fidelity than the Seventy, and avoid the explanation of metaphors. They all frequently agree in differing from the Septuagint.

§ 44, d.

THE THREE ANONYMOUS VERSIONS, &c.

There are, besides, fragments of three anonymous versions, which are called Quinta, Sexta, Septima, from their place in Origen's work on the Bible." [In the "literary journey" which Origen made to collect the materials for his polyglot, beside the above-mentioned versions of the whole of the Old Testament, he found three other versions from unknown authors, and of an unknown antiquity, which extend over some of the books. He placed them in the last columns of his Hexapla, and, with reference to the first four Greek columns, he called them the fifth, sixth, and seventh Greek translations.

There are no certain accounts of these three versions; for what the ancients have written respecting them bears marks of the extremest improbability. According to Epiphanius, the fifth version was made at Jericho; but, according to Jerome, it was found in a tub at Ni

Epiphanius, l. c. ch. 17: Ευρέθη ἡ πέμπτη ἐν πίθοις, ἐν Ιεριχῶ κεκρυμμένη ...... ἐν χρόνοις Καρακάλλου τε καὶ Γέτα. Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. vi. 16, says only that one of the three was found there. Jerome, Præf. ad Orig. Homil. in Cant. Cant., says, Quintam editionem, quam in Actæo littore invenisse se scribit (Origenes.) Epiphanius, 1. c.: EdgéOn Extη ëxdoσis xal αὐτὴ ἐν πίθοις κεκρυμμένη ἐν Νικοπόλει τῇ πρὸς ̓Ακτίᾳ. Eusebius, l. c., has one of the three versions of Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion found there. On the extent of these versions, see Jerome, Com. in Titum iii. Hody, p. 590, sqq. Jerome, Apol. cont. Rufinum, ii. 34, says, Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, and the authors of the fifth and sixth version, were Jews. The fragment of Hab. iii. 13, shows the author of the sixth was a Christian: Ἐξῆλθες τοῦ σῶσαι τὸν λαόν σου διὰ ̓Ιησοῦ τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου.

copolis, in Actium, by Origen. On the contrary, Epiphanius says he found the sixth at Nicopolis, in a tub, and Eusebius says he found the seventh in a tub at Jericho."

1. Some fragments of the fifth version still remain, from which it appears its author had the Seventy, Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus, before him. It usually agrees with the Seventy, or Theodotion, and, when it differs from them, it commonly takes an expression synonymous with theirs; and yet it bears marks of an acquaintance with the Hebrew original.

2. The sixth version was made by a Christian, as we learn from a fragment, in which it appears he found a distinct prediction of Jesus Christ in Hab. iii. 13. But perhaps the passage is a gloss. This version agrees with the Septuagint, Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion. It only included the Pentateuch, the minor Prophets, the Psalms, and the Song of Solomon.

3. Of the seventh version only the smallest fragments remain; most of which are found in the relics of Origen's Hexapla, and in a Syriac hexaplary manuscript preserved at Paris.]

Several fragments of versions occur as marginal notes in the manuscripts of the Alexandrian version. Among others we find the Hebrew, (O 'Eẞoaños,) which contains remarks on the text of the Septuagint, arising from comparing it with the Hebrew text. These are chiefly

collected from Jerome."

The Syrian (O Zúpoç) is a Greek version from Jerome's new Latin version, made by Sopronius, patriarch of Byzantium. [It was called the Syrian either be

cause it was chiefly used by the Syrian Christians, and, accordingly, we find it cited by Eusebius of Emessa, (not the historian,) Diodorus, and Theodoret, or because he resided a long time in Syria. He is called a Syrian in a passage of Theodore of Mopsuestia.]"

The Samaritan (Το Σαμαρειτικόν) is a Greek version of the Samaritan Pentateuch. [Sometimes this term designates the Samaritan Pentateuch itself. It is quoted by the Fathers who lived after the third century, and contains explanatory and paraphrastic passages. It is evidently the work of a Samaritan, but is of little value, except so far as it sheds light on the history of criticism and exegesis.]

b

The Greek (0 Elhyizós) is an unknown Greek

version.

[Besides those versions already named, and that found in the library at Venice, there may have been many others in ancient times, which are either lost or exist unknown in libraries. Origen, by the merest accident, it would seem, rescued several versions from oblivion. Why may there not have been more, which no Origen ever found? It was not until recently the Alexandrian version of Daniel was discovered, or the Venetian manuscript. May there not be others still undiscovered? The manuscripts of the Seventy contain marginal references to versions now unknown.]

" See Photius, in Biblioth. cod. 227, p. 205; ed. Hoeschelii, in Eichhorn, § 207. See, also, Döderlein's dissertation entitled, Quis sit ó Zúpos V. T. Græcus interpretes? Alt. 1772, 4to. [Eichhorn, § 207.]

d See Eichhorn, § 212, and Stroth's contribution to the criticism of the LXX. in his Repert. vol. ii. pp. 66–68.

§ 45, a.

III. CRITICAL HISTORY OF THE ALEXANDRIAN VERSION.

ORIGEN'S HEXAPLA.

The text of the Septuagint became corrupted to a great extent by frequent transcriptions and the caprice of officious critics. Thus Origen says, "But now there is obviously a great diversity of the copies, which has arisen either from the negligence of some transcribers, or from the boldness of others, -as well as from the difficulty of correcting what was written, or from others still, who added or took away, as they saw fit, in making their corrections." Jerome complains of this corruption, and says, "The vulgar edition, which is called the common, is different in different places;" and again, "The ancient and common edition of the Scriptures is corrupted to suit the time, and place, and caprice of the writers." There are examples of earlier corruptions in Philo and Josephus. [Thus Josephus says, King Jabin had three thousand chariots, and three hundred thousand infantry, and ten thousand horse, while the book of Judges, iv. 3, according to our present Hebrew and Greek text, speaks of only nine hundred chariots, and does not mention the rest of the host. here the Targum comes to our aid, for it has inserted the

4

But

с

Origen, Com. in Mat. tom. xv. Opp. iii. p. 671: Nurl dé dyhovót πολλὴ γέγονεν ἡ τῶν ἀντιγράφων διαφορά, εἴτε ἀπὸ ῥᾳθυμίας τινῶν γραφέων, εἴτε ἀπὸ τόλμης τινῶν μοχθηρᾶς τῆς διορθώσεως τῶν γραφομένων, εἴτε καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν τὰ ἑαυτοῖς δοκοῦντα ἐν τῇ διορθώσει προστιθέντων ή qaigouvτ. On the additions of the Seventy, see Ep. ad Africanus, Opp.

с

12.

Jerome, Proëm. in lib. xvi. Com. in Jes.; Ep. ad Sunniam et Fretelam. Josephus, Antiq. v. 5, 1. See Grabe, De Vitiis LXX. Interpretum ante Origenis Ævum illatis; Oxon. 1710, 4to. p. 3, sqq. Eichhorn, § 167.

same addition. Hence it appears Josephus followed tradition, and not a different reading in the manuscripts. The text of this version could not have been much corrupted in the time of Christ, to judge from the works of Philo and Josephus, and yet it appears to have been altered in some measure soon after that period."

But says Eichhorn, "From the time of the birth of Christ to that of Origen, the text of the Alexandrian version was lamentably disfigured by arbitrary alterations, interpolations, omissions, and mistakes. Justin Martyr had a very corrupt text, at least in the minor Prophets. He found readings which are now contained neither in the manuscripts, nor the Fathers, nor in the editions of the Seventy. Sometimes they agree more accurately with the Hebrew original; sometimes are synonymous with the readings of the present text of the Seventy. The good Father could not have derived them from the original; for he knew not a letter of Hebrew. In a word, before Justin's time, there were manuscripts of this version, which had been compared with the Hebrew original, and altered here and there. Finally, in the time of Origen, the text was brought into the most lamentable state by the negligence of transcribers; the boldness of uninvited criticasters, who altered, added, diminished, singed, and burned, at pleasure. In Daniel, Job, and Esther, were the additions which we still find there. Exegetical scholia were inserted here and there....... On the other hand, much was omitted from the text of the ver

Credner, Beit. vol. ii. ch. 6, 7, thinks the text of the LXX. used by Justin Martyr, had often been corrected in the Messianic passages, to make it conform to the original, and probably by a Christian hand. Similar readings are found earlier in the writings of the New Testament, in Barnabas, Clement of Rome, and others.

Origen, Ep. ad Africanus, p. 16, sqq.