Sepharad (Hastings' Dictionary)

Ob*" speaks of Jews ' who were in captivity in the land of Sepharad. Sepharad or [see Driver, LOT' 320] Siphan'd is the Saparda of the Assyr. inscriptions, who, in concert with the Kiramerians, Medes, and Minni, attacked Assyria in the reign of Esarhaddon. Their allies would seem to indicate that they came from tlie north-east of Assyria ; but in thi!

inscriptions of Darius H^staspis at Behistun and Naksh-i-Kustem the province of Sparda is named between Ewpt and Ionia in one instance, and between Cappadocia and Ionia in another. A Bab. inscription (Km. 710. 31, 36) states that in 'the 37th year of Antiochus and Soleucu.s, the 9th day of Adar, the governor of Chaldtea and an ofHcer of the king, who had gone to the country of Sapardu in the previous year to meet the king, returned to the city of Seleucia.'

We may gather from this that the district was in the northern part of Asia Minor, though, in the annals of Sargon, Saparda is placed to the ea.st of As.syria. The Targum of Jonathan identified Sepharad with Spain, probably in con- sequence of the similarity of the name to that of Hesperis ; hence the Spanish Jews are at i)rosent known as Sephardira, as distinguished from the Ashkenuzim or German Jews. See, further, art. Obadiah, vol. iii. p. 579". A. H. Savce. 8EPHARVAIM (D^rjs?

; LXX A has in all the passages in Kings Zeip(papoviiii, B has in 2 K 17" 2fT0aDowfiAt, in V." [where MT is dub.] ^eir<papo6v, in 18** ~tiripapovnd.iv, in 19" Xt<p(papovdti' ; in the Isaiah passages B has 'Eiripapovdiii, A Ziir((>apeln). — The ' two Sijipars,' a city of Babylonia, called in the cuneiform inscriptions ' .Sipi)ar of the Sun- god ' and 'Sippar of Anunit.' Sippar of the Sun- god was discovered by Hormuzd Ka.ssara in 1881 at Abu-llabba on the Euplirates, 10 miles S.E. of Baghdad.

A large quantity of valuable monu- ments and tablets have been found in the ruins of the temple of the Sun-god, which was termed Bit-Uri by the Semites, E-Babnra by the Sumor- ians. The Sumerian name of Sippar was Zimbir. Among the colonists transplanted to Samaria were men ot Sepharvaim (2 K 17'-""), and the capture of Sepharvaim by the Assyrians is referred to in 2 K 18" 19", Is 36'» 37'».

According to lierosus, Xisuthros, the Chaldoian Noah, buried the records of the antediluvian world at Sippara, as it was called by the Greeks. Abydenus {Fr. 9) states that Nebuchadnezzar excavated a great reservoir there ; and Pliny {HN vi. 30) afhrras that Sippar (which he calls 'ojipidum Hipparenorum') was the seat of a university. In the reign of Nabonidos the camp of the Bab.

army was just outside its walls, under the command of ' the king's son,' and the fall of Sippar followed immediately upon the de- cisive battle at Opis, which laid Babj-fonia at the feet of Cyrus.* A. H. SaICE. SEPTUAGINT t. Importance. ii. Name. liL Origin and History of the legend. Iv. Printed liditions. v. History of the Septuagint. vi. Maiiuscripls, Versions, Quotations. viL Use of the Septuagint. viii. Literature. f Abbreviations in this article : — (B=Gr. Text of OT ; /D=Heb.

Text of OT ; L.aff. = La^arde ; SSt. = hag. St-ptuafjintaStudieni Set, = Nestle, Septuarjintastudien ; Svv. = H, 13. Swete, An Jntrod. to the OT in (rreek (Cambridge. 19U«); Urt. = Unext ujid UbergetzuTigen der Bibel (Leipzig, 1897, being a reprint of the art * Bibeltext und Bibelubersetzungen ' in Herzog's liE^)]. i. Importance. — The Greek version of the OT, called Septuagint, is in most respects by far the most important version of the Bible treated in this Dictionary.

To the Fathers of the Greek Church it appeared of such weight that they praised the Septuagint with one accord as a token of the special providence of God, as a link in the Divine dispensation for the salvation of mankind, seeing in it the work of direct inspiration, and placing it in a line with the writings of tlie prophets and the pleaching of the apostles (cf., for instance, Irenitus [ill. xxi.

4], ' unus enim et idem spiritus Dei, qui in Prophctis quidem pra^conavit, quis et qualis esset advent us Domini, in Senioribiis autem [i.e. the Seventy Elders, to whom this version was ascribed] interpretatus est bene, quie prophetata fuerant, ipse et in Apontolis prsedicavit.

The various claims which call for careful atten- tion to the LXX are, perhaps, best summed up in the second edition of it published in England (Cambridge, 16G5, 12'), by John Pearson, after- wards bishop of Chester : t ' The LXX is useful and even necessary (titilis atque nec«?

sar»a): (1) ad Hebraicam veritatem probe perspiciendam ; (2) ad auctoritatem testimoniorum Apostolicorum con- firmandain ; (3) ad nativum Novi Foideris stylum recte intelligendum ; (4) ad Gra»cos Latinosque patres rite tractandos ; (5) ad scientiam denique lingnse Griecie ipsamque criticen adornandnm : quis cam doctis omnibus, pra'sertim theologis non videt esse commendatissimam ? ' t • (The identification of Sepharvaim with Sippar, which has the weighty support of Schrader (KA 'Vi 279 [COT i.

'271 f.l), bos been challenged by Haliivy {ZA li. 401 ff.), who would identify it with Stinbarain, a place subdued by Shaluianeser iv. (B.c. 727- 722). llaltjvy suggests that the same place is meant by the SniBRAlu of Ezk 47't. See, further, the Conim. of Bertholet or Kittel on KingH, and of Dillm.-Kittel on Isaiah, ad toco, — Kd.] t The preface of his edition has been frequently repeated — l(W:i, 1094. 1707, 1730, 1831, 1843; at last scnarately, Cambr. 1166, cum notulis Ed. Cburton (by Prof.

W. Selwyn). I Comp. in 8w. chs. 2-5 of part iii. on the Literary use and Value of the hXX, p. 433: ^No question can arise as to the greatness of the place occupied i)y the Alexandrian version in the religious life of the first six centuries of its history. The LX.\ was the Bible of the Hellenistic Jew, not only in Egypt and Palestine, but throuj^hout Western Asia and Kurope.

It created a language of religion which lent itself readily to the service of Christianity, and became one of the most important allies of the gospel. It provided the Orcrk-spealtlng Church with an authorized translation of the OT. and, when OhristiAn missions a<lvaiiced beyond the limits of liclleni'jm, it served ai a basis for fresh translations into the vernacular. 'The LXX has long ceased to fulfil these or any similar functions.

On the other hand, this most ancient of Biblical versions possesses a new and increasing imporumce in the field of Biblical study. It is seen to be valuable alike to the textual 438 SEPTUAGINT SEPTUAGINT ii. Name.

— The name 'Septuagint' is shortened from secundum or iuxta Septuaginta {interpntes or seniorex), and is based on tlie legend that the translation of the OT from Hebrew into Greek was made by seventj', or more exactly seventy-two, elders or scholars, whom king Ptolemy Philadel- pliiis, by the advice of his librarian Demetrius Phalereus, sent for for this purpose, from the high priest Eleazar of Jerusalem.

Martc Twe ifiiitfi7ix49Tm stands in the subscription to Genesis in Codex B ; irapat i^tf(jLt»;«yT« stands at the end of Proverbs in C ; ii TMt il3iofcKiuiiTet txeteti in the note of (^ before Isaiah ; >-, tu» e tor op') ipfjtyittJtA (or ixio^t!), and shorler oS «' (or «^), became a common expression, especially subsequent to the labours of Origen in textual criticism (ad A/ricanurn, § 5, t^v iptxytn'^a TMy i$iiu.r.3uiiTx ; in ill. XV. 14, rracpii roif c) ; see Hexapla, ed. Field, i. p.

xlviii B. ; and the ' testimouia ' at the end of Wend- land's edition of Ari^teas. Augustine [de Civit. Dei, xviii. 42 = Eugippius, p. 1018, Knoell) writes: 'post Ule (Philadelphus) etiam interpretes postulavit : et dati sunt septua- ginta duo, de singulis duodecim tribubus seni homines, linguje utriusqutj doctissimi, Hebrsese scilicet atque Grajcje, quorum interpretatio ut Septuaginta vorctur, iam obtinuit consuetudo.'

Where and when the word 'Septuagint' first makes its appearance in English we cannot tell.* On title-pages of editions it occurs subsequent to the editio Sixtina of 1587: n iraXaia SiaOriKT] Kara. Tovs ((i5oiJ.-r}KovTa, Vetus Testamentum iuxta Sep- tiKigiiita (in the reprint of Paris, 1G28 : secundum LA'X). Tlie London reprint of 1653 adds Inter- prelum, writing ex verHune Septiutginta Interpre- tum ; and this has been retained in all following reprints.

An edition of Bagster (1821) is entitled, sfcundum Septua- ginta Seniorum iiUertrrctationein ( = lren;eu9, lii. xxi. 2, i^httu.^- flT« vptff^i,Ttpot, in L.atin septuaginta setiiores).

i The English form 'Septuagint' occurs in the title of an edition of Bagater, as well as in that of the Cambridge edition of Swete (The OT in Greek according to the Septrutgint), and the great Oxford Concordance of iiat<:h-Redpath (A tjoncordance to the Sep- tuagint and the other Greet: Versions), The Dictionnaire tie VAcadimie Fran^aise^f gives only the plural, Les Septante, la vertian del Septante, la traduction da SeplaiUe-t In English as in German it became common to use the word as singular, supplying ' version,' critic and to the expositor, and it« serviceB are welcomed by students both of the Old Test, and of the New."

From this point of view, Prof. Ferd. Hitzig of Heidelberg, one of the acutest commentators on the OT, used to open his academical courses on OT exegesis with the question to his students: 'Gentlemen, have you a Septuagint? If not, sell whatever you have, and buy a Septviagint.' Even the student of early English cannot succeed without a knowledge of it.

When he reads in king Aelfred the word to the serpent (Gn 31-), 'on dinre wauibe 07id on dinum brei'ntuiii du Bcealt snican, he ought to know that the words in italio go back through the medium of the Old Latin Bible to the LXK, and that it is therefore out of place to print beside them the Latin Vulgate of Jerome, wliich rest* on the Hebrew, as has been done by A. S. Cook, Biblical Quotations in Old Ewjlish Prose Writers (Lond. 1898 ; cf.

the notice of Max Foerster in Knglinc-he Studign, xxviii. p. 421). The English Church retained BubsLantially the LXX in the Prayer-Book version of the Psalms and in her Liturgy. — No words of praise are spared by E. W.

Orinflel<J(^po;o<7)/): he calls the LXX the viaduct between the OT and NT, the vestibule of the Christian Church, the first interpreter of the OT and the sole canonical of the NT, the bond of union between Jews and Gentiles, the morning star before the sun of righteousness, the ke.v of the 8.acred trcasur>', the light of the Alexandrian Pharos, the sacred amalgam ; he who studirs the L.\.\ is declared to be in no danger of falling into neologj* (p. 173).

Grinfield also riyhtly refers to the intro- duction of ita study by .Vlaltby at Durham, .\rnold at Rugby ; to its recommendation by great philologists like Valckenaer, Ueinsius (Vot exeinplaria graca, etc). • On book titles cf. W. Wall, The Ute of the Septuagint Translation, 1730 ; Charles Hayes, A Vindication of the History of the Septuagint, 1736 ; Letters to a Friend conceniijuj the Septuagint, 1769; H. Owen, An Enquiry into the Present State of the Septuagint Version of the OT, 17(J9.

OrmQe\d (Apologt/, p. 157) usee the adjective ' Septuagintal MSS,' and calls Bp. Pearson (p. 177) ' the best Septuagintalist.' t The adjective 'sept\iagintaviralis' we have found In titles of dissertations aince lti.11, 1706, etc. : In Italian, ' L& Vcrsione de' Settaota, ' t Sett&Dtft. ' Ubersetzung,' though of course the plural is also used, especially when Septuaginta is translated into the vernacular, 'the Seventy,' 'die Siebenzig.'

Many scholars now prefer ' tlie Alexandrian ' or ' the Greek version of the OT,' or ' the OT in Greek.' We retain here the familiar name 'Sep- tuagint,' for which 'LXX' has been hitherto the usual abbreviation, but for which the modem sign ffi t is still more convenient. A frequent designation among the old Greek WTiters was also i) Koifii iKOocnt, or merely ij xoin), ' the common, the Vulgate edition,' in contradis- tinction to the Hebrew text and the later Greek versions ; cf.

, for instance, Basil, i. 447 D, on Is 2, fV rots dvTtyp(i(pots rijs koiptjs iKbbaeoi^ oxi KilroA raura, dXV iy t<^ 'E^patKy Kci^j-evov 4k twv Aoiirdw lj.(T(KoixLir6rt. In the writings of Jerome i] Koirq has a more definite signification assigned to it, on wliich see p. 445''. Other designations are : ^ iKKXriaiaoTiK^ ^/cSoffis (Gregory of TAys&a.,,in Psalm. 8) ; Td dirriypa<pa ttjs iKKXricrias (Origen) ; rd Tifurepa dirrlypaipa (Eusebius, in Psalm, ed. Mai, 591). iii.

Origin and History of the legend.— The story that there were seventy (or ratlier seventy-two) translators was first told by Aristeas, who claims to have been one of the ambassadors sent by Philadelphus to the high priest Eleazar of Jerusalem, to ask from him the copy of the Law and the men to translate it. This interesting piece of literature was pub- lislied first in Latin in the famous Roman Bible of Suueynheym and Pannartz (1471, fol.)

, reprinted at Nurnberg, 1475 ; separately at Erfurt, 14S3. The editio princeps oi the Greek text was prepared by Simon Schard, printed at Basle 1561 ; subse- quent editions, 1610, 1691, 1692, 1705 (Hody), 1849 (Oikonomos), 1869 (Moritz Sclimidt in Merx, Archiv, i.) ; all superseded by that of Mendelssohn- Wendland (Aruitem ad PhUocratem epistvla . Lipsiie, Teubner, 1900), and that of H. St. J. Th.ackeray in the Appendix to Swete's Introduction to the OT in Greek (Cambridge, 1900). L.

Men- delssohn had begun to add a commentary, only a part of which appeared after his death, edited by M. Kraschennikow, Jurievi (ol. Dorpati), 1897. A German translation (by P. Wendland) opens the second volume of Die Apokryphen und Pseudepi- qraphen des Alten Testaments icbersetzt. , . u. "herausgegeben von E. Kautzsch (Tiibingen, 1900, u. 1-31).

Fresh investigations are necessary ; for though it is now generally acknowledged that the letter is a literary fiction, — Constantine Oikonomos (irept Tuv o' fpfj.rjveuTOji' ttjs jraXotas diadTjKTjs, ^t^Xia 5', Athens, 1844-1849, 4 vols.; cf. also E. \V. Grinlicld, An Apology for the Septuagint, in which its claims to Biblical and Canonical AutJiority are briefly stated and vindicated, London, 1850) is the last defender of its genuineness, — scholars disagree entirely about its date and value.

E. Schiirer places it not later than c. 200 B.C. ; Herriot (on Philo), c. 170-150; Wendland, between 96 and 93, nearer to 96; L. Cohn (Neue Jahrbiicher fur d'ts klass. Altert. i. (1898) 52111".) doubts whether it was used by Philo ; H. Willrich {Judaica, Gottin- gen, 1900, pp. 111-130) brings its composition down to ' later than A.D. 33.' Strange, above all, are the varieties of form • At one time It was common in German to speak of the ' 70 Dollmetscher * ; cf. J. D.

Michaelis, Programina wuriune er row seinen CoUcgiii iiber die 70 Dollmetscher Sachri^it gi<bt (Gott 1787); the translation of Owen's Enquiry (Untersuchui^ del grgeiiwdrtigen Beschat^enheit der 70 Dollmetscher, 1772). Less- iiig seems to have formed the noun 'Siebziger' (see Grimm, Deutsclies WSrterbuch, x. 834) ; in Old German we read in Isidore, 7. 4, in dhero siibunzo trattunffum = ' in translatione LXX.' t It is strange that Lie. Kabisch (Religinnjibuch, i., Gottingen 1900, p.

2) finds the sense of the name obscure, and thinks of connecting it with the legend ol the 70 bidden (or apocryphal' books in 1 Ezra (2 Ksdras). SEPTUAGIXT SEPTUAGmT 439 wliiuli the story assumes in the writings of Epi- plianius, tlioiiyli he refers lo Aristeas as his authority.

He ni;ikes the number of books in the Alexandrian Library '54,SOO xXeicj i) iXaaaui,' Aristeas ' more than 20 niyriails ' ; he lias two letters of Philadelphus, and in one of them the saj'iiig from Sir 2ir* •11" Orfaavpou KfKpvfifUfou koI wrjyTJs ia(ppa,yiciUvy)s rii un/>^\tta ^y d/xtporipoii. He alone, and that onlj' in the Syriac text as first published by Lagarde {Si/mmicta, ii. HSU'.), states that it was ' the sevuuth year of Philadelphus, wore or less,' when the translation took j)lace.

He makes the translators work by pairs in 36 diderent cells, and originated the statement, re- peated as late as 15S7 in the preface to the Sixtina, that this happened ' trecentis uuo plus annis ante C'liristi adventum' (cf. Sw. p. 176; Wendland, 153, 159; Nestle, Sst. i. 12). Driieseke believed that Epiphauius drew from the lost chronicle of Justus of Tiberias, and that Augustine was lejiendent on Epiphanius ; but this has been rctuted by Wendlaiid {liheiniscltes Museum 56, 1. 11211.)

On the use made of this story by Fhilo, Josephus, and the ecclesiastical writers see 8w. 12-17, and especially the 'testimonia' in Wend- land's edition, pp. 85-166. That the number 70 and the legend of their wonderful harmony may be due to Ex 24", where (E reads koX rCm itriXiK- Ttav Tov \(jpari\ ov5^ Sic^uvT^frcv ov5^ eis, was first pointed out by Daniel Ueinsius in the Aristarckus sacer, ch. 10.

As the year in whicli the translation originated, other ecclesiastical writers give the 2nd, 17th, 19lh, or 20th year of I'hiladelphus ; in the Chronicle of Eu.sebius the MSSvary between the years 1734, 1735, 1736, or 1737 of Abraham (see Walton's Prolego- iiieua).

As therffiy, the Jews name the 8th of Tebet; according to the letter of Aristeas the arrival of the interpreters coincided with the day of a great naval victory of Philadelphus in the war against Antigonus, and was ordered to be celebrated for ever. liabbiuical Jews called that day the fast of darkness, for they re^'arded this translation as a national disaster, * like the daj' on which the golden calf was made' (see D. S. Maigoliouth, ' The Calendar of the Synagogue,' in the Erpu.sUor, Nov.

1900, p. 348 f.) Philo relates that in his time the Jews of Alexandria kept an annual festival, Tb x^piov trep.i'vi'ovi'rss, iv t^ TrputTov to ttJi iplirineias iii\ap.\p€ /coi iraXaiac ivcKiv evfpyeaias iel yca^oOarii euxapiaTT^aafTts t<^ Beip.

He knows that the interpreters, before they began, asked God's blessing on this undertaking, 6 5' iTnfiOa raU evxah Iva TO -rrXclov f| xal t6 cru'jiirav y^vo9 tui' avOpwirwy • That the predervatioti of Aristeas goes back to the library of Cu-uurea has been Bu^jgewtcd liy Weiuiland. It may have hhii a place in one of the Bible XISS issued by Eiisebius and FainphiluM.— Add to the ' testimonia ' collected by MendelaHobn- Wendland the strant,'u statement from pscndo-KuHcbiu!! on the .Star (publ.

by W. Wright in Jouni. uj Sacred Literature^ ISCit, vol ix. 117, X. 150), that the version was made under a king didido-ih[S] ( = Artaxerxe«?); and the notice, translated from Greek into Syriac at the end of the Fourth Book of Kinpi in the Syro-Ilexapla, that the men came from Tiberiat {OriffenU froiimenta, ed. Lagarde, 3.')6 ; BMujlUcca Synaca, 264). Cf. further the notice of F. Nau on ' Fragments d'une chronique Syriaque Maronite' (/{«ru« de [Orient Chrtlien, iv.

(18MJ 318), In which the names are given of the 72 translators who pro- duced 3tl identical versions. Nau has not printed ttie nameSL See on the names : 7'As Hook of the Bee, by Salomo of llasra, ed. by A. WalliH Budge (Anealnfa OxfmienJtia, Semitic Series, vol. i. part ii., Oxt. 1S8I), 4' p. li!Of.) The last but one of the inter- preters has the strange name 'Aa-itiM in the Greek text, Dia'3K ill one of the .Syriac lists. Ahhih/ii in another.

It this stands for the I Jitiii name A vitue, the list would be late. But this identi- hcAtion is ratiier uncertain. An Arabic chronicle combines the two tlgiires 72 and 70 by the supposition that two of the inter- preUTs died on the way. On the Jemnh notices about the origin of the version and its (^13) deviations from the Hebrew text, see the literature quoted in Vrt. p. (i3, and by Oikonomos, 11. filkS, lil. 43. Zosiraus l'ano|>olitanua {de Zythorum coi\fectume. ed. tininer, 1814, p.

6) relates that .Simon the high priest of Jerusalem sent to Ptolemy La^, ' Ei>u«t*. u ^^^r.riMri wkwmt rq« Uwuia iUnorr, aai <><>vrTirT< (UikODOmos, IL 328)l Kal irayKciXois OiardypiaiTi. This aspiration was fullilled when the work became one of the chief aids to the spread of Christianity.

As this was at the same time the first attempt made on a larger scale, in the domain of Grajco- Roman or Mediterranean culture, to translate a literary work from one language into another, it is the more interesting to ask w hether this attempt, as the above story relates, was due to the literary interest felt by a bibliophile king — <pi\6Ka\os Kal <pi\6\oyos, as he is styled by Epiph- anius * — or to the wants of a religious community. The latter view now generally prevails (cf.

Wend- land in Kautzsch, P.cui/epigrciphen, ii. 1; ZNTWi. 268). A third view is, that tlie undertaking was intended as an aid to Jewish propagandism. This explanation may tiiid some support in the words of Philo (who expresses the hope that these laws will obscure those of the other nations, as the rising sun obscures the stars), and in the very first document which speaks of (E, namely the pro- logue of the Bk.

of Sirach (compare the whole, especially dXXd koX rots ^ktos buvao$ax royy 0tXo/xa- douvTas xpTjalp.ous chai Kai Xiyovras Kal ypd^ovTas). This last passage is also the first to speak of all three parts of the Hebrew Bible [I'ip.os, tt po<t>ffTai, Kal TO, axXa viTpia. pi^Xla) as already extant in Greek ; Aristeas, Philo, and Josephus restrict their language to the Law, a fact to which Jerome emphatically called attention.

H the LXX version was due to the wants of the synagogue, it is all but certain that the Torah was the first part trans- lated. How soon and in what order the ether parts of the OT were overtaken is not made out ; nor has even the question how many dill'erent hands may be distinguished in the present collec- tion yet been sutficiently investigated. Two books only contain a notice bearing on this point. {I) Ejithcr (see Jacob, ZATIV, IS'JO, 241 ff. ; Willrich, Judaica, Giilt. 1900, 211'. ; art.

ESTUER, vol. i. 744). Willrich tliinks that the fourth year of Ptolemy and Cleopatra, in which a priest and Levite, Dositheus and his sou Ptolemy, are said to have brought ttiv TrpoK€ifj.ivTjv itriaToX^v i^v ^(poAraf thai Kal ipp,rivevK4vax Avaip-axov llroXc/xalov tCiv iv 'ItpovaaXiiix (Est H'), was not that of Philometor (B.C. 166-165) nor of Soter II. (B.C. 114), but that of Ptolemy XIV. (B.C. 48-47); but this seems very doubtful.

(2) The second note, which is equally obscure, stands at the end of Job (in Cod. A even twice, with strange variations) : oOtos ipixr)yeieTai ix n^s XvpiaKTii /3i/iXou (cf. art. JOB, vol. ii. 660, where it is translated, ' this man is described in the Syrian book as living,' etc.)

In accordance with the usage of the ancienc Church, we include in this article not only those books, the original of which was or is in the Hebrew Bible, but also those which were originally written in Greek, as the Wisdom of Solomon, or not received into all MSS or editions, as the Prayer of Miinasses. In an appendix we shall refer briefly to similar literary productions, as the Psalms of Solomon, the Bk. of Enoch, and other ' Pseudepi- grapha ' (see p. 450'').

As (5 was the Bible of the Early Church, it has a most intricate and complicated history ; it seems practical to begin with the history of the printed text, and to work our way backward as far as possible. iv. Printed Editions.— Long before the first edition of the New Testament in Greek ujipeared in print, a Greek and Latin Psalter was printed in Milan as first part of IS (20tli Sept.

1481), contain- ing among the Canticles at its end the Magnificat On the notlc« of Aristobulus (Clement Alex. Strvm^ L £2 Euseb. I'Tap. Bv. U. Ii), sev t>otaurer>, 111. 3lU-8»i. 440 SEPTUAGIXT SEPTUAGINT and Benedictus from Lk I'"-'. On the following editions of the Greek Psalms (Venice, 14S6 ; Aldus [without date, c. 1407] ; the Polyglot Psalters of Justiniani, Genua, 1516, and Potken, Cologne, 151S), see SU. hi. 7. 30-3:2. The first complete edition was the Compliite.

nsinn Poh/qlot of Cardinal Ximenes (1514-17 ; the OT linishe^lOth July 1517), in wliicli the Latin Vulgate is placed between the Hebrew on the left and (5 on the right, 'tanqunni. duos hi.ic et inde latrones, medium autem Jesum.' See on it Sw. p. 171 : Nestle, hitrod. to Textual Criticism of NTt p. 1. On the ' Spanish (.;reeU ' of this liilile, i.e. the places in which the editors translated paasaq^es niissintr in their Oreelt JISS for themselves into La, in, see urt.

64, and Field's edition of 1859, Append. ; Ceriani on Cod. Marolmiianus, Ezk 33^7. Its text — best signature c — rests chiefly on the MSS lent bj the Vaticiin, Ho 108, 248,* and a copy of the Venice MS Ho 68. The Gomplutensian was repiinted (1) by Arias Montanus in the Antwerp Polyglot of Pluntin, 1569-72 ; (2) in Wolder's Polyplot, Hambury, 159C ; and (3) in the greatest of all, that of Michel le Jay, Pahs, 1645. On (1) and (3) see Nestle, Jntrod.

lot The second great Greek Bible was that of Aldus Manutius and his father-in-law Andreas Asolanus (1518, mense Februario), — signature a, — based, as the editor states, ' multis vetustissimis exemplari- bns collatis ' ; as far as is a.scertained as yet, on the Venice MSS 29, 68, 121. An interesting commen- tary on this edition i- Steuchi Augustini Eugubini, VT ad Hib. veritatem coUata editiune Septuaginta interprete, Ven. 1529, 4°. This wag reprinted (1) 1529 by Joh.

Loniccrus, Strassbcrg, in the Lutheran order, with the addition of 4 Mac. [Ed. Pr.] and various readings from Ho 44 ; (2) 1645, at Basle, with Preface of Melanchthon, various readings and restoration of the common order in Proverbs and Sirach ; (3) 1650, at Basle ; (4) in the Heidelberg Polyglot 'in orticina Santandreana,' edited bv B. C. Bertram, 16SlliJ7 (new title-pages, l.i99, 1616); (5) 1597, by Franciscus Junius (du Jon ; others say Fr.

Sylburg), with altera- tions from c, and useful notes, the basis of the Concordance of Trommius ; (6) 16S7, by Nic. Glykas, Venice. The third and best edition was that printed at Rome, 1586 (most copies by pen, 1587 ; signature 6), 'auctoritate Sixti V. Pont. Max.,' ba.sed chiefly on the Codex Vatieanus Kar i^oxn" (1209 = HolI., now B), but making use of the preceding editions, o c 1526, 1545, 1572, and of the MSS Ho 16, 23, 51.

The prefatorj' matter is reprinted (partially) by Breitinger, Tischendorf, and others, and recently by Swet«, Introd. Useful are the ' Scholia ' at the end of most chapters from the other Greek versions, and the Church Fathers ; and an important com- plement is the Latin translation, published 1588, patched up by Flaminius Nobilius (and others) from the fragments of the Old Latin (vol. iii. 53'), with additional Notes to the Greek Text. Reprints : (1) Paris, 1628, by Joh.

Morinus, together with the Latin of Nobilius, as even then copies were rare ; (2) 1653, London, R. Daniel, 4* and 8" (and Cambridge) ; (3) 1657, in the London Polyglot of Brian Walton, with useful additions (colla- tions from A D O, Ho 60. 75), and valuable Prolegomena, the latter reprinted by Wrangham, Camb. 1828, in 2 vols. ; (4) 1665, Cambridge, with the line Preface of J. Pearson (see above) ; (5) 1683, Amsterd.

f ;; (6) 1607, Lipsi» (prepared bv Johannes Frick) ; (7) 1709, Fronekeno, by Bos, source of many reprints ; (8) 1725. Amsterd., by Mill (facsimile of cod. O and variants col- lected by Vossius, Ho 13.3); (9) 1730, Lips., Reineccius; (10) 1759-63, Halio • ; (11) 1798-1827, Holmes-Parsons (see below) ; (12) 1805, Oxford, 3 vols.; (13) 1817, Oxford, 0 vols., with Pref. of J. G. [not B.

, as on the title] Carpzov, and variations from A; (14) Londini (without date), in sedibus Valpianis (905 pp.); (16) 1821, Lond., Bagstert (very small print, 585 pp.); (16) Ixind., Bagstert (without date, with an English translation, 1130 pp.) ; (17) 1822, Venice, .Michel Glykvs, 3 vols. (not seen) ; (18) 1824, Lipsia), van Ess, and often ; 1887, with Prolegomena and Epilegomena; (19) 1831 (Olasgu»)t*; 1843, Londini, Tegg ; two very small vols., 667, 703 pp.

f • ; (20) 1839, • On this designation see below. J Editions omitting the scholia are marked , omitting the Apocry-pha t ; no edition without the »^hoIia is to be recom- mended, because they supply to those who cannot afford to procure Field's Hexapta a minor edition of the latter. Paris, Didot-Jager , also Greek and Latin ; often ; (21) 184(j Oxford , 3 vols.; 1875, improved in 4 Mac.; the latter ifprint 14 the basis of the Concordance of Hatch-Redpath ; (22) 18.

^0, LipsisB, Tischendorf, 8 80, ^ 87, the la-st two reprints correctexi and enlarged by collations of E. Nestle ; (23) 1874-76, Londini, Bib/i'i Uexagldtta t, ed. E. R. de Levante ; § (24) tht latest Polyglot advertised from Paris, to be edited by F. Vigouroux, printed by Didot, published by Roger & Chemovitz, has nol been seen by the present writer. From notices in the periodi- cals (Vigouroux, tUnieers, 4th Nov. 189S; F. Nau, Joum. Asiat., May-June 1899, 645 ff.

; Fonck, Zeilschri/t /iir Kath. Theol. xxiii. (1899) 174-lSO ; P. Th. Calmes, RB. 1900, 301, 302) it is apparent that it is only a mechanical reprint of the Greek column in the Puh.nil'itttnbibel ot .Stier and Theile (1847-66), th« text of which is based on unsound principles. A merit of its own belongs to the fourth great edition which was begun by Ernest Grabe (tl712), and appeared in 4 vols. fol.

or 8 in 8° at the Oxford University Press, only the first (Octateuch), 1707, and the fourth (Poetical books), 1709, during his lifetime, the second (Historical books), 1719, being linished by Fr. Lee, M.D., the third (Prophets), 1720, by W. Wigan, D.D.

, ' ex antiquissimo codice Alexandrino accurate descriptum et ope aliorum exemplarium ac jiriscorum scriptorum prsesertim vero Hexaplaris editionis Origenian;e emendatum atque suppletum additis sa>pe asteriscorum et obelorum signis,' with useful Prolegomena. As the title indicates, Grabe followed a twofold plan : (1) to represent the text of the Codex Alex- andrinus, and (2) to make his text at the same time correspond with the Hebrew text.

This he accomplished by the use of smaller type for the changed and supplemented passages, placing the readings of the Codex in the margins, and insert- ing the critical signs of Origen. Grabe's text was repeated (1) by Breitinger, Turici, 4 vols.

4", 1730-32, compared with the Vatican ; (2) by Reineccius in the Biblia quadnlingtda, 1750, 1751 ; (3) in a Bible issued by the Holy Synod of Russia (Moscow, 1S21), but without any attention to the meaning of the additions in small type, to the marginal readings and the critical signs, thus completely spoiling the work ; and this is circulated dj" it/XA>-«x; t^ kyi^ni-ntt i,6iHev9xf ffvveiov )r««-w, rit 'Paxrtf'iar, as rcL^ctjet [^i^dr.

itY,] Kargt Tei/{ i^ia- /A^zovTx IK r«u if b1o» ti ctxpiSSif ixioiii^Tot aipx»Bu 'AAt{tz»d;>ioir Xtip'^PBt^t and was repeated, as the title states, (4) iz r«t/ jr ^XoffX^ • • ' ixTt/^utiirrai etpx^^f ' AXli»tipiou K^i^xei, in an edition of 4 vols, printea at Athens, ia-ratn w •» 'Ayy\.m irttipioLi T->j: Tpi; iiaooffiw T^c XptfTixvfx^t Titiiuxe (1843, 46, 49, 50), The 5th edition, based on Grabe, is that which Fr.

Field prepared for the same Society at Oxford, 1859, avoiding as much as possible the faults inherent in the conditions of the task enjoined on him : see his preface, and Lag. S,Sf. i. 5-8. The result, so far, is, that we have up to the present day not a single edition of G based upon sound critical principles ; for even the two editions which remain to be mentioned have not yet at- tained this end.

These two editions we owe to the two great universities of England — the Vetut Testamenttim Grcecum cum variU Lectionibus, ed. Robertus Holmes ( . . editionem a R. H. incho- atara continuavit Jacobus Parsons), Oxonii, 1798- 1827, 5 vols. fol. ; and TKe Old Testament in Greek according to the Septuagint, edited for the Svndics of the University Press by H. B. Swete ((Cambridge, 1887-94,21895-99, 3 vols. 8°).

As early as 1779, Joseph White published a letter to the Bishop of London, suggesting a plan for a new edition of the L.\X. In 1788 R. Holmes appealed to the hberality of publio bodies and private persons, and obtained such a response as enabled him to procure collations from all parts of Europe. On the history of this edition, see an appreciative article in the Church tjuartertj/ Review, April 1899, lu2fT., and Sw. 184 fl.

It was the greatest attempt ever made to bring together a critical apparatus ; the list of MSS at the end of vol. v. number* 811. Of Versions used were those in Arabic (several), Armenian, Bohemian, Coptic, Ethiopic, Georgian, Latin, Slavonic. Syriac: further, the quotations of the ancient writers from philo and Josephus downwards.

In spite of some points in the plan and in the execution of the work, which are open to criticism, it \m a unique monument of the love to learning of the editor and his nation, and remains a storehouse of materials, indispensable to S The edition London, 1837 (ex editione Holmesii et Lambertl Bos, in 2 vols.), quoted by Sw. 182, from Urt. 67, seem) identical with No. 19 ; whether the date 1819 given by Urt. 67, 8w.

182, for the edition of Valpy is correct, seems doubtful ; il is taken from Gnesse's Trisor, where editions are mentiotfwi, Glasgow 1822, 18' (=No. 19), and London, 1827 (=Na 16 f> SEPTUAGIXT SEPTUAGINT 441 kD who hnve to do with the OT in Oreek. The work as sold at present ia divided into 5 vols. ol. : 1. (Pent) 17RS, H. (Jos.- iChron.) 1810, III. (Ezra-Cant.) 1823, IV. (Propli.) 1S27, V. (AiJOcr.) 16*27 ; butitdoea not seera to have been puhli.sJied in this order (see Jac.

Amersfoordt, De variis teclioiiihuA llotm- etnawji tnrnrum quorundatn Pentatexichi Mosaici, Lugd. Bat. 181S, pi 45X The text in the work is a reprint of b ; but, aa it seems, after a copy of Bos, corrected, but not evcrywliere according to an orifrinal copy. Its value lie.s, therefore, e.^clusively in the apparatus. The advance that has been made in the course of the 19th cent, upon the work of Holmes- Parsons is due, on the one hand, to the discovery of new material.'* — for instance, the Code.

\ Sinaiticus — which led to an enriching of the apparatus ; on the other hand, to greater exactness in using them, which was promoted especially by the progress made in the reproduction of MSS by the various methods of photography. Uf both advantages use was made in the Cam- bridge Sijptunijint (Sw. 188-lilO). The text is no longer that of b, but of B itself, given in the first ed. after tlie so-called (printed) facsimile-edition of Vercellone-Cozza, revised for tlie second by Dr.

Nestle, after the photograjdi of the Codex. In the apparatus the variant.-* are given of such uncial MSS as have been published in a .similarly trustworthy way ; above all of the Codices Alexandrinus, Sinaiti- cus, Ambrosianus, Marchalianus. This text will be repeated in the larger Cambridge Scptuagint, the i'oint editorship of which is entrusted to A. E. {rooke and N. McLean.

Its apparatus will em- brace the evidence of all uncial MSS and of a considerable nuiiil)er of cursives selected after investigation, with the view of representing the dillerent types of text ; the Old Latin, Egyptian, Syro-Hexaplar, and Armenian versions; and the quotations from Philo, Josephus, and tiie more important Christian Fathers. It is clear that the manual and even the larger edition are but a step towards the ideal of a truly critical edition.

For the text is that of a single MS with all its faults, while in the manual edition the grossest blunders are corrected only occasion- ally {e.g. Gu 6'- "> Xai^,IOS' XtjO, 32' S6et for valofs ; but not, for instance, 36^' 'UpovaaX^/i for 'lo-pa^X, 37"* iiTopivovTO for itrov-qpfvovTOf etc.) The present wTitcr cannot but repeat his wish (.see Proceedings of the 9th International Oriental Congress held in J-ondon, ii. (1892) p. 5711.)

that at all places where the text of the MS, and, in consequence, of the edition, is clearly false, the better readings might be placed on the outer margin. t Tlius the ad- vantages of Grabe's plan would be secured and its di.sad vantages avoided ; we should get at the same time a diplomatic reproduction of the MS, and a hint as to the true reading. The Octatcmh, form- ing the first volume of the larger edition, may be expected, as we are informed (Sw. 189), in the course of a few years.

Knnioss of sisoi.s Books-.— A. OAXoNioiL Book:— Genesis:— P«i<a(<uc/iu< hebraici el grcece, ed. G. A. Schu- mann, Lips. 1829, 8. only part i. (Genesis) ; GenfHf firtecc e fide edilioniji Sixtin/r addita ttcripturm diicrepantia e librifi manu teriptig a tte coUatU et ediliitnibus Compiutensi et Atdinaad- euratiMgim* enotata, ed. P. A. do La^arde, Lips. 1808 (of per- marient vahic tor ita Introduction and its accuracy ; collations from ADEFGS, 29, 81, 44, 122, l:iO, 13.1, abc).

Joshaa: — Joauee Imperatoris Iluitoria itluMrata atmte ex- p/^cato ab Andrea Hasio, Antv. I.'i74, tol., with new title-paf^e 1G0» (valuable for Ite UitroduotioQ and Ita use of the Syro- Bexaplario Version). Comp. on some faults in the new edition of the works of Philo, which would have been avoided by the UTe of Holmes- Parsons, PhU/jIofiujt, 1100, p. 260(1. : or Bee Ulysse Robert in bis Preface to the Latin Heptateuch of Lyon (lOfJO, p.

xxxiX f To quote some of the examples pointed out in the paper mentioned — is 8^1 text vivfiM, which is nonsense, for r«rsz/>^ Mdols: 1 Ea 4«> min for .irfi ; Ps 77 (78)80 ^yirrra, for lfimri>.< ; Sir 7" 271 421 «d(K^«^i> fur iioL^pw ; Sir 10^ m^iru for Jir/n,, etc Judges:— Z)« graca LXX inferpretum versume Sj/nteMmtif J. Usserii, Lond. iGS.*), 4', in Ussher'a Works, vol. vii. ; Libef Judicum gee. LXX ititcrpreteti, ed. O. F. Fritische, Turici. I 1867, i' ; P. de La^'ardc, .S''i>tua(iinta.

Sludien, i., ISUl (two texts of chs. 1-5): ^^« ^^"oi o/Jtul'jrs in Greek accordinii to the text of Codex Alexandrimts. edited ... by A. E. Brooke and N. McLean, Camb. 1807. On a promised edition see Q. F. Moore in the ' Internat. Crit. Comin.' on Judneg, p. xlv. Ruth: — Bv John Drusius, 'ad exemplar complutense,' Franek. 1686, 8, 1632, «° ; by L. Bos, Jena, 1783, 'secundum exemplar vaticanum.' Psalms :— The Psalter is that book of the OT which wos and is most used in the Church, e.

spccially in the Greek Church. In addition to the 32 editions mentioned in Sw. p. 102, there have come to the knowledge of the present writer editions of 1621, Venice (mentioned by Grabe, Prol. to Psalms, ch. iii. 5 8, as lent to liim by the Bp. of V.\y ; but perhaps this may be a misprint for 1524 ; see British Museum Catalogiu of Bibles, col.

800) ; 1525, Venice ; 1,145, 4 editions from Basle, Paris, Strassburc, Venice; 1648, Basle; 1684, Antwerp; 1606, Paris; 1052, London (different copies, with "^etX-n^ftt^ and YaXri/ne, on the title-paije) ; 1673, Venice; 1700 [s.i. probably in Bucharest]; 1706, in llontfaucon's Collectio nova, i. ; 1740, Blanchini's Pealterium duplex ; 1743, Venice ; 1754, with the Commentary of Euthymius Zigabenus, reprinted 1857 in Mice's Patr. (tt. vol.

128 ; 1786, Paria ; 1798, (Jonstantinople ; 1812, Baber, from Codex A ; 1820, Venice ; 1831 and 1836, London, Bible Societx/, with modem Greek; 1835, Smyrna; 1843, London, Biblia EcclegicE Polyglotta ; 1856, Jerusalem ; 1873, Rome (2 editions). Job:— From Codex A, by Patrick Toung, in the Catena of Nicetas, 1037, Franeker, 1662 (63). Proverbs :— 1564, Draconites (Polyglot). Esther: — Ussher, in his Syntatima, 1665, Works, vol. vii. (the two texts), repeated Leipzig, 1696; O. F.

Fritzache, Ziiricb, 1B48, 1840 (two texts). Hosea:— Pareus, Heidelberg, 1606 ; Fhilippeaux, Paris, 1636. Joel:— Draconites, 1605. Amos:— Vater, 1810, Halle. Jonas: — Munster, 1624 ; Artopoeus, 1643. Micah:— Draconites, 1566. Zecharlah:— Draconites, 1666. Malachi :— Draconites, 1!)64 ; Hutter, 1601. Isaiah:— S. llunatcr, 1640, Polyglot; J. Curter, 1S80, Pro- copii Cotnmentarii. Jeremiah:— S. Miinster, 1540; O. L. Spohn, 1794, 1824. LamentatlODs: — Kyper, 1662, Libri tree dere gramm. Heb.

(Polyiilot). Ezeklel: — IiCi»]A nnrm. nut c, Rome, 1840 (important). Daniel: — (a) The received text: Melanchthon, 1646; Wella, 1716. (bf The LX.X text : Rome, 1772 (Simon do Mofriatris or A. Ricchinio), very important ; repeated Gottingae, 1773, 1774 ; Utrecht, 1776 ; Uahn, Lipsise, 1845 ; new edition by Gozza, 1877 ; this text also in Holmes-Parsons, vol. iv. 1818; Oxf., 1848, 1875 ; Tischendorf, 1860 ; Swetc. B.

Apocrypha : — The first aeparate edition of the so-called Apocrj-pha appears to be that of PJantin, Antwerp, 1666, 4* : T« Ta>, Bi^Aioiv tctpat, 6 iiSpaiffTi fjpii\ ci» Imv. This edition has the strange arrangement, that on the first three sheets the leaves are numbered and the lines counted on the margins, on the fol- lowing sheets the pages and the verses.

The same arrangement appears in the copies, which have the title : Tu to/, HifiKiajv fxipot, 0 iipaiffTi ypet^iv cix lup'^xirati ; Bihliorvm pars Gr/xca, V'te llebraiee noji injienitnr, Antverpiie, 1684. A third edition, ' cum interpretatione Latina ex Bibliis Complutensibus dep- rompta'(344 pp.), followed in 1612. Oi [sic!] ccvoxpufpt iSifiyci; Libri VT apocrijphi omnes Gr<ece ad exemplar Vaticanum einendatiasiine expressi. Accedit Oralio .

Manassis et Prologus incerti auctoris in Eccleaiasticum, Frankfurt, 1694. Later editions are : Halle, 1740, 1708 (Kircher) ; Leijizig, 1767 (Ilein- ecciua); Leipzig, 1804 (Augusti); Oxonii, 1806; Leipzig, 1837 (Apel); London, 1871 (Greek and English); Leipzig, 1871 (Fritzsche ; best edition hitherto).* A part of the Aj^oerypha ia given in Liber Tobias, Jtidith, Oratio Man(tss(F, ^apientia, EccLesiasticus GreRct et Latine, cum dictis Heripturte itarallelis . .

et ad catena Ecctesiastici positum duplex alphabetum etliicum Ben Sira, Frankf. et Lips. 1691. Tobit:— J. Drusius, Franeker, 1601, 4'; F. H. Reusch, Frel- bur;;, 1870, 4". Judith:— A. Scholz, Commentar, Wflrzburg, 1887. Wisdom:— M. Iloberti Ilolkoth . . in tibrum Sapientia . . SoUotnonis proelectiones CCXIU. , . cum inserto Grceco textu . . [ed. by J. Ilytcrus], 1588, fol. ; Joh. Faber, Coburg, 1601 ; in Greek, Latin, and Armenian, Venice, 1827 ; F. H. Reusch, Frei- burg, 1858 ; W. J.

Deane, Oxf., 1881. Slrach:- Sec article Siracii. Books of Maccabees:- Aiftffr UasmoneFor^im mii vulgo prior M aceabcKorum Grcece ex editione Itnmana, et Latinet ca interpretatione J. Dnuii, Franeker, 1800 ; Maccabceorum liber I. Greece tec. ex. Vat. . recudi curavit P. J. Bruns, Uelmstodii, 1784. For literature see Urt. 6411., Sw. 171-194. v. Earlier Hi.story of the Septuaoint.— Much more complicated is the earlier, esjiecially the earliest, history of (5.

Of its pre-Curistian • Other editions in the complete (Polyglot) Bibles of Plantin of 1684 : 1618, 10, 15 ; Aureliu Allobrogorum, 1609 ; ObristiAO Bened. Michoelia, ZullichavitD, 1741, 40 (the latter the only 00m plete Bible in the original languages hitherto existlngji 442 SEPTUAGINT SEPTUAGINT times we know next to notliing ; the history of (5 is almost entirely its history in the Church.

A Hellenist, Demetnus, who lived, as it seems, under the fourtli Ptolemy, and wrote irepl twv ii> ry 'louSalf /SoffiX^wv,* is the first known to us who used (5. Tlie fragments preserved from other writers, such as Euji'jleiiius, Aristeas (the historian, not the author of nd Philocratem), Ezekiel, Aristobulas, are too small to show more than that these writers Avere acquainted with G.

More extensive is the use made of (S in such books as AVisdom (16^ 12» 6'), Sirach, 2 Maccabees (7"), 4 Maccabees (18"), which became afterwards parts of G, or in the Jewish portions of the Sibyllines. In the writinj;s of Philo, which can be traced back only to tlie library of Origen, and have been transmitted to us probably exclusively by Christian copyists, the ?

uotations from the Law are very numerous ; those rom the rest of the OT are few ; (juotations from Kuth, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Lamenta- tions, Ezekiel, Daniel, are entirely alosent. Yet it is difficult to get a clear impression of the Greek Bible he had before him.

This is owing partly to the unsatisfactory state of his text in former editions,t partly to the loose way in which he sometimes quotes the text : it is apparent, how- ever, that already his copy of (5 cannot have been free from errors, t E(iually unsatisfactory is a comparison of Jo- sephus ; we must rest content with knowing, for instance, that for his description of the Restora- tion he used what is now called the First Book of Esdras (vol. i. of the present work, p.

7G0) ; but as to his relation to our chief MSS of the book we are uncertain. § Even the New Testament, with its great number of quotations, does not permit of any very definite statements, except that it proves again that textual corruption had already found its way into the copies used by the writers of the NT (cf. He 3' if SoKifi-aa-lf, 12' ivox^i).

Even then the situation must have been what is described as existing in his time by Origen— chiefly, it is true, with refer- ence to tlie MSS of the NT, but including also those of (S — ti{iiffi^s TMt yfl»c<u.i*»n ilri lut't (X7« r»v rm utvrcit d«»«v>T« Ir ryi This variety of texts, strange as it may appear, is not difficult to account for.

(1) G was liable to all the dangers connected with transmission to which literary works were exposed in the days • In Gn ib^ he had the additional two sons of Dedan In his text, Raguei and Nadbeel, and traced the descent of the wife of Moses to Raguel ; see Eus. frcep. Ev. ix. 29. f Not only earlier jjivestiprations into the quotations of Philo (Homemann, 1773; Siegfried, 1873), but also the latest and excellent work of 11. E.

Ryle (,Philo and Holy Scripture, London, 1895), were >itiat«d at the outset, because even Mangey's edition of Philo proved untrustworthy. To give one exiniplc. What was the nanie of the second book of tne Law in .'hilo's Bible? Ryle says (p. xxii): 'Philo in one passage states that Moses gave to "this book the title •K«><r>.B. . ^Elsewhere, however, he refers to it by its familiar (jreek name "E^o^ee {f.g. i. 474, 609, 638).' But in all these pass.

iges we have now in the edition of Oohn-Wendland (iii. 4, 57, -iiO) the reading 'Ei«5.»>-i!, as offered by the better class of MSS. The poem of Ezekiel was also entitled 'E|«}«y)i, not' E=«J«£. J A well-known instance is the reading rfc^i^i In On 16", which is found in all our MSS of © (for rxtt^t, not 6«^iif, as Melanchthon put in his edition of 1645), presupposed already by Philo (the same insertion of ^ is illustrated by Codex F, spell- ing i9^«-4.

«> for the thirf i««4«» in On 49^il ; see Sw.'s edition, p. 807) ; compare also his etymologj; of YSttfH (On 16i<) = i. ««»».t, which presupposes B«iw«, a reading actually found in 7 MSS of 0. including the Lucianic ones, and in the Coptic version. } On other questiniis connected with the Bible of JosephuB, •ee below, p. 44(i« note ". „ „ ,. „.„, „„„ ,. II See on this passage A. D. Loman (in ThT vil. [18,31 233 ; he Biahea to read, i.

Vi i»» »«x'''»'«'' ^- '■ ^- ""f- """ " ^'^1'^ "■" »•>) and Oikonomos (iv. 4<iO ; be proposes r«x.u<i< »<>•> muiuxnf before the invention of the printing-press. (2) These dangers were increased in the case of works which were frequently copied and used not only privately but also in public service. (3) (5 is not an original te.

xt, but a translation, or rather a series of translations, and therefore much more exposed to alterations than an original text; for every reader possessed of some knowledge of Hebrew, or of a dirterent exegetical tradition from that embodied in ©, might change his text (cf. the changes introduced in many MSS of the OT from the quotations in the NT, e.g. in Ps 13' from Ro 3'"'").

(4) If the situation was bad enough before, it became worse when other Greek versions of the OT, especially those of Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, appeared and began to influence iS. At last a comparison of ffi with l?l and the versions just named was carried out systemati- cally by Origen ; but what appeared to him a safe- guard against the calamity that threatened the text turned out — not by his fault, but by that of later ignorance and laziness — the worst aggra- vation of it.

Continuing the passage quoted above, Origen goes on to say — r^v fjLit cur i> riit ittrtypoL^us rri< IlsJltcietr Ai«0>^««lf iia^nt^9, dtoO iiierrts, tSfiofMt iecretrt/en, Xfitnrifiitt ^frr,ffa)Mt1 rtttt Xiwa*t iiditririi ' Tai, yitp af^^at>^cu.

itatt atp» voic •' ii r^» Ta»» «rTi- ypafait iia^tmiet, rrv xfiirtf VMr^ffctfMItt etv rwv ^twah ixZccian T wtxi»t ixtieu< t^Aafdecav' tuti ntat fiit i^Aiffe^^ttt I rai '1:^^- jx^ fivj KUf^et, Ml ro^pt^rrtt eti/reL ircifnt ripil^iit, rifit it v-iT urrtp.ffxv TpoctSr.XiCfAt, ttL S^Ao, r OTj fir, Kii/iLttt xetpit T»IS 0 ix rin \oi^Si IJE^orfAi, Fuuj$ii^ ru ' ^^pxiK^ vp»fftliixaf^>' xai i ftit ^ouy.ofjLt*oi vpor.

f<iu airo:, ^ it rpaffKcmu r rtttZTtt, « p«vAiTaj ftp4 rrit ir«/s«3o3;)f tti/rii, ri f^n wtiYirif, We can sympathize \vith his joy (Beov iMvTm) at having found this criterion, thougli he used it, according to our Wew, in the wrong direction. It is of lesser weight that he simply took the Hebrew MSS which were at his disposal, and the Greek versions that agreed with them, for the original text.

Whence he got the former we are not in- formed,* though we hear something about his intercourse with a Jewish Patriarch called Julius (Hillel?);t but he acted on a more dangerous principle when he took what agreed with ^ or the other versions for the true text of G, instead of what differed from them. J Animated by this firinciple, and instigated, it would appear, and lelped by his iprfoSiuimi^, Ambrosius,§ he under- • Eus, (HE vi. 16) writes : TtretOrwi 3i ti^r.

yir rS '{Iptyttti rvf fliiWf Xoy^r et^njxpi0aiLtitn iiirxrie «< ««' rr,t '^Spxlix yX^Tvmt ixLut6t7», r/r( VI irxcic Toif 'louieutir QtptiAitxf xpttrer^tvf eti/rttt 'E^pxttt^ ffTUXl'O'^ ypx^xt xrr,put iit»> vir.rxa-Oxt, xux>tZetu Cl rke T» iripv rxpx Toiii'E^itpir.

K«i''rx tx; iipec;^ ypx^xi iip/Mr^tw- MTw ixiaffUf, Mxj Titxi iitpat rxpit r'xt xxStjUx^tvfUtxf ipfx,ntlimt i»aAA«TTOwffoef, rxf 'AjewAtfw xxi ^fjUAXX'v xxi t^tahorianes, tftvpUf, itt »ix •Ty vxtSt9 t T,i«» fM>x^' rr rxXxt XavSatioCffXi XP^'" ** ^i( xiixtvfx< wponyxytt. t Jerome, .^Ipof. adv. Rv/. 1. ii. (from the SO To^t of Origen in Is), and Montfaucon, Bexapla prael. pp. 21, 79.

Origen refers elsewhere to instructions he received from the Jewiab side : for instance, from a Jewish convert (in Jer. 20, Horn. 20, Op. iii. 178). Nor do we know where he got his Greek text. It differs sometimes very strangely from that of bis predecessor Clement. X Comp. the significant Mwn in the scholion belonging to Origen's edition of Proverbe as published in Tischendorfs Xotitia edit, codicit Sinaitici, p.

76, arid by Oikonomos (rtpi nn #' iv, 903) ; trMt «i i3t)jii wpcrxtifreu frrtit, tflrw »i,m tx4>tT» tvn ru^ rait A«(«7f ipu.r,tvTa7( »vrt i, t^ 'E^pxixi.^x^x txpk M^wf r^f #'• XXI 'efC4( M xfftptrxt irporxttrrxt pnroit, oitrjn i» fuw^ r« F.^pxix^ xxl Te7f XMTt'it ipfJK'tt/Txit ifipT, 1, it T«jf •' tixiri, V-ith the third axiom of Lagarde (A nmerkunpm rtir griechischen Ubertetzxtiuj der I'rovertnen, Ibu'S, p. 3 =}l\tthcilungen, i.

21): ' Wenn sich zwei Lesarten nebeueinander findeu, von deoen die eine den JIasoretischen Text ausdriickt, die andre nur atia einer von ihm abweichenden Urschrift erkliirt werden kann, BO ist die leutere fur ur«prunglich lu halten.' 8 Eua. (HE vi. 18); 'E» Ti.rft, xai ' AfA,ip4rit, rk riit OCxi.U' ritau epirir xiptfta! -rptt Tr,; ifirc ' Qpiytnotft rptff^tiHptirr,( xXrdlixf lAfyrvwV, xxi tiffxt uwi parrot xxrxt/yxs^tU riir iiatttxt r> r^e lKX>.r,riMm3^l ifiSi^olixs wpcrrlSirxt >.iyi. 2S.

_E€ 'uuitmt ii ami 'fiptytui rif tit rxt tfli«< ypxfxt vTtiMt:fxwf iyiurt xpx'it, ' A^ 0p»ficu tit rx uxXirrx xxptpuj^fnt xi/ri, iM/pixH 'irxit •yt wpvratwmt turxlf iix X«>«> nxi wxpaxXy^ftait xur t*t', xkXx mxi x^i9ttxf rmif «■"» iri»»l»>'»» X'f^'"'- »»t'0-/"«" r^ '^•' 'A""* S ••"'• SEPTUAGINT SEPTUAGIXT 443 took tlie greate-:t biblical work which Christian antiquity ever saw— the first Polyglot Bible, the Bo-callol Hexapla, anil a smaller edition of it, the Tetrapla.

In the first column he placed the Hebrew text !n Hebrew lettere, in the second the same in Greek trant^lileration ; then loliowed the version of At^uiia the Jew, — no doubt because it was the most literal one ; in the fourth column that of Sym- machus.

Then followed the column of 0 with the critical marks ; finally, the version of Theodotion, as bein^ a recension of C tor some biblical books, especially the poetical, he added a iyfth, tixth, and even a seventh version ; • so that in those parts there were seven, eipht, and even nine columns. The Tetrapla was an abridiLied edition, — whether later or earlier is nut quite 0|:rtaln, — contaiuini; only Aquila, Symuiachus, i3, and Theodo- Uou.

Till quite recently Origen's great work was known only from the description of Eusebius, Kpii)lianiu3, Jerome, and other writers, and some specimens preserved in scluilia of biblical MSS ; but in 189G Giovanni Mercati discovered in a pal- imiiscst MS of the 10th cent, at Milan tlie first continuous fragments of a copy of the Hexapla (Psalms).

These helped us to understand what an enormous task it must have been to arrange the whole OT in such a way, and at tlie same time showed also how easily mistakes might arise in it, and whence the variants come which are found in the statements about tlie Hexaplaric text. And now there has been pulilished quite recently by C. Taylor another leaf from among tlie Hebrew- Greet; Cairo Ge.nizah Palimpsests from the Taylor- Schechter Collection (Camn. 1900, 4°), containing a fragment of Ps 22.

From this double-leaf the outer columns and some lines of the top are cut away, but it is at least 200 years older than the MS discovered by Mercati, and conlirms the view th.at the arrangement according to coin (oicXiij/ tc Trpis Kui\ov), of which Eusebius speaks IJiE vi. 16), (onsisted in this, that Origen generally placed only one Ilebrew word, or at the most two, in one line, and was careful to see that the Greek corre- »TH>nded to it exactly.

Even so small a word as Vx i:» Ilebrew, nil in Greek, had a separate line. In the Cairo Palimpsest all the Hebrew lines, 105 in Dumber, consisted — they are cut oil', but we are quite certain about their extent — of only one word ; in the Milan-text this was the case with 10 out of 17, the re.st contain two, none more than two. As a full page of the Cairo Palimpsest contained 42 (or 43) lines, just as many as Codex B, wliirh, when opened, repre.

sents with its six columns the appearance of the Hexapla, a manuscript of the Hexapla Psalter arranged like the preserved Cairo fragment must have tilled about 4o0 leaves ; for I he Hebrew Psalter has about 19,000 words.t As the Psalter Ls, furtlier, something like the 14th or 15th part of the Hebrew Bible, the whole Hexapla Wt kftBfUt wmpmrmi int^ytptdtf^i, j^^ovnr xtreLyfjuittif it^J^iiXout «4Mj'y3«Ti; 0iffXi»ypii^4 Tl 41^;^ rirrcuf, ktJtM xtti Kepcut in T« KitX^.

iypx^li ijrxr,/Mttti{' Sf etranrmi' rr,t htbusoit rij» iriTx^l'O' kiOatoi iiptourlett i 'Au^peritt witpiffTr.fecT . . ^McA.rra acvro, wpalrplTIt iri ryjw Ta»» UTe/xifj/Mcnt, ffu»Toe<i,. It is true, Etisehius ■peaks here only of the commentaries of Orijten ; but Kpiph- aiiius refers the help of Ambrosias uImj to tlie Hexapla, and 'copyists {^i^XitypttSit) and ' typf-^'irls' would be needed by Ori^n for this costly work even more than for his connuen- taries ' husebiuB {BE vl.

16) goes on after the words quoted p. 442^. note ' ; i^' Mr (the other versions besides' Aquila, Symmachus, and Hicixlotion) ilk vv; klnkirr^a, rAor kp' ttl outt i.'d^, «vra rtur fAbtty iwT^^tar, irt kpa r^t fju» lOpoi i> rit wpif ' AurtM NjJur«Ai,, vr,, di ii inpv ruiit riwti^ It yi ij,r, ran iixirX7t rail ,]/MXfMi lAtrk rat iriry.utuf ■rtrfatpat txiirtil u ixove wlf^mtr, •AX« «<xj ixTiir mMi x^4ur,i rxpaOiic ipmitlixt, in /jui( xldit rvtiuXArrtu, atf i ll^iX qv^^rqf i nv*p.

Hark raie ^pittvt ' Airni,9l/ vtu fj'eu ^i^r.ptv. rttirtti di kritfot i«i rxCri rviayayiii, diiAWr vi wpit moika, mtu kiTiwp<Jiui «XAr,Aajf fAArk tUil etiiTr,t «1K 'iL^paitn niu4itruit, rk T^t ktyaiMitan fi/jur iiarrXvt kmypaica MarttXiXaint, liiaH riit ' \kCXu sa^ £uufM(;(^«v «ai Hi«^riw,a( iMiorit «/XA r^ riir i^our.K«fT« it T»i{ TITPetrkait iviKriKffxiuat€»t, f Kor the Ileb.

Psalt«r the ilas,sorelic numljering docs not •eem to be ]>reserved, but for the Svriac Psalt«r the number of words is |;iven as 19,gil4, of letters u 0U,B&2. would have filled more than 6000 leaves or 12,000 pages. It is probable that these ligures go beyond the real extent, for we may assume tliut other books were treated less luxuriously than the Psalms. At all events, the Hexapla was much larger than even the latest estimate supposed.

* These Bpeciniens,t besides givin" a glimpse of tho whole, show at the same time that tor the Church at large, and even for its most learned members, so costly a work was not necessary ; it was sufficient to copy the C column, and to place on it« margins the most notable various renderings from the other versions. This was done partially already by Origen himself, and especially by his followers Pamphilus and Eusebius.

Such manuscripts, more or less carefully copied by later copyists, trans- lated into Latin, Syriac, and Arabic, and excerpted by the commentators, are the souries from which hitherto our knowledge of the Hexapla has been derived, thanks to Drusius (1581, 1022), Nobilius ( 1587, 1588), Mont faucon (1713, 1769), and esjiecially Fred. Field (1875, 2 vols.) : see on this highly de- serving scholar Expos. Times, viii. IGO, 274, 325. The later fate of the original is unknown.

Jerome saw and used it in the library of C;esarea;J perhaps it was destroj'ed by the invasiin of the Arabs. A similar fate may have brought the codex, from which the Cairo-leaf was saved, into the hand of the Jew wlio used it in the eleventh cent, for a Hebrew liturgical book. In these specimens there was no occasion to apply eitlier ohelus or asterisk. In On 1 the lirst occasions to use the obelus occurred v. -:-»toi iydftro ourusX, v. -r Kal elSei/ 6 Oeds 6ti KaX6v\, v.

* ~- Kal ffvy^x^V • • • 7) (ijpiX. In vv.'- " the onlj- document known which lias preserved the obelus in the text is the Arabic version made from the Syriac ; on xv." and ' Origen him.self, Basil, and some scliolia testify that the obelized passages were not found in the Hebrew. The first occasion to insert a piece with the asterisk occurred at the end of v.', where p '-'i had no equivalent in G and Origen supplied ^ Kal i-yivfTo ourwsX, and so on. These are .

simple cases ; but what was to be done when there was variation of order or ditlerence of sense! In the former case (dillerent arrangement of ifl and ffi, as in Exoilus, Proverbs, Jeremiali) Origen adopted a twofoUl course. If the ditlerence was not too great, he let the text of every column follow its exemplar, but niurked these passages by both signs at once, asterisk and obelus (us wapi. vaai iiii> (pepdfitya, oiic i¥ aurois ii riirois). Elsewhere • See Sw. p.

74 : • It is difficult t« conceive of a codex or series of codices so pigantic as the Ilexaiila ... It« bulk would have been nearly jive times us preat as that of the Vatican or ijinaitic OT. It may be roughly estimated that the Hexapla, if written in the form of a codex, would have filled a'.J.'iO k-axes or ef»(M» pages; and these fljfures are exclusive of the Vm'n'a and Sexta, which may have swelled the total considerably. Even tne Tetrapla would have exceeded ilUUO leaves.'

— According to the ediclum OiocUtiani cop.\ ists were paid at the nile of 26 or 20 denarii for 100 lines, accoriling to the quality of the writing. From the Htichometrical lists of the llible we know that the I'salter had 6iuo lines, a complete OT about 80,000, a complete liible about 100,000. This would make 20.000 or 20,000 denarii for thecop3iiii,'of an ortlinar)' Bible. In the time of Constanlitie, Epiphanius.

when becoming monk, reserved from his fortune for buying the divine and life-giving Scriptures t itf^trfju^rm. (forty gold coins). t See p. 444 ; also the examples given by Field (1. p. xiv from 2 K l% in 7 and I>s 109 (1 10) a in « columns. X See de Vir. III. c. 64 ; commeitlarioli in Pmlmoa (ed. Dom Moriu, Atiecdota MaredMtlana, 1N1.0 (iii. 1, p. 6): * ntun ifwAoi^f Origenis in Cujsariensi bibliotheca relugens ; and p.

12 on I's 4" Id tpiod In iiluriniis codicibus invenitur, "ct olel corum," cum vctustum Origenis Hexaplum I'salterium relej^erem, quod ipsiua manu fuerat emendaluin, nco in hebnuo nee in ceteris editioni- bus liei apud ipmm qxioqu* Sepfuaijinta interpreUt repperi,' (All MSS have it, ami the Svriac Hexapla has it).

It may have lielonged to those fxioks In his library which Aracius and Kuzoius took care * In mcmbranlH instAurare,' ■» r^uAriait «,«>i^ ruttieti, to transcribe from papyrus on vellum {PliiUmit opera ed. CohD-Weudliuid, i. p. Ui; Jerome, <U Vir. lU. a lU: of 84, L). 1 444 SEPTUAGINT SEPTUAGINT (for instance in Jer 25"°'-) he followed the order of IH, as did Lucian, Chrysostom, and all modern editors of Polyglot Bibles.

No doubt Origen would make a note on this diflierent arrangement, but this is missing in the documents as we now have them. The obelus appears under various forms, mostly -:-, but also with two dots ~ or -=-; or without any dot -Xj ; so especially in the Codex Sarravianua. Tlie form -=- was called XrnxvlnKos, -r iiro\r)fu'i(rKos i their exact meaning is unknown, for what Epi- phanius says about tlieir ditl'erence is nonsense (sea Field, Pruleg. lix.)

The metobelus y (a mallet) or : signities the end of the notation. As a specimen PS 22 (21) >-2a FROM THE CAIEO PALIMPSEST. Hebrew (supplied Hebrew in Greek 1 from Hebrew transcription Aquila. S}iumachii8. o (lostX 1 1 Bible). (lost). » nrKi] (TV 5e <rv 5e av Se K ni.T • * nini nini nini .„ ^« ... M fl7] pt7) .. pmn .« fjMKpVVTfS ^Kpaif pLaKpVVTJi ~ 'ni'7'K .M IffXVpOTTJS flOV yevT} pjiv TTfv ^07]diay p,ov _ 'n-iii'S ...

ct$ ^07]diav fiov ■jrpos T-rjv ^<yij$iaw fiov €LS r-qv avTiKt^tj/Lv pu)v — : nam ... <TT€V<TOV (Tirevaov irpoo-x^^ — n n^-i-.i » pvcrai e^eXou pvaai ~ anno .« airo p-axo-t-pV^ airo p.axo.ipT}S airo pop.<f}aiat, Ts: ^ ^vxV'^ P-ov T-qv \pvxrjv fiov T7}V ^VXf}V p^OV — TO ... airo xftpos €K X^tpOi Kai €K x^f^po^ •• 3^3 • K KVVOS KVVO^ KVfOS _ 1 'm'n' ... fiovaxv' MOW T7}V p.0V0T1JTa fJMV T7]V pLOVOyeUT} pLOV, » •jV't?in ... (Tioaov fX€ (Toicroy pte (Tiaaou p.

€, 'SD • •a airo OTOfiaTOi €K OTOp-aTOt €K <TT0p.aT0i «. nnK .*■ XeovTos XeovTos XeocTos M. •3ipai ». /cat airo xeparup Kat airo Keparojv Kai airo KCparujp _ D'DT ... pT}fJ,L/i p.OVQKepU}TWV pOVOK€pit)TU}V — [I 'jn-jy .— €L<yaKowxow ftov TT)V KaKdtfflV flOV i^v raireiviixriv pLOV ».

iitrfixouffcte • Whetheror where the Quinta, Sexta, and Septima, which for this Psalm are expressly testified, hod found a place in this cop,v, cannot be ascertained; see, on theee versions for this Psalm, besides the testimonies collected by Field, Jerome {Anecdota Maredsol. iii. p. 33) : quinta et sexta editio : verba clamoris mei, v. 2.' — On the transcription of mn by lUni, pipi, and its curious consequences, see & echoUon of Jacob of Edessa in ZDMG xxxii (1878) 465 ff.

PS 46 (45) ^'^ FROM THE MiLAN PAUMPSEST. Hebrew. The same in Greek Letters. Aquila. Symmaehus. a Theodotion. > n-iah] \a^avcL(rffT} TW VtKOirOiW eirii'iirtos eis TO reXos ru) viKoiroiu "j^" mp -inS [XJa^Scij-KO/) Ttav vi.ij)v Kope Tuv vtwv Kope ivTrep Tuv Viuy Kope TOty VIOLS Kope niD^y Sy aX aX/tcjd eiri veavionjTuy wrep Tujv aiujviuv inrep TOir Kpv<piuiy vrep Tuv Kpvtpiuv 1-0 (Tip afffia uSri ^aX/40S wStJ ^i-aXo^f • uS dmSk fXuiei/x- "Kavov* • 0 $eos Jifuv 0 deoi -qfiuu § 0 8cOS TJfJ.

tJV lyi nono ILace' ovo^ eXirts Kai Kparoi veiroiOijats Kai KaTa(fn>yTj KOl Karacpiryrj Kai ta-Xi'S dvva/j.it SvvafMi miy ^tp , ^0T}8iia ^OTjdeia PorjSos ;807)90S nns3 /Sffopu 8 ev d\i\l/e(rip «» 6\i^(air ey 8\i\j/e(ri ev 8\i\pe<tir T»ie tuoouffeue r.UMt IKD KXD3 yt/jura fiuiS evpedtj + ffipodpa evpnTKO/icyos atpo- Spa Tan cupouffois i;/ios ffipoSpa evpfSri a<l>oSpa • pSv oX- yj"' cxt Toin-ut Sia TOVTO Sia TOVTO Sia TOVTO NT) nS Xw- vipa ov 4>o^ridTi(TOne8a ov <po^ri8riffop.

e8a ov <f>opri9riao/ie8a ov <po^Tidr\<Top.e8a Tona paafitp fv TU avToKKaj- aeadax evTutavyxdirSat ev TO) Tapafffftirdai cy Til} Tapa<Ta€(r8ai , P" oops y-qv ■n" rrtvyrio TTivyriy B1D31 ov^a/uoT Kai (V Tftf vftaX- Xcffflot Kai K\ivia8ai Kai /xcTOTi^etr^oi Kai aaXeveffdai D'l.T opi/i opr, opV opr) opv 3^3 )3\e;S fv KapSia ev KapSia ev KapSia tv KapSia [d'D' ta/xift SaXaaauy 8a\air<ruv OaXaaffuv SaXaffauy * In the MS >Mftu came in the third column, replacing there AquUa's rendeiinff.

t MS, by a frequent mistake, doubling the «-, tvpi9K^. t MS vacis (from ran, see note f ). S MS first-hand vw. SEPTUAGINT SEPTUAGINT 445 ■jf the use of these signs we may take Gn 34"''' from the Codex Sarravianus — Kcu re ptrreiiovTO' "Xj tiji' 'Vf ffapKO.

TTjy a/cpOjSif- afXTTjv ;;C iracTf 5 f^ep 5}i XOfifvoi TTvXtjv iro ^ Xews awou' : eyeye As It la of Importance to have a view of the documenta from which the O column of the Hexnpla can be recovered, the pres- ent writer had drawn up a list of all MSS which trace back their orijfin to the Hexapla and Tetrapla, and desisted etem- inata for them, but want of space forbids the printing of them here.

One of the most important means is the Syriac version made by Paul of Telia in the year (il7( = p), and, where this is defective, the Arabic version made by Uarith ben Sinan ben itliabut BO late as Una (see Prajf. of Holmes, vol. I.) The Hexapla is expressly cited in still exi.stini? documents as the source for Ex., Josh., 1 Kings, Ezra, Esth., Prov., Cant., Lain., Is., Ezek. ; the Tetrapla tor Oen., Josh., Kuth, Is., Ezek., Job, 12 Proph., ban.; the Heptapla for 2 Kings.

The 'Ox-Tetri)^ticf (Octapla) is occasionallyquotedashavingadifferent reading from the T»t^«- tf-fAj2r (Tetrapla) in a scholion on Ps 86^ Cu.) ryj Ituv (or f^y,Tyip iiin). Heptapla is used in p at 2 K 16'^; ni>T<M-i>j8», (not TiT^<wiiiJ«.) in Q at Is 3^. Sec, for Genesis, Field on On 47M ; fur Ex., Josh., Judges, Ruth, 1 and 2 Kings, Job, Prov., Eccles., Cant., 12 Projih., Is., Lam., the notes of p, (or Ezra and Esther the notes in Cod. S, for Is. and Ezek, the notes in Q ; for Ezek. and Dan.

the Codex Chisianus. On the order of the biblical lxK}k8 in the Hexapla we are not perfectly informed ; in C^ it is Octoteuch, Kings, Chron., Ezr.(-Neh.), Judith, Tobit, Psalms, Job, Prov., Kccles., Cant., Wisd., Sirach, 12 Proph., Jer., Bar., Ep. of Jer., Dan., Sus., Bel, Ezek., Isaiah. For Exodus a cojiy is attested, in which the Hebrew was compared by Eusebius with the Hebrew of tlie Samaritans. Seventeen such passages ore preserved in (B, and 6 from Numbers.t Curious is the expression ^Ti.

\»;^^»-«r i^' St tupofjt-iv •£«'>.»> (Tischendorf, Xotitia, 122); the note in 8 at the end of Esther speaks of t« iixr^x 'iiptyttout ^r' xi/r^v iioeStfiuta. At the end of Ex. ri «Ti rut ixicnit i£«TAdc ore distinguished from a iTtp»» iiarXjov. In the note at the end of Proverbs (Sw. p. 7b) for xati r«A» ecvrec xtiP' w'e must read juti T«?.(v mirextip't 'and again: by Piimphilus' own hand.' Strange is the Quotation of Urigen on La 117 (O;/. ill.

252) xark UfAfjutx'i* Ml Irtpctt ixitrtt rait'E^iofitKiutrti. If the copies of the (5 column of the Hexapla, which it was the task especially of Pamphilus and Eu.sebitis to prepare, had been cojjied with all its iriarks, it would have been well ; but later copyists m.'

^'lected these completely, and produced thus what we may call krypto-IlexriplarK copies, com- pletely spoiling by this carelessness the value of i1 — such a co])y is found, for instance, in the Codex Alexandrinus for 1 and 2 Kin^s. At the same time we have no right to coiiiidain, seeing that in the 19lh cent, the same ^irocess was re- peated in the case of Grabe's edition.

J Now it is clear that if we were to succeed, by a comparison of tliose docunionts which go back directly or indirectly to the Hexapla, in restoring its i5 (-olumn, we sliould have a Septnagintal text, but not the original one ; for, as indicated above, the principles on which Origen chose his text are not the true ones ; moreover, it would appear that he even further introduced little changes, so as to make his text correspond to the Hebrew, for instance in the matter of proper names, writing Tyipauv (Ex 6") for VtSauv, etc.

§ We must therefore look for • Origen took this whole system of notation from the Alexan- drian critii.*» of Homer, especially Aristarchus ; see the passages qiiMt«d by Swete, p. ,1, and the enumeration of the passages ''f Proverbs which varied in order from the Patmos codex, in Tischendorf's Holitia, p. 76. How inconvenient this was before the invention of numbering the verses and chapterv may be seen there. I On other po-isages (On 48 IS" etc.) for which « :U/^puriiUp is ipi'.

ted, see Field, i. p. Ixxxii ft., and S. Knbn, 'Samareitikon u?ul S<ptuaginta' in Monatsschri/t /iiT M'txtifiinchajt df« Jtiden- tliums, N. F. 1. (1804) 1-7, 4'J-07 ; ZDMU, 1»«3, 060. Kohu iM-lieves that there was originally a complete Greek translation of the Samaritan Targum. See above, p. 440'', on the Moscow and Athens reprints of Orube 8 edition of the Codex Alexandrinus ; and ct., (or ItJi dis- astrous results, e.g. Olkonomos, ii. 2£l,on the reading $if and X<ip*' In Ps 131". I Cf.

Ps 11, where lit w, wit^ra has nothing answering to It In Hebrew ; a scholion remarks that it ttuirt it nr rix<ii r« #' ««•» »)A^Mm ; Up, 184, sah., Theodoret have for It •,'> n:. •;«<i^ p^t^t. other sources. These have been found in the re- censions which Jerome mentions as being circulated in his times, besides the copies produced by Eusebius and I'ampliilus.

Jerome, who was almost the only one who opposed the popular views about (5, had also the right insight into the consequences of Origen's labours in textual criticism, when he wrote to Augustine — ' Et miror quomodo LXX interpretum libros legaa non puros ut ab els editi sunt, sed ab Origene emendatos sive corruptos per obelos et asteriscos. , . Vis amator esse verus Septuaginta mterpretum, non legas ea, qua) sub asteriscis sunt, imo rade de voluminibus, ut veteruni te fauturem probes.

Ouod si feceris, omnes ecclcsiarum bibliothecas damnare cogens. Vix enio. unus aat alter invenietur liber qui ista non haneat.' He mentions several times three sets of Bible texts as used in his time (PrcBf. in Paralip., adv. Ruf. u. 27)— ' Alexandria et ^E^ypt"' •" Septuaginta suis Betychium laudat auctorem, Constantinopolis usque Antiochiam Luciani {var. lee. Juliani) martyris exemplaria probat. medije inter has provinciffl Paleostinos (par. Uc.

-nai) codices legunt quos ab Origene elabor- ates Eusebius et Pamphilus vulgaverunt ; tosusque orbis hac inter se trifaria varietate compugnat.' The Gothic priests, Sunnja and Fretela, who had addressed him about questions in textual criticism, he instructed in the year 403 — * Aliam esse editionem quam Origenes et Cajsariensis Eusebius omnesque Gneciffl tractatores xpittit, i.e.

comniunem appellant atque vulgatom, et a plerisque nunc Apvjux^ct ' dicitur, aliam Septuaginta intei-pretum ijuaj in iixvke'it codicibus reperitur et a nobis in latinuni semionem fideliter versa est et Jerosolymae atque in orientis ecclesiis decantatur . .

xpitr, autem ista, hoc est communis, editio ipsa estqua) et Septuaginta, sed hoc interest inter utramque quod *o/»>: pro locis et teniporibus et pro voluu- tate scriptorum vetuscorrupta editio est, ea autem qua) babetur in icaa-Aoff et quam nos vertimus, ipsa est qua) in cruditorum libris incorrupta et iuiuiaculata Septuaginta interpretum trans- latio reservatur.' About the person and the work of Hesy chilis we know very little.

He may have been (not the lexicograplier of the second half of the 4th cent., who was a pagan, but) the martyr-bishop mentioned by Eusebius, HE viii. 13, together wiMi Phileas of Ihmuis (Sw. 79: 'It is pleasant to think of the two episcopal confessors employing their enforced leisure in their Egyptian prison by revising the Scrii)tures for tlie use of their flocks, neany at the same time that Pamphilus and Eusebius and Antoninus were working under similar conditions at Cxsarea ').

The fruit of his work is now .sought for the Octateuch in the MSS 44, 74, 76, 84, lOli, 134, etc. (see N. McLean, J'J'hSt, ii., Jan. 19U1, p. 306) ; for the Prophets, at least for Isaiah ami the XII, in Q and its supporters, 20, 106, 1!>>S, 306 (see A. Ceriani, de codice Marchaliano, Uonui', 1800, pp. 48ff., 105 If.) More clearly defined is onr information about Lucian and his work (see on him Sw. p. 8011'.)

Westcott-Hort came to tlie conclusion, that for the NT the growing diversity and confusion of Greek texts led to an authoritative revision at Antioch, which was at a later time subjected to a second authoritative revision, carrying out more coni])letely the purposes of the first. Of known names, they wrote, Lucian's has a better claim than any other to be associated with the early Syrian revision.

These revisers of the NT 'evi- dently wished their text to be as far as possible eas}', smooth, and complete, and for this purpose borrowed freely from all quarters, and as freely used the file to remove surviving asperities ' (ed. inin. p. 557).

This description agrees fully with our information about the Lucianic revision of the or, and with tlie observations we can gather from the existing documents, in which it is found to sur- vive, for the Octateuch in 19, 82, 108, 118; in the Historical books 93 is to be added ; in the Prophets 22, .36, 48, 51, 62, 90, 93, 144, 147, 233, 308. The Lucianic recension is of the highest value * Olkonomos, Iv. 99, wishes to road Ammmwh.

446 SEPTUAGINT SEPTUAGINT for the textual criticism of tlie Hebrew OT ; for tlie Hel)row MSS, used by Lucian at Antioch, seem to liave been liilferent from those whicli were at Origen's (iis|iosal, furtlier removed from the traditional Hebrew text ; but it must not be con- founded, as its editor P. de Lagarde was careful to warn ua (see especially Mittheilungen, ii. 171), with the Septuagint.

On the question, whether among the materials used for his revision the Syriac version was also included, and the other, how his revision is related to the Latin versions. Bee Nestle, Intivd. p. 182. * The statement that his autograph copy in 3 columns was, after his martyrdom, found at Nicomedia, we see no reason to doubt (against Sw. p. 85). t No express statements emanating from later times are known to the present writer regarding attempts to revise fli.

That the emperor Constantine ordered 50 Bibles for his churches from Eusebius, and that Athanasius procured for Constans irvirrla Tuv 0tluv 7po(/i(2i/, may be mentioned in this con- nexion. Later emperors and empresses showed their religious zeal partly by waiting copies with their own hands. The history of G passed on to the nations, which received it in the form of translations. vi. VERSIO.VS made from the SEPTUAGINT.

— If we are to trust the statement of Zosimus Pano- politanus (see Oikonomos, ii. 328), the Hebrew Bible was translated for Ptolemy at one and the same time into Greek and into Egj-ptian ; but Latin, not Egyptian, was probably the first language into whuh ffi was translated. On the Latin versions of (5 see the exhaustive article of H. A. A. Kennedy in vol. iii. p. 47 &.

X The most important addition to note is the publica- tion of Hcptateuchi partis pontenoris vcrsiu latina antiquissima e codire Luqdunensi par Ulysse Robert (Lyon, 1900, 4°). This discovery, already noticed by Kennedy (p. 49), called by McLean the most important event of the past decade in con- nexion with Sept. studies {JThSt, ii. 30.5), shows the mixed character of the Latin Bible text, already acknowledged by Kennedy, in the mo.

st striking way ; no Greek MS or group of MSS being known to which this Latin text adheres persistently. And the second, not less puzzling feature of these Latin texts becomes once more apparent, namely their variety. Cf., for instance, Dt 31 in the L[ugdun- ensis], M[onacensis], and W[irceburgensis]. V." Kari^fxjiia comestio L devoratio M interitus W. Koi ffX/V'ij(-e«) et tribulatio L et tribulationes W omitted altogether M. v.

* Kal i^nr\i)a64vTei Kop-qaovai et repleti recedent (=xi^irh<'ov(ri) L et sjitiati desiendent ludentes M ( = ;^opet''(roi'(Ti, or ira/j"ofTcy) et saturati alienabuutur W. • E. Klostermann {Origenes' HVrte, iii. p. xi) promisee an In- vestii^alion on the Jeremiah text used by Orijren, which a^'rees frequently with the group of MSS which are considered as Lucianic. Adam Mez {Die Bibfi de« Joacphus untermchl /iir Buck v.-vii.

der Archaologu, IJasel, 1895) notices that the Bible used by Josephus shows in Judges and Samuel many agreementa with Lucianic readings, and presupposes, therefore, an Ur- Lucian.' The paper on ' Lucian's recension of the Septuagint {Church Qiiarterty Review, Jan. 1901, pp. 37S)-398) came to the knowledge of the present writer too late to be used for this article. t On a copy going back to Basil, see SyncelluB (Chronogr. p. 382); i.

■»/ di etriyp<x^ ktcir iixpi^nfMtai M»ret r< vriyn,jt met wparmiioL,, ix vrit i }\.ourpuai ^tSkidbiiXritj i> w s«j irlytyfiarrrt, it iutytit xai 0iro( RaWXuof, toe i£ Z ucf'va (tTI/Aa^, «»ri^aA^v itMpSifar. In this copy Syncellus foimd 28 («*i ) years for the reign of ts«ii in 2 K 16^. This number ia found to-day in the MSS 55, 6«, 84, 119, 245, 246.

J The influence which O exercised on the formation of the mcdiajval Ronmii and even Teutonic languages through the medium of the Latin Bible version can be only hinted at. Even words of C(inmon life like oanap^, eidre, find their origin ulti- DlaU:l.^ ill i3. In the Bk. of Judges the new text side j regularly with A against B ; in some cases (1° 5'- *>) it alone offers what seems to be the original reading (see McLean, I.e.) On Wisd., Sirach, Esth., Job, Judith, 1 and 2 Mac, Pas.

sio Maccaba-orum, Bar., 3 Es., Cant., see Ph. Thielmann, ' Bericht iibei das gesanimelte handschriftliche Alaterial zu einer kritischen Ausgabe der lateinischen Ueberset- zungen bibli.scher Bucher des alten Testamentes' (Silzungsberlrkte der K. buyer. Akad, d. Wisi. 1899, Bd. ii. Heft 2, pp. 205-243). On the Egyptian versions see Forbes Robinson in vol. i. p. 668 ff. There is but one important addition to mention — The earliest known Coptic Psalter, edited by Wallis Budge (Lond. 1898). F. E.

Briglitman (JThSt, ii. 275) has shown that it represents the complete Greek text, of which U contains fragments, and that it has some remark- able readings, which do not occur in the common Greek text but only in Latin documents, e.g. i^aal- \evafr diri liJXou in Ps 95'", which is quoted from Justin onwards. Cf. further, Lieblein, ' Thebansk- Koptick Oversaettelse af Da\-ids 89. 90 Psalme' (Academy of Christiania, 1896); W. E. Crum, 'Coptic Studies' in Eg. Expl. F. Rep. for 1897, 1898).

On the Ethiopie versions gee R. H. Charles in vol. i. p. 791. With the fact quoted tliere that the Ethiopie Bible at no time contained the books of Maecaoees, compare the parallel fact that they are unknowTi also to the Canon in the 39th festal letter of Athanasius and in Codex B, which is con- nected by Rahlfs ^vith Athanasius {GGN, 1899, i. p. 72). Scarcely any addition has been made to the Arabic versions since they were treated by F. C. Burkitt in vol. i. p. 13611".

Of the Gothic version ascribed to Ulfilas, only a few fragments of the OT are extant, from Gn S-''*", Ps 52=^, Ezr 15. 16. 17 (not 28-'=) ; but these are sufficient to show that Ulfilas, as might have been suspected, followed the recension used in Constan- tinople— that of Lucian. The best edition is that of Lppstrora (Upsala, 1854, 1857, 4°), the most con- venient that of Stamm-Heyne ('1896, in which, however, as in all, the order in Ezra must be re- versed in the way indicated above), or E.

Bernhardt, 1884.* For the literature see Sw. p. 116; Urt. 119-121. The recension of Lucian is the basis also of the Slavonic version (first printed at Ostrago, 1581). From the quotations in Holmes (on Gen.) one might almost conclude that its present form is based on the Aldine edition of 1518, so frequently does it agree with it. For literature see Urt. p. 215 (Leskien) ; Sw. p. 120 ; Holmes, Prwf. in Tent. The Georgian version was nsed for Holmes (see Praef. in Pent.)

, but the fust edition (Moscow, 1743) was made conformable to the Slavonic Bible by the Prince Vakhusht, son of Vakhtang, king of Georgia. See Urt. p. 161 ; Sw. p. 120. The Armenian version (sec the article of F. C. Conybeare in vol. i. p.

151) rivals, in importance for the textual criticism of G, the Sjriac, and will be used for the larger Cambridge edition of C The version of the OT which came into common use in the 5yriac-speaking churches was made from the Hebrew, tnough it occasionally under- went intluences from (E (see art. SvRlAC Versions).

But besides this common version (Pe-shitta), the zeal of this Church produced a translation of Ci, prob- ably the most literal that ever appeared in any language, and therefore of the greatest importance for the textual critic. It was the work of one Paul, bishop of Telia dhe Mauzelath (Coi stantine An American edition woj published by O. 11. Balg, UIl waukee, 1891. That of Massmou is from 1865-1857.

SEPTUAGIXT SEPTUAGIXT 447 in Mesopotamia), and was executed by liim in Alexandria in the years GlG-617 There he liad at his disposal several MSS, which went back — with few intervening links — to tlie very Hexupla or Tetrapla of Ori;,'en ; hence the usual name of this version, the Sijro • Hexaplnr. Andrew du Macs (Masius, tl573; see on his merits Sst. i. 13-16) possessed a copy containing part of Deut., Josh., Judges, 1 and 2 Sam., 1 and '_' Kings, Chron., Ezr., Esth.

, Judith, and part of Tobit. Unfortunately, this codex has disappeared ; but what, in all likeli- hood, is the second volume of it, is preserved at the Ambrosian Library at Milan, and was piven to the world through the labours of Ceriani and a generous gift of Frederick Eicld (see above, p. 443'') as the Codex Syro-Hexaplaris Ambrosianus in a photo-lithograiihic facsimile edition as torn. vii. of the Monumenta sncra et profaTia [Milano, 1874, fol.)

; while the other parts tliat survived of this version (from Gen., Ex., Numb., .Josh,, Judges, 1 and 2 Kings) have been most carefully edited in the la.st work of P. de Lagarde (Hililiutheca Syrincce a Paulo de Logardt collects quw ad Philo- loginm Sacram pertinent, (iottingae, 1892, 4°, finished by A. Kahlfs). Of the former publications — .see the list in Nestle, Litt. syr. p. 29 f.

— only that of Thomas Skat Uordam {Librt Jud'uum et Ruth secundum versionem syriaco, hexaplarem, Haunise, 1859-61, 4°) deserves mention, on account of the ' Dissertatio de regulis grammaticis, quas secutua est Paulus Tellensis in Veteri Testamento ex Grneco Syriace vertendo' (pp. 1-57), together with Field's Olium Norvicensc, sive Tcntamen de Jicliquiis Aq^iilm Symmachi et Theodotionis e lingua Hyriftra in Gracam ronvertendis, Oxon. 1S64, 4°.

On account of the MSS used by Paul, and the princiijles followed by him, this version forms our chief authority for the text of Origen's recension. Oa the Arabic translation based on it see above, p. 44;')'. For the literature see W. Wright, art. ' Syriac Literature' in Eney. Brit. vol. xxii. = Short history, p. 18 ; Field, llcxapla, L p. Ixviitf. ; Sw. 112ir. ; Urt. 117. On other attempts to translate parts of (5 into Syriac, by Polycarp in the 5th cent. (Psalms), Jacob of Ede.

ssa in the years 704-5, see Sw. p. 115f. ; Gwynn, Dirt. Chr. /Hog. iv. 433. On the fragments of translations in the so-called Palestinian ilialect, we may refer to Sw. p. 114 f., and especially to F. C. I'.urkitt ('Christian Pale- stinian Literature' in JThSt, ii. 17411'. ). The frag- ments enumerated by Sw. p. 115, from Gen., Ex., Numb., 1 Sam., 1 kin"s, Psalms, Prov., Job, AVisd., Anuis, Micah, Joel, Jonah, Zech., Is.

, Jeremiah, have been augmented since by the publication of Palestinian Syriac texts from pal- impsest fragments in the Taylor-Schechtcr collec- tion, edited by A. S. Lewis and M. I). Gibson (l>ond. 1900, 4°), containing portions of Numb., Deut., Psalms, Is., Jer., and — as recognized by V. IJyssel— of Sirach (frag, xviii.) On the date and place of this whole literature see liiirkitt, I.e.

Up to the present day several of the Churches in which these various versions of G arose, have never emancipated themselves from them. But even in those parts where, as in the Latin West through Jerome, or in modern Europe through the influence of the Reformation, new Bible versions, based on the Hebrew original, came into use, there is still, in greater or less degree, an echo of (S to be licard through worship and theology.

It may Kulliie to recall tlie Pnij'er-Book version of the I'snims, or even the latest revision of the English Bible, in which it is not the names alone of the lM)oks of the OT from Genesis to Ecclesiasticus that tell of this first and most remarkable of all bibli- cal versions. Matkuials for run Restoration op ffi.— The materials for the restoration of (5 are, as can be gathered from the preceding history, (1) manu- scripts, (2) versions, (3) quotations. (1) Manuscripts. — The M.

SS used for the work of Holmes-P.arsons arecountcil at the end of vol. v. as 311 ; I. -XIII., being uncial MSS, are designated by Roman, the rest, being cursives, by Arabic figures. Tliere are some mistakes in this list : 23, for instance, the Codex Venetus, is an uncial codex ; others, counted under diH'erent numbers, have turned out to be parts of one and the same MS.

Another system of designation, used by Lagarde and in the Cambridge Septuagint, is to denote the uncial MSS by the capital letters of the Latin (and Greek) alphabet ; for a particular class of MSS Lagarde used small letters of the Roman, Cornill (in Ezekiel) of the tJreek alphabet.

It will be tlie task of the large Cambridge Septuagint to introduce a system of notation that will be generally accepted ; meanwhile it is best to adhere for the uncials to the system of Lagarde-Swete, for the cursives to Holmes- Parsons, always keeping in mind that the sharp distinctiim between uncials and cursives is in no way justified.

Ab to the contents, the MSS may be divided into those which contain the whole Bible (OT) or parts of it, the Octateuch,* the Historical, Poetical, and Prophetical books. Most frequent are MSS of the Psalms. The arrangement of these groups, and of the books within each group, varies greatly (see Sw. pp. 195-230 : ' Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of the Books ').

The books of Moses seem to stand at the head with no exception, and in all MSS the order seems to be the usual one, the inverted order, Nu. Lev. being atte.sted only by Melito (Ens. HE iv. 26; Sw. p. 203), in the list published by Mommsen (Sw. p. 212), and by Leontius of Byzantium (Sw. p. 207). In Latin the tliird book is sometimes called Leviticurn, the fifth Deuteronomi««.

Philo's designation of the latter, t) 'ETrii/o^/s, is taken from the book of Plato so inscribed ; Judges he calls il Twv Kpi/xaTuv ^(/SXos. The counting of four books of Kings or rather Kingdoms (liaffiXfiui') has been retained by the Latin Bible, partially also the name llapaXeiTrdfiefa for Chronicles. The form napa\ttirifx(yai occurs not only in Gregory of Nazianzns and Leontius (see Sw. [ip. 205, 207), but also in Origen (now Berlin edition, iii. 74, 1.

15 ; not decisive io tj irpon-j ISeurlpq.] tQv n., i. 341, ii. 374). On the other books and their names see Sw. p. 216 ; but note that the last books are gener- ally called ri, JIoKxa/SaiVd, books treating of (Judas) Macc.aba'us ; the extension of the name to the whole family, now generally in use, the M,accabe&» (plural), is not original. On the groupin" of the books (Historical, mcluding Pentateucli, Poetical, Prophetical) see Sw. p. 218 ; on their number, Sw. p. 219; art. CANON in vol. i. p.

348 ff. ; on the internal order, Sw. p. 226. The statement of J. M. Fuller [Upcaker's Commentary on the Aporryphii, i. 308), that the MSS ordered by Constantino From Euscbius were ' the first comtilete Greek Bible,' and that it contained apparently the books of the Ilelirew Canon and the Alexandrian version of the Apocrypha added as an Appendix, does not seem to restx)n sure foundation. When Eu.

sebius writes that he sent off the books iy rro\vTe\ui 7}ffKr]fi4voii Tfi'-x^^i Tptaaa Kal TtTpoao-o, the most probable explanation of the much disputed closing words seems to be, that each Bible consisted of three or four volumes. In a note at the end of Esther in the Codex Sinaiticus it is stated that it • Orwli MSS moRtIv count Oen.-Ruth u booVn 1-8, u Jitr»- Tiyx« ; the Latin Msf> (Icn.

-Jtidgcn an IIrptate\ir/in8 ; ttu' word Hexat«iirh, now ho tinich In unc tliat It Iioh an ortirir' dcvot«d to it in the preueut worlc, •eemi to be An Ixuiovation of t^e late I 19tb century. 448 SEPTUAGIXT SEPTUAGINT was compared witli a MS beloiij,nng to Paniphilus, which dpxv^ M^ f^X^ ^'^^ "^^s vpjrnjs tujv UacrtXeiutVj el! 5i TTji/ 'E(r8rip SXriyev.

From this it is [irobable that it was an-anged, not like B, wliicli inserts the seven Poetical books (the five Canonical + Wisdom and Sirach) between Ezra and Esther, nor like A, in which the Prophets follow Chronicles, and after them Esther, but like S and N, in which Ezra and Esther follow in\mediately upon Chronicles. This would give a Bible of four volumes (Octateuch, Historical books, Prophetical books, Poetical books). As regards their age, the MSS range from the 3rd to the 16th cent.

To the 3rd cent, is ascribed a scrap of papyrus in the British Museum, yield- ing the text of Gn 14" (Pap. ccxii. ; see Sw. p. 146) and the fragment of a Psalter (cont. Ps 12''-15^), ' the oldest Bible MS in any language in the British Museum and one of the oldest in existence aiij'where' (see Facsimiles of Biblical Manuscripts in the British Museum, edited by Fred. G. Kenyon, 19U0, pi. i. Pap. ccxxx.)

It is impossible to give here a list of the MSS of (K, or even of the uncials ; some of them have been treated under separate articles ; see the letter.s AsBCL ; we must refer to Sw. p. 122 If. and tile literature quoted there ; only some supple- mentary remarks may be ottered — In A (Alexandrinus) the Psalter appears not to have been copied from the same original as the rest of theMS.but taken from a separateChurch-Psalter (just as in the Aldine Bible of 1518).

Hence the additions before and after the Psalms (letter of Atiianasius, canon of morning and evening psalms, etc. ; Canticles). It would be well to control its use in the Cambridge Septuagint by comparison once more with the original or a former collation ; see, e.ff., 1 Es 4''' A + airnOv; 2 Es 7° A has irpurov, not Trarptpov), On the connexion of B (Vaticanus) with Atiian- asius see Th.

Zahn, Athnnasiiis und der Bibel- knnon (Erlangen, 1901 : Sonderabdruck aus der Festschrift der Universitiit Erlangen zur Feier des . . Prinzregenten Luitpold von Baj-em), p. 33 : 'It must be seriously considered whether the famous Codex Vaticanus is not that Bible which was produced by Athanasius at the order of Constans at Kome about 340 through Alexandrian copyists' (see Nestle, Introduction, p. 181, where in the note read ' Constantius ' for 'Constans').

Ceriani's view, that B was written by a Western scribe, had been proposed already by Richard Simon [Hist. Crit. du NT, c. 32). That it contains the recen.sion of Hesychius, was for the first time, as it seems, stated by Grabe ; Masius believed it was that of Lucian, Montfaucon that of Origen. On the text of Judges in this MS see below. S is a more convenient symbol than N for the Codex Sinaiticus, and is adopted in Swete.

That the copyist who WTote the not« at the end of Esther on the collation with the Codex of Pam- pliilus is identical with the corrector K° is an im- |iortant hint for the restoration of the recension of Eusebius-Pamphilus. D (Cottonianus). As this famous MS was reduced by fire in 1731 to a heap of charred and shrivelled leaves, it would be worth while to make investiga- tions whether the collation made before that time by Wetstein (AT i. p. 134) is still in existence.

On the relation of its pictures to the mosaics of San Marco in Venice, see J. T. Tikkanen, Die Genesixmosaikenvon San Marco in Venedig und ihr Verhitltnis zu den Miniaturen der Cottonbibel, etc., Helsingfors, 1889, 4° (Acta Soc. Scient. Fenn. xvii. ). G (Sarravianus). Add to the publications men- tioned by Sw. p. 137 : — P. de Lagarde, Semitica, Zweites Heft, Gbtt. 1879 (vol. xxv. of the ' Abhand- lungen,' etc. : ' Die pariser blatter des codei Sarravianus ').

M (Coislinianus), collated by Wetstein {NT i. 134), for a great part by Lagarde (Hymrn. ii. 142 j Ankitndigung, iii. 27 ; USt. i. 8). Q (Marchalianus). The distinction established by Ceriani between the origin of the text and of the marginal matter in this MS, the latter only being Hexaplaric, is a great help for the classifica lion of the .MSS of G.

On the 23 uncial MSS, or parts of such, Avhich have not yet been used for any edition, and remain for the present without a symbolical letter or number, see Sw. 146 fl"., 170. No. 14 (formerly in the possession of W. H. Heckler) has lately been acquired by the University of Heidelber", and will be edited by Prof. G. Deissmann. On No. 6, the oldest biblical MS in the British Museum, see preceding column.

The transition from the uncials to the cursives may be made by tlie MS E, which is now dispersed in Oxford, London, Cambridge (1 leaf), and St. Petersburg. It was brought by Tischendorf from the East in 1853 and 1859 ; the Oxford part written in uncials, the Cambridge leaf, which was kept back by Tischendorf, making the transition from uncial to cursive writing, the rest in cursives. The whole recent history of this MS has been described by A.

Rahlfs in GGN (not GGA as in Kenyon, Fac- similes, plate v.), 1898, 98-112 ; see also Sw. 134 f. ; Lagarde, SSt. i. 1-11 ; facsimile in Kenyon, pi. v. Most cursives await careful investigation ; some will repay it ; otliers may be discarded by it, as later copies of MSS still existing, like 33, 97, 238, which belong to one MS, and are copied from 87, or even as copied from printed editions. This we suspect to be the case with Ho 31 (Genesis with catena), at Vienna {Theol. Gr.

4) [on the date of this MS Holmes wrote, ' videtur esse xiii. vel xiv. sasculi' ; Sw. p. 149 ' (xiv.)' ; Lagarde, Genesis grwce, ' sseculi xv. a me non collatus, sed inspectus tantum ' ; H. Achelis, ' Hippolytstudien ' in Ti', N. F. i.4, p. 97, places it in the 16th cent.], and with 83, a Pentateuch at Lisbon (formerly Evora) ' of the 16th cent.' Both will tuin out to be copied from the Aldine edition of 1518. See on the cursives the list of Sw. pp.

148-168, and note that 25 is at Munich in the ' Staats- (not Stadt-) bibliothek ' ; 53 agrees in Numbers fre- quently with the Old Latin Codex Lugdunensis ; 130 is by Lagarde called t, and ascribed to the 13tli 'utvid.'Sw. '(?xi.)' ; 93 in 3 columns, with 2 texts for Esther ; facsimile in Kenyon, pi. viii. ; 155 'Cod. Meermanni ii.' is now Bodl. misc. Gr. 204 ; 156 the only Greek MS containing in Ps 95 (96) '" the addition a ligno, in the form dri rt^ ^u\tp. ( — ) A Psalter not mentioned by Sw.

is in the Brit. Museum, Add. MS 19,352 a.d. 1066, valuable not only aa a dated e.\aniple of Greek writing of the 11th cent., but especially as an example of the best style of Bj-zantine decorative art, applied to the ornamentation of copies of the Scrijjtures [sea Kenyon, Facsimiles, pi. vii., where Jesus Christ is enthroned between two cherubim (or rather sera- phim) as illustration of Ps 79 (80) -]. On the Lectionaries, which must be classed among the MSS, see Sw. p. 1G8 f.

Their value would be increased if the Lectionary-system of the Greek Church is as old as has been contended for recently by C. R. Gregory, Tcxtkritik des Neuen Testa- mentes, i. (1901), p. 327 11". In spite of the great mass of witne.sses thus used for the great work of Holmes-Parsons and later editions, their classification is still a problem, even in a book like that of Judges, where the differences are most marked. Compare the judg- ment of G. Moore (SBOT, 'Judges,' p.

22): 'A SEPTUAGIXT SKPTUAGINT 419 comiilete stemma exhibiting the filiation of tliese M.SS and recensions cannot ue made from the colla- tions in HP ' ; we may even doubt the correctness of the remark added by Moore : ' it would be comparatively easy if we po^i>^es.sed a few accurate collations of tj'pic-j.1 MSS properly arraiij^uj.' Perhaps a good step towards this end would be to arrange complete lists of the singular and sub- singular readings of our oldest witnesses, as ABS, e?

i)ucially for B, because this MS serves as standard for the collations of the larger Cambridge Septua- gint. Another fact worth mentioning in this connexion is, that every new witness, in spite of the great number of MSS already collated and the still greater number of variations extracted from them, adds a new reading, even for the I'salms, for which some 120 JISS have been used for HP.

See, for instance, the spelling irpbaax^^ instead of Tojcxes first making its appearance in Kenyou, tarsinnks, plate v. Ps 79 (8U)''. (2) (3) The same is the case with the Versions and Quotations. On these see above, §§ iv. and vi. As but few of the Greek Fathers are accessible in trustworthy editions, a large field waits here for patient and careful workers.

But, even before these viinutite be settled, ffi can and must be used for that purpose for which it is of the greatest import- ance, namely the textual criticism of the Hebrew Bible. vii. Use of G.* — The remark of Swete has already been quoted— that ffi possesses a new and incrcasint importance in the field of biblical study (p. 437'' n.t).

Its value as a witness to the Hebrew text was recognized partially in the time of Origen and Jerome, and afresh in tlie days of the Renais- sance and onwards from the 17th cent. ; but it can be fully acknowledged only by those who adopt the views maintained chiefly by Olsliausen, Lagarde, and their followers, that all existing MSS of the Hebrew OT go back to a single official copy or re- cension, made up somewhere in Palestine, perhaps at Jamnia, about the 2nd cent, after Clirist.

To quote only one statement. G. Moore (SBOT, 'Judges,' p. 23) writes — •The other Ancient Versions fexcept O) — the Latin of St. Jerome in iU Vulj^ate form (.'^), the Sj riof; (S), and the .Jewish TarjT^im ("O are all Ijiised on the I'aleMijiian Hebrew Standard Tfil 0/ the tnd ceiii. A.D., aji are also the new Greek transla- tixtis of 'A!£H, aiiri the revisions of (3 after these, and in the main the translation found (for Jud^resl in ©BVUmN [t.e. B and its allifs).

The pre-he^aplaric O alone represents a Hebrew text older than the oJJldtU rmnon made m tlie tchool 0/ £. AyiAa.'

In other words, ffi represents for ns (I) the excgetical tradition, or at lea-st the exegetical opinions of a Jewish school, or — if that name asserts too much — of individual scholars more than 2U0(J years before our time ; it is the oldest commentary on the Hebrew Bible in existence ; (2) when re-translated into Hebrew — with the necessary precautions, of course — it represents for UB the Hebrew MS (or MSS) lying before its authors, which is 1000 years older than the oldest MS at present at our disposal, and 300 years older than the one to which all of our Hebrew MSS go back.

In the first instance, it is sufficient to recall the great number of hnprtx hqomena which occur in the limited range of Old Helirew literature. In the second iilace, we learn first that the pala>o- graiihical cnaraotcr of the pre-Massoretic MSS was very dillerent from ours : few matres lertionis, no vowels, no lilterii; Jinnies, no separation of words, so that even in liturgical books there was uncertainty about those points (cf. I's 105 (100)' aVa/3oii'o>'T«! = D'^i.'

for D-H') ; perhniis abbreviation * Ct. tor the following, Sw. ch. t. ' Tb« S«ptaairint M • T«F«lon,' pp. 314-841. VOL. IV. — 29 strokes for n, o, n ; see Lagarde, Mitthcilicngen, i. 21 ; Fel. Perles, Analckten (18'Jo, pp. 4-35). The second fact that comes to liglit from a cora- S arisen of ffi and iB. is, that there is a great illerence between particular books or seta of books in the OT.

This arises partly from the circumstance that all the books are not due to the same translators, but still more from the ditlerent character of the text Ijiiig before them. That Isaiah, for instance, found an interpreter not worthy of this book, was remarked long ago oy Zwingli ; the translator of Job, saj-s Swete, p. 316, was perhaps more familiar with Greek pagan literature than with Semitic poetry; where the grandson of Jesus Sirach made his mistakes, we can judge better now than before.

I5ut more im- portant is the fact that already the Hebrew texts used by the translators dillered in varying degrees from the Massoretic text. The differences between (5 and ffl can be tabu- lated as touching the sequence or the subject- matter. The difierences of the subject-matter are, of course, of greater interest ; they are of a tliree- fold character — additions, omissions, variations. On the differences of sequence see Sw. pp. 231- 242. There are unimportant diflerences in Gn 31. 36.

47, Ex 20 (order of commandments) ; Nu 1. 6. 26, Jos 9. 19 (vol. ii. p. 782) ; great differences in Ex 35^0, 3 Kegn. 4. 5. 6. 7. 10. 11, Pr 15. 20. 24, Jer 25-41. On Ex. see vol. i. p. 810 f.; on Kings, ii. 862 If. ; on Prov., Sw. p. 241 ; on Jer., vol. iii. p. 573 f.)* Very awkward is the different number- ing of the Psalms. On the difference in the subject-matter see Sw. 242 If.

If we were to have a complete edition of Origen's Hexapla with its critical signs, it would be convenient to see at a glance the omissions and additions. The Law offers the smallest number of dif- ferences ; but besides some famous additions, as Gn 4' SUXOw^fi' els rd Treolox, the second Kaivdv (who has been erased in Cod. A 10") 10-"" 11"-" (1 Ch l"-23 A) — his addition, in connexion with other variations, made the whole chronology of the world different, see vol. i. p.

397 If ; Oikonomos, iii. 703-835 — there are smaller additions of interest, as 8 sons of Japheth for 7 in Gn 10; 11 nations for 10 in Gn 15"- '■'''(the addition of the Ei/aioi, either overlooked by Origen or wanting in his copy) ; 5 sons of Dedan for 3 in 25' ; 13 heinous offences for 12 in Dt 27 (on v.* see Grintield, Apology, pp. xii, 191). On Joshua, which does not seem to have been translated together with the Pentateuch, see vol. ii. p. 781 ff., and Bennett (SHOT).

On the word laTuoi — or yaialis ; this is the accentuation of B"" — Oikonomos, ii. 495 If, 551, has 40 pages. For Judges, e.g. 16"- ", it is sufficient to refer to G. Moore. The chapters 1 Regn. (Samuel) 17. 18 furnish a good example of how much difference of opinion still prevails. What Kuenen and Wellhausen call a liarmonLstic omission on the part of G, is con- sidered by others as a later interpolation in ilS. That G preserved in 3 liegn.

(1 K) 8'^; " a quo- tation from the Book of Jashar (see vol. ii. p. 551), and, with it, what Kittel (Ilnndkom.) styles the oldest more explicit confession of Jahweh in Israel, should alone be sufficient to prove its importance. For the Book of Psalms even cursive MSS of G enrich our knowledge almut the liturgical use of the Psalms (see Sw. 250); in the alphabetic psalm 145 the missing letter 1 is restored, perhaps only • B. Pick In The (Amerlc.) Indtpmdent (1897, p.

1273) wrltet on OomlU's edition of JureniiaJi (in SBOT): 'II Ihave counted ripht, no less than 1S21 words have thus Deon eliminated from the t«xt ; and It is surprising that none of these relegated pas sages ooDoera any of the quoUUon from Jar. In lbs NT.' 450 SEPTUAGIXT SEPTUAGINT by conjecture. The adilition to Ps 13' quoted in Ro 3"-'* is omitted by A and 05 cursives out of 105. Already Jerome declared the codices of ffi ■which contain it, to be interpolated from Ko 3.

If this be so, the agreement of sB, on which for the XT Westcott-Hort laid so much stress, is of no great value at least for the I'salras ; * on the other hand, it is to the credit of those MSS if thty have preserved a text similar to that in the hands of St. Paul.— On Ps 151 see Oikonomos, iii. 634 f.; on the ecclesiastical Canticles and the Prayer of Manassas among them, Nestle, S.it. iii. 6 11'.

; and note that tliis piece has not been utilized for the Greek Concordances of Trommius and Hatch- Redpatli {cf. dv€^txvla.(TTot, dfirn-oaraTOS^ &ct€kto$). On Proverbs Lagarde's early book of 1863 is still useful. Whether the shorter form of Job, in wliich, according to Jerome's reckoning, ' sei)tingenti ferme aut octingenti versus desunt,' preserved a primitive form, or is, on the contrary, the etiect of abbreviation, see vol. ii. p.

164 ; and correct there the statement from Origen, that sometimes 16 or 19 verses were missing, into 14 or 15 (Ex- positor;/ Times, X. 523 ; Sw. 2o5). On Esther see vol. ii. p. 774 ; the Greek of the book reminds one of 2 Mac. (cf. Tpio-aXiTijpios) ; on Jeremiah see ii. 572 ; and cf. i. 252 as to the identity of language in Jer. and Baruch, which book in all MSS of C is immediately connected with Jer. and Lamentations. On the heading of the latter see vol. iii. p. 22. On Daniel see i. 557.

Dn 11^ is the only passage where the name of the 'Pu^aioi occurs in a translation from the Hebre^^■ (for d'b? as in C O"^ Xu 24~). The affinity of the Greek of this book with that of 1 Esdras has been justly pointed out in i. 761. In .

Jeremiah, Esther, and Daniel (5 oilers con- siderable passages not to be found in Itl ; hut in addition to these ffi has preserved whole books, some of them of the highest liistorieal or theo- logical interest, which are not to be found in the Hebrew Canon, partly because they were origin- ally WTitten in Greek, partly for unknown reasons. The number of these books varies greatly in the still e.

xisting documents ; of others only the titles have survived ; a certain number remained known through the medium of the mediajval Bible as 'Apocrypha' even in the Protestant Churches. On these see art. Apocrvtha, vol. i. p. Ill tl'., and the special articles, as Baruch, i. 251 ;t Bel and THE DRAGOX, 276; ESDRAS, FIRST AND SECOND, 757, 763; J Jeremy, Epistle of, vol. ii. p. 578; Judith, 822; Maccabep^s, books of (i. -v.), vol. iii. p.

187 ; Manasses, Prayer of, 232 ; further, SiRACH, Three Children (Sono of the), Susanna, Wisdom of Solomon. That the collection of these books, though it is * Swete'8 statement, that Oripen marked the passage with an •"telus, lacks reliable testhnonv ; the words of Jerome are curious : • in hebraico non haberi nee etge in tfptua^inta inffr- pretilnu, sed in editione vulgata, quae ^rffice «/i..i dlcitur e^ in toto orbe diversa est.'

The words in italics are omitted in Field's quotation from e<L Vail. iv. 663. t The puzzlinif fact that on the margin of the Svro-Hexaplarlo text of Baruch there arc 3 notes stating that certain words in ]17 23 are not found in the Hebrew, which has been quoted for a Hebrew orijrin of this part of the book (i. '2,''i2 ; Sw. 276, n. S from Bevan in Encpc. Bibl.

L 494), is in contradiction to the remark at the head of the book, that the whole was obelized by Origen, and finds a very simple solution. For these notes do not refer to the text of Baruch, hut of the Hebrew OT iiuoted by Baruch 2' from Dt 2853. Ori^fn called attention to the fact that the generalizing ' every man ' «.«;•«■•» in Bar 2^ haa no P'N P'x to correspond in Dt 28". Thus these notes are a token of the great care which Origen bestowed on his Hexapla. t On the statement of Sw. p.

266, and Thackeray (DO, vol. i. p. 7,'i8), that Cod. A entitles both books iifii^t, cf. 'Nestle Marmnalien (1893), p. 28f., where it is shown that this is merely due to the knife of the English bookbinder, who cut away in both cases the first line of the title Er^«( (or IiyJ)«() transmitted to us almost exclusively through the Church, began to form itself in pre-Christian times, is clear from the contents (see vol. L 117, iii. 35).

A trace that G difi'ered from fH in its order and extent may be found in Josephus ; for he uses not only the Greek Esdras and the Additions to Esther, but follows also the order of G (not Ifl) when he counts 5 hooks of Moses, 13 Prophetical and 4 Poetical books, placing, apparently. Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, Esther (from the Hagiographa) after Kings (see Strack, ' Kanon des AX, in PRE^ ix. 752). On some lists of other Apocryphal books see Sw. p.

281 ; the Catalogue of the Sixty Books begins after the canonical and so-called 'apocryphal' books (the two Wisdoms, etc.) : Koi Saa a.ir6Kpv(pa- 'Addfi, 'Eni'x, Aduext ilarptapxai, llpofffux'? 'Iwini0, 'EXSdS, AiaBi'iKij yiwv(Tiuis,' AvaXTiif/i! M. etc. It is an interesting question, whether a trace of this apocryphal tradi- tion is not to be found already in Sirach (49''''^*).

For, after he has gone through the whole literature of the OT down to Zorobabel and Nehemias, he suddenly returns to Enoch, Joseph, Shem, Seth, and Adam. In an appendix to the Cambridge Septuagint at least two of these books have found a place — the Psalms of Solomon (the apparatus being much en- larged in the 2nd ed. (iii. 765 U'.)) and the Greek fragments of the Book of Enoch (for the first time added in the 2nd ed. (iii. 789 ff.)) On the Psalms of Solomon cf.

the German translation of Kittel in Kautzsch, Die Pseudcpigrnphen,121-li8; on Enoch, the new Berlin edition, Das Bitch Henoch, lieraus- gegebeu von Dr. Job. Flemminjr und Dr. L. Rader- macher, 1901. Much to be welcomed would be a collection of the OT apocrypha as sketched by Sw. p.

285, including amongst other remains the Rest of t/ie IVoi-ds of Baruch, the Apocalypse of Baruch, the Testament of Abraham, parts of the Oracul'i Sihyllina, the Testaments of the XII Patriarch'^, the Latin AscenMon of Isaiah (with the new Greek Fragments published by Grenfell, Hunt in The Amherst Papyri, part i. 1900; see on it F. C. Burkitt, The Classical Review, xiv. 457-459) ; per- haps also the Latin versions of 4 Esdras, Assump- tion of Moses, Book of Jubilees.

All these additions and omissions cover but the smaller part of the differences between US and ffi ; far more numerous are the variations in the proper sense of the word, the passages where G offers a reading different from Ifl. On this point cf. Sw. part ii. ch. v. ' The Septuagint as a Version,' and p.art iii. ch. iv. 'The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study.' A thorough, accurate, and cautious comparison between itl and G will exhibit these variations.

The comparison must be cautious, else there is the risk of stating variations where there are none, and it must be accurate and thorough, else real variations might be overlooked. In the lirst place, care must be taken to eliminate as much as possible from G all intra-Greek corrup- tions, i.e.

clerical errors, that sprang up in the course of transmission of the Greek text, and it is a mistake of many Commentaries to rest content to take the text of the small Cambridge Septuagint as the standard, as former scholars used to acqui»-so» in that of the Sixtina. Take as example the la'.est German Commentary on Genesis, that of Gunkel (Gottingen, 1901), and the very first note touching the textual criticism of this book. It concerns the use of the Divine names in ch. 2, and runs : ' .

Tiir d'.iVk is found in Genesis in Hebrew only in chs. 2. 3 (LXX, differing from the Hebrew, has in 2»' '•»•"• " i Sfis).' Now, this is true of the Codex Alezan- drinus : if Gunkel had used the editio Sixtina, he would have had to add vv,'- " ; and if we are still more circumspect, as commentators ought to be, and resort to Philo, Field's Hexapla, the collations oj SEPTUAGINT SEnUAGINT 451 H ;lmes, the versions as mtuesses for ffi, we must add further v.*; i.e.

not 5 times, but 8 times, G omits ■Ti.T in this chapter, and liaa it only twice (w."-").* The second care must be to observe the practice of these translators ; cf. Sw. p. 325 : 'The Alexandrian translators, wliile loyal to their original, aometinios even to a fault, manifest notliinj; like the slavish adherence to the letter with which Aquila has been charged.

They often amplify and occasionally orait ; they render the same Hebrew words by more than one Greek efjuivalent, even in the same context ; they intro- duce metaphors or grammatical constructions which have no place in the Hebrew text, and probably at no time had a place there, or tliey abandon lifjures of speech where the}' exist in the original.' Tliere is no mention here of the fact especially urged by Frankel, that the translators followed some sort of exegetical tradition (L.

Frankel, Vurstndien zu der Sc/itutiijiiifri, 1841 ; Ueber den EinJIuss der paldstitiixc/ieti Exegese auf die alexandrinische Hermrncitli/:, 1851). We must further bear in mind that the translators were accustomed to the Aramaic speech rather than to the Hebrew. To the examples quoted by Sw. p. 319, add, for in- stance, Ps 59 (60)« i'm = Ajrt$, 140 (141)' D.i-riy5 = ivSoKlais atnuv. Already Jerome remarked on this word in Ec l" nijn = vpoalpcaa : ' non hebraicum sermonem expre.

sserunt, sed syrum.' On meanmgs attached to Hebrew roots known to us only from Arabic see Sw. p. 498, Ps 83 (84) ' iiiaei, Dn "i^ (LXX) to60ri= ^Inzv. A glance into modern commentaries or the 'Critical Notes' after the Hebrew text in SBOT will show the importance of G in this direction. No conscientious commentator on the Hebrew OT can dis|)ense wth constant reference to (5.

We quote some examples from the first chapter of some books in SBOT— Ie On 1 Ball replace* c^p^ by mm^rvtuyi^t ; but he, too, has overlooked the interesting vanant in v. 18 (like all commen- taries (to our knowlcdffe, Dillmann, Spurrell, UolzLnger, Guokel), except T. G. Mt^intcl, Crituche PolyiiLotten-Cunferenztn uiier dot erste. Buck MoKe, 1790 ; a work of praiaeworthy in- dustn), no fcnving the sing. nJ'lJ'CC, O the pL ipx'", <•<•• n'rif'"?, the latter being condnned by Pe 135 (1.

%)", where /ID has tlie [>liiral, Q il^tjff.Ki the singular. The same difference oncurs 2- !0 ' his works') ; and tliuL this is not unintentional, is shown by the Targum Jonathan, which understands tile passjige of those 10 wondrous works whieh (Jod is said by rabbinical wit to have created. In Lv 1 Driver receives readings of © into the text in w.l7. »■ 1« ; In Nu 1 Paterson in v." ^Niyi lor ^Kiyi, /ID. For Jos 1 it is sufficient to quote Bennett's remark on v.

2 ; ' in this and other cases glosses, etc, not found in © art probably glosses later than the MS from which 0 was translated, and therefore better treated as variations of the text' A remark on Judgeji by Moore has already been quoted ; in !'• he reads 'p'jDyi for D]in ; one witness of (5 and the Coptic offering the doublet fura nv Juz^v 'A^j/mX^x. The original read* ing, the simple Amalec, has been found since, for the first time, in the Latin Lugdunensis, published by U. Robert.

On Samuel, after what has been done byThenius, Wellhausen, Driver, Klosteruiann, Budde, II. P. Smith, any word is super- fluous ; but the question may be asked, whether one would have found, r.g., in 1 S l" the true reading E'^f 9 18? tor D'1?? lyS'f by mere conjecture without the help of the versions (i» fi*rxtt Tfi»tT>Xt>T,).

And if we had hit on it In this way, we should not have had the same confidence In Its truth as we have now, when it is attested by the oldest witness attainabl& As far as we have seen, in every part of the SBOT that has appeared as yet, one or more rtadiiujg from (3 have been received into the text in the first chapter bv such different scholars as Comlll.Toy, Wellhausen, Siegfried, Kamphausen, Outhe, Kittel. But how much remains to be done may be illuiitrated by two examples from 1 Ch 1. On v.

» Kittel remarks : ' O + VLijea ; It bu crept In '/y error from v.' after )1' (ct (34,' overlooking the \l • Even in t." It Is omitted by a few witnenes (Ood. 87, Ambroslus), but Augustine testifies to it, saying expressly : ' NuUo modo vacare arbitror . . auod ah Ipso divini libri huiiis exordlo . . umiue ad hunc locum, nuaquam positum est Dominus Deua, sed tantunnnodo Deus : nunc vero ubi ad Id vontum est ... it Scriptura locut est: Et sumpsit Domiuus Deua.

* fact that (5 has ' EUsa ' among the sons of Japheth already In Gn lO'J. Again, in v.»2 Kittel omits to mention the additional names Raguel and Nabdeel, offered by man.v witnesses, just aa in Qenesia. If eart-juUii compared with /ID.'O turns out to be (As inott wUuable aid fur the explanation of the Hebrew Bible. But (5 is not less indispensable to the study of the XT : see on this point S w. pp. 450-457 ; Pearson a judgment (at the head of this article) ; Thayer's art.

Language of the NT, vol. iii. p. 40. To quote only one example : d7a7ri;T4s and p.oi/oyei'-/it both correspond in G to Heb. I'n;; the one occurs in the Synoptic Gospels, the other in John. Nor can the student of Ecclesiastical Literature succeed without familiarity with G (see Sw.pt. iii. ch. V. ' Influence of the LXX on Christian Litera- ture,' p. 46111".) The doctrinal as well as the devotional wTitings are full of its influence.

Take a book like Brightman's Liturgies, Eastern and Western, where tlie quotations are printed in black type, or an edition like that of the Apostolic Con-ititutions bj' Lagarde, which gives at the foot of the text the references to the biblical pas- sages ; the index of the latter shows more quota- tions from the OT than from tlie NT. Even many works of Christian art cannot be understood without recourse to G. Cf. D.

Kauf- mann, ' Errors in the Septuagint and the Vulgate from which Illustrations and Scul|)tures derived their origin ' {JQli xi. 163-160). If we speak of the firmament, we do so because G used rrepiufw., considering the heavens as frozen water. One side of tlie importance of G, which Pearson was not yet able to appreciate, lies in the value it ha,^ ior Semitic philology, apart from the exegesis of the OT. The system of^Hebrew vocalization is an invention of about the 7th cent. A.D.

; how the words were pronounced in the time of Christ, or Isaiah, or king Jlesha,— G calls him Muiro, see vol. iii. p. 349,— or David, or Moses, we do not know. Our oldest witness is again the transliteration of proper names and other words in G. Whether nouns of the form ijin inclek were still heard as monosyllables (nmUc), can be ascertained by the help of G. To have pointed out this importance of G is one of the merits of Lagarde {Ucbersicht, etc.

) ; the Supplement to the Concordance of Hatch- Red path (Fasc. i., containing a Concordance to the I'roper Names occurring in the Septuagint, 1900) helps much to facilitate studies in this direc- tion. These transliterations have, vice versA, their bearing on the question of Gree/c pronunciation ; see .some remarks in this directi(m bj' Kittel {SBOT, 'Chronicles,' p. 52 f.) and Macke, Era.imus oder Beuchlin (Siegburg, Progr. 1900).

On the place which G occupies in the history of the Greek Language, philologists now judge mucU more favourably than twenty years ago ; cf. ch. iv. in Sw. 289-314, ' the Greek of the Septuagint,' and add to the literature quoted there, p. 314, a reference to I v. Korsiinskie, Percvod iA'A''( Moskoa, 1878, 704 pp.), in Kussian : The version of the Septuagint and its importance in the hiitory of Greek Language and Literature ; further, Thayer s art. Language of the NT, vol. iii. p. 3611'.

; and Paul Kretschmcr, ' Uio Entstehung der Koine ' {Sitzungsb. d. IVirner A/c., phil. hist. KL, vol. 143, and sejiarately, 1900); Albert Thumb, Die griech- ische Sprache im Zi'italter (lis llcllenismus: Beitriige zur Geschichte unit Beurtheilitng der Koii'r), Strass- burg, 1901 (cf. Ed. Schwyzer in Ncue Jahrh. 1901, I). 2;J311'.); Oikonomos, ii. 91411. ; Grinfield, 146; H. A. A. Kennedy, ' Kcccnt Research in the Lan- guage of the NT" [Expos. Times, xii. 341, 455, 557) ; J. H. Moulton (i/». p.

362 in the notice of G. A. Deissniann, Bible Studies; Authorized Tr. by Alexander Grieve ; Edinburgh, Clark, 1901 ). Interesting are the philological remarks of Origcn (now ed-X 452 SEPTUAGINT SEPTUAGINT If the use and importance of (5 are such even in the unsatisfactory condition in which it lies at present before us, how much more will these be acknowledged when we have a better edition of it.

In such an edition, also, the accessory matter will demand due attention, the capitula- tion, lections, etc. (see Sw. pp. 342-366, 'Text- divisions : Stichi, Chapters, Lections, CateruB '). (o) In careful MSS of the classics (as in iIkvsp of Demosthenes, Herodotus) the lines have been counted i^y hundreds or by fifties, and their total stated at the end, because the copyist were paid according to their number, the normal line or (TT.'s;?

being the Homeric hexameter of 16 syllables or 37 to 38 letters on an average.* This has been introduced into Bible MSS.

One of the copyists of B, for instance, preserved on the margins the numbers from the MS which he copie<i ; so did Paul of Telia from the copy which he translated (616) into Syriac Afterwards the numbers 'were gathered into sticho- metrica) lists ; the most important of those lists are that in the Codex Claromontanus, the one lirstpublished by Mommsen, and that of Nicephorus; Me Sandav, Studia Biblica, iii. 266; Sw. 346 ; Berger, Uistoire de la Vulgate, 1893, pp. 316-327, 363 ; 0. H.

Turner in JTIiSt, ii. (Jan. 1901) 2a6. For books like Sirach and Job (with asterisks, 2200 ; without, 1600 stichi) these lists are especially valuable. (t) Jerome introduced into his Latin Bible the custom ol writing the text according to sense'linti, k^Xo. or w^/wbtab, 'quo<l in Demosthene et TuUio solet fieri'; the same was done for the Greek Dijde^:ajjrop/teton by Hesychius of Jerusalem, who at the same time divided the text into chapters.

(c) Such a capitulation is found already in some of our oldest MSS, as ABS ; for several books B gives even a double capitula* tion, dividing, for instance. Proverbs into 61 and 16, Eccles. into 25 and 7, Canticles into 40 and 5 chapters. Likewise the Syriac Urzapla (apparently from the copy from which it was taken) has in Joshua 52 and 11, Judges 65 and 7, 8 Regn- 105 and 18 chapters. In the same version and several Greek MSS summaries, t.

tAoj ot xtfixJux-ix, are added, and lists of them grefixed to the books (Sw. p. 354). The ' Synopsis ' ascribed to hrj'Bostom is, to a large extent, nothing but a collection of such *ijaAa<oE, The 88 chapters into which Hesychius di\ided Isaiah have been published lately by M. Faulhaber {Uesyckii Hierosoliimitani Interpretatio Isaiie prophette, Friburgi, 1900). These capitulations may become important hints for the classification of MSS.

In Canticles the summaries assume the character of stage directions ; see Er. Klostermann, ' Eine alte EoUenverteilungzum Hohenliede' (,ZATW xlx. (1899) 16S-182, from Cod. V). ((Z) The beginning and the end of the Lessons, which were read in Church already in the times of Origen and still earlier, were marked mth otpxr. and TiA«, the occasion sometimes being added on which the lesson was read (Sw. p. 356). An early specimen was the copy from which Paul of Telia made bis version.

On the division of the Psalter into 20 xa.BiirfiMrm see Sw. p. 359, or any printed Greek Church-Psalter. Interesting is the different numbering of the Commandments of the Decalogue in AB (see Sw. p. 365), and the division of the Book of the Covenant (Ex 20-23) mto 77 sections in the Codex Zittavieusis (H. A. Bedpath in Expos. Tim<4, viii 383). All these particulars must be attended to in a future edition, somewhat in the same way as in the edition of .

Jerome's Latin NT published by Wordsworth-Wliite ; but the chief difficulty is about the constitution of the text. For some books, as Judges, Esther, Tobit, it will be indis- pensable to give parallel texts. In the closing chapter of his Introdicrtion Swete has sketched some of the lines on which a future edition must be prepared.

But before this great work can be finished, and for the benefit of all wlio cannot aftbrd to procure it, it seems desirable to put together, either on the outer margins of the minor edition or in an Appendix, tliose emendations of the errors of B which are certain or all but certain. Still better would be a Commentary on ffi, which is as urgently needed as a Grammar and a Lexicon.'

^ etvrt TvD ut rk Zrat hi^eu ; lit 159, uitutriv m Itc 'E^fiadftuv ifif-tv ttuTKtrK ^ f4,ii tupovrtf t-/> Xiitv xtiuitrjv irafi' ' EXXr,ri¥ «»(t«iTA«- xiteti iit ir* KXAoir ro\>.M<i xtt'i rxi'mv kx) •riroirxi^ecd t^, irpeirt' fttftririK But this very word is found in Cicero, ad Attic xiii. 29. " By a happy fortune the lines in the Greek NT of the Wiirtemberg Bible Society at Stuttgart agree as closely as possible with the length of the ancient rT<x«; see Nestle, Jntroductiont p. 49.

t Take some examples at haphazard. In 8 Kegn. IS'" all texts (MSS, eto.) give xai Uiwpniri^ tSr /ittriUJmr ('and he tmrtit the kingdom '> flD has y^e'.Ti (• he took an oath of the king- dam '>. This la correct ; the translator mistook it for JTDb.ll | Appesdix: The later Gr. Versions.— "Vhs question whether (5 was used also in Palestine in the synagogues, has been answered affirmatively and negatively. At all events after ffi had passed into the hands of the Church, and an official Heb.

text, dillerent from the old one, had received the ajiprobation of the Rabbis, attempts were made among the Jews at new translations. From Justin we learn that the Jews declared G to be wrong in some details (/17J e'tvai Iv naiv d\j)9^), and that they tried new translations (oiW-o! i^riye'iado.i TreipCivrat). Irena^us mentions two who dared such a thing in his time (ujs ivtoi (paatv rCiv fieBep/xriveuELv ToX(i.

wviwv Tat ypaipdi) — Theodotion of Ephesus and Aquila of Pontus, both Jewish proselytes. Origen was so zealous as to procure both these translations and, in addition, that of Symmachus and parts of three more. With those materials he conipoBcd his Hexapla (see above). And all that we knew till quite recently of these translations — apart from a few Talmudic translations from Aquila — we owed to Origen.

It was only in 1897 that the first fragments of a separate copy of Aquila were found among the palimpsests of tlie Taylor- Schechter collection ; but even those may go back to the library of Origen. For brevity's sake we must refer to Sw. pp. 29-58. (1) The version of Aquila, according to one tradi- tion T(vd{pi3r)! or vev6ep6s of the emperor Hadrian, superintendent of the buUdin" of Alia Capitolina, won for Christianity, but finally pupil of R. 'A^iba, is the most literal imaginable.

By the emperor Justinian it was ordered that no other was to be used in the JeAvish synagogues. It is therefore possible that the copy of wliich fragments were found among the Hebrew-Greek palimpsests from Cairo, and which is ascribed to the 6th cent., may have been a synagogue copy.

But as it has been used for Jewish purposes apparently by the same time and hand which turned the fragments of Origen's Hexapla to the same use, both Greek MSS may have come from the same quarter ; and of the Hexapla it is the more probable that it came from Christian hands, because fragments of Greek MSS of the NT were found along with tliem. See, besides the publication of Burkitt, Taylor's new book mentioned above. On plates iii-viii it contains portions of Ps 90-92. 96-98. 102. 103.

Another small but interesting fragment of Aquila (mentioned by Sw. p. 170, postscript) has been published by Grenfell-Hunt in The Amherst Papyri, part i. (Lond. 1900, pp. 30, 31). On the top of a letter from Rome, \vritten probably be- tween 250 and 285 A.D.

, an uncial hand of the late 3rd or, more probably, early 4tli cent, has written part of the first verse of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and a more cursive hand, apparently about the time of Constantine, the first 5 verses of Genesis in (5, followed by the version of Aquila. These two biblical fragments may therefore claim to be amongst the earliest known, and the Genesis frag- ment is the oldest authority for the first 5 verses.' In the Aquila fragment the beginning of v. and the end of v.'

are here recorded for the first time. The Hebrew text which was translated hy Aquila agrees very closely with fH ; but it is interesting to observe that, of his few variations, some at least liave the support of still existing Hebrew MSS. The tetragrammaton ni.T is written in the old Hebrew letters. The version seems to have covered the whole of the Hebrew canon. (' and he taXisJied Uiwkrtrt). Again, we have in 1911 ir rrtipt^n Kuptov for «tj« I 91.

xifiiei, the latter {xuptoi) being read in A. A rommentary would have further the task of calling attention to the interpunction ; cf. Ps 44 (4ri)7, where it Is a question whether there must be a comma before and after « 0iof, or In v.s after ixpiru n^^OT in Is 611 after f;t:^"i'/^ and cTirT«Xxir ft*. In ll 716 itxuSu is In the Concordance of Hatch-Redpath re «cK0<(, while it is a verb. etc.

9 of Hatuh-Bedpath retemd U SEPTUAGIXT SEPTUAGIXT 453 Strange is the statement of Origen on Lamenta- tions (new edition, iii. 256) : "E/cSocrtt 5^ 'A<cAa »taJ OioSoriutfOS iv TOfS Op^fois ov ip^peratj fxovov o^ ^Vfi/xdx^^ Kal tiSk 'B^So/iriKoi'Ta, especially when we compare the same author's remark on 4^ (p. 270) : o 5i 'Ajri^Aas iifnj irvfC^a fivKTy)puv ij/i^y, ^Vfifiaxos oi vvoij II. ii. (see Field, ii, 743 11'. ). (2) Theodotion's work — on his date see Sw. p. 42 f., ami Th. Zahn, PA'£'» ix.

403 (on Irena;us)— was rather a revision of G than an independent version, the revision being made on the whole upon the basis of IB. For a specimen of it see Jer 40"'" and the 13k. of Daniel, where it replaced the original G ; see S. R. Driver, The Book of Daniel, in the Cambridge Bible for Schools, 1900, pp. xviii, .\cviii-c. The statement that his version seems to have in- cluded Baruch {Dui. Ckr. Biog. iv. 44 ; Sw. p. 44, etc.) is to be corrected after the explanation given above, p.

450, note t. Cf. on Theodotion (whose name h.as the same meaning as that of the Tar- gumist .Jonathan), Rahlfs in GGN, 1898, p. 109. (3) The works of Symmachus, including a Com- mentary on St. Matthew,* Origen got from a Christian woman, Juliana,t who had received them from the author liiraself. If Aquila is the most important of the three because of his literal- ness, Symni.

is in many respects the most interest- ing for his attempt to produce good Greek and for many of his interpretations ; cf. Gn 1-'' (KTtffer 6 Oeds Tie SivOp'jjTrov iv ilKbvi dtatpipui' 6p$ioy [i ^efis] (KTiaev ainiv with 1 S 28" (Nestle, Marginalien, p. 3).

(4) Besides these versions of the whole of the OT, Origen had at his disposal for single books two or three otlier versions, which from their place in tlie Hexapla got the designations Quinia (e' iri iTTTTi), Sexta {t (ktij), Septimn (f i^SS/iTj). As to wlience and when he obtained Siem, tradition varies (see Sw. p. 5311.): one at Nicopolis near Actium, the other at Jericho ; one under Caracalla, the other under Alexander Severus.

One at least is reported to have been found iv irlBois ; from this and from the expression of Eusebius, ovx oTo' S8ev (k Tivuv pn'x^v rdv irdXai Xac^at'OtVas xpitvov els (puji di'ix'fi'ffo!, it has been concluded that they were, perhaps, hidden during a time of persecution, and that the one found at Nicopolis may have been a relic of tlie early Christianity of Kpirus (see Sw. p. 55, quoting from Lightfoot, Bihlical Essays, p. 432). Hut ir/ffoi — see Sw. p. 53, n.

2 — are mentioned elsewhere, as used for preserving books instead of cistm or capsm. Jerome attributes both to Jewish translators; but they seem rather to be due to Christians. The autlior of the Quinia is charac- terize<l by Field as omnium elegantissimus. Which of the books of the OT were preserved in them is not quite clear ; in the Quinta at all events 4 Regn., Job, Ps.alm8, Canticles, Minor Prophets; in tlie Hexta also Job, I'aaliiis, Canticles, Ilai) 3.

A kind of version sometimes seems to be quoted as (5 2i;po5 (see Syriac Versions) and A 'E^patot; but under the latter designation are to be under- stood Greek quotations from the Helircw, due to such authors as were acquainted with that lan- guage. Tlie so-called Gracus Venctus, a version of part of the OT, preserved in a single MS of the 14th or 15th cent, at Venice, is interesting as the work • On the hope that this work wna still in existence In the loth cent. 8<.'e Urt. p. 83.

On tliL' suet of the Svmniiu;hiaiii Ke l'hila»triu8, d« hceres. c. 145 : ' hmrftici aiii qui Ihcodotionis etSymmachi ibidem iiiteri»retationem diverso modo Bequutitur,' »nd the remark of the »,>Tnc writer, a 116: 'est hmrusis, (|ua> iterum poot Aquilani f n'f/iHfahominum interpretationein oocipit, oon illorum Deatissiiuorum Bcptua^nta duorum qui intcgre Inriolutcque de Trinitate Bcntientes ecclesin cathollcB (unila- menta certiisima tradiderunt interpretantes scripturu mens.

' t Th » tombstone of a certain Juliana from Antioch, who died »t Oerasa, haa been found there bj' Merrill ; see lUi, UJ95, S86 ; ich'jrer, GV Y* u. liSn., 83i of a medioeval .Tew, perhaps a certain Elissens at the court of Murad I. at -Vdrianople in the 2nd half of the 14tli cent. : it attempts to give the Hebrew in Attic Greek and the Aramaic parts of Daniel in the Doric dialect, and renders .ti.t by (SfTwr^y, oiaLoyrfjs, dvrovpybs. See the edition of O. V.

Gebhardt (Leipzig, 1875, with a Preface by Franz Delitzsch ; Sw. p. 56). The Greek column of the Hebrew, Chaldee- Sjianish-Greek Polyglot of the Pentateuch, printed at Constantinople in Hebrew characters (1547), has been transliterated and printed separately ( 1S'J7) by D. C. Hesseling, and described by Lazare Belleli (Paris, 1897, La version 7i6ogrec(fue du Pcntateuche Polyglotte).

It is of interest tor the student of modem Greek, and so are the translations of the whole Bible or of parts of it into modem Greek ; but they do not fall within the scope of the present article. Of the OT as a whole the Catalogue of the British Museum mentions but one edition in modern Greek (London, 1840, by H. D. Leeves, assisted by N. Bambas). Literature.

— At the end of the article on the Greek Bible Versions (PltE^ iii 20= Urt, 80) tlie present writer has j^ven a list of about 280-300 books and articles treating: of these versions from 1601 up to 1897 in chronological order. Swete gives in his introduction, at the end of most chapters, literary references, amounting to about 600 in number.

The first list (i>- 27) em- braces a mere fraction of the vast literature selected for the purj^ose of representing the progress of knowledge since the middle of the 17th cent- It begins with the Critica ^acra o/ S. Cappellus, 1651; Pearson's Praijalio and Ussher's Si/atajma, 1().">3 ; the Prolegomena of Brian Walton, 1857. It is impossible to repeat these lists here.

A few remarks must sxitlict The most copious work on O that appeared in the Idth cent, is that of Constantine Oikonomos vt/>i Tur «' I/>u*i>u/Ta>,, 4 vols., Athens, 1844, 1845, 1846, 1S49, more than 3700 paf,'es.

Though it starta from wrong premises (canonical and inspired character of 0), it contains much useful information ; in voL iii 130 pages are devoted to the difference of chronology between fl> and O, in the last voL 170 pages to the quotations of the NT, 325 para- graphs to a list of the writers who used or praised O. The author may be compared to Grinfield, whose Apolorpj for the SeptuaqirU (Lond. 1S50) is equally wrong in its principles, hut still useful Of Jewish books L.

Frankel's V^orsludiea zu dcr Si'ptuaffinta (Leipzig, 1841) and Ueber den Einjluss der jfaMstinisdien Exer/ese auf die alexandrinisehe Uermeneutik (18.^>1), are not superseded^ A standard work for all times remains, H. Hody, de biblir.rum textibtu oriffinatibus, Oxf. 1705. On the views of the ancient Church, especially Jerome and Augustine, it is useful to compare P. Wendland, ' Zur iiltesten Oeschichte der Bibel in der Kirche' (.i^^Vri)' (1900) 207 ff.) On Augustine see also Joh.

Haussleiter, Ver Aufhau der aUchrutt- lichen Litteratur, Eine krilische Uniersuchun<f nehat ^tudicn zu Ci/priati, Victorin^ia und Auguttin (Berlin, \&dS = GGA, 1898, V. 337-379). Of all the scholars of the 19th cent none has done more in this field than Paul de Lagarde (1827-1891).

Of his publications which bear directly or indirectly on O, note : Libri apocnjplii syriace 1861, Con^litutione^ Avosudicce 1SG2, Anmerkungen zur griechigchen Ueber^etzung der ^ronerbifn 1803, Clementina 1885 (Preface), Penlateuc/l koplisch 1867, ilatcrialien zum Pentateuch 1807 (here the notice on the original copy of /B)), Genegia grxce and Uierimfnni gucestiones in Gen. 1868, On/imeutiea sacra 1870, 21887, Pmlterivm Uierontfmi 1874, Psalterium memphifictrm 1876, Sipnmicta L and ii.

, Semitica iL 1879, Orientalia ii., I'eleris tegtamenti ab Ori'jene reoensiti /raginenlff Ib^li, Ankun/lujuitn einer neuen Au^jabe der griecftinchen Ubcrsctzung 1S82, Litrrorwn veteria teKtamenti canonicorutn parft prior grcece 1883 (cf. GGA, 1883, 1249-62), jEgyptiaea 1883, Miltheihmten l-iv. 1884, 1887, 1889, 1891, Probe einer neucn Auvjabe der lat. Uebertiefzuwjen det AT 1885, Calence aggpt. 1886, Specimen novm ediL pnalterii greed \S87,SeptuagintaStudicn i.-iii.

, 1891, Bihliothecfp xgriacce qit/r ad phiiolngiam sacrain pertinent 1892, Peatierii graeci tpiinquwiena prima 1892. Among the MSS he left there is a complete collection of the biblical quotations of Augustine (13,176 from OT and 29,540 from .VT, now in the University Library of Gdttingen), MS Lagarde 34, and others ; see UrU p. 77. No other scholar can be mentioned beside him. Among articles in Kncvclopedios add : Hoberg, * Septuoginta ' in Wetzer-Welte'8 Encyklopaedic^ xL (1899) 147-169.

To Sw. p. 60 (Lit on Hexapla^ add the first attempt to collect their fragments made by J. Driesschus (=Dru8iu6) in pnaimoa DaiyidiM veterum inlerpretum fragyttenta, Aiitw. l.'iil • the enlarged edition of the collection of Nobilius in the Latin translation of the edilin Sirtina (Iloine, 1.VS8, reprinted by P. Slorinus, 1624, see above, p 440»); Bahrdt'o abridgment of Montfaucon's Uexapla (Lips. 1769, 2 vols.) To Sw. p. 108 (Coptic version) odd : J.

Goettsberger, ' Dl» svro-koptischen Oihelcitate aus deo SchoUen don Borhebraus (ZATW xxl (1901) 128-140), ,,To Sw. p. 110 (ICthiopic) add ; Osw. Kramer, Die aethiopiteh Cberrelzung dee /.acfiariae : eine \'oriiludie zur Ge.'-rhic/ite und Kritik d£a i>ept%tagintaUxtea, erstcs Ueft, Leipzig, 188& 454 SEPULCHRE SEPULCHRE To Sw. p. 119 (Armenian) add : J. Ooettsberger, ' Die syro- innenischen . . Bibelcitate . . des Barhebraua' (.Z^rir xxL I1901J 101-127). To Sw. p. 230 (Canon) add : H. L.

Strack, art ' Kanon des Alben Testamentcs' (/"/ii'S ix. 741-767X To Sw. p. 2C3 (Canonical Books), on Ecclesiastes, add : Dill- mann. On Canticles: Wilh. Riedel, Die Auslciund des HohtnlUdes, Leipzig, 1898, pp. 105-11)9, Die Hdss. iter arin-lu Uberaetzuil'] des UL. On Daniel : Uiessler, Dus ISudi Daniel: Texthrilische IfnlersiKfiung., HtnttsMt, ISO!>, pp. 02-.'>. where the close relation between the LXX of Dan. and 1 Esdras is recognized. To Sw. p.. 285 (non-Canonical Books) add: W. J.

Moulton, 'iiber die Uberlicterung imd den textkritischen Wert des dritten Ezra-Buches \ZATW, 1899, iL 20911.; 1900, i. Iff.] Judith : Willrich, Esther und Judith, in Jmlaica, Gottingen, 1900, 1-39. On Tobit : 41. Luhr, ' Alexandrinus und Sinaiticus zumBucheTcil)it'(^Jril'xx. [1900)213-203). On Maccabees ; B. Niese, Krilik dcr bpidcn Makkabdcrlnic/ier, Berlin, 1900 (reprint of two articles in llermes, xxxv, 2BS-307, 4.

53-627); Willrich, ' Jason von Kyrene und das ii Makkabaerbuch,' in Judaica, pp. 131-176. Sw. p. 330 on Philo. Note in addition to the paper mentioned (374 n. 3) from the Philolopus the answer of Wendland-Colin, pp. 621-636, and the rejoinder in vol. be pp. 274-279. On Josephus the earlier treatises of Spittler (1770) and J. G. Scharfenberg (17S0) still deserve mention. Oikonomos has a chapter of 90 pages, irj xxi vxpk ro't't ifx^'^'^ iB^tme ro^'if utT^PXt ywffTvi fl i/iu.,*fix t£ii /, u.

76S. Sw. p. 404 (Quotations in the NT). The extent of these quota- tions has been csLi.natcd by Spearman in the anonymous Letter on the Septuagint (1759) as equal in length to Ps 119; by Grinfleld (ISSn) as twice that length or the extent of Hark. The first collection seems to be m the Greek Testament of E.

Stephen (1550), about 250 passages; the first treatment of thesu quotations in England by Bishop Wettenhall, Scripture Authrntic and Faith Certain (166S); further, Randolph, The Prophecies and other Texts cited in the XT, 17S2, 1827 ; Grin- fleld, p. 142. On lluhri see Ezims. Times, May 1901, 355. Uf Dittniar, Vettis Testatnenlum in Sovo, a second part is in course of preparation. Sw. p. 477 (Influence of (B on Christian Literature^ See Oikonomos, vol iv. Eb. NesTLE.

SEPULCHRE (-inp ' grave,' n-iiap ' burying-plaoe ' [Mislm. -i:, a-::i3 ' burial lairs or niches']; Gr. nvn/J-a, ixv-qtitlov 'tomb,' 'monument,' rd^os 'sepulchre') is represented in Scripture, and particularly in OT, not only by these Hebrew and Greek equivalents, but also by words and phrases whicli are synonym- ous.

It is the pit (113 Is 38'^), the stones of the pit (i\2 ■jnx Is 14'"), a man's house (n;; Is 14'*), his everlasting house (d)j7 n-3 Ec 12=), t/w house of assemblage for all living (D-n ^:h n;;ia n'3 Job 30^), a.nd field of burial (.TjUfn n-\ifr 2 Cli 26-^). Of the terms used for the grave by the later Judaism none is more significant than the house of the Uving (D"nn n-J), and this is the euphemism by which the burying-place of the dead is now generally designated by modern Jews.

"We are the dead, they are the livmg,' t was the remark octually made to the present writer by an aged Rabbi in Smyrna, whose oHice it was to attend at the burial of his Jewish kinsmen, and see them laid to their last rest. The ancient Egyptians thought of the departed as the living, and called the cotfin the cfiest o) the livinn. The Egj-ptian conception of the grave as the everlast- ing house was not, however, inconsistent with a strongly cherished hope of resurrection.

But there was no expectatioii among the Jews of a return to earthly life in the original body, such as prevailed among the Egyptians and led among them to the embalming and preservation of the dead. The lat«r literature of Judaism speaks rather of a general resurrection, when the souls of the departed shall enter into new bodies and live on in them.

The terms employed to describe the grave are " Niese begins with the remark, that the origin of the common text in Holmes, Parsons, Tischendorf, etc, was apparently accidental and arbitrary Collenbar zicmlich zufallig und willkiirlich entstanden ') ; Kautzseh, Apokri/phen, p. 32, gives ' an < 'Xi. V. und aus nicht niiher bezeicbneten Minuskelcotliccs" ; Fritmche, Libri apocryphi, p. xix, 'nescio uiide desumptus.'

Now take the edition of 1688, where Nobilius remarks on 1 Mac 420 'Addendum est ex codice qtum potissimum in his libris srqiiuti suiniut et multis aliis «i irifii 'loCiat9'; on 8* ' deleiidum est ex aucturitate cudicum quos sequuti sujmts et vulgataj illud i>«, quod in multis antecedit et io nostram editionem per typographi incuriam irropsit' These and similar passages confirm the present writer's suggestion (see Sw. p. 181, u. 2), that, besides the Aldine edition. Cod.

Ho 19 has been used for the Sixtine edition. To these there must perhaps be added 64 (03): t It is natural to connect such an expression with the argu- ment which Jesus summed up in the memorable words, 'God is not the God of the dead, but of the living' (Mk 12''".) Cf. also the striking words 4 Mac I62S 'Those who die on behalf of God live unto God, as do Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.' used often to describe the Underworld where the dead live on.

The gathering-place of the departed in the world bej'ond is, as above, the pit (Is 38'), the nether parts of the earth (Is 44^), Sheol and Abaddon (Job 26', Pr 15"), tlie pit of destruction (Ps 55=^), the place of silence (Pa 94" 115>'), the land of darkness and of the shadow of death (Job 10-'). ' lleuce,' says Ur. Salmond, 'the distinction is occasionally sunk in the OT, and it became confused in the later usage of the Targums.

IJut that Sheol denotes a definite realm of the dead, and is not identical with the grave, appears from the usage of the term, and is recognized by the ancient Versions. It is to Sheol that Jacob speaks of going to join the son whose death he mourns, but of whose burial he knows nothing. It is Sheol that swallows up Korah and his company alive.

That a common habitation of the dead like the Sualu of the Babylonians, the Hades of the Greeks, the Orcus of the Romans, is meant, is indicated also by the fact that the expressions to be gathered to oiw's people or to one's fathers, to go to one's fathers, to sleep with one's fathers, are used in cases like those of Abraham, Jacob, Aaron, Moses, David, and others, where the temporary or permanent resting-places were far removed from the ancestral graves.'

A touching illustration of the father looking forward to a meetin" in another world with a departed child is David's ' I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me ' (2 S 1'2^). But while Sheol is thus ' the house of assemblage for all living,' it was in the sepulchre of his fathers, in the ancestral bur3'ing-place and with his departed kindred, that the ancient Israelite desired to be buried.

And there can be no doubt that the wish to be reunited with parents and children in Sheol had to do with the desire to be buried in the famUy sepulchre. The object of buiial, not merelj' in a grave but in the family grave, was to iulroduce the departed into the society of his kinsfolk and ancestors. In the earliest times this society was supposed to exist either in the family grave or in its immediate neighbourhood.

t ' Bury me not, I pray thee, in Egypt,' said the dying Jacob to Joseph, ' but I will lie with my fathers, and thou shall carry me out of Egypt and bury me in their burying-pl.ace ' (Gn 49-"- ^0, cf. Joseph's burial, Jos 24^-).

And nothing could be more pathetic in this reference than the request of Barzillai, who declined king David's invitation to live with him at court, and said, 'Let thy servant, I pray thee, turn back again, that I may die in mine own city, by the frave of my father and my mother ' (2 S 19" RV).

t was a duty of piety to see the bones of the dead placed in the family sepulchre, as David did for the bones of Saul and his sons (2 S 21'^'") ; and it was the proper punishment of disobedience to the command of Jehovah that a man's carcass should not come into the sepulchre of bis fathers (1 K IS''').

To be deprived of burial was the last indic;nity and the greatest of calamities ; the spirits of tlie unburied dead were believed to wander restlessly abroad, or to lie in recesses of the pit, ii they were admitted into Sheol at all (Ezk 32^"-, Is 14'°). For this reason the possibility of death at sea was regarded with horror.

So, too, no vengeance upon enemies could be more cruel than to throw their bodies to the dogs, or to allow them to rot upon the battlelield, or to be left as a prey to the fowls of heaven and the beasts of the held (Ezk 39*, 2 K 9^«). Of Jason, who ' slaughtered hia own citizens without mercy,' it is said (2 Mac 5'°), ' he that had cast out a multitude unburied had none to mourn for him, nor had he any funeral at all, or place in the sepulchre of his fathers.'

But the humane prescription of the law of Moses was that the criminal hant;ed upon the gaUows should be buried, and buried at all hazards, on tlie day of execution (Dt 21'-^) ; and in the case of the enemies of Israel captured and hung we find the law precisely carried out (Jos 8^ 10°"). The treat- • Christian Doctrine of Immortality, p. 199 [1901 cd. p. 161). t R. ll.Ch^T\ea,Eschatology : Hebrew, Jeunsh, and Christian p. 31 ff.

SEPULCHRE SEPULCHRE 455 nent of the body of Jesus (Jn 19"), and the burial of John the Baptist (Mt 14'-), and of Stejilien (Ac 8), by their friends are later illiistr.itions. Even Bnicides received tlie ordinary rites of burial, as is seen in the case of Ahithopliel (2 S IT'^). It was the dtity of anj' one who found a corpse in tlie open field to "ive it burial (To 1" 2», cf.

1 S •21"') ; and it is creditable to Jewisli feeling that tlie bodies of the (ientile dead were allowed to rest in the Jewish burying-place side by side with Je%vish remains.* Into the family grave only members of the family were admitted. In the Naliat;v:in sepul- chral inscriptions t a curse is pronounced upon the man who defiles or sells a grave, or who buries in it any who are not members of the family.

And the tamous inscri|)tion on the tomb of Eshmun- azar, king of Sidon, pronounces doom upon any who may disturb his repose, or open or carry oil' his coHin for the .sake of treasure, — niav they have no rest among the departed, maj' they be buried in no grave, and may they liave no prosperity in their city ! t The family grave was holy ground and a permanent possession. The family might lose their estate, out never the ancestral tomb ; for in .

selling land no Jew could dispose of the buryingjilace, to the use of which his descendants were entitled to all tirae.§ WTien the Jewi.sh people came to be dispersed amon^ the natiuns it was an object of solicitiido and anibilion to be l)uried in the sacre<l soil of Canaan. ' Wlioever,' says the Talmud, 'ia buried in Palestine is as if he were buried under the altar.' And a'.

;ain : ' Whoever is interred in Babylonia is as well off as if he lay in Palestine, and whoever is buried in Palestine lies the same as under the altar.' H About the :jrd cetit. it became ' a pious custom to be buried in Jud;na's holy earth, to which was attribute an exjiiatory power. The resurrection was con- lidcntly expected to take place in that country, which it was also believed would be the scene of the coming of the Messiah.

Those who had dic<l in unhallowed countries would roll about in the light loose earth until they reached the Holy I.and, where they could be revivified. Id place of living inhabit^ints who were continually decreasing, Judaea was becoming every day more thickly jiopulated with cori>ses. The Holy Ijand, which had formerly been an immense temple, inspiring great deeds and noble thoughts, was now a holy grave which could render noUiing holy but death.'

^ Burinl was the universal mode of disposing of the dead at all periods of Jewisli history [see BfRIAI,]. Bnrninri, which was the Babylonian and Roman usage, was among the Jews a death punislinii-nt intlicted for aggravated transgressions rathi-r than a mode of disposing of the dead (Gn 38«, Lv 20" 21", Jos 7", I K 13-, 2 K 23-""). Even when criminals had sutlered the last penalty of the law by stoning or burning, or where, as in the ca.se oi Saul and his sons, slain in b.

attle, necessity required that tlieir bodies should be burned (1 S 31"- '•'), their remains or aslies were provided with a resting-place in the bosom of the earth.** There was great variety in the choice of a burying-iilace among the Jews, at least in the earliest times. Abraham buried Sarah in the cave of the field of Machpelah (Gn 23"'); Deborah, Rebekah's nurse, was buried under an oak (Gn 35") ; Jacob buried Rachel (.see, above, p.

193) by the wayside (On 35"); they buried Joshua 'in tlie liorifer of his inheritance in Timnath-serah, wliich is in Mt. Ephrnim ' (Jos 24') ; and the men of Jabesh- gilead Imried the bones of Saul and his sons under a terebinth (1 Ch 10'-). Burial in the open street or at cross ro.ids was expressly forbi<hlen by the enactments of later times. ThiTO does not ai)pear to be evidence in the Scripture his- • Hamburger, RE, vol. i. VH. t Studia liibKca, i. 212 fl.

I Levy, ' Phonizische Studlen,' p. 2. J Tristram. Kmtem Cuttoim in Bible Land*, p. 100 H Hamburger, t.c. ji. 476. ^ Oraet!:, History oftht Jewt, vol. 11. 648 (American edition). •• Cf. Hamburger, ' Feuerbestattung der Toten,' Supplement. Band. Abt. ii. 40. ^'^ tory to warr.ant the statement that the family grave was originally in the house.

This belongs, so far as it aiipears to have been the case, to a later time, and is represented as an exceptional honour reserved for Icings, prophets, and other outstanding personages (1 S 25', 1 K 2', 2 K 21'8, 2 Ch 33-"). In B.abylonia and Assyria, at all events, 'only members of the royal family were permitted to be buried within the precincts of the town. Their bodies miglit be burned and entombed in one of the many palaces of the country.

We are told of one king, for instance, that he was burned or buried in tlie palace of Sargou ; of another, tliat he was burned in his own palace. The practice throws light on what we read in tlie Books of Kings ; there, too, we are told tliat Maiiasseli " was buried in the garden of hisown house" (2 K 21"), and Anion in the "garden of Uzza" (2 K 21-"). Private burial in the palaces they had inliabited when alive was a privilege reserved for the kings alone.

't The seiiulclaes set ajiart for the kings of .ludah (D'r^^rr nnap) are specially mentioned (2 Ch 21-° 24^ 28'-"). Not all the kings were privileged to re- ceive interment in the royal mausoleum. Neither Joash nor Jehoram was buried in the sepulchres of the kings (2 Ch 21"» 24«), wliilst Jehoiada was accorded the honour 'because he had done good in Israel and towards God and his house' (2 Cli 24").

The remains of Uzziah were not admitted to the sepulchres of the kings, but were interred in ' the field of burial which belonged to tlie kings, be- cause they wiid he was a lei)er' (2 Ch 20^). It is not possible to locate ' the sepulchres of the kings ' in Jerusalem.

It seems to be implied in a state- ment of the prophet Ezekiel (43'"") that certain kings of Judah were buried close to the tenii)le, if not actually within its precincts; and though there is no record of such a thing in the historical books, the statement is jusfilied by the fact that the royal palaces, within which some of tliem were interred, and the first temple, stood virtually within the same enclosure. There were also common burying- places called 'the gr.

aves of the children of the people ' (2 K "23^ Jer 2U'-''), into which the dead were sometimes cast in dishonour and contempt. To prep.are for himself a tomb in his lifetime has been the custom of every right-thinking Jew from early times down to the present day. Slu^bna, whose Jewish origin, however, is doubtful ( ls'i'2""-), Asa (2 Ch 16'*), Joseph of Arimatliica (Mt 27™), are instances in point. The cu.

stom was not con- lined to the Jews, for we find it followed by the Pharaohs, who built pyramids to receive their remains, by Eshmunazar, ly the Caliphs, and others. Of the sepulchres and sepulchral monuments of the ancient Hebrews and tlie later Jews it is pos- sible now to give an adequate description and a fairly complete history.

\\ e owe this to the labours — often skilled labours — of residents and travellers in Palestine, and especially to the orpinizod and persevering eil'orts of the Palestine Exidoration r'und and the kindred German Palas/iyia- Vcrcin. The sepulchral remains of Western Palestine, in particular, have been in many ca.ses carefully examined and measured and described, with plans and sketches, in the Reports and Memoirs of these societies.

Wo can now classify the sepulchral remains according to tho type which they repre- sent, and even, with some measure of certainty, a-ssign them to the period to which thoy belong, — to the Phmnician or Hebrew, Jewish, Herodian, Roman, Byzantine, Saracenic, or Crusading periods. There are three principal types of ancient tombs • So K. H. Charles, Esohaloloav, p. 82. t Kayce, Social Life among th» Auvriant and Babiilonian$, p. 67. 456 SEPULCHRE SEPULCHRE found in Western Palestine:* (i.)

Rock-hewn Tombs; (ii. ) Masonry Tombs ; (iii.) Sarcophagi. i. KoCK-HEWN Tomhs. — These are by far the most numerous, and they are found in many varieties. They are also the earliest in date. The soft limestone ranges of Western Palestine and Syria were honeycombed with natural caves, admit- ting of easy enlargement and adaptation. They had been available for the shelter of the living before being used for the reception of the dead (1 S 22' 243).

The usual form of Hebrew tomb in the earliest period took advantage of these caverns in the soft strata of limestone. In this the Hebrews copied the Phoenicians, whose prin- ciple of architecture, Kenan tells us,t was the carved rock, not the column, as with the Greeks ; but in point of architectural taste and skill they were far behind their masters.

In striking con- trast to the Egyptian sepulchral monuments, — massive pyramids and vast underground chambers, — the Hebrew tomb, wliether single or more com- plex, was marked by extreme simplicity. In fact, simplicity of construction and absence of archi- tectural ornament are the surest notes of tlie antiquity of a Hebrew sepulchre.

No less remark- able IS the contrast between the inscriptions and wall-paintings on EgA _)tian tombs — as at Beni- Hassan and elsewhere — and the plain and un- adorned simplicity of Hebrew tombs, which until a late period are entirely devoid of inscriptions. In some eases tombs are found singly on the hill- sides, as though individuals chose to have their last resting-place in their own vineyard, like Joseph of Arimathfea, who had his own new tomb in his garden.

More often they form a regular burying- ground or cemetery. Tombs of notable person- ages, like the so-called Tomb of Joshua, have gener- ally other tombs around them, the desire being strong among all Orientals to be laid near to some holy man or national hero.

(1) The simplest form of rock-he^vn tomb is that in which a grave has been sunk in the surface of the rock to receive the body, and fitted witli a slab, let in round the mouth, to cover it, the cover being sometimes flush with the flat surface of tlie rock, and sometimes raised and ornamented like the lid of a sarcophagus.

(2) Another simple form of tomb is an excava- tion driven into tue face of a rock — called iiis, plural D'5i3 — just large enough to receive a corpse, the mouth being closed hy a rough stone slab. (3) The most common description of tomb is that in wliich a number of kokini are grouped together in one or more chambers of the same excavation.

These, again, are in tliree varieties : (a) A sepulclire consisting of a natural cavern in one of the softer strata of limestone, having kukim cut in its sides with their beds on a level with the floor, the mouths of these being closed by rough stone slabs, either made to fit close, or only resting against the perforated face of rock, (b) A sepulchre where a square or oblong chamber has been cut in the rock, and kokim ranged along three of its sides, their mouths closed by neatly dressed stone slabs fitting closely, the entrance to the chamber itself being by a low square opening, fitted with a slab in the same manner, or with a stone door turning on a socket hinge, and secured by bolts on the inside.

In this kind of tomb there is usually a bench running in front of the kukim, and raised from 1 ft. 6 in. to 3 ft. above the floor of the excavated chamber, (c) A sepulchre in which one entrance leads into a number of chambers, each containing kokim. Such tombs generally have a • We follow SirCharlee Wllson'sclassiflcation : Bee The Survej/ »/ Wrgtem Pale*tim, Volume of Special Papers, p. 280 £f. ; and PEFftt, 1869, p. «6fl., where there are useful plans. t iliasion de PMnicU, p. 822.

sort of porch or vestibule hewn in the rock, tha front of the roof being often supported by pillan of natural rock surmounted by a frieze, and bear- ing other kinds of ornamentation. From thia porch a low door leads into an antechamber, with or ■\vithout tombs, from which access is obtained to the tomb chambers, all of which have raised benches running in front of the kokim openings.

Some of the chambers have, instead of kokim, arched 'ecesses (arcosolia) cut out in their sides, in which the body was laid, or perhaps a sarcophagus placed. The so-called Tomb of Joshua at Tibneh, on the Roman road from Antipatris to Jerusalem, is of this class. It is prominent among the nine tombs that make the rock cemetery of the place, and haa a portico supported on rude pieces of rock with very simple capitals.

There are niches for over two hundred lamps, arranged in vertical rows, giving the appearance of an ornamental pattern, and all smoke-blacked. ' Entering the low door,' says Conder, ' we find the interior chamber to be a square with five loculi, not very perfectly cut, on their sides. The whole is quite unomamented, except by four very rough brackets supporting the flat roof.

On becoming accustomed to the dark- ness, one perceives that the central lociUus at thu back forms a little passage about 7 ft. long, 2 ft. 6 in. high, and 3 ft. 4 in. broad, through which onb creeps into a second but smaller chamber, 9 ft. 3 in. by 8 ft. 1 in., and 5 ft. 5 in. high. In this, opposite the entrance, a single loculus runs at right angles to the wall, and a single niche is cut on the left for a lamp.' Conder (,PEFSt, 1878, p. 31) classifles the rock-cut tombs a follows :— 1.

Kokim tombs. 2. Locidus tombs, 3. Sunk tombg. The first two classes he believes to be of Hebrew and Jewish ori^Mn. but the third more likely to be Christian of the Byzan- tine period. The word kok and its plural kokim desij^nate the pi^^eon-holes or tunnels running in from the side of a sepulchral chamber, each having room for a coq^s'. and nothing more.

The designation toeuius {tocui in sepuU'hro) is applied to the shelf, or trough, or bench receptacle for the corpse, which is of later use than the kokim. In many tombs which have been examined there is a mixture of both kokim and loculi, indi- cating a transition period about the Christian era or earlier. 'The kukim tombs, Conder explains, 'are those which have parallel tunnels running in, three or four side by side, from the walls of a rectangular chamber.

The bodies lay with their feet towards the chamber, and stone pillars for raising the heatls are often found at the farther end. The kokim vary in number from one or two up to fifteen or twenty, and are of various len;;tbs, from 3 or 4 to 7 ft. There is no system of orientation, and the entrance door is in the face of the cliff, the chamber within being directed according to the lie of the rock.

This kind of tomb is certainly the niost ancient in the country, for the kokiiTt are sometimes destroyed in enlarging the tomb on a different system.' These tombs were used by the Jews. This is proved by a rare Hebrew inscription, by a representation of the seven-branched golden candlestick, and by the fact that some of them are sacred to modern Jews as the tombs of their ancestors, and that their measurements agree with the pre- scriptions in the Talmud.

The kokim are not sufficiently large, as a rule, to admit of the supposition that the bodies were embalmed or swathed in bandages like those which make the Egjiitian munmiy so bulky when preserved untouched. There is nothing in the sepulchral remains of Palestine any more than in the Bible itself to lead us to believe that the embahning of tlie dead was a Hebrew custom (Conder, Syrian Stotn' Ltir<', p. Vi'i). For another classification of tombs see Benzinger, Lleb. Arch. p. 22.'

t, which follows Tobler's in SWP, Volume of Special Papers, p. 2S8 f. We have seen that the simple tombs belong to the earlier period, and that the portico at tha entrance, with its ornaments, is usually a note of more recent origin. It is to the Herodian Age that the ancient tombs on the east side of the Kidron Valley, Absalom's Pillar (possibly the tomb of Alexander Janna'us), the Tombs of St. Jaiiiea and Zechariah, and the monolith known as tha Egyptian Tomb, are to be assigned.

The so-called Toiiib of St. James, now known as the Tomb of the Hene Hazir, with its Aramaic text, Doric pillars, and triglyphs, and inner chamber containing kokim, is perhaps the earliest of the group, and belongs to the Ist cent. B.C. The others are prob • PEFSt, 1873, p. i«. SEPULCHRE SEPULCHRE 457 ebly Inter.

Tlie fine monument to the north of Jerusalem, couiinonly called tlie Tombs of the Kings, but known to the natives as Kubfir es- Salattn (Tombs of the bultans), has been identi- fied hy Robinson as the tomb of Helena, queen of Adiabeue. It contains that mixture of kokim and luditi which would seem to date it on the border of tlie Christian era. In one of the lower chambers of the tomb was found a sarcophai^us ■with an Aramaic inscription containinj; the words Sara Meleka.

It is not impossible that this was the native name of Helena herself, and that the remains found in the sarco|)hagus were her own. ii. Masonry Tombs. — 'I hese are rarelj' found in Palestine, SJid thej' are later than the rock-hewn Bepulihres. They are confined to the northern portion of the country. Tlie most famous are described by Sir Charles Wilson (S(rP283). He mentions — (1) a building at Kedes (Kedesh- naphtuli), 34 ft. 4 in.

s<niare, with a doorway on its southern side leading to a chamber containing kokim, which have been used for interments down to a late period ; (2) two tombs at Tell l^uni (one of the possible sites for Capernaum), the one of which has 26 kokim, and, being subter- ranean, is closed with a door of basalt, the other of which ha.

s lucuU, and is built of coursed basaltic rubble; (3) a tine tomb at Malal, near Nazarelh, with 4 kokim and attached semi-pillars of the Ionic order outside ; (4) a square tomb at Teifislr with three lociili, a domed roof, and pilasters on each side ; (5) the remains of a building at Ain el B'aineh, which had stone over rock-cut tombs. To these Conder has added four more, three ot them at or near Jerusalem. iii. Sakcophagi. — hetween the 6th and the 4th cent. H.C.

the Phoenicians buried in sarcojihagi called anthropoid, having a human head and even an entire recumbent form on the li(^, the body of the sarcophagus being shaped like a mummy case. Such is the famous tomb of Eshmunazar with the celebrated Phoenician inscription. In the great discovery of sepulchral remains made at Beyrout Borne years ago, sarcophagi, njunimy shaped, some in white and some in black marlde, were found.

Among the sarcophagi discovered in the excava- tions was a si)leiidid sarcophagus in black stone resembling that of Kshmunazar, and bearing an inscription purporting that it is the tomb of Tab- nitli, priest of Ashtoreth and king of the Sidonians, Bon of Fsliniunazar. Some of those sarcophagi were maile of pottery, recalling the slipper-shaped plnzed earthen coffins found hy Loftus * on the ancient liabylonian mounds at Warka.

Although the Hebrews copied from the I'lucnicians in their rock-hewn tombs, they did not follow them largely in the use of sarcophagi. We have already men- tioned the Barcoiihagus of queen Sara found in the Tomb of the Kings. Of others found in Palestine, those di-scovered at Kedes are the most ornamented. The material out of which they are hewn is hard white limestone, almost like marble, ttnd the workmanship is excellent.

Some of them had been made for two bodies laid in opposite directions, and at the bottom of the locuU were amall raised pillars to receive the heads. With the exception of those great anthropoid sarcophagi, there is nothin" to show a very marked distinction between the Hebrew and Phccnician tombs from the earliest to the latest age. The history of the Bepulchres found in Phcenici'a agrees perfectly with the chronological series which has been established independently in Palestine.!

In the Greek age monuments erected over torn 1)3 became common, the tombs beneath being rock-cut. In such cases there is a combination of * W. K. Lottus, ChiihUM and Sutiana, p. 202. f Conder, Syrian Stone Lore, p. 97. the masonry and sarco|>liagus type of tombs.

Hiram's Tomb,* about three miles from moilem Tyre, containing a tomb or sarcophagus formed out of a huge block and emplaced on a pedestal made of three courses of grey limestone, most probably belongs to this period ; and tomb towers containing sarcophagi are to be found throughout Syria. At Palmyra those structures consist some- times of four or five storej-s.

Tombstones and sculptured sepulchres have been found atUabbath- ammon, in Eastern Palestine, belonging to the age of the Antonines, but are to be classed among pagan funerary monuments. Sometimes solid monuments were erected near tombs like the Kammuat el-Hirmil, east of the Jordan — a solid tower in two storej's, with pyramidal roof and bas- reliefs representing the hunting of the stag, the bear, and the wild boar, which date, it is supposed, from the 3rd or 4th cent.

Of sepulchral monu- ments we have a notable example in the mauso- leum erected at Modin by Simon the Maccabee for his father and his brother. ' Simon,' .says the writer (1 Mac 13-'"^), ' built a monument upon the sepulchres of his father and his brethren, and raised it aloft to the sight, with polished stone behind and before. And he set up seven pyramids, one over a<;,ainst anotlier. for his father and his mother and his four brethren.

And for these he made cunning devices, setting about them jjreat pillars, and upon the pillars he fashioned all manner of arms for a perpetual meinory, and beside the arms ships carved, that they should be seen of all that sail on the sea.' Of this famous structure all trace has been lost since the 4th cent., and its site has not yet been identified. (See Modin).

In this connexion we recall the stinging words of Jesus describing the Pharisees as whited seinilchres, outwardly beautiful, but inwardly full of the bones of the dead — as building the tombs of the prophets and garnishing the sepulchres of the righteous, but being of a totall.v dilferent spirit from tho.se they seemed to honour (Mt 23-''- 2a.

BU) Whited sepulchres were evidently sepulchral erections whitewashed or plastered over to render tlieiii c(mspicu(ms, and to preserve passers-by from the ceremonial defilement they might contract by approaching them. That some such distinguish- ing mark was necessary we gather from a similar Raying in St. Luke's (iospel, in which Jesus describes the scribes and Pharisees as ' graves which appear not' (Lk 11").

The reference m this passage must be to the humbler class of graves simply dug in the earth, and with no monument of any kind to m.ark the spot. At the jiresent day the white- wa.shed slabs covering Moharninedan graves around Jerusalem glitter in the sunshine and easily attract notice. (See for cairns or stones heaped on graves art. Burial).

There are two sepulchres in particular which must always have a special interest to the Bible student, and which are both alike enveloped in a certain degree of mystery — the cave of Mach- pelah, the burial-place of Sarah, Abraham, Isaac and Kchekah, Jacob and Leah ; and the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem, where the body of Jesus was laid and remained for ' three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.' As regards the grave of the patriarchs, now covered hy the mosmie at Hebron, see art.

Machpelaii [cf. also Stanlev's Sermnns in the JCrixt (pp. 141-16!)) and /Vi'f.Si for 1882 (pp. 1<.I3-214)]. Touching the Holy Sepulchre for which Saracens and Crusaders contended, and regarding whose site heated con- troversies still rage, it seems impossible to attain to certainty. The tradition of more than fifteen centuries located it within the Church of the Holy • Bm It flirurcd in Sifrian Stone Lore, p. M. t58 SERAH SEEAPHIM Sepulchre.

This tradition has been called in question since the days of Robinson. Its truth would require the site to have been without the wall of the city, for it is said that 'Jesus bear- ing the cross went forth unto the place called the place of a skull' (Jn 19"- '*), and that ' lie sullered without the ^'ate ' (He 13'-). But tlie Church of the Holy Sepuldire is not only near the very heart of the city as it is now occupied, but it must always have been within the line of the second wall.

The latter contention is opposed, however, ainong recent authorities by Conrad Scliick, who, after liaviiig resisted tlie traditional site for nearly forty years, has been led to accept it as the true site. He professes * to have ascertained by excavations and measurements that Calvary and the tomb in the garden wliere Jesus was laid were without the line of the wall thougli very close to it, just as wu read in Jn 19-".

The site favoured by recent authorities is a knoll of rock of rounded form and covered with shallow soil and grass, just outside the north wall of the city, and a little distance from the Damascus Gate. Under it is the cave called ' Jeremiah's Grotto,' and there are two holes in the face of the steep and rocky bank terminating the knoll, which look like the sockets of eyes in a skull. Dr. Selah Merrill, long United States Consul in Jerusalem, the late General Gordon, the late Sir J. W.

Dawson, and Colonel Conder,t have given their support to this site (see art. Jerusalem, vol. ii. p. 596", and cf. Survey of Weatem Palestine, vol. on Jerusalem, pp. 429-438).

Thomson, J after examining all the evidence on both sides, attained to no certainty as to the site : ' Far better,' he says, ' rest contented with the undoubted fact that somewhere without the walls of this limited plat- form of the Holy City the Son of Man was lifted up, " that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish, but have eternal life." ' LnERATHRK. — Keil, Bib. Arch. ii. 199 ff.; Benzingrer, Efh. Ari-h. iiji. 103 ff., 224-227; Stade, GVl i. pp. 14, 15 fl.

; Schwally, Das LeU'ii nach devi Tvd^, pp. 54-fi6 ; Conder, Syrian Stmie Lore ; K. H. Cll.arles. Eschatolofry : Hebrew, Jewish, and Christian; Thomson, Land and Book; Bliss, Eaxavatimis at Jerws.; SlfP, vols. i. andiv.; PEFSt, passim; ZDPV,paisim. Thomas Nicol.