The Book of Job

Author(s):  
Maria Gorea

The Greek version of the book of Job in its primitive form (OG) presents a text that is 389 stichs shorter than that of the Hebrew textus receptus. The pre-Hexaplaric Greek text is attested by scattered quotations from some Latin authors, by the Coptic-Sahidic version, or by the Greek Testament of Job. Origen filled the lacunae with revised material in order to restore the original length of the text. While the literal approach of this asterisked material towards the Hebrew helps in determining the translation technique that the translator followed, the OG text shows less concern for literality. Origen’s Hexaplaric Septuagint is hybrid because the lacunae were not simply the result of mere omissions, but also verses that were summarized or more synthetic. The ecclesiastical version preserved these additions and manuscripts have carefully indicated them, as also modern editions.

1984 ◽  
Vol 103 (4) ◽  
pp. 643
Author(s):  
Leonard J. Greenspoon ◽  
Homer Heater

2011 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 217-231
Author(s):  
Mogens Müller

The understanding of the role of the old Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, has undergone great changes in the last decennia. From looking upon the Hebrew text as the original and the Greek text as only a translation, it has now been common to view the Greek version as a chapter in a reception history of biblical traditions. By being used by New Testament authors and in the Early Church the Septuagint gained canonical status – alongside the Hebrew Bible. Thus the Old Testament of the Church in reality consists of both versions. The article argues for this also pointing to some of the theological consequences of viewing the connection between the two parts of the Christian Bible from the perspective of reception history.


Aethiopica ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 22-52
Author(s):  
Tedros Abraha

The aim of the paper is to provide an overview of little known Gǝʿǝz texts ascribed to Philo, namely: fragments of a Paschal Homily, a bulky but incomplete commentary on the Pauline Corpus and a fragment of Philo of Carpasia’s commentary on the Canticle of Canticles. While concentrating mainly on the latter, the present article wants to draw attention to linguistic characteristics common to the trilogy which is associated with the name Philo. The Gǝʿǝz version of Philo of Carpasia’s Commentary is a rare example of a strictly paratactic translation which is keen to reproduce literally the Greek text from which it depended. The outcome is a hardly understandable Gǝʿǝz text which is however interesting as a unique witness of an ancient translation technique. The Philonian trilogy is among other aspects, a mine of unknown or little attested Gǝʿǝz terms.  


1983 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
pp. 91
Author(s):  
Zipora Talshir ◽  
Homer Heater

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-62
Author(s):  
Andrzej Piwowar

The first part of the article synthetically presents the Old Testament Israelites’ attitude to doctors and their activities. It is an essential prerequisite for the depiction of the innovative approach to the issue proposed by Sirach in Sir 38:1-15. Subsequently, the translation of the text’s Greek version into Polish is presented and the pericope’s structure is divided into four parts: I. 38:1-3 – respect for the doctor, II. 38:4-8 – the value of medicine, III. 38:9-11 – the relation of the sick to God, and IV. 38:12-15 – the doctor’s role in treating the sick. The present article is devoted to the exegetico-theological analysis of the first part of the Greek version of Sir 38:1-15, that is of 38:1-3. Even though the article is based primarily on the Greek text of the verses, it takes into account its original Hebrew version as well. Sirach calls the believing Israelites to completely change their perception of doctors and their activities. He encourages his readers not to reject doctors but to treat them with respect and reverence, and, indirectly, not to ignore the doctor’s efforts meant to restore health to the sick one. The sage justifies his novel approach with two arguments. First, doctors were created by God and given the task of aiding the sick in their suffering. They are a mere tool in God’s hands, for God is the only Doctor that can truly heal a person (this aspect is emphasized more by the Hebrew than by the Greek text). Secondly, doctors deserve respect for even kings and dignitaries benefit from their service and treat them with respect and reverence. In 38:1-3 Sirach offers a perfect synthesis of Israel’s traditional belief in God, who is the only doctor able to heal a person, with the Hellenistic influence related to medicine and the people who dabble in it.


Slovene ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 128-158
Author(s):  
Alexander I. Grishchenko

This article demonstrates the apocryphal character of Jacob’s Blessing to His Sons (based on Gn 49), which is known according to the Palaea Interpretata. However, the Blessing was transferred to the Palaea together with the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs as their textual convoy, therefore the Blessing escorts the Testaments of the full redaction in the two copies known: in the so-called Archival Chronograph from the end of the 15th century (RGADA, f. 181, No. 279) and in No. 730 from the collection of the Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius (RGB, f. 304.I) from the early 16th century, which contains the more correct version of both the Testaments and of the Blessing. The Slavonic-Russian Blessing is undoubtedly a translation from Greek, although the original Greek text has not yet been found; there is no such convoy in the Greek copies of the Testaments. One also cannot find any relation to the apocryphal Testament of Jacob known in Coptic, Ethiopic, and Arabic versions. Some connection can be detected between the Slavonic Blessing and the Commentary on Jacob’s Blessing by St. Hippolytus of Rome, which was preserved in the Greek version as well. The importance of textual study of the Slavonic Blessing is enhanced by the fact that this work—in the exegetical commentary on the blessing to Dan—contains the Slavonic Hebraism mashliakh ‘Judaic Messiah (in the Christian sense: Antichrist)’ borrowed directly from Hebrew, with no Greek mediation, and hence this fact can indicate direct Judeo-Slavic contacts in the medieval Slavia Orthodoxa.


1883 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 186-206
Author(s):  
H. F. Tozer

The Greek Chronicle, which brought to light the feudal organisation of the Frank Principality, and is the principal authority for the first century of its existence, was first printed from the manuscript in the Paris library in 1841 by M. Buchon in his Chroniques étrangères relatives aux Expéditions françaises pendant le treizième Siècle. Its existence had long been known, for Ducange in his Greek Lexicon refers to it under the title De bellis Francorum in Morea; and the frequency of his quotations from it attests its value for linguistic purposes, so that it appears in some cases to be the earliest, and in some the only, authority for certain mediaeval Greek words. Ducange also intended to publish it, but was prevented by death, and no use was made of it as a historical document until Buchon's time. When it was first published, the editor believed that it was an original work; but this opinion he was led to alter by the discovery in 1845 of a French text in the library at Brussels, entitled Le Livre de la Conqueste de la Princée de la Morée. The view that this was the earlier of the two, and that the Greek version was derived from it, is now generally accepted, though it was doubted by so excellent a critic of Byzantine literature as the late Dr. Ellissen, who published extracts from the Greek poem, with a verse translation into German and historical notes, in the second volume of his Analekten der mittel- und neugriechischen Literatur, in 1856. The French chronicle was printed as vol. i. of Buchon's Recherches historiques sur la Principauté française de Morée, while the second volume of that work contained another Greek text, taken from a manuscript discovered at Copenhagen. This latter is undoubtedly superior to the text of the Paris manuscript, as it is fuller, and supplies many of its lacunae; but it is inferior in respect of orthography and metre: in the following pages, however, the references are made to the Copenhagen text, and the quotations are taken from it, unless the contrary is stated, because in it alone the lines are numbered. The poem, as edited by Buchon from the Copenhagen manuscript, supplemented in parts by the other, contains 9219 lines of ‘political’ verse, of which 1332 belong to the Prologue, and the remaining 7887 to the Conquest of the Morea. Its title is Χρονικὰ τῶν ἐν Ῥωμανίᾳ καὶ μάλιστα ἐν τῷ Μωρέᾳ πολέμων τῶν Φράγκων; for though the editor has given to the whole work the title Βιβλίον τῆς κουγκέστας, by which it is generally known, and to the part that follows the prologue the separate heading Τὸ πῶς οἱ Φράγκοι ἐκέρδισαν τὸν τόπον τοῦ Μωραίως, which is a line from the poem itself, yet these convenient appellations are his own invention. The Livre de la Conqueste carries the history twelve years further down than the Greek chronicle, for it continues to A.D. 1304, while the Greek manuscripts end in 1292.


Author(s):  
Staffan Olofsson

The LXX Psalms, dating from the second or the first century bce, is one of the most frequently discussed books in Septuagint studies. The chapter assesses major theories and recent developments in studies regarding the date and provenance of the translation, discusses its Sitz im Leben, gives an overview and emphasizes the importance of textual criticism of the Hebrew as well as the Greek text for scholarly work, presents translation models employed, with an emphasis on the Interlinear Paradigm, but also delves into specific details regarding the literal translation technique in the Psalms. The question whether and in what sense the translators’ theological background and milieu has influenced his translation is discussed. In the end the dependence of the Pentateuch on the Psalms and the extensive use of LXX Psalms in later Jewish and Christian literature is briefly presented.


Author(s):  
Natalio Fernández Marcos

These two books are treated in the same chapter: they are contiguous in both Jewish and Christian collections, and LXX Joshua provides two extra verses that form a ‘bridge’ to Judges. Though their Septuagintal forms are dissimilar textually, they each present particular challenges to editors. LXX Joshua is shorter than the Hebrew MT, while LXX Judges displays a very different text in the two main codices, Vaticanus and Alexandrinus. In both cases it is very difficult to determine what the original Greek translations would have looked like. The section on Joshua describes the present state of the question concerning the structure, language, and translation technique of the book. The conclusion indicates the most promising directions of the research, namely the analysis of the language in comparison with the other books of the Septuagint and with the history of the Greek language; the study of the Antiochian text in Joshua; the relationship between the Masoretic Text and the Greek text as well as between textual and literary criticism. The section on Judges classifies and describes the textual groups of Judges, including the present state of the question. Some of the most promising directions of research are the production of a critical edition of Judges in the Göttingen series maior; the analysis of the Antiochian text; the translation technique of the Old Greek and the relationship between the Masoretic Text and the different groups of Greek manuscripts, especially the groups A and B.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document