LITMIR.BIZ

Скачать книгу

the Greek arrangement reflects their literary genre. The Greek canon may be conceived of as having at least three and as many as five divisions:

      a) (1) Legal and (2) historical books;

      b) (3) Poetical and (4) sapiential books;

      c) (5) Prophetic books.⁷¹

      4.1.4 Original Form, Jewish Background, Place, and Date

      Most scholars are now of the opinion that all LXX manuscripts derive from a single translation that was repeatedly revised to conform to the proto-MT. The alternative model, suggested by Kahle,⁷² assumes multiple translations without specifying the relation between these translations.

      Jewish Background

      The Jewish origin of the LXX, described in the Letter of Aristeas, rabbinic literature, and additional sources, is reflected in its terminology and exegesis. Several Hebrew words have been preserved in the LXX in their Hebrew or Aramaic form (at the time of the translation, Aramaic was more commonly spoken by Jews than Hebrew), such as Greek sabbata (Aram. shabta, Heb. shabbat, Sabbath) and pascha (Aram. pasḥa, Heb. pesaḥ, Passover).

      Jewish exegesis is visible wherever a special interpretation of the LXX is paralleled by rabbinic literature, for example in the Pentateuch. The Jewish background of the Greek translation of the Torah is well established, while that of the post-Pentateuchal books is not. Nevertheless, there is little doubt that Jews translated these books in the third and second centuries BCE. There probably were no gentiles in Egypt, Palestine, or elsewhere who would have had the skills to make such a transcultural translation or an incentive to do so.

      Place

      Although often described as the »Alexandrian version of the Bible,« an Alexandrian origin of the LXX is likely only for the Torah and some additional books. There is now a growing understanding that several books were produced in Palestine.

      Date

      According to the Letter of Aristeas, the Torah was translated in Egypt at the beginning of the third century BCE. The remaining biblical books were translated at different times. Most of the post-Pentateuchal books use the vocabulary of the Torah, and the translations of the Latter Prophets, Psalms, and Sirach also quote from that translation. The Prophets and several of the Hagiographa/Writings—the Greek versions of which were known to the grandson of Ben Sira at the end of the second century BCE—were likely translated at the beginning of that century or possibly earlier. It is difficult to date individual books because there is little explicit evidence.

      4.1.5 Evidence

      The LXX is evidenced in direct witnesses, such as early papyrus fragments and manuscripts, and indirect witnesses, such as the translations made from the LXX into Latin (the Vetus Latina), Syriac (Syro-Palestinian translations), Armenian, Coptic (Sahidic, Bohairic, Akhmimic), Georgian, Old Slavonic, Ethiopic, Gothic, and A­rabic.

      4.1.6 The Greek Language of the LXX

      The LXX was written in the Hellenistic dialect of the Greek language, named koine, i.e. the dialect that was in general (»koine«) use by those who spoke and wrote in Greek from the fourth century BCE onwards to the Byzantine period. Research into the language of the LXX is important, since it forms the largest literary source written in this dialect. However, the study of the language of the LXX is complicated because of its many lexical and syntactic Hebraisms (unnatural elements in the target language).

      When the Greek translators could not express a Hebrew word adequately with an existing Greek word, they sometimes coined new words (»neologisms«). Examples are the verb sabbatizo (»to keep Sabbath«) for the Hebrew verb shavat (»to keep Sabbath,« related to the noun Shabbat), and proselytos (»proselyte«) for Hebrew ger (»stranger,« understood in its postbiblical meaning as »someone who joined the religion of the Israelites«).

      4.1.7 Translation Character and Textual Analysis

      The first translators had to develop translation styles. The general approaches of translators are usually expressed as »literal«, »wooden«, »stereotyped«, »faithful«, or »careful« and their opposites, »free«, »contextual«, or when exceedingly free, »paraphrastic.« Between these two extremes many gradations and variations may be discerned, from extremely paraphrastic (to the extent that the wording of the parent text is hardly recognizable) to slavishly faithful. For example, the characteristic Hebrew phrase in Gen 11:10 »Shem was 100 years old« (literally: Shem was a son of one hundred years) was translated Hebraistically into Greek as »a son of«. In natural Greek, a more appropriate phrase would have been chosen.

      The books of the LXX are characterized by different translation styles, probably based on the translator’s personal inclinations. An analysis of these styles is used in the text-critical analysis: If a translator represented his Hebrew text faithfully in small details, we would not expect him to insert changes in the translation. Therefore, when we find differences between the LXX and MT in relatively faithful translation units, they must reflect different Hebrew texts. On the other hand, if a translator was not faithful to his parent text in small details, he also could have inserted additional changes in the translation. These units (especially Joshua, Esther, and Daniel) pose special challenges since in these cases it is more difficult to assess the nature of the Hebrew text behind the LXX.

      4.1.8 The World of the Translators

      Many renderings reflect the cultural environment of the translators, which consisted of elements of both the Palestinian and Egyptian societies. The Egyptian background is visible in some local technical terms (e.g. the nogsim [»taskmasters«] in the story of the Israelites in Egypt in Exod 3:7 and elsewhere, were rendered by ergodioktai, literally: »those who speed up the workers,« known from Egyptian papyri; the Hellenistic division of cities into nomoi (districts) is reflected in the LXX of Isa 19:2). Palestinian background is reflected in Jewish-Palestinian halakhic exegesis. For example, the »second tithe« in the LXX of Deut 26:12 (MT shenat hamaʿaser, »the year of the tithe,« read as shenit hamaʿaser, as if, »second, the tithe«) represents the rabbinic term maʿaser sheni (»second tithe«) against MT. The concept of the second tithe is not mentioned in the Bible, and the translator of Deuteronomy could have made this identification only if he was aware of Palestinian rabbinic exegesis. A qesitah (a monetary unit of unknown value) is rendered in Gen 33:19 (and subsequently in Josh 24:32 , and Job 42:11) as a »lamb« (amnos, amnas) in the LXX, Targum Onkelos, and the Vulgate. This explanation is also reflected in Gen. Rabba 79:7.

      Even in fixed and seemingly frozen renderings one sometimes recognizes the translator’s ideas. Thus, the translator of the Latter Prophets, who usually rendered YHWH tzevaʾot (literally: »the Lord of armies«) as kyrios pantokrator (»the Lord, ruler of all«) must have had a certain view of the Hebrew phrase. For him, tzevaʾot included not only a body of »angels« or »armies« but also encompassed everything in the universe.

      The translators often added religious background to verses in Hebrew Scripture. This phenomenon occurs especially in Esther and Proverbs. Probably the most characteristic feature of the LXX of Esther is the addition of a religious background to a book that lacks the mention of God’s name in MT. In several other places, the translators interpreted the context as referring to the Messiah. Thus MT »A star rises from Jacob, a scepter comes forth from Israel« in Num 24:17 is interpreted in the LXX as »A star shall come forth out of Jacob, and a man shall rise out of Israel.« A similar interpretation is reflected in the Aramaic Targumim. In other instances, the translators avoided a physical depiction of God. Thus, in Num 12:8 »and he beholds the likeness of the Lord« has been rendered as referring to the »glory of the Lord«.

Скачать книгу