A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
by
About A Grammar of Septuagint Greek by
Title:
URL:
Author(s):
Publisher:
Print Basis:
Source:
Rights:
Date Created:
Editorial Comments:
Contributor(s):
CCEL Subjects:
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/conybeare/lxxgrammar.html
Conybeare, Frederick Cornwallis (1856-1924)
Grand Rapids, IVII: Christian Classics Ethereal Library
Ginn &Co., 1905
Jessica Hood, Multnomah College
Public Domain
2004-07-19
Unicode conversion by SLK; document needs a thorough formatting
Jessica Hood (Digitizer)
All; Reference;
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Table of Contents
About This Book p. ii
Title Page p. 1
Preface p. 2
Introduction p. 4
Abbreviations p. 18
Grammar p. 20
Accidence p. 21
Nouns p. 21
Verbs p. 26
Syntax p. 41
Construction of the Sentence p. 41
The Article p. 42
Gender p. 43
Number p. 44
Case p. 44
Adjectives p. 50
Pronouns p. 52
Verbs p. 55
Prepositions p. 65
Conjunctions p. 72
Indexes p. 80
Greek Words and Phrases p. 80
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Grammar of Septuagint Greek
F. C. Conybeare and St. George Stock
Ginn and Company, Boston. 1905
Digitized by Jessica Hood
E-text placed into the public domain Summer 2004
Courtesy of Multnomah Bible College, Portland, Oregon
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Preface
IN dealing with the Septuagint in and for itself we feel that we are in a humble way acting as
pioneers. For hitherto the Septuagint has been regarded only as an aid to the understanding of the
Hebrew. We have reversed that procedure and have regarded the Hebrew only as an aid to the
understanding of the Septuagint. This would be in a strict sense preposterous, were it not for the
admitted fact that the Greek translation of the Old Testament has occasionally preserved traces of
readings which are manifestly superior to those of the Massoretic text. That text, it should be
remembered, was constituted centuries after the Septuagint was already in vogue in the
Greek- speaking portion of the Jewish and Christian world.
For permission to use Dr. Swete's text we beg to offer our respectful thanks to the Syndics of
the Cambridge Pitt Press and to Dr. Swete himself. To our own university also we owe a debt of
gratitude. The Concordance to the Septuagint, edited by Dr. Hatch and Dr. Redpath, is a magnificent
work worthy of a university press. Without this aid it would be impossible to speak, with the
precision demanded by modern scholarship, about the usage of words in the Septuagint. It is greatly
to be regretted that the list of con tributors to this work should somehow have got lost owing to the
lamented death of Dr. Edwin Hatch. The labour of many good men, such as the Rev. W. H. Seddon,
now Vicarof Painswick, and the Rev. Osmond Archer, to name two who happen to fall under our
own knowledge, has thus been left without acknowledgement. They toiled silently for the
advancement of learning, like the coral insects who play their part beneath the waters in rearing a
fair island for the abode of man.
No one can well touch on Old Testament studies without being indebted to Professor Driver,
but our obligations in that and other directions have been acknowledged in the body of the work.
In composing the Grammar of Septuagint Greek we have had before us as a model Dr. Swete's
short chapter on that subject in his Introduction to the Septuagint. Help has also been derived from
the grammars of New Testament Greek by Winer and by Blass, and from the great historical
grammar of the Greek language by Jannaris. But in the main our work in that department is the
direct result of our own observation.
To come now to more personal debts, our common friend, Walter Scott, sometime Professor
of Greek in the University of Sydney, not merely gave us the benefit of his critical judgement in
the early stages of the work, but directly contributed to the subject-matter. We have accepted his
aid as freely as it was offered. No Higher Critic is likely to trouble himself about disentangling the
different strands of authorship in our Introductions and Notes. Still, if anyone should be tempted
to exercise his wits in that direction by way of practice for the Pentateuch, we will give him one
clue: If anything should strike him as being not merely sound but briUiant, he may confidently set
it down to this third source.
To the Rev. Samuel Holmes, M. A., Kennicott Scholar in the University of Oxford, our thanks
are due for guarding us against mistakes in relation to the Hebrew: but he is not to be held responsible
for any weakness that may be detected in that direction.
It remains now only to express our sincere gratitude to Professor Thomas D. Seymour for his
vigilant and scholarly care of our work during its passage through the press; and to tender our thanks
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
to Messrs. Ginn & Company for extending their patronage to a book produced in the old country.
May the United Kingdom and the United States ever form a Republic of Letters one and indivisible!
OXFORD,
May 22, 1905.
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Introduction
THE work of the Bible Society may be said to have been begun at Alexandria under the
Ptolemies: for there the first translation of the Bible, so far as it then existed, was made.
Under the old kings of Egypt there was no city on the site of Alexandria, but only a coast-guard
station for the exclusion of foreigners, and a few scattered huts of herdsmen. These monarchs had
no enlightened appreciation of the benefits of commerce, and cherished a profound distrust of
strangers, especially of Greeks, whom they regarded as land-grabbers.' But when the Greeks knocked
at the doors of Egypt in a way that admitted of no refusal, the lonely coast-guard station saw a great
change come over itself. Founded by Alexander the Great in B.C. 331, Alexandria became the
capital of the new Greek kingdom of Egypt and took its place as a great centre both of commerce
and of literature, the rival of Carthage in the one, of Athens in the other.
Alexander is credited with having perceived the advantages of situation which conferred upon
Alexandria its rapid rise to prosperity. With the Mediterranean on the north and Lake Mareia or
Mareotis on the south, it received the products of the inland, which came down the Nile and were
conveyed into the lake by canal-boats, and then exported them from its harbours. Under the Romans
it became of still greater commercial importance as the emporium of the trade then developed
between the East and the West, of which it had a practical monopoly.
The vicinity of sea and lake had advantages also in the way of health: for in the summer the
etesian winds set in from the north, and the lake, instead of stagnating, was kept full and sweet by
the rise of the Nile at that season. The kings too by their successive enclosures secured those
breathing-places which are so necessary for the health of a great city. It is estimated by Strabo that
a quarter, or even a third, of the whole area was occupied by parks and palaces.
Among the royal buildings was the famous Museum with its covered walk and arcades, and its
hall for the "fellows" of the Museum, as Professor Mahaffy aptly calls them, to dine in.- This
institution had endowments of its own, and was presided over by a priest, who was appointed by
the King, and, at a later period, by the Emperor.
What relation, if any, the Alexandrian Library, which was the great glory of the Ptolemies, bore
to the Museum, is not clear. The Museum stood there in Roman tunes, and became known as "the
old Museum," when the emperor Claudius reared a new structure by its side, and ordained that his
own immortal histories of the Etruscans and Carthaginians should be publicly read aloud once
every year, one in the old building and the other in the new (Suet. Claud. 42). The library however
is related to have been burnt during Caesar's operations in Alexandria. Not a word is said on this
subject by the historian of the Alexandrian War, but Seneca^ incidentally refers to the loss of 400,000
volumes.
' Strabo XVII § 6, p. 792 7iop9r|xal yap f\aav Kal £7ii6u|ar|xal Kaxct ondviv yr\c;.
^ Strabo XVII § 8, p.794 xwv 5e (JaoiA-Eicov l-iepoc; kaxi Kal x6 Mouosiov, £xov nepinaxov Kal e^eSpav Kal oIkov jaeyav, ev
o) xo oijjoolxiov xd)v jjEXEXovxcov xoO MouoeCou (piA-oA-oycov av5pd)v.
' De Tranq. An. 9 — Quadringenta millia librorum Alexandriae arserunt: pulcherrimum regiae opulentiae monumentum.
According to Tertullian (Apol. 1 8) the MS . of the translators of the Old Testament was still to be seen in his day in the Serapeum
along with the Hebrew original.
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
The inhabitants of Alexandria are described by Polybius, who visited the city under the reign
of the second Euergetes, commonly known as Physcon (B.C. 146-1 17), as falling into three classes.
There were first the native Egyptians, whom he describes as intelligent and civilised; secondly the
mercenary soldiers, who were many and unmannerly; and thirdly the Alexandrian citizens, who
were better behaved than the military element, for though of mixed origin they were mainly of
Greek blood.**
Polybius makes no mention of Jews in Alexandria, but we know from other sources that there
was a large colony of that people there. Their presence in Egypt was partly compulsory and partly
voluntary. The first Ptolemy, surnamed Soter, who had a long and prosperous reign (B.C. 323-285),
had invaded Palestine and captured Jerusalem on the sabbath-day, on which the Jews offered no
defence.' He carried away with him many captives from the hill country of Judaea and from the
parts about Jerusalem, and also from Samaria. These were all planted in Egypt, where they carried
on their quarrel as to which was the true temple, whither yearly offerings should be sent-that at
Jerusalem or the one on Gerizim. (Cp. Jn. 4:20.) Soter, recognising the fidelity of the Jew to his
oath, employed many of these captives to garrison important posts, and gave them equal citizenship
with the Macedonians. This liberal treatment of their countrymen induced many more Jews to
immigrate voluntarily into Egypt, in spite of the prohibition in the Mosaic law — "Ye shall
henceforth return no more that way" (Dt. 17:18). There were also Jews in Egypt before this time,
who came there under the Persian domination, and others before them who had been sent to fight
with Psammetichus (B.C. 671-617) against the king of the Ethiopians (Aristeas § 13). Jeremiah, it
will be remembered, was carried perforce by his countrymen into Egypt (Jer. 43:5-7, 44:1), some
of whom may have escaped the destruction which he prophesied against them (Jer. 42:16). This
was shortly after the reign of Psammetichus. Thus the return of the Jews to Egypt was no new thing,
and there they again multiplied exceedingly, even as they are recorded to have done at the first.
Philo, who was a contemporary of Jesus Christ, but lived into the reign of Claudius, declares that
of the five districts of Alexandria, which were named according to the first five letters of the
alphabet, two were especially known as Jewish quarters, and that the Jews were not confined to
these (Lib. in Flac. § 8, II 525).
With this large Jewish population in Alexandria, whose native language was now Greek, and
to whom Hebrew had ceased to be intelligible, we see an obvious reason why the first translation
of the Bible should have been made in that city. Arguing a priori we should certainly be inclined
to assume that it was the necessities of the Alexandrian synagogue that brought about the translation.
This however is not the account which has conic down to us, and which worked its way into the
fabric of Christian belief. That account represents the desire of the second Ptolemy for the
completeness of his library, and Pagan curiosity about the sacred books of the Jews, as having been
the motives which led to their translation into, Greek. It is contained in a letter purporting to be
written by one Aristeas to his brother Philocrates.
* Polyb. XXXIV 14, being a fragment quoted by Strabo XVII 1 § 12, p. 797.
5 Josephus Ant. XII. 1 confirms his statement of this fact by a quotation from Agatharchides of Cnidos, who wrote the
history of the successors of Alexander — "EoxiveBvoq'louSaiwv A£Y6iaevov,oi7i6A.iv6xupc(VKaiiaeydAr|vexovTeq'lepoa6Auiia,
TauTr|v u7iepei5ov vnh nxoA-ejaaicp yevojaevriv, oiiKa A.a|3eiv ou GsArioavxeq, oKKa 5ic( Tr)v axaipov 5eai5aiiaoviav xctAeiiov
unejieivav exeiv 5eo7i6xr|v.
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Aristeas, we gather, was a person of high account at the court of Ptolemy Philadelphus (B.C.
285-247), probably one of the three captains of the royal body-guard, Sosibius of Tarentum and
Andreas (§§ 12, 40) being the other two.^ He was a warm admirer of the Jewish religion, but not
himself a Jew by race.' Rather we are invited to think of him as a philosophic Pagan interested in
the national customs of the Jews (§ 306). On one occasion he was present when King Ptolemy
addressed a question to his librarian, Demetrius of Phalerum, the Athenian statesman and philosopher,
as to the progress of the library. Demetrius replied that it already contained more than 200,000
volumes, and that he hoped in a short time to bring the number up to 500,000; at the same time he
mentioned that there were some books of the Jewish law which it would be worth while to have
transcribed and placed in the library. 'Then why not have it done?' said the king. 'You have full
powers in the matter.' Demetrius mentioned a difficulty about translation, and the king came to the
conclusion that he must write to the High-priest of the Jews in order to have his purpose effected.
Hereupon Aristeas seized an opportunity, for which he had long been waiting. He represented to
the king that he could hardly with any grace ask a favour of the High-priest while so many of his
countrymen were in bondage in Egypt. This suggestion being seconded by silent prayer on the part
of Aristeas and by the concurrence of Sosibius and Andreas, the result was an immense act of
emancipation, by which all the Jewish slaves in Egypt, amounting to over 100,000, regained their
freedom, at a cost to the king of more than 660 talents. The way was now clear for the contemplated
accession to the library. The king called upon the librarian to send in his report, which is quoted
as from the royal archives. In it Demetrius recommended that the king should write to the High-priest
at Jerusalem, asking him to send to Egypt six elders from each of the twelve tribes, men of approved
hfe and well versed in their own law, in order that the exact meaning of it might be obtained from
the agreement among the majority (§ 32). Not content with his munificence in the redemption of
the slaves, the king further displayed his magnificence in the handsome presents he prepared for
the Temple, consisting of a table inlaid with precious stones together with gold and silver vessels
for the use of the sanctuary.* The conduct of the embassy was intrusted to Andreas and to Aristeas
himself, who gives his brother an interesting account of the Temple and its services and the
magnificent vestments of the High-priest, the conjoint effect of which he declares is enough to
convert the heart of any man.' Notices are also given of the citadel and of the city and country —
its cultivation, its commerce, its harbours, and its population — which in some respects show the
temerity of the tourist, for the writer speaks of the Jordan as flowing 'at the country of the
Ptolemaeans' (§ 1 17) into another river, which in its turn empties itself into the sea.
The High-priest Eleazar, in compliance with the request of Pbiladelphus, selected seventy-two
venerable elders, six from each tribe, whose names are given, men not only learned in the law, but
also skilled in the language and literature of the Greeks," who were to accompany the ambassadors
to Egypt on the understanding that they were to be sent back when their work was done. Before
* That Aristeas was himself captain of the body-guard is not stated in the letter, but it is not unnaturally inferred from it by
Josephus.
' This again, while only implied in the letter, is explicitly stated by Josephus, who makes Aristeas say (Ant. XII 2 § 2) "Io9i
jaevxoi ye, <h fiaaiksv, cbq oiixe yevei npooriKcov auxoiq, oiixe ojaocpuA-Oc; auzCov wv xaOxa nepl auxwv a^iw.
* The description of these presents occupies a considerable portion of the letter, §§ 51-82.
' § 99 Kal 5ia^£^aiov\ianiavxa avGpcoTtov 7ipoaeA96vxa xfj Gecopig xwv npoEiprnasvwv sic; £K7iA.r|^iv fj^siv Kal 6au|aao|a6v
aSiriyrixov, jaexaxpanevxa xfj Siavoig Sid xr)v nepl eKaaxr)v dyiav KaxaoKeuriv.
i» § 121: cp. Philo Vita Mosis II § 6, p. 139.
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
their departure Eleazar held a conversation with his guests, in which he offered a defence of the
ceremonial ordinances of the Jewish law, and expounded views on the symbolic meaning of clean
and unclean animals, resembling those set forth in the Epistle which goes under the name of
Barnabas.
When the deputation arrived in Egypt, the king waived the requirements of court ceremonial
and received the elders in audience at once. He first paid reverence to the volume of the law written
in letters of gold, which they carried with them, and then extended a welcome to its bearers. After
this they were entertained for a week at banquets, at which everything was arranged by a special
court functionary in accordance with their own customs, so that there might be nothing to offend
their susceptibilities. Elisha, the eldest of the Seventy-two, was asked to say grace, the ordinary
court-chaplains being superseded for the occasion. The grace he pronounced was as follows: 'May
God almighty fill thee, O King, with all the good things which he hath created; and grant to thee
and to thy wife and to thy children and to those who think with thee to have these things without
fail all the days of thy life!' (§ 185). The delivery of this benediction was followed by a round of
applause and clapping of hands.
The feast of reason was added to the enjoyment of the royal fare. For at a certain point in the
proceedings the king addressed questions of a vaguely ethico-pohtical character to the elders, which
were answered by them to the admiration of all, especially of the philosophers who had been invited
to meet them, among whom was Menedemus of Eretria." Each evening for five days ten elders
were interrogated, but on the sixth and seventh evenings eleven were taken, so as to complete the
whole number. The questions were elaborated by the king beforehand, but the answers were given
impromptu by the elders. The record of them occupies a considerable portion of the letter (§§
187-294). The law of the answer, if we may so put it, seems to be that each should contain a reference
to God and a compliment to the king. We are assured that we have them as they were taken down
by the royal recorders.
At the close of this week's festivities an interval of three days was allowed, after which the
elders were conducted by Demetrius to the island of Pharos, which was connected with the mainland
by a dam nearly a mile long'- and a bridge. At the north end of this island they were lodged in a
building overlooking the sea, where they would enjoy absolute quiet. Demetrius then called upon
them to perform their work of translation. We have particulars of their habit of life while it was
going on. Early in the morning every day they presented themselves at court and, having paid their
respects to the king, returned to their own quarters. Then they washed their hands in the sea, offered
up a prayer to God, and betook themselves to the task of reading and translating. Their work was
harmonized by collation, and the joint result was taken down by Demetrius (§ 302). After the ninth
hour they were free to betake themselves to recreation. It so happened, we are told, that the work
of transcription was accomplished in seventy-two days, just as though it had been done on purpose
(§ 307).
When the whole was finished, Demetrius summoned all the Jews in Alexandria to the island
of Pharos, and read the translation aloud to them all in the presence of the interpreters, after which
a solemn curse was pronounced upon any one who altered it. Then the whole work was read over
to the king, who expressed much admiration at the deep insight of the law-giver and asked how it
'^ Diog. Laert. 1 1 § 140 'E7ipeo|3euo£ 5k Kal npoq nxoA-ejaaiov (probably Soter) Kal Auoijaaxov.
'^ § 301. TO Tcov eTtrd araSicjv avax^l-ia xfjc; 9aAdoor|(; cp. Strabo XVII § 6, p. 792 xu> enxaoxaSio) KaAouj^ievo) x^l-ictxi.
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
was that historians and poets had combined to ignore his legislation. Demetrius of Phalerum rephed
that this was because of its sacred character. He had heard from Theopompus '^ that that historian
had once wished to avail himself in his history of some inaccurate renderings from the Jewish law,
and had suffered from mental disturbance for more than thirty days. In a lucid interval he prayed
that it might be revealed to him why he was thus afflicted. Thereupon he was informed in a dream
that it was because he had presumed to divulge divine things to 'common' men (§ 315: cp. Acts
10:15). 'I have also,' added Demetrius, 'received information from Theodectes, the tragic poet,'"*
that, when he wished to transfer some of the contents of the Bible into a play of his own, he found
himself suffering from cataract on the eyes, from which he only recovered after a long time, when
he had propitiated the god.' On hearing this the king paid reverence to the books, and ordered them
to be kept with religious care.
The elders, having now accomplished the work for which they had come, were dismissed by
the king with handsome presents both to themselves and to Eleazar, to whom Philadelphus at the
same time wrote a letter begging that, if any of the elders purposed to come and see him again, the
High-priest would not prevent it.
Such is the traditional account of the origin of the Septuagint, of which we have next to consider
the value. But first there are a few points to be noted.
To begin with, we see the reason of the name. The Seventy (Lat. LXX: Gk. oi 0') is a round
number for the Seventy-two. There were seventy-two interpreters, who took seventy-two days over
their work.
Next we see that the name is a misnomer as applied to the Greek version of the Old Testament
generally. There is no word in Aristeas as to a translation by the Elders of anything but the Law.'*
But the name, having once been applied to the Greek translation, was gradually extended, as the
Prophets and the Books were added in a Greek dress to the Law.
Thirdly we have to notice that in the Letter of Aristeas no claim to inspiration is advanced on
behalf of the translators.
That the Bible, as we have it in English, is inspired, has often been tacitly assumed, but seldom
laid down as a doctrine. But the inspiration of the Greek version was a point of belief with those
who used it, and presumably is so to the present day in the Greek church. Already in Philo we find
this claim advanced. He says that the interpreters all agreed in employing exactly the same words,
'as though by the whispering of some unseen prompter' Vita Mosis II § 7, II 140), and that a
comparison of the original with the translation by those who are acquainted with both tongues will
clearly show that they were not mere translators, but inspired hierophants and prophets.
Josephus {Ant. XII 2), presumably because he was not a Hellenist, and could read his Bible in
the Hebrew, does not see the necessity for this doctrine of the inspiration of the Septuagint. He
follows Aristeas closely, except at the end, where he actually turns the curse pronounced on alteration
into an invitation to retrench superfluities or supply defects!"
13 Theopompus came to Egypt during the reign of Ptolemy Soter.
i"* Theodectes died at the age of forty-one, about B.C. 334, i.e. at least half a century before the time of speaking: but the
expression 7iapc(9eo5eKxou .. . laexeA-a^ov eyco (§ 318), as contrasted with ecpr|oev aKr|Koevai Geonojanoud 314), seems to imply
that the communication was not direct.
'* See §§ 30, 38, 309, 312: Jos. Anf. Prooem. § 3 ou5e yap nfiaav SKeivoq (sc. 'EAed^apoq) e(p9r| Aa|3eivxr)v avaypacpriv,
dA-A.' auxct jaova xct xoO vojjou napeSooav ol nejacpGevxeq km. xr)v kify\jr\ov\i elq xr)v 'AA£^dv5peiav.
1^ Cp. Aristeas § 21 1 with Jos. Ant. XH 2 § 13 ad fin.
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
The early Christian Fathers gave play to their imagination over the story of the Septuagint.
Justin Martyr (Apol. 1 31 §§ 2-5) has a brief allusion to it, but the amount of credit which is due to
him in this connexion may be judged from the fact that he makes Ptolemy send to King Herod for
interpreters of the sacred books!
Irenaeus about a quarter of a century later (A.D. 175) says that Ptolemy, being afraid lest the
translators might combine to conceal the truth in some matter by their interpretation, had them
isolated, and ordered each to translate the whole. When it was found that they all agreed word for
word, then of a truth the Gentiles knew that the Scriptures were interpreted by inspiration of God.
But this, he adds, was nothing surprising, seeing that, when the Scriptures had been lost during the
captivity in Babylon, God inspired Ezra to rewrite them.'^
Clement of Alexandria (about A.D. 190) follows to the same effect as to literal inspiration, and
adds the prophetic writings to the work of the first interpreters (Strom. I § 148, p. 409 P).
Eusebius, with his exceptional regard for truth, is content to give us an epitome of Aristeas."
Epiphanius however (died A.D. 402) is lavish of details. He tells us that the king had thirty-six
houses constructed on the island of Pharos, in which he shut up the interpreters two together. In
these houses, which had no windows in the wall, but only skylights, the interpreters worked from
morning till evening under lock and key. In the evening they were taken over in thirty- six different
boats to the palace of Ptolemy Philadelphus, to dine with him. Then they slept two together in
thirty-six different bedrooms. All these precautions were taken to prevent communication between
the pairs, and yet when the thirty- six copies of each book of the Bible were compared together,
they were found to be identical. 'So manifestly were these men inspired by the Holy Ghost, and
where there was an addition made to the original, it was made by all, and where there was something
taken away, it was taken away by all; and what they took away is not needed, and what they added
is needed.'
This explicit assertion of the plenary inspiration of the Septuagint is manifestly prompted by
the craving for an infallible Bible, which was felt in ancient as in modern times. St. Jerome, who,
unlike the bulk of the Christian Fathers, made himself acquainted with the text of the original,
nailed this false coin to the counter;" nevertheless his younger-" contemporary Augustine gave it
full currency again, declaring that the same Spirit which spoke through the prophets spoke also
through their interpreters, and that any diversities there may be between the translation and the
original are due to 'prophetic depth.'-'
These later embellishments of the story of the Septuagint may unhesitatingly be set aside as
the outcome of pious imagination. But what of the original narrative which goes under the name
of Aristeas? Is that to be regarded as fact or fiction?
Irenaeus quoted by Eus. H. E. V 8.
Praep. Ev. VIII 2-5 and 9. Josephus, Tertullian, Eusebius, and most subsequent writers witli tlie exception of St. Jerome
call Aristeas 'Apioxaioc;. Tlie two forms would appear not to have differed appreciably in pronunciation. In the names of two of
the interpreters there is a similar variation, Baoeac; and Baveaq appearing also asBaoaCaq and Bavaiaq, whence it is an easy step
to the more familiar Greek termination -aioq.
Preface to the Pentateuch — et nescio quia primus auctor septuaginta cellulas Alexandriae mendacio suo exstruxerit,
quibus divisi eadem scriptirarint, cum Aristeas eiusdem Ptolemaei u7t£pao7tioxr)q et multo post tempore losephus Nihil tale
retulerint, sed in una basilica congregatos contulisse scribant, non prophetasse.
Jerome died A.D. 420, Augustine A.D. 430.
Aug. de Civ. Dei XVIH 42 and 43.
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
At first sight we seem to have strong external evidence for its truth. There was an Alexandrian
Jew named Aristobulus, who is mentioned at the beginning of Second Maccabees as 'the teacher
of king Ptolemy' (1: 10). The Ptolemy in question was the sixth, sumamed Philometor (B.C. 180-145).
Aristobulus, though a Jew, was also a Peripatetic philosopher, and anticipated Philo as an exponent
of the allegorical method of interpreting Scripture. So at least we gather from Eusebius, who in his
Praeparatio Evangelica several times quotes a work on the 'Interpretation of the Holy Laws' ^^
addressed by Aristobulus to Philometor. The interest of this work to us is that in it Aristobulus
refers to the translation made in the reign of his majesty's ancestor Philadelphus under the superinten
dence of Demetrius Phalereus. This seems decisive in favour of the historic character of the main
facts recorded in the Letter of Aristeas. And there is another piece of external evidence to be added.
For Philo, who himself lived at Alexandria, tells us that a festival was held every year on the island
of Pharos in honour of the place whence the blessing of the Greek Bible first shone forth (Vita
Mosis II § 7, II 141).
The external evidence being thus favourable, let us now examine the internal.
Time is the great revealer of secrets, and it is also, in another sense, the great detector of forgeries.
We have therefore first to inquire whether the document is consistent in point of chronology with
its own claims. Who are the persons mentioned, and did they live together? With regard to what
may be called the minor characters there is no difficulty. Aristeas himself, Andreas, and Sosibius
are otherwise unknown, while in the case of Menedemus of Eretria, Theodectes, and Theopompus,
we are not debarred by considerations of time from accepting what is said of them, though it would
fit in better with the reign of the first than of the second Ptolemy. But the relations between Ptolemy
Philadelphus and Demetrius of Phalerum, as represented in the Letter, are inconsistent with what
we know from other sources. Demetrius was expelled from Athens in B.C. 307 by his namesake
Demetrius the Besieger of Cities. Having subsequently found his way to Egypt, he became the
chief friend of Ptolemy Soter, by whom he was even intrusted with legislation.-' Unfortunately for
himself he advised that monarch to leave the kingdom to his children by his first wife Eurydice.
Soter however left it to Philadelphus, the son'of Berenice, on whose accession Demetrius was
disgraced. He died soon after owing to a snake-bite received during his sleep.- ^ This account is
given by Diogenes Laertius (V § 78) on the authority of Hermippus, whom Josephus'^ declares to
have been a very exact historian. If his authority is good in favour of the Jews, it must be equally
good against them.
It would seem then that, if Demetrius of Phalerum had anything to do with the translation of
the Jewish Scriptures, that translation must have been made under the first Ptolemy. This is actually
asserted by Irenaeus,-' who seems here to have followed some account independent of Aristeas.
And in another respect this alternative version of the facts is intrinsically more credible. For, whereas
the Letter of Aristeas represents Eleazar as an independent potentate, Irenaeus expressly says that
the Jews were then subject to the Macedonians, by whom he doubtless means Ptolemy Soter, who
22 Eus. Pr. Ev. VII 13, 14 : VIE 9, 10 : IX 6 : XIH 11,12.
25 AElian V.H. : IE 17: Plut. de Exsilio p. 602.
Cicero pro Bab. Post. § 23 implies that Demetrius was intentionally got rid of in this way — Demetrium et ex republica,
quam optime gesserat, et ex doctrina nobilem et clarum, qui Phalereus vocitatus est, in eodem isto AEgyptio regno aspide ad
corpus admota vita esse privatum.
Against Apion I 22 avr)p neplnfioav loxopiav enijaeA-riq.
Quoted in Eusebius V 8.
24
10
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
is recorded to have subdued the country. But, if the Letter of Aristeas is wrong on so vital a point
of chronology, it is plain that it cannot have been written by its assumed author, who can hardly
be supposed to have been mistaken as to whose reign he was living under. In that case its historical
character is gone, and we are at liberty to beheve as much or as little of it as we please.
There are some minor points which have been urged as proofs of historical inaccuracy in the
Letter, which do not seen to us to have any weight. One is connected with the letter of Eleazar,
which begins thus (§41) — 'If thou thyself art well, and the queen Arsinoe, thy sister, and the
children, it will be well, and as we would have it.' Now Philadelphus had two wives in succession,
both named Arsinoe. By the first, who was the daughter of Lysimachus, he had three children,
Ptolemy, Lysimachus, and Berenice; by the second, who was his own sister, he had none. But then,
as Eleazar was addressing Ptolemy, who was aware of these facts, it would have been superfluous
for him to guard himself against misconstruction (cp. § 45). Again (§ 180) Philadelphus is made
to speak of his victory 'in the sea fight against Antigonus.' It is asserted that Philadelphus was really
defeated in this battle: but, if so, this fal sification of fact is not inappropriate in the monarch's own
mouth. Who does not know the elasticity of the term 'victory'?
More important than the preceding are two passages in which the author, despite his cleverness,
seems to forget that he is Aristeas, and to speak from the standpoint of his own later age. For in §
28, in commenting on the systematic administration of the Ptolemies, he says 'for all things were
done by these kings by means of decrees and in a very safe manner.' Now it is conceivable that
Aristeas might say this with reference to Philadelphus and his father Soter, but it seems more like
the expression of one who could already look back upon a dynasty. Again in § 182, in recording
how the national customs of the Jews were complied with in the banquet, he says 'for it was so
appointed by the king, as you can still see now.' This could hardly be said by a person writing in
the reign of which he is speaking.
Our inquiries then seem to have landed us in this rather anomalous situation, that, while external
evidence attests the genuineness of the Letter, internal evidence forbids us to accept it. But what
if the chief witness be himself found to be an impostor? This is the view taken by those who are
careful to speak of the pseudoAristobulus. Aristobulus, the teacher of Ptolemy, would be a tempting
godfather to a Jewish author wishing to enforce his own opinions. One thing is certain, namely,
that the Orphic verses quoted by Aristobulus (Bus. Pr. Ev. XIII 12) are not of Greek but of Jewish
origin. This however does not prove much. For since they were employed by some Jew, why not
by one as well as by another? The Jewish Sibylline verses also go back to the reign of Ptolemy
Philometor. There is another thing which may be affirmed with safety, namely, that the closest
parallel to the Greek of Aristeas is to be found in the Greek of Aristobulus. Indeed it might well
be believed that both works were by the same hand. We incline therefore to think that whatever
was the date of the 'Interpretation of the Holy Laws' was the date also of the Letter of Aristeas. If
the former work is really by Aristobulus writing under Ptolemy Philometor, then we assign the
Letter to the same period. But, if the Jewish love of pseudonymity deludes us here also, then we
are unmoored from our anchorage, and can be certain of nothing except that the Letter was accepted
as history by the time of Josephus, who paraphrases a great part of it, and mentions the name of
the supposed author. Philo's evidence is not so clear. He agrees with the author of the Letter in
making the translation take place under Philadelphus, but he diverges from him, as we have seen,
in asserting its inspiration, nor does he anywhere refer to the writer as his authority in the way
Josephus does.
11
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
The Teubner editor of the Letter, Paul Wendland, puts its composition later than the time of
the Maccabees (say after B.C. 96) and before the invasion of Palestine by the Romans, B.C. 63.
The earlier limit is determined by arguments from names, which might be disputed, and the later
is taken for granted. We ourselves think that the work was composed before the Jews had any close
acquaintance with the Romans: but there is a point which might be urged against this view. Among
the questions asked lay Philadelphus of the Elders there are two in immediate succession — (1)
What kind of men ought to be appointed oxpaxr\yoil (2) What kind of men ought to be appointed
'commanders of the forces'? (§§ 280, 281). One or other of these questions seems superfluous until
we inquire into the meaning of oxpaxr\yoi in this context. The answer to the question in the text
clearly shows that the word here stands for 'judges.' Now, if we remember that oxpaxr\y6(; was the
Greek equivalent for the Roman praetor, it might at first seem that it could only have been under
the Romans that oxpaxr\y6(; acquired the meaning of 'judge.' But this leaves out of sight, the question
how oxpaxr\y6(; came to be selected as the equivalent of the Roman praetor. -The word must already
in Greek have connoted civil as well as military functions before it could have seemed to be a fit
translation of praetor. And this we know to have been the case. The oxpaxr\yoi at Athens were
judges as well as generals. At Alexandria they seem to have become judges instead of generals.
Turning now from the date of the Letter of Aristeas to that of the Septuagint itself, we have
already found that there were two forms of the tradition with regard to its origin, one putting it
under the reign of the second, the other tinder that of the first Ptolemy The latter comes to us through
Irenwus and is compatible with the part assigned to Demetrius of Phalerum in getting the Law of
Moses translated, whereas the former is not. Both versions of the story were known to Clement of
Alexandria, who gives the preference to the former. They were combined by Anatolius (Bus. H.E.
VII 32j, who declares that Aristobulus himself was one of the Seventy, and addressed his books
on the Interpretation of the Law of Moses to the first two Ptolemies. This however is out of keeping
with the fragments of Aristobulus themselves.
From the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus we may fairly infer that 'the Law, the Prophecies, and the
rest of the Books,' so far as the last were then written, already existed in Greek at the time of writing,
and the text itself shows acquaintance with the phraseology of the Septuagint version of the
Pentateuch. That Prologue cannot have been written later than 132 B.C., and may have been written
as early as the reign of the first Euergetes, who succeeded Philadelphus (B.C. 247-222). ^^
Philo displays an acquaintance through the Greek with all the books of the Old Testament,
except Esther, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, and Daniel. But he quotes the Prophets and Psalms
sparsely, and seems to regard them as inferior in authority to the Law.
The making of the Septuagint, as we have it, was not a single act, but a long process, extending
perhaps from the reign of the first Ptolemy down to the second century after Christ: for the translation
of Ecclesiastes looks as if it had been incorporated from the version of Aquila, of which we shall
speak presently. Tradition is perhaps right in connecting the original translation of the Law with
the desire of the early Ptolemies for the completeness of their library. Eusebius sees in this the hand
2'' In that case the words 'In the eight and thirtieth year in the reign of Euergetes I came into Egypt' may mean simply 'When
I wax thirty-eight years old,' etc., which is the sense in which Professor Mahaffy takes them. Wendland has pointed out a
resemblance of expression which might seem to imply that the writer of the Letter was acquainted with the Prologue to
Ecclesiasticus. Cp. Aristeas § 7 with the words in the Prologue — Kal d)q ou jiovov . . . xpnoiH°'^'> eivai.
12
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
of Providence preparing the world for the coming of Christ by the diffusion of the Scriptures, a
boon which could not otherwise have been wrung from Jewish exclusiveness (Pr. Ev. VIII 1).
We need not doubt TertuUian's word when he says that the Old Testament Scriptures in Greek
were to be seen in the Serapeum in his own day along with their originals. But the question is how
they got there. Were they really translated for the library? Or, having been translated by the Jews
for their own use was a copy demanded for the library? On this question each must judge for himself.
To us the story of the Seventy-two Interpreters carries no conviction. For why should the king send
to Judaea for interpreters, when there was so large a Jewish population in his own kingdom? The
seventy-two interpreters, six from each tribe, savour strongly of the same motive which dictated
the subsequent embeUishments of the story, namely, the desire to confer authority upon the Hellenist
Scriptures. We lay no stress in this connexion on the loss of the ten tribes, which has been supposed
to render the story impossible from the commencement. If it had been an utter impossibility to find
six men from each tribe at Jerusalem, no Jew would have been likely to invent such a story. Moreover
in New Testament times the ten tribes were not regarded as utterly lost (Acts 26:7, James 1:1).
Though they never came back as a body, probably many of them returned individually to Palestine;
and the Jews were so careful of their genealogies that it would be known to what tribe they belonged.
The wholesale emancipation of Jewish slaves by Philadelphus at his own cost is so noble an example
to kings that it is a pity to attack its historicity: but it is necessary to point out that the price recorded
to have been paid for each, namely twenty drachmas, is utterly below the market- value, so that the
soldiers and subjects of Philadelphus would have had a right to complain of his being generous at
their expense.^'* Josephus is so conscious of this flaw in the story, that in two places he quietly
inserts 'a hundred' before the 'twenty drachmas,' notwithstanding that this sixfold, but still modest,
price does not square with the total.
Of any attempt prior to the Septuagint to translate the Hebrew Scriptures we have no authentic
information. It is true that the writer of the Letter speaks of previous incorrect translations of the
Law (§ 314) as having been used by Theopompus: but his motive seems to be a desire to exalt the
correctness of what may be called the authorised version. Similarly Aristobulus (Bus. Pr. Ev. IX
6, XIII 12) speaks of parts of the Pentateuch as having been translated 'before Demetrius of
Phalerum' and before 'the supremacy of Alexander and the Persians.' But again there is a definite
motive to be found for this vague chronological statement in the attempt which was made at
Alexandria to show that Plato and before him Pythagoras were deeply indebted to Moses.-' For
when the Alexandrian Jews paid Greek philosophy the compliment of finding that in it lay the inner
meaning of their own Scriptures, they endeavoured at the same time to redress the balance by
proving that Greek philosophy was originally derived from Jewish religion, so that, if in Moses
one should find Plato, that was only because Plato was inspired by Moses. The motto of this school
is conveyed in the question of Numenius 'What is Plato but Moses Atticizing?' One of its methods,
we regret to add, was the fabrication of Orphic and Sibylline verses, to which we have already had
occasion to allude. This industry was carried on by the Christians, and affords a reason why in the
28
29
On the price of slaves see Xen. Mem. 1 15 § 2 : Plato Anterastae 136 C : Lucian Vit. Auct. 27.
Aristobulus in Eus.Pr. Ev. XIII 12 § 1 — 3>avep6voxiKaxr|KoA.ou9r|0£v6nAdxa)vxfiKa9'r|iaa(;voiao9£oic(, Kalcpavspoq
eoxi nepiEipYaojaevoq eKaoxa xd)v ev auxfj. Aiepjariveuxai yap npo Ar|iar|xpiou xoO fl>aA.r|pea)(; 5i ' sxepcov Ttpo xf^q 'AA.e^dv5pou
Kttl Ilepodiv eniKpaxrioewc; kxA.. . . . Teyove ydp noA-UjaaGriq, Ka9 coc; Kal IIuGayopaq noXka xtov nap ' r|iaiv i^exeveyxaq elq xr)v
eauxoO Soyj^axonouav Kaxexcipioev.
13
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
vision of Hermas (Herm. Past. Vis. 1 14 § 1) the Sibyl could at first sight be confounded with the
Church. In Lactantius the Sibylline verses form one of the chief evidences of Christianity.
Of translations of the Old Testament subsequent to the Septuagint the three most famous are
those of Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus. Aquila, like his namesake, the husband of Priscilla,
was a native of Pontus, and though not a Jew by birth was a prose, lyte to the Jewish religion. His
version is distinguished by the total sacrifice of the Greek to the letter of the Hebrew text. So much
is this the case that a Hebrew prefix which is both a sign of the accusative and has also the meaning
'with' is represented, where it occurs in the former sense, by ouv, so that we are presented with the
phenomenon of ouv with the accusative. This peculiarity presents itself in the Greek version of
Ecclesiastes^" alone among the books of the Septuagint, so that the rendering of that late work may
be conjectured to be due to Aquila. This translator hved during the reign of Hadrian (A.D. 1 17-138).
Theodotion of Ephesus is said to have hved towards the close of the same century, under
Commodus (A.D. 180-192). He also was a Jewish proselyte. His work was rather a revision of the
Septuagint than an independent translation. So far as the book of Daniel is concerned, it was accepted
by the Christian Church, and the older Septuagint version was discarded.
Symmachus of Samaria, who, according to Eusebius {H.E. VI 17), was an Ebionite Christian,
flourished in the next reign, that of Septimius Severus (A.D. 193-21 1). His version was more hterary
in form than that of Aquila.
The reader will observe that all three of these versions come from the side of Judaism. The
Christian Church was content with the Septuagint, whereon to found its claim as to the witness of
the Old Testament to Christ. Eusebius points to the providential nature of the fact that the prophecies
which foretold his coming were stored in a public library under the auspices of a Pagan king centuries
before his appearance, so that the coincidence between prediction and fulfilment could not be
ascribed to any fraud on the part of the Christians. The Jews however were not so well satisfied
with this aspect of things. The question of the Virgin birth divided the religions world then, as it
does now. Aquila and Theodotion were at one in substituting veavic; for TiapBevoc; in Isaiah 7:14,
and the Ebionites found support in this for their declaration that Jesus was the son of Joseph. There
were writings of Symmachus still extant in the time of Eusebius, which were directed against the
Gospel according to St. Matthew (H.E. VI17).
Besides these well-known versions there were two other anonymous ones, which were brought
to light through the industry and good fortune of Origen, the most scholarly of the Christian Fathers.
One of these, which was called the Fifth Edition, was found hidden in an old wine-cask at Jericho
in the reign of that Antoninus who is better known as Caracalla (A.D. 211-217); the other, which
was called the Sixth Edition, was discovered in the subsequent reign of Alexander Severus (A.D.
222-235) concealed in a similar receptacle at Nicopolis in Epirus, where we may presume St. Paul
to have spent his last winter (Tit. 3:12). Who knows but that it may have been one of the books
which he was so urgent upon Timothy to bring with him? We do not think the chances very strongly
in favour of this hypothesis: but it would account for some things, if we knew St. Paul to have had
access to another version besides the Septuagint.
The renderings of the four main versions were arranged by Origen in parallel columns along
with the original both in Hebrew and Greek characters, in a work which was consequently known
E.g. 2: 17 Kttl ei^ior|oa ouv xr)v ^wriv.
14
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
as the Hexapla. For the Psalms Eusebius tells us Origen employed 'not only a fifth, but also a sixth
and seventh interpretation' {H.E. VI 16). There was another work published by Origen called the
Tetrapla, which contained only the Septuagint along with the versions of Aquila, Symmachus, and
Theodotion. What the I seventh interpretation' spoken of by Eusebius was, it would be hard to say.
What is called by Theodoret the Seventh Edition was the recension of Lucian, which was later than
the work of Origen. Lucian was martyred under Diocletian (284-305 A.D.).
The work of Origen might enlighten the learned, but it did not affect the unique position held
in the Christian Church by the Septuagint ever since it was taken over from the Hellenist Jews. We
are familiar with the constant appeal made by the writers of the New Testament to 'Scripture,' an
appeal couched in such words as 'It is written' or 'As the Scripture saith.' In the great majority of
cases the Scripture thus appealed to is undoubtedly the Septuagint; seldom, if ever, is it the Hebrew
original. We have seen how, even before the Christian era, the Septuagint had acquired for itself
the position of an inspired book. Some four centuries after that era St. Augustine remarks that the
Greek- speaking Christians for the most part did not even know whether there was any other word
of God than the Septuagint {CD. XVIII, 43). So when other nations became converted to Christianity
and wanted the Scriptures in their own tongues, it was almost always the Septuagint which formed
.the basis of the translation. This was so in the case of the early Latin version, which was in use
before the Vulgate; and it was so also in the case of the translations made into Coptic, Ethiopic,
Armenian, Georgian, Gothic, and other languages. The only exception to the rule is the first Syriac
version, which was made direct from the Hebrew. When at the close of the fourth century St. Jerome
had recourse to the Hebrew original in revising the accepted Latin text, the authority of the Septuagint
stood in the way of the immediate acceptance of his work. , 'The Churches of Christ,' said St.
Augustine, 'do not think that anyone is to be preferred to the authority of so many men chosen out
by the High-priest Eleazar for the accomplishment of so great a work.'
Nevertheless Jerome's revision did triumph in the end, and under the name of the Vulgate
became the accepted text of the Western Church. But the Vulgate itself is deeply tinctured by the
Septuagint and has in its turn influenced our English Bible. Many of the names of Scripture
characters, e.g. Balaam and Samson, come to us from the Septuagint, not from the Hebrew; our
Bible often follows the verse-division of the Septuagint as against that of the Hebrew; the titles of
the five books of Moses are derived from the Septuagint, not from the Hebrew. Thus the Septuagint,
while it still survives in the East, continued its reign even in the West through the Vulgate; nor was
it until the time of the Reformation that the Hebrew Scriptures themselves began to be generally
studied in Western Europe.
Never surely has a translation of any book exercised so profound an influence upon the world
as the Septuagint version of the Old Testament. This work has had more bearing upon ourselves
than we are perhaps inclined to think. For it was the first step towards that fusion of the Hebraic
with the Hellenic strain, which has issued in the mind and heart of modem Christendom. Like the
opening of the Suez Canal, it let the waters of the East mingle with those of the West, bearing with
them many a freight of precious merchandise. Without the Septuagint there could have been,
humanly speaking, no New Testament: for the former provided to the latter not only its vehicle of
language, but to a great extent also its moulds of thought. These last were of course ultimately
Semitic, but when religious ideas had to be expressed in Greek, it was difficult for them to escape
change in the process.
15
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
So long as the New Testament is of interest to mankind, the Septuagint must share that interest
with it. The true meaning of the former can only be arrived at by correct interpretation of the
language, and such correct interpretation is well-nigh impossible to those who come to the Jewish
Greek of the reign of Nero and later with notions derived from the age of Pericles. Not only had
the hterary language itself, even as used by the most correct writers, undergone great changes during
the interval, but, further than this, the New Testament is not written in literary, but rather in colloquial
Greek, and in the colloquial Greek of men whose original language and ways of thinking were
Semitic, and whose expression was influenced at every turn by the phraseology of the Old Testament.
If we wish then to understand the Greek of the New Testament, it is plain that we must compare it
with the Greek of the Old, which belongs, like it, to post-classical times, is colloquial rather than
hterary, and is so deeply affected by Semitic influence as often to be hardly Greek at all, but rather
Hebrew in disguise. That everything should be compared in the first instance with that to which it
is most like is an obvious principle of scientific method, but one which hitherto can hardly be said
to have been generally applied to the study of the New Testament. Now however there are manifold
signs that scholars are beginning to realise the importance of the study of the Greek Old Testament
in its bearing upon the interpretation of the New.
Attic Greek was like a vintage of rare flavour which would only grow on a circumscribed soil.
When Greek became a world-language, as it did after the conquests of Alexander, it had to surrender
much of its delicacy, but it still remained an effective instrument of thought and a fit vehicle for
philosophy and history. The cosmopohtan form of literary Greek which then came into use among
men of non- Attic, often of non-Hellenic origin, was known as the Common (Koivri, sc. SidAeKToq)
or Hellenic dialect. Aristotle may be considered the first of the Hellenists, though, as a disciple of
Plato, he is far nearer to Attic purity than the Stoics, Epicureans, and Academics who followed
him.
Hellenistic Greek we may regard as the genus, of which Alexandrian Greek is a species. Now
the language of the Septuagint is a variety of Alexandrian Greek, but a very peculiar variety. It is
no fair specimen either of the colloquial or of the literary language of Alexandria.
The interesting light thrown upon the vocabulary of the Septuagint by the recent publication
of Egyptian Papyri has led some writers to suppose that the language of the Septuagint has nothing
to distinguish it from Greek as spoken daily in the kingdom of the Ptolemies. Hence some fine
scorn has been wasted on the 'myth' of a 'Bibhcal' Greek. 'Bibhcal Greek' was a term aptly applied
by the late Dr. Hatch to the language of the Septuagint and New Testament conjointly. It is a
serviceable word, which it would be unwise to discard. For, viewed as Greek, these two books have
features in common which are shared with them by no other documents. These features arise from
the strong Semitic infusion that is contained in both. The Septuagint is, except on occasions, a
hteral translation from the Hebrew. Now a literal translation is only half a translation. It changes
the vocabulary, while it leaves unchanged the syntax. But the life of a language lies rather in the
syntax than in the vocabulary. So, while the vocabulary of the Septuagint is that of the market-place
of Alexandria, the modes of thought are purely Hebraic. This is a rough statement concerning the
Septuagint as a whole: but, as the whole is not homogeneous, it does not apply to all the parts. The
Septuagint does contain writing, especially in the books of the Maccabees, which is Greek, not
Hebrew, in spirit, and which may fairly be compared with the Alexandrian Greek of Philo.
The New Testament, having itself been written in Greek, is not so saturated with Hebrew as
the Septuagint: still the resemblance in this respect is close enough to warrant the two being classed
16
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
together under the title of Biblical Greek. Hence we must dissent from the language of Deissmann,
when he says 'The linguistic unity of the Greek Bible appears only against the background of
classical, not of contemporary "profane," Greek.' Biblical Greek does appear to us to have a
hnguistic unity, whether as compared with the current Alexandrian of the Papyri or with the literary
language of such fairly contemporary authors as Aristeas, Aristobulus, and Philo, not to add others
who might more justly be called 'profane.'
The language of the Septuagint, so far as it is Greek at all, is the colloquial Greek of Alexandria,
but it is Biblical Greek, because it contains so large an element, which is not Hellenic, but Semitic.
Josephus, it has been asserted, employs only one Hebraism, namely, the use of TrpooTi6eo9aiwith
another verb in the sense of 'doing something again' (see Gram, of Sept. Gk. § 1 13). For the accuracy
of this statement it would be hazardous to vouch, but the possibility of its being made serves to
show the broad difference that there is between Hellenistic Greek, even as employed by a Jew,
who, we know, had to learn the language, and the Biblical Greek of the Septuagint.
The uncompromising Hebraism of the Septuagint is doubtless due in part to the reverence felt
by the translators for the Sacred Text. It was their business to give the very words of the Hebrew
Bible to the Greek world, or to those of their own countrymen who lived in it and used its speech;
as to the genius of the Greek language, that was entirely ignored. Take for instance Numbers 9: 10
"AvBpooTToq av6poo7to<; o sdv y^vrirai ocKaBapToq em ^j^uxfi dvOpooTiou, r\ sv 65(x) jaaKpdv vyXv r\ kv
xdic; ysvediq ujaoov, Kal Tioiriaei to Tidaxa Kupico. Does anyone suppose that stuff of that sort was
ever spoken at Alexandria? It might as well be maintained that a schoolboy's translation of Euripides
represents English as spoken in America.
One of our difficulties in explaining the meaning of the Greek in the Septuagint is that it is
often doubtful whether the Greek had a meaning to those who wrote it. One often cannot be sure
that they did not write down, without attaching any significance to them, the Greek words which
seemed to be the nearest equivalents to the Hebrew .before them. This is especially the case in the
poetical passages, of which Deuteronomy 33: 10b will serve for an instance — emQr\oovoiv Qvyiiayia
£v opyfi oov, 5id navxbq em to Qvoiaoxr\pi6v oov.. We can account for this by aid of the original:
but what did it mean to the translator?
Another obvious cause of difference between Bibhcal and Alexandrian Greek is the necessity
under which the translators found themselves of inventing terms to express ideas which were wholly
foreign to the Greek mind.
The result of these various causes is often such as to cause disgust to the classical student.
Indeed a learned Jesuit Father has confessed to us what a shock he received on first making
acquaintance with the Greek of the Septuagint. But the fastidiousness of the classical scholar must
not be nourished at the expense of narrowing the bounds of thought. The Greek language did not
die with Plato; it is not dead yet; like the Roman Empire it is interesting in all stages of its growth
and its decline. One important stage of its life-history is the ecclesiastical Greek, which followed
the introduction of Christianity. This would never have been but for the New Testament. But neither,
as we have said before, would the New Testament itself have been but for the Septuagint.
17
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Abbreviations
1 Clem.
2 Clem.
Ace.
Ant.
B
B.J.
Barn.
Ep.
Gen.
Herm.
Hes.
Hom.
II
Isocr.
Jos.
L. &S.
Mart.
Mss.
N.T.
0'
Od
Past. Mdt.
Past. Sim.
Past. Vis.
Plat.
Plant.
e
S. Ign.
Sim.
Xen
Ec
1 Clement
2 Clement
Accusative
Antiquities.
(Codex) Vaticanus
Wars of the Jews (Josephus)
Barnabas
Epistle
Genitive (sometimes Genesis)
Hermas
Hesiod
Homer
Iliad
Isocrates
Josephus
Liddell and Scott.
Martyrdom of Polycarp
Manuscripts
New Testament
Origen
Odyssey
Shepherd, Mandate.
Shepherd, Similitudes.
Shepherd, Visions.
Plato
Plautinus
Theodotion
Ignatius
Similitudes
Xenophon
Economics
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Eur Euripides
I.T. Iphigenia in Tauris
Phaedr Phaedrus
Thuc Thucydides
Cyrop Cyropedia
19
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
GRAMMAR OF SEPTUAGINT GREEK
20
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
ACCIDENCE
NOUNS, 1-14
1. Disuse of the Dual. The Greek of the LXX has two numbrs, the singular and the plural. The
dual, which was already falling into disuse in the time of Homer, and which is seldom addhered to
systematically in classical writers, has disappeared altogether.
Gen. 40:2 em zoic; Suolv euvouxoiq auTou. Ex. 4:9 ToTq Suai arnaeioic; toutok;.
Contrast with the above —
Plat. Rep. 470 B em SuoTv SiacpopaTv. Isocr. Paneg. 55 c nepi toTv noXeoiv toutoiv.
2. Eiq as Article. Under the influence of Hebrew idiom we find the numeral eiq turning into an
indefinite pronoun in the Greek of the LXX, as in Gen. 42:27 Auoaq Ee ei(; xov ladpoiTTTiov aurou,
and then subsiding into a mere article, as -
Jdg. 13:2 [Codex B] dvrip eiq, 9:53 yuvr) \\.ia. 2 K. [2 Sam.] 2:18 coasl yda SopKocq ev dypto. 2
Esd. [Ezra] 4:8 syP'^^oc'v emoxoXr\\ \\.ia\. Ezk. 4:9 ayycxi ev oorpaKivov.
There are instances of the same usage in the two most Hebraistic books of the N. T.
Mt. 8:19 ei(; ypayiyLaxevq, 9:18 apxoov eiq, 21:19 ouKfjv jjiav, 26:69 jjia TiaiSioKri, Rev. 8:13
£v6(; derou, 9:13 cpoovriv jjiav, 18:21 eiq ayyeXoc;, 19:17 eva dyY^^ov.
Our own indefinite article 'a' or 'an' (Scotch ane) is originally the same as 'one.' We can also
see the beginning of the French article in the colloquial language of the Latin comedians.
Ter. And. 118 forte unam aspicio adulescentulam.
Plant. Most. 990 unum vidi mortuum efferri foras.
Apart from the influence of the Hebrew, etc; is occasionally found in good Greek on the way to
becoming an article. See L. & S. under eiq 4. In German the indefinite article and the first of the
numerals coincide, and so a German, in beginning to speak English, frequently puts 'one' for 'a."
In the same way a Hebrew learning to speak Greek said eiq deroq and so on.
3. First Declension. In classical Greek there is a tendency for proper names, especially those
of foreign origin, which end in the nominative in -a preceded by a consonant other than p, to retain
the a in the genitive, e.g. ArjSac;, 'AvSpojaeSac;, KoviTrAeyac; (name of a Spanish town, App. VI De
Reb. Hisp. 43). In pursuance of this analogy we have such genitives as BdAAaq and ZeAcpaq (Gen.
37:2), Zouodvvaq (Sus. 0' 30).
On the other hand, nouns in -a pure, or -a preceded by p, are in a few instances found in the
LXX to take the Ionic form of the genitive and dative in -iqq and -r\.
Ex. 8:21[20] Kuvojamav . . . Kuvojamriq, 15:9 rfj laaxaipn. and Gen. 27:40. IK. [1 Sam.] 25:20
auTfjq £m|3£|3riKmri(; em xr\v ovov. 2 Mac. 8:23, 12:22 oneipr\(;.
It is said that in the Papyri oTieipric; is always used, never oneipaq.
The plural of yf\ is found in the LXX
Acc.Yd(;4K. [2 Kings] 18:35. Genyaioov 4K. [2 Kings] 18:35; Ps. 48:11; Ezk. 36:24; 2 Esd.
[Ezra] 9:1 and three other passages. Datyavq 4 K. [2Kings] 10:11. Yd(;4K. [2Kings] 19:ll.Yociai(;
Dan. 0' 11:42.
21
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
4. Second Declension, eeoq has a vocative Bee. Dt. 3:24: Jdg. 21:3, 16:28; Wisd. 9:1. Usually,
however ,the nominative is employed for the vocative, as in —
Ps. 21:1 [21:2] 6 Qebq 6 Qeoq jaou Ttpooxsc; Vioi ivari eYKaxekmeq jis;
But in Matthew 27:46 this passage assumes the form —
Qee yLov Qee \iov ivaxi yie kyKaxeXinec;;
The Attic form of this declension is of rare occurrence in the LXX. Aaoq and vaoq are the
regular forms. Asooq does not occur at all, and veooq only in Second Maccabees. aXux; is common:
but for that there is no non-Attic form, as it does not arise, like the others, on the principle of
transpositon of quantity.
5. Third Declension. The word aKvi\|; (Ex. 8:16) is interesting, as adding another instance of
a noun-stem in -cp to the rare word KarfjAiij; and vicpa, which occurs only in the accusative in Hes.
Op. 533. iKvixp is also found in the LXX with the stem okvitt-.
6. Absence of Contraction. Many words are left uncontracted in the LXX which in Attic Greek
would be contracted, e.g. —
Dt. 18:11 £Tra£i5oov £Traoi5riv. Prov. 3:8 ooxeon;. Sir. 6:30 xpuoeoq. Ps. 73:17 sap.
7. Feminine Forms of Movable Substantives. The form ^aoiXwoa for l^aaiAeia was not
approved by Atticists. It is comon in the LXX, whereas ^aoiXeia does not occur. Cf. Acts 8:27.
On the analogy of it we have 'Apd|3ioaa in Job 42:17, (pvXamooa in Song 1:6. The following also
may be noted: —
Y£V6Ti(; Wisd 7:12 A, texvTtk; 7:22, yivoxn; 8:4. uj^piorpia Jer. 27:31
8. Heteroclite Nouns.
alQaXx] (Ex. 9:8, 10) for aTOaAoq, which does not occur.
aAcov (Hos. 9:2), aoovoq (Jdg. 15:5) for aAooq, aAoo. Cf. Mt. 3:12, Lk 3:17 xr\v aXoova. In the
LXX both aAoov and aAooq are of common gender. Thus Ruth 3:2 tov aAoova, 3:14 xr\v aAoova;
Jug. 6:37 Tfi aXoivi; 1 Chr. 21:15 £v tw aXod, 21:21 £k rfjc; aAoo. Josephus (Ant. 5.9.3) has rfjc;
aAoooq.
Ynpouq, YHP^i^ for ynpooc;, yr\pa, but nominative always yf\pa(;. For ynpouq, see Gen. 37:3; Ps.
70:9, 18; but in Gen 44:20 Ynpooq. Forynpei see Gen. 15:15, Ps. 91:15, Sir. 8:6, Dan. 0' 6:1. When
one form is used, the other generally occurs as a variant. In Clement 1 Cor. 63:3 we have ecoq
Ynpouq.
eXeo(;, x6 for e'Aeoq, 6. Plural xa eXer\ (Ps. 16:7). The masculine form occurs in some dozen and
a half passages (e.g. Ps. 83:11; Prov. 3:16, 14:22). In N.T. also and in the Apostolic Fathers the
neuter is the prevailing form, e.g. 2 Tim 1:16, 18; Tit. 3:5; Hb. 4:16; Herm. Past. Vis. 2.2.3, 3.9.1,
S/m. 4.2; 1 Clem. 9:1, 14:1; 2 Clem 3:1, 16:2; Barn. £/?. 15:2. In Mt. 9:13, 12:7, 23:23 the masculine
form occurs, the two former being quotations from Hos. 6:6, where the LXX has the neuter.
eveSpov (Jdg. 16:2) for sveEpa. The former is quite common, the latter occurs only in Josh.
8:7, 9; Ps. 9:28.
Auxvoq, TO (Dan. 0' 5:0).
viKoq, TO (1 Esdras 3:9) for viK^. Cp. 1 Cor 15:55, 57; Herm. Past. Mdt. 12.2.5.
OKOToq, TO for 6, occurs in the best Attic prose as well as in the LXX (e.g. Is. 42: 16) and in the
N.T. (e.g. 1 Thes. 5:5). Cp. Barn£^. 14:6, 18:1.
22
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
The N. T. and the Apostolic Fathers afford other instances of heteroclites, which do not occur
in the LXX. Thus —
^fjAoq, TO (Phil. 3:6; 1 Clem. 4:8, 11, 13; 6:1, 2; 9:1; 63:2, but in 5:2, 5 Sid ^fjAov; Ignat. Ad
Tral. 4:2).
TiAouq declined like ^ov(; (Acts 27:9; Mart. S. Ign. 3 eixsTO xov nkooc,).
ttAoutoc;, to (2 Cor. 8:2; Eph. 1:7; 2:7; 3:8, 16; Phil. 4:19; Col. 1:27; 2:2).
Tucpoq, TO (1 Clem. 13:1).
9. Verbal Nouns in -|aa.
a. The Abundance of verbal nouns in - |aa is characteristic of Hellenistic Greek from
Aristotle onwards. The following instances from the LXX are taken at random —
dYvoiqiaa Gen. 43:12 (6 times in all),
dvojarivia 1 Ki. [1 Sam.] 25:28 (17 times in all).
SixoToviTiiaa Gen. 15:11 (5 times in all).
KaxaXeiyiyia Gen. 45:7 (20 times in all).
u\j;oovia . . . yavpia\ia . . . Kauxnvioc Judith 15:9
b. A point better worth noting is the preference for the short radical vowl in their
formation, e.g. —
dvdeevia Lvt. 27:28 etc. So in the N.T. Acts 23:14; Rom. 9:3; 1 Cor. 12:3, 16:22; Gal. 1:8, 9.
In Judith 16:19 we have the classical form avdQrwia. For the short vowel in the LXX, cp. 6£via,
SKOsjaa, £m6£|aa, napaQe\ia, npooQeyLa, auv9£|aa.
d(paip£via Ex. 29:27; Lvt. 7:4, 24 etc.
d(p£via 1 Mac. 9:28. So Kde£via, Is. 3:19, Ezk. 16:11.
Gen. 25:6 etc. So in N.T.
£up£Via Sir. 20:9; 29:4.
£\l;£Via Gen. 25:29 etc.
ovoxeyLa Gen. 1:10 etc. So dvdoT£|aa. In Judith 12:9 dvdoTrivia.
Xuvia (for) 2 Mac. 2:24.
10. Non- Attic Forms of Substantives.
dAooTiriKac; accusative plural (Jdg. 15:4) for aXoinsKac;.
apKoq (1 K. [1 Sam.] 17:34) for dpKTOc;, which does not occur. Cp. Rev. 13:2 dpKou.
STva (Job 13:11; 28:10) for Sivri-
£UOTpov (Dt. 18:3) for fjvuoTpov. So in Jos. Ant. 4.4.4.
ETraoiSoq (Ex. 7: 1 1) for eTiwSoq, which does not occur.
KAi|3avo(; (Ex. 7:28) for Kpil^avoq. So also in N.T.
Vi6Ai|3o(; (Ex. 15:10), the Homeric form, for |a6Au|35o(;.
TavieTov (Ex. 7:28: Jdg. 3:24, 15:1, 16:12) for TaviisTov, which also occurs frequently. The
shorter form is common in the Papyri.
v\\)eia (Tob. 8:21) for vyieia. In later Greek generally vyeia is usual, but the fuller form prevails
in the LXX.
X£tViappo(;(l K. [1 Sam.] 17:40) for xsivdppouq.
11. Non-Attic Forms of Adjectives.
23
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
evQr\(;, evQe(;, for euBuq, 6u9eTa, £u9u, which also occurs frequently.
fjviiouq, -u is an adjective of two terminations in the LXX. ri|aio£ia does not occur. Cp. Nb.
34:14 TO fjijiau cpuAfjc; Mavaoor\ with Jos. Ant. 4.7.3 Kai rfjc; MavaooinSoq r\\iioeia.
xdAKEioq, -a, -ov, the Homeric form, occurs in Jdg. 16:21, 1 Esd. 1:38, 5 times in Job, and in
Sir. 28:20 for xocAKOuq, xoc^kH' Xo^^kouv, which is very common.
dpYupiKoq 1 Esd. 8:24 only. Cp. Aristeas.37, who has also sAaiKog aiTiKoq, xocpiariKoq (112,
37, 227).
aioxuvTTipoc; Sir. 26:15, 35:10, 42:1 only.
oiYripo<i Prov. 18:18, Sir. 26:14 only.
KAe^jJiviaToq Tob. 2:13 only.
Gviqaiviatoq often used in the neuter for 'a corpse,' e.g. 3 K. [2 Kings} 13:25.
12. Comparison of Adjectives.
ayaQu)xepo(; (Jdg. 1 1:25, 15:2) is perhaps an instance of that tendency to regularisation in the
later stages of a language, which results from its being spoken by foreigners.
aioxporepoq (Gen. 41:19) is good Greek, though not Attic. 'Aioxioov does not seem to occur in
the LXX.
6YY100V and 'eyyiaxoq are usual in the LXX, e.g. Ruth 3: 12, 3 K. [2 Kings } 20:2, 'EyYiJTspoq does
not seem to occur at all, and eYYUTaroq only in Job 6:15, 19:14.
TrArioi£OT£pov adv. for TrArjoiaiTepov (4 Mac. 12:3).
13. Pronouns, a. Classical Greek has no equivalent for our unemphatic pronoun 'he.' One
cannot say exactly 'he said' in the Attic idiom. Auroq ecpiq is something more, and ecpiq something
less, for it may equally mean 'she said.' The Greek of the LXX gets over this difficulty by the use
of auToq as an unemphatic pronoun of the 3d person.
1 K. [1 Sam.] 17:42 Kai siSev FoAidS tov AauelS kox r\xi\iao£v avxov, on avxbq f\v Trai5dpiov
Kai avxbq TiuppdKriq \iexa KdAAouq 6(pQaX\iCdv.
In the above the repeated auroq is simply the nominative of the auTov preceding. In a classical
writer auToq so used would necessarily refer to Goliath himself. For other instances see Gen. 3:15,
16, 39:23: Nb. 17:5, 22:22: Jdg. 13:5, 16, 14:4, 17: 1 K. [1 Sam.] 17:2, 18:16. Winer denied that
this use of auToq is to be found in the N.T. But here we must dissent from his authority. See Mt.
5:5 and following: Lk. 6:20: 1 Cor. 7:12.
b. As usual in later Greek the compound reflexive pronoun of the 3d person is used for those
of the 1st and 2d.
Gen. 43:22 Kai dpyupiov exepov r\veyKayL£v yLsQ' eavxCdv. Dt. 3:7 Kai xa OKvXa toov ttoAeoov
£Trpovovi£uoa|a£v eavxoiq. 1 K. [1 Sam.] 17:8 SKXe^aoQe eavxoii; av5pa.
So also in Aristeas 3, 213, 217, 228 (eaurov = oeauTov), 248. This usage had akeady begun in
the best Attic. Take for instance -
Plat. Phoedo 91 C OTiooq \ir\ eyoo... djaa eauTov xe Kai ujadq e^ajtaxr\oa(;, 78 B Set r\\ia(; kpeoQai
eauTouq, 101 D ov Se SeSiooq dv... xr\v eavxov OKidv.
Instances abound in N.T.
Acts 23:14 aveQe\iaxioayisv kavxov(;, 5:35 npooexexe eavxoiq.
c. A feature more peculiar to LXX Greek is the use of the personal pronoun along with the
reflexive, like the English 'me myself,' 'you yourselves,' etc.
24
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Ex. 6:7 Kai Arjiaxpojaai e\iavx(x) ujaaq Xabv eyioi, 20:23 ou Troirio£T£ vyLiv eauroTq.
So also Dt. 4:16, 23: Josh. 22:16.
As there is nothing in the Hebrew to warrant this duplication of the pronoun, it may be set down
as a piece of colloquial Greek.
d. The use of TSioq as a mere possessive pronoun is common to the LXX with the N.T. e.g. -
Job 7:10 ou5' ou \ir\ emoxpe^w eiq tov TSiov oIkov. Mt. 22:5 aTtfjAOov, 6 \\.ev eiq tov iSiov ocYpov,
6 Se £711 xr\v £|aTropiav auTou.
14. Numerals, a. Suoi(v) is the regular form for the dative of Sue. So also in N.T. e.g. Mt. 6:24,
22:40: Lk. 16:13: Acts 12:6. Susiv occurs in Job 13:20, Suoiv in 4 Mac. 1:28, 15:2. Sometimes 5uo
is indeclinable, e.g. Jdg. 16:28 tcov 5uo ocpOaAjjoov.
b. The following forms of numerals differ from those in classical use: -
5£KaSuoEx.28:21:Josh.21:40, 18:24: IChr. 6:23, 15:10, 25:10ff. So in N.T. Acts 19:7, 24:11.
Cp. Aristeas 97.
5£Ka rpetq Gen. 17:25: Josh. 19:6.
S£Ka xeooapec; Josh. 15:36: Tob. 8:20. So in N.T. 2 Cor. 12:2, Gal. 2:1. Cp. Diog. Laert. 7.55.
5£Ka 7t£VT£ Ex. 27:15: Jdg. 8:10: 2 K. [2 Sam.] 19:17. So in N.T. Gal. 1:18.
8£Ka £^ Gen. 46:18: Ex. 26:25: Josh. 15:41.
5£Ka £TrTd Gen. 37:2, 47:28.
SEKaoKTO) Gen. 46:22: Josh. 24:33b: Jdg. 3:14, 10:8, 20:44: 1 Chr. 12:31: 2 Chr. 11:21.
The above numerals occur also in the regular forms -
SooSsKa Gen. 5:8.
rpetq Kai Sexa, rpioKaiSeKa Nb. 29:13, 14
xeooapeq Kai Sexa Nb. 16:49.
7t£VT£ Kai 5£Ka Lvt. 27:7: 2 K. [2 Sam.] 9:10
£KKai5£Ka, £^ Kai S£Ka Nb. 31:40, 46, 52
£TrTd Kai S£Ka Jer. 39:9.
OKTO) Kai S£Ka 2 K. [2 Sam.] 8:13.
kvvea Kai EsKa 2 K. [2 Sam.] 2:30 only.
c. The forms just given may be written separately or as one word. This led to the xeooapec; in
xeooapeoKaiEsKa becoming indeclinable, e.g. -
2 Chr. 25:5 viovc;xeooapeoKai5eKa.
The same license is extended in the LXX to EsKa xeooape(;.
Nb. 29:29 dvivouq eviavoiovq 5£Ka xeooapec; a\io)\iov(;.
The indeclinable use of xeooapeoKaiEsKa is not pecuhar to the LXX.
Hdt. 7.36 xeooapeoKaiBsKa {xpir\pea(;). Epict. Ench. 40 aTio xeooapeoKai^sKa exCdv. Strabo p.
177, 4.1.1 Trpoa£6riK£ S£ xeooapeoKaiBsKa eQvr\, 189, 4.2.1 £9voov xeooapeoKai^sKa.
d. The alternative expressions 6 ei-(; Kai dKOOToq (2 Chr. 24: 17) and 6 dKooToq npodxoc, (2 Chr.
25:28) are quite classical: but the following way of expressing days of the month may be noted -
Haggai 2:1 \\xa Kai £iKd8i tou \\.r\v6(;. 1 Mac. 1:59 ne\inxr\ Kai dKdSi tou \\.r[v6(;. Cp. 4:59. 2
Mac. 10:5 rfj TCjiTTTri Kai £iKd5i tou aurou \vr[v6(;.
25
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
VERBS, 15-33
15. The Verb Eivai. r\yir\v the 1st person singular of the imperfect, which is condemned by
Phrynichus, occurs frequently in the LXX. It is found also in the N.T. --
1 Cor. 13:11: Gal. 1:10, 22: Acts 10:30, 11:5, 17, 22:19, 20: Mt. 25:35: Jn. 11:15. According
to the text of Dindorf it occurs even in Eur. Hel. 93 1 . It is a familiar feature of Hellenistic Greek,
being common in Philo and Josephus, also in the Pastor of Hermas, and occuring moreover in such
authors as Epictetus (Diss. 1.16.19), Plutarch (Pomp. 74), Diogenes Laertius (6.56), Lucian (Asinus
46).
f\(; for f\oQa, which is condemned by the same authority, occurs in Jdg. 11:35: Ruth 3:2: Job
38:4: Obd. 1:11. Cp. Epict. Diss. 4.1.132.
earcooav is the only form for the 3d person plural imperative, neither sotoov nor ovtoov being
used. This form is found in Plato (Meno 92 D). See 16 d.
fJTOO or eoTOO occurs in Ps. 103:31: 1 Mac. 10:31, 16:3. So in N.T. 1 Cor. 16:22: James 5:12.
Cp. Herm. Past. Vis. 3.3.4: 1 Clem. 48:5, where it occurs four times.
fivieOa for r\]xev occurs in 1 K. [1 Sam.] 25:16: Baruch 1:19. This form appears in the Revisers'
textinEph. 2:3.
16. The Termination -oav. a. Probably the thing which will first arrest the attention of the
student who is new to the Greek of the LXX is the termination in -oav of the 3d person plural of
the historical tenses of the active voice other than the pluperfect.
There are in Greek two terminations of the 3d person plural of the historic tenses --
(1) in -V, (2) in -oav. Thus in Homer we have l^av and also e^r\oav. In Attic Greek the rule is
that thematic aorists (i.e. those which have a connecting vowel between the stem and the termination)
and imperfects take v, e.g. --
£-Auo-a-v, £-Aa|3-o-v, kXayi^av-o-v,
while non-thematic tenses and the pluperfect take -oav, e.g. --
£-5o-oav, £-Ti-6£-oav, £-A£-AuK-£-oav
In the Greek of the LXX, which in this point represents the Alexadrian vernacular, thematic 2d
aorists and imperfects may equally take -oav.
Of 2d aorists we may take the following examples --
d'Sooav or TSoaav, einooav, £Kpivoaav, kXa^ooav, £moaav, £upooav, £(p£pooav (=2d aor.),
Ecpdyooav, Ecpuyoaav, fjAOooav, rijadpToaav, fjpooav (Josh. 3:14).
Compounds of these and others abound, e.g. -
aTiriAOooav, SirjAOoaav, eiofiAOooav, e^rjAOoaav, TraprjAOooav, TrepirjAOooav, TipooriAOooav,
ouvriOooav, £V£|3dAooav, Trap£V£|3dAooav, e^eAiTiooav, KareAiTTOoav, dTieOdvooav, eior\\jayjooav .
b. Instances of imperfects, which, for our present purpose, mean historic tenses formed from a
strengthened present stem, do not come so readily to hand. But here are two -
£Aa|a|3dvooav Ezk. 22:12. £q)aivooav 1 Mac. 4:50.
These seem to be more common in the case of contracted vowel verbs --
sy^vvoooav Gen. 6:4 euOrivouoav Lam. 1:5.
STiri^ovouoav Nb. 1:18. rivovioOoav Ezk. 22:11.
26
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
8jroioOoav Job 1:4. Karsvoouoav Ex. 33:8.
exaneivovoav Judith 4:9. oiKoSojaouoav 2 Esd. [Ezra] 14:18.
suAoYouoav Ps. 61:5. Traperripouoav Sus. 6:12.
eSoAiouoav Ps. 5:9, 13:3.
Cp. Herm. Past. Sim. 6.2.7 svoxaQovaav, 9.9.5 eSoKouoav.
Such forms occur plentifully in Mss. of the N.T., but the Revisers' text has only eSoAioOoav
in Romans 3:13 (a quotation from Ps. 13:3) and napeXa^ooav in 2 Thes. 3:6.
c. The same termination -oav sometimes takes the place of -£v in the 3d person plural of the
optative.
aiveoaioav Gen. 49:8. Qr\pevoaioav Job 18:7.
einoioav Ps. 34:25. iSoiaav Job 21:20.
EKKOxpaioav Prov. 24:52 Kaxacpdyoioav Prov. 30:17.
eKAeiTTOioav Ps. 103:35. oXeoaioav Job 18:11, 20:10.
eXBoioav Dt. 33:16: Job 18:9, 11. nepmaxr\oaioav Job 20:26.
kveYKaioav Is. 66:20. Troiriaaiaav Dt. 1:44.
evXoyr\oaioav Ps. 34:25. nvpoevoaioav Job 20:10.
evpoioav Sir. 33:9. ^\)r\ka(pr\oaioav Job 5:14, 12:25.
d. In Hellenistic Greek generally -oav is also the termination of the 3d person plural of the
imperative in all voices, e.g. --
1 K. [1 Sam.] 30:22 anayeoQodoav Kal aTiooTpecpeTOOoav.
For instances in N.T. see 1 Cor. 7:9, 36: 1 Tim. 5:4: Tit. 3:14, Acts 24:20, 25:5.
17. Termination of the 2d Person Singular of Primary Tenses Middle and Passive. In the
LXX, as in Attic, the 2d person singular of the present and futures, middle and passive, ends in -r\,
e.g. ap^n, (pdyr\, Xvm]Qr\or\. The only exceptions to this rule in Attic are ^ovXei, oTsi, 6\j;£i, and
8081, of which the last is only used occasionally. In the LXX we have 6\p8i in Nb. 23: 13.
The full termination of the 2d person singular of primary tenses middle and passive (-oai),
which in Attic Greek appears only in the perfect of all verbs and in the present of -jai verbs, as
Xe-Xv-aai, 5i-5o-aai, is occasionally to be found in the LXX in other cases.
dTr8^8vouaai 3 K. [2 Kings} 14:6.
Koijaaoai Dt. 31:16 (A).
KTCcoai Sir. 6:7.
m8oaiDt. 28:39: Ruth 2:9, 14: 3 K. [2 Kings} 17:4: Ps. 127:2: Jer. 29:13 (A): Ezk. 4:11, 12:18,
23:32, 34.
(payeoai Ruth 2:14: Ezk. 12:18.
So in N.T. -
Kauxaoai Rom. 2:17, 23: 1 Cor. 4:7.
KaxaKavx&oai Rom. 9:18.
68uvaoai Lk. 16:25.
27
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
(pdyeoai Kai nieoai ov Lk. 17:8.
The Pastor of Hermas yields us enionaoai, nXavaoai, xpccoai. Such forms are still used in
Modern Greek.
In theory -oai is the termination of every 2d person singular in the middle and passive voices,
as in Si-So-aai, Xe-Xv-oai, so that m-£-oai, is a perfectly regular formation. But in Attic Greek the
a has dropped out wherever there is a connecting vowel, and then contraction has ensued. Thus
Ttieoai becomes first Tiieai, and finally mri. Confirmation of this theory is to be found in Homer,
where there are many examples of the intermediate form, e.g. avaipeai, Eevr\oeai, epx^ai, eux^oci,
TSriai, KsAeai, Xe^eai, XiXaieai, yiaiveai, ve\ieai, oSupeai, nodXeai. It is an interesting question
whether nieoai and (pdyeaai are survivals in the popular speech of pre-Homeric forms, or rather
revivals, as Jannaris and others think, on the analogy of the perfect middle and passive of all verbs
and of the present middle and passive of -vii verbs.
In Kauxaoai and the like, contraction has taken place in the vowels preceding the o (Kauxasaai
= Kauxaoai). aTiexevouoai (3 K. [2 Kings} 14:6) looks like a barbarism for dne^evodoai.
As against these fuller forms, we sometimes find contracted forms in the LXX, where the -oai
is usual in Attic.
Suvri for Suvaoai. Dan. 0' 5:16. So in N.T. Lk. 16:2: Rev. 2:2. In Eur. Hec. 253 Porson
substituted Suva for Evvr\, as being more Attic. Suvaoai itself occurs in Job 10:13, 35:6, 14, 42:2:
Wisd. 11:23: Dan. 6 2:26, 4:15, 5:16: Bel 6:24.
emoTH for emoxaoai. Nb. 20:14: Dt. 22:2: Josh. 14:6: Job 38:4: Jer. 17:16: Ezk. 37:4.
18. Aorist in -a. a. Another inflexional form for the frequency of which the classical student
will hardly be prepared is the aorist in -a in other than semivowel verbs. Attic Greek offers some
rare instances of this formation, as ein-a, r\veyK-a, exe-a, and in Homer we have such stray forms
as KrjavTsq (Od. 4.231), dXeaoQai (Od. 921 A), oeua (//. 20.189). Nevertheless this is the type which
has prevailed in the modern language.
b. In Attic the aorist siita occurs more frequently in the other moods than in the indicative (e.g.
Plat. Soph. 240 D dna\\xev, Prot. 353 A dnaxov imperative, Phileb. 60 D dnax(j), Meno 71 D
eiTiov imperative).
In the LXX this aorist is equally common in the indicative.
imam. 1:20: Ps. 40:5.
dnac; Gen. 44:23: Judith 16:14. Cp. Hom. //. 1 106, 108.
emavisv Gen. 42:31, 44:22, 26.
dnaxe Gen. 43.29, 44:28, 45:9.
emav Jdg. 14:15, 18: 1 K. [1 Sam.] 10:14: 2 K. [2 Sam.] 17:20, 19:42: 4 K. [2 Kings] 1:6: Tob.
7:5: Jer. 49:2.
elnov Gen. 45:17: Dan. 0' 2:7.
dndxhi Dan. 6 2:7.
dnaxe (imperative) Gen. 50:7. Cp. Hom. Od. 3.427.
dnao, Gen. 46:2.
c. While the classical aorist rjAOov is common in the LXX, the form with -a also occurs,
especially in the plural.
28
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
i]XQa\iev Nb. 13:28.
i]XQaxe Gen. 26:27, 42:12: Dt. 1:20: Jdg. 11:7.
iqAeav Gen. 47:18: Jdg. 12:1: 2 K. [2 Sam.] 17:20, 24:7: 2 Chr. 25:18: Dan. Q 2:2.
eXQaxo) Esther 5:4, 8: Is. 5:19: Jer. 17:15.
£A6aT£ Prov. 9:5.
eioeAOdroooav Ex. 14:6.
This aorist is common in Mss. of the N.T., but has not been admitted into the Revisers' text.
Cp. Herm. Past. Vis. 1.4.1 f\XQav, .3 aTrfjAOav: 1 Clem. 38:3 eior\XQayiev .
d. By the side of eiSov we have an aorist in -a, especially in the 3d person plural, where its
advantage is obvious. (See h below.)
d'Saviev 1 K. [1 Sam.] 10:14.
elSav Jdg. 6:28, 16:24: 1 K. [1 Sam.] 6:19: 2 K. [2 Sam.] 10:14, 19.
e. Similarly by the side of £i-Aov we have parts formed as though from £i-Aa.
KaQeiXav Gen. 44:11: 3 K. [2 Kings} 19:14.
el'AaToDt. 26:18.
aveiXaxo Ex. 2:5.
dTr£aaTolK.[l Sam.] 30:18.
SieiAavTO Josh. 22:8.
£^£iAdviTiv 1 K. [1 Sam.] 10:18.
£^£iAaTo Ex. 18:4, 8: Josh. 24:10: 1 K. [1 Sam.] 12:11, 17:37, 30:18.
TiapdAaTO Nb. 11:25.
f. The aorist eneoa occurs frequently in the 3d person plural, but is rare in other parts.
eneoa Dan. 0' 8:17. Tr£adTOO Jer. 44:20 (AS), 49:2 (AS).
eneoac; 2 K. [2 Sam.] 3:34. neoaxe Hos. 10:8.
Among compounds we find aneneoaxodoav, Bieneoav, eveneoav, eneneoav.
So in N.T. -
£Tr£oaRev. 1:17.
eneoav Rev. 5:14, 6:13, 11:16, 17:10: Hb. 11:30.
£^£Tr£oaT£ Gal. 5:4.
Cp. Polyb. 3.19.5 dvT£Tr£aav.
g. Other aorists of the same type are -
d^Oavav Tob. 3:9. eXa^av 2 K. [2 Sam.] 23:16.
£YKaT£AiTrav 2 Chr. 29:6. e(pdya\iev 2 K. [2 Sam.] 19:42.
e^aXav 3 K. [2 Kings} 6:3. e(pvyav Jdg. 7:21.
£Vi|3dAaT£ Gen. 44:1.
h. The frequency of the 3d person plural in this form is no doubt due to a desire to differentiate
the 3d person plural from the 1st person singular, which are confounded in the historic tenses ending
in -ov. It also secured uniformity of ending with the aorist in -oa. In 2 K. [2 Sam.] 10:14 we have
this collocation -
ei^av . . . ecpvyav . . . dafjAOav . . . dv£OTp£iJ;av.
In Jdg. 6:3 we find the anomalous form dv£|3aivav followed by ovvave^aivov.
29
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
19. Augment, a. The augment with the pluperfect is at times omitted by Plato and the best Attic
writers. Instances in the LXX are -
£v5£5uK£i Lvt. 16:23.
ene^e^r\Kei Nb. 22:22.
TTETrooKei 1 K. [1 Sam.] 30:12.
yieyievr\Keioav 1 Jn. 2:19.
it£7tioT£UK8ioav Acts 14:23.
TTETTOiriKeiaav Mk. 15:7.
|3£|3pa)K£i 1 K. [1 Sam.] 30:12.
SeSooKEiv 2 K. [2 Sam.] 18:11.
5s5coK£i3K. [2Kings} 10:13
£v585i3k£iv Job 29:14.
So in N.T. -
SeSooKEi Mk. 14:44.
8£8ooK£ioav Jn. 11:57: cp. Mk. 15:10.
tK^e^Xr\Kei Mk. 16:9.
K6KpiK£i Acts 20:16.
But in the LXX we occasionally find other historic tenses without the augment, e.g. 2 Esd.
[Ezra] 14:18 oiKoSoviouoav. This is especially the case with eiSov.
TSeq Lam. 3:59. I'Sov Gen. 37:25, 40:5.
TSev Gen. 37:9, 40:6. TipoiSov Gen. 37:18.
b. In Attic Greek, when a preposition had lost its force and was felt as part of the verb, the
augment was placed before, instead of after, it, as SKaQevBov, £Kd6i^ov, eKaQr\\\.r\v.
The same law holds in the Greek of the LXX, but is naturally extended to fresh cases, e.g. to
7rpovo|i£U£iv, which in the Alexandrian dialect seems to have been the common word for 'to ravage.'
£Trpovo|a£uoa|a£v Dt. 2:35, 3:7. riv£xi3paoav Job 24:3.
enpovoyievoav Nb. 31:9.
c. The aorist ri'voi^a is already found in Xenophon. In the LXX it is common, though by no
means to the exclusion of the form with internal augment. Besides fjvoi^a itself, which is conjugated
throughout the singular and plural, we have also the following --
rivoixen Nb. 16:32: Ps. 105:17, 108:1.
rivoixOric^'^^ Ezk. 1:1.
rivoiYVi£va Is. 42:20.
So also in N.T. -
fivoi^£ Acts 12:14, 14:27: Rev. 8:1.
Sirivoi^£ Acts 16:14.
fjvoiYov 1 Mac. 11:2.
rivoiY£'i:o 3 K. [2 Kings} 7:21.
5irivoiY|a£vou(; Acts 7:56.
rivoiYn Rev. 11:19.
Besides the Attic form with double internal augment, aveod^a, the LXX has also forms which
augment the initial vowel of this, and so display a triple augment. --
riv£a)^£Gen. 8:6:3Mac. 6:18.
r\veddxQnoav Gen. 7:11: Sir. 43:14: Dan. 7:10.
riv£q)YVi£vou<; 3 K. [2 Kings} 8:29: 2 Chr. 6:20, 40, 7:15: Neh. 1:6.
r\ve(x)yyL£va 3 K. [2 Kings} 8:52.
So in N.T. -
30
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
r\ve(jdyyLevov Rev. 10:8.
d. In Trpo(pTiT£U8iv the internal augment is wrong, since the verb is formed on the noun TipocpriTTiq.
In the LXX ■n:poe(pr\xevoev occurs only in 1 K. [1 Sam.] 18:10 (A) and Sir. 46:20. Nevertheless this
is the form which has been everywhere preferred in the Revisers' text of the N.T.
Trpo6(priT£uov Acts 19:6.
Trpoe(priT£uo£ Mt. 15:7: Mk. 7:6: Lk. 1:67: Jn. 11:51: Jude 14.
Trpo6(priT£uoaia£v Mt. 7:22.
Trpo6(priT£uoav Mt. 11:18.
e. Instances of double augment in the LXX are --
dTr£KaT£OTri Ex. 15:27.
dTr£KaT£OTrio£v 1 Esd. 1:33.
iqvooxArieriv 1 K. [1 Sam.] 30:13. Cp. Dan. 3:50: Dan. 0' 6:18.
20. Reduplication a. In verbs compounded with a preposition reduplication is sometimes
applied to the preposition.
KEKaxapayievoc; Dt. 21:23: Sir. 3:16. Cp. Enoch 27:2.
Tr£Trpovovi£U|a£vo(; Is. 42:2. Cp. 19.b.
b. In the form K£KaTripavTai (Nb. 22:6, 24:9. Cp. Enoch 27:1,2.) we have what may be called
double reduplication.
c. With p£piiaii£vo(; (Jdg. 4:22) and £Kp£pivivi£VTiv (Jdg. 15:15) may be compared Homer's
p£puTroovi£va (Od. 6.59). pepi(pQai [pepi(pQai] is cited from Pindar by Choeroboscus.
d. The reduplicated present £k5i5uok£iv occurs in four passages --
1 K. [1 Sam.] 31:8: 2 K. [2 Sam.] 23:10: Neh. 4:23: Hos. 7:1. It is used also by Josephus. Kixpav,
'to lend,' occurs in three passages --
1 K. [1 Sam.] 1:28: Prov. 13:11: Ps. 111:5. KixpHVi is used in this sense by Demosthenes.
e. The verb Kpd^£iv has a reduplicated weak aorist, £K£Kpa^a, which is very common, especially
in the Psalms; also a reduplicated strong aorist, though this is very rare.
£K£KpaY£v Is. 6:3. EKEKpayov Is. 6:4.
21. Attic Future, a. What is called the Attic future, i.e. the future out of which a has dropped,
is more common in the LXX than in Attic Greek. Thus the future of kXml,eiv, so far as it appears
in Attic authors at all, is eAmoco: but in the LXX it is always eXmCd. Among verbs in -i^oo which
take this form of future are --
aixviaAooTi^eiv
eYyi^eiv
K£paTl^£lV
oioovi^eiv
dTTOOKopaKi^eiv
ETTlOTTlpi^eiV
Kovii^eiv
oa |3|3aTi^6iv
dcpayvi^eiv
evayyeXi^eiv
yLsXi^eiv
ovXXoyi^eiv
dcpavi^eiv
KaOapi^eiv
Viepi^eiv
OUV£Tl^£lV
d(popi^£iv
Ka6i^£iv
There is no apparent reason for the contradiction in the future of verbs in -i^eiv. The retention
of in the future of such verbs is quite exceptional, as in Eccl. 11:4 Qepioei (mid.), Lvt. 25:5
SKQepioeK;. Of the two versions of Daniel 0' has in 4:29 ipooviiaouoi, while 6 has ipooviiouoiv.
Miqvieiv has a future in the LXX of the same sort as verbs in -i^eiv.
31
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
jirivico Jer. 3:12. \ir[viei(; Lvt. 19:18.
jjrivisTPs. 102:9.
b. In Attic Greek there are a few instances of verbs in -d^eiv dropping the o and contracting in
the future. Thus |3i|3d^£iv, e^exal,eiv have the futures |3i|36o, e^exG) in addition to the full forms. In
the LXX the former of these sometimes retains the a in the future (Dt. 6:7: Ps. 31:8: Is. 40: 13: Wisd.
6:3: Sir. 13: 1 1), the latter always: but the tendency which they exemplify is carried out in the case
of other verbs in -d^eiv. Hence we meet with the following futures --
dpTia Lvt. 19:13.
dpTTOOjaai Hos. 5:14.
£K5iKdTai Lvt. 19:18: Dt. 32:43: Judith 11:10.
kpya Gen. 4:12, 29:27: Ex. 20:9, 34:21: Lvt. 25:40: Dt. 5:13, 15:19: 2 K.[2 Sam.] 9:10.
epyaxai Lvt. 25:40: Job 33:29.
epYOOvrai Is. 5:10: Jer. 37:8, 9, 22:13, 41:14: Ezk. 48:19.
Karepyd Dt. 28:39.
Koi|adDt. 31:16.
KoijadTai Job 8:17.
c. Both in the LXX and in the N.T. semivowel verbs, i.e. those with X, p, vi, v, have a contracted
future, as in Attic, e.g. ipaAoo, onepeiq, xeyLeic;, pavei.
d. In Attic Greek the future of x£00 is still x£00 and indistinguishable from the present. In the
LXX the future is distinguished by being treated as a contracted tense. Thus we have --
6KX600, SX^Siq, £KX££t,
eKxseixe, skxsouoi.
The 1st person plural does not seem to occur.
e. To the contracted futures the LXX adds the post-classical eXG), from the same stem as si-Aov.
This future occurs both in the active and the middle voices, e.g. dcpeAoo (Nb. 11:17), e^eXeioQe
(Josh. 2:13).
So in N.T. -
dveAet 2 Th. 2:8.
f. In Attic xeXeiv and KaAsTv are in the future indistinguishable from the present. In the later
Greek of the LXX this ambiguity is avoided by the retention of the full form of the future. Thus
we have —
ovvxeXeood, ovvxeXeosK;, ovvxeXeoei,
ovvxeXeoexe, ovvxeXeoovoiv,
and
KaXeoo), KaXeosK;, KaXeoei,
KaXeoexe, KaXeoovoiv.
g. The future oXeooi, which is common in Homer but rare in Attic, does not occur in the LXX,
which has only the contracted forms --
oAeTProv. 1:32. oAouvrai Prov. 2:22, 13:2, 15:5, 16:33, 25:19.
32
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
oAsitai Job 8:13.
h. On the other hand, eXaoeit; in Ex. 25: 1 1 is the only instance of the future of eXavvoi in the
LXX.
i. In Attic OKeMvvvyn has future aK£5co, but in the LXX it retains the o, e.g. SiaoKsSdooo Jdg.
2:1.
22. Retention of Short Vowel in the Future. As a rule in Greek a and £ verbs lengthen the
vowel in forming the future. Exceptions are OTidoo and xocAdoo among a verbs, and among £ verbs
aiv£00, KaA£00, t£A£00. When the vowel is short in the future, it is also short in the 1st aorist.
To the £ verbs which have the vowel short in the future and 1st aorist we may add from the
LXX Trov£Tv, (pQoveiv, (popeiv.
So in N.T. -
£(pop£oaia£v (pop£aovi£v 1 Cor. 15:49.
Cp. Herm. Past. Sim. 9.13.3, 15.6 e(p6peoav.
23. Aorist of Semivowel Verbs. In Attic Greek semivowel verbs with a in their stem lengthen
the d into r\ in forming the 1st aorist (as cpav-, Ecpiqva), except after i or p, when they lengthen into
d (as jjiav-, £|aidva, Tr£pav-, £Tr£pdva). See G. .672.
In the LXX many such verbs lengthen into d when the d of the stem is preceded by a consonant.
Hence we meet with such forms as EyAuKavaq, £KKd6apov, £^£Kd9apa, £Tr£xapa(;, enicpavov,
£Troi|aav£v, £oriiiav£v, ori|idvri, ucpdvai, vcpavev, ucpdvrjc;, ^aXaxe. In Amos 5:2 eocpaXev is
ambiguous, as it might be 2d aorist.
The form KaQdpr\(; is read in Dindorfs text of Xen. Ec. 18.8, and in Hermann's text of Plato
Laws 735 we have Ka6dpri in B followed by Ka6rip£i£v in D. The aorist eor\\iava is found as early
as Xenophon. Cp. Aristeas 16, 33. 'EK£p5ava was always regarded as good Attic.
Such forms are also to be found in the N.T., e.g. --
£|3daKav£v Gal. 3:1. £ari|aav£v Rev. 1:1.
24. The Strong Tenses of the Passive. The Greek of the LXX displays a preference for the
strong over the weak tenses of the passive, i.e. for the tenses which are formed directly from the
verbal stem, namely, the 2d aorist and the 2d future. Thus riYY^^n^^' which is not to be found in
classical authors, except in a disputed reading of Eur. IT. 932, occurs frequently (in compounds)
in the LXX, and the future passive, when employed, is the corresponding form in -r\oo]xa\, e.g. Ps.
21:81 dvaYY£Ario£Tai, Ps. 58:13 SiayY^ArioovTai.
So again from piTiTOO we find only the 2d aorist and 2d future passive, e.g. Ezk. 19:12 Eppicpiq,
2 K. [2 Sam.] 20:21 picprjaerai.
The following are other instances of the same formation: -
^paxr\oexai (Bpexoo) Is. 34:3.
YpacprjoovTai Ezk. 13:9. Cp. Aristeas 32.
5i£6pu|3Tioav Nahum 1:6.
eKAeyfivai Dan. 0' 11:35.
kXv\jr\oexax Is. 34:4.
evecppdyri Ps. 62:12.
e^aAicpfivai 1 Chr. 29:4. Cp. Plat. Phaedr. 258 B.
33
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
eneoKenr\oav 1 Chr. 26:31.
r\Kaxaoxdxr\oav Tobit 1:15.
opuyfi Ps. 93:18.
TrepieTiAdKriaav Ps. 118:61.
ovve(ppvyr\oav Fs. 101:4.
vnexdyr\oav Ps. 59:10.
25. The Verbs neivav and 5i\pav. In Attic Greek these two verbs contract into r\ instead of a.
In the LXX they contract into a, and neivdoi further forms its future and aorist in a instead of r\.
edv neiva . . . edv Siipa Prov. 25:21. kneivai; Dt. 25:18.
5i\pa (ind.) Is. 29:8.
The parts of neivav which occur in the future and aorist are neivaoei, Tr£ivdo£T£, neivaoovoi,
eneivaosv, eneivaoav, Tieivdooo (subj.), neivao(jd\iev, neivaor\xe.
So also in N.T. -
7t£ivav Phil. 4:12.
Tr£iva(ind.) 1 Cor. 11:21.
Tr£iva 5i\pa (subj.) Rom. 12:20 (quoted from Prov. 25:21).
£dv Tiq 5i\pd Jn. 7:37.
For the future and aorist of Tr£ivdv in N.T. see Mt. 12:1, 3, 25:35: Lk. 4:2: Jn. 6:35: Rev. 7:16.
26. The Perfect of fJK£iv. "Hk£iv in the LXX has a perfect rjKa, which occurs however only in
the plural.
fJKavi£v Gen. 47:4: Josh. 9:12.
riKaT£ Gen. 42:7, 9: Dt. 12:9: 1 Chr. 12:17.
r\Kaoiiv) 18 times.
This form occurs once in the N.T. -
fiKaoi Mk. 8:3.
Cp. 1 Clem. 12:2 in a quotation from Josh. 2:3.
The aorist f\^a, which is found in late authors, is not used in the LXX.
Wherever the form f\Ke occurs, it is either imperative, as in 2 K. [2 Sam.] 14:32, or imperfect,
asin2Mac. 4:31,8:35, 14:4, 26.
27. Presents formed from Perfects, a. From the perfect eoxr[Ka there was formed a new present
oxr\K(ji, which occurs in two or three passages of the LXX.
OTriK£i Jdg. 16:26. oxr\Keiv 3 K. [2 Kings} 8:11.
OTriK£T£ (imper.) Ex. 14:13 (A).
So in N.T. -
OTriK£i Rom. 14:4.
OTriK£T£ (ind.) Phil. 1:27.
OTriK£T£ (imper.) 1 Cor. 16:13: Gal. 5:1: Phil. 4:1: 2 Thes. 2:15.
0TriKTiT£ 1 Th. 3:8: Mk. 11:25.
b. Similar to this is the verb YpTiYop£iv, formed from Eypriyopa. We may conjecture that the
pluperfect eyriyopei came to be regarded as a contracted imperfect, and so gave rise to YpTiyopoo.
34
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
eYpriYopo^"^ J^r. 38:28.
YpriYop^i^^ 1 Mac. 12:27.
YpriyopouvTOOv Neh. 7:3.
YPTiyopriooo Jer. 38:28.
6YpriYoprioe(v) Jer. 5:6: Bar. 2:9: Dan. 6 9:14.
eYpriYopn^n Lam. 1:14.
From this verb in its turn was formed a new verbal noun YpTiYopn^^<i Dan. 6 5:11, 14. Cp. also
the proper name rpTiYopioq.
So in N.T. -
YpriYop^V^^ 1 Th. 5:6.
YPHYop^i^''^^ (ii^psr.) 1 Cor. 16:13: Mk. 13:37.
YpriYopn^^'^''^^ 1 Pst. 5:8.
c. Of like origin is the aorist enejioiQr\oa, which occurs in Job 31:24. From 7r£7toi6£iv again we
have the noun Tr£Troi6Tioi(; 4 K. [2 Kings] 18:19.
d. The tendency to form new presents from perfects is already exhibited in Homer. Thus we
have dvooyei (Od. 5.139 etc.) formed from avooya, and yeyoovetv (//. 12.337) from yeyoova; also
the imperfect £vi£vitikov (Od. 9.439) from jaeviriKa.
28. The Verb loxavai and its Cognates. By the side of the forms in -yn there existed from
Homer downwards alternative forms in -co. Some of these present themselves in the LXX. Thus
we have the following parts of the transitive verb iardoo.
ioToooiv 1 Mac. 8:1.
ioTOOv 2 K. [2 Sam.] 22:34: Job 6:2: Ps. 17:33: Sir. 27:26: Is. 44:26: 1 Mac. 2:27.
Among its compounds we may notice the following -
KaeioTOOv Dt. 17:15: Dan. 0' 4:34. Cp. Aristeas 228.
KaQioxa \ieQioxa Dan. 6 2:21.
yLsQioxCdv KaQioxCdv Dan. 0' 2:21.
yLsQioxCdoi 1 Mac. 8:13.
Vi£6iaTdv 3 Mac. 6:24.
So in N.T. -
laTCOjisv Rom. 3:31. ouviotoov 2 Cor. 10:18.
dTTOKaBioTa Mk. 9:12. ouvioTOOvreq 2 Cor. 4:2, 6:4.
The form loxdveiv, also transitive, occurs in Ezk. 17:14. Cp. Aristeas 280, 281 KaQioxaveiv.
So in N.T. -
Vi£9ioTdv£iv 1 Cor. 13:2. ouviordveiv 2 Cor. 3:1. Cp. 5:12, 10:12.
Cp. Herm. Past. Vis. 1.3.4 yieQioxdvei.
Later Greek has a transitive perfect eoxaKa, which is implied by the rare, though classical,
perfect passive eoxayLai (Plat. Tim. 81 D). Thus in [Plato] Axiochus 370 D we find nepieoxaKaq.
soxaKayLsv 1 Mac. 11:34.
dcpeoxaKa Jer. 16:5.
KaOeoraKa Jer. 1:10, 6:17.
35
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
KaQeoxaKayLSV 1 Mac. 10:20. Cp. Aristeas 37.
So in N.T. -
£^£aTaK£vai Acts 8:11.
In Josh. 10:19 there occurs the irregular perfect imperative eoxr\Kaxe with connecting vowel a
instead of e. With this form may be compared Tr£Troi9aT£ Ps. 145:3: Is. 50:10: Jer. 9:4.
29. The Verb Ti6£vai and its Cognates. This verb does not offer much scope for remark. The
imperfect is formed, so far as it occurs, from the alternative form ti6£00.
kxieei(; Ps. 49:18, 20. hiQei Prov. 8:28.
This is in accordance with classical usage, which however has mOiqv in the 1st person. 'ETiOiq
is read by A in Esther 4:4.
The strong and weak aorists active seem to be about equally frequent. The only person of the
latter that is missing is the 2d person plural.
'E9riKavi£v is found (2 Esd. [Ezra] 15:10: Is. 28:15) and eQr[Kav is common.
The 2d person singular of the strong aorist middle is always £9ou, as in Attic.
In 1 Esd. 4:30 we find £TriTi6ouoav formed from the thematic ti6£00.
30. The Verb SiSovai and its Cognates. The present tense runs thus --
SiSoojai, SiSooq, SiSoooi,
SiSoaoiv.
In Ps. 36:21 we find 3d person singular 5i5oT from the cognate 5i56oo. The imperfect runs thus
£8iSouv, £8{5ouq, eSiSou,
£5i5ouv or £5i5oaav.
'ESiSouv as 3d person plural occurs in 2 Chr. 27:5: 3 Mac. 3:30; £8iSooav in Judith 7:21: Jer.
44:21: Ezk. 23:42: 3 Mac. 2:31.
The imperative active SiSou is found in Tobit 4:16: Prov. 9:9, 22:26. The 1st aorist is common
in the singular and in the 3d person plural of the indicative, £SooKav.
The 2d aorist subjunctive runs thus --
Soo, Scpq, Sep,
5ooT£, Sooai.
Of the above forms only 5i5oT, 3d person plural £5i5ouv, and £5ooKav are non- Attic.
The optative of the 2d aorist has the stem vowel long -
SwTi'; Ps- 84:7, 120:3.
Swiq 29 times. In Job 6:8, 19:23: Sir. 45:26 Soiiq occurs as a variant. Cp. Aristeas 185 Swiq.
So in N.T. -
SwTi 2 Th. 3:16: Rom. 15:5: Eph. 1:17: 2 Tim. 1:16, 18, 2:25.
31. The Verb levai and its Cognates, a. The simple verb i£vai does not occur in the LXX. It
has therefore to be studied in its compounds. The regular inflexion of the imperfect in Attic is
supposed to be I'riv, 'feiq, I'a, though in Plat. Euthyd. 293 A we have 1st person singular r\(pieiv.
'Hcpiaq therefore (Sus. O' 53) may be considered classical.
36
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
b. The following two passages will set before us the points that have to be noticed with regard
to d(pi£vai -
Ex. 32:32 el \iev acpeic; . . . acpec;. 1 Esd. 4:7 einsv dcpsivai, dcpiouoiv.
In the former of these dcpetq must be from dcpeoo, a cognate thematic form to dcpirijai, but without
the reduplication.
In the latter we have a new formation which treats the reduplication as though it were itself the
stem. Of this new verb we have the following parts --
dcpioo Eccl. 2:18. dcpiouoi 1 Esd. 4:50.
dcpioov Eccl. 5:11.
In the N.T. also we find dcpetq (Rev. 2:20) and fi(pi£(v) (Mk. 1:34, 11:16)
the imperfect of dcpioo. Cp. Herm. Past. Vis. 3.
7.1 dcpiouoiv.
The weak aorist occurs in the singular and in the 3d person plural dcpfJKav, e.g. Jdg. 1:34.
c. A thematic verb auviEiv existed in classical Greek. Theognis 565 has the infinitive auvisTv:
Plat. Soph. 238 E uses ^uvisTq. Of this verb we find the following parts in the LXX, if we may trust
the accentuation --
auvieiv 3 K. [2 Kings} 3:9, 11. ouviouaiv (dat. pi.) Prov. 8:9.
auvi6ov2Chr. 34:12.
So also in N.T. -
6 auviwv Rom. 3:11. In Mt. 13:23 the R.V. text has auvioov.
ouviouoi (3d pi.) Mt. 13:13: 2 Cor. 10:12.
d. In addition to this we find a verb of new formation like dcpioo -
ouvieiqTob. 3:8: Job 15:9, 36:4.
ouvieiProv. 21:12, 29: Wisd. 9:11.
auvioov Dan. 6 8:5, 23, 27 and passim.
ouviovTOOv (gen. pi.) 2 Chr. 30:22.
In 2 Chr. 26:5 ouviovToq and 2 Esd. [Ezra] 8:16 ouviovraq the accent seems to be misplaced.
The new participle ouvioov has not entirely ousted the -yn form in the LXX. We have ouvieic;
Ps. 32:15: oi ouvievreq Dan. 12:3: ouvievraq Dan. 6 14: toov ouvisvtoov Dan. 11:35.
e. The 3d person plural of the 1st aorist rjKav, which occurs in Xen. Anab. 4.5.18, is used in
the LXX in its compound dcpfJKav.
f. The verb auvisiv is to be met with also in the Apostolic Fathers -
ouvioo Herm. Past. Mdt. 4.2.1, 10.1.3.
auvi£i 4.2.2.
ouviouoiv 10.1.6.
ouvie 6.2.3, 6: Sim. 9.12.1.
OUVIOOV Barn. Ep. 12:10.
g. The 2d person singular present middle TipoiTi in Job 7: 19 is doubtless formed on the analogy
of Xvr\, but might be reached from itpoiEoai by loss of o and contraction.
37
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
32. The Imperatives avdoxa and anooxa, etc. It is the by-forms in -co which account for these
imperatives (avaoxa = avaoxa-e). 'Avdoxa in the LXX is used interchangeably with dvdoTri6i. Thus
in Dan. 7:5 0' has dvdoxa, while 6 has dvdoxr\Qi. But the same writer even will go from on to the
other. Thus in 3 K. [2 Kings} 19 we have dvdoxr\Qi in v. 5 and dvdoxa in v. 7, and again in 3 K.
[2 Kings} 20 dvdoxa in v. 15 and dvdaTTi6i in v. 18. So also Ps. 43:24, 27 dvdoxr\Qi . . . dvdoxa.
'Anooxa occurs in Job 7:16, 14:6, 21:14.
So in N.T., where we find in addition the 3d person singular and the 2d person plural.
dvdoxa Acts. 12:7: Eph. 5:14. Kaxa^dxod Mt. 27:42.
dvd|3aRev. 4:1. dva|3dT£ Rev. 11:12.
Cp. Herm Past. Mdt. 6.2.6, 7 dTToara . . . dTTOorriBi, Vis. 2.8 dvxioxa.
Similar forms are to be found even in the Attic drama and earlier.
eyi^a Eur. Elec. 113: Ar. Ran. 311 .
kni^a Theognis 845.
eo^a Eur. Phoen. 193.
Kaxd^a Ar. Ran. 35, Vesp. 979.
Trp6|3a Eur. Ale. 872: Ar. Ach. 262.
33. Special Forms of Verbs.
aip£Ti^£iv denominative from aiperoq.
djacpid^eiv 4 K. [2 Kings] 17:9: Job 29:14, 31:19 (in 40:5 djacpkaai) = djicpisvvuvai.
dTroKT£vv£iv Ex. 4:23: 2 K. [2 Sam.] 4: 12: 4 K. [2 Kings] 17:25: Ps. 77:34, 100:8: Wisd. 16: 14:
Hab. 1:17: Is. 66:3: Dan. 6 2:13: 3 Mac. 7:14.dTroTivvu£iv Gen. 31:39: Ps. 68:5: Sir. 20:12.£A£dv
for £A££Tv. Ps. 36:26, 114:6: Prov. 13:9, 14:21, 31, 21:26, 28:8: Sir. 18:14: Tobit 13:2: 4 Mac. 6:12,
9:3. So in N.T., Jude 22, 23. Cp. 1 Clem. 13:2: Barn. Ep. 20:2.
kXovoQr\(; Ezk. 16:4.
Eopaxaq 2 K. [2 Sam.] 18:1 1. Maintained by some to be the true Attic form.
sppriyooq for eppooyooq. Job. 32:19.
eoQew for koQiew. Lvt. 7:15, 11:34, 17:10, 19:8, 26: Sir. 20:16. Old poetic form. Hom. II.
24.415: Od. 9.479, 10.273.
KdOou for KdOTiao. Gen. 38:11: Jdg. 17:10: Ruth 3:18: 1 K. [1 Sam.] 1:23, 22:5, 23: 4 K. [2
Kings] 2:2, 4, 6: Ps. 109:1: Sir. 9:7. Formed on the analogy of Auou. KdOiqoo itself occurs in 2 Chr.
25:19. In Ezk. 23:41 we have imperfect EKdOou. So in N.T., Mt. 22:44: Mk. 12:36: Lk. 20:42: Acts
2:34: Hb. 1:13 (all quotations from Ps. 109:1): James 2:3.
Viaijadaoeiv Jer. 4:19.
oioeaq Dt. 9:2. Cp. Eur. Ion 999 (Dindorf).
md^£iv for me^eiv. Song 2:15: Sir. 23:21. Ilie^eiv occurs only in Micah 6:15 in the original
sense of 'to press.'
pdoo£iv Jer. 23:39 and eight other passages.
34. Adverbs. Hellenistic Greek supplied the missing adverb to dyaOoq. 'AyaOooq occurs in
Aristotle Rh. 2.11.1. In the LXX it is found in 1 K. [1 Sam.] 20:7: 4K. [2 Kings] 11:18: Tob. 13:10.
Among adverbs of time we may notice hi irpooiOev and dnb TipoooiOev as peculiar to the LXX.
Fortheformersee2K. [2Sam.]2:27:3K. [2Kings} 18:26: 1 Mac. 10:80; for the latter Ex. 18:13,
38
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
14: Ruth 2:7: Job 4:20: Sir. 18:26: 1 Mac. 9:13. Similar to these among adverbs of place is dTio
ViaKp69ev, Ps. 138:2. Such expressions remind us of our own double form 'from whence,' which
purists condemn.
In the Greek of the LXX pouv is used for Ttoi, just as we commonly say 'where' for 'whither.'
Jdg. 19:17 nou Tipoeuri, Kal noQev epxWJ
Cp. Gen. 37:31: Josh. 2:5, 8:10: Jdg. 19:17: 1 K. [1 Sam.] 10:14: Zech. 2:2.
not occurs only in a doubtful reading in Jer. 2:28, and has there the sense of ttoO.
Similarly ou is used for oi, which is not found at all.
Jer. 51:35 ou eav l^aSiorjc; SKei.
Cp. Gen. 40:3: Ex. 21:13: 3 K. [2 Kings} 18:10: Ezk. 12:16.
So in N.T. -
Trou = TroTlJn. 2:11,3:8, 8:14: Hb. 11:8.
oTTou = oTToi James 3:4.
OTTOi does not occur in Biblical Greek.
35. Homerisms. The Ionic infusion which is observable in the Greek of the LXX may possibly
be due to the use of Homer as a schoolbook in Alexandria. This would be a vera causa in accounting
for such stray lonisms as Kvvo\ivir\(;, jaaxaipri, eml^el^riKuiriq, and the use of oneipr\(; in the Papyri;
possibly also foryaioov, Yociaiq. Such forms also as enaoi^oq, eoQeiv, exavvoav (Sir. 43:12), yLoXi^oc;,
xdAKeioq, x^tlJocppoc;, noXeyLioxr\(;, have an Homeric ring about them.
36. Movable Consonants, v ecpeAKUoriKov is freely employed before consonants, as in Gen.
31:15, 41:55: Dt. 19:1: Ruth 2:3: Jdg. 16:11.
To axpt and v^XP^ <i is sometimes appended before a vowel and sometimes not.
Jdg. 11:33 axpi<; "Apvoov. Josh. 4:23 vi£xpi<;ou.
Job 32:11 axpt ou. 1 Esd. 1 :54 \iexpi ou.
2 Mac. 14:15 axpt atwvoc;. Job 32:12 yLsxpi vyiCdv.
'AvftKpu and avftxpuq differ from one another by more than the o. The former does not occur
at all in the LXX, the latter in Swete's text only once, 3 Mac. 5:16 avrtxpuq dvaKAtOfjvat auTou.
In the Revisers' text of the N.T. we find dxpt before a consonant in Gal. 4:2; dxptq ou 1 Cor.
11:26, 15:25: Gal. 3:19, 4:19: Hb. 3:13; viexptq ou Mk. 13:30; jaexptq al'viaToc; Hb. 12:4; dvuKpu
Xiou Acts 20:15.
37. Spelling. In matters of spelling Dr. Swete's text appears to reflect variations in the Mss.
a. The diphthong £i is often replaced by t, as in 1 Esd. 1:11 xocAKtotq compared with 2 Chr.
35:13 xocAKetotc;. This is especially the case with feminine nouns in -£ia, as
anodXia, SouAta, Aarpta, TiAtvOta, auyy^vta, uyta, cpapjaaKta.
Neuters plural in -eia also sometimes end in -la with recession of accent, as --
dyYta Gen. 42:25. nopta Gen. 45:17.
In the pluperfect of tarrnat again we sometimes find t for si --
toTfiKet Jdg. 16:29. e(pioxr\Kei Nb. 23:6,17.
TraptoTfiKet Gen. 45:1.
So also in the future and 1st aorist of Aetxoo, as --
39
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
EKAi^ei, £KAi^ai, eXi^av, Xi^ovoiv.
On the other hand elEeai for iSeai (nom. pi. of iSea) occurs in Dan. 6 1:13.
b. V in composition is sometimes changed into ja before a labial and sometimes not, as --
ouvi|3i|3dooo Ex. 4:12. ovv^i^aodxoi Jdg. 13:8.
Before a guttural or tt, v is often retained, instead of being turned into y, as -
£VKd6riTai, evKpaxei(;, evKpovor\c;, evKpucpiaq, evnoir\, evxoopio).
But on the other hand -
ouyKpiaic;, ovyyevia.
c. In the spelling of Xayi^dveiv ji appears in parts not formed from the present stem, as --
Ari|i\j;oviai, Arj^j^rj, Xr\\i^l)eoQe, eXr\\i(pQr\, KaxaXr\\i^\)r\.
This may indicate that the syllable in which the ji occurs was pronounced with |3. In modem
Greek ym stands for |3, and we seem to find this usage as early as Hermas (Vis. 3.1 .4), who represents
the Latin subsellium by ovyL\\)e.Xiov. Cp. 'Ay^aKovyi for Habakkuk.
d. The doubling of p in the argument of verbs is often neglected, as -
£^£pi(prioav, epavev, epdm^ov, epiipev.
e. The following also may be noticed -
epauvav for epeuvav Dt. 13:14.
Viiepoq, jaiepocpayia, yLiepocpayeiv, viiepocpovia all in Maccabees only.
xeooepaKovxa Dt. 9:9, 11: Josh. 14:7.
40
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
SYNTAX
CONSTRUCTION OF THE SENTENCE, 38-43
38. The Construction of the LXX not Greek. In treating of Accidence we have been concerned
only with dialectical varieties within the Greek language, but in turning to syntax we come
unavoidably upon what is not Greek. For the LXX is on the whole a literal translation, that is to
say, it is only half a translation - the vocabulary has been changed, but seldom the construction.
We have therefore to deal with a work of which the vocabulary is Greek and the syntax Hebrew.
39. Absence of laev and Se. How httle we are concerned with a piece of Greek diction is brought
home to us by the fact that the balance of clauses by the particles yisv and Ee, so familiar a feature
a Greek style, is rare in the LXX, except in the books of Wisdom and Maccabees. It does not occur
once in all the books between Deuteronomy and Proverbs nor in Ecclesiastes, the Song, the bulk
of the Minor Prophets, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel; and in each of the following books it occurs once
only -
Leviticus (27:7), Numbers (22:33), Tobit (14:10), Haggai (1:4), Zechariah (1:15), Isaiah (6:2).
Where the antithesis is employed, it is often not managed wiht propriety, e.g. in Job 32:6. As
instances of the non-occurrence of one or both of the particles where their presence is obviously
required we may take -
Gen. 27:22 'H cpoovri (poovr) 'IaKa)|3, at Se x^^P^<^ X^^P^(^ 'Haau.
Jdg. 16:29 Kai eKpaxr\o£v eva xf\ Se^ia aurou Kai eva tfj apioxepa auTou.
2 K. [2 Sam.] 11:25 noxe yLsv outoc;.
3 K. [2 Kings} 18:6 viia . . . aAAp.
40. Paratactical Construction of the LXX. Roughly speaking, it is true to say that in the Greek
of the LXX there is no syntax, only parataxis. The whole is one great scheme of clauses connected
by Kai, and we have to trust to the sense to tell us which is to be so emphasized as to make it into
the apodosis. It may therefore be laid down as a general rule that in the LXX the apodosis is
introduced by Kai. This is a recurrence to an earlier stage of language than that which Greek itself
had reached long before the LXX was written, but we find occasional survivals of it in classical
writers, e.g. Xen. Cyrop. 1 .4.28 Kai 656v xe outtoo TioAAriv SirjvuoBai autoiq Kai tov MfjSov fJK£iv.
Here it is convenient to translate Kai 'when,' but the construction is really paratactical. So again
Xen. Anab. 4.2. 12 Kai toutov xe iiapeXr\kvQeoav ox "EAArivsq, Kai exepov opoooiv £|aTrpoo96v Aocpov
KaT£x6^6vov. Cp. Anab. 1.8.8, 2.1.7, 4.6.2; also Verg. Mn. 2.692 -
Vix ea fatus erat senior, subitoque fragore intonuit laevom.
In the above instances the two clauses are coordinate. But in the LXX, even when the former
clause is introduced by a subordinative conjunction, Kai still follows in the latter, e.g. -
Gen. 44:29 kav ouv Ad|3riT£ . . . Kai YXixal,exe ktA.
Ex. 13:14 edv Se epoorriori . . . Kai epeiq ktA. Cp. 7:9.
Josh. 4: 1 Kai enex ovvexeXeoev nac; 6 Aaoq 5ia|3aivoov tov 'lopSdvriv, Kai exnev Kupioq.
Sometimes a preposition with a verbal noun takes the place of the protasis, e.g. -
41
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Ex. 3:12 £v TCp e^ayayeiv . . . Kai Xaxpevoexe.
In Homer also Kai is used in the apodosis after enei (Od. 5.96), rijaoc; (//. 1.477: Od. 10.188),
or 6t£ (Od. 5.391, 401: 10.145, 157, 250).
The difficulty which sometimes arises in the LXX in determining which is the apodosis amid
a labyrinth of Kai clauses, e.g. in Gen. 4:14, 39:10, may be paralleled by the difficulty which
sometimes presents itself in Homer with regard to a series of clauses introduced by Ee, e.g. Od.
10.112, 113; 11.34-6.
41. Introduction of the Sentence by a Verb of Being. Very often in imitation of Hebrew idiom
the whole sentence is introduced by eyeveTO or eoxai.
Gen. 39:19 sy^^'i^o 8£ ooq fJKOuaev . . . Kai eQvyLO)Qr\ opyfi. Cp. vs. 5, 7, 13.
3 K. [2 Kings} 18:12 Kai eoxai eav kyo) aneXQo) and oou, Kai Trveujaa Kupiou apei oe elq xr\v
Yfjv fiv ouK oiSaq.
In such cases in accordance with western ideas of what a sentence ought to be, we say that Kai
introduces the apodosis, but it may be that, in its original conception at least, the whole construction
was paratactical. It is easy to see this in a single instance like -
Gen. 41:8 kyevexo Se Tipooi Kai kxapax^r] r\ xpuxn aurou,
but the same explanation may be applied to more complex cases, e.g. -
Nb. 21:9 Kai 8Yev£T0 oxav eSaKvsv ocpiq avOpoonov, Kai ene^Xe^\)ev em xbv ocpiv tov xocAkouv,
Kai el,r\. And there was when a serpent bit a man, and he looked on the brazen serpent, and lived.
Cp. Gen. 42:35, 43:2, 21: Jdg. 14:11.
42. Apposition of Verbs. Sometimes the Kai does not appear after eyevexo, eyevr\Qr\, or eoxai,
thus presenting a construction which we may denote by the phrase Apposition of Verbs.
Jdg. 19:30 Kai eyevexo nac; 6 ^Xenodv eXeyev . . .
1 K. [1 Sam.] 31:8 Kai eyevr\Qr\ xf\ eTiaupiov, epxcvtai oi dAAocpuAoi.
Gen. 44:31 Kai eoxai ev tw iSeiv auTov \ir\ ov to TiaiSapiov \ieQ' rijaoov, xeXevxr\oei.
In two versions of the same Hebrew we find one translator using the Kai and the other not.
4 K. [2 Kings] 19:1 Kai eyevexo toq fJKOuoev l^aoiAeuq 'E^sKiaq, Kai Siepprj^ev xa ijaaTia eavxov.
Is. 37:1 Kai 6Y£V£to ev tco aKouoai tov ^aoiXea 'E^eKiav, eoxioev xa ijaaTia.
43. Ae in the Apodosis. The use of Ee to mark the apodosis, which is found occasionally in
classical authors from Homer downwards, is rare in the LXX.
Josh. 2:8 Kai 6Y£V£to ooq e^rjAOoaav . . . auTiq 8£ dv£|3ri.
THE ARTICLE, 44, 45
44. Generic Use of the Article. This is due to following the Hebrew.
1 K. [1 Sam.] 17:34 6 Xeodv Kai r\ apKoq = 'a lion or a bear,' 17:36 Kai Tiqv apKov exvnxev 6
5oOA6(; oou Kai tov AeovTa.
Amos 5:19 ov TpoTiov eav (pvyr\ avQpodnoc; en TrpoaooTiou tou AeovToq, Kai k\meor\ avxQ) r\
apKoq.
42
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Is. 7:14 iSou rj napQevoq ev yaoxpi Xr\yL^exai.
45. Elliptical Use of the Feminine Article. The use of the feminine article with some case of
xoopa or yf\ understood is not due to the influence of the Hebrew,
ri utt' oupavov Job 18:4.
Tiqv utt' oupavov Job 1:7, 2:2, 5:10, 9:6, 28:24, 34:13, 38:24.
Tfjc; UTTO Tov oupavov Ex. 17:4: Prov. 8:28: 2 Mac. 2:18.
Tfjq utt' oupavov Job 38:18.
Tfi utt' oupavov Esther 4:17: Baruch 5:3.
So in N.T. -
Lk. 17:24 r\ dccpaTrri dccpaTTTouoa SKTfjc; UTto tov oupavov eiq rriv uti' oupavov Xd\\.Kei.
GENDER, 46, 47
46. Elliptical Use of the Feminine Adjective. There is nothing about the feminine gender
which should make ellipse more frequent with it than with the masculine or neuter. Only it happens
that some of the words which can be most easily supplied are feminine. This elliptical use of the
feminine adjective (or of adv. = adj.) is a feature of Greek generally. It is not very common in the
LXX. Instances are -
en evQeiaq (oSou) Josh. 8:14.
£v Tfi £u6£ia Ps. 142:10.
Tfjc; nXaxeia(; Esther 4: 1.
Tiqv oujaTiaoav {yf\v) Job 2:2, 25:2.
scoq Tfjq oriiaepov (rjiaepaq) 2 Chr. 35:25.
Tiqv aupiov 3 Mac. 5:38.
e^6r\oev yieydXr\ (Tfj (poovfj) 4 K. [2 Kings] 18:28.
eiq Tiqv uiprjAriv (xoopav) 2 Chr. 1:3.
In the N.T. this idiom occurs much more frequently. Take for instance Lk. 12:47, 48 SaprjoeTai
noXXaq . . . oAiyaq {nXr\ya(;).
Cp. also -
Tiqv Tipoq OdvaTov (656v) Eus. H.E. 2.23.
ouK eiq jjaKpav Philo Leg. ad C. 4.
en evQeia^ Philo Q.O.P.L. 1.
£m l,evr\(; (xoopaq or yrjc;) Philo Leg. ad C. 3.
TieSidc; xe Kai opeivrj ibid. 1 .
xr\ TiaTpio) (yAoooori) Jos. B.J. Prooem. 1.
xdc, TiepioiKouq {noXexo) ibid. 8.
47. Feminine for Neuter. The use of the feminine for the neuter is a pure Hebraism, which
occurs principally in the Psalms.
Jdg. 15:7 sdv TioirioriTe ouTOoq TauTiqv, 21:3 exc, xi. . . b\jevr\Qr\ auTiq;
43
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
1 K. [1 Sam.] 4:7 ouy^YO"^^ Toiaurri e^Be^KaiTpiTfj. Ps. 26:3 kv xavxr\ kyo) eXni^od, 26:4 jjiav
riTriodjariv . . . TauTrjv eK^rjTriooo, 31:6 vnep xavxr\(; npooev^exai nac; ooioq, 117:23 Tiapd Kupiou
kyevexo avxr\, 118:50 avxr\ \ienapeKaXeoev, 118:56 avxr\ £yevr\Qr\ yLoi.
In the N.T. this license only occurs in Mk. 12:11, Mt. 21:42 in a quotation from Ps. 117:23.
NUMBER, 48, 49
48. Singular for Plural. Sometimes in imitation of Hebrew idiom we find the singular used in
the sense of the plural. When the article is employed along with a singular noun, we have the Generi
Use of the Article (44), but the presence of the article is not necessary.
Ex. 8:6 dv£|3i|3da9ri 6 ^axpaxoc; (= frogs), 8:18 e^ayayeiv xbv OKvTcpa, 10:13 Kai 6 aveyLoc; 6
voToq aveXa^ev xr\v dxpiSa, 10:14 ov yeYO"^^ Toiaurri dxpiq.
Jdg. 7:12 obosi dxpiq eiq TrAfjOoq (cp. Judith 2:20 ooq dxpiq), 21:16 rjcpavioOri dito Beviajislv
Yuvrj.
4 K. [2 Kings] 2:12 dp|aa 'lopaiqA Kai innevq auTou.
Ezk. 47:9 eoxai £K£i ixQuq TioAuq ocpoSpa.
This throws hght on an otherwise startling piece of grammar -
Jdg. 15:10 einav dviqp 'louSa.
49. Singular Verb with more than One Subject. In accordance with Hebrew idiom a singular
verb often introduces a plurality of subjects, e.g.-
4 K. [2 Kings] 1 8:26 Kai einsv 'EAiaKeivi . . . Kai Eojavaq Kai 'Icoaq, 1 8:37 Kai elafjABev 'EAiaKslvi
ktA.
This may happen also in Greek apart from Hebrew.
Xen. Anab. 2.4.16 "EneyL^\)e vie'ApiaToc; KarAprdo^oc;.
CASE, 50-61
50. Nominative for Vocative, a. The use of the nominative for the vocative was a colloquialism
in classical Greek. It occurs in Plato, and is common in Aristophanes and Lucian. When so employed,
the nominative usually has the article. As in Hebrew the vocative is regularly expressed by the
nominative with the article, it is not surprising that the LXX translators should often avail themselves
of this turn of speech.
3 K. [2 Kings} 17:18 xi eyLoi Kai aoi, 6 dvOpooTtoq tou Qeov; 18:26 ETidKouoov r\\iCdv, 6 BdaA.
Cp. 3 K. [2 Kings} 20:20: Ps. 21:1, 42:2.
For an instance of the nominative without the article standing for the vocative take -
Baruch 4:5 Qapoeixe, Aaoq yLov.
The nominative, when thus employed, is often put in apposition with a vocative, as -
3 K. [2 Kings} 17:20 Kupie, 6 jadptuc; Tfjq xnP'^'i- 17:21 Kupie, 6 Geoq \iov.
44
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
b. In the N.T. also the nominative with the article is often put for the vocative.
Mt. 11:26 vai, 6 Trarrip. Lk. 8:54 rj Tiatq, kyeipov. Mk. 9:25 to nvev\ia to aAaAov . . . e^eXQe.
Lk. 6:25 ouaiu|aTv, o[e\\.n£nkr\oyi£voivvv. Col. 3:18 a[yv\diKe(;,VKOxdoo£oQe. Eph. 6:1, Col. 3:20
Td TSKva, vnaKovexe.
The use of the nominative without the article for the vocative is rare in the N.T., as it is also in
the LXX. In Lk. 12:20 and 1 Cor. 15:36 we find acppoov put for acppov, and in Acts 7:42 oiKoq
'laparjA does duty as vocative.
As instances of apposition of nominative with vocative we may take --
Rom. 2:1 d) avQpodne Tiaq 6 Kpivoov. Rev. 15:3 Kupe 6 Qeoc;, 6 TiavTOKpaTOop
In Rev. 18:20 we have vocative and nominative conjoined --
oupav£, Kai oi aytoi.
51. Nominative Absolute. Occasionally we get a construction in the LXX, which can be
described only by this name.
Nb. 22:24 Kai eoTrj 6 ayyeXoc; xov Qeov ev xaiq avXa^iv toov ayLJieXodv, (ppayyibq svxevQev Kai
(ppayyibq evxevQev.
Nb. 24:4 ootk; opaoiv Osou eiSev, £v uttvo), d7toK£KaAuvivi£voi oi ocpOaAviol auTou.
As this construction arises out of a literal following of the Hebrew, it would be superfluous to
adduce Greek parallels. Like effects might be found, but the cause would be different.
52. Nominative of Reference. What is meant by this term will be best understood from the
examples -
Job 28:7 xpi^oc;, ouk eyvoo auTiqv nexeivov.
Ps. 102:15 avOpooTToq, woei xoptoq ai r\\iepai auTou.
To throw out the subject of discourse first, and then proceed to speak about it, is a Hebraism,
but at the same time it is a common resource of language generally.
So in N.T. -
Acts. 7:40 6 yap Mooofjq ovxoq . . . ouk oi5a\iev xi kyevexo auTCO.
Rev. 3:12 6 vikoov, Tioiriaoo auTov otuAov ev tw vaco tou Qeov jjou.
53. Nominativus Pendens. The nominative which is left without a verb owing to a sudden
change of construction is a familiar feature in classical Greek, especially if this be at all colloquial.
It is not however very common in the LXX.
Dan. 0' 7:15 Kai ocKriSidoaq kyo) . . . exdpaooov \ie.
Such cases can generally be explained on the principle of construction according to the sense.
It is seldom that we meet with so violent an anacoluthon as the following in the N.T. --
Mk. 9:20 Kai i5d)v auTov, to nvevyLa evQvq ovveonapa^ev auTov.
54. Accusative for Vocative. The accusative for vocative might seem an impossibility, yet
here is an instance of it.
Ps. 51:6 r\yanr\oa(; TidvTa Td pr\\iaxa KaTanovTia^iou, yAooooav SoAiav.
55. Accusative of Time When. In connexion with classical Greek we think of Time When as
being expressed by the genitive or dative, rather than by the accusative, though the latter also is
used. The employment of the accusative became more frequent after the classical period, and alone
survives in the modem language.
Gen. 43: 16 yiex' e\iov yap cpdyovTai oi dvOpconoi dpTouq Tiqv vi£oriia|3piav.
45
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Ex. 9:18 iSou eyo) uoo TauTrjv xr\v dopav aupiov xo:A.a^av.
Dan. 6 9:21 oboei wpav Qvoiac; eonepivf\(; (O' has ev wpa).
So also sometimes in N.T. --
Jn. 4:52 xQsc; wpav £|356|ariv dcpfJKev aurov 6 nvpexoq.
Rev. 3:3 Kal ou ^iri yviix; noiav dopav fj^oo em oe.
56. Cognate Accusative, a. By a Cognate Accusative is here meant that particular form of the
Figura Etymologica in which a verb is followed by an accusative of kindred derivation with itself,
irrespective of the question whether it be an accusative of the external or of the internal object. We
have both kinds of accusative together in the following verse, where 9ripav = venison.
Gen. 27:3 e^eoxx] Se'IaaocK hioxaoiv yLeydXr\v acpoSpa Kal einev "Tiq ouv 6 Qr\p£voac; yLoi 9ripav;"
b. The great frequency of the cognate accusative in the LXX is due to the fact that here the
genius of the Hebrew and of the Greek language coincides. Besides being a legitimate Greek usage,
this construction is also one of the means employed for translating a constantly recurring Hebrew
formula. Sometimes the appended accusative merely supplies an object to the verb, as in such
phrases as Sdviov 5av£i^£iv, 5ia98o9ai Sia9riKriv, 5iriY£to9ai SifiYiT^' evuTiviov £VUTrvid^6o9ai,
£m9u|a£Tv £m9u|aiav, 9u£iv Qvoiav, vrioT£U£iv \r\oxeiav, opiojiov 6pi^£o9ai, nkr\\\.yLeXeiv
TrAri|a|a£Arioiv or nXr\\iyLeXiv, npocpaoi^eoQai npocpaosK;.
At other times it is accompanied by some specification, as -
Nb. 18:6 A£iToupY£iv rdq Xeixovpyiac; Tfjq OKrivfjc; tou jaapTupiou.
Dan. 11:2 nXovxr\oei nXovxov jJEyav.
1 Mac. 2:58 £v tw fy\XG)oai ^fjAov vojaou.
c. Sometimes the cognate accusative is conveyed in a relative clause, as -
Ex. 3:9 Tov 9Ai|avi6v ov oi Aiyutttioi 9Ai|3ouoiv amove;.
Nb. 1:44 ri emoKexpic; fiv eneoKs^avxo.
1 K. [1 Sam.] 2:23 r\ aKor\ r\v kyo) dKouoo.
d. By other changes of construction we have still the figura etymologica, but no longer a cognate
accusative. Thus, starting from the common phrase 8ouvai Sojaa, we have SeSovievoi Sojaa (Nb.
3:9) and Sojaa SeSovievov (Nb. 18:6).
e. In one instance the cognate accusative is reinforced by a still further application of the
etymological figure -
Gen. 47:22 £v Soaei ydp eSookev Sojaa xoXc; lepevoiv.
This is not due to the Hebrew.
f. In a wider sense the term 'cognate accusative' includes an accusative of kindred meaning,
though not of kindred derivation, as -
Jdg. 15:8 enaxa^ev . . . TrAriyilv laeydAriv.
g. Instances of cognate accusative are common enough in the N.T., e.g. -
1 Jn. 5:16 ayLapxavovxa a\iapxiav jar) Tipoq 9dvaTov.
Mt. 2:10 exdpiqoav xocpdv laeydAriv ocpoSpa.
Jn. 7:24 xr\v SiKaiav Kpioiv Kpivare.
There also it occurs sometimes in a relative clause -
Mk. 10:38 TO ^dnxioyLa o kyo) l^aTiTi^oviai.
Jn. 17:26 rj dydTiri fiv rjydTrriKdq jae.
46
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Eph. 4: 1 Tfjq KArjoeooc; r\c; £KAri9riT6.
h. We have a triple use of the etymological figure in -
Lk. 8:5 s^fjABsv 6 aneipodv xov OTieTpai tov OTiopov auTou.
i. That the playing with paronymous terms is in accordance with the spirit of the Greek language
may be seen from the frequent employment of the device by Plato, e.g. -
Prot. 326 D doonep oi ypayi\iaxioxai ToTq \ir\n(jd SeivoTc; ypacpeiv toov TiaiSoov UTTOYpaipavTsq
ypayL\iac; xf\ ypacpiSi outgo to ypa\i\iaxeiov SiSoaai.
Hip. Maj. 296 C "AAAa jaevToi Suvdiaei ye SuvavTai oi Suvdvievof ou y^P ^o^^ dSuvaviia ye.
57. Accusative in Apposition to Indeclinable Noun. In the LXX an indeclinable noun is
sometimes followed by an accusative in apposition to it, even though by the rules of grammar it is
itself in some other case, e.g.-
Is. 37:38 ev tco oTko) Naoapdx tov TidTpapxov auTou.
4 K. [2 Kings] 1:2 £v tw BdaA jJuTav Beov'AKKapoov.
Perhaps it would be more satisfactory if this and § 54 were thrown together under a head of
Bad Grammar, a category which the reader might be inclined to enlarge.
58. Genitive Absolute. Strictly speaking, a Genitive Absolute is a clause in the genitive which
does not affect the general construction. It ought not therefore to refer either to the subject or the
object of the sentence. Even in classical authors however the so-called genitive absolute is sometimes
not employed with the precision which grammarians might desire, e.g. -
Plat. Rep. 547 B (3ia^o|a£voov Se yxA dvTiT£iv6vT00v dAArjAoK; . . . Cd\ioX6yr[oav .
Xen. Cyrop. 1.4.2 Kai ydp doBevrioavToc; auTou ouSeTioTe anekBine xov ndnnov.
Xen. Anab. 1.2.17 6daaov TipoiovTOOv . . . Spojjoq eyevexo ToTq OTpaTiooTaiq.
The genitive absolute is often employed in the same loose way in the LXX.
Tob. 4: 1 oxe fjviriv ev xf\ xwpa jiou . . . veooTepuo jiou ovToq.
Dt. 15:10 ou AuTrrjBriori Tfj KapSia oou SiSovToq oou auTW.
Ex. 2:10 dSpuvOevToq Se tou TiaiSiou, eioriyayev auTO.
Ex. 5:20 ovvr\vxr\oav Se . . . epxoyLevoic; . . . 8KTrop£uo|i8voov auTOOv.
So in N.T. -
Mt. 1:18 yLvr\oxevQeior\(; xf\(; jariTOOoq . . . evpeQx].
Acts. 21:17 yevo\iev(j)v 5e rijaoov eic; 'lepoooAujaa aoyievodq ane^^avxo r\\ia(; oi dSeAcpoi.
2 Cor. 4:18 KaT£pyd^£Tai r\\iiv, yLr\ okottouvtoov rijaoov.
59. The Genitive Infinitive of Purpose. The genitive of the verbal noun formed by prefixing
the article to the infinitive, which we may call for convenience the Genitive Infinitive, is one of
the regular ways of expressing purpose in Biblical Greek, corresponding to our use of 'to.' The
construction is not entirely unknown to classical authors (e.g. Plat. Gorg. 457 E tou KaTacpaveq
yeveoQai) and is especially favoured by Thucydides. There is nothing in the Hebrew to suggest it.
The following will serve as examples -
Jdg. 16:5 Kai 5r\oo\iev avxbv xov TaTieivoooai auTov.
Ps. 9:30 eve^pevei xov dpirdoai tttcoxov.
Job 1:19 rjAOov tou dTiayyeiAai aoi.
So also frequently in N.T., e.g. -
Mt. 13:3 e^f\kQev 6 OTieipoov tou oneipeiv.
47
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
James 5:17 Trpoorju^aTO tou yLr\ ^pe^ai.
60. Other Uses of the Genitive Infinitive, a. The genitive infinitive of purpose is only one use
out of many to which this syntactical device is applied. Take for instance -
Ex. 14:5 Ti TouTo enoir\oayLev xov e^anooxeiXai xovq uiouq 'lapaiqA tou \\.r\ ^ovXevew rijaiv (=
(hoxe yLr\ BovXeveiv);
Purpose is not expressed in either of these cases. In the former we have what may be called the
Explanatory Use of the Genitive Infinitive; in the latter we have something which represents 'from
serving us' in the orginal, but which we shall nevertheless class as a Genitive Infinitive of
Consequence, since it is only thus that the Greek can be explained.
b. The Explanatory Use of the Genitive Infinitive is common in the LXX, e.g. -
Gen. 3:22 'ASdvi y^YO"^^ ^^ ^K ^^ riiaoov, tou yiyvoooKeiv KaAov Kai Tiovripov.
Ex. 8:29 jar) npooQf\(; exi, Oapaoo, £^anaxf\oai xov yLr\ e^anooxeiXai xov Aaov.
Ps. 26:4 TauTiqv (§ 47) £K^riTriaw tou KaToiKeTv \ie kxX.
So in N.T. -
Acts 7:19 £KdK00O£ Touq naxepaq r\\iG)v, xov Troisiv SKBsTa toc l^pecpri auTOOv.
Gal. 3: 10 ouk evijaevei £v nam Toiq yeypayL\ievoic; . . . xov noif\oai auTcx.
c. As an instance of the Genitive Infinitive of Consequence we may take -
Ex. 7:14 (3£|3dpriTai r\ KapSia Oapad) tou \ir\ k^anooxeiXai xov Aaov.
So in N.T. -
Hb. 1 1:5 'Evd)x nexexeQx] xov \ir\ iSeiv 6dvaTov.
d. What is called in Latin Grammar the 'prolative infinitive' after 'extensible' verbs, or more
simply, the latter of two verbs, is also commonly expressed in the LXX by the genitive infinitive,
e.g. -
Ps. 39:13 OUK rjSuvdaBriv tou ^Xeneiv.
2 Chr. 3:1 fjp^aTO tou oiKoSojaeTv.
Gen. 18:7 eTdxuvsv tou Tioifjoai auTO.
So in N.T. -
Acts 3:12 obq . . . TreTioiriKooi tou TrepiTiaTeTv auTov, 15:20 kmoxeiXai . . . xov anexeoQai, 27:1
£Kpi9ri TOU dTTOTiAeTv.
61. Cognate Dative, a. Another form of the figura etymologica which abounds in the LXX
may be called Cognate Dative. As in the case of the cognate accusative its frequency is in great
measure due to the coincidence of idiom in this particular between Greek and Hebrew. Let us first
show by a few examples from Plato that this construction is in accordance with the genius of the
Greek language.
Crat. 385 B Aoyw Aeyeiv. Phdr. 265 C TiaiSia TreTiaToOai. Symp. 195 B cpeuyoov (puy£~iT6yfipa(;.
Crat. 383 A cpuoei . . . TiecpuKuTav. Cp. 389 C, D. Phileb. 14 C cpuoei . . . TiecpuKOTa.
b. But while we have to search for this idiom in classical Greek, it thrusts itself upon us at every
turn in the Greek of the LXX, owing to its aptness for rendering a mode of expression familiar in
the original.
c. Corresponding to the cognate dative in Greek, we find in Latin also a cognate ablative as a
rare phenomenon, e.g. -
curriculo percurre Ter. Heaut. 733. Cp. Plant. Most. 349
48
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
qui non curro curriculo domum.
occidione occisum Cic. Fam. 15.4.7. Cp. Liv. 2.51.9.
d. The instances of cognate dative of most frequent occurrence in the LXX are aKofj ockousiv,
^oofi ^fjv, Qavaxod anoQavei, Qavaxod 6avaTouo6ai, odAmYYi^ aaATii^eiv. But besides these there are
many others, as -
dyaTrriaei ayanaoQai KaKia KaKonoisiv
dAaAayvitp dAaAd^eiv KaKia KaKouv
dAoicpfi e^aXeicpeiv Kardpaiq KaxapaoQai
anodXia anoXXvvai KXavQ\i(x) xAaieiv
dcpaviojacp dcpavi^eiv Ari9ri XaQeiv
^BeXvyyLaxi ^5eXvooeiv AOoiq Ai6o|3oA£Tv
Seojacp SeTv Aurpoiq Aurpouv
5iaAuo£i SiaAu£iv \iveia lavriaBfjvai
SiajjapTupia 5ia\iapxvpeiv oioovioiico oioovi^6o6ai
5ia(p6£ipeiv (p9opd opyi^eoQai opyfi
SiKrj £k5ik£Tv OpKO) 6pKl^£lV
£K|3dAA£iv £K|3oAfi napa^ooei TtapaSoBfjvai
£k6Ai|3£iv £K9Ai|3fi Tr£pimTrT£iv Tr£piTrTa)|aaTi
£kA£iiJ;£i £KA£iTr£iv TrArivi|a£Aia TrAri|avi£A£Tv
£KTpi|3fi £KTpi|3fivai Trpovo|afi Trpovovi£u6fivai
£Tpi\p£i £KTpi|3fivai TipoooxQioiaaTi Trpoaox0i^£iv
£^£Trauvdv £^£pauvrio£i nxodoei mTrT£iv
£^ouS£va)0£i £^ou5£vouv xaXainodpia TaA£iTroop£Tv
£m6u|aia £m9u|a£Tv xapax\\ xapaooeiv
£moKOTrfi £moK£TrT£o6ai UTr£popdo£i UTr£piS£Tv
9£Ario£i 9£A£iv (p£pvfi cpepvi^eiv
Ka6aip£0£i Ka6aip£iv (p9opa (pBapfjvai
KaQapioyL(x) Ka9api^£iv xo£ip£iv xocpd
e. From the foregoing instances it is an easy step to others in which the substantive is of kindred
meaning, though not of kindred derivation with the verb.
Gen. 1:16 ^podoei (payf\, 31:15 Kaxecpayev Kaxa^podoei.
Ex. 19:12, 21:16, 17 Qavaxix) xeXevxav.
Ex. 22:20 Qavaxod 6A£6p£u9ria£Tai.
Nb. 11:15 dTTOKTavov yie dvaip£0£i, 35:26 £^65a) £^£A6ri.
Ezk. 33:27 Qavaxod dTroKT£v6o.
f. Instances of the cognate dative are to be found also in the N.T., though not with anything like
the frequency with which they occur in the LXX.
Jn. 3:29 xocpd xocip^i- Lk. 22: 15 £m6uviia £Tr£6u|arioa. Acts 4: 17 aneiXf\ (laapytv) dTr£iArioa)vi£9a,
5:28 Trapayy£Aia Trapriyy£iAaia£v, 23:14 dva9£|aaTi dva9£|iaTioa}i£v. James 5:17 Trpoa£uxfi
Tipooriu^aTO. Gal. 5:1 rfj £A£u9£pia r\yLac; XpioToq riA£u9£pooo£.
49
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
g. The expression in 2 Pet. 3:3 £v eviTraiyviovfi eyniaiKxai, while not exactly parallel with the
foregoing, belongs to the same range of idiom; so also Rev. 2:23 dTroKT£v6o £v Qavdxod.
ADJECTIVES, 62-65
62. fj^iiouq. In Attic Greek fjiaiauc;, like some other adjectives, mostly of quantity, has a peculiar
construction. It governs a noun in the genitive, but agrees with it in gender. Thus -
Plat. Phcedo 104 A 6 fjiaiauq Tou dpi9|aou aTiaq. Thuc. 5.31.2 eni rfj ri^iioeia Tfjq yfjq. Demosth.
p. 44, 4.16 ToTq rjiJioeoi toov iTTTreoov.
This idiom is kept up by Hellenistic writers, such as Philo, Strabo, and the translator of Josephus'
Jewish War. It is however very rare in the LXX, occuring only in the following passages -
3 K. [2 Kings} 16:9 6 apxoov Tfjq riiaioouc; (§ 11) Tfjq I'ttttou. Josh. 4:12, 1 Chr. 5:23 oi riiaio£i(;
(puAfjq Mavaoor\. Tob. 10: 10 xa fjiaiou {sic) toov UTiapxovTOOv. Ezk. 16:51 rdq riiaio£i(; toov djaapTioov.
1 Mac. 3:34, 37 Tdq ruaioeiq toov Suvdjaeoov.
Elsewhere instead of the Attic idiom we find to fjviiou or fjjaiou, irrespective of the gender and
number of the noun which follows, e.g. -
TO fjijiau Tou oikAou Ex. 39:2 fj|aiou dpxovTOOv 2 Esd. [Ezra] 4:16.
TO fjijiau auTfjq Lvt. 6:20. £v riiaioei rjiaepoov Ps. 101:25
TO fjijiou TOU al'viaToq Ex. 24:6. to f\\iiov toov UTiapxovTOOv Tob. 8:21.
63. Tidq. a. In classical Greek the rule for nao, in the singular is that with the article it is collective,
without the article it is distributive -
Ttdaa ri noXxc, = all the city.
Ttdoa TroAiq = every city.
Trdq differs from ordinary adjectives in taking the predicative position in an attributive sense.
Thus while dyaOiq r\ ttoAic; means 'the city is good,' naoa r\ ttoAic; means 'all the city.' Tidq may
however take the attributive position, like any other adjective. When it does so, the collective force
is intensified -
naoa r\ noXic; = all the city.
ri Tidoa TToAiq = the whole city.
Thus Plato' s expression (Apol. 40 E) 6 Tide; xpovoq is rendered by Cicero (T.D. 1 .97) perpetuitas
omnis consequentis temporis. For other instances of this use in classical authors we may take -
Hdt. 7.46 6 Tide; dvOpoomvoq l^ioq. Plat. Rep. 618 B 6 Tide; KivSuvoq, Phileb. 67 B oi navxe(; ^6e(;
= all the oxen in the world.
Xen. Anab. 5.6.5 oi JtdvTsq dvOpooiroi.
In such cases there is an additional stress gained by the unusual position assigned to naq.
b. In the LXX the same distinction seems to be maintained. It is true a writer will go from one
to the other, e.g. -
Jdg. 16:17,18 Kai dvi^yyeiAav auTfj Tiqv naoav KapSiav auTou . . . Kal eiSev AaAeiSd oti
dTifiYYeiAev auTfj naoav xr\v KapSiav auTou -
50
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
but so in English we might first say he told her his whole heart, and then add and she saw that
he had told her all his heart.
Other instances of the strongly collective force of naq in the attributive position are -
Gen. 45:20 td yocp navxa dyaBd Aiyutttou ujaiv eoxax.
Josh. 4: 14 £vavTiov tou navxbc, y^vouc; 'lapariA.
Wisd. 7:9 6 Tide; xpuooq.
2 Mac. 8:9 to Tidv Tfjq 'louSaiaq . . . yevoc;.
Still there is a tendency in the LXX to assimilate nao, to adjectives generally and to employ it
in the attributive position without any special emphasis.
c. Neither is the rule that nao, without the article is distributive at all closely adhered to, e.g. -
Ex. 8:16 £v Tidari yfi Aiyutttou, 16:6 Trpoq naoav auvaYCOYHV uioo 'lopariA.
1 K. [1 Sam.] 7:2 Tidq oiKoq 'lopariA.
d. In the plural oi navxeo, is rare, but may be found -
Jdg. 20:46 oi Jiavxe(; outoi.
1 Mac. 2:37 'ATro6dvoo|a£v oi navxec, ev rfj dTrAoTrju rijaoov.
2 Mac. 12:40 xdic, Se Tidoi oacpeq 6Yev£T0. Cp. Aristeas § 36 ToTq naox . . . TioAiTaK;.
Ai Tidoai is still rarer, but see -
3 Mac. 1:1 na^ayyeiXac, xcac, Tidoaic; Suvdvieaiv.
Td navxa is comparatively common, occuring, e.g., in Gen. 1:31, 9:3: Ex. 29:24: Lvt. 19:13:
2 Mac. 10:23, 12:22: 3 Mac. 2:3.
e. In the N.T. the collective use of Tidq followed by the article is clearly marked in many passages,
e.g. -
Gal. 5:146... irdq vovioc;. Mr. 8'34 Tidaa r\ ttoAic; e^fjAOev.
Also the distributive use of nao, without the article, as in 1 Cor. 11:4,5 nao, dvrjp . . . Tidoa Se
Yuvrj. In Rom. 3:19 we have the two usages brought into contrast -
vva Tidv aTOjja (ppaYfj, Kai UTioSiKoq Y^vrirai Tide; 6 koovioc; tco QeQ).
On the other hand there are also instances of nao, in the singular and without the article being
used collectively, e.g. -
Eph. 2*2 1 Tidoa oiKoSo|ari.
Mt. 2:3 Tidaa 'lepoaoAuvia.
Acts 2:36 Tidq oiKoq 'lapariA.
f. In the plural oi noMxeo, is more common in St. Paul than in the LXX. Take for instance -
Phil. 2:21 oi navxec, ydp xa eauroov ^rjTouoi. Cp. 2 Cor. 5:14. 1 Cor. 10:17 oi ydp TidvTec; £k
Tou kvbc, dprou |a£T£xovi£v. Cp. Eph. 4:13. Rom. 11:32 ouv6kA£io£ ydp 6 @eb(; xoxx; navxac, dq
dTr£i9£iav. 2 Cor. 5:10 Touq ydp TrdvraqriiadqKTA. 1 Cor. 9:22 ToT(;Trdaiy£y ova Tiavra.
oi TrdvT£(; dv5p£(;.
Td Trdvra occurs in Rom. 8:32, 11:36: 1 Cor. 15:27, 12:6, 19: Eph. 5:13: Acts 17:25: Mk. 4:11
and perhaps in other passages.
64. Comparison of Adjectives. Owing to the pecuharity of Hebrew syntax the treatment of
this subject mostly falls under the head of Prepositions. We need only notice here that the positive
may be put for the comparative.
51
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Gen. 49: 12 Xsvkoi oi oSovreq aurou f] ydXa.
Dt. 7:17 TToAu to eQvoq xovxo f] eyoo, 9'1 sQvx] yisyaXa Kai ioxuporepa \iaXkov f] ujaetq.
So in N.T. -
Mt. 18:8,9 KaAov ooi earlv eiaeAeetv . . . f] . . . I^Ariefjvai. Cp. Mk. 9:43, 45.
65. Omission of laaAAov. The comparison of attributes may be effected by the use of verbs as
well as of adjectives. In such cases the omission of viaAAov is common in the LXX.
Nb. 22:6 loxvei omoc; f] r\\ieic;, 24:7 v^\)(jdQr\oexai f] rwy l^aoiAsia.
Hos. 7:6 eXeoc; QeXod f] Qvoiav.
2 Mac. 7:2 £toivioi yocp dTro9vrioK8iv eoyLev f] naxpodovq v6\iov(; napa^aiveiv.
Cp. Aristeas § 322 xepneiv yap oTo|aai oe raura f] xa toov yivQoXoyodv ^i^Xia.
PRONOUNS, 66-71
66. Superfluous Use of Pronoun. A pronoun is sometimes employed superfluously after the
object, direct or indirect, has been already expressed, e.g. --
Ex. 12:44 Kal nav (aix) oiKSTriv y\ dpyupoovriTov nepixeyieiq auTov.
Nb. 26:37 Kal tw laATiadS uiw "Ocpep ouk eysvovTO auTW uioi.
The above may be considered as deflexions of the Nominative of Reference (§ 52) into an
obhque case by Attraction.
So in N.T. -
2 Cor. 12:17 yLr\ xiva oo— v aTrearaAKa itpoq ujadq, Si' auTou knXeo\eKxr\oa ujadq;
Mt. 25:29 xov Se \\.r\ exovxoq, Kal o exei dp6rio£Tai djt' auToO.
Rev. 2:7, 17 tw vikcovti Sooooo avxG). Cp. 6:4.
In Josh. 24:22 -
v\iei(; e^eXe^aoQe Kupio) Xaxpeveiv auTW -
Kupio) should be tov Kupiov (which A has). Then Aarpeueiv auTW would be an explanatory
clause added after the usual manner.
67. Frequent Use of Pronouns. Apart from any Semitic influence there is also a tendency in
later Greek to a much more lavish use of pronouns than was thought necessary by classical authors.
We have seen already (§ 13) that the missing pronoun of the 3d person was supplied. The possessive
use of the article moreover was no longer thought sufficient, and a possessive genitive was added,
e.g. -
Gen. 38:27 Kal xf\5e f\v 5i5u|aa £v xf\ KoiAia aurfjc;.
So in N.T. -
Mt. 19:9 oq dv dTioAuori xr\v yuvaiKa auTou.
1 Pet. 2:24 avxbc; dvriveyKev £v tw oo)\iaxi auTou.
68. 'ASeAcpoq as a Reciprocal Pronoun. The use of dSeAcpoq as a reciprocal pronoun is a sheer
Hebraism, e.g. -
Ex. 10:23 Kal ouk eiSev ouSelq tov dSeAcpov auToO = they saw not one another.
52
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
69. Hebrew Syntax of the Relative, a. One of the most salient characteristics of LXX Greek
is the repetition of the pronoun after the relative, as though in English, instead of saying 'the land
which they possessed,' we were to say habitually 'the land which they possessed it,' and so in all
similar cases. This anomaly is due to the hteral following of the Hebrew text. Now in Hebrew the
relative is indeclinable. Its meaning therefore is not complete until a pronoun has been added to
determine it. But the relative in Greek being declinable, the translator was forced to assign to it
gender, number, and case, which rendered the addition of the pronoun after it unnecessary.
Nevertheless the pronoun was retained out of regard for the sacred text. As instances of the simplest
kind we may take the following -
Nb. 35:25 ov expioav auTov, 13:33 xf\(;yf\(; r[\ KaxeoKe^\)avxo auTt^v.
Is. 62:2 6 Kupioq ovojadoei auTO.
Gen. 1:11 ou to onep\ia aurou £v auTCO.
Dt. 4:7 0) 60TIV auTCO.
Ps. 18:4 obv ovxi cuKovovxai at cpooval auTCOv.
Ex. 6:26 oiq einsv avxdlq.
b. Where the relative is followed by edv the same construction is employed, e.g. -
Nb. 17:5 6 avQpodnoc; o§v edv eKAe^oojaai auTov, 19:22 navxbc; ov kav a^r\xai aurou 6
dKdBapToc;.
c. Sometimes a demonstrative takes the place of the personal pronoun -
Gen. 3:11 ou £V£T£iAdiariv ooi toutou \i6vov \ir\ (payeiv.
d. In all the foregoing instances the appended pronoun is in the same case as the relative, but
this is not necessary.
Nb. 3:3 ou exeXeiodoev xac; x^tpocc; auTOOv lepaxeveiv.
The construction here, though determined by the Hebrew, happens to agree with the Greek
Accusative of the Part Affected.
e. Very often there is the same preposition both before the relative and before the appended
pronoun -
Ex. 34:12 eiq ri§v eiaTiopeuri eiq aurriv.
Nb. 11:21 £v oiq siyLi ev auToTq.
Gen. 28:13 r\ yf\ ecp' r\c; ov KaQev5ei(; en aurfjc;.
f. Occasionally the preposition is the same, but the case it governs is different, e.g. -
Jdg. 16:26 £(p' oiq 6 oiKoq oxr\Kei en' autouc;.
Josh. 24:13 yf\v ecp' r\v ouk SKOTtidoars en auTfjq.
g. Sometimes the preposition is confined to the appended pronoun. Then the problem arises.
Into what case is the relative to be put? -
a problem which is solved differently in different passages. In some the case chosen coincides
with that of the pronoun following, e.g. -
Gen. 24:42 triv 656v jaou, ri§v vuv eyCo 7i:op£uo|aai en autiqv.
Ex. 25:28 Touq KudBouq, oiq oneioei(; ev auroTc;.
Gen. 21:23 rfj yfi fl ov napodKr\oa(; ev avxf\.
In others it does not -
Nb. 14:31 xr\v yf\v ri§v vyLeiq aneoxr\xe an auTfjq, 19:2 f\ ouk ene^Xr\Qr\ en avxr\v ^uyoq.
53
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
3 K. [2 Kings} 17:1 d) TrapeoTrjv evoomov auTou.
h. Sometimes the relative has a different preposition from the pronoun following -
Nb. 13:20 xiq r\ yf[ siq fiv outoi £VKd6rivTai en auTfjq . . . xiveq at TioAeiq siq a outoi KaroiKouoiv
£v amaiq.
For other instances see Ex. 6:4: Nb. 15:39: Dt. 1:22, 1:33, 28:49.
i. Sometimes the preposition is the same, but instead of a mere pronoun we have a phrase, e.g.
Gen. 24:38 £v oic; kyo) TrapoiKOO £v rfj yfi auTOOv.
j. The construction of which we have been speaking is not confined to the simple relative, e.g.
Gen. 41:19 oiaq ouk eiSov Toiauraq.
Ex. 9:18, 11:6 fJTiqToiauTri ouy^ov^-
k. The habitual repetition of the pronoun in the LXX is a mere Hebraism, though a search among
Greek writers might reveal traces of a somewhat similar usage arising independently. Here are a
few instances -
Plat. Tim. 28 A otou yLsv ovv av 6 Sriiaioupyoc; . . . xr\v iMav kox Suva^iiv avxov aTiepyd^riTai,
Farm. 130 E obv rdSe xa aXka vi£TaAavi|3dvovTa xaq knodwyiiaq avxCdv Toxstv. Artist. Cat. 5.38
oiov £711 \iev Toov dAAoov ouk dv exoi xk; to toiouto TipoeveyKeTv.
1. In the N.T. this Hebrew syntax of the relative occurs not infrequently.
Philemon 12 o§v avene\i^\)a ooi auTov.
Gal. 2:10 o kox eonov5aoa avxb touto Tioirioai.
Acts 15:17 £(p' ov £mK£KAriTai xbv ovojad jaou en auTouq.
Mk. 7:25 r\(; eixe to OuydTpiov auTfjc; nvevyia dndOapTov.
Cp. Mk. 1:7: Lk. 3:16: also Mk. 13:19, 9:3.
Instances are most frequent in the very Hebraistic book of Revelation. See Rev. 3:8; 7:3, 9;
13:8; 20:8. Cp. 1 Clem. 21:9 ou r\ nvor\ auTou £v rijaTv eoTiv.
70. dvrip = EKaoxoq. The use of dvrip as a distributive pronoun is a pure Hebraism.
4 K. [2 Kings] 18:31 niexai dviqp Tiqv a\\.neXov auTou, Kai dviqp xr\v ouKfjv auToO cpdysTai.
Jdg. 16:5 r\\iei(; Sooooviev ooi dviqp xtAiouq Kal SKaTov dpyupiou.
71. ooTiq for oq. Except in the neuter singular 6 xi, as in Josh. 24:27, and in the expression eooq
OTOU, as in 1 K. [1 Sam.] 22:3, or yisxpi otou, which is found only in the Codex Sinaiticus version
of Tob. 5:7, ooxk; occurs in Swete's text only in the nominative, singular or plural. In meaning it
is often indistinguishable from oq.
Ex. 20:2 'Eyoo eiyn Kupioq . . . ooxk; e^r\yay6v oe. Cp. Dan. 6 6:27.
Ps. 89:4 rj r\\iepa r\ ex^ec; fjuc; SifjAOev. Cp. Nb. 14:8.
1 K. [1 Sam.] 30:10 SiaKooioi dvSpeq oiTiveq SKaQioav nepav xov xstvidppou. Cp. Ex. 32:4, 9:
Nb. 1:5: 1 Mac. 13:48.
Jdg. 21:12 TETpaKooiaq vedviSaq TiapOevouq, aiTiveq ouk eyvoooav dvSpa.
OiTiveq = ol' occurs several times in Aristea -
§§ 102, 121, 138, 200, 308.
The same use of oonq for the simple relative is found in the N.T., e.g. -
Col. 3:5 xr\v nXeove^iav, fJTi(; eoxiv eiSooAoAaTpeia.
54
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Acts 8:15 Tov Uexpov Kai 'loodvvriv oinveq Kaxa^avxeq kxX.
1 Tim. 6:9 smQvyiiaq . . . aXxivec; |3u9i^ouoi xovc; dvBpooTTOuq.
Gal. 4:24 anvd eonv aXkr\yopov\ieva.
VERBS, 72-84
72. Analytic Tenses. By an Analytic Tense is meant one which is formed with an auxiliary
instead of by an inflexion, as in English, 'is coming' for 'comes.' No reader of the LXX can fail
to be struck by the frequency of such forms. It results from the fact that both languages combine
to produce them. They are suggested by the great use made of the participle in Hebrew, while at
the same time there was a strong tendency towards the employment of such forms within the Greek
language itself. They are to be found in the best writers, both in prose and poetry, from Homer
downwards. Plato often has recourse to them, partly for the sake of philosophical precision, and
partly, it must be confessed, because in his later style he preferred two words to one. In the Laws
npenov eoxi almost altogether displaces npenei.
PRESENT
3 K. [2 Kings} 20:5 ouksi av eoQiodv apxov; Cp. Is. 10:8: Ezk. 36:13.
3 K. [2 Kings} 18:12 eoxiv (po^ovyievoc;.
Nb. 14:8 60TIV peouaa. Cp. 3 K. [2 Kings} 20:15: Dan. 2:28.
2 Esd. [Ezra] 23:24 ouk eiolv eniyivodOKOvxec;.
Prov. 3:5 Ta6i nenoiQux;.
Jdg. 11:10 eoxod dKouoov.
Dan. 0' 6:26 earoooav TtpoaKuvoOvTsc;.
2 Chr. 15:16 eivai . . . AeiroupYouoav.
FUTURE SIMPLE
Gen. 4:14 £oo|aai orevoov kox Tpsjicov. Cp. Dan. 0' 6:27.
Is. 47:7 eoo\iai apxovoa.
Gen. 4:12 orevoov Kal rpsvioov eor\.Cp. Ex. 22:25: Dt. 28:29.
Dt. 28:29 eor\ . . . a5iKov\ievo(;.
Nb. 8:19 eoxai . . . Jipoeyyil,U)V. Cp. Gen. 18:18.
Mai. 3:3 eoovxai . . . TipoadYOVTec;.
Is. 22:24 eoovxai 6mKp£|advi£voi.
Ezk. 34:29 eoovxai anoXXvyievoi. Cp. Dt. 14:33
PERFECT
Is. 8:14 nenoiQodc; fiq.
Is. 10:20, 17:8 nenoiQoxec; (h\iev.
Nb. 22:12 sonv ydp evXoyr\\ievo(;.
55
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
FUTURE PERFECT
Gen. 43:9, 44:32 ruaaprriKCoq sooyLai.
2 K. [2 Sam.] 22:3: Is. 12:2, 8:17 TieTroiBcbc; eoojaai (fut. simp, in force).
Sir. 7:25 eor\ xexeXsKOdc;.
Is. 58:14 eor\ nenoiQodc;.
Is. 17:7, 22:24 nenoiQodc; eoxai.
Ex. 12:6 eoxai v\iiv 5iaxexr\pr\\\.evov.
Is. 32:3 eoovxai nenoiQoxeq.
Gen. 41:36 earai . . . necpvXayyLsva.
IMPERFECT
Dan. 10:2 fjviiqv nevQCdv.
Dan. 0' 7:11 Beoopoov fjviriv.
Gen. 40:13 f\oQa oivoxooov.
Gen. 37:2: Ex. 3:1 iqv Tioiviaivoov. Cp. Gen. 39:23, 42:6: Nb. 11:1: Jdg. 16:21: Jonah 1:10:
Sus. 1: 1 Mac. 6:43.
1 K. [1 Sam.] 17:34 Tioiviaivoov rjv.
Jer. 4:24 f\v xpeyLovxa (sc. xa oprj).
3 K. [2 Kings} 18:3 r\v (po|3ouvi£vo(;. Cp. Dan. 0' 6:18.
Dan. 0' 1:16 rjv . . . dvaipoujaevoc;.
Baruch 1:19 fJvieOa aneiQovvxe(;.
Dt. 9:24 dTr£ieouvT£(; r\xe. Cp. Dt. 9:22, 31:27.
Jdg. 1:7 f\oav ovXkeyovxec;. Cp. Josh. 10:26: 1 Mac. 11:41.
PLUPERFECT
Dan. 0' 10:9 r\yir\v TtsTtTOOKOoq.
Dan. 6 10:9 fjviriv Kaxavevvyyievoc;.
2 Chr. 18:34 iqv eoxr\KOi(;.
1 K. [1 Sam.] 4:13 rjv . . . e^eoxr\Kvia.
Jdg. 8:11: Sus. 9 35 rjv Tt£Troi6uTa.
Josh. 7:22 f\v £VK£Kpuia|asva.
2 Chr. 5:8 rjv ^lanenexaKoxa.
Tob. 6:18 riToi|aao|a£vri f\v.
Is. 20:6 f\yLsv nenoiQoxei;.
Ex. 39:23 f\oav nenoir\K6xec; avxa.
b. riYV£o6ai may be used as an auxiliary instead of dvai.
Ps. 72:14 £Y£v6tiriv }i£viaoTiYOOvi£vo(;.
Is. 30:12 Tr£Troi6d)<; £Y£vou.
Nb. 10:34 £Y£V£to OKid^ouoa.
Ps. 125:3 £Y£vri9ri|a£v £U(ppaiv6|a£voi.
Ex. 17:12 £Y£vovTO . . . EOTripiyvievai.
56
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Sir. 13:9 UTioxoopoov ytvou, 18:33 \ir\yivov . . . ou|a|3oAoKOTr6ov.
c. Sometimes the verbal adjective is used in place of the participle.
Is. 18:3 aKouarov eoxai.
Dt. 4:36 ocKouoTri kyevexo.
Gen. 45:2: Is. 48:3 aKouaTov sy^^TO.
Is. 23:5 otav 8s ockoutov Y^vrirai.
Dt. 30:5 nkeovaoxov oe Tioiriaei.
d. When a causative form is wanted corresponding to aKouoTov yeveoQai recourse is had to
aKouoTov TTOieTv, e.g. -
Sir. 46:17 aKouarriv tRoir\oev xr\v cpooriv autoO. Cp. Ps. 105:2, 142:8: Jer. 27:2, 38:7: Is. 30:30,
45:21,48:5,6,20,52:7,62:11.
e. In the N.T. these analytic tenses are relatively even commoner than in the LXX.
PRESENT
Col. 3:2 koxiv . . . KaQr\\ievo(;.
2 Cor. 9:12 eoxi TrpooavaTiAripouaa.
Col. 1:6 eoxi KapTro(popou|a£vov Kai au^avojisvov.
Col. 2:23 eoxi . . . exovxa.
2 Cor. 2:17 eo\iev . . . Kanr\kevovxec;.
Acts 5:25 eioiv . . . eoxCdxeq Kai SiSdoKovreq.
Mt. 5:25 To6i euvocov.
FUTURE SIMPLE
Lk. 5:11 dvOpooTTOuq eor\ ^ooypoov.
Acts 7:6 eoxai . . . TidpoiKov.
1 Cor. 14:10 eoeoQe . . . XaXovvxeq.
PERFECT
Acts 25:10 sorcoq eiyn (present in meaning).
Acts 21:33 eoxi nenoir\KO)(;.
1 Cor. 15:9 rjAmKOTsq eo\iev.
Hb. 7:21, 23 eioiyeyovoxeq.
James 5:16 fi TreTioiriKax;.
2 Cor. 1:19 TreTioiOoTec; (h\iev.
Hb. 4:2 eo\iev eurjyyeAioiaevoi.
Hb. 10:10 r\yiao\ievoi eo\iev.
Acts 2:13 \ie\ieox(jd\iev 01 eioi.
FUTURE PERFECT
Hb. 2:13 eooyiai nenoiQodc, (from Is. 12:2 perfect only in form).
IMPERFECT
Acts 10:30, 11:5 fJviTiv npooevxoyievoc;. Cp. 22:19, 20: Gal. 1:22.
57
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Lk. 4:44 r\v KTipuoooov. Cp. Lk. 5:16, 23:8: Acts 7:60, 8:13, 28, 9:28, 10:24, 12:20: Phil
2:26.
Acts 12:5 r[V yjivo\ievr\.
Acts 21:3 rjv . . . dTrocpopTi^ojaevov.
Acts 16:12 fjiaev . . . SiaTpi|3ovT£<;.
Gal. 1:23 dKouovreq rjoav. Cp. Acts 1:10.
Acts 1:13 rjoav KaravievovTec;. Cp. Acts 1:14, 2:2, 5, 12, 42: Mk. 2:18.
f. Besides eivai other auxiliaries are used in the N.T. --
2 Cor. 6:14 jar) yiveoQe kxe^ol,v\jo\)vxe(;.
Col. 1:18 I'va YsvrjTai . . . Trpooreuoov.
Rev. 3:2 yivou yipr\\jo^G)v .
Acts 8:16 l^el^aTTTiovievoi UTiripxov.
With the last example cp. Aristeas § 193 d ]xr\ TreTioiOcoq UTiapxoi. The
same author has Kexapioiaevoq eor\ in § 40 and ioxuov koxi in 241.
g. Instances of analytic tenses occur here and there in Josephus, e.g. -
B.J. 1.31.1 Kai TOUTO f\v jadAioTa Tapaooov'AvTiTiaTpov.
Ant. 2.6.7 Ti irapovreq eir\\iev.
h. Also in the Apostolic Fathers -
2 Clem. 17:7 eoovxax 56^av Sovreq. Barn. Ep. 19:4 eor\ Tpejaoov,
19:6 ou ]xr\ yiyr\ emOuvioov. Cp. 19:9. Herm. Past. Vis. 3.4.2
UTiepexovTec; auTouq eiaiv, Sim. 5.4.2 eaoviai eoopaKOoq . . . aKriKoox;,
9.13.2 eor\ . . . cpopoov, Mdt. 5.2.8 eor\ eupioKovievoq, Sim. 9.1.8 euOrjvouv
fjv, 9.4.1 uTToSeSuKuiai rjoav . . . UTioSeSuKeioav.
73. Deliberative Use of the Present Indicative. The deliberative use of
the present indicative is not unknown in Latin, especially in Terence, e.g.
Phorm. 447 quid ago? Cp. Heaut. 343: Eun. 811: Ad. 538. It occurs also in
the Greek of the LXX.
Gen. 37:30 eyd) 56 ttou Ttopsuoviai m;
So in N.T. -
Jn. 1 1:47 ti Troiou|a£v; What is our course?
74. The Jussive Future, a. The Jussive Future is rare in Attic Greek, and,
when it does occur, is regarded as a weak form of imperative. In the LXX,
on the other hand, it is very common, and is employed in the most
solemn language of legislation. From the nature of the case it is not used
in the first person. It may be employed in command or in prohibition. As
instances of the former we may take -
Lvt. 19:18 ayjaiir\oei(; xbv TrArjoiov oou ooq oeavxov. Cp. Ex.
34:18,20: 3 K. [2 Kings} 17:11.
Lvt. 19:19 Tov voviov yLov (pvXd^eoQe. Cp. Lvt. 11:44.
Lvt. 19:22 Kal e^iXaoexai 6 iepeuq. Cp. Lvt. 19:20,21.
b. Very often the jussive future follows an imperative.
58
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Gen. 40:14 viviioeriTi \iov... Kainoir\oei(;. Cp. Gen. 44:4: Ex. 7:26, 9:1, 13: Nb. 15:2, 17: 3 K.
[2 Kings} 17:13.
Josh. 8:4 jjri jaaKpdv yiveoQe . . . Kai eoeoQe navxeq sToijaoi. Cp. Nb. 13:18.
c. Of the use of the jussive future in prohibition we have a conspicuous example in the Ten
Commandments (Ex. 20:13-17: Dt. 5:17-21) - Ou yioixevoen;, Ov Kke\\)ei(; ktA. So also -
Dt. 6:16 ouK £KTr£ipdo£i(; Kupiov Tov Qeov oov. Cp. Nb. 22:12: Ex. 22:28: Lvt. 19:12-19.
d. In the case of the jussive future we have ou in prohibition, because the formula was originally
one of prediction.
e. Occasionally there is a transition from the jussive future to ou yLr\ with subjunctive -
Nb. 23:25 cure KaxapaoK; Kaxapaor\ jjoi auTov, out£ evXoyCdv \ir\ evXoyr\or\(; avxov.
f. In the N.T. the jussive future is often used in passages quoted from the LXX. In Matthew it
is employed independently.
Mt. 5:48 £0£o9£ ouv v\iei(; t£A£ioi, 6:45 ouk £0£o6£ ooq oi UTTOKpirai, 20:26-28 oux ouTOoq eoxai
£v ujaTv . . . eoxai ujaoov Sou Acq, 21:3 Kai eav xk; v\iiv e{nr\ xi, £p£TT£ ktA.
75. The Optative, a. The pure optative, i.e. the optative as employed to express a wish, is of
frequent occurrence in the LXX, as might be expected from the character of the contents, so much
of which is in the form either of aspiration or of imprecation. But the use of the optative where in
Latin we should have the historic tenses of the subjunctive is hardly to be found outside of
Maccabees.
2 Mac. 3:37 tou Se |3aoiA£C0<; £7r£pooTfiaavTo<; tov 'HAi65copov, Ttoioq xk; eix] kmxr\oeio(;.
4 Mac. 17:1 £A£yov 8£ Kai toov 5opu(p6poov xiveq ooq . . . I'va jar) ^avoeiev xi tou ocojiaToq auTfjq,
£auTriv £ppnjj£v Kara xf\(; nvpaq.
The estabhshed practice is for the subjunctive to follow the historic tenses in a final clause -
Ex. 1:11 £Tr£OTrio£v . . . I'va KaKOoaoooiv, 9:16 5i£Tripri6ri(; iva £v8£{^coviai.
Wisd. 16:11 5i£oa)^ovTO, I'va yLr\ . . .yevodvxai. Cp. 16:18.
Cp. Aristeas §§ 11, 18, 19, 26, 29, 42, 111, 175, 193.
b. In the N.T. also the subjunctive is regularly employed in final clauses after an historic tense,
e.g. -
Tit. 1:5 TOUTOU x^piv dTr£AiTrov oe sv Kprirri, I'va xa Xeinovxa £Tri5iop9a)ari.
c. The pure optative is said to occur 35 times in the N.T., always, except in Philemon 20, in the
3d person.
In Luke- Acts the optative is commonly employed in dependent questions, e.g. -
Luke 18:36 £Truv9dv£T0 xi sir] touto,
with which contrast
Mk. 14:11 £^riT£i Trooq £UKaipoo(; auTov TiapaScp.
Outside of Acts the optative with £1 is found only in four passages -
1 Cor. 14:10, 15:37 (druxoi): 1 Pet. 3:14, 17.
76. Conditional with dv. Occasionally we find the apodosis in a conditional sentence devoid
of dv.
Nb. 22:33 Kai ei \ir\ £^£kAiv£v, vuv ouv oe yLsv dTi:£KT£iva, £K£ivriv 5£ Tr£pi£Troiriad|ariv. Contrast
22:29 and compare 2 K. [2 Sam.] 2:27.
59
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
77. Infinitive of Purpose. The use of the infinitive to express purpose, as in English, is common
to all stages of the Greek language, but abounds more in the LXX than in classical Greek.
Gen. 37:25 eKaQioav ^ecpayeXv aprov. Cp. 39:14, 42:7, 27, 43:22: Ex. 14:11: Nb. 22:20: Job.
2:1.
Of the use of the infinitive with the article to express purpose we have had occasion to speak
already (§ 59).
78. Infinitive of Consequence. This construction is of doubtful propriety in Attic Greek. In
the LXX it is much less common than the Infinitive of Purpose.
Ex. 11:1 Kal ouK eior\Kovoev e^anooxeiXai Touq uiouq 'lopariA.
79. Paucity of Participles. The small use made of participles in the LXX, as compared with
classical Greek, is a natural result of the paratactical construction which reigns throughout. The
same is the case, though to a less extent, in the N.T. Take for instance -
Mk. 14:16 Kal e^f\kQov oi laaBrirai, Kal f\kQov eiq xr\v ttoAiv, Kal evpev KaQodq einev avxdlq'
Kal r\xoi\iaoav xb Tidoxa.
The participle has disappeared in the modem language. Doubtless the influence of Biblical
Greek was among the causes of its decline.
80. Misuse of the Participle. The misuse of the participle marks a stage of its decline. We find
this tendency already manifesting itself in the LXX. Such an anacoluthon indeed as the following
Ex. 8:15, 9:7 iSwv Se Oapaoo . . . £|3apuv6ri rj KapSia avxov
may be passed over, as it might easily be paralleled from the most strictly classical writers. But
we find sentences in the LXX in which a participle is the only verb. Sometimes this arises from
following the Hebrew as in -
Jdg. 13:19, 20 Kal Mavooe Kal r\ yuvr) aurou ^Xenovxeq, 14:4 Kal ev tw Kaipw SKeivod oi
dAAocpuAoi Kupi£uovT£(; £v 'lapariA.
More often it does not, as in -
Ex. 12:37 aTrdpavrec; Se oi uiol 'lopariA, 15:18 Kupioq ^aoiXevodv xbv aioova.
Jdg. 4:16 Kal BapdK Siookoov.
Moreover we find a participle coupled with a finite verb by Kai. When the subject of the two
is the same, it is open to us to say that it is not copulative, but merely emphasizes the verb, as in -
Nb. 21:11 Kal £^dpavT£(; (Hb. impf.)£^'Q(3a)9, KaiTiapevel^aAovevXaAYasi, 22:23 Kali5ouoa
ri ovoq . . . Kal £^£kAiV£V.
Hardly so however when the subject is different.
Ex. 12:30 Kal dvaordq Oapaoo . . . Kal £yevr\Qr\ Kpauyri.
Nb. 22:23 Kal iSoov BaAdK . . . Kal £(po|3ri9ri Mood|3.
81. The Intensive Participle. On the other hand there is a cause in operation in the LXX tending
to an unnecessary use of participles. For in place of a cognate dative we often find the participle
used along with a finite form of the same verb, to convey the intensive force that is accomplished
in Hebrew by the addition of the infinitive to the finite verb, e.g. -
Gen. 22:17 ei \ir\v evXoyCdv evXoyr\o(jd oe, Kal TrArjOuvoov TrAriOuvoo to onepyLa oov.
Jdg. 1 1:25 \ir\ yLaxoyLevoq £|aax£oaTO vi£Td 'lopariA f] TroA£vi6ov £TroA£virio£v auTov;
We might fill pages with instances of this idiom, but a statement of its frequency must suffice.
This emphatic use of the participle is a more unmitigated Hebraism than the other forms of the
60
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
etymological figure. The cognate accusative is quite Greek and the cognate dative is to be found
in pure Greek, but we should search in vain among classical authors for the intensive use of the
participle. There is a clear instance indeed in Lucian (Dialogi Marini 4.3 iScov eiSov), but it is
interesting to remember that Lucian himself came from the banks of the Euphrates. In Hdt. 5.95
auToq jJEV (peuyoov EKcpeuyet there is a difference of meaning between the participle and the finite
verb - he himself escapes by flight.
In the N.T. we have one instance, other than a quotation, of this Hebraism, namely -
Eph. 5:5 Tore yivoooKOVTEc;,
but both the reading and the interpretation of this passage are disputed.
82. Other Varieties of the Etymological Figure. In Josh. 17:13 e^oAeBpeuoai Se auTouq ouk
e^ooAeBpeuoav the infinitive absolute of the Hebrew is represented in Greek by the infinitive, instead
of by a participle or a cognate dative, so that sheer nonsense is made of the translation. In another
passage, where the Greek departs from our Hebrew, an adjective takes the place of the participle -
Jdg. 5:30 oiKT£ip|aoov oiKTeipriaei.
Sometimes we find an adverb in place of the participle -
Ex. 15:1 £v56^oo(;Yocp SeSo^aorai.
Nb. 22:17 evniaooq yocp Tijariooo 0£.
Prov. 23:1 vorjTOOc; voei, 27'23 yvoooTOOc; emyvooori.
The following turns of expression may also be noticed -
Jdg. 11:25 £v dya6a) dyaBoorepoc;.
Dt. 18:8 laepiSa \ie\ie^io\ikvr\v .
1 K. [1 Sam.] 1:11 8cooco aurov evcomov aou Sotov.
83. Middle and Passive Voices. In later Greek the boundary lines between the middle and
passive voices are not clearly demarcated. Even in classical authors we find the future middle used
in a passive sense, as it is also in -
Ex. 12:10 OUK dTroAei\p£Tai d' aurou eooq Tipooi, Kal oatoOv auvrpixperai dn' auTou.
The same seems to be the case with ^uprjoooviai and e^uprjoaTO in Jdg. 16:17, 22.
So in N.T. -
1 Cor. 6:11 dAAd djreAouoaaOe, dAAd riyidoOrire, dAA' eSiKaiooOriTe, 10:2 Kal navxei; eiq tov
Mooofjv el^aTTTioavTO,
though here Riddell's semi-middle sense of the verb might plausibly be brought in by way of
explanation.
Instances of passive form with middle meaning are common in the LXX -
Nb. 22:34 dTiooTpacpriooviai / will get me back again.
Jdg. 15:9 e^epicprjoav spread themselves, 16:20 £KTivax0riao|aai shake myself 16:26
£maTripixOrioo|aai support myself.
3 K. [2 Kings} 17:3 Kpu|3ri6i hide thyself 18:1 TiopeuOriTi Kal ocpOrju xQtkxaa^ go and shew
thyself 20:25 eTipdOri sold himself.
So in N.T. in Luke 1 1:38 £|3aTrTio9ri is used for £|3aTrTioaTO.
84. Causative Use of the Verb. a. The causative use of the verb which is found in the LXX
may be set down with confidence as a Hebraism. BaoiAeueiv according to the Greek language
means 'to be king,' but it is frequently employed in the LXX in the sense of 'to make king,' e.g. -
61
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Jdg. 9:6 e^aoiXevoav x6VA^ei\ieXex.
1 K. [1 Sam.] 8:22 ^aoiXevoov amoi(; ^aoiXea, 15:11 e^aoiXevoa xbv ZaovX ei(; ^aoiXea.
There are all together thirty-six occurrences of the word in this causative sense.
b. Classical Greek again knows ^EeXvooeoQai in the sense of 'to loathe' or 'abominate,' but
not ^EeXvooeiv in the sense of 'to make abominable,' as in -
Ex. 5:21 e^5eXv^axe xr\v oojariv rjiioov evavriov Oapaoo.
Lvt. 11:43 Kai ou \ir\ ^5£Xvfy\xe xac; xpuxaq ujaoov. Cp. Lvt. 20:25: 1 Mac. 1:48.
c. Still more strange to classical Greek is the sense of 'to make to sin' often imposed upon
k^ayLapxaveiv, e.g. -
4 K. [2 Kings] 17:21 Kal e^riviapT£v avxovq djaapTiav yLeyaXr\v.
This is the prevailing sense of the word in the LXX, which is found all together twenty-eight
times, mostly in the phrase o £^ri|aapT£v tov 'loparjA.
d. In this causative use of the verb is to be found the explanation of Ex. 14:25 Kal r\yayev amove;
\iexa. I^iaq, where the R.V. margin has 'made them to drive.' Other similar instances are -
Ex. 13:18 £kukAooo£v = he led round.
1 K. [1 Sam.] 4:3 Kara xi enxaioev rjiaccc; Kupioq or\\iepov,
Ps. 142:11 ^r\oei(;yie.
85. Reduplication of Words. In Greek we are accustomed to reduphcation of syllables, but
not to reduplication of words. This primitive device of language is resorted to in the LXX, in
imitation of the Hebrew, for at least three different purposes -
1) intensification,
2) distribution,
3) universalisation.
1) The intensifying use.
ocpoSpa acpoSpa Gen. 30:43: Ex. 1:7, 12: Nb. 14:7: Ezk. 9:9: Judith 4:2.
ocpoSpa ocpoSpooq Gen. 7:19: Josh. 3:16.
To the same head may be assigned -
Ex. 8:14 ovvr\yayov avxovq Oijaoovidq Oivioovidq.
Dt. 28:43 6 TipooriAuToc; 6 £v ooi ava^r\oexai dvoo dvoo, ou Se KaTa|3riori Kdtoo
Kdtco.
In all the above instances perhaps the kind of intensification involved is that of
a repeated process.
2) The distributive use.
eiq eiq 1 Chr. 24:6
Sue 5uo Gen. 6:19, 7:3: Sir. 36:15.
enxa enxa Gen. 7:3.
XiAiouq £K (puAfjc;, x^Xiovi; £k (puAfjq Nb. 31:6.
TO Tipooi Tipooi 1 Chr. 9:27.
epyaoia Kal epyaoia 2 Chr. 34:13.
In pure Greek such ideas would be expressed by the use of dvd or Kard.
Sometimes we find Kard; employed in the LXX along with the reduplication, as in
62
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Dt. 7:22 Kara jJiKpov jJiKpov.
Zech. 12:12KaTd(puAd(;(puAd(;.
The idea 'year by year' is expressed in many different ways -
kviavxbv Kax eviaurov Dt. 14:21: 1 K. [1 Sam.] 1:7: 2 Chr. 24:5.
Kar' eviauTov sviaurov 1 K. [1 Sam.] 7:16.
kviavxbv k^ sviauroO Dt. 15:20
TO Kax' sviavxbv eviauTCO 3 K. [2 Kings} 10:28.
TO Kax' sviavxbv eviavxov 2 Chr. 9:24.
3) The universalising use.
dvOpooTToq dvOpooTioq = whatsoever man Lvt. 17:3, 8, 10, 13; 18:6; 20:9; 22:18:
Ezk. 14:4, 7.
dvSpi dvSpi Lvt. 15:3.
Of the above three uses the distributive is the only one which is to be found in the N.T.
Mk. 6:7 5uo 5uo, 6:39 ov\in6oia ov\in6oia, 6:40 npaoiai npaoiai.
So also in the Pastor of Hermas -
Sim. 8.2.8 f\XQov TdyvaTa TdyvaTa, 4.2 'eoxr\oav TdyvaTa TdyviaTa.
86. Expressions of Time. a. 'Year after year' is expressed in 2 K. [2 Sam.] 2 1 : 1 by a nominative
absolute eviavxbc; ex6\ievo(; eviauTou without any pretence of grammar.
b. The use of the word 'day' in vague expressions of time is a Hebraism, e.g. -
Gen. 40:4 ruaepaq = for some time. Cp. Dan. 0' 1 1:9.
Jdg. 15:1 yisQ' rijaepaq = after some time. Cp. 3 K. [2 Kings] 17:7.
3 K. [2 Kings} 18:1 \ieQ' rijaepaq TioAAdq = after a long time.
c. 'Day by day' (Hb. day, day) is expressed in Gen. 39:10 by rwiepav e^ rijaepac; (cp. Lat. diem
ex die). In Esther 3:4 KaQ' eKdoxr\v rwiepav is correctly used as the Greek equivalent for the phrase
day and day, which St. Paul (2 Cor. 4:16) has reproduced word for word in the form rwiepa Kai
r\yiepa.
d. The use of 'yesterday and the day before' as a general expression for past time = heretofore
is a Hebraism which presents itself in the LXX under a variety of slight modifications.
£Xe£(;KaiTpiTTiv IK. 4:7, 10:11: 2 K. [2 Sam.] 3:17, 5:2: 1 Chr. 11:2.
exee^KaiTpiTTivriviepavGen. 31:2,5:Ex. 5:7, 14: Josh. 4:18: IK. [1 Sam.] 14:21, 19:7,21:5:
1 Mac. 9:44.
exeeq Kd TpiTTiq Ruth 2:11: 4 K. [2 Kings] 13:5: Sus. Q 15.
an exQeq Kai TpiTriq rjiaepaq Josh. 3:4.
Tipo Tfjc; exOec; Kai TpiTrjq Dt. 19:4.
Tipo Tfjq exQec; Kai npb xf\(; TpiTiqc;. Ex. 21:29.
Ttpo Tfjq exQec; Kai npb xf\(; TpiTiqc; Ywiepaq Ex. 21:36.
Ttpo Tfjq exQe(; ouSe Tipo Tfjq TpiTriq Dt. 4:42, 19:6.
Tipo Tfjq exOec; ouSe Tipo Tfjc; TpiTriq r\\iepa(;. Ex. 4: 10.
In Joshua 20:5, which occurs only in the Codex Alexandrinus, we have an;#8217; exQt(; Kai
TpiTiqv, where £x0£c;-Kai-TpiTTiv is treated as a single indeclinable noun.
e. 'Just at that time' is expressed variously as follows -
63
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
au6oopiDan. 0' 3:15.
auTfi Tfi odpa 1 Esd. 8:65: Dan. 3:5, 6 3:15. Cp. Acts 22:13.
ev auTfi Tfi wpa Dan. 6 5:5. Cp. Lk. 12:12, 13:31, 20:19.
£v auTfi Tfi wpa £K£ivri Dan. 0' 5:5.
£v auTW TW Kaipw Tob. 3:17. Cp. Lk. 13:1.
87. Pleonastic Use of ekeT and £K£i9£v. Just as a personal pronoun is supplied after the relative
(§ 69), so a demonstrative adverb of place is supplied after a relative adverb or after some phrase
equivalent to one.
Gen. 33:19 ov eoxr\oev EKeiTriv axrivriv auTou. Cp. 39:20, 40:3: Ex. 21:13.
Ex. 20:24 ou eav enovoyiaoo) to ovovid yiov eKei.
Dan. 6 9:7 ou Bieoneipaq auTouc; £K£i.
3 K. [2 Kings} 17:19 £v w auToq eKaQ^xo sksT. Cp. Gen. 39:20: Ex. 12:13.
Gen. 31:13 £v TCp totto) o) fjAeixpdq jjoi £K£i aTrjAriv.
Nb. 14:24 eiqfiv eiof]XQev £K£T. Cp. 15:18, 35:26: Dt. 4:27.
Ex. 8:22 ecp' r\(; ouk eoxai £KeT.
4 K. [2 Kings] 1:4 r] kAivti ecp' y\(; dv£|3ri<; sksT.
Dt. 9:28 o9£v e^r\yaye(; r\yLa(; £K£T6£v.
Nb. 23:13 £^ oov ouk 6\pri auTov £K£T9£v.
Dan. 0' 9:7 eiq aq BieoKopmoaq auTouq £K£T.
This idiom, which is thoroughly Hebrew, is to be explained on the same principle as in § 69.
In the N.T. it is found only in Revelation -
Rev. 12:6 ottou £X£i £K£iT6Trov, 12: 14 ottou xpecpexai £K£T, 17:9 ottou r\ yuvr) KaQr\xai en avxCdv
(= £K£l).
88. Tidq with ou and jarj. a. The use of Tidq with a negative particle, where in classical Greek
ouSdq or |ari5£i(; would be employed, is a Hebraism, even though in certain cases the resulting
expression may be paralleled from pure Greek usage. The Tide; may either precede or follow the
negative (ou, jarj, yir\Ee, ou jarj) without difference of meaning.
b. We will first take instances from the LXX where the Tidq precedes the negative.
Ex. 12:43 naq aXXoyevr\(; ouk £5£Tai an auTou. Cp. 12:48: Ezek. 44:9.
Dan. 0' 5:9 Tide; dvOpooTioc; ou Evvaxai. Cp. Dan. 0' 2:10.
Hbk. 2:19 Tidv Trv£U|aa ouk £otiv £v auTCO.
1 Mac. 2:61 navxec; . . . ouk do6£vrioouoiv.
Ex. 22:22 naoav xnpocv Kai opcpavov ou KaKOdoexe.
Jer. 17:22 Tidv Ipyov ou Troirio£T£. Cp. Ex. 12:16, 20: Nb. 28:18: Jdg. 13:14.
So in N.T. -
Rom. 10:12 naq 6 moT£uoov en auTW ou KaTaioxuv6rio£Tai. Cp. Eph. 4:29, 5:5.
Rev. 18:22 ndq xeyyixr\(; ... ou jar) £up£9fi ev ooi exi.
2 Pet. 1:20 irdaa Trpo(priT£ia ypa(pf\(; iSiaq eniXvoe(jd(; ou Yiv£Tai.
1 Jn. 2:21 Tidv \l;£u5o<; eKxf\(; aXr]Qeia(; ouk £oti. Cp. 1 Jn. 3:6, 10, 15; 4:3; 5:18: Rev. 22:3.
c. In the following passages of the LXX the Trdq follows the negative -
Ps. 142:2 ou 5iKaioo9rio£Tai Evoomov aou Trdq ^oov.
64
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Eccl. 1:9 ouK eoxiv ttccv Trpoocparov utto tov fjAiov.
Ex. 20:10: Dt. 5:14 ou TioirioeTe ev aurfj ttccv epyov. Cp. Ex. 20:16.
2 K. [2 Sam.] 15:11 ouk eyvoooav ttccv pfjvia.
Tob. 12:11 ou jar) Kpu\j;oo dcp' ujjoov ttccv pfjiaa.
Ps. 33: 1 1 OUK eAaTTOoOrioovTai TTavToq ocYaOou.
Jdg. 13:4 jar) (pdyr\c; ttccv ocKaOaprov.
Tob. 4:7 jar) ocTTOOTpe^j^riq to TTpooooTTOv oou octto TTavToq tttooxou.
So in N.T. -
Rom 3:20 e^ spyoov vojjou ou SiKaioo6rio£Tai TTCcaa odp^. Cp. Gal. 2:16: Mt. 24:22.
Lk. 1:37 OUK dSuvarrioei TTapd tou 6eou TTdv pfjiaa.
Acts 10:14 ou5£TTOT£ ecpayov nav koivov.
1 Cor. 1:29 ottooc; \ir\ Kavxr\or\xai naoa odp^.
Rev. 21:27 ou \\.r\ eioeXQr\ eiq aunqv TTav koivov.
PREPOSITIONS, 89-98
89. Prominence of Prepositions. The prominence of prepositions in the LXX is partly a
characteristic of later Greek generally and partly due to the careful following of the Hebrew. But
while prepositions are employed to express relations for which in classical Greek cases would have
been thought sufficient, there is at the same time a tendency to blur some of the nice distinctions
between the uses of the same preposition with different cases.
90. eiq. a. eiq in classical Greek denotes motion or direction: in Biblical Greek it denotes equally
rest or position, and may be translated by 'at' or 'in' as wel as by 'to,' e.g. -
Gen. 37:17 TTopeuOoojaev eiq AodQaeiyL . . . Kai evpev auTouq eiq AodQaeiyL.
Josh. 7:22 eSpajJov eiq xr\v OKrivriv . . . Kai xavxa f\v £VK£Kpuiaia£va eiq xr\v OKrjvriv.
Jdg. 14:1 Kai KaT£|3ri laviipcov eiq Qa\ivaQa, Kai eiSev yuvaiKa eiq GajavdOa.
For examples of the former meaning only we may take -
Gen. 42:32 6 Se jJiKpoTepoc; . . . e{(;yf[v Xavdav.
Nb. 25:33 xr\v yf\v ei(; r\ vyLsiq KaToiKeTre.
Judith 16:23 ansQavev eic; |3aiTuAoud.
b. In the N.T. eiq denoting rest or position is very common.
Mk. 2:1 eiq oIkov = at home. Cp. Lk. 9:61: Mk. 10:10.
Mk. 13:3 Ka6ri|i£vou aurou eiq to opoq toov eAaioov.
Jn. 1:18 6 cov eiq tov koAttov tou TTaTpoc;.
Acts 21:13 dTToOavsiv eiq'lepovoaXrwi.
Cp. also Eph. 3:16: 1 Pet. 3:20, 5:12: Mk. 1:9, 39; 13:9: Lk. 4:23, 11:7: Jn. 9:7, 20:7: Acts 7:4,
8:40, 25:4.
The obliteration of the distinction between rest and motion is one of the marks of declining
Greek. In the modem language etc; has usurped the functions both of £v and TTpoq.
65
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
c. The use of eiq with the accusative after eivai and yeveoQai as practically equivalent to the
nominative may safely be regarded as a Hebraism.
d. 1 Chr. 11:21 r\v avxdiq eiq apxovxa, 17:7 eivai eiq r\yovyLevov.
3 K. [2 Kings} 20:2 eaxai jaoi eiq Kfjirov Aaxavoov. Cp. Gen. 48:19: 1 Chr. 11:6.
1 K. [1 Sam.] 17:9 sooyLsQa vyLiv eiq SouAouq.
Jer. 38:33 eaoviai auToTq eiq Qeov, Kai avxoi eoovrai \ioi eiq Xaov. Cp. Jer. 38:1: Gen. 48:19:
2 K. [2 Sam.] 7:14.
Gen. 2:7 kyevexo 6 avBpooTioc; eiq xpuxnv ^oooav.
Ex. 2:10 ky£vr\Qr\ aurfj etc; uiov.
1 K. [1 Sam.] 4:9 yeveoQe eiq avSpaq.
Ttpoq in one passage takes the place of eiq.
Sir. 46:4 jjia r\yLepa kyevr\Qr\ Tipoq 5uo.
e. In the New Testament this idiom occurs both in quotations from the Old and otherwise.
1 Jn. 5:8 Kai oi rpetq eic; to ev eioiv.
Lk. 3:5 eoxai xa OKoXia eiq euOeiaq (Is. 40:4).
2 Cor. 6:18 eoeoQe jjoi eiq uiouc; Kai Ouyarepaq (2 K. [2 Sam.] 7:8: Is. 43:6).
Mt. 19:5 eoovxai oi Sue eic; odpKa ^iiav (Gen. 2:24).
Mt. 21:42 kyevr\Qr\ etc; KscpaAriv Ywviac; (Ps. 117:22).
Lk. 13:19 6Y6V6T0 eiqSevSpov. Cp. Rev. 8:11.
Jn. 16:20 rj AuTiri ujaoov eiq xapdv yevr\oexai.
The same usage is to be found also in the Apostolic Fathers -
Herm. Past. Sim. 9.13.5 eoovxai eiq e nvevyLa, eic; ev oG)\ia.
1 Clem. 1 1:2 eiq Kpijaa Kai eiq orwieiodoiv . . . yivovTai.
Ign. Eph. 11:1 1'va \\.r\ r\\iiv eiq KpTjaa ysvriTai.
f. The employment of eiq to express the object or destination of a thing might easily be paralleled
from classical Greek, but its frequent use in the LXX is due to its convenience as a translation of
the corresponding Hebrew.
Gen. 34:12 Kai Sooaere laoi xr\v TiaiSa raurriv etc; yuvaiKa.
Ps. 104:17 eiq SouAov eTipdOri 'loooriq).
3 K. [2 Kings} 19:15 xptO£i<; Tov'A^ariA eiq ^aoiXea.
Gen. 12:2 Tioiriooo oe eic; eOvoq yLeya.
When the verb is active and transitive, as in all but the second of the above instances, eiq might
be dispensed with as far as Greek is concerned. When a verb of being is employed, this use runs
into the preceding -
Gen. 1:29 v\iiv eaxai eiq ^pCdoiv, 1:14 eoxodoav eic; or\\ieia.
g. The use of eiq with the accusative, where classical Greek would simply have employed a
dative, is shown by the Papyri to have been a feature of the vernacular Greek of Alexandria.
Ex. 9:21 Se \ir\ Tipoaeoxev rfj Siavoia siq to pf\\ia Kupiou ktA.
So in N.T. -
1 Cor. 16:1 xf\c; Xoyiac; Tfjq eic; Touq ayiovc; (the collection for the saints).
66
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
91. £v. a. Although £v was destined ultimately to disappear before eiq, yet in Biblical Greek we
find it in the plenitude of its power, as expressing innumerable relations, some of which seem to
the classical student to be quite beyond its proper sphere. One principal use may be summed up
under the title of "The £v of Accompanying Circumstances." This includes the instrumental use,
but goes far beyond it. Under this aspect £v invades the domain of yLexd and ouv. In most cases it
may be rendered by the English 'with.'
Hos. 1:7 aooooo amove; ev Kupio) @e(x) amCdv, Kai ov aooooo amove; ev to^o) ouSe £v povicpaia
ouSe £v noXeyLOd ouSe ev I'ttttok; ouSe £v [juievoiv. Cp. 1 K. [1 Sam.] 17:45, 47: 1 Mac. 3:12.
Ex. 6:1 ev yap x^tpt Kpaxaia kxX. (But in Ex. 3:19 we have edv \\.r\ \iexa x^tpoc; Kparaiaq.) Cp.
Ex. 3:20: Jdg. 15:15, 16.
Jdg. 14:18 £1 \ir\ ripoTpidoare £v xf\ SajadAei jjou. Cp. 3 K. [2 Kings} 19:19.
4 K. [2 Kings] 18: 17 ev Suvdjaei ^apeia. In the parallel passage Is. 36:2 jaerd Suvdjascoq TtoAAfjq.
1 Mac. 4:6 wcpBrj 'louSaq . . . £v xpioxiXioiq dvSpdoiv.
So in N.T. -
1 Cor. 4:21 £v pd|3Sa) eXQoi Ttp6(; v\ia(;; Cp. 1 K. [1 Sam.] 17:43: Ps. 2:9.
Eph. 6:2 svToAri irpooTri sv knayyeXia.
2 Pet. 3:16 ev dv9pcoTtou cpoovfj.
Mt. 9:34 sv tw dpxovn toov Saiviovioov SK^aXXei xa Saijjovia. Cp. Mt. 12:24, 25:16.
Mt. 26:52 £v yiaxaipa dTToAouvTai.
b. The £v of accompanying circumstances is not wholly foreign to classical Greek, though the
extended use made of it in Bibhcal diction is.
Eur. Tro. 817 d) xpuoeaiq ev oivox6ai(; d|3pd |3aivoov.
c. In another of its Biblical uses £v becomes indistinguishable from eiq, as in -
Ex. 4:21 TidvTa xa rspata d eSooKa £v raiq x^poiv oov.
Jdg. 13:1 TiapeSooKev auTouq Kupioc; sv x^tpt ^JuAioTisiji. Cp. Jdg. 15:12, 13; 16:23, 24.
Is. 37:10 ou jar) TrapaSoOfj 'lepouoaArna sv x^i^pi^ ^aaiAscoc;, while the parallel passage in 4 K. [2
Kings] 19:10 has siq x^i^poc'J ^aoiXeodc;.
Tob. 5:5 TropsuOfjvai sv 'Pdyoic;. Cp. Tob. 6:6, 9:2.
So in N.T. -
2 Cor. 8:16 x^P^ 5^ tw Gsw tco 5i56vti xr\v avxr\v OTiouSriv UTisp ujaoov sv rfj KapSia Titou.
Mt. 14:3 sOsTO sv (puAaxfj.
Jn. 3:35 navxa SsSooksv sv xf\ x^tpt auTou.
Rev. 11:11 7ivsu|ia ^oofjc; sk tou 6sou sioriAOsv sv avxoic;.
92. dno. a. diro in the LXX is often little more than a sign of the genitive, like our English 'of,'
provided that the genitive be partitive.
Ex. 12:46 Kal ootouv ou ouvrpiipsrs an' auTou.
Josh. 9:8 ouK f\v pf\\ia anb navxodv oov svsTsiAaTo Mcouafjc; tw 'IriaoT o ovk dvsyvoo 'Irioouq.
3 K. [2 Kings} 18:13 SKpuipa diro toov TipocpriTOOv Kupiou SKatov dvSpaq.
Joel 2:28 skxsoo djio tou TrvsujaaToq jaou.
2 Esd. [Ezra] 11:2 siq anb dSsAcpoov laou.
So in N.T. -
67
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Lk. 6:13 SKXe^ayievoq an auTOOv SooSexa.
Jn. 21:10 £V8YKaT£ ocTro toov oipapioov oo— v emdoare vuv.
b. ano = 'by reason of is another unclassical use which occurs in the LXX.
Gen. 41:31 kox ouk £TriYvooa9rio£Tai r\ £u9rivia em xf\c;yf\(; anb xov XiyLov.
Ex. 2:23 Kal Kaxeoxsva^av oi uiol 'lopaiqA aTio toov epyoov,
3:7 Kal Tfjq Kpauyfjc; auTOOv ocKfiKoa octto toov epyoSiooKTOOv.
Ps. 1 1:6 OCTTO Tfjq TaAaiTTOoopiac; toov tttooxoov . . . dvaoTriaoviai.
Sir. 20:6 eoTiv jJioriToc; aTio TroAAfjc; AaAiaq.
Nahum 1:6 at TieTpai Sie6pu|3rioav an auTou.
In this way ano becomes = utio, as in Dan. 0' 1:18.
So in N.T. -
Hb. 5:7 sioaKovoQelc; anb xf\(; evXa^eiaq.
Lk. 19:3 OUK iqSuvaTo anb xov oxAou, 24:41 dmaTouvToov auTOOv ocTro Tfjq xocpd<;. Cp. Acts
12:14,22:11.
Jn. 21:6 ouketi auTO eXKVoai Toxuov aTio tou nXr\Qov(; toov ixSuoov.
Of dTTO = UTTO see instances in Lk. 9:22, 17:25: Acts 20:9.
c. The combination diro . . . eooc; is a Hebraism. It may be rendered "from . . . unto," as in -
Dt. 8:35 dno Txvouc; toov ttoSoov oou eooq Tfjq Kopucpfjq oou,
or "both . . . and," as in -
Ex. 9:25 djio dvOpooTiou . . . eooq KTrivouq.
Sometimes Kai precedes the eooq -
Jdg. 15:5 diro . . . Kal eooq . . . Kal eooq both . . . and . . . and. Cp. Sir. 40:3: Jer. 27:3.
93. vi£Td. vi£Td with genitive = 'in dealing with' is a Hebraism.
Jdg. 15:3 OTi TTOioo eyoo vi^t' auTOOv Tiovripiav.
So in N.T. -
Lk. 10:37 6 noir\oa(;xb eXeoqyiex auTou: Acts 14:27. Cp. Herm. Past. Sim. 5.1.1: 1 Clem. 61:3.
94. vnep. a. The frequent use of UTiep in the LXX to express comparison is due to the fact that
the Hebrew language has no special form for the comparative degree. We therefore sometimes find
the LXX representing the original by the positive with vnep.
Ruth 4:15 r\ koxiv dyaOrj ooi vnep enxa ulouq. Cp. 1 K. [1 Sam.] 1:8, 15:28: 3 K. [2 Kings}
20:2: 2 Chr. 21:14.
1 K. [1 Sam.] 9:2 uxprjAoq vnep naoav xr\v yfjv.
1 Chr. 4:9 evSo^oc; UTiep xovq dSeAcpouq auTou.
Sir. 24:20 vnep jaeAiyAuKU.
Ezk. 5:1 povicpaiav o^etav vnep ^vpbv Koupeooq.
b. More often however the comparative is used, but the construction with vnep still retained.
Jdg. 15:2 dya6ooT£pa UTiep auTrjv. Cp. Jdg. 11:25.
Jdg. 18:26 SuvaTOOTepoi eioiv vnep auTov.
Ruth 3:12 eyyioov vnep eyie.
3 K. [2 Kings} 19:4 Kpeioooov . . . vnep Touq TiaTepaq. Cp. Sir. 30:17.
Hbk. 1:8 o^uTspoi vnep AuKouq.
68
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Dan. O' 1:20 oocpodxepovc; SeKaTiAaoiooq vnep xovq oocpiordq.
c. UTiep is employed in the same way after verbs -
Ex. 1:9 iRoxvei vnep r\yLa(;.
1 K. [1 Sam.] 1:5 xr\v "Avvav r\yana 'EAKavd vnep tautriv.
Ps. 39:13 £Ti:Ari6uv9rioav vnep xaq rpixaq Tfjq KscpaAfjq yiov.
1 Chr. 19:12 eav KpaTrjari vnep e\ie lupoq.
Jer. 5:3 eoxepeodoav . . . vnep nexpav, 16:12 ujaetq £Trovrip£uoaa9£ vnep Touq naxepaq u^ioov.
Cp. 17:23.
Jer. 26:23 nXr\Qvvei vnep dxpiSa.
Dan. O' 3:22 r\ K&ynvoc; 6^6Kau6ri vnep xb Ttporepov enxankaoiocx;.
d. So in N.T. -
after a comparative -
Lk. 16:8 (ppoviiioorepoi vnep Touq uiouq tou (pooToq.
Hb. 4:12 ToviooTepoc; vnep naoav jadxaipav.
after a verb -
Gal. 1:14 TrposKOTtTov . . . vnep noXXov(;.
Mt. 10:37 6 cpiAoov naxepa r\ \ir\xepa vnep eyie.
Cp. Herm. Past. Mdt. 5.1.6 r\ |aaKpo9u|aia YA-UKurdrri sarlv UTtsp to laeAi. Mart. Polyc. 18
SoKijaooTepa vnep xpuoiov oord auTou.
95. eni. a. eni with the accusative is used of rest as well as of motion.
Gen. 41:17 eoxdvai eni xb xstAoc; tou TroTa|aou.
Ex. 10:14 Kal dvfiYOCY^ auTiqv {xr\v dxpiSa) em naoav yriv Aiyutttou, Kal Kaxenavoev eni
navxa xa opia AiyuTrTou TioAAri ocpoSpa.
Jdg. 16:27 £Trl to Soojaa = upon the roof.
b. eni is sometimes used to reinforce an accusative of duration of time.
Jdg. 14: 17 Kal £KAauo£v npbc; avxbv eni xac; enxa r\\iepa(; dq f\v auToTc; 6 TroToq.
c. In Josh. 25:10 we find jaeyav eni tou iSeTv where in classical Greek we should have only
\ieyav iSetv.
d. In the N.T. also eni with the accusative is used of rest or position -
2 Cor. 3:15 KdAu|a|aa eni xr\v KapSiav auTOOv Keixai.
Mk. 2:14 Ka6ri|a£vov eni xb xeXodviov. Cp. Lk. 5:27.
Mk. 4:38 eni xb TipooKecpdAaiov KaOeuSoov.
Mt. 14:28 TrepiTiaTOOv eni xr\v QaXaooav (in Jn. 6:19 TtspmaTouvTa eni Tfjq QaXaoor\(;).
Lk. 2:25 Trveujaa dyiov f\v en avxov. Cp. Lk. 2:40.
Jn. 1:32 e\ieivev en avxov.
96. Tiapd. a. Tiapd naturally lends itself to the expression of comparison, and is so used
occasionally in the best Greek, e.g. Thuc. 1.23.4: Xen. Mem. 1.4.14: Hdt. 7.103. It is therefore not
surprising that it should have been employed by the translators in the same way as vnep.
Ex. 18:11 jaeyac; Kupioq Tiapd TidvTaq Touq Osouq. Cp. Ps. 134:5: Dan. 0' 11:12.
Nb. 12:3 Kal 6 dvOpooTioc; Moouafjq npavq ocpoSpa napd TtdvTaq Touq dvBpooTiouc;.
69
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Dan. 0' 1:10 aoQsvf\ napa xovc; ovvxpe(po\ievov(; v\iiv (6 has OKuBpooTid Tiapd xa TiaiSdpia xa
ouvriAiKa ujaoov). Cp. 0' 1:13.
Dan. 6 7:7 Sidcpopov Tiepiaaooq irapd Tidvra xa 6ripia.
1 Esd. 4:35 laxuporepa Tiapd navxa.
Dan. 0' 11:13 jaei^ova napd xr\v Trpoorriv (0 has noXvv vnep xbv Trporepov).
Dt. 7:7 ujaeic; ydp eoxe oAiyooToi Tiapd navxa xa eQvx].
Gen. 43:34 £|a6YaAuv9ri Se r\ vi£pk ^eviayisiv napa xaq jispiSaq ndvTCOv.
Ps. 8:6 r\Xaxx(jdoa(; avxbv ^paxv xi nap' ayyeXovi;.
b. In the N.T. Tiapd after a comparative is abundant in Hebrews -
1:4,3:3,9:23,11:4,12:24.
We find it after a positive and after a comparative in Luke -
Lk. 13:2 d|aapTOoAoi Tiapd TtdvTaq xovq FaAiAaiouq, 3:13 yLr\5ev nkeov napa to 5iaxexay\ievov
v\\x\ npaooexe,
and after verbs in -
Rom. 14:5 o yiev Kpivei r\\iepav nap' r\\iepav.
Hb. 1:9 £xpio£ 0£ 6 Qeoc; . . . napa Touq yiexoxovq oov.
c. In the Apostolic Father cp. -
Herm. Past. Vis. 3.12.1 iAapoorepav Tiapd to TipoTspov, Sim. 9.18.2 TiAeiova . . . Tiapd.
Barn. Ep. 4:5 (in a quotation from Daniel which is neither 0" nor 6) xaAsTiooTspov Tiapd TidvTa
Td 6ripia.
97. New Forms of Prepostion. a. Besides the more liberal use made of the prepositions already
current in classical Greek, we meet also in the LXX with new forms of preposition.
b. dTidvooBev occurs in Swete's text in Jdg. 16:20: 2 K. [2 Sam.] 11:20, 24; 20:21: 3 K. [2
Kings} 1:53: 4 K. [2 Kings] 2:3. It not unnaturally gets confused in some places with the classical
£Tidvoo9£v, which is very common in the LXX, having been found a convenient rendering of certain
compound prepositions in the Hebrew.
c. UTioKdTOoOev, which is only used as an adverb in classical Greek, assumes in the LXX the
function of a preposition, e.g. -
Dt. 9:14 £^aA£i\poo to '6vo\\.a avxCdv UTioKdTOoOev tou oupavoO.
The corresponding form uTiepdvooOev occurs in the LXX only twice, once as an adverb in Ps.
77:23 and once as a preposition in -
Ezk. 1:25 UTiepdvooOev tou ox£peo)yLaxo(;.
d. svavTi in many passages of the LXX has been replaced in Swete's text by evavTiov, but
there are still numerous instances of it left, e.g. Ex. 28:12, 23, 34; 29:10, 23, 24, 25, 26, 42. In N.T.
is occurs in Lk. 1:8, Acts. 8:21.
dTievavTi is also common, e.g. Gen. 3:24,21:26,23:19,25:9,49:30. In the N.T. it occurs in the
sense of 'contrary to' in Acts. 17:7.
KaT££vavTi is specially frequent in the book of Sirach.
e. evooTiiov is another preposition unknown to classical authors, but extremely common in
Biblical Greek, as being an apt equivalent for certain Hebrew forms of expression. Deissmann gives
instances of its adverbial use in the Papyri, so that we need not suppose it to have been invented
70
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
by the translators of the O.T. In the N.T. it occurs frequently in Luke- Acts, Paul, and Revelation,
but is not used in Matthew or Mark.
KaTsvcoTtiov occurs in the LXX in Lvt. 4:17: Josh. 1:5, 3:7, 21:44, 23:9: Esther 5:1: Dan. 6
5:22. In N.T. in Eph. 1:4: Col. 1:22: Jude 24.
f. omooo as a preposition is unclassical, but extremely common in the LXX.
In the N.T. it occurs in 1 Tim. 5:15: Acts 5:37, 20:30: Mt. 4:19, 10:38, 16:24: Lk. 14:27: Jn.
12:19: Rev. 13:3.
g. KaxomoQeiv) is construed with a genitive in Hom. Od. 12. 148, but its classical use is almost
wholly adverbial, whereas in the LXX, in which it occurs twenty-four times in all, it is mainly
prepositional.
In 2 Chr. 34:38 we have octto omoOev Kupiou. Cp. Eccl. 1:10 ocTro e\inpooQev r\\iG)v.
h. kukAoOev occurs in the LXX as a preposition in 3 K. [2 Kings} 18:32: Sir. 50:12 A: Jer.
17:26,31:17: 1 Mac. 14:17.
In N.T. only in Rev. 4:3, 5:11 kukAoOev tou Opovou.
kukAo) is sometimes used in the same way, as in 3 K. [2 Kings} 18:35: Sir. 23:18: Is. 6:2: Jer.
39:44.
Cp. Strabo 17.6, p. 792 xa Se kukAo) Tfjq KO)\ir\(;.
i. Other prepositions that may be briefly noticed are exoyisva nexpac; Ps. 140:6, eooixepov rfjc;
KoAu|a|3ri9pa(; Is. 22:11.
In Sir. 29:25 we have the combination koX Tipoq km toutok;.
98. Prepositions after Verbs. The great use made of prepositions after verbs is one of the main
characteristics of Biblical Greek. It is partly a feature of later Greek generally, but to a still greater
extent it is due to the influence of the Hebrew. In the following hst of instances perhaps the last
only is irreproachable as Greek: -
dSuvaretv ocTro Dt. 17:8.
aQexeiv £v 4 K. [2 Kings] 1:1; 3:5, 7; 18:7; 24:1, 20: 2 Chr. 10:19.
aipexi^eiv ev 1 Chr. 29:1: 2 Chr. 29:11.
^BeXvooeoQai ano Ex. 1:12.
|3oav£v3K. [2Kings} 18:24.
£k5ik£Tv £k Dt. 18:19.
£kA6Y£iv £v 1 Chr. 28:5.
eAm^eiv eni with accusative Ps. 4:6, 5:12, 9:11, 40:10.
eXnil,eiv eni with dative Ps. 7:1.
£V£Sp£U£iv eni Jdg. 16:2.
£VTp£Tr£o6ai dTTO 2 Chr. 36:12: 1 Esd. 1:45.
eniKaXeioQai £v 3 K. [2 Kings} 18:25, 26.
£o6i£iv ano Lvt. 22:6: Jdg. 13:16.
£u5oK£Tv £v Ps. 146:10.
e£A£iv £v 1 K. [1 Sam.] 18:22: 1 Chr. 28:4: Ps. 146:10.
6£Oop£Tv £v Jdg. 16:27.
KaTa(ppov£Tv eni Tobit 4:18.
AoYt^£o6ai dq 1 K. [1 Sam.] 1:13.
71
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
ViuKTripi^£iv £v 1 Esd. 1:51.
naxaooeiv ev 2 Chr. 28:5, 17.
noieiv eXeoc; ev Josh. 2:12.
Ttoisiv ekeoc; yLsxa Jdg. 8:35.
TioXe\ieiv £v 1 K. [1 Sam.] 28:15.
Tipoaexsiv eiq Ex. 9:21.
npoooxQi^eiv ano Nb. 22:3.
ovvievai eiq Ps. 27:5.
UTr£pri(pav6U£o9ai ocTro Tobit 4:14.
(peiSeoBai eni Dt. 7:16.
(po|3£Taeai dno Dt. 1:29, 7:29: Josh. 11:6: 4 K. [2 Kings] 1:15: Ps. 3:7.
(pvXaooeoQaiano Jdg. 13:14. Cp. Xen. Cyrop. 2.3.9, Hell. 7.2.10.
CONJUNCTIONS, 99-111
99. £1 with the Subjunctive, a. In Homer ex, or its equivalent ax, is common with the subjunctive,
especially when accompanied by k6(v), e.g. //. 1.80, 4.249, 7.375, 8.282, 11.791, 15.403, 16.861,
18.601: Od. 4.35, 5.471, 472, 16.98, 22.7.
In classical authors instances of ex with the subjunctive (without av) are rare rather than absent.
Some of them may have been improved out of existence, owing to a desire for uniformity.
Plato Laws 161 C exxx nov aAooq . . . avexyLevov f\.
Xen. Anab. 3.2.22 oi TioTaiaoi, ex Kal Tipoooo toov nr\yG)v anopoi d)oi.
Soph. Ant. 710 k£i nq n aocpoq. See GMT. 454.
b. In Hellenistic Greek the use of ex with the subjunctive becomes common, e.g. -
Arist. E.E. 2.1.17 ei fi avOpooTioq, 8.9 exxx(;npooQf\, 18 dyap . . . dTtoKtavri, 10.21 exnoXe\xCdoxv.
Philo 2.19, De Abr. §25 £1 e]X]xx(5Qo(; r\.
Jos. B.J. 1.31.1 d .. . do9£vriori. Ant. 1.2.3 ex Kal auii|3fi.
We should therefore antecedently expect to find this construction in the LXX, and yet it is
seldom found. It occurs in Jdg. 1 1:9, where an indicative and subjunctive are both made dependent
on £1 - £1 £moTp£(p£T£ \ie vyiexc, Jiapaxal,aoQax ev v'xoxq 'A\x\xodv Kal TiapaSco Kupioq avxovq evodnxov
eyiov. In Dt. 8:5 Swete's text has n:ai5£uoai in place of Trai5£U0Ti. In 1 K. [1 Sam.] 14:37 ex Karal^oo
OTTiaoo TOOV dAAocpuAoov is so punctuated as to become an instance of ex interrogative (§100). In
Sirach 22:26 ex KaKO. \xox ov\x^f\, the ouia|3fi has given place to auia|3ria£Tai.
In the N.T. there are a few instances of £1 with the subjunctive -
Rom. 1 1 : 14 £1 Tiooq Trapa^iqAooooo.
Phil. 3:11 ex Tiooq Karavrriooo exc; xr\v e^avaoxaoxv, 3: 12 d Kal KaTaAd|3oo.
100. ex Interrogative, a. In classical Greek ex is often used in indirect questions, e.g. -
Thuc. 1.5.2 £pooTOOVT£(; ex Xr\oxax exoxv.
Plat. Apol. 21 D fjp£TO ydp 84 exxxc; e\xov exr\ oocpooxepoq.
72
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Xen. Anab. 1.10.5 e^ovXevexo . . .ei neyLJioiev xivaq f] navxec; Toiev.
b. In Biblical Greek el has become a direct interrogative particle. This transition seems so natural
as to make us doubt the statement of Jannaris (Hist. Gk. Gr. §2055) that £i is in all these cases
'nothing but an itacistic misspelling for the colloquial iq.' In
Gen. 43:7 Aeyoov Ei exx 6 Tiarrip ujaoov ^fj; ei eoxiv hyXv dSeAcpoq ... jar) fi'Seijaev ei epet rjiatv
ktA.
we have first the direct and then the indirect use of ei as an interrogative particle. For other
instances of the former take -
1 K. [1 Sam.] 15:32 Kal eiTiev 'Aydy Ei ourooq mxpoq 6 Odvarog
2 K. [2 Sam.] 20: 17 Kai eiTiev r\ yuvri Ei ou ei 'Iood|3;
3 K. [2 Kings} 20:20 Kai eiTrev'Axad|3 Tipoq 'HAeiou Ei euprjKdq |ae, 6 exOpoq jjou; Cp. also Gen.
17:17, 39:8, 43:27: Ex. 2:14: Jdg. 13:11: 1 K. [1 Sam.] 9:11, 10:22,24; 14:37, 45; 15:22: 3 K. [2
Kings} 13:14, 18:17: 4 K. [2 Kings] 1:3: Tob. 5:5: Jonah 4:4,9: Joel 1:2: Dan. 6:20.
c. The interrogative ei is sometimes followed by the deliberative conjunctive, e.g. -
Jdg. 20:28 Ei TipoaOooviev exx e^eAOetv;
2 K. [2 Sam.] 2:1 Ei ava^G) eiq yiav toov TioAeoov 'Iou5a;
1 Chr. 14:10 Ei ava^G) em Touq dAAocpuAouc;;
d. In the N.T. ei interrogative is of common occurrence -
Mk. 8:23 eTriqpooTa auTov, ETti ^Xenexo,; Cp. Mk. 10:2, where the question may be either direct
or indirect.
Mt. 12:10 eTrripooTrjoav auTov Aeyovreq, Ei e^ean ToTq od|3|3aoi Oepaireueiv; Cp. Mt. 19:3.
Lk. 13:23 Kupie, ei oAiyoi oi ooo^ojaevoi; Cp. Lk. 22:49.
Acts 1:6 Kupie, ei ev x(h xpovo) touto) ktA. Cp. Acts 7:1, 19:2, 21:37, 22:25, 23:9.
101. ei in Oaths, a. ei is often found in the LXX after an oath in a sense practically equivalent
to a negative, e.g. -
Ps. 94: 1 1 obq wjjooa ev rfj opyfj jiou Ei eAeuoovrai eiq Tiqv Kaxanovoxv \iov.
This use of ei is a sheer Hebraism. The negative force imported into ei is due to a suppression
of the apodosis, which the reader may suply as his own sense of reverence suggests. Other instances
will be found in Gen. 14:23: Nb. 32:10,11: Dt. 1:34,35: 1 K. [1 Sam.] 3:14, 14:45, 17:55, 19:6,
28:10: 2 K. [2 Sam.] 19:35: 3 K. [2 Kings} 1:52, 2:8, 17:1,12, 18:10: 4 K. [2 Kings] 2:2: Ps. 131:2-4:
Jer. 45:16.
b. When an affirmative asseveration is conveyed by the oath, it is introduced by on, not by ei,
asin-
1 K. [1 Sam.] 29:6 ^fj Kupioq, on euOriq oh Kai dyaOoq ev ocpOaAvioiq jiou.
3 K. [2 Kings} 18:15 ^fj Kupioq ... on ariiaepov 6(p6rioo}iai aoi,
or else is devoid of a conjunction, as in -
1 K. [1 Sam.] 1:26 ^fj r\ xpuxri oou, eyd) r\ yuvr) ktA.
Jdg. 8:19 ^fi Kupioq, ei e^oooyovriKeiTe auTouq, ouk dv djieKTeiva ujadq.
c. In 4 K. [2 Kings] 3:14 on ei ]xr\ is merely a strengthened form of ei ]xr\, so that the r\ by which
it is followed in Swete's text, instead of ei, seems to destroy the sense.
d. In the N.T. we have the jurative use of ei in -
73
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Mk. 8:12 djariv Aeyoo vyXv, el 5o6rio£Tai rfj yevea xavxr\ orwieiov.
Also in Hb. 3:11, 4:3 in quotations from Ps. 94:11.
102. ei yLr\ in Oaths. As ei assumes a negative force in oaths and asseverations, so on the same
principle el virj becomes positive. Instances are -
Nb. 14:35 eyo) Kupioq eXaXr\oa, ei \\.r\ ouTOoq Tioiriooo (= I will do so).
Is. 45:23 Kar' £|aauTou ojavuoo, ei \ir\ e^eXevoexai £k tou ox6\iax6c; yLov SiKaioouvri (=
righteousness shall go forth from my mouth).
In 3 K. [2 Kings} 21:23 eav Se noXeyLr\oo\iev amove; Kax' eu9u, el jar) KpaTaiooooviev vnep
auTouq the oath itself is suppressed as well as the apodosis.
103. ei yir\v. el yir\v as a formula of asseveration has been supposed to be a blend between the
Hebraistic ei yir\ (§102) and the Greek f\ yir\v. It is however not confined to Biblical Greek, but
occurs also on the Papyri. We treat it under the head of Conjunctions because of the lack of accent.
It would perhaps be more correct to wirte it ei virjv and regard it as an Interjection. The following
are all the passages in which it occurs in the LXX -
Gen. 22: 17 ei \ir\v evXoyCdv evXoyr\o(jd oe, 42: 15 viq xy\v vyiav Oapaoo, ei yLr\v KaTdaKOTioi eoxe.
Nb. 14:23,28: Jdg. 15:7: Job 1:11, 2:5, 27:3: Judith 1:12: Baruch 2:29: Ezk. 33:27, 34:8, 36:5,
38:19.
In 2 K. [2 Sam.] 19:35 what we have is ex interrogative (§100) followed by yir\v.
In the N.T. el virjv occurs only in Hb. 6:14 in a quotation from Gen. 22:17.
104. eav, etc., with the Indicative, a. As in Hellenistic Greek ei may take the subjunctive, so
on the other hand eav, oxav and the like are found with the indicative.
Instances of eav with the indicative in the LXX are -
Gen. 44:30 eav £ioTropeuo|aai.
Jdg. 6:3 eav eoneipav.
3 K. [2 Kings} 21:23 eav Se 7toA£|arioo|a£v avxovq Kar' evQv.
Job. 22:3 eav ov f\oQa.
So in N.T. -
1 Jn. 5:15 eav oTSaviev.
Acts 7:7 TO eOvoq, o) eav ^ovXevoovoi. Cp. Herm. Past. Vis. 3.12.3 eav . . . eipriv£U£T£, 1.3.2
eav . . . vi£Tavoriaouaiv.
b. Instances of oxav with the indicative in the LXX are -
Gen. 38:9 oxav £ioripx£'i:o.
Ex. 17: 1 1 oxav £Trfip£v Moouafjq xac; X£tpo£<;.
Nb. 1 1:9 Kal oxav KaT£|3ri rj Spoooq, 21:9 oxav £5aKV£v ocpiq avOpooTiov.
1 K. [1 Sam.] 17:34 oxav fjpx£'i:o 6 Xeodv Kal rj apKoq.
Ps. 119:7 orav £AdAouv avxdlq.
c. So in N.T. -
Mk. 3:11 Kal xa Trv£U|aaTa rd dKdOapra, orav auTov eQeodpei, Ttpoa£mTrT£v aurco, 11:19 orav
6\p£ £Y£V£TO.
Rev. 8:1 orav fjvoi^£.
Cp. Barn. Ep. 4:14 orav ^Xenexe, 15:5 orav . . . KaTapyriaa.
74
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Ign. Eph. 8:1 orav yocp lariSejaia epic; kvr\^eioxai ev v\iiv.
Herm. Past. Sim. 9.1.6 oxav 6 fjAioq £mK£KauK£i, ^rjpai kyevovxo, 4.5 oxav . . . exeQr\oav. Cp.
17.3. 6.4 oxav endxaooev.
d. Under the same head come the following -
Ex. 33:8, 34:34 rjviKa 5' av eioenopevexo Mooofjc;, 40:30 rjviKa 5' av dve^x] dnb Tfjq aKrivfjc; r\
vecpeXx].
Tobit 7:11 onoxe edv eioenopevovxo. Cp. Bam. Ep. 12:3 OTTorav KaQeiXsv.
105. eav after a Relative, a. eav for av after a relative seems to occur occasionally in Mss. of
Attic authors, especially of Xenophon, but to have been expunged by editors. It is proved by the
Papyri to have been in common use in Egypt during the first two centuries B.C. Biblical Greek is
so full of this usage that it is superfluous to collect examples. Besides the simple relative in its
various cases we have -
ooa edv Gen. 44:1: Ex. 13:12. rjviKa edv Gen. 24:41: Ex. 13:5.
ou edv Ex. 20:24. KaOwqMv Sir. 14:11: Dan. 0' 1:13.
66£v edv Ex. 5:11.
As a rule the subjunctive follows, but not always.
Gen. 2:19 ttccv o edv eKdXeoev.
b. The use of av in such cases is not quite excluded, e.g. Ex. 12:15,19: Nb. 22:20.
c. In the N.T. also it is easier to find edv in this connexion than av, e.g. -
edv Mt. 5:19, 10:14,42: Lk. 17:33.
wMvMt. 11:27: Lk. 10:22.
ou edv 1 Cor. 16:3.
edv 1 Cor. 6:18: Gal. 6:7: Col. 3:23: Eph. 6:8: Jn. 15:7: 1 Jn. 3:22: 3 Jn. 5.
Kae6£dv2Cor. 8:12.
oTTouMvMt. 8:19.
oTiMv 1 Jn. 3:19.
For instances of dv take 1 Jn. 3:17: Mt. 10:11: Lk. 10:5,8,10,35.
d. In the Apostolic Fathers also we find the same use of edv after relatives-
Barn. Ep. 7:11 edv QeXr\, 11:8 Tidv pfj^ia 6768; edv e^eXevoexai.
Herm. Past. Vis. 3.2. 1 o edv TidOri, Sim. 1.1 oooi [edv] ev xdxc, evToAaiq \iov xabxaic, TiopeuOoooiv,
9.2.7 ooa edv ooi 5ei^oo.
106. 1'va with the Indicative, a. In the vast majority of places in which Iva occurs in the LXX
it governs the subjunctive. The optative, as we have seen, has practically vanished from dependent
clauses. But there are a few passages in Swete's text, and perhaps Ms. authority for more, in which
iva after a primary tense or the imperative mood takes a future indicative.
Gen. 16:2 eiaeAOe . . . iva TeKVOTioirioeK;.
3 K. [2 Kings} 2:3 (puAd^eiq . . . I'va TioiriaeK;.
Sus. 0' 28 eve5peuovTe(; Iva Oavaroooouoiv aurriv. Dan. 0' 3:96 eyw Kpivoo I'va irdv eOvoq . . .
SiajaeAioOriaeTai.
b. The 1st person singular of the 1st aorist subjunctive may possibly have served as a
stepping-stone to this use. Take for instance -
75
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
2 K. [2 Sam.] 19:22 an6oxr\Qi . . . iva \ir\ naxd^od oe.
This might easily lead by false analogy to -
aneXevooyiai, I'va \\.r\ naxd^sK; jae.
This theory however fails to account for the following -
1 Esd. 4:50 I'va dcpiouoi.
Tob. 14:9 ov Se rriprioov tov voviov . . . I'va aoi KaAcoq f\v.
The last can only be regarded as a monstrosity.
c. In the N.T. I'va with the future indicative occurs occasionally and is common in Revelation
1 Cor. 9:18 I'va . . . Brjaco.
Gal. 2:4 I'va r\yLa(; KaraSouAooaouaiv.
1 Pet. 3:1 I'va . . . KepSrjBrioovTai.
Rev. 3:9, 6:4, 8:3, 9:20, 14:13, 22:24 I'va eoxai . . . Kai . . . eioeXQo)oiv.
The last instance shows that even in the debased Greek of this book the subjunctive still claimed
its rights on occasions.
d. There are two apparent instances in St. Paul's writings of I'va with a present indicative -
1 Cor. 4:6 I'va \\.r\. . . (pvoiovoQe.
Gal. 1:17 I'va auTouq^rjAouTe.
With regard to these Winer came to the conclusion that "i'va with the indicative present is to be
regarded as an impropriety of later Greek.' Perhaps however in these cases it is the accidence, not
the syntax, that is astray, cpuoiouoOe and l,r\Xovxe being meant for the subjunctive. Winer closes
his discussion of the subject by saying, 'It is worthy of remark, however the case may be, that in
both instances the verb ends in ooo.' Here the true explanation seems to lie. The hypothesis of an
irregular contraction is not in itself a violent one, and it is confirmed by a passage of the LXX -
Ex. 1:16 orav yLaiovoQe rdq 'Ej^paiaq Kai d)oiv Tipoq tco tikteiv.
107. Ellipse before on. By the suppression of an imperative of a verb of knowing on acquires
the sense of 'know that.'
Ex. 3:12 Aeyoov "On eoo\\.ai yiexd oov.
Jdg. 15:7 einev . . . laviipoov ... on ei yLr\v £K5iKriooo £v ujaTv.
3 K. [2 Kings} 19:2 einsv . . . on rautriv nqv wpav ktA.
This usage originates in the Hebrew, but has a parallel in Greek in the similar ellipse before
obq, which is common in Euripides, e.g. Med. 609: Ale. 1094: Phcen. 720, 1664: Ion. 935, 1404:
Hel. 126, 831: Hec. 346, 400. Cp. Soph. Aj. 39.
108. dXk' r\. a. The combination of particles dXX' r\ occurs in Swete's text 114 times at least.
In most of these passages dXX r\ is simply a strengthened form of dAAd. If it differs at all from it,
it is in the same way as 'but only' in Enghsh differs from the simple 'but.' In the remainder of the
1 14 passages dAA' r\ has the same force as the English 'but' in the sense of 'except' after a negative
expressed or implied. It is thus an equivalent for the classical el virj. But even this latter meaning
can be borne by the simple dAAd, if we may trust the reading of -
Gen. 21:26 ouSe kyo) fJKOuoa dAAd or\\iepov.
b. The idea has been entertained that dAA' r\ is not for dAAd fj, as the accentuation assumes, but
for dAAo rj. This view would suit very well with such passages as Gen. 28:17, 47:18: Dt. 10:12: 2
76
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
K. [2 Sam.] 12:3: Sir. 22:14, where it happens that a neuter singular precedes, but it seems to have
nothing else to recommend it.
Where aXX r\ follows aXkoc, or erepoq, as in 4 K. [2 Kings] 5:17: Dan. 3:95, 6 2:11: 1 Mac.
10:38, the dAAd would be superfluous in classical Greek, so that in these cases it might be thought
that the r\ was strengthened by the dAAd, and not vice versa: but if we accept the use in Gen. 21:26,
it follows that even here it is the dAAd which is strengthened.
c. In contrast with the abundance of instances in the O.T. and in Hellenistic Greek generally,
e.g. in Aristotle, it is strange how rare this combination is in the N.T. In the Revisers' text it occurs
only twice -
Lk. 12:51 ovxi, Aeyoo v\\xv, dAA' f\ Siaviepiojjov.
2 Cor. 1 : 13 ou ydp dAAa ypdcpoviev v\iiv, dAA' f] d dvaYtvoooKsts.
109. on dAA' fj. This combination of particles occurs in the following passages of the LXX -
Jdg. 15:13: 1 K. [1 Sam.] 2:30, 21:4, 21:6, 30:17, 30:22: 2 K. [2 Sam.] 13:33, 21:2: 3 K. [2 Kings}
18:18: 4 K. [2 Kings] 4:2, 5:15, 10:23, 14:6, 17:35,36, 23:23: 2 Chr. 2:6.
An examination of these instances will show that they all fall under the same two heads as dAA'
fj. In the bulk of them on dAA' fj is simply a strongly adversative particle (= but); in the remainder
it is like our 'but' = 'except' after a negative expressed or implied. The reader will observe that the
range of literature, within which this combination of particles is found, is very limited, being almost
confined to the four books of Kingdoms. It looks therefore as if we had here a mere device of
translation, not any recognised usage of later Greek. In all but the first two instances the underlying
Hebrew is the same, consisting of two particles; in the first two there is only the particle
corresponding to on, and these passages seem really to fall under § 107.
There is one place in which we find this combination of particles still more complicated by the
use of 5i6n in place of on.
3 K. [2 Kings} 22:18 Ouk eina Tipoq oe Ou npo(pr\x£vei ouToq \ioi KaAd, Sion dAA' f] Kaxd;
110. on £1 jarj. This combination occurs in the following passages -
2 K. [2 Sam.] 2:27 Zfj Kupioq, on el \ir\ eXaXr\oac;, Sion xoxe £k npodiQev dvel^iq 6 Aaoq.
3 K. [2 Kings} 17:1 Zfj Kupioq . . .ei eoxai . . . vexoc;' on el \ir\ Sid aTOjaaToc; Aoyou jaou.
4 K. [2 Kings] 3:14 Zfj Kupioq ... on el \\.r\ TrpooooTiov 'looaacpdO . . . eyo) Aavi|3dvoo, ei (A)
ene^Xe^\)a npbq oe.
In the first of the above passages 'unless,' in the second 'except,' in the third 'only that' seem
to give the exact shade of meaning. In all of them the on might be dispensed with, and owes its
presence to the Hebrew.
111. dAA' fj on. There are four passages in which this combination occurs -
Nb. 13:29 dAA' fj on Opaou to eOvoq.
IK. [1 Sam.] 10:19 Ovxi, aXX'i] 6x1 ^aoiXeaoxr\oei(;e(p'Y\\iG)v, 12:12 Ouxt> dAA' fj on l^aaiAeuq
|3aoiA£uo£i £(p' fivioov.
2 K. [2 Sam.] 19:28 on ouk f\v naq 6 oiKoq tou Trarpoc; jjou dAA' fj on dvSpeq Oavdrou.
No one meaning suits all the above passages. In the first of them the Hebrew which corresponds
to dAA' fj on is rendered in the R.V. 'howbeit.' In the next two dAA' fj on might just as well have
been on dAA' fj (= Lat. sed.), as in Jdg. 15:3 (§ 109). In the fourth also on dAA' fj might have been
77
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
used in the sense of 'but' in 'nothing but,' etc., as in 1 K. [1 Sam.] 21:6, 30:17: 4 K. [2 Kings] 4:2,
5:15:2Chr. 2:6.
112. Aeywv, etc., for the Hebrew Gerund, a. A special cause of irregularity in LXX Greek is
the treatment of the Hebrew gerund of the verb 'to say' (= Lat. dicendo), which is constantly used
to introduce speeches. As the Greek language has no gerund, this is rendered in the LXX by a
participle. But the form being fixed in the Hebrew, the tendency is to keep it so in the Greek also.
Hence it is quite the exception to find the participle agreeing with its subject, as in -
1 K. [1 Sam.] 19:2 dTiriYY^i^^^v • • • Aeyoov, 19:11 aTrfiYY^i^^^ • • • Aeyouoa.
b. If the subject is neuter or feminine, the participle may still be masculine-
Gen. 15:1: 1 K. [1 Sam.] 15:10 eyevr\Qr\ pfJiaaKupiou . . . Aeyoov.
4 K. [2 Kings] 18:36 on evroAri tou l^aoiAeooq Aeywv.
Also, if the sentence is impersonal -
3 K. [2 Kings} 20:9 6YeYP'^^''^o . . . Aeyoov.
2 Chr. 21:12 f\kQev . . .ev Ypoc^pfi • • • Aeywv.
Jonah 3:7 eppeOr] . . . Aeyoov.
c. But the participle may even refer to another subject, as -
4 K. [2 Kings] 19:9 fJKOuoev . . . Aeyoov = he heard say.
d. It is rare for the Greek to fare so well as in -
Dt. 13:12 eav Se aKovor\(; . . . AeyovTOOv.
And here the genitive is probably not governed by ockousiv, but used absolutely. Cp. -
1 K. [1 Sam.] 24:2 dTrriYY^^n ocutw AeyovTOOv.
e. A very common case is to have the verb in the passive, either impersonally or personally,
and the participle in the nominative plural mascuhne, thus -
dTTTiYY^^Ti . . . AeyovTec; Gen. 38:24, 48:2: Josh. 2:2, 10:17: 1 K. [1 Sam.] 14:33, 15:12, 19:19,
23:1.
avriYY^^n • • • AeyovTsq Jdg. 16:2: Gen. 22:20.
5i£|3ori9ri r\ cpcovr) . . . XsYovxeq Gen. 45:16.
evXoyr\Qr\oexai 'lopaiqA Xiyovxeq Gen. 48:20.
An adjacent case is -
Ezk. 12:22 Tiq rj Trapa|3oAri v\iiv . . . AeyovTeq;
f. When the verb is active and finite, the construction presents itself as good Greek, as in -
3 K. [2 Kings} 12:10 kXaXr\oav . . . AeyovTeq,
but this is a little better than an accident, for what immediately follows is -
TdSe AaArioeic; tw Aaco touto) toTc; XaXr\oaoi npbq ok AeyovTeq ktA.
In Dt. 18:16 we have even rirrjooo . . . Xeyovxet;.
g. Where the principal verb is not one of saying, the divorce between it and the participle is
complete, both in sense and grammar -
Ex. 5:14 £|aaoTiYOo6rioav . . . Xeyovxeq, 5:19 soopoov . . . Xeyovxeq,
where the 'being beaten' and the 'seeing' are predicated of one set of persons and the 'saying'
of another. Cp. the complex case in 1 Mac. 13:17,18.
h. In the N.T. this Hebraism occurs only once -
Rev. 11:15 cpoovai . . . Xeyovxec;.
78
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
113. Idiomatic Use of TipooTiBevai. a. Another very common Hebraism is the use of TrpoanBevai
with the infinitive of another verb in the sense of doing a thing more or again, e.g. -
Gen. 37:8 TrpooeesvTo exi \iweiv = they hated still more. Cp. Gen. 4:2,12, 8:21, 44:23. Ex. 8:29
\ir\ npooQf\(; exi. . . £^anaxf\oai. Cp. Ex. 9:28, 10:28, 14:13.
Nb. 22:15,19,25: Dt. 3:26, 5:25: Josh. 7:12: Jdg. 8:28, 10:6, 13:1,21: 1 Mac. 9:1.
b. Sometimes tou precedes the infinitive, as -
Ex. 9:34 npoosQexo xov a\iapxaveiv.
Josh. 23:13 ou \ir\ TrpooOfj Kupioq tou e^oXsQpevoai.
Jdg. 2:21 ou TipooOriooo tou e^apai. Cp. Jdg. 9:37, 10:13.
c. The same construction may be used impersonally in the passive -
Ex. 5:7 ouKen TrpoaTsOrioeTai SiSovai axupov tw Aaco.
d. Sometimes the dependent verb is dropped after the middle or passive -
Nb. 22:26 Kai npoosQexo 6 ayyeXoc; xov Qeov Kai aneXQCdv vneoxx]. Cp. 4 K. [2 Kings] 1:11.
Ex. 1 1:6 fJTic; ToiauTri ou yeYO"^^ ^^^ ToiauTri ouketi TipooTeOrioeTai.
79
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Indexes
Index of Greek Words and Phrases
•dvaipeai, 5evr\oeai, spx^ai, suxsoci, TSriai, KsXeai, Xe^eai, XiXaieai, \iaiveai, veyLsai, oSupsai,
TTOoAeai.
•eSiSouv
•6kA{^61, EKXi^ai, sAi^av, Ai^ouoiv.
•£v riviiasi r\yL£pCdv
•£v raurri kyo) kXni^o)
•eveSpa
'eXeoc; QeXod f] Qvoiav.
*eXeo(;, 6.
*eXeo(;, to
•£Toiiaoi yap dTro9vrioK£iv koyiev f] Tratpwouc; vojaouq Ttapa|3aiv£iv.
•riiaepav £^ rwiepaq
*r\\iepa(;
*f\XQov xayyLaxa xayyLaxa, 4.2 eoxr\oav TdyvaTa TdyvaTa.
•ioxuei ouToq f] rivietq,
•6 TipooriAuToc; 6 £v ooi dva|3ria£Tai dvoo dvoo, au Se KaTa|3riori xdroo xdroo.
•obo£i wpav Buoiaq eoTrepivfjq
•Baaeaq
•5i5oo|ai
•Suo Suo,
•Siva
•SiSoaaiv
•Kal Tidv (oix) oiKerriv f] dpyupoovriTov TiepiTeiaeTc; auTov.
•Ka6' eKaoxr\v r\\iepav
•KaAov 001 60TIV eioeXQeiv . . . f] . . . I^AriBfjvai.
•Katd jiiKpov viiKpov.
•Katd cpuAdc; cpuAdq.
•AeuKoi oi 656vT£(; aurou f] ydAa.
'Via
•^169' r\\iepa(;
*\ieQ' riiaepac; TioAAdq
•jaeTd
•oi TtdvTsq ydp rd sauTCOv ^rjTouoi.
•ou yeyovsv roiaurri £^6£<; Kal Tpirfj
•Tidq dvrip . . . Tidoa Seyuvrj.
80
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•Tiaq oiKoq 'loparjA.
'naoa 'lepoo6Xv\ia.
•Tr£ivdoooii£v, Tr£ivdar|T£
•ttoAu to eQvoc; touto f] sy^' 9'1 £0vri yLeydXa Kal laxuporepa jaaAAov f] vyLsXq.
•Tipaoial npaoiai.
'ovyLJiooia ovyLnooia,
'ovvsKXeioeyap 6 Qebc; xovc; navxa(; eic; aneiQeiav
*ovvr\yayov avxovc; Bijaoovidc; Bijaoovidq.
'xepneiv yap oio\iai oe xavxa f] xa toov lauBoAoyoov |3i|3Aia.
•Touq ydp TidvTaq rjiadc; ktA
•Toiq Tidoi Yeyo'V'^ TidvTa.
•2"21 Ttaaa oiKoSojari.
•dyaBri r] TroAiq
•dyaBoq. 'AyaBooq
•dya9a)T£po(;
•dya9ooT£pa UTiep aurriv
•dyaTrrjoei ayanaoQai KaKia KaKOTioieiv
•dyaTrrio£i(; tov TrArjoiov oou ooq osaurov.
•dyvorjiaa
•dSeAcpoq
•dSuvaretv ano
•d9£T£Tv £V
•dKOU£lV
*aKovovxe(;f\oav
•dKofi dKoueiv, ^oofj ^fjv, Bavdrco anoQaveX, Bavdro) 6avaTouo6ai, odAmyyi oaAni^eiv
•dKouarri kysvexo
•dKouarriv enoir\oev xy\v cpcoriv auTou
•dKOUOTOV 6y£V£T0
•dKouoTov eoxai
•dKOUOTOV TTOietv
'aXeaoQai
•dAooTTEKaq
•dAooTiriKaq
•dAaAayjacp dAaAd^eiv KaKia kckouv
•dAAd dTieAouaaoBe, dAAd riyida9riT£, dAA' e5iKaio)Qr[X£
•dAAd fj,
•dAAd
•dAAd,
•dAAd.
•dAA' f] oTi
•dAA' f] OTi 9paou to e'Bvoq.
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•dAA' fj
•dAnei
*r\ enioKS^K; r\v eneoKs^avxo
*r\ r\yLepa r\ kxQst; fjuc; SifjABev
•ri utt' oupavov
•ri yf\ £(p' r\c; ov KaBeuSeiq en aurfjc;.
•ri Kdjaivoq £^£Kau9ri vnep xb nporepov knxanXaoiodq
*r\ kAivti £(p' r\(; ave^r\(; £K£T.
•rj AuTirj ujaoov eiq xapdv Y£vrio£Tai
•rj |aaKpo6u|aia yAuKUTdTri £otiv UTt£p to yiiXi.
*r\ naoa noXic;
*r\ Tiatq, £Y£ipou
*r\yiao\ievoi eo\iev
•ri|a£pa Kai rivi£pa.
•riiaio£ia
•ruiapTrjKObc; £oo|aai
95
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
*r\\iei(; Soooojiev ooi dvrip xtAiouq Kai SKaxbv dpyupiou
•rjviKa eav
•rjviKa S' av ave^x] anb Tfjq aKrivfjq r\ vecpeXx].
•rjviKa 5' av eioenopevexo Mooofjq
*r\xoi\iao\ievr\ f\v
•fJKOuasv . . . Aeyoov
•fjA9a|aev
•fjA6aT£
•fJvisBa
•fJvieBa dTieiBouvTeq
•fjviriv
•fjviriv KaxavevvyyLevoc;
•fjviriv nevQCdv
•fjviriv TreTTTOOKOOc;
•fjviriv Tipooeuxovievoc;
•fjvoiYov
•fjvoi^a
•fjvoi^e
•fjvuoTpov.
•fjp£TO ydp Sri, ^'t f^ syLov sir] aocpoorepoq.
•fjp^aTO Tou oiKoSovieTv.
•fJTOO
•fj(pi£(v)
•fj 60TIV dyaBri ooi unep STird uiouq
•fJKatiev
•fJKaoi
•fJKaoi(v)
•fJKaT£
•fJK£lV
•fjijiou dpXOVTOOV
•fjiaiouq, -u
•fJTic; ToiauTTi ou yiyovev
•fJTi(; ToiauTTi ou YEYO"^^ ^^'^ Toiaurri oukcti npoox£Qr\0£xai
•n
•ri jariv
•rjABav
•rjABev . . . £v ypa(pf\ . . . Xiyodv
•rjABov
96
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•rjABov Tou anayyeiXai ooi
*f\yL£v Tr£Troi96T£(;
*f\yL£v . . . 8iaTpi|3ovT£(;
*f\v
•rjv £VK£Kpu|aia£va
•rjv eoxr\KO)c;
•rjv auToTq s'k; apxovxa
*f\v yivoviEvri.
*f\v ^lanenexaKoxa
•rjv Kripuoooov
•rjv 7r£Troi6ma
*f\v TTOijaaivoov
•rjv Tp£iaovTa
•rjv (po|3ou|i£vo(;
•rjv . . . dvaipouia£vo(;
•rjv . . . dTro(popTi^6vi£vov
•rjv . . . £^£OTriKuTa
*f\oav KaTa|a£vovT£(;
•rjoav Tr£TroiriK6T£(; avxa.
*f\oav ovKXiyovxeq
*f\oQa
*f\oQa oivoxooov
•riTrjooo . . . Xiyovxeq.
•n-
•rjKa
•rjKav
•riK£
•riq £ix£ TO BuyaTpiov auTfjq Ttv£uvia aK&Qapxov.
•'H (poovri (poovri 'IaKa)|3, at 5£ X£tp£<i X^i^P^'i 'Haau.
•'H(pi£i(;
•"HK£IV
•i5£a
•iS£ai
•iSd)v 5£ Oapao) . . . £|3apuv6ri rj KapSia aurou
•iSd)v dSov
•iSou £YOi) uco tautriv triv wpav aupiov x^Aa^av
•i5ou ri napQsvo(; £v YocoTpi Ari|a\jj£Tai
97
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
laxuov eoxi
loxvpoxepa napa ndvxa.
levai
lAapooTepav irapd to Ttporepov
iordvai
loxaveiv
loxaod
[oxr\Kei
ioTOOjaev
ioTOOV
ioTOoaw
TSev
TSioq
TSoioav
rSov
TSooav
To9i euvooov
Ta6i nenoiQddq
loxe ytvoooKOVTec;
(/■ </ tf
irjv, leiq, i£i
I'va
I'va dcpiouai.
I'va £OTai . . . Kai . . . eiaeABoooiv.
Iva ri}iaq KataSouAoooouoiv.
Iva auTouc; ^rjAouTe
I'va Y^vritai . . . Trpooreuoov
I'va jar) rijaiv eiq KpTjaa Y^vrirai
I'va lari . . . cpuoiouaBs.
I'va Tidv OTOvia (ppayfi, Kal uttoSikoc; yevriTai Tidq 6 Koovioq tw Geco.
I'va . . . Brjooo
I'va . . . K£p5ri9rioovTai
I'orrivii
"Io6i tisvToiys, w l^aoiAeu, obq outs y^^i^ TtpoofiKOOv auToTq, out£ oviocpuAoq auTOOv oov raura Tiepi
auTOOv d^ioo.
6 GOV etc; tov koAttov tou Trarpoq.
oSuvdaai
OKTO) Kal SsKa
oAeoaioav
oAeooo
oAet
98
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
oXeixai
oAouvrai
o^urepoi vnep AuKouq
OTTIOOO
opuyfi
ooxsok;
6
6 avQpodnoc; o§v eav SKke^odyLai avxov,
6 apxoov Tfjc; rjiaiaouq
6 fjijiouq Tou dpiBjaou airaq
6 Qebq 6 Gsoq jiou Tipooxec; jjoi ivari eyKaTeAiTreq jae;
6 yap Mooofjc; ouToq . . . ouk oTSajaev ti eysveTO auTCO.
6 Se viiKpoTepoc; . . . eiq yf\v Xavdav
6 eiKOOToq TrpooToq
6 ei-q Kal eiKOOTOc;
6 Aeoov Kal rj dpKoq
6 viKOOv, TTOiriaoo aurov otuAov £v tco vato tou 6£ou ^lou
6 naq dvBpoomvoq l^ioq
6 naq KivSuvoq
6 TTccq xpovoq
6 TTccq xpuooq
6 TTOirioac; to eXeoc; yLsx' auTou
6 ouvioov
6 (piAoov TiaTepa f] jariTepa vnep syLS.
6 . . . Tide; voiioq. Mt. 8'34 ndoa r] tioAk; e^fjABsv.
OTTOTav KaBeiAev.
OTTOTE eav eioeTTopeuovTO
edv BsAri
eav JtaQw
Mv
£^riviapT6v Tov 'loparjA.
6 Kupioq ovojadasi auTO.
Se jjri Trpoo£ox£v Tfj Siavoia eic; to pfjvia Kupiou ktA.
Kal eonov5aoa avxb touto Troirjoai
yiev Kpiv£i rjviepav nap' ri^iepav
OUK eyLyievei ev naoi ToTq yeypayLyLevoii; . . . tou Tioifjaai auTd.
ov expioav avxov
bv TpoTTOv edv cpuYH avQpodnoq £k TrpooooTiou tou AeovToq, Kal e\ineor\ auTW rj dpKoq.
oq dv dTToAuorj Tiqv yuvaiKa auTou
OVTOOV
b^\)ei
99
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•on
•OTlMv
•696V edv
•69£v e^r\yaye(; rwiaq £K£T96v
•OTTOl
•oTTOu eav
•oTTOu exei £K£T tottov
• OTTOU ri yuvri Kd9riTai en avxCdv (= £K£T).
• OTTOU xpecpexai £K£T,
• OTTOU = OTTOl
•oTTOoq \\.r\ kydd... a\ia eavxov xe kox ujaaq e^anaxr\oa(;
•oTTOoq \\.r\ KauxnoriTai TTaoa odp^
•oq
•oaa eav
*6oa eav ooi S£i^oo
•oooi [£dv] £v ratq evxoXdii; \iov xavxaiq TTop£u9a)oiv
•ooTiq
•ooTiq opaoiv 9£ou £i8£v, ev uttvco, dTTOK£KaAuvi|i£voi oi 6(p9aAvioi aurou
•orav
•orav £AdAouv avxoic;.
*6xav enaxaooev
*6xav £TTfip£v Moouofjc; xac; x^tpocc;.
*6xav £5aKV£v ocpiq dv9pooTTov.
*6xav fjvoi^£
*6xav fjpx£'i:o 6 Aecov Kal r\ dpKoq.
*6xav 6^\)e eyevexo
*6xav 6 rjAioq £TTiK£KauK£i, ^rjpai £Y£vovto,
•orav |3A£TT£T£
*6xav ydp iari5£|aia £pi(; evr\peioxai ev vyLiv.
*6xav 5£ dKOUTOv y^vriTai
*6xav £ioripx£'i:o
*6xav |aaioua9£ xac; 'E^paiaq Kal woiv TTpoq tw t{kt£iv
•orav . . . exeQr\oav
*6xav . . . Kaxapyr\oei
•0T£
•6t£ fjviriv £v Tfi x^pa yLov . . . veodxepvo yLov ovToq
•on
•ondAA'fj
•ondAA'fj.
•on £VToAri tou ^aoiXeodq Xeybiv.
•on £1 \vf\
100
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•0Ti£i larj.
•on ouK rjv nac; 6 oiKoq tou Trarpoc; jjou aXk' f] on avSpeq Bavdrou.
•on TTOioo eyd) V'^''^' ocutoov Trovrjpiav
•oTou jjev ouv av 6 Srnaioupyoq . . . xr\v iMav Kal Suva^iiv aurou aTiepYd^riTai
•u|3pioTpia
'vyieia.
'vyeia
*v\iiv eoxai eiq l^poooiv,
•ujaetq e^eXe^aoQe Kupio) Xaxpeveiv aurco -
•ujieTq £Trovrip£uoao96 vnep Touq Tiarepaq ujaoov.
•ujaetq ydp £aT£ oAiyoaTol napd navxa xa eQvr\.
'vnep yiiXiyXvKV.
'vnep raunqq npooev^exai naq oaioq,
'vnep
'vno
•UTTO,
•uTiepdvooBev
•uTiepdvooBev tou oxepeodyLaxoq.
'vnepexovxeq auTouq eiaiv
'vnepaonioxr\(;
•uTr£pri(pav£ueo6ai diro
'vnexayr\oav
•uTToSeSuKuTai f\oav . . . vno5e5vKeioav.
'vnoK&xodQev
•uTTOxoopoov yivov,
•u\p£ia
•uxprjAoq vnep Tidoav Tiqv y^v
•u\poo6rio£Tai f] Fwy (^aaiAeia.
•uxpoovia . . . yaupiajaa . . . Kavxr\\ici
•obq
•obq dxpiq
•obq Wjiooa £v Tfi opyfi jaou Ei eAeuaovrai eiq nqv KardTiouoiv ^lou
•obq . . . TTETTOiriKOOl TOU TTepiTTaTeTv aUTOV
•obo£i dxpiq eiq nXf\Qo(;
'(hoei jjia Sopxdq ev dypco.
•w(p9ri 'louSaq . . . £v TpioxiAioiq dvSpdaiv
•woTiep oiypaviviaTiaTal ToTq lafiTroo Seivotqypdcpeiv toov TiaiSoov UTToypdxpavTeqypaiiiidqTfj ypacpiSi
OUTGO TO ypajJiaaTeTov 5i56aoi
•d) dv6pooTre Trdq 6 Kpivoov
•d) xpuoeaiq £v oivoxoaiq d|3pd |3aivoov
•obv ouxt dKouovTai ai cpcoval auTCOv
101
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
d)v rdSe xa aXXa yLsxaXayL^avovxa xac; eTioovuiaiaq auTOOv Toxsiv
f\ TTETTOiriKax;.
f\ ouK ene^Xr\Qr\ en avxr\v ^uyoq.
cI) eav
0) 60TIV aUTCp.
d) TrapeoTrjv evoomov auToO.
n
P
pdooeiv
piTTTOO
p£pi(p6ai [pepT(p6ai]
pepiiijaevoq
p£pvn(jd\ieva
pi(pr\oexai
po\i(paiav o^eiav vnep ^upov Koupeooq.
iva
Ai naoai
AuToq £(pri
BdAAaq
Baveaq
Bavaiaq
Baaaiaq
BaaiAeueiv
riyveoBai
rpriYoptoq
As
El dva|3a) £m Touq aXXocpvXovc;;
El dva|36o eiq jjiav toov noXeodv 'louSa
El Trpoo6a)|a£v exi e^eXQeiv
Eivai
Eiq
ZeAcpaq
Zfj Kupioq . . . OTi £1 \\.r\ TrpoaooTTOv 'loooacpdB . . . kyo) Xayi^avo), ei
Zfi Kupioq ... £1 £aTai . . . vexoc;' on d yLr\ 5id ox6\iaxoc; Aoyou jaou.
Zfj Kupioq, on £1 lari eXaXr\oac;, Sion t6t£ £k Trpooi9£v dv£|3ri 6 Xaoq.
e
Qee jjou 6££ jjou ivari yie kYKaxeXineq;
Kup£ 6 @e6(;, 6 TravTOKpdroop
102
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•Kupie, 6 Qeoq \iov
•Kupie, 6 jadpruq Tfjq XHPOC'J-
•Kupi£, £1 £V TCp XPO'VO) TOUTO) KtA
•Kupi£, d oAiyoi oi ooo^6|a£voi
•Kal TOUTOV T£ Trap£AriAu6£oav oi "EXXr\vec;, kox £T£pov opooaiv £|aTi:poo9£v Aocpov KaT£x6vi£vov
•Kixpav
•Kupio)
•AriSaq, 'AvSpojiESaq, KoyLnkiyac;
•Aaoq
•Aeooq
•Mrjvieiv
•0
•01tiv£(; = 01
•Ou jjoixsuaeic;, Ou KA.£\p£i(; ktA.
•OuK eina npbc; oe Ou Trpocprireuei ouToq \ioi KaXa, Sioti dAA' f] Kaxd;
•Ouxt> dAA' f] on ^aoiXea oxr\oeic; ecp' r\\iG)v
•Ouxt> dAA' f] on l^aoiAeuq |3aoiA£uo£i ecp' rijaoov.
•ni£^£iv
•not
•riou Ttpo£uri, Kal Tt69£v £pxn;
•lKVl\p
•louodwaq
•Td TidvTa
•Td TidvTa
•TdS£ XaXr\oeic; tw Aaco touto) roiq AaArjoaai npoq 0£ Xeyovxec; ktA.
•Ti TOUTO £Troirioaia£v tou £^aTrooT£TAai Touq uiouq 'lopaiqA tou ^iri 5ouA£U£iv riiaiv (= (hoxe \\.r\
5ouA£U£iv)
•Ti(; ri Trapa|3oAri ujaTv . . . Xiyovxei;
•Oav£p6v OTi KaTriKoAou9rio£v 6 nAdTOOv Tfj Ka6 ' rjiadc; voiao9£aia, Kal (pavepoc; eoxi
7r£pi£ipYaaia£vo(; £KaoTa toov ev avxf\. Ai£p|ariv£UTai ydp Tipo AriiariTpiou tou OaArjpEOOc; Si' eTspoov
Tipo Tfjq 'AAe^dvSpou Kal Ilepaoov kniKpaxr\oe(j)(; ktA. . . . Feyove ydp TToAujaaBriq, KaBooq Kal
nuBayopaq noXXa toov Trap ' r\\\xv yLsxeviyKac; eiq xr\v eauTou SoyviaTOTiouav KaT£xoopio£v.
•a
•d
•d
•ai6dAri
•aiv£oaioav
•aiveoo, KaAeoo, xeXeod
•aioxpoTepoq
•aioxuvTTipoq
•aixvaAooTi^eiv
103
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
ax,
ai yuvaiKec;, vnoxaooeoQe
at nexpai 5i£9pu|3rioav an amov
aipexi^eiv
aip£Tl^£lV £V
aipexoq
aXQaXoq
avQodpi
auToq dvriv£YK£v £v tw aoojaaTi aurou
avxbq \iev (pevyodv SKcpevyei
auTov
auToq
auToq
avxf\c; em^e^r\Kvir\c; em xr\v ovov
auTfi Tfi wpa
avxx] 6Y£vri9ri \ioi
avxx] \ie napsKaXeoev
^aoiXeia
^aoiXevoov avxoic; ^aoiXea
^aoiXiooa
^5eXvy\iaxi ^BeXvooeiv AOoiq Ai9o|3oA£iv
^BeXvooeiv
^5eXvooeoQai
^BeXvooeoQai ano
^e^apr\xai r\ KapSia Oapad) tou jar) e^anooxeiXai xbv Xaov.
^e^anxio\isvoi UTiripxov
|3£|3pa)K£l
^la^oyLEVOdv 5e kox avxixeivovxodv aXXr\Xoi(; . . . (h\ioX6yr\oav
^i^G), e^exG)
|3ouA£i, oT£i, 6\j;£i
|3oav £v
|3pa)0£i (payfi
|3paxTio£Tai (Bp£xoo
Y
Y£YWva
Y£V£o6£ dq avSpaq.
Ynpa
Ynpouq
104
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•Ynpwc;
•yripwc;, ynpa,
•ytvou YPnYop^"^
•ynv £(p' fiv ouK 6KomdoaT£ ett' auTfjq
•Ynpaq
•ynO
•yaiaic;
•yatq
•yaioov
•yaioov, yaiaiq
•yeyoovetv
•yev8o9ai
•y£V£Ti(;
•y£vo|a£voov Se rijaoov eiq 'lepoo6Xv\ia ao\iev(j)(; aneM^avxo r\\ia(; oi dSeAcpoi.
•ypacprjoovTai
•ypriyopriaiq
•ypriyoprioaT£
•ypriyopriaoo
•ypriyopooviev
•ypriyopoo.
•ypriyopetv
•ypriyopeiTe
•ypriyopouvTOOv
•yuvri \\.ia.
•Sdviov 5av£i^£iv, Sia6£o6ai SiaBfiKriv, 5iriy£ia6ai Siriyria, svvnviov £VUTrvid^£o6ai, £Tri6u|a£iv
£Tri9u|aiav, 9u£iv Qvoiav, vriaT£U£iv vr\oxeiav, opiaviov 6p{^£o6ai, nkr\\\.yiekeiv nkr\\\.yiekr\oiv
•§£
•5£Ka enxa
•S£Ka£^
•SEKaOKTO)
•SsKa Suo
•5£KaTr£VT£
•5£KaT£ooap£<;
'MKaxpeic;
•§£,
•5£.
•SiSou
105
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•SiSoooi
•SiKrj £k5ik£Tv opKO) opKi^eiv
•Sivri
•5i-5o-oai, Xe-Xv-oai
•Sojja SeSovievov
•Suva
•Suvri
•Suvaoai
•Suo
•Suo Suo
•SooSsKa
•Sooaoo auTov evoomov aou Sotov
•Swiq
•SwTiq
•Soo
•Sooai
•Score
•Sw
•Sa)(;
•Saprjoerai TtoAAdq . . . oAiyac; (nkriyac,).
•Set riviccc; epeoBai eaurouq
•SeSooKei
•SeSooKEiv
•SeSooKEiaav
•SeSojaevoiSoiaa
•Seojacp Seiv Aurpoiq Aurpouv
•Sid^fjAov
•SidAsKToc;
•Sidcpopov nepiooCdc; napa navxa xa 6ripia.
•Sirivoi^e
•SlOTl
•SiayY^ArioovTai
•SiaKooioi dvSpeq omveq SKaQioav nepav xov x£t|adppou
•SiaAt3o£i SiaAu£iv yLveia yLvr\oQf\vai
•SiajjapTupia SiajaapTupeTv oiooviovio) oioovi^£a6ai
•SiaoKeSdaoo
•Sia(p6£ipeiv (p9opd opyi^eoQai opyfi
•SiSovai
•SiSooo
•SiSoT
•SiSoT,
106
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
5i£iAavT0
5i£|3ori9ri rj (poovr) . . . Xiyovxei;
5ieQpv^r\oav
Sieooo^ovTO, I'va \ir\. . . Ysvcovrai
5i£Tripri9ri(; I'va evSei^oojaai.
SnqvoiYVievouc;
SixoTOjariiaa
5i\pav
5i\pa
Soiri
Souvai Sojja
5oKi\io)xepa vnep xpuoiov oata auToO
SueTv
SuvaTOOTspoi eioiv vnep amov.
SuoTv
5uoi(v)
e
£1
£1
£1 eyiyiioQoq f\.
£1 f\ avBpooTToq
£1 Kai KaxaXa^o).
ei Kai ouvi|3fi.
£1 Kaxd jjoi ouvi|3fi
£1 Kaxa^G) oTTiooo toov dAAocpuAoov
£1 yikv a(pei(; . . . acpec;
£1 \\.r\ ripoTpidaaT£ £v tfj 5ayLaXei \iov
£1 \\.r\ nenoiQodq UTiapxoi
£1 viriv £uAoY00v £uAoYriaoo oe
£1 viriv £uAoY00v £uAoytiooo oe, Kai TiAriBuvoov TrAri9uv6o to onepyLa oov
ei\ir\
e{\ir\v
elm,
e{\\.r\.
ei TtoA£|aa)aiv
£1 TUXOl
£1 - d £TrioTp£(p£T£ |a£ vyLeic; napaxa^aoQai ev uioTc; 'Ajiiaobv Kai TiapaSco Kupioq amove; evodniov
£V10U
d . . . do6£vriori
dS£ai
einaxo)
107
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
einov
ei(;
eiq aq SieoKopmaac; avxovq skeT.
eiq f\v eiof[kQsv £K£T.
eiq SouAov 6Trpd6ri 'loooriq).
£i<; ri§v eionopevr\ eiq aurriv
ei(; Kpijja Kai eiq oriiasioooiv . . . Ytvovrai
eiq oiKov
eiq xr\v v^r\kr\v (xoopav)
eiq Ti . . . kyevr\Qr\ avxr\;
eiq x^tpocc; l^aoiAeooq
£ioriA9ati£v
eiol YeYO'vo''^^<i
£iaiv . . . eoxCdxec; kox SiSdoKOVTsq
eioaKovoQeic; anb xf\c; evXa^eiac;
eioeXQdxodoav
ei,
ei TTOoq Karavrriooo eic; xr\v e^avdoxaoiv
ei TTOoq Trapa^rjAooooo.
£1 xi TTOU aXooq . . . dveiyievov f\.
ei xk; TipoaBfi
e'lSooav
einaiyiev
einayLev
einaq
einaxe
einaxov
einoioav
einooav, SKpivooav, eXa^ooav, kniooav, evpooav, ecpepooav
eioeXQe . . . iva T8KVOTroirio8i(;
eixexo xov nAooq
el'AaTO
ei\\.r\v
eiSav
eiSav . . . ecpvyav . . . eiof\XQav . . . dveoxpe^av
eiSov
eivai
eivai £i<; r\yov\ievov
eivai . . . AeiToupyouoav
eina
108
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
einav
einav avr\p 'louSa.
einaq
einev dcpeivai, dcpiouaiv.
einev ... on TauTrjv xr\v dopav kxX.
einsv . . . lajaxpoov ... on ei \ir\v 8K5iKriooo £v ujaiv.
einov
ein-a, fjvevK-a, exe-a
ei(;
eiq
eiq dsToq
eiq anb dSeAcpoov yiov
ei(; dYYe^o<i
etc; ypayL\iaxevq,
eic; etc;
evayyeXi^eiv
£uSoK6Tv £V
evQr\(;, evQec;,
evQvq, £u6£Ta, evQv,
evQr\vovv
evQr\vovoav
evXoyr\oaioav
evXoyr\Qr\oexai 'lopaiqA Xiyovxeq
evXoyovoav
evoxaQovoav
eupejaa
evpoioav
eia
ei
ei-Xa
£i-Aov
ei \ir\
ei \ir\v
^r\oei(; yLS.
^fjAoq, TO
^fi ri xpuxri oou, eyo) r\ yuvr) kxX.
^f\ Kupioq ... on oriiaepov 6(p9riooiiai ooi
^f\ Kupioq, on evQr\c; ov Kai dyaBoq £v 6(pQaX\ioi(; \iov
^f\ Kupioq, £1 £^oooYovriKeiT£ auTouq, ouk dv ansKxeiva ujadq.
fy\Xovxe
n
109
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
'QeXeiv ev
'QeyLa, £K6£via, £m6£|aa, napaQeyLa, np6oQe\ia, ovvQe\ia.
*Qr\pav
•6aaoov TipoiovTOOv . . . Spojjoq £Y£V£to ToTq OTpaTicoTai<;.
•Bavdro) d7toKT£vco.
•Bavdro) 6A£9p£u9ria£Tai
•Bavdro) T£A£UTdv
'Qapoeixe, Xaoc; \iov.
•e££.
•6£Aria£i 9£A£iv (p£pvfi cpepvi^eiv
'Qepioei
•9£Oopa)v fjviriv.
•9£00p£Tv £V
*Qr\pevoaioav
•i
•iHoxi3£i uTr£p rividc;.
•Kd6£via
•Kd6rioo
•Kd6ou
'KaXvyLyLa em xr\v KapSiav auTOOv K£TTai.
*Kr\avxe(;
•Kixpnvi
•kukAo)
•Kupioq ^aoiXevodv xbv aioova.
•Kal
•Kal dKrjSidoac; Eyco . . . exapaooov \ie.
•Kal avr\yayev avxr\v {xr\v dKpi5a) £m naoav y^v AiyuTtTou, Kal KaT£Trauo£v em navxa xa opia
AiyuTTTOu TToAAri ocpoSpa.
•Kal dvriyy£iAav aurfj xr\v naoav KapSiav aurou . . . Kal £iS£v AaAaSd on dTrriyy£iA£v aurfj naoav
xr\v KapSiav aurou
•Kal dvaordq Oapaoo . . . Kal £y£vri9ri Kpauyrj.
•Kal dpyupiov £T£pov riv£yKavi£v ti£6' eavxCdv.
•Kal eav xk; vyLiv e{nr\ xi, £p£TT£ ktA.
•Kal £y£V£TO £v TCp dKouoai Tov |3aoiA£a 'E^£Kiav, £oxio£v xa Ijadna
•Kal £y£V£TO oxav e^aKvev ocpiq dv9pooTrov, Kal £Tr£|3A£\p£v ettI tov ocpiv tov xocAkouv, Kal efy\
•Kal 6y£V£T0 (he; e^rjABoaav . . . auTiq Se ave^x]
•Kal 6y£V£T0 toq fJK0U0£v l^aoiAeuq 'E^eKiaq, Kal Sisppiq^sv Ta ijadTia eauTou
•Kal 6y£V£T0 Tidq 6 I^Aettoov eXeyev . . .
•Kal 6y£vri9ri Tfj eiraupiov, epxovTai ol dAAocpuAoi
•Kal £KpdTrio£v eva xf\ Se^ia auToO Kal eva xf\ dpioTepd auTou
no
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•Kal e\iior\oa ovv xr\v ^ooriv.
•Kai £v TCp Kaipcp £K£iva) oi dAAocpuAoi Kupieuovreq £v 'loparjA
•Kal e^apavxet;
•Kal £^riiaapT6v auTouq dviapriav yieYdXr\v.
•Kal e^fjABov oi |aa9riTai, Kal rjABov eiq nqv ttoAiv, Kal evpev Ka6cb(; smev avxdiq' Kal riToijaaoav
TO irdoxa.
•Kal e^ikaoexai 6 kpeuq.
•Kal enei ovvexeXeoev nac; 6 Aaoq 5ia|3aivoov tov 'lopSdvrjv, Kal einev Kupioq
•Kal £KAaua£v npoq avxbv em xac; tnxa r\\iepac; dq rjv auToTq 6 noxoq.
•Kal eoxai eav kyo) aneXQod anb oov, Kal nvev\ia Kupiou dpei oe eiq xr\v yf\v r\v ouk oiSaq
•Kal eoxai sv tw iSetv auTov jar) ov to TiaiSdpiov yieQ' rijioov, TeAeuTrioei.
•Kal £OTri 6 ayyeXoi; xov Qeov ev xdiq avXa^iv tcov a\meX(j)v, (ppayvoc; £vt£u9£v Kal (ppayyLoq
evxevQev.
•Kal fiyaysv auTouq \iexa ^iac;
•Kal iSobv BaAdK . . . Kal £(po|3ri9ri Mood|3
•Kal i5d)v auTov, to nvevyLa evQvi; ovveonapa^ev auTov.
•Kal iSouoa rj ovoq . . . Kal £^£kAiv£v
•Kal ooTouv ou ouvTpi\j;£T£ an auTou
•Kal 6 ave\io(; 6 votoc; dv£Aa|3£v xr\v dKpiSa
•Kal 6 dvBpooTTOc; Moouofjc; Tipauq ocpoSpa Tiapd TtdvTaq Touq dvBpooTtouc;
•Kal 656v T£ ouTTOO TToAAriv 8irivuo6ai auToiq Kal tov MfjSov fJK£iv
•Kal OTav KaT£|3ri r\ Spoaoq
•Kal obq ou jjovov . . . xp^<^^^ov(; dvai.
•Kal BapdK Siookoov
•Kal Auoiviaxov.
•Kal Mavoo£ Kal r\ yuvri auTou |3A£TrovT£(;
•Kal ydp do6£vrioavTO(; auTou ou5£TroT£ dTr£A£iTr£ tov TrdTTTiov
•Kal 8rioovi£v auTov tou TaTr£iva)oai auTov.
•Kal 5a)0£T£ ijoi Tiqv TiatSa TauTrjv eic; yuvaiKa
•Kal Sia|3£|3aiou|aai TidvTa dv9pooTrov Trpoo£A96vTa Tfj 9£Oopia toov Trpo£ipriia£voov dq ekttAti^iv
rj^£iv Kal 6auviaavi6v dSiriyriTov, vi£TaTpaTr£VTa Tfj Siavoia 5id Tiqv Tr£pl £KaoTriv dyiav
KaTaoK£uriv.
•Kal £1 lari £^£kAiv£v, vuv ouv oe \iev dTr£KT£iva, £K£ivriv 5£ Tr£pi£Troiriod}iriv
•Kal £iofiA6£v 'EAiaK£l|a ktA.
•Kal £i8£v FoAidS
•Kal £iTr£v 'Aydy Ei ouTOoq TriKpoq 6 6dvaT0<;;
•Kal £iTr£v 'EAiaKdja . . . Kal ZoyLvac; Kal 'looaq
•Kal dTr£v rj yuvrj Ei ou d 'Iood|3;
•Kal dTr£v'Axad|3 npbq 'HAaou Ei £upriKd(; \ie, 6 £X0po<; \iov
•Kal KaT£|3ri Iavi\pd)v dq 6a|avd9a, Kal dS£v yuvama dq 6a|avd9a.
•Kal KaT£OT£va^av oi uiol 'lopaiqA dito tcov £pyoov
111
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
Ariiaipoiaai ejaauTCp ujaaq Xabv e\ioi,
oi rpetq eiq to ev eioiv.
ov yLr\ ^5eXvfy\xe xaq ^vxaq v\iCdv
ov \ir\ Yvtpq TTOiav wpav rj^oo em oe
ouK £mYvooo9rioeTai rj evQr\via em Tfjq yf[(; and xov XiyLov.
ouK eior\Kovoev e^anooxeiXai xovq uiouq 'lopariA
OUK eiSev ouSeiq tov dSeAcpov aurou
navxeq eiq xov Mooofjv £|3aTrTioavTO
Tipoq £Trl TOUTOiq
Trpoo£9£TO 6 ayyeXoi; xov Qeov Kal aneXQodv vneoxx].
xa Trv£U|aaTa xa cuKaQapxa, otav auTov £9£a)p£i, Ti:poo£mTi:T£v auTW,
xa OKvXa toov noXeodv £Trpovovi£uaavi£v Eauroiq.
triv apKov £TUTrT£v 6 SouAoq oou Kal tov Aeovtu.
Tfjc; MavaaaiTiSoq riiaio£ia.
Tfjc; Kpavyf\(; avxCdv ocKriKoa octto toov EpyoSiooKTOOv
TfjSe rjv 5i5u|aa ev xf\ KoiAia auTfjq
TCp laATiadS uico "Ocpep ouk eysvovTO auTW uioi.
TOUTO f\v jidAioTa Tdpaooov'AvTiitaTpov
•Kai
•Kal
•Kal
•Kal
•Kal
•Kal
•Kal
•Kal
•Kal
•Kal
•Kal
•Kal
•Kal
•Kal
•Kal
•Kal
•Kal
•Kal
•Kal,
•Kal.
•Kai
•Kai.
•Ka6dpri
•KaBdprjc;
•Ka9£0TaKa
•Ka9ri|a£vov em to tsAcoviov
•Ka6ripei£v
•Ka6i^£iv
•Ka96 eav
•Ka9d)(; eav
•Ka6aip£0£i Ka9aip£iv (p9opd (pQapf\vai
•Ka9api^£iv
•Ka9apia|aa) Ka9api^£iv xo£ip£iv xapa
'KaQeiXav
'KaQeox&KayLev
•Ka9rivi£vou auTou dq to opoq toov £Aaioov
•Ka9ioTdv£iv
•Ka9ioTd |a£9ioTd
•Ka9ioT6ov
•KaA£0£l
*KaXeoei(;
112
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
'KaXeoexe
•KaAeoouoiv
'KaXeood
'KaXeiv
•Kara xi enxaiosv rjvifi'i Kupioq or\\iepov;
•Kara
'Kaxa^a
*KaxaXei\\.yia
•Kara.
•KaT££VaVTl
'Kaxecpayev Kaxa^podoei
*Kax6moQe{v)
*Kaxf[Xi^
*Kax' eyLavxov ojavuoo, si \\.r\ k^eXevoexai £k tou oxoyLaxoc; \iov SiKaioouvr]
*Kax' kviavxbv eviavxov
'Kaxa^axo)
'KaxaKavx&oai
'Kaxacpayoioav
•Karacppovsiv kni
•Katsvcomov
'Kaxsvoovoav
'Kaxepya^exai r\\viv, \ir\ okottouvtoov rjiaoov
'Kaxepya
•Kauxaeoai = Kauxdoai
•Kauxaaai
•KEinqfi aocpoq.
•KEKarripavTai
'KSKaxapayievoq
•K£KpiK£l
•K£paTl^£lV
•K£xapio|a£vo(; eor\
•K£(v),
'KXi^avoq
'KXe^iyidioc,
'KoiyL&oai
•KoijjaTai
•Koivia
•Koivri,
•KOVll^£lV
•Kpd^£lV
•Kpil^avoq.
113
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•Kpu|3ri9i
•Kpeiaooov . . . vnep xovq naxepat;.
•KTCCOai
•kukA69£v
•kukA666v tou 9p6vou.
•Kuvojjuiav . . . Kuvojjuiriq
•Kuvojjuiric;, laaxaipr], £m|36|3riKuiri(;
•Aeyoov
•Aeyoov "On sooyLai \iexa oov
•Aeyoov Ei exi 6 Tiarrip ujaoov ^fj; ei eoxiv vyuiv dSeAcpoq . . .\ir\ f[5ei\iev el epei riiaiv kxX.
*Xe-Xv-oai, 5i-5o-aai
•Arjiaxpojaai, Arjipri, Arivi\j;£o6£, £Ari|a(p6ri, KaTaAri|a\j;ri.
•Aoyw Aeysiv
•Auri
•Auou. Kd9riao
•Auoaq Se etc; tov lidpoiTTTiov aurou
•Auxvoq, TO
'XayL^aveiv yi
•Aarpeueiv auTW
•Aeixoo
•AeiToupystv rdq AeiToupytac; rfjc; OKrivfjc; tou jaapTupiou
'Xoyi^eoQai eic;
*Xvnr\Qr\or\
•A, p, VI, V
•Vieyav
'yLsyav iSetv.
•laeyaq Kupioc; itapd ndvTaq tou(; 6£ou(;
•VisjariKa
•jjeXpioTou
•jjexpt ujicov
•jjEXpiou.
•Visxpt q
•jjEXpic; al'viaToq
•Vi£xpi(; ou
•Vi£xpt<; ou.
•jar) dTrooTpeiprjc; to TrpooooTiov oou diro navxbc; tttooxou.
•jar) Ytv£o6£ ETepo^uyouvTec;
•jar) yivou . . . ou|a|3oAoKOTroov
•jar) jjaKpdv yiveoQe . . . kox eoeoQe navxeq STOivioi
114
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•jar) yLax6\ievo(; £|aax£oaTO yLsxa 'lopaiqA f] noXeyLOdv £TroA£|ario£v auTov;
•jar) TipooBfiq exi. . . e^anaxf\oai
*\ir\ TrpooBfjc; exi, Oapaoo, e^anaxf\oai xov \ir\ e^anooxeiXai xbv Aaov
•jar) (pdyr\(; nav aKaQapxov
*yLr\ Tiva oo— v aneoxaXKa npoq ujaaq, Si' aurou enkeo\eKxr\oa ujaaq
•vn-
•jjia r\yL£pa £yevr\Qr\ npbc; 5uo.
•jjia TiaiSioKri,
•jjiav riTriadjariv . . . Taunqv eK^rirriooo
•jjoAil^oq
•|a6Ai|3o(;, x^Akeioc;, xetMocppoq, TroAejaioTriq
•jjoAul^Soq.
•jjaAAov
•|aai|adao6iv
•jjei^ova Tiapd Tiqv Trpoorriv
•|a£9ioTdv£i
•Vl£6lOTdv£lV
•Vi£6ioTdv
•Vi£9ioT00v KaQioxCdv
*\ieQioxG)oi
'yLsXi^eiv
•|a£|a£aTOO|i£voi eioi.
•|a£pi5a |a£ia£pioia£vriv
•|a£pi^£iv
•Vi£Td 5uvdvi£00(; TroAAfjq.
•Vi£Td
•Vl£Td.
'yLsx' e\iov yap (payovxai oi dv6pooTroi dprouq xr\v \ieor\\i^piav
•|ariS£v nkeov napa x6 5iaT£TaYti£vov v\\xv Tipdoo£T£,
•jjrivioo
•|arivi£T
•iarivi£T(;
•jjid Kai dxdSi tou \ir\v6(;.
•jjid . . . dAArj
•jjiav-, £|aidva, Tr£pav-, £Tr£pdva
'\iiep6c;, iai£po(paYta, vii£po(paY£Tv, |ai£po(povia
115
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
|avrio6riTi jjou . . . Kai noir\oei(;
yLvr\ox£vQeior\(; xf\c; \ir\x(j)6(; . . . evpeQx].
\in
jjuKTripi^eiv 8V
V
V kcpekKvaxiKov
vr\ xr\v vyiav Oapaoo, ei yLr\v KaxaoKonoi koxe.
viKiq
vicpa
VlKOq, TO
vai, 6 Ttarrip.
va6<;
vsooq
veavic;
voriTOoq voei, 27'23 yvoooTOOc; emyvooari
^uprjooojaai
o§v aveneyL^\)a ooi auTov
oiKoSojaouoav
oiKxeipyLOdv oiKTeiprioei.
OlOOVl^£lV
01 riiaio£i(; (puAfjq Mavaoor\.
oiO'
oi yocp TrdvTeq £k tou £v6<; aprou yiexexo\iev.
01 TidvTeq
01 TtdvTsq avSpeq.
01 TtdvTeq dvBpooTTOi.
01 navxeq ^oec;
01 TldvTeq OUTOl
01 TTOTavioi, £1 Kai Tipoaoo toov TiriYOOv airopoi (hoi.
oi ovvievxeq
ol'aq ouK eiSov roiauraq
oiKoq 'lopar\k
oioQac;
oiov £Trl |a£v toov dAAoov ouk dv £xoi tic; to toiouto TtposvsyKstv
oiq eiTrev auToiq.
01,
ou
ou ydp dAAa ypdcpojaev ujaTv, dXA' r] d dvayivoooKSTe.
ou yeyovev ToiauTiq dxpiq.
ou 5iKaioo6rio£Tai evoomov oou Tidq ^oov
116
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•ou AuTrrjBriori rfj KapSia oov SiSovtoc; oov auTW.
•ou jar) Y^vrj emQv\iG)v.
•ou \\.r\ £ia£A6ri eiq auTiqv ttccv koivov
•ou \\.r\ Kpuipoo dcp' u^ioov ttccv pf\\ia
•ou \\.r\ TrapaSo6fi 'lepovoaXr\yL ev x^ipi |3aoiA£00(;
•ou \\.r\ Trpoa6fi Kupioq tou e^oAeBpeuoai.
•ou yLr\
•ou Troirio£T£ £v auTfi nav epyov
•ou Troirio£T8 vyLiv eauToTq.
•ou TipooBriooo tou e^apai
•ouSe kyo) fJKOuoa dAAd or\yiepov.
•ouSe ydp Tidaav eKsivoq
•ou5£TroT£ ecpayov nav koivov.
•ouS' ou \ir\ emoxpe^w etc; tov TSiov oikov
•ouSeiq
•ouK dSuvarrioei Tiapd tou 6eou Tidv pfj^ia
•ouK anoXei^exai a auTou eooq Tipooi, Kai ootouv ouvTpi\j;£Tai an auTou
•ouK eKneipaoEK; Kupiov tov Qeov oov
•ouK £AaTTOo9rioovTai itavToq dyaBou
•ouK eyvoooav Tidv pfjiaa
•OUK eOTlV Tidv TipOOCpaTOV UTtO TOV fjAiov
•ouK iqSuvaTO diro tou oxAou
•ouKrjSuvdoBriv tou ^Xeneiv
•ouK rjv pfjiaa djio irdvTOOv oov £V£T£iAaTO Moouofjq tw 'Irjooi o ouk dvsyvco 'Iiqaouc;.
•ouK £i<; viaKpdv
•ouk £ialv £myivcooKOVT£(;
•ouk £1 ou £o6ioov dpTOV
•ouK£Ti auTO £AKUoai Toxuov dTTO TOU nXr\Qov(; toov ixSuoov
•ouK£Ti TrpooT£9rio£Tai SiSovai dxupov tco Aaco.
•oupav£, Kal oi dyioi.
•ouxt> A£yoo ujaTv, dAA' f] 5iayiepio\i6v
•ou edv
•ou £T£A£lOOO£V Xaq X^tpOCC; aUTCOV l£paT£U£lV.
•ouT£ KaTdpaaiq KaTapdorj \ioi avxov, ovxe evXoyCdv \ir\ £uAoyriori(; auTov
•ou
•ou £dv £Trovoiadooo to ovojad jjou £K£i.
•ou £dv l^aSiorjc; £K£T.
•ou eav
•ou £V£T£iAd|ariv ooi toutou jjovou jar) (payelv
•ou £OTriO£V £K£T Tiqv OKTivriv aUTOU
•ou ri Ttvori auTou £v ri|aiv £otiv.
117
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•ou SieoTieipac; auTouq £K£i.
•ou TO onepyLa aurou £v auTW.
•ov
•ooo
•tt
'navxa SeSookev kv tfj x^i^pi^ cxutou
•TidvTa xa xepaxa a eSooKa £v rate; xepo^v oov
'navxeq . . . ouk aoQ£vr\oovoiv
'neyLJixw Kai eiKaSi xov yLr\v6(;.
'nevxe Kal Sexa
•TTiri
'nieoai
'niexai avr\p xr\v a\ineXov aurou, Kal dvrip xr\v ouKfjv aurou (payexai
*ni-e-oai
•TTopia
•ttccv epyov ov noir\oexe
*nav sdv SKaXeaev.
•ttccv pfjvia 0768; eav e^eXevoexai
*nav nvevyLa ouk £otiv £v auTCO.
•Tidv \p£u5o(; £K Tfjc; aXr\Q£iac; ouk eoxi
•Tidq
•Tidq dAAoyevric; ouk eSerai an aurou
•Tidq dvBpooTToq ou Suvarai
•Tidq 6 TTiaTsuoov £Tr' auTW ou KaTaioxuv9rio£Tai
•Tidq oiKoq 'loparjA
•Tidq TEXviTrjc; ... ou jar) eupeBfj £v ooi m
•Tidoa ri TToAic;
'naoa noXic;
'naoa TrpocprjTeia Ypoccpfjq iSiaq smAuosooq ou yiverai.
'naoav xnpocv Kal opcpavov ou KaKOdoexe
•TiaiSia Tr£TraTo9ai.
•TiaiSeuori
•TiaiSeuoai
•TiavToq ou edv diprirai aurou 6 dKdBaproq.
•Tiapd Kupiou kyevexo avxr\
•Tiapd 6£o5£KTOu . . . yLsxeXa^ov eyoo
•Tiapd
•Tiapd.
•TiapeSooKev auTouq Kupioq £v x^i^pi^ ^vXioxiei\i
118
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
'napayyeiXac; xdiq Trdoaiq Suvdjaeoiv
'napayyeXia TraprjYY^^^'^Vi^
•TiapeiAaTO
'napeXa^ooav
*nap£xr\povoav
'napQevoc;
*napioxr\Kei
'naxdooeiv ev
•TieSidq x£ Kai 6peivr\
'neivaoei
•7t£ivdo£T£, neivaoovoi, eneivaoev, eneivaoav, Tieivdooo
•Ttsivdoo
•Ttsivdv
'neiva
'neiva 5i\pa
•TreTTOOKei
'nemoxevKsioav
'nenoiQaxe
*nenoiQr\oic;
*nenoir\Keioav
•Tr£Troi66T£(; (h\iev
'nenoiQodc; kyevov
'nenoiQodc; £oo\iai
*nenoiQo)(; eoxai
'nenoiQodc; fiq.
*nenoiQeiv
*nenpovoyiev\ievoc;
'nepi ToTv noXeoiv toutoiv.
'nepieoxaKac;
*nepienXaKr\oav
*nepinaxr\oaioav
'nepinaxCdv km. xr\\ QaXaooav
•TiepiTraToOvTa km xf\c; QaXaoor\i;).
*neoax(jd
'nXeiova . . . napa.
'nXeovaoxov oe Tioirioei
*nXr\Qvvei vnep dxpiSa
*nXr\\iyLeXiv, npocpaoi^eoQai npo(paoei(;.
*nXr\oi£oxepov
119
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•TrArjoiaiTepov
•ttAouc;
•TrAouToq, TO
*nXovxr\oei nXovxov yLsyav
'nvevyia ayiov rjv en' auTov
•Trv£U|aa ^oofjq £k tou 9£ou eiar\kQev kv auToic;.
•ttoT
•ttou = TToT
•ttou.
•TTOirioaiaav
•TTOiriooo 06 eiq eQvoq yiiya
•TTOieTv eXeo(; sv
•TTOieTv eXeo(; \iexa
•TTOijaaivoov rjv
•ttoAuv UTiep Tov Tiporepov
*noXe\ieiv ev
'noveiv, (pQoveiv, cpopeTv
•Trop£u9riTi Kal 6(pQr\xi Ta)'Axad|3
*nopevQf\vai ev 'PdyoK;
•Trop£u6a)|a£v eiq Aoo6d£i|a . . . Kal evpev auTouq eiq AooBdeivi.
•TTopBriTai ydp f\oav Kal emQvyLr\xai Kara airdviv Yn<;-
'noxe yLev ouToq
'npenei
'npenov eoxi
*np6 xf\(; exQeq Kal Tipo xf\c; xpixr\c;
*np6 xf\(; exQeq Kal Tipo xf\c; xpixr\c; r\\iepac;
*np6 xf\(; exQeq Kal rpiTrjc;
•Tipo xf\(; exQeq ouSe Tipo xf\c; xpixr\(;
*np6 xf\c; ex^ec; ouSe Tipo Tfjq rpirric; r\yLepa(;
•Trpoq naoav ovvay(jdyr\v uioo 'lopariA.
'npo^a
•TipoiSov
•Trpoq
•TrpoeKOTTTOv . . . vnep noXXovq.
*npoir\
'npoieoai
• Trpo8(priT£uoa|a£v
•Trpo£(priT£uov
•Trpo£(priT6uoav
•Trpo£(priT£uo£
•TrpO£(priT£UO£V
120
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
'npovoyieveiv
'npoosQevxo exi yLioeiv
•Trpoo£9£TO Tou d|aapTdv£iv
•Trpoo£X£iv dq
•Trpoo£X£'i:£ eamoiq.
•Trpoo£uxfi Trpoorju^aTo
•Trpoorju^aTO tou yLr\ ^pe^ai
•Trpooox0i^£w ocTro
•TrpooTi9£o6ai
•TrpooTi9£vai
•TrpocpfiTric;
•Trpo(priT£U£iv
'nvpoevoaioav
•P
•o
•au 5£ 5£5id)(; av... xr\v eamov OKidv.
•ou 5£ Triprjoov tov voviov . . . I'va ooi KaAooq rjv.
•auYKpioiq, ovy^evia.
•auv
•auvi£
'ovoxeyLa
• 00)000 avxovc; ev Kupio) @e(x) avxCdv, kox ou oooooo auTouq £v to^o) ou5£ £v pojacpaia ouS£ £v noXeyLOd
ouS£ £v I'ttttok; ouSe £v iTTTreuoiv.
•oa
• oa |3|3aTi^£iv
•oai
•oav
•o£ua
•oiyripo'i
•OKOTOq, TO
•oK£5dvvuvii
•OK£560,
•OKVl\p
•OKVITT-.
•oKuBpooTid Tiapd Td TiaiSdpia Td ouvrjAiKa ujaoov
•oo(pooT£pou(; 5£KaTiAaoioo(; UTr£p Touq oocpioTdq.
•oTidoo
'oneipaq
*oneipr\(;
*onepei(;, xeyLei(;, pavei.
•OT£V00V Kai Xp£\l(jdV £or\
121
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
*oxr\Kei
^ox^Kel^/
*oxr\Kexe
*oxr\Kr\xe
*oxr\K(jd
*oxpaxr\y6(;
*oxpaxr\yoi
*oxpaxr\yoi
•ouKfjv jaiav,
'ovXkoyi^eiv
*ov\i^r\oexai
*ov\\.^eXiov
*ovvr\vxr\oav Se . . . spxoyLevoic; . . . eKnop£vo\iev(jdv avxCdv.
•ouvi£i
•ouvi£iv
•auvieiq
•ouviouoiv
•ouvioo
•auvioov
'ovvave^aivov
'ovv^i^aodxo)
'ovvexi^eiv
*ovve(ppvyr\oav
•ouvievai £i<;
•ouvievraq
•auviovraq
•auviovToq
•OUVIOVTOOV
•ouvioov
•auvicov
•ouvieiq
•ouvieTv
•ouviouai
•auviouoiv
'ovvioxaveiv
•OUVIOTOOV
•auviatcovTsc;
•ouvreAeoei
•ouvreAeoEK;
122
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
ovvxeXeoexe
ovvxekeoovoiv
ocpoSpa ocpoSpa
ocpoSpa ocpoSpooq
xa eXex]
xa fjijiau
rdopri
xa yap navxa ayaQa AiyuTTTOu vyXv eoxai
xa Se kukAo) xf\c; KO)yLr\(;.
xa xsKva, vnaKovexe.
xac, r\yLioei(; toov djaapnoov
xaq r\\\xo£i(; tcov Suvdjaeoov
rdc; TiepioiKouc; (TtoAsiq)
xeooapec;
xeooape(; Kai Sexa
xr\v aXodva
xr\v "Avvav r\ydna 'EAKavd vnep xavxr\v
XY\v 656v \iov, ri§v vuv eyo) Tropeuojaai ett' aurriv.
nqv U7t' oupavov
xr\v aupiov
xr\v yf\v eic; r\ v\ieic; KaToiK£iT£.
xr\v yf\v ri§v vyLsii; aneoxr\x£ an avxf\(;
xr\v SiKaiav Kpioiv Kpivare
triv nkeo\e^ia\, ti'tk; koxiv eiSooAoAarpeia
XY\v Trpoq Qavaxov (oSov)
triv ovyLJiaoav {yf\v)
xi sjiol Kal ooi, 6 avQpodnoq xov Qeov
xi nap6vxe(; e{r\yLsv
xi TTOiouviev;
Tiq rj yf\ eic; r[v ovxoi £VKd6rivTai en avxf\(; . . . xiveq ai n6Xei(; eiq a outoi KaroiKouaiv £v auratq
TO eQvoc;, o) kav SouAeuoouoi
TO fjijiau
TO fjijiou auTfjc;
TO fJlJlOU TOOV UTiapXOVTOOV
TO fjijiou Tou al'viaToc;
TO fJlJlOU TOU OIkAoU
TO fjijiou (puAfjq Mavaoor\
TO l^dTTTiojaa o kyo) l^aTTTi^ojaai
TO Kax' kviavxbv eviauTW
TO Kax' kviavxbv sviauTov
123
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•to ttccv Tfjq 'louSaiaq . . . y^voc;
•to nvevyLa to aXaXov . . . e^eXQe
•to Tipooi Tipooi
•to toov enxa OTaSioov dvdxoojia Tfjq QaXaoor\(;
•tov aAoova
•tov Aau£i5 Kal r\xi\iaoev amov, on auToq f\v naiSdpiov kox auToq TtuppaKriq yLsxa KaXXovc;
6(pQaX\\.Cdv.
•tov Kupiov
•tov riETpov Kal 'loodvvriv oiTiveq KaTa|3dvT£(; ktA
•tov 6Aiia|a6v ov oi AiyuTTTioi 9Ai|3ouoiv auTouq.
•tov vojiov jaou (pvXa^eoQe
•Tfjq dAoooq
•Tfjq ITTTTOU
•Tfjq UTTO TOV OUpaVOV
•Tfjq utt' oupavov
*xf\c;yf\c; r\v KaxeoK£^\)avxo auTrjv.
•Tfjc; KArjoeooq riq £KAri6riT£
•Tfjq Aoyiaq Tfjq eiq Touq dyiouq
•Tfjq TiAaTeiac;
•Tfi d Ago VI
•Tfi eXevQepia rwiaq XpioToq r\XevQep(jdoe.
•Tfi utt' oupavov
•Tfi yfi fi ov napddKr\oa(; ev avxf\
•Tfi jaaxaiprj.
•Tfi ne\inxr\ Kal eiKdSi tou auTou \\.r[v6(;.
•Tfi TiaTpio) (yAoooori)
•Tucpoq, TO
•toov UTiapXOVTOOV
•toov Se l^aaiAeioov yLspoc; eoxi Kal to MouaeTov, £xov TrepiTiaTov Kal e^sSpav Kal oikov jaeyav, £v
0) TO oiJjooiTiov TOOV jaeTEXovTOOv Tou M0UO810U (piAoAoyoov dvSpoov.
•toov 5uo 6(p9aA|a6ov.
•toov OUV16VT00V
•tw STTTaaTaSio) KaAoujaevo) xo)\iaxi.
•tw viKOOvTi Sooooo aUTOp.
•TauTrjv
•Tavi£iov
•TajJieTov
•TeAeTv
• TeooapeoKaiSsKa
•TsaoapsoKaiSeKa (Tpiripeaq)
•TsooepdKOVTa
124
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•TETpaKooiaq vedviSaq napQevovi;, aixivsi; ouk eyvoooav avSpa.
•texvTtk;
•Ti6£vai
•to ockouotov yeveoQai
•Touq KudBouq, oiq OTieiasK; £v autoiq
•toutou xdpiv aTreAiTTOv 0£ £v Kprirri, I'va rd Asmovta £Tti8iop6coari.
•ToTq rjiJioeoi toov iTTTreoov.
•ToTq Se Tidoi oacpeq ey^^'i^o
•ToTq 5uoi ori|i£ioi(; TOUTOiq.
•Totq Tidoi . . . TioAiTaK;.
•tou
•toO 8£ ^aoiXeodq enepooTrioavToc; tov 'HAioSoopov, TtoToq nq e'lri emtrioeioq
•tou Se jar) exovToq, Kal o exei dp6rio£Tai an auTou.
•tou Kaxacpavec; yeveoQai
*xo\io)xepo(; vnep naoav jadxaipav
•Tpil^oq, OUK eyvoo aunqv nexeivov
•rpeic; Kal SsKa, TpioKaiSsKa
•uiouq T£ooap£OKai5sKa
•cpdyn
•cpdysoai
•cpdysoai Kal nieoai ov
'(pvoei . . . TiecpuKOTa
'(pvoei . . . TiecpuKuTav
•(pav-, e(pr\va
•(p£i5£o9ai eni
•cpeuyoov (puy£~i to yrjpaq
'(po^eioQai ano
•(ppovijaooTepoi vnep xovq uiouq tou (pooToq
•cpuAdKiooa
•(puAd^eiq . . . iva noir\oei(;.
•(puAdoo6o9ai duo
•(puaiouo9£
•cpoovriv jjiav,
•cpooval . . . AeyovTsq
•xdAKEioq, -a, -ov,
'xdpiq Se TCp 680) TCp SiSovTi xr\v auTiqv OTiouSriv UTiep ujaoov £v Tfj KapSia Titou.
•xeo)
•XUjja
'xoopa
•xaAdoo
125
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
XaAeTTOorepov Tiapd Tiavra xa 6ripia.
XaAKioiq
Xahisioic;
Xahiovq, xocAKfj, xocAkouv,
Xapa xocipei
XeiyLappoc;
Xei\iappovc;.
xQeq iopav e^56yLr\v dcpfJKev auTov 6 nvpexot;.
XiAiouq £K (puAfjc;, xtAiouq £k (puAfjq
XpiosK; Tov'A^aiqA eiq l^aoiAea
Xpvoeoq
xpaAoo,
xprjAacprioaioav
\poo|aiaouoi
ipooviiouaiv
00
(ou, jari, larjSe, ou \\.r\
-a^eiv
-n-
-a
-aioq
-£ia
-sv
-it;
-la
-1^00
"Via
-V
-aav
-cp
-00
. 'ASeAcpoq
. 'EK£p5ava
. 'Eueri
.6
.sAsav
.) £^ 'Q|3oo6, Kai Trap£ve|3aAov ev XaAyaei
.), ecpdyooav, ecpuyooav, fjA9ooav, ruadprooav, fjpooav
1 Ttpoo69riK£ 5s xeooapeoKai^sKa sQvx]
18 e^ayaYstv tov OKvTcpa
126
A Grammar of Septuagint Greek
•18 £1 yap . . . dTTOKTEivri
•25 ouai vyXv, oi £|aTr£TrAriovi£voi vuv
•26 ETidKouaov rijaoov, 6 BdaA.
•28 oux ouTOoq eoxai kv v\u.v . . . eoxai ujicov SouAoq
•3 kav . . . £ipriveueT£
•45 ouK eoeoQe ooq oi unoKpitai,
127
TVNews
OpenLibrary