Skip to main content

Full text of "An introduction to the Old Testament in Greek. Rev. by Richard Rusden Ottley. With an appendix containing the letter of Aristeas edited by H. St. J. Thackeray"

See other formats



C. ]". CLAY, Mana<;kr 

1ianl5on: FETTER LANV:, E.C 

Etimlnirglj : loo PRINCES STREET 









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. 


First Edition, ujoo. Revised, 1902. Seeond Edition, 1914. 

>4// ri splits reserved 



Vu. ET Tn.FX 


OPriME MERiri 



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. 


May II, r9i4. 


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 


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 

H. B. S. 







_, The Alexandrian Greek Version i — 28 



Later Orctk Versions 29 — 58 


The Hexapla, and the Hexaphirir and otlier Recensions 

of the Septuagint 59 — 86 


Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint . . 87 — 121 


Manuscripts of the Septuagint 122 — 170 


I'rinted Texts of tlie Septuagint . . . , 171 — 194 

^•j Contents. 

TART 11. 



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

Books of the Hebrew Canon 231—264 

y Books not included in the Hebrew Canon . . 265 — 28S 

The Greek of the Septuagint 2S9--314 

The Septuagint as a Version 315 — 341 

Text divisions: .S7/</;/, Chapters, Lections, Gi'/<?;;.7(',&c. 342 — 366 




Literary use of the Septuagint by non-Christian Hel- 
lenists 369— 3S0 

Quotations from the Soptiiagint in the New Testninent 381 — 405 

Contents. xiii 


pp. 498-530 


.Quotations from the Scpluagint in early (Jluibtian 

writings 406 — 432 


riie Cretl< Veisions as aids to Biblical Study . • 433 — 461 


inllucnce of the Septuagint on Christian Liltraliire . 402 — 477 


Textual condition of the Scptuayint, and problems 

arising out of it . 478 — 497 


The Letter of Pseudo-Aristkas. 

Introduction ';33 — 55^ 

Te.M 551—606 


i. Index of Biblical references ..... 609— 616 

ii. index ol bubjetl-matter 617-626 





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. 


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. 


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 

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 

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 

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- 

^ 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- 

" 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 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- 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 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. 


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- 

• 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). 


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 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. 


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 

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. 

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- 

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. 



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] . .'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). 


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— ^ 


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 


Kol Tracras Tas<; ^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 


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- 

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. 


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- 
Ktti dvTa7roSoo"iv a/xapTwXwv 
'oTt au, Kvpie, 7^ cAttis ftou* 
TOV vipLcrrov e6ov KaTaffivyijv 
'°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 


aTTO Srjyfxov 8aifj.[ovi^ovTO^ fx.e- 
^Treaetrat. drro TrXayiov a^ov 
Ktti fxvpia<; airb Sc^l^wv aov^ 
7rpo9 ere ou 7rpoa€yy[i(r€i]" 
*€KTOs iv 6(f>9aXfji.OL<; ^aov Ittl- 
Koi airoTLaiv daefiiav oij/rj. 

CTi av, ^^^^, eATTi's /xou* 
vxpLOTov i6r]Ka<i oIktqtijplov 
'°ov fieraxOijaiTaL Trpb<; ak KaKta, 
KOL d(f)rj ovK iyyiacL iv aKiirrj 
"oTL ayycAot? avrov evreAetTat 
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^- 

* 11 Tttij oSois] pr vaaais A(R)T 

" MS. AeeNA. 


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, 
(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, 

"OTI IBoi) ol i^OpoC (70V ttTTO- 

KOI ^LaaKopTTiuB-qaovrai irdv- 
res 01 ipya^o/xevoi rijv 


^[ort r]vcf)pavd<i fxe, ^^]^^, ev 
Karepyw aov, 
[cv TToiT^jLiacrt] ^cipwv trou 


*[<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 
®€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- 

[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 



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 

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- 

'^ O. T. in Greek, iii. pp. vii. fF., 320 f. 


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). 


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 

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 

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 
{ 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 

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. 

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' 







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. 


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 

[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. 

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 

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/' 

a-Xpi': OVK iiroir)(T( yyjv, 8to8ous koX Ki(f>aXr]v Kovetav Trj<; 


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. 


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 


xlv. (xlvi.) 

I 3 










mp "'32'? 


Twv vlS>v Kope 

nioby hv 

aX • aXfi(o6 

tVl vfavtorqTOiv 




wt> D^^^x 

fXaetfi • Xavov 


[6 6ebs fjplv (?)] 

tyi HDHD 

ftacre • ovo^ 

AttI? (cal Kparos, 






(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 



iv rm avTdhXa(T<Tf(7da 






(cat iv T« (T<pakkea6a 






(V Kap8ia 




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

* 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 



tS)v v'lSyv Koyje 
virep tS>v alaviwv 

6 ^60? fjfMlV 

ire7roidr)(ris koI lax^s, 

fvpitTKoyLevos <T(f>6dpa. 

dia TOVTO 

oi (f>o^r}di](T6pfda 
fv ra* <Tvyx(1<T6ai 

fv Kapbii} 

* MS. reus. 

Ps. xlv. (xlvi.) I — 3. 


(IS TO TeXos' 

VTrep tS)v vimv* Kopf 

VTrep tS)v Kpv(f)i<ov 

6 deos fjpmp f 
KUTciCpvyrj Koi 8vvapis, 


Tois fiipovaais fjpas'l. 

8ia TOVTO 

ov (f>o^T)dr}(r6pfda 

(V TO) Tapd(r(Tea0ai 

Trjv yrjv 

Koi pfTaTtdfadai 


(V Kapbla 


* With interlinear 
variant toij \ildi% (Tli.). 

t MS. 1" manu rifuv 
{?Aq. Sym.). 

X With interlinear 


T^ VlKOTTOia*- 

Tols viols K6p( 

VTTfp tS)v Kpvcbimv 


f /J ^ t ^ 

o aeos Tjp<ov 

KaTa(pvyfi koi dvvapis, 


iv dXiyfrfa-iv 

(vpeBrjf (T(f)68pa. 



ov (Po^Tjdr](r6peda 

fv ro) Tapuaaeadai 

TTjv yfjv 

Koi aaXevfcrdai^ 


iv Kapbia 

* 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 

^ 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 
^,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. 


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 

' 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 

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 

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 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- 

* 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 

^ 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, />. 


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. 

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 
^^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. 


^'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 

* cod. demiserunt 



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

habet aurum t 

tollatadme; et dede- 
runt mihi, et proieci 
in ignem, et exivit 

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. 


Ancietit Versions based tipon the Septuagint. 91 


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- 

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 

We proceed to give a list of the extant remains of the Old 
Latin Version of the lxx., and the editions in which they are 

Old 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', 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, 

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., 

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). 


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). 


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). 


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 

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 

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 


bum evangolizantibus 
virtute multa; '^rex 
virtutu 111 dilecti,et spe- 
cie! domus dividere 



"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). 


lOO Ancient Versions based upon the Septiiagint. 


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. 


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. 


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." 


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 

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 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 

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 


/ {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 


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. 


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 


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. 


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 

* 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 

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 , 


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, 

(.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. 


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. 


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 

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



Name of Codex. 


Present locality. 
























ix — X 







IV + V 




Leyden, Paris, St 




St Petersburg 

CIII = i 

3 I 











V — vi 










viii — ix 



















Leipzig, St Petersburg 






























Fragmenta Tischendoifiar 




viii — ix 

Grotta ferrata 



iv — V 




V — vi 




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. 


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. 


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. 


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 

^ 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- 

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. 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 

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 

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. 

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. 


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 

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. 



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 

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 


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 

(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 

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 — 


16. Octateuch (xi) 

17. Genesis, cat. (x) 

1 8. 



(A) The Octateuch. 

Rome, Vat. Palat. Gr. 

Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. 

Florence, Laur. v. 38 
Moscow, Syn. 5,Vlad. 

Florence, Laur. Med. 

Pal. 242 (formerly 

at Fiesole) 

Klostermann, Anal. 

p. 1 1 n. 
Hexaplaric in early 

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 



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) 

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. 


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 


78. Gen., Ex., cat. Rome, Vat. Gr. 383 Field, i. p. 78 


79. Gen., ep. Arist., Rome, Vat. Gr. 1668 

cat. (xiii) 

82. Octateuch. ..(xii) Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. 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 

93. Ruth... (xiii) London, B. M. Reg. Lucianic (Lagarde's 

i. D. 2 tn in "Lucian") 


Manuscripts of the Septiiagint. 1 5 1 


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- 

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 

133. Excerpts from l.cvdcn, Univ. 


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?///- 
pp. II2ff. 

Josh.— Ruth (x London, B.M. Add. Continuation of E (p. 

— xi) 20002 134) with Peters- 
burg Ixii. See next 

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 


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) 


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 


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 


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. 

Octateuch (a.d. Athos, Laur. y. 112 Hexaplaric readings 

1013) (a few) 

Genesis,ffl/.(?xi) Constantinople, 224 

(formerly 372) 
Octateuch... £•«/. Athens, Bibl. Nat. 43 

Octateuch.. .(xiii) Athens, Bibl. Nat. 44 Lucianic(?) 
Octateuch, cat. Smyrna, (txo\ti evayy. 

Niceph. (xii) i 

Pentateuch, cat. Patmos, 216 

Num. — Ruth, Patmos, 217 

cat. (xi) 
Heptateuch (z;«- Patmos, 410 

perf.) (xiii) 
Pentateuch, test. Patmos, 411 

xii. pair, (xv) 
Octateuch... (x Sinai, i 

Pentateuch, cat. Sinai, 2 

Octateuch... (ix Jerusalem, H. Sepul- 

med.) chre 2 

Genesis, cat. (xii Jerusalem, H. Sepul- 

— xiii) chre 3 

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. 

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, 

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) 

71.. .2 Esdr., I — 3 Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. I 

Mace, Esth., 

Judith, Tob. 

74. ..I— 2 Esdr., I — 4 Florence, St Mark's 

Mncc, Esth., 

Judith, Tolx 

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) 


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 

244. I — 4 Regn. (x) Rome, Vat. Gr. 333 





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 


..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 

..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. 


(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. 


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 


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 


102. Psalms, cant. Oxford, Christ Ch. I 


103. Prov. i. — xix. Vienna, Th. Gr. 25 Klostermann, pp. 6, 

(xv) 18 

Manuscripts of the Septjiagiiit. 


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 


113. Psalms, frt/. (a. D. Milan, Ambr. B. 106 


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 


142. Psalms, LO)/i»i. Vienna, Th. Gr. 10 

(Nessel 8) 

143. Vs^\ms, proocm. Vienna, Th. Gr. \<) 

145. Psalms, cant, (x) Vellctri, I'.or<(. 

146. Psalms (x) [Cod. Fr. Xavicr] In Capitular Lib. 


147. Prov.— Job, cat. Oxford, Bodl. Laud. Klostermann, p. 51 
... (xiii) 30 

149. Job, Prov., Eccl., Vienna, Th. Gr. 7 
Cant., Sap., 

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) 


A Graeco-Latin MS. 
Now in St Mark's 
Lib. Venice 


Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 

155. Psalms (xii — (Cod. Meermanni II) Now Bodl. Misc. Gr, 


156. Vs?i.\ms,interli)i. Basle, A. 7. 3 

157. Job, Prov.,Eccl., Basle, B. 6. 23 
Cant., Sap. 

159. Eccl.,Prov.(part), Dresden, i 


160. Job (xiv) Dresden, 2 

161. Job, Prov.,Eccl., Dresden, 3 

Cant, (xiv) 


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, 

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, 


165. Psalms (xiv) London, B. M. HarL 


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. 


174. Psalms {Latin, London, B. M. HarL 

Arabic) (a.d. 5786 


175. Psalms (xi) London, B. M.2. 

176. Psalms, catit. London, B. M. Harl. 


' 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 


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 


185. Psalms, comm. Vienna, Th. Gr. 18 


186. Psalms, co?nm. Vienna, Th. Gr. 13 


187. Psalms {ttnperf.) Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. 


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. 


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. 


192. Psalms (/////><r/;) Paris, Nat. Gr. 13 

cant, (xiii) 

193. Psalms, cant. Paris, Nat. Gr. 21 


194. Psalms, cant. Paris, Nat. Gr. 22 


195. Psalms, cant. Paris, Nat. Gr. 23 


196. Psalms (inc. ii. Paris, Nat. Gr. 25 

3), cant, (xii) 

197. Psahns, cant. Paris, Nat. Gr. 29 


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. 


202. Psalms, cant.^ Oxtord, iiodl. Cromw. 

comtn. 110 

S. S. XI 


Manuscripts of the Septuagint, 


Psalms, catit.. 

Oxford, Bodl. Laud. 

prayers (a.d. 

C. 41 



Psalms {tmperf.) 

Oxford, Bodl. Laud. 

schol.^ prayers 

C. 38 


Psalms, cant. 

Cambridge, Trin. 


Psalms, cant. 

Cambridge, Gonville 

Facsimile in Harris, 


& Caius Coll. 348 

Leicester codex 


Psalms {imperf.\ 

Tubingen, (cod. 




Psalms (xiv) 

[Cod. Demetrii v.] 


Psalms, cant. 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 1541 


Psalms {itnperf.) 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 1542 


Psalms {tmperf.) 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 1848 


Psalms, cant. 


Rome, Vat. Gr. 1870 


Psalms, cant. 
(a.d. ioii) 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 1873 

Klostermann, p. 13 


Psalms, cant, (x) 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 1927 


Psalms, cant. 
(a.d. 1029) 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 341 


Psalms, li. — liii. 
(xiii — xiv) 



Psalms, cant. 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 20 

220 = 

= 186 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 13 


Psalms, ix. — cl., 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 16 


Psalms, cant. 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 21 


Psalms, cant. 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 22 


Psalms, cant. 

Bologna, 720 


Psalms, cant.., 

Rome, Barber, i (Gr. 

prayers (x) 



Psalms {tmperf.) 

Rome, Barber. 2 (Gr. 

cant.., prayers 




Job, &c. (xiii) 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 1 764 


..Prov., Eccl., 

London, B. M. Harl. 




..Prov., Eccl, 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 346 

Hexaplaric readings 

Cant., Job, 

Field, ii. p. 2 

Sap., Sir., &c. 


Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 163 

249. Job, Sap., Sir., Rome, Vat. Pius i Field, I.e. 


250. Job (xiv) Munich, Elect. 148 Field, /.f. 

251. Job, ^^a/.. Psalms Florence, Laur. v. 27 


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 


261. Job, Prov., Eccl., Florence, Laur. vii. 30 

Sap. (xiv) 

263. Psalms Copenhagen, Royal 


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 


267. Psalms, cant. Rome, Vat. Ottob. 

(xiv) (ir. 294 

268. Psalms, eat., Rome, Vat. Gr. 2057 Cf. Field, ii. p. 84 


269. Psalms, coiitm. Rome, Vat. I'al. Gr. 

Athen. (a.D. 44 


270. Psalms, cant. Rome, Vat. Gr. 1864 


271. Psalms, comm. Rome, Vat. Gr. 1747 


272. Psalms (imperf.) Romr, Vat. Pal. Gr. 

((//. (xiii) 247 

273. Psalms, tvj/.(,xiv; Rome, Vat Regin. Cf. Field, ii. p. 84 

Gr. 40 



Manuscripts of the SepUiagint. 

274. Psalms {imperf.) 

comm. (xiii) 

275. Psalms,<ra«/.(xii) 

277. Psalms, cant. 
■z'jZ. Psalms (xii — 

279. Psalms, cant. 

(xiii — xiv) 

280. Psalms (xi) 

281. Psalms (xi) 

282. Psalms (xv) 

283. Psalms (xii) 

284. Psalms, cant. 


285. Psalms, cant. 


286. Psalms, comm. 


287. Psalms {imperf^ 

comm. (xii) 

288. Psalms, comm. 

Thdt. (xii) 

289. Psalms, cofnm. 


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. 


295. Prov., comrn. Rome, Vat. Ottob. 

Procop. (xiv) Gr. 56 

296. Prov.— Sir. (xiii) Rome, Vat. Palat. Gr. 


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. 

300. Cant., comm. [Cod. Eugenii 3] 

302. Prov....(ix) = io9 
Psalms,A.u.io66 London, B. M. Add. 

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 


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. 

96. Isa., Jer., Ezek., Copenhagen See note on 87 


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. 


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) 


148. Daniel (xii) Rome, Vat. Gr. 2025 

153. Prophets (exc. Rome, Vat. Pal. Gr. Lucianic (Cornill) 

Zech.), comm. 273 

1 85. ..Dodecaproph. Vienna, Th. Gr. 18 Lucianic (Cornill) 

198. Prophets (im- Paris, Nat. Gr. 14 = Ev. 33. Burkitt, 

perf.) (ix) Tyconius, p. cviii 

228. ..Prophets (xiii) Rome, Vat. Gr. 1764 Hesychian (Cornill, 

but cf. Kloster- 
mann, p. I3f. Cor- 
nill's 0) 

229. ]tr.,T)2in.,comm. Rome, Vat. Gr. 673 


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 


304. Isaiah i. — xxv. Florence, Laur. iv. z 

comm. Basil. 

305. Isaiah (imperf.), Copenhagen, Reg. 


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. 


310. Dodecapr.,j<r/z(9/. Moscow, Syn. 209 

31 1... Prophets (xi) = 

...Prophets (ix, Jerusalem, H. Sepul- 
med,) chre 2 

III. Lectionaries. 

From the second century the Greek-speaking Churches, 
following the example of the Hellenistic Synagogue, read the 
Greek Old Testament in their public assemblies. 

Justin, .(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- 
„ 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). 



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 

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 | 


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. 


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- 

(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- 

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- 

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- 

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 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;, 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. 


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 


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. 


C. L. F. Hamann, Jena, 1874: Cantictitn Moysi ex Psalterio 
quadruplici, . .vianu scriplo quod Ba/ndergae asservatur. 


A. Masius, Antwerp, 1574: losuae iviperatoris historia. 
Readings are given from the Codex Syro-hexaplaris Ambrosi- 


J. Ussher, 1655 (in his Syntagma, Works, vol. vii.). Two 
texts in parallel columns (i) "ex codice Romano," (2) "ex codice 

O. F. Fritzsche, Zurich, 1867: liber 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 


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, 


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, qiiinquagena prima^). 


Patrick Young, 1637 (in the Catena of Nicetas). 
J. TerrentiuSj Franeker, 1663. 


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). 


J. Philippeaux, Paris, 1636; Hos. i. — iv., after Cod. Q. 
D. Pareus, Heidelberg, 1605 : Hoseas conimentariis illus- 


Vater, Halle, 18 10. 

W. O. E. Oesterley, Cambridge, 1902 (parallel texts of Q, 22). 

S. Miinster, 1524, 1543. 

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. 

Kyper, Basle, 1552 : Libri tres de re gramm. Hebr. lin^. (Hebr 
Gr., Lat.). 

^ See also Nestle in Hastings, D. B. iv. 441. 


Printed Texts of the Septuagint. 193 


'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- 

\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. 


Reusch, Bonn, 1870: Libcllus Tobit e cod. Siiiaitico. 

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- 

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- 

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^ 







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. 


Transliteration i 


Vulgate Latin 





Tm£^ n^x) 

OveXe fffjiu)6 








"AfAfies (p€Ku5el/j,^ 

' Apidfjioi 


Dnn"^n ni?x 

EXe a55e^apeifi 




'iwffove ^h '^oiv 









fa, /3' 
BactXeiwi' < 

(-1, 2 


Ova/j./x^\X Anj8t5» 

Kegum < 

'.3. 4 

•')n;y^7, njrt?'; 




T : : ■ > T : : • 




















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 




Vulgate Latin 







mm, D-im 




' Afx^aKo6/jt 






' Ayy aios 



T : ~ ; 



• T ; - 




200/) Oi 











Dn':;'n t;^ 

Sip acrcif)i/M 

AfffjLa, g.(XfxaTa 

Canticiiiu canti- 








Tlireni, Lamen- 









•■ • T 





T : V 



Esdias I, -2 


AaftpT] lafidv 


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' 



German & 




French MSS. 



I Tora/i 





II Nchiini 






J oshua 













I, 1 Samuel 





I, 2 Kings 
















xii Prophets 

xii Prophets 

xii Prophets 

xii Prophets 













III Kcthubim 






















Song of Song^ 


Song of Songs 






Song of Songs Song of Song 

s Lamentations 

Song of Songs Lamentations 

























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) 


' ApiOfioi 





BaaiXeiwi' a' — 5' 

IlapaXeiirop.ifui' a', ft' 

'Eaopas a, ft' 



"Loipia '^(tpdx 

' EaOrip 













' KiriffTo\j] \tfi(filov 



Codex Sinaiticus (K) 





llafia\enro/.i.ei>wt> a', f/3'] 
"EcrSpas [a'j, ft' 
MaKKaftaiujv a, 3' 

Qprjvoi, 'lepefuov 


' AfiftaKoi'ip. 

' Ayyalo% 



»PoX/io2 ^ao pi'a' (.f//Afcr.) 

Wapoifiiai ft ^o\o/x(i!VTOf sn/'scr.] 


'^oifila. L'aXo^uij'Tov 
^o(f>la 'hjjou viuu ^iipdx 
'I dp 

202 Titles^ Grouping, Nimiber^ and Order of Books. 

Codex Alexandrinus (A) 


'IrjcroOs vlbs Naui} 

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' 


QpTJvos [ + 'lep€/j.iov, snbscr.'] 

'ETTccrroXTj 'lepefilov 
'le^eKLrfX irpo<pr)T7)S le' 
Aavn)\ [ + Trpo<prjT7]S tS"', 
IwjSLt (Tw/3eir, siibscr.) 
"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/.) 


catal. ] 

Codex Basiliano-Venetus (N + V) 

(N) Aevi.Ti.Kbv 

HaffLXeiwu a — 5' 
llapa\ei.irof.iii'iov a', /3' 
"EcrSpa? [a'], fi' 

(V) 'Wp (subscr.) 
'A(r/xa j.(7fidTiov 
Ijocpia SoXo/xuivros 
"Zorpla 'l7]<Tov vlov Stpdx 






MaKKapaLwv a — 5' 


2ipax (SetpaXi 

4'aX/ioi 2oXo/-> 



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 


']ij<xoui Nau^ 



\ lapaXiiTTo/j.^fwi' ovo 

4'a\/ui2yi' Aa/3t5 

i^aXo/tttDi/os Ilapoi/ti'ai, 17 Kai 2oi/n'a' 

'jJllTyUa (f.ff/ld.TU)!' 





2. Origeii («/. Eus. H.E. vi. 25). 

' KpiQjxol 



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 


'lepepdai aiiv (Jpi'ivois Kal tj; 'Etti- 

(TToX^ iv ivL 

"Efu) 0^ TovTUf iarl 

3. Athaiiasius (c/. /<rj/. 39, 
Mitjiic, /^.O". xxvi. 1436). 



' ApiOfjioL 


'l-qaov^ 6 Tov Nai/j) 

' 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 


4. Cyril of Jerusalem (Calcch. iv. 35). 
Ai Mwa^cos irp^Tai irCvTi ftiftXoi 




'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. 


Oi dihdsKa 


'lepe/j-las Kal avv ouTCjJ Bapoi'x, 
Qpfjvoi, 'EiriaToXij 


"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 



To. 5k <TTixy)pik Tiyxo-vei irivre 




''Acrp.a q.<Tfj.dTuv {iwTaKaiS^KaTOv 
'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 


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 


(Viveffis — AevT€poi>6jj.wv) 
llivT€ (TTixvpeis 

('Ici))3, '^aXr-qpiov, llapoifxiai Za- 

XoflQvTOS, 'EKKXTjdiaCTTTIS, '^J^ff/xa 

"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 

'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 
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- 

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- 
Tyi'Toif vpofftypKlfovffi tV 'EtOtj/) 

(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' 
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 (?) 


2o6 Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 










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 

Anonyiui tiiai. Tiinothei et Aqiiilae. 

TeVecns ^ 


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- 

T6 8<xj5cKawp6(p-i]rov' 

'lepefiiai, 'lejeKnJX, 



'H '^ofpia 1,o\ofj.u>i>Tos 

'H wo^ia 'IijiroD i/toO Sipdx 


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) 

lesu Nave 

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 
Pro7't-rl)ia (ii) 

Salonionis Provei;1)iornm 
lesu fiiii Sirach 
[Adiungunt quidam lil)r. Sa|>i- 

entiae ct Cautica Cantico- 

Dot^tnaliia (i) 

12. Pseuilo Atli.uiasii syn. sc>: siZi.r. 
(Migiie, i".C xxviii. sS^ft'.). 





'l7]<Tovi 6 Tou Nauv; 



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 


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, 
'Et^s 5f ^Tepoi T^aaapes 




'Ekt6s Si TOUTUV elai 7ra\tv ^repa 
(iifiXla K.T.\. (as in Atlianasius, 
but adding 

'MaKKaf-idiKa pift\la S' 


'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- 


'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.). 



Liber sacerdotuni 



Josue tilii Nun 




Liber Dal)ariamin 


Psahni David Regis 

Proverbia Salomonis 


Sirat Sirin 


Sapientia Magna 












Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 209 

B. "0(Toi avTiKi-^ovTai Kal ovk eKuXi]- 
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.). 


Y^vtats K6a/jLov 


"EfoSos ^? AlyvTTTov 








'Itjo-oOs Noi't) 


KpLTai, TuvO 

v ■ 

' E<TdT)p 


BairtXftwi' a', ^' 


Boo-tXetwc y', 5' 

la . 

Ilapa\inroniv<j}v a', /3' 


"Vjcopa^ a! , fi' 


]iili\oi Si'aX/JtDi' pu' 


llapotfilai 2o\o/iiorroj 




.^JjiOfia qiffjidrwi' 



IV . 

AwdfKa TTpO<t>flTai 



K . 

'Iffiffiias Kal Bapovx, S/J^i-oi Kal 
















Daniel Minor 

Epistola Banich 

Liber tradilionis Senionim 

Josephi proverbia 

Historia filioriim Samonae 

Maccab. iv] 
Liber Maccabaeorum (i — iii) 


I^ist in Coifii. Barncc. 306 ; 

ITepJ rCiv {' fiifi\tuy, koI oaa Toirruv 


a'. lVf«(r« 

,/3'. 'E^odof 

y'. A«i'tr(si«» 

5'. .\pi0fioL 

S. S. 


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 
^laKKa^atuv rpia 

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 


2IO Titles^ Grouping, Number^ and Order of Books. 








"^(T/JLa (^cr^drwj' 







Ka . 











. "Ayu/3a^'ol5/* 




' 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 

(Esaias, leremiaSjEzechiel, Daniel, 
xii Prophetarum liber i) 

Psalmi David 
Salomon[is] iii 

(Proverbia, Ecclesiastes, Cantica 

Sapientia Salomonis 

Sapientia Sirach ( = Ecclesiasticus) 



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). 


(^)iiinc|iie Moyseos [libri] 

(Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, 
Numeri, Deuleronomium) 
lesu Naue 

Regnorum libri iv 
Paraiipomenon libri ii 


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- 

(Isaias, lercmias, Daniel, 





4. Innocent I, (e^. ad Exsupertum). 

Moysi[s] libri quinque 

(Genesis, Exodi, Levilici, Nu- 
meri, Deuteronomii) 
lesu Naue 

Regnorum libri iv 

Prophetarum libri xvi 
Salomonis libri v 





Machabaeorum libri ii 

Esilrae libri ii 

Paraiipomenon libri ii 

5, I'scudo-Gclasiiis dccrtl. lic iibr. 

Moysis v libri : 





lesu Naue 
Regum i — iv 

6. Cassiodorius {He imt. Div. litt. 



I -eviticus 


I 'euteronomiuin 

lesu Nave 

Regum i — iv 

ParalipDmcnon i, ii 



' 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 

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, 

Paralipomena i, ii 

Psalmorum cl 

Salamonis libri iii 

(Proverbiorum, Ecclesiastes, 
Canticum Canticorum) 

Liber Sapientiae filii Siracis 

Alius subsequens liber Sapientiae 
Item historiarum: 





Macchabaeorum libii ii 

Salomonis libri v 

(Proverbia, Sapientia, Ecclesias- 
ticus, Ecclesiastes, Canticum 


(Isaias, Hiereniias, Ezechiel, Da- 
niel, Osee, Amos, Michaeas, 
Joel, Abdias, Jonas, Naum, 
Abbacuc, Sofonias, Aggaeus, 
Zacharias, Malachias, qui et 





Esdrae [libri] ii 

Machabaeorum libri ii 




7. Isidorus (^de ord. lihr. s. scr^. 

Quinque libri Moyseos 
lesu Nave, ludicum, Ruth 
Regum i — iv, Paralipomenon i, 
ii, Tobiae, Esther, ludith, 
Esdrae, Machabaeorum libri 

Prophetae: Psalmorum liber i, 
Salomonis libri iii (Proverbi- 
orum, Ecclesiastes, Cantica 
Canticorum), Sapientia, Eccle- 
siasticus, libri xvi Propheta- 

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. 



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 


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 ver. FlIIL-XX 

to. Liber sacranientorum (Bobbio, cent, 
vl, vii). 

Liber Genesis 

Libri mulierum 



Maccabeorum libri duo 


Regum quatluor 
Pr()i)hetarum libri xvi 
Daviticum v 
Solomonis iii 
Esdra i 

Fiunt libri Veteris numero 

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)- 

lesu Naue 

Regnorum libri iv 
Paralipomenon libri it 

Psalterium Davidicum 
Salomonis libri v 
xii libri Prophetarum 

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- 

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 

-' 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]^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 

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 

■* The N.T. members of the same class are the Teaching and the 

^ 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. 


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. 


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. 


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 

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. 

^ For the order of the books in Latin MS. Bibles see S. Berger, His- 
toire de la Vulgate, pp. 301-6, 331-9. 


Books of the Hebrew Canon. 

The books which are common to the Hebrew Bible and 
the Alexandrian 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. 


Books of the Hebrew Canon. 




xxxvi. 8*^ — 40 


xxxix. I — 31 


xxxvii. 1 — 2 


xxxvi. 8 — 9 


„ 8-6 


» .. 35—38 




xxxviii. 9 — 23 


xxxviii. 1 — 17 


xxxvii. I — 24 


„ 18—20 


xxxvi. 20 — 34 

21 — 24 


xxxviii. I — 7 


„ 25 


xxxvii. 29 


» 26 


xxxviii. 8 


'.' 27 


xl. 30 — 32 


xxxix. I — 10 


xxxviii. 24 — 31 


» 11 


xxxix. 32 


» 13—23 


» 33—43 


xl. 6"— 8, 1(^2 


5, 26, 



xl. 8—10, 12—27, 29, 33, 


1. 24—37 


1. 26—37, 24—25 


vi. 22 — 26 


VI. 22, 23, 27, 24, 25, 26 


xxvi. 15 — 47 


xxvi. 19 — 27, 15 — 18, 44 — 
47, 28—43 


ix. 3—33 


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 


„ 20 — 21, 22- 



„ 7—8, 2—4, 9—14 


V. I — 16, 17 


V. 15—30, 32»' 


vi. 2 — 3 


v. 31—32^ 


vi. 4—5, 6—7, 




vi. 37—38, 2—3, 14, 4 
—10, 15—36 


vii. I — 6, 7, 8 — 9, 10 — 


vii. 13 — 18, 21, 19 — 20, 

II, 12—13 

23—24, 26, 25 


vii. 14—37, 38 



vii. 27 — 51, I — 12 


X. 23-24% 24b 



ix. 15, 17 — 19, 20 — 22 


» 26—29 


X. 23 — 26 



V. I^ 


» 31—33 


X. 27 — 29 


xi. 3—8 


xi. 4, 3, 7, 5, 8, 6 


XX. xxi 


xxi. XX 


IS ix. 22 — 39 

Psainis x. I — 18 


X. — cxii 


xi. — cxiii 


cxiii. I — 8 


cxiv. I — 8 


cxiii. 9—^12 


cxv. I — 4 




cxvi. I — 9 




cxvi. 10 — 19 


cxvi.— cxivi 


cxvii. — cxlvii. 11 


cxlvii. I — 9 


cxlvii. 12 — 20 

Books of the Hebrew Canon. 


Prov. XV. 27'' — xvi. 4, 6, 9 

„ XX. IO» T2, 13^ 16, 17 


„ xxiv. 24—37, 38—49, 50— 
68, 69 — 77, xxix. 28 — 

Jer. XXV. 14 — 19 
„ xxvi. I 

" " .. 2—28 
xxix. I — 7 

„ 8-23 
XXX. I — 5, 6 — II, 12—27 

xxxii. I — 24 
xxxiv. I — 18 




xxxviii. 1—34, 35—37, 38— 

XXX ix 

„ li- 1—30. 31—35 
Ezcch. vii. 3 — 9 

10 i-t o_ 









Prov. xvi. 6, XV. 28, xvi. 7, xv 29 
„ xvi. 8—9, XV. 30—33^ 
„ xvi. 5, 4^ 

„ XXX. I — 14, XXIV. 23—34, 
XXX. 15— 33, xxxi. I— 9, 10 

Jer. xlix. 34* — 39 

» 36*' 
xlvi. 2 — 28 

xlvii. I — 7 
xlix. 7—22 

„ 1—5, 28—33, 23—27 

XXV. 15 — 38 

xxvii. 2 — 22 


xxxi. 1—34, 37, 35, 36, 38- 




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, 


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 — 

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. 

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 — 

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 

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 

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, 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 ( [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, 


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 


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. 

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. 


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 

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 

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. 


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. 

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.- 

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.). '^ 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 


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. 


cxlvii. (cxlvii. lo — 20). As cxlvi., except that 'AXX. is not in 


cxiviii. As cxlvi. but 'AXX. is here represented in ilfl both 
at the end of the preceding Psalm and at the beginning of Ps. 

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. 



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 


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- 


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. 
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. 

1 1. 



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 

'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)- 


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 

* 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 { 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. 


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, 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 


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 

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, 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 

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, 

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. 



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^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 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''. 


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 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^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. 


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^ 

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. 


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 

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 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- 


- 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 


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. 


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 

- 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 

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 

^ 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 

'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, 

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- 

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. 


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 





fjiOKXoi (MSS.) 




veocrcroi, -tri'a 



tfoacros, -tria 





















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,„ 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. 


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- 


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 

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$', 

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<>- 

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, 

(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, 

(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 

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' ((, 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''"// ■^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. 


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 
€( 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 


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),, 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." 


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 

I Es 

aKokov6(i>^-=-KaTa, dat. (2 Esdr., 

2 Mace.) 
dvayva>(TTr)i = ypaiiixaT€vs, 2 Esdr. 
avaTrXrjpaxTii (Dan.) 
dviepovv (3 Mace.) 
dvTiypa(f)ov (Esth., Ep.-Jer., I, 2 

dtrovoeia-dai (2 MaCC.) 
drroaTi ris (2 Esdr.) 
drjpayayyelv, -yia 
8ia8rjij.a (Esth., Sap., Isa., 2, 4 

toypariCfiv (Esth., Dan., 2, 3 

8vo-o■6^fla, -l-irjpa (2 Mace.) 
fldcoKelov (Dan., i Mace.) 

(Tna-TTfvdeiv (Esth.^, Prov.^) 
ipapivJ], T] (cod. B) 
evdap(Tr]S (l, 2 Macc.) 
fviTpenS>s (Sap.) 


fv(f)v7]s (Sap., 2 Mace.) 




KaTaXo^i(Tp,6s (l, 2 Chr.) 

KoXiiKevfiv (Job', Sap.^) 



p,avidKtj (Dan.) 





opKcopncria (Ez.) 

Tr€i6upx^eiv (Jen, Dan.) 

TTpoKadrjyeladai (cod. B) 


7rpo(rK.€(pdXaiov (Ez.) 


(ro)paTo(j)vXa^ (Judith, 2 Macc.) 

VTTopvrjpaTi^fi I' 

<l)opoXoyia (l Macc.) 




\pvcroxaXivos (2 Macc.) 

The Greek of the Septuagiiit. 



aTrn^av\xa(^fiv (Sir.) 
aiTOTV\i-ir av'i^nv (3 Macc.) 

apyiTzaTpiuiTi]'} (Jos.') 

Bidnvpni (3 Macc.) 
8iniKT)TT]i (2 Esdr., Tob.) 


fvopyi^f(r6ai (2 Macc.) 
ecTTuiTopia (4 Regn.) 


dfpparrin (Jer.') 
KrjXiboiadai (J<-T.) 

Konavi^dv (3 RcC^n.) 

fKU'Laiirjs (l Ksdr.') 

fifyaXftoTTis (i Esdr., Jer.') 

Tpoaoyj/Li (2 Macc.) 


(To(fii(rTT]s (Exod.') 







VTrepptyedrji (l Chr.) 

VTrfpv\lrovv (Fs.'') 


(f)i\6ao(}}()s (4 Macc.) 


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.) 


(ifldvarria (4 Macc.) 

riKtjXihojToi (Ps.') 


dX(t(nv(i't(Td(it (I's.') 




di'f KXiniji 





(iTrdro^ov, (innTo/Kot 


dTiprjTOi (3 Macc.) 


^(icTKavin (4 Macc.) 



dv(T)(pT]frTos (Isa.') 


tVtTf'/i'iftoy (i Clir., I — 3 Macc.) 
*ni(l)']pi(fiv (Ucut.') 
(ixXfTji (Jcr.') 


fiip<ip<l>ia (3 Marc.) 


Idii'injv (3 Macc.) 

• Cf. supra, p. 168 f., for some interesting examples from other parts 
nf the book. 


The Greek of the Septuagint. 


fiaKpo^ios (Isa.i) 
ofJLoioiradrjs (4 Macc.) 


napddo^os (Judith, Sir., 2, 4 


woXvyovos (4 Macc.) 
(TvX\oyi(Tp.6s (Ex.^) 
T€Kfir]piov (3 Macc.) 
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. 

























n poaavaXiyeadai 
IT poavnop.ip.vrj(TKiLV 



3 Maccabees. 



^apvr^xh^ , 

The Greek of the Septuagint. 

-1 I -> 










fiif porpayia 













4 Maccabees. 


















TTiiBoKpaTelaBai, -rla 



■n po(T(niKaTnT('iv(LV 





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. 


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 

(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., 

- 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}''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 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 

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 

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)^<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), 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., 
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 


with an Alexandrian version. '>?, 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). 



Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, 


The Greek Old Testament, as it appears in the editions 
of the last three centuries, is divided into chapters and verses 
which correspond generally with those of the printed Hebrew 

The traditional text-divisions of the Hebrew and the Greek 
Bible are not absolutely identical. Besides the more serious 
differences described in Part II. c. i., it not unfrequently happens 
that a Greek chapter is longer or shorter than the corresponding 
chapter of the Hebrew by a verse or more, and that as a con- 
sequence there are two systems of verse-numeration throughout 
the succeeding chapter^ 

A system of verse-division* is mentioned in the Mishnah 
{Meg. 4. 4, Kidd. 30. i). The Massorets noted the number 
of verses (D''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 

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 

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 



Cod. Clarotn. 

Mommsen's list. 

1 Kingdoms 

2 Kingdoms 


2240 j 



3 Kingdoms 


2203 j 



4 Kingdoms 



1 Paralip. 

2 Paralip. 


5500 j 


I Esdras 



2 Esdras 

5500 j 
































I 100 
























I 10 



























1 Maccabees 




2 Maccabees 


7y>'^ { 



3 Maccabees 



4 Maccabees 


' 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 

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; 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- 











350 Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 





2 Paralip. 

1 Esdras 

2 Esdras 







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. 

H.-P. 161, 248; Barb. iii. 36; 353, H.-P. 

(including asterisked lines, 1600 without 

them) H.-P. i6i(?), 248 ; Barb. iii. 36 
Barb. iii. 36; Ven. gr. i. 13 
Barb. iii. 36; Ven. gr. i. 13 
Barb. iii. 36 ; Ven. Marc. gr. xvi, 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 










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. 







































Ep. of Jeremiah 













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 

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. 




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": 












y 65'-' 



3 Kingdoms 






4 Kingdoms 


































I Kinj^donis 






2 Kingdoms 

1 1 

i\ .ill urn 




' .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. 


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. 


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. 

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- 


On offus r]fj.(pai kcit- 

TOtrai/Ta frrj eTroirj(rav 

llfpl Kope KUi Sadav kcu 
Ai'iipwv Kai Aivciv, 


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. 


rifpi r^f pdi38ov 'Aapa)v 
rrjs ^XacTTrjadarjs, 

llepl ^T)wv iiu(ri\e(i)s A- 
poppiiMV . 

'itluxrfjv napa Toii Kupe avva- 

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. 


The following ti'tXoi for Exod. ii. — viii. are taken from a 
Vienna MS. (Tli. gr. 3) : 



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. 




ii^' n/J.' 



























































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- 

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 

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|) 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, 


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- 

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'. 


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). 


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. 


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). 


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. 


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. 







Literary use of the lxx. by non-Christian 


I. A HAPPY accident has preserved fragments of the lost 
literature produced by the Hellenised Jews of Alexandria 
between the inception of the Alexandrian Version and the 
Christian era. The Greek historiographer, Alexander Corne- 
lius — better known as 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 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. 

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." 


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 

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. 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). 



Quotations from the lxx. in the New 

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 


xxi. 24 (Lev. xxiv. 20, 
Dent. xix. 21) 



xxii. 28 


xxiii. 5 

xxiv. 8 


ix. igf. 

XXV. 40 

viii. 5 

xxxii. I 


vii. 40 


I Cor. 

X. 7 

xxxiii. 19 


ix. 15 


xi. 44 f. (xix. 2, XX. 7, 26) 

I Pet. 

i. 16 

xii. 6, 8 


11. 22 {^ 

xviii. 5 (2 Esdr. xix. 29) 


X. 5, Gal. iii. 12 

xix. 18 


V. 43, xix. 19, xxii. 39, 
Mc. xii. 31, Lc. X. 27, 
James ii. 8, Rom. xiii. 
9, Gal. V. 14 

.\xvi.i if.(Ezek.xxxvii.27) 

2 Cor. 

vi. 16 


xvi. 5 

2 Tim. 

ii. 19 


iv. 35 


xii. 32 

vi. 4f. 


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 


xii. 2I(.?) 

xviii. I 5, 18 f. 


iii. 22 f., vii. 37 

xi.x. 15 


xviii. 16, Jo. viii. 17, 2 Cor. 
xiii. I 

xxi. 23 


iii. 13 

xxiv. I 


V. 31, xix. 7, Mr. X. 4 

XXV. 4 

I Cor. 

ix. 9, I Tim. V. 18 

xxvii. 26 


iii. 10 

xxix. 4 


xi. 8 



xii. 15 

XXX. 12 —14 


X. 6—8 

xxxi. 6, 8 (Jos. i. 5) 


xiii. 5 

xxxii. 21 


X. 19 


xii. 19, Heb. X. 30 

36 (Ps. cxxxiv. 14) 


X. 30 

43 (Ps. xcvi. 7) 

i. 6 

2 KC},'!! 

.vii. 8, 14 

2 Cor. 

vi. 18, Heb. i. 5 

3 Ht^K'i 

.xix. 10, 14, iS 


xi. 3f. 


ii. if. 


iv. 25 f. 


xiii. 33, Heb. i. 5, v. 5 

viii. 2 


xxi. 16 


1 Cor. 

XV. 27, Heb. ii. 6—8 

xiii. 3 (v. 10, ix. 28, XXXV. 


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-- 


XV. 8 — II 


ii. 25—28 

xvii. 50 


XV. 9 

xviii. 5 


x. 18 

xxi. 2 


xxvii. 46, Mc. XV. 34 


xxvii. 43 



xix. 24 



ii. 12 

xxiii. I 

I Cor. 

X. 26 

xxxi. I f. 


iv. 6—8 

xxxiii. 13 — 17 

I Pet. 

iii. 10—12 

xxxiv, 19 (Ixviii. 5) 


XV. 25 

xxxix. 7—9 


X. 5—7 

xl. 10 


xiii. 18 

xliii. 22 


viii. 36 

xliv. 7f. 


i. 8 f. 



iii. 4 

liv. 23 

I Pet. 

V. 7 

Ixvii. 19 


iv. 8 

Ixviii. 10 


ii. 17, Rom. XV. 3 

23 f. 


xi. 9 f. 



i. 20 

Ixxvii. 2 


xiii. 35 

Ixxxi. 6 


X. 34 

Ixxxviii. 21 


xiii. 22 

xc. I I f. 


iv. 6, Lc. iv. I of. 

xciii. II 

I Cor. 

iii. 20 

xciv. 8— II 


iii. 7 — II 

ci. 26—28 

i. 10 — 12 

ciii. 4 


cviii. 8 


i. 20 

cix. I 


xxii. 44, Mc. xii. 36, Lc. 
XX. 42 f., Acts ii. 34 f., 
Heb. i. 13 



V. 6 (vii. 17, 21) 

cxi. 9 

2 Cor. 

ix. 9 

cxv. I 

iv. 13 

cxvi. I 



cxvii. 6 


xiii. 6 

22 f. 


xxi. 42, Mc. xii. 10 f., 
Lc. x.x. 1 7, I Pet. ii. 7 


iii. 1 1 f. 


xii. 5f. 


J as. 

iv. 6, 1 Pet. V. 5 

xi. 31 

I Pet. 

iv. 18 

xxv. 2 1 f. 


xii. 20 

xxvi. II 

2 Pet. 

ii. 22 


V. 13 

I Cor 

iii. 19 


i. 10 

ix. 26 

Quotatious from tlie LXX. m the New Testament. 385 


ii. 23 


ix. 25 

vi. 6 


ix. 13, xii. 7 

xi. I 

ii. 15 

xiii. 14 

I Cor. 

XV. 55f. • 


V. 25, 27 


vii. 42 f. 

ix. II f. 

XV. 15—17 


V. 2 


ii. 5 (. (Jo. vii. 42) 


ii. 28—32 


ii. 17—21 


>• 5 

xiii. 41 

ii. 3£ 


i. 17, Gal. iii. 1 1, Ileb. x. 
2,7 i- 


iii. 2 



ix. 9 


xxi. 5, Jo. xii. 15 

xi. r3 

xxvii. 9f. 

xii. 10 


xix. ^7 

xiii. 7 


xxvi. 31, Mc. xiv. 27 


i. 2f. 


ix. 13 

iii. I 


xi. 10, Mc. i. 2, Lc. vii. 


i. 9 


ix. 29 

vi. y f. 


xiii. 14 f., Mc. iv. 12, Lc. 
viii. 10, Jo. xii. 40 f., 
Acts xxviii. 26 f. 

vii. 14 

i. 23 

viii. r4 


ix. 2,3, 1 l't;t. ii. 8 



ii. 13 

ix. 1 f. 


iv. I 5 f. 

x. 22 f. 


ix. 27 f. 

xi. 10 

XV. 12 

xxii. 13 

I Cor. 

XV. 32 

XXV. 8 


xxviii. 1 1 f. 

xiv. 21 



ix. 33, x. I r, I Tct. ii. 6 

xxix. 10 

xi. 8 



XV. 8f., Mc. vii. 6f. 


I Cor. 

i. 19 

xl- 3 5 


iii. 3, Mc. i. 3, Lc. iii. 
4—6, Jo. i. 23 

6 8 

I Fet. 

i. 24 f. 



xi. 34 f., I Cor. ii. 16 

xiii. I — 4 


xii. 18—21 

xlv. 23 


xiv. 1 1 

xlix. 6 


xiii. 47 


2 Cor. 

vi. 2 

Iii. =; 


ii. 24 

7(Nah. i. 15) 

X. 15 


2 Cor. 

vi. 17 















20 f. 




'• 4 


. if. 

Ixvi. I f. 




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 

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 





0. T. 



Mic. v. 2 
Hos. xi. I 
Jer. xxxviii. 15 





iii. 4 — 6 

Isa. xl. 3 — 5 



iv. 4 

Deut. viii. 3 


10 f. 

Ps. XC. I I f. 



Deut. vi. 16 




15 f. 

Isa. ix. I f. 






Exod. XX. 13 

Deut. xxiv. I 
Num. xxx. 3 (cf. Deut. xxiii. 

Exod. xxi. 24 
Lev. xix. 18 



Isa. liii. 4 


13 (xii. 7) 

Hos. vi. 6 





vii. 27 

Mai. iii. i 



Hos. vi. 6 
Isa. xiii. I 



iv. iSf. 

vi. 9 f. 
Ps. Ixxvii. 2 
Isa. Ixi. 1 (T. +lviii. 6 





Exod. XX. 12, xxi. 17 



Isa. xxix. 13 



Ixvi. 24 



X. 6 


Gen. i. 27-i-ii. 24 

18 f. 



xviii. 20 f. 

Exod. XX. 12 — 17 



Zech. i.>c. 91- Isa. Ixii. 1 r 




xix. 46 

Isa. Ivi. 74-Jcr. vii. 1 1 


Ps. viii. 2 




XX. 17 

cxvii. 22 f. 





Deut. XXV. 5 (cf. ( '.en. xxxviii. 




Exod. iii. 6 


29 f. 

X. 27' 

Deut. vi. 4f. 




Lev. xix. 18 
Deut. iv. 35 



XX. 42 f. 

I's. cix. 1 





XX ii. yj 

Dan. xii. 11 
Isa. liii. 12 





Zecli. xiii. 7 



xi. 13 




Ps. xxi. I 


388 Qtwtations from the LXX. in the New Testament. 

(2) Quotations in the Fourth Gospel. 


1. 23 
ii. 17 
vi. 31 

X. 34 
xii. 15 



xiii. 16 

XV. 25 

xix. 24 




xl. 3 


Ixviii. 10 


xvi. 4, 15 (Ps. Ix.wii. 24f.) 


liv. 13 


Ixxxi. 6 


ix. 9 


liii. I 

v1. 10 


xl. (xli.) 10 

xxxiv. 19 (Ixviii. 5) 

xxi. 19 


xii. 46 (Num. ix. 12, Ps. 

xxxiii. 21) 


xii. 10 

(3) Quotations in the Acts. 


1. 20 


Ixviii. 26 + cviii. 8 

ii. 17 — 21 


ii. 28 — 32 



XV. 8—11 

34 f. 

cix. I 

iii. 22 f. (vii. 27) 


xviii. 15, iSf. 



xii. 3 +xxii. iS 

IV. 25 f. 


ii. I f. 

vii. 3 


xii. I 


XV. i3f. 

27 f-, 35 


ii. 14 

33 f- 

iii. 6 8 


xxxii. 2;^ 

42 f. 


V. 25—27 

49 f. 


Ixvi. I f. 

viii. 32 f 

liii. 7 f. 

xiii. 22 


Ixxxviii. 21 etc. 


ii. 7 



Iv. 3 



XV. 10 



i- 5 



xlix. 6 

XV. r6— 18 


xii. 15 + Amos ix. 11 f.+ 
Isa. .xlv. 21 

xxviii. 26 f. 


vi. 9 f. 


Quotations f yon tlic LXX. in the Nezv Testament. 389 

(4) Quotations in tJie CatJiolic Epistles. 

James ii. 8 
iv. 6 

1 Peter i. 24 f. 

ii. 6 
iii. 10- 
iv. 18 
V. 7 

2 Peter ii. 22 
Jude 9 



xix. 18 


XX. 13 f. 


XV. 6 


iii. 34 


xl. 6—9 

xxviii. 16 


xxxiii. 12 — 17 


xi. 31 


liv. 23 


xxvi. u 


iii. 2 

(5) Quotations in the Episths of St Paul. 


1. 17 
ii. 24 
iii. 4 


iv. 3, 22 



vii. 7 
viii. 36 
ix. 7 




x. 6-9 



20 f. 


li. 4 


l.i. 5 



xiii. I — 3* 

cxlii. 2 


XV. 6 


xxxi. I f. 


xvii. 5 

XV. 5 


XX. 14, 17 


xliii. 23 


xxi. 12 

xviii. 10 

XXV. 23 


i. 2 f. 


xxxiii. 19 

i.\. 16 


i. 10 


X. 22 f. 

i. 9 

viii. 14 1 xxviii. 16 


XXX. II — 14 


Iii. 7 (Nail. i. 15) 

liii. I 


xviii. 5 


xxxii. 21 


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 


26 f. 

34 f- 
xii. 20 f. 
xiii. 9 
xiv. 1 1 
XV. 3 

9 xvii. 50 (2 Kegn. xxu. 




1 Cor. i. 19 

11. 9 

vi. 16 
ix. 9 
X. 7 
xiv. 21 
XV. 32 


54 f. 

2 Cor. iv. 13 

vi. 2 

16 ff. 
viii. 15 
ix. 9 
X. 17 
Gal. ii. 16 
iii. 6 



1 1 


iv. 27 

v. 14 
Eph. iv. 8 



xxix. 10 + Deut. xxix 


Ixviii. 23 f. + 

xxxiv. 8 


lix. 20+xxvii 



xL 13 
XXV. 2 1 f. 


XX. I3ff., Lev. xix. i< 


xiv. 23 
Ixviii. 10 


xvii. 50 (2 

xxxii. 43 

Regn. : 


cxvi. I 


xi. 10 
Iii. 15 
xxix. 14 


ix. 24 

Ixiv. 4 + lxv. 

17 (0 


xciii. 1 1 


ii. 24 
XXV. 4 


xxxii. 6 


xxiii. I 


xxviii. II f. 
xxii. 13 


ii. 7 


XXV. 8 + Hos 

xiii. 14 




xlix. 8 


xxxvii. 27 + Isa. Iii. i 


xvi. 18 


cxi. 9 


ix. 24 
cxlii. 2 


XV. 6 


xii. 3 
xxvii. 26 


ii. 4 


xviii. 5 


xxi. 23 


liv. I 


xxi. 10 


xix. 18 


Ixviii. 19 


viii. 16 

Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament. 391 

Eph. iv. 26 
V. 31 
vi. 2 

1 Tim. V. 18 

2 Tim. ii. ig 


IV. 5 


11. 24 


XX. 12 


XXV. 4 


XVI. 5 

(6) Quotations in the Epistle to the Hebrews. 


•• 5 


ii. 7 (2 Regn. vii. 14) 


xcvi. 7 (Deut. xxxii. 43) 


ciii. 4 


xliv. 7 f. 

10 — 12 

ci. 26 — 28 


cix. I 

ii. 6 8 

viii. 5—7 


XXI. 23 



viii. 17 f. 

iii. 7 — 12 


xciv. 8 — n 

iv. 4 


ii. 2 

V. 6 (vii. 17, 21) 


cix. 4 

vi. I3f. 


xxii. i6f. 

viii. 5 


XXV. 40 

8 — 13, X. i6f. 


xxxviii. 31 — 34 

ix. 20 


xxiv. 8 

X. 5—10 


xxxix. 7— -9 



xxxii. 35 f. 

37 f. 


ii. 3f. 

xi. 5 


v. 24 


xxi. 12 


xlvii. 31 

xii. 5 f. 


iii. 1 1 f. 



xxix. 18 



xix. 12 f. 



ii. 6 

xiii. 5 


xxxi. 6, 8 



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 ( 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. 


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 

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* 


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- 

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 

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 


Ka'i dvop6di(Tti) aiiTijv, orrcoi av 
fK^TjTTjaoocriv ol KciTaXonroi Ta>v 


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 

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- 

Isa. viii. 14 ovx ws 'k'ldov 
TrpoaKOfificiTi (TvvuvTtjcrfadf 



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) 


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 

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> 

" Cf. I I'ct. ii. H (llorl). 

* So 'riicoiliition. 


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. 



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, 

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. 


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 


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>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 


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- 

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 


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 n<\NT<5k TA eONH 

K(\i n&CA A65& Aa- 
TpeyoycA- k&i h e5- 
oycfA AYToy eloYcf* 

ApGH, K&l H BAClAef(\ 

AYTOY OY MH (J^e^pi^. 

i Dan. vii. 9 — 14, LXX. 


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- 


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- 

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]€. 
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\\ 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 

{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. 

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. 

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. — 

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. 



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 


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 

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. 


Tfie Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study. 437 

verba ^ed7rveu( 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 

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- 

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 

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. 



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. 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 


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 
'Yirep TCOV aXXoiwdriaopevov, W^^^'^'bV (Pss. xliv., Hx., Ixviii., Ixxix.). 

Aq. eirl Tols Kpivois, Symm. virep tSuv avBwv, Th. virep Tutv 

'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]- 
'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- 
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, evay