-Y&LII«¥Mir^IEL&SIIirY« Gift of

193-^

THE BRITISH ACADEMY
The
Septuagint and Jewish Worship
A Study in Origins
By
H. St. John Thackeray, M.A.
HON. D.D. OXFORD, HON. D.D. DURHAM
Some time Grinfield Lecturer on the Septuagint
in the University of Oxford

The Schweich Lectures
1920

London
Published for the British Academy
By Humphrey Milford, Oxford University Press
Amen Corner, E.C.
1921

\Atrl !Ot
. 92.1 1

TO THE MEMORY OF
HENRY BARCLAY SWETE
IN GRATEFUL RECOLLECTION
OF GUIDANCE AND INSPIRATION
IN SEPTUAGINT STUDIES

PREFACE
This book contains in an expanded form, with the addition of
Appendices, the three Schweich Lectures for 1920 delivered last
December. I have divided into two the second Lecture, which
time did not permit of being delivered in full.
In doing me the honour to appoint me to the Schweich
Lectureship, the British Academy kindly offered me the oppor
tunity of putting together the results of my researches into the
Septuagint. The subject which originally suggested itself to me
was ' The liturgical use of the Old Testament as a factor in
exegesis ' ; a subject which has not been worked out, as it
deserves to be, and one on which the LXX supplies important,
though not the only, evidence. This now forms the basis of
Lectures II and III; in Lecture II, while keeping the LXX
mainly in view, I ventured to digress a little beyond my proper
province. The first lecture on Septuagint origins was prefixed
under advice.
The Lectures are a combination of things new and old. The
nucleus of I and II appeared in various contributions to the
Journal of Theological Studies, to the editors and publishers of
which I am indebted for permission to reprint portions of the
Tables which stand in the Appendix. The Lectures themselves
embody the results of a careful re-examination of the books
concerned. Lecture III is wholly new. Here I have reluctantly
retracted opinions previously expressed and I cannot claim to
have said the last word on the Book of Baruch ; but I hope that
the main idea (the liturgical framework, strangely overlooked
by the commentators) may prove to be sound.
I have also to express my thanks to kind friends at Oxford, to
whom I am otherwise so deeply indebted, for permitting me to
make use of the materials of my Grinfield lectures delivered
some years ago.
H. St. J. THAOKEEAY.
Maesham Lane House, Gerbaed's Ceoss,
St. Math's Day, 1921.

CONTENTS LECTUEE I
SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS :
The' Teanslatoes of the Peophetical Books page
Various claims of the Septuagint upon our attention. Its main value
as providing the materials for reconstruction of a Hebrew older than the
Massoretic text. Corruption and necessity for reconstruction of the text
of the LXX itself  9
Stages in the history of the transmission of the LXX text. (1) The
original Alexandrian version. The Jewish colony of Alexandria. Transla
tion of the Law probably prompted by lectionary needs. Criticism of
the traditional account in the Letter of Aristeas. Origin of the number
70 found in Exod. xxiv. Translation of the Prophets by a second
company, an official production. The ' Writings ' rendered more freely
and capriciously by individuals. (2) The Asiatic school of translators in
the second century a. d. Reasons for Palestinian revolt against the LXX.
(3) Confusion of LXX text caused by Origen's Hexapla . . . . 10
Recovery of LXX text aided by evidence of style. ' Strata ' in the
Greek Bible as in the Hebrew. Examples of (1) combination of Alexan
drian and Asiatic versions (the Books of Reigns), (2) co-operation of
Alexandrian translators (Jeremiah and Ezekiel)  15
The Books of Reigns. Titles. Early and late portions : (1) an original
expurgated version, (2) a supplement by a later translator, ' the Decline
and. Fall '. Alexandrian omission of latter half of David's reign ; the
translation broken at David's sin (2R. xi. 2) and David's death (3 R. ii. 11).
Other evidence for ' whitewashing ' of David : (l) 3 R. xv. 5 LXX, (2) the
Chronicler. Termination of Book II at David's death in the Lucianic
text. Main cha racteristic of the early portions a large use of the historic
present. Its functions : (1) ' date-registering ', (2) as ' curtain-raiser '.
Characteristics of the later translator. Is he to be identified with Theo-
dotion of Ephesus ? The test-word (d) n-d^oSos in the light of Asiatic
inscriptions  16
The ' company ' of prophetical translators (Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the Twelve) 28
The translators of Jeremiah. Varying position of Oracles against
foreign nations in Hebrew and Greek texts. Previous theories of a two-
volume Book of Jeremiah unsupported by -LXX evidence. Mechanical
bisection of Greek translation. Outstanding proof of change of style the
two renderings of ' Thus saith the Lord '. The two partners and their
methods. Rare instances of agreement in rendering accounted for by
imperfect collaboration. Hebrew evidence for a central break : (1) the
long and short titles to the Oracles, (2) the two colophons. The bisection,
irrespective of subject-matter, prior to the Greek translation ... 29
The translators of Ezekiel. Bisection of Greek translation. Analogy
with the Greek Jeremiah and contrasts. Wider activities of the main
translator in (1) the Minor Prophets, (2) the third book of Reigns . . 37

CONTENTS . 7
LEGTUEE II
THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP:
(1) The Feast oe Pentecost page
Nature of the inquiry to consider the extent of the influence on the
text of the use in public worship of Lessons and Psalms appointed for the
festivals. The liturgical use of the Old Testament a neglected factor in
exegesis. Important evidence furnished by the LXX . . 40
Evolution of the Jewish festivals. Pagan origins and solar connexions . 41
Evolution of the Jewish lectionary system. Introduction of the Haphtarah
or second lesson. The ' catch-word ' system  43
Feast of Pentecost  46
The theme common to the Haphtaroth and special Psalms the Merkabah
or theophany in thunderstorm  47"
The Prayer of Habakkuk (Hab. iii). The two themes (1) the theophany,
(2) the harvest, both appropriate to Pentecost. The two Greek texts.
Discovery of obscured lectionary rubrics incorporated in the text. The
retinue of the deity in v. 5 and an allusion to Greek mythology in the
LXX. Resheph and the winged sandals of Perseus  47
Psalm xxix. An additional line in the LXX. Reference to the Flood
explained by the connexion of Pentecost with the Deluge in the Book of
Jubilees  55
Psalm Ixviii. Dr. C. J. Ball's theory of Maccabaean origin strengthened
by the allusion to Pentecost in 2 Mace. xii. 31 f. Pentecostal reminis
cences  57

LECTUEE II (continued)
THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP :
(2) The Feast op Tabeenacles
The oldest of festivals with pagan associations, commemorating (1) the
vintage, (2) the autumnal equinox (Tekuphah). The dominant notes of
the festival Water and Light. The two prominent items in the ritual
(1) the Water-bearing, (2) the Illumination of the Temple, The pagan
origin of these ceremonies: the rain-charm and the sun-charm. The
' Feast of the sun and the rain '  61
Zeehariah xiv. The final world-battle and the millennium. The
millennial blessings : perpetual daylight, an unfailing water-supply, and
absence of winter. Chrisfs sayings at the feast : ' If any man thirst ',
' I am the light of the world '. His allusion to the lesson ... 64
Psalm Ixxvi. A companion to the Zeehariah lesson. Sennacherib and
Armageddon. ' His booth.' ' Radiant from the mountains of Tereph.'
The LXX text of the added stanza explained as an allusion to the
Zeehariah lesson. The Divine Vintage-gatherer  67
Psalms xlii-xliii. The modern use based on ancient practice. The
distinctive notes of the feast. The pervading thought of the water.
' The booth ' (LXX). < Send out thy light ' . . . . . . 72
Psalm cxviii. A liturgical direction as to the branch-waving procession
in the LXX text  74
1 Kings viii. An alternative Haphtarah to Zech. xiv. The nucleus
a canto from the Song-book (Book of Jashar). The LXX text. Another
obliterated rubric. The mention of the sun in the LXX expurgated from
the Massoretic text. Parallel between this expurgation and the dis
claimer of sun-worship at the Illumination ceremony .... 76

8 CONTENTS
LECTUEE III
THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP:
(3) The Book of Baedch and the Fast of the Ninth Ab page
An apocryphal book designed for liturgical use. Its structure :
historical introduction, followed by three sections with the respective
topics— Penitence, Wisdom, Consolation. Jewish parallels for the triad —
Punishment, Wisdom, Consolation. The post-exilic fasts.' The fast of
the ninth Ab (traditional date of burning of the Temple) and the three
sabbaths of Punishment and seven sabbaths of Consolation preceding and
following it. The Pesikta the main authority tor the cycle of sabbaths.
Structure of Baruch adapted to the cycle. The book an unsuccessful
rival to Lamentations, used on the ninth Ab  80
Modern literature and ancient versions. Problems as to unity, original
language, and date  85
(i) Historical Introduction (i. 1-14). Its purpose : a recommendation
from the Dispersion to the Jews of Jerusalem (1) to pray for the rulers of
a foreign country (' Babylon ') ; (2) to use the book in public worship on
certain days not clearly defined. (1) The prayer for foreign rulers.
Theory that the rulers (' Nabuchodonosor and Baltasar, his son ') mean
Vespasian and Titus. The abandonment of sacrifices for the Emperor
the origo belli. The place of writing not Rome, but probably N. Syria.
(2) The suggested liturgical use ' on a feast day and on days of season '.
The ' season ' to be identified with that of the capture and burning of
Jerusalem mentioned in i. 2. The ' feast ' perhaps that of the (spring)
New Year. The Syriac reading ' tenth Nisan ' in i. 8 . . . .88
(ii) The Confession (i. 15— iii. 8) divided into three portions ... 95
(iii) The Homily on Wisdom (iii. 9-iv. 4). A sermon on the text Jer. ix.
23 ('Let not the wise man glory', &c), being the last verse in the
Haphtarah for the ninth Ab. Examples of the rich, the wise, the strong
who have failed in the quest for wisdom. The peroration. Dependence
of the preacher on Job and Ben Sira explained by strict Jewish regula
tions on the literature permissible for use on the ninth Ab . . .95
(iv) The Consolation cantos (iv. 5-end). The seven cantos and the .
Haphtaroth for the seven sabbaths of Consolation alike drawn from
deutero-Isaiah, and in part from the same passages. Evolution of the
cycle of Consolation sabbaths.' Comparison of the cantos and the
Haphtaroth. Apparent dependence of the last three cantos on the
eleventh of the Psalms of Solomon  100
External evidence for Jewish liturgical use. Negative evidence of Jerome
applies to Palestine only. Two Syrian witnesses to such use. (a) The
Apostolical Constitutions (v. 20) attest use on tenth Gorpiaeus (probably
= ninth Ab). (b) A work ascribed to Ephraim Syrus attests use about
the tenth Nisan (on Palm Sunday)  107
MAP illustrating the distribution of (d) n-dpoSos in Asiatic inscriptions.
APPENDICES
I. The Books of Reigns : table of characteristics of the later translator 1 14
II. The Translators of Jeremiah : table of renderings . . . .116
III. The Translators of Ezekiel : tables of renderings, &c. . . .118
(11 Contrasts between the two main translators .... 118
(2) Renderings common to the two portions of Ezekiel a . . 120
(3) Renderings common to Ezekiel a and 3 Reigns . . . .123
(4j Ezekiel /3/3 (xxxvi. 24-38) a version made for lectionary use . 124
IV. The bisection of Old Testament books  130
V. Jewish calendar '  137
GENERAL INDEX  139
INDEX QF BIBLICAL AND RABBINICAL REFERENCES . . .142

LECTURE 1
SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS :
The Teanslatoes of the Peophetical Books
I have had the honour of being invited by the British
Academy to put before you some results of my researches into
the oldest translation of the Hebrew Bible, the Alexandrian
Greek version commonly known as the Septuagint. The Septua
gint has many claims on our attention. By diffusing for the
first time a knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures to the world
at large it was a Praeparatio Evangelica paving the way for
Christianity; it was the Bible of the early Church and the
parent of numerous daughter versions. Its language is a mine
of information on Kotvrj Greek, the lingua franca of the new
era dating from Alexander the Great. But, over and above these
and other subsidiary interests, its main importance consists in
its being a translation of a Hebrew text older by a millennium
than our earliest dated Hebrew MS. ; and, in particular, older
by a few centuries than the rabbinical revision of the original
which took place about a. d. 100. Crude and illiterate as it often
is, the production of men who, labouring under grave difficulties,
not infrequently misread and blundered over the Hebrew before
them ; with many imperfections, and transmitted in a text which
has itself suffered serious corruption, the LXX nevertheless
supplies the patient investigator, from time to time, with the
materials for the reconstruction of an older Hebrew than that
represented in our modern Bibles.
I have called my lectures ' a study in origins '. Under origins
I include the beginnings both of the LXX and of Jewish
worship ; the two, I believe, are intimately connected. To-day
I propose to give a sketch of LXX origins, in so far as tradition
and the work itself enable us to reconstruct the history ; and
to attempt, in the case of two selected portions, to investigate
the methods of the translators and to account for the form in
which their work has come down to us. The remaining lectures
will hinge upon Jewish worship. In Lecture II I shall consider

10 SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS
how far the use of portions of Scripture in public worship has
left its mark upon the text ; touching on the origins of the
festival services and the yet more remote origins of the festivals.
In Lecture III I shall apply this line of inquiry to a single book,
the whole structure of which seems to be governed by what
I may call the ' liturgical ' motive.
I may begin by briefly recapitulating the three main stages in
the rather complex early history of the Greek text. We have
first the original Alexandrian translations dating from the third
to the first century b. c. ; next the rival versions of the Asiatic
school in the second century of our era, and last the unavailing
efforts of Origen in the next century to establish a uniform text
by a fusion of the work of these two schools.
' Always something new from Africa ', says the proverb, and
perhaps even the land of the Pyramids never produced a novelty
which had a profounder and more enduring influence than the
Greek Bible. Long before the foundation of the great city on
the western arm of the Delta, Egypt had possessed the nucleus
of a Jewish colony. When Jeremiah was dragged thither
against his will, we read of Jews settled ' at Migdol, and at
Tahpanhes, and at Noph, and in the country of Pathros '.1 And
it is only in recent years that we have learnt of the outlying
colony living as early as the sixth century b. c. far up the Nile
, at Elephantine. But it was the expedition of Alexander and
I the founding of Alexandria in 332 b. c. which marked the begin
ning of a new era for the Egyptian ' dispersion '. If Alexander's
ambitious scheme of a world-empire ended, like similar latter-
day schemes, in failure, his meteoric career had one enduring
and beneficent effect, that of diffusing a knowledge of the Greek
language and culture throughout a large portion of the eastern
world. Lower Egypt, in particular, fostered the use of this
international tongue, and Alexandria became not only the
University of Greek learning, but the world's market and
centre of commerce with Greek as the medium for all business
transactions. Among the colonists of the new city the Jews formed no
/inconsiderable element. Befriended by Alexander, they were
[rewarded for their services in his army by the gift of full
citizenship and a quarter of their own in Alexandria. So rapidly
did the colony grow that by the beginning of our era the
1 Jer. xliv. 1.

THE LETTEE OF AEISTEAS 11
/Egyptian Jews numbered a million a or an eighth part of the
I population of the country.
There can be little doubt that it was the religious needs of this
thriving community which stimulated the ambitious project of
translating the Scriptures. Hebrew, even in the home-land, had
long since become a learned language ; but in Egypt even the
Aramaic paraphrase which served the needs of the Palestinian
synagogues, had, at least to the second or third generation of
immigrants, ceased to be intelligible. Clinging tenaciously to
their faith, but, driven by circumstances to abandon the use
of Aramaic, this enterprising colony determined that their Law
should be read in a language ' understanded of the people'.
The Greek Bible, it seems, owed its origin to a popular demand
for a version in the vulgar tongue.
It must be admitted that this is not the motive assigned by
ancient tradition. Tradition, not content with so humble, if
pious, an origin, must needs ascribe the work to the injunctions
of royalty. I need not dwell on the familiar story, told in the
so-called Letter of Aristeas, how Ptolemy Philadelphus, at the
instance of his librarian Demetrius, summoned from Jerusalem
seventy-two learned men to translate the Law, in order to fill
a gap in the royal collection. Long since discredited as a
contemporary and authentic narrative, there probably lies
behind ihe romantic and apologetic framework some element
of truth ; though it is hard to disentangle fact from fiction.
The original story is comparatively sober. The translators, we
are told, collaborated and ' arrived at agreement on each point
by comparing each other's work ' (§ 302) ; the procedure described
is quite natural and non-miraculous. It is only later writers
who introduce miracle, asserting that the translators worked
independently in separate cells or in pairs in thirty-six cells and
all produced identical versions ; that they translated the whole
of the Scriptures, not only the Law; that they were no less
inspired than the original authors, and so on.
In the original story I should, in general agreement with the
late Dr. Swete, regard the following items as credible. (1) The
Pentateuch forms a separate corpus within the Greek Bible.
It was rendered first and, in view of its homogeneous style,
as a whole. (2) The version is Alexandrian ; it contains Egyptian
words and the Egyptian papyri furnish the closest parallels to
its language. (3) It goes well back into the third century b. c. ;
1 Philo, In Flaccum, 6 (43 Cohn).

12 SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS
the Greek Genesis and Exodus are cited before the end of the
century,1 and the style is akin to that of our earliest papyri.
(4) It was the work of a company, probably a small company.
jThe traditional number, (seventy or seventy-two) is legendary ;
{the alternative number, five, found in a Eabbinic version of the
story,2 is more likely to be true. (5) The Hebrew rolls may have
been imported from Palestine. (6) Lastly, it is conceivable that
the work was countenanced by Philadelphus, a patron of litera
ture and interested in the antiquities of his subjects. It was in
his reign, and perhaps at his commission, that Manetho produced
a Greek version of the records of ancient Egypt.3 But that the
work owed its inception wholly to him and his librarian is
incredible. The Greek is the vernacular, that of the non-literary
papyri, not the more cultivated style proper to a work produced
under royal patronage. The importation of translators from
Palestine is another fabrication ; 'language proves them to have
been indigenous. /'As the late Dr. Swete acutely observed,
f ' Aristeas ' in stating that the translation was read to and
approved by the community before being submitted to the king,4
unconsciously throws light on its true origin. It was a people's
book designed, undoubtedly, for synagogue use.
The origin of the traditional number of the translators and of
their miraculous agreement in the later accounts has been traced
in the LXX itself, in the narrative of the law-giving.5 We
there read of seventy elders who form a link between Moses and
the people. They ascend the mount but a little way and worship
from afar. Jewish fancy seems to have identified these mysterious
elders with the translators, the intermediaries between Moses and
Israel of the dispersion. The Greek states (v. 11) that not one of
them perished, i.e. they were privileged to escape the usual
death-penalty for a vision of the deity. But the verb used for
' perish ' (Siafjxoviiv) was unusual in that sense ; ' not one dis
agreed ' was the more obvious meaning. Hence, it seems, arose
the legend of the translators' supernatural agreement. Hence
too, from their supposed presence on Sinai, the belief that they
shared the lawgiver's inspiration.
I The Greek Bible of the third century b. c. comprised only the
[Law. The translation of Prophets and 'Writings' followed in
1 ,By the historian Demetrius ; Swete, Introd. to 0. T.1, pp. 18, 369 f.
2 Masseketh Sopherim, i. 8 (ed. J. Muller, 1878).
s Mahaffy, Empire of the Ptolemies, 170.
4 Aristeas, § 308.
6 Ex. xxiv. See Nestle in Hastings, D. B. iv. 439 a.

TEANSLATOES OF THE HAGIOGEAPHA 13
the course of the next two centuries. The evidence to be put
before you to-day will throw light on the manner in which the
Prophetical collection came into being. We shall find indications
of the existence of a second company, analogous to the pioneering
body responsible for the Greek Pentateuch. This second instal
ment was also, it seems, in large measure, a semi-official production.
Very different- was the treatment of the Writings or Hagio-
grapha. These stood on a lower level than Law and Prophets,
being regarded as national literature, but not yet as canonical.
The Psalter, at the head, was the one book in this category
which the translators treated with respect. They appended,
indeed, an additional Psalm, but expressly placed it 'outside
the number '. The other books they did not scftruple to handle
freely, undeterred by any fear of- tampering with Scripture.
These paraphrases (rather than translations) were the outcome
of individual enterprise. A partial rendering of Job (one sixth
being omitted) was probably among the first ; later on Theodo-
tion's version was used to fill the gaps, and our Greek text is
a conglomerate of old and new. The first Greek narrative of the
return from exile (1 Esdras) was a similar version of extracts,
grouped round a fable of heathen origin. The translator of
these extracts appears responsible also for the earliest version
of Daniel, which he treated similarly, again incorporating
extraneous matter. The Greek Proverbs include maxims of
purely Greek origin. The translator was a classical scholar and,
happily, put much of his work into verse. Tags of rough
hexameters and iambics abound. In Greek, as in most languages,
proverbs commonly took the form of a rough line or half-line of
verse. So ' Cold water to a thirsty soul ' (xxv. 25) becomes
ojcrirep vSmp yjrvxpbv "tyvxy Siyfrm<rji irpoo-Tjves,
the first and last words being added to round off the hexameter,
while the answering clause, if we add a final word, forms a
second : ovt(os dyyeXia dyadr) 'k yfjs (lanpodev (^icei).
Similarly in iambics we have nrjyfi ^(0)77? 'ivvota tois KeKTrj/ilvois
(xvi. 22) and many others.1
Thus, it seems, was the Alexandrian Bible gradually built up.
The second stage in the history begins towards the end of the
first century of our era. It is a period of Palestinian revolt
against the laxity and inadequacy of the Alexandrian versions.
1 I may refer to my article on ' The Poetry of the Greek Book of Proverbs '
in J. T. S. vol. xiii (1912), 46 ff.

14 SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS
At the first even the Palestinians had given the LXX a friendly
reception. It was as freely used by Josephus as by the first
converts to Christianity. Greek, according to Eabbi Simon ben
Gamaliel, was the one language, beside Hebrew, in which the
Scriptures might be written.1 Soon, however, the work came to
be viewed by the orthodox with suspicion. The reputed date of
the original translation, observed at Alexandria as a feast-day,2
was now kept by the Palestinians as a fast; and tradition
asserted that the impious venture was punished by one of the
old plagues of Egypt.3 This revulsion of feeling was stimulated
by two main causes: (1) the revision of the Hebrew text by
E. Akiba and his school which took place about a.d. 100;
(2) animosity against the wicked Christians who had appro
priated and, as was alleged, distorted the LXX for their own
ends. The Dispersion still, however, needed a Greek Bible, and
the demand for greater accuracy and a stricter adherence to the
revised Hebrew created an outburst of new translations. We
know the names of three of these translators and possess con
siderable fragments of their work. The tendency to literalism
culminated in the jargon of Aquila of Pontus, who, not from
ignorance of Greek, but from a pedantic desire to present an
exact reflex of every jot and tittle in the Hebrew, produced what
has been called - a colossal crib '.* The work of Theodotion of
Ephesus was little more than a revision of the LXX or of other
lost versions. A successful plagiarist, he is best known for his
habit of transliteration, in other words for the evasion of the
translator's function. Towards the end of the century comes
Symmachus, whose elegant style reads like a direct challenge to
Aquila's monstrosities. Since Asia was the home of two of these
translators and perhaps of the third,5 while Palestine supplied
their text and canons of interpretation, we may call this the
Asiatic-Palestinian school.
The third land-mark in the history is the opus magnum of the
most eminent LXX scholar of antiquity, the Hexapla of Origen
1 T. B. Megillah, i. 8 (quoted by Bentwich, Hellenism, 253).
2 Philo, Vit. Mos. ii. 7 (41).
3 ' On the 8th of Tebeth the Law was written in Greek in the days of King
Tolmai, and darkness came upon the world for three days', Appendix to
Megillath Ta'anith (ed. Neubauer, Anecdota Oxon., Semitic Series, vol. i, pt. vi,
Oxford, 1895).
4 Burkitt in J. Q.R. Jan. 1898, p. 215.
6 The scene of the only recorded incident in the life of Symmachus is
Cappadocia.

STEATA IN THE GEEEK BIBLE 15
of Alexandria. Designed to bring the LXX into line with the
revised Hebrew by the aid of the Asiatic translations, it exhibited
in parallel columns the Hebrew, the same in Greek letters, the
three later versions, and the LXX. The basis of the LXX
column was the current Alexandrian text of the third century ;
this was supplemented or corrected where necessary by the later
versions, the interpolated matter being indicated by asterisks.
Origen' s ambitious scheme was planned on faulty principles and
ultimately produced only confusion. Copies of the LXX column
were multiplied lacking the precautionary signs, and the resultant:
mixture of old and new, of Alexandrian and Asiatic work, has
affected the mass of our MSS. The corruption of text, which
had begun before Origen's time, proceeded apace, and different
localities had their rival recensions. In the fourth century
three such recensions held the field, the so-called Hesychian
in Egypt, the Lucianic in Asia and Syria, the Hexaplaric in
Palestine ; and, in Jerome's words, ' the whole world was divided
between these three varieties of text \1 At this period our oldest
Greek MS., the Codex Vaticanus, makes its appearance.
This brief sketch of some rather familiar history will show
that the reconstruction of the original* Alexandrian version is
no easy task. Patient investigation of the style may, however,
enable us to distinguish, if I am not mistaken, not only between
the respective contributions of Egypt, and Asia, but even, to
some extent, between the work of two or more primitive and
contemporary translators. The detection and elimination of
isolated glosses or ' doublets ' is comparatively simple ; larger
results may be looked for if the inquiry is spread over a wider
area. A study of the language, in fact, reveals strata in the
Greek Bible, such as are found in the Hebrew. Critics of the
Hebrew Pentateuch have reached certain generally received
conclusions as to its structure and component elements. The
primitive narratives of Jehovist and Elohist are followed some
centuries later by the Code of the Deuteronomist, and that again
by the Priestly document, forming the framework of the whole.
Methods which have proved efficacious in the larger task may
also assist the LXX critic to determine approximately the limits
of the work of the several translators. The various renderings
of divine titles like ' Lord of Hosts ' have their tale to tell no less
1 ' Totus . . . orbis hac inter se trifaria varietate compugnat,' Praef. in
Parctlipp.

16 SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS
than the use of Jahweh or Elohim in the original, Though we
are far from the time when a Polychrome LXX will be possible,
the student is now equipped with abundant materials for the
investigation. Two results are possible. If I may borrow and
distort the meaning of the symbols used by the critics of the
Hebrew text, we may on the one hand discover that two primitive
translators of the second century b. c, J and E, have produced of
any particular book a joint version, JE, the symbols here standing
for the Jewish-Egyptian pioneers. Or again, we may find
that the original version JE (the work whether of one or more
translators) was incomplete, and that it was left to P, a repre
sentative of the later Palestinian- Asiatic school, to fill the gaps
and revise the whole. To-day I propose to put before you an
instance of both types. My illustration of the completion in
Asia of the unfinished work of Alexandria will be taken from
the Books of Samuel and Kings ; that of co-operation of contem
poraries from Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelye.
The Books of Eeigins
I take first, then, the Greek version of Samuel and Kings.
Here we have, I believe, an instance of translation in two stages :
a primitive partial rendering and a filling in of lacunae by
a representative of the later school. Direct external evidence
fails us; the evidence of style suggests that the conditions are
the same as in, the Greek book of Job. Here, moreover, we can
account for the reserve of the earlier translators ; patriotic
concern for their nation's honour led them to produce an expur
gated version of the history of the monarchy.
A word as to the text which is to serve as our guide. We have in
these books three main types: (1) that represented by Codex Vaticanus
(B) and printed in Dr. Swete's edition ; (2) that of Codex Alexandrinus
(A) the readings of which are recorded in his apparatus, and (3) the
Lucianic recension, edited by Lagarde. Of these I follow the B text,
though indeed my theory largely rests on readings on which all MSS. are
agreed. The A text, obviously a mosaic, is negligible. Broadly speaking,
it is a recension of the shorter B text, to bring it into line with the revised
Hebrew; the additional matter, absent from B, being supplied mainly
from Aquila, whose peculiarities are unmistakable. The only serious rival
to B is the Lucianic text. This too, as will appear, has its contribution to
yield ; but, while it undoubtedly contains an ancient element, it also bears
clear marks of editorial revision, and the more homogeneous and less
eclectic B text, notwithstanding many shortcomings, forms a safer basis
for our inquiry.

THE BOOKS OF EEIGNS 17
Titles and division of books first call for remark. In our
Hebrew MSS. the history of the Monarchy is comprised in
two undivided books with distinct titles — the Book of Samuel
and the Book of Kings. In the LXX we have a single work
entitled Ba<ri\eicoi> in the four familiar volumes of our English
Bible. While the translators have ultimately carried sub
division further than the Palestinians, the comprehensive title
suggests that the narrative of the Monarchy may once have
formed a unit with no division whatever. This is further
suggested by the fact that the Greek MSS. differ as to
the line of demarcation between the second and third books.
On the Greek title two remarks may be made. Whatever its
precise meaning, it is more appropriate than the first of, the
Hebrew titles; Samuel, whose judgeship occupies a compara
tively small space, hardly deserves to give his name to the
narrative of the reigns of Saul and David. Again, the title is
not Kings, but BacriXeiZv. As with the Book of Judges, which
Philo calls the Book of Judgements (Kpi/iara),1 the Alexandrians
preferred an impersonal to a personal title. What did they
mean by the word? The usual rendering 'Kingdoms', if
understood to refer to the twin kingdoms of Judah and
Israel, will be another instance, like 'Samuel', of the part
giving a name to the whole, since the disruption of the
kingdom is not reached until nearly half-way through the third
volume. In Hellenistic Greek, however, Bao-i\eiai had another
meaning, ' Eeigns ', and that, I believe, was the sense intended
by the translators.
Now, on investigation, we find that the narrative falls into
two main portions, one of which is characterized by certain
mannerisms of the Asiatic school, while the other lacks these
mannerisms and exhibits features peculiar to itself. I venture,
therefore, to call these main groups the early and late portions.
The 'late' matter is broken in two by intervening 'early'
matter but is apparently the work of a single translator. The
'early' matter is divisible into three smaller volumes, which
may or may not be the production of separate translators.
Probably they are the work of a company; but stress cannot
be laid on such minor differences of style as exist. The early
portions are : —
Book I (1 Sam.). The Eeign of Saul with preliminary
events. 1 De Confits. Ling. 26 (128 Wendland).
B

18 SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS
Book II (2 Sam. to xi. 1, stopping short of the Uriah episode).
The Eeign of David in his prime.
Book III (1 Kings beginning at ii. 12, Solomon's accession,
and probably lacking the last chapter). The Eeign of
Solomon and the beginnings of the Divided Monarchy.
That was the extent of the Alexandrian version. The two late
portions, by a single translator, are : —
(i) The last fourteen chapters of Baa. II with the opening of
III, comprising David's sin and the disastrous sequel:
the tragic story of Tamar and Amnon, the rebellion and
death of Absalom, the revolt of Sheba, Adonijah's bid
for the succession and David's death.
(ii) The last chapter of Baa. Ill with the whole of IV,
describing the growing degeneracy of the kings of Israel
and Judah, leading up to the double captivity.
My belief is that these two portions, which might collectively be
entitled ' The Decline and Fall of the Monarchy ', were omitted
as unedifying by the early translators, or at least that they were
content with so brief a summary that it had subsequently to be
superseded by a complete version.1
The two new dividing-lines to be noted are those which mark
the beginning and end of the first instalment of the later work,
David's sin and David's death (2 E. xi. 2 and 3 E. ii. 11). We
have some other evidence, apart from that of style, for the narrative
being broken at these two points.
For the 'whitewashing : of David by the omission of discreditable
and disastrous incidents two illustrations can be quoted. In the
M. T. of 1 Kings (3 E.) xv. 3 ff. Abijam son of Eehoboam is con
trasted with David. ' His heart ', we read, ' was not perfect with
the Loed his God, as the heart of David his father. Nevertheless
for David's sake did the Loed his God give him a lamp in
Jerusalem . . . because David did that which was right in the
eyes of the Loed, and turned not aside from anything that he
commanded him all the days of his life — save only in the matter
of Uriah the Hittite.' But the saving clause is absent from the
B text of the LXX. In other words, the Alexandrian translators
ignored the Uriah episode in the third book of Eeigns as they had
already done in the second. To them David was a life-long saint.
1 I employ the following symbols. Early portions : /33 (i. e. a section of 0) =
2 R. i. 1-xi. 1 ; 77 = 3 R. ii. 12-xxi. 43. Late portions : /3y (overlapping from (3
into 7) = 2 E, xi. 2—3 R. ii. 11 ; 78 = 3 R. xxii and 4 R. (whole) ; collectively
these two portions of the ' Decline and Fall ' may be cited as 08.

THE BOOKS OF EEIGNS 19
My second piece of evidence comes from the Chronicler, whose
procedure furnished a precedent for our translator. The ' white
washing' had begun already in the third century b.c. The
Chronicler closely follows his authority (2 Samuel) up to the
point where our translator laid down his pen, '. David tarried at
Jerusalem'. Then he ruthlessly curtails, passing over nearly
eleven chapters of his source. He was doubtless actuated by the
same motive as our translator, though his action was less drastic ;
he does not scruple, for instance, to include his hero's sin in
numbering the people.
If the evidence so far quoted for a bipartition or expurgated
account of David's reign is slight, we have clear and unquestion
able authority for the termination of a volume of the Reigns with
his death. You will remember that according to the Massoretic
division of books David's reign rather oddly encroaches into the
first book of Kings, which opens with his old age ; his death is not
reached until chap. ii. 11. The Lucianic recension of the LXX,
however, unites these sixty-four verses to the preceding book. This
arrangement, by which Book II closes with the death of David, as
Book I with the death of Saul, is certainly the more intelligible ;
and the evidence from style in the mass of our Greek MSS.
corroborates it. The characteristic features of the Asiatic school,
which first appear in the Uriah episode, run on into the first sixty-
four verses of Book III and then cease. Two lines of evidence
thus converge to the same end. The Lucianic recension brings
Book II down to the death of David, but its fairly uniform style
gives no hint of a change of translators at that point. The uncial
MSS. retain the familiar division of books, but their speech —
the altered style — bewrays them and confirms the Lucianic
tradition. The origin of the other arrangement, which attaches
David's old age to the reign of his successor, remains an enigma.
I suspect the explanation is to be found in an attempt to make
Samuel and Kings into volumes of more equal dimensions.
The Alexandrian translators opened their third book with the
accession of Solomon. How far did they carry the narrative of
the later Monarchy ? I am inclined to place the end of their
third volume one chapter earlier than in the printed texts— at the
end of the 21st1 (rather than the '22nd) chapter of 1 Kings
(Baa. y). The later Monarchy did not present any obvious
dividing-line, but at this point there did occur a note of time
indicating an interval of some duration : ' And they continued
1 In the Hebrew the 20th ; chaps, xx and xxi being transposed in the Greek.
B2

20 SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS
three years without war between Syria and Israel '. The translator
lays down his pen leaving Israel victorious over Syria. In the
previous verse (xxi. 43) occurs the last well attested instance in
the Reigns of the historic present, sure index of the early school.
Internal evidence. Main characteristic of the ' early ' portions.
The historic present and its functions.
Turning to the internal evidence on which my theory rests,
I need not dwell on the details.1 It will suffice to mention the
one outstanding characteristic of the ' early ' school and one or
two prominent features of the later or literalist school.
The main distinctive characteristic of the three ' early ' portions
is the large use of the historic present. The following statistics,
taken from the B text, practically hold good for the other
MSS., the Lucianic group excepted. Book a contains 151
examples, /3/S 28, yy 48 ; in ' all 227 examples, amounting
to not far short of two-thirds of the instances in the whole
of the LXX. Very striking is the contrast when we turn to
the ' late ' portions. Here there are no more than nine examples,
several of which are suspicious : —
In 0y: 2 R. xi. 7 Kal wapayiverai (perhaps a doublet of Ka\ tlcrrjKBev which
is unrepresented in M. T.) ; xiv. 27 (two examples of a marriage and birth
unrecorded in M. T.) ytverai ywr) . . . Wfcrei ; in the same context xiv. 30
napayivovrai (clause not in M. T.) ; xvii. 17 Troptiovrai /cal avayyi\\ovo-iv. In
yd we have only 4 R. i. 18 a 0ao-iXeiei (clause not in M. T.) and two examples
oi'io-Tiv for r)v in vii. 5, 10, which should not strictly be included, since owe
eo-nv is the invariable rendering of fX in this portion. The clauses not
in M.T. are either glosses or possibly relics of a primitive version of
extracts which have been incorporated in the later complete version. It
should be added that in the Lucianic text the historic presents continue
throughout 0S up to the fourteenth chapter of the fourth book, where
they cease.
I must ask for indulgence if I touch briefly on the functions of
this tense, in the Books of Eeigns in particular. The Greek use,
I venture to think, has not been generally understood, and our
books are specially enlightening. By substituting the present
for a past tense in narrative the narrator, according to the usual
view, vividly depicts a bygone incident as taking place at the
moment of speech. The tense is commonly described by the
vague epithet ' dramatic '. In our own language the practice has
been wellnigh relegated to the vernacular. We associate a liberal
use of ' Says he ' or ' He comes and says to me ' with persons of
1 See Appendix I.

THE BOOKS OF EEIGNS 21
the social status of Mrs. Gamp. In the Greek of the classical age
the use was shared by the literary language with the vernacular ;
a growing fastidiousness set in only in the age of the Koivt]}
Its functions may, I think, be more precisely defined than by the
word 'dramatic'. One narrower purpose which it served has
been detected and placed in a separate category. Brugmann
classifies the examples under the two heads * dramatic ' and ' date-
regisUring'. He traces the date-registering use to the bare
records of births, deaths, &c, in the old chroniclers and genealo
gists. But the 'dramatic' use seems also capable in most cases
of a closer definition. The present is mainly confined to verbs of
motion (coming, going, sending) ; some writers use it also with
verbs of seeing and saying. But the use with verba dicendi
seems always to have been regarded as vulgar. The tense as a rule
is, I believe, ' dramatic ' in the sense that it serves to introduce new
scenes in the drama. It heralds the arrival of a new character
or a change of locality or marks a turning-point in the march of
events. Even the colloquial Xeyei (shunned by the fastidious)
may be brought under the same head. It is the loquitur intro
ducing a new speaker. It marks the exact point where oratio recta
begins, the past tense being retained even in the verb immediately
preceding ; ' he answered and saith ', dnonpiQeh Xeyei in St. Mark,
viroXafiwv Xeyei in Job LXX. The main function is thus, I maintain,
to introduce a date, a new scene, a new character, occasionally
a new speaker ; in other words a fresh paragraph in the narrative.
In the ' early ' portions of the Reigns the tense commonly
serves one of these two purposes: either (1) as date-registering,
or (2) to introduce a new scene like a stage-direction, ' Scene
a battle-field. Enter the Philistines '.
The clearest instance of the date-registering use is the present
fSaaiXevei, which, along with OdnreTai, is constant in the recurrent
decease-and-accession formula in third Reigns. The formula here
runs ' A slept (eKoifirjOri) with his fathers and is buried (QdirTtrai)
with his fathers, and B his son comes to the throne (fiaaiXevei) in
his stead '.2 The Book of Eeigns is, as it were, parcelled out into
its component reigns by this device. The present catches the eye
like the underlining of a date. It is noteworthy that here and
1 This will appear from the following statistics collected from the first three
books of each of four leading historians. Herodotus (i-iii) has 206; in the
same compass ThucydideB has 218, Xenophon 61, Polybius 40.
2 Note in particular 3 R. xv. 25 'Upofinap. fiao-iXevci (of the accession) im
'lo-pafjk iv 'irti Sevripeo tov 'Arret 0ao\ 'loida, Kal i&do-LXevcrev iv '\crpar)\ err/ 8vo (of
the subsequent reign).

22 SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS
elsewhere it is the burial, if recorded at all, which stands in the
present, while the death is denoted by the past tense (eKoi/jirjOr]) ;
the interment, not the decease, marks the close of the career.
With this mannerism of the Alexandrian translators we should
contrast the later fourth book, where the formula consistently runs
eKoifirjOij-eTdcpii-iPaaiXevaev.1 In /3/3 nearly all the examples
fall under the date-registering head : y^pLovaiv ii. 4, v. 3 (David's
coronation), ii. 23 (death of Asahel),iv. 7 (death of Mephibosheth),
iv. 12 (death of his murderers), and so on.
A few examples will illustrate the historic present in its other
r61e as ' curtain-raiser ' in the drama of 1 Reigns. It occurs first
at i. 19 (of Elkanah and Hannah) Kal 6p6p((ovaiv to irpool Kal
npoaKvvovaiv . . . Kal iropevovrat ttjv 68bu ai)Toov ; the scene shifts
from Shiloh to Eamah, and the next words open chapter ii in an
ancient capitulary system.2 The reason for the next example,
iii. 15 Kal Koi/iaTai Sa/iovijX, is not so obvious, but we note that
the tense again coincides with an old chapter- opening in the same
MS. Chapter iv opens with a mise en scene depicting the
two armies encamped over against each other with four historic
presents. The main action follows in past tenses, the present
recurring only at the crises : the entry of the ark on the scene
(aXpovaiv 4), the defeat (jrraiei 10), the death of the wife of
Phinehas occasioned by the news (dirodfrjaKei 20). The presents
of coming and going in chapters v-vii mark the stages in the
itinerary of the ark. In the Goliath episode (xvii) we have
another characteristic mise en scene with eight presents in the first
three verses, beginning Kal awdyovaiv dXXocpvXoi . . . and ending
Kal dXX6<pvXoi 'iaravrai knl tov opovs kvravOa Kal 'IaparjX laraTai
kwl tov opovs kvTavOa (' Philistines right, Israelites left ', so to
speak). The presents in these proems have to my mind just the
same effect as a stage direction : ' France. Before the gates of
Harfleur. The Governor and some citizens on the walls ; the
English forces below. Enter King Henry and his train.'
I can only remark in passing that, the presents in St.. Mark
(Xeyn excluded) are used in a precisely similar way to introduce
new scenes and characters, that they generally coincide with
chapter-openings in the capitulary system in Codex Alexandrinus,
and that St. Luke, in suppressing them, has removed a feature
which to the observant reader serves to divide the older Gospel
into rough paragraphs.3
1 For the single exception, 4 R. i. 18 a pno-CKeiu, see above.
2 In cod. M.
3 Archdeacon Allen adduces the frequent historic presents in St. Mark as an

THE BOOKS OF EEIGNS 23
Characteristics of the ' later ' portions.
I turn to the later portions, the ' Decline and Fall '. Besides
the avoidance of the historic present, due here probably to
literalism — Hebrew had no equivalent — , these portions have
their own special characteristics. The common motive under
lying most of them is to adhere closely to the Hebrew and
to reproduce in the Greek minute distinctions in the original.
A few examples will here suffice.1
The most arresting is the monstrous use of eydo el/ii before
a finite verb. This solecism marks off the beginning and end of
' the Decline ' (/?y) ; the first instance occurring in Bathsheba's
message to David, eycS elfii . . . ex<» (2 E. xi. 5), the last in David's
death-bed words to Solomon 'I go the way of all the earth',
eyco el/it iropivo/iai . . . (3 E. ii. 2). Then we meet with no more
till we reach the fourth book (' the Fall '). This astonishing use
is elsewhere practically confined to Aquila and Theodotion.2
An ellipse of the relative (kya> el/xi iropevo/xai, e.g. representing
eyco elfii bs nopevofiai) will not account for all the instances.
The barbarism, I have no doubt, is a mechanical expedient for
preserving in the Greek the distinction between the two forms of
the Hebrew first person pronoun, the longer, and in the translators'
day the rarer, anolci and the shorter ani. Because anolci sometimes
stands for ' I am ' the literalist school ordained that it should
invariably be rendered eyco elfii ; the simple kya> being reserved
for ani. This rule holds good of all instances except the two last,
where the ani of the M. T. has doubtless replaced an earlier anolci.
In vocabulary I can but quote two instances. The same
scrupulous preservation of distinctions is seen in the use of
Keparivr] for shophar, the ram's horn, while adXitiy^ is reserved
for the hasoserah or straight trumpet of beaten metal. This
distinction is again characteristic of the Asiatic school. My
second instance I quote because it shows how late, and too often
neglected, Koivr) Greek may occasionally throw a reflex light on
the classical language. I refer to the peculiar rendering of the
Hebrew "N*1? (usually meaning ' a band of marauders ') by
ji.ov6£a>vos, a word elsewhere confined in Biblical Greek to two
instance of ' Aramaism ' (Studies in Synopt. Problem, 295, Expository Times, xiii.
329) ; a quite untenable theory. Would he maintain that 1 Samuel lay before
the Greek translators in Aramaic ?
1 See Appendix I.
2 The examples in the B text of Judges and Ruth are doubtless due to
Hexaplaric influence.

24 SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS
examples in Theodotion' s version of Job. Other LXX books
employ XyaTTJs, XyaTrjpiov and the like. Moi>6£a>vos, 'wearing
a girdle only ' and so ' lightly equipped ', is unparalleled outside
the Greek Bible ; but its poetical equivalent, ologwvos, occurs in
a familiar passage in Greek Tragedy, where I venture to think
it has been misinterpreted. At a critical moment in the Oedipus
Tyrannus of Sophocles, Oedipus, as will be remembered, anxiously
awaiting the all-important evidence of the herdsman, finds
consolation in the thought that rumour spoke of Laius as murdered
by robbers (XyaTai) in the plural. But, he adds,
el 6" di/Sp' ev ol6£a>vov avSrjaei, aa<pcos
tovt earlv rjSr] Tovpyov eis e/ie penov.1
' But if he names a single bandit, then beyond doubt this guilt is
laid at my door.' That surely is the meaning. The contrast is
between many XgaTai and one o/ocfcoi/oy ; and in the LXX jiovSfavos
is a synonym for Xj/aTfjs- With the profoundest respect, therefore,
I venture to question whether the late Sir Eichard Jebb might
not have reconsidered his translation 'if he names one lonely
wayfarer ', had the Biblical use come within his purview.2 The
belt which formed the sole accoutrement of the bandit carried
the dirk or irapa£a>vr), another word peculiar to the ' later ' portions
of the Eeigns.3
I must pass over the transliterations in /36\ Transliteration is
a hall-mark of Theodotion, and some of the instances here found
can only be paralleled from his work.
7s Theodotion or ' Ur-Theodotion ' the second translator ?
This brief review of some outstanding features of ' the Decline
and Fall ' might be thought to place the translator's name beyond
question. The word jiovogwvos is confined to these portions of the
Greek Bible and to Theodotion; Theodotion transliterates the
same Hebrew words and in the same way as those transliterated
in /3<S; and a fairly exhaustive examination of the vocabulary
reveals numerous other instances of words peculiar to, or charac
teristic of, the Ephesian translator.
1 846 f.
2 Mr. J. T. Sheppard in his recent edition (Camb. Univ. Press, 1920) follows
the lead of Sir Richard.
3 In 2 R. xviii. 11 in all the textB, ib. xxi. 16 in 'Lucian' and Theodotion, in
4 R. iii. 21 in Lucian alone. Usually translated ' girdle ' ; but note the variants
popcpaiav 2 R. xviii. 11 Arm., pAxatpav ib. xxi. 16 Symmachus, and the use of the
dimin. TrapafavLSiov for a dagger cited in Liddell and Scott.

THE BOOKS OF EEIGNS 25
The phrase inx* Xv n-pcio-xufia, ' to throw up a mound ' against a besieged
city is restricted to 2 R. xx. 15, 4 R. xix. 32, and e Dan. xi. 15 ; eVutaft'feij.
as the rendering of 33") to 08 (five times) and e Is. lviii. 14 ; rdo-a-civ
(for the commoner oTr/pL&iv) to npoo-amov to 4 R. xii. 17 and 9 Dan. xi. 17 ;
teal n-poo-e'™ renders '•S *|S1 only in 2 R. xvi. 11 and 6 Job xxxvi. 16
{irporremriiraTrio-ev is an obvious corruption). David, confronted with alter
native penalties, exclaims 2t««i pot mivroSev (2 R. xxiv. 14) ; Susannah,
surprised by the elders, makes the same exclamation in the version of e
(v. 22) and the context in both passages mentions the ' luncheon-hour ',
<Jpa dpia-Tov (2 R. ib. 15 ; Sus. 13). It is needlesB to multiply parallels.
Moreover, it is a priori probable that recourse would be had to
this translator to supplement an imperfect version. This is what
happened with the Greek Job. Similarly it was Theodotion's
version which supplanted the older paraphrase of Daniel. And
it has been conjectured that the two Greek versions of Ezra bear
the same relation to each other as the two versions of Daniel ;
the recurrence of the same transliterations in Esdras B and in
Theodotion is, in Mr. Torrey's opinion, conclusive.1
That there exists a very close relation between /35 and Theo
dotion is unquestionable. Yet, on several grounds, I find it
impossible to identify our translator outright with the Jew of
Ephesus. Were the ' Decline and Fall ' the work of Theodotion
pure and simple, we should expect to find no evidence from him
quoted in Hexaplario MSS. We do indeed find a paucity of
such attestation and are sometimes expressly told that Theodotion
agreed with the LXX. There remains, however, a residuum of
divergent renderings to be accounted for. Again, there are clear
indications that, before the time of Theodotion, Josephus made
use of a Greek version of the later Monarchy. Lastly, as Professor
Burkitt reminds me,2 our translation is not made from the
Massoretic text, as that of Theodotion practically was.
There remains the alternative that /J<5 is the work of a ' proto-
Theodotion', an anonymous version which Theodotion incorporated
nearly entire, introducing some quite minor alterations of his own.
I must confess to a prejudice against theories postulating the
existence whether of an Ur-Theodotion or an Ur-Marcus. Yet
this explanation accounts for the data more satisfactorily than
any other. It is, moreover, not unparalleled. In quotations
from Daniel the acquaintance shown with Theodotion's renderings,
not only by Josephus but even by New Testament writers, has
1 Apparatus for Textual Criticism of Chronicles-Ezra-Neh. (Chicago, 1908.)
2 He calls attention to a clear instance in 2 R. xvii. 3 where the M. T. has
dropped several words and the Greek has preserved the longer and better
reading.

26 SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS
forced critics to the conclusion that, unless Theodotion's date was
pre- Apostolic, he must have freely borrowed from an earlier lost
version. There is no improbability in such a lost original.
Many persons took in hand to improve upon the LXX, and
Origen discovered fragments of three other versions besides
those of known parentage.
Our translator appears to have been a pioneer of the literal
school and a predecessor of Aquila. He has advanced to the
stage of equating eyd> el/u with andki, but has not taken Aquila's
further step of representing n$? (the mark of the accusative) by
avv. Some of Aquila's renderings read like simplifications of
those of (38. Thus he replaces the rare and perhaps provincial
fiovofavos by the classical etigmvos- The same relation holds good,
I think, between two words (irdpoSos, irapoSiTTjs) which I will
take as my final test-words.
For illustration of LXX Greek we normally turn to the
Egyptian papyri. Here we must look to Asia and the inscriptions.
The inscriptions enable us to localize within a narrow area one
item in the vocabulary of our translator and to claim it as
a characteristic of Asiatic Greek. The word, moreover, is one in
which our translator parts company with Theodotion. Our object
is to get behind Theodotion to his forerunner and to determine
his provenance.
In Nathan's parable we read that ' there came a traveller unto
the rich man ' (2 E. xii. 4). In his Greek dress this traveller has
something to tell us of his travels. The Greek word in all our
MSS. except the Lucianic group is irdpoSos. Lucian and
Theodotion write the classical oSoinopos ; Aquila has irapoSiTtjs,
which also has ancient authority. A feminine irdpoSos we know ;
irdpoSos, masculine for ' a traveller ', is a solecism of extreme
rarity. Symmachus, probably an Asiatic, has it once (Jer. xiv. 8).
In the LXX so-called, we meet it again only in Ez. xvi. 15, 25.
But that chapter is probably not Alexandrian work ; it is just
such another passage, like the Uriah episode, as the original
translators would readily omit, containing a scathing indictment
of Jerusalem under the figure of a harlot making advances to
every passer-by (iravrl irap68a>).
Outside the Greek Bible 6 "irdpoSos is confined to sepulchral
inscriptions on or connected with the western sea-board of the
Levant.1 We find throughout Greece, the Aegean islands, and
the Levant a practice of appending to a sepulchral inscription
1 I have searched the papyri in vain for a parallel.

THE BOOKS OF EEIGNS 27
a greeting from the dead to the way-farer. The word ' way-farer '
takes two forms. Sometimes in verse, occasionally with variants
like \aipeiv toTs irapdyovaiv (or toTs irapepxo/ievois), the normal
phrase is either xa?Pe irapoSeiTa or \alpe irdpoSe. I have counted
upwards of forty examples with irapoS(e)iTr)S, seven only with
irdpoSos.1 JJapoSiTtjs is invariable on the mainland of Greece,
throughout both the Peloponnese (Laconia, Messenia, Arcadia)
and Thessaly ; Boeotia shows a variant form irapoSwTijs. Pro
ceeding north we find it in the island of Thasos, near Adrianople,
and at Perinthus on the north coast of the Propontis. Only when
we cross to the west coast of Asia and the adjacent islands do we
meet the alternative irdpoSe ; first at Mytilene in Lesbos, then at
Smyrna, then inland at Laodiceia, which has both forms, and
again in the island of Cos, which shows similar fluctuation.
Westwards of Cos and well out on the route to Greece, the island
of Amorgos reverts to the Hellenic irapo8(e)iT7]s (over twenty
examples), with a single exception ; irdpoSe occurs once in the
township of Aegiale, which, since the third century b. c, was
under Milesian rule ; the conquerors imported the Asiatic idiom.
This exhausts the instances of irdpoSos, with one highly significant
exception, in the far west. It is on a monument erected in Italy
to a boy of nine years old by his father, who describes himself as
AaoSiKevs ttjs Aaias; he has carried overseas the provincialism
of his home in the Lycus valley. Laodiceia is the only point
inland to which, to our knowledge, this form penetrated ; did it
travel thither from the coast by the high-road from Ephesus or by
river from Miletus ? Neighbouring Hierapolis shows irapo8(e)iTTjs
only, and eastwards in central Phrygia, that form, so far as our
evidence goes, is universal.2 IldpoSos is thus confined to the area
embracing Lesbos, Smyrna, Aegiale, and probably its mother-city,
Miletus, Cos, and Laodiceia — ta district having for its focus
Ephesus, the home of Theodotion. Ephesus itself yields no
evidence ; the sleepers of Ephesus have no blessing, only curses,
for the intruder. Yet Theodotion himself consistently writes
1 See Map at end of volume.
* The examples of n-dpoSos noted are as follows : Mytilene, Berlin Corpus
of Ins. Graecae, vol. xii, pt. ii, no. 410 ; Smyrna, Boeckh, C. I. G., vol. ii, 3273 ;
Laodiceia, ib., vol. iii, 6512 (inscr. in Rome) and Ramsay, Cities and Bishoprics
of Phrygia, vol. i, p. 78, App. i. 13 ; Aegiale (in Amorgos), Berlin I. G.,
vol. xii, 445 ; Cos, R. Herzog, Coische Forschungen (1899), nos. 133 and 163.
The examples of 7rapo8(e)iV>jr have been collected from the Berlin Corpus,
Ramsay, op. cit., and (for Perinthus) Jahreshefte des Osterreichischen Arch.
Institutes in Wien, Bd. i. (1898).

28 SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS
oSoiiropos. In our Greek Bible (if I may so put it) Nathan's
traveller is a bourgeois from Asia ; Theodotion, himself an Asiatic
of no mean city, presents him as an Athenian gentleman. In plain
language, to me this instance is conclusive proof that our translator
was a western Asiatic, but not Theodotion. Theodotion merely
appropriated his neighbour's version. To this anonymous Asiaticus
we owe the completion of the unfinished work of Alexandria.

The Company of Prophetical Translators
From the ' Eeigns ' or ' Early Prophets ' I turn to the ' Later
Prophets ' (from Isaiah to the Twelve), the translation of which
was doubtless the first to be taken in hand after the Pentateuch.
Here there were, I think, two stages : first a rendering] of select
passages appointed as lessons for the festivals and special sabbaths ;
secondly a complete version. The earlier stage will be illustrated
in my next lecture. To-day I am concerned with the complete
version, which must soon have superseded the lectionary extracts,
and in particular with Jeremiah. The Greek here gives us two
clues as to the procedure and personnel of the translators. It
indicates (1) a practice of dividing the longer books into two
approximately equal parts, (2) that the work was the outcome
of co-operation of a company of translators, analogous to the
pioneering company which gave us the Greek Pentateuch.
The work of this second company embraced, if I am not
mistaken, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve. The Isaiah
translator stands apart. The treatment of divine names often
affords a ready criterion, and in the phrase YHWH SABAOTH
the Isaiah translator, in common with the first book of Eeigns,
leaves the second word in its Hebrew form (Kvpios aa(3ad>6), while
the 'group', in so far as they use the phrase, translate by
' Almighty ' (Kvpios TlavTOKpdTmp). Though the question is
important, I must not stop to consider the reason for this isolation
of Isaiah and whether the translation succeeded or, as I incline
to think, preceded the group.
The links which unite the group are two. On the one hand,
the Greek Jeremiah and Ezekiel curiously resemble each other
in that a change of style, in other words of translators, occurs in
the middle of either book. In Jeremiah the break comes in
chap, xxix of the Greek text, in Ezekiel at or about the beginning
of chap, xxviii. The books differ in one respect. In Jeremiah the

THE COMPANY OF PEOPHETICAL TEANSLATOES 29
distinctive marks of the second style continue to the end.1 In
Ezekiel the second style, beginning in the middle, persists for
a dozen chapters (xxviii-xxxix), when the first style is resumed.
For convenience I shall refer to the two pairs of translators as
Jer. a and /3, Ez. a and 0. Broadly speaking, Jer. a translated
the first half, Jer. /? the second half of his book. Ez. a besides
the first half undertook also the last quarter, including the
hardest parts of his prophet ; the share of Ez. /3 being restricted
to the third quarter. Now, when we find two contiguous pro
phecies bisected in this way (for it is important to note that the
central break is purely mechanical, not governed by subject-
matter), we begin to suspect co-operation of a company, who for
greater expedition have agreed upon a division of labour. The
impression is strengthened by the second link, that of style.
Jer. a and Ez. a have many features in common ; but it is the
Soo8eKairp6(pr)Tov which is here of primary importance. I have
failed to discover any similar mechanical break in the Book of
the Twelve; but in style and vocabulary the Greek Minor
Prophets as a whole bear so close a resemblance to Ez. a as to
suggest that these large portions of the LXX may have been
rendered by a single individual, some leading spirit in the little
company. Jer. /3 and Ez. /3 stand apart; having their own
idiosyncrasies besides points of contact with the other members.
The translation of these portions seems to have been left to
subordinates, the lesser lights of the 'company.
The Teanslatoes of Jeeemiah
The Greek Jeremiah has probably provoked more inquiry
than any other Septuagint book, owing to its exceptionally wide
divergence from the Hebrew. The main difference between the
two texts consists in the dislocation and rearrangement of one
section, the group of prophecies against Foreign Nations. The
divergence affects the position assigned to the group as a whole
and the order of the individual prophecies. We have a similar
series of prophecies against Foreign Nations in Isaiah and Ezekiel,
where they occupy a central position. In the Greek Jeremiah
the Oracles similarly stand in the centre of the book, imme
diately after a sentence common to both texts (xxv. 13) which
seems to lead up to them. In the Hebrew, however, they are
relegated to a final, or penultimate, position, being followed
1 Excluding the Historical Appendix (chap. Iii).

30 SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS
only by the Historical Appendix (chap. Iii) which has no claim
to prophetic authorship. Again, in the Greek the separate
prophecies are unsystematically arranged.1 In the Hebrew they
stand in a fairly orderly geographical sequence, proceeding
eastwards from Egypt to Babylon.
This varying position of the Oracles has long since led critics,
from Eichhorn and Bertholdt in the eighteenth century to Duhm
in the twentieth, to conjecture that the Book of Jeremiah is
a compilation of two or more smaller volumes. The unfortunate
prophet has suffered Isaiah's traditional fate in being sawn
asunder, with the added barbarity that the operation has been
performed at different places. According to the latest theory,
that of Duhm (the most brilliant of German exponents of the
Prophets), there were two books: (1) chaps, i-xxv of the Hebrew,
which he entitles ' The Book of the words of Jeremiah ' ; (2) the
remainder (xxvi-lii), comprising, in his opinion, large extracts
from a lost Book of Baruch, a biography of the prophet, which
once had an independent existence as a historical book. These
extracts have been collected by an editor and expanded into
a second book of Jeremiah by the addition of a little book of
consolation (xxx-xxxi Heb.), the Oracles and the Historical
Appendix. That our Book of Jeremiah is a compilation from smaller
collections is indisputable.2 But such theories as I have
mentioned rest on no secure basis ; the Oracles against the
Nations, which seem to hold the key to the riddle of the two
texts, are attached by one critic to the first volume, by another
to the second. The advocates of a two-volume Jeremiah have
strangely overlooked the evidence afforded by the LXX. To
that evidence I will confine myself, without venturing on
precarious theories as to ultimate origins. In the Greek we do
find clear and unmistakable signs of bisection, but the pheno
mena do not support any theory of two self-contained volumes.
The division is purely mechanical, and yet appears to go back
behind the Greek to the original Hebrew.
It will suffice to quote a single instance of the variety of
styles in the Greek Jeremiah, a cogent criterion on which
1 Except that the three world-empires (Elam, Egypt, Babylon) precede the
smaller nations bordering on Palestine.
2 We need not go beyond the opening verses (i. 1-3) for witness to. its
gradual growth. The story of Baruch, after the burning of the first roll,
rewriting the whole and adding thereto ' many like words ' (xxxvi. 32) points
in the same direction.

THE TEANSLATOES OF JEEEMIAH 31
implicit reliance might be placed even if it stood alone. The
Alexandrians were not rigidly consistent in their renderings.
We have to allow for some natural variety ; and in looking for
proofs of a plurality of translators, it is sometimes difficult to
find test-phrases that are absolutely convincing. Here we are
fortunate enough to discover a diversity of rendering in the
commonest of Hebrew phrases running right through the book.
The alternative renderings are consistently adhered to on either
side of a central line. The phrase is njn; "ipa nb, 'Thus saith
(or " said ") the Loed '. This is rendered (1) by rdSe Xeyei Kvpios
upwards of sixty times in the first half (down to xxix. 8) ; (2) by
ovtcos eiirev Kvpios some seventy times in the latter half.1 The
last occurrence of TaSe Xeyei opens the prophecy against Edom
(xxix. 8) : the prophecy upon Ammon opens with ovtcos eiirev
(xxx. 1). Between these two occurs in our oldest uncials,
B and K, a unique instance of the mixture TaSe eiirev.'2. Seldom,
I think, can the higher critics of the Hebrew Pentateuch adduce
so convincing a proof of the limits of the component documents
J and E — or, I might add, of the intervention of the compiler
JE, though I should not lay stress on the unique TaSe eiirev —
as is here afforded of the limits of the respective work of a pair
of translators.
A glance at the Concordance will show numerous other
instances of discrepancy between the two parts, on which I
need not dwell. Certain words are represented only up to the
28th (or 29th) chapters ; others make their first appearance at
that point. Hebrew had another formula for introducing the words of the Deity,
miT DM ' Oracle of Jahweh '. a renders CM by \iyei, not distinguish
ing it from 1DN ; 0 ordinarily by cpricriv. Among nouns ' time ' in a is
Kaipdr,"in 0 XP°V0S 5 ' .i°y ' in a is XaP"> in $ xap/*°<™i<i/. ' I will light a fire '
in a is avd^as irvp, in 0 Kavo-eo nip ; ' to receive (education) ' in a Sigacrdai, in
0 Xa0e iv (imibeiav) ; the respective portions have lacr8ai larpeietv for ' heal ',
Karao-Krivovv KaraXveiv for ' dwell ' or ' tabernacle ', -n-apopyi&tv (irapa)mKpalveiv
for ' provoke '. And so on.
Then we have instances where 0 adopts an a word but gives it a nuance
of his own or coins another word from it; the tioo translators have co
operated. Thus while a employs the adjective a'0aro£, 'trackless' or
' desert ', 0 uses the neut. afiarov as an abstract noun ' desolation ' and coins
aftaroiv, ' to render desolate '. Similarly 0 seems responsible for coining
the substantive Irapla from the adj. tVn/xc? in a?
1 Down to li. 34. The phrase is absent from the Appendix.
2 xxix. 13. Of the converse mixture ovtm Xe'yu I have noted four examples
in the B text, two in either part, viz. xiv. 10, xxiii. 16; xii. 4, xlii. 13.
3 For further details see Appendix II.

32 SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS
The general results which emerge are as follows. The line of
demarcation falls somewhere in the latter part of chap, xxix
(Gr. text). A mixture of styles occurs at the juncture; the
actual point of transition cannot be fixed to a verse. The line
cuts the group of Oracles in two, four (or five) nations standing
on the one side, the remainder on the other. The bisection
goes back as far as the textual history can be traced. The
double vocabulary is prior to the earliest ¦ version made from
the LXX, the Old Latin ; Tyconius preserves the distinction
between TaSe and ovtcos, though disregarding the distinction of
tenses, writing 'Haec dicit', 'Sic dicit' respectively in the two
portions. It antedates the Asiatic school ; for Aquila, consistent
as he normally is, sometimes follows the LXX variety of trans
lation.1 We cannot definitely say that the double vocabulary
is older than New Testament times merely because the first
half is practically unused ; but in the Epistle to the Hebrews
(viii. 8 ff.) we have a long citation containing the characteristic
marks of Jer. /3. Behind New Testament times external evidence
fails us; but I think we may confidently assert that the dis
tinction in style between the two parts has stood in the Greek
ever since a complete version of Jeremiah existed. One further
remark. The line of demarcation cuts across and presupposes
the LXX arrangement of chapters with the Oracles in the centre
of the book. The translators are not, it seems, responsible for the
dislocation.2 For, whoever effected the drastic and arbitrary
transposition of these chapters clearly regarded the Oracles as
a unit. Were the translators responsible, the point selected for
the second translator to take over the work is likely to have
fallen on one side or the other of the transposed block.. In
fact the translators have ignored the unity of this section and
drawn their line right through the middle of it.
That translator /S was the weaker scholar of the two appears
from some curious examples of what may be called 'imitation
Hebrew ' or the employment of words or phrases of which the
only link with the Hebrew is a resemblance in sound, while
they entirely fail to reproduce the sense. They recall the
schoolboy's ' howler '. Some of these may be due to later
corruption ; to Hellenization, i. e. an endeavour to extract an
intelligible Greek meaning out of an original transliteration.
1 Thus ' time ' ()"iy) in a is icrupds, in 0 ifpovos ; Aquila ordinarily employs
Kaipds but once (xxxvii. 7) follows 0 in writing xpovos.
2 Cf. p. 36 below for a further rroof of this.

THE TEANSLATOES OF JEEEMIAH 33
Others, though pure guesses, are so curiously felicitous in their
context that I cannot but think they go back to the original
translator. Such errors might arise through mishearing, if, as
seems probable, the method employed was dictation and two
workers co-operated, one dictating the Hebrew and occasionally
assisting with the Greek, the other confining himself to transla
tion. A Hebrew word dictated by the one might be mistaken
by the other for a Greek rendering.
The following examples may be quoted:— (1) TTr] (the word for the
rhythmical cry of the vintage-gatherers as they trode the grapes in the
wine-vats, onomatopoeically rendered la Id by the ' Syrian ' translator, with
local knowledge) is represented by alSe Jer. xxxi. 33, o1.Se xxxii. 16.
Probably a scribal ' improvement ' upon an original nldiS or r)Sdd (cf. Aq.), as
the pron. o8e occurs nowhere else in Jer. 0. Jer. u, through confusion of 1
and "I, renders ol Kara0aiVovres- xxviii. 14. (2) 'The men of Kir-heres '
become ilvhpas KetpdSa? (xxxi. 31, cf. 36), meaning apparently ' the shorn
men ', which is in keeping with the context (37) ' Every head shall be
shorn and every beard clipped' in token of mourning. (3) xxxviii. 9
a\iKi£av (iirl Stmpvyas vSdrav) 'providing a lodging' answers to Heb. DS/piK
' I will bring them ' Gr. probably due to mishearing of dictated Heb.
The theme is the common one in Deutero-Isaiah,. &c, of Israel's happy
home-coming with God for their leader and nature conspiring to ease their
journey. (4) xxxviii. 21 2t/Jctoi> a-envrrjv, Seicop, iroinuov ripm piav, Heb.
'Set thee up waymarks (D^JS), make thee guide-posts' (D'HVieFl) on
the road to Palestine. Probably due to the translator ; reprisals on
Israel's foes are a standing feature in the Zionistic programme. But
corruption has affected the following clause ; correct ai^ouf to o'ipovs (with
Streane). (5) xii. 5 ias a8ov (Koyjrovrai cre) for Heb. }VlX ""in ' (saying)
Ah ! Lord '. Jer. a writes correctly oiSe pr) KXavcrovTat avrov Oipoi. Kvpie
xxii. 18. Cf. xxix. 6 where *fa is represented, if at all, by the definite
article j\ (r) pdxaipa). (6) Cf. also two examples where the Gr. Kal corre
sponds to Heb. '3 'because', xlii. 16, xliv. 16. (5) and (6) may be
explained by dictation.
It remains to mention some of the rarer instances of agreement
between the translators. In the forefront stands the rendering
of the Divine Name mN32f mir by Kvpios TLavTOKpdrcop which
runs right through Jeremiah and the Minor Prophets. With
this may be connected another title found in both parts of the
Greek Jeremiah, and, except for its model, nowhere else. In
the description of his call (i. 6) the prophet tries to evade his
onerous commission on the ground of youth and inexperience.
The verse runs in the Greek Kal eTira 'O a>v SeairoTa Kvpie, iSov
ovk eiriaTa/iai XaXeiv, oti vemrepos eyco el/ii. For 6 cov Seairora
Kvpie, ' 0 thou (self-)existent sovereign Lord ', the M. T. has
miT1 'JIN nnx 'Ah Lord God'. Clearly the translator in place
c

34 SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS
of the interjection n™ read fWK and had in mind the call
of Moses and the Divine Name by which God then revealed
Himself rvm -ipn tffiK (Ex. iii. 14), with the LXX rendering
'.Eyco eijii 6 rnv ... 6 cov direaraXKev fie. The reminiscence was
the more natural seeing that the lawgiver sought to evade the
responsibilities of office on the same grounds as the prophet.
Now this interpretation of nnK recurs in both parts of Jeremiah
(xiv. 13 ; xxxix. 17) ; whereas elsewhere in the LXX we find
of/ipoi or HTjSa/Mcos (Ez.), a a or Seojxai.
Incidentally we may note a parallel case of a description of a call to
office being modelled on that of a predecessor. In St. Paul's speech
before Agrippa (Acts xxvi. 15-18) the Apostle (or his biographer) reports
the terms of his commission in language reminiscent of the call of no less
than three prophets, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and the Lord's servant in deutero-
Isaiah (cf. Ez. ii. 1 ; Jer. i. 8 ; Is. xlii. 7 ff.). And that the biographer is
not wholly accountable appears from the Apostle's own allusion to his
conversion in Gal. i. 15, where the words 6 afyopio-as pe iK Koikias pr/rpos pov
ko.1 xaXetras are based on the call of the Lord's servant (Is. xlix. 1).
The translators were at one in their treatment of Divine
titles ; they were united also in their reverent attitude to the
deity. Jeremiah with bold Hebrew anthropomorphism represents
JHWH as ' rising early ' and sending His prophets or performing
similar actions. Our pair of translators hit upon the same ex
pedient to avoid what they regarded as an irreverent phrase;
they write ' in the morning ' (opQpov). In the only passage
where the literal 6p6pi(cov is allowed to stand (xxv. 3) the
subject of the verb is not JHWH but the prophet.
Further instances of the translators' agreement are mainly confined to
the use of some rare Greek words. In the recurrent phrase ' in the cities
of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem ' the Greek in both parts for ' in the
streets' has i'gadtv ('Upovo-a\r)p), twice in Pt. I (xi. 6, xxviii. 4), more often
in Pt. II (xl. 10, li. 6, 9, 17, 21 ; cf. Baruch ii. 23). This is one among
many indications that the translators' exemplar, in both parts, employed
abbreviations. Terminations were often omitted, and niXirQ was read as
flna. The confusion is peculiar to Jeremiah. (Similarly, in both parts
niiT1 was often expressed by a single Yodh ; and the abbreviation was con
fused with the suffix of the first pers. pronoun, e.g. Bvpov pov vi. 11,
dupoii pov xxxii. 23, Heb. 'the wrath of JHWH1.) Rare Greek words
peculiar to these two translators are : apcpobov a block or ' island ' of
buildings, Heb. jto"iX 'palace' (xvii. 27; xxx. 16); KarnpdKTijr for 'the
stocks" as instrument of torture, an unparalleled use (xx. 2 f. ; xxxvi. 26) ;
XivZves, Hellenization of D'Oj? 'cakes' (vii. 18; li. 19); avp-tyav, 'sweep
away' (xxii. 19; xxix. 21, xxxi. 33). The phrase 'the corner-clipt ', of
a foreign mode of cutting the hair, is similarly paraphrased in both parts :
TrepiKtipeaBai (to) Kara, irpoo-umov (ix. 26; xxxii. 9, cf. xxx. 10).

THE TEANSLATOES OF JEEEMIAH 35
The general result of the investigation is that we find a
cleavage with a distinct vocabulary on either side of chap, xxix
together with a few striking instances of agreement. I can
only account for the phenomena by imperfect collaboration of
two workers, the second of whom only partially followed the
lead of the first. The translator of the first half was the superior.
Clearly it was he who in the opening chapter made the happy
discovery of the analogy between the call of the lawgiver and
that of the prophet, whose book had been entrusted to his
charge ; his partner merely followed suit. The scholarship of
the latter, if he is responsible for some flagrant 'howlers', was
weak, and his inclusion in the company is surprising. It would
seem that in weightier matters, the treatment of the Divine
titles and one expression needing reverent handling, as also for
a few rare words, he sought help from his colleague and a
mutual agreement was reached. Generally, however, rigid uni
formity was not aimed at, and the inconsistency in the rendering
of the common formula ' Thus saith ' escaped detection. How
easily this might happen I know from personal experience.
I did not discover this, the most cogent proof of the double
vocabulary, until the last.
Our own Authorized Version of the New Testament owes some
of its inconsistencies to much the same cause, a lack of adequate
supervision and communication between two isolated companies
sitting at Oxford and at Westminster.1
One question remains. Were the translators the first to break
the book into two in the middle of the Oracles, or had they
warrant for so doing in their Hebrew exemplar ? I think they
had such warrant. The Hebrew text yields two pieces of evidence
(1) in the titles to the Oracles, (2) in the colophons appended to
two of them.
(1) The titles fall into two categories, long and short. The
long titles all ascribe the particular prophecy to Jeremiah and
add information as to date or occasion of delivery. The short
titles, with one exception, consist merely of the name of the
nation preceded by the preposition b, ' concerning Edom ', &c.
The important fact is that with the Hebrew order of nations
long and short titles are intermixed ; the arrangement seems
haphazard and only becomes explicable if the Oracles are read in
their Greek order. Eead in that order, we have six long titles,
1 See the Revisers' Preface.
C2

36 SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS
beginning ' The word of JHWH that came to Jeremiah the
prophet concerning Elam in the beginning of the reign of
Zedekiah, king of Judah ', and so on, followed by five shorter
titles, ' Of Edom ', &c, with only one approach to a fuller state
ment. Two results follow, (i) When the titles were inserted,
the chapters were arranged as in the LXX. They are a witness
to the priority of that arrangement, (ii) They afford Hebrew
evidence for a break or interruption in the middle of the Oracles.
The longer titles cease at about the end of Part I. The line of
demarcation, by this test, falls between Philistia and Btlom,
a line practically identical with that drawn by the change in
the Greek style.1 I conclude that our translators in their
division of labour did not act on their own caprice ; they merely
followed a division which they found already in their Hebrew
exemplar. The Hebrew editor who amplified the titles ap
parently had only Part I before him and did not carry his work
further. (2) The Hebrew contains two colophons which are not in the
Greek. Their similarity of form suggests that they come from
one hand. In xlviii. 47 (Heb.) we read ' Thus far is the judge
ment of Moab ' ; in li. 64 (Heb.) ' Thus far are the words of
Jeremiah' (at the close of the Babylon Oracle). The second
colophon is explained by the Hebrew arrangement, in which
Babylon is not only the last of the nations, but rounds off the
whole book apart from the Historical Appendix (Iii), which the
colophon-writer definitely pronounces to be no part of the
prophet's work. The first colophon is explained by the Greek
arrangement. In the Hebrew Moab stands in an intermediate
position, where no remark is called for. But in the Greek it is
the last of the nations, and the note calls attention to the fact.
I infer that the Hebrew editor was familiar with both arrange
ments of the Oracles and probably wrote these colophons at the
time when the rearrangement took place.2 While indicating
that in the Eevisers' opinion the Nations and the whole book
should close with Babylon, he thought fit to preserve an indication
of the older tradition by writing ' Thus far is the judgement
of Moab '.
The Greek translators, I conclude, utilized for their own
1 Edom is on the border-line and cannot with certainty be assigned to either
Part. 2 Probably in the first century a. d., when Babylon had become a pseudonym
for Rome.

THE TEANSLATOES OF JEEEMIAH 37
purposes an already existing division of Jeremiah into two
volumes. The second volume was no self-contained unit. It
had no formal opening and merely carried on the series of
Oracles with which Vol. I broke off. The volumes have ragged
edges. Moreover, and this point I would emphasize, Jeremiah
does not stand alone. The practice of a mechanical bisection
of books, at least the longer books, finds parallels in other parts
of the LXX. For the explanation we must look, I believe, to
what the Germans call Buchwesen, to something in the format
and make-up of the Hebrew rolls, in modern language to the
bookbinding or possibly the booksellers' department.
The Teanslatoes of Ezekiel
In conclusion, I can but glance at the phenomena presented
by the Greek version of Ezekiel. The analogy to Jeremiah is
curiously close. Again we have a mechanical bipartition of the
book for translation purposes. The transition again occurs in
the middle of a group of Oracles against Foreign Nations. I
place it within the long Oracle against Tyre, at the point where
the prophet turns from the city to denounce its prince. The
name of the city, which in chaps, xxvi-xxvii is the Hebraic
Sop, from xxviii. 2 onwards takes the ordinary Hellenized form
of Tvpos- But again, as in Jeremiah, a certain mixture of styles
at the juncture leaves the exact point of transition doubtful ; it
might be placed a little earlier.
That the central dividing-line is drawn mechanically is shown
by the translators' neglect of a more obvious division which
lay ready to hand. The book comprises two main themes,
Destruction and Eeconstruction, and falls accordingly into two
parts of twenty-four chapters each, the second part opening with
the Oracles against the Nations, which form the prelude to the
prophecies of Eestoration. This distinction of subject-matter
was well-known to the Eabbis, who observed that Ezekiel opens
with desolation and ends with consolation, and fancifully traced
in this the reason for its being placed, as early tradition placed
it, after Jeremiah, which is all desolation, and before Isaiah,
which is all consolation.1 Nevertheless, the translators went
out of their way to find a still more equal division with the
m'easuring-line. Beside these resemblances, the translation has its differences
1 T. B. Baba Bathra, 14b (translated in Ryle, Canon of 0. T., p. 274).

38 SKETCH OF SEPTUAGINT OEIGINS
from the Greek Jeremiah. In Ezekiel, in addition to the central
break, we find a second break at xl. i, coinciding with an obyious
change in subject-matter. The three divisions are thus (1)
chaps, i-xxvii which I call Ez. a1, (2) chaps, xxviii-xxxix Ez. /3,.
and (3) chaps, xl-xlviii Ez. ail- But, though we have this
threefold division, there are, as in Jeremiah, two main trans
lators and two only. The final portion, with the picture of the
ideal Temple and the future disposition of regenerate Israel,
notwithstanding the widely different topics with which it deals,
presents so many similarities of language to the first portion
that the two are undoubtedly the work of a single translator
(Ez. a). The leader, beside his first half, has appropriated also
the last quarter. His reappearance at the close supports the
belief that the pair were contemporaries co-operating on a
common task. There is no inherent reason for the omission
of the dozen chapters comprizing Ez. /3. A roughly equal
initial divisibn of labour, with the resumption of the task by
the leader at a point where it seemed beyond the capacity of
a subordinate, adequately accounts for the facts.
In another particular the versions of Jeremiah and Ezekiel
differ. We find in the latter one outstanding patch, the Greek
of which cannot be ascribed to either of the pair. Within the
province of Ez. /3 there falls a short section of fifteen verses
(Ez. xxxvi. 24-38, with the promise of ' the new heart ') in
another style ; the translators have here, I believe, incorporated
an older version made for lectionary use in the synagogue.1
As already suggested (p. 26), the unedifying chapter xvi was
perhaps omitted by the Alexandrian company, and the Greek
in our texts is a later supplement.
Detailed proofs of this threefold division appear elsewhere.2
Here I can but mention two instances. The Appendix (chaps.
xl-end) with its distinct topics lacks the Hebrew phrases
characteristic of the rest of the book. We can therefore point
to no one ubiquitous test-phrase comparable to ' Thus saith
YHWH ' in Jeremiah. Instead, we may take a phrase which
in the first two portions may be considered the leitmotif of
the prophet. 'They shall know that I am JHWH' in a' is
normally eiriyvcoaovTai Sion eyco Kvpios, in /3 yvcoaovTai oti eyco
1 See Appendix III (4).
2 See Appendix III, for further details, and Appendix IV for further proofs
of the prevalence of the ' half-book ' practice in Jewish antiquity, of which we
have found examples in Jeremiah and Ezekiel.

THE TEANSLATOES OF EZEKIEL 39
elfii Kvpios ; here there are three minor differences. In another
constant phrase ' Prophesy and say ' (lit. ' Thou shalt say ') a\
adhering to the Hebrew, writes irpocprJTevaov Kal epets; /3 has
two imperatives irpocprJTevaov Kal elirov.
In contrast to his subordinate colleague /?, who does not
reappear in the LXX, Ez. a was a master who played a pro
minent part in the translation of the Nebiim. I will end with
a brief reference to these wider activities of his. Not only did
he appropriate three-quarters of Ezekiel, but he is also apparently
responsible for the version of the bulk, if not the whole, of the
Minor Prophets. But, if I am not mistaken, his energies did
not stop even here. On a fresh reading the conviction has grown
upon me that it was he who gave us, in part at least, the third
book of Eeigns, the Greek narrative of Solomon and the divided
Monarchy. It seems probable that the Alexandrian expurgated
version of the Eeigns was likewise the work of a company.
Our translator was a member of that other company as well,
unless indeed the companies were one and the undertaking on
a still larger scale. The evidence is clearest in the sections
relating to the two Temples, Solomon's and Ezekiel's, where
there is a remarkable agreement in the architectural terms,
alike in the Greek renderings and in the transliterations. But
there are other parallels scattered sporadically over the two
Tjooks. Most remarkable of all is a rendering due, it seems, to
mispronunciation— to an error in dictation. Through confusion of
gutturals, 3 and V, wb'bi ' idols ' is constantly rendered in Ez. a
by eiriTTjSev/iaTa ( = niWl?) ; this error recurs only in 3 E. xv. 12.
The text of 3 Reigns has reached us in a disordered
state. I do not, of course, maintain that our translator is
responsible for the whole text as it stands in codex B. The
parallels with Ezekiel a come in clusters, from which we may
roughly estimate the extent of his handiwork. These groups
include some of the obviously early portions, the precious
fragment from the Book of Jashar and the alternative story of
the disruption, peculiar to the B text. These same paragraphs
also contain striking parallels to the ScoSeKairpocprjTOv.1
1 See Appendix III (3).

LECTURE II
THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
(1) The Feast of Pentecost
I have taken as the theme of my second and third Lectures
certain Jewish festivals and fasts and the portions of Scripture
nsed, or designed for use, on those occasions in the services of
Temple or synagogue. My aim is to show that these passages
cannot be fully understood without regard to their employment
in public worship. The liturgical use is, I venture to think,
a factor in exegesis which has been unduly neglected. The sub
ject deserves fuller treatment than I can give it by some expert
in Hebrew and Eabbinical lore. Such constructive work as has
been done on these lines we owe mainly to Jewish scholars. Our
English commentators have too often disregarded Jewish tradi
tion concerning lessons or Psalms proper to special occasions, as
having no bearing on interpretation. The traditions, it is true,
were not committed to writing before (at earliest) the second
century of our era, but there is good reason for thinking that they
or some of them were inherited orally from earlier generations.
The liturgical use, I maintain, goes well back into pre-Christian
times, before the text was finally fixed, and has in various ways
influenced and moulded the form in which the text has come
down to us. In the selection of the passages recited or chanted
analogy played an important part. Analogy with the first lesson
- determined the choice of the second ; and this process of assimila
tion was carried further, and the several portions of Scripture
employed on the same occasion tended to react on each other and
to be affected by the dominant notes of the ritual. Jewish
worship was homogeneous ; the service was no medley of incon
gruous hymns and prayers. Lessons and Psalms had an affinity
to each other and to the ritual. We need then to restore to their
original setting, and to study the mutual connexions between,
passages which were associated in ancient worship.
The field of inquiry is limited, but deserves working out. It
is practically limited to the prophetical lessons and Psalms for the
principal Feasts and Fasts and a few special sabbaths. I do not

EVOLUTION OF THE FESTIVALS 41
maintain that the text of the Pentateuch was affected. It had
weHnigh reached its final form when the custom of public read
ing was introduced, and was probably read in its entirety when
the Greek translation appeared. On the other hand, the text of
the Prophetical books had not, it seems, been stereotyped when,
about 200 b.c, they were received into the Canon and short
extracts began to be read on the festivals. At that very time the
Alexandrians were engaged in producing a Greek version. The
final compilation of the Psalter followed later. It is here,
I think, that this> line of inquiry may prove specially fruitful.
It has been increasingly recognized that such internal evidence
as the Psalms afford is insufficient to determine with certainty
the date and occasion of writing. The occasions on which some
of them were employed in public worship we know ; and we may
obtain light on details if we approach their study from this point
of view before attacking the problem of remoter origins. Litur
gical glosses may be looked for especially at the beginning and
end of a Psalm or adjacent to the liturgical ' Selahs '.
The Septuagint, which doubtless owed its existence to the
lectionary needs of a Greek-speaking community, furnishes im
portant, but not the only, evidence in the investigation. To the
LXX evidence I shall devote special attention, while touching on
other illustrative material. I was first attracted to this line of
research by the accidental discovery of an obscured rubric
embedded in a Greek version of an old Pentecost lesson. Later
I had the good fortune to find that the Greek rendering of an
obscure passage in the Psalm for the Feast of Tabernacles was
elucidated by the companion lesson. My lecture to-day will be
devoted to those and other passages employed at these two festivals.
I must begin with some preliminary remarks on the evolution
(1) of the Jewish festivals, (2) of the lectionary system.
(1) The inquiry is pushed back to festival origins by the
recurrence of certain dominant notes in the cultus, which are
reflected in the lessons. One is driven to ask, How did these
motifs arise ? In a fascinating chapter of his Prolegomena Well-
hausen long ago reconstructed the history of the evolution of the
Jewish festivals from a primitive agricultural stage to what may
be called the priestly and historical stage.1 On the settlement
in Canaan the Israelites took over, along with the land, the agri-
1 Prolegomena to History of Israel, Engl, trans. 1885, chap, iii, ' The sacred
feasts '.

42 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
cultural feasts of the conquered people, with the profound differ
ence that JHWH replaced Baal as the object of worship. The
feasts were purely agricultural without historical associations.
The spring Feast of Unleavened Bread (maffoth) marked the be
ginning, the summer Feast of Harvest (Kafir ; afterwards Weeks,
Shabuoth, or Pentecost) the end, of the corn-harvest, while the
autumn Feast of Ingathering (Asiph) or Booths (Succoth) celebrated
the vintage and olive harvest, the winding up of the agricultural
operations of the year. Associated with the spring festival was
another which came to be called Passover ; probably the oldest of
all, originating in a pastoral period before the settlement, when
the offering consisted of the firstling of the flock.
That was the primitive stage. In the final stage, represented
by the Priestly Code, much of this original character is lost. The
feasts, no longer movable and dependent on weather conditions,
¦ now have fixed dates assigned to them, and — the main innovation
— now primarily commemorate crises in the national history.
The spring festival recalls the liberation from Egypt, the slaying
of the firstling of the flock the slaying of the first-born, the un
leavened bread the haste of the departure. Pentecost — though
this identification came later — celebrates the law-giving on Mount
Sinai. Lastly, the booths of the vintage-gatherers stand for the
hut-dwellings of the Israelites during their forty years' wander
ings. Egypt, Sinai, Wilderness : the feasts now mark the stages
on the route to Canaan.
On the pagan origin of the festivals I would make one com
ment. Wellhausen speaks of the primitive ' solar ' festivals. The
context shows that by ' solar ' he means merely ' seasonal ', ' those
which follow the seasons of the year'.1 I would venture to
suggest that some of the popular ceremonies, those portions of
the cultus which are most tenacious of pagan relics, contain in
dications of ' solar ' connexions in the strict sense ; indications,
I mean, of an association of the feasts with the cardinal points in
the sun's apparent movements in the heavens, the equinoxes and
solstices, the Tekuphoih as the Hebrews called them. The
evidence is clearest in the feast of most recent institution. To
the three great festivals was added in post-exilic days a fourth,
that of the Dedication, instituted in 164 b. c. by Judas Maccabaeus
to celebrate the rededication of the Temple after its desecration
by Antiochus Epiphanes. Falling on the 25th Kislev (approxi
mately our December) and popularly known as the ' Feast of
1 Prolegomena, p. 83.

EVOLUTION OF LECTIONAEY SYSTEM 43
Lights ', illumination figured prominently in the cultus, and the
fables which gathered round it x relate to a miraculous kindling
of fire. The popular custom of the kindling of lights in the home,
increasing on each evening of the feast from one to eight,2 un
doubtedly symbolized the growing light of the year. Judas, it
seems, reconsecrated a pagan ' Shortest day ' carnival, just as old
pagan festivals of the solstices were rechristened as the birthdays
of John the Baptist and of our Lord. The Dedication feast was
modelled on that of Tabernacles.3 Tabernacles, Philo tells us,4
fell at the autumnal equinox, and the most popular ceremony was
a great illumination of the Women's Court of the Temple ending
with an express disclaimer of sun-worship. Passover approxi
mately synchronized with the vernal equinox. Pentecost alone
occupies an abnormal position, being fixed, when precise dates
were introduced, a month before midsummer. Whether it
supplanted an older midsummer festival it would be rash to
speculate.5 The hierarchy subordinated but could never suppress these
pagan associations, and relics of the nature religion survived in
practices known to us only from the Talmud.
(2) For the evolution of the lectionary system our main ancient
authority is the tractate Megillah in the Babylonian Talmud.
In modern times we owe most to some classical articles by
Dr. Biichler in the Jewish Quarterly Review?
We know from the scenes at Nazareth 7 and Pisidian Antioch 8
that lessons were read on the sabbath from both Law and
Prophets in New Testament times. The Torah readings were
already a long-established and widespread institution. Moses
from generations of old had his preachers in every city, being
read in the synagogues every sabbath.9 The custom began, it
seems, with short lessons on the Festivals and on four extraordi-
1 Narrated in 2 Maccabees.
2 According to the school of Shammai the number decreased from eight to
one ; Oesterley-Box, Religion and Worship of Syn.2, 404.
3 The author of 2 Mace. (i. 9) calls it ' the feast of tabernacles of the month
Chislev '.
4 De spec. Leg. ii. (de Septen.) 204 (24).
5 The curious omission of Pentecost from his festival-scheme by Ezekiel, who
deplores the Tamuz- and sun-worship of his time (viii. 14 ff.), is perhaps
significant. 6 Vols. v. (1893) 420 ff. and vi. (1894) 1 ff.
Luke iv. 16 ff. 8 Acts xiii. 15. 9 ib. xv. 21.

7

44 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
nary sabbaths. These primitive festival lessons, we may confidently
assert, were all taken from a single chapter, Lev. xxiii, containing
a catalogue of feasts with instructions as to ritual. The Mishna
names lessons from this chapter for three festivals 1 and the same
rule doubtless once applied to all. The practice, in Dr. Biichler's
opinion, had a controversial origin. It was the Palestinian
method of meeting the attacks of Samaritans or Sadducees, who
showed their animosity by unorthodox explanations of the por
tions of the Pentateuch relating to the festivals.2 Controversy
waxed warmest over an arithmetical problem. The Feast of Pente
cost or Weeks was peculiar in that it took its names not from its
nature, but from the interval separating it from the previous
feast or more precisely from the ceremony of waving the first
sheaf of the harvest. The Leviticus passage (xxiii. 15 f.), from
which the original lesson must have been taken, ran ' And ye
shall count unto you from the morrow of the sabbath, from the day
that ye brought the sheaf of the wave-offering . . . fifty days '.
But ' the morrow of the sabbath ', from which the reckoning
started, was ambiguous. The orthodox view was that ' the
sabbath ' meanfj the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread,
no matter what the day of the week ; the Sadducees identified it
with the ordinary s.abbath falling within the festal week. The
Alexandrian translators mark their orthodoxy by rendering ' on
the morrow of the first day ' (777 eiravpiov ttjs irpeoTTjs).3 It is not
surprising that this contentious lesson was abandoned. Our
oldest authority, in fact, names as the lesson not the Leviticus
passage, but the parallel one in Deut. xvi. 9ff., in which the time-
statement, though indefinite, lacked this particular ambiguity :
' Seven weeks shalt thou number unto thee : from the time thou
beginnest to put the sickle to the standing corn shalt thou begin
to number seven weeks.' Dr. Buchler is convinced that this
lesson supplanted an older one from Lev. xxiii ; the LXX, as
will appear, supplies the requisite missing evidence.
These festival lessons from Leviticus were the first stage. The
next was probably the introduction of weekly sabbath readings
1 Passover, New Year's Day, Tabernacles.
2 ' The people had to be taught . . . how to meet their attack ; this could
not be better achieved, or in a simpler manner, than by reading and explain
ing the disputed passages in the Pentateuch on the Festivals themselves which
had been made the subject of controversy,' J. Q. R. v. 424.
3 Lev. xxiii. 11, cf. 16. In the intervening occurrence of the phrase (v. 15)
they are content with a literal version, having already shown what meaning
they attach to 'sabbath '-

THE HAPHTARAH 45
according to a triennial cycle. The Pentateuch was divided into
some 150 sections and was read through once in three years. On
this system, which was in vogue in New Testament times and was
generally superseded by an annual cycle about A. d. 200, 1 need
not dwell.
The Haphtarah or prophetical lesson began with the reading
on the festivals of a few verses in illustration of the Torah lesson ;
its length was gradually extended. It is at this stage that the
LXX, now coming into existence, gains importance. The earliest
lessons seem to have been drawn from the Minor Prophets,
Ezekiel and Jeremiah.
The Haphtaroth for certain feasts and fasts present common
features which may throw light on the origin of the second lesson.
(1) The selected passage in several instances occupies a position
at the end of a book. The last chapters of Habakkuk, Zeehariah,
Hosea, Isaiah were all so employed. These final chapters, are
probably foreign to the books to which they are attached. (2)
Several lessons are poems, which again are suspected of being
interpolations in their prose context. We have the Psalm of
Habakkuk, taken, as we are told, from the Precentor's collection,
and the Song of Hannah ; while the nucleus of the lessons for the
Day of Atonement (from Jonah) and for the Feast of Tabernacles
(from 1 Kings viii) was probably in the one case the song of
Jonah in the whale's belly, in the other the Song of Solomon,
drawn, as the LXX tells us, from the Book of Jashar. I infer
that before the formal reception of the prophetical books into the
Canon, the custom had already grown up of chanting a canticle,
or reading some edifying passage, as a sequel to the Leviticus
lesson, and that this passage became the nucleus of the Haphtarah.
' It is probable ', wrote the present Dean of Westminster, ' that
the adoption of a lesson from "the Prophets " corresponded with
the period of their admission into the Canon ', which he dates
about 200 b.c1 If, as I venture to suggest, the way had already
been paved for a second lesson, ' there would be a tendency to
retain the familiar words and to regularize their use by engraft
ing them into the new prophetical collection. This would account
for the poetical form, the incongruity, and the final position of
these festival Haphtaroth. A final position would incidentally
assist the reader to find the place.
Another device for this purpose, to enable the reader to find
the second lesson — no easy task in a roll lacking chapters and
1 Canon of Old Testament, 116.

46 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
verses — was the catchword system.1 If we may judge by later
practice, each section of the Law was given a label, consisting of
the first or the first distinctive word or words or indicating the
general contents. This catchword was then written in the margin
over against the corresponding lesson in the prophetical roll.
Thus if the first lesson was labelled ' Jethro ', the reader of the
second would open his roll until his eye lit upon the marginal
note ' Jethro '.
For the Psalter the LXX titles already indicate the Psalms
appointed for daily use. For the festival Psalms, doubtless the
first to be used in worship, our fullest extant authority is the
tractate Sopherim, which, though dated as late as a. d. 800, pre
serves traditions of a far earlier age.2
Feast of Pentecost
I pass to Pentecost, the Feast of Wheat-Harvest and the Law
giving. Our oldest authority, the Megillah, names alternative
lessons: from the Law Deut. xvi. 9 ('Seven weeks') or Ex.
xix (the story of Sinai), from the Prophets ' Habakkuk ' or ' the
Chariot ' (Ez. i) ; adding that now that the festival lasts two days
all four lessons are used. This statement dates from the age of
the Tannaim, from the first or second century of our era, and
looks back to a remoter period of a one-day feast. When was
the second day added ? The author of the Book of Jubilees, writ
ing about 100 b.c. (Charles), in describing the institution of
Pentecost, lays such emphasis on its being confined to ' one day in
the year ' (this is repeated thrice) as to raise a suspicion that he
is combating an innovation of adding a second.3 The lessons are
therefore certainly as old as a.d. 100, possibly as early as 100 b.c.
The proper Psalm according to the tractate Sopherim is xxix
Afferte Domino, according to Eabbinical authorities lxviii Exurgat
Deus. ,
I am not directly concerned -with the lessons from the Torah.
The Sinai lesson was probably that for the second year in the
Triennial Cycle ; it is thought that the accident of its being read
at this season originated the tradition that the Law was given at
Pentecost. My observations will be confined to the Haphtarah
from Habakkuk and the two special Psalms.
1 The first lesson, being drawn either from a single chapter or, later, from
a continuous series, would present no difficulty.
2 Masechet Soferim, ed. J. Miiller (1878), p. 22.
3 Chap. vi. 17-22 (trans. Charles, 1902).

FEAST OF PENTECOST 47
The common theme which runs through all four passages from
Prophets and Psalter is a theophany in thunder-storm, a triumphal
march or ride of the deity across desert, sea or heavens amid
a general convulsion of nature. In Habakkuk : ' Thou didst
march through the land in indignation ', ' Thou didst ride upon
thy horses, thy chariots of salvation ', ' Thou didst tread the sea
with thine horses '. Ezekiel pictures the vehicle' of the deity
(the Merkabah) and the living creatures supporting it. In *. xxix,
under the image of the seven-fold voice of JHWH, we see the
thunder-storm sweeping across Palestine from Lebanon to Kadesh.
In *. lxviii : ' When thou marchedst through the desert ', ' Cast
up a highway for him that rideth through the deserts', 'The
chariots of God are twenty thousand ', ' Make melody to him that
rideth upon the heavens '. With these passages should be linked
one other, on which two of them are dependent, the blessing of
Moses in Deut. xxxiii (' The Loed came from Sinai ') ; and, though
authority is lacking, I suspect that it too was employed at Pente
cost, as a canticle. '
Whatever the origin of this primitive Saga of the divine
chariot-drive or theophany in thunder-storm,1 it is natural to infer
that it was the parallels with the terrors of Sinai which lent the
passages their appropriateness to Pentecost in the view of those
who selected them. On the other hand, the association of Pente
cost and the law-giving lacks early authority, being strangely
ignored by the Old Testament, Philo,2 and Josephus ; and I cannot
but suspect that the ' chariot-drive ' with the attendant convul
sion of nature has behind it some older pagan meaning, such as
the great journey from one end of heaven to the other of the
midsummer sun and the violent thunder-storms characteristic of
that season.
The Psalm of Habakkuk
I come now to the ' Prayer ' or Psalm of Habakkuk (Hab. iii),
the lyric ode appended to the prophecy, which, in the words of the
late Dr. Driver, ' for sublimity of poetic conception and splendour
of diction, ranks with the finest which Hebrew poetry has pro
duced'.3 Its beauty is unfortunately marred by some grave
obscurities. 1 ' Gewitter-Theophanie ' : Gunkel, Schopfung und Chaos, 106.
2 Philo, De spec. leg. ii. 22 (188 ff.) transfers the law-giving to the autumn
Feast of Trumpets. The trumpet denotes (1) that of Sinai (Ex. xix. 16) ; (2) the
derjXaros TToXf^os orav f) (picns iv iavrrj o-Tao-ido-rj.
3 Introd. to Lit. of 0. T.\ 317.

48 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
Broadly speaking, the nineteen verses fall into three portions :
(1) the opening prayer, (2) the theophany (vv. 3-15), (3) a beauti
ful passage about the harvest, which has proved or promises to
prove a failure, beginning 'For though the fig tree shall not
blossom And no fruit be in the vines ' and ending ' Yet will I
rejoice in JHWH, I will joy in the God of my salvation '} The
theophany is doubtless the oldest portion, which has been ex
panded for liturgical purposes. The passage about the harvest
has been penned, it seems, for a harvest festival. The words
look on beyond the wheat-harvest to the autumn ingathering of
vine and olive, and, if a bad year is anticipated, this may reflect
the Pentecostal custom of reciting the curses upon disobedience.2
The theophany, with reminiscences of Sinai, is equally apposite.
Pentecost commemorated both wheat-harvest and law-giving ; it
is this double commemoration alone which binds the two main
portions of the poem into a coherent whole.
This Pentecostal use is strangely overlooked by the commen
tators, and I approached the study of the poem quite unaware of
it. Its attraction for me was the peculiarity that two indepen
dent Greek versions have survived. On the one hand is what
I will call the normal text, represented by the bulk of the MSS.
and in the printed editions ; on the other a version which appears
in four MSS. only, two in Italy and two at Oxford.3 The normal
version is in the style of the Greek Minor Prophets as a whole ;
it is part and parcel of the larger work of the company of which
I spoke in my last lecture. The peculiar, or ' Oxford ', version is
to all appearance older, betraying the marks of high antiquity.
It is, I believe, a precious relic from the first stage in the Greek
version of the Prophets — the rendering of extracts appointed for
lectionary use on the festivals. In describing the versions as
independent, I should exclude the first two verses, where the
texts are practically identical. This, however, is due to confla
tion ; these verses are made up of ' doublets ' ; an early editor has
amalgamated two rival renderings of the exordium.
1 The Blessing of Moses (Deut. xxxiii) supplies the model for the beginning
(v. 3) and end (v. 19 ' He will make me to walk upon mine high places') of the
two main portions.
2 Buchler in J. Q. R. v. 440 quoting T. B. Meg. 31 b. Cf. Lev. xxvi. 16, 20
' Ye shall sow your seed in vain . . . your land shall not yield her increase,
neither shall the trees of the land yield their fruit '.
3 V (= 23) at Venice ; 86 (Rome, Barberini) ; 62 and 147 (Oxford). The
aberrant text is printed in E. Klostermann's Analecta zur Septuaginta, 50 ff.,
and in Field's Hexapla.

THE PSALM OF HABAKKUK 49
Obscured rubrics. The whole Psalm deserves careful study,
but I am primarily concerned with a few words only, in which
I discovered, as I believe, some obscured- rubrics. The use as
a Jewish canticle is patent ; the musical rubrics appear on the
surface. The lectionary rubrics are there too, but concealed.
The poem seems to be scored with the marks of ancient liturgi
cal use.
(1) I turn first to the colophon or docket at the close : in the
Hebrew ' For (or Belonging to the collection of) the Chief
Musician on my stringed instruments \1 The rubric, it must be
remembered, would follow the poem immediately without break.
The official ' company ' of translators had, therefore, some excuse
for failing to recognize its nature. They incorporated it into
the Psalm, and, interpreting the participle of nsj (' Director ' or
' Choir-master ') in its later sense of ' conquer ', produced the
rather ridiculous ending ' He sets me upon the high places to con
quer in his song ' (tov viKrjaai ev Trj cpSfj avrov).
The translator of the rival version has something quite different,
viz. the two words ra^iaas KareiravaaTo, ' He made haste and
stopped ' or, more probably, ' caused to cease ', ' gave rest '. Peace
after storm, after the terrors of the theophany, that was the
meaning he extracted from the Hebrew before him. The phrase
unquestionably represents a Hebrew original ; it is not, as has
been suggested,2 a scribe's idle comment on the brevity of the
Book of Habakkuk ! Doubtless this translator also erred through
misinterpreting a rubric. What rubric stood in his text ? For
it is impossible to extract his rendering from the note about the
Chief Musician. Now KaTeiravaaTo is the natural equivalent for
rvriB'n ' caused to cease ', the hiphil of nae> ' rest ' ; and this at once
suggests misreading of rQB>n ' the sabbath ' ; the two would be
indistinguishable in an unvocalized text. Again, the Hebrew
equivalent for Taylaas, 'quickly', is rnnip, and rrira with the
slightest of alterations becomes nino ' morrow of. I concluded
that the translator found in his Hebrew rotfri rnnD < morrow of the
sabbath '. This conjecture, I must repeat, was reached in ignor
ance alike of the Pentecostal associations of the Psalm and of the
phrase ' morrow of the sabbath ' and the storms which had raged
over it ; I had no preconceived ideas and failed at first to grasp
the sense of the restored rubric. I am not taking credit to my
self; I was lamentably ignorant. But my ignorance had its
2 By the late Dr. Sinker, Ps. of Hab. (Cambridge, 1890).
D

50 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
compensation in strongly confirming my belief in the conjecture
on which I had blindly stumbled, as its meaning dawned upon
me. ' Morrow of the sabbath ' ; in the light of the lectionary
history we at once recognize the phrase thrice repeated in con
nexion with Pentecost in Lev. xxiii (vv. 11, 15 f.) and found
nowhere else in the Old Testament. The note is a lectionary
' catchword ', indicating by its position ' Here endeth the second
lesson for Pentecost ', while its substance tells us what was the
first lesson. No catchword would so readily recall the Leviticus
lesson as this notoriously controversial phrase. The restoration
supplies the missing evidence that Pentecost, like other festivals,
drew its oldest Torah lesson from Lev. xxiii. It suggests, more
over, that the aberrant Greek version was made from an ancient
synagogue roll, designed for lectionary use.
(2) This discovery had to be followed up, and I was lured into
the fascinating study of the origins of Jewish worship. The clue
may have led me too far in the quest for catchwords. I found
none outside this Psalm, but I did discover, as I thought, two
similar notes in the body of it. The natural place for them is
at the point where the text is interrupted by the musical note
Selah. Dr. Briggs remarks on the tendency in the Psalter to
insert glosses before the Selahs.1
Our Psalm contains three Selahs. The first of these (in v. 3) is
represented in the Oxford version by two Greek words, /ieTa/3oXri ,
SiayjrdXfiaTps. Judging by *. ix. 17 where the Greek wSt) Sia-
¦^rdXfiaTos represents two Hebrew words, I infer that our trans
lator found another word in his original before Selah. Can it be
accidental that fieTafioXrj, which occurs only twice again in the
translated books of the LXX, in one passage (Is. xxx. 32) corre
sponds, rather strangely, to naun ('shaking') and that nauri is
the technical term for the ' wave-offering ' mentioned in the same
opening verse of the Leviticus lesson (xxiii. 15) : ' And ye shall
count unto you from the morrow of the sabbath from the day that
ye brought the sheaf of the wave-offering . . .'? I conjecture,
with diffidence, that this is another reference to |he first lesson.
A different catchword is used, and its position shows that the
Habakkuk lesson was once limited to two verses. A verse or
two, we know, was the usual extent of the oldest Haphtaroth.
(3) Again, just before the second Selah in v. 9 we find this
time in the Hebrew (as well as in both Greek versions) some in
congruous words interrupting the grand description of the theo-
1 Psalms (Internat. Crit. Comm.), vol. I. lxxxv ff.

THE PSALM OF HABAKKUK 51
phany. A row of three substantives without preposition, suffix,
adjective, or other adjunct, they stand in the M. T. shebtjoth—
mattoth— omee, ' Oaths— Eods (or Tribes)— Word ' ; and their
interpretation has taxed the ingenuity of the translators. Our
Eevisers, with a stretch of imagination, render ' The oaths to the
tribes were a sure word'. The normal Greek text, as acutely
restored by Nestle,1 had ' Seven sceptres saith the Loed '. The
Oxford version, most ingeniously of all, produces a rendering in
keeping with the preceding line (E.V. ' Thy bow was made quite
bare') viz. ' Thou hast glutted the shafts of its (or " his ") quiver '.
But ' shafts ' are not the same as ' rods ' and the rendering is
suspicious. I have no doubt whatever that the first word
Shebtjoth (' Oaths ') should be pointed Shabuoth (' Weeks'), and
little doubt that the LXX ' seyen ' should be prefixed to it and
we should read ' Seven weeks '.2 ' Seven weeks ' is the name
given in the Mishna to the Deuteronomy lesson which super
seded the lesson from Leviticus. The note is presumably Pales
tinian and may be expanded thus : ' Here, at v. 9, end'eth the
second lesson for Pentecost. Do not, like our brethren of Alex
andria, read either less or more. And the first lesson is " Seven
weeks " (Deut. xvi) ; it is not our custom to read from Leviticus.'
In the other nouns ' Eods ' and ' Word ', with a variant for the
second in the Oxford version which I read as : Jethro ', I saw
a row of catchwords to the Torah lessons for each year of the
triennial cycle. Jetheo meant the Sinai lesson (Ex. xviii-xx,
the modern name for it) ; Eods the lesson about Aaron's rod that
budded (Num. xvii. 16 Heb.) ; Woed or Peomise 3 the lesson
from Genesis xii, the first promise to Abraham. But the lessons
for the triennial cycle are only approximately known, and
I admit that these identifications are questionable.
The attendants of the Deity (v. 5). Turning from rubrics to the
poem itself, I can but touch on a single verse, in which Greek
mythology has left its mark on one (if not both) of the Greek
translations. Indeed, the original Hebrew of this old Jewish song
seems to contain a mythological and semi-pagan element.4 The
grim retinue of the Deity is thus described (v. 5) : ' Before his
1 Reading inra (for «r« to) cr/cJjnTpa, Aeyet Kvpios.
2 n'jnB> nyjw.
3 As suggested to me by Professor Burney ; cf. *. lxxvii. 9 (Heb.).
4 The Deity of the theophany is El, as distinct from JHWH of the opening
prayer, and in v. 4 is unmistakably compared to the sun. I suspect that, in
the oldest form of the poem, El was the sun-god Shemesh ; the same trans
formation has, according to Dr. Briggs, taken place in ¥. xix.
D2

52 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
face goeth Deber and Resheph goeth forth at his feet.' Deber is
Pestilence personified. Resheph is commonly interpreted either
as ' fire-bolt ' or as ' Fever ' ; but the word will call for further
remark. The picture recalls a similar procession in the Baby
lonian account of the Deluge, where Eamman the storm-god has
for one of his attendants the female counterpart of Deber,
Dibbarra, goddess of Pestilence.1 But it is the curious Greek
translations with which I am concerned.
First the Oxford version. ' Before his face shall go irrdoais ' (this,
as elsewhere in the LXX must mean ' Plague ') ' and at his feet
shall follow — to, fieyiara tcov irereivcov, the largest of the birds ' !
A grotesque picture, raising the difficult question of the meaning
which the Jews attached to the word Resheph. Besides this
passage it occurs five times in the Old Testament and once in the
Hebrew of Ecclesiasticus. Our E. V. consistently renders by,
' flame ' or ' fire-bolt ' ; but there is a widespread ancient ten
dency, not confined to the LXX, to explain it in terms of ornitho
logy, as meaning either a bird or a wing. In the Song of Moses
(Deut. xxxii. 24) we read of rebellious Jeshurun ' devoured by
Eesheph ', E. V. ' with burning heat ' (margin ' burning coals ') ;
but the LXX, along with Aquila and Onkelos, has ' devoured by
birds' (Ppcoaei opvemv). In Job v. 7 'the sparks' (the B' ne
Resheph, Resheph's brood) which ' fly upward ' become in the
Greek young vultures or eagles : veoaaol Se yviros (v. I. dercov) to.
v^rrjXd ireTovrai. In Cant. viii. 6 the fiery flashes of love appear
as wings (irepiirrepa). In the beautiful picture in Sir. xliii. 17 of
falling snow 'settling and loosely lying', the parallel clause sug
gests that the Hebr,ew writer himself refers to winged creatures :
' Like Resheph (Gr. coy irereivd KadiirTa/ieva) he sprinkleth his
snow | And as the lighting of the locust is the descent thereof.' 2
I know of no etymological justification for these renderings,
and can only suppose that the explanation is to be sought in the
attributes of the god Resheph. Resheph was a Phoenician solar
deity who figures in North Semitic Inscriptions in the company
of Shamash, the sun-god, and Rekabel, the rider- or chariot-god ;
in bilingual Cypriote inscriptions the name is translated Apollo.3
1 ' Ramman caused his thunder to resound ; | Nabu and Sharru marched at
the foot | . . . Dibbarra lets loose her mischievous forces ' (tr. Jastrow, Religion
of Bab. and Ass. 500).
2 The Greek Psalter alone interprets otherwise, rendering in lxxviii. 48 (Heb.)
by rw irvpi, in lxxvi. 4 by ra Kparrj (?read Kipara) ; in both passages Symmachus
writes olcuvoi.
3 Prof. G. A. Cooke, North Semitic Inscriptions, 55 ff. ; cf. Kraeling, Aram
and Israel (New York, 1918), 122.

THE PSALM OF HABAKKUK 53
In Palestine he gave his name to the coast-town of Arsuf, the
ancient ApoUonia (Apollo-town) ; and M. Clermont Ganneau in
a suggestive paper has shown reason for identifying him, with
metathesis of consonants, with the Greek Perseus.1 The myth of
Perseus and Andromeda is linked to the neighbourhood of Arsuf,
the town of Resheph.
To return to Habakkuk, what did this old translator mean by
ra jieyiaTa rcov ireTeivcov, which he refrains from naming? (There
was evidently felt to be something uncanny about Resheph ;
Jerome in this passage identifies him with the devil.) I am
tempted to find the answer in the wonderful ' flying creatures '
called ' phoenixes and chalkadri ', in ' size nine hundred measures '
which ' attend the chariot of the sun ', and are described in an
Alexandrian work dated early in the fb?st century A.D.2 It is,
however, perhaps unnecessary to go outside the Bible for the
explanation. The ' eagles ' of the Job translator may give the
clue and the birds in Habakkuk be identified with the living
creatures of Ezekiel's vision, of which it is said that 'they four
had also the face of an eagle '. If so, this is an instance of one
Pentecost lesson being interpreted in the light of the other.
The treatment of Deber and Resheph in the normal Greek text
is even more remarkable. Here we find an unmistakable, if veiled,
allusion to Greek mythology. In this version the Deity has" but
one attendant, Aoyos, ' the Word '. Deber, ' Pestilence ', has been
read as Dabar, ' Word ', a fitting forerunner to the Divine law
giver. Resheph becomes a mere attribute of Aoyos. The Hebrew
(y?F& *\fl) is taken to mean not ' Resheph at his feet ', that
is behind El, but ' Resheph to (or " on ") his feet ', that is the feet
of Aoyos. The oldest form of this peculiar rendering is preserved
in cod. A and runs :
rrpb irpoaSirov avTOv iropevaerai Aoyos Kai e^eXevaerai,
ev ireSiXois ol iroSes avrov.
1 Also— -mirabile dictu— with St. George, the patron saint of England;
Ganneau, Horns et St. Georges (Paris, 1877), cf. G. A. Smith, Hist. Geog. of
Holy Land, 129 n. 1, 163 f. That Resheph should represent both Perseus and
Apollo is not unreasonable ; on coins of Tarsus hero and god are brought into
the closest relation ; Ramsay, Cities of St. Paid, 152 ; Imhoof-Blumer in Journ.
of Hell. Studies, xviii. (1898) 171 ff. The hero must stand for some attribute of
the sun-god, possibly the wings of the solar disk.
2 Book of the Secrets of Enoch (ed. Charles), cap. xii ; cf. the description of
the phoenix which accompanies the sun and screens the earth from its rays in
the Greek Apocalypse of Baruch (ed. M. R. James in Texts and Studies, vol. V.,
1897, Apoc. of Baruch, § 6).

54 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
' His feet are in sandals ' is the translator's paraphrase of 'Resheph
on his feet ' ! We know of the fleet-foot ^loyoy from the Psalmist :
' He sendeth out his commandment upon earth ; his word runneth
very swiftly.' x But whence come the sandals ? Eemembering
the Greek connotations of Resheph, we cannot doubt that winged
sandals are intended, and we at once recall the irrrfva ireSiXa that
carried Perseus over sea and land ; and M. Ganneau has already
taught us that Eesheph and Perseus are one. The Aoyos shod in
the sandals of Perseus ! No wonder the Septuagint was suspect.
Only to an Alexandrian could have occurred so daring and
impious an association of things pagan and divine. I scrupled
to impute the blasphemy even to an Alexandrian until I found
confirmation for it. Hippolytus, in his Refutation of all heresies,
tells us (iv. 49) of certain heretics who gave an allegorical
explanation of the constellations as described in the Phenomena
of Aratus. They identified Cepheus with Adam, Cassiopeia with
Eve, Andromeda with the soul of Adam and Eve, Perseus with
the A6yos,the winged offspring of Zeus (tov JJepaea Abyov,irTepcoTbv
Jibs eyyovov), and so on.2 But the bare hint of such pagan ideas
in Scripture was intolerable. Fortunately an easy remedy was
to hand. By the omission of one letter ev ireSiXots became ev
ireSiois (so Irenaeus, in campis) ; this was again altered to eis ireSia
(so the B text), and this in the Lucianic recension was finally
' improved ' into els iraiSeiav ! The sandals are decently buried.
The Word now goes forth ' for instruction ' ; the commandment
is sent out upon earth. The adaptation to the Feast of the
Law-giving is complete.
In the next verse (6) the Oxford text, with the slightest of
emendations, comes to our aid. The E. V. runs :
He stood, and measured the earth ;
He beheld, and drove asunder the nations.
' Measured ', which editors wish to alter to ' shook ', should stand.
The error lies in the last verb. ' Drove asunder ' is the rendering
of an otherwise unattested hiphil of "V* ' spring up ', lit. ' made
to start up '. The true text is concealed in the aberrant Greek
text KaTavorjaas e^fjKaaev 3 rd eOvrj.
1 *. cxlvii. 15.
2 The rationalistic interpretation of Perseus which follows is interesting.
Tleprrevs de ia-rlv 6 (m-o-rrrepos "i£av, 6 irepaivav (Karepovs roiis ttoXovs Bib. piar\s Tf)s
yfjs Kal a-rpecpav tov koct pov.
3 So cod. 62 ; i^Uao-ev V, 86, 147.

THE PSALM OF HABAKKUK 55
'EggKaaev, ' made like ', is unmeaning ; but the alteration of one
letter at once gives us egrjraaev, ' inspected ', ' explored ', shows
that the Hebrew verb is not ">03 but im ' spy out ' and produces
a well-balanced parallelism : —
He stood, and measured (or ' surveyed ') the earth ;
He beheld, and explored the nations.
The Psalmist again yields a parallel, though the Hebrew verb is
different (?. xi. 4) :
JHWH is in his holy temple,1
JHWH, his throne is in heaven ;
His eyes behold,2 his eyelids try (LXX e£era<fei), the children
of men.
The advance of the Deity is stayed. Motionless overhead in the
zenith, with all-embracing glance He surveys the earth and its
inhabitants from one horizon to the other. It is the hush before
the storm.
• In verse 11 the same verb (IDy 'stood ') is used of sun and moon as in
v. 6 of the Deity. I will venture only two remarks on this corrupt passage.
(1) The text in none of its forms speaks of the withdrawal or obscuration
of the luminaries, which commentators read into it, but either of a stand
ing still or of an elevation. (2) The fine simile (in v. 10) of the tossing sea
' lifting up its hands on high ' (KfeO W£ Di"l) must be sacrificed. The
parallelism of clauses does not call for another clause answering to 'The
deep uttered his voice ', but does demand a predicate for {Stog*, which in
the Massoretic text stands without copula before rvv ; < Sun, moon stood
still in her lofty abode '. The predicate for the sun must be sought in the
previous line ; the Greek texts favour this construction. The most curious
of these is the Complutensian to vtyos Ttjs cpavraa-ias atrov (inxip for WT)
v-J/a>8r) 6 rjXiot, which I take to mean 'The sun was raised to the (full)
height of its appearance ', in other words stood at its highest station in
the heavens, was at the solstice. I do not suggest that this clumsy phrase
represents the original Hebrew, which was probably something like
Bfc>B> Up: "litf 'the sun lifted up its light' (DTI being a gloss) ; merely that
the translator perhaps saw an allusion to the solstice. It is curious that
the sole occurrence in the LXX of the technical term for the solstices is in
the chapter so closely linked with Pentecost (Deut. xxxiii. 14 r)\iov
TpoirS>v).
Psalm XXIX
I pass to the Pentecost Psalms. The LXX here does not
materially assist us and my remarks will be brief.
Psalm xxix, Afferte Domino, was sung on several festivals.
1 An echo of Hab. ii. 20 which opens the modern Pentecost lesBon.
2 +€ts rr)v OLKOvpivrjV cod. U.

56 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
Our main authority, Sopherim (xviii. 3), assigns it to Pentecost.1
The body of it depicts, under the figure of the seven-fold voice of
JHWH, the course of a thunder-storm from Lebanon to Kadesh.
It opens and closes with a picture of the celestial worshippers.2
It is this quasi-liturgical setting which is of interest.
In the opening verse the'LXXhas an additional line, familiarized
by its presence in our English Prayer Book : —
'EveyKare tco Kvpico, viol Oeov,
[eVey/care tS> Kvpico vlovs Kpia>v~\
eveyKare rco Kvpico 86£av Kal Ti/irjv.
The second line is obviously a duplicate of the first, due to
misreading of DvK ^.a (the anthropomorphism of which was
distasteful . to the translator) as Dy11*? 'J?. But the reading
was facilitated by the fact that rams were among the offerings
prescribed for each of the festivals on which the Psalm was used.
Eitual has affected text.
The conclusion runs : —
And in his palace all are saying ' Glory '.
This recalls Hab. ii. 20 (the opening verse of the modern Pente
cost lesson) : ' But JHWH is in his holy temple : be silent before
him all the earth '. Then follows : —
JHWH sat [enthroned or in judgement] at the Flood,
JHWH sitteth as King for ever;
JHWH will give strength unto his people,
JHWH will bless his people with peace.
What is meant by 'JHWH sat at the Flood'?3 The late Dr.
Cheyne, regarding this reference to Noah's flood as impossibly
abrupt, translates ' At the storm [namely that described in the
Psalm] Jehovah sat enthroned'. But Mabbul is the technical
term for the great deluge and is used of no other tempest.
Dr. Cheyne overlooked the Pentecostal use of the Psalm. We
have in fact evidence dating from a century before our era for
associating the Feast with the covenant to Noah. The author of
the Book of Jubilees carried back the institution of the festivals
1 The LXX title to the concluding ceremony of the Feast of Tabernacles
(it-oSiov o-Kr)vr)s). The closing verses were chanted on New Year's Day.
1 ' Gloria in excelsis is the beginning and pax in terris the end,' Delitzsch
observes. But parallels suggest that the ' palace ' of v. 9 is the heavenly, not
the earthly, temple.
3 The LXX has 'will colonize ((corouaa) the flood ', ' cause it to be inhabited '.
Cf. the Peshitta version ' will turn the flood ' (sc. into dry land).

PSALM XXIX 57
to patriarchal times. Pentecost, in his view, was the oldest of all.
Having been observed in heaven since the creation, it was first
kept on earth after the subsidence of the Flood. We read (vi. 15) :
' And he gave to Noah and his sons a sign that there should not
again be a flood on the earth. He set his bow in the cloud for
a sign of the eternal covenant that there should not again be
a flood on the earth to destroy it all the days of the earth. For
this reason it is ordained and written on the heavenly tables,
that they should celebrate the Feast of Weeks in this [the third]
month once a year, to renew the covenant every year.' The writer
clearly connected the Feast with the making of covenants ; the
covenant with Abraham is placed on the same occasion (xv. 1).
He seems to have read Shabuoth 'Weeks' as Shebuoth 'Oaths',
a confusion which we found also in Habakkuk. Thus the Deluge
was associated with Pentecost already in the second century b.c,
when the Psalter was being compiled, and the allusion to it in an
appendix to this Psalm is not so incongruous as it seems.
In the body of the Psalm we may note the curious LXX
rendering of v. 6. The Hebrew runs ' He maketh them (viz. the
cedars of Lebanon) to skip like a calf, Lebanon and Sirion like
a young wild-ox '. The LXX, reading the verb as PP!J ' crush '
instead of IR ' skip ', renders the first line Kal Xeirrvvei avrds, coy
tov fioaxov tov AlfSavov, ' he shall pulverize them, even Libanus
like the calf '. Probably the scene at Sinai is in the translator's
mind and the golden calf which Moses burnt and ground to
powder.1 PSALM LXVIII
On the great Whitsunday Psalm, Exurgat Deus, I have one
comment to make in confirmation of a theory of its Maccabaean
origin, and a few on details. We have rabbinical evidence for its
allocation to Pentecost, but our main authority, the tractate
Sopherim, ignores it. It was not the older of the Pentecost
Psalms ; it supplanted or supplemented Psalm xxix.
Some years ago, in a forcible article in the Journal of Theo
logical Studies, Dr. C. J. Ball propounded a theory as to the event
which this Psalm was written to commemorate.2 He urged that
it is all 'inspired by the rush and stir of contemporary life ' and
1 Ex. xxxii. 20 p^, Gr. KaTrpXeo-ev avrbv \emov.
2 J. T. S. xi. (1910) 415 ff. He had been anticipated by Wellhausen (Psalms,
1898, in Sacred Books of 0. and N. Test.).

58 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
that it alludes to events — in particular a bringing back of Jewish
exiles from the trans- Jordanic region — which cannot be identified
with any of the great deliverances in the early history. ' The
Lord said, I will bring back from Bashan ' (v. 22) ; with which
must be connected ' A mountain of God is the mountain" of
Bashan ' (15) and the mention of Salmon (14) in the same
locality.1 In Dr. Ball's opinion the allusion is to an expedition
of Judas Maccabaeus into the land of Gilead to rescue his
compatriots who were threatened with extermination by their
heathen neighbours.2 The author of 1 Maccabees, where the
story is found, proceeds to tell how the men of Ephron opposed
the rescue party on their return and were defeated with such
slaughter that the victors 'passed through the city over them
that were slain ', in literal accordance with the Psalmist's words
'that thou mayest dip thy foot in blood'. The victory was
solemnly celebrated at the capital : ' And they went up to Mount
Sion with gladness and joy, and offered whole burnt offerings,
because not so much as one of them was slain.' Dr. Ball suggests
that ' our Psalm or the first draft of it was the hymn composed
for the festal service on this occasion '.
The point I would urge is the support given to this theory by
a detail, strangely neglected by its author, in a second narrative
of the same event. The writer of 2 Maccabees (xii. 31 f.), after
describing the massacre at Ephron, goes oh to say that the victors
' went up to Jerusalem, the feast of weeks being close at hand.
But after the (feast) called Pentecost they marched in haste against
Gorgias '. The celebration of the victory coincided with Pentecost.
Dr. Ball, indeed, has a passing reference to that passage, but
merely as giving an indication of the season of the year, in
illustration of the ' bounteous rain ' of the Psalmist. It is charac
teristic of the general neglect of Jewish liturgiology that he
omitted to make further use of such strong corroborative evidence.
The Psalm commemorates a double event, both the victory and
the wheat-harvest. It is dominated by the two blending thoughts
of Jehovah as God of battles and as giver of the land.
A few details may be added. The verse about the rain (9) is
rendered in our Prayer Book version 'Thou, 0 God, sentest a gracious
rain . . . ', by the late Dr. Driver ' A bounteous rain thou didst
shed abroad, 0 God '. Literally the words run ' A rain of freewill
1 Salmon is probably the Jebel Hauran, the eastern frontier of Bashan and
Gilead, known to Ptolemy as 'Ao-akpavos. References here and below are to
the English verses. 2 1 Mace. v. 45 ff. (c. 164 b. a).

. PSALM LXVIII 59
offerings thou dost wave'.1 The Oxford Hebrew Lexicon finds
the verb ' wave ' ' not wholly suitable ' and Lagarde emends it.
The festival use explains both the allusion to the rain and the
technical terms employed in both Hebrew and Greek. 'Thou
shalt keep the feast of weeks . . . with a tribute of a freewill
offering of thine hand', we read in the Deuteronomy lesson
(xvi. 1 0). This offering is to be waved by the priest as a naun
or 'wave-offering' before the Lord, we read in the older
Leviticus lesson (xxiii. 20). The ceremony of waving, the
movement of the offering towards the altar and back, symbolized
its presentation to God and its return by Him to the priest. The
Psalmist acknowledges the gracious action of the Great High
Priest; His freewill offering of the rain alone makes possible
that of the worshipper. ' Of thine own have we given thee '.
The next verse (10), 'In thy goodness, 0 God, thou didst
prepare for the poor ', seems reminiscent of the injunction in the
Leviticus lesson (xxiii. 22) to leave the gleanings of the harvest
for the poor and the stranger. Again, the sequence of ideas in
the earlier verses (4 ff.), ' His name is J AH and exult ye before him.
(5) A father of the fatherless and a judge of the widows is God in
his holy habitation (or "¦place ", LXX toitco). (6) ' God maketh the
solitary to dwell in a house ; he bringeth out the prisoners into
prosperity', is the same as in the Deuteronomy lesson (xvi. 11 f.)
' And thou shalt rejoice before JHWH thy God, thou . . . and the
stranger and the fatherless and the widow that are in the midst
of thee, in the place which JHWH shall choose . . . ; and thou
shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in Egypt '.
Eeminiscences of Deut. xxxiii occur throughout the Psalm, but
here, as often, it is the conclusion which is most significant. In
the closing invitation to worship we have, as in Habakkuk, some
last echoes from the Blessing of Moses, but — and here lies the
interest — blending with them are phrases from *. xxix. It was
fitting that the older Pentecost Psalm should supply the model
for the finale of its rival which was coming to supplant it in the
festival ritual. The verses run : —
*. lxviii. 32 Sing unto God, 0 ye
kingdoms of the earth ; 0 make
melody unto the Lord.
33 To him that rideth upon the heaven This is from Deut. xxxiii. 26 ' Who
of heavens which are of old. rideth upon the heaven for, thy
help '.
Lo, he uttereth his voice, a mighty This is from *. xxix. 4 ' The voice
voice. of JHWH is with power '.
1 fpjfl 111213 DB'S, LXX ftpoxriv ckovo-iov acpopteU.

60 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP

*¦. Ixviii. 34 Ascribe ye strength unto
God. ,
His excellency is over Israel and
his strength is in the skies.

35 Terrible is God out of thy sanctua
ries.
The God of Israel, he giveth
strength and mightiness unto the
people. Blessed be God.

Again from *. xxix (1) 'Ascribe unto
JHWH glory and strength '.
Here we revert to Deut. xxxiii. 26
'Who rideth upon the heaven
. . . and in his excellency on the
skies \
And here to the final note of*, xxix.
(11), with Benedictus replacing
Benedicat. His model runs
' JHWH will give strength unto
his people ; JHWH will bless his
people with peace '.

• LECTURE II (continued)
THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
(2) The Feast of Tabeenacles
Feom the summer Feast of wheat-harvest I turn to the autumn
vintage celebration — the Feast of Sukkoth or ' Booths '. ' Taber
nacles ' is perhaps too grandiose a term. Of immemorial antiquity,
the feast is the earliest of which we have any historical record.
Doubtless a heritage from the Canaanites, the cultus bears clear
marks of its pagan origin. The Book of Judges ends with the
incident of the yearly feast at Shiloh when the young women
came out to dance in the vineyards.1 That of Samuel opens with
the annual pilgrimage of Elkanah to the sacrifice held at the
same' spot at the Tekuphah, the ' circuit ' or revolution of the
year.2 This can be no other than that called by our oldest
authorities, J and E, the Feast of Ingathering (Asiph) also falling
at the Tekuphah.3 The name Feast of Booths appears first in
Deuteronomy and is retained in the later documents.4 Sukkah
is Isaiah's word for 'a booth in a vineyard \5 and the feast probably
took this title from the custom of the grape-gatherers of migrating,
like the modern hop-pickers, to the scene of operations and
camping under improvised shelters made of branches. The exile
severed these agricultural associations, and the Priestly editors,
finding the old meaning of Sukkah too homely or heathenish,
interpreted it of the hut-dwellings during the wanderings in the
wilderness.6 Popular customs, however, refused to be suppressed,
and a place was still found for what may be called the ' harvest-
decorations ' of the feast.7 The practice, as we learn from the
Mishna, was for the worshippers to carry in one hand fasces or
thyrsi, known as lulabs, consisting of branches of palm, myrtle,
and willow, while the other hand bore a citron. The booths,
made of branches of the same trees, were also retained. Nehemiah
records a great revival of the feast which had fallen into abeyance.8
1 Judges xxi. 19 ff. 2 1 Sam. i. 3, 20 f. 3 Ex. xxxiv. 22.
4 Deut. xvi. 16, xxxi. 10 ; P and H. in Lev. xxiii.
0 Is. i. 8. 6 Lev. xxiii. 42 f.
7 ib. xxiii. 40 H. 8 Neh. viii. 14 ff.

62 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
One later celebration should be mentioned, the occasion when
the officiating royal high-priest, Alexander Jannaeus, was pelted
with the citrons for deviating from the established ritual at the
water-libation ; * the incident is a noteworthy illustration of the
tenacity of time-honoured customs in the face of priestly opposi
tion. In New Testament times the feast, lasting seven days,
with a closing and distinct ceremony on the eighth, was established
as the great holiday season of the year. Jerusalem swarmed with
pilgrims whose booths occupied every available corner of the city.
In its origin Sukkoth was the final harvest festival, marking
the winding up of the agricultural year. But it was also the
festival of the autumnal equinox. It was held, we are told, at the
Tekuphah. Tekuphah 2 in Eabbinical Hebrew, and how much
earlier we do not know, was the technical term for solstice and
equinox. There were four Tekuphoth, of which that of the
month Tishri was the third. Philo expressly states that the
feast synchronized with the equinox.3 The synchronism could
only be approximate, as the Priestly editors employed the lunar
month for their calculation. The solar reckoning, the Tekuphah
of our oldest documents, seems likely to have been the more
primitive. For the key-notes of the festival we must look to the ritual ; not
to the sacrificial enactments of the Priestly Code, but to the
popular ceremonies, which bring before us the two ideas which,
we shall find, dominate the services : watee and light. These
ceremonies are the Water-drawing and the Illumination of the
women's court of the Temple. Semi-pagan practices such as
these are long-lived and doubtless reflect primaeval practice.
The vivid accounts which have survived clearly come from an
eye-witness, though the written record dates from after the year
a.d. 70, which put an end once for all to the ceremonies described.
Of the water-drawing we are told i that a golden pitcher holding
three logs (or pints) was filled with water from Siloam and borne
in procession through the Water-gate, with blowing of trumpets
and the singing of Isaiah's words ' Therefore with joy shall ye
draw water out of the wells of salvation',5 up to the Temple.
There, with a libation of wine, it was poured by the priest, in the
1 Jos. Ant. xiii. 13. 5 (372).
2 Apparently connected with the verb nakaph, ' go around ', which is used of
the annual 'round' of the feasts in Is. xxix. 1.
3 Katpbv 'ixovo~a T°v pdonmpivrjs io-rjpepias De spec. leg. ii. (de Septen.) 204 (24).
4 T. B. Sukkah, iv. 9. B Is. xii. 3.

THE FEAST OF TABEENACLES 63
sight of all, into two pipes beside the altar; through these it
passed underground to the valley of the Kidron. The ceremony
was repeated each day of the feast.
We are not left to conjecture as to its meaning. In its far-off
origin it symbolized the rainfall of the coming year ; it was, it
seems, a species of rain-charm. The Jews themselves virtually
so explained it, though more spiritual meanings were found.
'Offer ye waters before me on the Feast of Sukkoth that the
rains of the year may be blessed to you ', so the Talmud.1 The
festivals looked forwards as well as back; thanksgivings for
blessings received mingled with prayers for future mercies. At
each festival the destiny of the succeeding season was fixed.
At Passover judgement was passed on the wheat-harvest, at
Pentecost on the fruit-trees, at Tabernacles on the water.2
Prayers for rain began at this season.3 A striking picture of the
struggle for water, in which the city has been engaged throughout
its history, has been drawn by Sir George Adam Smith.* The
pool itself, from which the procession started, commemorated
a notable achievement in this age-long contest with nature, viz.
the construction by Hezekiah of the conduit by which the waters
of the only spring in the neighbourhood were diverted within
the walls. ' He made the pool and the conduit and brought
water into the city.'5 The ceremony of the water-drawing
prefigured a time when the need for this extraneous supply
would cease, and waters would issue from beneath the very
threshold of the Temple, a river to make glad the city of God.
Of the other ceremony, the all-night illumination of the women's
court of the Temple and the accompanying torch- dance, we have
an unusually vivid description.6 It was regarded as an integral
part of the day-time proceedings, being known as the ' House '
(that is the indoor portion) ' of the water-drawing '. We read of
the great candelabra with wicks made of cast-off priestly vestments
and with four ladders to each on which stood young priests
replenishing the oil ; ' and there was not a court in Jerusalem
that was not lit up by the light of the house of water-drawing.'
But the most significant part of the programme was the procession
1 T. B. Rosh hash., 16 a. 2 ib. i. 2. s T. B. Taanith,i. 1.
* Jerusalem, i. 122. He remarks how the ' innumerable cisterns, public and
private, prove very distinctly that the people of Jerusalem have always
depended for their water, in the main, upon the collection and storage of the
rains and the surface percolations '-
5 2 Kings xx. 20. 6 T. B. Sukkah, v. 2-4.

64 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
of priests, at the close just before dawn. ' At the upper gate stood
two priests with trumpets in their hands. When the cock crew
they blew a blast, a long note and a blast. This they repeated
on reaching the tenth step and again on entering the court.
And so they proceeded sounding the trumpets until they reached
the east gate. At the east gate they turned their faces from east
to west and said : " Our fathers who were in this place turned
their backs on the Temple and their faces towards the east and
worshipped the sun towards the east ; but we, our eyes to JAH ".
E. Jehuda says: They repeated again and again, "We belong
to JAH and raise our eyes to JAH ".'
So with a solemn, public disclaimer of sun-worship the ceremony
ended at cock-crow. Surely this is very significant and justifies
the belief that the Hlumination is another relic of nature religion.
The disclaimer is based On Ezekiel's vision of the sun-worshippers
in the Temple,1 which might account for the place at which it
was pronounced. But why at this season, at this particular hour
of cock-crow, heralding the rising sun at the equinox? The
whole picture is that of a pagan carnival thinly veiled under
priestly influences.2 The illuminations, I have ho doubt, com
memorate the autumnal equinox ; they mark the beginning of
the descent to the long winter nights, and were in their origin
a charm or prophylactic against the encroaching powers of
darkness. First the rain-charm, then the sun-charm. We seem to be
carried back to a primitive Canaanitish ' Feast of the sun and the
rain ', the two factors, under God, in the ripening of the harvest.
The dominant ideas of the nature religion were, of course,
spiritualized, notably by the author of the 42nd Psalm ; of the
wealth of new meaning pnt into them by one Visitor to the feast
I shall have occasion to speak. Zechaeiah XIV
I turn to the prophetical lessons and Psalms. Of the former
our oldest authority 3 names two, Zeehariah xiv and 1 Kings viii
(the dedication of Solomon's temple). I will take first the
1 Ez. viii. 16.
2 We read of feats of jugglery. ' Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel . . . would take
eight torches in his hands and throw them into the air and catch, and one
would not touch another.'
3 T. B. Meg. 31 a.

ZECHAEIAH XIV 65
Zeehariah lesson, then the appointed Psalms, and finally the
alternative Haphtarah.
As the Haphtarah for Pentecost was the last chapter of
Habakkuk, so that for Tabernacles was the last of ' Zeehariah '.
Both chapters are foreign to their contexts. The last six chapters
of Zeehariah are notoriously an appendix to the prophecy and
the last of all may once have had an independent existence.1
The LXX here affords little assistance, but, excepting two verses,
the text presents no serious difficulty. The points I would
emphasize are two: (1) the prominence given not only to the
festival, which is expressly named, but to its dominant motifs ;
(2) the close connexion with the festival Psalm, for which the
lesson provides the model.
Beside the joy of the water-bearing the autumn festival had
other, more solemn, associations. The Jews connected the final
harvest of the year with a harvest in the future — an ingathering
of the nations to Judaism in the days of Messiah. This ingathering
was, however, to be preceded by a combined assault of the nations,
' Gog and Magog ' as they are called, upon the chosen people.
It is this world-battle and its sequel which the lesson depicts.
We are told of the mustering of the armies against Jerusalem,
the capture and looting of the city, and the deportation of half
the inhabitants. Then and not till then does JHWH intervene,
descending on the Mount of Olives, which at the touch of His
feet is rent by an earthquake, to do battle with the enemies of
Zion. The writer passes to the blessings of the millennium thus
ushered in : continuous daylight (according to the restored text),
a perennial issue of living waters flowing down on either side of
Jerusalem, the city renovated and enlarged. He then reverts to
the fate of the belligerent nations, gloating over the horrible
plague wherewith JHWH will smite them and their beasts of
burden. A remnant, however, will embrace Judaism. The verse
(16) which links the lesson both to the festival and, as will be
shown, to the festival Psalm must be quoted. ' And it shall come
to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came
against Jerusalem shall go up from year to year to worship the
King, the Loed of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.'
Then mark the penalty for disobedience (17): 'And it shall be,
that whoso of (all) the families of the earth goeth not up unto
Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, upon them
1 It deals at greater length with the topics of chap, xii, of which it is in
a sense a ' doublet '. E

66 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
there shall be no rain.' Eefusing to keep the harvest-festival
they shall have no harvest; the rain unprayed for shall be
withheld. For rainless Egypt a special punishment, not clearly
defined, is reserved.1 The chapter ends with prosaic ceremonial
details. So vast will be the concourse of worshippers that every
pot in Jerusalem will be requisitioned for sacrificial use.
Perpetual daylight and an unfailing water-supply; those,
with the absence of winter, are the outstanding blessings of the
millennium. The verses (6 f.) about daylight have unfortunately
reached us in a corrupt form and appear to state the very
opposite, viz. that there will be a weird day of gloom (neither
day nor night) with light at evening time.2 I follow the
interpretation of Professor Mitchell in the International Critical
Commentary : ' There shall be no more cold and frost (the " cold
and frost" we owe to the LXX); it shall be one day (that is,
one continuous day), not day and night (alternating) ', to which,
to make his meaning unmistakable, the writer adds, 'Yea, at
eventide there shall be light'. This interpretation has the
support of Jerome, whose commentary is valuable from the
knowledge shown of Jewish exegesis. ' Dies ', such is his para
phrase, ' dies in qua non succedent lux et tenebrae, sed erit
lumen perpetuum.' The cessation of winter is twice adumbrated
in the LXX, in the allusion to cold and frost already mentioned
and in the next verse (8), where in the phrase ' in summer and
winter shall it be', the translators substitute ' spring ' for 'winter',
and Jerome infers the abolition of the latter.3
An unfailing water-supply and perpetual daylight inevitably
recall the Water-drawing and the Illumination. Nor can we fail
to note with reverence that it is just these two ideas — -Water
and Light — which the greatest Visitor to the feast, fastens on
and applies to Himself. ' Now on the last day,' we read in the
fourth Gospel, 'the great (day) of the feast (i.e. the seventh day,
known as the Great Hosanna), Jesus stood and cried saying,
If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that
believeth on me, as the scripture said, out of his belly shall flow
rivers of living water.' 4 ' Again therefore Jesus spake unto
1 The Targum supplies the obvious penalty : ' The Nile shall not rise for
them '.
2 An interpretation which led to the use of the passage on Good Friday in
early Christian lectionaries.
3 ' Hoc dicamus quod illo tempore non sit hiems sed ver aestasque perpetua.'
4 John vii. 37 f.

ZECHAEIAH XIV 67
them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me
shall not walk in the darkness, but shall have the light of life.' J
That these profound sayings were prompted by the festival cultus
has often been suggested. That the first of them is probably
an allusion to the Zeehariah lesson has been acutely conjectured
by Dr. Israel Abrahams.2 'As the scripture said, out of his
belly shall flow rivers of living water.' We search the Scriptures
in vain for the actual words, but in all probability they are to
be explained as a paraphrase of the Zeehariah passage ' Living
waters shall go out from Jerusalem '(v. 8), for the synagogue reader
might substitute for the name of the Holy City the pseudonym
by which it was affectionately known, the tabiir or 'navel'.
Like Delphi to the Greek, so Jerusalem to the Jew was the
ojicpaXos or centre of the universe.3

Psalm LXXVI
From the special lesson I turn to the special Psalm (lxxvi
1 In . Judah is God known ') named by our main authority,
the treatise Sopherim ; 4 and I would propose to study it as the
Jewish worshipper read it as a companion to the lesson. It falls
symmetrically into four stanzas of three verses each, the first
and third stanzas terminating with Selah. The final stanza, in
Dr. Briggs' opinion, is a later addition, one of those semi-
liturgical appendices by which a Psalm is sometimes accommo
dated to a particular occasion. The gloss is for us the most
interesting portion.
The scene is, as in the lesson, Jerusalem a battle-field. The
Psalm commemorates some signal intervention of God to deliver
the Holy City from an enemy at the gate. 'At Salem is his
tabernacle . . . there brake he the lightnings of the bow, the
shield, the sword, and the battle.' The doughty foes sleep their
1 John viii. 12.
2 Studies in Pharisaism, i. 11. For other explanations, see the Expositor, vol.
xx (1920), p. 385 (Prof. Burney); ib. p. 196 (Dr. Rendel Harris).
3 The idea was based inter alia on Ez. xxxviii. 12 (a chapter closely allied to
Zech. xiv) where Gog purposes to turn his hand against the people that dwell
in the navel of the earth. Cf. the central position of Jerusalem in mediaeval
maps. 1 xix. 2.
E 2

68 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
last sleep ; the would-be spoilers are spoiled and paralysed ;
chariot and horses share their riders' fate. The Psalmist sees
in the stricken field the hand of God alone. The fame of the
deliverance has carried His name far and wide in Israel.
Earely is it possible in the Psalter to identify with certainty
allusions to historic events later than the occupation of Canaan.
Here there is a 'general consensus of opinion, ancient and modern,
that the scene portrayed is the destruction of Sennacherib's
army. This interpretation goes back to the Greek translators
who appended to the title the words 'touching the Assyrian'.
I do not question that verdict ; the writer undoubtedly had that
occasion in mind. But the Psalm must also be read, in the
light of the lesson, of the coming Armageddon. We trace in
the text a tendency to project into the future the details of the
historic deliverance under Hezekiah. The destruction of Sen
nacherib's army served as the model for the picture of the final
overthrow of Gog and Magog. The same metaphor is used of
Gog in Ezekiel, ' I will turn thee about and put hooks into thy
jaws',1 as of Sennacherib in Kings, 'I will put my hook in thy
nose and my bridle in thy lips, and I will turn thee back by the
way by which thou earnest '.2 The historian's veiled allusion to
the fate of the Assyrian host ' when the Angel of Death spread
his wings on the blast ' was materialized into the loathsome
plague described in ' Zeehariah '. In a remarkable, perhaps post-
exilic, passage attributed to Isaiah, the song celebrating the
Assyrian's downfall is likened to the chant used on the inaugural
night of a feast. Picturing the exultation over the deliverance,
the prophet writes : ' A song shall there be for you as in the night
when a feast is consecrated (or " opened ") and joy of heart like
his who marches with a flute to come into the mount of
JHWH ... For through the voice of JHWH shall Asshur be
panic-stricken'.3 The Feast, as usual when undefined, must
mean the Feast of Tabernacles ; and we have allusions here
both to the water-bearing procession to the Temple mount to
the accompaniment of flute-playing,4 and to the midnight
inaugural ceremony. It seems that even at the comparatively
early date when these words were written the festival opened
1 Ez. xxxviii. 4.
2 2 Kings xix. 28 = Is. xxxvii. 29.
8 Is. xxx. 29, 31.
4 ' The pipes at the time of water-drawing were played sometimes on five
days, sometimes on six ', says the Mishnah (T. B. Sukkah, v. 1).

PSALM LXXVI 69
with nocturnal rites, at which a song was chanted reminiscent
of the signal deliverance from Assyria.
Turning to details, the title tells us of a long history; the
Psalm had figured in many anthologies before being incorporated
in our Psalter. It is interesting to note that in the 'middle
Greek period' (c. 250 b.c.) it was set to stringed instruments
and stood in the collection of the Chief Musician, where it had
for companion with the same setting the Pentecostal Psalm of
Habakkuk. Verse 2 runs in the E. V. 'In Salem also is his tabernacle
and his dwelling in Zion '. The Hebrew for ' his tabernacle ' is
i3D} which is rather ' his covert ' or ' lair ' ; and as the second
noun may bear a similar meaning,1 the late Dr. Driver renders
'In Salem also is his covert and his lair in Zion'. , JHWH
is likened to the lion of Judah. Since this metaphor seems to
be resumed in v. 4 (' mountains of prey ') and finds a parallel
in Isaiah's allusion to Sennacherib,2 it is probable that it stood
in the original Psalm. On the other hand, Sukkoh ' his covert '
is hardly distinguishable from Sukkah ' a booth ' or Sukkatho
' his booth '. Hence other modern commentators render ' his
pavilion' (Kirkpatrick) or 'his bower' (Cheyne), and the
ancients (Greek, Syriac, and Midrash) did likewise. The word
'tabernacle' of our English Bible happily recalls the thought
which could not fail to occur to every pilgrim at the Feast of
Booths. JHWH is present with His worshippers, Himself ob
serving the feast in the immemorial fashion ; He too has His
Sukkah in the Holy City.3 The Greek translator here writes
6 tottos avTov, a euphemism for ' His booth ' ; in the other festival
Psalm (xlii. 4, Gr. xii. 5) he uses the two words ev tottco aKrjvrjs.
The Sukkah or Booth of God is a remarkable phrase only found
in these two Psalms and in one other which there is reason
to connect with this feast (xxvii. 5) ; it is not to be confused
with his Ohel or Tent, which is much more-frequent.4
Verse 3 ' There shattered he the Reshephs (the winged missiles)
of the bow'. If Sennacherib's host perished at some distance
1 The two occur in juxtaposition in Job xxxviii. 40 (of young lions).
2 Is. xxxi. 4.
3 The Midrash on the passage runs : ' R. Berechia has said, In the beginning
of the creation of the world the Holy One, blessed be He, made Himself a
booth in Jerusalem, in which, if one may so speak, He prayed.' The Hebrews did
not shrink from these bold anthropomorphisms.
4 The distinction is lost in the English and, in part, in the Greek ; these
versions employ ' tabernacle ' and cneijwj indiscriminately.

70 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
from the city, Zion was invariably the scene of the final world-
battle. The B text of the LXX adds an explicit reference to
the crushing of the last enemies, exet avvKXdaei to. Kepara ;
a clear case of history merging»into apocalypse.
The second stanza opens with the verse (4) quaintly mis-
rendered in our Prayer Book, 'Thou art of more honour and
might than the hills of the robbers '. The Hebrew has 'Illumined
(or "radiant" "»NJ) art thou, majestic, from the mountains
of Tereph' (usually rendered 'prey'). The Greek cpcorigeis ati
davfiaaTcos dirb opecov alcovicov.
'Eadiant', 'light-bringing'. We have one of the motifs of
the festival.1 It seems almost wanton to emend so apposite and
symbolical a word. Yet it has been proposed 2 to transpose the
radicals and for iiw to read N"P3 'terrible', because that word
opens the third stanza and occurs at the close of the fourth.
The suggestion, it is true, has the support of Theodotion (cpofiepos),
and the parallelism is in its favour; the Psalm is unusually
symmetrical. If the Psalmist wrote ' terrible ', ' illumined ' or
1 light-bringing ' is part of the accommodation to the feast which
seems to have affected the whole Psalm from the first.
' Majestic ' ; Heb. "VR?, Gr. 6avp.aaTcos. The Hebrew word had
special associations with the feast. The Greek translator found
it along with a mention of the Sukkah in the other special Psalm.3
For ' mountains of Tereph' (or 'prey') the Greek has 'eternal
mountains '. Dr. Briggs acutely accounts for the divergence
by assuming an original reading IV which might bear either
sense ' eternity ' or ' prey '. We cannot determine what the
Psalmist wrote; 'mountains of prey', carrying on the lion
metaphor of v. 2, is likely to be right. But we may try to put
ourselves in the place of the worshipper at the feast, and I
cannot but think that he would, in the light of the lesson,
read another meaning into the verse. He would identify the
mountains from which JHWH radiates forth with the Mount
of Olives on which ' his feet shall stand in that day '.4 He would
1 Augustine, with the Latin version of the LXX before him, and interpreting
it in a Christian sense, seems to see the sun of righteousness rising over the
eastern mountains. ' The great mountains are the first to receive thy light,
and from thy light which the mountains receive the earth also is clad. But
the great recipient mountains are the Apostles, who received as it were the
first beginnings (primordid) of the orient light.'
2 So Cheyne and, doubtfully, Driver.
3 xlii (xii). 5 iv totto) o-Krpir\s 6avpao-rr]S. Cf. also Is. xxxiii. 20 f.
* Zech. xiv. 4.

PSALM LXXVI 71
know the word Tereph (from the root meaning ' pluck ' or ' tear ')
in its other sense of a fresh pluckt leaf, and associate it with
the cognate adjective Tarciph, which, in its only occurrence in
Scripture, denotes a fresh pluckt olive leaf.1 'Mountains of
plucking' would for him connote 'leafy mountains' or more
specifically ' mountains of olive leaves '. It would be a readily
intelligible synonym for the mount from which he had gathered
olive branches for his thyrsus and his booth. One translator
in fact interpreted the phrase on these lines ; Theodotion writes
' from the fruitful mountains ' (dirb opeeov Kapirificov).
The next two verses (5 f.) portray the spoiler spoiled and
chariot and horse ' fallen into a dead sleep '. Both pictures find
parallels in the Zeehariah lesson and its prototype, Ezekiel's
vision of Gog.2 The lesson expressly mentions the beasts as
sharing their riders' fate.
The third stanza (the rising of God to judgement to save the
afflicted of the earth) calls for no remark. With it, in Dr. Briggs'
opinion, ended the original Psalm.
The parallels between Psalm and Lesson, so far cited, may by
themselves appear inconclusive. To clinch the connexion, to
establish that the former was in fact interpreted in the light
of the latter, we turn to the added stanza in its Greek dress.
Verse 10 runs in the Prayer Book version : —
The fierceness of man shall turn to thy praise :
and the fierceness of them [an ancient misprint for ' other ']
shalt thou refrain.
The Hebrew, in Dr. Driver's version, runs : —
For the wrath of man shall give thanks unto thee ;
with the residue of wraths thou wilt gird thyself '(">ann).
The words have proved a crux to interpreters; 'the whole
verse is dark ', wrote Dr. Cheyne. But if we turn to the Greek
we find :— oti ev6v/iiov dvOpdoirov ego/ioXoyrjaeTai aoi,
Kal evKaTdXifi/Jia evdvfiiov eoprdaei aoi.
'The residue of brooding wrath shall keep feast to thee.' The
translators, instead of Taw read the word, almost indistinguish
able from it in the unvocalized text, *\$Q.Z The hag intended
must be the pre-eminent Feast of Tabernacles, and we at once
recall the Zeehariah lesson: 'And it shall come to pass, that
every one that is left of all the nations which came against
i Q.en_ viii. n. 2 Zech. xiv. 14 f. ; Ez. xxxix. 9ff.
3 Or (less probably) ^ Jhn.

72 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
Jerusalem shall go up from year to year to worship . . . and
to keep the feast of tabernacles.'1 Here surely we have the
key to the stanza appended by some early worshipper. ' The
residue of wraths (that is, of the wrathful nations) shall keep
the Feast of Tabernacles in Thy honour.' In the Haphtarah
from Habakkuk we found lectionary references to the first lesson ;
here we have an allusion to the second lesson embedded in the
Psalm. The verse exemplifies the supreme value, on occasions, both
of the Greek version and of the liturgical factor in Biblical
interpretation. An otherwise obscure allusion finds a simple
explanation in the arrangements of the Jewish Church calendar.
We may infer that before the date of the LXX Psalter, at least
as early as 100 b.c, Zeehariah xiv and Psalm lxxvi were
companion pieces, used at one and the same service. If the
connexion were forgotten or severed (and a substitute for the
Psalm was found ere long) the Hebrew text represented by the
LXX would cease to be intelligible and invite emendation.
The remainder of the stanza summons Israel to pay its vows
and the neighbouring nations to bring presents to the Fearful
One (the Arch-Fear) who lops off the spirit of princes and is
terrible to the kings of the earth. The vows and presents may
have their festal connexions ; 2 but the interesting word here
is I?? 'lop off". It is the technical term for gathering grape
clusters and forms a final link with the festival of the Vintage
p73).3 Psalms XLII-XLIII
The tractate Sopherim names no rival to Psalm lxxvi. In the
modern service, usually conservative, its place has been taken
by a pair of Psalms, originally one, xlii and xliii. There are
many reasons for regarding this alternative as based on ancient,
if not quite the most ancient, practice, (i) The use is common
to the ritual of the two main divisions of orthodox Jews,
Ashkenazim and Sephardim.4 The divergence of these groups
1 Zech. xiv. 16.
2 The vows possibly allude to the private offerings of certain first-fruits which
began at this feast and continued to the next (T. B. Bikkurim, i. 6). The presents
recall the sequel to the Chronicler's story of Sennacherib (2 Chron. xxxii. 22 f.).
3 Cf. Judges ix. 27 ; and for the Divine Husbandman, John xv. 1 f.
* Oesterley, Psalms in Jewish Church, 165, 167. 'The Ashkenazim assign xlii
to the first, xliii to the second, day of the feast ; the Sephardim employ both
at all services.

PSALMS XLII— XLIII 73
takes us far back and a community of practice is proof of
antiquity, (ii) The use of the pair of Psalms carries us yet
further back. The original unity of the pair is shown by the
absence of a title for xliii and the refrain which they have in
common, ' Why art thou so. cast down, 0 my soul ? ' The modern
practice seems to be older than the separation ; yet the Psalm
is already divided in the LXX. (iii) Lastly, the festival use
has left its impress on the Greek, the Midrash, and apparently
even the original text.
The Psalm is a moving lament of a priest or Levite, looking
back from his banishment in the upper Jordan region towards
the Holy City, with a passionate longing for its services, and
a lively recollection of its festal processions at which in happier
days he took a leader's part. The autumn festival is specially in
mind. He touches all the key-notes.
The Psalmist gives expression in their most spiritual form
to the thoughts associated with the water rbearing. 'Like as
the hart desireth the water-brooks, so longeth my soul after
thee, 0 God. My soul is athirst for God, for the living God :
when shall I come and see the face of God?' He uses the
recognized phrase for visits to the Temple at the pilgrim
festivals. ' My tears have been my food day and night ' ; the
sustenance of the living waters being denied him.
Then in v. 4 (5) comes the thought of the processions. The
Hebrew in the Eevisers' rendering runs : ' These things I re
member, and pour out my soul within me, | How I went with
the throng and led them to the house of God, | With the voice
of joy and praise, a multitude keeping holy day.' The Greek
translators read otherwise and in one particular perhaps rightly,
viz. in their mention of the Sukkah, God's Booth or Tabernacle.
For ' with the throng ' (^]?1, a word without Biblical parallel)
they read ^pa or 'i?0| ' in a booth ' ; also, less happily, for
D?!^ ' I used to lead them in a solemn procession ', rTTW
' majestic ', while the frequentative imperfect becomes a future ;
the whole phrase thus running 'For I shall pass along in
[or " to "] the place of a marvellous tabernacle unto the house
of God '-1 i
1 The Midrash (tr. Wiinsche) understands the booth to be a portable con
veyance used by the pilgrims. ' They went up to the feasts ', writes this early
commentator, ' to see thy faee in litters (or " sedan-chairs ", o-Karao-TJjs) made in
the manner of a booth.' This same commentator finds another very curious
reference to the water-bearing in this verse. On the phrase 53in |i»n he

74 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
At v. 7 with the sense of his loss the waters for which he
pines take a more formidable shape. ' Deep calleth unto deep *
at the sound of thy waterspouts1.' 2 In place of ' the waters of
Shiloah that go softly', from whose pool he once led the pro
cession, he sees only roaring cataracts threatening to engulf him.
' All thy breakers and billows have gone over me.' The words,
both in Hebrew and Greek, recur verbatim in the Prayer of
Jonah, the lesson for the Day of Atonement.3 The Psalmist can
echo the words of the Fast-day and wear the sackcloth (or, as
the Greek has it, the heavy countenance) befitting it ; the joy
of the succeeding festival is not for him.
Such are the echoes of the daylight ceremony. Of the nightly
illuminations we may perhaps find two traces : ' And in the
night his song shall be with me ' (xlii. 8), and again ' 0 send
out thy light and thy truth ; let them lead me : let them bring
me unto thy holy mount, and to thy dwelling-places' (xliii. 3).
We leave the exile peering into the darkness, from the Hermons
or Mount Mizar, straining his eyes to see the glare which lit
up every court in Jerusalem, his ears to catch the notes of the
Levites' song. Psalm CXVIII
There remains yet one Psalm intimately connected with the
feast, at which I can but glance. This is cxviii, the last com
ponent of the Hallel. The Hallel was sung at all the great
festivals, but this concluding Psalm held a special place in the
ritual of Sukkoth.4" In the interpretation of one verse the LXX
again comes to our aid.
The Psalm is designed to be sung antiphonally by a pro
cession approaching the Temple and by the Levites who respond
goes out of his way to assert that the participle 3Mn (' on pilgrimage ',
' keeping holy-day ') is a Greek word and means ' a conduit ' ( Wassetieitung).
Apparently he connected it with dyayCs or iSpayayos and had in mind either
the water-bearers or Hezekiah's conduit which fed the pool whence the pro
cession started.
1 The Midrash refers these words to the upper waters addressing the lower
waters and generally to the rain-fall.
2 It is interesting to note that the word "113S (' water-pipe ' in the P. B.
version) in its only other occurrence in the Old Testament (2 Sam. v. 8
' Whosoever smiteth the Jebusites, let him get up to the watercourse ') probably
refers to the perpendicular shaft discovered by Sir C. Warren leading directly
from the Virgin's spring into the city. See Driver, in he. 8 Jon. ii. 3.
4 And is commonly believed to have been composed for the great celebration
of the feast recorded in Nehemiah.

PSALM CXVIII 75
from within. In the body of it the reiterated reference to a ring
of enemies, 'AH nations compassed me round about' (v. 10 ff.),
should be read in the light of the' final world-contest of the
Zeehariah lesson, 'I will gather all nations against Jerusalem
to battle '. But it is the concluding verses, sung as the proces
sion enters the Temple and bringing us into close touch with
the ritual, with which I am concerned.
The chorus without raise the cry of Hosanna : ' We beseech
thee, 0 JHWH, save now (N? nytyin) ; we beseech thee,
JHWH, send us now prosperity.' The Levites within reply
' Blessed be he that entereth in the name of JHWH ; we bless
you from the house of JHWH'. The procession respond, ac
cording to the Eevisers' version (v. 27), ' The Loed is God, and he
hath given us light : 1 bind the sacrifice with cords, even unto
the horns of the altar '. Eitual and vocabulary alike condemn
this rendering. The victim was not, to our knowledge, bound
to the sacred altar-horns ; there is no sure warrant for rendering
3D ' a festal sacrifice ' ; the preposition "W is an impossible
substitute for b after the verb 'bind'. The late Dr. Driver's
translation, 'Bind the festal victim with cords (and lead it)
unto the horns of the altar', removes two of these difficulties
but retains, the unusual meaning for 3D. ^ Now the Mishna tells
us 2 of a procession with palm-branches which was made round
the altar each day of the feast and repeated seven times on
the last day, with cries of ' We beseech thee, JHWH, save now,
we beseech thee, JHWH, send now prosperity'. It adds that
the branches were shaken 3 at the ' Hosannas ' as also at the
closing refrain ' 0 give thanks unto JHWH '. So closely, indeed,
were the wands associated with the cries of ' Save now ' that
they came to be known as ' Hosannas ' To this practice there
is a clear allusion in the Greek of v. 27 which in place of
' Bind the Hag with cords ' has avarrjaaade eopTijv ev tois
irvKagovaiv, 'Set in order (marshal) a (or "the") festival with
the overshadowing (or "leafy") (branches)'. That the trans
lators are right in their rendering of ^nhv. (' leafy branches ', not
1 cords ') appears from the Levitical prescription in which the
cognate adjective (^V) Is use(l : ' And ve shall take you on
1 Note again the dominant motif of the feast.
2 T. B. Sukkah iv. 5-7.
3 Was this in origin a water-finding charm? Note Aquila's equation of
Tin = "llTn = v8a>p in Lev. xxiii. 40 (ap. Field's Hexapla). The trees to
be employed were ' water-trees ' (? as divining rods).

76 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
the first day . . . boughs of leafy trees.' 1 Their interpretation of
IpN 'bind' as 'begin' or 'marshal' is unusual, but justified by
its use with nonjn? for 'to begin battle'. They give hag its
natural meaning ; but the Hebrew word is probably here used
in what some scholars regard as its original sense, a procession
in a circle.2
In the latest English version of the Old Testament,3 the
learned Eabbis of America have been the first to adopt the
LXX reading : ' Order the festival procession with boughs, even
unto the horns of the altar.' Following the lead of another
great American scholar, Dr. Briggs, I would go further and
treat the words as a liturgical direction which has crept from
the margin into the text. They overweight the verse, and the
balance of clauses is improved by their absence. We then read :
JHWH is God and hath given us light : [Here start the
branch-waving procession.]
even unto the horns of the altar.
In other words, He has by some dazzling display of light
manifested his acceptance of the sacrifices upon the altar. We
recall how at the dedication both of the Tabernacle and, ac
cording to the Chronicler, of Solomon's Temple, there came
forth fire from the Loed and consumed the burnt-offerings and
the sacrifices.4 1 Kings VIII
This brings me to my final passage. For to the other associa
tions of the feast there was added the commemoration of the
dedication of the Temple. An alternative Haphtarah to the
Zeehariah lesson was found in 1 Kings viii, which was read in
two portions on different days of the feast.5
The interest of the chapter, from the liturgical standpoint,
lies in (1) the opening and closing verses, and (2) the stanza
of poetry which is put into Solomon's mouth, and the editorial
revision to which these portions have been subjected.
I must pass over the opening and closing verses. The LXX
here presents a shorter text than the Hebrew ; commentators
are agreed that the additional Hebrew matter comes from a late
1 Lev. xxiii. 40.
2 Cf. Jin ' encircle ' and Driver, Notes on Hebrew text on 1 Sam. xxx. 16.
3 Philadelphia, Jewish Publication Soc. of America, 1917.
4 Lev. ix. 24, 2 Chron. vii. 1 ; cf. 2 Mace. ii. 10.
5 T. B. Meg. 31a.

1 KINGS VIII 77
editor. I suspect the longer opening to be a sort of lectionary
proem, analogous to the short introductory clauses prefixed to
some of the Gospels in the English Book of Common Prayer.
The main interest lies in Solomon's canto. A comparison of
Hebrew and Greek shows that the passage has been drastically
edited, as regards both text and position. In the Hebrew the
words are placed early in the chapter (v. 12 £), immediately
after the descent of the cloud upon the house, an incident which,
in the editor's mind, they are clearly intended to illustrate.
The text runs : —
Then spake Solomon :
JHWH hath said that he would dwell in the thick darkness.
I have surely built thee a house of habitation,
a place for thee to dwell in for ever.
In the Greek the words occupy a later position (v. 53 b) after
the prayer of dedication. Another line is prefixed to the canto
and the source from which it is taken is named at the close.
The Greek, though obviously by an unintelligent translator,
brings us. nearer to the original than the M. T., and runs as
follows : —
Then spake Solomon concerning the house when he had
finished building it :
The sun hath the Loed made known (v. 1. ' placed ') in heaven ;
He has said that he will dwell in (v.l. ' out of) thick darkness.
Build my house, a splendid house for thyself,
to dwell upon newness.
Behold is not this written in the Book of the Song?
I cannot dwell on the history of the interpretation of this
celebrated passage. I can but summarize the main conclusions
I have reached ; I have given a fuller statement elsewhere.1
The Book of the Ode ("P&U) is doubtless identical with the
primitive collection of national songs elsewhere called the Book
of Jashar f^JD). The last line of the stanza (Gr. 'to dwell
upon newness ') is, I suggested, in reality no part of the poem,
but a final docket ; as in the Psalm of Habakkuk a rubric has
been incorporated into the text. A common origin for the
obviously edited Hebrew 'A place for thee to dwell in for ever '
and the Greek tov KaroiKeTv eirl KaivoTrjTos can be found in a title
' For the sabbath, on (or " set to ") Alamoth', that is ' for soprano
voices'. In the opening line of the Greek canto we have mention of
1 J. T. S. xi. (1910) 518 ' New light on the Book of Jashar '.

78 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
the sun: 'The sun hath the Loed made known (eyvwpiaev) in
heaven.' Professor Burkitt has conclusively shown1 that the
easier Lucianic reading earrjaev must be rejected, that eyvwpiaev
is what the translator wrote and that it represents a Hebrew
nin. But 5?,li'"' cannot be right. What verb stood in the
original Hebrew ? Professor Burkitt suggested an imperative of
ysin < shine ' :
Sun, shine forth in the heavens ;
JHWH hath said He will dwell in darkness.
I ventured to suggest, with the duplication of one letter,
The sun of glory is beclouded in the heavens ;
JHWH hath said He will dwell in darkness.
This calls up a picture of a solar obscuration peculiarly in
keeping with the associations of the feast of the autumnal
equinox, when the hours of darkness begin to encroach upon
the day.
Certainty in restoration of this kind is rarely attainable. For
our immediate purpose two results seem to emerge. (1) The
nucleus of this lesson was probably a song. The Haphtarah
grew out of a canticle. (2) The song began with some statement
about, or invocation to, the sun, the exact nature of which is
doubtful. Whatever that statement was, later editors thought
good to excise it, together with the mention of the semi-pagan
song-book from which the canto was drawn. Editors and
translators realized well enough the Jew's besetting temptation,
among heathen neighbours, to sun-worship, and were suspicious
of passages, especially in the mouth of a polytheist like Solomon,
where the sun was placed in juxtaposition or comparison with
JHWH. Thus, in Ps. lxxxiv (Gr. Ixxxiii) 12, the Alexandrians
scented danger in the innocent words ' For the Loed God is
a sun and shield ' and freely paraphrased ' For the Loed God
loveth mercy and truth'? In- the present instance, the drastic
action of the editors is intelligible if, rightly or wrongly, they
saw in the canto a relic of paganism and read it as a solar charm
or invocation for the feast of the equinox. I find in their
expurgation a striking parallel to the explicit disclaimer of
sun-worship at the close of the Illumination ceremony : ' Our
fathers in this place worshipped the sun towards the east ; but
we, our eyes are to Jehovah.'
1 J. T. S. x. (1909) 439 ' The Lucianic text of 1 Kings viii. 53 b '.
2 Perhaps selecting eVos from its resemblance to ^Xior.

1 KINGS VIII 79

But I would rather close with words which, though now
abandoned in our services, the fathers of some of us used to
chant at evensong on this very day of Advent 1 at the turn of
the year — the Tekuphah — '0 dawning brightness of the ever
lasting Light and Sun of righteousness : come and illumine those
who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death ! '
1 This lecture was delivered on the evening of December 20. The Antiphon
quoted is from the ' 0 Sapientia ' series.

LECTURE III
THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP :
(3) The Book of Baeuch and the Fast op the Ninth op Ab
In the preceding lecture I endeavoured to show that the use of
the Old Testament in Jewish worship is an important factor in
the interpretation of select passages. To-day I take as my
subject a book, the whole structure and framework of which
seems to be governed by liturgical considerations. I dealt then
with two of the principal festivals and the canonical Scriptures
employed thereon ; my lecture to-day will relate to a Lenten
season and a book which never obtained admission to the Hebrew
canon. The Book of Baruch, though one of the shortest, is not the
easiest of the deutero-canonical writings. Absent from the
Hebrew and relegated in our English Bible to the Apocrypha, it
held in the Greek Bible a more honourable position. There it
forms, along with the Lamentations and the so-called Epistle of
Jeremiah, the first of a trilogy of writings appended to the book
of that prophet. That it stands first, taking precedence of
Lamentations, is remarkable ; the disciple above the master, the
secretary before the seer. But, indeed, it seems from the first to
have been treated in the Greek Bible rather as an integral part
of the prophecy than as an independent work ; the Fathers from
Irenaeus onwards cite it as ' Jeremiah ', and as far back as we
can trace its history it, or some part of it, formed an inseparable
adjunct to the prophecy.
The structure of the book is not clearly indicated in our
English Apocrypha. It consists of two distinct portions, the
first half being written in prose, the second half in the style of
Hebrew poetry ; each of these again falls into two subdivisions.
' The common theme', as Mr. Harwell1 writes, ' which binds the
two parts together is the destruction of Jerusalem and the exile
of her children.' We have (1) the historical introduction with
the express statement that the book is intended for liturgical use
1 The Principal Versions of Baruch by R. R. Harwell (Yale University, 1915).

THE BOOK OF BAEUCH 81
(i. 1-14) ; (2) a long confessional prayer of the exiles (i. 15— iii. 8).
To these prose sections, without any formal connexion, are
appended (3) a poetical homily on Wisdom (iii. 9-iv. 4), and (4)
a series of cantos of consolation (iv. 5-v. 9).
Setting aside the historical preface, we have three sections
with the topics Penitence — Wisdom — Consolation. Each of
these sections is largely dependent on different parts of the Old
Testament. The penitential section is in bulk a mosaic from
Daniel and Jeremiah ; the Wisdom section is based on Job and
other sapiential books ; the Consolations are drawn from deutero-
Isaiah, the typical comforter, as Jeremiah was the typical censor,
of the Jewish nation. The Confession lacks literary merit,
except such as it derives from the borrowed passages ; the
poetical portions are not such slavish imitations of their models,
and in places almost attain to the level of the best parts of Jewish
literature. I was first attracted to the Book of Baruch by a minor problem
as to its literary connexion with the Greek Jeremiah. But in
the course of my researches this interest was absorbed by a
discovery which, I venture to think, sets the whole book in a new
light. The book is expressly designed for use in the Lord's
house on certain days not clearly defined (i. 14), and it can only
be fully understood in the light of that statement. It is strange
that this clue has not been followed up. Ewald stands almost
alone in emphasizing this purpose ; but, beyond suggesting that
' the days of season ' (or ' assembly ') refer to the sabbaths,1 he
did not attempt to connect the book with any particular
occasion. I find the clue to the days intended in the structure of the
work, with its three well-marked divisions with the topics
Confession — Wisdom — Consolation. Now this is not a purely
heterogeneous collection of ideas. The triad Confession (or
Punishment) — Wisdom — Comfort meets us elsewhere. In a
tractate of the Talmud 2 we find the Hebrew kings and prophets,
the wise men, the Hagiographa, and so on arranged in groups of
threes typifying these or kindred ideas. The ideas exemplified
are normally Punishment, Wisdom, Piety, but in the group of
1 Quoted by Kneucker, in loc. Cf. Hist, of Israel (E. T.), vol. V. 208, n. 2 'In
the three divisions of its own contents the whole book thus supplies a type of
the contemporary worship in the house of prayer : first prayer, next preaching,
and lastly a more elevated prophetic close '.
* T. B. Berakoth, 57 b. F

82 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
Prophets Comfort replaces Piety, and we have the three topics of
our book : Punishment (typified by Jeremiah), Wisdom (by
Ezekiel), and Comfort (by Isaiah). In Baruch the confession is
largely drawn from Jeremiah, the consolations from Isaiah ;' the
wisdom section, for reasons which will appear, is based, not on
Ezekiel, but on the sapiential books. This sequence of ideas,
from Punishment through Wisdom to Consolation, seemed so
fitting that some rabbis arranged the prophetical books in the
corresponding order : Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah.1
Now this same catena of ideas reappears in a series of sabbaths
associated, like our book, with the destruction of the Temple.
The Jews brought back from Babylon the custom of annual fasts
at fixed dates. Before the exile fasts were exceptional, and only
held on extraordinary occasions.2 The post-exilic fixed fast-days
took two forms. On the one hand was the great Day of Atone
ment, the ceremony of purification held at the opening of the
year and intimately connected with the New Year Feast. On
the other hand, and earlier than the Day of Atonement, which is
unrecorded in Ezra, we find mention of four fast days com
memorating the outstanding national calamities at the time of
the Babylonian capture. We learn from Zeehariah that these
four fasts, held in the fourth, fifth, seventh, and eighth months,
existed in his time,3 and that at least two of them had been
observed throughout the exile. ' When ye fasted and mourned
in the fifth and in the seventh (month), even these seventy years,
did ye at all fast unto me ? ' 4 The principal fasts were that of
the fourth month (Tammuz), commemorating the capture of the
city, and that of the fifth month (Ab), recalling the culminating
disaster — the burning of Temple and city by Nabuzaradan.
Traditions varied as to the exact dates of the capture and
conflagration ; a variation due in part to later attempts to
produce a fictitious symmetry with corresponding events in
the Eoman siege. The conflagration is variously placed on
the 7th, 9th, and 10th of Ab ; but the anniversary of this
blackest of days was always kept on the 9th. With the return
from exile and the rebuilding of the Temple the fast lost its full
significance, and a deputation waited on Zeehariah to inquire
whether the mourning of the fourth month should be continued.5
For the subsequent history of the fast we are without information
1 T. B. Baba Bathra, 14 b.
2 Wellhausen, Proleg. to Hist, of Israel, 111.
3 Zech. viii. 19. 4 ib. vii. 5. 6 ib. vii. 3.

THE BOOK OF BAEUCH 83
until some six centuries later an overpowering stimulus to its
renewal was given when Herod's Temple suffered the same fate
as Solomon's at the hands of the Eomans. It was probably about
this time, in the years following a. d. 70, that the 9th Ab became
the centre of a cycle of sabbaths, which linked it on the
one side to the Fast of Tammuz, on the other to the autumn
New Year.
The Jewish summer, the period from Pentecost to Tabernacles,
was barren of feasts and full of mournful associations. Within
this season fell three of the ' national calamity ' fasts and the
Day of Atonement. Rosh Hashanah, the Feast of the New Year,
from its close association with the latter, hardly broke the
continuity of this long Lenten season. Now these fast-days
came to be linked up together by a chain of sabbaths having
the 9th of Ab for pivot. We might compare our succession of
Sundays named after Trinity ; or, as the pivot here occupies
a middle position and the sabbaths on either side differed in
their character, we should speak more correctly of a Lenten
season of sabbaths before the 9th Ab and an Advent season of
sabbaths after it. The cycle began with the 17th Tammuz, the
reputed date of the Babylonian capture of the city. Between
that date and the 9th Ab, the date of the burning of the Temple,
fell three Punishment sabbaths (Straf-sabbate), on which, accord
ing to our main authority, lessons were read taken respectively
from the first and second chapters of Jeremiah and the first of
Isaiah. The black fast-day of the 9th Ab was followed by a
period of seven Consolation sabbaths (Trost-sabbate), which
looked forward to and bridged the interval to the New Year.
On these were read passages of consolation taken from deutero-
Isaiah. Subsequently, at some date later than any with which
we are concerned, two more sabbaths were added which carried
on the series to the Day of Atonement.1
Our main authority for this cycle is the so-called Pesikta (or
Book of Selections) of Eab Kahana. That work consists of
homilies on the lessons, from Law or Prophets, selected for use
on the principal feasts and fasts in the Jewish calendar and on
two groups of sabbaths, the Ab group of ten sabbaths already
1 Like our ' Stir-up ' Sunday, these were known from the passages read as
' Seek (ye) sabbath ' (from Is. Iv. 6) and ' Turn sabbath ' (from Hos. xiv. 1 (2)).
The complete cycle thas embraced (1) three .sabbaths of Punishment, (2) the
fast of 9th Ab, (3) seven sabbaths of Consolation, and subsequently (4) two more
Lenten sabbaths in preparation for the Day of Atonement.
P2

84 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
mentioned, and a smaller group of four with the Feast of Purim
for pivot. The homilies take for their text a verse or two at the
beginning or end of the respective lessons. The Pesikta is ranked
by some critics among the oldest Midrashim which we possess ;
it is at any rate based on very ancient materials. The portion
embracing the cycle of ten sabbaths, which opens with a reference
to E. Abba bar Kahana, is thought to have been the oldest nucleus
and to have given its name to the whole. The cycle seems to
have had a considerable vogue in early times, but to have after
wards dropped out of general use. The Pesikta was for a long
time lost, and only rediscovered in the nineteenth century, the
princeps editio being dated 1868.1
Now the three main portions of our book curiously conform to
this cyclical arrangement. Both cycle and book have as their
cardinal theme the burning of the Temple. Arftwering to the
three sabbaths of Punishment with lessons (for at least two of
them) from Jeremiah, we have in Baruch a penitential section in
three portions, also largely based on Jeremiah. The central or
Wisdom section of the book I assign, for reasons which will
appear, to the Fast itself. Corresponding to the seven sabbaths
of Consolation we find a final consolatory section divided into
seven minor portions, based on deutero-Isaiah and, to a large
extent, on the particular passages which were read on those
sabbaths. The connexion is clearest in this final section. My
discovery, if it be one, of the liturgical framework of the book
began here. So close a parallelism, in the general scheme and
in particulars, can hardly be fortuitous. I am inclined to regard
our book as, in a sense, an unsuccessful rival to that which
follows it in the Greek Bible — the Book of Lamentations, a work
which through the ages has been linked with the 9th of Ab, has
formed the model for a series of beautiful dirges (Kinoth) for that
day, and was itself not improbably actually composed for such
liturgical use.
The discoverer of a new line of interpretation is unfortunately
not absolved from the task of dealing with other problems
presented by his text and with the work of his predecessors.
1 Ed. S. Buber ; I have not had access to this. I have used the German
translation of Wiinsche (Leipzig, 1885), Zunz, Die gottesdienstlichen VortrOge
derJuden (Frankfurt a. M. 1892), and Dr. B chler's article on ' The Triennial
Reading of the Law and Prophets' in the Jewish Quarterly Review, vol. vi. 1894,
pp. 62-73.

THE BOOK OF BAEUCH 85
Brief reference is necessary to modern literature, ancient versions,
and some outstanding problems.
We possess useful English editions in Archdeacon Charles'
Apocrypha and in the Speaker's Commentary ; but as the fullest
and most comprehensive exposition that of Kneucker, produced
as long ago as 1879, still holds the field. Kneucker's work is
a monumental example of German thoroughness and industry ;
his judgement is perhaps more open to question. It has been
challenged in one particular by the latest writer, Mr. Harwell,
of Yale' University, in his dissertation on The Principal Versions
of Baruch (1915). The main service of Mr. Harwell's work is
that he has established the importance of the Old Latin version
known as b. Of the two Old Latin versions one, a, which is
incorporated in the Vulgate (though Jerome had no hand in it),
has hitherto been regarded as older than b, which is printed
beside it in Sabatier. The superiority of b is inferred by
Mr. Harwell from its shorter text, from the absence of ' doublets ',
and chiefly froni the fact that it begins with Jer. Iii. 12 (the
burning of the Temple by Nabuzaradan), i. e. it is ' based upon
a Gree"k text in which Baruch has not yet been separated from
Jeremiah'. In his opinion the Old Latin b is descended from
a pre-Origenic text which antedates the standard text contained
in all our Greek MSS.1
Beside the two Latin versions we have a pair of Syriac ver
sions. The Syro-hexaplar so called (the seventh-century Syriac
rendering of the LXX column in Origen's Hexapla) is important
because of its reference to a Hebrew original. Three notes state
that certain words are ' not in the Hebrew '. Notwithstanding
these notes, a colophon adds that the whole book was ' obelized 't
in other words, that Origen knew of no Hebrew when he com
piled the Hexapla in the third century. The Hebrew original
must have been lost at an early date. The Syro-hexaplar further
contains interesting lectionary marks indicating the beginning
and end of lessons read in the Syrian Church services.2 Though
older than the Syro-hexaplar, the other Syriac version, the
Peshitta, is inferior. It abounds in conflate readings, and bears
at least one mark of Christian influence. Both Syrian versions
possess an interest as emanating from the only country from
which we have evidence for the use of the book in the Jewish
services. All the ancient versions seem to have been made from
the Greek, none from the lost Hebrew.
1 op. cit., pp. 41f.,44, 51. 2 ib. 7.

86 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
Brief as it is, the book presents several unsolved problems.
Opinions are divided on such questions as its unity, the language
in which it was first written, its date or the dates of its com
ponent parts. A unity of design in the mind of the final editor
may be inferred from its apparent relation to the sabbath cycle
already mentioned; but behind this unity are indications of
compilation from diverse sources. The work is clearly composite.
The prose and poetical portions come from different hands.
The divine titles afford a convincing criterion. Kvpios (Lord)
occurs abundantly (about forty times) in Part I (down to iii. 8),
never in Part II, which employs instead d aiwvios, 6 dyios, and
tieos.1 This diversity in style is accompanied by a diversity in
tone, a difference of attitude towards Israel's oppressors. In
Part I the exiles exhort their brethren in Jerusalem to ' pray for
the life of Nabuchodonosor king of Babylon, and for the life of
Baltasar his son ' ; Part II on the contrary contains the fiercest
imprecations upon the foreign foe. There are indications that the
two poems come from a single hand ; there are also links between
the two prose portions. This composite origin may be variously
explained. Mr. Harwell regards the poems as the older material,
which an editor has incorporated, prefixing the less original
prose sections of his own composition. I am not convinced by
this, and incline to the older view that the prose portions are
the original work which has subsequently been amplified by the
addition of the poems. I find it harder to believe that a writer
with the conciliatory tendency shown in the Introduction incor
porated and endorsed the final invectives, than that a later editor
by appending the cantos gave a more vindictive turn to a prose
work which he appropriated entire. As to language, it is generally
agreed that Part I had a Hebrew original. This appears not
only from the notes in the Syro-hexaplar ' not in the Hebrew ',2
but from the occurrence in the Greek of phrases which can only
be accounted for as mistaken renderings.3 Whether Part II also
had a Semitic original is more doubtful. Both Kneucker and
Harwell have reproduced a Hebrew text of this portion, and the
latter writer claims to have proved that the first poem was
composed in three-beat and the latter in five-beat measures.
1 In Part I deds is practically confined to the combination Kupios- 6 3e6s.
2 Which have been explained away. Nestle held that ' the Hebrew ' did not
refer to Baruch but to the Old Testament passages which form its model.
3 In particular ' Hear the prayer of the dead Israelites ' (iii. 4), where yilO
' men of ' has been read as ^D ' the dead of (Israel).

THE BOOK OF BAECTCH 87
I am not competent to judge whether he has proved his
case; but, as has often been remarked, Part II presents the
general appearance of being an original Greek composition,1
and this view is supported by the apparent dependence of the
second poem on the Greek Psalter of Solomon. As regards the
Greek and its relation to the translation of Jeremiah I have
reluctantly abandoned my former view.2 The Greek, I now think,
is all by a single hand. The similarity in Part I to the style of
the second translator of Jeremiah is due to a close imitation of
his style, and is insufficient to prove that the translations were
made by one and the same man.3 The question of date, espe
cially of the date of Part I, is difficult to determine. Outside
limits are given on the one hand by the dependence of Part I on
the Book of Daniel, on the other by the earliest citations of the
book by Christian writers of the second century ; but those limits
leave a rather wide range of 300 years (150 b. c. to A. d. 150).
The main problem is whether the whole or either part is later
than a. d. 70. My own opinion is that the whole work is not
earlier than the first century of our era. Part I was written in
Hebrew not long before a. d. 70 ; after the stirring events of
that year the book was reissued in Greek in an enlarged form,
with the addition of Part II. The fierce invectives and the call
for reprisals in the latter part can refer, I think, only to the
Eoman conquerors. I shall revert to this question in connexion
with the Historical Introduction. I do not claim to have solved
these riddles, and have considerable hesitation in suggesting so
late a date for Part I. I have one new contribution to make
to the interpretation of the book. For the rest, indeed for the
whole, I speak under, and shall welcome, correction. My theory
is based on the final edition of the work, and is unaffected by
the history of any earlier stages through which it may have
passed. The external evidence, slight but significant, for the
actual use of the book in Jewish worship, I reserve to the end.
My theory as to the use for which it was designed stands or falls
on its own merits, and is not touched by that evidence. The
design perhaps never was carried out in its entirety.
I proceed to examine the several portions of the book.
1 One phrase near the close, its 6p6vov $ao-ikfLas v. 6, meaning apparently
' as on a royal throne', suggests, but does not, I think, absolutely necessitate
a Hebrew original, as Archdeacon Charles holds (Apocr. and Pseud, i. 573).
'- 2 In J. T.S. iv. 261.
3 Part II of Baruch shows a few links with ' Jeremiah fi ' ; note in particular
Xappodvr) iv. 23. ,

88 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
The Histoeical Inteoddction
The Introduction (i. 1-14) states that the book was written by
Baruch in Babylon in the fifth year, on the seventh day of the
month, at the season when the Chaldaeans captured and burnt
Jerusalem. The date is extraordinarily vague. The starting-
point from which the fifth year is reckoned is not stated; the
month is not named, though the day of the month is ; the capture
and burning of Jerusalem appear to be regarded as contem
poraneous, though actually separated by an interval of three weeks.
The reference to the burning on the seventh day of the month
can, however, only refer to the fifth month of Ab, on the seventh
of which, according to the account in Kings,1 the conflagration
took place. The words ' in the fifth month ' have possibly
dropped out after 'in the fifth year'. Anyhow the book was
ostensibly written in the early years of the Judaean exile in
Babylon. It was read in the ears of the captive king Jeconiah and
his countrymen, who wept, and fasted, and prayed. A money
collection is then made and sent to the remnant at Jerusalem
with a covering letter enjoining them to expend it on offerings
to be presented on the altar of the Lord (represented as still
standing), with prayers ' for the life of Nabuchodonosor king of
Babylon, and for the life of Baltasar his son, that their days may
be as the days of heaven above the earth ',2 that so the exiles
might find favour and live peaceably under Babylonian rule.
' And pray for us also . . . for we have sinned/ The letter proceeds .
(i. 14) : ' And ye shall read this book which we have sent unto
you, to make confession in the Lord's house, upon a (or "the")
feast day and upon days (or " the days ") of season.' Then follows
the Confession.
I need not dwell on the inaccuracies which make it impossible
to accept this record as authentic. Baruch was never, to our
knowledge, in Babylon ; the last we hear of him in the Book of
Jeremiah is that he was forced to accompany the prophet into
Egypt, where he probably ended his days.3 A more serious
objection is the mention of Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar his
son as contemporaries. The writer here, as in the subsequent
Confession, follows the Book of Daniel, and follows it in a
notorious error. Inscriptions prove that Belshazzar was not
1 2 Kings xxv. 8 ; in Jer. Iii. 1 2 f . ' the tenth '. This dependence on 2 Kings
suggests that Jeremiah still lacked the Historical Appendix (chap. Iii) when
' Baruch ' was attached to it.
2 Cf. Deut. xi. 21. s Jer< xliii 6 f_

BAEUCH— HISTOEICAL INTRODUCTION 89
the son of Nebuchadnezzar and was never king of Babylon.
This dependence on Daniel at once brings Part I of our book
down to Maccabaean times.
What, then, does this Introduction tell us as to the real
purport of the book ? It is, as I read it, a recommendation from
a community of the Jewish Dispersion to their brethren at
Jerusalem to do two things : (i) to pray for the civil rulers of
a foreign country (called ' Babylon ') ; (ii) to adopt the use of
certain liturgical forms and ceremonies which they observe them
selves. These two petitions require consideration.
(i) The prayer for foreign rulers. The Introduction as a whole,
and this request in particular, are clearly based on Jer. xxix
(xxxvi). 1 ff. In Baruch we read ' And these are the words of the
book, which Baruch wrote ... in Babylon ', and lower down
' Pray for the life of Nabuchodonosor and his son '. In Jeremiah
we have ' And these are the words of the book which Jeremiah
sent from Jerusalem unto the elders of the captivity ', followed
by the advice (v. 7) ' Seek the peace of the land (Heb. ' city ')
whither I have caused you to be carried captive, and pray unto
the Loed for it ; for in the peace thereof shall ye have peace '.
That is the model. ' Settle down ', says Jeremiah, ' in Babylonia
and do not look for a restoration to your country until after
seventy years '. In Baruch we have, as it were, a rejoinder from
the exiles to the Jews at Jerusalem to put into practice them
selves the pacific policy recommended by Jeremiah.
Such a rejoinder or retort might conceivably be romance pure
and simple, without ulterior motive ; but is more likely to have
an underlying object arising out of contemporary circumstances.'
These pseudepigrapha usually have a purpose. What are the
circumstances here referred to? Now if we abandon, as we
must, the period of the Babylonian captivity, it is difficult to
find any intervening occasion forming a suitable background
until we come down to the great war with Eome of a. d. 66-70.
An attractive theory has been propounded that Babylon here,
as in the Apocalypse, stands for Eome, and that Nabuchodonosor
and Baltasar are no other than Vespasian and Titus. The theory
is attractive because we learn from Josephus that the abandon
ment of the customary sacrifices for the Emperor was the fans et
origo belli. f Eleazar, son of Ananias the high priest,' he writes,
' a very daring youth, being then the captain [of the Temple],
persuaded those who officiated in the Temple services to accept

90 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
no gift or sacrifice from a foreigner. This action ', he continues,
'laid the foundation of the war with the Eomans; for they
thereby abrogated the sacrifice on behalf of that nation and the
Emperor.' x This affords a striking illustration to Baruch's
advice, ' Pray for your rulers ' ; and, though this brings the date
of our book down as late as a.d. 69 (when Vespasian became
Emperor), I am tempted to accept the theory in so far as to
regard Nabuchodonosor and Baltasar as pseudonyms for th&
Eoman generals.
I am not, however, prepared to follow Kneucker in the equation
of Babylon with Eome as the place of writing. All indications
suggest an eastern, rather than a western, origin for our book.
(1) The cycle of sabbaths, forming, as I believe, the framework
of our book, has no known early connexion with the West.
Opinions are divided as to whether it originated in Babylon 2 or
Palestine ; 3 no one associates it with Eome. The Pesikta is traced
either to Palestine or more probably to some community of the
Diaspora in the neighbourhood of Palestine.4 (2) Again, our
book shows acquaintance with Palestinian literature of the first
century of our era. Use is made of the Greek Psalter of Solomon
which was probably produced in Palestine in early New Testament
times ; also of a version of Daniel allied to that of Theodotion
and to the text cited by New Testament writers. (3) Lastly, the
only known record of the liturgical use of our book comes from
the region of Syria and Mesopotamia.5
For these reasons I should look for the place of origin to the
region north of Palestine, to Syria or perhaps Mesopotamia,
on the eastern fringe of the Eoman Empire. I should read this
Introduction as an eirenicon put out from this quarter about
a. d. 69, when the sacrifices for the Emperor had been abandoned
and the siege of Jerusalem was impending, to the effect : Don't
provoke further disaster ; resume your former practice and pray
for the lives of our rulers and yours, the Eomans '. In his Intro
duction to his Jewish War, Josephus tells us of the ferment in this
region at the outbreak of hostilities. ' The whole of the Eastern
Empire ', he writes, ' was in the balance ; the [Jewish] insurgents
were fired with hopes of its acquisition, their [Eoman] oppo-
1 Jos. B. I. ii. 409 (xvii. 2). See Schiirer, Hist, of Jewish People, ii. 1. 302 ff.,
where references are given for the daily sacrifices for the Roman authorities.
2 ' Probably ', Elbogen, Derjud. Gottesdienst, (1913) p. 178.
3 So apparently Biichler, J. Q. R. vi. (1894) pp. 63, 72.
* Zunz, Die gottesdienstl. Vortr&ge der Juden, 207, note a.
6 See below, pp. 107 ff.

BAEUCH— HISTOEICAL INTEODUCTION 91
nents feared its loss. For the Jews hoped that all their fellow-
countrymen beyond the Euphrates would join with them in
revolt.'1 These hopes at that time proved barren; on the
contrary, if I read our book aright, the Eastern Jews counselled
submission. On the other hand, in the later revolt under
Trajan in a.d. 116, it was just these Jews of the Diaspora in
Mesopotamia who, with the homeland, played the leading part.2
The second edition of our book, with its vindictive ending,
appeared, I believe, in the interval between the two outbreaks.3
(ii) The suggested liturgical use. The exiles make a second
request to the mother-country, viz. to read the book which
accompanies their letter on certain occasions not clearly defined.
We have in another apocryphal book a parallel for an epistle
from one Jewish community to another commending the adoption
of certain ceremonial practices. In the second book of Maccabees
the Jews of the capital exhort their brethren of Alexandria to
. keep the newly-instituted Feast of Dedication.4 Here the order
is reversed, and it is the province which presumes to dictate an
innovation to the metropolis.
Verse 14 runs ' And ye shall read this book which we have sent
unto you, to make confession (egayopevaai) in the house of the
Lord, upon a (or "the") feast day and upon days of occasion
(ev r)iiepa eoprrjs Kal ev fj/iepais Kaipov) '.6 Two occasions for the
reading are specified : a feast and a series of days of meeting or
solemn assembly not ranking among the feasts.
The versions present two variants. As a curiosity we may
note in passing the text of the Peshitta Syriac. This Syrian
translator misread Kaipov as Kvpiov and rendered ' on a fast-day
or on the Lord's days'. He was obviously influenced by the
custom of his native Church ; the other Syriac version, the
Syro-hexaplar, indicates the length of the Christian lessons from
this book.
Far more important is the variant reading of the old Latin b :
1 B.I. i. 4f. (Proem 2).
2 Mommsen, Provinces of Rom. Emp., ii. 221 ff.
3 It was for the benefit of ' the natives of upper Syria ' that Josephus com
posed the original Aramaic edition of his Jewish War (B. J. I. ad init.). The
narrative may have had an incendiary effect, undreamt of by its author.
4 2 Mace. ii. 16 ' Seeing then we are about to keep the purification, we write
unto you ; ye will therefore do well if ye keep the days '. Cf. i. 18.
6 The Hebrew was doubtless 1J?i» ,D,3;i 3n DV3.

92 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
' et legetis librum quern misimus ad vos in domo domini in die
sollemni.' This translator omits both the word 'to make con
fession ' and the words ' and on days of occasion '-1 The book is
to be read only ' on a solemn day '. Influenced by Mr. Harwell's
defence of the shorter Latin text, I was strongly tempted to find
in this reading a trace of the first edition of our book, and to
hold that it was intended for use only on the ' feast ' or ' solemn
day ', and that the words ' and on days of occasion ' were inserted
in the enlarged edition. On further consideration I doubt the
originality of the b text. There are other examples in this Old
Latin version of omission of obscurities or studied brevity,2 and
I believe this to be one. I should be much more inclined to
regard the Latin text as original, were it not that it further
omits egayopevaai, ' to make confession '.
For kgayopevaai strictly applies only to Part I of our book,
the Confession which immediately follows. It is not applicable
to the Homily and the Consolations. In this word I think we
may find a witness to a first edition ending at iii. 8, a relic which
escaped revision when the text was enlarged. The word is
unlikely to have been inserted at a later stage, when Confession
formed the smaller portion of the book. The Old Latin seems to
have omitted it on this very ground.
The reading is to take place ' in the Lord's house '. Notwith
standing the opening reference to the Chaldaean conflagration,
the Temple is therefore represented as still standing, although,
as would appear from the following Confession, in a sorry condi
tion : ' Thou hast made the house which is called by Thy name
as it is this day' (ii. 26).
' On a feast day and on days of season.' I will take the ' days
of season ' first. I assume that definite days are intended and
that the words are not, as has been suggested to me,3 comparable
to the phrase ' and on such other days as the Ordinary shall
appoint'. Does the book enable us to identify the season?
Only one season is specified, namely in v. 2 'the season when
the Chaldaeans took Jerusalem and burnt it with fire '.4 That
1 The omissions are shared by the Ethiopic version (frankly an epitome),
which goes further still in omitting ' which we have sent unto you '.
2 e.g. ii. 18 (A «Vi rb piytBos o /3aSi'£« kvtztov Kai), iii. 1 (A aKTjlSiwv) ; for
brevity, ii. 23 ( A (povrjv bis).
3 By my friend the Rev. C. S. A. Whittington.
4 The Katpds in iii. 5 (the only other occurrence of the word) doubtless bears
the same meaninsr.

BAEUCH-HISTOEICAL INTEODUCTION 93
surely is the occasion intended. According to the traditional
reckoning the city was taken on the seventeenth of the fourth
month Tammuz ; J the burning of Temple and city occurred three
weeks later, on the 9th of Ab. I conclude that these three weeks
are the Kaip6s of v. 14. The book in its older form was to be read
on a feast day, and on the three sabbaths intervening between the
17th Tammuz and the 9th Ab. The Punishment sabbaths, in
Dr. Biichler's opinion, were instituted first, before the sabbaths
of Consolation.2 The word W» (here rendered by Kaipos) in
later Hebrew was specially used of the fast of Ab.3 In the
enlarged Baruch Kaipos would cover the whole cycle including
the Consolation sabbaths ; no revision would be necessary. I have
no doubt that in the final edition the Kaipos meant the complete
cycle. Can we identify the other occasion, the feast-day, on which
the book was to be read ? We might expect mention to be made
of a Fast-day rather than of a Fe'ast ; but eopr-q (or 3D) will not
bear that sense, nor can the vaguer dies sollemnis of the Old Latin,
in view of its use elsewhere to render eopr-q, be adduced as proof
of any variant in the Greek. Though v. 14 in our text specifies
no feast, it has been thought that it did once name a date, which
has got out of place in a MS. written in double columns
and is to be found in v. 8. In that verse, which betrays its nature
as a gloss by its lack of cohesion with the context, we are told of
the return of certain vessels to Jerusalem on the tenth of the
month Siwan. This date is again absent from the Old Latin b,
while the Syriac has the important variant ' on the 10th of Nisan '.
Commentators accordingly transpose this date from v. 8 to v. 14,
which then runs 'Ye shall read this book on the 10th Siwan, on the
feast day, and on days of season ' ; which they interpret to mean
' on the Feast of Pentecost and the fast days which followed it '.
I should agree that the date in v. 8 has got out of place, but in
view of the evidence of the versions I should banish it altogether
from the original text. The ' 10th Siwan ' and the ' 10th Nisan '
are alternative glosses, guesses at the particular occasion which
the writer left undefined.
What was that occasion ? There is little to be said for Pente
cost, which normally fell on the 6th (not the 10th) Siwan ; of the
fast days following it I can find no record.
1 According to 2 Kings xxv. 3, Jer. Iii. 6, on the 9th Tammuz.
2 J. Q. R. vi. 64.
3 Levy, Neuhebr. und Chald. WS/ierbuch, s. v.

94 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
The answer is not so obvious as in the case of the days of season.
Yet if there was one hag more appropriate than another to this
solemn Confession, it was that of the New Year. New Year's
Day (Rosh hashanah) was, in fact, the one day in the Jewish
calendar which could rank alike as feast and fast. Opinions
were divided on the question whether it should be reckoned
' a good day ' (a 3it2 Di'') or not ; ultimately the view prevailed
that its penitential character, as a day of judgement, outweighed
its festal associations.1
But, in the light of the misplaced Syriac gloss in v. 8 ' on the
10th Nisan ', I would venture to go further. The feast which
this community of the eastern Dispersion wish to recommend to
the mother-country is not that which the Palestinians themselves
observed at the autumn or civil New Year, but the old Babylonian
feast of the spring New Year held at the beginning of Nisan.
We shall find that our book was, in fact, read by the Syrian Jews at
that very season. Among the Babylonians the feast par excellence,
of remote antiquity, was that of the spring New Year held during
the first eleven (or more) days of the month Nisan.2 The Jews,
apparently on the return from exile, imported this feast, with
some of its associations, into their own calendar; with the
distinction that they transposed it 'to the autumn. While the
1st Nisan was regarded as the opening of the ecclesiastical year,
the Jewish New Year's Day Feast was kept on the 1st Tishri.
It is, however, not unlikely that the eastern Dispersion would
retain the custom of their adopted country and wish to commend
it to their Palestinian brethren. The suggested prayer for royalty
favours this identification. At the Babylonian feast the fate of
the king's life was determined for the coming year.3 The
associations of the Jewish Rosh hashanah were largely influenced
by those of the Babylonian feast. The New Year Haphtarah (the
Song of Hannah) and the New Year Psalms attest a connexion
between the day and the destiny of the civil ruler.4 What more
natural than that the Jews of the eastern Dispersion should
invite their Palestinian brethren at the spring New Year to pray
for the life of their rulers ? The petition may have had a
liturgical, as well as a political, motive.
1 Elbogen, Der jiidische Gottesdienst, p. 146.
2 M. Jastrow, Religion of Bab. and Assyria, 1898, pp. 676-82.
3 See e.g. Schrader, Keilinschriften3, 370 f., 514 f. ;• Jastrow, op. cit. 680.
¦* See the writer's article 'The Song of Hannah and . . . the Jewish New
Year's Day ' in J. T. S. xvi. 177 ff.

BAEUCH— THE CONFESSION 95
The Confession
I have necessarily dwelt at some length on the Introduction ;
the Confession which follows (i. 15— iii. 8) may be lightly passed
over. As shown in Dr. Swete's text, it falls naturally into three
parts : (1) the Confession proper (or '"inin, i. 15-ii. 10) beginning
'To the Lord our God belongeth righteousness, but unto us
confusion of face'; (ii) the prayer for mercy (nann, ii. 11-35)
' And new, 0 Lord, thou God of Israel' ; and (iii) a final prayer
(iii. 1-8), gathering up in more informal and personal style the
ideas of the previous sections, beginning ' 0 Lord Almighty, thou
God of Israel, a soul in anguish and a weary spirit crieth unto
thee ' and ending on the note ' Though penitent, we are still in
exile '. The whole is a mosaic of Old Testament reminiscences.
The groundwork of the first two sections is the confession in
Daniel (chap, ix) in a version resembling that of Theodotion ;
interwoven with this are fragments of the Greek Jeremiah, in
a style closely akin to that of the second of the two translators
of that book.
We cannot directly connect the three portions of the Confession
with the particular lessons from Jeremiah and Isaiah traditionally
assigned to the three Straf-sabbate. But the traditional lessons
are not necessarily the oldest. We shall find a much closer
connexion between the final portion of our book and the lessons
for the Trost-sabbate. Here I would merely urge that the three
fold division readily lends itself to the cycle arrangement, one
section being allocated to each of the sabbaths.1
The Homily on Wisdom
I pass to the second half of the book, and first to the Homily
on Wisdom (iii. 9-iv. 4), penned, as I shall endeavour to show,
as a sermon for the 9th of Ab.
The abrupt transition in the Greek from Confession to Homily
is bridged in the Old Latin b by a sentence which suggests that
this translator may have known of the existence of the Confession
as a separate book :¦ ' Et cum explicuisset librum orationis cap-
tivorum, accipiens spiritus vocem Ierusalem loquutus est dicens ',
&c. The book of the exiles' prayer is ended; the spirit hears and
responds to the city's cry.
1 If, with Mr. Harwell, we regard the shorter text of the Old Latin in i. 14 as
original, the Confession was designed, in the first edition for use only on the
feast-day ; the adaptation to the cycle* was an afterthought.

96 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
' Hear, 0 Israel,' begins the preacher, ' commandments of life :
give ear to understand wisdom.' The opening words recall the
Shema' (Deut. vi. 4) with which it was customary to preface
a discourse in the synagogue on solemn occasions.1 The following
homily takes the form of two questions and answers : Q. ' How is
it that Israel is in exile on hostile soil?', A. 'She has forsaken
the fount of wisdom ' ; Q. ' Where shall wisdom be found ? ',
A. 'Wisdom is known to God alone and is none other than the
Law which endureth for ever '. But, before reaching this positive
conclusion, the preacher proceeds, in the manner of Job, to
expound where and how Wisdom is not to be found and
to enumerate three types of men who have failed in the
quest. Now what is the connexion of this discourse on Wisdom with
the 9th of Ab ? I find it in the Haphtarah for the Fast-day ; the
whole section is a sermon on the lesson. The modern Jewish
service still retains the prophetical lesson from Jeremiah (viii. 13-
ix. 24 [23]) for which we have ancient authority,2 beginning
' I will utterly consume them ' and ending ' Let not the wise man
glory', &c. The primitive lesson was doubtless shorter. Two
verses only call for remark, one in the middle (perhaps originally
the opening) of the lesson, the other at the close. In Jer. ix. 12 f.
the same question is asked and the same answer given as in
Baruch. ' Who is the wise man that may understand this ? and
(who is) he to whom the mouth of the Lord hath spoken, that he
may declare it ? Wherefore is the land perished and burned up
like a wilderness . . .? And the Lord said, Because they have
forsaken my law.' The question ' Who is the wise man ? ' clearly
had a special appropriateness for the fast, since it recurs at the
close of what is still the alternative lesson for the 9th of Ab
(Hos. xiv. 9) : 'Who is wise, and he shall understand these things?
prudent, and he shall know them ? '
But the sermon in Baruch is yet more closely linked to the
concluding verses of the Jeremiah lesson : ' Let not the wise man
glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his
might, let not the rich man glory in his riches : but let him that
glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth, and knoweth me,
1 Ewald, cited by Kneucker, ad loc. This portion of the liturgy was taken
over by the Synagogue from the Temple: Oesterley-Box, Short Survey of Lit.
of Rabbin, and Med. Judaism, (1920) 163.
2 T. B. Meg. 31 a (on the authority of Abaye, died 338) ; Rab, ibid., names
another lesson, Is. i. 21.

BAEUCH— HOMILY ON WISDOM 97
that I am the Lord ', fee1 As I observed, the homilies in the
Pesikta sometimes take for their text the last verse of the lesson.2
The same holds good here. The verse ' Let not the wise man
glory', with its three types of the vain-glorious, is the text for
our sermon.
After tracing Israel's pitiful condition to her desertion of the
fount of wisdom, the preacher proceeds in the central portion of
his homily (vv. 16-28) to give concrete examples of the three
classes named in his text — the irXovaios, the ao<j>6s, the laxvP°s —
who have missed the true wisdom. The classes are marked off
by the thrice repeated refrain : oSbv 8e eiriaTrjfins ovk eyvwaav
(v% 20 of the rulers and the rich), oSbv Se aocpias ovk eyvwaav
(v. 23 of the worldly wise), oiSe oSbv eiriaTrJuris eSwKev avrois (v. 27
of the strong). The whole should be compared with a strikingly
similar discourse on false and true wisdom in St. Paul's First
Epistle to the Corinthians, reminiscent, I cannot but think, of
sermons to which Saul the Pharisee must often have listened on
the 9th Ab.3
First (16-21) the rich, 'they that hoarded up silver and gold,
wherein men trust, and of whose getting there is no end.' With
these he groups the princes of the nations ; and here the words
' such as lorded it over the beasts that are on the earth ' clearly
allude to Nebuchadnezzar, whose lordship over the beasts of the
field and the fowls of the air is emphasized both in Daniel and in
Jeremiah.4 The monarch, for whose life prayers were asked in
Part I of our book, is here quoted as an example of the futility
of earthly greatness. The words ' They that had their pastime
with the fowls of the air ' seem to be a mockery of the pleasures
of the idle rich.5 To rulers and rich are added (18) metal-workers
and craftsmen, an intermediate link between the irXovaioi and
the aocpoi. All these have vanished and gone down to Hades ;
a second and a third generation have seen the light but failed
to lay hold on wisdom.
1 In the LXX this clause has been interpolated into the Song of Hannah, the
New Year's Day Haphtarah (1 R. ii. 10) ; Rosh Hashanah and 9 Ab had peni
tential features in common.
2 Wiinsche, Pesikta, viii ; Weber, Jud. Theologie auf Grund des Talmud, (1897)
xxvii. 3 1 Cor. i. 18-ii. 16. Cf. Baruch iii. 16 with 1 Cor. ii. 6 ff. (ol Spxovres) ; and (oi)
im (rijs) yijs Bar. iii. 16, 20, 23, with the repeated 6 ala>v ovtos and 6 Koo-pos in 1 Cor.
i. 20 f., 27, ii. 6. The preacher's text is quoted in 1 Cor. i. 31.
4 Dan. ii. 38 ; Jer. xxvii. 6 (xxxiv. 5 LXX).
5 Folk-lore tales of Nebuchadnezzar may still be in mind.

98 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
At' v. 22 he passes to the aocpoi: 'it hath not been heard of in
Canaan, neither hath it been seen in Teman.' Jeremiah attests
the reputation of Teman for wisdom,1 and our preacher, who
draws largely on Job, doubtless has in mind his counsellor
Eliphaz the Temanite. With Canaan is linked Arabia : ' the
merchants of Merran and [once again] Teman ' — probably a cor
ruption of ' Midian and Temah ' — the /ivOoXoyoi (romancers or
fable-writers) and other purveyors of earthly wisdom. ' Neither
western Phoenicians nor eastern Arabs have found the true
wisdom', as Ewald paraphrases. Greek philosophy is ignored;
the instances are solely Biblical. This, again, suggests a Syrian
(or Palestinian) origin. «
As his example of the strong men the preacher selects (26) the
mightiest sons of earth, the giants renowned of old (ol ovofiaarol
air dpxrjs, cf. Gen. vi. 4 LXX), who might be expected to have
inherited wisdom from their divine progenitors. Yet ' these did
not God choose, neither gave he the way of knowledge unto
them '.2 So he sums up the negative side of his sermon : ' there
is none that knoweth her way, nor any that comprehendeth her
path' (31).
The peroration, with obvious reminiscences, in particular of
Job and the A'tveais aocpias in Ben Sira, possesses a beauty of its
own, and contains the famous verse often quoted by the Fathers
in proof of the doctrine of the Incarnation. ' Yet He hath found
her,' I paraphrase, ' He the omniscient, maker of earth and its
creatures, the light, the stars ', which in a beautiful figure appear
as outposts in the celestial army answering Adsumus to their
names : —
And the stars shined in their stations, and were glad :
He called them, and they said, Here we be :
they shined with gladness unto their Maker.
He is our God, none other shall be accounted of beside Him.
He hath found out every way of knowledge,
and hath given it unto Jacob His servant, And to Israel His
beloved.
1 Jer. xlix. 7 (xxix. 8 LXX).
2 It is curious to find an apparent allusion to the giants in a modern prayer
for the 9th of Ab, which similarly* dilates on the vanity of earthly wisdom.
' What are we ? what is our life ? . . . what is our strength ? what is our might ?
. . . Are not all the mighty men as nothing before thee and the men qfiname
D$D ^N) as though they had never been, and the wise as without wisdom
and the understanding as without knowledge ? ' 3X2 HVETl^ mypn (Polish
rite), ed. S. Baer, Rodelheim, 1875, p. 58 f.

BAEUCH— HOMILY ON WISDOM 99
Afterward did. she1 appear upon earth, and was conversant
with men.
This is the book of the commandments of God,
And the law that endureth for ever . . .
The model is here the Praise of Wisdom in Ecclus. xxiv, and the
sentence 'Afterward did she appear upon earth' may be the
preacher's reproduction of Ben Sira's words ' Then the Creator of
all things . . . said, Let thy tabernacle be in Jacob, and thine
inheritance in Israel . . . and so was I established in Sion'.2
But the personification of wisdom comes in awkwardly before
the identification with the Book of the Law ; 3 the introductory
fierd tovto is suspicious ; as is also the generalizing ' on earth ',
' among men ' in a passage characterized by Jewish particularism.
On the whole, therefore, I incline with some hesitation to
Kneucker's view that the verse is a Christian interpolation.
The sermon ends with an appeal to Jacob to turn4 and lay
hold on Wisdom as discovered in the Law; a warning not to
surrender her glory to ' Another ' and her privileges to an alien
nation — alluding, probably, to the rise of Christianity — and a
felicitation upon the race which, with its Temple, has not lost its
claim to be the sole possessors of the knowledge of the will of
God.6 The Temple is not actually named, but its destruction
seems to be hinted at a little higher up : ' 0 Israel, how great is
the house of God ! and how large is the place of His possession ! :
(iii. 24). ' The house of God ', he seems to say, is not the ruined
Temple but the broad universe.
A second link connects this sermon with the 9th of Ab. The
preacher took his text from the Haphtarah ; but we can also
•explain his choice of illustrative literature. That he should
draw on the sapiential books was natural ; but why does he have
recourse to Job in particular and after that to the A'iveais aocpias
in an apocryphal writing ? Now the studies proper to the 9th
of Ab were strictly limited ; ' the precepts of the Lord which
rejoice the heart' were too exhilarating for the fast-day. We
read in the Talmud : 6 ' The Eabbis taught : " All injunctions
which hold good for mourning hold good also for the 9th Ab.
One must not eat or drink or anoint oneself or put on sandals . . .
1 Or(?)'He\
2 Ecclus. xxiv. 8.
3 Though there is the same awkwardness in Ecclus.
4 Recalling another Haphtarah for 9 Ab (Hos. xiv. 1).
5 Cf. Rom. ii. 17. 6 T. B. Ta'anith, 30 a.
G2

100 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
One must not read in the Law, the Prophets, or the Writings,
nor study Mishnah, Talmud, Midrash, Halachah, or Haggadah.
But one may read and study passages which one is not accustomed
to read ; 1 one may also read from Lamentations, Job, and the
threatening passages (lit. 'the bad words') in Jeremiah".'
E. Jehuda even forbade the reading of unfamiliar passages,
placing all books on the Index except Job, Lamentations, and
Jeremiah's ' bad words ' 2
Of the permitted writings Lamentations, of which our book,
I suggested, was in a sense a rival, has left no mark on the
sermon. On the other hand, its text was drawn from one of the
gloomiest of Jeremiads, while Job provided the material for
the topic ' Where shall wisdom be found ? ' The language of
Job colours the whole discourse : ' Who hath entered into her
treasuries ? ' (iii. 15) ; ' Who . . . will bring her for choice gold ? '
(30) ; ' There is none that knoweth her way, nor any that com-
prehendeth her path. But He that knoweth all things knoweth
her, He found her out with His understanding' (31 ff.) ; the stars
which recall the morning stars singing together (34 f.) ; the
phrase ' saw the light ' (20) ; Teman with the reminiscence of
Eliphaz. Again, the Wisdom of Ben Sira, the apocryphal book
which came nearest to gaining admission to the canon,3 would
certainly figure among the unfamiliar and, for this occasion,
licenced Scriptures. The Consolations
This brings me to the final or consolatory portion of our book.
The National Mission, so to. speak, having opened with Eepen-
tance and proceeded in quest of Wisdom, closes with Hope.
This section falls into seven cantos. The first four begin alike
with ' Be of good cheer ' : dapaeire Xaos p.ov (iv. 5), Qappehe TeKva
(iv. 21), dapprjaare reKva (iv. 27), Bdpaei 'IepovaaXrjp. (iv. 30).
Most commentators carry subdivision no further. But three
more invocations of Jerusalem follow, constituting fresh open
ings: irepiPXeyjrai irpbs dvaroXds, 'IepovaaXrjp. (iv. 36), eKSvaai
'IepovaaXrjp. (v. 1), dvdaTr\Qi 'IepovaaXrjp. (v. 5). Dr. Swete marks
the first two of these, though not the last, by a short break in the
1 mnpb b»n 1JW Dipaa Nin tnip i33X (on the principle, apparently, that
the unfamiliar must also be uncongenial).
2 The writer adds that school-children had a holiday (as a penalty !) ; their
ordinary studies would cause unseemly joy;
3 Ryle, Canon of O. T. 184.

BAEUCH— THE CONSOLATIONS 101
text.1 These seven subdivisions may be classified again, according
to the speaker, in two groups. The first three cantos, part
penitence, part hope, are addressed by mother Zion to her exiled
children. The last four, all Consolation, are God's response,
through the seer's mouth, to the bereft mother — promises of
retaliation on her foes with glorious visions of a return to
Palestine under His leadership.
If I am right in connecting the seven cantos with the seven
Consolation sabbaths, the change of speaker and tone after the
third canto may be explained. The three first sabbaths fell in
the month of Ab, and in parts of Palestine mourning was kept
up until the end of that month.2 The four remaining sabbaths
fell in the month of Elul, and the 1st of Elul was one of the
minor New Years,3 a foretaste of the greater New Year's day
a month later.
That this portion of Baruch generally conforms to the sabbath
cycle appears from (1) the sevenfold division, (2) the dependence
on deutero-Isaiah, which dominates it just as Job dominated the
sermon, ' (3) the coincidence of four of the Isaiah passages which
serve as Baruch's model with those read on four of the sabbaths,
and (4) the reiterated Bdpaei (dapaeire) which seems deliberately
intended to recall the name by which the sabbaths were known.4
The Consolation Haphtaroth, writes Dr. Biichler, ' formed the
texts for homilies containing words of hope and encouragement '.s
The Baruch Consolations are, in my belief, such short poetical
homilies, designed to be read or sung on the respective sabbaths
as an accompaniment to the Lessons. If this theory is sound, we
have in Baruch, the earliest witness, apart from the scene in the
synagogue at Nazareth,6 to the lectionary use of the Book of
Isaiah. In Dr. Biichler's opinion, the employment of lessons
from Isaiah first came into vogue on these particular sabbaths.7
1 It is just possible that the three final cantos are a later appendix to bring
up the total to seven. They lack the initial word of good cheer ; they run
parallel to the eleventh of the Psalms of Solomon ; while no. (5) iB practically
a duplicate of the first part of no. (7). Anyhow the transmitted text is clearly
divisible into seven sections.
2 Sepphoris and Tiberias are mentioned ; T. J. Ta'anith (tr. Schwab, Gemaia
following iv. 6).
3 For tithes of cattle ; T. B. Rosh Hash. i. 1.
4 XntDnJT consolationis.
6 J. Q. R. vi. 72.
6 Luke iv. 17.
7 Although he would bring the date down to as late as A. D. 200.

MONTH

Sabbath

Is.

HfAPHTARAH)

Bar.

C(ANTO)

PSALM OF
SOLOMON xi.

AB

(1)

xl. 1-
9

' COMFORT YE MY PEOPLE '
ZION'S TIDINGS TO THE CITIES
OF JUDAH

iv. 5-9
12, 19

9*pceiTe Aaoc moy
ZION'S TIDINGS TO a! TupoiKOi
ceicoN THE DESERTED WIDOW (cf. H. II)

(II)

xlix. 14-
1821

ZION'S COMPLAINT OF GOD'S FOR
GETFULNESS
¦VISION OF GATHERING CHIL
DREN (2)
THE DESERTED WIDOW (LXX)

21

[Exhortation to patience and promise
of speedy delivery]

(III)
liv. 11
['0 thou afflicted . . . and not com
forted ']
27-
' YE SHALL BE REMEMBERED OF
HIM' (cf. II. II)
ELUL
(IV)
li. 121- 17-
' I (even) I AM YOUR COMFORTER '
FURY AND DOOM OF OPPRESSOR
REPRISALS— THE CUP OF tttcocic
30-
'HE THAT NAMED THEE WILL
COMFORT THEE '
DOOM OF THE OPPRESSOR
REPRISALS IN KIND— tttcocic
(V)
liv. 1-
[' Sing, o barren . . . ']
36-
VISION OF GATHERING CHIL
DREN (1)
3- V. OF GATHERING
CHILDREN
(VI)
lx. 1-
[' Arise, shine . . . ']
ZION'S AAiwnpoTHC DRAWS THE
NATIONS VISION OF GATHERING CHILDREN
(2): DAUGHTERS CARRIED ON
SHOULDERS (LXX)
v. 1-
ZION'S INVESTITURE (cf. H. VII)
ZION'S Aamttpothc SHOWN TO
THE WORLD
HER NEW NAMES (cf. H. VII)
5- Subservient Nature
(cf. C. VII)
(VII) j
lxi. 10-
lxii. 2(-)
[' I will greatly rejoice . . . ']
ZIONS INVESTITURE
HER NEW NAME(S)
5-
V. OF GATHERING CHILDHEN (3) :
CARRIED AS (ON) A ROYAL THRONE
(cf. H. VI)
Subservient Nature
8 ZION'S INVESTI
TURE
o
HGOhd t-3
c^ t>
QHi >b WHI
GO woCO W
The prophet's order is here abandoned ; chap, li follows liv, as if this lesson had been designedly allocated to the
fourth sabbath, the first after the month of mourning.
BAEUCH— THE CONSOLATIONS 103
The parallel between Haphtaroth and cantos is not absolutely
precise. Exact correspondence in position is confined to Cantos
(1) and (4) which are based respectively on the lessons for the first
and fourth of the sabbaths. In other instances the same passages
of Isaiah are employed, but not in the order in which they stand
in the Pesikta. Since, however, traditions vary as to the Haph
taroth and their order, and our book must represent a very early
arrangement, this difference presents no serious difficulty.
The relation between the Isaiah lessons which, according to
the most widely attested arrangement,1 were read on the seven
sabbaths and the Baruch cantos will appear from the Table,
p. 102. Upright capitals indicate correspondence between Haph
tarah and Canto in both subject and position ; sloping capitals
correspondence in subject but not in position.
The antiquity of this cycle of lessons is beyond doubt, though
its origin and development are obscure. Doubtless it grew from
smaller beginnings.2 I need not repeat Dr. Biichler's theory as
to its growth ; but it is noteworthy that he regards as the oldest
of the lessons the first and the fourth, which provide the model
for the first and the fourth cantos.3 A third ancient Haphtarah
was probably the last (ZION'S INVESTITUEE), which sets the
tone for the penultimate Canto.
These three passages, moreover, illustrate the two principles
which appear to have governed the selection. Those principles
were that either the word ' comfort ' must actually occur, as it
does in (I) and (IV), or the first word must be duplicated, as it is
in all three instances : ' Comfort ye, comfort ye ', 'I (even) I ',
' Exulting I will exult '. The Jews (with some modern authorities)
interpreted the words in the first Haphtarah ' She hath received
of the Lord's hand double for all her sins ' 4 to mean ' double
compensation for all her penalties ', and fancifully saw a symbol
of this in the duplicated words. Another system arranges the
lessons on this principle, for six Consolation sabbaths only, i. e.
double the number of Straf-sabbate, and each lesson beginning
with a double word.5 The former principle, the occurrence of
1 Found in the older Pesikta, the later Pesikta Rabbathi, and the Tosafoth
Megillah. 2 Maimonides knew of only one consolation passage as the ancient custom
(J. Q. R. vi. 64).
3 J. Q. R. loc. cit. 4 Is. xl. 2.
5 So the Midrash Tanchuma (on Deut. i). The list is xl. 1, li. 12, li. 9, li. 17,
lxi. 10, xxxv. 2.

104 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
the word ' comfort ', which gave its name to the series, is doubt
less the older of the two.1
I can but glance at the outstanding parallels between cantos
and lessons.
Canto 1 (iv. 5-20). Mother Zion's first address to her children
is prefaced by a divine consolation through the seer's mouth.
The topic — the reason for Israel's evil plight — links this canto to
the sermon for the fast-day.
The opening words ©apaeire Xaos fiov are an unmistakable
echo of the first Haphtarah W ioru icru. In Isaiah, of course,
the verb is transitive, and ' my people ' is object (not vocative) ;
the prophets (or, as in the LXX, the priests) are commissioned to
console God's people. But this is just what the prophet is here
doing ; nor, even if he did render his model ' Be comforted 0 my
people ', would he stand alone.2
In v. 9 Zion takes up the Xoyos irapaKXrjaews and remains the
speaker until the end of the third canto. In her first words we
have a second reminiscence of the Haphtarah. Before turning
to her own children she addresses her irdpoiKoi (fem.)> not, as in
the E.V., ' ye women that dwell about Zion ', but the neighbour
cities, which are mentioned twice again (vv. 14, 24). They have
witnessed the calamity of the Holy City, and are warned not to
exult over the deserted widow, but to reflect on the cause of her
woes ; they will (the next canto tells them) speedily behold her
deliverance. In this address to the irdpoiKoi we have surely an
echo of the prophet's call to Jerusalem to announce to her
* daughter-cities ' (Cheyne) the near approach of God : ' Say unto
the cities of Judah, Behold your God ' (Is. xl. 9).
This canto affords no more parallels to the first Haphtarah, but
the thought which pervades it of the desolate and bereft widow
comes from the second,3 as if two lessons had been run together.
At the close she turns to her children whom she is powerless to
help. With resignation she witnesses their departure after the
fateful 9th Ab. She exchanges the garment of peace for the
sackcloth of prayer, and will continue to cry unto the Everlasting
ev tois r)p.ipais pov. ' As long as I live ' is the usual rendering ;

1 In Baruch the double word is not found (even 6apo-eiTt iv. 5 is not dupli
cated), except in the last instance where the Syriac supplies it (' Arise, arise ').
2 Cf. Vulg. ' consolamini, consolamini, popule meus '.
3 Cf. 12 Ttj xVPf Kal KaraktHpDtioTi, 16 rijy X'lP09, ^ f'V™ 7aP <aTt\cicp8r)v eprjpos
with Is. xlix. 21 LXX iyu> 8« artKvoc Kal xhpa • ¦ • *y® &* KarfkticpStiv povr\.

BAEUCH— THE CONSOLATIONS 105
but may we not see an allusion to the ' days of season ' for which
the book is designed ?
Cantos 2 and 3, in which the Mother bids her children follow
her example of penitent prayer, offer no verbal parallels to the
.corresponding lessons.1 One leading idea of the second Haphtarah
has however, as we saw, been anticipated, and another, that of
God's forgetfulness, colours both these cantos.2
At Canto 4 (iv.. 30-35) there is a new Speaker. The Mother
city now becomes the recipient of divine consolation. The
month of mourning is over and New Year draws on. No more
mention of chastisement and the Chastiser (6 eirayaycov) ; consola
tion fills the field. Exordium and contents alike link this fourth
canto to the Lesson for the fourth sabbath. Qdpaei, 'IepovaaXrjp,
irapaKaXeaei ae 6 ovopdaas ae opens the canto. ' I, even I, am he
that comforteth you ' begins the Lesson.3 Eeprisals form the
topic of both. Isaiah dwells on the futility of ' the fury of the
oppressor ' and the transfer into his hand of ' the cup of stag
gering '. Baruch, with a particular enemy in view, voicing the
national thirst for vengeance of the generation following the
year 70, enlarges on the oppressor's doom. ' Woe to them that
afflicted thee, and rejoiced at thy fall ! Woe to the cities to
which thy children became bond-servants ! Woe to the city that
received4 thy sons ! ' As she rejoiced at Zion's fall, so shall she
mourn for her own desolation. In revenge for the burnt Temple
(so we may read between the lines) she will burn ' for many days '
with heaven-sent fire, and thereafter become the abode of devils.5
One little verbal parallel may be added. The two words used in
this canto of Zion's fall, irrw/ia and irrwais, occur in the LXX of
deute'ro-Isaiah only in the corresponding Haphtarah.
Cantos 5-7 (iv. 36-v. 9). The three final cantos may be con
sidered together. That the Consolation Lessons still form the
background is evident from the reappearance in Baruch of the
themes of two of them, though in a different order ; it is known
1 The nearest parallel to the third short canto is Is. Iv. 6 f. which in the
modern service is used on all fast days.
2 The speaker in Lesson (2), as in canto (2), is Zion herself : ' But Zion said,
The Lord hath forgotten me ' (Is. xlix. 14). The exhortation to long suffering
in the second canto (paKpo6vprjo-aT€ 25) and the promised remembrance in the
third (27) are apparently the answer to the complaint of forgetfulness.
3 Is. li. 12. ' Thy namer', a substitute for ' Thy maker' (Is. li. 13), seems to
come from the Lesson for the seventh sabbath (ib. lxii. 2).
4 Perhaps corrupt. '
6 Cf. Jer. ix. 11 (the Haphtarah for 9th Ab).

106 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
that the order of the three last Haphtaroth was variable.1 But in
two respects these cantos stand apart from the rest. The intro
ductory Odpaei is absent. * Beside the Isaiah lessons a third
document, running parallel to these verses, has to be considered,
viz. the eleventh of the Psalms of Solomon.
The relation between the three documents is shown in the
Table above (p. 102). The following results emerge, (i) The themes
of Haphtaroth (6) and (7) recur in Baruch, though in different order.
(ii) Baruch has no counterpart to Haphtarah (5). But this
Haphtarah is likewise unrepresented in the later Pesikta Rab-
bathi, where it is replaced by two passages from Zeehariah.
(iii) In Baruch its place is taken by the duplicated Vision of the
GATHEEING CHILDEEN. (iv) In both Baruch and the Psalm
an additional theme appears, which I call SUBSEEVIENT
NATUEE ; a picture based partly on Isaiah xl, partly on Jewish
Midrash, of mountains and hills brought low, valleys filled to
make a level road, and trees crowding into a shade, at the
bidding of God who leads the returning host. It looks as if
a scheme originally designed for six sabbaths has been amplified
in various ways to make up the round number seven.
A word as to the little Psalm of Solomon. It begins ' Blow ye
the trumpet in Sion, the holy trumpet of Jubilee '.2 The
' trumpet of Jubilee ' is significant, as it links the Psalm to the
Feast of Trumpets or New Year, and the sabbaths we have now
reached immediately preceded the New Year. It ends with
a short prayer, and in the centre gives a little picture of the
exiles' return with the three themes shown in the Table. Bishop
Eyle and Dr. James have adduced strong, I think convincing,
arguments for the dependence of Baruch on the Psalm. The
parallels in the added theme, SUBSEEVIENT NATUEE, are
specially striking. It will be observed, however, that in these
cantos Baruch has parallels with the Lessons which are absent
from the Psalm ; it cannot be urged that he knows the Isaiah
passages only through the medium of the Psalm.' The themes are
moreover rearranged, and the three cantos are only part of a
larger whole, all dependent on deutero-Isaiah. It is therefore
conceivable that the affinity between Baruch and Solomon is due
to mutual dependence on some older document. It seems pro
bable, however, that Baruch has in this portion, beside the
Consolation Haphtaroth, made free use of the Greek Psalm of
1 J. Q. R. vi. 70.
2 iv o-dXmyyi or/pao-ias dylav (tr. Ryle and James).

BAEUCH— THE CONSOLATIONS 107
Solomon as a subsidiary source. Whether the Psalm itself has
any connexion with an earlier stage in the sabbath cycle must be
left an open question.'
That the concluding section of Baruch is based upon the cycle
is, I venture to think, beyond doubt. The sevenfold arrange
ment and the recurrence in the canto of the theme of the lesson
in four (or five) instances out of seven can hardly be fortuitous.
External evidence of liturgical use.
From the internal evidence as to the designed liturgical use of
the book I turn to the meagre and uncertain external evidence
for its actual use in Jewish worship. The author's design, as
I said, may never have been realized in its entirety ; yet the
evidence, so far as it goes, curiously fits in with the results already
obtained. I begin with the negative evidence of Jerome, who states that
the Hebrews neither read nor even possessed the book : ' librum
autem Baruch . . . qui apud Hebraeos nee legitur nee habetur
praetermisimus.' x But Jerome's interests were confined to
Palestinian practice and did not extend to the Dispersion.
Against his remark we have to set two positive statements.
Both emanate from the region of Upper Syria. One dates from
the fourth century ; the other is ostensibly of the same date, but
may be a century or so later. The occasions indicated for the
reading of Baruch differ in our two authorities ; one of them is
ambiguous. (1) Evidence of the Apostolical Constitutions. The first passage
occurs in the Apostolical Constitutions (v. 20), a work compiled, as
is now generally admitted, in the latter part of the fourth cen
tury by the interpolator of the Epistles of St. Ignatius. In an
enumeration of Christian festivals the writer, after mentioning
the Feast of the Ascension, alludes to the future coming of Christ,
when the Jews shall look upon the Beloved of God whom they
pierced and recognizing Him shall mourn for themselves. He
proceeds : ' For even now, on the tenth day of the month Gforpiaeus,2
they assemble and read the Lamentations of Jeremiah in which
it is said . . . [here he quotes Lam. iv. 20 LXX] . . . and Baruch
1 In the prologue to his translation of Jeremiah. Cf. the prologue to his
commentary ' nee habetur apud Hebraeos '.
2 Two inferior MSS. insert \o>ov before yopmaiov. There is stronger authority
for prefixing ivvdrov : ' on the tenth of the ninth month Gorpiaeus.' See
Funk's edition (1905).

108 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
in which is written "This is our God. . . [here he quotes the last
verses of Bar. iii ending with the familiar words] . . . After
ward did He appear upon earth and was conversant with men ".
And ', he continues, ' when they read, they bewail and lament, as
they suppose for the desolation wrought by Nebuchadnezzar, but
in reality they unwillingly rehearse (irpooipta iroiovvrai aKovres)
the mourning which will hereafter befall them.'
The Constitutions is a compilation of older works. Its main
source at this point is the Didascalia Apostolorum, written a cen
tury earlier ; but this whole section is much expanded in the
Constitutions. In the Didascalia the parallel passage runs : ' As
also, after the mourning of the Christ,1 even until .now, on the ninth
of the month Ab, they read in the Lamentations of Jeremiah and
assemble and wail and lament . . .'
Thus the earlier Didascalia names Lamentations only, not
Baruch, and as the date of the Jews' mourning the 9th of Ab ;
the later work mentions Baruch as well, and for date the 10th of
Gorpiaeus. Two questions arise. (1) May we equate the two dates men
tioned, the 9th Ab (Did.) and the 10th Gorpiaeus (Const.) ? (2)
Had the author of the Constitutions warrant for his additional in
formation as to the reading of Baruch ?
The Syrian writer of the Constitutions employs the Syro- Mace
donian calendar, and we are left to discover the Jewish equivalent
for the month named. Most commentators identify the 10th
Gorpiaeus in this passage with the 10th of Tishri, the Day of
Atonement. If we may trust the reckoning followed by Josephus
and others, the equation should run : —

Syro-Macedonian Hebrew English

(10) Lous = Ab = approximately July
(11) Gorpiaeus = Elul = ,, August
(12) Hyperberetaeus = Tishri = ,, September

Gorpiaeus, in this system, coincides neither with Ab nor with
Tishri, but with the intervening month of Elul, which can hardly
be intended. The choice lies between the 10th Tishri and the
9th (or 10th) Ab. I think we are justified in deciding for the
latter date, because Lamentations, which is named along with
1 Or(?) ' for the Messiah '.

BAEUCH— LITUEGICAL USE 109
Baruch, has always been read on the 9th Ab, and I know of no
evidence for its use on the Day of Atonement. That the writer men
tions the tenth, not the ninth, is intelligible, because Josephus,1
with some Eabbinical authorities, dated the double burning of
the Temple on the 10th Ab, although in Palestine it was always
commemorated on the ninth.
I am, however, bound to admit that expert authorities are
sceptical as to the value of any information which the author of
the Constitutions did not derive from his sources, and incline to
regard it as his own invention and not based on tradition. Pro
fessor C. H. Turner, in a private communication, writes that he
' should hesitate to use this reference as any indication of actual
Jewish usage'. He would regard 'the existence of the well-
known passage in Baruch, referred by early Christians to the In
carnation ', as ' the sole ultimate reason for the naming of Baruch
side by side with Lamentations '. On the other hand, it may be
urged that the passage quoted occurs in the Homily on Wisdom,
which on internal grounds we found reason for connecting with
the 9th Ab. The external evidence, if I have correctly inter
preted it, confirms this. Again, if the statement in the Constitu
tions stood alone, we might perhaps dismiss it as untrustworthy.
But we have another witness from the same region to the use of
Baruch in Jewish worship.
(2) Evidence of a work ascribed to Ephraim Syrus. In this
case Baruch is not named, but a quotation is made from it which
the Jewish synagogue are represented as singing on a date shortly
before Passover. The passage occurs in a Palm Sunday sermon
or diatribe against the Jews entitled ' A sermon against the Jews
delivered on the first of the week of Hosannas, of the same our
father, the holy Mar Ephraim the Syrian'.2 The ascription to
St. Ephraim is, Professor Burkitt tells me, probably incorrect ; the
Homily appears to be later than a.d. 498, at about which date, as
we are told by a contemporary writer,3 Palm Sunday was first
observed as a festival at Edessa. Whatever its date, the sermon
is remarkable, not only for the light thrown on the early obser
vance of Palm Sunday (regarded as the Feast of Christ par excel
lence), but also for its allusion to a fast held simultaneously by
1 B. I. vi. 250 (iv. 5).
2 Syriac-Latin ed. of St. Ephraim's works, Rome 1743, iii. 209 ff. ; Engl, trans.
by J. B. Morris, Select works of St. Ephrem in the Oxford Library of the Fathers,
1847, 61 ff. I quote from the latter.
3 Joshua Stylites, cap. xxxii.

110 THE SEPTUAGINT AND JEWISH WOESHIP
the Jews.1 And, though this fast occurs at the spring New Year,
it is noteworthy that the special allusions are to the destruction
of Jerusalem, and to events commonly associated with the 9th Ab
and the other ' national calamity ' fast-days.
After extolling the Christian festival the preacher turns (§ 8)
to the Jews. ' He cut off the crowns to-day, loosening the crown
of Judah ; and the Lord caused the ruler to pass from his people.
. . . To-day the congregation that loved feast-days sitteth in
sorrow ; because she declined the feast-day of the Son, He hath
despised and rejected her feast-days.2 To-day the glory passed
away from the people of Israel . . . To-day the breaches
are multiplied in the dwellings of Jacob. . . .' Then comes the
Baruch quotation. ' To-day let the synagogue sing this song among
the people : " He hath brought upon me a great mourning : the Lord
hath left me desolate, and the Lord hath forgotten 3 that I am his
heritage, and hath reckoned me as a stranger, and as a widow
that is bereaved ".' Here we have a clear reference to the first of
the Baruch cantos : ' God hath brought upon me a great mourn
ing . . . the widow bereft of many ... I am left desolate.' 4 Later
on the preacher reverts to the Jews and asks (§ 15), like the
preacher in Baruch, ' What is thine iniquity, 0 daughter of
Jacob, that thy chastisement is so severe ? ' and returns
a similar answer. Yet for all this, he proceeds (§ 16), the nation
' now thinks within itself that a restoration shall be again given
unto it . . . Lo ! it expecteth and searches into the times when its
release shall be. It reads foolishly in the Prophets and under-
standeth not their words . . . With blustering voice it cries that
Jerusalem shall be built again . . . ' ; and then, quoting the con
solation passages from Isaiah on which Baruch draws, the Saint
rounds upon his adversaries (§ 20) : ' Learn, therefore, 0 Hebrew,
that the Lord hath built Jerusalem, and raised up her walls firm,
and blessed her children with peace.'
This sermon was delivered on Palm Sunday. We learn from
it that in the sixth century, if not earlier, the first of the Baruch
cantos was chanted in the Jewish synagogue at or in the neigh
bourhood of Edessa on that day. The context suggests that
1 The appropriation of Jewish prophecies to Christian use is another inter
esting feature ; while behind both Jewish and Christian ritual we may trace
the influence of a pagan festival in honour of the spring.
2 Cf. Lam. i. 1, ii. 6 (LXX).
3 Cf. Is. xlix. 14 (the Haphtarah for the second sabbath after 9 Ab).
4 Bar. iv. 9, 12, 19.

BAEUCH— LITUEGICAL USE 111
a larger use of the book may have been made. Now the Jewish
reckoning of Easter continued in Syria after its proscription by
the Council of Nicaea.1 Palm Sunday, according to this reckon
ing, would approximately coincide with the 10th of Nisan. Thus,
if we were right in regarding the date in Bar. i. 8 as a misplaced
gloss on v. 14, the Syriac reading in that verse ' on the 10th of
Nisan' finds a remarkable confirmation in this Syriac homily.
The homily further supports the conjecture that the ' feast ' on
which ' Baruch ' or the Jewish Dispersion which he represented
desired his book to be read was that of the spring New Year.
Why the mourning ceremony should fall in the spring is not
clear. I can only conjecture that the Jews of northern Syria,
following old Babylonian custom, kept their New Year feast in
the spring, and in connexion with it a Day of Atonement on the
10th Nisan, answering to the Palestinian fast of the 10th Tishri
at the autumn New Year.
In ah unworked field provisional results only can be expected.
I hope that these concluding lectures may at least have convinced
my readers that ' the liturgical factor in Biblical interpretation '
is one which we cannot afford to neglect; One thought remains.
British arms have in these latter days been privileged to bring-
some of the dreams of the ancient Zionists within reach of
realization. It may be hoped that British statesmanship may be
• enabled to complete the difficult task and to satisfy those aspira
tions, without the bloodshed which the Jews of old regarded as
the necessary preliminary to their fulfilment. Their debtors we
are ; and, as part of our rich spiritual heritage from Judaism, the
Book of Baruch has its lesson for us, in pointing to the path of
penitence, leading on to the quest for wisdom to reconstruct our
national life, as the road to our goal and ultimately, may be, to
consolation for our years of trial.
1 Professor Burkitt tells me that Aphraates (De/ Paschate, Demonstr. xii)
'fixes the Christian celebration of the Passion by the Jewish Passover'. His
rule appears to be : ' Let Easter Sunday be always the Sunday next after
14 Nisan.'

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I

THE BOOKS OF EEIGNS : TABLE SHOWING
CHAEACTEEISTICS OF THE LATEE TEANSLATOE
The text used for this and subsequent Tables is, unless other
wise stated, that of cod. B. The late portions are those entitled
$y and yS (collectively 08) .

a =

(3/3 =

/3y =

TY =

>8= _

Hebrew
1 Regn.
2R.i. 1- 2R.xi. 2-
xi. 1 i R. ii. 11
1
3 R. ii.
12-xxi. 43
3 R. xxii,
4R.
ADJECTIVES AND SUBSTANTIVES
(1)
(B»N)
ddpos
—

2R,xv.l8B, 3 R. i. 9 B
—
4 R. x. 6, 11
(2)
nsiB' -
KeparivT} Contrast
¦
2 R xv. 10,
xviii. 16,
xx. 1, 22
3 R. i. 34,
39,41
4 R. ix. 13
<ra\iriy£
xiii. 3
ii. 28,
vi. 15
—
—
 i
(3)
1H3 ,
tiovofavos Contrast
2 R. xxii. 30
4 R. v. 2,'
vi. 23, xiii.
20 f., xxiv.
2 quater
yeSBovp
xxx. 8,
15 bis,
23
f^oBla
—
iii. 22
—
—

.
(Tvarp^fxp.a
—
iv. 2
—
xi. 14
—
CONJl
JNCTIONS, PARTICLES, ETC.
(t)
Misc. i
av& fav on
Cf.
—
—
2 R. xii. 6,
10
—
4 R. xviii.
12 B, xxii.
19
4 R. x. 30,
"ItPK \V (
dv6' fav o~a
—
—
—
—
(5)
^5?D /
drrdvaQev

J
2 R. xi. 20,
xxi. 11, 15
4 R. ii. 3 B*,
Cf.
24, xx. 21
5A
1
3 R. i. 53
€7rdva>dev
—
1
2 R. xi. 21,
10 times in
xiii. 9,
4 R. (in
xxiv. 25
cluding
3 R. ii. 4
var. led. in
ii. 3, 5)
1 o-dXniyd renders another Hebrew word in this book.
2 indva8(v renders other Hebrew words in 3 R. vii f.
THE BOOKS OF EEIGNS

115

a =

(33 =

By =

yy =

78 =

Hebrew
1 Regn.
2R.i.l-
2 R. xi. 2-
3 R. ii.
3 R. xxii,
xi. 1
3R. ii. 11
12-xxi. 43
4R.
(6)(7) (8) (9)
< < (10)
Misc.
tn
k»t
OJK
CONJUNCTIONS, PARTICLES, ETC. (continued)
rjvtKa
ye
Kal pd\a
 1

 2
ii. 6 A, ,
7BA2
(=.W1)J
—
—
2 R. xii. 21,
xiii. 36, xvi.
16, xvii. 27,
xx. 13
29 times in
B, 24 in A
2 R. xi. 12-
xxi. 20
3 R. i. 6, 48,
ii. 5
2 R. xiv. 5,
3 R. i. 43
4 R. iv. 18,
xvii. 31
17 times in
B, 15 in A
3 R. xxii. 22
4R.ii. 5, &c.
4 R. iv. 14
SYNTAX
iyio dpi with
—
4
2 R. xi. 5,
 5
4 R. iv. 13,
finite verb
! i
xii. 7, xv.
28, xviii.
12, xx. 17,
xxiv. 12, 17
x. 9, xxii.
20
3 R. ii. 2
Historic
!51 exx.
28 exx.
2 R. xi. 7,
48 exx.
4 R. i. 18 a
present
xiv. 27 bis,
30, xvii. 17
bis6
[vii. 5,10] 6
1 fjvUa occurs in 1 R. i. 24 A (B omits clause).
2 Kai ye appears in Hexaplario interpolations in the A text in 1 R. xviii. 5,
xix. 20, 24 ; 2 R. iii. 19 ; 3 R. vii. 17.
* 3 Elsewhere thus only in Dan. (LXX) x. 21.
* <rv el . . . i\akrio-as 2 R. vii. 29 B is not parallel ; el has come from the
previous verse.
5 Contrast iyd> ii. 16, 18, 20, &c.
6 For these doubtful instances see p. 20.
H2
APPENDIX II

THE TEANSLATOES OF JEEEMIAH
EENDEEINGS

TABLE OF

The figures in brackets after a Greek word indicate the
number of times it is used.

Hebrew

Jeremiah a (i-xxix. 7) l

Jeremiah (3 (xxix. 8 '-li)

1

mni hdn m

TaSe \«-y€i. Kupio?

otjTws eiirev Kvpios

(about 60 times)

(about 70 times)

down to xxix. 1, 8 [13
xxx. 1— li. 34
AQ]
TaSe €iTT€V 2 Kvpios Xxix.
13 BN
2
nv hiph.
dvdij/ci) -nvp Kal Kara&dyerai
Kailtra trip Kal Karacp. XXX.
' kindle '
xvii. 27, xxi. 14 (xal
i'Serai), xxvii. 32
16
3
(n»oe>) nosy
u^avio-fios (18) ix. 11—
<J/3a.Tos (-ov) s (13) xxix. 14-
' desolation '
xxviii. 62
li. 22
4
1D1D np^
8e£acr9ai nat.8eiav ii. 30,
AaJ3etv Traibeiav xxxix. 33,
v. 3, vii. 28, xvii. 23
xlii. 13
5
N3T
ido-flai (7)
laTpeveiv (4) [Also xxviii.
9 larpevo-apev . . . Kal ovk
¦*
Iderj]
6
two i^n
Idov eyco tird-yd) V. 15, vi.
Ihov iyib (jjt'pu xxx. 5, xlii.
19, xi. 11, xix. 3, 15
17, xlvi. 16
[li. 35]
Ibov iya dyo xxxviii. 8
7
ny
Kaipos (27) ii. 27-xxviii.
Xpovos xxix. 9, xxxvii. 7,
18
xxxviii. 1
8
pe>
KaTac-KijvoOv vii. 12, xvii.
Ka-raXueiv xxix. 17, xxx. 9,
6, xxiii. 6, xxviii. 13
xxxii. 10
9
DI13 niph.
|ieTavos!v iv. 28, xviii. 8,
•n-aiiep-flai xxxiii. 3, 13, 19 5
(of Divine
104
repentance)
dvaiTaiiecrOai xlix. 10
1 The exact point of transition from a to |3 is uncertain ; a mixture of the
two styles occurs at the juncture.
2 A unique instance of this mixture. Of the converse mixture, ovras \eyet,
I have noted four instances in the B text, two in either part : xiv. 10, xxiii. 16;
xii. 4, xlii. 13.
1 In b afiaros occurs four times, as an adj. with yr) or 'iprjpos. In /3, in the
phrase elvai els ajiarov, it becomes almost an abstract noun ; cf. the vb. dfiarovv
xxix. 21.
4 Jer. /3 uses perav. only of human repentance (xxxviii. 19).
6 xxxviii. 15 B* = 'be comforted' (irapaKkrfirivai cett.).
•THE TEANSLATOES OF JEEEMIAH

117

Hebrew

Jeremiah a (i-xxix. 7)

Jeremiah /3 (xxix. 8-li)

10

nu

vojjiti x. 25, xxiii. 3, xxvii.
7, 19, 45 [Also = other
Hebrew words]

touos xxix. 20, xxxii. 16
KaTaXuo-is xxix. 21
KaTaXup-a xl. 12

11

3M

viros xiii. 19 (n-dX. al rrpbs

vdyef? xxxix. 44 = xl. 13

vot.), xvii. 26

(iv noXeo-iv rr)s v.)

12

DM hiph.

irapop-yijeiv vii. 18 f., viii.

iriKpaiveiv xxxix. 32 B, xl.

19, xi. 17, xxv. 6
9, xliv. 15
irapairiKpaiveiv xxxix. 29,
32 XA
13
' his soul shall be
e<rrai r) tyi'xh avrov els
eoTai r) \jr. (avrov) si's eupepa
for a prey '
o-K-OXa xxi. 9
xiv. 2, xlvi. 18, cf. li. 35
(bbv)
(cf. els irpovopr)v xxvii. 10)
14
TIC
TaXai-rrtopeiv iv. 13 (oval
o'XXuo-Oai1 xxix. 11, xxx. 3,
r)piv otl taXamiopovpev),
xxxi. 1 (oval iirl N. on
20 bis, ix. 19, x. 20
cSXero), 15, 18, 20,
(with doublet a>Xero),
xxxviii. 2
xii. 12 (xxviii. 48 Qms)
mc, it?
TaXanrwpia (iv. 20 = al.)
oXeflpos xxxi. 3, 8 (rj£ei oX.),
vi. 7, 26 (iji-ei rah.), XV.
32
8, xx. 8, xxviii. 35, 56
15
nrusEM
xapdxv. 16, xvi. 9, xxv. 10
%ap\ioo"uvT\ (xeip(JiovTi) xxxi.
J1W }
33 (-povr, N°.» Q),
xxxviii. 13 Q (-povr) BX),
-
xl. 11 (-povr) A)
Among other words characteristic of Jer. a, and absent from
the /3 portion, may be noted daefieTv and daefieia, 8iaaKopiri£eiv,
SiacpQeipeiv and Siacpdopd, SoKipd(eiv and SoKipaaros, eKSiKeiv and
eK8iKrjais,KaKia — KaKoiroieiv — KaKwais,KaTa8vvaareveiv,KXr]povopia,
aocpos, Taaaeiv (e. g. Trjv yfjv els eprjfiov), virdpxeiv, waei.
Of /3 words attention may be called to diroKXaiea&ai, diroaroXr\
(xxxix. 36, cf. Bar. ii. 25; Heb. "O'J 'pestilence', rendered by
Qdvaros in Jer. a and xii. 17), dirorpexeiv, fiopfieTv (cf. (Sopfirjais
Bar. ii. 29), yevos, Svvapis (25 times ; in a 4 times), Swaros,
evoiKetv, eirixeipov — ' arm ' (xxxi. 25, xxxiv. 4 ; cf. 2 Mace. xv. 33,
Vulg. manum ; in classical Greek only in the plural = ' wages '),
r\yeyLwv ( = -W), Ka6d, ttoXitvs (' fellow-citizen ' = m, xxxvi. 23,
xxxviii. 34; so only elsewhere in Prov.), npbs to (/j.rj) with inf.,
avvrdaaeiv, 0o/3oy, XPrilJiaT^LV' tyevSoTrpocpfJTris (=N"3:; once in
a, vi. 13). The. anarthrous infinitive is common in /3, rare in a.
The vocabulary of Jer. a, as a rule, finds illustration in Ezekiel
a and the Minor Prophets.
1 The simplex oXXivai is confined elsewhere in LXX to Proverbs and Job.
APPENDIX III

THE TEANSLATOES OF EZEKIEL: TABLES OF
BENDEEINGS
The phenomena are a little more complicated than in
Jeremiah. The various strata are as follows : —

„ i • f Ez. a (i) = i-xxvii.
Ez. a embracing l

(ii) = xl-xlviii.
Ez. /? = xxviii-xxxix exclusive of
Ez. (3/3 = xxxvi. 24-38.
Ez. a and Ez. /3 are the work of two collaborators ; Ez. /3/3 is an
independent version made- for lectionary purposes. The follow
ing lists exhibit (1) the main contrasts between Ez. a (i) and
Ez. /?, (2) renderings common to the two portions of Ez. a,
showing that they are the work of a single translator, (3) render
ings common to Ez. a and the third book of Eeigns, (4) the
peculiarities of Ez. (3(3 with an inquiry into their origin.
(1) Contrasts between the tivo main translators.

Hebrew

Ezekiel ai (i-xxvii)

Ezekiel j8 (xxviii-xxxix)

PHRASES

1
2
' (Prophesy and)
say ' (ITION)
' (They) shall
know that I am
the Lord '
(mm un ¦o)
(TrpocpqTevcrov Kal) epets
always to xxvii. 3
f Im-yvtoo-(ovTai) Sioti
| or yvd,o-(ovTai) ort
€YW Kvpios
to xxvi. 6 passim
PLACE NAMES
(7Tpocf>r)Tevo-ov Kal) etirov *
14 times from xxviii. 12
to xxxix. 1
-YVwa-(ovTai) on
eyw eip.i 2 Kvptos
from xxviii. 23 (where B
has Sioti)
to xxxix. 28 passim
3
-IV, "IIS
2op 3 10 times xxvi-vii
Tiipos xxviii-ix
4
' Tubal and
Meshech '
t| o~ijp.iraGra 4 Kal rd irapa-
TeivovTa xxvii. 13
Moo-ox Kal 0oPeX (with
variants) xxxii. 26,
xxxviii. 2, xxxix. 1
1 ipeU in xxxvii. 4. In a ehrdv renders the imperat. "IDK.
2 elpi is omitted in xxxvi. 38 B (= /3/3) and xxxvii. 14.
3 Only again in Jer. xxi. 13.
* — ¦'3?!' (°f- Nah. i. 5). r) 'EXXay Kal r, <r. ko.1 rd tt. means 'apparently ' Greece,
both the mainland and the adjoining islands'. Cf. Aristoph. Nub. 204 rr)v
o-vprraa-av (of a map of the world) and just below 212 TrapareVarai (of Euboea
lying alongside the mainland).
THE TEANSLATOES OF EZEKIEL

119

Hebrew

Ezekiel di (i-xxvii)

Ezekiel 0 (xxviii-xxxix'

GENERAL VOCABULARY

5

Q"B3N ' bands'

ot dvTiXap.pavouevoi xii.

ot irepi (riva) xxxviii. 6 bis,

¦ 14
9, xxxix. 4
.irapdra^is xvii. 21
ot p.erd (nvos) xxxviii. 22
6
naoB', dde>
/ d(j>avijeiv l iv. 17, xx. 26,
e'pt|p.oviv xxix. 12, &c. (8
and cognates
xxv. 3
times)
-
epi)p.os (10 times)
epi)Uia XXXV. 9
d<j>avio-p.6s (8 or 9 times)
dirioXeia xxix. 9, 10, 12,
xxxii. 15
7
n, m
' oiapird£eiv vii. 21
o-KvXeiJeiv2 xxix. 19,
and cognates
xxxviii. 12 f., xxxix. 10
8iapira-yT| xxiii. 46, xxv. 7
o-kOXov xxix. 19, xxxviii.
12 f.
8
mr
/ Siao-KopuC^eLv v. 2, 10,
XiKp,dv xxix. 12, xxx. 23,
vi. 5 (xx. 23 A)
26, xxxvi. 19
•| Siao-ireipeiv (v. 12 A) xii.
. 14 f, xx. 23, xxii. 15
o-Kopm£eiv V. 12
9.
jap.
elo-St'xeo-flai xi. 17, XX. 34,
o-vvd-yeiv 3 xxviii. 25, &c.
41, xxii. 19, 20 bis
(7 times)
10
aio
KaX6s4 xvii. 8, xx. 25,
&7a66s xxxiv. Ubis (xxxvi.
rvh, &c.
xxiv. 4
31 = m
11
KXijpa (5 or 6 times)
icXdfios (6 times)
12
nptn, ptn
J Kpa-raics iii. 9, 14, XX. 33 f.
[ 8-uvaTos iii. 8
lo-xupos5 xxx. 22, xxxiv.
4, 16
13
p6U
iii7epT]<t>av£a vii. 20. xvi.
iippis xxx. 6, 18, xxxii. 12,
49, 56
xxxiii. 28
The /3 portion has many other peculiarities, e. g. : —
(i) In prepositions &e. : the use of dvri in causal sense in
dvTi tov with inf. (5 times), dvrl tovtov xxviii. 7, xxxiv. 9 ;
a larger use of Sid with accusative, including Sid to (prj) with
inf. (Ez. a only in the phrase Sid tovto) ; el p-rjv = N? DK in
asseverations (5 times ; also v. 11 B, Ez. a else has edv prj) ; qviKa
av xxxii. 9, xxxiii. 33, xxxv. 11 (where a writes ev tw with inf.) ;
irepiKVKXw (10 times; cf. irirepKVKXw xxxii. 23 A); i^7r6 with gen.
(3 times ; never in a).
(ii) In general vocabulary : SovXos = ^^V (6 times ; irais Ez.
xlvi. 17) ; egeXeadai (a uses pveadai, aw£eiv) ; KaraSovXovv, Karep-
ydgeaoai, Tapdaaeiv, &c.
(iii) In syntax the practice of placing a dependent genitive
1 Also in /3/3 (xxxvi. 34 bis, 35 bis, 36) and xxxvi. 4.
2 Also xxvi. 12. There is some overlapping of the two styles in xxvi-vii.
3 Also with v. I. imo-wdyeiv in xvi. 37 (on this chap, see p. 26) ; 0/3 has
a6pol£eiv, xxxvi. 24.
4 Also xxxiv. 18. 5 Also xxvi. 17 AQ (Hexaplaric).
120 APPENDIX III
pronoun (or noun) before its governing noun becomes frequent
from the point where the two styles overlap, xxvi. 11 f., xxvii. 11,
xxviii. 2, xxxi. 14 = xxxii. 24, xxxii. 20, &c. (Eare in the
earlier chapters : v. 11, ix1. 10 B).
Of the rarer examples of agreement of the a and /? portions
perhaps the most noteworthy is eKKevovv pdxaipav (or popcpaiav)
three times in a, twice in /8 (v. 2, 12, xii. 14; xxviii. 7, xxx. 11),
a literal rendering of the Heb. ' empty out ' (i. e. ' draw ') ' the
sword ', but not without precedent of a kind in late Greek ;
cf. Anth. Pal. vi. 326 eKKevovv lovs = ' to use up all one's arrows '.
Other instances are ireXTij (xxiii. 24 and four times in /3 ; not else
in LXX) and arr}pi(eiv to irpoawirov (a eight times, /? thrice ; but
xxxv. 2 eiriarpecpeiv to irpoa.) ; in xxxvii. 7 two a words occur in
close proximity, eKarepos (cf. i. 11 f.) and dpfiovia (cf. xxiii. 42, in
different sense). These and a few other sporadic exx. may be due
to chance or to co-operation. Co-operation must, I think, be the
cause of the more numerous instances in the first two chapters of )8
(xxvi £).
(2) Renderings common to the two portions of Ezekiel a
(absent from 13).
The instances abound, notwithstanding the different subject-
matter of the two portions. An asterisk indicates that the word
or rendering occurs here only in the LXX.
to aWpiov (like Lat. atrium) ix, x ; xl, i-d vopipa v-xx ; xliii-iv
xlvii bv Tpoirov x-xxv ; xl-xlviii
dnevavri i-xxvi ; xl, xlii opao-is and o-^ris
d(pr)yovpevos (W£l) xi-xxii ; xiv ff. to irapd-rrav with neg. (no Heb. equi-
*dcbopio-p6s xx. 31, 40; xlviii. 8 valent) xx. 9, 14 f., 22; xii. 6,
*Di.ir\ao-id£eiv xxi. 14; xliii. 2 xlvi. 20
iyyi£eiv vii-xxiii ; xl-xlv naparnKpaivav o'ikos a passim ; xliv. 6
elo-nopeveo-Sai (K13) viii-xxvi ; xlii-xlvi napei; xv. 4 ; xlii. 14
*iv8vpr)paTal (|| 0 v1?5 ' idols ') xiv. 5, &c, npoBvpov (nflD etc.) viii-xi ; xliii-xlvii
passim ; xliv. 10 crayrpir, (D"in) 2 xxvi. 5, 14 ; xlvii. 10
ixdpevos-ov -a i-xi ; xlii-xlviii o-Kevos (v3) 3 ix-xxvii ; xl
rjyovpevos 5 times in either part o~vvrcXei>> iv-xxiii ; xlii f.
Kara with genit. Pt. i 3 times, Pt. ii Tda-aetv (01B>, 0^) iv-xxiv ; xl-xliv
8 times Tpiaa-os and i-picro-ais
Karevavri i, iii, xi ; xl-xlvii vnep and virepdva
T'/cdXa<7i£ (= ?lK>3t2) xiv, xviii; xliv imoaTaais
Koprj xxiv. 23 ; xliv. 20 Use of the historic pres. in the phrase
Kopvcpr) (B*N"1) Pt. i 3 times ; Pt. ii once m-mio iwl npoo-amov /aou ii-xi ; xliii f.
1 Through confusion of the gutturals 3 and V in dictation. The Gr. represents
nbby.
2 In 0 ayKio-Tpov (xxxii. 3). 3 In 0 o-rrXov (xxxii. 27).

THE TEANSLATOES OF EZEKIEL 121
Over against this habitual agreement of the two parts of Ez. a
must be set one remarkable instance of apparent discrepancy, in
the treatment of the divine title ADONAI JHWH (E. V. 'the
Lord God '). The composite name is a special feature of Ezekiel,
occurring in the M.T. upwards of 200 times. In cod. B the
equivalents in the various portions of the book are as follows :
In a (i) normally Kvpios ; rarely Kvpios Kvpios (5 exx. only in
i-xx, afterwards more frequently).
In B normally Kvpios Kvpios ; rarely Kvpios.
In (30 dSwval Kvpios.
In a (ii) with one exception1 uniformly Kvpios 6 deos (xliii—
iv), Kvpios deos (xlv-end).
Thus a (i) writes Kvpios singly or duplicated ; a (ii) Kvpios (6)
6e6s with or without the article!.
The evidence is set out in full in an essay on the Divine
Names in Ezekiel, with special reference to the LXX text,
contributed by Herr Herrmann to a volume of 0. T. studies which
appeared in 1913, dedicated to Professor 'Kittel on his sixtieth
birthday.2 Hermann infers from the above evidence a plurality
of translators (probably three) in Ezekiel. His lines of demarca
tion practically coincide with mine. He places the beginning of
the second translator's work ' somewhere about chap, xxvii ',
noting, as I did, some confusion (Verwirrung) of the two styles
at the juncture. His third portion begins, like mine, at chap. xl.
He differs from me in attributing this portion to a third
translator. Hermann's survey was limited to the Divine Names. He
would doubtless have modified his view, had he carried his
investigation further. This solitary instance cannot outweigh
the numerous examples of agreement between the two portions
of Ez. a.
The problem opens up large questions. Divergent renderings
of divine titles are commonly an index of a change of translators.
This title is, however, peculiar. JHWH was the ineffable Name ;
AD(0)N(A)I (the other tetragrammaton) was the spoken substitute
which eventually superseded it. The hallowing of the Name by
means of this surrogate antedates the Greek translators, who
constantly render JHWH by Kvpios, the equivalent of ADONAI.
What was the import of the combination ADONAI JHWH ? Did
Ezekiel ever write it and how often? Or is ADONAI in this
1 xliii. 27 Kvpios. On xliii. 18 Kvpws 6 debs 'io-parjK see below.
2 Professor G-. A. Cooke kindly drew my attention to this paper.

122 APPENDIX III
connexion a ' doublet ', a mere scribal injunction, ' Pronounce
Adonai'? Speaking with diffidence I should venture to share
Cornill's opinion that, while the double name was occasionally
employed by the prophet himself, the use has been widely
extended by his copyists.1
The apparent discrepancy in the practice of Ez. a may be
variously explained.
The most probable view, in my opinion, is that there is no
discrepancy. Translator a in i-xxvii wrote Kvpios, finding nirT1
only in his text ; in xl-xlviii he found rnrv ''JIN which he
rendered by Kvpios (b) debs. The inconsistency of practice lies
not in the translation but in the original Hebrew. Cod. B, with
its rare ~ks HTs in the first half of the book, is undoubtedly nearer
to the original than the MSS. which keep the double name
throughout; but that even B has not escaped interpolation
is shown by our earliest witness, the Old Latin of Tyconius,
which has a single Dominus in passages where B duplicates ks.
Alternatively, discrepancy in the Greek, if and so far as it
exists, might be explained by pronunciation. The Massoretic
rule that nin'' in conjunction with ''JIN took the vowel points, not
of 'JIN, but of DTPN, probably rests on earlier practice and would
account for the use of (d) 6e6s in xl-xlviii. The reader who
dictated the Hebrew of that portion of the book followed the
rule, which was neglected in the portions which employ k~s k?-
The practice of abbreviation in the original Hebrew is a further
factor which should not be forgotten. That mrp was represented
by * is shown by the confusion of the Name with the first
personal suffix ; e. g. Ez. xxxviii. 20 drrb irpoawirov Kvpiov (\\ 'at
my presence '), and conversely Jer. vi. 11 tov dvpbv pov ( || ' the fury
of JHWH '). But ' might also stand both for Israel (Ez. xiv. 8)
and for Judah (xxxvii. 19). Now nirp tin is in two instances,
one in each part of Ez. a, represented by Kvpios 6 debs 'IapafjX2
'laparjX here doubtless represents a Hebrew \ This suggests
the possibility that already in the days of the Greek translation
the tetragrammaton might be variously represented by a single,
a double, or even a triple yod, which has been erroneously
expanded by the translator, and that Adonai formed no part of
the original text.
1 Hermann, on ttye other hand, upholds the originality of the 217 exx. in the
M.T. 2 Ez. iv. 14; xliii. 18 (the first occurrence of the double name in this portion).
Also xx. 47 A.

THE TEANSLATOES OF EZEKIEL

123

These abbreviations or assumed abbreviations deserve remark.
The letter 3 was read as TV2 (Ez. xii. 23, xx. 5), also probably as
,;>3 ; hence the constant interchange of ' house of Israel ' and
' children of Israel '. K was read as ION (Ez. xlvi. 19). x *6 DN
was expressed by the initial radicals of the two words, which
were read as ?K, Gr. eiri (xxxvi. 7) ; Ginsburg quotes a parallel
in 2 Kings vi. 27. In Jer. iii. 19 the three radicals of *pK ' how '
were expanded by the translator into *3 nirp jok (yevono Kiipios on).2
(3) Renderings common to Ezekiel a and 3 Reigns.
As already stated, the evidence suggesting a common trans
lator for these books is clearest in the sections relating to the
two Temples (3 E. vi f. ; Ez. xl ff.). The Ezekiel translator
might be expected to avail himself of any existing version of
the narrative of the earlier Temple. But that this is no mere
case of imitation appears from the parallels scattered over other
parts of the two books. An asterisk indicates that the Greek
word or rendering occurs in the LXX only in the passages
cited ; a dagger that the word is not used elsewhere in the
Books of Eeigns.

Hebrew

3 Reigns

Ezekiel a

Description of Temple (vi f.)
1
D^lN
ralXdp
vi. 7, &c.
viii. 16 ; xl-xlvi
2
Misc.
tyelo-os
vii. 46
xl-xliii
3
Misc.
fypa<pis
vi. 28
xxiii. 14
4
Misc.
Tdido-rr/pa
vi. 11, vii. 46
xli-xlviii
5
Misc.
tSidra^is (archi
tectural term)
vi. 5, 14 A
xlii f.
6
Doubtful
tevSea-pos (archit.)
vi. 15
xiii. 11
7
Doubtful
*£vyoiv (i£vycop,eva)
vii. 43
xii. 26
8
*kP. = DON
*6vpiSes KpvwTai
vi. 9
xl. 16, xii. 26
9
*nns =
dvpcopa
vi. 30, vii. 42
xl-xlii
10
35
vcotos *(of felloe
of a wheel)
vii. 19
i. 18, x. 12
11
¦'ins
Trd birloSia
vii. 13
viii. 16
12
tp
rrpoBvpov
vii. 36
xliii. 83
13
' Misc.
CTTOa
vi. 31
xl. 18, xlii. 3, 5
14
Misc.
Tpto~cra)S
vii. 41 f.
xii. 16 (xvi. 30)
15
(i&5»i>E>)
+tu Tpicopo<pa 4
vi. 13
xii. 7 (M. T. differ
ent)
16
(JBD)
"'CpaTvovv
vii. 40
xii. 15 (M.T. differ
ent)
1 toiv lepeccv = "£> "li^N (for 'jn !>«). 2 I owe this instance to Duhm.
3 Redpath gives a 'wrong Hebrew equivalent here.
4 Word else only in Gen. vi. 16.
124

APPENDIX III

Hebrew

3 Reigns

Ezekiel a

In other parts of the. book.
17
to
fc'lyyos
xvii. 10
iv. 9
18
*HW) =
iavTiXapfidveoSai
ix. 11 [cf. 9]
xx. 5 f.
19
Misc.
tdirepeiheo-Bai
xiv. 28
xxiv. 2
20
nbx
tapd
viii. 31
xvii. 13, 16
21
DDE'
t SiaKpiveiv
iii 9
xx. 35 f., xliv. 24 1
22
Misc.
isPd£
xvii. 12
x. 2, xiii. 19
23
Misc.
fe'Kiroie'tv
xxi. 10
xlvi. 7, 11
24
nis, ns:
fipcpva-av
xvii. 21
xxi. 31 (xxii. 20 A)2
25
nin?
tirra7rocrreXXeLV
xii. 24 kB
xiv. 19 (21 A)
26
?D^liy ||
('idols')
f(TnTr)8evpaTa 3
xv. 12
vi. 9, xiv. 6, xx. 7 f.,
18, 39
27
Mii=c.
*k<it evdv
xxi. 23, 25
xlvi. 9
28
XT)
*rb 8ei
xiv. 28
xl. 7 ff.
29
31
tiKavovoSfo
xii. 28, xix. 4,
xxi. 11
xliv. 6, xiv. 9
30
Doubtful
*KaivoTrjs
viii. 53
xlvii. 12
31
Tin
KOLTCOV
xxi. 30
viii. 12
32
Misc.
tXdXrjpa
ix. 7
xxiii. 10 4
33
No equivalent
^to irapdirav
xi. 10
xx. 9, &c, xii. 6,
xlvi. 20
34
no, mo
tirapairiKpaiveiv
xiii. 21, 26
passim
35
Misc.
wapi£
iii. 18, xii. 20
xv. 4, xlii. 14
36
^n
irpOTeixio-pa
xx. 23
[xl. 5 = al.], xlii-
20, xlviii. 15
37
?3jn
ta-va-Kios
xiv. 23 (viroKa-u
£vXov cr.)
vi. 13 (llTOKaTCO
devSpov a-.) 5
38
\vhy
v^rrjXds
ix. 8
ix. 2
39
Misc.
+X"pa£
xii. 24 fB, xxi. 12
iv. 2, xxi. 22 bis,
bis
xxvi. 8
(4) Ezekiel 83 ( — xxxvi. 24-38) a version made for lectionary use.
Beside the broad lines of demarcation between Ez. a and
Ez. B, the above passage, of fifteen verses, stands apart and
cannot be attributed to either translator. It falls within the
province of /3 but has no kinship with his work. It contains
the promise of Israel's restoration to their own land, their
'baptism' from past impurities, the removal of the old stony
1 Also twice in Ez. 0 (xxxiv. 17, 20).
2 Also in Ez. 0 (xxxvii. 9).
3 = JTP'vJJ (' practices '). Error due to confusion of gutturals in dictation ;
cf. ivdvprjpara in List (2) above, p. 120.
4 Also Ez. xxxvi. 3 ; and once only elsewhere in LXX.
6 Else only Cant. i. 16.
THE TEANSLATOES OF EZEKIEL 125
heart and the gift of the spirit of God ; and, along with this
spiritual renewal, promises of the material blessings of rich
harvests, a cultivated land, waste cities rebuilt, and a population
comparable in number with the sacrificial flocks at the festivals.
Now the Greek of this passage stands out prominently from
its context ; it is a patch of a different texture from the sur
rounding fabric. The limits can be exactly defined. It is
bounded on either side by one of the characteristic marks of
translator /?, viz. the presence of elpi in the phrase ' shall know
that I am the Loed' (xxxvi. 23, xxxvii. 6), while within the
section the auxiliary is omitted (vv. 36, 38 B text). In this
instance /?/3 is at one with a ; elsewhere it diverges from the
style of both translators and recalls the manner of the Asiatic
school, Theodotion in particular. The peculiarities are as
follows : —
v. 24 ddpoLo-a. The Heb. verb (J*3p piel) is rendered in a by elo-bexeo-dai
(five times), in 0 by o-wdyew ' (seven times). 'Adpoi&iv, here only in Ez.
LXX, is the rendering of Theodotion in this book (xx. 34) and elsewhere.
ib. yatav (ni¥"IN). Biblical translators as a rule avoid the rare plural
of yr). The substitute employed by our pair of translators and others is
Xwpai. The poetical yalai, here only in Ez. LXX, was preferred by the
Asiatic school and is used by ' the three ' in Ez. xxix. 12.
v. 31 Trpocrox&eire Kara irpoo-amov avrav (Heb. 'ye shall loathe yourselves
in your own sight'). npoo-oxdi£eiv here only in Ez. Translator a writes
KowTeo-Bai (to) irpoo-ama (vi. 9, xx. 43) ; but Theod. in the first passage has
the same phrase as here and in the second a similar one, with the same
confusion of persons.2
v. 32 ff. The outstanding peculiarity in 0/3 is the use of the translitera
tion dSavai before Kvpios in the B text, in vv. 33 and 37 in the first hand, in
v. 32 in the hands of both correctors, where the first hand wrote Kvpios
Kvpios, the ordinary equivalent in 0 of ADONAI JHWH. The translitera
tion in v. 33 has the support of the Old Latin of Tyconius (ed. Burkitt,
Texts and Studies, iii, p. 33; in v. 32 the Lat. has Dominus only, the
quotation does not extend to v. 37). Only once again in the LXX does
dbccvai appear in cod. B, viz. in the Prayer of Hannah (1 R. i. 11), the
original Haphtarah for New Year's Day. 'Aiaval Kipios is the rendering
of the Asiatic school.
• v. 34 av8' wv on = ItPN nnn, ordinarily rendered in Ez. by dv8' liv.
Such combinations of particles are characteristic of the Asiatic school.
This one recurs in the LXX only in the later portions of the Books of
Reigns (App. I. 4) and in Deut. xxviii. 62 ; Theod. has it twice in Jeremiah.
ib. napoSeimvTos. The Gk. verb, here only in the translated books of the
LXX, similarly renders 12V in Symmachus (Ez. xxxiii. 28). Ez. a employs
Siobeveiv (v. 14, xiv. 15) and, in common with Ez. 0, bianopeveo-Bai.
1 Also in xvi. 37.
2 Unless we should read avrcov = vpav airaiv.

126 APPENDIX III
v. 35 tos Krjnos rpvcprjs. Here only in LXX is xijn-os used of the garden of
Eden ; the normal irapdbeio-ns appears four times in 0 (xxviii. 13, xxxi. 8f.) ;
but Theod. has Kr)rros in those passages and in Genesis. The O.L. of
Tyconius attests this reading (hortus).
Lastly in vv. 36, 38, as already mentioned, the elpi which translator 0
regularly inserts in the prophet's refrain is here omitted in the best MSS.
The abnormalities of this section are not confined to the Greek. The
M. T. itself has one grammatical peculiarity requiring explanation, viz. the
solitary instance in this book of the longer form of the 1st pers. pron.
anokl (v. 28), whereas ani occurs 138 times (Brown-Driver-Briggs, Heb. Lex.
s. v.). Another pronominal anal; Xeyapevnv appears in v. 35, the fern, form
It occurred to me that the peculiarities of this isolated section
might have a lectionary explanation. Alike in subject-matter
and in length it was adapted for public reading ; and, in fact,
I found ancient authority for such use in both Christian and
Jewish services. Two questions then arose. (1) Has this Greek
lesson come to us from Church or Synagogue ? (2) Is it earlier or
later than its context ?
(1) Is it a Christian lesson ? In the scheme of 0. T. lessons
in use in the Greek Church, preserved in LXX lectionaries,
the first five verses of our passage are assigned to the vigil
(irapapovr)) of Pentecost ; and the whole passage, lacking the
first verse, still stands in our English lectionary as an alternative
lesson for the evening of Whit-Sunday. The promise of the
Spirit in v. 27 explains the selection. On the other hand the
version is obviously Jewish, the product of the Palestinian-
Asiatic school of translators. Its peculiarities, as was seen,
appear already in the Old Latin (probably second century)
version used by Tyconius. It is hard to believe that at that
early date a Christian lesson had such far-reaching influence
as to affect all known MSS. and to leave no trace of any earlier
version. We must, I think, go further back and seek the
explanation in the synagogue worship.
With the Jews our passage was the primitive Haphtarah for
the sabbath known as that of the ' Eed Cow '.* The lesson seems
to have been originally confined to v. 25 ; that verse, ' I will
sprinkle clean water upon you and ye shall be clean ', gave the
passage its special appropriateness for the Jewish sabbath, as
v. 27 for the Christian Pentecost. If the choice of a festival
1 HOIK ms Num. xix. 2 ; the R. V. rendering ' red heifer ' seems to be
unwarranted. On this sabbath see Dr. Bfichler's articles in J. Q. R. v. 427,
448ff.,vi. 6ff.

THE TEANSLATOES OF EZEKIEL

127

important enough profoundly to affect the Greek text lies
between Pentecost and Eed Cow Sabbath, one might be tempted
to give precedence to the former. In reality, the Eed Cow
leads us right back to the origins of the Jewish lectionary.
The sabbath takes its name from the nineteenth chapter of the
Book of Numbers, containing the law of purification from
pollution by the use of a liquid in, which the main ingredient
consisted of the ashes of a red cow. The medicated waters were
laid aside for the removal of impurity as ' water of sprinkling '.
I am not concerned with the origin of a practice which the
Priestly Code doubtless took over from paganism ; merely with
the use to which the narrative was put in the Jewish liturgy.
' Eed Cow (or Parah) Sabbath ' was one of four ' extraordinary '
sabbaths, which in Talmudic times fell in the last month of the
ecclesiastical year.1 The sabbaths were extraordinary in that
there were allocated to them special lessons, from which they took
their names, falling outside the ordinary course of Pentateuch
readings. The sabbaths and lessons were as follows : —

Sabbath

1 Shekalim, ' Shekels '

2 Zakor, ' Remember
(Amalek) '
3 Parah, ' (Red) Cow '
4 Hahodesh, 'The
month '

First lesson

Ex. xxx. 11 ff. (the half
shekel tax)
Deut. xxv. 17 ff.
Num. xix
Ex. xii. Iff. ('This month
shall be unto you ', &c.)

Second lesson

2 K. xii (contributions for
Temple repairs) or
2Ez. xiv. 12 (value of the
shekel)
1 Sam. xv (Saul and
Amalekites)
Ez. xxxvi. 25
Ez. xiv. 18 (cleansing of
* sanctuary on New
Year's Day)

It has been established beyond doubt that the practice of
sabbath readings began with the above four passages from the
Pentateuch. Not only did they supersede the ordinary cycle
lessons, but Jewish tradition, which recognizes distinct stages
in lectionary development, assigns these particular lessons to
the earliest stage. If the ordinary sabbath readings were the
institution of Ezra, the lessons for the special sabbaths and the
festivals were ascribed to no less a person than the lawgiver.3

1 See the Jewish Calendar in Appendix V.
2 According to Karaite tradition.
3 J. Q. R. v. 426, quoting Sopherim xxi. 4.

128 APPENDIX III
The statement, exaggerated as it is, witnesses to a belief in the
remote antiquity of a custom of which the origin was forgotten.
That origin has been reconstructed with great probability by
Dr. Biichler. He maintains that the practice of Torah readings
on the festivals and special sabbaths originated in controversy
on disputed points of ritual. Of the four special lessons three
deal with eminently contentious topics : the Temple half shekel,
the red cow (both these are the subjects of special treatises in
the Talmud), the fixing of New Year's Day. Again, there are
indications that the allocation of these four lessons to the last
month of the year was not the original one, and that they were
transposed to the end of the calendar when the triennial cycle
was introduced. Another tradition connects the ' Eed Cow '
with the beginning of Nisan, not with the end of Adar, from
which Dr. Biichler infers that there was a time when this
passage 'formed the scriptural lesson for the first sabbath in
Nisan \l If he is right, the lesson acquires greater importance ;
it was a call to purification on the opening sabbath of the new
year. Passing from the first to the second lesson, here again we find
evidence that the Haphtaroth for the special sabbaths were
introduced before those for the ordinary sabbaths, perhaps even
before the festival lessons. It will be observed that, according
to one tradition, three out of the four were drawn from Ezekiel.
From this and other circumstances Dr. Biichler regards it as
a ' certain conclusion that the earliest Haftaras were taken from
this book, and were originally assigned to the festivals and
special sabbaths '.2
Eeverting to Ez. xxxvi, the document to which one naturally
turns to discover whether the lectionary use may have influenced
the text is the Targum, the Aramaic paraphrase read in the
Palestinian synagogues. The Targum3 quotes v. 25 in the
following form: 'And I will forgive your sins, even as they
are cleansed with the water of sprinkling and with the ashes of
the cow of the sin-offering ; and ye shall be cleansed from all
your impurities ', &c. The second lesson is here interpreted in
the light of the first. Again the concluding verse (38) runs :
' As the holy people, as the people which is purified and comes
to Jerusalem at the time of the solemn assemblies of Passover, so
shall the desolate cities of Israel be full of men ', &c. Ezekiel
1 J. Q. R. v. 449. 2 ib. vi. 7. 3 I use Walton's Polyglott.

THE TEANSLATOES OF EZEKIEL 129
specifies no4 particular feast ; the Targum associates the passage
with a lustration at the opening year in preparation for Passover.
These extracts show how closely this section was linked with the
sabbath of the Eed Cow. I have little doubt that the idio
syncrasies of the Greek text have a similar lectionary origin.
(2) Is Ezekiel (3/3 earlier or later than its context ? The answer
to this question is not so easy as it seems. It is difficult to
understand how a later version could so completely supersede
that of the original company ; that the Alexandrians incorporated
a lectionary version already current in Palestine is quite in
telligible. On the other hand, the style unquestionably favours
the second alternative. The marks of the ' Palestinian-Asiatic '
school are obvious. A mere transliteration like dSwvai is not
necessarily ' a Hexaplario interpolation ' as Cornill holds.1 Trans
literation of divine names sometimes preceded translation ;
aa(3awd is retained in the first book of Eeigns and Isaiah where
later translators wrote iravTOKpdrwp. 'ASwvai curiously reappears
in cod. B only in another old Jewish lesson (1 E. i. 11) ; for
public reading it may have been customary to preserve the
Hebrew form. But the accumulation of unusual renderings
clearly indicates non-Egyptian origin ; and, though the Asiatic
school apparently arose before the time of Aquila,2 we have
no ground for carrying its beginnings back to so early a date
as the second or first century b.c. The phenomena resemble
those presented by the Books of Eeigns, the unedifying parts
of which were filled in by Asiaticus ; with the difference that
here we have, not a passage which there was any reason to
expunge, but one which would be among the first to call for
translation. On the whole, I can only suppose that, in some
unexplained way, early in our era a later version of this
lectionary passage supplanted that of the original Alexandrian
company in the parent MS. from which all our MSS. are
descended. 1 Das Buch des Proph. Ez. (1886), p. 173.
2 See p. 26 above.

APPENDIX IV
THE BISECTION OF OLD TESTAMENT BOOKS
It was shown that the Greek translators of Jeremiah and
Ezekiel divided either book into two approximately equal parts,
unless indeed they merely took over this mechanical division
from their Hebrew exemplar. But this practice of bipartition
is not peculiar to these two books. I propose to collect here
(1) some further infernal evidence afforded by other LXX books,
(2) the external evidence, of a rather miscellaneous character,
for the prevalence of this custom of bisection.
Internal evidence. I can quote no further examples for bisection
on the part of the translators. I can, however, point to a similar
bipartition on the part of the scribes of the parent MSS.
from which all our oldest uncials are descended, in the case of
no less than three books, Exodus, Leviticus, and the Psalter.1
The differences between the two halves are here purely ortho
graphical. Their importance lies in their witness to a practice
of copyists, at a date far earlier than that of our oldest MSS.,
of dividing the books into two nearly equal portions. The uncials
have, in these orthographical details, faithfully" transmitted to us
the varieties in spelling of an earlier age and given us an insight
into the form of the archetypes.
In Exodus and Leviticus I have detected one certain clue only ;
but, if it stands alone, it is shared by both books, and the coincidence
cannot be accidental. It consists in the use or disuse of the form
edv for dv after the relative pronoun 6'y or after a conjunction
(r)viKa). I follow the B text, but the other uncials give much the
same result. In the first half of both books 6s dv and oy edv are
used interchangeably ; in the latter half of Exodus oy dv is
universal, in the corresponding part of Leviticus nearly universal.
The break in Exodus falls at about xxiii. 20, in Leviticus at or
near the end of chap, xv.-
1 The evidence is given more fully in an article in the J. T. S. vol. ix,
pp. 88-98.
2 The papyri show that the classical or tw was normal till towards the end of
the second century b. c, when or idv came in and remained thenceforth the
predominant form.

THE BISECTION OF OLD TESTAMENT BOOKS 131
In the Psalter the clues are more numerous ; the division clearly
occurs at the end of *. lxxvii LXX (lxxviii Heb.). Though mere
itacisms and the like, they are very significant. (1) Down to the
end of *. lxxvii the uncials, with few exceptions, write feminine
nouns in -eta (or -eia) without an epsilon, Svvaaria, evirpeiria,
peyaXoirpeiria and the like ; after that point they employ the
normal spelling. (2) In the B text at and e are constantly
interchanged in Part I, the last instance of this itacism occurring
in *. lxxvii. 12, iraiSiw for ireStw. (3) In Part I the uncials insert
the augment in the past tenses of evcppaiveiv, in Part II they
omit it.1
A second line of inquiry leads to a similar conclusion. In
some minuscules the character of the text changes in the middle
of a book ; from that point onwards the MS. joins another
group or family of MSS. I have been at the pains to trace
throughout the several books of the Pentateuch, in the larger
Cambridge Septuagint, the relationship of the text of each docu
ment to that of codex B, which may for this purpose be regarded
as constant. Such an investigation of ' the allies of B ' clearly
brings out the lack of homogeneity in certain MSS. ; the
type of text in one and the same MS. is found to vary from
book to book. Originally the constituent books of the Pentateuch
must have been written on separate rolls, and MSS. which
exhibit one type of text (say) in Exodus and another in Leviticus
witness to their descent from archetypes so written. But in a few
minuscules the change occurs in the middle of a book. An
interesting ' variable ' of this kind is the Paris Cod. o of Brooke
and M°Lean (= 82 of Holmes and Parsons). In Genesis its text
is Hexaplario; throughout Exodus, and in the latter half of
Numbers, it is one of B's strongest supporters ; in the rest of the
Pentateuch, including the first half of Numbers, it goes with the
multitude against B ; in the Books of Eeigns it joins the Lucianic
group. In Numbers the change occurs at xvii. 10 LXX, which is
almost exactly the middle point; according to the Massoretic
reckoning the middle verse fell five verses earlier.2
Thus internal evidence of three distinct kinds — style, ortho
graphy, type of text— indicates that the ' half-book' was a recog
nized unit alike for translators and for copyists of primitive LXX
1 It may be accidental that in a Psalter in the Library of Caius College,
Cambridge (H. and P. 206), the Psalm titles are wanting after *. lxxvi.
2 Similar phenomena occur in cod. a (Exodus and Leviticus) and cod. h
(Exodus and Joshua).

132 APPENDIX IV
MSS. It will be observed . that each of the three divisions
of the Hebrew Bible is represented: Pentateuch (three books),
Prophets (two), Psalter. This widespread recurrence of a break
of one kind or another at the midway point cannot be fortuitous.
External evidence. Before I quote the Hebrew witnesses, a few
passages in classical authors deserve remark. It would appear
that the custom of dividing a work into two halves was not
uncommon with authors and editors in the ancient world at large.
The physician Galen, in a eulogy on his master Hippocrates,
commends him for not, like others, writing books of 10,000 words
(or lines), to be afterwards cut up by their author into two :
' libros scribens decern milium verborum (or " versuum "), deinde
ipse rursum dividens eos bifariam ut alteruter sit per se.' Dr. Birt,
to whose Die Buchrollp in der Kunst 1 I owe the ¦ reference, has
more to say on this practice of Greek authors ; he thinks that
Thucydides' History was originally written in two rolls, of which
the second began at V. 26 with a renewed claim to authorship,
yeypacpe Se Kal ravra 6 avrbs 0ovKvSi8rjs 'Adrjvaios. Aulus Gellius
quotes Varro on a linguistic point to the effect that a book divided
into two equal parts should be described not as dimidium but as
dimidiatum librum?
But it is Hebrew practice with which I am directly concerned.
And here, I think, we must distinguish (though the two things
may have a common origin) between authors' practice and scribes'
practice — between the division of a work by its author or redactor
into approximately equal portions with distinct subject-matter
and a more mechanical bisection on the part of later copyists.
An instance of the former class is found, as already stated,3 in
Ezekiel, half Desolation, half Consolation. Joshua is another,
with twelve chapters devoted to the conquest and twelve to the
allocation of the conquered territory. In the New Testament we
have the two treatises of St. Luke of equal length, while the Acts
again falls into two nearly equal parts.
Then there are examples which seem to fall between the two
types. In the Books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles, we have
three concrete instances of the subdivision of a book originally
single. Here the partitionists (apparently the Greek translators)
seem to have been guided partly by subject-matter, partly by
regard to proportion. 1 Samuel breaks off approximately at the
death of Saul, but there is no obvious reason, other than a
1 Leipzig, 1907, p. 215. 2 Nodes Atticae, iii. 14. 3 p. 37.

THE BISECTION OF OLD TESTAMENT BOOKS 133
mechanical one, for the dividing-line in the Book of Kings.
In both Samuel and Kings the same rule holds good as in all the
instances of bisection which I have noted in the LXX, viz. that
Book I is slightly longer than Book II. In Chronicles the division
(at the death of David) is obviously one of subject-matter. Here
the rule is broken ; Book II is considerably the longer of the two.
External evidence proving the existence of the practice of
mechanical bisection of books is afforded by two important
Eabbinical passages.
The first occurs in the tractate Megilla of the Jerusalem Talmud.1
Among other regulations for the guidance of copyists of Scripture
the following is laid down: 'The writing on skin (Gewil, blJ)
should be on the hairy side, on parchment (Kelaf *bp) on the
smooth side ; to reverse this arrangement is forbidden. One must
not write half of it [i.e. half the book] on skin and half of it on
parchment ; but one may write one half of it on the skin of a clean
fame animal (ram) and the other half on the skin of a clean wild
animal ('Tn).' The passage presupposes a practice of writing
either half of a book on different materials.
The second passage occurs in the tractate Sopherim.2 ¦ After
stating that a copy of the complete Pentateuch must not be split
up into its component books, because one must not diminish the
sanctity of the whole which is greater than that of its parts, the
writer proceeds to mention the reverse process of building up
a Pentateuch out of smaller units. 'They do not', he writes,
' combine two books of the Pentateuch [lit. " two-fifths "] into one,
nor a book and a half into one volume ; but if it is intended to add
the remainder [i. e. to make up a complete Pentateuch later on]
it is permitted.' Here again we have the half-book mentioned
as a normal unit. These two passages seem conclusive.3
Another piece of evidence, perhaps the most important of all,
remains to be mentioned. The Massoretes, among other laborious

¦'o

1 T. J. Meg. 71 a. I owe the reference to L. Blau, Stuclien zum alihebraischen
Buchwesen (1902), p. 22.
2 iii. 4.
3 The relevance of a third is doubtful. In the Babylonian Talmud (Baba
Bathra, 13 b) there is a discussion about the division of property between heirs.
The Mishna forbids such persons to divide a copy of the Scriptures, on which
R. Samuel remarks that this prohibition applies only to a case where the
Scriptures are in one roll ; if in two, the heirs are at liberty to take one each.
But the reference here is apparently to a two volume copy of the whole Old
Testament, not to any single book.

134 APPENDIX IV
calculations, ascertained which was the middle verse, the middle
word, the middle letter in each book of Scripture. But the
beginnings of this practice date back behind the Massoretes.
In a passage in the Talmud,1 which cannot be later than a.d. 300,
the custom is already described as ancient. ' The ancients ', we
there read, ' were called Soferim because they counted all the
letters in the Law. They said that the Vav in the word gahon
[Lev. xi. 42] is the middle letter in the Law : the words " diligently
sought " [ib. x. 16] the middle words : the verse " then shall he be
shaven " [ib. xiii. 33] the middle verse. The Ayin in the word
yd'ar [" wood ",*. Ixxx. 14(13)] is the middle [letter] in the Psalter,
the verse "But he, being full of compassion, forgave their
iniquity" [*. lxxviii. 38] the middle verse.' We are not, indeed,
told that the ancients, like the Massoretes, calculated the middle
point in each book of the Pentateuch ; but it is noteworthy that
only the Pentateuch and the Psalter are mentioned. From this
and from the further fact that only in these portions of Scripture
is the middle letter indicated in the M. T. by larger script,
Dr. Ludwig Blau in his ' Massoretic Studies ' 2 infers that the
process of calculation began with the law-book and the hymn-
book of the Jewish Church. And it is just in these portions that
the changes in the orthography of the LXX MSS. occur,
which point to a practice of bisection.
Since the Massoretes based their calculations on earlier models,
we are led to compare their division of the books, according to
verses, with that of the early scribes and translators of the LXX,
and to inquire whether there is any connexion between the two.
The relation, in fact, is practically constant. In each book the
Greeks drew their line a little later than the Massoretes. In Exodus
the Massoretic division comes at xxii. 27 [28 LXX], that of the
Greek copyists at xxiii. 20, twenty -three verses later ; in Leviticus
the Massoretic Part II begins at xv. 7, the Greek at or about xvi. 1,
twenty-seven verses later; in Numbers the Massoretic middle point
falls at xvii. 20 [5 LXX], that of the Greeks, as attested by the
variation in the character of the text represented by cod. o (see
above), at xvii. 25 [1(1 LXX], five verses later. The Massoretes
bisect the Psalter at lxxviii. 36, ' the ancients ' two verses later,
the Greeks at the end of the same Psalm. In Ezekiel the
Massoretic dividing-line falls at xxvi. 1, the Greek at xxviii. 1,
while throughout this interval of two chapters there is a significant
' T. B. Kiddushin, 30 a.
2 J. Q. R. viii. (1896) and ix. (1897).

THE BISECTION OF OLD TESTAMENT BOOKS 135
mixture of the two styles in the Greek, suggestive of co-operation
between the translators. In Jeremiah, owing to the dislocation
of text and uncertainty as to the limits of the Greek Part II, no
exact comparison is possible. Similarly, as we saw, the Books of
Samuel and Kings were broken a little after the half-way point.
Can we account for this relation between the two dividing-
lines? The middle verse would rarely, if ever, coincide with
a break in the subject-matter. Scribes or translators, desiring to
approximate as nearly as possible to an equal division, were likely
to break the text at the first convenient halting-place after the
central point. And here we may, I think, push the comparison
with the Massoretic procedure a little further. In Exodus the
respective dividing-lines are xxii. 27 and xxiii. 20 ; at xxiii. 20
in the M. T, occurs the first s after the middle point, the first
indication, that is, of the beginning of a new ' open section ' —
a section for which a new line was required. Similarly at
Numbers xvii. 25 (the Greek dividing-line) occurs the first mark
of a new section (a) after the middle point (xvii. 20). In
Leviticus one s intervenes before the transitional point in the
Greek, but at that point occurs the first of the larger Massoretic
divisions, marked by a triple s. 'The Psalms', writes Dr.
Ginsburg,1 ' have no sections, as each Psalm constitutes a con
tinuous and undivided whole ' ; the Greek scribes made their
break at the close of the very Psalm which, according to the
Massoretes, contained the middle verse.
That the Massoretic practice may have had its counterpart at
Alexandria was suggested a quarter of a century ago in Dr. Blau's
' Massoretic Studies' already mentioned. After referring to kindred
phenomena in the stichometries of Greek and Latin Bibles, he
proceeds : ' I should merely like to suggest the question whether
the letter- counting of the Hebrew Bible did not give the students
and copyists of the Septuagint the first impulse towards a similar
proceeding. The Greek translators and the first people to use
and disseminate this version were, of course, Jews, and the
possibility that the Greek text of the Bible had its Massoretes
as well as the Hebrew is, therefore, not a priori to be rejected.' a
The suggestion, I venture to think, receives remarkable support
from the LXX evidence, of which the writer was unaware.
Dr. Blau conjectures that, as 'the Grecian stichometry and con
sequently also the counting of the letters which was connected
1 Introduction to Heb. Bible, p. 1 7.
2 J. Q. R. viii. (1896), p. 355 f.

136 APPENDIX IV
with it, goes back to the habits of the booksellers of classical
antiquity, who paid the copyists on a scale of this sort ', so the
fixing of the transcribers' remuneration may have given rise to
these elaborate Jewish calculations.
Two further testimonies of doubtful import^in art and in
tradition — may be appended. For a possible contribution of art
to this inquiry reference may be made to the ' double rolls ' and
' split rolls ' which figure in mediaeval illustrations and are
a source of perplexity to Dr. Birt.1 More apposite, perhaps, is
one item, with an apparently underlying element of truth, in
a fantastic account of the translation of the Greek Bible by a
writer not famous for veracity. Epiphanius, who quotes tradition
as his authority (cay aSerai Xoyos), asserts that the translators were
locked up in skylighted cells in pairs with attendants and short
hand writers ; each pair was entrusted with one book, the books
were then circulated and, in the result, thirty-six identical
versions of the whole Bible were produced. Zvyfj gvytj Kara
cUiaKov ('a pair to a cell') are his words; and again eKaarv 8e
£vytf f3i[3Xos p-ia eireSiSoro, cbs elireiv r\ /3i/3Aoy rfjs tov Koapov
Teveaews pia £vyfj, 17 "E^oSos twv vlwv 'IapafjX 777 dXX-n £vyfj,
(to) AeviriKov rfj dXXv Kal Kadegfjs aXXt] f3i[3Xos rjj aXXv.2 This
appears to describe fairly accurately the procedure adopted by
the translators of Jeremiah and Ezekiel ; in other books internal
evidence indicates no more than co-operation of a pair of copyists.
1 Die Buchrolle in der Kunst, p. 326, &c.
2 De mens, et pond. 3ff.

APPENDIX V

JEWISH CALENDAE
The months are lunar months. The calendar was adapted to the solar year by an occasional intercalary month (a second Adar).

mwu M« 03

' (I) NISAN

1
14 to
21

Ecclesiastical New Year
I FEAST of PASSOVER and UNLEAVENED
| BREAD (MASSOTH)

1
Ph
Or J
Hp

(II) IYYAR

(III) SIWAN

c. 6

FEAST of PENTECOST or WEEKS
(SHABUOTH)

<!
t>« '
CO

(IV) TAMMUZ

17

FA FA

ST (BABYL'V CAPTURE OF JERUSALEM)
/First sabbath of Punishment
Second „ ,,

M

(V) AB
(VI) ELUL

9

'Third „
ST (BURNING OF TEMPLE)
/¦First sabbath of Consolation
Second ,, „
Third „

1

Ne .<

vv Year for tithes
Fourth sabbath of Consolation
FifthSixth ,, „
VSeventh ,, v

(VII) TISHRI

(VIII) MAKHESHWAN

(IX) KISLEW

(X) TEBETH

(XI) SHEBAT

m (XII) ADAK

1 3
10
15 to
22

25 to

J
10

14
15

Civil New Year (ROSH HA-SHANAH)
FAST OF GEDALIAH
DAY OF ATONEMENT (YOM KIPPUR)
, FEAST of TABERNACLES (SUKKOTH)
and of EIGHTH DAY

FEAST OF

I DEDICATION (HANUKK.AH)
FAST (BEGINNING OF BABYLONIAN
SIEGE OF JERUSALEM)

Sabbath Shekalim
Sabbath Zakor
• FEAST of PURIM
' Sabbath Parah
Sabbath Hahodesh

GENERAL INDEX

Ab, fast of 9th, 82 ff., 93, 95 ff.
Abbreviations of Hebrew words 34,
122 f.
Abrahams, I., 67
Adonai .thwh 121 f., 125
dbcavai 129
Alexander Jannaeus 62
Allen, W. C, 22 f.
Analogy, influence of, on Jewish ritual
40
anoki and ani 23, 126
Anthropomorphism 34, 56, 69
Apollo = Resheph 52 f.
ApoUonia 53
Apostolical Constitutions 107 ff.
Aquila 14, 16, 23, 26, 32, 75
Aramaism, alleged, in N.T. 22 f.
Aratus 54
Aristeas, Letter of , 11 f.
Aristophanes 118
Arsuf (R esheph-towxi) 53
Asiatic Greek 26 ff.
Asiatic school of translators 14, 17, 19,
32, 125, 129
Atonement, Day of, 45, 74, 83
Augustine 70
Babylon as pseudonym for Rome 36,
89 f
Ball, C. J., 57 f.
Baltasar (?) = Titus 89 f.
Baruch, Book of, 80 ff.
,, , Greek Apocalypse of, 53
„ , supposed lost Book of, 30
Ben Sira, Wisdom of, 98 ff.
Birt, T., 132, 136
Bisection of books 28, 30, 37, 130 ff.
Blau, L., 133 ff.
Briggs, C. A., 76
Biichler, A., 43 f, 84, 90, 93, 101, 103,
128
Burkitt, F. C, 25, 78, 109, 111
Burney, C. F., §1, 67
Call of prophet to office 33 f.
Canticle as nucleus of Haphtarah 45,
78
Cantos, the seven, in Baruch 100 ff.
Capitulary systems in MSS. 22
Catchwords, lectionary, 46, 50 f.
Charles, R. H,, 46, 87
Cheyne, T. K., 56, 71

Chief Musician 49, 69
Chronicles, expurgation in, 19; division
of, into two books, 132 f.
Codex A 16, 53
„ B 16, 18, 31, 70, 122, 131
„ o (a, h) 131
Collaboration of translators 35
Colophons in Jeremiah 36
Company of translators 28, 39, 48
Complutensian text 55
Consolation sabbaths 83, 101
Curses recited at Pentecost 48
Daniel LXX 13
David, 'whitewashing of, 18 f. ; death
of, as termination of volume, 19
Daylight, perpetual, millennial bless
ing of, 66
Dedication, Feast of, 42 f., 91
binrpcovelv 12
Dictation, errors due to, 33, 39, 122,
124
Didascalia Apostolorum 108
Division of books 17, 19. Cf. Bisection
Driver, S. R, 47, 58, 69, 71, 75
Duhm, B., 30, 123
Duplicated words in Isaiah lessons
103 f.
iya> elpt with finite verb 23, 26
Elul, month of, 101/
Enoch, Book of Secrets of, 53
Ephraim Syrus, work ascribed to, 109 ff.
Epiphanius, on the pairs of translators,
136
Equinox, autumnal, 62, 64, 78
Esdras A 13
„ B25
fi/'favos 26
Ewald, H., 81, 96, 98
Exodus, bisection of, 130 f.
Expurgation of history of Monarchy
16, 19
Ezekiel, division of subject-matter, 37,
132 ; earliest Haphtaroth from, 128 ;
Greek translators of, 28 f., 37 ff.,
118 ff.
Fast-days, post-exilic, 82 f._
Festivals, evolution of Jewish, 41 ff.
Final chapters as Haphtaroth 45
Galen 132

140

GENEEAL INDEX

Ganneau, Clermont, 53 f.
Ginsburg, C. D., 123
Gog and Magog 65, 68
Gorpiaeus, month of, 107 f.
Habakkuk, Psalm of, 47 ff.
Hannah, Song of. 94 ; Prayer of, 125
Haphtaroth (Prophetical lessons), ori
gins of, 45, 101 ff., 126 ff.
Harwell, R. R., 80, 85 f., 92, 95.
Herrmann, J., 121
Hippolytus 54
Historic present, functions of, 20 ff.
' Hosannas ' = palm-branches 75
Illumination of Temple at F. of Taber
nacles 63 f., 66, 74, 78
Imitation of Hebrew in LXX 32 f.
Inscriptions, sepulchral, 26 f.
Isaiah, isolation of Greek, 28 ; placed
after Jer. and Ez. 37, 82 ; lectionary
use of, 101
Jashar, Book of, 39, 45, 77 f.
Jebb, R. C, 24
Jeremiah, Greek translators of, 28 ff.,
95, 116 f. ; Baruch cited as, 80
Jerome 66, 107
Job, partial Greek version of, 13 ; use
of, in Baruch, 98, 100 ; use of, on
9th Ab, 100
Jonah, use of, on Day of Atonement
45, 74
Josephus*25, 47, 62, 89 ff., 108 f.
Joshua, division of subject-matter, 132
Jubilees, Book of, 46, 56 f.
Judas Maccabaeus 42 f, 58
' Judgements ', Book of, 17
Keipdbes 33
KepctTivrj 23
King, prayers for, at New Year, 94
Kings, division of, into two books
132 f.
Kneucker, J. J., 85 f., 90, 99
Lamentations, Book of, used on 9th Ab
84, 100, 107 ff.
Latin, Old, version of LXX 32, 85,
91 ff., 95, 122
Lectionary extracts, translation of, 28,
38, 48, 124 ff. ; lectionary use of
Baruch 85, of Isaiah 101 ; (?) lec
tionary proem in M.T. 77
Leviticus, bisection of, 130 f.
Lights, Feast of, 43. Cf. Dedication.
Liturgical factor, the, in Biblical
exegesis 40 f., 72, 80
Lucianic recension of LXX 16, 19, 20,
24, 26, 54
Lulab 61

Luke, St., his suppression of historic
presents 22 ; his treatises of equal
length 132
Manetho 12
Mark, St., historic presents in, 22 f.
Massoretic calculation of middle verses,
etc. 133 ff.
Merkabah, the, 47
Minor Prophets, Greek version of, 29,
39
povo£a>vos 23 f., 26
' Morrow of the sabbath ' 44, 49 f.
Nabuchodonosor (?) = Vespasian 89 f.
Nations, groups of prophecies against
foreign, 29 f.
Nebuchadnezzar 97
Nestle, E., 51, 86
New Year, Babylonian Feast of spring,
94, 111. Cf. Rosh Hashanah
Numbers, bisection of, 131
6 oiv in Exodus and Jeremiah 33 f.
oSoHrdpos 26
Oesterley, W. O. E., and Box, G. H..
43,96
olo^tovos 24
Olives, Mount of, 65, 70 f.
Origen 14 f.
Pagan origin of festivals 42 f.
Palm Sunday, Syrian observance of,
109 ff.
Papyri as test of date 130
TrapaCdtvrj 24
Ttapob'niris 26 f.
rrdpobos (6) 26 f.
Paul, St., description of his call
modelled on O.T. 34 ; reminis
cences of 9th Ab 97
Pentecost as Feast of Lawgiving 42,
46 ff. ; omitted by Ezekiel 43 ; 44,
93, 126
Perseus 53 f.
Pesikta 83 f., 90, 97 ; P. Rabbathi 106
Philo 47, 62
Poems as Lessons 45
Pronunciation of Divine titles 122
Prophetical books, translators of, 28 ff.
Proverbs LXX, poetry in, 13
Psalter, Greek translation of,. 13 ;
liturgical use of, 41 ; LXX titles in,
46, 56, 68, 131 ; bisection of, 131
Psalter of Solomon 87, 90, 106 f.
Ptolemy Philadelphus 12
Punishment sabbaths 83 f., 93
Rabbinical arrangement of Prophets
37, 82
Rain-charm and rain-fall 63, 66, 74
Red Cow sabbath 126 ff.

GENEEAL INDEX

141

Reigns, Books of, 16 ff., 114 f. ; Book
III iof, translated by Ezekiel a 39,
123 f
Resheph 52 ff., 69
Rolls, ' double ' and 'split ', 136
Rosh hashanah (New Year's Day) 83,
94
Rubrics incorporated in text 49 ff., 77
o-al3ad>8 28, 129
Sabbaths, the four ' extraordinary ',
127 f. Cf. Consolation, Punishment,
Red Cow.
Samuel, division of, into two books
132 f.
Selah, glosses adjacent to, 41, 50
Sennacherib 68 f.
Seventy translators, origin of tradition
of, 12
Shabuoth and Shebuoth, confusion of,
51,57
Shammai 43
Shema\ the, 96
Siloam 62 f.
Smith, G. A., 63
Solar festivals 42 f. Cf. Sun-charm
Solstices 42, 55
Sophocles, Oedipus Tyrannus, 24
Strata in LXX 15 f.
Sukkah (Booth), the, of God 69, 73 ;
Sukkoth, see Tabernacles.
o-iv = m 26
Sun-charm and sun-worship 64, 78
Symmachus 14, 26
Syriac, Peshitta, of Baruch 85, 91,
93 f. ; Syro-hexaplar 85 f., 91
Tabernacles, Feast of, 61 ff.
Taldr (' navel ') as name for Jerusalem
' 67

Tammuz, Fast of 17th, 82 f., 93
Tebeth, 8th of, reputed date of LXX
translation 14
Tekuphoth, the, 42, 61 f.
Tereph, mountains of, 70 f.
Terminations, omission of Hebrew, 34
Theodotion 14, 23, 24 ff., 70 f, 90, 95,
125 f.
Theophany, the Pentecostal, 47
Thucydides, use of historic present
21 ; (?) written in two rolls 132
' Thus saith the Lord ', Greek render
ings of, 31
Titles, Divine, 28. 33 f, 86, 121, 129 ;
of Oracles in Jeremiah, long and
short, 35 f.
Titus 89
Tonus euphemistic 69
Torrey, C. C, 25
Transliteration 14, 24 f., 129
Triads, arrangement in, 81 f.
Triennial cycle, the, 45 f., 51
Trumpets, Feast of, 47, 106. Cf. Rosh
hashanah
Turner, C. H., 109
Tyconius 32, 122, 125 f.
Ur-Theodotion 24 ff.
Varro 132
Vespasian 89 f.
Vintage-gatherer, the Divine, 72
Water-drawing, the, 62 f. 66, 73 ;
(?) water-finding charm 75
Wave-offering 50, 59
Weeks, Feast of. See Pentecost
Wellhausen, J., 41 f., 57, 82
Winter, millennial cessation of, 66

INDEX OF BIBLICAL AND RABBINICAL
REFERENCES

Genesis :
vi. 4 LXX .
viii. 11
xii
Exodus :
iii. 14
xviii-xx .
xxiv. 11 LXX .
xxxiv. 22 .
Leviticus :
ix. 24
xxiii. 11-, 15 f. .
xxiii. 20, 22
xxiii. 40
Numbers :
xvii. 16 (1 E.T.) ff.
Deuteronomy :
xvi. 9 ff.
xvi. 10, 11, 12
xvi. 16
xxxii. 24 .
xxxiii. (2, 29)
xxxiii. 14 LXX
xxxiii. 26 .
Judges :
xxi. 19 ff. .
1 Samuel (1 Reigns)
i. 3, 20 f. .
i. 11 .
ii. 10 LXX
2 Samuel (2 Reigns) :
v. 8 ...
xii. 4
1 Kings (3 Reigns) :
viii. 53 b LXX
xv. 3 ff. LXX
xv. 12 LXX
xv. 25 LXX
2 Kings (4 Reign
xxv. 3
xxv. 8

s):

71
51

34
51 1261

. 76
44,50 . 59
61, 75 f.
. 51

. 4459
. 6152
47 f.
. 55
59 f.

61

61
129 97

74
26

76 ff.
. 18
. 39
. 21

2 Chronicles :
vii. I

93
88

76

Nehemiah :
viii. 14 ff. . . . 61, 74
Psalms : 1
ix. 17 LXX .... 50
xi(x)4 . . . 55
xix (xviii) . . . .51
xxix (xxviii) tit. LXX . . 56
xxix (xxviii) 1 . .56 (LXX), 60
xxix (xxviii) 4 . . . .59
xxix (xxviii) 6 LXX . 57
xxix (xxviii) 9 f . . . 56 f.
xxix (xxviii) 11 . . .60
xlii. 1-3 (xii. 2^1) . 73
xlii. 4 (xii. 5) LXX . . 73
xlii. 7 (xii. 3) . . . 74
xlii. 8 (xii. 9) . . 74
xliii (xlii) 3 . . .74
lxviii. 4 ff. (lxvii. 5 ff.) . . 59
lxviii. 9 (lxvii. 10) . . 58 f.
lxviii. 10 (lxvii. 11) . . . 59
lxviii. 32 (lxvii. 33) ff. . 59 f.
lx*i (lxxv) tit. . 68 f. ,
lxxvi. 2 (lxxv. 3) LXX . . 69
lxxvi. 3 (lxxv. 4) LXX . 52, 69 f.
lxxvi. 4 (lxxv. 5) . 70 f.
lxxvi. 5 (lxxv. 6) f. . . .71
lxxvi. 10 (lxxv. 11) LXX . 71 f.
lxxvi. 11 (lxxv. 12) f. . . 72
lxxviii (lxxvii) 48 LXX . . 52
Ixxxiv. 11 (Ixxxiii. 12) LXX . 78
exviii (cxvii) 10 . . .75
cxviii (cxvii) 27 LXX . 75 f.
cxlvii. 15 (4) . . . 54
Song op Songs :
viii. 6 LXX . 52
Job :
v. 7 LXX  52
Sirach :
xxiv. 8 . . . . 99
xliii. 17 . . .52
Hosea:
xiv. 1 . . . 83, 99
xiv. 9  96
Jonah :
ii. 3 . ... 74

1 English numeration, with that of LXX in brackets.

INDEX OF BIBLICAL EEFEEENOES

143

Habakkuk :
ii. 20
iii. 3 LXX
iii. 5 LXX
iii. 6 LXX
iii. 9 LXX
iii. 11
.iii. 19 LgX
Zechariah :
vii. 3, 5 .
viii. 19
xiixiv. 4
xiv. 6 f. LXX
xiv. 8
xiv. 14 f. .
xiv. 16
xiv. 17
Isaiah :
i. 8 .
xxx. 29, 31
xxx. 32 LXX
xxxi. 4
xl. 1 .
xl. 2 .
xl. 9 . .
xlix. 14
xlix. 21 LXX
li. 12
lv. 6 .
lxii. 2
Jeremiah: i. 6 LXX .
ix. 11 • .
ix. 12 f. .
ix. 23 f. .
xlviii. 47 Heb.
li. 64 Heb.
Iii. 6 .
Iii. 12 f. .
Baruch
i. 8 .
i. 14 .
ii. 16, 20, 23
ii. 26
iii. 16
iv. 9, 12, 19
iv. 23
v. 6 .
Lamentations :
ii. 6 LXX
Ezekiel :
viii. 14 ff. .
viii. 16
xvi LXX .
xvi. 15 LXX, 25 LXX
xxxvi. 24-38 LXX
xxxviii, 12
xxxix. 9 ff.

55 f.
. 50
51 ff.
54 f.
50 f.
. 55
49 f.
8282 6570

66 (LXX) f.
. 71
, 65, 71 f.
65 f.
61
68 50
69
104 103
104 110104
105
83, 105
. 105

105.

33 f.
. 105
. 96
96 f.
. 36
. 36
. 93
. 85, 88
80-111
.93f.. Ill
91 ff.
. 97
. 92 97
. 110
. 87
. 87
. 110
. 43
. 64
26, 38
. 26
38, 124 ff.
. 67
. 71

1 Maccabees:
v. 45 ff. .
2 Maccabees :
ii. 10
ii. 16
xii. 31 f. .
xv. 33

John :
vii. 37 f. .
viii. 12
xv. 1 f. .
Romans :
ii. 17
1 Corinthians ;
i. 18-ii. 16
Hebrews :
viii. 8 ff. .

58 76
9158
117

67 72
9997 32

Rabbinical Literature

Targum :
On Zech. xiv. 18
On Ez. xxxvi, 25, 38 .
Midrash :
Tanchuma on Deut. i.
Tehillim on Ps. xlii. 4, 7
Mishnah :
Bikkurim i. 6 .
Sukkah iv. 5-7 .
iv. 9 .
v. 1 .
v. 2-4 .
Rosh hashanah i. 1
i. 2
Megillah i. 8
Babylonian Talmud
Berakoth 57 b .
Rosh hashanah 16 a
Ta'anith 30 a . ,
Megillah 31 a . .43,
Kiddushin 30 a .
Baba Bathra 13 b
14 b

. 66
128 f.
. 103
73 f.
72
756268
63
101 63 14
81
63

64, 76, 96
. 134
. 133
37, 82

Jerusalem Talmud
Ta'anith iv. 6 . . 101
Megillah 71 a . - • .133
Other Works :
Megillath Ta'anith, Appendix to 14
Sopherim . . . .46
i.8  12
iii. 4 . y . . . 133
xviii. 3 . 56
xix. 2  67
xxi. 4  127

PRINTED IN ENGLAND
AT THE OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
BY FREDERICK HALL

3327