:^==^--f SDiatessartca PART II THE CORRECTIONS OF MARK BY THE SAME AUTHOR CLUE : A Guide through Greek to Hebrew Scripture (Diatessarica — Part I). Demy 8vo, Cloth, Price ys. 6d. ST. THOMAS OF CANTERBURY: His Death and Miracles. In two Volumes, Demy Svo, Cloth, with a Photogravure Frontispiece, Price 24s. AGENTS IN AMERICA THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 66 Fifth Avenue, New York Diatessarica— part n THE CORRECTIONS OF MARK ADOPTED BY MATTHEW AND LUKE BY EDWIN A. ABBOTT "This and this have I learned. Thus and thus have I learned it. Go thou and learn better." Huxley's Life and Letters, vol. ii. p. 301. LONDON AD-AM AND CHARLES BLACK 190 1 TO Jotjn %i$$ttoot AUTHOR OF THE HORAE HEBRAICAE TOGETHER WITH TROMMIUS AND WETSTEIN COMMENTATORS ON THE NEW TESTAMENT NOTABLE FOR THEIR APPLICATION OF JEWISH LEARNING TO THE INTERPRETATION OF CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES THIS BOOK IS DEDICATED BY THEIR DEBTOR THE AUTHOR PREFACE The object of this book is to demonstrate that Mark contains a tradition from which Matthew and Luke borrowed, and to discuss the corrections of Mark jointly adopted by Matthew and Luke. It is the Second Part of a projected series of works on the Gospels, and it assumes the conclusions of the First Part, which was entitled Clue. The following pages will incidentally present a mass of evidence for the translation-hypothesis main tained in Clue. But there has been no attempt to select such Synoptic disagreements as would be best fitted to put that theory effectively before the reader. The object has been rather to furnish the student with the means of studying for himself the relations between the Gospels, and to enable him to confute the book, if he can, with the materials that the book itself supplies. But, while neither denying nor regretting the ap pearance of weakness caused by this systematic non- selection, the author desires to point out that in a translation-hypothesis there is no room for the applica- vii THE CORRECTIONS OF MARK tion of the familiar saying, "A chain is not stronger than its weakest link." A moment's reflection will shew that, on the contrary, this kind of demonstration must be judged by its strongest instances. To repeat the example quoted in Clue (p. viii.) : if two Greek documents that are in general agreement suddenly differ by mentioning, the one, " Idumaea," the other, "Syria," we should be led to suspect that the diver gence arose from a Hebrew Original. " Idumaea " is in Hebrew din, and " Syria " is d-in : and their similarity has caused the two to be repeatedly confused by the Greek Translators of the Old Testament. Three or four divergences capable of similar explana tion would convince any reasonable person that they resulted from confusion of a Hebrew Original. And this conclusion would not be affected by the fact that many other divergences could be only doubtfully thus explained, and some not at all. Take the book of Job, and compare the Greek text with the Hebrew. There are probably a hundred blunders where we can point to the exact confusion of the extant Hebrew words or letters that has led the translator astray. There are some hundreds more that can be only doubtfully thus explained, or that cannot be explained at all. There are a few passages where there is no Hebrew extant, and where Greek interpolation may be suspected. But no reasonable person doubts that the great majority of errors in Job viii PREFACE proceeds from a misunderstanding of our Hebrew text, though we cannot at present in each case say what the misunderstanding was. Precisely the same argument holds good in the case of the Synoptic Gospels, as against the objection that "A few cases of divergence apparently, or even manifestly, arising from mistranslation, do not prove anything in the face of the larger number of divergences that cannot be thus explained." It would be truer to argue thus : "Six or seven cases of divergence explained by mis translation suffice to shew that possible error from mistranslation must always be considered first in every attempt to explain divergent passages. And if, in the book of Job, even with the Hebrew in our hands, we cannot always detect the precise error that led the Greek translator wrong, it is unreasonable to expect that we should detect it in the Synoptic Gospels, where the Hebrew is not extant. By a careful classification of the certain causes of errors in Job, we find ourselves able to explain, from confusion of Hebrew, a good deal that at first seemed inexplicable from this cause. The same result, it is hoped, may be attained, in the case of the Synoptists, by classifying their agreements and disagreements in different portions of the Gospels, by comparing them with the remarkable variations found in the Codex Bezae, the Sinaitic Syrian, the Arabic Diatessaron, and other ancient authorities, and by reviewing the total result in the light of a collection THE CORRECTIONS OF MARK of similar agreements and disagreements in the Greek renderings ofthe Hebrew old Testament." To the friends that revised Clue, the author must again express his thanks for similar aid. In particular, he is indebted to Mr. W. S. Aldis for a close and searching criticism that resulted in many modifications and amplifications of the first draft of the work : and Professor W. H. Bennett was kind enough to inspect most of these additions, as well as the first proof, and to add several valuable suggestions. Wellside, Hampstead, 16 March 1901. CONTENTS References and Abbreviation's . . Page xvii BOOK I DOCUMENTARY PRIORITY Introduction (273-5) ....... Page 3 CHAPTER I ABRIDGMENTS IN THE BOOK OF JOSHUA § 1. The nature of the abridgments (276-7). § 2. The encompassing of Jericho (278). § 3. Parallel in Layamon's Brut (279) . . . Page 5 CHAPTER II SAMUEL AND CHRONICLES § 1. Hebrew modification (280). § 2. David's reduction of the Philistines (280). § 3. Signs of posteriority in Chronicles (281). ' § 4. David's numbering of Israel (282). § 5. The tendency of the Chronicler's changes (283-4). § 6. The story of Araunah, or Oman (285-6). § 7. The answer "by fire" (287-9) . . ..... Page 10 xi THE CORRECTIONS OF MARK CHAPTER III DANIEL IN TWO VERSIONS i. The LXX both abridges and amplifies (290). § 2. The deciphering of the inscription by Daniel (291). § 3. The bearing of these extracts on Luke (292-3) ... . Page 20 CHAPTER IV CHRONICLES, EZRA, AND ESDRAS § 1. King Josiah (294-5). § 2. The explanation of the Greek additions (296). § 3. The proclamation of Cyrus (297-9). § 4. The preface to a letter to the king of Persia (300-3). § 5. Fasting and praying (304-5) . Page 28 CHAPTER V JUDGES IN TWO MANUSCRIPTS 1. The Song of Deborah, in the Codex Vaticanus (B), and in the Codex Alex- andrinus (A) (306-7). § 2. The difficulty of supposing that the author of A had B before him (308-9). § 3. The vengeance of Samson (310-1). § 4. Codex A less accurate again than B (312-3). § 5. Codex A, later on, more accurate than B (313) . . ... Page 36 CHAPTER VI PROOF OF MARK'S PRIORITY TO MATTHEW AND LUKE 1. Unsafeness of argument from mere antecedent probability (314). § 2. Analogy between the versions and editions of parts of the Old Testament and parts of the New (315-7). § 3. The Triple Tradition and the Double Tradition in the Synoptic Gospels (318 (i)-(ii)). § 4. Conclusion from the phenomena of the Triple Tradition (319-21). § 5. Illustration of the relation between the Synoptists (322). § 6. The Corrections of Mark adopted by Matthew and Luke (323). § 7. Appeal to facts (324-6). § 8. The use of a complete table of the corrections of Mark adopted by Matthew and Luke (327-30) ........ Page 44 xii CONTENTS BOOK II THE PRINCIPAL CORRECTIONS OF MARK1 § I. Arrangement (331-3). § 2. (Mk.) "the country of Judaea," (Mt.-Lk.) " the country round about Jordan" (334-5). § 3. (Mk.) " with the Holy Spirit," (Mt.-Lk.) "in (or, with) the Holy Spirit and with fire " (336-42). § 4. (Mk.) "rent," (Mt.-Lk.) "opened" (343). § 5. (Mk.) "casteth out," (Mt.-Lk.) "led" (344). § 6. (Mk.) "wild beasts," (Mt.-Lk.) "hungered" (345-6). § 7- (Mk.) "his brother," (Mt.) "two brothers," [(Lk.) "two boats"] (347-9). § 8. Mk.'s use of the word "proclaim" (350). § 9. (Mt.-Lk.) "Sir,"om. by Mk. (351). § 10. (Mk.) "cometh " etc., (Mt.-Lk.) "behold" (352-3). § 11. (Mk.) "by four," (Mt.-Lk.) "on a bed " (354). § 12. (Mk.) "before them," (Mt.-Lk.) "to his house" (365-6). § 13. The Exclamatory Interrogative (357). § 14. (Mk.) " seweth on," (Mt.-Lk.) " putteth on " (358). § 15. The "wine-skins" (359-60). § 15 (a). (Mt.-Lk.) "eating," Mk. omits (360 (i)). § 16. (Mk.) "except," (Mt.-Lk.) "except alone" (361). § 17. (Mk.) "plagues," (Mt.-Lk.) "diseases" (362). § 18. The naming of the Apostles (363). § 19. (Mk.) "parables," (Mt.-Lk.) "thoughts" or "purposes "(364-6). §20. The blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (367-9). §20 (a). (Mk.) "the (men) about him with the Twelve," (Mt.-Lk.) "the disciples" (370). § 21. (Mk.) "into them," (Mt.) "in his heart," (Lk.) "from their heart" (370-1). § 22. Interrogatives (372). § 23. (Mk.) "come," (Mt.) " light," (Lk.) " kindle " (373). § 24. (Mk.) " save that it may be," (Mt.-Lk.) "that shall not be" (373 (i)-(ii)). § 25. The mustard-seed (374-80). § 26. (Mk.) "they receive him," (Mt.-Lk.) "he went" (381). § 27. Jesus sleep ing on "the cushion"; Mt.-Lk. differ (382-6). § 28. (Mk.) "feared," (Mt.-Lk.) "marvelled" (387). § 29. (Mk.) "his garment," (Mt.-Lk.) "the border of his garment" (388). § 30. (Mk.) "villages," (Mt.-Lk.) "cities and villages" (389-90). § 30 (i). The positive instructions to the Twelve (390 (i) (o)-(e)). § 30 (ii). The negative instructions to the Twelve (390 (ii) (a)-(e)). § 31. (Mt.-Lk.) Herod "the tetrarch," Mk. differs (391-3). § 32. (Mt.-Lk.) "withdrawing" or "drawing back," Mk. differs (394-9). § 33. (Mk.) "on foot," (Mt.) "followed on foot," (Lk.) "followed" (400). § 34. (Mk.) "teach," (Mt.) "cured," (Lk.) "healed" (401-3). § 34 (a). (Mk.) "five," (Mt.-Lk.) "not . . . save (or, more than) five" (403 (i)). §35. (Mt.-Lk.) "that which superabounded," Mk. omits (404-5). § 36. (Mt.-Lk.) the "evil generation," Mk. omits "evil" (406-7). § 37. (Mt.-Lk.) "the 1 This table gives merely the section headings. The subsections will often be found to contain discussions on very important points, either in the context, or in other parts of the Gospels illustrative of the context. THE CORRECTIONS OF MARK sign of Jonah," Mk. omits (408-12). §38. (Mk.) "look," (Mt.-Lk.) "give heed" (413). § 39. The confession of Peter (414-7). § 40. (Mk.) "after three days," (Mt.-Lk.) "on the third day" (418). § 41. The Transfiguration (419-21). § 42. (Mk.) "he knew not what to answer," (Mt.-Lk.) "while he was still speaking (or, saying these things) " (422-4). § 43. (Mk.) "faith less," (Mt.-Lk.) "faithless and perverse" (425). § 43 (a). (Mk.) "unto me," (Mt.) "tome... hither," (Lk.) "hither " (425 (i)). § 44. (Mk.) "is," (Mt.-Lk.) "is destined to be" (426-8). § 45. (Mk.) "first" and "last," Mt.-Lk. different (429-31 (ii)). § 46. "Salt" (432-7 (i)). § 46 (a). (Mt.- Lk.) "it came to pass . . . Galilee" (438 (i)-(v)). § 47. (Mk.) "with- lowring-countenance," (Mt.-Lk.) "heard" (439-42). § 48. (Mk.) "as tonished," (Mt.-Lk.) "heard" (443). § 49. (Mk.) "cleft," (Mt.-Lk.) " hole " (444 (i)-(ii)). § SO. (Mk.) " a hundred-fold," (Mt.-Lk.) "manifold " (445-7 (iv)). § 50 (a). (Mk.) "after three days," (Mt.-Lk.) "on the third day" (447 (iv), see 418). § 51. (Mk.) "it was Jesus," (Mt.-Lk.) "Jesus was going, or passing, by" (448). § 52. (Mk.) "bring," (Mt.-Lk.) "lead" (449). § 53. (Mk.) "went forth," (Mt.-Lk.) "passed the night" (450-3). § 54. (Mk.) Interrogative, (Mt.-Lk.) Conditional (454). § 55. "Behold" and "behold!" (455-6). § 55 (a). (Mk.) "I will put a question," (Mt.-Lk.) "I, too, will question" (456 (i)-(iv)). § 56. (Mk.) "those," (Mt.-Lk.) "having seen " (457-8). § 57. (Mk.) "he will come," (Mt.-Lk.) " they say " (459-61). § 58. The Commandment-discussion (462-9). §59. (Mk.)"in his teaching," (Mt.-Lk.) "disciples" (470). § 60. Walking "in robes" (471-2). § 61. The reply of Jesus to Judas (473-7). § 62. The wounding of the High priest's servant (478-82). § 63. (Mk.) " the Son of the Blessed," (Mt.-Lk.) " the Son of God " (483). § 64. (Mt.) " from this moment," (Lk.) "from the present time," Mk. omits (484-5). §65. (Mt.-Lk.) "Who is it that struck thee?" Mk. omits (486-93). § 66. (Mk.) "was," (Mt.-Lk.) " sat " (493). § 67. Peter's three denials (494-8). § 68. (Mk.) (R.V. ) "when he thought thereon," (Mt.-Lk.) "having gone out" (499-501). § 69. The Jews prefer Barabbas to Jesus (502-3 (iv)). § 69 (a). Possibilities of Greek corruption in the context (504). §70. (Mk.) "bring," (Mt.-Lk.) "come" (505). § 71. (Mt.) " watched him (Lk. crucified him) there" (506). § 71 (a). (Mk.-Mt.) "his accusation," omitted by Lk. and Jn. (506 (i)-(iii)). § 72. The titles of Christ (507-8). § 73. The description of Christ's death (609-14). § 74. (Mk.) "he expired," (Mt.-Lk.) "coming to pass," or "came to pass" (514). § 75. (Mk.) " in Galilee," (Mt.-Lk.) "from Galilee" (515-6). § 76. Joseph of Arimathea (517-9). § 77. The burial of Jesus (520-1). § 78. (Mk.) " in a white robe," (Mt.-Lk.) "... lightning" (622-7). § 79. The end of Mark's Gospel— "for they feared" (628-33). § 80. Minor agree ments of Matthew and Luke (534-41) .... Page 61 CONTENTS APPENDIX I A Complete Table of the Corrections in Greek . . Page 307 APPENDIX II Oral Tradition . . . Page 325 Index of New Testament Passages . . Page 331 XV REFERENCES (i) Black Arabic numbers, e.g. (275), refer to subsections indicated in this volume or in the preceding one entitled Clue : subsec tions 1-272 belong to Clue : (275a) means a footnote on sub section 275. (ii) The Books of Scripture are referred to by the ordinary ab breviations, except where specified below. But when it is said that Samuel, Isaiah, Matthew, or any other writer, wrote this or that, it is to be understood as meaning the writer, whoever he may be, of the words in question, and not as meaning that the actual writer was Samuel, Isaiah, or Matthew. (iii) The MSS. known severally as the Alexandrian, the Sinaitic, the Vatican, and the Codex Bezae, are called by their usual abbreviations A, N, B, and D. The Syriac version of the Gospels discovered by Mrs. Gibson on Mount Sinai is called in the text the " Syro-Sinaitic " or "Sinaitic Syrian," and in the notes is referred to as SS. (iv) The text of the Greek Old Testament adopted is that of Professor Swete ; 1 of the New, that of Westcott and Hort. ABBREVIATIONS A and N, see (iii) above. B, see (iii) above. Buhl = Buhl's edition of Gesenius, Leipzic, 1899. Chr. = Chronicles. 1 This differs greatly from that of most earlier editions, which are usually based on Codex A (33). xvii THE CORRECTIONS OF MARK D, see (iii) above. Diatess. = The Arabic Diatessaron, sometimes called Tatian's, translated by Rev. H. W. Hogg, B.D., in the Ante-Nicene Christian Library. Ency. = Black's Encyclopaedia Biblica. Esdras, the First Book of, is frequently called, in the text, Esdras. Gesen. Oxf. = the edition of Gesenius now being published by the Clarendon Press. Hawkins = Hawkins's Horae Synopticae, Oxford 1899. Heb. LXX = that part of the LXX of which there is an extant Hebrew Original. Hor. Heb. = Horae Hebraicae, by John Lightfoot, 1658-74, ed. Gandell, Oxf. 1859. K. = Kings. leg. = (as in Tromm.) "legerunt," i.e. the LXX "read" so-and- so instead of the present Hebrew text. Levy = Levy's Neuhebraisches und Chaldaisches Wdrterbuch, Leipzic, 1889. L.S. = Liddell and Scott's Greek Lexicon. Oxf. Cone. = The Oxford Concordance to the Septuagint. S. = Samuel. Schottg. = Schottgen's Horae Hebraicae, Dresden and Leipsic, 1733- Sir. = the work of Ben Sira, i.e. the son of Sirach. It is commonly called Ecclesiasticus (see 20a). The original Hebrew has been edited, in part, by Cowley and Neubauer, Oxf. 1897 ; in part, by Schechter and Taylor, Camb. 1899. SS, see (iii) above. Tisch. = Tischendorf 's New Testament. Tromm. = Trommius' Concordance to the Septuagint. Wetst. = Wetstein's Commentary on the New Testament, Amster dam, 1751. W. H. = Westcott and Hort's New Testament. EXPLANATIONS (a) A bracketed Arabic number, following the sign =, and connecting a Hebrew and a Greek word, indicates the number of instances in which that Hebrew word is represented by that Greek word in the LXX — e.g. Ci~i'n = dva6ep,aTifa (13), egokoOpeva (23), diroAAtyu (2). (b) In cases where the verses of the Hebrew, the Greek, and the Revised Version, are numbered differently, the numbering of the Revised Version is, for the most part, given alone. xix BOOK I DOCUMENTARY PRIORITY INTRODUCTION [273] ' In a previous volume, entitled Clue, specimens were given, first of errors known to have been caused in the Greek Old Testament by translation from the Hebrew, and then of discrepancies and variations, in parallel passages from the Greek New Testament, capable of being explained in precisely the same way in which the discrepancies and variations in different versions and manuscripts of the Greek Old Testament had been explained. And the conclusion was reached that parts of the Synoptic Gospels are based on translations from a Hebrew document. Starting from this conclusion we have now to consider two distinct questions : Which of the three Synoptic Gospels is the earliest ? Which is the closest to the Hebrew Original ? [274] Incidentally these questions have been touched on in Clue, and it has been shewn that the later translation of Daniel by Theodotion is closer to the Hebrew than the earlier one ascribed to the Seventy ; that the free Hellenic 2 translation of Ezra, commonly called the First Book of Esdras, is probably, (32) from internal evidence, earlier, and certainly less accurate, than the closer Hebraic translation of Ezra printed in the Septuagint as the Second Book of Esdras ; and that the Codex Alexandrinus, though later by a century or more than the purest text of the 1 The number 273 starts from the last subsection of Clue, which was 272. 2 "Hellenic'' will be sometimes used to characterize the style of a LXX translation written in Greek of less Hebraic character than is customary in those books of the LXX which are known to be translations. 3 [275] INTRODUCTION Septuagint (represented by the Codex Vaticanus), is often closer to the Hebrew than the latter. But only brief extracts were given from these versions : and the discussion of their differences was mostly restricted to the considera tion of confusions of words and conflations. [275] Now other questions will arise. For example, is brevity a proof of earliness or of lateness ? And may a version that is in a considerable number of instances closer to the Hebrew be relied on as being always closer? Is a free Hellenic style always a sign of inaccuracy, and a Hebraic style of accuracy, in translation ? The following extracts are intended not so much to answer these and other similar questions, as to prepare the reader not to answer them prematurely. A complete answer cannot be given until a very full Table has been constructed of the Septuagint phenomena. But a great deal will have been gained if readers are led to disabuse themselves of two or three superficial but very common fallacies, and to keep an open mind. CHAPTER I ABRIDGMENTS IN THE BOOK OF JOSHUA § i . The nature of the abridgments [276] The following extracts from the book of Joshua, about the capture of Jericho, exhibit many omissions in the Septuagint. Some of the passages omitted may be described as Semitic repetitions. But the Greek also omits the command — which is not a repetition — to spend six days in encompassing Jericho, and a great deal about the " seven priests," and every mention of the " rams' horns." [277] Professor Bennett, in the Polychrome Bible, prints this narrative as one of a very composite nature ; and, although the omissions of the Septuagint do not exactly coincide with any particular colour, they belong mostly to the passages coloured as being of late origin. Some traditions about the mixed Hebrew origins of the story may possibly in part account for the freedom with which the Septuagint has condensed it.1 1 Polychrome Series, Joshua, ed. Rev. W. H. Bennett. In a note on this passage, Professor Bennett says, " In J they compass the city once a day for 7 days (vi. 3, 10, 11); they shout at the command of Joshua. In E they compass the city 7 times on one day (vi. 4, 12, 13), rising early (vi. 12) in order to have plenty of time ; the Ark and the priests are prominent, and the signal for shouting is given by the horn (vi. 5). There are also traces of a third story, used by E, according to which the signal, as in Ex. xix. 16, was given by a long (supernatural ?) blast of a single horn. Accordingly vi. 5 and parts of vi. 7 and vi. 20 are ascribed to E1. " RJE and RD have done their best to combine the two accounts into a continuous narrative ; and some one with musical enthusiasm, after the manner [278] ABRIDGMENTS 2. The encompassing of Jericho Joshua v. 1 3-vi. 1 2 (R. V.).1 [278] "(13) And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked, [and behold,] there stood a man over against him with his sword drawn in his hand : and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him, Art thou for us, or for our adversaries ? (14) And he said, [Nay ; but] as captain of the host of the Lord am I now come. And Joshua fell on his face to the ea.rth,[and did worship,] and said unto him, What saith my lord unto his servant? (15) And the captain of the Lord's host said unto Joshua, Put off thy shoe from off thy foot ; for the place whereon thou standest is holy. [And Joshua did so.] (vi. 1) (Now Jericho was straitly shut up [because of the children of Israel] : none Joshua v. 1 3-vi. 1 2 (LXX literally translated). [278] "(13) And it came to pass, when Joshua was in Jericho, and (i.e. then) having looked up with his eyes he saw a man standing over against him, and the sword drawn in his hand : and having come to him Joshua said to him, ' Ours art thou, or of the adversaries ? ' (14) But he said to him ' I as captain of the host of the Lord am now present.' And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and said to him, ' Master, what dost thou command thy servant ? ' (15) And the captain of the Lord saith to Joshua, ' Loose the shoe from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou now standest is holy.' (vi. 1) And Jericho was shut up and fenced in, and no one was going out from of Chronicles, has thrown in a perpetual blowing of horns, which would have rendered the horns useless as a signal, and is excluded by vi. 6 and vi. 16.'' 1 The bracketed italics in R.V. indicate roughly, the translation from the LXX more exactly, what the LXX omits. 6 IN THE BOOK OF JOSHUA [278] went out and none came in.) (2) And the Lord said unto Joshua, See, I [have] give[«] into thine hand Jericho, and the king thereof and the mighty men of valour. (3) And ye shall compass [the city], [all] the men of war, going about [the city once]. [Thus shalt thou do six days. (4) And seven priests shall bear seven trumpets of rams' horns before the ark : and the seventh day ye shall compass the city seven times, and tlie priests shall blow with the trumpets^] (5) And it shall be, that when they make a [long] blast with the [ram's horn, and when ye hear the sound of the] trumpet, all the people shall shout with a great shout ; and the wall of the city shall fall down flat, and the people shall go up every man straight before him. (6) And Joshua the son of Nun called the priests, and said unto them, [Take up the ark of the covenant,and] let seven priests it nor in to it. (2) And the Lord said to Joshua, ' See, I give Jericho into thy hand, and the king thereof that is in it, being mighty - men in strength. (3) But do thou set round it the fighting men in a circle. (4) And it shall come to pass, when ye trumpet with the trumpet, let all the people together shout, (5) and at their shouting, the walls of the city shall fall of themselves and all the people shall enter in with a rush, each man straight before his face into the city.' (6) And Joshua the son of Nave went in to the priests, (7) and spake to them, saying 'Charge the people 1 to go round and compass the city, and let the fighting men pass along, armed, before the Lord : (8) and let seven priests having seven sacred trumpets pass along in like manner before the Lord and let them give the signal with all their might : and let the ark of the covenant of the Lord 1 It is difficult to say whether verses 8 and 9 in LXX are parallel to 6, 7, or 8, in R.V. Note that, in R.V. 7 (txt., not marg.) the priests speak to the' people, but in LXX 7 Joshua tells the priests to speak to the people. Moreover, the statements oi fact in R.V. 8, 9 appear as commands, not facts, in LXX 8, 9 (240-3). 7 [278] ABRIDGMENTS bear seven trumpets [of rams' horns] before [the ark of] the Lord. (7) And they (or, he) said unto the people, Pass on, and compass the city, and let the armed men pass on before [the ark of] the Lord. (8) And [it was so, that when Joshua had spoken unto the people, the] seven priests bearing the seven trumpets [of rams' horns] be fore the Lord passed on, and blew with the trumpets : and the ark of the covenant of the Lord followed them. (9) And the armed men went before the priests [that blew the trumpets] and the rear ward went after the ark, the priests blowing with the trumpets as they went. (10) And Joshua commanded the people, saying, Ye shall not shout, nor let your voice be heard, [neither shall any word proceed out of your mouth], until the day I bid you shout ; then shall ye shout. (11) So [he caused] the ark of the Lord to com pass [the city, going about it 1 "HE(aiT6s)." The LXX perhaps and reverentially substituted " HE." 2 lit. "slept" iKoi^Sn, i.e. spent the slept," or "the ark . . . lodged." follow. (9) But let the fighting men pass along before, and the priests, the rearward, behind the ark of the covenant of the Lord, blowing the trumpets.' (10) But Joshua commanded the people, saying ' Shout not, nor let any man so much as hear your voice, until HE declare the day to shout aloud : x and then shall ye shout aloud.' (11) And having gone round, the ark of the covenant of God straight way went back into the camp, and (?he) lodged2 there. (12) And on the second day, Joshua rose early, and the priests took up the ark of the covenant of the Lord." took "to you (cd'"w)" as "God (ovi1™)" night. The LXX may mean " (Joshua) IN THE BOOK OF JOSHUA [279] once: and they] came into the camp and lodged [in the camp].- (12) And Joshua rose early in the morning, and the priests took up the ark of the Lord." § 3. Parallel in Layamon's "Brut" [279] Similar omissions characterize large portions of the Septuagint version of Joshua. Many of them bear a close resemblance to the omissions in the later version of Layamon's Brut, which cuts out epic superfluities and repetitions, and occasionally spoils the metre in so doing. In Josh. viii. 1, 2 "I have given into thy hand the king of Ai [and his people, and his city] and his land ; and thou shalt do to Ai [and her king] as thou didst to Jericho and her king ; only (LXX and) the spoil [there]oi [and] the cattle shall ye take," and in several other cases, it may be doubtful whether the omitted portions may not have been additions to the Hebrew text rightly rejected by the Septuagint. But in the following instance there can be hardly any doubt that the Greek translator is wrong. Joshua is addressing the sinner Achan, who has brought defeat on Israel (Josh. vii. 19): " [My son] give [/ pray thee] glory to the Lord . . . and tell me [now] what thou hast done." The bracketed words are omitted by the Septuagint. Their omission is natural, for they sound, even to modern ears, strangely lenient : their insertion, if they were not in the original narrative, would be most unnatural. In this last case, the Septuagint may be omitting, not for mere brevity, but for seemliness as well. CHAPTER II SAMUEL AND CHRONICLES § I. Hebrew modification The last chapter (277) touched on the possibilities of different strata of Hebrew documents, some of which might conceivably affect the Septuagint. To illustrate such possi bilities it will be useful to compare one or two passages in Chronicles (R.V.) with their parallels in Samuel (R.V.). It is known that Chronicles is later than Samuel. The first extract describes David's conquest of Moab : 2. David's reduction of the Philistines 2 S. viii. 1-5. [280] "(1) And after this it came to pass, that David smote the Philistines, and subdued them : and David took the bridle of the mother city J out of the hand of the Philistines. (2) And he smote Moab, and measured them with the line, making them to lie down on the ground ; and he measured two lines to put to death, and one 1 Chr. xviii. 1—5. [280] "(1) And after this it came to pass, that David smote the Philistines, and subdued them, and took Gath and her towns out of the hand of the Philistines. (2) And he smote Moab, and 1 Or, "Methegammah." 10 SAMUEL AND CHRONICLES [282] full line to keep alive. And the Moabites became servants to David, and brought presents. (3) David smote also Hada- dezer the son of Rehob king of Zobah, as he went to re cover his dominion at the River.1 (4) And David took from him a thousand and seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen : and David houghed all the chariot horses, but reserved of them for an hundred chariots." the Moabites became servants to David, and brought pre sents. (3) And David smote Hadarezer king of Zobah unto 2 Hamath, as he went to stablish his dominion by the river Euphrates. (4) And David took from him a thousand chariots and seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen : and David houghed all the chariot horses, but reserved of them for an hundred chariots." S 3. Signs of posteriority in Chronicles [281] Here Chronicles, even if we had not known it to be later than Samuel, would have been stamped as such by its explaining the difficult expression " the Bridle of the Mother City," indicating the territory of the king of Zobah (or the place of his defeat), and inserting " Euphrates " to define "the River." The Chronicler omits the details of the slaughter of Moab, perhaps as being out of harmony with the ecclesiastical tone of his work. 4. David's numbering of Israel 2 S. xxiv. 1— 10. 1 Chr. xxi. 1—7. [282] "(1) And again [282] "(1) And Satan3 the anger of the Lord was stood up against Israel, and kindled against Israel, and moved David to number he moved David against them, Israel. 1 Another reading is, "The river Euphrates." 2 Or, "by." 3 Or, " an adversary." I I [282] SAMUEL saying, Go, number Israel and Judah. (2) And the king said to Joab the captain of the host, which was with him, Go now to and fro through all the tribes ' of Israel, from Dan even to Beersheba, and number ye the people, that I may know the sum of the people. (3) And Joab said unto the king, Now the Lord thy God add unto the people, how many soever they be, an hundred fold, and may the eyes of my lord the king see it : but why doth my lord the king delight in this thing ? (4) Notwith standing the king's word pre vailed against Joab and against the captains of the host. And Joab and the captains of the host went out from the presence of the king, to number the people of Israel. (5) And they passed over Jordan, and pitched in Aroer. (2) And David said to Joab and to the princes of the people, Go, number Israel from Beersheba even to Dan ; and bring me word, that I may know the sum of them. (3) And Joab said, The Lord make his people an hundred times so many more as they be : but, my lord the king, are they not all my lord's servants ? why doth my lord require this thing? why will he be a cause of guilt unto Israel ? (4) Nevertheless the king's word prevailed against Joab. Wherefore Joab departed, and (8) So when they had gone to and fro through all the land, they came to Jerusalem at the end of nine months and twenty days. went throughout all Israel and came to Jerusalem. (9) And Joab gave up the (5) And Joab gave up the 12 AND CHRONICLES [283] sum of the numbering of the sum of the numbering of the people unto the king : and people unto David. And all there were in Israel eight they of Israel were a thousand hundred thousand vali' nt men thousand and an hundred that drew the sword ; and thousand men that drew the men of Judah were five sword : and Judah was four hundred thousand men. hundred threescore and ten thousand men that drew sword. (6) But Levi and Benjamin counted he not among them : for the king's word was abominable to Joab- (10) And David's heart (7) And God was displeased smote him after that he had with this thing ; therefore he numbered the people." smote Israel." 8 5. The tendency of the Chronicler's changes [283] Here the Chronicler condenses David's commands, and omits all the geographical details of the numbering of Israel and the time spent in the process. Joab's expostu lation in Samuel is much more courtly than in Chronicles, which represents him as asking the king " why will he be a cause of guilt unto Israel ? " More important than any of these differences is the substitution of " Satan stood up " for " the anger of the Lord was kindled." But they all reveal in the Chronicler a later writer, dealing freely with an earlier document, which he improves for the purpose of edification. At the same time the Chronicler omits as superfluous " go to and fro throughout all the tribes of Israel." Instead of " Joab the captain (or, prince) of the host," he has " Joab and the princes of the people " — a less military and more constitutional expression.1 1 "Joab [even] the prince ofthe host" (2 S. xxiv. 2) may have been confused (237) with "Joab and the princes of the host " (2 S. xxiv. 4). In the parallel to the latter, Chr. has simply "Joab," in the parallel to the former, "Joab and the princes of the people." [284] SAMUEL [284] On the other hand Chronicles inserts in the statistics one or two additional statements — which, if true, would be of great importance — entirely altering the account of the military forces of Israel, and adding that Levi and Benjamin were not counted. Instead of the merely personal statement that " David's heart smote him," the Chronicler says that God " smote " the people. § 6. The story of Araunah, or Oman [285] In the following extract, that part which deals with Oman seeing the angel, and Oman's four sons hiding themselves, has been discussed in Clue (106) where it was shewn that the variation probably originated in a mis take of the Chronicler who read " king " as being the similar word " angel." But a more important difference is that the Chronicler inserts a statement, of which there is no vestige in Samuel, that the Lord answered David from heaven by fire. 2 S. xxiv. 18-26. 1 Chr. xxi. 18-28. [286] "(18) And Gad [286] "(18) Then the came that day to David, and angel of the Lord com- said unto him, Go up, rear an manded Gad to say to altar unto the Lord in the David, that David should threshing-floor of Araunah the go up and rear an altar Jebusite. (19) And David unto the Lord in the went up according to the threshing-floor of Oman the saying of Gad, as the Lord Jebusite. (19) And David commanded. (20) And went up at the saying of Gad, Araunah looked forth, and which he spake in the name saw the king and his servants of the Lord. (20) And coming on x toward him : and Oman turned back, and saw the angel ; and his four sons that were with him hid them- Araunah went out, and bowed selves. Now Oman was 1 Or, "passing over." 14 AND CHRONICLES [286] himself before the king with his face to the ground. (2 1 ) And Araunah said, Wherefore is my lord the king come to his servant? And David said, To buy the threshing-floor of thee, to build an altar unto the Lord, that the plague may be stayed from the people. (22) And Araunah said unto David, Let my lord the king take and offer up what seemeth good unto him : behold, the oxen for the burnt-offering, and the thresh ing instruments and the furniture of the oxen for the wood : (23) all this, O king, doth Araunah give * unto the king. And Araunah said unto the king, The Lord thy God accept thee. (24) And the king said unto Araunah, Nay, but I will verily buy it of thee at a price : neither will I offer burnt-offerings unto the Lord my God which cost me nothing. So David bought the threshing-floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver. (25) And David built there i O threshing wheat. (21) And as David came to Oman, Oman looked and saw David, and went out of the thresh ing-floor, and bowed himself to David with his face to the ground. (22) Then David said to Oman, Give me the place of this threshing- floor, that I may build thereon an altar unto the Lord : for the full price shalt thou give it me : that the plague may be stayed from the people. (23) And Oman said unto David, Take it to thee, and let my lord the king do that which is good in his eyes : lo, I give [thee] the oxen for burnt-offerings,andthethresh- ing instruments for wood, and the wheat for the meal offer ing : I give it all. (24) And king David said to Oman, Nay ; but I will verily buy it for the full price ; for I will not take that which is thine for the Lord, nor offer a burnt - offering without cost. (2 5) So David gave to Oman for the place six hundred shekels of gold by weight. (26) And David etc. All this did Araunah the king give IS [287] SAMUEL an altar unto the Lord, and built there an altar unto offered burnt-offerings and the Lord, and offered burnt - peace-offerings. offerings and peace-offerings, and called upon the Lord , and he answered him from heaven by fire upon the altar of burnt -offering. And the So the Lord was intreated for Lord commanded the angel ; the land, and the plague was and he put up his sword again stayed from Israel." into the sheath thereof." § 7. The answer by fire [287] The alterations made by the Chronicler all tend in the direction of seemliness, or magnify the supernatural element. " Gad came and said " is altered into " the angel of the Lord commanded Gad to say." The space given in Samuel (xxiv. 21-23) to Araunah's utterances is partly devoted by the Chronicler to matters of fact. The price paid by the king for the altar is vastly increased (" fifty shekels of silver " changed to " six hundred shekels of gold "). " Calling on the Lord " is added to " burnt-offerings and peace-offerings." Lastly, instead of " the Lord was intreated and the plague was stayed," the Chronicler says that "the Lord answered him from heaven by fire " and " commanded the angel and he put up his sword." [288] It may occur to many readers, who find it impos sible to accept the " answer by fire " as a historical event, that their rejection of the narrative forces them to reject the narrator as absolutely dishonest: " How," they may ask, "could an event unique in David's life and extremely rare in Biblical History have been omitted by the earlier book of Samuel if there had been a vestige of tradition to support it ? The Chronicler must in this case have invented without regard to tradition. It is not a textual corruption, but a deliberate fabrication " 16 AND CHRONICLES [289] But such reasoning ignores two important considerations, (i) the extent to which marginal notes and traditional comments, intended at first to be mere paraphrases or suggestions, creep into the text, where they become his torical exaggerations ; (ii) the general rule that miraculous stories in the Bible spring from poetry or metaphor misunderstood. For example, in the narrative of Araunah, where Samuel has " I will buy it at a price," editors or commentators might naturally say, " The king did not mean ' at a price,' which might mean a nominal price : he meant ' the full price.' " Then coming to the " fifty shekels of silver," and remembering that Abraham gave four hundred shekels for a burial-place, they might suggest that silver here must mean " money," as it often does. Subsequent editors, approving " money," would find it indefinite and would suggest (a) "gold," adding, perhaps, that "shekel," which has the meaning of " weight," here means (b) " by weight." Again, later tradition might suggest that one of these shekels was equal to several, perhaps twelve, ordinary shekels of silver, thus obtaining (c) " six hundred shekels." And this, being conflated with the above, might result in " (c) six hundred shekels (a) of gold (b) by weight." This may be called " growth," or " accretion," or whatever other synonym critics may select : but it is not " fabrication." [289] As regards the " answer by fire," we must bear in mind that " fire " from the Lord is connected with the first sacrifice offered by Aaron as High-priest on the altar of burnt-offering, with the sacrifice of Gideon, with that of Elijah, and (in Chronicles, but not in Kings) with the first sacrifice offered in Solomon's temple.1 Now it was a general belief among offerers of sacrifice that the gods " ate " the victims consumed on their altars, a belief preserved in Deuteronomy : " Where are their gods . . . which did eat the fat of their sacrifices ? " 2 Against applying this belief 1 Lev. ix. 24, Judg. vi. 21, I K. xviii. 38, 2 Chr. vii. 1-3. 2 Deut. xxxii. 38. 2 17 [289] SAMUEL to Jehovah the prophets of Israel protested : and the Pentateuch never describes Him as "eating the fat," but only as " smelling a sweet savour " from it. However, the ancient belief appears to have left its mark on the Old Testament in the use of " bread " or " food " in such phrases as " the food of their God," and " of thy God," " my food," etc., meaning the sacrifices consumed by Jehovah.1 The Septuagint, disliking this anthropomorphism, substitutes for "food," in many passages, "gifts." In Lev. iii. 1 1, "the _/»<7^-^/"the-offering-made-by-fire unto the Lord," the LXX gives a paraphrase " a savour of a sweet-smell, a fruit-offering to the Lord," and again (Numb, xxviii. 24) " the food of the offering-made-by-fire," it has " a gift, a fruit-offering." Now a burnt-offering when consumed by fire may be said in Hebrew to be " eaten " by the fire? Hence, some Hebrew traditions might distinguish special sacrifices such as those of Gideon, Elijah, and Solomon, by saying, not indeed that God " ate " them, but that fire from the Lord " ate " them, or that He sent the fire to " eat " them. By this the originator may have meant what modern writers might express by " accepted," or " accepted with a special acceptance " : but it might be interpreted as meaning that fire came down visibly from heaven and consumed them. The story, being thus inter preted, would be amplified with explanatory details. In later Jewish traditions, " fire " is frequently mentioned in quaint stories intended to enforce the belief that God is specially present at any sacred action such as the study of the Law. It is recorded of Jonathan ben Uzziel that his fire in the study of Thorah burned up the birds that flew over him ; and Rabban Johanan and his disciples " read and expounded till the fire shone round about them as when 1 Comp. Lev. xxi. 6, 8, 17, etc. Gesenius, Oxf., compares also Numb. xxviii. 2, Ezek. xvi. 19, xliv. 7, Mai. i. 12. 2 Lev. vi. 10 "the ashes whereto the fire hath consumed (but lit. eaten) the burnt-offering," Deut. v. 25 "this great fire will consume us." The same word is used of "fire" in Is. v. 24, Nah. iii. 13 (R.V.) "devour." 18 AND CHRONICLES [289] the law was given at Mount Sinai." J In the Chronicler's account of Solomon's dedication of the Temple the descent of fire — omitted in the parallel Kings — may be nothing but a conflation of the statement in Kings that " the glory of the Lord " or " the cloud," i.e. the Shechinah, filled the house of the Lord.2 To return to the story of Araunah. Possibly a scribe, or editor, dissatisfied with the sober termination of Samuel, desired to emphasize the efficacy of the first prayer offered on the site of the new Temple ; and, in suggesting, in the margin, " answered by fire," he may have meant little more than we should mean by saying that " God answered him with His glorious presence," or "vouchsafed His presence, and answered him in power." The insertion of such a tradition in the text may have been facilitated by a con fusion between " fire " and " sacrifice by fire," which are very similar words.3 1 Taylor's Jewish Fathers, i. 13 (2nd ed. p. 21) ; Hor. Hebr. on Acts i. 13 ; see also Schottg. (on Acts ii. 3). 2 1 K. viii. 10, II ; 2 Chr. vii. 1-3. 3 [289«1 " Fire (pk) " and " fire-sacrifice (nem) " are easily confused : comp. I S. ii. 28, "offerings," tou irvp6s, conversely Numb, xviii. 9 "from the fire," tu>v Ka/nroj/iiTW. Hastings' Diet. B. ("Elijah" p. 688) speaks of "the lightning" as con suming Elijah's sacrifice, but says that the other story of the descent of fire on the captains of fifties (ib. 690) "can hardly be regarded as history." See 2 Mac. i. 19-22 for Nehemiah's discovery of the sacred fire after the exile. In 2 Mac. x. 3, when Judas Maccabaeus purifies the Temple, it is said that the Jews built another altar Trvpiio-apres \l80vs, Kal -rrvp 4k roiroiv Xa^bvres, a detail not found in the fuller account in I Mac. iv. 43-7. 19 CHAPTER III DANIEL IN TWO VERSIONS § i . The LXX both abridges and amplifies [290] THE following extracts from the Septuagint and from Theodotion's version of Daniel are selected as shewing that a version may abbreviate in one passage and amplify in another. Theodotion, throughout, practically adheres to our present Aramaic text : his translation is known to be later than that of the Septuagint. § 2. The deciphering of the inscription by Daniel Dan. v. 1 3-vi. 1 8 (LXX) (lit). Dan. v. 1 3-vi. 1 8 (Theod.) (lit). [291] "(13) Then Daniel was brought in unto the king, [291] "(1 3) Then Daniel was brought in before the king, and the king said to Daniel, Thou art Daniel, the [man] from the children of the captivity of Judaea whom the king my father brought [hither] ? ( 1 4) I have heard concerning thee that the spirit of God [is] in thee, and watchfulness and excellent wisdom hath been found in thee. (15) And now there have come in before me the 20 DANIEL IN TWO VERSIONS [291] and the king answered and said to him, ( 1 6) O Daniel, canst thou show me the interpretation of the writing ? And (i.e. then) I will array thee in a purple robe, and I will put a golden chain about thee, and thou shalt have authority over the third part of my kingdom. (17) Then Daniel stood over against the writing, and read, and thus he answered the king, This is the writing, It is numbered, it is reckoned, it is taken away ; and the hand that wrote stood [still], and this is the interpretation of them. (23) O king, wise men, enchanters, gaza- renes, that they may read this writing and make known to me the interpretation thereof: and they could not declare [it] to me. (16) And I have heard concerning thee that thou canst interpret judgments : now therefore if thou canst read the writing, and makest known to me the interpretation thereof, thou shalt wear a purple robe, and the chain of gold shall be upon thy neck, and thou shalt rule in my kingdom [being] third. (17) And Daniel spake in the king's presence, Let thy gifts be to thyself: and the gift of thy house give thou to another : but I will read the writing, and will make known to thee the interpretation thereof. (18) O king, God the Most High gave to Nebuchadnezzar thy father the kingdom, and greatness, and honour and glory; (19) and because of the greatness that he gave him all the peoples, tribes, languages, trembled and were afraid before him : whom he would, he destroyed, and whom he would, he smote, 21 [291] DANIEL (23) ... thou madest a feast for thy friends, and wast drinking wine, and the vessels of the house of the living God were brought to thee, and ye drank therein, thou and thy nobles, and ye and whom he would, he doth raise up (v-uVot, v.r. -ov), and whom he would he humbled. (20) And when his heart was lifted up and his spirit was hardened to deal proudly, he was brought down from his kingly throne, and his honour was taken from him, (21) and he was driven away from men, and his heart was given with the beasts (i.e. made like them), and with wild asses [was] his habitation, and they fed him with grass like an ox, and with the dew of heaven his body was wet, until he should know that God the Most High is lord of the kingdom of men, and will give it (i.e. the kingdom) to whosoever seemeth him good. (22) And thou there fore his son, Belshazzar, hast not humbled thine heart in the sight of God : thou knewest not all these things : (23) and thou hast been lifted up against the Lord God of heaven, and the vessels of his house thou didst bring before thee, and thou and thy nobles and thy concu bines and thy wives drank wine therein, and thou didst 22 IN TWO VERSIONS [291] praised all the idols of men, made with hands, and to the Living God ye offered no blessing, and thy breath is in his hand, and [it is] he [that] gave thee thy kingdom, and thou didst not bless him, neither didst offer him praise. (26) This is the interpre tation of the writing, The time of thy kingdom hath been numbered, thy kingdom ceaseth. (27) It hath been cut short and accomplished.1 (28) Thy kingdom is given to the Medes and to the Persians. (29) Then Bel- shazzar the king clothed Daniel in purple and put a chain of gold about him and praise the gods of gold and silver and brass and iron and wood and stone, which see not, nor hear nor know ; and the God in whose hand thy breath is, and whose are all thy ways, him thou hast not glorified : (24) for this cause was the bone of the hand sent from before him and it set therein this writing. (25) And this is the writing that was set therein, Man£, Thekel, Phares. (26) This is the interpretation of the saying, Man6, God hath measured thy kingdom and brought it to fulfilment : (27) Thekel, it hath been weighed in the balance and found lacking : (28) Phares, thy kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians. (29) And Bel- shazzar spake, and they clothed Daniel with purple and put the chain of gold about his neck, and he made proclamation concerning him, 1 [291«] Neither here, nor in v. 17, does the LXX mention the words " Mene, Tekel, etc.," but it gives them in a summary that precedes the story (coming before v. 1) thus : " In that same night there came forth fingers as it were of a man, and wrote upon the wall of his house, upon the plaster over against the lamp, Mane, Phares, Thekel : and the interpretation of them is — Mane, it hath been numbered. Phares, it hath been taken away. Thekel, it hath been weighed. " 23 [291] DANIEL gave him authority over the third part of his kingdom. (30) And the judgment came upon Belshazzar the king, and the sovereignty was taken away from the Chaldaeans and given to the Medes and to the Persians. And Artaxerxes, he of the Medes, received the kingdom. vi. (1) And Darius [was] full of days J and honoured in his old age, and he set a hundred and twenty-seven (sic) satraps over all his kingdom, (2) and over them three men that had leadership of them, and Daniel was one of the threemen,(3) havingauthority beyond all in the kingdom. And Daniel was clothed in purple, and great and honour ed before Darius the king, according as he was honoured and a man of understanding and wisdom, and a holy spirit was in him, and he prospered in the business of the king which he dealt with. Then the king was purposed to set Daniel over all his kingdom, and the two men whom he set with him, and a hundred and twenty - seven satraps. 1 Aram, "son of sixty-two years" (125). 24 that he should be the third ruler in the kingdom. (30) In that very night Belshazzar the king of the Chaldaeans was slain, and Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being sixty-two years [old].1 vi. (1) And [it] was pleas ing in the sight of Darius, and he set over the kingdom a hundred and twenty satraps, that they should be in the whole of his kingdom, (2) and above them three presi dents, of whom Daniel was one, that the satraps should render account to them, in order that the king might not be troubled. (3) And Daniel was beyond them, for an excellent spirit was in him, and the king set him over the whole of his king dom. IN TWO VERSIONS [291] (4) But when the king was purposed to set Daniel over all his kingdom, then the two young men counselled a counsel and purpose with themselves, saying to one an other, since they found no sin nor fault-of-ignorance against Daniel concerning which they might accuse him to the king, (5) and they said, Come let us make a decree against ourselves (? Ka0' eavrmv) that no man shall ask a petition or pray a prayer till thirty days from any God save only from Darius the king : else, he shall die : that they might get the better of Daniel before the king, and that he might be thrown into the den of lions. For they knew that Daniel prayed and be sought the Lord his God thrice a day. (6) Then those men came and spake in the presence of the king, (7) We have established a decree and a statute that every man, whosoever shall pray a prayer or make a petition of any God until thirty days save of Darius the king, shall be thrown into the den of lions. (4) And the presidents and satraps sought to find an occasion against Daniel. And they found no occasion nor transgression nor offence against him, because he was faithful. (5) And the pre sidents said, We shall not find any occasion against Daniel, except in the observ ances of his God. (6) Then the presidents and the satraps stood by the king and said to him, King Darius, live for ever. (7) All those who are over thy kingdom, ministers and sa traps, governors and magis trates, have consulted to gether to establish by royal statute and confirm a decree that whosoever shall ask a 25 [292] DANIEL petition of any god or man until thirty days, save of thee, 0 king, shall be cast into the den of lions. (8) Now therefore, O king, establish the decree and publish a writing, that the ordinance of the Persians and Medes be not changed. (9) And thus did king (9) Then king Darius corn- Darius establish and ratify, manded that the ordinance (10) But Daniel . . . should be put in writing. (10) And Daniel . . . § 3. The bearing of these extracts on Luke [292] It will be seen that the Septuagint omits a good deal of discourse about Nebuchadnezzar that might seem not to the point, and some more discourse that might seem tedious. It omits Daniel's verbal rejection of the king's gifts pre sumably because the narrative goes on to say that Daniel actually received them. It mentions the actual words of the mysterious writing in a short preface to the narrative, but not in the narrative itself.1 On the other hand it is fuller on the jealousy and plotting of Daniel's colleagues, who are described as saying " Come, let us make a decree"; and are said to "have established" it, whereas Theodotion has " have consulted together to establish " it. [293] On one point of some importance Theodotion is wrong and the Septuagint right. According to the former, the king "set" Daniel over the whole of his kingdom:2 but according to the Aramaic— which the 1 See 291a. , \DTr l!' 3 KaT^T1>""> but Aram- "thought („,„„) to set." Theod. dropping V (which follows a preceding „ ) and taking the word as from Heb. nw " put " may have considered it superfluous, since "set" follows. Dan. vi. 2 "three 26 IN TWO VERSIONS [293] Septuagint follows in this respect — the king only "purposed" to set Daniel in this position. This instance is of value in its bearing on the Synoptists. Luke — the latest of the three Evangelists, and a pains-taking historian — may have done his best, as Theodotion did, to return to his original ; but he may not always have been successful, and sometimes he may have altered Mark for the worse, while endeavouring to conform to the Hebrew. presidents of whom Daniel was one (in) " = in A.V. " three . . . first," and LXX perhaps conflates, " (a{) Daniel was one of the three, (a2) having authority beyond all in the kingdom, . . . honoured before Darius," i.e. "first." 27 CHAPTER IV CHRONICLES, EZRA, AND ESDRAS § i. King Josiah [294] The First Book of Esdras is parallel at first to Chronicles and afterwards to Ezra. After describing Josiah's Passover, Chronicles continues as follows : — 2 Chr. xxxv. 19, 20 "In the eighteenth year of the reign of Josiah was this passover kept. After all this, when Josiah had prepared the "Temple, Neco king of Egypt went up to fight against Carchemish by Euphrates." Before " the coming up of Neco " the Septuagint of Chronicles, and 1 Esdras, have the insertions italicized below : — The end of Josiah's reign. 1 Esdr. i. 20-23. 2 Chr. xxxv. 18-20 (LXX). [295] "(20) In the (18) "And there was no eighteenth year of the reign Passover like this in Israel of Josiah was this Passover . . . (19) in the eighteenth celebrated. (21) And the year of the reign of Josiah. deeds of Josiah were right (19a) And the soothsayers, before the face of his Lord and the sorcerers and the (lit.) in a heart full of piety. Tharaphein did king (22) And further what re- Josiah burn . . . lates to him has been written out in the former times concerning those who have 28 CHRONICLES, EZRA, AND ESDRAS [296] sinned and done impiously against the Lord beyond every nation and kingdom, and the things wherein they grieved him are [ ? ]. And the words of the Lord rose up against Israel. (2 3) And after all these deeds of Josiah it happened x that Pharaoh king of Egypt came and stirred up war in Charcamus on the Euphrates." (19^) Howbeit the Lord turned not from the anger of his great fury, wherewith the Lord was angry with Judah concerning all the ordinances zvherein Manasseh provoked him. (igd) And the Lord said, Even Judah will I re move from before my face as I removed Israel, and I have rejected the city that I chose, namely Jerusalem, and the house concerning which I said, My name shall be there. (20) And there came up Pharaoh Nechao, king of Egypt, against the king of the Assyrians to the river Euphrates." § 2. The explanation of the Greek additions [296] The explanation of these insertions is as follows. The translator of Esdras is dissatisfied with the termination of the history of Josiah as it stands in Chronicles, because the Chronicler omits the allusion — contained in the parallel Kings to the pathetic inability of this pious king 2 to cancel God's prediction of retribution for the evil wrought by Manasseh, who is previously declared (in Kings and Chronicles) to have "seduced them to do that which is 1 "Happened (wft)," (?) Greek corruption for dvtPv "came up" (in K. and Chr.). In the preceding verse, "they grieved him are " = Arfjnjow airrhv tanv. There appears to be some corruption or omission. 2 2 K. xxiii. 24-6. 29 [297] CHRONICLES, EZRA, AND ESDRAS evil more than did the nations whom the Lord destroyed before the children of Israel." 1 Esdras therefore inserts a very brief reference to Man asseh. But it is almost lost in the plural (" those who have sinned ") and obscured by the substitution of " sin " for " cause to sin," so that the allusion would hardly have been detected but for the phrase " beyond every nation and kingdom." The Greek translator of Chronicles — apparently influenced by the same feeling as the author of Esdras — inserted in Chronicles a full translation of the remarks in Kings concerning Josiah.2 The inference from this is, that when one of two parallel documents makes an inser tion to supply a real or supposed defect, the other may supply it also but in a different way. And, if the Greek translation of Chronicles was later than Esdras, or this portion of Esdras, then this is an instance where the later of two documents (LXX Chronicles) supplies a defect better — historically speaking — than the earlier (Esdras) by inter polating a passage out of a third document, the earliest of the three. § 3. The proclamation of Cyrus [297] The last words of Chronicles recur as the first words of Ezra. They are also repeated in 1 Esdras. The Hebrew in Chronicles and Ezra is almost exactly the same, but the Septuagint is different. The subject is the pro clamation of Cyrus for the rebuilding of the Temple. The Hebrew is (2 Chr. xxxvi. 23, Ezr. i. 2, 3) "Thus said Cyrus king of Persia, All the kingdoms of the earth hath the Lord, the God of heaven, given me : and he hath charged me to build him an house in Jerusalem which is in Judah. Who [is there] among you from all his people? The Lord 3 his God [is, or, be] with him (so Chr., but Ezr., 1 2 K. xxi. 9, 2 Chr. xxxiii. 9. 2 2 k xxi;i 24-27. 3 "The Lord" = m,v, " be '' = \v in Ezra (sometimes rv.v). The two were probably confused. 30 CHRONICLES, EZRA, AND ESDRAS [299] omitting " the Lord," has '' His God be with him ") and let him go up." Here Chronicles ends. But Ezra continues, " to Jerusalem which is in Judah, and build the house of the Lord, the God of Israel (he is God) which is in Jeru salem" (R.V. marg. "he is the God which is in Jerusalem"). 2 Chr. xxxvi. 23 (LXX). Ezr. [298] "(23) These things saith Cyrus king of the Persians to1 all the kingdoms of the earth, There hath given unto me [?] the Lord the God of heaven, and he commanded me to build him a house in Jerusalem in Judaea. Who out of you [is there] out of all his people ? There shall be his God with him and let him go up." 2, 3 (LXX). "(2) Thus I Esdr. ii. 3-5. [298] "(3) These things saith the king ofthe Persians, Cyrus : Me hath the Lord of Israel the Lord Most High appointed king of the world. (4) And he charged me to build him a house in Jerusalem that is in Judaea. (5) If therefore there is any one of you out of his nation, let his Lord be with him ; and going up to Jerusalem that is in Judaea let him build the house of the Lord of Israel — he is the Lord in Jerusalem."] that tabernacled in Jerusalem." [299] It is instructive to note that the Septuagint version of Ezra, which is generally very faithful to the Hebrew— or at least attempts to be — stops almost where the sentence in Chronicles ends : it merely adds " to Jerusalem." This raises 1 irdcrais Tats j3a "» Io«J«a • -cat ouco&ytvraro to, oikov 6v Iff\ • auros ofcow IXij/t. 31 [298] said Cyrus king of the Persians, All the king doms hath the God of heaven given unto me and he hath visited me upon me (sic)? to build him a house in Jeru salem that is in Judah. (3) Who [is there] among you from all his people ? Both (?) his God shall be with him and he shall go up to Jerusalem." 3 [Heb. adds, but LXX omits, " which is in Judah [300] CHRONICLES, EZRA, AND ESDRAS a doubt whether the translator of Ezra accepted as genuine the Hebrew addition, and whether it may not be of the nature of an Appendix, added under the impression that the extreme abruptness of the termination in Chronicles implied that some words had dropped out.. The translator of Chronicles has fallen into a serious error in making Cyrus address all the kingdoms of the earth.1 Esdras is accurate though very free. Ezra (LXX) is closest to the original except that the translator (after " kingdoms ") casually omits " of the earth " (which Codex A restores). As a fact, the Greek of Ezra is habitually closer to the Hebrew than is the Greek of Esdras — in which the habit of free translation often leads to error (apart from its frequent confusion of some Hebrew words). § 4. The preface to a letter to the king of Persia [300] The next extracts exhibit the above-noted charac teristics of Ezra (LXX) and Esdras in a still clearer light. The Hebrew, which passes speedily into Aramaic, is to the following effect: Ezr. iv. 6-1 1 (R.V.) " And in the reign of Ahasuerus in the beginning of his reign wrote they an accusation against the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusalem. And in the days of Artaxerxes wrote Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and the rest of his companions, unto Artaxerxes, king of Persia : and the writing of the letter was written in the Syrian [character] and set forth in the Syrian [tongue2]. (8) Rehum the chancellor and Shimshai the scribe wrote a letter against Jerusalem to Artaxerxes the king in this sort : (9) then [wrote] Rehum the chancellor and Shimshai the scribe, and the rest of their companions : the Dinaites 1 It can hardly be a mere case of Greek corruption since it involves the alteration of three terminations, which are corrected by Codex A : but the meaning intended by the translator is doubtful. 2 "Syrian." R.V. marg. " Or, Aramaic," and adds, "Chapter iv. 8-vi. 18 is in Aramaic. 32 CHRONICLES, EZRA, AND ESDRAS [302] and the Apharsathchites, the Tarpelites, the Apharsites, the Archevites, the Babylonians, the Shushanchites, the Dehaites, the Elamites, (10) and the rest of the nations whom the great and noble Osnappar brought over, and set in the city of Samaria, and in the rest [of the country] beyond the river, and so forth. ( 1 1 ) This is the copy of the letter that they sent unto Artaxerxes the king (lit. unto him, [even] unto Artaxerxes the king)." [301] This passage is full of repetitions which indicate original obscurity and subsequent conflation. In particular, the names suggest that Apharsites, if not a corruption of " scribes," is a repetition of Apharsathchites. Also Archevites is said to be an error for "who are Cuthaeans."1 Esdras omits the list He also substitutes " Coelesyria " for " beyond the river" (which might mean either east or west of the river), and condenses generally, while Ezra (LXX) clings to the corrupt Hebrew. I Esdr. ii. 15-16. Ezr. iv. 6-9 (LXX). [302] [makes no mention [302] " (6) And in the of letters to Ahasuerus.] reign of Astherus in the "(15) But in the times beginning of his reign he during the reign of Artaxerxes (sic) wrote against2 them that king of Persia, there wrote- inhabited Judah and Jerusa- againstthem2 (sic) against the lem. (7) And in the days of inhabitants in Judaea and Asardatha he (sic) wrote in Jerusalem, Belemus 3 and peace3 to Mithradates, Tabeel Mithradates and Tabellius and the rest of the fellow- and Rathumus and Beelteth- servants. To the king of the mus and Samellius the scribe Persians wrote the Phorologos and the rest that were in office (lit. "carrier of words," but 1 Black's Encycl. Bibl. i. 191, 293. 2 " Wrote-against them (Kartypafev airrHy)," perhaps an error caused by reading avro, "to him" (the reading of A) as outw (i.e. airwr) : "against" in Ezr. = iiri. 3 "Belemus" (Esdr.) = "in peace" (Ezr. ) = " Bishlam " (R.V.) (see 303). 3 33 [303] CHRONICLES, EZRA, AND ESDRAS with these, but dwelling in Samaria and the other places, the hereafter-written letter. ( 1 6) To king Artaxerxes the lord thy J servants Rathumus the [writer of] the things that befall, and Samellius the scribe and the rest of their council, and they that are in Coele- syria and Phoenicia." also " one levying tribute ") a letter in the Syrian language and interpreted. (8) Raoul Badatamen and Samasa the scribe wrote one (i.e. a) letter against Jerusalem to Arsartha the king, (g) These things judged Raoum - Baal and Samae the scribe and the rest of our1 fellow-servants, Deinaeans, Pharesthachaeans, Taraphallaeans, Aphrasaeans, Archouans, Babylonians, Sousunachaeans who are Elamaeans, (io) and the rest of the nations whom Asen- naphar the great and honour able removed from their dwell ings and he caused them to dwell in cities of the [land of] Somoron (sic) and the rest beyond the river. This is the setting forth of the letter that they sent to him [to Arsartha the king]." 2 [303] It should be noted here that the translator of Ezra has failed to recognize " Bishlam " as a name. But even in his error he has adhered to the Hebrew, taking " b " as " in," and " shim " as " peace " (which it actually means). He perhaps connected " in peace " with the phrase of greeting (" Peace be unto you "). i ..Thy," "our." These readings regard the letter as having commenced, and " thy " and " our " as words in the letter. 2 The bracketed words are printed by Swete with a capital (H>6s) as though they began the letter. 34 CHRONICLES, EZRA, AND ESDRAS [305] § 5. Fasting and praying [304] In the following extracts, Esdras mistakes " river " for " young man," omits the statement that God is against them that forsake Him, and converts " so we fasted and besought " into " and we besought again." Ezra (LXX) is so faithful to the Hebrew that the latter need not be printed separately. 1 Esdr. viii. 49-54- Ezr. viii. 21-24 (LXX and Heb.) [305] " (49) And I vowed [305] "(21) And I pro- there a fast for the young claimed there a fast at the river Thoue (Hebr. Ahava) to humble ourselves before the face of our God, to seek from him a straight way for our selves and our children and all our chattels. (22) Because I was ashamed to ask from the king a force and horse men to deliver us from the enemy in the way. Be cause we [had] said to the king saying, The hand of our God [is] on all that seek him, for good : and his might and his anger on all that forsake him. (23) And we fasted and sought from our God concern ing this, and he gave ear unto us (RV.was entreated by us)." The italicized words may have been omitted by Esdras as not being to the point, or they may be a late Hebrew interpolation. 1 " Unto all prospering," els va/rav i-rravbpBuxnv. 35 men before our Lord, (50) to seek from him a prosperous journey both for us and for our children and cattle. (51) For I was abashed [to ask (added by A)] horsemen and foot-soldiers as escort for safety against our enemies. (52) For we [had] said to the king [saying] that the power of our Lord will be with them that seek after him, unto all prospering." * (53) And aSain we besought of our Lord all these things and found him propitious." CHAPTER V JUDGES IN TWO MANUSCRIPTS § I . The Song of Deborah, in the Codex Vaticanus (B), and in the Codex Alexandrinus (A) [306] LARGE portions of the Book of Judges are trans lated so differently by the Codex Vaticanus (B) and the Codex Alexandrinus (A) that their texts are practically different versions. The first specimen given below is from the Song of Deborah where the poetic language naturally causes difficulty, as may be seen from the marginal alternatives given by the Revised Version and added in foot-notes below. Codex A, in many books of the Bible, is often more faithful than Codex B is to the Hebrew text. But that is not the case here. [307] Judg. v. 1 1- 1 6 (R.V.) luFar from the noise of archers, in the places of drawing water, there shall they rehearse the righteous acts of the Lord, [even] the righteous acts 2of his rule in Israel. Then the people of the Lord went down to the gates. (12) Awake, awake, Deborah, awake, awake, utter a song : Arise, Barak, and lead thy captivity captive thou son of Abinoam. (13) 3 Then came down a remnant of the nobles 4[and] the people ; the Lord 1 Or, " Because of the voice of the archers . . there let them rehearse." 2 Or, "toward his villages." 3 Or, " Then made he a remnant to have dominion over the nobles [and] the people ; the Lord made me have dominion over the mighty." 4 Or, as v.r., " the people of the Lord came down for me against (or among) the mighty." 36 JUDGES IN TWO MANUSCRIPTS [307] came down for me x against the mighty. (14) Out of Ephraim [came down] they whose root is in Amalek ; after thee, Benjamin, among thy peoples ; out of Machir came down 2 governors, and out of Zebulon they that handle 3the marshal's staff. (15) And 4the princes of Issachar were with Deborah. As was Issachar so was Barak. Into the valley they rushed forth at his feet. By the water-courses of Reuben there were great resolves of heart. (16) Why satest thou among the sheep-folds, to hear the pipings for the flocks? At the water-courses of Reuben there were great searchings of heart." Judg. v. 11-16 (B) (lit). "(11) Relate from the voice of them that play [on the harp] in the midst of them that draw water. There shall they give righteous nesses. Lord, increase right eousnesses in Israel. Then went down to the cities the people of the Lord. (12) Awake, awake, Debbora ! Awake, awake, utter a song ! Arise, Barak, and take captive thy captivity, son of Abei- neem. (13) Then (rore) went down a remnant to (or, for) the mighty. The people of the Lord went down to (or, for) him in the strong places from me. (14) Ephraim rooted them out in Amalek. After thee, Ben- 1 Or, "among." 3 Or, "the staff of the scribe." Judg. V. I I- 1 6 (A) (lit.). "(11) . . . to sound-forth the voice of them that play [on the harp] in the midst of them that rejoice. There shall they give righteous nesses to the Lord. Right eousnesses have they strength ened in Israel. Then went down to his cities the people of the Lord. (12) Awake, awake, Debbora ! Awake thou myriads with the people. Awake, awake, speak with a song. Strengthening rise-up, Barak, and strengthen thou, Debbora, Barak. Take captive thy captivity, son of Abineem. (13) When, (or, at one time, irore) his strength was-great, O Lord, humble for me them that are stronger than I. 2 Or, "law-givers." * Or, "my princes in Issachar." 37 [307] JUDGES IN TWO MANUSCRIPTS (14) The people of Ephraim avenged itself on them in the valley of thy brother Ben jamin among thy peoples. From me Machir they went down searching out ; and from Zabulon the Lord was- making-war for me among the mighty thence with the sceptre of-one-that-strength- eneth of leading. (15) In Issachar with Debbora he sent forth his foot -soldiers into the valley. In order that for thee 8 thou shouldst dwell in the midst of borders (lit. lips) he stretched out with his feet divisions of Reuben great ascertainments4 of heart. (16) Wherefore prithee (lit. for me) sittest thou in the midst of the Mosphaitham? to give ear to the pipings of them that awake [thee] to pass through into the [regions] of Reuben ; great trackings- out of heart." 1 Gk. corruption, ii-iKvoiiievoi for i^ixvoipjevoi. 2 Aiyopla, not recognized in L. & S. Did the writer mean Stvo/nla, not in L. & S., but capable of meaning "a double sheep-fold or cattle-stall" (which is the meaning of the Hebrew) ? 8 iva aoi ? Gk. corr. for iva ti i.e. "wherefore ? " as in v. 1 6. 4 " Ascertainments " = &.Kpi§a.aM, "trackings out " = ifrxviao-fiol (comp. B i£ucvoi/ievoi for i^oiuevoi), "searchings" (B) = i^eran)" i. e. "like this (fem.)." "That" = <3, and "verily " = dn : but here the two particles combined = " but " or "never theless." 2 "One and each." Codex A has read "at the last" (inx) as irm"one," and dropped the final letter in ( V)-inN " I will cease," so as to make that also mean "one," which it has rendered "(each) one" (unless iKAcrrov is Gk. corr. for iaxarov " at the last "). 42 JUDGES IN TWO MANUSCRIPTS [313] " son-in-law." B (xv. 6) has " of his friends " instead of "companion." But this is because B has taken in- as having its prepositional instead of its participial force. Our conclusion is that A has again followed a loose, free, and early translation, while B has adopted a later one, closer to the Hebrew. § 5. Codex A, later on, more accurate than B Yet, if we were to suppose that throughout the whole of the book of Judges, or even throughout the story of Samson, B was always more faithful than A to the extant Hebrew, we should be speedily undeceived by the account of Samson's death, where the Hebrew and A agree that the hero " called " to the Lord (but B has " wept "), and that there were " three thousand " spectators (but B has " seven hundred ")} On the whole, it appears safe to adopt the rule — subject to exceptions arising from special circumstances — that a later translation is likely to be more accurate than an earlier one. 1 [313 Acts x. 39, and also in a LXX insertion in : Esdr. v. 45. In Ezr. ii. I, " the children of the province (runon)," LXX has oi vidi ttjs xiipas parallel to I Esdr. v. 7 oi ix ttjs 'lovSatas. 1 " Felt," i.e. probably felt. Where the omission of the word cannot mislead the reader — as, for example, in describing the motives of the hypothetical Corrector (or, Correctors), and the reasons for the adoptions of his (or their) corrections by Matthew and Luke — "probably" may sometimes be omitted, for brevity. 2 [335«] Gen. xiii. 10, 11, R.V., "the Plain (-ai) (marg. Circle) of Jordan," T7jc irepixoipov rov Topo. ; in Gen. xiii. 12, "cities ofthe Plain," the word is used absolutely to mean "the Circle [of the Jordan]," and so, too, in Gen. xix. 17, 28. (In Gen. xix. 25, 29, it is called t) TreploiKos.) In Deut. xxxiv. 3, "the Plain," i.e. Circle, is called "the Plain of the valley of Jericho," LXX (om. "valley") koX to. rreplxwpa. Tep«x Siapp-qatreiv (44). 2 See Trommius' Index, «s' (hiph. ) = iKfiaXKeiv (5), dodyeiv (1), i£dyeu> (frequ.). Comp. Judg. xiii. 25 "The Spirit of the Lord began to move him (raya1?)," which means, literally, "to strike like a bell, or an anvil." But this is quite lost in the Greek, ni< = either "my brother" or " my brothers. " Hence I S. xx. 29 "my brother," LXX "my brothers." 2 [348a] After saying "he met two brothers," a writer might naturally feel obliged to add "more," or "other," or "again," in repeating the phrase about a second pair. If this explanation were not sufficient, we might be tempted to suppose that — the Hebrew "other" (irm) being similar to "brother" — conflation had taken place. "Other" and "after," in Hebrew, are identical. Comp. Judg. v. 14 "after thee (inn*)," LXX (A) "thy brother" (leg. ym) : conversely, in 1 S. xxx. 23 "my brethren (>rm)," LXX "after" (leg. inn). 3 [349«] " Brother (njj) " is confused, in 2 S. xv. 34, with " I (•«)," and mn = "shipping." "Ship"=n'3N. 71 [350] THE PRINCIPAL CORRECTIONS On both these points Luke is probably in error.1 But these, and other errors in Luke's narrative, arise not from a desire to exaggerate, or to alter on account of prejudice, but (at all events in part) from a misunderstanding of the Hebrew original. § 8. Mk.'s use of the word "proclaim " (i) Mk. i. 38 (lit.). Mt. iv. 23. Lk. iv. 43. [350] "that I may "proclaiming the " I must bring-the- proclaim also there." gospel of the kingdom." gospel-of the kingdom of God." This is translated above, as printed in Synopticon. But more probably Matthew should be left blank above, and Mt. iv. 23 should be differently arranged, as follows : — (ii) Mk. i. 39 (lit.). Mt. iv. 23. Lk. iv. 44 (lit.). "And he came ". . . teaching in " And he was pro- proclaiming into their their synagogues and claiming into the synagogues." proclaiming the gos- synagogues." pel of the kingdom." The fact is, that Matthew and Luke do not agree against Mark. On the contrary, Matthew deviates from Mark, and Luke follows Mark in using " proclaim " absolutely (for " pro claim the Gospel "> — a rare construction in the Gospels.2 § 9. (Mt.-Lk) " Sir," om. by Mk. Mk. i. 40 (lit). Mt. viii. 2. Lk. v. 12. "... saying to "... saying, 'Sir, "... saying, 'Sir, him that, ' If thou if thou wilt . . . '" if thou wilt . . . '" wilt . . . '" 1 The word " shipping " could perhaps hardly be used here to mean "vessels " ; and "brother" could not mean "companion," in narrative, except in a few special phrases, such as, "they said, each man to his brother," meaning, "they said to one another. " 2 It is confined to Mk. i. 39 (Lk. iv. 44), iii. 14, and Mt. xi. 1 " to teach and proclaim in their cities." 72 OF MARK L352l [351] The Hebraic "that," used before speech, might be omitted by the Corrector because it is superfluous. " Sir " might be inserted for seemliness. But more probably " to him that " resembled " Sir," in Hebrew, sufficiently to justify the correction.1 § 10. (Mk) " cometh" etc., (Mt.-Lk.) " behold" Mk. i. 40. Mt. viii. 2. Lk. v. 12. [352] (i) "And "And behold a "And behold a there cometh unto leper approaching." man full of leprosy, him a leper." and, seeing Jesus . . ." Compare : — Mk. ii. 3. Mt. ix. 2. Lk. v. 18. (ii) "And they " And behold they " And behold men come bringing unto brought-to him . . ." bringing . . ." him . . ." Mk. v. 22. Mt. ix. 18. Lk. viii. 41. (iii) "And there "... behold . . . " and behold there cometh . . . and see- having come - to- came a man." ing him . . ." [him]." Mk. ix. 4. Mt. xvii. 3. Lk. ix. 30. (iv) "And there " And behold there "and behold two appeared to them appeared to them men . . . who were Elias with Moses." Moses and Elias." Moses and Elias." 1 [351a] "Tohim" = ^: "that" = »a: ^> is frequently interchanged with 1, as in 2 S. ix. 4 "Ammiel," 'Aimhp (A, Ap^X), Neh. xi. 31 "Bethel," «ca B7,07,p, Prov. xxxi. 1 "Lemuel," (Theod.) 'Pe/3ow$\ : comp. Ezek. xxvii. 16 Heb. nrasn, AapuiB. Authorities are not agreed as to the origin of "Beliar" as a form of "Belial" (see Black's Ency. "Belial"). [351*1 Moreover, 3 is frequently interchanged with 3, so that >d i^> could become first .311 and then w i.e. "Rabbi." And in Mk. (x. 51) "Rabboum is parallel to Mt.-Lk. " Sir" Uipie). 73 [352] THE PRINCIPAL CORRECTIONS Mk. xiv. 43. Mt. xxvi. 47. Lk. xxii. 47. (v) "And straight- "And . . . behold "behold ... and way . . . there com- there came." he went before them." eth up." [352] " Behold " was probably in the Hebrew original, but Mark never uses this exclamation in narrative. Wherever " behold " occurs in a parallel passage of one, or both, of the Synoptists, introducing an arrival — as in the first three instances above — Mark will be found to use either (a) "comes," or — if " comes " is in the original already — (b) " straightway." In the Transfiguration — instance (iv) above — where there is no suggestion of arrival, and where " beholding " may be said to be implied in " appeared " — Mark omits " behold " and substitutes nothing for it.1 Matthew and Luke agree in adopting corrections that assimilate the Greek Gospel in this respect to the Hebrew. [353] In the instance marked (v) above, Mark has rendered " behold " by " straightway." This rendering occurs thrice in Genesis, and appears to have been a kind of ex periment in free translation, which the Septuagint did not continue. This form of " straightway " occurs only four times in the whole of the Septuagint. Mark repeatedly employs it2 § 11. (Mk.) "by four," (Mt.-Lk.) "on a bed" Mk. ii. 3. Mt. ix. 2. Lk. v. 18. "... a paralytic "... a paralytic " ... on a bed a carried by four." prostrate on a bed." man that was para lysed." 1 [352a] Note that in (i) and (iii), Luke and Mark severally add clauses about "seeing." These may be conflations arising from Greek corruption. A marginal iSov is easily confused with iSw (i.e. ISiliv) and transferred to the text. 2 [353a] Gen. xv. 4, xxiv. 45, xxxviii. 29, ei6is = mn. The only other instance is Job iii. n, where there is no Hebrew equivalent. Mark has much in common with the style of translation adopted in Genesis. For another possible instance of idiosyncracy in translation, confined to a single book of the LXX, see 313a. 74 OF MARK [356] [354] See Clue (196-205), where it was shewn that a Hebrew original "at a trap-door- in-the-roof" may have been mistaken for " by four," and also for " on a bed." The latter was adopted by Matthew and Luke. § i 2. (Mk.) " before them," (Mt.-Lk.) " to his house " Mk. ii. 12. Mt. ix 7, 8. Lk. v. 25, 26. " He went out be- " He went away "... before fore [them] all . . ., to his house . . . they their faces ... he they were amazed." feared." went away to his house . . . and amazement seized all and they were filled with fear." (i) " before them " [355] The original may have been, "He went out between them all," that is to say, between the crowded congregation, which made way so as to allow him to pass. The word meaning " between " is easily confused, and has actually been confused in the Septuagint, with the much more common word "house," as, for example, in Proverbs " Among the righteous," LXX " the houses of the righteous."1 Mark gives a free but correct translation, taking " between " to mean " in the midst of," " in the full view of." Matthew adopts the corrupt reading " house." Luke conflates " house " with a slightly different form (" before their faces ") of Mark's " before them all." (ii) " they were amazed " [356] Mark has perhaps paraphrased the original Hebrew "fear," thinking that "amazement" would better express 1 [355a] Prov. xiv. 9 "among, (p) " olxiai: Sir. xiii. 12 "in the house-of (no) (A l*ta ndi) " (where A has Sib. rl, but the older MSS. read Sti and connect it with what precedes) : Ex. iii. 3 " why (ynD)," Sn (A. F. rl Sti) : Judg. ii. 2 " But ye have not hearkened unto my voice : why (,id) have ye done this?" LXX "ye have not hearkened because (Sn) (but A "when," 6Ve) ye did this" : Judg. iv. 14 "Is not (xSn) the Lord gone out . . . ? " Sn (but A oix 1S06) ^eXerfo-erai . . . There are many more such instances. 76 OF MARK [359] [358] This correction probably originated in Greek cor ruption. The original Hebrew had " seweth." But the Greek of this (pd-jrTei) is convertible, by the alteration of a single letter, into " throweth (piTrrei)" ; and the two Greek words are thus confused in Job.1 Moreover, Mark's compound, " seweth- on," is not found in the whole of Greek literature. It was therefore probably altered to " throweth-on." But this, since it implied violence, was not so appropriate as " putteth on," which was therefore generally adopted by later Evangelists. Mk. ii. 22. [359] " Else,2 the wine will tear the wine-skins, and the wine is destroyed and the wine -skins [too]. [[But [people must put] new wine into new wine skins]]."3 § 15- " The wine-skins " Mt. ix. 17. "Or -else, the wine-skins are torn and the wine is spilt and the wine- skins destroyed. But [people] put new wine into new wine-skins." Lk. v. 37, 38. " Or-else, the new wine will tear the wine-skins, and will itself be spilt, and the wine-skins will be destroyed. But one- should-put new wine into new wine-skins." 1 "Sew(n2n/' occurs (4) in O.T. =(3) bd-rrTw, (1) trwpawTW. In Job xvi. 15 (LXX 16) " I have sewed" (nan) Ipaipav, there are v.r. eppafav, epiipav, eppapav. In the present passage, D reads errurvvpawrei. This was caused by some scribe who — aware that aw- was allowable and e7ri- was not — wrote aw in the margin, which D conflated. " Putteth-on (iirif3d\\ei) " might mean " throweth, or, casteth on," so that it is closely synonymous with eiripphrrei " throweth on." If the above explanation is correct, i-rripdwTei was altered to iwip'urTei which was replaced by the synonymous iwifldWei : and the intermediate phase of tradition, i-mpiirTd, is no longer extant. 2 [359a] " Else," Mk. et Se p-h, Mt.-Lk. el 51 p.h ye, see below on Mk. ii. 26. Mk. never uses ye. It occurs only thrice in the whole of the Pentateuch. The omission of ye leaves the reader free to translate thus : " But, if the wine should not tear. " The insertion therefore conduces to clearness. 3 These words, omitted by Tisch. and bracketed by W. H., are retained by SS, which however adds "put." The sentence may have been omitted by some scribes owing to its ungrammatical structure. If it was an interpolation, why did the interpolator omit "put"? 77 [360] THE PRINCIPAL CORRECTIONS [360] In this case, Greek corruption will best explain the divergences from Mark. The original Greek was probably, " Else, the wine will tear the wine-skins and (xaC) is destroyed (aTrorWvTat) also (or, and) (/cat) itself (avro?)." But "is destroyed '' and " are destroyed " in Greek MSS. are often distinguished by nothing but a horizontal line of abbreviation over one letter (atroXkvTab and airoXKyrai)} Again, the Greek " also " may mean " and also " ; and the Greek " itself " by the change of a letter may mean " they." Hence arose the following variations. (i) Mark took the words as meaning " and it is destroyed and also they [are destroyed]," and inserted or substituted nouns for pronouns to make this clear : " and the wine is destroyed and also the wine-skins? (2) Matthew and Luke followed the interpretation " are destroyed." This left the sentence incomplete, thus : " Else the wine will tear the wine- skins and they are destroyed, and itself ..." To make this clear, " the wine is spilt," or " the wine itself will be spilt," was inserted in the margin, and afterwards transferred to the text. If the words enclosed in double brackets in Mark are genuine, it is easy to see why Evangelists added a missing verb, variously supplied by Matthew ("put") and Luke (" should-put "). § 1 S (a). (Mt.-Lk) " eating? Mk. omits Mk. ii. 23. Mt xii. 1. Lk. vi. 1. [360] (i) 1" ... "... but his dis- " . . andhisdis- and his disciples be- ciples were hungry ciples were plucking gan to make a way, and began to pluck the ears and eating, plucking the ears." ears and eat." rubbing [them] with their hands." 1 [360a] This is a very frequent cause of Greek corruption. The abbreviation is confined, in the oldest uncial MSS., to letters at, or near, the end of the line. But the lines are so short that, in spite of this limitation, the contraction occurs" for example, in n, (Lk. vii. 21) twice in seven words, (Lk. vii. 22) thrice in eighth (Lk. vii. 4) twice in four. 73 OF MARK [362] See Clue, 211-218, where the passage and the context are discussed. Matthew and Luke omit Mark's difficult phrase (i.e. " making a way ") : and, by adding that the disciples " ate," they meet, by anticipation, the charge of wanton trespass necessarily implied in any exact interpreta tion of Mark's words. § 1 6. (Mk.) "except," (Mt.-Lk.) "except alone" Mk. ii. 26. Mt. xii. 4. Lk. vi. 4. "... except (lit. "... except (lit. "... except (lit. if not) the priests." if not) to the priests if not) alone the alone." priests." [361] As in Mk. ii. 22, so here, the Corrector disliked the use of " if not," to mean " except," without some addition to signify that "if" is not used as a conditional conjunction. There, he added a Greek particle (" at least "), here he adds '' alone." Similarly in the parallel to Mk. xiii. 32" except the Father," Mt. xxiv. 36 adds "alone." § 1 7. (Mk.) "plagues? (Mt.-Lk) " diseases " ML iii. 10. Mt. iv. 24. Lk. vi. 17. " plagues (lit. "diseases." "diseases." strokes)." [362] The difference shews Mark adhering to the custom of the Septuagint, which seldom uses the regular Greek word for " disease." Mark thrice uses " stroke (jidarri,^) " and only once " disease (voaos) " ; Matthew " disease " five times, " stroke " never ; Luke " disease " four times, " stroke " once. In classical Greek, Mark's word might mean "a plague" or " a scourge." It would naturally be corrected by later Evangelists.1 1 [362a] Mark may have had in view the Hebrew of Is. liii. 4 R.V. "carried our sorrows (m'skud)," LXX "sorroweth for us." This word = (i) p.dan£, (2) paXaicla, but never vbaos. The root is said to mean "pierce" (comp. Ezek. 79 [363] THE PRINCIPAL CORRECTIONS 1 8. The naming of the Apostles Mt. x. 2. "But ofthe Twelve Apostles the names are these, first Simon who is called Peter and Andrew his bro ther and James the [son] of Zebedee and John his brother, Philip ..." Lk. vi. 13—14- ". . . Twelvewhom also he named Apos tles, Simon whom also he named Peter and Andrew his brother, and James and John and Philip . . ." Mk. iii. 14 foil. "and he appointed Twelve, whom also he named Apostles, . . . and he appointed the Twelve and set a name on Simon [? namely] Peter, and James the [son] of Zebedee and John the brother of James (and he set names on them [namely] Boan erges, which is Sons of Thunder) and An drew and Philip ..." [363] Mark shews signs of confusion. Possibly he had before him two accounts, one (a) of the " appointing," the other (b) of the '' naming," of the Apostles : and he may have combined the two by means of parentheses. If so, the former (a) may have originally had " Simon and Andrew his brother," and Mark may have omitted " his brother " when he altered the order hy placing first those apostles zvho received new names? xxviii. 24 " a grieving (3ND0) thorn"), hence "soreness," "pain" : comp. 2 Cor. xii. 7 "thorn in the flesh "(marg. "stake"). But more probably the original was juj "stroke," & *P&- f}\rifia (10). „ 2 [366*] Another explanation is, that Mk. read the familiar htm ( parable ) instead of hvo (" treachery "). The letters y and v are often interchanged in LXX, as may be seen from the Oxford Concordance of Names ; see 2a/3aS')." 83 [367] THE PRINCIPAL CORRECTIONS — their sins and their blasphemies, as many blasphemies as they utter — but who so shall blaspheme against (lit. to) the Holy Spirit, hath not forgiveness ..." but the blasphemy against (lit. of) the Spirit shall not be forgiven. (a2) And whoso shall say a word against the Son of man it shall be forgiven to him ; but whoso shall say [a word] against the Holy Spirit it shall not be forgiven to him." the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him ; but to him that blasphemeth against the Holy Spirit it shall not be for given." [367] Compare a passage in the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, warning Christians not to judge a prophet speaking in the Spirit, " for every sin shall be forgiven, but this sin shall not be forgiven." J [368] In the original Hebrew Gospel, " sons of man (Adam) " probably occurred in all cases where " men " stands in passages of warning or reproof, such as that in Matthew, " Every idle word that men shall speak," where the modern Hebrew of Delitzsch has "the sons of man (Adam)." But when " son of man," in Christian documents, came to mean exclusively Jesus, Evangelists must have found the term " sons of man " incongruous in the old application. The natural course was to substitute the idiomatic Greek equivalent, *' men." But in a few cases the old phrase might be retained with the singular changed to the plural, " sons of men." The survival of the latter here alone in Mark is a proof of its extreme antiquity, and the parallel passages must be regarded as early corrections of it. [369] (i) The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles took the obvious course of omitting " to the sons of man," and of 1 Didach. xi. 7 irpotphrnv XaKovvra ev -rrveii/xan oi -rreipdaere oiSi oWpiceiTe- irdaa, yap dp-aprla de9i]aeTai, aiir-n Si r] dp-aprla. oix &(pedjjaer "attend on," "minister to." In Sir. xiv. 18 c &vSpes ol irepl Aa$dv represents " The-men-of Dathan." In 2 S. xv. 18 ol irepl occurs as part of a triple conflate (75) rendering " a'lay (servants) " and is probably intended to distinguish David's personal attendants from his warriors. In Dan iii. 23 (LXX), iii. 49 (LXX and Theod.), it occurs in Greek additions. 2 [370^] Possibly Mark's "when he was alone" may be a third member of this conflation, springing from an original ' ' those - who [were] about him." For "when" and "who" are easily interchangeable in Hebrew, e.g. 1 K. viii. 30, 2 Chr. vi. 21 "when," & ; 1 K. viii. 9, 2 Chr. v. 10 (R.V. txt.) "when," (marg.) "where," &, i.e. "in the things which. " Consequently — taking "those-who [were] about him" to mean "when [they -were] about him," i.e. "when they were with him by themselves, apart from the multitude" a free translator might render this "when he was alone " (or perhaps "when they-were (ereNOTo) alone," corrupted to " when he-was (ereNETo)."). But the discussion of this question must be reserved for a commentary on the Triple Tradition. See Mk. iv. 34, " But privately to his own disciples he used-to-explain all things" a passage omitted by Matthew and Luke. 86 OF MARK [371] § 21. (Mk) "into them," (Ml.) "in his heart," (Lk) "from their heart" Mk. iv. 15 (lit.). Mt. xiii. 19. Lk. viii. 12. "taketh away the "snatcheth that "taketh away the word that hath been which hath been word from their sown into them." sown in his heart." heart." (i) "Heart" [370 (i)] The original may have been " taketh away the word [that was] in their heart." Hebrew, like English, frequently omits the relative, where either that, or a parti ciple (e.g. " sown ") must be expressed in Greek. " In-the- heart-of," " from-the-heart-of," are frequently rendered in the Septuagint by the prepositions " in " and " from." 1 Mark perhaps wrote " into them " in order to avoid " in them," since the latter might mean " among them " (an ambiguity sometimes found in the Pauline " in you "). Matthew and Luke return to the literal Hebrew, "heart" (ii) (Mk.-Mt) " in(to)?' (Lk) "from " [371] This is a frequent variation (158a). Compare Lam. i. 15" he hath set at naught . . . in the midst of me? LXX "he hath taken away . . . from the midst of me? Gen. xxxv. 2 " Put away the strange gods that [are] among you," LXX "take away the strange gods from the midst of you." Reading " from," Luke would of course not require a relative or a participle. § 22. Interrogatives Mk. iv. 21. Mt. v. 15. Lk. viii. 16. (i) "Doth the "Nor do men "But no one, lamp come ? " light a lamp." having kindled a lamp." 1 See Tromm. index under yyp and 2b. 87 [372] THE PRINCIPAL CORRECTIONS Mk. vi. 37. (ii) " Are we to go away and buy . . . ? " Mk. viii. 12. (iii) "Why seek eth this generation a sign? Verily I say, (lit.) if1 a sign shall be given to this generation." Mk. xi. 22. (iv) R.V. "Have faith in God" (but ? better, " Have ye faith in God?") Mk. xi. 32. (v) "But are we Mt. xiv. 15. Lk. ix. 13. " that they may " unless we are to go away . . . and go and buy . . ." buy . . ." Mt. xvi. 4. " An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign, and a sign shall not be given to it except the sign of Jonah." Mt. xxi. 21. " If ye have faith Mt. xxi. 26. 'But if we say (v) ".But are we "But if \ to say From men ? " From men . . Lk. xi. 29. "This generation is an evil generation. It seeketh a sign, and a sign shall not be given to it except the sign of Jonah." [Lk. xvii. 6,2] " If ye jhave faith Lk. xx. 6. "But if we say From men . . ."1 Mk. xiv. 61. (vi) " Thou [then] art the Christ ? " Mt xxvi. 63. Lk. xxii. 67. "... that thou " If thou art the wouldst tell us z/thou Christ tell us." art the Christ." [372] These variations could not occur in Greek, where interrogation is almost always clearly distinguished from assertion ; but they could easily occur in Hebrew, where sometimes the interrogative is expressed (a) hy mere tone, (b) by a prefix identical with the article (often, as in (i) above! | [371a] Mk. viii. 12 lit. "if." "If," when thus used in Hebrew, maybe explained by "The Lord do so unto me" implied before it. R.V. here has the negative without' a marginal explanation ; but in Hebr. iii. u, iv. 3 "They shall not enter," it has marg. "Gr. if they shall enter." ' Luke is bracketed, as the context is very different from that of Matthew so that the parallelism is doubtful. 88 OF MARK [373] equivalent to a negation), (c) hy " if" (in which case it may amount, as in (iii) above, to a strong negation). As a result of (c), the Greek " if " is frequently used interrogatively in the Septuagint, and this may explain the variations in (iv), (v), (vi). In (ii), a Hebrew original of Mark's " Are we to go away ? " might be rendered in Greek either literally by " If (el) we are to go away," or, more classically, by a negative interrogative : " Surely we are not (jirj) to go away ? " Luke seems to have combined " if" and " not," reading " if we are not," i.e. " unless we are [to go away]." Some confusion appears to have caused Matthew to apply the phrase, not to the disciples, but to the multitude (" that they may go away ")? In (iv), Mark himself probably means " have " to be taken imperatively (as R.V.) ; but the parallelism of Matthew and Luke suggests that the writer of the original Hebrew meant the sentence either interrogatively (" Have ye faith in God ? Then shall ye obtain your petitions ") or else conditionally (" If ye have faith "). § 23. (Mk.) " come," (Mt) " light? (Lk.) " kindle " Mk. iv. 21. Mt. v. 15. Lk. viii. 16. "Doth the lamp "Nor do [men] " But no one hav- come ? " light a lamp . . ." ing kindled a lamp." [373] See Clue (186) where it was shewn that this divergence might be explained by a confusion of the Hebrew words " come " and " kindle." 2 1 [372a] This might arise from throwing Direct Speech ("should we go away?") into Indirect Speech. "The disciples said Should they go away?" The latter might easily become, " the disciples said they [the multitude] should go away. ' Moreover, the Hebrew 1st pers. pi. fut. active is easily and frequently confused with the 3rd pers. pi. past passive. 2 [373a] Comp. Ex. xiv. 20 "yet it gave light (tk-i)," icai Siij\8ev (? leg. «m, but see 186a). In 2 S. xxii. 29 "thou [art] my lamp," the parall. Ps. win. 28 89 [373] THE PRINCIPAL CORRECTIONS 24. (Mk.) "save that it may be? (Mt.-Lk) " that shall not be " Mk. iv. 22. " For (a?) there is not [anything] hid den save that it may be manifested, (a2) nor-yet did [anything] become hidden away but that it may come into manifestation]." Mt. x. 26. " For (a?) there is nothing covered that shall not be uncover ed, (