Skip to main content

Full text of "Grammar of Septuagint Greek"

See other formats

A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 


About A Grammar of Septuagint Greek by 





Print Basis: 



Date Created: 

Editorial Comments: 


CCEL Subjects: 

A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

Conybeare, Frederick Cornwallis (1856-1924) 

Grand Rapids, IVII: Christian Classics Ethereal Library 

Ginn &Co., 1905 

Jessica Hood, Multnomah College 

Public Domain 


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 


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! 

May 22, 1905. 

A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 


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 

' 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 

' 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 

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. 



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. 


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. 


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 



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. 


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. 


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. 


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 

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 


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. 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 


1 Clem. 

2 Clem. 












L. &S. 






Past. Mdt. 

Past. Sim. 

Past. Vis. 




S. Ign. 

1 Clement 

2 Clement 
(Codex) Vaticanus 

Wars of the Jews (Josephus) 



Genitive (sometimes Genesis) 







Liddell and Scott. 

Martyrdom of Polycarp 


New Testament 



Shepherd, Mandate. 

Shepherd, Similitudes. 

Shepherd, Visions. 








A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

Eur Euripides 

I.T. Iphigenia in Tauris 

Phaedr Phaedrus 

Thuc Thucydides 

Cyrop Cyropedia 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 



A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 


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. 


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; 

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 

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. 


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. 


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. 


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(;. 


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 

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. 


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 

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. 


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. 


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. 


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. - 


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 -- 








oa |3|3aTi^6iv 











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. 


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, 

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. 


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 

i. In Attic OKeMvvvyn has future aK£5co, but in the LXX it retains the o, e.g. SiaoKsSdooo Jdg. 

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. 


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. 


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. 


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, 

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. 


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. 


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, 


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 -- 


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. 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 



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. - 


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\ 


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; 


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 

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 

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. 


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. 


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. 


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. 


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 


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£. 


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. 


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 - 


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. 


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. 


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 

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. 


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. 


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. 


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. 


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 


Is. 8:14 nenoiQodc; fiq. 

Is. 10:20, 17:8 nenoiQoxec; (h\iev. 

Nb. 22:12 sonv ydp evXoyr\\ievo(;. 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 


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. 


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. 


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. 


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, 

e. In the N.T. these analytic tenses are relatively even commoner than in the LXX. 


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. 


Lk. 5:11 dvOpooTTOuq eor\ ^ooypoov. 

Acts 7:6 eoxai . . . TidpoiKov. 

1 Cor. 14:10 eoeoQe . . . XaXovvxeq. 


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. 


Hb. 2:13 eooyiai nenoiQodc, (from Is. 12:2 perfect only in form). 


Acts 10:30, 11:5 fJviTiv npooevxoyievoc;. Cp. 22:19, 20: Gal. 1:22. 


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 

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. 


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 

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. 


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. 

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 


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 

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. - 


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 

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 


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 

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 - 


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. 


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. 


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. 


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). 


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. - 


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 

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. 


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;. 


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 - 

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 


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 

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. 

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. 


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. 


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. 


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 

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, 

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 - 


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, 

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. 


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\ 

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 . . . 

b. The 1st person singular of the 1st aorist subjunctive may possibly have served as a 
stepping-stone to this use. Take for instance - 


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 


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 


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, 

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;. 


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. 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 


Index of Greek Words and Phrases 

•dvaipeai, 5evr\oeai, spx^ai, suxsoci, TSriai, KsXeai, Xe^eai, XiXaieai, \iaiveai, veyLsai, oSupsai, 

•6kA{^61, EKXi^ai, sAi^av, Ai^ouoiv. 
•£v riviiasi r\yL£pCdv 
•£v raurri kyo) kXni^o) 

'eXeoc; QeXod f] Qvoiav. 
*eXeo(;, 6. 
*eXeo(;, to 

•£Toiiaoi yap dTro9vrioK£iv koyiev f] Tratpwouc; vojaouq Ttapa|3aiv£iv. 
•riiaepav £^ rwiepaq 

*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 
•Suo Suo, 

•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. 

•^169' r\\iepa(; 
*\ieQ' riiaepac; TioAAdq 

•oi TtdvTsq ydp rd sauTCOv ^rjTouoi. 
•ou yeyovsv roiaurri £^6£<; Kal Tpirfj 
•Tidq dvrip . . . Tidoa Seyuvrj. 


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 


•dya9ooT£pa UTiep aurriv 

•dyaTrrjoei ayanaoQai KaKia KaKOTioieiv 

•dyaTrrio£i(; tov TrArjoiov oou ooq osaurov. 



•dSuvaretv ano 

•d9£T£Tv £V 


•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 





•dAaAayjacp dAaAd^eiv KaKia kckouv 

•dAAd dTieAouaaoBe, dAAd riyida9riT£, dAA' e5iKaio)Qr[X£ 

•dAAd fj, 




•dAA' f] oTi 

•dAA' f] OTi 9paou to e'Bvoq. 

A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

•dAA' fj 

•dAA' fj on 

•dAA' fj. 

•dAoicpfj £^aA£i(p£iv Kardpaiq KatapdoBai 

•djafiv Aeyoo vyXv, ei 5o6rio£Tai rfj yevsa TauTT] orivieTov 

•djavouq eviauaiouc; Sexa reooapeq d|aa)|aou<; 

•djacpieaai) = dvicpievvuvai. 






•dvdara = avdoxa-e 


•dvdoTrjBi . . . dvdora. 'Anooxa 




•dvfip eiq, 

•dvfip nepi naoav loxopiav emyieXr\(;. 


•dvrip = SKaoxoq 





*dvaQe\iaxi dvaQe\iaxioayiev 

•dvSpi dvSpi 


'dve^i^aoQx] 6 ^axpaxoq 

•dv£96|aaTioa|a6v eaurouq 


•dvrjYY^^n • • • Aeyovrec; 

•dvBpooTTOuc; eorj ^ooypoov 





'dnapavxeq Se oi uiol 'lopariA, 



A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

'aneQavev eiq ^aixvXovd. 

•dTTTiYY^i^^^ • • • Aeyouoa. 
•dTTfiYY^i^^^ • • • A.6YWV 

*anr\XQooav, SirjABooav, eior\kQooav, £^r\kQooav, napr\kQooav, nepir\kQooav, TrpooriA6oaav, 
ouvfi6ooav, kve^aXooav, Ttap£V£|3dAooav, e^eXinooav, KareAiTTOoav, aneQavooav, eior\yayooav. 
'anb dvBpooTTOu . . . eodq KTiqvouq 
•dTTO £iaTrpoo9£v r\\iG)v. 

'anb I'xvouq toov ttoSoov oou eodc; Tfjq Kopucpfjc; oou, 
*anb 6mo9£v Kupiou 
*anb viaKp69£v 
•diro npoodiQev 

*anb Tfjq TaAaiTTOoopiaq toov tttooxoov . . . dvaarriooiaai 
*anb xeooapeoKaiBsKa etcov 
•dTTO . . . Kai eodc; . . . Kal £00<; 

•diro . . . eooq 

•dTTOKTsivov lie dvaipsosi 

•dTTOora . . . ajt6oxr\Qi 
*an6oxr\Qi . . . I'va \\.r\ naxa^o) ae. 



•dTifjABov, 6 yiev eiq tov I'Siov dypov, 6 5s km xr\v k\inopia\ aurou 

•dir' £x0ec; Kal xpixr\(; rwiepaq 

'anayeoQodoav Kal dTrooTpscperoooav 


•dTr£i6ouvT£(; f\xe 

•dTieiAfi (viapyiv) aneiXr\oo)yLeQa 



*aneXevoo\iai, I'va \ir\ Tiard^sK; ^is. 



'aneneoaxodoav, 5ieneoav, sveneoav, eneneoav. 


•dTrriYY^^n ocutco AeyovTOOv. 

•dTrriYY^^n • • • AeyovTeq 

•dmoTouvToov auTOOv anb Tfjq xocpdc;. 

•dTToBavetv eiq 'lepouoaArivi. 



A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 


•dTTOKTevoo 6V Qavaxod. 




'anodXia anoXXvvai KAau9|aa) KXaieiv 

'anodXia, SouAia, Aarpia, 7tAiv6ia, ovyyevia, vyia, cpapjaaKia. 

*an;#8217; exQeq Kal rpirriv 


•doBevfj Tiapd xovq auvrpecpojaevouq v\\xv 












•dcpaviojacp dcpavi^eiv Ari9ri XaQeiv 





•dSpuvBevToq Se tou TiaiSiou, eiofiYOCYev auTo. 

•dviaprdvovra djaapriav \\.r\ irpoq Bdvarov 

•djaapTOoAoi Tiapd navxac; xovc; FaAiAaiouc; 




*ayyo(; ev ooxpaKivov. 

•dAAo fj. 




•dvBpooTToq dvBpooTToq 

•dvBpooTTOc;, wo£i xoptoq ai rijaepai aurou 


•avTiKpuq dvaKAiBfjvai aurou 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 






•apxoov el'q, 










•aAooq, aAoo 

•apjja 'lopaiqA Kal iTtTieuq auToO 
•auvd 60TIV dAAriYopoujaeva 

•'ASdja Y^yo'v^ ^^ ^K ^^ nvoov, tou YtY^^woKsiv KaAov Kal irovripov 

•'ATToBdvooviev oi TidvTeq ev xf\ dnAorriTi rj^ioov 

•"AAAa jjevToi Suvdjaei ye Suvavtai oi Suvdvievof ou ydp ttou a5vva\iia ye 
•"AvBpooTToq dvBpooTTOc; o edv yevrirai aKaQapxoc; em xpuxfi dvBpooTiou, f] ev oSco laaxpdv ujaTv f] £v 
xdiq yeveatq ujaoov, Kal Tioirioei to ndoxa Kupio). 
•edv eoTieipav 

•sdv 5£ dKouoriq . . . Aeyovroov. 
•edv Se epoorriori . . . Kal epetq ktA 

•edv 5e noXe\ir\ooyiev avxovq Kax' evQv, el \\.r\ KpaTaicooojisv vnep auTouq 
•edv Se TroA£|ariao|a£v auTouq Kar' eu9u. 
•edv 6ioTrop£uo|aai. 
•edv KpaTrjori vnep eyie lupoq 
•edv jar) \iexa x^tpoq Kparaidq 
•edv oTSajaev. 
•edv ouv Ad|3riTe . . . Kal Katd^ere ktA 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

•edv neiva . . . eav Siipa 

*eav TTOirioriTe ouTOoq TauTrjv 

•edv ovf\oQa. 

•sdv Tiq Si\j;a 

•sdv . . . vi£Tavorioouoiv. 



*e^6r\oev \ieyaXr\ (rfj (poovfj) 



'e^aoiXevoa xbv EaouA siq l^aaiAea. 

•£|3aoiA£uoav x6VA^ei\ieXex 

*e^5eXv^axe xy\v 6oyiY\v rijaoov evavtiov Oapaoo. 

'e^ovXevexo . . .el ne\inoisv xivaq f] navxec, I'oiev. 

•6Y£YP'^^''^o . . . Xeyodv. 


'kyevexo 6 dvBpooTToq eiq xpuxriv ^ooaav. 

•6Y£V£''^o S^ ^q fJKOuoev . . . Kai £9u|aa)9ri opyfi 

'kyevexo Se Tipooi Kal exapaxQx] r\ ^vxr\ aurou 

'kyevexo eiq SevSpov 

'kyevexo oma^ovoa 

'kyevexo, £yevr\Qr\ 

'kyevovxo . . . eoTripiyvievai 

•eyo) Kupioq eXaXr\oa, ei jar) ouTOoq Tioiriooo 

*kyo) Se TTOU nopevoyLai exi; 

•eyd) Kpivoo iva Tidv eBvoq . . . Siaii£Aio9rio£Tai. 

•eyy^wv vnep syLS. 

*£y£vr\Qr\ pfjiaa Kupiou . . . Xeyodv. 
•6Y£vri9ri aurfj eiq uiov. 
*kyevr\Qr\ eiq Ke(paXr\v yooviaq 
*kyevr\Qr\yL£v eucppaivojasvoi 
*kyev6yLr\v |a£|aaoTiYOOvi£vo(; 

•eyAuKavaq, £KKd9apov, 8^£Kd9apa, STiexapaq, emcpavov, £Tioi}iav£v, kor\\\.av€v, orjiadvri, ucpdvai, 
vcpavev, ucpdvriq, ^l)dXaxe 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 








•£^riT£i Trooq euKaipooq auTov TiapaSw. 

•£9voov xeooapeoKai^sKa 

•£K Trpooi6sv 

•£K Tfjc; a Ago 

•£Kd9£u5ov, £Kd9i^ov, £Ka9riiariv. 

•£Kd9ioav 5£ (payeiv apxov 


•£KdK00O£ Touq Jiaxspac; rjiioov, tou Jtoi£Tv £K9£Ta xa ^pecpx] auTOOv 




•£K|3dAA£iv £K|3oAfi TrapaS6o£i TrapaSo9fivai 



•£k8iK£IV £K 

•£K^riTriow TOU KaToiK£Tv \ie ktA 

•£k9Ai|3£IV £K9Al|3fi Tr£pim7tT£lV 7t£pi7tTCOViaTl 


•sKAeyeiv ev 

•£KA6^ao96 eauToiq avSpa. 


•£KA£i\p£i EKAeiTieiv nkr\yL\ieXia nXrwiyLsXeiv 


'SKXe^ayLEVoq an avxCdv SooSexa 

•£Kpi9ri TOU dTTOTrAetv 




A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

eKTpi|3fi eKTpi|3fivai Trpovo|afi npovo\ievQf\vai 


6KX600 and xov KvevyLax6(; jaou. 



eAdArjoav . . . Xeyovxeq 




eXdiKoq, oiTiKoq, xocpioriKoq 





eXni^eiv eni 



£ViaaTiYOo6rioav . . . Xiyovxec; 


£ia6YaAuv9ri Se r\ vi£pk ^eviayLsiv napd rdq laepiSaq TidvTOOv. 


£v dyaQ(x) dyaQodxepoq 
£v dvBpooTTOu (poovfi 
8V sviTiaiYViovfi £|aTraiKTai 
£v wpa). 

£V 0) aUTOq £Kd6riT0 £K£1. 

£v pd|35a) £A9oo npbc; ujadq 

£v auTfi Tfi wpa 

£v auTfi Tfi wpa £K£ivri 

£V auTW TW Kaipcp 

£v ydp x^i^pi^ Kparaid ktA 

£v 56o£i ydp £5ooK£v So^ia xdiq i£p£uaiv. 

£v 5uvdvi£i |3ap£ia. 

£v jjaxaipa dTToAouvrai 

£v ol'q kyo) TrapoiKOO £v rfj yfi auTOOv. 

£v oiq £1^11 £v auToTq 

£v Tidari yfi AiyuTiTou 

£V Tfi £u9£ia 

£v TCp dpxovTi Toov 5ai|aovioov £K|3dAA£i Td Saijjovia 

A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

£V T(x) aAo) 

£v TCp e^ayayeiv . . . Kai AaTpeuoere. 

sv TCp BdaA lauiav Beov'AKKapoov 

£v TCp ^rjAcooai ^fjAov vojjou 

£v TCp o'lKCp Naoapdx tov TidTpapxov auTou 

8V TW TOTTCp cI) fjAeixpdq jjoi £K£i aTrjAriv 


eviyKaxe anb tcov oipapicov co— v emdoaTS vuv 



svavTiov ToO iravToc; Y^vouq 'loparjA 

evSo^coqydp SeSo^aoTai 


eveSpeuei tou dpTidaai tttcoxov 

eveSpeueiv eni 

£V£5p£uovT£(; I'va 6avaTCoaouaiv auTr^v. 


sviauTov £^ eviauTou 

eviauTov kct' eviauTov 

eviauToq exovievoq sviauTou 

£VKd9riTai, evKpaxeic;, evKpovor\c;, evKpucpiaq, evTroir], evxcopicp. 

evvea Kai Sexa 

evTijacoq ydp Tijarioco oe 

svToAri TipcoTri sv knayyekia. 

£VTp£Tr£06ai dTTO 

£^ epycov v6\iov ov 5iKaico9rio£Tai naoa odp^ 

£^ Cibv OUK 6\pri aUTOV £K£T6£V 

£^£aTri S£ 'laadK SKOxaoiv ia£YdAriv ocpoSpa Kai £iTr£v "Tiq ouv 6 Qr\pevoa(; jjoi 9ripav;" 

£^6 Sep £^£A9ri 

£^fiA9£v 6 oneipodv tou aTr£ip£iv 

£^fiA9£v 6 oneipodv tou aTr£ipai tov OTiopov auTou 

£^aA£i\pco TO ovojja auTCOv UTroKdTCo9£v tou oupavou 






£^£Trauvdv £^£pauvrio£i nxodoei ninxeiv 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

e^epi(pr\oav, epavev, epdm^ov, epiipev. 



£^oA£9p£uoai Se avxovc; ouk e^odXeQpevoav 

e^ov5evo)oei e^ouSevouv TaAaiTioopia TaAeiTioopeTv 



enaxa^ev . . . nXr\yr\v yL£yaXr\v 

ene^Xe^a npbc; oe. 

£Tr£0Tri08v . . . I'va KaKOOooooiv 

£711 SuoTv 5ia(popaTv. 

em ^Evriq (xoopaq 

em TO Soojaa 

£711 TO 7rpoaK£(pdAaiov Ka9£uSoov 

£711 Tfi riiaio£ia Tfjq yf\c;. 

em ToTq Suolv £uvouxoi(; auToO. 

£711 TOU lS£Tv 






£7r' evQeiac, 

£7r' £u6£ia<; (65ou) 

£7ra£i5oov £7raoi5riv 


£7raoi56(;, £o6£iv, exavvaav 







£7rripooTa auTov, ETti ^Xeiiex(; 

£7rripa)Triaav auTov Xt\jovxe(;, Ei £^£aTi ToTq od|3|3aoi 9£pa7r£U£iv 

£7ri6riaouaiv Buviiavia £v opyfi oou, Sid iiavxb(; em to BuaiaoTripiov oou. 

£7ri6u|aia £7r£6u|arioa 

£7ri6u|aia £7ri6u|a£Tv Tapaxfi Tapdoo£iv 

£7ri9u|aia(; . . . dixxvec, ^vQxlpvax xovc, dv9pa)7rou(; 

£7riKaA£Ta9ai £v 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

•£TrioKOTrfi £moK£TrT6o6ai UTiepopdoei vnepiBeiv 
•eTTioTiaoai, nXavaoai, xpaoai 
'enioxeiXai . . . xov anexeoQai, 

• ETTioTri pix0tioo|aai 

•£TrAri6uv9rioav UTiep xac; rpixaq xf\c; KecpaAfjq jaou 




• £Trpovo|a£uaa|a£v 
•£Truv6dv£T0 xi £iri toOto 

'spy a 

• spy aoia Kai epyaoia 

•eppeBrj . . . Aeyoov. 




'epodxCdvxec; ei Xr\oxai eioiv. 


*eo6\ieQa v\\xv eiq SouAouq. 

'eoddxepov xf\(; KoAu|a|3ri6pa(; 

•£a9l£lV OCTTO 

•£0|a£v £uriYY£Aio|a£voi 

•£ovi£v . . . KaTrriA£uovT£(; 

•£OTi KapTro(popouvi£vov Kal av^avoyLevov 


'eoxi TrpooavaTiAripouaa 

•£0TIV p£ouoa 

•£aTiv (po|3ouia£vo<; 

'eoxepeodoav . . . vnep nexpav 

•£OTl . . . £XOVTa 

•£OTiv . . . Ka9rivi£vo(; 

•£TdxUV£V TOU TTOifjoai aUTO. 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 



•£Tpi\p£i £KTpi|3fivai npoooxQioyLaxi Trpoaox0i^£iv 



•£(p' r\c; ouK eoxai £K£T. 

•£(p' oiq 6 oiKoq OTriK£i £Tr' avxovq 

•£(p' ou £mK£KAriTai tov ovovid jjou ett' auTouq 



•£(pop£OaVl£V (pop£OOVl£V 

•£Xaprioav xocpdv |a£YdAriv ocpoSpa 



•£X0£<; Kai rpiTTiv 

•£X0£<; Kai TpiTrjv riia£pav 


• £x0£(;-Kai-TpiTriv 


•eoopoov . . . Xiyovxeq 

'tavxov = oeavxov 

•£KKai5£Ka, £^ Kai S£Ka 




'enxa enxa 

'enxaKal MKa 


'eoxavai em to xetAoq tou TroTajJou 








•£Ypa\pav £moToAriv \iiav 

•£Spa|aov eiq Tiqv OKrivriv . . . Kai raura rjv £VK£Kpuvivi£va dq xr\v OKrjvriv. 


•£9£T0 £v (pvXaKf\ 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 


•£Kpu\j;a and toov TipocpriTCOv Kupiou SKarov avSpaq 

•£A£Yov 5£ Kai TOOV Sopucpopoov Tiv£(; obq . . . iva jar) \j;auoa£v ti xov oodyiaxoq autfjc;, EauTrjv £ppi\jj£v 
Katd Tfjc; Ttupaq. 

•£|a£iv£v en auTov. 


•£v5o^o(; UTr£p Touq d5£A(pou(; autou 





*eor\ £upioK6|a£vo(;, 

*eor\ nenoiQo)(; 

*eor\ xexeXeKOdq 

*eor\ Tp£|aoov 

*£or\ . . . d5iKou|a£vo<; 

*eor\ . . . (popoov 



•£0£o9£ jjoi dq uiouq Kal BuyarEpaq 

•£0£09£ OUV U|a£l(; T£A£101 

•£0£o6£ . . . XaXovvxeq 


*eoo\iai apxouoa 

*eoo\iai sodpaKOdc; . . . aKriKoooc; 

*eoo\iai auToTq dq Qeov, Kal auTol £oovTai \ioi dq Aaov. 


*eoo\iai oxevodv Kal Tp£|aoov 

•£oovTai dTroAAuvi£voi 

•£oovTai £mKp£|advi£voi 

'eoovxai 56^av Bovxec; 

'eoovxai dq £ Trv£uiia, dq £v ooojaa 

•£oovTai 01 5uo dq odpKa jjiav 

•£oovTai Tr£Troi66T£(; 

'eoovxai . . . npooayovxeq 



A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

•£OTai £K£T ixQuq TToAuq ocpoSpa 
•£OTai vyLiv 5iaT£Tripriia£vov 
'eoxai jjoi dq Kfjirov Aaxavoov 
'eoxai xa OKoAid dq evQeiaq 
•£OTai . . . TldpOlKOV 
•£OTai . . . Tr£(puAaYVi£va 
'eoxai . . . Trpo£YYt^wv 
•£OTiv yap evXoyr\\ievo(; 
•£OTiv \iior\x6c; anb TroAAfjc; AaAiaq. 





•EOTOoaav etc; ornaeta 

•eoTOoaav TrpooKuvouvrec; 




•ecprjoev aKrjKoevai QeonoyLJiov 


'expioe OS 6 Geoq . . . napa Touq vi£t6xou<; aou. 

•e-So-oav, e-xi-Qe-oav, e-Xe-XvK-e-oav 

•£-Auo-a-v, £-Aa|3-o-v, £Advi|3av-o-v, 

•eva ayv^Aov. 



•eooq OTOU 

•eooc; Tfjc; oriiaspov (rijaepac;) 
•'Eyoo sijii Kupioq . . . ooTiq e^fiYOCYOV oe 

•'EAed^apoq) ecpQx] Aal^eTv xr\v dvaypacpriv, dAA' avxa jjova xa xov v6\iov nape^ooav oi ne\i(pQevxe(; 
enl xr\v e^r\yr\oiv eic; xr\v 'AAe^dvSpeiav. 
•'Evcbx yiexexsQx] xov \ir\ iSetv Bdvarov. 
''Enpeo^evoe 5e Kal irpoq nToAejaatov 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

*"Ene\i^\)e yLsApidioc; Kai'Apxao^oc;. 

•"EoTiv £6vo(; 'louSaioov XeyoyLsvov, oi noXiv oxupdv Kai yL£yaXr\v exovxeq 'lepoooAujaa, TauTrjv 

UTiepeTSov utto IlToAeiaaia) Y^vojaevriv, onXa Xa^elv ov QeXr\oavxe(;, dAAd 5id xr\v aKaipov 

5£oiSai|aoviav xocAettov vne\ieivav exeiv 5eon6xr\v. 
*r\yanr\oa(; Tiavra xa prjiaara KaTaTrovTiojaou, yXCdooav 5oAiav. 


*r\Xaxx(j)oac; avxbv ^paxv xi nap' ayyeXovc; 

*r\XniK6xe(; eo\iev 



*r\v eody \ievov(; 











•rjcpavioBrj aTio ^evia\ieiv yuvri. 

•ri dYaTiri fiv riydTrriKdq jae 

•ri dKori fiv kyCo dKouoo 

•rj dorpaTiri aoxpanxovoa ek Tfjq utto tov oupavov eiq xr\v vn oupavov Xa\inei 

*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. 


•ruiapTrjKObc; £oo|aai 


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 




•fJvieBa dTieiBouvTeq 


•fjviriv KaxavevvyyLevoc; 

•fjviriv nevQCdv 

•fjviriv TreTTTOOKOOc; 

•fjviriv Tipooeuxovievoc; 





•fjp£TO ydp Sri, ^'t f^ syLov sir] aocpoorepoq. 

•fjp^aTO Tou oiKoSovieTv. 


•fj 60TIV dyaBri ooi unep STird uiouq 





•fjijiou dpXOVTOOV 

•fjiaiouq, -u 

•fJTic; ToiauTTi ou yiyovev 

•fJTi(; ToiauTTi ou YEYO"^^ ^^'^ Toiaurri oukcti npoox£Qr\0£xai 


•ri jariv 


•rjABev . . . £v ypa(pf\ . . . Xiyodv 



A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

•rjABov Tou anayyeiXai ooi 

*f\yL£v Tr£Troi96T£(; 
*f\yL£v . . . 8iaTpi|3ovT£(; 


•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 oivoxooov 

•riTrjooo . . . Xiyovxeq. 





•riq £ix£ TO BuyaTpiov auTfjq Ttv£uvia aK&Qapxov. 
•'H (poovri (poovri 'IaKa)|3, at 5£ X£tp£<i X^i^P^'i 'Haau. 




•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 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

laxuov eoxi 

loxvpoxepa napa ndvxa. 


lAapooTepav irapd to Ttporepov 












To9i euvooov 

Ta6i nenoiQddq 

loxe ytvoooKOVTec; 

(/■ </ tf 

irjv, leiq, i£i 


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 


"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. 


OKTO) Kal SsKa 





A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 



o^urepoi vnep AuKouq 





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 


£^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 




A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 



•696V edv 

•69£v e^r\yaye(; rwiaq £K£T96v 


•oTTOu eav 

•oTTOu exei £K£T tottov 

• OTTOU ri yuvri Kd9riTai en avxCdv (= £K£T). 

• OTTOU xpecpexai £K£T, 


•oTTOoq \\.r\ kydd... a\ia eavxov xe kox ujaaq e^anaxr\oa(; 

•oTTOoq \\.r\ KauxnoriTai TTaoa odp^ 


•oaa eav 

*6oa eav ooi S£i^oo 

•oooi [£dv] £v ratq evxoXdii; \iov xavxaiq TTop£u9a)oiv 


•ooTiq opaoiv 9£ou £i8£v, ev uttvco, dTTOK£KaAuvi|i£voi oi 6(p9aAvioi aurou 


•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 


•6t£ fjviriv £v Tfi x^pa yLov . . . veodxepvo yLov ovToq 




•on £VToAri tou ^aoiXeodq Xeybiv. 

•on £1 \vf\ 


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 




*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, 





•uTiepdvooBev tou oxepeodyLaxoq. 

'vnepexovxeq auTouq eiaiv 


•uTr£pri(pav£ueo6ai diro 


•uTToSeSuKuTai f\oav . . . vno5e5vKeioav. 


•uTTOxoopoov yivov, 


•uxprjAoq vnep Tidoav Tiqv y^v 

•u\poo6rio£Tai f] Fwy (^aaiAeia. 

•uxpoovia . . . yaupiajaa . . . Kavxr\\ici 


•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 


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. 




p£pi(p6ai [pepT(p6ai] 

po\i(paiav o^eiav vnep ^upov Koupeooq. 

Ai naoai 
AuToq £(pri 

El dva|3a) £m Touq aXXocpvXovc;; 
El dva|36o eiq jjiav toov noXeodv 'louSa 
El Trpoo6a)|a£v exi e^eXQeiv 


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. 


Qee jjou 6££ jjou ivari yie kYKaxeXineq; 
Kup£ 6 @e6(;, 6 TravTOKpdroop 


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 



•AriSaq, 'AvSpojiESaq, KoyLnkiyac; 





•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. 



•riou Ttpo£uri, Kal Tt69£v £pxn; 



•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\ 

•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. 






•aiveoo, KaAeoo, xeXeod 





A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 


ai yuvaiKec;, vnoxaooeoQe 

at nexpai 5i£9pu|3rioav an amov 


aip£Tl^£lV £V 




auToq dvriv£YK£v £v tw aoojaaTi aurou 

avxbq \iev (pevyodv SKcpevyei 




avxf\c; em^e^r\Kvir\c; em xr\v ovov 

auTfi Tfi wpa 

avxx] 6Y£vri9ri \ioi 

avxx] \ie napsKaXeoev 


^aoiXevoov avxoic; ^aoiXea 


^5eXvy\iaxi ^BeXvooeiv AOoiq Ai9o|3oA£iv 



^BeXvooeoQai ano 

^e^apr\xai r\ KapSia Oapad) tou jar) e^anooxeiXai xbv Xaov. 

^e^anxio\isvoi UTiripxov 


^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£V£o6£ dq avSpaq. 




A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

•yripwc;, ynpa, 
•ytvou YPnYop^"^ 

•ynv £(p' fiv ouK 6KomdoaT£ ett' auTfjq 



•yaioov, yaiaiq 

•y£vo|a£voov Se rijaoov eiq 'lepoo6Xv\ia ao\iev(j)(; aneM^avxo r\\ia(; oi dSeAcpoi. 
•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 


•SsKa Suo 








A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 


•SiKrj £k5ik£Tv opKO) opKi^eiv 


•5i-5o-oai, Xe-Xv-oai 

•Sojja SeSovievov 





•Suo Suo 


•Sooaoo auTov evoomov aou Sotov 








•Saprjoerai TtoAAdq . . . oAiyac; (nkriyac,). 

•Set riviccc; epeoBai eaurouq 





•Seojacp Seiv Aurpoiq Aurpouv 



•Sidcpopov nepiooCdc; napa navxa xa 6ripia. 




•SiaKooioi dvSpeq omveq SKaQioav nepav xov x£t|adppou 

•SiaAt3o£i SiaAu£iv yLveia yLvr\oQf\vai 

•SiajjapTupia SiajaapTupeTv oiooviovio) oioovi^£a6ai 


•Sia(p6£ipeiv (p9opd opyi^eoQai opyfi 






A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 


5i£|3ori9ri rj (poovr) . . . Xiyovxei; 


Sieooo^ovTO, I'va \ir\. . . Ysvcovrai 

5i£Tripri9ri(; I'va evSei^oojaai. 






Souvai Sojja 

5oKi\io)xepa vnep xpuoiov oata auToO 


SuvaTOOTspoi eioiv vnep amov. 





£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 TtoA£|aa)aiv 

£1 TUXOl 

£1 - d £TrioTp£(p£T£ |a£ vyLeic; napaxa^aoQai ev uioTc; 'Ajiiaobv Kai TiapaSco Kupioq amove; evodniov 


d . . . do6£vriori 




A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 



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 


eiol YeYO'vo''^^<i 

£iaiv . . . eoxCdxec; kox SiSdoKOVTsq 

eioaKovoQeic; anb xf\c; evXa^eiac; 



ei TTOoq Karavrriooo eic; xr\v e^avdoxaoiv 

ei TTOoq Trapa^rjAooooo. 

£1 xi TTOU aXooq . . . dveiyievov f\. 

ei xk; TipoaBfi 








einooav, SKpivooav, eXa^ooav, kniooav, evpooav, ecpepooav 

eioeXQe . . . iva T8KVOTroirio8i(; 

eixexo xov nAooq 




eiSav . . . ecpvyav . . . eiof\XQav . . . dveoxpe^av 



eivai £i<; r\yov\ievov 

eivai . . . AeiToupyouoav 



A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 


einav avr\p 'louSa. 


einev dcpeivai, dcpiouaiv. 

einev ... on TauTrjv xr\v dopav kxX. 

einsv . . . lajaxpoov ... on ei \ir\v 8K5iKriooo £v ujaiv. 


ein-a, fjvevK-a, exe-a 



eiq dsToq 

eiq anb dSeAcpoov yiov 

ei(; dYYe^o<i 

etc; ypayL\iaxevq, 

eic; etc; 


£uSoK6Tv £V 

evQr\(;, evQec;, 

evQvq, £u6£Ta, evQv, 




evXoyr\Qr\oexai 'lopaiqA Xiyovxeq 









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. 




A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

'QeXeiv ev 

'QeyLa, £K6£via, £m6£|aa, napaQeyLa, np6oQe\ia, ovvQe\ia. 


•6aaoov TipoiovTOOv . . . Spojjoq £Y£V£to ToTq OTpaTicoTai<;. 

•Bavdro) d7toKT£vco. 

•Bavdro) 6A£9p£u9ria£Tai 

•Bavdro) T£A£UTdv 

'Qapoeixe, Xaoc; \iov. 


•6£Aria£i 9£A£iv (p£pvfi cpepvi^eiv 


•9£Oopa)v fjviriv. 

•9£00p£Tv £V 



•iHoxi3£i uTr£p rividc;. 




'KaXvyLyLa em xr\v KapSiav auTOOv K£TTai. 



•Kupioq ^aoiXevodv xbv aioova. 


•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 


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 


•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 


•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 


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 


























•Ka9ri|a£vov em to tsAcoviov 



•Ka96 eav 

•Ka9d)(; eav 

•Ka6aip£0£i Ka9aip£iv (p9opd (pQapf\vai 


•Ka9apia|aa) Ka9api^£iv xo£ip£iv xapa 



•Ka9rivi£vou auTou dq to opoq toov £Aaioov 


•Ka9ioTd |a£9ioTd 





A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 





•Kara xi enxaiosv rjvifi'i Kupioq or\\iepov; 






'Kaxecpayev Kaxa^podoei 



*Kax' eyLavxov ojavuoo, si \\.r\ k^eXevoexai £k tou oxoyLaxoc; \iov SiKaioouvr] 

*Kax' kviavxbv eviavxov 




•Karacppovsiv kni 



'Kaxepya^exai r\\viv, \ir\ okottouvtoov rjiaoov 


•Kauxaeoai = Kauxdoai 


•KEinqfi aocpoq. 




•K£xapio|a£vo(; eor\ 











A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 


•Kpeiaooov . . . vnep xovq naxepat;. 



•kukA666v tou 9p6vou. 

•Kuvojjuiav . . . Kuvojjuiriq 

•Kuvojjuiric;, laaxaipr], £m|36|3riKuiri(; 


•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 


•Auou. Kd9riao 

•Auoaq Se etc; tov lidpoiTTTiov aurou 

•Auxvoq, TO 

'XayL^aveiv yi 

•Aarpeueiv auTW 


•AeiToupystv rdq AeiToupytac; rfjc; OKrivfjc; tou jaapTupiou 

'Xoyi^eoQai eic; 


•A, p, VI, V 


'yLsyav iSetv. 

•laeyaq Kupioc; itapd ndvTaq tou(; 6£ou(; 


•jjexpt ujicov 

•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 


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 


•jjia r\yL£pa £yevr\Qr\ npbc; 5uo. 

•jjia TiaiSioKri, 

•jjiav riTriadjariv . . . Taunqv eK^rirriooo 


•|a6Ai|3o(;, x^Akeioc;, xetMocppoq, TroAejaioTriq 




•jjei^ova Tiapd Tiqv Trpoorriv 




•Vi£9ioT00v KaQioxCdv 


•|a£|a£aTOO|i£voi eioi. 

•|a£pi5a |a£ia£pioia£vriv 


•Vi£Td 5uvdvi£00(; TroAAfjq. 



'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£, 


•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 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

|avrio6riTi jjou . . . Kai noir\oei(; 
yLvr\ox£vQeior\(; xf\c; \ir\x(j)6(; . . . evpeQx]. 
jjuKTripi^eiv 8V 


V kcpekKvaxiKov 

vr\ xr\v vyiav Oapaoo, ei yLr\v KaxaoKonoi koxe. 



VlKOq, TO 

vai, 6 Ttarrip. 




voriTOoq voei, 27'23 yvoooTOOc; emyvooari 


o§v aveneyL^\)a ooi auTov 


oiKxeipyLOdv oiKTeiprioei. 


01 riiaio£i(; (puAfjq Mavaoor\. 


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 


oiov £Trl |a£v toov dAAoov ouk dv £xoi tic; to toiouto TtposvsyKstv 

oiq eiTrev auToiq. 



ou ydp dAAa ypdcpojaev ujaTv, dXA' r] d dvayivoooKSTe. 

ou yeyovev ToiauTiq dxpiq. 

ou 5iKaioo6rio£Tai evoomov oou Tidq ^oov 


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 


•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 £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. 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

•ou SieoTieipac; auTouq £K£i. 

•ou TO onepyLa aurou £v auTW. 




'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 



'niexai avr\p xr\v a\ineXov aurou, Kal dvrip xr\v ouKfjv aurou (payexai 



•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 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. 



•TiavToq ou edv diprirai aurou 6 dKdBaproq. 

•Tiapd Kupiou kyevexo avxr\ 

•Tiapd 6£o5£KTOu . . . yLsxeXa^ov eyoo 



•TiapeSooKev auTouq Kupioq £v x^i^pi^ ^vXioxiei\i 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

'napayyeiXac; xdiq Trdoaiq Suvdjaeoiv 

'napayyeXia TraprjYY^^^'^Vi^ 






'naxdooeiv ev 

•TieSidq x£ Kai 6peivr\ 


•7t£ivdo£T£, neivaoovoi, eneivaoev, eneivaoav, Tieivdooo 




'neiva 5i\pa 






•Tr£Troi66T£(; (h\iev 

'nenoiQodc; kyevov 

'nenoiQodc; £oo\iai 

*nenoiQo)(; eoxai 

'nenoiQodc; fiq. 



'nepi ToTv noXeoiv toutoiv. 




'nepinaxCdv km. xr\\ QaXaooav 

•TiepiTraToOvTa km xf\c; QaXaoor\i;). 


'nXeiova . . . napa. 

'nXeovaoxov oe Tioirioei 

*nXr\Qvvei vnep dxpiSa 

*nXr\\iyLeXiv, npocpaoi^eoQai npo(paoei(;. 



A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 



•TrAouToq, TO 

*nXovxr\oei nXovxov yLsyav 

'nvevyia ayiov rjv en' auTov 

•Trv£U|aa ^oofjq £k tou 9£ou eiar\kQev kv auToic;. 


•ttou = TToT 



•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 


'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. 




•TrpoeKOTTTOv . . . vnep noXXovq. 



• Trpo8(priT£uoa|a£v 






A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

'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 


•au 5£ 5£5id)(; av... xr\v eamov OKidv. 

•ou 5£ Triprjoov tov voviov . . . I'va ooi KaAooq rjv. 

•auYKpioiq, ovy^evia. 




• 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 |3|3aTi^£iv 









•oKuBpooTid Tiapd Td TiaiSdpia Td ouvrjAiKa ujaoov 

•oo(pooT£pou(; 5£KaTiAaoioo(; UTr£p Touq oocpioTdq. 




*onepei(;, xeyLei(;, pavei. 

•OT£V00V Kai Xp£\l(jdV £or\ 


A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 









•ouKfjv jaiav, 




*ovvr\vxr\oav Se . . . spxoyLevoic; . . . eKnop£vo\iev(jdv avxCdv. 











•ouvievai £i<; 

















A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 


ocpoSpa ocpoSpa 

ocpoSpa ocpoSpooq 

xa eXex] 

xa fjijiau 


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) 


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 fjijiou Tou al'viaToc; 


TO fjijiou (puAfjq Mavaoor\ 
TO l^dTTTiojaa o kyo) l^aTTTi^ojaai 
TO Kax' kviavxbv eviauTW 
TO Kax' kviavxbv sviauTov 


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; 
•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 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. 





• TeooapeoKaiSsKa 

•TsaoapsoKaiSeKa (Tpiripeaq) 



A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

•TETpaKooiaq vedviSaq napQevovi;, aixivsi; ouk eyvoooav avSpa. 



•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;. 


•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 



•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 


•(puAd^eiq . . . iva noir\oei(;. 

•(puAdoo6o9ai duo 


•cpoovriv jjiav, 

•cpooval . . . AeyovTsq 

•xdAKEioq, -a, -ov, 

'xdpiq Se TCp 680) TCp SiSovTi xr\v auTiqv OTiouSriv UTiep ujaoov £v Tfj KapSia Titou. 






A Grammar of Septuagint Greek 

XaAeTTOorepov Tiapd Tiavra xa 6ripia. 



Xahiovq, xocAKfj, xocAkouv, 

Xapa xocipei 



xQeq iopav e^56yLr\v dcpfJKev auTov 6 nvpexot;. 

XiAiouq £K (puAfjc;, xtAiouq £k (puAfjq 

XpiosK; Tov'A^aiqA eiq l^aoiAea 







(ou, jari, larjSe, ou \\.r\ 











. 'ASeAcpoq 

. 'EK£p5ava 

. 'Eueri 



.) £^ 'Q|3oo6, Kai Trap£ve|3aAov ev XaAyaei 

.), ecpdyooav, ecpuyooav, fjA9ooav, ruadprooav, fjpooav 

1 Ttpoo69riK£ 5s xeooapeoKai^sKa sQvx] 

18 e^ayaYstv tov OKvTcpa 


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,