The Books of Samuel

The textual history of the books of Samuel, both in Greek and in Hebrew, is laden with problems that the researcher needs to be acquainted with, whatever the focus of textual research. The Septuagint translation shows a close word-for-word correspondence to its Hebrew Vorlage, however, not without occasional freedom of translation, especially in lexical choices and grammatical forms, as well as erroneous translation due to defective knowledge of Hebrew. The Hebrew Vorlage used by the translator differed at times substantially from the later Masoretic Text, used for comparison during the early textual history of the Septuagint text as well as in research today. Not only is the Masoretic Text corrupted but it underwent editorial changes until the turn of the era. Textual differences caused by both the translator and the editors of the Hebrew text must have occasioned the repeated revisions of the Greek text by Jewish and Christian scribes.

Reception of the Septuagint among Greek Christian Writers

This chapter opens by explaining how profoundly patristic and Byzantine Christianity was shaped by the LXX. Not only learned literature (to which the chapter confines itself) but also popular texts, non-literary documents, buildings, ceremonies, etc. testify to the deep but diverse impact that the LXX had on everyday life. In the first of two main sections, the chapter discusses the ways in which Greek Christianity received and transmitted the text of the LXX (and of related Greek versions). The various forms in which the LXX was explained are presented in the following part, which combines a general image with a treatment of the catena format in particular. Throughout the chapter, particular aspects are highlighted with regard to which modern (Western) LXX scholarship still strongly depends (whether it realizes it or not) on views developed by patristic and Byzantine Christians.

The Book of Job

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.

The Pentateuch

The impetus behind the translation of the Pentateuch likely emanated from a well-educated sector of the Jewish community, whose members were not unfamiliar with the Hebrew original. The translation’s language style adheres closely enough to Semitic syntax and idiom to suggest that the original’s words were never expected to be lost from view. Being the first undertaking of its kind, the translated Pentateuch is filled with renderings that speak of a spontaneous, creative procedure in which various strategies were attempted. The extent to which the Greek Pentateuch would have functioned as a theological guide for Hellenistic Judaism is not clear. Some parts do exhibit interpretive shifts, while others simply defy being counted as Torah in Greek. The Greek Pentateuch was known to later translators who depended in varying degrees upon its vocabulary.

Jeremiah and Baruch

This chapter discusses two books that are inseparable in the Septuagint manuscripts: Jeremiah and Baruch. For both books, it surveys classical topics like translators, translation technique, and provenance. The main focus, however, is on the manner they exemplify important and recurrent issues in Septuagintal studies. The book of Jeremiah is a textbook case of a work that exists in two literary editions, a short one (in Hebrew) and a long one (in Greek). The study of the book of Baruch is a good example of a pseudepigraphical work that seems to be translated from a Semitic language, although this is disputed.

The Samaritan Pentateuch in Greek

It is widely held that the Samaritans produced a Greek version of their distinct recension of the Pentateuch (SP), referred to as the Samareitikon, though the precise historical circumstances of this text are unknown. Aside from an inscription from a Samaritan synagogue in Thessalonica quoting Num. 6:22–7 in Greek, the majority of evidence for the SP in Greek is preserved in Christian sources, dating from the fourth century ce. Moreover, Alfred Rahlfs claimed in 1911 to have discovered fragments of Genesis and Deuteronomy from the original Samareitikon; more recently, Bradley Marsh has made the same claim for fragments of Exodus.

Aquila

Subsequent to its inclusion in Origen’s Hexapla, the text of the biblical translation ascribed to Aquila, who according to both patristic and rabbinic testimony was a convert to Judaism, has been transmitted only fragmentarily in Greek. Isolated readings from Aquila’s version are cited in Greek in the margins of LXX manuscripts and in patristic works, but also in Hebrew translation in rabbinic literature. The discoveries of the Cairo Genizah and of the Hebraizing recension reflected in the Naḥal Ḥever Minor Prophets scroll have made possible a fresh look at Aquila’s translational approach and the transmission of his version, as well as the history of its reception among both Jews and Christians.

Translation Technique

The Septuagint translators did not make use of handbooks nor could they rely on editorial guidelines when translating the books of the Hebrew Bible. Yet every translator undoubtedly had his own typical methods and practices that diverged from those of others. These methods and practices constitute the translator’s ‘translation techniques’. The present chapter presents the difficulties and challenges in exploring and describing the translation techniques of the Septuagint translators. After a brief survey of the history of research, the question of the characterization of translation technique is dealt with, distinguishing particularly between quantitative and qualitative criteria.

Quinta, Sexta, and Septima

Eusebius reports that Origen added three further Greek versions to his synoptic Hexapla Maior along with Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion. These anonymous translations were differentiated by their placement in relation to the columns of the Three and the Origenian LXX (Field [1875] 2005: 83). Because of this, they became known as Quinta, Sexta, and Septima and were designated in MSS with Greek (or Syriac) alphabetic sigla: ε΄ (heh), ς΄ (waw), and ζ΄, respectively. As these versions have not survived in full, little is known about them. This chapter thus aims only to survey the evidence and secondary literature.

Chronicles/Paralipomena

‘Paralipomena’ is the Greek title for what in English is known as the books of Chronicles. The name means ‘things omitted’, i.e. in relation to the contents of the books of Kings, to which it was seens as a complement in antiquity. The division into two books has always existed in the Greek as far as we know and was introduced into Hebrew editions only in modern times. There are two main textual traditions, the Old Greek, and the Antiochian or Lucianic recension. The precise relationship of Paralipomena to the Hebrew Samuel–Kings and Greek 1–4 Kingdoms and to 1 and 2 Esdras is complex and not easily resolved.