r)r(u Ta>v dXaayp TfTpaKt'xTim.
"^Sorcorrai/ ovv i}fuv dvo fioai, k(u eKXf^dcrdaiaav tavro'is tov (va kui
fxfX t(T (IT oj IT av Kui fmSfToia-iti' fni ^vXa koi nvp fxtj iwiQiTOMjav ■ /cat
eyo) 7roiTi<rci) tov ^oiiv tov I'iXXov, Kai irvp ov fii] (TTidS). '*Kai (ioare
fv ovopaTL 6(wv i'pwv, kui eyo) fniK(iX((r<>p(ii f'v ovopuTi Kvpiov tov
' Cf. his rrolegomata to Librorum V. T. Canon. Pars prior graece
[Gutting. i8S_^), |). xiv.
- Or, as he denutcs ihciu, h,f, »i, d, />.
6-2
84 The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions.
6(ov fiov, Koi ((TTat, 6 deos os nv fTraKOvcri] arjfxfpov ev Trvpi, ovtos e'crri
d(us. Koi aireKpiBrj 7r«s 6 \abs koi elirfv Ayados 6 Xoyos bv eXdXriaas.
'^Koi flnev 'HXias rois irpo<f)i]Tcus Tr)s ala^vvrji EKXe^aade eavrois
Tov jSoiiv Tov fva, on vfiels ttoXXoi, koi TroiijaaTe irpcoToi, Ka\ fTriKCi-
Xetcrde ev ovofiari 6ewv vpa>v, koi jrvp fXT) eTridrjTe. '^ koi eXajSov tov
^oiiv Koi inoiTjaav, Kai fTreKaXovvro iv ovofxari tov BaaX koi sIttov
'F.TrdKOva-oi' I'jpcov, 6 BaaA, fTraKovcrov i^puiv. Kai ovk fjv cjiavrj kol
OVK rjv aKpoacris- koi buTpf^ov eVt tov SvcrinaTijpiov ov fTroirjcrav.
^^ Koi eyivfTo pearjpjSpia, koi epvKTT]pi(rev avTovs HXias 6 QealiiTrjs
KOL irpocredeTo Xiycov ETrtKaXficr^e eV (pcavfi fieydXj] lifia, p.i^iTOTe d^o-
Xeax'io- Ttf i'aTiv avTco, (cat apa pi]TTOT€ )(^pr]paTi^ei avTos i] prjiroTe
Kadevdfi, Koi f^avaaTrjcrfTai. ''^kol iiTfK.aXovvTO 4v (fxovjj peydXr] koi
KOTtTipvovTO KciTci TOV iOiixpov avTwv €v pux^aipais Koi iv creipopda-
Tais eais fKxvcfcos a1p.aTos eir' avTovs.
22 HXeioi' BA I Kvpiov} pr tov BA | oni Trpu(f)r]Ti]s 2** BA | oi
Trpo(pi]Tai 2"j om oi A | tov aXcrovs BA | om TfTpnKoaioi 2^ A
23 om ovv BA I orn km emQ. em ^vXa A | ^vXa] tcov ^vXcov B | tov
aXXov^ + Kai SoxTco em Ta ^vXa A 24 6ea>v^ deov A | eai' BA | om
a-r)p.(pov BA I om ecrn BA | aTreKpiOrjuav BA | enrov B emav A |
ayaOos o Xoyos or] koXov to prjpa o BA 25 HXftov BA | ^ovv^
pocrxov BA I Kai noi. TrpcoToi oti ttoXXoi vpeis BA | eTriKoXeaaade
B I 6ea>v^ deov BA 26 eXa^ev A | /iiouj^] poaxov BA + ov eScoKev
avTois A I BaaX I^J + ek irpcoidev ecos pearipldpias BA 27 HXeiou
BA 1 TTpoaedeTO Xeycov] enrtv BA | apa\ oti 6eos ecTTiv BA | prj-
TTore I**] oTi BA I Tis eaTiv avro)] avTO) ecTTiv BA | Ka6evbei\ + avTos
BA 28 Kara tov ediapov avTutv] om B KUTa to Kpipa avTcov
A I p.axaipa B | om ev 3" B
A 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. 'HXtas for 'HXeiov, the repeti-
tion of TT pocpTjTTjs before povaTaTos, the substitution of tmv dXaav
for TOV (iXaovs, of direKpidrf for dTreKpidijaav, and of ayados 6 Xoyos
for KaXov TO prjpa, and the addition of ar]pepov. (2) Others seem
to indicate an attempt to get nearer to the Hebrew, e.g. Sortoo-ai'
ovv (-"UPl^l), l^ovv ("13) ; or an adherence to an older reading which
the Hexaplaric LXX. had set aside, e.g. the omission of bv eSw^e?'
avTOis^ and eK rrpcoidev ecos pta~qp^pias. On the Other hand
Lucian follows the current Hebrew in K.aTa t6v ediapov avTcbv,
though he substitutes the easier ediu-pos for Aquila's Kpip.a, 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 at/ loc.
"^ Notes on the Heb. text of the Books of Samuel, p. 11. f.
TJie Hexapla, and the Hcxaplaric ajui other Recensions. 85
stilution 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-evidcntly
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 suffered martyrdom at Nicomedia under Maxiinin
in the year 311 or 31 2^ According to the Pseudo-Athanasian
Synopsis, his recension of the lxx. vvas subsequently discovered
at Nicomedia, bricked up in a wall. The story may have
arisen from a desire to invest the ifiSoixrj (as ' Lucian ' is called
by the author of the Synopsis) with the same air of romance that
belonged to the Qiiinta and Sexta, both of which were found,
as he asserts, eV ttiOol's. It is more probable tbat 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 avX-
XovKiai'LCTTaL". 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 i,xx. 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 Hesyciiius, if they belonged
' Mason, Persecution of Diocletian, p. 324.
^ Newman, Ariaus, p. 6 f . ; (iwatkiii, Studies of Aria nism, p. 31 n.
•' Hon, Introd. p. 143.
* On Lmi.ui's work see llic art. l.tdiauic Recension ol the LXX. in
Ch. 0. R. (Jan. 1901); K. Ilniilscli. Per r.tiJrante.xt d'es Oktateiich (iu
Mittctlun^en des Septurtt^inta Untaneliinens, lIcU i., Hcilin, 1910.
86 The Hexapla, mid the Hcxaplaric and other Recensions.
to the Delta or the valley of the Nile ; in Origan'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 kowti represented by Hesychius or Lucian.
Fortunately the task was beyond his strength, and MSS. and
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.
^ Praef. in Paralipp.
' Cf. Hort, Introd. p. 14a.
CHAPTER IV.
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 was 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 three or at the most four of the Bishops of Rome during
the same period bear Latin names'. In Gaul the Greek tongue
had sjjrcad up the valley of the Rhone from Marseilles to
Vienne and Lyons; the Viennese confessors of a.d. 177 used
it in their correspondence both with the Roman Hishops and
with their brethren in Asia Minor; the Bishop of Lyons wrote
in the same language his great work against the false };nosis of
the age. The Old Testament as known to Clement of Rome
and Ircnaeus of Lyons is substantially the Greek version of
' 'ihe evidence is collected by Caspar!, Qucllen zur Gesch. d. Tatif-
svmhols, iii. 267 f., and sunniiarised hy Saiiday and Ilcadlani, i\'i7///(f//.r. n.
lii.ff. '
88 Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint.
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.
1 On the other hand reasons have been produced for suspectint^ 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 ah^eady 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 Versions based upon the Septuagint. 89
Aug. de ci-ti. Dei xviii. 43 ex hac LXX. inteipretatione etiam
in Latinam linguam interpietatum 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 nianus 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 Hieronytnum): "ideo autem
desidero intcrpretationem 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 wiiich these
differences are found in extant texts'.
Genesis xlviii. ij f.
Cyprian, testimonia i. 212. Lyons MS.
''ubi vidit autem Joseph quo- ''videns autem Joseph quod
niam superposuit pater suus misisset pater ipsius dcxteram
manum dextcram super caput suam super caput Ephrem, grave
Efifraim, grave illi visum est, et ei visum est, et adprchendit lo-
Iadprchendit Joseph manum pa- scph manum patris sui ut aiifer-
'.ris sui auferrc cam a capite ret earn a capite Eplircm super
Effraim ad caput \Lanassc. '^dixit caput Manassis. '"dixit autem
lutcm loscpli ad patrcm suum Joseph patri suo Non sicut,
Non sic, pater; hie est primi- pater; hie enim primitivus est ;
ivusnious; supcrpoiic dexieram impone dextram tuam super
uam super caput suum. caput huius.
' To facilitate comparison obvious errors of the MSS. and urtliographical
lecnliarities have l)cen reniDveil.
' On the MSS. of the Testimonia cf. O. L. /<•.»/>, ii. p. i 2.5 ff.
90 Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint.
Lyons MS
^'et dixit Moyses
ad Aron Quid fecit
tibi populiis hie quia
induxisti super eos
peccatum magnum ?
*^et dixit Aron ad
Moysen Noli irasci,
domine ; tu enim scis
impetumpopulihuius.
^^dixerunt enim mihi
Fac nobis deos qui
praeeant nos ; nam
Moyses hie homo qui
eduxit nos de Aegyp-
to, nescimus quid
faetum sit ei. ^et
dixi eis Quicunque
habet aurum demat
sibi. et dederunt mihi,
et misi ilkid in ignem,
et exiit vitulus.
Exod. xxxii. 21 — 24.
WiJRZBURG
Fragments.
^'et dixit Moyses
ad Aron Quid fecit
populus hie quia in-
duxisti super eos pec-
catum magnum? ^^et
dixit Aron ad Moysen
Noli irasci, domine;
tu enim scis impetum
populi huius. -^dixe-
runt enim mihi Fac
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
iilud in ignem, et exiit
vitulus.
* cod. demiserunt
Munich
Fragments.
"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
tollatadme; et dede-
runt mihi, et proieci
in ignem, et exivit
vitulus.
t hiat cod.
Leviticus iv. 27 — 29.
Lyons MS.
^'si autem animadeliquerit in-
prudenter de populo terrae in
faciendo vel unum ex omnibus
praeceptis Dei quod non faciet,
et neglexerit, ^^et cognitum ei
fuerit delictum in quo deliquit*
in eo, et adferett priniitivum de
ovibus feminum immaculatum
quod deliquit ; ^'et imponet ma-
num supra caput eius et Occident
primitivum delicti in loco in quo
occidunt holocausta.
* cod. delinquil f cod. adfert
WuRZBURG Fragments.
*7si autem animaunadeliquerit
invita de populo in terra eo quod
fecit unum ab omnibus praecep-
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 holocausta.
I
Ancietit Versions based tipon the Septuagint. 91
Micali
Cyprian, testimonia ii. 12.
et til, Bethleem, domus illius
Ephratlia, num exigua es ut
constituaris in milibus luda? ex
te mihi procedet ut sft princeps
apud Israel, et processiones eius
a principio, a diebus saeculi.
V. 2.
Wkingarten Fragments.
et tu, Be[thleem,] domus [ha
bita]tioni[s^ Efrajta, nu[mquid
mini[nia es] ut sis [in milibus
luda? [ex te mi]hi pi-o[diet qui"
sit prin[ceps in] Istra[hel, et
eg]ressus ip[sius ab] initi[o, ex
diebus] saec[uli].
Isaiah xxix. 11, 18.
WuRZBURG Fragments.
"et erunt verba haec omnia
sicut verba libri huius signati,
quern si dederint homini scienti
litteras dicentes ex lege haec, ct
dicet Non possum legere, signa-
tum est enim...'^et audient in
die ilia surdi verba libri, et qui
in tenebris et qui in nebula;
oculi caecorum videbunt.
Cyprian, festimonia i. 4.
"et erunt vobis hi omnes ser-
mones sicut sermones libri qui
signatus est, quern si dederis
homini scienti litteras ad legen-
dum dicet Non possum legere,
signatus est enim...'^sed in ilia
die audient surdi sermones libri,
et qui in tenebris et qui in
nebula sunt; oculi caecorum vi-
debunt.
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
I)r 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 vviiere both types
3f text existed, he distinguished them by the designations
African Latin' and 'European Latin,' aj^plying the term
Italian'* to later revisions of the European text. The classi-
kation of the Old Latin authorities for the O. T. is less
idvanccd, and owing to the fragmentary character of most of
' Hurkilt {O. L. and Hula, |). yj) pro|)ONcs irffitionis.
•' Jn/roiiiiilivii, p. 78 IT. Cf. Wcstcott, Canon, p. 252 fl'.; Wordsworth,
\Pt). /,. lUblical lexis, i., p. xxx. ff.
vie- 1 •' (^11 .Xugiisiinc's use of llii.-, icrm see F. C. BmkiH, O. L. and Itala,
'• 55 fl-
92 Ancient Versions based iipofi the Septnagint.
the MSS. it is more difificult ; 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 {Bibliorum sacrorum Latinae versiones aniiquae...
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 command*.
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
^ Cf. Berger, Histoire de la Vulgate, p. 6 ; Kennedy, in Hastings' D. B.
p. 58 ff.
2 Introduction, P- 83.
'^ For this purpose the Vienna Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticonim
Latinorum is tlie best collection available ; but it is still far from complete.
* A revised Sabatier is promised by the Munich Academy (Archiv, viii.
■2, p. .^,11 ff.).
Ancient Versions based upon the Septiuigint. 93
the time of Ongen. Wliat 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
codices.
We proceed to give a list of the extant remains of the Old
Latin Version of the lxx., and the editions in which they are
accessible.
Old L.vriN Fragments of the Old Testament.
i. Pentateuch.
Cofl. Lu^jduncnsis, vi. (Uiysse R( bert, PcniatciicJii c Codice
Lu}^dtinensi versio Latina antiquissima, Paris, 1 88 1 ; Libroruni
Levitici et S luncrorum versio autiqua Itala e cod. pcraiitiquo in
bibliotlieca Ashburnhamicnsi consfnuito., London, 1868; Dclislo,
Decou''ertc d'un, tii's nncieiinr 7'frsion Inline dc diiix tivns dc
ia Bible in the Journal des Savants, Nov. 1895, p. 702 ff. ; U.
Robert, Heptateuchi partis post, versio Lat. anliquissiina e cod.
Lttgd., Lyons, 1900".
' Rules of Tyconiiis, \>. cxvi. f.
-' Histoire di la Vuli^ate, p. 6. Cf. Driver, .Samuel, p. Ixxvii. f.
' Vaiiae lectwnes, ii., p. 426.
* Monitm^nta sacra el profinia, I. i., |i. xvi. ; Le recetisioni dei LXX e la
versiiiiit iatnia detta Itala {Rcndtconti^ I'V-l). 18, i88()). See also Uiiver,
Notes on Samuel, p. Ixxviii. f. ; Kennedy, in I lastinjjs' D.fi., I.e. ; Nestle, Ki>i-
ftihruiii;'^, pj). 148 note, 280 [E. Tr., p. 182 f.]; Wordswoilh- While, p. 654.
'•" liurkitt, Rules of Tycoiiius, |). cxvii.
• Cf. N. M'Lean in/. Th. St. ii. 305 (T.
94 Ancient Versions based upon the Septnagint.
Containing Gen. xvi. 9 — xvii. 18, 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 1 i. i — xviii.
30, XXV. 16 — xxvii. 34; Numbers^ ; Deuteronomy^.
Fragmenta Wirceburgensia palimpsesta, .? vi. (E. Ranke, Par
palitnpsestoruni Wircebin'gensium^, 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. I — 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. Ziegier, Bruchstiicke einer
vorhieronymianische>i Ubersetzuitg des Pentatetichs, Munich,
1883).
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. 1 —
31, xxx. 16 — xxxii. 29.
Lectiones ap. Cod. Ottobonian., viii. (C. Vercellone, variae
leciioiies, 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. II — 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 — 37, xxvi. I — 27, xxvii. i — 5.
Fragmenta Philonca (F. C. Conybeare, in Expositor iv. iv.
p. 63ff.)-
Consisting of Gen. xxv. 20 — x.wiii. 8 in a Latin version of
Philo, quaest.
Fragmenta Vindobonensia (J. ^€i'i\^€\m.,Paliinpsestus Vitidob.,
1885).
Containing Gen. xii. 17 — xiii. 14, xv. 2 — 12.
^ Leviticus and Numbers formed until recently a separate codex, see j
Robert, p. vi. f.
- Deut. xi. 4 — xxxiv. 12 belongs to the fragment announced by Delislej
and published by Robert in 1900.
<* Belonging to the Library of the University of WUrzburg.
Ancient Versions based upon the Scptuagint. 95
ii. Historical Books.
Joshua, Judges i. i — xx. 31.
Cod. Lugdunensis (in the portion published by Robert in 1900).
Ruth.
Cod. Complutensis, ix., Madrid, Univ. Libr, (S. Berger in
Notices et Extraiis, xxxiv. 2, p. iigff.).
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.
antehieron. vers, fragment a Vindobonensia, 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, Weissbrodt, 1887, and A. Diining, 1888. Frag-
ments of 2 Regn. at Vienna published by J. Haupt, 1877. A
Vienna palimpsest containing considerable fragments of i — 2
Regn. (J. Belsheim, Palimpsestiis Vind., 1885). Readings from
the margin of Cod. Goth. Legionensis* printed by C. Vercellone,
ii. p. I79ff. ; cf Archi7>^ viii. 2. (The Verona and Vatican frag-
ments should perhaps be classed as Vulgate.)
I Esdras.
An O. L. text is to be found in the Paris MS. Bibl. Nat. lat.
Ill, tlie Madrid .M.S. E. R. 8, and another in a Lucca MS. ap.
Lagarde, Scptuagitttastudien^ 1892.
Judith, Tobit.
Cod. Complutensis.
Cod. Goth. Legionensis.
Cod. Vatic, regin. (Bianchini, Vindiciae,\). cccl.f. ; Tobit only).
O. L. texts are also to be found in the I'aris MSS. Bibl. Nat.
lat. 6,93, 161 (Tobit), I 1505, 1 1549 (Judith), 11553, in ^l^e -Munich
MS. 6239, the Milan MS. Amb. E 26 infr. (Tobit), and the Oxford
MS. Botll. auct. E. infr. 2 (Judith). See Notices et Extraits
xxxiv. 2, p. 142 ff. Of these texts some were printed by Sabatier,
and Munich 6239 is in Belsheim's Libr. Tobiue, &c. (1893).
Esther.
Cod. Pcchianus (Sabatier).
Cod. Vallicellanus (Bianchini, Viiidiciae, p. ccxciv. ff.).
' See V. Scluiltze, die Quedlinburger ItalaMitiiatnreti der k. Bibliothek
in Berlin (Munich, 1898).
- On th.-sc see Beij^er, Ilist. dc la Vul^att, p. iSf., ami tlic caution in
0. L. ant Itala, p. 9 f.
g6 Ancient Versions based upon tJie Septuagint.
Cod. Compliitensis (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.
11553 (Sabatier) and the Milan MS. Amb. E. 26 inf. (A. Peyron,
Cic.fragfiim. i. 70 fif. (1824).
(See Berger, op. cit.)
Psalms. ' "'• POF'TICAL Books.
Cod. Veronensis (in Bianchini).
Cod. Sangermanensis (in Sabatier).
A Reichenau palimpsest described by Mone, /. 11. gr. Afessett,
p. 40.
Fragments of the wSai edited by F. F. Fleck (Leipzig, 1837),
and L. F. Hamann (Jena, 1874).
Job.
Fragment. Floriacense (Sabatier). Containing c. xl. 3 — 9.
Readings from the margin of Cod. Goth. Legionensis {Notices
et Extraiis., p. iii fif.).
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles.
Readings in a St Gallen MS., see Notices et Extraits^ p.
137 ff. Fragments published by Sabatier, Vogel, Mone, Berger
(Hastings' D. B. iii. p. 50).
Wisdom, Sirach.
See Lagarde, Mittheilungen i. (Gottingen, 1884). C. Donais,
Une ancienne Version latifie de V Eccldsiastique (Paris, 1895).
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. ii;
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, Fragf/t. versionis ante-
Hieronymiaiiae., Marburg, 1868).
Containing Hos. vii. 6- ix. i, Amos viii. i — ix. i, ix. 5 — 9,
Mic. ii. 3 — iii. 3.
Ancient Versions based upon the Septiiagint. 97
Fragmenta Wein;4artensia, v. (E. Ranke, Fj'a^m. v. ante-H.y
Vienna, 1868; P. Corssen, Zivei neue Fragmente d. Weingar-
tener Prophetenhandschrift, 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; 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 — 1 1, xlii.
5, 6, 14, xliii. 22 — xliv, 5, 19— xlv, 2, xlvi. 9 — 23, xlvii. 2 — 15, xlviii.
22 — 30; Dan. ii. 18 — 33, ix. 25 — x. 11, xi. 18 — 23.
Fragmenta Stutgardiana (E. Ranke, Antiqtiissitna V. T.
versio?iis Lattnae fragmenta, Marburg, 1888).
Containing Amosvii. 13 — 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. P;iuli Carinthiaci (A. Vogel, Beitrdge
zur Herstellung der A. L. BibeliibersetzuHg, 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 Latinum conversi a palim.psesto Vaticano eruta, Helsing-
fors, i88i)i.
Contaming 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 Jtatu, Camb. 1 896).
Containing Jer. xvii. 10 — 17, x.\ix. 13 — 19.
Codex Vallicellanus B. vii. (Bianchini, Vindiciae, p. ccxiii.).
Containing Baiuch.
O. L. texts of Bariicli are also to be found in the Paris M.S.S.
Bibl. Nat. lat 11, 161, U951, and Arsenal. 65, 70; and in the
Monte Casino MS. 35, and the Reims MS. i.
Copious cxlr.icia from iii(j.-jl of ihc books of the O. L. Bible
are given in the anonymous Liber de dii'inis scripturis sive Specu-
lum, wrongly attributed to St Augustine (ed. F. VVeihrich in
the Vienna Corpus, vol. xii.). Two other patristic collections of
O. L. excerpts may also be mentioned here — the Tes/iinonia of
St Cyprian (ed. Hartel, Corpus, vol. iii. i), and the til>er regu-
larum Tyconii (ed. F. C. Burkitt, in Texts and Studies, iii. i).
See also the Collatio Carthaginiensis printeil in Dupin's Optatus
(Paris, 1700), p. 379 flf.
' rhi^-^e frafjtnents, as T am informed by Dr W. O. E. Ocsterlcy,
contain an almost purely Vuigaic text, and shuuld (lerhapsi disappear frum
this list.
S. S. 7
98 Ancient Versions based upon the Septiiagint.
(2) Latin versions of the Lxx. revised or taken over by
Jerome.
The great Pannonian scholar, Eusebius Hieronymus (a.d.
329 — 420), began his "useful labours'" upon the Old Testa-
ment at Rome about the year 383, probably (as in the case ot
his revision of the Gospels) at the suggestion of the Roman
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 into
the copies of the earlier work, but the opportunity was seized
of remodelling the Latin Psalter after the example of the
Hexapla.
Praef. i?i libr. Psalmorntn : "psalterium Romae dudum posi-
tum emendaram et iuxta LXX. interpretes, licet cursim, magna
illud ex parte correxeram. quod quia rursum videtis, o Paula
et Eustochium, scriptorum vitio depravatum, plusque antiquum
errorem quam novam emendationem valere, cogitis ut...renas-
centes spinas eiadicem notet sibi unusquisque vel iacentem
lineam vel signa radiantia, id est vel obelos ( -r ) vel asteriscos ( Jjc- ) ;
et ubicunque viderit virgulam praecedentem (-i-), ab ea usque ad
duo puncta (:) quae impressimus, sciat in LXX. translatoribus
plus haberi ; ubi autem stellae (•)«(•) 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
Psalterium Romanum and Psalterium Gallicanum respectively.
Both recensions established themselves in the use of the Latin
Church*, the former in the cursus psallendi, the latter in the
bibliotheca or Church Bible. At length Pius V. (f 1572)
^ Aug. ep. 82 (ad Hieronymum) : "hi qui me invidere putant utilibus
laboribus tuis."
^ Cf. adv. Rupn. ii. 30 " psalterium... certe emendatissimum iuxta LXX.
interpretes nostro labore dudum Roma suscepit" ; where, as Westcott saysj
(Smith's D. B. iii. 1698 «.), he seems to include both revisions. |j \
Ancient Versions based upon the Septiiagint. 99
ordered the Galilean Psalter to be sung in the daily othces, 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-
terium 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 based on Coverdale's version,
which was "translated out of Douche and Latyn into Eng-
lishe"; and many of its peculiarities may be traced to the Lxx.
through the Gallicm Psalter incorporated in the Vulgate ^
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 Latin and his 'Hebrew '3
Psalter.
Roman.
"Dominusdabitver-
bum evangolizantibus
virtute multa; '^rex
virtutu 111 dilecti,et spe-
cie! domus dividere
Galmcan.
Hebrew.
"Dominusdabitvcr- '•'Dominc,dabis ser-
buin evangelizantibus monem adnuntiatri-
virtiite multa; '^rex cibus fortitudinis plii-
virtutum jjc- dilecti: et rimae, '^reges exerci-
speciei domus divi- tuum foederabuntur,
spolia. '*si dormiatis dere spolia '■♦si dor- foederabuntur et pul-
in mcdios cleros, pen- miatis inter medios critudo domus dividet
nae columbac dear- cleros pennae colum- spolia. '^si dormicritis
gentatae,ctposteriora bae deargentatae et inter medios termi-
dorsi eius in specie posteriora-Scdorsieius nos,pennae columbae
auri. \iiiafi\alma\ in pallorc auri. dia- deargentatae et pos-
'"currusDeidertiniiii- psahna '^currus teriora eius in virore
Inim multiplex, milia Dei decern milibus auri '"rurrus Dei
laclantium. Dominus multiplex, milia lac- innnmcrabiks, milia
' Marline, di- ant. rit. i. p. iS f.
* Cl. Hp WcstcoU, History of the /English Iiihl,\ pp. 2o6 fT., 351 ff. ,
Kirkpatrick, Psalms, Inlr. p. Ixxiii f.
* E<liti()ns ]nil)lished in 1S74 i)y Bacr and Tischcndorf (^I.ib. Psalm.
Jleb. atque Lai.) and by Lagardc {/'salt, iuxta Ilcbruios).
7—2
lOO Ancient Versions based upon the Septiiagint.
Roman,
in illis in Sina in
sancto. '^ascendens in
altum captivam duxit
captivitatem, dedit
dona hominibus. et-
enini 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.
Gallican.
tantium : Dominus in
eis JSf in : Sina 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
faciet nobis Deus sa-
lutarium nostrorum.
diapsahna. ^' Deus
noster, Deus salvos -r
faciendi : et Domini
^ Domini : exitus
mortis, ^^verumtamen
Deus confringet capi-
ta inimiconim suo-
rum, verticem capilli
-i-perambulantium in
delictis suis.
Hebrew.
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. sem-
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 Speculum^.
Jerome, who had access to the Hexapla at Caesarea, took
adv.ntage 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, O. L. and liala, pp. 8, 32 I.
- Praef. in libr. Job: "qui adhuc apud Latinos iacebat in stercore et
vermibus scatebat errorum."
2 ibid, "integrum immaculatumque gaudete."
7
Ancient Versions based tipon the Sept7Mo;int. 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 Unes had been restored to this long mutilated book*.
A few brief specimens from Lagarde's text^ will suffice to
shew the character of the work.
X. 4 aut sicut homo perspicit, perspicis? % aut sicut videt
homo, videbis ? ^ aut humana est vita tua? aut anni tui sunt
tanquam SS dies V hominis ?
xix. 17 et rogabam uxorem meam v^ invocabam -;- blandiens
filios % uteri mei ^; at iUi in perpetuum despexerunt me; cum
surrexero, locuntur ad me.
xlii. 7 et defunctus est Job senex plenus dierum. -i- scriptum
est autem 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 l^een 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
Septuagint.
Praef. in libros Salomonis: "tres libros Salomonis, id est,
Proverljia, Ecclesiasten, Canticum canticorum, vctcri LXX. auc-
toritati reddidi, vcl anlcpositis lineis (-f-) superflua quacque
' Ad Pammcuh.: " vet erem edit ioncm nostrae translalioni conipara, et
iquido providehitis quantum distet inter vcritatem et mendacium. "
ferome's satisfaction with his original revision of Job was continued
;ven after he had produced a new version from the Hebrew; in the
weface to the latter he leaves the student tree to choose between the two
"eligat unusquisque quod vult ").
■'' Praef. in yob ed. lieb. See below, \A 11., c. ii.
"In Mittheilungen, ii.
I02 Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint.
designans, vel stellis (Jjs) titulo(?) praenotatis ea quae minus
habebantur interserens...et ubi praepostero ordine atque per-
verse sententiarum fuerat lumen ereptum suis locis restituens
feci intellegi quod latebat." Praef. in libr. Paralipomenoii:
"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...
at 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 tarn 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."
i 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 Lucinium): "LXX.
editionem et te habere non dubito." Ep. 106 (ad Siinn. et Fret.):
"editionem LXX. interpretum quae et in e^anXoh codicibus repe-
ritur et a nobis in Latinum sermonem fideliter versa est." Cf.
Ep. A7igusti7n 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 prions 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 haxd and,
Ancient 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 Sapicntia Salomonis inscribitur et in
Ecclesiasticc.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 librum 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.
LiiKRATURK. Besides the editions already mentioned the
student may consult with advantaj;e Eiciihorn, Einlcituni^, i.
321 ; N. Wiseman, Essays, i. (London, 1853) — a reprint of his
Two tetters on some parts 0/ the controversy concerning i Joh. t.
7; B. F. Wcstcolt, art. Vuli^uite \n Smith's D. B. iii. ; H. Ronsch,
Italii u. Vul^ata (Marburg;, i86q); F. Kaulen, Handhuch zur
Vuli^ata (Mainz, 1870); Ziegler, Die lat. BtbelUbersctzuni^en vor
' Pniif. ad Moral i a in yob.
' Cf. e.g. Berger, op. cit. p. xi. : " Ics textcs ties .inciennes ver>ioiis ct
de la nouvelle sont conslamment mtl^s et enchevctri^s dans les manuscriis."'
* Oil the relation of Jerome's Lalin Jiulith to the Septuagint see
C. J. Hail in Speaker's Cominnitary, Apocryjilia, p. 257 AT.
I04 Ancient Versions based upon tJie Septitagint.
Hteronymus {M.\imch, 1879) ; Lagarde, Probe einer neuen Ausgabe
der lat. Ubersetzungen des A. T. (1870) ; A. Ceriani, Le recensioni
dei LXX e la versione latina detta Itala, 1886; L. Salembier,
Une page inSdite de Fhisioire de la Vulgate, Amiens, 1890 ;
Bleek-Wellhausen (1893), P- 553 ^- 5 Scrivener-Miller, ii. p.
191 ff.; Gregory, p. 949 ff. ; F. C. Burkiit, The Old Latin and
the Itala, in Texts and Studies (Cambridge, 1896) ; E. Nestle,
Urtext, pp. 84 ff. [specially valuable for the bibliography of the
Latin versions] ; H. A. A. Kennedy, The Old Latin Versions,
in Hastings' D. B. iii. pp. 47 — 62; Corssen in Jahresb.f. d. class.
Altertumswissejisch (1899); Latin Versions of the O. T., art. in
Ch. Q. R. (Apr. 1901) ; W. O. Oesterley in/. 77/. Stud. v. vi. (text
of Min. Proph.).
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
* See Gospel ace. to St Mark, p. xiv. f. The Clementine Homilies (i.
8 flf.) attribute the foundation of the Alexandrian Church to Barnabas. But
a yet earlier beginning is possible. In Acts xviii. 24 cod. D reads 'A\e^-
a,vhpii)%...h'i y)v KaTrfxrujiipoi iv ry irarpLSi top \6yov roO Kvpiov, on which
Blass (Acta app. p. 201) remarks: "itaque iam turn (id quod sine testi-
monio suspicandum erat) in Aegyptum quoque nova religio permanaverat."
"^ Acts ii. 9 f. ol KaroiKovvres . . .MyvTTTov, lb. vi. 9 ri.vk% iK t^s (rvfayu-
yrjs r^s \€yo/ji.iyr}s...'A\e^avdpiui'. Cf. Report of the Egypt Exploration
Fund, 1899 — 1900, p. 54.
^ Cf. what is said of St Anthony in the Vita Antonii (Migne, P. G.
XX vi. 944 sq.).
Ancient Versions based upon the Septicagitit. 105
wnting with characters which are chiefly of Greek origin'.
This writing, known as Coptic — a corruption of AiyuTrnos — is
found with some variations in all MS. fragments of the
Egyptian versions of the Old and New Testaments.
</rhe 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
writing with only the New Testament in view, but his argu-
ment applies 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*. i"]
pThe 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 tliat
increased knowledge of the language has added to the dialectic
comj)lications with which the Coptic scholar has to struggle'.
• Ofttie 31 letters of the Coptic alphaliet 7 only (uj, tj, ^, o, -s, (^, ■\)
are not from the fircck. On the pre-Christian systems see Cleni. s/rom.
V. 4 ol trap Alyvir rlois iraiS(v6fXii>oi irpCJTov /xif irdi'TO3v...^K/iai'0a.vov<n rrju
iiri(fTo\oypa(ptKT)y KaXnvixivriv (ihe Deinolic), ituripav Si riji' UpaTiKTfi' . . .
V(tTr-Tr)v d^ Kal TtXtvralav rriv ltpoy\v(f>iKriv,
• Scrivener-Miller, ii. p. 97.
» /ftfr. to N. 7'. in Greek\ p. 85.
* Siur. bibl. froi^menta Coplo-Sahidua, i. p. viii.
* Sciivener-Mill<T, ii. p. 105 f.
' Hastings' D. B. i. p. 671. Cf. T. E. Brightman in/. Th. St. i. 154.
' The Uemotic, as it is known to us, appears to present no dialectic
lo6 Ancient Versions based upon the Septnagijit.
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 t6 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
tlie work of the single class — the scribes: see Hyvernat, £tnde sitr 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 ^j-ja'/iaf= Upper Egypt. On some
characteristics of the several dialects see Hyvernat, p. 431.
- Cf. SteindorfF, Die Apokalypse des Elias, p. 2.
Ancient Versions based tipon the Septuagird. 1 07
one MS. of Ezekiel ; in Sahidic, though few complete MSS. of
any Biblical 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).
iThe following list gives the more important publications
which contain portions of the Old Testament in the Egyptian
versions.
BOHAtRiC. D. Wilkins, Quinque libri Moysh, 1731 ; Fallet,
La 7<crsion CopJite du pentateuque^ 1854; Lagarde, Der Penta-
teuch koptisch, 1 867 ; Bruchstuckc der kopt. Ubersetzmigen des
A. T. in Orientalia i. 1879. '^^^ Psalter has been edited by
R. Tuki, 1744, J. L. Ideler, 1837, Schwartze, 1848, Lagarde, Psal-
terii versio Memphitica, Gotlingen, 1875, F. Rossi, Cinque niano-
scritti &c., 1894; Job by H. Tattam, 1846; the Prophets by
Tattam {Prophetae ininores, 1836, Proph. tnaiores, 1852).
Sahidic. Lagarde, Aegyptiaca, 1883; Ciasca, Sacr. bibl.
frai^tn. Coptosahidica Musei Borgiani, 1885 — 9; Am^lincau,
Fragments copies in Recucil v. ( 1 884), and Fragments de la version
thibaiiu\ ib. vii. — x. (1886 — 9); the same scholar has edited Job
in Proceedings of the Soc. of Bibl. Arch., 1887; O. v. Lemm,
BrurhstUcke, 1885, Sahidische Bibelfragmente, 1890; Krall, Mit-
theilungen, 1887 ; F. Rossi, Papiri Copti, 1889, Un nuovo codice,
1893; Masp^ro, Fragments de I'Ancicn Testament in Mhnoires
publics par les membres de la mission arch, fran^aise an Caire,
vi., 1892; E. A. T. W. Budge, The earliest known Coptic Psalter,
1 898 ' ; Coptic Biblical Texts in the Dialect of Upper Fgypt, 19 1 2 ;
N. l^cters, Die sahidisch-koptische (Jbersetzung d. Buches Ecclesi-
asticus...untersiicht, 1898; P. Lacau, Tcxtes de PA. T. en copte
sahidiqur, 1901 ; Sir H. Thompson, The Coptic Version of certain
books of the O. T., 1908; A Coptic Palimpsest, 19 u.
Middle Egyptian, &c. Tuki, Rudimenta linguae Coptae,
1778 ; Quatrem^re, Recherches sur la langue et la littSrature de
^'KO'P^^^ 1808; Zocga, Caial. codd. Copt., 1810; Engelbrcth,
pyagmenta liasmurico-Coptica V. et N. T, 181 1 ; Von Lemm,
Mitteldgyptische Fragmente, 1885; KrnW, Alittheili/nj;en, 1887;
Bouriant in Memoires de ITnstitut t'gyptien ii., 1889, and in
Alc'moires publih par &c. vi. i ; Stcindorff, 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 sul)mitted to examination by experts, will prove
' On the correspondence of this I'r^llcr willj cod. U sec hclow, p. 145.
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, whilst 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. Job
is perhaps "a translation of Origen's revised text, with the
passages under asterisk omitted^" whilst Isaiah is distinctly Hexa-
plaric, 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 reconstructing the text of the Greek Old Testament^J
Literature. Quatremere, Recherches; Zoega, Catalogus;
L. S\.&vn, Koptische Granimaiik, 1880; Kopten, Koptische SpT'ache
u. Litteratur^ 1886; Scrivener-Miller, ii. p. 91 ff. (J. B. Lightfoot
and A. C. Headlam); Gregory, prolegg.^ p. 859 fif. ; J. P. P.
Martin, hitr., partie th^or., p. 3ioff. ; H. Hyvernat, Etude sur
les versions coptes de la Bible in Revue biblique^ v. 3, 4, vi. I ;
E. Nestle, Urtext^ p. 144 fif. ; W. E. Crum, Coptic Studies^ 1897-8 ;
Catalogue of Coptic MSS. in Brit, Museum., 1905 ; A. E. Brooke
iny. Th. St. iii.
* See O. T. in Greek, iii. p. ix.
^ A. Schulte in Theol. Quarialschrift, 1894-5 ; see Hyvernat, p. 69.
* Ezechiel, p. 66 ff.
* Burkitt in Encycl. Brii. iv. 5027; cf. Hatch, Essays, p. 315 ff.;
Dillmanu, Textkritisches sum Buche Ijob, p. 4; Burkitt, O. L. and Itala,
p. 8; Kenyon, Our Bible and tke ancient MSS., p. 751.
^ Hyvernat, p. 71.
^ See the lemarks of F. Robinson in Hastings' Diet, of the Bible'x. 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 cir-
cumstance that the first Bishop of Auxume received consecration
at Alexandria, create an a priori probability that any early trans-
lationsfrom the Old Testament into Ethiopic were based upon the
Septuagint, whether immediately or through the Coptic versions. •
' Dillmann, who at one time had explained the numerous
transliterations and other approaches to the Hebrew in the
existing Ethiopic version 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 — corrected by otiier MSS. of the
LXX. ; (3) those in whicli the original version has been revised
from the Hebrew*. Lagarde, on the other hand, suggested that
the version was translated from the Arabic, as late as the
fourteenth century, and maintained that in any case tlie
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 the reconstruction of the
Septuagint^ " These suggestions are not however supported by
a closer exiiniination of the Etliiopic version of the Octateuch.
The text as i)rintcd by Dillmann, and especially the readings
of the oldest MS. he used, which is supported by a dated
thirteenth century MS. brought from Abyssinia to Paris since
' Ch.-irles (art. Ethiopic Version, in Hastings' D. B. i. \>. 791) states thai
'ilic Abyssinians first received Christianity tlirouj:;h Aramaean missionaries."
Hut Tyre in llic foiuth ccnlury was as (Ireek as Alexandria and Antiocii.
* Nestle, Urlext, p. I48. Loisy, J/istoire cri(i,/uc, I. ii. p. 231.
•■' Ankufidi^uiig einer ntuen Ausgabe der gr. Ubersetzung d. A.T.. p. 78;
cl. Matfrialen, i. p. iii.
iio Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagmt.
his edition was published, betray direct descent from a Septua-
gint text of a somewhat interesting type, which had apparently
undergone less Hebrew or hexaplar revision than the Greek
ancestors of the Armenian and Syro-hexaplar versions. We
are safe in concluding with Charles, ' It is unquestionable that
our version was made in the main from the Greek'.'"
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. Wn^xi's Jonah in four Semitic versions (London, 1857).
The Psalms were printed by Ludolf (1701), Rodiger (1815),
Dorn (1825), and Jeremiah, Lamentations and Malachi by
Bachmann (1893)3 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. etJiiopiens de la Bibliotheque Nationale (Paris, 1877);
D'Abbadie, Catalogue raisonne de MSS. etliiopiens (Paris, 1859);
Dillmann, Catalogus MSS. Aethiop. in Bibliotheca Bodleiana
(Oxford, 1848), and Abessiuisciie Handschr. d. k. Bihlioth. zu
Berlin; Miiller, AetJtiop. Handsclir. der k. Hofbiblioth. in Wien
{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 supplied the basis for
' This criticism of Lagarde's view is due to Mr N. M<^Lean, who has re-
cently examined the Ethiopic Genesis for the larger Cambridge Septuagint.
Ancient Versions based upon the Septnagint. ill
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 {Fsalterium 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 ZAW. 1885, p. 102 ff., 158). It shews traces
of Hcxaplaric 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, 1516; 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. ; Mrs
M. D. Gibson's Studia Sinaitica, iii. (London, 1894), Catalogue of
Arabic MSS. at Sinai (codd. i — 67). Cf. Hyvernat, op. cit.
Literature:. Schnun er, BibliHheca Arabica, 1780 ; H. E. G.
Paulus, Bodleiana specimina versionutn Petit. Arab.., 1789;
Eichhorn, Kinleitung, § 275 ff . ; R. Holmes, Praef. ad Pent.;
Rodiger, Dc origine et indole /Irab. libr. V. T. interpretationis
(Halle, 1829). Among more recent works reference may be
made to Cornill, Ezechiel, p. 49 f.; Loisy, IJist. crit. I. ii. p. 238;
Nestle in Urtext, p. i5ofF, ; F. C. Burkitt, art. Arabic Versions^
in Hastings' D. B i. p. 136 i^.; H. 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., 1. ii. p. 239. Mr Hurkitt in Hastings' D. A.
(i. p. 137) writes "J(iKlges), .S(amuel), K(ings), and Ch(ronicles), .nrc all
from the I'csliitla. "
■■' La^jardc gives for the Psalter four texts, viz. those published at Rome
(1614), Paris (1645), f^)uzhayya (i6n), Al([)|)o (1706); for Jol>, besides the
veri^ions mentioneri in the text, that of the I'aris I'oiytjlott.
112 Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint.
from the He'uicw 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 : ?;p/xr/v€t;Tai 8e Tavra els /J-ev rr]v
T(5v Svpojv Trap' otov Si^TTore, ovSe yap lyrwcrrat t*-ey(pL rvys Trjixepov
ocTTi? irork ovto's eoriv'. 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
sigr3 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
1 Migne, P. G., Ixvi. 241 ; cf. 3. 252 f. , 263, 466 ff., 492 ff.
'■' Nestle in Urtexty p. 230; cf. Bleek-Wellhausen, pp. 558 — 560; W. E.
Uarnes in_/. Th. St. ii. 186 ff.
• Gwynn, D. C. B., iv. p. 434.
A ncient Versions based upon the Septiiagint. 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 Old '.
(The version of Paul of Telia, usually called the Syro
Hexaplar, was first made known to Europe by Andreas Masius
(Andrew Du Maes, f 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 186 1 Ceriani added Baruch,
Lamentations, and the Ep. of Jeremiah. Of the historical
books Judges and Ruth were published by Skat Rordam in
186 1, 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 TelUnsis and Thomas IlarkUnsis, in D. C. H., iv.
pp. 266 (T., 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 tlu Septuagint.
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 yth 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, T893 — 6), G. Margoliouth,
Liturgy of the Nile (London, 1897), and Mrs Lewis, Studia
Sinaitica, vi. (London, 1897)*. This version has been made j,
from the lxx. ; in the Books of Kings the text is now known
not to be Lucianic, as it was at first supposed to be {Anecd.
^ Field, Prolegg. in Hex., p. Ixix., where many instances are produced.
* 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.).
Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint. 115
Oxon. ix. p. 32) ; in the Greater Prophets, it is in part at least
Origenic {Studia Sinattica, pp. xvi., Ixiii.) ; Job seems to have
contained the interpolations from Theodotion which are found
in the extant Greek lexts 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. 21^ —
xi. 10, xxviii. i — 12*; Num. iv. 46 f., 49 — v. 2f., 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. 2f; 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. ii** — 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, xlii. 5 — 10, 17 — xliii.
21, xliv. 2 — 7, 1. 4 — 9, Iii. 13 — liii. 12, Ix. i — 22, Ixi. i — 11, Ixiii.
J — 7 ; Jer. xi. 18 — 20^.
j (b) Mention is made" of a version of the Greek Old
JFestament 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
'eshitta, and there is no extant Nestorian version from the
jieek.
/ {c) Of Jacobite versions from the lxx. there were several.
i) Polycarp the chorepiscopus, who in the fifth century laboured
pon a translation of the New Testament under the auspices of
*hiloxenus, the Monophysite Bishop of Mabug, is known to
ave rendered the Greek Psalter into Syriac. The margin ot'
ae Syro-Hexaplar* mentions a Philoxenian 'edition' of Isaiah,
^ Hurkitt in Anerd- Oxon., Semitic ser., I. ix. p. 44, and cf. Nestle's
Dtes to Studia Sinattica, vi.
' See Studia Sin., vi. p. xiv. f. For recent additions see Nestle in
tastings' D.B. iv. 447.
^ BickcU, Conspectus rei Syr. lit., p. 9; cf. Ebedjesu in Assemani, iii. 71.
* Field, Ihxaphi, ii. p. 448.
8— a
^i
Ii6 Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint.
to which two fragments printed by Ceriani' from the British
Museum MS. Add. 17106 are believed 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
Parish 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 Su/jos. The student will 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. ^/r/ac,? (London, 1823);
O. and N. T., 1826. A complete Syriac Bible has recently been
published by the Dominicans of Mosul (W1887 — 91, (2)1888 — 92).
Svro-Hexaplar. A. Masius, Josuae-historia illustrata
(1574); M. Norberg, Codex Syriaco-Hcxaplaris (1787); C.
Bugati, Daniel (1788), Psabni (1820); H. Middledorpf, cod.
SyrohexapL, lib. iv. Reg. e cod. Paris. lesaias &c. e cod.
Mediol. (183s): Skat Rordam, libri ludicum et Ruth sec. Syro-
hexapl. (1861); P. de Lagarde, V. T. ab Origene recensiti frag-
menta ap. Syros set vat a v. (1880), and V. T. Graeci in sennonem
Jyroruni versi fragm. viii. (in his last work Bibliothccae Syriacae
...quae ad ■philologiajn sacram pertinent, 1892) ; G. Kerber, Syro-
hexaplarische Fragmente {ZATIV., 1896). Ceriani has published
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. be.,
Ixi. (Wright, Catalogue, p. 37 ff), and the Pentateuch and Daniel are
preserved at Paris.
* See Ladvocat, y eternal des savants, for 1765; Eichhom, Bibliothek,
ii. p. 270; De Sacy, Notices et extraits, iv. p. 648 ff. ; Ceriani, Mon. sacr.
etprof. V. i. i.
* On the other hand see Scrivener-Miller, ii. p. 7, note; and Bleek
Wellhausen (1893), p. 560.
J
Ancient Versions based upon the Septiiagint. wj
the conients of the London MS. in Monumenta sacra et profana^
ii., and those of the Milan MS. in vol. vii. (1874) of the same
series^.
Literature. G. Bickell, Conspectus ret Syrorum literariae
(1871) ; Field, Hcxapla^ I. p. Ixvii. sqq. (1875) '■> W. Wright, Syriac
literature in Encycl. Britannica, xxii. (1887); E. Nestle, Littera-
tura Syriaca (1888), and Urtext (1897), p. 227 ff. ; Scrivener-
Miller, ii. p. 6 ff.; Gregory, p. 807 ff.; J. P. P. Martin, Introduc-
tion (p. theor.), p. 97 ff. ; Loisy, Histoire critique I. ii. p. 234 f. ;
E. Nestle, Syriac Versions (in Hastings' D. B. iv.).
6. The Gothic Version.
iAbout 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
I" their records of wars and conquests (Philostorg. loc. cit.\ fiere-
<f)pa(Tev €1? TTjv avT<j)V <fiwvrjv ras ypa^as airdaas trXijv ye Brj tu5v
BacriAeicoi' arc tojv fi€v TroXe/xwi' laropiav e^oucroJv, TouSe eOvov;
6vTo<; (^iXoTToXc'/xou). 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. lii. 2 — 3, 2 Esdr. xv. 13 —
, 16, xvi. 14 — xvii. 3, xvii. 13 — 45. With the exception of the
'I I scrap from Genesis, they are derived from palimpsest fragments
1 1 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. Testa menti...frag-
menta^ Lip.siae, 1843) and in Migne P. L. xviii.; more recent
editions are those of Uppstrom, Upsala, 1854 — 7 ; Massmann,
Stuttgart 1855 — 7; Stamm, Paderborn, 1865; Bernhardt, Halle,
1875, 1884; G. H. Balg, The First Germanic B idle, Milwaukee,
189 1 ; Stamm-Heyne, 1896.
' For the Apocryphal books .see Lagarde, Libri V. T. apocr. Syriace,
ind Bensly- Barnes, The fourth hook of Maccabees in Syriac (Cainb. 1895).
* Socr. ii. II, iv. 33, Theodoret iv. 37, Thilostorg. ii. 5.
Ii8 Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint.
Lagarde {Librorum V. T. canonicorum pars /., 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 Septuaginta-Codex des Ulfilas
{AloJiatschrift f. Gesch. u. W. des Judenthiims, 1873), ^"^d
F. Kauffmann, Beitrdge zur Quellenkritik d. gothischen Bibel-
ubersetzutig {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
inaeed 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
^ 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.
I
A ncient Versions based upon the 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^ 1
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, but according to Cony-
beare it is a MS. of the eighteenth 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).
LiTKRATURE R. Holmes, Pracf. ad Pent.; F. C. Conybeare
in Scrivener-Miller, ii. 148 ff and in Hastings' D. Z>'., I.e.;
' Conybeare, op. cit., p. 151 f. He attributes the composite character
of the Armenian text (of which he {jives instances) to Hexaplaric influences.
' Genesis Gr., p. i8.
^ Mr M'^Lean, who has collated the greater part of the Octateuch,
informs me that " the Armenian shews a typical hexaplar te.\t in Genesis
and Exodus, agreeing closely with 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
Ruth."
* U/>. cit., p. 152 f.
'' In some MSS. Job precedes the Psalter.
• See Part II. c. i.
I20 Ancient Versions based upon tJie Septuagint.
H. Hyvernat, in Vigouroux' D. B. ; C. R. Gregory, Prolegg. p.
912 ff. ; J. P. P. Martin, Introd. (p. thdor.), p. 323 ff. ; E. Nestle in
Urtexi, p. 155, where fuller bibliographical information will be
found.
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 presei-ved 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 Georgianische Litteratur
(Vienna, 1798) ; A. A. Tsagarelli, Ati account of the monuments
of Georgian Literature [in Russian], St Petersburg, 1886—94;
A. Khakhanow, Les MSS. Georgiens de la Bibliothique Nationale
cL Paris (without place or date, ? 1898).
9. The Slavonic Version.
r . . .
iThe Greek Bible was translated mto 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 ,
y.
Ancieyit Versions based upon the Septiiagint. I2i
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,
1874—9).
(.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 Ur/ext, p. 215, "dass im
allgemeinen der Kirchenslavischen Ubersetzung der griech.
Text der Lucianischcn (Antiochenisch-Konstantinopolita-
nischen) Rezension zu Grunde liegt ist sicher."
LlTKRATURK. The Russian authorities arc given by Mr
Bebb in Scrivener-Miller, ii. p. 158. See also Grej^ory, Prolegg.
p. II12 ff. ; Professor Leskien of Lcipzif,^ in Urtexf, p. 2ir ff. ; the
article in Ch. Quarterly Review cited above ; and I h. Literalur-
zeilung^ iQoi, col. 571.
' The Russian Bible., in Ch. Quart. Review, xli. 81 (Oct. i8<;5), p. iiy.
122
CHAPTER V.
Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
The great edition of the Septuagint published by Holmes
and Parsons ends with a complete hst 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
publication 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 Biblical
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
1 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 tJie Septuagint. 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 //? mp 2 for the
Lucianic MSS. 82, 93, 118, 44S 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, 68, 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 w^at), or a particular group of books such as the Pen-
tateuch (tJ 7r€VTaT€uxos') or the Octateuch (17 oKTaT€v;(os = Gen.
— Ruth), the Historical Books (i Regn. — 2 Esdr., Esth., Judith,
Tobit), the three or five books ascribed to Solomon, the Minor
Pro{)hets {rh So)^€Ka7ri)6(f)r]Tov), the Major Prophets (01 Teaaapci),
or the Prophets complete (to iKKaiBeKairpocfiyjTov). 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 tfie sixteenth. Their present di^ri-
bution may be seen from tlie descriptions ; an analysis of
the list of Holmes and Parsons gives the following general
results: Italy, 129; Greal Britain and Ireland, 54 ; I'Vaiice, 36;
Austria, 26; Russia, 23; Germany, 13; Spain, 7; Holland, 6;
Switzerland, 6 ; Denmark, 4. This summary conveys a general
* Ltdr. V. T. can. pars i., p. v. sq.
* Ezechiel, p- 19 fi".
* Cf. Orig. in loann. t. xiii. 16, Epiph. de mens, et fond. 4. /'en/a-
tetuhus occurs in Tertullian adv. Marc. i. 10.
124
Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
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 Smai, which are now within the reach of the critical
student.
I. Uncial MSS.
The following table of the Uncial MSS. may be found
convenient. A detailed account of each will follow.
Syml
bols.
Name of Codex.
Century.
Present locality.
H.-P.
Lagarde.
Ill
A
Alexandrinus
V
London
II
B
Vaticanus
iv
Rome
C
Ephraemi
V
Paris
I
D
Cottonianus
v
London
E
Bodleianus
ix — X
Oxford
VII
F
Ambrosianus
V
Milan
IV + V
G
Sarravianus
V
Leyden, Paris, St
Petersburg
H
Petropolitanus
vi
St Petersburg
CIII = i
3 I
Bodleianus
ix
Oxford
K
Lipsiensis
vii
Leipzig
VI
L
Vindobonensis
V — vi
Vienna
X
M
Coislinianus
vii
Paris
XI
N
Basilianus
viii — ix
Rome
VIII
01
Dublinensis
vi
Dublin
XII
Q
Marchalianus
vi
Rome
R
Veronensis
vi
Verona
s=x
Sinaiticus
iv
Leipzig, St Petersburg
262
T
Turicensis
vii
Zurich
U
Londinensis
vii
London
23
V
Venetus
viii^ix
Venice
43
W
Parisiensis
ix
Paris
258
X
Vaticanus
ix
Rome
Y2
Taurinensis
ix
Turin
2a-e
Fragmenta Tischendoifiar
la
r
Cryptoferratensis
viii — ix
Grotta ferrata
A
Bodleianus
iv — V
Oxford
e
Washingtoniensis
V — vi
Detroit
n
Petropolitanus
viii — ix
St Petersburg
1 For IX = P see under Cursive MSS. (H.-P. 294).
* This MS. ought to take rank among the cursives; see below, p. 145.
Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 125
(A) Complete Bibles.
A (III). Codex Alexandrinus. British Museum, Royal,
I. D. V. — viii.
A MS. of the O. and N. Testaments, with lacunae. The
O. T. is defective in the following places: Gen. xiv. 14 — 17, xv.
1 — 5> 16 — 19, xvi. 6 — 9 (leaf torn across and the lower portion
lost); I Regn. xii. 18 — xiv. 9 (leaf missing); Ps. xlix. 19 — Ixxix.
10 (nine leaves missing). Sligiiter 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. Rosea — 4 Maccabees ; vol.
iii. Psalms— Sirach 1. 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 -^aky-m i8i6ypa(})os (cli.) and the
liturgical canticles, is preceded by the Epistle of Athanasius to
Marcellinus, the virodea-fis of Eusebius, a table, and the canons
of the Morning and Evening Psalms. The books of vol. iii. are
written (TTix^T/pcos.
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 maityr Thecla,' and
Cyril Lucar has written on a leaf prefixed to vol. i. : " Liber iste
...prout ego traditione habebam, est scriptus maiiu Theclae
nobilis facminae Aegyptiae ante MCCC annos circiter, paulo post
concilium Nicacnuin," But, apart from palaeographical con-
siderations-, this date is discredited by the occurrence in the
MS. of excerpts from the works of Athanasius and Eusebius, an'd
the liturgical matter connected with the Psalter. It has been
propostcl to identify Tiiecla with a correspondent of Gregory of
Nazianzus (see TllKCLA (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,
'637 (Jo'j). Ussher, 1655 (Judges vi., xviii.), Walton in the poly-
glott of 1657 (facsimile of I's. i.), Gale, 1678 (Psalter); and
the MS. was used by Grabe as the basis of his great edition
' For the order of the books see Part 11. c. i.
^ As to these see Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient MSS., p. 119.
1 26 Ma7iuscripts of the Septuagint.
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'^." 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 9c, i<c, xc, nnp, /vuTp, yCj anoc,
OYNOC, A<JkA, ihA, iAhm, nNA, and 15, m, c, n,, t< (koi, /xov, <jov,
•vai, -rai). 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 k.iowledge of an expert in palaeography.
B (II). Codex Vaticanus (Vatican Library, Gr. 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 TToXiv els yriv 'Pa/ieo-crij). 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.
* E. Maunde Thompson, Cod. Alex. i. p. 8 ff. Ibid.
Manuscripts of the Septuagmt. 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 I533^ 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 B with the Aldine text was made by
Bartolocci in 1669, and is still preserved at Paris in the Biblio-
th^que Nationale {MS. gr. siipplem. 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 Z?^ a«//^z//-
tate codicis Fa//fa«/ (Freiburg, 1810) 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 '^"'^ '^66 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 light 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. J Paul V., Paris, 1890, p. 81. Cf.
Nestle, Septuagintastitdicn, ii. p. 1 1, note i.
* La Vaticane df Paul III. ci Paul V. (Paris, 1.S90). Gregory, ProUgg.
p. 360.
* On this work see Nestle, Sepluagintast. iii. p. 13 ff.
128 Manuscripts of the Septiiagint.
The codex is written on tlie finest vellum in a singularly
beautiful hand^ which "may be attributed to the fourth century,"
and probably to the middle of the century 2, 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
dio7thotes (B^), we may mention an early corrector denoted as
B% and a late insiaurator, 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.
3769)-
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 voricrai — ii. 8, XV. 29 Kpe'ia-aMv — xvii. I, xviii. 1 1 17 Se ^6^a — xix.
23, xxii. 17 Triv 8e (TT)v — xxiii. 25, xxiv. 22^ ware afipatra — 56 r] yj],
xxvi. 23 x^'-^l ^"'^ — xxviii. 2, xxix. 48 — end of book ; Eccl. i. 2
fiaraioTTjs — 14, ii. 18 vtto tov ^Xiov — end of book; Cant. i. 3 — iii. 9
J^aXcufiaiv ; Job ii. 12 prj^avres — iv. 12 iv Xoyots aov, v. 27 crv 8e
yva>6i — vii. 7, x. 9 — xii. 2 apBpcoTroi, xiii. 18 olda eyo)— xviii. 9
TrayiSes. xix. 27 a 6 otpdaXfios — xxii. 14 vecfieXr], xxiv. 7 yvpvovs
iroXkovs — xxx. I ev pepfi, xxxi. 6 — xxxv. 15 opyfjv avrov, xxxvii. 5
— xxxviii. 17 davdrov, xl. 20 irepidrjareis — end of book; Sap. viii. 5
epya^opevos — xii. lo tottov fieravoias, xiv. 19 — xvii. 18 fvpfXrjs,
xv'ii. 24 eVi yap — end of book ; Sir. prol. I — vii. 14 Trpecr/Surepwi',
viii. 15 avTos yap — xi. 17 evcreliicnv, xii. 16 Km iav — xvi. I dxpr]-
(TTwv, xvii. 12 — XX. 5 (ro(f)6s, xxi. 12 — xxii. 19, xxvii. 19 — xxviii. 25
aradpov, XXX. 8 — xxxxiv. 22 ov pr/ aoi, xxx. 25 — xxxi. 6, xxxii. 22 Katj
6 Kvpios — xxxiii. 13 'loKco/iJ, xxxvii. il — xxxviii. I5,xxxix. 7 — xliv. 27 1
dcj>iKd)pfda, xlv. 24 iva avra — xlvii. 23 'Po0odp, xlviii. II — xlix. 12J
'lr](Tovs vlos- The distribution of the leaves is Proverbs 6, Eccle-
siastes 8, Cant, i. Job 19, Wisdom 7, Sirach 23.
^ Specimens are given in Sir E. Maunde Thompson's Greek and Latin\
Palaography, p. 150; and F. G. Kenyon's Our Bible dT'c, p. 136; E.
Nestle, Einfuhrung^, Tafel 4.
2 Sir E. M. Thompson, op. cit. p. 159; WH., Intr. p. 75.
' F. G. Kenyon, Paleography of Greek papyri, p. i^o. See A. Rahlfs,
Alter u. Heitnath der Vat. Bibelhandschri/t, in G. G. N., 1899, i. p. 72 ff.
I
Manuscripts of the Septiiagint. 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^. 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' Medici, 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 Palaeographia 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, A, B, K,
S, X, *) assume different forms in the two portions of the codex,
and there are other palaeogniphical indications that the hand
which wrote the earlier books did not write the later. Neverthe-
less Tischcn^lorf 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 arrangemcnt^
S = S. CouKX SiNAiricus. Leipzig and St Petersburg.
The remains of tiiis great uncial Bible contain the following
portions of the O. T. : Gen. xxiii. 19 avri) — xxiv. 4 rrofjfva-n, xxiv.
' On palimpsest MSS. sec Sir E. M. Thompson, Greek and Latin
Palaoip'aphy, y. 75 ff.
'■* I'Or a list of these see Oiiioiit, Inz'ctitaire sommaiie ties manuscrits
grees, p. i.
* Tischendorf, Ccd. Ephraeini rescriplus, prolef^. p. y.
* Sec a phol()grai>liii; facsimile in /•'tusimiU's lia plus aneiens manuscrits
grecs til- lii lUbl. Nat. (H. Omont, Paris, 1892J.
* See Tischendorf, op. eit., prolcgg. p. 5.
s. s. g
1 30 Manuscripts of tlie Sephiagint.
5 ets rijv y^v — 8, 9 pr]fiaTOS — 14 Kajj-rj^ovs, 17 Ktii finev — 19 ecos av,
25 avTM — 27 TTji', 30 avdpcoTrov — 33 XaXrja-ai, 36 avra)(l*') — 41 eK
T^S, 41' Spuurfiov — 46 a<^' ; Num. v. 26 aur^j— 30 irnirjo-ei, vi. 5
a-yios — 6 rereXfurj/KDia, II Ke(j)(iXi]v— 12 al (2"), 17 Knx-aj — 18 fiapTv-
plov, 22, 23, 27 Kuptoy, vii. 4 Mcovo-r^i/— 5 AfueiVats, 12 Nano-trcoi' —
13 i'v, 15 eva (2°) — 20 dvpidparos, I Par. ix. 27 ro Trpwt — xix. 17,
2 Esdr. ix. 9 KOpiof — end of book; Psalms— Sirach ; Esther;
Tobit ; Judith ; Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk,
Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lam.
i. I — ii. 20; I and 4 Maccabees.
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-Augustanus'^ (Leipzig, 1846): to
these in Mon. sacr. ined.^ nov. coll. i. (1855) he was able to add
Isa. Ixvi. I2^er. 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 Afomanenta (1S57) 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 PLlropolitanus, 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 Codicum
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 x 132 inches, and were gathered, with two excep-
tions, into quires of four. Each column contains 48 lines, with
12 — 14 letters in aline; 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 intervenes ; a breathing priina manu has been
1 So called in honour of Frederick Augustus, King of Saxony.
2 Cf. Tischendorf s remarks in Liti. C.-Blatt, 1867 (27).
^ " 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 Septuagint. 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 B ; 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 X% i<<^% N^-b^ X>-<:, K^. The first symbol covers the
work of the diorthotes and other nearly contemporary correctors ;
Xca, o.b, C.C 3re three seventh century hands, of which the last
appears chiefly in the Book of Job, whilst the later N<^ has occu-
pied itself with retracing faded writing in the Prophets.
After I Chron. xix. 17 cod. t* (FA) passes without break to
2 Esdr. ix. 9, but the place is marked by the corrector N"^-^ with
three crosses and the note /ie'xP' tovtov \tov\ arj^eiov rcbv rpicov
aravpuiv ecrnv to TtXns t6)v eirra (f)vXXcov tcov irepicrcribv Koi iit)
ovTuiv Tov "Eo-Spa. 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 {BMe
in the Chtcrch, 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. 5< is uncertain,
the heading "ErrSpay /3' does not prove this, since cod. X con-
tains 4 Maccabees under the heading MaKKa{-iai(jiv h' although it
certainly did not give the second and tiiird books (Thackeray,
/. c).
No uniform edition or photographic reproduction of this
most important MS. has yet appeared''^. The student is still
under the necessity of extracting the text of N 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
paiaeoj^raphy. (The N. T. has now appeared in collotype;
H. and K. Lake, introd. by K. Lake, Oxford, 191 1.)
N (XI). Codex Basiliano- Vaticanus. Vatican Library,
Gr. 2106, formerly Basil. 145^
' Anotlicr cx[)I.ination (suggested hy Dr Ciwynn) is given hy l>r
Liiptoii in Wace's Apciciypiia, i., p. 2.
* A facsimile of 1 lisilr. xviii. 15 — xix. 15 may be seen in Stade, Gesih.
i. Vo/k<:<: fsrael, ii. |>. 192.
^ Cf. Wcislcin, iV. T. i. p. 133; Lagarde, Septuagintastudien, p. 48.
9—2
132 Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
V (23). Codex Venetus. St Mark's Library, Venice,
cod. Gr. I '.
Dr E. Klostermann {Analecfa, pp. 9 f., ;^;^ f.) has 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. ig — 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 i6jx 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 Vatican 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 Basilian
monk^; the Venice book was once the property of Cardinal Bes-
sarion, by whom it was presented to St Mark's*.
The handwriting of N 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; ji
both codices were collated for Holmes and Parsons, who numbered ;
V as a cursive.
(B) Odateuch and Historical Books. i
I) (I). Codex Cottonianus. Britisli Museum, Cotton |
MSS., Otho B. vi. 5—6. ^
A collection of fragments, the largest of which measures no
more than 7 x 5^ inches, containing portions of the Book of
Genesis with vestiges of pictures executed in a semi-classical
style.
^ Cf. Deutsche Lit. -Zeit. 1897, p. 1475 f. .J
- Klostermann, p. 9. |i
^ Holmes, Praef. ad Pentateuch.
■• It was the eighth of Bessarion's MSS.; see Schott in Eichhorn's,
Repert., viii. 181.
Manuscripts of the Septtiagint. 133
No other uncial codex of the LXX., of which any portion
remains, has suffered so lamentable a fate. Brought to England
from Philippii in the reign of Henry VIII. by two Orthodox
Bishops'", and presented to the Englisli 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 173 1,
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. Gififord,
formerly an Assistant Librarian at the Museum.
Most of the London fragments were deciphered and published
by Tischendorf in 1857 (^c;^. sncr. ined., nov. coll. ii.) ; the rest,
together with the Bristol fragments, are now accessible in Dr
F. W. Gotch's Sitppleincnt 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, Crusiu-^, and Grabe; and
Grabe's collation, which is preserved in the Bodleian, was
published by Dr H. Owen {Collatio cod. Cotton. Getteseos cum
Editione Romana..., Londini, 1778). Some assistance can also
be obtained from the Vetusta Monumenta 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 Peircsc papers in the Biblioth^tjue Na-
tionale, transcripts have been found of Gen. i. 13, 14, xviii. 24 —
26, xViii. 16, which were made from the MS. in 1606. They arc
printed in l\Uinoires de la ."^ociilW Nationale des Antiquaires de
France, liii. pp. 163 — 172*. As this discovery was overlooked
^ Still an episcopal see in the time of Le Quien; see Liglitfoot, Philip-
^ plans, p. ^)4, note.
'■^ They statcil that it liad once been the property of Origen.
^ Walton's statement tliat Cod. D at one time contaiiu'd the Pentateuch
is howevcT gromidlcss ; in the Cotton catalogue of 162 1 it is described as
"Genesis only."
* I owe the reference to Dr Nestle {Urtcxt, ]>. 71).
134 Manuscripts of the Scptnagint.
when the second edition of TJie Old Testajitent 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, \^...^'^ kcrizipa koi iytvero Trpcol, T]fj.epa rpiTT]. ^* Km
einev 6 6f6s TevrjOTjTcocrav (pcoarripes iv tu> arepfaipaTi rov ovpiivoii
els (^axicriv r^y yiys, Koi dp)(fTu>rrcn' TJjs r)pepas Kai rrjs vvktos tov 5ta-
X(i>[piOiv]...
II. xviii. 24 — 26. ''* fav cSaiv TrevTtjKovra diKaioi iv rij TroXet,
diroXecTfii avTovs ; oifc dvrjcTfis travra tov tottov eK(7vov eveKa Ta>v
TrevTTjKOVTa Sikcuuiv, eVii' (o(tiv ev avrfi ; '^ pr]8afiS>s arv noirjaeis as to
prjpa ToiiTo, tov dnoKTelvai ^ikgiov pfTO. d(Tf(:iovs, Ka\ 'ifTTai 6 biKnios
o)S o dafj'iijS- pr]^apa)s. o Kpircdv -ndcrav Trjv yr)v, ov noirjcrfcs Kpiaiv ;
^iiirev be 6 Kvpios 'Edv evpa ev 2o[So/iois']...
l6. xliii. 16. ..dvpuTa Koi eToipacrov peT' epov 7o[p] </>ayovrai 01
avdpcoiroi ovToi apTov[s^ ttjv pearjplBpiav...
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 biKalcov — xx. 14 koi uTreSayKev, xxiv.
54 eKirepy^aTe — xlii. 1 8 elvrev be av\Tols\ Another leaf, now at the
Cambridge University Library, contains xlii. 18 [avjrois r^ rjpepa
— xliv. 13 TOV eva Kai, but the verso, to which xlii. 31 — xliv. 13
belongs, is written in (.'') 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 Beviapiv eya) pev yap), and
proceeds, with some lacunae, as far as 3 Regn. xvi. 28 {tu Xonra
tSdv (TvpTr\oKa>v). 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.
(
Mantiscripts of t/ie Septuagint. 135
The recent history of this IMS. 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 MoiiKim'iita sacra
ttiedita, 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 2 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 fail 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 datc^. According to the same autliority the uncial leaves of
the codex have passed through the hands of a nearly contempo-
rary corrector, and also of another wliose writing is more recent.
F (VII). CoiJKX Amijrosianus. Ambrosian Library,
Milan. A. 147 infr.
The remains of this important Codex consist of the following
' Mr Hradshaw, I now Icani, had ])reviousIy noticeil this, but lie does
not appear to have puljlislicd the fact, or to have left any written statement
about it.
'■• In his paper iiber tint von Tischfiidorf aus dem Orient itiit-gebrachte,
in Oxford, Cainbridi^e, London, u. Pelcrabnrg lici^ende Handscluifl der
Sepluaffinta, reprinted from NachrUhten der K. desellscha/f der IVissen-
schaften zu Gotlingett, 1S98; cf. 7'lt. L.-Z., Feb. 4, 1899, p. 74. See also
E. Klostermann, G. G. A., 1895, ji. 257.
' "The date of the whole MS., incUiding the uncial part, may very
well be the tenth century" (Class. Review, I.e.).
136 Manuscripts of the Septnagiut.
fragments of the Octateuch : Gen. xxxi. 15 [(iXXorptJm — y] ijpav-
vTjaas, xlii. 14 on KardtricoTroi — 21 fla-rjKOvaafifv avrov, 28 irapa-
X^rjcrav — xlvi. 6 rtjv KTrjaiv, xlvii. 16 ft eWfXoLnev — xlviii. 3 6 6e6s
fxoL cS(j)6r], xlviii. 21 Ta>v irnTepu>i' — li. 14 01 dSfXffioL Exod. i. 10
yr]s — viii. 19 rto [<Jtt/jao)], xii. 3 1 oi vloi — xxx. 29 o httt. avrav, xxxi.
18 iv rw opd — xxxii. 6 dv(T\iav\, xxxii. 13 [Tr6KvTv\i]\dvv(xi — xxxvi. 3
IT pocr\eb€-xovTo\ xxxvii. 10 a'l ^da-eii — end of book. Lev. i. I — ix.
18 kvk\(o, x. 14 [<\(j)(up( naJTos — end of book. Num. (without
lacuna). Deut. i. I — xxviii. 63 i]v(lipdv[di-j\ xxix. 14 koI rf)v dpdv
— end of book. Jos. i. i — ii. 9 €<^' [lyj/^as, ii. 15 avTfjs eV tw r[e]i';(6t
— iv. 5 ep-TTporrdfv, iv. lO [avjvereXecrev — V. I 'lopduprji', v. 7 'irjcrovi
— vi. 23 d8eX(f)ovs avTtjs, vii. I Zap-jSpi — ix. 27 Trjs a-rjfifpov '7/^[f'p«y],
X. 37 rjv iv avTji — xii. 12 Idaa: 'EyXciov^.
An inscription on a blank page states that the fragments were
"ex Macedonia Corcyram advecta, ibique 111. Card. Fed. Borro-
maei Bibliotliecae Ambrosianae Fundatoris iussu empta eidem-
que Bibliothecae transmissa sunt." They attracted the notice of
Montfaucon {Diar. Hal., p. 11, Pal. sacr. pp. 27, 186), and were
collated for Holmes, but in an unsatisfactory manner. Ceriani's
transcript {Mon. sact: 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^; 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 added j?^/7>;2rt inanu., a feature in which
thij 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 contain various read-
ings, notes, and scholia.
^ The fragments of Malachi and Isaiah, attributed to F in Holmes,
followed by 'J'ischendorf V. 7'.-, and Kenyon (p. 62), belong to a MS. of
cent, xi.; see Ceriani, Mon. sacr. etprof..,praef. p. ix.
^ See Sir E. Maunde Thompson, Greek and La/in Pal., p. 62.
* Cf. Thompson, op. cit. p. 72, "they were not systematically applied
to Greek texts before the 7th century."
Manuscripts of tlie Septuagiiit. i ij
G (IV, V). Codex Colberto-Sarravianus. (i) Leyden,
University Library, Voss. Gr. Q. 8. (2) Paris, Bibliothbque
Nationale, cod. Cir. 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 airiov — xxxvi. iS-X-dvyarpos 'Avd.
**Exod. xxxvi. 8—29, *xxxvii. 3 vcfjavrov — 6, *xxxviii. i — 18,
*xxxix. I [Kar]f£/)y(i(r^7 — II, * l6 (TKevi] — 19, xi. 2 fKei rijv ki[3(ot6v
to end of book, *Lev. i. I — iv. 26 f^{()i\d(reTai nepl, iv. 27 \aov
Tqs y7]s — xiii. 17 KOL l?)ov, *xiii. 49 Ifiaria — xiv. 6 Xfjfx'^eTai avro
Kai, *xiv. 33 — 49 (t(J)ayvL[(Tai], *xv. 24 KoifxijO;] — xvii. lO irpoa-
[t/Xutwi/], *xviii. 28 [(]Bve(Tii> — xix. 36 a-rddnia BiKaia koi, xxiv. 9 koi
Tots viols — xxvii. 16 I'ivdpoiTros TO). Num. i. I — vii. 85 rav aKevav,
xi. 18 Tis yj/Mfiid — xviii. 2 0i'X?/i/, xviii. 30 epe'is — xx. 22
irapeytvovTO ot, *xxv. 2 avTcov Kai — xxvi. 3, *xxix. 12 eoprdfreTf —
33 (TvyKpiaiv, 34 (cat ;^(f)/ju«p(p)oi/ — end of book. Ueut. iv.
I I •))} [icap]('5t'af : Tov ovpavov — 26 eVei K\r][povopi'i(Tat], vii. 1 3 rov
a'lTOv — xvii. 14 KaTaK\T]povoiJLrj[a-ji<i:\ Xviii. 8 — xix. 4 tuv 7rXr;[(rioi'],
xxviii. 12 [(6vf~\aii' — xxxi. ll. Jos. ix. 33 [€(cXf|r;]r(u — xix. 23
(WTTj i] KKrfpnvopia. +Jud. ix. 48 avrns Kai nai — x. 6 'Aacrapiodii
Kai (Tvv Tois, XV. 3 [2n/i]\|/-a)j' — xviii. 16 01 eK row vlcov, xix. 25 avrji
o\t]v — xxi. 12 rtrpaKoaiais.
The Leyden leaves of this MS. are known to have been in
the possession of Claude Sarn\ve, of Paris, who died in 165 1.
After his dcalli 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 (+ 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 i6th century, for they were once in the library of Henri
Memme, who died in 1596. With a Inrge 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 V. Pithaeus, Desmarcz,
Montfaucon''', and Dubrowsky. The text of the Leyden leaves
and the St Petersburg leaf was printed in facsimile type by
Tischendorf in tlie third volume of \\'\s A/ofiio/ir/i/a stura (Leip-
zig, i860); a splendid photograjjhic reproduction of all the
known leaves of the codex appeared at Leyden in 1897^
' I'ragmcnts marked * arc at Paris ; that marked f is at St Peteisburg.
' Montfaucon, Pai. sacr. p. 186 f . ; Tischendorf, Afon. sacr.mcd. n.c.
iii. proU^g. p. xviii.
* V. T. gr. cod. Sarraviani-Colbertini quae supersuiit in hibliothecis
Leidensi Parisicitsi Pelropolitana phototypice edita. Pratfatus est ll. Otnont.
138 Manuscripts of the Septiiagint.
The leaves measure 9I x 8| inches ; the writing is in two
columns of 27 lines, each line 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 unicjue position among
uncial MSS. of the Octateuch. It exhibits an Origenic text
which retains many of the Hexaplaric signs. Besides the aste-
risk ( Jjc ) and various forms of the obelus (Tj —■, -^^ -^1 and in the
margin, — ), the metobelus frequently occurs (:, •/) /'> V')- 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, Hexap/a, 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
N'.mbers. The fragments recovered contain chh. i. i — 2>'^, 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 Moiiu-
tnenta 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
Manuscripts of the Septiiagint. 139
specified (,-y0X€' = 3535) ; the scribe appends his name 'Icoan-
Noy MONAXoy cepp^oy-
K. Fragmenta Lipsiknsia. Leipzig, University Lil)rary
(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 Monumenta 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 N of the
Gospels'^.
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 — 3i,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. •• I— 4-
Like the great Cotton MS. the Vienna purple Genesis is an
illustrated text, each page exiiibiting 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 wiiich shew that it was at one time in North Italy.
Engravings of the miniatures with a description of the contents
may be lound in F. Lambecii Coinm. dc bibliothcca Vindoioiiensi,
lib. iii. (ed. Kollar., 1776), and a transcript of the text in R.
Holmes's Letter to Sluite Harrington, liishopof Durham (Oxford,
■795) » ^^^ both these earlier authorities have been superseded by
the splendid photographic edition lately published at Vienna (die
Wiener Genesis hcrausi^et^ebcn von Ii ilhclni Kilter v. U artel it.
Franz VVicklioff, Wien", /895).
' On the frajjmcnts of Judges see .Moore, yW^c-j, p. xlv.
" On the latter see II. S. Cronin, Codex Pur/'iiicus Petropolitanus,
p. xxiii.
140 Manuscripts of the Septnagint.
M (X). Codex Coislinianus. Paris, Bibliotheque Natio-
nale, Coisl. Gr. i.
A MS. of the Octateiich 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 {Evangeliutn quadruplex), 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 Facsimiles, 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 ; an edition is
now being prepared by Mr H. S. Cronin.
The leaves, which measure 13 x 9 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"), ^ut the later date is now usually ac-
i^epted. The margins contain a large number of notes prima
manu'^, among which are the excerpts from the N. T. printed by
Tischendorf in the Monuinenta 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 Repertoriuin.
Z^'^. Fragmenta Tischendorfiana. Two of a series of
fragments of various MSS. discovered by Tischendorf and
printed in the first and second volumes of Monumenta sacra
inedita, nov. coll. i. ii. (1855, 1857).
Z*. Three palimpsest 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 tlie ninth century and in a late cursive
hand.
2 Gregory, i. p. 375 ; Scrivener-Miller, i. p. 134.
Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 141
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, resembling that of cod. Q (v.
infra).
Z^. Palimpsest 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.
©. Codex Washingtoniensis. See Additional Notes.
n. FraGMENTA TlSCHENDORFIANA.
Four leaves taken from the binding of Cod. Porfirianus Chio-
vensis (P of the Acts and Catholic Epistles^), and published by
Tischendorf in Alon. sua: 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 Repertoriuni., xiii.
p. 177; cf. Lagarde's Genesis graece, p. 11, and A^07K Psalt. Gr.
edit. Specimen, p. 3. Parsons, who reckons it among the cur-
sives, is content to say "de saeculo quo exaratus fuerit nihil
dicitur"; according to Coxe {Calalogus codd. Bibliotk. Bod/, i.
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 lacunae (Ps. i. i — ii. 7, Ixv. 20 —
Ixviii. 3, Ixviii. 26 — 33, ( v. 43 — cvi. 2} have been supplied by a
later hand, which has also added the y\ru\^6i H^ioypafpin (Ps. cli.).
The Psalms are follow ec\ prima manu by eight canticles (Exoil.
XV, I — 21, Dcut. xxxii. I — 44, i Regn. ii. i — 10, Isn. v. i — 9, Jon.
ii. 3 — 10, Hab. iii. i — 10, Magnijicat, Dan. iii. 23 ff.).
Printed by lii.inchini in his Vindiciae canonicarum scriplura-
ruin, i. (Rome, 1740), and used by Lagardc in tlic apparatus of
his Specimen and I'salterii Gr. qiiinquai^ena prima, and in tlie
Cambridge manual .Septuagint (i8<>i). A new collation w.»s
made in 1892 by 11. A. Kcilpalh, which has been em|)l()yed in
' See Gregory, i. p. 447, .Scrivener-Miller, i. p. 172 f.
142 Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
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 10^x7! inches;
each page contains 26 lines. The Greek text appears at each
opening on the left-hand page, and the Latin on the right.
T (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 Magnificat, Isa. xxxviii. 10 — 20, the Prayer of Manasses^,
Dan. iii. 23 ff., Bencdictus, Nunc Diiiiittis.
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 o-rao-ets.
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 fourth volume of his
nova collectio (1869), ascribes the handwriting to the seventh
century.
The text of T agrees generally with that of cod. A, and still
more closely with the hand in cod. X known as t^*^".
U. Fragmenta Londinensi.\. London, British Museum,
pap. xxxvii.
Thirty leaves of papyrus which contain Ps. x. (xi.) 2 [ejis
(f)apeTpav — xviii. (xix.) 6, xx. (xxi.) 14 eV rals BvvaaTeiais aov —
xxxiv. (xxxv.) 6 /caraSia)K[co]i/.
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, Septuagintastudien, iii. p. 17 ff.
Manuscripts of the Scptuagint. 143
legiT, ad V. T. Gr.s p. ix., "quo nulliis codicum sacroruni antiquior
videtur"), and he was followed by La-arde, who as late as 1887
described the London codex as "bibliorum omnium quos noverim
antiquissinius" {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 distinguishing the title from the rest of the text. The
hand is not that of a learned scribe or of the literary type^.
It has been pointed out that the text of U corresponds
closely with that of the Sahidic Psalter published by Dr Budge^.
X (258). Codex Vaticanus Iobi. Rome, Vatican
Library, Gr. 749.
A MS. of Job with 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 Hcxaplaric materials are borrowed by
Field ^ ^
^V (43)- Codex Parisiensis. Paris, Biblioth^que Na-
tionale, (ir. 20.
A portion of an uncial Psalter containing in 40 leaves Ps.
xci. 14— cxxxvi. I, with lacunae extending from Ps. ex. 7 to cxii.
10, and from Ps. cxvii. 16— cxxvi. 4. So Omont {Inventairc
sominaire des inss. grecs, p. 4) ; according to Vtvxsovl^ {Praef. ad
libr. J'ss.), 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 ih,: /iritiJi Museum, i. (iS8i),
where there is .a photur^raph of I's. xxiii. lo IT., and Dr Kcnyon's /Waw-
gra/^hy of paf^yri, p. i i6 I.
^ Kenyon, loc. cit.
=• Cf. V. E. Brightman in/. Th. Si. ii. 275 f.
* .See K. Klostcrmanii, .Inateda zur SeJXuaginia, C,-'(-, p- 63.
•* Ilcxapla, ii. p. ^,
144 Manuscripts of the Septnagint.
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, cxliv. (cxlv.) 7 — 13.
(D) Prophets.
O (VIII). Fragmenta Dublinensia. Dublin, Trinity
College Library, K. 3. 4.
Eight palimpsest leaves — in the original MS. folded as four —
which are now bound up with Codex Z 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
pah'inpsesforu/n DHbIine7!si7i?n, 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. B CHosea, 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 Ren^ Marchal, from whom it has acquired
its name. From the library of R. Marchal 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 in the
' See Gregory, i. p. 399 f.; Scrivener-Miller, i. p. 153.
'■* KeccnsionideiLXX., p. 6.
1
I
Manuscripts of the Septuagmt. 14S
ninth volume of his Nova Collectio (1870). Field followed
Montfaucon in makinjj large use of the Hexaplaric matter with
which 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 H, 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 11^x7 inches; the writing
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,
Symmacluis, Theodotion, and the LXX. of the Hexapla. These
marginal annotations were added by a hand not much later than
that which wrote 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
8o}!i€K(tnp(')(f}i]Tov. 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
vno6((Tfis to the various books.
The Turin MS. does not appear to iiave been used hitherto
for any edition of the I. XX., nor has any transcript or collation
been published^
Z''•^ See al)ove, under (?>), p. 140.
Z''. Palimpsest fragments of Isaiah (iii. 8 — 14, v. 2 — 14, xxix.
1 1 — 23, xliv. 26 — xlv. 5j. As in Z", the upper writing is Armenian ;
the fireck hand belongs apparently to cent. viii. — ix.
Z'. Palimpsest fragment of ICzckiel (iv. 16 — v. 4) found among
llie Nitrian leaves at the British Museum. The (ireek IkukI
resembles that of Z", and is probably contemporary with it.
' Printed in O. T. in Greek, iii.', p. 8 f.
" In lOiclilidrn's Repertoi ium, viii. p. 202 f.
' 'i'ht: specimens and descriptions in the Turin (.at.-iioguc (p. 74^.)
seem to shew tliat the lieadin<js only are written in uncials.
S. S. 10
1 46 Mamisc7'ipts of the Sepiuagmt.
r. Codex Cryptoferratensis. Basilian Monastery of
Groita Feirata, cod. E. ^. vii.
This volume consists partly of palimpsest leaves which once
belonged to a great codex of the Prophets. A scribe of the 13th
century has written over the Biblical text liturgical matter 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 Sdcrorutn biblioriim veiustissima fj'agvienta, vol.
i (Rome 1867) and iii. (1877).
The original codex seems to have contained 432 leaves
gathered in quires of eight ; and the leaves appear to have
measured about \o\ x 8} inches. 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
letters.
It cannot be said that Cozza's transcript, much as Biblical
students are indebted to him for it, satisfies our needs. Uncial
codices of the Prophets are so few that we desiderate a photo-
graphic edition, or at least a fresh examination and more com-
plete collation of this interesting palimpsest.
A. Fragmentum Bodleianum. Oxford, Bodleian Library,
MS. Gr. bibl. d. 2 (P).
A fragment of Bel in the version of Theodotion (2 1 ywaiKmv —
41 Aa:'ir;A). 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
po''tion 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. M.., 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 {Netie Bruchstiicke des Cod.
Sin., Leipzig, 1875), who believed it to be a portion of Codex
Sinaiticus ; a more accurate transcription is given by J. R.
Harris, Biblical Fragments, no. 15 (cf. Mrs Lewis's Studia Sin.
i. p. 97 f.). Cent. iv.
Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 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 Aihenatiiin, 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. iigypt. Sprache, 1881 (Kenyon, op.
«■/., p. 131).
(8) Nine fragments of a MS. written 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. W., 1897, p. 339 fif.
(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, Anatecta,
pp. 34 ff.
(u) 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. 12 i.
(12) Palimpsest fragments of Wisdom and Sirach (cent. vi. —
vii.), carried by Tischcndorf to St Petersburg and intended for
publication in the 8th volume of his Moitiii/unta, wliich never
appeared. See Nestle, Urtcxt, p. 74.
(13) Two palimpsest leaves of Sirach belonging to cod. 2 in
the Patriarchal Lilirary at Jerusalem: cf. I'ap.idopulos, 'If/jofr.
WiiiK., \. p. 14: T« (iv(nT\r]i)aiTiK(\ (fjiiWa 2"/ ku\ 56 (i<ri nuXiiiyl/qfrTit
l)v i] <tp)(LKfi yf)u(})ri uvTjKfi fit Tuv (' aliova...TU naXaiov fit avroiu
Keifitvop tort diiTTr]\uv, koi iv (f)v\. 56 8iaKpivfTai t) iiTiyi)ii(j)ii
c()(t>fA Ihcoy y'oy cipdlx- The leaves contain Sir. prol. i — i. 14,
i. 29 — iii. II. I'rinlcd by J. R. Harris, (p. cit., no. 5.
(14) Part of a Papyrus book which seems to have contained
the Minor Prophets. The discovery of liiis fragment was
announced in 1892 by W. H. Hcchler, who gave a facsimile
of Zach. xii. 2, 3 ('Times,' Sept. 7, 1892; Transactions of (he
Congress of Orientalists, 1892, ii., p. 331 f). Mr liecliler
10 — 2
148
Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
claimed for this papyrus an extravagantly early date, but the
hand appears to belong to the seventh century; see Kenyon,
Palaeography 0/ papyri, p. 118. This MS., which contains Zech.
iv. — xiv., Mai. i. — iv., is now the property of the University of
Heidelberg'.
(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, Uriext, p. 74.
(17) A portion of a le.if of a papyrus book, bearing the
Greek text of Ezech. v. 12— vi. 3 (Bodl. MS. 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 which is engraved Ps.
Ixxix (Ixxx). I — 16, found at Rhodes in 1898. See Sitziingsberichte
d. ko/iigl. Preuss. Akad. d. Wissenschaftcii su Berlin, 1898
(xxxvii.)'-^.
II. Cursive MSS.
The following are the cursive MSS. used by Holmes and
Parsons, with the addition of others recently examined or
collated by the editors of the larger Cambridge Septuagint ^
14. Gen., Ex., ep.
Arist., cat. (xi)
15. Octateuch (ix —
X)
16. Octateuch (xi)
17. Genesis, cat. (x)
1 8.
Octateuch
xi)
(X-
(A) The Octateuch.
Rome, Vat. Palat. Gr.
203
Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.
2
Florence, Laur. v. 38
Moscow, Syn. 5,Vlad.
28
Florence, Laur. Med.
Pal. 242 (formerly
at Fiesole)
Klostermann, Anal.
p. 1 1 n.
Hexaplaric in early
books
Batififol, Vat., p. 91
^ Edited (1905) by Prof. G. Deissmann.
" The Amherst Papyri, pt. i. (1900), adds some small uncial fragments
from Gen. (i. i — 5) and Job (i. 21 f., ii. 3) and portions of Fss. v., Iviii., lix.,
cviii., cxviii., cxxxv., cxxxviii. — cxl. Finally, Mrs Lewis {Exp. Times,
Nov. 1901) announces the discovery of a palimpsest from Mt Sinai contam-
ing Gen. xi. 3, 4, 7 in an uncial hand of the sixth or seventh century.
^ The arable numerals are the symbols employed by H. and P. For
descriptions of the unnumbered MSB., the writer is indebted to Messrs
Brooke and M<=Lean, and Mr Brooke has also assisted him in verifying ,'
and correcting the earlier lists. j
i
Il
Manuscripts of the Scptnagint. 149
19. Octateuch ^ Rome, Chigi R. vi. 38 Bianchini, Vind,^ p.
(?x) 279 ff.
Lucianic, Lagarde's //
20. Genesis (ix) [Cod. Dorothei i.]
25. Gen., Ex., ep. Munich, Staatsbibl. Field, ii. Auct. p. 3.
Arist., cat. (xi) Gr. 9 Lag.'s m {Gen. gr.)
28. Num., Deut., Rome, Vat. Gr. 2122
Jos., mipL'r/.{-K\) I formerly Basil. 161)
29. Octateuch (inc. Venice, St Mark's, Cf. Lagarde Genesis,
Gen. xliii. 15) Gr. 2 ^.d, Septuagintast.
...(x) i. p. II. Lag.'s X
30. Octateuch (inc. Rome, Casan. 1444
Gen. xxiv. 13)
(xi)
31. Genesis, fa/, (xvi) Vienna, Imp. Lib. .? Copied from Aid.
Theol. Gr.4(Lamb. ; (Nestle.) Lag.'s 7f
32. Pentateuch (xii) [Cod. Eugcnii i.] Scrivener-Miller, i. p.
224
37. Lectionary (a.d. Moscow, Syn. 31,
1116) Vlad. 8
38. Octateuch.. .(xv) Escurial, Y. 11. 5 Hexaplaric, cf. Field,
i. p. 398
44. Octateuch.. .(xv) Zittau, A. i. 1 Lagarde's.?: sceGeite-
sis gr., p. 7 ff. and
Libr. V. T. can. i.
p. vi. ; Scrivener-
Miller, i. p. 261 ;
Rcdpath, Exp. 7.,
May 1897
45. Num. {lect.\ (xi) Escurial
46. Octateuch.. .(xiv) l'aris,Nat. Coisl.r,r.4 O.T. cxc. Psalter
47. Fragment of lee- Oxford, Hodl. IJaron.
tionary 201
50. Lectionary (xiii) Oxford, Bodl. Scld. 30
52. Octateuch..., ^';>. Florence, Laur. Acq.
Arist., cat. (x) 44
53. Octateuch (a.d. P. iris, Nat. Reg. Gr.
1439) 17*
54. Octateuch, <•/./?- Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. Field, i. p. 223. Ea-
rn/, (xiii — xiv) 5 garde's k
55. Octateuch. ..(xi) Konic, Vat. Kcgin. Part of a complete
Gr. I Biijle, cf. Klostcr-
mann, p. 12
56. Octateuch. ..(a. I). Paris, Nat. Ri-g. Gr.
'o<;3) 3
57. Octateuch, cp. Rome, Vat. (ir. 747 Field, i. pp. 5, 7»
Arisl., cat. (xi)
' Dots in this position slicw that the M.S. extends l)cyond the Oclalcuch.
150 Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
58. Pentateuch Rome, Vat. Regin. Hexaplaric. Field, 1.
(xiii) Gr. 10 p. 78
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
(impcrf.) (x)
64. Octateuch ... (x Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. Field, i. p. 5
— xi) 2 O. and N.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.^
Venice; see H. P.) 1867 (27)
■]T,. 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. lii. Lagarde's c. Horne-
1126) mann, p. 41 ; Owen,
Enquiry, p. 90
76. Octateuch...(xiii) Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 4 Hesychian
77. Octateuch, cat. Rome, Vat. Gr. 748
(xiii)
78. Gen., Ex., cat. Rome, Vat. Gr. 383 Field, i. p. 78
(xiii)
79. Gen., ep. Arist., Rome, Vat. Gr. 1668
cat. (xiii)
82. Octateuch. ..(xii) Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. Lucianic (in part).
3 Rahlfs, Sept.-St. i.
5ff. (Lagarde's/)
83. Pentateuch, (r<3:/. Lisbon, Archivio da ? Copied from Aid.
(xvi) Torre da Tombo (Nestle)
540 &c. (formerly
at Evora)
84. Heptateuch (?w- Rome, Vat. Gr. 1901 Hesychian
pcrf.) (x)
85. Heptateuch (/;«- Rome, Vat. Gr. 2058 Field, i. pp. 78, 397
perf. (xi) (formerly Basil. 97) ("praestantissimi
codicis")
93. Ruth... (xiii) London, B. M. Reg. Lucianic (Lagarde's
i. D. 2 tn in "Lucian")
a
Manuscripts of the Septiiagint. 1 5 1
94=131
105. Exod. xiv. 6 — 26 London, B. M. Bur-
&c. (xiii — xiv) ney
106. Octateuch..(xiv) Ferrara, Bibl. Comm. Hesychian. O. T,,
Gr. 187 N. T. (582 Greg.,
451 Scr.). Lagarde,
Ank. p. 27
107. Octateuch...(A.D. Ferrara, Bibl. Comm. Lagarde, ib.
1334) Gr. 188
108. Octateuch...(xiv) Rome, Vat. Gr. 330 Field, i. p. 5. Luci-
anic (Lagarde's d)
118. Octateuch {tin- Faris, Nat. Reg. Gr. Lucianic (Lagarde's
per/.) (xiii) 6 p)
120. Octateuch... (xi) Venice, St Mark's,
Gr. 4
121. Octateuch... (x) Venice, St Mark's,
Gr. 3
122. Octateuch... (xv) Venice, St Mark's, O. and N. T. (Ev.
Gr. 6 206) in Latin order.
Copy of 68. Lag.'s^
125. Octateuch... (xv) Moscow, Syn. 30,
Vlad. 3
126. Heptateuch Moscow, Syn. 19,
cat. in Gen.., Ex. Vlad. 38
(A.D. 1475)
127. Octateuch... (x) Moscow, Syn. 31a, Field, i. p. 5. La-
Viad. I garde, .liik. p. 3
128. Octateuch (xii) Rome, Vat. (}r. 1657, Field, i. pp. 168, 224
formerly Grotta fer-
rata
129. Octateuch (xiii) Komc, Vat. (ir. 1252 See note to 63
130. Octateuch (?xiii) Vienna, Th. Gr. 3 Field, i. p. 6. La-
(Nesscl 57) garde's t: Ank. p.
26. See note to 131
131. Octateuch Vienna, Th. Gr. r I'"ield, i. p. 5: "in
(x--xi) (Nessel 23) enunier.uione Hol-
mesiaiia [cod. 130]
perverse designaiur
131, ct vice versa.'
O. and N.T.
132. Lcrtionary (pa- Oxford, Rodl. Selden.
limpsest, xi — 9
xii)
133. Excerpts from l.cvdcn, Univ.
MSS.hyLVoss
134. Octateuch... (xi) Florence, I.aur. v. i ilcsychian
[52 Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
135. Gen., Ex. i. i — Basle, A. N. iii. 13 Field, i. p. 6. La-
xii. 4, cat. (xi) (Omont i) 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)
237 = 73
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, (Tun im-
(xiii) portant MS. des
Septaiite, in v?///-
letinCritJque,\2iZ(),
pp. II2ff.
Josh.— Ruth (x London, B.M. Add. Continuation of E (p.
— xi) 20002 134) with Peters-
burg Ixii. See next
page
Octateuch, cat. London, B.M. Add.
(xii— xiii) 35123
Lev. — Ruth, «r<2/. Lambeth, 12 14
(a.d. 1 104)
Lev.— Ruth, ^a/. Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.
(a.d. 1264) 5
Jos.— Ruth Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.
cat. (xii) 7
Octateuch Paris, Arsenal 8415 Hexaplaric readings
schol.
Heptateuch (//«- 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 11
(xv) 132 !l
Octateuch, ep. Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. Hexaplaric readings
Arist..,cat.{yi\\\) 129 j
Gen. — Ex. [iin- Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. !
per/.),ep.Artst., 130
cat. (xv)
i
Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 1 5 3
'£.-x..{imperf.)^cat. Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. Hexaplaric readings
(.xvi) 131 (interlinear)
Gen. i. — iii. (?), Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr.
comm. (palim.) 161
(xiii)
Gen., Ex., ep. Escurial S. i. 16 Hexaplaric readings
Arist., cat.
(A.D. 1586)
Octateuch...(z;«- Escurial Q. i. 13
per/.) (xi)
Octateuch, cat. Leyden, 13 (belongs
(xiii) to Voss collection)
Exod. — Deut. Leipzig, Univ. Libr. Hexaplaric readings.
{imper/.){x\)... Gr. 361 Published by Fis-
cher in 1767 = Lips.
(H. P.)
Gen., Ex., ep. Munich, Gr. 82
Arist.yCat.{xv\)
Jos. — Ruth...(x) Munich, Gr. 454 (for-
merly at Augsburg)
Octateuch, ep. Zurich, Bibl. de la Hexaplaric matter
Anst.,cat.{x\\\) 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)
Hexatcuch... (x) Grotta Ferrata Y. y. i
Gen. — Jos. {tin- St Petersburg, Imp. Continuation of E (p.
pcr/.)...{x — xi) Libr. Ixii 134)
Gen., comm. Moscow, .Syn. VI. id.
Chrys. 35
Joshua-Rulli... Athos, Ivdr. 15
cat. (xii)
Oct.iteuch (x) Athos, i'.mtocr. 24 I Ic.xaplaric readings
Octateuch... (x .A.thos, Vatop. 5 1 1
— xi)
Octateuch Athos, Vatop. 513
(A.D. I02l)
Lev. — KuKh, cat. Athos, Vatop. 515
(xi — xii^i
Ex. — Rutli Athos, Vatop. 516 Hexaplaric readings,
(xiv) much faded
154 Manuscripts of the Scptnagint.
Pentateuch {im- Athos, Protat. 53 Hexaplaric readings
perf.\ (A.D.
1327)
Octateuch (a.d. Athos, Laur. y. 112 Hexaplaric readings
1013) (a few)
Genesis,ffl/.(?xi) Constantinople, 224
(formerly 372)
Octateuch... £•«/. Athens, Bibl. Nat. 43
(xi)
Octateuch.. .(xiii) Athens, Bibl. Nat. 44 Lucianic(?)
Octateuch, cat. Smyrna, (txo\ti evayy.
Niceph. (xii) i
Pentateuch, cat. Patmos, 216
(xi)
Num. — Ruth, Patmos, 217
cat. (xi)
Heptateuch (z;«- Patmos, 410
perf.) (xiii)
Pentateuch, test. Patmos, 411
xii. pair, (xv)
Octateuch... (x Sinai, i
-xi)
Pentateuch, cat. Sinai, 2
(?x)
Octateuch... (ix Jerusalem, H. Sepul-
med.) chre 2
Genesis, cat. (xii Jerusalem, H. Sepul-
— xiii) chre 3
Octateuch, cat. Venice, Or. 534 : see
(xi) below, p. 508
(B) Historical Books.
rg^...! Regn.,2 Esdr., Rome, Chigi R. vi. 38
Judith, Esth.,
I — 3Macc.,&c.
(x)
29... I — 4 Regn., I — Venice, St Mark's,
3 Mace, (im- Gr. 2
perf.), &c. (x)
38. ..I Regn., 2 Regn. Escurial, Y. 11. 5
i. I — XX. 18 (xv)
44...1 Regn., 2 Esdr., Zittau, A. i. 1
I — 4 Mace,
Esth., Judith,
Tob., (N. T.)
&c. (xv)
' 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 mutandis to (C) and (D).
Manuscripts of the Septiuigint. 1 5 5
46...1 Regn.-2Esdr., Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.
Esth., Judith, 4
I — 4 Mace,
Tob....
52...1 Regn.-2Esdr., Florence, Laur. Acq.
Esth., Judith, 44
I — 4 Mace,
Tob., schol. (x)
55...1 Regn.-2Esdr., Rome, Vat. Rcgin.
Judith, Esth., Gr. i
Tob., I — 4
Mace, (xi)
56... I — 4 Ret,'n., I — Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 3
2 Chron., i — 2
Mace, (xii)
58...! — 4 Regn., I — Rome, Vat. Regin,
2 Chron., i — 2 Gr. 10
Esdr., J lid.,
Tob., Esth.,
«&;c. (xiii)
60. 1-2 Chron. (.?xii) Cambridge, Univ. Walton, Polyq;!. vi.
Libr. VI. 1. 24 121 ff.; J. R. Harris,
Origin of Leicester
Cod., p. 21
64... I Regn. -2 Esdr., Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr.
Esth., Tob., 2
I — 2 Mace, (x)
68... I Regn. -2 Esdr., Venice, St Mark's,
Esth., Judith, Gr. 5
Tob., 1—3
Mace (xv)
70.. 1-4 Regn., parts Munich, Gr. 372 (for-
of Chron., 'lob. merlyat Augsburg)
(xi)
71.. .2 Esdr., I — 3 Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. I
Mace, Esth.,
Judith, Tob.
(xiii)
74. ..I— 2 Esdr., I — 4 Florence, St Mark's
Mncc, Esth.,
Judith, Tolx
(xiv)
76. ..Esth., Judith, Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 4
Tob. (xiii)
82 ..I— 4 Regn. (xii Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.
—xiii) 3
92. I— 4 Regn. (x) Paris, Nat. (ir. 8 Kicld, i. p. 4S6
1 56 Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
93...i-2Esdi-.,Esth., London, B. M. Reg. Facsimile in Kenyon.
1-3 Mace, (xiii) i. D. 2 Two texts of Esther
98. I — 4Regn., I — 2 Escurial, 2. 2. 19
Chron., cat.
106...1 Regn.-2Esdr., Ferrara, Bibl. Comm.
Judith, Esth., Gr. 187
I — 2 Mace.
'^ 107. ..I Regn.-2 Esdr., Ferrara, Bibl. Comm.
S 1—3 Mace, Gr. 188
« Esth., Judith,
S Tob.(A.D.i334)
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)
i20...iRegn.-2Esdr., Venice, St Mark's,
I — 4 Mace, Gr. 4
Esth. (xi)
121...1 Regn.-2Esdr. 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
1 3 '...Historical Bks. Vienna, Th. Gr. 1
(exc. 4 Mace.) (Nessel 23)
(?xii)
i34...iRegn.-2Esdr., Florence, Laur. v. I
I Mace, (x)
158. I— 4 Regn., I— 2 Basle, B. 6. 22 Wetstein, N. T. i. p.
Chron. 132
236... I Regn.-2Esdr., Rome, Vat. Gr. 331
Esth., Judith,
Tob., 1—4
Mace, cat. (xii)
241... I — 4Regn.,i — 2 London, B. M. Harl.
Chron. 7522
242. I — 4 Regn. V^ienna, Th. Gr. 5
243. I — 4Regn.,crt/. Paris, Nat. Coisl. 8 Field, i. p. 486
Manuscripts of the Septnagint. 157
243*. I — 4Regn.(6rt/.), Venice, St Mark's, Field, i. p. 486
I Chron. — 2 cod. 16
Esdr., Esth.,
Tob.,Jud.,i— 4
Mace.
244. I — 4 Regn. (x) Rome, Vat. Gr. 333
245
246
247
248
311
I Regn. (ix — x) Rome, Vat. Gr. 334 Lucianic (Field)
..I Regn. (xiii) Rome, Vat. Gr. 1238
I — 4 Re;4n. (4 Rome,Vat. Gr.Urb. i
Regn. imperf.)
..I — 2Esdr.,Tob., Rome, Vat. Gr. 346 Nestle, Marg. p. 58
Judith, Esth.,
&c. (xiv)
..Historical ]5ks. Moscow, Syn. 341
(xij
..I Regn.-2Esdr.,
Esth., Tob.
..Judith, I — 3 Escurial, 12. i. 13
Mace. (3 M.
imperf.) (xi)
..iRcgn.-2Chron. Munich, Gr. 454(?for-
(x) merly at Augsburg)
..I Regn. -3 Regn. St Petersburg, Imp.
xvi. 28 (x or xi) Libr. Ixii.
..'lob., Judiili, GrottaFerrata,A. y. I
Estii., Ruth (x; (catal., 29)
..Tobit(xivorxv,) Rome, Vat. (ir. 332
..I Esdr., Tobit Leipzig, Univ. Libr. Hexaplaric readings
(fragments) (x Gr. 361
or xi)
..Esth., Judith, Athos, Vatop. 51 1
Tob.,i -4Rcgn.
(x or xi)
..Esth., Tob., Athos, Vatop. 513
Judith (A.iJ.
102 1)
..1-2 Chron. (xiv) Athos, V.itop. 516
..1—4 Regn., cv//. Athens, liibl. Nat. 43
(xi)
..I Rcgn.-2F.sdr., Athens, Hibl. Nat. 44
Esth., Judith,
Tob. (xiii)
..r — 4 Regn., I — Paris, Arsenal 8415
2 Chron. (xiv)
..I Regn. -2 Esdr., Tans, Nat. Suppl. (Ir.
I — 4 Mace, 6oy
Esth., Judith,
Tob. (xiv)
15^ Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
...\ — 4 Regn. (xii) Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.
7
(C) Poetical Books.
13. =1 (see under
Uncial MSS.)
21. Psalms, schol. [Cod. Eugenii iv.]
(xiii — xiv)
27. Psalms i—lxx Gotha, formerly Loth- An uncial MS., La-
ringen garde's M(p^) {Spe-
chtien, p. 27)
39. Psalms (/;«/^;y;) [Cod. Uorothei ii.] An uncial MS., La-
(ix) garde's E(i«) {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., Zfx-
vos tS)v nar.
TJfJLCOV (xiv)
5 5... Job, Psalms Rome, Vat. Reg. Gr.
(?xi) I
65. Psalms, cafi/., Leipzig
Lat. (xii)
66. Psalms, canL Eton Coll.
(xiv)
67. Psalms, cant. Oxford, C.C.C. 19 Harris, Leicester Co-
(xvi) dex, p. 20
68. ..Poetical Books Venice, St Mark's,
(xv) Gr. 5
69. Psalms, cant. Oxford, Magd. Coll. 9
(?x)
80. Psalms, cant. Oxford, Christ Ch. A
(xiii — xiv)
81. Psalms (xi) Oxford, Christ Ch. 2
99. Psalms, schol.., Oxford, Trin. Coll. 78
cat. (xii — xiii)
100. Psalms, cant. Oxford, Christ Ch. 3
(xi — xii)
loi. Psalms, ca7it. Oxford, Christ Ch. 20
(xiii)
102. Psalms, cant. Oxford, Christ Ch. I
(xiii)
103. Prov. i. — xix. Vienna, Th. Gr. 25 Klostermann, pp. 6,
(xv) 18
Manuscripts of the Septjiagiiit.
159
Klostermann, p. iS
104. Psalms i.-x. (xvi) Vienna, Th. C.r. 27
(Nessel 229)
106. ..Job, Prov.,Eccl., P'errara, Bibl. Comm.
Cant, Sap., Sir. Gr. 187
...Psalms (xiv)
109. Proverbs... (xiii) Vienna, Th. Gr. 26
no. Job, schol. (ix) Vienna, Th. Gr. 9
111. Psalms (ix) Milan, Ambr. P. 65
112. Psalms, f«/.(A.D. Milan, Ambr. F. 12
961)
113. Psalms, frt/. (a. D. Milan, Ambr. B. 106
967)
1 14. ..Psalms, comm. Evora, Carthus. 2
115. Psalms, ^(?/;/w. Evora, Carthus. 3
1 22... Poetical Hooks Venice, St Mark's,
(xv) Gr. 6
124. Psalms, cani. Vienna, Th. Gr. 21
i25...Proverbs(rtf/«;«. Moscow, Syn. 30,
Chrys.), Eccl., Vlad. 3
Cant., Sap. (xv)
1 3 1... Poetical Books, Vienna, Th. Gr. 23
&c. (?xii)
137. Job, ra/. (xi— xii) Milan, Ambr. B. 73 Field, ii. p. 2, and
Auct. p. 5
138. Job (x) Milan, Ambr. M. 65 Field, ii. p. 2
139. Proverbs — Jol), Milan, Ambr. A. 148 Field, ii. p. 2
cat. (x)
140. Psalms liasle, B. 10. 33
141. Psalms (A.n. Turin, B. 2. 42
1344)
142. Psalms, LO)/i»i. Vienna, Th. Gr. 10
(Nessel 8)
143. Vs^\ms, proocm. Vienna, Th. Gr. \<)
144=131
145. Psalms, cant, (x) Vellctri, I'.or<(.
146. Psalms (x) [Cod. Fr. Xavicr] In Capitular Lib.
Toledo
147. Prov.— Job, cat. Oxford, Bodl. Laud. Klostermann, p. 51
... (xiii) 30
149. Job, Prov., Eccl., Vienna, Th. Gr. 7
Cant., Sap.,
Pss.Sal.,fc>ww.
(xi)
150. Psalms (?xiv) Ferrara, Carmclit. 3
131. Psalms f/w/f//) Venice, Bibl. Zen.
I j2. Psalms (xi) (Cod. Nan. 25)
= 3o8*H. P. SecGeb-
liardt, Die Psatmcn
Sdtomo'x, p. 1 5
154. Psalms, cant. (Cod. Meermanni I)
(xiii)
A Graeco-Latin MS.
Now in St Mark's
Lib. Venice
i6o
Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
155. Psalms (xii — (Cod. Meermanni II) Now Bodl. Misc. Gr,
xiii)
156. Vs?i.\ms,interli)i. Basle, A. 7. 3
Lat.
157. Job, Prov.,Eccl., Basle, B. 6. 23
Cant., Sap.
159. Eccl.,Prov.(part), Dresden, i
Cant.,5(r/w/.(xi)
160. Job (xiv) Dresden, 2
161. Job, Prov.,Eccl., Dresden, 3
Cant, (xiv)
204
An uncial MS. La-
garde's D(P«) {Sped-
men, p. 2, cf. Ank.
p. 27)'
'Wetstein,A^. T. i. 132
Klostermann, p. 39
Field, ii. p. 2 ; cf. 6,
309, and Auct. 22.
Cf. Klostermann,
PP- 16, 39
Job, conim. (xv) Turin, Royal Library,
330
162. Psalms, z;//^;7/«. Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr.
Latin (xi) 24
163. Psalms (xii) Paris, Nat. Colbert.
Gr. 26
164. Psalms (xiv) London, B. M. Harl,
5533
165. Psalms (xiv) London, B. M. HarL
5534
166. Psalms, cant. London, B. M. Harl.
(A.D. 1283) 5535
167. Psalms, cafit. London, B. M. Harl.
(xiv) 5553
168. Psalms itmpcrf) London, B. M. Harl.
(xi— xii) 5570
169. Psalms (xii — London, B. M. Harl.
xiii) 5571
170. Psalms, cant. London, B. M. Harl.
(xii) 5582
171. Psalms, cant. London, B. M. Harl.
(xiv) 5653
172. Psalms, cant. London, B. M. Harl.
(A.D. 1488) 5737
173. Psalms, cant. London, B. M. Harl.
5738
174. Psalms {Latin, London, B. M. HarL
Arabic) (a.d. 5786
1153)
175. Psalms (xi) London, B. M.2. A.vi.
176. Psalms, catit. London, B. M. Harl.
5563
' The only Greek MS. which in Ps. xcv (xcvi) 10 adds aivo na fvXw
(sic) ; see below, p. 467.
Manuscripts of the Septuagint. i6t
177. Psalms {jmperf.) Paris, Nat. Gr. 27
cant, (xiii)
178. Psalms, cant. Paris, Nat. Gr. 40
(A.D. 1059)
179. Psalms, cant. Paris, Nat. Gr. 41
(xii)
180. Psalms, <r<T«/. (xii) Paris, Nat. Gr. 42
181. Psalms, cat. (xii) Cod.DucisSaxo-Goth,
182. Psalms, tra;//. (xi) Rome, Chigi 4
183. Psalms,fa///. (xii) Rome, Chigi 5
184. Psalms, cotnm. Vienna, Th. Gr. 17
(ix-x)
185. Psalms, comm. Vienna, Th. Gr. 18
(xi)
186. Psalms, co?nm. Vienna, Th. Gr. 13
(xi)
187. Psalms {ttnperf.) Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.
10
188. Psalms (imperf.) Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. An uncial MS. La-
186 garde's WKv^) {^Speci-
men, p. 3). Often
agrees with 156
189. Psalms, cant. Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.
13
190. VsA\\w^(iniperf.) Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. An uncial MS. La-
cant. 187 garde's K(i'») (.S^^a-
men, p. 3)
191. Psalms, cant. Pans, NaL Coisl. Gr.
i88
192. Psalms (/////><r/;) Paris, Nat. Gr. 13
cant, (xiii)
193. Psalms, cant. Paris, Nat. Gr. 21
(xii)
194. Psalms, cant. Paris, Nat. Gr. 22
(xii)
195. Psalms, cant. Paris, Nat. Gr. 23
(xii)
196. Psalms (inc. ii. Paris, Nat. Gr. 25
3), cant, (xii)
197. Psahns, cant. Paris, Nat. Gr. 29
(xiv)
199. Psalms (xi) Modena, Est. 37
200. Psalms, cant. Oxford, Bodl. Barocc. Cf. Nistlc, Sfptua-
15 ' gintuitutt. iii. p. 14
201. Psalms, cant. Oxford, Bodl. Barocc.
107
202. Psalms, cant.^ Oxtord, iiodl. Cromw.
comtn. 110
S. S. XI
I62
Manuscripts of the Septuagint,
203.
Psalms, catit..
Oxford, Bodl. Laud.
prayers (a.d.
C. 41
1336)
204.
Psalms {tmperf.)
Oxford, Bodl. Laud.
schol.^ prayers
C. 38
205.
Psalms, cant.
Cambridge, Trin.
Coll.
206.
Psalms, cant.
Cambridge, Gonville
Facsimile in Harris,
(xiv)
& Caius Coll. 348
Leicester codex
208.
Psalms {imperf.\
Tubingen, (cod.
cant.
Schnurrer)
210.
Psalms (xiv)
[Cod. Demetrii v.]
211,
Psalms, cant.
(xiii)
Rome, Vat. Gr. 1541
212.
Psalms {itnperf.)
(xii)
Rome, Vat. Gr. 1542
213.
Psalms {tmperf.)
(xiii)
Rome, Vat. Gr. 1848
214.
Psalms, cant.
(xiii)
Rome, Vat. Gr. 1870
215.
Psalms, cant.
(a.d. ioii)
Rome, Vat. Gr. 1873
Klostermann, p. 13
216.
Psalms, cant, (x)
Rome, Vat. Gr. 1927
217.
Psalms, cant.
(a.d. 1029)
Rome, Vat. Gr. 341
218.
Psalms, li. — liii.
(xiii — xiv)
?
219.
Psalms, cant.
Vienna, Th. Gr. 20
220 =
= 186
Vienna, Th. Gr. 13
221.
Psalms, ix. — cl.,
conim.
Vienna, Th. Gr. 16
222.
Psalms, cant.
Vienna, Th. Gr. 21
22?
Psalms, cant.
Vienna, Th. Gr. 22
225.
Psalms, cant.
(xi)
Bologna, 720
226.
Psalms, cant..,
Rome, Barber, i (Gr.
prayers (x)
372)
227.
Psalms {tmperf.)
Rome, Barber. 2 (Gr.
cant.., prayers
322)
(X)
228.
Job, &c. (xiii)
Rome, Vat. Gr. 1 764
241.
..Prov., Eccl.,
London, B. M. Harl.
Cant.
7522
248.
..Prov., Eccl,
Rome, Vat. Gr. 346
Hexaplaric readings
Cant., Job,
Field, ii. p. 2
Sap., Sir., &c.
(xiv)
Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 163
249. Job, Sap., Sir., Rome, Vat. Pius i Field, I.e.
&c.
250. Job (xiv) Munich, Elect. 148 Field, /.f.
251. Job, ^^a/.. Psalms Florence, Laur. v. 27
(xiv)
252. Job, Prov., Eccl., Florence, Laur. viii. Field, I.e.; cf. p. 309
Cant, (ix — ») 27 and Auct. p. 2
253. Job, Prov., Sir. Rome, Vat. Gr. 336 Klostermann, p. 17
(xi — xiv) ff. Gebhardt, Die
Psalmen Salomons
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, comm. (x) Rome, Vat. Gr. 743
258. Job,frt'/.,/;V/.(ix) Rome, Vat. Gr. 749 Field, I.e. Kloster-
mann, p. 68
259. Job, schol. (x) Rome, Vat. Pal. Gr. Field, /. c. Kloster-
230 mann, p. 1 1
260. Job, cat.., Prov. Copenhagen, Royal
Libr.
261. Job, Prov., Eccl., Florence, Laur. vii. 30
Sap. (xiv)
263. Psalms Copenhagen, Royal
Lib.
264. Psalms, cat. Rome, Vat. Ottob. Cf. Field, ii. p. 84 f.,
Gr. 398 and Auct. p. 1 1
265. Psalms, cant., Rome, Vat. Gr. 381
pict. (xiv)
266. Psalms (imperf.) Rome, Vat. Gr. 2101
(xiii)
267. Psalms, cant. Rome, Vat. Ottob.
(xiv) (ir. 294
268. Psalms, eat., Rome, Vat. Gr. 2057 Cf. Field, ii. p. 84
cant.
269. Psalms, coiitm. Rome, Vat. I'al. Gr.
Athen. (a.D. 44
897)
270. Psalms, cant. Rome, Vat. Gr. 1864
(xii)
271. Psalms, comm. Rome, Vat. Gr. 1747
(xi)
272. Psalms (imperf.) Romr, Vat. Pal. Gr.
((//. (xiii) 247
273. Psalms, tvj/.(,xiv; Rome, Vat Regin. Cf. Field, ii. p. 84
Gr. 40
11—2
164
Manuscripts of the SepUiagint.
274. Psalms {imperf.)
comm. (xiii)
275. Psalms,<ra«/.(xii)
276=221
277. Psalms, cant.
■z'jZ. Psalms (xii —
xiii)
279. Psalms, cant.
(xiii — xiv)
280. Psalms (xi)
281. Psalms (xi)
282. Psalms (xv)
283. Psalms (xii)
284. Psalms, cant.
(xiv)
285. Psalms, cant.
(xiii)
286. Psalms, comm.
(xii)
287. Psalms {imperf^
comm. (xii)
288. Psalms, comm.
Thdt. (xii)
289. Psalms, cofnm.
Euth.-Zig.
(xiii)
290. Psalms, cant.
291. Psalms (xi — xii)
292. Psalms, cat. (xi)
293. Psalms, nietr.
paraphr. (xv)
294. Psalms, Ixxi. 14,
-Ixxxi. 7,cxxvii.
3 — cxxix. 6,
cxxxv. II —
cxxxvi. I,
cxxxvii. 4-cxli.
21 (?xiii)
Rome, Vat. Ottob.
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
Floience, Laur. vi. 3
Florence, Laur. v. 37
Cambridge, Emma-
nuel College
Lagarde calls it P in
Genesis graece, 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
Cambridge Anfi-
quarian Society.,
1892—3, p. i68ff.i
■• Other Psalters used by Lagarde {Specimen, p. 3 f.) are St Gall 17 (ix)
= G(P") ; Munich 251 =L(p") ; a Bamberg Graeco-Latin MS. and a Cologne
MS. closely related to it, which he calls W and Z respectively. Cf. Rahlfs,
Sept.-St. ii. pp. 7, 8.
Manuscripts of the Septuagmt.
165
295. Prov., comrn. Rome, Vat. Ottob.
Procop. (xiv) Gr. 56
296. Prov.— Sir. (xiii) Rome, Vat. Palat. Gr.
337
297. Prov., cat. (xii) Rome, Vat. Gr. 1802
298. Eccl.,£'o/«;«.(xii) [Cod. Eugcnii 3]
299. Eccl., Comm. Rome, Vat. Gr. 1694 Klostermann, p. 29 f.
Greg. Nyss.,al.
(xiii)
300. Cant., comm. [Cod. Eugenii 3]
(xii)
302. Prov....(ix) = io9
Psalms,A.u.io66 London, B. M. Add.
19,352
Psalms Rome, Vat. Gr. 754
(D) Fropheiical Books.
22. Prophets (xi — London, B. M. Reg.
xiij i. L). 2
24. Isaiah, cat. (xii) [Cod. Demetrii i.]
26. Prophets (?xi) Rome, Vat. Gr. 556
33. Dan., Jer., cat. Rome, Vat. Gr. 11 54
(x)
34. Dan. (xii)
35. Dan. (xii)
36. Prophets (xiii)
Rome, Vat. Gr. 803
Rome, Vat. Gr. 866
Rome, Vat. Gr. 347
40. Dodecaprophe- [Cod. Dorothci iii.]
ton (xii)
Cod. DcMictrii ii.]
Cod. Demetrii iii.]
41. Isa., Jer. (ix — x)
42. Ezek.,Dan.,Min.
Proph.(xi — xii)
46... Isa., Jer., I'.ar., Paris, Nat. Cuisl. Gr.
Lam., \L\i. 4
Ezek., Dan.,
Minor Pro-
phets... (xiv)
48. Prophets (xii) Rome, Vat Gr. 1794
Cod. Pachomianus.
Lucianic ; Field, ii.
p. 4281. ComiU'sf
Hesychian (Cornill,
Ceriani) : cf. Klos-
termann, p. lof.
Originally belonged
to same codex as
Vat. gr. 1 153 : see
Klostermann, p. 11.
Cf. 87, 97, 238
Klostenuann, p. II n.
Lucianic (F"ield).
Cornill's o
Lucianic (Field)
49. Prophets (xi)
51. Prophets (xi)
Florence, Laiir. xi. 4
Florence, L.uir. x. 8
Lucianic (Field), Cor-
nill's 7. Kloster-
mann, pp. 1 1, 14
llcsvchius, Cornill's K
Lui i.inic (Field).
Cornill's d
1 66 Manuscripts of tJte Septuagint.
58,..Prophets (xiii) Rome, Vat. Reg. Gr. On the text of Daniel
lo inthisMS.seeKlos-
termann, p. 12
62. Prophets (xiii) Oxford, New Coll. Lucianic (Field).
Field, ii. p. 907 ;
Burkitt, Tycomus,
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
Propheten - catenen.
33, 97, 238 are
copied from 87
88. Isa., Jer., Ezek., Rome, Chigi 3 87 in Field (ii. p. 766).
Dan. (LXX.) O. T. in Greek (iii.
(?.\i) 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 X
91. Prophets, cat. Rome, Vat. Ottob. Gr. Hesychian (Cornill).
(xi) 452 Cornill's /*. See
note on 87
93. ..Isa; (xiv) London, B. M. Reg. Lucianic (Field)
i. D. 2
95. Dodecaproph., Vienna, Th. Gr. 163 Lucianic (Cornill)
comtn. Theod.
Mops.
96. Isa., Jer., Ezek., Copenhagen See note on 87
Dan.
97. Dodecapr., Isa., Rome, Vat. Gr. 11 53 See notes on 33, 87
cat. (x)
104. ..Isa. V. — Ixii. Vienna, Th. Bib. 27
(Nessel 229) 4
1 05... Fragments of London, B. M. Bur-
Prophets, &c. ney
(xiii — xiv)
Manuscripts of the SeMiiagint. 167
io6...Isa., Jer., Ezek., Ferrara, Gr. 187 Hesychian
Dan., Minor
Prophets to
Micah (xiv)
io9...Isaiah,fa/. = 302 Vienna, Th. Gr. 26
114. Dodecaproph., Evora, Carthus. 2
comm. 'Iheod.
Mops...
1 22... Prophets (xv) Venice, St Mark's,
Gr. 6
i3i...Prophets (?xii) Vienna, Th. Gr. I
(Nessel 23)
147. ..Isa., Jer., Ezek., Oxford, Bodl. Laud. Lucianic (cf. Field, ii.
Dan. (imperf.), 30 p. 907)
Dodecaproph.
148. Daniel (xii) Rome, Vat. Gr. 2025
153. Prophets (exc. Rome, Vat. Pal. Gr. Lucianic (Cornill)
Zech.), comm. 273
(x;
1 85. ..Dodecaproph. Vienna, Th. Gr. 18 Lucianic (Cornill)
(xi)
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 0)
229. ]tr.,T)2in.,comm. Rome, Vat. Gr. 673
(xiv)
230. Daniel (xiii) Rome, Vat. Gr. 1641
231. Jer. with Baruch Rome, Vat. Gr. 1670 From Grott.i Ferrata.
«!i:c. (xi) LucianiCjCornill'si.
Cp. Klostermann.
p. 14
232. Daniel (xii) Rome, Vat. Gr. 2000 A Jiasilian MS., cp.
Klostermann, p. i 5
233. Prophets (xiii) Rome, Vat. Gr. 2067 Lucianic (Field)
234. Susanna Moscow, Syn. 341
235. Susanna Rome, Vat. C,r. 2048
238. Ezckici, i:a/. (x) Rome, Vat. Gr. 1 153 Hesychian (Cornill).
Cornill's S". See
notes on ^2>t i^7,97
239. Prophets (A.D.
1046) -89
240. Dodccapr., tu/. Florence, Laur. vi. 22
(A.D. 1286)
301. Isaiah (ix) Vienna, Th. Gr. 158
302... Isaiah, ta/.( xiii)
= 109
1 68
Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
303. Isaiah, comm. Vienna, Th. Gr. 100
Cyril.
304. Isaiah i. — xxv. Florence, Laur. iv. z
comm. Basil.
(xi)
305. Isaiah (imperf.), Copenhagen, Reg.
cat.
306. Isa., Ezek. (xi) Paris, Nat. Gr. 16
307. Isaiah, comm. Rome, Vat. Ottob.
BcLsil. (xi) Gr. 430
308. Isaiah, comtn. Rome, Vat. Gr. 1509 Lucianic (Field)
Basil. and
Thdt. (xiii)
309. Isaiah, cat. (x) Rome, Vat. Gr. 755 Cf. Klostermann, p.
II
310. Dodecapr.,j<r/z(9/. Moscow, Syn. 209
(xi)
31 1... Prophets (xi) =
234
...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, .(4^(?/. i. 67 to, (rvyypdfifiaraTcov 7rpo(prjTd)V avayivdxrKfrai.
Const, ap. ii. 57 fiecros Be 6 dvayvaxrrrjs e'^' vyj/riXov rivos earajs
dva-'ivaxTKeTa ra Mcoaeas Koi 'irjaov Toii l^avrj, ra riov Kpircov Koi
Twv Baa-iXeicov k.t.\. Ibid. viii. 5 juera Tr]v dvdyvuxTW rov vopov Kai
tSuv 7Tpo(f>r]rQ)v. Chrys. in Rom. xxiv. 3 6 pdrijv ivravda elarikOuiv,
fliri ris iTpo(f}^Tr]s, tls dirocTToXos aripepov Biiki^B-q.
At a later time the dvayvwcreis or avayvtaa-yiara 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 MSS,
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, N. T. Gr., ad fin. vol. i. ; Neale, Holy Eastern
Church, General Intr., p. 369 ff.; Burgon, Last twelve verses of
St AT ark, p. 191 ff.; Scudamore, art. Lectionary, D. C. A. ii. ;
Nitzsch, art. Lectionarium, Herzog-Plitt, viii. ; GiegOTy, prolegg:
i. p. 161 ff., 687 ff. ; Scrivener-Miller, i. p. 74 ff. ; E. Nestle, Urtext,
p. 76; M. Faulhaber, Die Propheten-catenen nach rom. Hand-
schriften (Freiburg i. B., 1899).
The following list of MSS.' containing lections from the
Old Testament hiis 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)
H. M. Add. 1 184 1 (? 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)
„ Biirdett-Coutts, iii. 44 (xv) Gr. p. 749 (476, Scr. 290)
„ Burdett-Coutts, iii. 46 (xiii) Gr. p. 719 (226, Scr. 249)
„ Burdett-Coutts, iii. 53 (xv)
Oxford, Christ Church, Wake 14 (xii) Gr. p. 717 (207, Scr. 214)
„ ChristChurch,Wakei5('A.l). io68)Gr. p. 717(208, Scr. 215)
I Cambridge, Univ. Libr. Add. 1879 (? xi) (Gen. xi. 4 — 9, Prov. xiii.
19 — xiv. 6, Sir. \xxvii.
13 — xxxviii. 6) : a frag-
ment purchased fiom
the executors of Tisch-
cndorf
„ Christ's College, F. i. 8 (xi) Gr. \>. 714 (1S5, Scr. 222)
^Z*'', WH. 59
Ashburnham, 205 (xii) Gr, p. 720(237, Scr. 237-8)
Paris, Nat. Gr. 30S (xiii) Gr. p. 779 (24)
„ Nat. Gr. 243 (a.D. 1 133) Omont, .lASX Grecs cUitis,
no. xlvi.
* A few lectionaries have aheady been mentioned among the II.l'. .M.SS.
(37.61, 133).
I/O Manuscripts of tfte Septuagmt.
Paris, Nat. suppl. Gr. 32 (xiii) Gr. p. 704 (84)
Rome, Vat. Reg. Gr. 59 (xii) Gr. p. 757 (573, Scr. 395)
„ Vat. Gr. 168 (xiii or xiv) Gr. p. 786 (188, Sen 116)
„ Vat. Gr. 2012 (xv) Gr. p. 756 (556, Scr. 387)
„ Barb. 18 (xiv) Gr. p. 780 (40)
Grotta Ferrata, A' 8' 2 (x) Gr. p. 748 (473, Scr. 323)
„ A' 8* 4 (xiii) Gr. p. 748 (475, Scr. 325)
„ A' ^' 22 (xviii) Gr. p. 751 (506, Scr. 358)
Venice, St Mark's, i. 42 (xii) Gr. p. 724 (268, Scr. 173)'
Treves, Bibl. Cath. 143 F (x or xi) Gr. p. 713 (179)
Athens, Nat. 86 (xiii) Gr. d. 745 (443)
Salonica, 'EXXt^vikoG yvfivaalov tS' (xv or
. xvi) . Gr. p. 771 (837)
Cairo, Patr. Alex. 927 (xv) Gr. p. 776 (759, Scr. 140)
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, Sfcr. 364)
Jerusalem, H. Sepulchre (xiii) Harris, p. 13
Literature (on the general subject of this chapter). S troth,
in Eichhorn's Repertorium (vi., viii., xi.) ; the prolegomena to
Grabe, Holmes and Parsons, Tischendorf, and The Old Testa-
metit in Greek ; the prefaces to Lagarde's Genesis graece, Libr.
V. T. Canott.., p. i., Psalterii specimen; Kenyon, Our Bible and
the Ancient MSS.\ Madan, Summary, p. 615 ff. (Holmes MSS.,
A.D. 1789 - 1805) ; Nestle, Urtexl, p. 71 ff. ; H. Omont, Tnvenfaire
Siunniaire des MSS. Grccs de la Bibl. Nationale ; S. Berger,
Hist, de la Vulgate.
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 Sinaiticoruni (Oxford, 1886); Papadopulos
Kerameus, 'lepoao^vfxiTiKTj Bij^Xiodrjicrj i. — iv. (St Petersburg, 1891
— 1899); Sp. P. Lambros, Catalogue of the Greek MSS. on
Mount Athos (Cambridge, vol. i., 1895 ; vol. ii., with index, 1900).
He may also consult with advantage J. B. Pitra, Analecta sacra,
iii. (1883), p. 551 ff. ; H. A. Redpath, in Academy, Oct. 22, 1893;
E. Klostermann's Analecta zur Septua^inta (1895) ; ^''^ Lewis,
in Exp. Times, xiii. 2, p. 55 ff.; H. Omont, in Lit. C. Blatt;
A. Rahlfs, Septuaginta-Studien, ii. (1907).
1 At Messina, as Mr Brightman informs me, there are six lectionaries
of cents, xii, xiii. Mr T. W. Allen {^Notes on Greek MSS. in Italy, i8yo)
mentions two at Bologna (xi) and one at Lucerne (xv).
171
CHAPTER VI.
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 ; (3) those which are
limited to a single book or to a group ot 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 TJible was printed
at Alcalk {Comp/utum) 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 tlie birth
of Charles V. (1500 — 155^), and lived to see the whole of the
sheets pass through the press. He died Nov. 8, 15 17, and the
fourth vohinie, 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 pai)al 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 Polyglolta complectentia V. T.
172 Printed Texts of the Septuagint.
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]."
yxhe O.T. volumes of the Complutensian Bible contain in
three columns (i) the Hebrew text, with the Targum of Onkelos
at the foot of the page, (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 autho-
rised version of the Western Church \ The prejudice which their
words 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, coUocantes."
'^ In the dedication to Leo X. he says: "testari possumus...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. tum N. Testa-
menti codices perquam humane ad nos misisti."
* See Vercellone, in V. et N.T. ed. Mai, i. p. v. n. ; Var. lectt. ii. p.
436; Dissertazioni Accademiche, 1864, p. 407 ff.; Tregelles, Anaccount of the
printed text of the Greek N.T. (London, 1854), p. 2 ff . ; Delitzsch, Studien
zur Entsiehungsgeschichte der Polyglotten Bibel 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 Polyglott were the
Spaniard Antonio de Nebrija, Professor of Rhetoric at Alcalk,
and his pupil Ferdinando Nunez de Guzman (Pincianus); Diego
Lopez 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 whole in the
Septuagint columns of the four great Polyglotts edited by Arias
Montanus, Antwerp, 1569 — 72; B. C. Bertram, Heidelberg, 1586
— 7> 1599, 1 616; D. Wolder, Hamburg, 1596; Michael Le Jay,
Paris, 1645
1 2. In February \s\%-> 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 ; IlavTa
Toi KttT* i^0)(r/i' KuXovftiva fiifiXia, veia<; SryXaS?; ypa(f>rj<; TraXaia? re
Ktti veas. Sacrae scripturae veteris novaeque omnia. Colophon:
Venetiis in aedib[us] Aldi et Andreae soceri. mdxviii., mense
FebruarioJ
Like Ximenes, Andreas made it his business to examine the
best MSS. within his rea< h. 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 Bcssarion's collection of codices, which is
still preserved in St Mark's Library at Venice V Traces have
(Leipzif^. 1S71); LaRarde, Libr. V. T. can. i., p. iii.; E. NcsWc.Septuagin
tastudien, i. , pp. i, 13; E. Klosterniann, Annlccta, p. 15 f.
' On the orthography see Nestle, 6eptuiigintastudien, ii., p. 11, note b.
' Cf. Lagarde, Genesis graece, p. 6; Cornill, Eachiel, p. 79; Nestle,
1/4 Printed Texts of the Septuagint.
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, 1524, 1526; (2)?
with a preface by Philip Melanchthon, Basle, 1545; (3) H.
Guntius, Basle, 1550, 1582; (4) Draconites, in Biblia Fentapla,
Wittenburg, 1562 — 5; (5) Francis du Jon (Fr. Junius) or (.?) Fr.
Sylburg, Frankfort, 1597 ; (6) Nic. Glykas, 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, Eomana). It bears the title : h haaaia aiaohkh |
RATA T0Y2 EBAOMHKONTA | AI AY0ENTIA2 | HY2TOY E' AKPOY APXIE-
PEOS I EKAO0EI2A j VETVS TESTAMENTVM | IVXTA SEPTVAGINTA |
EX AVCTORITATE [ SIXTl V. PONT. MAX. j EDITVM | ROMAE |
EX TYPOGRAPHIA FRANCISCI ZANETTI. M.D.LXXXVl(l) ' | CVM
PRIVILEGIO GEORGIO FERRARIO CONCESSO.
The volume consists of 783 pages of text, followed by a
page 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.
(l) SiXTO QUINTO PONTtF. MAX. ANTONIUS CaRAFA
Cardinalis sanctae sedis apostolicae Bibliothecarius
Annus agitur iam fere octavus ex quo Sanctitas vestra pro
singulari suo de sacns litteris benemerendi studio auctor fuit
beatae memoriae Gregorio XIII. Pont. Max. ut sacrosancta Sep-
Urtext, p. 65. On the source of the Psalms in this edition see Nestle,
Septtiagintasttidien, iii., p. 32.
^ The second i has been added in many copies with the pen. The
impression was worked off in 1586, but the work was not published until
May 1587.
* "Elle n'est point signee, mais on salt qu'elle tut redigee par Fulvio
Orsini. Elle est d'ailleurs tres inferieure a la lettre de Caraia." (P. Batiffol,
La Vaiicane de Paul III. h Paul V., p. 89).
Printed Texts of the Septnagint. 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 afiferri 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 noa 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 Scptuaginta 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 celcbrioribus Italiae bibliothecis optima quae-
que exemplaria perquirercntur atque ex iis lectionum varietates
descriptae ad me mitterentur^ Quibus sane doctorum hominum
quos ad id delegeram industria et iudicio clarae memoriae
Gulielmi Cardinalis Sirleti (qucm 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) exemj^lari diligenter collatis ; intelleximus cum ex ipsa
collatione turn e sacrorum veterum scriptorum consensione,
Vaticanum codicem non solum velustate verum etiam bonitate
caeteris antcire ; quodque caput est, ad ipsam cjuam quaere-
bamus Septuaginta interprctationem, si non toto libro, maiori
certe ex parte, quam proxime accedcre. Quod mihi cum multis
aliis argumentis constaret, vel ipso etiam libri titulo, qui est Kara
Toiii f[:i8i)fj.i)K()VT<t, curavi de consilio et sententia eorum quos supra
nominavi, huius libri cditioncm ad Vaticanum exemplar emen-
dandam ; vel potius exemplar ipsum, quod eius valde probaretur
auctoritas, de verbo ad verbum repracscntandum, accurate prius
sicubi opus tuit recognitum et notationibus etiam auctum. Factum
est aiitcm providcntia sane divina, ut quod Sanctitate vestra
suadentc sui Cardinalatus tempore inchoatum est, id variis de
causis aliquoties intermissuin per ipsa fere initia Fontificatus sui
' On the genesis of the Sixtine fditiun the curious rcadir may cunsult
N'cstlc, Sefiluat^ifitiistudien, i., ii., where the particulars are collected wiili
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-
vantiae.
(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 antiquioreni 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, tum 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 otTensus, 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 Alexandre Severe in doliis repertae. quae
quod in octaplis inter Graecas editiones quintum et sextum
locum obtinerent, 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
nuUo modo possit, vel ipsis etiam Graecis scriptoribus testan-
tibus et Niceta confirmante his plane verbis in commentario
Psalmorum : ij/xets Se icai rr]v Toiavrrjv i'K8oaiv crejBa^onevoi, rfj
rmv flSSofijjKovTa Trpo(rKeifif6a fiiiXicrra, on dirjprjfievcos rrjv ttjs
Prmted Texts of the Septuagmt. 177
SiaXeKTou fieTajdoXiiv noiTjvafXfvoi fiiav e'v eKdarrois (vvouiv koi Xe^iO
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 coUocata
fuerit ut eius e regione aliae editiones quo inter se comparari
commodius possent ad legendum propositae essent, deinde
vero varietates tantum ex lis 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 triplici eiusdem sententiae interpre-
tatione intrusa, male praeterea a iibrariis 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 etia'ni 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. i\Iax. Ts enim quod in sacris litteris, unde
sanctissimam hausit doctrinam, aetatem fere totam contriverit,
qufidque 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 su i effecit ut summus Pontifex Gregorius XI II. Graeca
Septuaginta Interpretum Biblia, adhibita diligcnti castigatione,
in pristinum splundorem restitucnda curaret. Quam rem exe-
quendam cum ille demandasset Antonio Carafae Cardinali, viro
vetcris sanctitatis et omnium honestarum artium cultori, nulla
is interposita mora dclectum habuit doctissimorum hominum
qui domi suae statis diebus exemplaria maimscripta, quae
permulta imdique conquisierat, conferrcnt et ex iis optimas
quasque lectioncs elicerent ; quibus deinde cum codicc Vati-
canae bibliothecae sacpe ac diligenter comparatis inlcllectum
est, eum codiccm omnium qui extant longe optimum esse, ac
operae prctium fore si ad eius tivlcm nova haec editio para-
retur.
Sed emendationis consilio iam explicato, ipsa quoque ratio
quae in emendando adhibita est nunc erit apcricnda, in primis-
que Vaticanus liber 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 millesinium duccntcsiinum annum, hoc est
ante tcmpora B. Hicronymi et non infra, scriptus vidctur. Ex
S. S. ] J
178 Printed Texts of the Septiiagmt.
omnibus autem libris qui in manibus fuerunt unus hie prae aliis,
quia ex editione Septuaginta si non toto libro certe maiorem
partem constare visas est, niirum 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 Vaticano
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 coUati, qui Vaticanas
lectiones multis locis aut confirmarunt aut illustrarunt. Sed
libri Vaticani bonitas non tam ex horum codicum miro consensu
perspecta est, quam ex lis locis qui partim 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 expurgate exemplar! non
aliqua supersit macula) quemadmodum habentur in archetypo
relinqui quam eos ex alicuius ingenio aut eoniectura emendari :
quod inulta quae primo vel mendosa vel mutilata in hoc codice
vi'^.ebantur, ea postea cum aliis libris collata vera et sincera
reperirentur. Nam in libris Prophetarum, qui maxima in hoe
exemplar! (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,
turn ex libris manuscriptis in quibus ilia addita sunt sub aste-
riscis.
Atque haec ratio in notationibus quoque servata est, in
quibus cum multa sint ex commentariis Graecis petita quae in
codicibus manuscriptis partim mutilata partim varie scripta
aliquibus locis circumferuntur, ea non aliter atque in 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 iis repraesentata esse quae aut ad confirmandas lectiones
Vaticanas e scriptoribus vulgatis, aut ad explenda quae in Sep-
tuaginta non hahcntur, ex aliorum editionibus afferri potuissent,
quod in communibus libris cum legantur, inde sibi unusquisque
nullo neyotio 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 csset 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
Prophetas et hos ipsos aliter dispositos ; deinde reliquos quat-
tuor, quemadmodum 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 commoditali) in libro tamen quattuor Prophetarum
distinctio quaedam apparet subobscura, illi pacne similis quam
describit sanctus Dorotheas martyr, qui vixit sub Magno Con-
stantino.
Maccabacnrum libri absunt ab hoc exemplari, atque item
liber Genesis fere tolus; nam longo aevo consumptis membranis
mutilatus est ab initio libri usque ad caput XLVII. et liber item
Fsalmurum, qui a Psalmo CV. usque ad CXXXVIIl. nimia
vetustate mancus est. Sed haec ex aliorum codicum coUatione
emcndata sunt.
Quod si aliqua videbunlur in hac editione, ut ait V>. Hie-
ronymus, vel laccrata vel inversa, quod ea sub obelis et aste-
riscis ab Origene supplcta et distincta non sint ; vel obscura
et pcrturbata, quod cum Latina vulgata non conscntiant, ct
in aliquibus aliis editionibus ai)ertius ct expressius habeantur;
eris lector ailmonendus, non co spcctasse huius cxpolitionis
industriam ut haec editio ex permixtis eoium qui supra nominati
sunt inlfipretationibus (instar eius quam sciibit B. Hicronymus
a Graecis Kdivi'if, a nostris a[)pellatam Commumni) concinnala,
Latinac vulgatae edilioni, hoc est Hebraeo, ad vcrbum respondeat ;
sed ut ad cam quam Septuaginta Intcrpretcs Spiritus sancti
auctoritatem sequuti cdidcrunl, quantum per veteres liljros fieri
potest, quam proxime accedat. Quam nunc novis cmendationibus
illubtralam ct aliorum I ntcrprelum rclK|uiis quae supersunt auctam,
non parum profuiuram ad Latinac vulgatae intcUigcntiam, dubi-
tabit nc-mo qui lianc cum ilia accurate comparav( rit.
Quae si doctis viris et pie sentientibus, ut a((|uum est, proba-
buntur, reliquum erit ut Sixto V. Pont. M.ix. hums boni auctori
gratias agant, et ab omnipotenti Deo puljlicis votis poscant,
12 — 2
1
1 80 Printed Texts of the Septiiagint,
optimum Principeiu nobis florentem quam diutissime servet.
qui cum omnes curas cogitationesque suas in amplificandam
ornandamque Ecclesiae dignitatem contulerit, 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 pubhcam 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 coUocati 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 Septiiaginta 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 Presbytero Cardinali 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: Volumus et sancimus ad Dei gloriam
Ct 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 in 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. Thorn. Gualterutius.
The reader vi^ill not fail to note the intelligent appreciation
of the Lxx., and the wide outlook over the history of the Greek
Printed Texts of the Septnagint, 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 Vatican for MSS. of the lxx.,
but the result of these enquiries satisfied the editors of the
superiority of the great Vatican Codex (B = cod. Vat. 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. Vat. gr. 1252 (H. P. 63 + 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. 1241, 1242,
1244; see Batiffol, Im Vaticane, p. 90 f.). From these and
other sources tiie editors supplied the large lacunae of Cod. B*.
But they did not limit theirselves to the filling up of gaps or
even to the correction of errors, as will api)ear from a
comparison of the Sixtine text with the photographic represen-
tation of the Vatican MS. The edition of 15S7 is not an
exact reproduction of a single codex, even where the selected
M.S. was available ; but it is based as a whole on a great uncial
' Cf. Tregelles, An account of the printed text, Sa'c, p. 185.
' Accordiiifj to Nestle (Septnag-inlastutiii-n, i. p. 9, ii. )>. 11) CJenesis i.
1 — xlvi. 28 in cod. B are supplied liom cod. Chis. R. vi. ^S (II. P. ly, Lag. h).
1 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, Nobilius, 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 Sixiine 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 Polyc^lott). 4. Field, Cambridge,
i6h^{y>!\\.\\\.\iQ praefatio parae)ietica oi ]. Pearson^, Lady Margaret
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, 18 17 (with introduction by
J. [G.]^ Carpzow). 13. F. Valpy, London, 1819. 14. London,
1821, 26, 31, 51, 69, 78 (the LXX. column of Bagster's Polyglott).
15. Venice, 1822. 16. Glasgow and London, 1822, 31, 43.
I/. L. Van Ess, Leipzig, 1824, 35, 55, 68, 79, 87 (prolegomena
and epilegomena separately in 1887). 18. London, 1837.
19. Didot, Paris, 1839, 40, 48, 55, 78, 82. 20. Oxford, 1848, 75.
21. A. F. C. von Tischendorf, Leipzig, 1850, 56, 60, 6g, 75, 80, 87.
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 i8th century
by England, which had meanwhile acquired an uncial Bible
^ The praefatio was reprinted with Archd. Chui ton's notes by Prof.
W. Selwyn (Cambridge, 1855). The 1665 edition was reissued by
John Hayes, 1684.
^ See Nestle, Septuaginlastudien, hi., p. 32, note/.
Printed Texts of the Septuagint. 1 83
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 pubhshed 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 1 9) 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 | quern | ex antiquissimo codice Alexandrino | accu-
rate descriptum | et ope aliorum exemplarium, ac priscorum
scriptorum | prnesertim vcro Hexaplaris editionis Origenianae |
emendatum atque suppletum | additis saepe asteriscoriim et
obelorum signis | summa ciira edidit | Joannes Ernestus Grabe
S.T.P. I Oxonii, e theatro Sheldoniano | ...mdccvii."
XJ^his title sufficiently indicates the general principles upon
which tliis 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 Koiv-q^ marking with an obelus the
words, clauses, f)r paragraphs in the MS. for which he found
no equivalent in the Massoretic Hebrew, and placing an aste-
* Patrick Young had projerte<i a complete edition of cod. A (VV.alton's
Prolegomena^ ed. \Vr;ingh.im, ii. p. \i\). His transcript of the MS. is still
preserved at the British Museum (Harl. 75n=Ifolmes ^41; .sec above,
1>- 'S^)-
184 Printed Texts of the Septua^int.
risk before such as he beUeved 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. Tlie 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 quadriliiiguia^ 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
{Vetus Testametiium Graece iuxta LXX. interpretes. Recen-
sionem Grabianam ad Jidem codicis Alexandritii aliorutnque
demw 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 t/ie Septtiagiyit. 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 Hberality 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 (Sliute Barrington). Genesis appeared separately in
1798, followed in the same year by the first volume bearing the
title : Vetus Testamentum Graecum cum variis lectionibus. Edidit
Kobertus Holmes, S.T.P.,.^.vS'.6'., Aedis Christi Canoniais. Tomus
primus. Oxonii : e typographeo Clarendoniano. MDCCXCViu.
This volume, which contains the Pentateuch, with a preface
and appendix, was the only one which Holmes lived to complete.
v^He died Nov. 12, 1805, and two years later the editorship was
entrusted to James Parsons', under whose care tlie remaining
volumes were 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. tliere is a list of the Greek M.SS. collated
> Cf. Ch. Q. R., April 1899, p. \oi.
- rf. Vi-M\ii\\\ Summary calalo};ue of MSS. in thf Bodleian: l-'.i^^hteenth
..enlury collections, pp. 614 — 64 j.
•* On Holmes' less distinjjiiished coadjutor see Ch. Q. A', p. 104.
Parsons died in 1847 at the aye of 85.
1 86 Printed Texts of the Septnagint.
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 Quarterly 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 Versions were undertaken
by Paulus and Prof. Ford, and the Syriac quotations in the Hor-
reum mysteriorum 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-
* See above, p. 153. - Essays in Biblical Greek, \i. 132.
* Libr. V. T. Cation, f. i. p. xv.
Printed Texts of tite Septuagint. 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 lines and among materials
which were not accessible to Holmes and his associates.
6. ^he next step was taken by A. F. C. von Tischendorf
(181 5 — 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 sccula probatissimum repeterem, mutatis
tantummodo qui bus mutatione maxime opus asset, addita vero
plena lectionis varietate ex tribus codicibus antiquissinu's.quos
fere solos utpote editos confidenter adhibere licebat." The
three MSS. employed by Tischendorf ni his first edition (1850)
were A (from Baber's facsimile), C (from his own facsimile),
and FA, the portion of Cod. Sinaiticus which was publislied
in 1846 ; in the third and fourth e<litions he was able to make
further use of Cod. Sinaiticus, and to take into account Mai's
edition of Cod. B.
Since Tischcnflm fs death three more editions of his Septuagint
have appeared — a fifth in 1875, a sixtli and a seventh in 1880 and
1887 respectively, the last two under the supervision of Dr
Eberliard Nestle. Nestle added a Supplemcvtum editionuin quae
Sixtinain si'quuntur omnium inpriinis rischetulorjiiiiiarum^con-
sisting of a collation of the Vatican and Sinaitic MSS. with the
Sixtine text, tlic Vatican text being obtained from Vercellone and
Cozza's facsimile, and the Sinaitic from Tischendorf's edition of N ;
an appendix contained a collation of IJaniel (l.xx.) from Cozza's
edition of the Chigi MS. The SuppUntenlitm was reissued in
1887 with various enrichments, of which the most important
' JVoUgg. 8 viii.
1 88 Printed Texts of the Septiiagint.
was a collation of cod. A from the London photograph which
appeared in 1882 — 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. B 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 Syniinicta ii. (1880), p. 137 ff., and in a
modified and simpler form by a pamphlet published two years
later {Aiikundigung einer neuen Ausgabe der griechischen ilbcrset-
zung des A.T., Gottingen, 1882). A beginning was made by
the appearance of the first half of the text of the Lucianic
recension {Librorwn V.T. canonicorum pars prior Graece Pauli
de Lagarde studio et sutnptibus 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 with 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 afh mpz (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 tJie Septiiagiut. 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, L>ut 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 the present writer, instructed by a committee
consisting of Professors Westcott, Hort, Kirkpatiick, 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 Testament in Greek
according to the Septuagint, vol. i., Genesis — 4 Regn., 1887;
vol. ii., I Chron. — Tobit, 1891 ; vol. iii., Hosea — 4 Mace,
1894) ; the second and third revised editions"^ followed (vol. i.,
1895, 1901 ; vol. ii., 1896, 1907; vol. iii., 1899, 1905').
The larger Cambridge Septuagint has been entrusted to the
joint editorship of Dr A. E. Brooke, Fellow of King's Col-
lege, and Mr N. McLean, Fellow of Christ's College; and
of the Octateuch, which will form the first volume. Genesis
appeared in 1906, Exod., Lev. 1909, Numb., Deut. 191 1. It
reproduces the text of the manual Septuagint, but the apparatus
embraces, according to the original purpose of the Syndics,
* Cavihridsie University Reporlcr, M.nrch 13, iSS,^.
' Much of the lahour of revision was (generously uii'Icrtaken by Dr Nestle,
and valuable a.ssi.stance was also rendered by several English scholars ; see
i. p. xxxiii., ii. p. xiv., iii. p. xviii. f.
' The fourth edition is in progic.'>s (i. 1909).
190 Printed Texts of the Septuagint.
the evidence of all the uncial MSS., and of a considerable
number of cursives] " selected after careful investigation with
the view of representing the different types of text"; the
Old Latin, Egyptian, Syro-Hexaplar, and Armenian versions
are also represented, whilst use is made of the quotations in
Josephus as wel\ as those in Philo and the more important
Christian fathers] ' Such an apparatus falls 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 are
selected and arranged in such a manner as to enable the
reader to study the grouping of the MSS. and other authorities.
Thus the work proceeds 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 which 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 01 our extant MSS. But it supplies at least an excellent
standard of comparison, and until a critical text has been
produced S it may fairly be regarded as the most trustworthy
presentation of the Septuagint version regarded as a whole.^
ni. Editions of particular Books, or of Groups or
Portions of Books.
The Pentateuch.
G. A. Schumann, 1829; Pentaieuchus hebraice et gracce, J
(Genesis only published).
' V. T. Libr. can. praef. p. xvi.
* Cf. E. Nestle, Zur Rekonstrtiktion der Septtiaginta, in Philoloi;us,
N. F. xii. (1899), p. 121 ff.
Printed Texts of tJie Septuagitit. 191
Genesis.
P. A. de Laj^arde, Leipzig, 1868 : Genesis graece efide editio-
nis Sixtinae addita scripturae discrepantia e lihris tnanu scriptis
a se collatis et edd. Coniplutensi et Aldina adcuralissime enotata.
The MSS. employed are ADEFGS, 25, 29, 31, 44, 122, 130, 135.
The text is preceded by useful lists of the available uncial MSS.
and VSS. of the LXX.
Deutkronomy.
C. L. F. Hamann, Jena, 1874: Cantictitn Moysi ex Psalterio
quadruplici, . .vianu scriplo quod Ba/ndergae asservatur.
Joshua.
A. Masius, Antwerp, 1574: losuae iviperatoris historia.
Readings are given from the Codex Syro-hexaplaris Ambrosi-
anus.
Judges.
J. Ussher, 1655 (in his Syntagma, Works, vol. vii.). Two
texts in parallel columns (i) "ex codice Romano," (2) "ex codice
Alexandrine."
O. F. Fritzsche, Zurich, 1867: liber Itidicuin secundum Ixx.
interpretes. A specimen had previously appeared (in 1866).
P. A. de Lagarde, 1891 (in his Septuaginla-studicn, I. c. i. — v.).
Two texts.
A. E. Brooke and N. M°Lean, Cambridge, 1897 : The Book oj
Judges in Greek, ace. to the text of Codex Alexatidrimcs.
[G. F. Moore, Andover, Mass. (in his Critical and exegetical
Commentary on fudges, p. xiv.), promises an edition of the recen-
sion of the book exlubilcd by K, 54, 59, 73, 82, and Thcodoret.J
Rum.
Drusius, 1586, 1632.
L. IJos, Jena, 1788 : Ruth ex versione l\\. interpretum secun-
dutn exemplar Valicanum.
O. F. FriUbclie, Zurich, 1867 ' '^oxiQ Kara rovs o,
I'SAI-MS.
Separate editions of the Greek Psalter were published at
Milan, 1481; Venice, i486; Venice, not later than 1498
(Aldus Manutius); Basle, 1516 (in llieronvmi Opera, t. viii.,
ed. Pcllicanus); Genoa, \^\(y {Octaplum Psaltetium Justiniani}\
Cologne, 1518 {Psallerium in iv. Itnguis cura Inhannis I'otkeny
Other known editions bear the dates 1524, 1530 {Ps. sextupiex),
192 Printed Texts of the Septuagint.
iS33> 1541, 1543, i549> 1557, 1559, 1571, 1584, 1602, 1618, 1627,
1632, 1643, 1678 (tlie Psalter of cod. A), 1737, 1757, 1825, 1852,
1857, 1879 iJP^- tetraglotton^ ed. Nestle), 1880, 1887 (Lagarde,
Novae psalterii gr. editionis specimen)^ 1889 (Swete, The Psalms
in Greek ace. to the LXX., -with the Canticles ; 2nd ed. 1896),
1892 (Lagarde, Ps.gr. qiiinquagena prima^).
Job.
Patrick Young, 1637 (in the Catena of Nicetas).
J. TerrentiuSj Franeker, 1663.
Esther.
J. Ussher, 1655 (in his SyTttagtna, Works, vol. vii.). Two
texts, one Hexaplaric from an Arundel MS. (H. P. 93). A second
edition, Leipzig, 1696.
O. F. Fritzsche, Zurich, 1848 : 'Eardrjp. D^iplicem libri textuin
ad opt. Codd. etnendavit et cum selecta lectio)iis varietate edidit.
The Greek additions appear also in his Libri apocryphi V. T.
(see below).
Minor Prophets.
W. O. E. Oesterley, Codex Taurinensis, 1908 (with apparatus).
HOSEA.
J. Philippeaux, Paris, 1636; Hos. i. — iv., after Cod. Q.
D. Pareus, Heidelberg, 1605 : Hoseas conimentariis illus-
tratus.
Amos.
Vater, Halle, 18 10.
W. O. E. Oesterley, Cambridge, 1902 (parallel texts of Q, 22).
Jonah.
S. Miinster, 1524, 1543.
Isaiah.
S. Miinster, 1540 (in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin).
J. Carter, Paris, 1580 (in Procopii commentarii in lesaiam —
text based on Cod. Q).
R. R. Ottley, Cambridge, 1906 (text of Cod. A). ^
Jeremiah. 'f
S. Miinster, 1540. '•
G. L. Spohn, Leipzig, 1794 : Jeremias vates e vers. Judaeorum
Alex, ac reliquorum, interpretutn Gr.; 2nd ed., 1824.
Lamentations.
Kyper, Basle, 1552 : Libri tres de re gramm. Hebr. lin^. (Hebr
Gr., Lat.).
^ See also Nestle in Hastings, D. B. iv. 441.
I
Printed Texts of the Septuagint. 193
EZEKIEL.
'leffKi^X KaTa tovs o', Rome, 1840.
Daniel (Theod.).
Ph. Melanchthon, 1546.
Wells, 1 7 16.
Daniel (lxx.).
S. de Magistris (?), Rome, 1772 . Dnjjiel seaindum lxx. ex
tetraplis Orii^rnis intitc priinuiii editiis e sini(utaii Cliisiano codice.
Reprinted at (jcittingen, 1773, 1774 (Michaelis) ; at Utrecht, 1775
(Segaar); at Milan, 1788 (Bug;iti); and at Leipzig, 1845 (Hahn).
Cozza, 1877. The LXX. text is also given in the editions of 1 lolmes
and Parsons, Oxf. ed. of 1848, 1875, Tischendorf, and Swete.
Non-Canonical Books (in general)^
J. A. Fabricius, Frankfort and Leipzig, 1691 : Liber Tobias,
Judith, oratio Manasse, SapieJitia, el EccL'siaslicus, i^r. et lal.,
cum prolego))icnis. 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 apocryphi V. T. gr....
acccdimt libri V. T. pseudepi^raphi 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 : 1586, 160;, 1733, 1827.
Reusch, Freiburg, 1858; Liber Sapienliae sec. exeinplar Vati-
canuin.
\V. J. Dcanc, Oxford, 1881 : The Book of Wisdom, the Greek
text, the Latin Vulgate, and the A. V.; with an introduction,
critical afiparatns, and cominenttiry.
Wisdom ok .Siracil
D. Hoeschel, Augsburg, 1604 : Sapient ia Sirailii s. lucle-
siasticus, collatis lectionibns Tar. ...cum notis.
Lindc, Dantzig, 1795: Sententiae Jesu Siracidae ad Jidein
codd. et versionum.
Bretsclmeidcr, Rcgensburg, 1806 : Liber lestt Siracidae.
Cowley- Ncubauer, Original Ilebreio of a par linn of lucle-
iiasticus, &Q. (Oxford, 1897); Sciicchtcr-Taylur, Wisdom oj Ben
Sira (Cambridge, 1899)'-.
J. II. A. Hart, Caml)ridge, 1910 (text of Cod. 248).
' A fuller list is given by Nestle in ll.nslings, HJi. iv. 441.
- See Ncstle's art. Siracli in ll;i.slings, iv.
S. s. 13
194 Printed Texts of the Septtiagint.
TOBIT.
Reusch, Bonn, 1870: Libcllus Tobit e cod. Siiiaitico.
Baruch.
Kneucker, Leipzig, 1879.
I Maccabees.
Drusius, Frankfort, 1600; Bruns, Helmstadt, 1784.
Psalms of Solomon.
J. L. de la Cerda, in an appendix to his Adversaria Sacra,
Lyons, 1626.
J. A. Fabricius, in Codex pseudepigrap]ius V. T., Hamburg
and Leipzig, 171 5.
A. Hilgenfeld, in ZeitscJirift fiir 7vissensch. TJt. xi., and in
Messias Iiidaeorufit, Leipzig, 1869.
E. E. Geiger, Augsburg, 1871 : Der Psalter Salomons heraus-
gegebcn.
O. F. Fritzsche in Libri apocryphi V. T. gr.
B. Pick, Alleghany, Pens., in the Presbyterian Revieiv, 1883.
H. E. Ryle and M. R. James, Cambridge, 1891 : Psalms of
the Pharisees commonly called the Psalms of Solomon ; the
Greek text with an apparatus, notes, indices, and an introduc-
tion.
H. B. Swete in O. T. in Greek, vol. iii., Cambridge, 1894;
2nd ed. 1899.
O. von Gebhardt, Leipzig, 1895 : Die Psalmcn Salomd's.
Enoch (the Greek version of).
The fragments [in Ep. Jud. 14, 15 ; the Chronography of
G. Syncellus (ed. W. Dindorf, in Corpus hist. Byzant., Bonn,
1829); ZDMG. ix. p. 621 ff. (a scrap printed by Gildemeister) ;
the Manoires publics par les membres de la mission archtolo-
gique frangaise an Caire, ix., Paris, 1892] have been collected
by Dillmann, iiber den nenfundenen gr. Text des Hcnocli-buches
(1893); Lods, Livre d' Henoch (1893); Charles, Book of Enoch,
(1893), a"<^^ "ii'^ printed with an apparatus in the O. T. in Greek,
vol. iii., 2nd ed. (Cambridge, 1899).
Literature (upon the general subject of this chapter).
Le Long-Masch, ii. p. 262 ff., Fabricius-Harles, p. 673 ff,
Roscnmiiller, Hajidbuch, i. p. 47 ff., Frankel, Vorstudien su der
Septuaginta, p. 242 ff., Tischendorf, V. T. Gr., prolegomena
§ vii. sqq., Van Ess [Nestle], epilegomena ij i sqq., Loisy, Histoire
critique, \. ii. p. 65 ff.. Nestle,, Septuaginta-siudicn, i, 1886, ii.
1896, iii. 1899; Urtexty p. 64 ff^
PART II.
THE CONTENTS OF THE ALEXANDRIAN
OLD TESTAMENT.
13—2
197
PART IL
CHAPTER I.
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 i)Ooks. These
differences are of much interest to the Biblical student, since
they express a tradition which, inherited by the Chur<:h 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.
I9<^ Titles^ Groupings Number^ 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, {J}) Western Church.
A. Titles of the Books.
Hebrew
Transliteration i
Septuagint
Vulgate Latin
n^t^'N"!?
V,prialO
Vivecris
Genesis
Tm£^ n^x)
OveXe fffjiu)6
"E^oSos
Exodus
^y.\
OvLKpd
A€v[e]iTiK6v
Leviticus
i?']':!
"AfAfies (p€Ku5el/j,^
' Apidfjioi
Numeri
Dnn"^n ni?x
EXe a55e^apeifi
AevrepovS/Juoy
Deuteronomium
yt^'■^^':
'iwffove ^h '^oiv
'l7](T0VS
losue
D"'t?Ei1JJ'
'Sacparelfji
KpiTal
ludices
bt-t-ia^
^a/xovrj\
fa, /3'
BactXeiwi' <
(-1, 2
D''?Sp
Ova/j./x^\X Anj8t5»
Kegum <
'.3. 4
•')n;y^7, njrt?';
'lecrcnd
'Hcralai
Isaias
T : : ■ > T : : •
'lepe/jud
'lepep-ias
leremias
^•^I'^IP:
'le^iKLTjX
'lei^eKiTjX
Ezechiel
yjj'in
'ftavje
Osee
"pnV
'JwrjX
loel
Dioy
'A/xws
Amos
nnaV
'03^€Co6'AB^le^lo^
Abdias
1 As given by Origen ap. Eus. //. E. vi. 25.
2 I.e. Dn-1p3 ::'10n 'fifth of the precepts'; cf. the Mishnic title nSD
Dn-1pS (Ryle, Canon of the O. T., p. 294). Jerome transHterates the ini-
tial word, vayedabber ; cf. Epiph. (Lagaide, J>)'ww?V/<7 ii. 178), ova'ida^rip,
fj iartv 'A id/xwv. The book is also known as "ISIPS.
2 I.e. TH "n^PLll. (fiist two words of i Kings i. ), MalacJihn, Jerome;
SfiaXaxeip; Epiphanius.
Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 199
Hebrew
Transliteration
Septuagint
Vulgate Latin
r\p
'luvcis
lonas
T
M[e]ixalas
Michaeas
mm, D-im
NaoOfi
Nahum
pipan
' Afx^aKo6/jt
Habacuc
n;^2y
2o0owas
Sophonias
*in
' Ayy aios
Aggacus
nn3T
T : ~ ;
ZaxaplcLs
Zacharias
• T ; -
MaXox^as
Malachias
D^Ajnip
200/) Oi
■Weifj.
Psalmi
h^
Ue\J)0^
Ilapo(ju(a(
Provcrbia
2i>K
'It6/3
'U^
lob
Dn':;'n t;^
Sip acrcif)i/M
AfffjLa, g.(XfxaTa
Canticiiiu canti-
[(j.irp.dT<j)v^
coriuu
n-n"
'Poijd
RiUli
1
Qprjvoi
Tlireni, Lamen-
tationes
^\j\>
Kui\e
'EK/cXr/crtaffriJs
Ecclesiasles
"iDPM
'EffOrip
'EtO^P
Esther
•■ • T
Aaj/iryX
AavirjX
Daniel
X1TL'
T : V
'Ei-pd
'E<r5pai
Esdias I, -2
D''PtL'''"?.2"n.
AaftpT] lafidv
[laiiaXftwo/j^i'Ui'
l'aralii)ijiiiciii)ii
I, 2
' With variants MeffXiifl, MttrXtiS (leg for. MaXuO). Masalolh, Jerome;
dfi.(Oa\wl), E|)i|)hanius.
-■ ( )iigen inclu'les Ruth with Jndgcs un<ler ^^aiparclfji.
' Kpipli. /.<-.: f<TTL Si Kal AWi] p-ixpiL /9i/i\os rj KoXeirai KivuiO [Mishn.
niJ'pJ, Tjrii ipp.T]V(.v<.Tai Qpr]vo% 'Itpi/niou.
200 Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books.
B (i). Order of the Books in Jewish Lists'
Talmudic
Spanish
German &
Massoretic
Printed
MSS.
French MSS.
MSS.
Bibles
I Tora/i
')
!i
n
>>
II Nchiini
M
n
i>
1)
Joshua
J oshua
Joshua
Joshua
Joshua
Judges
Judges
Judges
Judges
Judges
Samuel
Samuel
Samuel
Samuel
I, 1 Samuel
Kings
Kings
Kings
Kings
I, 2 Kings
Jeremiah
Isaiah
Jeremiah
Isaiah
Isaiah
Ezekiel
Jeremiah
Isaiah
Jeremiah
Jeremiah
Isaiah
Ezekiel
Ezekiel
Ezekiel
Ezekiel
xii Prophets
xii Prophets
xii Prophets
xii Prophets
Hosca
Joel
Amos
Obadiah
Jonah
Micah
Nahum
Habakkuk
Zephaniah
Haggai
Zachariah
Malachi
III Kcthubim
»»
»»
>»
M
Ruth
Chronicles
Psalms
Chronicles
Psalms
Psalms
Psahns
Proverbs
Psahns
Proverbs
Job
Job
Job
Job
Job
Proverbs
Proverbs
Song of Song^
Proverbs
Song of Songs
EccleLlastes
Ruth
Ruth
Ruth
Ruth
Song of Songs Song of Song
s Lamentations
Song of Songs Lamentations
Lamentations
Ecclesiastes
Ecclesiastes
Ecclesiastes
Ecclesiastes
Daniel
Lamentations
Esther
Lamentations
Esther
Esther
Esther
Daniel
Esther
Daniel
Ezra-Neh.
Daniel
Ezra-Neh.
Daniel
Ezra-Neh.
Chronicles
Ezra-Neh.
Chronicles
Ezra-Neh.
I, ^ Chronicles
1 This hst has been adapted Iroui Kyle, Canon of the O. T. (table
following p. iSo),
Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 20 1
B (2). Ordkr of the Books in Uncial MS. Bibles.
Codex Vaticanus (Li)
'EfoSos
' ApiOfioi
AevrepovdiMioP
'Irjffovs
Kpirai
I'ovO
BaaiXeiwi' a' — 5'
IlapaXeiirop.ifui' a', ft'
'Eaopas a, ft'
llapoi/jUac
E/f/cXijamcrT^j
'Iwft
"Loipia '^(tpdx
' EaOrip
'lovOiiO
Twftdr
'ilaije
'A/Julii
'Iw^,\
OftSflOU
Afiftat'iii'/x
So^nct'as
AT-yaTos
'\laaias
'lefKula^
liapoOx
apquoi
' KiriffTo\j] \tfi(filov
'ltieKtri\
Aavij^X
Codex Sinaiticus (K)
T^veais
'ApiO/iol
*
*
♦
llafia\enro/.i.ei>wt> a', f/3']
"EcrSpas [a'j, ft'
'EaOrjp
TwftdO
'lovddO
MaKKaftaiujv a, 3'
Hcrafas
'lepefxla^
Qprjvoi, 'lepefuov
*
'Iw);X
'AftotioO
Iwvdi
Haovfi
' AfiftaKoi'ip.
' Ayyalo%
Zaxapios
iMaXax'cis
»PoX/io2 ^ao pi'a' (.f//Afcr.)
Wapoifiiai ft ^o\o/x(i!VTOf sn/'scr.]
EMiXrjiTiaaTi^i
'^oifila. L'aXo^uij'Tov
^o(f>la 'hjjou viuu ^iipdx
'I dp
202 Titles^ Grouping, Nimiber^ and Order of Books.
Codex Alexandrinus (A)
AeV€LTlK6v
^Apidfioi
AevrepovbfJLLOV
'IrjcroOs vlbs Naui}
Kpirai
Tia(n\eiC>v a — 5'
IlapaXeiirofiivwu a', jS' [o/wv ^tfiXia S"']
Ilpo(piiTat iS"'
'^(TTJe a
'Ayaws j3'
'Apdeiov e'
'Naov/.i, f '
'AfM^aKOl'l/jL f]
'Zocpovla'i 6'
' Ayyato^ i
Zax^pias la
MaXax6as t/3'
'Hcatas TV pofpriTT)^ i.y'
lepefilas Trpoi/njTTjs tS'
Bapo6x
QpTJvos [ + 'lep€/j.iov, snbscr.']
'ETTccrroXTj 'lepefilov
'le^eKLrfX irpo<pr)T7)S le'
Aavn)\ [ + Trpo<prjT7]S tS"',
'Eadrip
IwjSLt (Tw/3eir, siibscr.)
'lovdeid
"E^pa^ a' 6 iepeiis ("Ecrfpas a' iepevs,
catal. )
"Efpas j8' iepeys ("E(rfjoas /3' iepeys
fa/a/. )
M-aKKa^aliov a' — 5'
'^aKrrjpi.ov ('^oKfiol pv' KoX idiSypa-
<pos a stibscr., seq. (^3al id' . ^a\-
Ti)piov fier' (x}5(cv catal.)
llapotfilai SoXo/U.wj'Tos
"Xa/jLura CJ^crfxa subscr.) g.ix/j.dTix}!'
■^^'■'. SoXo/xwiTOS (2. SoXojUwcos
siedsc.,^,^ Uavdperos, cata/.)
siioscr.)
catal. ]
Codex Basiliano-Venetus (N + V)
(N) Aevi.Ti.Kbv
'Apid/xoi
AevT€pov6/J.LOv
'Irjcrous
'Poiid
Kpirai
HaffLXeiwu a — 5'
llapa\ei.irof.iii'iov a', /3'
"EcrSpa? [a'], fi'
'Effdrip
(V) 'Wp (subscr.)
Jlapoifilai.
'EKKXricriacrTris
'A(r/xa j.(7fidTiov
Ijocpia SoXo/xuivros
"Zorpla 'l7]<Tov vlov Stpdx
'A/ic6s
'IwjJX
'A/35ioi5
'A/u/3a/coy/x
lloKpovLas
'Ayyaios
Zaxcplcis
MaXax'cts
Htraias
'lepe/xlas
BapoiJX
QpT]VOl
'le^eKiTjX
Aavi-qX
'lovdid
MaKKapaLwv a — 5'
I
2ipax (SetpaXi
4'aX/ioi 2oXo/->
•'TOS,
catal.
Titles^ Grouping y Niunber, and Order of Books, 203
B (3) (a). Order of the Books in Patristic and
Synodical Lists of the Eastern Church.
I. Melito (rt/. Eus. II. E. iv. 26).
' h.pidp.ol
A€lrT(pOv6fJl.lOV
']ij<xoui Nau^
Kpirai
"Poid
\ lapaXiiTTo/j.^fwi' ovo
4'a\/ui2yi' Aa/3t5
i^aXo/tttDi/os Ilapoi/ti'ai, 17 Kai 2oi/n'a'
'E/C/cXT/fflOffTJJS
'jJllTyUa (f.ff/ld.TU)!'
llpO(f)1]TUllf
'liffaiou
'\epe/xlov
AavirjX
'Kaopai
2. Origeii («/. Eus. H.E. vi. 25).
KeviTiKbv
' KpiQjxol
AiVTepOvblMOV
Kpirat
BacTiXetwc a — 5'
WapaKuTTOtxivwv a , /3'
"EffSpas a', /3'
Bi/SXos 'i.'oKfj.wv
'^oKofiQvTO'i n.apoi/j.iaL
'' A.aixa, g.(Tfj.dTwv
'Haalai
'lepepdai aiiv (Jpi'ivois Kal tj; 'Etti-
(TToX^ iv ivL
AaPL-qk
'lei't/cf^X
'Iw/3
'Ea-^ijp
"Efu) 0^ TovTUf iarl
3. Athaiiasius (c/. /<rj/. 39,
Mitjiic, /^.O". xxvi. 1436).
IVvfcTt?
"E^oOoj
Atl/(T«K6l'
' ApiOfjioL
At VTtpOVOpLiOV
'l-qaov^ 6 Tov Nai/j)
Kpirai
' I'o^tf
\iaai\iiCji> riaaapa. ^iftXla
llapaXeiirofj.ii'wi' a , ft
"I'lcr (5/305, a', ft'
\Mft\o% ^a\nC>v
I \apoip.lai
VtKK\ri(na(jTy}s
4. Cyril of Jerusalem (Calcch. iv. 35).
Ai Mwa^cos irp^Tai irCvTi ftiftXoi
l"<)'t(TiS
'E^oSos
Aei'iT«K6»'
A(VT(pOf6filOV
'Etvi 5i
'IrjaoO vlov Nai'j)
Tui;' KptTwi' ftiftXlof fUTO. riji 'VovO
TcDj' 5^ XotTTlVJ' l<fTOpiKU)V ftlftXlwV
JiaffiXciuiv a — 5'
\lapaXfnropiivwi> a', ft'
T..0 'EffSpa a', ft'
'VjaOrjp (5u5iKdTr])
' Cf. Kus. //. /i. iv. ?2 o Tra? twj' d/JX«'''^'' X"/'^^ Ilovd/icroi' 'Lo(f>lav rd?
SoXo^ui'os 7ra/)()t/.tio5 AdXoni'.
204 Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books.
'It6/3
ripo0T77-at
Oi dihdsKa
'Hcraias
'lepe/j-las Kal avv ouTCjJ Bapoi'x,
Qpfjvoi, 'EiriaToXij
le^eKiriX
"EcTTt /cai 'irepa ^i^Xia toijtuv 'i^uidev,
ov Kavovi'^bfieva pAv Tervvwixiva Si
wapa Tuiv Trarepcov avayivihcKeaOai
Tols dpri Trpoaepxofievois...
lUiOcpLa ^oKoinLovTOS
'So<pLa 'Zipdx
'Eadvp
'lovSid
To. 5k <TTixy)pik Tiyxo-vei irivre
'up
Ilapoifiiai
'EKKXyjaiaffT'^s
''Acrp.a q.<Tfj.dTuv {iwTaKaiS^KaTOv
^ipMoi')
'EttI 5e Todrois rd irpocpriTiKO, irivTe
TiDi' 5di8€Ka irpo(pijTQv fila |3i/3Xos
'llcalov fj-la
'lepe/xlov [fiia] /J-erd Bapoi^x Kal
Qprjuojv Kal 'ETTicrroXTjs
'le^eKiTjX
Aaj'tTjX (eiKoffTT} SevT^pa ^i^Xos)
To. 5^ Xonrd wavTO. i^w KelaOu} ii> dev-
5*. Epiphanius (Iiaer. I. i< 6).
a'. YiviCfL'i
ft'. "E^odos
y' . AeviTLKdv
8'. 'ApiOfioi
e'. AevrepovdfJLiov
S"'. IrjaOv Tov Naw^
f . TcDi' KpiTuv »
7]'. T7;s 'Po6d
e'. ToO 'Ic6/3
t'. To "i^aXTriHOV
La'. TlapoLfxlai SoXo/xcDi'tos
t;8'. 'Z^KKXyjaiacrTris
Ly'. T6 'Acr^a twv g.ff/jLdrwv
i8'-i^'. BacnXeiwv a'- — 5'
iij', id'. IlapaXe(.irofi4vwv a', /3'
k', Td AuO€KaTrp6(p7]rov
Ka', Yiffaias 6 Trpo<pi)T7}'s
K^', 'lepefiLas 6 ir po(f>riTT]s , fitrd tCov
QpTjvwv Kai'ETn(7ToXu)i> avrou
T€ Kal Bapovx
Ky'. 'lel-eKirjX 6 Trpo(prp-r]i
k5'. AavirjX 6 irpo(p'r]T7]s
Ke', kS-'. "Ecrdpa a', /3'
KJ:'. 'EcrOvp
S*. Epiphanius (nV titeits. et pond. 4).
Ilevre vofMiKai (i) vevrdTevxas tj /cat
vonodecrla)
(Viveffis — AevT€poi>6jj.wv)
llivT€ (TTixvpeis
('Ici))3, '^aXr-qpiov, llapoifxiai Za-
XoflQvTOS, 'EKKXTjdiaCTTTIS, '^J^ff/xa
q.CTfJ.dTUJv)
"AXX77 irevTdrevxos, rd KaXovfieva Vpa-
(pela, Trapd tktl 8i ' KyL6ypa<pa Xe-
yop-eva {'li-jaov rod Nai'r;, /3i'/3Xos
KpLTuiv fierd ttjs 'Povd, IlapaXet-
irofxiinov a', p', JiaaiXeiQv a', /3',
BaaiXeiwv y', 8')
'H Trpo(pr)TiKT) wei'Tdreuxos {to ScoSeKa-
Trp6(pr]TOV, 'Haalas, 'Iepep.ias, 'lefe-
Kf^\, Aavi-qX)
"AXXat SOo (tov "EcrSpa 5i/o, fiia Xo7t-
^op-ivT], TTjs 'Etr^Tjp)
'II TOV lioXo/xwvTOi i) IlavdpeTos
Xcyoi-Uvi]
'H TOV 'iTjaoO TOV viov ^eipdx
'H 'S,o(f>la, TOV ^ipdx
'H [So0/a] TOV woXo/tcDi'Toi
Titles^ Grouping, N umber ^ and Order of Books. 205
5*. Epiphanius {tie mens, et pond. 23).
Wrecris Koanov
"E^ooos tCjv vlQiv 'ljpari\ i^ AlyinrTOV
AevLTiKbv
'ApiO/xQi'
T6 AevTepovd/uov
'U Tov 'Ir]ffov Tov Nai'vj
■H ToS 'IwjS
'n TQlf KpiTQv
'H TTjs 'Pov6
T6 ^aXrripiov
TQf Hapa\fLTro/x^vwi> a', (^
liaatKeiQv a' — 5'
'li Uaput/juQv
'() 'EK/cX7;<riaffTi7y
To ^ A(rp.a tujv ^afidnov
'I'o Aw5tKavp6(pi]Toi>
Tov irpo<pr]Tov 'llcraioi/
ToO 'lepffxioii
I'ou 'left/ctijX
Toi) :iai'tT7\
Tou "Eaopa a', /3'
T-^s 'EffOijp
6. Gregory of Nazianzus(<:rt>-w. i. xii. 5 ff ).
Bi)3\oi icTTOpiKal ifi'
(I'eVeffts, "E^ooos, AeuiTiKoi', 'ApiO'
/jiol, AevTepos vbp.o's, 'ItjcrOvs, Kpi-
rai, 'Vovd, lipd^eLS (iaaiKrjOov,
TiapaKenrbpLivai, "EuSpas)
B/^Xoi cTTLXVP''-'' e'
('Ici^, Aain'^, Tpeh ZioXo/xuvtIui,
'E/cA:X7;(TiacrT7;s, '^^CT/ua, ITa/iot-
ixiai)
B/j3Xot vpo(pqTLKal e'
(Ot 5w8eKa — ^'ftcrije/A/uwj, Mtx^'as.
'IwiyX, 'Iwvds, 'Afidias, Nadvfx,
' A^liaKoij/x, ^o(poi'ias, 'Ayyaioi,
ZaxapicLS, MaXax^as — 'Hcralas,
'iepenlai, 'Efe\'(7;X, AaptvjXos)
7. Alnphiloch!us(rt//.9^'/<•w(^. ap. Greg. Naz.
carm. II. vii., Migne, /^.G. xx.vvii. is'Ji)-
'H TrecTaTei/xos
(Kt/o-(s, "Eio5o5, Aei'tT(K6i', 'ApiO-
fU)i, AevTepofbfuof)
<)i KpiTttt
\iaai\(Mi' a' — 8'
llapaXfiwop.i'i'o)!' a', /3'
"Kaopas ft', /i'
^.Tixvpal Hip\oi {'
("Ici/i, ^a\|xo(, rpch 2)oXo/UcD>'tos —
Ilapot/iiat, 'E/cKX7;ffta(TT^s,'^A(T/ia
WpOffiijTai ol oJiSena
('UirTir, 'Afiwi, Mixo/ai, 'IwiJX,
'AjISla^, 'Iwfai, Naovft., 'A^/ia-
Kov/x, ^o(l>ovlai,' Ayyaioi, Zuxa-
p(as, MaXaxfa?)
Ilpo0^ot o2 riaaapti
('Waala^, 'Ir/if/.ii'a5, 'IfiVittiJX, Ao-
n^X)
Tyi'Toif vpofftypKlfovffi tV 'EtOtj/)
Tivei
(7/ (5/iTd7ft/XOS)
8. Pseiitlo-Chrysostom (.y«. script, sacr.
praef.). Migiie, /^.O'. Ivi. 513 sqq.
T6 XnropiKbv, (is
■II IVi-efTts \
'II "E^oSoy
T6 AeniTiAf^j' I
(J( 'ApiOpoi
Tb AiMTcpuvbpiov
'I7)(T0CS 6 TOV Nail?)
A/ BacriXerat a' — 5'
'EffSpay
T6 (TviifiovKevTkKbv, tij
A I lIa/M>(/(/ai
H TOU 2)(^X ^'"/''f
O 'E/ticXTyfrtaffTTjs
Td ' vJiT yuara riDc tfcrfidTtop
Td WpO({njTlK6f, lij
Oi de/ta^f irpof/irjTal
'PovO (?)
Aaff/d
2o6 Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books.
lO.
a'.
^'•
7'-
5'.
e'.
r'.
f.
^'.
l'.
ta'.
17'.
t5'.
9. Sui'oi/^ts er eTTtTojLito ap. Lagarde,
Septum^intast.y ii. p. 60 f.'
Ta MwcraiKci
a', r^cecris
/3'. "E|o5os
7'. A€VLTLk6v
5'. 'Api.dp.oi
e'. AeurepovdfJ.tov
Td grepa
S"'. 'I'»?(roOs 6 ToO Nail'/;
}'. Kpiral
7,'. 'Poi^^
TAos T'^s o/CTareuxon
To Terpa^cKjikeiov
0' . BaffiXetuJj' a'
i'. Ba(7iX«u)y |3'
La'. Bacr(Xet(3i' 7'
t/3'. BacrtXetuJj' 5'
17'. IIopaXetTrciyiiej'a a'
c5'. IlapaXeiTrd/xe^a /3'
te'. 'EcrSpu a'
ig-'. "Bo-Spa /3'
ij"'. 'Eo-^?';p
£7?'. Tw/Sir
£0'. 'Iou5^6'
k'. 'Iti/3
ToO SoXo/icDi'roj
/ca'. ^o<pia
Kj3'. Ilapoi/xtat
/C7'. 'E/CKX7;criacr7-//s
01 t/3' TTpocprjTai
Ke' . 'UffTje
/cS". 'Alius
Klj' 'IwTjX
K0'. 'AiSSioiJ
X'. ' icovas
\a'. 'Naovj.i
X/3'. 'A/3j3a\'oiVi
X7'. 'ZfO<povLai
\5'. ' Ayyaioi
Xe'. Zaxapi'as
XS"'. MaXax'as
01 S' iJLiyaKoi Trpocpyrai
Xf. 'Hcraias
XV- 'lepe/J.las
ft.'. AavLTjX
TAos tCov ^^ Kai d^Ka Trpo<pr)Tu>v
ixa'. 'Zo(j)la '\t!}<tov rod Sipdx
^ Lairarfle, /.r. : " ich wiederhole
'H Mw<rat/fiy
■KtvTarevxoi
Anonyiui tiiai. Tiinothei et Aqiiilae.
TeVecns ^
"Efooos
To AfWTfjfi;'
Oi 'Apid/xol
Ti AiVTepovb^aov ,
'0 Toi" Nai^^
Ot Kpirai, juerd t^s 'Poi'^
Td riapaXetTTo^iei'a a', /3'
Twv ^acCKeiQiv a', (3'
Tu}v jSacrtXetwi' 7', 5'
T6 'ifa\Tr)pLOv Tov Aaii8
Al Ilapoifiiai. SoXo^cDjtos
'0 'E/cKX');(rta(rT7/s, auf roh "A-
CTfiacnv
T6 8<xj5cKawp6(p-i]rov'
'lepefiiai, 'lejeKnJX,
"EffSpas
'loi^Si^
'E(r(^r;p
'ATriKpu^a
To/3ias
'H '^ofpia 1,o\ofj.u>i>Tos
'H wo^ia 'IijiroD i/toO Sipdx
'lI<Tai'as,
Aai'fTyX,
sie, von mir redii^ieit."
Titles^ Groupings N umber ^ and Order of Books, 207
II. Junilius de inst. ret;, div. legis i. 3 ff.
(ed. Kilin).
Ilisloria (xvii)
Genesis
Exodus
Leviticus
Nunieri
Dcutcronomium
lesu Nave
ludicum
Ruth
Regnn. i — iv
[Adiungunt plures Paralipomc-
non ii, lob i, Tol)ia.e i, Es-
drae ii, luditli i, Hester i,
Maccliahaeoiuui ii]
Pr Ophelia (xvii)
Psalnioiuiu cl
Osee
Esaiae
loel
Amos
Alxliae
lonae
Michaeae
Naum
Hahacuc
Sophoniae
Iliereniiac
Ezcchiel
Daniel
Aijgaei
Zacliariae
Malacliiae
Pro7't-rl)ia (ii)
Salonionis Provei;1)iornm
lesu fiiii Sirach
[Adiungunt quidam lil)r. Sa|>i-
entiae ct Cautica Cantico-
rum]
Dot^tnaliia (i)
Eccle.-iiabics
12. Pseuilo Atli.uiasii syn. sc>: siZi.r.
(Migiie, i".C xxviii. sS^ft'.).
'E^odos
AeVlTLKOV
'ApiOfMoi
AfiiTepovifiiov
'l7]<Tovi 6 Tou Nauv;
KpiTai
Tovd
Baa-ikeiCjv a', /3'
liacriKeLQi' y', 0'
llapa\enro/.K^vii}v a', /3'
"Kcropas a', /3'
'i^aXri'ipLov Aa^LTiKuf
llapoi/xiai ZoXo/UtDcros
'l''jKK\y]ffia(TTT)s rov avTov
''Acr/xa defxaTwv
'iu>li
llpo^rJTai SwoeKa fh tV aptOfiovfj-evoi
'ftcT^e, 'Afjuii, Mixaia^, 'Ico^X, 'A/3-
5iov, 'Iwj'Ss, Naoi//u, ' Ap-^aKovfi,
^ocpwvlas, 'Ayycuos, Zaxo-pias,
MaXax'as
'Et^s 5f ^Tepoi T^aaapes
'llffai'as
'lep(nlas
'E^'fA-tTjX
Aafi-qX
'Ekt6s Si TOUTUV elai 7ra\tv ^repa
(iifiXla K.T.\. (as in Atlianasius,
but adding
'MaKKaf-idiKa pift\la S'
llroXf/naiVd
'i'uX/j.oi Kai ifo'ii ^oXoixQvrot
13. Leontiiis (//(• .V/r//* H.).
Ti laroptKh pif^Xla iifi'}
(Vdvfais, 'E^ooos, ' AptO/xoi, A(virc-
k6v, AtVTfpOI'ufXlOV 'll](TOVS TOU
Nai'?;, Kpirai, 'Voi'iO, Adyoi tCiv
(iaaCKnu'v a' — 5', llapa\iiir6/x(-
vai, 'EffSpas)
14. Jnlin nf Ti:\mn<>cu'i(dryidi; ortAfld.
iv. 17).
UpioTij TTii/rdTevxo^, v Kal po/j.u0€aia
(IVi'fcris, 'Etooos, AtuiTuij', 'AptO-
not, AcvTepovuntof)
AtVT^pa 7recrdTciixo9, t4 KoXovfteva
Vpui/xta, napd rtui. St ' Ay tit', patfia
('IjjffoCy o TOU Nai»)J, Kpiral fxtra
2o8 Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books.
Ta Trpo(prjTLKa. (e )
('Hcraias, 'lepe/xias, 'Ie^eKirj\, Aa-
virfK, t6 AwdsKaTTpdipriTov)
Ta TrapaiveTLKo, {5')
('IcijS, JlapOL/j-iai SoXo/icicTos, 'Ek-
KKriaiaaTr)';, rb "" Kap.a tCov q.cT/j.d-
Tuv ^rb 'i^a\T7jpiOp)
TTjs VovO, BacriXeiSiv a', /3', Tiaai-
\eiQv y', 5', tuii' llapaXcnrofuvcou
a', /3')^
Tplrr] TreuTdrevxcs, at aTixvpa.1 ;8t/3\ot
(tov 'Ic6/3, t6 ^aKrijpiov, llapoi-
fxiai SoXo/xtDj'Tos, 'EKKXrjcnaffTTis,
TOV avTov,Ta," ^afxara TuJc'Ao'/xd-
ro3v TOV avTov)
Terdprrj Trei'Tarei/xos rj Trpo<priTiKy)
(rb Auj5eKairp6(py]Tov, 'Haalas, 'le-
pefiias, 'le^eKiTjX, AavLrjX)
"A AX at 5vo
(roO"Ecr5/ja a', ji', ij Ecr^?}/))
'H llavapeTos r. ^. q So^i'a toO 2oXo-
/iCOJTOS
'II 2o'Pla TOV 'li](roD
15. Nicephorus, Stichometria.
A. "Ocrat etat ypacpaX iKKXrjcna^ofKvat
/cat KeKavovKjfj.ei'at
a'. T^veais (ttIx- ,St'
jS'. "E^oSoj crTt'x. ,/3a)'
7'. AevLTLKbv (ttLx- ^jS'/''
5'. 'ApiOfloi CTTLX- ,7</>X'
e'. Aexmpovbixiov (ttLx- /yp'
S"'. 'IijtroOs frt'x. ^^/)'
f'. Kpirai Kal 'Void arlx- ,^vv'
1)' . Bao'tXettDt' a , /3' crr/x- ,'jfM'
0' . BatriXetoJ!' 7', 5' (Ttix- fi<^y'
L . Yiapakeiivbixtva a, (3' ctLx- ,^4*'
ta' "EaSpas a', /3' crrlx- ,f<p'
L^'. Bi/3Xos '^aXpiOiv cttIx- ,fp'
ly' . llapoifj-iai SoXo/xtii'TOS (rrix-
tS'. E/c/cX'ijo'tao-rT;? otIx- 4''"'
le'. 'Aafia g.(TixdTwv otIx- ffir'
iS"'. 'lco/3 Cyrix- fl'^'
if. 'H(ratas TrpofprjTrjs (ttLx- ,7^'
tTj'. 'lepe/j.las vpocprjTijs arix- ,S'
lO' , Bapoi^x "■'"'X- ^'
K . 'le^eKii'jX ffrix- ,5'
N-a'. AaviTjX ctIx- ,$'
K^. 01 8w8eKa Trpo^^rai crrix- ,7'
'O/xou T7)s waXaias oiaOrjKi^s
/3/pXot K^'.
i6. Ebedjesu [catal. !il»: EccL, Assemani
Bibl. Or. iii. s f.).
Genesis
Exodus
Liber sacerdotuni
Numeri
Deuteronomii
Josue tilii Nun
ludicum
Samuel
Regum
Liber Dal)ariamin
Ruth
Psahni David Regis
Proverbia Salomonis
Cohelet
Sirat Sirin
Bar-Sira
Sapientia Magna
lob
Isaias
Hosee
loel
Amos
Abdias
lonas
Michaeas
Nahum
Habacuc
Sophonias
Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 209
B. "0(Toi avTiKi-^ovTai Kal ovk eKuXi]-
crta^ovTai
a'. 'MaKKa^aiKo, y' crrlx- i^t'
y' . ^o<pia vloO ToO ^tfjax otLx-
d'. '^aX/jLol Kal (^8al "EoKofi.wi'Tos
OTLX- fip
e'. "Ei<j0r)p <ttIx- tv'
S"'. 'lovblO (TTix- ,a^'
f . 'Zujcrdvi'a cm'x. (ft'
1) . Tw/Ht, 6 Kai Tufiias ffrlx- ^'
17. LaoHicene Canons (Ix.).
a.
Y^vtats K6a/jLov
i3'-
"EfoSos ^? AlyvTTTov
7-
A€1'ITIk6i>
5'.
'ApiOfioi
«'.
AfuTepovdfjLiov
5-'.
'Itjo-oOs Noi't)
i\-
KpLTai, TuvO
v ■
' E<TdT)p
0'.
BairtXftwi' a', ^'
i
Boo-tXetwc y', 5'
la .
Ilapa\inroniv<j}v a', /3'
i(i-.
"Vjcopa^ a! , fi'
17'.
]iili\oi Si'aX/JtDi' pu'
(5'.
llapotfilai 2o\o/iiorroj
It'.
'KKK\rj(naaTi]s
ir'
.^JjiOfia qiffjidrwi'
'f-
•lai/3
IV .
AwdfKa TTpO<t>flTai
ie\
'Waalas
K .
'Iffiffiias Kal Bapovx, S/J^i-oi Kal
'EiTiffToXai
Ka'
'IfffKJTjX
Hti'
Aavti7X
Aggaeus
Zacharias
Malachias
Hiereinias
Ezechiel
Daniel
ludith
Esther
Susanna
Esdras
Daniel Minor
Epistola Banich
Liber tradilionis Senionim
Josephi proverbia
Historia filioriim Samonae
Maccab. iv]
Liber Maccabaeorum (i — iii)
19.
I^ist in Coifii. Barncc. 306 ;
ITepJ rCiv {' fiifi\tuy, koI oaa Toirruv
iKT6i
a'. lVf«(r«
,/3'. 'E^odof
y'. A«i'tr(si«»
5'. .\pi0fioL
S. S.
[i.e.
18. Apostolic Canons (Ixxxiv.).
[Viveffis, 'E^oSos, AivniKbv, ' A-
pi.0pi.ol, AevTepovo/JUov)
'lijjous NairjJ
Jia(Tt\€iQ>v T^ffffapa
JlapaXdiropL^vwi' dvo
'Ecrdpa Svo
'EcO-qp
^laKKa^atuv rpia
^aXTijpiof
SoXo/u(ii^oj rpla
(llapoifilat, 'EKK\v(TiacT-qi,
"JjiCrpLa q.(r/idTU)i>)
IIpO(^j;Twi' 5f KaSfo Hv
'Wcralov ^v
'Icptfilov iv
'leffKtTjX 'iv
AaviTjK iv
''E^ti>Oiv oi irpocTKrTopdffOw fiavOa-
VflV VP-ClV TOVS vioVi TTJl' i^O^/ol'
ToO no\viJ.aOous ^ipdx
B.M. Add. 17469; Coisl. 12a
t . Af)iT(pov6fxtov
S"'. 'lr](Tovi
^. Kpiral Kal 'Voi'-O
r}'-ia'. \ia(n\(tivv a' —5'
ifi'. MapaXinrSfiiva a', /S*
47'. Iw/i
14
2IO Titles^ Grouping, Number^ and Order of Books.
i8'.
"^aXrrjpLov
u'.
llapoifjlaL
L^'.
'EKK'\7]cnacrTrjs
'f.
"^(T/JLa (^cr^drwj'
cv'.
"Eadpas
id'.
'ilcTTJe
"'■,
'A/JLWS
Ka .
Mixaiay
K^'.
lurjX
Kj'.
'lujvds
k8'.
'A/35(oy
Ke'.
Nao(7(U.
kS"
. "Ayu/3a^'ol5/*
^r-
'Socpovlas
K7?'.
' Ayyatos
kO'. Zoxapias
X'. MaXax'ax
Xa'. Hcraias
Xj3'. 'lepe/xias
X7'. 'lefeK'iTjX
Xo'. Aaz/iiyX^
Ka2 oVa ^^w rtDi' ^'
a'. — 0(/)ta SoXo/xwi/TOS
/3'. 'Zo<pLa "Zipax
y'-S'. MaKKa^a'Mv [a' — 6'j
7;'. 'loi'S'}^
B (3) (^)- Order of the Books in Patristic and
Synodical Lists of the Western Church.
I. Hilary, prol. in libr. Fsalin.
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. Serniones dieium 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. Rufifinus 'yCoviin. in syiiib. 36).
Moysi[s] quinque libri
(Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Nu-
meri, Deuteronomium)
lesus Naue
ludicum, simul cum Ruth
Regnorum iv
Paralipomenon ( = Dierum liber)
Esdrae ii
Hester
Prophetarum
(Esaias, leremiaSjEzechiel, Daniel,
xii Prophetarum liber i)
lob
Psalmi David
Salomon[is] iii
(Proverbia, Ecclesiastes, Cantica
Canticorum)
Sapientia Salomonis
Sapientia Sirach ( = Ecclesiasticus)
Tobias
ludith
Maccabaeorum libri
' The B.M. MS. counts Ruth as a separate book and after Datiicl
places the numeral Xc'.
* "Quibusdam autem visum est additis Tobia et Judith xxiv libros
secuudum numerum Graecarum literarum connumerare."
Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 21 1
3. Augustine (<i<f </(V^r. Chr. ii. 13).
[Ilistoriae:]
(^)iiinc|iie Moyseos [libri]
(Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus,
Numeri, Deuleronomium)
lesu Naue
ludicum
Ruth
Regnorum libri iv
Paraiipomenon libri ii
lob
Tobias
Esther
ludith
Machabacorum libri ii
Esdrae libri ii
I'lophetae :
David liber rsalmorum
Salamonis libri iii
(Proverbiorum, Canticum Can-
ticorum, Ecclesiastes)
Sapicntia, Ecclesiasticus '
Prophetarum xii \
(Osee, loel, Amos, Ab-
dias, lonas, Michaeas,
Nahuni, Ilabacuc, So-
phonias, Aggaeus, Za-
charias, Malachias)
Prophctae iv maiorum volu-
minum
(Isaias, lercmias, Daniel,
Ezechiel)
JZ
o
a.
o
4. Innocent I, (e^. ad Exsupertum).
Moysi[s] libri quinque
(Genesis, Exodi, Levilici, Nu-
meri, Deuteronomii)
lesu Naue
ludicum
Regnorum libri iv
Ruth
Prophetarum libri xvi
Salomonis libri v
Psalterium
Historiaruni:
Job
Tobias
Hester
ludith
Machabaeorum libri ii
Esilrae libri ii
Paraiipomenon libri ii
5, I'scudo-Gclasiiis dccrtl. lic iibr.
Moysis v libri :
(jenesis
Exodus
Leviticus
Numeri
Deuleronomium
lesu Naue
Iiulicum
Ruth
Regum i — iv
6. Cassiodorius {He imt. Div. litt.
Genesis
Exodus
I -eviticus
Numeri
I 'euteronomiuin
lesu Nave
Regum i — iv
ParalipDmcnon i, ii
Psalterium
It).
' Of the caiionicify of these two books Augustine s]x;aks with some
reserve: "dc <|ua(lam simililudim- Salomonis esse <licuntur...i|ui tamcn
quoiiiam in auclurilalcm recipi meruerunt inter iiropiicticos numcrandi
sunt."
14 2
212 Titles y Groupings Njunber, and Order of Books.
Item libri prophetarum numero xvi:
(Isaias, leremias, Ezechiel, Daniel,
Osee, Amos, Michas, lohel,
Abdias, lonas, Naum, Abacu,
Sofonias, Agaeus, Zacharias,
Maleachias)
Paralipomena i, ii
Psalmorum cl
Salamonis libri iii
(Proverbiorum, Ecclesiastes,
Canticum Canticorum)
Liber Sapientiae filii Siracis
Alius subsequens liber Sapientiae
Item historiarum:
lob
Tobias
Hester
ludith
Macchabaeorum libii ii
Salomonis libri v
(Proverbia, Sapientia, Ecclesias-
ticus, Ecclesiastes, Canticum
canticorum)
Prophetae
(Isaias, Hiereniias, Ezechiel, Da-
niel, Osee, Amos, Michaeas,
Joel, Abdias, Jonas, Naum,
Abbacuc, Sofonias, Aggaeus,
Zacharias, Malachias, qui et
Angelus)
Job
Tobi[as]
Esther
ludith
Esdrae [libri] ii
Machabaeorum libri ii
I.
2.
3-
7. Isidorus (^de ord. lihr. s. scr^.
Quinque libri Moyseos
lesu Nave, ludicum, Ruth
Regum i — iv, Paralipomenon i,
ii, Tobiae, Esther, ludith,
Esdrae, Machabaeorum libri
duo
Prophetae: Psalmorum liber i,
Salomonis libri iii (Proverbi-
orum, Ecclesiastes, Cantica
Canticorum), Sapientia, Eccle-
siasticus, libri xvi Propheta-
rum
8. Mommsen's List, cited by Zahn, Gesc
Siudia Biblica, iii. p. 222 f. ;
Libri canonici
Genesis versus IIIDCC
Exoaus vef III
Numeri vef III
Leviticus vef IICCC
Deuteronomium vef IIDCC
Hiesu Nave vef MDCCL
ludicum vef MDCCL
Fiunt libri vii vef XVIIIC
Rut vef CCL _
Regnorum liber i vef IICCC
//. d. N. T. Kanons, ii. p. 143 f.; Sanday,
Preuschen, Atialecta, p. 138'.
Regnorum liber ii vef IICC
Regnorum liber iii vef IIDL
Regnorum liber iv vef IICCL
Fiunt versus VI HID
Paralipomenon liber i vef IIXL
liber ii vef IIC
Machabeorum liber i vef IICCC
liber ii ^ef MDCCC
lob vef MDCC
Tobias vei DCCCC
Hester vef DCC
1 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.
i
I
Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 2 1 3
Iiidit vcr MC
Psalmi Davitici cli vcr \'
Salomonis vef VI D
Prophetaeinaiores vUf XVCCCLXX
nitmero II 1 1
Esaias vir IIIDLXXX
leremias ver IIIICCCCL
Daniel v^ MCCCL
Ezechiel ver IIICCCXL
Prophetae xii ver IIIDCCC
Erunt omnes versus numero
LXVaillD
9. List in Cod. Claromontanus.
Versus scribturaruiii sanctarum
ita Genesis versus IIIID
Exodus versus HI DCC
Leviticum versus HDCCC
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. TTDC
quartus lib. ver. nCCCC
Psalmi Davitici ver. V
Proverbia ver. TdC
Aeclesiastes DC
Cantica canticorum CCC
Sapientia vers. \
Sapientia IlIU vcr. IID
XII I'rofetae ver. IITCX
Ossee ver. DXXX
Amos ver. CCCCX
iMicheas ver. CCCX
loel ver. XC
Abdias ver. LXX
lunas ver. CL
Naum vcr. CXL
Ambacum ver. CLX
So|ihoiiia.s vcr. C'XL
Ai;^cus vers. C.X
Zaciiarias ver. DCLX
Malachicl vcr. CC
Eseias ver. IIIDC
Icrcmi.is ver. FlIIL-XX
to. Liber sacranientorum (Bobbio, cent,
vl, vii).
Liber Genesis
Exodum
Leviticum
Numeri
Deuteronomium
Josue
Judicum
Libri mulierum
Ruth
Hester
Juditli
Maccabeorum libri duo
Job
Thobias
Regum quatluor
Pr()i)hetarum libri xvi
Daviticum v
Solomonis iii
Esdra i
Fiunt libri Veteris numero
xliiii
214 Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books.
Ezechiel ven IIIDC
Daniel ver. IDC
Maccabeoruni sic.
lib. primus ver. IICCC
lib. secundus ver. IICCC
lib. quartus ver. I
ludit ver. ICCC
Hesdra ID_
Ester ver. I
lob ver. IDC
Tobias ver. I
II. Council of C.tithagc, a.d. 397 (can.
47 = 39)-
Genesis
Exodus
Leviticus
Numeri
Deuterononiium
lesu Naue
ludicum
Ruth
Regnorum libri iv
Paralipomenon libri it
Job
Psalterium Davidicum
Salomonis libri v
xii libri Prophetarum
lesaias
leremias
Ezechiel
Daniel
Tobias
ludith
Hester
Hesdrae libii 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"'PJD"*"!1?"^)
is changed into 'Omissions' (IlapaXeiTro/xei/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-
' .See also the Latin list printed by Mr (". H. Turner in y. Th. St. i. 557 tT.
- Or less correctly IIa/)a\e(7r6/tfco(, ' omitted books,' as in some Hsts.
Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 215
sion itself. Thus Genesis appears to come from Gen. ii. 4
avrq -q )3i)3Xos ycveo-cws ovpavov kox yrj%. Exodus from Ex. xix. i
Tr\<i i^oBov T(3v vt(i3v 'lcrpa^]\ e/c yrj<; AlyvTrrov, Nu7tibers from
Num. i. 2 Kara dpidfiov i$ ovo/Aaros, Deute7-onomy from Deut.
xvii. 18 ypdipiL avTw to SevrepovofJiiov tovto €i? (^ifiXiov^, Eccle-
siastes from Keel. i. I pyjfxaTa iKK\r](rLa(TTOv.
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 Iv ftiftXoi ^a\ji<i)v, xiii. 33 Iv tu> if/aX/xio tw ^ievriptti, Rom.
ix. 25 iv Tip 'Q(rrJ€ Xcyci*. Philo^ USes FcVco-t?, AevtTi/<ov or
A-iviTiKij ^t^A.09, AiVTepoi'd/xiov, BafrtXeiat, Hapoip-iat, but his
practice is not quite constant; e.g. he calls Exodus t/ 'E^a-
ycuyjj*; Deuteronomy is sometimes 17 'Etth'o/ai?, and Judges »/
T<2i/ KpLixaTwv^ /3i/3/\.o?. Similar titles occur in the Mishna*,
whether suggested by the .\lexaudrian Greek, or independently
coined by the Palestinian Jews; thus Genesis is '"l"j'V; isp,
Numbers ons^p 'D, Proverbs nODil D, Lamentations ni:^p.
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 sec Driver, Deuteronomy, p. i. Tlie Massora calls
the book Hiinn n:L*'p.
• See also Acts xiii. ^o, 33, Rom. x. 16, xv. 11, Ilcb. xi. li.
' .Sec I'rof. Kyle's IVulo'aiid Holy Snipiine, \i. xx. II.
• So in Cohn-Wendlaiul's edition (iii. 4, 57, 230); in ii. 271 this title is
ascribed to Moses, although ^{o^wyTj docs not like ?{o5oj ormr in the Alex-
andrian version of the book. "U Kta-ywYTj was also the title of the Hel-
lenist Ezekiel's poem on the lixodus (see below, p. 371).
^ Cf. the change from D'Dpp to liafftXeiat.
• Sec Kyle, Canon pf the O. 7'., p. 294.
^ Sonjciimes in a simple transiiterati(;n, as C^wi-j/V &c. Tertullian has
Arithmi, but in Cyprian the Latin Nuiiieii is already used; sec Uurkitt,
O. L. and llala, p. 4.
2i6 Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books.
doms have become i, 2 Samuel, and 3, 4 Kingdoms, i, 2
Kings, whilst 'Chronicles,' representing the Hebrew CPjn"'"!.^!,
has taken the place of Paralipomenoti.
Cf. Hieron. Prol. Gal.: "tertius sequitur Santiiel^ quem nos
Rcgnorum primum at secundum dicimus; quartus Malac/ii/n, id
est Regum, qui tertio et quarto Regnorufu volumine continetur...
Septimus Dabre aiatnitn, id est ' Verba dierum,' quod significan-
tius Chronico7i 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 B (2),
the following are mentioned in the apparatus of Holmes and
Parsons. Joshua: 'irjarovs 6 Navr], 6 tov IScwrj, Jtidges: Kpirai
Tov 'laparjX, al rav KpiTOiv irpd^ns. Ch7'0niclcs: UapaXenroixevaiv
Twv ^aaiXeiav 'lov8a. Psai))is: AnuiS ■7Tpo(f)r]rov koi ^aaiXfcos
fiiXos. When Nehemiah is separated from Ezra its title is:
ra irtpl Nee/x/ou or Xoyot N. vloii 'A;^aXta. A few further forms
may be gleaned from the patristic lists. As an alternative for
IlapakenTop.iv(x)v the Apostolic Canons give tov jiifiXiov tmv j)pe-
pojv, while Ezra is known to Hilary as sen/iones die7-uin Esdrae.
The Psalter is sometimes ^liSXos "^aXpuiv, liber Psaliiioruin, or
"^uXTTjpiov AajSiTiKov, Psalini David regis, Psalteriuni Daviti-
CUtn. For ^ }^(rpa aap-arav we have occasionally aapara da-p-aTcov
— a form rejected by Origen {a/>. Eus. H.E. vi. 25 ov ydp, is
VTroXaplSdvova-i rives, ' Aapara dafj-drcov), but used by Pscudo-
Chrysostom and John of Damascus, and found in cod. A
and in several of the Latin lists ^; cf. the English Article VI.
"Canlica, or Songs of Solomo?i." The lesser Prophets are ol
8co8eKa or 8(Ka8vo, tS>v 8co8eKa 7rpn(pr]TU)i' fxia ^ijiXos, to 8a)8eKa-
irpocprjToi', prophctae xii ; the greater, ol Teaa-apes, prophetae ii/,
prophetae iv maiorrmi voluinimiin, or simply niaiores ; when
the tWO collections are merged into one they become ol 8eKa(^
or ol €KK(lL8fKa, TO € K KCilSeKaTT ptjCpTjTOV, prOp/ielUe XVl.
(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 Caiidium, until the plural was adopted by
Sixtus V. ; see Nestle, eitijnbilainn der Lat. Bibel, p. 18.
* Driver, Inirod., p. xxvii.
Titles t Groupings Number, and Order of Books. 217
(n-jin), the Propliets (Q^^??), and the Writings (D^nin?).
The Massora recognised, however, certain subdivisions within
the second and third groups; the Prophets were classed
as Former (D^JiC'N'i), i.e. Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings ;
and Latter (D''3nqx), and among the ' Latter ' the Twelve
minor Prophets formed a single collection'. Similarly 'the five
Rolls' (nipjp), 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 (i f. toS voilov
KUL TuJv 7rpo<f)rjTu}y kul twv oAXwv t<Zv kot avrovs rjKokovOrjKOTWv :
b f. Tov vofj.ov Kttt Twv Trpo(f)rjTwi' koI twv aXXoji/ iraTpittiv ^i/3Ata)v :
14 f. 6 vo/Ltos Ka\ aX irpocfirjTelaL xat to. A-oittu nZv ySt^Xiwv). 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 irdvra rd yeypafx/xefa iv tw vopua Mtouorcojs koX tois
7rpo<^r/Tai9 kui i/'aA/j.ot?). But the New Testament has no
com[)rchcnsive name for the third group, and even Josephus
{c. Ap. i. 8) speaks of four poetical books (probably Psalms,
Job, Proverbs and Ecclesiastes) as forming with the Law and
the Pro|jhets the entire series of sacred books ; the rest of
the Hagiograjjha seem to have been counted by him among
the Pro|)h(jts*. At Alexandria the later books were probably
attached to the canon by a looser bond. The writer of the
De vita contctiif^lativa appears to recognise four groups* (§ 3
voikovi, Kixi Xoyta OeanKrOiVTa 8((x irpo<f>rjTwv, kui i5/a»'ou9, koL tu.
uWa ois iirujTijfLr] kui imrtfida trui'ar^oi'Tai k<u TcAciorrTai).
Only the first of the three Palestinian groups remains undis-
' .St) alrcaily in .Sir. xlix. lo tuiv t/3' tt/jo^t/twi'.
'■ Sec Rylc", Canon of the 0.7'., p. 165 I.
■' Unless we omit the coiniu.i .tFut fi/ii'oi's .iml rctj.nrd 0. nal to. aXXa as
= llie llagiograplia; c(. Joscpli. c. Ap. as quoted lieiow, p. 110.
2i8 Titles, Grouping, Number, 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 lists 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-
1 Yet even the Torah was not always kept apart in the Greek Bible, as
the names Uctateuch and Heptateuch witness.
2 Dr Sanday (in Studia Biblica, iii. p. 240) regards this as Palestinian,
identifying it with Cyril's method. But Cyiil begins witli a dodecad
(SwJexdT?; r; 'Ea-^/?p' koX to. fxkv laTopiKa. ravTa).
3 The term ypa4>da (DO-in?) or ayidypa^a is transferred to this group.
Titles, Groupings Number, and Order of Books. 219
phetical — an end which he attains by relegating Ezra and
Esther to an appendix. Pseudo-Chrysostom's arrangement is
similar, though slightly different in some of its details ;
according to his view the Bible began with an Octateuch, and
the uTLxqpa. are broken up, the Psalter being placed with the
Proi)hets, and the Salomonic books described as 'hortatory"
(to (TVfj.fSov\€VTLK6v). Evcn in the eccentric arrangement of
Junilius'^ the Greek method of grouping is clearly domi-
nant.
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 B places the poetical books first, whilst in Codd. n and
A the prophets precede. But the order of cod. B 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
IVnphets should immediately precede the Evangelists.
(3) I'm-. NiuiiiKR oi- THE Books. In our i)rinled Hebrew
l!il)Ies the books of the Old Testament are 39 (Law, 5;
I'ormcr Prophets (Joshua— 2 Kings), 6; Latter Prophets, 15;
ilagiographa, 13). But Samuel, Kings, Ezra-Nehemiah, and
' So I.cDiitius (ri vapaiyeTiKd), but he classed ilie I'sallcr among
llu-m.
-' See Kiliii, Theodor v. Mopsueslia u. Junilius, \>. 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. i)'; 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 : 01' jxvpia^es /3t/3Xtco7' ela\ Trap' Tiph' davp-
(patvcov Koi pn)(op6vuiv, 8vo 8e pova Trpos toIs f'lKOcri /3t/3Xi'a...Kai
Tovrcov TTfVTe piv eari Maiv(T€a)s,,.oi pera Mcovcrrjv Trpo<l)rJTai...avvi-
ypay^av iv rpicri Kai SeVa jSijiXiois- al Se Xonrai reacrapes vpvovi els
TOV 6iOV Kai Tots ClvQpOiTTOiS VTToBrjKaS TOV ^lOV 1V€pU)(0VCnV . HC
is followed by Origen ap. Eus. I.e. ovk dyvorjreov S' etVai ras
evSiaOrjKOVs (3i^\ovs a>s 'E(3pcuoL TrapaSiSoacrtf, ocros 6 dpidpos
Tcov Trap' avTols (TToix^imv eariv and Cyril. Hier. catech. iv. 2>1)
dvayivcooTKe ras deias ypacpiis, ras eiKoo-t 8vo /3i/3Xowy Trjs TraXaias
8iaui]K7js. Similarly Athanasius, ep. fest. 39 (Migne, P.G. xxvi.
col. 1437)- When another numeration was adopted, efforts were
^ 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 jUtl and (<U, and in ii$l it follows Nehe-
miah and forms the last book of the Canon (cf. Mt. xxiii. 35, and see
Barnes, Chronicles, in the Cambridge Bible, pp. x. — xiii.).
^ The division probably began in the LXX.
^ Jerome, /*^'t»/. 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, 2, J, D, 3). The
'double books' were not always identical in different lists; see Sanday,
op. cit. p. 239.
Titles, Grouping, Number, mid Order of Books. 221
made to shew that it did not involve a real departure from the
canon of twenty-two; cf. Epiph. ]uier. i. i. 8, avrai elatv al etnoa-i
(TTTo. |3t/3Xot at eK dtov 8odei(rai Toii 'lovbaiois, eiKocrt 8vo fie a>s tu
nap' avTois (TToi^ela t5)v E^paiKMi/ ypafifiaTutv dpiOpovpevai hia to
8nr\ovad(u StKo [iifiXovs els nevTe Xtyofievas- dial. Tim. et Aq.
(ed. Conybeare, p. 66), avrai m. ^[^Xoi al deoTnxva-Toi koi ei'duWe-
Toi, icS^ p.fv ovcrai, k0 Be cipidp-ovyLevai. hia tu...€^ avran' StTrXoucr^di.
On the other hand the numeration in 4 Esdr. xiv. 44 rests, if
nongenti qtiatuor 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 writings by the name DHSD T'3,
"the Twenty-Four Books." It finds a place in certain Western
Christian writers, e.g. Victorinus of Petau cotnin. in Apoc: "sunt
autem libri V.T. qui accipiuntur viginti quatuor quos in epitome
Theodori invenies-." Victorinus compaces 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
XXiiil scniores mittentes coronas suas ante thronum, maiores
nostri probant hoc libros esse canonicos"). Jerome knows both
traditions, though he favours the former {Prol. 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
tlic Hebrew Canon was maintained.
Our earliest Christian list was obtained from Palestine^
and probably represents the contents of tlie Palestinian Greek
Bible. It is an attempt to answer the question. What is the
true number and order of tlie books of the Old Testament ?
i'.oth the titles aixl the grouping are obviously 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 i — 4 Regn. as two.
* Cf. Rylr. Canon, ]ip. 157 f., 222, 292 ; Sanflay, of<. cit. p. 2,^6 fT.
" /.aim od'-rs a Migjjcslion, to wliicli Samiay inclines, thai the writer
refers to the Excftftta ex Theodoto which arc partly preserved in the works
of Clement of Alexandria.
' M ell to a/. Kiis. If.K. iv. i6 iir(ihi\ /xaOtw tj/i' tQv ira\aiu)v ptfi\lwi>
ifiov\-l)0-qi iKplftdav, n6<ra rbv apiO^iiv xal inroia Ti)v ri^iv tuv...a.f(\(iCjv th
T7)v dfOToXfjf Kal ?wj Toy tLitov IvOa (Kijpt'xOij Kal iKpdx.Oj]...lv(fx^d aoi.
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 (etcrl 8e ai etKoo-t
8uo yStySAot Ka& 'E(^paiov<; atSe). 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
century.
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, e^w Se tovto)v ecTTt TO. M.aKKa(3a'LKd. Athanasius
takes up the expression, but names other books — the two
Wisdoms, Esther*, Judith, and Tobit^ Palestine was perhaps
natuially 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 (ei(Jt Se koL aA.Aai Trap avToi<; jSifSXoL Iv a/xt^iAeKTw*...
^ Eus. H.E. 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
("BtrSpas npwTr], Sevripa iv evL).
^ Cf. Melito's omission of Esther, and the note appended to the list of
Amphilochius.
■* The N.T. members of the same class are the Teaching and the
Shepherd.
^ Haer. i. i. j.
Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 223
^ J
avTat ^prjcrifioi /xei/ eicri Kai w^eAi/xot, aAX ets dpi6/xov prjrwv
ovK avafjiipovTaiy. 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, 'Empcroi /icv koX KaXai,
akX OVK dpiO p-ovvrat^ .
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 tliat there were those who wished to
raise tiic 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
Tcstamenti Veleiis terminatur aucloritas'"), and among them
I'obit, 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. tiifit.^. el pottd. 4.
^ Like Oiigcn, he explains that they form lopcthcr Imt a single book
' The ni)n-canf)nical books (r4 f^u) are liowever carefully distinguished
from r(Ml apoiiypka when the latter arc luentiotud ; e.g. in the sticho-
inetry of Niciphorus, and in the list of the 'Sixty Hooks.'
* In svmh. 38 "alii libri sunt qui non canonici scd ccclesiastici a maiori-
bus api)ellali sunt."
» Cf. Kelracl. ii. 4.
Ik
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 Ubri
quinque... Tobias, Judith... Machabaeorum Hbri duo"). The
African Church had probably never known any other canon,
and its behef 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 earher 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 oi
Esther ; the Wisdom of Sirach is cited by Barnabas^ and
the Didache'^, 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 when they
were written, but with that of the Old Latin version of the
Lxx. Codd. B N 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.
1 I Cor. 55. " c. 19. 9. ' C. 4.
* IViilipp. 10. ^ ^hvm. i. 10, V. 14.
6 Cf. Westcott in D.C.B. iv. p. 130.
I
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 (ki^mtoi,
KLonai, capsae, ctsfaeY, 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 cisfae which contained them
Irom the intrusion of foreign rolls, no scruple of this kind
would deter the owner of a roll of l'>sther 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 Msdras consorted together, and Baru( h and
the Epistle seemed rigiiily to claim a |)lace with the roll ol
Jeremiah. More rarely such a writing as the Psalms of Solomon
may have found its way into the company of kindred books ot
the canon. It is not a serious objection to this hypotliesis
' Sec Kciiynn, Palaeoj^ttifihy of Greek fa/'yri, |.|i. 24, 1 1 _^ ff.
' Jd. p. r22; "no jiapyrus roll of Iloinc-r hitJicrto discuvcrcfl contains
more (lian two books ol' the Iliad. Three short luations till the largest roll
t>l Ilyiicriclfs. "
• E. M. Thompson, Greek and Latin Palaeopaphy, p. 57.
S. S. IS
226 Titles, Grouping, Niniiber, 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 provenatice, 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.
* Ryle, ib., pp. 229 ff., 281 f.
■* On this see Sanday, Sttidia Biblica, iii. p. 24 1.
Titles, Grouping, Number, 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
nut 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 tlie 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. K begins with the Four, and
it is supported by other authorities, chiefly Western (Ruft.,
Chelt., Ps.-Gelasius, Cassiodorius, Nicephorus) ; whilst in a
few the subdivisions are mixed (Melito, Junilius, Ebedjesu*).
(2) The internal order of the Sw^eKa-rrpocfirfTov 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, Jonali. The dominant
Greek order may perhaps be due to "an attempt to secure
greater accuracy in the chronological arrangement*." (3) The
> Ruth is attacherl to i Rcfjn. in tlie Cheltenham list, ami Augiistinc
inclines to this arrani^cnient (sec Sanilay, /.c, p. ■242). The result was to
create a Heptateuch; for the word cf. J. E. H. Mayor, The Latin Hepta-
teuch, p. xxxvi. R. Peiper's text of the Heptatcuckos, to which Prof.
Mayor refers (p. xxxiv.), a]>pearcil in the Vienna Corpus scr. eccl. hit. vol.
xxiii. (1895).
' For statements by early Mohanuncdnn writers as to the extent of the
Jewish and (!hrislian Canons see Marj^oliouili in A'a/. Times, Nov. 1899,
p. 91.
^ The chief exceptions are: Cod. v, Ilosea, Amos, Joel, ()l)adiali,
)onah, Micah; Grejj. Naz. and Cod. Harocc, Hosca, Amos, Micah, Joel,
Jonah, Obadiah; Junilius, Ebedjesu, Augustine, the Hebrew order.
* Ryle, Canon, p. 129.
15—2
228 Titles t Groupings N 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 (MeUto, 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 (Melito, 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, atid 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. BkA,
Chelt., Garth., 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 scrilic 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 earlier*; and thus we may regard our earliest uncial
codices as prototypes of the variations in order which inuik
the mass of later MS.S. 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 botii books the centml figure is a woman; of. j). 113
(rii»hl-hand column).
'■ Ct. Ryle, Canon, p. iqq ff.
* Cf. Sanday, Studia Biblica, iii. |). ■233 ff.
* See Kcnyon, Palatographv of papyri, p. itgf. ; Sanday, I.e. Papyrus
was freely used for codices in I'.fiypt during the third century; cL Gicnft-ll
aiid Hunt, Oxyrhynchus Papyri, ii. p. 1.
230 Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Boo^s.
with Judith and Tobit. But these books occur in varying
order in the oldest MSS. ; in B we have Esther, Judith, Tobit,
but in X 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
Septuagint.
Literature. On the general subject of this chapter the
student may consult C. A. Credner, Cesch. d. N. T. Kanons (ed.
Volkmar, Berlin, i860); Th. Zahn, Gesch. d. A. 71 Kations, ii.,
p. 143 tf. (Erlangen, 1890); B. F. Westcott, Hist, of the Cano?i 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) ; E. Preuschen, Analecta {l^e\]mg, 1893) ;
H. L. Strack, art. Kanon des Alien Testametites in F.R.E? ix.
741—767.
^ For the order of the books in Latin MS. Bibles see S. Berger, His-
toire de la Vulgate, pp. 301-6, 331-9.
231
CHAPTER 11.
Books of the Hebrew Canon.
The books which are common to the Hebrew Bible and
the Alexandrian Version ' 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 Hei^rew Bibles.
GuEEK. Hebrew.
Gen. xxxi. 46'' — 52 Gen. xxxi. 48", 47, 51, 52*, 48**,
49. 5o», 52''
„ XXXV. 16—21 „ XXXV. i6-l-2i, 17 — 20, 22"
Exod. XX. 13 — 15 Exotl. XX. 14, 15, 13
„ XXXV. 8 — II, 12, 15 — 16, „ XXXV. 9 — 12, 17, 13-14,
17, 18, 19'' 16, 19, 15
' Following llic order of The OIil Tcsfantrnt in Gir,k, llicsc arc Genesis,
Exoclus, Leviticus, Numhcrs. Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Rulh, i — 4
Kingdoms (vol. i.), i— 7 Paralipomena, 1 Esdras, Psalms, Proverbs, Eccle-
si.-istes, Canticles, Job, Esther (vol. ii.), the Twelve Minor Prophets, the
Four Greater Prophets (vol. iii.) — 37 in all.
232
Books of the Hebrew Canon.
Greek.
Hebrew.
Exod.
xxxvi. 8*^ — 40
Exod
xxxix. I — 31
))
xxxvii. 1 — 2
5,
xxxvi. 8 — 9
5)
„ 8-6
,5
» .. 35—38
)>
7—21
J'
xxxviii. 9 — 23
»
xxxviii. 1 — 17
>,
xxxvii. I — 24
»
„ 18—20
>>
xxxvi. 20 — 34
21 — 24
,j
xxxviii. I — 7
5>
„ 25
,!
xxxvii. 29
J)
» 26
,J
xxxviii. 8
))
'.' 27
»
xl. 30 — 32
)l
xxxix. I — 10
)>
xxxviii. 24 — 31
)5
» 11
„
xxxix. 32
>>
» 13—23
,5
» 33—43
))
xl. 6"— 8, 1(^2
—32
5, 26,
27
5!
xl. 8—10, 12—27, 29, 33,
38
Num.
1. 24—37
Num.
1. 26—37, 24—25
J)
vi. 22 — 26
»
VI. 22, 23, 27, 24, 25, 26
5>
xxvi. 15 — 47
»,
xxvi. 19 — 27, 15 — 18, 44 —
47, 28—43
Josh.
ix. 3—33
Josh.
viii. 30—33, IX. 3—27
))
xix. 47 — 48
,,
xix. 48, 47
3 Keo
n. iv. 17, 18, 19
I Kings iv. iS, 19, 17
1)
„ 20 — 21, 22-
25—30
-24
,,
„ 7—8, 2—4, 9—14
»
V. I — 16, 17
5,
V. 15—30, 32»'
»
vi. 2 — 3
5,
v. 31—32^
)j
vi. 4—5, 6—7,
16—34
8,9-
-15,
,,
vi. 37—38, 2—3, 14, 4
—10, 15—36
»
vii. I — 6, 7, 8 — 9, 10 —
»
vii. 13 — 18, 21, 19 — 20,
II, 12—13
23—24, 26, 25
»
vii. 14—37, 38
-50
>,
vii. 27 — 51, I — 12
»
X. 23-24% 24b
,25
),
ix. 15, 17 — 19, 20 — 22
»
» 26—29
J,
X. 23 — 26
30
,>
V. I^
>j
» 31—33
,,
X. 27 — 29
))
xi. 3—8
)i
xi. 4, 3, 7, 5, 8, 6
»>
XX. xxi
„
xxi. XX
Psalir
IS ix. 22 — 39
Psainis x. I — 18
))
X. — cxii
„
xi. — cxiii
»
cxiii. I — 8
»
cxiv. I — 8
))
cxiii. 9—^12
>,
cxv. I — 4
»
cxiv
J,
cxvi. I — 9
»
cxv
>,
cxvi. 10 — 19
»
cxvi.— cxivi
1,
cxvii. — cxlvii. 11
»j
cxlvii. I — 9
»
cxlvii. 12 — 20
Books of the Hebrew Canon.
211
Greek.
Prov. XV. 27'' — xvi. 4, 6, 9
„ XX. IO» T2, 13^ 16, 17
—24
„ xxiv. 24—37, 38—49, 50—
68, 69 — 77, xxix. 28 —
49
Jer. XXV. 14 — 19
„ xxvi. I
" " .. 2—28
xxvii
xxviii
xxix. I — 7
„ 8-23
XXX. I — 5, 6 — II, 12—27
xxxi
xxxii. I — 24
xxxiii
xxxiv. I — 18
XXXV
xxxvi
xxxvii
xxxviii. 1—34, 35—37, 38—
40
XXX ix
xl
xli
xlii
xiiii
xliv
xlv
xlvi
xlvii
xlviii
xlix
1
„ li- 1—30. 31—35
Ezcch. vii. 3 — 9
10 i-t o_
11
»
»
,»
>,
»
■)■>
,>
),
>,
»
»
))
>)
»»
ji
Hebrew.
Prov. xvi. 6, XV. 28, xvi. 7, xv 29
„ xvi. 8—9, XV. 30—33^
„ xvi. 5, 4^
30
„ XXX. I — 14, XXIV. 23—34,
XXX. 15— 33, xxxi. I— 9, 10
—31
Jer. xlix. 34* — 39
» 36*'
xlvi. 2 — 28
1
li
xlvii. I — 7
xlix. 7—22
„ 1—5, 28—33, 23—27
xlviii
XXV. 15 — 38
xxvi
xxvii. 2 — 22
xxviii
xxix
XXX
xxxi. 1—34, 37, 35, 36, 38-
40
xxxii
xxxiii
xxxiv
XXXV
xxxvi
xxxvii
xxxviii
xxxix
xl
xli
xlii
xliii
xliv. I — 30, xlv. 1 — 5
Ezck. vii. 6 — 9, 3 — 5
2. Each of these contexts must be separately examined
with the view of discovering the extent and tiie cause of the
divergence. This can be dune but briefly here ; for further
234 Books of the Hebi-ew Canon.
particulars the student is referred to the commentaries which
deal with the several books.
In the following pages (5 = the Greek text, and ®*' ''• '"^- = the
Greek text as given in cod. A, cod. B, or as the case may be;
ilfl = the Massoretic text as printed in the Hebrew Bibles.
Gen. xxxi. 46 ff. The passage is in some confusion ;
'■'■vv. 45, 47, 51 — 54 appear to embody E's account... z^z;. 46,
48 — 50 the account given by J'." iit is loosely put together,
and V. 50'', which C& omits, is hardly consistent with vv. 48,
52. In C& 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 (FaScp) between Bethel and
Bethlehem ; see art. Eder in Hastings' D. B. (i. p. 644).
ExoD. XX. 13 — 15. <&^ and i$l represent here two distinct
traditions with regard to the order of the Decalogue. For the
order followed by ffi^ see Lc. xviii. 20, Rom. xiii. 9, Jas. ii. 11,
Philo de X. orac. 10, de spec. legg. iii. 2 ; that of ffi^^^iW is
supported by Mt., Mc, and Josephus. In Deut. v. 17 — 19
cod. B 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
Mose:.," the correspondence being so close that "in the main,
the narrative is repeated verbatim — with the single substitution
of past tenses for future V' But whilst in c. xxv. ff. the i.xx.
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 Pentateuch*."
1 Driver, lutr. p. 15.
^ The Nash (Heb.) Papyrus agrees generally with dSc ; see S. A. Cook,
A Unique Biblical Papyrus, Exp. T. x>v. 200; Burkitt, xwJ.Q.R. xvi. 559.
^ Driver, /;//;'. pp. 37, 38.
■* Robertson Smith, O. T. in the J. Ch. p. ii\ f.
Books of the Hebrew Canon,
235
The passage deals with the building and furniture of the
Tal)ernacle, 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.
Ornaments of the Ministers.
Ephod (xxxvi. 9 — 12).
Onyx stones (xxxvi. 13 — 14).
Breastplate (xxxvi. 1 5 — 29).
Robe of Ephod (xxxvi. 30 — 34).
Linen vestments (xxxvi. 35 — 37).
Crown plate (xxxvi. 38 — 40).
Structure of the Tabernacle
arid Court.
Hanginj^s (xxxvii. i — 2).
Veils (xxxvii. 3 — 6).
Court (xxxvii. 7 — 18).
Furniture of the Tabernacle^ Gr^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 —
26).
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-offering (xxxviii.
'-7)-
Laver (xxxviii. 8).
Court (xxxviii. 9 — 20).
Ornaments of the Ministers.
Ephod (xxxix. 2 — 5).
Onyx stones (xxxix. 6 — 7).
Breastplate (xxxix. 8 — 2l).
Robe of the Ephod (xxxix. 22 —
26).
Linen vestments (xxxix. 27 — 29).
Crown plate (xxxix. 30 — 31).
It is clear from this comparison that both ffi and itt 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. fT.
another Hebrew text in which the present Greek order was
observed. Many O. T. scholars (e.g. Kuenen, VVellhausen.
Dillmann) regard cc. xxxv.— xl. as belonging to a " secondary
236 Books of the Hebrew Canon.
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 iJtl. In Ijoth lists i)Jtt places
Gad third, and Asher eleventh ; whereas according to ® 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 (ffi
and ^). For this there may have been genealogical reasons ;
see Gen. xxx. 10 ff., xlix. 19.
C. vi. 22 ff. Here ^ obviously has the simpler and more
natural order, and Aeyovres avrols at the end of 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 flf. In the present Hebrew text the ceremony
at Ebal and Gerizim follows immediately upon the taking of
Ai, but in ffl- 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. 0i " involves
a geographical difficulty, for Ebal lies considerably to the north
^ See Driver, /;?/r. pp. 35, 39 ; Addis, Donwients of the Hexateiich, ii.
p. 276 f.
2 Robertson Smith, O. T. in the J. Ch. p. 125. Mr H. St J. Thackeray
notes, however, that "the same technical terms are sometimes differently
rendered in adjacent verses."
Books of the Hebrew Canon, 237
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 CSr still preserves the original order, though in
common with itt 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 ff.
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
triljcs. The real problem of the passage begins at iv. 20. Its
nature may best lje 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 (S"* and iJl resjjectively
as follows :
6" fa
Provision for the royal tabic (iv. .Solomon's m.irriagc (iii. i).
20—23). Provision for the royal table (v.
Solomon's power (iv. 24). 2 f., 7 f.).
His wisdom (iv. 25 — 30). The Kin.t;'s power (v. 4).
His marriage (iv. 31). Mis wisdom (v. 9—14).
His wife's dowry (iv. 32 flf,). His negociations with Kiii;^
His negociations with Kin;^ Hiram (v. 15 — 25).
Hiram (v. i — 12). His (joivc'e of workmen (v. 27—
His corvde of workmen (v. 13 — 32).
I7)- Foiinclatioiis of tlir 'lcm|)Ie laid
Foundations of the 'J'einplc laid (vi. i).
(vi. 1-5). I )iiiicnsii»iis (»f tlic Tenii)le(vi. 6).
Dimensions of tlie Temple (vi. Details ol the huiMiiiy (vi. 2,
Of.). 7,36).
* Driver, Intr. p. loo. » Cf. injta, p. 344.
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 0i 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 01 deals with the whole of Solomon's public works
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
palaces.
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 CSr^ has been translated from a recension of the
book earlier than that which is preserved in the Massoretic
text'.
C. X. 23 — 33. The text of ffi^- '-"<=• here admits two pas-
sages which it had passed over in the earlier contexts, where
they stand in Jlil (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
...is, 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, J^itr. p. 182, and note; C- F. IJurney, in Hastings' D. B.
p. S62 nr.
2 Intr. p. 181.
Books of the Hebrew Cano?i. 239
place in the text which was before the Alexandrian trans-
lator. C. V. i", which in the Greek order is x. 30, belongs in
X-fcl to another similar collection of loosely-connected para-
graphs. The arrangement followed by ©^ is perhaps not
materially better, but it probably represents an earlier stage
in the formation of the book.
C xi. 3—8. Here ffi^.Luc. presents a text which differs
from Cj* and 0i both in order and in form. A comparison of
(S^ with G'^ and iH will be found to be instructive ; the latter
is diffuse and repeats itself unnecessarily (3 e/cAivav yvvat/ce9
avrov rrjv Kap^iav avrnv...^ at ywaiKe? avTOv i^€KXivav rrjv Kap^cav
avTOv...c, iTTOpevOrj ^akoy/xwy OTTirrw T17S 'Ao"TupT7;s...7 rort wkoSo-
jiTqa-fv 2. v{}/r}\bv . . .ry 'AcrTaipTr)) ; 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 i.xx.'
Cc. XX., xxi. The relative order of these chapters is reversed
in 01, which justifies the change by prefacing the story of
Naboth with the words r]^i<r[ Q'>-)2'^^n inx \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'." Ob-
viously wrong as the present Hebrew order is, Cod. A has
adopted it, interpolating the inapposite c-ycVcro /xcTa rn p/ffxara
Tavra, which Origen had borrowed from Aqulla ; and even
I.ucian (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 chajitcrs.
PsAi.MS ix. — cxlvii.
Throughout the greater part of the Psalter (fi; and i*l
' H hownvcr omits the important stalrincnt of ?'. ,/, which conns "from
the older narrative" (Urivrr).
• See I-'icld ad loc, and cf. Silherstcin, iiher ,i,-n ^//.i/'/"",C '^<''' "■" ^od.
Ali-x. u. Vat. des dritlen K'bni)^ibi4ches..ubcrli<Jattn Tixtj^cslall ((JicMsen,
^ C. 1'. Burney, l.c.
240 Books of the 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. + cxv.
Heb. -cxiii. lxx.), and certain of the Hebrew Psalms being
vice versa divided in tlie 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 in 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 Or and JJl differ widely, as a comparison of the
contents will shew.
(5 M
Worus of Agiir (xxiv. 24 — yj). Sayings of the Wise (xxiv. 23 —
Sayings of the Wise (xxiv. 38 — 34).
49). Proverbs of Solomon (xxv. i —
Rest of the Words of Agar xxix. 21).
(xxiv. 50 — 68). Words of Agur (xxx. I — 33).
^ See Cheyne, Book of Psalnis, p. 228; Bleek-Wellhausen, p. 471.
Prof. Kirkpatrick {Psalms, 1. p. 41) speaks with less confidence.
^ See Kennicott, ii. p. 410. It should be added that in the M.SS.
Pss. cxvi., cxvii., cxviii. are also often written continuously.
* "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" (Cheyae op. cit. p. xiv.). See also Lagarde,
nov. Ps. gr. spec, p. 8.
Books of the Hebrew Canon. 241
(5 i«
Words of Lemuel (xxiv. 69 — ']']'). 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 finally settled when the Alexandrian translator did his
work'. 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 tabic which stands
near the beginning of this chapter will shew that the section
c. xxv. 15 — xlv. 5 (itt) answers in a general way to c xxxii.
I — li. 35 (G), 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 (CI). Speaking roughly
these two sections have exchanged places in the Greek text^
In G the prophecies against the nations precede the parable
of the intoxicating cup (xxv. 15 ff. = xxxii. i fif.); in itX they
form the final section of the book, coming immediately before
the historical appendix (c. lii.). 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
^ Cf. Robertson Smith, O.T. in J. Ch. p. 1 1 1 ; Toy, Proz'trbs, p. xxxiii.
' See Lagarde, Anmerkungen zur gricch. Oberseizung d. Frovetbien,
pp. 90, 91.
* Cf. Origcn ad Ajric. 4 ttoXXA 5^ Toiavra. koX iv T<f 'Itpffxlg. Kartvoifia-a-
fxtv, iv <p KoX Tro\\i]i> ixirdOtaiv koX iva.Wa.','iiv rrji X^ttwj ruif irfjo<pr)TtvofiJ'
vu)v tii^jofj-ef.
s. s. i6
242 Books of the Hebrew 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 ffi Elam, Egypt, Babylon, Philistia,
Edom, Ammon, Kedar, Damascus, Moab; but in JW, 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 CornilP, 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 koX iv aAXoi? Se ttoXXois dytois /3i/3Atots
cu/3o/x€v Tny fikv TrXeCova irap rjfuv Kci'yaeva rj Trap' 'E/3paiois, Trrj Sk
XeiTToj/ra) J and the Hexapla, as we have seen*, was the result
of a mistaken endeavour to assimilate the lxx. to the current
^ Driver, /nir, p. 263. * Ezechiel, p. 212.
2 Ft. I. c. iii.
Books of the Hebrew Canon. 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 important
exceptions In Gen. iv 8 the lxx. supplies the words of
Cain {8i€\6oifjiiv eh to ttcSiov), which are wanting in the
Hebrew Bible. The supplementary chapters of Exodus are
on the whole shorter in ffi than in iW ; 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 © into
eight, thus:
[^ev(f)pdvdriT(, oipavol, Sjia aiirto,
Koi irpo(TKVvr]i7dT(i)(Tav avTU vl>i\ ^eoO-]
€i)fhpui'6r)T€, edi'rj, p.(ru rov XaoO airrov,
\_Kai. (Pi(T\v(rdTa)(rav avTo) TTuvres dyyeXot ^for.^
5tI to ULIXU T0>V vlwV UVTOV eVSiKaTtit,
[^Koi (Kbinjjafi] Kul avTanudojtrti SiKf/i/ tois f^Opois,
[xai Tois [Microiiaiv dvranobiixTfi.,]
Koi (KKa6api.fi [Ki^pioc] tiju yijv rov XaoO.
There is nothing in iVi 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. PossiMy the Song was circulated in a
separate form in more than one transhiiion. 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 — a
244 Books of the Hcbretv Cation.
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
iiW; differ by defect or excess^
C. xix. 47 — 48 (i^). The order of these verses is reversed
in ffi, so as to bring the words avri] -q KXrjpovoixLa ktX. 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 ffi. " It is probable that the
ch. in its original form (P) has been enlarged by additions
from the law of homicide in Dt. (c. ig) at a comparatively late
date, so that they were still wanting in the MSS. used by the
LXX. translators ^"
C. xxi. 36 — 37, 42 a — d. The printed Hebrew Bibles
omit 7JV. 36 — 37, which contain the names of the Levitical
cities in the territory of Reuben, and they seem to have
been obelised 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
upon c. V. 3.
C. xxiv. 30 a — 33 b. F! 30 a continues the story of the
flint knives (v. 7, xxi. 42 d). ffi^, which omits v. 31, a
doublet of Judges ii. 7, adds to the book a postscript,
^- 33^ — ^} based on v. 33, i Sam. iv. ^f(., Judges ii. 6, 11 fi*.,
iii. 14*.
' See G. A. Smith in Hastings' Z>. B. ii. p. 784.
^ Op. cit.y p. 781 ff. * Driver, Tntr. p. 105.
* See Kennicott, i. p. 474, De Rossi, i. p. 96 ff.; and cf. Field, Hexapla,
i. p. 387, Addis, Documents of the Hexateuch, ii. p. 472 ff.
' See Knobel in Kurzgef, exeg. Handbuch zuin A.T., p. 488,
i
Books of tJie 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 S in a modified and
expanded form. Vv. 8 c, 9 a are omitted in S, which substi-
tutes StSoiis (.vy)\v . . .ZiKamv ("apparently an attempt to ac-
commodate the Song more closely to Hannah's position'"),
and inserts in the heart of 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. Jcr. ix.
o (f)fjovifios ev rfj (f)povTj(Tei...6 6 (T()(f)os fv tj/ cro({)ia...6 laxvpus
ovvaros iv ttj 8vvdfiei...T6i/ Kv- eV rrj l<r)(vi...oTi iyai elfii Kvpios 6
piQV, KQL TTOldv Kpipa Koi 8t.Ka(.0- TTOlcbv iXeOS Kul KplfHa KOI dtKOlO-
(Txjvqv iv fiftra Trjs yijs. arxivqv eVi t^s -y^s.
It has been noticed that i Regn. ii. iia (/cai KareXiTrei'
avrov eVei ei'WTrtov Kvpiov) probably corresponds to i Sam. i.
28 b {^Y^''7 D^' •inntf'M). if so, the Song has been inserted
in C& and i^ 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 ffi.
Cc. xvii — xviii. This is the most important of the contexts
in which ffi" differs from C5'^ Jtl 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 Wclihausen and Kuenen", the (Ireck translator, or the
scribe of the archetype followed by Cod. B, has deliberately
' Drivi-r, Suniuef, j). 20.
■■' See Wellhauscn, der Text d. B. Samtidis, p. 42; Driver, op. cit., pp.
17, i8, 11; H. P. Smith, Sarnttr/, p. 13.
* Driver, Ju/r., p. 170; Samud, p. i ifi f.
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. 148"., 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 (K. He con-
cludes that the verses omitted by CEr 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 MSB. existing when the lxx. translated the book."
The omissions are supplied in ffi*, ^'"'•, 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 ffi" omits by homoeoteleuton the
Heb. from "IT. (lu 11) to -ll'^p: (z;. 12). But it also omits 'hM
i"IJ? 'Y^i? {p- 11), and Wellhausen conjectures with probability
that €1 dTTOKXeio-^ifo-cTai was wanting in the original form of the
LXX.^
I Kings (3 Regn.).
In this book ffi° contains a large quantity of additional
matter, of varying character and worth".
' O. 7'. in J. Ch., pp. 121, 431 ff.; cf. Kirkpatrick, i Samuel, p. 241 fF.
^ I Samuel, p. 117.
•* Cf. Field adloc. * See H. P. Smith, Samuel, p. 212.
* See C. F. Burney, Notes on Heb. Text of Books of Kings, esp. pp. xix-xxx.
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. 10 ff.,
f^g = ix. 24 — 25 (/H), h = v. 16, i — k = x. 23 ff., i — o = ii. 8 — 9.
Similarly, ii. 46 a = iv. 20 (/H), b = v. 2 (jfl), c = iii. i (<tt), d = ix.
18 (/tt), e = iv. 22 — 23, f=iv. 24, g = v. 5 (Itt), h = 2ff., i — k = x.
29—30.
C. viii. 53a is an addition of quite another character and
of the highest interest. The true lxx. (C) omits viii. 12, 13,
which in cod. A are thus supplied from Aquila': roVe ciTrer
2aXo>/xojv Ku/)tos €i7r€V tov (TKrjvwcrai kv yiocfxo. oiKoSo/xrja'a oTkov
KUToiKriTrjpiov croi, tSpacrfxa rrjq KaOi^pwi trov aiwi/os. But after
?'• 53 © gives the substance of these words in a poetical form
which is expressly attributed to an older source :
TOTf fKuXrjcrfv 2. viT(p TOV oiKOv (OS avvfTe\e(T(v tov otKoSo^nrrot
avTov "HXtor (yv<l)pia-fv (Luc, ((TTrjcrev) iv ovpavio Kvpins- | find'
TOV KUTOiKuv fK yvi'><pov (A, (V yv6(f)co)- I olKo86p.i](rov oIkou fiov,
oIkov (Kirptnij (A, flnptni]) (ravTco, | tov KaToiKflv ('nl KaivurrjTos. \
ovK i^oii uvTT] yfypanTtii iv jiijiXiu) t^s wi^ryy;
Though this occurs in cod. A and Lucian, it was want-
ing in the Hebrew text which was before the translators
of tlic second century a.d., for in the Ilexapla it appeared
only in the LXX. column*. But (as its very errors shew) it is
a translation of a Hebrew original, and the (iifiXiov r^<: w8^<:
from which it came is doubtless none other than the Book
of Jashar (TJ'>^n-T3p, read as 1VD D) '. Here (& has preserved
> Cf. Field ad loc.
' See Field ad loc, who quotes from cod. 243, ravra if tijJ Haif\i^ rapA
H6vOlt IpipiTdl Tois o.
' Cf. Drivii, /ii/r., p. i8i. See Appendix OD Thackeray's examination
of this passage in_/. 7'A. Si. xi. 44.
k
248 Books of the Hebreiv Canon.
for us a precious relic, which in Jtt 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 = x}. 26 — ■
28; c = xi. 40; d — f=xi. 43''; xii. 2 — 5 (iB) ; g — n* = xiv. i — 20
(iftt); n*' — z = xii. 3 — 24.
But the passage is no mere cento of verses to be found
elsewhere either in (& or JW ; 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 ^H there is no a priori ground for
deciding which of the two is the more trustworthy. It is
worthy of notice that cod. B 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 fif., 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 y. Ch.,
P- 433-
^ Robertson Smith, op. cit., p. 118.
Books of the Hebrew Canon. 249
the Syro-hexaplar, but it seems to have been retained by
Lucian'.
C. xvi. 28 a — h consists of another recension of the sum-
mary of Jehoshai)hat's reign which occurs in c. xxii. 41 — 44,
47 — 50, where the last four verses are omitted altogether in
(S". 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. xvL 28. The summary of Joram's
reign has attached itself to the beginning as well as to the
end of the story of Elijali's ascension, whilst in ^^ it finds a
place only at the end (iii. i — 3). In this instance, however,
(5*' ^'"^- agrees with G" in repeating the summary, though
with some variations. The student will find a comparison
instructive.
1 Chronicles i. 10 — 16, 17b — 2 3 are wanting in G^ 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 Irom
Ilexaplaric 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 — 33, xxiv. i — 4, based
apparently upon a recension of the Hebrew which differs from
i^y and only in part assimilated to <&.
2 EsDRAS xxi, xxii. (Neh. xi, xii.). The lists of princes and
Levites are much shortened in CTi", which omils altogether xxi.
t6, 20, 21, 28, 29, 32—35; xxii. 4—6, 9, 15- J I, 38, 40, 41.
* Laijanle, V.'l\ (Jr. i. ad loc. Vox a careful treatment of the dilic-
renccs between and fft in 3 Kij^n. sec Ileiv.fcid, dsch. J. Volkei
Israel, ii.
250 Books of the Hebrew Canon.
Psalms.
In <& many of the Psalms receive titles, or additions to
their titles, which are wanting in JJl. The following is a list
of those which occur in the uncial MSS.
X. (xi.) + ■^/^aVof- So x'ii- (xiv.), xxiv. (xxv,), xliii. (xliv.), Ixxx.
(Ixxxi.).
xxiii. (xxiv.) + rJ5ff /xta? cra^lBdrov.
xxvi. (xxvii.) + 7rpo tov p^pto-^^vat.
xxviii. (xxix.) + e^o8iov a-Krjvrjs.
xxix. (xxx.) pr. fls to reXos.
XXX. (xxx\.)+fK(rTd(Tf (OS.
xxxii. (xxxiii.). Tw Aavei'S-
xxxvii. (xxxviii.) + 7r€yjt aa^iSdrov.
xli. (xlii.) + \|/'aX/i6s rw Aavei'S (cod. A.).
xlii. (xliii.). "^aXfios ra AaveiS.
xlvii. (xlviii.) + SevT-€pa aa^^drov.
Ixv. {\xvi.)-\-dva(rTd(rfO)s.
Ixvi. (lxvii.)+Ta) Aaveid (om. wS^y).
Ixix. (lxx.) + ft? rd ^uxrai fj.e Kvpiov.
Ixx. (Ixxi.). Tc5 Aaveid, vlwv Icoi/aSa^ koi ran/ irpatTcov alxp-o.-
XwriadevTcov.
Ixxv. (Ixxvi.) + 7rp6? rhv *A<r<xvpiov.
Ixxix. (Ixxx.) + V7rep TOV 'Aa-avpLOV.
XC. (xci.). Ati'Of cpSj/y ro) Aavfid.
xcii. (xciii.). Eij r^v fi^epav tov Trpocral^j^dTov, oti xaTcoKicrTai 17
y^ • aivos adfjs tm Aavei8.
xciii. (xciv.). '^aXp.bs rw Aavelb, rerpaSi cra/S/Saroi;.
xciv. (xcv.). Aivos (o8iis rw Aauet'S.
xcv. (xcvi.). 'On 6 oikos oi/coSo/i.ei7-at /iera tjjj/ al^fxaXaxriav •
wSjj Tca Aaveid.
xcvi. (xcvii.). Tw Aavel.8, oTt fj yjj avTov KadicTTaTau
xcvii. (xCviii.) + Tw Aavet'S.
xcviii. (xcix.). ^aXixbs ra Aaveid.
ciii. (civ.). Tw Aavet'S.
civ. (cv.). ' AXXrfXovid : 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 nj.-1?^n in the M.T. of the preceding Psalm].
ex. (cxi.). 'AXXrjXovid: so cxi., cxii. (cxii., cxiii.), cxxxiv.
(cxxxv.), [but in each of these cases the Greek title is the
equivalent of an opening HMPpn in the M.T. of the Psalm],
cxv. (cxvi. 10 — 19). ' AXXrjXovid. So cxviiL (cxix.).
cxxxvi. (cxxxvii.). T« Aaveid.
Books of the Hebrew Canon. 251
cxxxvii. {cx\x\i\\.) + Zaxapiov A {-p'lai T).
cxxxviii. {c\\x\x.) + Zaxapi(>v (cod. A.) + eV t^ Siaa-iropa (A» T).
cxlii. (cxliii.) + orf avrov 6 vlos KaraSiclxcei {Karfbiai^fv A).
cxliii. (cxliv.) + Trpoy roi^ FoXtuS.
cxlv. (cxlvi.). ' AWrjXovid' 'Ayyaiov Koi Zaxaplov (Heb. n^HJyi
^'"^li)-
cxlvi. (cxlvii. I — II). ' ^Xkrikovuf 'Ay-yat'ow koi Za;^ap/ov (where
'AXX. answers to the first word of the Psahn in |fl as in ex.
(cxi.)).
cxlvii. (cxlvii. lo — 20). As cxlvi., except that 'AXX. is not in
m
cxiviii. As cxlvi. but 'AXX. is here represented in ilfl both
at the end of the preceding Psalm and at the beginning of Ps.
cxiviii.
cxlix. 'AXXj;Xouta. In Ifl at the end of cxiviii. and the
beginning of cxlix.
cL 'AXXTjXovto, As in cxlix.
On the questions raised by the Greek titles see Neubauer in
Studia Bibl. ii. p. i fif., Driver, Intr. p. 348 ff., the commentaries,
e.g. those of Perowne, Kirkpatrick, and Cheyne, and the last-
named author's Oritrt/i of the Psalter. Valuable traditions are
probably embodied in the liturgical nolcs which assign certain
Psalms to particular days of the week (r^ pia va^iiiaTov, 8(vTepq
(T., TfTpa^i <r.', fls ri'jv r/fitpav tov 7rpo(Ta^,:iiiTov (cf. Mc. XV. 42)),
and in those which attribute others to the time of the Return
{Za)(apiov, ' Ayyniuv) or to the Dispersion (tV rrj Siaairopa). On
the other hand some of the Greek tides appear to be fanciful
(irpo TOV xpi(T6r)vai,, irfws rtiv YiAu'ib), whilst Others arc obscure
(f (crTTjifrfajy, avacTTuaicm).
For the Christian (mystical) interpretation of the Greek titles
see Athan. de titulis Psalinorum (Migne, P. G. xxvii. 591 sqq.),
the variorum prolen^omena in Pitra's Analecta sacra ii. p. 41 1 sqq.,
and Corderii exp. patr. Gr. in Psalinos^ passim.
Ps. xiii. (xiv.) 3 a — c. This, the only long interpolation 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.) T a, all taken or abridged from the lxx. version
with slight variations. 'J'hat it never formed a part of the
' Cf. TrifiTTTy aafijidTov prefixed to Ps. Ixxxi. in the cursive MS. 156
{Urtext, p. 75).
252 Books of the 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 /coiviy, according
to Jerome praef. in ha. \ of. 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 ©f stringing together
passages excerpted from various books of the Old Testament
(Sanday and Headlam on Romans, /. <:.), 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. {ij/aXfx6<; iSi6ypa(f>o<;)'. The MSS. of the LXX. con-
tain after Ps. cl. a Psalm which bears the title Outos 6 i/raA/xos
iStoypaqSos €is AauetS kol e^wOev tov dpt6fxov, ore ifiovofid^rjcrev tco
FoXiaS, O. L., /lie psalnms sibi proprie scriptus est David, extra
numerum, cum pugnavit 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
o\ fikv Kav)(r](r€(os ti^s iv Kvpto) aTrayyeXXovTcs Xoyous elal kJ3' Kai
/c5" , X'Jj ...pva : § 25 Tw eKXc^a/ievo) Kvpioi SiSous So^av t^aXXe koI
(TV ~ov pva iStov ovTa tov AaueiS) ; and it is quoted as a Psalm
of David by the author of the pseudonymous letter of Mary to
Ignatius (cent. iv. ; Lightfoot, Ignatius, iii. 144, tprjcrlv yap ttov
avTos OTL MiKpos '^p.r]v, kt\.). Moreover the scribe of Cod. ^i
regarded it as a part of the Psalter, for his subscription runs
vfAAMoi AaA pN<\. In cod. A, however, it is carefully excluded
from the Psalter proper (subscr. y&Amoi pN kai iAiorpA(|)OC a) ,
and the judgement of the Laodicene canon (/SifiXo's xj/aXfxwv
eKaTov TrevTrjKoi/To) is upheld by the title which in all the MSS.
^ Cf. Hatch, Essays, p. 209 fT.
^ Cf. Oeconomus, iii. p. 634 f.
Books of tite Hebrew Canon.
253
I
pronounces this 'autograph' (tStdypa^os) work of David to be
i^wdev or €Kro9 rod dpidixov, i.e. rdv pv if/ak/jiwv.
This Psalm 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
complete.
For the literature of Ps. cli. see Fabricius-Harles, iii. p. 749,
and Fabricius, Cod. pseudepigr. v. 7^, p. 905 ff.
The Ecclesiastical Canticles.
In certain uncial MSS, and a large proportion of the cur-
sives the Psalms are followed by a collection of liturgical w8ai
{canticd). The following table shews the sources and order of
those which are given by codd. A, R, T.
1. Exod. XV. I — 19.
2. Ueut. xxxii. i — 4J.
3. I Rej^n. ii. i — 10.
4. Isa. xxvi. 9 — 20.
5. Ion. ii. 3 — 10.
6. Hab. ifi. I — 19.
7. Isa.xxxviii. 10 — 20.
8. Prayer 0/ Alattas-
seh\
9. Dan. iii. 26 — 45.
10. „ „ 52— 88.
1 1. Mtii^nijical.
1 2. Nunc dimittis.
13. Benedicttds.
14. Alorniiii^ Hymn.
F.xod. XV'. 12 1.
Dcut. xxxii. I — 44.
I Regn. ii. i — la
Isa. V. I — 9.
Ion. ii. 3 — 10.
Hab. iii. i — 19.
MiijL^niJicat.
D.m. iii. 52 — 90.
[6] I Ref^n. H. [i] -10.
7. Mai^nijicat.
8. Isa.xxxviii. ID — 20.
9. Prayer of Manas-
sell '.
Dan. iii. 26 -45.
.. ., 52—56.
.. » 57—90-
Binedii (us.
A/unc dimittis.
10.
1 1.
12.
13.
f4.
1 5. Morning Hymn.
^ * The irpoa-eux'J Ma«'»'a<r<nJ (so Corl. A; Tntl. T. vp. Mafairffl; i/ioO
EfcK/oi/) is usually rc-g.-irdcl as an atlempt by a Ucllenislic Jew to re-
construct the prayer mentioned in a Chron. xxxiii. 18; see, however Ball
254 Books of the Hebrew Canon.
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,
II + 13; the 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 Mozarabic 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
Marten e, de ant. rit. eccL, p. 25, Neale, Hist, of the H. Eastern
Church., ii. p. 834 f., Freeman, Principles of Divine Service.^ \.
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 wpyiadrja-av, cant. i(f>o^rj6r](ra}' : Deut. xxxii, 7 yfvfSyv ye-
vfciis, cant, yevfas yeveSiv : 1 8 yewTjcravra, cant. TroirjcravTa : I Regn.
ii. 10* (f)povrj(r(i, cant, a-ocfiia: 10^ a/cpa yrjs, cant. + diKaios <av. 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 ansv er to the head-
ings pC'X"! "IDD, etc., which appear in the printed Hebrew Bible,
the Doxologies at the end of the first four books appear in the
in S^'Cakei^s Comtn. (Apocr. ii. 362 ff.). The Greek text appears in
Const. Aposi. 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.
Gr. 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 Septuagintastudien iii. (Stuttgart, 1899), p. 6ff.;
see also Ryssel in Kautzsch's Apokryphen u. Pseudepigraphen. _
1 For some other orders see Dom Morin in Revue BinMictine (cited by
A. E. Burn, Creeds, p. 262).
" A pre-Christian arrangement, as Hippolytus already knew (hypoth. in
Psahnos, rb ^aXriJ/sioc eh irivre dLilXov /3i/3Xia oi "Eppaloi). 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 Sludia 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.)
r8 — 20, Ixxxviii. (Ixxxix.) 5, cv. (cvi.) 48).
Proverbs. The variations of ffi and i^H in this book are
treated by Lagarde in his early book Anmerkutigen zur griech.
Ubersetzung der Proverbien, There is a considerable number of
Greek verses for which Jtt 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 ^tt 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 {q.\s 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 Afficntl. 4 'n\u.<TTa re otra tia fie<rov oXou Toii loj/y nap
'Efifjaiius fx(i> K€iTui TTQf) '//lif 5< ""^X'' ""' 7roXA<JKis' fj.(u (TTT] Tfacrapu
^ Tniu- (cr$' oTf fit KoX hfKaTfiTdapa Ka\ HfKatPvfu kuI 8eKae'^ ^fo>'-
/t-if. (I'vta Koi «$*). Cf. I Heron, prarf. in Hiob: "cui [sc. libro
lob], si ca quae sub astcriscis aclclila sunt subtraxoris, pars
maxima voluminis dctruncaljiuir, et hoc duntaxat apud Graecos.
ceterum apud Latinos. ..scptingcnli fcrme aut octingenti versus
desunt."
'I'he asterisks are preserved in certain cursive MSS. of the
' For this correclion bee a note by Dr Nestle in Exp. Times, Aug. i8yy
(P- 523)-
I
256 Books of the Hebrew Canon.
Greek Job^ and in MSS. of Jerome's version, while the shorter
form is represented by the earhest 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 iW ^
Dr Hatch^ in his Essay On Orige?t's revision of the lxx.
text of Job advocates the theory that the lxx. represents a
shorter Hebrew text which was afterwards expanded into the
longer form. Bickell, in his early book De indole ac ratione
versionis Alexandrinae (p. 42), maintained that the omissions
were chiefly due to the tr.inslator, and this view is supported
by recent critics. The evident desire of the translator to
follow classical models suggests that he was an Alexandrian
Hellenist* who intended hif 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 (xpofov
...TToXXov 7rpofie^r]K6TO<i...Xiywv 'iSoii dva/AcVw ktX.)".
The two notes at the end of the Greek Job (xlii. 17a, b — e)
scarcely profess to belong to the book. The first {yiypanTai 8e
aiiTov irakiv dvaarrjaeadai fied' dp 6 Kvpios dvia-Trjaiv) may be
either a Pharisaic or a Christian gloss, intended to balance the
eTfXevTi]G-ev 'lci)/3 of the previous hemistich, and arising out of
^ Cf. Hatch, Essays, p. 216; Field, Hexapla, ii. p. if.; E. Kloster-
mann, Analecta, p. 63 f.
^ Burkitt, O. L. and It al a, p. 8. ^ Essays, p. 214 ii.
* On the translator's date cf. Schiirer', ill. 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. B.!',
vol. I. pt. ii. p. 1723).
* Cf. Testament of Job (ed. M. R. James, Apocr. anecd. ii. p. 117).
Books of the Hebrew Canon. 257
xix. 26 tVt y^y avncrTTjcrm {v. I. dva(TTT](rei.) to dep/ia /uoi', to which
passage yiypairTm seems to refer. The second note, which
professes to come from an Aramaic source {ovms (pfxrjvevfmi e'/c
rrjs 2vpiaKTJs i3ifi\ov^), confuses Job (SI'S) with the Edomite king
Jobab (32'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 {pracp.
ev. ix. 25). From a comparison of this extract with the note
attached to Job, Freudenthal was led to ascribe the note to
Aristeas^. Beyond the geographical description of Uz {i-rrX rot?
opioid TTjs 'l8ovfxaias Koi 'ApiiiiUis), and the statements that Job's
wife was an Arab woman and that her son's name was Ennon
or Enon (v./.), the note contains nothing new: lyc — <■/ rests
upon Gen. xxxvi. 32 — 35 (lxx.), and 17 e on Job ii. 11 (lxx.).
Esther. In the Greek Esther we reach tlie maximum of
interpolation. Of 270 verses, 107 are wanting in tlie 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
T.atin }5ible 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 = n, xiii. 8 — xiv. 19 = 0, xv.
4 — 19 = 0, xvi. I — 24= e). This armngement 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, wliich i)recedes c. i., introduces the
story by (lcscril)ing the events which led to the first advance-
ment of Mordecai at the court of Artaxerxcs; b and k, which
' "'Ek Tjji S. /3. wcist doch auf cincn Midrascli odcr cin Tarj^iiin hiii"
(nillm.-inn, ///o/>, p. 361).
- .Schiirc' ■', ill. p. 311.
" Cf. Oiijjen, aJ .Ifric. 3 Ik r^? 'E(T<?i;p oGrt 17 tov 'Sla.p^oxalov et'XV oifrt
t; tt)? 'I'j'tO ;;/)... ira/J Vtfiiiaioti (f>^i)oi>Tai' dW oiiSi al ^TTicrroXa/' uXX' ot''5c i]
T(f) ' A/xfiav (Vi KaOatfHad tou ru>»' 'lovSalwf iOvovi ytypa/.i/xti'i], oi/Sf i) tov
Ma/iooxaiov.
* III tlic Camliriflpc I-XX. they arc dislinguislicd l)y the Roman caijjlals
A — V, a iiuialion suyycsted \>y Dr lloit.
s, .s. 17
258 Books of the Hebreiv 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. 178-7 (? 166-5), ^^^ fourth year
of Philometor\ But the historical value of the note is more
than doubtful'.
The Greek text of Esther exists in two recensions (i) that of
NABN 55, 93 <^, 108 rt!, 249 al., (2) that of 19, 93 a, \o%b; both are
exhibited by Ussher {Syntagma)^ Fritzsche ('Ecr^/;/j, 1848; libri
apocryphi, 1871), and Lagarde {li.br. caiioti. V. T. i., 1883). The
^ See Ryle, Canon, p. 139 f., 303 ft.; and cf. supra, p. 228 f.
"^ ^povpaL {>i>povpaia. X*, i>povpi/j. ii"-^), cf. c. ix. 26, and Jos. a«A vi. 13
ol 'lovoaioi Tas Trpoeiprifj.evas i]n4pas eopTd^ovcnv wpoffayopeijaavres airas
(ppovp^as (v. 1. (ppovpalas, Lat. conservatorcs). The 'Letter of Purim'
seems to he the book of Esther as a whole; cf. c. ix. 20.
* Handhuch zii d. Apocrypha, i. p. 73.
* Ryssel (in Kautzsch, Apokr., p. 212) inclines to B.C. 114, the fourth
year of Soter ii (Lathyrus), and Wilhich to B.C. 48-7, that of Ptolemy xiv.
^ See above, p. 25.
w
Books of the 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 Bitch Esther bei dem LXX. in ZATIV.,
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 Jerevdah^
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 slightly 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 addiiio.is, 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 ifl ; the following are the most noteworthy: viii. 10'' — 12, x. 6,
8, 10, xvii. I — 5% xxix. (xxxvi., LXX.) 16 — 20, xxxiii. (xl., LXX.)
14—26, xxxix. ( = xlvi., LXX.) 4—13, Hi. 28—30. Of these pas-
sages viii. id'' — 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 iiUerpolations in the M.T. On the other hand it is
possible tlial the omission of xvii. i — 5* was due to honiccole-
Icuton, the eye of the translator or the scribe of his archetype
having passed from nin^ (xvi. 21) to nin* (xvii. 5'). It is more
di.ricuit to account for the absence from ^ of the Messianic
passage xxxiii. 14 — 26. Dr Streane thinks that il must have
been wanting in tlie HclMew text whicli lay before the translators.
Possibly the Messianic hope which it emphasises had less interest
for a subject of the Ptolemies tlian for the Jews of Palestine.
Lamentations. The Greek translator has prefixed a head-
ing which connects the book with Jeremiah (>cai eytifro.. iKo.-
6l(T(V 'J «/>€// 109 K\atO)V ktA.),
> p. 24 f. ('(. A. 1?. D.ividM)!! ill Hastings' D.B. ii. 57.? ff. Tli.ickcray,
on tlic otlicr hand, iiislauccs llic kigo Alexandrian adililioiis to Kslhcr anil
Daniel.
17—2
26o 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 i\\.
There are three such passages in the Greek Daniel: (i) the
story of Susanna (2ororai/va, Sworavi/a), which in the version of
Theodotion^as given by the great uncials precedes Dan. i. i;
(2) the story of Bel and the Dragon (BtjA, Kat ApaKwv) which
follows Dan, xii. 13; (3) after Dan. iii. 23 a digression of 67
verses (iii. 24 — 90, lxx., Th.), consisting of {a) the pra5'^er 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 — go). 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 (opao-is t/3' 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 JuHus 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.
Iren. iv. 26. 3 "et audient eas quae sunt a Daniele propheta
voces" {Sus. 56, 52 f.), iv. 5. 2 "quern et Daniel propheta... annun-
tiavil" \BcI 4f., 25). Tert. de idolo/atria, 18 (Z>V/4f.). Hippol. in
^ Vide supra, p. 4fi ff.
2 On Thcodotion's Bel, see Gaster in J. of Bihl. Airhaeolo!:^', xvi. 289,
•290, 312 if-, xvii. 71 ^i.
■' .Susanna is perhaps made to precede Daniel because it descril)cs
events which belong to his early life; of. v. 44 ff. and v. 62 in a, b (i.xx.).
Books of the Hebrezv Canon. 261
Shs. (Lagarde, p. 145) <i^t^ y^^v ovv /; la-Topia yeyivqrai ixrrepov,
npoeypiUprj ^i rtjs l-ii;3\ov TrpMTrjs. Africanus, ep. ad O/'/i;: davpaCoi
8i TTcos fXadf ere to ptpos rnii l:iiji\l<iv tovto Kij^^iqXov <">i> ktX. Orig.
ad AfriciiJi. nap' dp.(f)OTf'p()is (lxx. and Theodotion) e/cftro to wept
TTjv ^(licrdvvav (w? aii 0/;y) TrXatr/xn, Koi al reXevTciiaL iv rut AavifjX
rrfpiKDnai. It will be noticed that the extracts from Hi|)polytus
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 (o-p^ti/os, o-xtC«"') in Siis. 54 f., Ball
{^Speaker'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 Habakktik (cod. 87, Syro-Hex., tit.
€K Trpo(f)r]T£La<; AfifiuKOVix vioO 'Irjorov €K T17S <fiv\rj<; Aevt), an
attribution evidently due to v. 33 ff., but inconsistent with the
place of the story in the Gk. MSS.
The addition to IJan. 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 Trpocrcuxr/ 'A^apCov
and the vfJ.vo<: twv TravipMV r)ix.utv (cod. A) or V. riHv TpL(Zv TTUifjon'
(cod. T).
Besides these additions, which are common to both texts of
Daniel, the text of the lxx. contains a large number of siiorter
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 stalcniLiit by comparing the two versions as they stand
iace to face in the Cambridge lxx., especially in c. iii. i — 3,
46, iv. 14 (17), 19 (22), 29—34 (32—37). V- ^3—23. vi. 2—5
' Cf. J. T. Mnrshall in Hastings, D. IS. iv. 632; on the other h.-ind, see
Kani|)linusen in Kiuyil. Bi/i.'ica, i. 1013. and conip. Kuthslcin, Apokr.,
p. 173)1. On the Aramaic version of the additions from I'hcodotion's
(inek cf. .Scluircr', iii. p. 333.
- Hall, /. c, p. 30S. See Nestle, f'.xp. T. xii. 527, and I)nid)ney,
/:'-</. /'. xviii. ■2S7. ^ Levan, Daniel, p. ^'i.
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 longer 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 variis ledio-
nibiis Holmes. Peniaieiichi (181 5). Hug, de PeHtnteiichi
vers. Alexandriiia conmientatio (1818). Topler, de Penta-
teuchi interpretationis A lexajidrinae indole ( 1 8 30). Th i er sch,
de Pentateuchiversione Alexandrina, libri iii(i84i). Frankel,
lib er den Einfluss der paldst. Exegese auf die alex. Herme-
ncutik (1851). Howorth, the LXX. and Samaritan v. the
Hebrew text of the Pentateuch {Academy, 1894).
Genesis. Lagarde, Genesis Graece (1868). Deutsch, exeg.
Analecten zur Genesisiibersetzimg der LXX. (in fiid. Litt.
Blatt, 1879). Spurrell, Genesis, ed. 2 (1898).
Exodus. Selwyn, Notae criticae in Versionem LXXviralem,
Exod. i — xpciv (1856).
Numbers. Selwyn, Notae, &c., Liber Nnmeroricm (1857).
Howard, Numbers and Deuteronomy ace. to the LXX.
translated into English (1887).
Deuteronomy. Selwyn, Notae, &c.. Liber Deuteronomii
(1858). Howard, (?/. ^//. (1887). Driver, critical and Exe-
getical Co7nmentary on Deut. (1895).
Joshua. Hollenberg, Der Charakter der alex. Ubersetzung
des Bitches Josua (1876).
Judges. Fritzsche, Liber ludicum sec. LXX. interpretes
(1867). Schulte, de restitutione atque iftdole genui?jae ver-
sionis graece Ludicum (1889). Lagarde, .Septjiagintast. \.
(1891), (Jud. i — v., texts of A and B). Moore, critical and
Exegetical Comm, oti fudges (1895).
Ruth. Fritzsche, 'Poi/(9 /earn rovs o' (1867).
Books of the Hebrew Canon. 263
I, 2 Kingdoms. Wellhausen, Der Text der BiicJu-r Samuclis
unlersucht {i^jl). Woods, the light ihrowti by the LXX,
on the Books of Samuel (in Studia Biblica, i. 21, 1885).
Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Samuel
(1890). Stcinthal, ZJir Geschichtc Sauls ti. Davids (1891).
Kerber, Syrohex. Fragmente zu den beiden Samuelis-
biichern {ZATW., 1898). J. Meritan, la Version Grecqtce
des livres de Samuel, pri'ciWe d'unc introduction sur la
critique text ue lie (189S). H. P. Smith, Critical and exeg.
conim. on the Books of Samuel (1899).
3, 4 Kingdoms. Silbcrstein, t'ber den Ursprung der im
Codex Alex. ti. Vat. des dritten Konigsbuches der Alex.
Ubersetzung iiberlieferten Texti^estalt (in ZATW., 1893).
C. F. Burney, Notes on the Heb. Text of the Books of Kings
(1903)-
I, 2 Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah. Howorth, The true
LXX. version of Chr.-Ezra-Neh. (in Academy, 1893).
Nestle, Marginalien (1893J, p. 29 ff.
Psalms. Sinker, Some remarks on the LXX. version of the
Psalms (1879). Baethgen, der text-kritisches VVerth des
alte7t Ubersetz. zu d. Psalmen (1882). Lagarde, psaltcri
graeci specimen (1887); psalmoruin quinquagena pritna
(1892). Mcrcati, nn palimpsesto Ambrosiano dei Salmi
E sapli {i%()G). Jacob, Bcitrdge zu einer Einleitung in die
Psalmen (I. Exc. v.), (1896).
Proverbs. La.'^a.rde, ' Anmerkungen zur griech. Ubersetz.
der Proverbien (1863). Pinkuss, die syr. Ubersetzung des
Proverbien,..in ihrcm Verhdltniss zu dem Mass. Text,
den LXX. u. dem Targ. untersucht {ZATIV., 1894).
ECCLKSIASTKS. ^x\'^\\\., The book of Kokeletk {i^'^l). Gratz,
Koheleth (1884). Klostermann (E.), de libri Coheleth ver-
sione Alexandriiia {\^()2). Dillinann, iiber die dr. Uber-
setzung des Koheleth (1892). Kiilil, observ. ad interpr. Gr.
et Lat. vet. libri Job (1834).
Ji)i!. Bickcll, De indole ac ratione versionis Alcvandrinac
jt'bi ( 1 862) ; der urspriingliche Septuaginta-text des Hitches
Jliob {i?)%()). Halcli, on Or/gen's rei'ision of the Book of
fob (in Essays, 1889). UilUnann, Text kritisches ziim B.
J job (1890). Maude, die Peschittha zu I Hob nehst einein
Anhang iiber ihr Verhdltniss zu LXX. u. Targ. (1892).
Beer, der Text des H. ///V'^Ji (18(^5 ). Diivcr, in Cout. Review
(Feb. 1896). Cheyne, in Enc. Bibl., 2489 f. (1901).
Esther. ]ACo\i, Esther bei dem LXX. {ZATIV., xZ'.yo). On
the (Ireek additions see Rysscl in Kauti^scli, Apokr., p. 193 (T.
264 Books of the Hebrew Canon.
DODECAPROPHETON. VoUers, Das Dod. der Alexandriner
(1880), continued in ZATIV., 1S83-4. Stekhoven, de alex.
Vertaling van het Dod. ( 1 887).
Hose A. Treitel, Die alex. Ubersetzttns; des Buches Hose a
(1888).
MiCAH. Ryssel, Untersuchnngen ilber die Texigestalt des
B. Miclia (18S7). Taylor, tlie Alass. text and the ancient
versions of Micah (1891).
Obadiah. Seydel, Vaticinium Obadiae ratio?ie Jiahita
transt. Alex. (1869).
NahUiM. Reinke, Zur Kritik der alt. Vers. d. Proph.
Nahiun (1867).
Habakkuk. Sinker, Psalm of Habakkuk (1890).
Zechariah. Lowe, Comni. on Zech. (1882).
Isaiah. Scholz, Die Masor. Text u. alex. Ubersetzung des
B. Jesaias (18S0). Weiss, Peschitta zu Deuterojesaia ti.
ihr Verliiiltniss zu M.T., LXX. ti. Targ. (1893).
Jeremiah. Movers, De Jttrijisque recens. feremiae indole et
origitie {\%y]). Wichelhaus, de Jeremiae vers. Alexandr.
indole (1847). Schulz, de leremiac textus Hebr. et Gr. dis-
crepantia (1S61). Scholz, der MasOr. Text u. die LXX.
Ubersetz. des B. Jereniias (1875). Kiihl, das Verhiiltfiiss
der Massora ziir Septnaginta in Jeremia (1882). Work-
man, the text of yeremiah (1889). Coste, die Weissagung-
en der Proplicten lereniias (1095). Streane, the double text
of Jeremiah (1896). The question of the two recensions
is dealt with at length in Bleek-Wellhausen, Einleitung,
§i58ff.
Lamentations. Goldwitzer, Ubersetzung mit Vergleichiifig
d. LXX. (1828).
EZEKIEL. Merx, Der Werth der LXX. fiir die Textkritik
der A T am Ezechiel aufgezeigt {Jb. pr. Th., 1 883). Cornili,
das Buch des Proph. Ezechiel (18S6); cf. Lagarde in Go/t.
gelehrte Anzeige/t {i June, 1886).
Daniel. Bludau, De alex. interprete libri Daniel indole
(1891); die alex. Ubersetzung des B. Da^tiel {i^gj). Be van,
the Book of Daniel {i8()2). L'6\\y, textkrit. Vorarbeiten zu
einer Erkliirung des Buches Daniel {ZATIV., 1895). On
the Greek additions see Rothstein in Kautzsch, Apohr.,
p. 172 ff.
26$
CHAPTER III.
Books not included in the Hebrew Canon.
The MSS. and many of the lists of the Greek Old Tes-
tament include certain l)ooks 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,
Toljit, Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah, i. — iv. Maccabees.
We may add the Psalms of Solomon, a book which was
sumetimes included in MSS. of the Salomonic books, or, in
complete Bibles, at the end of the Canon; and the Greek
version of l'>noch, 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 whicli 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 P^SDkAs. In MSS. of the Lxx. the canonical book
I-zr,i-Nehemiali appears under the title 'Eir^pas ^', 'Efr8/)us a'
being appropriated by another recension of the history of the
Captivity and Return. 'I'hc 'Greek Ksdras' consists of an
266 Books not included in the Hebrew Canon.
independent and somewhat free version of portions of 2
Clironicles 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. yj — 55 = Neh. vii. 73'" — viii. 13'*. The Greek book
ends abruptly, in a manner which suggests that something has
been lost ; cf. ix. 55 kcli fTrta-vvi'ixdrjaav with 2 Esdr. xviii. 13
a-vvfjxS'jarav oi apxavres ktK. 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
even*^s 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 Zerubbabel*. He evades the difficulty
^ The future {praevalebW) is without authority. In v. 38 Cod. A gives
tVxi^c", but in V. 41 inrf.pi.ax^e'- is unchallenged. The Latin te.Kts have the
present in both verses.
- H. St J. Thackeray, in Hastings' D. B. i. p. 76.
'^ ant. X. A. 4 — xi. * aiit. xi. 3. 2 sqq.
Books not included in the Hebrew Cafion. 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, strofn.
i. 21; Origen, in Joami. 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 ff.), 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. 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 " subse<iuenlly... required and. ..supplied
by what is now called the lxx. version*."
2. Wisdom ok Solomon. The Greek title is So^ta
2<iA(i)/iajros (^aXo/iuji'TO<;, 2oXo/xaji'T05, }£a\(D/X(ui'). But the book
' «;;/. xi. 7. I sqq. ' The Knglish Article (vi) follows this numeration.
•• In the Aiademy for iKy.v
* And ))ossil)ly the work of TheoH. (Craniin. of O. '/'. /// Gk, n. \ >,.
(In ("i>(l. N, I ("hron. xi. 22 -xix. 17 goes nii without a i)reak to Lsd. /:<.
ix. y, tile whole i>eiiig heatleil Ea5. p.)
268 Books Hoi included in the Hebrew Canon.
was often cited as 97 2o^ia, rj Tramperos So^t'a, 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
Sapicfiiiae (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. prae/. 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 Platonic doctrine of the four
cardinal virtues" (c. viii. 7 ci SiKaioawV^^i' dyawa rts, 01 ttoVoi
ravT'qs eiclf dptrai' <T(j}(f>poo-vvi]v yap Kot ^povrjo-iv e/<8t8a(r/<€t,
hiKaLOdvvrjv Kal avSpetav), and with the Platonic sense of
vXt) (c. xi. 17 KTcaaaa rov koo-^jlov k^ afx,6p(fiOv vXr]<;' cf. Philo,
de victim. 13, de mumi. 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-
* Ab amicis suggests iiiro (piXwv, and vwb (piXujv has been thought to be a
corruption of vtto 'PiXwi'os. See Tregelles ca/i. Mur., p. 53, and cf. Zahn,
Gesch. d. N. T. Kanons, ii. p. 100.
* See this worked out by W. J. Deane, Book of IVisdom, p. 33 f.;
C. J. Bigg, Christian Platonists, p. 14 IT.
^ bee Kep. 427—439, 44'2, ^:c.
Books not included in the Hebrew Cation. 269
sition which would be produced by the sophistic school of
rhetoric V' 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 al^ound, e.g. a.K-q\i-
OwTOS, a/i/^pocrtos, ItttA-A-o?, t,iiiTi.K6s, LofSoko?, KaK6i^io)(0o<;, KLvr]TLKo<;,
KpvaTa\\o€LOrj<;, o^.oiotra9r)<;^ TravTeTrtcrKO—os, 7roAv/xep7^5, irpwTO-
TrAacTTOs" ay(po>)(^ia, a7rauyao"/xa, ixTroppoia, elSexOeia, irepyeia,
(v^pdveia, /)£/x/iucr/jtos, o"uA/\oyi(T/xos' fxcTaKipvav, p.CTaWe'vetv, irpov-
(f}€(TTarai'. In some of these we can trace the influence of
philosophical thought, in others the laboured effort 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 lone 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 earlier 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 — T19 Se 6 ypa.\pa<i...To fxlv
uk7]0(<; 6io<; oiocv. 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 Ji:sus, son ov Siuach. In cod. 15 the
title of this book is simply 2o0ia ^cipdx'', l)ut codd. AC give
the fuller and more accurate form }io(f)ia 'Irjcrov viov ^fipdx
(cf. C. I.. 27 TTui^ctaj/. . .e^'ipo^a iv tw (SifSkito tuvt(o lr)(TOv<; utos
' Weslcott in Smith's /i. I), iii. 17S0. Cf. Jerome, A c. "ipse stylus
Graccam eiiii|iientinin rcilolcl."
« Sec DeaiK-. p. 17. Wcstcott, y. 17.S, Kyle, Smith's /.'. /;-. i. p. rS^.
" i;«tpdx— NTD. " In ihi- Ili'lirew J()sipi)oii ( I'm-ikIo Josephiis) ihc form
*lTt' is a Ir.Tiishteralion from the Latin" (Cowley anrl Neulmiier, Original
Hcbi CM of a portion of EccUsiasticui, p. ix. n.).
270 Books not included in the Hebrew Canon.
Seipa'x'). Jerome had seen a Hebrew Sirach which shared
with the canonical book the title of Proverbs {praef. in iibros
Salom. : "Hebraicum reperi... Parabolas {'Q'h^'d) praenotatum").
The later name, Ecclesiasticus, which appears in Cyprian (e.g.
testim. ii. i "apud Salomonem...in Ecclesiastico "), marks the
book as the most important or the most popular of the libri
ecdesiastici — the books which the Church used for the purpose of
instruction, although they were not included in the Jewish canon.
Cf. '^w'a.w.. in syinb. 38: "alii libri sunt qui non canonici sed
ecdesiastici a maioribus appellati sunt, id est, Sapientia quae
dicitur Salomonis, et alia Sapientia quae dicitur iilii Sirach, qui
liber apud Latinos hoc ipso generali vocabulo Ecclesiasticus
appellatur, quo vocabulo non auctor libeili sed scripturae qua-
litas cognominata est."
The Wisdom of the Son of Sirach was the work of
a Palestinian (c. l. 27 'Ir/o-ovs 6 'Upoa-oXvfjLetTr]?), and written
in Hebrew ; 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 tw 6yS6w koL rpiaKoarw
£T£i €7ri Tov EvepyeTou /Sao-iXews — 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
Eue.geLes 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 'EXeafd/) (which follows Seipdx in the Greek) see Ryssel in
Kautzsch, Apokr., p. 253. The newly-discovered Hebrew reads |iyDCi'
NI^D p "iry'pX p yiliJ'^ p, on which see Schechter, Wisdom of Ben
Sira, p. 65 ; Nestle in Hastings' D. B. iv. p. 541 f.
2 Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies (E. Tr.), p. 339 ff.
Books not included in the Hebrew Canon. 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 Helirew. 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. B 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 indice.
In all the known MSS. of the Greek Sirach', there is
a remarkable disturl^ance of the sequence. They pass from
c. XXX. 34 to c. xxxiii. 13 b, returning to the omitted passage
after xxxvi. 16 a. Tlie 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 M.SS. to which reference has
* Cf. Hatch, Essays, p. 281. A group of MSS. hc.ided by V = 23
contains a tnnsi(k'ral)l(- nunihcr of verses or sticlii omitted by the rest
of our (ireck aulhuritics; sec Smith, D. B^. I. i. |). 842.
- On'ifift of the original Ilebreiu of Ecclesiasticus, iSgy. .See on this a
letter Ijy Pr(jf. Driver in the Guarilian, June 28, i8y9, and Dr 'laylor's
reniarks in lien Sira, p. Ixx ff.
* It now appears that even H-P. 148 is no exception, so that Fritzsche's
"uno fortasse cod. 248 exccpto" (Li/ni apocr. p. 462) must be deleted. On
this MS. see Fritzsche, p. xxiii ; Zenner in /. A'. 7/i., 1895. The text of
Sirach after 248 lias been edited by J. II. A. Hart, for the Cambridge
University Press (1909).
•* See Fritzsche in exe^. llatidhttch^ v. p. 169 f.
2/2 Books not included in the Hebmv Canon.
been made. The true order is preserved in the Old T,alin\
Syriac, and Armenian versions.
4. Judith ('louSet^, -8i(9, -S/;'/?, = ri''l-ini, cf. Gen. xxvi. 34,
where the same speUings are found in the cursives, though the
uncials exhibit 'louSetV, 'lovSiV), 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 terminus ad quern is
provided by the fact that Clement of Rome knew the story
(l Cor. 55 lovSt^ 1] ixaKapia...Trape8wK€V Kv/uos 'OXocfiepvrjv iv
X^ipi Or}\da<;Y; and the name of Judith's enemy has suggested a
terfninus 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 {ci. e.g. viii. 6, x. 2 ff., 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/SpaloL tw ToijSla ov ^pwvrai ovSe rrj
Iov8r}0, ovSe yap e^ovcnv avra kol iv UTTOKpuc^ois 'E/JpaKm', cJs
aV avTwv fxaOoi'Te'i €yvct)/<a/x,ev). Jerome, on the other hand,
not only says expressly {praef. ifi Judith) : " apud Hebraeos
liber ludith inter apocrypha {v.t. 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 Lighlfoot's note tn/ loc. and his remarks in Clement i. p. 313 ff.
•^ Not 'OXo(fi^pi'7]i, as is presupposed by the Latin.
■* Cf. art. Holofcrncs in Hastings' D. B. ii. p. 402. There were,
liowever, earlier kings of the same name {op. cit. p. 823; cf. Schlirer"*, iii.
p. 169 f., n. 19).
"^ See however Ball in Speaker's Coiiim. Apt)cr. i. pp. 243, 259 f f . ;
and F. C. Porter in Hastings' B. D. ii. p. 823''.
I
Books not included in the Hebrciv Canon. 273
The Greek Judith is said by Fritzsche' to exist in three
recensions: (i) tiiat 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 (Tw/JttV (-^tV, -/^v't), Toj/5ei^, Tobias, liber Tobiae,
iitriusque Tobiae), a tale of family life, the scene of which is
laid at Nineveli 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
(Orig. de orat. 14 tt^ h\ tov Twfirjr ^tfSXw ttiriAeyouo-tv ol eK
7r£ptTo/i.T79, (OS /Mrj iv^tad-qKO)), or even to include it among tlieir
apocry[)ha (see above, under Judith); but it was accepted by
the Church (<?/. ad African. I. c. xp<2vTat tw TwySia al IkkXtj-
o-i'ut), and there is abundant evidence of its popularity among
Christians (cf. Ps. CIcm. 2 Cor. 16. 4, Polyc. ad Smyrn. 10. 2,
Clem. Alex, strom. ii. 23, vi. 12, Orig. de orat. 11, /// Rom.
viii. II, c. Cels. v. 19, Cypr. testim. iii. i, 6, 62). (inostics
shared this feeling with Catholics; the Ophites placed 'I'obit
among their prophetical books (Iren. i. 30. 11).
Jerome translated Tobit as he translated Juditli, tVom a
'Chaldee,' i.e. Aramaic, co[)y, but with such haste tiiat the
whole was completed in a single day {praef. in lob. "exi-
gitis ut lii)rum Chaldaeo sermone conscrii)tum ad latinum
stylum tradam...feci satis desiderio vestro...et ipiia vicina
est Chaldaeorum lingua sermoni Flebraico, utriuscpie linguae
peritissimum !o(|uaccm rcperiens unius diei laborem arripui,
[el cjuiil(|ui(l ille iiiihi llebraicis verbis expressit, hoc ego
' Vritzsche, libri apocr. p. xviii .s(|. ; .Scliiiier'', iii. ]>. 172. 'I'lic text in
l:oil(l. 19, loS, is said to lie Luciiinic (.Max I.nlir in Katitzsch, Af-okr.,
|). 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 B and x. In c. vi. 9 —
xiii. 18 Fritzsche adds a third text supplied by the cursives
44, 106, 1072. 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 American Journal
of Theology, iii. p. 541 ff.). Both, though on different grounds,
give preference to the text of X. Harris, however, points out
that while X is probably nearer to the original Hebrew, B
may exhibit the more trustworthy text of the Alexandrian
version of the book.
6. Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah (Ba/jo^x, 'Etti-
o-ToXr/'Icpe/xtou, Yprophetia\ 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. testivi. ii. 6); with Lamentations
they form a kind of trilogy supplementary to the prophecy
(Athan. ep. 39 'Icpe/xta? kox avy avrw Jiapov^, ©prjvoL, 'ETrtcrToXv;',
Cyril. Hier. catech. iv. 33 lepefxiov /xeTo. Ba/^ou^ koI @py]v(Dv koL
'Ettio-toX^s^). 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 Chnldce text, con-espunding in some respects to Jerome's lyatin, is
preserved in the Bodleian, and lias been edited by Neul)auer (Oxford, 1878).
^ An Oxyrh. Pap. 1076 (vol. viii) gives a new recension of c. ii. 2, 3,
4, 8.
^ Origen, while omitting Baruch, includes the Epistle in a foimal list
of the Hebrew canon (Eus. H. E. vi. 25 'lepe/xio.s avv Oprji'ois Kal rfi
'EiricToX-fj iv ivi).
Books not included in the Hebrew Canon, 275
The Epistle (avriypacfjov iTn(TTo\rj<; 77s a7r€(7T€iA€i/ 'lepe/Ata?
7rpo<; Tous d^Orjao/iivov? [v. I. aTra^^evras] aip^/xaXwrou? €15 Ba^v-
Awm) 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. I ft".)'.
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 /xawa = nnpp^ ii. ^ av9po)7roi'
= ^% iii. 4 TiZv T£^i'r/Ko'raji' = "Tip (for 'DP)^; 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 Raruch, led them to the conclusion that Baruch
was reduced to its present form after the destruction of
Jerusalem by Titus; and the lone of Bar. iv. 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 Alhcnagoras {snppl. 9) until the time of
1 On Ihe first point .see J. T. Marshall in Ilastinqs' D. B. ii. p. 579,
and on llie other hand .Schlircr", iii. p. 344. Cf. Nestle, Marginalicu,
" In the first .section llie Divine Name is Ki'^toj or K. 6 Oidi, wliilc in
ihe second it is eillier [6] OiU or 6 aiuii'ios, 6 avtoi. .See Dr Giflord in
Sf^eakfrs Comni., Apoc, ii. f. 253. 'lliackcr.iy holds tliat "the first luilf
of Haruch is, beyond a douhl, the jjroduction of the translator of Jor. /3."
(Jramni. of O. 7". tn Gk. i. \i\). n, t3 ; J. 'lit. St. iv. ■261 ff.
* "On the ni.ir^iii of Ihe .Syro-hexaplar text of Hanicli there are three
notes by a scribe slatinj^ that certain words in i. 17 and ii. 3 are ' not found
in the Hebrew.'" (A. \. I'.evan in /imyil. />'/7//<</, i. 494.)
* K.R. by J. T. Marshall in H.astinys' D. H. i. p. 251.
' Psalms of the Pharisees, pref., esp. p. Ixxvii.
18—2
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 Tew,
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 Constitutions^
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 possession, and his statement is confirmed
by Epiphanius.
Const. Ap. V. 20 Kai yap Koi vvv ^fKarr] tov firjvos TapTTiaiov
(TVvadpoi^6p,€voi Tovs Qpr'jvovs '\epep.'iov dvayiva)aKOv<Tiv...Ka\ tov
Bapovx- Hievon. p?'ae/. coinm. in Iere7n. "vulgo editioni Septua-
ginta copulatur, nee habetur apud Hebraeos" ; praef. vers. lerem.
"apud Hebraeos nee legitur nee habetur." Epiph. de mens, et
pond. 5 oil KilvTai ai firiaToXcii [Bapov^ /cat 'lepfpinii] Trap' ''Ej3paiois.
7. Books of Maccabees (MoKKa^aiW a, ^', y', 8', Macha-
baeormn libri; to. MaKKafSa'iKd, Hippol. in Dan. 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^
family.
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, strom. i. § 123 to twv
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. djiaTos, dwocrToXri, deafMwrrjs, Tret-
vwcra. Cf. Thackeray, /. c.
- V. 20. But the reference to Baruch is wanting in the Syriac Didas-
calia (Smith, D. B.^ i. p. 359).
^ For the name MaKKopaios see Schiher, £. T. i. p. ■212 f. n.; it
belonged primarily to Judas, cf. i Mace. i. 4 di'^crrij'Ioiyoaj 6 KaXoop-efos M. ;
loseph. a7!/. xii. 6 'lovdai 6 koK. M.
I
Books not included in the, Hebreiv Canon. 277
MaKKaf3ai.Kon', Origeil ap. Eus. /.C. TO. MaK/ca^a'tKO. airep eViyc-
ypaTTTai "Siap/irjO cra(3avauX. [v.l. 2. cra(3nve lA). 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 (j>ro/. gal. "Maccabaeorum primum libruni
flebraicum 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 Maccahees. The existence of a book bearing this title
is implied by Hippolytus, who quotes i Mace, with the
formula Iv rrj Trfiwrrj f3i(3\it) rtZv MuKKaftaiKwv avayeyfxnrrai, and
by Origcn, if we may trust the Latin interpretation {I'/i e/>. ad
Kom.y t. viii. i "in primo lil)ro Machahaeorum scriptum est");
the title itself occurs in Kus. pracf. ev. viii. 9 (7; StvTt'/ja twi/
MaKKa/3at'u)»/). lUit tlic evidence goes further back. Philo
shews some knowledge of the book in Qjiod omnis probus libtr,
§ 13, and the author of the Ep. to the Hebrews has a clear
reminiscence of its Greek (Heb. xi. 34. aAXoi 8« tTvuTrayurdrjaav
kt\., cf 2 Mace. vi. 19, 30).
' l-'or various attempts to interpret it sec Kyle, Cntion, p. 1S5; K.
Kraet/schmar, in Exp. 7'., xii. j). 93 ff.
'^ A IIel)rew text is prinle<l i)y A. Sdiwei/er, U/in- ilie lu-sle iine% hch.
'J'fxtes vom asli'ti Makkahiitil'uch (ISerlin, kjoi); luit bcc I'll. Noiilckc in
Lit. Centrallila/I, Mari.1) .iO, 1901.
" IJcigcr, Uiitoire dt la I'til^ate, pp. 6j, 68.
278 Books not included in the Hebrezv Canon.
The writer is described by Clement of Alexandria {strain, v.
14) as 6 (jvvra^a.ix.fvo'i ttjv twv MaKKafSaiKwv i7riTOfX.rjv. This
is precisely what he claims to do (c. ii. 23 vtto 'lao-wvos tov
Kvpr]vaiov Se8r]X(0fj.€va Sto. -TrevTC jBiB\i(av, Tretpacro/xe^a St' kvos
o-wTctyjuaTos cTriTc/xeiv). 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 beUeve 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 (^paVet probari potest "). The
vocabulary is extraordinarily rich in words of the later literary
Greek, and the book betrays scarcely any disposition to
Hebraise".
The second book of Maccabees presents a striking contrast
to the first. Covering a part of the same period (b.c. 175
— lOo), 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 MaKKa/SaiKd finds a place
* Westcott in Smith's D. B.^ ii. p. 175.
^ See the list of words given by Westcott, /. c. i. and in Smith's Z>. B.^ 1.
and Apocrypha.
* So Luther, in his preface to 2 Mace. : "so billig das erste Buch sollte
in die Zahl der heiligen Schrift genommen sein, so billig ist dies andere
Buch lierausgcworfen, obwolil ctwas Gutes darinner steht."
Books not included in the Hebreiv 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. K 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 e.xact description of 3 Maccabees would be that
which it seems to have borne in some circles — the Ptolemaica^
The story belongs to the reign 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 liad 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
l'>gyptian 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 proljable'." Moreover Josephus has a
somewhat similar tale drawn from another source, and con-
* P'ritzsche has used cod<l. 19, 44, .s.s, 62, 64, 71, 74, 93.
' In ilic I'scudo-Allianasiaii syuo(<u:, where the MS.S. f^ive MoKKa/iatxa
5', IlroXf^OKcd. Cicdner proposed to read M. Kot (/f) llroX. An ex-
planation of tlie cxistinp rcadinj^ attcni|)ted l)y Kabricius, cod. pseud, epi^r.
v. T. i. p. 1164, is hanlly to he considered satisfactory. Zahn {('n-sch. d.
NTliclieii h'linons, ii. \>. 317) su(7(^ests 7ro\f/i(Kd, but this is more ingenious
than convincing. Mm Wendiand {.his/i-tts, p. 133) and Thackcr.iy consider
tli.il llToXf/i'iiVi means llie letter of Aristeas.
* Mahally, Empire of the Ptoleiiiics, p. 267 (T.
28o Books not incliuicd in the Hebrew Canon.
nected with another reign' ic. Ap. ii. 5). The present book
is doubtless Alexandrian, and of relatively late origin, as its
inflated style, "loaded with rhetorical ornamentV' sufficiently
testifies. Some critics (Ewald, Hausrath, Reuss^) would place
it in the reign of Caligula, but the knowledge of earUer
Alexandrian life which it displays points to an earHer date,
perhaps the first century B.c*
4 Maccabees. According to Eusebius and Jerome this
book was the work of Josephus^
Eus. H. E., m. 10 ireiToi'TjTai Se Koi nXXo ovk ayevves (tttov-
bacrfia tw avbpi (sc. Iwctj^tto)) ir(pl avroKparopos Xoytcr/ioO, o rires
MaKKa^aiKov fTreypayfrav rw rovs dycovas rav iv roii ovtu> koKov-
fievois MaKKaliaiKols avyypd^fxaaiv inrep Trjs (Is ro 6(iov eixrefSfias
uvhpicrajxivu)v 'E^paiav rrepuxfiv. Hieron. de virr. ill. 13 "alius
quoque libro eius qui inscribitur irfpl avroKparopos Xoyttr/ioO
valde elegans habetur, in quo et Maccabeorum digesta martyria"
(cf. c. Pelag. ii. 5).
The book is a philosophical treatise upon the question,
et avToSe'cTTroTOS eoriv Tajv ttaQutv 6 cwcre/jT^s Aoy(,o"/xos. 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 2 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 T^s 8e (TO<^ias ctSeai KaQiaTa.(Jiv (jipovTjaL'i Koi SLKaLoavvrj
1 That of Euergetes II. (Pliyscon) ; cf. Mahaflfy, p. 381.
" Westcott in Smith's D. B. ii. p. 179. * Schiirer^ iii. p. 365.
■* "The date is probably c. 80 B.C.," Thackeray thinks, "as shown by
epistolary formulae and papyrus evidence."
* The same belief is expressed by the fact that the book is found in
some MSS. of Josephus. .See Fabricius-Harles, v. 26 f.
'' Viz. c. iii. 19, to the end.
Books not included in the Hebrew Canon. 281
h-ai dvSpia Kal (TUi^pocrvvrj), and he Sternly demands that the
TvaOrj shall be kept under restraint by the power of Reason.
In religion he is a legalist with Pharisaic tendencies; he
believes 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',"
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 (ra ivSuW-qKa, rd
€t/<o<TiSuo) and the 'external' books (ra c^o)), 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 tlie
catalogue of the 'Sixty Books,' after reciting the canonical
books of the O. and N. Testaments, and raTrcpi {leg. Tre'pa) tovtuw
€^<i> (the two Wisdoms, i — 4 Maccabees, Esther, Juditii, Tobit),
continues : Kai otra d-TrOKimcfxr 'ASd/x , VjVU)^, Aa/xe;^, Uarpidp^at,
V\p<>(Ttv)^q 'lii><ii'i<f>, *KX8aO, ^laOi'jKT] Mwufrc'ius, 'AraAr/i^ts Mwucrea)?,
'I'aA/xot 2«A.o/x(Di'T09, lIAiow aTTOKaA.ut/'iS, Hcraiou opaais, ^(xfiovCov
aTTOKciXwi^ts, Za^^apiov aTTOKaA.ui/'i?, Efrrt/)a aVoKaXui^iS. The
Pseudo-Athanasian Synopsis and the Stichometry of Nice-
phorus count among the diruKpvt^a. Trj<: TraAaiu?, together with
certain of the above, 'A(ipadn...]iap(w)(, 'AfifSaKovfi, 'E^tM>/A,
Kui Aaii»//\, {f/cvfiiTTLypiKftd". Ebed Jesu mentions also a book
called Tradilions oj tttr I'lldcrs, the History of Asciiatli, and
' Weslcott in .Smith's J). />".' ii. j). iKi.
- On this list see Zahn, Gesih. d. N7'iir/ii-n Knnons, ii. p. 289 (T. ami
M. 1\. James, 'J'cstiiniciit 0/ Ahni/iain, \>. 7 IT. (in 'J'cxls iiiiit .S/iiiiii-s, ii. 2).
282 Books not included in t/ic Hebreiv Canon.
even the Fables of Aesop disguised under the title Proverbs
of Josephus. Besides these writings the following ate cen-
sured in the Gelasian notitia libronim apocryphoriim : Liber de
filiabics Adae Leptogenesis, Poe/iitentia Adae, Liber de Vegia
nomine gigante, qui post diluvium cum dracone . . .pugtiasse perlii-
betur, Testamentum lob, Poenitentia lombre et Afambre, Solo-
nwnis ititerdictio.
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 avTiXeyo/Acra 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 Sei iSto^riKovs if/aXfjiov'S^ Xiyeo-OaL
iv rrj eKKXrjaia ouSe a/<avovio"Ta fSi/SXia, aAAa fxova ra Kai'oviKa.
rrjs TraXaius kol Katvrj'i 8ia$'r]Kr]<;. Happily the Psalms survived
in private collections, and find a place in a few relatively
^ The catalogue ends omoy BiBAia . . | and below, yaAmoi coAo-
MtONTOC I IH.
- By Dr J. R. Harris, who points out [Johns Hopkins Utiiv. Circular,
March 1884) that the six missing leaves in X between Barnabas and Iler-
mas correspond with fair accuracy to the space which would be required for
the Psalms of Solomon. Dr Harris has since discovered a Syriac version
of sixteen of these Psalms (out of eighty contained in the MS.).
^ Cf. Bals. ap. Beveregii Synod, p. 480 evpicTKOPTal rives \f/a\fioi trlpa
Tovs f)"' xf/dX/j-ovs Tou AaSiS Xeybjj.evoi. rod ^o\ofj.QvTOS . . .tovtovs ovv ovoixdaavTii
01 TraT^ftti idiuiTiKous.
Books not included in the Hebreiv 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 ff.' 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. Bishop Ryle and Dr James, who regard Baruch
iv. 36 — 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 apooyphon 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 tlie Greek. But until 1892 the Greek version
was known only through a few fragments — the verse quoted
by St Jude (^14 f.), a brief tachygraphic extract in cod.
Vat. gr. 1809, published in facsimile by Mai {pair. nov.
biblioth. ii.), and deciphered by tiildemeistcr {ZDMG., 1855,
p. 622 ff.), and the excerpts in the Chronographia of Georgius
Synccllus^ But in 1886 a small vellum book was found in
' In the I.nttcr case they fjo with the two Wisdoms in the order Sap.,
I's. Sol., Sir. or (in one insi.incc) S.ip. , Sir., I's. Sol.
- Ryic and James, Psalms of the Pharisees, p. xl IT., xliv (T. Schiircr',
iii. i>. 152 f.
' Kyle and janics, p. Ixxii ff. On the date see W. Frankenberg, die
Datierung der I'salmen Salomos ((iicsscn, i8<;6).
* Ryle and James, p. xc ff.
' These m.iy he conveniently con'snltcd in tiie Corpus hisli<riae /\v-
zanlinae, t. i, where tiicy arc cdileil hy \V. iJindorf.
284 Books not included in the Hebrew Canon.
a Christian grave in Akhmim (Panopolis), in Upper Egypt,
which contained inter alia the I'lrst 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 publies par les membres de
la mission archeologique Frofi^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. proph.
2; Orig. de princ. i. 3. 3, iv. 35, horn, in Num. 28. 2. The
book was not accepted by authority (Orig. c. Cels. v. 54
Iv Tats iKKX7]atai<; ov Trdvv ^eperat cos Oela to, liriyiypafx^xiva
Tov *Ei/wx /Si/^A-ta : in loann. t. vi. 25 d tw ^t'Aoi/ TrapaSc^ca^at
COS ay lov to /3l fiXiov. Hieron. de virr. ill. 4 "apocryphus
est"), but opinion was divided, and TertuUian was prepared to
admit the claims of a writing which had been quoted in a
Catholic Epistle {de cult, faevi. i. 3 " scio scripturam Enoch
...non recipi a quibusdam quia nee in armarium ludaicum
admittitur...a nobis quidem nihil omnino reiciendurn 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 Scliiiier-'', iii. p. 1 g6 ff.
Books not included in the Hcbrezv 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 fragments
of a pseudonymous Gospel and Apocalypse ^
Litp:rature of the non-canonical Books.
The Variorutn Apocrypha, edited by C. J. Ball (London, 1892).
I EsDRAS. De Wette-Schrader, Lehrbuch, §§ 363 — 4; Konig,
Einleitioig, p. 146; Dahne, Gesch. Darstellung, lii. p. ii6ff. ;
Nestle, Marginalien, p. 23 f. ; Bissell, Apocrypha of the O. T.,
p. 62 ff. ; H. St J. Thackeray, art. i Esdras in Hastings' D.B.,
i. ; Schiirer^ iii. p. 326 ff. ; Biichler, das apokr. Ezra-Biichs
(MGIV'J., 1897). Text and apparatus: Holmes and Parsons,
t. v.; Fritzsche, tiM apocr. V. T. Or., pp. viii. — x., i — 30;
Lagarde, libr. V. T. canon., p. i. (Lucianic) ; O. T. iti Creek, ii.
(text of B, with variants of A); W. J. Moulton, iiber die Uber-
lieferung u. d. textfcrit. Werth des dritten Ezra-Buchs, ZA TIV.,
1899,2, 1900, I. Commentaries: Fritzsche, exeg. Ilandbuch z.
d. Apokr.. i.; Lupton, in Speaktr's Co)iun., Apocrypha, i.; Guthe,
in Kautzsch, Apokryphen, p. i ff.
Wisdom of Solomon. Fabricius-Harles, iii. 727. De Wette-
Schrader, Lehrbuch, §§ 378 — 382; Kdnig, Eiiitcilung, p. 146;
Dahne, IJarsteltuno, ii. p. 152 {{.; Westcott, in Smith's D. B. iii.
p. 1778 ff.; Drumniond, Philo Jitdaeus, i. p. 177 i{. Text and
apparatus : Holmes and Parsons, v. ; Fritzsche, libr. apocr. V. T.
Gr., pp. xxiv. f., 522 ff. ; O. T. in Greek, ii. p. 604 ff. (text of B,
variants of NAC). Commentaries: Hauermcister, comtii. in Sap.
Sot. (1828); (irimm, exeg. Handbuch, vi. ; Reusch, obscrvationcs
Criticae in libr. Sapientiae {Fribnr^, 1858); Deane, the Book of
Wisdom (Oxf, 188 1); Farrar, in Speako's Comm., Apocr., i. ;
Siegfried, in Kautzsch, Ap>okryphen, p. 476 ff. On the Latin
version see Thichiiann, die tateinische Vbersetziing des Bitches
der IVeisheit (Leipzig, 1872).
* A collection of Greek O. T. apocrypha inif^ht perhaps incliule,
amongst other remains of this literature, tlie A'cs/ of tfie Words of Haruch
(,<l. J. Rendfl Harris), the Apocalypse of liaruch (ed. M. R.James), the
Testament of Abraham (ed. M. K. James), paits of the Or.icula .Sihvlliiia
(<•</. A. Rzach), the Tcslamcnls of tlic XII Patiiarchs [ed. .Sinker), ilio
Latin Ascension (f Isaiah (ed. O. von tjel)har(lt, with the new (Ireek frag-
ments), and perhaps also the Latin versions of certain im|>orlant books
which no lonj^er survive in the (Jreek, e.g. 4 ICsdras (ed. R. L. Hensly), the
Assumption of Moses (ed. R. II. Cliarles), the Ihol: of Jubilees, i] Xarrr)
Tlvtai%(.d. R. II. Charles).
286 Books not ijtcluded m the Hebrew Canon'.
Wisdom of the Son of Sirach. Fabricius-Harles, iii. 718;
De Wette-Schrader, § 383 ff. ; Konig, p. 145. Westcott and
Margoliouth, Ecclesiastia/s, in Smith's D. B!" 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 ;
0. T. in Gfrek, ii. (text of B, variants of t^AC) ; cf. J. K. Zenner,
Ecclesiasticus fiach cod. Vat. 346 {Z. K. Th., 1895). Bretschnei-
der, liber lesu Siracidae Gr., Ratisbon, 1806. Cf. ]A2itc\\, Essays,
p. 296 ff. Nestle, Marginalieti (1893), p. 48 ff. Klostermann,
Analecta, p. 26 f. Commentaries: Bretschneider {ut supra);
Fritzsche, exeg. Handbuch, v. ; Edersheim in Speakers Co/iim.,
Apocr. ii. ; Ryssel, in Kautzsch, Apokryplien, 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 Ecclesiasticns, Oxford, 1897; Smend, das hebr. Frag-
ment der Weisheit des festis Sirach^ 1897; Halevy, Etude sur la
partie du texte hebreu de PEcclhiastique (Paris, 1897); Schlatter,
das neu gefundene hebr. Stiick des Sirach (Giiterslob, 1897),
1. Ldvi, UEccUsiasiique., Paris, 1898, 1901 ; C. Taylor, in fQR.,
1898; D. S. Margoliouth, I'/ie origin of the '■ Original Hebrew^
of Ecclesiasticiis, Oxford, 1899; S. Schechter and C. Taylor, The
IVisdom of Ben Si?-a, Cambridge, 1899 ; S. Schechter, in JQR.
and Cr. R., Oct. 1899; various articles in Exp. Titnes, 1899;
A. A. Bevan in J'ThSt., Oct. 1899; H. Herkenne, De Veteris
Latinae Ecclesiastici capp. i— xliii (Leipzig, 1899) ; E. Nestle in
Hastings, D. B. iv. 539 ff.
Judith. Fabricius-Harles, iii. p. 736 ; De Wette-Schrader,
§ 373 ff- ■> Kcinig, p. 145 f. ; Nestle, Marginaliin, p. 43 ff. ; West-
cott-Fuller in Smith's D. B.^ 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 ff. ; Old Testarnejit in Greek, ii. (text of B, variants of XA).
Commentaries : Fritzsche, exeg. Handbuch, ii. ; Wolff, das Buch
Juaith...crlddrt (Leipzig, 1861); Scholz, Covinioitar zuni B.
Judith (1887, 1896); cf. Ball in Speaker's Coinm., Apocr., i. ;
Lohr, in Kautzsch, Apokryphen, p. 147 ff
TOBIT. Fabricius-Harles, iii. 738; De Wette-Schrader, § 375 fif. ;
Kdnig, p. 145 f. ; Westcott m Smith's D. B. iii. p. 1523;
Schiirer^, iii. p. 174. Text and apparatus: Holmes and Parsons,
v. : PVitzsche, pp. xvi ff , 108 ff. ; Old Testament in Greek, ii.
(texts of B and N, with variants of A); Reusch, libellus Tobit e
cod. Sin. editus (Bonn, 1870); Neubauer, the Book of Tobit: a
Chaldee text (Oxford, 1878). Commentaries: Fritzsche, exeg
Hajidbuch, Apokr., ii. ; Reusch, das Buch Tobias iibersetst u.
erkliirt (Friburg, 1857); Sengelniann, das Buch Tobits erkldrt
(Hamburg, 1857) ; Gutberlet, das Buch Tobias iibersetzt Ji. erkldrt
I
Books not inchided in the Hcbreiv Canon. 287
(Munster, 1S77); Scholz, Commentar z. BiicJie Tobias (1889);
Rosenmann, Stiniien z. Buche Tobit (Berlin, 1894); J. M. Fuller
in Spcako^s Co/ii/n., Apocr., i. ; Lohr, in Kaulzsch, Apokrypheti,
p. 135 \L Cf. E. Nestle, Septiiagintastudieii^ iii. (Stuttgart, 1899);
J. R. Harris in American Jourtial 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. Marshall, in Hastings' D. B. i. p. 249 ff.
ii. p. 579 ff.; Schiirer'', iii. p. 338 ff. ; A. A. Bevan, in Encycl. Bib-
Ulu, i. 492 ff. Te.\t and apparatus: Holmes and Parsons, v.;
Fritzsche, pp. xv f., 93 ff. ; Old Tesiatnent in Greek, iii. (text
of B, with variants of AQr). Commentaries: Fritzsche, exeg.
Haiulbuch, Apokr., i. ; Reusch, Erlcldning des Bucks Baruch
(Freiburg, 1853); Havernick, de libro Baruch (Konigsberg.
1S61); Kneucker, das Buck Baruch (Leipzig, 1879); E- H.
Clifford in Speaker'' s Comm., Apocr., ii. ; Rothstein, in Kautzsch,
Apokrypheu, p. 2 1 3 ff.
I — 4 Maccabef.S. Fabricius-Harles, iii. p. 745 {L ; De Wettc-
Scliradcr, § 365 ff. ; Konig, p. 482 ff. ; Wcstcotl 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, Judcn u.
Griechen vor dcr tnakkab. Erhebung (1895) ; Freudcnthal, die
Fl. Josephus beigelegte Schrift. ('Breslau, 1869); Wolscht, dc Ps.
Josephi ora/io/re. . .{Mcirbuvg, 1881). Text and apparatus : lh)hnes
and Parsojis, v. (books i. — iii.); Fritzsche, pp. xix ff., 203 ff. ;
0/d Testament in Gtcek, iii. (text of A with variants of NV in
books i. and iv. and V in ii., iii.). Commentaiies : Keil, Konun.
iiber die Biicher der Makk. (Leipzig, 1875) ; Bensly- Barnes,
4 Maccabees in .Sjr/rtf (Cambridge, 1895)'; Grimm in Fritzsche's
exeg. Handbuch,Apokr., iii., iv. ; Bissell, in Lange-Schaff's Comnt. ;
G. Kawlinson in Speaker's Coinm., Apocr., ii. (books i. — ii.) ; Kair-
weather and lilack, i Maccabees (Cambridge, 1897); Kautzscli
and Kamphausen, in Kaulzsch, Apokryphen, p. 24 ii.
l\SL;UL)b;i'lGRAl'ilA. The student will find fuller information on
this subject in Fabricius, Codex pseudepigraphus V. T. (Ham-
burg, 1722): Ilerzog-l'iitt, xii. p. 341 ff. (art. ijy Dillm.inn on
Pseudepigrapha des A. T.)\ Dcanc, Pseudrpigrapha {\-A\\y\\m\'^^\\
1891) ; J. E. H. 'rh<)m=;on, Books which influeiiced our Lord and
His Apostles (Edinburgh, 1891); Smith's and Hastings' Bible
Dictionaries; Schiirer^, iii. pp. 150 ff., 190 ff; the works of
Crcdiier and Zahn ; M. R. James, Testament of Abraham in
Texts and Studies (11. 11. j). 7 {{.); Bncyclopaedia Biblica, artt. Apo-
' A cnllaiion of the Syriac 4 Mace, with llie (Ircek lias bccu coiilribulcd
liy Ui r..\nn.s lo O. T. in Creep, vol. iii. (p. i^oo fl'.).
288 Books not included in the Hebrew Canon.
calyptic Literature and Apocrypha (i. 215-58). For the litera-
ture of the several writings he may refer to Strack, Einleitung,
p. 230 ff. In Kautzsch's Apokr. u. Pseudepigraplien the follow-
ing O. T. psendepigrapha are included : Martyrdom of Isaiah
(Beer), Sibylline Oracles, iii. — v., 2iX\d prooctn. (Blass), Ascension
0/ Moses (Clemen), Apocalypse of Moses (Fuchs), Apocalypse of
Esdras (Gunkel), Testament of Naphtali, Heb. (Kautzsch), Book
of Jubilees (Littmann), Apocalypse of Bariich (Ryssel), Testa-
ments of XII Pat?'iarchs (Schnapp). On the eschatology of this
literature see Charles, Eschatology, Hebrew, Jewish and Chris-
tian (London, 1899).
Psalms of Solomon. Fabricius, Cod.pscudcpigr. V. T., i. p. 914 fif. ;
Fritzsche, libr. apocr. V. T. gr., pp. xxv ff., 569 ff. ; Kyle and
James, Psalms of the Pharisees (Cambridge, 1891); O. v. Geb-
hardt, die Psabnen Salomds {^€\t^z\^, 1895); Old Testament in
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 Datierung der Psalmen Salomos
(Giessen, 1896). An introduction and German version by Dr R.
Kittel will be found in Kautzsch, Pseudepigraphen, p. 127 ff.
Book of Enoch. Laurence, Libri Etioch versio aeihiopica (Ox-
ford, 1838); Ti\V^xa.2ir\v\, Liber Henoch aethiopice (Leipzig, 1851);
Bouriant, Fragments du texte grec du livre d' Enoch... m Me-
moires, &c. (see above); Lods, le livre d^ Enoch (Paris, 1892);
Dillmann, iiber den nengeficndenen gr. Text des Henoch-Biiches
(Berlin, 1892); Charles, The Book (f Enoch {Oxford, 1893), "^^'^
Ethiopic Version of the Book of Enoch (Oxford, 1906), and art. in
Hastings' D. B. i. p. 705 ff. ; Old Testament in Greek, iii.^
(Cambridge, 1899). For a fragment of a Latin version see James,
Ape jr. anecdota in Texts and Studies, ii. 3, p. 146 ff. An intro-
duction and German version by Dr G. Beer will be found in
Kautzsch, Pseudepigraphen, 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 llie text of Enoch, in a separate form.
CHAPTER IV.
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 Septu.igint 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 linguistic characteristics of
the Alexandrian version. 15ut a separate grammar of the Greek
Old Testament was long a real want, and tho time has now
come for attenipting to supply it. Biblical scholars have now at
' See P'abricius-Harles, vi. p. ii;^ f. Both writers lived in the time of
Augustus.
- Sturz's treatment of the dialect of Alexandria and Ei^ypt needs to be
clieckcd by more recent rcsi-archcs, Init 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.
' Hibelsludien (1S95), and Neue Bibelitudien (1897).
* Sources of N.T. Grefk (i?,()i,).
" Etude iur h Grtc du N. T. (lSy6).
s. s. 19
290 The Greek of the Septuagint.
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
^ A lexicon was planned in 1895 by a Cambridge Committee, but the
work is suspended for tlie present. There have now appeared, dealing with
the Accidence, R. Helbing's Grafttmatik der Septtiaginta, i. Laut- und
Wortlehre, Gottingen, 1907; and H. St J. Thackeray's Grammar of the
O. T. in Greek, vol. i. Introd. Orthography and Accidence, Cambridge, 1909.
The Greek of the Septuagmt. 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 written by the Jewish- Alexan-
drian historians and philosopliers of the time.
3. We begin by investigating the literary conditions
under which both the translators and the writers lived at
Alexandria.
In the middle of the second century b.C Polybius' found
Alexandria inhabited by three races, the native Egyptians,
who occupied the site of the old seaport Rhacotis, the mer-
cenary class (to fuo-OoffiopiKov), 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 (el /xiyartes, "F^XAr/i'cs Ofiov dv€Ka6iy rj<Tav, koi ifii-
fjLvnrjVTo Tov KOLvotj Twv 'EWr^Vwc Wov;). Tliis fusion of various
elements in the Greek population of the city must have ex-
isted from liie first. The original colony was largely made up
of the veterans of Alexander's Macedonian army, volunteers
from every [)art of (Jreece, and mercenaries from the Greek
colonies of Asia Minor, and from Syria. Even in the
villages of the Faydm, as we now know, by the side of the
Macedonians there were settlers from Liljya, Cnria, I'hrace,
Illyria, an<l 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 tf) liave been marked by certain
phonetic changes^ and the use of barbarous terms such as
* a/>. Si rah. 797.
* Mahairy ill llmders PffnV Paf'yri, i. p. j.-. Cf. I'.mpire nf the Pto-
lemies, p. 17S f.
•' As the cli.ui^c of <f> into ^ (|{</-f l•/^); for 'I'«/'«»'/»t;. "^i^Oi ^^- •'^l'"''- •'''■
dial. Mac, p. 51, n.
19 — a
292 Tlie Greek of the Septiiagint
d87] = ovparo?, f3e6v^ = dijp, Savos = ^aVaros, and of Greek words
in unusual senses, as Trape/xISoXr], 'camp,' pv/xr], street ^ Some
of these passed into the speech of Alexandria, and with them
were echoes of the older dialects — Doric, Ionic, Aeolic —
and other less known local varieties of Greek. A mongrel
patois, 17 'AXc^avSpe'wv SiaXcKTos, 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';
similar collections have been published by Drs Grenfell and
Hunt\ The Greek of these documents is singularly free from
dialectic forms, owing perhaps to local circumstances, as Pro-
fessor Mahaffy 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 : dva8fv8pds, dvacfxiXaKpos, dva(f)d\avTos,
dpx^icrcopaTo(f)vX.a^, apxiTeKTOVflv, axvpov, ^aaiKifrcra, yevTjpa, diaipv^,
f,riyovTj, fpyoSiaKTTjs, fviXaros, f(f)i8f'iv, f<piopKelv, depicrrpov, oXtyo-
tlrv^elv, d)(yp<iipa, o'^dtviov, Ttaidiov, TrapaSel^at, TrapeTridrjpos, irepi-
Se^ioVf irepiodevfiv, TTpnKTcop, Trpecr^vTepoi, crrej/opfoopeiv, ^Safia. The
Berlin papyri yield many other such words, e.g. dvapLfTpTjcris,
yXvppa, 8iKaLa>ixa, iepoyp'dXrrjs, iparicrpos, /<araXo;^icr/ioy, KTrivoTp6(f>os,
fiia-OTTovTjpia, okoaxfprjs, (jvpTrXrjpoicris, v7ropvr]naTC<rfi6s.
^ A list of these words, collected from Hesychius and other lexicogra-
phers, may be seen in Sturz, p. 34 ff.
* From Q. Curtius {De rebus gestis Alexandri M., vi. 9. 36) it appears :
that the Macedonian and the native Greeks understood one another with j
difficulty.
^ In the Cunningham Memoirs for 1891, '93, edited by Prof. Mahaffy.
* In Fayilm Towns and their Papyri (London, 1900), pp. 100 — 112.
Further contemporary illustrations of Alexandrian Greek may be found in I
Wilcken's Griechische Ostraka (1899).
Tlu 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 (8e»cdTap;^ot) of a gang engaged in a stone quarry to
the engineer of the works (ap;(tr€'*crci)i') :
KAf'a)i/t ^aipeiv. o'l 8€KdTap)(oi rSav fK(\j6ep\u)v\ XciTofxoiv dbiKOv-
fjLeda- TO. yap opokoyqdevra viro 'AttoXXcoi/i'ou tov dioinTiToii ovdev
yivfTai T]plv, e;(ft 8e rfjv ypa(f)fjv Aionpos, (movdacrov ovv tva Kadd
f^fi\r](f)ap(v fj8q, iiiro Aiovvalov Koi AioTipov \pripaTi(rdfj rjpiVf nai
pr] TO fpya fvX(i(f)drj,Kadd koi epnpocrOev fyevero. e'av yap a'lcrdoyvTai.
ol (pya^opevoi ov6ev fjpds el\r](f)6Tas tov triBqpov iv4)(ypa d^crovaiv ^.
4. ' Simultaneously with the growth of the colloquial mixed
dialect, a deliberate attempt was made at Alexandria to revive
tlie 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, with its cloisters and
lecture rooms and tlining hall where scholars lived a common
life under a warden appointed by the King". i'o Soter is
also attributed the establishment of the great library which is
said to have contained 400,000 MSS". 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
with the Museum, or that the classical revival under Soter
and Philadelphus 'affected tnem directly. Such traces of a
literary style as we find in the Greek Pentateuch are probably
* Flinders Petrie Papyri, \\. xiii. (p. 33). The rcidcr will uuliie several
LXX. words (3«icdTapx<'i = I.XX. 3(/c<i8., 5(oi\7jt^v, xP'?A"'Tiff(r^yai, fV^x"/""')-
Sonietiincs these papyri .ifTord illustralioiis of the i.xx. which are not
merely verbal; cf. Ii. xiv. 2 h tA Hx^P"' ^P^^ ^'I" TrXlyOoy.
* Stralio, 794 ; cf. MaliafTy, Empire of tlu Ptolemies, \>. yi ff.
* Joseph., nut. xii. 3. .Seneca, de tranquil, aniinae 9. Cf. .Susemihl,
Gesch. d. griech. I.itteratur in d. Alexandriiurzeit , i. 336.
294 ^^^^ Greek of the Septuagint
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 koivt; or 'EXXryvtKi} SiaXeKTos —
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 Kowiq
begins in the second century with Poiybius (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 koivi;,
although, since the time of Scaliger, it has been distinguished
from the latter by the term ' Hellenistic^' A ' Hellenist*' is
properly a foreigner who aff'ects 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 io modern
Greeks p. 290.
^ Mullach, Grarnm. d. Vtdgarsprache, p. 48. II. A. A. Kennedy,
Sources of N. T. Greek, p. 11 ff.
^ See Winer-Moulton, p. 29.
* Acts vi. I, xi. 20.
Tli£ Greek of the Septuagvit. 295
ised writers as Philo and Josephus, and the post-apostolic
teachers of the ancient Church ; but it is appUed with special
appropriateness to ihe 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 kolvt].
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 1 Regn. i. — iii., 39; in 2 Chron. i. — iii., 27 ; in Prov. i. — iii.,
i6 ; 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
i.xx., or to have been used there for the first time in extant
literature.
'riic following arc tiic .St'[)tuagiiUal words observed in tlic
above-named passaj;cs. Verbs: «»'^/u«Ck, fifvrtpovv, dio^tfCtiv,
(TKDntVdl', K(tT(fliiXfnHl', KdTufivpilV, l]X(dl)tVflV, <>l>(hlTllfJ.flfy i)p6f)'l^tlV,
■ni'fvfj.uTii<l>(>f)('ifr0ai,nTu>)(i{^nv,(TKonnitiv, (Tvt'tfif)iii(^fti>, Tpitrl^fiv, rpo-
(fytvfiv, (\tt.\t )^6 pi^v . Nouns : iiyanrj, nnvvOtfr'ui, iirrff)it\Ti'ini(T(Ta,
fidfXvypit, yii'qfia, hofxa, fpyi)!^iu)KTi]t, OXippi'ii, KdraTTtTairpa, Kpip,a,
Xririi^oj, piOvcTfia, oXoKUVTuipa, ('iXokuvtuxtis, optUfxofxa, TrupTOKpiiruip,
' Or t^ofOffoOy, oUicr forms being iliic to mixture ; Tliiickcra)', G'r.
O. T. p. 105.
296 The Greek of the Septuagint.
TTpoarjkvTO^, irpocrKOfifia, poitTKOS, (rvvTpipp,a. Fo'>'eign words {a)
with Greek terminations : a/3pa, ^i/3is, o-ikKos' {b) transliterated :
al\a)x, ba^fip, f(pov8 ^dp, ve/3eX, fXtoe (ra^aa>6, olcpi, arfpcreped,
X^fpovjSflfi,
A 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 Bibhcal, and 36 peculiar to the Old Testa-
ment; nearly half belonged to the koivt], 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
desideratu7n. 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^ Psalm 1. (li.) alone yields four important
words (aya^vVciv, aKOVTi^eiv, dvofjLrj/xa, avTavaipelv) 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
noil-Attic: atxpoXcoTi^ecrdai, aTroTaacreadai, IBacriXiaaa, jSowos,
^pexfi'V (in the sense of veiv), ypriyopelv, eXevaecrdai, €^a8eX(pos,
KaTopdcopa, peyicTTav, peOvaos, olKoSoprj, TraiSiV/cf;, Trajrvpos, irapep-
^oXr], TTfTroidrjais, TrXfj^ai, pamcrpa, pvprj, aKopni^ecrdai., crvcrarjpoi'.
Some of these words are said to be provincialisms; e.g. ^owos
is Sicilian, o-KopTri^fo-dai is Ionic, Trapep^oXr) and pvpr) are Mace-
donian^.
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
Greek. Deissmann has already shewn that many well-known
1 Kennedy, o^. cii., p. 62. Cf. the lists in the appendix to Grinini-
Thayer's Lexicon of N. T. Greek (p. 691 ff. ).
* Essays, p. 69. * See above, p. 292.
The Greek of the Septiiagint.
297
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
yoyyxj^iiv occurs in a papyrus of 241 — 239 B.C ; (pyodidxTrjs,
255 B.C; Trapfni8t]pos, 225 B.C. ; forms such as 17X^0, (irrjXdocrav,
yiyovav, oiSes, Can be quoted from the papyri passim ; dvaarpe-
(f)fa6ui and avaaTpocpi) in an ethical sense, Xfirovpye'iv in reference
to the service of a deity, irfptTipvfcrdai of circumcision, irpfa^v-
Tfpos 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 : ayytXos, ypapparevs, 8iaj3o\os, ftdaiXov, fOvrj,
fKKXr](Tia, iravTOKparap, TrevrrjKocrrT], irpocrqXvros, XP'-'^'''^^'
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
diroKpivavdai
a(^(iX(To
aiT0Kpi6l)VUl
d(j)f[XaTO
piapus
poxXos
fUfpos
fjiOKXoi (MSS.)
ytvivduL
yXoianroKope'iov
y(vi)6rjvai
yX(0(T(TUKOpOV
veocrcroi, -tri'a
vovprjvia
opdpios
tfoacros, -tria
vfoprjvia
vpdpivoi
8volv
bvai
veivi^iv
TTfivav
(dflTO
eSiero
nf')Xf<^v
7Trixu>v
(vpTifia
(vpepa
TToSdlTOS
■noTaiToi
Ka6d
ic(i6^a)f
raxvTfpov
rdxiov
KUTlipVflV
Kuppvtiv
7. But the vocabulary of the lxx. is not its most character-
istic feature. With no otiier 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 words, that the Greek of the
I, XX. is unique, and not only or chicHy in its lexical eccen-
tricities, 'i'iiis may perhaps be brought home to the student
most effectually by a comparison of the (ireek Bible with two
great Hellenistic writers of the first century a.d. (a) In the
* oiOett bepan to yield apain to oiddt before the end of the .second
century B.C., and was ohsolct<' nl the date when the earliest extant M.SS.
of the 1 YX. were wriltca. It u hciicc 1111 aicliaisiii in ihcm (Thackeray,
(Jr. O. I. \>^. 58 fl.).
298 The Greek of the Septuagint.
works of Philo we have a cultured Hellenist's commentary on
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. tnundi 7 : <^r](T\ 8' ws eV apxfj inoi-qcrtv 6 deos
TQv ovpavov Ka\ rrjv yrjv, Tt]v apx^rjv irapakafi^avav, ov\ <ws
o'lovrai rives ttjv Kara ^povov- ^povos yap ovk i]v ivpo Kocrpov, dXX' ^
avv avTw yiyovev tj per avTov- tVei yap 8idcrTr)pa Trjs rov Koapov
KLVTjaecos eariv 6 xpovos, rrporepa di rod Ktvnvpevov Kivrjais ovk av
ykvoiTo, aKK dvayKoiov avTrjv 7) vcrrepov rj dpa crvPLaracrdai, dvay-
Kulov apa Kai rov ^p'^^'ov rj larjkiKa K6(rpov yeyovivai rj vsurepop ejcet-
vov irpecrlBvTfpov 8' dno<paivea-6ai rokpav d(piK6ao(pov. De migr.
Abrahatni 39: (.av pivroi aKoirovpevos pfj paSicos KaTaXap^dvijs d
^TjTels, eTTipeve prj KapvMV. . ov X'V*'' ^ (j)lXopadrjs rov tottov ^V)(ep
evflXrjTTTai, peraXrjCpdev Se rovvopa 2u;^e/x wp'iacris KaXflrai, ttovov
(Tvp^akov, eireibrj tois pepeai toutois dxdocpopelv edos, as Koi avros
irepcodi pepvrjrai Xeyav eVi rivos adXtjTov tovtov tov rpt'iirov Yttc-
drjKe TOV atpov els to TToveiv, nal iyevero dvijp yecopyos.
S)(TT€ pTj^eTTore, d) 8i.dvoLa, puXaKKxde'Kra OKXaajjs, dXXd Kiiv Tt 8oKij
8vade(i)pr)Tov elvai, to iv aavTrj ^Xenov 8iavOL^aaa 8i,dKVi\rov eiirci).
{b) 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, ant. ii. 9. 4.
eaKenaaav avro prjvas Tpels rpeis pev prjvas Trap avTo'is
...eKa^ev airm 15 prjTt]p avTov TpeipovcrL \av6dvovTes...prjxava)v-
di^iv, ical KartxpiO'ev avrfjv rat nXeypa ^i^Xivov . . eiveira xpi-'
da(f)a\T07ria(Tjj Kai eve^aXev to cravres d(T(f)dXT(o . . evTioeaai to
7raL8iov els aiJTr]v,„K.al Karecr/cd- TraiSiov , . .Mapidpr/ 8e rod Trai86s
irevev r] d8eX(pf] avTov paKpodev d8eX(f>fj . .dvTnrape^^et. (f)ep6pevov
padelv tL to dwo^rjaopevov avrat. ottol x'^pfjO'^'' d'^opevq to TrXeypa.
I Regn. i. i — 4. Joseph, ant. v. 10. 2.
avdpanrus rjv e^ ' Appaddip . . dvTjp Tav iv picroa ttoXitcov rijs
e^opovs'EcppaLp. . KoiTovTca 8110 'E(ppdpov KXijpovxias 'Papaddv
yvvalKes- ovopa ttj pia"Avva Kai ttoXlv KaTomoyv eydpet 8vo yvva^Kas
TT) pia ^evvdva. koi rjv ttj ^ev- "Avvav re (cai ^evvdvav. eK 8e
vdvaivai8ia, KOLTfi" AvvaovK rjv ravTrjs koi ira'i8es avra yivovrai,
naiSiov . . irXfjv otl tijv "Avvav ttjv 8e erepav areKVOV ovtrav
Tjydva EXkoi/o vnep TavTrjv. dyaTr&v 8ifTeXei.
The Greek of the Septnagint.
299
2 Chron. iii. 1^2.
Koi rjfj^aro ^(iXuficov roii
OlKoSofielp TOV OIKOV Kvp'iov . .
Kai rjp^aro oiKoflofif] iv tw ^r^vX
ru) SfuTc'pco iv Tea (Tti to) Tfrap-
TO) Trfs ^aaiXeias avrov.
Isa. xxxix. 6 — 7.
Iboii T]fi.4pai fpxovrai Koi
\j]p->\ri)VTaL iravTU to. iv tco otifw
<Tov Ka\...fh Ba^vXa)vu rj^ei....
Kol diTO TO>V T(KV<t>V (TOV Z)V
yfvvTfafis Xijp-yj/ovTaiy Koi iroir]-
aovviv cnrdbovTas fv tw oikco
TOV ^a<TiXe(i)s tS)v BalivXaiviuv.
Joseph, ani. viii. 3. i.
T^s 8e oiKoBopias rov vaov
'SfoXopcov rjp^aro Teraprov eTos tjbi)
Joseph, afif. x. 2. 2.
ta^i oil per' oXiyov xpo^ov els
Ba^vXava aov tovtov pfraTedrjao-
pfVOV TOV TtXoVTOV Koi TOVS €K-
yijvovs evvov^KTBrjaopivovs kui
dnoXeaairras to uvBpas eivat, rw
Ba^vXoivia SovXevaovras ^aaiXel.
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
fron) the Septuagint are translations, while the Atitiquities
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 ado|)ted 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 indifl'crent 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, hut 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 Septtmgint.
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 famiharising 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 spellings occur, of which 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
Christ.
To a considerable extent the orthography of the MSS. is
the same in the lxx. and the N.T. The student may find
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. Maced., p. 1 1 1 ff .
'^ See (e.g.) K. Meisterhans, Grammatik der Ai/ischen Inschriften
(Berlin, 1885); Y>&\&sma.nn, Neue Bibelstudien, Marburg, tSq;. E. Mayser,
Grammatik der griechischen Papyri aits der PtoUmderzeit , I. Teil, Leipzig,
1898 (Progr. des Gymn. Heilbronn).
TJie Greek of the Septuagint. 301
Moulton, Winer-Schmiedel, Blass). But even in MSS. which
hke KBAC 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 spellings 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.
Conso7tanis. Assimilation neglected in compounds : ivyaa--
Tp'ifivSo^-, crvvKaTaKXrjpovofjidv, avvafia-fios, (VKuivia, fV)(€ipi8tov.
Assimilation where there is no composition : e/i M*o''iP> ^V
ytiiTTpL Use of V ((JxXkvittikoi' before consonants (omission is
rare, except in a few cases such as 7ra<n before the art.) ; use of
the final s in nxpts, /i«'xP'^' '^'^■'■ws'> "vrLKpvs. Retention of the p. in
fut. antl aor. pass, ot \tipi:i<iv(iv (X/;^\//r)/Liat, (\T)fi(f>Or)v), and in words
formed from it, cj^. npi'<T'\i]jf\l/i<;. OiOdt, fajflfU- (sec p. 297, note)
for ovUfis, /iv<5fi'r. I" dropped in the middle of a word between
vowels, as Kpavrj, oXtoy, (\)(vftv (especially in cod. K). 'P not
rlouhlcd in compounds, e.g. inipavii^dv, KoXofiopis, KariipaKTos,
and reduplicated in the augment (ptpdi'Tia-piuus) ; aa- for tt in
fAdfro-oDi', rju<T<ov, and pir for pp in npn>}v^ diipadv. In some verbal
fr)rrns consonants are doubled, e.g. fitwfiv, KTfWfiv, x^'^*'*^^-
Rough and smooth consonants are occasionally exchanged, e.g.
KvOpa (i Rcgn. ii. 14, 15) for x*^^^"-
Vowels. Kt for i in syllables where t is long, e.g. .Semitic
words such as Ati'ti, AfufiVr;r, Anvti^, Itiwv, and (ireek words as
rpuTTt^fiTrjf, ytivf(T0iti, y€ivo){rK(iv. Also (perhaps by itacism) in
innumerable instances of t' : e.g. opttov, i\\t)0€ivi'it, uHiKtla, Kpdvtiv.
I for (I, e.g. Tt^oi, \iTi)vpyf'iv, u\i<l>fii', (iXtpiJid, KaT<\i(j)fli]Vy nup(i!iiyp.(i,
fi(tvi((iv, o(/>iX«'rr/v, fuytov, and csp. in nouns in -(ui, -na, e.g. (inu>\ia,
»'j'fii(i, niiifita,^<ifjiiiplii, (TTparla, anil those in *If)«', as fidrinv, flfiuyXinu.
A for t, as (pnvi'iii' ; t for «, as fKnfi<pt<Tdt)i', fxiipot, T*(rcT(paK<)VTa.
' F.siM'cially in roil. 15 (O.'J'. in C/rek, I. p. xiii.).
302 The Greek of the Septuagint.
Omission of a syllable consisting of t, as in irfiv, rafxelov. Pre-
fixing of a vowel, as in ex^fs.
Breathings. Rough breathing for smooth : e.g. ov^ oKl-yos,
f(f>' iXnibi, e(f>i8e, oiix eicraicovcrofiai (Jer. vii. 1 6), Kad' 6(pda\iiovs
(Ezech. XX. 14). Similarly we find aXaos, akanrrj^, eviavros Dt.
xiv. 20 (Nestle, Septuagintasiudien i. p. 19, ii. pp. 12, 13, 20 f.).
Smooth breathing for rough: ovk eveKev (2 Regn. vii. 12), ovk
virapxei (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 :
V^rbs. In -ovv from nouns in -os : ufiavpovv, aTrobeKarovv, airo-
XvTooiiv, diroTV(f)XovVf d(r(j)aXTOvv, dia^iovv, eKTVTroiiv, fXarrovovVf em-
SittAow, fTriTrffJLiTTovi', epvdpoBavovv, eio8ovv, davarovv, KaTaxpvaovv,
KVpovv, iraXaLovv, Tvapa^rfkovv, irepiKVKkovv, avyavpovv. In -iC^iv,
-dCfiv, -ui^eiv, -v^fiv : dyui^eiv, alperi^eiv, dKovri^fiv, dva^i^d^fiv,
dvadeparlCfiv, dnoyaXaKTi^eiv, avyd^eiv, dcpayviCeiv, dfjiavi^eiv, d(popi-
feti/, /3aSi^f iv, ye\oid^fi.v,ypv^€iv, 8avi(eiv, 8i,ayoyyv(eiv, diaaicedd^eiv,
Siaa-KOpniCeiv, biaxapiCfiv, eKdeplCfcv, fUKXTjcruiCfiv, eK/iueXtf"*',
eKcnreppart^eiv, eKTo/ct^etv, fvracjyui^eiv, evvirind^fiv, evMTi^eadai,
e^fiKovi^eiv, e^fraffiv, e^oTrXlCft-v, e^opKi^dv, fVi/cXii^etj/, (nipnvTL^fiv,
eiria-Kidlfiv, e7riaroi(id^fiv, inK^rjpi^fiv, dvaid^tiv, /caTa/cftd^eii/, Kara-
(TKld^fiv, KUTacro<pi((i.v, K\7]8ovt^fiv, Kopi^eiv, KOV(f)lCei.v, XfTri^fLv,
XevKodiCfiv, fxaKapi^fiv, [XfXi^eiv, otmvi^fiv, oj'u;^tXf"'» OTrro^eii',
opOpi^fiv, TTapadfiyp-aTi^ftv, napado^d^eiVf irapdXoyi^fiv, nepiaaTrl-
The Greek of the Septiiagbit. 303
ffiv, ir(piovv)(^[^fiv, irfpipavTi^fiv, TrXfoj'u^fii', TroXvxpovi^fiv, nporrfy-
yi^eiv, iTpo(TO-)^d'i^(iv, a(ii'ii:iaTl^€iv, aKe7rd(eiv, (TirtppnTi^eiv, oTTjpi^eiv,
(Tro)(u((iv, crvpTro8i((iv, avvadpni^eiv, avyoiKi^eiv, a-(paK(\l^€iv, crxuXd-
^fiv, T(i)(i^(iu, (pavXi^eiv, (pXoyi^eiv, )(\(opt^(iv, xpovi^eiv, \p-o)p,i^fiv.
In -fvfiv : dy)(i(TT(V(iv, 8io8fVfiv, e^oXedpeveiv, Uparevecv, kutu-
8vvacrT(veiv, KaraKvpieveiv, KaTa(f)VTevetv, KaTO^fveiv, peraWfyfiv,
TrpO(f>T]TfV€lV, TTpMTOTOKfVeiV, (TTpaT0Tre8(VflV, Tpo(p(vfiv, vbpfvfiv.
Nouns. In -pa, from verbs : ayincrpa, ayvtapa, dSiKrjpa,
atviypa, aWayp.a, dvaartpa, dvoprjpa, dvTanoHopd, d7r68opa,a(Tel3r]pa,
avyacrpa, dc^a'iptpa, [iSeXvypa, ^irjyrjpa, 8iKaio}pa, ?^i6pvypa, 8t;^oro-
prjpa, dopOy ('yKaraXippa, tdeapa, €<Ko\appa, eKrvnoypa, eirlvepa,
(TTiKoKvppa, fviTTidevpa, f-^tpa, fjpiafvpa, 6f)pfvpa, Ovp'iapa, 6vai-
aapa, Updrtvpa, ndpTroipa, KaraKavpa., KUTaiviTacrpa, Kav)(r]pa, KKeppa,
XfTTicrpa, 6\oiiavT(opa, opapa, o(f)fLKrjpa, ()\vpuipa, Trapddeiypa, irapd-
6fpa, TTupdpvpa, Trfpidtpa, ■mpi'^oipa, TTporroxSi-O'pa, Trpoaraypa,
TTpoyroyevTjpa, cmpeapa, avvdvrrjpa, avvKdXvppa, crvarepa, raypa,
riprjpa, ro^fvpa, (fxiXdKpcopa, cfyvXaypa, (fn'papa, ;^opTa<r/xa, )(Ci>vfvpa.
Id -pds, from verbs : d(f)(iviap(')s, yoyyva-poi, €VSfXf;i^«r/i()9, evirn-
pirrpns, e^iXarrpos, f'vKriTicrpos, iparurpds, Kadapifrpos, prjpvKUT pit's,
olwviapos, opicrpos, opKiapos, Trapit^vapos, ireipaapos, crTaapos, oTf-
vaypoi, (ppaypo?, x^P'-O'H-"^-
In -(Tii, from verbs : di'inpoTn, dvdpvTjn-is, d-rroKibapiaa-is, acfyfan,
^((iuiwrrii, ■ytj-yyi/ms', yupvoiirii, f^ijXoycrii-, ^idl:ia(Tts, 8iaad(f)t}(Tii, (K?ii-
KT)(ris, fK(TTn(Tis, (K^vais, (Trepa>Ti](Tis, KaTaKapnoiais, KardXfiylris,
KaTd<T)(ff''is, KaTOiKTjmi, oXoKupTraxrn, oXoKanraxrts, opoiaxrn, ttXtj-
poiKTis, ndpfvait, npuan, (TvyKpuiTH, iTwavrrjcru, <Tvi>TtpT]ais,(TV(rT(iiris;
Tnnttvoxrii, inrfpoparrn, viripoy^ns, urrorrrocris', (paiiiris, ;ifapd)ca)(rt$',
\T}p(V(ris.
In -rii from verbs : dXoKpf), dpaCvyfj, dnna-Kfvfi, dnoa-ToXf), dnn-
KHTii(Pvyfi, I'lXKrj, TTupdtioXi'i, npouopi], Trp<t(j)vX(iKT), crvvuyuiyi], rpanij.
In -Ti^i, from verbs (m.) : ah>iypaTi(TTri>,\ fVTti(f)iarTr)i, f'^7yr;rr;s,
f'ntSiiprjTrii, fppi]V(VTr]^, 7roXf^t(rTr)s', /j(K/*i(5f ur^v, (TK\na(TTi)'i, rrx<>-
Xfiorr/v.
A<ijfClh>t\s. In -ti'ov : (ViXtvoy, Htppdrivus, Kiipvivos, oarpdKii'ns,
nptKriuoi, (TTvpuKivoi, (fyXoyii'oi.
In -(or : iviavfrins, opDpi'jTpiot, iroXvxpovtot, vnoxfipios.
In -((tor: dpiTfviKi'n, (IprfviKoSfXapnrjviKOi, XfirovpyiKos, Xiflovp-
yiKi'n, pvpfyj/iKik-, nuTiiiKiti, TroDctXrifcdv, TTDXtpiKoi, npofjuiirirrTiKi'i';.
In -TOi : dKaT<t<TKfllCl(TTnSy <\Xv<Tl?io>Tl'lS, dofnlTDi, dTTfptKliOllpTOi:,
fTfiKdrdpciTOS, fiiXoyrjr/ii, Xn^fVTot, pKrflatTos, ovupaarot, nXfoviurTOi,
(^opoXnyimw.
(Jj) Words formed by composition :
Verbs compounded with two prepositions : dvfiiKlxnprlv, dvr-
nnnf^iiivtu, dnoKitOtaTav, (VKaTaXtiirdv, (vntptnuTfiyy i^iii'iitTTt'XXnr,
€iTi(TwirTTuv, KaT€p^X^n(^v, naptpjiuXXfiv, avvapdXnplidvdP, crvyufa-
304 The Greek of the Septuagint.
crTpi(j)eadai,,crvva7roXKveiv, avveKTroXffiovVj avveiraKoKovdeiv, crvvfirt-
(TKeTTTfiv, aw KaraKXrjpovofxuv, a-vvwapaKafil^avfiv, (xvvTr pone fin eiv.
Nouns. Compounded with nouns : dacfiaXTOTrKTaa, daa-vvovs,
erepo^vyos, Kap.T]\o7TapdaXis, KoXo/3opiy, fxaKporjfjLfpos, jiaKpo^puvios,
fiiKpoOvpos, oXd/cXjypor, oXoTrop^upoy, noXveXfos, no\v)(p6vios, ctkXjj-
poTpit)(i]}i.os, )(OLpoypvX\iov.
Compounded with a prefix or preposition : dvTnrpoa-onroi,
^AvTiKi^avos, dpx^i8ecriJ.o(j)vXa^, dp;^iSeo"p.a)r;;s, dp^Kpevs, dp^ijxdyfipoi,
dp)(lOlVOX^6oS, dp^L(TLT07rOl6s, eTTlTTeiXTTTOS, fVT7 pOaiOTTOS, KaTaXoiTTOS,
Kard^Tjpos, ■jrapaXios, TrapeTn'S^/ior, Trepidi^iov, irepikvTTOS, TrepioiKOS,
ir(plx<^pos, vTTav8pos, VTreppijKr]^.
Compounded with a verb stem, and forming a fresh noun or
a verb : dvep-ocfidopos, yXaaaoTfujTos, epyo8i.a>KTijS, 6avaTrj(p6pos,
6r)pid\a>T0S, drjpo^pcoTOS, InwoSpofxos, lcr)(v6(f)a>vos, KTT]voTp6(f)os,
vvp.(f)aya>y6s, (titottoios, crcfyvpoKOTTos, reXeacfyopos, 'x^aponoLos, bi-
^oTopLflVf ^(ooyovfh', KXoTro(f)op('iv, Kpeavopdv, Xi6oj3oXf2v, Xifiay-
Xovelv, vevpoKOwdv, opvidoanoTrelvy avpfioXoKoneiv, TeKvoTroidv,
y\ra>paypi.av.
(ii.) Declension of nouns :
Declension i. Nouns in -pa, -via, form gen. in r;y, dat. ?/, iiaxalprj,
fiaxalprjs Gen. xxvii. 40, Exod. xv. 9 ("vielfach bei A, bes. in Jerem.,"
W.-Schm.), KvvopvLijs Exod. viii. 17, €TTi^ej3r]Kvir]s 1 Regn. xxv. 20.
Decle)isio}i 2. Certain nouns in -ovs end also in -of, e.g.
Xfipappos, aSfXf/)i8os'. The Attic form in -ew? disappears ; e.g. Xa6s
and vaos are written for Xecos and veas — the latter however occurs
in 2 Mace. (A). Nouns in -apxos pass occasionally into the first
declension, e.g. TOTrdpxrjs Gen. xli. 34, Koipdpxrjs Esth. ii. 3, yeve-
(Tidpxfjs Sap. xiii. 3 ucrreov usu. contr. in nom. acc.,.uncontr. in
gen. dat.
Declension 3. Uncontracted forms are frequent, as {iaQia
Job xii. 22, niixecov, p^eiXecoz', and in the plural nom. and ace.
of neuters in -as, as Kipara, nepaTa. Trjpas makes gen. yrjpovs
dat. yjpft. Metaplasmus occurs in some words, e.g. 8vo, Sutrt, ttclv
with masc. noun, ttvXt], nvXea-iv (3 Regn. xxii. 11, A), frd^^ara,
(rdfi^ao'iv, Teaaapes, Teaadpois, x^^Pi X^'/-""'* Acc. in -av for -a,
vvKTav Exod. xiii. 21, rivav Nah. iii. 19, and freq. in {< and A*.
Proper nouns. Many are mere transliterations and indeclin-
able, e.g. 'ASa'/i, 'A^padjji, 'lu>crTi(p, 2apovi]X, Aav(i8, 'A^aa/S, HXeiov,
'EXfiarale, AavirjX. On the other hand some well-known names
receive Greek terminations and are declined, as Mcovo-^y or Mcdcrrjs,
'irjaovs, 'E^fKias, 'Haalas, 'lepepias ; while some are found in both
forms, e.g. we have both 'UXewv and 'HX(f)tas', Mavacrar] and
Mavaa-orrjs, SoXopwi^ indecl. and 2o\opo}v gen. -pcovos or -pwiTos-.
But in the translated books the indeclinable forms prevail, and
there is no a];)pearance of the forms "A/Spapof, ^la-pdrjXosj'loxTtjrros,
^ See Thackeray, G>: O. T. pp. 146, 147, "always a vulgarism"; also
J. Psichari, Essai sur le grec de la Septante-, in Revue des Etudes Juives, LV.
No. no, p. 164 ff.
The Greek of tlie Septuagint. 305
which are familiar to the reader of Josephus. In the case of
local names transliteration is usual, e.g. 'Iepovaa\i)fj., BrjOXiffi,
BuiOtjX, Sfto)!/. A tew however have Greek terminations, as
2afxdp(ia or 2ap.apia, ^lopdnvos, and some names of foreign localities
are Hellenised, as Ba^vXmv, 2vpia, fj epvdpa ddXuaa-a, 'idovfiaia,
A.XyvTTTos, and the two Egyptian towns 'Hpcocoi/ noXis (Gen. xlvi.
28), 'HXi'ov noXis (Exod. i. 11). The declension of the Hellenised
names presents some irregularities ; thus we find M<ova-fjs, -arj,
-crf'i, -arjv 'Irjcrois, -croVf -crol, -croiv '^lavacra'Tjs, -a-rf.
(iii.) Conjugation of verbs
Augments. Doubled, as in KeKariipavrai Num. xxii. 6, xxiv.
(),arT(K(iTi(TTr](T(v Gen. xxiii. 16, irap«TvvffiXr)6ri Ps. xlviii. 1 3, 21 (A).
Prefi.xed to prepositions, e.g. inpovopivaav Num. xxi. i, Deut. ii.
35, eirpcxfu'iTevaav Num. xi. 25 f , TjvuTiaravTo 2 Esdr. xix. 30 (B).
Lengthened, as ^ptXXov Sap. xviii. 4, Tjj3ovX6fjLr]v Isa. i. 29, xiii. 9,
r)hvvi]6i)v, T]dvvd(T6r]v, 2 Chr. XX. 37, Jer. V. 4. Omitted, as in dvfdr]
Jud. viii. 3, d(t)(dr] Isa. xxxiii. 24, uvrapKr^viv Deut. xxxii. 10, e|o-
\66p(v(v I Chr. xxi. 15, Ibtv Gen. i. 4, Karopduidr) 2 Chr. xxxv. 10.
Tenses and Persons, (i) Verbs in -o). New presents, as n/xc^uifo),
yptiyopo), ^(vvft), KTtvvd). Futures and aorists' with reduplication :
KfKpd^ejpai (Job vi. 5), (KtKpa^a (Num. xi. 2), eirfnniOrja-a (Jud. ix.
26 A); cf fKfKpuyov, Isa. vi. 3. Contracted futures in -w from
•d(T<o : (pya Gen. iv. 2, dpna Lev. xix. 13, fKbiKarai Deut. xxxii. 43,
(yKuvxn Ps. li. 3, irvpfiifia Isa. xl. 1 3, dnoboKipoi Jer. xxxviii. (xxxi.)
37. Futures (and aor.) with short vowels, ttovutq), Isa. xix. 10.
Irregular futures : (bopai, (pdyopai, \((o (Exod. iv. 9). Second aor.
forms with termination in -«: fih(ip.fif i Rcgn. x 14, ((ftvyav
2 Regn. X. 14, ((pdyaptv 2 Regn. xix. 43, (Xdaroi Estli. v. 4. Person
endings: 2nd p. s. prcs. pass, or middle in -aai: irUa-m, (jidyfaiu
(Eztch. xiii. 18, Ruth ii. 9, 14), unf^d'oiKrai 3 Regn. xiv. 6. 3rd p.
pi. imperf. anri aor. act. in -oaav : eytwuxruv Gen. vi. 4, fiXOofTaf
Exod. XV. 27, KaTtXiTToiTuv Exod. xvi. 24, KnTtvonva-itv Exod. xxxiii. 8,
ifvupoiiauv E/.ech. xxii. 1 1 ; cf the opt. tHvitrauTuv (ien. xlix. 8, (XBm-
iTav Deut. xxxiii. 16. 3rd p. pi. aor. mid. in -(vro: fvtXddfVTo Jud.
iii. 7(A), Hos. xiii. 6(li), Jer. xviii. I5(H*A), &c. 3rd p. pi. perf
act. in -av. foipctKcti' Deut. xi. 7; irimndav^ Judith vii. lo. 2nd j).
s. 1st aor. and perf act. in -n; dniiTTuXKfi Exod. v. 22; (f)a)Kfi,
2 Esdr. xix. 10, Ezech. xvi. 21. (2) Verbs in -pi. From tipi we
have rjfirjv, fjvdn. From Kddrjpm, KoSov Ps. cix. (ex.) I. From
uTTijpi, ia-rrjKt'vm, i<nt]Kwi. From Sificopi, €8id«To Exod. v. 13 (A),
Jer. xii. 34 ; 5oi, Ps. xli. 3 (B), 2 Regn. iii. 39 (A),
111. Syntax.
Many of the irregularities which fall under this head are
' See, however, Lighlfool on Clem. Kom. i. 34 ; Thackeray, Cr. O. J'.,
|P- '35-
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
translators.
Cases and Nuinbers. Nom. for voc, e.g. 6 6i6s for 6ei, Ps.
xxi. 2, asp. in the phrase Kwptt 6 ^edy; 6vydrT]p = 6vyaT€p, Ruth ii.
2, 22, iii. I, &c. Disuse of the Dual.
Comparison. Use of a preposition with the positive for the
comparative, e.g. fxeyas rrapu jravTai, Exod. xviii. 1 1 ; dyados
vrrep Sena, I Regn. i. 8.
Numerals. 'ETrTa^fTrraKis, Gen. iv. 24. Omission of koi
when numbers are coupled, e.g. 8eKa 8110, fieVa e^, SeVa irevre, &c.
Verl>s. Relative rarity of the optative moodi, and disappear-
ance of that mood in dependent clauses. Periphrasis with flpi,
e.g. 7r€7rot^&)s' ((TOfj.ai, 2 Regn. xxii. 3 ; I'o-^t Trenoidai, Prov. iii, 5.
Indicative with civ : imperf. and aor., orav elcrrip^^ero, Gen. xxxviii.
9; orav eirTJpfv, Exod. xvii. II ; orav Kareldrj, Num. xi. 9; tjviko av
etaeTropfvero, Jud. vi. 3 > *""" fCTfipav, Jud. vi. 2. Coordination
of indicative with conjunctive : Exod. viii. 8 f^aTToa-rekco airovs,
Kal dvaaai, Lev. vi. 2 'v/'ux'? ^^^ '^M"P''"// iicu...TrapL8ri...K.al ■^evcrrjTai.,
rj r]8iK.t](rev,,.fj evp€v...K.a.]. ■>^€vcrriTai...Ka\ opocrrj ktX. Use of infini-
tive, with or without the article, to express object, purpose, sub-
ject, or result^; e.g. (a) e^TjTet dveXelv, Exod. ii. 15: TJp^aro tov
oiKodop-elv, 2 Chr. iii. i ; (d) napaylvfTai jiorjdrjvai, 2 Regn. viii. 5 ;
dTreoretAf J/ tov I8flv, Gen. viii. 7 ! (^) (rvvejBri Kpepacrdijvai, Gen. xH.
13; TO 7rpo(TKoWd(r6ai dya66v Ps. Ixxii. 28; {d) 6 Beets eyw tov
davarataiu kul ^coonoifjcrai, 4 Regn. V. J.
Connexion of the sentetice. Use of gen. abs. in reference to
the subject of the verb: e.g. Tropevop-fvov (Tov...opa, Exod. iv. 21.
An^.coluthon : tSwi/ de ^apau>...i(iapvv6-q 17 KupSia ^apaa>, 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
^ Yet see Job iii. 3 fT., xxiv. 18 f., Ps. cviii. (cix.) 14, Isai. xlix. 15,
Ps. Ixii. (Ixiii.) 6, Prov. xxv. 26, and the exx. quoted on p. 305.
^ I follow mainly the classification of C. W. Votaw in his excellent
thesis on the subject (Chicago, 1896), Votaw 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 tlie Septuagint. 307
number of irregularities which are of Semitic origin. The
following are examples.
(«) Lexical.
1. Transliterations, and Greek words formed from the
Hebrew or Aramaic.
2. Words coined or adopted to express Semitic ideas, as
aKpo^va-Tia, dvade^ari^eiv, oXoKavrcona, aKcwSaXl^eiv, (mXay^in^fiv.
3. Phrases answering to the Hebrew idiom: e.g. aprov (fjayelv
= Dn? /'-X. eXeof noieiv uera ti.vos=^V TDH Ht^'y. ivairiov tov
Kvpiov = riin^"''pSPj C'y'*''' '^^Xl^ = ^^5?. t^'^?, Svaia croiTrjpiov = n3t
D^PptJ'j Xap^dvfiv iTpua-coiToi' =^ W^p ^y*^, n-acra erapl^ = "Jw'3/3 ,
vtos Tfo-afpuKovTa Koi eVof cVmurwi' = H^C^ rinXI D^y2'1S"j3.
4. Words with a new connotation : ayioi, apaprcoXos, aperfj,
a(f)('>pi(Tfxa, ucjipoiv, duijioXos, SLuOrjKr], diKaioavvr], €\-/cX?/cri'a, (Xfjjpu-
(rvvT), €^tXaor/iof, Kap8ui, Kvpios or 6 Kvpios, XeiTovpyelu, fiaraioTijs,
6crtorj;s-, ir€ipii(fiv, npti(ptiTT]s, 7rra>;^or, (rdp^, (f)vya8evTi}piop.
{I}) Grammatical '.
Nouns. Repeated to express distribution, e.g. (ivdpoirros
,'ivei,u)noi = ^'it. C;>', Num. ix. lo; (6v,) c^^ij = "•'li) ^3, 4 Regn.
xvii. 29. Similarly fivo 8vu, (Jen. vi. 19; Kara fiiKpov piKpuv (AF),
Exod. xxiii. 30. Emphatic adverbs also are occasionally doubled
after the Hebrew manner, as affxidpa o-f/><lt'5pa, Exod. i. 12, Ezech.
ix. 9; of. (Tflx'iiipa a<l)()8pu)s. Gen. vii. 19 (A).
Pronouns. Otiose use, e.g. Gen. xxx. i TfXfurijo-o) eydi (nrirp
*3bX); Exod. ii. 14 arv ^Aftr ("ipX ^^i>); Exod. xxxvi. 4 avrui,
ai/ToL To .Semitic influence is also due tiie wearisome iteration
of the obrK|ue cases of personal pronouns answering to the
Hebrew sudixes, e.g. Jer. ii. 26 ttvrol kiu oi jiiia-iXf'ii alruv kih ul
iipXovTfs avTwv Kul 01 ifpds; iivTwv K<u. ol iTpu(l)>}Tai avTcbv. The
fem. avrr) is occasionally used for tovto after the manner of the
Heb. nXT, as in Gen. xxxv. 17,27, xxxvi. i, Ps. rxvii. (cxviii.) 23;
see Driver on i S.mi. iv. 7. To the circumstance tliat liie
Heljrew relative is incieclmable we owe the pleonastic use of the
pronoun after the Greek relative in such passages as Gen. xxviii.
J3» *'^' ^f...«V' avTrjs (n'^y..."lL"N); Deut. i. 22 81" ijs...(v uiiTJi
' On this held see esp. Fraiikcl. Vorsludien, p. 132 ff. ; Thicr>ch, ai-
Pentat. vers. Alex., p. 1 1 1 ff.; 'ihumb, Die griech. Sp'r....dfs IJe/lrnismiis,
pp. 138 (T., 171 ff. : Thackeray, Gr. O. T. p. 25 ff. ; Fsichari, op. fit., p. iS.^ff.
20-2
308 The Greek of the Septuagint.
(rl3 . . . Ilj'js) ; Piov. iii. 15 hv ...avT(xiv. A Similar redundancy
occurs with relative adverbs: Deut. ix. 28, odfv...eii€W(v ("l^.'X...
D^'?P); 2 Chr. i. 3, ov^jKel..
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, lbu>v 'idov {''H'^ii'l HX"!);
Deut. xxxi. 18, d7ro(rTpo(p7j uno(TTpiy\r(x) (TWpX "iRpn); also the
Heb. idiom ? ^??*1: e.g. Exod. xiv. i^, oii irpoa-drja-ea-de en ISelv,
I Regn. iii. 6 ivpocridfTO kcu fKoXeaev (cf. V. 8 irpo(red. Kokfcrai,
Job xxix. I TTpoa-deh fiTrev (IPN'1 ...^Q'l). Constructions with
prepositions contrary to the Greek idiom: ^SeXvaaeadai dno
(''JSP), Exod. i. 12; (p(i8eadai eiri, Deut. vii. 16; eneparav eV
Kvpia, (njiT-i hm), I Regn. x. 22 ; dSoKelv iv or eVi (f V^H).
Hebrew forms of adjuration as i Regn. iii. 14 ft (DX) e^ikacrdr]-
(TfTai, ib. 17 TaSe Troirjarei aoi 6 6e6s, iav... A question standing
for the expression of a wish : Num. xi. 29 kui ris 8wt] Travra t6v
Xaov Kvpiov... ; Ps. Hi. (liii.) 6 tls daxrei tK ^eimv to aoorrjpiov Toii
'l<rpar]\; 'Eyw eip,i followed by an ind. (Jud. vi. 18 e'yco dp.i
Kodiaopiii, 2 Regn. ii. 2 eyw elpi Tropfvaopai) — a construction
limited in B to Judges, Ruth, 2 — 4 Regn. Periphrases such as
€(rop.ai 8i86vai (Tob. V. 15, BA). Pleonastic use ofXeyav = l\Diih^
often solcecistically : e.g. Gen. xv. I eyevrjdt] prjpa Kvpiov... Xeyiov,
xlv. 16 SiejBorjOi] r) <pa>vrj...\eyovr(S.
Pa7-ticles. Pleonastic use of Kai and Se, (i) in an apodosis,
e.g. Num. XV. 14, eav...7rpoay€vr]rai, ..,, Kai Troii'](rec KupiraipLa; Prov.
i. 28, eWat oTav...eycb be... ; (2) after a participle: Num. xxi. 11,
Kol e^apavTes...Ka\ irapeve^akov. Use of Kai in a coordinated
clause, where a dependent clause might have been expected ;
e.g. Num. XXXV. 2, a-wrd^eis toIs viols 'larparjX, kuI daxTovaiv ktX.
Prepositio?ts. See under Verbs. Peculiar uses of the Heb.
prepositions are often reflected in the Greek; e.g. i Regn. i. 24,
dvejSr] ev p6axa> (2'1?3) ; Lev. xxi. ID, 6 p,eyai otto ruiv d8e\<paiv
avTov (Vnxp ?n|n). a number of new prepositions or preposi-
tional phrases are used to express the Hebrew \JD7, e.g. evavri,
aTrevavTL, KarevavTi, eva>Tri.oi>, Karevamov, dno, iiri, trpo, wpoo'oiTrov.
Similarly oTria-ay represents ^IHX ; iv pio-a, dva p,eaov, 8ia peaov
= 'J]in3, OTTO (ck) pea-ov—'^'\r\'Q'^ 8ta \eip6s, els ;^er/3af, eK x^i'Pos
= "^!P, \*3 ; 686v = '^')/}.. The use of o-vv to express the prefix
riK, 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
I
The Greek of tJie Septuagmt. 309
cod. B shews this peculiarity, e.g. Eccl. ii. 17 ffiia-rja-a trvv ttjv
Cco^v (D^>nn-ns)i.
10. Both the vocabulary and the syntax of the lxx.
exhibit remarkable affinities with the modern language. Mr
Geldart (^Modern Greek Language, p. 10 1 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 {q\w well-known words common to the lxx. and modern
Cjreek : cVio-KeTrTo/xai, dTroKpivofiai, liriaTpiffno, Trpo(TKWw, ivwinov,
Trp6(TKo/xfJia, iriipa'Qb), aKoXovOC), KOLp.wp.ai, oAos, KaroiKw, Ka6i-
i^opai, KaOit,<i), TO. ip-dria, vTruytD... The Greek of the N.T... .is
by no means so vulgar, so merely a vernacular, as that of
the lxx." 'I'his estimate is perliaps 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 collocjuial
Greek, which ultimately triumphed over the classical standards*.
That the resemblance is less marked in the case of the New
lestament 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
I'hiladelpiius and Euergetes, who had been born in the heart
of a great (jreek city teeming with a cosmopolitan population.
' Sec ahovc, p. 39, n. 2.
- See I'sichari, o/>. at., p. \^^J\\.•, .S. Mcnardos, 7'/ie Value 0/ Byzantine
and Modern O'/tr/', Oxford, 1909.
* (;f. Prof. Jel)l) in Vincent an<l Dickson, p. ■289: "niiHkrn (jreek fia.s
inlieriled, not only tlie ancient lilcraluie, but also an oral tradition which
preceded that literature, which coexisted with it, and which has survived it."
5IO
The Greek of the Septuagint.
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
above.
I Es
aKokov6(i>^-=-KaTa, dat. (2 Esdr.,
2 Mace.)
dvayva>(TTr)i = ypaiiixaT€vs, 2 Esdr.
dvafi(})i(Tl3T]TriTa>i
avaTrXrjpaxTii (Dan.)
dviepovv (3 Mace.)
dvTiypa(f)ov (Esth., Ep.-Jer., I, 2
Mace.)
dvTLiraparda-aeiv
dtrovoeia-dai (2 MaCC.)
airooTjpaivfiv
drroaTi ris (2 Esdr.)
j3i^Xio(f)v\dKiov
drjpayayyelv, -yia
8ia8rjij.a (Esth., Sap., Isa., 2, 4
Mace.)
toypariCfiv (Esth., Dan., 2, 3
Mace.)
8vo-o■6^fla, -l-irjpa (2 Mace.)
fldcoKelov (Dan., i Mace.)
fp<pva'iovv
eTraK0V(TT0S
(Tna-TTfvdeiv (Esth.^, Prov.^)
ipapivJ], T] (cod. B)
evdap(Tr]S (l, 2 Macc.)
fviTpenS>s (Sap.)
DRAS.
fv(f)v7]s (Sap., 2 Mace.)
tepdSouXos
lepoyj/dXTTjs
IcTTopdv
KaTaXo^i(Tp,6s (l, 2 Chr.)
KoXiiKevfiv (Job', Sap.^)
XrjtTTevfiv
XcJTTodvreli'
p,avidKtj (Dan.)
fieyaXeioTTjs
pepiSap^ia
peTayevifTTepos
uvoparoypcKpia
opKcopncria (Ez.)
Tr€i6upx^eiv (Jen, Dan.)
TTpoKadrjyeladai (cod. B)
TrpOTTOpTTT]
7rpo(rK.€(pdXaiov (Ez.)
avv^palSfveiv
(ro)paTo(j)vXa^ (Judith, 2 Macc.)
VTTopvrjpaTi^fi I'
<l)opoXoyia (l Macc.)
^apaiTTfTTjs
xdaKew
XprjpuTiarijpiov
\pvcroxaXivos (2 Macc.)
The Greek of the Septuagiiit.
311
Daniel.
aTrn^av\xa(^fiv (Sir.)
aiTOTV\i-ir av'i^nv (3 Macc.)
apyiTzaTpiuiTi]'} (Jos.')
SiafifXi^fiv
Bidnvpni (3 Macc.)
8iniKT)TT]i (2 Esdr., Tob.)
fyici/»cXtos
fvopyi^f(r6ai (2 Macc.)
ecTTuiTopia (4 Regn.)
fUKaTa(f)f>l'>VT)TOS
(vm]fX(os
dfpparrin (Jer.')
KrjXiboiadai (J<-T.)
Kovinfia
Konavi^dv (3 RcC^n.)
fKU'Laiirjs (l Ksdr.')
fifyaXftoTTis (i Esdr., Jer.')
Tpoaoyj/Li (2 Macc.)
crafiiSvKr]
(To(fii(rTT]s (Exod.')
(TvvnXnav
crvvpoKvveadai
(Tvpiy$
iinaros
vnepnivfTOS
V7rfpev8n^oi
VTrepptyedrji (l Chr.)
VTrfpv\lrovv (Fs.'')
VTTfp(f)fp^i
(f)i\6ao(}}()s (4 Macc.)
Wisdom.
This l)Ook contains an unusually large vocabulary, con-
sisting in great part of compound words. The following list,
taken from c. i. — vi., will suflice to shew its lexical character*.
uytpo^xtft (2, 3 Macc.)
(llillinTOtTUi
(ifldvarria (4 Macc.)
riKtjXihojToi (Ps.')
(tKfuprjTof
dX(t(nv(i't(Td(it (I's.')
updpilvTiii
dpoXvvTDf
dvanii^iiTpus
di'f KXiniji
dvf^iKdKtn
(ivinroKpiTot
drrifudVToi
itTTdXoyiit
(iTrdro^ov, (innTo/Kot
drtXtaroi
dTiprjTOi (3 Macc.)
d'l>dt'ii'(oi
^(icTKavin (4 Macc.)
fifKuprjvuttoi
SiopOanjS
dv(T)(pT]frTos (Isa.')
«7ri(Tf/)(jXo)V
tVtTf'/i'iftoy (i Clir., I — 3 Macc.)
*ni(l)']pi(fiv (Ucut.')
f'pydTfia
(ixXfTji (Jcr.')
tijKVKXoi
fiip<ip<l>ia (3 Marc.)
drpijprff
Idii'injv (3 Macc.)
KaKorrpnyia
• Cf. supra, p. 168 f., for some interesting examples from other parts
nf the book.
312
The Greek of the Septuagint.
Karabaizavav
KarakvTTOS
fiaKpo^ios (Isa.i)
fxovorjijLfpos
ofJLoioiradrjs (4 Macc.)
OTrXoTTOtfW
napddo^os (Judith, Sir., 2, 4
Macc.)
irapajivdiov
woXvyovos (4 Macc.)
TrofiiTfveiv
irpcjTOTrXacrTOs
(rTe(f)cn'rj(f)opelv
crvyyi'coaTos
(TvX\oyi(Tp.6s (Ex.^)
T€Kfir]piov (3 Macc.)
<ptXdv0pa)Tros
XpT](riiJ.evfiv (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.
ayopavopia
duapialos
aKpoTToiXis
aKpcoTrjpid^fiv
dX\o(pv\icrp,6s
dvnXr]p,7rTeos
dTTivdavaTi^eiv
dpx'^yfviTT]s
aai'Xia
avfiaipfros
^apjSapoiv
8(iXav3piav
bevTepoXoyelv
8id(TTaXcns
8v(r7reTT]p,a
eTreuXajSfZo-^ai
aXoyttrria
dpvrjfTLKaKia
avfiKacTTOs
dveTTiaTpeTTTOS
evanavTTjTos
deop,axelv
dwpaKiap-os
KarevdeKTelv
XeXrjdoTtos
XiTcivfia
6Tr\o\oye7v
TTUTpMOS
iroX€fxoTpo(pe7v
TToXvirpaypoveiv
n poaavaXiyeadai
IT poavnop.ip.vrj(TKiLV
anXayxvicTfios
crvpp.i(TOTrovr]p(1v
(TVV(KKeVTf\v
TeparoTTOuis
■v/^u^aycoyta
3 Maccabees.
dl'eCJiLKTOS
d(Tivris
^apvr^xh^ ,
^v9oTpe(f)i]S
The Greek of the Septuagint.
-1 I ->
ypa(f)iK6s
8T]fJ.0T(\T]S
BiKaiOKpinjs
bvaciiuKTos
(VKnTiiWaKTos
Xaoypacjita
\ijiiavoiv
fjieynXoKpaTCiip
HeyaXop(pj]i
fiif porpayia
picrviipis
vfaviKos
TTcivodvpros
TrapavayivdiO'KfiV
TToXvdaKpvs
TrpoKaracTKLpovv
(n8r]p68ecrpos
VTTop.aa-ria'ias
inr6(f)piK0i
<pol3fpn€i8T]S
Xaprrjpia^
Xfipovopia
4 Maccabees.
(upo(i6pos
di'apo)(Xevfiv
apdpepfiuXos
(iadfvoyl^vxos
diTvprji
avTo8((TTroros
yaXaKTonoie'iv
y<l\llKTOTp()fj)ia
ft6o}X('i6vTOi
fi><tyK(iXi(Tp.a
tvciiTO(r(l)pctyt^fiv
(TripcoyoXuyf'irrStu
(7TTap.TIT0)p
evXoyioTia
0avaTT](f)t'>pos
i(po7rp{vr]s
KTunaXis
KoXXiirais
KT]pnyovia
ficiXdKoy^vxf^i'
^i<j)r](l)6pO',-
up'xpoiTuv
TTiiBoKpaTelaBai, -rla
7r(u8i))(apaKTt]p
nr]8(iXir>vxf'it'
■n po(T(niKaTnT('iv(LV
(Tvpirddfia
(TVPuyfXd^fiv
(f)lX()pT]T(Op
(f)iXo(rropyia
fjiiitTttycoyfiv
In the s/j/r of the oriplnnlly Greek hooks 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 I. XX. of the Psalms and of Proverbs. In 2 — 4
Maccabees the influence 01 the canonical books appears in the
retention of transliterated names such as 'A(3padti, 'lapaj/A,
AavirjX. I5ut 'lepovaaXijfx has become 'lipotroKv/ia, and Eleazar
is usually '¥',\(d^npn<;. ( )f I lebrew constructions or modes of
thought there is only an occasional instance, whilst it is obvious
314 The Greek of the Septuagint.
that the writers lose no opportunity of exhibiting their skill
in the literary style of contemporary Alexandrian Greek.
Literature. F. W. Sturz, De dialecto Macedonica et Alex-
andrina (1808); H. W. J. Thiersch, De Pentatenchi versione
Alexandrina^ libri iii. (1841); Z. Frankel, Vorstudien zii der Sep-
tiiaginta (1841); F. W. A. MuUach, Gramm. d. Vulgarsprache
ill historischer Entwickhing (1856); G. v. Ztzschmtz, Prof an-
gracitdt u. hellenist. Sprachgeist (1859); E. Reuss, art. Helle-
nistisches Idiom (in Herzog-Plitt, vi., 1880); W. Schmid, Der
Atiicismus...von Dionysius v. Halikarnass bis aiif d. zw. Piiilo-
j/nz/z/i- (Stuttgart, 1889 — 97); K. Meisterhans, Gramm. d. Atti-
schen Inschriften (188 1) ; R. C. Jebb, App. to Vincent and Dickson's
Handbook to modern Greek {\%%\); E. Hatch, Essays in Biblical
Greek (1889), pp. i — 130; H. A. A. Kennedy, Sources of N. T.
Greek (1895); G. A. Deissmann, Bibelsttidien (1895), ^^i"^ Neue
Bibelstudieji (1897), — also his art., Hellenistisches Grieckisch, in
Hauck, vii. p. 627 ff. (Leipzig, 1899), where a full bibliography will
be found. Phrynichus, ed. Lobeck(i82o) ; W. G. Rutherford, T^A^
new Phrynichus (1881); Du Cange, Glossarium, ad scriptores
mediae et infimae Graccitatis (Lyons, 1688); J. C. Biel, Noinis
thesaurus philologicus., sive lexicon in LXX. (The Hague, 1779);
J. F. Schleusner, Novus thesauncs philologico-criiicus... V. T.
(Leipzig, 1820); E. A. Sophocles, Greek Lexicon for the Roman
and Byzantine periods'^ {i%?>^); H. Anz, Subsidia...e Pentateuchi
vers. Alex, repetita (in Diss, pliilolog. Hal. xii. Halle, 1894);
J. Viteau, Etude sur le Grec du N. T. comparS avec celui des
Septante (Paris, 1896); E. Hatch and H. A. Redpath, Con-
cordance to the Septuagint (1S97); Th. Zahn, Einleitung itt das
N. T., \., pp. 24 ff. (1897); Byzantinische ZeitscJtrift (1892 fif.);
Archivfiir Papyrusforschung\\^t.\'^i\g,i2>q() ff.); G. A. Deissmann,
Die sprachl. Erforschung der griech. Bibel, and Die Sprache der
gtiech. Bibel {Th. Rundscliau i., p. 463 ff.); A. Thumb, Die grie-
chische Spraclie im Zeitalter des Hellenismus (Strassburg, 1901).
Much information on points of grammar and orthography
may also be gleaned from ihe N.T. grammars — A. Buttmann,
Gramniatik d. NTlichen SprachgebraucJis (Berlin, 1859) ; Winer-
Moulton, Treatise on the Greek of the N.T^ (1877); Winer-
Schmiedel, Gramniatik d. NTlichen Sprachidioins, Theil i. — ii.
(1894 — 8); F. Blass, Gramniatik d. NTlichen Griechisch (1896,
or the same translated by H. St J. Thackeray, 1898); A. R.
Jannaris, Historical Greek Grammar (1897); and from the
Introduction and Appendix to Westcott and Hort's A''. 71 in
Greek {Ttitr., pp. 302 — 313, App., pp. 148 — 180). The Gramm.
Untersuchungen iiber die biblische Grdcitdt of K. H. A. Lipsius
is limited to such matters as accentuation, punctuation, and the
abbreviations used in Biblical Greek MSS. ; but within its own
scope it is a serviceable book.
CHAPTER V.
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 wliich 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,
I lebrew 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 dilTercnt books or
groups of books. The Pentateuch is on the whole a close
and serviceable translation ; the I'salms* and more especially
' The external evidence hns l)ccn briefly stated in Part i. c. i. (p. 23 IT).
' Cf. R. Sinker, Some remarks on the LXX. Version of the Psalms,
p. Qff.
3i6 The Septuagint 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 ff. 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.
3Kilpioy o-repe'co/oia \iov Km "Kvpie irirpa fiov koI nx^'
KaracpvyT] fiov Kai pvaTrjs pov pcofxd pov Koi i^aipov pfv 6s pe
6 dfos pov fioridos Km Attico epoi- ^6 deoi; pov (j)vXa$ eaTcii pov,
eV avTov ireTToiSaJS eaopai in avra ....
'^alvav €TriKaX4(Top(u Kvpiov, koi ^alverov eniKaXeaopai Kvpiov,
€K t5)v ix6p5)v pov acodfjaopai. koX (k rcov e'x^pwi/ pov acodrjcropai.
^irepUa-xov pe cuSives Bavarov, ^ori iTfpieaxov pe avvr pLpp.ol
Koi xeipnppoi avopias e^erdpa^- davdrov, x^ipappoi dvopias eddp-
dv pe- ^o)dlv€S a8ov TTepieKvuXo)- ^rjcrdv pe- ^wSii'e? davdrov
adv pe, Trpo4(f)da(Tdv pe irayi^es eKiiKXcaadu pe, Trpoe(j)da(rdv pe
Bavdrov. ''koi ev tw dXij3ecrdai a kXt] porrjTes davdrov. ^ iv ra
pe iTreKokeadprjv Tov nvpiov, koi dXi^evdai pe i-rriKoXea-opai Ky-
Trpoi rov deov pov iKeKpa^a' piov, Kni irpas rov deov pov ^otj-
rJKOva-ev eK vaov ayiov avrov aopai, koL iTT aKovcrerai eK vaov^
</)a)v^f pov, Koi fj Kpavyr] pov avrov^ <f)o)v?is ^pov, Kcil Jj Kpavy^
[ivmiTiov avrov elaeXevaerai] els p.ov ev rols uxrlu avrov.
TO S>Ta avrov.
' Cf. e.g. Job ix. 9, xlii. 14; from the latter passage Theodore of
Mopsuestia argued the pagan origin of the hook (D. C. B. iv. p. 939).
2 Moore, Judges, p. xlvi. _
3 According to M<=Neile {Jntrod. to Ecclestasles) it is the earher edition
of Aquila's version; cf. Thackeray, Gr. 0. T. pp. 13, 60.
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
y?P, iTl'tvp in the first verse, and the use of the aorist and the
future in vv. 6, 7.
If further proof is needcl 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 D'Jyiif'^9 is uniformly represented in the
Hexateuch by <l>iiAio-Ti€i'/i., but in Judges and the later books by
dA.Aoc^uA.ot ; np2 js <^ijht(.k or 4>d(Tix in Clironicles''^) and Jere-
iniah^*), but Trdd-xa in all other books; D^'ilN is gi^'Awo-is or hrjXoi
in the Pentateuch, but in Ezra-Nehemiah 0wti^oj/tc9, <f>wTL(rwv ;
D''?n is aXrjdtLa in Exodus, but in Ezra rekdov ; in Isaiah n'^pV
is craftau)6 more than 50 times, whilst TravTOKimroyp, 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; ?'7i7 is
dwaywyr] in (Jen., Exod., Lev., Num., and again in tlie Pro-
l)hets, but iKK\r](Tia in Deuteronomy (with one exception) and
onwards to the end of the historical books. The singular'
phrase cyo) ci/xt-'?JN is limited to Judges, Ruth, and 2 — 4 Regn.;
,rw=nx of the object occurs in the true LXX. only in Ecclesi-
astes; aixijy is peculiar to Ciironicles and Ezra, other books
which contain the Ileb. word (Num., Deut., i Regn., I'salni.s,
Jer.) preferring yeVoiTo. Similar results may be obtained from
a comparison of the forms assumed by the same proper names
in different books, luijah (•1'^''?»S) is 'HAciou in the Books of
Kings, but 'IIAttts in Malachi and Sirach. The lists in
Chronicles use the Hebrew form of Gentile names (0<K<Dfi,
'\yaftu>6€i, &c.), where other books adopt the Creek (©ckwcitt;?,
' On Job xx.\iii. 31 see Thackeray, Urainiii. U. T. |> 55.
3i8 The Septuagint as a Version.
' AvaOitidciTf}'?, &.C.). In Ezra ^ni^ni^ becomes ' Aa-aovrjpo^, but
'Apra^ep^r^s is substituted by the translator of Esther, and
'Bepir]^ 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 of the external history of the Septuagint
(d) 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.
(r) [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 'Acrcrov/jpov in Daniel.
^ Cf. prol. to Siracli : tijv dWuv warplcov ^i^Xluiv.
* A. F. Kirkpatrick in Expositor, v. iii. p. ■268. Cf. W. R. Smith,
O. T. in jfewish Ch., pp. 75 f.
The SeptuagiJit 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 tlie 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
translators.
(a) The text of the Hebrew Bible has undergone no
material change since the l)eginning 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 M.SS. belong to one type of text, and it is, in the main,
the type whicli was known to Jerome, to Origen, and to
Atjuila, and which is reflected in the Targiims and the Talmud.
' Prol. ov yiip laodufafxel kt\.
* Even in I'alcstinc " lie fore the Christian era. ..the exegetical tradition
was still in a rudiniL-iilary st.i^c" (Kirl<|utrick, Divitte Lil'rary, p. 6c;).
* Dr Nc^lle jioints out that the mistakes of liie LXX. arc somelinies due
to Aramaic or Arabic coiloijuialisms, and gives the lollowing examples:
Aramaic: Num. xxiv. 7 i^t\(6<TfTai. I's. cxl. 4 wpotpaal^ejOcu. Hos. ii.
^3 ('*S) vycii'"ni^''V''t vi. 5 dirtO^piaa. Isa. iv. 2 ^iriXd/juf/fi, liii. 10 xaOa-
plaai. ]qt. xxxviii. (xxxi.) 13 xa/'i7<^'"'rai. Arabic: I's. Ixxxiii. 7 Suiati.
Dan. vii. ii (lx.x.) ibitUri,
320 The Septiiagint 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. J
ip) 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 arcliaic 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 l\\t yodh
as the smallest letter, and to the Kcpeat which are peculiar to
the square alphabet (Mt, v. i8). That the change had begun
' See W. R. Smith, O. T. in J. Church, pp. 56 f.; Driver, Sarmiel,
p. xxxix. ; Kirkpatrick, Divine Lib}-ary of the O. T., p. 64. Among the
Rabbis of Jamnia were Eleazar, Joshua, and Akiba, the reputed teachers of
Aquila; see Edersheim-White, History of the Jeivish Nation, pp. 132 ff.,
i74f.
- See pp. 39 f.
■* l?3"ip nn?, or, as the Tahimd calls it, nni^N '3; see Driver, Samuel,
pp. ix. ft'.
T/lc Scptnagint as a V^ersion. 3 2 1
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 \ 2 and D, n n and D, as well
as 2 and 3, 1 and ">, were more or less difficult to distinguish *.j
A few examples may be given from Driver's list. (1)1 Regn.
ii. 29 d(f)da\fia) (py, for I')]}); xii. 3 aTrnKpiOrjTe kut' efxoii {''2 13y, for
n >yv); Ps. x'xi. (xxii.) 17 o>pv$ai> (TiiO, for nN3); Isa. xxix. 13
ndrriv 8e aiiiovTai fx( (^DN OnXT mm, for ^HN DHXT *nm).
(2) I Regn. vi. 20 8i€\6(lu (lay?, for noyS); Jer. xxvi. (xlvi.) 25
TOP v'lov avT^s ('"133 for N3D)^'; i Regn. iv. 10 Taytiarwi' ('^Jt, for
'"p:-!), xxi. 7 A<onK 6 2upos ('D-isn jxi, for 7:5ixn 'i).
Another cause of confusion was the scriptio defeciiva in the
case of 1 and * where they represent long vowels, e.g. i Regn.
xii. 8 Kiu KUTfOKiaev avrovs (D2*ki''1, for D13''vi'^1); Ps. v. tit. vTrep r^s
Kkrjpovoixovatjs {vhu^n bn, for nOTl^n 7N); Job xix. 18 tls tov
awvH (D^y, for n'h'W) ; Jer. vi. 23 o.j Trip (L"SD, tor L*''XD;. 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 Slreane, Double Tcxf, 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 Tpla €TT], I'tt 'seven years,' where t has been read for 3. Here
G has the support of the Chronicler (i Chron. xxi. 12): see
Konig in Hastings' D./>'., iii. p. 562.
Further, in the MSS. used by the i.xx. ihc words seem not
to have l>een separated by any system of punctuation or
spacing. On the Moabite stone* and in the Siloam inscrip-
'ion*a point has been used for this purpose, ljut the Phoeni-
' Except perhaps those which lay before the tr.inslalors of the I'cnta-
teuch ; see I )river, /.r.
' A specimen of such a script, hut of nuuli later dale, maybe seen in
Driver, ('/>. cif., p. Ixv.
' Cf. Streanc ad loc. and on Jer. xx. ry.
* Sec Driver, op. cit., \k Ixxxvi., or Hastings' />.n. iii. art. Moab.
* Driver, op. cit., p. xv.
S. S. 21
322 TJie Septuagint as a Version.
cian inscriptions are without punctuation, and so were probably
the early Bibhcal 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
ihe differences witness to the absence of divisions in the
Hebrew MSS. and the non-employment of the final letters
1 Q n r.
Thus Gen. xlix. 19, 20 avTUiv Kara irodas. ' Ao-^'p . . . = "It^'X : U2pV
(m, 1t^'^» '^?V); Deut. xxvi.' 5 ^vpiav dnf^aX^v^llH' mN
(im, nnN' ••DniX); i Regn. i. I 61/ Natrei'/3 = n''Vn (i% tjIV \2) ;
Ps. xhii. (xliv.) 5 6 deos fiov 6 eVTeXXo/x€j/os=m^*0 '^rhii (iftl, D\l'?i«
ni^); Jer. xxvi. (xlvi.) 15 8ia tl ecfyvyev diro crov 6''Airis; = D^ yHO
Pin (iim, einD3 ynO); Zech. xi. 7 dsT7)v XavaavLTriv = ''^V^2h (M P'?
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 kgI aweKadicrev
avTols ^ nm Tf') (M, dm atJ^n); Num. xvi. 5 eVeo-/ce7rTai = -l|'?3
(i$l, -1P3); I Regn.xii. 2 Kadr}aoiJ.ai=:''n:;'^l (M, "^3^1); Nah. iii. 8
Ijifpida 'Afxij.a>u = \)Dii H^P (i^, flDX i^'m); Isa. ix. 8 ddvarov {12%
fR, "13^) dTTfCTTeikev Kvpios eVi 'laKco/3. In proper names the
differences of the vocalisation are still more frequent and appa-
rent, e.g. MaSta/i ()np) ; BaXaa/i (DJ?'??), Topioppa {^"pV), XoboX-
\oy6fiop (noy^in?), *ao-ya (n|D3), Sa/xi/^ci// (t'lC^'P-")-
{c) 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
^ Jerome in the last years of the 4th century knows nothing of a system of
vowel points ; see Nowack, Die Bedciiliin^' dcs Ilicionyinus fiir die A Tiiche
Textkrilik (Gottingen, 1875).
The ScptJiaghit 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 is subject to another vice, 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 mistakes, 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.
I. Tlie 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 tiie extent of sacrificing the Greek idiom.
The first chapter of (ienesis will supply instances of extreme
literalness, e.g. 7>. 4 aia jiur^iv tuv (f>u>T(><; Kal tix'a jiiiTov TUX)
(TKOT()V<;- 7>. 5 «y£i'eTo emrefxi Kai iycvero tt/jwi, rjiupa /ita- 7>. 20
(ItiTiTa {j/\ix^(Zi' ^(i)rron'. As we proceed, we are slill conscious of
moving in an atmosphere which is Hebrew and not Greek.
Hebrew constructions meet us everywhere; such phrases as
u<f)iK(ir6ai fws TTpo? Tira, iraitaiT luitt^v ajro rivot, TrpoariOiinL (tov)
iroitiv, XaXeii' cr xdftC Tivos, (x^6€<i kol tj)ltt)v, airo ytvtuiv (h
yti'cas (co)? y(via<i Kai yei'ca?, ciq ytyidv Kai y€V(ni), may be foinid
in the Prophets and Hagiographa as well as in the Pentateurh
Occasionally the translators set the sense at dcfiaiue in their
' Cf. Driver, o/>. cit., p. Iviii.
2\ 2
324 TJte Septuagint 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 (Se'o/xai)
by kv IjjLoi 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
Greek with little regard for rhythm or style, or the requirements
of the Greek tongue, i
{I?) 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 "PrJxa-f^ Sieo-reiA-aTo avT6l<;
where '?t^3(^) seems to have been read as ^^^3^, and 33"l con-
sequently treated as a proper name ; in others, the Hebrew
form is purposely maintained (e.g. dXXrjXovid, dfxyjv). 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 iv raTs djSapKrji'eu', 4 Regn. ii. 14 d<}>(f>(a
(Xin Fix), Jer. XXX viii. (xxxi.) 40 Travres da-ap-qfxwO ecos vd-xa\
KcSpwi/. As in the first and third of these specimens, the
article is often included ; and when a proper name is trans-
liter:.ted, the name is sometimes for this reason not easily
recognised; thus Ramathaim (i Regn. i. i) becomes 'Apixaddifi
(D*nD")n)". Similarly the n local is taken over in the trans-
literation, as in Gen. xxxv. 6 eis Aou^a=nt-l7. Sometimes two
words are rolled into one, as in Ov\aixfiav<; = t-l? Q?'!^ (Gen.
* Thus Hatch and Rcdpath take note of 39 transliterations, exchisive 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. ajipear to have been guided in these transliterations of Hebrew con-
sonants and vowel-sounds are expounded by Frankel, Vorsliidieii, p. 107 ff.
2 Unless the a is here prothetic, which is however less probable.
The Septiiagint jus a Version. 325
xxviii. 19)*. A doublet is occasionally created by adding a
translation to the transliterated Hebrew, e.g. in i Regn. vi.
II, 15 TO Oifxa €pya/3, vii. 4 to. a\<rr] 'Acrrapw^, xxiii. 14 ei'
Macrepifji iy tois o-tciois. In the case of a significant proper
name, wliere 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 iKoiXecr^v 'ASafx. TO ovofxa tt^s ywatKOS
Z(j>Ti] ('^JD) ; xi. 9 IxXrid-q TO ovoyia avTov Suy^^o-is (•'??) y xiv.
13 a.TrrjyyeLXei' 'Af^ijafjL tw Trepdrr) (^1?5^'7)'
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) Shght amplifications, which are probably not to be
ascribed to a fuller text, occur frequently in all parts of the
I. XX. ; e.g. the insertion of keymv 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 iSov Tf yij irAaTeia ivavriov u/xwi', xl. 17 aTro irnvruw tmv
yfvrjfxnTwi' wi' 6 ftao-iX€v<; (Pdfiad) taduL, Deut. vii. 16 ^ayij
TTrtVTa Tot (TKvXa r^v iOvtov (Heb. ' thou shalt eat all the nations ').
The translators frequently manifest a desire to supply what
the origin.il had omitted or to clear up wjiat was ambiguous :
they name the suliject or object when the Hei)rew leaves it
' Cf. Hicron. Qiiaest. hebr. p. 44 (eel. Lnparrle), De situ tt nom. pp. 106,
158. rcirsoii (I'riuf. fanien. p. 6) cmlcavours to defend the I.XX. even
Iiere.
326 TJie SeptJiagint as a Version.
to be understood (Gen. xxix. 9 ixvry] yap e/Boa-Kev to. irpo^aTa
Tov iTarpo<i ai^Vrys-, Heb. 'fed them'; xxxiv. 14 koX uirav avTot'i
2v/A€wv Kat Acvt ol aSeA^ot AeiVas vloX Se Aeias, Heb.
' and they said unto them '), or they add a clause which seems
to follow as a necessary consequence (2 Regn. xii. 21 aVecrTr/s
/cat e^ayes aprov Kal TrcTTcoKas: xvi. ID Kat ac^ere avTov Kat
ouTws KaTapdcr6o} = ^W^. Cp ^3) ^D), or they make good an apo-
siopesis (Exod. xxxii. 32 ct fx\v d(j>eL<; arrots rrjv dfxapTLav avrwv
defies). Less frequently they insert a whole sentence which is
of the nature of a gloss, as in Gen. i. 9 Kat awijx^V to uSwp to
VTroKaroi toS ovpavov eis ras 0"uvaywya.s auTOJV Kat w<j>6r] rj $r]pa,
which is merely an expansion of Kat eyevcro ovtws in the terms
of the preceding command avvaxOi^TO} kt\.; or i Regn. i. 5 ort
OVK rjv avTrj TratStov, a reminiscence of ?'. 2 rfj ''Awa ovk Tjv
iraiUov. On the other hand the lxx. not uncommonly present
a shorter text, as compared with M.T., e.g. Gen. xxxi. 21 Kat
Ste/3?/ TOV TTOTajxov (Heb. 'he rose up and passed over'), ib. 31
€t7ra ya'p Mi; ttotc ktA. (Heb. 'Because I was afraid, for I
said...'); I Regn. i. 9 fierd to <^ay€tv avTovs eV ^rjXw (Heb.
'after they had eaten in Shiloh and after they had drunk ').
[ (b) The translators frequently interpret words which call
for explanation. Hebraisms are converted into Greek phraseo-
logy, e.g. "i^ri? becomes dWoyevij's (Exod. xii. 43), and i^^^"l.?
evtauo-tos (Num. vii. 15); D^nQ'^' Piy "'Jt^l is rendered by eyw 8e
a'Aoyos eifjLL (Exod. vi. 12). A difficult word or phrase is ex-
changed for one more intelligible to a Greek reader; thus
1? £/)i7/xo5 is used for 2^.3lI (Gen. xii. 9) ; ' Urim and Thummim '
become 77 Sr^Awo-ts Kat tJ dkrjdeia (Exod. xxviii. 26); in the Psalms
dvTiXrjfjiTrTwp is written for ]^'>p (Ps. iii. 4), /3or]$6's for "'•1'^' (xvii. =xviii.
3), and yAwo-cra for "li^S (Ps. xv. = xvi. 9); similarly in Jer. ii. 23
TO TToAuaj/Sptov 'the cemetery' stands for ^^.''^^', i.e. the valley of
Hinnom\ An effort is made to represent Hebrew money by its
nearest Greek equivalent ; thus for ^'i^Ej' we have SiSpaxiJ-ov (Gen.
* Similarly in Prov. xxii. 10, where the LXX. read jH r\2 2lif''\ the
last two words are rendered iv <rvve5pl(^.
The Septuagint as a Version. 327
xxiii. 15, Deui. xxii. 29, 2 Esdr. xv. 15) as well as o-t/cAo?, and
for n"li o/5oAo5. Occasionally a whole clause is interpreted
rather than translated ; e.g. Gen. i. 2 ri hk yrj rjv d6paTo<; Koi. uKara-
(TK€vaaTO<i, Exod. iii. 14 eyw eljxi 6 wv, Ps. xl. (xxxix.) 7 aw/xa 8e
KaTrjpricro} (jloi. A dogmatic interest has been detected in some
of these paraphrastic renderings, chiefly where the i.xx. have
endeavoured to avoid the anthropomorphisms of the original;
examples are most frequent in the Pentateuch, e.g. Gen. xviii. 25
/x7/8a/i,aj? (TV TToiry'o-et? (Heb. 'that be far from tiiee ') ; Exod. iv. 16
(TV 8e avTw ear) to. tt^os tov deov (D^H'^X?^; xxiv. 10 tlhov tov
TOTTov ov eio-rry'/vct 6 6^eo? tou ^la-paijX (Heb. 'they saw the God of
Israel,' Aq. el8ov toi' deuv 'laparjX); ib. II twv eiriXeKTiav tot) 'I(t-
p(irjX ov St£0wi'vjo-ei' ouSc ets; Num. xii. 8 ttjv B6$ai> (rijp^) Kupiov
eT8tv; Exod. XV. 3 Kupios o-wrpiyScov TroAe/xovs ('^PCf''? ^''^); Deut.
xiv. 23 6 TOTTOs Of i.v e/cAc'^T/rai Kuptos 6 ^eos aov imKXrjd^vai (iBL'v)
TO ovofxa (J.VTOV (KfL ; Jos. iv. 24 >; 8u^'a/u.l? tov Kvpiov (^jn^'T^).
Such renderings manifest the same spirit of reverence which
led the lxx. to write o Kvpto? or the anarthrous Ku'pios, or
not infrequently o ^eo's, for the 'i'etragramrnaton, just as their
Palestinian brethren read for it 'P^ or D^r"^^'. In other
jjlaces the i.xx. appear to be guided by the Jewish Jfaliuha,
e.g. (}en. ii. 2 (Tvvf.Tk\(.aiv 6 ^^eos iv ry rjfxtpa rrj ^ktt] (^y^Ilti'n,
Aq. Tjj iftfiojirj) ] Lev. xxiv. 7 iindi'fiTiTi eVi to 6lpa XifSavuv
KuOapov Kai aAa" ; xix. 7 idv Bi. (3po)(r(L /SpoiOj] rjj rjfiipa rrj Tpirr],
a^uToV i(TTiv (Heb. 'an abomination ')^ Oi /Ltgi^ada 2l\so there
arc clear traces, as in Exod. xii. 40 Iv yy AlyvnTw xal iv yy
S.avdav, I Regl). i. 14 etTTti/ avrjj to Trai8dpiov 'IWtL*; v. 6
' Sec W. R. .Smilli, O. '/'. in J. Church, p. 77. Aquila, as we j;alhcr
fimn Ori^i-ii and now know fri)iii his ))ulilis!ii;(l rr.nj^inoiits (p. 39 f.), wrote
llic word in archaic IIcl)icw characters, whicli however were read as
K i/piot.
^ " Hecaiise sail as well as franlcinceiisc was used in ihi- .ictuul ritual of
iheir i)eriod" (W. R. Smith, op. cit., p. 77).
* On xxiii. i r see p. 17.
* "An evident atieinj)! to shield the priest from the charge of harshness"
(II. P. Smith, Sainiul, p. 10).
328 The Septnagint as a Version.
Kai ftecrov rrjs p(wpa? avTrj<; diecfivrjcrav yaues, Koi iyaero crvy^^vcris
davarov fteyaXy] iv tjj TroXet.
(c) 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.)
y^l is translated by aixaprwXo? in vv. 10, 12, 14, 16, 17, 20, 21,
32, 40, but by aaefiq'i 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 iri^,, 'give','
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 aiToS/xat (T€ (V '"I^^), Deut. xxi. 8 Iva /xrj
yevrjraL (]^^ "??<) ; when it is rendered directly, the following
Greek verbs (besides SiSwai and its compounds) are used to
represent it : ayetv, dTroaTeXXeiv, aTroTivav, d(/>i€rat, SeiKvwi'at,
^wpeicrOaL, iaf, luTtOivai, e/CTiVeiv, CK)(ieLV, iXeav, i^fSdWeiv, iyKa-
TaXetTTCtv, l-Traipeiv, eVi/5aAXeiv, iTTLTiOevai, lirty^itiv, e^to-rai'at,
tcrravai, KaTayQaAXeiv, KaOLcndrai, KaTara'crcretv, Kpeixdt,eLV, irapa-
TLuevai, TTepLTiOivai, Trotetv, Trpo€K(fiep€Li', Trpocriecai, irpoaTidii'ai,
cTTr/pt^eu', crvvdyeLv, cjiepetv. This is a somewhat extreme in-
stance, but a glance at Hatch and Redpath will 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 tlie several connotations of
the Hebrew words. Thus, to take a few examples : ]*i"?. is
variously rendered by uKpov, dpxi], kXi'tos, fxioo?, irepas, rd^iSy
' The example is suggested by Dr Hatch (Essays, p. 18), who gives
many of the passages at length. The index Hebraeus at the end of Trom-
niius will enable the student to add other iiibtaiiced (besides dio^vat and its
couipounds).
The Septuaglnt as a Version. 329
Xpo'i'os ; among the equivalents of 1?"^^ are aTroVptong, iirepioT-r]-
cris, Kpijia, TTpay/xa, rpoTTos, cfiwyt] ; for ^2 we have not only
KapSt'a, *pv)(T], <f>p>]i', vovs, Stuvoia, (TTOfia, ^poi'ijcrt?, but aTrj$o<i
and even crdp^ ; for "IpS, dpiO/xilv, iTncrKe-n-TcaOai, era^eiv, €k8i-
KcrK ; for '"1171^, SiKaiocrwr], iXerjfxoiTvvr], evcf)po(Twrj. Conversely,
the same Greek word often serves for several Hebrew words.
Thus SiaOrJKr), wliich is generally the lxx. rendering of ri*.")?,
stands also for nny (Exod. xxvii. 21, xxxi. 7), nnin (Dan.
ix. 13, LXX.) and even i^"^ (Deut. ix. 5) ; i^aipeiv, XvTpovv,
pveaOai are all used to represent ^^i; ctSwAoi' appears in different
contexts for ^N, ni^N^, '?'^x, np3, 'pyii, bnn, ]m, 2p, bps aW,
Y^}^, C)'?"?ri. Even in the same context or verse this some-
times occurs. Tims in Gen. i. — iii. yrj translates Y"?^, '^^1%
'^l}-', "^rV; in Exod. xii. 23 "i^V and HDS are both represented
by Trapfpxicrdai ; in Num. xv. 4 f. Ovaia is used both for i^ljlpP
and nDT. In such cases it is difficult to accjuit 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 tlie handling of synonyms.
{^) In reference to metapliors the Alexandrians allow
themselves some discretion. Thus in Gen. vi. 2 'the sons of
God' become ol ayyeXot tot) Oeov; in Num. xxiv. 17 'a sceptre
(^?*^'') shall rise' is rendereil by aiao-rv/VcTai av6pu)Tro<; ; in Deut.
X. 16 'the foreskin of your heart' is turned euphemistically into
Tr;i' (TK\rip()Knp?tLav vfiwi'; in Isa. ix. 14 fiiyav /cat fiLKpov represents
llch. 'both branch and rush.' Occasionally the translators
indulge in paronpinasia, without authority from the Heb., e.g.
(ien. XXV. 27 oiKojr otKiav = D Y'7^ 2?-!''''; xxvi. 18 Kai tVwj'o'/xa-
<rei' auTois ovoinna rilD'J* YyV^ ^'S'-'^-'i Job xxvii. I2 kivo. K<»'ot9 ;
WX. 13 f^€Tpi/3T](TaV Tpi(3ot fiov.
(f) Lastly, the reader of the Septuagint must expert to
fuid a large number of actual blunders, due in part perhaps to
330 The SepUiagint as a I'crsioii.
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 familiar
contexts. The following notes may assist him in a first effort
to grapple with the problems which present themselves.
Gen. XV. I — 6.
I. Ta p^/xara...p^/ia, Heb. "15"^. ..Dn?1. Aiyc^v = -hiO ; cf.
V. 4, where, as elsewhere, Aq. renders, tw \iy€Lv. 'YnfpaiTTri^^o) a-ov,
Heb. '■am a shield to thee'; cf. Dent, xxxiii. 29, Prov. ii. 7, al.
'O fuados a-ov ttoXiis. Vulg., A.V., R.V. connect Heb. with the
foregoing, supplying 1. 2. Aeo-7ror7^s = ''3~IN, as in v. 8, and not
infrequently in Jer. and Dan. (LXX.). 'ATroXvofiai lireKvos — an
interpretation rather than a literal rendering of '^y'f^. '^^ini. Yios
MdatK Tt}s oUoyevovs fxov = '^r\''2 T\2 p^K> p: cf. Hieron. qicaest
^ Philo has dTreXeycro/iai (see below).
The Septnagint as a I'ersioii.. 33 1
in Gen. "ubi nos habemus Et filius Masec vertuiculae meae, in
Hebraeo scriptum est 'ri'3 pC'O pi, quod Aquila transtulit 6 v'lb'i
rov TTOTi^ovTos oIkiov /xou...Theodotio vero Ka\ vlos rov eVt ttjs
oiKias ^ov." AdfiaaKos 'E\ie(fp, a literal rendering of the Heb.,
leaving the difficulty unsolved. 3. 'E7rfi8tj = \[}, and so in xviii.
31, xix. 19; did LXX. read QX ? OiKoyei^j;'? here = n;3n-|5. KXj;-
povofiTjcrd fjLt — a Hebraism, =KXr]pov6nos fxov tcrrat. 4. Kai €vdvs
...€yfp(To=T]Jii)). ^(ovrj = '\2'\, as in xi. i, but apparently not
elsewhere. "Os-.-olros, N■1^..."1t^'^{. 'Ek a-od, euphemism for Heb.
^^yop, unless the LXX. read ^rsp. 5. np6s avrov, a Heb. 6. Kai
(7ri(TT€vafv = \Dis^) (cf. Haupt ad loc). 'A^pcifj., /^ Heb. Toi df(o
= nin'a. 'EXoyia-Or]...fls (it*:., 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
(J as. ii. 23, Rom. iv. 3, Gal. iii. 6).
Kxoi>. xix. 16 — 24.
16. Kytv f T<i b€ . ..Koi e'yf i'oi/To = "'ri^1...''nM. Y(vt]6(VTOs irpos op-
Opoi' = '\p2r\ n^n3. 'Ett' opovs 2fiva, Heb. 'on the mountain.'
<tu)PT], cod. F with ifl pr. khI. 17. 'Ytto to lipus 2. (om. 2. AV),
Heb. 'at the nether part (n'jy>nn2) of the mountain.' 18. Aiu to
KOTafitiirjKfvui, an idiomatic rendering of T}J "lL''X"''JQp. Tov dfov
= nin\ cf. 21. 'O Kunv6i, Heb. 'the smoke of it.' 'E^ta-TJ], Heb.
as V. 16 where LXX. renders (irToijdrj. 'O X«uv = Dyr! ; M.T.,
'^'|'''J'- 19. llpo(iaivov<Tai t(r;^iipoT€pat = pTni "il/in. 20. 'E>caXf(rfi'
...Moiixrfjv, Heb. HLI'dV; the ^ after Nip is dropt in accordance
with Greek idiom'. 21. Aiyoiv, /^ Heb. 'Eyyifrtofrti', a soften-
ing of llie Heb. 'break forth' (DIH) ; jn tlic next verse tyyi^fiv
=6'33 ni. 22. Ku'i, Heb 'and also' (D31), usually /cut -y*, Aq. khI
Kaiyt (liurkitt, Aquila, p. 13). Ku^iw roi ^*a), a double ren-
dering of nin* 7S. 'ATTrtXXci^r; an (ivTojv : another instance of
euphemism : Heb. 'break forth upon thcni' (Aq. Skjko^//-// «V uvto'h \
23. npoiravdiirivai: the double compound occurs six limes in Jos.
xi. — xix. 'A(f}ttpi(Tai: the verb is here as in 7'. 12 the equivalent
of ?33 ///. 'enclose,' but with the added tliougiu of consecration
which is latent in d(f>opi(fiv, dcfx'ipia-pd, dipopiapdi (cf. E.xoii. xxix.
^ Or, as Dr Nestle suggests, it may have been taken as introducing ilio
ucc, as in later Hebrew or in Aramaic.
332 The SepUiagiiit as a Vcrsioti.
26, Ezech. XX. 40). 24. "ATTokta-T], euphemistic, as dnaXXaiji in
7'. 22 ; Aq. again, ^laKoylrjj.
Num. xxiii. 7 — 10.
7. napajSoXr/i' : here for the first time ='?t?'p. Lyons Pent.,
parabula. Mfo-oTroTanlas, i.e. Dnqj D1i< (Gen. xxiv. 10), or H-^,
nnx (Gen. XXV. 20) : here an interpretation of the simple D")X..
'Ait'\ Xe'ycoi/, a Heb. 'ETTiKarapao-ai /ioi, and Karapdaconat in ?/. 8,
represent DyT, whilst apaaai answers to "l"IK, and apao-w/xat (7/. 8)
to np3, an unusual instance of carelessness or poverty of
language on the part of the translator; 6pia>v (v. 9) is equally
unfortunate as a rendering of Dn)f, while on the other hand
oyjrofiai, npo<Tvo^(r(o fairly represent the Heb. Upoavodv rendei-s
11C' again in Job xx. 9, xxiv. 15. 10. 'E^aKpt/:Ja{'fo-(9at (Num.\ Job ,
Dan LXX.i), a late form for (^aKpijSoiv in LXX. and Jos. To
o-7re>^a, Heb. 'the dust': did LXX. read yiT, or have they glossed
nsy? Kai Tis e^apidplja-eTm, reading "IQD"' "1DI. A^povs 'lcrpar]\,
Heb. 'the fourth part of Israel' (Aq. rod TerdpTov 'l.). 'H \/^i)X'/
pov,as Heb., whilst the next word is sacrificed to an alliteration
{^vx^, \l/vxais). To (TTTeppa pov is a gloss on ^ri''"?n^ (cf Brown,
Heb. and Eng. Lex., p. 31); «? ro a-rreppa tovtmv, Heb. 'as he.'
Tliis 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. AvTM al fVToXai, Heb. 'this is the commandment.' 'O
Oeos fjpav, Heb. 'your God.' Ovrois, a Heb. Ela-n-opfveadf,
Heb. 'go over'; the Greek has lost the local reference, as in
iv. 14, 4 Regn. iv. 8. 2. "iva (j)o^ji(Tde...vpwi', Heb. 2nd pers.
sing. l,rip(pov, A f^- Oi vloi ktX., Heb. 'thy son and thy
son's son.' "iva paKporjpepevarjTe, Heb. 'and that thy days may
be prolonged'; paKporjpepeveLv {paKporjpepos yive<T6ai) represents
this or a similar phrase in iv. 40, v. 30, xi. 9, 21, xxxii. 47; paKpo-
Xpwios-, paKpoxpovlCfiv also occur in iv. 40, v. 16, xvii. 20,
xxxii. 27. The group is not found elsewhere in the LXX. except
in Exod.S Jud.i, and in Sirach. 3. Aoivai a M.T.; perhaps
added to complete the sense of the Greek ; yet see v. 10 C^? nri7).
4. K(u TavTa...Alyv7rTov a Heb; perhaps repeated from iv. 45
to form an introduction to"AKoi;e ktX. 5. Aiavoias...-^vx^s...8vvd-
pecos. The readings vary ; for biavoias AF Luc. read Kapblas, and
the text of B is here sf/per rasuram ; for dwdpecas some texts
give laxvos. The N.T, citations (Mt. xxii. 37 = Mc. xii. 29 ff.,
TJie Septiiagint as a Version. 333
Lc. X. 27) present much diversity, giving both renderings of
''ina'? and both of ^^V^P; cf. Dittmar, V. T. in Novo, p. 50 f.
6. Koi (V Tji yl/vxjj <Tov, A Heb. ; for 'in thy heart' Heb. has
'upon,' "as it were imprinted there (Jer. xxxi. 33)^" 7- IIpo-
lii^dcrds, Heb. 'shalt impress them upon'; Aq. Sevrepwo-fty, as if
the root were nji;', 'Ev avTo7s = 02. Kadrjfifvos ktX., Heb. 'in thy
sitting &c.' ; eV o'Uco, iv oSw are inexact, Heb. 'in thy house,' 'in
the way.' 8. \\(TakfvTov (F, acraXevTo) =- nbtpbp, ' for frontlets,'
circlets or tires for the head: Lyons Pent, (reading o-nXfura),
titobilia. 'AauXfvTov occurs in the same phrase in Exod. xiii. 16,
Deut. xi. 18. Aq. seems to have rendered the Heb. here and in
Exod. by vaKTu, i.e. 'compressed,' 'tight,' which Field {Hexapla,
i. 103) explains as the "thecas in quas schedulae membraneae
...inferciebantur." The I, XX. rendering may be an Alexandrian
name for the (pvXoKTTJpLuir, but the whole subject is obscure.
9. *Xtu$- =nitTp, as in Exod. xii. 7ff.
J' "S. x. 12 — 14.
\2. 'H Tjufpa Trapf8<oK€v...virnxfipiov — idiomatic rendering of
'3D7...riri DV3. The words that follow (f]vtKa...'lapai]\) seem to
be a gloss derived from 7/. 10. Kal flntv 'lijaovi, Heb. 'and he
said in the eyes of Israel.' ^rrjroy, Heb. 'be still.' Taliacdv, flfl
'Gibeon.' AtXci.', ^ 'Aijalon' (p'i'^^) ; cf. 2 Chron. xi. 10 A,
AtuXajf. 13. 'Ev (TTd(T(i = 'npV, which is thus distinguished from
the verb represented by (arrj. 'O deos, Heb. ""IS, Aq. to tdvos.
Unless a primary error is to be suspected here, the LXX. has
glossed its ori^'inal, from motives of piety. After t)ie stanza
ffl insirts a rLlerence to the Book of Jashar, which is wanting
in non-1 b xa|)laric texts of the l.xx. ; cod. O adds, -X- "I'^i toOto
ytypupfxtviiv tni^iiiXiov roO fiVofv- V. Ov irpofnoptvfTo ktX., a loose
rendering of Heb. D^pn DVS NU^ |*N N*?. 14. 'Hpf'pa rotairT] oi'Se
t6 npiWtpov ovbi t6 (itx"tov, a good example of a conscientious
compromise between idiomatic and literal modes of rendering
(cf. Heb.). '\i>dp(l>ni)Vf L"*t< ?ip3. 2vvfrTo\fpr](T(v ra 'l., Heb.
' fought for Israel.'
J Ml). V. 28 30^.
28. ffi" here omits the dilfii nil word UDTll i(!3\ koi Kurtpiiv-
' Driver, ai/ loc.
'^ In tliis j).xs.saj;c the text of B in O. '/'. ;// Uiak, i. 489, shuuld be comparc<l
with that of A (cd. Brooke and McLean)
334 TJie Septiiagint as a Version.
6avev). 'Ektos Tov To^iKov, 'forth from the loophole'; cf. Symm.
in Ezek. xl. i6 dvpl^es ro^iKai: ©■*■ bia t^s biKTVMrr^s, 'through the
lattice' (cf 4 Regn. i. 2, Ezek. xli. 16). 'E7rt/3Xe7roiio-a...2t(rapa' in
A appears to be a supplementary gloss. 'Y^trxvvdrj (B) confuses
K^K'3 poiel with t^12 kal ; the general sense of the former is given
by ^(TxaTio'ei' A. For ecrxari^eiv cf. I Macc. v. 53 ; has it been
suggested here by its similarity to the word used in B ? IloSes :
A more literally ix""?? but ttovs represents UVB elsewhere, e.g.
Ps. Ivi. (Ivii.) 6, Prov. xxix. 5. 29. At crocpai iipxova-ai: A, again
aiming at a literal rendering, ao(Pa\ ap^ova-mv. On the other
hand B's aTria-Tpc<\rfv \6yovs avTTJs eavrfj is close and yet idiom-
atic, while A's aTreKpivaro iv prjpacriv avTfjs goes too far afield ;
the latter appears to be a Hexaplaric correction (Field, ad loc).
30. Ovx evpr](Tov(Tiv avTov diapfpi^ovra (XKvXa ; SO ®^-*^ ; Heb. 'are
they not finding, [are they not] dividing booty?' Lxx. seem
to have read pTTID for 1p?n\ OiKreipnaiv oiKreiprjaei B, (fiiXid^av
(f)iKois A ; both, while labouring to keep up the alliteration of the
Heb., miss its point through ignorance of a rare use of Dn^i ; for
(piXidCeiv cf. xiv. 20 B, 2 Chron. xix. 2. UoikiKtcoi' (A, ttolkIXcov)
misses the dual ' embroidery on both sides' (R. V.), or ' a couple of
pieces,' " precisely as DTlCn"! above '' (Moore). Bd6r] in A seems
to be an error for ^acfyij, which is found in several cursives ; see
Field, ad /oc, and Lagarde's Lucian. Tw rpax^ijXa avroi o-Ki}Xa =
apparently bh^ "inNlv'P; M.T. 'for the necks of the spoil.' &^
substitutes the usual ai'aroX)7 for the spirited and literal rendering
of B (cf. Ps. xviii. = xix. 7), and appears to have read ITIIUJ^ ;
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.
27. IH begins in "IDN^I, A, Luc. koi el-rrev A. 'Ek x^i-pos tov
\fovTos...T7Js (ipKov, an exact rendering ; cf. Gen. ix. 5 eK x^i-pos
TrdvTcov Tmv drjplaiv. Luc, Th., eK aroparos tov X. Koi €k x^i-pos rrjs
apKov. Tov dnfpiTpijTov, repeated from v. 36 (/\ 151). 38. pav-
8vav (Jud. iii. 16, 2 Regn. x. 4): +avTov, A, with fH. ETeptKe^a-
\niav X' T^fpi Trjv KecfyaXrjv avTov : Luc. (A), with Iwl, tt. x- (T^fBrjKfv
eVi ktK., adding, /cat evedvaev avra dapaKU. 39. "E^axrfv tov
Aauet'S, sc. 2aovX (cf V. 38); Luc, A, follow Heb. in making
David the object of the verb (e(o)aaTo Aave/S). ^EKOTriaaev nepi-
TraTTjo-as (A, TrepnTaTfjcrai) ava^ koi dis, 'more than once he wearied
^ "Of the versions only [Vulg.] comes near the true sense" (Moor^).
Jerome renders puUherrima feminm-um.
T/ie Septuagi/it as a Version. 335
himself with walking (strove to walk) in them,' reading ^^^, as
in Gen. xix. 11 IN/fl, LXX. irapiKidrjirav (Wellhausen, Driver,
H. P. Smith). "Attu^ km 8is 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 □.'•rip'-l Oy?. 'Acfyaipovaiv avra d-n-'
avTov, reading the verb probably as D'lp!'"!, and omitting 1)1.
40. Aidovs Te'Kfiovs in B is obviously wrong, and A scarcely mends
matters by omittin^j the adjective. Correct, with Lucian, Xidovs
Xfiovs. 'Ev TO) Kabi(x) TTOififviKM : naBiov = Ka8i(TKos, here only in
LXX., and perhaps unknown elsewhere : voifjLevtKos (D^yiH) again
in Zach. xi. 15. Eh a-vWoyfjv, apparently for Olpbv (fE
D'lp'?*5'1, Aq. Kat iv dvaXfKTriplco). 41 is wanting in €>^, 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. Ui'ppuKrjs' cf. xvi. 12, Gen. xxv. 25.
43. 'Qo-fi, added by the translators to soften the opprobrious kvcov.
'Ev fjdi38(a Kul Xidois, Ifl 'in (with) staves'; Kal Xidon is prob-
ably intended to make the question correspond to the statement
of 7/. 40. The next words in the I,xx. K<n finev Anvei'S Ov^^l, dXX'
fj xfipoylv} Kvvoi are evidently of the same character — a "singu-
larly vapid reply" (Driver).
Regn. ii. 11--18.
II. \vT<oi> iTopfv<)fx(v<i)i> ('nopfvovTo Ka\ (XdXiwi' — an intcrestint,'
attempt to combine Greek idiom with some reminiscence of the
Heb. phrase; Lurian abandons the Heb., and corrects, avrcov
■nopfviiph'uiv Kin XuXovvtwv. IjTTroi' nvpoi, Heb. 'horses of fire';
cf. iTTTTfuj, Heb. 'horsemen,' ?'. 12. 'Ai'u iiiiTiw (P?), cf. Gen.
i. 7 8i(x,6>pi(T(v...dvii fX(<Tw. 'AvfXrffj.(f)dTi, Heb. 'went up'; the
Greek verb is apparently repeated from vv. 9, 10, where it = npt'.
From this passage it has been borrowed by the translator of
Sirach (xlviii. 9, 14, xlix. 14, Ii), and by two writers in the N.T.
('Mc' xvi. 19, Acts i. 2, 1 1"> ; on its symbolical use see the writer's
Apostles' Creed., p. 70 f. 'Qr, a Heb. ; cf i Regn. xvii. 43 (above).
12. Udrtp TTurfp, Heb. 'my father' ^/j. Ai(ppT)^ff...pr)ypaT<i, after
the Heb. : Lucian omits the noun, probably because of the harsh-
ness of the assonance. 13. Kai ilx/zojirfi' = m^l ; Luc, ku'i di'fiXaro.
Mr)X<i>Ti]v, 'sheepskin,' an interpretation of n'^"^.< {WuX^. pa ilium)
wherever it is used of Elijah's characteristic raiment (3 Regn.
xix. 13, 19, 4 Kegn. ii. 8 ff.) ; cf. Heb. xi. 37 nfpufXOov iv ptjXuiTu'n.
'Endvoidfv, sc. avTov (Heb., Luc). 'EAtjfrnlf, ^ Heb.; »c(ij ini-
oTptyl/fi' 'KAfKraif is Hexaplaric, and wanting in H*, but
336 The Septuagint as a Version.
supplied by B'^A Luc. 14. 'O ^eoj, m Vn'^$? ^i^^ 'A^c^w, a
transliteration answering to X-IH PlX {M-); in x. 10 the same
form = i<1SX, which was perhaps the reading before the LXX. in
this place. Aq. /caiVep avros, but Symm. Kai vvv, whence Jerome
etiain tiiinc. 15. km 01 ev 'lfpei;^a) : y^ Kai A Luc. with i^. 16. E^'.^
is not represented by <&)^^ ; Luc. adds dal. Ylo\ 8vvdfiews, 7')n"\3?.
'Ev Tw 'lopddvrj, 'EXetoraie, ^ Heb., Luc. 18. In A Luc. Aq. Th. fil
the verse begins 'And they returned to him'; cf. v. 13.
Ps. cix. (ex.) I — 4.
I. ["o] Kipios TM Kvpia fiov, ''yiah nini. 'ek Se^iwi/, ''yi?'h; in
V. 5 the same Gr. is used for ''J'P*. ?U. 'YttottoSiov rmv irohav aov :
vTroKciTco is the reading of the best authorities in Mt. xxii. 44,
Mc. xii. 36, but VTTOTT. keeps its place in Lc.^^- ^"-j Hebrews. 2. kui
KaTaKvpLev€= mi") apparently. 3. Mera aov, "m^iV (ill, '^tpV). 'H dpx^
seems to point to a reading n2''n3 or 03^3 (cf. Job xxx. 15, Isa.
xxxii. 8) ; rav ayiwv (a-ov) = □''C'^p (T'C^tp) ; Symm. eV opeaiv
('Tini for ^^Tn^) ayioLs. Ek yacrTpos wpo eu}(r(f)6pov iyiwqad cre,
though not quoted in the N.T., had an important place in post-
aposlolic Christian teaching from Justin onwards (cf. Justin,
Tryph. cc 63, 76, 83 ; Tert. adv. Marc. v. 9 ; Cypr. test. 17, cp.
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.
Arian. 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-
feruni gcnui te, with the variant generavi in Tert. I.e. ; Jerome's
'Hebrew' Psalter reads with JH quasi de imlva orietiir tibi ros
adolescentiae. The LXX. appear to have read their Heb. text
as T'TTl/'l "IHwVp Dmo, perhaps dropping 7D3? as unintelligible.
4. Kara rr\v rd^iv, ^H'll'l 7]}, Aq. Symm. Kara Xoyov. Cf. Heb. v,
6 ff., vii. II, 15 (Kara tt]v opoioTrjra). The translator probably
had before him the LXX. of Gen. xiv. 18; he transliterates the
unique name pTV"''3?D in the same way.
Prov. viii. 22—25, 30 — 31-
22. "Ekti<t€v pe. So (g>K'BAetc. Q L (^cotididit, creavii)\ codd.
23 = V, 252, with Aq. Symm. Th. Vulg. {possedit)., give eKrr}-
<raro — both possible meanings of HJp. The former rendering
supplied the Arians with one of their stock arguments (cf. Athan. ^r.
c. Ariati. ii. 44 sqq.). Ei? %pya avrov, a loose and partial translation,
probably a confession of inability to understand the Heb. j Th.
The Scptiiagint as a Version. 337
IT pit Tf/s (pyaa-ias a-jro roTf. 23. 'KOefieXiaxrev fi€, reading apparently
^:"tD^ where £&, has "ri??? ; cf. Ps. Ixxvii. (Ixxviii.) 69. Upo tov
TT}v yrjv TToifja-ai, a poor rendering of Heb., probably adopted to
bring this clause into line with v. 24 with which the LXX. seem
to have connected it. 24. LXX. overlook "'H/'Pin and n3D3, unless
they intend to convey the general sense by iroirjo-ai and npoeXdeiv.
25. ndvTaiv, f^ i^. Tevvu p-e, HI 'I was brought forth.' 30. dp-
po^ova-a = jIDX, the word being referred by the translator to
\^i^ ; similarly Symm. Th., ea-TTjpiypevT]. ^1^ Trpoa-e^^mpfv implies
the reading VV)^V'y ; DV DV is connected by LXX. with the next
clause. 31. "Ore.. (TvvTfXfo-as : Heb. 'rejoicing in the world of
his earth.' LXX. seem to have read Jl^PDnH prif-'D, as Lagarde
suggests ; had ?2r\ stood in their text, olnovptvr) would have
been ready at hand as a rendering (cf. 2 Regn. xxii. 16, Ps. ix. 9,
&C.). Ei(j)palv{To, reading VVi^W. Ylol av6pa>Truiv = Dnx \J3 ;
cf. vlovs 'A8dp, Deut. xxxii. 8; D"JX '3 is translated by this phrase
in Ps. x. (xi.) 4, and repeatedly in the poetical books.
[OB xix. 23—27.
23. Tii yap av ^cor) ; See above p. 308 ; the phrase is repeated
in the Hebrew, but the translator contents himself with using it
once. iSX is ignored; its usual equivalent in the LXX. is vvv or
ovv, unless it is transliterated (p. 324). Els top alwva seems to
represent '^V^, which in ffl belongs to the next verse ; Th.
translates it ds pnprvpiov, reading the word as 11^?. 24. B* omits
€1' jreV/Kiiv eV-yXi'f/jr^i'ot which appears to be necessary to the sense ;
in supplying it B'''XA prefix r'j, a manifest gloss. 25. 'Af'vaos
((TTiv 6 (kKviip pe /xAXcoi', a paraphrase of Heb. 'my Got'/ lives';
dtvaos in the LXX. elsewhere = D7y, and ?Xil is dyx^ia-Tfvs (Ruth
iii. g, etc.), or 'KvTpioTrjs (Ps. xviii. 14, Ixxvii. 35). 25—26. 'Etti
yijs dvaaTijCTtn or dviKTTt'jtrft appears to correspond with Ipl? 7V
(D'p*) Dlp^, and to htppu pov to dvavrXovi' TuvTa with HXt "l^i?? '"liy.
6^ points to nxr "PsS^p niy ni>n^ (.Siegfried in Haupt tu/ loc).
But the translator perhaps interprets his text in the light of tlie
doctrine of the Kchurrection, which was accepted from Mac-
cabcan times (cf. Job xlii. 17% and sec Dan. xii. 2, 2 Mace,
vii. 14, xii. 43) ; as cited by Clem. R. i Cor. 26 (ui'no-T^jfffjj
Tr\v adpKd pov TavTTjv Trju dvavrXriaaaat' TdVTa irdvTo), the words
are brought into still nearer agreement with the faith of the
S. S. 22
338 The Septuagi7it as a Version.
Church ; see Apostle^ Ci'eed, p. 89 f. Hapii yap K.vp'iov„.(rvveTe-
\ia6i] corresponds in position with words which JSl divides and
points as "ili^^. '"I.JQ'^ ^T-j'^P-l, but seems to be partly borrowed
from the next verse. ©-^ suggests H^N "h -It;'!;: ni'^xp"! (Sieg-
fried). 27- liavra 8e p.01 avvTereXfcrTai' ifl, ^DV? "173.
MiCAH V. I (iv. 14) — 4 (3).
I. 'Ep,(f)pa)(dfi(reTai dvydrrjp €fi(j)payp.co, i.e. "nJ T\'2 'TiJnn.
Ta? (pvXas roi 'l(Tpat]\ : LXX. read hifl't>\ ''P3K> for '* t^Cb'. 2. B7/(9-
Xe'e/i oiKos 'Ecppdda : did LXX. read nn-)S?X JT-B DnS-ni? ? 'OXtyo-
(TTos ei rov eivat 'art little to be,' as Heb. The passage is quoted
in Mt. ii. 6 in a Greek paraphrase^ which substitutes ov8ap,cos
iXaxla-TT) for 'little to be,' and rols fiy(p.6aiv (''QfX) for 'thousands'
(^r??^)- 3. *Eco? Kaipov TiKTOvarjs re^erat, apparently for e'los Kaipov
ov TiKTOvaa Tf^erai or e. k. tiktoikttjs ore re^erat. 4. Kai o'-v/'erat,
TO iroipviov avTov were obelised in Hex. and find no place in i3fl ;
the former has perhaps originated in a misreading of nvi) as
nX"l"l, so that /cat o\/^. Kai TToipavel is in fact a doublet. Kvpios,
subject; Heb. 'in the strength of J.,' the subject being the same
as in V. 1. 'YTrdp^ovinv, •l^tj^^l. ; the LXX. read HC, connecting
the verb with the previous words ; for 2iy'^ = vTTdpx,fiu cf. Ps.
liv. (Iv.) 20 6 VTrdpx^cov Tfpo Twv ala>v(ov.
Jerem. xxxviii. 31 — 27 (xxxi. 30 — 36).
Vv. 31 — 34 are cited in Heb. viii. 8 — 12, q.v. 31. Aiadfiaop.ai,
in Hebrews a-vvreXecrco, cf. Jer. xli. (xxxiv.) 8 arvvreXiaai (HIS)
duiSrjKTjv, and ib. 15. Tw oi'/cu i>is, in Hebrews enl rov oikop.
32. AiedffjLrjv, in Hebrews eTroiT^a-a : the writer appears to dislike
the repeated alliteration in 8iaTl6e(T$cu 8iadi']Kr]v. 'Ei/ rjfxepa eVt-
\al3ofifvov fjiov, for the more usual rov eVtAa/3e'o-^at jxe or ore {§)
eir{\a^6p.r]v. "On ovk. ivip.eivav f v.. . Heb. ' which. ..they broke';
r]p.ikr)cra alrav, reading Tlbyi for Tl'py^. 33. 17 8ia6>']Kr] fiov, Heb.
'the covenant.' Al8ovs Scocro), a Hebraism not represented in 1151 ; in
Hebrews 818011s appears without Scoo-co, and so AQ in Jer. Ets ti)v
8uivoiav avrav, Heb. 'in their inward parts.' 34. "liV i<* has no
equivalent in the Greek; tov ttoXlttjv avrov, 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 iK (Tov...'lapa-q\, which blends Mic. v. i*", 3*. It will
be observed that cod. A reads Tjyovp.ivos with Mt.
The Septuagiiit as a Version. 339
(Kiat;...
with an Alexandrian version. 'A7ro...ca>?, nyi ...'?; al
(HMpTiQ>v, i^,^ 'iniquity,' 'sin.' 35 — 37. In fE 36, 37 precede 35.
35. <iT](T\v Kvpios, Heb. 'thus saith J.' (at the beg. of the verse).
'Y\//a)(93, reading lOIT for •'n?|>! ; raneivcodij, Heb. 'be searched.'
O^K dnodonifia : ottoS. is a contracted future (of. p. 305) ;
oi-K is inserted, because the drift of the verse has been mis-
understood (cf. Streane, p. is6f.)- To yevos 'laparjX, Heb. 'all
the seed of I.'; -yeVoj = yiT again in 7/. 37. 36. 2fXjjvr)v, iiS, 'the
ordinances of the moon' (but cf. Cj^nn in v. 35, Heb.). Kpavyf]v,
reading perhaps L"3T or t31 for W"!. 37- Kuptoj IlavTOKpdTap
= ni.N3V i^^"l^ as almost invariably in the Prophets^ from Hosea
xii. 5 (6) onwards, with the exception of Isaiah, who transliterates
nixny (Ki'ptof (Tafini>e, Isa. i. 9, al.). See Thackeray, J. Th. St. iv.
p. ?45 a. ; this passage is from his " Jer. /3."
Dan. xii. I — 4.
I. Xoi/jav (l.xx.), probably a corruption for ^pav (cf. Bevan,
p. 48); rrap€\fV(Ter(n (LXX.), reading "^^V for TDy (draa-Ttja-fTm,
Th.). 'O ttyytXas (LXX.), a gloss; Th. literally, 6 apxov. 'ErrJ
Toi/s vluvs (LXX., Th.), ../?.3 7y. 'KKflvij f) fjpe'pa, LXX., earai
Kaipi'ii Th. ; Th. is .igain more literal than LXX. GXi\/r(y oia ov
yiyoviv (cf. Mt. xxiv. 21, Mc. xiii. 1 9). Th. repeats the subject
with the view of preventing ambiguity ; in the sequel LXX. (as
handed down to us) overlook ''15, wliile Th. adds «V r»/ yrf or «Vi t^j
y^i. 'Y\//co^;jrrfTat LXX.; Bcvan suggests acorruption for fKo-w^^'o-frat
or some other compound of awOr](Tfriu.\ but v^. may be a gloss
upon the tamer word which stood in the original. Th. rightly,
a-codrjatTui. ' Oi hv fvpfO;}, {<Vtp?n — Overlooked by Th., unless we
act cpt the reading of AQ, o (vptSfU [o] yeypappfvm. 2. 'Ki> rJ)
n\iiTn rryv y^f, LXX.; (v yr/i ;^a)/x(n-i Th., Hcb. 'in the ground of
dust '(but see Be\an, p. 201 f.). AicKmopdv kuI ahrxovrjv^ LXX.;
diaair. is perhaps a gloss on (n(T\. ; for the word sec Dcut. xxviii.
25. 3. Ot (fioxTTiipa Tov oiipitvov, LXX., a rcniinisccncc of (icn. i. 14
(lxx.) ; cf. Sap. xiii. 2. Oi Karia-xvovrts tovs Xoyovs LXX., reading
Dnm 'p^rno for D^ain-'nnvo; Th. translates D^airi D^?nvnp.
Ta I'taTpa tov nvpavov (l.XX.), the ordinary Biblical phrase, used
in iii. 36,63; Heb., Th. have 'the stars.' 4. ^Anopavciaiu (lxx.),
diHaxdioa-iv (Til.). Both senses have been found in tlic Heb.;
cf. Bevan, ad loc. UXrjtrdi^i i) -y/} (i8»K«nr, LXX., reading Hi,'"! or
ny-i for nyn.
* Zech. xiii. 1, Jer. xxvi. (xlvi.) 10 arc tlic only exceptions, and in both
aiscs the MSS. arc divided.
22 — 2
340 The 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-
soni praefaiio pataenetica (Cambridge, 1665 ; awi notulis E.
CJmrton, 1865); Hody, De Bibl. textibus origimxlibus (Oxford,
1705); Dr T. Brett, A Letter showing why our English Bibles
differ from the Septuagint, London, 1743 (dated Oct. 17, 1729);'
A Dissertation on the Ancient Versions of the Bible, London,
1760; Thiersch, De Pent. vers. Alexandrina (Erlangen, 1841);
Frankel, Vorstiidieft 211 der Septuaginta(LQ'\]iz\g, 1841); Ueber den
Einfluss der palcistinischen Exegese auf die alex. Hernieneutik,
1857 ; Gt\g&\; Nachgelassene Schriften, iv, 73 ff. (Berlin, 1875 — 8);
Selwyn, art. Septnagifit in Smith's D. B. ii. (London, 1863);
Wellhausen, do. in Encyclopaedia Britannica (London, 1886);
1 W. R. Smith, O. T. in J. C/iurch, p. 83.
^ 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 Anmerkuvgen, and Professor Toy's commentary in
the ' International Critical ' series.
The Septuagint as a Version 341
W. R. Smith, Old Testament in Jewish Church{\ZZ\^ ed. 2, 1892);
Hatch, Essays in Biblical G7rek (Oxford, 1889) ; Driver, Notes on
the Books 0/ Samuel, Intr. (Oxford, 1890 ; second ed., 1913) ; Buhl,
Kanoii u. Text des O. T. (Leipzig, 1891); Nestle, Marginalien
(Tubingen, 1893); Streane, Double Text of Jeretniah (Cam-
bridge, 1896); Kirkpatrick in Expositor, April 1896: Redpath
in A. J. Th. vii. (1903); the various Introductions to the Old
Testament ; Commentaries on particular books, esp. those of
Dillmann and SpurrcU (Genesis), Driver (Deuteronomy), Moore
(Judges), Wellhausen, Driver, and H. P. Smith (Samuel), Burney
(Kings), Mozley (Psalter), Toy (Proverbs), Ryssel (Micah),
Oesterley (Amos), Oltley (Isaiah), Cornill (Ezekiel). A complete
commentary on the LXX., or on any of the groups of books which
compose it, is still a desideratum.
On the Semitic style of the l,xx. the reader may consult the
EtVayo)yi7 of Adrianus (Migne, P. G. xcviii. or ed. F. Gdssling).
342
CHAPTER VI.
Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections,
Catenae.
The Greek Old Testament, as it appears in the editions
of the last three centuries, is divided into chapters and verses
which correspond generally with those of the printed Hebrew
Bible.
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''P'iD?i) at the end of each book and portion of the
canon; thus Deuteronomy is stated to consist of g^c^ pesukim,
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 riT'Ei'lS.
The parashahs are of two kinds, open and closed, i.e. para-
^ In such cases both systems are represented in tlie Cambridge edition
of the LXX. (see O. T. in Greek, i. p. xiv.).
^ For a full account of the divisions of the Hebrew text see Buhl, Kanon
u. Tt'.r/, p. 222; Bleek-Wellhausen, p. 574 f-; Ryle, Canon of the O. T.,
p. 235. Blau, Massorelic Sludies, iii., in y.Q.R., Oct. 1896.
Text-divisiflus : 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 D (for nnin?, 'open') and D (for
npinPj ' 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 parasliah ; the coin-
cidence is marked in the Torah by a thrice repeated q or D.
The Prophets were similarly divided for synagogue reading,
but the prophetic lections were known as haphtaroth (niinpn)
and were not, like the liturgical parashahs, distinguished by
signs inserted in the text, {c) Lastly, the printed Hebrew
liiblcs are divided into chapters nearly identical witli 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 Langion, 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 which use was also made of the older division into
verses or pestikim.
Of printed editions the Homberg Hebrew Bible of 1521
was the first to employ the mediaeval system of chapters ; the
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 (16C1). Both chapters
' A similar systciu of paragraphing has been adopted in the English
ReviNcd Version, and in the Cambridge i.xx.; sec R.V. IVeface , ax\A O.T.
in Creek, i. p. xv.
- In Baer's edition they are given throughout the Bible.
^ In the Pentateuch there is only one, the lesion (n) which begins at
Gen. xlvii. 28 (Ryle, p. 236).
* See Grc^iyiy, prolejiX- P- '''7 ^-
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 1 518, 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
devoted.
I. We begin with the shorter divisions, known as o-Tt'xot,
KcoAa, or KO/xjuara.
(a) 2-rt;^os, 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 ((rTt'xos XiOwv, Exod. xxviii.
17 ff.), the pomegranates wrought upon the capitals of the
pillars in the Temple (o-Tt'xot powv, 3 Regn. vii. 6), and the rows
of cedar- wood shafts (rptcGi/ o-rt^wv o-tvXwv KeSpivwv, 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, Kpavrwp KareXtTrei/ uTro/xi'T^/^ara
£ts fjivpLaSas (TTixoiv Tpeis: Dionysius Halicarn. vi. 11 26 TreVre rj
t^ /LtvpiaSas (TTL)(U)v Tov avSpo? (sc. Aiy/xoo-^eVovs) /caTaXeXoiTroTos.
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
1 It prints the verse-numbers in the margin, and begins every verse with
a capital letter.
■^ E.g. H.-P. 38 (xv.), 122 (xv.), where the modern chapters are marked.
Text-divisions : Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 34.5
the sense ; or it might depend upon a purely conventional
standard. Evidence has been produced' to shew that the last
of these metliods was adopted in the copying of Greek prose
writings, and that the length of the prose stichiis 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 tlie 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-
melry*. Thus the careful entry of the crTtxot in the margins of
ancient books, or the computation at the end of the number of
(TTLXpi. 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 /cwXa or
KOjifiara. The colon, according to Suidas, is a line which
forms a complete clause (o uTr-qinLarfxtvqv ti'i'oiai' €)^wv otti^o?) ;
the comma is a shorter uion''.
This arranj^cment was ori^nnally used in transcribing poetry,
but before JeroiiiL's time it liad been applied to the great prose
' I'.y Ch. Graux, Revue de philologie, II. (1878), p. 97 (T.
- J. K. Harris, Stichovictry, i)p. S, 15.
^ Sec v.. Maiin(lc-'riiom|)son, Gr.ami Lai. l\tli]ci\siraphy,'\.\i. 80; Pri)f.
Sanday, in Studia Ihhlica, iii. p. 2^)5 f. ; J. K. Harris, op. cit. p. 26.
* "Indiculum versuuin in iirlie Roma non ad liquidum, scd ct alibi
avariciae causa non hahent inlcgium."
'' See Wurdsworlii-Wliite, Epilo'^iis, p. 733, nn. i, 2.
346 Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc.
authors; ci.Wx&xon.praef. ad Isa)-: "nemo cum prophetasversibus
viderit esse descriptos, metro eos aestimet apud Hebraeos ligari,
et aliquid simile liabere de Psalmis vel operibus Salomonis; sed
quod in Demosthene et TuUio solet fieri, ut per cola scribantur
et commata, qui utique prosa et non versibus conscripserunt, nos
quoque, utilitati legentium providentes, mterpretationem novam
scribendi genere distinximus" ; praef. in Ezech."^: "legite igitur
et hunc iuxta translationem nostram, quoniam per cola scriptus
et commata nianifestiorem legentibus sensum tribuit." Cf. Cas-
siod. de inst. div. Hit., praef. Hesychius of Jerusalem (+c. 433)
treated the Greek text of the Dodecapropheton in the same
way ^: ecrTt \i,lv apx^alov tovto rots 6fo(f)6poi.s to (Tirov8a(xiJi.a (TTixq-
Sov, a)S Ta TToXXd, Trpos rrjv tS)v peXercopevcov crcKprivfutv rus 7rpo(f)rj-
T€ias eKTideadai. ovrco rotyapovv 6\^et fiev tov Aa(Sl8 Kidapi^ovra,
Tov UapoLpiaaTTjv de ras Trapa^oXas Koi tov 'F,KKXr]atacrTi]v tcis irpo-
(pTjTelas indeiiivov ovtco (Tvyypa<pf'i(rav ttjv eVi rw 'I(uj3 j3ij3Xov, ovtch
fiepiadevTa Tois (rTi)(^ois rot tcov J^crpaTav a(Tpara...ov pdrrjv ev Tois
8a)8fKa jSt/SXoif tCov Trpo(f>T]Ta>v koi avTos T]Ko\ovBri(Ta.
Specimens of colometry may be seen in Codd. N B, where
the poetical books are written in co/a 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
four.
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
Book. Nicephorus. Cod. Clarom. Mommsen's list.
Genesis 4300 4500 3700
Exodus 2800 3700 3000
Leviticus 2700 2800 2300
Numbers 353° 3650 3000
Deuteronomy 3100 3300 2700
Joshua 2100 2000 1750
Judges ( ^,^^ ^ 2000 1750*
250 250
Judges I , {
Ruth ; 2450 j
' Migne, P. L. xxviii. 771.
- Migiie, P. L. xxviii. 938.
2 Migne, P. G. xxiii. 1339 sq.
* Total of first 7 books, ' iSooo-*
Text-divisions : Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 347
Stichometry of
Stichometry of
Siioiioiiietry of
Book.
Nicephorus.
Cod. Clarotn.
Mommsen's list.
1 Kingdoms
2 Kingdoms
\
2240 j
2500
2000
2300
2200
3 Kingdoms
\
2203 j
2600
2550
4 Kingdoms
2400
2250^
1 Paralip.
2 Paralip.
\
5500 j
2040
2100
I Esdras
\
{
2 Esdras
5500 j
1500
Psalms
5100
5000
5000
Proverbs
1700
1600
Ecclesiastes
750
6co
Song
280
300
Job
1800
1600
1700
Wisdom
IIOO
1000
Sirach
2800
2500
Esther
350
1000
700
Judith
1700
1300
I 100
Toliit
700
1000
900
Hosca
530
Amos
410
Micah
310
Joel
90
Obadiah
70
Jonah
150
Nahum
140
Habakkiik
160
Zephaninh
140
Ilaggai
I 10
Zcchariah
660
Malachi
200
(I)C)(lccaproi)hct()n
3000
[2970]
3S00)
Isaiah
3800
3600
3580
Jeremiah
4000
4070
4450
liaruch
700
Ezckiel
4000
3600
3340
Daniel
2000^
1600
«350
1 Maccabees
(
2300
2300
2 Maccabees
>
7y>'^ {
2300
1800
3 Maccabees
)
I
4 Maccabees
1000
' In Mommsen's list the following totals are also given: Rulh and
I — 4 Kingilom.s, 9500; Salomonic books, 6500; Major I'rophcis, 15370;
the whole canon, 69500.
' bu^anna is calculated separately (500).
348 Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc.
The figures given above correspond to those in the hsts
printed in c. i., which follow the text of Preuschen {Analecta,
pp. I56f.,i42ff., I38f.). Some variants and suggested rectifications
may be seen in Zahn, Gesch. d. NTlichen Kanons, ii., pp. 295 ff.,
143 ff., and Sanday, Stadia 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 1—4 Regn. and Isaiah
present a nearly complete record ' of stichi written prima
manu, 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 B and Q agree
generally in Isaiah; in both MSS. the last entry occurs at
Isa. Ixv. 19, where the number of j-Z/V/i/ reaches 3500. But the
famous Chigi MS. of the Prophets (Cod. 87) counts 3820
stichi in Isaiah I 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. Cf. Nestle, Inirod. io
the Textual Criticism of ike N. T. (E. t r.), p. 4.
2 COK, or as AUatius read the MS., ["ixiH (3S0S); see Cozza, Sacr. bibL
vel. fragm. iii. p. xv.
3 Ve cod. March., p. 23 f.
Text-divisions : Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 349
where in F the stichi Z-xt 3000', but in Nicephorus 3100. On
the other hand the later uncial K makes the stichi of Numbers
to be 3535, which comes very near to the reckoning of
Nicephorus^
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 ivhich
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.
Kloslermann's Analecta^, givii)i4 the result of his researches
among cursive MS.S., with some additions supplied by the
Editors of tlie larger LXX.
Genesis 4308'* H.-F. 30, 52, 85 ; Barb. iii. 36; Val. gr. 746;
Pal. gr. 203 ; Athos, Pantocr. 24, Laur. 7.
112 ; Athens, Nat. 44
II. -P. 30, 52, 85; Barb. iii. 36; Athens,
Nat. 44
H.-P. 30, 52, 54, 85; Baib. iii. 36; Paris,
Keg. gr. 2; 2000, Athens, Nat. 44
3535" II.-P. 30, 52, 85; Barb. iii. 36; Vat.gr. 2! 22;
Alliens, Nat. 44; Paris, Keg. 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
' Tin- symbol us( d is "^1-, wliicli occurs also in H. On this symbol, sec
J. VVoisiii, De dracfoiiim notis numeiali/>tis, n. 67 (Kiel, 18S6).
• The nuniLT.ition of the s/ir/ii in the poctiiul books ascribed to the
gre.itcr uncials in the ("ainbri<lge manual i.XX. is derived from Ur Neslle's
.Su/<pl,menlum'* (I.eip/.ig, 18S7), and rests on an actual counting of the lines,
and not on stnlemenls in the MSS. themselves.
^ Cf. J. K. Harris, Sticlwmelry, p. 31.
• See p. 44 ff. Cf. /. Th. St.,\\. p. 338 IT.
•' 4400 in 1 1. -P. s4.
• 3.S.50 in H.-P. 54-
Exodus
3400
Leviticus
2700
Numbers
3535
Deuteronomy
3100
Joshua
2100
350 Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc.
Judges
Ruth
I
2
3
4
I
Kingdoms
Kingdoms
Kingdoms
Kingdoms
Paralip.
2 Paralip.
1 Esdras
2 Esdras
Psalms
Proverbs
Ecclesiastes
Song
Job
Wisdom
Sirach
Esther
Judith
Tobit
Hosea 75o
Joel 2IO
Habakkuk 150
Zephaniah 160
Haggai 120
Zechariah 670
Malachi 190
IsaicJi 3700
Jeremiah 45°°
Baruch 51 4
Lamentations* h4)(?)
Ep. of Jeremiah 200
Ezekiel 4500
Daniel 1800
Susanna 224
2100^ Barb. iii. 36; 2156, Paris, Reg. gr. 2 ; Athos,
Pantocr. 24
00 Barb. iii. 36; Paris, Reg. gr. 2
Barb. iii. 36 (500, Ven. Marc. gr. xvi)
Barb. iii. 36; 2042, Ven. Marc. gr. xvi
Barb. iii. 36; Ven. Marc. gr. xvi
Barb. iii. 36; Ven. Marc. gr. xvi
Barb. iii. 36) y^^^^ j^^^.^ _ ^^j
Barb. 111. Z^S
Barb. iii. 36 Ven. Marc. gr. xvi
Barb. ni. 36^ -^ ' ^
Barb. iii. 36 ^
H.-P. l6i, 248; Barb. iii. 36
H.-P. 161, 248; Barb. iii. 36; 753, H.-P.
253
H.-P. 161, 248; Barb. iii. 36; 353, H.-P.
253
(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, Ven. gr.
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. 2313
H.-P. 231 ; 3820, Barb. iii. 36
H.-P. 231 ; 3800, Barb. iii. 36
H.-P. 231 ; 350, Barb. iii. 36
H.-P. 86; /!(?) 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
2500
2343
2400
2600
2000
3000
1300
1800
5100
1750
750
286
2200
1250
2650
750
1300
750
1 2450 in II. P. 54.
2 Ecclesiastical Canticles, 600, Barb. iii. 36.
3 Total of Minor Prophets variously calculated at 3750, 3500, 3300
(Barb. iii. 36).
'^ Possibly a corruption of ne (see ne.\t page).
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.
Proverbs
61
16
Zephaniah
5
Ecclesiasles
25
7
Haggai
3
Song
40
5
Zechariah
18
Job
33
Malachi
6
flosea
II
Isaiah
74
Amos
6
Jeremiah
100
98
Micah
7
Baruch
9
Joel
3
Lamentations
85^
Obadiah
I
Ep. of Jeremiah
6
Jonah
3
Ezekiel
56
Nahum
3
Daniel
[2.]
21
flabakkuk
4
The figures in the left-hand colunm zxo. prima manu\ those
on the riglit are in a hand of perhaps the eleventh century
(? that of ' Clement the Monk,' the industrious instauralor who
has left his name on pp. 238 and 264 of the MS.*). In
Proverbs, Ecclesiasles, 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
' Tischcndorf (Man. icur. ined. n. c, i. prolc^jg., p. xxvii.) points out
that TcituUian rccopniscs a system of chapters in Niimhcr'^.
' In this hook the chaptcr-numl'crs corresijond to thu ilivisions indicated
in the original by the letters (jf the Hebrew al^>habel, and in the recension by
transliteration of the Hebrew alplial)elic names.
•■ This number includes the Greek additions.
* See the pref. to Fabiani and Cozza's facsimile, p. xvii. ^qq.
352 Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc.
Daniel the two sets of numbers are distinctly visible. In
Jeremiah the instaurator 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 Salonionic 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 (^) and proceed regularly (x. i, 16, 29, 31, 34, 36,
38; xi. I, &c.) down to xix. 17 (X^) ; in 3 Regn. the first
numeral occurs at c. viii. 22 (k^S), and the last at xxi. 17
(^) ; 4 Regn. returns only one or two numbers (e.g. 'Q stands
opposite to c. iii. 20). In Isaiah, again, the entries are few and
irregular; JS appears at c. ii. i, and ^ at xxi. i.
Cod. K seems to have no chapter-marks prima maim, but
in Isaiah they have been added by «*=•= 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
origin".
Cod. M like cod. B exhibits two systems of capitulation ^
1 Tischendorf, notes to facsimile, p. v.
- Ceriani, de cod. March., p. 24 ff.
" See Moiitfaucon, Biblioth. Coisliniana, p. 4 sqq.
Text-divisions : Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc, 353
one of which is accompanied by brief headings corresjjonding
in general character to the tltXol of the Gospels. The two
capitulations, which are represented with more or less of com-
pleteness in the Hcxateuch and in 1-3 Kingdoms^, differ
considerably, as the following table will shew :
Capitulation accompanied
by titles.
99
no
61
51
Cod. Sin. I. (x.) is divided into Ke(f)d\aia which number as
follows: Genesis, 150; Exodus, 88; Leviticus, 63; Deutero-
nomy, 69 ; Joshua, 30 ; i Regn., 66 ; 2 Rcgn., 63*.
A list of sections ^luoted by l)r Klostermann^ from the
< iirsive MS. cod. Barl)erini iii, 36 (cent. x. or xi.) exhibits
another widely different scheme":
Genesis
Marginal
Capitulation
106
Exodus
84
Leviticus
54
Niunbers
53
Deuterononi
y 65'-'
Genesis
26
3 Kingdoms
16
Habakkuk
n
Exodus
8
4 Kingdoms
17
Zephaniah
3
Leviticus
12
I4osea
5
llaggai
3
Numbers
21
Amos
6
Zccliariah
L3
Deuteronomy
35
Micah
6
Maiachi
'^
Josliuu
8
Joel
4
Isaiah
43
Judges
4
Obadiah
n
Jeremiah
41
I Kinj^donis
'5
Jonali
3
E/.ckiel
21
2 Kingdoms
1 1
i\ .ill urn
1
Daniel
9
' .Aiiolhcr Coislin MS. (Coisl. ^r. S) {jivi's llio fnlJKwinp cniiitul.ition
for s(iinc of llie later luNlories: i L'hroii. 8j, 2 Cliiuii. KC), Toliil 21, Jiulitli
34, I Ksdr. 109, 2 Esdr. 80, Esther 55.
' Hcpinninj^ at c. iv. 41.
* In Jiidjjcs there is no capilidafinn, Init (lie jjcriods of bondage are
(listinguislicil as AoyAcfA A, B, &c., and (he exploits of the successive
judges l)y KpiTHC A, B and so fortii.
* Cf. the niimhcrs in B. M. Add. M.S. 35113: Gen., I4.S; Kxotl., 84;
Lev., 62; Num., 61 ; Dent., 69; Josii., 30; Jud-, 33.
* AnaUifa, p. 80 ff. This division into sections, however, refers not to
the text of the honks, init to liiat of the synopsis contained in the M.S.
C'f. also the K«(>i.\aia in Ilah. iii. found in Harl). v. 45 (86, 11. -1'.).
* Interesting traces of another old capitulalion arc to be fuiind in the
iKKofx) Tov vii/xov prinletl in Coteleiii AVt/. 0'/'. A/01/, i. p. i. The cli.T|il<rs
s. s. 23
354 Text-divisions : Stichi, CJiapters^ 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 io-w 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. M.
Num.
vii. lO. To 8cbpa riov dp)(^6vTC0V. Ilepl rcov Swpcor cov TrpaarjveyKav
oi [t]/3' (ip^ovTfs.
viii. 5. Ilepi Tov ayviaiiov twv AcpopKTjJ^os tSjv AeveiTuiv els to
Afi>[tra)i']. XeiTovpyelv Kvpico.
xi. 16. Ilepi roiv TTpea^vTepcov Utpl o npecrj^vTepaiv rcov npocprj-
\i]\lrop,evu)v'-' to nvev- TfvaavToyv.
fia.
here are shorter and therefore more numerous than in any of the lists given
above, e.g. Exod. xxii. i — 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.
^ Paragraphs or sections marked by caj^itals 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. made for the use of the Editors
of the larger l.xx. : H.-P. x. xi., 16, 17, 18, ■29, 38, 46, 53, 54, 56, 57, 59,
64 (double system of capitulation), 68, 70, 73, 74, 76, 78, 79 (in Gen. xtt^'),
83, 84, 93, 108, 118, wo, 121, 123, 126, 127, 128 (contemporary numbers),
130, 131, 134; B. M. Add. 35123, Lambeth 1214; Paris Ars. 8415; Esc. 0.
i. 13, S. i. 16; Munich gr. "454 ; Grotta Ferrata A. 7. i ; Leipzig gr. 361 ;
Athos, Pantocr. 24 (double system of cajiitulation, tItXol), Vatop. 513,
516; Laur. 7. 112 (both chapters and crrLxoi- numbered); Athens, nat. gr.
44 ; Sinai I, Jerusalem, H. Sep. 2.
^ Tischendorf {.Uan. safi: iiied. n. c. i. p. 78) prints AyOMeNCON.
Text-divisions : Stichi, Chaptirs, Lections, etc. 355
Cod. K.
Num
xii. I.
'Ari/>d)i' Kai y\a^na Kara
Ilep\ Toiv Karacmcyf/'afi.e-
vwv Trjv yrjv.
xiv. 23. Ilfpt X(i[Xf;3] v'lov ['le-
CJJOVI'T]].
On offus r]fj.(pai kcit-
TOtrai/Ta frrj eTroirj(rav
llfpl Kope KUi Sadav kcu
Ai'iipwv Kai Aivciv,
XIII. I.
XIV. 34.
XVI. I.
Cod. M.
Hfpl Tijs "KfTTpas Mapiup t}v fcr^ev
vfiptcraaa ttjv yvvaiKa Mcocr^.
llfpl TUiv ano(TTa\(VT(i)v KUTaano-
nrjcrai rfjv yrjv.
XVll. I.
XXI.
rifpi r^f pdi38ov 'Aapa)v
rrjs ^XacTTrjadarjs,
llepl ^T)wv iiu(ri\e(i)s A-
poppiiMV .
'itluxrfjv napa Toii Kupe avva-
y<.oyt]s.
rifpl TO)V aTToaTciKivToiv TTpOS
Sj^COI', Ktll Trios (VlKtJtTfV aiTov
6 \(TparfK.
ri&)s bi<obtv(Tav oi vioi lap'HjX.
xxxiii. I. Enapcrii Km aTa6fio\To)v
vlcjv IcrparjX.
xxxiii. 3. llfpl roil vv)(dr]pfp()v.
XXXV. 9. Ilfpi rwv TToXfcov Twv Ilepi (f)oi'(U)i.
(fivya8evTr]pio}v.
The following ti'tXoi for Exod. ii. — viii. are taken from a
Vienna MS. (Tli. gr. 3) :
y-
b.
I
rrpwTTj onTiiiTui ir pos Ma)U(T/)i/ iv tj/ jidToy.
TTfpi Ttji (TVVdVTqiTfUlS p(T (j) Adpti')!'.
tirroSoy (?) Mantrfo)? Ktn 'Aapcov irpii'i 'bapitu),
nfp\ Tuiv p<t<TTiy(o(Uvru)v ypappartwi'.
S~. TTfpt rrjs p<iii8ov Tiji (TTp(i(l)fiiTrii (Is <><f)ii'.
C- npu>TT) TT\t]yip p(Tti(rTpii<l>ii rov vi%iTOi ds (tipn.
r). fitvTfpa nXrjyrf, Tutv (idTpd^aii'.
6. fpiTTj TrXrfyi'i, t<ov (TKVinaiy. KrX.
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 hy a complete set of TtrXot for the 'i'welve
Prophets and Isaiah'. The numbers are as follows: Hosea
* Migne, /*. G. xciii., 1345 si|C|. The titles for Isai.ih with .i collection
23 — 2
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 88. The titles are wiih scarcely an exception
polemical or dogmatic in character, e.g. Hosea : a. EIkwv tt;?
Twv 'louSatwK (Twaywy-^s, £^ 17s 6 XptcTTOs; to Kara. aapKa TtfCTerai,
Kttt Xaou TO /x,ei' eV aTncTTLa efxewev, to St varepov iTnaTpe(pei Kal
crw'^eTat. (/;) 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. i6 ff.,
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 cod. Vat. Gr. 347 [Hcsychii Hicros. interpretaiio Isaiae, Frei-
burg i. Breisgau, 1900).
^ liugati, Daniel, p. i. See also the irtpioxo-l (or virodicreis) els roi/s
\pa\/j.ovs ascribed to Eusebius of Caesarea, which precede the Psalter in
Cod. A (printed in Migne, f. G. x.\iii. 67sqq.).
^ See above, p. 168, and cf. Gregory, 'J exikritik, i. p. 337.
* //. .S'. V. 22 (.V 'AXe^afSpei'a r^ rerpadi. /cat ry Xeyofiivg wapaaKev^ ypa<pai
Text-divisions : Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 357
we tind 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-
nuin quae recitantur de illis dicere magis exigat quae lector
explicuit, tamen quoniam nonnuUi fratrum deposcunt ea potius
quae de prophetia Balaam scripta sunt ad sermoneni disputatio-
nis adduci, non ita ordini Icctionum 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 (/// i Sam. horn, iii.), Origen
complains that the O.T. lesson for the day was too long to be
expounded at a single sitting: to. avayvoio-devra irXfiova ea-rr Kai
(TTf'l ■)^pri €TriT(fJ.v6fJ.iV0V flTTflv, dv(Tl TTf /JlfCOTTdti- (il'fyUOXrdr] TU TTfpl
S(iiid\,,.{lTa ptTu TOVTO Tj laTiijVia t) nepi tov KfKpvcpdai rov AaviB...
(iT(i TU t^fjs r] ItTTopia -qv TpiTrj, ore K(tTe(f)vyfv npus \\xap...€^ris tov-
Tois TjV Tf laTopia fj Bialii'iTjTOi VTrep rrji eyya(TTpipvdov..,T(aadp<i}i'
IIViTOiV 7r(plK07TO)U...OTL TTOTf /^OtlXfTat 6 (TTiaKOTTOi TT pOT(lV(tTO). Oil
this occasion the O.T. lesson seems to have extended from
I Regn. XXV. i to xxviii. 25, including four irepiKoirai or shorter
sections, which, judging from the description, corresponded in
length very nearly to our own chapters".
The lections to which Origen refers were dou!)tless those
which were read in the pre-anaphoral portion of the Liturgy in
the hearing ot the catechumens as well as the faithful. In the
liturgy of Apost. Const, ii., tlie Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, the
Kingdoms, the Chronicles, Ezra, Ncheiniah, Job, the Salonionic
books, and the sixteen Prophets, 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
T< OLvayivilnjKovTai, Kal ol SiSioKuKoi TotJras 4f>firivtvov<n...Kal tovt6 icTiv Iv
' K\r'i,a.vO\n.[<f. fOo<: d/ixo'o''' *aJ yiiii'ilpiyifrji t4 ttoXXA ^v Toi'rais raii Jifi/pait
<l>uh(.T(xt lirl TT)% iKhXrialai otodfas.
' D. C. /!. iv. p. 104.
- Cf. tlic rlT\oi in llie- Coislin MS. (M), wlicrc /ti;', ixO', v' arc nearly
identical with cc. xxxi., xxxii., xxxiii. rcsi>ectivcly (Monlfaucon, ///W. Cohl.,
p. .8).
358 Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc.
Psalter and perhaps the Book of Esther, were employed for
"ihis purpose. The order in Book viii. names only the Law
and the Prophets, but probably the scope is the same. The
' ^rophet,' 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
apx^, reXos, written opposite to the beginning and end of the
TrepiKowi]*. Such traces of adaptation to liturgical use are found
even in cod. B, though not prima manii^. 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 dvayuwaryi in the lessons for the day. But
special Psalms were recited or sung in the Church, as they had
1 Biigliliii.-xn, Eastern Liturgies, pp. 470, 476, 527, 580. See Chrys.
ill Rom. xxiv. 3 (cited above, p. 168).
■^ D. C. A.\ Prophecy, Liturgical (ii. 173'^ ff.).
^ Deinst. coeiiob. ii. 6.
* On this word see Suicer, Thesaurus, ii. 673 sqq. It is used by Justin,
Dial. ",% and Clem. AI., Strom, iii. 38. In Origen (quoted above) the vepL-
KoiTT) is merely a section; at a later time it was used for the avd-^puana.
^ Fabiani .and Cozz:i, /'ro/egg., p. \ix.
Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lcctiotis, 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 p^ivate^ 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 lioiir of
the day and night. It is as follows :
Kanongc HMepiNooN h'aAmcon. K. NYKTepiNoi TcoN vj'aAmcon.
'Op^/ju'oP
f
7,
ii^' n/J.'
pfia
"Ql^iu]
(1
\|/'(lX/ii")S'
$
<]
:-i'
Kff
y
a
s;
pa
e
\i
r'
II
C
i&
1
K
6'
pUl
i
/>/*,
III
'"',
il-i'
pK
»
»
>»
a
■\|r(iXyuoy
oS'
i^'
k6'
v8'
8'
S"
1
e
S'
r
/
c
va
v
ir
6'
<
9
i
Co
»
f
in
KG
t/S'
vS-'
The existing order of the Orthodox Eastern Church divides
the Psalter into 20 sections known as KuOia-fjiaTa, each of which
is broken by the recitation of a Gloria into three o-TaVti?. The
larger sections arc i. — viii., ix. — xvi., xvii. — xxiii., xxiv. — xxxi.,
xxxii. — xxxvi., xxxvii. — xlv., xlvi. — liv., Iv. — Ixiii., Ixiv. — Ixix.,
\\\. — Ixxvi., Ixxvii. — Ixxxiv., Ixxxv. — xc, xci. — c, ci. — civ.,
cv. — cviii., cix. — cxvii., cxviii., cxix. — cxxxi., cxxxii. — cxlii.,
( xliii. — cl. In the later liturgical Greek Psalter the catliisnialii
arc divided by an ornamental band or some other mark of
separation, and tlie staaris by a marginal Ao (^o^«. i«' the
Doxology, which was repealed at the end ol eatli)*.
' See i». 251.
' Cf. C.xs^i.1n, /«(/. iii. 2S9.
•* Cf. Const, viii. 37, fitrbi t6 liiiOr/i/ai tui> opOfHvliv.
* Cf. Const, viii. ^4, I'ov ittCKyixnnKov \^ia\y.liv.
' Cf. O. '/'. in Gr., ii. p. \i.
360 Text-divisions: 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 {rofios a — XS", of. Eus. H.E. vi. 36).
Both in Isaiah and in Daniel certain prophetic opaaeis were dis-
tinguished. Thus cod. Q™s places op&cic A opposite to Isa. vii. i,
and opACic h' at c. xvii. i. Iry Daniel cod. A marks 12 opaaas,
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
iDCgins, e.g. dXe0 {(iK4>i "Xf^a'^), ftrid, -yi'/xfX (yV^)) ^aXeO (SAe^,
6VXt, bekd), and so forth-. 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 marghial enumeration distinguishes the
speeches of the interlocutors, and some MSS. (e.g. t< and V)
add marginal notes after the manner of stage-directions, such as
1) vvfj-Cpr] Trpo? t6i> vvfKplov, rais veavLO'iv t] vvp(j)r], al veavites rw
Small departures from the continuous or slightly paragraphed
writing of the oldest MSS. are found in a few contexts which
lend themselves to division. Thus even in cod. B the blessings
of the tribes in Gen. xlix. 3 — 27 are separated and numbered
A — iB. 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 vianu; and the systems of
numeration differ to some extent. Thus according to B", a' = pro-
logue, ^' = i-fii, 7' = iii, S' = iv, 6' = v, r' = vii, ^' = viii, »?' = vi,
& = \\, i' = x, while A^ makes 7' = iv, 8' = v, 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. y^T 'i^.) and
Wordsworth-White {Epilogus, p. 733 ft'.); for the stichometry see
also Dr Sanday in Stiidia Biblica, iii. p. 264 f. But it remains
' The variations in the MSB. are interesting and instructive.
^ Greek numerals are somclimes added in the margin ; see above, p. 351.
^ R gives the Ileb. letters in Greek; T the corresponding Greek numerals.
* In cod. V=23 these become sometimes lengthy t/tXo(, e.g. at v. 7
e^rjXdev /irj evpovcra rbv vv/.i(ploi' i] vvfX(p-q Kai (I)s iv vvktI evpeddaa uTrb tCcv
(pvKaKwv rrjs nd'Xecos Tpav/j.aTif,'€Tat, Kai a'ipovaiv avT7)i rb Oepiarpoi' oi raxo-
(pvKaKo'vi'Tes.
Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 361
doubtful wlielher these divisions of the Latin Bible belonged
originally to Jerome's version or were transferred to it from the
Old Latin'; 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 capitula not seldom [ad uxor. ii. 2, de
motifls^. II, de virg. vet. 4, de praescr. 5, adv. Prax. 20); but it
is not clear that he uses the word to connote definitely marked
sections.
On the capitulation of the Coptic versions the student will
find something in Wiikins, Pciitat. praef., ad fin., and Lagarde,
Oricntalia, p. 125 ff.; on the Egyptian lectionary, he may con-
sult the list of authorities collected by Brigh'tman, Aiicient
Liturgies, p. Ixix. For the Ethiopic version, cf. Uillmann's Ethio-
pic Pentateuch, I. ii., pp. 163 f., 173. The stichometry of the
Syro-Hexaplaric is discussed by Lagarde, MittJiciliotgen, 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.
XX ix. ff,
4. In connexion with the sul)ject 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 {conim.), or com])iled {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 ])lace
we will limit ourselves to the relatively late compilations which
lie based on the exegetical works of earlier writers '^
Such expositions were formerly described as tVXoyat' or
irapaypa(f>ni, or as eViTo/xai epfXTji'doiv, Of iiijyrja-w: fpavKTOelaai
uno f5irt(/)opG)i' TrnTffKDV, or a-vv6{f/(i<; <T)(nXiKal (k ?)t(i(l)<'ip(<)y vtto-
HurjuaToyv (jvXke)(^6(UJ-ai, or by some similar periphrasis. The
use of the technical term catena {trupti) is of comparatively
mi;(lcrn dale. Catena aurca is a secondary title of the great
* Cf. Sanday, op. cil., p. i-,i.
' <■ /'/. Q. I\. i. (;(;. |). (^ : " ilio process of drawintj ii|) Cafcn.ae goes on
fioiii llic fifih to the fourlci-nlli or filtccnlli century."
362 Text-divisions : Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc.
compendium of comments on the Four Gospels brought
together by Thomas Aquinas, and a Greek MS. Psalter of the
i6th century (Vat. Gr. 2240) adopts the phrase, translating it
by XP^'^V aXva-i?. "Zupd is used in this sense by the editor of
the Greek catena of Nicephorus, which bears the title Seipa
cvos Kat TrevTTjKovra vTrofJLvrjfxaTKTTiHv eis rr/v ^Oktolt^v^ov kol to.
Ti2v Bao-iXetwi/. 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 a-apac. 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 witliin
their reach. They laid under contribution Jewish writers sucli
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. R. i. 99, p. 46 f.
^ Text-dhnsious: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 363
place where their contributions begin : thus xpYc[oct6moy],
cop[ireNOYc], eYc[eBiOY], eeoA[copoY] ANT[ioxeoc], rpHr[opiOY]»
kyp[iAAoy]- If a second passage from the same author occurs
in the same context it is introduced as toy aytoy ; an anony-
mous writer is aAAoc 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 im[)licit con-
fidence in the verbal accuracy of ihe 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. Octatcuc/i, Historical
hooks: the Catena of Nicephorus, 2 vols., Leipzig, 1772 — 3;
Psalms: IJ. Corderii expositio Graiconnii patriiii/, 3 vols., Ant-
werp, 1643; Proverbs: Commentary of Procopius first printed
by Mai,aiui in Migne, P. G. Ixxxvii.; Song: Comniciitary ascribed
to Euscbius and Polychronius (iMeiusius, Leyden, 1617) ; Job:
Catena of Nicetas of Serrae (P. Junius, i.e. Patrick Young,
London, 1636); Isaiah: Commentary of Procopius (J. Curtcrius,
I'aris, 1580); Jeremiah, with Lamentations and Hariicli : Catena
iJiiblisliL-d by W. Gliislcr, 3 vols., Leyden, 1623; Ihviirl: Catena
|)ublished by A. AL'ii in Script, vet. nov. coll. I. On dicse sec
Ch. Q. R. i. 99, pp. 36—42.
The nineteenth century has added little to our collection
of printed (Ireek 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 lii)raries more accessible to Western
studrnts, at St Petersburg, Rome, Paris, and I.ondon. Perhaps
no corner of the field of Piblical and patristic research ofiers so
much virgin soil, with so good a prospect of securing useful if
not l)rilliant 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, 73, n, 78, 79, 83, 87, 90, 91, 97, 98, 99, 109, 112,
128, 135, I47i 181, 209, 238, 240, 243, 264, 272, 292, 302, 309;
London B.M. Add. 35123, Lambeth 12 14; Paris, Coisl. gr. 5, 7,
Reg. gr. 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 161 ; Zurich c. 11 ; Basle gr. iv.
56, vi. 8; Esc. 2. i. 16; Leyden, 13; Munich gr. 82; Athos Vatop.
15, \\€x. 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, TJ , 79, 93, 128,
130, 131, 135, 159, 256, 310; Paris Ars. 8415, Coisl. gr. 184.
On the Paris O. T. catenae see H. Lietzmann, Catem'u,
p. 2)7 ff- Some of the Vatican catenae are handled by Pitra,
a7talecta saa'a 11, Klostermann, analecta., passim; a full and
valuable account of Roman MS. catenae on the Prophets is
given by Faulhaber {die P}-opheien- Cafe/ten). 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. A Caten-
arum graeca7'um catalogus by G. Karo and H. Lietzmann is in
progress {Nachrichten der K. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften
zu Gollingen (Philologisch-hist. Klasse), 1902 ff.
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 Palacographia Graeca, Gardthausen's Griechische
Paldographie, and Sir E. Maunde Thompson's Handbook of
Greek mid 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.
&=*A/cJXa9. c', cy' = 2uV/Aaxo?. G', 96' = ©coSortW.
OY K n' eBp' = ov KelTai Trap 'E/3/)utot9. oi coB' oy k n' eBp'
= 01 wf^eXiafjievoi (o-Ti'xoi) ov Ketvrai Trap 'E^patot9. OM^ TOIC o'
= oyoiw9 Tois e/38ofJi7]KovTa. 01 f = "' T|0€t5, i.e. Aquila, Sym-
Text-divisions : Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 365
machus, Thcodolion. n' — Travres. A = AouKiaros (Field,
o
Hexapla, i. Ixxxv.). 01 A = ot XotTroi. mo = ii.dvo%. ch = oj^aioi/,
(K or (R^ = 'Cpty£V7j?. For nini sec above, p. 39 f.
(B = ar]fJL€Lui(TaL, crr]fjL€L(t)Teov, a-rjixeiov. fP = ypdif/ov or ypa^erai.
(5kp^=ap^. Te'=T£/\os. CTI — o'T6;^os. Ke'= Ke(^a'Xa(ov. KA = Ka-
A
Oia-fj-a. AN rr amyvcoo-/ua. cp = 8iwp^u)Tat (i.e. 'corrected tlnis
far'), a mark inserted by the Sto/j^wrjfs usually at the end of a
book. For further particulars see Field, 0/. cit., p. xciv. scjq'.
LllKRATURE.
Stichometry, colometry, &c.
Kitto, Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature, art. Verse; Herzog-
I'litt, art. Sfic/ioinetrie; Gregory, i. p. 112 f.; Scrivener-Miller,
i., p. 52 ff. ; Gardthausen, Paldographie, p. 127 ff. ; E. M. Thomp-
son, Handbook, p. 78 ff. ; Zahn, Gesch. d. Kanons, ii. p, 295 ff. ;
.Sanday in Sttidia Bihlicn, iii. p. 261 f f. ; J. R. Harris, SticJiomelry,
]>absim; Wordsworth-Wliite, Epilogus, p. 733 [i. (Oxford, 189S).
Capitulation.
Schiirer, ll. ii. 79 ff. ; Duhl, Kanon u. Text d. A. T., p. 222;
Ryle, Canon of the U.T., p. 235; Morinus, Exerc. Bibl. xvii. 3;
\)\.\\\\\w^, De ordine pericopariint(o\i\i'~,z. iv.); Zacagni, Collectanea,
pracf., pp. ixvii., Ixxxi. ; iMontfaucon, Bibliotli. Coisl., p. i ff . ;
the Benedictine Prolegomena in di-i'. S. Hieron. biblioth. iv.
(reprinted in Migne, P. L. xxviii. loi sqq.) ; Suicer, Thes. eccl.
s.vv. K((f)(iXniop, TTtpiKOTTij ; Herzog-lMitt, art. Perikopen; Gregory,
i. p. 120 ff.; Scrivener-Miller, i. p. 5'') ff ; Thoinasii opp. i. ;
r.eiger, Histoire de la Vulgate, p. 323 If.
Lections.
Suicer, Fhcs. eccl. s.vv. /ii'iJyi/wcr/id, avayvituri^, yixiff)/] ; Hrill, /)e
lectionariis or. el occ. eccl. (Helinstadt, 1703); Neale, Hist, of the
H. l-lastern Church, i. p. 369; Herzog-lMitt, artt. Lectionen,
Perikopen; D.C.A., art. Lections; Hurgon, Last tweh'e verses of
St Mark, p. 191 ff ; E. Rankc, Das kirchl. l'erikopen-.systeni der
roni. /.ituri; /V ( 1 5e rl i n , i S47).
Acrostics.
V. A. de Lagarde, Synnnicta i. 107 ; C. Taylor in Hastings'
J'lniyil. of Religion and I'.thics, i. p. 75 ; G. Uickell, ait. Acrostic
in Oxford New Jiui^tish Piet. ; I. Al)iahanis, art. Acrostics in
Jewish Encycl. ; Driver, Introd. to Lit. of <). T., cli. vii.
' For teniis connected will) wriling and iciding which occur in the text
ol the I XX. see Nestle, Introd. to tlie 'J'e.xtual Critu ism op the N. T., p. 46 f.
366 Text-divisions : Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc.
Catenae.
T. Ittig, De bibliothecis et catenis patrum (Leipzig, 1707);
J. C. Wolf, De cafenis Gr. patrum (Wittenberg, 1742) ; Fabricius-
Harles, viii. p. 637 ff. ; J. G. Dowling, Noiitia scnptorii7ii ss.
patrum (Oxford, 1839); Walch-Danz, Bihlioth. patristica (Jena,
1834), p. 247 ff. ; Harnack-Preuschen, Gesch. d. altchr. Litteratur,,
i. p. 835 ff. ; G. Heinrici, in Hauck, Real-Encyklop. iii., art.
Cateiien ; L. Eisenhofer, Procopius von Gaza, Freiburg, 1897 ;
P. Batiffol, in Vigouroux' D. B. ii., p. 482 ff., art. Chaines Bibliques ;
Lietzmann, Catenen (Freiburg i. B., 1897); M. Faulhaber, Die
Propheten-Cateiien nach romischeii Handschriften, in Biblische
Stiidien, 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 summa-
rised with admirable clearness and precision in the Cliurch
Quarterly Review for Apr. 1900, pp. 29 — 48.
9
PART III.
fJTERARY USE, VALUE, AND TEXTUAL CONDITION
OF THE GREEK OLD TESTAMENT.
369
PART III.
CHAPTER I.
Literary use of the lxx. by non-Christian
Hellenists.
I. A HAPPY accident has preserved fragments of the lost
literature produced by the Hellenised Jews of Alexandria
between the inception of the Alexandrian Version and the
Christian era. The Greek historiographer, Alexander Corne-
lius — better known as Polyhislor (o TroXvtcrrwp), from his
encyclopaedic learning — wrote a treatise On tJu 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, Kupolemus, 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. u.c. 200; for the other
writers the date of Polyhistor (c. u.c. 50) supplies a teriiiinUi
ad quern, if we may assume' that lie wrote the work attributed
to him by Clement and Eusebius.
' C^. Josi-pli., an!, i. 15, Clciii. Al. itiom. i. ijo, Liis. /»/•. €v. ix. 17.
* Sec Schiircr', iii. p. J47 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. strain, i. 141. Eus.j^^r. cv.
ix. I9(?), 21, 29. (2) Eupolemus: Clem. Al. siroin. 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. /"r. ev. ix.
25. (5) Philo the poet: Eus. pr. ev. ix. 20, 24, 37 (cf Clem. Al.
Strom, i. 154). (6) Theodotus: Eus. pr. ev. ix. 22. (7) Ezekiel
the poet: Eus. pr. ev. ix. 28 ( = Clem. Al. strain, i. 155), 29.
(8) Aristobulus : Eus. ^r. ev. viii. 10; ix. 6 ( = Clem. Al. strom. i,
22;; xiii. 12. (9) Cleodemus or Malchas: Eus. /r. ^z/. 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: {a) rov deov tu> 'A/3paa/i TrpoaTn^ai 'ICAAK TON
yiON oAOKApncbCAl avrw' t6v Se avayayuvra tou TralSa eVi to
opos TTVpav vfjcrai Ka\ eni6eTN(M tov 'laaaK' CCJJAZeiN 5e p-eXXovra
KcdXydfivai VTTO k^\-eKo^ KpiON avra npos rr)v KApncoCIN irapa-
(TTijaavTos^. (d) eKeWev Se eABelN eiC XA(})pA0&, i'vdev irapa-
■yej/eo-^at eic ' E(1)P<n6a, HN elNAl BH9AeeM...Kal re/\ev7-»;(rat 'Po;^»/X
TeKOYC(\N TOV Beviapiv'^. (c) (jjrjai yap tov A/Spno/i iraldas npOC
AN&TOAaC fVl KaToiKiav irepyJAai- 8ia tovto 8e koI 'AApoON K&i
M^piAM (LTTfiv BN 'AcHp(l)6 Mcomjv Ai9l0nfA& yripai \-^NdJiKd<^
{d) pfj €-^ovTa Se yAwp fKet yAvKi) aAAa niKpoN, tov deov
djiovTOS, iY-^ON Ti e/wBdiAeTN eic ttjv nrjyTjv, Koi yeveadai yXvKV
TO yAcop. fKeldev 5e elc ' EAeiM eXdelv, Kat fvpelv eKfl AcoAeKA
fxiv nHfAC yAatcon, eBAoMHKONTA 8e creAexH 4>oiNfKcoN*. (For
other coincidences, see above, p. 18.)
Eupolemus: eYAorHTOC 6 eeoc 6c ton oypanon kai thn
[-(HN eKTKTfv, OS ei'Aero livOpumov ;^/>70-roi' eV p^i/D^crrou avbp6s...Ka\
cipxiTeKTOvd COI AneCTAAKA (ivdpoinov Tvpiov en p.rjTpos 'lovSaiai
(K TIjS 0iA»)i- A(il'^.
I Cf. Gen. xxii. i ff.
- Cf. Gen. XXXV. 16.
^ Cf. Gen. XXV. 6; Num. xi. 34 — xii. r.
•» Cf. Exod. XV. 23 fi".
^ Cf. 2 Chion. ii. 12 ff.
Use of the LXX. by non-Christian Hellenists. 371
'ico^- katoikgTn hi TovTov eN TH AycfriAi x^P*-} ^'^'^ ^oTc opfoic
THC 'lAOY'\\AIAC K<\i 'ApABfAC yevea-Oat 8e avTov A^KMON koi
TToXvKTTjVov, KTij(Taa-dciL Jup uvTov TTpoBATA fJ-fi' 6 TTTAK I C X I A I A,
k&aahAoyc hi rpicxiAiAC, zeyrn Bocon neNTAKOciA, uNoyc
GHAeiAC nomaAac neNTAKOCiAC^
Ezekiel (in his ti"a;4edy »} 'E^a-ycoyi'/) :
Mapiafj. 8' d8e\(f)r] fjiov KnranTfVfv TreXns"
KuTTdTa dvyi'iTTjp /^acriAf'cor ABpAIC ofxoii
KUTtjXdf Xotirpoi?, ;^pa)ra (^mibpiivat viov.
'lAoyCA 6' ei/^vj /cat Xa^ova ANefAeTO,
tyi>a> S' 'Ejipaioi/ uvtu- Ka\ Ac'yft raSe
Mapia/jL d8e\(f)f] ■rrpoa-hpap.ova-a jSacriXldf
GeAeiC rpo^ON (toi nmbl rwS' 6upa) t(iy''
eK TCON 'EBp&fooN; T) 8' eVeo-n-fuo-fv ko/ji/i^*
fiuXova-a 8' ti'rre p-rjrpi, Koi Trapr]v ra^^v
avTT] re p-rjTrip KaXal'ifv p. ey ayKuXas.
(iTTfv 8i dvyaTTjp [■iacriXiai Tovtov, yvi'iii,
7p6(i>e^e, Kd.fCti Mic9uN uTroAtocco criOfv.
* * * * *
ovK eyAorOC iTe(f)vKa, yXoxra-a 8' eWt p.ov
8v(T(l)pa(TTos, icXNd<})(jONOC, uare pfj X6yovs
(poiis yeveirdui /SaatXeco? ivavTiov.
Aristolaulus : {a) eN x^'P' kp^taia eSHfAreN o 6e6c ce el
AirYHTOY^- ('5') lAoY X^'P Kyp^oy ecTAi * cn toTc kthn6Ci'
COY •="' f" ^"""t ToTc CN ToTc neAioic Banatoc MefAC.
2. Besides tlicse fragments, some complete books have
survived the wreck of the pre-Cliristian literature of the Jewish
colony at Alexandria. They are included in the Alexandrian
Clreek Bible, but may be employed as sei)arate witnesses of
the literary use of the canonical translations. And the evidence
supplied by them is ample. Thus the writer of Wisdom
knows and uses not only Exodus (Sap. xvi. 22 = Exod. ix. 24,
* Cf. J')1j xlii. 17 b, c, i. I fT. r>curlo-Aristcas ad Philocratem makes
abundant u.sc of tlic (Ircck Pcnlatcucli, as the reader may sec by reforrintj
to the Appendix, wlierc LXX. words and phrases are indicated l)y llic use
uf small uncials.
'"' (Jf. ICxud. ii. 4 IT. ; iv. 10, where o\jk tSkoyot is read by cod. V .
' Kxod. xiii. 9.
* I'".xi>d. ix. 3. 'J'.OTai A, in^arai H. Koi <.'»■ iratri, which is wanting in
Dur M.S.S. , may be ilue to a slip of menuiiy, or it is a short way of
expressini; what follows in the text (fv rt roit 'iiriroif kt\.).
24 2
^J2 Use of the LXX. by non- Christian Hellenists.
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. 36, and in 4 Maccabees xviii. 14 ff. 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. 312 l^i-^ea<i is a
reminiscence of Ps. Ixxviii. 3, lxx.; ib. 606 x^'^P'^'^0L7]Ta...iv
<Txi-crfj.aL<i TreTpwv KaraKpvij/avTe'; is borrowed from Isa. ii. 19 ft.,
lxx.; lb. 708 ff. is probably modelled on the Greek of Isa. xi.
6fif.
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
^ See Edersheim in Wace's Af>ocr. ii. p. 26.
^ Cf. A. Deissmann in Kautzscli, rseuJcpi^raphoi, p. 150: "als
Abfassungszeit wild man den- Zeilnium von fonijicjus liis Vespasian
annehmen diirfen."
'1
Use of the LXX. by i/o/i-C/iristian Hellenists, ^'j'})
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 f;iir 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 WLMidland's order is followed so far as their
edition has been published.
A. Exegetical works. De opijicio inundi (Gen. !.). Legiiin
allegoriae (ii. I — iii. 19). De Che7uHm etc. (iii. 24 — iv. i). De
sacrifieiis Abelis et Caini (iv. 2 f.). Quod deterius potiori
iiisidi<rri sol eat (iv. 3 — 15). De posteritate Caini (iv. 16—26).
De gigantibus (vi. 1 — 4). Qitod Dens sit iinmutabilis (vi. 4 — 12).
De agricidtiira (ix. 20). De plaiitatiotie Noe (ix. 20). De
ebrietate (ix. 21 — 23). De sobrietate (ix. 24). De confiisione
liiiguarum (xi. i — 9). De migratione Abratiami (xii. i — 6).
(2iiis rent in divinanini /teres (xv.). De eongressii eritditionis
gratia (xvi. i — 6). De ftiga et inTe?ttione (xvi. 6 — 14). De
mtitatione nomimnn (xvii. i — 22). De somniis i., ii. (xxviii. 12 ff.,
xxxi. 1 1 — 13, xxxvii., xl., xli.). De Abrahamo. De Joscpho. De
vita Moysis. De liecalogo. De circtimcisione. De monareliia.
Dc praemiis saeerdotttm. De victimis. De saerijieantibits. De
iitcrcede meretricis. De specialibtts legibus (3rd — loth command-
ments of the Decalogue). De iudiee. De iitstitia. De fortitu-
dinc. De liumanitate. De creatione principunt. De tribiis 7'ir-
tittibtis. De poenitcntia. De nohilitate. De praemiis et poc'iis.
De exeerationiliiis. Ouaestii'iies et solutiones (i) />/ Geiii-siin,
{2) in Jixodii/n'-. \\. I'hilosophical works. De nobilitate. (Jtioii
o/nnis prolnis liber sit. Pf Ti/a conteiiipliiti-iui. Ifc inrorriipti-
bililate mttndi. De pnn'idintia. Dc ta/ionr aniniatiitin. De
mitndo. C Political works. In Flaeetim. De legalione ad
Caii/»:.
In his exegetical writings Thilo quotes the l.xx. directly,
announcing each citation by a fornuda such as </>7;cri, u.ntv,
' /.It,', ad Cat. i. 28.
'•' On these sfc J. K. Il.irris, Prai^ments of /'/lilo, p. 11 If., and V. C.
(■Ill} heart, K.xpontor, IV. iv. p. 45^10.
374 ^^'^ ^if ^^^'^ LXX. by non-Christian Hellenists.
Xiyei, Xcyerai, yiypaiTTai, 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 task^
Nevertheless his quotations often differ from the Greek of the
LXX., as it is found in our extant MSS., 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
Rylej 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 yj/vxriv ^corjs (lxx. ds \//-. ^aaav)^. iv. 21 ovtos iCTTi
TTarrjp 6 KaTa(^)ei^as ■yjraS.Trjpiov kol Kidapav (LXX., jJi/ 6 k.). vi. 7
eovpmdrjv (LXX. iv(6vfir]dr)v). vi. 14 vocraias vocraias Troirjaeis rrjv
Ki^MTov (voa-crtds seniel LXX.). ix. 25 Trat? olKerrjs dovXos dovXcov
i'araL (LXX. tt. oineTrjs earai, and SO Philo, ii. 225. 2o). xv. 1 8 €«?
Tov iTOTapov, ToO fifyoXov TTorapov Evcjipdrov (LXX. om. rroTapoii 2°)''.
xviu. 12 oxjTTO) fiOL yeyove to evSaifxovelv ews tov vvv (LXX. omit to
ev8. and so Philo once, iii. 184. 28). Exod. iv. 10 ovk elpl evXnyos
(so Philo, apparently^: LXX. ovk Uavos dpi), xv. 17 ehpacrpa els
KuOehpav aov Kareipyaa-o) (LXX. els eroipov naToiKrjrrjpiov aov o Kar.).
XX. 23 per' epov (lXX., vph> avrols). xxiii. 2 peTU rrnWcov (LXX.,
peTa nXeiovcov). Lev. xix. 23 ^vXou jipuxreais (LXX., ^. ^paxripoi',
and so Philo ii. 152. 8). Deut. viii. 18 nXXa pveia pvTja-Bijarj (LXX.
Kol pvrjdd.). xxi. 16 kXtjpoSotij (LXX., KaTaKXrjpovopfj B, KaraKXT]-
poSoTJi AF, and these readings are found as variants in Phil. i.
209. 4).
» Cf. Ryle, F/ii7o, p. xlv. f. 2 Qf ^^ j^^^y^^ g^ y_
^ On this see Nestle, Zitr nciwti Philo-Aiisgahi; in PJulo/ogiis, 1900,
p. 259. Dr Nestle informs me that cod. 75 often agrees vvitli Fliilo.
^ See Nestle, o/). dt., p. 270. * See above, p. 371.
Use of tlie LXX. by iion-Ckristiim Hellenists. 375
The student who is at the pains to examine the readings
given above, will find that while some of them may be merely
reccnsional, 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 B
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
o TTOir/Vas; Deut. xii. 8 ocra, xxxii. 4 + €v airw.
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;
{b) 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 k«1 di)ii^t(,u(ra tnl to (f)i)f(ip vfiptvaraTo
Td'n Ka/x^Xotr (lxx., kcu ibpiiptv tn'i to ffypittj) di'TXija-tti v8o)p Kill
i'fip. niirraiv t«iv (cii/iryXoiy). (A) Num. v. 2 (^inrixTTfiXuTaya-ap tK
Tqt (lytiiv \}/i'X'l^ (LX.X. (k T?jt TraptfxjiDXtjf) tti'ii'Tu Xfnpi'iv. {c) ( iCn.
xxviii. 13 // -/7 (v. 1. Ttfv yi]v) «'</>' ^<i (tv KuOtv^tts ( + tV diri/v LX.X.)
' 111 Cicncsis i. — xlvi. 27, wlicrc 15 is wanting, Pliilo shews on tlie
wliolc a similar preference for the text re|)re>ente(l l)y D. The figures,
whicli are \)r Kyle's, are based on Man^ey's text, IjuI llic new edition, so
far as examined, gives very similar results.
376 Use of the LXX. by noti- Christian Hellenists.
(TOi Scocroj avrrjv. {d) Gen. xvii. I +xxxv. II eyw eljxi dehs uo^- f-y<u
6 6f6s <rov av^dv(w kcu irXrjdvvnv (Phil. iii. 161. 4 f-)-
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 Version was at least as great
as that with which the Authorised Version is regarded in
England, and Luther's Version 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, Flavins 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
thou[;ht; 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 ■xpy]ij6.ix,i.v6<i Ttcrt tt^os t^i/ 'EXXvyt/iSa cfxavrju crwi^epyois
ouTws IwoLrjcrajX-qv twv Trpd^ewi' T7]y Trapd^oa-w). But the Afltiqui-
ties of tJie Jews (at 'Iwo-t/ttoli laTOplat t»;s 'lovSatKr;? ap^^aLokoyms),
^ See Ryle, p. xvi. ff.
- Cr. D. C. B. iv. p. 387=.
^ Vit. r. "^ Tb. 1.
^ B. J. prooem. i tj; -kixtp'm [sc. y\i!L)aa-<^ crwrd^as.
Use of the LXX. by non-Christiati Hellenists. IJJ
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. i.
proem. I rauTi^v Se Ty]v lvi(TToi<jav €yK€;(€tpi(r/xat Trpayfj-areiav,
vofxi^wv airacri <f>ave'i(r6ai rot? "EXArjo'tv d^tav cnrov^rj<;' fXiXXfi yap
7r€pie$eiv airaaav i^v Trap* ijp-^v ap^aLoXoyiav kol Sidra^tv Tov
7ro\iT€vp.aT0<; ck t(3i' 'EifSpaiKOiv pieOrjpiiyjvevfievrjv ypajxp^a-
Twi'. 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 Eva...(7i7/xat'i'€i...7rdi/Twv fir/ripa (Gen. iii.
20); I. 2. I Kais...KTt(rti' (v. 1. KTTo-ti') aqp.aivei (Gen. iv. i);
iii. I. 6 KaKovcri Se EftpaloL to ftptZpa tovto fxdvva' to yap fiav
iTTf piuTr](TL<;... ' TL tovt' lariv' dvaKpLvov(Ta (Kxod. xvi. 15); v. lo.
3 ^ap.rnrrj\or...6eniT7]T(>i' av Tis eliroi (l Regn. i. 2o). (i>) His
narrative frcfjucntly follows a Heb. text different from the M.T.,
but represented by the i.xx. ; e.g. Ant. vi. 4. i ij<Tav eftfiofXTj-
Kovra Toi' apiOpov (i Regn. ix. 22, i¥l DV'^^'?) ; vi. 11. 4
VTroOdtra tols f.irift(>\iaioL<; i/nap C^^) uiyds (l Regn. xix. 13,
^¥1 "*'•??) J VI. 12. 4 A(oi^yo5 S 6 iiu/)OS o Tois Ty/jtiorous auTou
l36<TKwi' (i Regn. xxii. 9, iH '?'|{<e>7.3r'?L: 3V3 N-in^ 'p■^^{^ :^-^)-
vii. 2. I /xoi'Of (vpdi'T€<;...Toy 'li<rf3u)6ov Koi fjujre tous (f>x'>\aKa<:
TrapoiTas firjrf tt/c Ovpotpny iypi^yopvlav (cf. 2 Regn. iv. 6 I, XX. »cai
i8ou 7] 6vpu)pu<i iyviTTa^d' Knt (KaOtv^d'); vji. 5. 3 vrrTtpor o tuiv
* He possessed a copy of the sacred Ixioks wliicli Tiliis (planted him from
the spoils of the Temple: F//. 75 Tr)i> ahifffw iiroioi>/xr)i> TiToif...(itji\lwy
Itpuiv [fai] l\a^oi' xapLaafxivou TItov.
T,y^ Use of the LXX. by non-Christian Hellenists.
AiyuTTTt'toi' /Sao-iAevs Sowaxos.. .cAa^Sc (2 Regn. viii.7, LXX.;/\^JW).
(<r) 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. Ant. i. i (Gen. i. i fif.), iv apxv eKTia-ev 6 ^eos
Tov ovpavov Kttt T-qv y^v...y€V€(r6ai ^ws iKeXevaev 6 0e6<;...
Si€x<i)pi(r€ TO T€ ^(5s Kai TO aKOTOs-.-Kol avTij p.\v av eh]
■n-pwTrj r/pepa, Mwikt^s 8' avT-i)v fxiav dire. ..to twv TeTpaTro'Scoi/
ye'j/os appev Kat OrjXv it o irj <j as. i. 10. 3 (Gen. XV. 9 f.) 8a/ta-
\iv TpieTi^ovaav Kal alya Tpi€Tit,ovaav Kat Kpiov ojlolw<;
TpUTrj Kat Tpvyova Kal TrepKJT epav KeXevaavTOS SielXe, Twi'
opvioiv ovhlv SteAwV. i. 18. 7 (Gen. xxvii. 30) Traprjv 'Ho-av?
dvro T-^s drjpas. i. 20. 2 (Gen. xxxii. 23 f.) xei/xappouv Ttiot.
'\.a(iaK)(pv Xeyofxevov Sia/Je^ijxoTwv 'laKw/Jos viroXeXeip.p.ivo'i
. ..Suit dXa lev. ii. 4. i (Gen. xxxix. l) 'lo}ar](f)ov 8e TrojAou/xei'oi'
VTTO Twi/ ifJLTTOpwv wvy]adp,evo<; IleTe(fip-^<s avrjp At-yuTrrtos Ittl
Tcov ^apaco^ov [xayecpwv. ii. 6. I (Gen. xli. 45) Trpoa-rjyopevaev
avTov ^ovOovcfidvr]xov...a.yeTaL yap Kal UeTecftpov OvyaTepa twv
iv TYJ HXioviroXet lepewv...'Ao-evvrj6LV ovofiaTi. ii. 7. 5 (Gen.
xlvi. 28) dTravTTyo-d/xcvos €^e(crt Kai Ka^' 'Hpojwv tto'Aiv avTw
(Tvi/e(3aXev\ [if) 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.) KSpos 6 (3aaLXev<; Xeyet 'ETret jxe 6 9eo<; 6
^cytCTTos T^s olKovp.ev7}<; drreSei^e fSaatXea, tov vaov avTov
olKoSofitjcTiii ev 'lepoaoXvfxoL? iv ttj 'lovSaia X'^P?- ^i- 2. 2
(i Esdr. ii. 21, cf. 2 Esdr. iv. 17) l3aa-tXev<s Ka/x/Juo-^s
Pa$vfjL(i) TO) ypd^ovTi to. Trpoo-TTLirTOVTa Kal BceX^e/xw Kat
2c/AeXiw ypafi/xaTei Kal toi? Xoittois rots avvTacrarofjievoi<;
Kai oIkovo-lv iv "Xafxapeia Kal ^oivlkj] ruSe Xeyet. xi. 3.
2 — 8 = I Esdr. iii. — iv. Esther. 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 inst.inces I am indebted to a collation made by
Mr C. G. Writjlit for tlie Editors of the larger LXX.
Use of the LXX. by non-Christiaii Hclloiists. 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 Atit. v. — vii.
has led to the following results, which are important for the
criticism of the i.xx. (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 ^it. (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. 15, Josephus the Palestinian seems
to have followed that of an ' Urlucian.'
LllKRATURK. Hellenistic writers before Pliilo: Text: C.
Miillcr, Fra^menta historica Graeca iii. J. Freiidentlial, Ht-lltn-
islisclie Siudicn !., ii. (Biesi.ui, 1875). Cf Stiscmilil, Gesiliichlc
der griech. Littiratur in der Alex<indriiicrzcit^ ii. p. 356 ff.; E.
'>{:\\\.\xzx,Geschichledesjiidischen Volkt-^, iii. p. 345 ff.; Oecononnis,
ii. 76.
I'hilo : 'I ext : L. Cohn and F. Wendland, Pliilonis Alexandiini
opera qtiiic supcrsinit (Herliii, vol. i. 1896; vol. ii. 1897; vol. iii.
1S98; vol. iv. 1902; vol. V. 1906— in progress). Cf. C. Y.
Hornemann, Specimen exercitntionum ctitiiarutn in vcrsionein
' nioch, Die Quelleti d. Fl. Joaefhns, p. 8 ft".
* IJic liihel dii yost'p/iiij, \). ,ij tt.
380 Use of the LXX. by non- Christian Hellenists.
LXX. interpretiim ex PJiilone (Gottingen, I773); C. Siegfried,
Philo iind der iibcrliefcrte Text dcr LXX. (in Z. f. ivtss. Theologie,
1873, pp. 2i7ff., 411 ff., 522 ff.); A. Edersheim in D. C. B. iv.
p. 357 ff.; E. Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek (Oxford, 1889),
p. i4off. ; F. C. Conybeare, in Expositor, 1891, p. 456 ff, ; and
Jeiuish Q. R., 1893, p. 246 ff., 1896, p. 88 ff.; H. E. Ryle, Philo
and Holy Scripture (London, 1895); P. Wendland, in Philotogus
1898, p. 283 ff, 521 ff., 1899, 274 ft".; L. Massebieau, Zt' ctasseinent
des oeuvres de Pliilon (in Bibliot/tcque de Vecole des hautes etudes I.
pp. I — 91); J. Drumniond, in Hastings' D. B. suppl. 197;
J. H. A. Hart, in J. Q. P. xvii. p. 78ft".; Aug. Schroder, Be
Philonis Alexandrini Vet. Test.., Greifswald, 1907.
SibylHnes. Text : A. Rzach, Oracula Sibyttina, Vienna, 1891.
Cf. F. Blass in Kautzsch, Pseudepigraphen, p. i77ff-
Josephus. Text : B. Niese, Ft. Joseplii opera (Berlin, 1887—
1895). Cf. Spittler, 1779, J. G. Scharfenberg, 1780; E. Schiirer'-*,
E. T. I. i. p. 77 ff; A. Edersheim in D. C. B. iii. p. 441 ff. ;
C. Siegfried in Stade's Z. f. d. ATliche Wisscnschaft, 1883,
p. 32 ff. ; H. Bloch, Die Qiiellen des Ft. Josephus in seiner
A^xlidologia (Leipzig, 1879); A. Mez, Die Bibcl des Josephus
untersucht Jiir Buch v. — vii. der Archdologia (Basle, 1893).
381
CHAPTER TI.
Quotations from the lxx. in the New
Testament.
I. The writings of the New Testament were the work of
some nine authors, of different nationahtics 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 Nnv Testament in Greek (Text, p.
581 ff.), and in their text the corresponding passages are
distinguished by the use of a small uncial type. lUit 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.
* .Sec l)cli)\v, 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 tovto ytyovev Iva
7rXi]p(o6;) TO jjrjOfv (Mt.), ovrms or Kudcos yiypanTai, or yeypairrm
simply (Mt., Mc, Lc, Paul), yfypafxpivov iarlv (Jo.), Mouo-?;?
(AauetS) Xe'yf I or elinv, Xe'yei or eiirev j) ypn(f>J] (Jo., Paul), or to tiyiov
TTvevfia (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. T,
Table of O.T. passages quoted in the N.T.
Gen, 1. 27 (v. 2) Mt.
ii. 2 Heb.
7 I Cor.
24 Mt.
V. 24 Heb.
xii. I Acts
3Mxxii. 18)
XV. 5 Rom.
6 Jas.
i3f. Acts
xvii. 5 Rom.
xviii. 10, 14
xxi. 10 Gal.
12 Rom.
xxii. i6f. Heb.
xxv. 23 Rom.
xlvii. 31 Heb.
Exod. ii. 14 Acts
iii. 5 ff. Mt.
ix. 16 Rom.
xii. 46 (Num. ix. 12, Ps. John
xxxiii. 20)
xiii. 12 Lc.
xvi. 4, 15 (Ps. Ixxvii. 24) John
18 2 Cor.
xix. 13 Heb.
XX. 12— I7(l)eut.v. i6ff.) Mt.
xxi. 16 (17)
xix. 4, Mc. X. 6
iv. 4
XV. 45
xix. 5 f., Mc. X. 7 f., I Cor.
vi. 16, Eph. v. 31
xi. 5
yn. 3
iii. 25, Gal. iii. 8
iv. 18
ii. 23, Rom. iv. 3, Gal.
iii. 6
vii. 6f.
iv. 17
ix. 9
iv. 30
ix. 7, Heb. \i. 18
vi. 13 f.
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.
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, ]\!c. vii. 10
Quotations frovi the LXX. in the New Testament. 383
Exod.
xxi. 24 (Lev. xxiv. 20,
Dent. xix. 21)
Ml.
V.3S
xxii. 28
Acts
xxiii. 5
xxiv. 8
Heb.
ix. igf.
XXV. 40
viii. 5
xxxii. I
Acts
vii. 40
6
I Cor.
X. 7
xxxiii. 19
Rom.
ix. 15
Lev.
xi. 44 f. (xix. 2, XX. 7, 26)
I Pet.
i. 16
xii. 6, 8
Lc.
11. 22 {^
xviii. 5 (2 Esdr. xix. 29)
Rom.
X. 5, Gal. iii. 12
xix. 18
Mt.
V. 43, xix. 19, xxii. 39,
Mc. xii. 31, Lc. X. 27,
James ii. 8, Rom. xiii.
9, Gal. V. 14
.\xvi.i if.(Ezek.xxxvii.27)
2 Cor.
vi. 16
Num.
xvi. 5
2 Tim.
ii. 19
Ueut.
iv. 35
Mc.
xii. 32
vi. 4f.
Mt.
xxii. 2)7 ^-i Mc. xii. 29 —
33, Lc. X. 27
13, 16
iv. 7, 10, Lc. iv. 8, 12
viii. 3
iv. 4, Lc. iv. 4
ix. 19
Heb.
xii. 2I(.?)
xviii. I 5, 18 f.
Acts
iii. 22 f., vii. 37
xi.x. 15
Mt.
xviii. 16, Jo. viii. 17, 2 Cor.
xiii. I
xxi. 23
Gal.
iii. 13
xxiv. I
Mt.
V. 31, xix. 7, Mr. X. 4
XXV. 4
I Cor.
ix. 9, I Tim. V. 18
xxvii. 26
(ial.
iii. 10
xxix. 4
Rom.
xi. 8
18
Heb.
xii. 15
XXX. 12 —14
Rom.
X. 6—8
xxxi. 6, 8 (Jos. i. 5)
Hob.
xiii. 5
xxxii. 21
Rom.
X. 19
35
xii. 19, Heb. X. 30
36 (Ps. cxxxiv. 14)
Heb.
X. 30
43 (Ps. xcvi. 7)
i. 6
2 KC},'!!
.vii. 8, 14
2 Cor.
vi. 18, Heb. i. 5
3 Ht^K'i
.xix. 10, 14, iS
Kom.
xi. 3f.
rsnliii
ii. if.
Acts
iv. 25 f.
..7
xiii. 33, Heb. i. 5, v. 5
viii. 2
Mt.
xxi. 16
5-7
1 Cor.
XV. 27, Heb. ii. 6—8
xiii. 3 (v. 10, ix. 28, XXXV.
Rom.
iii. 10—18
2, lii. 1 — 3, cxxxix. 4,
Lsa. lix. 7f.)
384 Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament,
J — r
x/ •- — J--
Psalm
XV. 8 — II
Acts
ii. 25—28
xvii. 50
Rom.
XV. 9
xviii. 5
—
x. 18
xxi. 2
Mt.
xxvii. 46, Mc. XV. 34
9
xxvii. 43
19
Jo.
xix. 24
23
Heb.
ii. 12
xxiii. I
I Cor.
X. 26
xxxi. I f.
Rom.
iv. 6—8
xxxiii. 13 — 17
I Pet.
iii. 10—12
xxxiv, 19 (Ixviii. 5)
Jo.
XV. 25
xxxix. 7—9
Heb.
X. 5—7
xl. 10
Jo.
xiii. 18
xliii. 22
Rom.
viii. 36
xliv. 7f.
Heb.
i. 8 f.
1.6
Rom.
iii. 4
liv. 23
I Pet.
V. 7
Ixvii. 19
Eph.
iv. 8
Ixviii. 10
Jo.
ii. 17, Rom. XV. 3
23 f.
Rom.
xi. 9 f.
26
Acts
i. 20
Ixxvii. 2
Mt.
xiii. 35
Ixxxi. 6
Jo.
X. 34
Ixxxviii. 21
Acts
xiii. 22
xc. I I f.
Mt.
iv. 6, Lc. iv. I of.
xciii. II
I Cor.
iii. 20
xciv. 8— II
Heb.
iii. 7 — II
ci. 26—28
i. 10 — 12
ciii. 4
i-7
cviii. 8
Acts
i. 20
cix. I
Mt.
xxii. 44, Mc. xii. 36, Lc.
XX. 42 f., Acts ii. 34 f.,
Heb. i. 13
4
Heb.
V. 6 (vii. 17, 21)
cxi. 9
2 Cor.
ix. 9
cxv. I
iv. 13
cxvi. I
Rom.
XV. II
cxvii. 6
Heb.
xiii. 6
22 f.
Mt.
xxi. 42, Mc. xii. 10 f.,
Lc. x.x. 1 7, I Pet. ii. 7
Prov.
iii. 1 1 f.
Heb.
xii. 5f.
34
J as.
iv. 6, 1 Pet. V. 5
xi. 31
I Pet.
iv. 18
xxv. 2 1 f.
Rom.
xii. 20
xxvi. II
2 Pet.
ii. 22
Job
V. 13
I Cor
JSom.
iii. 19
Hos.
i. 10
ix. 26
Quotatious from tlie LXX. m the New Testament. 385
Hos.
ii. 23
Rom.
ix. 25
vi. 6
Mt.
ix. 13, xii. 7
xi. I
ii. 15
xiii. 14
I Cor.
XV. 55f. •
Amos
V. 25, 27
Acts
vii. 42 f.
ix. II f.
XV. 15—17
Mic.
V. 2
Mt.
ii. 5 (. (Jo. vii. 42)
Joel
ii. 28—32
Acts
ii. 17—21
Hab.
>• 5
xiii. 41
ii. 3£
Rom.
i. 17, Gal. iii. 1 1, Ileb. x.
2,7 i-
Zech.
iii. 2
Jude
9
ix. 9
Mt.
xxi. 5, Jo. xii. 15
xi. r3
xxvii. 9f.
xii. 10
Jo.
xix. ^7
xiii. 7
Mt.
xxvi. 31, Mc. xiv. 27
Mai.
i. 2f.
Rom.
ix. 13
iii. I
Mt.
xi. 10, Mc. i. 2, Lc. vii.
27
Isa.
i. 9
Rom.
ix. 29
vi. y f.
Mt.
xiii. 14 f., Mc. iv. 12, Lc.
viii. 10, Jo. xii. 40 f.,
Acts xxviii. 26 f.
vii. 14
i. 23
viii. r4
Rom.
ix. 2,3, 1 l't;t. ii. 8
17
Heb.
ii. 13
ix. 1 f.
Mt.
iv. I 5 f.
x. 22 f.
Rom.
ix. 27 f.
xi. 10
XV. 12
xxii. 13
I Cor.
XV. 32
XXV. 8
54
xxviii. 1 1 f.
xiv. 21
16
Rom.
ix. 33, x. I r, I Tct. ii. 6
xxix. 10
xi. 8
•3
Mt.
XV. 8f., Mc. vii. 6f.
14
I Cor.
i. 19
xl- 3 5
Mt.
iii. 3, Mc. i. 3, Lc. iii.
4—6, Jo. i. 23
6 8
I Fet.
i. 24 f.
'3f.
Rom.
xi. 34 f., I Cor. ii. 16
xiii. I — 4
Mt.
xii. 18—21
xlv. 23
Rom.
xiv. 1 1
xlix. 6
Acts
xiii. 47
8
2 Cor.
vi. 2
Iii. =;
Rom.
ii. 24
7(Nah. i. 15)
X. 15
II
2 Cor.
vi. 17
S.
s.
«s
hi.
liii.
15
I
4
7f.
12
liv.
I
Iv.
13
3
Ivi.
7
lix.
20 f.
Ixi.
If.
lxi\
'• 4
Ixv
. if.
Ixvi. I f.
24
Vll.
II
386 Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament.
Isa. lii. 11; Rom. xv. 21
Jo. xii. 38, Rom. x. 16
Mt. viii. 17
I Pet. ii. 24 f.
Acts viii. 32 f.
Mc. XV. 28, Lc. xxii. yj
Gal. iv. 27
Jo. vi. 45
Acts xiii. 34
Mt. xxi. 13, Mc. xi. 17, Lc
xix. 46
Rom. xi. 26 f.
Lc. iv. i8f.
I Cor. ii. 9(?)
Rom. X. 20 f.
Acts vii. 49 f.
Mc. ix. 48
Jer. vii. 11 Mt. xxi. 13, Mc. xi. 17, Lc.
xix. 46
ix. 23 f. (i Regn. ii. 10) i Cor. i. 31, 2 Cor. x. 17
xxxviii. 15 Mt. ii. 18
31 — 34 Heb. viii. 8 — 12
Dan. xii. 11 (ix. 27, \i. 31) Mt. xxiv. 15, Mc. xiii. 14
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
supplies 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
sources.
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. q. T.
i. 23 Isa. vii. 14
ii. 23 Exod. xiii. 12
Quotations from the LXX. in the Netv Testament. 387
Mt.
M
c.
Lc.
0. T.
ii.
6
18
Mic. v. 2
Hos. xi. I
Jer. xxxviii. 15
iii.
3
i.
3
iii. 4 — 6
Isa. xl. 3 — 5
iv.
4
iv. 4
Deut. viii. 3
6
10 f.
Ps. XC. I I f.
7
12
Deut. vi. 16
10
8
'3
15 f.
Isa. ix. I f.
V.
21
27
3'
38
43
Exod. XX. 13
14
Deut. xxiv. I
Num. xxx. 3 (cf. Deut. xxiii.
21)
Exod. xxi. 24
Lev. xix. 18
viii.
«7
Isa. liii. 4
ix.
13 (xii. 7)
Hos. vi. 6
xi.
10
i.
2
vii. 27
Mai. iii. i
xii.
7
18-21
Hos. vi. 6
Isa. xiii. I
xiii.
.4f.
35
iv. iSf.
vi. 9 f.
Ps. Ixxvii. 2
Isa. Ixi. 1 (T. +lviii. 6
XV.
4
vii.
10
Exod. XX. 12, xxi. 17
8f.
6
Isa. xxix. 13
ix.
48
Ixvi. 24
xix.
5f-
X. 6
8
Gen. i. 27-i-ii. 24
18 f.
X.
•9
xviii. 20 f.
Exod. XX. 12 — 17
xxi.
4f.
Zech. i.>c. 91- Isa. Ixii. 1 r
•3
xi.
•7
xix. 46
Isa. Ivi. 74-Jcr. vii. 1 1
16
Ps. viii. 2
42
xii.
10
XX. 17
cxvii. 22 f.
x.\ii.
24
J9
28
Deut. XXV. 5 (cf. ( '.en. xxxviii.
,8)
32
26
37
Exod. iii. 6
37
29 f.
X. 27'
Deut. vi. 4f.
3V
3'
32
27'>
Lev. xix. 18
Deut. iv. 35
44
3''^
XX. 42 f.
I's. cix. 1
xxiv.
'5
xiii.
14
XX ii. yj
Dan. xii. 11
Isa. liii. 12
xxvi.
31
xiv.
27
Zecli. xiii. 7
xxvii
9f.
xi. 13
46
XV.
34
Ps. xxi. I
25-2
388 Qtwtations from the LXX. in the New Testament.
(2) Quotations in the Fourth Gospel.
Jo.
1. 23
ii. 17
vi. 31
45
X. 34
xii. 15
38
40
xiii. 16
XV. 25
xix. 24
36
Z7
Isa.
xl. 3
Ps.
Ixviii. 10
Exod.
xvi. 4, 15 (Ps. Ix.wii. 24f.)
Isa.
liv. 13
Ps.
Ixxxi. 6
Zech.
ix. 9
Isa.
liii. I
v1. 10
Ps.
xl. (xli.) 10
xxxiv. 19 (Ixviii. 5)
xxi. 19
Exod.
xii. 46 (Num. ix. 12, Ps.
xxxiii. 21)
Zech.
xii. 10
(3) Quotations in the Acts.
Acts
1. 20
Ps.
Ixviii. 26 + cviii. 8
ii. 17 — 21
Joel
ii. 28 — 32
25—28
Ps.
XV. 8—11
34 f.
cix. I
iii. 22 f. (vii. 27)
Deut.
xviii. 15, iSf.
25
Gen.
xii. 3 +xxii. iS
IV. 25 f.
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. 2;^
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. r6— 18
Jer.
xii. 15 + Amos ix. 11 f.+
Isa. .xlv. 21
xxviii. 26 f.
Isa.
vi. 9 f.
f
Quotations f yon tlic LXX. in the Nezv Testament. 389
(4) Quotations in tJie CatJiolic Epistles.
James ii. 8
II
23
iv. 6
1 Peter i. 24 f.
ii. 6
iii. 10-
iv. 18
V. 7
2 Peter ii. 22
Jude 9
-12
Lev.
xix. 18
Exod.
XX. 13 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. u
Zcch.
iii. 2
(5) Quotations in the Episths of St Paul.
I\on).
1. 17
ii. 24
iii. 4
10—18
20
iv. 3, 22
7f.
17
18
vii. 7
viii. 36
ix. 7
9
12
i3
15
«7
26
27
29
33
x. 6-9
15
16
18
'9
20 f.
Hab.
li. 4
Isa.
l.i. 5
Ps.
1.6
xiii. I — 3*
cxlii. 2
Gen.
XV. 6
Ps.
xxxi. I f.
Gen.
xvii. 5
XV. 5
Exod.
XX. 14, 17
Ps.
xliii. 23
Gen.
xxi. 12
xviii. 10
XXV. 23
Mai.
i. 2 f.
Exod.
xxxiii. 19
i.\. 16
Hos.
i. 10
Isa.
X. 22 f.
i. 9
viii. 14 1 xxviii. 16
Dent.
XXX. II — 14
Isa.
Iii. 7 (Nail. i. 15)
liii. I
Ps.
xviii. 5
Deut.
xxxii. 21
Isa.
Ixv. I f.
* See above, p. j-ji f.
390 Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament.
Rom. xi. I f. Ps. xciii. 14
3 f. 3Regn. xix. 10, 14, 18
8
9
26 f.
34 f-
xii. 20 f.
xiii. 9
xiv. 1 1
XV. 3
9 xvii. 50 (2 Kegn. xxu.
10
II
12
21
1 Cor. i. 19
31
11. 9
20
vi. 16
ix. 9
X. 7
26
xiv. 21
XV. 32
45
54 f.
2 Cor. iv. 13
vi. 2
16 ff.
viii. 15
ix. 9
X. 17
Gal. ii. 16
iii. 6
8
10
1 1
12
13
iv. 27
30
v. 14
Eph. iv. 8
25
Isa.
xxix. 10 + Deut. xxix
Ps.
Ixviii. 23 f. +
xxxiv. 8
Isa.
lix. 20+xxvii
•9
Prov.
xL 13
XXV. 2 1 f.
Exod.
XX. I3ff., Lev. xix. i<
Isa.
Ps.
xiv. 23
Ixviii. 10
Deut.
xvii. 50 (2
50)
xxxii. 43
Regn. :
Ps.
cxvi. I
Isa.
xi. 10
Iii. 15
xxix. 14
Jer.
Isa.
ix. 24
Ixiv. 4 + lxv.
17 (0
Ps.
xciii. 1 1
Gen.
Deut.
ii. 24
XXV. 4
Exod.
xxxii. 6
Ps.
xxiii. I
Isa.
xxviii. II f.
xxii. 13
Gen.
ii. 7
Isa.
XXV. 8 + Hos
xiii. 14
Ps.
CXV. I
Isa.
xlix. 8
Ezek.
xxxvii. 27 + Isa. Iii. i
Exod.
xvi. 18
Ps.
cxi. 9
Jer.
Ps.
ix. 24
cxlii. 2
Gen.
XV. 6
Deut.
xii. 3
xxvii. 26
Hab.
ii. 4
Lev.
xviii. 5
Deut.
xxi. 23
Isa.
liv. I
Gen.
xxi. 10
Lev.
xix. 18
Ps.
Ixviii. 19
Zech.
viii. 16
Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament. 391
Eph. iv. 26
V. 31
vi. 2
1 Tim. V. 18
2 Tim. ii. ig
Ps.
IV. 5
Gen.
11. 24
Exod.
XX. 12
Deut.
XXV. 4
Num.
XVI. 5
(6) Quotations in the Epistle to the Hebrews.
Hcb.
•• 5
Ps.
ii. 7 (2 Regn. vii. 14)
6
xcvi. 7 (Deut. xxxii. 43)
7
ciii. 4
8f.
xliv. 7 f.
10 — 12
ci. 26 — 28
13
cix. I
ii. 6 8
viii. 5—7
12
XXI. 23
13
Isa.
viii. 17 f.
iii. 7 — 12
Ps.
xciv. 8 — n
iv. 4
Gen.
ii. 2
V. 6 (vii. 17, 21)
Ps.
cix. 4
vi. I3f.
Gen.
xxii. i6f.
viii. 5
Exod.
XXV. 40
8 — 13, X. i6f.
Jer.
xxxviii. 31 — 34
ix. 20
Exod.
xxiv. 8
X. 5—10
Ps.
xxxix. 7— -9
30
Deut.
xxxii. 35 f.
37 f.
Hab.
ii. 3f.
xi. 5
Gen.
v. 24
18
xxi. 12
21
xlvii. 31
xii. 5 f.
Prov.
iii. 1 1 f.
15
Deut.
xxix. 18
20
iCxod.
xix. 12 f.
26
Hagg.
ii. 6
xiii. 5
Deut.
xxxi. 6, 8
6
Ps.
cxvii. 6
Some interesting results follow i'rom an inspection of these
lists, (i) The Synoptic Gospels have 46 distinct quotations
(Mt. 40, Mc. 19, I.e. 17), of which 18 are peculiar to Mt.,
3 to Mc, 3 to Lc. 'I'herc are 10 which are conuiion to the
three, 3 common to Mt. and Mc, 4 to Mt. and Lc, but none
392 Qiwtatio7is from the LXX. in the New Testament.
which are shared by Mc. 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, 1—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.
"^ Turpie, O.T. in the N., p. 267.
^ Grinfield, Apology for tfie 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., iMc, Lc. Mt. xxi. i3 = Mc. xi. i7 = Lc. xix. 46 = LXX., Mc.
alone compleiing the verse. Mt. xxi. 42 = Mc. xii. 10= Lc. xx.
I7 = LXX., Lc. omitting irapa Kvplnv kt\. 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 vnoKtiToy in Mt., Mc. (2) CitiXtions 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. 6ff. = LXX.,
Mc. omitting irpoaKoWrjOfja-fTai kt>. Mt. xxiv. i5 = Mc. xiii. 14=
LXX. and 'I'll. Mt. xxvi. 31 =Mc. xiv. 27 (oniitting rrji noifn'Tji) —
LXX., cod. A, with one important variant not found in any MS.
of the LXX.; cod. 15 has quite a different text^ (3) Citations
common to Aft., Lc. Mt. iv. 4 = Lc. iv. 4 = lxx., Lc. omitting
the second li.ilf of the quotation. Mt. iv. 6=Lc. iv. lof = LX.\.,
except that the clause tov fiia(fiv\d$(u is omitted by Mt. and in
part by Lc. Mt. iv, 7 = Lc. iv. i2 = LXX. Mt. iv. io = Lc. iv. 8 =
LXX., cod. A.
'I'hus 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 qu(;lations which belong to
the common narrative to those which are peculiar to one of
the Synoptists, the results are very different.
' f)n these sec Hatch, Essays, p. 104, :nul the writer's St Mark, \s. 755.
^ Hatch, op. cit., p. 177 f.
» St Mark, p. 318 f.
394 Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament.
In Mt. there are i6 quotations which are not to be found in
Mc. or Lc. (Mt. i. 23, ii. 6, 15, 18, iv. 15 f., v. 33, 38, 43, viii. 17,
ix. I3 = xii. 7, xii. 18 ff., xiii. I4f., 35, xxi. 4 f., 16, xxvii. 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 httle 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. Aj Lc. iv. 18 f. differs 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 (/;) 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 difterent 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 . ; (d) Mt. ii. 6, xxvii. gf. ; (c) Mt.
ii. 15; (d) Lc. iv. 18 f. ; (e) Mt. xii. 18 ff., Mc.xii.29f.; (/) 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 roi'
vlov fxov for Tu TSKva avTrjs 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. C^f?)-
The three last-named causes of variation need to be con-
sidered at some length.
^ Cf. Sir J. C. Hawkins, Hor. Syn., p. 1238".
Quotations from the LXX. iti 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. 11 (etTrarc t^ Ovyarpl
2iwV 'I80U ktX.). Lc. iv. i8 f., which is professedly an extract
from a synagogue lesson Isa. Ixi. i ff., inserts in the heart of
that context a clause from Isa. Iviii. 6 (u7rocrTetA.ai reOpav-
cr/xeVous iv dc^ecrct). Still more remarkable is the fusion in Mc.
i. 2 f , where, under the heading xa^ws yiy pairraL iv tw 'Haaia
T(3 ■7rpo4>i]Ti], 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'sZev/jr/i/vy/"/ Wissetischaftliche Theo/ogie^,
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
Pliilo, 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. i.xx. Th.
ibox) o TTrtir puv tv 'ltiKu>ii u muv p^w H^ov o nu'ii /jK'I',
^p€Tl<Ta,o<iy(inifTi'>i fiov livTiXruxyj/opmavTov' «pT(Xr;>//<i/i(U avToii'
tv tvdoKtjiTf V q \lni^i] 'l(r/jnJ/X o (WeKToi 6 (WfKTui; pnv ttv
pov. pox', TTpoaiSt'^iiTo f i'dnKr]afv tj yj^v^^r)
avTUV T) ^t'X'l /*""■ piiv.
' ^Sy Mark, p. ^. ' In ii"-'- xxxv., xxxvi., xxxviii., xl.
^ xxxvi., p. 97 f. * Cr. Zalin, EinUituu^, ii. \>. 314 flf.
A
CI. p. 48.
396 Quotations from t/ie LXX. in the Nezv 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
Kai (TV, BrjffXfffi, yrj lovfia,
ovBafias eXaxL(TTT] ei iv roi^
rjyefiocnv lov8a • en aov yap
e^eXfiKTerai 7jyovfia>os, oaris
TTOifiavel Titv \ai.'tv fxav ItrparjTi.
ouSo/xcofJ fxi] D I eK (Toiij e^
ov (B*)S;C(D) I om yap K*.
Mic. V. 2, 4
Kai <Tv, BrjBXfep, oikos
E(j)pd6a, oAiyocrroy ft tov eivai
iv ;^tXia(ri,i/ lovba- i^ ov fioi
e'l-f Aei'creroi rod elvai els ap^orra
TOV l<Tpai]X...Ku\ TTOlfiai'd...
f| ov] fK a-ov B^'^AQ I f^e-
Xfvaeraij + i]yovfievos A
On the relation of the lxx. in this passage to the M. T. see
above p. 338. XiXidaiv, jjye/xdo-ti' answer to different vocalisations
of "'Q7i^, but ov8anS)s eXax^iaTT) el and rjyovfievos octtis tt. tov X.
fiov are paraphrastic. The Evangelist-has put into the mouth
of the Scribes an interpretation rather than a version of the
prophecy.
Mt. iv. I5f.
yrj Za^ovXu)v koI yjj Ne(^-
daXeifi, odov daXdaa-rjs, nepav
tov lopdavov, TaXeiXaia tS>v
fdvtov, 6 Xaos 6 KadTjfievos iv
aKOTia <f)oi)s flSfv p.eya- kol rot?
Kadrjuivois iv X'^P^ '^"' (Tkio.
davdrov (puis avtTeiXev avrols.
01 KadrjpfvoL D
om KOI D*
o"Kta]
Isa. ix. I f
X'^po- Za^ovXav, fj y?] Nf0-
daXeifx, KUi ol XoLvoi 01 tj)v
TrapaXiav kol nipav tov 'lop-
8dvov, TaXeiXaia tcov idvaiv. 6
Xaos 6 TTopevojievos iv CTKorei,
iSere (puis p.iya- ol KaToiKOvvTes
iv X^P9 o"'f'« davdrov, (pas
Xdfi-^ei i(f) vfias.
'Ne(f)daXfifx] + obov daXacrarjs
t<'=='AQ(Aq. Th.) | ■7rapaXiav] +
KaToiKovvTes ^»'^"AQ I iropev-
o/xf i'os] Ka3i]fj.(vos A I (TKiaj pr
Kut N<='»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., r. rcof edvav, x^P^ [""'] fKta. On the other hand
6861' 6aka(Tai]i, flb(v, avTols agree with M.T. The writer quotes
from memory, or from a collection of loosely cited testimonia.
Mt. viii. 17
avTos Tas atrOfvaas i]fiS>v
Tka^fv Koi ras vi'icrovs i^acr-
raa-fv.
Isa. liii. 4
ovTos ras Afiaprias rj^oov
<f)fpei Koi Trepi fifj-cov odwuTat.
Mt.'s version is based upon Ileb., from which the LXX. departs.
Cf. Symm. : tus afiapTias ij/xcoj' avros dvfXajdev koi tovs tfovovs
virifxtivev.
Vs. Ixxvii. 2
dvoi^co (V TTUpa^oKais to
(TTopa pov (pdey^opai npo-
fiXjjpara an ctpxjjs.
Mt. xiii. 35
avol^oi fv napajinXaii to
(TTopa pov fpfv^opai KfKpvp-
piva OTTO Karaf'ioXijs.
KaT(ifi<>\T]s:'\-\- Kocrpov N*CD
V. 35^ in Mt. follows the LXX. verbatim^ 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 tpfv^opai is nearer to ni?'3N than (fidty^opai, unit
KUTaf^oXrji introduces a conception which lias no place ui D"!]il^"'?P,
and in this sense the Oreck phrase is practically limited to the
N. T. (see Hort on i Pet. i. 20).
Ml. xxvii. gf.*
Kai (XdfillV. . .TTjU Ttpijl' TflV
TtTiprjptVOV <>V (TiptjITdVTO UITO
viu)v lapuTjX, Ka\ (^coKdv ai/ra
«tf Titi' aypov Tot' K(pitpt'o)v,
KuOa avvira^tv pm Kvpios.
Zach. xi. 13
»c<i( find' Ki'ptof npoi pt
K«^f V aVTOVi (Is TO XWVfVTl'jpiOl'
Kui (TK(y\fopai (I boKipov (artv,
ov Tponnv (doKipuaOrj vnip
avTwv. K(U fXafiiH'.. .K(ii ti'i-
fiaXov avTovs etj rut' mKi>v Ku-
piov fls TO xwvtvTi}piov.
f!i0Kip(l<TflTjV h*'"''\<AQ
Mt. has rc-arran^cd this passage, anfl given its sense, wiih-
oul regard to the order or coiislruciiun of the original. In doing
this he has abandoned the LX.X. altogether, and approximates
to the Heb.; ct. Acj. 17 ript) i/v iTipqdrjv vnip aiiToyv.
' Ml. ascribes this prophecy to Jcri-miah : t6t( iirXtipwOi] rd jirjOiu 5iA
'Itpffdov Tov TTpo<lti)Tov. THc slip IS probably due lo a coTifiision between
Zach. 1. c. and Jcr. xviii. 1.
t^UiKfV A*"'*' f?>OiKa N
39^ 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 belief 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. 2 1, 27, 31, 2yZ- 38, 43) which are hardly of the nature of
strict citations; the formula ippWrj tois dp^atois distinguishes
them from that class, and suggests that they purport only to
give the general sense.
(d) The Fourth Gospel quotes the lxx. verbatim^ or with
slight variants, in cc. ii. 17, x. 34, xii. 38, xix. 24, 36; 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 eiOvvare ttjv oSov Ku/jtoi) for €Tot-
l^idaare r. 6. K., evdeCas Troulre ras rpL/Sovs toD Oeov y/xiov (cf.
Mt. iii. 3, Mc. i. 3, Lc. iii. 4); in xii. 40, Isa. vi. 9, 10 is
paraphrased Tervc^A-WKci/ avroiv tovs oc^^aA/xotis kol eTrwpwcrev
auTtov rrjv KapBtav, which agrees neither with the lxx. nor with
M.T. ; in xix. 37 oif/ovrat cts oV i^eKii/TTjaav is a non-Septuagintal
rendering of Zach. xii. 10, which was perhaps current in
Palestine, since ets ov i^eKevryjaav 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 TrepLoxv
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. ('Pa/x<^oi(v) or 'Pai(f>dv, i« 1V3). Simi-
larly in xiii. 34 (= Isa. Iv. 3) to. ocria AauttS is read with the
LXX. for Ti."] ''^9-' C. xiii. 22 is a conflation of Ps. Ixxxviii.
1 See against this Nestle, Textual Criticism of the IV. T., p. 291.
'•^ An exact citation, with one or two variants of the A type.
Quo tat iojts from the LXX. in the New Testament. 399
2i+lxxi. 20+1 Regn. xiii. 14 + Isa. xliv. 28. C. xv. 16 ff.,
wliich is introduced by the formula touto) (7Vfi<f>wvovaLv oi Xoyoi
Twv Trpo(f)r]TtZi; Kadw<i yeypaiTTai, presents a remarkable instance
of free citation accompanied by conflation, which calls for
separate study.
Acts XV. i6ff.
avoLKoSofxrjaco rrju aicTjvfjv Aave'18
TT)V TTfTTTiOKvlaV, KOI TO KOTC-
Ka'i dvop6di(Tti) aiiTijv, orrcoi av
fK^TjTTjaoocriv ol KciTaXonroi Ta>v
UvdpiiTTUIV TOV KVplOV KOL TTllVTa
ra eOvT) €(f> ovs erriKfKXrjrai to
ovopd pov in' aitTovs, Xe'yft
KvpKts 6 iroiojv ravra * *
KnTfarpappfva'^ narfaKup-
ptva ACD
Jer. xii. 15+Amos ix. I if.
pfTu TO fKJ3a\(iv pf avTDXii;
fiTiiTTpf^Q) ... dvaarijaa} rr)v
(TKT]V})v Aavf\8 rfjv TreirrcoKviav..
Kal rii K(iTf(TKapp(va avrrji dva-
(TTJ](T<t) Kai UVOt,Ko8opj](T0} aVTlJV
KadoiS al r'jpepai rov alaivos,
OTTCos fK^r)Tr]a'u>(Tiv oi Kurd-
XoinOl TWV av6pb}7T(x>V, KOI
irdvrn ra eBv-q ecf) ovs eVt-
KfKXfjTai TO ivopd pov eV
avTovs, Xf'yft Kvpios 6 ttoluiv
ravra.
K<iT((TKapp(va\ Kartarpap-
pfva A''(^*
OTTCOi'J + f/l' A I «J'^^)C07rC0l']-{-
rov Kvpivv A
The combination in tliis quotation of looseness with close
adherence to the r.xx. even where it is furthest from the Hcb.
(e.j^. in o7ra>4- (K^riTrjiruxTii' ktX.) is sij^nitlcant, especially when it is
remembered that the speaker is St James of Jerusalem.
(</) The Catliolic l'".pistles use the i.xx. when they ([uote
the O.T. expressly, and with some exceptions keep fairly close
to the Alexandrian (Ircek. Thus Jas. ii. 8, ii^ 2.^, iv. 6,
I I'et. i. 24', iv. 18, V. 5, are substantially exact, i i'et. ii. 6
differs from the i-xx. of Isa. xxviii. i6. i Pet. iii. lo ft., an
unacknowledged extract from Ps. xxxiii. 12 ff., is adai)ted to
the context i)y a slight change in the construction, but otlier-
wise generally follows the l.xx.: ^cAwv ^<i>^i' uyaTrav koi ISeli'
yip.tpa<i aya6d<i for OiXwy ^., dymruiv IB. 7//x. u.ya6a% IS probably
' On this rc-Klinji see W. H.^, No/fs on atUtt ieiidin\y, p. ^)(^.
" c;f. Mc. X. 19, Ix:. xviii. JO. Jas. ii. 23, v. 20, i I'et. iv. M, differ from LXX.
* Dii the few variants in ihis passage see Hurt, .SV /'/f/-, p. 93.
400 QjiotatioHS from the LXX. in the Nezv Testament.
a slip, shewing that the writer was quoting from memory. In
2 Pet. ii. 2 2 (= Prov. xxvi. Il) kvwv iiTi(TTpeil/a<; iirl to iSiov
i^epafia is nearer to the Heb. than k. orav i-n-iXdrj eVi jov
lavTov i/xerov, and appears to be an independent rendering.
(e) More than half of the direct quotations from the O.T.
in the Episdes 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. 6ff., 16, 18, ig, 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, 10, 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 TrScra adp^ for ttSs ^wv LXX.; ix. 9 Kara tov naipov tovtov
iXivaofiaL, koI 'icrrai ry %appa. vios for rj^o) . . . Kara tov Kaipov
TOVTOV... Koi €^€L vlov ^dppa LXX. j ix. 17 eh o.vto tovto i^r]yeipd
ere for ei'CKev tovtov 8uTrjpi]0r]<;, and Svvap.iv for iaxvy LXX. ' ;
ix. 27 6 dpi6p.6s Twv vlwv 'I., eVt tt^s y^?5 xiv. 11 ^w eyw for
Kttr' ifiaVTOv ofivvix), e^o jxoXoyrj a erai tuJ ^ew for o/tetrai tov 6f.6v
LXX.; I Cor. i. 19 d^erT^Vw for Kpvij/w lxx.; Gal. iii. 8 TrdvTa
TO. Wvt] for Traarai at <f>v\al tt^s y^<; LXX.; iii. 13 CTrtKaTapaTOS
(cf. V. 20) for KtKaTapa/ji€VO<; LXX.; Eph. iv. 8 eSwKev SofiaTa
TOis dvOpwTrois for £'Aa/?cs 8. iv dvOpwiru)^ LXX.; iv. 25 p.€Ta. tow
TrXyjaiov for Trpos tov ttA. LXX.; V. 31 dvTi tovtov tor ei'CKev t.,
om. avTov 1°, 2°; cf Mt. xix. 5 f, Mc. x. 7 f ; vi. 3 Kal 'io-y
fj.aKpo)(povLO<s for K. iva fxaKpo-^p. yevy).
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 ff.
' B* reads bvvafiiv. 2 avois B^NR*.
* On this passage, see above, p. 251 f.
Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament. 401
The following instances will shew how far reconstruction is
carried in cases of conflation.
Rom. ix. 33 Ihnv Tiflrjfxi iv
Stcbr \idov irpoaKonfiaTos koi
nirpav (TKavhakov Koi 6 ttkt-
revuiv eV uvrci) ov KUTaKT^vv-
di](T(Tai.\
Isa. viii. 14 ovx ws 'k'ldov
TrpoaKOfificiTi (TvvuvTtjcrfadf
ivde
(OS TTfTpdS TTTCOfXari
xxviii. 16 l8ov eycb (pfSaWo) ds
Tu defieXia '2(td}V Xldop ttoXv-
TfXrj, fKXfKTov aKpoyuiinniov,
tVTipOV...K(H 6 7ri(TT(V(xiV OV /Xj)
KaTaicrxvvOj}.
Isa. xxix. ro TreTroriKfv vpas
Kvpios TTvevpari Karavv^ecos.
Dent. xxix. 4 K(u ovK eSooKev
Kvptos 6 ^fof vp'ii' Kapdiav
flHfvac KCtl d(pda\povs [tov]
^XfTTfiv Koi (Sra aKoveiv tios
Tjjs rjpfpas ravTTjs.
Isa. Ixiv. 3 OIK T]Kovaup.(v
ov8e oi o(f)da\po\ T]pa)U fi8ov
6(i)v TrXf/v aov, Kal ra tpya
(TliV a TTUUj<T(LS Toli VITOpi-
vdvcriv fKfov. Ixv. 1 7 ovS' oi
pt) fn(\6ij avToiu (TTi K(ip8lav.
Isa. XXV. 8 KUTtTTlfV O
dt'ii'dToi Icrx^iTas. Hos. xiii.
14 "■oO 17 8iKr] <Tov, dduuTf ; ttov
TO Kf VTpov aov, aSr];
In some cases a wide departure from the LXX. is probal^ly to
be expl.iincd by the siipjjusition that the Apostle ((uotcs from
memory ; e.g. :
Rom. XI. 8 (?!o}K€v niVoif 6
Seos TTUfipa KaTofv^ecos, o(f)daX-
pOVS TOV pt] (iXeTTfiv kcu o>Ta
Toi) pij UKOi^Cd/, eioy Trjs <TT]p.epov
Tjpfpas.
I Cor. ii. 9 a o(pdaXp<)i ouk
ftSfl/ Ktti ois OVK rJKOV(TfV Kdt
fni Kapbiav uvfiputirav ovk
iwfj'ir], iiaa ijTiiipiKKv 6 6(ui Tols
uyanuiTiv aiiTov^.
(lyoTToxrii/] vTTopfvovaiv
Clem. R. i. 34, 8.
I Cor. XV. 54 f. KUTcrrodrj o
Buvaroi fli v'tKni*. noii <tov,
ddvUTe, Tit J/tKOj; TTOV (TOV,
6uVUT(, TO KtVTpOV;
Rom. xi. 2 iL
ov»c oi^ciTf iv WXfia riXt'yfi
7} ypn(f)ii..,Kvpi(, Toiii rrp(K/»J-
Tdi (TOV (InfKTfivitv, tU dvrrui-
(TTrjptli (TOV KllTftTKIt\^(tV, >Cfjy<i»
vn(X(t(jt(hiv povoi, Kill ^t)Tovirii'
rijv '^v\i]v piiv. (tXX(\ Ti Xt'yfi
aurcp 6 )(pr)paTiirpt'ii; Knr*'-
Xinov fpavTu} inTOKKT^iXinvi
(IV^pllf, OlTlVti OL'K e'/Cd/iV^/dl'
yili/u T?! BiiiiX.
' Aq. Kal (IS iTTffttbv (TKavSdXov.
^ Oil this passinjc sec Rcscb, Aj^i,ipha, p. 154 IT.
S. S.
3 Rcf,m. xix. 14 (T.
Kfll flTTiV \W(ll)V...T(l Qv-
(TUllTTl'lptd (TOV KodflXllV Koi
TOVi TTf)li(j>ljT(lS (TDV lITTf KTfll'llf
...K(t\ vni>X('Xippiii tyoi povtl)-
TdTOi K<U (^rjTOVfTl TtjV ^V)(>)f
pi>v...K(ii fintv Kvpioi npiif
avTi'>v,,.K(tTiiXfiyl/fti iv hrptiijX
(TTtIi ^(X((l''5(If dv?ij)U)V, TTlil'TII
yi'ivdTa (1 ot'K (OKXiiirdv ydi'u r<i>
B«(iX.
" Cf. I I'ct. ii. H (llorl).
* So 'riicoiliition.
a6
402 Quotations from the LXX. in the Neiv 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 r<5 vofjico jiypanrai on 8ia (f)av\i(rfi6v ^eiXeoiv, 8ia
'"Ev fTepoykaxrcrois Koi ev )(fi- yXooaarjS irepas- on XaXrjaov-
\((Tiv erepcov XaXijaro) rS \au> (tlv tm Xnw rovra ... koX ovk
TovTO), Koi ouS' ovTas eto-- rjOfKr^crav aKOveiv.
aKOvaovrai fiov, Xe'yei Kvpios.
Jerome, quoting these words from St Paul, rightly adds,
" Quod mihi videtur iuxta Hebraicum de praesenti sumptum
capitulo." Aquila's rendering is remarkably similar, on ev erepo-
yXoyaa-Qis Kol ev ;^etAeo"ii' irepou- XaXj;crco rw Xaa rovTa. 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 fif.,
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 dififer
materially from the Heb. (viii. 8 ff.^ x. 5 ff., awfxa 8e KaTrjpnao)
fxoi, 37 iav VTroaTeiXrjTaL, xi. 21 pdfSSov, xii. 5 ixaaTiyol*). But
he sometimes deserts both version and original, substituting a
free paraphrase, or apparently citing from memory (i. 6, ix. 20
e(/£TctAaTo, x. 30^, xii. 19 f., 26). Some of his readings are
interesting : in i. 7 we have Trupos 0Xoya for nvp <^Xeyoi'®; in
i. 12 (1)9 i/xdrLov seems to be a doublet of o'o-et -n-epLJSoXaLov.
Notice also ii. 12 dTrayyeAcG for SLrjyija-ofiaL (perhaps after Ps.
xxi. 31 f.) J iii. 9 ev SoKLfj-aata for iSoKLpLaaav (eAoKiMACiA for
eAoKlMACA), and iii. 10 Tca-a-epaKOVTa errj- 810 Trpocrw^d(,(Ta for
^ As iv Toj vbfiifi seems to indicate.
^ Westcott, Hebrews, p. 476.
' 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 irvpbi <pXiya (sic) in Ps. ciii. 4. I
Qtwtations from the LXX. in the Neiv Testament. 403
Tco-o". trf] irpocrwxO'', X. 6 cuSo'/cT/cras for Tjrijtras B, i^T]Tr)(7a<;
nART; xii. 15 ivox^y for eV x"'^!/) ^ corruption supported
even in the LXX. by 15*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 Asia Minor, and which afterwards
supplied materials to Theodotion, and left traces in the
Antiochiaii 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 Ilort 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. 53 f, xi. 5 = Lc. vii. 22, xi. 21, 23 =
I,c. x. 15, 28 r, xiii. 32 = Mc. iv. 32 = Lc. xiii. 19, xvii. 17 = Lc.
ix. 41, xviii. 16, xxi. 33 = Mc. xii. i = I.e. xx. 9, xxiv. 29 ff.
Mc. xiii. 24 ff. = Lc. xxi. 25 iT., xxiv. 39 I-c. 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); (t/) in tlie canticles
01 Lc. i. — ii. ; (c) in St Stephen's speech, and, though more
sparsely, in the other speeches of the Acts; (^) in the Epistle
a 6 — 1
404 Quotations from the LXX. in the Neiv 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 ff., 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 {Q.\f 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, Sacroriun Farallelorum libri iii. \
(Heidelberg, 1588); J. Drusius, Parallcla Sacra (Franeker, '
^ See Mayor, Styatnes, 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.
\
Quotations from tJie LXX. in the New Testament, 405
1594); H. Hody, De Bibl. textibus, p, 243 ff. (Oxford, 1705);
W. Surenhusius, IT'ti'Dn "IDD sive /3i,3Xos (caraXXayr/r (Amsterdam,
1713); H. Owen, Modes of quotation used by the Evangelical
writers explained and vindicated {London, 1789); H. Gough,
JV. T. Quotations (London, 1855); A. Tholuck, Das A.T. in
N.T.—erste Beilage (Gotha, 1836); D. M-^C. Turpie, Tlie Old
Testament in tlie New (London, 1868); The New Testament
view of the C/^/ (London, 1872); Kautzsch, De Vefetis Testa-
inenti 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); Bohi, Die ATlichen Citate irn NT.
(Vienna, 1878); C. H. Toy, Quotations in the New Testament
(New York, 1884); E. Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greeks p. 131 ff.
(Oxford, 1889); W. Staerk, in Hilgenfeld's Zeitschrift fiir
Wissenschaftliche Theologie, xxxv. — xl. ; Bp Lightfoot's Biblical
Essays, p. 136 ff. (London, 1893); A. Clemen, Der Gebrauch
des A.T. in den NTlichen Schriften (Giitersloh, 1895); H.
Vollmer, Die ATlichen Citate bci Paulus (Freiburg in B.,
1895); J. C. Hawkins, Horae Synopticae, pp. 123 ff. (Oxford,
1889); W. Dittmar, Veins Testament um in Novo i. (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.
(Tubingen, 1900). See also the commentaries on particular
books of the N.T., e.g. Bp Westcolt, Hebrews, p. 469 ff.; J. B.
Mayor, St fames, p. Ixviii. ff. ; H. 15. Swete, St Mark, p. ixx. {i. ;
Apocalypse, p. cxxxix. ff. ; G. Milligan, Thessalonians, pp. iiv.,
Iviii. f.
4o6
CHAPTER III.
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 i/nd 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.
^ Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftstellcr dcr ersten drei Jahr-
htinderte (Hinrichs, Leipzig). The volumes already published contain
part of Hippolytus and an instalment of Origen.
Quotations in early Christian Writitigs. 4c 7
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); Dcut. xxxii. 8 f . (xxix. 2); Ps. ii. j i.
(xxxvi. 4), xi. 5 f. (xv. 5), xvii. 26 f. (xlvi. 2), xviii. 2 ff. (xxvii. 7),
xxi. 7 f f . (xvi. 15 f), xxiii. i (liv. 3), xxx. 19 (xv. 5), xxxi. i f. (1. 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
(hi. 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. 3 f.), 34 (xxx. 2), xx.
21 (xxi. 2); Job iv. 16 ff. (xxxix. 3 ff.), v. 17 ff. (Ivi. 6 ff.), xi. 2 f .
(xxx. 4), xix. 26 (xxvi. 2); Sap. xii. i2-|-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 (xlii. 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 i^ovOevrjfjLa, kAR; xxxi.
I f. ou, «*BA (ag. «"=•* w); xxxiii. 14 x^''^^ ^ov, «'^'AR; 16 oni.
OTi, n'^-^AR; xxxvi. 36 i$e^T]Tr]fTa (II. P. 99, 183); xlix. 21
avofj.€, H* ; 22 apTT. o>s Xtwv, R; 1. 17 to (TTi)ii.a...ra ^eiXrj]
Ixxxviii. 21 tXe'ti, B*; Prov. ii. 21 )(^py}(TTol luovTai olKrjTOj^e^ y?;?,
aKaKoL ok viro\et.(f>6r](Toi>Tn(. in auTT/?, cf. M*'^'*A — a doublet want-
ing in B, whose reading "appears to shew the hand of an
Alexandrian reviser" (Toy, cf. Lagarde); iii. 12 TruiSeuei, «A;
x.\. 21 (27) Xi'^vo?, a reading found in A as a doublet (0uJs...
7; XvXV()<;); Job iv. 21 €TcA€uT7;fra;/ (for i$r]i)dr6ri(ra\'), A; V. 17 ff.
is without the additions of the A text, and nearly as in B;
Isa. i. 17 xvV'/j ^*> ''g- B''''«A, Sevre kuI SuXeyx^. {f>ia\fxO.
O""), HAQ ; liii. 5 a//.apTta?...di'0/xta9 tr., NAQ; 6 vnlf) ToV
a/iaftTiwy i]/j.<Zv, 8 rJKti for vx^^V^ Q""') ^2, 90 al., Syrohex.""';
9 (vpidrj 80A09, w'^'AQ (see Lighlfoot's note) ; t^? irX-qyT/i,
B (A, airo T. ttA.); Ix. 1 7 apx^Kxa?] CTricTKOTTou? | tVirrKoTTOu?] 8ta-
Kot'ous; E/.ech. xxxiii. 11 dfLapTwXov, A (B, airtfiovs) ; Dan. vii.
10 iXdTovpyovy, Th. (r.xx. c^JcpaTrevoi')'.
' On Clement's quol.itions from the Ps.ilins .ind Is.ninh, see ITatch,
.fi'jMjj, pp. 175—9.
4o8 Quotations hi 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 eav KaracrTpojo-a),
'A. 2. lo-v crrpwo-co (lXX. la.v KarafSw); Isa. Ixvi. 2 Trpdov, 'A. (lXX.
Taireivov). 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 iXen aUoriw: Mai. iii. i
6 aytos' for 6 ayyeXos.
(d) 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 citandi (e.g. Ivi.
3 — i4 = Ps. cxvii. i8 + Prov. iii. 12 + Ps. cxl. 5 ((^y^crtV) + Job
V. 17 — 26 (koi -KoXiv Aeyet)). In Other cases one of the cita-
tions is correctly given, and another quoted loosely (e.g. xiv.
4 = Prov. ii. 21 f (A)-(-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 Ae'yft yap tvov Kai i^avacrTycr^fi /me kol l^opLoXoyrjaofxai <jof
Kai iKOtiXTjO-q KoX VTTVwaa' l^rjycpOqv, on (tv jXiT i/xov et, 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).
(<:) 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. i=Acts vii.
3 = Clem. x. 3 : Clem, reads aTreXOe for e^eXfyc (lxx. and Acts),
but rejects kol Sevpo with AD against Acts and cod. E.
^ 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.
" On ' composite ' quotations from the LXX. see Hatch, o/>. ciC.
p. 203 ff.
Quotations in early Christian Writi?igs. 409
(2) Exod. ii. 14 = Acts vii. 27 = Clem. iv. 11: Clem, reads
KpiTTjv for apxoi'Ta — "perhaps from confusion with Lc. xii. 14"
(Lightfoot). (3) Jer. ix. 23 f. (i Regn. ii. 10) =1 Cor. i. 31,
(2 Cor. X. 1 7) = Clem. xiii. i; here the relation of Clement to
the Biblical texts is best shewn by juxtaposition:
Jer. /.c.
fXTI KaV)(U(Tt)(J) 6 (TO-
ffms fv Tjj (TO(f)ia avTov,
Kat fMrj Kavx('t(r0(o 6
laxi'p'iS ei> TT) Icrxvi
aijTOv, Kcii fifj Kavxt'icdd)
6 irXovaioi iv rc5 ir\ov-
> * >\ V> * *
TO) avTov aAA n ev
■ a '
rovTo) KavxcfTUO) o Kav-
)((ofiei'Oi, crvvUiv Ka\
yivo}(TK(iv oTi iyo) ftfii
Kvpios f) TTOtoiv eXeoy
KUl KplpU (Cdi SlKCJt-
ocrvvrjv fVl TJ/y yijs.
I Regn. t.c*
prj Kavx(i<y0<>> o (j)p6-
vipos iv Trj (ppovrjo'fi
ai-Tov, Koi prj Kav^'i-
(t6(o 6 dvvuTiis iv Trj
bvvdpet avTov, koi pff
Ktw^ucdoi (I TrXovatos
iv Tut jrXoi/ro) avrov-
aAA I] ev rovTOi Kav-
Xdo'Ooi 6 Kavx(i>p(vos,
(TVvUlV KOi yiVOKTKflV
TttV KVplOV, Kul ITOk'iV
Kplpn KOI ^iKaincrvvrp'
iv fiiaa ti)s yrjs.
* ^cr. p. 245.
! Clem. t.c.
p'] Kavx(icd(i> O (TO-
</)()s iv Tfj ao(f)La avTov,
pi]8e 6 IcTxvpos iv rfi
Icrxvi avTov, p^]''>f o
nXovcTtos ev ra nXov-
TO) avTov aAA fj yt
Kavx<^pfvos iv Kvpici
Kuvxacrdioj;', tov in^T)-
Tfiv ai'Tov Koi Troie'tv
Kpipa Koi 8iKaio(rvvr]v.
+ I Cor. i. 31, 2 Cor.
X. 17: see Lightfoot's
note ati loc.
(4) Ps. xxi, 9 = Matt, xxvii. 43 = Clem, xvi, 15; Clem,
agrees with lxx., Mt. substitutes ■Ki-nnSf.v for T/ATritrti', rw
Btnv for Kvptov, and tl for on. (5) Ps. xxxiii. 12 ff. = i Pet.
iii. lofr. = Clem. xxii. i ff; Clem, agrees witii lxx. against
St Peter, who changes the construction (6 6'€A(ui'...7ra uo-utoj
ktA.). (6) Ps. cix. i=Mt. xxii. 44 (Mc, Lc), Acts ii. 34 f,
Hcl). i. 13=- Clem, xxxvi. 5: Clem, roads vTroTroStof with I,c.,
Acts, Hebr., against viroKaToy Mt., Mc. (BD). (7) Prov. iii.
12 Ilcb. xii. 6 = Clem. Ivi. 4: see above, p. 402. (8) Prov.
iii. 34 Jas. iv. 6, i Pet. v. 5 Clem. xxx. 2: ©tos ('> 6. Jas.,
I'et.) against Kr/dos LXX.; M.'i'. ^5•1^, but with reference to
nin* in 7'. 33. (9) Isa. xxix. 13'- Mt. xv. 8, Mc. vii. C = CIcm.
XV. I : again the passages must be printed in full:
' .See Halch, o/). a'/., p. 177 f.
4IO Qiiotations in early Christian Writings.
Isa. I.e.
Mt., Mc. tt.CC.
6 Xaos ovTOs (ovTos
6 \a6s Mc.) rots' xei-
\faiv fie Tifia, rj Se
Kapbla avrSyv iroppoa
dir^X^'] Mc. dcpiar-q-
K€v D direariv L 2P®
Clem. I.e.
OvTos 6 \ao9 rot?
^fiXfCLV fif Tifia, rj Be
Kap8ia avrav noppco
anearTiv an' epov.
6 Xaos
OVTOS ev Tco (TToiiari
avTov, Kai ev rois x^'"
Xecrti' avTcbv Tipmaiv
fie, T) 8e Kapdia avTav
iToppoci aTTe^eian epov.
Om iv T(fi CT^p.. aVTOU
Kal iv t<AQ.
Through constant citation, the context has taken more than
one type; Clement's is close to that of the Evangelists,
but has not been borrowed from them in their present form,
as hvedTiv shews. (lo) Isa. Hii. i — 12= 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 B and A, while often supporting A, it is less
constantly opposed to B 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-
sioHj 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 probably of Jewish descent and a
freedraan 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,
^ Clement of Rome, p. 61. Dr Nestle {Z. f. die NTliche Wissenschaft ,
i. 2) points out the Semitic style which reveals itself in Clement, e.g. v. 6
eirraKis, xii. 5 yivJiaKovaa yivwcTKUj.
Quotations in eat'ly 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), Hi. 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), Ezcch. xiv. 14, 18, 20 (vi. 8). The last of
these passages is cited very freely or rather summarised,
although introduced by the words Xe'yct -q ypa^rj iv tw 'E^(kli]X.
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. Iii. 5 as it is quoted by
Polycarp (see below)).
3. Another second century document, indisputably Roman,
the Shepherd of Hermas, contains no quotation from the lxx.
Hut Ps. ciii. 15 i,xx. has supplied the writer with a phrase in
Afand. xii. 3. 4, and Vis. iv. 2. 4 supplies evidence that he
knew and read a version of Daniel which was akin to Theodb-
tion's. The passage runs : 6 Kupios uTreo-TeiXcv toc dyycXoi'
auToD rov iiri twv 0-qf)iuiv ovTa, ov to ovofid ItrTtv tiiey/Jt't"', kcu
€Vt'</)/)tt^€c TO aro/xa avTov Iva fii^ ae Xv/jliIvt]. Comjiare Dan. vi.
2 2 (23) Th., o 6((>'i fxov aTTtdTdXtv Tov tlyytA.oi' avTuv koI l\i-
ff}pa$(y TO. CTTO/Jtara rwu XeorroJi' (lxX. aia-o>K€ /a€ 6 <?£os diro Twf
Atoi'Toji'), Koi ovK iXvfii^yavTo /xt',
4. The Old Testament is quoted in the ICpistlc of
Barnabas even more profusely than in the Epistle of Clement,
^ The acute coniccture of Dr f. Rciidcl Harris, who saw that the name,
which appears in (iu: MS. as Otypl or ihc like, must be an attempt to
teproiluce the verb 13D (I>.in. /. <:.).
' Sec above, p. 47, n. 4.
412 Qtiotations in early Christian Writings.
but with less precision. The writer is fairly exact in well-
known contexts belonging to the Psalter or the Book of
Isaiah ^ 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 fornmla citandl 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 : I'l Aeyet o aA.Xos irpo(f)y]Tr]<; M.(iiV(T7J<s avTOL'5 ; 'I80V TttSe
XiyCL Kijptos 6 Oeo? Eio'eA^are eis t^v yrjv rrjv dyaOrjv, rjV wfxocrev
JLvpios Tw 'A^pacLfx, Koi 'IcraoiK koi laKw/S, kol KaTaKXrjpovojXTjaare
avrrjv, yrjv peoucrav ydXa koi. /xe'At. Similar liberties are taken
even when the writer mentions the book which he is quoting:
x. 2 Mwucrry?...A.€yet aurois ev tu AevTepovofxiio Kai StaOyo'OjxaL
Trpos TOP Aaov tovtov to, StKatoj/xara fjLov — 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 neatly 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, lofif. (ii. 5, ix. 3, xv. 8),
iii. gf. (vi. 7), v. 21 (iv. 11), xxviii. 16 (vi. 2f.), xxxiii. 13 (ix. i), 16
(xi. 4 f.), xl. 12 (xvi. 2), xlii. 6 ff. (xiv. 7), xlv. 2 f . (xi. 4), xlix. 6 f.
(xiv. 8), liii. 5, 7 (v. 2), Ixi. i f. (xiv. 9), Ixvi. i f. (xvi. 2). (d) Partly
exact, partly free: Gen. xxv. 2 iff. (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). (^) Free, with fusion:
Gen. xvii. 23 + xiv. 14 (ix. 8), Exod. xx. 8-f-Ps. xxiii. 4 (xv. i),
Exod. xxxii. 7 + Deut. ix. 12 (iv. 8), xxxiv. 28 + xxxi. 18 (iv. 7), Ps.
xii. 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 ff.
^ See Hatch, Essays, p. i8off.
I
Qiiotatiofis in early Christian Writitigs. 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 fVt KaOeSpav, BX (ag. e. iia0(8pa AR), 5 ol aat^fis,
AfiaproiXnt, B (ag. aafdeis, oi ap,. A), xvii. 45 vTrijKova-av, N* | pov,
«"=■* RU (ag. poi 1° BS*A). xxi. 17 ■n-tpUaxep, H.-P. 81, 206. cix. I
Kvpioi, R I vTTOTTodiov (ag. vitokutco, Mc. xii. 36, BD). Isa. iii. 9
oTi, AV; V. 21 favT^v, AQ; xxviii. 16 e'pfidXa), N'AQ; xlii. 7 Koi
(^ayaydv \ 6e5f/Xf i/ovy] nfirfdrjfiti'ovs (as Justin, D/d/. 26, 65, 122).
xlix. 6 TfduKa, KAQ* (ag. Se'S&xa BQ"'e), 7 Xurpoxra/iei/oy (for pvad-
fifvos); liii. 5 «»'0|ij«f, afxaprias, NAQ, J rov Kfipavros airuv, N*^^
AQ; Iviii. 5 Xtyn Kvpios, Q, 6 l8ov <wrq fj vrjareia rji/ ; Ixi. I ra-
ireivoU, N*; Ixvi. I ij 8i yrj, NAQ | ij (for kui 2°), XA.
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 T7? Troifivr]<:. Occasionally
the text used by Barnabas seems to have been revised from
the Heb. ; e.g. in Jer. ii. 12 f^earr], t^ptfti/ become Ikotij^i,
<f>pi$dTw in accordance with M.T. ; in Gen. ii. 2 Barnabas has
with M.T. «V Ty 7/xc/)^ T^ c/^So'/i?/ where the lxx. read c. t. *}. t^
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. (</) The
genuine Epistles 01' Ignatius quote it only twice with :i, formula
citandi (Prov. iii. 34 ^ Eph. v. 3, xviii. i7 = Magn. xii. i) ;
* For further details sec Hatch, op, cil. p. 180 ff.
414 Qtiotatio7is in early Christian Writings.
two or three allusions (Ps. xxxii. 9 = Eph. xv. i, Isa. v. 26 =
Srayrn. i. 2, Hi. 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 St* vyuSs Sta Travros to ovo/x,a /xou
j3Xaa-<f}r]ixeLTai iv rots 'iOvecnv appears tO be changed into ouat
St ov ETTt fxaTaioTYjTL TO ovo/Act fxov cTTi Ttvwv ^XaacjirjfieiTai — a
form which occurs also in Pseudo-Clement (2 Cor. xiii. 2) and
Polycarp (Phil. x. 3)^ (d) Polycarp is no less sparing in his
references to the O. T. than Ignatius. He quotes only Isa.
lii. 5' (x. 3), Tob. iv. io = xii. g (x. 2), Ps. iv. 5 (xii. i) — the
last-named passage perhaps indirectly, 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 i-ma-Tpiij/aTe, 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 provenance. 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. iff. (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. l); IV. 7 (iv. 18. 3), 9 (iii. 23. 4), 10 (v. 14. i);
' On this quotation, however, see Nestle in Exp. Times, ix., p. 14 f.
^ The chapters and sections are those of Stieren.
Quotations in early Christian Writings. 415
ix. 5 f. (v. 14. i); xiii..i4 f., 27 (v. 32. 2); xiv. 22 (iv. 5. 5); xv. 18
(v. 32. 2); xvii. 9 ft". (iv. 16. i); xix. 24 (iii. 6. i), 31 ff. (iv. 31. i);
xxvii. 27 ff. (v. 33. 3); xlix. 10 ff. (iv. 10. 2), 18 (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. l), 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. 2f. (iv. 16. 2), 8 (iii. 6. 5),
22 (iv. 15. I, 4); vi. 4 ff. (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. 1), 4 (iii. 18. 7), 6 (iv. 10. 2; 31. 2), 8f. (iii. 12.
9); xxxiii. 9 (iv. 8. 3). i Re<^n. xii. 2 f . (iv. 26. 4); xv. 22 (iv. 17.
l). 2 Rcgn. xi. 27, xii. I ff. (iv. 27. i). 3 Kegn. viii. 27 (iv. 27. i);
xi. I ff. (iv. 27. i); xviii. 21, 24, 36 (iii. 6. 3); xi.x. 11 f. (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. 33. 13); xx. 5 (ii.
34. 3); xxii. 4f. (v. 31. 2); xxiii. i (iv. 36. 6); xxxi. 1 f. (v. 17. 3);
xxxii. 6 (i. 22. i; iii. 8. 2), 9 (ii. 2. 5, iii. 8. 2); xxxiii. 13 ff. (iv.
17- 3» 36. 2), 17 (iv. 28. l); xxxiv. 9 (iv. 11. 3); xxxix. 7 (iv. 17.
l); xliv. 3ff. (iv. 33. ii), 7 (iii. 6. i); xlviii. 13 (iv. 4. 3), 21 (iv.
41. 3), 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. 1, iii. 19. i);
Ixxxiv. 12 (iii. 5. i); Ixxxv. 13 (v. 31. 1); 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)j cix. i
(ii. 28. 7, iii. 6. i); ex. 10 (iii. 23. 5); cxiii. il (iii. 8. 3); cxxxi.
lof. (iii. 9. 2); cxlv. 6 (i. 10. i); cxlviii. 5 f. (ii. 34. 2, iv. 41. i).
I'njv. i. 20 f. (v. 20. 1); 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 (i. 19. i); xii. 10 (iii.
12, 13, iv. 20. 6). Amos i. 2 (iii. 20. 4); viii. gf. (iv. 33. 12). Alio,
vii. 19 (iii. 20. 4). Joel iii. 16 (iv. 33. 11). Jon. i. 9, ii. 3, iii. 8 f.
(iii. 20. I). Hali. iii, 2 (iii. 16. 7), 3ff. (iii. 20. 4, iv. 33. II). Zech.
vii. off. (iv. 17. 3, iv. 36. 2); viii. 16 f. (iv. 17. 3), 17 (iv. 36. 2); xii.
i<^ (iv. 33. m). 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. 1), 8 f. (iv. 4. 2, iv. ij,.
13), II (iv. 17. 1), 16 (iv, 17. I, iv. 36. 2, iv. 41. 3), 22 (iv, 12. l),
23 (iv. 2. 6); ii. 3 f. (iv. 34. 4), 17 (iv. 33. 13); v. 6 (iii. 17. 3), 12
(il. 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. 1 1); ix. 6 (iii. 16. 3, iv.
33. 11); xi. I ff. (iii. 9. 3), 6ff. (v. ly 4); xii. 2 (iii. 10. 3); xiii. 9
(v. 35. i); XXV. 8 (v. 12, i), 9 (iv. 9. 2); xxvi. 10 (v. 35. l), 19 (iv.
33. 1 1, V. 15. I, V. 34. i); xxvii. 6 (iv. 4. l); xxviii. 16 (iii. 2i. 7);
4l6 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. ZZ- 11); xl. 15, 17 (v. 29. l); xli. 4 (iv. 5. 1); xlii. 5 (iv. 2. i,
V. 12. 2), loff. (iv. 9. i); xliii. 5 ff. (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.
11), 8 (ii. 28. 5); liv. II ff. (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), 17 ff. (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. 1. 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 ff. (v. 34. 3), 26 (iv.
31. i); xxxv. 15 (iv. 36. 5); xxxvi. 30 f. (iii. 21. 9); xxxviii. il (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. iff. (v. 15. i), 12 (v.
34. i). Dan. ii. 23 f., 41 ff. (v. 26. i); iii. 24 ff. (v. 5. 2) ; vii. 8 (v.
25- 33), 10 (ii. 7- 4), 14 (iv. 20. II), 2off. (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 repositum est (M™^ « oTroKftrat^); 18 in 1
salutem tiiam susti/uei ie, Domine (cf. F""'"^ ap. Field). Exod.
XXV. ^o fades omnia (F Trouja-fis navra, Luc.) secundum typum
eorum quae vidisti. Num. xxiv. 17 surget dux in Israel (cf. Heb.
tD5t?', 2. o-K^Trrpov; LXX. avdpcoiros e| 'L). Deut. v. 22 (19) serip-
sit ea in duabus tabu lis lapideis (+Xi6Lvas B'^^'A Luc); xxxii. 6
^ Cf. Justin, Dial. 120.
Quotations in early Christian Writings, 417
I
et fecit te et creavit te ( + Kat iKTiaiv ere AF, +(cai (TrXaa-fv (T€
Luc.)- I Regn. xv. 22 aiiditus bonus super sacrijicium {dyadt]
Luc). Ps. .\xxix. 7 aures aiitem perfecisti mihi (possibly a cor-
rection from the Gallican Psalter, but a few cursives read after
the Heb. uula or Zra) ; xliv. \y facti sunt tibi filii (B^'ART iyevr]-
Brjo-av, ag. B*{< iyivv.) ; xlix. lo bestiae terrae {dypoii X'^-^A, Spvuov
BX*}, 15 indie tribulations tuae {d\iy}reMs aov S"^-^AR); ci. 27
mutabis eos {aXXu^eis N* e'At^ft? B(S"^''jAR(T)); cix. i suppeda-
neum pedum tuorum (vTroTrubiov, not vnoKdro); cxiii. II om. ev
Tois ovpavo'is (with K*^ ''AT). Mic. vii. 19 ipse {avros AQ)...proi-
ciet {dnoi>pi\l/fi A(t2)> dTTopifpijo-ovTai B), om. Tracruy. Hab. iii. 3
pedes eius (ot trofies AQ, Kara TroSa? B). Isa. i. 17 iustijicate
viduam (x^jpav B^'^XAr ag. XW*} ^*Q*) > ^^- 4 art^uet glorio^os
terrae {roiis ev^u^ovs NO""", ag. r. raneLvovs BAQ*) ; xxv. g om.
Koi aaaei rjpiis...vir(p€ivapfv avra (with NAQ*, a hexaplaric addi-
tion, cf. Field, ad loc); xxix. 13 popiiliis hie labiis me honorat
(oin. with XAQ eV t^ (Tropan avToi) koi e'v) ; xliii. 23 non servis/i
rni/ii in sacriJiciis = ov[di] fdovXfvads pm iv rai^ dva-'uas [p-ov] K*^*
(Ar), fecisti in (cf. A* enoiHCAeeN); Ixv. i qui mc non quacnoit
{(rjToiKTiv XAQ, ag. iiT(p(x)TO)(jiv B). Jer. xliii. 31 in/eratn super
eos {alroCs NAQ* ag. axnov BQ""), locutus sum super eos (eV
avTovs A(2, irpus avT. BX). Bar. v. 2 laeliliac (lxx. 8iK<uo(Ti>vr]s).
A special interest attaclies to Irenaeus' extracts from DanieP.
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 ot Rome, in a form which agrees with neither lxx.
nor Th.; Dan, xii. 9 is cited in the form 'ATror^je^*, AavirjX-
ouTui yhp 01 Xoyoi f.p.ir«f>payp.f.voi (.Itriv, tws ot aui'iei'Tts crwvioxri
Koi in \iVK(n KtvKafOuxri, where diroTpix^ is a LXX. reading, whilst
ip.weffipayp.ei'oi is from Th. and the rest of the sentence
seems to be suggested by his version (cf. €(i}%...€K\tvKayOu>(Tiy,
Th.). This (juotation 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 with some regard to verbal accuracy. l''or the
criticism oi the lxx his writings afford even richer materials
• See above, p. .(7.
s. s. 27
41 8 Quotations in early Christian Writings.
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. ^. = the
First Apology, Z>. = the Dialogue; the Second Apology contains
nothing to our purpose.
Gen. i. i ff. {A. 59, 64), 26 ff. (Z>. 62); iii. 15 (Z>. 102), 22 (Z?.
62); ix. 24 — 27 {D. 139); xi. 6 (/?. 102); XV. 6 {D. 92); xvii. 14
{D. 23); xviii. 2ff. (Z). 126), 13 ff. {D. 56); xix. i ff. {D. 56), 23—
25 {D. 56), 27 f. {D. 56) ; xxvi. 4 {D. 120); xxviii. 10 — 19 (D. 58,
120); xxxi. 10 — 13 {p. 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 (Z>. 126); xvii. 16 \D.
49); XX. 22 \D. 75); xxiii. 20 f. (D. 75); xxxii. 6 {D. 20). Lev.
xxvi. 40 f. (Z>. 16). Num. xi. 23 (Z>. 126); xxi. 8 f. {A. 60); xxiv.
17 {A. 32, D. 106). Deut. X. 16 f. {D. 16); xxi. 23 {D. 96); xxvii.
26 {D. 95); xxxi. 2f. {D. \-2.b\ 16—18 {D. 74); xxxii. 7 — 9 (Z?.
131), 15 (Z>. 20), 16—23 {D. 119), 20 (/?. 27, 123), 22 {A. 60), 43
{D. 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. (^. 40); ii. {A. 40); ii. 7 f . (Z). 122); iii. 5 f . (^. 38,
D. 97); viii. 3 {D. 114); xiii. 2 ff. (Z?. 27); xvii. 44 f. {D. 28);
xviii. 3ff. (y^. 40, Z>. 64); xxi. 1—24 (Z?. 18), 8f. {A. 38), I7ff.
(yi. 35, 38, D. 97); xxiii. {D. 36); xxiii. 7 (^. 51, D. 85); xxxi. 2
{D. 141); xHv. (Z). 38); xliv. 7ff (Z). 56, 63); xlvi. 6—9 {D. n);
.xlix. {D. 22); Ixvii. 19 (Z). 39); Ixxi. i — 19 {D. 34, 64, 121); Ixxi.
17 — 19 (Z^. 64); Ixxxi. \D. 124); xcv. I ff. {A. 41), 5 (Z>. 79), 10
(D. 7^) ; xcviii. (Z?. 37) ; xcviii. i — 7 (Z>. 64) ; cix. {D. 32) ; cix.
I ff {A. 45, D- 56), 3ff- (^- 63), 4 (^- 118); cxxvii. 3 (Z?. no);
cxlviii. I f. (Z>. 85). Prov. viii. 21 — 29 (Z?. 129), 24 — 36 (Z?. 61).
Job i. 6 (Z?. 79). Hos. x. 6 (Z>. 103). Amos v. 18 — vi. 7 {D. 22).
Mic. iv. I — 7 (Z?. 109) ; v. 2 (-4. 34). Joel ii. 28 f. (Z>. 87). Jon.
iv. 4ff. {D. 107). Zech. ii. 6 (yi. 52), ii {D. 119), 10 — iii. 2 (Z?.
115); iii. iff. {D. 7g); vi. 12 (Z?. 121); ix. 9 (yi. 35, B. 53); xii.
10 — -12 (yi. 52), 12 {£>. 121); xiii. 7 (Z>. 53). Mai. i. 10 — 12 (D.
28, 41). Isa. i. 3 (^. 63), 7 (A. 47), 9 (-4- 53, ^- Mo), u f. (^.
37), 16 ff {A. 44, 61), 23 ff (D. 27, 82); ii. 3f. (A. 39), 5ff- C^-
24, 135); iii- 9 (^- 136), 9— II (^- 17), 9—15 (^- I33)> 16 (Z>. 27);
V. 18 — 25 (£}. 17, 133), 20 (A. 49); vi, lo {B. 12); vii. 10 — 16
i
Quotations in early Christian Writings. 419
(Z>. 42, 66), 14 {A. 33); viii. 4 {D. 77) ; ix. 6 (^. 35); xi. 1—3 (A
87); xiv. I {D. 123); xvi. I {D. 114); xix. 24 f. {D. 123); xxvi.
2flf. (Z>. 24); xxix. I3f. {D. 27, 32, 78, 123); XXX. 1—5 {D. 79);
xxxiii. 13 — 19 {D. 70); XXXV. i — 7 {D. 69), 4 ff . {A. 48); xxxix. 3
(Z?. 50); xl. I— 17 (Z;. 50); xlii. 1—4 (Z?. 123, 135), 5—13 {D. 65),
6f. (Z). 26), 16 (Z>. 122), i9f. (Z>. 123); xliii. 10 {D. 122), 15 {D.
135); xlv. 23 {A. 52); xlix. 6 (Z?. 121), 8 {D. 122); 1. 4 (Z?. 102),
6ff. (^. 38); li. 4f. (Z). II); lii. 10 f. {D. 13), 13— liii. 8 (^. 50),
lii. 15 — liii. I (Z>. 118); liii. iff. {D. 42); liii. 8 — 12 {A. 51), 9
(Z;. 97); liv. I {A. 53); Iv. 3f. (Z?. 12), 3-13 (Z?. 14); Ivii. I ff.
{A. 48), 1-4 (/>. 16), I {D. no), 2 (Z). 97, 118), 5f. (Z). 27);
Iviii. I— II {D. 15), 2 {A. 35), 6f. (yi. 37), I3ff- (i^- 27); Ixii.
10 — Ixiii. 6 (Z?. 26); Ixii. 12 (Z>. 119); Ixiii. 15 — Ixiv. 12 {D. 25);
Ixiii. 17 {A. 52); Ixiv. lofif. {A. 47, 52); Ixv. iff. {A. 49, Z>. 24),
I (Z?. 119), 2 {A. 35, 38, Z?. 97), 8ff (Z?. 136), 9-12 (Z?. 135),
17—25 (Z>. 81); Ixvi. I {A. 37, Z>. 22), 5— II {D. 85), 23 f. (Z>.
44), 24 {A. 52, Z>. 140). Jer. ii. 12 {D. 114), 13 (Z?. 19); iv. 3
(Z>. 28); vii. 21 ff. {D. 22); ix. 25 ff. (Z>. 28), 26 {A. 53); xxxviii.
15 (Z>. 78), 27 (Z). 123), 31 f. {D. 11). Thren. iv. 20 (yi. 55).
Ezech. iii. 17 — 19 (Z>. 82); xiv. 20 (Z). 44, 140); xvi. 3 (Z>. 77);
XX. 19 — 26 {D. 21); xxxvi. 12 {D. 123); xxxvii. jff. (.r4. 53).
Dan. vii. 9—28 (A 31), 13 {A. 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
niaturer life between Ephesus and Rome; and each of these
associations may have supplied textual ijcculiarities. 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 tOrjKf, Z>'''E 13 (aTijinKTo (V
aiTi'iv n Bi flntv | o 6n\i I°] pr Ku/nor | om o Oa'ti Z° 1 4 y^r,
DE I (n'l 1"] fty I oni tiri 2°, 3', 4° (tV) | Xiiia] vutov I 5 tV I'thw
nuirr) fj I'lv 18 vnidijKfv, Z?"' I9 Oin (Ktivnv \ OvXiififiaovs,
DE* I TO ovofXd. xxxii. 22 — 30. 24 liyyfXos fifT avTOV, D
26 ii€ tvXf>yt)(Ttii, Z^*"E 28 om fTi, E I forai tu ofo/xu (tov,
U I Toil 6«)v, E I fii/i'ariK] + tai], Z^" E 29 oin vv, D
30 i(T<liOf{] tx<''i>'] (but €'(T('oOt], infr. D. 126). Dcut. xxxii. 16 —23.
16 f'^tniKpavaVy AV 17 om ku\ <w Btui, Ofii'ii | /]f(5fto-<ii'J oiHittTiv |
7rpoCT(/)aroi] pr Kill, A 20 om r^ntputv, AF 21 »r<i/)«i^i;«'<ii']
nnfj(l>f)yi(T(n', A 22 ic«i)^r)fr<T»ii] pr Kdi \ om kiito). Dcilt.
XXXlil. 13 '7- '3 *'""'] ''"■'' (cf. air' AF) | tnifmvoM', fif)i'i(Ta)V I
ativvaov 14 »c«^' Sipav^ Kadapiov 1 5 arrcij pr kui, AF' |
27 — 2
420 Quotations in early Christian Writings.
aevda)v'\ pr /cat TToTajxav 1 6 Ka6^ a>pav'\ Kapnav | rfj ^aTco | eV]
fV, AF 17 tt;? y^r, AF Jos. v. 13 — vi. 2. 13 om koL 2° \
I'Sei/J opa I eVai/rioi'] KarivavTi | om /cat tj pop(^iua...avTov | 6 'l7;(roi}s'
14 o 8e] Kai 15 TO viToSrjfjLa ck] ra VTrodrjpara | €0' c6 | om vCi'
(so A, but adding a-v) | ayios] y^ dyi'a. vi. I e^ avTTJs e|e7rop. | om
ovde (laeTTopevfTo 2 om fya> Ps. xxi. I — 24. 4 roi) Iapai]X
iX-^-^U 7 a./(9pci7rco./, XRU ] i^ovOivrjpa, NAR 8 /cat (wXU)
f\aXr](Tav )(fike(Tiv II (itto yaorpdy, N*^* 12 /^oj^^covJ + zLtoi,
j<c.aj^* 14 6 dpTra^o)!/] om 6, RU 1 5 e^exidrj, N<=-^R
16 cbo-ei] ©y, NARU 17 7rdSas] + /iov, N'^'^ARU Ps. xlix.
I om /cat 2°, X*^'^RT 3 evavTiov] evaTTior, RT 4 Staicpii'ai]
pr roi}, N-^-^ART 6 6 (^edj, NRT 7 dianaprvpodfiai, X<=-^T
10 Spu/ioi)] aypoC, N'^"A 16 e/cSi/yyiy, X'^-^AT 19 8oXi6rrjTas,
j^caRa 21 +rdr apaprlas aov, BSS^-^T 22 ou ^7, N<=-«RT
23 Tov deov'] fiov, a^-^T. Prov. viii. 21* — 36. 24 ras
TTTjyas irpoekdelv (but in D. 129 Trp. r. 7r»;yds) 25 twi'
^ovvwv (but Z*. 129 omits art.) 26 6 ^fds 28 /cat ws (1°)"
T)viKa, NA 29 KQi o)?] rjvLKa 35 fj'^OLpacTTai 36 dcre/SoOcrti/
+ €is', X'-^A. Amos V. 18 — vi. 7. 18 tov Kvplov 19 edj/ 4>vyrj
orav eKCpvyj), A | lipKTOs \ 6 ocpis 20 avrrj] avrois 22 ra 6X0
KavTwpara, A | rd? 6v<rias \ TrpocrSe^opaij + avrd, AQ™^ | acoTTjpiov,
A 23 air 6(TTr]aov | ^X'^''] "'X.^^os | ■^akpa>v opyavov 25 om
/x' eV?; I +X€yei Kwptos, AQ 26 'Fafjxiv | om avTcbv, AQ*. vi. I
dTrerpi^yT^crai'] pr 01 aivopaafifvoi enl toIs dp^jjyols (a doublet for
the Greek which follows, ascribed to Symmachus by SH) | om
/cat 2° I OLTot] eavTois, Q^ | rov 'icp.] om tov 2 +(ls XaXdvrjv,
22, 36, 42 ; Heb. | dUXdaTe] TropevdrjTf | 'E/xd^ *Pa^/3d] 'A/Lid(9 ri)!/
peydXrjv (rrji' pey., Symm. "20, 36, 5 1 al.") j dXXo(f)vXcoi''\ pr tcoz/ |
TrXfiovi, A j om. icTTiv I vperfpiov dpt'co)/] dp. vpa>v 3 /ca-
/c/ji/] TTOvrjpdv 4 Ka^eiiSoi'Tes'] Koipmpfvoi | epie^ous] apvas
5 iaratTa, AQ 6 rdv SivXicrpevov (a doublet)] €i/ (pidXais (Heb.)
7 Si/vaoTO)!/] + Twj' aTTOiKi^op.evajv | /cat peTcurTpaffyrjafTai. o'lKrjpa
KUKovpycov (a doublet of /cat f^apd. /crX.). Zach. ii. lo — iii. 2.
10 repTToi/] X"'Pf (cf- Eus. ^.^., p. 252) I ort, X II Karacpev-
^ovTot] TTpoarfBrjorovTaL | KaTaaKTjvdxrco \ eVtyj/oxr/;] yvuxrovrat \
narroKpdrcopJ rwv dvvdpeav \ aTrecrraX/ce 12 r^^ /lept'St] /cat
r))i/ fiepiSa, H^-^A, and, without /cat, X*Qr | nipertei] e/cXe'^erat " 86
in textu ex alio videlicet interprete" (Field). iii. i om Kvpios,
Kvpiov I TOV 'hjaovv^ om tov, AQF | d Std^oXos] om d 2 om
iniTip-qa-ai {l°)...8id^oXe \ om as (Hcb.). Mai. i. 10 — 12.
10 OeXrjpd pov \ Tas Bvcrias vpwv II diTO, AF ( om /cat 1°,
AQ I Trpocrdyerai] ir poacfie pfrm ' Stdri ptya] oti TipaTai (oti piya
D. 41) I om IlavT-o/cpdrcBp. Isa. i. 16 — 20. 17 xW'^^i
B«''XAr 18 SeOTfJ+zcai, XAQr I SiaXex^^t^e" ^ I X'O"".
fpeov^ i'pfovy ;^td»/a 19 (A. 61 omits /cat edv 6fXT]Te,..^dyea-6€.)
* See above, p. 407.
Quotations in early Christian Writings. 421
Isa. lii. 13— liii. 12. Hi. 13 tSov] iSe yap A. 14 noXKoi eVt o-e
AD. 15 6avnaa-6i](TOVTcu D. \ om eV auTw ^. i6 om
oyl^ovrai A. liii. 2 eVai/rtov] eVtoTrioi' ^4. ( eV. avrov ws iraib.
A.D. 3 TovixAovsTW) av6()ii>ir(3iv\ tovs dvdpunrovs A. {cf. navras
avOpwTTOvs, AQ*) 5 avTO? | di'opias, dpaprias A., NAQ | om
Tjpuv 3° A. 6 om Ki^piof y^. 7 Kflpovros A.D., B +avToi/
^., N-^-^AQ 8 ToO XaoO pov] avrav A. \ rj^drj] ijKft A.D., Q">e
9 ^ai/arovJ+auToC A., B^^'XAQ lo toO ttoi/ou] om roC ^.
II avTCDv] Tjpcov A.D. 12 TraoeSo^T?] pr airor ^. Isa. Ixii. lO
— Ixiii. 6. 1 1 Tois dvyarpda-iv \ (toI 6 craTrjp, XAQ | om avrov 1°,
AQ* 12 ou Kardkf'KeipptvT], (X). Ixiii. I epvdrjpa, B | IparMv^
+ avTov I )3i'a] pr dvapaivav (cf. Symm. ^a'lvutv, Heb.) 3 +X?7J'oi'
endrijaa povdjTaros, Symm., Heb. (a doublet of n-X. KarairfTr.) \
om pov, XAQ I 4-fif yrjv, B»-''NAQ 5 ouSety, NAQ | dvTfXd^eroy
K I om axjTovs I om /xou 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, Dial. 31.
(dfdipovv ecor otou
dpi'ivoi (TfOTjiraVy Ka\ 6
■rra\aun ijpfpMU ota-
^ijToextoN nepiBoAHN
marl )(i6va \(vkt]v, kui
TO Tp(x<JiJ'V\& Ti]<i K«pa-
Xtji avTov o)ati tpiov
KuOapuv, (') dfii'ivoi itvTov
(OCel (j>\o^ nvpi'is, ol
TpOX^ol aVTOV TTVp ^\i-
vov. iTorapui TTi'jMK
tiXKiv eKnopeY(^;'f''"f
<<t npoccorrou &YTOY*
\i\iai ;^tXt«8€C ^(i-
ToupYovv ai'Tcj Ka\ pv-
piai pvpiddfs napticr-
TT]Kficrai/ nvTut • fii;i\oi
av«f)^Oj)<Tav Ka\ Kpirij-
piOV IKi'lOtCTtV. t'Oct'o-
pOVV Tint THN C^CONHN
Dan. vii. 9 — 14, LXX.
(Ofapovv fcof ore
dpovoi (Tfdrjo'av, Ka\
TTiiKaios r]pfpun> fK ddrjTO
exwN nepiBoAHN wffet
^^loi'a, Kal jd Tpfx6i>AA(N
Tf)y KecfxiX?]^ avToii oxrcl
(plOV XfVKUV KuOupuv
6 ^pwov cbcel (j)\u^
nvpt'ii, Tpo^oi avTov
T7vp Kaiopfvov. nora-
pm nvpus (Xkcov, >c<it
elenopeycTO katA
npdctonoN aytoy
noTiipos nvpos' x^Xtai
^iXlddtt fdfpUTTfVUV
uiTou <(ii pvpiai pv-
pidua TruptiaTt'jKfKniv
uvrio- Koi KpiTt'ipiou
fKuOiat KaX lilfiXdi
Ibid., Th.
(Ofwpovv ecov OTOv
dpovoi fTtdqcrnv, koi
naXiiLos i]pepu>v tKa-
OrjTo, Ka\ TO fvbvpa
avTOV <o(T(\ ;^(a)i/ XfVKOi',
Kal T] 6p\^ Trjs K((f)aXiji
avTov cocrel fpiov kuOu-
puv 6 dpovos avrov
f/>Xo^ TTupof, ol rpo^ol
avrov iri'p <\>\iyov. iro-
rapbs TTvpus <IXk€v t/x-
TTpotrOiv avrov- )(iXtnt
)(iXiii8{s iXtiTovpYouv
avroi, Ka\ pvpiai pv-
pid^ts napicrrijKdcrav
aiiro)- Kpirrjpiov (kuOi-
<Ttv, Kat liifiXat tjufu>\-
Or]<Tav. tdfitjpovu Torf
dno (jiiovrjt rcov Xoywi'
nv. fUfwpovv I TO)v pfyiiXoiv oiv n)
^ Words common to Justin and LX.x. Imt not in Tli. arc juiutcd in
small uncials; those conimon to Justin and Tii. but not to i.\X., in
thick cursives. Most of llic rcmaming words arc to be found in the
three texts.
\22 Quotations in early Christian Writings.
Justin, Dial. 31.
TViv fieyoKcov \6yo)v av
TO Kfpas AaXfi, Koi
AneTYMnANfcGH to
0i]pLOV, Kal aTTwAero to
crafjLa avTov koi edodrj
fls Kavaiv TTvpos' kol
Tu Xoiird ©Tjpta [Asre-
o-tcLOtj Tiji dpX'HS avTcav,
KOI XPONOC (corjs Tols
Brjpioisedodrj ecos Kaipov
Koi xpONOY- edempovv
iV OpdpaTl TTJS VVKTOS,
aai I80V p.€Td Tcbv v€(f)e-
\S)v Toil ovpavov ws
vtoy dvdpa>irov Ipx©-
(j.£vos, Kal T}\dev ?ios
Tov iraXaiov tcov rjpe-
pa>v, KUL TTApHN evco-
TTiov avTov- Ka\ oi
HApeCTHKCTeC Trpoo--
tj'ya'yov (ivtov. kcu
eAoSH AYTOJ eloycf^
KAI TIMH B&ClAlKH,
KAI n<\NT<5k TA eONH
THC fHC KATA feNH
K(\i n&CA A65& Aa-
TpeyoycA- k&i h e5-
oycfA AYToy eloYcf*
(JkicONIOC HTIC OY MH
ApGH, K&l H BAClAef(\
AYTOY OY MH (J^e^pi^.
i Dan. vii. 9 — 14, LXX.
TOTS THN C})60NHN TWJ/
Aoyoji' Tav pfyu\cL>v cov
TO Kepas eXuAei" deco-
pav ijp-riv, KUL ATieTYM-
nANfc0H TO drjpiov,
Koi aTTwAero to trap-a
avTov Koi eSodr) els
Kavcriv TTVpos. Koi tovs
kvkXo) avToii diTiaTrjcrf
Trjs i^ovcrias avTcov, kol
XpONOC C^^rjs eSodr] aii-
Tols eCOS XPONOy KUL
Kaipov. edeu)povv iv
OpdpaTl T^S VVKTOS, Koi
Idov eVi T(bv vf<peXS>v
Tov ovpavov a)s vlus
avdpu)TT0v fJp^eTO, Ka\
as iraXaios rjpepaiv
Traprji'- Kal oi TT&peC-
THKOTSC naprjcrav av-
rw. Kal e866r] avTui
i^ovala Kal Tip,r} /3a-
aikiKi], Kal irdvTa to.
'46vr) Trjs yj)? KaTO. yivTj
Kal Ttdcra 86^a avTu>
Xarpevovaa- Kali] e^ov-
ala avToii i^ovcria alio-
vios rJTls ov pr] apdfj,
Kal 17 /3acrtAeta avTov
fjTis ov pT) (pdapij.
Ibid., Th.
Kepas eKelvo e'AaAet, ecos
dvrjpedrj to drjpLOv Kal
djrcoAero, Kal to aapa
avTov fdoOr] (Is Kavaiv
TTVpos. Kal Twv Xoiirwv
6T]piwv Tj d.p\r\ (j.€T€(rTd-
9t], Kal paKpoTTjs C^^^
ibodrj avTols ecos Kaipov
Kal Kaipov. edeaipovv
iv opapaTi Trjs vvktos,
Kal 180V |ji,€Td Ta>v ve(p€-
Xaiv TOV ovpavov as
vlos dv0pa>Trov ep\6\ie-
vos, nal ^ws TOV iraXaiov
Tojv rjpeponv e(f)6aafv
Kfil irpoo-ijxGi] avTm.
Kal avTO) edudrj rj ap^7]
KUi r) Tiprj Kal T] ^aai-
Xeia, Kal TrdvTes oi Xaoi,
(pvXai, Kal yXuicraai
8ovXevov(riv avTm • rj
e^ovcria avTov e^ovcria
aioivios ijTis ov rrapeXfv-
(TfTai, Kal T] (iacnXeia
avTov oil 8ia(f)dupr}a-e-
rai.
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; (if) in Deuteronomy it oc-
casionally supports A or AF against B, and (c) in the Psalms
the group ART, with the concurrence sometimes of «*, some-
times of a."-^; (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 Christian Writings. 423
his text has been altered from the text of Symmachus, or at
a Inter 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. 'EAetTovpyow
meets us here, as in Clement of Rome, and the phrases rh.
XotTTtt orjpia fiCTecTTadrj nys ap)(rj<;, fx(.Ta twv ve^eXcov ep^o/i,evo5,
€019 rov TraXatou, irpoariyayov avTOV, are undoubtedly due to
rheodotion, or rather to the version on which he wctrked. On
the other hand t^uyv -n-epi^oX-qv, to Tpi^mjia, TTvp (jiX.eyov, direTv/x-
Travi(r$r], )(p6i'OS ^'"^"i, oi TrapcaTr/xoTcs, and the whole o{ 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
|):issage as given by Tertullian'.
In a few instances Justin shews a disposition to criticise
the LXX. reading. E.g. in Ps. Ixxxi. (Ivxxii.) 7, he probably
proposed to read ok av6putTro<; (Q7»>'?) for ws av6pu)iroL\
Similarly in Deut. xxxii. 8 he realises that the LXX. has sub-
stituted dyyeKow diov for ^Nni^'l'^j^i ^ He maintains that in
(len. xlix. 10 the reading of the LXX. is €0)? av IXOrj iS a7^oV€lTa^
though according to the Jewish interpreters of his time the
words should rather be rendered £«»? av I to. aVoKc/'/io'a airrw.
His text of the LXX. contained some remarkal)le interpola-
tions; thus he quotes Ps. xcv. (xcvi.) lo* in the form 6 Kvpio^
' Rurkitt, OU Latin and Itala, p. 23 ff.
' Dial. H4. In the editions ivOpwiroi occurs twice, hut the context
a|.|)ears to shew that the singular siiould stand in the quotation.
» Dia/. i.^f.
424 Quotations in early Christian Writings.
i/Saa-lX-evcrep airo rov |uA,ov\ and ascribes to Jeremiah the words
ifjivyadrj Sk Kvptog 6 ^€0S (xtto 'Icrpa-^A. roiv veKpwv avTOv Twi/
K^KOifJirj^ivwv €ts 7?/i' ;)(a)/jtaTOS, koX Karef^r] Trpos avTov^ cvayycAt-
aaa-Oai aurots to (TwrqpLov avrov^. He cites also some words
which appear to have found a place in his copy after 2 Esdr.
vi. 21: Kai eiTrev "EcrSpas tw Aaw Tovto to Tvaa-^^a. 6 (TCOTrjp rjfxiov
Koi 7] Karacjivyrj Tjfiwv /cat iav 8iavo7]0'rJTe Kai dvajifj v/xwy
€7ri TTjv Kaphiav otl McXA-o/xev avTov TaTretvovv iv o"jj/x,eta), Kat
ftera ravra iXTTLorwfjLev (? iX.7rtcrrjTe) iir avrov, ov firj kpr}fjnii6fj 6
TOTTOS ovTos eis ttTravra )(^p6voVy Acyct o 6eo? twi/ Swa/xecov* eav 8e
fXT} TTLO-TiijarjTe avT<jS /xr^Se ctcraKOuo-T^rc tov K-qpvyixaro'i avTov,
ta-eaOe iirixap/xa rots e^i'ccrt^ 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 (to, /jlcto. ttjv e^aT^/xepov) ; 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^
^ A/>. i. 41, Dial. 73. Cf. Tert. c. Marc. iii. 19, adv. Jud. 10. No
existing Greek MS. of the Psalter is known to contain tlie words except
cod. 156 (see p. 160), which gives them in the suspicious form ciTro rip |i/X(^.
A ligno is found in the Sahidic and in the Latin of R and in some other
O.L. texts, Cf. the liymn 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).
- 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. 3r. 1) or
to Isaiah (iii. 20. 4). Cf. Lightfoot, Clement, ii. p. 40, and the writer's
Apostles' Crecd^, p. 58 f.
3 Dial. ib.
* On his works see Lightfoot, Clement of Rome, ii. pp. 388(1., 4191?.
^ Edited by G. W. Bonwetsch and H. Achelis in the new Berlin Corpus
(Hippolytus' Werke, i., Leipzig, 1897).
QuoiatioJis m early Christian Writings. 425
with fragments of most of the rest. The great treatise Adversus
omnes haereses yields but little 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 few specimens will shew.
Gen. i. 7 eTrai/co] vireptii'O} 28 naraKvpifvcraTf] KaT(iK\T]povofj.fj(TaT€.
xlix. 8 ff. (Lag. 5 (l), 102 (2)) 8 alvfo-dToiuav (l) alviaova-iv (2)
9 iK fi\a(TTOv pov vU (2) 10 w aTTOKfiTai (l), Ta aTTOKflfieva airro)
(2) I avT6s]+ €(TTui (l) 12 ;^apo7roi (cf. Field, ad loc.^ \ as dno
O'vov: of. UTTO OIVOV, A.DF. Exod. XX. 13 ff. OV fJLOl)^fliaeiS, ov (povfv-
(T€ii, ov >cX('\//'ftf. Deut. xxxii. 34 f. 34 irnp' (fiov 35 orav^
pr f'v (crttpoj, AF. xxxiii. 22 fKnTj^ijirerm, B. Ruth ii. 9
vhpfvnvTai, A 14 eV tu> (i^ei, B^'^A. Vs. Ixviii. iff. 4 eyyi^eiu]
(Kiri^fiv (B^'^XR) /if (R) 5 jjpna^ov 6 eyvwy] oiSd? | aTrt-
Kpv(ir)(Tav, X"^-* 8 (KuXvyjrav ivrponrj 10 KaTf(f>uyf. Prov.
vi. 27 dTTudijaei] dirohfo-pfVfl. xxili. 29 f. 29 dr]8Uu, XA | TreXiS-
^ voi, ]i^ 30 eV (ilvM I Ix^vfvovTcjv] KaTadKowovvTaiv. Job ii. 9**
TrXoi/^rtf, X'^'A. Am. V. 12 KaraTraTovvTfs, AQ*. Mic. ii. J f.
7 nojXwvTui 8 KnTfi/ai/rt] k(it<« TTpi'tarairov \ hopav} do^av (sic).
iii. 5 'Jyf'/'"*'] riyidirav, Q'"''. v. 5 iiTTiu uvti) 1) nap' epov fipiji'i]
Crav 6 'Aaavpios (cf. AQ) eVA^//. .Mai. iv. 4 ((TroareAXa)] nep-
■\lra> I jr/)iV]-|-^ | fipfpuv] pr rryi/, T 5 Trarepuv eVl TtKva \ f\6i»'
iraru^ui, X'=•^ Isa. x. 12 ii. 1 3 om. eV bis, XAQr 14 r;}
;(ftpt'] + /iou, AQ 16 Kvpios cra/Sao)^] ({(Sooj/at Ku/jios- 17 7ru/<i
(C(n<-</i»Vo)] (/jXuyt (cf. Syniiii.). xiv. 4 ff. 11 tU abov] (h yi]v \
KaTaKn\vpp.tt\ KUTuXfippu 12 Tr/xly] ftr, X* I4 v((j>(Xa>i', XAQP
16 ^(«u/x(i(roiifrti', XAQr I9 rt ^i/tjicotcoi'] TTf TrrojAcirrfoi/ 20
Kuddpi'iv] (Co/i\//(k I ;^/jci»'oi'] j^pdi/tov 21 <r(/iiiyr;i'(u] fiv (T(fiaytjv.
xlv. 1 1 4-K"i rcov dvyiiTtpuiv pov (cf XAQ) 1 3 om jSaaiXfii,
X'^^'AQ 14 (V <T(n nprxTKvvTjfTovfnv. Ixvi. 24 TtXtim'pTd, BSQ
(ag. A, TfXfvra). Ezcch. xxviii. 5 fpnopUi] fptrfipla. Dun.
ii. I ff. I ti(iTiX(t<i] + Nafiovx,o8ovo(ri'ip, A S t<ii'J + oiJv, AQ |
trCyKpuTii'^ + uvToi/, Q
The text of Hippolytus, it will be seen, like most of the
patristic texts, leans slightly to A!" in the Pentateuch, «• or
«'* in the poetical books, and AQ in the Prophets. At the
^ The references in the /ndex locorum of Duiicker and Schncidcwin's
edition (tibtiingcn, 1859) direct the reader for the most part to mere
allusions, or citations of only a few consecutive words.
^ In llippolyti Romani quiuferuntur omnia (/ru^r^ (Leipzig, 1858).
426 Quotations in early Christian Writings,
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 durmg 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 Xoyog TrpoxpeTTTtKos he aims to
persuade rather than to compel assent, whilst the Paedagogus
and the Stromateis are addressed exclusively to persons under
instruction, to whom 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
^ Clement's text of the Gospels has been examined by Mr P. M. Barnard
{Biblical texts of Clement 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
Prophets.
{a) Gen. i. 26 {jsirom, v. 29) kot tlKova Koi ofiolaaiu fj^ierfpav
(elsewhere CI. reads 6fi. ^fiwv, or omits the pronoun). xxxvii.
24 {stroffi. V. 54) 6 Se Xukkus k(v6s, DE. Exod. xx. 13 ff. (J>ro-
trept. 108, strom. ii. 33) oh (povda-eis ov noixeva€is.,.ov KXe\j^€is ov
ylf(v8oij.apTvpT](Tfis, AF. Lev. xviii. i ff. {strom. ii. 46). 3 iv
uItj] (eV avTTj B*, eV avTTJs B*''AF) ov noirjafTe (Troirjdr^afTai B*)
4 iropdfffde A 56 TToiTjaas avrd. Deut. xxxii. 23 ff. {paed. i.
68) 23 (jvvT(\iaii ((TVVTfXfaoi AF, (Tvviro\epT](r(t), B) 24
«7ra7roo-TfAd), A | ttjs yfjs, A (F) 41 ff. avraTroScoo-co, AF 42 +
Km T) pdxni'PH pov (f)dy(Tai Kpia ano aiparos Tpavpancov, AF
{d) Ps. xxxiii. 12 ff. {strom. iv. iii). 13 f^ptpas Ibelv, XAR
I4;^f4X;; crou, X'^-^AR. xcv. 5 {proti'ept. 62) hinpov'nav eto-tv fl'SwXd
(cf. Ircn.). cii. 14 (paed. i. 62) pvTjfrdtjTi, BH* Th. cxl. 5
{pned. i. 79) Afy;^e'rco /xt Sikuios Kdt 7rfU(5fi;(r(J-ra). cl. 4 opycii'tu,
BSRT. Prov. i. 25 {paed. i. 85) vnrjKiwfTe, NA | ou npocrfixfTe,
NAC {r)n(idi](TaT(, B). iii. 5 ff. [strom. ii. 4). 6 eV 7ruo-(uy, A i
Ttif fifioi'y (roi'] + 6 fit TToGy <tov ov pf) TvpovKoirTij (cf X'^-*: SH pr -T-)
12 nniSfvei, XA (fXe'y;^ft, B). xxiii. 1 3 /i>) a7rd(r;^ou (aTrdtr;^!;
LXX.) vi]nu>v iTtutxvuyi' (A; Tratfieueiv, B). Sir. i. 1 8 {paed. i.
68j + (fiu^os yap Kvpiuv dnudflTai ('tpapTi'jpara (so far 248), u(pT]j3ui-
8' oi fivi>f](T(T(u biKnioidtjvui, O.L. ix. 9 {paed. ii. 54) /xij avp^u-
\oiif)TTr)(Tqi] pi] (TvppaTiiKXiO^ii (n dyK<ova, O.L. xxxiv. 25 {paed.
ii.31) (iTTOiXdrfi/] rixpfioicrf. xxxvi. 6 {paed. i. 42) a)s ^I'Aoy /xoikos]
6 ^tXiyfioj/oj >cai ^(it_;^os (cf. <«)$• (/>£X(i/iOi;^ov, 55, 254). XXXviii. 1
{paed. ii. 68) om. ripmi, 106, 296, O.L. xxxix. 13 {paed. ii. 76)
a-y/;oO {vypoii X.\C)] i'(^uTa)i'. 18 {paed. ii. 44) oj fXarTowrei]
€Xurrto(7if f(f. Hob. (£■) Am. iv. 1 3 {protrept. 79) tSov e'-ya'),
B'-i'AQ (om B*). Nah. iii. 4 (/a^^. i. 81) tnlx'ipis, li^^Q.
Mai. i. ID ff. {strom. v. 137). 11 om. kiu i°, AC^ | 6vp[npa\
6v(jia I 7rpoo-<iy€ rai] irpotjfjjfpfrtu (cf. Justin). Isa. ix. 6 (paed.
i. 24) ui'of K(U t'fiuOi], XA(2I' I om fyfvi]dr], T \ (KXijdr} {KuXfiTiu,
BX<2r, Ka\(<T(i, A) I +d(npu(TTi)i (TvpliiivXov (X'-''A) Otui dvpaaTiji
iraTjjp (itci)i/(oy lipxoiP flpjpnj^ (X'-^A). 7 pfydXt) »; dpx'l uvTui'] +to>
irXrjOui'eii' rrjv iTai^ddv, Th. | opiov^ iripm. Til,, Symm. xi. i ff
{paed. i. 61). xi. 4 iXiy^fi. tovs t\pttpT(t>Xovs rfji yijv (cf. Ircn.).
xxix. 13 {paed. i, 76) 6 Xaos avros rots xtiXtaiv airrcov TipSxri pt, 17
ti Kapdia avTHif noppa tarlv dn' ipitv- pdrtjv 8i atfiuvTiu pt 8i8d(T-
of the LXX. is not likely to he equally insfnictive. hut it oii^ht to reward
a patient invcstij^ator. [.Since this note was written an examination of
Clement's LXX. text has been made by Dr O. Stahlin (Ctetnens Alex. u. die
Stptuaginta, Niimberg, 1901).]
428 Quotations in early Christian Writiiigs,
KOVT€S SiBaa-KoXlas evToXfiara dvOpcoirmv (cf. Mt. xv., Mc. vii.).
Ixvi. 13 (/>aed. i. 21) v^as Tropa/caXecra), X. Jer. ix. 23 f. {^paed.
i. 37): V. 24 abbreviated as in i Cor. i. 31. xiii. 24 ff. {strom.
iv. 165 f.). 24 8ie(nreipa, BNQ (8ie(pdeipa A) | viro, XAQ {dno,
B) I (fxpofjLeva] TTeTcop-eva 25 direideiv Vfxds epoi 27 fioix^eia
anarthr., Q | xpf/^ftcMo^ anarthr., B. xxiii. 23 f. {protrept. 78).
24 et 7roirj(7ei rt avOpanros (el Kpv^rjcreTai tis, B, el Kp. avdpanros,
AQ). Bar. iii. 13 (paed. i. 92) om xpovov, B. Thren. i. i
(paed. i. 80) ap^ovra ^copav eyet/rjdr] els (popovi. Dan. ix. 24 ff-
(shorn, i. 125) as in Th. (B*), with the addition koI rjjxicrv rijs
e/3So/i.aSoff KaTairavcret, dvpiafia Ovarlas KaX Trrepvyiov ac^aj/Kryxoi) ecoy
avvTekeias koI aTrovdrjs rd^iv d(f)avicrp.ov (cf. B^'^AQ).
10. 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 Diognefus, there will still remain the fragments
collected in the Relliqiiiae 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, Vigilius
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 Christian 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 of 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 Rulinus and Jerome. Bui 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 r alciiae. Homilies (17) in Latin, tr. by Ivuliiuis. Exiuius.
Fragments of Comincnlary, and notes. Ilomilirs (13) in Latin,
' Essays, 1. p. i 2y (T. ("On luiily Quotations Irom llic bcpluagint.")
- See I'art III. c. vi.
'*'Thcy are collected in Migiic, P. G. xi. — xviu
43^ Quotations in early Christian 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. Deuteronomy.
Notes from catenae, &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
Trjs iyyacTTpitivdov. 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. Ecctesiastes. 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 Phitocal. 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.
Lainentations. 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 Introduction
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, 1 366. 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 (iztpl Tr)s
(V TTVfv^aTi Kui aXr]d(ia npocrKvvria-fiOi, and y\a(f>vpd), comm. on
saiah, 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, t395. Fragments on the Psalms and
in the catenae, (xxxi.x.)
Diodorus of Tarsus, tc. 390. Fragments from the catenae.
(xxxiii.)
Dionysius the Pseudo-Areopagite, cent. v. (iii. — iv.)
Dorotheas the Archimandrite, cent. vi. — vii. (Ixxxviii.)
Ephracm the Syrian, 1373- Fragments of Commentaries on the
Pentateuch, the historical and the poetical books. (Rome,
1.732 ff.)
Epiphanius of Salamis, t403. (xli. — xliii.)
Eusebius of Caesarea, t339. Commentary on the Psalms; notes
on Isaiah ; fragments of other O.T. commentaries; books nfpi
TU>V TOTTlKOiV UfOflUTWV TOIV fV TJ) dftO yp(l(Pi^l and TTf/jl Tt]S TOV
tiifiXiov riov Tri)0(f)t]TO}v ovopna-las.
Eusebius of Emesa, t359. Fragments in the catenae of a comm.
on Genesis. (Ixxxvi.)
Eustalhius of Antioch, +337. On the Witch of Endor, ag.
Origcn. (xviii.)
Evagrms of Ponius, +398. Fragments in catenae,
(iennadius of Constantinople, +471. Fragments on Genesis,
Exodus, the Psalms &c. (Ixxxv.)
(iregory of Nazianzus, t389. (xxxv.— xx.xviii.)
Gregory of Neocaesarea, tc. 270. (x.)
(Gregory of Nyssa, 1395. (xliv.— xlvi.)
Hcsydiius of Jerusalem, tc. 438. (xciii.)
Isidore of Pelusium, tc. 450. (Ixxviii.)
John Chrysostom, t407. 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, tc. 760. (xciv. — xcvi.)
Julianus of 1 lalicarnassus, t536. Fragments in catenae.
Macarius Magncs, cent. iv. (ed. Blondcl).
-Maxinuis Confessor, t662. (xc— xci.)
^ Sec, however, II. M. (iwatkin, Ananiini, p. 69 n.
432 Quotations in early Christian 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, t43o. Fragments on the Pentateuch,
Job, Proverbs, Canticles, and Daniel ; comm. on Ezekiel.
Procopius of Gaza, cent. vi. Commentaries on Genesis — Judges,
I Regn. — 2 Chr., Prov., Cant., Isaiah. (Ixxxvii.)
Severianus of Gabala, +c. 420. Fragments of commentaries in
the catenae. (Ixv.)
Severus of Antioch, +c. 539. Fragments in the catenae.
Theodore of Heraclea, tc. 355. Fragments of comm. on Isaiah.
(xviii.)
Theodore of Mopsuestia, t428. Fragments of commentaries on
Genesis (Syriac and Latin), the rest of the Pentateuch and
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. Ei? ra "nropa rrji deias ypa(f)rjs,
questions on the Pentateuch and historical books. Commen-
taries on the Psalms, Canticles, the xii. Prophets, Isaiah, Jere-
miah (mcluding Baruch and Lam.), Ezekiel, Daniel. (Ixxx. —
Ixxxiv.)
Titus of Bostra, tc. 370. (xviii.)
Victor of Antioch, cent. v. — vi. {?).
Literature. T. Ittig, De bibliothecis et catenis ■patrum
(Leipzig, 1707). J. G. Walch, Bibliotheca patristtca, ed. J. T. L.
Danz (Jena, 1834). J. G. Dowling, Notitia Scriptorum ss.
Patrum (Oxford, 1839;. Oecononius, vol. iv. (Athens, 1849).
J Nirschl, Lehrbuch der Patrologia u. Patristik (Mainz, 1881).
O. Bardenhewer, Patrologie (Freiburg i. B., 1894). Fessler-
Jungmann, Institutiones Patrologiae (1890). H. Hody, De
iexfibus Bibliorum^ p. 277 ff. Schleusner, Opuscula critica ad
versionem Graecam V.T.pertinentia (Leipzig, 1812). Credner,
Beitriige zur Einleitung in die biblischen Schrtften, vol. ii. (Halle,
1834). R. Gregory, Prolegomena {de scriptoribus ecclesiasticis,
p. ii3iff.). Scrivener-Miller, ii. p. 167 ff. Hatch, Biblical
Essays, p. 131 ff.
453
CHAPTER IV.
The Greek Versions as aids to Biblicae 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,
l>ut 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 sjjread of the Latin Vulgate ; in
the East, where it is still recited by the Orthodox ('hurch in
the ecclesiastical offices, it lost much of its influence over
the thought and life of the i)eople. On the other hand, this
most ancient of P.iblical versions possesses a new and increas-
ing importance in the field of IJiblical study. It is seen to
be valuable alike to the textual critic and to the expositor,
and its services are welcomed by students both ut the Old
Testament and of the New.
' Sec r.-irt I., c. iv.
s. s. 28
i
434 ^/^<^ 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
earher 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 (fTniDp^ n^iDD, traditio) is already mentioned in the
saying of R. Akiba, Pirqe Aboth, iii. 20 niin'? a''"'D miDD,
'tradition is a fence to the Law'^; 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
(n"lD^n"vy3), 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 (''li?, 2''^?), the corrections known as the J-lpFl
Di-)3iD^, 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 Western text of
R. Ben Asher (cent, x.), and that which appeared about the same
time in the East under the auspices of R. Ben Naphtali. The
former has been repeated with minor variations in all Western
MoS.
The attitude of Christian scholars towards the Jewish
traditional text has varied with the progress of Biblical learning.
^ See Schiirer, E. T. II. i. p. 32911.; Dr C. Taylor, Sayings of the
Jewish Fathers, p. 54 f.
^ For the text see the great work of C. D. Ginsburg, The Massorah,
compiled from A/SS., alphabetically and lexically arranged, 3 vols. (London,
1880-5), o' the Bible of S. Baer; and for the Massorets and their work,
cf. Buxtorf, Tiberias, Ginsburg's Introduction (London, 1897), and his
edition of the Massortth ha massoreth of Elias Levita, or the brief state-
ments in Buhl, Kanon u. Text {p. gl"^ ff.), and in Urtext (p. 20 fT.); or
Strack, art. Text of the O.T., in Hastings, D.B. iv.
3 On these see Dr W. E. Barnes in y. Th. St., April 1900.
The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study. 43 5
The question of its relation to the text presupposed by the
Septuagint was scarcely present to the minds of Christian
writers before the time of Origen'. Origen, when the problem
forced itself upon him, adopted, as we have seen", a middle
course between the alternatives of rejecting the lxx. and
refusing to accept the testimony of his Jewish teachers. Jerome
took a bolder line ; his new Latin version was based on the
'original Hebrew,' and on textual questions he appealed with
confidence to the verdict of contemporary Jewish opinion :
prol. gal. " quanquam mihi omnino conscius non sim mutasse
me quidpiam de Hebraica veritate ...interroga quemlibet
Hebraeorum cui magis accommodare debeas fidem." Like
Origen he indignantly, and on the whole doubtless with justice,
repudiated the charge which was laid by some Christians
against the Jews of having falsified tlieir MSS.' But neither
Origen nor Jerome entertained a suspicion that the Jewish
official text had, whether by accident or design, departed from
the archetype.
Mediaeval Europe knew the Old Testament almost ex-
clusively through Jerome's Latin, as the Ancient Church had
known it through the i.xx.* When at length the long reign of
the Vulgaie in Western Europe was broken by the forces of the
Renaissance and the Reformation, the attention of scholars was
once more drawn to that which j)urported to be the original
text of the Old Testament. The printing of the Hebrew
text commenced among the Jews with the Psalter of 1477;
the edilio princeps of the Hebrew Bible as a whole appeared in
* See C. J. Elliott's art. Ilebreio Learning, in I>. C. J!, ii., csp. tlu-
summary 011 p. 872 b.
' Above, p. 60 If.
^ .See his comm. on I.iinh vi. 9 (Mignc, /'. /,. x\iv. 99).
* A few nictiiaeval scholars had aceess to (he Hebrew, e.g. the English-
men Stephen Harding (fiiT,^), Robert Gros-seleste (tn53), Roger Bacon
(to. 1292), the Spaniard Rayniundiis Martini (\c. 1286), and especially the
Norman jew, Nicolaiis dc Lyra lti340). On Lyra see Sieglried iu Merx,
Archiv, i. p. 428, ii. p. 28.
28 — 2
436 Tlu Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study.
1488, and three editions followed before the end of the fifteenth
century'. Meanwhile Christian scholars had once more begun
to learn the Hebrew language from Jewish teachers, and in
1506 the publication of John Reuchlin's Rudiftients placed the
elements of Hebrew learning within the reach of the theo-
logians of Europe. Under the circumstances it was not
strange that the earlier Reformers, who owed their Hebrew
Bible and their knowledge of the language to the Rabbis,
should have, like Jerome, regarded the traditional text as a
faithful reproduction of the inspired original. In the next
century a beginning was made in the criticism of the Hebrew
text by the Protestant divine Louis Cappelle (L. Cappellus,
11658), and the Oratorian Jean Morin (J. Morinus, 11659),
who pressed the claims of the Lxx. and the Samaritan Penta-
teuch. A furious controversy ensued, in the course of which
the Swiss Reformed Churches committed themselves to an
absolute acceptance not only of the consonantal text, but of the
vowel points. This extreme position was occupied not only
by theologians, but by experts such as the two Buxtorfs of
Basle (ft 1629, 1664), who maintained that the Massoretic text
in its present state had come down unchanged from the days
of Ezra and the ' Great Synagogue.'
The views of Louis Cappelle were set forth in Arcanum ptinc-
tuatio7iis revelatum, Amsterdam, 1624; Critica sacra, Paris,
1650; those of J. Morhi in Exercitationes ecclesiasticae in iitriim-
que Sainaritanoruni Pentateiichum (Paris, 1631), and Exe?-ciia-
tiones de hebraici graecique textns sinceritaie (Paris, 1633). The
younger Buxtorf answered Cappelle in his treatises De punc-
toruni origitie {i6^?>) aLX\d Anticritica (1653): see Schnedemann,
Die Co?it}-overse desL. Cappellus mit den Buxtorfen (Leipzig, 1 879),
Loisy, Histoire critique, p. 167 ff. The formida consensus eccle-
siarum Helveticaruni (1675) declared {can. ii., iii.) : " Hebraicus
Veteris Testamenti codex quem ex traditione ecclesiae ludaicae,
cui olim oracula Dei commissa sunt, accepimus hodieque reti-
nemus, tum quoad consonas tum quoad vocalia, sive puncta ipsa
sive punctorum saltern potestatem, et tum quoad res tum quoad
^ See De Wette-Schrader, Lehrbuch, p. 217 f.
I
Tfie Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study. 437
verba ^ed7rveu(rT0f...ad cuius normam...universae quae extant
versiones...exigendae et, sicubi deflectunt, revocandae sunt.
Eorum proinde sententiam probare neutiquam possumus, qui
lectioncm quam Hebraicus codex cxhibet liumano tantum arbitrio
constitutam esse definiunt, quique lectionem Hebraicam quam
minus commodam iudicant contigere eamquc ex LXX. scniorum
aliorumque versionibus Graecis...emendare religioni neutiquam
ducunt^"
Reference has been made to the place occupied by the
Samaritan Pentateuch in this controversy. A Samaritan
recension of the Law was known to Origen, who quoted it in
the Hexapla (Num. xiii. I a kiCi avra Ik toS twv "^aixapnTwv
Vl(ipaiKOv fiiTiftd^ofjiiv, xxi. 13 a iv /xovots twi' Sa/^apeiraJv
€vpofi€v: see Field, Jlex. i. p. Ixxxii. f.), and Jerome (^prol. gal.,
comm. in Gal. iii. 10); reference is made to it also by Eusebius
{C/iron. I. xvi. 7 ff.), and by so late a writer as Georgius
Syncellus (cent, viii.), who attaches a high value to its testimony
{Chronogr. p. 83 8ta«^wi'oi}cri toi 'E/?paiKa dvTLypaffya tt/jo? to
2a/jia/)€tT(in' ap^^nioTarov koi ^apaKTrjp(Ti SiaXAuTToV o Koi dXr)0€<;
(lyai Kal irpwToi' IC/^paiot Ka^o//.(),\oy(>r(rii). In the Seventeenth
century, after a long oblivion, this recension was recovered by
a traveller in the East and published in the Paris Polyglott of
1645. The rising school of textual criticism represented by
Morin at once recognised its importance as concurring with
the Septuagint in its witness against the originality of the
Massorctic text. Few questions, however, have been more
hotly discussed than the relation of the Samaritan to tlie
Alexandrian Pentateuch. Scholars such as Selden, Ilottinger,
and Eichhorn contended that the Greek Pentateuch was based
upon Samaritan MSS. Samaritans were undoubtedly to be
found among the early Palestinian settlers in I'.gypt. Of the
first Ptolemy Josephus writes : ttoXXou? niy^naXwrnv; Xnpiin'
dirn TTj<; ^afiapdr i?io<; Kn) toiv cr Vapit,(ii; KiiTwKiafy aTraiTas ti>i
Alyvmov dyayioy. It is significant that ^afidptia occurs among
' Niemcycr, Collectio Con/essionum (Lcipzijj, i*<4o), p. 731.
438 The Greek V elusions as aids to Biblical Study.
the names of villages in the Fayum', and a letter ascribed to
Hadrian, and certainly not earlier than his reign, mentions
Samaritans as resident at Alexandria. On the other hand the
traditional account of the origin of the lxx. directly con-
tradicts this hypothesis, nor is it probable that the Jews of
Alexandria would have had recourse to the Samaritans for
MSS. of the Law, or that they would have accepted a version
which had originated in this manner. Moreover the agreement
of the Greek and Samaritan Pentateuchs is very far from
being complete. A careful analysis of the Samaritan text led
Gesenius to the conclusion, which is now generally accepted,
that the fact of the two Pentateuchs often making common
cause against the printed Hebrew Bibles indicates a common
origin earlier than the fixing of the Massoretic text, whilst their
dissensions shew that the text of the Law existed in more
than one recension before it had been reduced to a rigid uni-
formity.
On the Samaritan Pentateuch the reader may consult J. Mo-
riniis, Exercitationes ecclcdasticae in utriimque Samaritanorum
Pentateuchuni', L. Cappellus, Critica sacra, iii. c. 20; Walton,
prolegs;. (ed. Wrangham, Camb. 182S), ii. p. 280 ff.; R. Simon,
Histoire critique du Vicnx Testament, i. c. 12; Eichhorn, Ei7t-
leitung, ii. § 383 ff. ; Gesenius, De PentatciicJii Sainaritani origine
indole ei auctoritaie comni. (Halle, 181 5); S. Kohn, De Penta-
tcitcho Samaritatio ciusque cum versionibus antiquis nexu (Leip-
zig, 1S65); Samareifikon u. Septuaginta, in MGJS., 1893 j
E. Deutsch, Samaritan Pentateuch, in Smith's D. B. iii. 1 106 ff. ;
E. Konig, art. Sam. Pentateuch, Hastings' D. B. suppl. vol. p. 71 ;
J. W. Nutt, Introduction to Fragmefits of a Sam. Targum
(London, 1872); J. Skinner in J. Q. R. xiv. 26; P. Glaue and
A. Rahlfs, Mitteilungen des Sept. Unternehmens, ii. (Berlin, 191 1),
for fragments of Or. transl. of Sam. Pentateuch.
The prevalent belief in the originality of the Massoretic
text appeared to receive confirmation from the researches of
Kennicott^ and De Rossi ^ which revealed an extraordinary
agreement in all existing MSS. of the Hebrew Bible. But as
1 As early as 255 B.C. (Thackeray); Petrie Pap. Series II. iv. (11).
^ Vetus T. Hebraicuni cum variis lectionibus (Oxford, 1776 — 80).
^ Variae lectiones V. T. (Parma 1784 — 8): Supplementum (1798).
The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study. 439
no MS. of the Hebrew Bible has come down to us which is
earlier than the beginning of the tenth century', this evidence
merely shews the complete success of the Massorets and the
Sopherim who preceded them in preserving the traditional text,
and the question remains to be answered at what period the
tradition was created. It may be traced in the fourth century,
when Jerome received substantially the same text from his
Jewish teachers in Palestine ; and in the third, for Origen's
Hebrew text did not differ materially from that of Jerome or
of the Massorets. We can go yet another step further back ;
the version of Aquila, of which considerable fragments have
now been recovered, reveals very few points in which the
consonantal text of the second century differed from that of
our printed Bibles*. Other witnesses can be produced to shew
that, even if Hebrew MSS. of a much earlier date had been
preserved, they would have thrown but little light on textual
(luestions*. On the whole, modern research has left no room
for doubting that the printed Hebrew Bible represents a
textus receptus which was already practically fixed before the
middle of the second century. But it is etiually clear that no
official texi held undisputed possession in the first century, or
was recognised by the writers of the New Testament. Thus
we are driven to the conclusion that the transition from a
fluctuating to a relatively fixed text took effect during the
interval between the Fall of Jerusalem and the completion of
Aquila's version. The time was one of great activity in
Palestinian Jewish circles. In the last days of Jerusalem a
school had been founded at Jamnia (Jal)neh, YebnaY, near
the Philistine seal)oard, by R. Jociianan ben Zaccai. To this
' "The earliest M.S. of uliirh the r.f,'e is certainly known bears date
A.D. 916" (I'ref. to the R.V. of the O.T. p. ix. 1).
■ Cf. F. C. liurkitt, Aquila, p. i6 f
• Cf. S. R. Driver, Samuel, p. xxxix. : "Quotations in the Mishn.ih and
Gemara exhibit no material variants... the Tarj^'uins also pre-siippose a text
which deviates from (the M.T.) but sli^jhtly."
* Neubauer, Gt'ographie du TalmutJ, p. 73 f.
440 The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study.
centre the representatives of Judaism flocked after the destruc-
tion of the city, and here, until the fresh troubles of the war of
Bar-Cochba (a.d. 132 — 5), Biblical studies were prosecuted
with new ardour under a succession of eminent Rabbis. At
Jamnia about a.d. 90 a synod was held which discussed various
questions connected with the settlement of the Canon. At
Jamnia also traditionalism reached its zenith under the teaching
of R. Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, R. Joshua ben Chananya, and their
more famous pupil R. Akiba ben Joseph, the author of the
dogma that every word, particle and letter in the Hebrew
Bible has a ineaning, and serves some purpose which can be
expressed by hermeneutical methods. From this canon of
interpretation to the establishment of an official text is but a
single step; a book of which the very letters possess a divine
authority cannot be left to the unauthorised revision of scribes
or editors. Whether the result was reached by a selection of
approved readings, or by the suppression of MSS. which were
not in agreement with an official copy, or whether it was due
to an individual Rabbi or the work of a generation, is matter
of conjecture. But it seems to be clear that in one way or
another the age which followed the fall of Jerusalem wit-
nessed the creation of a standard text not materially different
from that which the Massorets stereotyped and which all MSS.
and editions have reproduced'.
{b) It is the business of the textual critic to get behind
this official text, and to recover so far as he can the various
recensions which it has displaced. In this work he is aided
by the Ancient Versions, but especially by the Septuagint.
Of the Versions the Septuagint alone is actually earlier than
the fixing of the Hebrew text. In point of age, indeed, it
must yield to the Samaritan Pentateuch, the archetype of
1 See W. Robertson-Smith, O. T. in Jewish CIi., p. 62 f. ; A. F. Kirk-
patrick, Divine Library of the O.T., p. 63 ff.
The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study. 44 1
which may have been in the hands of the Samaritans in the
days of Nehemiah (c. B.C. 432)'; but the polemical bias of
that people, and the relatively late date of the MSS. on which
the printed text depends, detract largely from the value of its
evidence, which is moreover limited to the Torah.
Some of the difficulties which beset the use of the Lxx. as
a guide to the criticism of the text have been stated already
when its character as a version was discussed^; others,
arising out of the present condition of the version, will be
noticed in the last chapter of this book. "The use of the
Ancient Versions (as Prof. Driver writes^) is not... always such a
simple matter as might be inferred.... In the use of an Ancient
Version for the purposes of textual criticism, there are three
precautions which must always be observed : we must reason-
ably assure ourselves that we possess the Version itself in its
original integrity : we must eliminate such variants as have the
appearance of originating merely with the translator; the
remainder, which will be those that are due to a difference of
text in the MS. (or MSS.) used by the translator, we must then
compare carefully, in the light of the considerations just stated,
with the existing Hebrew text, in order to determine on which
side the superiurily lies," " In dealing with the i.xx. (Prof
Kiikpatrick reminds us) we have to rememl)er...that the LXX.
is not a homogeneous work, but differs very considerably in
its character in different books, if not in i)arls of books\"
Moreover in the case of the lxx. the task of the textual critic
is comjilicated by the existence of more than one distinct
recension of the Clreek. He has before him in many contexts
a choice of readings which represent a plurality of Hebrew
archetypes*.
1' .See Rylc, Cation, p. 91 f.
" I't. II., c. v.. p. 315 n.
^ Samufi, p. xxxix. f.
■* Expositor V . iii , p. 273.
* Sec II. I". Sinitli, Hamiul, p. 397 f., and the remarks that follow.
.j42 The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study,
The following list of passages in which the LXX. reflects a
Hebrew text different from Jfl will enable the student to prac-
tise himself in the critical use of the Version.
Gen. iv. 8 fSi does not give the words of Cain, though "IPXM
leads the reader to expect them, (iffi supplies AieXdcofXfv ds to
irediov (Hlb'n nDp3), and this is supported by Sam., Targ. Jer.,
Pesh.,Vulg. XXXi.29 ^^''^^, © l*^^ (joi Trarpos (rov) ; so Sam.,
cf. V. 30. xli. 56 Dn3 "lLyN"i?3"nS, © Trdvras rovs aLTofSoXa>vas
(-13 nnv'x', of. Sam., "in Dnii i:i't< b nx). xlix. 10 ffi ecos &v
eXOr] TO diroKelfifva avra, perhaps reading "l?t^* ( = 1/' "1"^*^) for 01
Ti?''^: but see Ball in Haupt, Sacred Books, ad loc, and cf. the
Greek variant a dnoKeirai. Exod. V. 9 •"iy^'^..-lb'y.l1., fit fiepifiva-
TUiarav ...iiepifivaTOiXTav (1VC^'^..1yti'''1). xiv. 25 "IpJI, (S koX crvvibrjcrev
(IDNM). XXX. 6 ...nnbsn '>:?)'?... n^-lSin •'ps'?. <© omits the second
clause: so Sam. Lev. xiii, 31 I'nK' lyt;', © dpl^ ^avOiCova-a
(nhy 'b'). Num. xxiv. 23 (S prefixes kqI iSwv to,/ "i2y (N^n.
Jiy-riN); cf. vv. 20, 21. Deut. iv. 37 Vnqx iy-)!?, i.e. Abraham's
posterity (Driver, ad toe); (Sr to (nrippa avT<ov fier avToiis vpMs,
i.e. D3nnN DyiH; so Sam. Josh. XV. 59 ® +efK(u...7ro'X€is:
ev8fKa Koi al Kco/xai avTcbv. The omission of these names in 01 is
doubtless due to homoioteleuton. Jud. xiv. 15 ''V''?^'i\ Di*3.
an, as the context seems to require, ev ttj >//ifp« tjj TeTupTj]
(■•yQin) ; but see Moore in Haupt, Sacred Books, ad toe. xvi.
13 f. <!It supplies a long lacuna in fH {koX evKpovaj]s...Trjs KeffioXi^is
avTov) caused by homoioteleuton ; on the two Greek renderings
of che passage see Moore in Haupt, ad toe. xix. 18 CJ et? tov
oIkov pov €ya> nopevopai {M "H^Ph ♦JN ri)r\\ JT-aTlS). The final
letter of ^ri''3 has probably been taken by iW for an abbreviation
of rwrw 1 Sam. i. 24 r\v^f Dn??, © iv p6<jx(f TpierlCovTi,
dividing and pronouncing K'?K'P "ID3. ii. 33 CBr supplies 3")n3
(eV pop(f)aia) which jitt seems to have lost. iii. 13 (!5 oti kuko-
XoyovvTfs dfov viol avTov, reading DTIaS for DiT?. iv. 1. The first
clause in 0L is irrelevant in this place, and must either be con-
nected with iii. 21 or struck out altogether. In place of it (Gf has
the appropriate introduction, koi iyevrj6r]...fls iroKepov (D^D*3 NH^I
' Lagarde (Symniicta i., p. 57) suggests a form XTl^C'^X.
i
I
The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study. 443
^N-it^ "jj; Tvaxhrh D*nt^''?D ivnp^i nT\r\). v. 6. For n.xi ^■T^;^•N-n^?
n v-133 (E5 has icai fxeaov rfjs xo>pas avTrjs dvecpiirjcrav fives, Cf. vi. 4 {.,
and see Driver and Budde (in Haupt's Sacred Books) adloc. H. P.
Smith would strike out the reference to mice in both contexts.
vi. 19 ki'Pw'"n^5 ^CJ'jX3 '^^. tf? KCLi ovK i](TfifVLaav ol viol \e)(oviov
iv Toiis avbpd(Tiv BaLdauuvs, where the first six words represent an
original of which itt preserves only three letters. Restoration is
complicated by the fact that dn-ixevl^eiv is an. \ey. in the LXX.
Klostermann suggests in^:3^ ^JQ nn wStJI. ix. 25 f. 0]} -13T1
!|D5P'il Ji'T^y 'p-lwXD*. ©, more in harmony with the context, Km
bi4<npa>(Tav ra 2aovX (7lNti'P 1"12T"I) eVi tw SainaTi, kgi fKnifxr'jdq
\^P^ .).)• X. 21 (Cf +Kai TTpo<rayov(Tiv ttjv (f)v\Tjv Mnrra/jet els
avBpas, a clause necessary to the sense, xii. 3 13 ''^'V D'*?yxi, © Kai
virndTjpa (cf. Gen. xiv. 23, Am. ii. 6, viii. 6); dnoKpidTjTe kot epov
(^ i:j; D't'yil). with (p; compare Sir. xlvi. 19 XPW"-^* ^fi ft»s-
vTTo5r]ij.dTcov...ovK fiXr](f)a, where for uTTo^. the newly recovered
Hebrew has D^y3 'a secret gift,' leg. fort. D^Syj 'a pair of sandals';
see, however, Wisdom of Ben Sira, p. Ixvii. xii. 8 tf*. supplies
Kill iTanelvouTfv cutovs AiyvnTos, omitted by /tt through homoio-
tcleuton. xiv. 18 C\l^^*n jhX nV"'^3, ^' npocrdyaye t6 e<poC8.
"The Ephod, not the ark, was the organ of divination" (Driver).
xiv. 41 f. m D^pn r^ir). <niuc^ supplying the lacuna, Tt on ovk
unfKfiidTjs roj SouXf.) (rnv (rrjpfpnv; el e'v f'fiin rj ev '\(»va6av t<^ vlu> pov
17 dfiiKlu; Ku/Jtf 6 ^«K 'la-pm'jX, 8,)s fi,'j\ovs (QniS)- (cai ft rude eivois
Ev Tw Xrtw 17 fii^iKja, 8or oaaWrfra (D'9^). Similarly in 7/. 42 <f!S
preserves the words tv tiv KaTaK\r]jHoiTi)Tai. ..mv vlov (ivtdv, which
M has lost through homoiotcleuton. See the note in Field,
Ilexapia, i. p. 510. xx. 19 '^);i^r\ jnNn 'PVX, (R nuph TO epydlS
fK('ivo = ])>ri 2}-)^ri ^VX, 'beside yonder cairn.' Similarly v. 41
dno rov dpydfi = 2i-\iiri '?yxp. 2 Sam. iv. 6. For the somewhat
incoherent sentence in j*I, iT, substitutes ku\ IM ,) evpo,,u)s rov
oiKiiv fKi'tOuifxv wpiws, Ka\ (vvtTTu^fv icdl <V(i^f P(Vi» — words which
explain the incident that follows, xvii. 3 if; fjp rpdrrov tni,rT,,(<p€i
r) I'vfKf)^ njuts Tov uvdpa oi'Tr'Jv jrX;?!' \lfvxi)i' «i"'.f dv8pos <tv Cl-^tls.
In the archetype of /H the eye of the scribe has passed from y'\X
to n:;"N, and the sentence thus mutilated has Iiecn rc-arrangcd.
xxiv. 6 V-in D^nrin yy^-h^y. No 'land of Tahtim Hodshi' is
known. «f;L"c ji^.fc preserves the true text, els y^v XtTnelp KaS»/s
444 ^/^^ Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study.
= rW'\\> D^nnn pX "pN, 'to the land of the Hittites, even to
Kadesh.' For the last word Ewald, followed by H. P. Smith,
preferred r\i)T\n, 'to Hermon.' 1 Kings xvii. 1 '•n'^'^p '•3^'Fin
"ly^J. «J5 6 Qfa^elrris €k Gfa-^Mv rf/s TaXadd ('J fBJf'rip?). 2 Chron.
XXXiii. 19 '•tin "'"15"^ by. ffi eVt TMi/ Xoywi/ rwi/ opcui'T-cov (Q^Tinn).
Neh. ix. 17 Onp'f (is eV AtyuTrrw (DnVD2). Ps. XVi. (XV.) 2
J^npx sc. ^^?)5. © ffTTa CrilPX) is manifestly right, and has been
admitted into the text by the EngHsh Revisers. xxii. 16
(xxi. 17) n^^^, Aq. ws Xe^v. <ffl wpv^au (1-13 = 1^X3). xxvii.
(xxvi.) 13 N>1^ (so M) is apparently read by © as S?, and then
connected with the previous verse. See Cheyne, Book of Psalms,
p. 379, and Abbott, Essays, p. 25. Wellhausen (Haupt, ad loc.)
would retain iM without the puncta extraordinaria. xlii. 5
(xli. 6) ffi +[««(] 6 <9eos /iou, as M in 7/. 12. xlix. 11 (xlviii. 12)
D?iyp i^''J?3 ^|l"'i?- ® ol Td(poi avTMV oIkim avrav els tov alatva.
Ixix. 26 (Ixviii. 27) •tisp''^, dH irpocrierjKav (•IS'-pi''). Ixxii. (Ixxi.) 5
"pa-is ksb inx. © rouT-o) 01- (Tvvi^aeiov (^?s x"? inx). Prov. x. lO'^ i
in iW is repeated from v. 8** which has displaced the true ending j
of V. 10. (flr restores the latter (6 Se Ae'yx'^'' M^^" TrajipTjaias elpr]- '
i/oTTotet), and thus supplies the contrast to lo'^ which is required
to complete the couplet. Jer. vi. 29 -IpJJ^? X? ^''Vl\- ® 7rovi]pia[i]
aliTcov oix eVaK7y[(rai'] (PP3 XT' Dyil). Xi. 15 D''3")n. (BJ /iiy evxai...; i
(C'ln^D); see however Streane, Double text, p. 133. xxiii. 33
Xbp np"nx. (JS u/ieis eWero Xrjppa (dividing and pronouncing Di^X
XL-'pn). Ezek. Xlv, 20 L'n'nn npL'3. <fS eV rw ei38(5/i<w /xT^ri, y^cm
ToC pr]v6s (P'mb nnxn "'V^nfj-n). Mai. ii. 3 yijri. © t-oj- apov
(c) In dealing with such differences between the Greek
version and the traditional Hebrew text the student will not
start with the assumption that the version has preserved the
true reading. It may have been preserved by the official
Hebrew or its archetype, and lost in the MSS. which were
followed by the translators : or it may have been lost by both.
Nor will he assume that the Greek, when it differs from the
The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study. 445
Hebrew, represents in all cases another Hebrew text ; for the
difference may be due to the failure of the translators to under-
stand their Hebrew, or to interpret it aright. His first business
is to decide whether the Greek variant involves a different
Hebrew text, or is simply another expression for the text
which lies before him in the printed Hebrew Bible. If the
former of these alternatives is accepted, he has still to consider
whether the text represented by the lxx. is preferable to that
of the Hebrew Bible and probably original. There is a
presumption in favour of readings in which (& and ^W agree,
but, as we have said, not an absolute certainty that they are
correct, since they may both be affected by a deep-seated
corruption which goes back to the age of the Ptolemies.
When they differ. Cut will usually deserve to be preferred when
it (</) fills up a lacuna which can be traced to homoioteleuton
in the Hebrew, or {b) removes an apparent interpolation, or
{c) apjjears to represent a bona fide variant in the original,
which makes better sense than the existing text. Its claims in
these cases are strengthened if it has the support of other
early and |)robably independent witnesses such as the Samari-
tan Pentateuch and the Targum, or of Hebrew variants which
survive in existing MSS. of the Massoretic text, or in the Q'ri'.
For guidance as to the principles on which the LXX. may be
employed in the criticism of the Hebrew Text the student may
consult L7ig:irde, /I /I »iir^unife/i zur t^riech. Ubersetzung der Pro-
verbicn, p. iff.; WtlUMUScn, I)cr Text der Biichcr Sa>/ii(e/i<!,
p. iff.; Robertson Smith, O. T. in the Jewish Chunh'^, p. 76 ff.;
Driver, Notes on the J/ebrew Text 0/ the Books of Sainuet,
p. xlviii. f. ; II. I'. Smith, Connn. on Samuel, pp. xxix. ff., 395 ff. ;
Toy, Coinnt. on Proverbs, p. xxxii. f. See also below, c. vi.
2. In the field of O.T. interj)rctation the witness of tlie
i.xx. must be received with even greater caution. It is evi-
dent that Greek-speaking Jews, whose knowledge of Hebrew
' On the rcl.iliun of the LXX. to tlic O'ri, see Frankel, VorstuJien,
p. 319 fT.
446 The Greek Vej'sions as aids to Biblical Study.
was probably acquired at Alexandria from teachers of very
moderate attainments, possess no prescriptive right to act as
guides to the meaning of obscure Hebrew words or sentences.
Transliterations, doublets, confused and scarcely intelligible
renderings, reveal the fact that in difficult passages they were
often reduced to mere conjecture. But their guesses may at
times be right ; and in much that seems to be guesswork they
may have been led by gleams of a true tradition. Thus it is
never safe to neglect their interpretation, even if in the harder
contexts it is seldom to be trusted. Indirectly at least much
may be learned from them ; and their wildest exegesis belongs
to the history of hermeneutics, and has influenced thought
and language to a remarkable degree.
{d) The following specimens will serve to illustrate the exe-
gesis of the LXX. in the historical books.
Gen. iv. I eKTrjad^rjv avBpunrov 8ia tov deov. iv. 7 ovk eav opdas
irpoa-eviyicrjs opdwi 8e fir) BUXjjs, rjpapTes; i](TV)(^a(Tov. vi. 3 ov pi)
Karapeivrj to nvevpa pov iv rols dvdpdjTrois tovtocs els tov alwva 8id to
fivai avTovs crapicns. xxx. 1 1 Km einev Aeta Ei' tv^J]' kcu eTTcavopaaev
TO ovopa aiiTOv Tad. xxxvii. 3 eTroirjaev Se avrm ;^ircoj'a ttoikiKov
(cf. 2 Regn. xiii. 18). xli. 43 iKrjpv^ev eptrpoadev avTov Krjpv^.
xlvii. 31 irpocTfKvvquev IcrpaifK eirl to aKpov Ttjs pa/3Sou avTov.
xlviii. 14 evaXXd^ [D evaWd^as] Tas p^eipay. xlix. 6 ivevpoKoirrja-av
Tavpov. 19 Ta8, Trfiparrjpiov iTfipaTevcrei avTov avTus 8e TreipaTevaei
aiJTmv KaTa irodas. Exod. i. 16 Kai S)(riv npos tw tik.T€iv. iii. 14 eya>
dpi 6 S)V. xvi. 15 fiTvav eTepos Tm eTepco Tt i(TTiv tovto ; xvii. 1 5
ewaivopacrev to bvopa avTov Kvpios KaTa(pvyr] pov. xxi. 6 irpos to
Kf.Trjpiov tov dfov. xxxii. 32 Koi vvv (I pev d0ets avTols ttjv dpaprlav
avTcbv, H0fs. Lev. xxiii. 3 ttj rjpepa ttj ejSdupTj (Td(3l3aTa dvdjravais
KXrjTfj dyia to) Kvpico. Num. xxiii. lo'' aTroOdvoi rj ^vx'rj pov iv
yf/'V^dls SiKaicov, Kai yivoiTO to cnreppa pov ais to (rrreppa tovtwv.
xxiv. 24 /cat KaKoxTovaiv 'E^paiovs. Deut. xx. 1 9 prj nvBpcoiros to
^v\ov TO iv rm dypa, da-€\6f'iv..,fls tov ^dpaKa ; xxxii. 8 faTrjcrev
opui idvav KUTa dpidpov dyyeXcov deov. 1 5 dTriXdKTicrev 6 rjyanr]-
pevos. Jos. v. 2 TToiTjaov aeavTca piaxnipas ireTpivas eK ireTpas
aKpoTopov. Jud. i. 35 rjp^aro 6 'Apoppa2os KUToiKflv iv rtG opei rtu
6(rTpaKb)d€i (A Toil pvpaivmvos), iv c5 ai apKoi Knl iv « at dXwTTfKfs,
iv TM pvpcnvavi (cat iv Qaka^elv (A om. iv Ta p. k. iv 0.). viii.
13 iirecTTpe-^fv Tehea>v...dno irrdviodev Trjs TrapaTa^ewy "Apes (A e'lC
TOW TToXipov dno dva^dcrecos Apes). xii. 6 Kot einav avTa> 'Einov
Bfj 2Tdxvs (A 2vv6r]pa). XV. 14 ff. rjXdov eW 2iay6vos...Kal evpev
The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study. 447
aiayova ovov...Kai tpprj^fv 6 6(bs top Xokkov tov ev Tjj '2iay6vi...8ia
TOVTO eK\7]dri TO ovofxa aiirrjs Iljyyij tov eniKuXovfifvov, rj ioTiv iv
2t«yoi't. xviii. 30 vlos Trjpaofi vios (A viov) Mavaaar) (nt^O'JS : on
the J suspensutn see Moore in comm. on Sacred Books, ad toe).
I Regn. X. 5 oil eoTTiv e'/cei to dvacrrtfia tcov uX\o(f)v\u)v €k(1 Nacrei/ii
6 iikX6(pv\os. xiii. 21 nai rjv 6 TpvyrjTos (Toijios tov depi^tiv to.
St aKevt] ^v Tpds (TiacXoi fls tw odovTO, ndi Tjj a^'ivj), koL rw bpindvto
VTTOCTTCKriS TJV T) ClVTrj. XX. 3O l''^ KOpCKTlCOV aVTOfXoXoVVTCOV (LuC. +
yvvuiKOTpiK^Tj). xxvii. 10 Kara votov rrjs 'lovdaias. xxxi. lo dvi-
BrjKav Tu (TKevTj avrov (Is to 'AarapTflov. 2 Regn. i. 21 dvpeos
2aoi/X ovK (Xi)ia-dr] fv eXaio). xii. 3 1 8iT]yay€v (A d7rr]yayev) avTovs
8ia TOV irXiv6(iov (Luc. Trepajyayti' avrovs ev /taSf^/ia). XX. 6 pij
iroTe...(TKid(r€i tovs 6(f}6aXfiovs T}p.u)v. xxiv. 1 5 utto Trpaidfv [koI]
fois Stpiii dpiarov. 3 Regn. xiii. 12 Ka\ BtiKvvovaiv avTw ol viol
avTov Trju n^ov. 4 Regn. i. 2 f. eTTi^rfTTicraTf (v to) BciaX (ivlav deov
AKKupwv (Luc. €'n€po)Tr](TaTf dia tov BditX fivuiv irpoaoxdicrfxa Bebv
AKKapd)u). viii. 13 Tis (<ttlv 6 boiiXoi aov, 6 kvcov 6 rtdvrjKoos, ori
TTOiriad TO pijfin tovto; xxiii. 22 f. ovk eyfvfj&rj [koto] to Trdcrxa
ToirTO U(f} 1)pLfpO>V TiaV KplT(bv...OTl dAX' If TM OKTOlKaidf KUTCp fTft. TOV
^aaiXfuis ^laicreia fyfvtjdq to irda^a [roiiTO^ (cf. 2 Chr. xxxv. 18).
(d) The translated titles of the Psalms form a special and
interesting study. The details are collected below, and can be
studied with the help of the commentaries, or of Neubauer's
article in Studia Biblica ii. p. i ^."^
1raXfi6i, -i^^D passtm (fvaL'' in Ps. vii., I^K' in Ps. xlv. (xlvi.)).
\lbi}, li'''^ passim ("I'lOtp in Ps. iv., iV^T^ in Ps. ix. 17).
^aXfids o)8^f, "1*B' "liOTO Pss. xxix., xlvii., Ixvii., Ixxiv., Ixxxii.,
Ixxxvi., xci., xciii. (A); u8j) ylraXp.(>v, Ty' 'D or "liDjP '^ (Ixv.,
Ixxxii., Ixxxvii., cvii.).
npoafvxT], n^PJ^ (Pss. xvi., Ixxxv., Ixxxix., ci., cxli.).
'AXX^Xoutd, n^'Dpn (Pss. civ. — cvi.,cx. — cxiv., cxvi., ex vii., cxxxiv.,
cxxxv., cxlv., cxlvi., cxlviii. — cl.).
Alvtais, npnri (Ps. cxliv.).
iTtjXoypafPia, tls <TTT]Xoypa(f}iav , DFISD (Pss. XV., Iv.— lix.). Aq. rov
ran(i.vMJ)povoi kuX (JttXoO, Th. Toii ran. <c«l dfiit)p.ov.
Els tA TfXos, nViO? (Pss. iv. — xiii., xvii., xviii., xxi., xxix., xxx.,
xxxv. — Ixi., Ixiii. — Ixix., Ixxiv. — Ixxvi., Ixxix., Ixxx., Ixxxiii.,
' The titles which arc given in the i.xx. l)Ul arc wanting in /tt, have
been enumcratctl in I't. 11. c. ii. (p. 250 ff.).
448 The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study.
Ixxxiv., Ixxxvii., cii., cviii., cxxxviii., cxxxix.). Cf. Aq. r&'
viKO-noiCa, Symm. enivUios, Th. els to vIkos.
'Ev vfxvois, ri"lJ''J^2 (Pss. vi., liii., liv., Ix., Ixvi., Ixxv.).
'Ev ^aXfiols, niJ''J33 (Ps. iv.).
'Yirep rfis K.\i]povofxovar]s, (?) ri''l?''n3n"?&< (Ps. v.). Aq. otto KXrjpo-
docnciv, Symm. VTrep K^rjpovxi-cov.
'Yirep T?js 6y86r]i, D^rp^'n-'py (Pss. vi., xi.).
'Ynep Tcov Xoyav Xovaii vloi 'le/xei/f/, ^J''P:"}2 r-ID'nn'^-'py (Ps. vii.).
Aq., Symm., Th. irepl, ktX.
'Yrrep tuv Xtjvmv, n^n^n'/V (Pss. viii., Ixxx., Ixxxiii.). Aq., Th. vnip
T7]s yerdiSos.
'Yrrep tS>v Kpv(f)Lcov rov viov, |3? Jl-ID'/'y (Ps. ix. ; cf. xlv.). Aq.
vTrep veavioTTjTos tov vlov, Th. virep oKja^s- rov vlov, Symm.
nepl TOV Oavarov tov vlov.
'Yirep TOV dvTLXrjpyj^eus Ttjs eoidivfjs, "in^'D ny^'Py (Ps. xxi.). Aq.
vnep Tiji eXd(f)ov Ttjs opdpivrjs. Symm. vTrep ttjs ^orjBeias Trjs
opdp.
'Yirep TCOV aXXoiwdriaopevov, W^^^'^'bV (Pss. xliv., Hx., Ixviii., Ixxix.).
Aq. eirl Tols Kpivois, Symm. virep tSuv avBwv, Th. virep Tutv
Kpivcov.
'Yirep Tod dyairrjTOv (w'S^), r\)l'<l] (T'K') (Ps. xliv.). Aq. Jcr/xa
IT poacf)iXias, Symm. acrp-a els tov dyaTrrjTov, Th. rols Tjyairr]-
pevoLS.
'Yrrep rov Xaov tov diro twv dyicov pepaKpvppevov, D'^JPH"! DpN DJ"!''"?!^
(Ps. Iv.). Aq. virep irepKTTfpds dXdXov paKpvapwv. Symm.
vnep TTjs rrepKTTepds viro rov (j)tXov aiirov airaxrpevov. E . virep
Tijs IT. r^s poyyiXaXov KeKpvppevcov.
'Yirep 'l8idovv, ^-ID-IT-'py (Pss. xxxviii., Ixi., Ixxvi.).
'Yirep fiaeXed {rov diroKpidrjvai.), (^13^?) n?r]D"7y (Pss. Hi., Ixxxvii.).
Aq. eirl x^pf'? (Symm. 8ta ;^opoi)) rov e^dp^^eiv.
Els dvdp,vr](Tiv, "T'STH'? (Pss. xxxvii., Ixix.).
Els i^opoXoyrjcnv, Hlin? (Ps. xcix.). Aq. els evxapia-riav.
Els a-vveaiv, avvea-ecos, TSb'O (Pss. xxxi., xli. — xliv., li. — liii., Ixxiii.,
Ixxxvii., Ixxxviii., cxli.). Aq. eiria-Tjjpovos, eiriarrjprjs, eiria-Trj-
poavvrjs.
Mrj 8iact)6eipT]s, nni^B'"?^ (Pss. Ivi.— Iviii., Ixxiv.). Symm. (Ps.
Ixxiv.) irepl dipdapaias.
The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study. 449
ToO fVKaivKTfioii Tov oXkov, H'liriTIBpn (Ps. xxix.).
libv dva^adfiav, liOV^i} (Pss. cxix. — cxxxiii.). Aq., Symm., Th.
Tap dfa^dcrtoiv, (Is ras ava^dcrfis.
It may be added that npDi (Pss. iii. 3, 5, iv. 3, 5, vii. 6, &c., &c.)
is uniformly 8id^aXfia in the LXX. ; Aq. renders it del, Symm.
and Th. agree with the LXX. except that in Ps. ix. 17 dd is
attributed to Th. In the Psahii of Habakkuk (Hab. iii. 3) Symm.
renders els t6v alcova, Th. els reXos, and in v. l^ fls re'Xoy has found
its way into copies of the LXX. (cf. X'-'\ and Jerome: " ipsi LXX.
rerum necessitate compulsi...nunc transtulerunt infinem^).
(^) Exegetical help is sometimes to be obtained from a
guarded use of the interpretation affixed by the Lxx. (i) to
obscure words, especially aira.^ Xeyofxeva, and (2) to certain
proper names. Some examples of both are given below.
(1) (jen. 1. 2 aoparos khi dKcirua KfvutTTos. 6 rrrepe'co/ia.
iii. 8 TO b( iXiP 6v. 15 Tr]pT)(T(i...Tr] prjaeis- vi. 2 01 ayyeXoi tov
6(ov {cf. Ueut. xxxii. 8, Job i. 6, ii. i). 4 m ylyavTes. viii. 21
8iav 0T]6 f IS. xxii. 2 TOV dyuTrrjTOV. xlix. ID rjyovpfvos.
Kxod. vi. 12 «Aoyo9. viii. 21 Kvvofivta. xii. 22 va-croinos.
XXV. 29 (ipToi f'v(oirini (cf. d. ir poKf ipevni xxxix. 18 = 36, a. tov
npocTcjnuv I Kej,'n. xxi. 6). xxviii. 15 Xoyiov, Vulg. rationale.
Exod. xxxiv. 13 Ta dX(TT) Vulg. luci, A.V. proves. Lev. xvi. 8 ff . o
fijroTTo/iTr (dor, 17 diron ofinr). DcuL x. 16 a kXt] po Kapdin. Jud.
xix. 22 v'to\ irapai' dpoiv (cf. viol Xoipoi I Rcgn. ii. 12, and other
renderings, whicli employ dvopia, droprjpa, dnoorTnalu, fi(rf,:ii;s-,
rlf/j/jojf). 2 Regn. i. 18 to ^i^Xlov tov tldovs. 3 Rcgn. x. il ^vXa
nfXfKTfTa (cf 2 Chr. ii. 8, ix. lof. $. irevKiva). Ps. viii. 6 Trap'
(Jyyf'Xovj. XV. (J T) yXoxTord pov. Xvi. 8 Kupa d(f)d<iXpov. 1. 14
nvtvpa ijyfpoviKuv. cxxxviil. 15 '/ VTroiTTiiiris pov. 16 to uKUTtp-
ydffTov (TOV. Prov. 11. 18 napd tco «^,'/ pfTci Ttoi' yrjytuSjv
(a doublet). Job ix. 9 nXfuiSa kui "Ea-irtpov ku) 'ApKTovpnv
(cf. xxxviii. 31). Zeph. i. 10 otto t;/v lifvTf'pas (cf. 4 Regn. xxii. 14).
Isa. xxxviii. 8 (4 Regn. xxii.) Toi/i d(Ku dvajiaOpovs. Ezech.
xiii. 18 n po<TKf(\)dXaiii, (nijioXaiti.
(2) Abanm, mountains of, Dn2rn"">n, to opos to iv tw nipav.
Num. xxvii. 12 (cf. xxi. II, xxxiii. 44). Ai^a^ite, V>ovya\os, Esth.
iii. I, .\ 17 (xii. 6); Moicffioji', E (xvi.) 10. .harat, land of,
^'V^'X'y^, 'A/J/ifi-i'n, Is.i. xxxvii. 38. Aahtorcth nnnV-y, "AardpT,]
• On this worrl see an article by C. A. Urigu's, in \\\g Journal of Biblical
Literature, 1899, p. 132 ff-. and art. Selahy in Ilaslinjjs, /;./>'. iv.
s. & 29
45 o The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study.
(the Phoenician 'Ashtart), Jud. ii. 13, 4 Regn. xxiii. 13. Baca,
valley of, ^??l' P^V? h <oika% rov KXav6fji5>vos, Ps. Ixxxiii. 7 (cf.
Jud. ii. 5, 2 Regn. v. 24, i Chr. xiv. 14). Caphtor, Caphtorim,
KaTTTradoKia, KoTTTraSoKes, Deut. ii. 23, Am. ix. 7. Cherethites,
Q'T'?.?, Kp^res, Zeph. ii. 5, Ezech. xxv. 16. Dodanim, Q''?']"!,
'PdStot (D''JT1), Gen. x. 4. Enhakkore ^5"l^i?^-pJ;, Ui^yij roi
eTTiKoXovfjiivov, Jud. XV. 19. Ichabod, ni33''N, ovai /3ap;^a/3a)^
(? = mnrTl2 •••in*, Wellh.), i Regn. iv. 21. Javan, t] 'EXXa?, Isa.
Ixvi. 19 (cf. Joel iii. 6). J ehovah-nissi, Kupios KariKpvyr] fiov,
Exod. xvii. 15. Keren-happ7ich, "^I-IBn pp., ^AfiaXdelas Kepas, Job
xlii. 14. Kiriath-sepher., "ISD Jl^'lp, TroXty ypafifidrcov, Jos. xv. 15 f.,
Macpelah, npSDGn, to a-nrjXaiov to SiirXovv, Gen. xxiii. 1 7, 19
(xxv. 9, xlix. 30, 1. 13). Moriah, land of, n*"}bn V'^N, rj yrj rj
v-^\t], Gen. xxii. 2. Pisgah, n|p3n, to XeXa^evfievov, Num.
xxi. 20, xxiii. 14, Deut. iii. 27 (cf. Deut. iv. 49). Zaanaim,
plain of DHll)31f^3 V^'^.i ^p^s TrXeoveKTovvrcov (B), 8p. dvanavofifvcov
(A), Jud. iv. II (cf. Moore, ad loc). Zaphnath-paaneah, ri?pV
n.jyB, '^ov6op(})uvrj)(. Gen. xli. 45 (Ball, c?^ loc. compares Egypt,
sut' a en pa-anx)- Pharaoh-Hophra, UlSn '3, 6 Ova<f)pT], Jer. Ii.
(xliv.) 30 (cf. W. E. Crum in Hastings, D. B. ii. p. 413).
B. The Septuagint is not less indispensable to the study
of the New Testament than to that of the Old. But its
importance in the former field is more often overlooked, since
its connexion with the N.T. is less direct and obvious, except
in the case of express quotations from the Alexandrian
version'. These, as we have seen, are so numerous that in
the Synoptic Gospels and in some of the Pauline Epistles they
form a considerable part of the text. But the New Testament
has been yet more widely and more deeply influenced by the
version through the subtler forces which shew themselves in
countless allusions, lying oftentimes below the surface of the
words, and in the use of a vocabulary derived from it, and in
many cases prepared by it for the higher service of the Gospel.
1 On the quotations see above p. 392 ff.
The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study. 45 i
I. Tlie influence of the lxx. over the writings of the N.T.
is continually shewn in combinations of words or in trains of
thought which point to the presence of the version in the
background of the writer's mind, even when he may not
consciously allude to it.
This occurs frequently {a) in the sayings of our Lord, where,
if He spoke in Aramaic, the reference to the i.xx. is due to the
translator: e.g. Mt. v. 3ff. fiaKapioi oi 7rrco;^oj'...ot Trevdovvrfs...
ol irpaels (Isa. Ixi. iff., Ps. xxxvi. II). vi. 6 eto-eX^e els to
TOfjifiuv (Tov (Isa. xxvi. 20). X. 21, 35 in avacTTrjcrnvTai. TeKva
ejrl yovfis...ri\6ov yuf) 8i)(^d(Tai...6vyaTep(i Kara Trjs firjrpos avrqi
Koi vvfKpr/v ktX. (Mic. vii. 6). xxi. 33 avOpanos €<f>vTfv(Tfv
apTrfXwua Kai (ppaypov avT<a Trepifffrj Kfv ktX. (Isa. v. 2). Mc.
ix. 48 ^XrjdrjPdi els yeevvav ovov 6 (tko>\7]^ avTutv ov reXevra
Ku'i TO iriip ov (TfievvvTai (Isa. Lxvi. 24). Jo. i. 51 (j^ecrde tov
oiiptivov uveayoTa kui tovs dyyeXovs tov 6eov dva^alvovTas Ka\ kcitg-
jiaivovTas (Gen. xxviii. 12); (J>) in the translated evangelical
record: Mc. vii. 32 (fjepovcriv avT(o kco^oi/ koi poyi\d\oi'...K(n
eXvdr] 6 Beapos ktX. (Isa. xxxv. 5 f., xlii. 7). xv. 29 ol rraparro-
pfvopevoi efiXa(T(f)ijpovi' uvtoi' KifovvTes tcis KecfiaXas: cf. Lc.
• xxiii. 35 laTTjKei o Xuos deuipaiv t'^epvicTtjpi^ov 8e ktX. (Ps.
xxi. 8, Isa. li. 23, Lam. ii. 15); (c) in the original Greek writings
of the N. r., where allusions of this kind arc even more abundant;
I I'ct. ii. 9 vpels 6« yevos f\Xe ktov, /iutriXftoi/ If puTt vpii,
tovos ayiov, Xaos els ire ptv oirjaiv, onois Tas upeTus e'^ayyeiXTjTe
ktX. (Exod. xix. 5 f , xxiii. 22 f, Isa. xliii. 20). iii. 14 t6v 8e
({)u[iou avTUiv pf] (fjojitjd^jre P'f}^^ Tapa)(dtjTe, Kvpiov 8e roi'
XpKTTov uyiuiTdTf (V Tais KapBtms vpiav (Isa. \'iii. 12 f). Rom.
xu. 17 IT pouooipei'oi KdXa evumiof nuvTtov <\vd p<j)7ra)v : cf. 2 Cor.
vni. 21 n povnov pep yap KoXa ov povov (vairiov Kvpiov dXXa
Kn\ evoi-mov dpBpdnroiv ( I'rov. iii. 4; in Roni. /. c. this allusion is
preceded by another to Prov. iii. 7). 2 Cor. iii.3ff. : Exod. xxxi.,
xxxiv. (lxx.) are in view throughout this context. Eph. ii. 17
evi)yyeXL(TaTo elprivrjv vplv to'is puK puv kui el pi] vrjv Tins e'yyvs
(Isa. Ivii. 19, cf lii. 7, Ixi. i). Phil. i. 19 oiHa yap oti tovto poi
dno(irjcr(T(ii els aoiT^piav (Job xiii. 16). Ileb. vi. 8 77...
eK(f>f'pov(Ta ... dKdfdas kui TpiiiuXovs ... KUTdpas iyyvs ((ien.
iii. 17).
These are but a few illustrations of a mental habit every-
where to be observed in the writers of the N.T., which shews
them to have been not only familiar with the lxx., but
saturated w^h its language. They used it as KnglLshmen use
29 — 2
452 The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study.
the Authorised Version of the Bible, working it into the texture
of their thoughts and utterances. It is impossible to do
justice to their writings unless this fact is recognised, i.e., unless
the reader is on the watch for unsuspected references to the
Greek O.T., and able to appreciate its influence upon his
author's mind.
2, To what extent the vocabulary of the N.T. has been
influenced by the Lxx. is matter of keen controversy. In
a weighty essay On the Value and Use of the Septuagint Dr
Hatch has maintained that " the great majority of N.T. words
are words which, though for the most part common to Biblical
and to contemporary secular Greek, express in their Biblical
use the conceptions of a Semitic race, and which must con-
sequently be examined by the light of the cognate documents
which form the Lxx.^" This statement, which has been hotly
contested, may conveniently form the basis of our discussion
of the subject.
{a) "The great majority of N.T. words are... common to
Biblical and contemporary secular Greek." This is certainly
true. Thus Dr H. A. A. Kennedy^ enumerates about 150
words out of over 4800 in Uie N.T. which are "strictly
peculiar to the lxx. and N.T." The list is as follows :
ayaQoTTOiiiv, dyadaavvrj, dyaWia(rdai, dyaXKlaais, dyid^tiv,
dyiaa/xos, dyiaxrvvT], alveais, dKpoywvialos, aixiJ^aX<oTev(iv, dXiayrjua,
aXXr]\ovui, dXkoyevTjs, dfifdvcrros, dfirjv, d/j.cpid^fii', dva^covvveiv,
dvaSffiari^fip, dve^i^viaaTos, dvdfjunrdpecrKos, avTaTro^ofxa, oTroSe-
Koroiv, diroKoXv^is, dnoKf^fyaXL^eiv, dtrocjideyyea-dai, /3aroy, /SSe-
\vyfia, jSe/Sj/XoCv, ^pox^], yhvva, yvMarrjs, yoyyv^dv, yvp-voT-qs,
8eKaTovv, tfKTos, dLayoyyv^fiv, 8aKiovv, Bottjs, dwap-ovv, e/3So/x»;-
KOVTUKIS, elpriVOTTOlflv, (K^T]T€lV, € KfXVKTTJpi^flV, fKITecpd^eiV, (KTTOp-
vfvfLV, eKpi(,ovv, e\(yfi6s, eXey^is, tinraiyfios, efiTraiKTrjs, fvavri,
ev8i8v(TKeiv, (v8o^d^(iv, evbvvaixoiiv, evevXoyelv, evKaivl^fiv, {'vraXfia,
ei'TaCpid^fiv, fvoDTriov, fvayri^eadai, i^diriva, f^aa-TpdrrTfiv, e^oXe-
dpfifiv, f^ovtevovv, f^virvl^fiv, fnavpiov, emaKonr], ewavaTravfiv,
fniyaiJ.l3piveiv, enKpavcnifiv, fprjfiaxris, fvSoKia, fcprjufpia, rJTTrjixa,
' Essays, p. 34. * Sources of N.T. Greek, p. 88.
Tlie Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study. 453
6e\rjais, Ifpartveiv, Uparevfia, Kadapi^eiv, Kadapicrfios, KOTaKav^a-
adai, KaTaKKrjjiovopflv, Kardvv^is, KaTavvcrcrfiv, Karevmniov, kotoi-
KTjTrjpiov, Kavaiov, Kav)(r](Tts, KXvdcovi^fffOai, Kopos, Kparaiovv, Xa^evros,
, XfiTovpyiKos, XvTptoais, fiaKpodvpeiv, pdwa, paraioTTis, paraiovv,
fieyaXdoTrjs, fxeyaXcoavvr], fifTotKelv, piadios, fioyiXdXos, poixaXh,
vIkos, uXfdpeveiv, 6Xiy6yf/-vxos, oXoKXrjpia, OTrrdveiv, onracria, 6p6o-
ropeiv, opdpi^fw, opKcufiocrla, oval, Trayi8evfiv, Trapa^rjXovv, irapa-
TTiKpacrpos, TrapoiKia, uapopyicrpoi, iraTpidp^ris, rceipaap.6s, irepi-
Kadappa, nepiovaios, Trepicrafia, irXrjpo(^op(iv, irpoaKoppa, npocr-
o)(di^(iv, iTpoiivdSt pavTL^dv, pavTicrpos, craj3a<ji>0, (rd^^arov, crayrjvq,
aaravai, (rdrov, crrjTd,ip<x>Tos, aUfpa, (TKdvhdXov, aicXr)poKap8ia,
(TK\T)poTpa)(rfXos, (TTJ]K(iVy (TTvyi'd^fiv , (Tvveyeipfiv, Ta7r€iv6(f)ficov,
vnoKOT}, vrravTrjcris, viroXrjViOv, vn(poy\rovv, varfprjpu, (f>uicrTrjp,
X^poviifip, ^idvpia-pos, o)Tiov.
Since the publication of Dr Kennedy's book some of these
words (e.g. yoyyC^eiv, XtiTovpyiKos^) have been detected in early
papyri, and as fresh documents are discovered and examined,
the number of 'Biblical' Greek words will doubtless be still
further diminished. Indeed the existence of such a class of
words may be almost entirely due to accidental causes, such as
the loss of contemporary Hellenistic literature.
{l>) On the other hand it must not be forgotten that the
Greek vocabulary of Palestinian Greek-speaking Jews in the
first century a.d. was probably derived in great part from their
use of the Greek Old Testament. Even in the case of
writers such as St Luke, St Paul, and the author of the
Epistle to the Hebrews, the lxx. has no doubt largely regu-
lated the choice of words. A very considerable number of
the words of the N.T. seem to have been suggested by that
version, or in any case may be elucidated from it.
K. p. : ayuQuirrvvq, ayaXXiaaQai, iyvl^dv, dypvirvtlv, aiviypa,
nipfTi(tii>, (tX)i{^i>v(v((Tflai, aXXoyeviji, fi^tfiXfiVrtor, dpdf)at'TOi, dpi-
pipvos, (ip(f)iiiXT](TTpov, tip(f)'i?ii>v, dnfXnt^fiv, dnfpirprjTot, (ijrXoTr/i-,
inT('tKpv<f)o<i, tiflf'Xvypa, yXoiiTadKopnv, yfoypi^fii', tidfitjpa, 8<'fi/>(i;^/xa,
oimopoi, HivXl^fw, fiuypfdv, €i'ayKaXi{^KfOiu, €'vTn(j>td(fiv, tvaiTi^fcrOai,
tnf)Td((iv, f^f(j)i>r]{, (^ovdtvoiiv, djKiiXoi, fvii^nvv, Gfiirri^fin, iKavov-
(rfliu, tKfii'iIj-, iKpui, i(TTo/)(ii', KappCdf, KiirdytXoJi, KiiTafmvtuTTtvfiv,
KtlTnKXxKTpdi, KllTUKVplfVtlVf K(lTlini)l'T i^€ll', K(lTa(f)lX€lV, KaVXU(T0lU,
KXarrpii, Kopdamv, K<')<f)ivoi, XtddrrTpdyrot. XiKpnv, ptcrovvKTWv, poyi-
XtiAos, pvKTTjpi^fiv, vfoprjvia, vIkos, vvfTrd^dv, inKOvptvT) (ij), opoOvpa-
' Dciiistnann, Bibtlsiudieti, pp. 106, 138.
454 The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study.
fioi/, ocrrpaKivos, Trayidevecv, Traiddpiov, irapadeiyfiaTi^eiv, TrapaKOvfiv,
TrapfTTidrjpos, TrdpoiKos, wepiKe(j)a\aia, nepiXviros, Trepl^copos, irepi-
yj/Tjpa, TTTjpa, TrXford^eiv, iroXvXoyia, TTokvirpaypovelv, tt pocrrfKvTOS,
7rpo(TKf(f)d\aiov, pdmcrpa, pvprj, (rayrjvrj, aiKepa, aivdcjv, (TKoXoylr,
(TTevox^copia, avWoyi^f(T0ai, avp^i^d^et-v, avp<pvTos, Tap{i)e'iov, rerpd-
8pa^pov, rpvpaXia, Tvpiravl^eiv, VTToypappos, (pipovv, ^^oprd^eLV,
Xpr]paTi^eiv, yj/fvboTT po(f){]Tr]s. To these may be added a consider-
able class of words which are based on LXX. words though they do
not occur in the LXX. ; e.g. : dTrpoacoTTokrjpirTws, ^dirTiap.a {-p6s),
Saipovi^eadai, irvevfiariKos, crapniKos, i//'ewS6;^pi(rrof.
(r) The influence of the lxx. is still more clearly seen in
the N.T. employment of religious words and phrases which
occur in the lxx. at an earlier stage in the history of their use.
The following list will supply illustrations of these :
aydnrj, ctymrrjTos, ayiu^eiv, dyiaapos, dSeX^dy, ddoKipos, aiptaii,
aladrjTrjpun', aKpoymvunos, dvddepn, di/a^coTrvpelv, dvaKaivi^eiv, dva-
(TTpocf)!}, dvaToXrj, dve^L)(^via(rTOS, aTrapxi], dvavyaapa, acfteais, d(po-
pi^fiv, ^aTTTi^eiv, fieliaici)(Ti.s, j^XaaCJyrjpelv, y(i^o(f)vXdKiov, yeevva,
ypapparevs, ypajyopelv, daipoviov, SiadrjKT), 86ypci, e'dvi], elprjviKos,
flprjvoTToielv, eKKXrjaia, eKaraais, eXfT]po(rvv>], ivipyeta, i^opoXo-
yeiadai, e^ovcrla, eirepuiTrjpa, eTTiaKOTros, eTTKrvvayeiv, enKpdveia,
ejrixoprjyelv, eroipaaia, evayyeXi^fcrdai, evap€(TTelv , evdoKia, evXajdeia,
^T]Xa>TT)s, ^coypelv, ^cooyovelv, dtXijpa, 0pi]aiceia, IXaapos, IXaarrjpiov,
lovBaicrpos, KaraXXayrj, Knrdvv^is, Krjpvypa, Kvf^epvrjcris, Kvpios,
XfiTovpyflv, Xoyos, Xoipos, Xvrpovadai, peyaXeiorrjs, pfyaXcoavvrj,
perapeXfia, pfrecopi^fcrdai, povoyevr]s, pop<pr], pvaTrjpLOV, ve6(pvTos,
oXoKXrjpos, opdoTopflv, ocrioTris, irapa[3oXi], TrapdSetcros, irdpoiKOS, Tret-
paapos, Trepiovcrios, Trepioxr], TrepnroLeladai, wiaTis, 7rXTjpo(pop€iadai,
7rXr]p(x>pa, Trvdpa, TrpeajUvTepos, irpoadyeiv, pveadat, adp^, ctkov-
8aXov, aKXrjpoTpdxTjXos, crepvos, avveidrjcris, (T<ppayi^eiv, cr(OTr]pia,
rdprapos, vnocrTacris, vcrTeprjpa, "Y'^icrros, <piXdv6poo7ros, (f>a)S, x^'
puKTTjp, xfipoypa(f>ov, xpi-o'Tos. Many of the characteristic phrases
of the N.T. also have their roots in the LXX., e.g. eiKcjv 6eov
(Gen. i. 26), oapi] (vmSms (viii. 21), ndpoiKOs koI TrapeniSijpos
(xxiii. 4), irpoacoTTov irpos irpacrcoTrov (xxxii. 30), Xaos irepiovaios
(Exod. xix. 5), 80^0 Kvplov (xl. 29), dva-la alveaeais (Lev. vii. 2),
Xap^dvfiv Trpt\iT(x)TTov (xix. 1 5), jj biacrnopd (Deut. xxx. 4), yej'ea
8ie(TTpapp4vri, aKoXid (xxxii. 5), pr] ytvoiro (J OS. xxii. 29), tAewy aoi
(2 Regn. XX. 20), piKpuv Scrov ocrov (xxvi. 20), bid^oXos (i Chron.
XXi. l), TO aCiTTIpiOV TOV dfOV (Ps. XCvll. 3), 6)S?) KUlVrj, OVOpU
Kaivov, and the like (Ps. cxliii. 9, Isa. Ixii. 2, &c.), Kvpios 6 -nrav-
roKparaip (Am. ix. 5), BovXos Kvplov (Jon. i. 9), rpdire^a Kvplov
(Mai. i. 7), rjp4pa eiria-Kmriis (Isa. x. 3), rjpepa Kvpinv (xiii. 6, 9),
6 TTois [rov 6eov^ (xli. 8, &:C.), e'-yoj elpi (xliii. 10), eK KoiXlas prjrpos
The Greek Vej-sions as aids to Biblical Study. 455
(xlix. l), TO. TTfTftva Tov ovpavov (Ezech. xxxi. 6), 6 Fay Koi Mayw-y
(xxxviii. 2).
The non-canonical books have their full share in the contri-
bution which the Septuagint makes to the vocabulary of the N.T.
Many Biblical words either occur for the first time in the O.T.
* Apocrj'pha,' or reach there a further stage in the history of
their use, or appear in new combinations. The following ex-
amples will repay examination : aiwi', airavyaajxa, anoKakv^ti, uno-
aroXrj, davvfTos, afpeais, ^awTi^fiv, /iiatrtXfi'a {roii d(ov), duifjioi'Lov,
BiaKOvluj diairovfiaOaiy diKaioiiv, eK/Sacrij, e/cXfRrciy, fnlBareveiv, iiri-
(TKonoi, f7ri(TTpo(f)j], eniTifMia, eTriifydveta, (vawXay^vos, fv^^apiaria,
1810s, iXaapos, iXu(TTi]piov, Kavoiv, KXrjpos, KXrjpovv, koivos, koivovv,
Koa-fios, KTiais, Xfirovpyia, Xfirovpyos, pvcrTTjpiov {tov deoii), vdpos,
rrapovcria, ■n-evrrjKoaTr], frrjpeia nai ripura, (TKiivhiiKi^fiv, avpTTudfia,
(Tvpnade'iv, ao)Ti]p, x^^P'-^ '^"'' fXeos, j^pttrros.
(d) "The great majority of N.T. words and phrases
express... the conceptions of a Semitic race, and... must con-
sequently be examined by the light of. ..the lxx." But the
connotation will usually be found to have undergone con-
siderable clianges, both in ordinary words and in those which
are used in a religious sense. In order to trace the process
by which the transition has been cflected the N.T. student
must begin with an investigation into the practice of the
I, XX. Such an enquiry may be of service in determining the
precise meaning wliich is to be given to the word in the
N.T., but it will uKjre frequently illustrate the growth of
religious thought or of social life which has led to a change
of signification. l)r Hatch indeed laid down as "almost
self-evident" canons the two propositions (i) that "a word
which is used uniformly, or with few and intelligible exceptions,
as the translation of tiie same Hebrew word, must be held to
have in Biblical Greek the same meaning as that Hebrew
word"; and (2) that "words which are used interchangeably as
translations of the same Hebrew word, or group of cognate
words, must be held to have in Biblical Greek an allied or
virtually identical meaning'." These principles 
Open Library
