The Old Greek Psalter: Studies in Honour of Albert Pietersma 1841272094, 9781841272092, 0567332063, 9780567332066

Citation preview

JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT SUPPLEMENT SERIES

332

Editors David J.A. Clines Philip R. Davies Executive Editor Andrew Mein Editorial Board John Jarick, Richard J. Coggins, Alan Cooper, J. Cheryl Exum, John Goldingay, Robert P. Gordon, Norman K. Gottwald, Andrew D.H. Mayes, Carol Meyers, Patrick D. Miller

Sheffield Academic Press

The Old Greek Psalter Studies in Honour of Albert Pietersma Edited by Robert J.V. Hiebert, Claude E. Cox and Peter J. Gentry

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 332

Copyright © 2001 Sheffield Academic Press

Published by Sheffield Academic Press Ltd Mansion House 19 Kingfield Road Sheffield SI 19AS England www.SheffieldAcademicPress.com

Typeset by Sheffield Academic Press and Printed on acid-free paper in Great Britain by Bookcraft Ltd Midsomer Norton, Bath

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN 1-84127-209-4

CONTENTS Preface Publications of Albert Pietersma Abbreviations List of Contributors

7 9 13 17

MARGARET PIETERSMA Who Is Albert Pietersma?

19

JOHN WILLIAM WEVERS The Rendering of the Tetragram in the Psalter and Pentateuch: A Comparative Study

21

TAKAMITSU MURAOKA

Pairs of Synonyms in the Septuagint Psalms RAIJA SOLLAMO Repetition of Possessive Pronouns in the Greek Psalter: The Use and Non-Use of Possessive Pronouns in Renderings of Hebrew Coordinate Items with Possessive Suffixes

36

44

ANNELI AEJMELAEUS Characterizing Criteria for the Characterization of the Septuagint Translators: Experimenting on the Greek Psalter

54

PETER J. GENTRY The Greek Psalter and the Kcciye Tradition: Methodological Questions

74

6

The Old Greek Psalter

CAMERON BOYD-TAYLOR, PETER C. AUSTIN AND ANDREY FEUERVERGER The Assessment of Manuscript Affiliation within a Probabilistic Framework: A Study of Alfred Rahlfs's Core Manuscript Groupings for the Greek Psalter

98

EMANUEL TOY

Scribal Features of Early Witnesses of Greek Scripture

125

JOHAN LUST The pisqah be'emsa' pasuq, the Psalms, and Ezekiel 3.16

149

ROBERT A. KRAFT AND BENJAMIN G. WRIGHT III Coptic/Sahidic Fragments of the Biblical Psalms in the University of Pennsylvania Museum

163

ROBERT J.V. HIEBERT

Syriac Biblical Textual History and the Greek Psalter

178

NATALIO FERNANDEZ-MARCOS

David the Adolescent: On Psalm 151

205

JOHANN COOK

Intertextual Relationships between the Septuagint of Psalms and Proverbs

218

ARIE VAN DER KOOIJ

The Septuagint of Psalms and the First Book of Maccabees

229

TYLER F. WILLIAMS Towards a Date for the Old Greek Psalter MOISES SILVA The Greek Psalter in Paul's Letters: A Textual Study

248

277

CLAUDE E. cox Schaper's Eschatology Meets Kraus's Theology of the Psalms Index of References Index of Authors

289 312 343

PREFACE This volume is presented as a tribute to Albert Pietersma, Professor of Septuagint and Hellenistic Greek in the Department of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations at the University of Toronto, on the occasion of his sixty-fifth birthday. The choice of the Old Greek Psalter as the focus of this collection of essays is an obvious one, given the important body of work in this area of scholarship that Professor Pietersma has produced during the course of a distinguished academic career. Nineteen scholars from nine different countries have contributed to this effort. Such broad geographical representation is a testament both to the many friendships and connections that he has cultivated throughout the world and to the rich diversity within the guild of Septuagint scholars known as the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies (IOSCS). Professor Pietersma has, in fact, served in various capacities on the IOSCS executive for nearly thirty years, first as Secretary and Archivist (1972-80), next as President (1980-87), and subsequently as Immediate Past President (1987-93) and Honorary President (1993-). He continues to play a key role in the ongoing business of the IOSCS and in the supervision of its special projects. Most prominent among the latter are the New English Translation of the Septuagint, currently in preparation (to be published by Oxford University Press), and a commentary series on the Septuagint, which has recently been launched. The range of topics that is addressed in the present volume is indicative of the significance of the Old Greek Psalter for biblical research and related disciplines. Subject areas that are treated include translation technique, textual criticism, scribal phenomena, literary criticism, versions, Hebrew Bible, apocrypha and pseudepigrapha, Hellenistic literature, New Testament, and biblical theology. The burgeoning interest in Septuagint studies, which Professor Pietersma has done his part to foster, bodes well for the future of interdisciplinary research of the sort exemplified in this book. Robert J.V. Hiebert Claude E. Cox Peter J. Gentry

This page intentionally left blank

PUBLICATIONS OF ALBERT PlETERSMA

Books A Revised Critical Edition of the Greek Psalter. In progress. Sahidic Manuscripts of Luke and 2 Corinthians (with S. Comstock). In progress. A New English Translation of the Septuagint and the Other Greek Translations Traditionally Included under That Title: The Psalms (New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000). Translation Manual for 'A New English Translation of the Septuagint' (NETS) (Published for the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies; Ada, MI: Unical Books, 1996). The Apocryphon ofjannes and Jambres the Magicians: Papyrus Chester Beatty XVI (with New Editions of Papyrus Vindobonensis Greek inv. 29456+29828 verso and British Library Cotton Tiberius B. v f. 87) (Religions in the Graeco-Roman World, 119; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1994). The Acts of Phileas, Bishop of Thmuis (Including Fragments of the Greek Psalter: P. Chester Beatty XV with a New Edition of P. Bodmer XX, and Halkin's Latin Acta (Cahiers d'orientalisme, 7; Geneva: P. Cramer, 1984). De Septuaginta: Studies in Honour of John William Wevers (ed. A. Pietersma [primary editor] and C. Cox; Mississauga, Ontario: Benben Publications, 1984). The Apocalypse of Elijah, Based on P. Chester Beatty 2018 (Texts and Translations, 19; Pseudepigrapha Series, 9; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1981) (primary author; with S. Comstock and with assistance from Harold W. Attridge). Two Manuscripts of the Greek Psalter in the Chester Beatty Library, Dublin (Analecta Biblica, 77; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1978). Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri IV and V: A New Edition with Text-Critical Analysis (American Studies in Papyrology, 16; Toronto and Sarasota: Samuel Stevens Hakkert and Company, 1977).

Articles 'The Text of the Old Testament', in William R. Farmer, Armando J. Levoratti, Sean McEvenue and David L. Dungan (eds.), International Catholic Bible Commentary (Verbo Divino Estelle, Spain [Spanish language version]; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press [English language version], forthcoming). 'Exegesis and Liturgy in the Superscriptions of the Greek Psalter', in B. Taylor (ed.), X Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies, Oslo 1998. In press.

10

The Old Greek Psalter

'The Place of Origin of the Old Greek Psalter', in P.M.M. Daviau, J.W. Wevers and M. Wiegl (eds.), The World of the Aramaeans. I. Biblical Studies in Honour of PaulEugene Dion (JSOTSup, 324; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001). 'The Present State of the Critical Text of the Greek Psalter', in A. Aejmelaeus and U. Quast (eds.), Der Septuaginta-Psalter und seine Tochterubersetzungen (Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Gottingen; MSU, 24; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000), pp. 12-32. 'Yohanah and his Brother', in Lawrence H. Schiffman and James C. VanderKam (eds.), Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls (2 vols.; New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), II, pp. 1000-1001. 'A New English Translation of the Septuagint', in B. Taylor (ed.), IX Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies, Cambridge, 1995 (SBLSCS, 45; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), pp. 177-87. 'The Acrostic Poems of Lamentations in Greek Translation', in L. Greenspoon and O. Munnich (eds.), VIII Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies, Paris 1992 (SBLSCS, 41; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995), pp. 183201. 'Inscribed Artifacts at Tell Jawa, Jordan: Naoumas' Jug', BASOR 295 (1994), pp. 73-80 (with P.M.M. Daviau). 'Origen's Corrections and the Text of P. Bodmer XXIV, JNSL 19 (1993), pp. 133-42. 'A Sahidic Lectionary of the New Testament and Psalms', BASP 29 (1992), pp. 57-66 + plates (primary author; with S. Comstock). 'Coptic Texts in the Chester Beatty: Pshoi of Jeremias and Cephalon', BASP 29 (1992), pp. 67-78 + plates (primary author; with S. Comstock). Articles in David Noel Freedman (ed.), Anchor Bible Dictionary (6 vols.; New York: Doubleday, 1992): 'Bodmer Papyri' (I, pp. 766-67), 'Chester Beatty Papyri' (I, pp. 901-903), 'Enemessar' (II, p. 507), 'Holofernes' (III, p. 257), 'Hydaspes' (III, pp. 340-41), 'Jannes and Jambres' (III, pp. 638-40), 'Nanea' (IV, pp. 1019-20). 'The Apocryphon of Jannes and Jambres', in J.A. Emerton (ed.), Congress Volume: Leuven 1989 (XIII Congress of the International Organization for the Study of the Old Testament; VTSup, 43; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1991), pp. 383-95. 'Articulation in the Greek Psalms: The Evidence of Papyrus Bodmer XXIV, in GJ. Norton and S. Pisano (eds.), Tradition of the Text: Studies Offered to Dominique Barthelemy in Celebration of his 70th Birthday (OBO, 109; Freiburg: Universitatsverlag; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1991), pp. 184-202. 'Ra 2110 (P. Bodmer XXIV) and the Text of the Greek Psalter', in D. Fraenkel, U. Quast and J.W. Wevers (eds.), Studien zur Septuaginta: Robert Hanhart zu Ehren (Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Gottingen; MSU, 20; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1990), pp. 262-86. 'Coptic Martyrdoms in the Chester Beatty Library', BASP 24 (1987), pp. 143-63 (primary author; with S. Comstock). 'New Greek Fragments of Biblical Manuscripts in the Chester Beatty Library', BASP 24 (1987), pp. 37-61. 'New Fragments of Genesis in Sahidic',BASP 23 (1986), pp. 137-47 (primary author; with S. Comstock). 'Septuagint Research: A Plea for a Return to Basic Issues', VT 35 (1985), pp. 296-311. 'Jannes and Jambres', in J.H. Charlesworth (ed.), The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, I (New York: Doubleday, 1985), pp. 427-42 (primary author; with R.T. Lutz).

Publications of Albert Pietersma

11

'Kyrios or Tetragram: A New Quest for the Original Septuagint', in A. Pietersma and C. Cox (eds.), De Septuaginta: Studies in Honour of John William Wevers (Mississauga, Ontario: Benben Publications, 1984), pp. 85-101. 'Cephalon, a New Coptic Martyr', in Gerald E. Kadish and Geoffrey E. Freeman (eds.), Studies in Philology in Honour of Ronald James Williams (The Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities; Toronto: SSEA Publications, 1982), pp. 113-24 (primary author; with S. Comstock). 'The Edited Text of P. Bodmer XXIV, BASF 17 (1980), pp. 67-79. 'David in the Greek Psalms', VT 30 (1980), pp. 213-26. 'Proto-Lucian and the Greek Psalter', VT 28 (1978), pp. 66-72. 'The Greek Psalter: A Question of Methodology and Syntax', VT26 (1976), pp. 60-69. 'The "Lost" Folio of the Chester Beatty Ecclesiasticus', VT 25 (1975), pp. 497-99. 'Greek and Coptic Inedita of the Chester Beatty Library', B1OSCS1 (1974), pp. 10-18. 'F.G. Kenyon's Text of Papyrus 963', VT 24 (1974), pp. 113-18.

Reviews G. Bohak, Joseph and Aseneth and the Jewish Temple in Heliopolis (Early Judaism and Its Literature, 10; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996). JNES. In press. A. Aejmelaeus, On the Trail of the Septuagint Translators (Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1993). RSR. In press. J. Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter (WUNT, 2; Reihe 76; Tubingen: J.C. Mohr, 1995). BO 54 (1997), pp. 185-90. B.W. Longenecker, 2 Esdras (Guides to Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995). SR 25 (1996), pp. 372-73. N. Fernandez-Marcos, Scribes and Translators: Septuagint and Old Latin in the Books of the Kings (VTSup, 54; Leiden: EJ. Brill, 1994). JAOS 116 (1996), pp. 553-55. J. Sievers, The Hasmoneans and their Supporters: From Mattathias to the Death of John Hyrcanus I (South Florida Studies in the History of Judaism, 6; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990). IOUDAIOS ELECTRONIC REVIEWS, 1992. A.M. Kropp, B.J. Diebner, R. Kasser et al., Hamburger Papyrus Bit. 1 (Cahiers d'orientalisme, 18; Geneva: P. Cramer, 1989). Chronique d'Egypte (1992), pp. 192-94. G.F. Willems (ed.), Elie le prophete: Bible, tradition, iconographie (Publications de 1'Institutum iudaicum; Leuven: Peeters, 1988). RSR 17 (1991), p. 81. J. Ziegler (ed.), Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum graecum auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum. 11/4. lob. (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1982). JBL 104 (1985), pp. 305-11. R.S. Bagnall and N. Lewis, Fourth Century Documents from Karanis (American Studies in Papyrology, 20; Columbia Papyri, 7; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979). The Second Century 3 (1983), pp. 199-200. W.R. Bodine, The Greek Text of Judges: Recensional Developments (HSM, 23; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1980). RSR 8 (1982), p. 374. J.R. Busto Saiz, La traduccion de Simaco en el libro de los Salmos (TECC, 22; Madrid: CSIC, 1978). JBL 100 (1981), p. 262. M. Caloz, Etude sur la LXX origenienne du psautier (OBO, 19; Fribourg: Editions universitaires; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1978). JBL 98 (1979), pp. 589-90 and RSR 8 (1982), pp. 178-79.

12

The Old Greek Psalter

E. Tov, The Septuagint Translation of Jeremiah and Baruch (HSM, 8; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1976). JAOS 99 (1979), pp. 468-69. J.T. Nelis, / Makkabeeen (De Boeken van het Oude Testament, VI:IA; Roermond: J.J. Romen & Zonen, 1972). BO 35 (1978), pp. 304-305. A. Schenker, Hexaplarische Psalmenbmchstucke (OBO, 8; Freiburg: Universitatsverlag; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1975). JBL 96 (1977), pp. 433-36. A. Leone, L'evoluzione delta scrittura nei papiri greci del Vecchio Testamento (Papyrologica Castroctaviana, 5; Barcelona: Papyrologica Castroctaviana; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1975). JBL 96 (1977), pp. 136-37. S. Jellicoe (ed.), Studies in the Septuagint: Origins, Recensions, and Interpretations (Library of Biblical Studies; New York: Ktav, 1974). SR 5 (1975-76), pp. 313-14. M. Smith, Palestinian Parties and Politics that Shaped the Old Testament (Lectures on the History of Religions, New Series, 9; New York: Columbia University Press, 1971). JBL 91 (1972), pp. 550-52.

ABBREVIATIONS AASF AB ABD AGJU AnBib ANRW

ANTF Anton AOAT ArchP ASOR ATD BA BASOR BASF BETL BHS BHT Bib BIOSCS BJRL BO BSac BWANT BZAW CBET CBQ CBQMS CFC ConBOT

Annales Academiae scientiarum fennicae Anchor Bible David Noel Freedman (ed.), The Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992) Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums Analecta biblica Hildegard Temporim and Wolfgang Haase (eds.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischen Welt: Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung (Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1972-) Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen Textforschung Antonianum Alter Orient und Altes Testament Archivfur Papyrusforschung und verwandte Gebiete American Schools of Oriental Research Das Alte Testament Deutsch Biblical Archaeologist Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research Bulletin of the American Society ofPapyrologists Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium Biblia hebraica stuttgartensia Beitrage zur historischen Theologie Biblica Bulletin of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester Bibliotheca orientalis Bibliotheca Sacra Beitrage zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament Beihefte zur ZAW Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology Catholic Biblical Quarterly Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Monograph Series Cuadernos defilologia cldsica Coniectanea biblica, Old Testament

14 COT CRINT CSCO DCB DID ETL HALAT

HAT HKAT H-R

HSM HTR HUCA ICC IDE

IDBSup IOSCS JAOS JBL JBLMS JJS JNES JNSL JSHRZ JSJ JSOTSup JSPSup KAT KBH

LEH LSI MSU NETS NICOT

The Old Greek Psalter Commentaar op het Oude Testament Compendia rerum iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum Corpus scriptorum christianorum orientalium A Dictionary of Christian Biography Discoveries in the Judaean Desert Ephemerides theologicae lovanienses Ludwig Koehler et al. (eds.), Hebrdisches und aramdisches Lexikon zum Alien Testament (5 vols.; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1967-1995) Handbuch zum Alten Testament Handkommentar zum Alten Testament E. Hatch and H.A. Redpath et al., A Concordance to the Septuagint and the Other Greek Versions of the Old Testament (Including the Apocryphal Books) Harvard Semitic Monographs Harvard Theological Review Hebrew Union College Annual International Critical Commentary George Arthur Buttrick (ed.), The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (4 vols.; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962) IDB, Supplementary Volume International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies Journal of the American Oriental Society Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Biblical Literature Monograph Series Journal of Jewish Studies Journal of Near Eastern Studies Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages Judische Schriften aus hellenistisch-romischer Zeit Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha, Supplement Series Kommentar zum Alten Testament A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (W.L. Holladay, based upon the lexical work of L. Koehler and W. Baumgartner) J. Lust, E. Eynikel and K. Hauspie, A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint H.G. Liddell, Robert Scott and H. Stuart Jones, A GreekEnglish Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 9th edn, 1968) Mitteilungen des Septuaginta-Unternehmens A New English Translation of the Septuagint New International Commentary on the Old Testament

Abbreviations NRSV

OBO OTL OTS PGM RB RevQ RSR RSV

RTP SANT SBL SBLDS SBLSCS SBLTT SJSJ SNTSMS SR SSN STDJ TDNT

TECC THGD THGL THGN TRE TSAJ TU TynBul UBS UBSGNT VT VTSup WBC WUNT ZAW

15

New Revised Standard Version Orbis biblicus et orientalis Old Testament Library Oudtestamentische Studien K. Preisendanz (ed.), Papyri graecae magicae Revue biblique Revue de Qumran Religious Studies Review Revised Standard Version Revue de theologie et de philosophic Studien zum Alten und Neuen Testament Society of Biblical Literature SBL Dissertation Series SBL Septuagint and Cognate Studies SBL Texts and Translations Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series Studies in Religion/Sciences religieuses Studia semitica neerlandica Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich (eds.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley; 10 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964-) Textos y estudios 'Cardenal Cisneros' J.W. Wevers, Text History of the Greek Deuteronomy (MSU, 13; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1978) J.W. Wevers, Text History of the Greek Leviticus (MSU, 19; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986) J.W. Wevers, Text History of the Greek Numbers (MSU, 16; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1982) Theologische Realenzyklopddie Texte und Studien zum antiken Judentum Texte und Untersuchungen Tyndale Bulletin United Bible Societies United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament Vetus Testamentum Vetus Testamentum, Supplements Word Biblical Commentary Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

This page intentionally left blank

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

Anneli Aejmelaeus, University of Gottingen, Germany Peter C. Austin, The Institute for Clinical Evaluative Services, Department of Public Health Services, University of Toronto, Canada Cameron Boyd-Taylor, Department of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations, University of Toronto, Canada Johann Cook, University of Stellenbosch, South Africa Claude E. Cox, McMaster Divinity College, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada Natalio Fernandez-Marcos, Instituto de Filologfa, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, Madrid, Spain Andrey Feuerverger, Department of Statistics, University of Toronto, Canada Peter J. Gentry, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, KY, USA Robert J.V. Hiebert, Trinity Western Seminary, Langley, BC, Canada Arie van der Kooij, Universiteit Leiden, The Netherlands Robert A. Kraft, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA Johan Lust, Katholieke Universiteit te Leuven, Belgium Takamitsu Maraoka, Universiteit Leiden, The Netherlands Margaret Pietersma, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

18

The Old Greek Psalter

Moises Silva, biblical scholar, writer and editor, Litchfield, MI, USA Raija Sollamo, University of Helsinki, Finland Emanuel Tov, Hebrew University, Jerusalem John William Wevers, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada Tyler F. Williams, North American Baptist College, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Benjamin G. Wright III, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA, USA

WHO is ALBERT PIETERSMA? Margaret Pietersma On 28 September 1935, Albert Pietersma—'Al' to most people—was born in the Netherlands in a small town called Opende, Groningen, just across the border from Friesland, where he grew up in a family that included four boys and two girls. Al is the second eldest. Intending to become a farmer, he started attending agricultural school at the age of thirteen. But that was interrupted by emigration to Canada in the spring of 1951. He then helped his parents build up the family farm near Brockville, Ontario, by working in a factory in the daytime and doing farm chores after he came home from his day job. In the summers he would work late into the night, bringing in the hay. But in 1956 he realized that farming was not really something he wanted to do for the rest of his life. Since he had no high school diploma, he started doing high school by correspondence and began to think about what kind of career he wanted to take up. In an immigrant society, the only educated people one came in contact with were the doctor, the domine and the school teacher, so he decided to become a domine. Once he had begun his studies at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan, he saw what was out there—so many wonderful subjects to explore! After two years of college, he knew pretty well that he would like to teach classical languages, though he did not close the door completely on becoming a preacher. So, after four years of Calvin College he went to Calvin Seminary. After two years of college, he was also quite certain that he wanted to spend the rest of his life with me, Margaret Stadig, a native of Amsterdam, though by then also living in Brockville, Ontario. We were married in August of 1960. Five years and two sons later, we moved back to Canada where Al continued his studies at the University of Toronto, obtaining his PhD in 1970. He has been teaching there ever since.

20

The Old Greek Psalter

Al's academic accomplishments are many. But he is not only an outstanding scholar, he is also quite handy around the house. An excellent carpenter, he has renovated our last two houses—which has included digging out basements in order to gain proper ceiling height. He does plumbing and electrical work, including adding extra circuits. But enough of his accomplishments. What kind of a person is he? He is a warm, generous, honest, loyal, kind, loving individual. He is also very determined and forthright. He does not beat around the bush. He stands up for his convictions and is not afraid of confrontations. He will apologize when he is wrong—which is not often, and that can be very infuriating! I've been married to Al for forty years. We have two sons, Bryan and Kevin, and a daughter, Larisa. We all love and admire him. Al is a happy person. He often sings around the house, mostly Dutch hymns, of which he knows many. Al and I love gardening together. We also enjoy going to garage sales, seeing plays, going to concerts, and listening to classical music. But we derive the greatest pleasure from the simple things in life, such as when Al reads me stories after dinner, or, most of all, when we sit in our garden, each sipping a mug of coffee in the morning or a cup of tea in the afternoon. It is not unusual to see us doing that late in the fall or very early in the spring while it is still quite chilly, with our coats and hats on. We love the outdoors. Al is a man of simple pleasures, a homebody, who is looking forward to retirement!

THE RENDERING OF THE TETRAGRAM IN THE PSALTER AND PENTATEUCH: A COMPARATIVE STUDY John William Wevers

In 1984, Albert Pietersma honoured me with a brilliant analysis of how the translators of the Pentateuch dealt with the tetragram in his 'Kyrios or Tetragram: A Renewed Quest for the Original LXX'.1 In it he discussed critically the place of the tetragram, either in Palaeohebrew script or reflected in mm in Greek uncials as a misreading of the tetragram in Aramaic script, that is, of mn\ The latter phenomenon had led scholars, both ancient and modern, to believe that the Pentateuch translators had not translated the perpetual qere TIN in Greek by Kupioq, but had simply left the tetragram either in Aramaic or in Palaeohebrew script. Pietersma argued forcibly, and I believe convincingly, that the evidence for the tetragram in certain old papyri of the Pentateuch— particularly in mss 848, 943, 802 (with its IAQ) and 847—as well as the mm of the Milan Psalter (Ra 1098)2 as part of the text history of the Greek Psalter, was not original text, but was a revision within its text history. 1. Yhwh in the Pentateuch In order to clarify any relation which might conceivably exist between the Greek Pentateuch's method of dealing with the tetragram and that of the translator of the Psalter, I first offer a brief resume of the situ-

1. In Albert Pietersma and Claude Cox (eds.), De Septuaginta: Studies in Honour of John William Wevers (Mississauga, Ontario: Benben Publications, 1984), pp. 85-101. 2. G. Mercati, Psalterii hexapli reliquiae (Vatican City: Bybliotheca Vaticana, 1965). For an analysis of its contents, see S. Jellicoe, The Septuagint and Modern Study (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968), pp. 130-33.

22

The Old Greek Psalter

ation in the books of the Pentateuch,3 based in part on earlier work done on the Greek Pentateuch,4 but re-examined for this paper. As is well known, it is the perpetual qere, rendered as Kvpioq, that is represented throughout the books of the Old Testament, rather than the kethib, miT. This was the thesis that Pietersma ably defended in his essay referred to above. But since Kt>piopiov. This contrasts with the translator's rendering for the tetragram. In the nominative, only once is K-upioq articulated: at 28.13, a 6 8e Kvpioq structure occurs. Since the particle 8e is necessarily postpositive, the 6 serves simply as a grammatical convenience. The genitive Kvpioi) is always unarticulated, as is the accusative icupiov. The dative occurs only eight times, of which two, 4.3 and 12.8, are articulated. In both cases, the tcp represents the preposition in the phrase miT1?. In other words, the LXX represents the two morphemes separately: TO> renders"?, and Ki)piq> stands for mrp. In Exodus, KupiOQ is much more frequent, occurring 354 times in the book, mainly for the tetragram. In four instances, it represents a textual problem, since the MT reads QTfrK.9 But the use of Kt)piopi6pio ]1T«. At 110(109).!, the Hebrew reads ^ivb HIPP DW. The one addressed is iq> KDpicp uot), that is, the ideal ruler. Finally, at 122(123).2, 'the eyes of slaves look to the hands TO>V KDpioov auTedv, that

is, to Dmrm. The remaining 35 instances of 'nfl/pTK all refer to deity, of which 21 are in the nominative. Of these, ten are unarticulated.13 The following examples are illustrative. At 39(40). 18, the LXX refers to God as Kvpio^ who povn.ei uou. At 67(68).20, eMoyrjioq Kupioxi 6 Ki3pioD. This parallels 6 0eo Ki)piq> occurs at 21(22).31, 67(68).33, and 13. 11(12).5; 15(16).2; 39(40). 18; 65(66).18; 67(68).12; 20, 23, 76(77).8; 77(78).65; 109(110).5. 14. 2.4; 8.2, 10; 34(35).23; 36(37).13; 38(39).8; 44(45). 12; 53(54).6; 67(68). 18; 134(135).5; 146(147).5. 15. 67(68).21; 70(71). 16; 89(90). 17; 96(97).5; 113(114).7. The plural articulated genitive form is found at 122(123).2 and 135(136).3, but in neither case, of course, is Israel's God the referent.

WEVERS The Rendering of the Tetragram

27

135(136).3. The accusative as an equivalent is attested in only one such case, at 129(130).6, whereTOVKvpiov appears in the clause, fiXmaev f| \|A)XT| |io\> eid tov Kt>piov. It may safely be concluded that, as in the case of the Pentateuch translators, the articulation of K-upioq as a rendering for T1K was a matter of indifference to the translator of the Psalter: TW could be translated by Ktipioq with or without an article. Four instances in which the deity is referred to involve textual difficulties, and merit a brief comment. In one case, 76(77).2, npbc, Kvpiov has DTI^N as its MT counterpart. Presumably the parent text read 'PK mrr. The reverse is true for the other three cases which, properly speaking, should not be included in the tally of instances in which the Psalter translator has rendered the tetragram, since miT of the MT becomes Geoq in the LXX. At 68(69).32 and 97(98).4, mrr1? of the MT becomes iq> 6eq> in the LXX. Similarly, at 70(71).!, mrr of the Hebrew becomes 6 6eopie is the equivalent in 198 cases. On 27 occasions, icupie has no equivalent vocative in the MT. I suspect that most, and probably all, are glosses rather than based on a parent mrr. Of course, theoretically, 'HR could have been employed as a vocative rather than mm. In any case, the position of Ki>pie is to be noted. In 17 instances, the vocative follows the second person singular pronoun; I would consider all of these to be original glosses.16 In two places, 79(80).8 and 93(94). 19, the vocative begins the verse. At 7.7, 34(35).23, 43(44).27 and 50(51).20, it follows an imperative. Similarly, at 87(88).3 and 142(143).8, the vocative is impelled by an imperatival clause. In two passages, 118(119).93 and 138(139). 13, it follows a second person singular aorist verbal clause. There are 34 cases in which the articulated nominative, 6 K-upioc;, corresponds to mil'' in the Psalter. In two additional places, 6 icupiot; has no equivalent in the MT. At 21(22).32, 6 icupux; is given as the subject of ercoinaev, and at 135(136).23, an articulated icupux; occurs at the end of the first stich. The MT of this stich is }£> "Dt l]f?BBn0, 'the one who remembered us in our lowliness', which the LXX has rendered by creating a oil clause and naming the subject as 6 K\>piopiopiopio£. This partly replicates v. 17 which is the sade verse, with the substitution of niotoc, for 8iKaio phrase, but there the LXX has translated it as Kaiaxp'u^fioo'ucnv erai (nXfjGei eiprivrig). The verb is quite rare, and I find it difficult to distinguish between an em plus dative modification and a direct modification by a genitive. At 2.2, Toti KDpioi) is governed by Kcmx. The phrase modifies the clause that precedes it, 'and the rulers are gathered together / against the Lord and against his anointed'. At 17(18).32, rcAjrv TO\) Kupiou renders HU^no

mrr. The articulated genitive in six cases renders a Hebrew *7 phrase conveying the sense of possession. Thus at 3.9, too) icupiou f\ aompia means the aomipia, viz. njnZJTT, belongs to the Lord. Similarly, at 21(22).29, rj jiacnXeia belongs to the Lord, that is, TO\) Kvpiov, which the parallel line also stresses with KQI crutoc; 8ecm6^ei TG>V eGvrov. At

30

The Old Greek Psalter

23(24).!, TO-U KDpio-u fj yn real TOrcXripGouaaimiq occurs, which is then explicated in the second stich, fj oiKovu-evri Kai 7cdvxe KDpicp is found in a nominal clause, where it is the predicate of 6 ovpavoq. Other cases of mrp1? in nominal clauses are rendered by the genitive, for which see pp. 29-30 above. With regard to the remaining instances, the verb forms that tq> Kvpicp modifies are given below to provide necessary context: dyaUiaoooneecc dXaXd^aTe avTCwtoSaKja) anoScoaoo 900) / ^aare etna epei eXaX-Tioev eveYKaTe E^ayopEVoo) E^dp^aTE e^ojioXayeioee / -o9ai E^oXoyTiaaaeaxTav EvXoyTmEvoi

94(95).! 99(100).! 115.3(116.12) 115.9(116.18) 12(13).6,95(96).! (2x), 95(96).2,97(98).!, 103(104)33,149.1 15(16).2, 139(140).? 90(91).2 17(18).! 28(29). 1 (2x), 28(29).2,95(96).? (2x), 95(96).8 31 (32).5 146(147).? 32(33).2,91(92).2,104(105).!, 105(106).!, 106(107).!, 117(118).!, 29, 135(136).! 106( 107).8,15,21,31 113.23(115.15)

20. At 72(73).28, EV TO) K-upio) corresponds to the MT's HTPP '3TIQ. Whether the parent text was TWQ or mJT'D is not known. More often, miTQ is translated as em TCp Kwpio). This occurs seven times, in modification of JiEJioi6a at 10(11).!; £A,7ci£K ETiEKOtXEaavTo, and at 17(18).7 as erceKaXeaduriv. In both cases, TOV Kt)piov serves as a modifier. There remain four passages in which TOV Kupiov modifies various verbs: rcapco^uvev at 9.25(10.3),rcpocGpcourivat 15(16).8, covei8ioev at 73(74). 18 and ayan&v-czq at 96(97). 10. When one peruses the detailed lists in the above sections, it becomes clear that the translator of the Psalter has not followed the strict pattern established by the translators of the Pentateuch. To be sure, iojpio\)A,al icupiou at 121 (122).4. There are three cases of 6 K\>piopio fh)u,(p oov eXey^xl? M£ uiiSe TH opyfj aov nmSeuarn; UE. Nor does one see why the sequence of the Greek words is reversed in translating an identical Hebrew collocation, *]K pit"!: Guuxx; tf|\> at 78.49 and 85.4. Whatever subtle differences in nuance there might be between all those Hebrew nouns, there was no chance that our translator could do justice to them with merely two equivalents. A highly literary word such as UTJVK;, known to the translators of the Pentateuch, was possibly unknown to him. Or if it was, his translation policy was not that of Jerome.12 2. Words for 'Rock' Psalm 18.3 contains two words that denote hard, solid stony objects, U'pp and "T)2£, which both metaphorically refer to the God of Israel.

•OMB 'w ppi 'ED la non« ms ^« natem vrnscn '•xho mrr Kvpioq otepeotyiti \LO\) KOI KOTa(|)i)YT| \uov>, Kai pTjarng jiou, 6 6eo, Kai eX,7tiw ere' avtov, wepaoTtiaTrnq p,oi) KOI Kepaq ocornpiaq ^io\), dvnXTmnTcap JIOD.

11. A point disputed by scholars. F. Biichsel admits no material difference between the two, in TDNT, III, p. 168. H. Kleinknecht, however, writes: 'opyri, in distinction from 0Dp,o£, is essentially and intentionally orientated to its content, namely revenge or punishment' (TDNT, V, p. 384). For an older view, see R.C. Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament (London: Macmillan, 9th edn, 1880), pp. 130-32: Trench quotes Ammonius in summing up his main thesis: 6uu6 el 6 iMtepacntiorriq Hot).

As in the case of our translator's concern about theological 'correctness' or orthodoxy that is shown in his choice of Qeoc, to render IKS, we note a similar example in this second semantic field. How else could one account for a most remarkable rendition at 84.12?

DTT^N mrr ]JDI tfotf eXeov Kai dXf|9eiav ayaroji Kvpioq 6 Geoq.

The Greek can be retroverted as DTftK mrr an^ nORI non or something of that nature. One doubts, however, that such was the translator's Vorlage. Rather he or a later reviser was anxious not to give any hint that the Israelite religion had anything to do with the abominable sunworship. The range of Greek nouns selected by our translator is theologically biased to a large extent. Some of the corresponding Hebrew words have an obvious military connotation, nothing of which is very evident in the Greek words that have been chosen. In only a few instances does he employ Greek words of military import: oxvpcojia = HJilD (89.41); 7iepu>xt| = tsaQ (108.1 1), = TfcD (31.22; 60.1 1). He appears thus to be more interested in biblical soteriology than in figures of speech used by the Hebrew poet to give expression to it. It is in accordance with this

18. Here the text is about Ephraim, not God.

MURAOKA Pairs of Synonyms in the Septuagint Psalms

43

concern that ]?D is personified as tmEpaamaTife 'one who holds a shield (dorciq) over, protector' and dvtiA/nuTnxop, 'helper', rather than being construed as a word designating a piece of armour, thus |3Q rather than]?!?.19 The Psalms translator does not appear to be aiming at consistent translation equivalence. Rather, he has a pool of related or synonymous words or phrases which he draws upon, particularly where two or more semantically corresponding words or phrases occur in proximity in the Hebrew text. His translation also appears to be coloured by certain doctrinal concerns. These tentative conclusions, based on a relatively small database, could have text-critical implications as well. Before one sets about reconstructing a Hebrew Vorlage of the Greek Psalter, one needs to consider its character as a translation.

19. When God is depicted as a warrior in a battle scene, our translator does use an appropriate Greek word: e.g., H]^1 |3D pTOH fan1? HK Df!1? JioXfiUTjoov tovq jioXeuowtdq U£. emXapoti ontan) Kai 6i)peoi) (35.1b-2a); )3D ntfp 'EXZh "1325 nQtf HQn'PQT Dim eicei auveTpiyev Tv fyivrim.5 (ioi> 6 icupux;

When collecting the material for this essay, I paid attention to idiomatic free renderings that appear in the Greek Psalter and that would also have been excellent translations for the coordinate items with possessive suffixes examined here. Ps. 35(34). 14

Tchnm *? rne-jro ox; TtXrimov, ox; dSeX^ov iniexspov, oikox; einpeatow Ps. 46(45).2

wi norm •&> DTTPR 6 8e6s f)|i£v KOTa*))^ KOI 8wajiii;

16. In Isa. 12.2, the Qumran scroll lQIsa has the same reading that the translator of the Psalter had in his Vorlage.

52

The Old Greek Psalter Ps. 59(58). 17

'b-ra DTD. 01301 ^ urn rrrro cm eyevriGTis dvtiA,r|U,7tTG)p JIOD KOI KaTai)yn ev f|U£p(ji OXixj/eccx; uou

The preceding examples demonstrate that it was within the competence of the translator to refrain from repeating the possessive pronoun and to place it in a number of possible positions. These kinds of idiomatic renderings did not, however, occur to him while he was translating the coordinate nouns with their possessive suffixes; that would have required non-repetition in the Hebrew Vorlage. The possessive pronoun corresponding to the preposition *? and its suffix was placed by the translator accurately in the same position as the Hebrew preposition occupied in its context, in Ps. 46(45).2 before the first of the coordinate items, in 59(58). 17 after the first coordinate item, and in 35(34). 14 after the second coordinate item. Apparently, the translator himself was unaware of the great skill exhibited by these renderings. The use of the possessive pronoun for *? with a suffix in these examples, where *p denotes the possessor, must be attributed to him, but thereafter the idiomatic expression arose almost automatically from his adherence to the Hebrew Vorlage. Conclusions The translation technique followed by the translator of the Greek Psalter has been illuminated in a few general studies on the books of the Septuagint. Soisalon-Soininen, in his investigation of infinitives, classified the Psalter with a group of slavishly rendered books/sections, such as 4 Kingdoms, Judges, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, The Twelve and Ecclesiastes.17 Based upon a consideration of the renderings of the semiprepositions, the book of Psalms was assigned to the fourth and most slavish category.18 In his grammar, H.St.J. Thackeray divided the books of the Septuagint into different categories 'from the point of view of style'.19 17. I. Soisalon-Soininen, Die Infinitive in der Septuaginta (AASF, ser. B 132,1; Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, 1965), pp. 177-90. 18. R. Sollamo, Renderings of Hebrew Semiprepositions in the Septuagint (AASF, Diss. Hum. Litt. 19; Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, 1979), pp. 28089. 19. H.St.J. Thackeray, A Grammar of the Old Testament in Greek According to the Septuagint. I. Introduction, Orthography and Accidence (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1909), pp. 9-13.

SOLLAMO Repetition of Possessive Pronouns

53

As I have pointed out elsewhere, his classification is rather confusing.20 The book of Psalms is placed by him in the classification 'indifferent Greek'. For him this category is 'a large one, containing books of various styles'. Whereas Soisalon-Soininen and I describe the character of the translation technique employed by the translator, Thackeray pays more attention to the quality of the Greek used by the translator. This analysis of the repetitions and non-repetitions of possessive pronouns in coordinate items does not alter the total picture with respect to the typical characterization of the Septuagint Psalter. The Psalms translator was very slavish indeed, clearly more so than the most slavish translators of the Pentateuch (Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy). The percentage of repetitions is very high, both in cases with two coordinate items (91%) and with three or more items (100%). The highest percentages for the Pentateuch are 86% for Numbers, 76% for Deuteronomy and 75% for Leviticus. The very few and sporadic cases of non-repetition provide occasional glimpses into the competence of the translator of Psalms, a competence which he mostly did not employ to good effect.21 To return to Thackeray and the question of the style and quality of the Greek used, it is safe to conclude that the language of the Greek Psalter is unidiomatic and clumsy. The point of comparison is nontranslation Greek. Possessive pronouns are never repeated in stylistically elegant literary texts. The Greek translation of the Psalter exhibits the almost total opposite of good literary style, as the overwhelming abundance of possessive pronouns attests. This is one clear example of the peculiarly Hebraistic character of the Septuagint Psalter.

20. R. Sollamo, 'Some "Improper" Prepositions, such as ENOPION, ENANTION, ENANTI, etc., in the Septuagint and Early Koine Greek', VT 25 (1975), pp. 773-82 (775). 21. When translating the verbal forms, the translator put slightly more of his competence to use, according to J.H. Sailhamer, The Translation Technique of the Greek Septuagint for the Hebrew Verbs and Participles in Psalms 3-41 (Studies in Biblical Greek, 2; New York: Peter Lang, 1991), pp. 207-10.

CHARACTERIZING CRITERIA FOR THE CHARACTERIZATION OF THE SEPTUAGINT TRANSLATORS: EXPERIMENTING ON THE GREEK PSALTER* Anneli Aejmelaeus

Albert Pietersma once aptly described the analysis of translation technique in Septuagint research as 'the quest for the Archimedean point'.1 Indeed, as thorough an acquaintance as possible with the characteristic mode of translation of the various translators of the Septuagint is one of the basic requirements of all Septuagintal scholarship.2 'As to the principle, there is no disagreement', Pietersma states.3 Much work has been done in this area over recent years and decades, and this gives us a general idea of the quality of the Septuagint translations and enables us to cite examples of free translators as well as of literal ones, of those adding interpretative elements and of those of conservative predisposition. Ever since Thackeray, it has been customary to classify the translators and place them into groups characterized by approximately equal skill and by a similar attitude towards the original. Every time a new criterion is used to group the translators, the scholar is eager to check whether the grouping is in agreement with earlier ones, and is quite happy if this is the case. Thus, translation technique is in danger of being regarded as something very constant—as if the analysis were in no need of refinement, as if the quest had come to an end. * An oral version of this paper was given as an invited presentation to the Septuagint Section of the International Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, Helsinki, 16 July 1999. 1. 'Septuagint Research: A Plea for a Return to Basic Issues', VT 35 (1985), pp. 298-311(299). 2. Cf. my 'What We Talk about when We Talk about Translation Technique' (paper read at the X Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies [IOSCS], Oslo, 1998). 3. 'Return to Basic Issues', p. 299.

AEJMELAEUS Characterizing Criteria

55

1. The Portrait of a Translator As for the principle, it is generally accepted that the translators were individuals. This acknowledgment is indeed a prerequisite of great importance for all work on and with the Septuagint, and a fact that we must keep on repeating to those not so familiar with the basics of Septuagint studies. But how much individuality is actually allowed for? What I think we should get rid of is a picture of the translators as belonging to different 'school classes'. Those 'in the first grade' have learned to master only a few of the difficulties of the Hebrew language, those 'in a higher class' accordingly show mastery of more difficult details, and those 'about to graduate' have almost no weakness at all, but write fluent Greek. Classifying the translators would then mean assigning them to their respective 'school classes'. What you then expect to find in the products of these translators is and should be in accordance with their respective classes. A first grader normally produces a first grader's results. But in reality, the mode of translation of any given translator is not that constant. The translators show different capabilities in different areas. For the task of describing one particular translator, this means that we must strive to provide as many-sided a documentation of his working habits and abilities as possible. I am now thinking in particular of the translator of the Psalter. He is a rather new acquaintance for me and a rather puzzling one because his competence, for the most part, does not respond to the same tests as does that of the translators of the Pentateuch. This translator is one of those who are normally classified as literal, sometimes even extremely literal. According to a well-known thesis, the translator of the Psalter is understood to be a forerunner of the later xaiye tradition.4 How little justice this characterization really does to the translator of the Psalms has already been pointed out by Albert Pietersma.5 What one needs in order to gain a more reliable and

4. The clearest formulation of this thesis is found in O. Munnich, 'Contribution a 1'etude de la premiere revision de la Septante', in ANRW, II, 20/1, pp. 192-220. See also the review of the discussion by S. Olofsson, 'The Kaige Group and the Septuagint Book of Psalms', in B.A. Taylor (ed.), IX Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies: Cambridge, 1995 (SBLSCS, 45; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), pp. 189-230. 5. See his critical review of H.-J. Venetz, Die Quinta des Psalteriums: Bin

56

The Old Greek Psalter

complete picture of this translator, as well as others of his kind, is new and other criteria for the characterization of translation technique. The task referred to, viz. the description of the working habits and abilities of one translator, is no doubt held to be legitimate by most scholars. It is absolutely necessary to do this kind of groundwork if one wishes, for instance, to use the Septuagint for the purpose of doing textual criticism of the Hebrew Bible. The same holds true for Septuagintal textual criticism or editorial work. However, this type of study—in spite of the agreement in principle—has not always been practised with the necessary consistency. What has interested some scholars and inspired them to publish special studies on certain parts of the Septuagint is discovering examples of extraordinary renderings and theologically motivated interpretations or changes in wording, not so much the normal mode of handling words and expressions of the source language. How does one paint the portrait of a particular translator? First of all, I think that the full description of a translator should aim at describing both his normal mode of translation and his special achievements—the conventions observed as well as the rare cases showing what he is capable of achieving. Second, hand in hand with the two extremes just mentioned go the two ways of presenting the data. On the one hand, it is necessary to give statistics of phenomena that are frequent in the text. On the other hand, individual examples of singular cases complement the picture. Third, the portrait of a translator always needs the background provided by other translators. A comparison with other translators, as far as it is possible to make, helps one to evaluate the individual translator. Once again, individual features exemplified by rare cases complete the picture. It is also relevant to ask whether the translator under observation somehow reveals his knowledge of books translated earlier, or perhaps seeks help from parallel cases. The material used to exemplify the translation technique in a certain book consists of various linguistic phenomena. Both grammatical and lexical items are useful for this purpose and should be considered. Particularly interesting from the viewpoint of translation technique are cases where the two languages concerned differ from one another in structure or in idiom, and where the translator had to choose between a Hebraistic expression and an idiomatic Greek expression, or otherwise had the need to clarify the meaning of the text for his readers. Since the Beitrag zur Septuaginta- und Hexaplaforschung (Hildesheim: Gerstenberg, 1974), in 'Return to Basic Issues', pp. 307-11.

AEJMELAEUS Characterizing Criteria

57

texts in question have religious content, the issue of theologically motivated translation choices immediately emerges when the 'meaning' of the text, the semantic aspect, is touched upon. The theological motivation behind the whole business of translating the Scriptures and behind certain modes of translation or single equivalents used has quite correctly been emphasized lately, but it is most important in respect to methodology that the theological aspect of the work of the translator not be separated from his mode of working in general.6 In the case of the Psalter, I should like to emphasize this prerequisite in particular, since one of the main concerns of the translator of the Psalter must have been to find formulations that could be used in praise and prayer to God. And this not only in clear theological statements but also when speaking of the human experiences and aspirations of the petitioner and of the hopes and fears of the community. Most of the time, I trust, the translator was conscious of the necessity to formulate usable religious language, rhythmical prose that could be read aloud or recited by the Jewish community. 2. Different Criteria of Translation Technique Translation phenomena are commonly described in terms of literalness and freedom. As is well known, James Barr, in his Typology of Literalism, has focused on literalism, because literalness is easier to deal with.7 Freedom is more difficult to define, other than as departure from literalness. On the other hand, it is precisely freedom that has to be described when we try to describe the work of a translator. Speaking of the Septuagint in general—which must be allowed every once in a while—one would do well to point out which literal methods of translation led to the overall flavour of the language employed in most parts of it. But speaking of one individual translator—as most of the time we should be doing—it does not help much to describe his literalness. When speaking of one individual translator, we wish to demonstrate those features that are characteristic of his work and that help to distinguish him from the others, that is, features of freedom, departure from the literal 6. Cf. F. Austermann, ' "Deshalb werden nicht aufstehen Frevler im Gericht". Zur Ubersetzungsweise und Interpretation im ersten Septuaginta-Psalm' (paper delivered at the X Congress of the IOSCS, Oslo, 1998). 7. J. Barr, The Typology of Literalism in Ancient Biblical Translation (MSU, 15; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979).

58

The Old Greek Psalter

method. It would be interesting to know—and also useful for the various applications of the data of translation technique—just how much freedom and what kind of freedom a translator could allow himself. In seeking and characterizing criteria for the characterization of the Septuagint translators, it is very helpful to use Barr's differentiation of the various aspects of literalness or freedom as a point of departure. Each linguistic phenomenon studied should be analysed in order to discover which aspects of translation play a part in its treatment. A further principal distinction, I consider most important, is the one between the quantitative and qualitative aspects. Under the rubric of quantitative aspects I would include features such as (1) the word-for-word or element-for-element approach or the departure from it (i.e., adding or omitting elements), (2) word order—either retention of the word order of the original or a variation of it, and (3) segmentation—either narrow or wide—that is, the size of the portion of text that was usually, or could possibly be, taken into account by the translator.8 By qualitative aspects I refer to (1) the choice of equivalents, (2) the consistency of these choices, (3) the adequacy of lexical equivalents, (4) the adequacy of the grammatical forms chosen, and (5) the level of interpretation.9 The quantitative aspects have more to do with the structure of the text, the qualitative aspects with its meaning. When characterizing criteria, I should like to see here two poles—the quantitative and the qualitative— between which all the various criteria can be placed. Very few such criteria are solely either quantitative or qualitative in nature; most of them reveal features of both, but in varying degrees. For instance, there are several effective criteria of translation technique in the area of clause connections. In this area, the two languages concerned differ greatly. Consequently, consideration of Greek idiom produces variation and the use of several different conjunctions for the few existing Hebrew ones. For the most part, it is a question of the quantitative aspect of translation, since a change of conjunctions presupposes particularly wide segmentation. For the adjustment of conjunctions, the translator had to check at least one—possibly two— whole clauses. The semantic aspect is not lacking, but plays an inferior role. One excellent criterion of translation technique in this regard is the variation between oxi and yap as renderings of the loosely causal 'D (a 8. 9.

Cf. Barr, Typology, pp. 18-29. Cf. Barr, Typology, pp. 29-44,48-49.

AEJMELAEUS Characterizing Criteria

59

feature that I never weary of mentioning).10 Nevertheless, even this criterion has its limits. By this criterion we are able to distinguish the very best groups of translations: (1) Esther o', Exodus, Job and Proverbs (in which ydp is nearly always correctly used), and (2) Isaiah, Genesis, Joshua and Daniel o' (in which yap is employed a considerable number of times, although cm appears too).11 As for a translation like the Septuagint Psalter, this criterion has nothing to say. Of the 360 cases of causal *D in the Psalter, only seven have been rendered by yap (i.e. 1.9%) whereas the figures for the Pentateuchal books are between 26% and 85%.12 To mention another well-known criterion, the use of the participium coniunctum as a rendering of co-ordinate clauses was first introduced by Ilmari Soisalon-Soininen.13 This criterion, too, presupposes relatively wide segmentation, and it has to do primarily with the structure of the text rather than with its meaning. This criterion brings out the good quality of the translations I have just mentioned, plus a few others: the remaining books of the Pentateuch and 1-2 Samuel, all of which are narrative texts. However, the four cases of participium coniunctum in the Psalter—four in such a large biblical book—are statistically fully negligible. Another similar case is the rendering of the Hebrew 3 + infinitive construct. In the highest quality group, the translators show a preference for renderings with a temporal clause or a participial construction over against ev tcp + the infinitive. As for the Psalter, there are merely seven cases of the freer alternatives against 52 of ev TCp + the infinitive.14 The poor translator does not seem to qualify at all according to these criteria. But there must be other criteria to make it possible to distinguish between the translators outside the 'top ten' group. In order to be able 10. See my 'OTI causale in Septuagintal Greek', in On the Trail of the Septuagint Translators (Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1993), pp. 17-36. 11. 'DTI causale', p. 28. 12. Genesis 55%, Exodus 85%, Leviticus 35%, Numbers 27%, Deuteronomy 26% — total 244/528, i.e., 46% ('OTI causale', p. 26). 13. I. Soisalon-Soininen, Die Infinitive in der Septuaginta (AASF, B 132; Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, 1965), pp. 177-78. See also my Parataxis in the Septuagint (AASF, B Diss. 31; Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, 1982), pp. 89-108. 14. Soisalon-Soininen, Infinitive, pp. 188-90.

60

The Old Greek Psalter

to achieve this, it is necessary to look for criteria that more clearly have to do with the qualitative aspect of translation, that is, with the choice of equivalents, with treatment of idioms and metaphors, with the activity of the translator on the level of words—the smallest units that convey meaning and make up the semantic content of the text. The division between quantitative and qualitative aspects which I aim at is not identical to the division between grammatical and lexical aspects. Several grammatical and syntactical features belong in the category of qualitative aspects. For instance, the use of the subjunctive or optative is very strongly connected to the semantic aspect of the form, giving expression to a wish or thought that is unreal or not yet real. When treating one word, the verb, a translator had to choose not only the lexical item but also the verbal form—out of a number of forms with distinctions unknown in Hebrew—and these two, the lexical unit and the form, combined to make up a meaningful verbal expression. In saying this, I stress that my focus is on the practice of translation. If one were to focus on the systematic description of the Greek language, one would naturally have to speak of different sentence structures. Among the grammatical and, in particular, syntactical items, there are some that typically presuppose the mastering of large contexts and structures—exemplifying the quantitative aspect—whereas others seem to function within a more narrow space and with a primary emphasis on the semantic aspect of the words used—which would mean location nearer to the qualitative pole. Among the latter, I would tentatively include prepositions. In this connection, I should like to experiment with the renderings of a particular Hebrew preposition, viz. ]Q, and to examine the way the translator of the Psalter handled this item. Did he have standard equivalents which he employed without consideration of the semantic aspect, or was he after all led by the semantic effect of the words he wrote? Methodologically speaking, what interests me is whether items such as prepositions can be used as criteria for evaluating translation technique in the case of translators who do not distinguish themselves on the basis of quantitative aspects. 3. Experimenting with a Preposition I proceed to my experiment with the renderings of the Hebrew preposition ]D. The preposition ]Q has several different functions for which different renderings must be used in Greek. This makes it interesting for

AEJMELAEUS Characterizing Criteria

61

my test. For the usual semantic values 'from', 'away from', 'out of, the Greek language has two main alternatives to offer: GOTO and EK, which at first sight are not easy to distinguish (cf. von and aus in German) for speakers of languages in which this sort of differentiation is not made. My impression is that in the vast majority of cases the translator of the Psalter correctly distinguished between the functions of the two prepositions.15 Which one of the two was chosen depended mainly on the verb of the clause—whether it was a verb connoting departure or distance, redemption or protection, separation or turning away, and so on—but also on the main word of the preposition, so that both prepositions sometimes occur in parallel stichs, as in the following examples. Ps. 52(51).?

D"n pKD -pzhtfi ^n«Q -|ncn -jnrr mtf? "par ^TH 8ia TOVTO 6 Geoq KCt6eXev oe ei •imep %iKia.8ag eljeXeljduiiv 7tapappi7iTeic6ai ev i4> oiicq)TOV6eou uaXAov (•+• Ga) fj oiicelv EV XdpnyYv M.OD TCI Xoyvd ODD, •vwcep (xeXi KHI Kiipiov tcp OTOjiati p.o\). Ps. 135(134).5 arhvf^oQ iwwi mn' "pnr'D OTI neyai; Kiipvow KOI dvTajtoScoaei ^01 Kvpioq KOTCI TT)V SIKHIOOTJVTIV (iou KOI KOTO Tfyv Ka6apioTnTa t&v xevpcov jtou avxaitoScoaei (avc > S U R) M.OV

Ps. 132(131).! 1

n3DD mtir-R^ not* in1? mn'-rate dafioaev Kvpioq Tip Aam5 ciXT|6Eiav Kai ov (if) d9ETTiaei avrr|v Ps. 85(84).9

nboD1? mB^TW TTon-V«i iDi}-b« mbtz? -QT 'D OTI XaX,r|OEi Evpnviiv Bid TOY Xaov auTOi) real ejci vovq oaioi*; auroii KOV ETO. Toi)^ E7iicrtpeovTa(; npbc, awov Kap6iav. (!)

Note that, in the Psalter, dnooTpeijxD also serves 13 times as an equivalent for ~IHD hiphil in the idiom 'hide one's face' (see Ps. 143[142].7 above). For this variation in the choice of equivalents, there are, of course, different reasons. First, the resources of the two languages are different indeed, and the Greek language in particular offers vast possibilities to use more specific expressions for the often very simple Hebrew idiom. Second, one should also consider the poetic nature of the Psalter. The main feature of Hebrew poetry is parallelism. The parallel lines often

72

The Old Greek Psalter

contain synonymous expressions, a fact that makes the task of the translator only more demanding. One often notices that the translator of Psalms alternated synonymous or near-synonymous equivalents in order to fit the words into the line better (cf. Ps. 118[117].8-9 above). Sometimes one Greek word is repeated for the Hebrew parallel expressions, but repetition can function as a poetic device as well (cf. Ps. 18[17].21 above). It is important that lexical studies on the Greek Psalter properly take into account the poetic structure of the text; for each case of an equivalent used, it is necessary to check a larger context, including the parallel lines. The poetic structure of the text and its function as religious poetry— prayer and praise—must be taken into account when characterizing the work of the translator. In passing, I would like to mention the translation of divine epithets.27 As is well known, the Greek Psalter never uses epithets such as 'rock' or 'stronghold' for the God of Israel, but interprets these metaphors as 'helper', 'help', 'protector' and the like, or gives the referent 'God' instead. I do not believe that the translation of the divine epithets is a fully isolated phenomenon in the Psalter, or that it somehow contradicts the general mode of translation in this biblical book. It is merely the tip of the iceberg, the rest of which is not so easy to discover. I think that the avoidance of concrete epithets for God indicates that the translator was very conscious of his duty to create a Greek book of Psalms which could be used by his religious community in prayer and praise to God—nothing less. It is only natural that the translator had a religious or theological motivation for several of his choices. The prevailing opinion about the Greek Psalter may be that it contains dreadfully poor poetry. Of course, this is true if we compare it to classical Greek poetry. But if one considers the constraints within which the translator worked, one cannot avoid the impression that he did rather well after all. The translator did not show his best side in the quantitative respect, which I think is fully understandable. The structure of sentences was not the foremost interest of the translator, who was coping with problems caused by the parallelism and the religious content of the text. In Hebrew poetry, the sentence structure is formally rather simple: short independent clauses follow one another, and the text consists mainly of small units of thought. The logic of the 27. See S. Olofsson, God is My Rock (ConBOT, 31; Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1990).

AEJMELAEUS Characterizing Criteria

73

discourse is, for the most part, not made explicit through complex syntactical devices, but it is to be discovered through the content. The translator of the Psalter could not and would not change this overall scheme of the text, and that is why he rates as a poor translator, as far as the quantitative aspect of his work is concerned. However, he concentrated his efforts on the qualitative aspect. It is in this respect that I think there is a lot more to be discovered about this translator. As a result of observations in this area, I anticipate that it will be possible to make clearer distinctions between those translators who do not qualify in the quantitative respect, and between original translations and recensional activities, for which literalism in every possible respect was a strict rule and a conscious goal. That was not the case for the translator of the Greek Psalter.

THE GREEK PSALTER AND THE Kcdye TRADITION: METHODOLOGICAL QUESTIONS Peter J. Gentry

It is a privilege to join fellow-students of Albert Pietersma, along with colleagues, friends and scholars from around the world, to honour him with a contribution to this volume on the occasion of his sixty-fifth birthday.1 My doctoral dissertation, published six years ago, included a preliminary probe analysing the relationship between the Greek Psalter, the Greek Minor Prophets Scroll from Nahal Hever, the remains of Theodotion's Greek translation of Job, and Aquila.2 At about the same time, Staffan Oloffson presented a major paper on the relation of the Greek Psalter to the Kaiye group of texts at a meeting of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies (IOSCS) in Cambridge, England, which was later published in the Congress Volume.3 What follows here is an assessment of the contribution by Oloffson and a proposal with respect to issues of research methodology. Oloffson has sought to develop a broader contextual framework than 1. See also PJ. Gentry, "The Asterisked Materials in the Greek Job and the Question of the KAIGE Recension', Textus 19 (1998), p. 141 n. 1. Professor Albert Pietersma was not only my first instructor in Hellenistic Greek and the co-supervisor of my doctoral dissertation, but has been all I could ask for in a friend over the past 25 years. 2. PJ. Gentry, The Asterisked Materials in the Greek Job (SBLSCS, 38; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995). See also idem, "The Place of Theodotion-Job in the Textual History of the Septuagint', in A. Salvesen (ed.), Origen's Hexapla and Fragments (TSAJ, 58; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998), pp. 199-230, and idem, 'KAIGE Recension', pp. 141-56. 3. S. Olofsson, 'The Kaige Group and the Septuagint Book of Psalms', in B.A. Taylor (ed.), IX Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies: Cambridge, 1995 (SBLSCS, 45; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), pp. 189-230.

GENTRY The Greek Psalter and the Kai/ye Tradition

75

has previously been employed for examining questions pertinent to Kaiye group research. In the process, he has adopted S.P. Brock's characterization of the LXX translator as either expositor or interpres, operating in the context of tensions between Diaspora or Hellenistic Judaism and Palestinian Judaism regarding the translation of Scripture.4 This approach has much to commend it. Such a framework is necessary since discussions about various types of translation technique will not be productive, nor will the early history of this translation be clarified, without such contextualization. The first stage in the process that gave rise to the Kaiye group of texts, according to Oloffson, is that certain circles in Palestine felt the need to bring the Greek translation into closer alignment with the Hebrew text of their time. Diaspora Judaism countered this development in the Letter ofAristeas by affirming that the original translation had indeed followed the ideal of literal translation and had a respectable pedigree. 'Later on, when it was evident that the translation differed not only from the Hebrew, but also was not consistent as regards translation technique, the LXX was boldly put on a par with the Hebrew original, and regarded as divinely inspired, as evidenced by e.g. Philo.'5 The final stage, which occurred sometime after the destruction of the Second Temple, was the recognition by literalist revisers that no translation, however literal, could do justice to the original language of revelation. Therefore, extremely literal renderings were produced on the basis of an interlinear model which only had meaning in relation to the Hebrew text. Olofsson assumes here a bilingual community. 4. S.P. Brock, 'The Phenomenon of Biblical Translation in Antiquity', The University of Birmingham Review 2 (1969), pp. 96-102; idem, 'The Phenomenon of the Septuagint', OTS 17 (1972), pp. 11-36; idem, 'Aspects of Translation Technique in Antiquity', Greek Roman and Byzantine Studies 20 (1979), pp. 69-87; idem, 'Translating the Old Testament', in D.A. Carson and H.G.M. Williamson (eds.),/f Is Written: Scripture Citing Scripture—Essays in Honour of Barnabas Lindars, SSF (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), pp. 87-98; idem, 'To Revise or Not to Revise: Attitudes to Jewish Biblical Translation', in G.J. Brooke and B. Lindars (eds.), Septuagint, Scrolls and Cognate Writings (SBLSCS, 33; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992), pp. 301-38; A. Pietersma, 'Kyrios or Tetragram: A Renewed Quest for the Original Septuagint', in A. Pietersma and C. Cox (eds.), De Septuaginta: Studies in Honour of John William Wevers (Mississauga: Benben, 1984), pp. 85-101.1 have urged (in Greek Job, p. 496) that this approach be given greater attention. 5. Olofsson, 'The Kaige Group', p. 192.

76

The Old Greek Psalter These translations and revisions presuppose access to a Hebrew text or an interpreter in the same way that the 'meturgeman' in the synagogue worship translated and commented on Hebrew texts. These extremely literal translations and revisions seem to be the product of a bilingual community where the original language had cultural and religious prestige. The subordinate positions of the translations was at the same time a great advantage, because it implied that translations could also function as commentaries.6

Olofsson does not, however, appear to correlate the results of his investigation of translation technique in the Greek Psalter clearly and directly with the framework he establishes at the outset. Among numerous studies over the years by scholars who have attempted to discern different revisions in the history of the transmission of the Greek Old Testament, he acknowledges the work of D. Barthelemy in identifying the revisional activity of the icaiye group and the relationship between the Greek Psalter and the Kaiye group—observations that have subsequently been elaborated upon and refined by H.-J. Venetz, A. van der Kooij and O. Munnich. The similarities between LXX Psalms and the kaige group which are disclosed by Barthelemy: [sic] the translation of DilQlC rniT by Ktipio6e eonv lx, cov otnc eonv lx, oi>x imfjp^ev lx, KOI ot> uf| untip£g lx, HT|8e 133'R OUK fjv lx, 13?.'R1 OUK eimv [sic] lx, ^'Kl vai ou nn eiip^? lx.29

As a basis for evaluating the evidence presented by Olofsson, all the data for renderings of ft* in the Greek Psalms as well as in Exodus and Deuteronomy are provided in the Appendix. Since dynamic equivalence is the approach of the translator of the Greek Exodus, while formal equivalence is the approach of the translator of the Greek Deuteronomy, we will have the opportunity to compare and contrast patterns in the Greek Psalter with both expositor and interpres styles in the Greek Pentateuch. The evidence for the Psalter recorded in the Appendix can be summarized as follows: ]'» = 01) IX

•p«l = ot>Se 3x fw = un8e lx f« = oi>eev lx j'K = owe elvai 47x (e nt| \>nap^\\ b duaptcaXo?

59.14

IQJW n"pD nann n^D

58.14

ev opyfj awteXEia?, Kai ot> (iij -undp^ODcrtv Djcap^ouoav B R LbRL'55

["8 = OX) |if| eivat see 49.22 above

]'K = OUK eivai 3.3 avftia •& nruner ]'» 3.3

ot»K £K ccrnv TCOIWV dya96v 53.4 in«-Q3 )'H 52.4 O\>K eK eK f(v dpiOnoi; 105.37 17&D TDDBfa )^T 104.37 KOI o\)K f|v EV idlq (t»vXdiK f(v 6 poTj9cov 119.16i 'TKZDD Ttfrjnn 118.16! Kai otnc ecrctv autoiKecrav TCEpaq

Kai E^)' moxx; dvSpawwov, olq OOK eonv acornpia Kai Tfjq awEOEoaq a\>roi) O-OK eonv dpiG^oq

91

92

The Old Greek Psalter

"ft* = o\)Se ewai

32.2

rrm irrra pro

31.2

ot>5e Efftiv ev T8e yap etra v Ttvevjia ev T(p at6|j,aTi avtrov

]'« = oi)

33.16

'rrrma wzh] ~]'?arrpK

32.16

ot) aw^etai paaiXe'uq 8id TtoAAfiv 8'6vajj,iv

]">» = o\)5e

19.4 O'Tll |^l 1D«-|^ 18.4 OVK eioiv XaXiai ovfis Axiyoi 144.14 n«SV ]'»1 pB~]'« 143.14 ot)K ecniv KataTtTcoiia ^payiAoi) ovSe Sie^oSoq

144.14 irramn nms fw 143.14 ot)8E Kpauyfi ev TOI toikq) ot)K eveTiiCTeijaaTe Kvplq) T(j> 0e» \)^«v

GENTRY The Greek Psalter and the Kctiye Tradition 4.12

"Tip TfTIT D'm DDr« TOlDm ETSDKJ DT1« mm ^lp

4.12

((wovfiv pTijidTOov \)nei yap drco6vT|aKa> ev TTJ yfj TOUTR Kai oii Siaftaiva) TOY 'Iop8dvnv Toinov

21.18 IQ« 'Tipm ra« ^ip2 uoti i3T« mioi ~mo p &vb mrr^D 21.18

edv 8e nvi xi vioq d7iei6fjx WCOKOVCDV (j>am)v Ttatpoq Kai G>vnv ^Tpoi;

21.20 21.20

tf?pa DOtf 11PH niQl TITO HT 1333 TV2 'apr'w 1TDW Kai epovoivTOI POKTHpla = rtf&aaax 22.4; SyrPs r^i\CU>

pepilXoca medio-passive = jaata ethpaal 9.26(25); SyrPs -«n\, ethpaal poTjBeia = t^cu-t.-L&jn 7.11(10); SyrPs riii.ta^ PODXTJ = rtfkaxtea 1.1; SyrPs rtb^ik = rriu.^ 1.5, 20.12(11); SyrPs «&=***» (1.5 rf^cuw/11^) poOq = r*tn= 8.8(7); SyrPs KTioA* YVOOT-> ethpaal 27.2; SyrPs rtf^a 5t| = Ai^. 7.10(9), 21.24(23) (= Rahlfs's variant); SyrPs A^co 8iapovXia = rriu_x*fc 5.11(10); SyrPs rfAiaxua. 8ia0Tpcr| = rfsnla 24.10, 14; SyrPs rn.i = j».-u» 2.3; SyrPs nm& pael Siarnpeo) = t^j pael 11.8(7); SyrPs iAu» pael Sid TOWO = rCiaAVa 1.5, 15.9,17.50(49) (and c of SyrPs), 24.8; SyrPs rftun\V» 8ia6opd = r*A~" 9.16(15); SyrPs r*&iai\au&iM 8iKaioq = I^OL..-!! 7.12(11) SyrPs r£ir&i = r^AtcuL..-*! H, r^UL..fiy 2.12; SyrPs r^Aurco = *Aa 2.11, 17.44(43), 21.31(30); SyrPs K&O.T^ *Aa Sweden = ,!»**. 17.39(38), 20.12(11); SyrPs r^» 5uvato5 = nnAd^u 17.18(17), 20(19), 23.8 (2x); SyrPs ro-j-s. peal participial adjective (^JLA.) 8(5pov = r£i±>icu> 14.5; SyrPs nrruxu edv uf| = rA y(* 7.13(12); SyrPs r*W Eyy\)»^t EKtpEa»i 9.29(28); SyrPs rCin^iA Evipo^ioi; = r«rAiieuxt 17.8(7); SyrPs !j&a» ETCtaTtXacyiox; = r£ar^ aphel 16.5; SyrPs t* pael Kata(|)X,oYiCo> = A»o\ ethpaual 17.9(8); SyrPs jaoxV eshtaphal Katevavn = \-.Q«\ 5.6(5); SyrPs p.ta KCtTEuGtiva) = ipk aphel 5.9(8); SyrPs^ik pael Kevoq = bL.rta*+tt> 7.5(4); SyrPs r5a£o|i£VTi \iEiit avouaaq EXaaoaw yi VETCH, 6 8e ouvaymv eautq> net' etioepeiai; JiXn6wftr|aetav SiKaioq oiKtipev KOI KixptjiWealth hastily gotten with iniquity will become less, but the one who gathers for himself with godliness will be multiplied. The righteous one is merciful and lends.

Another possible example of dependency is to be found in the last part of LXX Prov. 13.11, which has no Hebrew counterpart but is reminiscent of Ps. 111(112). 5. First, there is the parallel use of the verbs oiKxipoo and Kixpdox Second, the latter verb is a neologism that is found in only one other LXX text, 1 Sam. 1.28. That the Greek Proverbs text is dependent on the Psalms translation is the most plausible explanation for the parallels. This, of course, raises the question about the date of Greek Proverbs. Evidently the translation is pre-Philo, since Philo appears to quote LXX Proverbs in a number of his writings.76 Recently, Johann Cook has dated the Septuagint of Proverbs to the beginning of the second century BCE on the basis of internal evidence.77 If this date is accurate, it would push back the translation of the Psalter to the late third century BCE. e. 1 Maccabees 1. Psalm 78(79)2-3 and 1 Maccabees 7.16-17. Ps. 79.2-3

MT

avan epsf? toKD -poj) rfxirrw iru ptrirrn1? fTon nra •nip ]'KI cfazrrr nnno D'DD DDT issto They have given the bodies of your servants to the birds of the air for food, the flesh of your faithful to the wild animals of the earth.

76. For example, Prov. 3.4 and 4.3 (Ebr. 84), 4.11-12 (Congr. 177), 8.22-23 (Ebr. 31andV;Vf.62). 77. "The Dating of Septuagint Proverbs', ETL 69 (1993), pp. 383-99.

WILLIAMS Towards a Date for the Old Greek Psalter

78.2-3

1 Mace. 7.16-17

271

They have poured out their blood like water all around Jerusalem, and there was no one to bury them. (NRSV) LXX eGevto TCI 6vr|CTiuma TG>V SoiiXcov ao\> (3pa>uma TOIpie (which is added by a late corrector of K and a few other witnesses). The same type of omission occurs in Rom. 11.8 = Deut 29.3, possibly to avoid confusion with Christ.15 5. Rom. 15.11 = Ps. 116.1 involves three minor alterations: a change in word order (OG = Aiveiie TOV Kt>piov, rcdvTct id eGvrj; New Testament = Aivevre, Tidvia TQ eGvTj, TOV Ktipiov);16 the addition of Kat at the beginning of the second line; and a change from the second person ercaiveaate to the third person ejcaweadtcoaav. The majority of New Testament manuscripts, but with virtually no early support, follow OG in reading the second person ercaiveaaTe; the third person is attested in P46 K A B C D *F and a number of important cursives. (A few OG 14. Of course, proponents of the so-called new perspective on Paul would dispute this point. If they are right, then the apostle is indeed not quoting the psalm, or else he is injecting foreign ideas into the text. 15. So Koch, Schrift, p. 87: 'offenbar um ein mogliches MiBverstandnis von K\>pio