y-y So H® (τ: WH? ΔΝ (‘luxury, enjoyment’: ‘for enjoyment is not good for every one’), cf. % (‘food is not, &c. —?b5x Sor b2b) zz So B® k: cp. Ὁ: HW? ann jr $3 was ὅπ ΝΟῚ 3. et non omni animae omne genus placet ὅ-ἃ #® [Ὁ] yan dx (mg. an bw and [5s] mn): 320 [5x] tn bx (cp. QP mg. 2): G μη απληστευου. Perhaps QP should be read (with a different division of the letters) by stn bx (so Lévt, Strack) : then point Wi Dy (Nef. of ΠῚ.) < scatter not thyself upon (dissipate not thyself)’‘indulge not excess’ ( G& ‘be not insatiable in’): the reading of ® sn bw ‘be not excessive’(?). Smend reads yn->w: Hif. ( strengthened Qal) of yw ‘to be restless’: he renders ‘sei nicht ausgelassen (bei)’, and regards the other readings as variants artsing (bs []}Π and by sin) from Sy sym and this from S yun: cp. YIN v. 30 Ὁ 325 mg. b-b HP ὑπ — (κα: 32" mg. and H>b> ce 325 Javn byy ὅτ: 32" mg. Ἰῆ 2 ΠΠΠ ὈΝῚ 2a scribal error Jor wynn which wself 7s a correction of BWM (so Smend): Levi reads yinnn and explains from Syr. as meaning ‘desire’ Ff So ®: Ge ecra πονος (B): bul other MSS. (SA 248 ἅς.) vooos (3 infirmitas: so 3) ss 32" ynnn (op. nole ® above) YQ” mg.: BP Aw: E& καὶ ἡ ἀπληστια ἘΠΕ 30 Nt G (cas xodepas): so Num, xi. 20 (Heér. and LXX) iri % apy da (‘through lack of discipline’: cp. Prov. v. 23 DW pRa Symm. δι᾽ απαιδευσιαν): G 60 ἀπληστίαν: 33, propter crapulam: 96 ‘through much food ’ 1} BP oy ὦ ὁ. YI: mg. ayy aya BP: (ἃ τιμα 3. 3. and the citation in Rabbinic sources (ΡΥ 123): see exeg. note for these, and also for the use of AY in these connextons (ny used in an Aram. sense = Heb. ΓΝ ‘to take pleasure in, treat in a friendly way’ ) Καὶ 395 me. JIA vob (#? vb here this MS. ends): Qk πρὸς tas χρειας (+avrov NAV 155 253 254 307 Syro-Hex)
28. For not everything is good for every one... Cp. 1 Cor. vi. 12. 29. Indulge not excess. Cp. xxxi. (xxxiv.) 7, ‘be not insatiable’ (€& μὴ ἀπληστεύου, as here).
Nor immoderation ... lit. ‘be not poured out’ (& μὴ ἐκχυθῇς = ἸΏ JAWN by), i.e. do not allow yourself to be given up excessively to. Cp. Ep. Jude 11 ‘rushed headlong (ἐξεχύθησαν) for wages in the error of Balaam’.
30. sickness ...loathing. There is a clear allusion to Num. xi. 20. Possibly both here and in the Numbers passage the word translated ‘loathing’ (Vulg. ‘nausea’) may, as Smend suggests, denote something stronger, some severe illness like dysentery (Smend renders ‘ Brechruhr’). Oriental dysentery is especially dangerous. For the whole verse Cp. Xxxi. (XXxiv.) 20.
31. prolongeth life. Lit. ‘ will add life’: cp. for the expression xlvili. 23; Ps. Ixi. 6 (7); Prov. ili. 2, ix. 11.
XXXVIII. 1-23. This section falls into two well-defined subsections, the first of which treats of the physician and | his healing art, which should be resorted to in sickness (vv. I-15); and the second with mourning for the dead
(a) XXXVIII. 1-15. God has ordained the physician, and given man the power and means to use the healing art, in order that these should be resorted to when needful (vv. 1-8). In time of sickness, together with prayer, repentance, and sacrifice, the skill of the physician should be called in to aid. The section seems to be addressed to people who, on religious grounds, were unwilling to consult the physician in times of sickness ; cp. 2 Chron. xvi. 12 (‘ Asa... was diseased in his feet... yet in his disease he resorted not unto the Lord, but to the physicians’—the contrast is significant).
1. Cultivate the physician in accordance with the need of him. The line is cited more than once in Rabbinic | works in the form—(‘ The proverb says :) Honour thy physician before thou hast need of him’ (AZdrash rabba to Exod. xxi; cp. Midr. Tanh. Gen. }P'2 § 10; also in an Aram. form in T. J. Zaanith iii. 6). This form agrees with 3" here in reading ‘ before (thou hast need of him)’; but the alternative reading (52 @) ‘in accordance with the need of him’ is to be preferred here, being supported by the logical connexion. The physician is to be cultivated and honoured ‘because’ God has ordained him for a special and necessary office in human affairs. This point the author is enforcing to people who were inclined to deny the necessity of the physician under any circumstances. The reading } ‘before’ here may have arisen under the influence of xviii. 19 (‘ Have a care of thy health or ever thou be sick’); so | Taylor. The word rendered ‘cultivate’ (49) occurs also in xxxi. (xxxiv.) 15, with the meaning to treat in a friendly and considerate manner ; cp. Y in Aram. ‘to delight in, welcome’ (2, 7. ΠΥ).
ordained. The Hebr. word here rendered ‘ordained’ (pon) sometimes has the meaning ‘ created’ (so Xxxxi. |
2 It is from God that !the physician getteth wisdom}, And from the king he receiveth ™gifts™. 3 The skill of the physician lifteth up his head, And he may stand before nobles®. 4 God °hath created°® medicines out of the earth, And let not a discerning man reject them. 5 Was not ?the water? made sweet “by the wood‘, *That He might make known to all men His power’? 6 And He gave men discernment, That they might glory *in His mighty works’. 7*By means of them the physician assuageth pain‘, 8 And likewise "the apothecary prepareth a confection":
τιμαις (jo 106 296 > τιμαις) αὐτου: Clem. Alex. has only πρὸς χρειαν αὐτου: δι. προς τας χρειας YD x05
(so read): QP y2798 vas 8: so Rabbinic citations ( ὉΞΟ for > under influence of xviii. 19) 1-1 ® pom NEN 8S: G& ( freely) ἐστιν caors m-m So: (ἃ dona (but V 248 253 Syro-Hex δοξαν) nn So 30 (with mg. nbn Sor p’2"93): Qk καὶ evavte μεγιστανων θαυμασθησεται: S ‘and before kings they set him’ 0-0 So
|Z he marginal DY (88) ‘spices’ $ and occurs in the Rabb. cttation (see exeg. note), but rs not to be preferred to the text MANN ‘medicines’] ΡῸΡ So H (τ: 3 aqua amara $ (amplifying ref. to Exod. xv. 25) a Y mg. yyo G: B vert pyr ὥ rr %® ἼΠ5 wax 59 yrrnd maya (for Ὁ syaya+if, cp. 1 Chron. xix. 3): Gr εἰς ro γνωσθηναι τὴν ἰσχὺν αὐτου S (dut 248 70 +70 [248 απο] avOpwrou [so £|®) ss So GS: ® ‘in His (mg. their) mighty work’ (but pl. ἐς required by DNA 7 a) t-t G ev αὑτοις εθεραπευσεν και npev Toy πόνον αὐτου (N¢-" 157 307 &c. Syro-Hex Sah Eth αὐτων) = ‘with them doth he heal and taketh away his (their)
_ pain’: 3» in his curans mitigabit dolorem (Aug. spec. mitigavit dolorem ipsorum) θεραπεύων ἀνεπαυσεν QS
[ἃ may have added \ of 3) to NID] u-u % unguentarius faciet pigmenta suavitatis + et unctiones conficiet
[xxxiv.] 13 38, 27 mg.) ; the Greek so renders here (ἔκτισεν) ; cp. vii. 15, xxxix. 25, xl. 1,xliv. 2. But in all these passages the meaning ‘allot’ or ‘ ordain’ is to be preferred. [The meaning ‘create’ in xxxi. (xxxiv.) 13 may be explained from the idea of smoothness, shape, according to Smend.]
2. It is from God that the physician getteth wisdom... The skill of the physician is derived from God, and is not dependent on the favour of earthly potentates for the high estimation with which it should be regarded. This seems to be the thought of the couplet. ‘King’ in clause 4 probably means an earthly king, and is not to be regarded as a title of God here (the King, i.e. the heavenly King). The verse, however, may not be intended to assert more than the fact that the physician derives his skill from God, and at the same time receives recognition and is honoured
by the highest of earthly potentates. Physicians were regular officials of Oriental courts, and highly esteemed there. (ἃ generalizes the statement (‘from the Most High cometh healing’).
3. lifteth up his head ...stand before nobles. A physician specially skilful may rise to the highest honour. For the expression ‘stand before nobles’ (τ. ὦ. ‘kings’) cp. Prov. xxii. 29.
4. created medicines out of the earth. Herbs used for medicinal purposes are specially in the writer’s mind. In
the Midrash rabba on Gen. viii (cp. also Ya/gut, Job, ὃ 501) some sayings are grouped together which correspond to
(4a) God causes spices to spring up out of the earth: (7) With them the physician heals the stroke, (8a) And of them the perfumer compounds the perfume.!
5. Was not the water made sweet by the wood... The allusion is to Exod. xv. 23f. Ben-Sira rightly interprets the miracle to have been effected by the nature of the wood: so Targ. Onq. ad doc. (‘and the Lord instructed him (in the properties of) a tree, and he cast it into the waters, and the waters became sweet’: cp. also Philo de vita Moysi, i. 33, and Josephus, Azz. 111. 1. 2). F
That He might make known to all men His power. So # rightly. God is the subject of the sentence (& makes the reference to the power (virtue) of the wood). God reveals His power through natural agents and properties.
6. That they (i.e. men) might glory in His (God’s) mighty works. For the expression ‘glory in’ (2 4N5N7)
7. By means of them the physician assuageth pain. ‘By means of them,’ i.e. by the forces which God has placed in natural objects. The subject of the sentence in the text of # is the physician: (τ (wrongly) makes the subject of the sentence God. [€ may have read 1318219 ND) NDI OA (cp. Rabb. cit. above).]
8. And likewise the apothecary prepareth a confection. Or the clause (#) may be rendered: ‘And likewise the perfumer prepareth a perfume’ (μίγμα). In BH Mpiis a professional name ‘ mixer, perfumer’ (cp. Exod. xxx. 25,35; Eccles. x. 1, &c.); in 1 Chron. ix. 30 cp. ‘compounders of the ointment’: NOP (the word used here) in Neo-Hebrew ‘ointment’ (ointment-mixture) (so 1 Chron. ix. 30). Thus the line might be rendered : “And likewise the apothecary (compounder) prepareth an ointment (ointment-mixture).’ For Ap (Gr. μυρεψός) cp. xlix. 1. The offices of apothecary (compounder) and physician were, of course, not distinct.
1 npn As pnd APT AAD) ADA NN NAW N|NT OWI INA DD ndyn mos
ἘΠ That His work may not cease, YNor health’ “from the face of His earth. 9 My son, *in sickness* Ybe not negligent’ ;
Pray unto God, for He can heal’. 10 *[ Turn] from iniquity, and ‘purify thy hands!* ;
And from all transgressions” cleanse thy heart. 11 <dlGive a meal-offering with) a memorial ?,
°And offer a fat sacrifice® to the utmost of thy means’. 12 And to the physician also give a place’;
Nor should he be far away, for of him there is need. 13 For there is a time when successful help is in his power ; 14 For he also maketh supplication to God,
'To make his diagnosis successful’,
And the treatment, jthat it may promote recovery). 15 He that sinneth before his Maker
kShall be delivered into the hands* of the physician.
sanitatis (@ doublet) VV 39 MwAN: ( καὶ εἰρηνη [ παρ᾽ αὐτου] (& reading yap for map: pax enim Dei) [ἢ εἰιρηνη mvs for mvrn (Hart): but Smend thinks tt translates Q ‘ Heil’ | W-W @& map αὐτου ἐστιν emt mpoowrov τῆς γῆς WN 9p dy yD [AwIN] ‘and that health from him may be upon the face of the earth’ (Smend thinks this may be the original tex/): @ DIN 31D WIN, mg. WIN 5D S (‘from the face of the earth’): 27 classzcal Hebrew 35 by would be required x-x So ®: G+ σου (so S 3.) y-y ® Aaynn by & (see Surther exeg. nole): S>(X ne despicias te ipsum) 2 G& -Ἐσε (so L) a-a 3) (at beginning of line) ἐς here defective: (D\) pp 32m Sy ‘flee from iniquity and from respect of persons’ (Schechter): (Dr1 ἐς supplied also by Levi, Strack, Peters): 1 mg. has 7D) ‘prove’. G& αποστησον πλημμελειαν (248 7O—petas) καὶ εὔθυνον χειρας =
PDS aN) by DN (evdvs 73 Ps, Ixxviii. 1): so Smend would emend the whole line: DDD 137) Syn mle) s this τς confirmed by parallelism of next clause. & has ‘remove iniquity and falsehood’ b-b G apaptias (s7g.) cy. 11>8 dd Febr. MS. defective, only the final word of the line, AAS, being legible: (ἃ dos ευωδιαν και punpoovvoy σεμιδαλεως : mg. ANADN: Smend remarks that a fem. noun must have preceded this, and he restores the whole line: AIDS Ox ANI jn: Lev? ΤΙΣΙΝ nim) Win (cp. xlv. 16) ‘offer incense and a memorial’ e-e 39 Wy jw) ‘and make fat what is set in order or prepared’ (¢.e. ‘the offering prepared’): cp. nd ny 1. 14 where (ἃ renders by mpoopopa: Ge here και λιπανον προσφοραν ft ® own ‘p93 (Schechter proposes T\1 %5ID3 ‘according to the savings of thy substance’): @ ὡς μὴ ὑπαρχων ? 78 ‘BD: or as έν suggests ἢ bap: perhaps Inn 55 (Lévt) should be read. ἘΣ s-2 So & = 19 (MS. defective): G+ καὶ yap avtov εκτισεν κυριος
(addition from v. τὴ) h (τ -Ἐ σου : cp. ® mg. ΤΙΝ (corrupted for nN?) i-i awa xb πον avin (AWE Wes ‘solution’, Eccles. viii. ΤῊ: (ἃ ἀναπαυσιν (2 from avadvow : λυσις WWE Eccles. viii. 1. [ὥ here ‘health "ἢ For nbs (read as Hif-) Q mg. has AND (1. ὁ. 10) S$: UW diriget J) (ἃ χαριν εμβιωσεως FY: S ‘in his hand and life’ Kk So ® mg. Ν" Sy ἼΘ᾽ & and & (ἐμπέσοι ets xetpas): ἸΗ text pd ἼΞ2Π) ‘is presumptuous before’ 1D pr. tit. de exequiis m-m # ΝΠ (7. ‘cause to flow’) G& καταγαγε : S ‘ multiply’
(395 Har?) nn 39 NA: Ck ws dewa racyov ΔΓ o-o ® odynn dx (‘hide not thyself’) pop 30 onynaa (dul seng. suff. ts required: so read with versions): G& (for whole line) καὶ pn vmepdys την ταφὴν
That His work may not cease, Nor health from the face of His earth. ‘His (i.e. God’s) work.’ The idea is that God’s mighty working manifests itself ceaselessly on the earth in the work of the physician. ‘The reason ...is a divine design to encourage science, which otherwise would vanish, being useless. ‘“ Miraculous” healing would never have suggested a study of botany or mineralogy’ (Edersheim). @ obscures the meaning.
9. in sickness be not negligent. The Hebr. word rendered here ‘be negligent’ (so &) means ‘to let oneself go’, i.e. be careless: so Prov. xiv. 16; Sir. v. 7, vii. 10, 16; cp. xiii. 7, xvi. 8. It is not necessary to alter the text in these passages to 13YNN, ‘trouble oneself’.
Pray unto God, for He can heal. Cp. Exod. xv. 26.
το. Turn from iniquity, and purify thy hands... The expression ‘clean of hands’ (‘he that hath clean hands’) symbolizes innocence or freedom from guilt ; cp. Job xvii. 9, &c. The idea that physical ills are a punishment for sin is here emphasized, as often elsewhere in the O. T. ee.
11. Give a meal-offering with a memorial. The sacrifice as described in Lev. ii. 1-3 is meant; the ‘memorial is that part of the hah which is burnt upon the altar. All incense was so burnt (cp. xlv. 16). Lévi restores here: “ Offer incense and a memorial.’ :
offer a fat sacrifice... Cp.vii. 31; Prov. 11]. 9, &c.
12. And to the physician also give a place. Note the order of Ben-Sira’s thought: In sickness first make thy peace with God; resort to prayer and sacrifice ; then call in the physician (‘for verily the Lord hath created him’ is an addition in & from v. 1).
14. To make his diagnosis successful, And the treatment ... For the text see critical note. The word rendered ‘treatment’ lit. = ‘ healing’. i
15. He that sinneth... Shall be delivered into the hands of the physician. This probably means that if a man sins against his Maker he will be punished by sickness and ill health, and will then have to depend upon the physician for relief—God will not help him (presumably till he has made his peace with God). & (ἐμπέσοι : but 23 55 254 ἐμπεσεῖται) renders: ‘let him fall!’ but the alternative rendering is to be preferred.
(ὁ XXXVIIT. 16-23. On mourning for the dead (= 2+2+24+2+42 distichs).
16 !My son, ™let tears fall™ over the dead ; »Show thy grief® and wail out thy lamentation. In accordance with what is due to him bury his body, ° And hide not thyself® ?when he expires?. 17 1Let thy weeping be bitter and thy wailing passionate‘; And make mourning such as befits him : A day or two on account of *gossip'— And be consoled ‘on account of (thy) ‘sorrow!*. 18*For out of sorrow! proceedeth "bane® ; YEven so’ “sadness of heart’ *'prostrateth! vigour*. y19 *!Worse than death is abiding sorrow], 5) And an unfortunate life is cursed by the heart’. 20 *And let him no more occupy thy thoughts® : > Dismiss the remembrance of him, and remember the end”.
αὐτου ( and neglect not his burial Ἢ 4-ᾳ 35. ἼΞΟΌ (mg. nnn) ann (mg. 993) ΔΖ ἽΠ : Gk πικρανον κλαυθμον και θερμανον κοπετὸν IBD ὩΠΠῚ 33 WN (so Smend restores and reads): JD OA Δ} ‘make hot lamentation’. Lévi keeping ® text TaD ONT renders ‘ accomplis exactement les cérémonies funebres Ὁ, ὁ (reading “WON ‘ wine’ for ὙΠ) renders: ‘wine and food for them that lament’ TY G διαβολης 227 (so read): ®B Ayn (9 ‘ of men’ ? oyn from nyor: Lev’) 8-3 ® fext jy Ayr: (ἃ dumps ενεκα ἢ [VI WAY2: “ὁ read: ¥ ‘on account Neh. ii. 3) & X-X κάμψει ἰσχὺν NDS Ay (so read): WB fext ΤΩΝ 7 Yv. 19> zz 3 ( fusing 18 Ὁ and 19a) has ‘|for so an evil heart] more than death crushes through anxiety the poor man and brings distress, for the life of the poor is for a curse of the heart’: (ἃ (clause a) ev ἀπαγωγῃ (NX A &c. enaywyy) παραβαινει (nce A ἄς. Syro-Hex ΨΚ παραμενει) καὶ Aum. Smend proposes Jor this line Wy PI nwo yr. S misread yr as δ: (ἃ wgnored yr and read nA) for NY (cp. iii. 28 ἐπαγωγὴ NID): so Smend. The second clause ts im (ἃ καὶ ἥδιος πτωχοῦ κατα (55 248 254 καταρᾳ) καρδιας a-a Wy aS yo avn bx ‘turn not thy heart back to him again’: ® mg. Wy ab wy mvin by ae. as rendered above: & seems to have understood yoy as ‘upon it (ἡ δ. sorrow)’ ‘set not thy heart upon sorrow’ (μὴ dos es λυπὴην τὴν καρδιαν cov which n> inn by JUD), Xxx. 2 Τὴ: S$ ‘upon oaths’ b-b So 38 : & (mitigating the harshness) αἀποστησον αὐτὴν μνήσθεις Ta exxata
(ὁ) XXXVIII. 16-23. Proper mourning and burial should be bestowed on the dead ; but sorrow, unduly prolonged, can only harm the living, and cannot benefit the dead.
In accordance with what is due to him bury ... ‘Perhaps in grave-clothes suited to his station’ (Edersheim). For the Greek word here used (περίστειλον) cp. Tobit xii. 12 and Ezek. xxix. 5, LXX.
And hide not thyself when he expires. So 38 (for the expression ‘hide thyself’, used absolutely as here, cp. Deut. xxii. 3). (ἃ ‘And neglect not his burial’: this, perhaps, gives the sense fairly correctly. A passage in the Babylonian Talmud, cited by Schechter (JZoed Qatan 27 6), will illustrate the meaning: ‘ Formerly the funeral (lit. the bringing out) of the dead was more grievous to his relatives than his death—so much so that his relatives used to leave him and flee ; until Rabban Gamaliel came and himself set the example of going forth (in the funeral procession) in linen garments,’ &c. The abuse referred to is the burden of expense entailed by extravagant funeral fashions, which caused relatives to abandon the dead and take to flight rather than face the requirements. It would seem probable that some such abuse is aimed at in the text. Smend explains the verse as referring to the laws of ritual uncleanness in connexion with a corpse (cp. Num. xix. 14f.). Rather than incur this impurity people would leave the dying man. But this is most improbable.
17. Let thy weeping be bitter and thy wailing passionate. Lit. ‘make bitter weeping’ (same expression Zech. xii. 10): the Syr. variant here, ‘ wine and food for them that lament’ (see critical note), is interesting. It is an allusion to the customary funeral feast, mentioned in Jer. xvi. 7 (also ? Tobit iv. 17), but the reading is due to misunderstanding of the original text, though some allusion to the custom would have been expected.
( A re or two on account of gossip. i.e. to avoid slander or public criticism. 3 has ‘on account of people’ generally).
be consoled on account of (thy) sorrow. i.e. after the prescribed days of mourning are ended. These, according to the strict letter of the law, were seven, but in ordinary life may have been reduced to one or two days. ὃ has ‘on account of life’, i.e. that thy own life and health may not suffer. The duty of burying the dead with proper respect is constantly enforced in Rabbinical literature ; cp. also the Book of Tobit.
18. bane. renders θάνατος. The Hebrew word (ΠΝ) may be understood of sudden death brought about by accident or misfortune ; cp. Gen. xlii. 4, 38, xliv. 29; Exod. xxi. 22, 23 (Targ. Onq. renders NN, ‘death,’ in all these passages). So again in our book xxxi. (xxxiv.) 21 38 (soSmend). Sorrow unduly prolonged will bring sudden misfortune (death).
19. Worse than death is abiding sorrow... Cp. xxx.17. The verse is wanting in #: for text see critical note. ( in clause a (B ἐν ἀπαγωγῇ παραβαίνει καὶ λύπη) is explained by Ryssel to mean: with the departure of the corpse from the house, sorrow also passes away (cp. v. 23a). (® for 19 J? ab nbdp 2.5 Π|}}}
“20. let him no more occupy thy thoughts. 4 ‘give not thy heart unto sorrow’: cp. xxx. 21.
remember the end. The sense of the whole verse is: Give not up thy life and energies to vain regrets;
remember thine own end, that thou thyself hast to die, and live thy life, while thou hast it, in the right way.
21 ¢4Remember him not, for he hath no hope‘; Thou canst not profit him, while thou harmest thyself. 22 “Remember his doom, for it is the doom of thyself— °His® yesterday, and thine to-day! 23 ‘When the dead is at rest, let his memory rest? ; And be consoled when his soul departeth.
(a) XXXVIII. 24-30. The superiority of the scribe over the labourer and artisan
24 The wisdom of the scribe £increaseth wisdoms, And *he that hath little business" can become wise. 25 How can he become wise that holdeth ithe goad’, And glorieth Jin brandishing the lance/?
ο ® ¢ransposes (wrongly) vo. 21, 22 (10 22, 21) 4-ὁ So ®: & again diverges, modifying the original sense: μὴ emthaby ov yap εστιν emavodos (R.V. ‘forget it not, for there is no returning again’): 3% renders the whole verse : “Remember grief and dispel sins, and put not thy trust in riches, for there is no hope in them ; for like a bird of the heavens that flieth and alighteth, so is wealth before the sons of men; thee it rejoiceth and another it harmeth ’ ee SoQ 3: G eno (so tn clause a Ge has τὸ κριμα pov except B 253 308 which have avrov]): so AV Syro-Hex.& ΓΞ γιρ. [721] Maw no maws G& (but καταπαυσον may Nw: cp. x.17) δ: So S (+‘for him’): (ἃ ev εὐκαιρίᾳ σχολης (EV ‘cometh by opportunity of leisure ’) hh So ®: (ἃ o ελλασουμενος πραξει αὐτου : 85. ‘he who is not busy with vain things ’ (snpnD ΡΞ xo cp. 1 Ani, We ΠῺΣ Pesh.) iri} adm ‘ox-goad’ (cp. Judges iii. 31): G& apotpov: % ‘plough-share’ (c. LXX Theod. Judges iii. 31,
aparporous: Vulg. vomer) 35) ἸΏ has Wynn nna ‘(who glorieth) by reason of brandishing with the lance’ (cp. 2 Sam. xxiii. 18): G ev δορατι κεντρου ὃ VIVO NINA: so Smend reads here (Ὁ B.H. 1277) καὶ 39 any soya (abs Ps. cxliv. 14 ΠὉΝ) = (τ Boas ἐλαυνων 1] wa 331} (mg. WwA Iw: over Line
21, Remember him not, for he hath no hope. So 38. (ἃ ‘forget it (i.e. thy latter end) not, for there is no returning’ (? reading ΠΡ for MPN, Lévi) : for this sentiment cp. Job viii. 8 ; Wisd. ii. 1.
22. Remember his doom... Cp. xli. 2, 3.
23. When the dead is at rest, let his memory rest... Cp. for the sentiment 2 Sam. xii. 23.
XXXVIII. 24—XXXIX. 11, with an Appendix, XXXIX. 12-35. This forms an independent section which has for its general theme the scribes. It falls into three well-defined subsections (besides an Appendix), the first of which brings out the superiority of the scribe over the labourer and artisan (xxxvili. 24-30); then, the place of the craftsman in the civic economy is dwelt upon, but at the same time his inability to fulfil the higher offices of counsellor and judge is set forth (xxxviii. 31-34); the last subsection gives a glowing picture of the work and activity of the true scribe, and of his honourable status (xxxix. I-11). The Appendix (xxxix. 12-25) contains a hymn of praise for creation.
The whole section is extremely valuable for the light it throws upon the position and character of the older Sopherim, and also, incidentally, on the trades that flourished in Jerusalem in Ben-Sira’s days. These earlier scribes, in contrast with the later Teachers of the Law, appear for the most part to have belonged to the upper and wealthy classes (cp., however, xi. 1; Eccles. ix. 16), and to have been separated from the working classes (peasants, labourers, and artisans) by a wide social gulf. They were apparently a leisured class, raised above the necessity of earning a livelihood, who took the lead in public affairs and counsel, and acted as judges in pronouncing judicial decrees (cp. XXxVili. 33). They obviously belonged to the nobility, and perhaps to the noble families of the priesthood (hence their position as judges). They appear to have familiarized themselves with foreign affairs and countries, and to have sometimes occupied positions under foreign monarchs, in which capacity they would naturally act also as the representatives of their own people and state. Smend points out that originally the tradition of the scribes grew out of the priestly Zovah, and, consequently, the earlier scribes were drawn from the priestly class. This was still the case in the time of Ben-Sira.
(a) XXXVIII. 24-30. This subsection is particularly interesting as containing a more or less representative enumeration of the handicrafts that flourished in Jerusalem, by the side of agriculture, when the author wrote. They appear in the following order of precedence: engravers of gems (signets and precious stones), smiths, and potters. Some of the more ordinary trades, such as weaving and carpentry, are passed over, as too obvious to mention, perhaps.
24. The wisdom of the scribe increaseth wisdom. Schechter cites Baba bathra 21 a: ‘The emulation of scribes increaseth wisdom’ (723M 729N ODD ΓΝ). G& apparently understood ‘ wisdom’ at end of the line to mean “learned leisure’.
he that hath little business... Cp. Pirge Aboth iv. 14: ‘R. Meir said: ‘Have little business, and be busied in Torah.’ But the rule in Mishnaic times was that study of the Law should be combined with a trade; cp. Pirge Abothii. 2 (‘Rabban Gamaliel said: Excellent is Torah study together with worldly business, for the practice of them both puts iniquity out of remembrance ; and all Torah without work must fail at length and occasion iniquity’).
25. And glorieth in brandishing the lance. The ox-goad is apparently meant here, as in the preceding line (50 (τ and πεν i restored text; see critical note). [For phrase ‘brandish the lance’ cp. 2 Sam. xxiii. 18 ; 1 Chron.
kWho leadeth cattle* 'and turneth about oxen!,
™ And whose discourse™ is with bullocks ἢ 26 ™m He is careful "to harrow 'the seed-strip!*, And his anxiety is °to complete the provender®. 27» Likewise the maker of carving and. cunning device?, Who by night as by day “hath no rest‘; ‘Who engraveth signet-engravings’, sAnd whose art it is to make variety of design’ ; He is careful tto make the likeness true’, [ And his anxiety is to complete his work. $)28 So also "the smith" that sitteth ‘by the furnace’,
w And regardeth the weighty vessels: The flame of the fire *cracketh®* his flesh, And with the heat of the furnace Yhe gloweth’ ; Τὸ the sound of the hammer he inclinéth his ear’, And to the pattern of the vessel *directeth® his eyes.
sw): Gk καὶ avacrpepopevos ev epyos avtwv m-m 35) pnyywy IVyw & mm (wrongly) transposes clauses a and Ὁ here. In transl. above the clauses follow the right order a-n 30 (defechve) mer a π΄΄'.... [π|τὸῦ (most scholars complete by adding oyna [ep. Ge]: but Smend reads yr nd23, cp. 8): (ἃ ἐκδουναι αὐλακας : S$ ‘in his seed-row’ (Ay I xnbia Smend’s reading above: cp. nad in Neo-Hebr. ‘tow’: ΝΠ 771 Targ.) 0-0 35 52 mab (Schechter p31 mibad, ‘to victual the stall DE Ck εἰς χορτασματα δαμαλεων ᾿Ξ aps (vel b3535 ] box) PP ® (defective: MS. mutilated) 0 ΠῚ w)n Awy AN (point with Peters ὉΠ JY: others AWN) wan) : Ge οὕτως mas τεκτῶων και ἀρχιτέκτων 9-4 38 mutilated here: Smend ( following § partly) v.24 a and Ὁ has: ‘So also all the craftsmen are disturbed together, and night and day on them (ve. cher works) they think’: ere ‘are disturbed’ ( ? 1yP) has been transposed to the first clause: so Smend) rr G ot γλυῴοντες γλυμματα σῴφραγιδων (?) ONIN MND nn|D (Smend) 8-8 Gr καὶ ἡ ὑπομονὴ (so B: buf SA Syro-Hex x ἐπιμονηῚ αὐτοῦ αλλοίωσαι ποικιλίαν: ἢ επιμονὴ αὐτου (?) INION and ποικιλίαν AWN: αλλοιωσαι AY (‘change ἢ ὑπὸ (ἃ εἰς opowoa ζωγραφιαν (ζωγραφειν APN, ppn Ezek. xxiii. 14, Is. xlix. τό, LXX) [for 27 c-f $ has: ‘on the work of carvings and signets and of pearls; also their thoughts are needed for the works of their craft’ | tt xxxvili. 28—-Xxxix. 14 7s not extant tn ® u-u G& yadxevsW9N (worker in metal ἐς meant) YY G& ἐγγὺς ἀκμονος (* by the anvil’): du/ $ ‘[to sit] by the furnace’ (righily) ? M2 byw (Ge 240 byw: or as akpavos a corruption of καμινου ?) w-w S$ ‘ And to consider closely the implements of the balance’ (reading rightly pain >): (ἃ καὶ καταμανθανων apy (so B wrongly ; V epye: 248 Syro-Hex ev py) σιδηρῳ (Vv σιδηρου: δὰ 55 106 254 308 epya σιδηρου): orig. Hebr.? Spvin saa ynanm (so Smend) XX τηξει (SW A &c.) ὃ ypa (cp. Micah i. 4 LXX, where τήκομαι ypann): § (‘cracketh’): Β (V 253 308) πηξει (‘stiffeneth’) Y-¥ Gr διαμαχήσεται : S (rightly) ‘he burneth’ (G a misrendering of AANNA) 2:2 E own σφυρης (+ axpovos 248) καινιει τὸ ovs αὐτου (‘ The noise of the hammer reneweth his ear’): du/ $ (‘ Over against the model he will bend his hand’) suggests κλίνει Sor camer: so read (and accentuate pov) a-a Cp. 3 ‘And over against the image of his work his eyes shall
Who leadeth cattle and turneth about oxen. # mg. gives an excellent sense (‘Who leadeth cattle and turneth them about with song’): the construction of the Hebrew is easier, and it may be right (so Smend).
26. He is careful to harrow the seed-strip. lit. ‘he setteth his heart’ aad me (κα καρδίαν αὐτοῦ δώσει). In Palestine the field is arranged in separate seed-strips, which are ploughed and sown separately. See further on this point Krauss, Zalmudische Archdologie, ii. 179 f. ξ . F
his anxiety is to complete the provender. G& ‘his sleepless care is for provender of heifers’; cp. Gen. XV. 9, xxiv. 35. See further critical note. ον
27. Likewise the maker of carving and cunning device. ‘ Likewise,’ i.e. is likewise prevented by the demands of his craft from enjoying the leisure necessary for a member of the learned class (a scribe). It is best to regard the verse as dealing with one class of workers only, viz. the engravers of precious stones (seals and gems; so 3). For this form of art see Benzinger, Avchdol., 258 f., and cp. art. ‘Engraving’ in JE, Smend understands two classes to be referred to, the gem-engravers and the weavers of embroidered stuffs; he renders 27 ad ‘and he also whose art it is to weave embroidery’ (‘und auch der, dessen [Kunst] es ist, bunt zu weben’). But this is less probable.
28. So also the smith that sitteth by the furnace. The worker in metals is meant, here denoted by the Heb. term Yn probably. The work of the smith, as here described, is more particularly associated with the furnace, in which the ore was melted, and the anvil, on which the metal was beaten out (cp. Is. xliv. 12). With the present passage cp. also Ezek. xxii. 18-22; and see further s.v. ‘metals’ in £B and /Z; cp. also Krauss, of. cet. 11. 299 f. {Gi reads by the anvil’; but the rendering adopted is supported by the context ; see further critical note. ]
And to the pattern of the vessel directeth his eyes. This clause apparently refers to the hammering, Out of the metal according to a model.
& (3) He is careful to complete his work, And his anxiety is »to measure it off exactly. 5. (G&) 29 Likewise the potter who sitteth °at his wheel°, And driveth the vessel with the soles of his feet ; ®Who is all the time in anxiety over his work®, f And all his handiwork is §by number®' ; 30 "His arms are cracked by the clay, iAnd ‘before old age! he is bent and bowed!’ ; He is careful to complete Jthe glazing§, And his anxiety is *for the heating of* the furnace.
(6) XXXVIII. 31-34. Though unfitted for the highest offices the craftsman fills an essential place (ΞΞ2 - 2 - 2 distichs).
31 All these !are deft! with their hands, And each is wise ™in his handiwork™.
32 Without them a city cannot be inhabited, "And wherever they dwell they hunger not”.
33 °But they shall not be inquired of for public counsel®, And in the assembly ?they enjoy no precedence?.
be directed’ (G> ‘directeth’) b-b & κοσμησαι emt συντελειας (cp. xvii. 10): κοσμειν = Ἰ xiii. 21; cp. xvi. 27 ce So S (xd39 by): Ok ev epyw αὐτου dd So S$: G καὶ συστρεφων ev ποσιν αὐτου τροχον (NC-2 mov) e-e So & (3 >the line) ΓΙῸ (ἃ : S (cn disorder and corrupt)‘ And his eyes are upon the vessels of allhis work’ 5-8 & evapiOpos (B &c.), ev αριθμῳ (55 153), ἐν αριθμοις (307) h-h $ ‘ His arms break up (split) the clay’ (¢ransposing
subject and object) : (ἃ ev βραχίονι αὐτου τυπωσει πηλὸν i-i$ ‘And until he die he is bowed down and bent’: Gk και πρὸ ποδων Kaper wxxvv αὐτου | Smend conjectures NW s05 for nid yd in 5] 1) ἃ (NAV ἄς. 3) χρισμα = ΤΠ (95 ‘his work’: ? confusing with vy) Kk (τ καθαρισαι : S ‘to build’ (context demands ‘ to
heat’ = 3yr>: καθαρισαι wrong transl. of Ya in LXX: cp. Hos. vii. 4, Jer. xxxvi. 22) 1-1 & evemorevoay (εις χείρας αὐτων): EV ‘put their trust in their hands’ ( probably mtstranslating 128 or PBN: so Smend): % ‘for the
sake of their advantage ’ (?) m-m & ἐν τῷ epyp αὐτου : 85. ‘in the work of their craft’ on So 3: (ἃ ka ov (2 read οὗ) παροικησουσιν οὐδε περιπατησουσιν (Plast two words corrupted from ov pn πεινασωσιν : Edersh. suggests confusion between YAY» and \2y>°) 0-0 Gr (Ν 6.8) add εἰς βουλην λαου ζητηθησεται: 7O 248 εν βουλῃ Aaov ov ζητηθησεται S P-P (ἃ οὐχ ὑπεραλουνται ? YIN νῷ (so 8) a-a This ἐς the order of the clauses in SAV S: Β has them in the inverted order rr % ‘covenants and judgements’ (sugges/s YEW PN, cp. xlv. 17: so read with Smend): & διαθηκὴν κριματὸς 8-3 G& expavwow WI) (cp. xvi. 25): S ‘consider’ (9 reading 122) Sor rr) t-t So S (“nan ΒΟ) Ξε δον rp: & (NAV &c. L) παιδειαν (Β 253 308 δικαιοσυνηνὴ:
to measure it off exactly. R.V. () ‘to adorn them (the vessels made) perfectly’; the Greek κοσμῆσαι might be understood of the polishing of the metal, but probably a Hebrew word meaning ‘to measure off’ (see critical note). The reference will then be to getting the dimensions of the finished vessel exact.
29. Likewise the potter. For the work of the potter as here described cp. the art. ‘ Pottery’ in Sand JZ;
who sitteth at his wheel. Cp. Jer. xviii. 3-4.
all his handiwork is by number. The meaning seems to be that the potter goes on mechanically multiplying his products, which are all of one uniform quality (the reading of some Gr. MSS. ‘ without number’, i.e. endless, is a correction).
30. His arms are cracked by the clay. i.e. his hands are cracked and disfigured by his work. For the text see critical note (the correction is necessitated by the context, which describes what the potter suffers from his work. @ ‘he fashioneth the clay with his arm’ does not yield a suitable sense : the clay is prepared by stamping [cp. Isa. xli. 25], and manipulated on the wheel with the hands).
the glazing. Probably smearing with paint, which was then polished; see ZZ, s.v. ‘ Pottery’, ὃ το.
for the heating of the furnace. R.V. (= (πὶ ‘to make clean the furnace’; but the furnace of the potter required no cleansing, as the soot was destroyed by the great heat. What was necessary was to raise the furnace to the greatest possible heat, and maintain it there; cp. xxvii. 5.
(ὁ), XXXVIII. 31-34. This subsection follows closely on the preceding in logical order, by bringing out the value of the craftsman for the community; but, at the same time, his inability to fill the higher public offices is emphasized.
32. Without them a city cannot be inhabited. Cp. xvi. 4.
they hunger not. 1.6. have no difficulty in finding work and bread (& yields no coherent sense). j
33. But they shall not be inquired of... The clauses that follow refer to the public work of the scribes, who
must have included priests to some extent (cp. xlv. 17).
i ng ok
4Qn the seat of the judge they do not sit, ‘And law and justice’ they understand ποῖ“. ®They do not expotind’ ‘the instruction of wisdom’, * Nor understand the proverbs of the wise" ; 34 "But they understand the work ‘they have wrought!!, And ‘their thought’ is on the practice of their craft.
τ Not so he that applieth himself ‘to the fear of God”, * And to set his mind* upon the Law of the Most High ; Who searcheth out the wisdom of all the ancients, And Vis occupiedy “with the prophets of old”; 2 Who *heedeth® the discourses” of men of renown, And ‘entereth® 4into the deep things of parables ; 3 Searcheth out “πε hidden meaning® of proverbs, And ‘is conversant! 8with the dark sayings of parablesé ; 4»Who serveth among great men, And appeareth before princes? ; Who travelleth ‘through the lands of the peoples:, iTesteth) good and evil among men; 5 Who is careful *to seek* !unto his Maker!, And ™before™ the Most High "entreateth mercy";
® here παιδειαν διδασκαλιας (cp. Xxxix. 8) tt-tt So S: G καὶ ev παραβολαῖς οὐχ ευρηθησονται u-u $ ‘for ( %3) they are skilled in the works of the world’: @& adda ( 1D) κτισμα awvos τηρησουσιν (50 B: στηρισουσι, στηριουσι NC-2 248): στηρισουσι 1D), corrupt for \YI (? S): κτισμα HYD (so xxxvi. 24): doth G and & appear to have read andy, which may have arisen, as Smend suggests, from ddyd (so read) v-v So S (p09): (ἃ ἡ δεησις αὐτων (3Η ἢ aN: so Smend) w-w So S (rightly): &> xx So $( ?yrannd): & και διανοουμένου YY (ἃ ἀσχοληθησεται: cp. ἀσχολια xl. 1 poy: S ‘turns (to the’, &c.) z-z 3. in prophetis (cp. © of xli. 3, xliv. 22): cp. $ (‘to the prophets of old’): G& ev προφητειαις a-a Gr συντηρησει 2" or 2) (‘ treasureth ’): cp. Prov. 111. 1: 85. “ learneth’ b-b G& (B 248 308) διηγησεις (dul the rest and & Sah dmynow) τὸ OF συνεισ- ἐλευσεται: cp. δὲ Ps. Ixxiii. 17: S ‘thinketh’ d-d & ev erpopas παραβολων : S ‘on what is deep (? opny) corrupted in G's MS. to ΩΡ V apy Aram. " perverse, crooked’: Edersh.) e-e Ck aroxpupa nnd) (S misplaces in next clause) ff (ἃ ἀναστραφησεται : cp. viii. 8, 1. 28 8- (ἃ ev αἰνιγμασι παραβολων b-h 3 (wth clauses transposed) ‘and in the midst of the powerful he goeth, and in the midst of kings and of great ones he serveth’: (ἃ /ranslation above iri Ge ev yy ἀλλοτρίων εθνων : 85. ‘through the cities of the world’ (? snbdyr Jor s22y3) H? Myr yaswa ‘through the land of the peoples’ 34 G& (ayaa) yap... ἐπείρασε (dul δὲ“ yap: so): © tentabit (rightly : ἐπείρασε wrong tense): so S K-kK G& ορθρισαι = ἽΠ (XL ad virgilandum diluculo) 2&9 SiO) pray x l1S>: & προς κυριον Tov ποιήσαντα αὐτὸν (κυριον prob. gloss : omit) m-m So & (evavre) :
34. their thought is on the practice of their craft. Their mental horizon is bounded by the requirements of their craft.
(c) XXXIX. 1-11. This, the last of the three subsections (apart from the Appendix), gives a glowing picture of the work and position of the ideal scribe. ed
1. Not so he that applieth himself ... the Law of the Most High. Cp. the description of Ezra, the ideal scribe, in Ezra vii. 10.
Who searcheth out the wisdom of all the ancients ...the prophets of old. One, the principal, source of the scribe’s knowledge is thus defined as the Law, the Wisdom books, and the Prophets. The other source of the scribe’s wisdom, as described in vv. 2 and 3, is an oral tradition; but the descriptive terms employed do not suggest that it was legalistic or halakic in character, but rather of the type embodied in the Wisdom literature (proverbs, sententious sayings, maxims for the conduct of life, perhaps (?) allegories).
2,3. entereth into the deep things of parables ... hidden meaning of proverbs... dark sayings of parables. Cp. the description of Wisdom in Wisd. viii. 8 (‘she understandeth subtilties of speeches and interpretations of dark sayings’). For ‘deep things of parables’ @& has ‘subtilties (στροφαί) of parables’: cp. Prov. i. 3 (also Wisd. viii. 8); what is meant is the process of investigation described in v. 3, by which the ‘ hidden meaning’ is deduced — all that is implicit in the sayings. : sin
4. Who serveth among great men... Cp. xxxi. (@& xxxiv.) 9-12 and notes there. The wisdom of the scribe is culture—they are identical—and therefore the scribe has access to royal courts and enters into the service of kings. The high estimation of travel and foreign experience is particularly interesting. The education of the ideal scribe is broad and humanistic.
S$ (ἃ) Who openeth his mouth in prayer, And °maketh supplication® for his sins. 6 PTf? 4it seem good to God Most High’, He shall be filled™ with the spirit of understanding. ® He himself poureth forth wise sayings in double measure’, And giveth thanks tunto the Lord in prayer‘. 7 He himself “directeth" Ycounsel and knowledge’, wAnd setteth his mind’ on *their* secrets. 8 He himself declareth ¥ wise instruction Y, And glorieth in the law “of the Lord’. 9 His understanding many do praise, @ And® never shall ?his name?” be blotted out : His memory “shall not cease’, And his name shall live from generation to generation. ἢ τὸ 4eHis wisdom® doth ‘the congregation‘ tell forth, And £his praise’ the assembly publisheth. _ 3(&) 11 ἘΠῚ he live long®, ‘he shall be accounted happy’ more than a thousand ; And when he cometh to an end, Jhis name sufficeth?.
12 *Yet again will I fix my thoughts and 'make my doctrine to shine forthl, 1As the full moon on the twelfth day!.
§% ‘from before’ ™ SoS: Ge δεηθησεται 9-9 So & (δεηθησεται) : 3% ‘seeketh good’ ( perhaps ‘good’ belongs to next verse) EP (ἃ cav (+ yap 106 155 157 296 307 308 L) 9-4 Ge (ear) κυριος o peyas θελησῃ (κυριος o peyas oy by: cp. xlvi. 5): S>(dut ‘good’ at end of previous verse may be a remnant of this clause: then the line may have run in 38 my by ‘yA 31 ON: so Smend) rr So (τ: ὁ ‘he shall be made wise’ 8-3 ὁ ‘he giveth out parables doubly’ 3) ov "5 Ὁ wa xin: G& ανομβρησει ρήματα σοφιας autos t-t So &: “ὁ ‘unto Him in his thoughts’ (reading Sor wb) u-u Gr κατευθύνει ( 1)3"): 96 ‘ understandeth’ ( 7.2‘) v-v So (τ (βουλην αὐτου [Ν 254 39} αὐτου rightly | kat εἐπιστημηνῚὴ : S$ ‘parables of the wise’ W-W kar... . διανοηθησεται ann (vi. 37: xiii. 18) ΣΤΥ (ἃ αὐτου (mzstake for αὐτῶν or avtns) y-y §% ‘instruction of wisdom” ( Soy D2): (ἃ παιδειαν διδασκαλίας αὐτου 2- Gr διαθηκης κυριου ( probably διαθηκῃ and νομῳ orzginal variants): & ‘ of life’ aa δα AC ἄς, Syro-Hex & have και (ews): 50 3: B>xa b-b So ᾧ (rightly): &> c-e (ἃ οὐκ ἀποστήσεται (= 255m wb: cp. Job vii. 16 LXX) d This verse follows xliv. 14 in Q e-e So (τ: ® onyosan ©
ti G@ ‘he shall leave a name’ (4ut does not harmonize with the context’) ?786%, a mistake for Wx [so Smend | & (ονομα from next line in &) 1) (ἃ ἐμποιεῖ αὐτῳ (? origin. ἐμποιεῖ ty ovopate αὐτου : cp. xiii. 17 wow PID?) KK G& ere (NS Sah + δε) διανοηθεὶς ἐκδιηγησομαι : S ‘attend (understand) and I will say my doctrine’: but the next clause suggests that a verb meaning to ‘ give light’ orzginally stood at end of first line—perhaps, as Smend suggests, WX which S$ read WW (so xxiv. 32 G dora ON m 8): 2? AW WN) PINS TWD | 1-1 So $ (‘as the moon on the day of the Twelfths’): @& καὶ (248, 70 ov: LZ enim) as διχομηνια ἐπληρωθην (BY ἡ
5. Who is careful to seek unto his Maker... The note of true piety is strongly emphasized, as always. The cultivated humanists of Israel always kept a firm hold on the practical side of religion. 6. If it seem good to God Most High. Even when the conditions previously mentioned have been fulfilled, special | grace is still required to inspire the scribe with the spirit of true wisdom. j He himself poureth forth wise sayings in double measure. i.e. he is not merely dependent upon the | tradition which he has inherited, but puts forth what is his own: contrast the ideal of the later teachers of the Law— | e.g. ‘ Eliezer b. Hyrqanos is a plastered cistern which loseth not a drop’ (i.e. is a mere receptacle of tradition: 2 2746 | Aboth, ed. Taylor, ii. 10). The attitude of the earlier Sopherim to tradition was essentially freer and more independent. For ‘in double measure’ (a double portion) cp. xii. 5, xviii. 32 in 38. 8. wise instruction. Cp. |. 27, xxxvill. 33 6. glorieth in. Cp., for expression, xxxvili. 6, ]. 20.
9. his name shall live... Cf. xxxvii. 26, xliv. 14. 5 ἢ το. His wisdom doth the congregation tell forth... xliv. 15 (104 xxxi. [xxxiv.] 114). @ misrenders ‘congregation’ (7) here by ‘nations’; so by ‘peoples’ xliv. 15, cp. ‘ people’, xlvi. 7. |
11. If he live long... i.e. if long life is granted to him his reputation is assured; he reaps fame and honour; }
and when he dies ‘his name sufficeth’, i.e. in memory—his memory lives on and is cherished. For the text of verse see critical notes. The versions misunderstood it. !
it) 13 Hearken unto me, ™ye pious™, and "your flesh shall grow”, Εν °Like the cedar® that is planted Pby streams of water?. 14 “Your scent shall be sweet as Lebanon?, ‘And ye shall put forth blossoms as the lily’. ‘Lift up your voice’ and tsing together’, 4And?" vblessY the Lord for all His works. 15 Ὁ magnify His name, And acknowledge Him with praise, *With songs of the harp* Yand of stringed instruments 9; And thus shall ye say’, *with a shout®:
16 The works of God Pare all good», © And supply every need in its season®. 7121 c) °° None may say: This is worse than that ; bird) For everything availeth in its season. “(By His word) He ordereth (the luminaries in the heavenly height)?, “And by the utterance of His mouth in His treasury®.
27wy Ὁ Σ xb nv, cp. 1. 6) mm GF vor ὁσιοι (but 248 Syro-Hex>vor; V 253 have οι anstead): 3 SP" nD So 3: Gt καὶ βλαστησατε 0-0 & ‘like the lilies’ (from v. 14) ‘and like cedars’: Gr ws ροδὸν (? ‘rose’ substituted for cedar’) ΡῸΡ & emt ρευματος vypou (so NAC V &c.: but B aypov): Clem. Alex. ent ρευματων υδατων :
% super rivos aquarum: $ ‘on the water’ (cp. o> "Sar /. 8) a-a4 $ ‘and like pleasant odours (= nn) shall your scent be sweet, like the scent of Lebanon with its cedars’ (a double rendering): τὶ ὃ ΠΥ pr2d3) DIMA: G και ws λιβανος ευωδιασατε oc pny tr So (τ: S$ ‘and like the root of the king’s lilies’ s-3 §o S:
(ἃ διαδοτε οσμην (wrong rend.) tt awecare acpa—but read apa S a-a Clem, Alex. & here και (so 3): &> YY So G& (ευλογησατε 1393): S$ = 1717) (‘and give thanks ὃ) W-W (τ dore τῷ ονοματι αὐτου μεγαλωσυνην (cp. bas yan Deut. xxxii. 3) και εξομολογησασθε ev aveor αὐτου (Clem. Alex. and & have αὐτῷ for ev aweor αὐτου: Eth
places avr» after cEopod.: read αὐτῷ ev aweor (so Smend)): 35. ‘recount His mighty deeds with praises Ὁ ΕΣ 2 ni Say myelin: Ge ev ῳᾧδαις χειλεων (corrupt for xedvov) Y-¥ H 5} et) (ze. 32 for O32 as in Ps. xlv. 9 vel ‘strings Ne so Smend, Strack: Lévi reads "8 39 b3y ‘all kinds of music’: (ἃ καὶ ev κινυραις zz SoG &:
Ὦ “ΝΠ aa 10 ΠΡ ἼΠΣ : E& ev εξομολογησει b-b So 38: & wavra ort καλα σφοδρα (S$ +‘ together ’) c-e So ® mg. (Ὦ fexi ‘And He supplieth every need in its season’): $ ‘And they all for their functions were created’ :
G καὶ παν mpooraypa εν καιρῷ αὐτου εσται ce-ce These two lines misplaced in Q—transposed to follow 21a and Ὁ on account of similarity with that verse: with ὦ. 16 they form a sort of refrain, which is repeated in vv. 33-34- & has also a misplacement: vv. 16, 21, 17 4- 19 ts here defective (one word, Try, ἐς legible): Ck ev Noy αὐτου
cor os θιμωνια vdop = ? DD 33D Way 373 (cp. Ps. xxxiii. 7): S ‘at His word the sun rises and at His word it sets’: according to Smend 3 read 3 WY? 393 and paraphrased as above: G& read 19 for 13 and thinking of Exod, xv. 8, Ps. xxxiii. 7 rendered as above: Smend restores ἘΠῚ 53] a3 py masa (zz xl. rr ann zs
masrendered in (τ by vdatov): Ryssel DWDY Sy ἼΩΝ) 3 (—‘ He stations [them ] at [their] stations’: cp. 2 Chron. xxx. 16; Neh. xiii. rr): Zev? pos qayn am (‘and what wilt thou compare unto Him?’) e-e # YD Ny)
(d) APPENDIX : XXXIX. 12-35.
With xxxix. 11 a distinct division of the book ends. The hymn that follows in xxxix. 12-35 may, perhaps, be tegarded as an appendix to the preceding section, which extols the wisdom of the ideal scribe. It may be intended _ to serve as a specimen of such ‘ wisdom’—an example of the Sopheric teaching. Its theme is the creation and the | divine government of the world, which are revealed everywhere as all-wise. vv. 12-15 form an introduction, 16-31
the song proper, and 32-35 an epilogue. !
12, Yet again... my doctrine shine forth... The author means, ‘I will set forth the best doctrine I can express.’ For the figure cp. xxiv. 16. ; ,
the full moon on the twelfth day. The reckoning may depend upon an inaccurate observation of the time of the new moon (Smend). : :
13. your flesh shall grow ... i.e. ye shall flourish and prosper (a promise). For the figures in this verse cp.
like the cedar... by streams of water. For cedars by water cp. Numb. xxiv. 6; Ezek. xxxi. 3 f.
16. The works of God are all good. has ‘ exceedingly (σφόδρα) good’. Cp. Gen. i. 31, 33.
And supply every need in its season. So#mg. W text: ‘He (God) supplieth.’ @& ‘and every command (ΝΣ 52) for ΤῊΣ 55) shall be’.
17 a, 6(= #21 c,d). None may say: This is worse than that; for everything availeth in its season, ΟΠ These two lines have been misplaced in 38 (at beginning, cp. v. 21); (τ has them in the right place (in a modified
form) ; correct (Κα 17 α(τί τοῦτο; εἰς τί τοῦτο ; to τοῦτο τούτου πονηρότερον, aS in τ΄. 34 α). The four lines (beginning |‘ The works of God are all good’) thus form a refrain, being repeated in vv. 33-34 at end of the poem. They express the burden of the whole composition. ; :
(By His word) ... treasury. For the text of this difficult verse see critical notes. The meaning of the rendering
k 21 (α) None may say: 'Wherefore is {151}
18 In His place (Ὁ) His good pleasure attaineth its end‘, το » The works® of all flesh are before Him,
20 'From everlasting to everlasting He beholdethi,
22 "His blessing” overfloweth as the Nile, 23 “Even so His wrath dispossesseth nations4,
24 ‘His paths* are plain for the blameless’ ;
And there is no “restraint® to His deliverance. And there is nothing hid from before His eyes.
jAnd there is nothing small or petty with Him ; Is there limit (Ὁ) to His deliverance Ὁ] There is nothing too wonderful or hard for Him.
For everything ™is selected for its use™. And °saturateth® the world Plike the River?. And He turneth a watered land into salt.
Even so ‘they offer obstacles* "to the presumptuous”.
ysis. (‘And the utterance of His mouth is His treasure’): (ἃ kat ev ρηματι oroparos αὐτου ἀποδοχεια ὑδατων (so Smend corrects lo ἈΝ) Hf So (9): G& ev προσταγματι αὐτου πασα ἡ ευδοκια &-§ Ok os ἐλαττώσει (cp. 35) : but Clem. Alex. ἐλαττωσις (? OND for Ny) hh So &, : ® ΓΦ ii So 38 and &: S> J In B® these clauses are inverted: probably they should stand as above so that clauses Ὁ and ἃ (as in vv. 18 and 19) may begin with PS (js): Ge>clauses Ὁ and ς (? passing accidentally from first js) to second): clause b(c) (‘there ἴδ. nothing small’, &c.) ἐς affested by $ as well as ® (against &) k 3 places the two clauses corresponding to this verse afler Ὁ. τῇ. 11 ®% ΠῚ Tao ANS Gece cam@s ae se rouro; “ὃ mm 7 4n3) was: Ge εἰς χρειας αὐτῶν εκτισται ( ΝΖ) for N33: so 8) nn So & S: HY m3 (read yn373) 0-0 15 ANI: Ce επεκαλυψεν (mistake for ἐπεκλυσεν & inundavit) P-P 39 ἽΠ)5 : G ws κατακλυσμος ( Sanna : so Peters reads) 4-4 So ® and &: Gk ovres opyny (N¢-* Sah Eth r2ghily opyn) αὐτου ebvn κληρονομησει (S for Wry has ‘jadgeth ’) tr So &: ἢ [nw oN] nim ‘the paths of the blameless are straight’ S (+ ‘ before his face ’) s-3 Read ne ond: ® mg. & (nw Ὁ 05] ymnaN: ‘His paths are straightforward to the straight ’"—no/e word-play) tt ® hynny: & προσκομματα uu So GS: 38 om (read ord) v-v So ® (pon): Gk εκτισται (‘are
here given is that God, the great and all-wise Creator, disposes the heavenly bodies in their due order, and controls | their movements. ‘In His treasury’ = in God’s (celestial) treasury ; cp. Deut. xxviii. 12 (‘J. shall open to thee His | good treasury, the heaven’) ; cp. Jer. 1.25. The lit. translation of 17 4, as the Hebr. text stands, is ‘and the utterance | of His (God’s) mouth is His treasure’: another suggestion is to read ΠΝ) for 17¥IN; then render ‘and (by) the utterance | of His mouth they were formed’. Peters reads: ΓΝ YH ΝΣ
‘ By His word the waters formed a heap (wall), And by the utterance of His mouth treasuries.’
There is then an allusion to Ps. xxxill. 7 and Exod. xv. 8; cp. & (R. V.). : i 18. In His place (7) His good pleasure attaineth its end. ‘In His place’ where He (God) is; cp. for the | phrase 2 Sam. iii.12. @ has ‘in (ov at) His command’. Peters, following this, reads: ΠΛ ΝΣ 1030 ina ‘when He | commandeth, His will attaineth its end’ (an excellent sense, which may be right). For the last phrase cp. xi. 174, / xlili. 26 a. 19. The works of all flesh are before Him... Cf. xvii. 15. ἢ 20. From everlasting to everlasting He beholdeth. Nothing escapes Him—past, present, and future are open | before Him. For the thought cp. xlii. 18 f. Ϊ Is there limit (lit. number) to His deliverance? Cp. for phrase Job xxv. 3. Wellhausen and others would read | imyyind (a formation from YY like NN): then render ‘Is there limit to His vision?’ 21-27. God's works are a blessing to the pious, but a source of evil to the wicked. ΜΝ 21. For everything is selected (or created) for its use. Cf. Qod. iii. 7 (‘ He hath made everything beautiful in | its season’). 22. asthe Nile. The yearly overflow of the Nile is meant, which fertilizes the country adjacent. like the River. i.e. the Euphrates; also much used for purposes of irrigation. 23. His wrath dispossesseth nations. The Canaanites are referred to; cp. xvi. 9. turneth a watered land into salt. There is an allusion to Ps. cvii. 34 ; Sodom and Gomorrah are referred to. 24. His paths are plain for the blameless. Cp. Ps. xviii. 25 (26) f.
offer obstacles. The Hebr. word here abbynp») may be taken to mean ‘lift themselves up as a breastwork’
(nbsp) or obstacle; for the sentiment of the whole verse cp. Hos. xiv. 9 ὁ (‘for the ways of J. are right, and the just shall walk in them ; but transgressors shall fall therein’). |
25 Good things for the good’ hath He allotted’ from the beginning ; Even so to the evil “good and evil”. 26 *(The chief of all the necessaries)* of life for man Are water and fire, and iron and salt, xsThe fat of wheat**, milk and honey, The blood of the grape, oil and clothing. 27 All these prove good to the good— Even so for the evil they are turned "to evil’. ᾿ 28 “There are (winds) which are formed (for punishment)’, 9(And in their fury)* ’remove moun(tains). °In the season of destruction they pour out their force, And appease the spirit of their creator‘. 29 Fire and hail, “{famine!¢ and pestilence— These also are formed for judgement. | 30 °Beasts of prey®, scorpions and vipers, And the avenging sword to exterminate the wicked — f All these are created for their uses, And are in the treasure-house (ready) to be requisitioned in due time’: 91 When He giveth them the command they rejoice, And £in their prescribed tasks disobey not His behest.
| 32 Therefore from the beginning "I was assured, } And when I had considered it I set it down in writing:
created \— ὁ ( pon) : 0QL8 W-W Of kaka xX 10 defective: Ck ἀρχὴ πασης xpeas (ΞΕ Ἴ ΝΣ $3 wien: so read with Peters: Smend [yn b> wen) XESS Ge καὶ σεμιδαλις πυρὸς ( ὃ ΠῸΠ ION: cp. S ‘fat and wheat δὴ) sy 3η yd & (3 ?): ἴῃ meg. sad (Cc ‘to loathing ὅν Cp. XXXxvii. 30) 22 15 defective (ἃ ἐστιν πνευματα a εἰς εκδικησιν ἐκτισται (restore Ἰὴ S13 pavind min wr: 50 Lévt, Peters, Smend np) a-a 10 defective: the missing words (— Ck και ev θυμῳ avrar) ODN) 5 cp. xlv. 24, xlviii. ro (Peters) : but Lévt, Smend DDSI} ὉΞ- ® oon ny: Ck ἐστερεωσαν μαστιγας αὐτῶν ( 2ypy ony: cp. Jer. xv. 8, Hos. xi. 9, LXX, and Hebr.: but Smend DS, cp. Job xiv. 18, xviii. 4) ce & HMw oN. nm war ody da ΠΡ) (Peters) d-d So &: Hy (read ayn): cp. xl. 9 (where read IY for ny ) ee ® jw mn (op. xii. 13) (ἃ θηριων οδοντες (® Ut. “beasts of tooth ’) If Clauses c and d are preserved in ®: wa ood nds 55 spa nydt ayiwa nom but & in 31 Ὁ (και ἐπι της γῆς εἰς χρείας ετοιμασθησονταιὴ attests the genuineness of the clauses: ent τὴς γῆς PANI
| for SINI: and εἰς χρειας nay>: Gi has shortened and misplaced the lines. 3% attests them partly in τ. 34, also shortening and misplacing 8. 39 Opn: (ἃ (enexactly) ev τοις καιροις αὐτῶν b-h ®snaywnn Cowley-Neub. (or ) Mayan): D8) 7 Meo-Hebrew ‘sure’: so ΣΝ ΠΠ “1 was assured (or assured myself’) (ἃ εστηριχθην
25. Good things for the good... The verse is cited in the Sefer Vesirah in the following form: ‘Good is kept for the good, . ᾿ And evil for the evil’
(oynd are yy mad ATHY ΠῚ): see Cowley-Neub., p. xxvi. (τ and § take ® pon in the Arabic sense of ‘create’ as in xl. 1 (cp. xxxviii. 1 also); but this is unnecessary.
26. (The chief... necessaries)... water... Cp. xxix. 21. The place of iron in this list is certainly remarkable, as Edersheim remarks. The fat of wheat. A poetical expression for the choicest wheat; cp. Deut. xxxii. 14; Ps. Ixxxi. 17, cxlvii. 14. The blood of the grape. Cp. |. 15 (in &); the expression ( wine) is derived from Gen. xlix. 11; it recurs in 28. There are (winds)... The action of destructive winds (MINN πνεύματα), not spirits, is meant, as the context shows. For the phrase ‘remove mountains’ cp. Job ix. 5 (of God). In Rabbinic Hebr. the phrase (‘ uproot’ or i Teémove mountains’) to accomplish what is seemingly impossible (cp. Edersheim, 1.276 and Times of Jesus the Messiah, il. 109, 376, notes). Here probably earthquakes and similar catastrophes are in the writer's mind. : 29. Fire and hail, famine... judgement. Cp. Ps. cxlviii. 8. The judgements in view are such as are described n Gen. xix, Exod. ix, and 2 Sam. xxiv. 30. Beasts of prey (lit. of tooth)... The forces of judgement here are earthly, in v. 29 cosmic (Smend). For beasts of prey ’ cp. xii. 13 (‘wild beasts’ R. V.).
the avenging sword. Cp. Lev. xxvi. 25. ;
And are in the treasure-house (ready) to be requisitioned in due time. In xliii. 14 God’s ‘treasury’ is Iso the armoury of judgement, as here ; cp. Job xxviii. 22 f.; contrast Deut. xxviii. 12 (‘the good treasury’ of heaven ; 31. in their prescribed tasks (BPN), Cp. Exod. vi. 14; Prov. xxxi. 15.
SIRACH (39) πη ΤΠ,
%#° 55 ‘The works? of God are all good, JThey supply) every need in its season. 34 None may say: This is worse than that ; For everything ‘availeth* in its season. 35 And now ring out !whole-heartedly! And praise the name of the Holy One!
(a) XL. 1-17. The woes of humanity and the destruction of evil
40 1 Much occupation *hath God apportioned®,
And heavy is the yoke upon the sons of men—
From the day that he cometh forth from his mother’s womb,
Until the day ?when he returneth® “to the mother of all living : ἃ (35) 2%Preoccupation and anxiety of heart,
And watchfulness for the future, till the day of his death !4 n 3 From him that sitteth in exaltation on a throne,
Unto ®him that is clothed® with dust and ashes ;
4 From ‘him that wearetht diadem and plate, Even unto ‘him that weareth a garment of hair®:
ini Read wyn (for Avy) as in v. 16 (so G, 9) J (ἃ χορηγησει = PED (cp. v. 16: read pi.) I-k 30 mg.
(ἃ ἐν πασῃ καρδιᾳ και στοματι ® mg. (+75)) aa So: (ἴ εἐκτισται παντὶ ἀνθρωπῳ (εκτισται pbn as im XXXix. 25: see nole there): 86. ‘hath God created’ b-b 30 Ἰ:)ν = (ἃ (248 157) [eos | επιστροφης [nuepas| (δ: ἐπιστραφη: B em rapy corrupted from ἐπιταφης : cp. & usque in diem sepulturae) ce # ὙΠ 93 (mg. ΚΝ) ON bys Gas μητερα παντων: & ‘to the earth of the living’ (Lev? adopts mg. ‘ earth of all living’) d>®: (ἃ τοὺς διαλογισμοὺς αὐτῶν και φοβον καρδιας επινοια προσδοκιας nuepa τελευτῆς : & ‘their praises (reading a derivative of ΤΙ for AWM) and the perception of their heart and the last of their words till the day of their death’: perhaps ® underlying & may have been : 330 max) mavnn (ny) on oy sy ΠΡΊΝ nawpm
the substantives in apposition 10 PdY in Ὁ. τ (ch. v. 5). Peters ( following S mainly) restores : pap mswnr aniavino ἐ ΠῚ OY Ἵν BAIT NINN) [ews nuepas may have stood originally in Gr: 70 155 have npepas | e-e So 38 mg. (read wand) ; Ὦ καὶ wed: δι ( freely) τεταπεινωμενου ( n> according to Smend): 8 2Wy> (cp. ΠῚ repeated in next verse) ry mow... my: dut G dopouvvros . . . περιβαλλομενου (two different words): hence Peters reads ὨΔῚΝ «. . TOY | (HUY = περιβ. Job xxiii. 9: Ps. Ixxii. 6) 8-8 30 (Jast word defective) read (vel Wy) WY none (‘a garment -
33, 34. The works of God are all good... season = vv. 16-17 (refrain repeated). 35. And now ring out... Cp. Ps. cxlv. 21.
XL. 1—XLI. 13. With chapter xl a new section begins, which extends to xli. 13. Its contents may be grouped | (a) XL. 1-17. Following closely on the hymn of thanksgiving for God’s goodness we have here, by way of contrast, | a lamentation over the woes of humanity. Suffering is inherent in man’s lot. His life must be passed in restless | anxiety and misgiving, and constantly be visited by misfortune. But the godless experience the worst ills, viz. those | which are inflicted by God in punishment for sins. What is false and unjust comes to destruction, but what is true abides. The two objects of the wicked man’s desire, property (vv. 13-14) and children (vv. 15-16), are referred to, to illustrate the writer’s main contention; in the final verse (17) he sets forth the blessedness which results from the fear | of God. } 1. Until the day when he returneth to the mother of all living. For the idea cp. Gen. iii. 19; cp. also in this book (Sirach) xvi. 30, xvii. 1 (4 mg. adopted by Lévi = ‘land of (all) living’, cp. Ezek. xxvi. 20, xxxii. 32). The i conception of the earth being man’s mother is worked out in 4 Ezra ix. 9-15; cp.also Job i. 21 ; Ps. cxxxix. 15. ᾿ ] 2. Preoccupation ... death. The substantives are in apposition to ‘much occupation’ in v. 1, the governing } verb being ‘(God) hath apportioned’; cp. vv. 5 @ and 6. The text adopted by Peters may be rendered: ‘ Their ᾿ thoughts and the imagination of their heart, and their last actions (or their fate) until the day of their death.’ 566. further critical note.
3-4. From him that sitteth in exaltation on a throne... Nobody, high or low, enjoys rest from distracting care and peace.
#5 (2) »(Naught but) anger and jealousy", anxiety and fear, j Terror of death, ‘strife’, and contention! > (4) And what time he resteth upon his bed, The sleep of night *doubleth this distraction!*. 6 For a little, vainly—'for a moment—he reposeth|, m And then is disturbed by dreams™ : *Deceived" by the vision of his soul, He is like a fugitive fleeing °from before the pursuer°— 7 ®(Now roused he waketh from his sleep!?, Wael loves saison @Y 5 6 66a co a 6 τ Ὁ 8*(There are) with all flesh, both man and beast, Yea and upon the ungodly sevenfold’ : 9 Pestilence and bloodshed, *blight and drought’, ‘Devastation and destruction, famine and plaguet.
of hair or skin’): G wpodwoy (‘a hempen frock’ R.V.)
of hh G& θυμὸς και (dos (1 ANID JN read ANP) AN)
k-k 10 mg. NYT AWN Ek addoroe THY γνωσιν αὐτου ( read Wy or YVYI: cp. Qoh. ii. 22): § ‘disturbeth them’ FT 15. ype pra: Gr ev ἀναπαυσει ( ya e.g. Job xxi. 13): &>ywpH 2) (defective) Bowes... 4 νὸν OMA PAD: Ce καὶ am exewou εν ὑπνοῖς ws ev ἡμέρᾳ axomas (? for koma) (Arm). Read (0) vay mrordma par (P23) 133}: cf. xiii. 7, Qoh. viii. το, Esther iv. 16: @& καὶ am ἐκείνου p31, corrupt for pan) [v. 6ab>3] on ® yo ὈΝ (Pe read AYOND Hof. part. as in Neo-Heb. ‘misled’: Smend yoyo 7. ὁ. Lhithpalpel of yydo nyo: cp. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 16, same form from yyn: but the extstence of such a root is doublful): Peters eliminates wy as intrusion from previous line and reads here yi ( ‘trembling on account
of’, &c.): Ge τεθορυβημενος S (qdon27) ? pynd pynn [‘for vision of his soul’ $ has ‘ vision of the night’ ]
according to Lévi = “ while still preparing to fight he awaketh’: G& ev καιρῳ σωτηρίας αὐτου εξηγερθη : 36 ‘according
to the wish of his heart he awaketh’ ? yp 12253 py12. Perhaps ® may be restored: yp nw yi AY
‘now roused he waketh from his sleep’: 1p would account for \\87 in 5. (y and ¥ often confused) and for
Ty τι 3) ALS. : (ἃ apparently read the text yp inywn ny[2] Onywn 2a corruption of nw Wy) a4 3η defective (M2 .......N ΠῚ can be made out with difficulty): G καὶ ἀποθαυμαζων εἰς ovdeva φοβον, whence Peters restores AN pXd one» ‘And marvels at there being nothing to fear’: S ‘And seeth that there is nothing therein’ ( ἢ ΠΣ Ὁ PN 5. ANT: cp. 3) ALS.) rr MS. defective here: G& TON Ty) DIND wa d5 oy pny’ oye dy: $ <All the sons of flesh their care is with them, and wealth driveth away their sleep’ =
Pam Wyn Awy ony on ra 53 oy (Levt). Gi ts fo be preferred ss ® aM AMIN (forms TV WN:
3. him that sitteth...onathrone. Cp. Exod. xii. 29.
him that is clothed with dust and ashes. For the metaphor (‘clothed with’) cp. Job vii. 5 (‘flesh clothed with ... clods of dust ἢ).
_ 4. him that weareth diadem and plate. The diadem or turban (JS) of the High Priest is meant, with the | metal plate (j°8) attached to it. Cp. Exod. xxviii. 36-39 ; see also Josephus, 4 wt. iii. 7.6, and Jewish War, v. 5,7; cp. » further Zech. iii. 5 and Exod. xxxix, 30 f.
him that weareth a garment of hair. Cp. Gen. xxv. 25; Zech. xiii. 4; Matt. iii. 4. S renders ‘garment of
poverty’; the mantle of hair was such, and was worn sometimes as a protest against luxury and extravagance, or as a badge of simplicity.
5. Terror of death. Cp. Ps. lv. 4 (5). _ what time he resteth upon his bed...
6. And then is disturbed by dreams. For this text see critical note. @ is here obviously corrupt ; if, with the Armenian, ἐνυπνίοις and koma be read (for ἐν ὕπνοις σκοπιᾶς) (καὶ ἀπ᾽ ἐκείνου ἐνυπνίοις ws ἐν ἡμέρᾳ koma) it may be rendered “and after that he toils with dreams as in the day’, i.e. he works hard during the greater part of the night by dreaming. Peters reads a Hebr. text (Y3" nidn2 1)3)2})) which may be rendered, ‘and then he wearies himself from the midst of terrors’ (for nibna cp. Jer. xv. 8). ὧν
7. Now roused he waketh from his sleep. For the conjectural restoration of the text here adopted see critical note. The line thus restored affords an excellent sense: distracted by fearful dreams the sleeper at length awakes—the disturbance of his rest is complete. τὰ And his vision (?)... It seems impossible to restore # here (but see critical note). But the sense of the verse is doubtless well preserved in (ἃ and S: (ἃ has ‘And he marvelleth that the fear is naught’. For the general idea (the shock of awaking from the dream) cp. Isa. xxix. 8.
8-9. (There are) with all flesh, both man and beast ... Pestilence ... The two verses form one long sentence. Note that the whole animal world is here included (cp. Gen. vii. 23 ; Exod. ix. 25). : F
9. Pestilence and bloodshed... destruction. In ® the three pairs of words form a series of alliterations ; cp. Is. li. 19 (where, perhaps, 274 ‘drought’ should be read for 227 ‘sword ’).
Cf. Qoh. ii. 22 f. (‘ Even in the night his heart taketh no rest’). The
®" 10"For the wicked" vevilv is created, And on his account “destruction is imposed”, 11 All things that are from the earth return to the earth, * And what is from on high (returneth) on high*. ἃ (5) 12¥ All that is false and unjust is destroyed, : But what is true abideth for ever’. ἘΠ 13 * Wealth unjustly gotten* *fcometh to an end) like a torrent?, »And like a water-course that is mighty in a thunder-storm?: 14 “With its onrush ‘rocks are rolled away! “-- 4Even so doth ‘plunder! suddenly come to an end‘. 15 °A branch (sprung) from violence® ‘hath no tender twig)’, &For an impious root® is on the point of a crag*:
msn (2. ayn) (S> che verse) u-u % yor Sy ( ἐπὶ τοὺς avopovs ( ‘to be a burden upon the wicked’)
v-v 355 ΠΡ: G& ταῦτα παντα (? 9D a variant 123) w-w % ΠῸΣ whion (fo make sense the commentators propose to insert 85 ‘ruin departeth not, but Ἢ: read DWN with Peters (τ eyevero (IY γινεσθαι 1 Sam. XXX. 25, Job xxxviil. 33, &c.): S>v. το x-x So ® ony by DDD Ws: Ck καὶ απὸ vdatwv εἰς θαλασσαν ἀνακαμπτει (D) Sy pn wy): 3= 3 Y-y >®: (ἃ has παν δωρον και αδικια εξαλειφθησεται και πιστις εἰς Tov
αιωνα στήσεται (= in Hebrew . noes mb tne 55 (:sayn ndry> anny (so Pefers).
&: ‘Every one that sins and cheats shall cease, But the diligent of the world, even they shall stand’
=?navh Syn son 55) (symp odwy N01
S$ may have read Ὑ for NW in line 1: so emend (with Smend) 2-2 3) mg. dyn Syn ‘wealth born of wealth (or strength)’: @& χρηματα αδικων ( ὃ ody Syn) : S ‘wealth of deceit’ (2 ὃν Syn): read by on (or mb) a-a ® ΣΝ PID ‘is like a perennial torrent ’—an unsuitable sense | Smend ad loc. argues that the meaning ‘perennial’ zs not made out. He thinks the original tdea ts that of strength, then (of a stream) strongly flowing—a rushing current. So he retains the word here|: both G& and $ have a verb in place of \n'S: υἱᾶ. (ἃ EnpavOnoera ( {D3 according to Peters: cp. Isa. li. 12 LXX): 95. ‘shall be swept away’: read, perhaps, with Ryssel DAY (Δ όυϊ, as well as Smend, keeps ins bry ‘a swiftly flowing torrent’) b-b So ® mg. & (‘like rivers that are full of light clouds’ [reading nidp Sor nidip]): (ἃ καὶ ws βροντὴ μεγάλη ev vero eEnynoe " And shall roar themselves out like great thunder in rain’ (a free rendering) ce mg. yy DYDD INN’ oy (emend to ab3 and point DYDD): (ἃ ev τῷ ανοιξαι αὐτὸν χειρας evppavOnoera (read ευφρανθησονταιὴ 38: S only has one line for this verse, which ts usually supposed to represent clause a: but more probably clause Ὁ (see next note) 4- ® on’ my ONND 5: (ἃ ovras οἱ παραβαινοντες ΓΞΞ ? BNNB for ὈΝΠΒ) εἰς συντελειαν εκλειψουσιν : S ‘when they are taken away they come to an end’ ( 2aDAY PAE 3). Combining ®, G&, and S$ read BM δ} ONND 13 (or onn nbn) e-e ® fext DOM III mg. DON ANI: W mg. & exyova ασεβων: S ‘and offspring to the wicked — man’ ( 39 mg.?): read DION WN) ££ ap» xb(=?<shall not be unpunished’): Ge ov πληθυνεῖ kAadous
1o. For the wicked evil (or calamity) is created... Cp. xxxix. 29.
11. All... from the earth return to the earth. Cp. Gen. iii. 19; Eccles. xii. 7; Job xxxiv. 15. :
what is from on high (returneth) on high. ‘The return of the spirit to its Maker is meant; cp. Qo/. xii. 7. The prosperity of the ungodly shares the fate of all created things ; it comes to destruction (cp. Ps. xlix).
13. Wealth unjustly gotten ... torrent ... Cp. Job vi. 15-18 for the image. Just as the torrent suddenly swollen in a thunder-storm as suddenly goes down, so wealth unjustly gotten disappears. In clause ὁ ‘ in a thunderstorm ’= lit. ‘in flashing of thunder’. For θα see critical note.
14. With its onrush rocks are rolled away. For the word rendered ‘rocks’ here (0°52) cp. Jer. iv. 29; Job xxx. 6. i misread this as ‘hands’ (D°BD), and may be rendered ‘in the opening of his hands one shall rejoice’ (i.e when he is made to disgorge his ill-gotten wealth there is general rejoicing). % might be rendered (understanding the word in this sense), ‘ when he (the wicked man) lifteth up his hands (sc. as a beggar) men rejoice’; or ‘ when He (God) lifteth up His hands (sc. against the wicked man to punish him and reduce him to poverty) men rejoice.’
Even so doth plunder suddenly come to an end. For text see critical note. 38 as it stands = ‘for suddenly doth he (? the wicked man) come to an end for ever’ (cp. G&). The words cannot be understood of the brook; they. must refer to the riches, and this is well expressed by the emended text. ῃ
15. A branch (sprung) from violence. i.e. the wicked man himself (not his offspring) ; cp. the parallel expression in clause ὁ ‘an impious root’.
hath no tender twig. i.e. has no permanent posterity. For the idea cp. xxiii. 25 ; Job viii. 11 f. olf
an impious root is on the point of a crag. For S see critical note, and cp. with its rendering Matt. xiii. 5.
16 iLike reed-stalks (?)i jon the bank of a torrenti, *Which are consumed before any (other) !plant! ¥. 171 But kindness shall never be moved},
And righteousness is established for aye.
(ὁ) XL. 18-27. The fear of the Lord is the greatest of all good things (=10 +2 distichs).
18 mA life of wine and strong drink™ is sweet,
But better than both is “he that findeth a treasure”. 10 Child °and city° establish a name,
PBut better than both is he that findeth wisdom. Young cattle and planting make fabundance! to flourish”, But better than both 415 a woman beloved ?.
| 20 Wine "land song!" rejoice the heart,
But better than both is ‘the affection of lovers’.
(kAados npr Hos. xiv. 7, LXX): read 13 prs NO: with Peters, &e. SS Gr καὶ ριζαι ἀκαθαρτοι (ἢ read axa@aprov): IN ww 5 τῷὸ, S hh ® (τ: 9 ( freely) [‘ for the root of sinners] is like an ear of corn which sprouts upon a rocky crag’ 1 ®H nw Mp (221. of DMP καρδαμον, ‘ nasturtium or cress’: Cowley- Neubauer suggest M"DP2 ‘like reed-stalks’: pl. of NDP): G& ayer 39 ὙΠῸ (cf. Job viii. 11): so Peters reads here: Hart suggests that 38 may be a corruption of PW2 (PY 108 in Targ. of Job viii. 11) i ® naa by ὑπ) (133 ‘side’, only here: cp. Syr. ὩΣ ‘wing’, and Aram. Ὁ ‘bank): Ge ἐπὶ (mavros υδατος καὶ) χείλους
ποταμου (mavros vdaros καὶ} with &): G ἢ ὉΠ) nay dy k-k ® mg. Ary Tw 52 Ὧ50 (1 text yy): (ἃ πρὸ παντὸς χορτου εκτιλησεται : Peters conjectures: ἽΝ) yod b> ὩΞῸ (ἃ παντὸς vdatos in previous line ?app b>: fart) 1] So BH: G& xapis ws παραδεισος ev εὐλογίαις ADVI PIYD IDM) ‘but kindness is like a blessed Eden’ (? from xl. 27): S$ ‘ But the works of the pious in season ( [Ἴ}3) are blessed’ (cf. Isa. li. 3) mm So # ἼΣΩΣ YN: for ἼΞΦΥ 1” HB mg. has Sow amy ‘wealth of understanding’: @& has ¢wn avrapkous ἐργατου ( VY MN: avrapkous probably an addition in &): BH mg. may, as Peters suggests, be an independent attempt to emend ® in order to eliminate the offensive expression ‘a life of wine and strong drink’ (ὧν substituting ‘a life of wealth of understanding’). % ext zs certainly strange, but is supported (partly) by τ: S>line. Hart ingeniously proposes to read Sow in ‘grace and understanding’ (jn _for 5») "Π): cp. Prov. iii. 4 n-n 38 Ws NBD: G rightly takes NSD as participle ‘one finding’ (so most moderns): a subst, S82 ‘ finding’ (so Peters) ὃς highly doubtful 0-0 39 Wypr: Ge καὶ οἰκοδυμη πολεως P-P G&>19b and c, but the clauses are atiested by 3 as well as %: omission in & probably caused by homoroteleuton (so Peters, §c.). Smend, however, regards them as not a genuine part of the text, the double mention of ‘a name’ (77 10 ἃ and το c) betng alleged as suspicious. The repetition is certainly awkward: probably ‘a name’ in 19 c¢ should be emended to ‘abundance (fatness) ’ (Heb. jw) as suggested by Fuchs: nw may easily have arisen out of this (2 through jaw), perhaps under the influence of the previous DW 4-4 NP AWN: Ee γυνὴ apwpos λογιζεται (possibly, as Smend suggests, λογιζεται NIWMNI: apwpos an addition) TT G& καὶ μουσικα = WW (cp. for the equivalence Gen. Xxxi. 27,
16. Like reed-stalks... (ἃ may have preserved the true reading here, ‘sedge’ (ayer = 19N; see critical note), and also the true construction of the sentence. Then the whole may be rendered, ‘Sedge on a torrent’s bank is consumed before any (other) plant: but kindness, ἅς. (so Peters). Cp. Job viii. 12. :
17. But kindness ... righteousness. Kindness and righteousness as between man and man are meant. # in clause a (cp. Prov. x. 30) differs from (ἃ and S (see critical note). If the latter be followed the first line will run: ‘But kindness is like a blessed Eden’ (cp. v. 27).
(4) XL. 18-27. In this subsection the various good things of life are enumerated—in a series of ten contrasted sets of boons. The climax is that the highest good is the fear of God. Nied
18. better... he that findeth a treasure. Both Lévi and Peters prefer to render—‘the finding of a treasure’. | This certainly suits the construction of the verse, ‘finding’ rather than ‘the finder’ according with the predicate ‘ is ' sweet’. But there is a grave philological objection to the rendering. ‘Treasure’ here may, perhaps, be explained by
19. Child and city. (π᾿5 rendering ‘children and the building of a city’ gives the sense intended correctly. There may be an allusion to the building of such cities as were named after their founders (e.g. Alexandria). On the perpetuation of one’s name cp. xvi. 1 f., xli. 11 f. ,
Young cattle and planting. Operations which promote natural increase are referred to, breeding of stock and sowing of crops being mentioned as typical examples. 20. Wine and song rejoice the heart. Cp. xxxi. (xxxiv.) 27 f. ; ἢ
the affection of lovers. Or ‘the love of friends’. i's ‘love of wisdom’ is probably a deliberate alteration due
to revision; cp. Wisdom ii. 7 f.
21 Pipe and harp make sweet the song, But better than both is ta tongue sincere’. 22 "Grace and beauty" Ycharm the eye’, But better than both are “the crops of the field”. 23 *A friend and companion will each conduct himself opportunely*, But better than both is Ya discreet wife’. 24 “A brother and helper will come to the rescue in a time of adversity’, But more than both doth righteousness deliver. 25 Gold and silver *make the foot stand sure?, But better than both "15 good counsel”. 26 Wealth and strength ‘lift up® the heart, But better than both is the fear of οὐ. In the fear of Jahveh there is no want, And with it there is no need to seek *support®. 27 The fear of God is a very Eden of blessing, And ‘its canopy (stretcheth) Sover® all that is glorious.
(ἃ ἀγαπησις σοφιας (° a tendency alteration) t-t 35. ΠῚ nw : G& γλωσσα ηδεια (S 38) u-u 10 defective : Gz xapw και καλλος INN) "5" (Peters), Oy) 5) (Smend), im 8» (Lev) (καλλος — Shy) ΧΙ ΤΩΣ ΧΠΠ 9, 18) vv 35. py won: Gk ἐπιθυμησει o οφθαλμος σου (cou>A &c. Syro-Hex 3) wow 359. ay ons (‘ the growing things of the field’): @ χλοην (Ὁ. . yon) σπορου ‘the green blade of corn’ (δ ἢ σποριμου) xx BY defective way my.......: Ge φίλος καὶ eraupos εἰς Katpov ἀπαντωντες (last word ? D'Y32): S for last word ‘will receive greetings from one another’ ())373n)): read 121)" nyd sam anw and render as above (others render: ‘ friend and companion give support at the right time’) y-¥ So 3S: (ἃ yn pera avdpos 2-2 defective : MY 1.......- TN: (ἃ αἀδελῴοι καὶ βοηθεια εἰς καιρον θλιψεως S: Peters, following Lévt mainly, restores: mis nyd yoy any mx: Versions do not support the insertion of verb: Smend restores ANS NYI Di ANA AN “a brother and a partner’, ἄς. (ANY occurs ἐπι Neo-Hebr. ‘form a partnership or attachment’; 7 occurs again in ® mg. xii. 18, xlii. 3) 8-ἃ (ἢ επιστησουσιν moda 539 (amy) —only last word legible in ® b-b @& βουλη (only B* 55 have yun) ευδοκιμειται : S ‘good counsel’ (% consilium beneplacitum): read AID Ayy 9-ὁ The word is illegible in ® (MMS. mutilated): Cowley-Neub. read \WY3}) = G& (avvacovow) : Smend iSdy9 (‘make to exult’): Lév7 oa ἃ In the MS. of B® there is a marginal note by the side of vv. 22-26 ab, written in vertical lines, as follows :
moa AS DIN ΝῊ 3 DWT ὋΝ 2) 55
ΣἸΘῚΞ. OF DNA wo bawa
:pyenad wn ayn = wad oa ADD
“ΑἹ! the days of the poor are evil. Ben-Sira says, At night also. His roof is the lowest of roofs, and his vineyard is in the height of the mountains ; The rain of other roofs falls on his roof, and the earth of his vineyard falls on other vineyards.’
This citation agrees, with one slight variation (viz. nid» ἘΝ for nda AN), with the passage as cited in 7. 8. Sanhedrin 100 Ὁ. It is probably excerpted from some compilation of selected sayings which circulated under the name of Ben-Sira, and contained, together with genuine quotations, a number of others which do not belong to the genuine text of Ben-Sira’s book. The cttation here given appears to belong to the latter class. A Persian gloss zs added in the MS. (written in Hebr. characters) as follows: ‘It is probable that this was not in the original copy, but it is used as a proverb’ (see Cowley-Neub., p. 7) e-e Reading yywro ( IS. defective): so Bacher, Smend, Peters. €& βοηθειαν $ [5 here adds a gloss on next verse: ‘the fear of God over everything is exalted ; seize it, my son, and let it not go, for there is nothing like it’] ff 10 aAnan (τ (εκαλυψαν avrov): S “15
1. Pipe and harp make sweet the song. i.e. of course through their accompaniment. 2. Grace and beauty ... crops of the field. For the sentiment cp. Matt. vi. 28-29. 3. will each conduct himself opportunely. Or ‘will give support’ (and guidance) ‘at the right time’. The same verb (373), common in NH, is used in iii. 26. a discreet (or prudent) wife. The expression is borrowed from Prov. xix. 14; cp. also Sir. xxv. I. 24. A brother and helper... Possibly the original form of the sentence was exclamatory: ‘ A brother and helper in time of adversity.’ Cp. Prov. xvii. 17. 3 But more than both doth righteousness deliver. Cp. Prov. x. 2, xi. 4, 6. ‘Alms’ (for ‘righteousness ’) is a possible rendering. 25. Gold and silver make the foot stand sure. i.e. give a sure footing, a firm position. Neubauer cites the following from T. B. Pesachim 119 a: in reference to Deut. xi. 6 (‘and every living substance that followed them’ [lit. ‘was at their feet’]) R. Eleazar says: ‘This means the wealth of a man, which makes him stand firm upon his feet.’
bdyn
(c) XL. 28-30. A beggar’s life no life at all (= 3+1 distichs).
5 1 Hs {Resin 28 My son, live not 'a beggar’s life;
Better is one dead ‘than importunate‘.
29 A man that looketh to a stranger’s table— His life is not to be reckoned as a life:
JA pollution of his soul) are *the dainties presented‘, 1And to an understanding man inward torture.
_ 30™In the mouth of an insatiable (man)™ begging is sweet,
But inwardly it burneth as fire.
il ταν ἈΠ! Death, how bitter is “the remembrance of thee®”
To him® ‘that liveth at peace‘ in Shis habitations ; ΤῸ him that is at ease", and prospereth in all,
And that still hath strength to enjoy luxury?. 2 Hail! Death, how* welcome is thy decree!
™To the luckless man®, and that lacketh strength, »That stumbleth and trippeth® °at everything®,
? That is broken”, “and hath lost hope".
εἐπαιτησεως ii ® Shymomn : ἡ exatew (35 renders whole verse: ‘him that asks refuse not ; and be not good to kill but to keep alive —mzsunderstanding ®) 1} Ὦ was Sy (50 read for ® text Sayn) GS (possibly we also fo be read) Καὶ % mg. I Myon (G& read Ἵ for 3321) 1-1 ® (with mg.) “yor yr wed Ὁ: (ἃ misunderstands m-m G ev στόματι αναιδους (so 3) wD) ty ‘Da (for ® war ny vid) ; so read. a Some MSS. of 39. insert the title De memoria et iudicio mortis —-»-b $ Ah! Death, how evil art thou’ ὁ So the margin ; the text has ‘ Life’ d-d So tk; the lext of ® ts corrupt e $4 ‘rich’: &#+et iusto ffs “sitting ’ s-s Lit. ‘his foundation’; & S ‘his possessions’ b-h & ἀπερισπαστῳ (ευπρεπεστατῳ V 253): 9 “strong ἡ i & τροφην; read τρυφην ( Ὦ 9) k Reading m2 for 12 (Ne® 253 $ Syro-Hex): >G 1 Reading PN for Wn (® marg. pn, pin, and pn) m-m Reading D8 wend (cp. B marg. in v. 10) (‘to aman of sorrows’): (ἃ επιδεομενῳ : S$ ‘broken’ u-n Reading with ® marg. wprn Swria: & ἐσχατογηρῳ Kat περισπωμενῳ : 96 ‘that is old and stumbleth’ (cp. 3» defecto aetate) 0-0 Of περι παντων iP Reading Vw (Ryssel) for IND (= &): B mg. reads ANWN DAN (‘lacking sight’): S ‘lacking wealth’ 9-4 % ‘and is
26. But better than both is the fear of God. The fear of God is the one all-sufficing and all-important possession ; cp. Xxxiv. 10.
27. its canopy (stretcheth) over all that is glorious. Cp. Isa. iv. 5 (the source of the expression here).
28. live not a beggar’s life... Perhaps this saying of Ben-Sira has influenced the dictum (cited from Ibn Gabirol by Cowley-Neubauer, p. xxx): ‘ Better the grave than a fall to poverty’. ‘A beggar’s life’ is lit.in Ha ‘life of gift’ (or ‘gifts ἢ), i.e. a life dependent upon gifts.
In 28 4 the word rendered ‘ importunate’ dyno) lit. ‘to make oneself a mound’ (denom. from mbt ‘a mound’ thrown up by besiegers) ; fig. to advance against, beset, cp. xxxix. 24; here ‘to beset’ (with requests) ‘to importune’ (see Driver in the Glossary in Cowley- Neubauer, p. xxxiii).
29. A man that looketh...asalife. Cp. the citation freely given in 7. δ. Besah 32 0: ‘ There are three men whose life is no life. They are these—The man who watches the table of his neighbour, and he over whom his wife rules, and he whose body is ruled by pains.’
A pollution of his soul are the dainties presented. For ‘ dainties presented’ cp. xxxvi. 19 (24) note. Such gifts pollute in so far as they are begged for, not because they have been presented.
30. But inwardly it burneth as fire. Cp. Jer. xx. 9.
(4) XLI. 1-4. Death fearful to some, welcome to others, inevitable for all.
I. the remembrance of thee. Lit. ‘thy memory’ (7751).
in his habitation. in, cp. Hebr. of xliv. 6, i.e. the conditions under which he is living.
that is at ease. Cp. Job xvi. 12, xxi. 23. ;
to enjoy. Lit. ‘to receive’ (cp. Gt ἐπιδέξασθαι), cp. Hebr. of xxxiv. (A. V., R. V. xxxi.) 3.
2. Hail. MNM, an expression of satisfaction, as in Isa. xliv. 16.
how welcome. Lit. ‘how good’.
thy decree. Cp. xiv. 12, and see Isa. xxvill. 15, 18.
stumbleth. The word >> has in Neo-Hebrew the meaning to be weak or ill (Smend). _ :
broken. Cp. Ps. Ixix.21 (20 in R. V.), cxlvii. 3, where the same Hebr. word is used of being broken in heart. The text of # reads 27D ‘intractable’, or the like (cp. G& ἀπειθοῦντι) ; but this word is out of place in its context.
3 ‘Fear not Death, (it is) thy destiny’, a Remember that the former and the latter (share it) with thee. ; 4 This is the portion® of all flesh from God, t And how canst thou withstand" the decree’ oft the Most High! “(Be it) for a thousand years, for a hundred, or for ten (that thou livest)™, In Sheol there are no* reproaches concerning life.
(6) XLI. 5-13. The end of the ungodly contrasted with the honour accorded to the name of the righteous (= 3+3+1+3 distichs).
5 An abominable offspring is the generation’ of sinners, And “a godless sprout? is *in the dwellings of the wicked*. 6 *From the son of the unrighteous man °shall the dominion be wrenched away*?, 4 And want® shall ever abide with his seed%. 7 A godless father do the children’ curse, SFor because of him do they suffer reproach®. 8 Woe unto you, ungodly men, iWho have forsaken the Law of the Most High God'"! 9 ἘΠ ye increase (it will be) for mischief*, 1And if ye bear children (it will be) for sighing ; If ye stumble (it will be) for everlasting joy’, And if ye die (it will be)™ for a curse®.
unable to work’: (ἃ ‘... patience’: # ... sapientiam IT μὴ εὐλαβου κριμα θανατου 5 (ἃ τὸ κριμα : S ‘the end’ tts> u Lit. ‘reject’, or ‘despise’ V (ἃ ευδοκια W-W Q& εἰτε δεκα εἰτε εκατὸν evre χίλια ETN x Reading τὰς (8 marg.) for WX y Reading 7 for 727 (Smend) 2-2 Reading SY 732) a-a So & (ΞΞ ς 3): ® τ᾽ mutilated, but may perhaps be read yw r Δ b-b (ἃ rexvay apapT@\wy απολειται κληρονομια e-¢ Reading yapn advan (Smend) a-d 35 ἡ» almost entirely mutilated © G& oveidos f S ‘his righteous
sons’ ss ® ἐς almost entirely mutilated: + ‘in the world’ h-h Jy ® only three letters are preserved SESS Kk (τ καὶ eav γεννηθητε εἰς καταραν γεννηθησεσθε; pr. cav yap πληθυνητε εἰς ἀπώλειαν 248 (cp. ®) LI G&>
M (τ μερισθησεσθε n For the whole verse $ has: ‘A fruitful woman is the joy of her people, and if there die an
3. thy destiny. Lit. ‘thy decree,’ as in v. 2, i.e. to which thou art destined, cp. xxxvill. 22 a. the former and the latter. The reference is probably to the generations that have gone before and those that will follow after. (share it) with thee. The Hebr. might mean: ‘ (are) with thee’, i.e. they will all be together hereafter in Sheol (cp. the expression ‘to be gathered unto the fathers’, 2 Kings xxii. 20). 4. This is the portion. Cp. Job xx. 29, xxvii. 13. ; how canst thou withstand... Cp. Lev. xxvi. 15 for this phrase in Hebr. DNDN PHD ON. withstand. See critical note. x : ; the decree. # reads ‘the Law’, see critical note, but this can hardly be right, because ‘ Torah’ is never used in this connexion. In Sheol there are... Since in Sheol it will be found that the same fate has overtaken all men, it will be immaterial whether one man lived longer on earth than another; men will not quarrel about that. Cp. Eccles. vi. 6.
(e) XLI. 5-13. Death means far different things to the godless and the pious. In the case of the latter their name lives on.
5. offspring. The Hebr. word 02 occurs in Gen. xxi. 23; Isa. xiv. 22 ; Job xviii. 19; in each case it is the parallel to 133 ‘sprout’ in the next clause. the generation of sinners. The reference is most probably to the Hellenistic party in Israel (see v. 8), and especially to the high-priestly family, as v. 6 seems to show. : and a godless sprout... The Hebr. text is mutilated, and it is impossible to reconstruct it with certainty, but the general sense is probably as given above. = | 6. From the son of... Ryssel renders this clause ‘ Because of an unrighteous son a kingdom falls to pieces (reading Y0A), a rendering which the text may quite well bear, but if, as the present writers hold, the reference is to the high-priestly family, Ryssel’s rendering seems too general. In the marg. of ® is read bay Pad, ‘from amongst — the uncircumcized ’, a term which could well be applied to the Hellenistic ruling party (cp. 1 Macc. i. 48, 11. 46, &c.), so that at all events a later scholiast understood the passage as in reference to the Hellenizers. the unrighteous man. boy, the regular term for a tyrannical ruler, cp. Job xviii. 18, xxvii. 7, xxix. 17, Xxxi. 3. -..Wwrenched away. Cp. 1 Sam. xv. 28 (nsdro-ns mim yap); 1 Kings xi. 11; 2 Kings xvii. 21. 8. Who have forsaken... This is a clear reference to the Hellenizers, cp. 1 Macc. li. 23, ili. 6, 8, &c. * || 9. if ye increase... i.e. If they have children, these will likewise be godless. . ΜΝ _if ye ἅϊε... The reference is not to anything that would happen after death, but rather to the execration m which they will be held at the time of their death. |
10° All that is of naught returneth to naught?,
PSo the godless man,—from nothingness to nothingness ?.
11 4Vanity is man (concerning) his body 4, *But the name of the pious shall not be cut off?.
12 Be in fear for thy name, for that abideth longer for thee Than thousands of ‘precious treasures®.
13 tLife’s goods last for limited days ὕ,
"But the reward of a name for days without number®.
(2) XLI.14—XLII. 8. Moral duties enumerated under the category of shame.
(i) XLI. 14-15. Lntroduction to the section on the subject of shame (= 2 distichs).
14 [v Hidden wisdom and concealed treasure, What is the use of either ?
15 Better the man who hideth his folly, Than the man who hideth his wisdom. ]
(ii) XLI. 16—XLII. 8. */ustruction concerning shame* (= 2+10+1+1+9 distichs).
16 YHear, O children, instruction concerning shame’,
And be abashed “according to my judgement?. (16) For not every kind of shame is meet to retain, ; >And not every kind of abashment is to be approved”. 17 °Be ashamed of a father and a mother of whoredom, Of a prince and a ruler“ of lies,
unrighteous father his righteous sons will not grieve over him’ 0-0 In place of this clause & has a variant of ik ie 4: ὥ:» PP (ἃ ovrws ασεβεις ἀπὸ καταρας εἰς an@\av: 86 ‘the end of the ungodly man is for destruction ’, so for the whole verse 1-9 S> : (ἃ revOos avOparav ev σωμασιν αὐτῶν rr xc-8 alone among the MSS. of & has preserved the right reading: ovopa δὲ ἀγαθὸν οὐκ εξαλειφθησεται ( Arm): Ge ovopa δὲ ἁμαρτωλων οὐκ ἀγαθὸν εξαλειφθησεται ss So ® mg., the text reads ‘treasures of wisdom’; & ‘great treasures of gold’ tt (ἃ ayabns (ons ἀριθμὸς ἡμερων wu (ἃ καὶ ἀγαθὸν ονόμα εἰς αἰωνα διαμενεῖ: S>from here to xiii. 8, except 19 Ὁ, 20a ν The order of the clauses of vv. 14-16 differs in (ἃ ( 14b, c, 15) xx $G> y-Y This clause 14a in & 2 & “peace ’ ama & ἐπὶ τῷ ρήματι pov b-b (ἃ καὶ ov παντα πασιν εν πίστει ευδοκιμειται cH mnserts the title De omnibus vitiis declinandum ce So 38 mg. ( &)
Io. the godless man. 537 is often used in reference to one who is an apostate.
nothingness. Cp.xli. 10. In each case the Hebr. word is 19M (‘tohu’), which in Gen. i. 2 is used of the ‘ waste’ of chaos; it is also used in reference to moral worthlessness (cp. Isa. xxiv. 10, lix. 4). Both the words for ‘naught’ and ‘nothingness’ occur together in Is. xl. 173; cp. Is. lix. 4. ;
11. But the name... This thought of the memory of the righteous departed being held in honour was the beginning of a development regarding the conceptions about the future life; this memory involved, sooner or later, the question as to differentiation between the righteous and the sinners beyond the grave, and when once this point was reached further development of thought was inevitable. (Cp. Prov. x. 7; 1 Enoch ciil. 4, civ. 13; Zest. Twelve Patr., Naphtali viii. 5.)
12. Be in fear for thy name. Cp. Eccles. vii. 1, and Pivge Adoth ii. 8: ‘He who hath gotten a good name hath gotten it for himself’; iv. 19, ‘Rabbi Simeon said, There are three crowns, the crown of Torah, and the crown of Priesthood, and the crown of Royalty, but the crown of a good name mounts above them.’
for that abideth. For the Hebr. word ΠῚ cp. Eccles. vill. 15.
Than thousands of ... Cp. Prov. xxii. 1. 13. the reward. Lit. ‘goods’ (N210) ; the same word as in ‘ Life’s goods’; in the Hebr. there is a play on the double meaning of N20: ‘The good things of life’ prosperity, ‘the good things of a name’ its honourable remembrance.
XLI.14—XLII. 14. With xli. 14 a new section begins, which extends to xlil. 14. It contains an enumeration of moral duties under the category of shame. It falls into two distinct subsections, (a) xli. 14-xlii, 8 ; (4) xlii, 9-14. (2) XLI. 14—XLII. 8. After an introductory piece (xli. 14 4, 15) there follows the main part of the subsection, with the heading ‘ Instruction concerning shame’. It enumerates things to be ashamed of, and then the things not to be ashamed of. ‘
14,15. These verses, which occur also as xx. 30, 31, are evidently out of place here ; possibly they were added rom a marginal note (Smend), as seeming to offer an appropriate introduction to the section beginning at v. 16.
16. The title to this section is found in 38 only. : : ; ’
according to my judgement. i.e. in accordance with my teaching concerning this subject ; # paraphrastically,
‘quae procedunt de ore meo.’ 17. of whoredom. i.e. guilty of whoredom.
%#° 184Ofa master and a mistress‘ of deceit, Of an assembly and a people of transgression, Of a comrade and friend of treachery, το And of a place, where thou sojournest, of pride®. Be ashamed] to break an oath or a covenant®®, To stretch out thine elbow at meat, ‘To withhold¢ a gift that is asked for’, 2τα (ἢ) ®To turn away the face” of thy friend, 21 (&) ‘To cause the dividing of portions to cease’, 20a(&) To be silent towards Shim that greeteth (thee)/, 200 (&) To look upon a woman that is a whore, G21c | To gaze on a woman that hath a husband, 22a To be busy with his maid*', °220() ™And to violate her bed™, 22¢ ({π) To [speak to] a friend with reproachful words ;— 224 (Δ And after giving a gift contemn not,— 42, 1™To repeat °the word thou hast heard?®, And to lay bare any secret counsel: So shalt thou be truly ?shamefast?, And find favour in the sight of all living.
“But of these things be not ashamed, And accept not persons *unto sin”:
Of the Law of the Most High, and the statute ; And of justice, to do right by the wicked ;
d-d azo κριτου και apxovtos © Reading 11 ( mg.) for Win the text: (ἃ περι κλοπης ee-e0 Uk καὶ azo αληθειας θεου kat διαθηκης ; ἾΗ ἦν much mutilated 14 G aro σκορακισμου λημψεως και δοσεως 8. Reading YN bh Reading (on the Lasts of Cc aro aroorpodns προσωπουὴ 5 ΖΞ ΠῚ (Ryssel) it The text of Wis partly mutilated [τ] So mg.
Κακ ® ἧς wanting with the exception of two letters at the end of v. 22a ! Reading my) (Cowley-Neubauer) λογου akons p-p & sine confusione: (ἃ αἰσχυντῆρος a Here xlii begins in EV rr Reading SON? =
G& του ἀμαρτανειν (with Cowley-Neub., Smend): ἸΏ text Nom (=? ‘And accept not persons and so bear sin’: cp. Pefers)
18. a master and a mistress... Smend thinks that the reference here is to Gentile kings and queens into whose service Jews of noble family entered.
. of treachery. Cp. Lev. vi. 2.
19. of a place. i.e. the people of a place; like ὋΝ (‘city’), which is often used of the inhabitants of a city, see
an oath or a covenant. Cp. Gen. xxvi. 28.
To stretch out thine elbow... Cp. xxxi. (i xxxiv.) 14. Peters thinks that the reference is either to the action of the arm when taking an oath, connecting this with the previous clause; or else to the withholding of a gift in the following clause. It is, however, best to take the words as referring to behaviour ; the whole passage exhibits a curious variety of topics referred to.
21 a. To turn away the face. i.e. to make him turn away in anger because the gift asked has been withheld ; i adds, apparently by way of explanation, ‘ne avertas faciem a proximo tuo’; but the reference is to the turning away of the face of the friend, cp. xviii. 24.
214. To cause the dividing of portions... The reference is possibly to the dividing of an inheritance (see xlii. 3), but more probably to the bestowal upon the poor of portions of the offerings for sacrifice, cp.2 Sam. vi. 19 (Smend). Peters understands the words in a general sense as a prohibition against niggardliness.
20 a. that greeteth. Lit. ‘that asketh peace’ ; the usual Oriental mode of salutation.
XLII. 1. To repeat the word... Cp. xix. 7; a warning against circulating mere unsupported rumours.
lay bare any secret counsel. Cp. xxii. 22 ¢, xxvii. 16 f.
shamefast. The Hebr. word used (2) occurs only here and in xxxii. (xxxv.) Io in this sense (as an adj. = ‘ shamefast ’).
find favour in the sight of all living. Cp. xlii. 8.
But ... be not ashamed, And accept not persons unto sin. This general exhortation applies to what follows: of certain things (following) the injunction is to be not ashamed, while some of the things enumerated also involve the application of a judicial and impartial mind. To the latter the injunction ‘accept not persons (i.e. exhibit not partiality) unto sin’ (i.e. so as to bring sin upon thyself) specially applies.
2. Law of the Most High... statute... justice. The ‘Law of the Most High’ the Law generally, regarded as a body of principles invested with divine sanctions ; ‘the statute’ the particular enactments which result from
a Εἰ ὃς. ἃ
τας δ᾽ ον το ng eee pe γον
ea (a=
3 Of reckoning with a comrade Sand (fellow) traveller’,
And of the division of an inheritance tand a property* ; 4 "Of the small dust" of the scales and balance, ‘And “of testing’ measure and weighty ;
4(2) Of buying whether little or much,
5 “And of profit from traffick with the merchant ™Y ; *Of frequent correction of children,
And of smiting the side of an evil-disposed servant*. 6 For an evil wife Ya seal,
And where *many* hands are, *a key*! 7°Upon what is deposited make a mark?, And let giving and receiving all be in writing.— 8 Of the correction of the simple and foolish (be not ashamed),
°Or of the tottering grey-head occupied with whoredom?: So shalt thou be truly well-advised,
And a man (truly) modest before all living.
58 So 30 mg. NAN) (read MHS) G καὶ οδοιπορων (3 /ex/ ‘and a master’ 78) ὑπὸ 39 wn (Prov. viii. 21): & εταιρων (ἢ read erepov) Ws [3 mg. WY ? fo be read IM: 50 Ryssel | wu So ® (omitting \ in Sy) pnw by (Isa. x]. 15): G& περι ἀκριβειας : Smend supposes an infin. to be implicit in pr’ (‘to rub off,’ then ὃ «to balance ’) 5 ὦ wow ® minon (or read ninwn): 2 Neo-Hebr. mm (Amn) ‘to prove, test’ (cp. ΤΠ ‘skilled, expert, tried ἢ ww-Www 35 (difficult to decipher) 73n q2n[0 | Wd by: Ck περι αδιαφορου (but NAC 155 157 307 διαῴφορου ‘difference, profit? IND) πρασεως (B + cat) ἐμπόρων (C europov): read $73ah 731 ὙΠ by X > 30 (bul 3ἢ mg. 5a Dw points to the lines having been in text originally): G& καὶ ( probably to be omitted) περι παιδειας τεκνων TOAANS καὶ οἰκετῃ πονήηρῳ πλευραν αιμαξαι: Srom which restore with Peters (cp. Lévt):
37 pa ἼΘΙ dy yn sayd yds mon by (Levi: νὸς mon yr stay) ΣῪ ® pan anin (>on as marginal note): & καλὸν σῴραγις (kadrov an addition) 22 So (ἃ = ma which read
Jor ® mp7 aa ® NaN: (ἃ κλεισον (? orzginally κλεις): read nna (Ryssel), as parallelism demands v-b &
‘Whatsoever thou handest over (let it be) by number and weight’ (9 eav παραδιδῳς, ev ἀριθμῳ καὶ σταθμῳὴ: ® apn 1 (mg. TPS) WPAN own dy: ὅτ may have read ὈΡΦῸΥ ἼΒΟΙ Ἢ span Sy το ‘upon a deposit number and weight” (1) 125) = ‘what is entrusted to a hand’, ze. ‘a deposit’: cp. 1 MBWN Lev. v. 21): 22 wll be nearer 9, however, to read with Peters DDN 3 IPD by ce mg. NINA Ay) SeAD ay (8 xi ww av). For ΤΣ Any) & has κρινομενου περι πορνειας (so 253 307 Syro-Hex.) (but B πρὸς veous)
the application of these principles in practice ; while ‘justice’ is a general term denoting the administration of such laws. The injunction is obviously addressed to the Scribes, who are responsible for the administration of law and Justice. Smend explains the general meaning of the verse to be an admonition to the Scribes not to be ashamed of the Law of their fathers (i.e. their ancestral religion) in the face of Greek fashions and influences. :
to do right by the wicked. i.e. probably not to hesitate to acquit the ungodly man when he is proved innocent of a particular charge.
3. Of reckoning with a comrade and (fellow) traveller. The meaning apparently is—do not allow feelings of false shame and pride to deter from settling accounts, involving mutual indebtedness, where friends and fellow travellers are involved. Lévi aptly quotes the French proverb, ‘Les bons comptes font les bons amis.’ Smend interprets differently. He takes ‘reckoning with’ to mean ‘demanding from’: ‘Do not be deterred by feelings of false shame from asking a companion (on a journey) and a fellow traveller, who is staying for the night at the same inn, who he is.’
of the division of an inheritance... i.e. of determining exactly the details involved in the division of an inheritance or property (for the Hebr. of the last word cp. Prov. viii. 21). ,
4. Of the small dust of the scales... Cp. Is. xl. 15. (ἃ gives the sense well, ‘of exactness of scales.’ Care must be taken that the exactness of the balance is not disturbed even by a fleck of dust. The scales, measures, and weights used by the trader must be tested (‘measure and weight,’ lit. ‘ephah and stone ἢ). ἢ - ᾿
Of buying whether little or much. Contrast xxvi. 29, xxvii. 2, where the dangers involved in buying and selling are dwelt upon.
5. of smiting the side of...servant. Cp. xxxiii. 24 f. (= (τ xxx. 33 ἢ).
6-7. The construction changes in these verses, but it is not necessary for that reason to transpose them,
8. Of the correction of the simple... i.e. Be not ashamed to correct the foolish and ignorant, and also to correct the tottering grey-beard occupied with whoredom ; for 8 ὁ cp. xxv. 2. Fah ;
aman (truly) modest. The Hebr. word here rendered ‘ modest’ (Y13¥) = ‘lowly’ in Bibl. Heb. (cp. Prov. xi. 2),
but ‘pious’ in PBA. Smend renders it ‘ gesittet’. [It is supposed by some scholars that the word ‘ Essene’ is equivalent to yuy.]
(6) XLII. 9-14. The care of daughters (= 4+2+2+2 distichs).
HP 9 4A daughter is to a father °a treasure of sleeplessness’, f And the care of her banisheth slumber': In her youth, lest she pass the flower of her age’, And 'when she is married, ‘lest she be hated ; τοῦ i'JIn her virginity, lest she be seduced, ik And in the house of her husband*, ™*lest she prove unfaithful ** ; In her father’s house, lest !she become pregnant!J, m And in her husband’s house”, lest she be barren. TI “Over thy daughter keep a strict watch”, °Lest she make thee a name of evil odour°—
ἃ The following version of vv. 9 and 10 ts cited in T. B. Sanh. 100? :
sw xd mina sw nao maxd na wManN Now ΠΌΡΡΩ
mn Now Any
wean xd ΝΟ ma
oa ad ym xd xo news
.DavD AYN Now Ap
(9a) A daughter is a vain treasure to her father: ( 9b) ἴοι fear about her he does not sleep ; ( το ἃ) inher youth, lest she be seduced ; ( 9c) in her maidenhood, lest she play the harlot ; when she is marriageable, lest she be not married ; (= 10d) when she is married, lest she have no sons; when she is old, lest she practise sorcery.’
e-e ® ext IPO moo ‘a deceptive treasure’ (cp. ‘vain treasure’ 7m Talm. citation): G& ἀποκρυῴος ἀγρυπνια: read WY for PW (so Peters, Smend): S ‘great honour’ Ef So & S: 18 (defective) :[ 7M) [yn]|an Anas (cp. Xxxi. [xxxiv.] 1 G and ®) 8-8 So Ck (παρακμασῃ) ἢ 33N (cp. ΠΣ ‘when she is marriageable’ zz Zalm.
cit.): ® vn (‘she commit adultery’) corresponding to nxn in Talm. cit.: % ‘[that she] be not blamed’ hh So & ($ ‘and by her husband’) Apa (so read): MM nari So G&S (B Lex defective) : read NIV fD: 39 mg. Won ‘she be forgotten’ lili So 1η 3: (ἃ ev παρθενειᾳ ( + avtns Syro-Hex 3) i Transposed in G& (right order in ® as given above tn the translation) Ik & text (defective) [apy] mal) (® mg. Ww n33) (ἃ pera avdpos ουσα kk-kk @ μὴ more παραβῃ : ® text lacking read with ἸΏ mg. own 15 (Peters ; and Smend with xd for 33) Ll G& ἐγκυος γενηται : lacking (read ANN) m-m $9 38: (τ ‘And when she is married’ (συνῳκηκυια ndyyay) nn # mg. ἜΣ pInn INI Sy oon: Ge em θυγατρι αδιατρεπτῳ στερεωσον chudakny: S with 30 mg. +‘my son’ (® text defective: rs restored by Lévi (ww "Ὁ [Ὁ jpn [an b[ana by 2) 0-0 39 text defechve— the last two words are (2. 7b) AND DY: read MD ov [7d nvyn 15]: 38 σις. ’N? ‘wy ‘yn ‘B ?avEw JwyN 15 pannd G& py ποτε ποιήσῃ σε επιχαρμα ( nynw Exod. xxxii. 25) exOpos: perhaps, however, & read in Exodus ΤΠ ( ἐπίχαρμα in Exodus). Levi reads ἢ mg. omnnsd Sun Jwyn jp: S (‘a bad name’) ® ext Ρτν 39 ext py nddpy (so δένει, Peters, Strack): but Smend reads it dy nbnpi = (ἃ (και εἐκκλητον aov: cp. §
soya wn) 9. B feat (qnawrin) corrected in left margin to JOIN) G: Win wan 35 right margin nwan (= ἢ nyan)) ror ayy maya: (ἃ ev πληθει πολλων (ἢ read πυλωνὴ 5:8 These two lines (11 e f) are
(ὁ) XLII. 9-14. The subject of this subsection is the care of daughters. The same subject is touched upon in
9. A daughter ...treasure of sleeplessness... Edersheim cites some of the Talmudic dca on the subject of daughters and women generally, among others the following: ‘ Happy he that has male children; woe to him that has female children’ (Qidd. 82 6; Baba bathra 16 ὁ, &c.); ‘Women are of light mind’ (Sadd. 33 6; Qidd. 806) ; and the well-known one in Pz7ge Adoth, ‘prolong not converse with a woman’ (1. 5). The Blessing in the Jewish Morning Prayer may also be cited: ‘ Blessed art Thou, O Lord... who hast not made me a gentile...aslave...a woman.’ — But the harshness of tone manifest in Ben-Sira towards women generally was much mitigated in later (Rabbinical) — Judaism under the influence of the Pharisees.
... lest she pass the flower of her age. i.e. without being married. Smend prefers to keep the reading of 38 (13n 15 : Poel of 7793), which he renders ‘ lest she entice (men)’: but ‘lest she commit adultery’ is a more probable rendering.
to. be seduced. For the Hebr. word here used cp. Exod. xxii. 15; Ezek. xiv. 9.
she prove unfaithful. Cp. Num. v. 12, 19 f., 29 (same Hebr. word ΠΝ = ‘go aside’).
11, Over thy daughter keep a strict watch. Cp. xxvi. 1o.
; a name of evil odour. Cp. the Biblical expression ‘to make odious’ (lit. ‘cause to stink’, WNIT e.g.
A byword in the city Pand accursed of the people?—
4 And shame thee? "in the assembly of the gate’.
. §In the place where she lodgeth ‘let there be no lattice’,
"Or spot overlooking the entrance round about”®.
12 vLet her not show her beauty to any male’,
w And among wives let her not converse.
13 For from the garment issueth the moth,
And from a woman a woman’s wickedness.
14 *Y Better is the wickedness of a man than the goodness of a woman’ ; 7And a disgraceful daughter poureth forth disgrace’*.
In praise of God as Nature's Lord.
15 *I would fain remember* God’s works,
And what I have seen I would recount.
By the word of God His works were formed”,
¢And what was wrought by His good pleasure according to His decree®.
lacking in Ux (acctdentally omitted: ? the translator's eye passing from ND) in τὰ f fo ND or PI 271 12 b omitted two lines) t-t So ®: S wncorrectly ‘let her not go forth’ u-u SoM DID NID HID MD: S (Preading NID NI) 33D 1219) ‘ And let her not be round about in houses’ v-V So ®: (ἃ misunderstood the line (mavte avOpore jn ἐμβλεπε ev καλλει): as also $ (' Reveal not to every man what is in thine heart’) WW G& καὶ ev μεσῳ I: 50 S rightly: ® m3 XX > y-y So ® mg. & (η ἀγαθοποιος γυνὴ ὃ an interpretation of NWS AV: but Lévt makes it WW '2001) 2% Reading with ® mg. (correcting nX3) fo NI) A_IN yan n|aND nar: cp. (ἃ και γυνὴ καταισχυνουσα εἰς ονειδισμον (e a free rendering of nan pan). Smend reads DN) — ‘ shame causing ὦ Jor nband ἅτ So Y (τ μνησθησομαι δε (δε for dn) b-b So S$: (ἃ ev Aoyous Κυρίου ta epya avrov 3ἢ Mg. ? ® text [139 onds awa: read ny YY Jor last word (? 3): so Peters C-C NCA καὶ γέγονεν ev εὐλογίᾳ αὐτου κριμα (Β &e.>): Sah καὶ yeyovey εὐλογία τῶν κριματων αὐτου (ευλογιᾳ Sor evdoxia) : 3 ynpd ws Syyay (read pnp Sor inpd, cp. 41): ® mg. has np> which Peters retains: then render ; ‘and teaching (doctrine) is a work of His grace’: Cowley-Neub. render ® text ‘and him that doeth His pleasure He hath accepted’
Or spot. The Hebr. term (N°3)) has here a general sense as in VA, ‘place’, ‘spot’. Smend suggests MN n)3) for 8.3 Na) = and ‘ where she spends the night (let there be) no entrance,’ ἅς. 12. Let her not show her beauty... Perhaps # (Nin jnNn bs) may be rendered ‘ Let her not give a look to any
male’, i.e. show herself, be visible to (cp. Smend). NIN has the meaning ‘look’, ‘countenance’ in PH, cp. also xvi. I.
And among wives... 1.6. let her not mix on familiar terms with married women. 13. For from the garment issueth the moth. The reference is to daughters. If such mix with married women on familiar terms, and listen to the conversation of the latter, sexual impulses and desires will be stirred which will lead to sin. The sentence is couched in proverbial form. The moth issuing from the garment is a figure of something emanating spontaneously from within. S% interprets rather than translates, ‘For as a moth falls upon a garment, so doth jealousy upon a woman from the wickedness of her fellow.’ 14. Better is the wickedness of a man than the goodness of a woman. As Edersheim remarks: ‘ The misogyny of the author here reaches its climax.’ poureth forth disgrace. Cp. x. 13 (‘poureth forth abomination’).
XLII. 15—XLIII. 33. This piece forms a distinct division. Its theme is the praise of God—of God as the mighty and all-wise Lord of nature. The introduction (xlii. 15-25) sets forth God’s omnipotence and omniscience. The main (central) part has for its subject the firmament and the sun (xliii. 1-5), the moon (xliil. 6-8), the stars and the rainbow (xliii. 9-12), the storm, the snow and the hoar-frost, the ice, and lastly the sea (xliii. 13-26). A concluding section (xhii. 27-33) has for its main thought that the highest praise man can offer to God is inadequate. As Smend points out, the question of the origin of the heaven, of the dry land and the sea, does not come into the writer's treatment of the theme (cp., however, xliii. 23) any more than the creation of vegetation, of the land animals, and of man. God shows Himself to be the Lord of nature in the wonderful adjustment and economy that are maintained in natural forces and life. With xlii. 15 f. cp. xviii. 1-7. 15. I would fain remember... Cp. Ps. Ixxvil. 12. And what I have seen .. . = Job xv. 17. as ; And what was wrought by His good pleasure according to His decree. For text see critical note. According to Peters’ rendering (‘and doctrine is a work of His grace’) creation and the wisdom-teaching are placed side by side: cp. xliii. 33; Ps. xix (the light of creation and the light of revelation set together).
SIRACH 42° τὸ 22
17 The rising sun ‘is revealed? over all things, And the glory of Jahveh “15 over all His works’. 16 ‘God's holy ones have not the power’ To recount £His wondrous works of might& ; (Though) God hath given strength "to His hosts™ iTo endure in the presence of His glory’. 18 He searcheth out the deep and (man’s) heart, JAnd all their secretsi * He surveyeth* : 1For Jahveh possesseth all knowledge, And seeth what cometh unto eternity. 19 He declareth ™what is past and what is future™, And revealeth “the profoundest secrets”. 20 °No knowledge is lacking to Him®, P And no matter escapeth Him?. 21 The might of His wisdom? ‘is established", From everlasting *He is the same’: ‘Nothing hath been added and nothing taken away (therefrom) *, And He needeth none to give counsel. "All His works are truly lovely, And are ‘like blossoms! to behold®.
ad SoH: (ἃ (cnexactly) ἐπεβλεψεν e-e So ®: (ἃ (¢nexactly) πληρες to epyov αὐτου ff So: G ove ενεποιησεν τοις aytots Kuptos 8-§ $ has ANWIST NMI = ΠΥ 2} mixbp3 (so read with Smend): (ἃ παντὰα τα θαυμασια αὐτου: ® fext Ὁ nrwdDd (dut mn here ottose with ὃν in clause a: probably only a variant on by) ἈΠΕ So yas: (τ (¢aking Pas obs together) Kupos 0 παντοκρατωρ 11 So 38: Gk στηριχθηναι ev δοξῃ αὐτου to παν (bul L> τὸ παν, which τς not orzginal) Jj ἸΏ omnynyo O55): Ge καὶ ev πανουργευμασιν αὐτων k-k 39. pan 11>: G eye yap o Kupios πασαν ειδησιν και ἐνεβλεψεν εἰς σημεῖον arwvos 15 restored in Hebrew by Peters thus:
nyt $5 mm yp oD δον mms bx pan
& attests the two lines also, rendering (freely): ‘for before God nothing is hidden, and there lie revealed before Him all things that come into the world mm ® (reading nvnn mg. for text nv) nvan man Ge ra παρεληλυθοτα καὶ ἐπεσομενα (so 35 which, however, omits mM) ‘He declareth’ at the beginning of line) nn 39) ΠῚ) APN (Apn‘ what is to be explored’, ‘the whole range’: cp. Job xxxviii. 16): G& ἰχνη αποκρυῴφων: & paraphrases: "πὰ there are revealed before Him] all things that are hidden ” 0-0 So 39: (ἃ ‘no thought’ (διανοημα Srv as ἦι xxxv. 18) ‘escapeth Him’ ($ ‘no wisdom’) P-P So ®: & ‘there is not a word hid from Him’: τ ‘word (thing) * $+ ‘of man’ 4.4 39 fext defective: Q mg. NAIA: (ἃ τὰ μεγαλεια της σοφιας αὐτου : read INN N33 rr 10 jan (pont 12H: cp. S ‘standeth fast’): Smend prefers to point j ‘measured off’, ‘regulated’ (ut parallelism favours j2: so Peters): Ge εκοσμησεν jpn ss 2) NIT INN: Gi (B) καὶ ews, os (A 55 248 &c. Sah Lat Arm), ὡς (8 253 &c.) are all corruptions of an original [ και] as= TMS (G+ καὶ εἰς τὸν αἰωνα) tt So Ge: (defective) dyxa wd [Ὑ AO Ν])Ρ (S>21 bed) uu & ws πανταὰ τὰ
16. The rising sun... i.e. just as the sun shines over everything, so the glory of Jahveh is manifest in all His works.
17. God’s holy ones... ‘God’s holy ones’ here = the angels (cp. Job xv. 15). The meaning of the verse is: even the angels are unable to recount God’s wondrous works—they need special strength to be given to them in order to stand in the divine presence. Sinful man can do neither. Cp. xliii. 27-33.
18. He searcheth out the deep and (man’s) heart... i.e. the two inscrutable things. Omniscience = Almighty power (Smend). The word rendered ‘deep’ (3 DTN) recalls the stories of the subduing of the monsters of chaos (Rahab, Leviathan, the demons) by Jahveh as set forth in the old accounts of Creation (cp. e.g. Is. li. 9-10). For our verse cp. Dan. ii. 22 (‘He revealeth the deep and secret things’), Judith viii. 14 (a good parallel), and Job xxxviii. 16.
a Her Jahveh possesseth all knowledge... what cometh unto eternity. For the thought cp. Is. xi. 21 ff, xhii. 9 f.
19. He declareth what is past and what is future... That God knows and reveals to men both the past and the future proves Him to be the controller of history and events—again a thought characteristic of Deutero-Isaiah: cp. also XXxix. 29 in our book.
20. No knowledge is lacking to Him... For the idea cp. Ps. cxxxix. 3f. :
21. Nothing hath been added and nothing taken away (therefrom). i.e. from ‘the might of His wisdom’
And He needeth none to give counsel. Cp. Is. xl. 10, 14.
22. All His works are truly lovely ...like blossoms. The beauty of creation is compared to the loveliness of
flowers. For the text see critical note. The verse is regarded as a gloss by Schlatter (it is absent from 38).
Τὴ 23 ‘Everything liveth and abideth for ever’,
“ And to every need all things respond”. 24 *They are all different, one from the other®*, But He hath not made any one of them ‘superfluous’. 25 *The one exchangeth what is good (in it) with the other’, And who can be satiated with beholding *the beauty®?
(ὁ) XLIIT. 1-26. Recital of the manifestations in Nature of God's might
#@°1 >The beauty of the (heavenly) height is the pure firmament?, ©And the firm heaven® “poureth out light“.
epya αὐτου επιθυμητα καὶ ws σπινθηρὸς ἐστιν θεωρησαι [here the first ὡς ts probably due to assimilation to the second in second clause: so Smend: onwénpos has probably arisen from an original σπινθὴρ os & tanquam scintilla quam (quae): cp. Pelers |: S freely ‘And all His works He establisheth in truth for ever, and in holiness they are all of them praised’. ‘in truth’ 27: clause a ( Π2Ν2) may be right. Perhaps ® of first clause may be restored thus: ywyo 5> oon ΠΣ. Ln clause Ὁ kar ws σπινθηρ os WY P8ID according fo Peters ( ‘and are as a spark which can be seen’). But yrs) 7s probably corrupt. Read ay py yo (Lev? suggests p82): WD) may easily have been corrupted tmlo %33)) vv (ἃ mavta ταῦτα ¢y και μενεῖ εἰς τὸν awva: W (defective) Des 5 soo im Site syd Ty) on NIN: so Smend, Lévi: Peters ( following 61) reads San Jor Sia: B® mg. has ap), thus reading the Line [ΜΝ] DY NIT (Pelers thinks 8 of B a correction for dogmatic reasons). Between this verse (xlii. 23 a) and its next half (23) the Hebr. MS. inserts v.25 and xiii. 1, thus producing the dislocation xiii. 23 a, 25, xliii. 1, xlii. 23 Ὁ, 24, xliii. 2. Ad she top of the next folto the Hebr. MS. has against v. 24 (BND AY ΝΟΥ nm ΠῚ ow obs «ον Ὁ) the following :
aw abn ΠῚ by ΠῚ .
xlii. 25
syon rand pare on)?
any Sy ypn ar asin) Ae mn) wap ony oxy)
thus restoring the right order xiii. 24, 25, xiili. 1 w-w ® (feat damaged) can be read: yous don ibs Pil (3) mg. yrows): (ἃ ev πάσαις xpecas και παντα ὑπακουει (but & places καὶ at beginning WB: so Sah): 5. implies same text, but paraphrases πὶ So 3) (fext): Ge (misunderstanding) ‘All things are double one against another’ (ravra δισσα εν κατεναντι τοῦ evos): SoS (reading Dw for ® ow) Y-Y (ἃ exduvov (B), ελλιπὸν (A): 3 aliquid deesse : ® ..w read ww by Levi, Peters*( ‘He hath not made one of them in vain’). Smend restores [WRw po 2:2 35 (mg. 3) 121 abn mr by ar: G mexactly ‘One thing establisheth (εστερεωσεν) the good things of another’: & ‘but one with the other (forms) pairs’ a-a 30 mg. ANin: G& δοξαν αὐτου ( ‘God’s glory’): S (¢nterpreting rightly) ‘their glory’, ¢.e. ‘ the glory (beauty) of all things (the whole world)’ b-) $>: 38 mg. yp ond ΝΠ ano by: & γαυριαμα vious στερεωμα καθαριοτητος : read (wth Smend) ANY ysp7 DD ASIN ce 35 mg. DW Dy (cp. Exod. xxiv. 10 pwn Dyy>) : (ἃ «ios ovpavov (cp. LXX Exod. xxiv. 10 καὶ womep εἰδος orepewpatos tov oupavov) d-d 35 mg. ΤΣ Ὁ (fo be emended to ya with Bacher: cp. xiii. 2). 38 text has Wn which Peters prefers to keep, reading 177 yy) ‘bursteth with majesty’: Ge ev ὁράματι δοξης (S>1b as well as τ ἃ) 23. Everything liveth and abideth for ever. ® has ‘He (i.e. God) liveth and abideth for ever’ (# mg. DP) is common in NH, but is always applied to God; often in the Synagogue Liturgy). The text as translated (‘everything liveth’, &c.) follows G and 3. It may have been altered for dogmatic reasons in #; so Peters (cp. Smend).
And to every need... Cp. xxxix. 33. : ᾿ : 24. They are all different, one from the other. The rendering of (τ, ‘All things are double one against another’ (see critical note), limits the reference in vv. 22-25 to living organisms that, exist in pairs. But 10 is to ᾿ ἰδ preferred: in the text of 32 the reference is to nature as a whole. νουγίῃηρ is distinct, but yet all things
armonize.
25. The one exchangeth what is good (in it) with the other. ‘All things work together for good.’ There is a constant interchange and mutual dependence.
the beauty. i.e. of the whole of nature.
(6) XLIII. 1-26. THE MAIN Porm.
1-5. God’s power manifested in the firmantent and the sun. : 4 ;
1. The beauty of the (heavenly) height is the pure firmament... There is a clear allusion (cf. 19) to Exod. xxiv. 10 (‘as it were the very heaven for clearness’). The subject of the verse is the firmament, as clause 6 clearly shows: clause a in ® (see critical note) = ‘the beauty of the (heavenly) height is spread upon purity’. This, as it stands, might be interpreted of the sun ; but the context forbids it.
2 ©The sun when he goeth forth maketh heat to shine °— ‘How awe-inspiring is the work of Jahveh'! 3 £At noontide’ he bringeth the world to boiling heat, And before "his scorching (ray) who can maintain himself ? 4 (Like) a glowing furnace which keepeth the casting hot, (So) the sun’s dart setteth the mountains ablaze': iA tongue of flame consumeth the inhabited (world)!, «And with its fire the eye is scorched*. 5!For! great is Jahveh that made him, m And His word maketh His mighty (servant) brilliant™. 6" Moreover, the moon He made for its due season”, ©To rule over periods® and for an everlasting sign :
e-e Sp 3 mg. which reads WON NNT Wa wow (B vext has VI ΜΔ): ὃ yD confirms Bacher’s emendation | in previous clause): (τ ‘The sun when he appeareth bringeth tidings as he goeth forth’ (Atos ev ὁπτασιᾳ διαγγελλων ev εξοδῳ) ® with reading MN8I yD (ANN interpreted by Aram. NON ‘to see’) ff J wy ND 7 (read AWD): (ἃ cKevos θαυμαστὸν epyov ὑψίστου read }2 for MD, giving τί τίς Aram. meaning σκευος &-¢ Lite “when he is at noon-tide’ (ASM: denom. from DIAS) (τ ev μεσημβριᾳ αὐτου (so S$) bh Liz, “his scorching heat ’ (129n) i-i ® ἧς very dificult here (mg. PS8VO) P\¥1) DAD MDI WI kine 1; Line 2: wow (mg. mw) πρὶν on (mg. Pd?) pda: Gr καμινον φυσων (so Ne® A Sah: for the erroneous φυλασσων of BNC &c. 39) ev epyos ; καυματος τριπλασίιως ἥλιος εκκαιων opyn: & ‘AS the furnace which blows in the work of the smith (so) three times ᾿ more doth the sun burn up the mountains’: @& suggests the reading amd, and $ a reading MB (or MBI): | in line 2 both & and 3 wrongly read why Sor πρὶ or mov. A possible restoration ts, perhaps : (vel MB'3) MBI W3 ™ mow psa on ‘ (Like) a smith’s smelting-pot which keepeth the casting hot, (so) the sun’s dart’, &c., or (with the reading mp) of ® text) ‘ Like a glowing furnace which keepeth the casting hot’ (so Smend substantzally) : perhaps DD of ® mg. ( ‘kindleth’) zs right (cp. v. 21). In line 2 mbvi it. ‘what is sent’, z.e. mzsszle, dart, 7s to be preferred. For other possible renderings cp. exeget. nole i ® mg. Ws ned ( aNd): ® text ΠΝ (naw ὍΣΣ the two remaining words in ®): (ἃ (strangely) ατμιδας πυρωδεις εκφυσων (SN AC: but Β &e. ἐμφυσωνὴ ὃ NAW TNO ONY) (Ge zenores WIN): S& k-k 9 py ADM ANI ( ‘fire’ as m Aram.: cp. Dan. iii. 6, &c.): @& ‘And sending forth bright beams he dimmeth the eyes’ (και ἐκλαμπὼν axrivas ΓΝ) : Ge καὶ ev λόγοις αὐτου κατεσπευσεν πορειαν (‘and at His word he hasteneth his course’): Ge ? due fo reminzscence of Ps. xix. 6 (‘the sun rejoiceth as a mighty man to run his course’): so Lévz (so that (ἃ may have read + nas yyw wat): Bacher proposes to read YAN ‘his pinions’: cp. Mal. iii, 20 Hebr. (for the sun's wings): | so Peters, who reads the whole line: ἼΣΩΝ AYP 7373) ‘and at His (Jahveh’s) command he (2 e. the sun) stretcheth (171. ?stirreth up) his pinions’: Smend reads the line: WIN NYY 77) ‘And His word assureth | victory to His mighty servant’ (ἡ δ. to the sun): zs may be right. S$ & (rendering ‘by the words of the Holy ὦ One he hastens his march’) nn ® ext MAW nyny A ny on (BH mg. ny ny and ny sy): Ge καὶ ἡ σεληνὴ ev πασιν εἰς καιρὸν autns (248 και σεληνὴν εποιησεν εἰς στασιν [ev πασιν of B, &c., corrupt for eromcer): hence Peters restores: yny> ΠΡ AY DN (so read): Smend reads: ny ny ΤΠ ΠῚ" Δ) Κ᾿ Moreover, the moon shines from season
ae κρίνον "δ: <
πα υσυσς, τννουν τος στοῶν
2. The sun... maketh heat to shine. (& here (= R.V.) has misunderstood the text; see critical note.
3. And before his scorching ... who can... Cp. Ps. xix. 7 (‘there is nothing hid from the heat thereof’). The sentence may be modelled on Nahum i. 6 (‘ Who can stand before His indignation ?’) |
4. (Like) a glowing furnace which keepeth the casting hot, (So) the sun’s dart setteth the mountains ablaze. ᾿ The ‘glowing furnace’ (lit. ‘furnace blown upon’, i.e. to maintain the flame and heat ; for the expression cp. Jer. i. 13) | keeps the metal-casting in a fluid state by its great heat ; in the same way the sun’s dart (lit. ‘what is sent’, ‘ projection’) I sets the mountains ablaze with its great heat. This rendering and explanation of the difficult text agrees with that of ᾿ Ryssel and Smend ; Peters less probably : ‘A furnace glows with imprisoned heat; the sun, let loose, sets the mountains ablaze.’ This does not yield a good comparison; and the same remark applies to other renderings (collected by Lévi).
5. And His word maketh His mighty (servant) brilliant. His ‘mighty servant’ is, of course, the sun, the most wonderful and impressive object in creation, according to ancient conceptions. The creator of such an overwhelming |, source of power must Himself be all-powerful. For the alternative renderings see critical notes. In the preceding Ϊ description a vivid sense of the searching heat of the Oriental sun is apparent.
6-8. The Moon. As Edersheim has pointed out, the moon occupied an all-important place in the ancient world, and more especially among the Jews, in the reckoning of time. The year was—and is—calculated among them bythe } moon. Their festal calendar is also arranged on a lunar basis. Consequently the determination of the new moon—by observation—was a highly important matter for the Jewish communities. Symbolically the moon in the Haggada represents Israel (the moon is in the sky both by night and by day): while the sun, visible by day only, stands for the ' Gentiles, and so on.
6. Moreover, the moon He made for its due season. # text has: ‘ Moreover, moon by moon the seasons return zs which can hardly be right. ]
To rule over periods. Cp. Gen. i. 16, 18. The Hebr. word rendered ‘ period’ (}*P) strictly ‘end’, and is used | of time in Neo-Hebr.: the determining point which marks the end of a period of time (long or short). In Apocalyptic it bears a technical sense.
7 PBy her (are determined) the feasts and times prescribed ”, 1A light-giver waning with her course": 8*Month by month she reneweth herself*— How wonderful is she in her changing ! *The army-signal of the cloud-vessels on high®, 'She paveth the firmament with her shining’,
9"The beauty of heaven, and the glory, are the stars", vy And a gleaming ornament’ Win the heights” of God. το * At the word of the Holy One* *they take their prescribed place’, z And they sleep not? at their watches. tr Behold the rainbow and bless its Maker, @For* Pit is majestic exceedingly in majesty”: 12 ¢Jt encompasseth the (heavenly) vault with its glory’, And the hand of God hath spread it out ‘in pride®. 13 His might® ‘marketh out the lightning‘, sAnd maketh brilliant "the flashes of His judgement®.
to season’ c-o ® yp nbwnr (ἃ avaderEw χρονων ( free rendering) PP So ® text (read with mg. 13) O3 Pn wo Iyw: WH mg. pin 332) Tw 12 ‘by her is the appointed feast and from her is the prescribed ordinance’: (ἃ azo σεληνης σημειον εορτης : S CG. Smend reads yn and Peters ΓΛ at beginning of line τα So Ge φωστηρ pecoupevos exe συντελείας (3 G) N]PNI HY YW (s0 Peters reads) : 38 wp pn3 ον)» yom ?‘and the good pleasure of her Maker by her circuit’ (Smend proposes an impossible restoration ADY yD 73) tr So 35 xt: Qmg. winnd si) ww> win (‘the new moon is like its name in that it reneweth itself’) Gk μην κατα To ονομα αὑτῆς avEavopevn (2 from an original avaveopern: 50 Lévt) this reading ts a good variant on that of text ss ® ony ΟΣ) way v2 (cp. Job xxxviii. 37): (ἃ σκεῦος παραβολων ev ὑψει B wrth 33 omitted : S$G tt ® ana pypr Aya: G ev orepewpare ovpavov exrayrov ? 357 with suppression of the obscure WI (9 (ἃ with particip. at beginning) u-u So ® 339 WT DMW NIN (31D collective: or ὃ read D221) $ (which has ‘stars ἢ : Gk καλλοὸς ovpavov δοξα αστρων Y-V & κοσμος φωτιζων 38 mg. PWD AY) (ἡ. 6. Paw /prv ‘to be bright red,’ ‘shine’): % δεν MAND YN) (‘and her light shining ’) W-W So ® “ext, (so Peters) y-¥ So G& ornoovra κατα κριμα Pn Wy (so read with Smend): Ἰῃ pn Wy" 2-% Of καὶ ov μη ἐκλυθωσιν : ® fext nvr xdy (1. 4. 3NW. ‘collapse,’ ‘sink down’: cp. Lam. iii. 20, Qer’): 38 mg. wr (read ww ‘sleep [not]’: so S which misunderstood 13, taking it from nw ‘to change’) a-a FD: > bb ® (72) MINI WW: so Levi, Peters: Ce cpodpa wpaoy ev τῳ αὐγασματι αὐτου (3ῃ mg. AI for ΠΝ) ce ® AMIDA ADA (1. yn) W & dd Reading \wi1: G&> (encorrecily) e-e So ® (2) : (ἃ προσ- τάγματι αὐτου ( ? IN Yi: so Smend reads) ἘΠ So ® pra mn: & κατεσπευσεν (so Bab AC &c. WH: κατεπαιῖσε in B* N* 248 &c. ws a mistake) χιονα (ἢ xwova corrupted from yxepwva): G& misunderstood AYN as a syn. of ΓΤ ( ταχύνει 771 Ot) 771 next line ὅτ ® myo): (ἃ και ταχυνει (cp. τ΄. 5 Kareorevoer) h-h (τ aorparas Κριματος αὐτου ( ἢ DEW NIP or, possibly, HWA): Bvext...... Mpy nym) (HM mg. for the whole verse :
ἽΡΞ ANN anya) ze. ‘His rebuke maketh signs in the morning, “ὯΔ Dyp’ non) And rejecteth what exists in judgement’:
but pra and nyin) are better readings: ΡΟ also seems to be a corruption from OP (Prov. xxvi. 18) or nip
7. times prescribed. ‘dates légales’ (Lévi). 8. Month by month. Cp. Isa. Ixiii. 23 (same phrase). Note the variant to this line (cp. R.V.): see critical note. _ The word-play in 38 is marked.
The army-signal (or beacon) of the cloud-vessels on high. The reference is to the fire-signal or beacon which in front of the camp or army serves to control and direct its movements. Edersheim refers to the haggadic story that the moon, because she had humbled herself to rule only by night, was, by God’s appointment, to be attended by the Stars as a retinue, both when she rose and when she went down. For ‘cloud-vessels’ (lit. ‘ water-skins * [of heaven] ‘clouds’) cp. Job xxxviii. 37. Peters conjectures ‘ giants’ (δ) for 22) ‘cloud-vessels’) and renders the whole line : ‘Weapons against the host of the giants on high’ (the giants here = the stars as opposed to the moon).
9-10. The Stars. 9. in the heights of God. Cp. Job xxv. 2. Io. At the word... prescribed place. Cp. Ps. cxix. 91. they sleep not... Cp. Baruch iii. 34 (‘And the stars shined in their watches, and were glad; when He called them, they said, Here we are,’ &c.). 13-176. The Storm. The storm-piece in Ps. xxix should be compared. As Smend remarks, the genuine Jewish
14 1On that account! jHe hath created a treasure-housej, k And He maketh the clouds fly like birds*. 15 'By His mighty power He maketh strong the clouds, And the hailstones are broken! 17 @mHis thunder’s voice maketh His earth to be in anguish™, 16a ™And by His strength™ °He shaketh mountains°®. τό ὁ The terror of Him stirreth up the south wind?, 174 4The whirlwind of the north‘, hurricane, and tempest’ ; ’Like flocks of birds He sheddeth abroad ‘ His snow’, «And like settling locusts" Yis the fall thereof’.
(Is. 1. 12): [P1 ‘fiery arrow, brand, or spark’). Dawa may be right) i 30 mg. yynd & (ἢ text 1105) J Haw Na: (ἃ ( freely) ηνεῳχθησαν θησαυροι HIE τ noo Fy: (ἃ καὶ εξεπτησαν νεῴελαι ws πετεινὰ AWD py Ay (Lev): merewa Fw im v. τῇ ο, [Peters reads ry] rl So τ: Peters restores ®: 3732 ΣΝ 3w Ay ΡΠ anya. [75 certain Greek MLSS. the order of the clauses of vv. 16-17 15 confused (as in Swete) ; the first line of v. 17 (47 a) ἐς wrongly placed. it should precede 16a and Ὁ: thus the right order ts 17a, 16ab, 17 bed. The translation in text above gives the correct order, though retaining the Greek numbering of the verses | mm 39. fext has this line (tt omits the two following lines = 16ab) in the following form: avon diny ἸΌΝ bp: ® mg. supplies the missing clauses, together with 17 a:
yan bn yoy Sap (17 a) DT Dy ἹΠῚ22Ὶ (16 2)| this order vs also found in certain MSS. mayor mario Siydy (17 »)|
For Sm & (original reading) has wduncev (so Sah &c. allered to ovadioev i» BNC 7ο 106 157 &c.) nn # mg. W)I3): (ἃ καὶ ev οπτασιᾳ αὐτου ( Pa different reading: ἢ ἸΓ ΤΙ.) o-o 35 mg. DT Oy ‘He maketh mountains indignant’: (ἃ σαλευθησεται opn ( DN Dt): read, perhaps, DAN yy P-v So 38 mg. (above): Ge ‘at His will the south wind will blow’ (ev θεληματι αὐτου πνευσεται vores, P reading YON or NIN: probably & did not understand ®) a-a So 35 “εχ poly npeydt (Zit. ‘heats of the north’) (ἃ καταιγις Bopeou : ® mg. Syyby ( ‘storm, whirlwind’: Aram. and Neo-Hebr.: cp. also Job xxxvi. 33, where mbyy-by should probably be read mbippy ‘His storm ἐὴ) : read mg. τοῦ 10 AIYD ADD: (ἃ καὶ συστροφη πνευματος ( ΠῚ" n51D)) Ss ® mg. WIAD: G ὡς πετεινὰ καθιπταμενα tt So: (ἃ χιονα una 39 fw" AIAN): Gk καὶ ws axpis καταλυούσα VV So 35 mg. & ww 18 mad 3y1n (this may be read mad ‘its whiteness ᾽) = @& καλλος λευκότητος αὑτῆς
view of nature is reflected throughout. Every storm may be regarded as in a sense a foretaste and anticipation of the world-judgement.
14. On that account. i.e. on account of His judgement.
He hath created a treasure-house. ( suggests the reading ‘the treasure-house is opened’ (reading YP2) or Ypa” for 811). This certainly accords well with the context. God's treasure-house (or houses), containing the winds, storm, &c., is opened, and the storm let loose: cp. Job xxxviii. 22 (‘treasuries of snow... hail’) ; Deut. xxviii. 12 (‘J. shall open unto thee His good treasury, the heaven to give thee rain,’ &c.); Jer. li. 16 (‘ When He uttereth His voice... He maketh lightnings...and bringeth forth the wind out of His treasuries’) ; cp. also xxxix. 30 of our book. There is a reference to the treasuries of snow, hail, &c., and the chamber of the whirlwind and the storm in 7. 8. Chagigah 12 ὁ. like birds. Cp. 17 ¢ (‘like flocks of birds’), The Hebr. word here used (5/1) probably = ‘birds’ (so &) both
in this chapter (625), and also in Deut. xxxil. 24 Θ ὄρνεις LXX, aves Vulg.) and Job v. 7 (AW) 32 in LXX νεοσσοὶ γυπῶν) ; possibly also in Ps. xxviii. 48, D°DW72 = ‘to the vultures’ (so it is explained in Exod. γαῤῥαλ, § 12, in reference to the Psalm passage): ‘7ésha@fim means birds of prey’ (M)D\YN \N TDWI). The more common meaning of the word is ‘flame’, ‘spark’. The conception of the clouds pictured as flying birds of prey may be due to mythological associations; cp. Ps. xviii, 10 (‘And He rode upon a cherub, and did fly eagle-like upon the wings of the wind’).
15. By His mighty power He maketh strong the clouds, And the hailstones are broken. ‘ On the one hand, the light and elastic particles of cloud are combined into heavy masses; and, on the other, solid blocks of ice are splintered into hailstones’ (Edersheim).
ne His thunder’s voice... anguish. A reminiscence of Ps. xxix. 8 (‘ The voice of J. bringeth anguish upon the wilderness’).
16 ὁ. The terror of Him stirreth up the south wind. Cp. Ps. Ixxviii. 26.
17 6. The whirlwind of the north. So ® mg. (f5¥ Syyby), 38 text has ‘the hot north winds’ (/)D¥ mayb, |
lit. ‘the heats of the north’) ; cp. Ps. xi. 6, ‘a glowing wind,’ i.e. the sirocco. But this does not suit the north, which | was a cold wind. 7
17 ¢c-22. Snow, hoar-frost, ice. ᾿ 17¢, Like flocks of birds. For this rendering cp. note on 142 above. Cowley-Neubauer render ‘like darting flashes’.
sheddeth abroad (18 ἢ"}}»). Cp. Ps. Ixviii. 9 (10), of rain (same Hebr. word). 17d. the fall thereof. Cp. Num. xi. 9.
18 “The beauty of the whiteness” *!dazzleth! the eyes*,
And the heart ¥'marvelleth)¥ at the raining thereof.
19 The hoar-frost also *He poureth out? like salt,
ΓΑ Πα maketh the crystals sparkle! like sapphire*.
20The icy blast of the north wind He causeth to blow?,
° And hardeneth the pond like a bottle’.
Over every basin of water “He spreadeth a crust®,
And the pond putteth on as it were a breastplate.
21 “It burneth up the produce of the mountains as a drought’, ‘And the sprouting pasture as a flame.
228A healing for all such is the distillation of the clouds®,
"Even the dew, alighting to bring refreshment after heat}.
23 ‘By His counsel! i He hath stilled the deepj,
And hath planted* !the islands! in the ocean.
© ® text Dy NAY (Ὁ read ὙΠ)" " dazzleth’ [Syr. tox,: “4767 ‘to blind’, of the sun]: or read nN " dim’): (ἃ ἐκθαυμάσει οῴθαλμος (Ὁ reading ADM and wrongly making yy subject of verb): WB mg. mn ( ὃ ‘remove, take away’: cp. Prov. xxv. 4, 5) ΣῪ Read with & (εκστησεται) MIN: W AN (‘is disquieted ’ ?) zz So 30 meg. Tae” Ge ἐπὶ γης χέει (ἐπὶ ys an explanatory addition): W text ἸῸΝ (copyist’s mistake under influence of τὴ ἃ) aa ® ὌΝΩΝ W|ADD psn (‘And maketh it to bloom with flowers like sapphire,’ Cozvley-Neub.): emend with Peters DIS WDDI py» ( /ranslation given above in text): G& ‘and when it is congealed it is as points of thorns’ (και παγεισα γίνεται σκολοπὼν axpa: the last three words ? DI DYDD). Ln emended text ys 7s Lif. of y8) ‘sparkle’: cp. Ezek. i. 7 (o°2¥ ‘thorns’ 11) bob ® Dw pay mo ny (ΤῸΝ = nay from may
‘cold’: the word-play confirms ὌΝ in previous verse): ἾΗ & ‘the cold north wind shall blow’ (reading iW jor 3) ce Reading with Q mg. WIPO NDP’ API’ ( αὶ has wypo 1.6. NP: aip ‘cold’: Gen.
Vili. 22): (ἃ καὶ παγησεται κρυσταλλὺς ep (so Syro-Hex 307 &c. Sah &c.: dut B ap) υδατος APD NDP npr [n4p “ice” κρυσταλλος Ezek. i. 22 2 LXX]. 277 Aram. apy ‘ bottle’ prodadly in Job xiii, 28. Wellhausen and Bacher conjecture ΝΣ (‘and like a metal-plate’): Smend suggests DAp2 ( Aram. NDP ‘skin’, ‘covering’, “surface ’) 4-ἃ 12 op (Qal occurs Ezek. xxxvii. 6, 8): (ἃ καταλυσει ( ? DIP) ee ® pw’ 3qn3 ann bya): Gr καταφαγεται opn και ερημον εκκαυσει ( Pe ann) On yba) Ff 3 fx? onoy mA (cp. ΝΟΣ ms Ps. xxiii. 2): mg. has ἫΝ ‘form’ (Ps. xlix. 15) or ‘rock’: G& καὶ amooBeree χλοην ") ΠῚ) s-s So ® ὯΝ Fy 55 NBD: ὅπ wacts παυτῶν κατα σπουδὴν ομιχλὴ (P reading ὩΣ for 573) bh 19 wind ya by (m. 2) δ᾽: Ge dpocos amavrwaa amo Kavowvos ‘apace (Sa dew coming after heat shall bring cheerfulness’ R.V.) ? reading yap for yb (so Peters emends) and (?) TWO for Δ γ᾽ : read WD wid ye by " Even the dew, alighting to bring refreshment (or enrichment) after heat’. 30 /ex/ ΝΒ vs dificult: ? ‘hastening’ (Aram. sense YB: ‘hastening to revive’) i G& λογισμῳ avrov InaWNNA (so read): ἸΏ wnawnn, Q mg. naw» (? ‘from His quietness ’) 11 ® nr ρῶν") (Lev pre [2]) ? ‘overpowereth the deep’ (but Hif. of ΡΩΝ does not otherwise occur): Lév’ ‘he maketh an arsenal of’ (pws denom. from PW): Ek ἐκοπασεν αβυσσον (A yppwa: so read with Peters). 77 ts determined by own in next clause ( 727 AN): Smend alters unnecessarily to IN kK (ἃ και εφυτευσεν = yo (50 read): HO: (Bacher proposes Sey ‘and uplifteth islands’
18. The beauty of the whiteness. Or ‘of its whiteness’ (i.e. the snow’s whiteness) ; see critical note. 19. The hoar-frost ... like salt. Cp. Ps. cxlvii./6 (‘like ashes’). Cp. Ps. cxlvii. 16-17 for vv. 17-19 generally. , And maketh the crystals sparkle like sapphire. The sapphire, as Peters remarks, besides blue, flashes with other colours, such as red, green, &c. The sense is: God makes the crystals of the frost sparkle with all sorts of colours. For the comparison to sapphires cp. Lam. iv. 7; Cant. v. 14. For & see critical note. [For ® text ‘And maketh it to bloom with flowers like sapphires,’ cp. Num. xvii. 8 ( 23 in Hebr. text).] 20. The icy blast. Lit. ‘the cold’ (cp. 73 Prov. xxv. 13). like a bottle. For this rendering see critical note. [In Joshua iii. 16 1] = ‘heap’ (cf waters) 1s rendered
N3pY) in the Targum (Strack) : cp.? 1)) = ‘bottle ’.] For the conjectured alternatives see critical note.
as it were a breastplate. Cp. Isa. lix. 17. ᾿ ᾿ ᾿ 21. It burneth up the produce of the mountains as a drought. ‘It’=the north wind. The cold of the north wind . is as destructive in its ravages as the heat of the east wind (sirocco). For ‘ produce of the mountains cp. Job xl. 20. 22. A healing... distillation of the clouds. For the expression (‘distillation’) cp. Deut. xxxii. 28.
Even the dew, alighting to bring refreshment after heat. ‘ Dew’ (50) and ‘heat’ (AW = ‘dry heat’ in VH)
are contrasted : in VH ‘the time of dry heat’ (117 NyW), i.e. noon-day, is opposed to ‘the time of dew’ (bon ny). 23-26. The Sea. The passage shows reminiscences of Ps. civ. 25 ff. : ν 23. By His counsel He hath stilled the deep. One of the mightiest evidences of Jahveh’s power is that He tamed monsters of the deep; cp. Job ix. 13, xxvi. 12 (some scholars would read *‘Rahab "in our passage for * deep’).
And hath planted the islands in the ocean. Apparently Ben-Sira shared the belief that the islands in the sea arose as the result of Jahveh’s conflict with the dragon of the sea (Tiamat, Rahab). When the sea was overcome and sank, the islands appeared.
24 They that go down to the sea tell of ™its extent”,
n And® when our ears hear it we are astonished. 25 Therein are marvels, the most wondrous of His works,
° All kinds of living things®, ?and the monsters of Rahab?. 26 By reason of Him “'business! prospereth4,
And at His word 'what He wills is done’.
27 *More like this we will not add’, And tthe conclusion of the matter’ is: He is all. 28 "We will sing praises, because we cannot fathom" ; ’For greater is He’ than all His works. 29 Terrible is Jahveh “exceedingly”, * And wonderful are His mighty acts*. 30%Ye that magnify Jahveh, 7lift up your voice’, As much as ye can®, "for there is still more °Ye that exalt Him’, “renew your strength‘, And weary not, °for ye cannot fathom (Him)°!
which has been corrupted into Inoovs in BRAC Eth &c. mm So 30 \nyp (‘its bounds’: /7. ‘its end’): Ge τὸν κινδυνον avrns (2 interpreting: Lévt suggests that (ἃ read \ns8) nn G+ καὶ (so read): Y> 0-0 35 an] b> PD (ἃ ποικιλία παντὸς ζῳου Ρτρ 35 739 NII: G κτισις κητων (WAC κτησις κτηνων): κητὸς ΠῚ
Job xxvi. 12 2 LXX: nyn133 20 be taken in a concrete sense (cp. Isa. iii. 25: JWI o ἐσχύοντες ὑμων : Pelers) 1-4 ® ἼΝΟΡ nby)evoda ο ἀγγελος αὐτου (Cod. 248): Β &c. evadia τελος αὐτου (τελος arose from ἈΠΠΈΕΙΟΒ mzsread ATELOS): Ὁ read noxbdi ‘ work, business’ (= mond wy Ps. cvii. 24) mr 39) yy Sym ( potnt bye): Gk συνκειται παντα ss % AD NO ΠΌΝΘ ny: G& ‘we may say many things yet shall we not attain’ (πολλα
ἐρουμεν kar ov μὴ αφικωμεθαὴ, 2. ὁ. reading ἢ) xb) and interpreting this to mean ‘to attain the end’ (ΠῚ : φῴ. Dan. iv. 30): /hen # would = ‘even more things like these (we might say) and not attain the end’ (so Smend):
an excellent sense, and suiting the next clause admirably: but \D3 ts doubtful tt 39 7390 yp: G& συντελεια λογων u-u 315 pnd xb 3 Ty (mg. nd33) nb[sa]: (ἃ δοξαζοντες που ισχυσωμεν ; VPNI xb 3 n5323 (xd | rendered by rhetorical question) : so read with Peters: Wy probably intruded into ® text here from previous line ( mg. ΠΟ.) Ὁ ΤΌΣ) “we will exult’) v-v 320 Syty NM: Ge αὐτὸς yap o peyas wow ἸΏ ND IND]: (τ ( freely) και opodpa peyas xx ® fext 37 mydan (® mg. wnN23 read YNINII, pl. demanded by nixbp3): G καὶ θαυμαστὴ ἡ δυναστεια αὐτου emended text (δυναστεια ΓΔ xv. 18) y here in ἸΏ four distichs are compressed tnto two lines: cp. χὶν. 26, xlvi. 17 Ὁ foll. in same Hebr. MS. (B) 2-2 ® Sy wenn: & (abbreviating) ὑψώσατε a-a 15 5). 523 = G& καθ οσον av δυνησθε b-b 359 ἫΝ wD: Ge freely ‘for even yet will He exceed’ (υπερεξει yap kat ert) c-e ® OMI: Ce καὶ (L>xar) ὑψουντες avrov: read with ἸΏ mg. yD (so Peters, Smend) d-d 39 ma dn: Ge πληθυνατε ev ἰσχυι ee 39 mg. [pn ΝΟ 5: (ἃ d/ranslates yapnn by
the same word as §D\) (=? D2) 7 Ὁ. 27 above, viz. [οὐ yap μη] αφικησθε tf Wy (defect.) ΠΌΝΟ. νυ νων ὃ mm
24. They that go down to the sea. Cp. Ps. cvii. 23 (same phrase).
25. Therein are marvels... This and the following verses reflect the phraseology of Ps. cvii. 23f. ‘Therein’ (ov) may be due to Ps. civ. 25 (which passage has also influenced Ben-Sira here).
26. business. A reminiscence, perhaps, of the phrase ‘they that do business in great waters’ (Ps. cvii. 23), and so to be interpreted here (Lévi). Cp. Wisd. xiv. 2f. (the vessel sailing for trade). The alternative rendering (cp. # text), “by reason of Him angels prosper’ (i.e. in their various missions, which are controlled by God), introduces a more gener. thought, which not inappropriately concludes the section (cp. also clause 4). It should be noted also that the angels, as God’s ministers, are referred to in the Psalm (civ) which is in the author’s mind here (‘who maketh His angels of the winds, His ministers of the flaming fire’, v. 4).
(ὦ XLIII. 27-33. CONCLUSION (CP. THE EXORDIUM, xlii. 15-25).
27. More like this we will not add. The sense is rather lame. Note the alternative reading : ‘ Even more such things we might say and not attain the end,’ i.e. fail to exhaust the catalogue of God’s mighty works—an excellent sense.
And the conclusion of the matter is: He is all. For the phraseology cp. Eccles. xii. 12, 13. The originality of this clause is guaranteed by 38, though it sounds very Hellenistic, and, in fact, was regarded by Dr. Edersheim as ‘evidently a spurious addition by the younger Siracide’.. The whole context shows that the words must not be interpreted in a pantheistic sense, though, taken alone, they might be so interpreted. What Ben-Sira means is that God is manifest in all His works (cp. & ‘ipse est in omnibus’): cp. Col. i. 17 f.; Heb. i. 3.
28. We will sing praises (lit. magnify) ... all His works. Cp. Ps. cxlv. 3.
29. Terrible is Jahveh... Cp. Ps. xcvi. 4f.
30. renew your strength. Cp. Is. xl. 31, xli. 1.
31 Who hath seen Him, that he may tell thereof? And who shall magnify Him as he is?
32‘ The number of things mysterious is greater (even) than these‘, sAnd I have seen (but) few’ of His works.
33 "Everything hath Jahveh made,
‘And to the pious hath He given wisdomi,
iPraise of the fathers of oldi. (a) XLIV. 1-15. General introduction (=2+7+3+3+3 distichs). *Let me now hymn the praises* !of men of piety!, ™QOf our fathers™ in their generations.
2™No little glory™ did the Most High °allot® them, P And they were great? “from the days of old®:
Cz πολλα aroxpupa εστιν μειζονα τουτων: read πον [δγ ΓΛ ΠΟ 1) 2. (so Peters) 8- 9 NNT Oy: G+ γαρ (odrya yap κτλ.) hh 30 Son DN: (ἃ παντὰ yap Hi SoG: 38 (defective) [ADIN in3 pron) i The title appears as a superscription in ®: DY MANX Nw, and in G& as πατερων vpvos (but Codd. 23 [V] 106 252 and Complut.>): tt rs probably not original Καὶ 1 yo mdSaN: G& αἰνεσωμεν δὴ 1] ® son ὌΝ ὅ: (ἃ adpas evdo€ous ( ἢ NAD ‘WIN — 33? tnfluenced by 2a: buf WIN according to Peters, who so reads) indy nbn of ® text & has simply ‘He hath appointed to them’ ὃ pm y pdm: so Peters reads + mn | pp ® yaa) 7. 6. 1; but Cx την μεγαλωσυνὴν αὐτου = on : so Peters reads γ51}) — lig No little glory did the Most High allot them] and His greatness’ ($ ‘and all their greatness Ἢ a-a ® ody mo: (ἃ ( freely) am αἰωνος : 85. ‘to
31. Who hath seen Him... Only extant in (πὰ (# omits). The verse is regarded as a gloss by Ryssel (cp.
32. The number of things mysterious (hidden)... Cp. xvi. 21. Κα
33. Everything... God has created all things; true wisdom consists in the fear of God (piety)—the two chief affirmations of the Jewish faith.
Chapters XLIV—XLIX form a well-knit and distinct division of the book, having for their theme the praise of the fathers of old. The heroes enumerated range from Enoch to Nehemiah (in a series of well-defined sections), The connexion with the preceding division is a natural one; God, whose glory is manifest in the mighty forces and phenomena of the natural world (xliii), is also worthy of praise both for and in the lives of the great heroes and pious men that shine through history. An appendix (]. 1-24) sets forth the praise of the high-priest Simon, who can hardly be reckoned, as Smend points out, with the fathers of old. 1 he ᾿ ἢ
The whole forms a historical retrospect of Israel’s history from the earliest age; cp. similar surveys in the O.T. in Psalms Ixxviii, cv, cvi, cxxxv, cxxxvi, and Ezek. xx; in the apocryphal literature, Wisdom x ff., 1 Macc. li. 51-60 ; and in the N.T., Heb. xi, &c. The subject throughout is Israel, regarded as the chosen and truly representative race. All that is best and highest in humanity is reflected in the Israelitish race, and comes to glorious expression in the long line of patriarchs, pious kings, heroes, prophets, and teachers, which stretches from the beginnings of history.
Ben-Sira lays special emphasis on the duty and privilege of the community to remember the pious of the past (cp. xliv. 9, 13, 15, xlv. 1, xlvi. 11, xlix. 1, 9, 13). He also lays stress upon the splendour of the cultus as the visible expression of Israel’s unique relation to God. Thus Moses is subordinated to Aaron in importance, and David’s greatest glory is that he was the founder of the Temple music and psalmody (xlvii. 8-10). This is all the more remarkable, as Ben-Sira was inclined, if anything, to depreciate the efficacy of sacrifices fer se. Throughout Ben-Sira closely follows the narrative given in the canonical Scriptures, and reminiscences of scriptural phraseology are of frequent occurrence. It is clear that he values highly the written word (cp. xlviii. 10 = Mal. iil. 23, 24), which he obviously regards as among the most precious possessions of the chosen community of God. _ It is interesting to note, in this connexion, that the author shows clear indications of acquaintance not only with the Law (Pentateuch) and the Prophets (including Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings), but also with Chronicles (xlvii. 8 ff.), Nehemiah (xlix. 13), the Psalms (xliv. 5, xlvii. 8 ff.), Proverbs (xliv. 5, xlvii. 17), Job (xlix. 9), and perhaps Ecclesiastes (Qoheleth) (xlvil. 23). No allusion is made to Daniel, which was not yet extant when the author wrote; and it is uncertain whether Ruth, Lamentations, and Canticles were yet regarded as sacred Scripture, as he makes no clear allusion to any of them.
The whole forms a carefully articulated composition, falling into strophes, and consisting of 211 distichs.
(a) XLIV. 1-15 forms an introductory section to the enumeration that follows, setting forth, in general terms and under twelve categories, the different classes of eminence into which Israel’s heroes fall. The reference is to Israel only, and does not include the heathen (see on vv. 3-6). [The title is extant in 30 and G, but is absent from certain Greek MSS. (see critical note). It is probably secondary, though the possibility remains that it may be an original feature due to the author (so Smend); Peters thinks it original in the form ‘ Praise of the Fathers’ (omitting ‘of old
I. men of piety. So (probably rightly). It is piety in its broadest sense of duty rendered to God that Ben-Sira sees manifested in various types of character and achievement. For the alternative reading (‘famous men’) see
in their generations. i.e. in chronological order.
3 (Men) who wielded dominion’ over the earth *in their royalty’, And men of renown in ‘their’ might ; "Counsellors" in their discernment, v And all-seeing in their prophetic (power)” ; 4 Princes of nations *in their statesmanship*%, y And (trusted) leaders in their penetration’ ; “Clever of speech” *in their (scribal) instruction *, >And speakers of wise sayings in their tradition” ;
eternal generations ’ HT 30 mg. PAX WA: G& κυριεύοντες [S>v. 3. ἃ Ὁ ο] =s% ὨΠΊΞΟΙΩΣ : & ev ras βασιλειαις αὐτῶν ὑπὸ > ther uu 38 mg. ΝΜ" (Ώ text + article) : (ἃ βουλευοντες (65 106 155 157 248 254 Compl.: v./. βουλευταὶ 296 308 Eth: she βουλευσονται of B is a mastake for βουλευοντες): “x | prudentia
sua] praediti γτν # Dnsi23 53 nm (cp. $5 mn xv. 18): Ge amnyyedkores ev προφητειαις (Jul 8* 155 253 308 &c. and H+ev προφηταις), misreading NM as MIN and omitting b3: p. d‘ And they declared by their prophecies signs’ w-w 10 Dy IY: Ge ἡγούμενοι Aaov: S ‘and kings’ (ome/ing Ὁ 10 avoid reference to heathen: so Peters) x-x ® ono. (‘in their prudence,’ Cowley-Neub.) S: (ἃ ev διαβουλίοις yy 18 onipnna Ds: S>: Ok και εν (so 248 ἄς. Sah Eth: bul B ἄς. > εν) συνεσει γραμματειας (x γραμματειαῖς : Sah Eth γραμματεις)ὴ λαου ? ONIN ὮΝ 3) z-2 1η mw wIn Ek codor λογοι (? or7ginally λογῳ: note variants λόγοις 296, εν Noyas A &c.): S ‘the wise taught’ a-a 32 ὩΠΊΒΟΞ (cp. Weo-Hebr. ΠΥ ΒΟ ‘ offic of scribe’): ® mg. has “DIDI te. 77D or DIDMZ (Job xxxiii. 16) or DIDWR= & ev παιδειᾳ avrov: 86 ‘in their wisdom ’ b-b ® ὈΠῚ 05 adv: G> : S (combining 4d and 5a) ‘And the rulers have explored their praises on lutes and harps’. or other possible renderings of ἸΏ cp. exeget. notes. Bacher emends second
word fo ono ( ‘in their parables ’) e-e 30 pin by ὙΠ pI (ποίο the word-play: PN... .. 7PM) (‘who sought out music according to rule,’ Cow/ley-Meub.): Gk εκζητουντες pen μουσικὼν (2gnoring Pn by: cp. XXxii. [xxxv.] 6 where “912 bip is rendered μελος μουσικων) d-d Ὡπ53 Sep ἽΝΌΝΣ (+) wth best MSS. of &: και διηγουμενοι ἐπὴ εν γραφῃ) e-e 35 bn WN Ok ανδρες πλουσιοι ἘΓῚΒ ΓΞ "5 Ὶ : read "ὩΣ ὩΟῚ Uk και (so 155: others > ) KEXOPNYLEVOL ἰσχυι s-8 38 ὩΣ) ὃν ὉΣΡῚΦῚ Ξξ (ἃ ( point hab) ta) G& ev παροικιαις αὐτωνῚ
3-6 (7). Twelve categories of men are here enumerated (for the number twelve in such a connexion cp. xxiv. 13-17 and 1. 6-10); of men who ‘ were honoured in their generation and in their days had glory’ (v. 7; it should be noticed that vv. 1-7 form a single logical period). It is then stated (vv. 8 and 9) that some of these have left a name which deserves to be honoured and remembered, while others have left no memorial. In other words, some were pious, and are remembered as such by posterity (the enumeration of these is introduced in v. 10), while others were not, and are deservedly forgotten (v. 9). Lévi and Ryssel think that the reference in vv. 3-6 is to heathen heroes—the great men of the pagan world—conquerors, warriors, counsellors, poets, writers, ἅς. ; and that Ben-Sira draws a deliberate contrast between these and the heroes of Israel. The former are only partly remembered by their own people, while the memory of the pious in Israel never fades. But the terms of v. 3d (ref. to the prophets) and v. 4c, d (ref. to the scribes) can hardly be made to apply to the heathen ; and it is doubtful whether Ben-Sira would have reckoned any heathen heroes among the truly pious. The terms used can all be applied more naturally to the heroes and great men of Israel. The absence of any specific mention of priests in these verses may be explained by supposing that Ben-Sira intends to include them among the princes and teachers.
3. (Men) who wielded dominion ...of renown... Rulers like David and Solomon and warriors like Joshua are meant.
Counsellors... all-seeing in their prophetic (power). i.e. such men as Elisha and Isaiah, who were at once counsellors of the nation and prophets.
4. Princes of nations in their statesmanship (lit. in their devising), And (trusted) leaders (or potentates). ‘Princes of nations’ such as Joseph (a viceroy); leaders of Israel (‘trusted leaders’) like Zerubbabel and Nehemiah. misunderstands 4 ὁ (rendering, according to the probable original Greek text, ‘scribes of the people in understanding’ (see critical note); ‘scribes of the people’ DY OW; cp. for the expression 1 Macc. v. 42). The Hebrew word rendered ‘in their penetration’ (ANI7PMD2 lit. ‘in their searchings out’) does not occur again, apparently, in this sense (in Ps, xcv. 4 Pi) ‘a place to be searched out’, i.e. remotest part); but a form of the same word is used in Prov. xxv. 2 of the activities that characterize the life surrounding a royal court, ‘It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the glory of kings is to search out a matter’ (123 1PM). Cowley-Neubauer render here ‘in their care’. :
Clever of speech in their (scribal) instruction. The Hebr. word here rendered ‘(scribal) instruction’ does not occur in this sense in Biblical Hebrew (in Ps. lxxi. 15 ΠῚ ΒΟ ‘numbers’; but LXX γραμματεία : TDD 18D ‘book’, if it be a genuine form); but it can be justified from Neo-Hebrew (cp. SOMIED (AND) ‘the office of scribe’; navad ‘the art of the scribe’). The reference in our text is doubtless to the work of the scribes as instructors, in which Ben-Sira was so deeply interested.
And speakers of wise sayings in their tradition. Lit. ‘ proverbialists (δ᾽ δ 9) in their keeping’ (viz. of the tradition) ; for the translation ‘speakers of wise sayings’ or ‘proverbs’ cp. Num. xxi. 27; and for ‘ keeping’ used in this sense (viz. guarding a tradition) cp. Prov. iv. 21, vii. 1, xxii. 18. Lévi objects to this rendering on the ground that it anticipates v. 5 ὁ, where ‘ the makers of proverbs’ are the subject (thus involving an awkward repetition), but the objection is not a fatal one ; in our present verse the author is thinking of the wise as a class of men who expressed their wisdom in proverbial form orally (in their teaching) ; in v. 5 ὁ he refers specifically to the authors of
5 ‘Devisers of psalms according to rule®,
4And authors of proverbs in books®; 6 °Men of resource® ‘and supported with strength‘,
And living at ease in their dwelling-places?: 7 All these "were honoured? ‘in their generation’, jAnd in their daysi had glory*. 8 Some of them there are who have left a name, !1That men might tell of their praise!: 9 And some of them there are who have no memorial, ™So that there was an end of them when they came to their end"; » They were as though they had not been,
And their children after them».
roANevertheless° these were men of piety,
P And their good fortune shall not come to an end? ; τι With their seed “their prosperity? remaineth sure, "And their inheritance to their children’s children’. 12 *In their covenant their seed abideth,
And their children’s children for their sakes®;
hh So ® mg. GS: Wexi> ΓῚ 3 OWI: G& ev yeveas (70 4+ avtwv): 85. ‘in their generations’ Ji So H mg. (oD) G and 8: 18 text a K-k ἸΏ onntsan S: & καυχημα 1 (ἃ tov εκδιηγησασθαι enawous $(+‘their’): 32 ondnoa (mg. miynynd) ΡΝ (‘That men might tell of it in their inheritance,’ Cowley-Neub.): read ontana mynwad (with Smend: so Peters, omitting Δ) [Ayn Aram. ‘YRWS ‘to narrate’, ‘tell ’| mm 35 nav AWN naw: && ( freely) και ar@dovvto ws οὐχ umap£ovres (S$ 3) nn So 53) and &: S> (?for dogmatic reasons) 0-0 15 obwx) Gi adn’ p-P 9 nL awn xd onipn): & (< whose righteous deeds have not been forgotten’) ὧν av δικαιοσυναι (248 Sah + avrav) οὐκ ἐπελησθησαν (reading DNPIs) for anypny): S ‘and their goodness shall not come to an end’: reading onary} (so emend ®) 9-2 35. O31» BI, ze. ‘their prosperity’ or ‘their goods’, ‘property’ (parallel 10 ‘their possession’ next line): Ce ayaby (9 ΞΞ 8) τὴν 35 (O32 ya ondnn ὦ (‘and their root to their children’s children): Ge κληρονομία exyova αὐτῶν 7s obviously wn disorder (° read κληρονομία αὐτῶν τοις εκγονοις autor) : x (Codex Sang.) hereditas nepotum illorum Ss Q> ; but the verse ts attested by (ἃ and S$. (ἃ has ev ras διαθηκαις (70 - αὑτῶν 35) comm σπερμα αὐτῶν και Ta Texva αὐτῶν δι αὐτους, 1. 6. ὮΠ)Σ OWNIYI) OVA Wy? on 33: S 221 second line reads [raw] ΓΙ ΠΣ.) for DWI and (3) ὉΠ.)3 833 for D3 (Peters follows S in line 2, and renders ‘and their children in their works ’)
certain books (Solomon and others) who have reduced this proverbial wisdom to writing. The alternative rendering adopted by Lévi and others makes the line refer to governors or officials. Thus Cowley-Neub. render 4¢ and d:
‘Wise of meditation in their writing,
And governing in their watchfulness.’ Lévi: ‘Wise orators for their instruction, And officials for their offices ’
(the reference, according to Lévi, being to heathen orators and officers). 5. Devisers of psalms according to rule. Lévi, ‘ perfecters of poetry according to rule.’ The reference is to the composition of psalms set to traditional melodies. In this connexion David and the guilds of temple-singers would be thought of primarily. 6. Men of resource. . . living at ease in their dwelling-places. The patriarchs, and perhaps Job, were in the writers mind (so Smend). 8. Some... have left a name. Such are again referred to in wv. 10 f. g. And some ... who have no memorial... The reference is to godless kings, doubtless of the northern kingdom. As the Chronicler, so Ben-Sira passes these over in silence.
They were as though they had not been. For the expression cp. Job x. 19; Obad. 16. 10. Nevertheless these were men of piety. Cp. v.1. This introduces the enumeration that follows of great and pious men in Israel. And their good fortune shall not come to an end. Not only were they happy and fortunate in their lives, but their happy estate (reading ONPI3¥) with G and $; ΠΡῚΝ = ‘good fortune’, ‘prosperity ’ sometimes) lives on in their descendants’ happy and prosperous lives (this is further developed in vv. 11 f.). The reading of & affords a good sense—‘ their righteousness shall not be forgotten’ (but anticipates v.13 ὁ). 39 has ‘their hope shall not come to an end’. 11. With their seed their prosperity remaineth sure. Cp. Job xxi. 8, 16; also xlv. 26 of our book. 12. In their covenant (or covenants)... Though this verse is absent from ® the variants in ὅτ and 5S (see critical note), which can only be explained by a Hebrew original, show that it must have formed part of the original Hebrew text. ‘Covenant’ in Ben-Sira’s phraseology means always a gracious promise by God. The covenants in the | author’s mind are not only those with Abraham and Noah, but also those with Phineas, Aaron, and David (cp. xxiv. 25, xlv.15). So Smend.
i" 13 Their memory* abideth for ever, «And their righteousness shall not be forgotten"; 14° Their bodies were buried in peace’, “ But their name liveth unto all generations. 15 *The assembly recounteth their wisdom, And the congregation declareth their praise*.
(6) XLIV. 16-18. Enoch and Noah.
16 ¥2ENOCH walked with Jahveh [and was taken]*, 2A miracle of knowledge to all generations*.
t-t So 39 S: G ro σπερμα αὐτων (Dyrt for D751) u-u ® defective ,..., . 3 DNpPIsi: (ἃ καὶ ἡ δοξα αὐτων οὐκ εξαλειφθησεται : read (?) Π| Ξ: ΝΡ ὈΠΡῚΝΙ: so Lévi (Smend thinks there are faint traces of a 7 [which may be ΓΙ] at end of line): Smend reads nnn: Peters, following πα, Wy xd ona v-v ® defective ᾿Ξ) oy b[ws sees? (ἃ τὸ σώμα αὐτῶν ev εἰρηνῃ eradn: read with Peters : \DDNI pvdvia on} (so 9) wow Ἢ defective 0) [ap ee ee et (ἃ καὶ τὸ ovopa avtay ζῃ εἰς yeveas: read )N) ay Mm Ὁ Ξξξ ὅ : x-x 30 fex/>: but ® mg. has Sap spp’ ondany ΓΝ wn on & (λαοι AI): S>lne 1: im line 2 and B (the whole verse XXXix. 10) Y uv. 16 wanting in & 7-2 3 ΠΡΌΣ) oh) toh) sbanm ΘΠ x[ yoo] qm (here | ἡ Dvn ΝΙΝ) must be deleted: came in from next verse): genuine Hebr. text: ‘Enoch walked with Jahveh ee
was taken ’] = (ἃ Evoy ευηρεστησεν Κυριῳ (so LXX Gen. v. 24) και peteTeOn (the last word ‘and was taken’ zs probably an addition to the original text: see exeget, note). aa Sy 39. ay ΠΡ ΠΡῚ mw: G& ‘An example of repentance to all generations’ (umodevypa μετανοίας Tats yeveas ) b-b 35 fext AID nyd (Ώ ΡῈ Ξ Cae nya): (ἃ ἐν καιρῳ opyns eae Be) sonn : (ἃ ἀνταλλαγμα ($ ‘he was taken in exchange for the world’) d-d So
13. Their memory abideth for ever. Cp. xxxix. Ἂς, d.
14. But their name liveth unto all generations. = xxxix. 9 d.
15. = χχχίχ. 10 (see notes there).
(6) XLIV. 16-18. ENOCH AND NOAH.
16. Enoch walked with Jahveh [and was taken]. The phraseology is a reminiscence of Gen. v. 24 (for the text cp. critical note). The last word rendered ‘and was taken’ is probably an addition to the original form of the text ; it overloads the line and spoils the rhythm (so Schlatter and Smend ; the latter scholar points out that xlix. 10, which uses the same phrase of Enoch, implies that his being ‘ taken’ has not previously been mentioned. See further notes on xlix. 10).
A miracle of knowledge to all generations. So. @& has ‘an example of repentance to the generations’. The translation of & reflects in an interesting way the influence of controversy. At an early period Enoch lived in popular legend as a heroic figure whose destiny was glorified by God. These features received elaborate and exaggerated development in the circles of the apocalyptists: thus Enoch’s wisdom, a feature that belongs to the oldest form of the tradition (cp. Ezek. xxviii. 3 ἢ, where read ‘Enoch’ for ‘Daniel’; so also in Ezek. xiv. 14, 201), receives elaborate development in the apocalyptic Enochic literature (cp. especially 2 Enoch), and Enoch becomes the exemplar of piety and wisdom, the friend and confidant of God, and the accredited revealer of divine secrets to men.’ Against this, as it seemed, exaggerated estimate there was raised a protest in Rabbinical circles which is reflected in some of the early Rabbinical literature. Thus in the WZdrash rabba on Gen. ν. 24 the idea that Enoch was translated without dying is expressly refuted® (contrast the Christian view in Heb. xi. 5). Another view, reflected in Wisd. iv. 10-14, was that Enoch had been inconsistent in his piety, and was removed (? by death) before his time, in order that he might not fall into further sin (‘he was caught away lest wickedness should change his understanding’). Cp. also Philo, de Advahamo,§ 3, where ‘he was not’ is explained to mean that his former blameworthy life was wiped out and effaced, being no longer‘ found’. In @&’s version of our text, therefore, the influence of a later exegesis which had made its way to Alexandria is traceable. In 38, on the other hand, which represents the text of the original author, one primitive feature of the Enoch-tradition has been retained, viz. his wonderful knowledge. Ben-Sira, like some of the later Rabbis, would not have been predisposed to exaggerate unduly the claims of Enoch in the apocalyptic direction. Nor, in fact, has he done so. See further on xix. 14, and cp. Frankel, Ueber den Einfluss der palastinischen Exegese,
[It should be added that in the Targ. of Pseudo-Jonathan (on Gen. v. 24) the old popular view of Enoch reappears. He is represented as a pious worshipper of the true God, who was translated to heaven, and received the names and offices of metatron and ‘great scribe’ (Safra vatba). This doubtless was made possible after controversy (with Christians) had ceased. ]
1 Cp. on this point ZB, 5. v. ‘Enoch’.
As Cheyne points out (ZB, s.v. ‘ Enoch’), the Enoch-tradition shows traces of solar origin: ‘A child of the “‘all-seeing” sun must be wise as well as pious.’ This primitive idea will account for the later developments according to which Enoch was the inventor of writing, arithmetic, and astronomy (cp. /wdz/ees, ch. iv). A
In the same passage it is said that he had been reckoned among sinners, and was still inconsistent in his piety, and that God said if he continued pious He would take him out of the world. Cp. Wisd. iv. 10-14. Targ. Ong. says: “God made him to die.’
17 NOAH the righteous was found blameless;
>In the season of destruction” he became ‘the continuator® ; 4For his sake there was a remnant",
¢And by reason of the covenant with him the Flood ceased’. 18 ‘ By an eternal sign* (God) concluded it with him, Not to destroy (again) all flesh.
(c) XLIV. 19-23. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (3+3+1+3 distichs).
19 ABRAHAM, ‘the father: of a multitude of nations’, fe iTarnished not his glory/; 20 Who kept the commandment of the Most High, And entered into a covenant with Him: "Tn his flesh* He engraved him an ordinance, And in trial he was found faithful. 21 Therefore with an oath ! He promised him! τὰς ΤῸ bless™ "the nations” in his seed’, °To multiply him ‘¥as the dust of the earth?”, And to exalt his seed ‘ as the stars’ ; 4To cause them to inherit ‘from sea to sea, And from the River to the ends of the earth ’.
HS: (ἃ δια τοῦτο (for δια τουτὸν 32 ways) ἐγενηθὴ καταλιμμα τῇ yn (? τῇ yn originally after ἀνταλλαγμα: cp. ὥ above) e-e ® dap ban 22) : (ἃ δια rovro (reading ΡΠ ΞΕ) Sor 5) 22) ἐγένετο κατακλυσμος (Θ para-
phrases) HE So ® ody mwa: & διαθηκαι acwvos ( odiy m3) (S may zmply also N73: rendering ‘ oath’) ὅ- ® text N73) (ἃ ἐπεθησαν : ἢ mg. nD [3 renders the line: ‘an oath God sware to him in truth “| hG@+
κατακλυσμῳ i Gr+peyas (μεγας πατηρῚὴ JJ So ® (27. ‘ Put not in his honour any blemish’) 199323 jn3 xd DY): S ‘and there was not put any blemish in his honour’ ®: (ἃ καὶ οὐχ evpeOn oporos (read popos) ev τῃ δοξῃ [38 mg. ‘BIT for DY cp. Ps. 1. 20] KK G+ καὶ (και ev σαρκι avrov), but & and a number of Greek codices (106 him’: τι Aram. ὯΝ ‘to swear’: so S here ‘God sware to him’ m-m So 35: Ck ενευλογηθηναι, so S (but 248 ενευλογειν = 3η) nn So 30 and (τ: 95 ‘all the peoples of the earth’ 0-0 So (ἃ and 3: but x* >the line with ® P-P So G (cp. Gen. xiii. 6): S$ ‘as the sand of the sea’ (cp. Gen. xxii. 17) 4 G+ καὶ (preceding) : but 38 S> και
17. Noah the righteous. Cp. Gen. vi. 9, vii. 1 (Heb. xi. 7). ‘ In the season of destruction he became the continuator. (% renders ‘he became a substitute ’ (ἐγένετο ἀντάλλαγμα). The exact meaning of the Hebrew word rendered ‘continuator’ has been the subject of much discussion.
Its form (ardnn) is similar to, such Hifil noun-formations as T25N (‘disciple’), and it seems best to explain its meaning from the Hifil of the verb (yoni) as it is used in Job xiv. 7 ‘to put forth fresh branches’, ‘sprout again’. So here the noun would mean ‘continuator ’, ‘renewer’ (one who starts the race afresh). Cowley-Neubauer render ‘successor’, and in the Glossary this is explained as follows: ‘i.e. humanity at large perished, but Noah was spared to carry on the succession and keep the race alive’: cp. xlviii. 8 (in xlvi. 12 ΛΠ is probably a verbal form). With this meaning cp. the use of the verb in Hebrew 42M ‘to cause to come in place of’, ‘to make to succeed,’ Is. ix. 9; in Aram. N5)2nN ‘substitute’, ‘representative’. S. Krauss in /QA, xi. 156 f., discusses the word and proposes to render our passage: ‘At the time of destruction there was a change (a reward, a compensation)’. See further Cowley-Neubauer ceased. i.e. probably ceased to come any more, was not to be repeated (so S$ understands the meaning rightly). 18. By an eternal sign... Cp. xliiil. 6; Gen. ix. 12f, xiii. 17. Not to destroy (again) all flesh. Cp. Gen. ix. 15. (ὃ XLIV. 19-23. ABRAHAM, ISAAC, AND JACOB. 19. Abraham, ‘the father of a multitude of nations’. Cp. Gen. xvii. 4f. (xii. 2 ἢ, xv. 5). (ἃ (‘Abraham was a ἊΣ father of a multitude’, &c.) combines with this the other explanation of the name Abram ‘exalted father’ so Hart). Tarnished not his glory (or honour). The same phrase (cp. critical note) occurs in xlvii, 20. 20. And entered into a covenant with Him. Cp. Gen. xvii.10; and for the phrase Ezek. xvi. 8 (1.33 NJ). And in trial... Cp. Gen. xxii. μ᾽ ΤΡ 21. Therefore with an oath...seed. Cp. Gen. xxii. 16-18 (also xii. 3, xviii. 18) : see also Gal. iii, 8. To multiply him ‘as the dust of the earth’... his seed ‘as the stars’. Cp. Gen. xxil. 17. : ... to inherit ‘from sea to sea...earth’. Cp. Gen. xviii. 18; Exod. xxiii. 31; Deut. xi. 24; Joshua i. 43 Ps. Ixxii. 8; and Zech. ix. 10. ‘The River’ (i.e. the River far excellence) is, of course, the Euphrates.
SIURANCIS] 4b aaah. i
And to ISAAC also ‘He promised it? ‘likewise’, For his father Abraham’s sake ;
‘And the blessing of all predecessors Rested upon the head of ISRAEL';
"And He titled him with the dignity of firstborn", And gave him ‘his inheritance’ ;
w And He set him in tribes, So as to be divided into twelve.
And He caused to issue* Yfrom him 7a man?
“Who found favour® in the sight "of all living”. °Beloved of God and men®
Was MOSEs ®of happy memory?
rt 15. Dp && eornoev 5:8 ® mg. 3 Ge ovras: 38 lexi 13 ts a copyist’s mistake (‘He raised up a son’)
tt So $=: 595k we by an owe 55 nana: & (ευλογιαν παντῶν ανθρωπὼν Kat διαθηκην καὶ κατεπαυσεν emt
κεφαλὴν Τακωβ) supports the reading suggested partly: ἀνθρωπὼν may have displaced an earlier ἀρχαιων. text has wna pwan 55 na
Syn wa Sy ans al
‘The covenant of every ancestor (predecessor) He gave him, And the blessing rested on the head of Israel’.
It τ noticeable that & lke ἸῺ has the two words ‘covenant’ and ‘blessing’, only im the reverse order. This suggests a double reading in the Hebr. text used by G, viz. NINA and nn), the latter a variant on the former (perhaps originally ΓΞ). Line 2 of ® zs overloaded. WN was probably written in abbreviated form for DNWNI: 19N3, which zs not attested in either U& or S, is probably a varvant on ANI u-u So 38 mg. ADI WD": fex¢ 73733 37533") ‘and He confirmed (established) him in the blessing ᾿ς (ἃ ἐπέγνω avTov εν εὐλογίαις αὐτου ? reading NWI (cp. xv. 18) for WIND (so Smend—then render: ‘and He (God) recognized him (ἡ. 6. singled him out) in blessing’ (S ® mg. freely rendered) v-v So ®: Ge ἐν κληρονομιᾳ (κληρονομιαν 248 & 8) ww So 30 may Le rendered (see exeget. notes): G& misunderstanding ® renders: ‘and divided his portions ; among twelve tribes did He part them’: $ ‘He made him father to the tribes, and they went forth and He divided unto the twelve tribes’ xx So G Nyy: so W (which ts defective in this word partly) is to be read (note the assonance with S32 which follows at the beginning of next line) y-y So ® Ge: but Sah Eth εξ αὐτῶν (sc. ‘the tribes ’—zurongly) 2-2 So ®: Ce avdpa edeous (1DN WN: so Peters): S ‘righteous men’ (but original reading probably ‘righteous man’): 3» Eth read avdpas edeous (50 70) a-a ® JM NW (wo/e NSW a play on nv) b-b ® on 55: & πασὴς σαρκος c-e So ® DWIN) pad(s DAIS: G yyarnpevov .. . [ Μωυσην ] wrong construction (making the clause dependent on preceding): & ‘beloved was he of God and also in the sight of men’ 4-ὁ ®% Aad wat: G& ov τὸ pnpoouvoy ev εὐλογίαις : Pefers reads masa yt (cp. Ixvi. 11); so apparently 3 here (20d N21 not uncommon in Neo-Hebrew) e-e ® text defective: BY marg. Νὴ YD): G wpotwoev αὑτὸν δοξῃ
22, And to Isaac... likewise... Cp. Gen. xxvi. 3-5, where the covenant and the promises made to Abraham are repeated.
22-23. And the blessing of all predecessors Rested upon the head of Israel. i.e. the blessings promised to Abraham and Isaac, and possibly also those promised to Adam and Noah. For text cp. critical note. ᾿ 23. And He titled him with the dignity of firstborn. The foundation-passage is Exod. iv. 22 (cp. also Hos. xi. 1): cp. further xxxvi. 12 (17) of our book. See further critical note (for variant forms of the text). And He set him in tribes, So as to be divided (pnd = pon> for pong? : so Peters) into twelve (reading sey pw for text, which omits 5: with Smend, Peters). Smend, however, renders substantially the same Hebrew text: ‘and He assigned it (i.e. the inheritance) to the tribes to be a portion (pond) for the twelve’ (18 oad [jas
sy Ὁ" 5] pond). For the division by Jacob cp. Gen. xlix. But more probably God is here the subject of the
sentence, in which case the laws issued by divine authority for the division of the land into twelve parts are in the writer’s mind.
He caused to issue. Cp. Isa. xv. 9 (same verb ΝΥΝ ἽΠ).
from him. viz. from Jacob: Jacob’s sons receive no further attention (but note the reference to Joseph, ch. xlix. 15).
found favour in the sight of all living. Cp. Exod.xi.3. The author has also in mind, doubtless, the daughter of Pharaoh and the priest of Midian.
XLV. 1. of happy memory. The Hebrew expression used here (nad 721) is varied from the one commonly employed, ‘ his memory (be) fora blessing’ (narad y731 575), which, in an abbreviated form , is often used, as a pious
interjection, after the mention of dead Israelites: e.g. ‘our Rabbis of blessed memory’ ὦ Ἰ 12), &c. The full phrase (in its usual form) occurs in xlvi. 11.
2 °And <He made him glorious as? God’®, And mighty ‘in awe-inspiring deeds’. 3 By his words’ "he brought? <signs”! swiftly to pass", JAnd He emboldened him) in the presence ‘of the king*. And He gave him a charge ‘unto his people>}, And showed him ™SHis glory?™. 4 For his faithfulness and meekness™ He chose him out of all °<flesh?®. 5? And? 4He caused him to hear His voice‘, And let him draw nigh “into the dark cloud”. *And He placed§ tin his hand* "the commandment, Even the Law of life Yand discernment’ ; That he might teach ἡ His statutes” *unto Jacob®, yAnd His testimonies and judgements’ “unto Israel”.
6 And He exalted a holy one *‘like unto him>®, Even AARON of the tribe of Levi. 7»And He made him an eternal ordinance’, And bestowed “upon him His majesty°:
apov ὃ DMNA ID (so Smend: cp. xxxvi. 17 where opowwoas ΠΤ) : S has ‘and He made him great in blessings’: Peters restores: ODN. WII (doth (ἃ and & paraphrase ἸΏ in order to mitigate its boldness)
(® text defective) hoh 10 3D: & κατεπαυσεν (a mistake for κατεσπευσενὴ ii So & nim: 38 defective [9 >3a| 33H wpinn: (ἃ εδοξασεν (248 pr. και): S ‘and set him’ Kk So 3) : (ἃ βασιλεων (but 53 254 Bacihews) S (Peers reads nnd) 1] SoG: 30 defective: S$ nyn (so Peters reads) m-m Reading maa ΠΝ GS: B defective [S+v. 5a misplacing | "(ἃ ηγιασεν (δ 248 &c. L Sah+avrov) wrongly cloud’ s-s 35 /ex/ Dw, 38 marg. jn ὑπὸ So®: (ἃ αὐτῷ Kata προσωπον -ξΞ S (ΞΞ 24055) u-u So 38 ΓΝ: (ἃ ἐντολας: S> v-v So 38 nn) Ge: S ‘and blessings’ (mzsreading 38) ww So 30 YPN: (ἃ διαθηκην: S ‘His laws’ ss So ® marg. (W αὶ Apy2): S ‘those of the house of Israel’ ΣΤΥ So ® ΒΦ ΟῚ yyy: § ‘and His laws and His covenants’ wz So ® G&: S ‘unto Jacob’ a-a So & S( +1003): 3»
b-b So 38 = (ἃ ἐστησεν αὑτὸν (2nfertor reading avr) διαθηκην αἰωνος : S reads Dy for ody (?.an intentional alteration) τὸ ® text voy: ® marg. ὙΠ 1%: read with Peters ynnvoy: & tepaterav λαου (explanatory paraphrase)
2. And He made him glorious as God. The author has in mind Exod. iv. 16 (‘he shall be to thee a mouth, and thou shalt be to him as God’); cp. also Exod. vil. 1. 38 mg. (which is adopted by Smend) has: ‘And He titled him by the name of “‘God”’’: the boldness of the expression has led to its mitigation in the versions (see critical notes).
awe-inspiring deeds. i.e. the wonders performed in Egypt (see Exod. vii-xi) ; cp. Deut. iv. 34, xxvi. 8, xxxiv. 12 (‘great terrors’ = ‘ awe-inspiring deeds’).
3. he brought signs swiftly to pass. There is a corruption here in & which has obscured the meaning (see critical notes), As Smend points out, vv. 2-3 a, ὁ set forth Moses’ power in the face of the heathen.
in the presence of the king. Cp. Exod. vii. 1.
And He gave him a charge unto his people. Cp. Exod. vi.13. In vv. 3¢, αἰ and 4 the pre-eminence of Moses among his own people is set forth.
showed him His glory. Cp. Exod. xxxiii. 18, xxxiv. 6.
4. his faithfulness and meekness. Cp. Num. xii. 3, 7, also i. 27 of our book
out of all flesh. ‘All flesh’ here means, apparently, all Israel (not all mankind): cp. 1. 17 (39) : so Smend.
5. His voice. Cp. Deut. iv. 36.
let him draw nigh into the dark cloud. Cp. Exod. xx. 21, xxiv. 18.
placed in his hand the commandment... Cp. Exod. xix.7; Exod. xxxii. 15; Deut.vi. 1. The Decalogue is referred to.
the Law of life. Cp. xvii. 11. For ‘life’ in this connexion cp. Ezek. xx. 11.
teach His statutes unto Jacob... untoIsrael. Cp. Ps. cxlvii. 19.
(e) XLV. 6-22 (AARON). The great length of this section, which is devoted to Aaron, and the abundance of its detail, suggest that the subject of the Aaronite priesthood, as embodied in the High Priest, was one which specially interested Ben-Sira. See further the discussion in the General Introduction, § 9 ii.
7. And He made him an eternal ordinance. In the Pentateuch the phrase ‘an eternal ordinance’ (BY pn) is always applied to the rights, laws, and privileges of the Aaronite priesthood ; here it is applied to Aaron himself ; in the possession of the glorious priesthood he is himself an ‘eternal ordinance’; for a similar turn of expression cp. Is. xlii. 6, xlix. 8 (“I make thee a people’s covenant’): so Smend.
bestowed upon him His majesty. . Cp. Num. xxvii. 20; 1 Chron. xxix. 25. (ἃ has ‘the priesthood of the people’; but such an expression is doubtful, as the ‘priesthood’ is always spoken of in the Bible as God’s, not the people’s.
4And He blessed him °with His glory®, And girded him fwith beauteous magnificence‘? : And He clothed him with the perfection of adornment”, iAnd adorned him‘ with splendid vestments) *— 1The breeches}, ™the tunic and robe™2— And encompassed him °with pomegranates, And with resounding bells® round about, ? That he might make music? with his steps, So as to cause the sound of him to be audible “in the inmost shrine‘, For a memorial for the children of his people : ‘(With) the holy garments of gold and violet And purple’, the work of the designer ; (With) the breastplate of judgement, *(with) the ephod and waistcloth’, t And (with) scarlet’, the work of the weaver ; (With) precious stones "seal-engraven" YIn settings’, “<the work of the stone-engraver ’* ;
a-d Reading AAW Ce ἐμακαρισεν αὐτὸν (so S$): ® has NAW) ‘and He ministered unto him’ 9: So 35 δα 222: ® mg. 73732: (ἃ ev εὐκοσμιᾳ tf Reading with ® mg. ANN nrpyinsa (so Smend): ἸΏ text ONT maya (ὁ under influence of Num. xxiii. 22, xxiv. 8): LXX περιστολην δοξης: % ‘in the height of His glory’ & H+o mys wmvrady (a doublet made up of 8a+gqa to make up stichot of verse after 4a and ἢ ὁ had been fused into one line) h-h %} mA NaN bsb5 (& συντέλειαν καυχήματος : % “ with garments of purple’ ii 10 YIN]: Ge καὶ ἐστερεωσεν avrov (read eotepavocey WL coronavit): % ‘and honoured him ’ ii Reading
ny 553 (for ® ny 393) = & and S k Verses 8 c-14 ὦ are lacking in 85 1115 mp3: Ck περισκελη mm Reading Soyo) nn (@ mins): G καὶ ποδηρὴ Kar enopida (επωμις offen in LXX for WAN: Smend and
Peters regard ἐπωμιδα as an error for (3) διπλοιδα which often Saya mm LXX) n Atv. ga in the margin the note occurs in Persian: ‘This MS. reaches thus far’: see Cowley-Neub., p. 25 0-0 Reading (Noldeke, Peters) OA WDD) D4: cp. G ροισκοις xpvoos κωδωσιν πλειστοις : W PIN DIVA DWwydD bp ® AD yI nnd: (τ (freely) nxnoa horny [MY only again in Neo-Hebrew ‘chant’, ‘music Ἵ q-a 39 WAIT: (ἃ εν ναῳ TF So ® (+) defore nbsn: cp. Gk): (ἃ στολῃ aya, χρυσῳ και νακινθῳ και moppupa 5:8. So 19 TIN) TIAN: Ge δηλοῖς αληθειας DYN) DIN (so Peters reads, but ® to be preferred ; see exeget. noles) tt % nydin wh & κεκλωσμενῃ κοκκῳ (72 Bible always in reverse order, ")} nydin) u-u # oni ᾿ΓῚΠΞ & γλυμματος σφραγιδος : this is given in next line in 18 which adds here the incorrect gloss jwnn by VME ἢ [or na (ἃ ev δεσει χρυσιου (cp. Exod. xxxix. 13 7 LXX) W-W Gk ἐργῳ (so read for epywv) λιθουργου jAX WIN nwy (Exod. xxviii. 11): so read with Smend Χ 1 ἘΠῚΡ" jax bs (a gloss: &>) y-y Reading (NDI) Dy G&: ® nan dyn zz Hwa... ων νιν PIS). Zhe missing words in & oni nina: but this does not suit the traces that
And girded him with beauteous magnificence. For text see critical note. text has ‘and girded him about (as) with the towering horns of a wild-ox’, under the influence of Num. xxiii. 22, xxiv. 8. The word rendered ‘towering horns’ in the Numbers passages (N)DYIN) means here apparently ‘magnificence’—a meaning for which there is some support in the LXX rendering of the word in Numbers (viz. δόξα).
The breeches. Cp. Exod. xxviii. 31.
the tunic. i.e. the ordinary outer garment: cp. Exod. xxviii. 39.
robe. i.e. the violet robe (ndan Ssyn9) which was always worn with the ephod ; cp. Exod. xxviii. 31.
9. with pomegranates, And with resounding bells. For text see critical note. Cp. Exod. xxviii. 33 f.
to cause the sound of him... audible... i.e. ‘they were to call God’s attention to Aaron as the representative of his people’ (McNeile on Exod. xxviii. 33); cp. Exod. xxviii. 35 (‘And the sound thereof shall be heard when he goeth in unto the holy place before the Lord, and when he cometh out, that he die not’). It has also been thought that their purpose was to apprise the people when Aaron had reached the Holy Place. They were probably a survival (some form of charm), the original meaning of which was forgotten. According to Josephus, δ. Z, v. 5.7, ‘the bells signified thunder and the pomegranates lightning.’
το. (With) the holy garments. Cp. Exod. xxviii. 2-6. Here the ephod, girdle, and ‘ breastplate’ are specially meant (see following verses).
the breastplate of judgement. Cp. Exod. xxviii. 4,15. ‘Breastplate’ is a somewhat misleading translation of the Hebrew word (jn), though it has become consecrated by usage. It probably denoted a bag or pouch of some kind, in which were contained the Urim and Thummim (= ‘of judgement’).
the ephod. Cp. Exod. xxviii. 6-12.
waistcloth. Otherwise spoken of as the ‘girdle’ (338) ; cp. Exod. xxviii. 4, 39, 40.
10-11. the designer...the weaver. The division is only rhythmical—the same craftsmen are meant in each case. scarlet ... precious stones. Here. again, the division is rhythmical: ‘scarlet’ entered into the making of the ‘breastplate of judgement’, as well as of the ephod; and similarly precious stones (of both).
seal-engraven. Cp. Exod. xxviii. 21. The engraven stones (twelve) of the breastplate of judgement, inscribed with the names of the twelve tribes of Israel, are meant.
In settings. Cp. Exod. xxviii. 17.
For a memorial in graven writing, According to the number of the tribes of Israel.
12 (With) the crown of pure gold *<(resting) upon? the mitre’, The diadem engraven, ‘ Holy to Jahveh ’?—
“Majesty most glorious, praise most puissant®, >The desire of the eyes, and the perfection of beauty” !
13 °Before him there was nothing like them‘,
dAnd no stranger shall He clothe therewith for ever @: ©So <He trusted him and? his sons®, And ‘his sons’ sons?! throughout their generations®.
14 His (Aaron’s) meal-offering is wholly consumed
» Twice every day as a continual sacrifice».
15! Moses consecrated him’,
And anointed him with the holy oil ;
And it became for him jan eternal covenant), kAnd for his seed*, !as Jong as the heavens endure!
™To minister (to God) and for Him to execute the priest’s office™, And to bless His people in His name®.
16 He chose him out of all living,
To bring near °the burnt-offering and fat pieces®,
remain in MS.: read with Lévi wap »> myn [ys] a-a | ry ndamy Na. ἼΠ b-b Reading with & (επιθυμηματα οφθαλμων κοσμουμενα wpaa: last word belongs fo τ. 12 not to 13. a—so Syro-Hex.) bb>99) py sone ἘΠΕ ὁ Reading (1p An ΝῸ (MBO = GE 4A Reading my drab: xb ody ayn (cp. Ge) ἀὅὁ ὁ 39 defective ma yd... . «NT: Cowley-Neubauer suggest MD pad) 95 penn (so read): (ἃ πλὴν των wey αὐτου povoy (50 Peters, reading oS yI2 ἽΝ) ff Reading "32 ya) (cp. Gk και τα exyova avtou) : 38 92 13] 8-Ξ 38 (restored)
m5}: Ge δια παντὸς h-h ® pyoys aan ov day (>1 defore 52 with &) i 10 ὙΠῚΝ nD NPD % (‘And Moses placed upon him his hand’): G& emAnpooev..... tas xetpas (+avrov 70 248 30) 11] phy ma: & εἰς διαθηκὴν αἰωνιον "mead: so 88 Καὶ 3 ὙΠΟ) = 3: (ἃ και ev τῷ σπέρματι αὐτου ll 15
Ὁ oD τ-ὄ S: (ἃ εν ἡμεραις ουρανου m-m 15 ἢ ἡπ5) nov: (ἃ λειτουργεῖν αὐτῳ aya και teparevety : 5»Ὁ minds, “omitting the eternal priesthood here ascribed to Aaron and his seed’ (Hart) n-n So HS: (τ ev τῳ ονοματι (+avrov Ne? &c. Syro-Hex. 3. : ΒΝ ΤΑΝ 155 >avrov) o-o So 38: S ‘burnt-offerings’: (ἃ καρπωσιν Κυριῳ (=?onbyd aby)
For a memorial . .. According to the number of the tribes of Israel. Cp. Exod. xxviii. 21, 29 (‘And Aaron shall bear the names of the children of Israel in the breastplate of judgement upon his heart, when he goeth in unto the Holy Place, for a memorial before the Lord continually’).
12. the crown of pure gold... Thediadem. The terms are in apposition and synonymous ; the ‘ plate’ or ‘diadem’ which was fastened on to the ‘mitre’ or turban is meant: cp. Exod. xxviii. 36f. For text of second clause see critical
Majesty most glorious ... This emotional touch reveals the feeling of the writer that all the majesty and glory of Israel were embodied in the High Priest.
13. Before him. i.e. before Aaron was thus invested.
there was nothing like them. i.e. like the holy vestments. ee
no stranger. i.e. no unconsecrated person of another tribe in Israel. The emphasis laid on this point is noticeable. Evidently Ben-Sira would not have tolerated any breach in the legitimate succession to the Highpriesthood, such as, as a matter of fact, occurred shortly after the period when he wrote.
shall He clothe therewith. ‘He,’ i.e. God. ;
So He trusted him and his sons. The text is uncertain (see critical note). That adopted might, perhaps, be rendered (following a Neo-Hebrew usage): ‘Such He entrusted to him and his sons,’ i.e. such a position of honour and responsibility. La ἢ
And his sons’sons... The High-priesthood was to be maintained perpetually by legitimate succession.
14. His (Aaron’s) meal-offering ...as a continual sacrifice. The daily meal-offering of the High Priest was offered half in the morning and half in the evening; and it was specially distinguished by being wholly burnt upon the
15. Moses consecrated him, And anointed him... Cp. Lev. vili. ν
And it became for him an eternal covenant... The anointing with the holy oil of Aaron was a solemn guarantee that the priesthood should remain perpetually in Aaron’s line.
as long as the heavens endure. The same phrase recurs in 1. 24 (‘as the days of heaven’); cp. also Ps. Ixxxix. 30; Deut. xi. 21. τος
To minister . . . execute the priest’s office... bless... Cp. Deut. x. 8; Exod. xxviii. 41, 43, &c.;
16. He chose him out of all living. Cp. v. 4 above; also Num. xvi. 5, 7, xvii. 20. ;
the burnt-offering and fat pieces. The burnt-offering was, of course, wholly consumed upon the altar; in the case of animal-sacrifices which were not wholly burnt the fat pieces were reserved for burning on the altar.
HP P And to burn a sweet savour and a memorial”, And make atonement “for the children of Israel". 17*And He gave him His commandments’, sAnd invested him with authority over statute and judgement’, ‘That he might teach His people statutes, And judgements unto the children of Israel*. 18 “But strangers were incensed against him", And became jealous of him in the wilderness ; < The men of Dathan and Abiram, ᾿ And the congregation of Korah Yin their violent anger’. 1g And Jahveh saw it “and was angered “, xy And consumed them’ in His fierce wrath ἢ: And He brought a sign to pass* upon them xa And devoured them® ?with His fiery flame?*. 20 °And <He increased?® Aaron’s glory, And gave him ¢his inheritance*: (20c) °<The holy contributions?® ‘He gave him! for sustenance, εἴτα) »And!* the fire-offerings of Jahveh they might eat : (21d) <The presence-bread?! is his portion, (214) jAnd the gift-sacrifice) for him and for his seed.
pp So WH: CG θυμίαμα και evwdiay εἰς μνημοσυνον : S ‘and sacrifices and incense’ τα So 38: G& περι tov λαου σου (N* 248 >c0v: 70 V & have avrov): 85 ‘for all Israel’ rr So ® S: (ἃ eSoxev αὐτὸν (so B Syro- Hex V 253: she other MSS., also &, read avr@) ev evrodats αὐτου ss So 38: G εξουσιαν ev διαθηκαις κριμάτων (reading DEVI ῬΠ3): S ® (though pointed as plural nouns) ὑπὸ Verses τῇ σα > in S: & has διδαξαι τον Ἰακωβ τὰ μαρτυρια (NC%-+avrov) καὶ ev νομῳ αὐτου φωτισαι (enferior reading φωνησαι) Ἰσραηλ: this may be more ortginal than ®, and suggests : :Syabesne ΠΥ ΠΟ ynsiny yyy apy bd (so Smend) u-u So 35 13 ΠῚ) ΣΙ 2 ΞξΞ S$: (ἃ επισυνεστησαν αὐτῳ αλλοτριοι (using the LXX word from Num, xvi. 19, XXvi. 9, ΧΧΥΙΪ. 3) ντν ® DDN Mya: (ἃ ev θυμῳ καὶ opyn: S ‘in strength’ w-W So 30 S: G καὶ οὐκ evdoxnoev s-x (x-x) These clauses are transposed in 3 yy So ® S: G& καὶ συνετελεσθησαν ( soa) Sor 05.) Zé Reading ΝΖ ( for NIN) & S (cp. Num. xvi. 30) [G& has τερατα: S$ ‘a blow’ for nin ‘sign’| a-a So ® (DdaN) ῷ and 2% (consumsit eos): Gr καταναλωσαι αὐτοὺς b-b 39 ἸΒΝ Wawa ev Proye πυρὸς αὐτου (so 55 254 i): others ev mupt proyos αὐτου: & ‘with flame’ ce Reading ΘΝ (Levi, Peters) Cx και προσεθηκεν : 95 ‘and He put (upon Aaron)’ [Send n3v ‘and He doubled’ | dd So ® S: G& κληρονομιαν e-e Reading nynn]} w[ 4p: Gk ἀπαρχας πρωτογενημάτων ὃ MWA ΠῚ ΤΙ (a conflation) : Swap mvs 1; apparently there were two readings, viz. WIP MYDNAN and WIP NWN: the former τς supported by Num. xix. 18 Hf So: (ἃ ἐμερισεν auto (B against all other MSS. and %& avros) 8. 10 has the clauses rightly in this order: & (wrongly) 20¢d 21ab: S compresses the four clauses tnto two, rendering : ;
The holy first-fruits and the presence-bread To him and to his seed.’
hh So ὅτ: H> Hi Reading pa ond with Peters (Noldeke naryo ond): cp. S (the translator of $ apparently passed accidentally from ond af end of 2ος 10 the ond af beginning of 20d: & ev πρώτοις ητοιμασεν πλησμονὴν (pr. εἰς 70 τοῦ &c. 248 &c. Sah ev πλησμονῃ) ? paw Jy ord (e the first two words a corruption of nay ond): for ev πρωτοις od: cp. iv. 17 1) ἸῺ monn: Ee as cdoxev [arte | kk Reading
to burn a sweet savour and a memorial. The former (‘to burn a sweet savour’) is the technical term applied specially (but also in other connexions) to the burning of the sacrificial pieces and the fat upon the altar (cp. Lev. i. 8, 9); the latter (‘a memorial’) is applied specially to that portion of the meal-offering which was burnt upon the altar (cp.
17. And He gave him His commandments... Cp. Deut. xxxiii. 10, xvii. 10 f., xxi. 5. Ben-Sira evidently applied Deut. eat 8f.to Aaron. The divine authority of the priesthood in religious (ceremonial) enactments is emphatically asserted. ‘
18. But strangers were incensed against him. In Num. xvi. 40 (Hebr. xvii: 5) ‘stranger’ is explained as = one ‘who is not of the seed of Aaron’. Men not of the priestly tribe are here meant.
became jealous of him. Cp. Ps. cvi. 16. The men of Dathan and Abiram. Cp. Num. xvi.
19. with His fiery flame. Cp. Job xviii. 5. ΐ
20. And (He increased) Aaron’s glory. Not only did the abortive rebellion of Dathan and Abiram result in the Aaronite priesthood maintaining its position triumphantly (cp. Num. xvii), but the privileges of the position were strengthened (cp. Num. xvili. 1-7).
The holy contributions. Or ‘offerings’. 1. 6. those parts of the sacrifice which were contributed to the priest (the ‘ heave-offerings’ so called); cp. Num. xviii. 8 ἔν,
22 Only *<in the land of the people?* might he have no heritage,
1And in their midst divide no inheritance!; ™Whose portion and inheritance is Jahveh™ »In the midst of the children of Israel ?.
23 Moreover PHINEHAS the son of Eleazar
°<Was glorious? in might “as a third??, In that he was jealous ?for the God of all”, And stood “in the breach for his people‘; tWhile his heart prompted him’, sAnd he made atonement® tfor the children of Israel*. 24 Therefore for him, too, "He established an ordinance’, YA covenant of peace to maintain the sanctuary”: That to him and to his seed should appertain The High-Priesthood for ever. 25 “Also His covenant was” with David, *The son of Jesse*, of the tribe of Judah ; y<The inheritance of the king is his son’s alone?’, While the inheritance of Aaron (belongs) 2to him? and to his seed.
oyna ΚΝ (ἃ : S$ ‘in their land’ I] So: Gk και μερις οὐκ ἐστιν avT@ ev haw (cp. Num. xviii. 20): S$ ‘And they did not divide a portion with them’ m-m Reading yndan ypbn om awe: cp. {ὰ αὐτὸς yap pepis σου (defective) . ...+4. NII: G& τριτοὸς as Sofay: S$ ‘in his power received three honours’ ( ὃ wrby Sms 9233) : read (with Smend) :*>w 37) AI v-p So 39 53 mdxb: (Οἵ ev φοβῳ κυριου: 5. ‘in the matter of the Midianitish woman and the son of Israel’ (from Num. xxv. 6 ff.) 4 39 wy ἼΞ3 : (ἃ ev τροπῃ daov (155 ἐντροπῃ : 3» reverentia): $ oyn y D3 tr So 38: G& ev ἀγαθοτητι προθυμίας Ψυχῆς αὐτου: S > s-s So %# G: S$ ‘and he prayed’ {τὸ So: G περι tov Ισραηλ (ὦ u-v 39. Pn oA: (ἃ ἐσταθὴ (egnoring pn which vs regularly rendered διαθηκη, in order 10 avoid repetition of the word [ διαθηκη] ; see following clause): $ ‘with oaths God sware to him’ VV So 39: Gk διαθηκη εἰρηνης (22 previous stichus). mpoorarew (50 106 157 254 Sah: other MS. mpoaTatny) aywwv καὶ aov (so 70 253 V N&® &c. Sah LH: ofhers Aa@) avrov—the last clause vs an addition of (τ: & ‘that he should build for Him an altar’ (9 explanatory paraphrase) W-W So: Ge καὶ διαθηκην (read και διαθηκη nv—7O 106 Sah καὶ διαθηκη) xx SoD: (τ υιῳ (70 Nea 30. -ΕἼεσσαι) s-y Reading vad yaad bn nina: ἢ) MS. has Ὑ325 105 we nbmr—which is obviously corrupt: WS ts regarded as a miswritten WX by some scholars: then (reading wad Sor 250) the sentence means: ‘The heritage of a man (passes) to his son alone’: S$ fas: ‘The heritage of kings he alone inherited ’ rt So S$: 3) and &>
21. the fire-offerings of Jahveh they might eat. Cp. Num. xviii. 9, 18, &c. {The presence-bread) is his portion. For the text see critical note. According to the Mishnah (Sw. v.7 f.), "" the loaves were eaten by the priests, one half by the outgoing division for the week, the other half by the incoming ivision. the gift-sacrifice. The word rendered ‘gift’ (73M) is twice applied (in the form [1}2) to sacrifices in the Pentateuch; cp. Num. xviii. 11 (Gen. xxxiv. 12). The usual word is govbanx (13). It is a comprehensive term. 22. (in the land of the people) might he have no heritage... Cp. Num. xvili.20; Deut. xviii. 1; Joshua xiii. 14.
23. Phinehas the son of Eleazar. Cp. Num. xxv. 7 ff.
{asathird). It is significant that Phinehas is set beside Moses and Aaron as ‘third’; this may possibly point to disputed succession to the High-Priesthood (cp. 1 Macc. ii. 54: ‘ Phinehas our father . . . obtained the covenant of an everlasting priesthood’; cp. also 4 Macc. xviii. 12).
In that he was jealous... Cp. Num. xxv. 11, 13.
24. A covenant of peace... High-Priesthood for ever. Cp. Num. xxv. 12f.
to maintain the sanctuary. (see critical note) has a significant addition here ; it renders [‘to be leader of the sanctuary] and of his people’; i.e. not only leader in ecclesiastical but also in political affairs. When the grandson of Ben-Sira wrote, the political power of the High Priest had been strongly asserted. The High Priest had become ethnarch. One consequence was that the office became the sport of constant political intrigues.
25. (The inheritance of the king is his son’s alone), While... For the text see critical note. It is difficult to be sure what the exact point of the couplet is. Apparently the second line forms the antithesis to line one. If so, the meaning may have been: the power and privileges of the king, as sovereign, are transmissible only to his son, viz. by direct succession ; whereas the power of the priesthood belongs to, in a sense, and is inherent in every member of the priestly tribe, all Aaron’s descendants, in fact, together with Aaron himself. Others (cp. & and S) see no antithesis, but, on the contrary, a parallel statement to the effect that in each case the dignity is only transmissible in direct and
® =» And now bless ye Jahveh”, Who has crowned you with honour? ; 26 °May He grant® you wisdom of heart, 4<To judge His people in righteousness? ; That your prosperity® ‘may never cease’, £Nor your power "for perpetual generations.
(g) XLVI. 1-10. Foshua, the son of Nun, and Caleb, the son of Fephunneh
46 1A mighty man of valour* was Joshua ?the son of Nun”, ed A minister of Moses in the prophetical office®, ®Who was formed to be® according to’ his name® » A great salvation for his chosen®®, iTo take vengeance upon /the enemy!? k And to give an inheritance * to Israel’. 2 ™How glorious was he when he stretched forth "his hand™”, °And brandished the javelin against the city®! 3 ? Who was he that could stand before him ?? 4For he fought the wars of Jahveh*.
d-d So G& & (with ‘in His name’ for last words): ἴῃ» : supply text: Pasa wy paw ee ® asap —4: & τα ayaéa αὐτων f-f I ποῦν sb an error for NW nb: cp. & wa pn αφανισθῃ : $ 18 8-8 Gr καὶ την δοξαν avrov: 85. ‘their power’: ® defective: read ?oan Wan: Pefers DNANAN: Smend DINAN bh So ®: cp. & ‘for all generations for ever’: G& εἰς yeveas αὑτῶν
aa (τ κραταιος ev πολεμοις (πολεμῳ NA C 155 248 iL) b-b G& Ναυη, 8* o Ναυὴ (N&* 248 ο Tov Navn), AV γο 155 Syro-Hex Sah Eth wos Ναυη ( S% 35) c-e S ‘By prophecy he was reserved to become like Moses the great one, to bring salvation by his hand to them that love him’ d-d && και διαδοχος Μωσῃ ev προφητειαις : % successor Moysi in prophetis ee (ἃ os ἐγένετο: & qui fuit magnus ἔ G& κατα ( L) & Reading, with Smend, yw. ( (ἃ L) for WI hob (πὶ peyas exe σωτήριᾳ εκλεκτων αὐτου: % Maximus in salutem electorum Dei i ἐκδικῆσαι ἐπεγειρομένους (reading “OPI for 2p) «xOpovs ( 3) 2: 3 ‘the hateful men’ kk G om@s KAnpovopnoy (karakA. δὲ Α 55 157 248 254 Syro-Hex): &% ut consequeretur haereditatem 1 $ ‘the children of Israel’, and adds ‘the land of promise’ m-m Qf ὡς εδοξασθη εν τῷ ETFapat χειρας αὐτου nn § ‘the spear that was in his hand’ 0-0 OF καὶ τῳ εκκλιναι ρομῴφαιαν emt πολεις Pb (τ τις mporepov αὐτου οὑτως etn (S 3η) 4-4 (τ τοὺς yap πολεμίους Κυριος (V N&® 7o 248 253
legitimate succession, from father to son. In this case the external position and power of the High Priest is primarily thought of, not his spiritual authority. There is probably some allusion intended to contemporary events—the intrigues against the legitimate holder of the position of High Priest (Simeon, who would be regarded as a descendant of Phinehas) by the Tobiadae. For the covenant with David cp. 2 Sam. xxiii. 5; Jer. xxxiii. 21; Ps. lxxxix. 4; 2 Chron. xiii. 5, xxi. 7; Isa. lv. 3. See further in ch. xlvii of our book, especially vv. 11 and 22. f And now bless ye Jahveh. Cp. 1. 22a. Who has crowned you with honour. Cp. Ps. viii. 6.
26. May He grant you wisdom of heart. Cp.1.23. The reference is to the legitimate representative of Phinehas the High Priest.
(g) XLVI. 1-10 (JOSHUA AND CALEB). 1. A mighty man of valour. Cp. Judges vi. 22, and 2 Chron. xxvi. 12 (Sept. and Hebr.).
A minister of Moses. ΠΟ NW); cp. Exod. xxxiii. 11 ; with @& cp. 2 Chron. xxvili. 7 (den mw ,..). Gis explanatory; the prophetic minister becomes in due course his successor, as in the case of Elisha, see 1 Kings xix. 21. For the prophetic succession see further the note on xlvii. 1.
the prophetical office. N12) may rightly be rendered here ‘ prophetical office’, though in the O.T. it is not used in this sense; it means ‘prophecy’ in 2 Chron. xv. 8 (genuine prophecy), Neh. vi. 12 (false prophecy), and ‘prophetical writing’ in 2 Chron. ix. 29. With & cp. xliv. 3 ¢. ἡ
Who was formed to be according to his name. The emended reading is preferable, especially as it 15 supported by & ; Joshua (= ‘ Jahveh is salvation’), as the leader of the Israelites into the Promised Land, would be appropriately called the saviour of his nation. For a somewhat similar word-play in the Hebrew see xlvii. 18.
for his chosen. Cp. xlvii. 22; Num. xi. 28 (Sept.).
To take vengeance upon the enemy. The reference is to Joshua x. 13.
to give an inheritance... Cp. Deut. i. 38, iii. 28.
when he stretched forth his hand. See Joshua viii. 18, 26.
against the city, i.e. Ai. 3. Who was he... Cp. Joshuai.5. The rendering of & seems to have been based on Joshua x. 14.
the wars of Jahveh. Cp. Joshua x. 146; 1 Sam. xviii. 17, xxv. 28; and ‘the book of the wars of Jahveh’,
Ἡ 4 Was it not through him that the sun stood still’, (And) one day *became as two 5 5 *For he called upon the Most High God", vYWhen he was in sore straits (and) his enemies around him’; And “the Most High God answered him* yWith hailstones and bolts?’ ; 2°] 6*He cast them down upon the hostile people’, And in the going down? he destroyed ‘them that rose up°, Β΄ In order that all? the nations °(devoted to) destruction® might know f That Jahveh was watching their fighting’: s And also because? he fully followed after God?, , And ‘did an act of piety‘ in the days of Moses, He and Caleb, the son of Jephunneh, kIn that they stoo firm when the congregation broke loose*. 1To turn away wrath from the assembly, ™ And to cause the evil report to cease™— 8 "Wherefore also they two” were set apart° From among the six hundred thousand footmen?, To bring them into their® inheritance, (Into) a land flowing with milk and honey".
Syro-Hex πολεμοὺς Kuptov, A πολεμίους Ku) emnyayev & ἀνεποδισεν (A ενεποδισθη LL) s-s Reading mr ows ( ἃ D, cp. xxv. 19) following Smend; Peters reads paws mn: % ‘And one day became two days’ tt S$ ‘For he prayed unto (//. before) the Lord’ ἃ Gk δυναστην v-v Reading pap ΔΝ 1S ASDND (Smend): S$ ‘And He heard him and put strength into his hand’, cf. xlvii. 5 Ww OF μέγας Κυριος: 3> x G® αὐτων ΣῪ S ‘And He cast down sulphur from heaven’ % (ἃ duvapews κραταιας a-a Reading INN DY by pwn (cp. (ἃ xateppagev ἐπ εθνος πολεμον [read πολεμιον S UL Eth| and see Joshua x.11). Jn ® the text of this and the following clause ts almost wholly obliterated b-b 3> c-e Reading DP ( (ἃ ἀνθεστηκοτας) ; Smend reads 19}5 (‘Canaan’), which (κα, he thinks, intentionally paraphrased: 85. ‘them all’ d &> e-e pan, which Smend thinks that G& misread as \29N (‘his sword’) and paraphrases by rendering πανοπλιαν, or that perhaps πανοπλίαν 7s an error for απωλειας ΤῸ (ἃ ort evaytiov Κυριου o πόλεμος αὐτου : 85. ‘ that God Himself was fighting against them’ ὅτ Ge καὶ yap: S$ ‘and he also’: %> h (τ δυναστου ii & εποιησεν εἐλεὸς KK Gk ἀντιστῆναι ἐναντι εχθρου ( 248 253 Syro-Hex εκκλησιας) 1-1 G@& κωλυσαι λαὸν απὸ ἀμαρτιας : S “ΤῸ turn back the assembly’ ( a compromise between Ux and ἸΏ ᾿ [ Smend |) mm Qf καὶ κοπάσαι yoy- γυσμον πονηριας : S+ ‘from the land of promise’ nn (ἃ καὶ autor δυο ovres: S ‘and they alone’ op yyw, which G& (Secwnoar) read as oy = 9 P S>(cp. Num.i. 46) ας» τ In ἸΏ 8cd form a single clause
4, that the sun stood still. follows Joshua x. 13 (Hebr. and Sept.) ; with & cp. xlviii. 23; Isa. xxxvili. 8. 5. For he called upon... Cp. xlvi. 16, xivii. 5, xlviii. 20. the Most High God. The expression ’£/‘E/yon occurs here, as far as we know from the Hebrew text now extant, for the first time in the book; it is used again in this verse and in xlvii. 5, 8, xlviii. 20; ἴῃ 1. 15 d, where ® is wanting, & has ...tWior@ πανβασιλεῖ, which probably represents ’£/‘Elyox. The name ‘£/yox alone occurs nine times. Both these names for God are, as far as can be seen, used only in chapters xli to the end ; elsewhere in the book
either Elohim or Jahveh is used; the latter is abbreviated as a rule in the MSS. thus: δὴ or”. When he was in sore straits. Cp. Prov. xvi. 20; Smend says that the noun M238 in the Talmud means ‘oppression’ or the like. his enemies around him. Cp. v. 16. With hailstones... Cp. Joshua x. 11. bolts. vraids, cp. xliii. 15 ; Ezek. xiii. 11, 13, ‘lumps of ice.’ 6. He cast them down... ‘ The Lord cast down great stones from heaven upon them,’ Joshua x. 11. in the going down. Or ‘descent’, i.e. the pass of Beth-horon (the ‘ hollow way’). (devoted to) destruction. Cp. xvi. 9; Joshua vi. 17. That Jahveh was watching their fighting. Cp. Joshua x. 14. he fully followed after. ‘TN xdn, cp. for the expression Num. xiv. 24; Joshua xiv. 8, 9, 14. 7. did an act of piety. DN Ny, cp. xlix. 3; the reference is to Num. xiv. 6-Io. In that they stood firm... Cp. Num. xiv. 1 ff. broke loose. Or ‘cast off restraint’; for Y15 cp. Exod. xxxii. 25 ; Prov. viii. 23, xxix. 18. to cause the evil report to cease. Cp. Num. xlv. 3. 8. were set apart. For the root Oy see Ezek. xlii. 6, and cp. Gen. xxvii. 36; Num. xi. 17, 25. To bring them into... The subject, i.e. God, is understood. their inheritance. Cp. Joshua xi. 23, where Joshua, as God’s instrument, is spoken of as giving the whole land for an inheritance unto Israel. a land flowing with milk and honey. The stereotyped description of the promised land: see Exod. iii. 8, 17, and often in the Pentateuch: cp. Jer. xi. 5, xxxii. 22; Ezek. xx. 6-15.
9 And He! gave strength unto Caleb, And unto old age it remained with him, ΤῸ cause him to tread* "upon the high places" of the land ; And also his seed obtained” a heritage, το In order that Wall *the seed of Jacob” might know yThat it is good “to follow fully” after Jahveh.¥
(A) XLVI. 11,12. The Fudges (=3 distichs).
11 Also the Judges, each with his name, 2 All whose hearts were not beguiled®*, Nor turned back from (following) after God?. May their memory be “for a blessing®. 12 4May their bones flourish again out of their place?, ¢And may their name sprout afresh for their children”.
13 ‘Honoured by his people and loved by his Maker’ 8 Was *‘he that was asked for’ from his mother’s womb ; Sanctified ‘of Jahveh? in the prophetical office,— Samuel, who acted as judge and priest. By the word of God ‘he established the kingdom‘, And anointed princes! over™ the people®.
8 (ἃ o κυριος t-t Reading yd Sor pan (cp. (ἃ επιβηναι avrov) u-u (ἃ em ro (B* art.) υψος Υ Hwy: G& κατεσχεν : S has the future W-W G& πάντες οἱ vioe Ἰσραηλ xS> y-y $ ‘Who had fulfilled the law of Jahveh and His judgements ἡ 2% (ἃ τὸ πορευεσθαι (cp. v. 6 ὁ where the same Hebr. word ἐς differently rendered) a-a (ἃ οσων οὐκ εξεπορνευσεν ἡ καρδια b-b G& ἀπὸ Κυριου: & ‘from the law of God’ τὸ (ἃ ev evdoytats (cp. Sept. of Zech. viii. 13) d-d Wanting in ® (see, however, xlix. τὸ 6): & ‘ May their bones shine like lilies’ (cp. XXXIX. 14) e-e (τ καὶ τὸ ονομα αὐτῶν αντικαταλλασσομενον ef τῇιοις δεδοξασμενων αὐτων : S * And may they leave their good name behind for their children, and their glory for the whole nation’: % et nomen eorum permaneat in aeternum permanens ad filios illorum sanctorum virorum gloria. In 32 11 cd and 126 form one clause tf Reading, with Smend, WAY WAX wy IAD (the text has WeAy NY WY ITN): Ce ηγαπημενος ὑπὸ κυριου αὐτου αὶ A C+3apound: 6 “and loved by his Creator’ 8: (τ mpodntns Κυριου κατεστησεν βασιλειαν (Β βασιλεα) και ἐχρισεν ἀρχοντας emt τὸν λαὸν αὐτου h-h 35 Seow, Jor which Smend reads Seer & he that was lent’) after 1 Sam. i. 28 I SS Καὶ $ ‘the kingdom was established’ 1S ‘governors and kings’
9. And He gave strength... Cp. Joshua xiv. 6, 11.
the high places of the land. i.e. the fortified places, cp. Deut. xxxiii. 29; and for the rendering of @& cp. Joshua xiv. 12.
And also his seed... Cp. Num. xiv. 24; Joshua xv. 16 ff.; Judges i. 11 ff. 10. to follow fully. See note on v. 6. 11. each with his name. Ben-Sira desires to make some reference to the names of the Judges collectively without mentioning each by name.
All whose hearts were not beguiled. Cp. Is. xix. 13; the reference is to such passages as Judges xvi. 16-18 (Samson), viii. 27 (Gideon), &c.
May their memory be fora blessing. Cp. xlv. 1 note.
12. May their bones... See xlix. 10.
And may theirname... Cp. Tob. iv. 12, ‘we are the sons of the prophets’; a spiritual relationship is, of course, meant, and in that the good example of Israel’s saints and heroes is emulated by succeeding generations it can be said that their names sprout afresh. See further xliv. 9, 13, 15, xlv. 1, xlix. 1, 9, 13.
sprout afresh. For the Hebr. ἢ ΠΗ cp. xliv. 17.
13. ‘he that was asked for’. Note the word-play in 38 Sewn (‘he that was asked for’) and Syynw in 13a (‘Samuel’). Smend’s emendation (see critical note) is most probably right. Sanctified of Jahveh. % 11), cp. ponds 713 in Judges xiii. 5, xvi.17; Ben-Sira interprets 1 Sam. i. 11 as though it referred to the Nazirite vow. the prophetical office. See note on v. 1. By the word of God. Cp. 1 Sam. ix. 27.
14 "By means of the commandment” °he commanded the congregation®, P And he mustered the tents of Jacob?. 15 °* Because of his truthfulness they sought the prophet’, ’And the seer* was also found reliable in his words*4. τό "ἡ And, moreover, he called upon God” “When his enemies surrounded him on every side", In that he offered up a sucking lamb, x[And cried unto the Lord]*. τῇ *And Jahveh thundered from heaven’, zWith a mighty crash His voice was heard’, 18 *And He subdued the garrisons of the enemy’®, >And destroyed? all the princes® of the Philistines. το “And at the time when he rested upon his bed, He called *Jahveh and His anointed to witness°®: **From whom have I taken a bribe, Seven a pair of shoes?’s* And no man accused him. {And also to the time of his end he was found upright In the eyes of Jahveh and in the eyes of all living .] ᾿ 201?Moreover after he died he was enquired of’, He declared unto the king his way* ;
m ὁ ‘for’ mun Reading Mor (the word is quite mutilated in 10}: G& ev νομῳ Κυριου 0-0 Of expwev συναγωγὴν : S ‘he commanded the congregation’ P-P Ok καὶ ἐπεσκεψατοὸ Κυριος τὸν Ιακωβ (cp. 1 Sam. vii. τό, 17, 2 Chron. xvii. 7 ff.): S ‘And the Lord commanded Jacob’: ® reads apy mds span (‘and he visited the gods of Jacob’); ¢hzs 7s an obvious error which Peters emends by reading py ond: pp" (‘and God visited Jacob’), but this sudden change in the subject of the sentence makes such an emendation improbable ; it ἐς better to read apy day IPE (δέν, Smend),; see further exegetical note. The corruption must have found its way into the Hebr. text very early, since it was read by & qa S> tr The text of ® τς considerably mutilated ; Smend reconstructs wt thus: MIN ΦΥΥῚ YD nrwNIa; Peters would read: AN w II wn3VNA (‘ Because of his reliability the seer was enquired of’); df, according to Smend, there ts not room for \NIVONI, while the upper halves of the letters of YD are quite visible; wir7 ts to be seen on the MS.; the form wr), which occurs in Ὁ. 20, has a different meaning : (τ ev moter αὐτου ἠκριβασθη προφητης S38 (ἃ καὶ εγνωσθὴ ev πιστει (NAC τοῦ ρημασιν HH: ρηματι V 55 248 253 254 Syro-Hex) avrov πιστὸς ορασεως t Reading ΠΝ (for ΝΥ) u-u % ‘And moreover he conquered the enemies on all sides’ V-V Gt καὶ ἐπεκαλεσατὸ Tov κυριον δυναστὴν W-W Qk ἐν τῳ θλιψαι (70 248 Sah Eth+avrov: N* + avrov) exOpous αὐτου (N* > αὐτου) κυκλοθεν s-x A fourth clause ts required, but tt 1s wanting in ® as well as in all the Versions ; the above ts supplied from τ Sam. vil. 9 y-y This clause ts almost wholly mutilated ; Smend reconstructs tt thus: ΝΥ DWN PD DyW from Ck καὶ eBpovtrnoev am ovpavou Kuptos 2-2 G& και ev ny μεγαλῳ ακουστὴν εποιησεν την φωνὴν αὐτου ama Gr καὶ εἐξετριψεν nyoupevous Τυριων (reading “8 [ 5] for “ν) b-b &> © Ge apyovras (in the Sept. catpamns ts used for 72). In ® 17 ὁ and 18 form one clause d-d (χὰ καὶ προ καιρου κοιμησεως αἰῶνος e-e Of evarte Kuptou και χριστου (= 8): + αὐτου NC-2 70 248 ff Oe χρηματα και ews ὑποδηματων απὸ πασὴς σαρκος οὐκ edna 8-8 S> hh & $>; α later glossator added these two clauses (cp. 1 Sam. xiii. 8-15, xvi. 1 ff., xix. 18 ff.) ii (ἃ καὶ μετα To ὑπνωσαι autov ἐπροφητευσεν (Β προεφητευσεν) Kk (ἃ τὴν τελευτὴν αὐτου
πον σον
Se te ee
14. By means of the commandment. # 7183, cp. xliv. 20; the reference is to 1 Sam. vil. 2 ff. the tents of Jacob. Cp. Num. xxiv. 5, ‘ How goodly are thy tents, O Jacob.’ 15. truthfulness. i.e. reliability; cp. 1 Sam. ix. 6. prophet ...seer. See 1 Sam. ix. 9. in his words. Cp. 1 Sam. iii. 19. he offered up a sucking lamb. Cp. 1 Sam. vii. 9. 17. And Jahveh thundered... Cp. 1 Sam. vii. 10; 2 Sam. xxii. 14. crash. YP5 is Neo-Hebraic; it does not occur in the O. T. the garrisons. 2.2) means in the first instance a ‘pillar’ (Gen. xix. 19), and then a small garrison or fore-post the princes. {7D is the special term used especially in Judges and 1 Samuel of the Philistine ‘lords’ or ‘tyrants 5 five in number, who ruled over the five chief Philistine cities; cp. Judges ill, 3; 1 Sam. vi. 17. _ 19. And at the time... his bed. The identical words occur in xl. 5c. Cp. 1 Sam. xii. 2 ff. Jahveh and His anointed. See I Sam. xii. 5. Ἶ a a : even a pair of shoes. i.e. something of a trifling nature; cp. Amos ii. 6, viii.6. Both 2) and & follow the Sept. of τ Sam. xii. 3, and depart from the Massoretic text. 20. he was enquired of. Cp. 1 Sam. xxviil. 7 ff. his way. i.e. his destiny.
#® And he lifted his voice from the earth, 'To blot out iniquity by prophecy.
47 1*And moreover after him* stood up Nathan, To serve” “in the presence of David. 2 4For as‘ the fat is separated ® ‘from the offering?, So was David (separated)f from® Israel. 3 He played® with lions as with kids’, And with bears as / with calves of Bashan).
1-1 Jn ® only one word (ΠΝ }3)3) ἧς preserved in this clause: (τ ev προφετειᾳ εξαλειψαι ἀνομιαν Aaov: 856 ‘to destroy sins by prophecy’ a-a Gr καὶ pera tovtoy (C 55 248 254 τουτοὴ: % post haec ( Sah) Ὁ Ge προφητευειν (70 248 οπροφητης SX): S ‘to cause to hear’ c-c (ἃ ev ἡμεραις (3 3) dd (τ worep: Het quasi enn Zz. ‘lifted up’: (ἃ αφωρισμενον : © separatus (Gr 3 38) ΓῈ & ano σωτηριου ( ddw, cp. Lev. vi. 12): Hacarne ff Expressed in 3 5 (ἃ L+ των vier h Gr ἐπαιζεν (Bab καὶ ἐπαιξεν, C ἐπαισεν, 70 248 254 επεξενωσενὴ : S ‘he slew’: 30 lusit 1 Reading OV) ( & 8) for 11; the plur."’s required to correspond with the plur. in the next clause J) jwa 3a which Haléoy, Peters, Smend, and others emend 10 W833; cp. & ev apvact προβατων (cp. LXX of Ps. cxiv. 14,
To blot out... The reference is to the fact that by announcing the approaching death of Saul, Samuel prophesied the blotting out of the sins of the people, of whom Saul was the representative; Saul’s death atoned for the sins of th people as well as for his own sins. :
1. stood up. 2Y, asin v. 12, in the sense of ‘ appear upon the scene’; this is also frequently the force of the word as used in the later books of the O. T., especially in Daniel ; see e.g. viii. 22, ‘. . . four kingdoms shall stand up [i.e. appear] out of the nation’ (cp. Dan. xi. 2—4, xii. 1), almost equivalent to ‘arise up’ (O)P); see also Ezra ii. 63;
Nathan. It is noticeable that Ben-Sira lays stress on the succession of the prophets, cp. xlvi. 1, xlviii. 1, 12, 22, xlix. 8; his is the conviction of earlier writers and prophets, that the line of prophetical teachers in Israel has been uninterrupted since the time of Moses (cp. Amos ii. 10, iii. 7, 8; Hos. xii. 13; Jer. vii. 25, xv. 1, &c. &c.). As A. B. Davidson well says (Old Testament Prophecy, p. 16f.): ‘The real history of Israel is a history in which men of prophetic rank and name stand at the great turning-points of the people’s life, and direct the movements. The inner progress of the people was throughout guided by prophets who fertilized the religious life of the nation with new thoughts, or nourished the seeds of truth and higher aspirations already planted in the heart of the people into fuller growth and fruitfulness. ...’ This offers a good comment on Ben-Sira’s point of view in these chapters.
To serve in the presence of David. ... ΣΡΩ ayn, lit. ‘to present oneself before’ some one with the implication of readiness for service (cp. e.g. Job i. 6, 11.1; Zech. vi. 5). In 1 Kings i. 26 Nathan speaks of himself as the ‘servant’ of David; but this is exceptional: the true prophets are normally not the servants of any one but Jahveh ; their unfettered freedom of speech and independent attitude towards those in authority were among their leading characteristics. It is probably owing to this that the Greek renders ‘ prophesy’ instead of ‘serve’. The reading of is, however, to be retained, as it more literally accords with the O.T. narrative. On the verse generally see
2. as the fat is separated. The reference is to the intestinal fat of the sacrificial victims (oxen, sheep, and goats), cp. Exod, xxix. 13, 22; Lev. 111. 3 ff., vii. 22 ff.; see also 1 Sam. ii. 15 ff. It is this part of the victim, ‘the fat of the omentum with the kidneys and the lobe of the liver, which the Hebrews were forbidden to eat, and, in the case of sacrifice, burned on the altar... . The point of view from which we are to regard the reluctance to eat of them is that, being more vital, they are more holy than other parts, and therefore at once more potent and more dangerous’ (Robertson Smith, Ze Religion of the Semites*, p. 380f.) The prohibition is only in regard to the fat about these more holy parts, and does not extend to the ordinary fat of an animal referred to in Neh. viii. 10, ‘Go your way, eat the fat (Ὁ ΟΦ, i.e. the tasty fatty morsels), and drink the sweet .. .’
separated. Lit. ‘lifted up’, the technical term used in Lev. iv. 8, 10, 19, &c. for separating the fat from the flesh. Schechter (Zhe Wisdom of Ben-Sira, p. 31) pointedly refers to Ps. Ixxxix. 20 (19 in EV): DY ANI "2 ἽἼΠ, which may well have been in the mind of Ben-Sira.
from the offering. Lit. ‘from the holy thing’, cp. Lev. iii. 3 ff., xxi. 22; Num. v. 9, xviii. 17, 2 Chron. xxix. 333 Ezek. xxxvi. 38.
from Israel. With the rendering of (τ (see critical note) cp. 1. 20. : 3. He played... > pnw in the O. T. means to ‘laugh’, usually in derision (cp. Ps. xxxvii. 13, lix. 9), whereas 3 Pn’ eee play’; e.g. with beasts, in Job xli. 5 (xl. 29 in Hebr.). With the verse before us cp. 1 Sam. xvii. 34-36;
calves of Bashan. Properly ‘bull-calves of Bashan’, which is inappropriate as the parallelism requires a harmless and weak animal of some kind to correspond with ‘kids’; it is scarcely to be doubted that (ἃ $ reflect the right text here.
ἸΡ΄ 4 In his youth* he slew the giant*, ‘And took away" the reproach from the™ people’, "When he swung his hand with® the sling”, And broke? the pride of Goliath. 5 For ‘he called unto God* Most High’, And He gave strength ἴο δ᾽ his right’ hand, So that he struck down" ‘the hero versed in war’, ~ And*® exalted the horn of his people*. 6 °* Therefore the daughters sang of him, And honoured him with: ‘{Slayer] of ten thousand ’*. When he had put on the diadem” he fought, And subdued the enemies on all sides, *And plundered* the Philistine cities >’, And broke their horn unto this day°*.
16): S ‘with lambs’: L cum agnis Kk Ge ovye amexrewev yeyavra ( 1): 7O 248 > οὐχι: SB 14 Reading ny Syo mann apy (following 1 Sam.' xvii. 26 Ν᾽ Syn naan wom); she text, somewhat mutilated, reads apparently ndy main... (cp. Jer. xxiil. 40 ody mann ody ΠΩ and the same in Ps.
Ixxvili. 66) ll (χα εξηρεν τὰ κὁ ‘his’ un & ev τῷ ἐπαραι χειρα (A V χειρας) ev λιθῳ σφενδονὴης OLE ‘upon’ P (τ καταβαλειν (WC 155 κατεβαλεν = i) 9 (τ γαυριαμα: 35. ‘the whole (pride) ’ tr $ ‘he prayed in the sight of God’ (perhaps in reference to 1 Sam. xvii. 45, 47), cb. 39 invocavit Dominum (a/. Deum) omnipotentem 8 Gr Κυριον ss Zt. ‘into’ tZ> ἃ Gr εξαραι VN) mondy PI WN: G ἀνθρωπον δυνατὸν (B* > δυνατον) ev πολεμῳ (Sah wodepurs) : S ‘the mighty man’ WoW (τ ανυψωσαι (B ανυψωσει) WW Gr S> (expressed in 254 3)) x $+‘ Israel’ y-s (τ has mistaken the connexion between these verses and
renders freely:
ουτως ev μυριασιν εδοξασεν avtov καὶ ἥνεσεν αὑτὸν εν εὐλογίαις Κυριου ev τῷ φερεσθαι αὐτῳ διαδημα δοξης. εξετριψεν yap €xOpovs κυκλοθεν και εξουδενωσεν Φυλιστίειμ τοὺς ὑπεναντιοὺς .. . In the last clause G& = ® zz S$ ‘Therefore the women praised him in myriads’ zz 5. ‘crown’
aa Reading 11 (so Peters): ἸΏ text has jn which Lévy adopts, as well as Cowley-Neubauer (‘and set nakedness among the Philistines’); uf the clause ts corrupt ; Halévy suggests tas). See further exegetical note :
3. extirpavit: S ‘he took vengeance on’ Ὁ py (& read DY, which Smend and Halévy adopt, Cowley- Neubauer emend to dy ‘naked’) ὁ © in aeternum 4. In his youth he slew the giant. Cp. 1 Sam. xvii. 40 ff. And took away... Cp. in addition to the references in the critical note, Isa. xxv. 8.
And broke... Lit. ‘broke in pieces’; referring to the cutting off of Goliath’s head and the taking of his armour. 5. he struck down. In the O.T. 477 means to ‘thrust out’ or ‘ push away’ (cp. 2 Kings iv. 27); in Is. xxil. 19, to ‘ depose’ (in reference to Shebna). the hero versed in war. With the Hebrew (see critical note) cp. the words in I Sam. xvii. 33 319 none WN. And exalted the horn of his people. The figure is taken originally from that of the wild-ox holding up his head in conscious strength, well illustrated, e.g., in the oracle of Balaam (Num. xxiii. 22), ‘He hath as it were the horns of the wild-ox’; cp. for the expression 1 Sam. ii. 1; Ps. Ixxxix. 17, cxlviii, 14; 1 Macc. 1]. 48. , 6. Therefore the daughters... Cp. 1 Sam. xviii. 6,7; Ps. Ixviii. 12 (Hebr.). And honoured him. For 3 733 cp.xlv.2; the word means properly to ‘ give a title’, cp. Job xxxii. 21; Is. xliv. 5, xlv. 4; this seems to be the way in which it is used here. ot When he had put on the diadem. 52¥ is used in the O. T. of the high-priestly ‘turban’, see Zech. ili. 5; it is not
used of a king’s crown (the nearest to this being the metaphorical phrase nad ἘΝ, ‘a royal diadem,’ in Is. Ixii. 3), 2 Chron. xxiii. 11; Ps. cxxxii. 18) are used. It is possible that the term which Ben-Sira employs points to the idea of the high-priestly as well as the royal character of David, and this is not without significance from the point of view of the Messianic thought of his times. On the other hand ἢ" is used quite generally in xi. 5, xl. 4.
he fought. i.e. he fought as the leader of the armies of Israel; he had, of course, fought before this on his own account many times (e.g. 1 Sam. xxiii, I-5, xxvii. 7-12, xxx. 17-20); but Ben-Sira lays stress on the fact of David having fought because he was essentially a fighting king (cp. 1 Chron, xxii. 8). ἧς 2 :
7. And subdued the enemies on all sides. Viz. the Philistines (2 Sam. v. 17-25, viii. 1, xxi. 15-22); the Moabites (2 Sam. viii. 2); the Syrians (2 Sam. viii. 5-13, x. 1ff., xii. 26-31); the Edomites (2 Sam. viii. 14) ; the Ammonites
And plundered the Philistine cities. See critical note. The Philistines were the most inveterate foes of the Israelites during the early days of the monarchy; hence the special mention of them here. ᾿ unto this day. Ο. Τ. phraseology. The rendering of 3} (sce critical note) would be really more to the point.
®® 8 4eTn all that he did® ‘he gave thanks‘ Unto God Most High’ ® with words of glory™®. iWith his whole heart he lovedi his Maker’, k And sang praise every day continually*. 9 ‘Music of stringed instruments he ordained™ before the altar, And set "the singing? of psalms to harps™’. & 10?He gave comeliness to the feasts, And set in order the seasons throughout the year x rpaFor that he gave praise’ to His Holy Name; Before morning" the sanctuary® resounded' (therewith)?”. 11 Jahveh also" put away his sin’, And lifted up his horn for ever.
4-ὁ Jn the margin of ® ‘David’ 7s inserted: 3‘ Therefore he gave forth his voice in words of thanksgiving and honour’ e-e ΖΔ ‘in every work of his’ ( &) {τ Reading MYM Ini for MIN. ,.: Cx ἐδωκεν εξομολογησιν ( 3) 8- (τ ayw Ὑψίστῳ ( 3") h-h The text ἐς mutilated ; reading 5 NA (Smend) following & ρηματι (155 ρημασινὴ δοξης + % laudavit dominum et dilexit deum, qui fecit illum et dedit illi contra inimicos potentiam i Read τὰ for INN: E& ὑμνησε και ἡγαπησε: 70 -᾿ κυριον K-k The Hebrew text ἐς much mutilated ; Smend emends as follows : ἽΝ bay ow 33) (of which the text above ts the rendering) ; Peters emends YA bom ow 555) which vs based on the addition of 70 248 to v. 9, an addition which, as Schlatter has shown, belongs here, v12. καὶ καθ ἡμεραν awecovow ev wdas αὐτων : Cr >the whole clause, unless we are to discern a remnant of tt in ὑμνησε και: ΞΘ joins the clause on to Ὁ. 9, see next note 1-1 § ‘and every day he sang praise ( 8 @) in a continual offering’ ;
perhaps in reference fo 1 Chron. Xvi. 6, 37 ... j)8 ΒΟ on, avd wa oy 3395 ὙΠ (Smend): G has:
και eotnoev Wadt@dous κατεναντι Tov θυσιαστηριου και εξ ἡχοὺυς avt@v yAvKawew pedn
(For the addition here of 70 248 see preceding note) m So the marg. of ® on ® marg. Dy ayo dyp © Lit. ‘voice’ pp Lhe text of ® τς wholly mutilated ; Peters, on the basts of &, reconstructs ut as follows :
10 ond in3 (εδωκεν εν εορταις εὐπρεπειαν) mw np pn yw jpn (και εκοσμῆσεν καιρους μεχρι συντελειας (ΞΞ ΠΩ 3 ΓΦ)
S ‘he offered (ΜᾺ gave) great songs of praise year by year’ PP-PP 3> 4-ἃ Ge ev τῷ awew avrovs (Eth avrov): & laudarent Tr GE καὶ απὸ πρωι (πρωιας NAC &c.): + porn NO* 5. 248+ avrov: & dei sanctitatem ὁ (ἃ nxew (70 nye): H amplificarent ug i> Υ (ἃ ras apaptias (= 9) W-W (ἃ διαθηκην βασιλεων (55
8. he gave thanks. Cp. Joshua vii. 19 77)N 112. With his whole heart. Cp. Deut. vi. 5. every day continually. For the phrase cp. xlv. 14 (Hebr.). 9. Music of stringed instruments. 7°? 121); cp. the titles to Ps. iv, vi, liv, lv, Ixi, Ixvii, Ixxvi, and cp. Is. xxxviil. 20; _
Hab. iii. 19. Cp. VY %S> in 1 Chron. xvi. 42, and Sao ΠῚ in xxxix. 15 above. From the time of David onwards stringed instruments seem to have occupied the most important place among musical instruments in the Temple worship; the £zmor (‘lyre’) and zebe/ (‘harp’) are the only two stringed instruments mentioned in the O. T. outside the Book of Daniel.
And set the singing of psalms to harps. Cp. 2 Chron. xvi. 4,5. The meaning seems to be that David composed, or at all events introduced, harp accompaniments to the psalms when sung; ]P>'N means lit. to ‘arrange’ or ‘ put in order’; cp. Eccles. xii. 9, ‘. . . he set in order ({?M) many proverbs.’
Io. He gave comeliness to the feasts. The Zadokites of this period had become lax in the conduct of public worship ; it was probably for this reason that Ben-Sira laid stress on David’s work in this direction, and made special mention of the feasts (Smend).
And set in order the seasons. Cp. 1 Chron. xxiii. 31; i.e. the festive seasons. It is probable that Ben-Sira is reading back into earlier times the developed musical service in the Temple, of which details are given in the Mishnah ; in Voma iii. 11, Tamid vii. 3, e.g., we are told that there was a special Temple official whose duty it was to superintend the psalmody; there were under him a large number of musicians, including singers and instrumentalists; these had to accompany the daily burnt-offerings, as well as the solemn festival services, with the singing of psalms and playing on stringed instruments.
Before morning... Cp. Ps. lvii.8 (9 in Hebr.), ‘I will awake the dawn’; cxix. 62, ‘At midnight I will rise to give thanks to Thee.’ In reference to Ps. |xxii.5 (‘ They shall fear Thee while the sun endureth’) R. Jochanan taught that it was meritorious to worship at dawn. ‘The Wetigin (Κ᾽ ΤῊ = “the ancient pious”) watched for the first rays of the sun to begin the “Ammidah (Berakhoth 96,296). There are now several societies of We¢igin in Jerusalem who worship at that hour. They. have prepared tables of the sunrise for the year round from special observations taken from Mount Olivet.’
11. put away. 133M, lit. to ‘cause to pass away’; see 2 Sam. xii. 13, }YWD WAY 7M DI, which is quoted here | almost verbatim, and cp. 2 Sam. xxiv. 10 (= 1 Chron. xxi. 8),
his horn. Cp. Ps. Ixxxix. 23, cxxxii. 17.
ΘΙ ΘΕ 44 τὶ τὸ
Also He gave to him “the decree of the kingdom”, x And established his throne* over Israel’.
12%And “for his sake* there stood up after him’ >A wise son who dwelt in safety”. 13 Solomon reigned in days of peace’, 4And* God gave him® rest round about‘, Who prepared! a house for “His name’, h And set up*® a sanctuary for ever*. 14 How wise wast thou in thy youth’, JAnd didst overflow like the Nile with instruction": ! 15 !™Thou didst cover the earth with thy soul}, »And didst gather parables like the sea®™. 16 °P Thy name reached unto the isles afar off”, 1And they listened’ for the report of thee?”
254 βασιλεως, 70 248 βασιλειας Syro-Hex #): S ‘the throne of kingship’ X“¥ Gr καὶ Opovoy Sons (cp. a mighty king : 2-2 O& μετα τουτὸν ανεστὴ vios ἐπιστήμων ( 3) aa (δ. b-b O& καὶ δὲ αὐτὸν κατελυσεν (N 70 κατεπαυσεν, ch. Ὁ. 13) εν πλατυσμῳ (=? INWSI, cp. Ps. cxviil. 5): WH et propter illum deiecit omnem potentiam inimicorum, οὗ. v. 8 (critical note): S$ ‘and Solomon dwelt in peace’, jorning this verse 10 13a © 70 248+ καὶ εδοξασθη 4- % cui subiecit deus omnes hostes: 248 + αὑτὸν dd & > 9 N* ὡς (& @) ff wa στησῃ ff (ἃ ex: Hin 8 $4‘for ever’ h-h 5.» bh & ἐτοιμασῃ i $+‘ Solomon’ J Ge και ἐενεπλησθης (εσοφισθὴ C*, -σθης C®) ws ποταμὸς συνεσεως k S ‘wisdom’ Il & alters the construction, γὴν ἐπεκαλυψεν ἡ ψυχὴ σου (70 248 + πασανὴ m-m 3, 201)17|0 this verse on to v. τό, ‘through thine understanding and through the height of the honour of kings ’ n-n Reading aAnw ov wa vdpmi (Smend) for
mw ora dpm (‘And didst gather songs in the height’); she Hedr. text rs mutilated ; Peters, following &, would read AN wna xdonr (‘And didst fill it with dark speeches Ἢ: Ge καὶ everAnoas ev (248>) παραβολαις αἰνιγμάτων 0-0 35.» Wa) eye (U5 4-4 Ge καὶ nyannOns ( probably mistaking Is’ for IAN) εν τῇ εἰρηνῃ σου (mistaking Ἵν for bw) r Lit. ‘yearned for’
the decree of the kingdom. i.e. the decree of perpetual sovereignty to David and his house; cp. v. 22;
And established his throne. It is possible that & read 1123 ND2) (see critical note).
over Israel. This is preferable to ‘over Jerusalem’ of the Hebrew text, which is possibly due to the influence of Messianic thought ; cp. Is. xxiv. 23.
12. And for his sake. i.e. for his father David’s sake ; cp. xliv. 12, 22. As Solomon was not truly faithful to Jahveh (cp. 1 Kings iii. 3, xi. 1-8) his prosperous and peaceful reign is ascribed to the merits of his father David (cp. 1 Kings xi. 12, 13, 32-6). This doctrine of the merits of the fathers (M128 M3!) was much developed in later Jewish teaching, though one can see from a passage like that before us that the essence of the later teaching was already in existence long before. The thought of the solidarity of Israel often finds expression in Rabbinical writings; Israel is one self-contained organism, all the component parts of which are dependent upon each other in spiritual things, so that whatever may be lacking in righteousness to one can be supplied by others who are more righteous. Naturally those who were regarded above all others as righteous were the patriarchs of old, whose good deeds were so great and so Many in number that some of them could be imputed to men of later generations, whose lives were not so rich in well-doing ; cp. e.g. the words in the Midrash Shir ha-shirim (‘Song of Songs’) oni. 5 (‘I am black but comely’): ‘The congregation of Israel says, “1 am black through my own deeds, but comely through the work of my fathers ”.’ It is said of Solomon that before he sinned he had accumulated much merit; but after he sinned all the blessings which he received were due to the merits of his fathers (Midrash Qoheleth rabéa to i. 1); it is precisely the same thought which lies at the base of the verse before us.
who dwelt in safety. Cp. 1 Kings v. 4 (v. 18 in Hebr.).
13. peace. i117, lit. ‘ prosperity’ (cp. Job xii. 5; Ps. cxxii.6; Jer. xii. 1), but peace and prosperity are closely allied ; the peace which Solomon enjoyed owing to his father’s victories enabled him to live in prosperity. And God gave him rest. Cp. 1 Kings v. 4 (v. 18 in Hebr.). And set up a sanctuary for ever. Cp. Ps. Ixxviii. 69, 70. 14. How wise wast thou... For this direct address cp. xlviii. 4-11 ; with the words cp. I Kings iii. 12, iv. 29 ff., x. 1. like the Nile. Cp. xxiv. 27, xxxix. 22. 15. A continuation of the simile in the preceding verse. with thy soul. i.e. with his influence; Smend compares the phrase WD) JAW (‘to pour out the soul’) in I Sam. i. 15; Ps, xlii. 5. Cp. also the words of the queen of Sheba in 1 Kings x. 6; 2 Chron. ix. 5.
16, the isles afar off. Cp. Is. xli. 5, and especially Ixvi. 19 O'PIN7 DYN; ΟΝ is not necessarily an island in the usual sense, indeed very rarely so in the O. T. (cp., however, Is. xl. 15); it refers originally to any land which a mariner can make for in order to gain shelter and rest; later on in the more general sense of ‘border’ or ‘region’.
the report of thee. Cp. 1 Kings x. 1.
17 *By thy songs, parables, dark speeches’,
And satires" thou didst cause astonishment to the peoples‘. τ8 Thou wast called by the glorious name
Which is called over Israel’.
Thou didst heap up gold like tin, And *abundance of* silver like lead’. το *But thou gavest” thy loins* unto women, »And didst give them to rule over thy body”. 20 Yea®, thou broughtest a blemish upon thine honour, And didst defile ‘thy bed4, So as to bring wrath upon thy progeny’, "And sighing concerning thy bed? ; 21 850 the people became®£ two sceptres*, And out of Ephraim ‘(arose) a sinful) kingdom‘. 22 Nevertheless* God! did not forsake His™ mercy, "Nor did He suffer any of His words to fall to the ground”. °He will not cut off the posterity of His chosen”, Nor will He destroy “the offspring* of them that love Him!;
<8 Gr ev ῳδαις καὶ παροιμίαις καὶ παραβολαις : S ‘he interpreted proverbs of wisdom ina book’ t-t Ge και εν (248 L>) ερμηνιᾳ (SC -ἰαις) ἀπεθαυμασαν σε (248>) xopa ἃ 75 the text of ἸΏ this rs jorned to the first clause YY && ev ὀνόματι Κυριου του θεου (70 248 Kuptov maons τὴς yys) του επικεκλημενου Θεοῦ Ἰσραηλ, joining 1] on to the rest of the verse:
S ‘Thou wast called by the name of God, whose is the glory’ Reading ὅν 135 (= (ἃ 8) for S429 (‘like iron’) xx S> y S ‘like dust’ (cp. Job xxvii. τό, Zech. ix. 3) 7-2 (ἃ παρανεκλινας ἃ 248 τὰ σπλαγχνα σου: 8 ‘thy strength’ (cp. Prov. χχχὶ. 3) b-b Gk καὶ ἐενεξουσιασθης ev τῷ σωματι cov: © potestatem habuisti in corpore tuo © &>(hab 253 Syro-Hex) d-d G& τὸ omeppa σου (reading yur for ἽΝ", but cp. Ezra ix. 2, Mal. ii. 15) Θ $ ‘thy children’s children ’ ff Oh καὶ κατενυγὴν ἐπι tn αφροσυνῃ σου 5: (τ γενεσθαι diya τυραννιδα 88 3 ‘ divided itself into’ h $ ‘kingdoms ’ Hi G& ἀρξαι βασιλειαν απειθη JS ‘heathen ’ k Reading ΟΝ (cq. xliv. 10): &> 1 G& ὁ δε Κυριος m 19.» (hab & 5) nn Gf καὶ ov μὴ διαφθαρῃ (A Ne-* διαφθειρῃ) απὸ τῶν epyov αὐτου: 3» et non corrumpet nec delebit opera sua 0-0 Reading 1") yond mas xd (Smend) ;
Peter's reconstruction runs + 33 2) YAN WAN? uy: the text of ® rs much mutilated: Ex ουδὲ μὴ εξαλειψῃ ἐκλεκτοῦ αὐτου ekyova p-p $ ‘the seed of those that love Him’ 4-4 Gt omeppa tov ἀγαπήσαντος avrov: 85 ‘the sons of
His pious ones’ t In the text of ® this ts joined to the preceding clause ss Reading with Smend apy in
17. By thy songs... Evidently Prov. i. 6 was in the mind of Ben-Sira, where several of the same words occur (natn, adn, dwn). Rae
thy songs. Cp. Cant. i. 1, ‘The Song of songs, which is Solomon’s’; 1 Kings iv. 32, ‘and his songs were a thousand and five.’ “) is used of both secular (e.g. Amos ν. 23; Isa. xxiv. 9) and religious songs (e.g. Ps. xlii. 9, Ixix. 31, &c.), and also specifically of the songs of the Levitical choirs in the Temple worship with musical accompaniment
parables. Cp. Prov. x. 1, xxv. I (andy Sw) ; Sun is ‘a sentence constructed in parallelism, usually of Hebrew Wisdom, but occasionally of other types’ (BDZ, s. v.). :
dark speeches. ΠῚ is a saying the meaning of which is not apparent on the surface; cp. Judges xiv. 12 ff.; 1 Kings x. 1; in Ezek. xvii. 2 it has the sense of ‘allegory’; something that needs interpretation.
satires. ΠΥ ; cp. Hab. ii. 6 (‘a taunting riddle’, nN nsdn) ; the root yo means to ‘scorn’. 4 18. Thou wast called by the glorious name... Cp. Deut. xxviii. 10; Amos ix. 12; and the Greek of James ii. 7. The reference here is to the original name given to Solomon, according to 2 Sam. xii. 25, viz. Jedidiah, ‘ Beloved of Jahveh’; see Ryssel ‘7 /oc. (& did not see the point, and probably altered the phrase deliberately, which it regarded as irreverent. Thou didst heap up... Cp. 1 Kingsx. 21, 27. like lead. ‘Like stones’ in 1 Kings x. 27.
19. But thou gavest... Cp. 1 Kings xi. 1-3. 20. thou broughtest a blemish... Cp. xliv. 19. And didst defile... Cp. Gen. xlix. 4.
And sighing concerning... i.e. Solomon’s lax morality caused grief to men. It is strange that Ben-Sira makes no direct reference to Solomon’s idolatry (cp. 1 Kings xi. 4-8), though it is implied by 21 a. ὃ 21. So the people became two sceptres. Cp. 1 Kings xii. tL a sinful kingdom. Lit. ‘violent’; in Amos ix. 8 occurs ANONT 770. 22. did not forsake His mercy. Cp. 2 Sam. vii. 15; Ps. Ixxxix. 33 (34 in Hebr.). : Nor did He suffer any of His words... For the phrase cp, e.g. 1 Sam. 111. 19; 2 Kings x. 10, ἃς. a posterity. j)),cp.xli.5; the word isa rare one, occurring only three times in the O.T. (Gen. xxi. 23; Job xvill. 195 His chosen. "ὙΠ is used in reference to Israel in xlvi. 1.
rs FS
“σ΄ πε, ἘΠ ῈΉΤ
And He will give to Jacob a remnant’, ‘And to the house of David "a root from him"*.
(2) XLVII. 23-25. The wickedness of the people under the kings who succeeded Solomon (= 2+ 3 distichs).
23 And Solomon slept’ Yin Jerusalem™,
And left after him *one that was overbearing*. YGreat in folly¥ and lacking in understanding 2(Was) he who’ by his counsel made the people revolt. ® And (then) he arose—of him let there be no memorial*— »Who sinned and made Israel to sin”, ¢And put 4a stumbling-block (in the way) of Ephraim®®’,
24 ‘To drive them from their land;
# And their sin became very great®‘, + And they sold themselves to (do) all manner of evil.
1 Until* there arose” a prophet like fire, Whose* word? was “like a burning furnace’.
nN (the text of 38 rs much mutilated) & t-t Reading with Smend wre ye I 125) (the text of ® is again almost wholly obliterated): €& καὶ τῳ Δαυειδ εξ αὐτου ριζαν wu $ ‘a great kingdom’ Υ (ἃ ἀνεπαύσατο w-w Reading with Peters "envi (abbreviation for ὈΝΟΦΥΣ, see exegetical note below) ; only the last letter (wv) of the word is preserved ; Smend proposes werd (‘ despairing’, cp. Eccles, ii. 20): Gt pera τῶν πατέρων ( + αὑτοῦ NA Sah # "ΣΝ Dy): > x-x Reading yD (see fLebr. of Prov. xxix. 21 [.Smend |) : (ἃ ek Tov σπερματος αὐτου (cp. LXX of Gen. xxi. 23 p10 [Smend]): S> YY (τ Aaov αφροσυνην (Syro-Hex λαὸν αφροσυνηςῚ) 2.2 Reading Ws; the present text has nyann, but this cannot have been the original reading as clauses c and d are enclosed within ἌΓ, and dy; this play on the name of Rehoboam makes it in the highest degree improbable that the name itself would also appear : & reads os, which reflects the original text, but places before it ‘Rehoboam’. For another word-play see x\viii. 17, 22 aa Reading with Smend 72% om by op for “" bs OP WS Ty 3) j2 Dyan ἽἼΞΙ ὦ; apart from the fact that this makes the clause too long, the mention of ‘ Jeroboam the son of Nebat’ can hardly have originally stood together with ‘of him let there be no memorial’. Zhe words DP AWN ἫΝ presuppose a connexion with the preceding clauses which would give no sense ; they are evidently taken from x\viii. 1. The present text has clearly suffered at the hands of a glossator: G& καὶ lepoBoau wor (δὲ wos) Ναβατ: % ‘let there be no memorial to him, (even) to jeroboam the son of Nebat’ b-b G& os εξημαρτεν τον Ἰσραηλ c-e Although these words are considerably mutilated in the text of ἸΏ sufficient remains to decipher them with reasonable certainty 4- (χὰ odov auaprias © S$ ‘the house of Ephraim’ ff wrongly transposes these two clauses S-8 Gr και ἐπληθυνθησαν av ἀμαρτιαι avrwv opodpa: S$ ‘ And he made their sins many’ h-h @& καὶ πασαν πονηριαν εξεζητησαν + ews (A ws) εκδικησις ἐλθῃ ἐπ αὐτοὺς : 70 248 - opyy καὶ εκδικησις : H+usque dum perveniret ad illos defensio et ab omnibus peccatis liberavit eos (dominus), cf. v. 11 and xlviii. 1-15 ἃ G& ‘and’ b @+‘ Elijah’ e Lit. ‘And his’ 4 Reading 737 ( (ἃ 3) for 735 €-€ Ok ws λαμπας exaceto: 3S combines & ® ‘ burned like
aremnant. Cp. xliv. 17. ...aroot. Cp. Is. xi. 1, 10; a reference to the Messianic hope, cp. 1 Kings x1. 39.
23. slept. 13 standing alone as here never has the sense of ‘dying’ in the O. T.; it is always followed by some words which explain it as referring to death, e.g. in 1 Kings xi. 43, ‘he slept with his fathers’; in Isa. xiv. 8 the context shows that death is meant ; otherwise it means simply to ‘sleep’ or ‘lie down’, &c.
in Jerusalem. Every suggested emendation must from the nature of the case be hypothetical; the one adopted in the text is that proposed by Peters; it commends itself on account of 1 Kings xi. 42, 43: ‘And the time that Solomon reigned in Jerusalem... And Solomon slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David...’ The abbreviation
“YY might, apart from other reasons, conceivably have been suggested by the false etymology ndw yn (‘ possession
of peace’), which has been one of the etymologies put forward in the past (cp. /Z, vii. 119 a). The rendering of t (see
critical note), which would commend itself on account of the phraseology, is ruled out because of the absence of a final Δ involved, which is clear in the text; the omission of μετὰ τῶν πατέρων in S is also against these words representing | the original. made...revolt. Lit. ‘throw off restraint; cp. Prov. xxix. 18; with the whole clause cp. 1 Kings xi. 8, 13, 14. and made Israel to sin. Cp. 1 Kings xiv. 16. And put a stumbling-block... Cp. 1 Kings xii, 28. i 24. To drive them from their land. Cp. 2 Kings xvii. 22, 233 Jer. xxvii. 10. And they sold themselves... Cp. 1 Kings xxi, 20. ' (m) XLVIII. 1-11 (ELIJAH). f I. a prophet like fire. Cp. Mal. iv. 1, 5 (ill. 19, 23 in Hebr.). like a burning furnace. Cp. 2 Kingsi. 1off.
2! And he broke for them the staff of bread‘,
And by his zeal" imade them few in number?é. 3 By the word of God* "he shut up the heavens! ;
Fire™ also” descended thrice®. 4? How terrible wast thou, Elijah? !
And he who is like thee shall be glorified". 5 Who didst raise up a dead man "from death’,
And from Sheol'*, "according to the good pleasure" of Jahveh ¥ ; 6 Who broughtest down “kings to the Pit*,
And¥ them that were honoured from their beds” [of sickness] ; 7 *Who heardest® rebukes? in Sinai,
¢ And judgements of vengeance in Horeb*. 8 Who anointedst kings °for retribution ®,
‘And a prophet as successor in thy place?. 9 Who wast taken upwards £in a whirlwind,
4 And by fiery troops to the heavens”. το 1Who art ready for the time, as it is written’,
kTo still wrath before the fierce anger of God!*,
a burning furnace ’ Tf Ge ( 5) os (S καὶ) ἐπηγαγεν ex avtovs λιμὸν (-Εἰσχυρον 248) s-s & et inritantes illum invidia sua pauci facti sunt+non poterant enim sustinere praecepta domini h + uyupo 70 ini 3 ‘he rent them asunder’ K Ge Κυρίου 1-1 G& ἀνεσχεν ovpavoy m 70 248: S Syro-Hex Eth+‘ from heaven’: £-+ terrae 1 Gr ovras (>NC* 70 248 253) © $+4*upon the altar and upon the godless men’ Ρ-Ρ (ἃ ws εδοξασθης HActa ev τοις θαυμασιοις cov: W& sic amplificatus est Elias in mirabilibus suis ᾳ Lit. “ shall glorify himself’: Gr καυχασθαι (δ A τοῦ 155 296 καυχησεται --- H): 3. potest gloriari Rae SSS 83> t 7o 248 253 Syro-Hex + ψυχην uu 77 ἧς possible that ® read Δ instead of 3 ( 3): ( εν Roya, οὗ. Ὁ. 3 Vv 3 (ἃ ‘the Most High’: 3» domini dei WW (ὁ. X (ἃ εἰς ἀαπωλιίαν : + et confregisti facile potentiam ipsorum y 3 ‘thrones’: G& κλινης 2 ® transposes vv. 7, 8 a Reading yown ( &) for youn ( 3 ‘who proclaimed ’) b 3 ‘in his temptation’ (msunderstanding the whole verse): (ἃ ἐλεγμὸν : 70 248 253 Syro-Hex + Κυρίου ce $> 4 Reading 52 ( & 8) for ΝΟῸ e-e So G& εἰς ἀνταποδομα (B modwn ὃ, ὃ ) Ef Gk καὶ προῴητας Siadoyous per avrov: W et prophetas facis successores post te 8-ὃ (ἃ ev λαιλαπι πυρὸς h-h OF εν appatt ἱππὼν πυρινων : & ‘ by fiery horses to heaven’: ® zs mutilated at the end of the verse, ‘to the heavens’ zs added on the basis of S (cp. 2 Kings ii. 11 DWN AAYD3) i-i 15 “1. ‘Who art written (as) ready for the time’: G ο καταγραφεις ev ἐλεγμοις (ελλεγμουις (sz) N, ἐλεγμοὺς 248, edeypos A) εἰς καιροὺς (V 55 254 Syro-Hex καιρὸν 3η); εν ἐλεγμοῖς 7s probably a corruption of eroos: ‘And he who is ready to come’ kk The end of this line in ἸΏ vs mutilated, though the ὃ of by zs veseble according to Smend and Peters: & κοπασαι ὀργὴν (+ κρισεως Kuptov 70 248) προ θυμου: & ‘before the day of Jahveh comes’ (= Mal. iii. 23 [iv. 5 EV]) 1% domini m-m $> nn @& πατρὸς πρὸς υἱὸν : % ‘the children unto the fathers ’ 0-0 $ 27}. ‘to proclaim’
3. he shut up the heavens. Cp. 1 Kings xvii. 1; James ν. 17. Fire also descended thrice. Cp. 1 Kings xviii. 38; 2 Kings i. 10,12. For the addition of S$ (see critical note) cp. I Kings xix. 38. 4. How terrible wast thou... For this direct address cp. xvii. 14. 5. Who didst raise up... Cp. 1 Kings xvii. 17-24. adead man. For the Hebr. Μὴ} cp. viii. 7. 6. Who broughtest down kings... Cp. 1 Kings xix. 17, xxi. 109 ff. the Pit. See ix. 9, li. 2 (Hebr. and Gr.) ; cp. Ezek. xxviii, 7.
And them that were honoured... i.e. these he brought down to the Pit; the reference is to Ahaziah, 2 Kings 7. Who heardest rebukes... Cp. 1 Kings xix. 9 ff., 15 ff. As in τ. 6 the two clauses say the same thing in ἃ
different way. Ben-Sira regards Sinai and Horeb as identical, but it is questionable whether he was correct in this, though many modern scholars regard the two as identical. On the other hand, Cheyne (ZB, iv. 4643) says that originally they were distinct : ‘ Horeb lay in the Sinaitic peninsula, Sinai in Midian, on the west coast of Arabia’ (cp. Wellhausen, Prolegomena’, p. 359; Moore, Judges, pp. 140,179; Stade, Entstehung des Volkes Israel, p. 12). Von Gall regards the ἘΠΡΟ ΒΟΟΣ of the two as ‘a post-exilic confusion’ (A/éisraelitische Kultstatten, p. 15). See further Driver on xod. iii. 1. 8. Who anointedst kings. i.e. Hazael and Jehu; cp. 1 Kings xix. 15, 16. retribution. Cp. xil. 2, where the Hebr. word is used in the sense of ‘ recompense’. a prophet. Cp. 1 Kings xix. 19-21. as successor. Cp. xliv. 17 (Hebr. and Gr.). in thy place. Cp. 1 Kings xix. 16, ‘and Elisha... shalt thou anoint to be prophet in thy room.’
To ™turn the heart of™ the "fathers unto the children”, And °to restore the® tribes of Israel”. 11 4Blessed is he that seeth thee, and dieth®,
Τ a 5 Yr
(z) XLVIII. 12-16. Elisha. The sinfulness of the people and their punishment
G 12 ‘Elijah was hidden in the [heavenly] chambers’,
Then was Elisha filled with his spiritt®. vIn double measure did he multiply signs,
And marvellous was all that went forth out of his mouth’. All his days he moved “before no man”,
And no flesh* exercised authority over his spirit’ ;
(te. fo preach the Gospel fo; due to Christian influence) Ρ (ἃ Ιακωβ ( 2), cp. Isa. xlix. 6 4-4 Ge μακαριοι οἱ ἰδοντες σε και οἱ εν ἀγαπήσει (read εν ἀαναπαυσει) KEKOO [LN LEVOL (248 253 254 κεοιμημενοι): 5S ‘Blessed is he that hath seen thee and is dead’ rr This line ts almost wholly obliterated in %; Smend, on the basis of G& 55, proposes to read: mnn mn 5 Paws (‘And [more] blessed art thou thyself, for thou livest’), making the words refer to Elijah ; Peters, also following G, would read: ΡΤ 7M NIN Di 5 (‘ For we too shall live [again]’), as hough the words referred to Ben-Sira’s readers (see further exegetical note): Ge καὶ yap npets fon (N*A Cons, 70 Conv) ζησομεθα: ‘nay, he dies not but lives’: % post mortem autem non erit tale nomen nostrum (cz reference fo Elijah) 8-8 7s much mutilated, the text represents Smend’s reconstruction: AND) 7\NIw mx, based tn part on G& and & ; Ηλειας os (7o>) ev λαιλαπι ἐσκεπασθη (7x LXX σκεπαζειν ND): S ‘ Elijah was gathered into the chambers in Heaven’: Pelers reconstructs: 7nd) ΠΡΌΣ Ww dN t-t ® vs again almost entirely obliterated, only three letters remaining ; the above ws the rendering of &: %‘ And Elisha received a double (portion) of prophecy’ uA 7o 248 Syro-Hex + ay.ou γτν & >: S ‘And many wonders and signs did his mouth utter’ W-W Gi ὑπὸ (55 248 aro) ἄρχοντος (70 248 ἀρχοντωνὴ X-X Oi και... ovders Σ (ἃ avrov ( 9)
... And to restore the tribes of Israel. With & καταστῆσαι φυλὰς ᾿Ιακώβ cp. Mark ix. 12 ὁ δὲ ἔφη αὐτοῖς ᾿Ηλείας μὲν ἐλθὼν πρῶτον ἀποκατιστάνει πάντα, with which Weber compares the \NT ΠΡ by which Rabbi Sa‘adya Gaon expresses Elijah’s activity preparatory to the coming of the Day of Jahveh (/vidische Theologte, p. 353).
This is one of the few passages in which Ben-Sira refers to the Messianic Hope (see also xliv. 21, xlv. 25, xIvil. 11, 22, xlvili. 24, 25, xlix. 12, |. 24, li. 12) ; but neither the nature of the book nor the historical circumstances of the time, by which Messianic conceptions were always conditioned, were such as to lead one to expect much stress to be laid on this subject. During the third century B.C. the Jews lived in quietude and prosperity, and the hopes concerning the Messianic Age seem to have dropped into the background ; not that the Jews ever really abandoned (until quite modern times) their Messianic expectations ; these only ceased, for the time being, to play an important part.
11. Blessed is he... 1.6. those that saw Elijah in the flesh were blessed, though they died. The next line of this verse is almost entirely obliterated in # (see critical notes). Peter’s suggested reading can scarcely be right, as it presupposes conceptions concerning the future life which are too advanced for the time of Ben-Sira. By the time the Greek translation was made the beliefs regarding this subject had greatly developed. The rendering of S is due to Christian influence. As regards Smend’s proposed reading, the point is that Elijah was still alive, i.e. he had never died ; the reference is not to life after death.
Elijah has been glorified in Jewish legend more than any other biblical personage. ‘The Haggadah which makes this prophet the hero of its description has not been content, as in the case of others, to describe merely his earthly life and to elaborate it in its own way, but has created a new history of him, which, beginning with his death, or “translation”, ends only with the close of the history of the human race. From the day of the prophet Malachi, who says of Elijah that God will send him before “the great and dreadful day”’, down to the later marvellous stories of the Hasidic rabbis, reverence and love, expectation and hope, were always connected in the Jewish consciousness with the person of Elijah. As in the case of most figures of Jewish legend, so in the case of Elijah, the biblical account became the basis of later legend. Elijah the precursor of the Messiah, Elijah zealous in the cause of God, Elijah the helper in distress—these are the three leading notes struck by the Haggadah, endeavouring to complete the biblical picture with the Elijah legends’
12. hidden in the [heavenly] chambers. Smend is probably right in his reconstruction of the Hebrew text; the ‘chambers in Heaven’ of $ doubtless reflects the original Hebrew, though ‘in Heaven’ may well be an explanatory addition, and ‘ chambers’ was most likely in the singular in the Hebrew as Ben-Sira speaks elsewhere of only a single ‘chamber’ in the realms above (see xxxix. 17, 30, xliii, 14); the division of the heavens into various departments of which the innermost is the J/ehiza, or dwelling-place of the Almighty, is a later development (cp. 1 Enoch xxii. 9-12, 4 Ezra iv. 35, 41, v. 37, vi. 22; see also 2 Cor. xii. 14; Medarim 32 a [T.B.], Shabbath vi. 8d [T.J.], Midrash Bereshith Rabbah, 1. \xviii).
was Elisha filled... Cp. 2 Kings ii. 9, 13. ho ; ᾿ In double measure... Cp. 2 Kings ii. 9, 20-22. Peters thinks that the omission of these two lines in & (see critical note) may be due to the fact that they seem to give more honour to Elisha than to Elijah; the omission may, however, be merely due to an oversight. moved. Cp. Esther v. 9, ‘... that he stood not up nor moved for him.’
13 Nothing was “too wonderful for him’,
zz And *from his grave® his flesh ** prophesied”, 14 In® his life he did wonderful acts,
And in his* death marvellous works.
15 For all this the people turned® not, And ceased‘ not from their® sins® ; Until they were plucked» from their land, And were scattered in all the earth. Ὁ i And there were left ‘unto Judah but a few"! ; 1But still a prince was left unto the house of David’. 16 Some among them did ™that which was right™, ᾿Ξ And some “among them” °committed fearful sin®.
17 Hezekiah fortified” his‘ city, ‘In that he brought" water’ into the midst thereof, t And hewed through the rocks with iron‘, «And dammed up the pool with mountains". 18 In his days Sennacherib came up’, And sent Rabshakeh ¥, «And stretched forth* his hand’ against Zion, And blasphemed? God in* his arrogancy.
2-2 (ἃ umepnpev avrov: S ‘was hidden from him’ w-wh. S> a-a yn, 11). ‘from his place beneath’: (ἃ ev κοιμησει aa ( τὸ copa αὐτου b Reading with Smend and Peters $1) ( (1) for 8723 ὁ (ἃ και (7O>) ev 4 G&> (70 248 38) ὁμί -Ἐ αὐτου after ‘ works’ © (ἃ μετενοησεν (cp. Xvii. 4) f (ἃ ἀπεστησαν eBAC> 2g S‘evildeeds’ Gr empovopevOnoav: S ‘went into captivity ii S$ ‘And Judah alone remained a small dominion to the house of David’ k-k G& 0 λαὸς ολιγοστος I-l (ἃ και αρχωὼν (wee apxovres) ev (> BiG 55) τῷ οἰκῳ Δαυειδ m-m (& τὰ ἀρεστὸν : S repentance’ wan (US 0-0 9 21}. ‘did iniquity wondrously ’: S$ ‘added sins unto sins’: Gr ἐπληθυναν ἀμαρτιας bp S ‘built’ « 5.» IT Or και εἰσηγαγεν ( 3) 8 BC τὸν yoy, N* V 253 τὸν nwy (Νο:ἃ τὸν aywyor), 70 Syro-Hex τὸν νηωρ (A 248 39); probably corruptions of v8paywyov (‘a conduit’) tt S>: (ἃ ὠρυξεν σιδηρῳ axporopoy uu S>: Ck καὶ ὠκοδομησεν κρηνας (/. κρημνουςῚ es vdara v $+ ‘against them’ W 70 248+ εκ Aayes (cp. 2 Kings xviii. 17, xix. 8): Cr+xav ἀπηρεν (dittography): %&+ et sustulit manum suam contra illos (a variant of the third clause) S-X Ge καὶ emnpev y BNC η χει (A 70 248 χειρα [ 3: Syro-Hex Sah Eth]) 2 (ἃ ἐμεγαλαυχησεν ἃ &>(hab Ν 70 ἄς.) b-b $> ο So Gr, and
13. Nothing was too wonderful... i.e. too hard; cp. Gen. xviii. 14, ‘Is any thing too hard (lit. too wonderful) for the Lord?’
And from his grave... Cp. 2 Kings xili. 20, 21. - Peeper i.e. exercised prophetic powers, though of course in a different way from that recorded of Samuel in 14. Practically a repetition of the preceding verse.
And ceased not from their sins. The repentance recorded in 1 Kings xviii. 39 was but of short duration.
Until they were plucked... Cp. Deut. xxviii. 63.
there were left unto Judah but a few. Cp. Is. xxiv. 6.
16. did that which was right. Cp. the oft-repeated formula in Kings, e. g. 1 Kings xv. 11, ἄς. (0) XLVIII. 17-25 (HEZEKIAH AND ISAIAH). 17. Hezekiah fortified. Note the word-play in Hebrew PIN itn’. Cp. 2 Chron. xxxii. 5, 30.
In that he brought water... Cp. 2 Kings xx. 20; 2 Chron. xxxiii. 30.
And hewed through the rocks. The reference is evidently to the boring of the tunnel from the Gihon to the Pool of Siloam ; see Driver, Votes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Samuel, pp. xv, xvi, who says in reference to the inscription in the tunnel which leads to the Pool: ‘ The inscription will not be later than the time of Hezekiah, who ‘is stated to have “made the pool, and the conduit, and brought water into the city ”, in terms which appear exactly to describe the function of the tunnel in which the inscription is.’ On the inscription the word 2M, ‘ hew through’, here
used occurs twice in the sense of cutting through a rock; and V¥, ‘rock’, which likewise occurs twice on the inscription, is the word used in the text.
And dammed up... Cp. Is. xxii. 11; Ezek. xxxix. 11. 18. Sennacherib. Cp. 2 Kings xviii. 13 ff.; 2 Chron. xxxii. 1 ff; Is. xxxvi. 1 ft. stretched forth his hand... Cp. Is. x. 32; and for the expression see Job xv. 25.
blasphemed God... Cp. 2 Kings xviii. 22; 15. xxxvii. 6, 23.
» 19 >Then® were they shaken ‘in the pride of their heart“, And they writhed as °a woman in travail®?; 20 And they called unto God Most High®*, 5 And spread out their hands unto Him? ; iAnd He heard the voice of their prayer*', And saved! them by the hand of Isaiah™ ; 21 And He smote” the army of Assyria, ° And discomfited them by the plague®.
22 ?For Hezekiah did? “that which was good‘,
—And was strong’ in the ways of David*— ‘Which Isaiah the prophet" commanded _him*,
Who was great and faithful in his vision.
23 “In his days the sun went backward *, And he added life unto the king.
24 By a spirit of might he saw the future®*. And comforted Ythe mourners of Zion’.
25 Unto eternity he declared the things that shall be, And hidden things before they came to pass’.
! 1 The name? of Josiah is as sweet-smelling incense, That is well mixed, the work? of the apothecary. ©The mention of him® is sweet 4in the palate? as honey, And as music at a banquet of wine.
probably 38, but the text ts mutilated d-d (ἃ καρδίαι και χειρες αὐτων e-e Ok αἱ τικτουσαι ἘΞῈ CS ξ-ὃ Uk τὸν κυριον τον ἐλεημονα h-h § ‘And Hezekiah spread out his hands before the Lord’ i-i Qf και o aywos εξ ovpavov ταχυ (V 248>) επηκουσεν αὐτῶν k-k S$ ‘And God quickly heard their prayer’: 30 vocem ipsorum + non est commemoratus peccatorum illorum neque dedit illos inimicis suis 1 purgavit m+ sancti prophetae n $ ‘broke up’ 0-0 Gk καὶ εξετριψεν αὐτοὺς ὁ ayyedos αὐτου : S ‘And smote them with a great blow’ p-P So (τ 3; the text of ® ts mutilated 9-4 (ἃ τὸ ἀρεστὸν Κυριῳ (N* >) τ S ‘walked’ 5 (τ (s* >)+rov πατρος αὐτου (cp. 2 Kings xviii. 3) t In ® the remainder of this verse and τ᾿. 23 τς wholly mutilated ἃ $+ ‘the most praiseworthy of the prophets’ . SoS L(G>) w-w % ‘For by his hand the sun stood still’ Χ Qt ra ἐσχατα Y-Y Gk τοὺς πενθουντας εν Serwv 2-2 3‘ And as long as he was in the world he saw signs and wonders before they came to pass’ (a misunderstanding, or conscious alteration of, the Flebrew text): & BY ἃ G& pynpoovvoyv: % memoria >» B ‘by the work’ (A ®) ὅτ &> dd && ev παντι στοματι
19. they writhed... Cp. 2 Kings xix. 3; Isa. xiii. 8. 20, spread out their hands. Cp. 2 Kings xix. 14, 15, where, however, only Hezekiah does so. He heard the voice... Cp. 2 Kings xix. 20. And saved them... Cp. 2 Kings xix. 20 ff. 21. And He smote... Cp. 2 Kings xix. 35. And discomfited them... For & (cp. critical note), which has perhaps the better reading, see 2 Kings xix. 35 (Hebr. and Sept.), and cp. 1 Macc. vii. 41, 2 Macc. viii. 19. 22. Who was great... Cp. Is. vil. 23. the sun went backward. Cp. 2 Kings xx. 9-11; Is. xxxviil. 7, 8. he added life unto the king. Cp. 2 Kings xx. 5, 6; Is. xxxviil. 5. the future. NM’ MN, lit. ‘the end’; the reference is to the return from the Exile (Is. xl. 3-11), and to the glorious future in store for Jerusalem (Is. Ixi. 1-7). And comforted the mourners... Cp. Is. xl. 1, lxi. 2, 3. 25. With this and the preceding verse compare what is said in 7716 Martyrdom of Isaiah, ch. iv. I. as sweet-smelling incense. Lit. ‘incense of spices’, cp. Exod. xxxvil. 29. That is well mixed. Lit. ‘that is salted’, cp. Exod. xxx. 35. For the use of salt in the cultus cp. Lev. ii. 13 (‘With all thine oblations thou shalt offer salt’), see ZB, iv. 4249. in the palate. Cp. Prov. xxiv. 13.
#” 2 ©For he was grieved? at our backsliding®, And put an end to £the vain abominations? ; 3 And he *gave his heart wholly® unto God?, And in days of violence* 'he practised piety’.
(gq) XLIX. 4-7. Fudah’s evil kings ; the persecution of Feremiah (%+2+2 distichs).
4 Except David™, Hezekiah, "and Josiah, They all dealt utterly corruptly”, And? forsook the Law ?of the Most High P— The kings of Judah, till [they came to] their end ; 5 And their might? was given” unto others*, And their glory to a strange’ nation ; 6 And so "the Holy City" was burned, And the ways thereof laid waste Through’ Jeremiah; 7. because they had persecuted* him, And he a prophet formed from the womb,
€-@ αὐτὸς κατευθυνθὴ ev επιστροφῃ λαου (δὲ αὐτου) Ck f Reading mbna Sor bmp (Simend) 8- (ἃ βδελυγματα ἀνομίας h-h G& κατευθυνεν τὴν καρδιαν αὐτου: 3» et gubernavit, &c. i (ἃ ® ‘the Lord’ k && avopwv ( tL) 1-|Ὲ G& κατίσχυσεν την ευσεβειαν ( 35) ™ G& 3+ καὶ (so Peters) n-n fext makes the second line begin with ‘and Josiah’ (innwn obs wwN), dul rt ds better to keep ‘and Josiah’ in the previous line and emend the second line by adding inf. abs. (= (8), reading inne nnwn nd> (so Peters) ο & ‘For’ p-p S$> a Lit. “horn’ t Zit. ‘he gave’ 8 Reading DNS (znstead of ΠΝ Ὁ) Ξε (ἃ 5 t %+5a)
(variant from |, 26 (?)) u-u @& ἐκλεκτὴν πολιν αγιασματος v Lit. “ΒΥ the hand of’ (= &); ‘In the days of’ S, a correction from x\viil. 18, 23 ΣΧ 35. ΠῚ} : (ἃ εκακωσαν Υ & ‘sanctified (cp. Jer. i. 5) % (ἃ ‘to harm’
2. he was grieved... ® (bn3) he entered upon his inheritance’ (?), yields no satisfactory sense; the reference is doubtless to the effect produced on Josiah by the newly-discovered Book of the Law, cp. 2 Kings xxii. 11 ff. For the Hebrew as emended cp. Amos vi. 6. The Greek (‘He behaved himself uprightly in the conversion of the people’) means that he showed his uprightness by converting the people to obedience to the Law; but possibly & should be emended, ἀποστροφῇ for ἐπιστροφῇ ().
put anend to. Cp. 2 Kings xxiii. 5, II. abominations. Cp. 2 Kings xxiil. 13.
3. gave his heart wholly. Or ‘ perfectly’; the expression is formed on the model of such expressions as
‘integrity of heart’, cp. Gen. xx. 5. For the verb (Hiph‘il form) cp. Job xxii. 3. he practised piety. For the term as applied to Josiah see 2 Kings xxiii. 3, 25.
(g) XLIX. 4-7 (JUDAH’s EvIL KINGs).
4. Except David... Ben-Sira definitely excludes all other kings except the three mentioned ; contrast, however, the representation of the Chronicler, according to whom Asa (2 Chron. xv. 8 ff.) and Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. xvii. 5 ff.) ought to be reckoned among the pious reforming monarchs. The Book of Kings also speaks favourably, though not with such marked emphasis, of these two rulers (see 1 Kings xv. 11 ff., xxii. 43).
the Law of the Most High. For Ben-Sira’s attitude towards the Law see Introduction, ὃ 9 ii. till [they came to] their end. 1.6. until their death, or, perhaps, until their line came to an end. The Hebrew is ambiguous; the context (see next verse) rather favours the latter.
5. And their might was given. (& ἔδωκαν γὰρ τὸ κέρας αὐτῶν: for the phrase cp. 1 Macc. ii. 48, also Ps. Ixxv. 5.
others ... strange nation. i.e. the Babylonians. By their sins the kings brought about the ruin of the nation, culminating in the Babylonian Exile.
a strange nation. 3) "11; cp. 173) DY, Exod. xxi. 8; apparently the combination 133 "3 does not occur in the O. T. elsewhere.
6. the Holy City. wP NP; the designation of Jerusalem as the Holy City (W777 WY) occurs first in Is. xlvili. 2, lii. 1, also in Neh. xi. 1,18; cp. Dan. ix. 24; MP is a poetical variation on the common VY (‘city’). For & (a refinement) see crit. note.
was burned. Cp. 2 Kings xxv. 9.
the ways thereof. Cp. ‘the ways of Zion’, Lam. i. 4.
laid waste. Cp. 2 Kings xxv. 10; the same root is used in reference to the gates of the city in Lam. i. 4.
Through Jeremiah. Jeremiah prophesied the destruction of Jerusalem, cp. e.g. Jer. xxxvi. 29; the actual fulfilment of this prophecy is regarded by Ben-Sira as the inevitable result of the prophet’s prediction; the prophecy produced its own fulfilment. From another point of view the prophet may be regarded as having been inspired to foresee the result which was inevitable from other causes. Ben-Sira here seems to regard the prophecy of woe as being invested with the same fatal power which, according to ancient ideas, belonged to the uttered curse.
7. because they had persecuted him. For the persecution of Jeremiah see Jer. xxxi-xxxviii. Because they persecuted God’s chosen representative and servant (the prophet) they brought upon themselves destruction.
And hea prophet... Cp. Jer. i. 5.
ΤῸ pluck up, to break down’, and to destroy, And likewise to build, and to plant, “and to strengthen*.
(r) XLIX. 8-10. Ezekiel, Fob, and the Twelve Prophets (2 +2 distichs).
8 Ezekiel saw a vision, And described the different beings of the chariot. 9» He also made mention of Job “(among the prophets)*” deWho maintained “ fall the ways of righteousness “αὶ το And, moreover, as for the Twelve Prophets,— ® May their bones (flourish in their place) 8, Who recovered Jacob to health®, ὃ iAnd delivered him (by confident hope)‘.
(_ yan, cp. Jer. xxxi. 28) 8-ὃ > b-D (χὰ καὶ yap ἐμνησθὴ των exper ev ομβρῳ ὁτὸ Restoring “S12 i.e. DINDI: G mzsread Δ), cp. Aquila, Ps. Ixxvii. 2 for ομβριω ( yan); 3) ALS. has space Jor this but τς tllegible : SS d-d 55. ‘Whose ways were all righteousness ’ 9:9 (τ και ἀγαθωσαι, but V κατορθωσαι, 248 ἄς. κατωρθωσε ( Syro-Hex.) If ῥα τοὺς evBuvovras odovs Ἐ- ® (defective)... ONY Nn; supply oNNN nw (so Smend and Peters) @& ta oota ἀαναθαλοι εκ του τοπου αὐτων ( 45) h-h & mapeKaheoey (-cav A 55 155) δὲ tov Ιακωβ (jo S$ Ἰσραηλ) 1 35 (defective)... MY: (ἃ καὶ Avtpwcaro (-σαντο A 254 ) avrovs ev morer ελπιδὸς (the
‘To pluck up...’ Cp. Jer. i. Io.
and to strengthen. These words were added to the citation by Ben-Sira in order to fill up the line.
(vy) XLIX. 8-10 (EZEKIEL, JOB, AND THE TWELVE PROPHETS).
8....vision. Cp. Ezek. i; see also Ezek. x.
the different beings of the chariot. Lit. ‘the sorts, or kinds, of the chariot’, The term ‘chariot’ here is a technical one to denote Ezekiel’s picture of the heavenly beings who support Jahveh’s throne-chariot. This is the earliest use of the term (7355) in this technical sense of a sacred mystery. In early Rabbinical literature the term ernployed is 12351) NYY, and it was laid down that it ‘should not be taught to any one except he be wise and able to deduce knowledge through wisdom of his own’ (Mishnah, JZegid/ah iv. το, Hagigahii.1). The study of it was laterdeveloped into a whole system of theosophy. In its earliest form the conception of Jahveh riding on Cherubim upon the clouds seems to be a genuinely Hebrew one; cp. Ps. xviii. 11, [ν 11]. 5; Deut. xxxiii. 26. In 1 Chron. xxviii. 15 the Ark with the Cherubim is called the ‘Chariot’; the story of Elijah riding to heaven (2 Kings ii. 11) may have been suggested by the Assyrian sun-chariot drawn by horses (cp. 2 Kings xxiii. 11). Ezekiel, in his vision, apparently saw Jahveh riding on the throned chariot, supported by the Cherubim, when leaving the doomed Temple at Jerusalem. It is worth noting that the term ‘ chariot’ does not actually occur in Ezekiel’s vision, though it became the technical term describing it; nor must a chariot in the ordinary sense be thought of in this connexion. The divine ‘chariot-throne’ represents a transformation of the original conception, and has become something quite transcendental.
g. He also made mention of... Ezekiel (xiv. 14, 20) mentions Job in company with Noah and Daniel as one of the prophets, if this reading can be accepted as correct (see critical note). It is significant that Ben-Sira brings in the mention of Job in this way ; he deliberately calls attention to the Job of older tradition as this is embodied in Ezekiel ; in this tradition Job figures with Noah and Daniel, or possibly, in the original text of Ezekiel, Enoch (instead of Daniel). In the apocalyptic sense Noah and Enoch were certainly ‘ prophets’, and a reflection of this view may perhaps be seen in the opinion held by some Rabbis that Job was one of the prophets of the Gentiles (Seder Olam Rabba xxi). A possible inference from the way and the position in which Ben-Sira mentions Job is that he was not acquainted with a canonical Book of Job, though he may have known some form of our Book of Job not yet canonical.
...all the ways of righteousness. Ezekiel in the two passages referred to above speaks of Job, in company with Noah and Daniel, expressly as a type of righteousness (‘... by their righteousness’).
1o. the Twelve Prophets. It is interesting to note that the Twelve Prophets are treated as a single book ; this implies, probably, that they had already assumed essentially the form in which they appear in the Canon ; note, too, that they follow Ezekiel, as in the Hebrew Canon.
May their bones(fiourish...) Cp. xlvi. 12, where this curious expression also occurs; there is, of course, no teference to a resurrection here. The word means literally ‘to send out shoots’; here it has, no doubt, a metaphorical meaning such as, ‘ May their memory flourish,’ or the like ; but originally the idea of the bones ‘sprouting’ must be connected with some old-world superstition. Among the ancient Semites it was a regular custom to pour water on the graves, which suggests the idea of causing something to grow. Among the Arabs one of the usual prayers for the dead was that Heaven might send rain upon their graves (cp. Wellhausen, Res/e avabischen Heidenthums, pp. 182 ff.). For the belief that the life of the deceased lies dormant in his bones, see Tylor, P7zmitzve Culture, ii, pp. 150 ff. ; Jevons, Intr. to the Hist. of Rel., p. 56; Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes of Central Australia, pp. 530 ft.
Who recovered...(hope). This is an interesting summary of the outstanding teaching of the book of the Twelve Prophets, as Ben-Sira conceived it. Their book is to him essentially one of consolation and hope. This was also the view of the Rabbinic teachers who, in order to avoid a gloomy and threatening conclusion to the whole book (Malachi ends with the words, ‘Lest I come and smite the earth with a curse’), directed (see the Massorah) that the last
verse but one should be repeated in reading. This is also the case with the books of Isaiah, Lamentations, and Ecclesiastes.
1 So as to follow the actual last verse.
(s) XLIX. 11-13. Zerubbabel, Foshua the son of Fosedeg, and Nehemiah (3 +2 distichs).
11 * How shall we magnify Zerubbabel— He, indeed was as a signet on the right hand ;— 121And also! Jesus, the son of Josedeq ? Who in their days™ built the House™*, And set up on high “ἴῃς Holy Temple°, Which was prepared for everlasting glory. 13 P Nehemiah,—glorious is his memory?! Who raised up “our ruins‘, © And healed our breaches, And set up gates and bars’.
(ὃ XLIX. 14-16. Conclusion (Enoch, Foseph, Shem, Seth, Enoch, and Adam) (3 distichs).
t4 * Few like® Enoch have been created on earth ; tHe also was taken up" *(from off the face thereof) **. 15 “Like Joseph was ever a man born ὃ His body* also Yendured a visitation’. 16 Shem, Seth?,*and Enoch were (/zgh/y honoured) ὃ: But above every living thing »was the beauteous glory of? Adam.
last words perhaps nos mypna [Smend] or mpn ΤΟΝ [ Perers]) καὶ τὸ ALS. damaged ; restore with Smend (cp. Peters) & substantially : Saant ΓΝ ΠΟ) m9 spor cy Sy onina sim ΓΝ ja yw’ ns Oo
14 So S: (ἃ and Sah ουτως m A Β΄ πυργον (?) (Bt οικον) n S$ ‘who in their poverty’ 0-0 @ λαὸν (A vaov)
αγιον Κυριῳ P-P Gr και νεμουσιν (No A Νεεμιου) ἐπὶ πολυ τὸ μνημόσυνον, 70 248 και εν εκλεκτοις nv Νεεμιας (70 Τερεμιας) ov ἐπι πολυ τὸ μνημόσυνον αὐτου (0 aura) τὰ Ge ἡμιν (δὲ nov) τειχη (N* χείλη, NC-® τείχη) πεπτωκοτα rt (τ ¢ransposes these two clauses 5:3 G& οὐδε εἰς ὑῦ ὦ; u A μετετεθη (Gk ἀανελημφθηὴ v-v Reading
with Bacher (JQR, xii. 281) mB Sy (cp. Gamo τῆς yns) for DID ( ὃ ‘in person’ [Smend] or ‘within’ [Schechter ]) W-W ( οὐδε ws (B 68 0 de) Ιωσηφ εγενηθηὴ (Textus Receptus εἐγεννηθη) avnp: S ‘A mother’ (mzsunderstanding DS) ‘like Joseph was not born’: G& + nyovpevos αδελῴων otnprypa Aaov (1. τὰ, ® 8) Χ (ἃ ta οστα y-Y 70 248
(s) XLIX. 11-13 (ZERUBBABEL, JOSHUA, AND NEHEMIAH).
11. asa Signet... See Hag. il. 23; cp. Jer. xxii. 24 for the full phrase,
12. Jesus. Or Joshua, cp. Ezra ili. 2, 3.
the House. As Smend points out, οἶκον may be a correction of πύργον, which can be used of any lofty building ; cp. Josephus (Bed/. Jud. vii. 10. 3), who speaks of the temple of Heliopolis as πύργῳ (παραπλήσιος).
set up on high... For the Hebrew phrase cp. Ezra ix. 9.
...for everlasting glory. An echo of the Messianic Hope, cp. Hag. ii. 7, 9.
13. glorious is his memory. The warmth of the terms with which Ben-Sira speaks of Nehemiah contrasts significantly with his silence regarding Ezra; apparently the latter did not occupy so high a place of estimation within the circle of the scribes to whom Ben-Sira belonged as was the case with the later scribes. These earlier Sofherim were profoundly affected by the spirit of the Wisdom-Literature, and had an altogether wider outlook. There is a marked contrast in this respect between Ben-Sira and the generality of the later Rabbis, with whom in so many other respects he has such striking marks of affinity. It would seem that Nehemiah’s pious aspiration that he might be remembered for good (Neh. xiii. 14, xxii. 31) has met with a sympathetic response on the part of Ben-Sira.
Who raised up our ruins. See Neh. ii, passim. gates and bars. Cp. Neh. vi. 1, vii. 1.
14-16. In order to provide a fitting conclusion to the Praise of the Fathers, and at the same time to mark it off from the hymn in praise of Simeon which follows (ch. 1.), Ben-Sira reverts to the most glorious of the Fathers of old. With the object of enhancing Israel’s glory, Joseph is bracketed with Enoch, and Shem, Seth, and Enoch with Adam,— Israel’s ancestors with those of the human race (Smend).
14. Few like Enoch. Enoch has already been referred to in xliv. 16. (ἃ ‘not one...’ involves a difficulty, seeing — that Elijah was also taken up without dying (2 Kings ii. 11) ; # removes the difficulty (‘Few.. .’).
He also was taken up. Cp. Gen. v.24. The omission of this whole clause by % (see crit. note) may be due to dogmatic reasons (36 also omits xliv. 16, see notes 27 /oc.).
15. His body also... i.e. a providential visitation in being transported from Egypt to the land of promise — (cp. Gen. 1. 25; Exod. xiii. 19; Joshua xxiv. 32). Enoch was translated into heaven in a wonderful way, but shared this distinction with Elijah; Joseph, however, enjoyed the unique distinction of having his body transported long after death from a foreign country to the Holy Land.
XLIX. 156 and L. 1-24. Jn praise of the High-Priest, Simeon, the son of Fochauan. 154*Great among his brethren and the glory” of his people ) 1 Was Simeon, the son of Jochanan® the priest**. ®In whose time’ the House was renovated?®, And in whose days the Temple was fortified ; 2 4iIn whose days the wall was built+, k(Having) 'turrets for protection! like™ a king’s palace* ; 3™™In whose time a reservoir was dug, A water-cistern™ °like the sea°® in its abundance™. _4?He took thought for his people [to preserve them] ‘from robbers®, And fortified his city against the enemy"?.
++ uro Κυριου : S ‘ was buried in peace’ 22 fr SUL aa (τ ev avOporas εδοξασθησαν : S ‘and Enoch among men were created’: # wpb) (v. 15) wn), for which read 132). ..: Ὁ combines G& and ® and misreads \12) as \(S)133 b-b (ἃ ev τῃ κτισει (= MNIII for NANDN)
aa |. , ἡγούμενος αδελῴων στηριγμα λαου Σιμων Orrov (B* ΝΕ Tovov) vos ἱερεὺς ὁ peyas b Hn asan: S ΝΣ ( ny ‘ crown i) ¢ $ Syro-Hex ΝΠ) ἀ S++ ( Cr) 9: (ἃ os ev (wn αὐτου ὑπεραψεν otxov f $3 hit. ‘generation; in his days’ & Reading P1213 (Schechter) for ἽΡΒ) (‘visited’): S Π)3) (‘was built’) h ® places v. 3 before v. 2 Mi (τ καὶ um αὐτου εθεμελιωθὴ vos διπλης Καὶ (ἃ ἀναλημμα ὑψηλον περιβολου tepou I Reading ΓΞ Sor yo Ἔ m Reading Ὁ for 3 (‘ in ἢ mm-mm (ἴ ey ἡμεραις αὐτου ἡλαττωθη (read ἐλατομηθὴ with Fritzsche) arodoxeov vdatwv χαλκὸς woer θαλασσης τὸ περιμετρον: S ‘ He dug a well’ n Reading MUN for MWS 0-0 Reading DD ( &) for ἘΞ p-p 3 ‘And he saved his people from the enemy’ (4 Garo πτωσεως: Ha perditione T . . . ἐνπολιορκησαι « to besiege )
16. Shem... For this juxtaposition of Shem, Seth, and Adam, cp. 1 Chron. i. 1. Shem, Seth (and Enoch) “represent the ancestors of the pious part of the post-diluvian and antediluvian world respectively’ (Edersheim).
But above every living thing. The thought implicit here seems to be that Adam, in virtue of having been directly created by God without human parentage, enjoys a glory which is not shared by any other member of the » human race (cp. Luke iii. 38). This idealization of Adam is a notable feature, and occurs here for the first time in Jewish literature ; it played Jater an important part in the development of Messianic doctrine (the Second Adam); but
| itis precarious to impute such an idea to Ben-Sira, whose thought here may merely have been that Adam in his ideal _ | aspect was only adequately and worthily represented in his pious descendants, i.e. the Chosen People. Ay ὃ. XLIX. 15 6+L. 1-24 (IN PRAISE OF THE HIGH-PRIEST SIMEON). : ; 4 ΤΙ XLIX. 15 ὁ. Great among his brethren. Cp. Lev. xxi. Io, ‘ He that is the high-priest among his brethren. . .’ dd the glory of his people. M N5N is used in Esther i. 4 in reference to the majesty of King Ahasuerus. 4d L.1. Simeon. The second of the name, who lived at the beginning of the second century B.C.; it was this Simeon, | not Simeon I, who was surnamed ‘the Righteous’, a title given, according to Smend, because he was the last of the | house of Zadok to observe the Law. Josephus speaks of his father as Onias (Az. xii. 4. 10). ἢ Jochanan. }3M\' is a shortened form of ᾿Σ ΠῚ ΠΡ; cp. PDN (Ezek. i. 2) for [3 Πὴ, which is also contracted to $M) (Jer. xxvii. 20) and 39D (Jer. xxii. 24,28). For the Greek "Iovias cp. the form 131’, which occurs on an ossuary jinscription found at Gezer (see PE FQ, 1904, p. 342). uk _ In whose time. i.e. Simeon was no more living when this was written; the Greek makes this still clearer, see jcrit. note. oe) i the House. Used in reference to the Temple in Ezek. xl. In the earlier literature it does not, as a rule, stand
alone, but ‘of God’ or ‘of Jahveh’ is added; in 1 Kings vi (cp. also 2 Chron. i. 18, ii. 3, &c.), however, it stands alone.
3 renovated. Lit., according to the emended reading (see crit. note), ‘to breach up’; the verb occurs in 2 Chron, \kxxiv. 10 as parallel to pif ‘to repair’, also in reference to the ‘ House’; this is its only occurrence in the O.T., jhough the noun P73 (‘a breach’) is found fairly frequently.
oh} the Temple was fortified. Cp. Josephus, «172. xii. 3. 3.
_ | 2. turrets for protection. i.e. battlements placed at intervals along a wall, cp. v. 4 ὁ. >| Tike... i.e. as in a king’s palace.
A water-cistern. The Hebrew as it stands has MUN (¢1 will talk’), which is clearly corrupt. Schechter, llowed by Ryssel, reads MM, as in Jer. xviii. 22 (the Qév7 has MW); but this does not account for the presence of ε δ, Bevan, followed by Smend, suggests mvs, citing line 9 of the Mesha Inscription (MWN7 12 VYN) tyodya NS JAN),
And I built Baal-Meon and made therein a reservoir’; cp. also line 23: pind nhwsn ΝΟΣ ΤΩΝ JIN), “And I made tices (?) for the reservoir for water’); this seems to be preferable. The word does not occur in the O.T.; cp., »wever, ΠΝ ‘a pit’, Jer. ii. 6, xvili. 20, and NNW, with the same meaning, in Ps. lvii. 7, cxix. 85. in its abundance. i271 in reference to a mass of water occurs in Jer. x. 13, li. 16; cp. also I Kings xviii. 41. 4. He took thought. For the expression [2 4N7 in the sense of being concerned about something cp. Ps. xxxviii. 19. from robbers. *NN lit. ‘from (becoming) a prey’; cp. Prov. xxili. 28, the only other occurrence of the word in HORA “δ | fortified his city. Cp. xlviii. 17. : _ | against the enemy. Smend, on the basis of what was probably the text before the Greek translator, reads
5 How glorious was he ‘when he looked forth from the Tent’, And" when he came out from the sanctuary ! 6 Like a morning-star Yfrom between the clouds’, And like the full moon “on the feast-days” ; 7 *Y Like the sun shining upon the Temple of the Most High’, And like the rainbow *becoming visible” in the cloud*’; 8 ‘Like a flower on the branches° in the days of the first-fruits?, *And as a lily by the water-brooks’®, As the sprout’ of Lebanon on summer days, 9 And £as the fire of incense’ in the censer? ; Like a golden vessel’ ‘beautifully wrought?*, Adorned with ™all manner™ of precious stones ; το Like a luxuriant™ olive-tree °full of berries °, And like an oleaster? “abounding in branches‘. 11*When he put on his glorious* robes’, And clothed himself in perfect* splendour,
ss (ἴ ev περιστροφῃ Aaov t $ ‘Temple’ usG> V-V (ἃ ev μεσῳ vepedns W-W (ἃ ev nuepas: 70 248 + αὐτῆς (deg. eoptns): S ‘in the days of Nisan’ x ® WD msert ‘and’ y-y The clauses are transposed in V 70 248 253 Syro-Hex 2So (ἃ: 38 ‘king’: 3> aa (τ φωτιζον ev νεφελαις δοξης b-b > οτο Reading DDI 725. (znstead of DIYDYID): Ck ὡς avOos ροδων: S ‘like spikenard’ d-d Reading pn \23n (Peters) for IYI: Gr νεων : S ‘of the field’: # vernis e-e (ἴ ws kpwa ex εξοδων vdaros f' > “trees } &-2 Ok ws πὺυρ και λιβανος : S ‘as the smell of incense’ ἢ Reading ΠΙΓΙΩΠ ( 9 &) for ANA iS ‘necklace’ kKSo S: the Hebrew text ts much mutilated: (τ ὁλοσφυρητον (‘all of beaten [gold]’) 1 Zz#.‘enamelled’ ™™ Reading bs Sor by 1 G&> : 70 248 evmpenns ( 3) 0-0 (ἃ ἀναθαλλουσα καρποὺς : S ‘great with branches” P Gk κυπαρισσος 4-a Reading ὩΣ 71412 zslead of 43y ΠΥ (‘ giving its branches to drink’ = 5): G υψουμενη
‘against a siege’ (reading 7)¥!2'D instead of 1¥!2). S renders according to the present Hebrew text. With regard to the text of (ἃ Smend says: ‘The infinitive is meaningless, for ἐμπολιορκῆσαι cannot well=rov μὴ ἐμπολιορκηθῆναι.᾽ It is true πολιόρκησις does not occur elsewhere, but ἐμπολιορκεῖν is also rare and is not found in the Bible. In any case & did not read ἽΝ, but ΝΠ, i.e. ΝΞ or DWN.
5. How glorious. Cp. xlvi. 2.
when he came out. Ben-Sira is referring to the moment when the High-Priest, after having taken the ritual bath and being robed in the special garments, comes forth to offer the burnt-offering in atonement for himself and the people. It is the Day of Atonement that is referred to, the ritual of which is described in Lev. xvi; see especially vv. 23-25. Many further details of this ceremony are to be found in the Mishnic tractate Vowa; an English translation of this tractate with full notes by G. H. Box is published in Church and Synagogue, xi. 139 ff., xii. 49 ff.
from the sanctuary. M375 N°), lit. ‘from the house of the veil’ (i.e. the Holy of Holies), so called because of the veil of blue, purple, and crimson which separated the Holy of Holies (Dedir) from the Holy Place (Hék/a/) ; but there was also a veil in front of this latter, separating it from the Court of the Priests; it must, however, be the former to which reference is made here, because the veil is spoken of as the Pavoketh, whereas the veil before the Holy Place was known as the AM/asakh.
6. amorning-star. Lit. ‘a shining star’; cp. Ps. cxlviii. 3.
...feast-days. It was full moon at the two chief feasts, Passover and Tabernacles.
7. Like the sun shining. The Neo-Hebrew word (Ὁ Hiph.) occurs in xliii, 9 inthe margin; it is not found in the | O.T. Josephus thus describes the effect of the sun shining on the Temple: ‘ Now the outward face of the Temple in its front wanted nothing that was likely to surprise either the minds or the eyes of men ; for it was wholly covered with | plates of gold of great weight; and when the sun arose it reflected back a truly fiery splendour, and caused those who jorced hen to look upon it to turn away their eyes, just as they would have done at the rays of the sun itself”
And like the rainbow... Ben-Sira evidently had the words of Ezek. i. 28 in mind: ‘As the appearance of the | bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain.’
8. Like a flower on the branches. Cp. the Midrash .5 12). ha-Shirim to ii. 3: ‘Just as the apple-tree first brings | forth the bloom and then its leaves.’ 1
in the days of the first-fruits. Cp. Num. xxviii. 26 (Hebr. and Sept.). asalily. Cp. xxxix. 14. by the water-brooks. Cp. Is. xxx. 25, xliv. 4. the sprout of Lebanon. The same words (fiaad M18) occur in Nahum i. 4; the reference is to the cedars on Mount Lebanon. : ᾿ Adorned... Cp. xlv. 11. 10. a luxuriant olive-tree. Cp. Ps. lii. 10; Isa. xi. 16. full of berries. Cp. Is. xvii, 6. { oleaster. In Neh. viii. 15 the oleaster (the wild olive-tree) and the olive-tree are also mentioned together. See further Nowack, Hebraische Archaologie, i, pp. 66, 238.
When he went up "to the altar of majesty", *And made glorious the court of the sanctuary * ;
12 When he took the portions from 7the hand of his brethren’,
While standing *by the blocks of wood, Around him the garland? of his sons°, deTike young cedar-trees® in Lebanon ; And ‘like willows by the brook‘ did they surround him‘, » All the sons of Aaron in their glory, And the Lord’s? fire-offering * in their hands, In the presence of the whole congregation! of Israel.
14™Until he had finished the service of the altar™
2And arranging the rows of wood of the Most High”, 15 °(And) stretched forth his hand to the cup, P And poured out of the blood of the grape? ; Yea, poured (it) out at the foot® of the altar, A sweet-smelling savour *to the Most High, the All-King'®
ev (248>) vepedas (= py opin) ΤῸ (τ ev τῷ avadapBavew αὐτὸν στολὴν do€ns 83+ ‘holy’ t Reading bibs for 731 (Smend) u-u 3 ‘to receive the songs of praise’ ν & ‘holy (altar) ’ x-x § ‘In the beauty of the might of the sanctuary’ y $ ‘the pieces of flesh’ 2- (ἃ εκ χείρων ἱερων τῷ (τ map ἐσχαρᾳ βωμου b Lit, ‘ crown’ ¢ $ G& ‘ brethren’ ἀ-ἃ 8». &-€ E& ὡς βλαστημα κεδρου (referring to the High-Priest) ff (ἃ στελεχη φοινικων (6 stems of palm-trees a) h G+ καὶ igs> K Ge mpoopopa 1 3 ‘people’ M-M QF καὶ συντελειαν λειτουργων ἐπὶ βωμων nn € κοσμησαι προσῴφοραν Ὑψίστου Παντοκρατορὺς : 3 ‘and to serve the Most High with holy joy’ °° > /hrough homototeleuton, both this and the preceding verse ending presumably
with yoy (‘Most High’). p-p S* And took old wine’ 4 Lit, ‘foundations’; 3 ‘side’ tr 55»
11. glorious robes. For the description of the High-Priest’s attire see Exod. xxviii. 36-42, xxix; cp. Sirach When he went up... Cp. Lev. xvi. 18, ‘And he shall go out unto the altar that is before the. . .’ the altar of majesty. 117 (‘majesty’) is not used in the O.T. in reference to the altar. And made glorious the court of the sanctuary. ΠΝ (= περιβολή, precincts’) is used of the ledge (R.V.
‘settle’) surrounding the altar of Ezekiel, see Ezek. xliii. 14,17, 20,xlv. 19; but YP is never used of the altar, always meaning ‘sanctuary’; we must, therefore, take 7 in its later meaning, as in 2 Chron. iv. 9, where it is used in reference to the great, i.e. the outer, court; it is also used in this sense in the Mishnic tractate Vora, where details concerning the ritual on the Day of Atonement are given; e.g. in i.8 mention is made of the ΠΝ being ‘full of Israelites’, and in iv. 3 there is a reference to ‘the pavement which is in the court’ (7MWYaY 73199), 12. When he took the portions. i.e. of the animals to be sacrificed; see the details in Yowa ii. 5-7. For nn) used in the sense of portions of sacrificed animals cp. Exod. xxix. 17; Lev. 1. 8, vill. 20, 1x. 13. blocks of wood. ND 7p, lit. ‘rows’, i.e. the pieces of wood laid ready for use. The word comes from the root WY ‘to lay in order’, which is used technically for laying the wood in order for the burning of the sacrifice ; cp. Gen. xxli. 9; 1 Kings xviii. 23. According to Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrqanus, who lived during the first century A.D. (JZegzllath Ta‘ anith v), the fifteenth day of Ab was the great day for wood-offering, ‘when both priests and people brought kindlingwood in large quantities to the altar, for use in the burning of sacrifices during the whole year’ (EA, i. 26a). Josephus (Bell. ud. \i. 17- 6) refers to this when he says: ‘ Now the next day was the festival of Xy/ofhoria, upon which the custom was for every one to bring wood for the altar, that there might never be a want of fuel for that fire which was unquenchable and always burning.’ Like young cedar-trees. Cp. the somewhat similar expression in Ps. cxxviil. 3 O'N Sonya. like willows by the brook. Cp. Lev. xxiii. 40; Job xl. 22; Is. xliv. 4; for the rendering of & (see critical 13. In the presence of... Cp. the same phrase in 1 Kings vill. 22. 14. the service of the altar. Lit. ‘to serve the altar’ Nat mid ; cp. the similar phrase in Joel !. 13 Mand Nw. the rows of wood. See note on v. 12 ὁ. toupee les : ᾿ 15. poured out of the... Cp. Josephus, 477. 111. 9.. 4: ‘They bring the same quantity of oil which they do of wine, and they pour the wine about the altar.’ See Num. xxviii. 1-8 ; cp. Yoma 111. 4. For the expression ‘blood of the grape’ cp. xxxix. 26; Gen. xlix. 11; Deut. xxxii.14. The stress laid upon the drink-offering is noteworthy; in the Mishna ( Yoma) it is merely mentioned, nothing more. ; A sweet-smelling savour = 1.) 0", the technical term for an odour soothing to God ; it is usually employed in reference to burnt-offerings (cp. Gen. viii. 21; Exod. xxix. 18; Lev. 1.9; Num. xv, &c., ἅς.) ; in, e.g., Exod. xxix. 41 the drink-offering is mentioned together with it; in Ezek. xvi. 19 it occurs in reference to offerings of flour, oil, and honey to idols; but in Ezek. xx. 28 it says: ‘... there they presented the provocation of their offering, there also they made their sweet savour, and they poured out there their drink-offerings.’
Then the sons of Aaron® sounded With the trumpets tof beaten work'; Yea, they sounded and caused a mighty blast to be heard «For a remembrance before the Most High”. ’(Then) all flesh“ hasted together” And fell upon their faces to the earth, To worship *before ¥the Most High*, 2Before the Holy One of Israel*’. “And the sound of the song was heard®, And over the multitude” ‘they made sweet melody°; 4° And all the people of the land cried In prayer before the Merciful, ‘Until he had finished Sthe service of the altar®', 4 And His ordinances had brought him nigh unto Him?.
20 Then he descended, and lifted up his hands
Upon the whole congregation of Israel}, k And the blessing of the Lord (was) upon his lips*, And he glorified himself with the name of the Lord!. ™And again they fell down™, (now) to receive” °The pardon? of God from him°*.
8 #+‘the priests’; G+ ‘shouted and’ ὑπὸ S ‘before all the people of Israel’ u-u S ‘in order to bless before all the people’ VA ES W & ‘the people’ s-x (ἃ ‘their Lord’ Yay eo God: 2-2 (ἃ ‘the Almighty God Most High’ a-a 10 vt, “And the song gave its voice’: & ‘ And the singers praised (Him) with their voices’: S$ ‘They gave their voice to thanksgiving’ bb (ἃ ev πλειστῳ oxo c-e Reading pa way ( 61) zstead of 7) 1D yn (‘they arranged his lamp’) d-d @& ‘And the people besought the Lord Most High’ ee S> ff See note on 14 a above S-£ Gr κοσμος Κυριου hh (τ καὶ τὴν λειτουργιαν αὐτου ετελειωσαν i (τ wey Ισραηλ kk && δουναι ευλογιαν κυριῳ (Ν V 70 253 Syro-Hex kuptov) εκ χειλεων αὐτου 1 (ἃ avrov (157 κυριουὴ mM (ἃ καὶ εδευτερωσεν ev προσκυνήσει n Reading nawd ( &) for mw (Smend) 0-0 Oe τὴν εὐλογιαν παρα Ὑψιστου » Reading ΤΣ (Smend) ; the text τς somewhat mutilated, but Smend says that the letters ‘3, namentlich », sind kaum zweifelhaft ; von nm ist anscheinend der linke Fuss
16. With the trumpets... Cf. Num.x. 2(R.V.marg.); for NWP (‘beaten work’) cp. Is. 111. 24. For a remembrance... Cp. Num. x. to. 17. To worship... Cp. 2 Chron. xxix. 28. 18. over the multitude... i.e. the prostrate congregation. 19. And His ordinances... The Hebrew word 05vD, which often has the sense of ‘judgement’, is also used as a technical term expressive of something that is due to somebody ; thus in Deut. xviii. 3, ‘this shall be the priest’s due from the people .. .’, cp. Deut. xxi. 17; in Num. xv. 24 reference is made to the offerings to the Lord ‘ in accordance with what is due’, or, as the R. V. renders it, ‘according to the ordinance’ (25.222), cp. Job xxxvi. 6, Prov. xviii. 5. 20. Then he descended. According to Lev. ix. 22, Aaron does not descend from the altar until after he has pronounced the Blessing, and Yomza vi. 2 seems to agree with this. And the blessing of the Lord... Cf. Yoma vi. 2,‘ And the priests and the people who are standing in the court (70Y3), when they hear the “Ineffable Name” (W75197 Dv’) proceeding out of the mouth of the High-Priest, then they bow themselves down and worship, falling down upon their faces, and say: ‘‘ Blessed be the Name of the glory of His Kingdom for ever and ever.” ’ This was the only occasion on which the Holy Name was pronounced. As is well known, in the Hebrew text of the O. T. the name 17) (‘Jehovah’= Jahveh) is written with the vowels of Adonaz (‘Lord’), and pronounced so ; if the title Adowaz precedes 717 (i.e. if the text has ‘the Lord Jahveh’) it is written with the vowels of E/ohim (‘God’). This was done in order to avoid pronouncing the Holy Name. In the Hebrew
of Sirach, Jahveh is always written or ὡς This non-uttering of the Holy Name was not always due to reverential fear, but often also because of superstitious dread. ‘The names of supernatural beings, such as gods and — spirits, are commonly believed to be endowed with marvellous virtues, and the mere utterance of them may work wonders and disturb the course of nature’ (Frazer, Ze Golden Bough’, i, p. 441). This must certainly have applied at one time to the mass of the uncultured among the Israelites. There is a curious passage in Pzrye Abdoth v. 14, where it is said that ‘Noisome beasts come into the world for vain swearing, and for the profanation of the (divine) Name’. he glorified himself. i.e. because he was privileged to utter the Holy Name.
21. And again they fell down... The verse presents us with the picture of the whole congregation falling down for the second time; the first time it was in order to receive the High-priestly blessing, now it is in order to receive divine justification, implying pardon for sin, through God’s minister; cp. the somewhat similar thing mentioned in Lev. ix. 24, ‘And there came forth fire from before the Lord, and consumed upon the altar the burntoffering and the fat; and when all the people saw it, they shouted, and fell down on their faces’; the acceptance of the offering was an earnest of divine forgiveness which the whole congregation received prostrate. In Ben-Sira’s day, apparently, the ‘ absolution’ was pronounced by the High-Priest.
22 Now ??bless ‘the God of all4?P, "Who doeth wondrously® on earth’, Who exalteth man* from the womb, And dealeth with him according to His will”. 23 May He grant you wisdom’ of heart, And may there be peace ‘among you”. 24 May His mercy be established * with Simeon’, *xy And may He raise up for him the covenant of Phinehas; May one never be cut off from him’; 2 And as to his seed**, (may it be) as the days of heaven?**.
L. 25,26. Three Detested Nations (2 distichs). 25 For two nations doth my soul feel abhorrence, (Yea), and (for) a third, which is not a people ; 26*The inhabitants of Seir? and* Philistia, And that foolish nation that dwelleth in Sichem*.
SUBSCRIPTION TO) GHE BOOK
L. 27-29. The Concluding Words of Feshua’, the son of Eleazar, the son of Sira (%+2 distichs), 27 4Wise instruction and apt proverbs*4 eefeOf Jeshua’, £8the son of Eleazar£2, the son of Sira’,
erhalten’: (ἃ τὴν εὐλογιαν : WH virtutem rp-pp & ‘bless ye all God’ a-4 ‘the Lord God of Israel’: 5S ‘and the people of the land praised God’ rT G τῷ μεγαλοποιουντι παντὴ 5 Reading ΕΝ Sor xdapn ὑπ ‘our days’ u ΛΔ ‘favour’: Ge ‘mercy’ Y (ἃ ‘joyfulness ’ Ὑτν (ἃ ‘in our days in Israel (7o> in Israel) for the days of eternity ’ XS Gr μεθ μων xx-xx $ ‘and with his seed’ IY & > 271 0g και εν Tals ἡμεραις αὐτου λυτρωσασθω nuas (70>) τὰ (τ ov καθημενοι ev oper Σαμαρειας (A 155 Ἔ και): © in monte Seir b S ‘Gebal’: 70 248 Syro-Hex+ καὶ avdpes ot κατοικουντες © (ἃ εν Σικιμοις dd (ἃ παιδείαν συνεσεως και επιστημης : 55 ‘all the proverbs of the wise and their riddles’ e Reading wy Sor bern ee-ee S “are written in this book’, omztting all the rest of vv. 27 bcd f pr. ‘of Simeon the son of’ S-S Q& “ Jesus the son of Sirach, Eleazar the Jerusalemite’: 2η Gt this and the next line are transposed 88-88 70 248 L>
The pardon. See crit. note. The reading of (τ, ‘blessing,’ can scarcely be right, as the preceding verse has just dealt with the High-priestly blessing.
22. Now bless... Martin Rinckart composed his hymn ‘Nun danket alle Gott’ (‘ Now thank we all our God’) on the basis of this text. doeth wondrously. Cp. Judges xiii. 19 (reading xbapn= Sept.). 23. May He grant... The clause also occurs as xlv. 26a.
24. with Simeon. The alteration in & is evidently intentionai, and the same applies to the omission of the two next lines; the ‘covenant of Phinehas’ had come to an end by the time that Ben-Sira’s grandson made his translation, so that _} the passage as found in 35 would have appeared inappropriate. The mention of Simeon does not necessarily mean that ΟΠ he was still living when Ben-Sira wrote (see note on v. 1) ; ‘Simeon’ stands here for his house and lineage.
| the covenant of Phinehas. Cp. xlv. 24, 25.
May one never be cut off... i.e. May his line always have a successor. as the days of heaven. i.e. endless’ L. 25, 26 (THREE DETESTED NATIONS). ὃ 25, 26. These verses must probably have been added at the close of the book (if not by the author himself, which, however, is likely enough, then by a contemporary) with the special object of warning readers against those belonging to the three races mentioned. There was ample ground for the utterance of these words; the inhabitants of Seir, i.e. the Idumaeans (Edom), had been the bitter enemies of the Jews ever since the Return from Babylon; see e.g. Obad. 11-14; v.65 Hebron, and the villages thereof, were in possession of the Edomites (‘the children of Esau’) in the days of Judas || Maccabaeus, cp. Josephus, Azz. xii. 8. 6, Bell. Jud. iv. 9.7; they had probably occupied this territory, which was less unfertile than their own land, ever since the Captivity. The antipathy which Ben-Sira had for the Philistines is easily ΟΠ understood when it is remembered how strongly Hellenized their country had become ; in the centuries following the
} Macedonian conquest the influence of Greek civilization was profound and wide-reaching (for details see ZB, iii. 3725). | But the most hated of all were the people of Sichem, i.e. the Samaritans, as is well known ; they were, as Smend points j out, especially dangerous to their neighbours at this time, because the Seleucidae had made common cause with them | against the Jews.
that foolish nation. 5123 J, cp. xlix. 5; Deut. xxxii. 21. L. 27-29. SUBSCRIPTION TO THE BOOK. a aan) 27. apt. OI5\N; cp. Prov. xxv. 11; PIDN~DY 927 ἼΔῚ ‘a word aptly spoken’ (Symmachus renders it ἐν καιρῷ αὐτοῦ). : /Smend thinks that both here and in Prov. xxv. 11 the reference is to metrical form. Jeshua‘... 18 inserts ‘Simeon the son of’, so also in the two subscriptions at the end of the book; but
18" hiWhich he declared in the explanation of his heart", And which he taught with understanding. 28 Blessed is the man® who meditateth* on these things}, ἢ And he that layeth them up in his heart shall become wise". & 29™For if he do them, °he shall be strong for all things”, 30" ?For the fear of the Lord is life?®.
APPENDIX TO THE BOOK (LI. 1-30)
51 1 22°T will thank Thee, ‘Jahveh, O King,° 4J will praise Thee, O God “οἵ my salvation®??, I will declare Thy Name‘, £(Thou) strength of my lifes; 2 "For Thou hast redeemed my soul from death, i'Thou didst keep back my flesh from the Pit’, k And from the power of Sheol Thou didst deliver my foot*; 'Thou didst preserve me™ from the scourge of a slanderous tongue, And from the lips ®of them that turn aside to lies™ ; °Thou wast Pon my side?® in the face of those that rose up against me ; 3 ‘Thou didst help me, according to the abundance of Thy mercy, Out of the snare ‘of those that watch for my stumbling’, And from the hand of those that seek my life ; From manifold troubles didst Thou save me%,
h-h Reading NBA (so Smend for yw) xv 125 WE ii (ἃ exapaka τῳ βιβλιῳ τουτῳ [here follows 27 ὁ], os ανωμβρησεν σοῴφιαν aro καρδιας αὐτου ii (τ os k & ἀναστραφήσεται 1 % + bonis m-m 5 ‘and learneth them and becometh wise in them’ n-n 38» o-o $ ‘the height of the fear of the Lord is excellent above all things ; take hold thereof, my son, and let it not go’ PP Tn ® these words form
one line with li. tba; (ἃ ore φως (106 φοβος) Κυριου ro txvos αὐτου: 55 70 248 254 Syro-Hex +xa τοις evoeBeow edwxe goquav: 55 70 248 254 + εὐλογητὸς κυριος ets Tov αἰωνα γένοιτο yevotto: 7O + δοξα σοι o Geos ἡμων Soka σοι 4 70 Syro-Hex >ch. li.
a-a Transposed in ® Ὁ προσευχὴ ἴησου wov Σειραχ rnserted as title by & ee So & S: ® ‘my God, my Father ’ d-d 3 ‘Every day will I praise Thy Name, O Lord’, mésplaced after v. 11 e-e @& ‘my Saviour’ f 3+ ‘in praises’ 5- Gr >: S ‘my trust is (in) the Most High from everlasting’ hoh (χὰ ore σκεπαστης kat BonOos eyevou μοι i Gt καὶ ελυτρωσω to copa pou εξ απωλιας k-k G@> II S>: (ἃ καὶ εκ mayidos S:aBodns γλωσσης m 35 + ‘from the slander of the people’ nn (τ ἐργαζομενων Ψευδος 0-0 & > p-p Lit. ‘for me’ 4-4 (ἃ eyevou βοηθος, kar ελυτρωσω pe κατὰ τὸ πληθος ελεου και ὀονοματος Gov εκ βρυγμὼν ετοιμος εἰς βρωμα, (δὲ και) εκ χειρος ζητουντων τὴν Ψυχὴν μου εκ πλειονων θλίψεων ὧν εἐσχον tr Reading spby ‘EY (Schechter)
Ben-Sira’s grandson, in the Prologue to his Greek translation of the book, calls the writer Jeshua‘, the son of Sirach. It is probable that the mention of Simeon here is due to the occurrence of this name in vv. I, 24.
28: Blessedtismerms Gp ΒΞΙΙ 1:
29. For ifhe... There can be no doubt that originally # had this clause in some form.
LI. 1-30 (APPENDIX TO THE BOOK).
LI. τ. Jahveh, O King. Cp. Ps. cxlv. 1. The consensus of both (τ and $ against # favours the reading in the text ; for my God, my Father of ® cp. Exod. xv. 2, and the Adinu Malkenu prayer in the Jewish Liturgy (Singer's ed., ΡΡ. 55-57), as well as the Shemoneh ‘Esreh (‘ The Eighteen Benedictions’) (see, further, Taylor’s edition of Pirge Aboth, Excursus v, p. 124; the Hebrew text of Shkemonch ‘Esreh is given by Dalman in Die Worte Jesu, pp. 299-304).
O God of my salvation. Cp. Ps. xviii. 46, xxv. 5. I will declare Thy Name. Cp. Ps. xxii. 22, cil. 21. (Thou) strength... Cp. Ps. xxvii. 1.
Thou didst keep back... Cp. Job xxxiii. 18; Ps. xxviii. 50. Thou didst deliver my foot. Cp. Ps. xxv. 15. that turn aside to lies. Cp. Ps. xl. 5.
... that rose up against me. Cp. Ps. iii. 1, lvi. 9.
. the abundance of Thy mercy. Cp. Ps. v. 7, Ixix. 13, cvi. 7, 45. of those that watch for... For the Hebrew (see crit. note) cp. Jer. xx. Io. that seek my life. Cp. Ps. xxxv. 4, xl. 14, ]xiii. 9, Ixx. 2.
4 And from the straits of the flame round about (me), stFrom the midst of the fire that I kindled not’, 5 "From the deep of the belly of Sheol"’, YFrom the lips of wickedness, and from the framers of lies’, 6 *And the arrows* of a deceitful tongue. My soul drew nigh’ unto death, And my life” to the nethermost* Sheol”. 7°And I turned about on every side‘, “yet there was none to help me®?, ee And I looked for one to uphold”, but there was none. 8 Then did I remember ‘the loving-kindnesses of Jahveh‘, And SHis mercies§ which have been from of old, Who delivereth them that trust in Him», i And redeemeth them ‘from all evil*'. g And 1 lifted up my voice! ™from the earth", "And cried out for help from the gates of Sheol”. 10 °Yea, I cried: ‘O Jahveh?, my Father “art Thou?®, *For Thou art the hero of my salvation’ ; ™Forsake me not™ in the day® of trouble, *In the day of wasteness and desolation‘. 111 will praise Thy Name continually, «And will sing Thy praise in prayer’.
ss $> tt Reading (it. ‘ that was not kindled’) Anas xd uN yuna: (ἃ καὶ ek μεσου πυρὸς ov οὐκ εξεκαυσα u-u Reading Sie on pany ( &) Y-VY G καὶ aro γλωσσης αἀκαθαρτου και λογου ψευδους xX G& βασιλει diaBory: ‘which presents a gloss (“arrows of the tongue” slander) fogether with a corruption of an original Bodies (Jer. ix. 8) 07 βελη (cp. Job Xxxix. 22, βασιλει B: Beda δοιὰ A ®)’ (Hass) YB ηνεσεν (NAV 53) 5): Ξ3., laudabit dominum 7, 5.6 spirit’ : (ἃ -Ἐην συνεγγος ἃ NCA 248 κατωτατου (& κατω) b $+ ‘and my spirit draweth near unto death’ τὸ (& περιεσχον pe παντοθεν 4-ὁ $ ‘in order that I might be upheld’ ©& 3 >‘me’ ee-ee OF ἐμβλέπων (A εβλεπον, 248 ἐπεβλεπονῚ εἰς αντιλημψιν ανθρωπὼν ΓΕ G& τοῦ εἐλεοὺυς σου κυριε 8- (τ της ἐργασιας σου h-h (τ ore εξελη τοὺς ὑπομενοντας σε Hi (χὰ καὶ σωζεις αὐτοὺς εκ χειρὸς εθνων (NA ἐεχθρων, V πονηρωνῚ k-k 3 ‘from him that is stronger than they’ 1 Ge uwerecay m-m B ἐπὶ γην, NA aro yns (cp. 248 amo opyns) un Gf καὶ ὑπερ θανατου (A aro afavarov) ρυσεως εδεηθην : S ‘and I made supplication’ C505 Oy εἐπεκαλεσαμὴν κυριον πατερα κυρίου μου 00 Reading δὰ ΡΝ. ( & 3) for on) (‘ Yea, I exalted ’) Ὁ 45)» 4-ἃ $ ‘from on high’ tr Gr >: 3 ‘mighty Lord and Saviour’ Tr-rr Qf μη με εγκαταλιπειν 5 Gr ev ἡμεραις (248 253 εν npepa iL) tt Gr ev καιρῳ ὑπερηφανιων αβοηθησιας : S> wu Reading JIN) (Smend) = & for 728) («And I will remember thee ’) Vv (ἃ ev εξομολογησει : S ‘in praises’
4. the straits of the flame. Cp. Is. xlvii. 14. that I kindled not. Cp. Job xx. 26; a figurative way of expressing the presence of troubles not of one’s
own making.
5. From the deep... This rendering is uncertain, as O97 does not occur in this connexion in the O.T.; cp. Jonah ii. 3; note, however, {1 (‘belly’) is not used elsewhere in a similar connexion.
the framers of lies. Lit. ‘them that plaster lies’, cp. Job xiii. 4; Ps. cxix. 69. 6. And the arrows... See crit. note. Cp. Ps. lii. 2.
My soul drew nigh... Cp. Ps. Ixxxvili. 3.
to the nethermost Sheol. Cp. Ps. Ixxxvi. 13, Ixxxviil. 6. 7- Iturned about... Cp. Ps. cvii. 12; Is. Ixiii. 5. 8. ... the loving-kindnesses... Cp. Ps. xxv. 6.
...them that trust in Him. Cp. Ps. xvi. 1.
And redeemeth them... Cp. Gen. xlvili. 16; Ps. cxxi. 7.
from all evil. 97 S30, for which Smend would read 1 ἢ2)2 (=x) ‘from the hand of evil’, cp. Hab. 11. 9; which Peters reads ἫΝ 7°D (‘from the power of the enemy’); @ possibly read this, cp. I Kings XXviil. 18. 9. from the gates of Sheol. Cp. Is. xxxvili. 10; Jonah ii. 3.
Io. ...my Father art Thou. See note onv.1; cp. Ps. Ixxxix. 26. The rendering of && (see crit. note) is probably due to Christian influence. Cp. Ps. ii. 7, cx. I. ἡ the hero of my salvation. Cp. ‘the rock of my salvation’ in Ps. ἰχχχίχ. 26 (cp. Ps. Ixil. 2), and ‘the strength of my salvation’ in Ps. cxl. 7 (cp. Isa. xxxiii. 6). In the day of wasteness... See Zeph. i. 15, from which this is quoted. 11. I will praise... Cp. Ps. cxlv. 2. KI And will sing Thy praise. This rendering of & is preferable to that of #3; the two verbs Vt and « 7 occur together in Ps. cxxxv. 3.
ous)
STRAGC EN “bien τ
‘¥ Then did Jahveh hear my voicewy, And gave heed to my supplication ;
12 ~ And He redeemed me from all evil”
x And delivered me* Yin the day of trouble’. Therefore will I give and offer praise’, And bless the Name of Jahveh”?:—
(6) τοῦ χνὶ (Extant only in Hebrew): A Thanksgiving (=1+4+4+443 distichs).
i. Give thanks unto Jahveh, for He is good ; ii. Give thanks to the God of praises ; iii. Give thanks unto Him that keepeth Israel ; iv. Give thanks unto Him that formeth all ; v. Give thanks unto the Redeemer of Israel ; vi. Give thanks unto Him that gathereth the outcasts of Israel ; vii. Give thanks unto Him that buildeth His city and His Sanctuary ; viii. Give thanks unto Him that maketh a horn to sprout for the house of David ; ix. Give thanks unto Him that chooseth the sons of Zadok to be priests ;
VAP (ice W-W (ἃ ἐσωσας yap pe εξ απωλειας XX (τ καὶ ἐξείλου pe: V και εξελου μαι Y-Y (ἃ ex καιρου πονήρου A + και εξιλου (516) μαι: 55.“ from all trouble’ 2 (ἃ - σοι zz-tz 248 ‘Thy Name, O Lord’: ῷ ‘ Thy holy Name’
gave heed to my supplication. Cp. Ps. cxl. 6, exliii. 1. in the day of trouble. Cp.v. toc; Ps. xli. 1.
(ὁ) 1: πανὶ, (EXTANT ONLY IN HEBREW) : A THANKSGIVING.
The Psalm which is here inserted is formed on the pattern of Ps. cxxxvi, that is, if this latter is prior in date; the possibility, however, of both having been composed on an earlier pattern (Peters) must be allowed for. It is probable that this Psalm is an amalgamation of two poems, a shorter one, vv. vi-ix, and a longer one, vv. i-v, x-xvi (=twelve verses). The first clause of each verse of the shorter poem is longer than the corresponding clauses of the longer poem. The place in which vv. vi-ix are inserted is the natural one, the word ‘Israel’ being the point of attachment. The omission of the whole by @ 55 favours the opinion that it did not form part of the original book ; but Smend, who regards the whole as original, accounts for the omission by saying that (ἃ took exception to its ‘ un-Greek character’, as well as to the words in v. ix, while $ followed & in omitting it because of the anti-Jewish tendency which is characteristic of $. This explanation seems inadequate, for the ‘un-Greek character’ would apply to the whole book, while the natural objection to v. ix (the downfall of the house of Zadok had taken place by the time the translation was made) would not account for the omission of the whole section. It seems more likely that vv. vi-ix are original, and that the rest was subsequently added, the amalgamation of the two taking place as suggested above. See, however, the discussion in the Introduction, § 3, iii.
i. Give thanks... This verse is identical with Ps. cxxxvi. 1; cp. the refrain at the’end of each verse in this psalm as well as in Ps. cxxxvi.
ii. the God of praises. Cp. Ps. xxii. 3, Ixxi. 6; and see also the Shemoneh‘Esreh (cp. note on v. 1 above) iii: “The holy ones praise Thee every day.’
111, that keepeth Israel. Cp. Ps. cxxi. 3-8. iv. that formeth all. Cp. Jer. x. 16, li. 19.
v. the Redeemer of Israel. Cp. Is. xliv. 6, xlix. 7, and Shemoneh “Esveh vii: ‘Blessed art Thou, O Lord, the Redeemer of Israel.’
vi. that gathereth the outcasts... Cp. Ps. cxlvii.2; Is. xi. 12, xxvii. 13, lvi. 8; and Shemoneh “Esreh x: “Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who gatherest the outcasts of Thy people Israel.’
vil. that buildeth... Cp. Ps. cxlvii. 2; Isa. xliv. 28; and Shemoneh ‘Esreh xiv : ‘Blessed art Thou, O Lord, the Builder of Jerusalem.’
Vill. that maketh a horn to sprout... Cp. Ps. cxxxii. 17; Ezek. xxix. 21; and Shemoneh ‘Esreh xv: ‘Do Thou speedily cause the shoot of David to sprout forth, and do Thou lift up his horn through Thy victorious salvation; every day do we hope for Thy salvation. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who causeth the horn of salvation to sprout forth’ _
x. Give thanks unto the Shield of Abraham ; xi. Give thanks unto the Rock of Isaac ; xii. Give thanks unto the Mighty One of Jacob; xiii. Give thanks unto Him that hath chosen Zion; xiv. Give thanks unto the King of the kings of kings ; _xv. And He hath lifted up the horn for His people ; The praise of all His pious ones, xvi. For the children of Israel, a people nigh unto Him, Hallelujah.
(c) LI. 13-30. A Poem describing how Ben-Sira acquired Wisdom (= 1449 distichs).
τ \13 *When I was yet young, before I wandered abroad’, Ἶ ΝῚ desired her and sought her out?. t4°In my youth I made supplication in prayer‘ ; 4And I will seek her out even to the end. τ She blossomed like a ripening grape’, My heart rejoiced in her®. My foot trod ‘in her footstep‘, From my youth 51 learned Wisdom®.
“| *? 19 ws mutilated ; all that is left τ NYT YI ὋΣ (‘I was young’)=S. From here to v. 15 a incl. 9 | is wanting b-b G& εζγτησα σοφιαν mpodavws ev προσευχῃ μου ὅτ [yn ® this clause stands as v.16 a, which
wt has displaced: Ge evavte vaov ἠξιουν περι αὐτῆς ἀ-ἃ Wanting in ® e-e Reading ἐξήνθησεν ὡς περκάζουσα ΠἘ σταφυλή (Bickell, cp. Sept. of Amos ix. 13) for εξ avOous ὡς περκαζουσης σταφυλης: cp. & et effloruit tanquam ΠῚ praecox uva ft Reading AWN (Smend) for ANNA: G& ev εὐθυτητι: HS+‘O Lord’
5-Οὁ Gk cyvevoy αὐτὴν
x. the Shield of Abraham. Cp. Gen. xv. 1; Ps. xviii. 2, and Shemoneh ‘Esreh i: ‘Blessed art Thou, the Shield | of Abraham.’
| ‘xi. the Rock of Isaac. Cp. Deut. xxxii. 4; 2 Sam. xxiii. 3; Ps. xviil. 2, xlii. 9, Ixxi. 3; Is. xxx. 29, li. 1; in Shemoneh ‘Esreh xviii the expression ‘ Rock of our life’ occurs.
xii. the Mighty One of Jacob. Cp. Gen. xlix.24; Ps. cxxxil. 2, 5; Isa. i. 24, xlix. 26, Ix. 16, and Shemoneh ‘Esreh | i: “Blessed art Thou, O Lord our God, and God of our fathers, God of Abraham, God of Isaac, and God of Jacob, the ΟῚ great, the mighty, and the fearful God, | ΧΙ. that hath chosen Zion. Cp. Ps. Ixxviii. 68, cxxxii. 13, cxxxv. 21, and Shemoneh ‘Esveh xvii: ‘Be pleased, | O Lord our God, with Thy people Israel, and their prayer; and set up again the sacrificial service for the altar
| of Thine House ... And may our eyes behold Thy merciful return to Zion. Blessed art Thou who restorest Thy | Shekinah to Zion.’ (On the withdrawal of the S#esinah from earth, and the reasons for this, see the Midrash _ | Bereshith Rabba, c. 19; the passage is given in the authors’ Zhe Religion and Worship of the Synagogue, p. 219.)
xiv. King of the kings of kings. Cp. the title ‘God of gods, and Lord of lords’ in Deut. x. 17. In Shemoneh ‘Esreh the title ‘King’ is applied to God five times, and in xi occur the words: ‘Reign Thou over us, O Lord, alone in loving-kindness and mercy. In Pivge Adoth iv. 32 occurs the expression: ‘The King of the kings of kings, the Holy One, blessed be He.’ Xv, xvl. These two verses are identical with Ps. cxlviii. 14.
The Poem (vv. 13-30) which follows is an acrostic, each verse beginning with the letters of the Hebrew alphabet
_ jin their order ; this had already been discerned by Bickell before the discovery of the Hebrew text (see the Zedtschrift ur katholische Theologie, vi. 326-330; 1882). 13. When I was yet young. Cp. vi. 18; Wisd. viii. 2. ; before I wandered abroad. For this use of πλανᾶσθαι cp, xxxiv. 11 ( (ἃ xxxi. 12); Ben-Sira refers to his travels Aso in xxxix. 4. : 14. Inmy youth. Smend is probably right in regarding ἔναντι ναοῦ of (τ as a mistake for ἐν νεότητί μου ( 39). in prayer. ἐν προσευχῇ pou of (τ belongs here, notin v.132. ἃ 15. My heart... This clause was probably longer originally ; it is unduly short as it stands. in her footstep. See critical note; @, as Smend points out, may have read ΠΝ 3 (‘in her footstep’) but lsunderstood it ; cp. Job xxiii. 11, ‘ My foot hath held fast to His steps’; for ® as it stands cp. Ps. xxv. 5, xxvi. 3. Ilearned. Smend suggests the reading ‘N7PN (‘I tracked’) ; cp. (πα, which certainly gives a better parallel to the receding clause. For ¥ as it stands cp. Ps. Ixxi, 17; Prov. xxx. 3.
& 16I bowed down mine ear a little and received her?, 10" And much knowledge did I find’; 17 “And! her yoke was glorious to me*, m™ And to my Teacher do I offer thanks ™. 18 5] purposed to do good” “with her?°, °° And PI was not put to shame?, for I found her°°. 19 My soul was attached‘ to her, "And I turned not away my face from her’ ; & “I spread forth my hands to the heaven above’, 38" ‘And for ever and ever I will not go astray from her‘. "My hand opened her gates, And [| entered unto her, and looked upon her". 20 YI set my soul aright” “after her”, *And I found her in herY purity *; . ἢ gat me understanding *through her guidance’. ᾿ G “Therefore I shall not be forsaken”*, ἽΝ 18" 21 My inward part was troubled®¢ “like an oven’ “to look upon her®, Lh Therefore have I gotten® a good possession. 22 Jahveh gave fme the reward of my lips‘, And £with my tongue£ do I praise Him.
23 Turn in® unto me, ye unlearned, And lodge in my house of instruction.
bh This clause has been displaced by 14a in ® i {τ -Ἐεμαυτῳ : Sah+‘because of her’ (Smend) k-k & προκοπὴ EyEVvEeTO μοι εν αὐτῇ 11η», but the Ὶ ἐξ required as the sixth letter of the alphabet, this being the sixth clause mm G τῳ διδόντι por σοῴφιαν δωσω δοξαν n-0 Q& διενοηθην yap του ποιῆσαι αὐτὴν ° A word has fallen out here 00-00 (τ καὶ εζηλωσα ( perhaps a mistake for εζητησα ®) To ἀγαθὸν και ov py αισχυνθω P-P Reading WIN ( &) for Jan xd (‘I will not turn back’) 4 Gr διαμεμαχισται (reading AP wy for ApPwn): ¥ ‘clave’. τοῦ Gr καὶ εν ποιήσει λιμου διηκριβασαμὴν s-s Wanting in 38, 20 α stands in place of tt t-t Gr καὶ ta ἀγνοήματα avtns ἐπενθησα uu &> v-V Reading *wp) N33 () for 5) snn3 W-W (ἃ εἰς αὐτὴν xx Gk wrongly transposes this and the next clause ¥ στ 3 >‘her’ 2-2 Reading, with Smend, andanny Sor andnnn (‘from the beginning ’ t 3) a-a Only the first word and one letter of the second word are left in 18 b-b 3 “1 shall not forsake her’ ο 3 ‘burned’ φτοῦ > d-d G& εκζητησαι αὐτὴν € ® S+‘in her’ If & γλωσσαν μοι μισθον μου 85- (ἃ ev αὐτῇ h Reading ὙΠ (= 9) for Ὧ)3 : & ἐγγισατε
to my Teacher. The Teacher is, of course, God.
18. The text is very corrupt here, and must be emended with the help of &.
19. In this verse & apparently had a text before it which in part differed from that of # as now extant. Ϊ My hand opened her gates. For the thought of Wisdom having her dwelling-house cp. xiv. 23-25, Prov. ix. 1 ἢν and looked upon her. Cp. xv. 7, ‘Sinners shall not see her.’ F
20. understanding. Lit. ‘heart’; cp. Prov. xv. 32, xix. 8, where the same verb as here is used (JP).
21. My inward part was troubled. Cp. Jer. xxxi. 20.
Therefore have I gotten... Cp. Prov. iv. 7.
22. the reward of my lips. i.e. success as a teacher.
house of instruction. The Beth ha-Midrash, or Beth Midrash, is the technical name for the ‘house’ where |
students gathered together for instruction in the Law. Great scholars had their own ‘houses’ where they gathered | pupils together. The Beth ha-Midrash of Ben-Sira is the earliest of which we know; in Yoma 35 ὁ (T. Babli)
mention is made of the one in which Shemaiah and Abtalion taught, and which Hillel, when a youth, could attend only ᾿ς. after having paid an admission-fee to the janitor; ‘ whether or not this charge of a fee, so contradictory to the maxim of the men of the Great Synagogue (Ado¢/i.1,‘‘Raise up many disciples”), was a political measure of the time, it seemingly | stands in connexion with a principle pronounced by the Shammaites (Ad. 2). N., A. iii, B. iv, ed. Schechter, p. 14) that | ‘‘ only those who are wise, humble, and of goodly, well-to-do parentage should be taught the Law”. On the other hand, | the Hillelites insisted that “all, without exception, should partake of the privilege, inasmuch as many transgressors in Israel, when brought nigh to the Law, brought forth righteous, pious, and perfect men”’ (7,2), iii. 117 δ). Ben-Sira
says distinctly that the wisdom was to be acquired ‘ without money’; see v. 25 and cp. Wedarim 36 a (T. Babli): “As | I have taught you without payment, saith God, so must you do likewise.’ Reference is made (Zauma debe Eliyahu Re ix [x], xvi, and elsewhere) to the Beth ha-Midrash in the Temple (cp. Matt. xxi. 23, xxvi. 55; Luke ii. 46, xx. 1, ΧΧΙ, 37: | John xviii. 20), which was called Beth ha-Midrash ha-gadol, ‘the Great house of instruction.’ |
24 ‘How long will ye lack ‘these things*'? And (how long) shall your soul be so! athirst ? 25 | open my mouth and speak “of her™, Acquire Wisdom” for yourselves without money. 26 Bring® your necks under her yoke, PAnd her burden let your soul bear? ; 4She is nigh unto them that seek her4, - ‘And he that is intent (upon her) findeth her’. | 27 Behold with your eyes that ‘I laboured but (little) * therein’, «And abundance of peaceY have I found®. 28 ἡ Hearken to my teaching, (though ye be but) a few*™, And much Ysilver and¥ gold shall ye acquire thereby. ) 29 May my” soul delight *in my Veshzbah*; And ye shall not be put to shame "in singing my praise». 30 Work your work °in righteousness °, And He will give you“ your reward in its time.
[Blessed be Jahveh ; and praised be His Name to generations.
Thus far the words of Simeon the son of Jeshua‘, who is called Ben-Sira.
The Wisdom of Simeon, the songof Jeshua‘. the son of Eleazar, the son of Sira. May the Name of Jahveh be sii: from now and unto eternity.]°
i G& καὶ (τι 8 A) ore υστερεισθαι (υστερειτε N A) λέγετε ev τουτοις καὶ it. ‘from these things and those things’ 1 Lit. ‘ very’ mm & > n> ° (ἃ υποθετε bP Gr καὶ επιδεξασθω ἡ Ψυχὴ ὑμὼν παιδειαν ( 9) τὰ Ok eyyus εστιν evpew αὐτὴν rt G&> Ss Reading, with Smend, snbny {op {{ΞΞ (τ 8) Sor NTDy\ NYA ip { (‘I was small and I persisted’) tG&> uvu Reading, with Smend, ANID NN AIAN for... WAND 2 (‘ and I found her,-—peace ) Υ G + ἐμαυτῳ w-w # pr Ὁ" (΄ many ΠΕ (ἃ μετασχετε παιδειαν ev πολλῳ αριθμῳ ἀργυριου x Reading ΒΟΌΣ ( &) for ὙγΠ}03 (‘in my youth’) yY &> 2 (ἃ S ‘your’ ana (ἃ ev τῇ ἐλέει αὐτου: 55. ‘in my repentance’ b-b @ ev αἰνεσει αὐτου c-e Smend would read ny nba, Peters
ny sad (= G8) d SoG S: L> e-e (ἃ ‘Wisdom of Jesus, son of Sirach’: 55 70 248 254 ‘Blessed be the Lord for ever; Amen, Amen’: 3 ‘ Blessed be God for ever, and praised be His Name to generations. Thus far the words of Jeshua‘ the son of Simeon that is called the son of Asira [so also Syro-Hex, but some Syriac MSS, read Sirach|. The writing of the Wisdom of Bar Sira is ended’. Zhe subscription varies in the Syriac MSS.
24. shall your soul be so athirst. Cp.Is.lv.1; Amos vili.11. Cp. Pivge Abothi.4: ‘ Let thy house be a meetinghouse for the wise, and powder thyself in the dust of their feet ; and drink their words with thirstiness.’
25. without money. Cp. Is. lv. 1, 2, and the Talmudic quotation in the note on v. 23.
he that isintent. 1/5) jN)3, lit. ‘that giveth his soul’.
27. (little). For the use of {OP in a temporal sense cp. Is. liv. 7.
28. (though ye be but) afew. For this use of 15D1 cp. Gen. xxxiv. 30; Deut. iv. 27.
And much silver... Cp. Pivge Adoth ii. 19: ‘If thou hast learned much Torah, they give thee much reward ; and faithful is the maker of thy work, who will pay thee the reward of thy work ; and know that the recompense of the reward of the righteous is for the time to come.’
29. Yeshibah. i.e. Circle of hearers, later an Academy of learning. ‘At first the Beth ha-Midrash was the place where the Yeshibah assembled. ... Later, when the number of students increased, it became necessary to hold the sessions in a separate large hall adjoining the Beth ha-A/¢drash, and this hall was known by the name of Veshzbah’ (JE, xii. 595 a). For nv". (τ read "3 (‘in His salvation,’ referring it to God), while S read "NW (‘in my repentance ’), neither understanding, presumably, what was meant by the Ves/zdah.
in singing my praise. ‘N12.
30. Work your work. i.e. the work of seeking wisdom.
in righteousness. The reading of & S, ‘before the time,’ is probably the correct one, the reference being to the time of final reckoning ; cp. John ix. 4.
δι. SHORT ACCOUNT OF THE BOOK.
Tur Book of Wisdom has long enjoyed the reputation of being the most attractive and interesting book in the Apocrypha. Nor is the reputation undeserved if attention is confined to the first ten or eleven chapters. In these chapters both thought and expression are of a high order. The thought, it is true, is not that of a systematic or consistent thinker, but of a writer imbued with a strongly religious spirit ; one who felt the stress and perplexity of life and suffering, and yet resisted the temptation to abandon—like many of his co-religionists—his ancestral belief in a God of righteousness. These thoughts are expressed in the ancient Hebrew style of parallelism ; in spite of rare words, the languagé is vigorous and the construction simple: the impression that he was well acquainted with the literature and philosophy of Greece grows upon one the more the book is studied, and he is not without boldness in revising some of the traditional beliefs of his religion.
The work falls naturally into three sections: (1) cc. i to vi. 8; (2) vi. 9 to xi.1; (3) xi. 2 to xix. The first section has been well called ‘the book of eschatology’; it portrays in vivid contrast the different destinies which await the righteous and the ungodly who oppress them. The impious and defiant speech of the ungodly, the picture of their despair and remorse after death, and the description of the divine vengeance upon them are the outstanding literary features in this part of the book. The religious teaching also of this section is interesting and important. The writer enunciates the doctrine of immortality immediately after death, denies that suffering presupposes sin, refuses to admit that early death is necessarily a calamity, or that childlessness is a mark of divine displeasure. It would be difficult to find five other chapters in the Old Testament Scriptures with so much departure from traditional views.
The second section consists of the panegyric on Wisdom which gives its name to the book. In beautiful and eloquent language the attractions of Wisdom as a heavenly Being are set forth. ‘Wisdom is radiant and fadeth not away’; she seeks to know those that are worthy of her, and leads them to the enjoyment of immortality in the presence of God. According to the testimony of Solomon, who now speaks, her treasures are bestowed upon mankind in answer to prayer. The fine description of Wisdom is continued, and culminates in the statement that ‘she is a breath of the power of God, and a clear effluence of the glory of the Almighty’ (vii. 25). Solomon is not the only one who has been favoured by her. She guided the great ones of old, rescued them from all their troubles, and finally brought the holy nation itself out of captivity and ‘ prospered their works by the hand of a holy prophet’ (xi. 1).
From this point onward a great change takes place. We have no longer a poem extolling goodness and celebrating Wisdom, but a Midrash in glorification of the Jews.
From xi. 2 to the end of the book we have an historical retrospect of Israel in Egypt and in the © wilderness, broken by a dissertation on the origin and evils of idolatry in cc. xiii, xiv, xv. Chapters x1 and xii with xvi to xix contrast the lot of Israel in the wilderness with that experienced by the Egyptians during the plagues. The writer sets himself to prove the two propositions that ‘ By what things a man sins, by these he is punished’ (xi. 16), and ‘ By what things their foes were punished, by these they in their need were benefited ’ (xi. 5). First, the punishments of the Egyptians are said to have been framed in accordance with a variety of the /ex ¢alionis.— This is shown most clearly in the plagues of frogs, lice, and flies. Because the Egyptians worshipped despicable animals, by despicable animals they were punished. But the writer's power of drawing parallels does not end here. He goes further and gives examples to prove his other contention that what was noxious to the Egyptians was beneficial to Israel. Historical facts are ingeniously selected and opposed to one another; if the main facts are intractable, the details are made to furnish the required lesson. If he cannot get a positive comparison, a negative one will do. The comparisons are mostly forced, except in the case of the last plague, where the slaying of the firstborn had a double effect. It punished the Egyptians and at the same time freed Israel. The first of these ideas, appropriateness of retribution, was doubtless based on Exod. iv. 22-23: ‘Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, my firstborn: .. . (because) thou hast refused to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, thy firstborn.’ The second seems to be peculiar to this book.
In cc. xiii-xv the author discourses on idolatry and its attendant evils. He treats the worship of the heavenly bodies with some leniency, only marvelling that the worshippers did not go a step farther and find the Sovereign Lord of all through His works.- He then turns to idolatry proper, and following Isa. x] pours scorn and sarcasm on those who worship a crooked piece of wood for which the workman can find no use save as an object of worship: a piece of wood not sound enough to be used for the building of a ship. The origin of idolatry is sketched after the manne of Euhemerus, and the methods of a second idol-maker—the worker in.clay—held up to derision. 7 After this digression the writer turns once more to the Egyptians; and from here to the end the contrast between Egypt and Israel is resumed... The work concludes with a repetition of a favourite theme of the writer, that the world fights for the righteous: the elements by their transmutation into one another are used by God to punish the Egyptians and defend Israel.
The book is included in the so-called Wisdom Literature of the Hebrews, the chief object of which is to discuss the problem of life and its conditions. Some of the writers limited their teaching to directing men aright in their social relations. They saw that much of the failure and unhappiness of life arose from disregard of prudential considerations and rightly laid emphasis on this. Small troubles were the result of imprudence; serious troubles the result of deliberate wrongdoing ; therefore, to avoid trouble small or great, be prudent and abstain from wrongdoing. We have examples of this teaching in Proverbs and Sirach. But the teaching of experience showed that this doctrine was very imperfect. The rich oppressed the poor, however prudent and pious the poor might be; and in times of religious persecution or national trial the theory broke down utterly. Some teachers faced these perplexing facts and tried to account otherwise for the mystery of suffering. Here they deserted the réle of the sage inculcating prudential precepts, and became religious rather than moral teachers (though the difference would hardly be recognized by a Jew), endeavouring to penetrate the mysteries of God and explain them to suffering humanity.- We have examples of this in Job, Ecclesiastes, and the well-known Psalms, xxxvii, xlix, and lxxiii. It is to this last division that the | writer of Wisdom, cc. i-x, belongs: the later chapters, xi to xix, have nothing in common with either ' class of Wisdom literature.
The authorship of the book is unknown. It is perhaps the work of more than one writer, and _ dates probably from after 50 B.C. St. Paul undoubtedly knew and used the book, Romans and | Ephesians showing clear traces of its influence; some other parts of the New Testament also show points of contact with it.
§2. TITLE.
The earliest mention of the book is perhaps found in p. 11 a, line 8 of the Muratorian Canon (A.D. 200). There the title is ‘ Sapientia’, with the added words ‘ ab amicis Salomonis in honorem ipsius scripta’. Clement of Alexandria, head of the Catechetical School A.D. 190-203, speaks of it under the title Wisdom of Solomon. Tertullian (cca 250) quotes it as the Wisdom of Solomon. Origen (d. 250) speaks of it inthe same way as Clement. Cyprian (d. 258) quotes it as Solomon or the Wisdom of Solomon. The Latin version has ‘ Liber Sapientiae’; the Peshitta, ‘The great Wisdom _ | of Solomon.’
‘Inthe fourth-century MSS. s and B the title is Σαλομωντος and Σαλωμωνος respectively. The Alexandrine fifth-century MS. has Σολομωντος. Jerome (d. 420), who recognizes that the book is | pseudepigraphic, says it was entitled ‘Sapientia Salomonis’. Only the Latin omits the name of Solomon, and this may be due to Jerome’s influence: although he did not alter the translation— “calamo temperavi’ he says—he may have altered the title.
The most important uncials, * A and B, contain the book in its entirety. C (Codex Ephraim) | ontains viii. 5—xii. 10, xiv. 19—xvii. 18, xviii. 24—-xix. 22. V (23), eighth-ninth century, contains the hole. The cursives mentioned in Holmes and Parsons are numbered 23 (but this isa mistake: 23 |According to Klostermann (Axalecta, Leipzig, 1895) 55 does not contain Wisdom. Klostermann has Pxamined 248 and 253, while Nestle (Urtext und Ubersetzungen) has investigated the readings of 68, 706, 157, 253, and 296. Of the cursives 248 seems to be the most important. It is frequently juoted by Prof. Margoliouth in RAS, 1890, and Sanday and Headlam (Komans, p. 51 note) say, Cod. 248 embodies very ancient elements.’ Grimm and Feldmann quote certain Parisian MSS. ollated by Thilo of Halle, who contemplated an edition of the book (c, 1825). ; The text of B is given in Swete, O.7. iz Greek, with the variants of’ Aand C. Many interesting ariants in the cursives are given in Grimm, Holtzmann, and especially Feldmann. Feldmann’s
investigation (Zexrtmaterialien z. B. der W., Freiburg im B., 1902) is by far the most thorough yet published. § 4. THE VERSIONS.
The Latin version is the Old Latin; Jerome did not touch it: he says ‘calamo temperavi’. It. is generally faithful to the Greek, but includes several lines not in any Greek MS., one of which (ii. 8) is undoubtedly, another (i. 15) possibly, genuine; a third (v. 14) a very intelligent gloss: others, e.g. ii. 17, vi. I, 23, viii. 11, ix. 19, xi. 5, are glosses pure and simple. The text has been exhaustively examined by Thielmann in the Archiv fiir lat. Lex. und Gram., 1893, pp. 235-277.! Like previous investigators, Thielmann comes to the conclusion that the home of the version is North Africa. This he proves by full lists of words and constructions in Wisdom, only found elsewhere in North African Latin. A short list of such words is given in $4 of Westcott’s article on Wisdom in Smith’s DB; a longer list may be found in Deane, /zdex //. As Tertullian and Cyprian used it, the version is placed by Thielmann in the latter half of the second century.
The Syriac (Peshitta) version is full of mistakes and paraphrases, but is of great interest on account of its striking relationship to the Latin. Prof. Margoliouth points out that the Peshitta agrees with the Latin ‘in a way which cannot be the result of chance’. This relationship is probably that of assistant to the Latin translator. The reverse could not be the case, since, if the Syriac translator had had the Latin to refer to, he would have made far fewer mistakes. Both the Latin and the Syriac are from earlier Greek MSS. than any we now possess.
Some interesting instances of agreement between the Syriac and Latin, besides those mentioned by Prof. Margoliouth on p. 279, FRAS, 1890, are as follows: v. 14, x. 5, 12 (see note), xiv. 2, and especially xiv. 19, of which Prof. Margoliouth says ‘the Latin rendering can only be accounted for as a rendering of either the Syriac or the (supposed Hebrew) original’.
There are numerous additions in the form of explanatory glosses, e.g. the proper names in c. x, Cain, Noah, Abraham, Lot, Jacob and Joseph, are inserted, and in xix. 17 (Syr. 16) ἐκεῖνοι rightly explained as the men of Sodom.
The text has been thoroughly examined by Joseph Holtzmann, Die Pesch. z. δ. der W., pp. 152, Freiburg im B., 1903. Of his conclusions, the two following deserve mention here: (1) the language of the copy before the translator was Greek, as is shown by mistranslations which could only have arisen from a misunderstanding of the Greek; (2) the Syriac version was used by the translator of the Latin version, therefore its date must be earlier.
The other versions (except the Arabic—which is said to be very late——twelfth century or later) have been examined by Feldmann, who has collated the Coptic (Sahidic), Syro-Hexaplaric, and Armenian, and given the variants of each. He then (pp. 41-84) gives a most useful enumeration, with frequent discussions, of the various readings throughout the book.
ὃ 5. DATE.
The difficulty of arriving at a satisfactory date for the book is seen from the differences which exist between scholars as to the period of its composition. Grimm dates it 145-50 B.C., Thackeray 130-100 B. C., Gregg 125-100 B.C., Gfrérer 100 B.C., Bousset under the Empire, Farrar 40 A.D.
An indisputable terminus a quo is obtained from the fact that the writer made use of the | LXX version of Isaiah, but that may be no later than 200 B.c. By common consent this date | is far too early. It is, however, possible to get a later date for the ¢erminus a quo. If the line | in 1 Enoch v. 7 is the source of Wisd. iii. 9 the book must be later than the translation of Enoch | into Greek, which was probably undertaken as a whole, seeing that the fragments which survive | include chapter 1xxxix. The latest part of Enoch consists of chapters xxxvii to ]xxi, and the date of this according to Charles is 94-79 B.C. We may suppose Enoch to have been translated at | some date between 70 and 50 B.C. and adopt this period as the terminus a quo. 4
Mr. Thackeray dates the book 130-100 B.C. on the ground that the two forms οὐδείς and | οὐθείς occur in it, a characteristic which he would assign to that period (Gr. of O. T. Gk., p. 62). | On the ground, however, that only the ὃ forms of οὐδείς occur in LX X Proverbs, he assigns that book | to about 100 B.C., making it later than Wisdom. But it is difficult to believe that the author of | Wisd. i-xi was not acquainted with LXX Proverbs. If he was not, we must delete iii. 11 and | vi. 12 ¢ as interpolations based on Prov. i. 7 and viii. 12 4. It is no doubt possible that these lines | may be interpolations, but it is more difficult to get rid of πάρεδρον yap εὑρήσει τῶν πυλῶν αὐτοῦ (vi. 14), which seems to be a reminiscence of Prov. i. 21 ἐπὶ δὲ πύλαις δυναστῶν Tapedpever, and Vili. 2 παρὰ yap πύλαις δυναστῶν παρεδρεύει. Possibly, too, ἀγρυπνέω in Wisd. vi. 15 is a reminiscence of the }
1 There is an earlier work by Thielmann, Die dat. Ubers. d. Buches der Weisheit (Leipzig, 1872).
same word in Prov. viii. 34. _ Moreover, the general description of Wisdom in c. vi. 9-16 seems based on that in Prov. i and viii.
Further, if the LXX version of Proverbs was not in existence when Wisdom was written—and this would be the case if Mr. Thackeray’s dates are accepted—we must assume that the author was able to consult Proverbs in the Hebrew, and yet that he resorted to the Greek for such an important book as Isaiah. It seems impossible to deny that in c. ii. 12 he accepted the erroneous LXX translation of Isa. iii. 10 (as the writer of the second part accepted that of Isa. xliv. 20). This would bea strange circumstance if he were able to read the original.
The evidence, therefore, is strongly in favour of assuming the dependence of Wisdom on LXX Proverbs. We may, however, with Mr. Thackeray accept a date for Proverbs subsequent to Sirach, i.e, subsequent to 130 B.C., and take the order as Sirach, Proverbs, Wisdom. This would strengthen the conjecture made above that the date of Wisdom is not earlier than the middle of the first century B.C.
The serminus ad quem depends on the undoubted use made of the book by St. Paul: this would require a date not later than the first few years of our era: it would take some little time for the book to acquire a reputation and get into circulation. Grimm points out (page 34) that the writer’s apparent ignorance of the Alexandrine doctrine of the Logos points to a date earlier than Philo. More than that, as Philo did not expound his doctrine of the Logos as though it originated with him, the date of Wisdom must be earlier than the acceptance of this doctrine by the Jewish scholars of Alexandria. This argument is no doubt valid, but it only means that the book must be earlier than the student life of Philo, which may be placed from 5 B.C. to A.D. 5. To place the book on this account a hundred years earlier than Philo, as Gregg does, seems quite uncalled for. But ignorance of the Alexandrine Logos doctrine can only affect the date of the first part of the book ; the second part may with Bousset (Religion des Fudenthums, p. 35) be dated after the beginning of the Empire (say 30 B. C.), on account of xiv. 17, where the likeness of an adsev¢ ruler is mentioned.
The present writer inclines to a date between 50 and 30 B.C. for the first part of the book, and 30 B.C. to A. D. 10 for the second part, which was written in continuation of part 1.
$6. ComposiTE NATURE.
The unity of the book was carly disputed. In the eighteenth century the French scholar Houbigant pronounced the work to be composite, and was followed by Eichhorn, Bretschneider, and others. Houbigant divided the book at the end of ch. ix ; Eichhorn, whose position is here adopted, at xi 1; Bretschneider, at vi. 8 and xii, taking ch. xi as the work of a redactor. Gfrdérer (1835) and Grimm (1860) upheld the unity of the book, the former speaking with scorn of Eichhorn, the latter with respect; and the deservedly great influence of Grimm caused subsequent scholars to accept his decision. In 1900 Siegfried called it ‘the well-arranged product of a single author’.
In 1903, however, Lincke in Samaria und seine Propheten divided the book into two parts. He attributed cc. i-xii. 8 to a writer living in Samaria in the time of the Seleucidae. It was a polemic against the hierocracy at Jerusalem. Ch. xii. g to the end is Alexandrian.
In the same year Stevenson, in lVisdom and the Fewish Apoc. Writings, a little volume in the | Temple Bible Series, offered another division of the book. He agrees very nearly with Eichhorn in making the first part end at xi. 4; but in the remainder of the book he sees three different compositions—viz. (1) cc. xiii-xv, the section on idolatry; (2) xi. 21—xii. 22, the section on the love and mercy of God; (3) the strictly historical part, xi. 5-20, xii. 23-27, Xvi-xix.
In 1904 Weber, in Hilgenfeld’s Zeztschrift, attempted another analysis. He also divided the book into four parts: cc. i-v, the book of eschatology; cc. vi-x, the Book of Wisdom proper ; c. xi to the end, the book of the method of retribution; in this last part the chapters on idolatry .(xili-xv) are an insertion. Feldmann, in 7b. Zeitsch. 1909, pp. 140-150, criticized and rejected Weber's attempt, scarcely noticing Lincke’s work.
Kohler in the ¥ezzsh Encycl. maintains the composite authorship, apparently following Eichhorn. Toy in the Eucy. Bid. and Ency. Brit. thinks that the question admits of no certain answer.
The arguments for the unity of the book (some of which are given by Grimm) may be set forth as follows: (1) Use of certain unusual words and expressions throughout the book—e. g. the word μεταλλεύω is used in the same evroncous meaning in both parts, iv. 12 and xvi. 25; ἀπότομος, a word which occurs nowhere else in the Greek Bible, is found in v. 20, 22, vi. 5, Xi. 10, Xii. 9, Xvlii. 15; ἀνυπόκριτος inv. 18, xviii. 16, nowhere else in the Greek Bible; κίβδηλος, ii. 16, xv. 9, only twice besides in the Greek Bible ; συγγνωστός, vi. 6, xiii. 8, nowhere else in the Greek Bible. The phrase ἐν ὄψει is found in iii. 4, vii. 9, viii. 11, xiv. 17, xv. 19, but nowhere else in the Greek Bible (but see below) ; θηρίων θυμοί, vii. 20, xvi. 5, and λογισμοὶ ἀσύνετοι, i. 5 and xi. 15, both seem to be unique
phrases; πανταδύναμος, vii. 23, Xi. 17, Xvili. 15, γεώδης, ix. 15, XV. 13, διέπω, ix. 3, ΧΙ. 15, διερευνάω, vi. 3, xiii. 7, occur nowhere else in the Greek Bible; κακότεχνος, i. 4, Xv. 4, only once besides, 4 Mace. vi. 14. (2) The same extensive vocabulary, the similar use of compound and poetical words, assonances, and the like. (3) The rhythmical structure (see Thackeray, 77S, vol. vi, p. 232) throughout the book. (4) The use of philosophic theories in both parts—e.g. in part 1 the Stoic doctrine of the world-soul, in part 2 the Stoic doctrine of the metabolism of the four elements. (5) Omission of proper names in both parts.’ (6) The occurrence in both parts of the striking conception of the ‘ world fighting for the righteous’, which is found in v. 17, 20, xvi. 17, 24, xviii. 24 (perhaps), and xix. 6. The most formidable argument is the first. Many scholars would feel that the use of μεταλλεύω alone decides the question.
The arguments for the composite nature of the book are :—
(1) The difference in style, presentation, and tone.
(2) The omission of all reference to Wisdom in xi. 2 to the end, except in one doubtful passage.
(3) The abandonment of the transcendental view of the Deity.
(4) The absence of any reference to the doctrine of immortality, except a passing reference
(5) Abandonment of parallelism.
(6) The numerous and striking linguistic differences.
The first five points may be explained away ; it may be said that the writer is a philosopher in the first part, a preacher in the second ; the sixth point, however, is more troublesome.
The most striking linguistic difference is found in the very different proportions in which certain particles are used? in the two parts—e.g. μέν is used three times only in the first part, v. 13, vii. 1, 30, and twenty-seven times (according to Swete’s text) in the second, xi. 6, 10, SSI) MOH τῇ, Σὶν. Σ, toh II), Ἐν. Ὁ; Τῇ, Bais 2) Ὁ; ΤΆ, 18; 21: ΣῊ I my, SQN TB, vl, FW, WG UP xix. 5, 10, 14. δέ is also unequally distributed, with fifty-two occurrences in part 1, eightytwo in part 2. ἵνα occurs seven times in the first part, viz. ii. 19, vi. 9, 21, ix. 2, 10, x. 8, 12, and 18, 26, xviii. 20, 22, xix. 15, and in connexion with this μόνον is of course more frequent in the second part than in the first. γάρ occurs 52 times in the first part, as against 102 in the second; καὶ γάρ twice in the first part, twelve times in the second.
In addition to these considerable differences the following smaller differences in the use of particles exist :—
ἀνάπαλιν, XIX. 21. This gives seven of these particles in part 1 to thirty-six in part 2.
The distribution of some other words is worthy of notice. The following occur only in the first part :-—
τρίβοι, in a metaphorical sense, ii. 15, v. 7, Vi. 16, κίνησις, il. 2, Vil. 24.
ix. 18, x. τὸ (in xiv. 3 the singular is used in a ] ,κινητικός, vil. 24.
literal sense). εὐκίνητος is in both parts, vil. 22 applied to Wisdom, ἐνθυμέομαι, 111. 14, VI. 15, Vil. 15, 1X. 13. Xili. ΤΙ applied to a tree, nowhere else in the
ἰσύνεσις, IV. 11, ix. 5.
πολύς is evenly distributed, but the compounds (seven) are all in part 1: πολυτελής ii. 7,
1 The singularity of this largely disappears when we notice that Philo often omits the names of historical characters? see Vita Mosis, Bk. i, c. 42 (Caleb and Joshua), 43 (Edom), 59 (Reuben and Gad); Bk. ii, c. τὸ (Lot) ; Bk. iii, cc. 21 ἢ and 38 (Korah, Dathan, and Abiram). 7 * It must be stated that the proportion of matter in the two parts is 11} to 13, or 23 to 26: the second part may
be taken as one-eighth longer than the first: but in considering the particles it should be noticed that there arein | B 556 stichoi in part 1, to 568 in part 2.
πολύγονος IV. 3, πολυετής iv. 16, πολυμερής Vil. 22, πολυπειρία Vili. 8, πολύφροντις ix. 15, πολυχρόνιος
The following words occur in the second part only :—
ἀρνέομαι, Xi. 27, Xvi. 16, xvii. Io. μεγαλύνω, XIX. 22, μεγάλως, Xi. 21, XIV. 22, peya- δεῖ, zecesse est, Xil. 19, XV. 12, xvi. 4, 28. λωσύνη XVill. 24.
The following differences occur in the two parts :— ἐπισκοπή, li. 20, ill. 7, 9, 13, iv. 15, all in a favourable sense ; xiv. 11, xix. 15, in an unfavourable sense (pointed out first by Weber).
ἴδιος occurs eleven or twelve times: two of these occurrences being in part 1, the remaining nine or ten in part 2. This difference could hardly be connected with difference in subjectmatter.
The word ὄψις occurs three times in the first part, eight times in the second. In the first part it is used in a metaphorical sense in the phrase ἐν ὄψει; in the second, seven times literally, the eighth being doubtful. This should be considered with the similar cases of ἐπισκοπή and τρίβος.
The distribution of βίος and ζωή is worth noticing. βίος occurs ten times in the first part and five times in the second, ζυή once in the first part and six times in the second. ἐξετάζω and ἐτάζω and its derivatives five times in the first part, once in the second; κολάζω is a favourite word in part 2, eleven times as against once in part 1. This last, no doubt, is due to difference of subjectmatter. The same reason holds good for σοφία, which occurs twenty-eight times in part 1 and twice in part 2.
The use of compound words is considerable in both parts, but there are differences to be observed. Of compounds of ἐπί there are nineteen in part I as against forty in part 2 ; compounds of πρό have nine instances in part I as against twenty-two in part 2; πρός seven in part I as against twenty in part 2; and ὑπό five in part I as against twenty-five in part 2. Compounds of κατά are twenty-one in part 1 to thirty-four in part 2, of μετά seven in part 1 to twelve in part 2. This gives sixty-eight of these compounds in part 1 to 153 in part 2. If the cumulative argument is worth anything, it should certainly be considered in deciding what weight should be assigned to | these linguistic differences.
The difference in style, presentation, and tone between the two parts is undeniable. In style, | as Eichhorn says, ‘the first part is appropriate and concise, the second inappropriate, diffuse, exaggerated, and bombastic’ (p. 145); though a few passages in part 2 may escape this censure.
With the exception of iv. 15-17, where the text is in disorder, there are no specially difficult or doubtful passages in the first part. while there are serious difficulties in xii. 5, 24, Xv. 17 ¢, 18 ὁ, το ὦ, xvii. 6, 13, and xviii. 1, 2. It is also worth noting that the difference in style between the two parts led Siegfried, who accepts the unity of the book, to print his translation from xii. 19 'to the end in prose. The presentation in the first part is varied: we have the author's own words, | the speech of the apostates, Solomon’s address and his prayer ; part 2 is one continuous apostrophe to the Deity. In tone the second part is pervaded by a narrow and bitter Jewish spirit, which is markedly absent from part 1.
In answer to this latter point, it may be said that part 1 deals with Jews only; that there was no opportunity of displaying narrow national feeling towards the Gentiles. It must then be asked what, on the supposition of its unity, was the object of the second part of the book? how does it fit in with the object of the first part? The first part is a polemic against the apostate Jews of ,. |Alexandria, and an appeal to them, by the example of the wise king, to return to the worship of τς }Jehovah. But this object could hardly be helped forward by the contents of part 5. The teaching
jthat by what things a man sins, by these he is punished, appears to be pointless with regard to the jsins of the apostates. It is very far-fetched on the part of Bois to find this teaching in iii. Io. Again, these apostates who had adopted Greek or Epicurean views of life were in no danger of falling into idolatry ; they could scoff at the worshippers of a ‘rotten piece of wood’ as well as the wthor. The only way in which the appeal to history could be thought to influence them would be py pointing out that in plaguing the Egyptians and delivering Israel, Jehovah had shown Himself o be the true God, and that the Egyptians themselves had confessed Him to be so; but in view f the sceptical and scoffing attitude of the apostates towards the miraculous, as recorded by Philo see end of note on i. 1), such an appeal could have no effect. It might uphold the courage of the ithful ; it could have no effect on unbelievers except to make them scoff the more.
The difference in the view of the action of the Deity adopted in the two parts (pointed out in the note on xi. 2) is seen most plainly in two parallel passages, where the very functions assigned to Wisdom in part 1 are assigned directly to God in part 2. In vii. 22 Wisdom is πάντων τεχνῖτις, in viii. 6 τῶν ὄντων . . . τεχνῖτις, while in xiii. 1 God Himself is called τεχνίτης. In viii. 1 it is said of Wisdom διοικεῖ τὰ πάντα, in xv. 1 God is addressed directly as διοικῶν τὰ πάντας. Moreover, when Heinisch (p. 47) affirms the God of the Book of Wisdom to be the living persomal.and almighty God of Israel, the passages he quotes in support of this position are drawn entirely from the second part of the book. He adduces xii. 18, xi. 17, 23, xvi. 13, 15, Xi. 22, xiii. 1-7. This testimony is all the more valuable as it is given quite unwittingly. It shows plainly what part of the book a writer must resort to in order to find the action of the Deity portrayed in Jewish fashion.
In truth there are considerable difficulties in the way of accepting the unity of authorship which have not beéfmet by its upholders. If we could assume that the writer of the second part had studied the first part carefully and wished to write a supplement to it, both resemblances and differences could be accounted for.
The proofs adduced by Thackeray (77S, vi, pp. 232 ff.) and approved by Blass seem to show that the writer of the second part endeavoured to keep up the poetical form of the first: for this reason, although the second part is very prosaic, it has been thought well to keep the verse form
of the Revised Version throughout.
§ 7. AUTHORSHIP AND LANGUAGE.
The author of the book is generally assumed to be an Alexandrian Jew. But the opinion of scholars is not unanimous on the point. Bretschneider considered the first section, i—vi. 8, to have been written by a Palestinian Jew. Grimm in 1833 wrote a thesis entitled ‘de Sap. libri indole Alexandrina perperam asserta’, but he withdrew from this position in his great commentary of 1860, where the Alexandrian origin of the book is maintained. Grimm’s later position was unanimously accepted till the appearance of Prof. Margoliouth’s article in 7RAS, 18G0, entitled ‘Was the Book of Wisdom written in Hebrew?’! He there maintains that ‘the writer shows no acquaintance with Egypt beyond what he might have got from the Bible, and that he shows a familiarity with the interpretation of the Midrash which points to the Palestinian School’. “This last clause can refer to the second part only, cc. xi—xix.
In 1903 Lincke, while accepting Greek as the original language, maintained that cc. i-xii were written in Palestine, and Bousset in Die Religion des Fudenthums (1906), p. 212, writes, ‘The early chapters of the Wisdom of Solomon are probably of Palestinian origin. (He thus admits the composite authorship ; see also p. 501, where he speaks of the second and third parts of the book.)
It seems difficult to accept the proposition that the book was written in Hebrew in face of the numerous instances where dependence on LXX seems undeniable, 6. g. :—
il. 12 ἐνεδρεύσωμεν δὲ τὸν δίκαιον, ὅτι δύσχρηστος ἡμῖν ἐστιν. Isa. iil. 10 δήσωμεν τὸν δίκαιον ὅτι δύσχρηστος ἡμῖν ἐστι. These passages have only to be put side by side to show the dependence of one upon the other (the fact that the passage from Isaiah is corrupt in the present Hebrew text, which should doubtless read "ws 21) 3 py, does not enter into consideration here ; though it shows how the LXX got δήσωμεν).
ΧΙ. 4 καὶ ἐδόθη αὐτοῖς ἐκ πέτρας ἀκροτόμου ὕδωρ. Deut. vill. 15 τοῦ ἐξαγαγόντος σοι ἐκ πέτρας ἀκροτόμου πηγὴν ὕδατος. Here the fact that ἀκρότομος, ‘steep’, is an incorrect translation of wnbn, ‘flint’, makes for an undoubted connexion between the two passages.
Xl. 22 ὅτι ὡς ῥοπὴ ἐκ πλαστίγγων ὅλος 6 κόσμος ἐναντίον cov. Isa. xl. 15 πάντα τὰ ἔθνη. . . ὡς ῥοπὴ ζυγοῦ ἐλογίσθησαν. ‘The thought is identical, and the writer could not have got it from the Hebrew, which has ‘dust
pnw of the balance’. ‘ xv. 7 and Isa. xliv. 20 both refer to the idolater. The Hebrew has ‘he feedeth on ashes, a heart deceived
hath misled him’. The LXX divided the words in the Hebrew text wrongly and translated σποδὸς ἡ καρδία αὐτῶν. ‘The writer of Wisdom followed this and wrote σποδὸς ἣ καρδία αὐτοῦ.
XV1. 22 πῦρ φλεγόμενον ἐν τῇ χαλάζῃ. Exod. 1x. 24 τὸ πῦρ φλογίζον ἐν τῇ χαλάζῃ. The LXX translator was perhaps puzzled at the meaning to be assigned to the Hebrew word dann, ‘ darting hither and thither’; at any rate he did not translate it literally, but put another word which would make sense: the writer of Wisdom
borrowed directly from the LXX. These examples seem to make it plain that Pseudo-Sol. did not use the Hebrew Bible and that he drew
his quotations directly from the LXX. The following resemblances also show the writer’s acquaintance with LXX : , ll. It σοφίαν yap καὶ παιδείαν 6 ἐξουθενῶν ταλαίπωρος. Prov. i. 7 σοφίαν δὲ καὶ παιδείαν ἀσεβεῖς ἐξου- θενήσουσιν. - ; 1 Prof. Margoliouth’s thesis was contested by Freudenthal in an article entitled ‘ What is the Original Language
of the Wisdom of Solomon?’ /Q2, iii. 722-53. a
vi. 12 (if genuine) καὶ εὑρίσκεται ὑπὸ τῶν ζητούντων αὐτήν. Prov. viii. 17 of δὲ ἐμὲ ζητοῦντες εὑρήσουσιν. Vi. 14 πάρεδρον γὰρ εὑρήσει τῶν πυλῶν αὐτοῦ. Prov. 1. 21 ἐπὶ δὲ πύλαις δυναστῶν παρεδρεύει. Compare also v. 17 with Isa. lix. 17, quoted below, p. 527. See also notes on vi. 7, xii. 26, and xiv. 8.
Again, throughout the book, compound words abound—a mark of Alexandrian Greek. Swete, Introd. to O.T. in Greek, p. 311, gives over fifty from the first six chapters.
Further, the knowledge of Greek philosophy displayed in the book speaks for its Alexandrine origin ; though this is not absolutely decisive, as Proverbs and Ecclesiastes are supposed by some scholars to show traces of Greek philosophical influence. Moreover, the doctrine of immortality in all probability, and the doctrine of the transcendence of God certainly, are Alexandrian, not Palestinian. Finally, it seems likely that iii. g ¢ is borrowed from the Greek translation of Enoch. As we cannot imagine a Palestinian writer borrowing from the Greek translation of a book originally written in Hebrew, the borrowing must have taken place outside Palestine, and the only possible alternative seems to be Alexandria.
But wherever the book originated the writer is unknown. In part 1 he plainly speaks in the name of Solomon, though the name itself is not mentioned, any more than it is in Ecclesiastes (where, accordng to McNeile,i. 1 is no part of the original text). The speaker is said to be of royal birth (vii. 5); he prays for wisdom (viii. 21), and says ‘thou hast chosen me to be a king’ (ix. 7). This is, of course, a literary device and would deceive no one. But it made the book anonymous, and anonymous it still remains.
The earliest record of any conjecture as to its authorship is given by Jerome, who says that some of the ancient writers affirm the author to be Philo. This may also have been the opinion of the writer of the document known as the Muratorian Canon. An interesting suggestion was made by Tregelles that in the Muratorian Canon, p. 11 a, lines 7 and ὃ, where the Latin has ‘ Sapientia ab amicis Salomonis in honorem ipsius scripta’, there may have originally stood ὑπὸ φίλωνος instead of ὑπὸ φίλων. But though Jerome’s testimony is interesting as showing that at an early period many saw the impossibility of ascribing the book to Solomon as Origen also did (Contra (δίς. v. 29), the authorship of Philo does not recommend itself to modern scholars. The Philonian doctrine of the Logos, the pronounced dualism which said σῶμα = σῆμα, and almost certainly the doctrine of ideas, are all absent from Wisdom; while the persouality of the devil is accepted as a fact in Wisdom, whereas in Philo it is allegorized into pleasure.
The suggestion that Apollos was the author (Noach, Plumptre) is generally rejected.
Like many other books in the Canon, both Hebrew and Greek, its authorship must remain unknown.
δ ὃ. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER BOOKS IN THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS.
The relationship of the Book of Wisdom to Ecclesiastes is generally admitted. The first section of Wisdom might be said to be a polemic against the words of Eccles. vil. 15, ‘ There is a righteous | man that perisheth in his righteousness, and there is a wicked man that prolongeth his life in his } evil doing.’ That one book could be written in answer to another (both now sacred) is seen from | Ecclesiastes itself, which was doubtless written in antagonism to the view propounded by Ezekiel and his followers that righteousness and unrighteousness were both rewarded in this life, a view which the author of Job also contests. Ruth, also, was probably written as a protest against the endeavours οὗ Ezra and Nehemiah to enforce the Deuteronomic law (xxiii. 3) against mixed marriages. The | first part of Wisdom, therefore, may have been written to oppose the despairing philosophy of _ | Ecclesiastes and the opinions and practices of the apostates, who may have quoted it to support their |views. The most striking passages, a full list of which is given in Grimm, p. 30, and McNeile, Ρ. 38, are the following :—
Wisd. ii. τ, ‘Short and sorrowful is our life.’ Eccles. ii. 23, ‘All his days are but sorrow, and his labour _ fis grief.’
Wisd. ii. 2, ‘By mere chance (airocxediws) were we born.’ Eccles. ili, 19, ‘The sons of men are a chance’ (R.V. margin). ; Wisd. ii. 4, ‘Our name shall be forgotten and no one shall remember our works.’ Eccles. i. 11, ‘There is no remembrance of the former generations.’ Eccles. ii. 16, ‘For of a wise man, as of a fool, there is no \remembrance for ever.’ Eccles. ix. 5, ‘The memory of them (i. e. the dead) is forgotten.’
Wisd. ii. 6-10 and Eccles. ix. 7-9 show a great similarity, the difference being only in tone. ‘The tone ΠΥ the apostates’ words in Wisdom is defiant, that of Ecclesiastes is sad: ‘Go eat thy bread in gladness, and |drink thy wine with a cheerful heart.... At all times let thy garments be white, and let not oil on thy head pelacking. Enjoy life with the wife whom thou lovest all the days of thy transient life, which he hath given
thee under the sun; for that is thy portion in life. . . . There is no work nor device nor knowledge nor
wisdom in Sheol, whither thou goest.’ AWE (The phrase ‘this is our portion’, Wisd. ii. 9c, is probably an echo of the words ‘this is his or thy
portion ’, which recur in Eccles. itl, 22, v. 18, ix. 9.)
Hitzig in his edition of Ecclesiastes (1847) refused to admit any connexion between the two books. According to Grimm, Hitzig did not give any reasons for his assertion. Mr. Gregg, in CBS, also rejects the idea of any connexion, and gives reasons, but they do not seem convincing. It is true that Epicureanism and Sadduceeism did not require Ecclesiastes to appeal to. The Sadducees in 1 Enoch cii. 6 say, ‘ As we die so die the righteous, and what benefit do they reap for their deeds? Behold, even as we, so do they die in grief and darkness, and what have they more than we? from henceforth we are equal.’ These are the very same sentiments as those found in the speech of the apostates in Wisdom ii. _Sadduceeism was a disease of the time, and the author of the first part of Wisdom combated it. That he would have opposed it had Ecclesiastes never been written is quite likely, but for all that the form of Wisdom ii. 6-10 probably owes something to Ecclesiastes ix. 7-9.
The influence of the Book of Wisdom upon the New Testament has been differently estimated. Eichhorn (p. 202) first pointed out resemblances in Romans and Ephesians, but Grimm declined to admit any direct connexion even in the case of Wisd. xv. 7 and Rom. ix. 21. Other scholars, however, maintain a direct connexion not only with St. Paul but with the Gospel of St. John, the Epistle of St. James, Hebrews, and the Apocalypse.
In his commentary Grimm gives, on p. 36, a large number of passages where connexion between Wisdom and the New Testament was affirmed by Nachtigal, Stier, and others; but all earlier investigations with regard to St. Paul’s use of the book have been superseded by that of Grafe, Das Verhaliniss der Paulinischen Schriften zur Sapientia Salomonis, Theol. Abhandl. in honour of
Seeing that St. Paul nowhere quotes Wisdom by name, it is almost impossible to adduce a proof of connexion which will satisfy everybody ; a parallel in expression or thought may be only a coincidence or go back to a common source. Take, for instance, passages that would occur to any one who knows both books, Rom. i. 20 and Wisd. xiii. 1, where the possibility of knowing God through His works is affirmed: here both writers might be independently using a well-known argument of the Stoics. The argument of course is cumulative: one or two resemblances would be of no value for proving connexion: but when in two short books like Wisdom and Romans a large number of parallelisms are found (Sanday and Headlam, p. 51, quote ten verses from the first chapter of Romans which have points of resemblance to Wisdom) it seems perverse to deny connexion. The most striking parallelism between Wisdom and Romans is found in the passages where St. Paul expounds his doctrine of predestination.
In Wisd. xii. 12 ff. and Rom. ix. 21-3 Grafe (p. 265) traces three thoughts :—
(1) The idea of the infinite power of God, which admittedly by itself proves nothing. Wisd.
(2) In the same context, however, both writers dwell upon the fact of God being longsuffering towards His enemies although He knows it will be unavailing. Wisd. xii. 8-10, 11a, 20a; Rom. Ibe Dye
(3) In the same context also is found a contrast between the enemies and the sons of God in relation to their respective destinies. Wisd. xii. 20-2; Rom. ix. 22, 23.
The point to be noticed is that these three ideas occur in close connexion both in Wisdom and Romans.
In addition to the parallelism of thought there are also resemblances in language.
τίς γὰρ ἐρεῖ τί ἐποίησας ; ἢ τίς ἀντιστήσεται τῷ μὴ ἐρεῖ τὸ πλάσμα τῷ πλάσαντι: τί με ἐποίησας οὕτως κριματὶ σου ; . . . τῷ γὰρ βουλήματι αὐτοῦ τίς ἀνθέστηκεν ;
Again, there is the parallel between Wisd. xv. 7 and Rom. ix. 21. i Here St. Paul uses in O.T. fashion the image of the potter and the clay as an illustration of q God’s dealings with man, but in addition to this he introduces the thought which is not found in the O.T. of the potter making out of the sate clay some vessels for noble and others for ignoble purposes. The latter point is found only in Romans and Wisdom. But even here Grimm will not admit direct connexion. He thinks that both writers may have independently hit upon the same illustration. Here Grimm seems to be quite alone; all other expositors recognize the connexion. Grafe was the first to point out in full the connexion between St. Paul’s views on idolatry and i
those expressed in Wisdom, especially in regard to the lighter judgement passed on the more refined form of idolatry found in the worshippers of natural phenomena.
Taking oroxeia’ in Gal. iv. 3 as referring to the heavenly bodies, Grafe points out the lenient judgement passed by St. Paul here, and compares the lenient judgement on the same kind of worship in Wisd. xiii. 6. Against the grosser forms of idolatry St. Paul is scathingly severe, and the same attitude is found in Wisdom. Ἶ
Again, after discussing the nature and folly of idol worship, both the writer of Wisdom and St. Paul dwell upon the immorality which they affirm to be the direct result of idolatry. Both give a long catalogue of vices, St. Paul 24, Wisdom 14, which naturally tally in several points.
Another similarity worth noticing is that between the striking and original thought in xi. 23 6 that God’s longsuffering is meant to lead sinners to repentance, and Rom. ii. 4 ‘not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance.’
An interesting comparison between Wisd. ix. 15 and 2 Cor. v. 1 ff. is pointed out by E. Pfleiderer (p. 317 note). He there shows the similarity both of thought and language. With reference to this, Otto Pfleiderer remarks (Prim. Christianity, vol. i. p. 454): ‘It is true that 2 Cor. v. 1-5 has such close affinities with Wisd. ix. 15 that the conjecture is legitimate that this passage may have hovered before his (St. Paul’s) mind and perhaps even suggested the choice of his words. But this close affinity by no means proves a direct borrowing of the Pauline doctrine from the Book of Wisdom.’
The connexion of Wisd. v. 17 ff. with Eph. vi. 11ff. is denied by Grimm on the ground that Isa. lix. 17 is the source of both. The passages are as follows:
λήψεται πανοπλίαν τὸν ζῆλον αὐτοῦ ἐνδύσασθε τὴν πανοπλίαν τοῦ θεοῦ
Ns a , Abe ren kat ἐνεδύσατο δικαιοσύνην ὡς θώ-
Ἢ ρακα, καὶ περιέθετο περικεφαλαίαν | ... ἐνδύσεται θώρακα δικαιοσύνην καὶ . ἐνδυσάμενοι τὸν θώρακα δικαιο-
υ] σωτηρίου ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς. | περιθήσεται κόρυθα κρίσιν ἀνυπόκρι- σύνης... ἀναλαβόντες τὸν θυρεὸν τῆς tov’ λήψεται ἀσπίδα... ὀξυνεῖ δὲ πίστεως.... καὶ τὴν περικεφαλαίαν τοῦ ἀπότομον ὀργὴν εἰς ῥομφαίαν. | σωτηρίου δέξασθε καὶ τὴν μάχαιραν.
The decisive point for those who accept direct connexion is the fact that πανοπλία occurs in both Wisdom and St. Paul, but not in Isaiah: also ‘shield’ and ‘sword’ are in Wisdom and St. Paul, but not in Isaiah. On the other hand, περικεφαλαίαν σωτηρίου in Isaiah corresponds to περικεφαλαίαν τοῦ σωτηρίου in St. Paul.
The fact that St. Paul knew and used the Book of Wisdom makes it far easier to admit its influence on other parts of the New Testament. The parallels to St. John and St. James adduced by other scholars and rejected by Grimm have now more to be said for them. Mr. Gregg quotes a large number of parallels to St. John, the most interesting being ‘ This is life eternal, that they should know thee’ (St. John xvii. 3) and Wisd. xv. 3. Prof. J. B. Mayor in his commentary on St. James, p. xxv, gives twelve passages from Wisdom, echoes of which may be found in the epistle.
$9. THEOLOGY AND PHILOSOPHY OF THE BOOK.
The theology of the Book of Wisdom is Alexandrine, a combination of Jewish religion with Greek philosophy.
The first part, cc. i-xi. 1, is more Greek than Jewish, and in nothing is this shown more clearly than in the idea of Gcd presented by the two parts respectively. The idea of God in part 1 is that of Greek philosophy—a transcendent God who has no immediate contact with the world. It is true that in the later parts of the O.T. the writers had largely abandoned the conception of Jahveh as a God who had direct dealings with mankind. The theophanies which took place under the guise of the ‘Angel of Jahveh’ disappear, and in Daniel, for instance, the angel Gabriel gives to the seer the revelation which would have been given in earlier times by the “Angel of Jahveh’, i.e. by Jahveh Himself. God gradually became thought of as more and more remote, though even in Daniel the scene where the Ancient of Days sits in judgement on the nations shows that God could still be thought of as having immediate dealings with mankind. In Wisdom, however, in cc. i-x, we find that the author conceives God to be so remote, that He performs His will by means of an intermediary, whom He sends forth into the world (ix. 10). This intermediary is Wisdom, and “possesses alt-the attributes ‘of Deity. She is omnipotent (vii. 27), omniscient (viii. 8 and ix. 11), and puts these attributes into action: she administers all things well (viii. 1). At | the Creation Wisdom stood by God and chose His works ; the subsequent administration of the world was committed to her, since her relationship to God at the Creation ensured to her complete knowledge
1 That R.V. here, following Lightfoot, must be given up, see the article ‘Elements’ in /lastings’ DB.
of His commands (ix. 9). If God knows all things, it is because Wisdom takes her report to Him (i. g-10). If for a moment it is said that God gave Solomon knowledge of things that are (vii. 17), it is immediately corrected by the statement, ‘ For she that is the artificer of all things taught me, even Wisdom’ (vii. 21). In ix. 1 the direct action of God is not spoken of s¢mpliciter ; it is softened by the expressions ‘ word’ and ‘ wisdom ’—‘ who madest all things by thy word, and by thy wisdom formedst man. * .
It must be admitted that the passages in which the writer speaks of the author of Creation are not at first sight consistent. We seem to have three views: (1) God as Creator, i. 14, vi. 7, ix. 1, ix. 9; (2) God as Creator while Wisdom is present and exercises the prerogative of choice, viii. 4, ix. 9; (3) Wisdom as creator, vii. 22, viii. 5 and 6, and by implication in vii. 23 (all-powerful), and vii. 27 (hath power to do all things). The only possible way of reconciling these utterances is to take (3) as representing the philosophic view of the writer, while in (1) God is spoken of as Creator on the principle that ‘qui facit per alium facit per se’. No. 2 may represent the means by which the writer endeavoured to reconcile the biblical with his philosophic view of Creation. That the view expressed in vii. 22 and viii. 5 and 6 was deliberately adopted by the writer may be inferred by comparing vii. 22 with vii. 19, where he corrects an expression which might have been taken as attributing unmediated action to God. Yet it would appear that the writer felt unwilling to deny that man can have direct access to God. Solomon’s prayer in c. ix presupposes that God hears man directly, and the belief in God as real, and not as a philosophical abstraction— to say nothing of the influence of the psalmists—caused the author, as it did Origen, to believe in direct access to God in prayer. This, it may be said, is inconsistent with a strictly philosophical belief in the abstract transcendence of God as ἐπέκεινα νοῦ καὶ οὐσίας, but it is an inconsistency our author shares in good company. On the other hand, the doctrine of the transcendence of God entirely disappears in part 2, where He is repeatedly spoken of as acting directly on the world (see note on xi. 2).
It is generally agreed that ‘Wisdom’ is not a ‘ person’, i.e. a being capable of exercising understanding and will—a self-determining intelligence. What, then, is it? Is it an attribute of God personified? Personification is difficult to us: it is a device of the poet ; but to the Oriental mind it came easily enough. The O.T. contains numerous instances of the personification of the nation: Rachel is pictured as weeping for her children: ‘Ephraim hath grey hairs upon him, and he knoweth it not,’ says Hosea ; the nation is personified as the suffering servant in 2 Isaiah. The personification of an attribute or power would naturally come later. We perhaps see the first beginnings of it in 2 Isaiah (see the commentators on Ixxiii. 10) with respect to the Spirit of God. The belief in subordinate heavenly powers present at Creation (Gen. i. 26, Job xxxviii. 7) would help to give Wisdom its position in Prov. viii and Sir. xxiv; though probably without Greek influence Wisdom would never have been personified as it is there (Siegfried, Hastings’ DB, iv, p. 925). In answering the question whether our author regarded Wisdom as personal or impersonal, we must remember that to the ancients, to whom even the stars were persons, the modern idea of personality was quite foreign, and that the same question with regard to the Logos of Philo cannot be satisfactorily answered (Caird, vol. ii, Bvol. of Theol., p. 200). But Philo did answer a somewhat similar question—was the Logos created or uncreated? ‘The Logos, he declares, is neither uncreated like God nor created like us; but he is at equal distance between the extremes’ (Caird, p. 202). ‘The Logos is not unbegotten as God.’ ‘On the other hand it is not begottenas man’ (Drummond, Philo, ii. 192). We shall perhaps not be far wrong if we attribute the same idea to our author with regard to the personality of Wisdom.
God created the world by means of Wisdom, and as Wisdom is φιλάνθρωπος, i. 6, vii. 23, the motive of Creation, though not explicitly stated, can be assumed to be God’s love to man. This is expressed in both parts of the book, but with far greater emphasis on His love in part 2. * Itisime that made both small and great, and alike he taketh thought (προνοεῖ) for all’ (vi. 7). ‘But thou sparest all things, O Sovereign Lord, thou lover of souls’ (xi. 26). But though there is more stress placed on love in the second part, in part 1 God assigns to mana higher destiny. In ii. 23 it is said,‘ He made him an image of his own being, while in xv. 11 He simply bestows on man the gift of life: accordingly, in part 1, a higher standard is demanded from man if he is to be worthy of His love: ‘For nothing doth God love save him that dwelleth with Wisdom,’ vii. 28; while in part 2 no such high demand is made; mere existence ensures God's love: ‘ For thou lovest all things that are, and abhorrest none of the things that thou didst make,’ xi. 24. The Creator made man in His love, bestowed upon him the gift of likeness to Himself. From this being He looks for conduct worthy of his privileges, and therefore demands wisdom and righteousness (i. 6-8). In accordance with this demand Justice punishes those that sin (i. 8), while the righteous are rewarded with the ‘wages of holiness’ and the ‘prize for blameless souls’ (ii. 22). The reward is life, the punishment is death. But it is spiritual life, not so much upon earth—though the writer recog-
nizes that as is seen from the blessings of Wisdom recounted in cc. vi and vii—as in the future; a blessed immortality with God entered upon immediately after death.
It is doubtful, however, whetHer the writer had realized that this belief involved the abandonment of the traditional Jewish eschatology. It certainly seems as though he could not give up the old Jewish idea of a visible triumph of the righteous over their enemies. The day of judgement also is mentioned more than once (iii. 18, iv. 20), and this is inconsistent with the belief that the soul immediately after death receives its full reward, happiness or misery, life or death. Again, ch. iii. 7 ff. clearly reflects ideas of a distinctly Jewish type. The righteous shall ‘run to and fro like sparks amongst the stubble’. Here we seem to have an echo of the judgement by the sword inaugurating the Messianic Kingdom: then it is said, ‘they shall judge nations and have dominion over peoples,’ indicating a belief in a Messianic Kingdom which would naturally succeed the judgement. In v. 17, however, the conception is somewhat different. There it is Jehovah Himself who is to overthrow the ungodly by means of the forces of nature, while the spirits of the righteous are safe in His keeping. Probably iv. 18 0 ff. is also equivalent to this.
With regard then to the future destiny of the righteous we must ask, what did the writer contemplate for them? The alternatives are (1) an everlasting Messianic Kingdom on earth, (2) a temporary Messianic Kingdom with heaven afterwards, or (3) immortality immediately after death—a purely Greek idea. If the first alternative is taken, he must have considered that the righteous were to descend from heaven at the day of judgement or decision and take up their position as rulers in an everlasting Messianic Kingdom. The mournful retrospect of the ungodly is said to take place when their sins are reckoned up, that is, on the day of decision. After this day of decision there will come for the righteous the time of their triumph, which is described in iii. 7. Against this arrangement of events Grimm affirms that in no known Jewish system of eschatology does this descent of spirits with (it is to be presumed) heavenly bodies take place: though Charles’s translation of t Enoch cviii. 12 should be considered, ‘ And I will bring clad in shining light those who have loved my holy name, and I will seat each on the throne of his honour.’ And it may be urged that a writer who could in these chapters propound four novel beliefs might have entertained a fifth. .
The second alternative of a temporary Messianic Kingdom is found in 1 Enoch xci-civ, a book that has many points of contact with Wisd. i-x. There we find the wicked oppressing the righteous, encouragement given to the suffering righteous by the promise of reward in the next world: after their death their souls are guarded by angels: a temporary Messianic Kingdom comes into existence at the appointed time: at the close of this Messianic Kingdom the last judgement takes place, and all the righteous, including those whose souls had been kept in safety, enjoy everlasting life in heaven (see Charles's 1 Exoch*, pp. 219-23). Wisd. iii. 7 deviates from this scheme, it is true, but v. 17 does not, nor perhaps iv. 180 ff. Enoch makes it plain that the punishment of the unrighteous in the Messianic Kingdom is not effected by means of the righteous who have died ; their souls are still in the keeping of angels ; while in Wisd. iii. 7 it is the very same righteous who have suffered who are to ‘run to and fro like sparks in the stubble’, i. e. to consume their enemies. But in v. 17 Jehovah Himself overthrows the ungodly, the righteous being covered by His Hand. Thus iii. 7 fits in with the first alternative, v. 17 with the second.
The comparison of these different schemes of eschatology with Wisdom forces one to the belief that the writer simply added the idea of the immortality of the soul immediately after death to one or other of the current forms of Jewish eschatology, and did not, or rather could not, make them consistent. It is perhaps doubtful whether he felt the difficulty. Indeed, a much greater Alexandrian, Philo, found it impossible to have a consistent eschatology. He accepted the idea of a Messianic Kingdom though it was entirely ‘foreign to his system’ (Charles, Eschatology, p. 260) : and with regard to a greater than either—St. Paul—we are told that it is impossible to get a systematic scheme of eschatology out of his writings (Stevens, 7eol. of New Test, p. 482). ;
Lastly, it is no doubt just possible that the writer adopted a purely Greek view of immortality : that iii. 7 ff., iv. 18 ὁ Ε΄, and v. 17 ff. are survivals of a former method of thinking which he had discarded, traces of which, however, remain in his language: but the expressions used seem to be too forcible for this explanation to hold good.
But the belief in the future blessedness of the righteous cannot do away with the perplexing fact that at present they suffer, and suffer undeservedly. Death, and even premature death, seems to be their portion. How is this to be explained? This brings us to the discussion of the problem of undeserved suffering and the solution offered by the writer.
In the greater part of the Old Testament the problem of undeserved suffering does not appear.
1 The reason in the last case is obviously that St. Paul’s eschatological views advanced with his own spiritual experience and development.—General Editor.
Affliction is punishment, and the punishment is retributive. In Amos there is a hint given that punishment may be disciplinary and remedial. The Israelites have been punished, “ Yet ye have not returned unto me.’ In one solitary place in Prov. iii. 12,‘ Whom the Lord loveth he reproveth,’ and in Job v. 17, ‘Happy is the man whom God reproveth,’ this idea recurs ; in the Elihu speeches also (Job xxxv. 15 and xxxvi. 8) suffering is regarded as disciplinary and remedial; but the problem of undeserved suffering which gave rise to the book is apparently abandoned as insoluble. How great the perplexity continued to be is seen from the desperate argument in 2 Macc. vi. 12-17. There the writer says that the afflictions which came upon the Jews ‘were not for the destruction but for the chastening of our race’, and are ‘a sign of great beneficence’, while the reason of the heathen escaping such afflictions is that they may be punished ‘when they have attained unto the full measure of their sins’.
In the first part of Wisdom a solution of the problem is offered in the theory that suffering is meant to test the righteous and prove them worthy of immortality and communion with God. ‘As gold in the furnace, he proved them’ (iii. 6). This corresponds to the conception in 1 Enoch cvili. 9: ‘The righteous were much tried by the Lord and their spirits were found pure.’ This world is not all: there is recompense and reward in the future. This belief may be said to be consoling, though it cannot be taken as a complete solution of the difficulty, which is perhaps to be found in the deeper thought suggested in Isa. liii. But even if the solution attempted is not quite satisfactory, the problem of the undeserved suffering of the righteous is fairly faced and an endeavour made to answer it. They will eventually be rewarded with life, while the wicked are punished with death.
The meaning of the word ‘ death’, as used in part 1, is not at first sight apparent. Does it mean physical death only, or physical death in the first place and spiritual death afterwards? Or does the author always use it to denote spiritual death? He says ‘God made not death; ... for he created all things that they might have being: and all the created things of the world are serviceable to life, and there is no poison of destruction in them’ (i. 13 ff.). From this it follows that our author, in accordance with ideas found in other writers (1 Enoch ]xix. 11), probably held that death did not belong to the original purpose_o reation an hat ma ould have i arn τ had not sinned. This conclusion seems to follow also from ii23, ‘God created man for incorruption, an made him an image of his own being,’ i.e. immortal. ‘ By the envy of the devil death entered into the world, and those who belong to him experience it.’ But what of those who do not belong to him? Do not they experience death? No, says our author; they only seem to die (iii. 2). The fact of physical death is passed over and attention directed solely to spiritual death. Other writers—St. Paul, for instance,—did not pass over physical death in this way ; they accounted for it by saying that physical death came upon all men, good and bad, on account of Adam’s transgression. We may suppose that our author would have accepted this theory : it is quite consistent with his views, and was a common belief of the time.
Physical death, however, is practically disregarded by our author: he fixes his attention upon spiritual death, and this can take place even on earth. The wicked are made to say, ‘as soon as we were born we ceased to be’ (v. 13). According to this statement spiritual death does not mean annihilation; the wicked are spiritually dead even on earth; and in the next world this miserable condition continues, with the additional fact that they are now conscious of their condition. That they are likened to a city razed to the ground, the very name of which is forgotten, does not mean that they are to be annihilated. They are still to be ‘in anguish’ (iv. 19 c). We can compare this with 1 Enoch cviii. 3, where we read ‘their names shall be blotted out of the book of life... and their seed shall be destroyed for ever, and their spirits shall be slain, and they shall cry and make lamentation in a place that is a chaotic wilderness’. This seems to give exactly the view of the author of Wisdom. The opinion of Bois, therefore, reviving that of Bretschneider, that the writer believed the wicked suffered for a time and were then annihilated, must be rejected. An existence which was nothing but pain and misery could rightly be called ‘death.’
The doctrine of retribution in part 1 is Life for the righteous, Death for the unrighteous, with the additional threat that the latter may be punished in this world and in their children. Suffering in the case of the righteous tests their goodness, while in the case of the unrighteous it is purely retributive.
An part 2 a different attitude is adopted. Undeserved suffering appears not to be thought of. Punishment is deserved, but it is remedial—God loves all men, otherwise He would not have created them ; hence punishment inflicted by a God of love must be for the benefit of His creatures. In applying this theory to the Israelites the author, by means of ignoring much of the traditional narrative, is apparently consistent ; but not so when he deals with the fate of the heathen, in xi. 16 and xii. 22. In truth, he adopts a very difficult réle. He wishes to reconcile the O.T. statements of the action of God in exterminating the Canaanites with the higher view of the Deity due to
Ethical Monotheism. Ethical Monotheism cannot regard punishment as arbitrary or merely retributive ; it must be reformative. Accordingly the writer ignores the biblical account and affirms that punishment in the case both of the Egyptians and the Canaanites was inflicted to give them the opportunity of repentance. But the fact remains that they did not repent. This is accounted for in the case of the Canaanites by saying that they were incorrigible. ‘They were a seed accursed from the beginning;’ while the Egyptians are punished because, when they knew the true God, they refused to obey Him; though subsequently they are placed in the same position as the Canaanites by the statement that Destiny (ἀνάγκη) was dragging them to their doom (xix. 4).
In addition to the eschatology in part 1, the anthropology differs from that of the Old Testament, in that it assumes the existence of the soul before birth. The question as to whether the writer accepted this belief at first sight admits of no dispute. In viii. 19, 20 he says, ‘ Now I was a child good by nature and a good soul fell to my lot; nay, rather, being good, I came into a body undefiled.’ These words seem decisive. But granted that the writer believed in the pre-existence of the soul the question may be asked, What kind of pre-existence? Do the words of viii. 19 mean in his mouth, as they would in the mouth of Philo, not mere existence but self-conscious existence? It may help to answer this question, if we remind ourselves of the writer’s attitude towards some other Greek ideas which he adopts, and ask whether they meant to him what they meant to the philosophers. We have seen that he adopted the Greek idea of immortality, but that it cannot be said that he did so fully and completely, since it is probable that he believed in a final day of judgement (iii. 18) to be followed or preceded by a Messianic Kingdom on earth. Again, he knew something of the philosophic theory of the inherent evil of matter, and says with reference to the body, that it ‘weighs down the soul’; but there is no indication that he adopted the opinion that the body was no better than a tomb; i. 14 shows that he is very far from accepting the philosophical belief in the evil of matter as Philo subsequently did. It may therefore be fairly argued that as the writer perhaps did not accept the Greek philosophical belief in immortality, and certainly did not accept the belief in the evil of matter, without modification, it is quite possible that he also modified the philosophical belief in the pre-existence of the soul. In the case of the two former beliefs, however, it must be remembered that it would have been contrary to Jewish feeling to admit them completely. The complete and formal abandonment of the Messianic hope and the absolute worthlessness of the body were opinions too much opposed to Jewish tradition to be accepted by a writer who, though he had no great feeling for strict consistency, yet desired not to deviate too far from his ancestral beliefs. But there is no reason for thinking that the Greek doctrine of pre-existence was antagonistic to Jewish religious feeling. According to Harnack (Hist. of Dogma, vol. i, pp. 319 ff.), the early idea of some sacred object on earth being a copy of the original in heaven underwent development in the time of the Maccabees and the following decades. The conception became ‘applied to persons’. Moreover, the Rabbis themselves adopted and worked it out, locating the unborn souls in the seventh heaven.'| According to Porter? (p. 267), this Rabbinic idea of pre-existence is ‘impersonal or half personal’, and it is belief in this kind of pre-existence which he would ascribe to the author of our book. But it is doubtful if we have any more right to ascribe to the writer subsequent rabbinic than subsequent philosophic ideas; indeed, as the writer is an Alexandrian, it would seem less unjustifiable to ascribe to him the subsequent Philonic method of thinking on this point. Probably the writer of part 1 adopted the idea of the pre-existence of the soul without asking himself whether he was thinking of a mere vague general notion of existence, or a definite idea of self-conscious existence ; it is worth noting, however, that he is far more definite than the writer of part 2 in xv. ὃ and 11. :
In regard to the writer’s philosophical beliefs, it is generally agreed that he was well acquainted with the theories of the Greek philosophers, but whether his knowledge was firstor second-hand is a matter of dispute. Grimm considers that the writer’s knowledge did not go beyond that possessed by every educated Alexandrian of the time: that he had no first-hand acquaintance with Platonism he infers from the absence of all reference to the doctrine of ideas, though it appears quite legitimate to ask whether a writer who admittedly had considerably more than a bowing acquaintance with Greek philosophy could have been ignorant of such a celebrated theory. Whether the writer's knowledge was firstor second-hand, it was certainly extensive. The views of the Stoics, of Plato, and of Heraclitus (to take them in order of importance) can all be traced in the book. In vii. 17 ff. he claims for his hero acquaintance with the whole range of philosophy and science ; and he can hardly have failed to possess some of the knowledge which he attributes to Solomon.
} Weber, Jiidische Theologie, 1897, p. 205. é ine 2? «The pre-existence of the Soul in the Book of Wisdom,’ see below, p. 534. Porter takes viii. 19 to be by the same writer as xv. 11. Much of his argument would require restating if these are from different authors.
The influence of the Stoic philosophy appears in the idea of the world soul in i. 7, vii. 27, viii. 1. It is seen in the epithets ‘alone in kind’ (μονογενής) and “ manifold’ (πολυμερής) applied to Wisdom in vii. 22, where the one world soul and its different manifestations are referred to, and especially in the use of technical Stoical terms. The reader can satisfy himself of this by referring to Ritter and Preller,! extract 513 (taken from Diog. Laertius’ life of Zeno), where in the first few lines we find voepds, τὸ διῆκον διὰ πάντων, διὰ τοῦ ζῆν κεχώρηκεν, all referring to the Deity. Like expressions are applied in c. vii to Wisdom. The four Cardinal Virtues (viii. 7) are Stoic, and also the metabolism of the elements, by the help of which the writer of part 2 endeavours to rationalize the miracles of the Exodus. The Sorites, a favourite figure of the Stoics, is used in vi. 17-20.
The influence of Platonism in the book is just as undeniable: the transcendence of God, the preexistence of souls, the depreciation of the body (in part 2 also the pre-existence of matter (xi. 17)), all show platonic influence. Moreover, it seems difficult to deny a first-hand knowledge of Plato when we compare ix. 15 φθαρτὸν yap σῶμα βαρύνει ψυχήν, καὶ βρίθει τὸ γεῶδες σκῆνος νοῦν πολυφρόντιδα, with the passage from the Phaedo 81 C ᾿Εμβριθὲς δέ γε τοῦτο (i.e. σωματοειδές) οἴεσθαι χρὴ εἶναι καὶ βαρὺ καὶ γεῶδες καὶ ὁρατόν. ὃ δὴ καὶ ἔχουσα ἡ τοιαύτη ψυχὴ βαρύνεται. The three points of connexion. βρίθει, γεῶδες, and βαρύνει, in one and the same sentence would be striking if they were all ordinary words; but when it is remembered that Bpi@@ occurs nowhere else in the Greek Bible, and that γεώδης occurs only here and in xv. 13, the argument for direct connexion seems very strong. Porter, who denies direct dependence, admits the probability of some indirect connexion. It should also be noticed that the Platonic classification of the Virtues is implicitly rejected in vii. 12.
With regard to Heraclitus, we have to remember that, as Zeller (SZozcs, p. 371) says, ‘there is hardly a single point in the Heraclitean theory of nature which the Stoics did not appropriate.’ This increases the difficulty of deciding. His influence, direct or indirect, is to be found in ii. 3, ‘reason is a spark kindled by the beating of our heart’; but, as mentioned in the note on the passage, the Stoics took up the idea. It is true that the Stoics considered that souls lived after death until the great conflagration, and our author puts into the mouth of the ungodly the exact view of Heraclitus—the belief in extinction immediately after death.2 This, however, was also the view of the Epicureans, so we cannot be sure of the direct influence of Heraclitus here.
In vi. 24 the author announces his intention of making known the secrets of Wisdom, and apparently declaims against those who enviously keep knowledge to themselves: here all the commentators see a reference to the pagan mysteries,fbut E. Pfleiderer® wishes to see a reference to an individual philosopher—Heraclitus ; the reference, however, seems quite general ; the quotation from Philo by Grimm (see note) shows that the heathen mysteries were not identified with any individual. Our author’s statement that ‘a multitude of wise men is salvation to the world’ is said by Pfleiderer to stand in direct opposition to the saying of Heraclitus, ‘To me, one is ten thousand if he be the best’ (Zeller, Pre-Socratic Phil. ii, p. 10), but neither observation is very original. The first is surely a commonplace, and as for the second, Milton’s ‘ fit audience, though few’, does not depend on Heraclitus.
The metabolism of the elements at the end of part 2 is traced by E. Pfleiderer to Heraclitus, and to him directly, rather than indirectly through the Stoics, on account of the allusion in c. xix to three elements only—fire, water, earth—since Heraclitus recognized only three. But it is difficult to see how the author could have brought in the idea of air changing into anything else: water changes into earth in the passage through the Red Sea, and earth becomes water again to overwhelm the Egyptians ; fire lost its power and was unable to melt the heavenly food; what need or opportunity was there for adducing the change of air into another element? In this connexion it is worth noticing that Philo in Vita Moss, iii, § 2, in speaking of the High Priest’s robe (see note on xviii. 24) only mentions three elements and calls them ‘the three elements’, air, water, and earth, so that if we had no other passage to go by, we should be unable to prove that he accepted, as he certainly did, the doctrine of the four elements. It must, no doubt, be admitted that the Book of Wisdom has points of connexion with the system of Heraclitus, who was highly esteemed in Alexandria, but whether directly or indirectly it is impossible to say.
Heinisch,* who denies to the writer of Wisdom anything beyond a superficial knowledge of Greek philosophy, admits, or rather affirms, that he had read Xenophon’s WWemorabilia. He quotes Mem. 2, 1 (the choice of Hercules) side by side with Wisd. viii. 2-18, and points out that in nearly every one of these verses there is an echo of the passage in the Memoradilia. It is not merely that the writer knew the story of the choice of Hercules, but that he had read it in Xenophon, to which Heinisch commits himself. This is highly probable, but it is difficult to reconcile it with
1 Eighth ed., 1898. * See Zeller, Pre-Soc. Phil. ii, p. 105. 8 Die Phil. des Heraclitus, see below, p. 533+ * Die griech. Phil. im B. der Weisheit, see below, p. 534. d é
Heinisch’s denial of any direct acquaintance on the part of the author with other Greek writers. -One who had studied the Memorabilia carefully enough to reproduce from memory a large number of the sentiments put into the mouth of Virtue in 2. 1 would not be a superficial student of the book ; and if he had studied the M/emoradilia carefully it is probable that he had paid the same attention to much more celebrated works such as the Phaedo. It may be added that Heinisch was the first to notice the close resemblance between these passages of Wisdom and Xenophon. [0 shakes one’s confidence in a scholar to find that a resemblance discovered by himself is maintained to be the result of direct connexion, while those pointed out by other scholars are minimized or denied.
With reference to the general question of the indebtedness of our author to other thinkers, it may be noticed that Menzel! gives 135 places where connexion has been traced by one scholar or another. Most writers are children of their time, and their work cannot but show traces of the intellectual atmosphere which they breathed. We can admire the language and thought of the Book of Wisdom (i.e. cc. i-x), and yet admit that the parallels pointed out by the critics are valid.
In its method of interpretation of O.T. Scripture the book contains both haggadah and allegory. The haggadic treatment of the plague of darkness is equal to anything in the Rabbis, the allegory is of a milder type. We do not meet with that thoroughgoing kind of allegory where the literal truth of the narrative is denied as in Philo. The nearest approach to this is in the treatment of the serpent in Eden and the cloud which accompanied the Israelites on their wanderings. According t our author the serpent was not really a serpent but the devil, the cloud was not really a cloud but the form which Wisdom assumed. In some other instances historical events are regarded as parables. Lot’s wife was turned into a pillar of salt as a warning against unbelief. The victory of Jacob in his struggle with the angel shows that piety is more powerful than even a supernatural opponent. That the manna was to be gathered before sunrise shows that prayer must be offered betimes: that it melted after sunrise shows that the hopes of the ungrateful come to naught. The successful intercession of Aaron, with his symbolical garments which represented the world, probably illustrates the truth that the world fighteth for the righteous. The ark of Noah shows that God blesses natural productions when they are put to a beneficial use, e.g. wood for the building of ships; and perhaps that He will protect men venturing on the high seas for the beneficent purposes of commerce. The narrative of the brazen serpent in the wilderness and its healing power is taken as historical ; but the serpent has no magical power: it acts as a reminder to the Israelites who had forgotten God. This can hardly be called allegorical treatment unless allegory is taken to mean any interpretation of the narrative which goes beyond the literal one.
The allegorical traits in the book are not nearly so strong as the haggadic, but though the latter is generally associated with the methods of the Rabbis, both flourished vigorously amongst the Hellenistic Jews (Schiirer, ii. 1, p. 341).
ὃ 10. CHIEF CRITICAL INQUIRIES.
Eichhorn, Einlettung in die apokryph. Schriften des A. T., pp. 6-207. Leipzig, 1795.
Gfrérer, Phzlo, vol. ii (1831), pp. 200-72. An interesting review of the whole book.
Edmund Pfleiderer, Die Phil. des Heraclitus, 1886, pp. 289-348. Pfleiderer affirms that the writer of Wisdom had an intimate knowledge of Greek philosophy and in especial a direct acquaintance with Heraclitus. Heinisch (see below), pp. 18-30, subjects Pfleiderer’s contention to a searching criticism. He denies that the writer of Wisdom had even a superficial knowledge of the system of Heraclitus.
Drummond, Philo Judaeus, 1888, vol. i, pp. 177-229. As a preliminary to his exposition of Philo’s philosophy Dr. Drummond gives a most valuable discussion of the theology of the Book of Wisdom. The following statement deserves attention : ‘There is little connected reasoning of any kind in the work. . . . It is as though the process of investigation had been conducted elsewhere, and led to results esteemed satisfactory by an important section of the Jewish community’ (p. 186).
P. Menzel, Der griech. Einfluss auf Prediger und Weisheit Salomos, 1889, pp. 39-70. Menzel gives a useful table of passages (135)—which Professor Margoliouth says ‘might be considerably reduced without disadvantage ’— where connexion between Wisdom and Greek philosophy has been pointed out by Grimm and Pfleiderer. He has coined a somewhat question-begging epithet in the word ‘ parallelomania’ which shows his attitude towards those who would trace the ideas of the author to their source. He admits, however, some of Pfleiderer’s positions. Menzel is severely criticized by Heinisch, pp. 9 ff. Cheyne (Origin of Psalter, p. 423) calls the work ‘a painstaking dissertation ’.
H. Bois, Essaz sur les origines de la philosophie Judéo-Alexandrine, 1890, pp. 211-311. Notes on the text 373-411. Bois undertakes a thorough examination of the theological principles in the Book of Wisdom, in a fresh and stimulating manner. In his notes on the text he suggests the rearrangement of certain passages, one of which is most probably right (see note on iv. 15). He also suggests several emendations, some of which are accepted by Siegfried. His exposition of the transmutation of the elements alluded to in ch. xix ad fiz. deserves special attention.
Margoliouth. In the //AS for 1890, pp. 263-97, Professor Margoliouth maintained that Bretschneider was on the right track in suggesting that the Book of Wisdom was originally written in Hebrew; and adduced many passages where he affirms that traces of mistranslation can be proved. This theory has not, however, found acceptance. Freudenthal in the /Q2, 1901, contested it.
1 Der griech. Einfluss, &c., see below, § 10.
Grafe. In 1892,in 7heol. Aéhandl. in honour of Weizicker, pp. 253-86, Grafe published a convincing paper on the question of St. Paul’s use of the Book of Wisdom. oa
Thielmann. In 1893 Thielmann published an exhaustive inquiry into the Latinity of the Latin version of the book in Archiv fiir lat. Lex. und Gram., pp. 235-77-
Feldmann, Zexthritische Mat. zum B. der Weisheit gesammelt aus der sahidischen syrohexaplarischen und armenischen Ubersetzung, Freiburg im B., 1902, pp. 84. A most valuable contribution to the criticism of the text.
Joseph Holtzmann, Dze Peschitta zum δὶ der Wetsheit, Freiburg im B., 1903, pp. 152. A thorough investigation of the Syriac version.
Weber, in Zeitschrift fiir wiss. Theol., 1904, upholds the composite authorship, tracing four different hands in the work. Feldmann in Bz6/. Zeitschrift, Freiburg im B., 1909, contests this view.
Heinisch, Die griech. Phil. im B. der Weisheit, Mimster 1. W., 1908, pp. 158. An exhaustive inquiry into the relationship between the book and Greek philosophy ; a work of great learning and ability. Unfortunateiy the writer, a Roman Catholic, seems to have made up his mind to prove that the author of the Book of Wisdom ‘ taught nothing which contradicted the faith inherited from his fathers. That which was new, which he expounded in his speculations on Wisdom and in his Eschatology, made no breach with the ideas of the O.T. . . . and if it has found acceptance in the N.T., that is only a proof that the sacred writer in his literary activity was under the guidance of divine inspiration’ (p. 156). The author's knowledge of Greek philosophy was, according to Heinisch, ‘ very superficial.’
Porter, ‘The pre-existence of the Soul in the Book of Wisdom and in the Rabbinical writings.’ (In O/d Testament and Semitic Studies in memory of William Rainey Harper, 1908, pp. 208-69.) A vigorous onslaught upon the prevalent view that the writer of Wisdom accepted the Greek doctrine of the pre-existence of souls. In this he is upheld by Heinisch (p. 86); though as Heinisch will not admit that Wisdom contains anything contrary to the doctrine of the Church, i.e. the Roman Catholic Church, his judgement is biased. An admirable summary of Porter's position is given by Prof. W. B. Stevenson in the Zuéernational Journal of Apocrypha, April, 1912. Prof. Stevenson affirms that ‘the argument is convincing’.
EDITIONS.
(The earlier editions of the book may be found in Grimm, p. 45, or Deane, p. 42.)
Grimm, 1860. In Kurzgefasstes exeg. Handbuch zu den Apokryphen, pp. 300. It is difficult to speak too highly of this masterly work. Grimm first published a commentary in 1837. For the next twenty-three years he was collecting additional materials, and the result was the work of 1860, which is and will probably long remain an indispensable quarry for all students of the book.
Deane, W. J., 1881, prints the Greek, Latin, and English A.V. in parallel columns. It contains very useful linguistic notes both on the Greek and the Latin.
Farrar, Speakers Comm., 1888. Abounds in apt illustrations from classical and hee ees
Zockler, Apocryphen und Pseud. des Alt. Test., 1891, pp- 355-95. Short introduction, translation, and notes.
Siegfried in Kautzsch’s Afocrypha, 1900, gives a new and excellent translation, generally following Grimm. The notes, however, are very short.
Gregg, Camb. Bible for Schools, 1909. This is, perhaps, the best edition in English,
ae WishvOnr OF SOLOMON
True religion leads to a blessed immortaiity : irreligion and apostasy to destruction.
Seek the knowledge of God by purity of life: such knowledge (t.c. wisdom) cannot be attained by the slaves of sin.
11 1 Love righteousness, ye that be judges of the earth, Think ye of the Lord with a good mind, And in singleness of heart seek ye him ; 2 Because he is found of them that tempt him not, And is manifested to them that do not distrust him. 3 For crooked thoughts separate from God ;
And the szpreme Power, when it is brought to the proof, putteth to confusion the foolish : 4 Because wisdom will not enter into a soul that deviseth evil,
Nor dwell in a body held in pledge by sin. 5 For the holy spirit of discipline will flee deceit,
And will start away from thoughts that are without understanding,
And will be scared away when unrighteousness approacheth.
The sinner cannot escape punishinent: his very words are known.
ὁ For wisdom is a spirit that loveth man, And she will not hold a blasphemer guiltless for his lips ;
1. τ. judges of the earth. It isin his assumed character of Solomon that the writer speaks of ‘judges of the earth’ ; in all probability, however, the judges really aimed at are the rulers of the Jewish community in Alexandria. As in the time of Philo the Jews in Egypt amounted to a million souls, we may presume that at least half a million lived in the capital. Strabo (died A.D. 21), quoted by Josephus, 47. xiv. 7, says: ‘There is also an ethnarch at their head who rules the people and dispenses justice, and sees that obligations are fulfilled and statutes observed, like the archon of an independent state.’
Doubtless many of the ruling classes in Alexandria, like those in Palestine, were of a Sadducean type and inclined to
Hellenize. Indeed, some Jews, like Tiberius Julius Alexander who held high office under Nero, went over to the Gentiles completely. Bousset, Re/. des Jud. (p. 81, note 1), thinks that complete apostasy of this kind only rarely took place. The persecution of the pious by the freethinkers spoken of in ii. 10 may be paralleled by the oppression of the Pharisees under Alex. Jannaeus about 94 B.c. See Charles, 1 Ezoch,p.297. ‘The rulers appear as the aiders and abettors of the enemies of the righteous. These enemies are the Sadducees, sinners, apostates, and paganizers.’ Ch. il. 12 shows that apostates are the object of the polemic: ‘ He upbraideth us with sins against the law.’ Philo alludes to apostate Jews, De Conf. Ling., ch. ii: ‘Those who are discontented at the constitution under which their fathers have lived, being always eager to blame and accuse the laws, say—Do you boast of your precepts as if they contained truth itself? Behold, the books which you call sacred scriptures contain fables at which you are accustomed to laugh when you hear others relating them.’ See also Vita Mos. i. 6. A Intermarriage with the Gentiles would facilitate apostasy, and as an act is not censured unless it has taken place, we may infer the existence of such marriages from Jubilees xxx. 7, ‘If there is any man in Israel who wishes to give his daughter or his sister to any man who is of the seed of the Gentiles, he shall surely die, and they shall stone him with stones, for he hath wrought shame in Israel ; and they shall burn the woman with fire, because she has dishonoured the name of the house of her father, and she shall be rooted out of Israel.’
with a good mind, Greek ‘in goodness’. What a pious Jew would consider to be right thoughts about God may be gathered from Exod. xxxiv. 6-7, especially the last clause, ‘Jahveh is a God full of compassion and gracious . . . forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty.’ The opposite is seen in Ps. 1. 21, ‘Thou thoughtest that I was even such a one as thyself.’
singleness of heart. A Hebraism: straightness of mind as opposed to crookedness ; see τ΄. 3, ‘ crooked thoughts.’ The heart is the seat of the intellect in Hebrew; the reins (see v. 6) the seat of the emotions.
5. discipline : A.V. and R.V., but the idea of instruction must be included.
scared away: ἐλεγχθήσεται is a difficulty of long standing. Schultess (1820) declared the word to be corrupt. R. V. ‘ put to confusion’, margin ‘convicted’; Grimm, from a use of the word in Byzantine Greek, ‘is scared away . Siegfried, ‘is filled with a spirit of reproof,’ a very satisfactory meaning if allowable. The idea of being ‘ put to shame’ like purity in the presence of iniquity is possible. This use of the word is found only in Homer, according to Liddell and Scott ; and the book is admittedly full of poetical words. ,
6. For wisdom, &c. This line, which appears to have no connexion with what precedes or follows, has given great trouble to the commentators. Grimm takes the sense to be ‘ Wisdom is a spirit that loves mankind, and for that very reason will not leave wickedness unpunished’. The earlier commentators took φιλάνθρωπος in the sense of * mild’,
Sa |
Because God is witness of his reins, And is a true overseer of his heart, And a hearer of his tongue: 7 Because the spirit of the Lord filleth the world, And that which holdeth all things together hath knowledge of every voice. 8 Therefore no man that uttereth unrighteous things shall. be unseen ; Neither shall Justice, when it punisheth, pass him by. 9 For the counsels of the ungodly shall be searched out ; And the report of his words shall come unto the Lord For the punishment of his lawless deeds : το Because ‘here is an ear of jealousy ¢/az listeneth to all things, And the noise of murmurings is not hid. 11 Beware then of unprofitable murmuring, And refrain your tongue from blasphemy ; Because no secret utterance shall go forth with impunity, And a mouth that lieth destroyeth the soul.
God does not willingly afflict men: they bring punishment and death upon themselves.
12 Court not death in the error of your life; Neither draw upon yourselves destruction by the works of your hands: 13 Because God made not death; Neither delighteth he when the living perish: 14 For he created all things that they might have being: And the products of the world are healthsome, And there is no poison of destruction in them: Nor hath Hades royal dominion upon earth ; 15 For righteousness is immortal, (But the gain of unrighteousness is death). 16 But the ungodly by their hands and words called him unto them: Deeming him a friend they were consumed with love of him, And they made a covenant with him, Because they are worthy to be of his portion.
‘gentle’, and connected it with preceding verse. The meaning then would be: ‘ Wisdom is put to confusion or scared away when wickedness enters in, because it is a mild and kindly spirit and cannot stay in the same abode as injustice.’ Bois, p. 379, seeing that these explanations are unsatisfactory would transpose the line to the end of v. 13, and in this alteration Siegfried concurs. But the close connexion between the last line of v. 13 and the beginning of v. 14 militates against this. In face of these difficulties it does not seem rash to suggest that the line may be an interpolation on the basis of vii. 22-3, where Wisdom is said to be a πνεῦμα and φιλάνθρωπος. Further, the fact that this line is out of harmony with its surroundings gives force to Weber's suggestion that vv. 4, 5, together with this line, have been interpolated; the connexion obtained after their omission is quite satisfactory. wv. 3. ‘The Power, when brought to the proof, chastiseth fools and (6) will not hold the blasphemer guiltless for his lips. For God, &c.’ ἢ: 7. filleth, as A.V.; R.V. ‘hath filled’; but see Grimm’s note, Burton, Δ΄, 7. 77οοας and Tenses, § 76, and cf. St. John xi. 11. i holdeth all things together. We have here the Stoic idea of the world soul. The Stoics said of the world, | els ἅπαν αὐτοῦ μέρος διήκοντος τοῦ νοῦ, καθάπερ ἐφ᾽ ἡμῶν τῆς ψυχῆς. See Dio. Laert. in Ritter and Preller, ὃ 493; Zeller, ὦ 8. For examples of unrighteous things see the quotation from De Conf. Ling. in the note on v. 1. ᾿ 11. blasphemy. καταλαλιά in parallelism with murmuring, γογγυσμός, plainly means speaking against God: γογγυσμός is the word used in LXNX Exod. xvi. 7, 8, 9, for the murmuring of the Israelites. 4 13-16. Man lost his uprightness and immortality through his own act according to this passage; in ii. 24, through Pal the envy of the devil. ae | 15. For righteousness. Either this line is in its wrong place and should be transferred perhaps to a position a between wv. 22 and 23 of ch. ii, where it would be in a satisfactory context, or we must with Grimm accept the ~ succeeding line found in some Latin MSS., ‘iniustitia autem mortis acquisitio est.” Grimm renders this by ἀδικία δὲ | θανάτου περιποίησις ἐστιν (the word περιποίησις is not found in the LXX with this meaning). As the line stands it has no connexion with what precedes or follows, and if the extra line is not accepted deletion or transference to the end of ii. 22 would seem to be justified. It should be noticed that the line summarizes the teaching of this part of the book, and may originally have been a marginal note. The Latin line zzzus¢itia autem would then be a gloss like ii. 17, vi. 1, &c., and αὐτόν in the next line, referring to Hades, would not be separated from its antecedent. a 16, Seems to be based verbally on Isa. xxviii. 15, though the context is quite different. There the covenant is that Death should spare the other contracting parties, while here they give themselves into the arms of Death. For ryxo used to denote a state of mind, see vi. 23, ‘pining envy.’ E. Pfleiderer, followed by Bois, takes this verse as referring to the pagan mysteries, especially to the identification of Hades the God of death with Dionysus the God of life.
Some men even prefer the ways of death: they affirm that their souls are even as their bodies, that after this life nothing remains.
21 For they said within themselves, reasoning not aright, Short and sorrowful is our life ; And there is no remedy when a man cometh to his end, And none was ever known that returned from Hades. 2 Because by mere chance were we born, And hereafter we shall be as though we had never been: Because the breath in our nostrils is smoke, And reason is a spark kindled by the beating of our heart, 3 Which being extinguished, the body shall be turned into ashes, , And the spirit dispersed as thin air ; 4 And our name shall be forgotten in time, And no man shall remember our works ; And our life shall pass away as the traces of a cloud, And shall be scattered as is a mist. When it is chased by the beams of the sun, And overcome by the heat thereof. 5 For our allotted time is the passing of a shadow, And there is no putting back of our end ; Because it is fast sealed, and none reverseth it.
They therefore will enjoy this life to the full, and crush those whose lives reprove their own. 6 Come therefore and let us enjoy the good things that oz are ; And let us use creation with all earnestness as youth's possession. 7 Let us fill ourselves with costly wine and perfumes ; And let no flower of spring pass us by : 8 Let us crown ourselves with rosebuds, before they wither : 9 Let there be no (meadow) without traces of our proud revelry : Everywhere let us leave tokens of or mirth: Because this is our portion, and our lot is this.
Heraclitus had said ὡυτὸς δὲ ᾿Αἴδης καὶ Διόνυσος (Ritter and Preller, ὃ 49, Zeller, Pre-Socratic Phil., ii, p. 100). If this is accepted and we assume that the writer is referring to the apostate Jews, we must infer that they had gone so far as to take part in the pagan mysteries. His ‘ portion’ is the realm assigned to him.
Il. The opinions here put into the mouth of the godless may easily have been known to the writer from his personal experience of Jews who adopted the tenets of Epicurus; most scholars also see a reference to Ecclesiastes, see Introduction, p. 525. It should, however, be noticed that the same sentiments are put into the mouth of the ungodly in t Enoch cii. 6-8. δ :
I. It is impossible to say whether ὁ ἀναλύσας is transitive or intransitive. Grimm on 2 Macc. vili-xxv gives eight places where ἀναλύω = ‘to return’; but it is used in the passive in iv. 12, so that if we take this as deciding the author’s usage, it should be transitive here. Against this it may be urged, that in view of the liberties which the author allows himself to take with the Greek language, it is quite possible that he used the active and passive forms of an intransitive verb without any appreciable difference of meaning. ΠΡΟ ae
2. reason is a spark. A reference to the view of Heraclitus and others that fire (see note on xiii. 2) is the primitive substance. ‘The soul of man is a part of this divine fire’ (Zeller, Oxd/ines, p. 70). ‘It was conceived ... as a transient individualization of the one primitive substance or force, and this individualization terminated at death’ (Charles, Zschaz., p. 143). The Stoics adopted this view. ‘The soul is . . . a part of the divine fire which descended into the bodies of men when they first arose out of the aether’ (Zeller, Ow/¢/ines, p. 244). Οἷς. Tusc. i. 19 ‘Zenoni Stoico animus ignis videtur ’. le ΠΝ
4. overcome. This is perhaps a justifiable paraphrase. The Greek means ‘weighed down’, which is incorrect from the point of view of Natural Science. But the writer merely wanted a parallel expression to ‘ chased away’, and being unscientific chose an incorrect term. }
5. allotted time, reading καιρός with δὲ A and Latin, as against Bios, B*. So most editors. ayn
putting back. The explanation adopted by Grimm, Siegfried, and others, that no man can die twice, is not
satisfactory. Gregg’s reference to the shadow on a sundial is more acceptable, though there is a sudden change of _ }'metaphor in the next line in the word ‘sealed’; the end is fast sealed = the end is predetermined. ; :
The sense probably is ‘while we are young’, and Grimm gets this by reading ὡς ἐν νεύτητι on the authority of 157, 248, 253, and the Complutensian polyglot. B reads ὡς νεότητι, δὲ and A ὡς νεότητος. 7: spring, reading ἔαρος for depos. So A, Latin, and most editions. ;
ga. The Greek here has one line, μηδεὶς ἡμῶν ἄμοιρος ἔστω τῆς ἡμετέρας ἀγερωχίας ; the Latin has two: ‘nemo nostrum €xors sit luxuriae nostrae’, and ‘nullum pratum sit quod non pertranseat luxuria nostra’. This is a doublet of the Greek line with λειμών in line 2 for ἡμῶν. As an old glossary to the book shows that it originally contained the word λειμών, this must be restored in place of ἡμῶν, and μηδεὶς λειμών κτλ. accepted as the true reading. See Feldmann.
proud revelry : ἀγερωχία, may be an allusion to the heathen mysteries (Bois, p. 295).
our portion; our only portion and lot. For connexion with Ecclesiastes see Introd., p. 525. |
"9 SS ee a ἂι
THE WISDOM OF SOLOMON 2. 1o—3. 1
1o Let us oppress the righteous poor ; Let us not spare the ‘widow, Nor reverence the hairs of the old man grey for length of years. τι But let our strength be zo ws a law of righteousness ; For that which is weak is found to be of no service. 12 But let us lie in wait for the righteous man, Because he is of disservice to us, And is contrary to our works, And upbraideth us with sins against the law, And layeth to our charge sins against our discipline./ 13 He professeth to have knowledge of God, And nameth himself servant of the Lord. 14 He became to us a reproof of our thoughts. 15 He is grievous unto us even to behold, Because his life is unlike other men’s, And his paths are of strange fashion. 16 We were accounted of him as base metal, And he abstaineth from our ways as from uncleannesses. The latter'end of the righteous he calleth happy ; And he vaunteth that God is his father. 17 Let us see if his words be true, And let us try what shall befall in the ending of his Ze. 18 For if the righteous man is God’s son, he will uphold him, And he will deliver him out of the hand of his adversaries. το With outrage and torture let us put him to the test, That we may learn his gentleness, And may prove his patience under wrong. 20 Let us condemn him to a shameful death ; For according to his words he will be visited.
But they are wrong: a future life ts in store for the righteous, who shall then triumph over the ungodly. ‘
21 Thus reasoned they, being far astray, For their wickedness blinded them, 22 And they knew not the mysteries of God, Neither hoped they for wages of holiness, Nor did they judge that there 15 a prize for blameless souls. 23 Because God created man forincorruption, iw INCErTop TION And made him an image of his own proper being ; d 24 But by the envy of the devil death entered into the world, 2 | And they that belong to his realm experience it. " 1 But the souls of the righteous are in the hand of God, And no torment shall touch them.
12. The translation of παιδεία in the last line is difficult. Weber gives ‘and reproaches us on account of the sins of — our method of life’ (Bz/dung). Mr. Gregg would omit. The line certainly looks like an addition. Ἷ let us lie in wait. Cf. LXX rendering of Isa. iii. 10, see Introd., p. 524. 20. according to his words, i.e. ‘if what he says is true.’ i visited. ἐπισκοπή is always used in a good sense in this part of the book, see Introd., p.523. The word ἐπισκοπή is said to be used only once outside biblical and ecclesiastical Greek. It is a translation of the Hebrew word 28, which means a visitation to deliver, LXX Gen. ]. 24, 25, Exod. iii. 16, or a visitation to punish, LXX Isa. xxiv. 53 , xxix. 6. See Hort’s full note on 1 Pet. ii. 12, and Charles’s Afoc. Bar. xx. 2, note. 22. At the end of this verse i. 15 would be appropriate. There is a prize for blameless souls, viz. immortality. mysteries of God, i.e. that suffering is not necessarily punishment, but is often a test of goodness which will a rewarded after death by immortality. ‘ 23. The difference between the author and Philo is seen very plainly here. In Philo, man is the image of the Logos | (Drummond, Philo Judaeus, ii. 186-7). his own proper being, ἰδιότητος, N A and B. ἀϊδιότητος, 248, 253, and most of the patristic writers. But Gen. i.26 seems to decide for the former, though Sanday and Headlam (Romans, p. 51) are doubtful, while Prof. Margoliouth — prefers ἀϊδιύτητος. He also suggests κατ᾽ εἰκόνα, which is now upheld by Feldmann. 24. Bois (p. 297) suggests that the reference here is to Cain, the first murderer, and Mr. Gregg adduces additional arguments for this. All other expositors take it to refer to the temptation of Eve. In 1 Enoch Ixix. 6 it is said that a Satan led Eve astray. This seems to favour the latter view.
eee ae
2 In the eyes of fools they seemed to die ; And their departure was accounted 20 de their hurt, | 3 And their going from us 20 ée their ruin: But they are in peace. 4 For though in the sight of men they be punished, Their hope is full of immortality ; 5 And having borne a little chastening, they shall receive great good ; Because God tested them, and found them worthy of himself. 6 As gold in the furnace he proved them, And as a whole burnt offering he accepted them. 7 And in the time of their visitation they shall shine forth, And like sparks among stubble they shall run to and fro. 8 They shall judge nations, and have dominion over peoples ; And the Lord shall reign over them for evermore. 9 They that trust on him shall understand truth, And the faithful shall abide with him in love; Because grace and mercy are to his chosen, And he will graciously visit his holy ones.
But the unrighteous shall be punished, both they and their ungodly offspring, while the righteous though childless shall be rewarded.
τὸ But the ungodly shall be requited even as they reasoned,
They which lightly regarded the righteous saz, and revolted from the Lord 11 (For he that setteth at naught wisdom and discipline is miserable ;)
And void is their hope and their toils unprofitable, And useless are their works :
12 Their wives are foolish, and wicked are their children; 13 Accursed is their begetting.
Because happy is the barren that is undefiled, She who hath not conceived in transgression ; She shall have fruit when God visiteth souls.
III. 2. seemed. The righteous cannot die. For this spiritual idea of life and death see v. 13 and x. 3. Philo says (Quod det. Pot. § 15), ‘The wise man who appears to have departed from this mortal life lives in a life immortal.’
5. tested. The object of affliction is testing, proving; not punishment. Cf. 1 Enoch cviii. 9: The righteous ‘were much tried by the Lord and their spirits were found pure’.
7. visitation. Cf. Ps. cvi. 4, ‘visit me with thy salvation.’ Salvation in the O. T. always means deliverance— deliverance from one’s foes and triumph over them. So here; the writer cannot refrain from picturing the visible triumph of the godly over the wicked, though it is quite inconsistent with the idea of reward or retribution coming immediately after death. For the figure cf. Obad. 18 upon the destruction of Edom: ‘The house of Jacob shall be ᾿ς a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau for stubble.’
8. In the Messianic Kingdom. Cp. St. Paul, 1 Cor. vi. 2, ‘Know ye not that we shall judge angels.’
g. understand truth, i.e. God’s methods in governing the world.
οὖ. With ὅτι χάρις καὶ ἔλεος τοῖς ἐκλεκτοῖς αὐτοῦ compare 1 Enoch v. 7 καὶ τοῖς ἐκλεκτοῖς ἔσται φῶς καὶ χάρις Kai εἰρήνη. I Enoch i-xxxvi was written before the persecution under Antiochus Epiphanes ; but the translation of Enoch into Greek was probably undertaken as a whole. If this is later than the latest part of 1 Enoch (cc. xxxvii-lxxi) it must be subsequent to 94 B.C., and so has a bearing on the date of Wisdom itself, see Introd., Ρ- 520. i
9d. SoNA and Syriac, καὶ ἐπισκοπὴ ἐν τοῖς ὁσίοις (ἐκλεκτοῖς δὲ) αὐτοῦ, which B Latin and R. V. omit. For justification of this see note on iv. 15. In addition, the line is suitable here as a rejoinder to ii. 20 ὁ.
10. reasoned. This means that the annihilation after death proclaimed by the godless shall indeed be their iot, only the writer’s idea of annihilation is different from that of the apostates.
11. he that setteth, ἅς. This line is almost a verbal reproduction of Prov. 1.7, ‘The ungodly set at naught wisdom and discipline.’ ; ;
13. happy. The reference here may simply be general ; but it is difficult to read Philo’s account of the Therapeutae without feeling that the writer of these lines had them in mind. Of the virgins who were enrolled amongst the Therapeutae, Philo (De Vit. Co. § 8) says they ‘yearn not for mortal but for immortal offspring’, οὐ θνητῶν ἐκγόνων ἀλλ᾽ ἀθανάτων ὀρεχθεῖσαι. This, and the statement in the text ‘She shall have fruit when God visiteth souls’, seem to belong to the same circle of ideas. It is not necessary to infer that the writer belonged to the sect; Philo, in spite of his admiration for them, was not one of them. Whether he is referring to the Therapeutae or not the writer shows
considerable independence in discarding the strong Jewish belief that a numerous offspring was the greatest blessing of mankind.
transgression.
This refers to unlawful marriages with the heathen. See Jubilees xxx. 7, quoted on 1.1. fruit.
This may be a vague phrase for reward. Philo works out the idea contained in the words ‘ immortal offspring’ as that ‘ which the soul that is attached to God is alone able to produce by itself and from itself’, meaning _ perhaps what the Christian sums up in the word ‘bliss’. This is subjective and may be contrasted with the more bjective statement as to the reward of the childless man, which is to be a blissful position in the heavenly sanctuary.
THE WISDOM OF SOLOMON 3. 14—4. ὃ
14 And happy is the eunuch which hath wrought no lawless deed with his hands, Nor imagined wicked things against the Lord ; For there shall be given him for his faithfulness a peculiar favour, And a lot in the sanctuary of the Lord of great delight. 15 For good labours have fruit of great renown ; And wisdom’s root cannot fail. 16 But children of adulterers shall not come to maturity, And the seed of an unlawful union shall perish. 17 For if they live long, they shall be held inno account, And at the last their old age shall be without honour. 18 And if they die early, they shall have no hope, Nor in the day of decision shall they have consolation. 19 For the end of an unrighteous generation is always grievous. I Better than this is childlessness with virtue ; For in the memory of virtue is immortality: Because it is recognized both by God and man. 2 When it is present, ez imitate it ; And they long after it when it is departed : And throughout all time it marcheth crowned in triumph, Victorious in the strife for prizes undefiled. 3 But the multiplying brood of the ungodly shall be of no profit, And with bastard slips they shall not strike deep root, Nor shall they establish a sure hold. 4 For even if these put forth boughs and flourish for a season, Yet, standing unsure, they shall be shaken by the wind, And by the violence of winds they shall be rooted out. 5 Their branches shall be broken off ere they come to maturity, And their fruit s/a// be useless, Not ripe to eat, and meet for nothing. 6 For children unlawfully begotten are witnesses of wickedness Against parents when God searcheth them out.
The premature death of the righteous ts followed by immortality, but the very memory of the ungodly shall perish.
7 But the righteous, though he die before his time, shall be at rest. 8 (For honourable old age is not that which standeth in length of time,
14. sanctuary. Where is this sanctuary to be? In the Jerusalem which the seer saw ‘descending out of heaven
from God’ (Rev. xxi. 10) or in heaven itself ? of great delight. θυμηρέστερος in an elative or intensive sense. Thackeray, G7., p. 181 ; Blass, Gr. of N. 7. Gk,
15. cannot fail. These two lines are merely a variation of i. 15, ‘For righteousness is immortal’; and iv. 1, ‘ For in the memory of virtue is immortality’; see also viii. 13. It may be that the writer could not get rid of the old Jewish idea of subjective immortality, Ps. cxii. 6, Prov. x. 7, or that he wished to oppose the repeated statement in Ecclesiastes | i. IT, ii. 16, ix. 5, that there is no remembrance of the dead, righteous or unrighteous. See Introd., p. 525.
16. adulterers. Those who had contracted unlawful marriages, as is plain from the next line and from iv. 6.
17. In denying that affliction necessarily indicates God’s displeasure and is therefore punishment, the writer advances beyond the view of Ezekiel and his followers. Here, in affirming that the children shall be punished for the parents’ sins, he falls behind it. See also iv. 4.
18. Reading οὐκ ἕξουσιν with δὲ A Latin; οὐκ ἔχουσιν B. |
hope. The idea seems to be that even if the children of the godless die young, before they have had much time | to sin, they will have no hope of future happiness.
1g. An involuntary and instinctive utterance of the old view that wickedness is always punished in this life.
IV. 3-6. This is taken by Grimm as referring not to a material but to a spiritual state. The children of the ungodly — have an ineradicable taint. Here again the writer falls below Ezekiel and displays the spirit of the imprecatory psalms. _ 6. witnesses of wickedness. Their sufferings are a proof of the sin of their parents. Cf. St. John ix. 2. \M 8. old age is not that, ἄς. The writer has already departed from the traditional view that life without offspring cannot be regarded as happy ; he now departs from the belief that length of days is necessary to the happiness of a godly man. Here again one cannot fail to be struck with the correspondence of the author’s views with those of the Therapeutae. | Philo (De Vita Cont., ch. 8) writes: ‘For they do not regard those as elders who are advanced in years and aged, but as mere youths if they have only lately devoted themselves to the vocation ; but they call those elders who from their earliest years have spent time and strength in the contemplative part of philosophy.’ Grimm gives a whole series of |
DE SS ree
Nor is its measure given by number of years:
9 But understanding is grey hairs unto men,
And an unspotted life is ripe old age.)
το Being found well-pleasing unto God he was beloved of him, And while living among sinners he was translated :
11 He was caught away, lest wickedness should change his understanding, Or guile deceive his soul.
12 (For the fascination of wickedness bedimmeth the things which are good, And the frenzy of desire perverteth an innocent mind.)
13 Being made perfect in a little while, he fulfilled long years ;
14 For his soul was pleasing unto the Lord:
Therefore He hastened him out of the midst of wickedness.
16 But a righteous man that is dead shall condemn the ungodly that are living, And youth that is quickly perfected the many years of an unrighteous man’s age.
15 But as for the peoples, seeing and understanding not,
Neither laying this to heart :—
17 For they will see the wise man’s end,
And not understand what the Lord purposed concerning him,
And for what he safely kept him :—
18 They will see, and despise ;
But them the Lord shall laugh to scorn.
And after this they shall become a dishonoured carcase,
And a reproach among the dead for ever:
19 Because he shall dash them speechless to the ground,
And shall shake them from the foundations,
quotations from Greek and Latin authors emphasizing this thought. Perhaps the quotation from Bailey’s ests given by Farrar is as good as any: ‘We live in deeds not years; in thoughts not breaths,
In feelings not in figures on a dial ;
We should count time by heart-throbs.’
10. εὐάρεστος, ἅς. This looks like tautology. But reference to the LXX shows that the writer is thinking of Gen, v. 22, 24 (of Enoch) ; vi. 9; xvii. 1; and other places where εὐαρεστέω, a translation of 9200 ‘to walk’, plainly refers to the spiritual condition of the person mentioned. In xvii. 1 εὐαρέστει ἐναντίον μοῦ addressed to Abraham shows this very clearly. Gen. v. 22, 24, shows that Enoch is referred to here. No one could say that Enoch’s comparatively early removal was a punishment ; it was plainly a blessing, and this supports the author’s contention in v. 8 as to the early death of other righteous men.
12. bedimmeth. The editors point out that the word ἀμαυρόω was used by Greek philosophers to express the darkening of the moral sense. things which are good, τὰ καλά. Moral and spiritual qualities. perverteth. Greek μεταλλεύει, so again in xvi. 25. The word properly means ‘to mine’. Here the author gives it the meaning of ‘change’, deriving it no doubt from ἄλλος. Commentators compare this mistake with that in St. Mark xii. 4. 13. he fulfilled long years. Of a Rabbi who died young it was said, ‘In the twenty-eight years of his life he has learned more than others learn in a hundred years’ (Oesterley and Box, /e/. of Syn., p. 97). 14-16. The passage reads as follows in the R. V. according to B :—
14. For his soul was pleasing unto the Lord: Therefore hasted he out of the midst of wickedness. 15. But as for the peoples, seeing and understanding not, Neither laying this to heart, That grace and mercy are with his chosen, And that he visiteth his holy ones : — as 16. But a righteous man that is dead shall condemn the ungodly that are living And youth that is quickly perfected, the many years of an unrighteous man’s old age. Some rearrangement is plainly necessary. For (1) the passage is now impossible as it stands in B, (2) The MSS. show that there has been some transference to or from iii. 9. (3) Transference of 15 ὁ, αἱ to iii. 9 relieves this passage. (4) After 15 c,d have been returned to their proper place, the necessity of placing v. 16 before 15 is obvious. Bois (p. 387) would make a much more thoroughgoing rearrangement, but it has been thought better to be content with the minimum of alteration. ee ΠΕ ΗΝ : 15. the peoples. wv. 17 ff. show that the ungodly are meant. δὲ B Latin give λαοί, A ἄλλοι. Mr. Gregg, on the basis of the latter, would emend to ἄνομοι. It looks, however, like a reminiscence of LXX Isa. vi. 9: ‘Go, tell this people (Aads) . . . seeing ye shall see and not understand.’ te aA i Ἂ 18. This is best explained as the judgement by the sword at the beginning of the Messianic age, like νυ. 17 ff | 19. foundations. The figure in the mind of the writer was probably that ofa city razed to the ground. CE. Psy 1x: 6: at Το enemy are come to an end, they are desolations for ever; and the cities which thou didst uproot, their memory is _ perished’ (Driver, Parallel Psalter).
And they shall lie utterly waste, and be in anguish, And their memory shall perish.
The remorse of the ungodly at the judgement. Their retrospect.
20 They shall come, when their sins are reckoned up, with coward fear ; And their lawless deeds shall convict them to their face. 1 Then shall the righteous man stand in great boldness Before the face of them that afflicted him, And them that make his labours of no account. 2 When they see 22, they shall be troubled with terrible fear, And shall be amazed at the marvel of his salvation. 3 They shall say within themselves repenting, And for distress of spirit shall they groan, This was he whom aforetime we had in derision, And made a byword of reproach: 4 We fools accounted his life madness, And his end without honour: 5 How was he numbered among sons of God! And how is his lot among saints ! 6 Verily we went astray from the way of truth, And the light of righteousness shined not for us, And the sun rose not for us. 7 We took our fill of the paths of lawlessness and destruction, And we journeyed through trackless deserts, But the way of the Lord we knew not. 8 What did our arrogancy profit us? And what good have riches and vaunting brought us? 9 Those things all passed away as a shadow, And as a message that runneth by: to As a ship passing through the billowy water, Whereof, when it is gone by, there is no trace to be found, Neither pathway of its keel in the billows: τι Or as when a bird flieth through the air, No token of er passage is found, But the light wind, lashed with the stroke of her pinions, And rent asunder with the violent rush of the moving wings. is passed through, And afterwards no sign of “er coming is found therein: 12 Or as when an arrow is shot at a mark, The air disparted closeth up again immediately, So that men know not where it passed through: 13 So we also, as soon as we were born, ceased to be; And of virtue we had no sign to show, But were utterly consumed in our wickedness.
V. 2. When they see it. Cf. 1 Enoch cviii. 15: ‘And the sinners will cry aloud and see them (i.e. the righteous) as they shine, and they indeed will go where days and seasons are prescribed for them.’ |
4. madness. Seeii.15. The refusal to purchase material advantage at the price of apostasy.
6. Verily, ἄρα = ‘as it now seems’. ‘Hence it amounts sometimes to an expression of regret’ (Donaldson, (τ. G7,
7. trackless deserts. They now see that the ‘ primrose path of dalliance’ is better described as ‘a dry and weary land where no water is’ (Ps. Ixiii. 1).
knew : in a practical sense ‘ pay heed to’. So frequently in the O. T. See especially Amos iii. 2, ‘ You only have I known ( regarded with favour) of all the nations of the earth’. See also Ps. i. 6.
9 ff. The images here used to denote the transitory nature of life are vivid and poetical: whether they are quite — appropriate in the mouth of those in whom the agony of remorse is supposed to be working, is another question. The — passage forms, however, an effective contrast to their defiant boasting in ch. ii.
12. closeth, ἀνελύθη. The active is used in ii. 1 and has been translated there as intransitive (see note). ‘ Various explanations are given of ἀνελύθη, but it seems most simple to take it in the sense of “returns” as ii. 1’ (Deane). Ὁ ἀνέλυσεν is read by 23 (V) and 253.
13. ceased to be. Another proof that the writer’s view of life and death is spiritual. j
At the end of v. 13 the Latin adds ‘Talia dixerunt in inferno hi, qui peccaverunt’. This, if not genuine, is appropriate, as showing that the following verse is a reflection of the author and no part of the words of the ungodly.
14 Because the hope of the ungodly is like chaff carried off by the wind, And like a thin spider’s web driven away by a tempest ;
And like smoke which is scattered by the wind,
And passeth away as the remembrance of a guest that tarrieth but a day.
The bliss of the righteous and the miserable fate of the ungodly.
15 But the righteous live for ever,
And in the Lord is their reward,
And the care for them with the Most High.
16 Therefore shall they receive a glorious kingdom,
And a diadem of beauty from the Lord’s hand ;
Because with his right hand shall he cover them,
And with his arm shall he shield them.
17 He shall take his jealousy as complete armour,
And shall make the wole creation his weapons for vengeance on /s enemies : 18 He shall put on righteousness as a breastplate,
And shall take judgement unfeigned as a helmet;
10 He shall take holiness as an invincible shield,
20 And shall sharpen stern wrath for a sword :
And the world shall go forth with him to fight against 47s insensate ves. _ 21 Shafts of lightning shall fly with true aim,
And from the clouds, as from a well drawn bow, shall they leap to the mark. , 22 And as from an engine of war shall be hurled hailstones full of wrath; The water of the sea shall rage against them,
And rivers shall sternly overwhelm them ;
»23 A mighty blast shall encounter them,
And as a tempest shall it winnow them away :
So shall lawlessness make all the land desolate,
And their evil-doing shall overturn the thrones of princes.
Admonttion to the rulers.
) 1 Hear therefore, ye kings, and understand ; Learn, ye judges of the ends of the earth:
14. hope. The object of their hope or that on which they found their hope, e.g. riches, &c.
spider’s web. So Cursives 23, 106, reading ἀράχνη, andalsoR.V. margin. NAB read πάχνη, ‘hoar-frost’, which is quite unsuitable. Some MSS. give ἄχνη, which was no doubt the reading of the Syriac (Jsax.), and of the Latin spuma. Both πάχνη and ἄχνη can be explained from ἀράχνη better than ἀράχνη from the others. The strange mistranslation in LXX Ps. xc. 9 may be compared, τὰ ἔτη ἡμῶν ὡς ἀράχνη, ‘ our years are like a spider’s web’.
16. a glorious kingdom, βασίλειον, occurs in i. 14 and here. In i. 14 it undoubtedly means kingdom, and there is no reason to adopt a different meaning here. In Dan. vii. 18 and 22 the kingdom is given to the saints.
17-23. These verses are not quite consistent with the similar passage in iii. 7 ff. There the righteous execute iudgement on the ungodly: here, Jehovah Himself rouses the forces of Nature to fight against them. See Introd.,
17 ὁ. See in note on xix. 18 the quotation there given from Philo. ἢ ᾿ 18-20. Compare Eph. vi. 11-17, and see Introd., p. 527. The πανοπλία found both here and in St. Paul, which is taken by some scholars as conclusive evidence of direct connexion between the two writers, consisted of helmet, breastplate, greaves, and shield, as defensive, sword and lance as offensive armour.
18. judgement unfeigned, without respect of persons.
20. stern, or relentless, Greek ἀπότομος, also vi. 5, xi. 10, xii. 9, xviil. 15 and the adverb v. 22.
21. Possibly the rainbow is referred to: if so the translation should be, ‘And from the well-drawn bow of the clouds’ as in the Latin ‘a bene curvato arcu nubium’. The association of Jahveh with a thunderstorm is frequent in Hebrew poetry, see Ps. Ixxix. 17-20, xcvil. 3-5; Hab. iii.
15-230. This passage is ‘eschatological’. 23 ¢ suddenly brings the reader back to the present age. _ : 23 ὁ. Feldmann would omit ὡς on the authority of the Coptic. It is certainly better away. A ‘mighty blast’ is a tempest. ;
So shall lawlessness. The writer returns to the idea of i. 1. Those who follow these ungodly and lawless | ways are in high positions in the community, and without any exaggeration may be addressed as judges and princes.
VI. The writer now apparently takes a wider outlook than in i.1. Having dealt with the misdeeds of the governing body of the Jews in Alexandria, he turns in the manner of the prophets, e.g. Isa. viii. 9, Ps. ii. 10, to the rulers of the outside world. They too have a law which they have not kept, for the transgression of which they will be punished. It is not necessary to suppose that the writer ever thought of his words reaching the ‘rulers of the ends of the earth’, any more than Isaiah or the writer of Psalm ii imagined that their words would come to the ears of the foreign nations or rulers whom they apostrophized. The Jewish magnates at Alexandria are still the real object of the address. _ j
1. The Latin begins the chapter with the words ‘ Melior est sapientia quam vires, et vir prudens quam fortis’, ἃ good introduction to the section.
2 Give ear, ye that have dominion over much people, And make your boast in multitudes of nations. 3 Because your dominion was given you from the Lord, And your sovereignty from the Most High ; Who shall search out your works, And shall make inquisition of your counsels: 4 Because being officers of his kingdom ye did not judge aright, Neither kept ye the law, nor walked after the counsel of God. 5 Awfully and swiftly shall he come upon you; For a stern judgement befalleth them that be in high places: 6 For the man of low estate may be pardoned in mercy, But mighty men shall be searched out mightily. 7 For the Sovereign Lord of all will not regard any man’s person. Neither will he stand in awe of greatness ; Because it is he that made do¢/ small and great, And alike he taketh thought for all; 8 But strict is the scrutiny that cometh upon the powerful. 9 Unto you therefore, O princes, are my words, That ye may learn wisdom and not fall away. 10 For they that have kept holily the things that are holy shall ¢hemselves be accounted holy ; And they that have been taught them shall find what to answer ; 11 Set your desire therefore upon my words ; Long for tem, and ye shall be instructed.
« Wisdom desires to be found.
12 Wisdom is radiant and fadeth not away ;
And easily is she beheld of them that love her,
And found of them that seek her. 13 She forestalleth them that desire to know her, making herself first known. 14 He that riseth up early to seek her shall have no toil,
For he shall find her sitting at his gates. 15 For to think upon her is perfection of understanding,
And he that keepeth vigil for her sake shall quickly be free from care. 16 For she goeth about, seeking them that are worthy of her,
And in their paths she appeareth unto them graciously,
And in every purpose she meeteth them.
The Sorites.
17 For her true beginning is desire of instruction ; And the care for instruction is love of er ;
6. searched out, Greek ἐτάζω. The same word in ii. 19 probably means ‘ torture’, so perhaps the A. V. and Latin are right in their interpretation, ‘tormented ’, ‘ tormenta patientur ’.
7. regard any man’s person, R. V. ‘refrain himself for’, The Greek ὑποστελεῖται πρόσωπον here is probably an echo of Deut. i. 17 LX.X, where ὑποστείλῃ πρόσωπον is used to translate the Hebrew D‘35 1°37, to show partiality to any one. The injunction to Moses to make no difference between small and great appears in the same context.
12. This description of Wisdom is based on Prov. viii.
And found. This line looks so much like a variant of Prov. viii. 17 that some scholars have suspected it of being an insertion. But the writer probably had the chapter in Proverbs before his mind, so in spite of its omission in B* it _ may be genuine. It is found in 8 B® and A. Ἵ
15. to think upon her. Through the contemplation of Wisdom, a man gains a high moral standard: cf. ‘ His (i.e. Plato’s) theory of education is dominated by the thought that the mind itself inevitably “imitates” the character _ of the things it habitually contemplates. Just because the aspiration after wisdom is:the fundamental expression of
the mind’s true nature, it cannot be followed persistently without resulting in a transfiguration of our whole character’ 17-20. An instance of the logical figure called Sorites, or Chain-inference, of which the Stoics were very fond (Zeller, S¢oics, p. 216 note). wv. 20 contains the main conclusion consisting of the first and last step: Desire for — wisdom promoteth to a kingdom. But the first premiss is not expressed in v. 17 and must be supplied, and another — member is omitted in v. 19.
[The desire for wisdom is the beginning of wisdom ; ] 17. The true beginning of wisdom is the desire for instruction ; The care for instruction is love of wisdom ;
= 18 And love of her is observance of her laws ;
And to give heed to er laws is the assurance of incorruption ; ” rg And incorruption bringeth near unto God ;
_ 20 So then desire of wisdom promoteth to a kingdom.
Solomon promises to declare the nature of wisdom.
21 If therefore ye delight in thrones and sceptres, ye princes of peoples, Honour wisdom, that ye may reign for ever.
| 22 But what wisdom is, and how she came 20 me, I will declare,
And I will not hide Zer mysteries from you ;
But I will trace “er out from her first beginning
And bring the knowledge of her into clear light,
And I will not pass by the truth ;
23 Neither indeed will I take pining envy for my companion,
Because envy shall have no fellowship with wisdom.
24 But a multitude of wise men is-salvation to the world, And-an understanding king is tranquillity to Zzs people.
| 25 Wherefore be ye instructed by my words, and ¢hereby shall ye profit.
Solomon at first like other men: wisdom given to him in answer to prayer.
711 myself also am mortal, like to all,
And am sprung from one born of the earth, ¢/e man first formed,
2 And in the womb of a mother was I moulded into flesh in the time of ten months, Being compacted in blood of the seed of man ard pleasure that came with sleep. 3 And [ also, when I was born, drew in the common air,
And fell upon the kindred earth,
Uttering, like all, for my first voice, the self-same wail :
4 In swaddling clothes was I nursed, and with watchful cares.
5 For no king had.any other first beginning ;
6 But all men have one entrance into life, and a like departure.
_ 7 For this cause I prayed, and understanding was given me:
~ Icalled upon God, and there came to me a spirit of wisdom.
The value of wisdom.
8 I preferred her before sceptres and thrones, _ And riches I esteemed nothing in comparison of her. g Neither did I liken to her any priceless gem, Because all the gold of the earth in her sight is but a little sand, And silver shall be accounted as clay before her.
18. Love of wisdom is the keeping of her laws ; The keeping of her laws is immortality ; 19. Immortality bringeth near to God ; [To be near to God is to be a king; } So the desire for wisdom promoteth to a kingdom. There is remarkably little deviation from the exact logical form: what there is is justified by the poetical character of the composition. 22. tome. Ewald and Fois understand μοί after ἐγένετο. from her first beginning. This (the A.V. and Latin) is the better translation; not ‘from the beginning of creation’, R. V.; as is seen from vii. 5, ‘no king had any other first beginning, where the Greek is practically the same. mysteries. The Alexandrian Jews regarded their syncretism of Greek philosophy and Hebrew religion as a mystery, which, however, they were anxious to propagate in contrast to the heathen who kept their mysteries secret. Ct. Philo, de Sacrificantibus, 12 ‘Why, ye initiates, if these things are good and profitable, do ye shut yourselves up in darkness and benefit three or four only, instead of bringing the advantages into the market-place for all men, so that every one might enjoy a better and happier life? For envy does not dwell with virtue.’ See vii. 13. 23. Cf. the last clause of the preceding quotation which strikingly resembles 232. The pride of the philosophers is no doubt referred to and perhaps the greed of the Sophists. For the Sophists see Philo, de Congress, 23. 24. a multitude of wise men. This is a sounder view than that of Ecclesiastes i. 18, ‘ In much wisdom is much grief : _ and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.’ ‘VII. τ. first formed. The word πρωτόπλαστος first occurs here. ; 2. wasI moulded. The man is here identified with the body in contrast to the soul which pre-existed, see viii. 19. | 3. Kindred, ὁμοιοπαθής. This is the usual significance of the word. But the commentators point out that the affinity is not between Solomon and the earth but between Solomon and the rest of mankind. Grimm gives ‘ equally trodden by all’. It is, perhaps, another instance of the author's tree use of the language.
THE WISDOM OF SOLOMON@(@i1e-22
το Above health and comeliness I loved her, And I chose to have her rather than light, Because her bright shining is never laid to sleep.
τι But with her there came to me all good things together, And in her hands innumerable riches :
12 And I rejoiced over.them all because wisdom leadeth them : Though I knew not that she was the mother of them.
13 As I learned without guile, I impart without grudging ; I do not hide her riches.
14 For she is unto men a treasure that faileth not, And they that use it obtain friendship with God, Commended 20 him by the gifts which come through discipline.
Solomon's own great knowledge came from this gift of wisdom.
15 But to me may God give to speak with judgement, And to conceive thoughts worthy of what hath been given me ; Because himself is one that guideth even wisdom and correcteth the wise. 16 For in his hand are both we and our words; All understanding, and αὐ acquaintance with divers crafts. 17 For he hath given me an unerring knowledge of the things that are, To know the constitution of the world, and the operation of the elements ; 18 The beginning and end and middle of times, ‘ rf The alternations of the solstices and the changes of seasons, 19 The circuits of years and the positions of stars ; zo The natures of living creatures and the ragings of wild beasts, The powers of spirits and the thoughts of men, / The diversities of plants and the virtues of roots : 21 All things that are either secret or manifest I learned, 22 For she that is the artificer of all things taught me, evex wisdom.
The attributes of wisdom: her source: her activity.
For there is in her a spirit quick of understanding, holy, Alone in kind, manifold, Subtil; freely moving,
11. Cf. Matt. vi. 33, ‘and all these things shall be added unto you.’ 12. mother, γενέτιν (hapax); δὲ and B give γένεσιν, but γένεσις has already been used in vi. 22 and again in Ψ, 5 in the abstract, and therefore is hardly likely to be used here with a concrete meaning. Wisdom is the ‘mother’ or root of all ‘good things’, not merely the chief. Plato’s classification of the Virtues is rejected. See on viii. 7. 13. without grudging. See notes on vi. 22 and 23. 14. friendship with God. See on v. 27. given. These gifts would be called ‘graces’ by the Christian. The R.V. takes the gifts as offered to God to win His favour. 15. judgement, or as R.V. margin, ‘according to his (i.e. God’s) mind’, κατὰ γνώμην. what hath been given. There are three readings here given by Feldmann. (1) δεδομένων: B, and three cursives, including 248; (2) λεγομένων : N A, six cursives, Syriac and other versions; (3) διδομένων : comp. Latin (guae mthi dantur), Coptic, and Ethiopic. λεγομένων is generally rejected. διδομένων is preferred by Grimm and Feldmann. This reading, as Farrar points out, emphasizes the fact that the gift of Wisdom is continuous. 17-20. In these verses the writer shows his knowledge of the technical terms of Greek science. He highly esteems all branches of learning, including astronomy; which Philo, in spite of the remarkable contributions made by Alexandrian astronomers to the advancement of the science, strangely depreciated (Drummond, PAzVo, i. 264). 17. things that are, τῶν ὄντων γνῶσιν ‘philosophy’. constitution of the world ‘cosmology’. 18. beginning, &c., of times ‘ chronology’. alternations, &c. ‘astronomy’. 19. circuits, i.e. cycles, e.g. the metonic and solar cycles. 20. natures, &c. = zoology. powers of spirits. Latin gives vz ventorum, but Josephus, Azz. viii. 2, says that Solomon is said to have had power over spirits, so that demonology and not meteorology may be meant. thoughts of men. The desires and passions which agitate the soul; part of the modern science of psychology. 22. The writer here takes care to emphasize his belief that the action of God is only indirect; thus differing from the presentation in the second part. artificer, τεχνῖτις. It is suggested by Toy, following Grimm, that this is founded on Prov. viii. 30, where Wisdom is said to be jY2N and where the LXX gives ἁρμόζουσα. It is doubtful, however, whether this can be accepted. It would involve the correction of LXX by the writer.
Clear in utterance, unpolluted, Distinct, that cannot be harmed, Loving what is good, keen, unhindered, 23 Beneficent, loving toward man, Steadfast, sure, free from care, All-powerful, all-surveying, And penetrating through all spirits That are quick of understanding, pure, subtil : 24 For wisdom is more mobile than any motion ; Yea, she pervadeth and penetrateth all things by reason of her pureness. 25 For she is a breath of the power of God, And a clear effluence of the glory of the Almighty ; Therefore can nothing defiled find entrance into her. 26 For she is an effulgence from everlasting light And an unspotted mirror of the working of God, And an image of his goodness. 27 And she, though but one, hath power to do all things; And remaining in herself, reneweth all things : And from generation to generation passing into holy souls She maketh them friends of God and prophets. 28 For nothing doth God love save him that dwelleth with wisdom. 29 For she is fairer than the sun, | And above all the constellations of the stars: Being compared with light, she is found 20 de before it ;
22, 23. Wisdom has twenty-one qualities, the number no doubt being purposely chosen as a multiple of the two sacred numbers, seven and three. Philo calls Wisdom πολυώνυμος.
Grimm quotes a fragment ascribed to Cleanthes the Stoic: τἀγαθὸν ἐρωτᾷς μ᾽ οἷον ἐστ᾽; ἄκουε δή" τεταγμένον, δίκαιον, ὅσιον, εὐσεβές, κρατοῦν ἑαυτοῦ, χρήσιμον, καλόν, δέον, αὐστηρόν, αὐθεκάστατον, αἰεὶ συμφέρον, ἄφοβον, ἄλυπον, λυσι- τελές, ἀνώδυνον, ὠφέλιμον, εὐάρεστον, ὁμολογούμενον, εὐκλεές, ἄτυφον, ἐπιμελές, πρᾶον, σφοδρόν, χρονιζόμενον, ἄμεμπτον, αἰεὶ διαμένον. 2
22. in her, ἐν αὐτῇ NB Latin. αὐτή =‘ She is a spirit’ Α. If ἐν αὐτῇ is right this is the nearest approach the author makes towards giving a distinct personality to Wisdom. But in ix. 17 he plainly makes Wisdom equivalent to the Holy Spirit.
quick of understanding. νοερός, a technical term of the Stoics applied to the world soul, see oni. 7. Other Stoical terms in this passage are φιλάνθρωπος (23), χωρεῖν (23), διήκειν (24), διοικεῖν (viii. 1). Three of these are found in one passage of Dio. Laert. quoted by Ritter and Preller, ὃ 513. ἀπόρροια (‘ effluence’) is also a philosophical term.
Alone in kind = ‘the only one of its kind’, povoyevés; manifold, πολυμερές, are opposed to one another and correspond to the Stoic idea of the world soul and its different manifestations. Compare St. Paul on the Holy Spirit,
keen, unhindered. These words go together. Most commentators compare the λόγος τομεύς of Philo which divides, arranges, and unites the unarranged matter of chaos. Heinisch (p. 134) refuses to accept this.
1.283: free from care, ἀμέριμνον. This may be equivalent to the Aristotelian word αὐτάρκης applied to virtue in Ethics
subtil. R.V. ‘most subtil’, Latin szé¢c/is, Greek λεπτοτάτων. λεπτύς probably = ‘ethereal’. In v. 22 Wisdom is said to be a πνεῦμα λεπτόν. Here it is said to penetrate spirits like itself intellectual, pure, and λεπτοτάτων. This can hardly mean that the spirits through which Wisdom penetrates must be λεπτά in a superlative degree, while Wisdom possesses the quality only in a positive degree. If it is not a mere rhetorical use of the superlative it must Mean spirits which have the quality in as high a degree as is possible for men to possess it: an elative use of the superlative. / :
26. effulgence, ἀπαύγασμα. Cf. Heb. i. 3. The word can mean either (1) effulgence, radiance, or (2) reflection. The word ‘effluence’, ἀπόρροια, v. 26, upholds the first, the words ‘ unspotted mirror’ uphold the second. Since the word ‘mirror’ seems to be in parallelism with ἀπαύγασμα the meaning ‘reflection’ is the more probable. Heinisch (p. 133) decides for ‘effulgence’ on the ground of Sir. i. 9, where it is said of Wisdom that God ‘poured her out upon
his works’. So does Westcott on Heb. i. 3. Grimm and Gregg favour the rendering ‘ reflection ’.
27. all things. Omnipotence is here ascribed to Wisdom. ; i
remaining in herself, &c. Bois (p. 391) argues that this line contains a philosophical idea to be traced to Heraclitus or the Stoics. The primaeval fire, or the Logos, remains the same in its essence in spite of all its various Ba estations in nature (see note on πολυμερές, Ψ. 22). Grimm and Heinisch are content with a reference to
friends of God. See v. 15. Deissmann, 8176. S¢., p. 167, thinks the word means favourites. ‘ Friend was the title of honour given at the court of the Ptolemies to the highest royal officials.’ ‘ φίλος θεοῦ denotes high honour in the sight of God, nothing more nor less.’ But the thought was not peculiar to Egypt. If Heinisch is right in seeing direct connexion between ch. viii and the fable of the choice of Hercules (see note on viii. 2) the words may be an echo of OU ἐμὲ φίλοι μὲν θεοῖς ὄντες in that passage. Compare also Plato, Leg. iv. 716 Ὁ ὁ μὲν σώφρων θεῷ φίλος. Philodemus (about 50 B.c.) quotes a Sfozc saying ‘that the wise are the friends of God and God of the wise’ (Zeller, Séoics,
and prophets. The Stoics also believed in prophecy and said that only a wise man could be a prophet. Cic. De Div. ii. 63 ‘Stoici negant quemquam nisi sapientem divinum esse posse.’
30 For to the light of day succeedeth night, But against wisdom evil doth not prevail ; 1 But she reacheth from one end of ¢he world to the other with full strength, And ordereth all things well.
Solomon desired wisdom for a bride to assist him both in public and private matters: but only God could give her.
2 Her I loved and sought out from my youth, And I sought to take her for my bride. And I became enamoured of her beauty. 3 She proclaimeth er noble birth in that it is given her to live with God, And the Soverejgn Lord of all loved her. 4 For she is initiated into the knowledge of God, And she chooseth out for Aim his works. 5 But if riches are a desired possession in life, What is richer than wisdom, which worketh all things ? 6 And if understanding worketh, Who more than wisdom is an artificer of the things that are? 7 And if a man loveth righteousness, The fruits of wisdom’s labour are virtues, For she teacheth self-control and understanding, righteousness, and courage; And there is nothing in life for men more profitable than these. 8 And if a man longeth even for much experience, She knoweth the things of old, and divineth the things to come: She understandeth subtilties of speeches and interpretations of dark sayings: She foreseeth signs and wonders, and the issues of seasons and times. 9 I determined therefore to take her unto me to live with me, Knowing that she is one who would give me good ¢houghts for counsel, And encourage me in cares and grief. ro Because of her I shall have glory among multitudes, And honour in the sight of elders, though I be young. 11 I shall be found of a quick discernment when I give judgement, And in the presence of princes I shall be admired. 12 When I am silent, they shall wait for me ; And when I open my lips, they shall give heed unto me ;
VIII. τ. ordereth, διοικεῖ, A favourite term of the Stoics. They said τὸν δὲ κόσμον διοικεῖσθαι κατὰ νοῦν καὶ πρόνοιαν (Dio. Laert. 133, in Ritter and Preller, § 493). 3
2-18. In every one of these verses except 14 Heinisch finds an echo of the speech of Virtue in the apologue of the choice of Hercules in Xenophon, Mem. ii. 1. The fable was no doubt well known, but Heinisch insists that Pseudo- Sol. had a first-hand acquaintance with Xenophon’s work. The passage runs as follows :—
Virtue says: ‘I associate with gods and I associate with men who are good (cf. v. 3, it is given her to live with God), and no noble work divine or human is done without me (cf. v. 4, she is initiated into the knowledge of God, and she chooseth out for him his works). I am a beloved co-worker with artificers (cf. v. 6, Who more than wisdom is an artificer?) ... a steadfast ally in the work of war (cf. v. 15, . . . I shall show myself a good ruler, and in war courageous), and the best companion in friendship (v. 18, in her friendship is good delight). . . . And the young rejoice in the praises of their elders, and those who are older are delighted with honour from the young (cf. v. 10). And when their destined end shall come they will not lie unhonoured in forgetfulness, but be celebrated in song and flourish in memory for all time’ (cf. vv. 13 and 17).
In this case, as in that of the connexion between Rom. ix and Wisd. xii, it should be noticed that the resemblances are all found in one continuous passage in both authors.
3. proclaimeth, R.V. ‘glorifieth’. δοξάζω = to cause the dignity and worth of some person or thing to become manifest and acknowledged, cf. 2 Thess. iii. 1. See Thayer’s edition of Grimm’s 4. 7. Lexicon. Does a man desire noble birth in a bride? Wisdom is noble enough to be the bride of God. Philo (de Cherub. 13. 14) calls God the husband of Wisdom. .
6. ἐργάζεται has a pregnant meaning ‘to work effectually or successfully’. If @pévnows—earthly wisdom—works with success, much more does σοφία, the divine wisdom.
7. self-control, ἄς. The four cardinal virtues ; a well-known philosophical classification originating with Plato and taken up by the Stoics. Zeller (iii. 2, p. 230, note) affirms direct Stoic influence here, since Chrysippus made Wisdom the root of the four virtues, whereas Plato made Wisdom one of them. See also note on vii. 12.
8. dark sayings, parables or allegories. The writer probably had Proy. i. 6 in mind, where the αἰνίγματα of {πθ΄ wise are spoken of.
signs and wonders. Probably a reference to the prediction of eclipses, &c., by astronomers.
12, See Job xxix. 9.
HEE WISDOM OF SOLOMON 8: 135 ὁ] 3
And if I continue speaking, they shall lay their hand upon their mouth. 13 Because of her I shall have immortality, And leave behind an eternal memory to them that come after me. 14 I shall govern peoples, And nations shall be subjected to me. 15 Dread princes shall fear me when they hear of me : Among my people’I shall show myself a good ra/er, and in war courageous. τό When I come into my house, I shall find rest with her ; For converse with her hath no bitterness, And to live with her hath no pain, but gladness and joy. 17 When I considered these things in myself, And took thought in my heart how that in kinship unto wisdom is immortality, 18 And in her friendship is good delight, And in the labours of her hands is wealth that faileth not, And in assiduous communing with her is understanding, And great renown in having fellowship with her words, I went about seeking how to take her unto myself. 19 Now I was a child good by nature and a good soul fell to my lot ; 20 Nay rather, being good, I came into a body undefiled. 21 But perceiving that I could not possess wzsdom except God gave her to me (Yea and to know by whom the grace is given, this too came of understanding), I pleaded with the Lord and besought him, And with my whole heart I said,
He prays to God for this gift, pleading his own human weakness and the greatness of his task. 2 τ God of the fathers, and Lord who keepest thy mercy, * Who madest all things by thy word ; 2 And by thy wisdom formedst man, That he should have dominion over the creatures that were made by thee, 3 And rule the world in holiness and righteousness, And execute judgement in uprightness of soul ; 4 Give me wisdom, her that sitteth by thee on thy throne ; And reject me not from among thy servants ; 5 Because I am thy bondman and the son of thy handmaid, A man weak and short-lived, And of small power to understand judgement and laws. 6 For even if a man be perfect among the sons of men, Yet if the wisdom that cometh from thee be not with him, he shall be held in no account. 7 Thou didst choose me before my brethren to be king of thy people, And to do judgement for thy sons and daughters. | 8 Thou gavest command to build a sanctuary in thy holy mountain, And an altar in the city of thy habitation, A copy of the holy tabernacle which thou preparedst aforehand from the beginning.
17. Wisdom is immortal. Those akin to her share her immortality. But in xv. 3 knowledge of the might of God is immortality. It may, however, be said that this knowledge could only arise from kinship with or the possession of Wisdom.
19. See Introd., p. 531, for the doctrine of pre-existence in the book. For the difference between the Jewish and Greek conception of pre-existence, see Harnack, History of Dogma, vol. i, pp. 318 ff.
20, This verse is a correction of v.19. If v.19 stood alone it would mean that the writer identified the Ego with the body or perhaps with the compound organism body and soul. But, strictly speaking, the soul is the Ego, hence the correction. In v. 19, as in vii. 2, the writer uses ordinary everyday language such as we find in the second part, ‘ the soul which was lent him’, xv. 8, or in the N. T., ‘this night thy soul shall be required of thee’ (Luke xii. 20), where the soul seems to be regarded as distinct from the personality. It is generally accepted that the writer deliberately corrects himself in view of his doctrine of the pre-existence of the soul; but see Porter. Cf. note on xv. 8.
21. possess wisdom, i.e. ἐγκρατής in the sense of the Latin coos, understanding σοφίας. Grimm takes it in the sense of ‘continent’, but all other moderns take it as in the text.
IX. 1. by thy word... by thy wisdom. We may, perhaps, see here the truth of the statement that the writer of Wisdom was a forerunner of Philo. Word and Wisdom are here synonymous. Our author chose Wisdom, Philo chose the Word as the intermediary between God and the world.
3. God’s purpose in Creation beneficent, see 1. 13. Ε
8. A copy. In Ps. cxxxv. 16, Exod. xxv. 9 we have the idea of heavenly archetypes of certain things on earth. This seems to have been a common Semitic idea. The temple of the goddess Nina was built by Gudea, King of
9 And with thee is wisdom, which knoweth thy works, And was present when thou wast making the world, And which understandeth what is pleasing in thine eyes, And what is right according to thy commandments.
ro Send her forth out of the holy heavens, And from the throne of thy glory bid her come, That being present with me she may toil wzthk me, And ¢hat I may learn what is well-pleasing before thee. Ir For she knoweth all things and hath understanding chereof, And inemy doings she shall guide me in ways of soberness, And she shall guard me in her glory. 12 And so shall my, works be acceptable, And 1 shall judge thy people righteously, And I shall be worthy of my father’s throne. 13 For what man shall know the counsel of God? Or who shall conceive what the Lord willeth ? 14 For the thoughts of mortals are timorous, And our devices are prone to fail. 15 For a corruptible body weigheth down the soul, And the earthy frame lieth heavy on the mind that is full of cares. 16 And hardly do we divine the things that are on earth, And the things that are close at hand we find with labour ; But the things that are in the heavens who ever yet traced out ? 17 And who ever gained knowledge of thy counsel, except thou gavest wisdom, And sentest thy holy spirit from on high? 18 And it was thus that the ways of them which are on earth were corrected, And men were taught the things that are pleasing unto thee ; And through wisdom were they saved.
The work of wisdom in history from Adam to Moses.
if 10 x She guarded to the end the first formed father of the world, that was created alone, And delivered him out of his transgression,
Lagash (3000 B.C.), after he had been shown a model of it in a dream (Maspero, Dawn of Civilization, p. 610). It is, therefore, not necessary to resort to the Platonic doctrine of ideas as Gfrérer does. Grimm prefers to take ἁγία σκηνή, as heaven itself. ‘lhe temple would then represent the higher just as the high-priest’s garments represented the lower world. Cf. xviii. 24.
g. Here Wisdom is only present as a spectator at the Creation in accordance with Prov. viii. 30. His devotion to Scripture in this place overcomes the writer’s philosophical theories.
11. glory. The meaning of this is difficult. The Latin cuts the knot by translating fofefZa. Certain scholars’ follow this and refer to Rom. vi. 4. If, however, ‘guard’ can be taken as carrying on the idea in ‘ guide’ in the preceding line, then ‘ glory’ may, as Grimm suggests, refer to the brightness which Wisdom sheds over the path of her followers. As the author places great stress on the superiority of Wisdom to Light (see vi. 12, vii. 10, 26, 29) this interpretation seems most probable.
15. The writer was no doubt somewhat influenced by the Greek idea of the inherent evil of matter, though he probably _ did not accept it. It is quite possible to admit that the body is the occasion of evil without accepting the dualistic theory that it is the cause of evil. For the connexion of this verse with Plato’s Phaedo see Introduction, p. 532.
cares. The cares are mentioned in the next verse. Grimm prefers the rendering which is given in R.V. margin, ‘that museth on many things.’ The thought is a common one in literature, sacred and profane. See St. Paul, 2 Cor. v. 4, ‘For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened’; Seneca, ZP. 65 ‘Corpus hoc an pondus ac poena est.’ Philo made the body equivalent to a tomb, but according to Ritter and Preller, καὶ 46, note b, he did not, as is sometimes said, get this from Heraclitus: ‘ Sed quod aiunt σῶμα esse quasi σῆμα, non est ab Her. inventum.’
16. hardly. If the mind were not weighed down by the body, knowledge would be easily acquired.
close at hand, ra ἐν χερσίν. δὲ 23 read ποσίν, also the Armenian according to Feldmann.
17. Here ‘thy holy spirit’ is plainly equivalent to Wisdom: this may have some bearing on the reading of vii. 22.
18. through wisdom were they saved. Houbigant divided the book here, and it must be admitted that it is a very good ending. It is in striking contrast to the ending of ch. xix.
X. 1. alone. According to Gen. ii. 7, Adam was created before anything was ready for him, therefore he required protection. The ingenious emendation of Bois, οὐ μόνον, the ov having dropped out after κόσμου, is accepted by Siegfried and Heinisch (p. 147). He would translate ‘ Wisdom not only guarded and delivered, but gave him’, &c. For re used in this way he quotes Esther v. 3 (Bois, p. 399).
his, ἰδίου. This is doubtless, as already pointed out by Grimm, an instance of the ‘use of the exhausted ἴδιος, which is confirmed by the Apocryphal books, especially by those in Greek from the first’ (Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 123-4). Inch. xviii, vv. 13 and 21, there seem to be undoubted examples of this use. Opinions may differ as to the other cases, ii. 23, xi. 13, ΧΙ]. 23, XVi. 23, XVil. IJ, xix. 6, 13, 20, though Deissmann says the best course is ‘ to take
ie }
|. 2 And gave him strength to get dominion over all things.
3 But when an unrighteous man fell away from her in his anger, He perisned himself in the rage wherewith he slew his brother.
4 And when for his cause the earth was drowning with a flood, Wisdom again saved it, Guiding the righteous man’s course by a poor piece of wood.
5 Moreover, when nations consenting together in wickedness had been confounded, Wisdom knew the righteous man, and preserved him blameless unto God, And kept him strong when his heart yearned toward his child.
6 While the ungodly were perishing, wisdom delivered a righteous man, When he fled from the fire that descended out of heaven on Pentapolis. 7 To whose wickedness a smoking waste still witnesseth, And plants bearing fair fruit that cometh not to ripeness ; (Yea and a disbelieving soul hath a memorial ¢here, a pillar of salt s¢z// standing.) ᾿ 8 For having passed wisdom by, Not only were they disabled from recognizing the things which are good, But they also left behind them for Azan life a monument of their folly ; So that wherein they had offended could not but be known: 9 But wisdom delivered out of troubles those that waited on her.
10 When a righteous man was a fugitive from a brother’s wrath, wisdom guided him in straight paths ; She showed him God’s kingdom, and gave him knowledge of holy things ;
She prospered him in his toils, and multiplied the fruits of his labour ;
αι When in their covetousness mex dealt hardly with him,
She stood by him and made him rich ;
12 She guarded him from enemies,
And from those that lay in wait she kept him safe,
And in his sore conflict she guided him to victory,
That he might know that godliness is more powerful than all.
13 When a righteous man was sold, wisdom forsook him not, But from sin she delivered him ;
She went down with him into a dungeon,
:4 And in bonds she left him not,
Till she brought him the sceptre of a kingdom,
And authority over those that dealt tyrannously with him ; She showed them also to be false that had accused him, And gave him eternal glory.
ἴδιος in the old sense only when the context absolutely requires it’. See also Bois, p. 409. In xix. 13 ἴδιος is fortified by αὐτῶν and is certainly emphatic. d
3. This is generally taken to mean that Cain underwent spiritual death when he slew his brother. Compare v. 13, ‘As soon as we were born we ceased to be.’ The writer’s idea of life and death is a spiritual one. We find the same idea in Philo: ‘Cain rose up and killed himself. . . . For the soul which destroys out of itself the virtue-loving and God-loving principle has died to the life of virtue’ (Quod det. fot. § 14). There are two traditions as to the death of Cain, one that he was slain accidentally by Lamech who was blind, the other that he was overwhelmed in the fall | ofa house. See note on xi. 16. : :
4. for his cause. Like the author of the ‘ prophetic’ narrative in Genesis, Pseudo-Sol. considers the evil on the earth before the flood to be due to the descendants of Cain.
5. knew, reading ἔγνω δὲ A C Latin and Syriac. B gives εὗρεν.
the righteous man. Abraham.
7. Cf.‘ Apples of Sodom’. See Josephus in his account of the Dead Sea, Bed?. Jud. iv. 8. 4. ) Bek still standing. Josephus says ‘I have seen it, for it remains even now’ (Azz. i. 11. 4). * Robinson (ii. 108)
remarks that during the rainy season such pillars are constantly in the process of formation and destruction’ (Driver, in Hastings’ DB, vol. iii, p. 152).
8. disabled, i. e. they incur ‘judicial blindness ’.
Io. Jacob. ;
holy things, or holy ones, i.e. the angels ascending and descending. ; ‘ Wes @
_ 12. guided him to victory. Latin ‘dedit ut vinceret’. R.V. ‘watched as judge’, but see SpaSev in Liddell and Scott, ii. 2. The Syriac agrees in this interpretation. 13. Joseph.
15 She delivered a holy people and a blameless seed from a nation of oppressors. 16 She entered into the soul of a servant of the Lord, And withstood terrible kings in wonders and signs. 17 She rendered unto holy men a reward of their toils ; She guided them along a marvellous way, And ‘became unto them a covering in the daytime, And a light of stars through the night. 18 She brought them over the Red sea, And led them through much water ; το But their enemies she drowned, And out of the bottom of the deep she cast them up 20 Therefore the righteous spoiled the ungodly ; And they sang praise to thy holy name, O Lord, And extolled with one accord thy hand that fought for them : 21 Because wisdom opened the mouth of the dumb, And made the tongues of babes to speak clearly.
1] 1 She prospered their works by the hand of a holy prophet.
Contrast between the fortunes of Israel and Egypt; the instrument of punishment to the Egyptians
became the instrument of benefit to Israel. |
2 They journeyed through a desert without inhabitant, And in trackless regions they pitched their tents. 3 They withstood enemies, and repelled foes. 4 They thirsted, and they called upon thee, And there was given them water out of the flinty rock, And healing of their thirst out of the hard stone. 5 For by what things their foes were punished, By these they in their need were benefited. 6 When the enemy were troubled with clotted blood instead of a river's ever-flowing fountain, To punish the decree for the slaying of babes, 7 Thou gavest them abundant water beyond all hope, 8 Having shown ¢hem by the thirst which they had suffered how thou didst punish the adversaries. 9 For w hen they were tried, albeit but in mercy chastened, They learned how the ungodly were tormented, being judged with wrath : 10 For these, as a father, admonishing them, thou didst prove ; But those, as a stern king, condemning them, thou didst search out. τι Yea and whether they were far off from the righteous or near them, they were alike distressed ; 12 For a double grief took hold on them, And a groaning at the remembrance of things past.
15. a holy people and a blameless seed. This idealization of Israel is in strong contrast with Exod. xxxii. one | Deut. ix. 6, and other similar passages. But the moral and spiritual superiority of the Jews to the heathen in the first" century B.C. (see Bousset, Ae/. des Jud., p. 83) would naturally be carried back to their ancestors in a heightened degree.
17. This is the strongest instance of allegory in the book. It is quite of a piece with ‘ Philo’s habit of allegorizing an angel into a Logos’ (Drummond, ii, p. 268).
20. spoiled. According to a tradition mentioned by Josephus (Avz. ii. 16. 6) the arms of the Egyptians vere pase’ up on the shore and so provided the Israelites with w eapons. i |
. dumb. In Exod. iv. 10 Moses says ‘I am slow of speech’.
a 2. Here the second part of the book begins. In wv. 7 the writer speaks of the direct action of God, and continues to do so in vv. 10, 15,17. In v. 20, it is true, he speaks of ‘ Justice’, and the ‘breath of thy power’: but reverts to | the idea of the direct action of the Deity. W isdom has disappeared and with it the Greek view of God as transcendant. — 4
4. called upon thee. The writer prefers to follow Ps. cvii. 5 rather than Exod. xvii. 1-7. +
ἀκρότομος = ‘abrupt’, ‘ precipitous’: the LXX translation of vendn (‘flint’) in Deut. vill. 15. This shows direct Ἢ dependence on the LXX. Ἷ 5. The principles enunciated here and in τ΄. 16 (appropriateness of retribution) are dwelt upon at considerab length in the rest of the book. The first point (elaborated in cc. xvi-xix), viz. that what injured the Egyptians benefit Israel, seems to be peculiar to the author. It appears later in Philo (Vzta Contem. cii), ‘ For by the commandment of God the sea became to one party the cause of safety and to the other that of utter destruction’.
6. The R.V. margin says ‘The text of this verse is perhaps corrupt’. B and C upheld by the Latin read. ταραχθέντες : S A ταραχθέντοςς If the nominative is read, a subject must be supplied — “the enemy’, as in R.V.; ifthe — genitive, the translation must be ‘Instead of a perennial fountain of a river turbid with clotted blood thou gavest — them’, ἄς. R. V. (i.e. Hort) takes the first; Grimm, Feldmann, and others adopt the second.
12. things past, reading παρελθόντων 8 A. παρελθουσῶν is given by B and C agreeing with μνημῶν. Feldmann has a long discussion of the passage: he would emend to μνήμονας agreeing with αὐτούς.
] 13 ΕῸΓ τῶν they heard that by the very means wherewith they had been punished the others had been benefited,
They felt the presence of the Lord ;
14 For him who long before was driven forth in hatred they left off mocking: And marvelled at the events that had come to pass, Having thirsted in another manner than the righteous.
Appropriateness of retribution shown to be the purpose of God.
15 But in requital of the senseless imaginings of their unrighteousness, Wherein they were led astray to worship irrational reptiles and wretched vermin Thou didst send upon them a multitude of irrational creatures for vengeance ; ἱ τό That they might learn, that by what things a man sinneth, by these he is punished. |r For thine all-powerful hand, That created the world out of formless matter, Lacked not means to send upon them a multitude of bears, or fierce lions, 18 Or new-created wild beasts, full of rage, of unknown £zzd, Either breathing out a blast of fiery breath, Or blowing forth from their nostrils noisome smoke, Or flashing dreadful sparkles from their eyes ; τ Which had power not only to consume them by their violence, But to destroy them even by the terror of their sight. 10 Yea and without these might they have fallen by a single breath, Being pursued by Justice, and scattered abroad by the breath of thy power. But by measure and number and weight thou didst order all things.
τ For to be greatly strong is thine at all times; And the might of thine arm who shall withstand ? 2 Because the whole world before thee is as a grain in a balance, And as a drop of dew that at morning cometh down upon the earth.
14. in hatred, reading ἐν ἔχθεσι with N AC: B gives ἐν ἐκθέσει. 16. For the idea see Ps. vii. 15, 16 (‘He hath made a pit,’ &c.) and numerous other passages in the O.T. Jub. » iv. 31 puts it very plainly: ‘For with a stone he (Cain) had killed Abel and by a stone was he killed in righteous | judgement.’ As usual the writer does not trouble himself about literal accuracy. The Egyptians were punished, not
by the identical animals which they worshipped, though in one district or another almost all animals were sacred, but by others, i.e. frogs and lice, quite as irrational and disgusting. Philo (Vita 1705. i. 17) says, ‘ For as the Egyptians } used to honour the water in an especial degree . . . he thought it fitting to summon that first to the affliction and | correction of those who honoured it.’ 17. That created. Reading with all the versions, Lat., Syr., Arm., Kopt., ἡ for καί. Β δὲ A C all read καὶ κτίσασα. 'N® exhibits a conflate reading ἡ καὶ κτίσασα. For the confusion between ἡ and « see Cobet, Variae Lectiones, _p. 5, ‘7 et « in veteri scriptura nil differunt.’
formless matter. As the words stand they convey a purely Greek philosophical idea. Matter was in existence from all eternity and God moulded it to His purpose. The question then arises—Did our author also conceive of ‘matter as increate or did he assume that God first created formless matter and then brought it into order and |arrangement? Grimm points out that the author’s object was to adduce as great a proof as possible of the power of God. Creation ex zihzlo would be even a greater marvel than the organization of matter; as the author does not mention this greater marvel it is urged that he did not accept it. Siegfried (PAz/o, p. 230) thinks that as Philo assumes ithe doctrine of the eternity of matter to be true and to require no proof, the Alexandrian Jews had accepted it before him. But even Philo, philosopher as he is, seems to waver in his acceptance of the beliet (Siegfried, p. 232): ‘God, when he begat all things, not only brought them into manifestation, but made things which did not exist before, being himself not only a Demiurge but also a Creator,’ De Somm. i. 13. Caird (Evolution of Theol., vol. ii, p. 191), speaking Ὁ Philo’s views, says, ‘In accommodation to Jewish notions God must be supposed to create the matter in which his deas are realized.’ bears, or fierce lions. In Vita Mosis, i. 19, Philo says, ‘Some one may ask why God punished the land with
uch insignificant and despised animals and not rather by bears, lions, and panthers . .. who devour human flesh.’ che answer he gives bears a striking similarity to that in Wisd. xii. 20-25, ‘ God was desirous rather to admonish the “gyptians than to destroy them.’ 18. noisome smoke. R. V. taking βρόμος, ‘ roaring’, as a misspelling of βρῶμος, ‘ stench’. 19. The basilisk was supposed to kill by a glance. 20. measure and number and weight. Hence God deals out appropriate, not arbitrary retribution. This assage is referred to in Charles’s Zestaments Naph. ii. 3, where we read, ‘ By weight, measure, and rule was all the -jeation made.’ 22. a grain: cf.Isa.xl.15. Another indication of direct dependence on LXX.
— God, though almighty, is full of mercy and es } ae ,
hare
23 But thou hast mercy on all men, because thou hast power to do all things, And thou overlookest the sins of men to the end they may repent. 24 For thou lovest all things that are, And abhorrest none of the things which thou didst make ; For never wouldst thou have formed anything if thou didst hate it. 2; And how would anything have endured, except thou hadst willed it ? ~ Or that which was not called by thee, Zow would it have been preserved ? 26 But thou sparest all things, because they are thine, O Sovereign Lord, thou lover of souls ; 12 τ For thine incorruptible spirit is in all things. 2 Wherefore thou dost chastise by little and little them that fall from the right way, And, putting them in remembrance by the very things wherein they sin, dost thou admonish them, That escaping from their wickedness they may believe on thee, O Lord.
As shown by his patience with the Canaanites.
3 For verily the old inhabitants of thy holy land, 4 Whom thou didst hate because they practised detestable works of enchantments and unholy rites, 5 Merciless slaughterers of children, And sacrificial banqueters on men’s flesh and blood, 6 Confederates in an impious fellowship And murderers of their own helpless babes, It was thy counsel to destroy by the hands of our fathers ; 7 That the land which in thy sight is most precious of all dads Might receive a worthy colony of God's servants. 8 Nevertheless even these thou didst spare as dezzg men, And thou sentest hornets as forerunners of thy host, To cause them to perish by little and little ; 9 Not that thou wast unable to subdue the ungodly under the hand of the righteous in battle, Or by terrible beasts or by oze stern word to destroy them at once ; το But judging them by little and little thou gavest them a place of repentance, Though thou knewest their nature was evil, and their wickedness inborn, And that their manner of thought would in no wise ever be changed, τι For they were a seed accursed from the beginning: Neither was it through fear of any that thou didst pass over their sins.
23. repent. The thought that the goodness and mercy of God are calls to repentance does not seem to occur earlier than this. It was taken up by St. Paul, Rom. ii. 4, and is found in 2 Pet. iii. 9.
24 to xii. 2. This beautiful passage has nothing to compare with it in cc. i-x. Ch. i. 13, 14 do not speak of the love of God in the fervent way that the writer does here: while vi. 6-7 refer rather to God’s compassion.
24. In Philo, as in his master Plato, the goodness of God is the motive of Creation. But we have not quite got this idea here. It only needs another step, it is true, but the author did not take it. He does not go beyond the O.T. The Jews did not ask what motive God had in creating man. The nearest approach to alleging a motive is found in Isa. xliii. 7, where the creation of Israel for the ‘ glory’ of Jehovah is spoken of.
25. called ‘created’. A Hebraism, cf. Isa. xli. 4. ‘Calleth’ in Rom. iv. 17 is not quite the same, but probably ‘issues commands to’.
26. lover of souls. φιλόψυχος, in classical Greek, means ‘ cowardly’.
XII. The writer has set forth a very high ideal of God in xi. 24, and endeavours to illustrate it not only by His action towards the chosen people, but even by the treatment extended to His enemies, the Egyptians and Canaanites. He can only achieve his purpose by disregarding certain parts of the Biblical tradition. The Egyptians, according to the writer, were treated mercifully, in being afflicted at first with lighter plagues as a means of correction and admonition. It was only when they refused to be admonished and to obey the God whom they recognized to be the true God, that the punishment of death was inflicted. The difference between this view and that found in Exodus is considerable. There Jahveh hardens Pharaoh’s heart to prevent the plagues from having a reformative effect. Again, the Canaanites, who, in spite of xi. 24, are described in xii. 4 as being hated by God, and as ‘a seed accursed from the beginning’, are | said to have been leniently treated in order that they might escape from their wickedness by repentance. The reason | given in Exodus (xxiii. 29, 30) why the Canaanites were destroyed little by little is that the land might not become the | prey of wild beasts. The Deuteronomic editor of the Book of Judges gives two reasons why the Canaanites were not driven out at once: (1) To prove the Israelites ; (2) To give them experience in war (Judges ii. 22-iii. 6). ΕῚ
5. slaughterers, φονέας. R.V. gives ‘slaughters’, emending to φονάς. This is probably on account of θοῖναν, — ‘banquet’, in the next clause; but φονέας is supported by μύστας and αὐθέντας γονεῖς later on, so that it seems better to — take ‘ banquet’ as used by metonomy for ‘ banqueters’ as in the Latin, which gives devoratores. q
6. Confederates. The true reading of this line in the Greek seems beyond the possibility of recovery. The above © rendering is that of the R.V. reading ἐκμυσοῦς from ἐκμυσής, a word coined by Grimm in his first edition (1837). Grimm, in the edition of 1860, read ἐκ μυσοῦς μύστας θιάσου, which equals ‘impious initiates or confederates of a (secret idolatrous) fellowship’. The meaning is the same, but he avoids coining a word. ny
11. accursed from the beginning. Cf. Gen. ix. 25.
God's possession of almighty power shows that his leniency is due to his mercy. 12 For who shall say, What hast thou done? Or who shall withstand thy judgement ? And who shall accuse thee for the destruction of nations which thou didst make ? Or who shall come and stand before thee as an avenger for the unrighteous? 13 For neither is there any God beside thee that careth for all, That thou mightst show wto him that thou didst not judge unrighteously : 14 Neither shall king or prince meet thee 20 plead for those whom thou hast punished. 15 But being righteous thou rulest all things righteously, Deeming it alien from thy power To condemn him that doth not deserve to be punished. 16 For thy strength is the beginning of righteousness, And thy sovereignty over all maketh thee to spare all. 17 For when men believe not that thou art perfect in power, thou showest thy strength, And in dealing with them that know 22 thou puttest their boldness to confusion. 18 But thou, being sovereign over ¢iy strength, judgest in gentleness, And with great forbearance dost thou govern us ; For the power is thine whensoever thou willest.
His mercy an example to men. το But thou didst teach thy people by such works as these, That the righteous must be a lover of men; And thou didst make thy sons to be of good hope, Because thou givest repentance when men have sinned. 20 For if the enemies of thy servants, even them that were due to death, Thou didst punish with so great heedfulness and indulgence, Giving them times and place to escape from their wickedness ; 21 With how great carefulness didst thou judge thy sons, \ To whose fathers thou gavest oaths and covenants of good promises! 22 While therefore thou dost chasten us, thou scourgest our enemies ten thousand times more, To the intent that we may ponder thy goodness when we judge, And when we are judged may look for mercy.
Those who did not respond to lenient treatment received a heavier punishment. 3 Wherefore also the unrighteous that lived in folly of life
Thou didst torment through their own abominations. 4 For verily they went astray very far in the ways of error,
Taking as gods those animals which even among their enemies were held in dishonour, Deceived like foolish babes. |5 Therefore, as unto unreasoning children, thou didst send thy judgement to mock them.
_ \5 But they that would not be admonished by a correction which was but as child’s play | Shall experience a judgement worthy of God.
7 For because through their own sufferings they were moved to indignation | Against those creatures which they thought to be gods,
16. beginning of righteousness. So R. V.; Grimm, Deane, Farrar, and Siegfried, ‘ foundation.’ , Everywhere else in the book ἀρχή means ‘ beginning’, though in xiv. 27 it is parallel with αἰτία ; it may mean that God’s power enables Him always to do justice. The word ‘source’ might be a good equivalent. ee ἢ ΠΝ
17. The Revisers say ‘The Greek text here is perhaps corrupt’. Β gives εἰδόσι, ‘those that know’; A οὐκ εἰδύσι, ‘those that know not’. Latin has gz sciuat, with which the Syriac agrees. Bois (p. 400) offers the emendation ἐνδοιάζουσι, which is accepted by Siegfried. To rebuke the audacity of those that doubt certainly seems at first sight amore likely statement than to rebuke the audacity of those that know ; but if we compare the last two lines of the chapter we see that the Egyptians, who ‘saw and recognized’ the true God and may thus certainly be said to know Him, are thought of here, so that εἰδόσι is right. The Egyptians knew God’s power but defied it.
20. indulgence, reading διέσεως 8. B reads δεήσεως, which gives no sense. A and Latin omit. ;
24. ΘΟ R. V. Bois, however (p. 401), compares ἐν ζώοις τῶν ἐχθρῶν ἄτιμα with xv. 18 τὰ ζῷα τὰ ἔχθιστα σέβονται, and takes ἐχθρός with the same meaning in both places. If this is right we must probably translate ‘taking as gods the
epee tore t
|most ignoble of hateful animals’. For the positive used as a superlative see Blass, Gr. of NV. Tr, . 143. ΟΠ 26. The writer was misled by the LXX of Exod. x. 2 ὅσα ἐμπέπαιχα. There is no idea of child’s play in the Hebrew jvord.
27. In opposition to R. V. and other renderings it is here suggested that ἐφ᾽ ois is not prospective, anticipating ἐπὶ
οὕτοις, but simply means ‘because’ (on ἐφ᾽ ᾧ and ἐφ᾽ vis see Sanday’s Nowans, v. 12, and Lightfoot, Phil. ili. 12). Che editorial comma after ἠγανάκτουν must be deleted.
Being punished by their means, They saw, and recognized the true God whom before they refused to know ;
Wherefore also the uttermost penalty came upon them.
Men being foolish by nature cannot know the true God, but worship, perhaps excusably, the works he has made.
13 τ For by nature all men were foolish, and had no perception of God, And from the good things to be seen had not power to know him that is, Neither by giving heed to the works did they recognize the artificer ; 2 But either fire, or wind, or swift air, Or circling stars, or raging water, or luminaries of heaven, They thought to be gods that rule the world. 3 And if through delight in their beauty they took them to be gods, Let them know how much better than these is their Sovereign Lord ; For the first author of beauty created them : 4 But if through astonishment at their power and influence, Let them understand from them how much mightier is he that formed them ; 5 For from the greatness and beauty of created things Does man correspondently form the image of their first maker. 6 But yet for these men there is but small blame, For they too peradventure do dwt go astray While they are seeking God and desiring to find him. 7 For living among his works they make diligent search, And believe their sight, because the things that they look upon are beautiful. 8 But again even they are not to be excused. 9 For if they had power to know so much, That they could explore the course of ¢iings, How is it they did not sooner find the Sovereign Lord of these works ?
the true God. The indignation of the Egyptians at their gods, on finding them to be weaker than Jahveh, drove them to acknowledge Him to be the true God. The savage is often angry with his fetish. The statement in the text is founded either on Exod. viii. 8, ix. 28, x. 17, where Pharaoh requests Moses to ‘entreat Jahveh’ for him, thus recognizing that Jahveh was the true God, or on Exod. viii. 18, where the magicians, being unable to repeat the third plague, say, ‘ This is the finger of God.’
Wherefore. The writer takes it for granted that the reader will supply from the preceding words the thought that the Egyptians, though they recognized the true God, still refused to accept His admonition : ‘ Wherefore,’ &c.
XIII. 1. by nature . . . foolish, as opposed to the intelligence that comes from wisdom. A solitary and indirect
reference to the Wisdom of part 1.
the good things. The argument from design was a favourite one with the Stoics. ‘They argued from the analogy of human art, and contended that the orderly movements and immutable constancy of the universe were just as clear an evidence of controlling reason as could be found in a statue or picture, in the course of a ship or a sundial’ (Drummond, PAz/o, i, p. 77). Cf. Rom. i. 20, and see Sanday and Headlam, 7x doco.
him that is, τὸν ὄντα, from LXX Exod. iii. 14 ᾿Εγώ εἰμι ὁ “Qu.
2. By the words ‘fire’, &c., Grimm, on the basis of Philo, De Dec. Ov. ch. xii, and De Vita Cont. τ, takes the author to refer to the personification of natural phenomena under the names of Hephaestus, fire; Aeolus, wind; Hera, air; and re Poseidon, water. Εἰ. Pfleiderer, who wishes to make the author a thoroughgoing Greek philosopher, takes the references to be to Heraclitus, who made fire the original element (i.e. fire as a vivifying and quickening power) ; Anaximenes, who proposed air; Pythagoras, who, with many others, considered the ‘circling stars’ to be gods; and Thales, whocon- | sidered water to be the origin of all things. It is, of course, impossible to deny that the writer may have had these philosophers in his mind, but the reference is most probably a general one. See the statement of Prodicus in Zeller, Pre-Socratic Phil. ii, p. 482.
_ luminaries of heaven. These were common objects of heathen worship. Cf. Deut. iv. 19, where it is also distinctly stated that Jahveh assigned the heavenly bodies to the nations to be worshipped. :
3. their beauty. The commentators point out that the admiration of beauty is a Greek trait, not Hebrew. The beauty of the universe was a favourite subject with the Stoics.
5. greatness and beauty. Although N B and A, the Latin and Peshitta, all read ‘the greatness of the beauty’, the editors (except R. V.) all accept the reading given in the text, which follows N#, various cursives, including 248, Athanasius, and other patristic authorities ; and according to Feldmann is found in the Armenian, Syro-Hexaplar, ἢ Aethiopic, and probably the Coptic versions. ἶ 4
9. The writer, perhaps, forgot that he considered the Gentiles to be μάταιοι φύσει, ‘foolish by nature’, see v. 1. His question may be one of surprise, or he may, as Grimm and others suggest, insinuate that there was a moral failu f Philo makes it an intellectual failure, ‘Therefore those persons are mere guessers who are anxious to contemplate the uncreated God through the medium of the things which he created; acting like those persons who seek to ascertain” the nature of the unit through the number two when they ought to employ the investigation of the unit itself to ascertain the nature of the number two, for the unit is the first principle.’ ͵
SS =
THE WISDOM OF SOLOMON 18. 1o—14. 6
But some men are without excuse because they worship objects which they themselves have made. το But miserable were they, and in dead things were their hopes, Who called them gods which are works of men’s hands, Gold and silver, wrought with careful art, and likenesses of beasts, Ora useless stone, the work of an ancient hand. τι Yea, and if some woodcutter, having sawn down a tree he can handle, Skilfully strippeth away all its bark, And fashioning it handsomely maketh a vessel for the service of life ; 12 And with that which is left he prepareth his food and is filled ; 13 And taking that which is left again, for which no use can be found, A crooked piece of wood and full of knots, Carveth it with the diligence of his idleness, And shapeth it by the skill of his indolence ; Then he giveth it the semblance of the image of a man, 14 Or maketh it like some paltry animal, Smearing it with vermilion, and with paint colouring it red, And smearing over every stain that is therein ; 15 And having made for it a chamber worthy of it, He setteth it in a wall, and maketh it fast with iron. 16 In order therefore that it may not fall, he taketh thought for it ; Knowing that it is unable to help itself; (For verily it is an image, and hath need of help ;) 17 And when he maketh his prayer for his goods and for his marriage and children, He is not ashamed to speak to that which hath no life ; 18 Yea for health he calleth upon that which is weak, And for life he beseecheth that which is dead, And for aid he supplicateth that which hath no experience, And for a good journey that which cannot so much as use its feet, 19 And for gaining and getting and good success of his hands He asketh power of that which with its hands is quite powerless.
Folly of the navigator who for safety prays to a useless piece of wood. 1 1 Again, one preparing to sail, and to journey through raging waves, * | Calls on a piece of wood less sound than the vessel that bears him ; [2 For that vesse/ the hunger for gain devised, And an artificer by his wisdom built it ; 3 And thy providence, O Father, guideth it along, Because even in the sea thou gavest a way, And in the waves a sure path, 4 Showing that thou canst save out of every danger, | That so even without art a man may put to sea ; ' \5 And it is thy will that the works of thy wisdom should not be idle ; Therefore also do men intrust their lives to a little piece of wood, | And passing through the surge on a raft are brought safe 20 land. _ |) For in the old time also, when proud giants were perishing,
10. work of an ancient hand, Acts xix. 35. τι ff. Founded on Isa. xl, xli, xliv and xlvi. : } _13. idleness. The idol is made at odd times and no care spent upon it. A different method is mentioned in XIv. 19. NB ἀργίας, A ἐργασίας. indolence. N* A Β ἀνέσεως, συνέσεως N* Latin. ᾿ 18, ἀπειρότατον. An elative. A.V. margin ‘that which hath no experience at all’. R.V. ‘ hath least experience’. XIV. 1. less sound. Lit. ‘more rotten’; see xiii. 13, where the wood of which the idol is made cannot be used for anything else. Ἢ 2. by his wisdom. So the Vulgate and Syriac. NBA give τεχνῖτις δὲ σοφία, and R.V. translates ‘an artificer, even wisdom’. Nearly all the editors prefer the first, taking wisdom as the human quality. Blass (Gram. of N. 7. |G&., p. 6) points out that the mute « in the dative was often omitted by scribes ; also (see p. 8) ἡ sometimes becomes «. © read τεχνίτης δὲ σοφίᾳ. See also Thackeray, Gr. of O. 7. in Greek, p. 85. hee 3. Because. This and the next three lines refer to Noah. The lines justify the statement that it is God’s jorovidence that guides a vessel rather than man’s seamanship. Noah was not acquainted with navigation. 5. alittle piece. ἐλαχίστῳ, elative sense = ‘very little’. See Thackeray, G7. of O. 7, p. 185.
The hope of the world, taking refuge on a raft, Left to the race of men a seed of generations 20 come, Thy hand guiding the helm, 7 For blessed was the wood through which cometh righteousness :
Idolaters shall be punished.
8 But the zdo/ made with hands is accursed, itself and he that made it ; Because his was the working, and the corruptible thing was named a god: 9 For both the ungodly doer and his ungodliness are alike hateful to God ; το For verily that which was made shall be punished together with him that made it. τι Therefore among the idols of the nations shall there be a visitation, Because, though formed of things which God created, they were made an abomination, And stumblingblocks to the souls of men, And a snare to the feet of the foolish.
The origin of idolatry.
12 For the devising of idols was the beginning of fornication, And the invention of them the corruption of life: 13 For neither were they from the beginning, neither shall they be for ever ; 14 For through the vain error of men they entered into the world, And therefore has a speedy end been devised for them. 15 For a father worn with untimely grief, Making an image of the child too quickly taken away, Now honoured him as a god who then was a corpse, And delivered to those that were under him mysteries and solemn rites. 16 Afterward the ungodly custom, in process of time grown strong, was kept as a law, And by the commandments of princes graven images were worshipped. 17 And when men could not honour them in presence because they dwelt far off, Imagining the likeness from afar, They made a visible image of the king whom they honoured, That by their zeal they might flatter the absent as if he were present. 18 But unto a yet higher pitch of worship Did the ambition of the artificer urge forward even them that knew him not, 19 For he, wishing perchance to please the ruler, Compelled his art to give the likeness greater beauty ; 20 And so the multitude, allured by the grace of his work, Now accounted as an object of worship him whom they had honoured before as a man. 21 And this became a hidden danger unto life, Because men, under the power either of calamity or of tyranny, Invested stones and stocks with the incommunicable Name.
Evil results of idolatry.
22 Afterward it was not enough for them to go astray in the knowledge of God ; But also, while they live in sore conflict through ignorance of him,
7. Tighteousness, i.e. ‘the righteous purpose of God’. The ark preserved a righteous man, who was the ancestor _ of the righteous people. This is the highest example of the beneficial purposes for which wood has been used: other | examples are seen in its enabling God’s gifts to be conveyed from one part of the world to another; but wood which is put to a bad use is ‘ accursed’.
8. idol made with hands. χειροποίητος, the term used in LXX Isaiah to translate baby, il. 18, x. 11, e¢ al.
11. a visitation. ἐπισκοπή used in an unfavourable sense as in xix. 15, the only other occurrence of the word in this part of the book.
14. devised. ἐπενοήθη is used as a paranomasia—which the R.V. keeps up—upon ἐπίνοια, ‘ devising’, in Ψ. 12. | The A. V. prefers to give the meaning plainly, ‘ therefore shall they shortly come to an end.’ Cf. 1 En. xcix. 9, where — of the idolaters it is said, ‘They shall have wrought all their work in a lie and shall have worshipped a stone: therefore in an instant shall they perish. ἢ
15. The theory of Euhemerus was that idolatry arose from the worship of deceased heroes. The writer adopts this view with a slight modification. p
17. On the basis of the words ‘ adsen¢ ruler’ Bousset (2e/. des Judenthums, p. 35) would date the book after Egypt | had come under the Roman Empire. For the worship of the Emperors, cf. Dill, Roman Society from Nero, p. 617: | ‘But Egypt went rather too far for the western mind in its apotheosis of kings.’ aa
22. Cf. Philo, de Conf. Ling. c. 12, ‘For they do in peace everything that is done in war; they plunder, ravage, — carry off booty ; they assault, destroy, pollute; they murder treacherously ; they murder openly if they are the more |
powerful.’
That multitude of evils they call peace. 23 For either slaughtering children in solemn rites, or celebrating secret mysteries,
Or holding frantic revels of strange ordinances, 24 No longer do they guard either life or purity of marriage,
But one slays another treacherously, or grieves him by adultery. 25 And all things confusedly are filled with blood and murder, theft and deceit, 26 Corruption, faithlessness, tumult, perjury,
Disquieting of the good,
Ingratitude for benefits received,
Defiling of souls, confusion of sex,
Disorder in marriage, adultery, and wantonness. 27 For the worship of those unnameable idols
Is the beginning and cause and end of every evil. 28 For their worshippers either make merry unto madness, or prophesy lies,
Or live unrighteously, or lightly forswear themselves. 29 For putting their trust in lifeless idols,
They wickedly swear fa/se oaths and look not to be harmed. 30 But for both szzs shall the just doom pursue them,
Because they had evil thoughts of God by giving heed to idols.
And swore unrighteously in deceit, despising holiness. 31 For not the power of them by whom men swear,
But Justice which hath regard to them that sin,
Punisheth always the transgression of the unrighteous.
Benefits of worshipping the true God.
δ. But thou, our God, art gracious and true, Longsuffering, and in mercy ordering all things. 2 For even if we sin, we are thine, knowing thy dominion ; But we shall not sin, knowing that we are accounted thine: 3 For to know thee is perfect righteousness, Yea, to know thy dominion is the root of immortality. 4 For neither did any evil device of man lead us astray, Nor yet the painters’ fruitless labour, A form stained with varied colours ; 5 The sight whereof leadeth fools into lust : Who desire the form of a dead image that hath no breath ; 6 Lovers of evil things, and worthy to have such things to hope in, ; Are both they that make them, and they that desire, and they that worship them.
Another example of the manufacture of idols.
7 For a potter, kneading soft earth, Laboriously mouldeth each vessel for our service : Nay, out of the same clay doth he fashion Both the vessels that minister to clean uses, and those of a contrary sort, All in like manner ; But what shall be the use of either sort, The craftsman Aimse/f is the judge.
27. ἀνωνύμων, Latin ixfandorum. The meaning may be ‘unspeakable’, ‘indescribable’, referring to the immoralities of the mystery cults without any reference to Exod. xxiii. 13. The context favours this. Cf. Eph. v. 12.
XV. For a moment the writer turns aside to contrast the true worship with the false. The interruption has the effect, which was doubtless intended, of giving a slight rest to the reader before renewing the polemic against idolatrous worship. ne 2. τὰ shall not sin. If the nation could be regarded as holy and blameless in the past in spite of the admissions in xii. 22, xvi. 11, xviii. 20, the future could be painted in the same colours. __ bee j 5. lust, ὄρεξιν. NAC and all the versions. ὄνειδος B and 68. ποθοῦντες in τ΄. 6 justifies this. The reference, no doubt, is to Pygmalion, King of Cyprus, who fell in love with a statue of Venus. ‘ ; 7. For the connexion of this verse with Rom. ix. 21, see Introd., p. 526. E. Pfleiderer compares the saying of Heraclitus that ‘ the clay out of which things are made is for ever being moulded into new forms’ (Zeller, Pve-Soc. Phil. ii, p. 17), and affirms direct connexion.
8 And also, with evil labour, he mouldeth a vain god from the same clay, He who, but a little before was made of the earth, And will soon go his way 20 the earth out of which he was taken, When the soul which was lent him shall again be demanded. 9 Howbeit his care is, Not that his powers must fail, Nor that his span of life is short ; But he rivals the workers in silver and gold, And copieth moulders in brass, And esteemeth it glory that he mouldeth counterfeit things. 10 His heart is ashes, And his hope of less value than earth, And his life of less honour than clay : 11 Because he was ignorant of him that moulded him, And of him that inspired into him an active soul, And breathed into him a vital spirit. 12 But he accounted our life to be but a game, And our way of life a gainful fair ; For one must, saith he, get gain whence one can, though it be by evil means. 13 For this man beyond all others knoweth that he sinneth, When out of the same earthy matter he maketh both brittle vessels and graven images. 14 But most foolish were they all, and of feebler soul than a babe, The foes of thy people, who crushed them ; 15 Because all the idols of the nations they reckoned as gods; Which have neither the use of eyes for seeing, Nor nostrils for drawing breath, Nor ears to hear, Nor fingers for handling, And their feet are helpless for walking. 16 For.a man it was that made them, And one whose own spirit is borrowed moulded them ; For no one hath power, dezvg a man, to mould a god like unto himself, 17 But, being mortal, he maketh a dead thing with lawless hands ; For he is better than the things he worshippeth ; Of the two, he indeed had life, but they never.
= 8. the soul which was lent him. This idea is repeated in v. 16, and must therefore be taken as a settled con-
viction of the writer. Whether in his mind it included the idea of pre-existence, it is perhaps difficult to say ; it is, however, far less definite than the statement in viii. 20, “1 came into a body undefiled,’ and it is immediately, followed by words in τ΄. 11 which are apparently inconsistent with pre-existence. From ψυχή here and πνεῦμα in v. 16 it appears that they were to our author only different names for the same thing. This shows without any elaborate argument that there is no trichotomy intended in v. I1.
9. he rivals. The clay idols were glazed and gilded. ‘
10. For the connexion of this verse with LXX see Introd., p. 524. The word ‘ashes’ in Isa. xliv. 20, on which this passage is based, means that which is worthless. Cf. Job xiii. 12, ‘Your memorable sayings are proverbs of ashes.’ The words are a rhetorical statement that the whole being of the idolater is inferior to the clay he uses, though in v. 17 the opposite statement is made.
_ 11. That the soul and spirit are here the same, cf. second part of note on v. 8. On the subject see the long and interesting note of Lightfoot on 1 Thess. v. 23 (JVotes on Epistles of S. Paul).
12. a gainful fair. This comparison is traced by Grimm to Pythagoras, who said τὸν βίον ἐοικέναι πανηγύρει (Dio. Laert. vili. 1.6). Cicero (¢# Tusc. Disp. v. 359) and other writers quote the saying. As the comparison was evidently ell Engen; we cannot from its use here deduce any direct acquaintanceship by the author with the system of >vthagoras.
gain. The commentators quote the well-known passage of Horace, ‘rem facias, rem. Si possis recte, si non,
15. It was a characteristic of heathen worshippers that they admitted the reality of the gods of other nations. This was natural enough to people who were not Monotheists. The Hebrews themselves before they were Monotheists acknowledged the existence of other gods besides Jahveh. Solomon recognized the gods of his foreign wives (1 Kings xi. 1-8). But the Egyptians went further than this. ‘The Egyptian gods during the flourishing period of the country’s history were not exclusive. They admitted into their number such of the gods of neighbouring peoples as had been found to be powerful and capable of resistance ’’ (Wiedemann, p. 186 of Hastings’ DB, extra vol.).
17. Of the two. R. V.‘Forasmuch as’, reading ἀνθ᾽ ὧν with 8. All other MSS. ὧν, except 157 and 253, which omit. For the disappearance of the dual see Thackeray, Gr. of O.T7., p. 22.
The Egyptians worshipped irrational and unclean animals and were therefore punished by means of them. Small animals, vis. quails, benefited the Israelites.
18 Yea, and the creatures that are most hateful do they worship, For, being compared as to want of sense, these are worse than all others ; 19 Neither, as seen beside other creatures, are they beautiful, so that one should desire them, But are outcasts from the praise of God and his blessing. 16 τ For this cause were these men worthily punished through creatures like those which they worship, And tormented through a multitude of vermin. 2 Instead of which punishment, thou, bestowing benefits on thy people, Preparedst quails for food, Food of rare taste, for the desire of their appetite ; 3 In order that thine enemies, when they desired to eat, Might for the hideousness of the creatures sent among them Loathe even the necessary food ; But these ¢hy people, having for a short space suffered want, Might even partake of food of rare taste. 4 For it was needful that upon those tyrants inexorable want should come, But that to these it should only be showed how their enemies were tormented.
Tt ts true the Israelites had serpents sent against them, but that was for admonition.
5 For even when terrible raging of wild beasts came upon thy people, And they were perishing by the bites of crooked serpents, Thy wrath continued not to the uttermost ; 6 But for admonition were they troubled for a short space, Having a token of salvation, To put them in remembrance of the commandment of thy law : 7 For he that turned toward it was not saved by that which he saw, But by thee, the Saviour of all. 8 Yea, and in this didst thou convince our enemies, That thou art he that delivereth out of every evil. g For them verily the bites of locusts and flies did slay, And there was not found a healing for their life, Because they were worthy to be punished by such as ¢hese ; τὸ But thy sons not the very teeth of venomous dragons overcame, For thy mercy came to their help, and healed them. τ For they were bitten, that they should remember thine oracles ; And were quickly saved, lest, falling into deep forgetfulness, _| They should be irresponsive to thy beneficence : 12 For of a truth neither herb nor mollifying plaister restored them to health, 5 But thy word, O Lord, which healeth all things ; 13 For thou hast power over life and death, And thou leadest down to the gates of Hades, and leadest up again. 4 But though a man caw slay by his wickedness, | Yet the spirit that is gone forth he bringeth not back, Neither giveth release to the soul that Hades hath received.
194. The writer probably considered that other animals besides the serpent were included in the curse of Gen. iii. 14: _ || possibly all the creeping animals.
XVI. 3. hideousness, εἰδέχθειαν. This reading, a hapax legomenon, is generally accepted. It is given by C, some Cursives, including 248, and the Syro-Hexaplar version. de.x@eirav is given by δὲ B A, Complu., Latin, Syr., and some cursives. εἰδέχθειαν is accepted by most editors as referring to the frogs in the ovens and kneading-troughs, Exod. Vili. 3. ἢ
3¢..food. Literally, ‘appetite.’ As for the quails see note on xix. 12. nen ; :
6. The allegory here is not so thoroughgoing as in xvi. 17. There Wisdom is identified with the cloud : here the Serpent is a σύμβολον. Philo suggests that the serpent was chosen as a symbol of σωφροσύνη and καρτερία.
token. WN and A read σύμβουλον, ‘ counsellor ’. :
11. irresponsive, a paraphrase of ἀπερίσπαστος, ‘ unconcerned about’. R.V. ‘unable to be roused by’. 23 (V) and 253 read ἀπερίστατοι, ‘destitute of’. F τς 12. thy word. Cf. Ps. cvii. 20, ‘ He sent his word, and healed them.’ See on xvili. 15.
How the Egyptians were punished by fire and the Israelites benefited.
15 But thy hand it is not possible to escape ; 16 For the ungodly, refusing to know thee, were scourged by the strength of thine arm, Pursued with strange rains and hails and showers inexorable, And utterly consumed with fire ; 17 For, what was most marvellous of all, In the water which quencheth all things the fire wrought yet more mightily ; For the world fighteth for the righteous. 18 For at one time the flame lost its fierceness, That it might not burn up the creatures sent against the ungodly, But that ¢hese might see and perceive that they were pursued by the judgement of God: το And at another time even in the midst of water it burns beyond the power of fire, That it may destroy the fruits of an unrighteous land. 20 Instead whereof thou gavest thy people angels’ food to eat, And bread ready for wse didst thou provide from heaven without ¢ezr toil, Bread having the virtue of every pleasant savour, And agreeing to every taste ; 21 For thy substance manifested thy sweetness toward //y children, Ministering to the desire of the eater, And transforming itself according to every man’s choice. 22 But snow and ice endured fire, and melted not, That men might know that fire was destroying the fruits of the enemies, Burning in the hail and flashing in the rains; 23 And that this e/ement again, in order that righteous men might be nourished, Had even forgotten its power. 24 For the creation, ministering to thee its maker, Straineth its force against the unrighteous, for punishment, And slackeneth it in behalf of them that trust in thee, for beneficence. 2s Therefore at that time also, converting itself into all forms, It ministered to thine all-nourishing bounty, According to the desire of them that made supplication ; 26 [hat thy sons, whom thou lovedst, O Lord, might learn
16 ff. Hail was rained down upon the Egyptians, but (v. 20) manna upon the Israelites.
strange rains. Rain is unusual in Egypt, see Deut. xi. lo. ‘It is only the parts along the sea-coasts that are
ever moistened with a few drops of rain’ (Philo, Vita Mos. i. 20).
17. Philo (11. Mos. i. 20) notices this ‘ miracle within a miracle’. The lightning and the thunderbolts penetrated
and descended through the hail, still they did not melt it nor were the flashes extinguished by it.
18. that these—and they alone: even the animals that formerly plagued them miraculously escaped. The writer
has forgotten that the frogs are said to have been swept away by an east wind. 19. fruits, γένημα. A new κοινή formation distinguished from γέννημα, ‘ offspring ’, see Thackeray, Gvavz., p. 118. 20. provide. Reading παρέσχες A CYi4 Latin, and Syriac. ἐπέμψας B.
agreeing to every taste. This idea is found in the Talmud, Yoma 75, where it is said, “Just as a child at the breast enjoys various flavours, so did the Israelites when they ate the manna find therein various flavours.’ Doyo m2 12 prsvo im poow Syneew ior ba yon AN ὈΟΡῸ ADD ΠᾺ Oy pn At Iw AD. This fancy no doubt existed in the author’s time, and he desired to explain it by the doctrine of the metabolism of the elements
mentioned in the next note.
21. substance, Greek ὑπόστασις. This word has caused great difficulty. Early scholars proposed emendations;
A.V. gives ‘sustenance’, and 248 altered gov into αὐτοῦ. It has been made equivalent to the Logos, and the R. V. translates it by ‘thy nature’. It seems probable, however, that the writer was thinking of nothing more than the
common substance which according to the Stoics underlay all four elements. As pointed out in the next note, he —
makes use of the doctrine of the metabolism of the elements to account for the manna being transformed to suit every
taste. Here he goes back in thought to what the manna was before it assumed the attributes or accidents which | differentiated it from other objects. The technical terms among the Stoics for substance and attribute were τὸ ὑποκείμενον or οὐσία and τὸ ποιόν (Zeller, Stozcs, p.97). The steps of the process were (1) ὑπόστασις, (2) manna, (3) transformation. —
transforming itself. The author here gives a metaphysical basis to the events mentioned in v. 20 by the Stoic doctrine of the interchange of the four elements. Heraclitus first, and the Stoics after him, taught that the elements changed into one another by condensation and rarefaction, πύκνωσις and μάνωσις. See Dio. Laert. ix. 8, quoted in
Ritter and Preller, ὃ 36, for Heraclitus (Heraclitus recognized only three elements) ; and for the Stoics, Ritter and
Preller, ὃ 497, and Zeller, S¢oics, &c., pp. 131 ff. See also the quotation from Philo given in the note on xix. 18. 22. snow and ice, i.e, the manna. See xix. 21. F 23. might be nourished. See Num. xi. 8, where the manna is said to have been capable of being baked in the
oven, though it melted before the sun.
24. Straineth...slackeneth. In addition to the interchange of the four elements with one another, the power of
a single element—here in vv. 22 and 27 fire—could be increased or moderated.
eh fo eas
pete ἴα. μα
dite
That not the growth of carth’s fruits do nourish a man, But thy word which preserveth them that trust thee.
27 For that which could not be injured by fire, Simply warmed by a faint sunbeam melted away ;
28 To make known that we must rise before the sun to give thee thanks, And must plead with thee at the dawning of the light:
29 For the hope of the unthankful shall melt as the winter’s hoar-frost, And shall flow away as water that hath no use.
The plague of darkness.
17 τ For great are thy judgements, and hard to interpret ;
Therefore souls undisciplined went astray.
2 For when lawless men supposed they had overpowered a holy nation,
They themselves, prisoners of darkness, and bound in the fetters of a long night, Close kept beneath their roofs,
Lay exiled from the eternal providence. 3 For while they thought that they were unseen in ¢hezr secret sins, They were scattered one from another by a dark curtain of forgetfulness, Stricken with terrible awe, and sore troubled by spectral forms. 4 For neither did the recesses that held them guard them from fears, But sounds rushing down rang around them, And phantoms appeared, cheerless with unsmiling faces. 5 And no force of fire prevailed to give them light, Neither could the brightest flames of the stars illumine that gloomy night : 6 But there appeared to them only the glimmering of a fire self-kindled, full of fear; And in terror at that sight on which they could not gaze They deemed the appearance To be worse than it really was ; 7 And the mockeries of magic art lay low, And shameful was the rebuke of their boasted knowledge : 8 For they that promised to drive away terrors and troubles from sick souls _ Were sick themselves with fear worthy of laughter: 9 For though no troublous thing affrighted them,
Io Yet, scared with the creepings of vermin and hissings of serpents, they perished for very trembling,
Refusing even to look on the air, which could on no side be escaped.
) 11 For wickedness in itself is a coward thing, and witnesseth its own condemnation,
27. by fire, i.e. the manna in the oven.
28. Several scholars have maintained that ‘Wisdom’ was written by a member of the Therapeutae, and have
appealed to this passage as well as to iii. 13, 14, iv. 8, and viii. 28. Grimm, however, shows that the habit of prayer before sunrise was a Jewish practice.
XVII. 3. secret sins. The writer appears to attribute to the ancient Egyptians the mystery cults of his own time. He seems to picture some of them as engaged in their worship and suddenly scattered. It is true, he says in v. 16, every man remained in the place where he was ; but, as he also says in xix. 17 that they tried to grope their way to their houses, it is plain that rigid consistency is not to be looked for in details due solely to the imagination of the writer, hence the literal translation ‘ scattered ’—R. V. margin—is best. A and C read ἐσκοτίσθησαν. The description is a good example of the Jewish haggadic method of treating history.
4. rushing down. Reading δὲ καταράσσοντες with B#> A C and Latin descendens. Feldmann prefers δ᾽ ἐκταράσσοντες, the reading of Β΄. δὲ has ταράσσοντες, and so affords no help. If the more difficult reading is to be preferred that in the text—R. V. and Mr. Gregg— should be taken.
6. And in terror, &c. ‘The form of expression is too obscure to be understood with certainty’ (Farrar). If, however, we take ὄψις and ra βλεπύμενα to refer to the same thing, viz. the self-kindled fire, a good meaning can be obtained. The Egyptians did not or could not gaze directly upon the fire, but for all that could not avoid seeing it, and consequently were more terrified than they would have been had they deliberately looked at it. The endeavours of timid people to avoid seeing the flashes of lightning in a storm may be compared.
7. Reading κατέκειτο with δὲ B and Latin, as against the plural in AC and 248, The plural is no doubt the more difficult reading, and is perhaps supported by καταγέλαστον in 84. It is accepted by R.V. ; but it is difficult to believe that a Jew would call the punishment sent by God μαγικὴ τέχνη. The R.V. gives ‘and they lay /e/pless, made the sport of magic art’.
10. the air. The ancients considered the natural colour of the air to be dark—taxw6os (Philo, Vita Jos. ill. 6 and 12). They shut their eyes so as not to look on the blackness of the air which surrounded them, ;
11. in itself. Reading ἰδίως δὲ A B and Latin, not ἰδίῳ 8* and Comp. followed by Grimm and R.V. ἴδιος is used nine other times in this part of the book, and is never separated from the word it qualifies. This is upheld by Feldmann. The origin of the mistake was doubtless the itacism in δὲ and A, which both give μάρτυρι for paprupet. See Thackeray,
And, being pressed hard by conscience, always forecasteth the worst : 12 For fear is naught but a surrender of the succours which reason offereth ; 13 And when from within the heart the expectation thereof is o’erthrown It reckons its ignorance worse than the cause that bringeth the torment. 14 But they, all through the night, which in truth was powerless And which came upon them out of the recesses of powerless Hades, All sleeping the same sleep, 15 Now were haunted by monstrous apparitions, And now were paralysed by their soul’s surrender ; For fear sudden and unlooked for came upon them. 16 So then each and every man sinking down in his place Was shut up in ward in that prison which was barred not with iron: 17 For whether he were husbandman, or shepherd, Or a labourer whose toils were in the wilderness, He was overtaken, and endured that inevitable necessity, For with one chain of darkness were they all bound. 18 Whether there were a whistling wind, Or a melodious noise of birds among the spreading branches, Or a measured fall of water running violently, 19 Or a harsh crashing of rocks hurled down, Or the swift course of animals bounding along unseen, Or the voice of wild beasts harshly roaring, Or an echo rebounding from the hollows of the mountains, All these things paralysed them with terror. 20 For the whole world desde was enlightened with clear light, And was occupied with unhindered works ; 21 While over them alone was spread a heavy night, An image of the darkness that should afterward receive them ; But yet heavier than darkness were they unto themselves. 1 But for thy holy ones there was great light ; And the Egyptians, hearing their voice but seeing not their form, Envied them because they had not suffered, 2 And because they do not harm them zozw, though wronged by them before, are thankful ; And for their former hostility besought their pardon. 3 Whereas thou didst provide for thy people a burning pillar of fire, To be a guide for ¢he¢y unknown journey, And withal a kindly sun for heir proud exile. a 4 For well did the Egyptians deserve the loss of light and imprisonment in darkness, They who had kept in close ward thy sons, Through whom the incorruptible light of the law was to be given to the race of men.
conscience. This is the first mention of conscience in the Scriptures. It is here regarded as the higher self, after the manner of Philo (see Drummond, Phz/o, ii, pp. 124 and 295). forecasteth. Reading προείληφε with N* and Latin praesumit instead of προσείληφε with δὲ A B C, which is accepted by Prof. Margoliouth and translated ‘ always increaseth its hardships’. In spite of the manuscript evidence all editors read προείληφε. According to Feldmann the Armenian and Coptic versions uphold it. | 17. in the wilderness, κατ᾽ ἐρημίαν, a Hebraism due to the LXX using ἔρημος to translate 12712, the place where cattle are driven for pasture ; not a wilderness in our sense of the word. | 18. The birds are made to sing in the darkness, and in v. 20 the writer says the whole world besides was in light. It has therefore been suggested that he thought of a subjective darkness, which would, of course, simply be blindness. But v. 10 is against this, and in xix.17 he distinguishes between the blindness of the men of Sodom and the ‘ yawning darkness’ which encompassed the Egyptians. ; 21. spread. ἐπέτατο BA, ἐπέκειτο δὲ, ἐπετέτακτο 254. The right form is doubtless ἐπετέτατο, which is printed in the Roman text apparently without manuscript authority. ae An image, ἄς. Mr. Thackeray, 77:5, vol. vi, p. 232, thinks that this line may be a Christian interpolation. | The repetition of σκότους locks suspicious. a
XVIII. 1. not suffered. Grimm, Siegfried, Farrar, Gregg, all agree in reading οὐ with A and Latin, instead of οὖν, Sand B. Grimm’s explanation that οὐ was altered into οὖν by a scribe who took κἀκεῖνοι to refer to the Egyptians fully justifies the rejection of οὖν, though it is better supported by manuscript evidence. Deane, following Gutberlet, takes or and οὖν together = ‘ whatsoever they also had suffered (before), they (the Egyptians) counted them happy’. This 15. accepted by Feldmann and Stevenson. 7
4. Through whom, &c. Cf. Test. of Twelve Pat. Levi xiv. 4: ‘The light of the law which was given to lighten every man.’ "
The Egyptians counsel death against the Israelites, but are slain themselves.
5 After they had taken counsel to slay the babes of the holy ones, yAnd when a single child had been cast forth and saved, To punish them thou didst take away a multitude of their children, And destroyedst all ¢ezr host together in a mighty flood. 6 Of that night were our fathers made aware beforehand, That, having sure knowledge, they might be cheered by the oaths which they had trusted :
7 So by thy people was expected the salvation of the righteous and destruction of the enemies ; 8 For as thou didst take vengeance on the adversaries,
By the same act thou didst glorify us, and call us unto thyself. 9 For holy children of good men offered sacrifice in secret,
And with one consent took upon themselves the covenant of the divine law— That the saints would partake alike in the same blessings and perils— Singing the while the fathers’ songs of praise.
το But there sounded back in discord the cry of the enemies, And a piteous voice of lamentation for children was borne abroad.
τι And servant along with master punished with a like just doom, And commoner suffering the same as king,
Παρ Yea, all the people together, under one form of death,
Had wth them corpses without number ;
For the living were not sufficient even to bury them,
Since at a single stroke their noblest offspring was destroyed.
13 For though they had disbelieved all things by reason of their enchantments,
Upon the destruction of the firstborn they confessed the people to be God’s son.
| 14 For while peaceful silence enwrapped all things,
And night in her swiftness was in mid course,
} 15 Thine all-powerful word leaped from heaven down from ¢e royal throne,
A stern warrior, into the midst of the doomed land, 16 Bearing as a sharp sword thine unfeigned commandment, | And standing filled all things with death ;
“A And while it touched the heaven it trode upon the earth. | 17 Then forthwith apparitions in terrible dreams troubled them, ἶ And fears came upon them unlooked for: F
18 And one thrown here half dead, another there, Declared the cause of his death: τ For the dreams, perturbing them, did foreshow this, That they might not perish without knowing why they were afflicted.
5. To punish them. Charles on Jub. xlviii. 14, p. Ixxiv, shows that «is ἔλεγχον must be taken as in the text. He would emend by deleting ‘ and saved’ in line 2 and ‘ of their children’ in line 3. He shows that πλῆθος is probably a mistaken rendering of 127, ‘a myriad’. The meaning then would be that for every single Hebrew child cast into
the Nile, ten thousand of the Egyptians were drowned. The passages here and in Jubilees are both based on a common tradition.
6. our fathers, i.e. the Patriarchs, as probably in v. 9. 9. divine law, reading θειότητος B A as against ὁσιότητος &, Latin, Syriac, and other versions. the saints, τοὺς ἁγίους. This is quite in accordance with the writer’s idealization of the Israelites. R.V. with Grimm and others would take τοὺς ἁγίους with aivous, ‘the sacred songs of praise’, but, as Mr. Gregg points out, the thythm of the Greek is against this. the fathers’, ἄς. The reading adopted in the text is that of R. V. margin, following δὰ A, Complut., the Latin, and in all probability the Syriac. The writer attributes the custom of his own time—the singing of psalms at the Passover—to the Israelites at the Exodus. R.V. translates ‘the fathers already leading’, &c., reading προαναμελπόντων with B.
12. noblest, R. V. ‘nobler’. For this rendering of the comparative, see Thackeray, Gram. of O. T. in Gk., p. 181.
14. her swiftness. ἴδιος is here plainly used in its ‘exhausted’ meaning, see note on x. I.
15. Thine all-powerful word. Eichhorn, p. 158, and Gfrérer, p. 236, affirm this passage to show a pre-philonian use of the Philonic Logos. But in view of xvi. 12, which is plainly based on Ps. cvii. 20, and the Jewish complexion ἡ of this part of the book, it seems better with Grimm to take it as founded on O. T, usage (cf. Hos. vi. 5 LXX, 1 slew } them by the word of my mouth’; Jer. xxiii. 29, ‘Is not my word like a fire? saith the Lord ; and like a hammer that
breaketh the rock in pieces?’; Ps. cxlvii. 29, ‘His word runneth very swiftly’), though undoubtedly it differs from | these passages in a far stronger personification. In 1 Chron. xxi. 16, which the writer may have had in his mind, the | destroying angel is said to stand between heaven and earth. ᾿ 16. unfeigned, ἀνυπόκριτος. The command was meant to be executed. It was no empty threat, feigned to terrify. | 17. terrible dreams. The textual evidence for ὀνείρων δεινῶν is δὲ A, several cursives, Comp., and all the versions. B alone reads δεινῶς which R. V. renders. 19. The revelation by dreams to those about to be punished may be compared with the dream of Nebuchadnezzar,
The Israelites also experienced the punishment of death, but the plague was stayed by the zntercesston of Aaron.
20 But it befell the righteous also to experience death, And a multitude were stricken in the wilderness : Howbeit the wrath endured not for long. 21 For a blameless man hasted to be their champion: Bringing the weapon of his ministry, Even prayer and the propitiation of incense, He withstood the indignation, and put an end to the calamity, Showing that he was thy servant. 22 And he overcame the anger, Not by strength of body, not by power of weapons ; But by word did he subdue the minister of punishment, By bringing to remembrance oaths and covenants made with the fathers. 23 For when the dead were already fallen in heaps one upon another, Standing between he stopped the advancing wrath, And cut off its access to the living. 24 For upon “zs long high-priestly robe was the whole world pictured, And the glories of the fathers weve upon the graving of the four rows of precious stones, And thy majesty was upon the diadem of his head. 25 To these the destroyer gave way, and these he feared ; For the mere proof of the wrath was enough.
But there was nothing to stay death in the case of the Egyptians.
19 x But upon the ungodly there came pitiless wrath to the uttermost ; For what they would do He knew before, 2 How that, having pressed them to be gone, And having speeded them eagerly on their way, They would repent themselves and pursue them. 3 For while they were yet in the midst of their mourning, And making lamentation at the graves of the dead, They adopted another counsel of folly, And pursued as fugitives those whom with intreaties they had cast out. 4 For the doom they deserved was dragging them unto this end, And made them forget what things had befallen them, That they might fill up the punishment yet lacking to their torments, 5 And that thy people might journey by a marvellous road, But they ¢hemselves might find a strange death.
Dan. ii. E. Pfleiderer would see the influence of the Stoics here, and they certainly laid stress on the prophecies of ¥ } the dying (Zeller, Stozcs, p. 355, note 6). ΠῚ] 21. Aaron, see Num. xvi. 47. 22. anger. Reading χύλον for ὄχλον, which gives no sense. So all editors (except Gutberlet and Deane), following | Bauermeister. al 24. the whole world. This is explained by passages in Philo, Vzta Mos. iii. 12 and 13, where we learn that the high priest’s robe and its adornments represented the κόσμος. The robe itself was blue, or rather dark purple (ὑάκινθος), and represented the air. The flowers on it symbolized the earth, and the pomegranates water, and (in c. xiii) 7 the scarlet dye of the robe is the emblem of fire. The writer is thus able to get in another illustration of the idea found in v. 17, 20, xvi. 17, 24, and xix. 6, that ‘ the world fighteth for the righteous’. | 25. he feared. ἐφοβήθη is supported by N® A, some cursives, including 248, the Comp. and Latin. Itisaccepted by Grimm, Siegfried, Feldmann, and Deane. ἐφοβήθησαν is supported by N* BC, some cursives, and Syr., and is adopted by R.V. and Mr. Gregg. Against the plural it may be urged that (1) the subject ‘the people’ has to be supplied, and (2) there seems to be no reason why the people should have feared the holy garments of the high priest. —
XIX. 2. pressed, ἐπιστρέψαντες. R.V. ‘changed their minds to let thy people go’. For the rendering here adopted _ see Jebb’s note on Soph. 7rach. 1182, where he says of ἐπιστρέφω, ‘the primary notion is that of turning some constraining force upon a person.’ 1
3. adopted. R.V. ‘drew upon themselves’. For similar uses of the word in the sense here given see Liddell and Scott under ἐπισπάω, mid. -
cast out, ἐξέβαλον. Probably a reminiscence of ἐκβάλλω, Exod. xi. 1 and xii. 33.
Creation fought for the chosen people,
6 For the whole creation in its several kind was fashioned again anew, Performing their several commands, That thy servants might be guarded free from hurt. 7 Then was beheld the cloud that shadowed the camp, And dry land rising up out of what before was water, Out of the Red sea an unhindered highway, And a grassy plain out of the violent surge ; 8 Through which they passed with all their hosts, These that were covered with thy hand, Having beheld strange marvels. 9 For like horses they roamed at large, And they skipped about like lambs, Praising thee, O Lord, who delivered them. ΟΠ τὸ For they still remembered what came to pass in the time of their sojourn, How instead of bearing cattle the land brought forth lice, And instead of fish the river cast up a multitude of frogs. 11 But afterwards they saw also a new race of birds, When, led on by desire, they asked for luxurious dainties ; | 12 For, to solace them, there came up for them quails from the sea.
And against the Egyptians.
13 And upon the sinners came the punishments Not without tokens given beforehand by the force of thunders ;
| For justly did they suffer through their own exceeding wickednesses,
iq For grievous indeed was the hatred which they practised toward guests. _ | 14 For whereas certain men received not strangers who came among them, 7 These made slaves of guests who were their benefactors.
15 And not only so, du¢ God shall visit the former after another sort, Since they received as enemies them that were aliens ; 16 Whereas these first welcomed with feastings, And ¢hen afflicted with dreadful toils, Them that had already shared wz them in the same rights. 17 And they too were stricken with loss of sight (Even as those others at the righteous man’s doors), When, being compassed about with yawning darkness, They sought every one the passage through his own door.
6. fashioned again. The writer again refers to the philosophical doctrine of the transmutation of the elements into one another ; see xvi. 21 and xix. 18. Bois (p. 270) calls this ‘a second edition of the Creation’.
12. The writer omits all mention of the murmuring of the Israelites. So does Philo, Vita Mos. i. 37, ‘the Hebrews... enjoyed the most exquisite meat, varying their food with this necessary and delicious addition.’ Philo takes it that the supply of quails was as regular as that of the manna.
13. beforehand. Josephus, 4v/. ii. 16, records the tradition that the overthrow of the Egyptians in the Red Sea was accompanied by a violent storm. Our author has perhaps slightly altered the tradition, though the reading is not absolutely certain, γεγονότων B, προγεγονότων 8 A C Latin and Syriac. The tradition is probably founded on the poetry
own, ἴδιος, strengthened by αὐτῶν, is most probably emphatic. Grimm would make it very emphatic: their own extraordinary and peculiar wickedness.
14. certain men, i.e. men of Sodom.
15. The punishment, ἐπισκοπή, of the men of Sodom is to be lighter than that of the Egyptians. When is this ἐπισκοπή to take place? Grimm thinks in the Messianic age, or rather perhaps at the world judgement preceding it. This is the only certain reference in this part of the book to future retribution. In the earliest section of 1 Enoch there are different gradations of punishment for the wicked in Sheol (Charles, Eschatology, p.188). The text is that of R.V., which is conjectural. Swete gives καὶ οὐ μόνον, ἀλλ᾽ ἢ τις ἐπισκοπὴ ἔσται αὐτῶν, which means ‘and not only so, but assuredly a certain kind of visitation, i.e. deliverance, shall be theirs’. But the author would not be likely to entertain any idea of a deliverance of the Sodomites, and to weaken the word ἐπισκοπή to mean ‘consideration’, ‘ allowance’, is without justification. We can, dividing the words of B differently from Swete, read ἄλλη τις ἐπισκοπή = ‘ another kind of punishment’, but as after οὐ μόνον, ἀλλά is necessary, and the Latin gives ‘sed et alius quidam respectus’, R. V. is probably right in seeing an instance of haplography in B and adopting the emendation of Grabe, ἀλλ᾽ ἄλλη τις ἐπισκοπὴ.
The marvels explained by the theory of the transmutation of the elements.
18 For the elements changed their order one with another, Just as the notes of a psaltery vary the character of the rhythm, Continuing always the same, each in its several sound ; As may clearly be divined from the sight of what came to pass. 19 For creatures of dry land were turned into creatures of waters, And creatures that swim trode zozw upon the earth : 20 Fire kept the mastery of its own power in ¢he midst of water, And water forgat its quenching nature : 21 Contrariwise, flames wasted not the flesh of perishable creatures that walked among them ; Neither melted they the ice-like grains of ambrosial food, that were of zatwre apt to melt. 22 For in all things, O Lord, thou didst magnify thy people, And thou didst glorify them and not lightly esteem them ; Standing by their side in every time and place.
ee ΜΡ eee ee eT ΒΘ
nate
18. i.e. God deals with the elements as a musician handles his instrument. He arranges and rearranges them to produce the required results (Bois, pp. 410 ff.). Cf. Philo, Vt. Mos. i. 17, ‘For all the elements of the universe, earth, water, air, and fire, of which the world was made, were all brought into a state of hostility against them, so that the country of those impious men was destroyed to exhibit the height of the authority which God wielded, who had fashioned those same elements at the creation of the universe so as to secure its safety, and who could change them all whenever he pleased to effect the destruction of impious men.’
Continuing. μένοντα is neuter, agreeing grammatically with στοιχεῖα, but the sense shows that it should agree with φθόγγοι.
22. Contrast this verse with ix. 18, ‘Through wisdom were they saved’; with x. 9, ‘ But wisdom delivered out of troubles those that waited on her’; and xi. 1, ‘ She (wisdom) prospered their works by the hand of a holy prophet.’ The point of view has certainly changed, if not the writer.
Seer ey Seale Oo ΤΥ ee
ieee
pes tg
ADS I
aera
“ΠΕ bOO ΘΕ BAR ΕΗ OR 1 BARUCH
$1. SHORT ACCOUNT OF THE ΒΟΟΚ.
THE Book of Baruch, of which the Greek version is found in all our editions of the LX.X, forms one of a series of writings to which the name of Jeremiah’s secretary is attached. Brief characterizations of these will be found in Charles’s Apocalypse of Baruch, Introd., § 2 (p. xvi f.).
As will be shown in the sequel the tragic events of 597 (586) B.c., which heralded the exile, constitute a thin historic drapery which invests the yet greater tragedy of the Jewish race in A. D. 70. It is now generally accepted by recent critics that Nebuchadnezzar (Nabuchodonosor) and Belshazzar (Baltasar) represent the persons of Vespasian and Titus. Other corresponding traits between the Babylonian conquest here portrayed and the Roman conquest will reveal themselves to further scrutiny. Among alternative solutions which have been propounded from the days of Griineberg (1797) to those of Ewald, Kneucker, and Schiirer, none will be found to satisfy the conditions of the problem so well as that which we have just indicated (substantially that of Kneucker and Schiirer).
§ 2. CONTENTS.
The contents may be briefly summarized as follows:
I. Ch. i. 1-14. Baruch wrote the words of this book in the fifth year and read them over to Jechonias and his fellow exiles in Babylon. These wept, made a money collection, and sent it to the High Priest in Jerusalem with a message that it was intended for the purchase of offerings on the altar, and also with a request for prayer on behalf of Nebuchadnezzar and his son, whom they desire loyally to obey, as well as on their own behalf, who have sinned against God. This book of confession of sin shall be read on the feast-day in God’s house.
II. i. 15-ili. 8. The confession immediately follows. God is just. Their punishment is the result of sin and disobedience (i. 15-ii. 12). To this there follows a prayer for Divine mercy (ii. 13-iii. 8. God’s previous utterances through Jeremiah are recalled, especially His command to serve the king of Babylon. Disobedience to this command has brought calamities on Israel and the destruction of the Jerusalem temple (ii. 21-26). Divine assurances follow that captivity will bring with it repentance and a final restoration to and rule over Palestine (ii. 27-35). This section closes with a cry to God not to remember Israel’s past iniquities (iii. 1-8).
III. In the rest of the book we pass from the prose of the previous portion to poetry.
(a) iii. g-iv. 4). Here, in the style of Hebrew Wisdom literature, we have the praise of God’s laws of life. Neglect of them is the cause of Israel's calamities and exile. Learn, therefore, where wisdom is to be found (iv. g-14). Not among the great and powerful rulers has it been found, nor even have those who are reputed wise discovered it (iii. 15-28). No one has found it in heaven or earth, but God, the all-wise Creator, alone is in possession of it, and has bestowed it on Jacob—the Law of God which is eternal and leads to life (iii. 2g-iv. 1). This section concludes with a brief exhortation to Jacob to lay hold of Wisdom and walk in its light, and not to surrender the honour of this unique possession to any other.
; (ὁ) From this song of exhortation to Israel we pass to another of very different character : | Strains of lamentation and comfort in the style of the Deutero-Isaiah (iv. 5-v. 9): ‘Be comforted’
| is the recurring refrain (iv. 5, 21, 27, 30) addressed (i) by Jerusalem to her children (iv. 5-29). ‘Ye have been sold among the heathen, yet not to be destroyed. You have been surrendered to the enemy because you have angered God by past transgressions’ (iv. 5-9). There follows a lamentation over the banishment of her children, and their harsh treatment at the hands of foreigners (iv. 10-17). ‘But God, who has brought calamity, will also bring deliverance. I indeed trust in God for your salvation. Bear God’s wrath in patience. You shall soon behold your enemy’s destruction and set your foot on his neck. Joy shall come in place of sorrow’ (iv. 18-29). (ii) God’s word of comfort to Jerusalem (iv. 30-v. 9). Calamities are denounced against those cities that rejoiced at her fall. Fire shall come upon them. They shall be the habitation of demons. Jerusalem is exhorted to lift up her eyes and behold her children flocking to her from East and West, to divest herself of her
garment of sorrow and array herself with a robe of salvation and a tiara of glory. Her enemies shall bring her children back to her. Mountain and hill shall be made low and valleys filled that Israel may return. Woods and fragrant trees shall yield their shade to Israel, whom God shall bring back in joy.
§ 3. COMPOSITE CHARACTER.
The composite character of the treatise is evident from the preceding survey. The prose section comprised in I and II stands zz marked contrast with both the poetical sections in IXI (a) and (6). (1) in contents. The prose section is a confession of sin and a recognition that Israel’s calamities and exile are the penalty for Israel’s sins of disobedience. These will bring about repentance. It concludes with a cry for Divine mercy. On the other hand III (a), which is poetic in form, is based on a different conception. Here Israel’s calamities are due to his neglect of Divine law regarded as Wisdom. This Wisdom, which belongs to God alone, He has bestowed on Israel as his precious privilege. Israel is exhorted to lay hold of it as the only means of safety. The contrast with III (6) is still more marked. We note the different attitude adopted towards Israel’s conquerors. In i. 11, 12 Israel is exhorted to offer prayer on behalf of Nebuchadnezzar and his son, ‘and the Lord will give us strength, and lighten our eyes, and we shall live under the shadow of Nabuchodonosor king of Babylon, and under the shadow of Baltasar his son, and we shall serve them many days, and find favour in their sight.’ Here the tradition of Jeremiah and Ezekiel is followed (Jer. xxvii. 6-8, xxix. 4-7; Ezek. xxvi. 7-12, xxix. 17-20). So again, ii. 20-22, 24 ascribes the calamities which Israel suffered to his refusal to obey the prophetic injunction, ‘ Bow your shoulders to serve the king of Babylon, and remain in the land that I gave unto your fathers.’ But when we turn to III (Ὁ) the attitude towards Israel’s conquerors is that of embittered subjugation leading to revolt reflected in the literature of the late-exilian or early post-exilian period (Jer. 1, li; Isa. xlvii). ‘Thine enemy hath persecuted thee ; but shortly thou shalt see his destruction, and shalt tread upon their necks’ (iv. 25). The peoples who afflicted Israel and rejoiced in his fall, the cities where Israelites served in slavery, shall feel craven dread and grieve in their own desolation (iv. 31-33). (II) We note also great diversity w7th respect to the O.T. sources from which they respectively borrow. In ch. i. 11-1ii. 8 we have frequent citations from Jeremiah, Daniel, and Deuteronomy. Specially noteworthy is the repeated employment of whole clauses of Dan. ix. 7-19 in Baruch i. 15-ii. 17. On the other hand, the Wisdom section, iii. g-iv. 4, contains numerous borrowings from Proverbs, Job, Deutero-Isaiah, and Sir. xxiv. The last section (iv. 5--ν. 9) is very largely based on Deutero-Isaiah. The concluding portion is evidently inspired by Ps. of Sol. xi.
§ 4. CRITICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS.
\ We have arrived, therefore, at the following general result, viz. that in the Book of Baruch we have to deal with three distinct literary elements which possess all the signs of emanating from different hands. (A) A prose document to be found in ch. i. 1-iii. 8. (B) A poetical document of the character of Wisdom literature in ch. iii. g-iv. 4. (C) A further document of exhortation and comfort is added in iv. 5—v. 9. These we shall now consider separately.
(A) Difficulties beset us when we examine the opening verses of the book.
(i) In verse 2 the fifth year is the date assigned to the writing, and this is reckoned from the date when Jerusalem was captured and burnt (2 Kings xxv. 9; 2 Chron. xxxvi.19). This, we know, took place in the year 587-586 B.C. Accordingly Fritzsche, followed by Gifford (Apocrypha, ed. Wace), would identify the assigned date of the writing with 582 (583) B.c. This view, however, encounters difficulties. (4) The destruction of the temple in 587-586 B.c. hardly seems compatible with the offerings (burnt-offerings, sin-offerings, and incense) to be offered on the altar to which Baruch i. to makes reference. Accordingly Kneucker follows Eichhorn and other critics in dating the fifth year from the earlier capture of Jerusalem in 597 B.C. by Nebuchadnezzar, when Jehoiachin was made prisoner. Though the treasures of the temple and of the king’s palace were carried off (2 Kings xxiv. 13), as well as the officers, household, artisans and soldiers (verses 12, 14-16), both city and temple were left intact. This, of course, rids us of one difficulty. Moreover, 597 is the date from which Ezekiel reckons (i. 2, viii. 1, &c.). On the other hand, it stands in complete variance with the explicit statement in Baruch i. 2 (last clause). Kneucker | himself is aware of this contradiction (p. 16 NB). The difficulties which invest the alternative date 587-586 are far from insuperable. We learn in Jer. xli. 5 that offerings were made at the Jerusalem altar by men from Shechem and Shiloh after the temple had been destroyed. Therefore some form of cultus still persisted. (4) We have no evidence in Jeremiah or any other O. T. source that Baruch ever went to Babylonia. It is true that we have no personal details respecting Jeremiah’s companion and scribe after he accompanied the prophet to Egypt (Jer. xliii. 5, 6); nevertheless such negative
evidence contains no presumption against such a journey of Baruch to Babylonia and his residence there after 586 B.C. But in the presence of other features in Baruch i affecting its historic credibility it will be seen that this is a subject of minor significance.
(ii) Among these other features we note that Baltasar (who is called in Daniel Belshazzar or Belteshazzar) is spoken of as son of Nebuchadnezzar (Bar. i. 11, 12). This is in exact accordance with Dan. v. 2, 13, 18, 21, and is known to be due to historical confusion. The only Belshazzar known to the cuneiform documents is Bel-Sar-usur (‘Bel, protect the king’), son of Nabonidus (Nabtinaid), the last king of Babylon, overthrown by Cyrus.
(iil) The text of verse 2 is uncertain. The omission of the number or name of the month is strange. As is well known, months were designated by numbers (beginning from Nisan as the first month of the ecclesiastical or Babylonian calendar) in all exilian and post-exilian Hebrew documents.
(iv) The following verses hang very badly together. (a) After verse 1 we naturally expect that the words of the book will soon follow; instead of this, thirteen verses of narrative succeed. (0) Verse 4 has ail the appearance of a redactional prolongation of the final clause of the preceding verse. (c) Verse 8 (as Kneucker has clearly shown) stands out of its natural place. The subject of the sentence cannot be Joakim of the preceding verse, but is evidently Baruch who is last mentioned in verse 3. Moreover, verse 9 follows naturally after verse 7 rather than verse 8.
(B) The character of the document iii. g-iv. 4, as based on the Wisdom literature of the O. T. (Proverbs and Job) and containing a citation from Eccles. xxiv. 8, has been already indicated in δῷ 2, 3. It is a message of comfort and exhortation addressed mainly to the exiles who have long lived ‘in the enemies’ land’ (iii. 10), in other words, to the Jewish Diaspora. Their calamities are due to their abandonment of the fountain of Wisdom, the way of life revealed in the Torah. This amid all his losses Israel possesses as his priceless and eternal privilege conferred by God. Hold fast to it, and walk in its light, happy and secure.
This entire section has a unity of its own, and it is quite evident that this is the book to which Bar. i. 1, 3@ refers. These verses, therefore, form the adequate and natural preface. That verse 2 originally belonged to this preface is extremely improbable. It probably formed part of the introduction to the document A (ch. i. 2, 3 d-iii. 8). The reference to the destruction of Jerusalem by fire, i. 2 and ii. 26, points to this conclusion. A redactor united A and B. [{ is this combined work which we shall first consider. C will be considered later.
$5. A HEBREW ORIGINAL OF DOCUMENTS A AND B.
A considerable number of the older critics held that the original of the Book of Baruch was in Greek. This was the opinion of Grotius, Eichhorn, Bertholdt, Havernick, Keil, and Noldeke (in his Alttestamentliche Literatur, p. 214). But this view has been abandoned by recent scholars. Even De Wette, who for a time held to the former view, saw reason to forsake it, and adopted the theory of a Hebrew original in the fourth edition of his /xztrod. to the O. T. (German), p. 443. Similarly Reusch, Ewald, Hitzig (Die Psalmen, vol. ii, p. 119), Fritzsche (Exegetisches Handbuch zu den Apocryphen des A.T.—Special Introd. to Baruch, pp. 171 foll.),and more decisively Kneucker, who in his elaborate work, Das Buch Baruch (1879), unhesitatingly (in contrast with Fritzsche) assumes for the whole book a Hebrew original which he devotes the utmost pains to reconstruct. Schiirer, on the other hand, sustains the doubts of Fritzsche (zb7d., p. 172) as to the latter portion (iii. g-v. 9), with this difference that he decisively asserts that Greek and not Hebrew was its original form (Gesch. des jiid. Volkes im Zeitalter Christi®, iii, p. 340; PRE*, i, p. 642). Similarly Reuss and Hilgenfeld (in Zettsch. fiir wiss. Theol.). Bevan, in Enc. Bibl., inclines towards this view. Marshall (art. ‘Baruch’ in Hastings’s DB) propounds the ingenious theory that iii. g-iv. 4 was originally composed in Aramaic. ‘This view is based on a comparison of the Greek with the versions ’—the Peshitta [as Marshall assumes it to be], the Syr. reproduction of Origen’s Hexaplar, as well as the Vulg. Nine examples are given by Dr. Marshall, but the first of these, iii. 16,‘ peoples’ ᾿ς world ~ ‘is quite as easily explicable on a Hebrew basis poy and aby ; the second (iii. 18), which has more : attractiveness, might also be explained from two possible meanings of O°) in Hebrew. The meaning ‘fashion’ is probably late.and due to Aramaic influence. Cf. Gen. xiv. 19, 22; Ps.cxxxix. 13; Prov. viii. 22. In the ¢hird case (iii.19) we have the two renderings of 5 and S"** respectively of ἠφανίσθησαν, ‘they are vanished’ (R.V.), which Kneucker rightly holds to have reproduced the original Hebr. 728 ‘perished’. This Hebr. word is rendered by S \annw (the Ethpa.) ‘were corrupted’, hence ‘ perished’. Comp. the use of the Greek verb in Matt. vi. 19 f. (cf. Syr. where Pa. 5an is used) as well as in Attic Greek. On the other hand, S®°*- nnd, the Ethpeel, does not mean ‘sinned’ nor does it arise out of NNN ‘disappeared’. We constantly find we used for ‘ destroy’ (as well as ‘ sin’), and as the equivalent
of ἀφανίζω (in Exod. xii. 15; 2 Kings x. 28; Ezek. xix. 7; Jer. 1.21, &c.), and its passive or Ethpe. as the rendering of ἀφανίζεσθαι, Ezek. xxv. 3; Job. xxii. 20 (cf. 2 Macc. xii. 22). Comp. other examples in Payne Smith’s Thesaur. Syr. In this case the S"°*: slavishly adheres to the Greek version. The fourth example (iii. 21) cited by Marshall, based on the diverse renderings, ‘laid hold’ and ‘cared for’, Iam not able to follow. The 555" reading is not 11¥ but 1x. The /fth (iii. 23), ‘remembered ’ and ‘ trod’, is due to a corruption of the Syriac translation (see notes) and therefore has no bearing on the question of the original. The szr7h (iii. 31) accounts for the Vulgate exgucrat by an Ethpeel form yan instead of xyi. But the Ethpe. form of this verb has no other than a passive meaning which can hardly be fitted into the structure of the clause and verse. The seventh example (iii. 34), ‘ their watches’, and the colourless Syr., ‘their places’, may be accounted for by the loose rendering of 5 or by the corruption of the Hebr. original suggested in the notes. The ezghth (iii. 37), ‘appeared’ . . . ‘was revealed’, might just as easily be explained as variant translations of a Hebr. original ΠΝ) (or nnbz3). In the general suspicion which regards the verse as a later Christian gloss, its evidential value counts for little. The xzzth example (iv. 5), ‘advantage’. . . ‘dignity’ (Vulg.), need not be dealt with, as it evidently possesses no cogency.
Nearly all living scholars, including Dr. Marshall, as well as Dr. Charles (in Encycl. Brit. (11th ed.)), are agreed that A (ch. i. 2, 3 6-iii. 8) was composed in Hebrew. For this there is strong evidence, and, in the opinion of the present writer, a fairly good case can be made for B (ch. i. 1, 3 ὦ,
(a) The strongly-marked Hebraisms of the Greek version have been long recognized as affording unmistakable indications of a Hebrew original, viz. ch. i. 10 μάννα (cf. Jer. xvii. 26, xli. 5), or, as we should properly read with Codd. 22, 33, 36, 48, &c., μαναά, is evidently the Greek mode of writing mm, Inthe same verse the formula περὶ ἁμαρτίας simply covers the Hebr. ΠΝ ΘΠ ‘sin-offering’, as Lev. v. 10, 11, vii. 37, &c., clearly prove. Other significant traces of a Hebrew original may be cited, viz. ii. 23 ἀπὸ ἐνοικούντων, Hebr. 224"); εἰ μήν, ‘surely’, arising out of εἰ μή, Hebr. 8? ἘΝ idiomatically used for strong asseverations (ii. 29); βόμβησις (2bzd.) for {27 ; "1 misread as‘ dead ’ in iii. 4. Still more significant are the frequently recurring relative constructions so characteristic of Hebrew. Thus in ἐπεκλήθη τὸ ὄνομά σου ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ dy ὙΦ SIP] WS naINS—. Comp. ii. 17,29. These relative constructions are obviously characteristic of prose rather than poetry in Hebrew, and therefore belong to the document A rather than B (ch. i. 1, 34, iii. giv. 4). In the latter, however, we have variants. in the Greek and Syr. renderings such as ‘ peoples’ and ‘ world’ (iii. 16), as well as iii. 18 ‘ workers’ in silver (LXX) and ‘those who gain’ silver (Syr.), included in Marshall’s list which can best be explained on the basis of a Hebraic original. Similarly iii. 11 ‘thou art counted with them that go. down into Hades’, iii. 14 ‘length of days’. iii. 18 ‘there is no searching (ἐξεύρεσις) of his works’ are all Hebrew phrases. In some cases, as will be shown in the notes, the Syr. version points the way more clearly to a Hebr. original. See also Kneucker, p. 25, but the list requires sifting.
(ὁ) So far at least as document A is concerned the hypothesis of a Hebr. original is rendered fairly certain by the marginal note which the Syro-Hexaplar version attaches to Bar. i. 17, ii. 3 ‘not recorded (dz. placed) in the Hebrew’ μεν LoS pro J. On the other hand, see Nestle in art. ‘Septuagint’ in Hastings s DB. iv. p. 450, footnote 7.
$6. THE GREEK ORIGINAL OF C (Bar. iv. 5-v. 9).
It is, however, quite otherwise with document C. This document is a unity, not a series of lays, as Rothstein argues. Here evidences accumulate that the original was in Greek.
(2) The strongest support for this view is to be found in the close parallels between the Greek of Ps. of Sol. xi and Bar. iv. 36-v. 9.
Baruch. Ps. of Sol. xi.
iv. 37 ἰδοὺ ἔρχονται ot viol σου. . . συνηγμένοι ἀπ᾽ 3 ἴδε τὰ τέκνα σου ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν καὶ δυσμῶν συνη- ἀνατολῶν ἕως δυσμῶν. γμένα.
V. I lepovoadyp . . . ἔνδυσαι τὴν εὐπρέπειαν τῆς παρὰ 8 ἔνδυσαι, *TepovoaAnp, τὰ ἱμάτια τῆς δόξης σου. τοῦ θεοῦ δόξης. vay
ν. 5 ἀνάστηθι, ᾿Ιερουσαλήμ, καὶ στῆθι ἐπὶ τοῦ ὑψηλοῦ. 3 στῆθι, Ἰερουσαλήμ, ἐφ᾽ ὑψηλοῦ.
καὶ ἴδε Gov συνηγμένα τὰ τέκνα ἀπὸ ἡλίου δυσμῶν ἕως καὶ ide τὰ τέκνα κτλ. aS above. ἀνατολῶν.
y. ὃ ἐσκίασαν δὲ καὶ οἱ δρυμοὶ καὶ πᾶν ξύλον εὐωδίας... 6-7 οἱ δρυμοὶ ἐσκίασαν αὐτοῖς ἐν τῇ παρόδῳ αὐτῶν.
ΠΗ 5 3 icy πᾶν ξύλον εὐωδίας ἀνέτειλεν αὐτοῖς 6 θεός.
Comp. also Bar. v. 7 with Ps. of Sol. xi. 5. Here, as well as in the underlined phrases above, we have evident borrowings from the Greek of Deutero-Isaiah (see notes). But zz the case of Baruch the borrowing comes through Ps. of Sol. _This is made clear (a) by Bar. v. 8 compared with Ps. of Sol. xi. 6,7 ; (8) by the repetitions. Note Bar. iv. 37 and v. 5 (the latter in closer approximation to Ps. of Sol. xi. 3). See also the careful investigation of this subject in Ryle and James’s ed. of the Ps. of Sol., Introd. pp. Ixxii foll. Other parallels between the document C and the Ps. of Sol., viz. iv. 26 ὁδοὶ τραχεῖαι, and Ps. of Sol. viii. 19; also Bar. iv. 20 and Ps. of Sol. ii. 21, 22 (Jerusalem clothed in sackcloth) are cited in Kneucker, p. 43 note, and also by Ryle and James (Introd., p. 1xxvi), who extend the list so as to cover the whole of the Book of Baruch. Many of these, however, have very slight significance, while those which belong to the document C leave an irresistible impression of dependence by this document on the Ps. of Sol., and therefore become an important indication with respect to date.1
(ὁ) Collateral evidence is supplied by the Syr. version. It will be seen hereafter that there are indications to warrant the belief that that version is based on the original Hebrew text as well as on the Greek version of the documents A and B; but when we come to the document C evidences abound that the only text on which the Syr. is based is the Greek. In iv. 20 and v. 1 the Greek word στολή is taken over into the Syriac. In iv. 34 Syr. even embodies a conflate reading. Thus in the LXX we have in B the original reading ἀγαλλίαμα, ‘exultation’, which was corrupted into ἄγαλμα, ‘statue’, ‘idol’, embodied in A. In Syr. we have the conflate reading ‘I will take away from her the idols and the exultation’.
(c) Moreover, the phraseology is occasionally such as Hebrew could hardly employ. Thus in iv. 28 δεκαπλασιάσατε ἐπιστραφέντες ζητῆσαι αὐτόν," return and seek him ten times more’, could scarcely be represented by iwipad 39 MWY (so Kneucker). The Piel (or Aram. Pael) of Y means only ‘to tithe’. Only some such circumlocution as perhaps 72>) 28> 1390 OYMwY would convey the idea expressed in the Greek. See also below on Greek style, ᾧ 9, I (Greek version).
(4) Lastly, the O.T. citations are based on LXX rather than the Hebrew text. This is especially clear in the Pentateuch.
Baruch. EXE
iv. 7 παροξύνατε yap τὸν ποιήσαντα ὑμᾶς θύσαντες Deut. xxxil. 16, 17 παρώξυνάν με. .. ἔθυσαν δαι- δαιμονίοις καὶ οὐ θεῷ. μονίοις καὶ οὐ θεῷ.
Iv. 15 ἐπήγαγεν γὰρ ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς ἔθνος μακρόθεν, ἔθνος Deut. xxviii. 49, 50 ἐπάξει κύριος ἐπὶ σὲ ἔθνος μακρό- ἀναιδὲς... καὶ οὐκ ἠσχύνθησαν πρεσβύτην οὐδὲ παιδίον θεν. .. ἔθνος ἀναιδὲς... ὅστις οὐ θαυμάσει πρόσωπον ἠλέησαν. πρεσβύτου καὶ νέον οὐκ ἐλεήσει.
Iv. 20 ἐξεδυσάμην τὴν στολὴν . .. ἐνεδυσάμην δὲ Isa. lil. 1 ἔνδυσαι τὴν ἰσχύν σου. . -
[On re-studying the question of the original language of this chapter I have come to the conclusion that it was Hebrew on the following grounds :
1°. There can be practically no doubt that the true text of v. 6 is: εἰσάγει δὲ αὐτοὺς ὁ θεὸς πρὸς σὲ αἰρομένους μετὰ δόξης ὡς θρόνον βασιλείας. ; :
2°, A comparison of this verse with Isa. Ixvi. 20, xlix. 22 makes it clear that the text is to be rendered as in the R. V. ‘God bringeth them in unto thee borne on high with glory, as on a royal throne’, but decidedly not ‘as a royal throne ’.
3°. Now since the Greek is vigorous and idiomatic, the author of the Greek does not think in Hebrew, he is more or less a master of the Greek of his period. Accordingly he could not have written ὡς θρόνου βασιλείας if he had Meant ὡς ἐπὶ θρόνου βασιλείας. But since the context and the associations of the passage require us to translate ὡς
θρόνου βασιλείας ‘as on a royal throne’, it follows that we have here a definite Hebraism = m3 NDI3. See my note on § 5 of the Ps. of Sol. where this subject is discussed by Dr. Buchanan Gray. This Hebraism could only be explained in one of two ways: either the writer thought in Hebrew or the Greek is a mistranslation of the Hebrew. The rest of the Greek is wholly against the former hypothesis. Hence we must have recourse to the latter. The Greek of ch. v is a translation from the Hebrew. ; ἔξ AY
4°. The peculiar form of the expression has not been noticed. In Isa. Ixvi. 20 it is on actual wagons, horses, and litters that the returning Israelites are carried, since it is the Gentiles that convey them. But in our text, since it 15 God Himself that conveys them, the means by which He conveys them are not chariots, &c., nor anything that the writer can definitely describe. The Israelites are not borne ‘ on a royal throne’ but on something resembling a royal throne. We have here the use of the Apocalyptic 3 so frequently used in this sense in Ezekiel and Daniel, and I Enoch, and of its Greek equivalent ὡς in Revelation. The supernatural element (at all events imaginatively) is introduced here and in the verses that follow.
1 See note on the Introduction to the Ps. of Sol., ὃ 5. We cannot accept Rothstein’s suggestion that Ps. of Sol, xi is based on Bar. iv. 36-v. 9.
THE BOOK ΘῈ BARUEH
5°. No real difficulty is caused by the fact of the very close resemblance of Ps. of Sol. xi and 1 Bar. iv. 36—v. 9. They can be explained as versions of two different recensions of the same Hebrew psalm. In the LXX and Theodotion we have Greek translations of two recensions of the Semitic text of Daniel, the older of which is lost. In the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs the two divergent Greek forms of the text presuppose two similarly divergent forms of the Hebrew original: while in the Zadokite Fragments, which are preserved only in Hebrew, we have two recensions of ch. ix. See of. cit. in vol. ii. :
All, therefore, that we need to presuppose, is that the author of 1 Baruch adapted for his own purposes an existing Hebrew psalm, which is itself, or one form of it, preserved in Ps. of Sol. xi. Posszby also the translator of 1 Baruch had not only the Hebrew original of Baruch before him but also the Greek Version of Ps. of Sol. xi, just as Theodotion had the LXX, and the translator of the Hebrew original of 8 of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs had a before
him.—GEN. EDITOR.]
δ. DATE AND AUTHORSHIP.
We are now ina better position to consider the questions of date and authorship. The question of date has to be examined in relation to the three documents A, B, and C (a) separately and (0) in connexion with their redactional combination.
With reference to A (i. 2, 3 4—iii. 8) the determining factor in deciding the date is the close connexion between Dan. ix. 7-19 and Bar. i. 15-ii. 17 as well as the historical confusion common to Daniel and this document (i. 11, 12), to which attention has already been called (§ 4). Now close literary parallels are often capable of alternative solutions. So here it might be argued that Baruch precedes Daniel. And this was the view taken by Ewald (Gesch. des V. Isr.® iv, pp. 265 foll. ; Propheten des Alten Bundes’, iii, pp. 252 foll.) ,who assigned the document to the close of the Persian Empire when the communities in and around Jerusalem were in a state of ferment (during the reign of Artaxerxes III (Ochus)) against Persian rule. This letter, under the name of Jeremiah’s secretary Baruch, was intended to effect among Palestinian Jews what Jeremiah’s own Epistle (Jer. xxix) effected among the Jews in exile, contentment with established foreign rule. Whatever view be taken as to the historical pvzws, whether it be Daniel or Baruch, it has been perfectly clear to nearly all except Roman Catholic critics that the document must have been composed long after the Babylonian exile. As in the case of Daniel, so also in that of this book, the historical confusion common to both can only have arisen long after the Babylonian Empire and its events had become a confused tradition. That the document A came after the Book of Daniel is indicated :
(1) By a comparison of Dan. ix. 7-19 with Bar. i. 15—-ii. 17. The latter is longer and characterized by much repetition of phrase, e.g. ‘have not hearkened unto the voice’ . . . (= ‘obeyed the the former is not entirely free.
(2) By the contents of A. Here the whole situation that is disclosed cannot be reconciled even with the late Maccabaean period. It is hardly conceivable that any Jew would have recommended at that time, with the retrospect of the great Maccabaean struggle behind him, and in the existing state of national feeling, a policy of loyal submission to their conquerors. Nor was that period one of utter gloom and national humiliation. Fritzsche’s conjecture (p. 173) we may safely put on one side.
It is quite otherwise with the events of 63 B.C., when Pompey invaded Judaea and captured Jerusalem. Some of the indications in the document A might be held to accord with the humiliations and sufferings inflicted on the Jews when the Roman general espoused the cause of Hyrcanus against his brother Aristobulus, and laid siege to the temple quarter of Jerusalem, and even entered the Holy of Holies. The cup of humiliation was full when he carried off Aristobulus as his prisoner, and Jewish captives and spoil graced his triumph two years later. It might indeed be argued that the friendly attitude enjoined towards Israel’s conquerors in A (i. 11, 12; ii. 21 f.) would accord with the date 48 B.C., when Julius Caesar’s policy of clemency was extended towards the Jews. Cp. Joseph. Ant. xiv. 10 (passim); according to Suetonius (Caes. 84) large numbers of Jews bewailed his death. See Schiirer, ed. 3, iii, p. 30. When we turn, on the other hand, to the document C evidences might be held to accumulate in favour of identifying the situation created by Pompey’s invasion with that which underlies the Book of Baruch, e.g. the reference in iv. 15 to the ‘shameless nation, and of a strange language’ brought ‘ from far’ points clearly to the Roman invasion, and might be compared with the phraseology of Ps. of Sol. xvii. 9. Other references, such as the ‘captivity’ of Jerusalem’s “sons and daughters’ (iv. 14) and the denunciation of Rome, ‘she that rejoiced’ at Jerusalem’s ‘ fall, and was glad of thy ruin’ (iv. 33), ‘her exultation and her boasting ’, become significant in the light of the captives which Pompey carried to Rome to adorn his triumph, which included not only Aristobulus, but also his son, Antigonus, and his two daughters.
But they become even more significant in the light of the later Roman triumph under the Flavian dynasty which wrought the greatest tragedy from which Israel has ever suffered. Ever since Kneucker’s careful investigations (published in 1870) critical opinion has decisively inclined. towards the view that the actual historical events which underlie the Book of Baruch belonged to
the Jewish struggle against Rome of the years A.D. 66-70. The chief indications which point to this conclusion are :—
(i) The identification of Vespasian and his son Titus with ‘ Nabuchodonosor’ and ‘ Baltasar his son’ (i. 11, 12), whom Israel is commanded to serve loyally (ii. 21 f.). This expression of complaisance towards Rome finds its parallel in the attitude of the chief Pharisees in Judaea at a somewhat earlier period described in Josephus, Wars, ii. 17. 3, and in that of Josephus himself.
(ii) The fearful sufferings of the Jews to which reference is made (viz. ‘great plagues’, ii. 2; ‘eating the flesh of children ’, ii. 3 ; ‘ bones of kings and ancestors cast forth’, ii. 24) accord with the incidents in the siege of Jerusalem portrayed by Josephus (Wars of the Fews, vi. 3, 4, story of the daughter of Eleazar devouring her own son; cp. also iv. 5. 1,2). The reference in ii. 25 to those who ‘were cast out to the heat by day, and to the frost by night, and died in great miseries by famine’ finds ample confirmation in the full record of Josephus, according to whom (Wars, vi. 9. 2-3) ‘there perished for want of food 11,0co’ at one time. On the other hand, the references to the captivity and bondage (ii. 13, 14, 23, 29; iii. 8) are fully attested by Josephus. His numbers are doubtless exaggerated in many cases, yet he is probably not very wide of the truth when he reckons the numbers of those who were carried into captivity during the entire war to be 97,000
(iii) The clear and definite reference to the destruction of the temple by fire in i. 2 and ii. 26 cannot be said to apply to the events of 63 B.C., when Pompey entered the temple, and its precincts were desecrated by slaughter (Josephus, Wars, i.7.4f.). Bar.ii. 26 evidently points to the destruction of the temple by fire in A.D. 70 (Jos., zbzd., vi. 4).
When we turn to the document B the contents can hardly be said to reveal a distinct historical situation. It is a discourse on Wisdom embodied in the Torah. Israel has been for some considerable time dwelling in a foreign land (Bar. iii. 10) which can only refer to the very extensive diaspora in Egypt, Asia Minor, and other lands. It is difficult to found any definite conclusion as to date upon this. It is obviously intended to console Israel during the Roman dominion in Palestine. While Israel’s temporal heritage had passed under Roman subjugation and paid tribute to the conqueror, the great spiritual possession, wisdom enshrined in the Torah, remained Israel’s eternal glory of which none should deprive him (Bar. iv. 1-3). There can be little doubt that the significance of such a message to Israel would be enhanced during the years that followed the great overthrow in Vespasian’s reign when Israel was bereft of temple and temple rites in the sacred city. The contents of B might seem to indicate Alexandria or Palestine as the place of its origin, but about this it is impossible to pronounce definitely on the basis of these contents only.
With the document A it is otherwise. Ch. i. 2, when connected with ii. 26, in its reference to the total destruction of Jerusalem and its temple by fire, decisively points to the conclusion that it belonged to the original introduction of the document. Here the date of the writing is fixed as the fifth year after the destruction of the temple, i.e. A.D. 74. The spirit of submission to the Roman authority, which it reflects, would be natural in the years which immediately followed the overwhelming and crushing blow to Israel’s national aspirations which the capture of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple involved. A spirit and policy like that of Josephus underlies the document. Israel's main consolation at this hour was the spiritual consolation of the Torah. That at least remained. The document B was equally appropriate to the years which followed the catastrophe of A.D.70. On the whole it appears probable that both A and B proceeded from the circle of Johanan ben Zaccai, the first president of the School at Jabneh after the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. For (1) Johanan was a man of peace. He counselled peace in the struggle against Rome, and it is recorded of him that he prophesied imperial dignity for Vespasian in the days when he was a Roman general. (2) His pupils tore their garments and made lamentation as for the dead when they heard of the destruction of the temple of Jerusalem. (3) We read in Suc. 28a@ that he was a devoted student of the Torah, ‘ He did not go four yards without reflecting on the Torah and without the phylacteries. These are significant traits which are reflected in both the documents A and B. See Fewish Encycl., art. ‘Johanan ben Zaccai’. This view has been suggested to the present writer, independently of one another, by both Prof. Burkitt and Mr. I. Abrahams.
We have already seen that the attitude of the document C (iv. 5-v. 9) to the Roman power is altogether different. Instead of compliance we have notes of burning resentment and hostility (see above, § 3). Asin the document A the events of the Flavian War against Judaea in A.D. 66—7o clearly stand in the background. The captivity of Jerusalem’s children (iv. 14), like the references in A (ii. 13, 14, 23, 29; iii. 8), are in conformity with the well-known facts of history (Joseph. Bell, Iud. vi. 9. 3). ‘Those that rejoiced’ in Israel’s fall and the ‘exultation in her great multitude (iv. 33, 34) receive a vivid illustration in the triumph of Vespasian and Titus. Such ‘boasting is to be ‘turned into mourning’ (iv. 34). We are unable to follow Kneucker in holding that the ‘ fire that
shall come upon her from the Everlasting ’ is a reference to the volcanic eruption which destroyed Pompeii and Herculaneum in A.D. 79. a
It is hardly possible to determine the date of such a document by any definite terminus ad quem. As terminus a quo we naturally have the tragedy of A.D. 70, whose events were still vivid in the memory of the writer. The minds of those to whom he appealed were beginning to recover from the shock of a quite recent disaster. Therefore, while the document A might appeal to those who were cowed by a quite recent calamity, the document C might be reasonably placed a few years later. Perhaps A.D. 78 might be a not improbable date. But it might well have originated later still.
§ 8. REDACTION OF THE DOCUMENTS.
We have already seen that there is strong evidence to prove that the document A was originally composed in Hebrew, and that arguments less cogent, yet valid, lead us to the same conclusion respecting the document B, which is poetical in form. The combination of both these documents into a single Hebrew roll probably followed not many years after their separate origination. In the prevailing gloom and depression awakened by such a catastrophe as that of 70 A.D.—the azn¢ée terrible of the Jewish race—consolatory works and apocalyptic treatises would meet a widespread want. Documents A and B would appeal to minds that were disposed to bow to the inevitable— the cosmopolitan Jew, the liberal Pharisee whose sympathies were with Ananus rather than John of Gischala. ‘The immediate result of the terrible calamity was a profound shock to the spirit. How could God permit such a disaster to overtake His chosen people?’ Schiirer (GFV*, i, pp. 659 foll.) shows how these fundamental religious problems which meet us inthe Psalms recurred with pressing intensity in the days that followed the destruction of Jerusalem. The solution of the problem of Israel’s calamity was that it was a ‘chastisement which God had inflicted on the people for their
It is difficult to decide how much in ch. i. 1-14 is the work of the editor who pieced together A and B. We have already seen that verses 3-9 hang badly together. We are confronted by an historical difficulty in i. 6-10, to which allusion has already been made. In § 4 we dealt with the apparent historic incompatibility of sacrificial offerings with the ruined temple. How can we reconcile these verses with the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70? Are we to regard i. 6-10 as unessential drapery ? This seems hardly possible. We are driven, in fact, to raise the question discussed by Schiirer (2b7d., pp. 653 foll.): Did sacrificial offerings actually cease immediately after the destruction of the temple? Putting aside Clem. Rom.,ch. 41, and the Ep. to Diogn. 3, in which the allusion to sacrifices might be regarded as having reference to the past rather than the present, we come to the argument of Josephus, coztr. Ap.ii.6 ad fin. After stating that the law nowhere forbids Jews to pay honour to worthy men, provided it be inferior in kind to that which is paid to God, the writer proceeds to say ‘we willingly testify our respect to our emperors and to the Roman people. We also offer perpetual sacrifices for them . . . although we offer no other such sacrifices at our common expense, not even for our own children, yet do we this as a special honour to the emperors.’ Other confirmatory evidence is cited by Schiirer; and though he is able to bring a considerable array of testimony on the other side, the statement of Josephus combined with Bar. i. 6-12 leaves behind a strong impression that such sacrificeswere actually offered in Jerusalem after A.D. 70 by a party who were complaisant to the Roman power.! Probably these sacrifices ceased in the second century and subsequent Jewish writers ignored them as temporary and illegitimate.
The Greek translation of the Hebrew original of A and B was probably made at the close of the first century or soon after the beginning of the second. Whether it included from the first the document C (iv. 5-v. 9) or the latter came to be added subsequently it is impossible to determine. Kneucker, indeed, who regards the entire book as originally written in Hebrew, would make the terminus a quo of the Greek version about A.D. 118 or perhaps after the war of Bar Cocheba, A.D.132-135. The terminus ad quem is A.D. 172, for Irenaeus (Adv. Haereses, v.35) quotes the passage Bar. iv. 36-
1 The view here adopted has the support of Mr. I. Abrahams. Schiirer, G/V’%, i, p. 654, cites the passage in Taanith iv. 6 in which, when enumerating Israel’s days of calamity, it is stated ‘on the 17th Tammuz the Tamid came to an end’. The language of Josephus, which has been cited, practically admits this: ‘although we offer no other such sacrifices at the public expense.’ Abrahams therefore argues that the statement cited by Schiirer from Taanith iv. 6, so far from contradicting the statement of Josephus, gives us a clue to its real meaning, since the Zaméd was habitually bought at the public expense (paid for by the Shekalim). Cf. Peskta Rabbati (sect. Shekalim). Josephus asserts that though the Tamid had ceased, contributions for a sacrifice for the emperor continued. It is therefore impossible to set aside such an express statement as that of Josephus, especially when taken in conjunction with the important collateral testimony of Bar. i. 6-10. We have sacrifices for the emperor in the days of Caligula (Wars,
v.g as the words of Jeremiah. Somewhat later (A.D. 176-178) Athenagoras, in his Afologia, addressed
to the emperor, M. Aurelius, cites (§ 69) Bar. iii. 35 as the words of an inspired prophet in close connexion with passages from Isaiah.
$9. THE VERSIONS.
I. Among the versions, the Greek was the first to appear, and secured thereby a wider currency for the entire work among the scattered Jewish population, and subsequently among the Christian communities of the Roman Empire.
Opinions are divided on the question whether a single hand or two hands have worked at the Greek translation. Both Fritzsche and Schiirer have argued for a single hand, as earlier scholars (e.g. De Wette and Hitzig) have done. Fritzsche (p. 172) acknowledges that differences in style are to be found between ch. i. 1-iii. 8 and the remainder of the work, but the language in both portions is in the main the same, while other scholars account for the difference by difference of subject-matter. Kneucker, on the other hand, contends strongly that two hands have worked at the Greek translation, and submits the entire book to a careful scrutiny (pp. 76-82). It should be noticed, however, that in his comparisons a very large number of the divergences in style are found in ch. iv. 5-v. 9, which we have already shown good reason for regarding as originally composed in Greek, This of itself would involve a considerable difference in style from the earlier portion trans-
lated from an original Hebrew text. Thus Kneucker observes the frequent employment of the Greek case reproduced in Syr. by s,), also a more independent and free arrangement of words, iv. 9, 24, 25, Ν. 1,2. Inch. iv. 10, 11 τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν τῶν υἱῶν μου καὶ τῶν θυγατέρων without the repetition of τὴν aixu. before τῶν θυγ. Also the genit. before the governing noun, iv. 25, 37, v. 5, 7, and the qualifying adj. or adjectival phrase preceding the noun: τὴν παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ ὑμῶν σωτηρίαν (iv. 24), τὴν Tapa τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπελθοῦσαν ἡμῖν ὀργήν (iv. 25); cf. iv. 29, 31, 33, 26, ν. 2.
Another point to which the same writer calls attention is the close connexion between LXX on Jeremiah and our own text in those cases where borrowings from Jeremiah have taken place; e.g. close resemblances are explained by some (Dillmann, Fritzsche, and Ewald) as due to the fact that the same Greek translator has produced the LXX of Jeremiah and the Greek rendering of Baruch. This theory, however, does not explain the differences as well as the coincidences of language. A more probable theory is that of Havernick, Schiirer, and (in later years) of Hitzig that the Greek translator of Baruch was acquainted with and made use of the LXX Jeremiah. This view will be found to be in some respects parallel to that which we shall have to adopt in reference to the Syriac version. The Greek translator of the document A was evidently familiar with Theodotion’s version of Daniel (G®) or its groundwork, as we have indicated frequently in the notes."
The MSS. of the LXX from which our text is obtained are, in the order of importance:
1. The Codex Vaticanus (B), written in uncials of the fourth century.
2. Cod. Alexandrinus (A), written in uncials of the fifth century, now in the British Museum.
3. Cod. Marchalianus, written in uncials not later, according to Ceriani, than the sixth century, designated Q.
4. Codex Venetus (numbered 23), ‘written in sloping uncials of the eighth and ninth centuries’ Swete).
( a addition to these we have twenty-two cursive MSS. The famous Szwaztec codex (x) and the | Codex Ephrém Syri (C) do not contain the Book of Baruch.
II. A Syriac version which ranks next in importance to the Greek must have been made before the time of Ephrém Syrus (about the middle of the fourth century), who specially cites the Book of Baruch. This version is identified by Ewald, Ceriani, and Schiirer with the Peshitta, while Kneucker ᾿ disputes this view, holding that the Pesh. did not contain the books of the Apocrypha. We have a Syriac version in two forms:
(1) That which is contained in Walton’s Polyg/ott, vol. iv, based on the Pocock Codex as well as the Cod. Usserianus. Upon this version we have chiefly relied in the accompanying commentary. This version has been amended by Paul de Lagarde in his work Libri Veteris Testamenti Apocryphi
(2) We have also the Syro-Hexaplar translation of Bishop Paul of Tela, executed at the instigation of the Monophysite patriarch Athanasius of Antioch in the year A. Ὁ. 617 at Alexandria.
= bea aelaae
wo + ee
1 Theodotion is mentioned in the Syro-Hexaplar as textual authority for the Greek (cited in margin of Ceriani’s edition with initial }), Cp. πονεῖ. Bib/., ‘ Text and Versions,’ § 50.
It derives its name from the fact that it is based on Origen’s Hexapla and closely follows the Greek text in the retention of Greek words and Hexaplaric signs. It thus becomes a valuable aid in the restoration of the Hexaplar text (De Wette, Eilectung, 8th ed.,§ 60). This Syro-Hexaplar version is contained in a codex belonging to the eighth century, written in Estrangelo, called Ambrosianus, reproduced in 1874 by photolithography (not by any means clearly in some places) by Ceriani. There is also an earlier reproduction (1861) by the same scholar (clearly printed and easily read). We are here chiefly concerned with Walton’s and Lagarde’s text. A very cursory examination of this version when compared with LXX (A and B) clearly shows that it is no mere slavish reproduction of the latter, but contains numerous variants as well as expansions. We have already shown that there is clear evidence to indicate that the Syriac version (i.e. Walton’s, and also Lagarde’s amended version) in iv. 5-v. 9 is based on the Greek original for the simple reason that in document C there was no other. But it is otherwise with i. I-iv. 4 (A and B). Here we are unable to follow in its entirety Kneucker’s elaborate proof that the Syriac version is wholly based on the LXX. Reasons will be forthcoming in the commentary which point to the conclusion that the Syr. was based on the Hebrew original as well as on the LXX version. (1) This inference might be suggested by the Syr. rendering of ἐπὶ ποταμοῦ Σούδ, Bar. i. 4 ad fin. Here Σούδ is reproduced in Syr. by Sar. This may point to a Heb. variant, since the confusion of 1 and Ἵ is exceedingly common, and Greek reproduces ¥ by σ (as in i”). Too much stress, however, cannot be laid upon proper names, which Syriac notoriously modifies and alters. (2) A more instructive example is i. 1, where ev Βαβυλῶνι corresponds to the Syr. \N.aaS ‘to Babel’ as though Baruch wrote the letter zo Babylon. This variant is best explained by the Heb. original 5333 in which the first of the three letters 3 was
dropped and 533 was naturally interpreted as accus. ‘to Babel’. (3) A more striking example is found in the enigmatic word ἐσχεδιάζομεν (B; in A ἐσχεδιάσαμεν) in i. 19. The word is a az. εἰρ. in the LXX. In Suidas and Hesych. the Greek word is explained by ἐγγίζειν, πλησιάζειν which yields no satisfactory sense and yet is reproduced in the Syro-Hexaplar by woo e>:00. Fortunately we have in Diod, Sic. i. 23 and Polyb. xii. 4. 4, xxiii. 9. 12, a guide to a signification which yields a better sense, ‘act precipitately or rashly’ (R.V. ‘ dealt unadvisedly’): ‘ We have acted precipitately in not hearkening to his voice. We have, however, in Dan. ix the source from which many passages and phrases are borrowed, and here Dan. ix. 5, 11 enables us to restore the original ipa vow p29 32773. Here Kneucker is obliged to confess that the Syr. version (that of Walton) ‘is relatively the most correct’, oSas ssaas ἢν 9330 which evidently closely follows the Heb, original. But how did ἐσχεδιάζομεν arise? It might perhaps be suggested that it arose by corruption of ἐστασιάζομεν. But it is a far more probable view that 3277 became corrupted into 377. (4) For ἐκολλήθη εἰς ἡμᾶς τὰ κακά in the following verse (i. 20) we have in Syr. JNas @S> bhlo. With the former cp. Deut. xxviii. 60 (Heb. and LXX). The corresponding Heb. of the original may therefore have been 7970 332 paam, But the Syr. rests on a variant 7}17 32 83M) which has greater inherent probability since we have in Dan. ix. 13 AN2 nxt ΠΡ 5s, and we know that Dan. ix. 7-19 is the source from which phraseology is largely derived in Bar. i. 15-ii. 17. (5) In ii. 7 LXX ἃ ἐλάλησεν κύριος ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς, πάντα τὰ κακὰ ταῦτα ἃ ἦλθεν ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς. The original Heb. evidently was Ὅλον ANST NN ΠΡ ΟΞΓΤΙΝ Ὅλον Taq mm ΡΝ, Here Syr. renders the opening Heb. WS by ‘inasmuch AIS? Ὁ 5 τ bess ers λον Sfx ‘inasmuch as the Lord [our God] has declared concerning us all these evils which have come upon us’. This rendering of the relat. in Heb. is not only more accurate but brings with it better construction and sense. It is obviously not based on the Greek but on the Heb. original. (6) Another striking example may be found in ch. i. 9, on which consult the commentary. (7) Examples of dependence on a Hebrew original, sometimes on a variant corruption, may also be found in the document B (Bar. iii. g-iv. 4), e.g. iii. 16 ody for ὑοῦ, 18 TDD for 170. On these instances the notes should be consulted ; also on iii. 21, 23, 34, 35. In not a few cases we have inferior renderings, and in a large number of passages indicated in the notes we have expansions ' in the Syriac text itself, evidently in some cases added in later copies. But in some of the modifications introduced into the Syriac we may probably see primitive influences. And this concerns the document C (iv. 5—-v. 9) as well as A and B.
The most natural explanation ot tnese variants and expansions is to be found in Prof. Sanday’s article in Studies in the Synoptic Problem, pp. 17 foll., in which he describes the physical conditions under which a scribe or copyist worked with the roll, not spread out before him on a desk, but deposited in its scvivdum or capsa for intermitter.t reference. A good example of a variant thus caused may be found in Bar. iv. 16 (on which see note). Still more would variations occur when we have to deal with translations and not copies. Here subtle motives would also co-operate, enhanced in the case of a rendering which was more or less paraphrastic. ὃ
We have therefore sufficient indications to show that the original author of the Syriac version as represented in Walton’s Polyglott and Lagarde’s edition made use of the Hebrew original of A and B, and not exclusively of the Greek translation as Kneucker insists (p. 163 f.). That it rested also on G Kneucker shows from many examples. Perhaps the most significant is to be found in iii. 32, in which κτηνῶν τετραπόδων corresponds to M2 in the Heb. original (cf. Exod. ix. 9, 10) This is the word which Delitzsch employs in his Heb. N. T. for τετράποδα in Acts x. 12. But Syr. has no corresponding word, and so there renders ᾿ς» Ksaoly J¥&2S just as in Bar. iii. 22. Jess δι Mroily Cp. i. 14 note.
Accordingly the conclusion to which we are guided is analogous to that to which Cornill was led in his memorable critical edition of Ezekiel (1886) when dealing with the Peshitta: ‘It is apparent at every stage that S has rendered its Heb. original freely, and does not contemplate a literal translation’ (p. 148). This will be found abundantly illustrated in the notes on Baruch, where additions and variations of phrase will be found, ‘additions of the most varied character’ (p. 150). ‘Sis no pure recension but a mixed one. In the first place LXX has exercised over it an important influence’ (p. 153). A similar result is even recorded in far different conditions and a very different field, where divergences of rendering are naturally restricted, viz. in Genesis, by Hanel in his careful investigation of the Peshitta (‘ Die aussermasoretischen Ubereinstimmungen zw. der Septuaginta und der Peshitta in der Genesis’). This writer shows from a large number of instances that S is there based not only on LXX but also on a Heb. text which stands considerably nearer to the LXX than the Massoretic version (pp. 68 foll.).!
From slight yet significant indications we may derive some inference as to the date of the Syriac version in its origin.
(a) In Bar. v. 2 Jerusalem is exhorted to put on the diadem (μίτρα), but when we turn to the Syr. we find the diadem is exchanged for the military helmet (Jhicam as in 1 Sam. xvii. 5, Eph. vi.17). Again, in v. 5 ‘by tents’ takes the place of ‘on the height’.
(6) We note the expansion given in Syr. of iv. 31, 32: ‘The cities shall be in dread that treated thee ill and rejoiced in thy downfall. The cities shall be in terror that enslaved thy sons. Thou shalt rejoice in their downfall. They shall be alarmed who treated thee ill. She shall be in dread who received thy sons.’ An extra clause is added. The last clause refers to Rome specially, which we know possessed a large population of Jews (cf. Juven. Sav. iii. 12-16 and Schiirer®, vol. iii, p. 35). The cities to which reference is here made are probably those to which the large number, to which Josephus refers, was deported. See above under § 7 (ii).
From these indications, of which (a) is the more significant, we infer that the Syriac version arose at a time when there was a considerable reawakening of the martial spirit of revolt against Rome. This points to a date about 130 B.C. and after, when the struggle, headed by Bar Cocheba, | was impending—the last uprising of Judaism against the power of Rome. At that time a large | population of Jews (considerably augmented by those who had escaped from Judaea under the
Flavian dynasty) had settled down in the Euphrates lands. Among these Jews Syriac versions, not only of the O.T. but also of such works as the Book of Baruch, would find ready acceptance. The reader who has studied Prof. Burkitt's Zar/y Eastern Christianity (see esp. pp. 75 foll.) will not find this date unreasonably early. Lastly, we know that the Jews were persecuted under Trajan, and that before the outbreak of Bar Cocheba’s rebellion Rabbi Akiba made a final journey throughout Parthia and Asia Minor and preached against Hadrian and his legions (see art. Akiba in Hastings’s Exc. R.£.) The Syriac version in its earliest form may have arisen 132 A.D.
III. We have two ancient Latin versions, (a) the Vetws Latina a, sometimes called the ‘Itala, which also included Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, 1 and 2 Macc., Prayer of Manasseh, and fourth Esdras. That this version originated before the time of Jerome is evident from the fact that Cyprian (Zest. adversus Fud. ii. 6) quotes Bar. iii. 35-7 and Tertullian (Adv. Praxean 16) makes a reference to verse 37. The version was, however, incorporated into the Vulgate. Fritzsche in Schenkel’s Bibel-lexicon characterizes the style of the /¢a/a as a patois full of provincialisms and violations of grammatical and syntactical rules. Not a few Greek terms are retained in Latin form. The careful investigation of this version by Kneucker (pp. 143-9) shows how closely the Greek version is followed, but not the exact text of any existing codex. (6) Vetus Latina ὦ was first published at Rome in 1688 by Jos. Caro from an old MS. Since then it has been republished by | Sabatier in the Bidhiotheca Casinensis, vol. i (1873), on the basis of three additional MSS. Where
Vet. Lat. a differs from the Greek text, Vet. Lat. follows the latter. It is, however, also clear that Vet. Lat. 6 follows in a considerable number of details Ver. Lat. a, but has a better Latin style.
1 Also Burkitt (κε. Bibd., ‘Text and Versions,’ Peshitta, § 60) remarks that the Syr. Ecclesiasticus is partly a rendering of the Hebrew.
IV. The Aradic version contained in Walton’s Polyglott closely adheres to the Greek text. Kneucker has shown in his detailed examination (pp. 177 foll.) that in the vast majority of instances G* is followed and not G*.
V. The Ethiopic version similarly is based on G* in abbreviated form. It is contained in Dillmann’s Biblia Vet. Test. Aethiopica, vol. v (1894).
VI. The Coftic version was first published in 1870 by Father Bsciai (see Kneucker 7 /oc.) in an edition on the basis of the Cairo codex of the Prophets. Brugsch published subsequently (1872-4) a Sahidic (Thebaic) version of the Book of Baruch (including the Epistle of Jeremiah) in Lepsius’ Zeitschrift fir agyptische Sprache und Alterthumskunde, series x, pp. 134-6; Xi, pp. 18-21; xii, pp. 46-9, from a careful, though not faultless, copy made by the learned Copt Kabis. We have also an edition by Schulte, 1892 (pp. 37-9). This version, like the Arabic and Eth., adheres on the whole to G‘, though there are omzsstons of individual words such as καί and of particles and pronouns, and even of phrases, and there are also additions.
VII. The Armenian version likewise follows, with few exceptions, G*.
§ 10. INFLUENCE ON CHRISTIAN AND JEWISH LITERATURE.
The influence of the book on ecclesiastical Christian literature has been far greater than upon the Jewish. We have already referred to the use made by Athenagoras of Bar. iti. 35 (see § 8, ad fin.), as well as by Irenaeus, who quotes (Adv. Haeres. v. 35) the passage in Bar. iv. 36—-v. 9 as the words of Jeremiah. It seems at this time to have been assumed that because Baruch was the secretary of the prophet, and wrote out many of his discourses, the Book of Baruch must have also contained the utterances of Jeremiah. Thus Clemens Alexandr. (Paedag. I. x. g1-2) cites several passages from the Book of Baruch as the words of Jeremiah. Hippolytus, in his treatise Contra Noétum, takes note of the fact that Noétus and his followers make use of the passage Bar. iii. 35-7 as a support to their patripassian views of Christology. On the other hand, Origen, like Melito, follows the Jewish Canon, and so ignores what Roman Catholic theologians (including the latest commentator Schneedorfer) call the Deutero-Canonical books (Apocrypha), though Lamentations and Epistle of Jeremiah are included in the canonized writings. It is probable, however, that (as in the case of Clemens Al.) he included the Book of Baruch under Jeremiah, since he cites the oft-quoted Bar. iii. 38 in his Commentary on St. Fohn’s Gospel, and also Bar. iii. g-13 in his Ferem. Homil. vii. 5. Similarly his pupil, Dionysius of Alexandria, quotes Bar. iii. 14, 15, while Apos¢. Const. cite Bar. iv. 4. So also references are to be found in Tertullian and Cyprian. Lactantius cites Bar. iii. 36 f. as the words of Jeremiah along with citations from Isaiah and the Psalms (7)ι52, iv. 38). Ephrém Syr. regarded Bar., as well as the other Apocrypha, as Scripture.
Yet in fact many Greek Fathers of the fourth century separated the Apocryphal (or so-called Deutero-Canonical) writings from the Canonical. Baruch, however, formed an exception, since it was treated as an appendix to Jeremiah, and so formed part of what Athanasius calls κανονιζόμενα καὶ παραδοθέντα, πιστευθέντα τε θεῖα εἶναι βιβλία. Similarly, Cyril of Jerusalem and the Provincial Synod of Laodicea. Thus we find Chrysostom frequently quoting passages from Baruch as words ‘of the prophet’ or Jeremiah.
As we follow the Zatz Fathers from Hilary of Poitiers and Ambrosius onwards we find a similar tradition. On the other hand Jerome, who studied and followed Hebrew tradition, forms a unique exception. He separates the Book of Baruch, together with the Epistle of Jeremiah, from the book of the prophet Jeremiah as non-Canonical: ‘Librum autem Baruch notarii eius, qui apud Hebraeos nec legitur nec habetur, praetermisimus.’ This is the more remarkable since in subsequent times Pope Felix III, Cassiodorus, and others cite Baruch as authoritative scripture. In the Latin Bible (as revised by Jerome) Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah are omitted. Thus they are not to be found in the Cod. Amiatinus, the oldest known MS. of the Vulgate. On the other hand, at the Council of Trent it was recognized as part of the O.T. among other Deutero-Canonical books. Our English Bible follows the Protestant tradition in placing it among the Apocrypha as non-Canonical. For further detail we would refer to Reusch’s work, pp. 2-21, and to Schiirer, G¥ V’, iii, p. 342 f. Among Protestant German divines till Ewald there was a tendency to depreciate the value of the book.
With reference to the Book of Baruch as a part of Fezwzsh literature, we have already shown that there are strong grounds for the belief that a Hebrew original of Bar. i. 1-iv. 4 existed for a time among the Jewish communities of the Diaspora during the last quarter of the first century, and that the rest of the book must have been published within that period in Greek. During the early part of the second century the whole must have circulated in Greek and somewhat later in Aramaic {among the Jewish settlements of Mesopotamia). But the history of the book both then and later among the Jewish communities is most obscure. Probably the note of complaisance towards the
Roman power in ch. i. 1-iii. 8 did not commend the book to Jews after the suppression of Bar Cocheba’s insurrection in A.D. 135. The testimony of the Apostolic Constitutions (v.20) that on the 10th of the month Gorpiaeus it was read along with the Lamentations of Jeremiah as a portion in Jewish worship is subject to some difficulty, as we are unable to identify the date assigned with that of the Jewish Calendar, though the statement is confirmed by a reference to synagogue-worship accompanied by a citation of Bar. iv. 9 in Ephrém Syrus. See Schiirer, G¥V*%, iii, p. 342. The express statement of Jerome (Preface to Jerem.) that in his day the Book of Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah were‘ not read among the Hebrews’ would lead us to the conclusion that in the fourth century A.D. both had ceased to have any recognized place in current Jewish religious literature.
§ 11. THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF THE BOOK OF BARUCH.
Since the book is composite in authorship and tendency, it cannot be said to present in its three documents any uniformity of ideas, except in certain positive general features common to all three parts and also in the general absence of others to which allusion will be made.
(a) Doctrine of God. In all the three documents God is recognized as the absolute ruler of Israel’s destiny, the fountain of righteousness and power, i. 15, 19, ii. 6, iii. 1, 32 foll. The document B (iii. g-iv. 4) naturally emphasizes God’s wisdom and universal knowledge (iii. 32-7). On the other hand, God’s mercy, which listens to the cry of His people, is assumed throughout the penitential supplication of i. 15-111. 8, and is expressly affirmed in il. 35, ili. 2. These features are, however, most prominent in document C (iv. 5-v. 9), which is greatly influenced by the Deutero- Isaiah, in which God’s love and mercy to His people is the dominant theme. This divine compassion is the ground of the repeated exhortation ‘Be of good cheer’. ‘He that called thee by name will comfort thee.’ This document C is specially characterized by the designation of God as ‘ Everlasting’ (αἰώνιος), iv. 22, 35, v. 2, and as ‘Holy One’, iv. 29. On the other hand, when we turn to the document A (i. 2, 3 ὁ- 11. 8), Lord God (nds mm) is the usual combination, frequently with the Ist pers. plur. added, ‘ Lord our God.’ In fact ‘Lord’ (= 7’) belongs to this document and not to the other two. To this in two passages (iii. 1, 4) is added the epithet ‘Almighty’ (παντοκράτωρ, Heb. niway) or ‘ All-ruler’ (iii. 1, 4). See Gifford’s Introd. ad fin.
(ὁ) The doctrine of Sin and of Szzffering as the divinely inflicted chastisement for sin is strongly emphasized throughout ihe book, especially in i. 13, 18-ii. 10, 22 foll., iii, 10-13, iv. 6-8, 12, 13. Moreover, the sin of the fathers is visited in chastisement on the children, though the obverse doctrine of merit through the righteousness of ancestors which plays so large a part in Jewish Soteriology (cp. Matt. iii. 9, Weber, Fiidische Theologie, § 63) is repudiated in 11. 19.
(c) Silence on other points of doctrine. One is impressed by a certain meagreness in the religious conceptions presented to us in this brief book. In this respect it stands sharply contrasted with the wealth of ideas contained in 2 Baruch, i.e. the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch. Of the Angelology of the latter (2 Bar. vi. 4 f., vii, viii, temple destroyed by angels, with which the Epistle to the nine and a half tribes should be compared, Ixxx. 1,2 in Charles’s ed. of 2 Bar.) we have not a trace, nor have we mention of Sirens, Liliths, and dragons (2 Bar. x. 8); only a stray reference to demons in 1 Bar. iv. 35, a borrowed feature. Even the Messianic element prominent in 2 Bar. (xxix. 3-8, xxxix. 7) is conspicuous by its absence, as in fact are apocalyptic and eschatological ideas generally. Ofthe resurrection of the righteous, to which 2 Bar. alludes (xxx), not a word is said in 1 Bar., though we cannot go so far as to assert (with Toy in Fewish Encycl.) that it is denied in ii. 17, where the language respecting the dead in Shedl is merely an echo of Ps. cxv. 17. Nor have we the pessimistic forecast of a coming age of decay such as we find in 2 Bar. xxxi. 5, xxxii. 5, 6 (cf. Epistle to the nine and
a half tribes, 1xxxiii. 9-23, Ixxxv. 10). The 2 Baruch and the Epistle to the nine and a half tribes evidently belong to a school and atmosphere of thought entirely different from that of
I Baruch. (d) Great message of document B. Ch. iii. g-iv. 4, with its praise of Wisdom embodied in the
' Torah, strikes the highest note that meets the ear throughout the whole book. There is something
profoundly impressive and pathetic in the closing verses of this document which direct Israel's
thoughts away from his national humiliation, the temple-ruins and the vanished material pomp of
religious ritual, to the eternal glory of that wisdom enshrined in the Torah which was to be Israel's inalienable possession for ever: ‘Turn thee, O Jacob, and take hold of it: walk toward her shining in the presence of the light thereof.’ We can afford to miss the grandiose and bizarre effects of apocalyptic as we stand in the clear sunlight of this sublime utterance. In place of the ruined temple the broad universe is the ‘house of God’ (iii. 24, 25).
$12. SELECTED LITERATURE.
The articles on the Book of Baruch in the Excyc/. Bibl, Hastings’s DB,‘ Encycl. Brit. (11th ed.), Jewish Encycl., and in PRE*, i, p. 640f. under ‘ Apocryphen des A.T.’—Perhaps the most complete and useful is by SCHURER, G/ V3,
ἀπ 35 commentaries specially to be mentioned are FRITZSCHE, E-xegetisches Handbuch zu den Apocryphen, Leipz., 1851; REUSCH, Zrklarung des Buches Baruch (1853), which is from the Roman Catholic standpoint, useful for its survey of the book’s place in patristic literature, [also from same standpoint Das Buch Jeremias, des Propheten Klagelieder u. das Buch Baruch by SCHNEEDORFER (1903)]; EWALD in Die Propheten des Alten Bundes, iii (Die jiingsten Propheten). The most important, however, is that by KNEUCKER (1879), which contains not only an ample Introduction but also a very complete textual apparatus with a careful examination of the different versions, a full commentary, a translation, and a reproduction of the original Hebrew. In English should be specially — mentioned the Commentary on the Apocrypha, edited by Dr. Wace, to which the Ven. E. H. Gifford, D.D., contributes the commentary on the Book of Baruch. Lastly, Die Apocryphen des A.T., by KAUTZSCH, to which ROTHSTEIN — contributes Baruch, will be found useful and suggestive.
Among other contributions we should mention HITZIG, Zeitsch. fiir wissensch. Theol., 1860, pp. 262-73; GRATZ, ‘Abfassungszeit und Bedeutung des Buches Baruch,’ Monatsch. fiir Gesch. τε. Wissensch. des Judenthums, —
Attention should have been drawn above under § 2 to the two parts of the confession of Israel, noted in his article by Dr. Marshall. The jst and shorter portion (i. 15—ii. 5) appears to have been intended more especially for use by the inhabitants of Judah. Hence the distinction in ii. 4 ‘round about ws . . . hath scattered chem’. The second patt (ii. 6-111. 8) is the confession more especially of the exiles. Hence in ii. 13, iii. 8 ‘scattered ws’. This distinction is useful since it accounts for the repetition of phrase in the two parts, e.g. i. 15 and ii. 6; ii. 4 and ii. 13 (iii. 8). Both portions obviously proceeded from the same hand, rested on like presuppositions (such as the solidarity of Israel and Judah), and are based very largely on Danielic phraseology.
=) a ae oP eae a yy Ὰ
PIE BOOK OF BARUCH
1 And these are the words of the book, which Baruch the son of Nerias, the son of Maaseas, the
᾿ 2 son of Sedekias, the son of Asadias, the son of Helkias, wrote in Babylon, in the fifth year, avd in the seventh day of the month, what time as the Chaldeans took Jerusalem, and burnt it with fire.
|} 3 And Baruch did read the words of this book in the hearing of Jechonias the son of Joakim king of | 4 Judah, and in the hearing of all the people that came to ear the book, and in the hearing of the | mighty men, and of the kings’ sons, and in the hearing of the elders, and in the hearing of all the people, from the least unto the greatest, even of all them that dwelt at Babylon by the river Sud. 6 And they wept, and fasted, and prayed before the Lord; they made also a collection of money | 7 according to every man’s power: and they sent 22 to Jerusalem unto Joakim the igh priest, the | son of Helkias, the son of Salom, and to the priests, and to all the people which were found with | 8 him at Jerusalem, at the same time when he took the vessels of the house of the Lord, that had been | carried out of the temple, to return tem into the land of Judah, the tenth day of the month Sivan,
TITLE. G SHex. Baruch; S ‘In addition the Second Ep. of Baruch the Scribe’; S (Lag.) ‘ The Second Epistle’ ; Arm. ‘Ep. of Baruch’ ; Vet. Lat. a ὁ ‘ Prophecy of Baruch’ ; Copt. ‘Baruch the prophet’. [The ‘Second Ep.’ in S title refers by implication to the earlier preceding Ep. in S addressed by Baruch to the nine and a half tribes beyond the Euphrates. }
INTRODUCTION 1-14 [1, 3@ belong to document B; 2, 3 4-14, excluding redactional insertions, to document A].
1. On the personal details respecting Baruch see Ency. Bibl, sub voce, and cf. Joseph. Anz. x. 9. 1, Kneucker Introd., pp. 2 foll. J/aaseas here is obviously the Mahséiah of Jer. xxxii. 12; Asadzas is the Hebr. Hasadiah. We find the name in 1 Chron. ili. 20. In S, through omission of the opening character and the frequent confusion of 1 and 7, the name takes the form μα. This form of the name may, however, have arisen through Jer. li. 59. Baruch’s genealogy is here traced further back than Mahséiah (Jer. xxxii.12). 5. reads ‘to Babylon’, as though the letter were dispatched _ from Palestine. How this may have textually arisen has been already explained, Introd., ὃ 9 (ii. Syr. Version). In
this way the so-called Second Ep. (in S) accords with the preceding epistle addressed to the nine and a half tribes beyond the Euphrates (cf. Title above), which is given in Walton’s Po/yg/. and as an addendum in Charles's 4foc. of Baruch, pp. 124 foll.
2. The omission of the numeral before μηνός is certainly unusual, and points either to a defective original or to an | omission by the translator. S leads us to the conclusion that the omission belonged to the original. We have no - warrant, therefore, for the insertion of the name of the month Sivan (with Ewald).
In Ezek. i. 2, viii. 1, &c., the years are reckoned from the date of the first capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar when Jehoiachin was made prisoner (597 B.C.). In this year, however, Jerusalem was not burnt, but in the subsequent and final capture when the temple was destroyed 587-586 B.c. (cf. Bar. ii. 26). It is from this date, therefore (with . Fritzsche, as against Eichhorn and others), the fifth year should be reckoned. See Introd., § 4.
3, 4. The language reminds us of 2 Kings xxiii. 2; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 30. πρὸς τὴν βίβλον, i.e. to hear the book. βίβλος instead of βιβλίον in 3a. Similarly βίβλος in iv. 1. We know nothing of the locality of Sud. Grotius conjectures
that it refers to the city Soita. Bochart would emend to Sw, i.e. the city Sora. S, in fact, renders ‘river of Sar’,
_ which may be founded on the original 1)¥, but it is precarious to base a conclusion on the Syr. treatment of proper
| names. Cheyne’s suggestion of Shihor (in Ezcy. δ 164.) is pure conjecture. L and Ar. follow G in reading Sud; so also characteristically SHe.
5. With the phraseology comp. 2 Chron. xxiv. 5, 11; Lev. v. 7, &c. 7. ἱερέα (as contrasted with following ἱερεῖς) is used in the pregnant sense of the head-priest of the Jerusalem ἢ sanctuary as in 1 Kings iv. 2; 2 Kings xi. 9, xii. 8; cf. Lev. xili.2; Num. iii. 6; Neh. xili. 4; 1 Chron. xvi. 39, ἄς. | (cf. 1 Macc. xv. 1). In assigning this position to Joakim the writer departs from earlier tradition. According to I Chron. v. 39 the succession of High Priests was Shallum, Hilkiah, Azariah, Seraiah. Esdras (A) viii. 1 interpolates ‘Zichri between Hilkiah and Azariah. In only quite late times we find a tradition (in Joseph. «1712. xi. 5. 1) that on the | death of Darius a certain Jehoiakim, son of Jeshua, was High Priest contemporary with Ezra. But this was more |than 120 years after the time to which this passage refers. The chief priest in Jerusalem at the time of its final over- 8. As already shown (Introd., ὃ 4) the reference of αὐτόν is vague. ‘He’ might be referred to Joakim (Jehoiakim)
of the preceding verse (so Herzfeld, Hilgenfeld, &c.). But this is evidently not intended. Baruch, the subject of |.\verse 3, is meant, since his presence in Babylon and not in Judaea fits the situation (so Fritzsche, Reusch, Ewald, _ | Havernick, Hitzig, and Kneucker). ry ;
|. The restoration of the vessels to Jerusalem is another departure from the older tradition. According to the latter, _ | the vessels which had been carried off by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings xxiv. 13, 1. 6. 597 B.C., and xxv. 14f., i.e. 586 B.C.) ες restored by Cyrus (Ezra i. 7-11). The statement in this verse seems to ignore Jeremiah’s polemic against Hananiah and the false prophets (Jer. xxvii. 16, xxviii. 3, xxix. 4). Zedekiah’s preparation of silver vessels is another jaddition to the later story. The angelic vision in 2 Bar. vi. 4-10 respecting the concealment of the furniture of
Πα Holy of Holies is another example of the freedom with which later writers dealt with history. The month Sivan ἵ \(May-June) belongs in origin to the Babylonian Calendar (Schrader, COT, ii, p. 69 f.), borrowed by exilian and |post-exilian Judaism and made the third month of their ecclesiastical year. It is mentioned in the late post-exilian _ \Esther viii. 9. S reads here Nisan and om. ‘silver’ (perhaps as derogatory to national dignity),
g xamely, silver vessels, which Sedekias the son of Josias king of Judah had made, after that Nabuchodonosor king of Babylon had carried away Jechonias, and the princes, and the captives, and the το mighty men, and the people of the land, from Jerusalem, and brought them unto Babylon. And they said, Behold, we have sent you money ; buy you therefore with the money burnt offerings, and sin offerings, and incense, and prepare an oblation, and offer upon the altar of the Lord our God; 11 and pray for the life of Nabuchodonosor king of Babylon, and for the life of Baltasar his son, that 12 their days may be as the days of heaven above the earth : and the Lord will give us strength, and lighten our eyes, and we shall live under the shadow of Nabuchodonosor king of Babylon, and under the shadow of Baltasar his son, and we shall serve them many days, and find favour in their } 13 sight. Pray for us also unto the Lord our God, for we have sinned against the Lord our God; and 14 unto this day the wrath of the Lord and his indignation is not turned from us. And ye shall read — this book which we have sent unto you, to make ‘confession in the house of the Lord, upon the day — of the feast and on the days of the solemn assembly. er 15 And ye shall say, To the Lord our God delongeth righteousness, but unto us confusion of face,as 16 at this day, unto the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to our kings, and to 17 Our princes, and to our priests, and to our prophets, and to our fathers: for that we have sinned — 18 before the Lord, and disobeyed him, and have not hearkened unto the. voice of the Lord our God, 19 to walk in the commandments of the Lord that he hath set before us: since the day that the Lord © brought our fathers out of the land of Egypt, unto this present day, we have been disobedient unto 20 the Lord our God, and we have dealt unadvisedly in not hearkening unto his voice. Wherefore the plagues clave unto us, and the curse, which the Lord commanded Moses his servant Zo pronounce in
9. Obviously an echo of Jer. xxiv. 1. There δεσμώτας corresponds to the doubtful word 73D = ‘ prison’ (Isa. xxiv. _ 22, xlii. 7; Ps. cxlii. 8), and there applied apparently to those who are imprisoned. The ‘ people of the land’ corresponds to }J87 OY of Zech. vii. 5, but meaning here, as in 2 Kings xxiv. 14, Jer. i. 18, Dan. ix. 6, the common people Ἥ as opposed to the aristocracy (in Zech. the laity as distinguished from the priesthood). S varies considerably after
‘princes’, viz. ‘and the officers and the workmen and the armies from Jerusalem’. Here ‘the workmen’ (rexviras = wonij) takes the place of ‘ the people of the land’ in ἃ and Syr.-Hex., and stands in closer accord with both Jer. xxiv. 1 and the history of the year 597 B.C. (comp. 2 Kings xxiv. 14). We are in fact led to conclude that S here rather than G is based on the original Hebrew text. ri,
10. μάννα (more correctly Bees in many codd.), ‘oblation’, is obviously an attempt to reproduce the Hebr. 1219 . Jer. xvii. 26, xli. 5. ποιήσατε, ‘prepare’, is a literal rendering of the Hebr. ONY), as in Exod. xxix. 36, &c., Lev. ix.
7, XV. 15. Similarly καὶ ἀνοίσατε, ‘and offer’, most probably corresponds to ὉΠ ΠῚ (Jer. xxxiii. 18 G*; Exod. xxiv. 5,
11. The exhortation to pray for the life of Nebuchadnezzar reflects the tone of prophecy in Jeremiah and Ezekiel towards Babylonia. In later exilian prophecy the tone becomes embittered (Isa. xlvii, Jer. 1, 11, contrasted with — Jer. xxvil. 6-8, xxix. 4-7; Ezek. xxvi. 7-12, xxix. 17-20). προσεύξασθε περὶ... seems an echo of ‘Jer. Xxix. 7 (xxxvi. 7 G*). On the historical questions involved see Introd., § 8.
Baltasar appears in Dan. y. 1 as Belshazzar (H, in Goand@ Baltasar). Both here and in Daniel we have the same confusion of names. Belshazzar (in Babyl. Bél-sar-usur, ‘ Bel, protect the king’) was son of Nabonidus (Wabi-naid, ‘ Nebo is gracious’), the last Babylonian king, not of Nebuchadnezzar (as in Dan. v. 2, 13, 18, 22, and in” the present passage). ;
12. S introduces characteristic variations in the opening of the verse, ‘and that the Lord grant unto us that we may serve him.’ 7
13. ἀπέστρεψεν (‘is . . . turned’) is here intransit., whereas in verse 8 above ἀποστρέψαι is transit. On this ten- | dency of transit. Greek verbs to become intransit., see Radermacher, W77Ziche Gram. (1911), pp. 18 foll.; comp. — below, 11. 8. The Hebrew equivalent may be easily restored from Isa. ix. II, 16, &c. (G Eaonecias lv. 10, Vize Woy A FN 3 Av NP. S adds ‘our God’ to ‘Lord’ in all three cases where the Deity is mentioned. This — combination is the usual formula in 1 Baruch. ;
14. make confession (ἐξαγορεῦσαι), evidently the rendering of nimnnd, as in Lev. v. 7, xvi. 21; Num. v. 7. καιρός here stands for ἽΝ) in the sense of festival season or ‘solemn assembly’ (πανήγυρις), Whereas ἑορτή, ‘feast’, is the translation of 9. Comp. Hos. ix. 5, xii. 10. But while SH: reproduces here G, S has ‘days of the Lord’. This is evidently due to the influences of a corrupted Greek text (κυρίου for καιροῦ). G®S ἡμέρᾳ... - ἡμέραις, but G*ange harmonize by reading plur. in both cases, L by reading sing. S, moreover, introduces additions, ‘ make confession ot behalf of us in the Lord’s house before the Lora, ϊ
CONFESSION OF THE PALESTINIAN REMNANT, i. I5-ii. 5 (document A. See note on p. 582).
15-18 is closely modelled on Dan. ix. 7-10, yet abbreviated.
15. as at this day is the familiar Hebr. aya DID in 1 Kings viii. 24 and Dan. ix. 7. On this pregnant use of 2 in Hebrew see Gesen.-Kautzsch, Hebr. Gr,” § 118.6; comp. below, ii. 26 note.
17. before the Lord. ἔναντι G® belongs to the κοινή, Radermacher, W7Viche Gram., p.117. G** ἐναντίον ; ‘for that we have sinned,’ ἅς, = (” 2D) mms NON Wr, ΘΠ: ᾿χὶ 8. til.
19. On xebidCouer (G4 ἐσχεδιάσαμεν), a ἀπ. εἰρ. in LXX (é dealt unadvisedly’), see Introd., § 9, ii (Syr. Vers.). S and Dan. ix. 5, 11 clearly show that we have in Ga rendering based on a corrupt text. Translate: ‘We have rebelled in not hearkening ...’ ἐσχεδιάζομεν arose out of the corruption of 13771) into 137719, ;
20. clave (ἐκολλήθη). A strong phrase which occurs again in iii. 4. This and other expressions in this verse are
THE BOOK Or BARUCH LT 202) 13
the day that he brought our fathers out of the land of Egypt, to give us a land that floweth with
21 milk and honey, as at this day. Nevertheless we hearkened not unto the voice of the Lord our
22 God, according unto all the words of the prophets, whom he sent unto us: but we walked every
man in the imagination of his own wicked heart, to serve strange gods, and to do that which is evil
2 1 in the sight of the Lord our God. Therefore the Lord hath made good his word, which he pro-
nounced against us, and against our judges that judged Israel, and against our kings, and against
2 our princes, and against the men of Israel and Judah, to bring upon us great plagues, such as never
happened under the whole heaven, as it came to pass in Jerusalem, according to the things that
3 are written in the law of Moses; that we should eat every man the flesh of his own son, and every
4 man the flesh of his own daughter. Moreover he hath given them to be in subjection to all the
kingdoms that are round about us, to be a reproach and a desolation among all the people round
5 about, where the Lord hath scattered them. Thus were they cast down, and not exalted, because
6 we sinned against the Lord our God, in not hearkening unto his voice. To the Lord our God
7 belongeth righteousness : but unto us and to our fathers confusion of face, as at this day. 207 all
g these plagues are come upon us, which the Lord hath pronounced against us. Yet have we not
intreated the favour of the Lord, in turning every one from the thoughts of his wicked heart.
g Therefore hath the Lord kept watch over the plagues, and the Lord hath brought them upon us;
το for the Lord is righteous in all his works which he hath commanded us. Yet we have not hearkened unto his voice, to walk in the commandments of the Lord that he hath set before us.
11 And now, O Lord, thou God of Israel, that hast brought thy people out of the land of Egypt
with a mighty hand, and with signs, and with wonders, and with great power, and with a high arm,
12 and hast gotten thyself a name, as at this day: O Lord our God, we have sinned, we have done
13 ungodly, we have dealt unrighteously in all thine ordinances. Let thy wrath turn from us: for we
obviously Deuteronomic, cf. Deut. xxvill. 60 (Hebr. and G). In the original there would stand nbsm AYA 33 pawn (cf. also Dan. ix. 11). But S has a variant which is more probable. See Introd., ὃ 9, ii (Syr. Version).
21-22 continue in the Deuteronomic strain (esp. of Deut. xxviii) reflected in Dan. ix. 5-17. S contains an interpretative expansion ‘to do all the words of his servants the prophets’.
22. (ἢ (followed by Vet. Lat. a and Ar.) wrongly places ἡμῶν instead of αὐτοῦ after καρδίας.
II. 1-2 follow Dan. ix. 12, 13 with many close resemblances in G to the corresponding version in Dan. of G9, but δικαστάς for κριτάς and δικάσαντας for of ἔκρινον. Note ὑπὸ παντὸς τοῦ οὐρανοῦ common to both, καὶ ἔστησεν... δικά- σαντας is almost ἃ literal reproduction of Dan, ix. 12. 5.-Ὁ “πὰ Judah’ in both cases to ‘Israel’. Corresponding to ἔστησεν, ‘made good’, we should have the familiar 07%. This Hif. is used in the sense of keeping a command or
promise by fulfilling it. Cf. verse 24 and Gen. xxvi. 3; Lev. xxvi.g; Deut. ix. 5: 1 Sam. i. 23, xv. 13; I Kings il. 4,
155 ἘΠῚ τ; Jer. Xi. 5, Xxxili. 14. S proto appears to reproduce the Hebr. original, but this is not a necessary conclusion; cf. SHexand Ar.
ἄνθρωπον “lop. Here Hebr. original would be me WN where WN is used collectively as in Joshua ix. 6 and Judg. vii. 23 (where G more correctly has ἀνήρ). ω
(Δ 3 preserve the full original text, since they add τοῦ ἀγαγεῖν (Q* ἀναγαγεῖν) ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς κακὰ μέγαλα ἅ, ‘to bring upon us great plagues such as’, just as in Dan. ix. 12, i.e. in Hebr. original ,. , TWN πο ΠΡ Ὁ seas. So SHex.
(with asterisks) and Ar. 8, however, has |uiso ek. lo, perhaps based on 77) yody 83%, and after ‘heaven’ adds ‘upon all the earth’ (evidently an expansion ; cf. Dan. ix. 12).
3. ἄνθρωπον, Hebr. YN in sense of ‘every one’. We have here language based on Jer. xix. 9, Deut. xxviii. 53 (cf. Lev. xxvi. 29); G* ‘sons’ (plur.); so Ar. S has s¢zg. as G®.
4. ὑποχειρίους, ‘in subjection’, 172 ΠΝ jn” [cf. Gen. xiv. 20 (H and G)], closely followed in 5. The latter part of the verse is an echo of Jer. xlii, 18 (G closely corresponds), ‘reproach and a desolation’, mvs np ; οὗ ἢ
5. Borrowed from Deut. xxviii. 13.
CONFESSION OF THE EXILED COMMUNITY IN BABYLON, ii. 6-iii. 8 (document A).
6. Repetition of i. 15 with slight variation.
7. S renders ‘seeing that the Lord our God hath uttered against us all these evils’, &c., eo SA») Ss»
-« ἐκεί
Eve [yos? Ἱμωο, which is a better rendering of the original Hebr. apy ONat NNW nyindocny sy TiN 734 WR. See Introd., ὃ 9, ii (Syr. Vers.). Here, however, 5865: follows Gas usual. On ὡς ἡ ἡμέρα αὕτη cf. Bar. v. 6 note.
8. G is here nearly identical with G# in the corresponding portion of Dan. ix. 13. νοημάτων, ‘thoughts’; S wind}, ‘inclinations’, ‘desires’, as in i. 22 (διανοίᾳ), corresponds to Hebr. NNAWMD,
9. An almost exact replica of Dan. ix. 14, which in its turn echoes Jer. xliv. 27. Note that for ‘works which he hath done’ in the Dan. passage, we have here ‘which he hath commanded us’ (in S \,a99 just as in G and Sher Hebr. 33¥). Yahweh is watching over the calamities in order to bring them to pass as retribution for transgression.
Io. Repeats with variations i. 18, which closely follows Dan. ix. 10, G partly following the Dan. passage in G®.
11. Reproduces Dan. ix. 15 in its earlier part with Deuteronomic phrases added. Here again G follows the Dan. version of (9.
12. Continues the Danielic phraseology at the close of ix. 15 (cf. 5). Geandé in Dan. as rendering of Ὁ ΟΞ. Cf. verse I.
13. The language is borrowed from Jer. xlii. 2, 72701) by ἽΝ.) ‘D ‘for we are left but a few out of many’ (cf.
G, however, prefers δικαιώματα to the κρίματα of
14 are but a few left among the heathen, where thou hast scattered us. Hear our prayer, O Lord, and our petition, and deliver us for thine own sake, and give us favour in the sight of them which have 15 led us away captive: that all the earth may know that thou art the Lord our God, because Israel 16 and his posterity is called by thy name. O Lord, look down from thine holy house, and consider 17 us: incline thine ear, O Lord, and hear: open thine eyes, and behold: for the dead that are in the grave, whose breath is taken from their bodies, will give unto the Lord neither glory nor righteousness : 18 but the soul that is greatly vexed, which goeth stooping and feeble, and the eyes that fail, and the rg hungry soul, will give thee glory and righteousness, O Lord. For we do not present our supplication 20 before thee, O Lord our God, for the righteousness of our fathers, and of our kings. For thou hast sent thy wrath and thine indignation upon us, as thou hast spoken by thy servants the prophets, 21 saying, Thus saith the Lord, Bow your shoulders to serve the king of Babylon, and remain in the 22 land that I gave unto your fathers. But if ye will not hear the voice of the Lord, to serve the king 23 of Babylon, I will cause to cease out of the cities of Judah, and from without Jerusalem, the voice of mirth, and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom, and the voice of the bride: and the 24 whole land shall be desolate without inhabitant. But we would not hearken unto thy voice, to serve the king of Babylon: therefore hast thou made good thy words that thou spakest by thy servants the prophets, zamely, that the bones of our kings, and the bones of our fathers, should be taken out 25 of their places. And, lo, they are cast out to the heat by day, and to the frost by night, and they 26 died in great miseries by famine, by sword, and by pestilence. And the house which is called by thy name hast thou laid was¢e,as at this day, for the wickedness of the house of Israel and the house
Deut. iv. 27). ἀπὸ πολλῶν has been accidentally dropped out of G*® and is inserted in 8. ΠΕ" τσ. We are
justified in restoring 72771) to the Heb. 1 Baruch, since some G codd. (22, 36, 48, 51, and others) retain ἀπὸ πολλ. and its omission is indicated in the marg. of SH®=-. S supplies us here with a parallelism: ‘because we have been left a few out of many and are scanty among these peoples among whom thou hast scattered us.’
14. ἀποικίζω corresponds to NAY (cf. Jer. xliii. 12, H and G). So here S eda.
15. S adds ‘holy’ to ‘name’. ’
16-17. ἐννόησον eis jas = 323 13} (or f2 Dan. ix. 23, G? ἐννοήθητι ἐν). S repeats jam, κάτιδε, ODT (or PWT, Deut.
Hoe . . . thine eyes repeat Dan. ix. 18. On ὧν... αὐτῶν Hebr. relat. cf. verses 4, 13 above.
We have here the ordinary O. T. teaching of life in Shed] taught in Ps. vi. 6, Ixxxvili. 11, Cxv. 17. πνεῦμα Corresponds in meaning to O° ΠΥ of Gen. vi. 17 (cf. ONO NW), ii. 7). σπλάγχνα usually corresponds to Hebr. Ὁ ΘΠ (cf. 5), but here it is more likely that the original had ὩΣ (as Kneucker suggests). δικαίωμα here = δικαιοσύνη (verse 18 ad fin.). Comp. Isa. xlv. 23 foll. The corresponding Hebr. ΠΡῸῪΝ describes ‘that aspect of Yahweh's activity which has for its object the salvation of His people’ (Kautzsch in DB, v, p. 683).
18. ἐπὶ τὸ μέγεθος has caused difficulty to interpreters. S affords no help. Fritzsche rightly suspects that there lurks behind it a corrupted Hebr. original. The passage seems to reflect the spirit of Deut. xxviii. 65 f.
19. καταβάλλυμεν τὸν ἔλεον, ‘present our supplication’, is fairly clear. S paraphrases: ‘We seek from Thy presence compassion and cast our supplication in Thy presence.’ It is nearly certain that we have here the rendering of the original Hebr. ΠΣ nda WIN, Jer. xxxvili. 26, xlli. 9; Dan. ix. 20, In all these passages G renders 730A (which means ‘ pity’ and thence is used in the pregnant sense ‘/ruyer for pity’) by the corresponding ἔλεος, properly ‘compassion’, ‘ pity’, like the Hebr. equivalent, and similarly used in a pregnant sense.
This verse exhibits a reaction against the prevalent Jewish doctrine of merit. It is not on account of the righteousness of ancestors and kings that we found our claim to divine compassion. See Weber, Jd. Theol., §§ 63 foll. δικαιώματα, ‘acts of righteousness’ (ΠΡῚΝ) ; comp. Rom. v. 18.
20. Phraseology borrowed from Jer. xxxvi. 7, 7207) 4&0 ‘wrath and indignation’. So also as in Dan, ix. 6, D'N337 712 }ν (G° παιδων, GP δουλων). Here Dan. LXX for ‘servants’ is followed.
21. Based on Jer. xxvii. 11,12 and xxix. 5 f., ‘bow your shoulders,’ in Hebr. DIINIY 334 (or perhaps D2nIY 27, Gen. xlix. 15), reflecting the attitude of Jeremiah and Ezekiel towards Babylonia ; cf. i. 11-12 above. bie
23 reproduces Jeremiah’s words repeated in Jer. vii. 34, Xvi. 9, xxxiii. 11. εἰς ἄβατον, ‘desolate’, probably εἰς ἐρήμωσιν in Jer. vil. 34, mann ; comp. S }aiauaX. ἀπὸ ἐνοικούντων is an obvious Hebraism, viz. Wi ( av PND,
24. ἔστησας, ‘thou hast made good’, cf. ii. 1, 12, note.
should be taken out, τοῦ ἐξενεχθῆναι = δον πο, Jer. viii. 1. S has also the act., viz. yon (Aph.).
25. Based on Jer. xxxvi. 30; latter part of the verse follows Jer. xiv. 12, xxxviii. 2.
sword, famine, pestilence, but in the order ‘famine, sword, pestilence’. That ἀποστολή represents ‘ pestilence ’ (027) is clear from Jer. xxxii. 36, where ἀποστολή is given in G. This use of the Greek word appears to arise from
the use of ἀποστέλλειν as the equivalent of πον when employed as in Jer. xxiv. 1o (H and G) of Yahweh sending plagues as chastisement. S and Ar. ‘exile’ appears to have arisen from a misunderstanding of the true meaning of ἀποστολή as SHex. marg. indicates.
26. οὗ... ἐπὶ ait@. Heb. relat. constr. as in ii. 4,13. There are no sufficient grounds, as Kneucker alleges, for regarding the first part of this verse as not genuine. Of the genuineness of the entire verse we have clear evidence in its thoroughly Hebraic diction. Not only the relat. construction already noted, but also ὡς ἡ ἡμέρα αὕτη reflects the pregnant use of 3 (Gesen.-Kautzsch, Hebr. Gr.®, § 118. 6, cf. Hos. ii. 5, 17, ix. 9, xii. 10). Moreover, the verse stands in full harmony with i. 2. The mere fact of repetitions of phrase (Kneucker cites i. 15, ii. 15) constitutes no argument against genuineness in a document crowded with repetition.
LE Ὑ ὙΨΥΨΥ, ᾿ς
ae ee) we reed Freee eee
ERLE sae af eA eaesy
| 27 of Judah. Yet, O Lord our God, thou hast dealt with us after all thy kindness, and according to all 28 that great mercy of thine, as thou spakest by thy servant Moses in the day when thou didst command | 29 him to write thy law before the children of Israel, saying, If ye will not hear my voice, surely this very great multitude shall be turned into a small amber among the nations, where I will scatter »3othem. For I know that they will not hear me, because it is a stiffnecked people: but in the land 31 of their captivity they shall lay it to heart, and shall know that I am the Lord their God: and I 32 will give them a heart, and ears to hear: and they shall praise me in the land of their captivity, and 33 think upon my name, and shall return from their stiff neck, and from their wicked deeds: for they 34 shall remember the way of their fathers, which sinned before the Lord. And I will bring them again into the land which 1 sware unto their fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, and they 35 shall be lords of it: and I will increase them, and they shall not be diminished. And I will make an everlasting covenant with them to be their God, and they shall be my people: and I will no more remove my people of Israel out of the land that I have given them. O Lord Almighty, thou God of Israel, the soul in anguish, the troubled spirit, crieth unto thee. 2 Hear, O Lord, and have mercy ; for thou art a merciful God: yea, have mercy upon us, because we , 4 have sinned before thee. For thou sittest as king for ever, and we perish evermore. O Lord Almighty, thou God of Israel, hear now the prayer of the dead Israelites, and of the children of them which were sinners before thee, that hearkened not unto the voice of thee their God: for the _ | 5 which cause these plagues clave unto us. Remember not the iniquities of our fathers: but remember 1 6 thy power and thy name zow at this time. For thou art the Lord our God, and thee, O Lord, will 7 we praise. For for this cause thou hast put thy fear in our hearts, to the intent that we should call upon thy name: and we will praise thee in our captivity, for we have called to mind all the
27. S adds after ‘kindness’ the clause ‘and according to all thy purpose’ (gtady)- Comp. Ps. li. 3.
29. Comp. Deut. xxviii. 62. The reading εἰ μήν (G**) [in Ο ἡ μήν], ‘surely’, arose out of εἰ μή, a literal rendering of the original Hebr. x ON idiom used to express a strong asseveration which would be unintelligible in its literal Greek form. S, on the other hand, reproduces the Hebr. original. See Winer, Grammar of N.T. Greek, 8th ed., p. 553, footnote 7 (on Heb. vi. 14), and especially p. 627, footnote 3, where useful parallels are given. βόμβησις, ‘multitude’, corresponds to /1!2 in the original (so Fritzsche, who compares Jer. xxxi. 34 ἐβόμβησε, 197), rendered ‘people’ in S, which expands into a parallelism, ‘shall be turned into a small number and shall be diminished among the peoples.’ Hebr. relat. constr. ot . . . ἐκεῖ as in verses 4, 13, 26, above.
30. lay it to heart is hardly satisfactory. The phrase is an echo of I Kings vill. 47, where R. V. rightly renders “bethink themselves’ (cf. Luke xv. 17 and Delitzsch’s Hebr.), nad-bis 33°, almost literally reproduced in GS and L (convertetur ad cor suum). ἀποικισμός = YY, Jer. xliii. 11.
31. Hebr. ins ‘ear’ (sing. and du.) is used to express ‘mind’, ‘ intelligence’ (cf. Assyr. zzz). Comp. 1 Sam. ix. 15,
32. A parallelism. i 5 " are.
33. stiff neck, NWP AY, as in verse 30 (TY NYP, Exod. xxxii. 9, &c.; Deut. ix. 6, &c.), though we have τράχηλος ᾿ in 30 and νῶτος here (S has same word) for ‘neck’.
34. Deuteronomic (Deut. vi. 10, &c.); last clause echoes Jer. xix. 6 ὁ. ᾿
35 recalls Jer. xxxi. 31, xxii. 40; remove,. probably ὯΝ as in Isa. xlvi. 7 (cf. Num. xiv. 44), though S suggests
a stronger word. Kneucker prefers WAN, cf. Jer. xii. 14 foll., xlii. 10.
III. 1-8. Bitter cry of appeal to God from the exiles, and confession of past sin.
I. Παντοκράτωρ, ‘ Almighty’, Hebr. NINIY¥, as in 2 Sam. v. 10, vii. 8, 26, &c., appended to 117".
crieth, ΠΡΌ (as in Ps, Ixxvii. 2). S + ‘afflicted body’ (perhaps ΠΡ 7543).
2. S characteristically adds ‘God’ to ‘ Lord’.
a merciful God, yea have mercy’. God’.
So S (as in 2 Sam. ἀκηδιῶν must be the partic. and would correspond to
G® ‘Hear, O Lord, and have mercy’, (Δ ™4rg- + ‘for thou art S + ‘for thou art merciful and kind’. L and Ar. + ‘ because thou art a merciful In the original we might therefore assume, with Kneucker, TAX WOM 730 1D 33M, 3. καθήμενος corresponds to IY, used of sitting on a throne, Exod. xi. 5 (H and G). We should probably follow _) Ps. xxix. 10 (rather than Isa. Ivii. 15, with Kneucker), i.e. pdiyd aw. S ‘abidest for ever’. 4. For ‘dead’ of GS and other versions, read with R. V. marg. ‘men’, ΤΠ of the original Hebrew being misread ΤΠ instead of ‘ND. A more literal rendering of G would be: ‘and [so] the evils clave unto us.’ S prefixes ‘curses’ )to ‘evils’, The original would then be nya} niqw7 332 ΠΩΡΞ ΠῚ (cf. Deut. xxviii. 20), or in sing. ANT 2 pam yy. pai is. 8. ‘iniquity and folly’, apparently based on an alliterative combination, aNNOND WS ndasmy ndwyn, but here probably, as in many other cases, S expands the original text.
7. With the opening cf. Jer. xxxii. 40 ὁ. The original has become corrupted. Hence we have several variants. S ‘that we may invoke (call upon) thy holy name’, where ‘holy’ is evidently added as inii. 15. In other respects this jaccords with G*°, which substitute τοῦ for καί before ἐπικαλ. In the latter part of the verse G* reads ‘because we jhave put away from our mind all the iniquity’, &c. Similarly Ar. and Vet. L. @ convertimur ab iniquitate. But
GBM Ae εἰ αἱ. “because we have recalled to our mind’ (ἐπὶ καρδίαν), ἄς. S ‘because ¢how hast recalled to our mind
II
THE BOOK OF ΒΕ ΘΗ 85 τὸ
iniquity of our fathers, that sinned before thee. Behold, we are yet this day in our captivity, where thou hast scattered us, for a reproach and a curse, and to be subject to penalty, according to all the iniquities of our fathers, which departed from the Lord our God.
Hear, O Israel, the commandments of life : Give ear to understand wisdom.
How happeneth it, O Israel, that thou art in thine enemies’ land, That thou art waxen old in a strange country,
That thou art defiled with the dead, That thou art counted with them that go dow into the grave?
Thou hast forsaken the fountain of wisdom.
For if thou hadst walked in the way of God, Thou shouldst have dwelled in peace for ever.
ws YT lh
Learn where is wisdom, where is strength, Where is understanding ; that thou mayst know also
Where is length of days, and life, Where is the light of the eyes, and peace.
Who hath found out her place? And who hath come into her treasuries ?
PROT Se ΠΡ ὙΡΡΡΙ eee
Where are the princes of the heathen, And such as ruled the beasts that are upon the earth ;
They that had their pastime with the fowls of the air, And they that hoarded up silver
And gold, wherein men trust And of whose getting there is no end?
For they that wrought in silver, and were so careful, And whose works are past finding out,
all the evils and iniquity . . .’, where we have an expanded version, but may perhaps infer that in the Hebrew original! Ἧ
8. οὗ. . . ἐκεῖ, Hebr. rel. constr. as in ii. 4, 13, 26, and also recurrence of the phraseology of ii. 4 and 29, comp. — Jer. xlii. 18. S lengthens the series: curse, reproach, derision, and condemnation (= ὄφλησις R.V. to be subje to penalty), the last word in S being the same as that which renders κρίμα in 1 Cor. xi. 34 (cf. Delitzsch, Hed. ΛΝ, 7. ad loc.). The Jer. parallel has also four terms: curse, horror, malediction, reproach (in which ‘ malediction’ in G is _ rendered dpa). Accordingly S restores to our text the ‘curse’ of the Jez. passage, whereas the condemnation (subjection to penalty) might be regarded as a weakened form of the ‘horror’. The original of S we might accordingly —
conjecture to be MOwINDA nddpor mBq} πόνο,
BARUCH’S PRAISE OF AND EXHORTATION TO WISDOM REVEALED IN THE LAW, iii. 9-ἶν. 4 (document Β). 9. S ‘understanding and wisdom’. Comp. Proy. iv.16. The fuller expression in S maintains a more equable and
rhythmic parallelism, mands ΓΞ ny3> ΡΠ. The influence of the Wisdom literature (esp. of Prov.) throughout this document is obvious and natural. 10-12. R.V. rightly follows (δ ὁ in omitting in verse Io the second τί of G®. It is quite possible that we ought here to follow S and read: Wherefore, O Israel, art thou waxen old in thine enemies’ land, Hast polluted thyself (M887) in a strange land (cf. Hos. ix. 4), Art counted (ΠΟ) with the dead who go down to the grave (rin ‘77, Ps. lv. 16; Prov. i. 12), Hast forsaken the fountain ΟΡ) of Wisdom? (Prov. xviii. 4). 16-17. Wisdom is not to be found among the rich and mighty of this world. There seems to be a subtle reference to Nebuchadnezzar. Cf. Dan. ii. 37, iv. 20f.; Jer. xxvii. 6. 16. It would be best to render here by ‘ peoples’ (OY) rather than ‘heathen’, since ἔθνος also stands as the
equivalent of OY (Gen. xvii. 16; Lev. xxi. 1; Prov. xxx.26). So Kneucker. Moreover S reads here poiy (ody) ‘age’
which is evidently a corruption of OD}. 17 portrays the luxury and amusements of the rich. Comp. Judith xi. 7. " 18, they that wrought in silver might correspond to }D3 ὙΠ, as Kneucker suggests. Prov. xi. 27 (R.V. margin)»
They are vanished and gone down to the grave, And others are come up in their steads,
Younger men have seen the light, And dwelt upon the earth:
But the way of knowledge have they not known, Neither understood they the paths thereof:
Neither have their children laid hold of it: They are far off from their way.
It hath not been heard of in Canaan, Neither hath it been seen in Teman.
3. The sons also of Agar that seek understanding, [which are in the land, ] The merchants of Merran4and Teman,
And the authors of fables, and the searchers out of understanding ;
None of these have known the way of wisdom, Or remembered her paths.
‘4 O Israel, how great is the house of God! And how large is the place of his possession ! 5 Great, and hath none end ;
High, and unmeasurable.
6 There were the giants born that were famous of old, Great of stature, avd expert in war.
would lead us on a wrong scent. We should rather find the original through 5, ‘who gain silver’, ἢ ‘2p, which
might also mean ‘ makers’ or ‘fashioners’ in silver. This is really an Aramaic use of 3), reflected in the later Hebrew diction of Gen. xiv. 19, 22; Prov. viii. 22; Ps. cxxxix. 13. Both this and the following verse begin with the interrog. “Who ?’ in S, in continuation of the series of interrogations that follow after ‘Learn where’, &c., in verse 14. On the other hand, G begins verse 18 with ὅτι, ‘for’, as thoughit gave the reason for the preceding verses. As these are interrog., we can only obtain an intelligible sequence with verse 18 in G by assuming (with Fritzsche) that a negative answer [‘ They no longer exist’| is implied after verse 17. But this anticipates verse 19. It would be better, there- | fore, to read at the opening of this verse with S, ‘who are they who gain (are makers in) silver. ..?’ ae
whose works are past finding out. A relat. sentence, more literally ‘There is no searching (ἐξεύρεσις) of
their works’. S ‘There is no numbering of their works’. The Hebrew original of G would be pinyynd TPH PS), and
of S md BD j'8}. The latter is perhaps an inferior reading. But both are quite consonant with the Wisdom literature on which this document (B) int Baruch is modelled. Prov. xxv. 3; Job v. 9, ix. 10, xxxvi. 26 (cf. Isa. xl. 28). 19. The answer to the preceding queries. All these devotees of worldly pomp have vanished. Ὁ ᾿ 20. ‘The young’ would be a better translation of νεώτεροι OY37, as opposed to DPT (πρεσβύτεροι), Ps. xxxvil. 25, cxlvili. 12 (cf. Judges viii. 20). ‘Have seen the light’ ‘ have been born ᾽ Job ili. 16, 20, xxxiii. 30. For ‘knowledge’ S has ‘loving intelligence’ (sikolé d°rehm®th6) or ‘ intelligence avd love’ (Lag.), an evident later expansion.
21. their children, i.e. the third generation, viz. sons of the young men of verse 20, who are themselves the sons of those who are referred to in verse 19.
are far off. S ‘have removed themselves far and revolted from z¢s way’, i.e. of knowledge. Fritzsche rightly
restores the sing, with S in place of the plur. (αὐτῶν) with G, so also Rothstein. Moreover, the fuller rendering in 5 points to a more rhythmic length of line in the original 711") 3PN7 ADVAN,
22. Teman, situated in Edom, was celebrated for its wisdom, Jer. xlix. 7. ; >
23 is at variance with the passive construction of the previous verse (contained in G). From this defect S_is \/entirely free, which shows the impress of the Hebrew original. This verse 1s obviously a continuation of the preceding '‘nor among the Hagarenes who seek after understanding’, 73330 ΡΞ 30 an}. The error in G probably arose | from the omission of the first 3 in 1933 (cf. i. 1). The force of the preceding negatives continues in this clause. Hence /there is no need to write 9223 85), “ The emendation of 083M into WNIAN ‘gains’, by Kneucker (who reads ΠΝ) YIND, ‘die um Erwerb das Land durchziehen’), is utterly unwarranted, and tends to destroy the parallelism. Probably ᾿ ‘“Merran’ has arisen by corruption from ‘ Midian’ through the constant confusion that arises between Ἵ and Ἢ (so Gifford,
who cites ‘ Medan and Midian’, Gen. xvi. 15, xxv. 2, sons of Keturah). Comp. Geri. xxxvii. 36. The Hagarenes are ‘mentioned in Gen. xxv. 12f. They are the nomads referred to in 1 Chron. v. 20f., xxvii. 31. They inhabited the district jeast of Gilead. Comp. Ps. Ixxxiii. 7.
It is impossible to resist the suspicion that this verse has received undue extension. S has ‘followed up’ for
|fremembered ’, through corruption of its own text, i.e. REST) instead of φρο, ee ; ; 7 | 24. S prefixes ‘ Lord’ to ‘God’, thus securing the usual. combination. For large it reads ‘long and spacious’. 25. S has here an abbreviated text which spoils parallelism and rhythm, viz. ‘ And it has no end and is lofty and has no measure.’ The ‘ house of God’ here is evidently the Uxzverse (not heaven exclusively as in il. 16).
26. Gen. vi. 4 plays a considerable part in later Jewish writings, as 1 En, vii; Sir. xvi. 7; Wisd. xiv. 6.
These did not God choose, Neither gave he the way of knowledge unto them :
So they perished, because they had no wisdom, They perished through their own foolishness.
Who hath gone up into heaven, and taken her, And brought her down from the clouds ?
Who hath gone over the sea, and found her, And will bring her for choice gold ?
There is none that knoweth her way, Nor any that comprehendeth her path.
But he that knoweth all things knoweth her, He found her out with his understanding :
He that prepared the earth for evermore Hath filled it with four-footed beasts :
He that sendeth forth the light, and it goeth ; He called it, and it obeyed him with fear:
And the stars shined in their watches, and were glad : When he called them, they said, Here we be; They shined with gladness unto him that made them.
This is our God, And there shall none other be accounted of in comparison of him.
27-28. For ‘knowledge’ S has ‘ wisdom’. 28 ἃ (= 27 4) in S ‘ wisdom and understanding’.
29-30. The interrog., as frequently in Hebrew, anticipates a negat. answer. Comp. as parallels Deut. xxx. 12, 133 i
Prov. xxx. 4; Sir. li, 28. Here again S expands beyond the original (which was probably 0° mayb ay Ὁ) into ‘who hath passed over the sea’s bounds and extremities’. i 31. From the interrog. form we pass to the direct negat. For ‘comprehendeth’ (ἐνθυμούμενος), S ‘ meditateth’, ‘pondereth ’, perhaps Hebr. [30 (Prov. xxiii. 1), or ᾿Ξ (Isa. xliil. 18, lil, 15, Job xxxvil. 14). 32. Only God can discover wisdom with His omniscience—a clear echo from the Book of Job (xxviii. 12-24, which evidently underlies the thought of this passage). For ‘ understanding’ S has ‘wisdom’, cf, verse 27 above. For
‘prepared’ read with S ‘established’ (j'312). ‘For evermore’, perhaps, as S indicates, in Hebr. py>iy pdiyd. Υ
‘ Four-footed beasts’ (τετράποδα) corresponds to Hebr. ni293. G has evidently influenced’ here S, which renders | “beasts of four feet’; see Introd., § 9, ii (Syr. versions). : 33. fear is an inadequate rendering of τρύμῳ. S has a different conclusion to the verse which might appear to” indicate a lost line: ‘Who sendeth forth the light and it goes, and called it and it obeyed him, and the earth — responded to him with trembling.’ Here the introduction of the earth comes in abruptly after the reference to the light of heaven in the previous couplet : ; wows yovin i> sip
TTS (aa) esa
‘trembling’ (τρόμος) is more consonant with the earthquake, and is therefore more in place when connected with
the earth than in reference to light. Cf. Ps. xviii. 8, xlvi. 7, civ. 32. Rothstein interprets ‘light’ as lightning (Job xxxvii. 3, avi 35), but this does not harmonize with verse 34, though readily compatible with such an intervening couplet as indicates. 34. their watches. S ‘their places’. We have to choose between the original readings : ΠῚ ΟΞ and oninipra. The latter is colourless, and might have arisen by corruption from the former, which yields a picturesque and appropriate metaphor, the stars being represented as keeping sentinel duty at their night-watches. Cf. Sir. xliii. 10. Hom. J/iad viil. 555,556. ‘ Here we be’ (πάρεσμεν), S ‘ behold us’ reproduces the Hebr. original 337), 35 exhibits evident echoes of Isa. xliii. 10, 11, xliv. 6, xlv. 18, which in S become more apparent than in G, since we have three clauses, the third being a parallel of the second. S omits ‘our’, and for ‘in comparison of (πρός) him’ in the third clause renders * above him’ (q10) :
This is God, and there is none other beside Him, And none other shall be reckoned above Him.
wiydad IMS PX) YON NT (or 35>) NPY WAN avy δ
/36 He hath found out all the way of knowledge,
37. And hath given it unto Jacob his servant, And to Israel that is beloved of him.
ει [Afterward did she appear upon earth, And was conversant with men. |
| This is the book of the commandments of God, And the law that endureth for ever:
2 All they that hold it fast ave appointed to life ; But such as leave it shall die. 3 Turn thee, O Jacob, and take hold of it : _ Walk towards her shining in the presence of the light thereof. Give not thy glory to another, Nor the things that are profitable unto thee to a strange nation, O Israel, happy are we: For the things that are pleasing to God are made known unto us.
5 Be of good cheer, my people, The memorial of Israel.
Ye were sold to the nations, But not for destruction :
Because ye moved God to wrath, Ye were delivered unto your adversaries.
For ye provoked him that made you By sacrificing unto demons, and not to God.
36. For ‘ knowledge’ S has ‘ wisdom’, probably in accordance with the original. Comp., however, verses 27 and 32 above. The passage reflects Jewish particularism, and is evidently based on Sir. xxiv. 8 foll. Cf. Prov. viii. 31.
37 has long been suspected as a Christian gloss (Grotius, Hitzig, Hilgenfeld, Kneucker, Rothstein). Greek and Latin Fathers cite it in the interests of the Logos doctrine. See Introd., § 10. In S the subject is masc., i.e. God: ‘revealed himself and was seen.’ So L and Ar. In G the subject is probably God as in verse 36, but it might be | wisdom (knowledge) ; cf. Prov. vill. 31.
IV. 1 is evidently connected with iv. 36 (rather than 37). identified with the Torah, which is eternal. S ‘book and memorial of the commandments... to all who hold it fast it shall be (for) life’. The addition ‘ and memorial’ is evidently an extension of the original.
2. The expression is varied in S:
Turn and incline, O Jacob ; Lay hold and go in its path (cf. Prov. ili. 18, iv. 13) Toward the brightness of its light (cf. Isa. lx. 3).
3. For ‘glory’, S ‘praise and honour’, and for ‘ profitable’ (συμφέροντα G), S ‘good and advantageous’, which | are evidently paraphrastic expansions. ‘Glory’ prob. in Hebr. original ὙΠ (Dan. xi, 21).
4. S ‘Happy are we, happy art thou . . . What is pleasing to God we know.’
Hebrew idiom, which would here be YT ods ΘΠ (cf. Deut. xxiii. 17).
The wisdom which God has bestowed. on Jacob is
This last clause conforms to the
SONGS OF LAMENTATION AND COMFORT ADDRESSED (a) BY JERUSALEM TO HER EXILED CHILDREN, AND (6) OF
| CONSOLATION ADDRESSED BY GOD TO JERUSALEM, iv. 5-v. 9 (document C). (Verses 5 to 9a should be regarded as introductory.) x
(a) Lamentation and comfort addressed by Jerusalem to her banished sons (iv. 9 6-29). The situation is that of the Jews in exile (verses 8, 10), just as in chap. i, and the language is obviously moulded on that of the Deutero-Isaiah, but, unlike the Deutero-Isaiah, the language of lamentation is more prominent, and the situation is painted in darker } colours. In verses 7 foll. confession is made of past transgression (as in i. 17-11. 12) for which the present calamities } are the penalty (iv. 6). In iv. 17-29 the exiles are exhorted to cry to God and deliverance from their enemies will
come. Though the present be painful it shall speedily end, and better days shall come (21-24) ; destruction shall } befall their foes (25 foll.), and for the exiles joy in place of the evils of the past.
5. S renders here, as in verses 27, 30, ‘be comforted’, which is evidently a Deutero-Isaianic trait (cf. Isa. xl. 1,
liv. 11). Also for ‘my people’, S ‘people of God’. ‘ Memorial’ ( remembrance’ = Hebr. 131) is the equivalent of
‘name’, to which it frequently stands in parallelism (Exod. iii. 15 ; Job xvill. 17; Prov. x. 7).
Cf. Deut. xxv. 19 and LXX (Kneucker).
The word ‘ memorial’, therefore, means those who preserve Israel’s name (Grotius, Fritzsche).
| 6. S ‘your adversaries’ (as R. V.), giving greater definiteness than Ὁ (τοῖς ὑπεναντίοις). For * ye moved God to wrath’ |(G®S L Ar.) G4 has ‘we’, by obvious textual error.
7 contains an evident reminiscence of Deut. xxxii. 16, 17.
S appends to ‘him that made you’ the appositional
Ye forgat the everlasting God, that brought you up; Ye grieved also Jerusalem, that nursed you.
For she saw the wrath that is come upon you from God, And said,
Hearken, ye women that dwell about Sion:
For God hath brought upon me great mourning ;
For I have seen the captivity of my sons and daughters, Which the Everlasting hath brought upon them.
For with joy did I nourish them ; But sent them away with weeping and mourning.
Let no man rejoice over me, A widow, and forsaken of many : For the sins of my children am I left desolate ;
Because they turned aside from the law of God, And had no regard to his statutes,
Neither walked they in the ways of God’s commandments, Nor trod in the paths of discipline in his righteousness.
Let them that dwell about Sion come, And remember ye the captivity of my sons and daughters, Which the Everlasting hath brought upon them.
For he hath brought a nation upon them from far, A shameless nation, and of a strange language,
Who neither reverenced old man, Nor pitied child.
And they have carried away the dear beloved sons of the widow, And left her that was alone desolate of her daughters.
But I, what can I help you?
phrase ‘the everlasting God’, an evident expansion, since it recurs in the following verse. This appellation
‘everlasting’ attached to God (αἰώνιος) is a Deutero-Isaianic trait (Isa. xl. 28 ἃ ody ὙΠΟ Ν) which is ἃ special characteristic of the document C (iv. 10, 14, 20, 22, 24, 35, v. 2). Gifford indeed remarks that αἰώνιος seems to take the place of κύριος (717).
8. An equally evident reminiscence of Deut. xxxiil. 184. S applies the term ‘ nurse’ in both clauses, i. e. to both God and Jerusalem. ‘God, that zuvsed you ... Jerusalem, that veaved you’ would be a closer rendering of the Greek. GA, again, in the first clause substitutes ‘us’ for ‘ you’ (as in verse 6), i. 6. ἡμᾶς for ὑμᾶς, against G? S L Ar.
9. S characteristically prefixes ‘Lord’ to ‘ God’ in both places, and introduces the parallelism ‘the wrath which has come upon you and the anger from the presence of the Lord God’ ; to ‘ great’ it adds ‘eternal’ as epithet of ‘ mourning’. In 94 (‘ Hearken ye...’) begins Jerusalem’s lamentation over the exile of her sons (9 6-16).
1o. S ‘everlasting Lord’ and ‘upon me’ (not ‘them’). The latter is probably due to a harmonizing tendency.
11-12. S + ‘and groaning (sighs)’. Also ‘rejoice in my widowhood who am abandoned and desolated of much people’. The language and ideas are cast in the Deutero-Isaianic mould (Isa. xlix. 21, liv. 1, 4). S also appends an extra parallel clause with variation in phraseology :
‘Because of the sins of my sons, because they turned aside from the fa‘h of the Lord God.’
13. S ‘statutes and judgements’, the familiar combination in Deut. (Deut. iv. 1, &c.) The rest of the verse in S runs: ‘ Nor did they walk in the way of God’s statutes, nor did they tread or betake themselves to the paths of true instruction (lit. instruction of truth) in righteousness.’ Here ‘instruction’ (discipline) and ‘betake themselves’ are expansions. ‘ Truth’, however, rests on a more secure textual foundation, being found in G®* 4l- (+ ἀληθείας) L (om. disctplinae). And it has O.T. warrant. Cf. 1 Kings iii. 6.
14. We have here a change from 3rd to 2nd person. This, however, should probably be consistently carried out through the entire verse, as in S (so Kneucker). S om.‘ come’, and has in its place the pers. pron. ‘ ye’ (‘ ye inhabitants
of Zion, remember’), but this is probably due to inner-Syriac corruption of yooh “come ye’ to μον OME
15. Evidently echoes Deut. xxviii. 49, 50.
16. S ‘And they took captive and carried away the beloved (sons) of the widow and her daughters. The ‘daughters’ are inserted in this clause perhaps owing to the influence of verse 14 above. S omits ‘ daughters’, however, in the latter part of the verse: ‘ And her alone and solitary left they desolate.’
17 foll. After the lamentation there now begins a message of comfort. Jerusalem can afford no help, but God can. The question here, as frequently in O. T., implies a negation ; and this S directly expresses.
For he that brought these plagues upon you Will deliver you from the hand of your enemies.
Go your way, O my children, go your way : For I am left desolate.
I have put off the garment of peace, And put upon me the sackcloth of my petition: I will cry unto the Everlasting as long as 1 live.
Be of good cheer, O my children, cry unto God, And he shall deliver you from the power and hand of the enemies.
For I have trusted in the Everlasting, that he will save you ; And joy is come unto me from the Holy One,
Because of the mercy which shall soon come unto you
From the Everlasting your Saviour.
For I sent you out with mourning and weeping : But God will give you to me again with joy and gladness for ever.
For like as now they that dwell about Sion have seen your captivity : So shall they see shortly your salvation from our God, Which shall come upon you with great glory, and brightness of the Everlasting.
My children, suffer patiently the wrath that is come upon you from God: For thine enemy hath persecuted thee ;
But shortly thou shalt see his destruction, And shalt tread upon their necks.
My delicate ones have gone rough ways; They were taken away as a flock carried off by the enemies.
Be of good cheer, O my children, and cry unto God: For ye shall be remembered of him that hath brought ¢hese things upon you.
For as it was your mind to go astray from God: So, return and seek him ten times more.
18. (19 + ὑμῖν after ἐπαγαγών, G* after τὰ κακά.
19. ‘ My’ before children om. GL, and inserted in S Ar.
20. Jerusalem clothed in sackcloth of sorrow and supplication, the reverse of the picture in Isa. lii. 1, Ixi. 3 (cf. 1 Bar. v. 1 below). S takes over στολήν of G. S ‘I will cry unto thee that livest for ever in my days’, G ‘unto the Everlasting in my days’ (= ‘in my life-time’, i. e. ‘as long as I live’).
21. Be of good cheer. S reproduces the form of Isa. li. 17, cf. li. 1, ‘awake’, G® ‘power and hand’, also Ar. Vet. Lat. α, ὁ de manu principum inimicorum appears to presume a reading ἐκ χειρὸς δυναστῶν ἐχθρῶν (Kneucker). G* om. ‘ power’, prob. due to paraphrastic expansion. S carries expansion further: ‘from the hands of the mighty and from the hands of rulers and from the hands of adversaries.’
22. S for ‘ Holy One’ has ‘ Lord God Everlasting’, after which it renders * because he hath at once taken compassion on them on account of the compassion of God your everlasting Saviour’. G*om. ‘ because of the mercy ’ (compassion). There can be little doubt that extensions have crept into the text.
23. S ‘God’ + ‘from whom I received you’ (obvious expansion).
24. S prefixes ‘ Lord’ to ‘ our God’, and continues : ‘and he shall bring you with great joy.’ Also ‘ everlasting Lord’. It may be noted, however, that this appellation of deity, κύριος (717), while frequent and indeed characteristic of the document A, is in reality foreign to C (see Introd., § 11, and note oniv.7). It is evidently introduced by S, which has a tendency to combine ‘ Lord’ with other designations of deity. Comp. S, verses 27 0/5, 28, 36, ν. 1, 2.
25. S ‘ My sons, be patient and endure the wrath’ (+ ‘Lord’). ‘Thine enemy’ G*®S L Ar. G® om. ‘thine’.
26. S expands: ‘have gone into captivity and have travelled on hard rough ways’, apparently an attempt to | represent Isa. xl. 4 (including J?Y and Ὁ 53“). S continues: ‘ They have been scattered on difficult ways, they have | been scattered like a flock that is carried off by enemies.’ ‘Scattered as a flock’ is a combination which meets us in
27. Cf. verse 5. S ‘ for there shall be for you w7/h the Lord remembrance from him that brought ¢/ese [evils] upon you’. Gom. obj. to ‘ brought’.
28-29. The phraseology is singularly unpoetic and non-Hebraic. See Introd. § 6 (¢).
(ὁ) Message of comfort addressed by a prophet in God’s name (iv. 34) to Jerusalem (iv. 30-v. 9). Obviously a pendant to the address to the exiles by Jerusalem (iv. 5-29) which precedes. The enemies of Jerusalem shall receive divine chastisement (iv. 31-35). In this we see the influence of Jer. li. Help shall come from the east (iv. 36, v. 5), ‘ i.e. her exiled sons in Babylonia and the Euphrates lands. The language and ideas of the Deutero-Isaiah resound in | chap. v (esp. verses 5 and 7).
THE BOOK OF BARUCH 4) 2957 ἢ
For he that brought these plagues upon you Shall bring you everlasting joy again with your salvation.
Be of good cheer, O Jerusalem : For he that called thee by name will comfort thee.
Miserable are they that afflicted thee, And rejoiced at thy fall.
Miserable are the cities which thy children served : Miserable is she that received thy sons.
For as she rejoiced at thy fall, And was glad of thy ruin: So shall she be grieved for her own desolation.
And I will take away her exultation in her great multitude, And her boasting shall be turned into mourning.
For fire shall come upon her from the Everlasting, long to endure ; And she shall be inhabited of devils for a great time.
O Jerusalem, look about thee toward the east, And behold the joy that cometh unto thee from God.
Lo, thy sons come, whom thou sentest away,
They come gathered together from the east to the west [at the word of the Holy One], Rejoicing in the glory of God. : Put off, O Jerusalem, the garment of thy mourning and affliction,
And put on the comeliness of the glory that cometh from God for ever.
Cast about thee the robe of the righteousness which cometh from God ; Set a diadem on thine head of the glory of the Everlasting.
For God will show thy brightness unto every vegzow under heaven.
For thy name shall be called of God for ever The peace of righteousness, and the glory of godliness.
30. Be of good cheer recurs here, as previously, iv. 5, 21,27. called thee by name is naturally expressed in S analogously to Dan. i. 7 (cf. Phil. ii. 9). ; é
31-32. Miserable is not an adequate rendering of δείλαιοι. (Shall be) ‘alarmed’ or ‘affrighted ᾿ (5) is nearer the true meaning. Versions render variously. S expands the clauses of the verse: ‘The cities shall be in dread that treated thee ill and rejoiced in thy downfall. The cities shall be in terror that enslaved thy sons. Thou shalt rejoice — in their downfall. They shall be in dread who treated thee ill. She shall be in dread who received thy sons.’ S seems to luxuriate in repetition of the phrase. :
3. S om. second clause of parallelism ἐγ frotasz, but amplifies the afodosis: ‘So shall she be grieved and vexed.’ The city (sing.) which is vaguely referred to in verses 32-5 is evidently Babylon (= Rome).
34. A strange confusion has arisen in G4, which reads ἄγαλμα, ‘statue’, ‘idol’, for ἀγαλλίαμα, ‘ exultation’ (G*). This is reflected in the conflate reading of S, ‘I will take away from her the idols and the exultation of great assemblies, — and the joy shall become mourning.’
35. The conception is evidently derived from Jer. li. 58. Kneucker thinks that we have here a reference to the eruption of Vesuvius in A.D. 79, which would of course furnish a ¢evm. a guo as regards date of document C (Introd., pp. 51 foll.), but the expression in the text is far too general in character. J j
The demons who are to inhabit the desolated city are a feature borrowed from Isa. xiii. 21, 22; Jer. li. 37.
36. The opening clause reflects Isa. xlix. 18, lx. 4.
V. 1. Again, as iniv. 20, S reproduces στολήν of G. affliction, S+‘and suffering’, ‘and array thyself in the splendour
which is from the Lord God unto glory everlasting’. Both conceptions and language resemble Isa. litte 2. durdois, ‘robe’, should rather be rendered by ‘tunic’, viz. the Hebr. Soy of Isa. Ixi, 10, of which this passage 15 evidently an echo. G there renders by χιτῶνα, but διπλοῖς is the rendering in other passages where the same Hebrew This Baruch passage is the reverse of Ps. of Sol. ii. 21, 22, where the μίτρα or ‘ diadem’ (Heb. δ 5) is put off. We have already seen (Introd., ὃ 6) how close is the parallel between 1 Bar. iv. 37-v. 8 and Ps. of Sol. xi. 3-7. Here it may be noted that in S the military ‘helmet’ (Sar?) takes the place of the ‘diadem’ as the woman’s head-dress. See Introd., § 9, ii (Syr. Versions) ad fin. 3. S ‘unto every man upon all the earth’. 4. θεοσέβεια, ‘godliness’, is the equivalent of the Hebr. ‘fear of the Lord’ (so S) as in Job xxviii. 28; comp. Gen. xx. 1. L. pietas. ‘ i
MIE ΘΟ ΚΘ OF BARUCH 5.7529
Arise, O Jerusaiem, and stand upon the height, And look about thee toward the east,
And behold thy children gathered from the going down of the sun unto the rising thereof [at the word of the Holy One],
Rejoicing that God hath remembered them.
For they went from thee on foot, Being led away of their enemies :
But God bringeth them in unto thee Borne on high with glory, as oz a royal throne.
For God hath appointed that every high mountain, and the everlasting hills, should be made low,
And the valleys filled up, to make plain the ground, That Israel may go safely in the glory of God.
8 Moreover the woods and every sweet-smelling tree have overshadowed Israel [by the commandment of God].
9 For God shall lead Israel with joy in the light of his glory With the mercy and righteousness that cometh from him.
5. Evidently reflects the Isaianic passages, Isa. li. 17 and Ix. 4, and these either affect the version in S (e.g. ‘awake’ repeated, a Deutero-Isaianic trait) or S reflects the existence of a variant G in closer adhesion to the Isaianic model. Similarly ‘ gathered’, S + ‘and coming to thee’; cf. Isa. lx. 4. Note in S the military feature ‘ by the tents’ in place of ‘upon the height’ (G), though possibly this might arise by corruption ; see Kneucker, p. 133.
6. G® ὡς θρόνον, Sas [on] a royal throne’, lit. ‘throne of the kingdom’, has occasioned some difficulty. This seems to have been early felt, for in G** L and Ar. we have ‘ children of the kingdom’, i.e. royal sons. The passage is obviously based on the Isaianic passages, Isa. xlix. 22, lx. 4, 9, and lxvi. 20, descriptive of the restoration of Jewish exiles. Are we to interpret ὡς θρόνον as meaning that the children are to be carried in state as a royal throne (a palanquin or sedan chair (Isa. Ixvi. 20)), or, as seems more natural and as S (‘carried aloft in glory on a royal throne ’) warrants us in supposing, should we interpret ὡς θρόνον as equivalent to ‘as on athrone’? This has the appearance of, and probably is, a Hebraism = ND23, the well-known pregnant use of 3, GA,§ 118.6, It would be perilous to base upon such a slender sporadic example any argument for a Hebraic original of the document C in face of the evidence already set forth (Introd., δὲ 6, 9. i). Let us remember that this document came from a patriotic Hellenic Jew familiar with his O. T., both in Greek and Hebrew. Examples of the pregnant use of 3 he would find reflected in his Greek Scriptures, 1 Kings viii. 24; Hos. ii. 5, 17, ix. 9. xii. το. Before deciding upon a Hebr. original-we must give due play to the considerations that should weigh with us as to the effect produced upon the Greek diction of Jews familiar with the Hebr. Scriptures as well as with ‘the LXX, the constant reading of which by Hellenist Jews has unconsciously affected their Greek’. See Moulton, Gr. of NV. 7. Greek, vol. i, p. 13.1 Cf. also above, 1. 15, 11. 26.
7. Evidently based in idea and phraseology on Isa. xl. 4. S om. ‘and the everlasting hills (mounds)’ of Gand after
‘made low’+‘and rough places shall become smooth and level’, in closer approximation to the Isaianic original ; comp. iv. 26 above.
8. S ‘all trees of the wood’.
9. S ‘For the God of Israel shall go before you’, in closer adherence to Isa. lii. 12, lviii. 8; Exod. xiii. 21. For
1 See the note by General Editor in Introd., § 6, and that in the Ps. of Sol. (vol. ii), καὶ 5.
EPISTLE OF JEREREG
PROBABLY most readers approach these relics of the past with a controlling opinion or prejudice in their minds, whether they are conscious of the fact or not. If, however, we wish to form a just appreciation of the significance of an ancient document, we must clear our minds of prepossessions and let it speak to us. We must be careful neither to overlook things which are there, nor to read into it things which are not there. It may have been mere chance which caused it to survive the wreck of much else that we could wish had been saved ; but it is more likely that it was preserved because of some intrinsic merit, or because of something in it which specially appealed to the sympathies of its earliest readers.
δι. NATURE AND SCOPE OF THE WORK.
The so-called Epistle of Feremy reads more like a sermon or hortatory address than a letter ; a fact which may account for its characteristic repetitions. The author is very much in earnest, as becomes a preacher. The idolatry he denounces is no imaginary picture, but the reality of his own environment. And it is not the idolatry of Canaan, so strongly condemned by the prophets of Yahweh, nor that of Egypt, which Jeremiah might have denounced had he long survived his forced migration to that uncongenial region. It is the idolatry of Babylon. For ‘Babylon’, in the author’s use, is evidently not a mask for some other land or city. Not only is he aware of a very peculiar custom there prevalent, which Herodotus has also noted (v. 43; cf. Hdt. i. 199); but many incidental allusions and individual touches agree with other known features of Babylonian religion. (See the notes on vv. 4, 11, 15, 30-32. 41, 43.) Had ‘ Babylon’ meant Egypt, the degrading animal-worship, of which the author of Wisdom makes so much, would hardly have escaped the shafts of his eager though not very profound satire.
ᾧ 2. PROBABLE DATE.
But what Babylon was it? Was it the Babylon of Nebuchadnezzar the Great, whose magnificent temples were enriched with the plunder of nations and maintained by the tribute of a subject world? Was it Babylon in its imperial splendour, as Jechonias and the men of the First Captivity saw it—Babylon as it was when the susceptible heart of the poet-priest Ezekiel was so powerfully impressed by the carven and painted symbols of its immemorial faith? Not Babylon in its glory, but Babylon in its decay, as Herodotus saw it more than a century afterwards; or rather as Alexander saw it, crumbling slowly away, yet still, in its ruined majesty, preserving enough of its ancient splendour to induce the conqueror of the world to choose it for his future capital and seat of empire. When our author makes Jeremiah predict a sojourn of the Jews in Babylon for ‘seven generations’, he does it deliberately. He can hardly have been ignorant of the famous prophecy of the seventy years, or of the less-heeded estimate of three generations involved in the statement that the exiles were to serve Nebuchadnezzar and his son and his son’s son (Jer. xxv. 12; xxvii. 7). He seems, in fact, to be giving us a clue to his own period. Seven generations, allowing forty years to the generation according to Old Testament reckoning, would cover 280 years. If we count from the exile of Jechonias (597 B.C.), this brings us to the year 317 B.C., or counting (as the author may have done) from 586 B.C., the year of the final Captivity, we arrive at 306 B.C., some thirty years after the arrival of Alexander in Babylon. It must not be forgotten that the Jews who returned to Palestine in consequence of the Edict of Cyrus were only a small part of the Jewish population of Babylonia. — Great numbers of them were perfectly satisfied with their adopted country, and no more desired to return to Judaea than our own colonists in Australia or New Zealand desire to return to
BEISTREE “OF JEREMY
the narrower conditions of English life. What is more, they not only went beyond the advice of Jeremiah (xxix. 4-7) in the matter of regarding the land of their exile as their permanent home. Many of them assumed Babylonian names, implying at least an identification of the God of Israel with Bel-Merodach or Nebo ; and there must always have been a strong temptation to assimilate themselves entirely to their neighbours in the customs and manners of life. Doubtless there was considerable leakage from the synagogue to the indigenous worships. Some might sincerely believe that the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple and the overthrow of their national independence were proof enough of the superiority of the Babylonian gods. Others would surrender themselves to the influence of more sordid considerations (cf. Jer. xliv. 17 f.). The zeal of loyal spirits would naturally be roused by this state of things; and pieces like the one before us might have been circulated among the weak believers and waverers as dissuasives from the folly of exchanging the religion of the prophets for any lower form of faith and life.
ὁ 3. ORIGINAL LANGUAGE.
If the author belongs to anything like so early a date, he probably wrote in Hebrew, not Greek. But this probability is greatly strengthened by a careful study of the phenomena of the Greek text. It is incredible that a piece so formless, so confused, so utterly destitute of the graces of style, as this ‘Epistle’ now is, should have been thought worthy of preservation in
_the Alexandrian Canon of Scripture, had such been its original condition. Our translators and their Revisers have done their best; but what a poor halting semblance of sense, not to say manifest nonsense, the result too often is! Harmony with context and logical connexion of thought are often untraceable. We are presented with a voluble but ill-connected succession of propositions, bearing little visible relation to each other beyond a general animus against idolatry. But almost every verse exhibits peculiarities which suggest translation, and that from a Hebrew original, as will be seen by reference to the notes on the text. It is, of course, often easier to see that the Greek is more or less suspicious than to divine the true reading of the lost Hebrew archetype. A suggestion may seem plausible, even probable, without being right. But a possible sense is better than nonsense and may be accepted provisionally, in preference to the assumption that we have before us nothing better than the crude effusion of an illiterate fanatic. Amid all such uncertainties one thing appears to be certain. It is that in this Epzstle of Feremy there are places where the strange phraseology of the Greek can only be accounted for by assuming that the writer of it supplied the wrong vowels to some Hebrew word which he was translating, or mistook some Hebrew consonant for another resembling it, or could only guess at the meaning of a corrupted text. His MS. may have been badly written or have become illegible in places through time and use. Perhaps also, like some of his modern commentators,
- he was not himself a too expert Hebraist, though capable enough of a certain careless and
| misleading fluency in Greek, which enabled him to conceal lack of knowledge under a surface of smoothly-expressed inaccuracies. It may suffice to examine a few of the more striking instances here, referring to the notes on the text for a more complete presentation of the evidence.
(1) Κι τῶ: ‘from rust and moths’. The true meaning; but the Greek has ἀπὸ ἰοῦ καὶ βρωμάτων ‘ from rust and foods’. In LXX βρώματα bois (Gen. xli. 35 f) or box (Gen. vi. 21)
food. The translator read the latter word here, instead of Dok from a devourer ( moth or grub; cf. Mal. iii. 11 ; Isa. li. 8; Matt. vi. 19 σὴς καὶ βρῶσις 928) YY moth and devourer). The translator supplied the wrong vowel-points in reading his unpointed Hebrew text. ;
Ὶ (2) Γ΄. 20: ‘They are as one of the beams of the temple; and men say their hearts are eaten out, ἄς. Here there is no apparent connexion of thought, and the Greek does not help us. But
the words τὰς δὲ καρδίας αὐτῶν φασίν suggest a corruption of the common Hebrew phrase ‘to say in one’s heart’ = zo think. The original sense may thus have been: And he (the idol) is like
a beam (i.e. a mere log) inside the ¢emple (cf. 1 Kings vi. 15); yet they think that he eats!
(i.e. consumes the offerings made to him). For eating, as a proof of being a ‘living god’, see
Bel 6. Our translator pointed qn instead of 3nd. (Num. xxii. 4).
(3) V. 31: Gk. duppevovow, drive chariots. Not even a Jew of 100 B.C. would have
accused the Babylonian priests of careering about in chariots inside their temples, and that with all the outward signs of mourning upon their bodies, rent clothes, shaven heads, &c. But read ‘they weep’ instead of ‘they drive chariots’, and the context is satisfied, and all becomes clear. It is merely a matter of writing 122, which was perhaps miswritten 132” in the translator's
MS., for 1395 they vide. Cf. v. 32, and the notes zz loc. The reference is to services of mourning
}for the gods, especially Dumuzi = Tammuz (see Cxnetform Texts, vol. xv).
BPISLEE “OF TE Revi
(4) V. 35. ‘They can neither give riches zor money’ (χαλκόν): a false antithesis, and incongruous with the context (v. 34; cf. 1 Sam. ii. 7). What is obviously required is οὔτε πενίαν, ‘nor poverty’: Prov. xxx. ὃ. The translator may have mistaken a badly written wn poverty for wn, and then guessed that this was a remnant of vm) ( χαλκός). But if mzen in) Hs) 3<18) 10. reallly means ὃ πένης (LXX and Syr.), it may be that mabn ( πενία) stood in the Heb. MS. of our Epistle, and the Greek translator, not being acquainted with the rare word, identified it with the like-sounding χαλκός ; cf. the transliterations of Heb. words in LXX.
(5) Γ΄. 54. ‘Neither can they judge . .. being unable: for they are as crows between heaven and earth. The point of the comparison is obscure. Moreover, a verb seems wanting, as crows — are not always in the air. ᾿Αδύνατοι ὄντες is perhaps a misrendering of 7 5 (cf. Job xxviii. 4 with v. τό, xxxi. 16), and ὥσπερ αἱ (AQ™ vecte) κορῶναι may be due to misreading O'37y3 for Ὁ 3}. We thus get the sense: for they hang suspended—like the clouds—between heaven and earth, — The reference would be to plated wooden images hung against the walls of the temples.
(6) V. 59. ‘ Therefore it is better to be a king that showeth his manhood ...than such false — gods.’ Was such a feeble truism worth writing or worth preserving? Could it ever have proved edifying to any readers whatever? But let us look at the context. The other comparisons of the verse are a vessel, a door, a wooden pillar—all inanimate objects. Emend Better is a stick (Ezek. xxxix. 9) 7x the hand of a mighty man... than the false gods, and harmony and sense are restored to the whole verse. (Heb. 1133 7°2 929 31D instead of 13} AN ΠΩΣ rib.)
(7) Γ΄. 68. ‘The (wild) beasts are better than they: for they can get under a covert, and help themselves. The object of getting under a covert is surely ¢o Aide; and it is almost self — evident that αὑτὰ ὠφελῆσαι represents Heb. ndynd to hide themselves. The translator vocalized the word wrongly, reading 0295 70 profit them (cf. Isa. xxx. 5) instead of D2VN to hide. 4
(8) 1΄. 72. ‘The bright purple that rotteth upon them.’ The Greek has ‘the purple axzd the — marble that rotteth upon them’. As I pointed out long ago (Var. Apocr. in loc.), this is clearly a case of confusion between ww byssus, fine linen, and its homophone ww alabaster or marble — (Cant. v. 15). ‘Marble’ does not ‘rot’, ‘fine linen’ does; and ‘purple and fine linen’ go together —
For a not inconsiderable amount of similar evidence the notes on the text may be consulted. Altogether it would seem difficult to avoid the conclusion that our £fzs¢le is a free translation of a lost Hebrew original. In that case, the Greek version may very well be considerably later in date, and may even belong to the age of the Maccabees.
(ie EPISTLE OF JEREMY
A copy of an epistle, which Jeremy sent unto them which were to be led captives into Babylon by the king of the Babylonians, to certify them, as it was commanded him of God.
Because of the sins which ye have committed before God, ye shall be led away captives into 3 Babylon by Nabuchodonosor king of the Babylonians. So when ye be come unto Babylon, ye
I
I. copy of an epistle, which Jeremy sent. (᾿Αντίγραφον ἐπιστολῆς ἧς ἀπέστειλεν ᾿Ιερεμίας = NNN PWD ™ noe 1; cf. Ezra iv. 11; v. 6.) It is nowhere stated in the body of the letter that Jeremiah wrote it. The statement might be only the guess of an editor or translator who remembered Jer. xxix and 2 Macc. ii. 2. Some such introductory formula, however, seems almost necessary to the understanding of what follows; and, upon the whole, the superscription is probably an integral part of the original composition. Cf. the last clause ‘as it was commanded him of God’ with τ. 3 ‘JZ will bring you out’ and v. 7 ‘ mzne angel’.
Why does not the author say ‘ Jeremiah she prophet’, after the precedent of Jer. xxix. 1 and 2 Mace. ii. 1? He assumes that every reader will know who ‘ Jeremiah’ was, although others besides the prophet bore the name (e.g. 2 Kings xxiv. 18 = Jer. lii, 1). But doubtless in his day the others would not be thought of. The mention of the name would at once suggest the great prophet whose importance had come to overshadow that of all the other great figures of the past in the imagination of later generations.
them which were to be led: i.e. were about to be led, or were on the point of being led (τοὺς ἀχθησο- μένους). There is no mention of such a letter being sent by Jeremiah to the captives deported by Nebuzaradan in 586 (‘the remnant of the people’; Jer. xxxix. 9). The prophet was, however, so kindly treated by the Chaldeans that, had he wished to do so, he would probably have been permitted to communicate with his unfortunate countrymen. But the record is silent; and, besides, the whole character of the letter is quite unlike the sort of appeal which the dreadful circumstances of the time would have elicited from the tender heart and powerfully stirred sympathies of the prophet. No satire on idolatry, however brilliant, no series of gibes and jests at the gods of the conquerors, however ingeniously conceived and bitterly expressed, could seem other than strangely ill-timed to the poor captives, cowering in abject fear before their conquerors, in the very hour of what seemed to be the irretrievable ruin of their country and the triumph of the gods of Babylon.
The letter of Jer. xxix is expressly stated to have been sent to the exiles (of 597) when already established in Babylon (see vv. 1, 4, 7); not when they were on the point of leaving their own country, as our superscription affirms in regard to the captives to whom this ‘ Epistle of Jeremy ’ is supposed to be sent.
the king of the Babylonians. The same expression recurs in 7. 2, and is, so far as it goes, an indication that the heading is due to the composer of the letter. The phrase of the canonical books is ‘the king of
Babylon’ (Kings, Jer., Ezek., &c.), which the Syriac has in both places here also. See also Baruchi.g τι f. It would be somewhat strange if a Greek translator had rendered so easy and common a phrase as the
Heb. aa Ἴ in this unnatural way. (Was the original phrase 82533 ΣῚ ΝΞΟ Cf. Ezra iv. g for ‘the _ Babylonians ’.)
to certify them. Rather, ‘to report unto them. This word ἀναγγέλλω in LXX mostly represents | Heb. 7.17, ‘announce, report, give a message’; e.g. Jer. xvi. 10 ef saep.
2. Rather, ‘It is on account of your sins which ye have sinned before God, that ye will be brought to Babylon as captives.’ Cf. Jer. xxxix. 7; 2 Kings xxv. 7. The writer is not predicting, as the English of both A. V.and R. V. seems to imply. He is declaring the moral cause of the banishment which, as they well knew, awaited them. It is as though the people had asked the question supposed in Jer. xvi. ro.
Since it was, strictly speaking, Nebuzaradan who carried away the people after the fall of Jerusalem in 586, 2 Kings xxv. 11, while (according to 2 Kings xxiv. 10-16) Nebuchadnezzar himself carried away Jehoiachin and his fellow-captives, it would seem that our author really intends the earlier captivity of 597. verse, in fact, summarizes the message of the prophet to the exiles of the first captivity, Jer. xxix. 4-11.
3. Lit. ‘ye shall be there many years and a long time unto seven generations; but after this I will bring you out thence with peace.’ Cf. Jer. xxix. 10, 11. The datum ‘unto seven generations’ is quite inexplicable if the author was acquainted with the writings of Jeremiah and felt himself bound by their data in such a matter. It is difficult to imagine any Jew of literary pretensions ignorant of that prophet’s limit of ‘seventy years’ for |the Babylonian Captivity (Jer. xxv. 12; xxix. 10). It is, of course, possible that the author was thinking
of another passage of Jeremiah, viz. xxvii. 7. There the prophet estimates the divinely appointed duration of | Babylonian dominion at three generations. ‘All the nations’, he says, ‘shall serve Azm ’ (i.e. ‘ Nebuchadnezzar \the king of Babylon’), ‘ avd his son, and his son’s son, until the time of his own land come.’ This might be tegarded as limiting the duration of the Captivity also to three generations; and we might suppose that a Hebrew ἃ ( 3) has been confused with + ( 7) in the original text of our Epistle.
The next
But see the Introduction,
EPISTEE OF JEREMY 3-2
shall remain there many years, and for a long season, even for seven generations: and after
4 that I will bring you out peaceably from thence. But now shall ye see in Babylon gods of
5 silver, and of gold, and of wood, borne upon shoulders, which cause the nations to fear. Beware therefore that ye in no wise become like unto the strangers, neither let fear take hold upon you because of them, when ye see the multitude before them and behind them, worshipping them.
6, 7 But say ye in your hearts, O Lord, we must worship thee. For mine angel is with you, and 81 myself do care for your souls. For their tongue is polished by the workman, and they
§ 2, for what appears to be a more probable solution of the difficulty. The Syriac cuts the knot, reading ‘until seventy years; and after seventy years I will bring you forth from thence in peace’. ‘ With peace’ (μετ᾽ εἰρήνης = Dw) occurs in LXX Gen. xxvi. 29 ; Exod. xviii. 23.
Since Jer. xxvii. 7 does not appear in the LXX (see Q™s), it would seem that our epistoler was not dependent on that source for his knowledge of Jeremiah’s writings, but was acquainted with the Heb. text.
4. But now shall ye see. Νυνὶ δὲ ὄψεσθε = INN Any, And now, ye will see: cf. Gen. xxxii. 11; Exod. xxxii. 34.
gods of silver, and of gold, and of wood. Vulgate: ‘gods of gold, and of silver, and of stone, and of wood.’ But cf. Ps. cxv. 4, cxxxv. 15; Jer. x. 4 for ‘silver and gold’. For the addition (found also in Syr.), see Deut. iv. 28, xxix. 17; Dan. v. 4. Obviously, stone would be too heavy a material for gods which were to be ‘borne upon shoulders’; i.e. carried in procession by the priests on their festivals, as depicted in the Assyrian sculptures. The ‘gods of silver and of gold’, moreover, were not of solid metal; but of wood
- overlaid with the precious ores. See Isa. xl. το f., xli. 6 f., xliv. 12-17, xlvi. 6 f.; Jer. x. 3-5.
which cause the nations to fear. Lit. ‘showing (or displaying) a fear to the nations’ (δεικνύντας φόβον τοῖς ἔθνεσιν = ND ONIA-NN ON, ‘making the nations behold an object of fear’), A ‘fear’ or ‘dread’ denotes a deity in Aramaic (NPN, Syr. Jl.$) as well as in Hebrew (81); Isa. viii. 12 f.; Ps. Ixxvi. 12; MB, Gen. xxxi. 42. The curious Greek phrase, which is usually explained by reference to Ps. Ix. 5 (‘ Thou hast made thy people see hard things’), suggests the Hebrew original given above, with its characteristic paronomasia or play upon like-sounding words (mar’ém méra@’), which the translator failed to reproduce in Greek. So the LXX everywhere ignores this feature of Hebrew style.
5. Rather, ‘Beware, then, lest ye also become wholly assimilated to the foreigners, and fear at them | (i.e. the idols) seize you, when ye see a crowd before and behind them bowing down to them.’ This again suggests a Hebrew original. “9 omSy inNm ooMN ANT D2 295 ons ὯΣ WIN ADT 15 ὈΠ 5). Note — especially the ἀφομοιωθέντες ἀφομοιωθῆτε Y9N 77 (the compound Greek verb seems peculiar to this Epistle in LXX: see Tromm), and ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς Dn ‘on account of them’, as the source of the fear. For the phrase ‘fear take (or seize) you’, see Ps. xlviii. 7; Exod. xv. 15. ‘ Before and behind them’: i.e. in the procession.
6. But say ye in your hearts. The Greek has ‘your understanding’ (τῇ διανοίᾳ), as in Gen. xvii. 17 ; xxvii. 41. Heb. 092252 ‘in your heart’ (sing.). The Greek of what follows (cot δεῖ προσκυνεῖν, Δέσποτα) might represent Heb. "ἽΝ ninnwnd 75. The verse, however, may be an interpolation. It breaks the connexion between vv. 5, 7 (see note on 2. 7), and is omitted by LXX“.
7. For mine angel is with you: recalls Exod. xxiii. 23, xxxii. 34 ; Gen. xxiv. 7, xlviii. 16; Exod. xxiii.20; Ὁ
The next clause should run: ‘And he (emphatic) careth for your lives.’ The original verse may have been something of this kind :
ee EO ee een ee ἐς ον.
Se wee TORE Clea ere at eee eee eee he
ye ee me th 0g
pons y2Nbn 5 spavexd) wat Nm
Cf. Gen. xxvi. 24; Isa. xliii. 5; Ps. cxlii. 5; Jer. xxx. 14, 17. (For the plur. τὰς ψυχάς = wD) sing., cf Ps. xix. 8, xxxiii. το LXX.) .
God is represented as speaking directly, as in v. 3. No doubt, the author felt that the whole message was a ‘word of God’, like all prophetic utterances. But the present verse may perhaps be a direct quotation from some poetical or prophetical piece. It does not seem likely that an author writing in Greek would have chosen to use the phrase ἐκζητῶν τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν in this special sense, unless he had had such a word as wot (or wpa, Prov. xxix. 10) before him. ‘To seek a man’s soul or life’ generally implies a murderous, not a benevolent motive. See Ps. xxxv. 4, xxxviii. 13, &c.; 2 Sam. iv. 8 (all wpa). For wi = ἐκζητῶ, see also Gen. ix. 5. Perhaps the author intended this last use: ‘And he requireth ov will require (i.e. avenge) your lives.’ (So Syr. ‘The A. of the Lord—* ἼΝΟΙ for ‘sxb2—is with you, and he will avenge your souls.) Further, why ἐκζητῶν, and not ἐκζητεῖ (or ἐκζητήσει), if the author was not translating a Heb. participle?
8-16. Ldols, though made of costly materials and richly adorned, are powerless to help or 10 hurt.
8. For their tongue is polished by the workman (more /i/.a craftsman. τέκτων τε wan, Isa. xl. 18, 20; a carver or graver in wood, metal, or stone). Heb. perhaps: wan 33 ΠΡ wd 35 (sharpened rather than polished) ; a paronomasia. Cf. Ps. Ixiv. 4, cxl. 4. κατεξυσμένη here only in LXX (Tromm). If ‘ polished’ were what the author intended, this might represent Heb. ΠΡῚ 5 or AVA. It is implied that the images’ mouths were open,
BES SEE Ὁ PE RENY ‘9214
9 themselves are overlaid with gold and with silver; yet are they but false, and cannot speak. And
taking gold, as it were for a virgin that loveth to go gay, they make crowns for the heads of their | ro gods: and sometimes also the priests convey from their gods gold and silver, and bestow it upon 11 themselves ; and will even give thereof to the common harlots: and they deck them as men with 12 garments, eve the gods of silver, and gods of gold, and of wood. Yet cannot these gods save 13 themselves from rust and moths, though they be covered with purple raiment. They wipe their 14 faces because of the dust of the temple, which is thick upon them. And he that cannot put to
as if to speak (sez?. oracles). The connexion of thought with what precedes may be: ‘Fear them not, for,’ &c, The verse is reminiscent of Ps. cxv. 4, 5a.
and they themselves: i.e. their bodies (Greek αὐτά τε: cf. Ziad i. 4). clause may have been: D332) 2ΠῚ3 Aan) oxy.
yet are they but false. ψευδῆ = “pw, Jer. x. 14, ill. 25, @ deception or fraud, of an idol. Render: ‘ but they are a fraud.’ Heb. 3py on); after which the verse concludes with 1395 153)" Nb).
g. Lit. ‘And as for a virgin fond of adornment, taking gold they make crowns upon the heads of their gods.’ φιλόκοσμος only here in LXX, Heb. omnby ὈΝ ΟΡ nowy wy anroinpd sy avan adinad sewn. Ce.
ro. Lit. ‘But there are also times when the priests, filching from their gods gold and silver, spend it on themselves’, Heb. perhaps ‘121 ὩΣ ΠΣΠ 12927 DYN AN; ὑφαιρεῖσθαι = 393, Job xxi. 18. καταναλίσκω εἴς τι,
‘to spend upon a thing,’ is a classical phrase. The verb renders Heb. Sox “to eat, consume,’ Jer. iii. 24 et al. Possibly εἰς ἑαυτοὺς ( pnb) is due to the translator’s having misread ond ‘ bread’ as on. The Heb. will then have been: ond 52x) or vdaxy ond) ‘and eat bread’ ( feast: Gen, xliii. 25; Ps. xiv. 4; Jer. xli. x; Luke xiv. 15). Otherwise, cf. 2 Kings xii, 12 and suppose an original like wey» owas) ‘and would spend it on themselves’: so the Syriac (} p51).
11. Render: ‘while they will give part of them (i.e. the gold and silver ornaments) even to the harlots on the roof’; i.e. apparently, the roof of the temple, where perhaps they slept for coolness, as on an ordinary
house-roof (cf. Joshua ii, 6). These would be hierodules or temple-harlots such as we know to have been
connected with some of the Babylonian temples, e.g. that of Ishtar at Erech (πόρναι ΞΞ ΠῚ Ρ; cf. Gen, xxxviii. 21 f.; Deut. xxiii. 17). στέγος, roof (Syr. om.), was also used for a brothel in late Greek ; and the variant τέγος (A Q) is Aquila’s equivalent of 73? in Num. xxv. 8 ‘a vaulted tent’, rendered by the Vulg.
_ lupanar, and so used in Neo-Hebrew. Cf. Lat. fornex, ‘vaulted cellar; brothel.’ Was this the author’s
meaning here, and did he write ΠΩΡΠ Sy mod ox oan nn (‘and they would give part of them even to the whores by the arched bower’)? In view of the Babylonian custom, the former interpretation seems preferable. Indeed, it seems possible, and even probable, that the original reference was to the supposed brides of Bel, who slept in the shrine on the top-stage of his great pyramidal temple (see Hdt. i. 181).
and they deck them as men with garments, &c.= yyy ant ἹΠῸΝ ney Apa nds ΠΝ wad ΟἼΝΘ omy sy (cf. Ezek. xvi. 11; 2 Kings x. 22). This sentence resumes the thread of the narrative from v. 9, vv. 10, 11 a _ constituting a parenthesis.
12. Lit. ‘But these are not saved from rust and fret, arrayed in purple apparel’ = ὈΞΝΟῚ axdna mye oN jos 2 nwiabn ; cf. Num. x. 9; Ezek. xvi. 18, xxiv. 6; Esther viii. 15; Mal. iii. r1; Job xiii, 28; 1 Kings xxii. 10, for the vocabulary. The second clause probably belongs to this rather than to the following -verse (Vulg., Arab.) ; since, if ‘rust’ refers to the tarnishing of metal, ‘fret’ (βρώματα) seems to indicate the ravages of moths or grubs in clothing. The genitive absolute is, therefore, incorrectly used by the translator. But, further, βρώματα in the LXX generally means food (Heb. S38 or bon).
Heb. ΟΝ or ob. The whole
Tromm. gives twenty-one ‘instances of βρώματα 3 Ν᾽ (e.g. Gen. xli. 35 f.) and ten of βρώματα Say (Gen. vi. 21). It is evident that
| ‘from rust and food’ cannot be right. We probably have here another instance of error in translation from the | Hebrew original. If Sox) stood in the unpointed text, the translator may be supposed to have pointed j 2283 (= καὶ Bp.) instead of Sonn ‘and from a devourer’ (i.e. moth or grub ; Mal. iii. 11 ; cf. Job xiii. 28 ; ἢ Aros iv. 9). LXX makes the same blunder in Isa. lv. το, giving εἰς βρῶσιν for bond (‘to the eater’). In
| Matt. vi. 19 also σὴς καὶ βρῶσις May represent bait YY “moth and devourer’ (Isa. li. 8. Cf. also Assyr.
13. They wipe their faces. ἐκμάσσονται is strange, if this be the meaning. We should have expected ἐκμάσσουσιν. The middle voice denotes ‘to wipe away one’s own tears’, Anth. Palat. 5. 43. If the Heb. was JDMID in» ‘they wipe their faces’, the translator might have pointed the verb as a passive, ante), understanding ‘they are wiped as to their faces’ ‘they have their faces wiped’; though the sense might rather be simply ‘their faces are wiped’. (For the verb see Prov. xxx. 20; Isa. xxv. 8.) [ ἘΠῚ the temple is τῆς οἰκίας m3 ‘the house’. Cf. 1 Kings vi. But ma in the sense of temple or God's house (Assyr. d7/ 111) is usually οἶκος in LXX, while οἰκία is an ordinary dwelling-house. Did the translator use |the latter word purposely, to express contempt for the heathen temple ?
14. Lit. ‘And a sceptre holdeth he, as a man judge of a place, who will not destroy him who offendeth
EPISTLE OF JEREMY τ τὸ
death one that offendeth against him holdeth a sceptre, as though he were judge of a country.
15 He hath also a dagger in his right hand, and an axe: but cannot deliver himself from war and 16, 17 robbers. Whereby they are known not to be gods: therefore fear them not. For like as a vessel that a man useth is nothing worth when it is broken; even so it is with their gods: when they ©
18 be set up in the temples their eyes be full of dust through the feet of them that come in. And
as the courts are made sure on every side upon him that offendeth the king, as being committed
to suffer death; eve so the priests make fast their temples with doors, with locks, and bars, lest
19 they be carried off by robbers. They light them candles, yea, more than for themselves, whereof
against him’ $1 sin AX sa Nd ἼΦΝ AID Daw WIND JOIN HAL (cf. Amos i. 5; Exod. ii. 14; Gen. xx. 9). ἀνελεῖ may also stand for 3) wll smite (Gen. iv. 14); a suitable word in connexion with paw (Isa. xi. 4). The Babylonian gods are represented on the sculptures and seal-engravings as holding sceptres, swords, axes, and other emblems of authority. Some of the Hittite deities at Boghaz Keui carry sceptres; and an axe is the common Egyptian symbol for a god. j 15. Lit. ‘But he holdeth a dagger in (A Q) the (A) right hand and an axe’ Heb... . ἢ) Δ) 12°23 35n Jon. LXX has ἐγχειρίδιον for Heb. 29m ‘sword’ in Ezek. xxi. 3, 4, 5 and elsewhere. Syr. adds: ‘in his left,’ which may very well be right. Restore therefore : sows wa. 15>. Lit. ‘but himself from war and brigands he will not deliver’. The collocation ‘zwar and brigands’ is improbable ; and it seems natural to suppose a confusion of πόλεμος and πολέμιος, Such as we observe in Esther ix. 16, where we find ἀπὸ τῶν πολέμων (but B πολεμίων) for oN». Restoring πολεμίων (cf. A πολέμων), here, we conjecture the following original text: 1D] MN) _ Sy ΝΟ one on, and himself from enemies and spoilers he cannot deliver (cf. Isa. xliv. 20; Obad. 5). 16. they are known. Gk. γνώριμοί εἰσιν, which, according to the ordinary use of the LXX, should mean ‘they are kinsfolk’ (Ruth ii. 1) or ‘friends’ (2 Sam. iii. 8). The translator probably had the Heb. oy» in his MS., and possibly confused the participle with the substantive. The verse, which is rhetorically repeated in almost the same words at vv. 23, 29, 65, 69, may be reconstructed in Hebrew somewhat thus: πον τὸν om ἸΝΟΤ ΟΝ 5τὸν (ΘΠ) ταῦ on. Cf. Isa. xxxi. 3, lvii. 6; Jer. x. 5, v. 7. 17-23. The senseless zdols are patient of all indignities. é 17. A reminiscence of Jer. xxii. 28, Hos. viii. 8, as regards the language of the first half of the verse. But — σκεῦος ἀνθρώπου is suspicious, as it hardly means ‘a vessel shat a man useth’; and if it did, the description —
would be quite superfluous. It looks as if wan earthenware (Jer. xxxii. 14: YAN >) had been misread D7" by confusion of letters (w or & is sometimes mistaken for YY or 12), or perhaps rather wax. Cf. also the Syr., which gives ‘a potter’s vessel’. Lit. the Greek says: ‘ For just as a vessel of aman, if broken, becometh useless, such are their gods.’ The Heb. may have been: ὉΠΠΟΝ ὙΠΟ 73 12 yan PS yp wan ὍΣ. 93 ‘For like an earthen vessel broken, useless, so are their gods.’ A broken vessel is a proverb of worthlessness, Jer. xxii. 28. (The full — stop is rightly placed here; what follows is a new thought.) The next statement may be rendered: ‘ When they have been established in their houses, their eyes are (become) full of dust from the feet,’ &c. But it seems probable that, in the Hebrew, the clause 0°N23 O°2¥' ‘set up in the houses’ ( temples), or whatever the — phrase was which the Greek represents by καθιδρυμένων (? DYDD] OD) αὐτῶν ἐν τοῖς οἴκοις, was connected — with the preceding words. The sense will then have been: ‘So are their gods, set up in their temples.’ Then : followed in the Hebrew, as a new sentence: ;O°N37 soar say ind pany ‘their eyes are filled with dust’, &c. LXX4 gives κήποις for οἴκοις ; an interesting variant, which recalls Isa. Ixv. 3. Cf. also v. 21 and the note there. 18. the courts are made sure on every side. Gk. περιπεφραγμέναι εἰσὶν ai αὐλαί, ‘the courts (of the — palace) are fenced in all round’; cf. Job i. 10 (VW περιφράσσω; Hos. ii. 6 (8) φράσσω, ‘hedge in’). — αὐλή generally “yn ‘court’; but ‘the courts are fortified’ does not give a good sense, and αὐλή sometimes — represents Heb. ayy ‘gate’ (Ps. cxxii. 2; Esther ii. 19). Perhaps the Heb. was ὉΠ yD) ‘the gates are shut’. αὐλαί can hardly be the courts of a prison, as in Jer. xxxii. 2, xxxiii. 1 (Gifford); for that would require the addition of τῆς φυλακῆς. as being committed to suffer death. Lit. ‘as having been led off for death’ (execution). This is not very intelligible; and A prefixes the conjunction 7 07, which improves the sense, and may be right. ἀπηγμένος in LXX renders Heb. “Ds ‘ prisoner’ (Gen. xxxix. 22; cf. xl. 3 VON ἀπῆκτο, xiii. 16 MONT ἀπάχθητε; Isa. xiv. 17 τοὺς ἐν ἀπαγωγῇ = ODN). Either this (nid ΟΝ) might have been the phrase here, or we may suppose an original 72% N52 ‘one led to death’ (Isa. liii. 7; Jer. xi. 19). The rest of the verse is easy. The whole may have run in the Hebrew pretty much as follows: oxywn mp2 75nd son wx ΝΣ WS sw ow ὍΣ 5 oma odpsna mndsa oA yin’ ὉΠ, ΠΝ 7D (e210 nyo? wx) mob TDN WI ‘And just as around an offender against a king the gates are shut, or around one bound for execution (or a man led to execution) ; so do the priests strengthen their (the idols’) houses with doors, and locks, and” bars, lest by the hand of spoilers they should be despoiled’. (Syr. ‘And like a man who is condemned by the ~ king, their arms are stretched out—lke the condemned (pl.) to death. Their houses their priest strerigthen,’ &c. This points to a different Greek exemplar.) 19. They light them candles. Rather: ‘Lamps they burn’; Gk. λύχνους καίουσιν, which probably represents Heb. 135y" ΤῚΣ ‘lamps they arrange’ ; see Lev. xxiv. 4. t
eter eerie
La Ah Ae ΡΟ ΤΥ oy ey
Sn al ee eee ot ee eet et as ee
ΕΒ ΘΙ ΒΥ ΟἿ JEREMY 20225
20 they cannot see one. They are as one of the beams of the temple; and men say their hearts 21 are eaten out, when things creeping out of the earth devour both them and their raiment: they 22 feel it not when their faces are blacked through the smoke that cometh out of the temple: upon
23 their bodies and heads alight bats, swallows, and birds ; and in like manner the cats also. Whereby | 24 ye may know that they are no gods: therefore fear them not. Notwithstanding the gold wherewith they are beset to make them beautiful, except one wipe off the rust, they will not shine: for not even
| 25 when they were molten did they feel it. Things wherein there is no breath are bought at any cost.
yea, more than for themselves. A’s reading πλείονας αὐτοῖς = ond om < many for them’, is preferable.
The rest of the verse might have been: jam mmyvoa md vay xd ἼΩΝ ‘of which they cannot see even one’.
20. They are as one of the beams of the temple; and men say their hearts are eaten out, &c. Evidently there is something wrong here. The connexion of thought, if any exist, between the first and second
members of the verse is hopelessly obscure. The Greek does not help us. ‘ He is, indeed, as a beam of those out of the house; but their hearts they say are licked up’: surely a false contrast. It is likely that the words τὰς δὲ καρδίας αὐτῶν φασίν conceal the common Hebrew phrase ‘to say in one’s heart’ = to think, and that
the sense of the original was: ‘And he (i.e. the idol) is like a beam of the temple, yet they think that he eats.’ See Bel 6 ff. for eating as a proof of being a ‘living god’. ἐκλείχειν ppd ‘to lap’ or ‘lick up’, 1 Kings xxii. 38, and the syn. nb, ibid. xviii. 38; Num. xxii. 4 (of eating). The Hebrew may have been: “πὸ voor? paday man MVPs WM And he ἐς like a beam of the house (or read: MID ANPI ὥσπερ δοκὸς τῶν ἐκ τῆς οἰκίας); ‘And they say in their heart, ‘‘ He licketh up!”’ (The translator pointed 75%, as he renders by a passive infin.) The verse continues, if we translate literally: ‘Of the reptiles from the earth eating up both themselves and their dress they are not aware.’ This may have sprung from Heb. omw ὈΞῚΝ aADINA wD sp ΝΟῚ ὈΠΥ 3), ‘The creeping things of the ground (Gen. i. 25) eat them and their robes (1 Kings xxii. 30),
and they know not. (Syr. ‘They are like beams, &c.; and their heart ts fooltsh and goeth astray ; and they are destroyed by the reptiles of the earth, and are eaten—they and their garments.’)
21. Lit. ‘(They are) blackened as to their face from the smoke out of the house’. The Hebrew may have been: ΤΠ jwyo ons yvn ‘ Their faces are black from the smoke of the house’. Cf. Lam. iv. 8. In that case, μεμελάνωται (Q*) τὰ πρόσωπα (QMS) would represent the Hebrew more correctly than the reading of B, But A’s τοῦ ἐκ τῆς γῆς καιομένου is more likely to be original than B’s τοῦ ἐκ τῆς οἰκίας (dittogr. from v. 20). It points, moreover, to the Heb. m2qNA7W2 AdyA (jwy3) ‘(through the smoke) which goeth up from the ground ’ (cf. v.54 note). The Greek translator seems to have vocalized nbyn as nbya ΞΞ καίειν, fo light a lamp
22. swallows, and birds (Gk. “he dzrds) is a curious collocation. We should expect the name of some | other species to be added to that of the swallow. The Syriac, accordingly, has ravens, which may be right, as the
dominant idea would seem to be that of unclean birds (Lev. xi. 14, 15, 19). But ‘bats and swallows and [all] the birds’ is also possible ; especially if ‘the cats’ be correct in the next clause. The mention of the (domestic ?) cat is unique in LXX. The word (οἱ atAovpor) might conceivably represent Ow (= Aram. jw, Arab. pol) or p*\nn (see Talmud Bab. Hor. 13a). The Targum renders DN by this last word in Isa. xii. 22, Xxxiv. 14. Was the word here ΠΝ ‘kites’ or ‘hawks’, which the translator misread ON and rendered ‘ cats’? | Then the Heb. of the verse may have been ΠΥ ΝΠ ON DIAM ODOM oODdyyn im owxr-dyy onary. | (The Syriac has: ‘And on their heads sit bats and swallows and ravens together, and also weasels.’ For
23. γνώσεσθε Win ‘ye may know’, sand won-dy jo-by AMA Syewd 5 win Adyn.
24. Lit. ‘For the gold which they wear for beauty,—unless one have wiped off the rust, they will not make 70 | shine; for not even when they were being cast, were they aware (of it)’. There is no obvious relation between | the two statements of this verse, the connecting yap notwithstanding. But it is at least evident (face R.V.) that ) στίλβω is used transitively in the former of them, as in Diosc. i. 111 and Aristaen. i. 25. The Heb. might be YN’ (Job xli. 24) or 1m (Ps. xviii. 29). In the second, ‘they were molten’ or rather cas? (ἐχωνεύοντο = psn) can hardly be right; for the verse has in view, as the first member shows, idols overlaid or plated with the )precious metal, not images of solid gold. The sense required, and indicated, by the context is: ‘for they do fnot know when (or that) they are dirty (or tarnished).’ Possibly the translator mispointed won ‘were brought |forth, produced’, the real word being dn were defiled (cf. Ezek. xxviii. 7 ‘defile thy brightness’: Isa. xxx. 22). 18 περίκεινται, ‘which they have round them, which they wear’; cf. Acts xxvili. 20; also τὰ περικείμενα χρυσία,
plates of gold dad on an ivory statue, Thue. ii. 13. Heb, 00 xd ON (mnNen? Ἰ5Π2) nya’) BY We INIT NN 13 295m (an adden) 55. wa xd 5 (Ps. xviii, 29 wee) NY ND ΠΝΌΠΠ ΠΝ vrs. 25. at any cost. Gk. ἐκ πάσης τιμῆς = VND ba»; a misreading of “Ὁ Spa. The Heb. may have been:
ΒῺΞ AN PSN wes on mrmp> wn daa: cf. Jer. χ. 14; 2 Chr. i. 16. n whom is no breath.’
Better: ‘At all cost they are acquired,
Rr 2
26 Having no feet, they are borne upon shoulders, whereby they declare unto men that they be 27 nothing worth. They also that serve them are ashamed: for if they fall to the ground at any time, they cannot rise up again of themselves: neither, if one set them aright, can they move of themselves: neither, if they be set awry, can they make themselves straight: but the 28 offerings are set before ‘them, as if they were dead men. And the things that are sacrificed unto them, their priests sell and spend; and in like manner their wives also lay up part thereof 29 in salt; but unto the poor and to the impotent will they give nothing thereof. The menstruous woman and the woman in childbed touch their sacrifices: knowing therefore by these things that 30 they are no gods, fear them not. For how can they be called gods? because women set meat 31 before the gods of silver, gold, and wood. And in their temples the priests sit on seats, having 32 their clothes rent, and their heads and beards shaven, and nothing upon their heads. They roar
26. Rather emg footless ... exposing their own shame to mankind. Cf. Isa. xlvi. 7, xlix. 22, for the first reproach ; for the second, Jer. xiii. 26, Nah. iii. 5. Indecent figures of gods were perhaps commoner in Egypt than in Babylonia, where they usually appear draped. See the procession in my Light from the East, p. 173. But nude and phallic figures occur on the seals. Heb. :ondp oINA-ns DN J ose ana-by oda psa.
27. Lit. And even they who attend on them are ashamed On13y"O) Way. The participle θεραπεύων TAY in Isa. liv. 17 also (LXX θεράπων T2Y saepe). Perhaps the translator pointed O73) (Zech. ii. 13). The next sentence is lit. ‘On account of the rising by help of them, lest ( if?) ever he have fallen upon the ground’, Instead of ‘by help of them’ (δι᾿ αὐτῶν), i.e. of the attendants, LXX* gives ‘by themselves’ (6: ἑαυτῶν), i.e. unassisted. δι ἑαυτοῦ would have been better after πέσῃ, sing. Further, the negative must be supplied: ‘On account of their not rising by themselves, if ever he have fallen,’ &c. Heb. perhaps: OS DWA ip by Ty bp) ‘because of his rising by their hand if he have fallen to earth’. Cf. 1 Sam. v. 3, xxviii. 20. The Chinese say ‘A fallen Buddha rise!’ (Pi Fou-tu ki), of a hopeless case (Giles, Dict. 3600). The verse continues: ‘nor, if one have set him upright, will ( ‘can’—a Hebraism) he move of himself, nor if he be bowed, will he stand erect; but as before corpses the gifts are set before them.’ The Heb. might have been: ond ow ond onps 3 tyr Nd yoy oxy 725 Φ xd wopoa na wx ON «And if a man set him up in his place, he will not move alone ; and if he bow, he will not stand up; but as (before) the dead bread is set before them’. Cf. Isa. xlvi. 1, 7 ; and for the offerings to the dead, Ps. cvi. 28, Ecclus. xxx. 18 f., Tobit iv. 17. τὰ δῶρα ond, Lev. xxi. 6, 8; and παρατιθέναι = DW, Gen. xliii. 32 ἃ]. The change from plur. to sing. exemplified in this verse is a common characteristic of Hebrew style (see Driver, Samue/, p. |xix).
28. Lit. ‘But their sacrifices their priests sell and use up; but in like manner the women (A their wives) also, salting part of them, neither to a beggar nor to a pauper give any share’. In Hebrew: 195° ὩΠῚ ΠΣ rmavdoxn ΝΟ yas) ὋΝ on (Lev. ii, 13) mindy (A = omws) ow ὯΔ yor (Isa. iii, 14) TDI ONIAD (cf. perédoxa: Job xxxi. 17). Instead of yay ‘and greedily consume’, perhaps 32) ‘and use up’ (cf. Deut. xxxli. 23; Gen. xxi. 15); and instead of mindy ‘salting’, perhaps mw2n ‘spicing’ or ‘pickling’ (ch Gen. |. 2, 3, 26). (The Syriac ‘their priests ea ¢hem and their wives gorge themselves with them’ may indicate a more original text : voy edunt pr. 12° consumunt; nom vorant pr. ΤΊΤΟΥ condiunt.)
29. See Lev. xii. 4, 7, xx. 18. ἀποκαθημένη ‘(a woman) sing apart during menstruation’ 717; λεχώς (for which Q’s λεχώ is more correct), ‘a woman in childbed, or ‘one who has just given birth’ nby. Heb. therefore: :myna ΓΟ ΠῚ myn omnara, an argument which would appeal to none but orthodox Jews. (For the construction γνόντες οὖν κτλ., cf. Isa. xxvi. 11: γνόντες δὲ αἰσχυνθήσονται WA WM. Here perhaps : 4 ὈΝῚ ὈΝΤΝΟ 5. aden wo; ch Q’s γνῶτε.) (γνόντες is rare in LXX. It occurs otherwise only a few times in the idiom γνόντες γνώσεσθε WAN yO), Jer. xxvi. 15 et sim.)
30. Another objection from a purely Jewish point of view. There were no priestesses or female attendants of Jahweh. πόθεν yap is perhaps equivalent to 7x 35, ‘For how?’ B κληθείησαν and A κληθήσονται might either of them represent a Heb. impf. See v. 27 for παρατιθέασιν θεοῖς, ‘they set (food) before gods.’ The Heb. verse might be: 791 2m ADI ΠΌΝΟ mow ows 5] ODN NTP Pe 5.
31. sit on seats. So Syr.; but it is very doubtful whether διφρεύω, ‘drive a chariot’ (Eurip. Androm. 108), can bear this meaning, although δίφρος may be a chair or throne (ND3; Deut. xvii. 18; 1 Sam. i. 9). Ὁ cuts the knot by substituting καθίζουσιν, ‘they sit” The sense is perhaps not unsuitable, if the word could bear it; but the whole context shows that the author is thinking of the mourning for dead gods, which was a well-known feature of Babylonian religion. We may, therefore, suppose that the original text had 153) ¢hey zweep, which the Greek translator misread 1239) ¢hey ride (see the Introduction, ὃ 3). For the other phrases of the verse, cf. Lev. x. 5, 1 Sam. iv. 12, 2 Sam. xv. 32, Jer. xli. 5, Lev. xiii. 45; whence we may infer an original text: SYM] DWNT FPN WNT Mw ONdAD ‘yp 133) ODA ONIN, ᾿Ακάλυπτοι (here only) should probably be ἀκατακάλυπτοι, as ΟἾΔΕ -- yp ‘unbound’ (by unwinding the turban); a thing forbidden to priests, Lev. xxi. Io. ᾿
32. Lit. ‘But they roar, shouting before their gods, as persons αἱ a dead man’s wake’. Τὸ περίδειπνον, ‘a funeral-feast,’ perhaps renders O11 (Jer. xvi. 5; cf. Amos vi. 7) = targumic Nm, NNW ‘the funeral-
33 and cry before their gods, as men do at the feast when one is dead. The priests also take off } 34 garments from them, and clothe their wives and children withal. Whether it be evil that one
doeth unto them, or good, they are not able to recompense it: they can neither set up a king 35 nor put him down. In like manner, they can neither give riches nor money: though a man make 36 a vow unto them, and keep it not, they will never exact it. They can save no man from death, 37 neither deliver the weak from the mighty. They cannot restore a blind man to his sight, nor 138 deliver any that is in distress. They can show no mercy to the widow, nor do good to the 39 fatherless. They are like the stones that be Aew out of the mountain, chese gods of wood, and | that are overlaid with gold and with silver: they that minister unto them shall be confounded. 49 How should a man then think or say that they are gods, when even the Chaldeans themselves 41 dishonour them? Who if they shall see one dumb that cannot speak, they bring him, and intreat
feast’, eaten soon after the burial of the corpse. Cf. Jer. xvi. 7: ‘And they shall not break bread unto the mourner, to comfort him for the dead’ (so Giesebrecht). The Heb. of the verse may have been: ‘385 ypyn) tnd nna owisa oAnds (Ps. xxxvili. g ΣΝ Ὁ). These rites of mourning for the gods recall the ‘women weeping for Tammuz’ of Ezek. viii. 14 and the Babylonian festivals of mourning for the same deity (Dumuzi).
33. Lit. ‘From their dress taking away (a part), the priests will clothe their wives and children’.
34-39. Unlike Jahweh, they do nothing. Carlyle’s cry to Froude, ‘He (God) never does anything!’ may be remembered. The prophets of Israel thought otherwise. They thought He did everything.
34. Lit. ‘Neither if they have suffered evil by any one, nor if good, will they be able to repay’. Cf. Deut. xxxii. 35, Jer. xvi. 18, Prov. xxv. 22, and many other places.
In Heb.
i Heb. perhaps: ΞΡ 219 ON) Y? ON pwd bay xb wx nen «Tf evil or good they have received from a man, they cannot repay’. See Jer. xlii. 6;
ob ii. ro. : put him down: lit. ‘remove him’. The Heb. of the second sentence might have been: 759 nypmd xb yond ΝΟΥ yday. With this and the next two verses cf. r Sam. ii. 6-8.
35. money; Gk. χαλκός copper, a copper coin, and then collectively, money. The original phrase may have been D°DD2) Wy ‘wealth and riches’, which is rendered πλοῦτον καὶ χρήματα, ‘wealth and money,’ 2 Chron. i. 12. Probably, however, χαλκός nv), as usual, and this Heb. term is a disguise or corruption of some word meaning poverty, e.g. wn (cf. Prov. xxx. 8), This gives a better parallel to what precedes (ὡσαύτως). Heb. nnd ybay xd wae τῶν j2. The next sentence is based on Deut. xxili. 22, and must have Tun pretty much as follows: : #7) xd oder xd) 92 nnd wx a ow.
36. Heb. spydmy xb pin qa Soy | aby xo ΟΝ mon.
37. Lit. ‘A blind man into seeing ( visus) they will not bring round’ (περιστήσωσιν, B. A’s παρα- |} στήσωσι set bestde or near is less suitable). The Greek is rather peculiar and suggests translation. Perhaps | εἰς ὅρασιν should have been εἰς ὁρῶντα ; and 12% may have been misread 2} }) (= στήσωσιν). Hence we get: yaw xd AyD Wy DIN «A blind man into one seeing they restore not’ (cf. Lev. xiii. 16, Isa. xxix. 17). There follows: yyy x5 95 sya ΕῚΝ «A man in straits (Isa. xxv. 4) they will not deliver’. 38. Cf. Isa. ix. 16, Ex. i. 20, for the language. The verse falls back easily into Hebrew: | 2n™ xd mobs por xd om.
39. these gods of wood. ‘The italicized words probably represent the Heb. correctly. Cf. Isa. xxi. 9, where | LXX renders mds by τὰ χειροποίητα αὐτῆς, and Isa. xxxi. 7, where yanr ΟΟΝῚ wos ΟΝ is rendered τὰ | χειροποίητα αὐτῶν τὰ ἀργυρᾶ καὶ τὰ χειροποίητα τὰ χρυσᾶ. The Heb. of the clause may have been: }apan cnbsy ann ὙΠΟΝῚ pym cnbs ort aan and ‘To the stones of the mountain are like the gods of wood
and the gods of gold and silver’. The second clause is simply ;.w2» on2y) ‘and their servants shall be jashamed’. See note on v. 27a. The priests are intended.
40. Lit. ‘How then is it to be thought or proclaimed that they are gods?’ Cf. the classical use of νομίζω, | *¢0 believe on or acknowledge as a god’; e.g. in the indictment of Socrates: ots ἡ πόλις νομίζει θεοὺς ov νομίζων,
not believing in the gods in which the state believes.’ Heb. perhaps: ΣΌΠΟΝ OF 1D NIP) ΠῚ PON? AD) |‘ And how should we believe and how proclaim that they are gods?’
41. they bring him, and intreat him to call upon Bel. Or, ‘having brought Bel, they expect him to speak.’ But the man would be taken before the god. And ἀξιῶ in LXX is ‘to beg, pray, request’ (Dan. i. 8, Jof the verse might have been Samy wyam a> Say xd ἼΦΝ aby ἸΝῚ oN 3 DMN DPD DMwWIA AT AN \eyay sin 5. ΝΟ man awe wpa‘ And also they, the Chaldeans, dishonour them’ (Deut. xxvii. 16); ‘for if they have seen a dumb man who cannot talk, they will bring him in (to the temple) and beg of Bel that he may speak, thinking that he (Bel) is aware.’ (Syr. ed bring him Jdefore the gate’: perhaps xban gale was
Ἥττων = 55, Job xx. το. Perhaps rather wbm
43 themselves, and forsake them: for they have no understanding. The women also with cords
him to call upon Bel, as though he were able to understand. Yet they cannot perceive this
about them sit in the ways, burning bran for incense: but if any of them, drawn by some that passeth by, lie with him, she reproacheth her fellow, that she was not thought as worthy as herself, nor her cord broken. Whatsoever is done among them is false: how should a man then think or say that they are gods? They are fashioned by carpenters and goldsmiths: they can be nothing
somehow confused with 53 Ss unio Bel. Cf. Jer. 1. 26 where Syr. renders mDIND by her gales, reading or guessing man.) 42. Yet; rather, “πα. The idolaters themselves cannot see all this (A: τοῦτο νοήσαντες), and abandon them (the idols); for they are devoid of sense (Jer. x. 8). Hebrew: ‘3 ans ayy (nxt) pand bay ΜΟῚ :ond pe nyr. 43. This verse describes a well-known custom of Babylonian religion, which, according to Herodotus (i. 199), was observed in honour of the goddess Mylitta (MvAurra). ‘ Mylitta,’ he says, ‘is the name the Assyrians give to Aphrodite.’ Aphrodite is, of course, Ishtar, the goddess of love and procreation; and — ‘Mylitta’ is simply a contracted or corrupted form of the epithet mw’al/zd/u, ‘she who causes to bring forth’ (i.e. Eileithyia or Lucina), or ‘she who brings forth’ (intensive) all living, the Great Mother, as the Deep (Tiamat) is called mu-al-li-da-at gim-ri-shu-un, ‘the Mother of them all, in Creation-Tad.i. See also Ishtar’s lament over mankind when drowned by the Deluge (Flood Legend, WZ, xi. 119 ff.), where she seems to claim them as her offspring. Heb. (oon MY) WIR NYPD AAwWN O9772 (Jo. i. 8) odan nin wn xb) mo pa navna ΝῸ 19 sO ΠΙΠΊΨΎΤΙΝ (ch Gen. xix. 35) wy ΠΞΞΦῚ TAY VN Wa ye jAD ΠΠΝ ἽΦΝΘῚ + APA mban «And the women, girt with ropes, sit in the ways offering groats (or chaff); and whenever one — of them is dragged off by a passer-by, she reproaches her companion, because she has not been valued even as herself, and her rope has not been broken’. ‘Bran’ (τὰ πίτυρα) perhaps means crushed or pounded grain, since the ancients did not separate the skin from grain, as is done in modern milling. The account of Herodotus is as follows: ‘But quite the most disgraceful of the customs which the Babylonians have is the following. Every native woman is.bound to sit in the temple of Aphrodite and, once — in her life, have carnal intercourse with a foreigner. Many, moreover, not condescending to mix with the others, as being proud of riches, drive in a closed carriage-and-pair and stop at the temple, with a great following of attendants. But the majority proceed in this way. In Aphrodite’s precinct sit, with a fillet of cord round their heads, many women (for some are coming, others going); while rope-drawn passages keep every direction of ways through the women, by which the foreigners pass through and make their choice. And when a woman seats herself there, she does not go home before one of the foreigners has thrown money _ into her lap and dealt with her outside the temple. But when he throws it, he has to say this much: “I invoke 7” over thee the goddess Mylitta!” (The Assyrians call Aphrodite ‘‘ Mylitta”.) ‘The money may be ever so little in amount, for she may not refuse it, for it is not lawful for her (to do so); for this money becomes sacred: but she follows the first that throws, rejecting no man. But after the intercourse, she makes expiatory — offerings to the goddess, and goes home. And after this, thou wilt not give her so much when thou receivest her in marriage. - ‘All, then, who are possessed of beauty and stature soon go home; but all of them who are plain wait
a long time, unable to fulfil the law. Some even wait three or four years’ time. A similar custom prevails in some places in Cyprus.’ 3 Our verse seems to describe something similar but not identical. There is no mention here of the Sanctuary (ἱερόν) of Aphrodite. The women ‘sit in the ways’ or streets, instead of repairing thither: cf. — Gen. xxxviii. 14 ff., Prov. vii. 8, 12. Herodotus does not mention the offering of ‘bran’; and it is not clear whether the ‘cords’ (σχοινία) of our verse are to be identified with his ‘fillet of cord’ (orepavov θώμιγγος) — or his ‘rope-drawn passages’ (cyoworevées διέξοδοι), or with neither. The expression ἐφελκυσθεῖσα, ‘ dragged a him,’ seems to imply a cord round the woman’s waist, a sort of Venus’s girdle, which is then symbolically _ roken. 44. Whatsoever is done among them is false. This agrees with A’s reading παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς, and seems to refer
to the Chaldeans or their priests. Q’s ἐν αὐτοῖς D3, which would more naturally mean ‘upon them’, i.e. the idols (cf. Num. xxxiii. 4, Dan. ix. 12), in the sense of punishment. Heb, perhaps: “pv ond mwyi 73 ‘All the things that are done unto (or for) them are a fraud’; or "PY ond yyy TW b3 ‘Everything which” is wont to be done for them is a fraud’ (so Syr.). πάντα τὰ γενόμενα NYY TWN ὅθ, 1 Kings xxii. 54.) Perhaps, therefore, xin (sw) ~pYy ond wy awe 55 <All that they do in their honour is a fraud (folly)’s (Both ψευδῆ adj. and ψεύδη subst. appear for apy in LXX.) For the rest of the verse see v. 40. The ὡς ( ὥστε: so AQ) seems superfluous as well as difficult.
Ὡς θεοὶ αὐτοὶ ὑπάρχοιεν would be more intelligible. Cf. Soph. Oed. Tyr. 780: καλεῖ με πλαστὸς os εἴην πατρί. 4 45-52. Idols are merely works of art (‘the work of men’s hands’, Ps. cxv. 4). 45. Heb. perhaps: 77 Fy) wan 51) AWYD ‘handiwork of carpenter and smelter are they’: cf. Jer. x. 9)
1 46 else than the workmen will have them to be. And they themselves that fashioned them can never } 47 continue long; how then should the things that are fashioned by them? For they have left lies | 48 and reproaches to them that come after. For when there cometh any war or plague upon them, 49 the priests consult with themselves, where there may be hidden with them. How then cannot men understand that they be no gods, which can neither save themselves from war, nor from 50 plague? For seeing they be but of wood, and overlaid with gold and with silver, it shall be 51 known hereafter that they are false: and it shall be manifest to all nations and kings that they 52 are no gods, but the works of men’s hands, and that there is no work of God in them. Who 63 then may not know that they are no gods? For neither can they set up a king in a land, nor [54 give rain unto men. Neither can they judge their own cause, nor redress a wrong, being unable:
Ps. cxv. 4. Since Avy fecr/ is often rendered by γίνομαι in LXX, e.g. Gen. xlii. 25, 2 Kings xxiii. 23,
Jer. viii. 8, we may suppose the original of the second clause of the verse to have been something of this kind: :meyd own wan xo ἼΩΝ ans avynd wy xb «They are not made into another thing which the craftsmen did not want to make’. This implies γένωνται (A Q) for γένηται (B).
| I Literally rendered, B’s text says: ‘no other thing will result than what the craftsmen wish them to become,’
In 2 Kings ii. 10, οὐ μὴ γένηται nn xb; and so here the Heb. may have been 3) \YSn AWND AW 53 mar xd ‘there will not come into being aught different from that which’, &c. (cf. Esther i. 8, iii. 7 for maw with j ‘different from’).
46. B wrongly omits εἶναι θεοί from the second clause, where A Q [Syr.] preserve those words. Heb. pynbs ya DMD ὌΨΙ AD. OM oN ND OMe OM (cf Gen. xxvi. 8, Deut. iv. 26) ‘And they, their makers, cannot prolong days; And how shall works of their hands become gods?’ Gods are πολυχρόνιοι and, indeed, eternal.
47. Lit. ‘for they left lies and a reproach to those who are born after’ (i.e. to posterity). The connexion of thought would seem to be: for the idolaters bequeath, not gods, but a damnosa haereditas of disappointment or deception (ψεύδη pw, Jer. x. 14) and reproach (ὄνειδος 7DN) to after generations. Posterity is not likely to regard as gods things which had failed to help in the hour of national danger and disaster, and whose impotence was a subject of mockery to the conquerors (cf. 2 Kings xviii. 33 ff.), and of shame and mortification to their worshippers (Isa. xlii. 17, Jer. xlviii. 13). sense, see Job xviii. 20, Eccles. i. 11, iv. 16.
48. when ... or plague. Rather, ‘Whenever . . . and evils’ (κακά =Ayn, as in Mic. iii. 11: οὐ μὴ
ἐπελθῇ ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς κακά). Heb. of verse: mo (inyr SN ws or) IM DADA Wy AYN ΠΌΠΟΙ. omdy saa 5 :Ooy wwann’ (AN). B: ἐπ᾽ αὐτά upon the idols; A: ἐπ᾽ αὐτούς upon the idolaters. The Heb. omby | might mean either; but A is probably right. Βουλεύονται πρὸς ἑαυτούς. Cf. 2 Kings vi. 8 for the construction (bx yy).
49. Lit. ‘How then is it not possible to perceive’, ἄς. = Heb. 1n nyt }N ΠῚ; see for this construction Ezra ix. 15, Eccles. iii. 14. Instead of ‘themselves’ (ἑαυτούς) A gives ‘them’ (αὐτούς). ‘ Plague’ should be Σ Sevils’ (κακά), as in v. 48. The Heb. of the rest of the verse may have been: yyw xd ἼΩΝ on ody xb oa
(Isa. xlvi. 7 ΠΝ) ΠΡ ΟῚ noNdny (A Q: oMN) OwDI nN.
50. Heb. possibly: DB 7Y DT WI (om. Q) 3 (cf. τ. 6, and Deut. xxviii. 42 ) xxvi. 32, also Exod. xx. 23) : ΠῺΠ “py 3 13 INN ya HDI ANT ‘For inasmuch as
overlaid with gold and silver, it will become known hereafter that they are a fraud’.
51. and that there is no work of God in them καὶ οὐδὲν θεοῦ ἔργον ἐν αὐτοῖς ἐστίν ; a somewhat strange statement, and suggestive of mistranslation. If the Hebrew were D2 Ty DDN pa (‘ And there is no god working in or through them’), we have here a parallel to the error of LXX in Job iv. 17 (ἀπὸ τῶν ἔργων αὐτοῦ wwyd) and Joel ii, rx (NIT AWY ἔργα λόγων αὐτοῦ). Cf. also Prov. xx. 12 (κυρίου ἔργα myy Ayn).
52. Bhas: rim οὖν γνωστέον ἐστὶν ὅτι οὐκ εἰσὶν θεοί; ‘By what then must it be known that they are not | gods?’ an inept question, surely, after all that has been already said. A’s reading is preferable: Τίνι οὖν
γνωστὸν οὐκ ἔσται κτλ. = ‘To whom then shall it not be known’, &c. rods DN 1D NIN ya xb 19) (cf. Exod. xxxiii. 16).
53. The verse falls back into Hebrew quite naturally. dy (1 Kings xiv. 14) 12)" xb yN(7) tbo 5 $3an) WIND ΘΟ ΤΙΝ ‘For a king of a (the) country they cannot set up, and the rain of the ground they cannot | give ’, Apparently the Greek translator misread DINT(= ἀνθρώποις) for MINT: see Deut. xxviii.
54. The position of ἑαυτῶν (A Q αὐτῶν) is remarkable. It, looks as if the word were an attempt to render \ Heb. 73 or 07; an emphatic sAey. Heb. npn 137 xb pr: cf. Jer. v. 28. The next clause, οὐδὲ μὴ | ῥύσωνται. ἀδίκημα (* nor redress a wrong’), appears to be a reminiscence of Isa. i. 17, where LXX®* has ῥύσασθε ᾿᾿ἀδικούμενον pron wwe. Here also A has ἀδικούμενον for B’s ἀδίκημα. We may therefore suppose an original text yon MwN' ΝΟῪ ‘nor can they correct an oppressor’, or ‘right one that is wronged’. (Cf. also 12 Sam. xxii. 49: ἀδίκημα DD.) ‘Being unable’ (ἀδύνατοι ὄντες) probably belongs to the next clause ; where A Qme read ai instead of γάρ (no doubt correctly), This gives the sense: ‘being powerless as the crows
Heb. :onnxd naam apy ΣῚΡ 3. For pane in this
ξυλινά = 75 Exod. they are wood and
EPISTEE (OF JEREMY Ὁ
55 for they are as crows between heaven and earth. For even when fire falleth upon the house of — gods of wood, or overlaid with gold or with silver, their priests will flee away, and escape, but 56 they themselves shall be burnt asunder like beams. Moreover they cannot withstand any king 57 or enemies: how should a man then allow or think that they be gods? Neither are those gods of wood, and overlaid with silver or with gold, able to escape either from thieves or robbers. 58 Whose gold, and silver, and garments wherewith they are clothed, they that are strong will take 59 from them, and go away withal: neither shall they be able to help themselves. Therefore it is better to be a king that showeth his manhood, or else a vessel in a house profitable for that whereof the owner shall have need, than such false gods; or even a door in a house, to keep the things safe that be therein, than such false gods; or a pillar of wood in a palace, than such 60 false gods. For sun, and moon, and stars, being bright and sent to do their offices, are obedient.
between the heaven and the earth.’ The point of the comparison, however, is still obscure, for ‘ crows’ (or ravens: see Jer. iii, 2 T3122 ‘TWD = ὠσεὶ κορώνη ἐρημουμένη, LXX reading or misreading “23 WYP) do not give the impression of powerlessness, especially when flying in mid-air. Moreover, a verb seems wanting, as crows are not always in the air. Now in Job v. 16, xxxi. 16, ἀδύνατος represents Heb. by, weak, helpless. It seems possible, therefore, that the Hebrew text here had TD (for they hang suspended: cf. Job xxviii. 4), which the Greek translator ignorantly rendered ἀδύνατοι ὄντες. The reference would be to images hanging on a wall (cf. v. 21 note): Heb. ΝΠ pai own 3 Dy δ 5. We may further suggest that o’y3 (‘like the clouds’) has been mistaken for oy27y3 (‘like the ravens’), The Syriac has: ‘And not like the ravens between — heaven and earth do they fly in the atr’ (ANNI 1775). :
55. Hebrew possibly: maps on) wd yi oA. AOD aN py mde maa (wx dws on) we dyn 5 DI pa ws ἼΠΞ (cf. Gen. xv. το: διεῖλεν αὐτὰ μέσα).
56. Heb. may have been: ὈΠῸΝ > (cf. v. 40) ponds nnpd mn (Deut. xxviii. 7) wap xd ove dyn qb Sy :non. (For mp ‘to receive a lesson’, cf. Jer. ii. 30.) i 57- Διαθῶσιν (B) is evidently wrong. The syllable cw has been accidentally omitted. Q presents the right _ reading διασωθῶσιν [so Syr.]: cf. τ. 55. The Heb. was probably something like the following: xd) pvaa xb 23m 4D3) yy sabw wb oi» ‘Neither from thieves nor from robbers’ (Obad. 5) ‘can gods of wood and
silver and gold escape ’. 58. Lit. ‘From whom the strong will ( may) strip off the gold and silver; and the raiment that lies about them they will (may) go off with.’ Heb. np» omy Ws O13 NS) OA NS) D|DD AN Dw Ww} ὩΣ) Π AWN ryadm (cf. Gen. xxxvii. 23, Ezek. xvi. 39, Isa. xlix. 25, for the language). In the third member of the verse, A’s οἱ δέ, but they, seems better than B’s οὔτε Nd) ‘and not’. Heb. ywr xd owad pm (Joshua x. 6), ‘and they (the idols) will not save themselves.’ 59. What writer, thinking in Greek, would have expressed himself in this fashion? Lit. the words run more _ like this: ‘So that it is better to be a king exhibiting his own courage, or a vessel in a house useful for what the possessor shall use it for, than the false gods.’ The fitness of the first comparison is far from being self-— evident. It goes without saying, that a king giving proof of life and vigour in the face of attack is superior to a ‘god’ who can do nothing to defend his own person. But why a‘king’ and not rather a ‘man’, i.e. any one whatever? Possibly because god and king are synonymous terms in Oriental use (cf. 1 Sam. xii, 12; Ps. v. 2, xx. 9, xxiv. 7, Ixviii. 24; Isa. vi. 5, viii. 21, xli. 21); and a ‘king’ who fights for crown and kingdom (he was perhaps thinking of the struggles of some contemporary sovereign) is certainly ‘ better’ than a roi fainéant. Heb. : (apy ads) snap wns Avy seNd Syn maa "55) naa ΠΝ aN ἼΟ (nnd) aro 12 by. It seems questionable whether the Hebrew had ‘It is better to be a king’, as the Greek has it (cf. Prov. xxi. 9), or ‘Better is a king’, &c. (cf. Prov. xix. 1, Eccles. iv. 13), of which A Q’s κρείσσων (B κρεῖσσον) looks like a reminiscence. The nominatives in what follows (ἢ καὶ θύρα ἐν οἰκίᾳ... καὶ ξύλινος στύλος) May point in the latter direction, They at least show that the author of the Greek forgot the construction with which he started, and support the view that he was translating from a language destitute of Case-inflexions, viz. Hebrew. The LXX rendering of the Canonical Books often exhibits the same error. [1 leave this note as originally written, in order to show how little can be made of the text as it stands; but see Introd. § 3 (6) for a conjectural emendation of the first clause of the verse.]| The Heb. of the rest of the verse might be: rapy snds dana yy sya (apy nde) 12 ἼΦΝ ΠΝ now maa ΠΟῚ pn (τὰ βασίλεια = dann, Nahum ii. 6). The triple ἢ οἱ ψευδεῖς θεοί is hardly original. The first two occurrences look like artless insertions intended ~ to make the meaning clearer. (Cf. Wisd. v. 9-13.) I have therefore enclosed them in brackets. The Syriac omits all, perhaps correctly. : ' 60. Unlike the things just mentioned, and those enumerated in vv. 60-63, the false gods are useful for no purpose whatever. PD yOW) pan ly DML”
BESTE OR IE REMY 61-68
| 61 Likewise also the lightning when it glittereth is fair to see; and after the same manner the wind } 62also bloweth in every country. And when God commandeth the clouds to go over the whole 63 world, they do as they are bidden. And the fire sent from above to consume mountains and woods
doeth as it is commanded: but these are to be likened unto them neither in show nor power. | 64 Wherefore a man should neither think nor say that they are gods, seeing they are able neither 65 to judge causes, nor to do good unto men. Knowing therefore that they are no gods, fear them | 67 not. For they can neither curse nor bless kings: neither can they show signs in the heavens
᾿ 68 among the nations, nor shine as the sun, nor give light as the moon. The beasts are better than
‘For sun and moon and stars do shine ;
They are sent on a business and obey.’
For χρείας = jf}, see Eccles. iti, 1 Symm. and ib. 17 Aq. For the sense of pan, cf. Isa. liii. ro, viii. 13.
Ἑήκοος = pow, Prov. xxv. 12. It is evident that the Greek closely follows, while partially misunderstanding, the Hebrew.
61. Likewise also the lightning when it glittereth is fair to see. The attribution of beauty to lightning
is quite contrary to Biblical conceptions, which rather associate awe and terror with this phenomenon: Ex. xix. 16; Ps. xviii. 14, Ixxvii. 18; Rev. iv. 5. Evorros might be ‘well-seen’ = conspicuous. But it is probable that we have here another instance of error in translation; the author of the Greek version having
connected N1)3 Zerrzble with ANA seen. The Heb. may have been: δ) INIA P72 AN ‘And also lightning when it appeareth is awful’; or N71) ὙΝΠΣ ΡΖ oO 131, ‘And so also lightning when it shineth is terrible’. In either case there is a paronomasia on the two like-sounding words, such as is characteristic of Hebrew style. (In Zeph. ii. rr NW) is rendered by LXX ἐπιφανήσεται, and in 2 Sam. vii. 23 MINWI = ἐπιφάνειαν, while N73 is rendered by ἐπιφανής six or seven times. In these cases there is a similar confusion of the above Heb. roots.) The rest of the verse might be: ΩΦ) ys Soa mn oa j2) ‘And so also wind bloweth in every land’. For τὸ δ᾽ αὐτὸ καὶ... see Phil. ii. 18 (Gifford).
62. Lit. ‘And to clouds whenever it is commanded by God to go over all the inhabited (world), they accomplish what was commanded’. The Hebrew may have been simply: >> San by asyd obs omya pay (59 wy) My nN (wy). Isa. xiii. τα, xiv. 17 ban ἡ οἰκουμένη ὅλη ; but ib. Xiv. 26 ἐπὶ τὴν οἰκουμένην ὅλην yn 92 oy. The translator possibly connected the 2. of omyya with pbx, supposing the verb to be passive. Cf., however, Isa. v. 6: AWN DAA by καὶ ταῖς νεφέλαις ἐντελοῦμαι. See Ezek. xxxix. 14 for ἐπιπορεύεσθαι
says. The paronomasia with ὩΣ was probably intentional.
63. the fire: i.e. lightning, which is ‘the Fire of God’. Instead of ‘to consume’ (ἐξαναλῶσαι, ‘ to spend’ or ‘destroy utterly’), Q gives ἐξερημῶσαι, ‘to desolate utterly’. The latter might be an attempt to render Heb. ayannd or ownd more exactly ( to /ay waste), but the Heb. may have been simply sy2d fo consume (cf. Syr.). Q’s addition καὶ βουνούς, and hills (so also Syr.), may be original: cf. Isa. lv. 12. Δρυμούς may represent a sing. y’, as in Isa. x. 18, though plur. oy? (Ezra ii. 25) or My? is perhaps more probable. The Heb. of the verse might be: om, [3 ΠΟ Π ΠΥΡῚ (Man) on ayad ΡΟ (Amos i. 7, το, ἅς.) mmdv wNM 2530) ΠΣ om dy wt xd (cf. Ezek. xxxi. 18, Dan. i. 13, 15 ANT ἰδέαι). (Syr. ‘They are not like ove
_ of these things’; cf. A Q: ἑνὶ αὐτῶν or τούτων.) 64. Heb. :oax5 aerndy wav prawd ay xd 5. onbds on ΟΝ ΝΟῚ ΠΝ ΝΟ yo by. The last word was
| probably intended to be vocalized DIN) = τοῖς ἀνθρώποις. For 5 a7, see Joshua xxiv. 20. (Syr. adds: nor do evil after do good.)
66. curse ... kings. See Eccles. x. 20. Cf. also Num. xxii. 6. ‘For kings they will (= can) not curse nor bless.’ ek
67. in the heavens among the nations. It is probable that this is an instance of a ‘conflate reading ’, ΩΨ = pnw (out of which it might easily have originated). The Heb. of the first clause may well have ‘been: on x5 ows myn) ‘and signs in the heavens they cannot set’. Cf. Joel iii. 3 (Heb.), Neh. ix. το. \(Syr. corrects: ‘and signs in heaven / the nations they show not.’ Cf, Matt. xvi. 1.) The fluctuation of the
Greek codd. between ὡς σελήνη (B) and ὡς ἣ σελήνη (AQ; recte) again suggests a Heb. original ; for the unpointed n> might, of course, be read either way (72 or 17°3). The Heb. of the latter half of the verse
may have been: ΠΣ yx NOV wows Nd.
68. The beasts are better than they τε ὉΠ N30 ANA. For ΠῚΠΠ, see Gen. vil. 21, viii. 1. (Perhaps mwa nn, Jer. xii. 9. Syr. deasts of the wilderness.) There seems to be something wrong about ithe reason. Literally the Greek says: ‘which are able by escaping into a covert to profit themselves. Abra or Ἰξαυτὰ ὠφελῆσαι is a strange expression for ὠφεληθῆναι. Now, the verb ὠφελεῖν in LXX usually renders Heb. |oyin «to profit’, as in Isa. xxx. 5; and it is likely that the translator mistook nbynd ‘to hide’ for ‘to. profit \hem’. It is merely a question of vowel-points (δυὸ instead of pbynd Niph. Inf.). Obviously, the motive for
} fleeing into a covert’ would be to Arde, rather than to ‘help’ or ‘profit’ oneself.
EPISTLE (OF ERENMico—72
69 they: for they can get under a covert, and help themselves. In no wise then is it manifest unto —
“vous that they are gods: therefore fear them not. For as a scarecrow in a garden of cucumbers that keepeth nothing, so are their gods of wood, and overlaid with gold and with silver. Likewise 71 also their gods of wood, and overlaid with gold and with silver, are like to a white thorn in an orchard, that every bird sitteth upon; as also to a dead body, that is cast forth into the dark. 72 And ye shall know them to be no gods by the bright purple that rotteth upon them: and they
69. Heb. perhaps: “δ Dm 5 35 ya AMI IIT PS ‘There is nothing whereby it is known to us that they are gods’. Cf. Gen. xv. 8.
70. a scarecrow. Strictly speaking, προβασκάνιον is an amulet or safeguard against witchcraft, such as, according to Plutarch, workmen hung up before their shops. Cf. βάσκανος = ἣν p71, Prov. xxiii. 6. Since βασκαίνω is to ‘slander, disparage, envy, grudge ’, is it not just possible that the translator misunderstood Isaiah’s andy (Isa. i. 8), connecting it with nd ‘to murmur’ (perhaps rather ‘be evil, Aostile’; cf. Assyr. lawdnu,
lamdnu, limnu, be evil, evil, hostile) rather than with nd ‘to lodge?” ‘The Syriac actually renders supnt πόντῳ, as in Isa. 1. 8. But the context rather suggests a post or pillar (perhaps a terminal figure, like Priapus), set up to scare birds and other pilferers, cf. Hor. Sa. I. viii. 1-7); and the original phrase may have been modelled on Jeremiah’s mwpr(a) ὝΠ5 ‘like a post (scarecrow) in a garden of gourds’ (Jer. x. 5), which is said of idols as being speechless blocks. Heb. of verse: $403) 2ΠῚ py omnby #2737 ΔΙ) PX AwPpa Wn ANS 5 ‘For as a post in a cucumber-plot protecteth nothing, so their gods (of) wood and gold and silver’ (protect nothing). ‘Their ‘terrors are empty terrors, like those of the palm-trunk, rough-hewn into human shape, and set up among the melons to frighten the birds away’ (see my exposition of Jer. x. in Prophecies of Jer., pp. 227-9, Expositor’s Bible).
71. white thorn, the Greek ῥάμνος, a kind of prickly shrub, also called παλίουρος ; Rhamnus paliurus, of which Theophrastus mentions two kinds, a white and a black, as we have our ‘ whitethorn’ and ‘ blackthorn’ in the hedgerows. ῬῬάμνος is the equivalent of 7ON ‘bramble’, ‘buckthorn’, in Judges ix. 14, 15, Ps. lviii. ro, where it is mentioned as the inferior of all the trees (Judges l.c.), and as used for fuel (Ps. |.c.). Here, the idols are as contemptible as this common hedge-growth, upon which any bird might settle and foul it (cf. v. 22). Tristram enumerates sixteen species of Rhamneae in Palestine (Zc. Bib. s.v. “Thorns’). It is not evident why the Rhamnus should be ‘7x a garden” (τῇ ἐν κήπῳ ῥάμνῳ), as it was not a garden plant. Probably a hedge of thorns round the garden (not ‘orchard’) is intended. Or the idea may be that of a wild growth in
a neglected garden. a dead body ...cast forth into the dark is a comparison by which the writer intends to signify the extreme
of contempt.’ Cf. Amos viii. 3; Jer. xiv. 16, xxil. 19; Isa. xxxiv. 3; Baruch ii. 25; 1 Macc. xi. 4. Fora
corpse to be left unburied was the height of indignity. ‘Into the dark’ may be a vivid touch, suggesting in one word (qwna) an entire picture. We see the helpless body, perhaps of an infant, thrown out furtively under cover of night into the darkness of the deserted street, to become a prey to pariah dogs. (For the construction ἐρριμμένῳ ἐν σκότει, instead of εἰς σκότος, cf. 2 Kings ix. 25, 26, xiii. 21.) But it seems more likely that Jwna is a corruption or alteration of na ‘into the street’ (Jer. xiv. 16). The original text of the verse
may have been something like the following: bea (7285) nod on ydy avy aay 53 ἼΦΝ ja tend a ᾿Ξ :[DD) ann py] omnbds wt yina. (The concluding words may be due to inadvertent repetition from the
preceding verse.) Or perhaps ,,., nodD On... omnds ide) OND 0.
72. Lit. ‘And from the purple and the marble that rotteth upon them it shall ( may ; Hebraism) be known that they are not gods’. The Greek word μάρμαρος means any stone or rock which sparkles (μαρμαίρει) in the light ; and then specially marble ( Lat. marmor). The margin and R. V. are both wrong in supposing that
the term is here used as an epithet of πορφύρα, with the sense of ‘ brightness’ or ‘ bright’, which the word never —
bears. As I pointed out long ago in the Varzorum Apocrypha, the Greek translator has here confused the
Hebrew WY ‘linen’ (Exod. xxv. 4; = Greek βύσσος) with its homophone YY ‘marble’ (Cant. ν. 153
wy siDY στύλοι μαρμάρινοι). Byssus is coupled with purple in Exod. xxvi. 1, and elsewhere ; see especially Prov. xxxi. 22 (ἐκ δὲ βύσσου καὶ πορφύρας ἐν αὐτῇ ἐνδύματα). The robes of the idols might ‘rot’ upon them, but ‘marble’ hardly. The Syriac at least shows a sense of the fitness of things, with its ‘purple and s7/k stuffs’. Heb. ands ove 5 yay omy apn wen ΠΛ ΝΠ wor. For ap σήπομαι, cf. Job xix. 20, where LXX has
ἐσάπησαν --- APII (obviously reading ’ap4). The variations ἐπ᾽ αὐτούς (B), ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶν (A), ἐπ᾿ αὐτοῖς (Q), might
all be attempts to represent Heb. omby ‘upon them’. ‘ And they themselves’ (αὐτά te); in contrast with their apparel. Heb. perhaps simply om) ‘and they’; or D5 ‘and their body’; or pon (Aramaism). Cf. v. 8. shall be consumed; rather devoured (βρωθήσονται = yay or Saye; cf. Isa. li. 8). The idea might be devoured by fire; but then WN2 seems necessary, as in Ezek. xxiii. 25, Neh. ii. 3 al. The word may have been passed over accidentally ; but it seems more likely that the Greek translator misread ya» shall perish (Isa. i. 28) as wax» “shall be eaten up’. This gives us as Heb. for the rest of the verse: "ΠῚ yp» ans DAY ΣΥΝΕ mpan. [v. 20 may possibly give the clue to the sense: ‘Things creeping out of the earth devour both them and their raiment.’ But I prefer the preceding suggestion.| After plur. βρωθήσονται, with subject αὐτά,
PR Ok a eakE NY 73
_ 73 themselves afterward shall be consumed, and shall be a reproach in the country. Better therefore is the just man that hath none idols: for he shall be far from reproach.
the following clause καὶ ἔσται ὄνειδος Ought to mean ‘And it shall be a reproach’ = ADIN AN; but Q’s ἔσονται is preferable.
73. An apparently lame conclusion. Idols will evidently become a reproach to their worshippers ; therefore one who has nothing to do with idols will be far from reproach ; a on segutfur, unless idolatry be the sole ground of reproach. Further, there is no obvious reference for the comparative κρείσσων. Better than whom? A vague ἢ αὐτοί, than they, meaning ‘the Chaldeans’ (v. 40), may have fallen out; cf. οἱ θεοὶ αὐτῶν, ‘their gods,’ in vv. 70 sq. Or the omitted phrase may have been ἢ of θεραπεύοντες αὐτά, ‘than they that serve them,’ v. 27. See the repeated ἢ of ψευδεῖς θεοί, v. 58 (Eng. 59). The Hebrew of the verse may thus have been: [5 5y sA_IND Pinna ΝῚΠ 5 (BAMAypD) ANAND 1 pS DANY py wN TID ‘Therefore better is a righteous man who hath no idols than they (than their worshippers); for he (A: αὐτός) will be far from reproach’. The phrase ἄνθρωπος δίκαιος ‘a non-idolater’, in the sense of the writer; cf. the use of ἄνομοι, ἀσεβεῖς, υἱοὶ παράνομοι, ἁμαρτωλοί, for the heathen and renegade Jews in 1 Macc. fassem. And it would perhaps give a more coherent sense if the statement of the verse were: ‘Better is a “righteous” man ( a non-idolater) than one that hath idols ; for (unlike the latter) he will be far from reproach’ (which the latter must share with
his discredited gods) = Heb. “1 od»5x 15 swxn pay ws aw. The translator may have confused 1S with
snd (x5), not, and omitted to notice the particle of comparison. (Possibly his Heb. MS. was worn at the end.) The Syriac ends thus: ‘ Well is it, then, for the righteous man who is far from reproach, and zs looking
for the Lord God!’ (that is, the Parousia). ‘Finished is the Epistle of Jeremiah the Prophet. His Prayers be with us!’
THE PRAYER OF ΝΙΝ 555
δι. DESCRIPTION OF THE BOOK.
fos ots eh gr ον iis pain eg χες ἐν ee
‘THE Prayer of Manasses, King of Judah, when he was holden captive in Babylon, is the title of a short penitential Psalm. It is written in Greek, and contains thirty-seven στίχοι. In Fritzsche’s Libri Apocryphi Vet. Test. Graece it is divided into fifteen verses; and this division has been very generally adopted. :
The Psalm consists of (2) an invocation of the Deity (vv. 1-7), (4) a confession of sin (vv. 8-10), (c) an entreaty for forgiveness (vv. 11-15).
ὃ ΠΟ ORIGING
Its literary origin is obscure. There seems, however, to be little reason to doubt that the author was a Jew, i.e. not a Christian. While, in the case of so short a fragment, it is difficult to decide with absolute certainty, it seems most probable that the Prayer was originally written in Greek; and that the existing Greek text is not, as has sometimes been maintained, a translation from the Hebrew or Aramaic.! If this view be correct, ‘ The Prayer of Manasses’ should be classed with such writings as ‘The Song of the Three Children’, and be regarded as, in all probability, the composition of — a Hellenistic Jew, who in the interests of his people’s faith wrote the penitential Prayer to suit the special circumstances under which the prayer, ascribed to Manasseh, King of Judah, in 2 Chron, XXxXlil. 18, 19, was supposed to have been uttered.
It will be convenient to quote the whole passage in which this mention of the king’s prayer
(11) ‘Wherefore the Lorp brought upon them the captains of the host of the king of Assyria, which took Manasseh in chains (Or, zztk hooks), and bound him with fetters, and carried him to Babylon. (12) And when he was in distress, he besought the Lorp his God, and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers. (13) And he prayed unto him; and he was intreated of him, and heard his supplication, and brought him : again to Jerusalem into his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the Lorp he was God. .. . (18) Now the rest of the acts of Manasseh, and his prayer unto his God, and the words of the seers that spake to him in the — name of the Lorn, the God of Israel, behold, they are written among the acts of the kings of Israel. (19) His prayer also, and how God was intreated of him, and all his sin and his trespass, and the places wherein he built high places, and set up the Asherim and the graven images, before he humbled himself: behold, they are written in the history of Hozai (Or, the seers).’
According to this account, a Prayer of Manasseh? was reputed, in the Chronicler’s time, (a) to have been preserved among ‘the acts of the kings of Israel’, and (4) to be contained in the records — of Hozai (or, the seers). Whether the Chronicler himself was acquainted with any such Hebrew — prayer, or whether he is simply repeating a popular tradition, we have no means of determining. No — such writing was ever contained in the Hebrew Scriptures; nor, if it ever existed, has it survived in any Hebrew or Aramaic form.
It is easy to understand that the Chronicler’s story of Manasseh’s repentance and prayer and deliverance from captivity must have produced upon the minds of devout Jews a profound impression. — The record of his idolatry and of his persecution of the servants of Jehovah had stamped his name with infamy in the annals of Judah. But side by side with his wickedness were commemorated the — unusual length of the king’s reign and the quiet peacefulness of his end. The Chronicler’s story of the repentance and conversion of Manasseh provided the explanation of a seemingly unintelligible — anomaly. Henceforth his name was associated by Jewish tradition not only with the grossest acts of idolatry ever perpetrated by a king of Judah, but also with the most famous instance of Divine forgiveness towards a repentant sinner. What more remarkable example could be found of the longsuffering compassion of the Almighty and of His readiness to hear and to answer the supplication of a contrite penitent?
Nothing would be more natural than for a devout Jew to endeavour to frame in fitting terms the kind of penitential prayer, which, according to the tradition, Manasseh had poured forth when he was in captivity in Babylon. The sentiments embodied in such a form of petition might conceivably be
τ See note on § 7.—GEN. Ep. * The oldest non-canonical reference to this prayer is to be found in 2 Baruch Ixiv. 8.
αἰχμάλωτος ἀπήχθη καὶ εἰς τὸ χαλκοῦν ἄγαλμα καθείρχθη k Ἰδιερράγη . . . δεδεμένῳ δὲ ὄντι ἐν φυλακῇ, ἐν πέδαις χαλκαῖς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι ἐδίδοσαν αὐτῷ ἐκ πιτύρων ἄρτον βραχὺν καὶ ὕδωρ
appropriate to those of his countrymen who had fallen into idolatry, and who might yet be reclaimed from the error of their way.
According to this hypothesis, the Psalm was composed for a practical devotional purpose.
§ 3. ITs LITERARY HISTORY.
‘The Prayer of Manasses’ makes its first appearance in extant literature, so far as is known at present, in the so-called Didascalia. This was an early Christian writing, composed probably in the second or third century, and incorporated into the Afostolical Constitutions, a work of the fourth or fifth century, of which the first six books consist of the Didascalia.
The author of the Didascalia was probably a member of the Christian Church in Syria, and wrote in Greek. Ina long extract, apparently derived from some other writing, he records at length the narrative of Manasseh’s idolatry and punishment, of his repentance and prayer, of his miraculous deliverance from captivity and restoration to Jerusalem. The object which the author of the Didascalia has in view is to illustrate God’s mercy towards a repentant sinner. After briefly mentioning the classical instances of David’s repentance at the rebuke of Nathan, of Jonah’s repentance and the answer to his prayer uttered in the whale’s belly, of Hezekiah’s supplication and the pardon of his sin of pride, he continues, ‘ But hearken, ye bishops, to an excellent and apposite example; for thus is it written in the Fourth Book of the Kingdoms (i.e. 2 Kings) and in the Second Book of Chronicles. Then follow extracts from the LXX of 2 Kings xxi. 1-18 and 2 Chron. xxxiii. 1 ff.,
which are welded together and expanded by four Additions, to which there is nothing corresponding in the Hebrew text. The order in which these extracts follow one another is as follows:
(1) 2 Kings xxi. 1-4. (7) Addition B. λέγων, followed by ‘ The Prayer
(2) 2 Chron. xxxiii. 5-8. of Manasses’.
(5) Addition A. (10) Addition D.
The Additions are as follows:
(A) An insertion between 2 Chron. xxxiii. 11 and 12: καὶ ἣν δεδεμένος καὶ κατασεσιδηρωμένος
ὅλος ἐν οἴκῳ φυλακῆς, καὶ ἐδίδοτο αὐτῷ ἐκ πιτύρων ἄρτος ἐν σταθμῷ βραχύς, καὶ ὕδωρ σὺν ὄξει ὀλίγον ἐν μέ
s ἐν οἴκῳ φυλακῆς, καὶ αὐτῷ ἐ ρων ἄρτος μῷ βραχύς, καὶ ὕδωρ σὺν ὄξει ὀλίγον ἐν μέτρῳ,
ὥστε ζῇν αὐτόν, kal ἣν συνεχόμενος Kal ὀδυνώμενος σφόδρα.
(Β) After 2 Chron. xxxiii. 13 καὶ προσηύξατο πρὸς κύριον (LXX αὐτόν) is added λέγων" κύριε παντοκράτωρ... εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. ᾿Αμήν.
(C) Instead of 2 Chron. xxxiii. 13 καὶ ἐπήκουσεν αὐτοῦ" καὶ ἐπήκουσεν τῆς βοῆς αὐτοῦ, is substituted kal ἐπήκουσε τῆς φωνῆς αὐτοῦ κύριος, καὶ ὠκτείρησεν αὐτόν" Kal ἐγένετο περὶ αὐτὸν φλὸξ Tupds, καὶ ἐτάκησαν
| παντὰ τὰ περὶ αὐτὸν oldnpa’ καὶ ἰάσατο κύριος Μανασσῆν ἐκ τῆς θλίψεως αὐτοῦ.
(D) Instead of 2 Chron. xxxiii. 14 is substituted καὶ ἐλάτρευσε μόνῳ κυρίῳ τῷ θεῷ ἐν ὅλῃ καρδίᾳ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ ψυχῆ αὐτοῦ πάσας τὰς ἡμέρας τῆς ζωῆς αὐτοῦ" καὶ ἐλογίσθη δίκαιος.
The preservation of this short disconnected Psalm may thus, with good reason, be ascribed to | the accident of its occurrence in the Didascalia and the Afostolical Constitutions. There is no
evidence to show that it was ever included in the Septuagint, the Judaeo-Greek Canon of Holy | Scripture. But, very possibly, in consequence of the popularity of the Apostolical Constitutions, ‘The Prayer of Manasses’ became well known in the Eastern Church; and it was a natural step to take,
to detach the Prayer from its context and to insert it among the Canticles (δαί, Cantica) used and
sung for liturgical purposes, and to be found appended to the Psalter ‘in certain uncial MSS. and ) a large proportion of the cursives’ (Swete, Jztrod. to the O. T. in Greek, p. 253).
In the Codex Alexandrinus (A) there are fourteen Canticles appended to the Psalter in the ‘following order: (1) Exod. xv. 1-19 (#37) Μωυσέως ἐν τῇ Edd): (2) Deut. xxxii. 1-43 (φδὴ Μωυσέως ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ): (3) 1 Sam. ii. I-10 (προσευχὴ “Avvas μητρὸς Σαμουήλ): (4) Isa. xxvi. g-20 (προσευχὴ “E¢exiov): (5) Jonah ii. 3-10 (προσευχὴ ᾿Ιωνᾶ): (6) Hab. iii. 1-19 (προσευχὴ ᾿Αμβακούμγ: (7) Isa. xxxviii. 10-23 (προσευχὴ “E¢exiov): (8) ‘The Prayer of Manasses’ (προσευχὴ Μανασσή):
1 On the Jewish Midrashic legend respecting Manasseh’s deliverance see Ball’s ‘Introduction to the Prayer of
Manasseh’ in Speaker’s Comm. on Apoc. ii. 362 ff. Compare 2 Baruch Ixiv. ὃ, part of the section (liii-Ixxiv) assigned by Dr. Charles to 50-70 A.D. Cf. Anastas. 2 Ps.6 Canis. thes. Monum. iil, p. 112 φασὶν οἱ ἀρχαῖοι τῶν ἱστοριογράφων,
ὅτι ἀπενεχθεὶς M. κατεκλείσθη eis ζῴδιον χαλκοῦν ἀπὸ βασιλέως Περσῶν καὶ ἔσω ὧν ἐν τοιούτῳ ζῳδίῳ προσηύξατο pera
δακρύων. Toh. Damasc. Paral/. 2.15, Opp. ii, p. 463 ἱστορεῖται παρὰ ᾿Αφρικάνῳ, ὅτι ἐν τῷ λέγειν δὴν τὸν Μ, τὰ δεσμὰ i za 5 ae BG ὃ Cos ; ῥ ΩΡ: ἼΔΕ τ ;
διερράγη σιδηρᾶ ὄντα καὶ ἔφυγεν. Suidas s.v. Μανασσῆς : ὑπὸ Μεροδὰχ βασιλέως ᾿Ασσυρίων δέσμιος εἰς Νινευὴ τὴν πόλιν
ἐδεήθη τοῦ κυρίου καὶ τὸ μὲν ἄγαλμα θείᾳ δυνάμει
ὀλίγον σὺν ὄξει μετρητῷ πρὸς τὸ ζῆν αὐτὸν καὶ μόνον, καὶ τότε προσηύξατο πρὸς κύριον" κύριε παντόκρατορ.
(9) Dan. iii. 23 (προσευχὴ Aapiov) : (10) ὕμνος τῶν πατέρων ἡμῶν : (11) Magnificat (προσευχὴ Μαρίας τῆς θεοτόκου): (12) Nunc Dimittis (προσευχὴ Συμεών): (13) Benedictus (προσευχὴ Ζαχαρίου) : (14) The Morning Hymn (ὕμνος ἑωθινός). Similarly, in the Codex Turicensis (T), the liturgical Canticles are appended to the Psalter; and ‘The Prayer of Manasses’ appears ninth in the list. But the evidence of Codex Alexandrinus would alone suffice to show that in the Eastern Church the Prayer was in use for liturgical psalmody in the fifth century A.D.
δ. ΠΕ Titres
To the Psalm is prefixed the title ‘The Prayer οἵ Manasses’ (προσευχὴ Μανασσή) in Codex Alexandrinus (A); ‘The Prayer of Manasses the son of Hezekiah’ (προσευχὴ Μανασσὴ τοῦ υἱοῦ ‘E¢exiov) in Codex Turicensis (T); and in the editions of the Vulgate ‘The Prayer of Manasses, : King of Judah, when he was holden captive in Babylon’ (Ογαΐζίο Manassae regis Iuda cum σαῤίηδ. teneretur in Babylone). :
There is no sufficient reason to call in question the correctness of the title. (1) The title is derived from the narrative in the Dzdascalia in which the Prayer has been incorporated. (2) There is no evidence to show that the Prayer had existed before its inclusion in this Manasseh tradition. (3) Though it is noteworthy that the Prayer contains no mention of any proper name of personage or — place, by which the legitimacy of the title might be confirmed, there are nevertheless to be found in it allusions which are most naturally interpreted on the assumption that the Prayer is put into the mouth of Manasseh, King of Judah. Thus, (a) the speaker describes himself as ‘weighed down with chains’, κατακαμπτόμενος πολλῷ σιδηρῷ (ver. 10): (ὁ) he dwells with emphasis upon his many sins in past time, ἥμαρτον ὑπὲρ ἀριθμὸν ψάμμου θαλάσσης .. . ἀπὸ πλήθους τῶν ἀδικιῶν μου (ver. 9): (c) he makes particular mention of the forms of idolatrous sin whereby he had provoked the wrath of God, στήσας βδελύγματα καὶ πληθύνας προσοχθίσματα (ver. 10).
The objection must be admitted for what it is worth that there is no reference to the Temple of Jerusalem or to the religious worship of Israel. But this omission is intelligible, if we are correct in assuming that the composer is concerned with the tradition of Manasseh’s repentance in its religious rather than in its historical bearings.
$6. DATE OF COMPOSITION.
It seems probable that the Dzdascalia (lib. ii. 21), in which the Prayer was preserved, was composed in the first half-of the third century A.D. (F. X. Funk, Dze Afpostol. K onstitutionen, 1891, p. 50), and in Syria (ébzd., p. 54). If we may assume that the author of the Dzdascalia borrowed from some Jewish, or Hellenistic, source the whole passage relating to Manasseh, then the Prayer, and the writing in which it stood, must have been well known in the beginning of the third century A.D. Its composition must be assigned to an earlier date than this.
The inclusion of the Prayer among the liturgical Canticles in the Codex Alexandrinus implies a high degree of estimation; and if those Canticles were copied from a yet earlier MS., we might be justified in inferring that its adoption for liturgical use had its origin not later than in the fourth century, and that a considerable interval of time must have elapsed between its becoming known in the Eastern Church and its being transcribed for liturgical use in MSS. of Scripture. Perhaps, however,we cannot say more than that (1) ‘The Prayer of Manasses’ probably found its way into liturgical use after becoming known to the Church through the Didascalia: (2) that the citation, in the Ddascalia, of the long extract in which the Prayer occurs, points to an earlier date for the period of its — composition: (3) that the position of the Prayer, in a setting of passages cited from the Greek versions of Kings and Chronicles, suggests that the Prayer itself is of considerably later date than — the translations which were used as a framework into which the penitential Psalm was inserted.
§ 7. ORIGINAL LANGUAGE.
‘The Prayer of Manasses’ is too brief to admit of any degree of certainty in the reply to the question whether we have to do with a Greek original, or with a Greek translation from a Hebrew — or Aramaic original.! If it be a translation, it deserves to rank high. But the general impression _
1 [There is, I think, one real piece of evidence on behalf of a Semitic original. This is to be found in ver. 7: σύ, κύριε, κατὰ TO πλῆθος τῆς χρηστότητός σου ἐπηγγείλω μετανοίας ἄφεσιν τοῖς ἡμαρτηκόσιν σοι καὶ τῷ πλήθει τῶν οἰκτιρμῶν σου ὥρισας μετάνοιαν ἁμαρτωλοῖς εἰς σωτηρίαν.
Here μετανοίας ἄφεσιν is clearly anomalous and unintelligible. Furthermore, if we compare the two στίχοι, we discover that it is just this phrase that destroys the otherwise exact parallelism of the στίχοι. Originally the first line contained five elements parallel to the five elements still preserved in the second. Three of these still exist: κατὰ το πλῆθος τ. χρηστύτητός σου || τ. πλήθει τ. οἰκτιρμῶν σου, ἐπηγείλω || ὥρισας, τ. ἡμαρτηκόσιν σοι || ἁμαρτωλοῖς. Over against
παι... πω.
produced by the flexible style and ample vocabulary favours the view that Greek is the language in which it was composed: and it receives further support from the consideration that the manner in which it is inserted in the Dédascalia extract among quotations from the Greek renderings of Kings and Chronicles, combined with Greek ‘ Haggadic’ Additions, would suggest an originally Greek compilation.
The language may be described as a good specimen of the κοινὴ διάλεκτος, and contains phrases which show the usual Semitic colouring, e.g. ἀπὸ προσώπου (ver. 3), ἐνώπιόν σου (ver. 10), εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα (ver. 13). The occurrence of such adjectives as ἀμέτρητος, ἀνεξιχνίαστος, ἀνυπόστατος, ἄστεκτος (vv. 6, 7), of such substantives as ἀγαθωσύνη (ver. 14), ἐπαγγελία (ver. 6), ψάμμος (ver. 8), and of such verbs as ἀνανεύειν (ver. 10), ἀτενίζειν (ver. 9), κατακάμπτειν (ver. 9), would suggest a freedom from the usual restrictions of translation.
The employment of phrases based on, or derived from, the LXX seems to indicate an acquaintance with the Greek version rather than the work of an independent translator; e.g. 6 ποιήσας τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν σὺν παντὶ τῷ κόσμῳ αὐτῶν (ver. 1), cf. Gen. i. 1, ii, 1 : μετανοῶν ἐπὶ κακίαις ἀνθρώπων (ver. 7), cf. Joel ii. 13: μὴ συναπολέσῃς με ταῖς ἀνομίαις pov (ver. 13), cf. Gen. xix. 15: εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα μηνίσας (ver. 13), cf. Ps. cil. (cili.) 9 : ἐν τοῖς κατωτάτοις τῆς γῆς (ver. 13), cf. Ps. cxxxvili. (Cxxxix.) 15: πᾶσα ἣ δύναμις τῶν οὐρανῶν (ver. 15), cf. Ps. xxxii. (xxxiii.) 6.
Strange constructions such as ὡρίσας μετάνοιαν... εἰς σωτηρίαν (ver. 7); ἥμαρτον ὑπὲρ ἀριθμὸν ψάμμου θαλάσσης (ver. 9) ; εἰς τὸ ἀνανεῦσαί με ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν (ver. 10) ; κλίνω γόνυ καρδίας μου (νετ. 11); διὰ παντὸς ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις τῆς ζωῆς μου (ver. 15) seem to indicate the freedom of one who wrote in Greek.
It has been strongly urged by Sir Henry Howorth that the current LX X version of 2 Chronicles should be identified with the work of Theodotion; and that as we have ‘a free rendering of parts of Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah grouped round a fable (1 Esdras), and by the same hand a paraphrase of parts of Daniel, also with legendary additions’ (Thackeray, Grammar of O.T. in Greek, p. 15), so we should be prepared to recognize in the Manasseh narrative, Prayer, and Additions, preserved in the Didascalia a reproduction of the original LXX version, for which the more literal version of Theodotion was afterwards substituted.
This view has been supported in Old Test. and Semitic Studies in Memory of W.R. Harper:
Apparatus for the Textual Criticism of Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, by C. C. Torrey (Chicago,
§ 8. THE THEOLOGY OF ‘THE PRAYER OF MANASSES’.
The two main religious ideas which pervade the Prayer are (1) the infinite compassion of the
| Almighty, and (2) the efficacy of true repentance.
The opening Invocation portrays in striking terms the Omnipotence of the Deity, and this
} leads up to the consideration of the yet nobler attributes of His mercy and goodness (vv. 6-7). An
| effective prelude is thus furnished to the sinner’s confession of his iniquities, the climax of which had been reached by his having set up idolatrous abominations. The glory of God and the abasement of
| the sinner having thus been set over against one another in sharpest contrast, the way is prepared for the ardent supplication for forgiveness which occupies the remainder of the Prayer.
The reader should take notice of the emphasis laid upon the Israelite patriarchs and their true spiritual lineage. The God of ‘our fathers Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob’ (ver. 1) is ‘the God of the righteous seed’ (ver. 1) and ‘of the righteous’ (ver. 8). The Patriarchs had not sinned against God \(ver. 8). Those only were the righteous seed who had not yielded to idolatry. The range of view
jof the Psalmist is limited: it has regard to the sin of idolatry and to the pardon of the repentant
μετάνοιαν ... εἰς σωτηρίαν in the second line we have the corrupt phrase μετανοίας ἄφεσιν in the first, which on the
janalogy of the former phrase should obviously be ἄφεσιν... εἰς μετάνοιαν. If we ask how this corruption arose I reply that “itis possible to explain it as due to a transposition of nawind ( εἰς μετάνοιαν) from the end of the line to the place }mmediately after amp ( ἄφεσιν). In this new position the translation rendered nawn? AMD by μετανοίας φεσιν--α rendering that is quite possible though wrong in this context. On the order of the Greek cf. ver. 11 τῆς jrapd σου χρηστότητος. Thus we should read: ‘Thou, O Lord, according to thy great goodness hast promised forgiveness to them that have sinned against thee that they may repent ; And in the multitude of thy mercies hast appointed repentance unto sinners that they may be saved.’ If the above evidence is valid, then we can also recover the right rendering of ver. 4 ὃν πάντα φρίσσει καὶ τρέμει πὸ προσώπου δυνάμεώς σου. Here the two verbs should be taken together. Then ὃν... pure Hebraism = an ΒΟ ++ awe. Hence render—
‘Before whose power all things shudder and tremble.’—GEN. ED.]
. ἀπὸ προσώπου δυνάμεώς σου is
idolater. But a warning seems to be conveyed against the notion that Divine acceptance was ensured by Jewish lineage. The same note is struck, though it may not ring so clear, as in Luke iii. 8: ‘Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance, and begin not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father.’ Cf. John viii. 39; Rom. ix. 6, 7. Other points, characteristic of Jewish religious thought and deserving of attention, are the following : (a) supernatural efficacy ascribed to the sacred Name (ver. 3) ; (2) the statement that ‘ repentance’ is appointed by God for certain persons, and not for others a the representation of the under-world (S/eo/, or Hades) as a region containing various grades of remoteness from the light of heaven (ver. 11) ; (d) the description of the angels as the ‘host of heaven’ (7 δύναμις τῶν οὐρανῶν, ver. 15).
$9. VERSIONS.
(a) ‘The Prayer of Manasses’ was never included in the LXX version of the Old Testament Scriptures. Its position among ‘the Canticles’ appended to the Psalter, in certain MSS., is due to liturgical reasons.
The Greek text was first printed by R. Stephanus in his edition of the Vulgate. ‘The Prayer’ follows 2 Chron.; and a short Preface contains this sentence : ‘Graecam hanc Manassae regis Iuda orationem, nunquam antehac excusam, peperit tibi, candide lector, bibliotheca Victoriana.’
It does not appear in the majority of the printed editions of the LXX. In the Complutensian Polyglott (1514-17) it is printed in small type, in Latin, at the end of 2 Chron. It was not contained in the Sixtine edition (1586-7) of the LXX; nor does it appear in the editions of Holmes and Parsons, or of Tischendorf.
In Walton's Polyglott (although not mentioned in the index of contents) it is found in vol. iv (the — Apocrypha) placed before 3 Esdras, and is printed both in Greek and in Latin. The note is prefixed: ‘ Orationem Manassae regis Iudae Graece non extare affirmatur in praefatione Bibl. Vulg. Lat. Edit. Antwerp. 1645. Quam tamen Graece iuxta exemplar Bibliothecae Victorianae in Bibliis latinis Roberti Stephani, Edit. 1540, fol. 159 excusam atque insuper in MS. A post Psalmos inter Cantica exaratam invenimus: ipsamque hic subiunximus.’ The variants of Cod. A are recorded.
On the other hand, it is found in three reprints of the Sixtine edition, that of Frick (1697), that of Reineccius (1730), and that of Kirchner (1750). It was also included in Grabe’s edition of the LXX, following Codex Alexandrinus. But there was no foundation for the note: ‘ Προσευχὴ Μανασσή, 2 Paral. cap. xxxiii iuxta quaedam exemplaria’ (1817, ἵν. 165). This statement has led | to a very general misapprehension. No ancient Greek MSS. of 2 Chron, xxxili exist containing — ‘Oratio Manassis’.+ ἢ
(6) The Latin. As it was not extant in the Hebrew or the Greek Bible, it was not included in _ the work of Jerome. In all probability he was not aware of its existence. Otherwise, he would — scarcely have failed to make some allusion to it in the passage referring to the repentance of Manasseh: ‘ Legimus Manassem post multa scelera et post captivitatem in Babylone egisse poenitentiam et ad meliora conversum Domini misericordiam consecutum. Unde et fidei suae, per quam i crediderat Deo, filium vocavit ἐπώνυμον, id est Ammon’ (/z Sophoniam Liber 7, ed. Migne, P.L., —
At what date the Latin version, which is a good specimen of translation, was made is not known. It is probably much later than Jerome’s version. The Prayer, however, is very commonly found in mediaeval MSS. of the Vulgate, immediately after 2 Chronicles, and often with the title ‘Oratio Manassae’. ie,
In his Septwagintastudien, iii, p.20, Nestle states that he had been assured both by Ph. Thielmann in Landau and by S. Berger in Paris that, so far as they knew, there was no MS. of the Vulgate © containing ‘The Prayer of Manasses’ of an earlier date than the middle or first third of the thirteenth _ century. A list of fifteen Latin MSS. in the British Museum containing ‘ The Prayer of Manasses’ at the end of Chron. has been most kindly furnished me by Mr. J. P. Gilson of the MS. Department; all belong to the thirteenth century. It would be extremely interesting to know whether there exists any copy of the Vulgate containing 2 Chron. followed by ‘The Prayer of Manasses’ which is of an earlier date. It is also an at present unsolved problem to determine the influence which fro the beginning of the thirteenth century led to the common inclusion of the Prayer in the Latin Scriptures.
An eleventh-century MS. of the Mozarabic Psalter gives a text which differs considerably from
==: ΕΣ ewe oe, Se th δὲς PSE τρις λέει ας EE METS Oe OL SE Le Come BTN eT Se να, κμόλλκει,ε ee DoT eet ee eee
See the valuable discussion in Nestle’s Septuagintastudien, iii, pp. 6-22. Stuttgart, 1899.
that in the thirteenth-century Latin Bibles, and with the title ‘Oratio Manasse Regis De Libro Paralipomenon’. See below, Note B.
The three Latin MSS. (Colbert 273, Colbert 933, Remig. 4) which Sabatier collated with the Clementine Vulgate for his 5761. Sacr. Lat. Vers. Ant. (iii. 1038 sq.) belong to the same period, and have no special claim to distinction (see Fritzsche, Lzbri Apoc. Vet. Test. Praefat., p. 15).
It was printed in the Latin Bible of Stephanus (1540) together with the Greek text, and it appeared also in Joh. Brentius’ edition of the Vulgate (Leipzig, 1544), in two columns, one in Greek, the other in Latin, side by side.
The edition of the Vulgate issued by Sixtus V (1590) did not contain the Prayer.!. But in the revised edition of Clement VIII (1592) it was inserted, together with 3 and 4 Esdras, as an appendix after the New Testament. The Praecfatio ad Lectorem written by Cardinal Bellarmine contains the following statement: ‘ Porro in hac editione nihil non canonicum, nihil adscititium, nihil extraneum, apponere visum est ; atque ea causa fuit, cur libri ΠῚ et iv Esdrae inscripti, quos inter canonicos libros sacra Tridentina Synodus non annumeravit, ipsa etiam Manassae regis Oratio, quae neque hebraice neque graece quidem exstat, neque in manuscriptis antiquioribus invenitur, neque pars est ullius canonici libri,extra canonicae Scripturae seriem posita sint.’ This statement, as Sir Henry Howorth has pointed out (Soc. Bzbl. Arch., vol. xxxi, pt. 3, p. 90), ‘was probably unwittingly taken over from the Dominican Pagnini’s revised version of the Vulgate which was published in 1527, before Stephen had published his Bible. In Pagnini’s edition the Prayer is put at the end of 2 Chronicles, and is headed: “Oratio Manasse regis Iuda quae neque in Hebraeo neq. in Graeco habetur.”’
In modern Greek Bibles ‘The Prayer of Manasseh’ has a place immediately after the Books of Chronicles (e.g. St. Petersburg, 1876).
§ το. SYRIAC VERSION.
An account of the Syriac Version of the Prayer appeared in Hermathena xxxvi, 1910, from the competent pen of Professor George Wilkins, of Trinity College, Dublin. In his article he published a collation of a Paris MS. (Ave. fonds 2, Biblioth. Nat., Syr. 7) which is probably a transcript of the Syriac MS. (Vaz. viii) written by Sergius Risius, Maronite Archbp. of Damascus, circ. 1610,
The Syriac Version of the Dzdascalia is preserved, according to Professor Wilkins, in the following four MSS.:
(1) Cod. Syr. 62 ( Saint Germain 38), Paris, ninth century, P.
(2) Harris Codex (Mrs. Gibson’s Horae Semiticae), eleventh century, = H.
(3) University Library, Cambridge, thirteenth century, = C.
(4) Cod. Borgia, Museo Borgia, Rome.
$11. OTHER VERSIONS.
Armenian MSS. of the O. T. Scriptures contain the Prayer among the Canticles appended to the Psalter.
It is also stated to occur in the old Slavonic Version (cf. article by Sir Henry Howorth, Soc. It is found appended to the Psalter in the Ethiopic Version of the Psalms (ed. Ludolf, Frankfort, 1701). And the Ethiopic Version of the Afostolical Constitutions (ed. Thomas Pell Platt, London, 1834) contains the Prayer.
The principal authorities for the text are (a) the two Greek uncial MSS. Alexandrinus and Turicensis; (4) the Latin and Syriac Versions ; (c) the Afostolical Constitutions and Didascalia.
The text of cursive MSS., containing the Canticles appended to the Psalter, has yet to be critically investigated.
The MSS. of the Afostolical Constitutions are given by Pitra in his Juris Ecclestastict Historia Jet Monumenta, tom. 1, p. 163 (Romae, 1864). Pitra himself seems to have relied especially upon
The important edition by P. de Lagarde, Lipsiae, 1862, contains an apparatus criticus, The old edition of Cotelerius (1672) is well worth consulting.
τ The Bull of Sixtus V (Aeternus ille), by which it was prefaced, had simply this allusion: ‘ Orationem Manassae, quae neque in Hebraeo, neque in Graeco textu est, neque in antiquioribus manuscriptis Latinis exemplaribus reperitur ; sed in impressis tantum post librum secundum Paralipomenon affixa est, tanquam insutam, adiectam et in textu 3acrorum librorum locum non habentem repudiavimus.’
The principal problems presented by the text of ‘The Prayer of Manasses’ are to be found in:
(1) ver. 7; the additional clauses found in the Latin and in the Afoszol. Const. at the close of
(2) ver. 9; additional clause in the Syriac Version and in the Mozarabic Psalter ;
(3) ver. 10; various readings arising from the obscurity of the verb ἀνανεῦσαι;
(4) ver. 10; the gloss added in Cod. T (μὴ ποιήσας τὸ θέλημά σου καὶ φυλάξας τὰ προστάγματά σου) and the Latin.
$13. ENGLISH VERSIONS.
‘The Prayer of Manasses’ was not included in Coverdale’s Bible, 1535. But it appears in Cranmer’s Bible (Grafton), 1539 (being given a place in the Apocrypha after ‘ Bel and the Dragon’ and before 1 Maccabees), and in the subsequent editions (1541, 1549, 1562, 1566).
It receives the same position in the Bishops’ Bible, 1st ed., 1568. It does not appear in the — Genevan version. In the ‘ Authorized’ (1611) and ‘ Revised’ versions it stands between ‘ Bel and the _ Dragon’ and 1 Maccabees.
In the Douai Bible of 1609 the Prayer precedes 2 Esdras and follows 2 Maccabees. It is headed by the note: ‘The Prayer of Manasses, with the second and third Bookes of Esdras, extant in most Latin and Vulgare Bibles, are here placed after al the Canonical Bookes of the Old Testament, because they are not received into the Canon of Divine Scriptures by the Catholique Church.’
In Luther’s Bible it stands at the end of the Apocrypha, after the Additions to Daniel.
SUMMARY OF THE PRAYER.
(1) The Invocation: (a) O God of Israel (ver. 1), Lord and Creator of the Universe (vz. 2, 3), Ὁ infinite in power (ver. 4) and in anger against the sinner (ver. 5); (ὦ) infinite also in mercy (ver. 6), — Thou hast proclaimed forgiveness for repentance, and appointed me the sinner unto repentance
(2) The Confession: my sins are innumerable; I am unworthy to look upwards: I am justly — punished, loaded with chains, in misery (vv. 9-11). 4
(3) The Entreaty: 1 beseech Thee (ver. 11) ; I acknowledge all (ver. 12); grant pardon; con-— sume me not; nor let Thine anger burn for ever (ver. 13).
(4) The Ascription: Thou, the God of them that repent, wilt graciously save me (ver. 14); and I will praise Thee for ever.
(5) Doxology: Angels hymn Thy praises; Thine is the glory for ever (ver. 15).
Al, Note on the Latin MSS. containing the Prayer of Manasses.
In the British Museum, the following MSS., all of the thirteenth century, contain the Prayer of Manasses _ at the end of 2 Chron. : (1) Add. 31,831 (f. 271 B): early thirteenth century.
[3 Lansd. 453: first half of thirteenth century. Does not contain Prayer, but has marginal note on f. 127 B: ‘M[inJus Oracio Manassé regis qué sic incipit “ Domine deus . . .”’|
(8) ,, 1 A. xix. (f. 106 B, insertion by a different hand). ἰὴ: του (τοῦ! Βὴ)
Β. Mozarabic Psalter: Eleventh (?)-Century MS. of Prayer of Manasses.
In the ‘Mozarabic Psalter (MS. British Museum, Add. 30,851) edited by J. P. Gilson, M.A., of the Department of Manuscripts in the British Museum’, vol. xxx of the Henry Bradshaw Society (London, 1906), Canticum xxii contains Oratio Manasse Regis De Libro Paralipomenon 7-15 ; and the text differs sufficiently
1 For this list I am indebted to the kindness of Mr. Gilson.
widely from that which is found in the Latin Bibles to justify its transcription here (‘the character of the handwriting’, says Mr. Gilson in the Prefatory Note (p. viii), ‘points to the eleventh century as the date at which the MS. was written’). XXII [Canticum] Oratio Manasse Regis De Libro Paralipomenon. _ Antiphona. *Peccabi domine peccaui et iniquitatem meam ego agnosco.* Deus altissimus magnanimis . miserator et multe misericordie . patiens super mala hominum. Tu ergo domine secundum multitudinem bonitatis tue promisisti indulgentiam et remissionem delinquentibus tibi . et habundantia misericordie tue statuisti penitentiam peccatoribus ad salutem.
Tu ergo domine deus iustorum . non posuisti penitentiam iustis tuis Abraham Ysaac et Iacob . qui non peccauerunt tibi . sed posuisti penitentiam mihi peccatori. Quoniam super numerum arene maris habundauerunt iniquitates mee . et non est declinatio delictorum meorum. Et nunc iuste contineor . (et)? digne comprimor percurbat(u)s (in)? multis vinculis ferreis . ad non erigendum caput. Quoniam non sum dignus aspicere et videre altitudinem celi . pre iniustitiis meis. Quoniam irritabi furorem tuum . et feci malum coram te. Statuens abominationes . et multiplicans odiositates. Et nunc flecto genua cordis mei . precans a te bonitatem. Peccaui domine peccaui . et iniquitatem meam ego agnosco. Ne perdas me cum iniquitatibus meis . neque in finem iratus contineas mala mea neque condemnaueris ‘me cum (h)is* qui sunt in inferiora terre. Tu es enim deus penitentium . ut in me hostendas bonitatem tuam. Indignum me saluabis secundum multitudinem misericordie tue. et glorificabo nomen tuum in omni uita mea. Quoniam te laudat omnis uirtus celorum . et tibi est gloria in secula seculorum.
1 et] interlined. * percurbatus] z on erasure ; zz interlined. * his] # interlined.
THE PRAYER OB MANASsES
O Lord Almighty, *which art in heaven”, Thou God of our fathers, Of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, And of their righteous seed ; Thou who hast made the heaven and the earth, With all the array thereof: Who hast bound the sea by the word of thy command : Who hast shut up the Deep, and sealed it With thy terrible and glorious Name ; Whom all things do dread ; yea, they tremble before thy power : For the majesty of thy glory cannot be borne, And the anger of thy threatening against sinners is unendurable:
A Codex Alexandrinus. T Codex Turicensis. Const. Apost. Constitutiones Apostolorum, lib. ii, cap. xxii (apud Cotelerium Patves Afostolict, tom, 1, p. 171; et apud Pitram Juris Eccles. Graecorum Historia et Monumenta, tom. i. 162). Syr. Syriac Version. Lat. Latin Version, in Vulgate. | Moz. Mozarabic Psalter: Canticum xxii. See Note B, above.
TITLE. Cod. A H προσευχὴ Μανασση: + του wov E¢excou T: Latin Ovatio Manassae regis Iuda cum captus teneretur in Babylone I. exovpare om. T, Const. Apost., Syr., Lat. 2. ο κλεισας : και κλεισας T σφραγισαμενος: + αὐτην T, Const. Apost., Lat. 4. φριττει : φρισσει T, Const. Apost. 5. τε και. Some edd. de καὶ : vero et Lat.
1. κύριε παντοκράτωρ. On the opening words of this invocation, compare I Chron, xvii. 24 κύριε παντοκράτωρ θεὸς
The reading ἐπουράνιε, omitted in Codex Turicensis, is possibly a gloss on παντοκράτωρ. In the Ὕμνος ἑωθινός (the fourteenth of the ’Q.dat in Codex Alexandrinus) we find an elaborate ascription, κύριε βασιλεῦ ἐπουράνιε θεὲ πατὴρ ἐπουράνιε.
ὁ θεὸς τῶν πατέρων. Cf. 1 Chron. xxix. 18 κύριε ὁ θεὸς AB. kK. Io. x. "lo. τῶν πατέρων ἡμῶν.
τοῦ σπέρματος αὐτῶν τοῦ δικαίου. The writer implies the distinction between the true seed of the Patriarchs (‘the righteous’, cf. τ΄. 8) and the nominal, which is found in Tobit xili. 9, 13: ‘O Jerusalem, the holy city, he will scourge thee for the works of thy sons, and will again have mercy ov the sons of the righteous. “ Rejoice and be exceeding glad for the sons of the righteous. Ne are reminded of St. Paul: ‘ For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel ; neither, because they are Abraham’s seed, are they all children’ (Rom. ix. 6). [
2. ὁ ποιήσας κτλ. This verse is based upon the LXX of Gen. i. 1 ἐν ἀρχῇ ἐποίησεν 6 θεὸς τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν, and Gen. ii. I καὶ συνετελέσθησαν ὁ οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ γῆ καὶ πᾶς ὁ κόσμος αὐτῶν. Cotelerius, commenting on these words, cites ‘ Theophanes Cerameus Homilia’ 56 κόσμος καὶ ἡ τοῦ κάλλους ἁρμονία καὶ διακόσμησις κατὰ τὸ ὑμνούμενον ἐν ὠδῇ Μανασσή. Ὃ ποιήσας τ. οὐρανὺν κ. τ. γῆν σὺν παντὶ τῷ κόσμῳ αὐτῶν (Patres Apostolic, vol. ii, p. 150). 4
σὺν παντὶ τῷ κύσμῳ αὐτῶν. Latin ‘cum omni ornatu eorum’. The word κόσμος is here evidently introduced from
the LXX of Gen. ii. 1, and may be regarded as an indication that the Prayer was written in Greek. The precise meaning of κόσμος is not certain. The fact, that in Gen. ii. 1 κόσμος = NI¥ ‘host’, causes Ryssel to consider that the — reference is to ‘ the host of heaven’, i.e. ‘the stars’, as e.g. in Deut. iv. 19, xvii. 3 ; Isa. xl. 26; Ps. xxxiii. 6. But in — the first three passages the words ‘of heaven’ are added; in Isa. xl. 26 ‘the host’ of the stars is clearly meant. Here the word κόσμος is followed by αὐτῶν, by which, strictly speaking, is denoted τὴν γῆν, as well as τὸν οὐρανόν. On the other hand, the literal renderings ‘ ornament’ (R.V.) or ‘ order’ (R.V. marg.) are too limited ; and the second alternative, ‘array,’ seems best to combine the ideas of splendour and orderliness.
3. ὁ πεδήσας kth. There is a reference here to the passages in the O. T. describing the power of the Almighty in restraining the sea within its bounds, and in imprisoning the waters of the Abyss. See especially Job xxxviii. 8, 10. 11: ‘Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth... when I... prescribed for it my decree, and set bars and — doors, and said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further.’ Ps. civ. 9: ‘Thou hast set a bound that they may not pass over; that they turn not again to cover the earth.’ ἡ
ὁ κλείσας τὴν ἄβυσσον. ἄβυσσος is the rendering of DNA in Gen. i. 2, vii. 11, viii. 2. Here it evidently denotes the subterranean watery depths upon which the ancient Israelites believed the earth to be upheld. Cf. Apoc. ix. 1 κλεὶς τοῦ φρέατος τῆς ἀβύσσου, and xx. 3 καὶ ἔβαλεν αὐτὸν eis τὴν ἄβυσσον καὶ ἔκλεισεν καὶ ἐσφράγισεν ἐπάνω αὐτοῦ, where we may observe the association with κλείειν and σφραγίζειν. 1
σφραγισάμενος. Cf. Job ix. 7, ‘which commandeth the sun ... and sealeth up the stars.’ The seal denoted possession, security, and inviolability. ἐνδόξῳ. Cf. Tob, viii. 5 τὸ ὄνομά σου τὸ ἅγιον καὶ ἔνδοξον. The rabbinic belief in the magical efficacy residing in the sacred Name is here referred to. Solomon was reputed to have wrought miracles by a seal engraved with the Tetragrammaton. Cf. Sirach xlvii. 18 and Gittiz 68 a. The Name was often mentioned as the embodiment of power and attributes. Cf. Baruch iii. 5. 2
4. ὃν πάντα φρίττει. For dpirrew with acc. cf. Judith xvi. 10 ἔφριξαν Πέρσαι τὴν τόλμαν αὐτῆς.
ἀπὸ προσώπου «th. Latin has ‘a vultu virtutis tuae’. It admits of doubt whether this phrase simply amplifies the
object of the verb expressed in ὅν = 53! ‘in the presence of’; or whether it introduces a fresh thought, ‘ because
of’, ‘ by reason of’ (= °32!2). Τὴ the former case it would grammatically be closely conjoined with φρίττει and τρέμειν
in the latter case it would introduce with τρέμει an explanatory clause. See, however, note on p. 615.
Infinite and unsearchable is thy merciful promise ; For thou art the Lord Most High, of great compassion, long-suffering and abundant in mercy, and repentest thee for the evils of men. *Thou, O Lord, according to thy great goodness hast promised repentance and forgiveness to them that have sinned against thee ; and in the multitude of thy mercies hast appointed repentance unto sinners, that they may be saved.
7. ot. av: av yap Τ : guoniam tu Lat. om. ὑψιστος Const. Apost., Syr. om. «ac' Const. Apost. om. car? T, Moz. Insert *ov kupie .. . cornptav* Const. Apost., Syr., Lat., Moz.: om. AT 8. ἐμοι : pr. ex T, Const. Apost. ; Lat. propter me
5. dorexros. The Latin renders by ‘importabilis’. The adjective does not occur in the LXX. Hesych. ἄστεκτος, ἀφόρητος, ἀβάστακτος. Cf. Aesch. Fragment 220. ἡ μεγαλοπρεπία τῆς δόξης gov, The phrase is evidently derived from Ps. cxliv. (cxlv.) 5 τὴν μεγαλοπρεπίαν τῆς δόξης τῆς ἁγιωσύνης gov, and 12 καὶ τὴν δόξαν τῆς μεγαλοπρεπίας τῆς βασιλείας σου. ἀνυπόστατος. Latin ‘insustentabilis’. An adjective of rare occurrence in the LXX: cf. Ps. cxxiii. (cxxiv.); 6. ἀμέτρητον. Another uncommon adjective in the LXX. Cf. Isa. xxii. 18 ; Baruch ili. 25 ; 3 Macc. iv. 17. τε kat. The reading of some editions, δὲ καί, and the Latin, seems to deserve support on internal grounds. (1) At this point the main subject which occupies the thought of the Prayer, i.e. the mercy of God, is first reached. The power (v. 4), the majesty and the wrath (v. 5), have been described ; but here, in v. 6, another note of infinite graciousness is to be recorded. (2) The variation of thought between the two adjectives, ἀμέτρητος and ἀνεξιχνίαστος, is not sufficient to make the re prefixed to the καί strongly preferable. ἀνεξιχνίαστον. Latin ‘investigabilis’. In LXX Job v. 9, ix. το. Comp. Rom. xi. 33; Eph. iii. 8. τὸ ἔλεος τῆς ἐπαγγελίας σου, ‘the mercy of thy promise’, or ‘thy merciful promise’, referring to the promise of forgiveness to them that repent implied in vv. 8, 11, 13, which forms the nucleus of the prayer. ἐπαγγελίας. ἐπαγγελία, in the sense of ‘promise’ or ‘declaration’, is a common word in the N.T., e.g. Luke xxiv. 49; Acts i. 4, il. 33-9; Rom. iv. 13-14, and often in Ep.to Heb. But it occurs rarely in LXX, e. g. 1 Esdrasi.7; 7. ὅτι σύ (or, σὺ γάρ). The present verse develops the claim to the Divine mercy. It appeals to the language which would be familiarly known from passages in the O. T. ὕψιστος. The omission of this adjective by Const. Apost. and Syr. has been explained on the ground that it is out of place at the head of a list of epithets of a moral character and bearing upon the mercy and forbearance of the Almighty: ‘At in Editionibus, in Horologio, et in quinque MSS. Regiis, σὺ yap εἶ κύριος ὕψιστος ᾿ (Cotelerius). The passage in Ps. xcvii. 9, ‘ For thou, Lord, art most high above all the earth,’ has led to the insertion in Latin texts - of ‘super omnem terram’. εὔσπλαγχνος. Not found in LXX ; Eph. iv. 32 (Robinson, ad /oc.); 1 Pet. ili. 8. εὔσπλαγχνος κτλ. In this rehearsal of the merciful attributes of Jehovah we have the key to the whole Prayer of Ἰ Repentance. The language reminds us of Exod. xxxiv. 6; Ps. cxxxvi. 15; Joel ii. 12, 13; Jonahiv. 2. Of these | passages, the words of the prophet Joel are probably uppermost in the author’s mind, For (1) it is a classical appeal for repentance, and hence would be appropriate to the subject of the Prayer; and (2) the expression μετανοῶν ἐπὶ κακίαις | is derived from the LXX of Joel ii. 12,13. The passage runs as follows: ‘ Yet even now, saith the Lord, turn ye unto } me with all your heart, and with fasting, and with weeping, and with mourning ; and rend your heart, and not your | garments, and turn unto the Lord your God: for he is gracious, and full of compassion, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy, and repenteth him of the evil’ (LXX μετανοῶν ἐπὶ κακίαις). ἐπὶ κακίαις ἀνθρώπων. Latin ‘et poenitens super malitias hominum’. The word κακίαις seems to be borrowed
) from the LXX of Joel. The prophet’s own phrase ‘ of the evil’ (ΠΡ ΛΠ by) had reference to ‘the evils’ of calamity which befell the people as the punishment for their sins. But the LXX rendered by κακίαι, which ordinarily denotes ‘wickedness’ (Lat. ‘ malitia’), the source of sorrows; and not by τὰ κακά = ‘evils’, or sala, as the consequence ᾿ οὗ sin. The common meaning of κακίαι may be illustrated from Gen. vi. 5 (LXX) ἐπληθύνθησαν ai κακίαι τῶν ἀνθρώπων, in which context it ‘repented’ the Lord that He had made man, because the wickedness of men was increased. But κακίαι may have reference to the punishment arising from the sin: 1 Chron. xxi. 15 εἰδεν κύριος καὶ μετεμελήθη ἐπὶ τῇ κακίᾳ ; Jonah iii. 10 μετενόησεν ὁ θεὸς ἐπὶ τῇ κακίᾳ (cf. iv. 2); Matt. vi. 34 ἀρκετὸν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἡ κακία αὐτῆς. Probably an intentional contrast is here drawn between the μετάνοια ascribed to the Almighty (cf. Gen. νὶ. 6 ; 1 Sam. xv. 11; 2 Sam. xxiv. 16), in His pity relenting towards suffering, which is sin’s penalty ; and the μετάνοια of the sinner for his own sin )which calls down Divine judgement. The addition to the text contained in Const. Apost. and in the Latin, though | }omitted in Codd. A and T, is an important expansion of the main theme of repentance. It particularizes the promise (ἐπαγγελία, v. 6) as one that proclaimed ‘forgiveness of repentance’, i.e. forgiveness of sin, to the repentant jisinner ; it decrees for sinners the duty of repentance, with a view to their being saved. If only a gloss, it constitutes [ἃ very substantial addition to the Prayer. But it is, more probably, part of the original document. (1) It was very (possibly accidentally omitted, because these two στίχοι both commence with the same words (ὅτι σύ) as the preceding στίχος. (2) Arguing from the contents of the passage, it is more reasonable to suppose that such remarkable phrases las ἐπηγγείλω μετανοίας ἄφεσιν and ὡρίσας μετάνοιαν... εἰς σωτηρίαν should have been included in the original Psalm, ‘j}than that they should have been inserted as a gloss. (3) Against their being a gloss, it is to be observed that the | next verse, σὺ οὖν... οὐκ ἔθου μετάνοιαν ktX., Seems to imply some such sentence, and would not follow so naturally \ipon μετανοῶν ἐπὶ κακίαις ἀνθρώπων. : ᾿ : ΠΩΣ d μετανοίας ἄφεσιν. Latin ‘ poenitentiam et remissionem’, The Mozarabic Psalter, ‘indulgentiam et remissionem, |tvoids the difficulty by a paraphrase. The introduction of μετάνοια with ἐπηγγείλω seems at first sight incongruous. \[he ‘ promise’ of ἄφεσις is conditional upon μετάνοια. The object of the Prayer is to unite the two ideas of the }inner’s repentance and the Divine pardon as closely as possible. For general sense compare Luke v. 32. For }. restoration of the text on the basis of a Semitic original see note on pp. 614, 615. μετάνοια in the LXX, Prov. xiv.
THE:PRAYER OF MANASSES#s 10
Thou, therefore, O Lord, that art the God of the righteous, hast not appointed repentance unto the righteous, unto Abraham, and Isaac and Jacob, which have not sinned against thee: But thou hast appointed repentance unto me that am a sinner ; For the sins I have sinned ave more in number than the sands of the sea. For my transgressions were multiplied, O Lord: My transgressions were multiplied, And I am not worthy to behold and see the height of heaven by reason of the multitude of mine iniquities. *And now, O Lord, I am justly punished and deservedly afflicted ; For lo! I am in captivity,* Bowed down with many an iron chain, So that I cannot lift up mine head by reason of my sins, g. ort om. T, Const. Apost. poul: + κε ἐπληθυναν T ; Lat. domine multiplicatae sunt kupte ἐπληθυναν at avopia μου Const. Apost. οὐκ ert Const. Apost. *And now ... captivity* insert Syr., *And now... _ afflicted* insert Moz., omit Codd., Const. Apost., Lat. 10. σιδηρου Const. Apost.; σιδηρω T ; Lat. ferreo avavevoac: pr. μὴ, om. pe T ; Lat. ut 20 Possim ὑπερ ἀμαρτιὼν τὴν κεφαλὴν T, Syr., Lat. μοι ἀνεσις : aveors μοι T
15; Sirach xliv. τό; Wisd. xi. 23, xii. 10, 19. For ἄφεσις cf. Isa. Ixi. 1 κηρύξαι αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν (1107). For forgiveness through repentance see Hos. ii. 1-4, vi. 1 ff., xiv; Isa. i. 16 ff. ; Ezek. xviii. 21 ff.
τῷ πλήθει τῶν οἰκτιρμῶν σου. Cf. κατὰ τὸ πλῆθος τῶν οἰκτιρμῶν σου, Ps. |. (li.) 1, Ixviii. (Ixix.) 19.
ὡρίσας. Lat. ‘decrevisti’. Cf. 3 Macc. vi. 36 κοινὸν ὁρισάμενοι περὶ τούτων θεσμόν.
εἰς σωτηρίαν (Lat. ‘in salutem ᾽) after μετάνοια has a suggestion of Ν. Τὶ phraseology. Cf. 2 Cor. vii. 10 ἡ γὰρ κατὰ θεὸν λύπη μετάνοιαν εἰς σωτηρίαν (Vulg. ‘poenitentiam...in salutem’) ἀμεταμέλητον ἐργάζεται. But both the idea and — phraseology are pre-Christian: cf. T. Gad v. 7 ἡ yap κατὰ θεὸν ἀληθὴς μετάνοια ... ὁδηγεῖ... πρὸς σωτηρίαν. Had the — author of the Prayer been a Christian, he could hardly have omitted a reference to ‘salvation through Jesus Christ’. There is no higher conception here than that of deliverance from the penalty of Divine wrath. γ
8. ὁ θεὸς τῶν δικαίων. This is not a Biblical phrase. Compare with it v. 1 ὁ θεὸς... τοῦ σπέρματος αὐτῶν τοῦ δικαίου. ‘The righteous’ are the elect Israel, as distinguished from the οἱ ἁμαρτωλοί, of ἀσεβεῖς, οἱ ἄνομοι. Compare the contrast — in Luke xv. 7 between the ἁμαρτωλός and the δίκαιοι. q
τοῖς οὐχ ἡμαρτηκόσι oot. The Patriarchs were invested with sinlessness in the estimation of the reverent few. Such treatment of patriarchal virtue was based on such passages as Gen. xvii. 17-19, xxii. 18, and Exod. xxxii. 13. ἐπ᾿ ἐμυὶ τῷ ἁμαρτωλῷ. Lat. “ propter me peccatorem’. Cf. Luke xviii. 13 ὁ θεός, ἱλάσθητί μοι τῷ ἁμαρτωλῷ. The article gives distinctiveness to the self-condemnation. [
9. ὅτι. The confession of his exceeding sinfulness occupies the following four verses, and, as the expression of repentance, forms the basis of entreaty for pardon.
ὑπὲρ ἀριθμὸν ψάμμου θαλάσσης. The construction is obvious, though grammatically harsh: ‘to sin more than the number of the sand of the sea’ is equivalent to saying that it was easier to count the sands of the sea than the number — of his offences. a
ψάμμος in the LXX is found only in Wisd. vii. 9 ὁ πᾶς χρυσὸς ἐν ὄψει αὐτῆς ψάμμος. The more common word is
ἐπλήθυναν κτλ. Cf, Isa. lix. 12: ‘For our trangressions are multiplied before thee.’
πληθύνω. Used intransitively.
οὐκ ἄξιος. Cf. Luke xv. 19, 21, which may be the origin here of the variant reading οὐκέτι.
ἀτενίσαι, ‘to look at with intent gaze’. Lat. ‘intueri’. The word is of rare occurrence in the LXX, 1 Esdras
τὸ ὕψος τοῦ οὐρανοῦ. ‘The height of heaven’ is the Throne of the Most High. Cf. Isa. xxxviii. 14 ἐξέλειπον yap pot οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ τοῦ βλέπειν εἰς τὸ ὕψος τ. οὐρανοῦ πρὸς τὸν κύριον. For the thought see Ps. cxxiii. 1: ‘ Unto thee do 1 lift up mine eyes, O thou that sittest in the heavens.’ ὃ
9, 10. Between v. 9 and v. 10 the Syriac version inserts the verse: ‘And now, O Lord, I am justly punished and deservedly afflicted; for lo! I am in captivity.’ The Mozarabic Psalter reads: ‘Et nunc juste contineor, et digne comprimor.’ In favour of some such insertion there are certainly the following considerations: (1) Ψ. 10 Opens with μὴ κατακαμπτόμενος, which stands in no suitable relation either to v. 9, οὐκ εἰμὶ ἄξιος, or to the following clause, διότι παρώργισα ; (2) the clause beginning with μὴ κατακαμπτόμενος has no main verb, and is grammatically disconnected ; (3) if there is any consistency in the arrangement of the στίχοι, it is noticeable that, whereas in 7. 9 we find a group of three στίχοι, (1) διότι ἥμαρτον Krd.. (2) ὅτι ἐπλήθυναν κτὰ., (3) καὶ οὐκ εἰμί xrd., and in v.10 ¢de a group of three στίχοι, (1) διότι παρώργισα κτὰ., (2) καὶ τὸ πονηρὸν κτὰλ., (3) στήσας βδελύγμ. κτλ.; and in ὦ. 11 a group of three στίχοι, (1) καὶ νῦν κλίνω κτὰ., (2) ἡμάρτηκα κτλ., (3) καὶ τὰς ἀνομίας κτὰ., this grouping breaks down in v. 10 ὦ ὦ, κατακαμπτόμενος κτὰ. and εἰς τὸ ἀνανεῦσαι κτλ. The reading of the Syriac and Mozarabic would thus supply grammatical coherency and rhythmical balance. Hence it is quite conceivable that they may have preserved the true text. Its opening words, καὶ νῦν, being identical with the opening of v. 11, may have led to the accidental omission. If genuine, it conveys a further reference to the position of the speaker as a captive in prison. There is, of course, another alternative, which is only conjectural, and yet is not altogether impossible, that the line κατακαμπτόμενος.. . . σιδηρῷ has been inserted to identify the utterer of the Prayer with Manasses; and thai the following line, εἰς τὸ... ἄνεσις, is a further expansion of the gloss. On the other hand, if κατακαμπτόμενος kth. original, the probability seems to be strong that some clause, like that of the Syriac version, has fallen out of the Greek text.
10. κατακαμπτόμενος. If not conjoined to some clause such as that which the Syriac version supplies, the present clause follows very awkwardly upon what has gone before ; and grammatically the sentence is extraordinarily disjointed and prolonged. In consequence, the Latin and the English version begin here a new sentence.
THE PRAYER OF MANASSES τὸ τ
Neither have I any respite:
Because I provoked thy wrath, and did that which was evil in thy sight.
T did not do thy will, neither kept I thy commandments :
I set up abominations, and multiplied detestable things.
ir And now I bow the knee of mine heart, beseeching thee of thy gracious goodness. “12 I have sinned, O Lord, I have sinned,
And I acknowledge mine iniquities.
13 But, I humbly beseech thee,
Forgive me, O Lord, forgive me,
εἰς TO... ἄνεσις om. Const. Apost. ἔμη ποιησας τὸ θελημα σου καὶ φυλαξας ra προσταγματα σου insert T and Lat. but not Moz. aTnoas... προσοχθισματα om. T II, καρδιας : + μου T, Const. Apost. Lat. 12. eyo ywooxw Codd. A T, Const. Apost., ed. Fritzsche: avaywaoxo Vulgo; Lat., Moz. agnosco 13. atrovupat...aves por: om. Moz.:
katakapnt. Lat. ‘incurvatus sum’. This verb is rare in the LXX, Ps. xxxvii. 6, lvi. (Ivii.) 6; cf. Symmachus
πολλῷ δεσμῷ σιδηρῷ. Latin ‘ multo vinculo ferreo’. Cf. 2 Chron, xxxiii. 11: ‘ The captains of the king of Assyria ... took Manasseh in chains [Or, wth hooks], and bound him with fetters, and carried him to Babylon.’ There is no sufficient reason to explain, as Zéckler and Ball, this sentence metaphorically of sin and its chains, like Ps. cvii. 10, ‘being bound in affliction and iron.’ The whole context of this verse is occupied, not with the iniquities that produced the punishment, but with the penalty, of a quite real and overwhelming kind, which had befallen the speaker. Again, the metaphorical use of iron chains applied to sin is not a common one ; and there is nothing in the character of the Prayer which would favour the theory of a metaphorical use of these simple words.
The precise meaning of πολλῷ is doubtful ; it may either be rendered as if it were the same as πολλοῖς δεσμοῖς, or the singular number may denote ‘a weighty chain’. For the use of πολύς with a singular substantive—most of the examples usually given are with an abstract noun—cf. v. 14 κατὰ τὸ πολὺ ἔλεός σου. εἰς τὸ ἀνανεῦσαί pe κτλ. This is the most difficult expression in the whole Prayer, and the difficulty has given rise to the variety in the readings. ,
ἀνανεύειν in the LXX is employed to translate [N'2 and Ni) (Hiph.) in the sense of ‘ to refuse’: cf. Exod. xxii.17 ; Num. xxx.6; Neh.ix.17. Here, however, it is used in a sense that represents the physical motion of the verb (νεύειν) and the preposition (ἀνά), and means ‘to incline upward’, as Ps. xl. 12, ‘so that I am not able to look up.’ We have, _ therefore, three alternative renderings: (1) Fritzsche, ‘so that I shake (my head) over my sins’ (cf. Polyb. xviii. 13. 3
ἀνανενευκώς ‘with the head up’; Dionys. Areop.; Basil, Ps. vii, p. 140; Chrys. De Zelo et Piet. (ap. Suicer.). (2) εἰς τό with inf., equivalent to τοῦ with inf. ( Hebr. ἢ with inf.) = ‘more bowed down .. . than to lift up »y head, because of my sins’, in the sense of ‘ bowed down... so that I cannot lift up my head, or look upwards’. This gives a good sense, but grammatically it is a harsh construction. (3) εἰς τὸ μὴ ἀνανεῦσαι τὴν κεφαλήν, as Cod. T, ‘so that Icannot lift up my head.’ This text is evidently emendational. The insertion of the μή gives the same sense as No. 2. So Latin, ‘ut non possim attollere caput meum.’ The omission of the whole line, εἰς τὸ... ἄνεσις, in Const. Apost. may have been due to the obscurity of the meaning ; but see note on vv. 9, lo above. __ j
ἄνεσις. Latin ‘respiratio’, in the sense of ‘release’, or ‘cessation’, or ‘relief’. Cf. LXX in 2 Chron. xxxiii. 15 ; 1 Esdras iv. 62; 2 Esdras iv. 22. In the N.T. it occurs of St. Paul in prison, Acts xxiv. 23. Cf. 2 Cor. vii. 5.
παρώργισα. The verb παροργίζω, ‘to anger’, is of frequent occurrence in LXX with a personal object; e.g. Judges ii. 12 παρώργισαν τὸν κύριον. But there is no instance in the LXX of the phrase here used, παροργίζειν τὸν θυμόν τινος.
The line μὴ ποιήσας... τὰ προστάγματί cov added by Codex Turicensis, and in the Latin version, ‘non feci voluntatem tuam et mandata tua non custodivi,’ seems certainly to be a gloss, expanding the words τὸ πονηρὸν ἐνώπιόν σου ἐποίησα. It adds nothing to the sense of the verse, it overloads the arrangement of the lines, it places μὴ ποιήσας immediately after ἐποίησα, and interposes a general negative between the assertion of wicked action (τὸ πονηρὸν ἐνώπιόν σου ἐποίησα) and the statement of its most conspicuous instance of enormity. The line should not, therefore, be included in the text. ᾿ ‘
στήσας βδελύγματα xr. Latin, ‘statui abominationes et multiplicavi offensiones.’ Mozarabic, ‘ Statuens abomi- Nationes et multiplicans odiositates.’ βδέλυγμα is the usual rendering in the LXX for NIpIn ‘abomination 5 (Ge 2 Kings xxi. 2: ‘And he (Manasseh) did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, after the abominations of the heathen.’ προσοχθίσματα is the word used for ‘ the abomination’ (jPV) of the Zidonians and of Moab in 2 Kings xxiii. 13 τῇ ᾿Αστάρτῃ προσοχθίσματι Σιδωνίων καὶ τῷ Χαμὼς προσοχθίσματι Μωὰβ καὶ τῷ Μολχὸλ βδελύγματι υἱῶν ᾿Αμμών. On the outrages committed by Manasseh upon the worship of Jehovah and upon the Temple at Jerusalem see 2 Chron. Xxxill. I-9. : Ἶ
II. καὶ νῦν κτλ. The confession is complete; the entreaty for compassion now begins. ; ;
κλίνω γόνυ καρδίας. In the LXX κάμπτω is the regular verb to be used with τὰ γόνατα. With κλίνω we find another construction in 2 Esdras ix. 5 κλίνω ἐπὶ τὰ γόνατά pov. The heart of the suppliant is here represented as a person kneeling. For this personification of the heart cf. Rom. ii. 29, ‘circumcision is that of the heart.’ The teaching of the prophet Joel is perhaps still influencing the writer : ‘Rend your heart, and not your garments’ (Joel ii. 13).
δεόμενος τῆς παρὰ σοῦ χρηστότητος, i.e. begging for the kindness which continually proceeds from thee. It is more than τῆς χρηστότητός σου, while the Latin ‘ precans a te bonitatem ’ fails to reproduce the Greek idiom. ;
12. ἡμάρτηκα. The perf. tense gives the sense of the continued result of the sin, ‘I have sinned, and am in a state of sin” This is a different shade of thought from that of the aorist ἥμαρτον (τ΄. 9). For this acknowledgement of sin compare the cases of Balaam, Num. xxii. 34; Saul, I Sam. xv. 24, xxvi. 21; David, 2 Sam. xil. 13. :
ἐγώ. Emphatic: ‘I—the guilty one—am alone cognizant of my guilt, and therefore alone can perceive and acknowledge my transgression.’ ; P : aa he
γινώσκω. Latin ‘agnosco’. Cf. Ps. 1. (li.) 5 ‘iniquitatem meam ego cognosco ΄. In this passage some editions have ἀναγινώσκω. Cf. Ps. xix. 12 : ‘Who can discern his errors?’
13. αἰτοῦμαι. The reading ἀλλ᾽, which is found in Cod. T and Const. Apost., expresses the fresh departure made at this point in the Prayer: ‘Nevertheless, in spite of my sinfulness, I beseech,’ &c. Latin, ‘ quare peto rogans te.
“THE PRAYER OF MANASSES τ ας
And destroy me not with mine iniquities.
Neither, in thy continual anger against me, Lay up evil in store for me:
Nor pass thou sentence against me, When I am in the lowest parts of the earth.
For thou, O Lord, art the God of them that repent ; And in me thou wilt show forth *all* thy goodness :
For thou wilt save me, unworthy that I am, According to thy great mercy.
And I will praise thee for ever all the days of my life: For all the host of heaven doth sing thy praise,
And thine is the glory for ever and ever. Amen.
atrovpat: pr. αλλ T, Const. Apost.; Lat. gware μη: pr. και T, Const. Apost.; Lat. ef ze οτι σὺ ev κυριε o Geos AT: ott συ Geos Geos Const. Apost. 14. ev enor AT ; em εμοι Const. Apost. Oecéns A T ; δειξεις Const. Apost. ; Lat. ostendes, ed. Fritzsche τὴν αγαθωσυνὴην: pr. πασαν T; Lat. ommnem, ed. Fritzsche 15. εν Tas ἡμεραις AT: εν πασαις tats ἡμεραις Const. Apost.: Vulgo wacas tas npepas
ἄνες μοι. The repetition of the prayer for forgiveness corresponds with the repetition of ἡμάρτηκα in the previous verse. For ἄνες cf. Ps. xxxviii. (xxxix.) 13 ἄνες μοι iva ἀναψύξω = ‘ O spare me, that I may recover my strength’.
μὴ συναπολέσῃς μετ. ἀνομ. μι The phrase is evidently based upon the LXX of Gen. xix. 15 iva μὴ συναπόλῃ ταῖς ἀνομίαις τῆς πόλεως. Cf. Wisd.x. 3. Used of persons, the same verb is found with pera and the gen., Ps. xxv. (xxvi.) 9 μὴ συναπολέσῃς μετὰ ἀσεβῶν THY ψυχήν μου 3 XXVil. (XXviii,) 3 μετὰ ἐργαζομένων ἀδικίαν μὴ συναπολέσῃς με. ;
εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα μηνίσας. Latin ‘in aeternum iratus’. Another phrase borrowed from the LXX: Ps. cii. (ciii.) 9 οὐδὲ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα μηνιεῖ ; Jer. 11]. 12 οὐ μηνίω ὑμῖν εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα.
τηρήσῃς τὰ κακά μοι. Latin ‘reserves mala mihi’. The meaning is: ‘do not, by long-continued anger, retain, or lay up in store against me, the evils which I have deserved.’
τὰ κακά : not the sins I have committed; but the evils I have brought upon myself as the punishment of sin.
καταδικάσῃς, ‘pass sentence of condemnation upon.’ The verb renders the Hiph. of YW in Ps. xxxvi. (xxxvii.) 33- The punishment of physical suffering, disease, want, injury, exile, was deemed to be inflicted for offences against the law of God.
The Mozarabic Psalter renders ‘ neque in finem iratus contineas mala mea neque condemnaueris me cum his qui sunt in inferiora terre’. 7
ἐν τοῖς κατωτάτοις τῆς γῆς. This phrase renders /IS“NNHA in the LXX of Ps. cxxxviii. (cxxxix.) 15, where — Codd. A B read ἐν τοῖς κατωτάτοις τῆς γῆς. In that passage, as in Isa. xliv. 23, the lowest region in the under-world of the departed is denoted by this term. It does not indicate the place of torment ; but rather the most remote and inaccessible locality in the unknown region of departed spirits. Here, as in Ps. cxxxviil. (cxxxix.) 15, the meaning is: “When I am most remote, and abide in the lowest parts of the earth, condemn me not.’ ‘ Do not prolong, or delay, the punishment of my sins, so that they may be visited upon me, however inaccessible in the lower world.’ The other rendering, ‘nor condemn me to (i. 6. for punishment in) the lowest parts of the earth’, follows the Latin, ‘neque damnes me in infima terrae loca.’ ‘ The lowest regions’ were not a locality of torment, like the mediaeval hell, but the most inaccessible place in the shadowy under-world.
14. ὁ θεὸς τῶν μετανουύντων. Another Divine title, which does not elsewhere occur in Holy Scripture.
δείξεις or δείξης. The former reading gives the simplest meaning, and is supported by the Latin ‘ ostendes’ and Const. Apost. δείξῃς, which is read by Codd. A and T, is grammatically harsh. The subjunctive must be dependent — on the μηδέ in v. 13 ; but the prohibition closes with v. 13, and if in v. 14 the positive side of the injunction is to be continued in the subjunctive, the construction is almost intolerable, especially with the clause ὅτι ov... μετανοούντων interposed.
τὴν ἀγαθωσύνην. Cf. LXX in Judges ix. 16; 2 Chron. xxiv. 16. The insertion of πᾶσαν (Cod. Τὴ) is a very natural amplification : Latin ‘omnem bonitatem tuam’.
ἀνάξιον. A rare adjective in the LXX. See Esther viii. 13 ; Sirach xxv. 8; Jer. xv. 9.
σώσεις. The deliverance here contemplated is from the manifold punishment he had deserved.
κατὰ τὸ πολὺ ἔλεός σου. Cf. v. 7.
15. διὰ παντὸς κτλ. Latin ‘semper omnibus diebus vitae meae’. Mozarabic Psalter, ‘in omni vita mea.’ The mene usta phrase in the LXX would be πάσας ἡμέρας τῆς ζωῆς pov. Cf. Ps. xxii. (xxiii.) 6, xxvi. (xxvii.) 4, Cxxvil. CXXVIll.) 5.
_ πᾶσα ἡ δύναμις τῶν οὐρανῶν. Lat. ‘omnis virtus caelorum’. The meaning is ‘all the heavenly host of angelic beings’; and the phrase is probably derived from Ps. xxxii. (xxxiii.) 6 πᾶσα ἡ δύναμις αὐτῶν. Cf. Dan. viii. 10, See 2 Chron. xviii. 18, ‘all the host of heaven standing™6n his rigk® hand and on his left’; and Luke ii. 13, ‘a multitude of © the heavenly host praising God.’
καὶ σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. “A short concluding doxology reminding us of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt. vi. 13). For instances of Jewish doxologies cf. 1 Chron, xxix. 11; 1 Esdras iv. 59.
Ἀμήν. For the liturgical use of Amen see 1 Chron. xvi. 36 = Ps. cvi. 48, Judith xiii. 20 (γένοιτο), Tobit viii. 8 ; and compare, in N. T. illustration of this usage, 1 Cor. xiv. 16 and Rev. v. 14.
THE PRAYER OF AZARIAH AND THE SONG ©The THREE CHIEDREN
δι. SHORT ACCOUNT OF THE BOOK.
THE subject of this introduction is not really a ‘book’; and it is sometimes known as the ‘First Addition’ to the canonical Book of Daniel. It is an illustrative interpolation inserted in that book after iii. 23 ; and is found there, forming an integral part of the book,! in Theodotion, the LXX, Vulgate, and some other versions dependent on the LXX. ΤῈ is absent from the Aramaic text.
It consists of four parts :
(a) Verses 1,2. An introductory verse or verses connecting it with the narrative. This intro- | duction occurs in two different forms in the LXX and in Theodotion.?
(ὦ) Verses 3-22. A ‘Prayer’ ascribed to Azariah, one of the ‘Three Children’ who were | thrown into the fiery furnace.
This ‘ Prayer’ begins with praise to God (3) and an acknowledgement of His justice (4), especially | in the judgement executed upon Israel (5-10). There follows a prayer for deliverance, for His | Name's sake (11) ; because of His promise to the Patriarchs (12, 13); because of their great sufferings } and true repentance (14-19). The Prayer concludes with an appeal for deliverance, for the punish- ΟΕ ment of the enemies of Israel, and for the world-wide manifestation of the glory of God (20-22).
(c) Verses 23-27. A narrative as to the further heating of the furnace, the burning up of the Chaldeans round about, and the descent of the Angel of the Lord into the furnace to protect the ἘΠ ‘Three Children’.
(4) Verses 28-68. The Song of the Three Children with an introductory verse.
The Song is an ascription of praise to God, in which all His creatures, animate and inanimate, are called upon to glorify Him.
Verses 35-65 have the same refrain, ‘Sing His praise and highly exalt Him for ever,’ slightly |varied in verse 52. These verses form the Benedicite.
$2. TITLE OF THE BOOK. Just as this ‘ Addition’ is not really a book, so originally, being merely a section of the Greek \Daniel, it had no separate title. Thus Swete* says, ‘In the Greek MSS. no break or separate title \divides these Greek additions from the rest of the text.’° But the Alex. MS. gives the Prayer and the \Song under the titles ‘ Prayer of Azarias’ and ‘Hymn of our Father’ as two of the fourteen hymns which it inserts as an appendix to the Psalter. Other MSS. head the Song ‘Hymn of the Three Children’. The Vulgate inserts after Dan. iii. 23 the note Quae sequuntur in hebraeis voluminibus ton repert. Then follows our ‘Addition’ and then another note, Hzcusque in Hebraco non habetur ; ὦ quae posuimus de Theodotionis editione translata sunt. Lagarde in his edition of the Syriac version of the Apocrypha gives the heading ‘ Prayer of Hananiah and his companions’ from one MS., and from Walton (literally) ‘ Prayer of the House of ‘Hananiah’; the meaning of the latter phrase being the same as the former.® | In the A.V. and R.V. the whole ‘ Addition’ is placed under the title ‘The Song of the Three doly Children’, adding the note, ‘ Which followeth in the third Chapter of DANIEL after this place, — Well down bound into the midst of the burning fiery furnace.—Verse 23. That which followeth is not ΠΣ the Hebrew, to wit, And they walked—unto these words, Then Nebuchadnezzar—verse 24. Π Inthe Prayer Book verses 35-65 form one of the canticles of the Morning Service, the opening rords of the Latin version, Benedicite, Omnia Opera, being used as a title.
1 But cf. below, § 2. 2 Cf. below and notes on verses 1 f. 5 Cf. below, ὃ 7.
4 Introduction to the O.T. in Greek, p. 260. :
5 Tischendorf in his edition of the Vatican LXX inserted titles in brackets, hence the statement sometimes made at these titles are given in the Vatican MS.
THE PRAYER OF AZARIAH, ETC.
The LXX version of Daniel was almost universally displaced at an early date by that οἱ Theodotion, made in the first half of the second century A.D. The English versions are made from Theodotion.
The MSS. may be classified thus :
(2) MSS. of Theodotion’s Version.’
A. Codex Alexandrinus contains the whole ‘ Addition’ as part of Danzel and also the Prayer and Song as two of the Canticles.
B. Codex Vaticanus.
V. Codex Venetus.
Q. Codex Marchalianus, a complete copy of the Prophets preserved in the Vatican Library, written in Egypt not later than the sixth century. The margins supply copious extracts from the — various Greek versions.”
Τ. Codex Cryptoferratensis, in the Basilian Monastery of Grotta Ferrata, a volume consisting — partly of palimpsest leaves of an uncial MS. of the Prophets of the eighth or ninth είτε. This
R. Psalterium Graeco-Latinum Veronense, ‘a bilingual Psalter of Western origin and attributed to the sixth century . .. the property of the Chapter of Verona, includes the Song as one of eight canticles supplementary to the Psalter.
T. Psalterium Purpureum Turicense, a Western uncial, ascribed by Tischendorf to the seventh century, containing the Psalter, followed by canticles, including the Prayer and the Song. Verses | 14-19 are wanting. It is in the municipal library of Zurich.®
Swete, pp. 165 ff., further enumerates a large number of cursive MSS. of, or including, Daniel.
(ὁ) MS. of the LX X.
This version is only extant in the cursive MS. 87, the Codex Chisianus, in the library of the Chigi family at Rome. It contains Jer., Baruch, Lam., Ep. of Jeremiah, the LXX Daniel, Hippolytus on Daniel, Theodotion’s Daniel, Ezek., and Isaiah. It is usually assigned to the ninth. century.® ‘
(a) The Old Latin of Daniel is extant in various fragments and patristic quotations. These show that the version included our ‘Addition’. F. C. Burkitt’s investigations seem to point to the conclusion that before the time of Jerome there were current Latin versions of both the LXX Daniel and Theodotion’s Danzel.8
(6) The Vulgate of Daniel is made from Theodotion, and includes the additions.
(c) The Peshitta Syriac. Swete® states that ‘ From the first the Peshitta seems to have included the non-canonical books of the Alexandrian Bible except 1 Esdras and Tobit’. A. A. Bevan
i a a a οὰς μσως, τπ τ οἕὦροὦἕὁυοὁἐιηι, κτὺν ππμσκσα
Hebrew and Syriac ΒΙΡ]65." The version is made from Theodotion, but differs considerably from both Theod. and LXX, probably through corruption and free handling. (2) The Syrohexaplari ic Verswn isa literal version of the LXX column of Origen’s Hexapla, and supplements the testimony of Codex Chisianus as to the text of the LXX. (6) A Syriac version of Daniel and other books of Jacob of Edessa, A. D. 704-5, exists in MSS. at London an Paris, but only specimens have been printed." (f) Egyptian Versions. (i) The Bohairic Coptic, based on Theodotion, but influenced by the LXX." (ii) The Sahidic. j (9) The Ethiopic Version, based on Theodotion. (2) The Arabic Version, based on Theodotion. (ἢ The Armenian Version, from the text of Theodotion."
1 For details of MSS. merely named, see Swete, 7)12. ¢o the O. T. in Greek.
” For further details as to these versions, see Swete, Jt. to the O. T. in Greek.
8 The Old Latin and the Itala, p. 28. De} UA. 10 The Book of Daniel, x.
ᾧ 5. ORIGINAL LANGUAGE.
This problem might seem to belong to the realm of pure scholarship ; but it is involved in the controversy between the Protestant Churches and Rome as to the canonicity of the Apocrypha. | Protestant divines have been inclined to regard original composition in Hebrew as one mark of
canonicity, though they have never formulated any rigid doctrine to that effect. Dr. Barry, for instance, wrote of ‘the true Hebrew Canon of the Old Testament’! He probably only meant the canon current amongst Palestinian Jews, but the use of the term ‘ Hebrew’ lays emphasis on the fact that the books of the Palestinian canon are extant in Hebrew or Aramaic; while the Apocrypha, when he wrote, were not extant in Hebrew.
Thus, according to Rothstein,* most Protestant scholars since Eichhorn, including Fritzsche, Schiirer, KGnig, Cornill, and Strack, have decided for Greek as the original language ; while Catholic scholars have held that the ‘ Addition’ was written in Hebrew. But some Protestant scholars have also taken this view, e.g. Delitzsch, Zockler,: Bissell,? Ball, Vatke, and Reuss. Further, Rothstein himself is inclined to accept a Hebrew original.
Bissell’s statement * that ‘the majority of critics of all schools have always held to the opinion that this composition was originally written in the Hebrew or Aramaic language’ is too sweeping ; but perhaps on the whole the balance of authority inclines that way. The theory of a Hebrew original is also favoured by J. T. Marshall:° ‘The evidence for a Hebrew original is not irresistible, but probable’; Kamphausen® states that it cannot be conclusively proved that the ‘ Additions’ were written in Greek; J. E. H. Thomson’ argues for a Hebrew or Aramaic original; Swete® writes, ‘The addition to Dan. ili. 23 is clearly midrashic, and probably had a Semitic original.’
The present writer is clear that there was a Hebrew original probably for the bulk of our ‘ Addition’, and certainly for the Prayer of Azariah. It must not, of course, be overlooked that various considerations, partly drawn from the study of the newly-discovered papyri, reduce the force of much evidence which would prima facie point to a Hebrew original. Idioms and words supposed to be Hebraisms or Aramaisms seem to belong to ordinary Hellenistic Greek, unless, indeed, the Jewish population of some districts gave a Semitic flavour to the local dialect. Moreover, it is always possible that if a Jewish author were more familiar with Aramaic and Hebrew than with Greek, or were soaked in the language of the LX. X and had read nothing else in Greek, he might write original Greek as if he were translating from Hebrew. These considerations, accordingly, have been borne in mind, and due weight has been given to them; they lessen, but do not destroy, the force of the general arguments advanced, and there are specific items of evidence which are not affected by them. The conflicting views of various scholars show that there is not obviously an
overwhelmingly strong case for either view.
Allowing for a very little editing or corruption of the text, there is not much that could not have been written in Hellenistic Greek, and nothing which could not have been translated from Hebrew. The present writer admits that, as he is mainly interested in the Old Testament, he may | have some slight bias in favour of a Hebrew original, but he believes that he has made due allow-
ance for his personal equation. In studying the ‘ Addition’ for the purposes of this work, he has | felt that for the most part the Greek goes into Hebrew of its own accord, and many passages are | most easily understood as unidiomatic renderings of a Hebrew original. The vocabulary is almost entirely confined to that of the LXX. ] Moreover, some little weight may be given to the argument that a pre-Christian Jew would compose prayers and hymns in Hebrew rather than in Greek, Hebrew being the language of devotion. Thus Reuss maintains? that a Jew in prayer could only think in Hebrew. But if our | ‘Addition’ was originally composed to supplement a Greek Davzel, it would naturally be written in Greek. We do not think it was so composed, partly because of other evidence of a Hebrew | original, but were such evidence entirely lacking, the use of Greek might thus be explained by the }purpose for which the passages were written.” It must, however, be admitted that, with a very few exceptions to be mentioned later, the \idifferent texts and versions do not present the kind of variations which would arise from the jindependent use of a Hebrew or Aramaic text. Theodotion and the LXX are so similar that they jare clearly texts of the same Greek original. It is true that the Peshitta Syriac has some striking differences from both of them, so that Thomson maintains” that ‘ The Syriac could not have been
8 So Rothstein, but apparently Bissell does not expressly adopt this view. 4 p. 443.
Apud Rothstein, p. 174; somewhat similarly Thomson, p. 114.
10 Cf. further below, p. 629. ΤΡ Deals
THE PRAYER OF AZARIAM, Ee
made from the Greek, nor the Greek from the Syriac; they must have had a common source’, probably Hebrew. We think, however, that the history of the Peshitta version of our ‘ Addition’ makes this unlikely.! A Syriac translator some centuries after Christ would hardly have known or used a copy of the Hebrew criginal. The variations of the Peshitta are probably due to a tendency to paraphrase.
When we turn to detail, it is desirable to examine separately (a) the Prayer, (6) the Song, (c) the narrative verses.
Let us take first the Prayer of Azariah.
Verse 4. ‘All thy judgements truth’, ἀλήθεια; the use of the substantive is a familiar Hebrew idiom. Similarly ‘ judgements of truth’—so literally, in verse 5.
Verse 6. ‘We have dealt lawlessly in departing from thee, ἠνομήσαμεν ἀποστῆναι ἀπὸ σοῦ. i.e. ‘We have lawlessly departed from thee’, a familiar Hebrew use of the dependent infinitive.
Verse 9. The peculiar word ἀποστατῶν, R.V. ‘forsaken of God’, is most easily understood as a rendering of the Hebr. 0°97 ‘rebels’, as in LXX, cf. notes.
Verse 14. ‘ Low in all the world,’ where perhaps we might have expected ‘lowest’ or ‘lower than all’, is often explained as due to the confusion of two similar Hebrew letters, see note.
Verse τό. ‘Humble spirit,’ lit. ‘spirit of lowliness’, a familiar Hebrew idiom. ἥ
Verse 17. ‘ Wholly go after thee, lit. ‘complete’ or ‘ be complete after thee’, ἐκτελέσαι ὄπισθέν σου, a literal rendering of the Hebr. phrase 7108 dD, cf. πὲ xp and similar phrases, found in Joshua xiv. §f., 14, &c., in the sense of ‘follow with perfect obedience and fidelity’. This instance is conclusive as LXX does not render this phrase by ἐκτελέσαι, so that the Greek cannot be got from
the LXX of the passages in the canonical O.T. Aquila in Deut. i. 36 renders ΝΟ by πληρῶσαι; otherwise Aquila, Symm., and Theod. are not extant for the passages where this phrase occurs. The LXX of this verse has a double rendering for the phrase, in one of which τελειῶσαι, ‘ complete’, is an alternative rendering of the original Hebr., and the other ἐξιλάσαι, ‘make thou atonement’, isa guess by way of correction; LXX has many such guesses. We have not seen this explanation of ἐκτελέσαι κτλ. elsewhere. Cf. note.
Verse 21. ‘ Let them be brought to shame and deprived of all their dominion.’ R.V. ‘ Let them be ashamed of all their power and might’,? καταισχυνθείησαν ἀπὸ πάσης τῆς δυναστείας, cf. Ps. cxviil. (LXX Hebr. cxix.) 116, μὴ καταισχύνῃς με ἀπὸ τῆς προσδοκίας μου, ‘Make me not ashamed of my hope,’ “120, Similarly Sirach xxi. 22 (which is known to be a translation from Hebrew) ἰασχυνθήσεται ἀπὸ προσώπου, R.V. ‘will be ashamed of entering’, lit. ‘from (the) face’, probably ‘from ’, i.e. ‘so as to keep away from the presence of the master of the house.’ The phrase in our
passage may be a mere Hellenism, but makes much better sense if taken as a case of the pregnant use of the Hebr. 3. Cf. note.
Numerous minor Hebraisms might be cited. It is true that the majority of these apparent Hebraisms, taken individually or to the number of three or four, might be explained away as due to the influence of the LXX or otherwise. But some of them, notably ἐκτελέσαι in verse 17, cannot be thus disposed of; and this fact, together with the concurrence of so many in a few verses, shows that the original language was Hebrew. Aramaic, indeed, would be possible,t but much less probable.
The scheme of the Song of the Three Children is so simple, that for the most part it might equally well have been written originally in Greek or translated from Hebrew. The predilection for compounds with ὑπερ- is a matter of taste that may be due to a translator, just as much as to the original author.’ But we find Hebraisms in the few places where there is an opportunity for them to occur. The genitive of the substantive is used for an adjective in verse 30, ‘the name of Thy glory’ for * Thy glorious name’, and in verse 31, ‘the temple of Thy holy glory ’ for ‘Thy holy and glorious temple’, In such a case the balance of probability seems in favour of a Hebrew original.
The Narrative Verses include a good deal of curious Greek, e.g. καίοντες τὴν κάμινον νάφθαν for - ‘heating the furnace with naphtha’, which might represent a too literal rendering of a Hebrew or Aramaic original. Here, too, the vocabulary and idiom are largely that of the LXX. On the other hand, there are several touches that do not look like translations from a Semitic original, e. g. τοῖς περὶ τὸν ᾿Αζαρίαν, but this and others might quite conceivably be somewhat free renderings from Hebrew or Aramaic. On the whole, too, verses 23-27, which connect the Prayer and the Song, seem some-
: Cf. above, p. 626, ἡ 4 (c). ‘ ? Theodotion ; the LXN corrects to ἀληθιναί, * “Power and,’ an addition found in some authorities.
é The Targum of Num. xiv. 24 translates xo lit. by mein. Ὁ Cf. notes on verses 29, 30.
what rhetorical, and are not so simple and straightforward as the Greek of the narratives which precede and follow the ‘Addition’. Moreover, Theodotion and the LXX differ considerably. It is possible that we have to do with a Greek expansion of an Aramaic original.!
In any case the section or sections originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic were to a certain extent edited after they were translated into Greek.
$6. COMPOSITION OF THE BOOK, DATE, ETC.
The ‘ Addition’ was not part of the original Book of Daniel. As we shall show later, the Prayer of Azariah could not have been composed with reference to the rest of the book. It seems, however just possible that the ‘ Addition’ as a whole was part of the book before it was translated into Greek, but that it was somewhat amplified in the course of translation or afterwards. For the most part the Greek of the ‘ Addition’ is very similar to that of the canonical part of the book, and indeed to the LXX of the canonical books generally.?_ We will return to this subject after discussing the separate sections.
The ‘ Addition’ as a whole probably belongs to the first century B.c. It is later than the canonical Daniel, i.e. later than 168 B.c.; the LXX is apparently by the same hand as that of the canonical Daniel, which was probably in existence at the beginning of the Christian Era or somewhat later.
The Prayer of Azariah was not originally composed in reference to the incident of the Three Children. If it had been, it would have been put into the mouth of Hananiah (Shadrach), who always stands first of the Three. Thus the Peshitta heads the ‘Addition’, ‘Prayer of Hananiah and his companions.’ There is nothing whatever in the Prayer to connect it with the incident to which it is attached. Moreover a Jew, writing a Prayer for the beginning of the Exile, would hardly have forgotten Jeremiah and Ezekiel, to say nothing of Daniel himself, and spoken of the people as having been without a prophet. On the other hand verse 15, which states that there was neither priest, prophet, nor leader, neither sacrifices nor place for public worship, points to the dark days at the beginning of the Maccabean struggle. Probably, therefore, it was composed by, or in the name of, some unknown Azariah, about 168-170 B.c.
The Song of the Three Children is expressly connected with the incident by verse 66; but probably this was not part of the original Song. The jubilant tone of this poem is in marked contrast to the despondency of the Prayer. The ‘holy and glorious Temple’ and its services seem to be flourishing. Apart from verse 66, it might belong to any prosperous period after the reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah, probably some time after the success of the Maccabean revolt. There is nothing to indicate that it was composed with reference to the incident of the Three Children.
The Narrative Verses were obviously put into their present form in order to connect the Prayer and the Song with the rest of the book; but they may be based on a section of the original Daniel, no longer included in the canonical book. In the latter the sequence between verses 23 and 24 seems imperfect. In 23 we read that the Three Children ‘fell down bound into the midst of the burning fiery furnace’. We are not told how they fared, but verse 24 goes on at once ‘Then Nebuchadnezzar the king was astonied’, nothing so far having happened to astonish him. Apparently originally something like the apocryphal narrative verses I, 2, 23-27 stood between the canonical verses 23 and 24, and may have provided the basis for the apocryphal narrative verses.
These facts seem to point to some such conclusions as the following: Two independent Hebrew poems, the Prayer and the Song, were inserted, either at the same time or at different times, in the Hebrew-Aramaic Daniel;® the narrative section originally connecting the canonical verses 23, 2 was modified in order to connect the poems with the rest of the book. There were then in circulation copies of two editions of Daniel, one with the ‘Addition’, the other without ; the former, longer, edition was the more popular and the more widely circulated. But later on it was held that the shorter form was the more authoritative ; and in copies of the longer form our verses 1-68 ° were marked as an addition. From a copy or copies so marked, fresh copies were made which omitted our ‘Addition’, without restoring the section which originally stood in the canonical chap. iii, between verses 23 and 24.
The various authors and editors were clearly Jews ; nothing whatever is known of them, beyond what may be gathered from the ‘ Addition ’ itself.
See further § 6, on the composition of our ‘Addition’. See notes, passim. 5’ So Thomson, Dazze/, p. 115. * Verses 30f., cf. notes. We are not concerned here with the history of the Book of Daniel apart from our ‘ Addition’.
THE PRAYER OF AZARTAL see:
§ 7. INFLUENCE OF THE BOOK ON LATER LITERATURE, CANONICITY, ETC.
As the ‘ Addition’ was current in early times as part of the longer Daniel, it is difficult to know how far it was accepted as canonical. When Daniel is mentioned in a list of canonical works, there is usually nothing to show whether or no it includes our ‘ Addition’. Its absence from the Massoretic edition of the Old Testament probably shows that the ‘ Addition’ was not included in Daniel as it was received into the Palestinian Canon.
On the other hand, it was generally accepted in the early and mediaeval Christian: Church, being included in the LXX, Latin, Syriac,! Egyptian, Arabic, Ethiopian, and other versions. The ‘ Additions’ to Daniel are freely used by the Greek and Latin Fathers : ὁ a Father who accepted Susanna and Bel and the Dragon would a fortiord accept the Prayer and the Song.
At the Reformation our ‘ Addition’ shared the fate of the rest of the Apocrypha. The Roman Church kept it as an integral part of Daniel and of the Old Testament ; the Reformed Churches took it out of Daniel and made it a separate Apocryphon.
Philo apparently makes no use of Daniel, and Josephus in his version of the incident of the Three Children and the Fiery Furnace, Az. x. 10. 5, entirely ignores this ‘ Addition’.
Most of the parallels between the New Testament and the ‘ Addition’ are also parallels with the canonical Old Testament ; and the two or three that remain may be mere coincidences. We may, however, note one. In verse 64 we have ‘ spirits and souls of the righteous ’,? with which we may compare Heb. xii. 23, ‘the spirits of just men, * and Apoc. vi. 9, ‘I saw... the souls ὅ of them that had been slain for the word of God.’ But here there need be no literary connexion ; moreover, in Wisdom of Solomon iii. 1, we have ‘ The souls of the righteous are in the hand of God’. Thus there is no sufficient evidence that the writers of the New Testament made use of this ‘ Addition ’.®
Verses 35-66 form the Lenedicite which stands in the Morning Service of the Prayer Book as an alternative to the Ze Deum. The S.P.C.K. Prayer-Book with Commentary states, ‘The rubric of 1549 directing its use during Lent was done away with in 1552, and there is now no special direction when it should be used. But it is still deemed more suitable for that season than the exultant strain of the Ze Deum, and to those days when the Lessons relate to the wonders of creation.’7
These few verses, about one long Biblical chapter, are mostly secondary and imitative, largely a cento of phrases from the Old Testament. They illustrate, however, some of the features of Jewish theology about the beginning of the Christian Era. Thus the unique deity of one God is set forth in verse 22 and at length in the appeal of the Song to all things animate and inanimate to praise God. Yet this one God is still specially the Champion of Israel against their enemies, verse 21. It is possible that the ‘worshippers’ of verses 10,68 are proselytes, or, at any rate, include Gentiles.
In verses 5, 6, 14 the misfortunes of Israel are explained by their sins, whereas in Psalm xliv, commonly regarded as Maccabean, the Jews protest that they are innocent martyrs, persecuted for loyalty to their God. But the sins confessed here are probably those of the nation in the past. Azariah says for himself and those for whom he speaks, ‘But in a contrite heart and a humble spirit let us be accepted .. . now we follow thee with all our heart, we fear thee and seek thy face,’
Further, in verses 16, 17 we have the idea that penitence is an acceptable sacrifice, cf. Psalm 1i.8
ᾧ 9. BIBLIOGRAPHY.
See the list of works dealing with the Apocrypha as a whole,® and in addition the following :— (a) CHIEF EDITIONS OF THE TEXT (AND OF THE ANCIENT VERSIONS). _ (i) LXX of Daniel, 5. de Magistris (?), Rome, 1772: ‘Daniel secundum LXX. et tetraplus Origenis nunc primum editus e singulari Chisiano codice.’ Reprinted .. . at Milan, 1788 (Bugati) ; and at Leipzig, 1845 (Hahn). The LXX text is also given in the editions of Holmes and Parsons, Tischendorf, and Swete.!” These authorities also
give the text of Theodotion ; Theodotion was also used for Daniel in the Complutensian, Aldine, Sistine, and Grabian editions of the LXX, and in the minor editions based upon them?
But perhaps not in the original Peshitta, cf. 4c. * Smith’s DB, i. 258.
Πνεύματα καὶ ψυχαὶ δικαίων. 4 Πνεύμασι δικαίων. ° Τὰς ψυχάς.
Cf. W. Dittmar, Vetus Testamentum in Novo, p. 351. 7 p. 43.
Cf. Maldwyn Hughes, Zhe Ethics of Jewish Afpocryphal Literature, p. 69.
(ii) Peshitta Syriac. Lébrz Veteris Testamenti Apocryphi, Syriae, Lagarde, London, 1861. (iii) Syro-hexaplaric Version. The Daniel of this version was published by Bugati in 1788. (iv) Egyptian, Coptic, or Pohairic Version, Tattam, Prophetae Majores, Oxford, 1852.
(6) CHIEF CRITICAL INQUIRIES.
BEVAN, A. A. Daniel, 1892, Section on ‘LXX’, pp. 43 ff.
BiLupavu. 2916 alexandrin. Uebersetzung des δ. Dan., &c., 189741
BRULL. ‘Das Gebet der drei Manner im Feuerefen, Jahrbuch fiir jiid. Gesch. τε. Litt., viii, 1887, pp. 22 ff.3 BurRKITI, F.C. Zhe Old Latin and the Itala, Camb., 1896, Section on ‘ LXX Text of Dan.’, pp. 18 ff. Dictionary of the Bible (Hastings), 1902. J. T. MARSHALL, ‘ Three Children, Song of the’, iv. 754.
DRIVER, S.R. Daniel (Camb. Bible), pp. xviii ff., and Section on ‘ Versions and Comm.’, pp. xcviil ff. Encyclopaedia Biblica, 1899, A. KAMPHAUSEN, ‘ Daniel, Book of’, i. 1013.
_ THOMSON, J. E. H., in Pulpit Commentary on Daniel, 1897, Excursus on ‘Song of the Three Holy Children’, p. 112.
a IR I a TD
es —
THE PRAYER OF AZARIAH AND THE SONG OBE: THREE CHE DREN
The Prayer of Azariah, 1-22.
1,2 AND they walked in the midst of the fire, singing the praise of God, and blessing the Lord. Then Azarias stood up with his companions and prayed on this manner; and opening his mouth in the
3 midst of the fire said, Blessed art thou, O Lord, thou God of our fathers, and worthy to be praised :
4 and thy name is glorified for evermore: for thou art just in all the things that thou hast done, and
5 all thy works are true, and thy ways right, [and all thy judgements truth]. In all the things that thou hast brought upon us, and upon the holy city of our fathers, evew Jerusalem, thou hast executed true judgements: for according to truth and justice hast thou brought all these things upon us
6 because of our sins. For we have sinned and committed iniquity in departing from thee, and we
7 have sinned grievously in all things, and have neither hearkened unto thy commandments nor kept
Our version follows the text of Theodotion; variations found in the LXX are given in the notes.
1. In the Greek MSS. this verse follows iii. 23 of our Daniel. -
they, the ‘Three Children’. In the account of this incident in the canonical Daniel they are referred to by their Aramaic names, ‘ Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego’; but in this ‘Addition’ they are called Ananias, Misael, and Azarias, the Hellenized forms of their Hebrew names, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah.
God... the Lord. In the Pentateuch the divine names often alternate through the combination of clauses from documents using ‘God’ and ‘ Yahweh’ respectively. This alternation seems to be sometimes imitated, as a point of style, by later writers ; cf. Jonah iii. 10, iv. 2.
the Lord, κύριος, representing the Hebrew divine name, Vuhweh.
2. stood up with his companions, συνστάς, R.V. ‘stood’. The verb is used in 1 Kings xvii. 26 LXX to translate spy ‘stand’. In Dan. ili. 23 the three ‘fell down bound’.
1, 2. Instead of these two verses, LXX has the following: ‘Thus then prayed Hananias and Azarias and Misael, and sang praise to the Lord, when the king commanded them to be thrown into the furnace. And Azarias stood and — prayed thus and opened his mouth and gave thanks to the Lord, [together with his companions in the midst of the fire, the furnace being brought to an exceeding great heat by the Chaldeans].’ Rothstein regards the words in brackets as a later addition. On the words ‘brought... to a heat’, i.e. ὑποκαιομένης, cf. Jer. i. 13, where ὑποκαιόμενον renders M53, R.V. ‘seething (cauldron) ’.
There is no apparent reason why the following ‘ Prayer’ should be put into the mouth of Azariah. Where the three names are given in the canonical Daniel, his name, whether as Azariah or Abednego, stands last, and in verse 66 of our ‘Addition’ it stands second. As the ‘Prayer’ itself does not connect in any way with the incident in Daniel, and the name is a common one, the Azariah of the ‘ Prayer’ may originally have had nothing to do with the Azariah of Daniel.
3. Cf. 1 Chron. xxix. 10, 20 (Yahweh, the God of their fathers) ; 2 Chron. vi. 3, 4.
and worthy to be praised, aiverés. LXX has αἰνετόν connecting with the following, ‘and thy name is worthy to be praised,’ &c.
4. thou art just, &c. Neh. ix. 33 R.V., ‘thou art just in all that is come upon us; for thou hast dealt truly’; 2 Esdras, καὶ σὺ δίκαιος ἐπὶ πᾶσι τοῖς ἐνχομένοις ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς, ὅτι ἀλήθειαν ἐποίησας.
thy works, ἄς. Cf. Deut. xxxii. 4.
true, ἀληθινά. This Greek word is frequently used in the LXX for the genitive of the Hebr. ’éeth, ‘truth’, such genitives in the Hebrew often doing the work of an adjective. The idea in the Hebrew is rather ‘ faithful’ than ‘true’; faithful, as corresponding to the nature, promises, and commands of God.
right, εὐθεῖαι. Often in LXX for Hebr. yashar, ‘straightforward’; so Hos. xiv. τὸ LXX.
[and allthy judgements truth]. Apparently a variant arising by dittography from the clause ‘and judgements of truth’, which immediately follows in the Greek; so Rothstein. The words for ‘judgements’ are different, κρίσεις and κρίματα respectively.
truth. LXX and Syr. marg. have ‘true’, ἀληθιναί; Syr. text agrees with Theodotion.
5. the holy city, &c. Cf. Isa. Ixiv. 1of., also lii. 1, Neh. xi. 1, and Deut. ix. 24.
brought .. . upon, ἐπήγαγες as in the earlier part of the verse; LXX has ‘wrought’, ἐποίησας.
6. sinned (first occurrence). LXX adds ‘in all things’.
in departing from thee. A more idiomatic rendering of the first part of this verse would be, ‘ We have sinfully and lawlessly departed from thee.’
sinned ... sinned grievously, jpdpropev . . . ἐξημάρτομεν. The ἐξ of the latter may be used of erring from the mark, emphasizing the nature of sin as a divergence from a standard, an aberration. ’Efapyaprdvo is occasionally used in LXX in the sense of ‘sin’, but more often in that of ‘cause to sin’; it does not occurin N.T. In view of the similarity of the first and last clauses of this verse, Rothstein regards ‘sinned and’ as a later addition; but ἡμάρτομεν and ἐξημάρτομεν probably represent two different Hebrew words.
thy commandments. The LXX reads ‘the commandments of thy Law’.
DAE PRAVER OF AZ ARIAT 85 τὸ
8 them, nor done as thou hast commanded us, that it might go well with us. So all that thou hast g brought upon us and everything that thou hast done to us, thou hast done in true judgement. And
thou didst deliver us into the hands of lawless enemies, and most hateful forsakers of God, and to το ἃ king unjust and the most wicked in all the world. And now we cannot open our mouth; shame τι and reproach have befallen thy servants, and them that worship thee. Deliver us not up utterly, for 12 thy name’s sake, neither disannul thou thy covenant ; and cause not thy mercy to depart from us, for the sake of Abraham that is beloved of thee, and for the sake of Isaac thy servant, and Israel 13 thy holy one; to whom thou didst promise that thou wouldst multiply their seed as the stars of 14 heaven, and as the sand that is upon the seashore. For we, O Master, have been made less than all 15 the nations, and are brought low this day in all the world because of our sins. Neither is there at this time prince, or prophet, or leader, or burnt offering, or sacrifice, or oblation, or incense, or place 16 to offer before thee and to find mercy. But in a contrite heart and a humble spirit let us be
8. The first two clauses are practically identical, and Rothstein and others may be right in regarding one of them as a gloss, probably the former. g. lawless, i.e. Gentiles who had not the Jewish law. LXX inserts ‘our’ before this word.
most hateful forsakers of God, ἐχθίστων ἀποστατῶν. ἐχθίστων might mean ‘most hostile’ or ‘most hateful’ ; either would suit the sense, but in the Apocrypha it occurs with the latter meaning, e.g. Wisd. xv. 18. ἀποστατῶν and cognate words in the LXX would usually represent the Hebrew root 97419 ‘rebel’; so Num. xiv. 9, Joshua xxii. 19. In Acts xxi. 21 Paul is accused of teaching ἀποστασίαν ἀπὸ Μωύσέως, i.e. ‘apostasy’ in the modern sense, and ἀποστάτης in ecclesiastical writers has the sense of ‘apostate’. In 1 Macc. ii. 15 we read of agents of Antiochus compelling the people to apostatize, καταναγκάζοντες τὴν ἀποστασίαν. Here it may represent the Hebr. p44) ‘rebels’, i.e. against God; but it would be understood by the later Greek reader in the sense of ‘apostate’. Probably the phrase does not refer to the Gentiles but to apostate Jews., In the time of the revolt of the Maccabees we read of “renegade and wicked Jews’, Az. xil. 7.1, who took the side of the oppressor, cf. xii. 5. 4. aking, ἄς. In the present setting of the Prayer the king will be Nebuchadnezzar. What we read of him elsewhere does not convey the impression that he was ‘unjust and most wicked in all the world’. In Jer. xxv. 9 Yahweh speaks of him as ‘my servant’. But the author of this clause was probably thinking of Antiochus Epiphanes.
the most wicked in all the world. The Greek is πονηροτάτῳ παρὰ πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν, an unusual construction, probably elliptical for ‘more wicked than any of the kings of the whole earth’. 10. them that worship thee, τοῖς σεβομένοις oe ; the participle also occurs in verse 68. In Acts οἱ σεβομένοι are the proselytes, e.g. xvii. 17 τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις καὶ τοῖς σεβομένοις. Possibly the word has the same sense here and verse 68. Rothstein thinks the clause an addition; a reference to proselytes might well be added as an afterthought. Il. utterly, εἰς τέλος. This phrase and εἰς τὸ τέλος frequently occur in the LXX and represent numerous Hebrew originals, most often nyid ‘for ever’, or in the Psalm headings ny2d, apparently understood in the same sense. disannul, διασκεδάσῃς, lit. ‘scatter abroad’. This verb, with διαθήκην for object, is the regular LXX rendering of n)2 153 ‘annul a covenant’, e.g. Judges ii. 1.
12. that is beloved of thee. In 2 Chron. xx.7 LXX Abraham is called τῷ ἠγαπημένῳ cov; the Hebrew has ads, R.V. ‘thy friend’. In Isa. xli. 8 he is called "3 ΠΝ, R.V. ‘ my friend’, LXX ὃν ἠγάπησα, ‘whom I loved’. The root JMN is the regular word for ‘love’. In James ii. 23 Abraham is called ‘the friend (φίλος) of God’, and this is his common title amongst Mohammedans.
thy servant ... thy holy one. These epithets are not applied elsewhere to Isaac or Israel (the patriarch) respectively. In Deut. ix. 27 Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are called ‘thy servants’, and the va/zon of Israel is constantly spoken of as, or exhorted to be, holy, e.g. Deut. vii. 6. 13. LXX has, ‘As thou didst speak unto them, saying that ¢/oz wouldst greatly multiply (πολυπληθῦναι) their seed as the stars of heaven for multitude,’ &c.
Cf. Gen. xxii. 17 πληθύνων πληθυνῶ τὸ σπέρμα σου ws τοὺς ἀστέρας τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ ὡς τὴν ἄμμον τὴν παρὰ τὸ χεῖλος τῆς θαλάσσης, “ Multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven and as the sand by the seashore.’ _
14. Master, δέσποτα. Very occasionally used by LXX to render’ Adonai,’ Adon,’ Elohim, Yahweh; fairly common in the Apocrypha as a divine title, and so used in Luke ii. 29; Acts iv. 24; 2 Pet. 11. 1; Jude 4; Apoc. vi. το. The word expresses ‘ the absolute control of a master over a slave’ (R. J. Knowling on Acts iv. 24).
in all the world. It has been suggested that we should read ‘ (lower) than all the world’, an original Hebrew 2!) having been misread as $53: [ἢ some forms of the Hebrew script 2 and 3 are very similar. 15. Cf. Hos. iii. 4; Ps. lxxiv. 8, 9, perhaps Maccabean. prophet. In the time of Nebuchadnezzar there were Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and others. burnt offering, ὁλοκαύτωσις, πον. The sacrifice in which the victim was wholly consumed on the altar. sacrifice, θυσία. Used in LXX both for M1, the general term for the sacrifice of an animal (so probably here), and for 732, sometimes limited to bloodless offerings. oblation, προσφορά. Only once in LXX, Ps. xxxix. 7, where it is used for nh ; it is fairly common in the Apocrypha. ae oe : to offer. The Greek καρπῶσαι is a derivative of καρπός, ‘fruit’; Liddell and Scott explain its use in the sense of ‘offer’ by suggesting that it meant to ‘bring’ or ‘offer fruit’. In classical Greek it is most often used in the passive or middle to mean ‘to derive profit’, ‘to enjoy’. The noun κάρπωμα is the regular LXX for NWN ‘an offering made by fire’, which had nothing specially to do with fruit, but was commonly used of animals. The verb occurs in the sense of ‘offer’ in Lev. ii. 12, 16; cf. Ps. li. 18 LXX. According to Deissmann, LXX uses καρπόω in the sense of burn ’4 heart, Gk. ψυχῇ, which is occasionally used by the LXX to render the Hebr. ΞΡ ‘heart’.
1 Bible Studies, pp. 135 ff.
THE PRAYER OF AZARIAH 17-29
17 accepted, like as in the burnt offerings of rams and bullocks, and like as in ten thousands of fat lambs; so let our sacrifice be in thy sight this day, and graz¢ that we may wholly go after thee, for 18 they shall not be ashamed that put their trust in thee. And now we follow thee with all our heart, 19 we fear thee and seek thy face. Put us not to shame, but deal with us according to thy forbearance, 20 and according to the multitude of thy mercy. Deliver us also according to thy marvellous works, 21 and give glory to thy name, O Lord: and let all them that do thy servants hurt be confounded, and let them be brought to shame and deprived of all their dominion, and let their strength be broken ; 22 and let them know that thou art the Lord, God, sole and glorious over the whole world. 23 And the king’s servants, that put them in, ceased not to make the furnace hot with naphtha, pitch, 24 tow, and small wood; so that the flame streamed forth above the furnace forty and nine cubits. 26 And it spread, and burned those Chaldeans whom it found about the furnace. But the angel of the Lord came down into the furnace together with Azarias and his fellows, and he drove the flame of 27 the fire out of the furnace; and made the midst of the furnace as it had been a moist whistling wind, so that the fire touched them not at all, neither hurt nor troubled them. 28 Then the three, as out of one mouth, praised, and glorified, and blessed God in the furnace saying :
The Song of the Three Children, 29-68.
29 Blessed art thou, O Lord, thou God of our fathers, And to be praised and highly exalted for ever.
17. burnt-offerings. LXX and B of Theodotion have the singular. grant that we may wholly go after thee. The Greek ἐκτελέσαι ὄπισθέν σου is obscure as Greek. It is a literal rendering of the Hebr. 108 xn, R.V. ‘followed fully’, Num. xiv. 24, xxxli. 11 f.; Deut. i. 36; Joshua xiv. 8 f., 14. LXX of these passages renders the phrase by ἀκολουθέω and cognate or synonymous words. The LXX reading ἐξιλάσαι, ‘make thou atonement’, is a correction to improve the sense. At the end of the verse the LXX adds καὶ τελειῶσαι ὄπισθέν σου, a variant of our clause, which was originally placed in the margin as a correction of the LXX ἐξιλάσαι ὄπισθέν σου, and then inserted in the text in the wrong place.
19. deal with us. LXX adds ἔλεος, giving the sense ‘show us mercy’.
forbearance, ἐπιείκεια. In 2 Cor. x. 1, St. Paul exhorts the Corinthians by the meekness (πραότητος) and forbearance (ἐπιεικείας) of Christ. Dean Bernard on this passage (£2~. Gk. Test.) points out that ἐπιείκεια, ‘gentleness’, “sweet reasonableness’, is one of the qualities of the Righteous Man in Wisd. 11. 19; and that in Greek ethics the ἐπιεικής is the ‘equitable’ man who does not press for the last farthing of his rights.
The noun does not occur in the LXX of the canonical books, but in Ps. Ixxxv. 4 LXX (Heb. Ixxxvi. 5) God is said to be ‘good and forgiving’ (Hebr, ΠΡΌ, LXX ἐπιεικής) ‘and of great mercy’.
21. do... hurt, ἐνδεικνύμενοι, ‘show’, as in LXX of Gen. 1. 15, 17.
let them be brought to shame and deprived of all their dominion, καταισχυνθείησαν ἀπὸ πάσης τῆς δυναστείας. Some MSS. insert ‘power and’ before ‘dominion’, R.V. ‘let them be ashamed of all their power and might’. This does not make sense, and would not be the natural way of expressing ‘let them be ashamed of the use they have made of their dominion’, as it is sometimes explained. The sense ‘ashamed of their dominion or authority’ because it had failed them in their hour of need would be more probable. Perhaps, however, the Greek renders a pregnant use of the Hebrew 7z7 as suggested by the translation; cf. the next clause. See also p. 628.
22. the Lord, God, &c., Κύριος Θεὸς μόνος ; LXX has μόνος Κύριος ὁ Θεός, ‘alone the Lord God.’
23. to make the furnace hot with naphtha, ἄς. The construction is peculiar, or rather impossible, καίοντες τὴν κάμινον νάφθαν. In the LXX text νάφθαν κτλ. is the direct object of ὑπέκαιον, and it is possible that Theodotion’s text is an ungrammatical abbreviation. In the rendering of the Aramaic Dan. iii, ἡ καιομένη is used for NMP. ‘fiery’, the epithet describing the furnace. After ‘make the furnace hot’, the LXX continues, ‘And when they had cast the three all at once into the furnace, and the furnace was thoroughly aglow with seven times its usual heat’ (this rendering requires rapa rather than xara), ‘and when they had thrown them in, those who had thrown them in were above them, but the others kindled under them,’ then follows ‘naphtha’, &c., as in Theodotion. The broken construction indicates a gloss or glosses. According to Aram. of Dan. iii. 22 (LXX, iii. 23), the men who threw the Three Children into the furnace have already been burnt to death, and therefore could not go on kindling fuel. The LXX gloss is an unsuccessful attempt to explain away the difficulty.
25. spread, διώδευσεν ; LXX διεξώδευσε, ‘escaped’.
26. the angel. LXX has no article, but probably is intended to be definite. The article is not written before ‘angel’ in the Hebrew phrase for ‘the angel of the Lord’.
drove, ἐξετίναξεν, lit. ‘shook out’, but the verb is the regular LXX rendering of ἽΝ) ‘shake, shake out’.
27. moist . . . wind, lit. ‘wind of dew’. 28. ens LXX ἀναλαβόντες, ‘taking up’, i.e. ‘speech’, An English writer might have said, ‘broke forth into song,’ &c.
blessed. LXX adds after this word, ‘and exalted.’
29. highly exalted, ὑπερυψούμενος. The verb is used in LXX of canonical books in Ps. xxxvi. 35, xcvi.9; Dan. iv. 34 (Theod.). Compounds with ὑπερ- in the intensive sense are not common in LXX of canonical books, e.g. ‘ highly-praised’, ὑπεραινετός (verse 30), ‘highly sung’, ὑπερυμνητός, ‘highly glorified’, ὑπερένδοξος (verse 31), do not occur in LXX, except in this ‘Addition’, At the same time a translator with a turn for hyperbole, having appreciated the effect of
the ὑπερ- in ὑπερυψούμενος, might readily introduce ὑπερ- to strengthen other epithets. In several places the texts vary as to the insertion or omission of ὑπερ-.
THE SONG OF THE THREE CHILDREN 30-46
And blessed is thy glorious and holy name, . And to be highly praised and highly exalted for ever. Blessed art thou in the temple of thy holy glory, And to be highly sung and highly glorified for ever. Blessed art thou that beholdest the depths and sittest upon the cherubim, And to be praised and highly exalted for ever. Blessed art thou on the throne of thy kingdom, And to be highly sung and highly exalted for ever. Blessed art thou in the firmament of heaven, And to be sung and glorified for ever. O all ye works of the Lord, bless ye the Lord, O ye heavens, bless ye the Lord, O ye angels of the Lord, bless ye the Lord, Sing Azs praise and highly exalt him for ever. O all ye waters that be above the heaven, bless ye the Lord, O all ye powers of the Lord, bless ye the Lord, Sing ἀξ praise and highly exalt him for ever. O ye sun and moon, bless ye the Lord, Sing A7s praise and highly exalt him for ever. O ye stars of heaven, bless ye the Lord, O every shower and dew, bless ye the Lord, O all ye winds, bless ye the Lord, O ye fire and heat, bless ye the Lord, | Sing δὴ: praise and highly exalt him for ever.
31. the temple of thy holy glory. The reference may be to the Temple at Jerusalem; verses 62 f. seem to imply that the Temple services were observed at the time this poem was written. On the other hand, verses 14 f. state that there were neither Temple nor services. Thus it would seem that the Prayer and the Song belong to different periods. In this verse, however, the reference may be to the Heavenly Temple; the following verses refer to God as in heaven,
32, 33. LXX has these verses in the reverse order.
32. sittest upon the cherubim. A favourite title of Yahweh, e.g. 2 Sam. vi. 2. The original reference was to the Ark, but the Ark disappeared before the Exile and was not replaced, Jer. iii. 16. Unless this is the mere repetition of a conventional phrase, the cherubim here, as in Ezek. i, are supernatural beings.
highly exalted, ὑπερυψωμένος ; LXX ‘glorified’, δεδοξασμένος.
33. on the throne. LXX ‘on the throne of glory’, i.e. ‘glorious throne’.
34. of heaven. LXX and Syr. omit.
35-65. The Prayer Book Benedzcite ; cf. Introd., § 7.
Ben Cha Β5: ὉΠ 22,
Sing his praise and highly exalt him for ever. This refrain, slightly varied in verse 52, is repeated up to and including verse 66. Cf. Ps. cxxxvi, where the refrain, ‘For his mercy endureth for ever,’ is repeated in each of the twenty-six verses ; cf. cxlviii, cl, and cxxxv. I-3, 19-21.
36, 37. LXX reverses the order of these two verses.
all ye waters. Some texts have ‘ye waters and all things’.
39. O all ye powers of the Lord, bless ye the Lord. So LXX of Ps, cili. 21, except that the psalm has ‘his’ for “of the Lord’. The Hebr. is Y8I¥, E.V. ‘his hosts’; cf. ‘Yahweh Sebaoth’, ‘Lord of hosts’; in which phrase ‘hosts’ referred at various times to (a) the actual Israelite armies, () the heavenly bodies, (c) the angels. As the present writer is using a conventional phrase, he may have had no definite idea of what he meant by it. The Vatican MS. of Theodotion has ‘ Let every power bless the Lord ’.
40. Syr. marks this verse as spurious, but it is well supported and is required by the context. : i
42. every. Rothstein proposes to omit with Pesh.; cf. 44 ff, where there is no ‘every’ before the various pairs.
The Alexandrine MS. of Theodotion and LXX insert here the verses numbered 45, 46, in A.V., thus :—
‘45. O ye winter and summer (LXX, frost and cold), bless ye, &c. 46. O ye dews and storms of snow, bless ye, &c. ‘Winter and summer’, in Alex. MS. ‘cold and burning wind’. 45-51. The order of these verses varies in different authorities. Thus LXX has 45, 46, 49, 50, 47, 48, 51. 45 is a doublet of 48 or, according to LXX, of 50, of which 46 is also partly a doublet.
THE SONG OF THE THREE CHILDREN 47-65
O ye nights and days, bless ye the Lord, O ye light and darkness, bless ye the Lord, O ye cold and heat, bless ye the Lord, O ye frosts and snows, bless ye the Lord, O ye lightnings and clouds, bless ye the Lord, O let the earth bless the Lord, Let it sing Ais praise and highly exalt him for ever. O ye mountains and hills, bless ye the Lord, O all ye things that grow on the earth, bless ye the Lord, O ye seas and rivers, bless ye the Lord, Sing “is praise and highly exalt him for ever. O ye fountains, bless ye the Lord, O ye whales, and all that move in the waters, bless ye the Lord, O all ye birds of the heaven, bless ye the Lord, Sing Ads praise and highly exalt him for ever. O [all] ye beasts and cattle, bless ye the Lord, O ye sons of men, bless ye the Lord, O Israel, bless ye the Lord, O ye priests of the Lord, bless ye the Lord, O ye servants of the Lord, bless ye the Lord, O ye spirits and souls of the righteous, bless ye the Lord, O ye saints and meek-hearted, bless ye the Lord,
48. cold and heat, ψῦχος καὶ καῦμα. Alex. MS. of Theod. ‘frost (πάγος) and cold’, apparently a variant of the LXX (verse 49, A.V.) © O ye frosts (πάγοι) and cold, bless ye’, &c. '
ΕΙΣ Ἡνδε τὺ πάχναι. Vatican MS. ‘frost’. Both πάγος and πάχνη render “WDD ‘hoar-frost’, and πάγος also renders alt rost’. y
56, 55. LXX has these verses in reverse order, i.e. 55, 56, as in A.V.
55. fountains. LXX ‘showers and fountains’.
57. whales, κήτη, sea-monsters or huge fishes; κῆτος is used in the LXX for 0°33 ‘sea-monsters’, Gen. i. 21, for Jonah’s ‘fish’, 33, and for the mythical sea-monsters, Leviathan, Job iii. 8, and Rahab, Job xxvi. 12.
all that move, &c. Cf. Lev. xi. 46.
beasts and cattle, τὰ θηρία καὶ τὰ κτήνη; LXX imoba καὶ θηρία τῆς γῆς; Χ 1: 24... ds ΠΣ ΞΕ ak the TE ρ ny 5 τετράποδα καὶ θηρία τῆς γῆς ; cf. LXX of Gen. 1. 24, quadrupe
62. O ye priests of the Lord. Vat. MS. of Theod. omits ‘of the Lord’; the margins of LXX and Syr. have ‘ye priests, servants of the Lord’.
63. Ο ye servants of the Lord. Vat. MS. of Theod., LXX, and Syr. omit ‘of the Lord’. These are temple ministrants, perhaps Levites; cf. Ps, cxxxiv. 1, Cxxxv. I, 20.
64. O ye spirits and souls of the righteous. ‘Spirit’, πνεῦμα, represents 117, sometimes the divine element in man , ‘soul’, ¥3, often the vital principle. The verse is one of a series appealing to various classes of living men, so that it also refers to the living, ‘righteous souls,’ not souls of the departed.
65. saints and meek-hearted. ‘Saint’, ὅσιος, and ‘meek-hearted’, ταπεινὸς τῇ καρδίᾳ, represent the Hebr. hasid and ‘anav or ὑγιῆ, which in post-Exilic times were technical terms for members of the nationalist party which insisted
iae SONG OF THE THREE, CHILDREN 66-68
O Ananias, Azarias, and Misael, bless ye the Lord, Sing δὲς praise and highly exalt him for ever. For he hath rescued us from Hades, and saved us from the power of death, And delivered us from the midst of the burning fiery furnace, even out of the midst of the fire hath he delivered us. O give thanks unto the Lord, For he is good; for his mercy exduveth for ever. O all ye that worship the Lord, bless the God of gods, Sing ἀξ praise, and give thanks unto him;
on the strict observance of the Law. “ας and ‘anav or ‘an? occur in the same context of the true believer in Ps, xvili. 25, 27; Ixxxvi. 1 f.; cxlix. 1, 2,5,9. In Matt. xi, 29, Christ speaks of Himself as mpavs καὶ ταπεινὸς τῇ καρδίᾳ, ‘meek and lowly of heart.’
Verses 66-68 are probably an addition; verse 66 was added to connect the hymn with the ‘ Three Children’, Verses 67, 68 were added from the psalm as a closing doxology, the clause ‘ O all ye that worship the Lord’ being introduced later, possibly in order to bring in a reference to proselytes; cf. on verse 10. These verses probably displaced an original conclusion, less suitable to the present context of the hymn.
66. Cf. on verse I.
Hades, adov, the Hebr. S/eo/, the abode of the dead.
burning fiery furnace, lit. ‘furnace burning of flame’; LXX and some texts of Theod. omit ‘ furnace’, leaving ‘from the midst of the burning flame’.
67 exactly = LXX of Ps. cxxxv. 1 (Hebr. cxxxvi. 1). good, χρηστός, ‘benevolent and benevolent.’ In Ps. cxxxv. 1 and elsewhere in LXX it is used to render 00, ‘good’. 68. ye that worship the Lord, οἱ σεβόμενοι τὸν x. Cf. on verse 10. the God of Gods. Cf. Ps. cxxxvi. 2. LXX adds at the end, ‘and for ever and ever,’ καὶ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τῶν αἰώνων.
§ 1. CONTENTS OF THE STORY OF SUSANNA, AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS IN INTRODUCTION,
Two elders are made judges in a Jewish community. One evening they see a Jewess walking in her husband’s garden, and both become enamoured of her. Next morning they detect each other near the garden, acknowledge to each other their passion, agree to accost the woman, and are repulsed with scorn. To protect themselves they must accuse the woman; they betake themselves to the synagogue of the city and issue a summons to Susanna. She appears with her household, and is ordered to be unveiled. The elders appear as witnesses before the assembled people. They aver that while they were walking in her husband’s garden, they detected the woman in company with a youth who escaped. Being arrested she refused to tell who her paramour was. The official standing of the elders leads the whole synagogue to believe the evidence and to condemn Susanna.
On her way to execution, a youth (Daniel) questions the verdict, reopens the trial, and examines the two elders separately. The one says the crime took place under a mastick tree ; the other says under a holm tree. The contradiction condemns both. +The synagogue applauds the young man because he had proved them to be false witnesses. ‘And as the Law prescribes, they did unto them as they had wickedly devised against their sister. The elders are gagged, cast into a ravine, and destroyed by fire from heaven.
The inspired sincerity of youth, by means of cross-examination, prevented a judicial murder, therefore let youth be honoured.
The later version of Theodotion locates the scene in Babylon when Daniel was ‘a young lad’. The house of Joakim, husband of Susanna, is the resort of the people and place of trial. The scene in the garden is more detailed.
This story of Susanna is a parable intended to illustrate the value and necessity of cross- ἢ examination of witnesses. It also seeks to vindicate the execution of false witnesses, although their « victim may be delivered before his sentence was carried out. The story is a product of the» Pharisaic controversy with the Sadducees in the later years of Alexander Jannaeus, ¢c. 95-80 B.C. The original language was the literary Hebrew of that period. A later recension of the Hebrew named the Deliverer Daniel, and associated the story with Daniel conceived as an historical person living in Babylon in the early years of the Captivity. This subsequent association with Daniel is the main cause of the differences between Theodotion’s version and the LXX. The story circulated independently, and was sometimes associated with the name of Habakkuk. The LXX before the Christian era placed it in an appendix to Daniel; Theodotion and the Uncials, in the interests of chronology, make Susanna the opening chapter of Daniel. The Hebrew MSS. now extant have no claim to be considered the original of the Greek versions.
δ 5. DIED.
In the earliest MSS. the story has no name, being part οἵ Δανιηλ BA; Δανιηλ κατα τοῦ Θεοδοτιωνος Ὁ. In Codex Chisianus, LXX Dan. is entitled Δανιηλ κατα τοὺς Ὁ. This title is repeated at the end of Dan. xii; Dan. xiii is headed Σουσαννα. Codex Chisianus gives Theodotion’s version under the curious title ro ep aypytvos Δανιηλ, Susanna being c. 13; 6. 14, which follows, has the superscription ἐκ προφητείας ᾿Αμβακοὺμ υἱοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐκ τῆς Φυλῆς Λευί. The Syriac Hexapla makes the latter title include Susanna. A codex from Athos: ὁράσεις (1. ὅρασις ?) ἕνδεκα τοῦ προφήτου Δανιήλ deinde sequitur περὶ τοῦ ‘ABBaxodp. His omnibus praemittitur περὶ τῆς Συσάννης Another Greek title is Διακρισις Δανιηλ.3
Syriac Versions gaaay JM&.sab History of Shushan Pesh., Lag. 1; JMwtsag καθὰ Jobo Lag. 2; ‘the book of the youthful Daniel, the history of Shushan πο, JNeas Harkleensian edition ; ‘Book of the Women’ (i.e. Susanna, Judith, Ruth, Esther) in Bible of Jacobite Syrians.
) De Habacuci prophetae vita atgue aetate, ὃ 13, Franz Delitzsch, 1842. * Walton, Polyg/oZ, vi, p. 191.
The Vulgate places Daniel between Ezekiel and Hosea as ‘ propheteia Danielis’, Susanna being Gs ΤΌ:
The Arabic version has an invocation of the Trinity, and ‘begins to translate the prophecy of the prophet Daniel whose prayer be for us! Amen.’
In general literature the designation varies, e.g. τὸ δρᾶμα τῆς Σωσαννίδος, Nicolas (of Damascus ?) ‘ Pistill (epistle) of Swete Susan’, Scots poems of the fourteenth century.
The position in which Susanna is inserted is variable. It precedes the canonical Daniel in BAQ Old Latin and Copto-Memphitic Versions; it is appended after Dan. xii in LXX, Syrotetraplar Version of LX X, Vulgate and Versions based on it.
These titles reflect variety of opinion as to the origin, authorship, and character of the story. There is uncertainty as to whether the book is history, prophecy, apocalypse, apocryphal or canonical scripture.
The Codex Chisianus 87, first published at Rome in 1772, is for Susanna, as for Daniel, the sole authority for the Greek of the Septuagint. It is a ninth-century cursive, and at the end of Dan. xii says it was copied from an exemplar with this subscription : ἔγραφη ἐκ τῶν τετραπλῶν ἐξ ὧν καὶ παρετέθη. Its text is,thus only once removed from the recension of the LXX made by Origen c. A.D. 240. The Codex Chisianus receives important corroboration from the Syro-Hexaplar Codex, written in Alexandria A.D. 616-617 by Mar Paulus of Mesopotamia. The LXX text from Origen’s Hexapla is rendered literally into Syriac. The agreement of Chisianus with the Syro-Hexaplar gives assurance for the LXX text of Susanna as approved by Origen. The Old Latin versions and quotations in the Fathers do not suffice to fix a generally received text at an earlier period. Theodotion’s version of Susanna was adopted into the Greek Bible in place of LXX. It has thus all the MS. evidence available for the Greek Daniel in the Church Bible, and is found in Codex aticanus B, Codex Alexandrinus A, and in Cod. Marchalianus Q, sixth century. The text here used is that of Swete, vol. iii.
Among MSS. two in Hebrew require notice, because the question of a Semitic original is much discussed, and because one of these MSS. has been supposed to contain the Semitic original of certain apocryphal] books.
In Bodley’s Library at Oxford is a MS. (Heb. d. 11, Catalogue No. 2797) called Sepher hasz- Zikhronoth, compiled by Asher hal-Levi about A.D. 1325, written in German rabbinical character. It contains legendary matter illustrating Biblical history from the Creation to the time of the Maccabees. The catalogue describes the contents of the part preceding Susanna as a Hebrew translation of the Aramaic passages in Daniel by Yerahmeel,.., the Aramaic text of the Song of the Three Children, the history of Bel and the Dragon in Syriac in Hebrew characters without a Hebrew translation. In fol. 74 ὁ begins the Midrash concerning Ahab and Zedekiah (Jer. xxix. 21). Fol. 75a and 7564 contain the Story of Susanna in Hebrew, occupying fifty-three lines. A later hand has headed the page: 521 "2 mew nvyn. The story itself begins a new paragraph headed mwiw nwyo Ar After Susanna the history of Nebuchadnezzar is resumed. The compiler considered the elders identical with the false prophets mentioned by Jeremiah, and located the story in Babylon. Has this Hebrew text any claim to be considered the original of the LX X and Theodotion ? The Greek versions have some thirty verses nearly identical ; in these passages this MS. omits much, adds not a little, and freely paraphrases the rest. Two translators, however arbitrary, could not make this text responsible for the agreements or divergences that exist in LXX and Theodotion. The language is in parts a fair imitation of Biblical Hebrew: in other parts it is not; e.g. v. 23 0 fol. 75, 1. 18, “iow meas. pin ὉΝΣ yen Sy soar oaan Syn mem priya. ὍΣ ΠΟΙΒΝῚ Ὁ apy; fol. 76, 1. 29, a supplement to θ' v. 59 neNT wn ἸΒΟΠῚ oN ΠῚ ΝΟΥ FN AT ND pa ΝΘ; for 737 we find ‘77 three times; for ‘thereupon’ 3% with a Perf. three times ; twice there appears 1n37 N33 for ‘the garden of his house’. The compiler of the MS. evidently knew Syriac, and may have carelessly followed some Syriac version in writing the story for the amusement of his heirs male. His object appears in his preface: ‘Blessed be my descendants, and may they be established if they fulfil my wishes.’
The second Hebrew MS. is also in the Bodleian (Heb. MS. e. 12, Catal. No. 2779). The volume, with which the leaf containing Susanna is bound up, contains hymns, astronomical tables, &c., disorderly arranged. The copyist of fol. 3 signs himself Mordecai ben Samuel, and finished his work
1 Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, vol. (xvi, 1894, ‘The Unknown Aramaic Original of Theodotion’s Additions to the Book of Daniel,’ pp. 280-90, 312-17.
Susanna occupies both sides of one folio, 55, thirty-five lines on the first page, thirty-four on the other. The story conforms closely to the Greek of Theodotion, so closely that either the Vulgate or Theodotion must have been used by the translator into Hebrew. The additions and omissions in Heb. e. 12 are not many and not important. The garden, τ. 3, ‘has all kinds of trees’; the elders are called ‘priests’; the maids fetch soap going out ‘by the doors of the house’. The Hebrew is more idiomatic than in MS. d. 11. Yet here too we have a version, The writer has not understood v. 5, yet has tried to be faithful to the obscurity of the Greek. 892 DMD WwW fOIT INN. IS wyn Aoans ἸΞΟῚ oyans DAW WIP) DWNT DM|wWAD S3ap [pyn] pyn no 5. DEW A. Again, in vw. 15 he has failed to recognize the Greek form of pvov Dinmd and renders: ΠῚΡ DY 932 AMS OMNI TY νων mesy pnnd nays nw py ob anya when ova. In τ. 18 he ignores the gender in the verbs ; περιπατούντων ἡμῶν ywabmwa v. 36; the comparative he renders by ἼΠν", ἐνδοξότερον 1333 ANY Ὁ. 4; αἱρετόν po. 210 ANY. That he used Theodotion and not the Vulgate appears to follow from his treatment of v. 22: καὶ ἀνεστέναξεν Σ. καὶ εἶπεν Στενά μοι πάντοθεν Ὁ an AMIN ΘΝ ΠῚ ΠΟ MINN). Here he reproduces the repetition of the sound. He ignores the play on the names of the trees.
These two Hebrew MSS. are of some interest as showing the Jewish attitude to the story during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. They also illustrate the facility with which every phrase of the Greek can be reproduced in Hebrew.
Two forms of the Old Latin version of Daniel can be traced. Burkitt? finds that the tract De Pascha computus, dated A.D. 243, is the earliest Latin follower of Theodotion’s Greek for Daniel. But ‘the earliest Latin version of Daniel as witnessed by Tertullian, S. Victorinus of Pettau, and partly by S. Cyprian was made from the LXX’. ‘The text of Daniel used by Tertullian is a form of the LXX differing slightly from Origen’s edition, but agreeing most closely with the quotations of Justin Martyr’ (ib. p. 23). In Sabatier? the Versio Antiqua preserves about forty-four verses of Susanna out of the sixty-five in the Vulgate. In these Theodotion’s version is much more obvious than the LXX. The verses at the beginning are given; and Sabatier adds, ‘ Haec Susannae historia, si Flaminio Nobilio fides, in omnibus vetustis libris est principium Danielis, . . . in multis inscribitur Daniel ut in nostra; in quibusdam Svoavva: in aliquo Διακρισις Δανιηλ. 5 In Cod. Wirceburgensis Palim. sixth century, Susanna vv. 2-10 survive.
The Vulgate. St. Jerome’s preference for Theodotion’s Susanna led to the disappearance of the LXX Susanna. St. Jerome says the churches of his time read Daniel according to Theodotion, the LXX Daniel being long ago discarded. ‘ Hoc cur acciderit, nescio’; but after comparing both versions with the Semitic original in the rest of Daniel, he agrees that sound judgement has been shown in substituting Theodotion. The Vulgate therefore puts Theodotion’s Greek into Latin. At the end of Dan. xii, this note precedes Susanna: ‘ Hucusque Danielem in Hebraeo volumine legimus. Quae sequuntur usque ad finem libri de Theodotionis editione translata sunt.’ Jerome therefore had never seen a Hebrew or an Aramaic Susanna. The Vulgate has an extra verse at the end, v. 65 ‘Et rex Astyages appositus est ad patres suos et suscepit Cyrus Perses regnum eius.’ This error in chronology belongs to Bel and the Dragon, which follows in c. 14.
Syriac. The LXX Susanna is faithfully reproduced in Syriac in the Codex Siro-estrangelo Bibliothecae Ambrosianae. Bugatus * gives this note after Dan. xii from the Syriac: ‘ Descriptus est ab exemplari in quo erat adnotatio haec: descriptus est a Tetraplis cum quibus etiam collatus est.’ Swete and others refer to the MS. as ‘Codex Syro-Hexaplaris Ambrosianus’. As Origen had no Hebrew for Susanna, he must have had two columns blank in his Hexapla; the names Tetrapla and Hexapla here evidently refer to the same text. This version was made at Alexandria by Mar Paulus of Mesopotamia, in the years A.D. 616-617. It is an exact translation, and serves to fix the LXX text as approved by Origen A.D. 240.
Walton’s Polyglot gives two Syriac versions, W, the Peshitta, W, the Philoxenian or Harkleensian made by Thomas, Bishop of Heraklea about A.D. 616. Both are based on Theodotion, but make additions in sympathy with the story. Two other Syriac versions are edited by Lagarde,® from two codices in the British Museum. These MSS. belong, one to the ninth, the other to the tenth century.
1 Burkitt, Zze Old Latin and the Itala, p. 7. ἢ Bibliorum Sacrorum Latinae versiones antiguae, 1751. = Kennedy, DB (Hastings), art. ‘Old Latin Versions’. * “Daniel secundum editionem LXX interpretum ex tetraplis desumptam, ex codice siro-estranghelo Bibliothecae Ambrosianae Syriace edidit Caietanus Bugatus Mediolani 1788.’ ° Apocryphi Syriace, Lagarde, 1861.
They resemble Walton’s first Syriac version ‘Apud Waltonem versio duplex ‘est, altera fere cum nostris consonans’. In the last twenty verses the variations between these two versions (le lenyrare considerable. E
Coptic Versions. The Copto-Memphitic was based on Theodotion’s version. It may have been made by the beginning of the fourth century. ‘Hoc unum statuemus, interpretem nempe coptomemphiticum magnam semper fidem Theodotioni habuisse, quam vero textus Theodotionei recensionem secutus fuerit, certo definiri non posse.’} In this version Susanna is found at the beginning of Daniel.
No fragments of Susanna appear to have survived in the Sahidic version? The ‘ Song’ appears
Arabic. John, Bishop of Seville A.D. 719, made an Arabic version of the Bible from the Latin Vulgate as it is supposed." The version in the Polyglots is derived from an old MS. of Greek akin to A.t| The version of Susanna in Walton conforms to the Vulgate. The two trees are called sandayan 355% and ale summag ; but no attempt is made to reproduce these sounds in the verbs.
The new elements in the versions have been supposed, especially in the Harkleensian Syriac, to be independent gleanings from tradition (Briill, Ball). The fidelity of the translators has been impaired by the warmth of their feelings ; e.g. Susanna is only a few days betrothed to Joachim, and the rest of her life is passed in widowhood, day and night being devoted to the service of the Lord (Syr. Harkl.). Susanna is set free from her chains, ibid. Hebrew ‘ the elders, the accursed rascals’, &c.
ὃ 5. THE ORIGINAL TEXT.
‘ Things originally spoken in Hebrew have not the same force in them when they are translated into another tongue.’ So testified the younger Ben-Sira, c. 130 B.C., when he ‘ laboured to interpret * in Greek the Hebrew composition of his grandfather. The Semite and the Aryan had created their language in different worlds. Between them there was no aboriginal kinship such as embraced the Greek and the Roman. The verbal paradigm of Arabic cannot be forcibly adjusted to the moods and tenses of the Greek verb. A Greek could neither pronounce nor write the sound ‘Shoshanna ’. Ben-Sira’s ‘labour’ was in some respects like trying to graft the laurel on the palm. -
The two tense-forms of Semitic, aided in Hebrew by the potent Vav consecutive, offer perceptible resistance to expression in the Greek idiom. One effect is a monotonous repetition of καί introducing clauses which can be more subtly linked by Vav in Hebrew. In the LXX of Susanna καί introduces clauses, where Hebrew Vav consec. or conj. would conveniently replace it, over fifty times; an equal extent of narrative and dialogue in St. John’s Gospel yields such a καί twenty times; St. Luke fifteen ; Josephus twelve times. A Greek-speaking Jew, or a Greek influenced by the LXX, when composing in his own conversational Greek, thus by this test exhibits a freedom which is conspicuously absent from Susanna.® <A similar test shows that αὐτός for Hebrew pronominal suffix occurs much oftener than in the Greek, which an Alexandrian Jew (Philo) writes spontaneously ; cf. Susanna v. 30, v. 9 τὸν νοῦν αὐτῶν LXX, τὸν ἑαυτῶν νοῦν Theodotion ef passim. Redundant auxiliary verbs, 6. g. ἀναστάντες εἶπαν vv. 29, 34, reflect the superfluous %*P*) of Hebrew. καὶ ἐγένετο for "Πν καθὼς ἐχθὲς καὶ τρίτης ἡμέρας Theodotion v. 15, for peow Dion ; σφόδρα = ἽΝ vv. 4, 27, 31; ᾿Ιδού for 739; εἷς τὸν ἕτερον and ἀλλήλους for InN 5X INN or NN bx ws; infinitive with prep. Anon), ἵνα θανατώσουσιν αὐτήν LXX; τοῦ θανατῶσαι αὐτήν Theodotion v. 28 ; σχίσει σου τὴν ψυχήν LXX v. 55; πεπαλαιωμένε ἡμερῶν κακῶν LXX v. 52. Article for vocative οἱ υἱοὶ ᾿Ισραήλ Theodotion τ΄. 48, LXX omits οἱ The versions have οἱ γονεῖς αὐτῆς v. 3 which Hebrew would express by ON) IN (Hebrew MS. e. 12 7 nay), but in v. 30 LXX lets the literal Hebrew appear ἡ γυνὴ σῦν τῳ πατρὶ ἑαυτῆς καὶ τῇ μητρί, Theodotion οἱ γονεῖς αὐτῆς. ᾿
The names of the trees and the paronomasia σχῖνον... σχίσει v. 54 f, πρῖνον . - . καταπρίσῃ v. 58 f. have caused the assumption of a Greek original since Africanus. ‘The history of Susanna is even very certainly a Greek original, as Julius Africanus and Porphyry already showed from the play on the ννοτ5. 7 Theodotion often resorts to transliteration of Hebrew words: νωκεδείμ. Amos i. 1, σαβείρ Dan. xi. 16. He is especially timid about trees: Isa. xli. 19 βραθὺ καὶ θαδαὰρ καὶ θαασούρ,
1 Daniel, Copto-Memphitice, p. xiv, Bardelli, Pisis, 1849. oe "
3. Fragmenta Copto-Sahidica, Ciasca ii, Rome, 1889. 5. Scrivener’, xii. 414.
4 Encycl. Bibl. art. ‘Texts and Versions’, ὃ 64. , ,
5 The English version has skilfully hidden the offensive ‘and’ by ‘albeit, now, then, but, yet, also’.
® Most of these Hebraisms are corroborated and others are indicated by Scholz, Susanna, p. 148, and Bludau, Die Alexandr. Ubersetzung des B. Daniel, p. 183.
T Schiirer, II. ii. § 33 (Eng.).
the fir, the pine, and the box-tree. Had his Hebrew text regarded the tree-names as suggesting the verbs to be used, Theodotion would sore suo have transliterated them. But LXX is here so apt as to be irresistible to Theodotion. The LXX translator will guess rather than transliterate Hebrew. In Dan. ἵν. νὶ, as a translator he exhibits that effrexata licentia’ for which he was dismissed from the Greek Bible, and his version of Daniel and Susanna imprisoned in Cod. Chisianus for 1000 years. This free and lively translator made the pun which has puzzled translators from Mar Paulus to Luther. From internal evidence we conclude that both Greek texts are versions dependent on a Hebrew original.
This conclusion is confirmed by a comparison of the texts of LXX and Theodotion. Half the story coincides in both, sometimes verbally identical, sometimes agreeing in sense though differing in terms. The variation consists in the use of a synonym, ora different construction, or a different order of words, e. g. κάλλιον δέ με LX X 23, αἱρετόν μοί ἐστιν, Theod. = % sip ; ch av. 10, 14, 28535500. ΠΝ ΠΕ nature of the resemblances in the two Greek texts shows that neither writes independently. Where they disagree, they write constrained Greek, e.g. LXX 29, 32, 55, 62 4, and in parts peculiar to Of vv. 15, 24, 39 6, 45. Apart from Semitic idioms in either text, the identity, the nature of the resemblances, and the divergences suggest the dependence of translators. Independent writers could not deal with a common Synoptic tradition as these writers do. Theodotion is a critical reviser of the LXX, but he too defers to an authority superior to the Greek.
Had Susanna been written in Greek to scourge certain officials in Alexandria it could scarcely have been represented as Babylonian history, where Greek was unknown. Its association with the Canon would be unlikely, and, had there been no Hebrew original, it is difficult to see why Symmachus and Theodotion should have taken the trouble to revise a casual tract about an Alexandrian fama. Origen and Jerome could find no Hebrew archetype ; but the second century A. Ὁ. produced versions enough to secure a place for Susanna in the Tetrapla of Origen c. A.D. 240. It appears doubtful whether Aquila included Susanna. Akiba was his tutor, and the Jewish Canon, which was definitely settled c. A.D. go, excluded Susanna. The story would not be popular with elders, and it was the elders who fixed the Canon, Susanna was useless for the polemical purposes of Judaism ; it reflected on the good name of the daughters of Israel and the probity of the judges. It was, therefore, an encumbrance to the Canon and excluded. Hippolytus, Bishop of Rome, already suggests this explanation before A.D. 230. The lemnisci in Syro-estrangelo Tetrapla are accompanied by the marginal note Σ. ©’, implying that Aquila had no Susanna. But unless there had been a Hebrew archetype in the time of Symmachus and Theodotion (A. D. 150-200) there is no sufficient reason why Susanna should have been included in Origen’s Tetrapla.
$6. INTEGRITY OR COMPOSITE NATURE OF THE TEXT.
The story of Susanna is skilfully compacted. Its characters are few and vividly contrasted ; the issues at stake are of universal interest, death or dishonour are the calamities imminent, suspense deepens as the story proceeds, there is an impressive reversal (περιπέτεια) of the intended effect into its direct opposite, at the end nothing requires to be added except the applause of heaven and earth. A feeble woman in the right (cf. Esther, Judith) has triumphed over tyranny in the wrong. The genius of the writer is more important than his material, whether that were chiefly legendary, traditional, or suggested by contemporary politics. Nobody remembers the raw material, nobody forgets the story.
Though the story is coherent and homogeneous, it appears to have suffered alteration in some features. The earlier form of the story seems to have had no connexion with Daniel or Babylon. In LXX Daniel is an intruder. He does not appear till v. 45 and is introduced awkwardly in apposition to νεώτερος. His name is mentioned only four times—vv. 48, 51 a, 52, 59 ; the original vedrepos maintains his anonymous part in vv. 52 a, 55, 60 ; and in the epilogue οἱ νεώτεροι are the heroes, while Daniel is forgotten. The contrast is not between youth and age, but between such an one as the son of Simon ben Shetach and the pair of Sadducean informers and judges who secured his condemnation by false witness. The son, who chose death in order that his father might be able, even on Sadducean principles, to inflict the penalty of death on his false accusers, is the νεώτερος come to — judge justly. This requires us to omit the preface which never belonged to LXX, and which is superfluous in view of LXX v. 7, to delete ἐκ βαβυλῶνος in the dubious and difficult v. 6, and either to read νεώτερος four times for Δανιήλ, or else merely to omit the proper name.
The transference of this original story to Babylon offends against verisimilitude. Recent captives
va E abe is ee the universal opinion of these chapters, but I hope in a future work to show that it is wrong.— xeneral Editor.
were not likely to have synagogues, popular election of judges, the right to carry out a sentence of death. Joakim is too comfortable with a pleasure garden and 500 famuli. The disastrous trees and the stadion have no place in Babylon. ‘ Other cities’ (v. 6) could be Judaean villages with fewer than 120 families; they are a curious addition to ‘Babylon’. Such features are proper to Judaea in the time of John Hyrcanus and his successors.
The career of the individual Daniel also affects the question. The book became known c. 165 B.C. ; by its merit and in the temper of the time it became instantly popular, and was translated into Greek before 1 Maccabees was written. Meanwhile Daniel himself was a nebulous personality, halfangelic, wholly admirable. Theodotion’s version of Daniel in Cod. Chisianus bears the title τὸ ep ayputvos Δανιηλ. Exp is explained as ‘angelus, quo nomine Daniel a barbaris etiam dictus est’, and stands for ὙΠ ‘the Watcher’. To Theodotion ς. A.D. 150, Daniel is still associated with the ‘ Sleepless Angel keeping Watch’. Josephus apologizes to his Roman readers c. A. D. go for summarizing the Book of Daniel as history : ‘ I have described these matters as I have found and read them; but if any one is inclined to another opinion about them, let him enjoy his different sentiments without any blame from me.’? In the time of Alexander Jannaeus Daniel was still a semi-angelic figure, not yet regarded as an historical person who lived during the time his book describes. In the fervour of the struggle between Pharisee and Sadducee a polemical tract would have been derided which made such use of his name as Susanna does. There is evidence that Susanna circulated independently of Daniel. Jerome? (Pref. to Commentary on Daniel) cites the opinion of Eusebius and Apollinarius : ‘Susannae Belisque ac Draconis fabulas non contineri in Hebraico, sed partem esse prophetiae Abacuc filii Iesu de tribu Levi’ In Cod. Chisianus Bel (Dan. xiv) still retains the superscription ἐκ προφητείας ᾿Αμβακοὺμ. υἱοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ ἐκ τῆς φυλῆς Λευί. Suidas * derives ᾿Αμβακούμ from S38 and oy, and comparing ταλιθὰ κούμ in the Gospel, gets the sense πατὴρ ἐγέρσεως. The additions to Daniel were thus by a section of early tradition connected with the name of Habakkuk.
The intrusion of Daniel and Babylon into the story explains the chief differences between the LXX as conceived above and Theodotion’s version. The preface is new and locates the scene in Babylon. The epilogue ignores the νεώτερος of LX X and sings the praise of Daniel. Joakim resembles the Chief of the Captivity mb: wx: at his house justice is administered, in it the trial is conducted. It is easier to identify Joakim with the captive king Jehoiachin; no children are mentioned ; anxiety for the continuance of the Davidic lineage may supply a motive for the methods of Ahab and Zedekias. Details are added chiefly in the scene in the garden. Doors are shut, the maids are dismissed, no other observer is present, the guilty youth escapes though the elders try to prevent him. These variations make the evidence of the elders more telling against themselves. The LXX hurries over the garden scene ; its interest is in the trial.
Theodotion as a translator is ‘simplex et gravis’. His habitual deference to the Hebrew text would not allow him to invent the additions to LXX of Susanna. A second edition in Hebrew adapted to Babylon appears to be the source of his revision and extension of the LXX. When the story had achieved its purpose, when the dictum of Simon ben Shetach, ‘ Make full examination of the witnesses,’ ὁ became dominant, then it became possible to identify the youthful champion of the right with Daniel. Daniel’s name ‘ ΕἸ is my Judge’ commended his claim to be the νεώτερος of the first edition.
§ 7. AUTHORSHIP AND DATE.
Judaea was vigorous under John Hyrcanus and his sons, 139-79 B.C. Not content with subduing the Idumaeans, they also circumcised them: disapproving the Samaritan heresy they demolished the Temple on Gerizim. They did hard fighting, sustained serious reverses, yet kept adding to their territory. At home in Jerusalem Pharisee fought Sadducee with persistent energy. Points in dispute seem trivial: should Pentecost be kept on a Sabbath? should there be a procession at the Feast of Tabernacles? should certain vessels of the Temple be ritually cleansed ? (‘better wash the Sun too,’ sneered the Sadducee) ; should informers be executed before or after their victim has suffered punishment? does the intent to slay in a false witness merit death ? : :
During the first ten years of his reign, 105-95 B.C., Alexander Jannaeus was too busy with foreign war to take an active part in these disputes. At the Feast of Tabernacles, 95 B.C., while acting as high-priest, he poured the libation of water, not on the altar as the Pharisees required, but at his feet. The indignant worshippers pelted their king and high-priest with the festive fruits they carried in their hands. The king called in his Pisidian and Cilician mercenaries, who slew 6,000 people in the Temple. Six years of civil war followed. After his defeat at Shechem Jannaeus had
8 De Habacuci prophetae vita atgue aetate, Delitzsch, 1842. 4 Pirge Aboth \. 10.
800 Pharisees crucified in Jerusalem in one day. To save themselves 8,000 Pharisees fled into exile. Weary of strife, the king asked the rival party what terms might satisfy them. ‘The first condition is thy death, was the reply. Nearing his end, the king appointed his queen Salome (Alexandra) regent and left her this advice, ‘ Fear not the true Pharisees or their honest opponents ; but fear the painted ones who look like the Pharisees, whose works are like the work of Zimri, and who seek the reward of Phinehas.’ The Pharisees made the day of his death an annual festival.
The leader of the Pharisees in this period was Simon ben Shetach. While the Sadducees had control of the law courts, informers by false witness secured a verdict of death against the son of Simon. Before the sentence was carried out, the perjurers confessed; according to Sadducean views, ‘life for life’, ‘eye for eye’, the perjurers could not be executed. The son of Simon, however, refused to be tried again, preferring to die that his accusers might also suffer that penalty. ‘ Father, said he, ‘ if thou desirest that help should come through thee, use me as a threshold.’! Another point contended for by Simon ben Shetach was that informers should be carefully cross-examined.
‘Simon ben Shetach said, “ Make full examination of the witnesses ; but be guarded in thy words, perchance from them they may learn to lie.”’* Both these contentions were realized when the Pharisees came into power at the death of Jannaeus 79 B.C. The Synhedrion was reorganized. ‘ Witnesses in the law courts were no longer to be questioned merely upon the place where, and the time when they had seen a crime committed, but they were expected to give the most detailed and minute evidence connected with it, so that the judge might be more certain of pronouncing a correct judgement, and also more able to entrap the witnesses should they make contradictory statements.’ ὃ
Satire of the Sadducees, the vindication of the need and value of cross-examining informers, the application of the zws ¢alionzs to convicted perjurers are the aim of Susanna. The story appears to belong to the period 95-80 B.c. and to have been written by a supporter of Simon ben Shetach. In the heat of controversy neither party could well call the young detective Daniel. That identification would suggest itself when the tract had achieved its purpose. The language would be Hebrew. Though Aramaic was the common language in Jerusalem at this time, writers, especially a Pharisee, would share the temporary revival of interest in Hebrew. The Semitic idioms in the Greek texts in many cases favour a Hebrew rather than an Aramaic source.
The LXX version may have been made before the Christian Era, but its Hebrew exemplar had already a slender attachment to Daniel. Theodotion, not later than A. D. 180, possibly as early as the latest N. T. writers, used a Hebrew text which contained a new preface and epilogue emphasizing Babylon and Daniel. This conception led to the identification of the two elders with Ahab and Zedekiah and the assimilation of legends about the captive king Jehoiachin.
§ 8. INFLUENCE OF THE BOOK ON LATER LITERATURE.
In Jewish circles the story would prepare the general mind to appreciate the announcement of the Golden Rule. The domestic scandal would not win credit for Judaism from Gentile readers. Josephus does not care to make the story known to the Romans; Akiba about the same time secures its exclusion from the Jewish Canon. It is doubtful whether Aquila included Susanna in his literal Greek version of the Hebrew Bible. Origen can find among learned Jews only vague stories about the elders. Africanus says the story is a fiction of recent date, which had never been in Hebrew. Henceforward Judaism knows the story only as gossip about the methods of the false prophets Ahab and Zedekiah (Jer. xxix, 20-23). Briill* asserts that Nachmani is the only Jewish author of the Middle Ages who mentions Susanna, and his quotation is part of Judith, which he refers to the Roll of Shoshan. The Hebrew MSS. of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries show that individuals were sufficiently interested to make careful copies; and that Jewish tradition still identified the elders with the false prophets in Babylon.
Influence in Christian Literature. The plea for cross-examination of informers may have coloured a | the arguments of Justin in his Afology. The rescripts of Hadrian and Antoninus Pius adopt the principle advocated in Susanna. Antoninus says: ‘If any one hereafter shall go on to inform. against this sort of men, purely because they are Christians, let the persons accused be discharged, although they be found to be Christians, and let the informer himself undergo the punishment.’
In the Greek O.T. of Alexandria the story acquired authority by its attachment to the Book of Daniel, and thus secured the attention of the Church while it lost the regard of the synagogue. The Church hesitated to pronounce it prophecy, or vision, or history. Matt. xxiv. 15 cites Daniel as
1 Jerus. Sanhed. vi. 3. 2 Pirge Aboth i. το.
~ Graetz, Hist. of the Jews (Eng.), ii. 50.
Brill, Das apokryphische Susanna-Buch, 18 .6. A good summary of Briill’s important essay is given Ὁ Ball, Apocrypha, Dr. Wace, ii. 325-30. seas Σ ; ᾿ ΤῊΝ Ἶ
a prophet; the parallel passage in Mark xiii. 14 omits ‘the prophet’ in the earliest MSS. Theodotion and the Syriac and later versions regard Susanna as history ; Jerome, with some hesitation, includes it under prophecy. The allegorical interpretation soon became dominant in the Church. Hippolytus, Bishop of Rome, A. D. 230, writes: ‘Susanna is a type prefiguring the Church ; Joachim her husband prefigures the Christ. The garden is the election of the saints, who like trees that bear fruit are planted in the Church. Babylon is the world ; the two elders are typical of the two nations who plot against the Church, the one being of the circumcision, the other from the Gentiles.’1 The same conception is ably represented in the latest expositor of the Latin Church, Dr. Anton Scholz.”
An incipient phase of this view can be traced in Irenaeus before A.D. 200. In his work contra Flacreses, iv. 26,> Irenaeus quotes, as from Daniel, Susanna vv. 20, 56, 52,53. He is explaining how prophecy has a new meaning after its fulfilment. Any process is mysterious till it is finished. The Jews who deny the Advent fail to understand the prophecies. The true interpretation belongs to sincere disciples of Christ. There are impostors among presbyters who do evil secretly, saying, ‘No one sees us.. To them apply the words of Daniel the prophet, ‘Seed of Chanaan, not of Judah, &c. He enforces this view by reference to Matt. xxiv. 48 f. Irenaeus has no doubt that Daniel is a prophet, that Susanna belongs to his book and describes something that really happened, and that the Divine purpose in the history of the world is made manifest in the Christian revelation. In the light of this new Revelation, casual phrases in the old records acquire a new significance.
Tertullian, de Corona Militis, iv, discussing women’s dress (1 Cor. xi. 5) argues that the interference with Susanna’s veil does not warrant the inference that the veil was customary or necessary for women. He quotes the word στάδιον as in LXX.
Origen defends the canonicity of Susanna and often refers to the book. Jerome gave it a place in the Vulgate. Before the Reformation the story had taken popular and dramatic form. Hildebert, Archbishop of Tours, ‘ Egregius Versificator, had made it the subject of a Latin poem (ce. 1100). From German an Ober-Engadine version had adapted the story for a play ; as the alliterative poems had done for the Scots. Luther's Bible gave Susanna currency in the North as far as Iceland. The Council of Trent made its place in the Canon more secure. In the nineteenth century the Bible Societies, by refusing to circulate the Apocrypha, diminished the fame of Susanna ina section of Christendom. The Anglican Church reads from Susanna in November ; the Latin Church makes use of it on the vigil of the Fourth Sunday in Lent, also in the ‘Ordo commendationis animae’, ‘Libera Domine animam servi tui, sicut liberasti Susannam de falso crimine.’
The subject has been treated pictorially in the Catacombs and also by modern artists.
In Daniel, as in post-exilic literature generally, m7 tends to become xomen ineffabile and is replaced by ὈΠῸΝ and ‘8. Only in Dan. ix does 77 occur, and there it is used seven times: LXX renders Κύριος six times, omits once; Theodotion has Κύριος seven times. In the same chapter (Dan. ix) ‘278 for the Divine Name appears eleven times: LXX renders by Κύριος five times, δεσπότης four times, omits twice: Theodotion by Κύριος consistently eleven times. Further, in this chapter, ods with or without suffixes appears eleven times: LXX renders by Θεύς eight times, Κύριε twice, δέσποτα once; whereas Theodotion renders uniformly by Θεός eleven times. Theodotion avoids δεσπότης, which by his time would mean the Roman Emperor denuded of divine honours. Thus Theodotion is scrupulous and consistent in rendering the Divine Names ; the LXX is irregular and careless of Jewish feeling on the subject. The same motive can be traced in Dan. ix. 26, where Theodotion avoids the LX X term Χριστός for DV, The Hebrew of Susanna as reflected in Theodotion would use ‘218. Οὐρανός for DY vv. 9, 35 is an evasion due to reverence.
In Susanna, vv. 44,62, LXX refers to an angel, while Theodotion does not. This is likely due to inexact translation. In Dan. ii. 11 LXX renders i! DN by ἄγγελος : Dan. iii. 25 Aram.=iii. 92 LXX PIN 72) N01 by ὁμοίωμα ἀγγέλου θεοῦ : Dan. iv. το M2 SY Ὁ WP) VY by ἄγγελος ἀπεστάλη ἐν ἰσχύι ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ : Dan. x. 21 Daw ΝΞ Μιχαὴλ ὁ ἄγγελος. The term ἄγγελος is thus too elastic in LXX to allow any inference as to its difference from Theodotion on the doctrine of angels. Theodotion also refers to ἄγγελος vv. 55, 59. A Sadducee would not have written δ ΟΡ,
The story does not intend to teach anything new in theology. Its theism is incidental and generally accepted. The Law of Moses expresses the will of God: His Word condemns injustice.
1 Greek Text in Pitra, Avzalecta Sacra, ii, p. 256. 7 ᾿ ν ᾿ : 2 Commentar tiber das Buch “ Esther’ mit seinen ‘Zusitzen’ und tiber ‘ Susanna’, Anton Scholz, Wiirzburg, 1892.
5 Migne, vii. 1054. 4 Migne, Latin, ii.
Belief in God makes Susanna prefer death to sinning against God; she trusts in God, Who is not of one generation only, Who perceives the causes of events, knows her innocence, answers her prayer, and inspires her deliverer. On the other hand, an error in theism is the most deadly of errors. Unbelief in God, although veiled by hypocrisy, perverts the elders, leaves them a prey to passion, allows them deliberately to plan murder, and blinds them to the penalties of their conduct. Injustice is the fruit of atheism. That Susanna should represent the Messianic kingdom, Joakim and Helkias the God of Israel, the elders the ungodly powers of the world, can hardly be the intention of the writer (Scholz). Allegory and apocalypse have come from students of the story, not from its author.
§ 10. BIBLIOGRAPHY.
See also in Bibliography for the other Additions to Daniel. (a) TEXT.
LXX. Cod. Chisianus, ed. Rome, 1772, Bugati, Cozza.
Syro-Hexaplar Ambrosianus, Ceriani, 1874.
Theodotion, as in Swete, O.7. in Greek, vol. ili.
Versions. Walton, Polygiot, vi. 191 f.; Lagarde, Apocryphi Syriace, 1861. Old Latin. Sabatier, II, 1751.
Copto-Memphitic. Joseph Bardelli, Pisis, 1849.
Hebrew Versions in MS. Bodleian Hebr. MSS. d. 11 and e. 12.
(ὁ) CRITICAL INQUIRIES.
Commentary by Hippolytus, Bishop of Rome, c. A.D. 230. Part of the Commentary of St. Hippolytus on Daniel, lately discovered by Dr. Basilios Georgiades. J. H. Kennedy, Analecta Sacra, ed. Pitra, ii. 253 ff., 1884. Origen. Fragments of Commentary based on Theodotion in Jerome. Discussion of views of Africanus and Porphyry. Jerome. Preface to Commentary on Daniel. Vulgate. Handbuch zu den Apokryphen des A.T. Fritzsche, Leipzig, 1859. Apokryphen des A.T. Strack und Zockler, 1891. Apocrypha of the O.T. Bissell, 1880. Commentar iiber das Buch Esther mit seinen Zusatzen und tiber Susanna. Anton Scholz, Wiirzburg, 1892. Die Alexandrinische Ubersetzung des Buches Daniel. August Bludau, Freiburg i. B., 1897. Das apokryphische Susanna-Buch by Dr. N. Briill in Jahrbiicher fiir Jiidische Geschichte und Literatur, 111. Jahrgang, Frankfurt am Main, 1877. Commentary on the Apocrypha, ed. by Henry Wace, D.D., 1888; Szsanna, by C. J. Ball. Die Apokryphen des A.T., ed. by E. Kautzsch, 1890; Susanna, by W. Rothstein.
GENERAL.
In Susannam Danielicam. De Celada, 1656, appendix ‘de S. figurata in quo Virginis Deiparae laudes in Susanna adumbratae praedicantur’. fol. 672+ pp. Fine-spun exhortation based on fantastic allegory.
Susanna. Ein oberengadinisches Drama des XVI. Jahrhunderts. Jakob Ulrich, 1888. This is a literal translation from German into Ladino, e.g.‘ Unna bella histoargia da quella seinchia et prusa duonna Susanna.’ The elders are called Achab and Sedechias; the maids are Spondea and Promptula; there is a Judex Dadan, a Notarius, &c.
ἱστορία εκ του Δανιηλ περι τῆς Σωσαννης. Venice, 1682. A paraphrase of the story in Greek elegiacs extending to about 400 lines. Modern Greek constructions are often used.
Scottish Alliterative Poems in riming stanzas, edited by F. J. Amours. Scottish Text Society, 1896-7. ‘The Pistill of Susan, Four Versions from MSS. of Fifteenth Century.’ The Vulgate and Wiclif are here much adorned. The garden has palms, poplars, pears, plowine, junipers, and roses:
‘There were popinjays present (?), nightingales upon nest. Blithe birdies of the best, on blossoms to sit.’
Susanna, or the Arraignment of the Two Unjust Elders. Robert Aylett, D.C.L., 1622. An edifying exposition in English verse for the benefit of ‘our Judges in Westminster Hall’.
The Apocrypha Controversy. Edinburgh, 1826. Susanna ‘is justly characterized as a fable’. The British and Foreign Bible Society was forbidden to expend subscribers’ money in circulating the Apocrypha—‘ these unhallowed
productions of the wisdom and folly of men that have been so presumptuously associated with the sacred oracles of God,’ Resolution, p. 38.
Susanna according to the Septuagint.
1 There dwelt a man in Babylon, and his name 2was Joakim: and he took a wife, whose name was Susanna, the daughter of Helkias, a very 3 fair woman, and one that feared the Lord. Her parents also were righteous, and taught their 4 daughter according to the law of Moses. Now Joakim was a great rich man, and had a fair garden joining unto his house: and to him resorted the Jews; because he was more honour- 5 able than all others. And the same year there were appointed two of the elders of the people to be judges, concerning whom the Lord had spoken when He said that iniquity went forth from Babylon through elder-judges who were thought worthy to govern the people.
6 And cases from other cities also came before them for decision.
Now these men observing a woman of beautiful form, the wife of one of their own brother-Israelites, who was called Susanna,
THE HISTORY OF SUSANNA
Set apart from the beginning of Daniel, because it is not in the Hebrew, as neither the Narration of
The Revised Version of the Greek of Theodotion.
There dwelt a man in Babylon, and his 1 name was Joakim: and he took a wife, whose 2 name was Susanna, the daughter of Helkias, a very fair woman, and one that feared the Lord. Her parents also were righteous, and taught 3 their daughter according to the law of Moses. Now Joakim was a great rich man, and had ἃ 4 fair garden joining unto his house: and to him resorted the Jews; because he was more honourable than all others. And the same year there 5 were appointed two of the ancients of the people to be judges, such as the Lord spake of, that wickedness came from Babylon from ancient judges, who were accounted to govern the people.
These kept much at Joakim’s house: 6 and all that had any suits in law came unto them. Now when the people departed away at noon, 7 Susanna went into her husband’s garden to walk. And the two elders beheld her going in every day, 8
PREFACE. 1-5 a. These verses are marked with /emmzsc¢ in LXX and the margin has A = 9, i.e. Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion. The Syro-Tetrapla has obeli + and margin} ©. These marks apparently signify that Origen’s Tetrapla inserted this preface in the LXX, borrowing it from other versions. The Syriac suggests that Aquila did not include Susanna. The Jewish Canon had rejected Susanna c. A.D. 90, and Aquila conformed closely to Jewish views. The preface comes from a later form of the story, which locates the scene in Babylon, and calls the young detective Daniel. The LXX had some other introduction, probably connecting the story with Palestine, in the time of Alexander Jannaeus.
1. Babylon. The preface (vv. 1-5 a) definitely places the scene in Babylon; cf. ὃ 6, Introd.
Joakim. The proper names Joakim, ‘the Lord will establish,’ Helkias, ‘the Lord is my portion,’ Daniel, ‘ my
judge is El,’ may have been as significant as Melchizedech Howler and Habakkuk Mucklewrath were to readers of Scott. 2, Susanna, mwiy in -Hebr., is reproduced Σουσαννα, also Σωσαννα Breet, Hos. xiv. 6, ‘Israel shall grow as the lily.” The ‘lily’ is used as simile of a bride, Cant. ii. 2; of flower-shaped capitals of pillars, 1 Kings vii. 19; in titles of Psalms xlv. 1, Ix. 1, Ixix. 1, Ixxx. 1. Erman derives from Egyptian sdsez ; and the lotus was an emblem from early times in Egypt. Lane (Araéic Dict.) derives from Persian. In O.T. Susanna is not found as a proper name of a person, but appears in Luke viii. 3. What is called the ‘ poppy-head’ on the coins of John Hyrcanus might come under the name ‘Shoshanna’. Like Esther and Judith, Susanna might thus be an emblem of right ultimately vanquishing might, cf. Scholz, Comm. 2722 doc. The story has doubtless been the cause of the use of ‘Susan’ as a personal name.
“Ὁ model of a chaste and constant Dame, The world all chaste ones hence Susanna name.’—Robert Aylett, 1622.
The Latin Catalogue of Saints has more than twenty who bear the name ‘Susanna’. 5. the same year. This phrase applies to a context which is lost. The Syriac-Harkleensian begins: ‘When
Daniel was twelve years old, there was . . .’ Daniel was 71812 12 when his insight began.
ancients, R.V. for πρεσβύτεροι ; assembly for ἡ συναγωγή, vv. 41,60. The R.V. hesitates to use the terms ‘elders’ and ‘synagogues’ because their existence in Babylon c. 590 B.C. might be felt to be an anachronism. The technical use of the terms suits the conditions in Judaea c. 150-50 B.C. i
such as the Lord spake of, that wickedness. . This rendering is inexact, cf. LXX. ᾿
concerning whom. περὶ ὧν ἐλάλησεν ὁ δεσπότης ὅτι ἐξῆλθεν... A Hebrew split-relative with ὅτι for 3 introducing oratio recta. Cf. LXX Jer. xxiii. 15 ὅτι ἀπὸ τῶν προφητῶν ἐξῆλθεν μολυσμὸς πάσῃ τῇ γῆ. The false prophets Ahab and Zedekiah whom Nebuchadrezzar roasted in the fire for sins like those of the elders, Jer. xxix. 21-23, may be present in the recollection of the writer, and may be responsible for the insertion of this verse. Jewish tradition names the elders Ahab and Zedekiah, and has much to say of their methods. Before the birth of a child they would promise the mother that the child would be a boy; to the neighbours they would say ‘ That woman expects a son but it will be a daughter’. In either case they got a reputation.
daughter of Helkias, wife of Joakim, as she walked g about in her husband’s garden at eventide, were inflamed with love for her; and they perverted their mind and turned away their eyes so as neither to look toward Heaven nor to be mindful of right decisions.
And though both were smitten by desire of her, yet each concealed from the other the evil that possessed them in regard to her; neither 12 was the woman aware of this matter. And as
soon as it was daylight they came stealthily,
evading each other, hurrying ¢o see which should be first to show himself to her and to speak with 13 her. And behold! she was taking her walk according to her wont and the one elder had barely arrived, when lo! the other came up. Then the one began tocross-examine his fellow, demanding, ‘Why art thou gone forth so very early, 14 leaving me behind?’ With that they made confession each to the other of his painful state.
Then said the one to the other, Let us repair to her; and having agreed together on a plan,
they made advance to her and sought to constrain her.
22 But the daughter of Judah answered them, I know that if I do this, it is death to me: and if
I do it not, I shall not escape from your hands.
23 Yet it is better for me not to do this and to fall
into your hands rather than to sin before the Lord.
9. Heaven. οὐρανόν for God; cf. Dan, iv. οὐρανῶν = Mark, Luke, ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ.
and walking ; and they were inflamed with love for her.
And they perverted their own mind, and 9 turned away their eyes, that they might not look unto heaven, nor remember just judgements.
And albeit they both were wounded with her 10 love, yet durst not one show another his grief. For they were ashamed to declare their lust, that 11 they desired to have to do with her. Yet they 12 watched jealously from day to day to see her. And the one said to the other, Let us now go 18 home : for it is dinner time.
So when they 14
were gone out, they parted the one from the other, and turning back again they came to the same place ; and after that they had asked one another the cause, they acknowledged their lust: and then appointed they a time both together, when they might find her alone. it fell out, as they watched a fit day, she went in as aforetime with two maids only, and she was desirous to wash herself in the garden: for it was hot. the two elders, that had hid themselves, and watched her. Bring me oil and washing balls, and shut the garden doors, that I may wash me. did as she bade them, and shut the garden doors, and went out themselves at the side doors to fetch the things that she had commanded them: and they saw not the elders, because they were hid. Now when the maids were gone forth, the 19 two elders rose up, and ran unto her, saying, Behold, the garden doors are shut, that no man 20 can see us, and we are in love with thee; therefore consent unto us, and lie with us. If thou 21 wilt not, we will bear witness against thee, that a young man was with thee: and therefore thou didst send away thy maids from thee. Susanna sighed, and said, I am straitened on every side: for if I do this thing, it is death unto me: and if I do it not, I cannot escape your hands. It is better for me to fall into your 23 hands, and not do it, than to sin in the sight of the Lord. With that Susanna cried with a loud 24 voice: and the two elders cried out against her. Then ran the one, and opened the garden doors. 25
So when the servants of the house heard the cry 26
in the garden, they rushed in at the side door, to see what had befallen her.
17 θ. washing balls, σμήγματα. The same word is used, Esther ii. 3, 9. Hebr. DPA ‘ things for purification’.
22. Death is the penalty imposed on the unfaithful wife, Deut. xxii, 21 ; cf. John viii. 4, τι
Lev. xx. 10; Deut. xxii. 22 ; for unchastity, death by stoning,
And they 18 |
Then 22
But when the elders 27 23, ΔΘ ‘the heavens’ for ‘God’. So in Matt. ἡ βασιλεία τῶν
And there was nobody there save 16 |
Then she said to her maids, 17 |
So these transgressors of the law turned away, vowing vengeance and planning together how they might put her to death. And they came into the synagogue of the city in which they dwelt, where were assembled in council all the Israelites of the place.
: Then the two elders and judges arose and / said, Send for Susanna, daughter of Helkias, ‘a the same who is the wife of Joakim. And } 30straightway they summoned her. And when | the woman appeared with her father and mother, her bondmen and her bondwomen to the number of five hundred also presented themselves, as well 81 as the four little children of Susanna. Now the woman was very delicate.
Yet the lawless pair ordered that she should be unveiled, that they might sate themselves with the beauty of her attraction.
33 Whereat all her attendants and all who knew - 34 her began to weep. Then arose the elders and __ judges and laid their hands upon her head.
But her heart was stayed upon the Lord her - God, and looking upward she wept within her- 35 self, saying, O Lord the eternal God, who | knowest all things before they come into being, Thou knowest that I have not done what these lawless men maliciously allege against me. And
36 the Lord hearkened to her entreaty. Then the F two elders affirmed, We were walking about in 37 her husband’s garden, and as we came round the Stadion, we saw this woman dallying with a man; we stood still and observed them consort- ᾿ 38 ing together, but they were not aware that we were standing by. Then when each of us had confirmed the other, we said, We must find out | 39 Who these persons are. So we came forward _ and her we recognized; but the young man 4o escaped us being concealed by a mask. And | having arrested her, we put the question, Who 4ris the fellow? but she refused to tell us who he was. These things we declare as witnesses. And thewhole synagogue believed them inasmuch as they were elders and judges of the people.
had told their tale, the servants were greatly ashamed : for there was never such a report made of Susanna. And it came to pass on the morrow, 28 when the people assembled to her husband Joakim, the two elders came full of their wicked intent against Susanna to put her to death: and 29 said before the people, Send for Susanna, the daughter of Helkias, Joakim’s wife. So they 30 sent ; and she came with her father and mother, her children, and all her kindred. Now Susanna 31
was a very delicate woman, and beauteous to behold.
And these wicked men commanded her 32 to be unveiled (for she was veiled) that they might be filled with her beauty. Therefore her 33 friends and all that saw her wept. Then the two 34 elders stood up in the midst of the people, and laid their hands upon her head. And she weep- 35 ing looked up toward heaven: for her heart trusted in the Lord.
And the elders said, As 36 we walked in the garden alone, this woman came in with two maids, and shut the garden doors, and sent the maids away. Then a young man, who 37 there was hid, came unto her, and lay with her. And we, being in a corner of the garden, saw 38 this wickedness, and ran unto them. And when 39 we saw them together, the man we could not hold ; for he was stronger than we, and opened the doors, and leaped out. But having taken 40 this zvoman, we asked who the young man was, but she would not tell us: these things do we testify. Then the assembly believed them, as those that were elders of the people and judges:
so they condemned her to death. Then Susanna cried out with a loud voice, and said, O ever-
32. Regulations for dealing with a wife suspected of adultery are given in Num. v. 11-31. The way in which these rules were applied is discussed in detail in Mishna. Sota i. 5 contains the following : ‘Sacerdos arreptis eius vestibus - +. quoad sinum mulieris denudaret : crines quoque eius explicabat. R. Iuda (tamen hic limitat) dicens, si sinum venustum ipsa haberet, non fuisse eum a Sacerdote revelatum: nec capillos solutos, si essent decori” The elders are παράνομοι because they broke this limitation, for the very purpose the rule was intended to prevent. The spectators see in the unveiling an indignity and a foregone assumption of guilt. ‘ ἔ P ΕΝ SoLytie , that they might sate themselves, &c. The phrase ἵνα ἐμπλησθῶσιν κάλλους ἐπιθυμίας αὐτῆς LXX=0' ὅπως ἐμ. τοῦ κάλλους αὐτῆς appears to be due to a mistranslated construct : eo ΠΝ ἘΣ LXX ΡΒ) NINA 34. laid their hands upon her head. Cf. Lev. xxiv. 14, ‘ Bring forth him that hath cursed without the camp : and let all that heard him lay their hands upon his head, and let all the congregation stone him. The elder judges are not assessors in this trial, but witnesses. This is the reason for the laying on of hands ; ct. Bab. Kam. god: nwWy3 Ἵν ὮΝ ΝΥ ‘a witness cannot be made ἃ judge’.‘ Death by stoning imposed the responsibility on the whole congregation ; no one could say whose missile caused death. Here the whole synagogue, guided perhaps by three or twenty-three of its leaders (Synhed. 1), is considered responsible for the verdict. ‘ Ἷ ἜΝ 37. Greek influence in the second century B.C. had induced Jewish youth to practise athletics. a race-course. δε 20 is used to indicate something like a στάδιον in Jerusalem.
bya?
Some cities had
Andas she was being led away to be destroyed, behold! zhere came an angel of the Lord; and as it had been commanded him, the angel bestowed a spirit of discernment upon a young man, 48 this being Daniel. Then separating the crowd
Daniel stationed himself in the midst of them and said, Are ye so foolish, O sons of Israel, that without examination and knowledge of the truth ye have condemned a daughter of Israel to 51° die? Now therefore take these men apart from each other, that I may cross-examine them.
51» And when they were separated, Daniel said to the synagogue: Now consider not that these men are elders nor say, They can never be false; but I will examine them with reference to that which
52 is suggested to me. And he summoned one of the two, so they brought forward the elder before the young man. Then said Daniel to him:
Hearken, hearken, thou ancient of evil days!
now have overtaken thee thy sins which thou
hast committed in time past.
Being trusted to hear and to decide capital cases, thou hast both condemned the innocent and hast acquitted the guilty, although the Lord saith: ‘The innocent and the righteous slay thou not.’
Now therefore under what tree and at what sort of place in the garden hast thou seen them together? The impious man answered, Under 55a mastick tree. Then said the youth, Right well hast thou borne false witness against thine own soul; for the angel of the Lord will cleave thy soul this day.
lasting God, that knowest the secrets, that knowest all things before they be: thou knowest 43 that they have borne false witness against me, and, behold, I must die; whereas I never did such things as these men have maliciously invented against me.
And the Lord heard her 44 voice. Therefore when she was led away to be 45 put to death, God raised up the holy spirit of a young youth, whose name was Daniel: and he 46 cried with a loud voice, I am clear from the blood of this woman. Then all the people turned them 47 toward him, and said, What mean these words that thou hast spoken? So he standing in the 48 midst of them said, Are ye such fools, ye sons of Israel, that without examination or knowledge of the truth ye have condemned a daughter of Israel?
Return again to the place of judgement : for these 49
have borne false witness against her. Wherefore 50 all the people turned again in haste, and the elders said unto him, Come, sit down among us, and show it us, seeing God hath given thee the honour of an elder. Then said Daniel unto 51 them, Put them asunder one far from another, and I will examine them. So when they were 52 put asunder one from another, he called one of them, and said unto him, O thou that art waxen old in wickedness, now are thy sins come home to thee which thou hast committed aforetime, in 53 pronouncing unjust judgement, and condemning the innocent, and letting the guilty go free; albeit the Lord saith, The innocent and righteous shalt thou not slay. Now then, if thou sawest 54 her, tell me, Under what tree sawest thou them companying together? Who answered, Under
a mastick tree. hast thou lied against thine own head ; for even now the angel of God hath received the sentence of God and shall cut thee in two.
And Daniel said, Right well 55>
44-45. Mishna Synhed. vi. 1, 2 prescribes appeals for fresh evidence after the verdict is given, ‘When the person to be stoned is led out, a herald must precede proclaiming these words: This person N. M., son of N. M., is on the way to be stoned, for the crime (specified), on the testimony of N. M. and N. M.; whosoever can show his innocence, let him approach and set forth his reasons.’ If none appeared, when they came within ten cubits of the place of stoning, the condemned was invited to confess, in deference to Joshua vii. 19.
51>. with reference to that which is suggested to me, κατὰ τὰ ὑποπίπτοντά μοι. of his suspicion. The Philoxenian Syriac says ‘according as God has given to me’.
before his evidence is proved inconsistent with that of the second elder. of the examination.
Divine inspiration is the source ἢ Daniel condemns the first elder y ‘a incon 2 5. ν His insight into their past is not the result — ‘ ( Any indication of the will of the Invisible King was sufficient in the Theocracy to supersede the operation of ordinary rules and restrictions ; the theory being that the Divine Sovereign chose His own ministers when
and how and whence He pleased’ (Ball, 221 Zoc.). The elders of v. 50, Theodotion, are thus not the two who have given witness, but their colleagues on the bench.
53: The innocent and the righteous slay thou not. OUK QATFOKTEVELS,
54-59. Under a mastick tree, ἅς. ὑπὸ σχῖνον... σχίσει and ὑπὸ mpivov . . . katampion, Ψ. 590. Origen says (Epistle to Africanus, 48 f.): ‘This passage gave me no rest and I often wondered about it, so I betook me to several Hebrews, asking what πρῖνος was called in their language, what was the verb for πρίζειν, also how they rendered σχῖνος and σχίζειν’ His inquiry was intended to refute the contention of Africanus that the play on the words proved that = | Susanna had been composed in Greek, not in Hebrew. That Hebrew could use paronomasia eveninadeath sentence _ appears from Achan’s condemnation by Joshua, vii.25. That the LXX would copy a play upon words appears, e.g-,in | Judges x. 4: DY... DY ‘colts... cities’, Gk. πώλους .. . πόλεις. Some of the versions succeed in preserving ©
the Greek play in Syriac. With some liberty in choosing the trees, the play can be furnished by Hebrew, e.g. T38, _ which occurs in Cant. vi. 11: ‘=
Quoted exactly from Exod. xxiii. 7 LXX ἀθῷον καὶ δίκαιον
{TAD OFT Dyya Wary ” yop tae ty sy wer dy mvp aon ays WA oN NOA NN Other ways are given in Ball, Afoer. ii. 324. |
Then removing the one he gave command to bring the other before him, to whom he said: Wherefore is the seed that is in thee become perverted as ¢hat of Sidon and not as that of Judah? beauty has beguiled thee, base passion ! 57 Even so were ye wont to do with daughters of | Israel, who through their fear companied with / you; but a daughter of Judah scorned to endure 58 your pestilent licence. Now therefore tell me, ᾿ς Under what tree and in which spot of the enclosure didst thou detect them consorting | together? Who answered, Under a holm tree. | 59 Then said Daniel, Thou sinner! even now the angel of the Lord is standing with drawn sword, till the people shall make an end of thee, that he may cut thee to pieces. Then the whole synagogue shouted aloud in praise of the young man because from their own mouth he had proved them both to be confessedly false witnesses. And they dealt with them according as the Law prescribes, doing to them just as they maliciously intended against their sister. So when they had gagged them, they led them out and hurled them into a chasm; then the angel of the Lord cast fire in the midst of them. And thus was innocent blood kept safe on that day. 62” For this cause the young men are beloved of 62° Jacob by reason of their sincerity. And as for us, let us watch over young men that they may become men of worth, for so young men will be God-fearing, and there shall be in them a spirit of knowledge and discernment for ever and ever.
Gemara Makkoth 5 8).
the Sadducees Zo silence .. .’. imposed, no further defence can be offered.
preferred the younger, Gen. xlviii. 14 (Briill).
sons virtuous young men.’
(Graetz, History of the Jews, Engl. edition, vol. ii, p. 50).
Cf. Code of Hammurabi, § 3: ‘If a man in a case pending judgement . . spoken, if that case be a capital suit, that man shall be put to death.’ μ 60. ἐφίμωσαν, ‘muzzle’, ‘put in the pillory’. Cf. Matt. xxii. 34, ‘The Pharisees when they heard that He had put Possibly more than a mere verbal coincidence. Strangling or suffocation 15 mentioned in the Talmud as the mode of death for false witness (Briill on v. 60-62). Here it denotes symbolically that silence is
So he put 56 him aside, and commanded to bring the other, and said unto him, O thou seed of Canaan, and not of Judah, beauty hath deceived thee, and lust hath perverted thine heart. Thus have ye dealt 57 with the daughters of Israel, and they for fear companied with you: but the daughter of Judah would not abide your wickedness.
Now there- 58 fore tell me, Under what tree didst thou take them companying together? Who answered, Under a holm tree. Then said Daniel unto him, Right well hast thou also lied against thine own head: for the angel of God waiteth with the sword to cut thee in two, that he may destroy
With that all the assembly cried out with 60 a loud voice, and blessed God, who saveth them that hope in him. And they arose against the 61 two elders, for Daniel had convicted them of false witness out of their own mouth: and accord- 62 ing to the law of Moses they did unto them in such sort as they maliciously intended to do to their neighbour: and they put them to death, and the innocent blood was saved the same day.
Therefore Helkias and his wife praised God for 63 their daughter Susanna, with Joakim her husband, and all the kindred, because there was no dishonesty found in her. And from that day forth 64 was Daniel had in great reputation in the sight of the people.
60-62. the Law prescribes. Deut. xix. 16-21 prescribes the treatment of a false witness, v. 19, WWN3 Dy) i yd nivyd DM, LXX καὶ ποιήσετε αὐτῷ ὃν τρόπον ἐπονηρεύσατο τῷ πλησίον ποιῆσαι (cf. 6’). On the application of this rule the Pharisees and Sadducees differed acutely during the reign of Alexander Jannaeus, 105-79 B.C. If the person falsely accused has actually suffered death, only then shall this regulation be carried out, said the Sadducees. The Pharisees maintained that if the perjury has been detected before its victim has suffered, then the same penalty must be inflicted on the false witnesses. The elders must therefore perish, in accordance with the Pharisaic interpretation of Deut. xix. 19 (Hamburger Real-Encycl. fiir Bibel und Talmud, ii. 1050 ; Mishna Makfothi. 6 ; Sifre on Deut. xix. 19;
. has not justified the word that he has
62», beloved of Jacob. The patriarch Jacob trusted his younger sons Joseph and Benjamin, and of Joseph’s sons For ἁπλότης cf. τ Macc. ii. 60. ; ᾿
62°. let us watch over young men, καὶ ἡμεῖς φυλασσώμεθα εἰς υἱοὺς δυνατοὺς νεωτέρους. Meaning must be sought from the Semitic original : on > DYI 722 HIN) For εἰς ? as translated above, v. LXX, 1 Sam. xviii. 17; ὙΠ 23 υἱοὺς δυνατούς, 2 Sam. ii. 7; = υἱοὺς δυνάμεως, I Sam. xiv. 52; 2 Sam. The Semitic metaphor ‘son of valour’ forbids Fritzsche’s emendation of εἰς into ws, ‘let us guard as
If the epilogue enforcing the didactic side of the story is an addition (Briull), it has been added in Hebrew, not in Greek. Cf. ‘One of the objects that Simon ben Shetach had greatly at heart was the promotion of better instruction. In all large towns high schools for the use of young men from the age of sixteen sprang up at his instance’ (c.
Ὁ BaGe),
BEE AND THE DRAGON
BEL AND THE DRAGON forms the third of the Apocryphal Additions to Daniel, and was written originally almost certainly in Hebrew, though none of the Hebrew original has survived. The other two Additions are the Song of the Three Children and Susanna. In the Greek and Latin texts the three Additions to Daniel constitute an integral part of the canonical Book of Daniel, and were recognized as such, and therefore as themselves canonical, by the Council of Trent. The Song of the Three Children is, however, the only one of the three which has a necessary connexion with the Hebrew canonical Book of Daniel, standing in the Greek and Latin texts between Dan. iii. 24 and 25. The other two Additions are appended, and appear to have an origin independent of the book to which they are attached and also of each other, though in all three, as also in the canonical book, the name and fame of Daniel forms the principal theme.
δι. NAME AND POSITION IN THE CANON.
In the Greek Codd. Bel and the Dragon stands at the end of the canonical Book of Daniel, bearing therefore no distinct title. In Codd. A and B of ©? it is, however, preceded by the words ‘Vision (ὅρασις) xii’; i.e. it forms the twelfth and last of the series of visions into which this enlarged Book of Daniel is divided. In the LXX it is called ‘ Part of the prophecy of Habakkuk the Son of Jesus of the tribe of Levi’: see note on v.1. In the Vulgate Bel and the Dragon forms ch. xiv of Daniel.
In Syr W (see § 3) the Story of Bel is preceded by the heading ‘Bel the idol’, that of the Dragon having at its beginning the words, ‘ Then follows the Dragon.’
Bel and the Dragon is the title in all the Protestant versions of the Apocrypha, these versions keeping the books now known as Apocryphal apart as being, it was thought, deuteroor noncanonical. In a Nestorian list of biblical works mentioned by Churton* it is called ‘The Lesser Daniel’.
§ 2. CONTENTS.
The two stories as told in common by LXX and © may be thus summarized.
1. The Story of Bel, vv. 1-22. There is in Babylon an image of Bel-(Marduk, Merodach) which Daniel refuses to worship, though no form of worship is mentioned besides that of supplying the god with food. The king, identified in © with Cyrus, remonstrates with the delinquent Hebrew, pointing him to the immense quantity of food consumed daily by Bel as a proof that the god thus recognized is a living, true deity. Daniel denies that the food is eaten by the god, and asks permission to put the matter to a test. This request being granted, he is shown the lectisternia, the sacred tables, covered with food which it is alleged the god will consume during the night. It is agreed that the doors of Bel’s temple shall be closed and sealed for the night after the departure of the priests. But in addition, Daniel takes the precaution of having, without the priests’ knowledge, the floor of the temple strewn lightly with ashes. When the morning breaks, the doors are still closed and the seals intact, but the food has disappeared, evidence, the king thinks, that it has been consumed by Bel. Daniel, however, points to the tracks of bare feet on the ash-strewn floor as evidence that the priests have entered the temple by secret doors and removed the food. Angered by the trick which the priests had played on him, the king has them put to death and the image destroyed.
On the word ‘ Bel’ see note on v. 3.
2. The Dragon Story, vv. 23-42. There is in Babylon a great live serpent (dragon) worshipped
by a large number of the inhabitants, who feed it lavishly. In the present case the god is represented
by a living creature which can be fed and which needs feeding. Daniel refuses to bow down before
the serpent, and throws out a challenge to the king, that, if permission is given him, he will destroy ᾿- the creature alleged to be ἃ god. Receiving the requested permission, Daniel makes a mixture of |
1 i.e. Theodotion’s version, see § 3. 2. The Uncanonical and Apocrythal Scriptures, p. 398 f.
which pitch is the principal ingredient, and thrusting it down the serpent’s throat this creature bursts asunder and dies. Infuriated at the death of their god, the populace demand the death of this god-murderer. The king yields, and has Daniel cast into the den of lions, the usual punishment of persons found guilty of capital charges. But though Daniel remained in the company of seven lions for seven days, he suffers no injury. On the sixth day Daniel, being naturally hungry, is miraculously supplied with food. The prophet Habakkuk has prepared the midday (?) meal for his reapers, and is on the way to the field where they are. An angel arrests him, telling him he is to carry the meal to Daniel in the lions’ den in Babylon. On his alleging his ignorance of the location of the lions’ den, and even of Babylon itself, the angel lays hold of the hair on the crown of his head and conveys the prophet to the den, where, seeing Daniel, he hands him the food, and seems as safe among the lions as Daniel himself. The angel then restores Habakkuk to his Palestine home. Seeing that Daniel was preserved (the Habakkuk incident is an evident interpolation), the king magnifies God, sets Daniel at liberty, and substitutes for him in the den Daniel’s accusers, who are at once devoured by the lions.
The meaning of the word ‘dragon’. The Greek word (δράκων) translated ‘dragon’ denotes originally a large serpent. Homer uses δράκων and ὄφις interchangeably without the least apparent difference. Even the drakén of Greek mythology remains essentially a serpent. In the East the serpent came to be commonly used as a symbol of the principle of evil. In the LXX δράκων translates most frequently (twelve times) the Hebrew 14 (¢annin), rendered in the A. V. generally (eight times) ‘dragon’, sometimes (thrice) ‘serpent.’ In two passages (Amos ix. 3, Job xxvi. 13) the usual Hebrew word for serpent (22) is represented in the LXX by δράκων. There is no good reason for departing from the simple impression which the narrative gives that in the present tale the dragon is a live snake worshipped as a god. Perhaps such worship is to be regarded as a survival of totemism. There is abundant evidence of snake worship in various parts of the ancient world, and there is good reason for believing that it obtained in Babylon. (1) The god Nina was worshipped in the form of a serpent.! (2) On Babylonian seals men are figured worshipping gods apparently serpentine in form, their lower parts consisting of serpent coils with worshippers in front. (3) Both Berosus and Helladius speak of gods worshipped as serpents in Babylon.* (4) Jensen, quoted by Baudissin (PRE *,v, p. 6), says there was a serpent god called in Sumerian Sera#. For traces of serpent worship among the Hebrews, see Num. xxi. 8f., 2 Kings xviii. 4. There is no certain proof that in ancient Babylon the live serpent as in distinction from the image of a serpent was worshipped, but there is no conclusive evidence to the contrary, and the analogy of other countries favours a decision in the affirmative.
Fritzsche * holds that the story was composed in Egypt, where serpent worship is known to have existed in early times. but that the author inaccurately transferred it to Babylon. But since Fritzsche’s time fresh evidence of such worship in Babylon has presented itself.
Modern writers generally maintain that the dragon in this story represents a mythical monster with a serpent’s head and neck, an eagle’s legs, a lion’s body, and a unicorn’s horn. In this or some similar form a very large number of Babylonian inscriptions picture this monster or other monsters (we can never be quite sure as to this) as in conflict with Marduk or some other Babylonian deity. The monster has been very commonly identified with the mythological dragon, but no decisive proof of the identity has been furnished. W. Hayes Ward has made a careful attempt to bring together the various forms in which the ‘ dragon-myth’ has been portrayed on Babylonian-Assyrian inscriptions,> and he assumes throughout that in all it is the Marduk-Tiamat conflict of the Babylonian Creation legend that is set forth, but he gives no proof of this, for the name Tiamat is not once connected with the representation. Indeed it seems now generally understood that Tiamat was a snake deity, and that the dragon of the story now under consideration is no other than Tiamat: so Sayce, Ball, Gunkel, Marshall, Toy.
The present writer ventures with Jensen and Baudissin to dispute and even deny this, and for the following reasons :
1. There is no evidence in the Babylonian-Assyrian inscription that Tiamat was conceived as aserpent. The serpentine forms pointed out cannot be shown to be intended for Tiamat.
2. Berosus does not once translate the Babylonian Tiamat by dragon or by any word denoting serpent. He uniformly transliterates the word, though not as we should do now, but as Thalatth.
3. The idea embodied in Tiamat differs from that of the dragon or serpent. In Babylonian mythology Tiamat stands for the female principle, expressing itself in darkness and disorder, older
1 See Sayce, Hibbert Lectures, p. 282 f. ? e.g. Rawlinson, /zve Great Monarchies a. 122 f., li. 14. 8 Exeg. Handbuch zu den Apoc., i, p. 121. 4 See figures in Gressmann, A/tor. Texte und Bilder, \\. 9of. 5 See American Journal of Semitic Languages, X\v. 94-105.
than the gods themselves, since the birth of the gods took place through their separation from the primaeval chaos (= Tiamat). Tiamat is usually identified with the primaeval ocean, wild and rebellious, needing to be subdued. We are probably to see a reference to it in the on rendered by English versions ‘the deep’: LXX ἄβυσσος : Vulg. Adyssus. Ὁ ἢ
4. In the present story the dragon is a god alongside of Bel in the preceding story: there is not the remotest hint that he is regarded other than as a Babylonian deity worshipped in the form of a serpent or dragon. ;
The present writer would like to add that he does not now, as he once did (see Century Bible, Psalms, ii, pp. 50, 63, 112, 141,177), agree with Gunkel and the bulk of recent Bible scholars in seeing reflections of the Marduk-Tiamat legend in innumerable passages of the O.T. Later writers have too blindly followed Gunkel (see his Schipfung und Chaos).
ὃ 3. TEXTUAL AUTHORITIES : MANUSCRIPTS AND VERSIONS.
1. Manuscripts. The Greek text exists in two principal forms throughout the Book of Daniel including the Apocryphal Additions. τὴ
(1) & (i.e. the LXX) has been preserved in but one MS., the Codex Chisianus (from the Chigi family which owned it), published in Rome in 1772, in Cozza’s Sacrorum Bibliorum Vetustissima Fragmenta Graece et Latine, in Swete’s G (in parallel pages with ©), and in Tischendorfs ἃ. This unique MS. is quoted by Field and Swete as Cod. 87, which must be distinguished from that so designated by the Oxford editors, Holmes and Parsons.
(2) Of Theodotion’s text (©) of Bel and the Dragon the following MSS. exist: B, A, Γ (vv. 2-4
Besides the above majuscules (uncials) there also several valuable minuscules (cursives), as e.g. those numbered 34, 49.
For details and explanations, see Swete’s edition of & and his /xtroduction to the O.T. in Greek.
2. Versions. (1) Greek. It may not be strictly correct to speak of the two best known texts (ἃ and ©) as versions since no Hebrew or Aramaic original has come down to us. Yet according to the view of a Hebrew lost original advocated by the present writer (see below) these so-called versons are correctly thus described.
A careful comparison of & and © of Bel and the Dragon has led the present writer to these conclusions. (a) That & is a translation from a Hebrew original. This is made exceedingly probable by the presence of a large number of Hebraisms (see § 4, ORIGINAL LANGUAGE), though there is another possible explanation (see below, ᾧ 4, (c) 5). (6) That © contains a much larger number of Hebraisms than (ἃ : see on vv. 1 f., 5 f., 16, 18, 27, 28, 39, &c., suggesting what other considerations make likely that Theodotion corrected & with the aid of a Hebrew original before him.
Yet, on the contrary, © corrects at times the Greek of & (see on vv. 26, 40, 42), and it avoids the Hebraism Κύριος without the article (= Hebrew 1), preferring Θεός : see v. 5.
Theodotion’s version of Daniel displaced that of & at a very early time, for though in his Hexapla it is the true & that he uses, yet in his own writings Origen almost invariably cites ©. In his preface to Daniel Jerome points to the fact that in his own time the Christian Church had rejected & in favour of © on account of the defective renderings in the former. Even Irenaeus (οὖ. 202) and Porphyry (οὖ. 305) preferred © to & Field was the first to indicate clearly that what has for centuries been treated as & of 1 Esdras, &c., including Daniel and its Additions, is really the version of Theodotion.
(2) Syriac. In this language there are two principal versions :
(a) The Peshitta, best preserved in the Cod. Ambrosianus B 21 (sixth century), reproduced in Walton’s Polyglot and critically edited by Lagarde (Leipzic, 1861). In Bel and the Dragon this version follows © very closely, though at times (see on vv. 2, 18, 25) it agrees with ὅτ against ©. There are several cases where this version and © agree against & (see on v. 21). Ina few cases this version diverges from
both the Greek texts (see on Ὁ. 27). In the notes Walton’s Polyglot has been used, the version ~
consulted being designated Syr W. But Lagarde’s critical edition has always been compared.
__ (δ) The Hexapla’s Syriac version is that made by Paul of Tella in 617 from Col. VI (&) of Origen’s Hexapla. It exists in manuscript form (Cod. Ambrosianus, C. 313). This most valuable MS. has been edited, photographed, and published by Ceriani (Milan, 1874). In the notes it is quoted
as SyrH. As might have been expected from its origin, it is in general agreement with &, rather —
than with 0, and thus differs from the other Syriac version, which follows © closely. (3) Aramaic other than the Syriac. For the Aramaic text of parts of Bel and the Dragon see ᾧ 4, ORIGINAL LANGUAGE.
F
There are no Targums on Ezra, Nehemiah, or Daniel, a lack easily explained if it could be assumed that all these books were written originally in Aramaic as portions of the existing books of Ezra and Daniel are. ἢ
(4) Latin. (4) Fragments of the Old Latin version occur in Sabatier’s work, Aibliorum Sacrorum Latinae Versiones Antigquae, 1743, &c., vol. ii. Judging from the specimens therein preserved it may be confidently stated that in Daniel and its Additions this version follows © closely.
(4) Jerome’s version—Vulgate simply reproduces it—is also based on Θ, though in some parts (see on v. 42) it is independent of any other version or text known to us.
(5) Arabic. The Arabic version of Saadias (A.D. 892-942) was made from the Hebrew and therefore lacks the Apocrypha. The Arabic version of Bel and the Dragon in Walton’s Polyglot has
no critical value, being due to a priest living in Egypt in the sixteenth century ; see Walton, Proleg. xiv. 17 f., and Cornill on Ezekiel, p. 49.
4. THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE.
Until comparatively recent years the prevailing view was that Bel and the Dragon was composed and first edited in the Greek language: so Eichhorn, Ewald, De Wette, Schrader, Fritzsche, Schiirer, and Konig.
(a) In favour of this conclusion the following reasons have been given :
1. No traces of any Semitic original with reasonable claims have been discovered. Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome distinctly say that no Hebrew (or Aramaic) form of this tract was known in their day.
2. It is denied that the Hebraisms are more numerous than can be accounted for on the assumption of a Greek original. See below, (0) 3, 4.
3. In the Greek of Susanna there are certain word-plays inconsistent with a translation: e.g. Ὁ. 54 f. ὑπὸ σχίνον ... σχίσει, and 58 f. ὑπὸ mpivoy . . . mpicat. No such word-plays have been discovered in Bel and the Dragon, and where in Susanna they do occur they can be easily due to a translator. Why cannot a translator adopt alliteration? Moreover, it is noteworthy that Bel and the Dragon is more Hebraic than Susanna, though less so than the Song of the Three Children.
(ὁ) On the other hand, the opinion has been growing among recent scholars that the work was written originally in Semitic (Hebrew or Aramaic). Drs. Marshall and Gaster contend for an Aramaic original. But there is evidence conclusive to the present writer that the author of Bel and the Dragon wrote in Hebrew.
1. It has been pointed out (see ᾧ 3, 2 (1)) that © introduces Hebraisms which are absent from &, a change due undoubtedly to the fact that Theodotion had before him a Hebrew text as well as &, which latter he corrected by means of the former.
2. The extraordinary extent to which the syntactical construction called parataxy (co-ordination) exists points to a Hebrew, not an Aramaic original. The recurrence of the Greek καί with all the shades of meaning borne by the Hebrew waw and the Arabic wavw and fa is characteristic of Hebrew very much more than of Aramaic. The latter is much richer than Hebrew in conjunctions and adverbs, so that in it hypotaxy (subordination) of sentences exists, very much in the manner of Greek ; especially is this last true of Syriac which came under Greek influence.
3. There are many examples in the LXX and especially in © which imply the Hebrew ‘waw consecutive’ construction and cannot be otherwise explained. Thus sentences often begin with καὶ ἣν (=) and also with καὶ ἐγένετο, followed in this latter case by a finite verb; see vv. 14 and 18. This waz consecutive construction is peculiar to Hebrew at its best, even late Biblical Hebrew has almost lost it (cf. Ecclesiastes, &c.).
4. There are many other Hebraisms: thus v. 14 in © begins with words implying A}. In τ. 27 (©) καὶ ἔδωκεν is good Hebrew (159) but bad Greek, cf. & ἐνέβαλεν. The use of θύρας," doors’, in the sense of the singular is Hebraic, see note on v. 18. οὐδὲ εἷς (v. 18 ©) isthe Hebrew πὰ PS. The constant recurrence of καὶ εἶπεν with the various shades of meaning possessed by V8") is a Hebraism: see v. 20, &c.: ἄγγελος κυρίου = NT JNDD, the anarthrous ἄγγελος following the rule for nouns in the construct: see on v. 343 ἀναστάς (BP) followed by another verb: see on vv. 37 (&) and 39 (©).
5. There are sometimes textual mistakes best explained on the assumption of a Hebrew original : see for examples the notes on v. 14 (&).' ᾿
6. It is in favour of a Hebrew original that these two tales have been actually found in that language in a more or less complete form, as in the Midrash Rabda de Radbba.
1 See Franz Delitzsch, de Habacuce, p. 82; Neubauer, Zodit, viii.
(c) Dr. M. Gaster discovered an Aramaic form of the Dragon story embedded in the Chronicles of Serahmeel, a work of the tenth century, and he maintains that in this fragment we have a portion of the original text of Bel and the Dragon,! an opinion with which Dr. Marshall seems to be in sympathy. In that case the original text of the three ‘ Additions’ was Aramaic, as these two scholars maintain. The present writer does not think that Dr. Gaster has proved his case.
1. There are constructions in all the ‘ Additions’ which are not Greek and which can be explained from Hebrew but not from Aramaic. See above, (6) 2.
2. Two only of the three ‘ Additions’ occur in the Aramaic version found by Dr. Gaster, and only a part (Dragon story) of the third; what has become of the rest ?
3. This Aramaic form of the Dragon story differs from that in the Greek and Syriac in many particulars. In v. 24 the two Greek versions and Syr W have ‘ the king (said) >, which the Aramaic text omits. In v. 35, after ‘And Habakkuk said’, the Aramaic document adds ‘to the angel’, which &, ©, and Syr are without.
4. The compiler of the Chronicles of Ferahmeel distinctly says that he had taken the Song of the Three Children and the Dragon story from the writings (i.e. the translation) of Theodotion, he having himself, it is implied, turned the Greek into Aramaic. Dr. Gaster lays stress on the compiler’s words? that what he gives in Aramaic is that which Theodotion himself found, but the reference can be only to &, which Theodotion made the basis of his own translation, and not to an Aramaic original, though it must be admitted that the compiler does not express himself unambiguously. But when such ambiguity does exist the decision must be according to facts otherwise authenticated.
5. There is of course another explanation of the apparent Semiticisms in Bel and the Dragon. It is probable, as Wellhausen holds,® that the language of & represents a Hebrew-Greek jargon actually spoken, as is the Yiddish of the present day. In favour of this are, in addition to the innumerable Hebraisms, many of them due to translation, the large number of Hebrew words transliterated instead of being translated even in cases where the sense is not obscure: e.g. βεδέκ for P73, ‘ breach’, 2 Kings xxii. 5; χεττιείμ (χεττιείν) fora restored DNI=NN3, 2 Kings xxill. 7; ἰαμείν for DY, ‘shovels’, 2 Kings xxv. 14. These and other Hebrew words were perhaps taken over into the Greek spoken by these Jews, just as Polish-Russian-German Jews to-day talk in a German interlarded with Hebrew words.
δ». AUTHORSHIP, DATE, AND PLACE OF ORIGIN.
Nothing whatever is known of the author of this work and nothing that is definite of the place or date of composition. We have no Hebrew or Aramaic original from the style of which it might have been possible to draw conclusions as to date.
It is quite certain that Bel and the Dragon imply the canonical Boek of Daniel and belong therefore to a later date, for they show subsequent developments of Daniel legends. The canonical Daniel is dated by modern scholars at about 160B.c. The general character of this tract suggests that, like the canonical Daniel, it arose at a period when the Jewish religion was bitterly persecuted. Such a period was the reign of Antiochus VII (Sidetes) (139-128 B.c.). This Syrian monarch reconquered Palestine and did his utmost to suppress Judaism. At that time Hebrew was, even in Palestine, more a literary than a spoken language, and this might explain the fact that the use of the waw consecutive—a feature of the classical language—is preserved. It is assumed that the place of origin was Palestine, and not, as Bissel and most hold, Babylon. The references to Babylon are the same in the canonical Daniel, but they are only a literary device; and this can be said also of the mention of clay and bronze (v. 7), which Bissel cites as proof of a Babylonian origin.
ΤῸ is to be noted that Judaism in the narrow technical sense is entirely absent from these two stories—what is taught is the absurdity of idolatry and the duty of worshipping the only true God —Yahweh. The Judaism of Babylon was of a definite orthodox kind and could hardly have given rise to a tract so vaguely religious as the one under consideration. The universalism of Bel and the Dragon stamps it as a product of the Wisdom school of Judaism, though the positive characteristics of the literature of that school (Ecclesiastes, &c.) are lacking.
Assuming a date of about 136 B.C. for the Hebrew text the LXX must be later. It may be taken for granted that when r Macc. ii. 59 f. was written (i.e. about 1co B.C.) the three Additions
Ξ : ps . . (ter a 5 nslation and notes).
F. Bleek, Einleitung in das Alte Test.®, 535. Deismann, however, says (Bzéle Studies, 68) that in a private communication to him Wellhausen abandons the above view.
formed no part of the Book of Daniel and did not perhaps even exist in Greek. Yet these Additions exist in all extant MSS. of the Greek and Syriac texts. The character of the Greek in & and other considerations suggest that this version was made at Alexandria at a date not much later than 100 B.C. Yet the evidence for reaching such a conclusion is slight.
Theodotion is generally believed to have lived and to have completed his translation at Ephesus towards the close of the second century of our era. This accords with the fact that Irenaeus, who died A.D. 202, used © and preferred it to G.
ᾧ 6. INTEGRITY.
With the exception of small parts to be indicated in the notes, and vv. 33-39, these two tales seem to have been written by one author, who, however, used pre-existing materials. The incident of the miraculous transportation of the prophet Habakkuk from his home in Palestine to the lions’ den in Babylon (vv. 33-39) is certainly a later piece having no necessary connexion with the rest of the story.
$7. TEACHING.
These two stories teach the doctrines of the oneness and absoluteness of Yahweh, called Κύριος in G,a translation of the Hebrew word substituted by Jews from about 300 B. Cc. for Yahweh, which near that time took on a mystic and esoteric sense.
Little is told us of Yahweh’s character. He is great, the only true God (v. 11), a living God in contrast with Bel (v. 5). Nothing is said of the nature of the demand He makes, ritual or ethical.
There is no allusion to any distinctively Jewish beliefs or practices. The law is not mentioned nor is the existence of a Divine revelation to man implied. This tract is silent as to sacrifice and temple, and even as regards priesthood, except that in (ἃ Syr W (not ©) Daniel the prophet is spoken of as a priest ; all this strong evidence of the low place assigned by the writer to the external side of the Jewish religion. We do, however, read of an angel, but in a part of the Dragon story (vv. 33-39) which is certainly introduced by an editor αὖ extra.
For further Introductory notes, including references to special literature, see ‘Bel and the Dragon’ (by the present writer) in Ze International Standard bible Encyclopaedia (Chicago), vol. 1.
I
The translation of © is that of the R. V., that of & is by the present editor. See Introd., § 3, 1, 2
I. THE STORY OF BEL, vv. 1-22
From the prophecy of Habakkuk the son of And king Astyages was gathered to his 1 Jesus of the tribe of Levi. fathers, and Cyrus the Persian received his kingdom. { There was a certain man a priest, by name And Daniel lived with the king, and was2 _
Daniel, son of Abal, a companion of the King of | honoured above all his friends. Now the Baby- 3
Babylon. lonians had an idol, called Bel, and there were And there was an idol Bel whom the Baby- | spent upon him every day twelve great measures
lonians worshipped. And they expended on him | of fine flour, and forty sheep, and six firkins of
daily twelve artabas of fine wheaten flour, and | wine.
four sheep, and six measures of oil.
1. Syr H begins the Story of Bel exactly as does &. Βαϊ © and Syr W begin with a chronological notice which in the Vulg. closes Susanna.
Habakkuk. Greek ᾿Αμβακούμ, Syr. H ᾿Αβακούκ. So also in vv. 33 ff. It is certain that Habakkuk the prophet is meant (see on v. 33), though the tradition that he was a Levite, based on Hab. iii. 194, is probably inaccurate. According to The Lives of the Prophets he was of the tribe of Simeon. See Stonehouse, 7he Book of Habakkuk, pp. 61 ff., for this and other traditions regarding Habakkuk. This title in (ἃ and SyrH (not in Syr W) owes its existence to the interpolated incident in vv. 33-39.
Cyrus ... received his kingdom. According to this verse, identical in Syr W, Cyrus succeeded his grandfather Astyages immediately upon the death of the latter. But Herodotus (i. 130) says distinctly that Cyrus took the kingdom from Astyages by force. Ancient authors disagree on this matter, as also as to whether in fact Cyrus was the immediate successor of his grandfather or not. Recent cuneiform inscriptions confirm the testimony of Herodotus That the incidents related in Bel and the Dragon could not have occurred during the reign of Cyrus goes without saying.
the Persian. On these words see Century Bible, Lzva, Nehemiah, Esther, pp. 19, 41.
2. a priest, by name Daniel. That Daniel was a priest is stated in & and in Syr W, one of the rare instances in which the Peshitta agrees with @ against ©. Dan. i. 3, 6 proves that Daniel could not have been a priest. That he is so described is due to priestly influence, and belongs to the period of priestly domination.
Abal. “Aad (so Fritzsche, Tisch., and Ball) for ᾿Αβιήλ (God my father) or ᾿Αβιχαίλ ( strong one, lit. father
possessor of strength, Num. iii. 35). But probably we should write with Swete and Rothstein ‘A8da\ for Hebr. baa,
Gen. iv. 2. According to Epiphanius (Adv. Haeres. lv. 3) Σαβαάν (ΝΞ), | YW) was father of the prophet Daniel.
acompanion. The Greek word συμβιωτῆς denotes strictly one that lives (βιόω) with another. Cf. Vulg. conviva. Plutarch ( /zdius Caesar, 211) employs the word for the confidants of the emperors.
lived with the king. Render, as in && above (the same Greek word being used), ‘ And Daniel was a companion of the king” Syr W ‘And Daniel’s glory equalled that of the king, and he dwelt with the king and was more praised than any of the king’s friends’.
King of Babylon. In & and Syr W the particular king of Babylon meant is not named.
3. Bel. The Hebr. word 93, a short form of bya, occurs in the O.T. in Isa. xlvi, Jer. 1. 2, li. 44, in all which passages it stands for Marduk (Merodach), chief of the Babylonian deities. Originally it denoted any one of the Babylonian local gods, and in particular the principal one worshipped at Nippur. Cf. the generic use of ?Y3 (Baal).
worshipped. That the Babylonians worshipped Bel is in (ἃ distinctly stated: in © and Syr W it isimplied. The word translated ‘ worship’ (σέβομαι) = ‘ to revere’, especially as God.
artabas (in Gr and © ἀρτάβαι): R.V. (©) renders ‘great measures’. The artaba (ἀρτάβη) was a Persian measure = about half a hectolitre.
: four. 80 (ἃ ἀπά SyrH. But © Syr H™S Fri τεσσαράκοντα (forty), which gives a better proportion. In Syr W
‘forty rams’.
measures. The Greek μετρητής (R.V. ‘firkin’) = about nine gallons. Note the large quantity supposed to be consumed by Bel.
oil. So G: but read (with Θ Syr W Syr H™8) οἴνου (wine). Cf. vv. 11, 14,21 in (ἃ. Note the three kinds of sacrifices: meat offering (779212), animal offering (M31), and drink offering (392), which accord with the regulations of the Priestly Code. ; i j
G ὃ7 4 The king also used to worship him, and the king used to go daily to do homage to him ; but Daniel used to pray to the Lord. So the king said to Daniel, Why bowest thou not down to 5 Bel? Then Daniel said to the king, None do I worship save ¢he Lord, the God who created the heaven and the earth, even Him who has sovereignty over all flesh. 6 Then the king said to him, Is this then not a god? Dost thou not see how much is ἡ spent on him daily? Daniel therefore said to him, Let no one by any means mislead thee by false reasoning, for this is within of clay and without of bronze: and I swear by ¢#e Lord the god of gods that this never did eat anything. 8 So the king became angry and summoned the overseers of the temple, and said to them, Show me who eats the things prepared for Bel, otherwise ye shall die. Or (if ye do show that Bel devours them), Daniel, who alleges that these things are not eaten by him, (shall die). But they said, It is Bel himself who devours these things. Then Daniel said to the king, Let it be thus. If I shall not show that it is not Bel who devours these things, let me suffer death together with roall my friends. Now Bel had seventy priests besides (their) wives and children. So they conducted the king into the idol temple.
verse denote habitual actions.
300 B.c. © and SyrW have ‘God’.
to the Hebrew. the worship of the peoples they conquered. 5. idols made with hands.
all flesh = every human being. See Gen. vi. 12.
7. Let no one .. . reasoning. words in G, ‘Let noone. .
4. worship. The Greek verb (σέβομαι) means to revere, usually as one does a god.
And the king did honour to it, and went daily 4 to worship it: but Daniel worshipped his own God. And the king said unto him, Why dost thou not worship Bel? And he said, Because I 5 may not do honour to idols made with hands, but to the living God, who hath created the heaven and the earth, and hath sovereignty over all flesh.
Then said the king unto him, Thinkest thou 6 not that Bel is a living God? or seest thou not how much he eateth and drinketh every day? Then Daniel laughed, and said, O king, be not 7 deceived : for this is but clay within, and brass without, and did never eat or drink anything.
So the king was wroth, and called for his 8 priests, and said unto them, If ye tell me not who this is that devoureth these expenses, ye shall die. But if ye can show me that Bel devoureth them, 9 then Daniel shall die: for he hath spoken blasphemy against Bel. And Daniel said unto the king, Let it be according to thy word. Now the τὸ priests of Bel were threescore and ten, beside their wives and children. And the king went with Daniel into the temple of Bel.
The imperfect tenses in this
him. Rather than ‘it’, as the Greek has the masc., though εἴδωλον, for which the pronoun stands, is neuter.
the Lord. The anarthrous Κύριον translates the word (ΣΝ) read for the tetragrammaton (717) from about Here, as in the foregoing Hebraism in & (‘used to go and bow down’), Θ corrects in the direction of classical Greek. Theodotion often does this, though in other cases he corrects & according It is quite according to the usual policy of the early Persian kings to fall in, at least outwardly, with See Century Bible, This description of idols is not in &. things or idols because they are the work of men’s hands’. made idols and the God who is Himself the Zakery of heaven and earth.
‘zra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ὁ. 40. Syr W gives ‘I worship not images or sculptured In © and Syr W there is a contrast drawn between man-
6. The proof that Bel is a true, living god is the immense quantity of food he is able to eat daily! __ It is difficult to account for the differences between (ἃ and © in this verse. The
. reasoning,’ would be in Hebr, U8 77! ὃς mia; the Greek παραλογίζομαι standing in
(ἃ generally for the Hebr. 115), ‘to deceive’. © has simply μὴ πλανῶ, ‘deceive not thyself’. Probably the two texts represent independent attempts to translate the above Hebrew, © as usual avoiding a peculiarly Hebrew construction— the absolute infinitive before a finite verb strengthening it. ; ; Iswear. Not in ©. Probably in the original Hebrew no such verb was employed, but the conjunction DN, which implies a negative oath. This Hebrew construction might easily give rise to the construction in G& and to that in ©, though in & DON by ΠῚ (see Dan. xi. 36) is also implied. laughed. Sov. 19 (& and ©): (ἃ here omits this verb. : brass (6). Render ‘ bronze’. Brass was unknown in the times when this tract was written. eat. © has, as Gk, simply ‘eat’; ΘᾺ add ‘or drink’. : 8. the overseers of the Temple. In © ‘his priests’. Probably & translates the Hebrew freely, © literally. these expenses. Better ‘ this outlay’, i.e. the things on which money has been expended. The Hebrew word thus rendered is perhaps the late ΠΑΝῚ Π (see Ezra vi. 4, 8). (ἃ seems to translate freely. ; 9. (if ye . .. them). The words bracketed in the translation are added because implied in the Greek (τ, or at least are necessary for the sense. Let it be thus, ἄς. ascribes more words to Daniel than 6. for he hath spoken blasphemy against Bel. © and Syr W give the reason, & does not. 10, With the seventy priests of Bel cf. the four hundred of Baal in 1 Kings xviii. 22. children. Θὲ παιδίων, ‘little children’. λ “ἢ ; the idol temple. Greek εἰδώλιον, as in 1 Esdras ii. 9; 1 Macc. 1. 47:1 Cor. viii. το. © has ‘the house’ (τὸν οἶκον), i.e. ‘temple’ (see 1 Kings vi. 1; 2 Kings xix. 33) ‘of Bel’. It is probable that © follows the original Hebr.
BEL AND THE
Then the food was laid out in the presence of the king and of Daniel, and mixed wine was 12 brought on and set out for Bel. And Daniel said, Thou thyself seest that these things are in 13 their places, O king. Do thou therefore seal the bolts of the temple, when it is shut. And the
utterance pleased the king.
Then Daniel ordered those with him to put out of the temple all (the rest) and to besprinkle the temple with wood ashes, none of them outside the same knowing (it). And then he shut the temple and gave orders to have it sealed with the king’s signet ring and with the signet rings of certain priests of high rank: and this was done. 15 And it came to pass on the morrow that they
came back to the place, but the priests had, in
the meantime, entered through secret doors and
devoured all that had been placed before Bel 16 and drunk up the wine. Then Daniel said, O priests, look at your seals, whether they remain (intact); and do thou, O king, mark well whether anything has happened of which thou disapprovest.
And they found (the state of things) as it was
DRAGON τα τὴ
So Bel’s priests said, Lo, we will get us out: 11 but thou, O king, set on the meat, and mingle the wine and set it forth, and shut the door fast, and seal it with thine own signet ; and when thou 12 comest in the morning, if thou find not that Bel hath eaten up all, we will suffer death: or else Daniel, that speaketh falsely against us. And 13 they little regarded it: for under the table they had made a privy entrance, whereby they entered in continually, and consumed those things.
And it came to pass, when they were gone 14 forth, the king set the meat before Bel. Now Daniel had commanded his servants to bring ashes, and they strewed all the temple w7th them in the presence of the king alone : then went they out, and shut the door, and sealed it with the king’s signet, and so departed. Now in the night 15 came the priests with their wives and children, as they were wont to do, and did eat and drink up all. In the morning betime the king arose, and 16 Daniel with him.
And the king said, Daniel, are the seals whole ? 17
11-17. These verses differ in (τ and © considerably. How can we account for this if both the Greek versions were
made from one Hebrew original ? 11. the food, lit. ‘ things eaten ’.
mixed wine. What is meant is probably that the wine was mixed with certain aromatic spices which gave it
a more pungent flavour. See Isa. v. 22; Ps. xvi. 2.
signet, i.e. δακτυλίῳ, ‘ finger-ring signet’. 13. bolts. they entered in, &c.
‘and carried away what remained.’
This is according to common Oriental custom ; many, however, think that the allusion is to the Greek and Roman practice of diluting wine by water. 64 δακτύλῳ, ‘ finger’.
The Greek word (κλεῖδας) means primarily ‘keys’; then, as here, ‘bolts’, ‘ locks’. Cf. 1 Kings xviii. 25, ‘ put no fire under.’ common in heathen temples (Hom. in Petrum et Helicum, Opp. (Ben. ed.), vol. ii, p. 880.
Such deceptions were, according to Chrysostom, Syr W adds to v. 13 in ©,
14. besprinkle. (ἃ καταστῆσαι, a Hebraism (DY); Θ᾽ and Syr H™S κατέσησαν, ‘they shook through a sieve’ (Θ᾽
κατέσεισαν, ‘ they shook’), implying 353") (= 35°J*)})—this yields no sense.
Read, with © 34 49 κατέστρωσαν, representing
the Hebr. 11), which might easily have been misread as either of the above Hebrew words. temple. The Greek word vads is used in (ἃ and N.T. for the temple building proper in distinction from the
temple and its enclosures (ἱερόν). wood ashes.
sealed. (ἃ σφραγισάμενος.
could easily be read DMM (‘seal’).
The word σποδός in & denotes specially wood ashes.
Read κλείσας ; the sealing followed the shutting. We have in this confusion, as well as in that in the verbs noticed above, strong
τέφρα is the word used in ©. See
The Hebr. verb OND (‘shut’)
evidence of a Hebrew (not an Aramaic) original. The temple door was sealed, according to ©, with the signet ring
of the king. high rank’ (see Dan. vi. 17).
set the meat before Bel (0). this should be added.
Syr W adds, ‘ and with Daniel’s signet ring’; (τ adds, ‘and with the signet ring of certain priests of
Syr W + ‘and filled the vessels with wine according to the custom’; probably
15. Verse 15 ὁ in & corresponds to v. 15 in ©, 15 a answering to 16 in ©.
it came to pass. . . that. ‘On the morrow they came back.’ secret doors.
Note the Hebraism. ψευδοθυρίδων, lit. ‘false doors ’.
the priests (not Daniel) testing the seals.
In good Greek, as in English, the usual expression would be, Θ avoids the Hebraism.
16 foll. In © it is the king who takes the initiative—rises early, asks about the seals.
In G it is Daniel that speaks,
16. remain. The Greek word (μένουσιν) perhaps to be understood absolutely ‘remain as hey were’, the Hebr.
for which would probably be 372; but it is most likely that the original Hebr. word was modu (are intact, literally
“complete ’), misread as above. ΓΘ (σῷοι in v. 17) favours this. Ἦ
_ 17. This verse in G& has been variously rendered: ‘they found that the seal had lasted’ (lit. ‘was’), and ‘they
found how the seal vead/y was’. But we should have expected ‘ seals’—the plural—as in τ. 16, and as in 9, v. 17.
Fritzsche is probably right, therefore, in regarding (ἡ) σφραγίς as an interpolation. In the second part of the verse
(the day before); so they cast away the seals. 18 But on opening the door they saw that what had been set out for Bel had been consumed and that the tables were empty. The king accordingly rejoiced, and said to Daniel, Great is Bel, and 19 with him is no deception. And Daniel laughed heartily and said to the king, Come, see the deception of the priests. Then Daniel said, O king, whose footprints are these ?
zo And the king said, (Those) of men, women, 21 and children. Then he went to the house in which the priests resided, and found Bel’s food together with the wine. And Daniel showed the king the secret doors through which the priests entered for the purpose of consuming 22 what had been set before Bel. The king therefore led them out of Bel’s temple and delivered them up to Daniel ; and what had been provided by purchase for him he gave to Daniel, but Bel he destroyed.
Now there was a dragon in the same place, And the
24 and the Babylonians worshipped (it).
we are to read ‘seals’ (plural). ὡς ἔμενεν".
And the king. So 64° SyrW Fritzsche.
suggests that © corrects & from the Hebrew original. door.
tables. So G: © ‘table’.
with thee is no deceit at all. G: ‘there is no deception,.. .
infinitive. see the deception of the priests. in him’ (Bel). and said. whose.
GES VIVE ἃ; »Θ᾽.
their wives and children, so that (καί) they showed,’ &c. found. SyrH evpor (‘ they found’).
secret doors.
hidden’ (κρυπτάς).
up Bel.
destroyed, lit. ‘overthrew’ (κατέστρεψεν). 23. dragon, or ‘serpent’. in the same place. 0” om., reading simply, τόπω OMB, worshipped. See on v. 4.
THE DRAGON STORY, vv.
Translate then as above.
62 om. twos ; render then, ‘ find out these footprints.’ 20. The ὁρῶ (‘I see’) of © translates probably the Hebr. 73/7. 21. © and Syr W omit the words in ἐᾷ in the beginning of v. 21, but they are necessary for the sense and should
probably be restored. Verse 21 in © would in that case read: ‘ Then the king, becoming angry, went to the house
in which the priests resided, and found Bel’s food together with the wine.
In (ἃ the doors are lit. ‘ false doors’ (WevdoOvpia) ; see on v. 15.
22. Bel’s temple. τὸ Βήλιον = ‘ the temple of Bel’ only here; but cf. Πυθεῖον, f
delivered them (x). (ἃ says the king delivered up the priests to Daniel; © and SyrW say he delivered Syr W Arab., translating the Greek ἔκδοτον of © as ‘ gift’, render ‘ gave Bel as a gift to Daniel’. that what had been expended on Bel (the residue) was also delivered up to Daniel.
See Introduction, ὃ 2, 2. © SyrW have ‘great dragon’. ‘and there was a great dragon.’
And he said, Yea, O king, they be whole. And as soon as he had opened the door, the king looked upon the table, and cried with a loud voice, Great art thou, O Bel, and with thee is no deceit at all. Then laughed Daniel, and held the king that he should not go in, and said, Behold now the pavement, and mark well whose footsteps are these.
And the king said, I see the footsteps of men, women, and children. And then the king was angry, and took the priests with their wives and children, who showed him the privy doors, where they came in, and consumed such things as were upon the table. Therefore the king slew them, and delivered Bel into Daniel’s power, who overthrew him and his temple.
And in that same place there was a great dragon, which they of Babylon worshipped.
SyrH has ‘that the seal remained’, reading, perhaps,
But 68 (Swete) om. ὁ βασιλεύς.
18. Note the double Hebraism with which © begins τ΄. 18, though && has the regular classical construction.
Greek has ‘doors’, plural, a literal rendering of the Hebr. pnds, a two-leaved door. For such a door see 27. D. B.iv.7006. Another confirmation of a Hebrew, not an Aramaic, original. Syr W has the singular (¢a7“a),
This
After the latter word © needs, and seems to have had, words similar to if not identical with those in (ἃ, Probably we should restore according to Syr W, which usually follows © closely: (after ‘door’) ‘the king looking upon the table and seeing that what had been set for Bel had been consumed, cried
This last clause of v. 18 in © is a literal translation of a Hebraism absent from not one’, NON PN.» - ΠΟ PX. 19. That Daniel laughed heartily (σφόδρα) is stated in G, not in 0. On the other hand, that Daniel held back the king from looking in appears in Θ, not in &.
Referring probably to the king’s acclamation (v. 18), ‘there is no deception His priests deceive if Ze does not, and indeed cannot.
Cf. Prov. xiv. 3. It represents probably the Hebrew absolute
The sense requires it. It is not represented in G.
He thereupon seized the priests and
In © the doors are literally See the reference in Fritzsche. (τ adds
ev τω Torwm ΘΑ; εν αὐτὼ Tw
BEL AND ἘΠΕ
king said to Daniel, Thou wilt not, wilt thou, say of this also that it is bronze? Lo, he liveth, eateth, and drinketh: do homage to him.
But Daniel said, Give me the power and I will destroy the dragon without sword or staff. So the king conceded this to him, and said, It is granted thee. Then Daniel took thirty minas of pitch, fat, and hair, and boiled them together, and made a cake (out of them) and threw (it) into the dragon’s mouth ; and after it had eaten (the cake) it burst asunder. And he showed it to the king, saying, Is it not the case that ye worship these (fragments) ?
Then there assembled against the king all the inhabitants of the country, and they said, The king has become a Jew; Bel he has overthrown and slain the dragon.
And when the king saw that the mob from the country was gathered against him he called his companions, and said, I give (up) Daniel to be destroyed.
Now there was a den in which seven lions were kept to which those who plotted against the king used to be delivered up, two bodies of
24. Daniel. brass (©). See v. 7, and render ‘ bronze’.
do homage. It represents 745 in the Aramaic parts of Daniel.
+ μὴ es... χαλκ. ἐστιν ἰδου..
The same verb (προσκυνέω) occurs in v. 4.
DRAGON 24-32
And the king said unto Daniel, Wilt thou also say that this is of brass? lo, he liveth, and eateth and drinketh: thou canst not say that he is no living God: therefore worship him. Then said Daniel, I will worship the Lord my God: for he is a living God.
But give me leave, O king, and I shall slay this dragon without sword or staff. The king said, I give thee leave. Then Daniel took pitch, and fat, and hair, and did seethe them together, and made lumps thereof: this he put in the dragon’s mouth, so the dragon did eat and burst insunder : and Daniel said, Lo, these are the gods ye worship.
When they of Babylon heard that, they took great indignation, and conspired against the king, saying, The king is become a Jew, and he hath pulled down Bel, and slain the dragon, and put the priests to the sword. So they came to the king, and said, Deliver us Daniel, or else we will destroy thee and thine house. Now when the king saw that they pressed him sore, being constrained, the king delivered Daniel unto them: who cast him into the lions’ den: where he was six days. And in the den there were seven lions, and they had given them every day two carcases,
+ jun και τοῦτον ερεις ore χαλκους ἐστιν" ov ζη και εσθιει και πίνει (this is translated in the R.V. (@) above ;
.. και πεινει Δ.
It is the one used in & to translate the Hebr. MOAT,
Cf. a similar use of the Lat. ferrum. 27. thirty minas. adopted after the exile by the Hebrews. together.
© has μάχαιρα.
ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό = the Hebr. VAN}.
J The Greek word (ἐξουσία) denotes delegated authority. sword. The word in (ἃ denotes strictly iron; then an iron weapon. (ἃ uses it in Job v. 20 for 29M (sword).
The weight is not given in ©. The mina (Greek μνᾶ, Hebr. 739) is a Babylonian weight The heavy mina weighed 1-636 lb. avoir., the light mina half this. See
See Exod. xxvi. 9.
a cake (Gr). μάζα usually = ‘a barley-cake’; cf. dpros,‘a wheaten cake’, © Syr H have the plural. Syr W has a transliterated form of the Greek σφαίρας (cf. ‘ sphere’), 1.6. ‘round things’, ‘balls’, ‘ pills’. —The R.V. renders ‘lumps’,
following the Vulg. massas.
dragon’s mouth. + ‘and the dragon swallowed them’ (to complete the sense) Syr W. Perhaps it is original
and should be restored. and after .. . asunder. these (fragments).
has wdov. dy.
+ ‘so that it died’ Syr W. : S). In & ταῦτα has a touch of irony, ‘these bits !? what things ye worship !’ (lit. ‘See the objects of your worship’, σεβάσματα).
The words in © should be rendered, ‘see See Acts xvii. 23. ΘᾺ, for dere in (τ,
28 foll. differ much in G and ©. Verse 29 of © is wholly lacking in &. 28. against the king. & reads ‘against Daniel’ (τὸν Δανιήλ), but the sense requires τὸν βασιλέα as in Θ.
a Jew. περι tov βασιλεως λεγουσι ws yeyovey Iovdatos Syr H™8. translates ©, ‘a Jew has become a king,’ which is against the context. The verb used in v. 22, often rendered ‘ destroy’.
has overthrown. “pulled down’). But ΘᾺ reads as Gr (κατέστρεψεν). 29. Lacking in &.
Grotius omits the article before βασιλεύς, and
ΘΒ has a different verb here (κατέσπασεν =
30. This verse is fuller than the corresponding verse of ©, the latter giving what appears to be a kind of summary. Verses 31 foll. in (τ correspond in matter to vv. 32 and 31 in ©.
31, 32. den. The Greek word λάκκος (cf. the English ‘lake’) =a water-pond, a reservoir, then a pit or dungeon,
as in Dan. vi. 8, &c., where it translates the Hebr. and Aram. 33.
Bevan on Dan. vi. vivarium into which people looked from above.
Lions were kept in such places for the chase. See
Fritzsche holds that the den in Dan, vi. 8, &c., is a mere cistern, whereas here it is a proper But in regard to Dan. vi. 8, &c., he is hardly right.
BEEP AND! 2 HE
persons condemned to death being provided for 42 them daily (as food). So the crowds cast Daniel into that den that he might be devoured and find no burial. And Daniel was in the lions 33 den six days. Now it happened on the sixth day that Habakkuk had wheaten loaves crumbled in a bowl, cooked, and an earthen jar of mixed __wine, and that he was proceeding into the field 34 to the reapers. Then the angel of the Lord spake to Habakkuk, saying, Thus says the Lord God to thee: The dinner which thou holdest, take it away to Daniel to the lions’ den in Babylon.
But Habakkuk said, O Lord God, I have not seen Babylon and the den—I do not know where 36 (it) is. Then the angel of the Lord laid hold of Habakkuk by the hair of his head and set him 37 over the den in Babylon. And Habakkuk said 4 to Daniel, Arise, and eat the dinner which the 38 Lord God has sent thee. Then said Daniel, (Yea), for the Lord God who forsakes not those τς who love Him has remembered me.
eee te
7 39 So Daniel ate; and the angel of the Lord set Habakkuk down (in the place) whence he had
(two) bodies. persons, human beings. and Polyb. xii. 16. 5, σῶμα = a slave.
calamity, no doubt for superstitious reasons. six days.
the dissimilation of the final ‘k’ to ‘m’.
but it is not necessarily either.
a force of His spirit’), Douay version. ra Palestine to Babylon, and in another he is brought back.
37- Habakkuk. Syr W. he cried out’.
who forsakes not. ἐγκαταλείπων & : 39. Note the Hebraism in ©, ἀναστάς ; so Syr W.
in his own place (©). For εἰς (68), Θ᾿" reads ἐπί.
σώματα : not necessarily the bodies of dead persons. Here it = criminals condemned to death. ‘Two carcases ’, R.V. of 8, should be ‘two human bodies’ or ‘two persons’. The addition in © and Syr W to vz. 32 ((τ 31), ‘ which then,’ &c., was suggested by Dan. iil. 19.
that he might be devoured. The reason is given in & only. See Century Bible on Psalm Ixxix, 3. Daniel was in the den six days (so G, v. 32, ©, v. 31). day that Daniel was miraculously fed. ©, τ΄. 40, says he was delivered on the seventh day.
33-39. The miraculous incident in which the prophet Habakkuk plays so prominent a part has no vital connexion with the rest of the narrative, and is certainly a late interpolation. of the past, such as Daniel, Habakkuk, were becoming more and more idealized.
33. @& alone gives the time—the sixth day—and also the earthen jar and the mixed wine (see on v. 11); the place in Judaea (R. V. ‘ Jewry’) is given by © and Syr W only. © and Syr W speak of Habakkuk ‘the prophet’; not so (ἃ. The Greek form of the name, ᾿Αμβακούμ, is due to the change of the first of two ‘
34. the angel, ἄς. The definite article rightly prefixed, though it is absent from the Greek (&& and ©).
a Hebraism, cf. 17> qn, the article in a construct noun being unnecessary in Hebrew, as in Welsh. See
᾿Αμβακούμ Gx Θ" (see on vv. I, 33).
the angel of the Lord. © changes ‘ Lord’ to ‘ God’.
DRAGON 31-39
and two sheep: which then were not given to them, to the intent that they might devour Daniel.
Now there was in Jewry the prophet Habak- 33 kuk, who had made pottage, and had broken bread into a bowl, and was going into the field, for to bring it to the reapers. But the angel of 34 the Lord said unto Habakkuk, Go carry the dinner that thou hast into Babylon unto Daniel, in the lions’ den.
And Habakkuk said, Lord, I never saw Baby- 35 Jon; neither do I know where the den is. Then 36 the angel of the Lord took him by the crown, and lifted him up by the hair of his head, and with the blast of his breath set him in Babylon over the den. And Habakkuk cried, saying, O 37 Daniel, Daniel, take the dinner which God hath sent thee. And Daniel said, Thou hast remem- 38 bered me, O God: neither hast thou forsaken them that love thee.
So Daniel arose, and did eat: and the angel of 39 God set Habakkuk in his own place again imme-
It = bodies of living or dead persons ;
The ancients dreaded non-burial as a dire According to v. 33 (@&) it was on the sixth The legend belongs to an age when the heroes
’s’ for euphony (‘ mb’ for ‘ bb’) and
It is really
The dinner. The Greek ἄριστον denotes more commonly the mid-day (dinner) than the morning meal (breakfast), See Susanna, v. 13, where the R. V. renders ἀρίστου ὥρα as ‘dinner time ’. 35. den. After λάκκον in ©, O° adds τῶν λεόντων : cf. τ΄. 34 (G and ©). is. 04; >0® So R.V. SyrW has ‘and the den I do not know’.
36. The verb ἐπιλαμβάνομαι takes after it two genitives in both versions, an unusual but not unprecedented construction. According to & the angel laid hold of the hair of the prophet’s head ; © says it was of the crown (κορυφή) of his head that the angel laid hold, though he was lifted up by his hair. ᾿ ;
the angel of the Lord. © omits Κυρίον : the article before ἄγγελος supports this. See on τ, 34.
with the blast of his breath. Only in ©. Render ‘with the swiftness of wind’, omitting αὐτοῦ (dittograph). Syr W and Midrash Bereshith Rabba, ‘by the might of the Holy Spirit’; Jer. Vulg. 7 cmpetu spiritus sui (‘by the See Dan. ix. 21; Ezek. viii. 3.
In one instant Habakkuk is transferred from
᾿Αμβακούκ ΘΑ. ΘᾺ omits ᾿Αμβακούμ, reading ‘and
Arise and. ἀναστάς, &c., a Hebraism, though found in Syr W. Cf. Dip followed by another verb = ‘ set about’.
See Introd. δὲ 4, (ὁ) 4, and cf. Century Bible, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, p. 145.
38. In & Daniel speaks of God in the 3rd person ; in © he addresses God. ἐγκατέλειπες O: ἐγκαταλιπών Syr H. Syr W gives 3rd person as (τ,
Syr W has simply ‘an angel’.
taken him on the same day. But the Lord God 40 remembered Daniel. (Then) the king after these things went forth bewailing Daniel; and as he stooped to pry into the den he saw him sitting 41 (there). So the king cried out and said, Great is the Lord God, and there is no other (god) 42 besides Him. And the king led Daniel out of the den, and those who would have brought about his destruction he cast into the den in the
presence of Daniel, and they were devoured.
on the same day (τῇ αὐτῇ ἡμέρᾳ (τὴ ; immediately (παραχρῆμα ©): ‘in that hour’ = ‘immediately’ Syr W. The bracketed words in the rendering of && above occur in Syr W, which usually follows &. This last clause in & is absent from Θ. 40. after these things in & corresponds to ‘on the seventh day’ in ©. 41. In & the king speaks of God in the third person; in © he addresses God. See on v. 38.
But the Lord God remembered Daniel.
clause of verse (‘there is no other’). the king (6%). © om. ὁ βασιλεύς. and there is none other beside thee.
> και οὐκ ἐστιν πλὴν σου αλλος Θ᾿“. words are appended: Δανιηλ kara τοὺς 6: in O° Δανιὴλ : in ΘᾺ τελος Δαν. προφητου.
diately. Upon the seventh day the king came to 4o | bewail Daniel: and when he’came to the den, he 1 looked in, and, behold, Daniel was sitting. Then 41 cried the king with a loud voice, saying, Great art thou, O Lord, thou God of Daniel, and there is none other beside thee. And he drew him out, 42 and cast those that were the cause of his destruction into the den: and they were devoured in a moment before his face.
Syr W omits last
In & (followed by Syr H) these
i ee ἜΛΑ αδΩν
PEP Cae ee a ee Pea oe Θ ἜΤΝ ΒΡῸΡ ee
eee Aw PPI@NS © ESTHER
cm a I EA ES AED AT Ti TR Nd
δι. CHARACTER OF THE ADDITIONS.
THE Additions to Esther consist of six passages (containing 107 verses not in the Hebrew text), inserted in the LXX text by way of amplification of subjects referred to in the canonical chapters.
It cannot be said that these Additions, which are imaginative reconstructions of a forgotten past, are of great interest or importance. Perhaps as much as two centuries separate their date from that of the canonical portions of Esther, and they emanate from a different centre of Jewish life and thought, which possessed no independent sources of historical information.
Any interest, therefore, that these fragments possess lies not in their power to enlarge our knowledge of the story of Esther, but in the reflection they offer of the religious development of the circle in which they originated,
If we are to attach any weight to the postscript found in the LX X (Esther xi. 1)—and Ryssel’s reason for rejecting its witness is not sufficient—the translation of canonical Esther dates from not later than 114 B.C.; but it seems unlikely that the Additions were incorporated with the translated portions until after this postscript was appended. The Additions may not all be the work of one author, but they are not translations, and Greek was their original language! It is probable that the Additions, with their slightly Egyptian flavour (cf. the use of ἀδελφός in Dg, φίλοι in E 5, the application of the word ‘ Macedonian’ to Haman in E 10, and ἐκτιθέναι in E 19), were composed in Egypt, where the veneration for the canonical book was naturally not so high as in Palestine, rather than in Palestine by Egyptian Jews temporarily residing there.?
But were the Additions made immediately upon the reception of the translation of Esther in
Egypt, or only after some time had passed, and interest in the book had been awakened, and a desire aroused in the minds of patriotic Jews to hear the story of Esther in greater detail ? The latter hypothesis seems the more probable. Not only is time required for the creative activity of the imagination to get to work ; but the postscript, which with its explicit reference to the translation of Esther must have been appended immediately on the introduction of the translation into Egypt, would surely have been worded differently, if the Additions had been already incorporated.
The date of the Additions, therefore, may be placed in the earlier part of the first century, and
they may be regarded as contemporaneous with the Book of Wisdom. They can be referred to Maccabean times (as e.g. by Jacob and V. Ryssel) only by a complete rejection of the witness of the postscript. Wisdom is the work of an Alexandrian Jew keenly distressed by Egyptian idolatry and by the growing laxity and indifference to the national religion on the part of a large number of the Jews resident in Egypt. The writer of Wisdom represents that more conservative section of the Egyptian Jews in whom the forces of reaction were at work, and who became the more ardently patriotic in proportion as they saw the traditions of their religion neglected.
The Additions to Esther may be accounted for in a similar way. The relations between the domiciled Jews of the Diaspora and the natives of the country were at times far from cordial, and in periods of trial and oppression, when the Jews were driven in upon themselves, it was natural for them to take refuge in the study of their sacred books, and of those especially, such as Esther, which told of the subjection of the heathen to the chosen people. It was only natural that elaborations of these favourite narratives should spring up, and in course of time take their place as authentic parts of the original works.
The Additions are free from all trace of Alexandrine doctrine, but there is no reason to suppose
1 Cf. Ryssel, in Kautzsch, i. p. 196; André, Les Apocryphes del’ A. T. pp. 203, 204. Sees 2 Cf. Jacob, ZATW, x, 1890, pp. 274-90; and Jellinek, Beth-ha-Midrash, v, p. viii. The ‘Additions’ to Esther sprang out of the imagination of an Alexandrian Jew, and hence their original language was Greek. 665 DG Sie
THE ADDITIONS TO [ESTEE
that every Jew residing in Egypt surrendered to the influence of the philosophic atmosphere ot Alexandria. The practical purpose with which the Additions were composed would cause their author to eschew the introduction of all foreign elements. His hearers would be of the simpler type, not versed in speculation, but familiar only with the religious ideas of the O. T.; his object would be rather to confirm them in the old than to provide a meeting-place for the old with the new. Accordingly, the Additions might be expected to be strictly orthodox and conservative in tone ;
and this is exactly what we find. The spirit of simple prayer breathes in them, and trust in God SS Eee
and remembrance of God’s mercies to Israel are especially emphasized.
~The object of the author is purely practical, and speculative questions are altogether beyond his range. It has been thought that the object of the Additions was ‘to remove the uneasiness arising from the secular tone of the original story’. This isa proposition very difficult to accept, suggesting as it does a deliberate effort to correct the canonical book, and thereby an implied censure on its character. The difference between the tone of the canonical book and the additions can be less invidiously accounted for, on the supposition that the latter came into existence to meet an historical need, and that floating legendary material was drawn upon for the purpose of consoling and strengthening a simple-minded people in adversity. If it is true that the Additions have introduced the religious note, it cannot be said that they have a materially higher tone. Hatred of the heathen andthirst for revenge appearin undiminished vehemence.
It has been assumed so far that we are justified in speaking of these six passages as additions, which first took shape in Greek. It is true that they are not all homogeneous, and that some of them are more Hebraic in character than others. But of two (Adds. B and E) it may be said 3 that any re-translation of these rhetorical and florid pieces into Hebrew would be impossible, while of the rest it is enough to say that the Hebraisms they contain are fully accounted for by the fact that the Jew who composed them could not divest himself altogether of the idioms of his people.® A somewhat paradoxical contention has been put forward by Langen, Kaulen, and Scholz, who are concerned to prove the authenticity of the Additions, the effect of which would be to show that the LXX form of Esther is the original, and the Hebrew only an abbreviated edition of the book. This hypothesis rests on the existence of various Midrashic compilations,* and especially of an Aramaic piece known as ‘ Mordecai’s Dream’, containing the Dream and the Prayer of Mordecai and the Prayer of Esther, of which the so-called Additions to Esther are ex hypothest the Greek form.
But there is much more reason to regard these diffuse Aramaic fragments as being indirectly based on the LX X Additions than vice versa ;° and, further, inasmuch as not more than one of these pieces can be proved to have existed as early as even the middle of the fourth century, they are quite valueless as proofs of a Hebrew original earlier than that known to St. Jerome.
Almost equally baseless is the argument that the older and fuller Hebrew text was deliberately expurgated of the name of God, in order that it might not suffer dishonour when the Esther-roll was read during the course of the rather secular festival of Purim. Such editing of the book is far more difficult to credit than the hypothesis of subsequent additions.
One of the surest arguments against the original integrity of the book in its LXX form lies in the many discrepancies between the canonical Esther and the so-called Additions.© Some of these may be noted here:
(1) Δ 2. Mordecai is represented as holding a high position at court in the second year of Artaxerxes ; but Esther ii. 16 speaks of the seventh year.
(2) A 13. Mordecai himself informs the king of the conspiracy of the eunuchs ; but Esther ii. 21-23 says that Esther told the king in Mordecai’s name.
(3) A 16. Mordecai is rewarded for his services, but Esther vi. 3, 4 shows that Mordecai had been forgotten.
(4) A17. The reason for Haman’s grudge against Mordecai is that Mordecai had caused the death of the eunuchs, but in Esther iii. 5 it is that Mordecai will not bow before Haman.
(5) C 26,27. Esther protests her hatred of the position of queen to an uncircumcised alien. But the Hebrew makes no such suggestion.
(6) Eto. Haman is called a Macedonian, but in Esther iii. 1 his father’s name is Persian.
1 Streane, Esther, p. xxix.
ὅ Cf. S. I. Frankel, Hagiographa posteriora ... ὁ textu Graeco in linguam Hebraicam convertit, &c., 1830 ; André, op. cit. pp. 203, 204; Jellinek, Beth-ha-Midrash, v, Ῥ. vill. οὖ 6.5. a treatise on Esther in the Babylonian Talmud, Megillah τοῦ ff.; in the Pirke Rabbi Eliezer, ch. 491.; in Josippon, cent.x; M/cdrash Esther Rabba, cent. xi or xii. For an exhaustive list see Ryssel, p. 195; cf. André, p. 198; Fuller, Apocr. of O.T., p. 363.
(7) E22. The Persians as well as the Jews are required to keep the feast of Purim; but in Esther ix. 20-28 the Jews alone are charged to observe it.
The Additions are six in number, distinguished by Dr. Swete in his edition of the O.T. in Greek by the letters A to F in accordance with a suggestion made by the late Prof. Hort. As they stand in A.V. and R.V., they are practically unintelligible.!| Jerome’s relegation of the Additions to an appendix, in which their relation to the canonical chapters was altogether obscured, is responsible for this.
Not finding them in the Hebrew, he desired in his translation to mark the distinction between them and the authentic portions ; and this arrangement was carried over into A.V. and R.V2
Their contents are as follows :—
_A. Mordecai’s Dream, and the conspiracy of the two eunuchs (a double of Esther ii. 21-23). Precedes Esther i. 1.
B. The king’s Edict commanding the destruction of the Jews. Follows Esther iii. 13, and expands iii. 8-13.
C. Prayer of Mordecai, and Prayer of Esther. Follows Esther iv. 17.
D. Esther’s appearance before the king. Follows D, and is an amplification of Esther v. 1, 2.
E. The king’s second Edict in favour of the Jews. Follows Esther viii. 12.
F. Interpretation of Mordecai’s Dream. Follows Esther x. 3.
a BL RAS ARS ARID sae
ᾧ 2. MANUSCRIPTS.
The current and unrevised text of the third century is more or less closely represented by the uncials :
B. Vaticanus, cent. iv.
A. Alexandrinus, cent. v.
x. Sinaiticus, cent. iv.
N. Basilio-Vaticanus, cent. vili-ix; and by many cursives, of which the most important are (as numbered by Holmes and Parsons, Vet. Test. Graecum cum var. lect., Oxford, 1798-1827)—
108. Rome (Vat. Gr. 330), containing two recensions, the first of which, known as 108 a, represents the unrevised text.
249. Rome (Vat. Pius I).
Other nearly allied cursives are—
52. Florence (Laur. Acq. 44).
243. Venice (St. Mark’s, cod. 16), with which the Aldine edition is connected.
248. Rome (Vat. Gr. 346), of which the Polyglot of Alcala (Complutensian, 1514) is a reproduction.
The recension made by Origen in the third century is represented by the cursive numbered 93, which contains two recensions of Esther, that known as 93 ὦ having the critical signs employed by Origen.
The readings of 93 4 correspond very closely with the corrections inserted in Cod. Sinaiticus by the first of three seventh-century hands, known as 8**, who acknowledges his indebtedness to the work of Origen.
The Hesychian, or Egyptian, recension, of the fourth century, is represented by 44, 68, 71, 74,
The Lucianic, or Antiochian, recension, of about A.D. 300, is represented by 19, 93a, 108 ὁ. P. de Lagarde,* who designates these MSS. respectively by the letters ἦι 7, d,, has reconstructed the Lucianic text, and placed it in parallel columns with that of the uncials. There is a very wide difference between the two types of text, but the Lucianic (known by Lagarde as a) contains all the six longer additions.
Certain resemblances between the details in Josephus’ account and those in the Lucianic text led Langen® to argue that Josephus had in his hands the so-called Lucianic recension, and that therefore this text is not a recension of the third or fourth century, but an independent translation
Cf. Swete, /ztr. to Ὁ T. in Greek, p. 257.
Cf. Jer., Prol. in Esth. ch. x, ed. Vallarsi, ix, p. 1581.
THE ADDITIONS TOLES@ HER
from the Hebrew. But there are too many correspondences between the two types of text, especially in the Additions, for this theory to be possible.?
No Syriac version of Esther is known ; the book is altogether absent from the Nestorian MSS? Paton® writes that the Coptic versions, which would presumably give a Hesychian type of text, have never been published, while the Ethiopic version, fourteen MSS. of which are known to contain the Book of Esther, is equally inaccessible. An Armenian version of Esther also exists, but in too corrupt a form to be of any service. :
The only ancient versions extant and available are the Old Latin and the Vulgate.
(1) The Old Latin belongs to the middle of the second century, and is a useful witness to the LXX text as it existed before the time of the three recensions. _ It is the work of one who, though not a good Greek scholar, made a faithful effort to translate the Greek original, and where he failed to understand the Greek, as in the case of the two edicts, reproduced it word for word in Latin. This makes it possible in many cases to reconstruct with comparative certainty the Greek text which lay in front of him.t The Old Latin version contained all the six Additions (except A 12-17), together with certain others peculiar to it, e.g. after B 7, in C14, a very long addition in C τό, after C 90, in D7. On the other hand it omits A 12-17, and (in Cod. Pechianus) C 17-23.
(2) The Vulgate was undertaken by St. Jerome at the request of Pope Damasus, and was produced between A.D. 390 and 405. He devoted himself particularly to the books which belonged to the Hebrew Canon, and paid less attention to those which were only known through the LXX.
In the case of Esther, he gathered all the non-Hebraic additions together, and placed them somewhat contemptuously at the end of his translation of the canonical book. In the Prod. zz Esth. he writes: ‘Quae habentur in Hebraeo, plena fide expressi. Haec autem quae sequuntur scripta repperi in editione vulgata quae Graecorum lingua et litteris continetur, et interim post finem libri hoc capitulum ferebatur, quod iuxta consuetudinem nostram obelo, id est veru, praenotavimus.’
Jerome’s translation differs very largely from the Old Latin, the former being as free as the latter is slavishly literal. Very often he is content to give only the general sense of the Greek, and his work is more like an original Latin composition than a translation.°
$4. DATE OF THE ADDITIONS.
The Additions belong to that mass of floating legendary material which in the course of years gathered around the name of Esther.
It is impossible to assign a single date to them, as they are written in different styles, and may be the work of different authors, some of the additions (e.g. A ( D F) having probably grown up gradually and assumed their present shape after an existence of some years in an oral tradition.
The two edicts (B and E), on the other hand, are of a quite different character from the four already mentioned which have strong Hebraic affinities: B and E belong undoubtedly to Egypt, and their periodic style shows that they could have originated in no other way than as formal written compositions. They show considerable resemblance to 2 Macc., which clearly emanated from Egypt (cf. Β 5 πρὸς τὸ μὴ τὴν βασιλείαν εὐσταθίας τυγχάνειν with 2 Macc. xiv. 6 οὐκ ἐῶντες THY βασιλείαν εὐσταθείας τυχεῖν) ; but although the place of origin is clear, the date (in so far as internal evidence is concerned) is in both cases equally indeterminate.
No conclusion, again, as to the lateness of A and F is to be drawn from the failure of Josephus to employ them. It is quite as likely that they did not suit his purpose as that they were absent from the MS. he employed or from all the MSS. of that period.
The present writer is not satisfied with the arguments of Jacob against the validity of the postscript in Esther xi. 1: ‘In the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy and Cleopatra, Dositheus, who said he was a priest and a Levite,and Ptolemaeus his son, brought the Epistle of Phrurai here set forth,
which they said was true, and that Lysimachus the son of Ptolemaeus, that was in Jerusalem, had q
interpreted it. Jacob’s objection is based on the assumed impossibility of a translation with so many clearly marked examples of Egyptian vocabulary ° having been made in Palestine ; but he
1 See Paton, Esther, pp. 37, 38; Fuller, p. 365; André, p. 207. A very full statement concerning the MSS. may be found in Paton, Esther, pp. 29-38.
2 André, Les Apocryphes, p. 207.
Cf. Jacob, Das Buch Esther, Giessen, 1890, pp. 13-22.
5 Cf. André, Les Apocryphes, p. 208.
5 Cf. Jacob, Das Buch Esther, p. 51, (ev) OpovigerOa, ἐκτιθέναι, καταχωρίζειν, ἀρχισωματοφύλακες, διαγράφειν.
ay et sie SW mee am.
ignores the assertion of Dositheus and Ptolemy who brought it to Egypt, that it was made by Lysimachus son of Ptolemy, whose very name proclaims him to have been connected with Egypt, even if a temporary resident at Jerusalem. The postscript may be regarded as reasonably trustworthy, and various inferences may be drawn from it.
(1) It was appended to the translation of the canonical Esther immediately on its introduction into Egypt.
(3) The postscript refers so definitely to the translation of Esther, that it cannot be held to cover the Additions, which were not translations.
(4) Some time must have passed between 114 B.C., the date of the introduction of the translation into Egypt, and the incorporation therewith of unauthentic matter. Its sacredness would have protected it from formal alterations for at least a quarter of a century.
(5) The most probable date then for the incorporation of the Additions would be from about 80 b.C. onwards, the terminus ad quem being about A.D. go, the date of their employment by Josephus.
If the postscript is rejected (as by Jacob followed by Ryssel), the dating of the Additions is rendered even more indefinite. Jacob can only name one certainty with regard to date derivable from the Greek form of canonical Esther, i.e. that it must have been made at some time long or short before the destruction of the Ptolemaic régime in 30 Β. 6.2. He also argues that Esther must have been one of the earliest of the Old Testament books to have been translated into Greek after Kings, Chronicles, and Job, which Freudenthal has shown were translated about 150 B.C.;° but Jacob’s argument is mere hypothesis, however reasonable. Apart from the postscript, we are left without any means of dating the Additions more closely than between about 125 B.C. and A.D. go.
a πὰ aR A πορῆν
ᾧ 5. AUTHORSHIP.
The Additions are not a homogeneous whole, and are bound together by no community of style. This does not prevent them from being the work of one hand; for an even greater dissimilarity exists between the earlier and later chapters of the Book of Wisdom.
But there is no evidence of any kind to show whether the Additions were all composed at the same time, or were all intercalated at the same time. All that can be said is that the Additions originated among the Egyptian Hellenistic Jews, and that they are based on familiar legendary materials.
In view of the more Hebraic tone of AC DF and their simple narrative style, as contrasted with the Greek tone and self-conscious rhetoric of B and FE, it is not unnatural to view the former as the written form of a tradition long known and finally reduced into its present shape by dint of frequent repetition, and to regard the latter as having originated with a single individual. It is hardly likely that the agent in the two cases was one and the same.
§ 6. INFLUENCE ON LATER LITERATURE.
(a) Fewish. The direct influence of the Additions is to be seen in Josephus, Avt. xi. 6. He draws upon Adds. BC DE, following them closely and yet employing them with by no means a slavish dependence. He introduces a few details not found in the Additions, which were either his own invention or copied from embellishments in the MS. he used. He makes no reference to the Dream of Mordecai (Add. A) or its interpretation (Add. F); he alters the time of the conspiracy of the eunuchs, and relates that the services rendered by Mordecai were forgotten, whereas the Additions say that he was rewarded. Josephus gives the reason adduced in Esther iii. 5 for Haman’s hatred of Mordecai, and not that given in the Additions. He introduces new features into the Prayers of Esther and Mordecai, and into the account of Esther’s appearance before the king. Similarly, he deviates from the exact language of the Greek in the Royal Fdicts.
But the dependence of Josephus on the Additions is in the main beyond doubt.
The so-called second Targum gives a very free reproduction of the Edict in Addition E. This Targum dates from about A. D. 800.
The Prayers of Mordecai and Esther were used by Josephus ben-Gorion in his history composed about the beginning of the tenth century.’
From this work has been borrowed the abbreviated form of the same prayers in WWidvash Esther
' Jacob, Das Buch Esther, p. 43- SNOB Cia ἘΞ 553. ‘ Targum Sheni on Esther, viii. 13, quoted by Fuller, p. 400.
THE ADDITIONS TO Bs TER
Rabba (cent. xi, xii), and also the Prayer of Esther in Midrash Lekach Tob (c. 1100). It is also the source of the Prayers of Esther and Mordecai which are found in an Aramaic fragment of cent. xi or xii This fragment, which was claimed by Langen? as a witness to a Hebrew original of the Additions, is now clearly recognized by Bissell * and Fuller (p. 364) as being derived, through Josephus ben-G., from the Greek Additions. Fuller quotes the Prayer of Mordecai in this version,
(2) Christian. The Additions are occasionally mentioned in the Fathers, but they can hardly be said to have exercised any influence. Clement of Rome (ch. lv) makes a reference to the Prayer of Esther, ἠξίωσεν τὸν παντεπόπτην δεσπότην, cp. Add. D 2 ἐπικαλεσαμένη τὸν πάντων ἐπόπτην Θεόν ; while Origen writes (ad Africanum 3): ‘From the Book of Esther neither the Prayer of Mordecai nor that of Esther is accepted among the Hebrews; and similarly neither the Edict of Haman for the destruction of the Jews nor that of Mordecai.’
Nevertheless, he held these Additions ‘to be fitted to edify the reader’, and he regarded their absence from the Hebrew Canon as no reason for ‘rejecting as spurious the copies in use in the Christian Churches’, or for ‘enjoining the Brotherhood to put away the sacred copies in use among them’. References to the Additions are found in Clem. Alex. Strom. iv. το; Rufin. Aol. ii. 333 Aug. (cf. Sab. Bzb/. Sacr. lat. vers. ant.) Contr. Epist. a Pelag., col. 428; 2. de grat. et lib. arb.,
§ 7. THEOLOGY OF THE ADDITIONS.
The theology of the Additions is strictly conservative and Palestinian in type. It stands in the same category with that of Ecclesiasticus, ch. xxxiii (xxxvi), xlii, xliii, the Prayer of Daniel (Dan. ix), and the Prayer of Judith (Judith ix).
The absence of all trace of Alexandrine doctrine can only be accounted for on the assumption that the Additions took their rise in a pious and simple-minded stratum of orthodox Egyptian Judaism, or else were based on legendary material belonging to Palestine which had nearly crystallized into the shape we know when it was carried in an oral form to Egypt. The truth probably lies somewhere between these alternatives.
The points which find illustration in the Additions are :—
the only true God, C 14: as the God of Abraham, C 8, 29, and of Israel, C 14; as having chosen Israel, C 9, 16, E 21; as the Redeemer from Egypt, C 9; His disposing Providence, D 8, E 16, F 1, 7; His readiness to hear prayer, F 6,9; and to help the needy in trouble, C 14, 24, 30; His holiness, C 17; His righteousness, C 18; His jealousy of His honour, C 7, 8, 20, 22, 28, 29; His punishment of sin, C 17, 22, E 18; His mercy and pity, C 10.
There is no mention of the Law or of a future life; the temple and the altar are only mentioned metaphorically (D 20). There is one reference to angels (D 13).
§ δι, BIBLIOGRAPHY.
(a) The Text. (i) Reproductions. pagans Facsimile reproduced under the direction of Sir E. Maunde Thompson, London, 1881-1883. 3 vols. (1) Editions. Holmes and Parsons (with variants of 12 uncials and 261 cursives), V. 7. Graecum cum variis lectionibus, Oxford, O. F. Fritzsche, Libxi Apocr. V. T. Graece, Leipzig, 1871. Tischendorf, Κ΄. 7. Graece iuxta LX X interpretes (ed. 7, Nestle), Leipzig, 1887. H. B. Swete, 0.7. in Greek according to the Septuagint, Cambridge, 1801. J. Ussher, De Graeca LXX interpretum versione syntagma, cum libri Estherae editione Origenica et vetere Graeca altera, London, 1655 (from cod. 93). O. F. Fritzsche, ΕΣΘΗΡ, Duplicem libri textum ad opt. codd. ed., Zurich, 1848. A. Scholz, Commentar tiber das Buch Esther. [Two Greek texts, in parallel columns with text of Josephus. ] P. de Lagarde, Zit. V. 7. Can. Pars Prior Graece, Gottingen, 1883. [Two types of text.] Ι (6) The Ancient Versions. (i) Zhe Old Latin. P. Sabatier, Bzbliorum Sacrorum Latinae Versiones antiqguae seu Vetus Itala et caeterae .. . quae cum Vulgata 1 Ed. de Rossi, Sec. var. lectt. sacri textus et Chald. Estheris additamenta, ΤῸ. 1783, and Jellinek, Beth-ha- * Deuterokanon. Stiicke im Buche Esther, Freiburg, 1862.
Latina et cum textu Graeco comparantur, 3 vols., Paris, 1751. [Based on Cod. Corbeiensis, and giving variants of Cod. Oratorius (to end of ch. 2) and Cod. Pechianus.]
Berger, Notices et extraits des manuscrits de la Bibl, Nat. et autres bibl. xxiv, pt. 2, 1893 (pp. 141-52).
(ii) Zhe Vulgate. Hieronymi opp. ed. Vallarsi, vol. ix.
(c) Critical Inquiries.
S. I. Frankel, Hagiographa posteriora . . . ὁ textu Graeco in linguam Hebraicam convertit, &c., Leipzig, 1830. Langen, ‘ Die beiden griechischen Texte des Buches Esther’ (Z2bingen Theol. Quart., 1860, pp. 244-72). Langen, Die deuterokanon. Sticke im Buche Esther, Freiburg, 1862.
F. Field, Ovigents Hexaplorum quae supersunt, 1875, vol. i, p. 793 ff.
W. J. Deane, ‘ The LXX Adds. to the Hebrew text,’ Lxpositor, Sept. 1884.
Kaulen, Einteztung tn das A. T., Freiburg, 1890.
Jacob, ‘Das Buch Esther bei den LXX, ZATW, x. 1890, pp. 241-98. [See also Znauguraldissertation von δ. Jacob, Giessen, 1890. |
L. E. T. André, Les Afocryphes de l’A. T., Florence, 1903.
L. B. Paton, ‘A Text-Critical Apparatus to the Book of Esther,’ in O. 7. and Sem. Studies in Mem. of W. M. Harper, vol. ii, pp. 1-52, Chicago, 1908. [See also L.B. Paton, 4 Critical and Exeget. Comm. on the Book of Esther, pp. 29-47 (in Intern. Crit. Comm.), Edinburgh, 1908.]
(dz) Chief Editions of the Additions.
Fritzsche, Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch su den Apokryphen des A. T., vol. i, pp. 67-108, Leipzig, 1851. Bissell, Zhe Apocr. of the O. T., New York, 1880.
J. M. Fuller, in Speaker's Commentary, ‘ Apocrypha,’ vol. i, pp. 361-402 (ed. Wace), London, 1888.
Ball, Zhe Eccles. or Deuterocanon. Books of the O. T., London, 1892.
Scholz, Commentar tiber das Buch Esther mit seinen Zusttzen, 1892.
V. Ryssel in Kautzsch’s Die Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen des A. T., vol. i, pp. 193-212, Tiibingen, 1900. G. Jahn, Das Buch Esther nach der LXX hergestelit, Leiden, 1901.
A. W. Streane, Book of Esther, Cambridge, 1907.
ΒΟῊΝ LT
THE ADDITIONS VO" Ese
ADDITION A. The Dream of Mordecat.
1 (xi)(2) In the second year of the reign of Artaxerxes the great king, on the first day of Nisa, Mardocheus the son of Jairus, the son of Semeias, the son of Kiseus, of the tribe of Benjamin, saw a dream. (3) 3(4) He was a Jew, dwelling in the city of Susa, a great man, serving in the king’s court ; and he was of the captivity, which Nabuchodonosor the king of Babylon carried from Jerusalem with Jechonias, the king of Judaea. f ἤ 4 (56) And this was his dream ; and behold noise and tumult, thunderings and earthquake, confusion upon the earth. ν 5 (6) And, behold, two great dragons came forth, both of them ready to fight, and their cry was great. 6(7) And at their cry every nation made itself ready for war, to make war upona nation of righteous men. 4 (8) And behold a day of darkness and of gloom ; tribulation-and anguish ; affliction and great confusion upon the earth. 8 (9) And the whole righteous nation was troubled, fearing the evils that threatened them, and they made ready to perish.
ADDITION A, vv. 1-11. Zhe Dream of Mordecai. Addition A consists of 17 vv., and in the LXX is placed at the beginning of the canonical Book. These vv. are numbered in Vulg. xi, 2-xil. 6. By an easily explained process of inversion, it follows Add. F in Vulg., which thus places the interpretation of the dream before the dream itself.
In Vulg. this Add. is separated from Esther xi. 1 by the following note : ‘Hoc quoque principium erat in editione Vulgata, quod nec in Hebraeo, nec apud ullum fertur interpretum.’ Josephus shows no acquaintance with any part of this Addition. :
1. In the second year. There is a discrepancy between the dates as given in canon. Esther and in the Additions. In Estheri. 3 the king’s feast occurs in the third year of his reign, and in Esther ii. 16, 19 Esther entered the palace and Mordecai sat at the gate in the seventh. But here the dream is seen in the second year. Ryssel (Kautzsch, p. 193) makes an elaborate attempt to reconcile the discordant dates, but it is better to acknowledge the difficulty than to try to explain it away. ὶ
Artaxerxes. For the identity of this king with Xerxes I (486-465 B.C.) see Paton, Esther, Intr., § 22. In canon. Esther LXX renders Ahasuerus by Artaxerxes, but Persian monuments make it plain that Ahasuerus represents Khshayarsha, the Persian form of the name Xerxes. Uncial texts of the Adds. give A7¢axerres, though some of the later Lucianic recensions correct to Assuerus.
the great king, the customary title of the Persian king. Cf. Isa. xxxvi. 4,13. So Add. B1, Et, though > βασιλέως NA.
first day of Nisa. Vulg. WVisam, the Heb. form of the Bab. Nésannz, which after the exile replaced the old Isr. name Abib. This month corresponds to March-April. Lucianic texts give the name according to Macedonian reckoning, ‘Adar-Nisan, which is Dystrus Xanthicus.’
Mardocheus, the Gr. form of Mordecai. His genealogy is borrowed from canon. Esther ii. 5. Shimei and Kish are doubtless not his grandfather and great-grandfather, but remote ancestors belonging to the tribe of Benjamin. For Shimei cf. 2 Sam. xvi. 5 ff., and for Kish, father of Saul, cf. 1 Sam. ix. 1, xiv. 51. See Paton, Zs¢. p. 167.
of the tribe of Benjamin. Mordecai was thus, as a member of the family of Saul, the hereditary enemy of Haman, who was of the house of Agag, whom Saul destroyed (1 Sam. xv). ;
2. a Jew. Mordecai, though a Benjamite, may be classed as a Jew, because during the exile men of all tribes came to be known as Judaeans. After the fall of Israel, Judah had given its name to the nation.
city of Susa. One of the three capitals of the Persian empire, on the river Choaspes, which separated the city of Susa from the fortress of Susa.
serving, see Esther ii. 19, vi. 10. Vulg. ‘ inter primos aulae regiae ’.
3. of the captivity, cf. Esther ii. 6; 2 Kings xxiv. 15. He was not himself a captive, but was sprung from an exiled family.
Jechonias (Jehoiachin) was carried away in B.C. 596, and therefore it is a chronological impossibility for Mordecai to have been himself one of those deported from Judaea. 4. his dream. For the interpretation see Add. F. noise and tumult. φωναὶ θορύβου A. confusion. καὶ τάραχος δὲ ἃ A, 5. came forth. προσῆλθον A. their cry. ἐγένοντο αὐτῶν φωναὶ μεγάλαι A. 6. made itself ready. For a similar concourse cf. Joel iii. 2, Zech. xiv. 2. righteous men. A conventional epithet for the people of God, cf. Wisd. x. 15, ‘A holy people and a blameless seed,’ and xvii. 2. The enemies of Israel were similarly ἀσεβεῖς, ἄνομοι. 7. gloom. Vulg. dzscrzminis. For the idea cf. Joel ii. 2; Matt. xxiv. 29. &. that threatened them. Gr. τὰ ἑαυτῶν κακά.
TEES DIMONS TO ESTHER. A 9-17
(10) And they cried unto God ; and from their cry, as it were from a small spring, there came up a great river, eve much water.
o{11) A light and the sun rose, and the humble were exalted and consumed the glorious.
far (12), And Mardocheus, having seen this dream and odserved what God had deremnined to do, awoke and kept it in his heart, and sought by all means to understand it until the night.
ΨΥ ΥΥ
Mordecai discovers the plot of the two cunuchs.
χη) And Mardocheus took his rest, as was his custom, in the court with Gabatha and Tharra, the two
eunuchs of the king who kept the court.
3 (2) And he heard their communings, and searched out their counsels, and learned that they were
preparing to lay hands upon Artaxerxes the king ; and he informed the king concerning them.
'14(3) And the king examined the two eunuchs, and they confessed ¢hezr intention and were led forth and executed.
) And the king wrote these things for a memorial, and Mardocheus wrote concerning these things.
) bere the king charged Mardocheus to serve in the court, and gave him gifts in respect of these things.
117 (6) And Haman, the son of Hamadathus, a {Bugaeanj, was in honour in the king’s sight, and sought
to bring evil upon Mardocheus and his people because of the two eunuchs of the king.
9. cried unto God. The name of God is not present in canon. Esther. The Additions offer a strong contrast in this respect, ‘God’ and * Lord’ appearing forty-two times, from their cry. Mingled, i-e., with their tears. 10. light and the sun. For these as pictures of happiness cf. Wisd. v. 6. the humble. The Old Lat. has hzemzles, but Lucianic MSS. have oi ποταμοί by a copyist’s error. the glorious. The adj. is plural, but Haman is specially thought of. Cf. A 17: ‘Haman... was in honour in the king’s sight.’ 11. having seen. ὁ ἑωρακώς NA. had determined. βουλεύεται A. kept it. Cf. Luke ii. 19. until the night. > Vulg. There is nothing in the Adds. to suggest that the conspiracy of the eunuchs did not follow immediately upon the dream of Mordecai. But canon. Esther places the former in the seventh year of the king’s reign. The Luc. texts endeavour to harmonize the accounts by reading: ‘And M. being raised from his sleep pondered what the dream might be, and his dream was hidden in his heart, and at every opportunity he was searching it out, until the day in which M, slept in the king's court.’
ADDITION A, vv. 12-17. Mordecai discovers the plot of the twe eunuchs, This piece (cf. Esther ii. 21-23) which forms part of Add. A is omitted by Old Lat. Josephus depends on LXX for his account of the plot.
12. as was his custom. ἡσύχαζεν 8°. Mordecai’s circumstances were still humble. Cf. Esther ii, 19-21.
Gabatha. The names of the eunuchs are borrowed from Esther 11. 21, vi. 2, though the names are given by LXX only in δὲ "8 πρὶ For Gadatha (Bigthan, Bigthana, Heb.) Vulg. has ‘ Bagatha’, and Jos. Βαγάθωος.
Tharra (Teresh, Hebr.). Θάρα &*, Θάρρας δὲ "ἃ, Θεοδόσιτος Jos., ‘ Thara’ Vulg.
13. counsels, lit. azxvzeties, concerning the success of the plot.
informed the king. In Esther ii. 22 he informed Esther.
concerning them. Szfer co Vulg.
14. led forth. Complut. has the curious ἀπήγχθησαν (were strangled). * iussit duci ad mortem’ Vulg.
15. fora memorial. In the book of the chronicles of the kings of Media and Persia (Esther x. 2).
16. charged Mardocheus to serve. In canon. Esther no recompense is made to Mordecai. His deed is embalmed and forgotten in the royal chronicles. Cf. Esther ii. 23, vi. 2, 3. In the Adds. his reward is service in the king’s court, an advancement from a merely tolerated presence there. ᾿
in respect of these things. περὶ τούτων, i.e. not on account of the eunuchs, but in return for services rendered (pro delatione, Vulg.). 7
17. And Haman. It is not easy to see how much is implied by avd. The mention of Haman follows in the Adds. immediately on the discovery of the plot, and suggests that the grudge borne by Haman (who was already in high favour) against Mordecai was in some way due to the action which M. had taken and which had led to their death. Canon. Esther iii. 1, on the other hand, states that ‘after these things’ the king exalted Haman, as though H. received credit for the discovery of the plot. Haupt (Pw7zm, p. 37) suggests that instead of telling the queen (Esther 11. 22 M. had revealed the plot to Haman, who had taken to himself the credit of saving the king. This would explain the advancement of Haman, and M_’s refusal to bow before him. But Haupt’s suggestion is too subtle: the reason is probably to be found in H.’s jealousy of a successful underling, whose vigilance might one day be directed against himself.
a tBugaeant. Undoubtedly a corrupt reading, though found also in Esther iii. 1 and ix. 10 LXX.
Whatever the epithet may mean, it is derived from the LXX rendering of Esther lil, 1 (Heb, ΝΠ, Vulg. ‘ qui erat de stirpe Agag’), which prompted its gratuitous introduction into ix, 10 LXX. It is obvious that the LXNX version of Esther iii. 1 was earlier than the composition of any of the Additions, and therefore that Βουγαῖος did not originate with their author. It should be noted that in Esther ix. 24 the Heb. text is as in Esther iii. 1, but is there rendered by LXX ὁ Μακεδών (Vulg. ‘stirpis Agag’): this rendering is borrowed by the author of Addition E (v. 10).
What then does Βουγαῖος mean? Is it a false transliteration for what should have been ‘Ayayatos (cp. Teyaios 93 2), or has it a meaning of its own? rae ΜᾺ
These is no reasonable ground for identifying the word with the Homeric dw//y, or braggart (//. xiii. 824), nor can
THE ADDITIONS TO ESPRERS soa.
ADDITION B.
The Letter of Artaxerxes.
1(xiii)(1) | Now the copy of the letter is as follows. The great king Artaxerxes writeth these things to the princes of one hundred and twenty-seven provinces from India to Ethiopia, and to the subordinate governors. ι ἫΝ
2 (2) Having become lord of many nations and attained dominion over the whole world, not as though 7 am elated with the presumption of power, but as one who ever rule my life with moderation and mildness, I desire to establish the lives of my subjects in a lasting tranquillity, and, making my kingdom peaceable and safe for passage to its /wthest bounds, to restore that peace which is desired of all men. Bins
3 (3) But having made inquiry of my advisers how this might be brought to pass, Haman, who excels in prudence among us, and is approved for his unswerving goodwill and firm faithfulness and is
4 (4) exalted to the second place in the kingdom, has shown us that among all the nations in the world there is scattered a certain evilly-disposed people, which sets itself in opposition to every nation by its laws, and which habitually neglects the ordinances of the kings, so that the consolidation of the kingdom honourably intended by us cannot be brought about. — a ὶ
5 (5) Having understood therefore that this nation stands alone in opposition to all men continually,
ADA create eh Ὁ δύσπνους ος
Par ay Sar awh
SR ac
it be regarded as a Grecized form of Bagoas (Judith xii. 11). Its presence here is due to a mistake which first occurred in Esther iii. 1, either in the original transliteration from the Hebrew, or in subsequent MS. transcription. What was originally a piece of inadvertence was confirmed into an error bya copyist who did not see in the expression a reference to the predestined antipathy between Mordecai of the family of Saul, and Haman of the family of Agag (cf. 1 Sam. xv). Amalek was Israel’s most ancient enemy. Γωγαῖος of 93 @ and Μακεδών (Esther ix. 24 LXX) bring out the idea better than Bovyaios, even if incorrectly.
For Haman, the son of Hamadathus, see Paton, sz. p. 69.
because of the two eunuchs. Luc. texts have ὑπὲρ τοῦ λελαληκέναι αὐτὸν τῷ βασιλεῖ περὶ τῶν εὐνούχων διότι ἀνῃρέθησαν.
ADDITION Β. Zhe Letter of Artaxerxes. Addition B (xiii. 1-7) is preceded in Vulg. by Add. A, being separated from it by the following note: ‘ Hucusque prooemium. Quae sequuntur, in eo loco posita erant ubi scriptum est in uolumine ΑΖ diripuerunt bona, uel substantias eorum, quae in sola Vulgata editione reperimus, Ep7stolae autem [UE ὦ ὁ
The place of Add. B in LXX is between Esther iii. 13 and Esther iii. 14. Josephus (Azz. xi. 6. 6) has made copious use of this Add.
Its Greek provenance is betrayed by its turgid style, which is altogether foreign to other Persian decrees to be found in the Bible (Ezra i. 2-4, iv. 18-22, vi. 3-12, vii. 11-26). The same trait appears in Add. F, both these rescripts being of Graeco-Egyptian composition.
1. The great king, cf. A. 1. Cf. the inscription on the rock of Behistun, ‘ the great king, the king of kings.’
one hundred and twenty-seven provinces. This number is drawn from Esther i. 1, vill. 9, and may reasonably be regarded as symbolic and indicating (12 x 10 + 7) the universal dominion of Xerxes.
If, on the other hand, it is treated as historical, we are reminded of Dan. vi. 1, which tells how Darius appointed satraps Over 120 provinces, and the suggestion is that the kingdom of Xerxes was greater even than that of Darius. According to Herodotus (iii. 89) there were only twenty satrapies in the kingdom of Darius, or, according to his own inscriptions, twenty-nine ; hence, provinces (Hebr. medinah) would refer to subdivisions of satrapies corresponding to racial groupings. Paton, /s¢. p. 124, mentions that in Ezra ii. 1 the ‘ province’ means no more than Judaea, which was only a part of the great satrapy of Trans-Euphrates (Syria, Phoenicia, and Cyprus).
India. Not modern India, but its north-west portion which is watered by the Indus. For the conquest of India by Darius see Hdt. iii. 94-106.
Ethiopia. The modern Nubia. Hdt. iii. 97 relates the subjection of Ethiopia by Cambyses.
India to Ethiopia is borrowed from Esther i. 1, viii. 9 LXX (cf. Dan. iii. 1 LXX), the former representing Hebr. “δια and the latter rightly Azsh.
2. I desire, lit. 7 deszved, in the epistolary manner.
and, making . .. furthest bounds. > Vulg. There is a slight anacoluthon here, which is removed if for παρεξόμενος we read παρασχεῖν.
peaceable. For ἥμερον, lit. came, i.e. through building cities and roads, A and many cursives read ἤρεμον.
3. my advisers. Cf. Esther i. 13-15.
among us, i.e. at our court.
unswetving- Reading with Complut. ἀπαραλλάκτῳ for τως BNA.
second place in the kingdom, i.e. next after the king. Cf. Dan. v. 7. But Haman is not named among the counsellors of the king in Esther i.14. There is something to be said for Fritzsche’s βασιλείων δὲ B instead of Swete’s βασιλειῶν. The latter is what we should expect, but in Esther i. το LXX Haman is called one of the seven eunuchs that ministered to the king. However, ‘ the second place in the palace’ is a comparatively inferior position.
4. evilly-disposed people. Cf. Jos. Amz. xi. 6. 5; Esther iii. 8.
in opposition. ἀντίθετον B, ἀντίτυπον NA.
ordinances. προστάγματα B, διατάγματα B4» (δια- over an erasure) δὲ Α.
be brought about. κατατίθεσθαι. Fritzsche’s καθίστασθαι is hardly necessary. gL
5. in opposition. ἐν ἀντιπαραγωγῇ, a military metaphor, lit. es 2% hostile formation against. Cf. 1 Macc. xiii. 20.
THE ADDITIONS TO ESTHER. B5—C 5
observing perversely an alien manner of life in respect of its laws and being ill-affected towards our ὁ (6) government, working all the damage it can that our kingdom may not attain to security, we have decreed accordingly that they that are indicated to you in the letters of Haman, who is set over our affairs and zs our second father, be all with wives and children destroyed root and branch by the sword of their enemies without pity or mercy, on the tfourteenth} day of the twelfth month Adar in ἢ (7) the present year; that they who in days past and even now are malicious may in one day go down violently into Hades, and may henceforth leave our state secure and unthreatened. Σ
ADDITION C. The Prayer of Mordecai.
τ 1) (8). And Mardocheus besought the Lord, calling to remembrance all the works of the Lord, and said,
2 (9) ‘Lord, Lord, King that rulest over all. for in Thy power is the whole world, and there is none that
3 (10) gainsayeth Thee when Thou willest to save Israel: for Thou didst make heaven and earth, and
4 (11) every wondrous thing beneath the heaven ; and Thou art Lord of all, and there is not ove that shall ( resist Thee, the Lord.
12) ‘Thou knowest all things; Thou knowest, Lord, that it was not in insolence or in pride or in vainglory that I did this, ¢o wz, that I did not bow before proud Haman.
observing perversely. παραλλάσσον, bya solecistic use. This seems to make ξενίζουσαν superfluous ; accordingly Fritzsche suggests παραφυλάσσον, but Jos. supports the text. παράλλαξιν N&* A,
manner ... laws, i.e. the Mosaic law. νόμων is very loosely joined to διαγωγήν.
that our kingdom. συντελοῦν κακὰ καὶ πρός. I omit καί which has crept in through dittography. δὲ points in this direction.
6. accordingly. > οὖν Ne.
set over our affairs. Vulg. renders ‘qui omnibus prouinciis praepositus est, et secundus a rege’. Cf. Dan.
our second father. Vulg. has ‘quem patris loco colimus’. Cf. Add. E11. “Phe expression reflects the king’s regard for Haman (cf. Esther vi. 11) rather than Haman’s solicitude for the welfare of the king. Cf. 1 Macc. xi. 32, ‘ Demetrius the king to Lasthenes his father, greeting.’
be ... destroyed. ἀπολέσαι BNA, deleantur Vulg. In some ways ἀπολέσθαι would be smoother, as the subject of ἀπολέσαι is not named.
sword of their enemies. ἐθνῶν μάχαις A can hardly be intentional.
on the tfourteentht day. This should no doubt be ¢hzrteenth; cf. Esther ili. 13, viil. 12, ix. 1, E 20. The error is due to a confusion between the day fixed for the massacre and the day fixed for the commemorative festival ; cf. Esther ix. 16-19. No very careful attempt was originally made to remove discrepancies between the canonical book and the Additions.
Adar. Luc. texts have the Macedonian ‘ Dystri’.
7. our state. πράγματα BN rightly, but A, recalling v. 4, has προστάγματα. After mp. Old Lat. has (cf. E 24)
‘qui autem celebrauerit gentes Iudaeorum inhabitabilis non solum inter homines sed nec inter aves ; et igni sancto comburetur et substantia eius in regnum conferetur. Vale.’
ADDITION C. Zhe Prayer of Mordecai, vv. 1-11. Add. C follows Esther iv. 17 in LXX, and immediately precedes Add. D. In Vulg. it is numbered xiii. 8-xiv. 19. It is separated from xiii. 7, which forms the conclusion of Add. B, by the following words: * Hucusque exemplar epistolae. Quae sequuntur, post eum locum scripta reperi, ubi legitur: Pergensyue Mardochaeus fecit omnia quae et mandaverat Esther, Nec tamen habentur in Hebraico, et apud nullum penitus feruntur interpretum.’
Josephus makes free use of Add. C in Azz. x1. 6. 8.
1. NA read Μαρδοχαῖος ἐδεήθη. 2. Lord, Lord. κύριε θε κύριε A.
for in Thy power. This clause introduced by ὅτε establishes the assertion of the Divine Sovereignty.
the whole world. For τὸ πᾶν, the universe, cf. Sir. xlii. 17, xliii. 27, and Plat. 777. 28 C, Cra¢. 436E. Heaven and earth are specified in next v. as the chief constituents of τὸ wav. Cf. Isa. xlv. 18. . ᾿
that gainsayeth Thee. For ἀντιδοξεῖν, a late Gr. word, cf. ἀντοφθαλμεῖν, Wisd. xii. 14, ‘ Neither king nor tyrant shall be able to gainsay Thee in Thy punishments.’
when Thou willest. ἐν τῷ θέλειν, si decreuerts Vulg.
shall resist. Cf. Wisd. xii. 12, ‘Who shall say “ What hast Thou done ?” or who shall resist Thy judgement?’ 5. thatit was...Haman. > Old Lat. ;
not in insolence. Mordecai disclaims any personal prejudice against Haman as the reason for his refusal, and in v.7 puts forward a reason savouring strongly of the morbid scrupulosity of later Judaism. Any reason which would have been valid in the case of Haman, the king’s representative, would have been valid also when M. appeared before the king, and yet not only did M. have to bow to the king, when he became vizier, but he must have himself received the homage of the people (Esther viii. 15). Ezra and Nehemiah appear to have observed the court regulations without
rotest.
Β Various conjectures as to the ground for M.’s refusal are noted by Paton, Zs¢. pp. 196, 197. The reason is not given in canon. Esther, and that given here is purely imaginary.
THE ADDITIONS TO ESTHER ὁ 6-16
6 (13) ‘For I had been content to kiss the soles of his feet for the salvation of Israel. ;
7 (14) ‘But I did this that I might not set the glory of a man above the glory of God: and I will bow before none save before Thee, my Lord, and I will not do it in pride.
8 (15) ‘And now, Lord, God and King, the God of Abraham, spare Thy people ; for the eyes of our enemies are against us to consume us, and they seek to destroy the heritage that is Thine from the beginning. i
9 (16) ‘Despise not Thy portion which Thou didst redeem unto Thyself out of the land of Egypt.
10 (17) Hearken to my prayer, and be gracious unto Thine heritage; and turn our mourning into feasting, that we may live and sing Thy Name, O Lord; and destroy not the mouth of them that praise Thee.’ :
11 (18) And all Israel cried out with their might, for their death was before their eyes.
The Prayer of Esther.
12(xiv)(1) And Esther, the queen, fled zz prayer unto the Lord, being seized with an agony of death. And 13 (2) taking off her glorious raiment, she put on garments of anguish and mourning ; and instead of the choice ointments, she covered her head with ashes and dung, and she humbled her body τοῦδ much 14 (3) fasting, and ‘every place of the ornament of her joy she filled with her tangled hair. And she besought the Lord God of Israel and said, ‘My Lord, our King, Thou art God alone ; help me who 15 (4) stand alone, and have no helper save Thee: for my danger is in my hand. τό (5) ‘I have heard ever since I was born in the tribe of my family that Thou, Lord, didst take Israel out of all the nations, and our fathers from their progenitors, for an everlasting inheritance, and that Thou didst for them all that Thou didst promise.
6. Mordecai acknowledges that his attitude towards Haman has brought this calamity on his people. to kiss the soles. Cf. Xen. Cyr. vii. 5. 32, ἃ token of homage apparently reserved for kings. Cf. Isa. xlix. 23, ‘lick the dust of thy feet.’ Η 7. the glory οἵ aman. Ryssel quotes Dan. iii. 18; 2 Macc. vii. 2. will not do it, i.e. will refuse to give homage to Haman. 8. Godand. > 06 θεός δ Α Vulg. eyes...are against us. ἐπιβλέπουσιν. Cf. Lat. 2-videre. heritage. For κληρονομία in the sense of God’s special possession of Israel cf. Ps. xxvill. 9, xciv. 5. 9. Thy portion. For μερίς cf. Sir. xvii. 18. These words seem to be a reminiscence of Deut. ix. 26 LXX μὴ ἐξολεθρεύσῃς .. - τὴν μερίδα σου ἣν ehutpaow .. . ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου. 10. heritage. For κλῆρος cf. Deut. ix. 29; ‘sorti et funiculo tuo’ Vulg. mourning into feasting. Cf. Isa. Ixi. 3, and for εὐωχία 3 Macc. vi. 30. f destroy not. μὴ ἀφανίσῃς, lit. ‘blot not out’; Vulg. suggests the idea of the cessation of spoken praise and renders freely, ‘ne Claudas ora te canentium.’ It is the living who praise God, cf. Isa. xxxvill. 19. For στόμα B, τὸ στ. ΔΑΝ has τὸ αἷμα, which is impossible, but N°* corrects to στόμα. . 11. all Israel. With this v. cf. Esther iv. 16. with their might. ἐξ ἰσχύος αὐτῶν. Cf. Dan. iii. 4, iv. 11, ἐν ἰσχύι, and Isa. xlii. 13. Vulg. has ‘pari mente et obsecratione ’. vu. 12-30. The Prayer of Esther. 12: ΠΕ ΘΙ ΒΞ: ΟΧΣΞ τὸ δῇ agony. For ἐν ἀγῶνι some cursives have ἀγωνίᾳ. Cf. Luke xxii. 44. Esther’s condition was one of great perplexity ; she was beset on one side by the stringent rules of the court etiquette, and on the other by her patriotism and the outspoken insistency of Mordecai (Esther iv. 13, 14). 13. taking off. Cf. Jonah iii. 6. glorious raiment, including the διάδημα (Esther i. 11, iil. 17). Cf. Ps. xlv. 14; Isa. ili. 18 ff. garments of anguish. Cf. Judith viii. 5. Sackcloth is no doubt intended. ointments. As symbols of joy. Cf. Ps. xlv. 8, cxxxiii. 2; Isa. Ix1. 3. covered her head. κεφαλὴν αὐτῆς NA, Cf. Judith ix, 1. humbled her body. σῶμα αὐτῆς δ Α. Cf. ‘ to afflict the soul with fasting’, Lev. xvi. 29; Ps. xxxv. 13. every place. It would be most natural to interpret this of her apartments, but as the entire passage refers to the disfigurement of Esther’s person, it must mean that her torn hair fell over the sackcloth she was clothed in.
14. And... Israel. Old Lat. substitutes ‘and she fell upon the earth with her maidens from morning until evening’. My Lord. κύριε ὁ 65 pou A. Cf. v. 2. My Lord...alone. Old Lat. substitutes ‘ Deus Abraham et Deus Isaac et Deus Jacob, benedictus es ’.
Thou art God alone, following Swete’s punctuation, lit. ‘Thou alone hast being’. Cf. Ps. Ixxxvi. το. R.V. has ‘Thou only art our King’. But this does not bring out the idea of God’s absolute sovereignty so well. Note the Gr. σὺ εἶ μόνος" βοήθησόν μοι τῇ μύνῃ.
15. ἐν τῇ χειρί μου Α. 16. Ihave heard. Cf. Deut. xxxii. 7; Ps. xliv. 1. didst take Israel. Cf. Deut. iv. 20, 34, xxvi. 5 ; Joshua xxiv. 3.
progenitors. So R.V. for προγόνων, better than A.V. predecessors. inheritance. Deut. xxxii. 9.
didst promise. A inserts αὐτοῖς. For vv, 16-23 (ὅτι ov... . θλίψεως ἡμῶν) Old Lat. has ‘quoniam Noe in aqua diluvii conservasti. Ego audivi in libris paternis meis Domine quoniam tu Abrahae in trecentis et decem octo viris novem reges tradidisti. Ego audivi
fis ADDONS TO ESTHER. τ -
[17 (6) ‘And now we have sinned before Thee, and Thou hast delivered us into the hands of our enemies ! 18 (7) because we have given glory to their gods. Righteous art Thou, O Lord. | 19 (8) ‘And now they have not been satisfied with the bitterness of our captivity, but they have laid 20(9) their hands (in the hands of their idols), to remove the ordinance of Thy mouth, and to destroy Thine inheritance, and to stop the mouth of them that praise Thee, and to quench the glory of Thy (10) house, and Thy altar, and to open the mouth of the nations to give praise to vain zdo/s, and that a king of flesh should be magnified for ever.’ 22 (11) ‘Surrender not, O Lord, Thy sceptre unto them that be not gods; and let not them ¢hat are our enemies mock at our fall; but turn their counsel against themselves, and make an example of him that began Zo do this against us. 3(12) ‘Remember (us), O Lord; make Thyself known 70 7s in the time of our tribulation, and give me courage, O King of the gods and Lord over all dominion. 4 (13) ‘Put eloquent speech into my mouth before the lion; and turn his heart to hatred of him that fighteth against us, that there may be an end of him and of them that are likeminded with him.
5 (14) ‘But save us by Thy hand, and help me who s¢and alone, and have none save Thee, O Lord.
in libris paternis meis Domine quoniam tu Ionam de ventre ceti liberasti. Ego audivi in libris paternis meis Domine quoniam tu Ananiam Azariam Misahel de camino ignis liberasti. Ego audivi in libris paternis meis Domine quoniam tu Daniel de Jacu leonum eruisti. Ego audivi in libris paternis meis Domine quoniam tu Ezechiae regi Iudaeorum morte damnato et oranti pro vita misertus es et donasti ei vitae annos quindecim. Ego audivi in libris paternis meis Domine quoniam tu Annae petenti in desiderio animae, filii generationem dedisti. Ego audivi in libris paternis meis Domine quoniam tu complacentes tibi liberas Domine usque in finem.’
17. Andnow. ὅτι Α.
we have sinned. Cf. Dan. ix. 16. The Prayer of Esther recalls the tone of the Prayer of Daniel.
delivered us. Cf. Deut. iv. 27.
18. given glory. Ryssel thinks this refers to a declension into idolatry on the part of Israel while in exile. But it cannot be so: the exile is viewed as the punishment of pre-exilic idolatry. Cf. 2 Kings xvii. 10-16, 29-41, xxi. 7, 21.
Righteous. Cf. Dan. ix. 7.
19. satisfied. A late use of ἱκανοῦσθαι.
laid their hands. Vulg., failing to understand the meaning, renders ‘ robur manuum suarum idolorum potentiae deputantes’.
We must either render literally, ‘they have applied their hands,’ &c., or, following the hint supplied by δὲ ἢ τὰς χεῖρας τῶν εἰδώλων αὐτῶν, read with NC® ™S: ἔθηκαν τὰς χεῖρας αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τὰς χεῖρας τῶν εἰδώλων, and render as in text. . The mistake, as Lagarde saw, was caused by the double χεῖρας.
For the custom of striking hands as the outward expression of a contract or bargain cf. 2 Kings x. 15; Prov. xi.
20. ordinance. ὁρισμός. Cf. Dan. vi. 7,8, 12,15. If the ὁρισμοί of the Medes and Persians were unchangeable, what an impiety to seek to overthrow those of the living God! The destruction of Israel would invalidate the determination of God to make Israel His inheritance.
mouth ... praise. στόματα ὑμνούντων A. For ἐμφράξαι cf. Job v. 16; Ps. Ixill. 11, evil. 42.
house, i.e. the Temple. Cf. Isa. vi. 1. That the reference must be to the Temple of Jerusalem, still the ideal centre of the people’s religion even though destroyed and its worship suspended, is plain from the mention of the altar. With the destruction of the people the altar-fire would be finally quenched. Cf. Judith ix. ὃ.
21. vain idols. μάταια, a conventional word for false gods. Cf. Lev. xvil. 7 LXX.
should be magnified. The passive θαυμασθῆναι follows very loosely upon the active infinitives which depend on ἔθηκαν τὰς χεῖρας. The Persian king is referred to, who will win glory for all time, as a king of flesh who has defeated the King of heaven. Vulg. loosely renders ‘ et laudent idolorum fortitudinem ἡ.
22. Surrender not. For God to permit the destruction of His people is tantamount to an abdication of His throne and the power symbolized (in the case of an earthly king) by the sceptre.
them that be not gods. τοῖς μὴ οὖσι, i.e. those who have no being, in contrast to Jehovah, in whom being resides. Cf. v.14 σὺ εἶ μόνος, and Wisd. xili. 10-19, xiv. 13 οὔτε yap ἣν [εἴδωλα] ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς, οὔτε εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα ἔσται, and 1 Cor. vill. 4.
mock. Either the subject of the verb is changed, and ‘ our enemies’ is now the subj.; or the gods are thought of as mocking. Cf. Wisdom’s mocking, Prov. i. 26, and Jehovah’s, Ps. ii. 4. The former seems to suit the context better.
their counsel. αὐτοῦ δὲ ἢ, i.e. Haman.
make anexample. παραδειγμάτισον. Cf. Num. xxv. 4; Ezek. xxviii. 17 ; Heb. vi. 6.
him that began. Haman. ‘ qui in nos coepit saevire’ Vulg.
23. make Thyself known. Cf. Ps. xliv. 23-26. f
give me courage. In this verse Esther passes from prayer for national deliverance to prayer for personal safety (vv. 24-9). In support of her entreaty she urges (vv. 26-28) that for religious reasons, none of which is even hinted at in canon. Esther, she hates the position she is forced to occupy, and distinguishes her official duties from her personal predilections. Here again, as in v. 7, we find ourselves in the atmosphere of later Judaism.
King of the gods. Cf. Ps. xcv. 3.
before the lion. Strength is suggested, cf. Jer. xlix. 19 ; and terribleness, cf. Prov. xix. 12, xx. 2; Sir. xxviii. 23. The Aramaic ‘ Mordecai’s Dream’ has, ‘ For Thy maid feareth before him, as the kid before the lion’ (Merx, Chres?.
turn his heart. For μετατίθημι in this sense cf. Sir. vi. 9 φίλος μετατιθέμενος εἰς ἔχθραν.
anend. συντέλεια in this sense is used with ἀπώλεια 1 Mace. iil. 42.
25. havenone. A assimilates to 7. 14 by adding βόηθον.
THE ADDITIONS TO ESTHER €26— D3
26 (15) ‘Knowledge hast Thou of all things, and Thou knowest that I hate the glory of the wicked, and I 27 (16) detest the bed of the uncircumcised and of any alien. Thou knowest my necessity, that I abhor the sign of my proud estate, which is upon my head in the days when I show myself openly ; I abhor it
as a menstruous rag, and I wear it not in the days of my leisure. ' 28(17) ‘And Thy servant hath not eaten at the table of Haman, and I have not honoured the king’s
feast, neither have I drunk the wine of the libations. : : 29 (18) «And Thy servant hath known no joy since the day I was brought here until now, save in Thee,
30 (19) Lord God of Abraham. O God, whose strength is over all, hear the voice of the hopeless, and save us from the hand of them that deal wickedly, and save me out of my fear.’
ADDITION D.
The appearance of Esther before the king.
τ (xv)(4) And it came to pass on the third day, when she had ceased praying, she put off her garments of 2 (5) humiliation, and clothed herself in her glorious apparel. And being majestically adorned, she called 3(6) upon the all-seeing God and Saviour, and took with her two maids: and upon the one she leaned as
26. Knowledge hast Thou... and Thou knowest. Cf. St. Peter’s appeal to the universal knowledge of Christ ohn xxi. 17. : I Bate the glory. It is no personal vanity that keeps Esther where she is; the glory of her high place is shame to her. Cf, Esther ii. 8-17. of any alien. The prohibition of marriages with those outside the covenant dated from very early times (cf. Deut. vii. 3, 4), and came to rest on religious sentiment blended with national prejudice. In Ezra x.2, Neh. xiii. 23 ff., we learn something of the abhorrence in which the marriage of Jewish men with heathen women was held. A, through a simple oversight, omits from ‘the bed of ’ (v. 26) down to ‘ that I abhor’ (v. 27). 27. my necessity. She is under compulsion, and as wife of a heathen king she must wear the token of her dignity, the royal crown, her badge of shame. sign of my proud estate. The crown royal, a kind of peaked turban, which had to be worn when the queen appeared in public. Cf. Esther i. 11, ii. 17. For ὀπτασία, appearance, cf. Mal. ili. 2. rag. Cf. Isa. Ixiv. 6.
king’s feast. Cf. Esther i. 5, 11. 18. the libations. Cf. Deut. xxxii. 38 LXX. One reason for Esther’s abstention from the royal feasts was their
heathen character. Cf. Dan. v. 3, 4. Fuller suggests that there is a reference here to the Haoma-drink, which ‘ was drunk by the faithful for the benefit of themselves and the gods’. Cf. Sayce, Ancient Empires, p. 269. 29. since the day I was brought, lit. ‘ since the day of my change’, i.e. since the day of entry into the palace. 30. the hopeless. For ἀπηλπισμένων cf. Isa. xxix. 19; Judith ix. 11. saveus...saveme. Cf. v.23. Old Lat. adds ‘ transfer luctum nostrum in laetitiam, dolores autem nostros in hilaritatem : surgentes autem supra partem tuam Deus palam facito, aperi Domine ; cognoscere Domine’.
ADDITION Ὁ. Esthers interview with the king, vv. 1-16. Add. D consists of sixteen verses, and follows in LXX immediately upon Add. C. In Vulg. it is numbered xv. 4-19, and is separated from xiv. 19 by the following words, which are not unlike Esther iv. 13 ff. :
‘ Haec quogue addita repert in editione Vulgata.
(1) Et mandavit ei (haud dubium quin esset Mardochaeus) ut ingrederetur ad regem, et rogaret pro populo suo et pro patria sua.
(2) Memorare, inquit, dierum humilitatis tuae, quomodo nutrita sis in manu mea, quia Aman, secundus a rege, locutus est contra nos in mortem ;
(3) Et tu invoca Dominum, et loquere regi pro nobis, et libera nos de morte.
Nec non et ista quae subdita sunt.’
Jos. (Anz. xi. 6. 9) draws largely upon Add. D, which endeavours to show in detail what is briefly stated in Esther v.1f. The danger of Esther’s enterprise is emphasized by the king’s wrath, which serves also to set off the power of God which could turn the king’s heart.
1. the third day. Cf. Esther iv. 16, v. 1. A. W. Streane quotes the Midrash, ‘Never did the Israelites find themselves in trouble longer than three days,’ and refers to Gen. xxii. 4, xlii. 17; Jonah i.17; and Hos. vi. 2.
when she had ended her prayer. > Vulg.
garments of humiliation. ἱμάτια θεραπείας, cf. D 13; so A.V. garments of mourning. Esther's θεραπεία (or service), Cf. Esther iv. 16, consisted in mortification and prayer. Accordingly, Fritzsche is perhaps right in emending vest. ornatus Vulg. to vest. oratus. After these words Old Lat. has ‘et lavavit corpus suum aqua et unxit se unctione’.
glorious apparel. Cf. Esther v. 1 and Judith x. 3.
2. majestically adorned. γενηθεῖσα ἐπιφανής. Vulg. “ cum regio fulgeret habitu’; Jos. ‘adorned herself as became a queen ’. }
she called. The religious element is as usual emphasized in non-canonical Esther.
two maids. So NA, instead of ras δύο B, her two maids. She was waited upon by seven maids (cf. Esther il, 9), and of them she took with her only two.
For ἅβρα (Vulg. famula, but elsewhere delicata, i.e. pretty, delicate) cf. Gen. xxiv. 61; Judith x. 5.
The ἅβραι were maids of honour for the queen’s personal service.
3. she leaned. ἐπηρείδετο, cf. Prov. iii. 18.
Pri ADD THONS TO ESHER, =D 4-14
(7) 5(8) one that walked delicately, and the other followed Zev, holding up her train. And she herself was i radiant in the perfection of her beauty, and her countenance was happy and lovely: but her heart 6 (9) was stricken with fear. And when she had passed all the doors, she took her stand before the kine - now he was sitting upon his royal throne, clad in all his array of majesty, all adorned with gold and ᾿ precious stones. And he was very terrible. A 7 (10) And lifting up his face that flamed with glory, he looked wpon her in fierce wrath. And the queen fell down and changed colour and swooned, and she bowed herself down upon the head of the maid who went before her. (11) And God changed the spirit of the king into mildness, and in alarm he sprang up from his throne and raised her in his arms until she came to herself again, and comforted her with reassuring words, )and said unto her, ‘ What is it, Esther? I am thy brother. Be of good cheer, thou shalt not die, ) For our commandment is ov/y for our subjects. Draw near,’ ; ) Then he raised the golden sceptre and laid it on her neck, and embraced her and said, ‘ Speak to me.’ 16) And she said unto him, ‘I saw thee, my lord, as an angel of God, and my heart was dismayed for 17) fear of thy glory. For wonderful art thou, lord, and thy countenance is full of grace.’
_~oa ee el
pa is se
walked delicately. ὡς τρυφερευομένη, Vulg. ‘quasi prae deliciis et nimia teneritudine corpus suum ferre non sustinens’. Esther adopted the languishing manner of deportment cultivated by the pampered ladies of the harem. The impression of delicateness is heightened by Esther’s having a train-bearer. ὡς rpu¢., lit. ‘like a pampered, effeminate woman’. ᾿
4. train. ἔνδυσις, a very rare use, and dr. dey. in LXNX.
5. the perfection. ἀκμῇ BNA, ὡς ἀκμῇ δὲ, ἐν ἀκ. N° Cf. uv. 7, ἐν ἀκμῇ θυμοῦ, 27 fierce wrath,
happy and lovely, lit. ‘happy like a lovely (face)’. Old Lat. adds ‘oculi autem gratissimi’.
6. passed all the doors. Cf. Esther v. 1, ‘[she] stood in the inner court of the king’s house, over against the king’s house: and the king sat upon his royal throne in the royal house, over against the entrance of the house.’ Esther had entered into the inner court, in itself an act of presumption. Cf. Esther iv. 11. The throne-room opened upon the inner court, and through this door Esther passed into the immediate presence of the king.
took her stand. κατέστη, but ἔστη Ne A.
majesty. ἐπιφάνεια ; cf. v. 2 ἐπιφανής. The regular use of emu. in LXN is in connexion with the w7sttations of heavenly beings ; cf. 2 Macc. (six times). The sculptures of Persepolis present a striking picture of the splendour of a Persian king (cf. Rawlinson, Azczent Mon. iv. 153). The Greeks assessed at 12,000 talents the value of the precious stones worn by Xerxes.
7. flamed with glory. > δόξῃ A, which reads καὶ ἦρεν τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ πεπυρωμένον ἐν ἀκμῇ θυμοῦ, and ‘he lifted his face, which flamed in fullness of wrath’. For ἀκμὴ θυμ. cf. v. 5.
fierce wrath. Esther had violated the rule (see Esther iv. 11) which forbade any one to approach the king unsummoned. After ἔβλεψεν Old Lat. has ‘et cogitabat perdere eam rex, et erat ambiguus clamans, et dixit, quis ausus est introire in aulam non vocatus ?’
felldown. Cf. Esther viii. 3. But this seems to be a fall due to fear, rather than in token of obeisance. Vulg. corrutt.
changed colour. μετεβάλετο δὲ, but μεταβάλλειν has an intr. use.
swooned. ἐν ἐκλύσει. But LXX more commonly gives a milder meaning to ἔκλυσις, 1.6. weariness, and Vulg. does so here, taking ἐν ἐκὰ. with the following clause, ‘ lassum super ancillulam reclinavit caput.
bowed herself down. ἐπέκυψεν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς τῆς ἅβρας τῆς προπορευομένης αὐτῆς A, προσπορ. N, le. ‘who was coming towards (the king)’.
8. changed the spirit. Cf. an intr. use of μεταβ., Hab. i. 11 τότε μεταβαλεῖ τὸ πνεῦμα. Old Lat. has ‘Deus autem iram convertit in miserationem et furorem ipsius in tranquillitatem’. For μετεβ. N* has μετέλαβεν, and conversely for ἀνέλαβεν below A has ἀνέβαλεν.
inalarm. ἀγωνιάσας, Vulg. ‘ festinus ac metuens’.
from his throne. > αὐτοῦ A.
with reassuring words, lit. with peaceable words. For the expr. λύγοι εἰρηνικοί cf. Deut. 11. 26; Mic. vil. 3; and 1 Macc. (seven times) ; also Sir. iv. ὃ ἀποκρίθητι αὐτῷ εἰρηνικὰ ἐν πραύτητι.
9. What is it, Esther? Old Lat. adds ‘soror mea Hester es et consors regni’.
thy brother. An expression of intimacy, intended to show that the king regarded Esther as really entitled to special consideration. Cf. Song of Solomon viii. 1. For the Egyptian use of ἀδελφός as ‘ husband’ cf, Witkowski, Epist. Priv. Graec. xxvi, p. 37, where we find a wife so addressing her husband. For the converse use of ἀδελφή cf.
Io. our commandment. Lit. ovr comm. is common, i.e. it governs the king’s subjects generally, but not so favoured a one as Esther. Cf. Vulg. ‘non enim pro te, sed pro omnibus haec lex constituta est’. The words, preceded by ‘ Thou shalt not die’, are a reminiscence of Esther iv. 11. Paton, however (p. 220), quotes Herodotus to the etfect that people might send in a message to the king, and request an audience.
11. Draw near. Vulg. ‘ Accede igitur et tange sceptrum ’.
12. embraced her. τὴν Ἐσθήρ A. The pronoun is better as in BN.
13. as an angel of God, i.e. radiant and terrible. The expression does not accord well with the scrupulosity shown by Esther in Add. C; it comes strangely from a Jew to a heathen. Perhaps this is why it does not appear either in Josephus, or the Midrash, or Ben-Gorion. Cf. 1 Sam. xxix. 9 (cod. Al.) ; 2 Sam. Χινε 17, 20: ΧΙΧ: 2η-
for fear of. > φόβου A, but Vulg. has ‘ prae timore gloriae’.
14. full of grace. χαρίτων μεστόν. Cf. Ps. xlv. 2 ὡραῖος κάλλει παρὰ τοὺς υἱοὺς τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ἐξεχύθη ἡ χάρις ἐν
χείλεσίν σου.
THE ADDITIONS TO ESTHER.” D15—E5
15 (18) But while she was speaking, she fell swooning. 16 (19) And the king was troubled, and all his servants sought to comfort her.
ADDITION E. The Decree of Artaxerxes concerning the Fews.
τ (xvi) Of which letter that which follows is a copy. εν ΐ
The great king Artaxerxes to the rulers of countries in one hundred and twenty-seven satrapies from India to Ethiopia, and to those who are well affected to our government, greeting.
2 Many, the more often they are honoured by the all too great goodwill of their benefactors, have 3 become the more proud; and not only do they seek to injure our subjects, but, being unable to ἡ endure abundance, they take in hand to devise schemes against their own benefactors. And not only do they take thankfulness away from men, but also, being lifted up with the ostentatiousness
of the foolish, they suppose that they shall escape the evil-hating justice of the all-surveying God. 5 Yea, and oftentimes many of those who have been placed in she highest positions of authority have been moved by the specious words of ¢hose their friends who have been entrusted with the administration of the government to become partakers of innocent blood, and have become involved
15. Swooning. ἀπὸ ἐκλύσεως Β + αὐτῆς SA, lit. because of her fainting. She fella second time. Cf. v. 7. 16. servants. θεραπεία, curta Old Lat. Cf. Gen. xlv. 16 Φαραὼ καὶ ἡ θεραπεία αὐτοῦ.
Appition E. Zhe decree of Artaxerxes concerning the Jews, xvi. {-24. Add. E consists of twenty-four verses, and is placed in LXX between Esther viil. 12 and viii. 13. In Vulg. it is numbered XVi. 1-24, and is separated from Add. D by the words ‘ Exemplar epistolae regis Artaxerxis, quam pro Iudaeis ad totas regni sui provincias misit ; quod et ipsum _in Hebraico volumine non habetur’. It presents an imaginary reconstruction of the edict mentioned in Esther viii, 13; which, while cancelling the earlier rescript (Add. B), instructs all the king’s subjects in the most precise way to render all the aid in their power to the Jews on the thirteenth day of Adar. For the style of this Add. see note on Add. B. Josephus, Az. xi. 6. 12 reproduces this letter very fully. ᾿
1. Of which letter, lit. of which things, i.e. the letter, that which follows ts a copy. av > X*.
to the rulers .. . Ethiopia. The recipients are described in almost identical terms with those in Add. B. Here σατραπείαις (σατράπαις N*, σατραπίαις N°“) precedes χωρῶν. On satrapies see B 1. ἰδίων χωρῶν ᾿ξ ἢ,
to those πο... government. τοῖς τὰ ἡμέτερα φρονοῦσι takes the place of τοπάῤχαις ὑποτεταγμένοις in B 1. Nea mg A have wrongly καὶ σατράπαις τοῖς τὰ... Two classes of officials are thus referred to, (4) the governors in 127 satrapies, (4) the other officials, less prominent than satraps. Vulg. supports this view with ‘ac principibus qui nostrae iussioni oboediunt’, and this is better than to refer the clause (with Fritzsche) to subjects generally, who are mentioned unambiguously in τ΄. 3. Jos. seems to favour ‘subjects’.
2. Many. A veiled reference to Haman. Cf. Esther iii. 1.
their benefactors. Cf. Luke xxii.25. Their benefactors are the kings who have elevated them to their high position. A. W. Streane recalls how Ptolemy III (247-242 B.c.) obtained the actual title of εὐεργέτης (benefactor) through his restoration of the images of Egyptian gods, carried off by Cambyses to Persia.
the more proud. μεῖζον ἐφρόνησαν. The general is interpreted by the particular in vz. 12-14.
3. abundance, i.e. the excess of the honour bestowed on them in particular. Ryssel recalls the old proverb τίκτει
τοι κύρος ὕβριν. Satiety is shown in thanklessness, v. 4.
against their own benefactors. It has been suggested that Haman was not altogether free from participation in the plot of the two eunuchs, discovered by Mordecai (Add. A), and that Haman’s hatred of Mordecai was due to his having been thwarted by him. Cf.A17. Haman’s part in the plot may be referred to here. See also Esther
4. thankfulness. καὶ κατὰ τὴν evy. NA wrongly, by dittography. ;
lifted up... foolish. ‘Avidorum praesumptionibus inflammati’ Old Lat. This is a nearer translation of τοῖς τῶν ἀπειραγάθων κόμποις ἐπαρθέντες than in Vulg. ‘humanitatis in se iura violare’. ἀπειραγάθων has given much concern to copyists (ὑπεραγάθων 52, ἀπειρωπάθων 93 a) and to commentators, but it is a late ecclesiastical word, and (like ἀπειρόκαλος) is not to be translated literally, but with the general sense of foolish. ‘ Men ignorant of benefits’ is very clumsy. Zhe foolish are either the parasites who fawn upon the zouveau riche, or the too highly honoured man himself.
suppose. For ὑπολαμβ. 8*°? A have διαλαμβ.
evil-hating. An attribute properly belonging to God, but here by a rhetorical licence applied to His justice. With μισοπόνηρος cf. μισοπονηρία, 2 Macc. iii. 1, and μισοπονηρεῖν, 2 Macc. iv. 49, vill. 4.
5. those placed . . . positions, i.e. kings, such as Xerxes himself, who have been misled by their underlings.
specious words. παραμυθία in the Greek is the subject of the verb, but the sentence runs more smoothly if it is turned as in text.
friends . . . entrusted. Ryssel suggests with much probability that φίλων should be rendered as in text, and not as often ‘entrusted with the management of the affairs of their friends’, since a king would be slow to speak of kings as the ‘ friends’ of their subordinates. Ryssel speaks of φίλοι as the universal title of honour borne in Egypt by the highest officers of the king (cf. 1 Macc. ii. 18 and Jacob in ZA7W x. 283), and translates Statthalter. Fritzsche emends φίλων to φιλοφρόνως or φιλοτίμως, but this is unnecessary.
_ partakers. For μετόχους B 93 4 have μεταιτίους, which seems better in sense, and explains the corruptions perevous N* and μεταγνοῦσα A.
innocent blood. For αἵματα ἀθῷα cf. Jer. xix. 4. Cf. Jer. ii. 34 αἵματα ψυχῶν ἀθῴων.
THE ADDITIONS TO ESTHER.” E 6=15
6 in irretrievable disasters, tiese men beguiling the innocent goodwill of their lords with the false trickery of their evil disposition.
7 And the things impiously accomplished through the pestilent behaviour of men who ¢hus exercise their power unworthily may be seen not so much by an examination of the more ancient records
8 which have been handed down as by observation of the things near at hand; and care must be taken for the future, in order that we may render the kingdom tranquil and peaceable for all men,
9 not by relying upon tinformations}, but by ever passing judgement with clemency and attentiveness upon the matters that are brought to our notice.
ro For Haman, the son of Hamadathus, a Macedonian (an alien in very truth from the Persian blood
11 and one who is fallen far from our favour), having been a guest among us, so far enjoyed the goodwill which we display towards every nation, that he was called our father, and continued to receive the honour of all as the second person after the royal throne.
13 But he, not bearing his proud position, took counsel to deprive us of our kingdom, and 20 deprive of life not only Mardocheus who is at once our saviour and perpetual benefactor, but also Esther the blameless partner of our kingdom, together with their entire nation, by manifold chicanery and
14 deceits asking for them zo be delivered up to destruction. For through these wiles he thought to catch us isolated and to transfer the kingdom of the Persians to the Macedonians.
15 But we find that the Jews whom this trebly-dyed villain had delivered to destruction are no evil-
6. with the false trickery. τῷ τῆς κακοηθείας τρόπῳ N° ‘while they after the fashion of their maliciousness (i.e. as malice is wont to do) by lying craft overreached.’
7. The text of this verse is slightly corrupt, though the sense is plain. ὡς BA > N*, παραδεδώκαμεν NO, wapeddxapev BA, ὅσα BA, ὅσον &, ὑμᾶς BN A, ὑμῖν N*, ἐκζητοῦντας BNA, ἐκζήτουν S*. Accepting Fritzsche’s ὧν παρέδωκαν (‘ which they, i.e. our predecessors, handed down’), I read as follows: σκοπεῖν δὲ ἔξεστιν, οὐ τοσοῦτον ἐκ τῶν παλαιοτέρων ὧν παρέδωκαν ἱστοριῶν ὅσον τὰ παρὰ πόδας ὑμῖν ἐκζητοῦντας, τὰ ἀνοσίως συντετελεσμένα.
exercise ... unworthily. The text here is corrupt. ἀνάξια δυναστευύντων B, ἀξιας δυναστευω | το N*, ἄξια δυναστευοντῶ N°, αξιοδυναστευοντων A. Fritzsche’s ἀναξίᾳ, . . . λοιμότητι is not very satisfying, besides which τῶν is in the wrong place. I suggest either to read with Cod. 248 τῶν ἀναξίως δυναστευόντων, or to follow the hint given by A and accept the rather long compound τῇ τῶν ἀναξιοδυναστευόντων λοιμότητι. It is just possible that ἀνάξια as in B might be right, the use being adverbial as in ἀνάξια πράττειν ; but a suggestion made by Ryssel, ἀναξίᾳ (dat. of subst. formed from ἀνάσσειν), cannot be entertained.
which ... handed down. ὡς παρεδώκαμεν would mean ‘as we handed down’, but it would not fit with τῶν man. iot., which refer to chronicles of an earlier age. A. W. Streane refers to the inscription on the rock of Behistun, which, recording events in the reign of Xerxes’ predecessor, Darius Hystaspes (522-485 B.C.), tells of the rebellions of Smerdis and Gomatas. Fuller’s ‘as we have made clear’ might be a translation of παραδεδείχαμεν, but not of παραδεδώκαμεν.
the things near at hand. τὰ παρὰ πόδας ὑμῖν. Cf. the prov. τὰ πρὸς ποσὶν σκόπει.
8. care must be taken. Before προσέχειν supply ἔξεστιν from v. 7.
in order that we. Unless εἰς rd . . . παρεξόμεθα is a colloquialism, which is not to be expected in this passage, we must emend εἰς τὸ to ὅπως, or else, following Codd. 52, 64, 243, 248, read Sore, and emend παρεξ. to παρέχειν or παρέξειν.
Be era ation Fritzsche, following Ne A, inserts οὐ, and for μεταβολαῖς BNA suggests διαβολαῖς, which is found in Luc. texts, and is perhaps supported by varzetatibus in Old Lat. and sé diversa zubeamus Vulg., both of which may point to an earlier corruption διαφοραῖς. οὐ χρώμενοι ταῖς διαβολαῖς, as translated in text, is supported by Jos. Anz. xi. 6. 12, ‘it is not fit to attend any longer to calumnies.’ . ᾿
With this change of text, there is no longer the question of the formal revocation of the earlier edict (Add. B), a step which would seem to be opposed to the Persian rule stated in Dan. vi. 8, 12. Cases are indeed cited where Persian kings have repealed their edicts, but the strongest argument for a change of text seems to lie in the evident antithesis between the first and second clauses of v. 9.
10. ws yap ‘Audy BNA. I suggest ὁ yap. ;
a Macedonian. Vulg. ‘et animo et gente Macedo’. Cf. Esther ix. 24 LXX, which renders by Μακεδών the same Hebr. expression as in Esther iii. 1 is rendered Bovyaios. The word is no doubt intended to represent Haman as a traitor, but it is probably employed as a word held in odium by the Jews, who associated it with Antiochus Epiphanes, the hated reversionary in Syria of the Macedonian power. ᾿
an alien. Both ‘ Agagite’ and ‘ Macedonian’ describe Haman as a foreigner. Cf. also the plot ascribed to him in v.14. His malignity is emphasized by ἐπιξενωθείς : he had enjoyed the privileges of hospitality. ;
11. our father. Cf. Add. B 6 and v.3. For ‘father’ as a complimentary title cp. Witkowski, 2%. Priv., p. 50.
as the second person. Cf. Esther iii. 1; see also 2 Chron. xxviii. 7, and 1 Esdras iii. 7 δεύτερος καθιεῖται Δαρείου, καὶ συγγενὴς A. κληθήσεται. : a eee 5 ἘΝ
12. deprive ... kingdom. For Haman’s motive, however, cf. A 17 and Esther ill. 5. See also Esther iil. 11. It is difficult to see what Haman could hope to gain by the motive attributed to him here and inv. 14.
13. benefactor. As recorded in the royal chronicles, Esther vi. 1. Paton writes (p. 245) : ‘It was a point of honour with the Persian kings to reward promptly and magnificently those who conferred benefits upon them (cf. Her. iii. 138, 140; v. 11; viii. 85; ix.107). According to Her. viii. 85 the Persians had a special class of men known as Ovosangaz, or ‘benefactors of the king”.’
14. these wiles. > τούτων A.
transfer. μετάξαι BN A, μεταλλάξαι 44 74 76 106 120 236.
15. trebly-dyed. τρισαλιτήριος. Cf. 2 Macc. vill. 34, xv. 3.
THE ADDITIONS TO ESTHER. E 16—F 1
16 doers, but govern themselves with the most righteous laws, and are sons of the Most High, Most Mighty, Living God, who ordereth the kingdom both for us and for our fathers with the most
excellent governance. 17 Ye will do well therefore not to give effect to the letters sent by Haman the son of Hamadathus,
18 because the man himself who wrought these things has been hanged with all his house at the gate of Susa; for God that ruleth over all hath speedily rendered unto him the justice that he merits.
19 Now therefore display the copy of this letter openly in every place, and suffer the Jews to obey
20 their own laws, and reinforce them so that on the thirteenth day of the twelfth month Adar, on the selfsame day, they may defend themselves against those who attacked them in the time of their
σι affliction: for this day hath the God who ruleth over all made to be unto them a day of gladness instead of the day of destruction for the chosen race.
22 Do yealso therefore, among your commemorative festivals keep z¢ a notable day with all good
23 cheer, that both now and hereafter it may be a day of salvation to us and to the Persians friendly to us, but a memorial of destruction to those who conspire against us.
24 And every city or country without exception which shall not do according to these commands shall fall under our wrath and be destroyed with fire and sword; it shail be rendered not only unpassable for men, but also hateful for all time to beasts and birds.
ADDITION F.
The interpretation of the Dream of Mordecai. 1 (x) (4) And Mardocheus said, ‘ These things are from God.
16. sons of the Most High. Cf. Hos. i. 10 LXX κληθήσονται καὶ αὐτοὶ viol θεοῦ ζῶντος. The Jews are members of the people which God has created as His ‘son’.
who ordereth. ‘Darius Hystaspes, the father of Xerxes, was wont to attribute—judging from the inscription over his tomb at Naksh-i-Rastam—all that he had done to the favour of Ormuzd’ (Sfeaker’s Comm. ad loc.). For the likeness between Persian and Jewish language on the subject cf. Ezra i. 3, vii.21; Dan. iv. 34 ff., vi. 27; Jer. xxvii. 6.
18. hanged. ἐσταυρῶσθαι, i.e. 7mpaled. Cf. Esther vii. το.
with all his house. Haman’s sons were not actually impaled till the fourteenth day of Adar, though they died on the thirteenth day. Cf. Esther ix. 12-14. It was indeed a Persian custom to execute the family with the guilty one (cf. Dan. vi. 24), especially in the case of a traitor, but here Haman evidently suffered alone. Cf. Esther vii. 10,
19. display. ἐκθέντες. For ἐκτιθέναι, a specially Greek-Egyptian word, cf. Esther iii. 14, iv. 8, viii. 13, ix. 14.
openly. With μετὰ παρρησίας cf. Esther viii. 13 ὀφθαλμοφανῶς.
obey their own laws. For νομίμοις BX A have νύμοις. The same permission was given by Artaxerxes to Ezra
20. thirteenth day. So Esther ix. 1, but Add. B 6 has ¢he fourteenth day.
the selfsame day. The very day appointed for the destruction of the Jews. Cf. Esther iii. 13, vill. 11.
21. ruleth over all. ὁ ἐπὶ πάντα A.
chosen race. The Jewish fabricator of the decree betrays himself here by an expression that a Persian king would not have used. For ἐκλεκτός applied to Israel cf. Ps. cv. 6; Isa. xliii. 20.
22. commemorative festivals. Fritzsche, thinking ὑμῶν out of place in a decree addressed to Persians, and unsuitable in connexion with ἐπωνύμοις, which when so used could not bear its full meaning, suggests ἐν ταῖς ἐπωνύμοις κλήρων ἑορταῖς. We should thus have κλήρων as the translation of OV, translating ‘on the feasts known by the name of Lots’. The suggestion is good, but not essential. ᾿ anotable day. Cf. 2 Macc. xv. 36. Translate, supplying ταύτην, ‘ Keep it (i.e. the 13th day of Adar) a notable
23. it may be. After σωτηρία many Codd. add 7.
a day of salvation. σωτηρία stands in antithesis to ἀπωλείας, and should therefore have this accent; Fritzsche, neglecting this, reads σωτήρια (i.e. ἱερά), but wrongly. The day is to be a ‘ salutary’ day for the Persians, as well as a memorial of their king’s deliverance. But they are not called upon to observe the feast in the Jewish way.
Salvation to us. ὑμῖν N* ὑμῶν A, Fritzsche suggests ὑμῖν here for ἡμῖν, which is in harmony with ὑμεῖς at beginning of v. 22.
24. fire and sword, lit. ‘spear and fire’.
unpassable .. . hateful. Cf. Jer. xxxii. 43, li. 62; Ezek. xxv. 13, xxxii. 13.
for alltime. > cis... χρόνον A.
ADDITION F. The interpretation of the Dream of Mordecai, x. 1-10. Add. F consists of 10 vv., and is numbered in Vulg. x. 4-13, and is the only one of the six Adds. which is given there in its right place. But while in relation to the canonical portions its position is correct, it stands in an inverted relation to the uncanonical, Jerome having gathered out of the text all the Adds. which preceded, and placed them after it in a kind of appendix. Jerome prefixed to this Add. the following words which separate it from Esther x. 3: ‘Quae habentur in Hebraeo plena fide expressi. Haec autem quae sequuntur, scripta reperi in editione Vulgata quae Graecorum lingua et litteris continetur; et interim post finem libri hoc capitulum ferebatur ; quod iuxta consuetudinem nostram obelo, id est veru,
THESADDITIONS TOLESTAER: Elzrr
‘For I remember concerning the dream which I saw respecting these things ; and nothing thereot
is unfulfilled.
5 (6) ‘The little spring became a river, and there was a light and the sun and much water.
4(7) ‘The river is Esther, whom the king married and made queen. And the two dragons are I and
5 (8) Haman. And the nations ave those that were gathered together to destroy the name of the Jews.
) 6 (9) And my nation, this is Israel, which cried unto God and were saved. And the Lord saved His
᾿ people, and the Lord delivered us out of all these evils. And the Lord wrought great signs and
wonders, such as have not been done among the nations.
0) ‘Therefore the Lord made two lots, one for the people of God and the other for all the other
1) nations ; and these two lots came at the hour and the moment and the day of judging before God (for His people) and for all the nations.
2) ‘So God remembered His people, and justified His inheritance.
3) ‘And these days shall be unto them in the month Adar, on the fourteenth and fifteenth day of the same month, with an assembly and joy and gladness before God, from generation to generation for
ever among His people Israel.’
si)(1) In the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy and Cleopatra, Dositheus, who said he was a priest and
praenotavimus.’ In LXX Esther this Add. is the concluding portion of the book. Josephus shows no acquaintance with either the Dream of Mordecai or its interpretation.
1. These things, i.e. the history recorded in the chapters of canonical Esther.
from God. Cf. Ps. cxviii. 23 (Matt. xxi. 42), of an event determined by God’s providence. 2. the dream. See Add. A. respecting these things. ‘ Haec eadem significantis’, Vulg. The interpretation of the dream in detail occupies
3. spring became. The style of this verse is naturally rather abrupt. πηγὴ ἐγένετο N* A seems better than πηγὴ 7 B. Vulg. quite unnecessarily translated ‘the little spring became a river, and was turned into light and the sun, and overflowed into many waters’. ‘There is nothing in the Greek of either the dream or its interpretation to suggest this. The elevation of Esther answers to ‘the spring [which] becamea river’, while the safety and joy of the Jews upon their deliverance are pointed to by ‘ the light and the sun’ (cf. Esther viii. 16). But cf. Luc. MSS., ἥλιος καὶ φῶς ot ἐγένοντο τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις ἐπιφάνεια τοῦ θεοῦ.
4. the ἔννο ἄγσαροῃηβ. > δύο A. See Add. A 6.
5. the nations. See Add. A6. The suggestion is that the whole world was arrayed against the people of God.
destroy the name, i.e. the very existence of the Jewish people.
6. my nation. We should have expected τὸ δὲ ἔθνος τὸ δίκαιον from Add. A 6.
cried unto God. See A 9. signs and wonders. Cf. Ps. cxxxv. 9. 7. Therefore. ‘This verse is omitted by A. ; two lots. Cf. Esther ii. 7, which shows Haman seeking to obtain a lucky issue by lot; cf. 1 Sam. xiv. 41. Here God’s making two lots means simply that God took into His own arbitrament the decision between His people and their enemies.
8. This verse is omitted by B*, but is inserted in the lower margin. ;
came ... before God. Hardly, with Ryssel, that ‘the destinies represented by them were /w/flled’. They came before God, and God passed judgement on them.
moment. καιρόν B, κλῆρον BY NA. : ;
(for His people) and. Fritzsche’s suggestion is good, and has been incorporated into the text. The question is of both lots, but the mention of ‘the people’ in v. 9 may be the cause of its omission in τ΄. 8. ᾿ ᾿
9. justified. Servavit, Old Lat.; wsertis est, Vulg. But the meaning is the characteristic meaning of δικαιοῦν, cf. Deut. xxv. 1; Sir. xiii. 22 ‘ pronounced their cause righteous ’. aes
το. fourteenth and fifteenth day. καὶ τῇ πεντ. > N* A* (καὶ τῇ ε΄ kai N°2™S), The actual day of deliverance was the 13th day of Adar, but the fact of the observance of the festival on the 14th and 15th days caused Jewish writers to seek for an explanation. ;
_ The explanation as given in Esther ix. 16-19 is as follows: the Jews in the provinces avenged themselves on the 13th Adar, and rested on the 14th; but the Jews in Shushan required two days for their vengeance, and did not rest till the 15th Adar. abe
The 14th day was the principal day, and is referred to in 2 Macc. xv. 36 as ἡ Μαρδοχαικὴ ἡμέρα. ᾿ ;
11. Esther and the Wisdom of the Son of Sirach are the only books of the Greek O. T. which offer any information
as to their authorship and date. j ἢ The objection has been raised against the authenticity of this subscription that it represents the author of the version as a Palestinian Jew, whereas his speech has an Egyptian colour; but his name ἡ Lysimachus son of Ptole- _maeus’ suggests a distinctly Egyptian origin, and it is legitimate to assume that he was an Egyptian Jew who through residence at Jerusalem became acquainted with this Hebrew .Wegid/ah, and having acquired a knowledge of Hebrew, sought to benefit his Egyptian brethren by providing them with a Greek version. ; It is indeed impossible to say whether the subscription was appended by the translator of the canonical Hebrew portions, or by the author or incorporator of the Additions ; but there is nothing in the subscription to make us hesitate to accept its witness. The Wisdom of the Son of Sirach was translated 132 B.C., and it is probable that Hebrew Esther was translated about the same time. A It used to be thought that the date indicated by the subscription was 178 B.C., Ptolemy Philometor, who reigned at that period, being well disposed towards the Jews. But further investigation has shown that of the four Ptolemies who were married to a Cleopatra only one (Ptolemy VIII, Soter ΠῚ, Lathyrus) was married to a Cleopatra in the
THE ADDITIONS TO-ESTERE ει
a Levite, and Ptolemaeus his son brought in 29 Egypt the Epistle of Phrurai Zere set faith; Sia they said was ¢we, and that Lysimachus the son of Ptolemaeus, of the dwellers in Jerusalem, had
The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English, volume I: Apocrypha, part 3 of 3. Oxford, 1913. Hermetic Cloud, https://hermeticcloud.com/library/charles-apocrypha-and-pseudepigrapha-1-part-3/. Public-domain text reproduced in full; markup only.
Machine-read text of the Internet Archive scan apocryphapseudep01charuoft; the reading is uncorrected apart from the removal of page numbers, running heads, line-end hyphens and the scan's own marks.