BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME FROM THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND THE GIFT OF Henrg W. Sage 1891 -]^:.>Ji.6...S'.L I^^Hjj./.O.f:. 9963 The date shows when this volume was taken. JAN 7 '1Q1^ ^27 Si. NOV 81962 m: 0E;C6 1962 r HOME USE RULES. All Bosks subject to Recall. Books act u^ed for instruction 6r research are returnable within 4 weeks. ' Volumes of periodi- ycals and, of pamphlets are held in the library ^as much as possible. For special purposes they are given out for a limited titne. Borrowers should not use their library privileges for the ben e- fit of other persons. Books not needed during recess periods should be returned to ■ thelibrary, or arrange- ments made for their return during borrow- er's absence, if wanted. Books needed by more than one person are held on the reserve , list. ' Books of special value and gift books, when the giver wishes it, are not allowed to circulate. ^ Readers are asked to report iCil cases of books marked or muti- lated. Do not deface books by marks and writing. CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 924 092 324 684 m XI Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924092324684 OLD TESTAMENT AND SEMITIC STUDIES IN MEMORY OF WILLIAM RAINEY HARPER OLD TESTAMENT AND SEMITIC STUDIES IN MEMORY OF 3^illiatn 3Klaine^ Harper EDITED BY ROBERT FRANCIS HARPER FRANCIS BROWN GEORGE FOOT MOORE VOLUME TWO CHICAGO THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS 1908 Copyright 1908 By The University of Chicago Published January the tenth, 1908 Composed and Printed By The University of Chicago Press Chicago, Illinois, U. S. A. CONTENTS OF VOLUME TWO "^ PAOEB A Text- Critical Appaeatus to the Book op Esther 1-52 Lewis Battles Paton The Apparatus for the Textual Criticism of Cheonicles-Ezba-Nehemiah 53-112 Charles Cdtleb Tobket ''Critical Notes on Esther 113-204 Paul Haupt Critical Notes on Old Testament Passages . . 205-226 Julius A. Bbwer The Origin of Some Cuneiform Signs . . . 227-258 George A. Barton The Structure of the Text of the Book of Zephaniah 259-278 Charles Prospero Fagnani An Omen School Text 279-326 Morris Jastbow, Jr. The Original Language of the Parable of Enoch 327-350 Nathaniel Schmidt Dhimmis and Moslems in Egypt 351-414 KlOHARD J. H. GOTTHEIL The Strophio Structure of the Book of Micah 415-438 John Merlin Powis Smith A TEXT-CRITICAL APPARATUS TO THE BOOK OF ESTHER LEWIS BAYLES PATON A TEXT-CRITICAL APPARATUS TO THE BOOK OF ESTHER Lbwis Baylbs Paton The Book of Esther in the mimerous versions and recensions presents so many striking differences from the Massoretic form of the text that it has seemed to me worth while to gather the variarit readings and present them in a complete text-critical apparatus. For this purpose I have made use of the following sources : i^ = Codex Sinaiticus, according to Swete, The O. T. in Greek, 1896. A = Codex Alexandrinus, according to Swete. Aid = The Aldine text of ffi, according to Holmes and Parsons, Vet. Test. Gfraec. cum Variis Lectionibus, III, 1823. B = Codex Vaticanus, according to Swete. Ba = Baer and Delitzsch, Quinque Volumina, 1886. Br = The Pentateuch, Five Megilloth and Haphtaroth, Brescia, 1492, according to Ginsbmrg, Massoretico-Critical O. T., 1894. B^ = Bomberg Kabbinic Bible, Venice, 1516-17. B^ = Bomberg Kabbinic Bible with Massora, Venice, IV, 1526, accord- ing to Kittel, Biblia Hebraica, 1906, and Ginsburg. BT = Babylonian Talmud. C = Complutensian Polyglot, Alcalfi, 1514-17. ffi = The Greek Version as represented by the uncials and the cursives, except L. G = Ginsburg, Massoretico-Critical Edition of the Hebrew Bible, 1894. H — The Hesychian recension of ffi, represented in general by codd. 44, 68, 71, 74, 76, 106, 107, 120, 236. ?§ = The consonantal Hebrew text. 3 = The Latin version of Jerome, or Vulgate. Jos = Josephus, Antiquities, xi. JT := Jerusalem Talmud. K = Kennicott, Vet. Test. Heb. cum Variis Lectionibus, 1776. 3 4 Text-Cbitioal Apparatus to the Book ov Bstheb L = The Lucianic recension of ffi, represented by codd. 19, 93a, 1086 ; ed. Lagarde, Lib. Vet. Test. Can. Graece, 1883. (Codd. 93 and 108 contain two recensions of Esther: 93a and 1086 that of L; and 936 and 108a that of O.) iL = The old Latin version (Itala), according to Codex Corbeiensis; ed. Sabatier, Bib. Sac. Lat. Vers. Ant., 1751. iS/P = Old Latin, Codex Pechianus, according to Sabatier. M = J. H. Michaelis, Biblia Hebraica, 1720. ilH = The Massoretic Hebrew text. N = Codex Basiliano-Vaticanus (= XI, according to Holmes and Par- sons). N' = The Hagiographa, Naples 1486-87, according to Ginsburg. W = Hebrew Bible, Naples 1491-93, according to Ginsburg. O = The Origenic recension of (E, represented in general by codd. 52, 55, 64, 936, 108a, 248, 249, according to Holmes and Parsons, and Field, Origenis Hexaplorum quae supersunt, 1875. Oc = Occidental MSS or Massoretic authorities. Or = Oriental MSS or Massoretic authorities. Q = The QerS, or marginal readings of ill. R = De Kossi, Variae Lectiones Vet. Test., 1786. S = Hebrew Bible, Soncino, 1488, according to Ginsburg. S = The Syriac version. SA — The Syriac version in Codex Ambrosianus. gL = The Syriac version in the London Polyglot. SM = The Syriac version in the Mosul edition. S)V z= The Syriac version in the Urumia edition. ®' = The First Targum. ^^ = The Second Targum. The readings of the cursives are all taken from Holmes and Parsons. They are as follows: 19 = Eome, Chigi R vi. 38 (cf. Bianchini, Vindiciae, 279 flF.; 19 = La- garde's h). 44 = Zittau, A 1. 1 = Lagarde's z (cf. Gen. Gr. 7 flF.). 52 = Florence, Laur. Acq. 44. 55 = Eome, Vat. Reg. Gr. 1 (cf. Klostermann, Analecta, 12). 64 = Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 2 (cf. Field, i. 5). 68 = Venice, St. Mark's, Gr. 5 (cf. Scrivener-Miller, i. 219). 71 = Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 1. 74 = Florence, Laur. Acq. 700 (49). Lewis Bayles Paton 5 76 = Paris, Nat. Keg. Gr. 4. 93 = London, B. M. Keg. i. D. 2 (93a = Lagarde's m). 106 = Perrara, Bibl. Comm. Gr. 187 (cf . Lagarde, Ankilndigung, 27). 107 = Ferrara, Bibl. Comm. Gr. 188. 108 = Kome, Vat. Gr. 330 (cf. Field i. 5; 108b = Lagarde's d). 120 = Venice, St. Mark's Gr. 4. 236 = Kome, Vat. Gr. 331 (cf. Klostermann, Analecta, 78). 243 = Venice, St. Mark's Gr., 16 (cf. Field, i. 486). 248 = Kome, Vat. Gr. 346 (cf. Nestle, Marginalia, p. 58). 249 = Rome, Vat. Pius 1 (cf. Field ii. 2). Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, Gothic, and Syro-Hexaplar do not exist for Esther, and the Ethiopic, Coptic, and Arabic secondary versions are not accessible in printed editions. The text of the Armenian version of @ is so corrupt that it did not seem worth while to secure its variants from one familiar with Armenian. My method has been to take the Textus Receptus of Van der Hooght (1705) as the standard of comparison, and to record deviations from it in MSS, editions, or versions. Variations of accentuation in the Hebrew, which do not affect the interpreta- tion, and which for the most part represent only the notions of particular punctuators or schools of punctuators, such as Baer's -3^-17^ for "i'^H/J , -liaysi for -iilS»1 , -fO^ZA for IpSn^ , or -t: :t: -t: :t ' ^ -ii-i- v -:|— ' '•.• - '■■ - Ginsburg's insertion of Raphe over all quiescent or aspirate let- ters, it has not seemed worth while to include. In the case of the long passages that are found in @LiL, but not in f^, I have taken Swete's edition of Codex Vaticanus as the standard of com- parison. These passages I have inserted in full as additions to 1^, and have recorded the variants in footnotes. Variants in the versions which represent the same Hebrew word I have not attempted to record; for instance, when <3 renders tiriTT'J by Bo^w and L by ttotov. To have recorded all the variants of this sort would have been useless and would have swelled this article to an enormous size. Title "inOXl Bii a^ovxoSovoabp'^ ^acnXeiiv Ba/SwXww? i^^ 'lepovaaXrjfj,^ fieTa^ 4 'lexoviov Tov^ ^acnXeayj Trjv 'lovSaiai.^ *Kal tovto"' avTov^ to evvv- viov Kul ISoi) (^aival'^ koX^ 66pv^o<;,^ ^povToi Kol^ creia-/j.6'i,s Tapaxof 6 CTTt Trj<; 777?. ^Kot ISoii^ Svo^ BpuKOVTe^" fieyaXoi,^ eTOi/ioi" TrporfKdov^ 6 afi4>6Tepoi iraXaieiv koX iye'veToS axiTotv^ (fycovt)^ fjieydXt],^ ^Kal t^* ^covy avTMv^ '^TOip.dadr] irdv eOvo'; et?^ iroXefiov wcTTe^ TroXe/irjaai 7 SiKaicov" eOvo^.^ ^ koL^ ISoii^ r]p,ipa ctkotov; koI yvoipov," 0Xu\jri^^ kov 8 (TTevoxeopM,^ KaiccoaK^ Koi^ Tapa^o^^ fieyat' eirV tjJ?'' yrj'i- "koi eTa- pax^V^ Biicatov^ irdv e^i/o?,*' (}>o/3ov/ievot to. eavTcov Kaxd,^ Koi r)T0i- 9 fidadrjffav^ diroXeadai-^ °«al i^OTjcrav^ 'jrpo<; tov^ 6e6v.° diro Se"* ttj? ^orj'i'' avTuv^ iyeveTO ooaavels diro^ fitKpd^ ttjjytj?' iroTafi,b<;^ fieyav, 10 vS(op TToXv''^ "<^ciJ9* Kal^ o" ^Xio? dveTecXev, Kal ol Taireivol^ ui^co^jj- A: 1-17 936 has under -•- : C has in cap. xi-iii, Lib. Esth. Apocr. 1 » om 71 1 bAfftruTjpoi; L : Ao-trvpiov 19, 1086 ; Assuero it : Aprapf epf 01/ A I om X A L 44, 52, 55, 64, 71, 74, 76, 106, 107, 120, 236, 243, 248, 249, C, Aid, Athan. ii. 98 | d om L | • + (i')>'0! 44, 71, 106, 107 : +/i7|vo5 ASap L I f Nio-a J5 * (-iriiv 5{ ?) A, 55 : Nio-ai/ L : Mitra {with oorr. N) N : Nenrai/ Athan. I. c: +o! «(7Ti Avirrpo! Bai-fltKO! L: qui est Andicus 3L | slapttov 236: lapou 243, 248, C, Aid: larim JL | h Se/»eiou X A L and many cursives : Sti^auov 19 ; 2e|iieei 248, 249, Athan. i.e.; Sa.,,yr„ L | e,<,<„.,5 236 | f + «at L | B», a. J? : om A L : /o«« «»tts e< IL | h-ie« ^^,5 ^„„„ Li I ]-k vob>p ffoAu iroTafjLos jLteyos L 10 «so i{c.a.L: other codd «a.*»,i: ^a)Toi X* I '■om L !L J?* 936, 249 I com L H 52 108a I a iroTa/uoc L : humiles 1 ' Lewis Batles Paton 7 aav /cal /eaT€(f>ayov^ tou? eVSo^ou?. "/cat SteyepdeU'^ MapSoxalof;^ 11 iaypaKw^^ to evvTrvtov tovto,** ical^ rl^ 6 Oeh^i^ ^e^ovKevrai^ TroLrjaai, elx'^v^ avTo^ ev r^^ icaphla^ koI^ iv iravrl \6ym^ ijdeXev^ iTrtyvcavac^ avrb^ eo)? ttJ?^ vvkto^.^ ^^fcal^ 'qa-vxaa-ev^ MapSoxaw^ iv r^ avX^^ 12 fiera Ta^dOa^ xal @appa^ t(ov hvo eifvovx^ov rov ^aaiXioi^i rmv^ (j>v\aa(T6vT(ov r-qv aiiKrjvj^ ^^fjKovaev^ re^ avTW^ tov9 Xoyiafiov^^ koX^ 13 Ta? pbepiiiva^^ avrStv i^Tjpavvrjaev,^ /cal eixaOev^ on^ eTOifid^ovcriP^ TU'i^ X^lpa'i^ i7n/3aX€Lv^ 'Apra^ep^j)^ ra ^aaiXel,^ /cal^ VTreBec^ev^ T^^ ^aSo;^a409 ' eypa'^jrev^ irepl^ rtav Xoycov rovrcov^ ^^Kal iirera^ev^ 6 ^aa-tXev'i 16 MapSo^ato)^ Oepairevetv^ ev rrf aiX^^^ kol eBco/cev avTa>^ Bofiara^ irepX Tovrcov.^ ^'' icai^ riv^ 'Afiav 'AfiaSd0ov^ ^ovyaiov hvo^ eivovx(*>v tov^ ^a 52, 120 I P-QavTO eiriyvitivai A | q + eiriKpttris Siaa-a^tTqSrjffeTat, avTio L [ ^om A 74, 76 | "Jj/Lte- pa9 L 12~17 om 3L I 12*"^ "I)? VTrj-uxre L 1 b-|-Kai eAoyttraTO ec eaUTw Tt o 9«09 ^e^ovAeuTal iroti)(rat to €vvnviov TOVTO 44 I Cftat tiv ^A,: -f- 6 eupoKO); to ei'Viri'iov touto 106 | ^-(-tov jSoo'iAeuf L : eAcrraou L : Karayov 93a; TaPpaBa 936; Batfa 120: t&apa ^* : 0eScuTOU L: 0eu6eTOu 19: ©apas 936 [ g-hom L I hiTji/ irvKrtv 936 13 a-l^/cat iiKOVtre li | b 5e ^c. a : yap A | c-drous A.oyto'/jiou; auTWi' A: touj Xoyov^ avratv Lt \ »-« om 44, 106 1 * 5taPoAa5 L : «ap5ias 249 1 g-b om L | i us L | J ef ijyoucTo L | lE-m tou en-idetrdai L | * + avTUiv 44, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236 | Q Atrtrvi^po) L | o-\-tov aveKtiv avrov ev Se ^povriva^ o MapSox^ov L I Pom L I flairrtyyeiKe L | r-Bom L | • + Map5oxatos 44, 76, 106, 120, 236: +Map6ouxator 74: + avTw MapSoxatos 71 | tvTrep 936 14 ftTjToo'**' Li 44, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236: e^era^ev 52: e^rjTourev (tr over eras.) A* | >>-«om .52 | d-}-(cac evpe rou? Aoyov? MapSoxatotf L: +auTou 52, 243 C, Aid | « + ot evi'ovxoi L | ^ e^rfxBtiirav ^ # o. b A : ain\yxByi<'='"°^, 936 under -^: + awov 936): om it: convivii 3 I -jban] om it 3 44, 106 | bsb] om it | Dypl] om L it | -jTrlTm] as ffi (o/ 44, §36, 106): ni^aH] Thebari it: om 3 | bllj^jb — "tip om ffi: to end of vs om it I riyiTU] k^ (& \ riD3] om ffi L | 'XT'ZlI om it: + oiTov 936 under *: et nemoris 3: om It | "ib^on] quod regio cultu et manu Consitum erat 3: + aywv ra croiTrjpw, avTOv. r/v 8t e^tarpto/jieva L: -\- kckoct- p.rjixo'ri ffi: + Kai 1JV r] avXri KeKoa-firiiJievT] 44, 71, 74, 76, 120, 236: Kai rp/ KfKoZ S: Pabataleus %: om ffi L | DIM] ^ares 3: ooaic* S (uoQio S*): ^as IL: om ffi L | XSDIS] Marsana 3: )_i^miD S: om ffi L it I p^JSa] Mamuchan 3: ^^-inS^i S: Muchaeas 3L: om ffi L | my^TB] omSffi'lLL I 15*^] trwith d'^lTC'^n S: oieyyvsffi: Kat otopwvTesL: quiproximi% \ D'^niB'^n] prKaiL | HiTUi*^] l^'^^ S: omLlL | niSbai] J30S( ewm J: tm fiao-iXa (Sc: +koi airi^'yeiAav avTto ffi: om It 15 nii] om 3 L I na— "^ban] tr to vs 13 after ■j-'Tl L | •'nHJl] om L it I nmay to^o S I D''"n23n'l] +Kai rovs ijyoD/itvous tov y8acri\eS avTiiTTfy Till ^acTiXa cos ow avTetircv TO) fiaxriXa kpToiip^r) (K: oTt rjKvpma-e to Trpoarayixa tov jSacriAeus L: neglexit enim et con- tempsit 3L 18 om L I fltn DVtTl] easempZo hoc S: ^lioa^ S: quomodo non 3L | n3"l535 povr)imTi avrov L: -\- et optimMm, est sensui tuo % | X^^ — ViSb^S] 7rpoo-Ta^aTO))8ao-iXtKoi'ffi: jube^: omL | nflS'^l — "lliy] ypai^ijTO) as Tracras Tas x^] o S | bih] om bS ® I iniib^S] om suffix & \ XTI n!3"l ""S] quoniam verum est IL: om ffi L I bSI] + ovTws ffi I "ip'i + Kat 8o^av L | blljSb] tr w next ffi L IL 21 "imn]+p8' s I ^rya] ev xapSioL i o'^'mrmi + suff. -oio &■. om L I "jb53ln] €Tot/i.iiiiio &: + /tvjy/xovevw o & I nniry] eXaXyja-tv ®: eirotTjo-o/ A L | flS^V — Tl'^^] km (US KaT€Kpiv€v avTrjV ®: Acra-vrjpo) rut j3a(TiXu L: oera avrrj KareKpidrj A | nXI ] 2 1"i53S{^1] + 31^ S I "]ban] irpos tov ISaa-iXm A: e/MS il I TTniBSD] pr o S: om ® L S, (936 has under *) | iTflpa''] t,rfrrjBriTOi 6opa ® 3 np5^1 — rQla] omEL | ^blori] omS | d''TpS] omlS I in'iib7j] om S S: om i A I ISnp'^l] eiriSa^aToxrav A | bS Hi*] om ® 3 | PlNia — Q''\23jn] om L: et adducant eas ad civitatem Susan et tradant eas in domum feminarum, 3: et perducantur in Susis Thebari in conspectu mulierum ?L | bit — tlT'Sil] om S> \ "y bx] -^^ ^- km irapaSoOriTtoa-av mv 7r«7Tft)S L: iZZt It | "iriC5< X%n] so 936 under*: KMovoyua.avT-q'E.o-drip'B: T7jvEcr6>;p L: tr toend of vs {Hester) It: gwae aZtero nomine vocabatur Esther 3 \ ITi ^3] ^vya- ''■'JP A/x.etva8a/3 (A/uvaSafi Jt A) aSeXt^ov jraTpos avTOw ©: ^Zia fratris ejus et nutrierat earn Mardochaeus sicuti adoptaiam filiam It: filiae fratris sui 3 I "^5 — Di<1] om (S L: It has I -|5tn] + oSpa it'-'^e L: + mmts 5^ 3 I nxn^j n^iaij so l it «■ " "^936 under *: om (Sit | ni7jni— nib] om L I --51170] so X -• -s, 936 under *: om ® | nab] eis ywa«a (5 (as Ovyarepa 936) Lewis Bayles Paton 13 8 "Tt^^ — ''^ri om L I imi] om ® E (936 has under *): et juxta mandatum illius 3 | niiyD] lAlioi^ S | ni3"i] + pulchrae 3 | J-Jl'^an] om JJ I ■]"' ^5<] pr. et traderentur 3: Za^ & \ i^tl] Egeo 3: + ^oicLKjiio S: Tai vi, ® (+ as ayadov 936 under *): aetatis ipaius in conventu mulierum % 10 om L I sb] pr o Si: pr xat ® iL | 'inCSt] gwae 3 | }^ay] ikia^ S | nsnibDj] m-iusj-k/ S I T'jln] + de hac re omnino IL 11 om L I bSniJ om T © (A 936 have) | ''Sl^a] gwi 3 | ''igb] n K 2 I iT'n] om S I D''T235n] in qua electae virgines servabantur 3 \ fy^ Dlbffl] l-='i-*' ^- T' avfi^r](reT^avi; tTTt^aveo-raTij L: + introeundi IL | fi^ — end of vs om L I yiT'DS^] so 151: Abihail 3: \ .■..^j SA; V--i^) SLM; 'filial SU: A6i/iei (Chihel) E: A,i.avaSa/3 ® (A/Jixat^ C) | 1^] /toMs 3 !L I -lias — nab] om © a (936 has under *) | Xllb] ev tw eurekOav A: pr ov e/teXAei' 44: introibat % \ 'ib^atl] + et factum est cum introiret ad regem, % \ ^31] muliebrem. cultum 3 \ ^^ — nX] om \ nisba] TO yvvaiKuov ©: om IL I nfflit^i] avrrj © E | ni''ba'^i — ''ntsi] om © L: IL has, and 936 under * 18 1133?^^ - rnnyi om L | 'jban] om 3 \ blia] om © IL (936 has under *) | V'Tn^l] r=^° *: Kai Tai o fiaa-iXevs L | ninira] pro conjunctione et nuptiis 3: rovs ya/iovi © IL: tov yai^v L | "inDS] + wt^ai/tos L | niriab] Tots vtto TTjV PacriXftav avrov ©: pr iratrais L 44, 71, 74, 76, 106, IL 3 \ ','C\1-\ — ^baPll om © L E I ) -• 19 om L I ynpnm — n^iTD] om © IL (936 has under *): + et congregarentur 3: + ,_JLsi S | "in^ai] om 1 S | nm^] here only in book written defectively, M: e^epaTrevev ©: sedebat IL I 'ibanl om © (936 has under *) > \ "> u Lewis Batles Paton 15 20 om L I na? ri«1] om ® (exc 936 *) | ''Sn-|5a] + 4>oPa TO) )8ao-t\ei irepi avTiav ® (A: 13): eu St pov7ipurai, as iMrq/j-oawov ®: Kat eypaij/ev o /SaaiXcvs ets p.vqiwKcv avTo) So/MiTa (om L) TTtpi TouTcov ® ( A : 16) L ( A : 16) 16 Text-Ceitical Appaeatus to the Book of Estheb CHAPTER III III, 1 -iHit] pr «ai £V£V€ro L IL | b^a — ■'^jKn] ««' 'jv A/wti' AiMi.Sa.eov Boiryaios evSo^os evonrtov Tov fiaATiXeoi^ ® (A: 17): A/tav A,MiSaflou MaKeSowi Kara irpoo-coTTov ro« /SacrAecos L (A:17) | "j/jn-nst] SO Ben Asher: "I^IHTIS Ben Naphtali (Ginsburg) I JtriTjn] -^r*" ^: A/iaSa^ovSL: XvafmOa- Sou A: A/mflou 19: A/MSadovv 93d; A/ua^aSov 106: om IL | "jj^^n] ««» era* de siirpe Agragr 3: Bovyaiov ® L: MaxeSova L (A: 17): Totyawv 93a; Ovyaiov C: om 44, 106 % \ inX^Sn] om S S | inX] + <«&ri (roSpa © IL: e9v/j,w6r] rm MapSoxaicu Kai opyi; tiiKavOr) or auTo) L: iratus est valde 3 6a om © (exc 936 *) L | VD^JH TH"'!] Ur-^i^ -^ooi Ij-^j^o S: et pro nihilo duxit 3: et quaerebat % \ ^^] + m S \ ''Sn"ia3] ei iL | lllb] M< perderet eum % \ -jan] om 3 © L | T^aTTilb] om S | bS fl5* — IBI^lanX] om L I bS] + nationem 3 \ bia] om bS ^ © IL | '■'3T02 US] et Mardochaeum et genus ejus IL: tov MapSoxaiov Kai navTa tov Xaov avTov L : om 3 © 7 Toina — ■ffliniffli-iK] om l | ■m'rra — p-'S] om © (exc j^ »■•<■»«>) | ■jIlDXin] + neomeniae IL | TB^n] om S E | ■jb7jb] tj^s /Soo-iXttas ®: regr- Lewis Baylbs Paton 17 nante IL | 5''S)n — Ittil] "at eirotijo-tv xj/rj^uriJia Kai ePaXev K\ijpovs ®: decre- tum fecit et misit sortem it: km eiropevOr) Ajjav Trpos tous Ofovi avrov L aft vs 10: missa est sors in urnam, quae Hebraice dicitur phur 3 \ "ffsi] ]^ Si: ^ovp 93b* \ Kin] ^-'O'Jio * I 'lafl ''5Sb] so 93&*: om (S JL | UV)2 — TBinb] om L | ffllhb] TlJ'inb Var Oc: + gens Judaeorum deberet inter fid et exivit mensis 3: + uxm aTroXecrot ev lua ijii^pa to yevos MapSop^aiov Ktti eirecrev o KK-qpo odtov tpvdpoi eyevETO tKTperroJV auTov el o<^9a\pMV odtov L | "iSiTl] om ® (exc 44, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236: 93b *) 1L L | TDl"l1'ffinS] flcto corde propter genus Judaeorum et dixit 3L: xapSux av\r) Koxa irepi IcrpajjA, Xcywv L: + X.iyon' ® (om 936) I nnx] om S ® 3L L I 1"iB53l] om (5 (exc 936 *) L: incredi- biie % I n^ayn ■j'^a] om 3 n l i riiria] om t L: xai t.ypa\j/av ®: ef scripta sunt it | bii — "ITTS^] om L I b55 om(S!L(exc 936*) | •j^'/^'n] + scribis % | bsi] +omnes3 | -jbaHl om ® (exc 936 *) | bj] + bS S ® it L | nS'^ia] ras x*'P«s L: iroXeis 18 Tbxt-Cbitioal Appabatus to the Book of Esther 93a I nD''152'l] om ® (exc S °'') L (exc 93a): + a-iro IvSikijs cms tjjs Ai^to- irtos Tttis fKttTOv £iKO(rt eirra x«)pa'S ® ^ (93b -^) | bi^l — '2t\D'2] om L | bKI ''"ITB] om 3 I d3>1 QJ] Vioik» S: twv e9vv Kara T-qv aurcDV Xeliv ®: uni- uscujusque loci gentium secundum interpretationem eorum 11 | flTI'D — lilTDbS] om © 3L I lEniTflrii^] so Oc: var Or ■ffll^lTUn^t | nnSS] om 3 ®: pr KM 936 iL | CDnn3i — '^bMH] om ® (exc 936 *) | Dnri3i] onni'i Ba G: kox cr^fmyi^ov L | "jban*! ipsius 3: + ov yap ea-riv os airocTTpol/a T7]V <74i.k±> >oQ-i ,-ikS S: + the following section (B:l-7)in(S?LL ADDITION B 'Tij?* Se eirtcTToX'^? icrrlv rb avriypacfjov ToSe^ Bao-tXeu? /ieya? 'Apra^ep^rj'!'' tok^ airo^ rrj^ 'IvBiktj'; eto?' tjjs Al6iOTria<} eKarov^ ecKoa-i^ eiTTa ■)((op5>v dp'^pvcri^ Koi TOirdp'^ai';^ vwoTeTajfievoi'i^ rdSe^ 2 7/oaet.™ ^TToXK&v iirdp^m edv5>v^ ical Trderrj<; iiriKpaTrjaai;^ oIkov- fievi]<;, i^ovK')]drjv,'' /i^^ rm Opdaei ttj? i^ova-lai ewaipofj.evo'i'' iiriei- KecTTepov^ Se koI fiera iJTrioTrjTO'iB del^ Sie^dycov,^ Toii?i tS>v virore- Tayp.evwv'^ dKVfidTOVov tjjs cttict-toAijs roSe 44, 106 | c AtrtrvTjpo? L: ^rtorxerxes H, |aTi)5 93o | eun-o 19, 1086; in % | '/texP' 4*, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236 | g + itai L I t etKOO-t «at Ij A 93fo I i apxoviTL L : apxoviruv 19, 108& | i ffarpairais L | k om L | I-n» gui were qui proprie sentiunt quae in nos salutem % 2 "-n om 93a | b -(- tt)! L | o cpouAevSiji' 936 ; scribo igitur % \ d om 936, 106 | e ETrapf^evoi 108o ; tr with ' A " I g n-paoTr)T05 i{ c. « : iriOTTjTO; A I 1> om S, 249 | i Sie^ayeif 93a ; St,e(ayayoiv 936 | j-k TOVI V7rOTCTav)iie»'ou9 71, 76 : Om TOiv 74 | 1 SO BAN 936 ; most codd Bab aievp-avrov^ : arapaxovi L : execrabilis S, | m stratum JL | n piou 71, 76, 248, C : iiitae secJ S, | o Se L I p tipb^oi/ A N 52, 55, 64, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120, 243, 248, 249, C, Aid | IpeHinens S, | r a^pi A L 936 ; + tcok 44, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236 | B wapexop-eva L : Jrapef o/Jievoc 44, 106, 120, 236 : TTape^oilevtav 55 | t om L ] a-x rffV TTa(TiV avOpittnoit 7ro0ovp.evriv eipjjyTiv L | V Trop0ovp.evT}V 44 | w om L : iTapa A | xpraesiajlS IL Lewis Bayles Paton 19 ^irvOofiivov^ he fiov Tmv avfi^ovKtov ttw? av a;^^ew; tovto iirl irepa^^^ 3 a-axppoa-vvy^ Trap' r^fuv^ SievejKa^^ /cat* iv t^^ evvo(a a7rapaWdKTQ)<;^ fcal ^e^aia irla-Tei^ airohehi^ piivo^^ icaV' SevTCpov^ to)v^ ^aa-iXeccjv^ y€pa<;'^ airevqve^ fxevo'i^ 'Afiav ^eTreSec^ev^ rifuv}^ iv^ irda-au;^ tol^ 4 Kara rrjv olKOVfievrjv * rifjiSiv^ tcaTev0vvofM€V7]v afiGfi7rTCii)av^ Tov^ Terayp^evov^ iirl^ tS)v 'irpayp^drcov^ /cal Sevrepov 7raT/3o?3 'qpiSyv^ Trdpraf;^ avv jvvat^l Kal t4kvol^ airoXia-ai^ oXoppt^el^ TaZ?^ T(bv i^Bp&v^ pia'xaipai^^ dvev iravro^^ olktov^ Kal (jyetSov^^ t^^ reaa-apea-KacSeKaTTj tov SooSeKarov^ p^7)vb<:^ *ASap tov^ iv€TOpov ^ ♦, 44, 106: irapoAAo^Li' X *=• * A 936 | ^ Svo-votj B ^ (Suo-ctfij) , A : SvtrvovvToq 44, 106 | o u/xeTepots 93a | P rrpotrTayp.a- s 936 | ^om L: 5iKaiW9 249 20 Text-Ceitioal Appakatus to the Book op Esther ew* rov aSrjv KaTe\06vTe;S ek top /j-eTeireira ^jooVok" evaradrj'^ ical aTapaxO'^ Trapex'^o'i'V'^ Vl^^^ ^'"^ TeXoiK to, Trpdyfiara.^ 7 t-e ovveMovre! ei! tov ASiji' L | ^ om L | I-l euo-Tuflijcroiuiv (cat )»i) Sia TeXows Tra.pex"""'^ W" Trpayfiara L | 1 aTapaxor S{ • (x«i S a Tw €m(TTo\Mv ©: om It | I^Slnb] "JlHI.tl^ Ba G: ut scirent 3: e^cTidero ®: et imperatum est IL | tTl] om 3S®iL (exc 93&*) | bSl] om bS ®; omnibus it | TlT^'U — V'TSSii] om it | nn53l] om ffi (exc 93&*) | ■'ib^ — Q^ayn] om 3 I ""ib^] r^o S: Kat irpoo-cToyij © | d'^TTlS] SO N' S Br CB': Wlt^ Ba G | TlTn] statutum IL 15 d-'Sin — -jban] om L I D^:2^n — IS:^''] om oil (exc 936*) | "|^^3 D'^Sim] eo-ireuScTO Se to -rrpayiia ® 31. (ypa/jL/w. 52, 64) | "ibBil] om (5 31 (exc 986*) | 0303 mini] om ® (exc 936*) | ITD^nan] yS'Wji. some codd and edd: +et convivium fecerunt omnes gentes il | riT^iri] om 3 ® It L (exc 936*) | ■]bsrTl — Plllrfflb] om L: Aman autem cum introisset regiamcumamicisluxuriabatur% | mUmcbj+lr*^! ■^ I "l^'ytTl — tlSISS] tr aft 4: 1 L: om It (cf. 4:3): et cunctis Judaeis qui in urbe erantflenti- bus 3 I ™!n23] so B^: ra'imj Ba G: om 3 © (exc 936*): +cm tok ycyevrj- fia/oii L I : -\-Et invocabant Judaei Deum patrum suorum, et dicebant : Domine Deus, tu solus Deus in coelo sursum, et non est alius Deuspraeter te. Si enim fecissemus legem tuam, et praecepta, habitassemus forsitan cum, pace omne tempus vitae nostrae : nunc autem, quoniam nonfecimus praecepta tua, supervenit in nos omnis tribulatio ista. Justus es, et tranquillus, et excelsus, et mMgnus, Domine, et omnes viae tua^e judicia. Et nunc Deus non des filios tuos in captivitatem., neque uxores nostras in violationem,, neque in perditionem, : qui factum es nobis propitius ab uSJgypto, et usque nunc, miserere principali tuae, parce, et non des haereditatem nostram in infaniam, ut hostes dominentur nostri. Et in Susis, in civitate proxima regi, propositum, erat exemplum, et cognita erant scripia (followed by A : 3, q. v.) It CHAPTER IV IV, 1 ''51"iai] et hie It I by om ffi It I flWi llBK] scripta quae erant in epistola It: +3: 15, 4: 3 in part g-. u. L | yip'^l] TrepieiXcTo L | ''Sl"!^] om 3® It: -\- ikdiiiv £ts tov oikov avrov L | plH] + (coi KaTitraa-aTO @ It 3 (exc 71 : 936 -:-) | ISSI] + super caput ejus It: kox aoSa>6eK L: om 71 I li2""l — mai] omL i S2''1]om UtT'S | "^mn] Sia tjjs irAaTtias ®: per totam plateam It | p^T'^'l] + ^ Sverots rr/ iroka 936 -4- | J-lpST] et vociferans Lewis Bayles Paton 21 IL: om 71 I Slbll^] omiL 71 | n"l53l] om ®E: ostendens amaritudinem amimi sui et hoc ejulatu 3: -\-ab aula virili usque ad portam muliebrem damans : gens perit nihil malifaeiens 3L: + atpErai lOvoi fi.r]S£v i;8iki;kos ® 2 ^in'^l] et sedit it | iy] in 3L | ^jgb] om S: atrio % \ "lyia] r-qv ovXijv L: aulae iL: tijs iroXecos 936; rrjs avXijs A | "ib^Jil] ttjv efm L: muliebris %: om 936; + xat eo-rjj ® L | rjj^] + ^-aJ]? )iiaicJ S | lyiu] tijv ovXijv ® IL: ttdXjjv i<°'-"B 936; om L | nb^n] om ® H: tijs 5ro\£<09 936; TO PaxTiXua. L I pTB] + Kat o-ttoSov ® (936 -s-) 3 tr to 4: 1 L: tr to 3: 15 end 3L | X^T'Ta\ ■"oXu L: om it | nnSn] oppidis 3: om ® !L 5 (exc k^'-'C"*!, 936*) | t^TTQ^ — TjX^ om L | DIpH] ttc 'ocjs 3 I "Ql] ra ypa/iiMTa | riliyS] om S, I rT'0"'"ID1] om T S I rTJr^ — 1Xt3] om L IL | ^KH fliban] gwod audiens 3: aKova-aa-a to yeyovos ® | nbTUtll — Vb^lS] Kcu airev i) fiaxri- Xura-a ircpieXccrde rov craKKov L: et missit spadonem, qui praesto erat in conspectu ipsiv^, dicens; vade,exi celerius hinc, et auferes vestimenta quae est indutus, et indue ilium vestimenta alia IL | D'^Hj^] om ® (exc 936 *) I ''ST17J riX] eum 3 \ T^^yu] + km eurayaytTt avrov h: + et veni ad me, ut sciam quid vult f rater meus, quoniam vocem fratris mei audio, magnam vocem tribulationis et planctus, et plorationis, et angustiae, et necessitatis, et exiit spado et dixit ei IL | ^3p J^^"!] et noluit Mardochaeus deponere saccum et om,nem humilationem suam IL 5 om L IL I Tinilb] 'nnrib var Oc: Athach 3: ^Zoi + jjio^av^ S: A)(padaiov @: A)(pad£ov A: Ey;<^paS(uov 44: AOaK 936 (so always): Eyj^po- daiov 106: A^x C (so always) | -iblZfi] aft iTrji 3: avrrp ®: om 249 | ■iTflii — rr^ssb] om 71 1 n-7jyn] >oW s 1 ini^sni] + ut tret 3 \ nyib] + ab eo 3: + owt; ® (936 -): + avTov X '■ A N 71, 74, 76, 120, 286, 249 I HT riM] TO o/tpi^Ses ®: ^ to axpiySes * ri tovto 936; om 71 | bjl — nT] om 3 © (exc 936 *) | piT'] om S 6 om © IL L (exc 936 *): X «• » "s J^as as tijv wAaTttav t»js iroXews i; eo-Tti' KttTa irpocrmirov T17S irvXijs T»;s iroXeow: A has em tt/v ■/rXaraav irpoi tt) {rri A* TO sup ras A*) PcuxiXea. \ "jblSn] palatii 3 7 om L I TjT^ — irpp] om IL | bi] om ® (exc );< «■ ' "S 936 *) | nsi — end of vs] simul de decern millibus talentorum quae dedit Amanpretium 22 Text-Ckitioal Appaeatus to the Book of Esther perditionis Judaeorum% {ir aft 4: 8) | qOSn] om ® (exc X """S 936 *) | bipTflb] om ® (exc X ■=•% 936 *) | b^] + ^-^ ■» I "133] IH, *= '"''^ y'^°'^ ® I -ib7jn] om s: + /ivptw TaAavrcov (5 2. | D"'-'Tin"'a] n"'"isin*;a Q Oc: C'l'liT'Sl var Oc 8 msil — inOi^] om L 71: tr w rest of vs H | -^Hs] so Ben Aster: nnS Ben Naphtali (Ginsburg): om S (5 (exc K "■% 936 *) | nifl] om S"® IL (exc 5* "■', 936 *) | ITSN — Ql^aimb] om It | 103] om M, 74, 76, 106, 236 I DT'12TI3nb] om 3 S | ifiD] missit^ \ lb] confesUm% | niK^tlb — ^JlDS] om 2/ I "IDDS] reginae 3 \ T'^nbl] k(u enrev ® It: aXX airev L: om 3 S | ^b] ivto) ®: outcus L: spadoni IL: om 3 S | nilisbl] evrei- Xaa-5(u M, 106): + irpos avTijv L: +spadoni infra it | ^''TBilb] rursum, 3: eittov © 5L: koi airei/ L | bi*] auTrj © IL L | ^nCi^J + dicens 3: om L IL 44, 71, 74, 76, 106, 236 I bx — end of vs] om L | tsb^JPlb] salva flar %: + tantum 3: + -M S: +juoi^ © 5L I "iban ln'^3] pr r=? .S: ev rrj PatriXeta © 3L: + ^iJl S I Q''Tin''fl] + quoniam uxor regis sum E 14 ■'ij o)s oTt ©: oTi A, 44, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236: om S L | lannn] om ©ILL (exc x°'""S 936*) | ''ir^inn] irapaKovcnji ®: wepi&js L: wow praemiseris IL | HTil in?!!] tov e^ovs o-ov + tov /*>? PorjOrja-ai avrois oAA L | T:T\] ]i-»oj S: om 3: /3o7j0eKi © IL: /3o7j0os L | nb^Sni] ko-i o-Ki^n-n ©: ef defensor %: Kai o-oTrjpta L | "71535'''] pr ovk 106 | D^'nilTlb] b'''l!|!T'b G: avTots L (ev avTois 93a) | ins D1p5353] per oocasionem aliam 3: aXKoOtv ©IL: o ^eos L I fiSTS] +-» -J-ro-^l S | ITlSbab] +«< iw tah' tempore parareris 3; -\-ut gentem, tuam liber es. Et introiit spado, et renuntia- vit verba Mardochaei Hester reginae IL: + koi aireX.0u>v avriyyeiXo' avrri 71 15 "l53Xni] KOI (e^)oireerTei\£V © L | "inDi^] V jSoo-iXio-cro L | n'^TTJlb] rwrSMm 3: tov ijkovto irpos avrrp/ © (om irpos avTtjv A): denuo cum misis- set qui ad eam venerat IL: om L | "'iTlJi bit,] « Mardochaeo + domine f rater, si tibi videtur introibo, licet moriar IL: + haec verba 3; om L: + \eyovavia^ oiiBe iv <})LKoBo^ia iirovrjcra toOto,' ro^ fir) TrpocrKvvelv rbv VTreprj(^avov^ 'Afidv.^ 6 ^OTi'^ jjvBoKovv^ (^ikelv" TreXfiaTa^ "ttoSmv aiiTOv^ Trpoi;^ acDTtjpiav^ 7 'ItTjOaTjX., 'aWa ivoiTjiTa tovto^ Xva firj^ 0a) Bo^av avBpdyirov" vTrepdveo So'^t;? 6eov-'^ Kal ov^ irpoaKwrjcro) ovheva^ ifKrjv aov tov^ Kvplov^ C : 1 *-d om 71 3L I I3 + tov L 44 : pr MapSoxaioy i^ *• * 1 *5-d ovtou Ta epya L | d avTov 44 ; TOV Kvpiov 936 ^5 c. a 2 * ef dixerunt IL [ b-f Seo-Trora TTavTOKftarop L : Deus Abraham et Deus Isaac et Deus Jacob, benedictus es IL | c 9e A : om 71 | d-f jSao-tXev? travTOKpaTii>p C, Aid | »-' navToxparup (op) N ^ c. a 44, 52, 64, 71, 74, 76, 106, lOSo, 120, 236, 243,248,249 | g-5eomJL | g + Ti)L | h-iecrri ra rrax-ra L | e-81> om 71 I ^ TouTo Aid I J-k om 93b 1 1 os L | m oi/Ttraf erat L 1 °-3c om 93a | o -j- oikov L 3 a-b om 106 I a + TO L 4 oom A: +ffu L | b-c Kvpteuets L | d-fom L | ^ aynraa-iTeTai ^* 5 ^-{-ya.p L I bjravTuv 55, 93fe | cyiyvioaKiL^ A: -\-Ka.i to yeros Ivpav^X L: -|-icoi 249 I dom 44, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236 | e-txai ovkoti L | onvpiot Aid | '-lom JL | g-hom L | 'om L | Itou L: om 74, 76, 106, 120, 249 | k airepiT^ijTOl' L 6 *-fi quoniam non mihi placet plantas pedum Aman adorare IL | a cTret L [ ^ euSoKouv S A L 44, 74, 106, 1086, 120, 236, 248, 249, C I o .(.lAiio-ai L : om 93a | ilTa ireAjtuTa tioj- L : to m\p.a Ttav 93a 1 f-g eccKet' TOU L 7 *om L: +nO«. ita IL 1 l'-d/i>jS6;'a irpoTa^w ttjs Sofr;; aov Seo-iroTa | c afdpwirbj ^c.a52: avQpbiTTOtv K * 1 d -1- ^ou X c. a A 936 IL I e-' p.if]Beva. npoa-Kvvrjiriil Li | ' ov^era A 1 g om C | ^ Kvptf Lewis Baylbs Paton 25 /iou,' Kol ov TToiija-eo avra^ iv vTreptj^avia.^ 'koI vvv, T^vpce o* Oebi 8 6 ^aaiXeii';^ 6 ^eo?" ' A^padfi,^ eia-ai^ rov Xaov^ aov, on e7rt/3\e- TTOvcriv^ ■fjiuv eh Kara^dopav Kal iireOvfiijcrav^ cnroXeaai'^ rrjv ef ap')(7Jpia':'' Kal^ TrevOowfi Koi^ avrX tmv' vTrepi)dvwv f/Zvaixdrav^ criroSov xal^ Koirpi&v^ eirXrjcrev^ Trjv Ke-221om 71 I 15_om lOSa | b + TT, A L 16 aijKovo-a L [ b-fwe tou irps /xov A: irarpiKTjs jitou /St^Aov L: tov irarpos /aov 936.' in libris patemis meis D&mine % I CYe^/eas 108a | d-fie« <^uAi7$ ^ I g-23ciL has the following: quoniam Noe in aqua diluvii conservasti. Ego audivi in libris patemis meis Domine, quoniam tu Abrahae in trecenlis et decern octo viris, novem reges tradidisti. Ego audivi in libris patemis meis Domine, quoniam tu ,lonam de ventre ceti liberasti. Ego audivi in libris patemis meis 26 Text-Ceitioal Appaeatus to the Book of Esthee /now iv^ ^v\5« TraT/sta? ^ov,* otiS av,^ Kv/ate,' e'\a/Se?J tov 'laparjk iic irdvTWV r&v eOvmv Koi tov^^ TraTepat fjjjilhv^ eic iravrav'^ tS>v irpo- yovMv airrSiv^ ek" KXrjpovoixiav aiwviov, Kol eVoiTja-a? avTok baa^ 17 i\d\T]a-a<:.'i " Kal^ vvv^ rnjLapTOjjbev'^ ivcoTriov^ crov, Kal irapeScoKav 18 ■nP-a<;'= ek %et/3a? tmv^ ixdp&v rj/iMV-e ^^avd'^ a>v^ eho^daafiev'^ roh 19 Oeois avT&v. BiKaio'; el, Kvpie-^ "/eai vvv"- ou% iKavioOrjcrav iv^ iri- 20 Kpaa-fj,a> 8oi»\eia?« r/fiKov, aXXa^ edrjicav'^ ra? X^'j""?' avTOivfi ^'e^apai opicrfAov (TTOfiaTO'; aov'^ Kal^ atftavicrai K\r)povofJ,Cav aov, Kai ifi,(j>pa- ^ai'^ (TTo/Ma^ alvovvTiov^ v ofio- Domiti^y quoniam. tu Ananiam, Azariam., Misahel, de camino ignis liberasti. Ego audivi in libris paternis meis DoTnine, quoniani tu Daniel de lacu leonum eruisti. Ego audivi in libris paternis meis Domine^ quoniani tu Ezechiae regi Judaeorum^ morte damnato, et orante pro vita, misertus es, et donasti ei vifae annos quindecim. Ego audivi in libris paternis meis Domine, quoniam tu Annae petenti in desiderio animae, filii generationem donasti. Ego audivi in libris paternis meis Domine, quoniam tu complacentes tibi liberas Domine usque infinem \ h-j eAurpucru L | i om 120 | ^ om 52 | 1 avrtav L | m om L (exc 93a) | i aurou 108a | o eiTiQey-evos auTOts la-pai}\ L | P a Li : wy 52 | Q + aVTOts ^ A 936, 249 : + aUTOts koa Trap€(r\ov oaa. 17 o-b om L : OTt A I b ij/iaprijicajiiei' A 936 : Tiixaprov 19, 1086 I c evavTtov L | e rifiiv 936 [ f-g om a : Tois ex«P»w 1A"»>' 52, 64, 243, 248, C, Aid | ' om 93a, 106 | g om 249 18 »-l>ei L I ctSofaioiiev 93a | dom 44, 106, 120, 236 19 oom 44, 106 I brio A I cSou^ms X : i^vxijs 93a | ii-eaA\ eTreSijKoiv L (eTre97)/ca! 19,1086) | ' + avTOiV ejrt TaXtav ^5 * : + avTiov en-i rots cificoAoLC 44, 106 : -\- avTuv eirl Ta? x^^P"^^ ^<'"' ^^vtov 52 20 "auTior L I bom L I cei-^pali) A | dtriojioTa 5{ 249 | eujij/oviToiv A 936 | 'ire L 936, 44, 52, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236, 248, C, Aid | gom 106 | h 9uo-iav 74, 76, 120, 236, 243, 248, Clbapxi" X* 24 aft 29 IL I aev pvoftevov 93a; Kupte iTvppvdfiov 249 I b-{-Kflit xaptTftio-oc Ta pruj-aroL /lov L: + et gratiam da in conspectu meo IL 1 CjgatrtXewsL | djUCTao-Tpei/foc L I eavTwi* ^* | x + iravTwc 74, 76, 120, 236 Lewis Bayles Paton 27 voovjJTOiv airq>-S ^rjfioJi^ Se pvaai^ ei/" xeipi aov,^ koX ^orjOrjO-ov 25 /loi^ Tr)^ fiovT} Kal jXT) i'x^ovarjS ei fxri ere, Kvpte.'^ TrdvTCOv^ yv&aiv ^X"^i' ''°Kai 0(Sa; on ifiio'Tjcra'^ So^av avdfimv,^ Kal'^ ^Se\vt7<70fiLai 26 KOiTijv^ airepiTfiriTcav^ koX^ iravTO's aXKorpiov.^ "''aii^ olSa'i Trjv^ 27 avayKTjv fiov," on ^SeXvtrcrofiai to arjfielov rrji virepr](j)av(a<; fiov^ 6 eanv eiil T9J9^ /cec^aXij? jiov^ iv rifiepuK^ 6iTraaiaopS) avro iv r]fiepa.i<;^ ■f](rvx''0''i /*oi/.™ ''^KaX^ ovK €(f)a'yev^ •q" SovKrj^ aov^ Tpaire^av^ 28 'Afidv,s Kal^ OVK iSo^aaa^ avfiiroaiov^ ^aaiXeco';,^ ovSk^ etriov olvov^ (TirovhSiv^ ^^ KaX^ oiiK T]vcj)pdvOi]^ r]" SovXr) crov^ a(^'® r)fiepa6j3ov fjiov} 24 gawTOj-ig, 93a 25 »-iiom H, I bpuo-oj- 19 I c+TTj L I d+Tij eparaia L | eTKiix 93a | '-horn L I g + ZSojiSox A 44, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236, 249: +3oTi8eiai' N: + erepoi- /SotjSov 243, C | li+ on erv L | i iravTOKparop 108a, 249 I Horn 1 26 *"^ om 3L : aft e L ( b avo/j.ov L | L Aid: ev 52 | Jijuepau L I gom J?* (Sea has) I b-iom L N IL: a^pi •'uv 44, 71,74, 76, 106, 120: paxP'- tou wv 52, 64, C, Aid : axpi tov it/v 249 | i ei jitj L | k-1 om 44, 106 1 1 + Kvpie 74, 76, 120 I m-n Seo-iroTa L : Kvpie Kupie A^pctdii. 236 | Domine L 30 "^^om 44, 106 S. I a-c^ai i/w Svi-aros 0)1- L | 1> Cm 52, C | di(,ui'i)! J{c. »AIi 71, 74, 76, 120, 248, C I c oj^riKiTurtL€VMV ^ : air€KTTt« eirava-aro irpoa-evxo- ixeifrj (+ Eo-^T/p L) tie8vav /]<;,'' iiriKaXecrafiein} tov^ iravToav iiroTrrrfv^ 3 Oeov^ Kol^ crcorrjpa,^ irapeXa^ev^ ra?^ Svo a^pa<;,^ ^kuX ry fiev fiia 4 iirrjpelieTo'^ «? rpv(f>epevo/j.evr], *^ Se erepa eTnjKoXovOec Kov^l^ovaa"' 5 Tr]V^ evSvo'iv" auTJj?' ^ical avrrj ipvOpicbaa^ aKjxri^ koXXov; aiiTt]'!, Kal TO TTpoacoTTov avTri'5{c. aJJ: +ciii 5{*l'' + TOV 108a | c om L : + «"")« t? I d + oculi autem gratissimi 3L: Trpo^tAe? ^* | e airetrTei'o/ijici'ij 52, 93a; airoo-rej'w/ji.ei'ij 106 I '-gom L 1 g + e< formidans a domino in terrore mortis^ quoniam mors erat ante oculos ejus Vl, 6 a om L : an-aca? 108a 1 (=D:6) lazJini] mreo-TTj ©: ott,; l | i/jyni — ^b^Jtl ^] om E I "l^ina — m^'J^SSn] om © L | nSD] evwTrtov ® L: KaTcvwTrtov 936 X °' I ri^a] om © L I "jb^iani] et Ule S-. km auTos ®: e< invenit Artarxerxem regem %: ov auros 936 | ItTlSba] om nisbo 3 19: gloriae suae % | iT'na — ri-'an] omOLiL i niiban — tr-an] omS: + the following (D:6-7) m®L3L 6 ^Kal Traa-av^ a-ToXrjv" Tri<;^ eTTt c^ai/eia? " avrov^ eveSeSvKei,^ oXoi^ Bia xpvtrov' KaV Xidcov^ TroXvreXcbv,'^ zeal'" iji;" (jjo^epb'i" a-)9T) L | li /xerePaAeTO ^ ] i frcojixa N : rrpoaianov L | 1 €TT€Kvif/ev A L : Kart- pxefiv 44, 71, 74, 76, 1U6, 120: KaTiKvilitf 52, 64, 108a, 243, C, Aid: «)r.«aA.ui/ &: + the following (D: 12-16) in® L!L "Kal rjaTrdaaTO avrrjv^ Kal ehrev AdXrjcrov fioi. "«ai ehrev^ \g avrm^ EZSoV eye, Ktipie," w? dyyekov 0eov, Kal irapd^dv^ V KapSia fiov airo^ (f>6^ov^ t^? B6^r)<; aov.e ^*6ti.^ Oavixaarot; el,^ Kvpie," Kal^ 14 TO ■jj-poa-coTrov aov^ ■x^apiTOip^ fiea-Tov.^ ^^iv'* Se tq) hiaXeyecrOai 15 avTTjV^ eirecrev airo iKXvTT)v E- ''^-^ S: om il | -^53^ nx] om ^ I nm nX] ir^^l? ^l S l -imCi^] resfwae il | iJl-'l — end of vs. 8] om ^ I pjm "^ban] a/;i^oT£poi ® L I iTax— incK] om s i nniry] etirev ® | inC!!<] eis regina S: + SaTrvoi/ 7r0XvTeA.es L (936 under -^): om 249 6 om il I inOt^b] ei 3: om 44, 106 | niTCan] postquam biberat abundanter 3: om L | ■j'^-'J-i] om ® L (exc X """s, 936 under *) | HM] + co-Tiv Pai] ^.^ V= V:io S I -|ban ■'layl] tat r^yao-eat tjjs ^Sao-t- Xetos ® I "^ban] SUOS 3 12 17jn "153X^1] Kai EKavxaTo Xcycuv L: et gloriabatur dicens % \ "ll^tl] om 3 I qi<] post haec 3: us L: om ® IL | "inCX] om ® L IL (5< °" A 936 have) I |-!Sb72n] rex It: om S | Dy — nmsyj om 3L | tiy] £i j«,r, L | b« — nrnay] ev iTrurynxm 17/iepo avrtp L: om S | fltlTijy "ITTS] om 3© (exc i<° "): aurijs 74, 76 I "^niS DS ^y Kat e/ne ;uoi/ov L | 031 — "ibtttl] regina autem nullius mentionem fecit, nisi met: et ego sum necessarius tuus inter omnes amicos ejus, sedile autem meum supra omnes, et ab omnibus adoratur H | dj] om @ L | "rbafl Dy ilb] om ® L (exc Jt "■'"■^ 936 under *) 13 bSI] om ® L (IL has) | HT — ''b] tovto 8t kvirei /xe fwvov L I "ITflS ny bSa] otw ® L IL: tv tovti xpovw orai/ X "■ ° "^ 936 under * | 31231"'] om 6 L IL (exc X ■=• ', 936 under *) | "lyifln] ev rij avXrj ® L: om IL | nban] om ® (exc S "• », 936 under *) IL: + ^^^j ^ "^]i 13? S: + Kat /iij wpotrKv- vB /te L: + won adorantem me IL 14 T2J1T] cf. 5: 10: 6?ossam IL (Pech.) | bil] om bS ® L ^ (exc }<''••, 936 under *): ceteri 3 \ ^3(11!^] 01 <^t\oi (+ai;Tov J^" *, 936 under*): om L : + £K ycvous lovSoicov eoriv ■ eTrtt a-vyKc^^uipriKe crc o y8o(7i\evs a^iavurai tows louSotous, Kat cScuKav o-ot 01 ^eot as CKhiK-qariv avTotv -rffj^pav oXeBpiov L | iTDy^] Koiri^To) o-oi ® L IL (om o-ot A 44, 71, 74, 76, 106, 236) | nsj] om ® L IL (exc s4'^-""5) I f^7JJ^] pedum IL: +Kat Ktto-^o) L | "Ipnil — ""^bab] tr aft Vby L I nbab laSi] om IL: + aww L | ibrfl] m^ appendatur 3: /cat Kpe/juwOifTui ® IL: Kat Kptfjuwov L | ^jTia HX] «utov L | Vby] ei'i Tov ^vAov 6 L: TO eo IL I xm — y2Ti] om IL | Dy] Tpos L | Jinujan bx] om L | naiB] ««' £D<^patvov © (om KOI L) I lain] om L I ■'3sb] Ty3 some codd S I -jT^n] ei 3: +-.£14 S | yyn Wi] km eTrowjo-ev ovtcos L 32 Text-Ckitical Apparatus to the Book ov Esther CHAPTEK VI VI, 1 "ib^^Jil mSir rniS] <> Se Kvptos aTrea-rrja-ev tov vttvov airo tov piwi- Aoi)S &: ^ hvvaTO'i aTre<7Tr] SiSacrKaXto avrov ®: Kai iK\rfir)(Tav oi avayvuMTToi L: et dixit rex iL | X^'Stlb] + sibi 3: ao-5"lp3 VD"''!] avayivMO-KeivlS: avaywoxTKiro L I 'rblSn ''Dab] avTO) ® L: avra eyonnov tov ySacriXeo)? t<°% 936 Under * 2 ninlD S^^^l] ventum est ad ilium locum ubi scriptumestS: evptv 8e ra ypafi,fiaTa ra ypatjjevTa '^ * I 1-JJX — end of vs] om L | Itflpn "llStt] xat CiyTTjo-ot ® I ']b533] om 3L (5 (exc 44, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236) ifll^TirnX] +quod cum audisset 3: eum + et legit lector benefactum Mardochaei et com- memoratus 3L 3 om L I nban] + tok Siaxovois ovro« 44, 71, 74, 76, 936, 120, 236 | na] die nondum H | Jlblljl "Ip"'] om % \ "'DTiab] huic homini !L [ riT by] om ® (exc X'-°, 936 under *): secundum quod fecit nobis 3L | 1'153X ■'1] +ei 3: + flii. S I inaX''! — end of vs] om IL | VrnTUa] om ® (exc 936): pr ac 3 S | ->ib] "Xb Ba | mryD] CToi^cras ® | 111] +(cat area-Tija-cv o /3aa-iXcvs tov vow cr^oSpa, Xeywv ttio-tos avrjp MapSoxaioi as jrapa- ^vXaKr]v TTj'S i/'uX'JS /^ot") St OTt awTos ciroLrj6ovow avTia- evcKeiTO yap ofioi AfMV cv Tots a-n-XayxyoK avruiv. Kai evevorjo-ev o /SocriAcus. xai cytvETo opdpo'i L: + ev Se TO TTW^oveo-^at tov ^acriXca trepi tijs eoi/oias (+ tou X 71, 74, 76, 108a) MapSoxaiov (wtpi-MapS. om 936 ; TavTa 44, 106) i8o« Xpav (+ acrrtXBev ^ "■ " -^ 936) iv Tr, avXr, (as TrjV avX,./ !}^ "=■ ' "«, 936 *) (+ otKou tov /3a L | -jani — end of vs] aft 6:5 it I N3] >?v L I nsnb — nai^^nn] om ®: Apav 8e i^pBpiKa L: «d Lewis Bayles Paton 33 regem et cogitabat IL | flllSTltl] interius 3 | "ibab] + et juberet 3 | by — lb] om L I lb] om ® (exc 5< "■ "■"«, 936 under *): +et non eum per- misit Dominus loqui IL 5 TnaS""! — nura] om L | rbls*] om J ® (exc m'-^"', 93b under*) 1 HDH] om 3 IL I 112)13 roV] om 3L 6 -jan i<"Q"'1] om IL (S (exc K "'""'' 936) | iprf] om I L | 'p'nn lb] lanb "^ban R 593: o |8ao-iX£us T(« A;uav (5 E | -^ban'] om 3 | riM] iJ^ Po S I ITnuyb] ironjo-o) ®: iroirjo-o/x£v L: ^ef iL | T23''Xn] + to) tov fiacriXea rifjuovTi L: +gMt regem honorificat % | "i^BX — 'l"lp''S] om IL | 'rbail''] cyo) ® I l^blS] + ei reputans 3: Xcyojv L: cttm cogitatione sua IL | "lab] weminem IL | VSH"^ — "ip"'] Aa6e< rex necessarium % 7 lan] om 3 IL 6 (exc J<'' 44, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236, 936) | 'iban bn] domine rex iL: om 3 L 44, 106 | 'ffl■'^^] 1i-=^ *: honori- ficanti regem IL ] TfflSt — 'l"ip"'3] om IL 8 'li^''3''] a>fyiaiT(i»Tav oi TroiSes tov fiacriXvoi ® {eifeyKaTio A): \r]6riTpav, kox t) KapSia avTov irpos tov Kvpiov. Kai eiuTTaTO c a(t>a<7ux. Kai €a-7rev(Tei> A/MtvL | irO'^iT'l] >Trai © iL: TO) avSpt TO) TOV l3a ot€ XaXets irepi avTOv KaKa, irpoa-iropfverai croi Ta KaKa- r^oTJXo^e L I ^tUi<] om @ H | ''i 'lb] |31 oi^i^*^ S: avTov apAivaa-daj. « it I bl3n biSD] om 3t I bl3D] bS3 N' a few codd: ^oZ S | V3Sb] om ® L H + oTi ^£05 ^o)v /x£T avTov ® (936 H-); + oTt o ^£05 cv aDTois L: + quia jam, propheta est iL 1 4 lay] ^oaiifl:^ S : om 3 itr L @ (exc K ° ' "S 249, 936 under *) | ''CIDI] l^ai'i S: Tis L I -jban] reginae 3L: om L ® (exc js^"'"?, 936 under *, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236, 249) | ly^^n] 7rap,v L | X^ailb] om S L IL ® (exc X""°S 936 under *) | pjn] ewm 3 L | 'ITBN — nnOX] «<" ovtojs tkapmdri L I inOX] regrtna 3: + 77 Pacri\io-cra 71, 74, 76, 120, 236 CHAPTEK VII VII, 1 i(2''1 — fllfnijb] KOI iropfvdus aveirea-e ev 5 S | 1^05^] om 3 L 31 © (exc i>5 ■=••"«, 936 under *) | nsbail] eo E: avTo>v L 2^53X^1] VI factum est ^: -inD!!°Pov (Tov; + a)s Se etSev ij jSatriXtcro-a OTt Setvov ei^avi; to) /SaaiXa koi /iLO'OTrovrjpci, enrev Mjj opyi^ov, Kvpie- ikovov yap OTt ETDXOV TOU tAxMT/iOV O-QD" OJOj^OV, ^O'lXeV aVpiOV 8e TTOtTJO-O) KaTa TO p);/ut cov. Kat o)fioo-ev o fiaxriXevs tov anayyaXai avTrjV avTia tov VTr£pr]avevcrap,a/ov TOV xotTjcrat tovto, Kot /ucTa opKov V7rt(T)(£T0 TroiTjfTOL avTij o av ^ovXi^Tai L 6 naSni] «<" Oapa-ria-aaa aira> L | 1|2 TC^K] o i/'ev8»7S ODTOo-t L | ^'''1X1] + wosferJ: regis ?L: o ^iXoscrovL: om ® (exc Ut "^^ ""5, 936*) | "1^(11] quod ille audiens 3 : Aman autem audiens verba iL | "jani — end of vs] om JL I ]!ani] ille 3 I nyn?] so N' S N^ Br C B^ B^^ G-. fiynS Ba: + illico ^ I ''SSba — nsbStl'li vultum regis ac reginae ferre non sustinens 3: et cecidit xmltus suus H 36 Text-Critioal Appaeatus to the Book of Esthee 7 inana] eK^u/xos Se y£vo/*£vos L: om It® (exc Jj^ <'»"S 936 under *) | T''il inlm23^52] de loco suo + projiciens mappham %: de loco convivii 3: KM irXrjOw: opyr]^ L: + ei intravit 3: + ■ nq\i\ S: -\- km tqv irepnraTOiv L: + eif exiit IL | "in^^n 1^33] hortum arboribus consitum 3: tov Krprov ® (+ TOV tTVfx.vTov m °- '"°^, 936 under *): hortum IL: om L I "7^ni — end of vs] om L I 1733>] om IL ® (exc i< "•*, 936 under * 249): napeKaXa 52, 64, 243, 248, C, Aid): -Jjpnb] Traprrraro ®: KM -qTuro 52, 64, 243, 248, C, Aid: Tap£Ka\a 55, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236 | 112333 b?] om IL @ (exc X °°, 936 under *, 249) | "inDS<13] om IL ® (exc K "• ' "^ 936 under *) | JlflbS "'5] om ® 3L I rU^in VbS] eauTov ei/ kokois ovto ® IL | 'pnT\ tW2\ om IL ® (exc X " % 936 under *) 8 '^bam — ■j-'^] tr aft trby L | -^b^jni] gM« cwm I I n3j52] om L I IfT'Sri] nemoribus consito + ei intrasset 3: om L IL ® (exc j^'=»'"8, 936 under *) | bi< — T'^ti] ad locum suum IL: om ® (exc J< "-"^e, 936 under *) | "j^ni] reperit Aman 3: + erapaxOr] km L | b33] + £ti tods TToSas Eo-07;p tijs ySaeriXtcj-a-rjs L | "ITflSt — iT'by] ofwoi' Tiji/ /3av L I "ib^Sn] ~H o^X ""*!'<»' •'■0' I? ajjiMpTui T1JS yffacrtAeias L : + WOM sufficit quonicmn super me et regnum m,eum manus ausus fuit mittere IL | "'7J3?] /iov L IL ® (;u,£T c/Aov !!t "■ "°0 I rr^na] ei/wmov ;u,ov L: om IL I "Qlil — ISH] ojrai^SrjT*) Kfiav Kai //.ij ^yfio- Kai ovTws aTTT/ycTO L: om IL: A^iuiv 8e axovcras SiiTpaTTri T(o TT/aocronro) ® (pr o Xoyos eirjXdof €k tov crTOfuiTOi tov fiacnXiuys X "•""«, 936 under *) 9 njl3"in] pQ-=i-' S: Bovya^av ®: Bouya^av S"-": BouTaflav N: BoD- yaOa X * 71: BovyoSav 64: TafiovOai 93a: Bovxa6av 236: Aya^as L: Afiov- XaSas (2a;8ovxaSas) Jos xi, §261, 266: Buzatas {Baguas) IL: Ap^wva 936; Xapl3wva C: cf. 1:10 I D"'D"'^Dn] + 3wi stabant 3: + ^jo i^i^) S: Twv TraiScuv avTov L : + ovtos Se fyi/w/cei tovto to ^vXov t8a)V tow uTavpov ev tt; oiKia TOV Kjxav ot€ EKoXa avTov an to Sei-trvov Twv fiacriXaov Ktu ■mpi tovtov irvdop^voi eyvo) Trap evos Tmv ttoiScdv to KaTao'KCva^O/u.ei'ov 52, 64, 243 (exc ciScuv, TOV SeiTTVOv), 248 (+ Kai aire), C, Aid | "lb7jn ''33b] Trpos tov ySao-iXea ®: tov PauiXtdis A: regis IL: om L | Qj] xat ®: Domine rex IL; om 3 L | ^TUX — "^bTan] tr aft n7J« L I -iisX] om S ® I p^n] om 3: + }3:^,ol. S: + iva KpEfMo-r] 111 +ut ilium suspenderet IL | "'^^'iTob] tov MapSoxMov L: + -oia:^.^ S, I -iiax — iTjri] om IL | ^irx] -? i^^^ S | nit:] om S ® (exc X """^ 936 under *) ! ^7jy] pr koi ® S: om L 44, 106 | -jan n"!!] ev tjj ai)Xi7 auTov L: om 44, 106 | ni2!;] iTaj S Br: |vXov ® (pr vi/^jjXov X °-*, 936) om A L: erectum E | H^JX] pedum IL: + KeXeuo-ov ow, Kupte, ctt avToi auTov KpefjMcrO-qvM L | vb?] + ^t uxor ejus et decern filii ejus IL 10 om L I iblT'l — I'Jtl] KM iKpeixaa-Or) A/tav ®: ei suspensi sunt sicut praeceperat rex IL | ''5l"l72b] + tpayur9v £V avTO) o jSios avTOV. KaL airev o j8a9aXfiu>K a-ov N: in conspectu tuo IL: in oculis ejus 3 \ "ilDSI — TT^Zi] om ® ?l (exc 5t """^ 249, 93b under *) | "^b'jn^J ei 3 I rD"'ya ^:« naltil] om 3 S j ani'^] obsecro ut novts epistolis 3: ,^o2LaJ S: mfitpOyiTui ©: mittantur a te litterae % | ^''TCnb] awo%'^'%\ D'^TinTl] eos 3 I "jb"^)! ni2^n7J bSD] ev TTj PcuTiXua (TOV ®: m regrta tea in nomiwc ftto 3L 6 om L 106 I XSTa'' "ITDS] om ® IL (exc 93b *): et interfectionem 3 I NSa''] Xi£7:n K 245 R196,S^b/i{r in some codd | TOS"'X1 — TllblTS] 38 Text-Cbitioal Appaeatds to the Book of Esthbb om 3 I Tl'^iilV] (Twdrivcu. ®: liberari H | pnj S Br B': om @ IL I ^nOXb] UU ^^ om 44, 106 | TObSH — ^mrTTl] om ® 11/ (exc 93& under *) : tt] ^acrtXia-crrj A & \ SlDtn — ^HDlS^b] ^it cve^a- ptcr£v avTo) ySoo-tXeus Ta Kara T-qv ySacrtXeiav L | jTI^n] OVa 3 % \ tT'^] Travra Ta VTrap)(ovTa ^: Omnes facultates It | ItlDXb] kcu £)(a.pwraii.rjV ovo>. eviTV)(e Se i; PauiXurtra E(r07;p Kat KaTa TeKVajv A/jiav to) jiaxriXa, oirtos awoOavuxri Kai avTOi ixera tou vaTpos avTtov. Kai avfv o /SocrtXevs rii/£ix.o\oyq(TaTO o /JacrtXeus Ti; /3a(riXi(Tcn] aTroKTav6r]vai avSpas, /cat eiTrcv ISov 8tSb)/i.t crot tod Kpe/xacat. icat eyevcTO ovtids L 8-13 tr aft VS 14 L | DtlSl] f^it o /8acrtA.eus ev£X"P'0'£ TO) MapSo^atco L: om ontt IL I irifiS] ypa<^Etv L: scribe 11: om « | Q-'TinTl bj] om 'ntl ri3?a] era* awfem tempus 3 \ '^wb'^fi] tu TrpwTo) ® It (rpiTo) it "■■""% 936) | ■UJ^n] om S ® It I -jVD] Siban 3: ^i-^p. S: Nt(ra(v) ® (Stomv !«< °""°5, 936): om ^ I mrlbTrn] «v T€.TapTr, 249 | D-'mryi] om it | 1:2] tov avTov ctous ®: Tou SevTcpov ETows i5 *: TOV avTov ixfjvoi A N 76: ipsius mensis It: + ) -^ ^^ S I nni""l] CLSiJo S) \ niS] '-=^ S: ETreo-TetXt Se L | '^il-ia] omit® (exc J* = ""O Map8oxaios Sta ypo/x/x«,Tw L: Eo-^w 44, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236: omit I biS — endofvs] om L | bi*] Vl S | bxl] om 1 S | D'^iSTlTCni^n] principes3: ]LJL ^kSfL, S: tois otKovo/tots ®: actoribus% \ "I'l'ffl'l] + qui praesidebantS: tw o-aTpaTrw It ® | niD'^lian] om ® It | "ilfl^] om Sit® (exc !!<■=••"« 936) | ttIS] + bx several codd K and R I riTI-D'] sa- trapis It I T\T~l^l2^ TiTTQ^'] gentium imperantibus It | piriinSS] Kara rr/v eavTwv Xe^tv ®: secundum it | I^Tubi Dyi Dyi] oOj^ii. ■^] I'^vV ^ S; gentem et gentem secundum uniuscujusque eorum linguam E: om ® (exc 936 under *) | bxi — DDTfflbil] et Judaeis prout legere poterant et audire 3: om it ® (exc 936 under *) Lewis Batles Paton 39 10 SWI — ICinCriK] omL I nni"''!] aJS^4o &-. eYpaoi^^lo S: mt efm.yur6ri payuTaTO L | "^baffl tov jSoaiXeeos L: awou ® IL | nbT23"'1 — end of vs] cm L I nblB'^l] KOI c^aireo-TEiXav ®: (e^aireo-TCiXev i^ °" A) | n"'13D] om IL | T'l] 8ta ® IL I D"'2iin] ^iP\iaop<»v ®: librarios currentes it | CDlDl] )jlaffi) ^jjso S: om 6 I i^DI — D''S13"in] 9m« P^*" omnes provincias discurrentes veteres litteras novis nuntiis praevenirent I: om ® IL: tow £7rij3aTats T v/uv ypap,iw.Ta ej(0VTa ovrus E^vos lovSaMov aircides o'lrovSao-aTt Ta;(£0)s avaTre/ii/rat /xoi tis an-o>- A.E(ai/. tyo) 8e o MapSo^cuos p.ijwu> vpMi tov ravTa ipyaaa/jLcvov irpoi raw Sovcrwv jrvAots KiKpefuurOai koi tov oikov ovtod SutKexapurOoj,. ovtos yap ejSovAtTO aTro- KTetrai 17/Mis L I JlTBlbTSn] quarta L | "nay CDtB] om L | IHITi] om 3 S L IL I 'list] + the following passage (E: 1-24) in © L IL (L inserts after 8:7): ADDITION B ''Hi/" icTTiv^ avTiypeufyov t^?" i7na) L : fiaf rapis IL ; + iSiwi/ ^ * | m apf oval i5 I n -|- fT-aTpafraic X *'■ ■* '"S A : om L 40 Text-Ckitioal Apparatus to the Book or Esther 2 Ta fjneTepa ^povovcn° jjjat/setj'.P '^troXXol t^* trKeiarri rwv ei/epye- TovvTCOv 'X^pTjaTOTrjTi^ TTVKVOTepov" TifimfMevoi^ fiel^ov" iv^ ra' •Kpdyjj.aTa^ irapafjivOCa^ p.eT6')(pv<;^ alfidrtov^ aOaxov^ KaTaarq- 6 (Ta' L 5 *-c om L I b om 52 1 b-c n-oAAotrTo)*' 74, 76 1 d ef ouo-iiov L I e TCTavjaevoi L : + t** L : + Kat 44, 71, 74, 76 I i tiiiriarevoiievuiv L | g aft 1 L 44, 71, 76, 236 | liom 44, 71, 76 | lorn L | I irpoo-TayjiaTa 52: ypafL^Lara 249 1 ^ irapafivda 55 : om L 1 I-° aiTtovs admiav ai/laTtuc L [ 1 ^erecovs ^ * : /xcTayi/ovtra A : /if rairiovs 936 | ^ fJ-era to)** A | ° aft o 249 1 KaTacrTTjtra'; J^ A : KarauTrjirai'Tei L | P TrepiejSaAo*' L | p-q circumdederunt calandtatibus intolerabilibus H 6 a KaKOTTOiiay Ij : aATjfleias 4. : «aKon-L(TT€ios 93a .' + rpon-w i5 '^^ * ™S 936 | b -j- 5e i5 * j om A L 1L [ <1 ffapoLAoyto'a/xei'os i5 A : irapaAoyio-ajue^'Ot L | e om 936 | ' eyi'co/xoo'ui'Tji' A : (Tvyyvtiip.o(TVVT\v 74, 76 : tTTvyviamv ^ ♦ 7 aom 108a t bco-Tii' L | c-dom L [ e-Jom L | e TraAaltiirepwi' A | 'om i5*: tor N I g7rapa5e5o- ti.%viitv np.f.v L: irapa5t5itjKafL(v i5 °- * I ^"^ Kat otrov to L | bocoF J? I i + TOUff 44, 71, 106 | It jUtepo? ^♦: iroAAaf 19, 1086 | 1 Vfitv ^ * : ijfiaiv 44 : om L | m eK^Tjrouc ^ * : flewpovi'Te? L : €«^TjTOui/Tes 936 | ° af tws li I "om L I Pom 936 | A | rSui/acrrev- o/jiei'wir 936 I " wpoTjjTt L : Av^oTTjTt A : AijuoTijTt 52, Aid : w/iotoTijrt 936 | Q-a dtgna dominaniium, pestilentia 3L 8 'om L 236 | boo-a 52 | Cto S* 71, 74, 76, 249 | li-e;neT e?rei.Tii L: p-er aura 936 | f-g«nl. 5{ '■ * L : TO X c- b : ojffTe 52, 64, 243, 248, C, Aid | li-i irapexeiv Trao-l TOts efli'ea-l jllct eiprjvtii L 9 aov xP"/*'""' i?«- » A L 249 a, I bSe 52: Tc 243, 248, C, Aid | cJia|3oAaw L: varietatibus 1 1 dom 44, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120 [ e-h/ieT eirieiiceiots Siefa-yovTe? L 1 'Set ^* j gfiera ^ A ] i ayavoKTljirewf X*: om L I •-icum clementissima occursioTie 3L Lewis Bayles Paton 41 10 "«?* yap^ 'A/uAv" 'AfiaSddov^ MuKeSmv^ raZ? akrjdelai'i^ aXK6rpio eirif evo>9eis yap Tj/uii- L | cAn(jai/ 19: om 249 | iAiJLa9ov A: o /laSa^ov 93a; Afia^ajov 236 (always) | d-eom 44, 71, 106 | eBoi/youos L | «avo(«ini! 19, 1086 I gaft h 936 | i i(>pi>i'i)/xaTot L I iom 19, 44, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236 | jSiwToit L: begin. Aa X* Cimprob \a ^ I) ferena it | k-lom L | k f ecwfleis C 11 n-bTiji ef 7j)iaii/ L I »oil N | =-ii i^iAavflpcoirias aim 44, 71, 76, 106, 120 | c ,J)iXaK9pi»7riiii/ 236, C I li cos A : Te 52 I e avii7ropeu€(7-9ai X • : amvopeuSiji-ai L : ayopeueirSat C : Om !L | '-g tr Li | 1> irpocr- /lui'oufiei'os A : TrpocTKui/eio-Sai L | i omJit6its subditis nobis %: + «ai 44, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236 | JSeurepuv 1086 | k^oo-tAutcji' L: ^aaiktmv 19, 1086 | Iflpoi'uy L | mom L | J-net secundum habem sedile iL 12 " «v«y«' L I I) eirerriSjuo-e 5{ : eTriTijStuffev A : eTreTeAevire 52 : eve-rijievat 936 ; aiMltS est S. : + il*ia5 L I i!-aom L: tr A | co-Ttpeo-ai S* I '^"('M X* I »-'om 71 | eom A | J + utTao-njo-ai L 13 «Se L I b-fom 44, 106 | CffuTTipnv i{*: om 71 1 dom L i eirai/ruv 52, 243, 248, 249, C, Aid: om 71 I -dTou™v tuv Tpowav L: tov Tpoiroi- toviok 44, 106 | d om A | e Jiflii 55 »: u>)9om L I c + ovi- L I i + et impio H, | e-fvp,ii. L | gjudaeorum S, | ievpur/toMti-iiut N: gm- inuenmntiir IL | Htr A | i|xi L: om N | i-ktr L | k + oAAa 44, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236 | lai-ay- «aioT«Tovs S* I mom 44, 71, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236 | i>-otr93a | n ,r„\iTei,o|iievo.5 93a I oomM 16 "-0U.OV! ovra, 44, 106: fiUi ^ I -IT'om 71 | >ov 93a | b + «ai L | cmo.t ^<•: af t d 249 | i-ip-ovov L I d-eom 44, 106 | dom tov A KJom 1: tr 76 | epr tou 936 | «ofto5 936 | g + «ai aA,9.. vov L H>om 936 I i naTevSuvovToj S * : «aT6«9vvavTO! L 74, 120, 236 I JTjuat 55* I k-lom L: et po»- teris JL I k om 106 I m ayiav S * : + ixexpi TOU I'l/x L I n-o sicut volwmus % 17 » iroi,i)(njTe i{ : 7roiT)o-aTe A L 52, 108 : iroiijo-eiTe 93a ; iroitiTe 243, 248, C, Aid : I b irpoff«xoi/r€t L: om 249 | c-froit irpoaireo-ToA^evow ufiiv vno A^av L I iUav A: Tov Auak N I eAdaSaSov A 52- om L 44, 71, 106, 1, 42 Text-Oritioal Apparatus to the Book of Esther 18 crraXeto-i' <^pdnfia<7LV,^ ^"Sia to^ avTOV^ rov" ravra^ i^epyacrdfievov^ TTOO? Taif ^ovcrcov^ TTvXaK eaTcivp&aOai^ criiv^ rrj^ "TravoiKia^ TtjP Kara^iav^ tov ra^ Trdvra iiriKpaTovvTO^"^ ffeov^ Slo, rd'^^ow cvrro- 19 S6vT0';° avTq>v Kpl om 108a | Com J?* A 249, lOSfel I ^ra rotaura L | ^ epya.tTaiJ.evov L: eLpy}tJ.evov 19, 108fe 1 ' 5u(rot9 N | h-q om 71 | b-J alToSeSti>KOTOi auTW L i i om N i J n-apotjcta 76 [ Ic + SiKiji^ L | 1 Cm ^ * 52, 248 | m KaTOTrreuOFToff L | n-o om L I o airoAoi/Tos 55 : OiiToSovTa 106 : airoSovrei; 243 | P-Q aei KptTov -j- CKTeflTjTw L 19 a-b 5e TO L I c-d om L ] d eKTe^e^'TOS X * • enTedevre^ A : exponens H | e-1 om L 1L | g-J XpT](r6aL re TOV9 louSatous L: permitte omnes Jitdaeos uti % \ li-iTois loufiatoi? 74 | ixP^^'^''^'^ 52, 64, 243, 248, C, Aid I kauTui/ 249 | li/o/xois i{ A L 52, 64, 936, 243, 248, 249, C, Aid 20 a-c et confortiari cum (minibus % \ b eirnrx^eiv Li \ d om 44 | e tntTefievov^ 52 | i om ^ • L | S tt-vvbiVTai A*: aiivvatrdai N: aiJ.vvovrai 19, 93a, 108b; + eKpiflij fie vn-o TWC Kara Trjv fiatriKeiav lovSaiui/ ayeii' L | h-irijv reou A | ojiiiui- 74, 76: om A | dom A | 'riii.ep> A : avovai 52 : o-wovai 55 : evvoovn 108a ; evvava-i. Aid I i-1 TcoK 5e eiriiSouA.euo-ai'- TM** L : Ta)!- fie TouTot? eirt^ovKevaavTiav A ; Tois fie tmv eTri^ovAevEii/ aurois toAjuui/twi/ 44, 71, 74 106 120, 236 : tois Strtuv eiriPouAeueii- ToAjioxri 76 : tois 5e ij^iii/ em^ovKeva-airi 108o | m (ij'ijfioo-vi'ai 108a | n + 7roi7jo-€Te 108a 24 "iL I tiSe 1,44, 106 I c+itaiL I d^ L: om93a | ex"P ^ €KTi9tureo) A I ni] om S © (exc 936 under *) | n5"'153] ti? fiaaiXeia © | !lD"'iai] om S ® (exc Lewis Bayles Paton 43 93b under *) | ''iba] om 3: foao Si o.^^aX/io<^av«)s ® | D'^Myfl bib] om Q I HTn arb] om j i Dpsnb] iroX£/i^<7ai o 14 D"'2in — nban] om L I n'^Sin] Pr => S: oi /xev ow wnras ® I 1^51 — D''3"iri'fflrti< '='°'«, 936 under *): pr |-oaaio1o S I D"'3"lln'II3nKin] om S l ISS"'] om IL | D''bnn'?3] "^= S: festinanter^ \ D^Simi] perferentes 3: 2u>)jgi|mVi S: tiriTtXeiv ®: koi Sudko/xcvoi CTriTt- X«iv H ° ""S 93& under * | "inn] nuncia 3: to Xeyo/iem ®: praecepta ^ I '^ban] cm 3 S I mni — end of vs] om 44, 106, 107, 236 | mm] + regis 3: iJ,jaaso S: exemplum epistolae IL | JlStlS] i-o^-^i? '® I n"l"'in] om 3 (exc X "■', 936 under *): civitate regis IL: Trepiexpv TaSe L (here L inserts 8 : 8-13) 15 K2''] + de palatio et 3 ] 'p'aTl "'SSba] om iL ® L (exc X °•*'°^ 936 under *) \ "iini Jlbin] om IL L ® (exc H ■= ""°S 936 under *) | -|iri1] ^osjo S: ei aereis 3; acptvijv X °% 986 | nTa3>"l — nbllDi] om L (exc 93a) I nbna] om 3 S ® it I '^■'ISni] et amictus 3 | Win] serico pallio 3: ei byssinum % | ■la:^"!^"!] om IL: om 1 © L | -ITjailB "I'^JHI] iSon-es St ot ev 5oiio-ots ® L IL I nnaiZJl] om L iL ® (exc X '=■»"«).• + on A 16 TTWd om 44, 106, 107 | nnaTCl] ttotos L | yB^^\ KuSmv L: tu Kvpua 6ea> 19: k«/3«d to) Oeo) 1086; om IL © (exc J< "■% 936 under *) | "lp''1] om L 3L © (exc N "•», 936 under *) 17 bDll — niti] om L I bSnV] om © (exc 108a): om 1 S | nD''iai] om S IL © (exc 936 imder *) | b53l ''J om © IL | -ry] om % j I'-yi] om S 3L © (exc 936 under *) | Dlpa — end of vs] om 71 | Q1p5a — niti] om 44, 106, 107 I Dlpa — -jbari] om a N 52, 74, 76, 243 | Dpa] om © E | in] om 248, C, Aid | imi "jbatl] om IL © (exc S< "= ""^ 935 uj^jer *) | irrn] om 3 I y^^] + ov av eieTiOri to CKdefm © (exc X): + to eKOefm 248, C, Aid I irjJTfll] lAaj S I D'^TH^b — lltJ] om IL | D'^nirT'b] epwZae 3: + o S I nitJ DTI] Kfti eu^poowij ©: xai ayoAAtoo-ts 74, 76, 120, 236: om 249 | yiNH ''aya] altertus genOs S-. tevTa vtto ®: to ypayn/mTo 44, 106, 107 | iTllfflyflb imil om © (exc X— »», 936 under *) | Dm - l^mB] om S> \ ^^X DVn] e< 44 Text-Ceitioal Appaeatus to the Book of Estheb 3 I -,^5^ _ -,^j^] om ® (exc 93& under *) | "naiT] inhiabant 3 \ -v ® L H I D-iTin-n] -Dewm IL | "^STI?:!] l-al:^? S 4 "'a ■ — "lb7;2n] om L 31 (exc i^o-^mg, 93& under *) | ''i] + cogi- noverant 3 \ "'Sma] S^em 3 | n"'33] -iai. S | '^b/jn] + et plurimum posse 3 I "ibin lyT^ml] fa/ma quoque nominis ejus crescebat 3: Trpoo-- tir€(rev yap to irpoa-Tayfja Tov pacnKeo)^ ovofiacrdrivai ©: praecepfum enim erat timorem regis nominari iL: xai Trpoa-eiretrev ev Sovcots ovoiuurO-qvaj. Afmv Kai Tovs avTiK£tp.£vous L | 13>'J2T2:] oiia^ S | ri15"'n7jn b'DJ,] quotidie 3 I ]zi -iNVi ^ai\-in S: £v iraa-ri {rrj) fiaaiXtta (S L: in omni civitate ejus %: +avTov M, 74, 76, 106, 120, 236 | ''S^— blljlj et per cunctorum era volitabat 3: om L IL (S (exc 93& under *) 5-19 om IL 1 5 om L ® (exc 936 under *) | bSl om 3 | HIH] magna 3 I jltll] et occiderunt eos 3 | ■jia^^'l] om 3 | D31^"I!D] quod sibi para- verant facer e 3 6 om 3L I 'iTTlTEIll] om 1 S: xai ev avrri ® | Kai ev Sowow S* X"""*''''' A L I riT'nn] om s* l 44, loe 3 1 n'^mn^n] om 3 1 -aiii] om 3 s l « (exc i^o- % 936 under *) | niXa 11372^1] cirToicocrtovs L 7 om it 106: tr aft 9: 10a 3 | 5<*: /cai tov aSeX^ov avTou L: Ae\(f>ov 936, 108a I !!51nBD!!<] Esphatha 3: Zosoo) S: 4>ao-ya ®: *Miya S<*: $aya A: $apva L: A^apmp93a.' $ao-ra74, 76?: ApK^afc 986 ; $ayya 249: Ao-<^aeo C 8 omlL106 I SnilS] -jL^^fS S>'^: -{l^^j^ Si-"": ^apaSa^a®: *apaaflo K: BapSa^a A: Tayac^apSa^a L: OapSa^a 71, 74, 120, 236: $ovpa«a 936; Lewis Bayles Paton 45 ^apSajSa. 243, 249, Aid: $opa8a0a C I S^-ibnii] )-^? 5: Bap(Ta B: Bapt\ XA: Bapea many codd: tods ercpovs 71: om L | StnT^SJ] -^i-*? ^*: 'r"? S"-"": Sap/Saxa ®: Sap;8aKa some codd: Sap/^xa 76: Sap/xaxa 120: Sapo- /Jaxa 236: AptSa^a 936, C: om L 71 9 om 3t 71, 106 | KniB7J-|S] KniC'^IS (both TU and n small) G: PhermestaS: ZaioMj^l S*: Zoul^s S •■»"': Map/wio-i|Uffl ®: Map/mo-tju, S 55, 64, 243, 248, Aid: Map/iaap/*oo-^a 936 / ^appaa-Oa C I "'D''"!!!^] ■'"'': S: Apo-aiov ® (tr with next): kputov ^•. Apurai 936, C: om L I ''T'lS] -'?1 S: Vovaiov ®: Pou<^avov A; Apou<^otov N 55, 64, 74, 76, 108a, 120, 236, 243, 248, Aid: ApiSai 936, C: om L | sriT'^l] l^rge 1, small T; so JH: Jezatha 3: ^o\ S>: ZafiovOaiov ®: ZafiovStdav H: Zafiov- yafla A: Za^m>ea.Sav N 55, 64, 243, 248, Aid I Za<^ov8ai8av 52: ZafiovOaJdav 108a; lt.o.Qau6'L: Bai^aea C: Omt^aea 936 10 om IL I niTfly] pr extra 3: pr koi L 44, 106, C 1 !!irn7jn p] om 3 S: + Agagitae 3: + I-ik^ S: + {rov) Bovyatou <5 L: + koi Bovycuov 44, 106: + Bo«8eov Di* 1 "n^] tods ex^povs 249 | D^'linTl] + qv-orum ista sunt nomina 3 | Ijltl] pr quos cum. 3: om L ® (exc S °° A, 936 under *) | J^T^ni — Dl"'] Kcu, Sir/piratrav ® : /cat StT/pTratrav TravTa Ta avTcov L : Kat ov SLTipircurav C: kg, 936 under *) | iJi'C'n — JCTi] om L | fis^l — 'pTi om @ (exc jjj c. amg^ 935 yjj^ej *) I rii3i-,7j -ii4T232] £v St t,? ireptx^po (x<"P« ■^) ®: KM ot Ev Ti; TTipixiopoi L | "ib^Jtl] om 3 S L ® (exc 936 under *) | liijy TV2] quantam putas eos exercere caedem 3: tus oiet txprjcravTo (Kexprivrai i< °- " A) ®: Kexprp/Tai L: + Kttt ei7r£v o fiacnXevi irpos 'Eifrdtip 44 | 11701'] om "1 54 codd K R, 3 S I ^1131 — end of vs] om L (cf. 8: 2 end) | "jribj^lIJ] a^iois + £Ti®: postulas + ultra % \ 1W1] i-:ii»iJ S: Kat eo-Tat @: om 3 | -jb] om ^ I naV — end of vs] om ® (exc 936 under *) | liy] om 3 S | yjyni] utflerijubeam 3: v_soi_»iJ S 13 om 3L I OX — nta] om S L: tw ;8ao-iXa ®: awo) 44: eov tu) PatnXa (jmvrj 936 under * | Dj om S ® L | "112511233 "1113 S] om S ® (exc 936 under *): CVS eav OeXoxnv L | niTISSb] )(p-r}(y6ai ®: avcXetv L | OVH tlli] iJLlcQ-»? ^j | S: (ocravTMs ®: koi hiapiraJ^av L | flXI — Wh] om L (cf. 8: 7 end) | yy|n bj] om ® (exc X "■ ", 936 under *) ' 14 om 11 106 I 1135^^1 Kat eirerpexpfv ®: xat (rmtytop-qcrev L: CTrea-Tpoj/ev i<* I ~b23n — end of vs] om L | -p-/2Ti] om ® (exc 936 under *) | -iriSIII] 46 Text-Ceitioal Apparatus to the Book of Esther Kai €ie6rjKe{v) ® | fll] Tois lovSaiois ®: + tt) TcacrapcaiauSeKaTr] tov ASap Kai air(.KT£ivav avSpas T/oiaKocrtovs 236 | TO'ITBD] T?js TroXtus ■n-oXa ® (exc it*): -\-urbe caedem exercuerant 3 \ ibflpS] in caede versati sunt 3 \ 13 "ii^y Jll23lbl233] om ® (exc 5< "=• * ™e, 93b under *): + p,,vos ASap 936 under -h | nS^mitni — end of vs] om 71 | in'] om ® (exc X ■=■""«, 936 under *): tod A8ap 74, 76 | ni31] koi ovk aveiravaavTO B 55, 74, 76: avcTrava-avTO it*"*" A N 936 C: xai av€Trav(ravTO other codd | 13^] om ® | niryi] illflyi K 176, Q: e« idcirco constituerunt 3: nyov §£ ® I QV Iflit] om ®: + solemnem 3 \ nril2353] fJ-^ra xapas ® 19 omLiL I 15 by] hivero3 | D^'Tinsn] CnSH Q: omS | C]"'ni25"'n] ^l1 5: om @ (exc it '=■^ 936 under*) | ninSH ''lyn] UVjjaic M" S: m oppidis non muratis ac villis 3: ev watrri x<«pa tt] €$ S> \ bD^ — nDlTI] om® 3LL: U-»^ li^ ''^ S: revertente semper anno 3 22 a-'M'^S — nnaiDI] om L I rriT'D] D^a^n K ISS, R 378, 11: ev yap TavTcus raw ■i;p.£pats ®: in dtebiis 3 | TClJ^J om ® (exc i<<=» A) I ins] erraverMnt IL j Qm] om ® (exc it °- » ™8, 936 under *) : e< servati sunt iL | IB^rim] om lannn 3: om 1 S: secundum mensem% \ "ITDX] om3 | "jSilS] scyriptus est %: iypari H A | Dtlb] om S: + os ijv ASap ® (936 under -;-, A om) I pj-'a — nita om 5^ 936 | blitai — niti] om 106, 249 | Qniit] oXov ayaOas ®: auras A: oXas aya^as 44, 106: o Aaos aya^as 76: oA.ov as aya^os 68, 243, c. Aid I nmaa] yafw-v ® iL I nn^airi] om nnaTr loe i ribt353l] mby37Jl var: eiawocrTeXXovTai ®: mi airarreiXe L: mittere it | rilDa] dona -et partes JL | 'Cit] sacerdotibus iL: om L | Itiy^b] tois <^i\ois ®: ei amicis it: om L | niDnai] om L it ® (exc 936 under *) | CD'^nitb] + et orphanis et viduis IL 23 bapl] ibnpi 29 codd k k, a;' a;^ 3 s ® it l | D^ninTi] + .OBI »\s S: -\-in solemnem ritum 3 | HJ^' — iHlWb] om L ® (exc 936 under *): et posuerunt in commemoratione % \ tii^l — end of vs 25 om L I ■'STia] om iL I DrT'bjt] DrT'by 19 codd K, 26 codd E: om K 236, S 24 om L iL I ^5] ,ra)s ®: ottws X A: -n-epL 44, 106: Vjtio S | sman] AfmSadov ®: A/iaya9ow J^*: A/Mi6a8ov A: + o E/8ot)yatos s«to-amg: Zpiem S^": ^yiooi &^: om 44, 71, 106 | ^:s,j,ii.Ti] i-^ S: (o) MaxcSuv ®: Twyatos 936 .■ om 44, 71, 108a | D'^liriTl bS IIS] om® | -n:S] +e« adversariua 3 I bi] om K 95, 170, R 266, 547, 3 | 3i2jn] £jro\£/ia ®: os eno\ep.et 44, 106: ToAe/ia 108a | D'^lin'Tl b^] avrovi ®: avTois 74, 76, 249, Aid: tovs louSaious A 936 ; + malum 3 \ Q-QStb] om ® | bsHI] b'^SPlI N' C: KaOm ediTo ®: KOI (OS cetTo iJ"* A 936 | bsHI — vs 25 1113^1] om 106 | ^13] pfewr 3: )^ S: i/rj;<^t(r/*a ®: om 71 | blljtl USin] gwod nostra lingua vertitur in sortem 3: xai K\r;pov ®: koi £;8aA.e(v) ovp o €v Kpepacrai tov 48 Text-Ceitical Appaeatus to the Book of Estheb MapSoxaiov ® (936 under -J-) | alTfl^] ,^oiJ S: cycvovro ®: cyeviTo A | irQTTTOj] om 3 ® I iTflS* — D^nHTl] tr aft ItcSI S | nicn "Ifflit] ■ ^ ■> - /) _:^) &: oa-a 8e tTrexap'/o-ev exa^ai <5 (irpalat 71, en-aya-yev 936) | iTTXT by] «T avTOV ® I inX ibni] -ai-Ja^iJo S: Kai CKpeixatrdr) avroi © | yyn by] om © (exc l>t =■ "■ °- '> a N, 936 under *) 26 om IL 71 I ribxln D^a"'b] om A I D^"!l3] phurim S: J-Sis S: $/30upai G: ^povpi/i H"': #oup8atd L ^ovp/jMia 19, 1086, $ovpS[a 93a): 9ovpovp€ip. 936; ^povpiv 249: ^ovpip, C: $povp£as (^poupatous) Jos xi, §295 I tD'tC by] id est 3: 8ta®L | lisn] sortiumS: U'^ S: tovs KA.r;poi)s ® L: Tous Katpovs N I "p by] eo quod 3: ot6 =r^ ''^o ■* = — end of vs om 44, 106 | 1i<"l] sustinuerunt 3: weirovdacriv I pi'J'l ^] ^r^ '^^^ ■^ I DtT'bs^ y^jPi] deinceps immutata sunt 3 27 om L IL I 1"2"'p] Ktti eo-Ti;o-£(i') ®: ta-T-qaav N: utttjcte fumj/Jioavvov 74, 76,236: omS3 | 113^p— llay] om 44, 71, 106 | bspl] ibZipl Q,Kethlbh in many codd NS 3i:> ®* 3 S @ | bs] om (S (exc 936 under *) | D^lbDH] sing. S I ttbl] P? S I -ilay] aXXws xp'jo-ovrai @ | HITlb — end of vs] om ® (exc 936 under *) | Dj/JTDI] ,ooiis}^ S | tlDTSl] om S 28 om 4A, 106 | D^'JTII] "s ™s 77/xepas L: e« diet ?L | nbsil] om % \ D^'liTi] ii-vqixoawov ^-i^ &■. km mrpiMv »8i'^, 93b under *) | 053] tributarias 3: reXr] S A 93b (imder *): ra tcXij L: om ® | bl?] omnem 3: +aCi>s &: em rrjv fiaxriXeiav & {rrjV jSao-iXoov under H- 93b): em TT/v ySacrtXeiav odtou 44: om L | "'"'Kl] + cunctas 3: om ''■'J^ ® L 2 bsi— imiarii] om it | nffiyi3 bs] pi s: om © l i ispn] ttjv ur^w avTov ® L | imilSI] Kai (rriv) avSfmyaBiav (+ avTOv 44, 106) ®: om L I flblj H'ffllS'l] oiZoflj a M n >-Zo S: irXoiJTOV re Kai So^av L ® (93b under -h): ei awwMwttaia est gloria % \ ''Dl"!^] tijs /Sao-iXaas auTou ©: KdiMapSoxatosL: Mardocha^i^ \ "IIBH — 'lbl3n] om© (exc 93b under*): cSo^ao-e L: + in regno suo It ] QH Jt'lbtl] om 3: xai L: 1-a-»Ai S: ycypaTTTai©: eypai/revL | 120] iibris 3: tois iStjSXtots L | D^aTI ''"Q'7] om L IL 3 © (exc 93b under *) | ■'Dbab] regis 3L: om 3 L 64, 71, 74, 76, 93a, 106, 236, 248, 248, 249, C, Aid I 0"l31] + «s fivrjfixKTvvov © L (93b under -^): om 3L 3 ''nfT'n] om © L IL (exc ^''■'"^, 93b tmder *) | TCVi'd] + looi S: SieSexiTo © L: suscipiebat IL | "ibab] tov /Soo-iXta © it L | TUlllTBTli^] Afyraiepiriv ©: Beplijv L: + in die ilia % | bl"I31] + locai ^iAoujuh/os L: etmagnificattis% \ Vtlii lib inro Tiuv lovSauuv (Bao-iXeuv 71) Kai (^iXovjucvos © (om xai tX.. 44, 106, 249): •mro TravTtav tov lovSotojv L: a Judaeis et ex ducatu IL | 'fflU] (8t)ijyeiTo ®: KOL ijyeiTo L: praeerat IL | Ult3] Trjv ayyijv ©: om L IL | I^Qjb — DlbT25] om © IL: avrcov Kai So^av TTcpiETiflei L | I^IT] TO) iOva auTOD © L IL: + the following passage (F: 1-11) in © L IL (93b under -f-): 50 Tbxt-Oritioal Appaeatus to the Book of Estheb ADDITION P 1 '^Kal ehrev^ Ma/3So;;^;at09^ Tlaph rov" 0eov^ iyevero ravra. 2 'ifiv^crOr^v'^ yap^ irepl" rov ewrrviov^ ov elSov^ irepX^ rmv \6y(ov rov- 3 ra>v,B ovSe^ yap^ Traprj\0ev^ ostt'^ avra>v^ Xoyoi;-^ '^ /MCKpa^ Trrjyr) Tj^eyiveTo iroTap.o'i, koI rjv aK ical ■^Xto? ical vBcop •jrokv." 'EaO^p icTTiv^ o" TTorafiOi, rjv iydfirjcrev^ 6 ^aatXev'i koL^ eTroCrjaev^ ^acrC- g Xiaaav^ *oi^ Be^ Svo" hpaKovres, e'^ci) elp,i^ koI 'Kfidv^ ^ra^ Be^ 6 edvri, TO. e'in(TVvaj(6evTa'^ UTroXeaai to^ ovofia^ raiv^ 'lovSaiwv^ ^to^ Se e6vo<; to ifiov, oCto's iaTLV^ '\crparfK ol ^orjcravrei tt/oo? tov deov KoX crmdevTe;.'^ koI^ ecraxrev K.vpio<;^ top Xaov ainov, Kal ippvaaTO^ K-vpiofS r]p,dpoavvr]'i evdnriov'^ tov deov^ Kara yeved<;° el<;^ tov^ al Xaq> avTOv^ 'YapariX} F ; 1 a eiTre L | !> + dd omnes % \ »-d itupiou 44, 71, 74, 76, 106 2 'tiJ-''W>V L 68 I bom S? A 44, 936, 106: + Mardochaeue a, | com L | d + SMt iL | eetSei- L 1 f-g Om L : ■Jrept. ror ^0701- tqvtov 52 I h-j icat aTrereAeo-^ij L | h-i ov yop ^ : ouSev A : ov rii yap 249 | k-m om L I k cm A | 1 aurov 44 I m -|- Kat €ljt€v L 3 a + rj 108a I bom 44, 52, 55, 71, 74, 106, 236, C i ii-oom L S- | di|^ 44, 936 | s-iom L H | ' eyTjjLLei' 71 : eTrotyjo-ev 106 | g-lJ om 106 4 a-iJKoioiL I bom 106 I com A I ivS*: eiM^ 93a | eAufiarW: A)ia93a 5 a-b iroTa^Off ra L : fiuviina autem IL | b om 936 [ « (rvvaxBevra L 1 d-B om L : TO -yeros 44, 106 ' T0U9 Ij t B Iov5aiou$ li 6 a-c Tj^tos Kat 0w? ot eyevocTO T0t9 lovSaioi? CTTi^aveia TOV 0eov. TOUTo TO fcptjaa L : «oZ ef luna erant Judaei. hoc judicium 5. | b + o A 52, 64, 68, 248, C, Aid | li-iom L IL | eom A | itpvmro SC A52 I 5om 55 »• a A 44, 71, 74, 76, 936, 106, 236 | hom N | iomH | k + KupiosN | i-noml06 ] mom 68 I o-PTavTa L %: +TavTa. N | qom Jl | rem 936, 108a 7 a-iom A 19,'71,236 | a-bKaiLS, | c + xupios 52 | ii+€v52 | i-Sefa T<» fleo) TOU Aaou S | c-fom 936 I £-6om 3L | f fljui 936 | i om L 3L | b-iroi! eSi/eo-i iratri 249 I I genii % 8 a-n om B* 71, 236 | b Trpoo-rjASov L : accesserunt IL | c auToi X : om A | d lupai L | e icaTa L : secundum 3L | f«\r,por Bab ^ A, 936, 108o | eom L 44, 106 C S, | b>iM«p. 106: om 71 | dASep 71: + ei- L | s-iom 31, | e-gom i5* A* 248, C | 'om N I h om many codd | 1 om 44, 106 | j-k dies synagogue il, | i + tt,? 93a, 1086 | 1 f»er 52, 64, 68, 243, Aid | m-nomJL | oyevtav A: yei-eo-eii 19 : progenie vestra IL | p-rom !L | qom 93o | som IL | torn 52, 64, 68, 243, C, Aid : + a^y,v 93a Lewis Bayles Paton 51 11 ""Etov9 TcrdpTOV jSaa-iXevovTO'f TLToXe/xalov xal KXeoTrar/ja?* ela-ijveyfcev Aotrideo^,^ 89 ^^ €7] elvai iepeh^i fcal AevetTTj';,^ xal UroXe- fialo'i 6® vlo^^ airov rrfv TrpOKeLfievrjv^ eTricrToXfjv tojp ^povpal^ ^v €aa'av^ etvai teal ipfiijvevKevat^ Avaifiaxov^ UroXefiaiov^ ratv^ iv 'lepovaaX'qfi,^ XX om L (exc 19) % \ aKAaioTrarpa? A [ l>Ati>i/ jSao'tAetuf ' CIS fie Tijv £(rdi)p eXijyev TOiaunj Tt? ei* wAaTei tfiioxctpo? UTro(n/ju.iw IlaiLi^iAof 5iop0u(raTO revxoc €V ri} t^vAaxT} fiia ttjv tov 6v iroAA'^ Kai Xa.pt.v K.a.1 TrAarvo'p.o fcai et ye p.!} |3apv ciTrei toutu t(i> avTiypa'^ta irapairKTjtriov evpetv avTtypa^ov ov paStof, 6le0(i>k)j fie to avTO TraAatuTaTOf jSi^Aio Trpos Tofic ro rev^os ei? to, (corr Ttfa) Kvpia ovofiara. ^ c. a, c. b mg inf APPARATUS FOR THE TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF CHRONICLES-EZRA-NEHEMIAH CHARLES CUTLER TORREY THE APPAKATUS FOR THE TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF CHRONICLES-EZRA-NEHEMIAH Charles Cutler Torret I did not at first intend to devote a separate article to this subject, as I did not wish to take the time and space which would be necessary. But in the process of editing and annotating the portions of the text which are to follow, it became evident that some extended justification of my critical procedure would be indispensable. The original plan of setting forth the most neces- sary facts in an introductory page or two, to be supplemented by subsequent footnotes, might have left room for the suspicion of arbitrary or hasty methods. Other considerations, moreover, seem to make it especially desirable that I should give here some clear account, however brief and imperfect, of those parts of the apparatus regarding which I feel able to speak with confidence. The chief of these considerations are the following: (1) No critical use has ever been made of the versions of these books, nor even of any one Greek version or recension.' (2) No attempt has been made to determine or state the principles of such critical use. (3) The conclusions which I have already reached and stated^ in regard to some of the versions and recensions of the Ezra history are so revolutionary as to need all the added corroboration of this nature that can be given them. I I do not wish to seem to deal unfairly with those recent publications in which some attempt has been made to emend the massoretie text of the one or the other of these books : Kittel's Books of Chronicles, 1895 ; Guthe-Batten's Ezra and Nehemiah, 1901 ; these being the reconstructed Hebrew-Aramaic text of the Polychrome Bible ; also Benzinger's BUcher der Chronik, 1901; Kittel's BUcher der Chronik, 1902; Siegfried's Esra, Nehemia und Esther-, 1901 ; Bertholet's Esra und Nehemia, 1902 ; and Marti's edition of the Aramaic portions of Ezra in his Grammafik der biblisch^aramdischen Sprache, 1896. But in the following pages sufficient evidence will be g:iven to justify fully the assertion that no one of these attempts, so far as its treatment of text and versions is concerned, deserves to be called " critical." In all of these cases the procedure is without any fixed principles, or any preliminary study of either text or versions with a view to ascertaining their character. Moreover, no one of these scholars shows any approach to thoroughness in his employment of the materials which he actually attempts to use. If in any instance the criticism of the text went so far as to include the careful taking of the testimony of even codex B (ordinarily called " the Septuagint") throughout the whole extent of the book or passage treated, the evidence of this fact at least does not appear, while numerous indications seem to show the contrary. ^American Journal of Semitic Languages, Vol. XXIII; cited in the sequel as AJ8L. 55 56 Textual Criticism of Cheonicles-Ezra-Nbhemiah (4) Many other facts, hitherto unobserved, regarding manu- scripts and versions and their characteristics and mutual relations are so important as to deserve some treatment here, at least in outline. In particular, the proof of the very momentous fact that Theodotion was the author of our "canonical" Greek version of Ohron.-Ezr.-Neh. ought at last to be rendered.^ I. NATURE OF THE TEXT-ORITIOAL PROBLEM In our Hebrew-Aramaic tradition of the Chronicler's history, we have a text which is neither one of the well-preserved of those which constitute the Old Testament, nor yet among the very worst. The many lists of names have been carelessly handled, and are in correspondingly bad condition. The narrative portions read smoothly on the whole — smoothly, that is, when their author- ship is taken into account — but nevertheless give plain evidence of being corrupt in many places. The trouble lies not merely in single words and phrases, but also in the apparent misplacement of a few long passages, one of which consists of several chapters. There is ground for the suspicion, moreover, that one or more passages of importance have been lost from our massoretic recen- sion. There is good evidence of a gap after Ezra 1:11; something is plainly missing between 6:5 and 6:6; while the presence of the Story of the Youths in I Esdras suggests its own important problems. When we come to the testimony of the Grreek versions, we are confronted with two somewhat widely differing forms of the history. One of them agrees quite closely with MT, and has the same extent and arrangement; the other — obviously a mere fragment — begins near the end of Chronicles and extends not quite through the story of Ezra. During the part of the history covered by the two in common, the difference between them lies in (1) the words 3 The following discussion of the critical apparatus is only fragmentary, leaving a good many highly important matters either half treated or not touched upon at all. it contains the things in which I have happened to be especially interested, being in the main based upon collations made and facts observed by me twelve years ago, in the course of my study of the literary and historical problems of Ezra-Neh. ; and the conclusions are the same, with some slight modification, as those which I then reached. But though the discussion is incomplete, I believe that it will at least lay a sure foundation for further investigation. Charles Cutlbk Toebby 57 and phrases of the narrative, the divergence here (i. e., in the Greek) being very great; (2) the position of extended passages; (3) material of very considerable amount found in the one recension but not in the other. We have in the Grreek, more- over, clear testimony to two differing Semitic texts, the differ- ence being such as to suggest either a long history of trans- mission along independent lines, or else an unusual amount of freedom in the handling of the texts. Of course, both of these causes might have been operative. And finally, each one of the two main forms of the narrative, the "canonical" and the "apocryphal," has come down to us in a double Greek tradi- tion, the one embodied in Lagarde's edition,* and the other con- tained in the most of the existing manuscripts, including the codices (A, B, 5^) used in Swete's Old Testament in Greek. That is, for a portion of the Chronicler's history amounting to about thirteen chapters, we have at every point to compare four Greek texts. Of other versions, aside from the Latin of Jerome, which was made from our Hebrew-Aramaic recension, we have to take into account three renderings of the I Esdras Greek, namely, the Syriac (the work of Paul of Telia), the Ethiopic, and the old Latin. The Syriac and Arabic versions of the canonical Chron.-Ezr.-Neh. have long been known to be late and well- nigh worthless — the Arabic absolutely so — and any attempt to make a critical use or "investigation" of them is a waste of time. It is evident from this statement of the case that the solution of the textual problem is to be gained chiefly from an examination of the Greek recensions. We need to know the relative age and, if possible, the actual age — of the two (or more) Greek translations; the principles according to which they were made, and the extent to which they can be trusted; their mutual rela- tions; the character and quality of the Semitic text which lies behind the Greek I Esdras. And it is obviously very important (as it is everywhere else in the Old Testament) to inquire minutely into the history of the transmission of the text, finding out how *Librorum Veteris Testamenti canonicorum pars prior graece, Gottingae, 1883. 58 Textual Obitioism of Cheonioles-Ezea-Nehbmiah and to wliat extent the original readings have been accidentally or deliberately changed, and distinguishing carefully the divergent lines of tradition which can be recognized. What is the real significance, for textual criticism, of the two recensions which are contained, respectively, in the editions of Swete and Lagarde? What manuscripts, or families of manuscripts, are especially note- worthy? We have one absolutely sure witness to the "Septuagint" text of Origen, in the Syro-Hexaplar version of I Esdras and a part of Nehemiah ; which of our Grreek MSS stand nearest to this version? In a word: On what principles shall one proceed who wishes to study critically the Hebrew- Aramaic text of these books with the aid of this unusually complicated and unusually interest- ing apparatus? These are all questions which must be answered before any satisfactory criticism of the text of any part of Chron.-Ezr.-Neh. can be undertaken. Up to the present time, the most of these questions have not even been raised, and not one of them has been answered with any approach to correctness. An unscholarly use of "the LXX" has been, more than any other one thing, the bane of modern Old Testament study; and if there is any portion of the Old Testament in which the consequences have been especially mischievous, that portion is Chron.-Ezr.-Neh. Those who have attempted to emend the Semitic text of these books by the aid of the Greek have been wont to take at random any seemingly useful "reading" of the nearest available text of the canonical Greek, or of I Esdras, choosing in each case either codex B (one of the worst possible MSS, as it happens) or " Lucian," as the need of the occasion may decide, treating all alike, and usually without making any attempt to criticize the Greek itself, or to go behind the text- reading of the edition which happens to be used. Pew of those who have dealt at length with Chron., Ezra-Neh., or I Esdras, have attempted to state what conclusions, if any, they have reached in regard to text and versions. A. Klostermann's article "Ezra und Nehemia," in Hauck's Eealencyclopddie', has an account of the several versions of these two "books" which contains a good many acute observations as to details, but does not give much help in matters which are of primary importance. It is remark- Chables Cutler Toeeey 59 able, moreover, that in his whole discussion he should make no mention at all of the I Esdras version. Even a brief examination of this "apocryphon" might have shown him its fundamental significance. An introductory word in regard to the Hexapla. I have already {AJSL, pp. 65-68) touched upon the status of the Chron.- Ezr. books in Origen's great work, and the apparent lack of Hexa- plaric material in the MSS which are now known. As for Origen's fifth column, containing his "LXX" text, I shall show in the sequel that we have extremely good information in regard to it. Concerning the other Hexaplaric versions of these books next to nothing has hitherto been known. Field's Hexapla has the appearance of containing some material here, but really gives hardly anything more than a collation of L with the received text. "Whether the plus of L is Hexaplar, or not, there is nothing to show. Of specific ascriptions there are surprisingly few, and these are confined to the books of Chronicles. Supposed readings of Aquila are noted in I Chron. 15:27; 25:1, 3; 29:25. Marked with the 2 of Symmachus are readings found in I Chron. 5 : 26 ; 9:1; 11:5; 15:27; 21:10; 25:1, 3; II Chron. 12:7; 19:11; 23:13; 26:5; 30:5; 32:5; 33:3; 34:22. The absence of any readings from Theodotion, ordinarily a favorite among the secondary translators and a frequent source of variant Greek readings, is very noticeable. This fact, of itself, might well have suggested to students, long ago, the probability that Theodotion himself was the author of our standard version of Chron. -Ezr.-Neh. As I have previously remarked [AJSL, p. 71, note), no sure trace of the work of Aquila or Symmachus in the book of Ezra-Nehemiah has heretofore been found. I believe that the hand of each of these two translators can be recognized in one or two places, at least, and have no doubt that a careful search would reveal other instances. In all probability, the "Aquila" and "Symmachus" columns of the Hexapla were both duly filled, in the canonical Chron. -Ezr.-Neh., the "Theodotion" column alone being vacant. In I Esdras, on the other hand, the "LXX" column alone was filled, all the others remaining unoccupied. 60 Textual Criticism of Cheoniolbs-Ezea-Nehbmiah ii. theodotion the authoe op oue sign of oheonioles-ezea-nehemiah I have more than once stated my own conviction that the trans- lation of the Chronicler's history which now stands in our Greek Bible was the work of Theodotion/ Others who have held and expressed this view are Grotius (1644), Whiston (1722), Pohl- mann (1859), and most recently, Sir Henry Howorth; see AJSL, p. 121. No one of these scholars, however, excepting the first named, has been able to bring forward any direct evidence tend- ing to establish the theory. The manner of the argument has been simply this: 'Our Greek version of the Chronicler's history bears the marks of a late origin, especially when compared with the version preserved in "First Esdras." Theodotion's version of Daniel supplanted the older translation, in the Greek Bible ; it is therefore a plausible supposition that it was Theodotion who made the later translation of the Chronicler's books.' Grotius, in his annotations to the Old Testament, pointed out an interesting bit of evidence, though in such a way as to leave some doubt as to the conclusion to be drawn from it. In a note on II Chron. 35 : 6, he says that our Greek version of Chronicles is that of Theodotion, while the two chapters (35 and 36) of II Chron. with which I Esdras begins are "from the Septuagint." He also adds: " Theodotionis autem interpretationem in Parali- pomenis et aliis quibusdam libris recepit Qraeca Ecclesia." He expresses himself cautiously in this passage, saying nothing either in regard to the remainder of I Esdras or to the canonical Ezr.- Neh., for the obvious reason that the bit of proof which he hap- pens to be using here, namely the rendering of the Hebrew word !1DS, would be a conspicuous failure in Ezra 6:19 ff. (=1 Esdr. 7:10 ff.). "Theodotion," he has just observed, very acutely, "semper vertit acr£K, non ut alii interpretes irdcrxa."^ The pos- 6 Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, London, 1903, pp. 139 f . ; AJSL, pp. 67 f. fl The assertion is a little too sweeping, for some of the "other translators " rendered the Hebrew word in still other ways, though Grotius may not have been aware of the fact. And indeed, from the citations given in Field's Hexapla it might seem that the translite- ration ■^ourexi outside the books of Chronicles, is not the property of Theodotion. It is not only lacking in Field's list (pp. xl f.) of the Theodotion transliterations, but is even attributed to Symmachus in the three passages where its occurrence is noted by him. Chaeles Cutlek Toerey 61 , Bible value of this observation is apparent when we notice that the form a(reK (or rather ^aaex) occurs eighteen times in the book of Chronicles, but nowhere else in our Greek Old Testament. As for the one passage in Ezr.-Neh. in which the passover is men- tioned, namely Ezr. 6 : 19-21, it is of course easy to suppose that the long familiar word Trdax"- was substituted at an early date; there were many such substitutions in the early history of the Greek Bible. The problem of identifying a given translation as the work of Theodotion is in some respects a peculiar one. Whoever makes the search for this translator's own work, with the purpose of setting apart everything that could be called characteristic of him, will probably be surprised to find how little in extent the material really is. We have, it is true, "Theodotion's version" of the whole book of Daniel; but this is in reality merely a revision of the old Greek translation, whose renderings and construc- tions are generally retained, the alteration consisting mainly in such cutting, shaping, and supplementing as to make it fit closely the later traditional Hebrew text. In the case of the extensive fragments of Theodotion's version of Jeremiah which have been preserved (see Swete, Introduction to the Old Testa- ment in Oreek, pp. 44-46) it is not known whether the work is namely Ex. 12:11, 27; Num. 9:2. But whoever examines carefully the material collected in Field's footnotes in these three places will ascertain the following facts : (1) According to the Syr.-Hex. (by far the most trustworthy witness of those cited) the word HDS . in Ex. 12:27, was rendered by "the LXK" Tairx»; by AquUa iirep^ao-is; by Symmachus j.^^ irilcrxii (no*^ao-«Xi asPieldgivesI), the difference from LXX being in the other words of the clause; and by Theodotion "like the LXX." In 12:11 the renderings are the same, except that Symmachus is said to have had 7rao-xa(nof "^ao-ex'M) i/Trepfnaxritri^. (2) Theodoret, whom we should suppose to have had good means of information, says that Theodotion's rendering was (juxaex. (3) According to notes found in a few codices, in Ex. 12 : 11 and Num. 9 : 2, the transliteration (ia-ex is attributed to Symmachus, or to "Aquila and Symmachus." Such attributions as these last, coming from unknown hands, are notoriously untrustworthy. The ancient copyists, scribblers, and annotators were as careless as our modern ones, which is saying a great deal. False ascriptions abound, and each one is likely to be copied into several other MSS. Hence most of the evidence of "double versions" of Aquila (Field, pp. xxiv ff.) or Symmachus (pp. xxxvi f.). With regard to the rendering of nOS, the transliteration is exactly in the manner of Theodotion, and not at all in the -manner of Sym- machus. Indeed, the use of this barbarism by the latter translator would be altogether in- explicable. The fact is probably this : Theodotion's ^airex was replaced at a very early date, in most MSS, by iria-xa. (cf . the many oases of this kind cited below) , and in the Theod. text known to Origen the latter word only was found. The Theodotion version was very well known and much used ; then, when the rejected word (jtaa-ex survived in a few MSS, it is natural that it should have been attributed by some to the work of Symmachus, the least known and used of the later Hexaplaric versions. 62 Textual Ckitioism op Cheonioles-Ezea-Nehemiah merely a version, or an independent effort. At all events, there is here extremely little that could contribute to any basis of com- parison with such a book as the Chronicler's history. The manner of the author, or reviser, in his attempt to hold fast to the Hebrew, is indeed apparent, and it is the same in all three of the versions named: Daniel, Jeremiah, and the Chronicler; but more definite evidence than this is required. The comparison of the diction of our Greek version of Chron.-Ezr.-Neh. with that of Theodotion's part in Daniel reveals a few striking coincidences, which will be noticed below, as well as the obvious general resemblance. In addition to the material already mentioned, we have, for our knowledge of Theodotion's work, only the scattered renderings of his in various parts of the Old Testament which have been preserved in Hexaplar codices. It might therefore seem to be a very difficult matter to collect material sufficiently extensive, and sufficiently characteristic, to serve as a sure basis for com- parison. If we were dealing with ordinary translators, this would be true, and a trustworthy conclusion might be despaired of; but fortunately this translator has one peculiarity so pronounced and so well understood that the proof can be rendered complete. As students of the Hexaplar versions long ago observed, Theodotion's chief characteristic is his tendency to transliterate the difficult or doubtful words of his Hebrew text. See especially Field's Hexapla, I, xxxix-xlii, and Swete's Introduction, p. 46. Because of his extreme caution, he refuses to decide in cases of uncertainty, but simply writes out the troublesome Hebrew word in Greek letters. The extent to which he has done this is very remarkable. Field gives a list (pp. xl f.) of more than ninety words of this kind, collected from the material already known to us as Theodotion's, including the most of the books of the Old Testa- ment. Doubtless this number could be considerably increased, even from the sources which we already have, if we were better able to criticize them ; moreover, it may safely be taken for granted that the ancient collectors of Hexaplaric readings generally dis- regarded such of Theodotion's transliterations as had resulted from an obviously corrupt and easily corrected text. Even in the MSS, indeed, the tendency to get rid of these Ohaelbs Cutler Toeeey 63 unnecessary barbarisms is quite marked; see below. Now, this very same striking peculiarity of transliteration is found in the Greek of Chron.-Ezr.-Neh., from the beginning to the end of the work, and with the examples pretty evenly distributed. The fact has not hitherto been observed, and the number and character of the instances will probably prove a surprise to Old Testament scholars. When the comparison is made with the similar instances collected by Field, it will at once be plain that we are dealing with thesametranslator. I subjoin a list of the transliterations of this kind which occur in Chron.-Ezr.-Neh., not claiming that it is complete. It will be seen that it includes examples of all the classes of instances found elsewhere in Theodotion. There are the unusual words, such as "Il35 Ketfxfiovp, W^^tlt\ Oavvovpeifi; words of ambiguous meaning in their context like 13in a/cxeX'^'Pt nilTC'ITB aepaepcoO ; technical terms not capable of exact transla- tion, such as ni^bs aXr)iJ,a>9, "IT^ ^adtav. Then there are the many cases where the text had become slightly corrupt. In a con- siderable number of the examples which follow, the difficulty with the word was due solely to the confusion of 1 and "^ by copyists; thus, ywXrjXa for Plb^b Jt''j, /Jiedweareifi for D'^TZSri^ma . In other cases, two of the letters of the Hebrew word had become accident- ally transposed ; thus a^eSrjpeifi for D"'"l3in , fiedax^^eip, for Q'^Snrilna , afiaa-eveid for ri"'313"u:n , ya-^v'! for 312^ .' In the most of these cases of text-corruption, the true reading was not hard to find, and almost any translator would have made the emendation for himself. It is eminently characteristic of Theodotion and his method that he refused to take any such responsibility. Then, finally, there are the perfectly well-known words, such as aiv, yai, yav, fiavaa, regarding whose exact meaning or use in certain pas- sages the translator may have been in doubt.* Concerning the occasional procedure of Theodotion in such cases, see again Field ' Of course, such instances as these and the preceding ones would generally not be recorded by the ancient collectors of Hexaplaric readings. The fact that they originated in mere blunders was apparent. 8 In the case of the transliteration ea, for HnS . "governor," it may be that Theodo- tion evaded the translation because he was not quite satisfied with any of the ordinary readings of the word : a-TpaTijYos, iirapxos, ap\u}v, ^ye^iii' ; or because he did not wish to take the responsibility of choosing among them. It is perhaps worthy of remark, in this connec- tion, that in the Greek of Hag. 1:1, 14, the word UnS is not rendered at all. 64 Textual Criticism of Cheonioles-Ezea-Nehemiah and Swete, in the places named. One must agree with Field, that there are some instances in which it is impossible for us to find any sufficient excuse for the transliteration. The following is the list:' 1. a^ySou? (see no. 37). 2. a^eSr, Ezr. 2:58. For "^W, "servants." In the phrase nSoblZJ ''"I33>, the name Solomon was not recognized: viol a^eBr] 2e\/ta, hence the ''13.^ was cautiously trans- literated. It was certainly not thought of as forming part of a proper name. (L has viol t&v SovXmv 2a\o- ficcv: two alterations.) 3. a/3e8r]peifi aOovKieifj, I Chron. 4:22. MT D''p''riJ D^"i3"in , "the words are ancient." 4. a^eipa Neh. 1:1. nT^^n, "the palace." So 7:2, ^eipa. (L has ^dpi<; in both places.) 5. ayryai II Chron. 26:9; in the L text only. For N'^aSl, "the valley." See also no. 29, and below, p. 74. 6. ayovyei/j, II Chron. 9:10; in three cursives only; see below, p. 75. MT D'^a^lSbx (but in I Kings 10:11 f. D^aabN), "algum wood." 1. aScoprjefi Neh. 3:5. MT Dri''T':|K, "their nobles." (L: ot la-'xypol avr5)v.\ 8. aeepa-aOa Ezr. 2:63; Neh. 7:65, 70. For Knia^nn (title). 9. aOovKieifM (See no. 3.) 10. aiKap. II Chron. 8:4. MT Db^li*, "porch." 11. aiv Neh. 2:14; 12:37; in the latter passage the MSS have alvelv. For V^ , "spring." (L has in both cases t^? '7rr}yrj<;. ) 12. aXrjuwe I Chron. 15:20. MT niobS . (L: irepl tmv Kpv- (j)ia)v, as in the Psalm-superscriptions.) 9The orthography varies considerably in the MSS, and I record usually only one form, without wasting time over the vain attempt to determine the original. Of course the varia- tions between i and ei, ai and e, etc., have no significance whatever, and are rarely of any use even in determining groups of manuscripts. Scribes were free to exchange them at pleasure, and did so. As et is used most commonly (though not consistently) for the long i sound in our best-lmown uncials, I have adopted it. The plural endings -eiji and -ei.v (the latter apparently later and due to the influence of spoken Aramaic) are also frequently exchanged in the MSS. Charles Outleb Toeeby 65 13. anaaevetd I Chron. 15:21. MT fl^5''?31I3n . (L: irepl t)j? 0780V; cf. Ps. 6:1; 12:1.) 14. apaa I Chron. 2 : 52. For tllXTi (MT tlXnn , "the seer"). It seems impossible to determine whether Theodotion regarded this as a proper name, or not. The original rendering here seems to have been: "/cat ^aav viol tm 2a>/Sa\ Trarpl J^apiaOtapeifi apaa ecrei Kp.p,avi(o6, '"'vfiaa- (f>ea)d K.apia6iaeip, AidaXeifi, Ai^eiOeifi, k.t.X. See nos. 38 and 63. 15. apiriX I Chron. 11:22. MT b^''^^, which Theodotion cer- tainly did not regard as a proper name. (L inserts viov<;, from the Greek of II Sam. 23:20.) 16. aaa^eiiJi I Chron. 26:15, 17. MT D''SpX, "stores." 17. a^^ovaa>e II Chron. 26:21. MT {ketib) MlTBan, "sepa- rateness." 18. axexap Neh. 3:22. For ^MH, "the circuit." (L: tov ■rrptoTOTOKov, corrected from a reading "liStl .) 19. axovx II Chron. 25:18 (twice). For ninn, "the thistle." 20. ^aaXraa/jL Ezr. 4:8, 9, 17. For WO bV^, "reporter of news." 21. ^a0(ov (A /3a8(Bi/,L ^arav) Ezr. 7:22. For y^pa, "baths" (the liquid measure). 22. ^aicxovpioK Neh. 13:31. For tryQ^, "firstfruits." (L: trpa)TO TT^ ; 3:31, ^v^ avva0iveiiu, TT^ U^Tntl, cf. vs. 26! (In all of these cases, L trans- lates the word TC^.) 66 Textual Ceiticism of Cheonioles-Ezea-Nehemiah 27. 7a^i;? I Chron. 4:9. From a reading VlSi, rendered w? 7a/37y?, where MT has ISJl, "in pain." (L: ev Sca- TTTWcret.) 28. ya^a Ezr. 5:17; 6:1; 7:20. For STDS , "treasure." 29. yai Neh. 2:15, in the L text and the cursive 121; 3:13, in L only. For K^5 > "valley." See also no. 5, and below, p. 74. 30. yavo^a II Chron. 36:8. For SW ■)?, "the garden of 'Uzza." The passage containing these words is wanting in MT, and also in I Esdras, but certainly stood in the Hebrew text from which Theodotion translated; see further below. The phrase occurs also in II Kings 21:18, 26, where it is rendered (in all the Greek texts) iv TO) K-^TTtp O^a. 31. dpayyi BevevvoiJ,.) 34. y avrov Kal to, vwepwa zeal rafs airo0iqic(K Tce; iaL vaxaXv I Chron. 11:32. For "'bn? , "wadys"(?). 55. o^aX II Chron. 27:3; 33:14; Neh. 3:26, 27; 11:21. For bslJCn), the "hill" in Jerusalem. 56. aa^axfod II Chron. 4:12; only in the cursives 56 and 121; see below, p. 75. For niSiB, "nets." 57. ffo^wX. ( ? A. (rax(ov, B a-axcox- The reading of the cod. Basiliano-Vaticanus, N [XI in H. and P.] is given as aai^tfiaa-axa>\ ( ! ) ; the first part of this being probably the proper name Aae^eia, from the beginning of vs. 19?) Ezr. 8:18. For bS'lO, "prudence." (Lhas [ai/^/jJo-weros.) 58. trepaepad II Chron. 3:16. For nilTBlTB , "chains." (L: a\vo"tS&)Ta.) "It is a mistake to suppose that the x of this form is the transliteration of n ■ I' «s merely one of the cnstomary blunders of codex B. (lerepoafl was miswritten iitra^xaS (x for tt, several other examples are given in the sequel), and so on. 70 Textual Ceitioism of Chbonioles-Ezba-Nehemiah 59. (Toofj. I Chron. 29:2. ForDniD, name of a stone. (L: [Xi(9oi;s] ovv')(p0 I Chron. 2:53. For flinSTO^ ," and the families (of)." The same word is translated in vs. 55, just below — the context there being so plain as to leave even Theodotion no room for doubt! (The L text has acci- dentally lost the first words of vs. 53 ; see Nos. 14 and 38. Both A and B are corrupt here.) 64. ao-e% II Chron. 30:1, and often. For hOS , "passover." The old Greek version of the Chronicler's history had ■n-daxa; see II Chron. 35:1, 6-13, 16-18, in I Esdras (1:1, 6ff., 16-19). The large number of occurrences of the word in these two chapters of the Theodotion version was what kept it from being changed, even in the L recension. See also above, p. 61, note. 65. ea (?) Neh. 5:14, 15, 18; in the Egyptian text only. For nns , "governor." The word occurs four times in these three verses, and appears at first sight to have been transliterated three times and translated once. This would be a truly Theodotionic proceeding; still, it is perhaps more likely that the word was originally translit- erated in all four cases. At present, through accidental corruption and attempted correction, the forms originally written have been nearly obliterated ; only close scrutiny can find the trace of them. The Egyptian text of the verses in question now reads: "'Atto tj)? 7ifji,epaol fiov ^lav avrSsv (nriSlTl DHi) ovk eayov, ^''koI Ta€a, instead of ^iav avr&v;^^ vs. 15, (ftecoB instead of ^ia'i; vs. 18, aprov rov (f)ea instead of aprov tjj? /Siia?. (The L text has substituted translations in each of the three cases: aprop rij? '^ye/iovia<; in vss. 14 and 18, and ap'^^ovTet in vs. 15.) 66. xo/iai/etfi Ezr. 8: 27. The source of this is the word D^Dbil'lb (MT. D'^Di"n«b), "in drachmas," which was divided D''3M!3 '1"'^^ and characteristically rendered ets Tr)v ohov j^a^tavet/i. (In cod. A this has been improved to e. T. 6. Spax/i'^veiv; while in the L text the correction has gone still farther, changing the last word to Spaxp-d's.) 67. X'^P°^^^i-t^ II Chron. 3:8 ff., and elsewhere. For D"'l?ni , "cherubim." This transliteration is not peculiar to Theodotion. 68. X^XX^^P (?) I Chron. 16:3; only in the L text, which reads Xe\x"'Pj presumably because of a common scribal error in the G-reek. For "l3i, "loaf." A and B have aprov. Cf. No. 18, where the same word (meaning "circuit"), written with the article, is transliterated by axex^^P- 69. xoS^vcoe Neh. 7:70, 72. For Plisni , "robes." Very likely the Kodmvoi (?) of Ezr. 2:69 (above, No. 46) originated in this same transliteration. (L, in all three cases, ffToXa? tejoart/ta?.) 70. x<»^a/»e^ (-«B^?) II Chron. 4:12 (twice), 13. For niinb, "capitals." 15 So it is given, in tact, in both Schleusner and Tromm. Klostermann, among modern scholars, has recognized the fact of a transliteration. "How easy the corruption of ipToi- to linSiv would be may be seen from vs. 15, where codex A has avrois for aproi?. 72 Textual Ckitioism of Chronioles-Ezra-Nehbmiah The regularity with which these words are distributed through the history is worthy of notice. Leaving out of account the repe- tition of such frequently used words as aa£)( and x^pov^eifi, the number of occurrences in I Ohron. is 28; in II Chron. 32; in Ezra 16; and in Neh. 30. To those who have examined Theodotion's transliterations in connection with the other extant traces of his work, this list will be conclusive. The large number of these words, and their charac- teristics in detail, added to the facts which have already been noticed, place the matter quite beyond the reach of doubt. It is to be remarked also that a few of the words in the list are already known from other sources to have been used by this translator ; such are KaST](7€tfi, fiavaa, fi£')^a)va)d, (j>aa-ex, and probably yeSSovp. To make the demonstration still more complete, it is further to be observed that in the few points of contact between the Theodotion element in Daniel and our Greek translation of the Chronicler's work there are some striking instances of identical usage. One of these is the case of the word /iavaa, noticed above. Another is the use of \n^ (a favorite word with Theodotion) as the rendering of 2'^S'D ; found only in II Chron. 32:30; 33:14; Dan. 8:5; in the last- named passage substituted for the airo Sva-fjLwv of the older version, which certainly needed no correction! Equally striking is the substitution of evmhiai, as the rendering of "l^'nifT'D , in Ezr. 6 : 10 and Dan. 2:46; in both cases correcting the airovhai, of the older translation. Notice also the peculiar rendering airo fiepovt for ri^p7J , only in Dan. 1 : 2 and Neh. 7:70; the use of the verb cyvveri- ^eiv, and that of the noun er^Kalvia. Undoubtedly other examples of the kind can be found; I have made no thorough search. In the case of gentilic names, it is Theodotion's custom to transliterate exactly, instead of using the Greek adjective endings. The latter, however, have been substituted later in a good many instances, sometimes in the Egyptian text and very often in L. Thus, in Neh. 2:19 the original rendering had o Apcovei, 6 Afi- (jLcoveL, and o Apa/Sei,; where L offers o 'D,pcoviTrj<;, 6 'Afip.toviTT)';, and 6 "Kpa-^. An example of a passage in which nearly all the Greek texts have made the change is Ezr. 3:7, where for "Sidon- ians and Tyrians" cod. 121 has StSaw/i and ^(opip, (probably Chaeles Cutleb Toeeey 73 almost exactly what Theodotion wrote) ; B has Irjhaiieiv and SeB/setv; all the other MSS have substituted the Greek adjective forms. Many other instances of the kind could be given. In some cases where Theodotion was in doubt whether the word before him was a gentilic name or not, he cautiously repro- duced the Hebrew article by the Greek a. In such cases it was inevitable that those who cared for the Greek text should often have taken the further step of substituting the Greek article. For example, in Ezr. 2:57 Theodotion wrote viol ^aa-(^e)paO (or ^axepa6^) aae^coeifi {W'^IT}), as is attested by the Egyptian Greek tradition. But in the L text we find viol (^axepaB t&v ^a^mei/jL. Of course accidental corruption of these unfamiliar forms took place from time to time. Thus, in I Chron. 18:17 Tov X.€prjOi was Theodotion's rendering. I was miswritten for X, as occasionally elsewhere, and in a cursive manuscript became CO, as in a great many other places. Hence the r&v lepewv in both L and the ordinary Egyptian text (but not in A). It remains to be said in general, regarding Theodotion's trans- literations (and especially those of ordinary nouns), that in all probability some of them, and perhaps a considerable number, have been lost. Of course, in a version which came into common use as a part of the Greek Bible, these uncouth words were very soon felt to be seriously disturbing, especially in the many cases where the Hebrew word and its meaning were perfectly well known. We should therefore suppose that the process of remov- ing these peculiar creations of Theodotion would have begun almost immediately. We can see the process going on in the texts which are known to us. In the Lagarde recension, it is the rule (not systematically carried through, to be sure) that these transliterations are replaced by translations; and we can see the same tendency actively at work even in the most conservative group of manuscripts. Observe, for example, what has taken place in I Chron. 28:17, where the unusual word ('')11SS occurs six times. The L recension ( !) has preserved Theodotion's /ce^- dpayjoi form a doublet, though in this case it is the translation which seems to be secondary. No one but Theodotion would be likely to transliterate in such a case as this; and that it was actually he that did it appears to be rendered certain by Neh. 3:13, where L gives for the same phrase i,nly ttjv irvkrjv yai. But in all three of these passages the word yai has quite disappeared from the manuscripts of the standard text ! A case in which the L text has retained a transliteration which has already been dropped by all the MSS of the "Egyptian" group, with the single exception of codex 121, is the word o-ip£ifi, in 19; cT if he had known that it had already been rendered (I Esdr. 6:4) by the obviously suitable (niyriv 1 Chaeles Outlee Toeeey 77 Since an interval of 300 years lay between them, and the later edition was, generally speaking, independent of the former one, the comparison of them is obviously a matter of great importance for purposes of textual criticism. But before they can be thus used in any satisfactory way, it is necessary to know to a consid- erable extent the history of their transmission ; the state of preser- vation of the various texts ; the age, the character, and the trust- worthiness of the translations; the relative excellence and mutual relations of manuscripts. The following observations will serve as a beginning. The old Greek translation of Chron.-Ezr.-Neh. was made not long before the middle of the second century b. o. The direct evidence of this is found in the quotation from the Greek historian Eupolemus, in a work composed about 150 b. o. (see Schurer, Geschichte^, III, 351 f.). The historian is telling of the building of Solomon's temple, and quotes from the letter of Hiram, king of Tyre, in the form of it which is found only in II Chron., chap. 2. The text of the passage, corresponding to II Chron. 2:12£f., is given in Swete's Introduction, p. 370, and reads as follows: evKoyrjTO'i 6 deb's os tov ovpavov koX rrjv 'yrjv eKTicrev, 8? eXXero avOpco- TTov yprjo'Tov eK y^^prjarov avBp6 and ntip(?). In I Esdr. 5:29 f. we have the passage in what seems to be its original form, with the names Aya^a, A/covyS, Ovra, K?7Ta/3, Aya^. In Ezr. 2:46 the names Oura, K.j]ra^, are 3f Thia clause is found also In II Kings 24:6; and it is customary in both Kings and Chronicles to use this formula in speaking of any king who dies a natural death while occupying the throne. Ohakles Cutler Toeeey 85 wanting in all the texts known, and therefore presumably were not found at this point in the official text of the second century A. D., their loss being due to the carelessness of a copyist. In Neh. 7:48 the most of the Greek manuscripts, including codices A and i^ , contain all the names ; in MT, and also in a few Greek codices, including B, the last four names of those mentioned above have fallen out accidentally for the obvious reason just given. The names Ovra and KijralS, therefore, which are now not repre- sented anywhere in the Hebrew Old Testament, were present in the Hebrew rendered by Theodotion. It cannot be held that they were inserted from I Esdras, in the Greek translation, because (1) such an insertion is altogether unlikely; (2) if made, it would certainly have been in Ezra, chap. 2, not in Neh., chap. 7; (3) the only form attested by any I Esdras text is Kr/ra^, while in the Theodotion texts we have everywhere KrjTap. It is remark- able that our commentators and critics of the Hebrew text should not notice the testimony of the Greek in Neh. 7 : 48. All, appar- ently, omit even to look at the footnote in Swete; codex B is "the Septuagint."" These illustrations will suffice. The "official" text differed in some important particulars from that of our massoretes and also from the text of Theodotion, although both were derived from it. A satisfactory restoration of it is generally possible, however, by the use of these two, with occasional aid from other sources. Of course the numerous minor variations, due to the usual accidents of transmission and defects of translation, are taken for granted. Sometimes Theodotion, and sometimes MT, has preserved the better reading. The latter deserves the preference, on the whole. The restoration of Theodotion's Hebrew-Aramaic text is in theory a comparatively easy matter, since we know how close a rendering he was wont to make, and since, because of the late date of his work and the nearness of our oldest manuscripts to his time, we can put unusual confidence in the traditional Greek. In fact, however, a good deal of close study is often needed in order to find out what "the traditional Greek" is. And when it has once been 3> It is quite characteristic of the L recension that it should expunge these two names both in I Esdras and in Nehemiah — since nothing in the Hebrew corresponds to theml 86 Textual Criticism of Chkonioles-Ezka-Nehemiah found, the danger of blundering in constructing from it a new Semitic text is very great, even under these most favorable circum- stances. IV. NOTES ON MANUSCEIPTS AND VEKSIONS Fortunately, the history of the transmission of the three "books," Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, is one and the same his- tory, generally speaking. They have stood side by side, from the first, sharing the same fate, whether in translation or in man- uscript tradition. Especially in the Greek codices which contain these books, it can be seen that they all, including I Esdras, have come down to us through the same lines of descent. That which is seen to be true of codex A, or of codex B, or of the grouping of certain cursives, in I Chronicles, for example, will be found to hold good for I Esdras or Nehemiah. That which can be proved regarding a translation, or a recension, in one part of the history will be true, speaking broadly, in every other part. 1. The Superiority of the A Manuscripts to those of the B Group Theodotion's translation of Chron.-Ezr.-Neh. was not made until (at least) the middle of the second century A. D. Our oldest Greek codices date from a time only two or three centuries later than this, and some one or more among them might easily have been copied from manuscripts belonging to the translator's own time. Moreover, these books were already a part of "Sacred Scripture" at the time when the version was made, and the need of a careful tradition of the Greek text was already beginning to be keenly felt. We should therefore expect to find Theodotion's Greek pretty well preserved, in general ; and to be able to recog- nize in some manuscript, or group of manuscripts, a text closely approximating to that which came from the translator's own hands. And in fact, both of these expectations are realized. Thanks to the multitude of proper names in every part of the Chronicler's history, the grouping of manuscripts is relatively easy ; and because of Theodotion's many peculiar transliterations, which subsequent editors liked to get rid of, it is often possible to distinguish at a glance the original reading from the later one. Ohaeles Cutler Toeeey 87 Among the Greek manuscripts, those which contain the L text form a very conspicuous group by themselves. These are the cursives 19, 93, 108, with the occasional addition of others." This peculiar recension will be described below, and may be passed over here. All the other manuscripts may be divided roughly into two main groups. The one of these has for its constant members the uncials B, ii, and N,^^ the cursive 55 (almost an exact duplicate of B) , and is supported by the Syro-Hexaplar and Ethiopic ver- sions. The other group is led by the uncial A, and may be said to include all of the remaining cursives, though it must not be inferred from this that the group is homogeneous.'* The charac- teristic of the manuscripts and versions of the B group is the remarkable fidelity with which they reproduce the archetype from which they all were derived. They carry us back — and evidently not very far back — to a single codex, whose multitudinous errors, including even the most glaring blunders of copyists, are everywhere faithfully repeated. Among these half-dozen wit- nesses, the best text is given by codex ^^ , so far as it is preserved ; that of codex B is the worst. As for the MSS of the "A group," they present no such uniform type, but differ among themselves after the usual manner of O. T. Greek MSS, though in relatively slight degree. That is, we find in them just the variety which we should expect to find in a group of codices derived from Theodotion's translation. The best text in this group is that of codex A. The current (and, so far as I know, unchallenged) opinion as to the best Greek text of the books Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehe- miah is that expressed by Kittel, Bucher der Chronik, p. 24, middle: "B hat nun trotz vieler Schreibfehler doch im ganzen den besseren Text, auch bei den Namen, wahrend A sich fast durchweg Angleichung an den MT zu Schulden kommen lasst." 321 use, of course, the notation of Holmes and Parsons, wherever the contrary is not expressly stated. 33 The codex Basiliano-Vaticanus, numbered XI by Holmes and Parsons. It is hardly correct to speak of this manuscript as a "constant" member of the group, to be sure, for in Chronicles and I Esdras it seems to occupy a peculiar position; see below. 3* Certain subdiTisions of this main group are obvious enough, but I pass them over here as unimportant for my purposes. 88 Textual Cbitioism of Chkonioles-Ezka-Nbhemiah But this view is altogether mistaken. Codex A, in these books, has noi been conformed to MT; and as for the misguided worship of codex B, it has nowhere so little justification as here. B gen- erally yields an inferior text in the Old Testament, and in this case it is at its very worst. First, as to codex A. It makes the impression of being sur- prisingly "correct," as contrasted with B. It reads smoothly, as a rule, stands generally pretty close to our massoretic Hebrew, and (what is especially noticeable) does not give in its proper names the monstrosities which are the rule in the other uncials, but rather presents what appears to be a mere transliteration of the MT forms. But this does not show, by any means, that A's is a corrected text. We are not dealing here with the Penta- teuch, or the books of Samuel, or with a translation made in the third century b. o. Theodotion had before him a Hebrew text which very closely resembled our MT; he rendered it exactly, and transliterated very carefully; and we happen to have in codex A a pretty old and unusually trustworthy copy of the original version. That is all. The theory that A has been exten- sively corrected can be shown on every page and in every chapter to be untenable. The codex contains a great many ancient errors of which the correction is perfectly obvious, but the erroneous readings have in almost all cases been allowed to stand. Take, for example, the numerous transliterations described above (p. 63), where Theodotion dealt timidly with corrupted words which were easily emendable, and which appear in their correct form in MT. Any "edited" text would correct these forms — as they are corrected in L, for example. But in A they remain unchanged. A good illustration, again, from I Esdras is the ancient corruption of the name "Megiddo," in 1:27, where the original Greek reading MayeBSa)(^v) was very early altered, through accidents of a familiar type, to M-eyaeSSw; and MeraeS- Sov<;. Everyone knew what the correct reading was, and in L (but not in A) it was of course substituted. Moreover, in the part of I Esdras which was least of all subject to correction or alteration, the Story of the Youths, the text of A shows the same superiority to that of B as elsewhere. A typical example is fur- Chaeles Cutler Toekey 89 nished by the proper name 'ISov/j,aioi, "Edomites," in 4:45, 50. In both places A gives it correctly, while B has in the first instance 'lovSaioi, and in the second Xa\Sotot.'' In Ezr. 8:10 it is obvious that cod. A and a small group of allied MSS have preserved an ancient reading which stood in the text of Theodotion, but is wanting in MT, L, and the B group alike. MT reads fl'^aiblT "'3153 ; the B and L groups have cnrb v'l&v loKeifiovd, or its equivalent. But A and its fellows have airo vi&v Ba[ajw, leXei/Movd, which is certainly correct. The name was dropped from the L recension and from the MSS of the B group because (on comparison with MT) the ^avi was taken for an unnecessary doublet of vl&v. It must always be remembered that A stands in no sense alone. Its text is usually that of the great majority of our MSS. But what is much more important still is the fact, which is quite obvious in every part of Chron.-Ezr.-Neh. and I Esdras, that the cause of the considerable variation in the Greek texts is not correction, but corruption; and that the corrupt forms of proper names, which are especially characteristic of the B group of MSS, were derived directly from the very same (and far more correct) forms which appear in A and its nearest associates. In other words: we have in our MSS the offspring of only one Greek version of the three canonical books, namely that of Theodotion; at a short distance from the original, but already considerably disfigured by accidents of transmission, stands A; farther on in the same direction, and with the disfigurement very much increased, follow the MSS of the B group. The great inferiority of codex B, together with the fact that it represents in general a mere corruption of the A text, may be illus- trated here by a few typical examples; others will be given below. II Chron. 34 : 22, A @aKovad, B Ka0ova\. A's reading agrees neither with MT nor with II Kings 22 : 14, but undoubtedly represents Theodotion's rendering of nniptl , as also appears from a comparison of the qere with the kettb in our MT. 3' This is a mere correction for 'lovSaioi ; cf . codex 55 and the Ethiopic version. 90 Textual Cbitioism of Cheoniolbs-Ezka-Nehemiah II Chron. 36 : 8, the transliteration yavo^a, mentioned above. A and most MSS have yavo^av (the p from the following letter /x, in an uncial text), B yavo^ar], with the familiar corruption of N to H. I Chron. 5:6, 26, for IDDbS flban, A has both times ©ayXad- akva(rap; B, in vs. 6 ©aXya^avaaap, and in vs. 26 ©ayva^afiaaap. This is a fair sample of the difference between A and B through- out the four Chron. -Ezr. books. I Chron. 1 :54 (and Gen. 36:43) for the name Dl^y A has Upafi, B Za^aeiv ! The scribal blunders, mostly made in copying a cur- sive text, are only those which the B scribes are constantly making. The original transliteration was aipa/j,. The Z came from the final N of the preceding word; ip = (j>, as very often; the confusion of a with CO can be found on almost every page of B ; /tt becomes IV, VI, etc. very frequently. I Chron. 2:47, for the name ]Tfl"'3, A has Trjpa-afji, B ^coyap. Neither agrees with MT, and the B reading is a corruption from that of A, as usual. I Chron. 4:5, for "l^muX, A Aaxovp, B lapa (A for X, see below on Neh. 3:2). I Chron. 4:21, the translit. e^Sad a/3^ow, given correctly in A and in other codices. B has e ; on the contrary, the confusion of the letters 8 and /a is a rather common thing in B or its nearest ancestors. Another example of the kind is Ezr. 8:27 Ka(f>ovSTj6 (the transliteration, according to B), where A and most of the others have Ka(f>ovpr] or its equiva- lent. In both of these cases, and in others of the same nature, the testimony of the other MSS of the B group shows that we have to do merely with corruption in the Greek text. Neh. 3: 2, B reads Zal3aovp for MT ^^3T. This certainly seems at first sight to point to a variant Hebrew reading, but it does not in fact. The other MSS of the B group (X , V) show that the reading of their archetype was ZuKxovp. The two scribal blun- ders, B for K and A for X, have each many examples in codex B. II Chron. 27:3; 33:14. Theodotion's transliteration o<^aX was corrupted by one of the very first copyists into o(t)i/, for jroAewi', in I Chron. 18 : 8, or hundreds of others even worse than these 1 92 Textual Ceiticism of Cheonioles-Ezea-Nehemiah essays I have published for the first time the extant fragments of the same version of Nehemiah." We therefore have direct access to the "Septuagint" column of Origen's Hexapla, not only in I Esdras but also in Nehemiah. Through the general neglect and misunderstanding of I Esdras it has happened that no one has ascertained what Greek MSS are most nearly related to the Syriac, though this can be done with the greatest ease and cer- tainty, thanks to the abundance of proper names. Nestle's aston- ishing assertion that the Syriac I Esdras was derived "from the Lucian text" (!) has already been noticed. Comparison shows, on the contrary, that the Hexaplar Syriac of both I Esdras and Neh. clings closely at every point to the peculiar text of the B group, which has just been described. That is, the MSS of the B group are Hexaplar MSS. This conclusion is confirmed by the much misunderstood note appended to the book of Nehemiah in codex K, written apparently by the original hand.'^ The note states that the codex had been care- fully collated with one of the oldest and most correct of all existing Hexaplar MSS. But there is in the MS itself no evidence of any considerable diorthosis to which this note could refer. The corrections in the original hand are few and unimportant. The 37 1 might have added there, in giving the evidence that this is really the Syro-Hezaplar version, that its transcriber himself explains exactly what is meant by the recurring phrase, " according to the tradition of the Seventy." In a note at the end of the extracts from the book of Daniel (MS Brit. Mus. Add. 12,168, fol. 1616) he says that the version from which all these excerpts are made is that of Paul of Telia. 38 Thus Swete, in his edition ; and the probability seems to me to be strongly supported by the attendant facts. Of course, the task of distinguishing the work of the successive bands in codex S5 is one of notorious difficulty — often quite hopeless. The matter is further complicated by the considerable additions to the text which have been made by the ''second" corrector (&5 c. a), of the seventh century, whose work has been quite generally supposed to be that which is referred to in the note; see Tischendorf's Vetus Testatnentum Graece (1887), Vol. I, Prolegomena, p. 6.3; Nestle, Einfilhrung in das griechische NT.2, p. 51; and compare also the note appended (this time by i5 c a?) to the book of Esther in codex i5. But the addi- tions of this corrector are of a quite different type. They include : (1) the plus of the Hebrew (on which see below) ; also (2) corrections from the A text, such as those in Neh. 2 : 16 ; 7 : 70, and elsewhere; (3) extensive insertions, mostly worthless doublet readings, from the L recension, such as those in Neh. 1 : 9, 11 ; 2 : 5, 6, 8, etc. ; and (4) corrections from still other sources, such as the name of the month in Neh. 1 : 1, and the word eui'ouxoff in 1 :11. It would be plain, even without direct proof, that this variegated material was not derived from Origen's "LXX" column ; and the witness of the Syro-Hex. version in 2 : 5-8 shows conclusively that it was not. This version of Paul of Telia, it is to be remembered, included everything — even the asterisked matter — which stood in the fifth column of the Hexapla. The note at the end of Neh. in i{ then, if it tells the truth, has nothing to do with the work of the cor- rector H c. «. Chaeles Cutler Toebey 93 necessary conclusion is, that at least in the book of Ezr.-Neh. codex i^ is, and from the first was known to be, a Hexaplar codex; and that care was taken to make it as faithful a replica of Origen's text as possible."" We can say then with certainty that in both "First Esdras" and "Second Esdras^^ (Ezra-Nehemiah) the manuscripts X,*" B, 55 represent more or less faithful transcripts of the fifth column of the Hexapla, and that codex N" is Hexaplar at least in Ezr.- Neh. It is important to notice, further, that the asterisked passages (Origen's insertions from the plus of the Hebrew) are omitted. This fact appears plainly from a comparison of the Gfreek with the surviving fragments of the Syro-Hexaplar Nehe- miah, which contain the plus. The B MSS coincide exactly with the Syriac except in this one particular." In regard to the B group in Chronicles it is necessary to speak with more caution ; but it is hardly to be doubted that here also these same MSS contain the Hexaplar text. The codices i<, B, and 55, at all events, have the very same character here, and bear the same relation to one another and to the A group, as in the Ezra-Nehemiah books. I have not satisfied myself, thus far, that the same is true of codex N; for this, in the majority of the 39 One must of course bear in mind the fact of the remarkable displacement of a portion of codex X' and of the MS from which it was copied (the origin of the circum- stance having been, probably, the accidental transposition of a single quire), in these very books; and also the possibility that the above-mentioned note was simply transcribed from an older codex. But no one of all these uncertainties can affect the conclusion that iC is here a Hexaplar MS. That fact is absolutely certain. *01n codex S5 , which is incomplete, I Esdras is now lacking, to be sure. The fact that in certain other books of the Old Testament codex B contains, or has affinities with, a Hexa- plar text is well known ; see Swete's Introd., pp. 487 f . ; Cornill, Einleitung*, p. 335. "According to Swete's Introdtiction, pp. 132, 202, this codex does not contain I Esdras. What the ground of this statement is, I do not know, and nothing in the literature to which I have access has yielded any explanation. According to Holmes and Parsons, nearly the whole of the last chapter of the book is missing in the codex (XI) , but their apparatus includes readings from every other part. The relation of the text of N to that of the Hexapla is not a simple one. In Ezr.-Neh. it is plainly based on Origen's ; in I Esdras and Chron., on the other hand, it differs so widely as to make one of two suppositions necessary : either it represents an intermediate stage between the older and more correct text of A and the type selected by Origen ; or else, it is e c 1 e c t i c . It usually contains old and relatively correct readings, but is plainly related everywhere to the Origen text in a way that is not true of cod. A and its nearest relatives. I have not made any thorough examination, and so cannot speak with confidence. 42In codex S, the "second" corrector (So. a), of the seventh century, has introduced these passages, as well as considerable other material of varied character. See the descrip- tion of his work in a preceding note. 94 Textual Criticism of Cheonioles-Ezka-Nehemiah points at which I have tested it, has seemed to abandon its com- panions of the B group and to conform to the text of A and its fellows; see above. The investigation is rendered more difficult by the fact that !J^ is wanting in nearly the whole of Chronicles, while the help of the Syriac and Ethiopic versions is no longer to be had, and the text of B is so corrupt as to render it unfit to be a basis of comparison. The following passages will serve to show both the relatively poor quality of the Hexaplar text in these books (Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, I Esdras) and also the relative amount of cor- ruption in the several MSS which compose the Hexaplar group. It is often possible to recognize successive stages of degeneration, and in such cases it is almost invariably codex B which occupies the last stage. Ezr. 10: 23, where A and nearly all of the MSS of its "group" have the correct reading: A, KcoXtra? Kal ^edeia leal lovSm 55 , K.eo\iTav k. ^aaia k. leSo/ji, N, Ko)\teT K. ^aSaia k. NaSo/t B, K.o)\i,ev K. ^aSaia k. loSofi Neh. 1:1, A, X.acrer]\ov; if, and N, 2e%e7;X; B, Se^efXov. I Chron. 11:12, A (correctly), A%(B%t; X, A%a)i'et; B, Apxovei. I Chron. 11:33 f., Theodotion's original transliteration must have been: EXta/3a d 2aaXayS(Bz/t, ^eve Aaafi 6 Tovvi A, EXtdySa 6 SaXa/Sww, vioV^ AcrafjL 6 Tatvvi, m, ^afia^a 6 '2,a)fj,ei, "Bevvea<; 6 ^oiMoyevvovviv** B, 1,afj,a^a 6 Ofiei, Bewata? d ^ofji,oXo'yevvovpet,v The variations of i^ and B from the original text are due here, as in the other cases, merely to copyist's blunders in the Greek. I Chron. 12:27, A and N, IcoaSae; X, TtoaBae; B, TcoaSa<;. I Chron. 15:9, A, EXt7?X; X, Ei^TyX; B, Ez^t;/?." Neh. 7 : 70, 72, A, %o^coi^a)0; X and B, in both places, fiexovcoO. ■13 Such harmless correction of Thedotion's unnecessary transliteration occurs spora- dically in all of the MSS. Thus in I Chron. 2 : 53 B has irdA.€ts laeip, while A retains KaptaSiaetp. 44 Presumably ev from w, as occasionally elsewhere. 45 How it is possible for a scholar who has both commented on the books of Chronicles and edited their Hebrew text to say (as quoted above) : " B hat . . . . im ganzen den besseren Ohaelbs Cutler Toeeey 95 I Esdr. 5:66, A, Aa-^aaapeO, the original (corrupt) reading of the I Esdr. fragment; B, N, Ka^aKa^ad; and this still more corrupt form stood in the Hexapla, as is shown by the Syriac and Ethiopic versions. I Esdr. 8:7, A, E^pa?; B, Ai/rapa?(!); so also the Syr.-Hex. and the Eth. (with a slight variation). Cf . the form found in B in 9 : 46. I Esdr. 8:31. Eor (^aadfiaa^ (or W), given in all the MSS which are not Hexaplar, B, Syriac, and Ethiopic have Maadficoa^. I Esdr. 8:33. The Hebrew (Ezr. 8:7) has: ri'^yTS'' Db''^ ''Daa- This was correctly rendered in the I Esdras text, as A and its associates show: ex t&v vimv EXa/j,, 'lea-alw;. In the text of Ori- gen's LXX column, the first letter of each of the two proper names was missing ; B has sk t&v viS>v Aa/t, 'Ecria?, and with this the Ethiopic agrees, though combining the two proper names into one ; Syriac has ) . mssi; |.iis ^, i. e. the same text, but reading MAA in place of AAM. These examples, which are truly representative, could be vastly multiplied. And they all tell the same story. It is an interesting question, but one which we hardly have the means of answering, how Origen happened to choose this inferior text for his "Sep- tuagint." Possibly some old and venerated codex led him astray; or it may be that he made the same mistake which modern scholars have made. Not knowing that Theodotion was the author of this version — and we may be sure (see AJSL, p. 68) that he did not know it — he may have looked with suspicion on the Greek text that agreed closely with MT, and have preferred the one that showed somewhat more divergence. Even the latter stood nearer to the Hebrew (leaving proper names out of account) than was the case with the Greek versions of most of the Old Testament books. 3. The Versions Made from OrigerCs "Septuagint" The main facts regarding the Syriac translation, made by Paul of Telia, I have already set forth {AJSL, pp. 65 ff.). It is most unfortunate that just this portion of the Maes codex, which Text, anch bei den Namen," when it is everywhere aa clear as daylight that the difference between the readings of A and B, in Swete's apparatus, is a difference due simply to inner-Oreek corruption, and that A has, or approximates to, the very forms from which those of B were corrupted, passes my comprehension. 96 Textual Criticism of Chronicles-Ezba-Nbhemiah contained Chronicles, First Esdras, Ezra, and Nehemiah, should have perished utterly, leaving no trace behind. In other manu- scripts I Esdras has been preserved entire; and a single MS — published in AJSL, pp. 71-74 — gives us a few extracts from Nehemiah. We know that this version was made from the fifth column of the Hexapla, and that it was very exact. In the- attempt to deter- mine its relation to the existing Hexaplar MSS of the Chron.-Ezra books we are at a great disadvantage, because of the scantiness of the material. Codex X lacks I Esdras; and N, as has already been observed, either occupies an intermediate position or else yields an eclectic text, and cannot be trusted as a witness to Origen's readings. Throughout I Esdras the Syriac stands pretty close to codex B, but represents in general a text some- what less disfigured by the blunders of scribes. The same is true in the Nehemiah extracts. Here, where we are at last able to compare i< , the portion of the text is too small in extent to give a satisfactory basis of comparison. The Syriac agrees very notice- ably with B in reproducing the clerical blunder Xe\«eta ()-^V-) in 1:1, and in retaining eKTenvay/jievcov (j^aoic) instead of iKreray- /Mevcav, in 4:16(10) ; in the former case against all other witnesses, and in the latter against all but the faithful codex 55. On the other hand, the Syriac agrees with St against B in the passages 8:2, Kal eW; 8:9, ot cruj/eTt^oi/Te?; ibid., TJKovcrev; 8:10, tiepiSav, "doorkeepers," Origan's text had Ovyarepav, "daughters"( !), and this nonsense is transmitted, as usual, by B, Ethiopic, and Paul of Telia. That we are ultimately dealing in these cases merely with a single very corrupt manuscript is proved conclu- sively—as also in a hundred similar cases — by the fact that both the Syrian text (preserved in L) and the ordinary Egyptian text (given by the great majority of the MSS) testify only to the correct reading. 98 Textual Ceiticism of Cheonioles-Ezka-Nehemiah The Ethiopic will generally be found, then, to agree with codex B. In many passages it differs, however, its distance from B being, on the whole, about the same as that of the Syriac, with which, in turn, it frequently fails to coincide. 4. The Two Main Branches of the Greek Tradition In the case of the Chron.-Ezr. books, the fact of a double tradi- tion of the Greek text can be especially well observed. The one branch may be called the Syrian, inasmuch as it forms the basis of the Lucianic recension; the other I have termed Egyptian, and this designation, though probably not exact, is at least con- venient. In the I Esdras fragment, and especially in the Story of the Youths, where there is no complication from successive transla- tions, conformation to a Semitic text, and the like, the phenomenon of the two slightly differing types of text is seen in its simplest form. A typical case is that of the proper name in 4:29, which I have elsewhere discussed {AJ8L, p. 183). Here, the form Ba^uKov is attested by a formidable array of witnesses, including Josephus ; while the more familiar form, 'BapraKov, goes back to a period considerably earlier than Origen, as is shown by the fact that it is attested by all our Greek MSS, excepting the few which constitute the L group. Throughout the whole of I Esdras, some- thing similar to this can be observed. There are plainly two distinct traditions of the Greek text, differing from each other slightly, on the whole, including both the spelling of the proper names and the wording of the narrative. The variation is not at all such as to suggest two translations, but consists rather in those occa- sional differences which inevitably arise in the course of time, through the ordinary accidents of transmission, when documents are handed down through separate lines or families of manuscripts. The one "family" includes the text adopted by Origen, and also nearly all of the extant MSS; and we may therefore regard Alexandria as its proper home, even though it was in current use far beyond the borders of Egypt. Of the text belonging to the other line of transmission we know that it formed the basis of the one which came to be regarded as authoritative in Syria, at least in Charles Cutlbe Toeeey 99 and after the fourth century A. d. (Swete, Introduction, pp. 80- 86). It is thus presumably the text which had been handed down in Syria and Palestine from an early date. Its influence also extended far to the north and west. The MSS containing it are few (those of the L recension), but it is also embodied in the old Latin version of I Esdras. This same type of text — plainly belonging to the same tradition as that of I Esdras — is found in other parts of the Old Testament, as is well known. A. Mez, in a pamphlet" published in 1895, showed that the Greek text followed by Josephus in his Antiquities, for the part of the Old Testament which includes Joshua, Judges, and the two books of Samuel, was usually the same which underlies the L recension. I had already, in my own investigation of the text of I Esdras, conducted in that same year, made a similar comparison for this book, and reached a result somewhat resembling that of Mez. In this case, how- ever, Josephus' text does not correspond to the nucleus of L ; nor, on the other hand, does it agree throughout with any form of the "Egyptian" tradition; it seems rather to occupy an intermediate position, giving now the reading of the one, now of the other. The cases in which Josephus coincides with L, against the ordi- nary I Esdras text, while not many in number, are worthy of notice. Examples are: I Esdr. 1:9, cf. Jos. x, 71, the numbers of the sheep and bullocks. I Esdr. 4:29, cf. Jos. xi, 54, the name of the father of Apama, already mentioned as an example. Ezra. 4:10 (the passage now missing in our I Esdr. 2:16 [13]), cf. Jos. xi, 19, the name of the king, Salmanassar. Inasmuch as all the Greek texts of I Esdras came from a single MS, the beginning of the two diverging lines of tradition, Egyptian and Syrian, lies not very far back, presumably a good while after the time of Josephus. It follows that the coincidence of his text with either one of the two (in cases where we cannot suspect correction or contamination) gives us the original reading of the I Esdras fragment. From what has been said thus far, it might be supposed that the L text embodies merely the Syro-Palestinian tradition of the *' Die Bibel des Josephus untersucht filr Bilcher, v.-vii. der Archaol, , Basel. See also Swete's Introduction, p. 319. 100 Textual Criticism of Cheonicles-Ezea-Nehemiah I Esdras Greek in the same way that the MSS of the A and B groups embody the Egyptian tradition. This is by no means true, as will be shown below. The L text is everywhere contaminated, conflated, and arbitrarily altered, even in the Story of the Three Youths; and this unfortunate redaction — the only form in which we know the text — was undertaken at a late date. In the canonical Chron.-Ezr.-Neh., again, we can observe the same phenomenon of a Syrian text differing slightly (in its primi- tive form) but unmistakably from the Egyptian text. The differ- entiation did not begin in this case until after the middle of the second century a. d., since it is in Theodotion's version that it takes place. We should therefore expect the variation to be rela- tively small, and this it is in fact; but the distinction between "Syrian" text and "Egyptian" text is a real and important one, nevertheless. No better illustration is needed than that which has already been given, above, in recording occasional instances in which the Syrian tradition preserves Theodotion's characteristic transliteration — directly against the whole tendency of the L recension — while the Egyptian emends by translating. It often happens, of course, that the L MSS contain a synonym of the word which is found in all the other codices. This is in many cases not the mere result of a somewhat free transmission, however, but rather of a deliberate revision; see below. There are not a few instances, finally, of addition, subtraction, or altera- tion in the Egyptian text, where L has preserved the original form. A good example is furnished by I Chron. 26:16-18, where in the whole array of MSS of the A and B groups vs. 18 contains a secondary rendering** which was evidently unknown in Syria, as it is wanting in L. Such revision as this is rare in the Egyptian text, however, while in L it is the rule. An example of a later Egyptian alteration, whose influence has not proceeded quite so far, is II Chron. 33:14, where MT reads: Q^jtn lyiUl Sj^llbl *8 Based on a slightly difEerent Hebrew text? The rpeis suggests flliUblB + flDblB ; the word n 30131.3] is apparently in another place ; HJiyn is not translated in either version. This added rendering makes it still more certain, by the way, that in the first clause of vs. 17 the original reading was UX^b , and not Qllbn (the H came from the lastletter of the preceding word). Our modern translators, editors, and commentators appear not to have noticed this. Chaeles Cutlee Toeeet 101 bsisb SllDI. Theodotion rendered this: [Mer^ ravTa wkoBo/jlt)- and in a good many cases it is our sole Greek witness to the true reading. It is sometimes the case, to be sure, that even with the testimony of both recensions before us we are at a loss to find the original. With L alone, on the other hand, we should be very badly off. Unless it is constantly controlled by the Egyptian text it is very difficult to put it to any critical use. Along both of these main lines of tradition there has been a good deal of accidental corruption of the text, the greater part of which is easy to trace. The only type of text in which this corruption has gone very far is, as has been shown, Origen's own " Septuagint." The relation of the A group to the B group is in all other respects a close one; see, for an illustration, Neh. 12:376-38, where a long passage is wanting in ABJ5 , though present in many cursives as well as in the L text. It formed a part of the Theodotion version, as the Bavvovpei/jL shows (cf. 8:11). That is, the codex which was the ancestor of both A and the MS which Origen took as the basis of his text had accidentally lost this passage. Among the cursives of the Egyptian family which deserve close attention, *9 Ou the possibility that this was the translation of Symmachus, see below. 102 Textual Ckitioism of Cheonioles-Ezra-Nehbmiah cod. 56 and (especially) the Aldine MS 121^° are conspicuous for the extent to which they have preserved the original readings of the Theodotion version. 5. The Syrian Tradition, the Lucian Recension, and our L Text How wide an influence the Syro-Palestinian text exerted during its early history, while it represented merely a divergent form of the Greek tradition, we do not know. We do not even know whether it was ever a relatively correct text." We know simply that it preserved a good many old readings which were lost or changed in the more widely current version. It presumably deteriorated gradually, like its fellows, until the time when it was made the basis of that thoroughgoing recension which has survived to the present day. Near the end of the third century A. d., Lucian of Antioch undertook a revision of the Grreek Old Testament. The few facts which are known in regard to this Syrian editor have often been rehearsed; and the reasons why our L text is commonly supposed (and doubtless rightly) to be identical with Lucian's recension are also familiar.''^ Even the bare comparison of the citations from Theodoret, given in Holmes and Parsons, would lead one to the conclusion that L is an Antiochian text ; while the fact that it rep- resents not a growth but an arbitrary revision is patent enough. Occasionally in descriptions, and commonly in actual use, our L text is treated as though it were identical, or nearly identical, with the text of the Syro-Palestinian tradition. Thus Swete {Introduction, p. 379) , in dealing with the Old Testament text used by Josephus, speaks of a probability that in certain of the historical books "the Greek Bible of Palestine during the second half of the first century presented a text not very remote from that of the recension which emanated from Antioch early in the fourth." But this is by no means the true state of the case. The version as reconstructed by Lucian bears about the same relation to the one on which it was based as a thoroughly remodeled, 50This codex sometimes shows a close affinity with the L MSS, it is to be observed. 51 The old Latin translation of I Esdras gives us some information on this point, to be sure ; see below. 52 See Swete, Introduction^ pp. 80-86. Chablbs Cutlee Toeeey 103 renewed, and enlarged house bears to its smaller original. In every part of the structure, a great many of the old beams, boards, stones, and other materials have been replaced by new ones, new fabric has everywhere been superadded to the old, and the fashion of the whole has been changed. The following classes of altera- tions characterize the Lucian recension: 1. The text has been extensively conformed to the massoretic Hebrew, (a) Theplus of MT is freely inserted; not consistently — nothing is done consistently in the L recension — but as a rule. Thus I Chron. 26:16, 17; Ezr. 9:13; 10:3; Neh. 2:1, 8; 8:9; 11:23; these being merely single examples of what takes place in every chapter, (b) The Greek text is very frequently corrected according to the Hebrew. The original reading of the Greek is changed from singular to plural, or vice versa, in order to conform to MT. Words which appear to be out of agreement with the Hebrew are often dropped, and their places are taken by transla- tions of MT. So, for instance, in Ezr. 9:3, 5. 2. The Greek has been very much contaminated from other Greek texts. These include: [a) The parallel or duplicate accounts. Thus, a great many of the original readings of the L I Esdras have been discarded, their places being filled by the readings of the canonical version. In like manner, the readings of the parallel passages in the other historical books are adopted whenever they happen to be preferred. That is, for example, the reader of the L version of Chronicles must everywhere be prepared to find that the word or phrase with which he is dealing has simply been transplanted thither from Genesis, or Samuel, or Kings. (6) Readings found in any part of the Old Testament may be substi- tuted for those of Theodotion in the interest of the harmonistic tendency. (c) Harmonizing alterations on the basis of the immediate context, usually very mischievous, are frequently made. Thus in I Esdr. 5:5 instead of 6 tov Zopo/3a^eX L offers 6 kuI Zopo/3a^e\. 3. One constant feature of the L recension is its conflation from various sources. Side by side with Theodotion's rendering, in these books, we very often have that of some other translator, or an extract from a parallel passage. Some of these secondary 104 Textual Ckitioism of Cheonioles-Ezea-Nehemiah renderings are derived from the other Hexaplar versions; some are doubtless the work of Lucian himself; still others are of unknown origin. For characteristic examples see I Chron. 22:3; Ezr. 9:13; Neh. 4:10 (2), 27 (17); 6:10. Often a correction stands beside the word it was intended to correct, as in I Chron. 4:22. Occasionally a long passage is repeated in varying form, as in I Esdr. 1:96-13, where the I Esdras and Chronicles accounts are put side by side. Not infrequently the translation of our MT is accompanied by the rendering of a manifest corrup- tion of it, as in Neb. 2:6, 8. It would be interesting to search for traces of the work of Aquila and Symmachus among these double renderings, whether they are found in L or in other recensions or manuscripts of these books. Sometimes, though probably not often, the identification would be possible. In Neh. 5:13 (L), Ovto)? eKTivd^at 6 0eo? aiiv Trdvra dvSpa 8? ov arrjaei (tvv tov Xoyov tovtov k.t.\., where the (Tvv • • • ■ avv, representing iTli^ • • • • j^^j^ ^ ^g jjqj. ^^ ^j^g ordinary Greek, it seems certain that we have an extract from the translation of Aquila. In 13:25 (L) the verb ifiaSapoocra (other- wise unknown) looks like an imitation of the Hebrew t317Jit (not rendered here by Theodotion) on the basis of the verb fiaZi^eiv, "make bald." If this is really its origin, it is presum- ably a coinage of Aquila, whose fondness for such new creations is well known. '^ The hand of Symmachus is pretty certainly to be seen in the double rendering of TiTIIZ in the Hexaplar text (S5, B, but not the Syr. -Hex.) of Neh. 1:3, ev rrj x^Pf ^^ '''V "■o'^"' We know that Symmachus would have been likely to substitute TTo'Xt? for the older rendering xotpa, for he makes this very same correction in I Kings 20 : 14 and Dan. 8 : 2. The secondary trans- lation in II Chron. 33:14 (the passage already discussed above), where bSSJil is rendered by ro dSvrov — the doublet this time also occurring not in L but in certain Egyptian MSS — suggests Symmachus, though I do not know that it is possible to say more 63 On the basis of this verb-form in Neh. 13:25, Klostermann (BeaUncycl., loc. cit.) would emend the impossible " ejraXA.6jinjv " in Ezr. 9 : 3, 5 to e/iafiapto^ijv I On the contrary, the Hebrew word which corresponds there is ^b'^3?)2 , "my outer garment," and we must read in both verses to irdWioy /xou. Chaeles Cutlek Toeeey 105 than this. In I Sam. 5:9 Symmachus renders Q'^bSJ' by KpvTrrd, and he is the only one of the translators to interpret the root bsS in this way. In Neh. 3:15, where MT has nbllj , and the ordi- nary Egyptian text reads r&v KoahCav^* codex S has, instead. Be Tov "liXaiaii. This certainly appears to be an ascription to Theo- dotion, as Klostermann has observed. Whether it is a correct ascription or not is another question, but the possibility can hardly be denied. In that case we should have to suppose that a rendering corresponding to our MT has supplanted the original- one here. 4. Alterations merely in the interest of literary quality and completeness, or to suit the editor's dogmatic or other preferences, are everywhere abundant. These include: (a) The removal (usual, but not invariable) of Theodotion's transliterations, which are accordingly replaced by translations. For examples, see the list above. (6) The free revision of diflBcult phrases, often to the extent of changing their meaning and completely obscuring their relation to the original Semitic. A characteristic example is I Esdr. 4:39, where instead of the exactly rendered, but dis- turbing, Aramaic idiom, to, hlKaia iroiel cnro irdvTcov toiv aSiKcov, "she executes judgment on all the wicked," the L text has SUaia •jroiel, Kal cnrb irdvTwv rmv aBiKcov aTre^erat. So in 5:6 L alters TOV irparov /iJ/i/o? (for ry irpdnri tov jj.rjvo'i^ into tw TrponTCp fJLrjvL Or in 2:17 (14) where the ordinary text has vaov viro^dXXovTai — in MT ICiT' !!<^T2:!!< — L has "improved" the reading to vaov vTrep^dXKovTa defieTuova-iv. Or in II Chron. 2:12 (13), tov TratSa fiov substituted for tov iraTepa ixov. (c) Supplementary and interpretative additions, composed freely ad hoc. These are also very numerous, and every one of them is a trap for the unwary text-critic who wishes to advance science by giving new Hebrew readings from "Lucian." For example, in II Chron. 18:19 the narrative runs as follows: 'Yahw6 said to his heavenly retainers, Who will mislead Ahab? One proposed one thing, and another another.' At this point L adds: koX elirev, Out®? ov Sw^aei;^^ siThiswordisa veritable translation of nblC (of. the Aramaic SnbiB, "hide"), and is by no means to be altered into jSoAtSMr, as Klostermann proposes on the basis of the ren- dering in 4:17 (11). ssLagarde edits — wrongly, as I believe — k«1 elirei- oifrcus Ou Svri)i'\.0K Kol TOK 'KoiTTOi'! edvsffiv Kal T0t9 TJep /3 in L's edition ( = Ain Fritzsche's edition) and <3^ for ^aOtjp a ( = B in Fritzsche's edition). ST denotes the first Targum in L's edition; C^ = ''DlI) D1j"iln (the numbers after W refer to the pages and lines of L's edition). The apocryphal additions to B in (@ are cited according to the cc. and vv. of the Vulgate {3) e. g. 11, 2 = (3^ 1, 1. This cor- responds to the numeration in the Authorized Version (AV). Paul Haupt 117 In addition to these symbols note the following abbreviations: AG^ = Delitzsch, Assyr. Grammattfc (Berlin, 1906). — A3P = Ameri- can Journal of Philology. — AJSL = American Journal of Semitic Languages. — AoP = 'Winckler, Altorientalische Forschungen. — AOG = Winckler, Der alte Orient und die Oeschichtsforschung (Berlin, 1906) = MVAG 11, 1. — ASKT = Haupt, Akkadische und sumerische Keilschrifttexte (Leipzig, 1881). — AT = Altes Testament. — AV = Author- ized Version. — A V= Authorized Version, margin. — B = Bertheau, Die Bilcher Esra, Nechemia und Ester, second edition (Leipzig, 1887) by Victor Ryssel. — BA = Beitr&ge zur Assyriologie von Delitzsch und Haupt. — BAL = Haupt, Beitr&ge zur assyrischen Lautlehre = Nach- richten von der Kgl. Oesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu GOttingen, April 25, 1883.— BDB = Francis Brown (assisted by S. E. Driver and C. A. Briggs) A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the OT (Boston, 1906).— BL = Haupt, Biblische Liebeslieder (Leipzig, 1907).— BT = Li. Golds chmidt, Der babylonische Talmud. — C = Paulus Cassel, Das Buch Esther (Berlin, 1878).* — c.= chapter; cc.= chapters. — Cant. = Haupt, The Book of Canticles (Chicago, 1902) reprinted from AJSL 18, 193-245; 19, 1-32.— Ch = Cheyne.— CV (i. e. Congress-VoHrag) = Haupt, Die akkadische Sprache (Berlin, 1883). — DB = Dictionary of the Bible. — E = Esther. — EB = Encyclopcedia Biblica, edited by Cheyne and Black. — jBcc?.= Haupt, The Book of Ecclesiastes (Baltimore, 1905) reprinted from AJP, No. 102.— (5 = Greek Bible (LXX). — < (T2J"l''T2Jr:i<) = Old Pars. " : ~t viT T : ~ Khsayarsa. It is not necessary to suppose that 'U31''T23ni< ((Juslyw^a*!) became TcnVlflnj* {Kings 126, 47; 270, 22) and that the 1 and 1 were afterwards transposed, while the "^ was corrupted to 1. The name TB'T'"!''! does not appear as TBli"'"!'!! . viT :iT '■ "■ ... :,T For the transposition of the vowels c/. D''3S"i^UJriJ5 (3, 12) for D''3&'1'lTpriK - Old Pers. khsatrap&van, also tI1'"l53 for tlhSa (see n. on ■'STiai 2^5) and Ijffilina for ■jlTrn'ia, 1'aTi:n'1Jj5,'Assyr. Araxsamna; see Pur. 23, 15;* cf. ij,'Purim, -p. 52, 'belowl ' The first T of 'fflTl'nijnst is a corruption of "^ , the second 1 is due to dittography of the "i ; cf. the dittographed 1 in d1"lt21 and "'"ll^yn , Kuth 2, 8; 3, U; also nn-Tiayb, Nah. 2, 1 (see Nah. 29, below) and Q^IIS = Q''T"I3 (9, 19). The letters 1 and "^ as well as 1 and -| are often confounded, dittographed and haplographed (Pur. 51, 22). For 1 and -i cf. E 8, 13; Euth 2, 1, and Kings 259, 29. S reads correctly ' *> i « * ■■] , just as we find in an Aramaic inscription: 'U3"lS''T23ri , corre- sponding to the Babyl. Xisi'arsu {-i, -a) or Axsiiarsu (x = • ). For confusion of 1 and 1 (1) cf. my remarks on U^'2 tlH"! " ID^I DID instead of "Qi^l DID and in'TiXIt for Ti))^'} (Ex! 15, 2) in'AJSL 20, 158, below (see also 23, 225, below). The suffix in "aSni D10 X is due to dittography of the initial "i of the following H^^ • In the gloss 2 K 16, 10 we find p^n'a^1 for plH'Q'yi ; in Job 41, 21 (a variant to V. 20) nnin stands for Himri=Assyr. tartaxu, shaft, arrow (KB 6, 328). In E 1, 16; 2, 21; 3, 12; 8, 10 we find inllTrHK ; in 10, 1: ICITCnX • The form TZS'llTflriit (j-N^i^t) is more correct than '12Jl"l'|;ijnit , although the first *i is a corruption of ■> . In 1231123)1^5 the omission of the *! (for ■>) before "l is due to haplography; similarly "| has been omitted before 1 in isln (for lisn) E 7, 8, and ®S {Sa/mXeci, \lla^) *C/. also JISTO = Assyr. abttbu (Nah, SI) and modern Arab, qaba-jdr for French abat-jour (VG 1, 121, below). tFor T13 = nsa fo praise of. Eth. "}?i^ ! (AG2, §146). $IN23 Ed. Meyer still renders : Ross und Reiter; he also maintains the pre-Exilic date of Moses' Song of Triumph. He agrees with me, however, in stating (p. 49, below) that there is some historical nucleus in the story of the catastrophe of the Egyptians ; cf. my remarks in AJSL 20, 149. 153. 154. 158. 120 Ceitical Notes on Esthek i,i read inllS instead of MITIS , Joel 1, 17; D'^llS must be derived from ^112 = ■'""lis ; see n. on 9, 26. In 27 out of the 29 cases in which the name TflT'lCriK occurs in E it is due to scribal expansion; cf. especially 1, 15. 16; it is original only in the opening clause 'S ■'7J"'a TT'I (!> 1) and in the phrase 'S iTllSbS (3,6;— 9,30 is a gloss). Wherever we find Tn '^b/OH or nabTU "pizn (GK", § 131, g) either the name or the title is due to scribal expansion. The proper Eng. phrase is King David, the proper Heb. expression is nblDH Tn • The king David is neither good Eng. nor good Heb. The proper names (David, Solomon, Kehoboam, Jehoram, Jehoash, Rezin, Josiah) must be omitted e. g'. in 1 K 1, 82. 37; 5, 27; 8, 5; 9, 11; 12, 6. 18; 2 K 3, 6; 14, 11; 16, 6. 11. 17; 22, 24; 23, 29,* while the omission of the title king is required e. g. in 1 K 1, 53; 2, 29; 10, 16. 21. 23; 2 K 16, 11. 16; 25, 8. Even in cases where 'lb7jn is affixed to the proper name, the title may often be omitted; cf. e. g.2 K 9, 15 and Stade's nn. (in Kings) on the passages cited above. It is often stated that the name of God is never mentioned in E {cf. n. on 4, 14) while the King of Persia is referred to 187 times, and his kingdom 26f times; cf. e.g. W 27 and Hastings' DB 1, 733, footnote. S (137, n. 1) remarks that the King is mentioned 190 times. I find that the name TBT'lBllJ^ occurs 29 times, while he is simply referred to as the King 193 times. This would be 222 times, not 187. In several passages, however, the title *]b53)l does not refer to Xerxes in particu- lar, but means royal in general. ® has for 'UJT'TUni!^ the name of his son 'ApToiep^rj's (cf. Ezra 32, 5). This discrepancy is not striking if the name lij^^mnx is a later addition in all the passages except 1, 1 and 3, 6 (see above). ®'' 'Aa-a-mjpos is a later correction, just as {nl31i5 (see below) =|K ipovpai for *OYPAI = *OYPAI ; see n. on 9, 23.-6^ AySaTo^a seems to be a corrup- tion of M xmni* (Ay3aTaCa=KTnnx = NnTni^ = !! 5, 10). — ©^ ZaOoXda (for Za.eopea) = m im. — 'S"' ®apal3a (®* ©a/Jaf) = iW Di15 (©apaySa = Bapada = ^-Q = D5^1 = 05^3 ; cf. S below). iW X51!3"iri does not appear in ®^, but ©-^ has instead of ®^ ©ap^aa (for ©apo-a) = TUin the name Oaptfitaa which is a corruption of S^JH"!)! • In 7, 9 ®^ has for M tiyO.'^Ti the name Bo-u-ya^av which seems to corre- spond to ilH Stfirin (for SDt^33 ; see above). (S^ AyaOag (var. TafiovOag = ©^ Bovya^av, cf. (5^ Ta/Jafc = 3 Bagatha, 12, 1, = ilH S^rijl; also 6 'Axpa^atos = 'A^oxatos = iriH > 4, 9, and Ta^ov^a = Ta^ovfia = (l^'lTy > Kings 176, 33) may have been influenced by the Greek names 'Ayafe, "Ayadog, &c. According to Jewish tradition Harbonah was a good man; he is blessed with M and E after the reading of the Megillah at the Feast of Purim. The transposition in A XSIHtl"! may represent a simi- lar adaptation; KDHITI suggested the verbs ^s^ho >&-?, to have pity t) V V o e V and compassion ; cf. jj.aa.piao )iVmi'v , compassionate and merciful ; )°- --'^ 1 1 Vi ■«? , tender-hearted and benign. For H = 3 = 3 cf. AJSL 23, 235, n. 46; also n. on 9, 9. The name KSIZnH suggested destruc- tion; cf. iia^I and ijk-:i^ = Ul^^ (SG^ § 128, B). C/. the remarks on /xovxciios and fiovyd'ios in the nn. on v. 14. S reads X353'^n/3b > to the eunuchs, instead of M "IttlH^jb (for •\ = -< cf. the remarks on IT'll'UjriX = TUT^lUnS) adding after ilBl Jj^HjlSI the name 'ffl"iln which corresponds to the third name in (S^, ®appa. The names in S, after the prefixed Xp^JTiab , are : iilTljl 5^311)11 XHTl 115313 "iflT tairi Xri"13ji< • Apart from the preservation of lunn , which is omitted in M, and the interpretation of ilBl "jaiH/jb as J^J^JTl/jb, to the eunuchs, the names in S are practically identical with those in M. The differences consist in transpositions and other slight graphic varia- tions (n for 3 &c). For SMnJS *" has SHri'lliX • For the transpo- sition Nilim = S5l2"in cf. @ 'ApKEo-aios = m HDTBIS , v. 14; VaPaOa = Bayada = HHnjiD, > Va^ovdai = BovyaOav = Itlj^ ; also @^ Ava/j, for Afuiv (3, 1). 3! Mauman, Bazatha, Harbona, Bagatha, Abgatha, Zethar, Char- chas follows M; so, too, 3t. 1,12-14 Paul Haupt 127 The derivation of tl^l'O from Assyr. sa resi (ZDMG 53, 116) seems T to me impossible; for = Assyr. T23 of. ^nD5< = Istar; see Kings 270, 26. (12) Heb. ivt,"^ , to refuse (cf . Syr. ^»ii> ]Jlio |] , it is not tedious to me, I do not mind, Eth. tn>H j manndna, to reject; Arab. »JcL»^ mum 3, 'ana, deliberation) may be a secondary Piel derived from the interrogative pronoun "M, whatf (cf. Assyr. mlnii, howf and minfl, wftai?) i.e. a compound of the interrogative pronoun 53, whof what? and the interrogative particle J. ; nu {cf. n. on 7, 5). Heb. l>t!aln'l meant originally she said, What! Cf. AJSL 22, 259 and WdG 1, § 67, d, also trfl^ (Num. 13, 30) from Ctl • ilK TllUl is scribal expansion; cf. the remarks on T^T "ibMn in nn. on v. 1. ®^ has Ao-rtv 17 fiacrikuTa-a for ilTUJl nSbjaH 5 in v. 11 ®^ has simply t^v jSacri'Xio-o-av for riSb?^!! "^tYffll iHii ■ (13) JH "1^1 means here procedure; cf. v. 17 and ''i'Tn53 """im (3, 4) also niai^in ""im (9, 31) and D^^SH "^31 (9, 32). In rTl n1 (5C S5"'Tl Xri''"l1i< , S lJU?o iflJoioJ , O^'' voiwv Kol Kpia-iv, 3 leges ac jura m,ajorum, AV law and judgment, LB Recht und H&ndeV) the term "i^^ is not added as an explanation of riT (S). The meanings of the two terms are entirely different: fil denotes especially a personal or executive act, while pT denotes a legislative act; n"I is a royal decree (niSbjJ "QT, v. 19; cf. mS 1, 8; 2, 12; 4, 16 and the last paragraph of nn. on 1, 14) or edict, and 'i"''7 means consuetudinary law including the ecclesiastical (ceremonial, ritual) law; in Arabic the term (^t> din is therefore used for religion. The term d"'tn corresponds to the decisions of the Roman emperors, which were called decrees (Lat. decreta) and formed part of the imperial constitutions (Lat. constitu- tiones prineipum). Cf. v. 19: ^^a1 D"1S) ''fni IHS'^I fllSba "111 S22''- Heb. riT is a Pers. loanword (cf. Ezra 63, 18) and means lit. what is given (Lat. datum). Heb. T"] , on the other hand, is a Babyl. loanword . (KAT*, 650 below) which may ultimately be, not Semitic, but Sumerian (SD 527, 1). Babyl. dinu corresponds to Sumer. di = din, just as qantl, reed is derived from Sum. gi = gin (CV 9). For the vanishing of final consonants in Sumerian see SFG 49; ASKT 136, 1. 7; CV 8; and for the preservation of silent final consonants in loanwords cf . Pur. 16, 32 (also -^TDa = TD3). (14) For M ihpril we must point I'lpH'l, he caused to come near, i.e. he summoned (cf. Josh. 7, 16; 1 S 10, 20; Jer. 30, 21) or he had summoned (cf. the n. on {llmsy , v. 9). S's conjecture ^"I'jsn (1 K 5, 7) is not good. ®^ xat TrpomjXOev avrw (®^ TrpoaryjXOov) does not presuppose a diflferent consonantal text; the Hiphil SIpH may be 128 Critical Notes on Esther i,i4 intransitive; c/. Ex. 14, 10 and Kings 174, 27; nor need we read the plural, •WptfSsee Kings 170, n. *) or inp^jV ^ H^nib ■j^S'^^pn, S 01^ ' "^ '^ "r • The names of the seven councilors are just as doubtful as the names of the seven chamberlains in v. 10; ij-njj might be identical with the first part of the name "'ST'iS iriTlJ , but the initial 123 may be a corruption of '2 ; see Ezra 34, 5. — For ■ffl'^lb^ri cf. 1 Chr. 7, 10 where this name is followed by "imr^M5< which has been combined with the cuneiform Axseri given in the cuneiform account of the fourth campaign of Sar- danapalus (KB 2, 177, 1. 126) as the name of the King of Man (or Van; cf. n. on TlTfll, v. 9) between Lake Van and Lake Urumiah; cf. Ninth Annual Report of the Johns Hopkins University (Baltimore, 1884) p. 28. According to TBAI 166 "iJmfl and tI3"'T23"in are corruptions of ^nirS, while ^mcnS is a slightly modified form of TiriTTN!— iW D17J may be a shorter form of the following name X301';3 (of- n. on ■'^ijl iia , Nah. 35) just as Hnj2 (= IjOjJ, = HCnj.) is a shorter form of the following KfljQK (v. 10). — The name pl'ja appears also in vv. 16 and 21. For the seven names of M, (3 Charsena, Sethar, Admatha, Tharsis, Mares, Marsana, Mamuchan) ©^ has but three, viz. 'ApKea-aTo^, ^apa-a- daXoi ((S^ Sapecr^eos) and MaXricreap. In VV. 16. 21 ® has o Movxaios for pTJ<3 ; this may be a Greek adaptation, just as povpai, vigils for D'^"l'13 (see nn. on 9, 23) and fiovyd'ioi, braggart for rwyaios — "'jttri = ''jjS (see n. on 3, 1). For the article cf. the remarks on 6 MapSoxato^ = ^yi'V2 (2, 5) and GK", § 125, d. Movxaios, it may be supposed, was regarded as a dialectic by-form of /totxtKos, adulterous; cf. .^olian Motcra = Movcra, MoKraios = MoDtraTos- This councilor may have been called 6 ^aovxaTos, because he advises the King to divorce the Queen; cf. Matt. 5, 32 and the remarks on S S3l3m for M SD'13'iri in nn. on v. 10. 6 /u,oT)xaTos, ^-inSVi , 3 Mamuchan. ®^ Ma/joux"'"* is a subsequent correction for (tovx "f- ^. on "IDSQ , Nah. 35. In blip = (>** , DlDn = nnn , nya = nyn ; ania = nnto , titjp = map , tans = nna , &o the q is due to partial assimilation ; see AJSL 23. 248, below. tSee also Moses Schorr, Altbabyl. Bechtsurkunden (Vienna, 1907) p. 171, below. 130 Ceitical Notes on Esther i,18. 19 appear before him, and she did not come. But even if D"I70K!3 referred exclusively to the women, it would not be necessary to substitute 7"l7JSl ; see Kings 83, 35. (18) For I'liil (a: nS'^ai) we must read "'llil, whenever; cf. v. 22 llTUbn for IlirSi) and 3, 4 (Knhlv DlXJXn , Q^rS Q-iai<5) also Nah. 47 (ni for ■'"a) and S iT23D"Q for M 5<2Tr"li , v. 14. The T prefixed to C|22p is the Waw apodosis (GK", § 143, d) cf. ^Ty'^ , 3, 4; Jl'Tll , 4, 11; inn, 5,3.6; inn and ujyni, 5,6; 7,2; 9,12; ^b^a-l , 5,9; ^D^HDl, 6, 14; -jianSI, 9, 1; alsoVhe gloss in Eccl. 5, 6: niiD'bn n"Q""'S Qibntll , m many a dream there are vanities. The phrase ■1^"'-Tn "'"IIIl^ tlSp*! means : Whenever there is contempt (disrespect, disobedience, on the part of the women) there is wrath (on the part of the princes). Heb. "^IS J whenever (Job 39, 25) means lit. in the sufficiency, abundance, frequency ; for "il cf. Proverbs 61, 6. The Versions did not understand the phrase: SC Tia"11 1^1 "jIH nCaS KiniOb biD''"' ]ai , S <;i:i>ao ll^oio jZoj >mn , J unde regis justa est indignatio. B's sie werden reden, und zwar nach Geniige Verachtung und Zorn is impossible. AV, Thus (shall there arise) too much contempt and wrath. Similarly Wd (following R in K) und nach Geniige Verachtung und Verdruss (wird es geben) and S und es wird dem entsprechend Geringschatzung und Arger (geben) but in his nn. S states correctly that the IV-TIS will be on the part of the ladies, and the BlSp on the part of their husbands. (19) For the phrases lltJ ■jb7jn b? Dl!^ (cf 3, 9) and T?! lti''"'1 "iban see Kings 137, 17. The omission of TidblZTl after "'ITIB'I is intentional; ®^, however, has ■^ /Satri'Xio-o-a instead of ■'iTffl'l ; S ]^-i\V' -^^.^o . Contrast n. on nib^JH instead of IDDS^ in 4, 4. iWl PUnU^b (■* oiZj n m\) means simply to another woman; cf. y"| 1 S 28, 17 CTnb is gloss) and Neh. 2, 1 (see Kings 74, 7). iWl nS^HQ tlilton does not mean who is more beautiful than she (this would be n!!<"l53 SnlltS ; c/. v. 11; 2, 2. 3. 7) but who is better than she, who is superior to her. ®^ yvvaiKi KptiTTovi ainfi^, ®^ aXXrj kp^ittovl ova-r] ovT^s, 3 altera quae melior est ilia, AV unto another that is better than she. The new queen is to be just as beautiful as Vashti, but of a sweeter disposition, not so ill-tempered. The idea of the author was no doubt that Vashti's refusal to obey the King's command was simply due to her bad humor (so, correctly, S, ad v. 12) although N (EB 1403) says, It has been well remarked by A. H. Niemeyer that the most re- spectable character in the Book is Vashti who declines to exhibit her charms before the crowd of revelers. According to ^^ (224, 27 ; 237, 30) the King commanded the Queen to appear naked (srib''ti"iy) before his guests. 1,20-22 Paul Haupt 131 (20) The clause ^''(1 tllTi '''D (omitted in O"; B >^si|^j? M^) is concessive: although it is great, however great it be; cf. Proverbs 39, 35; OLZ 10, 65, n. 3; Nah. 39 {ad Jer. 50, 11). S renders correctly: so gross es ist; but the explanation given in his nn. is not satisfactory (cf. n. on 4, 7). According to B the phrase "itip ly"! bnSMb means here, not noble and mean (so, correctly, Schultz and S; cf. D''liain and D''533>n, v. 16) as in V. 5, but old and young. ©^ Smb irrmxini £«)S irXova-iov, <5'' awo wtui^&v l^l , JBL 19, 66. The modern Yiddish phrase is mS^mme I6shen reden, to talk in the mother tongue (m&mme = mamma, mother, and 16shen = I'lTflb , tongue). An Alexandrian Jew in such a case talked to his wife, not in Hebrew, but in the language of his people, i. e. in plain Greek, just as a Jewish rabbi in Berlin would talk to his wife in such a case, not in Hebrew, but in German; cf. the last n. on 8, 9. But Ty Trarpim cjxovrj (2 Macc. 7, 8. 21. 27) does not mean in der Landessprache (so Kamphausen in K) but in the paternal (or ancestral) language, i. e. in Hebrew (or Aramaic). The language of the country would be 17 iirixuipio^ bb53535i i«i33 ■jTB-'bi; ®' ti'')2y i^-'b yn bb53n53l. 132 Critical Notes on Esther 8,1-5 (1) M "^rnfll nX "liT , he remembered Vashti means he could not forget her; he thought of her with affection and was inclined to reinstate her. The insertion of the negative in ®^ ovk In ifji.vqjji>) = <5 MapSoxaios, 3 MardochcEus; see Ezra 58, 41. ® combines the name with J^^^T ^CCIZ , pure myrrh. 6, as a rule, prefixes the article, o MapSoxaTos; cf. 6 Movxatos = ■Ii'15352 (!> 14) and o "Axpa^aTos = 'TPlln (4, 9) also o Ajuxtv in S"^ (5, 9) where ®* omits the article, and o Tie^i — "'THj (see Kings 192, 23). The Herodotean pro- totype of M is Otanes; the Maccabean prototype is Jonathan (see Pur. 8, 22; 6, 36) but the name M is Babylonian. The author of E would not have given his Jewish hero and heroine (for E = Istar see above, p. 119) names connected with heathen deities, unless M (o MapSo- XaTos) and E had been the familiar names of some favorite characters in the popular festal legends and dramatic plays (Pur. 38, 31) for the * Cf. the scribal expansions (derived from 3, 13) at the end of 8, 11 and 8, 3 (derived from 9, 25) also the glosses at the end of 9, 2 and 3 (derived from the end of c. 8) and the two scribal expansions (derived from 9, 22 and 10) in 9, 16. See further nn. on QTJO'^n ^l^m and Don IIBiJJ (6, 2) and second n. on 6, 8. 2,6.7 Paul Haupt 133 (Babyl. and) Persian New Year's festival {Pur. 11, 31). According to Ch (EB 3198) M derived his name, not from Marduk (so, too, C 50, be- low) but from Jerahmeel: Abihail is most probably a popular corruption of Jerahmeel, Kish = Cushi, and the true name of M may have been Carmeli; cf. the Jerahmeelitish explanations of the names Vashti (1, 9) and Shethar, Tarshish (1, 14) and contrast IN 400, 1. (6) IE -ITU IS "^r^^"' 'CN refers to ''5'Tia ; the pIDS t|1D should be after iflip ; contrast last n. on 1, 14. The genealogy, p 'T'^^'' "jl ■Cp 'li ''TCfl^, is parenthetical. J air (about 600 b.o.) is M's father; Shimei (about 1000 b. o.) and Saul's father, Kish (about 1050) are two of his famous ancestors; cf. the complete genealogies of M in tt 7, 6; W 2, 5. C 62 deems it impossible that Kish in the present passage repre- sents the father of Saul. 2E inserts between Shimei and Kish the name of Shimei's father, Gera. Shimei is named, because he considered him- self at least as good as David; just as M, the descendant of the first king of Israel, considered himself at least as good as the barbarian H (see ad 3, 4). M is introduced as a descendant of Saul, not as a son of David, because imder the reign of the Maccabean princes descendants of David were not personce gratoe (see Pur. 28, 31). For ^^J^^ = ^"^iH'C , the Heb. form of the Jewish name Meier, Meyer, &c, see BA 1, 170, below. For nasnj^ll we had better read "isblblSD = ® NajSouxoSoi/oo-op = Babyl. Nabti-kudurrl-ugur. For the correct pronunciation of mis- pointed cuneiform names see Kings 270, 16. The best form is the K«thiv in Jer. 49, 28: -ll^SJimiinS ■ The o of the final syllable seems to be preserved also in ^"12315123 (Ezr. 2, 1) unless the "l is merely due to dittography of the "i ; cf. the remarks on '!Bl"l'1123ril!< (1, 1) for Tfl"l^^ri5< . The X (which was assimilated to the preceding consonant; c/r^ibn = xitt =xit', SFG 11, below; VG 127, 8) is found also in the spelhng "lS^^3^J11D ; the "i instead of 5 {cf. nn. on 05i>^ , 1, 8, = Assyr. urSsu) in "l^!!<"n5inD ■ The w instead of r is due to dissimi- lation (contrast Aram. 1"'"l|n for T'^Pi)- We have no right to restore throughout "iSii^'nS'inS (with "i and i<) just as it would be pedantic to substitute in the text of an English author sycomors for sycamore, or Nazirite for Nazarite. The omission of the J^ and the substitution of 3 for T no doubt represent the actual pronunciation. The 3 is certainly not due to graphic corruption, while the alleged preservation of the o in the final syllable "ilS {Ezra 26, 51) may be due to dittography of the 1 . (7) ilE nSin , Myrtle (cf. Mvpptvt], Mvprd^, &c) corresponds to the Babyl. xadassatu, bride; for Jl = -^ ^md — cuneiform yj see Pmt-. 39, 20.* This name is not given in ®^''; 3 Sdissa,- S uojoi . The ♦According to TBAI 166, u. 3, nOHn is doubtless derived from IHICCS]- Cf. Ch's explanation of iniCI (1,9). 134 Critical Notes on Esthee 2,9 stems of Assyr. xadassatu (with • ) and Syr. ).ioj-u (itrTlH; SG^, § 26, B, with _ ) are not identical; but Aram. ij^D!!^ , myrtle may be a C contraction of xadassatu (see Pur. 39, 23) and HQin may be con- nected also with ASao-a (=!^;2:^n, Nova) i.e. the name of the place where Nicanor, the prototype of II {Nah. 26, 1; 30, 4) was defeated on the 13"^ of Adar, 161 b. 0. {Pur. 9, 26). Alasa, the name of the place where Judas Maccabaeus was slain, may be an intentional alteration of Adasa; see Pur. 38, 89. iTO 'Th T\'2i the daughter of his uncle (the brother of his father) means, of course, his cousin (cf. the extract from Maqrizl in L, Purivi, p. 13) not his niece. Wd (169, below) calls E M's cousin, but in the introduction to c. 2 he refers to her as M's niece ; so, too, p. 181, 1. 10; on p. 186 (bis) he calls M E's uncle. The same mistake is made by N (EB 1100-7) and S (149, 1. 8 from the bottom). Cf. also W 17. 18; C 49, 10; 57, 17; 78, 15. In C 53, 8 E's father, Abihail, is said to be a cousin of M. B (400) has correctly cousin, not niece. ®^ inserts between 6vyd- rrjp and a^tK4>ov jraTpos avroB the name Ajji€iva8afi; see nn. on v. 15. M ns'n nS'' refers to the ^gfwre; DX^a nilt:, to the /ace; ixn cannot be derived from JlXI , it is a secondary modification of "lin , turn in the sense of form, shape; cf. n. on ''pVSl (Cant. 7, 2) AJSL 18, 217. The a in ^i^p is on a par with the Pathah furtive. Cf. also Kings 167, 37. Instead of !nlb ("'iTl'J lb f'inpb) ®^ (tTraiSeucrev avrrjv iavriS) ek ■ywatKa seems to have read Ti''^b ■ According to Rabbi Meir (Meg. 13*, quoted C 62, below; J 46, below) we should read rT'^b instead of nnb ; cf BT 3, 584 (n-'ib xbi* nnb ^ipn bx "vxd ^T) UW12 x^n). The word JT^ , house is used in the Talmud for wife. The original form of n"'2, house was ba't, see AJSL 22, 258, below; forbat = bint, daughter see Pur. 50, 25. 3, correctly, Mardochceus sibi earn adoptavit infiliam; & jz^s ^jjoic ai^iaU, K^ i! tauS,hha) does not mean Tie hastened (3 accelerare, & v-soijjo) but he took a special interest; cf. French s'empresser (S, betrieb eifrig). The cosmetic treatment could not be hastened; a period of twelve months was prescribed by a royal decree (v. 12) and E had to await her turn (v. 15). Nor did Hegai hasten to send E her meals; she was not starving. But he took a special interest in E and gave special orders concerning her cosmetic treatment and her meals; cosmetic treatment without proper diet does not help very much. Hegai also devoted special attention to the selection of E's seven maids. His experienced eye saw that E was likely to become queen (contrast C 58, 12). 2,10.11 Paul Haupt 135 For the position after the object of the infinitive fib Dlnb (which is more Aram, than Heb.) see K's Aram. Gr. §§75. 84; GK^'^ §142, f, n. 2. Cf. Dan. 2, 46: T^ nSSib "I^X I'^nh^DI nniai;-2, 10: n-'innb bsr xibti n!3a ^'^ Nrnra"' by tudx "n^i^ sb ; — 6, 24: u^aa p npMnb laj* bH-'Dnbv The clause ''^ban ri^aa Pib fimb, which appears in iWl after fii'^KItl fl1"lSDn , is more appropriate after n^fliUS ; M "iban IT^a^Q t^lb mUb is probably a misplaced correc- tion of fTib nnb i°; cf. Pw. 47, 41. (10) m tlTXl is pluperfect; cf. n. on ntTay (1, 9). The objec- tion raised by several commentators, that the Persian oflBcers could not fail to discover E's Jewish extraction, is not valid. The officials in charge of a royal harem pay very little attention to the race and faith of an odalisque; any girl riS"l)0 niltil ^KFl tlS"' is eligible.* E was not asked any questions; but, at the advice of M, she did not talk of her Jewish extraction, because this might have spoiled her chances of becom- ing Queen. I quae noluit indicare eipopulum etpatriam suam is mis- leading. See also nn. on 3, 4. (11) M l^n ''Jsb means opposite (or in front of) the forecourt, & \li Zh >ojj, K 5 a Shinarite woman. On the preceding page Ch states that we must substitute for Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk (Ex. 23, 19) Thou shalt not clothe thyself with the garm,ent of a Jerahme&' lite woman. Cf. Acts 26, 24. 2,16-18 Paul Haupt 137 the connection between "inDi* "I'P TSlrO. and -jbaiH bb5 Sllb ■ If the author had intended to give the name of E's father, he would have mentioned it in v. 7. -= ^aia = January, ] ^ais = December) just as S uses ^i-V- for -jrO (8, 9). For jsi iniib/jb yrnr nDiai s has mzo n\vi\ -i^-,] ij^^ . (18) For the scribal expansion ^tlcH !inTI353 flSi^ S reads ,.=1:^0 M tmfl, *S^ a^ecrts (©'' d^OTas) means neither rest (S t^Tl, 3 requies) nor a day of rest, holiday (B, S) nor exemption from military service (cf . tinbllJ'J , discharge from the ranks, furlough, Eccl. 8, 8, and Her. 3, 67) nor remission of taxes (2C ny^'D plHTiJ ; so W 16, below; cf. 24 and C 73, 6) but release of prisoners (Matt. 27, 15). Demetrius I (162-150 B. 0.) promised to release all Jewish captives in his kingdom (1 M 10, 33). If ® ai^ecris meant remission of taxes, it would be an Alexandrian adaptation, just as ® kQpovCa-Ori (1, 2). Remission of taxes at festive occasions was customary under the reign of the Ptolemies, but not in the Persian empire or in the Seleucidan kingdom. The promises of Demetrius I (1 M 10, 25-45) were extravagant, and Jonathan and his people gave no credit unto them. 'Avco-k (<^opffl53 is preceded by the gloss nri'HK , por- tion, ration. A glossator who misunderstood tlJ^TB'J to mean tribute (cf. 2 Chr. 24, 6. 9)f added the gloss which we find in M at the beginning of c. 10, where it is connected neither with what precedes nor with what follows, just as we find at the end of the Book of Canticles two disconnected mis- placed glosses, viz. 12, 13 (belonging to 2, 14) and 12, 14 (which belongs to 2, 17). See remarks on misplaced incorrect glosses in ZDMG 61, 297, 1. 20; Nah. 43 (vv. 11. 6) and 41; also 30 (v. 4) and 25 (v. 11). Cf. nn. on 3, 7; 9, 16. According to AoF 3, 26 the King levied the tax after he had repealed the decree to exterminate the Jews, because he wanted the money which H had promised to pay for the privilege of exterminating the Jews. AoF 3, 27 the statement T'i^nbiTfla ]tr'-\ HW niD-'TOb 11)15^1 "ib^n is said to be meaningless; it is suggested that we should read instead of t^^'2^1'db the singular t^T^'db , referring to the capital, i. e. Seleucia; nSTB53 (or JjiLLt is used of the release of prisoners ; cf. however vv. 29-31. tThe terms DSlillO, HnSTO, miO = Assyr. mandattu (for mandantu, from nadanu, to ffjve = ■jflD , SFG 43, 2) are euphemisms ; c/. AJSL 23, 231, u. 27; Pmj-. 47, 31. 2,19-22 Paul Haupt 139 (19) VV. 19 f. is not an sTrdvoSos or retrogressio, as Grotius says, but a gloss added by some one who deemed it necessary to explain the clause -^ban ^yisn n^ii^ ^iiiav ®^ omits n^Dir nibinn p^snii, also the final clause of the preceding verse, "ibHn T'i nSTHtS IFT'I ; for •plzn ^Staa mn'"' "'il'ia'l 'S'' tas 6 Se MapSoxaio? idtpdmvev iv Ty avkfj, which means, according to W 18, below, he had a high position at the royal court (of. 11, 3; 12, 5) but Otfrnrnvuv may mean also to pay a vi^it (cf. Otpaveueiv ras dvpas Tivds) &c. It is not necessary to suppose that M had an oflBcial position at the royal court (cf. C 75, 8; contrast 135, below). He may have been a "'inbyj or TpaTre^tVijs, i- e. he may have had a money-changer's table at the King's Gate, i. e. apparently (according to 4, 2. 6) the gateway* leading from the City to the Acro- polis; cf. last n. on c. 3. The King's Gate of Susa, it may be supposed, corresponded in some respects to the Propylcea of Athens. But accord- ing to W^ (259, 27) the gate was between the royal palace and the harem (Xiba n-'n lyi S-^TTD Tr'2)2 I'-byi i^ynn)- The translation of ■jban "iJTsn iiurn ''^irrr^ ^sin^jb -js niasi (6, lo) in &- koX rrotv crov MapSo^aioi Toi 'lovSatu) Tcp KaOri/ievta iv T v. 14, and 3, 7. (20) This verse contains two tertiary glosses to "iriDS "iMSn"! ■'ilia Dira 'ibab at the end of v. 22 (cf. n. on 3, 7). (21) M C|On ■'"l5a'©13 (®^ 01 apxKro)fuiTo(j>v\aK£g, S janitores, S \L.iZ ^-f^J) seems to be misplaced; it should be inserted in v. 22 (see below). According to 1, 10 (where TU'lln has been displaced by the gloss iff o Xdyos, koI iurnw.vo' 'EitrOrip, Kat air^ ivc^dvicrev T<3 /Sao-iAet to. t^s iinl3ovX^s. If we substitute for m ^iin-j 0123 "jb7jb nnosi "la^mi nsban nnosb the name "["Wnb , everything becomes perfectly natural and consistent; see Pur. * Cf. the out on p 178 of the translation of Ezekiel in SBOT. 140 Ceitioal Notes on Esther 2,23 37, 20. We may add to iptlb the statement ''rij^^n KfllSn p from 3, 1 (see below) and ttCTl ''"l!D'lI313 (see Pur. 38, 5). How the received text originated I cannot tell. We have a similar confusion of names* in 7, 9 where (S''* have BovyaOav (= "11033 ; ®^ Bov^aBav = "1^173) instead of !lD11"iri> and we find a similar transposition in 1 K 10, 1 where the clause riin,"' DTUb belongs to v. 25 of c. 9; see Kings 114, 36; cf. also the remarks on misplaced glosses in Nah. cited above, in nn. on v. 18 and the remarks on transpositions, Nah. 37. (23) M. ibn"''! means they were impaled (see Pur. 6, 22) or crucified (B) not they were hanged (Keuss, Wd, S). Cf. Herod. 3, 159; also Josh. 8, 29; 10, 26. The King says in 7, 9: TbS> ^PlbPl , i- e. impale him upon it. Nor does yp'in mean to hang (see Numbers 59, 51). ST xcp by ■|in"'i^ri la-'ba^si, s uxj>] -s^ ^o inserts the negative: jiSvi >o,_o li^ioo* Ijimn aaZLD jlo ; cf. n. on v. 1. The nega- tive is, of course, impossible (cf. 6, 2) but & jlo shows that the translator realized the difficulties in the received text. M "jban "'Ssb does not mean in the presence of the King, but to be presented (or submitted) to the King ; at the disposal of the King (cf. Gen. 24, 51) or for the King, so that they might be ijsb D''5<"ipD "iblStl (6, 1). The King had given orders to record all important events so that he might have an accurate account of all that had happened whenever he called for it. If extracts from newspapers are collected "ib^jn ■'DSb > the King does not superintend the clipping; nor does he read all the clippings. Similarly we find in the gloss 3, 7: b"'3n "IMH ^5Sb "lis ) i- e- the lot was cast for H; he had given orders that the lot be cast so that he might learn the result, but it is not necessary to suppose that H was present while the lot was cast; contrast Pur. 15, 5. Cf. also BL 117, below, and Mai. 3, 16; Is. 65, 6. * Of. also the confusion of names discussed in AJSL 23, 227, 1. 6 and the confusion be- tween H and M (see Pur. 3, 26) in S, referred to in n. on 7, 8. See also Daniel 29, 15 ; ZDMG 61,294,1.12; and Weissbach's aiticle Euphrates in Pauly- Wissowa's encyclopffi- dia, § 1 (according to Hesychius the Jews called the Euphrates EfifieKeA). t Cf. also L, Purim, p. 9, below (^_>JL«fl). 3,1 Paul Haupt 141 We must add at the end of c. 2 the statement ''i yi"' J^b "ibHtll iptib Tan ""Sna ; see Pur. 37, 20-43. it is not necessary to say ^aln nj* TSn W- 3, 4; 4, 4; GK", § 117, f). Nor need we substitute ^■^tXl T\l^ }X112 (2 K 17, 4). (1) For the omission of ''33Sn SmHil "Q, after l^jn in the present passage see ad 2, 22. O'' has simply A/mv for "'^ji^tl XlHTJln p "j^jn Q''TliT'n TIS in V. 10; so, too, &■. H represents the name of the prin- cipal deity of the Elamites (contrast n. on ■'3n"133 , 2, 5) JJumba, 5umman, Amman, &c (see Pur. 10, 24). The double m of this ancient Elamite (or Susian) name is preserved in certain MSS of &' (A/jL/iav). Also the name of H'a father (XrnSn , ® 'A/jASado's, 3 Ama- dathus) is not Persian, but connected with the name of the chief deity of the Elamites. The initial Jl of Sini^ari is certainly not the article (LB Medatha) cf. ®^ Tai for ■'jfl (see ad 2, 3). The m- vowel of IJum- man appears in Strabo's 'fi/iavos koi 'AvaSaros {Pur. 26, 10). Kawlin- son combined H with 'Qfrnvrig. @* A/mv in Tob. 14, 10 is a subsequent corruption or adaptation (Pur. 51, 5). (S^ has there A8a/*, ®^ Na8a;8. Nadab is given also in the Vetus Latina, while the Syriac Version has 'Akab; cf. EB 5112 and the various readings in Tob. 11, 18. H is neither Persian nor Hebrew {Pur. 12, 16). In the apocryphal letter of the King (16, 10) A/mv 'A/wiSa^ov MaxijSaiv (<5'' o /Sovyaios) is called oAAoTptos Taiv tSv Ilepo-oiv ai/taTos {^^ poviijiJiaTOi) and in M's prayer (13, 12) H is called wcpiy<^ovos {cf. AJSL 23, 235, 1. 6) but in the correspond- ing verse of ©'■ (5, 15 in L's edition) dTrcptVfiTjTos. He may have been an officer of the (colored) Susian body-guard of the Persian kings {Pur. 38, 5). M ^j^iKn (S '-^f. 3destirpeoTdeprogenieAgag,-!!L ri^j^ n''3'"lT53; cf. below) is a subsequent adaptation of the original "'jXjJI , the Gagean or northern barbarian ; see JEzekiel 99, 32. Cf. the remarks on 6 Mov- Xatos = iSltQ^a (1, 14). In Num. 24, 7 (a Messianic passage added during the Greek period) all the Greek Versions have ria, balances; Xi?;] = 'lpi^'32 , /etter; bl53'^= blH = b^^^ = Assyr. malu = ma'alu (stem J^t ; see Pur. 17, 1) front; -ji^S = 1^^ , Aram. '^^^ , flocks; TTJ^-) = ras, ra's, head; yi^Q , i. e. lio for -jiio , '^^'0 , "ji^Tfl , Eth. "iKi: san, Assyr. sSnu, shoe; see ad 1, 5. For Wn's untenable combination of ''IJ^Jt (= "^^i^j) with Assjt. agftgu and Arab. _L^ hajjaj, tyrant see Pur. 42, 21. From the Greek point of view the Macedonians were northern bar- barians, and the Jews regarded the Samaritans as northern barbarians. This explains why H is called both a Macedonian and a Gagean; it also throws some light on the epithet of John Hyrcanus {cf. W 36, below). This Maccabean prince conquered the Samaritans and destroyed the temple on Mt. Gerizim in 128 b. 0. Hyrcanus may mean Conqueror of the Hyrcanians, i. e. Samaritans; cf. Scipio Africanus, &c.* The Samaritans, it may be supposed, were called Hyrcanians owing to the admixture of foreign colonists from the North {cf "I12J53 in ^ 120, 5).f In the Talmud the Samaritans are called Cutheans (D^HIS) i- e- inhabi- tants of Cutha, NE of Babylon. H corresponds, in some respects, to Sanballat, Tobiah, and Geshem; see Pur. 52, 16. (2) For the meaning of 3>13 cf. JAOS 22, 73. * The founder of the dynasty of Reuss, Henry I, was called Buzze, Beusse, or Buthene owing to his exploits against the Poles or Western Eussians about 1247 ; cf. E e 8 c h , Vber den Ursprung des dynasiischen Naniens Beuss (Gera, 1874). The Gymnasium illustre at Gera is known as Butheneum. Cf. the title of the Czar: Selbstherrscher aller Beussen, French aufocrate de toutes les Bussies (i.e. Great Russia, Little Eussia, White Eussia, &c) . t Similarly the Greeks used Hyperboreans as a general name for the inhabitants of northern countries, and the Hungarians are often called Huns; contrast THCO 162. 3,4^6 Paul Haupt 143 M lb means concerning him; ®S ■'HlbS • H received this high rank T\1'D ; see ad 1, 15. (4) The K«thlv DI^Hl {^ llHrilbbttn) is better than the Q^rg D"lttXi • The Q®r6 would mean as soon as they said (cf. 'rm'j , 2, 1; rili^ii > 5, 2. 9) but D"l5J!!i3 means in (spite of) their saying; cf. bl3!l ri!)5T , &c. For n = 5 c/. n. on ^^'2^ , 1, 16. iW ^lllTT' Kin ^IflX Dilb TSn '''2 is an erroneous explanatory gloss to ■'STia ''"I3"! which does not mean the words of Mordecai (as in 4, 9) but the attitude of Mordecai; cf. n. on nibatl ")3T , 1, 17. For incorrect glosses cf. Nah. 41, 1. 3; 43, 1. 7; ZDMG 61, 297, n. 115. M '''D~r02 ■'13T IT^yTI is equivalent to whether M would persist in his attitude (3 utrum perseveraret in sententia ; LB ob solches Thun Mar- dachais bestehen wiirde). M's Jewish extraction was probably unmis- takable so that it was unnecessary for him to tell any one that he was a Jew. He was known as '^b^OH 1^121 aiurin "'TiriTl ^ilia {cf. 6, 10 and n. on 2, 19).* E, on the other hand, may have been an Oriental beauty without any pronounced Jewish features so that she was able to conceal her extraction {cf. n. on 2, 10). The fact that M was a Jew would be no satisfactory explanation for his refusal to prostrate himself before H. The ancient Israelites did not object to the irpoo-Kwijo-ts; cf. e. g.2S 14, 4; 18, 28; 1 K 1, 16. The reason for M's refusal to bow before H was different (see Pur. 37, 40; cf. n. on 7, 6). Similarly M's ancestor, Shimei, of the family of Saul, refused to bow before David, and threw stones at him, although the King was surrounded by his body- guard; and the King did not punish him, just as H disdains to punish M, fearing, perhaps, that M's services in connection with the discovery of the conspiracy against the King would become known, if he tried to punish M (see Pur. 12, 40). If H succeeded in obtaining permission for a general massacre of all the Jews {cf. AJSL 23, 225, n. 4) the killing of M would attract no attention {cf. also C 93, 21). Certain Eussian officials would adopt the same course in the 20''^ century; see Pur. 35, 9; 43, 18. 27. 32. 46; 44, 1. (6) The clauses i^n^^j D^J tlS lb IT^an "'i , after "nib , and ''^T\'C ID3> , at the end of this verse, are glosses to CTinTl bi Hi^ ; cf. second n. on v. 4. Both glosses are omitted in (S^ which reads for v. 6 of ii5l simply : Koi e^ovXtvcraTO d<^ov«roi iravras Toiis viro ttjv 'ApTa^cp^ou /3a AJSL 23, 215. 244) also with {l"l'13 , wine-press, originally va< ; cf . the cut in the translation of Joshua (SBOT) p. 68 and my translation of Is. 63, 1-6 in JHUC, No. 163, p. 49*. According to J. D. Michaelis Nicanor's Day might have been called D^I'IS , because the Syrian army was crushed at Adasa as grapes are pressed in a wine- vat; see Pur. 51, 38. * Cf. the last but one paragraph of nn. on 2, 18 and the misplaced glosses in 2, 19. 20, also the gloss Dni^li^'a DISI in 9, 16. tSee the Variorum Apocrypha, London (Eyre & Spottiswoode). t The original form of this word is not D'''nS > but 1T1S for ■iTTlS=Ved. pttrti, portion; see n. on 9, 26. 3,7 Paul Haupt 145 For il'n'IS ) wine-vat cf. also Hag. 2, 15. 16 where we must read: — nbsai nip orn-p niaab 5*5-152^125 nnsi 15 ':'nn"'"'n '"■52 1 "bs-^ni iix-b'y pH-di'Ts d-naa niffl? nn-'in 'nsn'i n-'-iicy na'iy-bi* sn is :n''-iw nri^ni miB's' o'^iran riiBiib ^xi III I 1 1 I spin bx 16 o) mni 15 («) For ""a, /iow? cf. Til riK ^12 (Ruth 3, 16) and Assyr. ml-nu, howf (see n. on "it^/J, 1, 12). For J^S, in the second couplet, read !!5a (cf- Hag. 1, 9). The omission of flBH in the second hemistich of V. 16 is due to the omission of riSH i^ the last hemistich; contrast t^TOb nsm (1, 9) where the prefixed b is emphatic; cf. n. on 'ffllisb (7, 8). The omission of the prefixed "0 before n"ll3 is due to haplo- graphy; for the enjambement* in the last line cf. AJSL 23, 240 and the second line of Nah. 2, 11 (Nah. 50). The plural of rms may have been D''"l13 (Pur. 20, 24; 51, 26) and blljil Sin "lis b"'Bn in the present verse is rendered in S: missaest sors in urn am quae Hebraice dicitur phur. The translation of b'^lJtl Kin 113 b^Sn in ® 9, 24, Wero i^^^to-yita Koi icXrjpov, means he cast a ballot, that is a lot, koI in this connection is explicative and cor- rective {cf. n. on 1, 17). For ®'s translation of b"l1jn Xltl ^13 b'^Sll in the present passage see below, n. on b''Btl • There is no Persian word for lot from which 115 = bl15 could be derived; Pers. »w^ , »^L5 , s.U , o do not mean lot (see Pur. 45, 42) nor could they appear in Heb. as "1I3. The Iranian word for lot is viLwj pisk. There may have been a word 113 (connected with "|1"|S, pofand n"ll3) va^) = Assyr. pftru, wrw; but if D"'"ll3 was combined with "113 , urn it was merely a subsequent popular etymology which may have been suggested to a glossator by the use of ri353 , part, por- tion in the sense of lot, destiny \ as well as by the oracular practices observed on New Year's eve {Pur. 17, 38; 18, 27; 21, 33; cf. also C 101, 8) and the allotting of offices at the beginning of the year (AoF 3, 10). hostage (Days of the Lots) is the Grer. term for days on which it is possible to forecast the future {Pur. 18, 28). At the Chinese New Year's » Contrast Budde' s Oeschtchte der althebr. JUtteratur (Leipzig, 1906) p. 26, 1. 8. tAccording to Glaser (OLZ 9, 320) Heb. H^ (see Kings 163, n. *) may mean pari, por- tion, lot, oracle (cf. Pur. 45, 3). As to liSN. Glaser thinks, it is not a loin-cloth = '^\/-\ i, fota or , U e^ maqtab (see the translation of the Psalms in SBOT, p. 224, fig. s) but a band or scar/ like the stole worn by Roman Catholic priests, or the pall of the Pope, archbishops, &o, and the n'^bO of the Jews. Of. the Byzantine M(<.o<)>6pioi'. 146 Ceitioal Notes on Esthee 3,7 festival the priest produces a box with small ivory chips variously inscribed. If the lot marked wisdom comes out, it means more veisdom for the man for whom the lot is drawn. Similar oracular practices may have prevailed at the celebration of the Persian New Year (Nauroz) in the times of the Maccabees. Cf. the statement of Berlini, quoted in ZDMG 61, 277, on the same day (Nauroz = Purim) the happy lots are distributed among the people of the earth (v:ylt>L*.viJ| *a»Ju jui. [joJ^\ J^l). The casting of the lots for the two goats on the Day of Atonement* may be a purified form of some Babyl. oracular practice at the beginning at the second half of the year {Pur. 3, 39; 4, 2. 20. 26. 33; 33, U; 49, 26). E is a festal legend for Nicanor's Day, just as the Book of Nahum is a festal liturgy for the celebration of that great victory gained by Judas Maccabseus over Nicanor on the 13*'' of Adar, 161 b. o. (OLZ 10, 64; ZDMG 61, 275). This commemoration of Nicanor's Day was combined with the observation of the Persian New Year's festival (celebrated at the time of the vernal equinox) which is no doubt based on the Babyl. New Year's festival {Fur. 3, 3; 4, 39; 11, 27; 19, 10). In the Talmud the cuneiform name of the New Year's Festival, akitu, aqltuf appears as li^tT'Dpi^ (which is an adaptation of U^ln'^pS) while Nauroz is corrupted to ^^nnTJ (for r'\nM2 , Tinnia)- See ZDMG 61, 276. The original meaning of D''"11S (=Nauroz = Akitu) is not lots, but portions, Heb. T^yCi ; see n. on 9, 26. In casting lots in order to determine what day would be most unlucky for the Jews and therefore most auspicious for the general massacre planned by H {cf. L, Purim, p. 8, 1. 13) they did not try every single day of the year until they finally hit on the 13"' day of the 12"i month. They might have put 12 lots, marked from 1 to 12, into the urn (Assyr. pHru) and 30 lots marked from 1 to 30; then it was only neces- sary to draw two lots. But the phrase 'iC'inb 12"in'J'l DVb UT)2 shows that this simple procedure was not used at that time. They tried first the first day, then the second, and so forth; when the lot decided in favor of the IS'*" day, they tried to determine the month. In this way it was necessary to cast the lot 25 times before they hit on the 13"' day of the 12''' month. Cf. my remarks on Urim and Thummim in JBL 19, *For the reason why the Day of Atonement was observed during the Babylonian Cap- tivity on the lat of Tishri, whUe the New Year was to be celebrated on the lOtli of Tishri, see conclusion of n. on 9, 31. ■j-In the new texts found during the German excavations at KaVat 8hergd.f (AgSur) Assyr. akitu appears as a synonym of kir6tu= ni3 (2 K 6, 23) and .cv* qlran (see Kings 208, 15; MDOG, No. 33, p. 34; cf. the photograph of the bSt akiti, ibid. p. 30). This shows that the etymology of akitu, given in Pur, 31, 3, is correct. Akitu appears in the Talmud as itnTlDpli , while 5{^p appears in Assyrian as KID ; cf- VG 122, also the remarks on ^ip = kftru (BL 132) and "IDSU = tupSarru in JVaft. 34, and AJSL 23, 246. 3,8 Paul Haupt 147 73, n. 61 and Numbers 57, 41. Adar means Xvyaios in Assyrian; the 13"^ of Adar was a dies ater Kar' i$oxrjv {Pur. 32, 33). iM b'^Stl is impersonal; so Keil, Schultz, R in K, S; LB ward das Loos geworfen vorH; cf . the translation in %, quoted above, missa est SOTS, and the translation of Leviticus (SBOT) p. 62, 1. 54; see also Kings 289, 19 and nn. on ySH W^ (5, 14) and nnS'^l &c (8, 10). It is not necessary to read, with O, ib'^ESil ; contrast 6, 9 where O reads T23''ibH'l instead of 'ni3''!3bni- According to B, b^'BH refers to H, and the explanation of "lis is not merely b^'l^lTI IS^Iil ; as in 9, 24, but Klil "CCn ■'SSb b^l^n • M lan ''iSb , however, must be connected with ^13 b^BJl: — I'jn ''DSb (blian i^in) niS b'^Sn. Even if we read yOtib instead of 'p2T\ "'SSb > as Wd suggests, the phrase bllSil KIH "iMInb would be very strange. For "i^n ''Dsb see n. on ^ban ''DSb (2, 23). According to W the lots were cast by the scribe Shimshai (of. Ezra 4, 8. 17. 23 and C 103). ©^ ^iso states (ad 6, 1) that the King com- manded the scribe Shimshai to bring the Book of Eecords. S has ^ojj ]^ -o^o ]^ ^i] ; SE -jian Clip i^ms Sill siib^a b'^a^ (Syr. 1^ is apparently a transposition of i/^<^os; see Pur. 45, 11). For the translation of this clause in ®^ and B^ see Pur. 16, 1. (S'' has koI /SoAAci kA.i;povs eis ttjv TpuTKoxhcKaTyp/ ToS /iijvos A8ap Nicrav ktX. Here Nicrav represents a variant (c/. last n. on 1, 4) to ASap (it may be derived from M ID^D at the beginning of this verse). After M IBllTD we must, with B, E in K, Wd, following ® koX l/Ja- A.£v kXijPOus fiiiipav i$ ijjuepas Koi [Lrjva CK /oirjvos {uxttc aTToXeaaL to yevos Map- So^atov) K5 riTUJSI is not Heb. What Wn has in mind would be:— f|D5 nSS niTBS' D^"'1in''n lbpT25"'1 ^t^T■ But the sug- gestion that SCSn in V. 11 is a gloss is correct; see below and cf. above, ad 2, 18. The interpretation (W 17) that H offers the King 10,000 talents to make up the financial loss involved in the extermination of the people (loss of taxes) is unwarranted; cf. below, ad 7, 4. Heb. bpTIJ to pay, properly to weigh, may be a Babyl. loanword; cf. KAT^ 649. The stem is a Saphel of bp ; cf. n. on '130 (1, 22). The initial Tfl is therefore a IBs (SFG 20, 3; ZDMG 34, 861; BAL 100; con- trast AG^ § 63) = v-*/ , (j« . For the Z in "^-oZ and the yy in Jjd cf. JJO&.S = ) *jLs = Assyr. passtiru = Sum. bansur (BA 1, 161) and »oZ] , jjjI = Assyr. Assur; -Xifc = Istar, &c; see my paper on the name Istar in JAOS 28, 118, below. iWl |nlD5tb53 "'fflS (cf- 9, 3; means here officials, especially revenue officers (cf. the remarks on jUx!ii| , ZDMG 61, 275). Also in 1 K 11, 28; 2 K 12, 12 (contrast Kings 240, 20) as well as in Neh. 13, 10; Ezr. 3, 9 &c nDi^bjJ TWS means business man (cf. \j/ 107, 23) especially ^naw- cier, tax-gatherer, collector, &c. Cf. also 1 S 8, 16; Dan. 8, 27; 1 Chr. 29, 6. (10) For n"'"nn^n "i^'ir ® has ^aa^tri sp-^ya, s u?^? i n-^,\sn . The addition Clin'^n "OS ''j JSn XmSn "13 , which is omitted in O^'', seems to be a scribal expansion; see n. on v. 1. (11) In "131 Dyni -jb pri: -|D5n the two words fpSn and DyH should exchange places (cf. n. on 1, 6) and HDlDn should be relegated to the margin {Pur. 6, 33) as the question of a reader who was anxious to know what became of the enormous amount of money (10,000 talents, i. e. about 118,000,000). Cf. for this gloss Kings 137, 35; Isaiah 19, ^8; 81, 18; Eccl. 20, x; 21, c; 25, kk; BL 3, y. The King takes it for granted that H will pay the money into the royal treasury; he therefore deems it unnecessary to refer to it, saying simply: "jb llDD DyH- It is extremely unlikely that an Oriental monarch should be so generous as to turn over eighteen million dollars to his prime minister; cf. n. on 2, 18. (12) For the Pers. loanword D"'D3'mTZ3ni5 , satraps (® (TTparriyoi, S lifcjis?, SE ''t3b"'t3~lt2D!!< = (TTpaT-qXaTrp) see n. on T25"l1UjriK (1, 1) also n. on D-'Dnniflnx (s, lo). 8,13 Paul Haupt 149 Heb. flinS is a Babyl. loanword. The singular JlrtS must be pronounced pixxSh (GK", §27, q) not pSx&h (AOG 25)/ The doub- ling of the n , however, is secondary, just as in D'TIS , brothers; nns , one; ^tM^, after, &c. In Assyr. paxatu, pixatu (HW 519") the guttural is not doubled. M Dy ^"I'lD refers to the native chiefs; & Jikioi, |io-fcj, SC "ijlll^ (13) Heb. U^'2r\, & Q^h* ^ "{"'DIIiiT'") , ® /8t;8Xia<^dpoi) means originally runners, then especially foot-soldiers; see Kings 232, 34. Here it is used for couriers (ayyopoi, cf. Her. 8, 98) who were (according to 8, 10) mounted. B'' ck xapas rpixovruiv hnrioiv (var. HrTrcov) is a doublet; cf. ©'' ASap Nto-av in 3, 7 and n. on 1, 17. In Assyrian, rakbu (= 15"l) is used for envoy, and allaku xantu for courier (HW 619''. 28P). The stem xamatu, to burn is identical with the stem xamatu, to hasten; the original meaning is to flash; cf. ZDMG 61, 297, n. 115 and modern Arab. ^^. =^^, a^J ; also iV^afe. 41 (purldu, cowrier = t\jjj). M naxbl Tth T^'Xfb (so, too, 7, 4; S, ll) is not pleonastic; T'SlUnb , *o exterminate is the general term {cf. v. 6 and 4, 18). This extermination could be effected either by a general massacre (jUTh) or by forcing the surviving Jews to flee from the country like wild beasts; cf. Arab. Jol := (ji>=ky) and my remarks on the last line of i^ 1 in AJSL 19, 141, below. See also n. on "TSli^l (9, 6) and C 121, below. At the time of the Syrian persecutions under Antiochus Epiphanes and his suc- cessors the orthodox Jews were either massacred (1 M 1, 57. 63; 2, 38; cf. Pur. 35, 6 and n. on QinS;b , 4, 7) or forced to flee (1 M 2, 28. 29. 43; cf . Pur. 34, 39). avCa-ai for ^n!!^b1 TTh T'^lBllb , just as niMniC Xbl y^'D mh ■'STna (v. 2) is rendered 6 Si MapSoxaTos ai irpoa-eKvva aimS, or as we find for '1"|'3^1 ^-TSQ i'^- 8) simply Sieo-Trap/tefov. For the accumulation of synonyms, which is by no means indicative of a late date, cf. ZDMG 61, 295, n. 97. Heb. bblB , to plunder (cf . 8, 11) is a Babyl. loanword. The noun bblD (^ .oai tfnil ; cf. AJSL 3, 107) means here household effects, personal property, just as Ger. Plunder means household effects, trumpery, baggage, while the verb plundern means to pillage. In certain parts of the United States the term plunder does not mean pillage, spoil, booty, but household or personal effects, baggage, luggage. Ger. plilndern is a privative denominative like our to skin &c (AJSL 22, 251; Nah. 32). Assyr. salalu (HW 662") means to carry off; so bbllJ denotes mov- ables; French, meubles ; cf. the Ger. privative denominative uermSfteZw. See also Pur. 34, 18. *J8 has \4m'i also for "iQinD in 6, 14. 150 Ceitioal Notes on Esther 3,u— 4,i The conjecture (AoP 3, 26) that this verse is evidently a subsequent (post-Seleucidan) addition is gratuitous. (14) The clause nnai HrTJ bil m "jriSrib is in apposition to Dtlin . We may supply the relative pronoun "|12J5< before insnb , but not in'' (S). Nor is Wd right in stating that "insilb introduces the contents of the edict. S> renders freely: \^ai^Z] )^Zlsj {1lb Ti^ ''i pTT iriSba "^ban "iSir , at the end of the following verse, loai 2u^o VaiiiD? Ji.'2^ Upo ].ojD . t nSl w»Ji) IjBoiaJ, we cannot attach much importance to the insertion of V^azzl . The verb Taib , to put on is not used only of dresses; ^Qi^ t25lb is just as possible as "'lien 'Bib rrm (Job 7, 5) or nabii rncn iisib'' (-a 35, 26). cf. also 2 s 13, i9: Pnr«"l by "IS» "lan nplnl. For the symbolical meaning of the rend- ing of garments and the sprinkling of ashes &c see Pur. 25. M "15123 hi^ Sinb means to come to the gate, i. e. to approach the gate; to enter the gate would be "iSTBl i^llb , see AJSL 21, 134, below; 3 aulam regis intrare is inaccurate. (3) The clause Q''n"lb 5S;' "lH)5<1 pTB (AV, man,?/ Zaj/ in sackcloth and ashes) means Most of them had a sack-cloth (or coarse loin-cloth) and overspread (Ger. aufgeschmierte) ashes (i. e. spread over the body). Heb. D'^Slb would mean Many had (® niH i<53ti''p1 DTB TTllbl ]''i^^jO ^•'p^'^:! '^ibs DTsna, ^' ]"'K"'aDb is^isina Katipi x-poi) but D'^S'lb means Most of them had; cf. ttoXXoi and oJ iroXXoi (GK^', § 133, g). C's rendering (even) the great ones is impossible. The Qi^Jl bll^ bli< ^^D521* ■'IDH were universal among the Jews, and most of them even put on the loin-cloth and sprinkled ashes on their head. Instead of yS^ we must point yJJ'' (as participial attribute to "ia!*() = SS''53 (GK", §53, s). For M^ i^"^ instead of yT^ c/. conclusion of n" on 1, 5. The b in D''n"lb is not the b discussed GK", § 121, f (cf. n. on 5, 12) but the b explained in WdG 2, 149, D; nor is y^-^ verbal predi- cate to both plZ) and "igj^ , but attribute to "iSX • B and Wd (follow- ing 3 sacco et cinere multis pro strato utentibus) think that they spread a garment of hair-cloth, sprinkled with ashes, on the ground and sat down on this garment; so too, S: Sack und Asche hatte die Menge {der Juden) untergebreitet ; cf. ®^ (to-kkov koX (ttto^ov ea-rpoxrav eavTois. But this spreading of the sack-cloth on the ground would be at variance with the disregard for personal comfort, which is characteristic of mourning. The sack-cloth was not spread on the ground, but put on as a loin-cloth, and the ashes were not sprinkled on the loin-cloth, but over the body. @^ has for J^S'^I "1SH1 pi23 'ffllb'^l in v. 1: koI irepie^aXeTo 33 , and at the end of c. 3 ffl-'^ has iTapdcra-ero for (13133 • 3 renders consternata est. The stem bnbnnn is derived from bin , just as pT23pnT25n (for plCptCnn) is derived from p'l'ffl ; see Nah. 41. The verb bsp (S Viia j3o, ^ b''np Sbl) is Aramaic; cf. the glosses in 9, 23. 27 and n. on ib^l (7, 4). Assyr. qablu, midst (BL 97) = Arab, qalb, heart (AJSL 1, 227); cf. last n. on 7, 9. (5) For linn (^ v^<^ with T misread i) has 'AxpaOattK. This is a transposition of 'Afc^aios, the p emphasizing the guttural (velar) character of the T ; see BA 1, 257, 1. 18. For o 'A^padaXos (v. 9) cf. n. on 6 Mov^aios (1, 14) and for the transposition cf. the remarks on Ayadag = Ta/3ov6ag = Bovyadav in nn. on 1, 10. 'AxpaOaiog may be influenced by Greek names like 'A^aTiji, 'A)(pa.Srii, &C. M T'layn is causative {3 quern rex ministrum ei dederat, AV whom he had appointed to attend f upon her) just as !31pn in 2, 14; it could also be intransitive {S> k*iopD >o)J?). Cf. AJSL 22, 204, 1. 5; Psalms 83, 50. For by read bs«, as in v. 10 (S Zo^^). Cf ijia b? (v. 7) for ^m bs< and nn. on 1, 17. The phrase b? HIS , which means to enjoin upon, is correct in vv. 8. 17 and in 2, 10; bst m^ means to order to, to order to go to. This is a constructio prcegnans (GK", § 119, ee) like bij^ ■ • • ■ Dp ■jn^ati ns j (7, 7). (7) The translation (AoF 3, 26) M told him everything, and the amount of money which H had commanded to pay to the JewsX in order to annihilate them ; he gave him also the tenor of the edict which he had issued in Susa in order to exterminate them, is impossible. * Of. the fifth footnote to nn. on 3, 7. t Cf. n. on HTOyriT (5, 1). t&6rman(?) welchen H befohlen hatte zu bezahlen den Juden sie zu vernichten, Wn means, I suppose, welchen B den Juden zu bezahlen befohlen hatte, i. o. which H had com- manded the Jews to pay. 4,8-11 Paul Haupt 153 Heb. D'^'^Tin^n blpTSb cannot mean to pay to the Jews;* H is the 1 pretii (see Kings 224, B) 3 pro Judoeorum nece. In his nn. S explains the 3 as 1 pretii (so, too, Wd; cf. n. on 7, 4) stating that D''''Tin^3 means properly als Preis fUr die Juden, but in his translation he renders in Betreff der Juden. There are several discrepancies between the translation and the nn. in S's commentary, which would, perhaps, have been eliminated, if S had been able to revise his work; cf. nn. on 1, 20; 5, 1. 8; 6, 6; 7, 8; 8, 11; 9, 2. 16. 26; also S's transliteration Mordehai (as though it were Tnn:a) and Pur. 29, 26. For the K«thlv D'^^'H^iT'S the Q»rS substitutes the contracted form n'^n^n^a ; cf. s, i. 7. 13- 9,' 15. is. M. D13Xb means here to ruin them; this includes killing and pro- scription, banishment, expulsion with confiscation of property {cf. n. on 3, 13). (8) The Athnah in nb Tatlbl is correct; frib TSTlb must not be connected with the following n''b? Wisbl (against B). The inf. Tanbl is coordinated to the preceding niSlflb : Hatach is to show E the document and to tell her about it, explain it to her (AV to show it unto E and declare it unto her). Hatach told the Queen the substance of the edict, although he presented a copy of the decree. Even if E could read the copy, she was probably satisfied with the verbal report. An official who submits a letter to his superior will often give the sub- stance of it, so that the letter is not read, although it is produced. The clause fT'by nilSbl represents the final request: M requests Hatach to urge E, in view of all the evidence submitted, to go to the King. The eunuch Hatach may have been a Jew; cf. C 145 and the second footnote to n. on 2, 10. (11) For the etymology of r\"'tt"'5a cf. AJSL 22, 258, below. For "im nnX) there is hut one decree for him, cf. Dan. 2, 9: S^HH ■i']5JT7 j^-ij-] . The suffix in in! represents the genitivus objectivus (so S): his decree = the decree against him; contrast n. on 1, 17. The loanword TTI is feminine; cf 3, 8. 15 (nlSifl On^m , flDFlD mtl) and SG^ p. 57, below. The b in n"^anb {^ trCdb tVTI m^Tj «^n Unn) may be the Lamed inscriptionis, as in Is. 8, 1 (GK", § 119, u). This is a variety of the emphatic b {cf- n. on lainiDb , 7, 8) just as Assyr. ma before the oratio directa is a variety of the emphatic ma (see Proverbs 68, 7). ffi^ renders tT^atlb IflT iTlHit freely: ovk eo-Ttv avTi4 Paul Haupt 155 accidental (N) but intentional (Wd). According to N (EB 1403) it is due to the coarse and worldly spirit of the author; but the avoidance of the name of God is no evidence of coarseness or worldliness: a man may- be absolutely irreligious, yet use the name of God in an oath &c. The phrase ^MJj^ d1p!!313 'Tby nbSin is a reverential allusion to interven- tion on the part of the Supreme Being, just as some one may say in Washington, The Secretary of State is in favor of it, but Somebody Else may object, alluding to the President.* In post-BibUcal Hebrew, QlpaH is used of God (c/. JBL 24, 17) and D'^pbit is substituted for DTlb)!* , just as we prefer to say By Jove, or dear me, or Good gracious. Good by, &c in order to avoid the name of God. Ger. achherrje is a corruption of Ach Herr Jesus, just as Hullee gee is a corruption of Holy Jesus. M niibab roan nsTS myb d>« yiv ^a means, who knows whether thou hast not attained royalty for a time like this, i. e. Perhaps thou hast been made Queen just for such a contingency ; cf. Gen. 45, 7; 50, 20. @^ Koi Tts oiSev n £is Tov Kaipov TovTov eySacrtXevcras; so, too, iin i^ai SlnlSby "iDniib iC'CU ■ instead of the rhetorical question Who knows f Ethiopic uses a negative expression for perhaps, viz. Kl^h. i enda'I, lit. not my knowing, haud scio, yTi"' "'SD'^S ; see Dillmann's grammar (1899) p. 343; English translation by J. A. Crichton (London, 1907) p. 387. For similarly clipped forms cf. my remarks on the causa- tive preiix ifl in nn. on 3, 9 and in the paper on the name Istar ( JAOS 28, 114) also Nah. 24, below: VG §44, d; and the remarks on "ilna (5,8). T T iWl Dti SIV ■'70 means perhaps, just as Lat. haud scio an ; contrast haud scio an non=perhaps not. As soon as the negative is inserted (after art) in AV Who knoweth whether thou art come to the kingdom for such a time as this, the meaning is clear. LB, correctly, Wer weiss, ob du nicht um dieser Zeit willen zum KOnigreich gekommen bist; C und iver weiss, ob du nicht (grade) fiir diese Zeit zum, Kdnigreich gelangt bist. Similarly AV renders Jon. 3, 9: Who can tell if God will turn and repent instead of Who can tell whether God will not turn and repent. If we substitute but for DS > we need not insert the negative. *ln the German Reichstag Gen. Von Beimling, the commander of the colonial troops in German Southwestern Africa, said on May 26, 1906: DarUber habenSie hier nicht zu bestimmen, sondern ein Anderer (i. e. the Emperor). In his novel Trittram of Blent (vol. 1, p. 255 of the Tanchnitz edition) Anthony Hope says: And if by a miracle he [the prime minister] said yes^ for all I know somebody else might say no. This dark refer- ence to the Highest Quarters caused Southend to nod thmightfully.— lhid. p. 270 we find: There was now not only the very grave question whether Robert Disney [the prime minister] — to say nothing of Somebody Else — would entertain the idea ; and on p. 117 of vol. 2 : The last words had. presumably^ reference to the same quarter that Lady Evenswood had once described by the words '^Somebody Else." 156 Cbitioal Notes on Esther 4,16 If the negative were inserted in Hebrew, '151 mjb sb D5<; the phrase would mean : Perhaps thou hast not been made Queen just for a contingency like the present. This statement would be possible only if E had not become Queen. If the King had given orders to kill the Queen, the father of one of the maidens who were not made Queen, might have said to his daughter: — niSblib PySn Sb DX 'STC' '^12 riNTS nsb • The negative in our Who knows whether thou hast not been made Queen just for such an em,ergency is on a par with our not in phrases like Won't you comef which is quite different from Will you (really) not comef The particles t^btl or '$^^12 (B) could not be used in this connection. B's interpretation (which has been adopted by Eeuss) Who knows (what may happen) when thou hast come to the royal throne at that time or when thou hast appeared before the King's majesty at that time (Ger. Und wer weiss wenn du um diese Zeit hinge- kommen sein wirst zum koniglichen Thron) is impossible. This would be: iiTin n^D "jbari b« t^hi^^ irrr rra yir ^ai • The words 'TTVT TV2 could not be omitted, and iJ^Titl ny3 would be appropriate only if a time had been specified; e. g. if E had been urged to go to the King at a certain time, then some friend, wishing to dissuade her, might say, If I were you, I would not go; who knows what will happen when thou goest to the King at that time. It is true that this phrase might also anticipate a favorable outcome; Naomi might have added to her instructions in Ruth 3, 3: Jn^a 125''5 3, 13). E risks her life, just as Sheherazade and the Herodotean prototype of both, ^aiSu/ati? {Pur. 8, 38). 3 tradens- que me morti et periculo. (17) M. "ihyi does not mean he transgressed the Law by ordering a fast for the 13"^ and 14"> of Nisan (so J. D. Michaelis) but he went over (so C 162) to the City to call the Jews of Susa together and to urge them to fast for three days in order to crave Jhvh's blessing on E and her hazardous undertaking in behalf of her brethren. The City, in which M's brethren lived, was separated from the Acropolis (cf. n. on 1, 2) by the Choaspes, Assyr. Ukntl (JHUC, No. 114, p. Ill"; cf. JAOS 18, 145, n. 1). n (1) It is perhaps not necessary to insert (with B, R, Wd) IB'llsb before ri'lSbu (AV, put on her royal apparel) as in 6, 8; 8, 15. ©^ irepie^dkeTo Tr]v So^av avT^s, but <5^ tt. to. Inarm t^s So'^ijs, 3 induta est regalibus vesti- mentis, B Uoai^j ^k,a£jS. n.^^^^, % XWib^a "'TSlab msnbl. The abstract fllSb'JS may mean regalia. Milton uses royalty for emblems of royalty (Assyr. simat sarrftti). 'LB zog sich kOniglich an ; so, too, C 163. S translates: da zog E das Kdnigs'gewand' an; but in his nn. he states that piliba TBab is abridged for niiba TBIab TUnb ; cf. nn. on v. 8 and 4, 7. iTO ^^yril does not mean she stepped in, entered (S) or she stood (so AV = 3 stetit) but she waited ; cf . 6, 5; 7,7 and our stay - Lat. stare, Arab. Jji\ {Kings 174, 27; cf. n. on T^aSTl , 4, 5). To stay means to come to a stand, stop, wait, remain. Shakespeare says: a servant that stays upon me; cf. n"'3Sb T'aSil (4, 5) also naS in Eccl. 1, 4; Ex. 9, 28 (iwb iiscb sbi Dinsi nnbTCi^i) and Josh. 3, 16 (nay'^i D''an ; of- Grer. stauen). M tT'^n nns niil does not refer to E (as S states) but to the royal throne; -jbaH tVO, HDi refers to E, but not n^aH !ins nSb • The throne was opposite the entrance, so that the King, seated on his throne, could see who was waiting in the forecourt. (2) M rna'l? is a circumstantial accusative; see JBTrngrs 136, 37; 298,3; and below, vv. 9. 14: naiS ; v. 13: nirV ; 6, 12: IBH"! ''ISni bnK- Cf. also Gen. 27, 6: "j-'riK iTcy b« "QiM "{"'ni!* fix ^tysrm n'sn ; 158 Critical Notes on Esther 5,3-8 Is. 6, 1: KiBDI 01 SDi b? nifl-' "'ilX nK nS11!<1 ; is. 6, 8: y^'CKI I52b< ■'51N bip riH. The rendering of yspll in S osculata est is unwarranted; Si Z^m.] , (3) The nt3 in TltrffliJl HMI is indefinite (GK", § 137, c) = wftai(ever) *aZai^ -..oijoio , but i n t N i-^^z? >ojiD or ,_Ai^Zj l*^*^- . The 1 in y^\V^ (®^ ««' icrrai uoi) is the TFaw apodosis,' cf. n. on ^"lil (1, 17). S supplies before this T : — {was du auch ver- langst). ®^ inserts in the present verse before kol non^a-o) croi: — avdyyeiXov fjtoi; and in v. 6, before Iws rnxia-ovs t^s ;8ao-t\etas imv. — airrfirai {cf. Mark 6, 22: cuTrjo-ov /ie o iav ^e'Xgs, Kai Swcro) croi). 3 etiam si dimidiam partem regnipetieris,dabiturtibi; % TllSba niabsib ^"'$'3. Tm, DX ib^Si^ "lb rr^D'^SriS ; ^ ^»^^ ^aoi-^ZZ -^Zr, S^r^ qL^SiN Jl^r^ disregards the TFaw apodosis; so, too, LB awcft die Hctlfte des Kdnigthums soil dir gegeben werden and AV it shall be even given thee to the half of the kingdom,. (4) m lb is preferable to SC "Kh ; contrast Dtlb (v. 8). For lani see n. on ''Tt^T\ (4, 16). (5) The view (AoF 3, 36) that 5, 5-8 is merely an erroneous repetition of 7, 1 is gratuitous. (6) 111 'nribSjllIJ must be read tinbllj ; see last n. on 2, 15. (7) The 5 at the end of this verse corresponds to our — . There should be a dash, not a colon in K's Textbibel; also the Athuah in TlTCpS (v. 8) is equivalent to a dash. E starts to tell the King what her petition and request is. She begins: My petition and request — then she hesitates and decides to wait another day; she therefore invites the King to dine with her a second time when she will answer his ques- tion (so, correctly, B and Wd). The idea, that it would be better to wait another day, comes to her while she adds the humble qualification: if the King is kindly disposed toward me, and if it seem proper to the King to grant my petition and to accede to my request. (8) The last clause of v. 8, 'put] "Qli niCyS Itiai , shows that the explanation given above is the correct interpretation of vv. 7. 8. T!f this last clause were omitted, we might interpret: My request is (= all I ask is simply) that the King dine with me again. S supplies in his translation after my request: — besteht darin, following 3 petitio mea et preces sunt istae (just as LB and AV supply is at the end of v. 7) but in the nn. he gives the correct explanation; cf. n. on 4, 7. M "ina (S r^) is generally read mohhar and supposed to be a 6,9-11 Paul Haupt 159 contraction of 'ItlK^ .* the part. Pual of ^ni!< ; but the initial 53 is a remnant of QV , day, just as the final D iu DlTDblD , the day before yesterday, lit. the third day; cf. the remarks on KhSih. ; in nn. on 4, 14. The adverb "1)153 is shortened from "iHj^ 'OT' , ® b5"l)153i"' or ■;iri53i'' , for Sins nr , inns or; «/. Heb. -linns nr (Prov.Yi,25; is!" so, 8). For the long d cf. jzsjo = JZ| + s . The original meaning is posterior day, subsequent day, following day; contrast Ptirst's dictionary (edited by K) 1, 724*. The form T\tri2 (constr. T\tV2) must be a com- T t; T ~ t: T pound of I^inu<+DV; ^^^ feni. form t^^lTIS rnay be a contraction of T t: T T t: T fl^inX; of. tZ^r^\, at last and ll^fl, at first {SG\ §155) also TTiB (=K'^n3 pftraiat, ZDMG 61, 194, n.2) Gen. 49,22; see Genesis 111,35 and GK2', § 80, g. (9) In yj Sbl Qp sbl the two verbal forms are participles in the accusative (Dp = U-sLs) not perfect forms. It is not necessary to say 5T Sbl dp Sb Sim ; see Kings 136, 38 and cf. n. on fnW (v. 2). @^ Kol firj irpoa-Kvvei /nc, but S oUia ''b-.IZZi )3o >oj5 jlo (in 4, 4 S has i-L^IZZ] = bnbnmril)- Nor does JT Sbl mean er machte nicht Platz (S). 3 sed nee motum quidem de loco sessionis suae; LB noch sich vor ihm bewegte ; AV nor moved for him. In (S^ we find the correction : Kal ovK iiaviaTr) ov8k iTp6fJi,rj(Tev dir' avTov. (10) For 12317 (* '-^'1 , ^ Zares) @'"' read Zaa-apa (Vet. Lat. Zosarra) and @^: Sutrapa, i. e. 11237 ; for the <» cf. ®^ Btopa^i? = SrijS (1, 10). The form Zwa-dpa is probably influenced by the Greek name Zwcrdpiov. Joseph us reads Zapacra (with variants). Jensen conjectured that 12317 was a cor- ruption of I231j = Qiri(ri)sa, the name of an Elamite goddess; cf. ''iniBl (1, 9) and for j = 7 : Ezekiel 114, 31 and <5^ A^ara^a = xnanS, ®* ZritSaeada = ^1132 ; see nn. on 1, 10. For Babyl. 3 = p see VG § 45, t (cf. ibid, h, 13). Jensen is now inclined to identify 12317 with the Babyl. goddess of wine, Siresu (see Genesis 81, 34; Pur. 30, 34; 31, 25) just as he accepts Graetz's (or rather J. D. Michaelis') combination of Q^llS and rillS (see Pur. 50, 2; cf. n. on 3, 7) but his former explana- tion is preferable. According to % 12)17 was 133> flHS "'Snn 1111 am ; for ■'Dnn = ■']ni23'l cf. n. on 1in (l, 6). Ch thinks (EB 5411) that 12317 is a mutilated form of tlSI^ ; cf. Ch's explanation of TllBl (1, 9). (11) Hitzig's conjecture VDS HI; die Fulle seines Ansehns (cf. ju=».) = his great distinction (endorsed by B) is just as gratuitous (con- trast Q-'lZJIS for D"'123ia , Nah. 2, 4) as his emendation J-i1i23 bS 111531 1535 (1, 22). Sfiliorumque turbam, S -oiIldj ii-^anjo = M VJl 11 (cf. 9, 10). *Iii BDB 5S3^ 1nl3 ia connected with Assyr. maxru, front; but /roret means past, and bacTc = future ; cf. SFG 15, u. 3. 160 Ceitioal Notes on Esther 5,12—6,1 M bS before "ibafl ib'^a "ITflS is impossible; all that wherewith he had advanced him (B: alles das womit ihn der KOnig gross gemacht) would require the insertion of 11 after ib'^a ; of. -jban "Q licb TfflK (see Kings 169, 33) 6, 8; also 0^13 1)13 Tffl^ W'a^'D in 9, 22. Cases like Ifjlp ^^m bi nii (4, 7; 6, 13) are quite different; cf. also 10, 2. S's explanation, all with regard to which the King had advanced him (LB Alles wie ihn der Konig so gross gemacht hatte ; AV all the things wherein the King had promoted him) is not natural; cf. the remarks on the common mistranslation of the phrase inblU .... "I123S , Nah. 24, below, and n. on ilb ixb53 "ITUX (7, 5). We must insert bS before D'^-ncn , following 3, 1 and S p'^l tob7:i TTTT "'11^ ^T n7J IT'I iiSb^aT ^nnyi "il^mi bi ''iby Sr^SpTT ; ^ swper omwes principes et servos suos. In S Q-iNvi ^j-si^ Vs VLo {J^'^oi "V^ ai Vi ■ nlo) bi appears before 1133? , where it is less appropriate. (12) ilW nb K1"lp (« (^ U] ^V^ ; cf. SG^, § 279, A) means in- vited by her (so Wd) not to her (LB, AV, S) = ® nnib "iMlTa !J5Di< ; cf. mrT'b nu* nil^n (Ruth 3, lO) and n. on 4, 3. (13) m "1125^ nS" bDa means as long as (LB, AV, S, K) not when- ever (B). ®""' orav, but 3 quamdiu. M VS is construct state before the relative clause; cf. ITBX DIp'P (4; 2; 8, 17) and Kings 285, 5. (14) M yyjl TCyi does not refer to H, but is impersonal; cf. the re- marks on b'^Bn in nn. on 3, 7 and n. on 6, 9. o]_o) waiting (not standing, AV stand- eth) see n. on 5, 1. (6) For nilZJyb na cf. n. on 1, 15. J5l ■'3X153 "iriV "Ip"' niTIiyb does not mean to confer more honor than on me (B mehr Ehre als mir ; also Wd mehr als, AV more than to myself) but to confer honor except on me {&''^ el ix,ri i/j.€, 3 nullum alium nisi; LB wem, anders denn mir, K ausser) S translates ausser mir, but in his nn. he says, "'3533 "llHl^ means mehr als ich; cf. n. on 4, 7. M ■'353a "inV (® "^353 TT\'' , S ^»i:-.? .^ j-iSw*) means beyond me, beside me, in addition to me. Nor does "IQ tCiT mean more than in Ecclesiastes, as Wd states. In Eccl. 2, 15 'itT means exceedingly, extremely, very; in 7, 11 it means exceeding; superior, better; in 7, 16: exceeding, over, too; in 12,9: beyond, in addition to ; in 12, 12: besides (see Eccl.). 162 Critical Notes on Esther 6,7-9 (7) The prefixed nominative absolute, at the end of this verse, "ITUJ^ '1I3''J!< ^'T)^'2 ysH 'ib/Jtl, does not reflect the verblendete Wjerstilrzung of H, as Wd supposes; this construction is by no means abrupt (B) in Semitic; c/.GK", §M3,c, footnote; WdG2,256; SG^, §317; Dillmann, Ethiop. gi?, p. 446 (Eng. translation, p. 505). (8) For the phrase -^b^jn 11 IZJnb niri!!^ (® XS' XV^. iTC^ab ''I s^niibab bs ■'i nan «iba , but s u:^^ -'^^?) see n. on bi (5,11). The last clause of this verse, iTUi^-Q Uliba TQ "jriS "n23i!<1 , is a tertiary scribal expansion, derived (c/, n. on 8, 14) from the secondary addition in 8, 15 (nbTl3 lilT H'ltjyi) and "iiax is a quaternary gloss. If we omit 112X) the suflSx in 1'U3i("Q refers to the man who is to be honored (just as the Maccabean prototype of M, Jonathan, was honored by King Alexander Balas; see 1 M 10, 20. 61; Pur. 6, 35; cf. also third n. on 9, 16) but llBJ^^a tTlSb^J ^ln5 IDD iTBitl can mean only on whose head (referring to the horse) a golden crown has been placed (so % B, K, Wd, s). In 2c tT^^'\2 stiisbaT Kb'^bi nn'^n-'s "Ti the suffix refers to the horse, the clause being coordinated to the preceding relative clause (sniSbMb b^l NaVl) NSba "lb? lit '''] (S^DIDI)- I, LB, and AV, however, do not refer the suffix to the horse: 3 et {homo debet) accipere regium diadema super caput suum, LB (den Mann .... soil man herbringen) doss man die konigliche Krone auf sein Haupt seize, AV and the crown royal which is set upon his (scil. the King's) head (this would require transposition of IVQ TffiSt : — HllDbS "inS'l lU35^"il "iriD "iTBit). M "ITBS was inserted by a reader to whom the f\*|5b52 "ins on the head of M seemed too gross an exaggeration; cf. n. on the gloss D^'SI D'^H"' (1, 4). If the final clause, fiisba *in5 "DDI lT23iS"l!3 ) were original, we should expect a reference to ln1Sb53 "llTlb in V. 10, after OlDil tlStl 'fflinbn fli^ !np ; also in v. 11. It is possible that this gloss iTTXia niiblJ "ItlD "iriDI stood originally after lirabni Tip-^zi yan "^ban iibs^ ir-a^n n^^ . m in; is, of course, perfect Nif'al, not impf. Qal (Maurer) for "jFl3 (see Judges 57, 42). Nor is it necessary to read 'iDFl'^'l or ItlS"''! (B) for "ipiJI , especially if this gloss stood originally after "1j1 ibnbn'l • In ®^ this clause is omitted; in ©^ a hand of the 7'^ cent, has added in the margin (after the clause "ib'Q'n Vby 3D"I "IIBS DIDI) the correction Kal Sod-qTn) 8id8riiM jSao-iXews eiri T^v KeaXij's for TBtt") "^isH (^ rr'TT'^i by qt:yna , & "■•■■' . ■=mVi, 3 operto capite) is corrected in ®^ to KaTaKCKoXv/jiiJ.ei'oi K£<^a\^v. J's conjecture, that the original text was not TUKI or Id"! , but TCTl » is destitute of all probability. (13) The Dagesh forte conjunctivum (GK^, § 20, k) lb"1"ia>5"'1 is due to the enclitic character of "lb ; of- the Dagesh in >(2"ni3'lpS &c for XS"naipX (Cant. 73, ad Cant. 3, 2; Proverbs 67, 41) also Arab. l»Lc bo Jj ,5 fl-ktilli-ma 'ftmin; Uo JuJj" qalllumma; Lo U^ la'i^mma, with great difficulty; LcwJy* LiLi. Lo (j«uJ| LoLi *I believe, of course, that E is entirely flotitious (see Pur. 21, 35). I merely try to defend the author of E against unwarranted criticisms of modern expositors (cf. e. g. nn. on 2, 10; 3, 14; 7, 7; 8, 11- 13; 9, 3) just as my paper on Jonah's Whale (cf. AJSL 23, 255) in the Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, vol. 46, pp. 151-164 (1907) is not a vindication of the historical character of this Sadducean apologue (about 100 b. 0.) but a refutation of some unfounded objections raised by modern students of the Bible. 164 Critical Notes on Esther 6,14—7,4 ia'&mmt 'n-nSsu-ma* hasa Quraisan (WdG 2,224, D; 276, B; 343, B) &c. The Dagesh or'thophonicum (GK^', § 13, c) in 1 Vbiin (c/. 7, 3: ''ln5 translates: ^?3Co ^oaiJ 13 )-i\Vi\e, that they (the sa- traps) should not annoy the King; hm] ("I^Jl) means not only to do harm, but also to annoy, molest, irritate. In Ezr. 4, 13 pTDtiri d'^ibS means: she (Jerusalem) will give the great King (cf. ZDMG 61, 289, 17; Nah. 30, below) trouble. Jerusalem cannot injure the great King, but the city may give him trouble. The clause pTUnn D^'Sb/O QhSif^l certainly does not mean: thou shalt endamage the revenue of the Kings (AV). z , LB und ihr Vornehmen wird den Konigen Schaden bringen ; but ®'' reads 1 Esdr. 4, 13: koL Trpoi tovtov; fiaaiXmaiv 6)(XtJ(tov(tiv (cf. end of next paragraph). In Ezra 4, 15 "jj^'ial "piba mpTiHS means, not hurtful (AV) but troublesome for the great King (6 /tcyas jSatriXtus) and the provinces (the satraps) and T'zhl2 flpTStlb , at the end of v. 22: to the trouble (or annoyance) of the great King (not to the hurt of the kings; so AV). iW CnSS in Ezra 4, 13 is certainly not a noun meaning revenue, but an adverb with the meaning eventually, finally, ultimately. injustice. The original reading may have been the abbreviated genitive of oxXr/o-ts, trouble, annoyance (cf. oxXov irapexciv, to give trouble, &c). ^ it3b72"7 i!33 means he was surprised, taken by surprise, overtaken (Ger. uberrumpelt) not he was afraid (so AV). Arab, oob means to happen unexpectedly, to come or fall upon a person suddenly and unexpectedly (jusJ lil !i.XiS). The noun RXxj denotes a surprising event, a sudden attack. 6^'- irapaxOri, which is used in 4, 4 for bribHWril ; 3 obstupuit. S "^izzl ; so, too, in 4, 4 for bribrmrT) . ® Q''a3>nT23"'X . (7) For the pregnant construction, ■jn'^nn flSj bit. Dp "^bani, cf. the last paragraph of nn. on 4, 4. W's conception of this passage is entirely wrong. It is perfectly natural that the King leaves the room and goes to the garden. In the first place, he was very much incensed and did not like to give vent to his anger in the presence of the Queen; many a man who is enraged will get up and leave the room rather than speak out in the presence of his wife. Moreover, the King wanted to have time to think the situation over. H was grand vizier and had no doubt a number of powerful adherents; so he could not be disposed of without due consideration. B states that the King went to the park um in der freien Luft die erste Hitze des Zorns verrauchen zu lassen und zu uberlegen, welche Strafe liber H zu verh&ngen sei. The King's suspicion had been aroused as soon as he learned from the oflScial records that M, not H, had discovered the conspiracy {cf. n. on 6, 10). The 7,8 Paul Haupt 169 statement that the King left the room and went to the garden, is not a grober und geradezu unerkldrlicher Compositionsfehler (W 18; con- trast C 181, below). In a di-amatic performance (see Pur. 38, 31; 12, 1) the audience would wait in breathless expectation for the reappearance of the King. When the King returned, he knew, of course, that H had no idea of assaulting the Queen; his remark. Is he going to assault the Queen while I am at home ? is a cruel jest (C 200 calls it todtende Ironie). It showed how the King was disposed toward H (C 200 says: In diesen furchtbar ironischen Worten lag H's Todesurtheil). For ■^rr'nn ns: see nn. on 1, 5. For "l^fly, remained (not stood up, AV; % surrexit; & Jqjs) see n. on 5, 1. For 'T'bs read vbs ; see n. on 1, 17. S> |JwA.^.a v»oialii, (^ ^'^HJ (8) The pointing ^33 implies that H threw himself at the feet of E (c/. 8, 3) when the King returned. The translation had thrown himself (AV was fallen, S war niedergef alien, K war niedergesunken, 3 reperit Aman super lectulum corruisse) would require the pointing bS2 ; for ~ T the pluperfect of. n. on 1, 9. The participle is more dramatic. Also iT25 is participle, not perfect. After ["Itaan bS we may supply (but not insert) n''b:;in p''Tnnb or n^banb pviib -, cf rbann prnni (2 k 4, 27) and iKpdTr, if he wanted to clasp, or kiss, the feet of the Queen. A man may kiss the hem of the garment of a lady to show his humble devotion to her; but her husband may misinterpret it. S's rendering vor dem Diwan is inac- curate. If H had fallen down before the couch, the King could not have made his cruel jest. Heb. by cannot mean before; it might mean close to, hard by; cf . GB» 534^, 3, c. This bj is different from -p^TS bj {cf. our phrase to sit over a meal) &c {Kings 134, 27). If a man sits very close to a lady in a crowded car, he sits almost upon her. S> has in 8, 3 -oioli^- V:^ i.l:^o for Tb^'\ ""DSb bSDI . For tltaa = lectulus convivalis (Talmud. HDM) see BL 68. *Syr. Dia is a transposed doublet {cf. HUblS = Th'dSS) of 1133 = biSy = bttS ; see last n. on c. 7; cf. AJSL 23, 245 ( Jts = c Ji) and 247 {&'f= r^) ^1^° ^^^^- (•T^ = Jk^' (Ijj i^iOmS VoS J^I (•vsi). C/. last n. on 4, 4. 170 Critical Notes on Esther 7,9 For rr^ai ^W niban nS irinib Dan see conclusion of first n. on V. 7; D3 corresponds to the Gar. etwa gar (so, correctly, S) cf. etiam (Cic. Tusc. 2, 7, 17) and qjtn Job 40, 8; Gen. 18, 13. 23; Am. 2, 11. ilH lUl^ib is not inf. with the prefixed preposition b > but impf. with prefixed emphatic b ; see Proverbs 52, 11; AJSL 22, 201, 1. 18; contrast GK^', § 114, i, note 1 ; see also my paper on the scriptio plena of emphatic la- (Hb) in OLZ 10, 305, and the remarks on Hag. 1, 9 in nn. on 3, 7. W 18 remarks, the King does not say the Queen, which would be more correct and more impressive, he says: soil denn dem Weibe in meinem Hause Gewalt angethan werdenf It is true that (S''^ have rrjv yvvaiKa, but M has tl'Dbl^tl tlX ; so, too, SM. On the other hand, ©^ has ■^ jSao-iXtcrtra in 1, 19 where the omission of this title in JSl is inten- tional. ill inin refers, of course, to the cruel jest of the King (see con- clusion of first n. on v. 7) not to a special command to execute H, as B supposes; the order to put the grand vizier to death is given at the end of V. 9 in the words 1''by iMbfl • For 'ISrt {3 statim operueruni faciem ejus) read, with Condamin {Revue biblique, 7, 2, 258-261, cited by S) and Perles (Analekten, p. 32; 1"i2n , as in i/' 34, 6, following (S^ SieTpamj t ^^a-z] .^-iooi? y.oias]o, but % ""ISXI SnnS IS'^SninK larn- S da stand H schmachbedecM follows 2C; but in his nn. he says: Owing to the reference to 6, 12, the reading of the received text is preferable: there M (sic/) was a mjj^l ''13)1 ; now H's head is covered. S adds: Cf. for the game of dice, that took place between H and M, 3, 7; 9, 24-26. — If S had been able to carry his own notes through the press, he would probably have suppressed these remarks; cf. n. on 4, 7. (9) For JlSlnifl see nn. on 1, 10. According to ®^ the eunuch who suggested the impalement of Haman was not nSIH'lll > but Bovya^av = "llTljn who had been impaled according to 2, 23; see n. on 2, 22. M HDn D3 does not mean Hue accedit quod (S). It implies an ellipsis, just as the D3 in ^'D dj (Kuth 2, 21) I might also state that, or DS in "y^m ■'i CiH (Gen. 3, 1) which corresponds to our by the way or d, propos; cf. also Hi^'^^n btb Dit in 5; 12. Harbonah thinks H is a TiVZ "p, ; be ought to be impaled, and we have not only a malefactor worthy of impalement, behold! there is also (Q^) the pole which H set up for M.* If we render this D3i by Why, we have again an ellipsis: Why, there is the pole means originally: Why don't you impale himf There is the stake &c. * H's pole is a May-pole ; see Pur. 11, 23 ; BL 102. 8,1 Paul Haupt 171 M -jban by niti-ia^ ^iriK (c/. l S 25, SO; Jer. 32, 42) could mean only who made kind remarks about the King, (AV who has spoken good for the King, LB der Gutes filr den KOnig geredet hat) but not who did the King a good turn or who rendered the King a great service (S der doch filr des Kdnigs Heil gesorgt hatte). We must point ^^'1 iit3 and insert ^533 before this. <5^ has simply MapSoxatiu t<3 XaX^travrt vepl rov pao-iXcot's, in (S^ a corrector has added aya6d. Also ©■' reads t6v MapSop^aiov rov AaXijo-ovTa dya^o. Trepl Toiv /8a. Ja- mil a means a good deed, a favor, benefit. In Assyrian, on the other hand, tGru gimilli, to return a deed (HW 198'') means, as a rule, to return an evil deed, to retaliate. Our verb to retaliate means now especially to retaliate injuries, but formerly one could say also to re- taliate favors; to retaliate a visit meant to return a call, to repay a visit. Similarly to requite may mean to recompense, to reward or to retaliate, to punish; cf. 133"''©!!^ Xb (=lb I'^ll)!!* aTjCH or rfUJH H^H 11Z3S"I by ib'Oj) verily I will punish him (or them) in Am. 1. 2 (see OLZ 10, 306)." The stem b^U is a secondary modification of bHi (Arab. J>»S) with partial assimilation of the initial 5 to the sonant nasal (cf. Nah. 31, below) and b53a is also allied to ^a^;* cf. xj/ 57, 3 ("'by "123 bsb) and Nah. 26, below; 45, below, f The original root is D5 (Nah. 35, below). (7/. also Assyr. kamSlu, to be revengeful, to resent, be indig- nant; kimiltu, resentment, anger = ^1^2lp2 (HW 335''). Just as to retaliate was formerly used in the sense of to repay or return a favor &c, so the verb to resent could formerly be used in a good sense = to receive with satisfaction. n (1) J thinks that Jib S{ see GK", § 112, p. The idea (AoF 3, 3, below) that the final l in "ila^i is due to Per- sian influence is just as fanciful as the explanation of "ItT'Q ; see conclu- sion of nn. on 1, 5. The constr. of pas^ should be liziS , not p3i^ ; similarly the constr. of ".nblB should be inb^J > not inb'ilj ; cf- nn. on ]lrr^ (1, 5) and tl^alTfl (4, 11). (7) The clause D^IIIT'a IT' nb;S "i;2i< by is a gloss, just as 31113'^ 1125^1 by D'^iirr'n by aion ia>^ nyin inairn?:] (9, 25) is not original. The King did not give the order: vby IPlbn (7, 9) because H had planned to exterminate all the Jews in the Persian empire; this plan had been sanctioned by the King. H was impaled because he had deceived the King {cf. second n. on 6, 10). The alleged assault on the Queen was merely a pretext (cf. n. on 7, 7). The gloss nbuJ "llfli^ by D''lin''U IT" is derived from 9, 25 just as the scribal expansions in vv. 3 and 5. (8) iil CIIHTI by (so, too, S) means, of course, concerning the Jews (3 rStlliT' Va3) not to the Jews (B). LB and AV for the Jews. 8,9 Paul Haupt 173 S in Betreff der Juden. Wd says, Q^TinTl bS may mean in Betreff der Juden or an die Juden ; he thinks this equivocal phrase is inten- tional inasmuch as the letters were sent both to the satraps concerning the Jews and to the Jews themselves. But this view is erroneous; cf. third paragraph of nn. on v. 9. ^ (9, 21). Jensen combines vj-^l-" with the cuneiform name of a star {Procyonf) xabagirflnu (HW 268*). The intervocalic 6 became v (ZA 19, 285; contrast AG^, § 57, a) and this may have been elided; cf. also Heb. 'n^'lX formflgar=ma5ar = ma5gar = mansar (stem "i^ZJ) and -jIDX (2 K 4, 2) = '^IDM, nilMTflX = n^iaira , nnna^ = nnnaa ; see Kings 241, 24. For d'^lin"'!! bs^ (ai ]"'XTin"' nib , ®^ lyp6.y, toTs 'louSatW) read, following S, 'iJl by, as in the preceding verse; cf. nn. on 7, 7 (Vb^ for Vby) and 1, 17. This '•'Irj b? must be connected with the preceding 174 Ceitioal Notes on Esther 8,io clause ii1"ia ni2S "n23>{ bSi , not with ^'HT'] ■ On the other hand, the bK before D^jSITCHS (see n. on 3, 12) depends, not on J-jllS , but on ilTlS"'! • S, correctly, l-kVa^ Vi^ .jij^oio ^sLs^ >Of^ '^a osijo . The instructions were, of course, sent to the Persian officials, not to the Jews. The "i before D''!32T7T23r!S{n bs must be omitted; it was added after bS had been miswritten bs • The prefixed *! is omitted in &; on the other hand S has in 9, 2 jiNsi; jiu^^:^ ^gi\n-i^o .oov^'iajis instead of "^ban nii'^na bsi on^^ys; c/. also nn. on 9, lo. 29. The proclamation was to be made known to all the peoples (bsb '''1^3 D^533') in the Persian empire; in this way the Jews learned of it, so that they could organize armed resistance to defend their lives and protect their property. M learned what had happened, when H's decree was published in Susa (4, 1) although H had, of course, sent qo special mes- sage to M. Contrast D^lin^H bS bi* D^ISD tlbTfl^l in 9, 20. The gloss DSItflbSI D3lnS5 D^'IIHTI bs^l, at the end of the present verse, is due to the misreading D'^TliT^tl biJi instead of '^H b? • The Jews have always adopted the language of the country in which they settled; the Persian Jews understood Persian, just as the Alexandrian Jews spoke Greek; it was not necessary to write to them in Heb. or Aramaic; cf. n. on last clause of c. 1. (10) The verbal forms nni^l, Dt^ri"''!, )lb'U3''1 are impersonal; cf. remarks on ^HS 1125t< (v. 5) and b''Sin (3, 7). ©'' iypdri, e(T(j)payL(Tdri, and i^w7r€<7TeiXav; but it is not necessary to read 3n3''1, although S renders clsZlsZ]o ; nor need we read (with J) 'irib'lD''1 • For D"!^"!, couriers see n. on 3, 13. M D^DIDi is an explanatory gloss to the following 'ffliin "'ni'l • Another glossator has added the Pers. term Q'^Dimcnxn , and "'il D''lj/J"in is a tertiary explanation of this antiquarian gloss; cf. v. 14 where D^Sa")!! ■'D3 is omitted. ®^ has for "^nSh d"'ClCn D"'2^n T'D D''S7Jin ''33 H'^Siri'fflnHn lUi^n slmply 8ta ^i^Aia<^dpw (3 per vere- darios) and at the beginning of v. 14 @^ substitutes for ^^il D'^lS'in CD'lln'OriKil ITSin the term oi 'nnrw (3 veredarii celeres) but a correc- tor has added in ffi^: Koi iTn/BaTai tS>v iropiuiv ol /AeyicrTaves- S omits the gloss D''D1D3) and substitutes for the antiquarian gloss, giving the Pers. name of the royal horses, a Pers. word for the couriers : — j^^o Isi^'i v»Ls i-«j? ^k2i5 jjs^] f^^o ]4a\'i f-L^ ^■^i-4, • -"^^^ ^^^ Waw explicative in ^j^o cf. n. on 1, 17. LB reitende Boten auf jungen Maulthieren, AV posts on horseback, and riders on mules, camels and young dromedaries. According to Ed. Meyer, Geschichte des Alter- thums, 3, 67 both D'^SItT^nX and WyoTi ''Si refer to the couriers, not to their horses; but this is erroneous. J considers D^ClDH Q'^^'l a ridiculous combination; but modern couriers often travel on horseback 8,10 Paul Haupt 175 (or in automobiles) although courier means originally runner. We also have now mounted infantry. JSl 1I33"| means raf-'ers; this might mean race-horses ov swift drom- edaries; but Herod. 5, 14; 8, 98 favor the meaning race-horse; see Kings 80, 45. ® Kal tois S.p[w.cn - nSlbl instead of irlD^bl (1 K 5, 8) is not good; no scribe would have corrupted niD"l into Ti:5"i ; cf. remarks on the emendation KXiJptuv for vfiS>v in nn. on 3, 7. Heb. 1231^1 , property means originally mount = animal for riding; cf. Assyr. rukilsu (see Ezra 57, 38) whereas Syr. li«i n means originally property and then especially animal for riding. In Mic. 1, 13 "ilJilb nil3l53n UTTi is corrupt; it cannot mean bind the chariot to the swift beast; but the meaning of the passage may be: Abandon the chariot for the racer, i. e. try to get away as quickly as possible, not in a chariot, but on the back of a swift horse. M Dtl"! may be a corruption of """mtil , although the reading of M is confirmed by <5 i/'d^os = DPl"! = l^-^' (not = ^Mzn , as Marti supposes). S )-fcs?? ]l n-i-,-sn .^i-^ ; cf. Gen. 46, 29: t-^o oiJuasjio ..aioa-k = iri^Si"!^ FiDI'' 'HDii"''! • Heb. lUtl"! to cast down may mean to cast off; cf. -I'^blBn 2 K 7, 15; Eccl. 3, 6, and % PlSTflti^Fl (Ex. 23, 11). ' "'■'■' M CSimcHK^n is derived from Old Pers. khsatra, dominium; so it means dominicus. Instead of D''3"in'!2JriKn we must point D''5"imfi!nHn •t::--;t •t;-:-t {cf. n. on 3, 12). This was the name of the horses kept for the personal use of the King (cf. 6, 8: -Tb^ari Vb? 151 "1113 !!* DID)- The horses (saddle horses and teams) kept by a landed proprietor for his personal use are often called in Germany Herrschaftspferde (i. e. seignevirial or manorial horses) in distinction from the Wirthschaftspferde, i. e. the farm-horses, work-horses, &c. B (436, 3) correctly states : Wir milssen wohl an herrschaftliche Pferde denken, welche in kOniglichen Gestuten gi'oss gezogen wurden ; cf . the Ger. Trakehner. ® "'D'^^bltJ"!? , ^ "^b'^tiU (naked) seems to be a corruption of sbstilS , courier, and SI Jtbutll!^ is a transposition (cf. footnote to n. on 7, 7) of J^lbstJ — Syr. I jNo; = tabellarius. Cf. conclusion of seventh n. on 7, 4 (Jip''2T'1iJ^ = !!^p''TD'l!!^) and Kings 84, 3; see also last n. on 4, 4. For Q^D5a"in "'33 > which would mean sons of the herdsmen (cf . Syr. Vaic? , herdsman) we must read Q^S^JI ^3n , t ^ons of the herds or * T : studs, i. e. bred in the royal studs for the special use of the King. In Syriac, j-a:^^ means a fterd, especially of horses; in the Talmud, 'n53"l seems to denote a cross between a jackass and a mare, i. e. a mule ; instead fin the same way D'^'ffi'lSi Aorses must be pointed D'^lB'IBi not D'^lDIB ; the latter per form (Syr. (-^J.^) means horsemen. The objections raised by Arnold (JBL 24, 45) are not valid. It is true that we use horse for horsemen. 176 Ceitical Notes on Esthes 8, u of tlSl'l it would be better to read 'HB"! (= ramak). Nor does Arab. JtCo^ rSmaka denote a blood-horse, bred in a stud; in fact, it means an inferior mare. But such changes of meaning are not uncommon; the word mare means in German (Mahre) a mean or poor horse, a jade ; (j-S^ hajln means in classical Arabic of low origin, a mean or poor horse, but in modern Arabic it is used for fast dromedary. The etymo- logical equivalent of knave in German, Knappe, means squire of a knight, while in modern English, knave is used for rogue. J's objections against the interpretation sons of the studs are gratuitous. Cf. Fleischer in Levy's Talmudic dictionary, 4, 487". The stem -j^Q^ may be Semitic; it may be a transposition of Q15 ; cf. Arab. rvJjS' karim, noble and our well-bred. The primitive meaning is dug = tilled, culti- vated, cultured; see AJSL 23, 247; cf. conclusion of preceding note. (11) The clause Q'^Tin^'b "ib^lTI IHS TBi^ means, of course, that (AV, incorrectly wherein; so, too, C 217) H; S wodurch) the King had given (permission) to the Jews (cf. 'IlnS'', 9, 13, and Kings, 113, 7) not which he had given to the Jews, referring to the horses. S's statement that the King presented those horses to the Jews is unwarranted. JH btlpnb does not mean to assemble, but to organize themselves, to take concerted action. ®^ interprets this to mean -xp^crdai tois vdftois avrSiv; cf. 1 M 6, 59: crTi;o' *i\-iS . LB die sie dngstigten is misleading; AV, correctly, that would assault them. S's suggestion, that we should supply D''Tin''b "lb7jn "llTlD after Onn D''["l]"l2n is gratuitous; at any rate this addition would be just as superfluous as the second tTlTS after tllD'^TJ^b nHDni in 2, 18. It is probably due to his misunderstanding of the clause "jbMn "jtlS 1123^ D"'Tin*'b at the beginning of this verse. S's note, Die Lesart (DflX D''"liJn instead of dnsi D"'"!"!;!!!) ist zweifelhaft, da man nicht erwarten wird, doss diese Bedrdnger von Weibem und Kindern werden angegriffen iverden, is due to some uncorrected misunderstanding, just as the remarks referred to in n. on 4, 7. M Q"'iBj1 nti is a scribal expansion derived from 3, 13 (see Pur. 34, 5) but S's remark, von Weibem und Kindern hatte man schwerlich Gefahr fur sein Leben zu befurchten is unwarranted: a heathen woman might assault a Jewish woman, a heathen boy might attack a Jewish boy; some heathen children might kill an old Jew &c. M Tinb DbblBl D""l!331 ~,t2 is a gloss derived from 3, 13 {cf. n. on D"'Sirn , V. 14). The phrase pT lyi lyS?^ is omitted by the glosssator in the present passage. but D''biri!353 > i. e. they take a personal interest in the matter; cf. n. on 2, 9. For Wbrai^ read wbti^'u ■ Also the clause SlT'ari IIBTCI ilDM Mill (®^ Uf-rier) 8e to Trpoar- ray/M Koi iv Sowois) is a scribal expansion derived from 3, 15 (contrast B). S takes 'ijl Jl3n3 as a relative clause, coordinating rniril to "ibiSn "ims : — Uh^ ^*'n*^ ro^-^l? |Jr-°°^^° l^^^-a*- Similarly S renders: und das Dekret war gegeben in der Konigsburg zu Susa, i. e. and the decree (which the couriers were ordered to transmit to the satraps) had been given in the royal castle of Susa (K: the couriers left .... as soon as the decree had been given in the castle of Susa; this would be '1:^1 •jp^ftD ; cf- n. on 3, 4). (15) For lini fibiri (which is omitted in (S^; but vpovv i®' Trepi.-ir6p light is especially appropriate inasmuch as M and E were originally gods of light; see Pur. 9, 36; 10, 32; 11, 20; 22, 6; 26, 34; cf. MDOG, No. 33, p. 35, below; also ZDMG 61, 287, 21. (17) ®^ prefixes to ImiSdiiov = D'^lfT'tlM the verb irepiere/jixivTo lau. B^ substitutes TrepierefjivovTo for D''nn''n53 (® ■(■'"l^'^jim)- S has simply ^moZLUi . C's emendation d''1)T'ln53 is imnecessary. It is possible that Q'^lilTlM means Judaizing in the sense of sympathizing with the Jews, favorably disposed toward the Jews; cf. Hellenizers &c; Arab. lUAJkiu taqaiiasa means to side with Qais (WdG 1, 37). Contrast fin^bs D^ibsn 0,27). 180 Critical Notes on Esther 9,1.2 t3 (1) (S" has here Tpto-KatSeKarg = DV ^125 mrlblTQ ; so, too, in 8, 12; contrast last n. on 3, 7. In ®^ a corrector has substituted Teo-orapeo-icat- SeKaTTj. For nnn tllbirb Q^l'in^n ■'n^i^ T^aiB "nSSl Dm S has simply ^oaiin'y,-S\^\, depending (contrast SG^ §249, D) on the preceding oj-a^^iinv. = niiaynb . Both clauses, D-'iin^n '^n^s i^nir "nrs ora dnn tiibinb and drr'XDba nan o^nin^n itibin'' "iibk seem to be scribal expansions. The pronoun j>5'in does not refer to QV , as B and Wd state; 'I'iSnSI !><'in means it was changed (Keil) —S> ]Z, . os A^ii^-i-*-! . AV it was turned to the contrary. (2) il« ibnpD (so, too, 9, 16) is pluperfect; cf. nn. on t^T\W (1, 9) and bnpnb (8, 11). The apodosis does not begin with ibnpD (AV, K) but with lianDI (LB) cf. n. on ^nil (1, 17). For Onyi ■'TCpSH ■S has .ooiJ-kis -^-inS-t . The meaning of the Heb. phrase is undoubtedly who tried to do them bodily harm &c, not ■who were unfriendly disposed; cf. Num. 35, 23 ("lb H'^lil 52 ^2^1, who can endure His I I I fury. Heb. "1)2'$ , to abide may mean endure, remain firm, and Q'lp , to stand may have the same meaning (cf. to stand fire &c). Nor is it necessary to read Dn"'D93 (^ "lin'^SKZ) as in Josh. 10, 8; 21, 42; 23,9. Wd's statement, Es ivird nicht gesagt, dass die Heiden anfingen ; schon die, welche das UnglUck der Juden suchten, wurden umgebracht. Jeder also, der im Rufe ernes Judenfeindes stand, ward getddtet, is gratuitous. The clause at the end of this verse, D''533'n bS bS QIHS bS5 ""S is an illogical scribal expansion derived from the end of c. 8 ; cf. n. on 8, 14; see also passages like Deut. 2, 25; 11, 25; Josh. 2, 9, &c. The reason why no one could withstand them was not, that all the gentiles were 9,3-6 Paul Haupt 181 frightened, but that the Jews were fully prepared for the attack and had organized a vigorous resistance and defense. (3) For JlDSba ■''■ffly see n. on 3, 9. iW D''J5TD5'3 '^°®^ ^'^^ mean extolled (3 extollebant, & ^tjn.v , &' iriimv, M? 'WTO.'^I^ , LB erhoben) but they supported (AV helped). Also the clause at the end of v. 3, Qpfby ''Slia IHS b33 ""iD , is a scribal expansion. It is expressed in B"^, but ®^ omits v. 4. S has "l^'O instead of ''STia- The reason why the satraps &c favored the Jews is given in v. 4. (4) In the same way the clause at the end of v. 4, '^'^Tf^ lU'^i^n "'S bn^l "jb"!!! 1 is due to scribal expansion; bTlwil is inf. absol. (c/. n. on nnsn, 2,18). T (5) M pli^l j"ini is a scribal expansion, due to HSlJil .... IjlJl in the following verse (cf. n. on 8, 14). The term D5iS"l5 (S ^ooU-ls^ ^] , tg IIHlniy^i) at the end of v. 5 implies that the authorities did not interfere {cf. v. 3). If the authorities had allowed the Jews to organize armed resistance, the numerous massacres in Russia during the past few years would have been nipped in the bud {cf. n. on DlBSD b? I'SSb , 8, 11). But, as a rule, the assail- ants of the Russian Jews were supported by the governors, military commanders, officers of the police, &c (see Pur. 35, 21; 43, 15. 22. 32. 38. 44. 46. 48; 44, 2). M QDilSli does not mean to their hearts' content (French d coeurjoie; this would be DSlb fTlSjiriS or QiaSJ n^S bi^)- It implies simply that the Persian Jews had free hands in dealing with their assailants owing to the non-interference on the part of the authori- ties. Syr. '«1 tS? .^1 means in my opinion, in my judgment. The Persian governors &c received no instructions to suppress all anti- Jewish demonstrations (the royal edict issued by H could not be repealed; cf. 8, S*") but they did not support the assailants of the Jews, and allowed the Jews to defend themselves. In this way the permission granted by H's edict was not worth more than the pound of flesh which Portia* allowed Shylock to cut from the body of Antonio. (6) The addition of |n"l''^n {^ \-^r^ is due to scribal expansion; the fight between the Jews and their assailants did not take place in the Acropolis, but in the City of Susa {cf. nn. on 1,2; 4, 17). In w. 12-15 we find simply TOlTS , not Jl'T'Sn 1T231T23 . The scribes did not know the exact meaning of |n"l''3n j tliey regarded it as a kind of epitheton ornans; cf. Assyr. Uruk suptlru (JAOS 22, 8, n. 7). No importance can be attached to &" iv Sow-ois rrj woXu, for % 1 SMiTB^B ^apcrav Kal Neo'Tatv'' ^apcrav {kol tov) Zo\ t "^ ^ Pharsandatha 2 psb^ Ae\6v* •Q-aiij Belphon 3 xmsosi iSoo-ya'* (uov 'a1i7 »9 Arisai 9 ^ms 'Apaatov ^9?) Aridai 10 xnri ZaPovOalov^ lt,a.6ove zoy Jezatha (a) Corrected in 05^ to ^apiravveaTaiv, d^ ^apaavetrrav. — (ft) 05^ 'Paya (L ^atra). — (c) (fiS •tapaa.ea, ®A BapSafla. — (d) (gSA BapeK (L Bapea). — (e) u)v. In S ^? the >-= is miswriting for us. The e in AeX^wv may be due to the influence of AeX.Cv are Greek proper names. $0070 may be transposed from A(r< • * -^=^^1 is pho- T T : ~ netic spelling (see Kings 279, 52) for iovpSi. (see n. on v. 26). M iX^bliU is supported by S U^^. The initial J^ of J^'^blK may be due to dittography of the final X of the preceding iiri"l*|S (for >5m"iS) just as the prefixed Faya in ©'' Tayaap&i6a may be due to dittography (or rather tritography) of the second syllable of the pre- ceding $ao-ya; see above, n. g. The prefixed nxi before each of the ten names may be secondary. ®^^ BapeA. may be a corruption of Ape\ = ^"IX = ^"1^ ; the initial B may be due to the preceding name, ®* BapSada = ®^ ^apaSaOa. & ]f^i corresponds to T'"! of M XlHT^^Jt ; ^ ■^j-'? ^^^ preserved the n . The transposition may be due to the fact that Ij-k? is more common in Syriac than ]f*i . Owing to the vocalic character of the r there is not much difference in Syriac between initial "1 and "iX ; cf. SG', § 52 (also § 32) and for the dropping of the final ri see § 26, C. @ 2apj8axa may be a corruption of ApSaOa, the initial 5a is perhaps due to dittography of the second syllable of the preceding Bapo-a. Ap^axa (for ApSada) may be influenced by the Persian names 'Ap^Sa/ojs, 'Ap/3. for i- , sl for io , and a. for .*.) influenced, perhaps, by 1aj2j.3 , persuasion, supplication. gA _^gjj(jj|,^ stands for Zaici.s , iu«iOfS ; the a is due to corrupt ditto- graphy of the following io . Mi\ . v. 5). This, it may be supposed, is the his- torical prototype of the slaughter of the assailants of the Jews in the Persian empire under the reign of Xerxes. (17) S's rendering. Am dreizehnten Tage dee Monata Adar dafanden sie Ruhe, und den vierzehnten machten aie zu einem Tage dea Featmahla und der Freude, is impossible. K connects TUnnb IW mrlbTC DV^ 11« (at the beginning of v. 17) with D^yniBl ni23»n Qn"'S3TDa 3iim Cbs in the preceding verse, the intervening clause fist inblB Xb (1-T311 DT' being regarded as a parenthesis. In ©'' this clause is transposed: AntoXtcrav yip avrSiv /Jivplovi TrevTaKwr^^tAibv! tjj TpuTKaiSiKdrig tow ASap, koI ovSiv SiripvaArav. For &^ TpidKai^cKdry (= IKl) ®* has Tta-a-apta-KtuStKa.T'o {cf. last n. on 3, 7), The clause DT" ns^ inblB ir^'^ l-'l's-*, just as ©^ renders ot 'louSatoi oi Sucrwapixivoi iv iraa-Q Xii>pa. Ty i^po(Tvvriu ayaOijV ayova-LV i^aTroa-riWovTes jUEptSa? Kal rots irk-qa-LOV. This addition was Originally omitted in ®^. For niDa (= ni^ica ; see n. on 2, 18) cf. n^fllDM (2, 9). Meg. 7» we read that Rabbi Jehudah sent Eabbi Osha'yah a leg of veal and a pitcher of wine {^)20^ rT'^TSlit "'H^b ST'b "11123 fl^-'inS TV^rr "'n"! ^Strtarri Snnjl Xnbn J^bj'^St). ^ renders: 11^1-1 -jmiflXD (Supov). 3 partes epularum et ciborum. (20) Wd thinks it not impossible that vv. 20-28 and 29-32, which B considers to be a subsequent addition, were taken from an older source, and that E was composed for the purpose of explaining these two docu- ments, just as some critics believe that the object of the Book of Jonah is to explain the psalm in c. 2; contrast AJSL 23, 256. B (376, below) stated: Die Einschaltung 9, 20-32 wird aus einem anderen Purim- Buche in unser Purim-Buch hineingestellt sein. But it is a mistake to suppose that the entire section 9, 20-32 is derived from a different source. The first three verses (20-22) are genuine, also the first part of 26 and vv. 27 and 28^; but vv. 23-25, the second part of v. 26, v. 28", and 29-32 represent secondary additions. They were not taken from an older source, but added by a later glossator (cf . Pur. 44, 31). M, the prime minister, had received reports from all the governors of the provinces, stating what had happened on the 13*^^ of Adar, how many assailants of the Jews had been slain, and how the Jews had celebrated the following day. M sent this information to all his coreligionists in the Persian empire, urging them to commemorate this notable event for all time to come. (21) W U^pb (a: X!a''"'pb) is Aramaic {cf. last but one n. on 1, 8). Ruth 4, 7, where we find QSpb , is a gloss. The phrase Dtl'^bj' ti^pb 9,22.23 Paul Haupt 187 means to enjoin upon them. & has ^eauNs ^Snm?. S reads also ^ai »N\ l^fa-t- nNnno at the beginning of v. 23. For ^1235 n^an DV nsi nn« Tflinb ^w nsniK tar ns D^ras 11 S has »ls Ijrn-ino )iws-i;)j ^i,ns , just as S uses tt-'V* for "I'l'iD in 8, 9. For lima c/. KDiH OT (Prov. 7, 20). (22) The 5 in Qi^a^S (SE K'^ttV I^JTH ; «/• n. on ''^il , 1, 17) is not the Kaph similitudinis, but the Kaph veritatis (GK^', § 119, x). (23) The section w. 23-25 is a gloss; see n. on v. 20. The immediate sequelof V. 22 is V. 26: — Qi-i'ia JlbSil '0^'^'')) I5t"lp "15 bV , therefore (i. e. on account of the Q-'sriHb iTiisnai ins"! bx TB"-}* niss tTibina) ovpSi) is due to haplography; cf. n. on ©ITnaniit (1, !)■ ®^ povpai (i. e. watches, vigils) is a popular adaptation of <^ovpai (with A for A) = (t>ovpSL. This popular etymology may have been suggested by the vigils (cf . D'^"l53T2J , Ex. 12, 42) or watch-meetings which have been held on New Year's eve from times immemorial. The Purim festival is a Jewish adaptation of the Persian spring festival Naurdz, and this is derived from the Babylonian New Year's festival (about the time of the vernal equinox) so that D''"l'lS = niD53 corresponds to Lat. strenae, French 6trennes. The observance of the Persian New Year's festival was combined with the commemoration of Nicanor's Day; see Pur. 3, 6; 4, 41; 9, 26; 10, 39; 14, 40; 17, 7. 23; 46, 24. 29. 32;* 50, 37; 51, 10; 52, 4; ZDMG 61, 275, 17; 277, 1. For bSp read, with SST, ibSpl ; so, too, Oort; cf. the Q«re in v. 27 and Kings 127, 46; 269, 6. The verb bsp is Aramaic {cf. last n. on 4, 7) but it is not a denominative verb derived from inbSp (B, W). The clause niTDyb ibntl ^'!23S< flX refers to the celebrations of the victory over their assailants, and DiT'bK ^S1"l53 ilTlS ^T23i? riJ5 alludes to the two days of feasting on the 14''' and 15'*" of Adar. The Jews in Susa had celebrated the IS*'' day; the provincial Jews, the 14*''. M recommended the perpetual general observance of both days. * In 1. 22 read Franz for Harder. 188 Ceitioal Notes on Esthee 9,24.25 (24) For ^jiom ^ (3, 1) S> has here ^yiooi j^ . S thinks that DnaSlb after D^HlT'il b^ ninn (c/. Nah. 1, 11) is an erroneous repetition of DlSbtbl at the end of the verse; but d^itb 1" is correct, and Q"l3l!5bl is an explanatory gloss to the preceding d^nb • ■* tas simply .qJ] ^^oojjJj ]^ ^.iDJlo . For b"113n Kin "lis bsn > ®^ Wero ijiriuTita Kai KXrjpov, see nn. on 3, 7. ® xiiiy «in itT-x xcs yni2, a:' xin xnba nmi xcs yn^ M dSnb is a paronomasia (so Schultz; cf.C 233). The assonance with the name H might be imitated by translating to harm them or to mayhem them. For WBTi we must point Q7Jn ; all the forms of UDtl in OT are forms of QIJ-j ; see Nah. 44. On the other hand, all the forms of the stem of nisbri , execrations must be derived from "ijb (ZDMG 37, 535) = ,jjt} ; cf. Aram, rsi-i = ,jL«i.^ ,* also Heb. T'la = jui, si'r and AJSL 23, 245, 1. 13; for ifi instead of ia cf. Cant. 59 {ad v. 11) and Kings 141, 26. (25) M ntj^hsl does not mean when it came, scil. TOTl tlDlUriM (so B, Wd, S) but when she came, scil. E (so SCa^SS, LB, AV, K). The author of the original book would not have written ftshni , but H331 roban "inos. ilM "lS©n dy (omitted in W) cannot mean (he commanded) by letters (so AV). According to GB", 542''- the phrase means (he spoke) in con- nection with a letter, i. e. by means of a letter (Arab, xaxi ^,j^). S (da verkilndigte er) mit dem Schreiben which is explained to mean zu- gleich mit dem Erlass des Schreibens (contrast ^nS^Q dSI , Ezr. 1,1; cf. Kings 179, 2). Nor can "ISOH d? "I53X mean he gave a written order (B, Wd, K). ilBl "13Dil dJ is a tertiary gloss referring to the letter which the King had authorized H to send to all the governors &c (3, 12; 8, 5). The first glossator simply stated: The King said. The mischief which H planned against the Jews, shall recoil on his own head; so H and his ten sons were impaled. A subsequent glossator deemed it necessary to empha- size the fact that the King had made this statement although he had authorized H to exterminate all the Jews in his empire; he therefore added "ISSH dJ? , i- e. in spite of the letter (scil. which the King had authorized H to send to the governors &c). For Qy, in spite of cf. * Arab. i_axC\ = IsUi , flat cake of bread baked on a griddle, or in the ashes of a fire (not in the oven) is an Aram, loanword with c, (owing to the preceding . ) f or c = ijO ! cf. 'iJUO^ (ZAT 26, 359) and HSS"! , pl. DlSi"! d K 19, 6 ; Is. 6, 6) = post-Bibl. niSri (Men. 63s). For v;yLs. rufat and oO« riifat cf. Si» riiffa and o. ruff, chopped straw, chaff. ' > y y 9,26.27 Paul Haupt 189 tlTUy (Neh. 5, 18) and WdG 2, 164, below. The statement of the glossator, ibni iffixi bj Q^innTi by nian itts ny^n inniana niiu"' yyn by T'SS t1S<1 iriK, is at variance with the original narrative; the glossator might have said: isma by ^01 TBifi Hyifl inaiuna alB'^ yyn by inx ibni iiaxn by ^1^n^'r\■, cf. n. on 8, 7. (26) For the first part of v. 26 see n. on v. 23. The author of the original Book may have known that ^'13 (or rather ''^'1S=''1"|'1S) was a pp. .. Pers. word for HDM ■ ^ reads Joi. I^'joa .oJoi iicoj^ ^] \f^ jJoiii^Jas )^^ >Qjk^ ; here l-»^ may be a corruption (or adaptation) of 1^ . Instead of l-kios it would be better to point )-kias. 2C has ii^'avb THp "p I'^jU; jp'l . This is the sequel of the clause at the beginning of v. 26, nign DTE by Q-'IIS nbxn D^a'>b iS^-lp p by, the verb 153Sp being coordinated to 1H"lp • The following bSlpI (Q'r6 ibSpi) is a gloss to the preceding 'lasp; it was added owing to the ibspl at the beginning of the gloss vv. 23-25. 190 Critical Notes on Esther 9,28.29 S has simply n\nno for both bSpl 153^p 5 c/'. n. on v. 21, also footnote to n. on 2, 3. M D^lbsn refers to the proselytes (contrast d'^in'^riia in 8, 17). For DH'^b? we must not read QiTT'bi^ (contrast last n. on 4, 5). In DiT'bj' Q^lbsn tliis preposition means in addition to; see Kings 125, 7. M "llisy !! &c). iW DSaTil Dlfl^i , according to their writing and according to their time (but S ^oiia}a ,_*.£i*loj ,^1) means according to the written traditions concerning these days (festal regulations, festal legends, &c; see Pur. 11, 35; 9, 22) and according to their dates, viz. the 14* and 15*^ of Adar; i.e. the last full moon of the JlDtS , the tropical year (AJSL 22, 256). For the reason why the two spring festivals, Purim and Passover, are not celebrated at the vernal equinox, on the first day of the first month, but on the 14«i' and W^ days of the 12«i' and the 1^' months, respectively, see conclusion of n. on v. 31. For the two days of the festival cf. ilian TDlnn DVD (1 S 20, 34). B's view that dnniS refers to M's letter (vv. 20. 23) is erroneous. For 1)21 of- n. on irO (8, 9). (28) The second part of this verse is an explanatory gloss, not only to the first part of v. 28, but also to the end of v. 27. & has .oi^M for l-QS'"' , and i-aiJ for qlD'' • (29) Verses 29-32 represent a subsequent addition. For b^IT'ni^ TO, , which seems to be a tertiary addition, see n. on 2, 15. The prefixed "1 in ''5T1521 is a secondary addition (cf. n. on v. 10). The original text of this gloss was no doubt: t1!!< tlSbMH "lUDSS nflinl D'^IBn niai^ nX D»pb ■'lin^n ^i"1^70 rpri bi , Queen E described all the power of the Jew M in order to enjoin this Purim message (which M had sent to the Jews; see w. 20-22) i.e. E sent a letter to all the Jews setting forth M's capacity for action and performance (especially otra eTrotjjcrev, what he had accomplished for his coreligionists and what he might accomplish for them in the future) and urging them to observe the feast of Purim as prescribed by M. V. 32 ("llnDi< "152S5S1) speaks only of E, not of M. 6^ reads in the present verse: koI iypa^j/ev Eo-^ijp ij j3a?o ]Ji-*.5 Ui) does not mean words of peace and truth (so AV; S Worte des Friedens und der Wahrheit; 3 ut haberent pacem et susoiperent veritatem; '^^ "'b'^S KtSTBIpTl i^^bin) but words of greeting and faithfulness (cf. Psalms 80, 27). LB mit freundlichen und treuen Worten, K mit freund- schaftlichen und wohlgemeinten Worten. The Queen, of course, did not send a warlike message or a statement that was not true; but she sent her coreligionists friendly greetings, emphasizing the fact that she would remain a faithful Jewess and never abandon the religion of her fathers. (31) JBl n5b7jn nnONl after ''lin'^n ^imX3 is a tertiary gloss. The UrrbV in DiT'bj' Q'lp "ItQi^S does not refer to DtT'SaT , as Wd supposes, but to the Jews; cf. 'QtV'yS D^pb in v. 21. M DMpyTI rilBI^Zn ''"im, at the end of this verse, means the procedures (cf . n. on 1, 13) or institutions of the great fast (plur. intens.) and their crying (or invocation), 52E 'iltirilb^, ®^ i^^SliS^ ''b"'53 HtY'D^mi • This refers to 4, 1 . 3 . 16. M had cried with a loud and hitter cry (n^53l Plblj HpJT pST'^l) and the Jews had fasted, wept, and lamented (1SD7J1 "'531 0122) when the edict of H became known. Afterwards E asked M to fast with all the Jews of Susa for her sake, three days and three nights, before she went to the King, and E herself with her maids fasted in the same way. 192 Ckitioal Notes on Esthee 9,32-10,2 The statement in the present passage, .... D'^IBH ''53'' flX U^pJ , DnpSTi niai2in ''"al .... I^J^p nirXS would seem to imply that the Jews had adopted the fasting (and crying) before they adopted the feasting. They may have observed the Babyl. New Year's festival at first as a fast-day, but the less orthodox Jews (the Sadduceans) may have gradually adopted the celebration of the (Babyl. and) Persian New Year's festival (just as many modern Jews celebrate Christmas). This was afterwards sanctioned by the ecclesiastical authorities, but the date was changed: the feast was celebrated, not at the beginning of the first month, but at the middle of the preceding month, just as the ancient Heb. spring festival, the Passover, was not celebrated at the beginning (new moon) of the first month (about the time of the vernal equinox) but at the middle (full moon) of the first month, in order to avoid a coincidence of the Jewish Passover and the Babylonian New Year's festival. During the Babyl. Captivity Ezekiel (about 570 b. 0.) recommended to observe the Day of Atonement on the 1** of Tishri, while the New Year was to be celebrated on the 10"^ of Tishri, in order to avoid a coincidence of the Jewish New Year with the Babyl. festival at the beginning of the second half of the year. Under Persian dominion, about 500 B. o. (when the Priestly Code was compiled in Babylonia) the two festivals in the seventh month, as prescribed by Ezekiel, exchanged places 80 that the Day of Atonement was observed on the 10"* of Tishri, because the Persians celebrated the /uiyoipovui on that day. Cf. n. on V. 27 and Pur. 4, 20-37; 20, 3; 33, U. (32) Wd's view that "1333 refers either to the book from which the author took the two letters {cf. n. on v. 20) or to our Book of E, is gratuitous. Heb. 13S3 does not necessarily mean in the book (AV) it may also mean in a book (so K, S) see Kings 191, 37. (1) For the misplaced gloss in v. 1 see fourth paragraph of nn. on 2, 18. (2) In V. 2* we must transpose » and P; the opening clause, bSI inilnjl ISpn musa, should follow the second clause, T\)>i:ii lm23"iS1 "]b53n ib'^j "lirS "STia ; even the first clause 1)n^13:i1 ISpn tiWTD bSI refers to M, not to the King. The clause "ib/JH Sb'^j ^T23X is a scribal expansion derived from 5, 11; it cannot mean whereunto the King advanced him (so AV; K zu der ihn der Konig erhob) nor does it mean whom the King advanced (so S; s i-ai^ Bu=5o]?, s; N5br) rr'-^m ''I, ^' j^iba ti^n^ "^nn ^^) or whereby the King had advanced him (B; 3 qua exaltavit Mar- dochceum). Cf. footnote to n. on 2, 3. 10,3 Paul Haupt 193 (3) For d'^'IIJT'b bliai it would be better to read D''1in''a bl'lS'l • Si 1-t?a* Vi» Vsj . The b instead of i seems to be due to the b in ■^bSlb nStUa and to the following clause, "rn^. i'lb ''IS'Tl (® ''Sn "'iHitT 11lnln1i<''3Dl 1 omitted in S) which, of course, does not mean acceptable to most of his brethren (contrast n. on 4, 3) but acceptable to the multitude of his brethren, i.e. to his numerous coreligionists (so B, S). In the large number of his coreligionists there was not one who disliked him. Cf. V52 l'^ , the large number of his sons (5, 11). The phrase ilayb 31t3 123"!^ means: he tried to promote the interests of the Jews, while iy"iT bsb DiblB 1111 implies that he was not haughty and distant, but affable and kind to the meanest among his brethren, in spite of his exalted position. For DlblC ISlI S refers to Zech. 9, 10; xj, 85, 9. Cf. xj, 122: "Jl nibT25 HminiX and miSpSK "^b lit:. [The Hebrew text follows.] 194 "inox nbaa 9,22-10,3 Dn^n^K52 D^iin^n onn ini ^t23« a^a^i : nsiri ns^ij bin ia ^las 9, 22 riiTusb nit: wvb bn^ii^ai nnairb ■jia^'a crib ^^ans itsk ynnni manai inyib tc^x niDa nbirai nnaTci nmsa ^a^ oniK na^p'Y r^isn QTT by D'^^13 nb^n c^a^b i«^p -js bs "iD^s'-^asb 27.26 d^ffi:> nrnb i f on^by D^ibsn bs bsi d^^t bsi on^b? D^iin^n :ri^'3y^ »bi} nsiri niic bsn osaTSi oansi nbi^n D^a^n ^iia r^j^ nnsirai nnaiua -nil in bsn Q^Tuysi d-'ists nbsn ci^a^ni 28 *!"Tyi Tyi nnai nrna on xibn {1^1151 iBpn nwa bill "^ima nbn^ manai \\ 10,2 "'sna "5 :Diai ''la "ibab d^a'^n '"in lao by D'^aini 3 nit: yji'-i rni!(. ahb "1211 D''iin'''n' bn^i ^^^bab niTija '^nirr'n !iyiT bsb nibir nam layb :nn"ibx idtib ans "ii»x n»i mwrb i^nn nins ns ni-nnin 'rbapn », 23 m aiffi"' >'Tii3S ibttn i5sb nsan t^^uyrh (bnian xin) niD bem hd TiDa nxi "inx ibni tosi by nimnin by sffln nios nyin inainntt :7yn by 'TbapT 27 (t) ssix-i riMi nsTH masn ■'"im bs by p by 26 (») ny-i-T'a moi sb o-isn ni-iinin tiito i"iay «b nbsn Di-nen iTa^i 28 m ns D'lp.b [iTinin "iDnna"} aph bs ns | } "nsbttn -inox ariDm 29(*) O'l-iwyi yaw bs D^Tinin bs bs d^i^isd nbtsii :«Di-i^n nnas b nt? D-ipb tnasi nibw iian TD"-i';"iBni5 msbia'a' n:''Ta n«m 31 TONDT "''■'■nnin "iDTitt on^by D'p itsio oniDBTa nbsn Di"i|n "ihi "inox 113X131 tonpyTi mttisn i-qt nynr byi dibs3 by iH^p 32 '."iBQi nnssi nbsn Di-ifn iiai n^ip TD"T^"CDn« 3 o) 7b)3n ib'qj -itds? 10, 2 (a) Dnibs yian ntn roD by 26 (ss) ison oy o.hd (yy) mnsbi 9,240/3) riDban inosT 31 (tp,) niDwn nxm («) binii» na 29 («) 9,6-21 inDi* rbjn 195 'D'^iinTi lain 'i^bittii insisis Dn^Mton iwi "mn nsa 9,6 :tb"« nixa iran isn'T'ii^ n«i »n'D'3Tfli3 fi»i ^ JDT nit laK^i t-^ban '^aab "-jinTira D^aiinn nsDa ki sinn ora 12.11 •ffl'^H mna iran '^D-'Tin^n ijin '^■jicnan nDban inc^b 'jban nai iTfls n5j "^ban nina -utirn -jan ■'in triw nxi :wrn ny ^m2]3i nai t|b ■^ns-'i ']nbxi2; ■nriit D'^Tirr^b ina n:< pr ma '^ban by nx ino^ laxni 13 :yyn by ibn'' pn "sn mw n!i fiiws ns^nai ns^na nria nxai D^niBSi D^sin n^n) D^^ao nbian ^ban iro>3tin onn^i '-jban niia nns^i ^ TS1 ry bin ^tbk D^iinsb ^ban ins n^i^ jeasin ^ssh" 11 w^ bs ri55 iiKb^ annbi i^airnb acaD bs laybi bnpnb «-jban nii^ia bsa m^ orn rons d^'T^sh nriai nna' 12 nnsn i^Tsna :(ni« lann s^in) ^w d^sib iamb ^w niflibaa 13 D^^iin^n nrnbi D^asn bib ^ib^ (nriai nria bsa m insnb) tnn^n^jta Dpsnb ntn orb D^i'^'n? ^ban ^iaba i^s'' "iiiai rD^bn'a'a iss'^ "irsin ^ash ciann la.u "]ffiiiB "i^yni laanxi yia yaT\^ "nbsn'f ^in' nisba lainba nrna bsai ni5''i itbtsi nnaici niiK-nn-'in u^i'tvb {"-ribnis 17. 16 nnaia y^^aa itrri ^ban "inn itdi^ nipa n-'yi ^r^y bim nnai D^nn:na yixn ''aya D-'a'ni nits ori nmua D'^iin^'b ^itbtti :nn^by n^nin^n ins bas •'a iins 11 or iiriy niribiEii (n"it i»nn «in) lann -nry D-'Sisni 9, x D-'TifT'n ibnpi :^xin ^ianDi "nifflynb imi -jban im yan 2 sb ir^xi dnyn ''TBpnan T' nbrab v-jban nina bnn drr'iyn ''TD'yi niriBm D'^iaiiTflnxni nirnan ""1125 bsi :''Dn^3sb lay 3 in"!! "sna bina "5 ro-'Tin^n ri« n^!!^'ffl?a -jbab "nss nssban 4 cn^n^i^ bsa D^mn^n 13^1 J^ni3^ian bsa 'jbin iyami ']ban n QiDioa («) Bi'^'ions 8, 1 (') DDTtobDT DanDD nimnin bsT s, 9 (») Tiib nbbttn Diwsn nta (-) b^n n (1^) "O'^s'iinwnsn 1 w Dis^imnnsn u («) WT^'tons 12 «) mian iiaTCQ hspid mm ib^an ina csimn (t) nnttwi c-') nbna anr rrntsyi ita (p) Dna nibirib DiTinin "iiii? Tiaia iins Di'^as, s m amby iDTTa ^ns bsa 13 s («) niayn ba by Dins bsD id 2 (s) binai ^b'ln idtim «isn ^d 4 (o Diiinin 9, s (««) QiD'tt^n isn s, 1 m 7,5-8,9 iriDx nbaxi 197 ma« i^in riT ^&5i ht sin ^a nsban ■nnosbv ^^ban ^aj^^i 7,n snn -(an n^isi "is ia^« imos ia»ni :p miflyb lab 'xVa e inana Dp ^bani :nibani ^ban ^sba nyai lani ntn 7 ino«a 112353 by ispib na? lani in^nn nsa b« v^n nwaaa ma "jbani j^jban n»a nsin rby nnbi ^s n«i "i niban s "inos nuis ntoan by bsi ^ani ^-n nmra m^a b« ■jn'^nn nsaa imn n^aa ^w nsban n>< ■oiasb can ^ban ^aj^^i n^'by :i"n'sn lan'^SBi "]ban "sa ss'' itc» yyn ron di ^ban ''jsb D-'D^isn -Ja nnj^ niiain -las-'i 9 pTi n^aa nas '^ban by aita I'ai" "baa" ^mx ^annab lan nw by -jan n» ibn^i jrby iribn^'^ban ^ax^i nas D'^isan naa ^ jnisifl iban nam "aiiab i^in itbs yyn n^i2 lan m-^a nx reban nnoi^b »^ban "^w Ninn ora 8,» :rtb Kin na "incs ni^an ^a '^ban ^asb sa ^aiiai a^^iin^n ntomi "aTiab t^sn^'i -jana "i^ayn ii25i< inyati ni* '^ban id^i 2 t^an in-'a by •'STia ns ino« ■]3nnni ']ani rban ■'iab bsni ^ban "ssb lanni -ifios trjoini 3 tiaiTH nx "inoxb ':;ban ti^ri : ^^a'sa'n lan ny^ ns< i^aynb ib * aiti "^ban by d« ia«ni i-^ban ■'asb layni ^noit cipni anrn n ri'^ya ''iK naiai '^ban "ssb -nain iiBai rssb in "nssa asi^i ■iiE!!< D-'iin^n rii^ nasjib ama ^isx ^D-'isDn rix a^ianb ana-' pmbia ■]"7'ai 198 nnoK nba^j 6,3-7,4 Tfaatr^ tii bs ^D^nab nbiiii n]:^ mrss na ^ban nai^^i 6,3 ^^ni ^a -jban ^aK^i nm Msinwn s3 4 nx nibnb ^bab ^a«b niis^nn ^ban n^a ^sn by sn "jani) nin rbs ^ban ^nys ma^^i !(ib -,^5n nirs yyn bs ^sn^a n :!(5i3'' ^ban nait'^i nsna las lan -[ban iTTx ir^i -ban ib'na ^ffix II nxi rsa ani iiiry -naa ns ^cnb "lap^i 11 sb r|S ^lais"'! i-jban "layi u^^^n {b'D\ by ix'isiD itex nxi 12 nx ''S nmsy ^rax nrrujan bx "jban cay naban ^nox nx''an "b niTD' isD-x nt bii :-jban Dy nb xiip ■'sx inab D51 "nt^ 13 j'iban ^yira aicr "^iin^n ^ania nx nxn ^dx itux my bra nas D^^an nas yy wy^ rani5 bsi imaK ffinr ib laxm u b» "jban ny iiai rby ■^STia nx ibn-'i ^bab ^a« "ipaai jyyn 123^1 -jan "ssb "lain ats-^'i nam nmcan -nwDtn ^SD nx x-^anb ^ax^i -jban nsis nns xinn nb-iba e,s by ''alia n^an nirx aina xisa-^i i-^ban ^isb d^xnps' rn-^i 2 :v-;baa T nbtcb iirpa iirx p'^ban "d^^d "sm tcini xanja ■jisn 12 (8) iian u (7) pn 8, 1 cis) pn 5, 9 (-) ■O'-Tvons (y) Don i'TaiB'53 2 o) aiisin iim e, x (»> 200 nnos rhyn 3,i&-4,i7 ni^an iiriTBa nsna mm -jban ^nnn d^sim ixa^ fi^sin a.iia pip innb""! rial ri» "S^p^i may] "ncs bs ns yT "iinai *,« ^33b ij s^a^i :niai nbna npyr pyt^i i^yn -;ina uri ib»i 2 bini :(pTr luiibi '^ban ^tb ^» »inb ]^k ^i) ^ban 'lya 3 d^iin^b biia biK s^aa inii iban nm tos^ nipa HD^iai ns^ia iD^aib ys':^ "isxi pto iBoai "^im dTsi niban bnbnnfn Tib n^y^ n-'D'^xi ^noK mnys ni^sinni 4 itbi rbya ipia "i-'onbi '^Diia nx a^abrib D-^iaa nbTrni isa n^isb T^ayn "ituk -jban ^D'^nsa t^nnb inD« j^npni jbnp n bx ^nn KS^i :nT na b?i riT na riyib ^sn^a b'n' inisni e "STia" lb na""! i^^ban "cin "ssb iirs^ T-yn aim bK "Siia 7 b'x' bipirb -jan ia» nisx rpsn fnans nxi rry ninx bs pik •jns iffix min ans lauins nxi :D"iaKb n^'^Tirr'n "jban "Tsa s niisbi nb i^anbi nnox nj^ mx'inb ib "i^i nTaisnb -jTBiTBa Kia-'i :nas by rssba lupabi ib •\'}'nT\rh '^ban bi« sinb rr-by 9 piTia "nm nx "incxb la-^i -^inn Dyi "{ban '•nny bi psiia bs inisni '^nnb ^mdk "laxni n-'' ■^ban b» Kia'' "iTrs^ niBiti ir^x bs ^tbm D-^yr -^ban nirna nab n-'anb im nnx is^ip'^ «b "itbx n^a'^ssn nsrin bs ■'pix'ips Kb "SKI n'Tii anrn ti^i-nr mx "^ban ib 'cirr "ncxa :Dr D-'TBibTB riT -jban bx Kiab bs I'^Tanb ■'iiia "laK^i nnox '^in nx ^aniab "^^"y^ 13.12 ''i iD-^-iin^n bia -^ban n-'a'a' tibanb Tjirssn ^ann b^ nnoK 14 Dipaa D-'Tinxb iiay nbani rt'ii; mxTn riyn ir^inn iB^nn dx Fiyan nxTS myb dx ynr ''ai' "naxn y^^ n^ii nxi inx 'iMibab D^nin'^n bs nx diss t^b psina bx a'-Tcnb nnox naxni ie.it3 D'-a"' mabTB inian bxi ibixn bxi "by iai:ai ]i23iiDn D-'Xsasn n^x ^ban bx xiax ■]5n'i i^ qisx ■^nnysi ''sk aa on nb':b pMnx "irnaK ^Tsxii rr^s xb T nnox rby nni^ nirx bsi wi ''ima -iny^i 17 ''3'TIM 4, S («) 8,1-u ^fiDs rbya 201 ^siiai "jban ib m^ p ^i ^lanb a^innTuai D^y^is ^jban nsuji ^ban ^TDi ^iDs ^ban ^is$ rta^r^ jnirinyj^ «bi 5^5^ sb 3 rbs d^iasi ^n^i i^jban ni^a rii< ^n^ nn« 3>i^a ^snnab 4 ^^yi nay'ri mxnb "]anb iTa^i nrrbm saia xbi on dt v«ba^i lb rnnn^aai y^b ^si^a i^it ^3 -jan sti :^^5i"ia n i^aianb «TBpa^'i {} iiab ^sinai "i^ nbisb rrsa Tn*:i :nan e 5[] Tfl-^vicrii^ Miba bsa -nrx {qn^nin^n nbi n« n^ayn p I'laai ■ntsa in« w "^i^m^; "^bab "lan nas'^i s ^ban "nn inii dj ^^tb b»^ ns^iai nna by nibTDSi I'^ban runtis Dnnsi nnii "-^ban aiia laiirbi nsi 13 niKbi yrh T^aiDinb "^ban nina bs bx n^s^n rn ff^-iao n'oibir:! inm ora D-^TBii tits -jpT nsi ^ysa o-^nirr'n bs nx ipmrsi :Tinb obbmi ei-i5< ffl'rn j^in) itcy cj-^sia luinb "Tay u wnb D^ayn bib ^iba (ni^iai nr'ia bin m -jnsnb) anin :nTn arb D'^im IMn 3, n M iTini sin i»s onb T^an 13 4 (« ©""I'l'innx s, « (»> TC'i'^'iBns 8 (,) iDTiB Qy nx lb iiian id (« ^annia or (o pn e (S) t5i"'"on8 12 («) DDDn'V u (0 D"'-nn''n -112 ij'KS'n KmBn p "iw bicn '"'ib'ab nnwr dtub nsiaa cjcs win «in) iTOSin onna 7 m bTian bB''i wnnb' wnnai oiib niiio pn issb (bman sin) -ns : cms min sin) iwy d-^ain innnb 'itey manbw by ©"-I'ytens 3, 7 (A'/*) 202 -iriDK Thyn 2,10-23 ms ^51^.33 ^i Pimbi7j nxi nay n» -incs^ rn^an s^b) jQ^irDn ^ ^i:n ^5sb ^bnntj ^sn^a on or biai (n^an «b iiri^ n^by n nii nb nrn yisa ^-jban bi? s^inb nnysi n^ys ^n y^anni 12 CTCin niBTB in^piia "a'^ litba" p ^5) irnn "nny d^dtd u^v::n riTni !(D-©;n ^piianm D'^aiam n^TBiri niBisi ^an -jaTrn 13 piay sinb pib -,103^ laxn ^teh bi ris ^ban bK rii^n nnyin nnir K^n iphni nijin x-n n^ys :"jban rr'n iy c^sn n-^na u Kb (Q^Tcab^sn naiu' "^ban d^-id T^TsyTiJ t bK) ^D"";rDn n^n b« :Dffii nxipDi "^ban nn van d« "^ "^ban bx iiy Kinn DK "s ^m mrpn ad ^^ban bj* Kinb ^inci^ ^'n yarci na bi "ryn ]n nisiB'D "^nni o-'iusn "laiu'' "sn ^an*' nir^ nj^ «in) "TTcyn irnnn iniiba in-'a b^ '"]ban bs '^npbni :n"'K'"i le bia ^riDK nx '^ban snx-'i nmisbab yma n^iri (nnp irnn 17 ni^ba nns dtdsi nibinnn bia risb lom in j^iani n-'irin r^is bib bna nnma -ban wi pmsi nnn ni^ba^i n^Ex^n is {"^ban T5 n"i<'T23a -p^v ^nis^iab nram -rnnyi ^312: mnni -jrija r|2£p '^'^ban ^yirn nirr "sinai nnn n-^a^n 21 ''ii^ab "imn yr^^i I'-'jban i'' nbicb impi'^i {{ ^ban "D'^^d 22 nmn mpn^i ! isqcn ^laisai [^j"Kj'n ^nian is] 'lanb' -^ns'i 23 "|ban "Dsb D^a'^n '''^m isdi sns^i y^ ^^ '^•^"^^ i^^^i '*^^^"''' i'-janb i^an_ "snna "i yn" Hb ibanY nib lb npb 'Tos idtto -n bin^ns ro a,TB («) "'3® iki) ©""I'l'ians 2, 12 (o n^n I'^Ki yisn by du "ibian nw"! 10, x m ntoy (« nnos nnica ni? is c^) tBi'i'ians 21 (p) nb'nn nyica auji iDTrai ""nibina fiproi 19 (t) **i3TTi2 DttQ "jbttb inox -iBsni nsbion "inosb 22 (^bi is risba miba ^n-i ^^s;-. aia '^ban by nx iqispi -jro '''na'i 19 "ssb "imri Hiin xb ituk -nny^ Kbi ''lai Dia "ma nn3""i DJims) yafflii tnsaa niitin rtmyib -jban ■|PT' ^msbai "-jban d liFi'' D-'TEin bsi (si'^n nai "^ inisba bsn mfly irax) ^ban :]Cip iyi biiaab ^n-'bynb i]?-' rpiaa ^ais "^ban iry^i n^nicm ^ban "rya "imn ats""'! 21 uj.TO'3 nnai nria b« '^ban mria bs bi< Q'^-isd nbtB-'i 22 lon-'in ^iffl 'ffl-'x bi nrnb isiirba tiyi Qy b»i niax n»i TiTDi ns ^5T "-jban nan '^'is'b nb^n D'-iain "inn 2,k iTTpa" rnmaa "^ban "lys iiaK-"! tn^by ins itbh nxi nirery 2 bia D''Tps "^ban ipa::i :n»ia tviaita nibina niiya ^bab 3 bs nsia nait: nbina niys ba n« isap^i iniaba nina nnn ^ban ^ban "rya ats'^n "nui^ niysm :^nTan "jtuitb 4 :"]a yjyi '^ban "rya lain at)'"'i "niBi "yaip p ■Pi*'' p) "p^ia layji ni-^an ■jiDiTsa rr^n "Tin" is"!!* n iTc» ^nban oy D-'bTiiii-'a nban itbx 1 ■'S-'a" T2^i« '\'iiny p e (iFics KT!) nsnn ns< pit ^ri-'i :baa -^ba I'sbnb'iai nbjjri 7 niaai n»na naitii nsth ns" niyini d«i as nb i^s ^s Th na "^ban nai yaiana "rr"! :nab ib "snia nnpb nasi ri'^as s n-'a bs 'npbni ^n'T'an pns bn niai ninyD yapnai imi ion s'isni vrya niysn ati^ni iD^icDn lao "sn i^ bs "^ban 9 j-jban fpaa'^f nb nnb nniia risi n-'pinan ns bna-'i raab nabttn -im n« lyais "iws is (0) iD"i';'»n« " (f ) wi'^wnx 1, w (-) iB-i'Tians 2, M (a) nay iicb'a' 12701 22 (p) wi'vians 19 m inipinian pnai DiiSDn Taia iban di"id '"•'an ii bs D-iwin rr^a bx 2, s w inos (•) ijn Ti bs « («) mini ^^b m:i'> oy nnban iib« e m n^iw^ yaiB IBIS iyi I'^na ^ban «Kin) ir"^"^'fflnx ^ir^ "rr^i i, s :nTnr! -jTBiiija -nrj* iwiba itp bs ^^ban nnisi^ uremia n»53i 2 D^s b-'H "^itoY rinyi ma bib nnica nicy libab aibTr wtts 3 Tins "n233> n« ipii^nna jrsab nis-'ian ""mBi d-^anisn "lai 4 ITBi'ffls cj^sisain Qyn bsb ^ban nw ttixn D'^a^n m'ii^'baai n Tn'-'n MM isrQ D^a" nyn'ffl nwiaa "jtip iyi biiaab ni^sn ''b-'ba by las^xi inbsn"} "bnm tins jf{D"s'i5' ■nnn* :^ban e -ini iniri t:nn na^s-i by tpsi snt nitsa^' ittb ''iiayi fpi ni niiba ■j'^-'i D'^iiir D'^bsa D-'bii anr ^bsn riipirni :mnbi 7 n-i bs b? -^ban la*' p •'S D5i< 'i-'X rrnn n^'n'om :-]ban i^s s ntiTsa nnfflj nsban "msi d: jtb^j^i ©"s iiisis minyb in-^n 9 i^sinn sn-n "ja^nab nas i''''a -^ban ab nios "j'^aTan nra "^ niiba ^naa ^^ban ^iab naban ^nicS ns »^inb :"]ban u ■ji^ani ti^"?! ns'na nut: ■'S n-^s-' mx n^^iiini n''asn miKnnb 12 ^ban ^sp-'i D'^D'^^Bn n^n i-iss^ -jban inn sinb ^naban ^s ''5) D-'nyn "sr o-^ainb '^ban las^-'i ni niya imam iis^a 13 "in? Mian? rb!!* a"npn"i :i""ii m ^jt bs ■'ssb "^ban "qt u ^>i'i "lai Dia ""ITT nynifl ^iiaa xip'ia o^a "ir^min jtwj^s '^nsbaa niisyb na crnis 1 nisban Ws'm-i D-'ma-ri ']ban'''3s it3 !D''D'"isn Ti "-^ban latta nx nimBy xb ^•bh by D''3"i Ditti 4 («) ©""i";'iBn« (v) Dnn ff^ttii 2 o) iD'-TviEins 1, s («) w'-i'i'inns (0 xn33Ki 1, -^ (») -"^ibtib -iics 9 (7,) i^in (o ' iin e w »"-i"i"on8 (i») inirn 1, it: (*) inwT 12 (<) W'TI'ttinS 1,9 ( while Budde and Nowack regard it as a correction of a more original SD^*^ f^^5 ' ^^^ adopt the latter as an original element of the text, which according to them was : " And the Angel of Jahve led ' the house of Joseph ' from Gilgal to ' Bethel.' " That bi^lTD*^ tX^^ corresponds here to DD^*^ tl"'D is clear, for the Judaeans do not go to Bethel. But it is not an original part of the text, but another marginal note, which explained that the Angel of Yahweh went with the Joseph tribes, according to chap. 1 : 22 ; koL cttI to;' oIkov 'lapa^A is thus a gloss upon a gloss. Note also the peculiar grammatical construction in the Greek, which gives no sense and shows its secondary character. At best it might be supposed that ^1*^3 ?fi5 bSTC stood originally after "|1ai{''"l , " and he said to the house of Israel." Julius A. Beweb 215 tion. Verses 5 f . are addressed not to the Servant of Yahweh but to Cyrus; they expand the thought of 41:25; verses 7-9 expand 41:26-29. In this way everything has its true, natural force. The terms employed in the address correspond precisely to those used in chap. 45 with reference to Cyrus: ^x^ p.t^'^'^ " '^'^^^"^ "piptr'.v!"''^!* *^=i Compare also 'fjT^'^P ^it^i 'T'O**'^!? ^^'•^^■ Yahweh declares the purpose which he has in view with Cyrus. Cyrus is to set the captives free. The introduction, vs. 5, sums up the claims that have been made for Yahweh in the previous chapters, and forms an admirable backing for the work of Cyrus. The Almighty God, the creator of the world and of men, stands behind him in his undertaking. Omnipotence guarantees its complete success. The emphasis on "I, Yahweh," is at once clear when we remember the debate of chap. 41. Yahweh has called him, and no one else; for it is he who directs the affairs of the world. Yahweh watches over him and protects him ("lS3) ; "unharmed" he goes from battle to battle (41:3), his life is charmed because it is in Yahweh's keeping. All this is plain, and stands out very clearly when applied to Cyrus. But now we come to the diflBcult dS H'^'^^? • Before we determine its mean- ing we should observe that the following phrase d'^ia "linb is not an original element of the text. The reasons for this assertion are, first, that it is missing in @^, and therefore rightly omitted in Swete's edition; one cannot explain its omission, but very well its addition; second, it is missing in 49:8, where our passage is evidently quoted,' and where there would be no reason for its omission, on the contrary every reason for its addition if it had already been in the text of 42:6; for it would be strange indeed if it had been there and yet had been omitted, when in the fol- lowing verse he speaks to those who are in darkness. It was thus not yet in the Hebrew text of the LXX, and it was not yet in the Hebrew text of the interpolator of 49:86 a. It was intro- sDuhiu,li[aTti. 216 Ckitioal Notes on Old Testament Passages duced into our passage by one who regarded the verses as addressed to the Servant of Yahweh, and in fact, he took the phrase from one of the Servant of Yahweh songs, 49:6. With the recognition of this interpolation, one of the diflB- culties in determining the meaning of D? f^"'"]^? is eliminated. It is clear from vs. 7, which defines Yahweh's purpose, that DJ must refer to Yahweh's people Israel. Moreover, it seems to the present writer that Duhm is quite right when he declares that the phrase has not been correctly preserved, and also that Duhm's proposal to read QJ f^?"!?'? for D? ^^''^sb should be adopted. The change is exceedingly slight, merely D for '^ . It is exactly what we expect in connection with the following.' Verse 7 follows quite naturally. It expresses the manner in which Cyrus shall be a blessing to the people: He shall "open blind eyes, bring out captives from the prison, and those who sit in darkness from the house of restraint." Cyrus shall be the agent of Yahweh in the restoration of his exiled people. The phrases do not fit the Servant of Yahweh, but are altogether appropriate in connection with Cyrus. And exactly in line with this is the conclusion in vss. 8 f., which looks back to the great argument of chap. 41: I, Yahweh, that is my name; I, not the idols, have done this. To Yahweh all the glory is due. He had prophesied things in the past; these prophecies had come true. Now he foretells something new that will also certainly come to pass, the release and restoration of Israel. Taken thus the whole passage can, and must, be regarded as genuine, and is not to be given up as secondary with Duhm, Cheyne, and Marti. 4. Jeeemiah 2 : 34 The second half of this verse is difficult. The latest com- mentator of Jeremiah, Cornill, does not translate it. If one looks over the many suggestions that have been made, it may be said that today there are two that commend themselves to many scholars. The one translates, "Not in the act of breaking s The phrase 07 fl''"!^? was already read by the liXX and by the interpolator of 49 : 8, so the corruption must be very old. It, also, is due to the fact that these verses were taken as referring to the Servant of Yahweh. Julius A. Bewek 217 in didst thou find them," i. e., those whom thou hast slain were not detected in crime. Thus Brown-Driver-Briggs, Hebrew Lexicon, s. v. n"1Firi7^ ; so already the Syriac version, the Targum, Hitzig, Graf, et al. The passage is then compared with Exod. 22 : 1, according to which such killing would be justified. This is not without diflBiculty, for if the murdered people are innocent, it is rather strange that we should be assured that they were not killed in the act of breaking in. But especially difficult, on this interpretation, is the following clause ; n^^"b3 b? "'S could then only mean "but on account of all these," i. e. the afore- mentioned evil practices of nature-worship. And one might think of prophets and true Yahweh worshipers who were killed by them because of their protest against the wickedness of the people. The other interpretation is that of Duhm, which Comill regards as the most acceptable so far proposed. Duhm takes n"iriri7|a concretely as "burglars," instead of abstractly as "bur- glary," and translates, "Not with burglars have I found it, but upon all these;" with "these" he points at certain well-known people. The "it" refers to "'P'l , which must be read for D'^ in the first half of the verse. In this Duhm rightly follows @ and Giesebrecht. The reference of the whole clause would be to the human sacrifices which were offered in connection with the nature-worship which the people practiced so zealously. The difficulty with this view is that a burglar is not a type for a murderer; for one does not as a rule find blood on burglars, and this would be required here: Not with burglars — where of course everybody expects to find blood — have I found it, but upon all these! Moreover, the difference in the prepositions, S with mnrra and by with nbif;"b3 , is inexplicable. So already Cornill. Nevertheless Duhm is in the main on the right track. That the reference cannot be to judicial murders is quite clear from the following, where the people are confident that Yahweh's wrath shall turn away from them, because they believe themselves guiltless (vs. 35). It must be connected with the religious practices. The solution of the difficulties in this verse is in a slight emen- dation of the text. We should probably read D''']nDHSl for 218 Critical Notes on Old Testament Passages Iniritl531." The translation would be: "Not in hidden places have I found it (the blood), but upon all these." The antithesis is simple and natural. The murders have not been committed in secret, but openly; and the people declare in addition that they have brought no guilt on themselves thereby. Openly they carry the very traces of their crimes, of the sacrifices of children and slaves ; they are not ashamed of them or afraid because of them ; they think, on the contrary, that they have deserved mercy and for- giveness on account of them. Compare Mic, chap. 6. The people have the brazen forehead of a harlot, and refuse to be ashamed (3:3). A reading of the second and third chapters will show that this is entirely in line with the argument of the prophet. The change is simple and slight and the meaning that we get is exactly what is needed in this verse. It is significant that both Luther and A.V. instinctively felt this. Luther translated "und ist nicht heimlich, sondern offenbar an denselbigen Orten" and A.V. (also R.V. margin), "I have not foimd it by secret search but upon all these."" 5. Psalm 32 : 2 Professor Briggs, in his commentary on the Psalms, has proved conclusively that the clause iT'M'l in*l"lS ^''K'l introduces "a disturbing thought." As long as the poet refrained from con- fessing his sins he was in misfortune and sickness as the result of his sin. The sickness had been sent by God as a means of dis- cipline; it should bring the sufferer to a confession of his sins. But he was obstinate, and as a result the hand of God rested very heavily upon him until it finally brought him to penitence and confession. When he had confessed he experienced at once God's forgiving grace. Of this he tells us in his psalm. It is evident that "the poet does not regard deceit, but the obstinate refusal to confess his sin, as the obstacle to the forgiveness of sins and the removal of misfortune" (Duhm). But may it not be pos- sible that the poet wrote ''"IM and not tV'^'^ , " and in whose 10 One is tempted to suggest mnOlSS . but the feminine form does not occur in bibli- cal or later Hebrew. This would require the change of but one letter. 11 A.V. seems to have arrived at this meaning by connecting ''digging" with "search- ing," digging for something hidden. The synonym "ISH has both meanings, "dig" and " search for." Julius A. Bewee 219 spirit there is no rebellion" f This would be exactly in line with what he says in the psalm. There is, however, another argument against the genuineness of the clause, the argument from meter. "This clause adds a defective line to a strophe complete without it" (Briggs). This is held also by Bickell and Duhm. If this argument prevails, it will still be interesting and important to explain how this addition was made. For Professor Briggs himself has pointed out its striking character: "This renunciation of deceit of spirit is a very high ethical ideal, not appearing elsewhere in the Old Testa- ment." In view of this, and of the above-mentioned argument, it seems likely that the explanation of the origin of the reading n*!^'! lies along the line before followed; viz., that the clause originally read, in harmony with the context, '''1^ , which was mistaken for TP'Z^ . 6. King Jaebb in Hosea 5:13, 10:6 Of the many explanations collected most fully by President Harper [Amos and Hosea, pp. 277 f.), the one that has com- mended itself as the best is the one which regards IT" 'p'D as originally being H"! ""Sb^S "the great king"=Assyr. sarru rabti, "the old nominal ending being retained because the whole expres- sion was thought of as a proper name" (p. 273).^^ It is the king of Assyria according to this proposal who is meant by Hosea. And he is called by one of his titles of honor. Now it is significant, that this title of honor is given nowhere else in the Old Testament to the king of Assyria by Israelites. In II Kings 18:19, 28 = Is. 36:4, 13 the Assyrian king is called bllSn "ib^n by an Assyrian officer. This blljil '^b'D'n is the exact Hebrew translation of sarru rabu. If these points are kept in mind, it will be seen that the term 3"! '''zb'D was not current among the people in Hosea's time as a designation for the king of Assyria. Did Hosea, then, coin the phrase himself? That would imply that the man who protested with all his might 12 The reading of US 'Iapei> is due to corruption; probably the 2 of the old Hebrew script was mistaken for )2 • It has no claim to originality and should not be used to restore the reading 0"^ ISblO i which has no exact parallel in Assyrian, on which the whole explanation of the reading S"! IDblO and D^ "'DP'H depends. 220 Critical Notes on Old Testament Passages against political alliances with Assyria and Egypt, who opposed most earnestly foreign and especially Assyrian influence, should have come under the influence of Assyrian speech to such an extent that he applies a name of honor to the very king with whom he wants Israel to have nothing to do. What possible reason could he have had, he of all men, to call the king of Assyria by his proud title ? Only on one supposition could it be made probable that Hosea used this oflScial name: if he referred to it sarcastically in addressing the princes and nobles, using a phrase which he might have heard at court. But there is no trace of sarcasm in 5:13 and 10:6 in the use of the phrase. In view of the difficulties which beset even this brilliant sugges- tion I venture to submit a new proposal. In brief it is this: King Jareb is no one else but King Jeroboam, '2T' is a simple abbreviation of D3'l"l"' . It is under King Jeroboam that Hosea prophesies (Hos. 1:1), and he is mentioned by name in the superscription of Hosea's book. That such abbreviations of names were not uncommon is well known; compare, e. g., Ahaz, whose full name was Jehoahaz, the Assyrians called him lauhazij or Coniah, Jeohonia, Jehojachin; or, Dy53]5'' I Chron. 24:23, where the Vatican text has Iokoim, or Shalman for Shalmaneser (Hos. 10:14). The passages read, then, as follows: 5:13 And Ephraim saw his sickness And Israel" his sore And Ephraim went to Asshur And King Jeroboam sent (messengers) to him. TT' "]b52 is subject of the last clause. For bi< read rbK . The parallelism of the lines is perfect. 10:6a Yea, it itself shall be brought to Asshur As a tribute of King Jeroboam. 31"' "^b^ab iin'D is not a tribute for King Jareb, but a tribute of King Jareb. I prefer to retain the Hebrew text rather than change it to "Tb53 lnnD53 , because it is indetermined. The difiPerent use of b in the first half of the line does not speak against taking 13 This explanation strengthens the argument against the originality of Judah in the Julius A. Bbwbb 221 it as above. — It is probably due to the b in 10:6 and to the omission of the suflBx with bi^ in 5 : 13 that scholars have always thought a foreign king, Assyrian, Egyptian, or Arabian, was referred to in these passages. The historical situation under Jeroboam II has led historians to conclude that Assyria must have been responsible to a large extent for Israel's victories over Syria. "Jeroboam's own rela- tions to Assyria," says George Adam Smith," "have not been recorded either by the Bible or by the Assyrian monuments. It is hard to think that he paid no tribute to the 'King of Kings.'" Now, Hos. 5:13; 10:6 explicitly refer to the tribute of Jeroboam. Hos. 5:13 shows that in a time of great distress, when the nation had received a sore "wound," King Jeroboam turned to Assyria for help and "healing." It is highly probable that the Syrian danger is referred to here. Hosea is opposed to these political schemes. There is only one who can help Israel: Yahweh, and Him they have forsaken! Out of His hands no one, not even Assyria, can save them. Hos. 10 : 6 is not a reference to the past, but an announcement of future happenings. The political situa- tion has not been remedied by seeking Assyrian help, as Hosea had said. Political alliances drain the strength of the nation (7:8). Hosea foresees the time when King Jeroboam will have to send not only the contents of the treasury of the temple at Bethel, but the golden calf as part of the tribute to Assyria. There is a grim sarcasm in the passage, though not in the phrase i"!"' "ibo ; the golden bull, whom Hosea ridicules, will be sent as a present to Assyria. He cannot help, he is worth only the price of his gold. And then, the folly of it! It will be all of no avail, for the one who will destroy Israel is Yahweh; cf. 10:2 and 10:6, 8. None can avert the awful catastrophe. In neither of these passages is Assyria the instrument of Yahweh, or is exile in Assyria contemplated by Hosea. 7. Composition of Hosea, Chap. 2 In an article on "The Story of Hosea' s Marriage" in AJSL, January, 1906, pp. 120-30, I tried to prove in regard to chap. 2 14 " The Book of the Twelve Prophets," Expositor's Bible, 1898, Vol. I, p. 46. 222 Oeitioal Notes on Old Testament Passages that certain elements which have been regarded as secondary are in reality a part of Hosea's own story, telling of his determi- nation to do with his adulterous wife as was customary with adul- teresses. The following are the verses according to the numbers of the verses in the Hebrew text, which differ from those of the English Versions: I. 2-Aa^ She is not my wife, And I am not her husband, 2:6 And her children I will not pity. Because they are children of harlotry, 2:7a For their mother has played the harlot, She that conceived them has done shamefully. 2 : 12 And now will I uncover her shame Before the eyes of her lovers, And no man shall save her out of my hand. There is, however, another part of Hosea's own story contained in vss. 4, 5 as Seesemann" and Meinhold'* had already pointed out, but I had not seen their writings at the time. Meinhold thinks that vs. 3 belonged originally to the Hosea-story and restores it as follows, nann ^b Tiab^ ^xiy-sibi b^-\r ''Sib "lajsi "then said I [i. e., Hosea] to my sons Jezreel and Lo-'Ammi and to my daughter Lo-Ruhamah." This is a very ingenious and plausible suggestion. Perhaps we might restore a little more in harmony with the Massoretic Text as follows, "'Xjy-xb'l bi^nrb ^^istl nsril ^ DtliUKbl "then said I to Jezreel and Lo-'Ammi and to their sister Lo-Ruhamah." One cannot, of course, be dogmatic about such a conjectural reconstruction. But the reconstructed verse forms an admirable introduction to the following, and one has but to read the verses in the light of the suggestion that they belong to the Hosea-story to feel how evident this is. II. 2:3 Then said I to Jezreel and Lo-'Ammi and to their sister Lo-Ruhamah, 2:4* Contend with your mother, contend, that she put away her whoredoms from her face, and her adulteries from between her breasts, 2:5a Lest I strip her naked, and set her as in the day of her birth. 15 Israel und Judah bei Amos und Hosea nebst einem ExTcurs Uber Bos. 1-S, 1898, pp. 32-44. ^^Studien zur israelitischen Eeligionsgeschichte, 1903, pp. 64-73. Julius A. Bewer 223 This part belongs to an earlier stage of the story of Hosea than 1. Hosea tries to make his wife leave off from her adulterous practices. But in vain! Then comes the stern resolve of 1, Upon this follows chap. 3. I thought that this was all that we had of Hosea's story, and so I wrote "The story breaks off here. We are not told what Hosea did. But there can be no doubt that he obeyed the divine command."" But there is still another part, which Seesemann has correctly recognized: vss. 8, 9. It is again striking and interesting that these verses have been regarded as not original." They are as follows: III. 2:8 Therefore, behold I will hedge up her way" with thorns, And I will build her a wall that she may not find her paths. 2:9 And when she follows her lovers she shall not overtake them; and when she seeks them she shall not find them. Then shall she say, I will go and return to my first husband, for it was better with me then than now. Hosea shows us here how he fulfilled Yahweh's command of chap. 3. He will make it impossible for his wife to have further intercourse with her lovers. He seems to have put her away from his home. He does not supply her with means of living and makes it impossible for her to gain a living by harlotry. A period of suffering results which is intended as moral discipline for her, the result of which is to be her willing return to her husband. With this Hosea-story there is now woven together the Israel- story, which tells of Israel and her husband Yahweh. It is interesting to see how closely connected the verses belonging to the Israel-story are, now that they are disentangled from the Hosea-story. The beginning is fragmentary. "ioc. c«., p. 125. 18 Compare Harper, Amoa and Hosea, p. 236. 19 Hassoretic text haa " thy " way, Greek awr^i. 224 Ceitioal Notes on Old Testament Passages 2:56 .... And I will make her as the wilderness, and set her like a dry land, and slay her with thirst; 2:76 For she said, I will go after my lovers. Who give me my bread and my water, my wool and my flax, my oil and my drink. 2:10 And she did not know that it was I who gave her The corn and the new wine and the oil and multiplied her silver and gold [which they used for Baal]. 2:11 Therefore I will take back again my corn in its time, and my wine in its season, And will pluck away my wool and my flax given to cover her nakedness. 2:13 And I will also cause to cease all her mirth, her feasts, her new moons and her sabbaths and all her festal assemblies. The remaining verses of the chapter are all from the Israel-story. The one verse, which does not belong here is vs. 20, for it breaks the close connection between vss. 18, 19, and 21. In vs. 19 we must read TBp , out of thy mouth, instead of tV&2 ; and in vs. 22 instead of Ti\TT Tit^ read ■'flj^ , which was regarded as an abbre- viated '^ flN = mn^ riii . Both changes are obvious. On the genuineness of the disputed verses see AJSL, January, 1906, pp. 128 f . There are thus these two stories, the Hosea-story and the Israel-story, woven together in chap. 2 almost as much as in Hosea's own life. It is not simply a literary interest, but a pro- found human interest in the life a:nd suffering of this great prophet of love that makes the separation of these two stories so important. 8. Isaiah 14:28 The arguments for placing the prophecy concerning Philistia, Isaiah 14:29-32, in the year when Sargon died, 705 B. o., appear to me conclusive. They need not be repeated here, for they are Julius A. Beweb 225 well known. This date involves the admission that the super- scription in vs. 28 is redactional and that its authority has to be given up, for it states that the oracle dates from the year in which King Ahaz died. But Winckler in his Alttestamentliche Vniersuchungen, pp. 135 ff., maintains that the introductory for- mula must be ancient and not the work of a redactor. And the genuine formulas in 6:1 and 20:1 so altogether similar to this one, attest the ancient character of 14:28. Winckler dates the oracle from the year 720 B. o. The diflSculties connected with this date are formidable; compare Whitehouse, "Isaiah" in The New Century Bible, ad loc, and also Marti, Das Buck Jesaia, ad loc. The element of truth in Winckler's position is his insistence on the genuineness of vs. 28. But it is most improbable that King Ahaz was mentioned originally in the formula. The whole oracle shows that the king who had died and over whose death Philistia was exulting was King Sargon, and the new king, who would be a more terrible oppressor, was his successor Sennache- rib. Whether the introductory sentence contained originally the name of Sargon, which later by some accident dropped out, we cannot tell, but it is evident from the oracle itself that we must explain "in the year of the King's death" as referring to Sargon's death in 705 B. o. But how could anyone read Ahaz into the text? The reason is very simple : he misread the original text of Isaiah which must have have been nTH mi'Dn HTriKT '^baH niaTlDTr:! "in the year of the King's (Sargon's) death I saw this oracle." For the construction compare Isa. 6:1: nijS'lSlI irT^TS" 'p'un nia-nSlTQ, and for the combination of TMTi with XT1353 compare Hab. 1:1: nrn "nrs J^TSSDH; Isa. 13:1: nrn "nUi^ bns Vsm-a. The term i^lUM for oracle was a popular term in the time of Jeremiah and there is no reason why the term XT2553 and the phrase 1^12353 HTH should not have been used by Isaiah. The restoration of the original text is extremely simple, involves a minimum of change, is in accord with the prevailing idea concerning the date, and regards an introduction as original, which the interesting genuine formulas of dating in Isaiah vouch for. 226 Ceitioal Notes on Old Testament Passages Of course, if the name Sargon was originally in the text, fol- lowing 'ibjsn , which, however, I do not know, the misreading could take place only after it had been omitted for some reason or other. The misreading was a very natural mistake and involved that the »1 at the end of THii was regarded as an abbre- viation of In"'!!. The whole process can easily be seen by pla- cing the two texts together: nrn is^man ntriHi ^ban ma-nsffln TT T T ' THE ORIGIN OF SOME CUNEIFORM SIGNS GEORGE A. BARTON THE OKIGIN OF SOME CUNEIFORM SIGNS Geobge a. Baeton Professor Friedrich Delitzsch, to whose industry and scholar- ship Assyriology owes so much, was the first to attempt a sys- tematic explanation of the origin of all the cuneiform signs. Up to the publication of his Entstehung des dltesten Schriftsy stems, oder der Ursprung der Keilschriftzeichen, Leipzig, 1897, it had been taken for granted that the cuneiform signs originated in hieroglyphic pictures, although for a large part of them no one had been able to suggest a hieroglyphic form. In reality the origin of about two hundred of them remained unexplained. Delitzsch, in the work mentioned, proposed a new theory of the origin of many of these. While admitting that certain signs originated in pictures, and that others were formed by combi- nations of pictures, or by doubling and tripling origiuEd pictures, he set forth the fact that the Babylonian scribes themselves recognized certain signs as gunus of simpler signs, i. e., as Delitzsch holds, they were made from the simpler signs by add- ing three or more wedges, sometimes in one position, sometimes in another. In meaning these gunned signs expressed, in Delitzsch's opinion, a "heightening" or " potentializing" of the meaning of the simple signs. From this Delitzsch went a step farther, and inferred that besides this potentializing motif the Babylonian scribes employed many other motifs, each one of which expressed some abstract idea, and that our present syllabary is largely composed of signs artificially formed by combinations of these motifs. This theory of Delitzsch, although Hommel protested against it at the Oriental Congress in Paris in 1897, has been pretty generally regarded with favor by Assyriologists. Among Amer- ican scholars Professor Kent' has approved and amplified it, and Professor Prince'^ accepts its explanations for most of the signs. 1 T?ie American Journal of Semitic Languages, XI 1 1, 200 ff . 2 Materials for a Sumerian Lexicon, passim. 229 230 The Obigin op Some Cuneiform Signs The authority of Delitzsch's great name and the fact that the theory gave us a semblance of knowledge where before we had only ignorance, led the present writer at first to regard the work of Delitzsch with favor.' As my Semitic Seminary was devoted in the year 1901-2 to Old Babylonian inscriptions, I was led to study the whole subject anew, and became convinced that Delitzsch's theory is too abstract* to fit the primitive conditions in which the cuneiform signs originated. The discovery was then made that in early times the picture of an object was often made in different ways according to the pleasure of the writer, that in later times there was a struggle for survival between these variant forms, and that what the later scribes regarded as gunus of a simple sign is in most cases simply the survival of a variant picture* of that simple sign. Miss Ellen Seton Ogden, who was a member of the Semitic Seminary in that year, deserves in part the credit of making this discovery with me, and is now at work upon a disser- tation in which she will prove that any account of the origin of cuneiform writing based upon the gunu theory of the Baby- lonian scribes is necessarily as little like the real origin of them as a history of Israel based upon the P document would be like the real history of that people. Any sound method of investi- gation must first take into account the earliest known forms; secondly, it must take into account all the simple ideographic meanings, not simply a few of the most common, as Delitzsch has done ; and thirdly, it must follow the psychological principle that the picture originally represented some objective thing, and be able to show how the various meanings came, by psychological processes, to be attached to the picture in question. In applying these principles one will naturally be compelled to make allow- ances in many cases for a mixture of the meanings of two signs. Such mixture has arisen, first, from a similarity of the forms of two signs, and, secondly, from similarity in the sounds of the names of the objects which the primitive signs represented. These would seem to be the sound principles on which to investigate this subject, though in so complicated a problem these will not always enable us to arrive at certain results. 3 See the writer's Semitic Origins, 161. 4Cf. JAOS, XXIII, 28, n. 17. Geoegb a. Babton 231 The writer hopes to publish within a few months an investiga- tion of the whole cuneiform syllabary based upon these principles. In the present article he takes the opportunity of presenting in advance a few of the results in a form different from that which in the larger work the complicated nature of the material will render necessary. Egyptologists are accustomed to arrange the Egyptian hiero- glyphs under such . headings as "figures of men," "figures of women," "members of the human body," "quadrupeds," "parts of quadrupeds," "implements,"^ etc. We can now begin to do the same for Babylonia, though our lists under each heading are as yet much briefer than the Egyptian lists. In the following pages but a few of the writer's results are presented, and those presented are selected almost at random. An effort has been made to illus- trate the possibility of introducing into the cuneiform syllabary the same classification which Egyptologists use in arranging the hiero- glyphs. Thus in the following table under A are grouped human forms; under B, parts of the human body; under 0, animal forms; imder D, parts of animals; E, birds; F, fishes; G, trees and plants; H, water and canals; I, houses and their parts; J, implements and vessels; K, articles of apparel; L, fire. Had space permitted, the examples under several of these heads might have been made more numerous, and several additional classes might have been added. In the first part of the table a tolerably complete genealogy of the later forms is in each case given, but from class G, No. 2, onward, only a few of the forms of each sign are presented. This compres- sion for the sake of economizing space does not seriously affect the illustrative examples. No effort has been made to follow the archaic revival of old forms which may be seen in many of the records of Assyrian Neo-Babylonian kings. That is suflBciently done in Amiaud and M6chineau's Tableau Compari. The prin- ciples on which this work is done must in the present article be presented by illustration rather than by full demonstration. The sign in A, 1 has long been correctly recognized as the picture of a man." A, 2, Delitzsch regards as the picture of a c See the tables in the Egyptian grammare of Brugsch and Erman. Hommel followed this method in the paper read at the Paris Congress of Orientalists, but I was unable to procure a copy of his article until after this essay had been sent to press. 6 So, Houghton, TSBA, VI, 462, and Delitzsch, Ureprung der KelUchriftzeichen, 23. 232 The Obigin of Some Cuneiform Signs man, plus the motif for 'great," but Kylands made a suggestion, which is quoted and approved by Houghton,^ that it is the picture of a man surmounted by a crown or umbrella. This suggestion is, I believe, on the right track. Primitive Babylonian sheiks or kings, like many others, wore a magnificent headdress, out of which the crowns of later time were developed, and this motif for 'great' is nothing but a rude representation of this primitive headdress.' In considering A, 3, the ideographic meanings do not aid us, as the one meaning given (Kakasiga, S^, IV, 27) has not yet been successfully translated; but the form suggests that the original was the picture of a man standing with one arm bent and the hand resting on the hip. A, 4 of the table is a difficult sign, as among its ideographic meanings there are none which designate objective concrete things. The meanings are: 'seize,' 'go out,' 'be high,' 'be full,' 'flaming' or 'brilliant,' 'lift up,' 'lifting up' (of the hands in prayer), 'pardon,' 'be high,' 'be heavy,' 'to honor.' The earliest form of the sign which we have is considerably removed from a pictograph, but is still sufficiently close to suggest that its original was the picture of a king wearing his primitive headdress, standing with one hand resting on his hip and the other outstretched. B, 1 represented the legs of a man (cf . the Egyptian y\, Erman, Aeg. Grammatik, 2d ed., p. 208, No. 96). These strong legs were apparently in accordance with Semitic ideas used to denote strength. (Of. "He delighteth not in the strength of the horse, he taketh no pleasure in the legs of a man," Ps. 147:10.) By natural psychological processes it then came to signify 'deeds,' 'fight,' 'wrath,' 'anger,' and 'rise against.' B, 2, as Delitzsch has recognized,'" represents the buttocks, and so naturally came to stand for 'later,' 'after,' 'future.' B, 3, 4, and 5 form an interest- ing series. B, 3 is a head ; B, 4 the same with two lines which represent the lips, while the analogy of the development of these two, as shown by a comparison of their genealogies, makes it clear that B, 5 represented a head to the face of which a beard was attached. This apparently suggested a full-grown man, hence we have the meanings 'strength,' 'be strong,' 'protection.' These ' £7^:2, pp. 103 ff. 8 rss^, VI, 462 n. 1. 9 Cf . below, K, 2. iO Nachwort, p. 45, n. 1. George A. Barton 233 naturally suggest the opposite, 'fear,' which became also one of the meanings. It wonld also stand for an old man, hence it signi- fies 'be old,' 'rest' It also represents two deities, Salulu and Salmu. Was it because these gods were pictured with beards? Delitzsch" makes much of the fact that the Assyrian scribes {S^, II, 42) call this sign a gunu of B, 1. That was natural in later times when the old pictorial form was lost, but research now makes it clear that originally the sign was born not because an abstract potentializing motif was attached to a picture of a head, but because it pictured a head with a beard. B, 6 was evidently originally a rude outline of a head and neck. Its position is the reverse of B, 3. Perhaps this was to emphasize the idea of the neck. This picture expresses directly the meanings 'neck,' 'head,' and 'man.' Through the meaning 'head' the meanings 'front,' 'totality,' etc., might attach themselves to the sign. Through the meaning ' man,' that of 'brother,' 'side,' etc., came to be expressed by it. Through 'front,' it might come to signify 'fight,' though this meaning may have been suggested by the severed head. How it came to mean 'house,' 'door,' 'beam,' 'peg,' and 'land,' it is difficult to tell, unless there was a mixture with pictures of houses (I, 3, 4, or 5). B, 7, explained by Delitzsch" as gunu, is probably, as comparison with B, 6 shows, a neck and head surmounted by some sort of headdress or burden. Its one meaning is 'tribute.' Whether it pictured tribute brought on the head, as portrayed on the black obelisk of Shalmaneser, or whether the severed head itself, often bound with a costly turban, was tribute or booty, it is difficult to say. Perhaps this and the preceding sign were pictured reversed to indicate that the head was severed from the body, in which case the head itself would be the 'tribute.' B. 8 is evidently the left shoulder, arm, and hand. Its one ideographic meaning is 'left' B, 9, 10, 12, and 13 have long been recognized as of phal- lic origin," but B, 11 has not before been satisfactorily explained. Delitzsch (op. cit., 177 ff.), explains it as compounded of a motif for direction plus a motif which he cannot explain. The earliest 11 UKZ, 63. That tlie scribes sometimes grouped as gunus signs wliich had not even a common origin may be seen by comparing S', 19 with Thuieau-Dangin's Becherches, Nos. 447 and 91. 12 UKZ, 123. laOppert, Exp. en Mieopotamie, II, 111, 115; Delitzsch, UKZ, 93, 28 fl. 234 The Origin op Some Cunbifoem Signs form of the sign bears a striking resemblance to a clay phallus found at Ashur and pictured in the Mittheilungen der deutsch. Orients-Gesellschaft, No. 22 (June, 1904), p. 26, and I have no doubt represented an ithyphallus. Such a picture would naturally express 'unto,' 'in,' 'in the midst of,' 'out from,' 'with,' 'desire,' etc. B, 14 has also long been recognized" as a foot, though until a few years since no such perfect picture had been found as that in an inscription published by Scheil [DiUgation en Perse, II, 130) . Class C represents animals. No. 1 was probably the picture of a donkey, as in proto-Elamitic, or a donkey's head and neck, as apparently in the Hoffman tablet. Delitzsch's explanation (op. cit., 149), seems unnatural in comparison. The meanings 'ass' and 'horse' confirm this origin. C, 2 was evidently the picture of a pig. This the one ideographic meaning, ' swine,' confirms. In Class D, No. 1 is the picture of the tuft of the tail of some animal, as a cow or lion. Our form comes from the time of Sargon, however, and what the first perpendicular sign represents it is impossible to tell. As an ideogram it means 'tail,' 'part of an animal or human body,' and possibly 'fly' — meanings easily suggested by the picture. D, 2 represents a dressed animal hung up by the hind legs and cut open in front, such as may be seen both in the East and West where meat is dressed upon farms. It means 'flesh.' D, 3, 4, and 5 represent teats. Possibly D 5 is that of a human breast. This origin most satisfactorily accounts for all their meanings. This origin proposed for D 3 and 5 is not new,'^ but so far as I know D 4 has not been so explained; but the forms and the meanings ('fat,' 'oil,' 'bright,' 'full,' 'satisfied,' etc.) combine to prove this. D, 6 and 7 are pictures of the head of an ox, differing only in that one represents the eyes and the other does not. Class E contains pictures of birds. Nos. 1 and 2 are too clear "See Oppert, EM, II, 108, and DelitzBch, UKZ, 16, 28. 16 Cf. Ball, PSBA, XIII, 491, who mentione this explanation for D, 3 only to reject it. Ball's objection that it did not also mean ' milk ' loses its force when we know that variant pictures of the same thing had that meaning. Cf . also for D, 5 Prince, Sumerian Lex., Ill, who gets at the meaning, 'teat,' in a roundabout and artificial way after the manner of DelitzBch. It is far more probable that it was the simple picture of a ' teat,' Gbokge a. Barton 235 to need comment," No. 3 is a bird and an egg. This had appar- ently never been suspected until the researches of Thureau- Dangin brought to light the pictorial form. This form satisfac- torily accounts for the ideographic meanings, 'to bear,' 'a son which is borne,' 'some sexual organ' (possibly 'clitoris'), 'kin' or 'family,' 'womb' or 'inclosure.' By a natural psychological process, 'impetuous,' 'strong,' and 'to fear' became attached to it also. E, 4, which means 'raven' and 'bird,' is shown by analogy with the developed forms of E, 1, as well as by the meanings, to have been originally the picture of a bird also. B, 5 has long been a puzzle. Its meanings: 'young offspring,' 'young ox,' (or 'child'), 'cattle,' 'kid,' 'gazelle,' are all derivable from a single idea. Delitzsch (op. cit., 160) holds that it is compounded of i-^, 'gazelle,' plus ^, 'crowd.' When, however, we compare this sign with the egg in E, 3, and with the way in which the bird forms (E, 1, 2, and 3) developed in Babylonian writing, it becomes clear that this sign was the picture of a young bird in process of being hatched from an egg. This view, when natural psycho- logical association is taken into consideration, would account for all the meanings. It stood for young bird and then was used to signify other young animals. Class F includes pictures of fishes. P, 1 is evidently the diagram of a fish." This would account for the meanings: 'fish,' 'to peel' (on account of preparing a fish for eating), 'the god Ea,' because he was represented in the form of a fish;'* then from the greatness of Ea it came to stand for 'prince,' 'great,' and 'very much.' F, 2 and 3 have long been recognized as fishes," though Delitzsch [op. cit., 63 ff.) follows the Babylonian scribes in regard- ing No. 3 as a gunu of No. 2. The meanings 'monster,' 'broad,' 'fat,' are equally explained on the supposition that the picture represented a larger fish with a dorsal fin. 16 On E, 1 see Hommel, Sum. Lex., No. 67; Hilprecht, OBI, Pt. II, 35, n. 4; Ball, PSBA, XIII, 378 and XX, 16flE. ; also Barton, JA08, XXII, 121. On E, 2 cf. Oppert, EM, II, 108, and Honghton, TSBA, VI, 464. 1' Sayoe, quoted by Honghton, TSBA, VI, 470, explained it as a ecepter which a prince carried ; Jensen, Kosmologie, 343, regards it as originally a weapon ; while Delitzsch, UKZ, 161S., componnds it of h i ■ I , ' man,' pins the gunn signs. 18 See Barton, Semitic Origins, pp. 91 and 196. 19 See Oppert, EM, II, p. 108, and Delitzsch, UKZ, 70 ff . 236 The Oeigin op Some Ouneijokm Signs In Class G we have placed trees and plants. G, 1 (unless the sign has been written the other end up from the usual method) is a potted plant. If reversed, it may be the picture of a pine or cypress. Its chief meanings are 'garden' and 'cypress' or 'pine.' G, 2 represents two plants growing in a pot. Its two clear meanings are 'plant' and 'garment.' The latter meaning was probably attached to the sign through the use of flax as material for clothing. G, 3 Delitzsch has rightly said^° is a plant or tree growing in (or by) water. G, 4 and 6 are reeds ;^' G, 5 two trees growing. All the meanings of these signs have grown out of ideas suggested by these pictures. G, 7, as has long been recognized, represents two heads of grain. ^^ G, 8, representing a palm tree, in early times was expressed through variant pictures. The picture which survived, as Professor Hommel suggested to me in a private letter after reading Semitic Origins, pp. 105 ff., was the picture of a palm tree growing in the midst of irrigating ditches, the tops of which were blowing in the wind as shown in the following sketch:"' Under H are grouped water and canals. H, 1, the wavy lines for water, resembles both the early Chinese" (^) and the Egyptian^^ (~) characters. A common psychological impulse underlies the mode of expression in these widely different centers of evolution. H, 2 represents the little irrigating ditches by which gardens are irrigated. One sees them everywhere in the East.'^^ H, 3 is not so certain. Hommel has suggested (see Delitzsch, Nachwort, p. 19) that it is the picture of a leathern bottle, and so suggested 'desert.' It seems to me more probable that it is a rude outline of the lower Mesopotamian valley with its two great rivers and (in early times) occasional sections of irrigated and so 2opp. ci*., p. 13ia, 21 No. 6 is not a gunu of No. 4, but a picture of a larger variety of reed, as the earliest form makes evident. 22 Cf. Houghton, TSBA, VI, 475; Ball, PSBA, XX, 19; and Delitzsch, UKZ, 125 S. Ball and Delitzsch are not so specific as Houghton. 23 For previous explanations, see Ball, FSB A, XVI, 193, and Delitzsch, pp. cit., lUS. 24 See Chalfant, Early Chinese Writing (Pittsburg, 1906), PI. VI, No. »4. 26 Cf. Erman, op. cit, p. 217, No. 55. 26 So Delitzsch, op. cit., p. 159. GrEOEGE A. Barton 237 fertile land. That would account for the meanings 'plain,' 'lands,' etc. By an extension of the latter meaning it came to signify 'desert,' 'elevated country,' and then 'back.' Class I includes houses and their parts. I, 1 is probably lattice-work to suggest a reed house. I, 3, 4, and 5 are perhaps reed houses built on stilts. One of them represents the river in overflow, as the fish in the lower story shows. Possibly Nos. 3 and 4 were intended to represent the common reed hut of the country with a band about it to hold it together." I, 2 is clearly a picture of an oriental door."' One sees them in many places closely resembling this, with a door socket at the bottom, the revolving post standing in it, and the door considerably raised above the threshold. Class J includes implements. Nos. 1, 2, and 3 are clearly arrows. Hilprecht {OBI, Pt. II, p. 35) is much more nearly right than Delitzsch as to the origin of J, 2. J, 4, 5, 6, and 7 are different forms of nets. J, 4 was shaped somewhat like a modem insect net and is represented as held by the two hands. This view is confirmed by the meanings. The concrete meanings are a 'net' and 'pit'(?). These are just the objective meanings from which the others can be psychologically derived or suggested, e.g., 'throw down,' 'remove,' 'to storm,' 'to take,' 'to spoil,' etc. By variation and extension of these the sign was used to express ' to bring,' ' to think,' 'to protect,' 'to love,' and the 'goddess Ishtar.' The last meaning was probably attached to it because the goddess ensnared men; then 'to love' was associated with it because of the goddess. J, 5 and 7 Delitzsch correctly recognized as nets,^ though as the oldest form of J, 6 had not come to light when Delitzsch wrote he went astray in explaining that sign.'" It is in reality a net reversed, and as J, 5 naturally expresses 'overthrow,' 'curse,' 'cord,' 'rope,' 'sinew,' so No. 6, 'a snare rendered impotent,' sug- gested by the fact that it was a snare, 'fear,' 'be afraid;' then, 27 See Peters, Nippur, II, 74 S. ; Hilprecht, Exploratiom in Bible Lands, 160 ; Clay, Light on the Old Testament from Babel, p. 282. 28 Oppert, EM, II, 108, was on the right track, calling it a column and lintel. Lehmann, Litteratur Centralblatt, January 8, 1898, suggested the right explanation. 29 UKZ, 165 fl. soiftjd., 97 ff. He explains it as composed of two gnnu motifs. 238 The Origin op Some Ouneifoem Signs from its position 'to wash' and 'anoint,' washing and anointing having such a prominent part to play in removing spells; then, as a special extension of this line of meanings it denoted a class of priests who attended to such matters. The group J, 8-J, 14 consists of pictures derived from various forms of pottery.'' J, 8 is a clay bowl for measuring, having a round bottom such that it could be easily held in the hand.'^ J, 9 is probably a jar with a pointed bottom, such as one often sees in the East, though the meanings in this case are too uncertain to help in identifying the picture. J, 10 is shown by analogy with the other signs derived from pictures of jars to be derived from the representation of such an objecf Here as in other cases the jar is made to stand for some special thing that a jar could contain. Possibly they had a special type of jar for honey. At all events this ideogram was ultimately limited, as appears from our present information, to 'honey' and 'good.' J, 11 is a common drinking- jug, similar to those one sees often in the East, set on a rude stool, such as may be found today.'* It signified 'a vessel,' then, 'abundance,' then, possibly because of its pressure on the base, it expressed 'oppression,' and 'distress.' J, 12 and 13 are variant pictures of the same kind of drinking- jar as that pictured in No. 11, though without the stool or base. The only real difference is that one has a line of ornamentation on the side and the other does not. In usage the ornamented one was used to suggest 'strong drink,' then, by a natural process of association, 'speak,' and 'approach,' while the plain one signified simply 'vessel' or 'pot.' J, 14 was a jar of a different form. The one or two lines of ornamentation on it were transformed by the later scribes into the sign for water. This fact indicates that we should be cautious in assuming, except in the presence of very early epigraphic evi- dence, that a sign is composed by putting together two others. '° 31 See de Morgan's pottery series of proto-Elamite signs, in Beciieil de travaux, XXVII, 237 ff. 32 First identified by Barton, JAOS, XXIII, 24. 33 In JAOS, XXIII, 24 I made a tentative guess at the original of this— a bee entering a hive — which I now abandon. 34 One ought, perhaps, to compare snch bases for holding jars as are pictured in Ben- zinger's Heb. Archaeologie, pp. 252 S. 35Delitzsch, UKZ, 168 ff., makes this inference. Geoege a. Barton 239 J, 15 is the picture of a covered and probably a steaming pot.'° It therefore represented 'rejoicing,' 'exulting,' 'bursting forth,' and probably on account of its heat, the opposite idea of 'be afraid' (galadu). Under K, I have classed signs which I regard as originally representations of articles of clothing, although I am aware that my opinion in the case of one of them rests on uncertain evidence. K, 1 I regard as a picture of some article of clothing of a priest, and K, 2 the headdress of a sheik or king. It is true that the oldest forms of K, 1 known to us do not resemble anything closely enough to be certainly identified. It seems clear, however, that two different pictures have been blended in the sign.'' In order to form an opinion as to the origin, we must call in the assistance of the meanings. They are 'a cistern' (?) or 'precious stone' (alallu), 'road' or 'progress' (alaktu), 'to make sweet,' 'man' or 'lord,' 'wool,' an 'offering,' 'gift' or 'almoner,' 'a seal,' 'to count,' 'number,' 'a kind of tree,' 'god Marduk,' 'to cut off,' 'an ofl&cer,' 'a jar,' 'a signet,' and 'a priest.' Such a list appears at first to be a hopeless mixture. As Thureau-Dangin has noted, however, the meanings, 'water-holder' and 'jar'" have been at- tached to this sign through a mixture with J, 14. Of the other meanings, 'wool' is an objective and primitive one, and I suspect that the picture represented some priestly breastplate or headdress, made of that material, that the sign came to stand accordingly for 'priest,' and that the other meanings ■ were gradually associated vdth the sign in consequence of the duties of a priest. Of course, however, the discovery of an earlier text may show that this view is mistaken.'' K, 2 has already been treated above under A, 2. I believe it was the headdress of a sheik or a king, and for that reason came to be the symbol for 'great.' Its occurrence in one text separated from the head of the king,'' when one considers the freedom of 36 Cf. Barton, JAOS, XXII, 127, u. 2. " I cannot agree with Thurean-Dangin, SuppUmenty No. 419, that the two forma were originally the same. 38 Delitzsch, UKZ, 168 S., regards it as a system of canals. 39 Thureau-Dangin, SuppUment^ No. 99. 240 The Origin of Some Cuneipoem Signs treatment which the ancient scribes allowed themselves, does not disprove that view. L, 1 is a primitive bowl into which two tinder sticks are inserted to ignite them by friction/" It stood accordingly for 'fire,' 'smith,' etc. L, 2, meaning 'brightness,' 'new,' 'shining,' was a represen- tation of a torch. 'Pour out' is a meaning attached to it by psy- chological association. NOTE The abbreviations in the following table will nearly all be readily recognized by Assyriologists. The following, perhaps, need explanation: D6c. = de Sarzec's D4couvertes en Chald6e. DiUgation or D61. — J. de Morgan's D6Ugation en Perse. HLC = Barton's Haverford Library Collection of Cuneiform Tablets, Philadelphia, 1905. Manistusu = the inscription of that monarch published in D4Ugation, Vol. II. Kanke = Babylonian Expedition of the University of Pennsylvania, Series A : Cuneiform Texts, Vol. VI. Rec. = Thureau-Dangin, Recherches sur I'origine de l'6criture cunii- form,e. RTC = Thureau-Dangin's Recueil de tablettes chald6ennes, Paris, 1903, Sup. = SuppUmsnt to Thureau-Dangin's Recherches. Tablet ijj = an unpublished archaic tablet. UKZ = Delitzsch's Enstehung des dltesten Schr if tsy stems oder Ursprung der Keilschriftzeichen, Leipzig, 1897. *•> Delitzsch, op. cit.^ 178 and Prince, Sumerian Lexicon, p. 58, have thus correctly explained it. George A. Barton 241 L. 1 /vrtT\ ^i£fcs' Ur-Nina, D&e. PI. 2 "'», No. 2. tW e:4i>» Eannadu, Die. PI. 3, A, III, 4. ZS^ttJa. Lugalzaggisi, OBI, No. 87, 1, 7. rTMDDni*- JUanistusu, Face A, XII, 6 and 14. , "Bsif^ Gudea Statue, B, VIII, 3. f^i?^ "' Ur. HLC, PI. 2. No. 379, 1, 1. ^^^ Hammurabi, Lavis, X, 3. l4^^ Hammurabi, Letters, No. 17, 7. ^^ El-Amarna, Berlin, No. 8, 20. 'l^ Cassite, Clay, Vol. XIV, No. 167, 23. ^ " " " " " 9la, 26 lJf\ /K Nebuchad. I, I, 38. '\ 1 L li ~ -' 1^4. Neo-Bab. e. g. Strassm. Nab. No. 6, 15. A. 2 gin>.>. 3^>4fff=» En-sag-kus-an-na, OBI, No. 90, 2. i'9S Ur-Nina, DAo. PI 2 "is, Nn 1 t-'rTn' 3 ""^ *-' III ^ /»-^7f^ Eannadu. D&c. PI. 4, A. I, 5. 3-. Pre-Sargonic, JCI, No. 1, env. II, 4. ^,P^y*^ Gudea Statue, B, VII, 14. ^f^ GudeaCyl.A,VII,l ^<^ "■ Ur, e. g. HLC, PI. 47, No. 376, rev. 12. ^g*;^5» Hammurabi, Laws, I, 2, and passim. ^^ Period of Hammurabi, Ranke, No. 28, 25. fc^f* El-Amarna, Berl., No. 104, 1, and passim. tp^;:;; Cassite, Clay, Vol XIV, No. 56, 9. ^=^f6- [— 1 Lugalzaggisi, OBI, No. 87, I, 28. <^ " " " " 111,26. «c:^|;=f Manistusu, Face A, XIV, 7. <;:(|^ TCI, No. 4, env. II, 2. yrf y Gudea Statue, B, II, 9 and gammurabi, HfctJ t2E=f "^Ur, HLC, PI. 8, No. 396, III, 8. i3p=f Sammurabi, Letters, No. 6, 17. t ^0> ' Ur-Nina, DU. PI. 2ter, No. 4, 18. P"^ Eannadu, D^c. PI. 4bis, IX, 2. J— j^ Lugalzaggisi, OBI, No. 87, III, 7. ^^^ Manistusu. Face C> VIII 3. ^ Geoege a. Baeton 245 B.7 B.8 t*^ Sargon, TCI, No. 44, 3. Tt3^ Giidea Statue, B, VI, 63. il*r?t> "lUr, HLC. PI. 32, 1, 22. fT^^ Hammurabi. Laws, XII, 13. , YV" Shamshi-Adad, IR, 30, II, 13. ^^b' Bab. Boundary-stone, IIIR, 41, 1, 2, 9. *i4^ Neo-Bab. e. g. Strassm. i\ra6. No. 267, 1, ^^"Y^. Assyrian, e. g. Assurb. VE, 2, 41. X^ vl3$^- III Ur, CT, VII, No. 12,946, obv. 6. t^t^^ I Dynasty of Babylon, Ranke, No. 90, 7. j^i^iflT Assyrian, e. g. Assurb. VR, 26, 13c. »^ 6=5 ^2:^ Die. PI. Ibis, No. la, I, 2. PMr TCI, No. 12, II, 3. ^f-jf OBI, PI. VI, VIII, 20. flh^ Gudea Cyl. A, IV, 19. ^^i::^ " " B, XIV, 12. J^— < « " 11,69. ,U-rf Nebuchad. I, I, 58. Hf**» " " " 3. t^T 246 The Origin of Some Ounbifoem Signs B.10 B.U CO B.12 B.13 >^ ^^ Assyrian, e. g. Sen. Taylor Cyl. VI, 12. H^-i ^^J Neo-Eab. e. g. Strassm. iVab.No. 110, 4. -Cn:* -CXI :• Blau, Monument A, obv. IV, 2. -G»=» Manistusu, Face C, VII, 13. 1^^::=^ TCI, No. 7, env. V, 2. •-$2=^ Gudea Statue, C, II, 20. ►•^fexf " Cyl. A, XII, 6. i-^>.^T' "lUr, HLC, PI. 13, No. 44, 7. »-^''< " « XXXIX, 80. I — 4^ El-Amama, Berlin, No. 8, rev. 4. V-i» Eannadu, CT, PL 1, II, 4 and III, 5. F^ Lugalzaggisi, OBI, No. 87, II, 46 and III, 5. f^ ETC, No. [8J, 1,5. p^p^ Gudea Statue, B, V, 6, and Cyls, passim. tri^ "I Ur, HLC, passim, e. g. PI. 2, No. 379, 1, 5. tp>^ Hammurabi, Laws, XIV, 27, etc. ttl^/f " ie«ers. No. 22, 7. |;yy ^f El-Amarna, Berlin, No. 8, 15. 'ijr ^ Neo-Bab. e. g. Strassm. Nebuchad. No. 116, 8. »J^fJt Assyrian, e. g. Tig.-Pil. I, IK, 11, 49. O Archaic, E. A. Hoffman, Tab. JAOS, XXIII, 19, O Manistusu, Face C, IX, 6. [I, 2. ^ TCI, No. 4, endroit, II, 5. ^ Gudea Statue, B, IV, 5. ^ " Cyl. A, VII, 16. tO mUr,HLC,P1.29, 1, 9. t^ Hammurabi, Latvs, XXII, 80. J^ Hammurabi, Laws, XXII, 75, etc. Tj_ I Dynasty of Babylon, Kanke, No. 17, 39, etc. j^ El-Amama, Berlin, No. 90, 11. ^ Cassite, Clay, XIV, 91a, 30 etc. ^ Nebuchad. I, I, 50. A- Neo-Bab. e. g. Strassm. Nab. No. 11, 5. ■t^ Assyrian, e. g. Assurb. VR, 1, 124. tSTfl ^ Manistusu, Face B, III, 11. T^J* TCI, No. 32, 2. ■^¥ Geoege a. Baeton 247 B. U C. 1 • \?4< Gudea Statue, B, VII, 31. "^■^ III Ur, HLC, PI. 21, No. 102, 5. kf ^< JJammurabi, Laws, VI, 44. j^<^ 1 Dynasty of Babylon, Ranke, No. 11, 29. ^L^ Cassite, Clay, XII, No. 58, 25. |t^ Neo-Bab. e. g. Strassm. iVo&. No. 196, 8. ^:--^ Assyrian, e. g. II, R, 39, 71a. p^ (I^^Wg Archaic, DiUgation, II, 130, 1. 11^ Archaic, Die. PI. Ibis, No. 1, obv, II, 1. A Ur-Nina, D4c. PI. 2bis, No. 2, and Eannadu, i::::^/ D4c. pi. 4*", f^, ii, a /^^::::Z:;;j Lugalzaggisl, OBI, No. 87, 1, 46. pr:^ Manistusu, Face B, IV, 1. Y gammurabi, iaios, IX, 20. i— «- jr' El-Amarna, Berlin, No. 52, rev. 21. 'r~^Y Assyrian, e. g. Assurb. VR, 1, 118. ►^^ Neo-Bab.e.g.Strassni. Nebuchad. No.108,7. ^ ^^^—J(> Pioto-Elamite, D61. VI, No. 4,997, rev. 5. rvf Archaic, E. A. Hoffman Tab. JAOS, XXIII, 6>X 19, III, 3. -.^^P^ Ur-kagina, D6c. PL 32, B, IV, 5. ^ttt<»- Eannadu, D4c. PI. S^S ES I, 9. <^ji^ Lugalzaggisi, OBI, No. 87, II, 10. ««-Jt=» Manistusu, Face C, IX, 16. i^ras^ Gudea Statue, F, IV, 10. 4^^ " Cyl. A, x; 19. <^'ap!pr in ur, HLC, Pis. 34 and 35, passim. CHyv>. Hammurabi, Zaws, VI, 46. ttlE 248 The Obigin of Some Ouneifoem Signs C. 2 D.l D.2 D. 3 ^^^^ El-Amaina, London, No. 35, 23, ^^j^ « " " 5,29. Nebuchad. I, I, 20. *--jy^. Assyrian, e. g. Assurb. VE, 1, 34. tjfe^^ Neo-Bab. e. g. Strassm. iVab. No. 140, 1, ,,.^tll:f Sargon, TCI, No. 1, obv. IV, 2. .^WT " " " 41, obv. 8. /^; yf HLC, PI, 12, No. 52, 8, etc. H^m ^- Hammurabi, Laios, VI, 58. jfe^ Neo-Bab. e. g. VE, 46, 19a. M^ifcl^ Esarhaddon, Cyl. 1, 45, II, 14. *-^t^PPPf Assurb. e. g. IVR2, 43, 8b. Sargon, unpublished text, JJeo.No. 434. Ur, Eeisner, Vrkunden, No. 154, III, 22. t^|-^^ Hammurabi, Laws, XXXVII, 31. \\t^^*^ Assyrian, e. g. TiglathrPileser, IR, 9, 77. y^ ►tifl Neo-Bab. e. g. Strassm. Nab. No. 700, 10. t^p^^ " " " Clay, Murashu, No. 54, 9. ^^><^ gammurabi, Lam, XLIII,27. ^^ \^=&i-^ " XXXVII, 32. Assyrian, e. g. Assurb, VE, 8, 32. Neo-Bab. e. g. Darius, AJSL, XVI, 73, No. 16, 1 and 6. Ur-Nina, D6c. 2^'^ passim, ^^^ passim, u « u 2ter, No. 1, III, 5. Eannadu, CT, IX, No. 85,977, II, 2. " " 85,978, 1, 1. ETC, No. [11], rev. Ill, 2, of. No. [10], II, 1. Manistusu, Face A, II, 13. Ur-Bau, D6c. PI. 8, I, 7. ►toHtt i=^^ t# ^t: Gudea Cyl. A, VIII, 21. Geoege a, Baeton 249 D.4 D. 5 f^ "J Vt, HLC, passim. l5t Hammurabi, Laws, I, 9. J^^ Hammurabi, Letters, No. 9, 6. ^Sj" El-Amarna, Berlin, No. 4, 4. t=ft Assyrian, e. g. Tig Pil. I, IR, 10, 25. ^^ Neo-Bab. e. g. Cyrus, VR, 35, 21. ^ T^ TCI, No.4,env.I,2. ^ Ur-Nina, D4c. PI. 2tof, No. 4. 4 ^ Eannadu, Z>^c. PI. 3bi9, D», I, 11. ^^ Lugalzaggisi, OBI, No. 87, II, 28, 29, j.^^ Manistusu, Face A, V, 10. ^. Sargon, OBI, No. 1, 1, 2. ^^ Gudea, e. g. Statue B, VIII. 5. Kj^ Gudea, e. g. Cyl. A, 1, 1. J5^ niUr, Ur-Guv, CT, XXI, PI. 5, No. 90,001, 7. I^^ " " " " " " 7, " 90,000,4. ^^ iiiUr,HLC,P1.2, No. 379, 111,4. ^^ " e. g. HLC, PI. 50, No. 144, rev. 3. ^^ Hammurabi, Laws, e. g. II, 12. *^ Hammurabi, Letters, No. 8, 8. ''T' El-Amarna, Berlin, No. 2, 1. '^ Nebuchad. I, I, 4. >.fl — »■ i_ Assyrian, e. g. Assurb. VR, I, 11. ^ Neo-Bab. e. g. Strassm. Nab. No. 43. ^ ^^IU=> RTC, No. [11], rev. I, 1. \m m=[]> Ur-Nina, i>^c. p. XXXV, No. 4, 15. j — r{j> Eannadu, D^c. PL 4biB, D2, II, 2. f= |> " " " 3, A, 1, 4. 1 Ui> Lugalzaggisi, OBI, No. 87, 1, 30. w^y>- " " " " n, 7. =njp> Manistusu, Face A, II, 15. ^tp- Sargon, OBI, No. 1, 3. r=\np- Gudea Statue, B, IV, 3. |^> " Cyl. A, II, 22; Cyl. B, XVII, 15. 250 The Oeigin op Some Cuneiform Signs D.6 D.7 ^^ i"Ur, e. g. HLC, PI. 36, No. 334, 2. ]^^ « " » " 7, " 337,4. ^Bg^ Hammurabi, Laws, II, 32, etc. 4|-^ 5ammm:abi, Letters, No. 43, 5. ^TJ !^ El-Amarna, Berlin, No. 18, rev. 14. ^> Nebuchad. I, I, 43. tlY^g^ Assyrian, e. g. Assurb. VR, 3, 131. ^ Neo-Bab. Strassm. Nab. No. 938, 1. ^ =^ Manistusu, Face C, X, 14. t^ RTC, No. [11], rev. Ill, 2. ^ Naram-Sin, TCI, No. 19, rev. 1. C^ Gudea Statue, B, IX. 8. t^ Gudea Cyl. A, V, 8. j^ I" Ur, HLC, PI. 22. No. 26, V, 20. ',_>C " <' " 23, " 29, IV, 15. ^=^ Hammurabi, Laws, IV, 54. }~^ Hammurabi, Letters, No. 1, 3. ^— ^ El-Amarna, Berlin, No. 1, 8; London, No. 41, 8. t^ Assyrian, e. g. Assurb. VK, 1, 62. tX^ Neo-Bab. e. g. Strassm. Nab. No. 234, 3. 5^ =0 =^ • Eannadu, D^c. PI. 3bis, Di, I, 24. ^ RTC, No. [17], IV, 7. ^ Gudea Statue, F, III, 12. H> I" Ur, HLC, Pis. 34 and 35, passim. t=y> Hammurabi, Laws, VI, 45, etc. yJ^ Hammurabi, Letters, No. 15, 13. »+^ El-Amarna, London, No. 35, 21. ^p> " " " " 5,23. XX^ Cassite, Clay, List, No. 123. t^ " " No. 99a, 17. tfi Assyrian, e. g. Assurb. VR, 2, 132. t^ Neo-Bab. e. g. Strassm. Nab. No. 72, 12. t^ Gbobge a. Barton 251 E.1 1^ E.2 Mouuinent A, obv. I. 2. '< Deo. PI. Ibis, No. 1, obv. IV, 1. Eannadu, Die. PI. 2, A, I, 7; CT.VII, PI. II, 6. -^ ""^ BI.U, s A^ Lugalzaggisi, OBI, No. 87, II, 24 "J-h^t=^ OBI, No. 112, 5. ^■11^^$=^ " " 114, 2 and 4. ^^=^ Manistusu, Face C, VII. 29. !^ •HH^T^J^iii Ur, Reisner, Urkunden, No. 125, II, 6. iJXfi:^ "I Ur, HLC, PI. 8, 1, 5. ^^fxf^ " " " 10, No. 158, obv. 7. vflWrfe^" Uammurabi, Lom'S, VII, 9; Letters, No. ^M;P^ 97, 23. »-f-^ El-Amama, Berlin, No. 90, 16. ^1^ Casgite, Claj, XIV, No. 110, 7. *.^p^:^A< Assyrian, Tig Pil. I, IR, 10, 50, and 70. t-^Ji^ Neo-Bab. e. g. Strassm. Nab. No. 30, 8. »_&7x^ Assyrian, e. g. Assurb. VR, 1, 84. Gudea Statue, B, II, 18. Gudea Cyl. B, V, 6. H^r^ ^\ Archaic, unedited text in Louvre; cf. w Thureau-Dangin, Sup. No. 33. *^— ■^ Archaic, D4c. PI. l^s, rev. I, 3. ■^"V^ Eannadu, Ddc. 4ter, F2, V, 4. '\J Manistusu, Face B, I, 7. *f^ Sargon, TCI, No. 27, env. 4. t*=^ "I Ur, Reisner, Urkunden, No. 35, VII, 6. HP^ " HLC, PI. 8, No. 396, 1, 11. f^ " •• " " " " 11,12. »^T 252 The Origin op Some Cuneifobm Signs E.3 E.4 E. 5 F.l (f^y Gudea Cyl. A, XXV, 6. tfi^ " Statue, E, V, 12. tjl£ Hammurabi, Laws, VII, 13. if^ " " " 6, 25, etc. yJfCf " Letters, No. 59, 9 and 13. jjiy El-Amama, Berlin, No. 6, 5. ^;^- Tiglath-Pileser I, IR, 14, 63. yJ(^ Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian,pas«m. '% "-T^ Archaic, unedited text in Louvre; of. \J Thureau-Dangin, Sup. No. 36. 'T V <^ Manistusu, Face B, XIII, 10. >|L_<^ TCI, No. 11, end, I, 1. ifej tl^ Gudea Statue, B, VI, 49. , TlX„^ IIIR, 43, IV, 14. t—^Jc:^ Shamshi-Adad, IR, 29, 5. ^-p^ Neo-Bab. e. g. IIIR, 37, 46 f . t-Jf^lt^ Assyrian, e. g. CT, XIII, PI. 9, I, 31. ^X^ ttr ^■s/ Sargon, unedited text in Louvre; cf . Thureau- . * » Dangin, Rec. No. 41 . 'Tl 4 Gudea Cyl. A, XXIX, 12; Cyl. B, VIII, 8. ►-T^:i^ Assyrian, IIR, 5, 4c. Hkt^T " IVR2, 3, 706. -hO -f-O Blau, Monument A, obv. V, 1. »|-Q> TCI, No. 39, env. I, 9, II, 6 and 11. vf-0. " " 16, end, 1 and 4. bf-^ Gudea Cyl. A, VIII, 8, etc. vf-<^ "lUr, Reisner, Urkunden, No. 27, III, 9. )X-<> " HLC, PI. 12, No. 52, obv. 16 and 19. ,J^ " " " 2, •' 300, obv. 2. i-f-^ Hammurabi, Laws, XXXVIII, 96. J^^ Assyrian, e. g. IVR2, 22, No. 2, 8. ►4^^ Neo-Bab. e. g. Clay, Mtt/rashu, No. 106, 4. vW 4K ■+¥< D6c. It", No. 5, II, 3. -H+; D^%attow, II, 130. Ill 1 Ur-Nina, Die. PI. 2»>i8, No. 2. HHH Manistusu, Face A, XIII, 22. ■iW-' Lugalzaggisi, OBI, No. 87, II, 5. ►flfB Gudea Statue, B, IV, 8. >m Gboege a. Barton 253 F. 2 F. 3 4 Gudea Cyl. A, I, 25; cf. X, 16. ^jf0V "iUr,HLC,P1.9,I,6. v^ " " " 23, No. 29, III, 13. OBu^ Sammurabi, Lavta, I, 61, etc. t^^f- Neo-Bab. e. g. Strassm. Nab. No. 178, 42. v-^iiy Assyrian, e. g. Aasurb. VK, 27, 31c. IS. IT/ Hammurabi, Letters, No. 27, rev. 6. TT^ El-Amarna, Berlin, No. 7, rev. 15. m Cassite, Clay, XIV, 25, 8. J5^ Nebuchad. 1, 11,43. ^ I& Assyrian,, e. g. Assurb. VR, 1, 59. rfi Neo-Bab. e. g. Strassm. Nab. No. 82, 8. Blau, Monument B, 3. Eannadu, PI. 3»>i3, E>, III, 3. Manistusu, Face A, XVI, 2. Gudea Statue, B, VI, 26. Gudea Cyl. A, II, 3, etc. niUr, HLC, PI. 27, No. 186, 3. " " " 40, 1, 7. « « 28, No. 248, IV, 4. Hammurabi, Laws, XXI, 10. G. 1 Archaic, CT, V, 3, II, 6. Sargon, TCI, No. 39, env. I, 8. Gudea Cyl. B, XIX, 9. niUr, Reisner, Urkunden No. 114, 1, 5. " HLC, PI. 18, No. 183, 1. H<')mmurabi, Laws, IV, 42, 50, etc. " Letters, No. 69, 7. Cassite, Clay, XIV, List, No. 171. Nebuchad. I, I, 7, etc. Assyrian, e. g, Assurb. VR, 2, 93. ►rfX^ Neo-Bab. e. g. Strassm Nab. No. 810, 6. >»!> Eannadu, D4c. p. XLIII, II, 12. W ^^ff^ ^•fe^ 254 The Oeigin of Some Cuneifoem Signs 0.2* I G.3 G.4 ^V^ G.5 LugaJzaggisi, OBI, No. 87, II, 12. TCI, No. 4, rev. 1, 1. Manistusu, Face A, XIII, 1. l"Ur, Reisner, Urkunden, No. 16412, III, 12. Ur, HLC, PI. 13, No. 44, 1. Gudea Cyl. A, II, 16. ^^^^IXf Hammurabi, Laivs, II, 8, etc. ^{•ffrf El-Amarna, Berlin, No. 139. < Eannadu, D6c. PL 3, A, 1, 11. Manistusu, Face A, XI, 6. Gudea Statue, B, II, 10. Hammurabi, Latvs, II. 10, etc. Tablet TC, I, 1. me. PI. Ibis, No. la, III, 1. Eannadu, r)4c. PI. 2ter, Nq. 5, 1, 6. Manistusu, Face A, III, 4. p=>-^ Lugalzaggisi, OBI, No. 87, 1, 3. t|f^^ Ham murabi, Laws, II, 28, etc. DiUgation, II, 130. D&c. p. XXXVII, Nos. 7 and 8. Manistusu, Face A, XI, 3 and 8. m ^ ^Ti^ ^M W^ Gboege a. Barton 255 G.6 G.7 G.8 *a^>^ yj ))')')- Blau, MoQument, B, 2. ^V)»?) Manistusu, Face D, XIX, 14. ^1 Hi •w ^ 7i Ur-kagina, B^c. p. LI, Na. 4, VIII, 4. Eannadu, D6c. PL 3, A, I, 6, etc. " p. XLIII, Galet A, VII, 1 Lugalzaggisi, OBI, No. 87, 1, 17. Manistusu, Face A, II, 15. liiUr,HLG,P1.25,I,16. " " " 40, ill, 6. Bammui-abi, Lmvs, XXXII, 50. H. 1 H.2 H.3 ^$siS-. Archaic, Hoffman Tab. JAOS, XXIII, >rrC~^i^\^ vx [p. 19, III, 3. \S=<^ Epocli of Ur-Nina, D6c. ^^ [p. XXXVII Ur-kagina, D6c. p. LI, No. 4, XI, 26. li=X^^ Lugalzaggisi, OBI, No. 87, III, 29. ^p==^ OBI, No. 113, 5. ']t^i^ HI Ur, HLC, Fl. 6, No. 257, III, 7. jnss. LI _^ Archaic, D4c. PI. 1*", No. 5, III, 3. ^{^^ Epoch of Ur-Nina, Dec. p. XXXVII. j^ { " Hammurabi, iaws, e g. II, 23. ,//lN^* Archaic,i)^J^3atto«, II, 130; Blau, Monument JUL i)^c. Iter, No. 6a. [B, 1; JAOS, XXm, 19. )||"'H Mafnistuau, Face A, II, 6, etc. }i-^X Sammurabi, Laws, XIII, 32. 0^ ^m W ^>M Eannadu, X>^c. PI. 4*6', Fi, 1, 10. Eannadu, CT, IX, No. 85, 979, III, 2. Sargon, TCI, No. 32, rev. 5. niUr,HLC,P1.26, LIO. ti^ Archaic, JAOS, XXIII, 19, III, 1. Ur-kagina, Die. p. LI, I, 6 and 10. Hammurabi, Laws, II, 1, etc. t^^ mi 256 The Origin of Some Cdneifokm Signs 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 J. 1 J. 2 J. 3 J. 4 J. 5 J. 6 .^U M^ Ur-Nina, Die. PI. 2ter, No. 4, 18. -M^ Manistusu, Face A, XIV, 22. i^ ■£ Hammurabi, Laws, XVI, 29. w^ I 1 1 1' U D^c. PI. It", No. 5, IV, 3. 11 J Manistusu, Face A, VIII, 20. t^ Hammurabi, Laws, II, 67; XVIII, 37, etc. t^ fG lO Archaic, JAOS, XXIII, 19, III, 1. rXJ Archaic,Blau,Monum'ntB; JAOS, XXII, 120. ^iX^ Hammurabi, Laws, XXIII, 10. tfcT cH^ CX^ Ur-Nina, D6c. PI. 2t'is, No. 1. l-jg Eannadu, Ddc. PI. 3Wb, E1, I, 27. tlt§f inUr.HLC, P1.9, 1, IB. t Ensagkusanna, OBI, No. 93, 3. ^) ^ Ur-Nina, X>^c. 2b:s, No. 1, 1, 1. . ^Cx^ TCI, No. 1, end, V, 1. -^ M ' l^ Gudea Cyl. A, 1, 10, etc. >H-)» ^)>»'') Lugalzaggisi, OBI, No. 87, III, 21. iU " " " " « " (variant). '^ ( niUr, HLC, PI. 46, IV, 1. t=:^ 4K/ -IK/ Lugalzaggisi, OBI, No. 87, 1, 35. •TT «| Ur-kagina, D6c. p. L, V, 4. ^r^xlf HLC, PI. 23, No. 29, II, 10. Hr? "^ Archaic, Hoffman Tab. JAOS, XXHI, 19, 1, 1. *^ TCI, No. 3, II, 6. ;:^=>l CT, V, PI. 3, III, 4. J>^ Gudea Statue, B, I, 8. ^ i=C^ P=t^ Manistusu, Face D, XII, 7. t?^ gammurabi, Laws, XLII, 26. t:^>i> Nebuchad. I, VR, 55, 38. wip&lf ci^ HiJ^ Archaic, Hoffman Tab. JAOS, XXIII, 19, 1, 3. .i;::^ Archaic, Blau, Monument A, rev. 1 (JAOS, XZ^ Gudea Cyl.A, XVIII, 20. ■^^"' ^^^)- ►i=&r caE[g a3tiS . Archaic, D6c. 1'", No. 5, I, 2. '^'l!^ Matiistusu, Face A, V, 8. tflp *Cr Hamnmrabi, Laws, II, 20. tfe ^ ~f^ Archaic, Blau, Monument A, obv. V, 3 f JAOS, "X! XXII, 120). inaj> Archaic. OBI, No. 110, 18. j^-^ Ur-Nina, D4c. PI . 2te^ No. 2, III, 6. mJj^. Eannadu, D4c. PI. 4'»'', subscription 2 and 3. « ^ ^> Archaic, Hoffman Tab. JAOS, XXIII, 19, 1, 1. 3> ■' Die. PI. Iter, No. 5, IV, 4. 1^ Ur-kagina, jDdc. p. LI, VII, 3. ^C^ Mani.stusu, Face C, XXIII, 16. ►^^ El-Amarna, Berlin, No. 181, 8. , MF?^ \^{(\ rlAKA Archaic, Blau, Monument A, obv. 1, 3 (JAOS, iilLJ Archaic, Proto-EIamite, /)^M- XXII, 19). ^^j-, gaticm, VI, No. 364, 1. WS^ Gudea Statue, A, II, 1. pat"! " " F, III, 10. »^^J I'lUr, Reisner, Urkimden, No. 126, 1, 10. mTTT 258 The Oeigin of Some Cuneipobm Signs J. 15 K. 1 K. 2 L. 1 L.2 ^ Mt/ Archaic, mUgMion, II, 130. ^ J|;> Eannadu, Z»^c. PI. 4, A, II, 3. <=0 Manistusu, Far<^ C, III, 9. ^ ^ Hammurabi, £aws, VI, 27, etc. ^i p=ffl H=J Archaic, Hoirmaii Tab. JAOS, XXJII, 19,1, 1. >— tJj Archaic, unpublished tablet at Constant., cf . Thuieau-Dansrin, Sup. No. 363. \\ 1 Entemena, Silver vase 22 {D6c. PI. 43WS). ^s Manistusu, Face C, XIV, 24. idrM Sargon,TCI,No.51,env.lO. tfrj gammurabi, Letters, No. 91, 8. t=ftt t a- 2 Eannadu, passim, cf. CT, VII, PI. 1, 1, 1, III, 3, etc. ^ inur, e. g. HLC, PI. 12. No. 181, 2, etc. a- 3I> ^^ Archaic, JAOS, XXIII, p. 19, II, 1 (Hoffman ^~«__ Archaic, Blau, Monument B, 4 Tab.) =JX3 (JAOS, XXII, 120). aSHf Manistusu, Face A, XIII, 9. ^5^t^ Hammurabi, Imws, XVII, 9. UfT ^ ^^^^^ Archaic, D6c. PI. Iter, No. 66, 1, 7. ^P Eannadu, Die. p. XLIV, Galet, B. =3^ « « « XLIII, VIII, 4. =3:^ Manistusu, Pace A, XII, 19. Witi\ THE STRUCTURE OF THE TEXT OF THE BOOK OF ZEPHANIAH CHARLES PROSPERO FAGNANI THE STKUCTURE OF THE TEXT OF THE BOOK OF ZEPHANIAH Charles Pkospeeo Fagnani §1. THE SUPERSCRIPTION, 1:1 nibna-p iims'p niisa-bs n^n— iiBx nini-'i:m •.rxr\7V §2. THREATS OP JUDGMENT, 1:2— 2:15 A. THE DAY OF YAHWEH WHICH CONFEONTS ISRAEL, 1:2-18 ntn Qipian pt 1 iHC aOS ; as above, Geaeums-Kautzsch, 72aa; 113m), u. 3. 2iB!I PliblpD'anl; as above, Wellhausen. 3iK5C J-|i5 ; as above, ffia. 260 THE STRUCTURE OF THE TEXT OF THE BOOK OF ZEPHANIAH §1. THE SUPERSCRIPTION, 1:1 The word of Yahweh which came to Zephaniah the son of Cushi, the sou of Gedaliah, the sou of Amariah, the son of Hezekiah, in the days of Josiah, the son of Amon, king of Judah. §2. THREATS OP JUDGMENT, 1:2—2:15 A. THE DAY OF YAHWEH WHICH CONFRONTS ISRAEL, 1:2-18 I 7 Hush before* Yahweh, for nigh is the day of Yahweh, For Yahweh hath prepared a sacrifice, he has sanctified his guests. * the Lord II 2 I will completely take away everything from oflp the face of the ground,* 3 I will take away man and beast,f the birds of heaven and the fish of the sea. if * oracle of Yahweh tl will take away X&nA the stambling-blocks with the wicked, and I will cut oS mankind from the face of the ground. Ill 4 And I will stretch out my hand against Judah, and against* the inhabitants of Jerusalem, And I will cut off-j- Baal to the last remnant, and the (very) name of;}; the priests, •aU ffrom this sanctuary X the idolatrous priests with 261 262 Text of the Book of Zephaniah tna^iai Dan I DH'^Dii^ tr^n n^j^baan 9* *-)na5:in-by 5bnn I -bs by "nnpsi 9« vi pnss imibarffldbn bD byi «* r!3to52n-]52 ribb-'i I c'^i-in -cica npss bip*io vn tirnsan-'ia nbyiumyisna biia ^mci u mni DS5 Sinn min nim* tODD ibitsrbD in-OD pss ny-bs nians 13 1 "n''35s^n-b5 ''Mpai i '"isa DbiBii-'-nH *Trsnx5*i2 vm Dnaba n^iasri I Dn'^^air by d'^KSpn 4 ima: DSb'ga ; as above, ffi 22, 36. 51. 95. 185. 238; &F, Wellhansen, Nowaok, Marti. 6 m€ 153 ; as above, ffi, G. A. Smith, Oort, Marti. 6 ^8C QITpl'^H . ' m€ 151B'' ib'^bin ; as above, Marti (possibly). 8 jaE IDDnS i as above, Novpack (probably). ^m€ nils? ; as above, ffi. lOiWC B1ttJ3Sn ; as above, Amos 6:1. • t -t r Ohahles Pbospeeo Pagnani 263 IV B And those who worship on the house-tops the host of heaven, And those who worship* Yahweh, and (also) swear by Milcom; * who swear 6 And those that turn back from after Yahweh, and those who have not sought Yahweh and have not inquired after him. V 8a *And I will punish the princes and the house of the king, 96 Who fill the house of their lord with violence and deceit. * And it shall come to pass in the day of Yahweh'a sacrifice. VI 9a And I will punish all who leap upon the threshold,* 86 And all who wear foreign apparel; *in that day VII 10 *Hark! a cry from the Fish Gate, and a wailing from the New Quarter, 11 And a great clamor from the hills, and a wailing from Makhtesh.f * And it shall come to pass in that day, oracle of Yahweh t For all the trafiickers are destroyed, all those laden with money are cut oS. VIII 12 *And I will search Jerusalem with a lamp, and I will punish those who are at ease. Who are thickened upon their lees, who are saying to themselves, *And it shall come to pass at that time 264 Text of the Book of Zephaniah lyr sbi i nin^ i^t:^^ xb k :nri"ns imni'sbi dim-id lyciDi inw xbn nina isai is* ixa '^inaaii si^p I biian ""nr niip « x npisai nn^s or I sinn orn n-ay or i5«,6 xi nsi^ni laiTu or I ''nxiia^oi nxiu nr i5c,i6 xn tniinnin niDsn byiininsnn D-'iyn by ^n-niyi libni I mnb ''misni n xm : Q^bbji Danbi I "isyi oai "|3ti51 ob^iinb b^r-j^b i Dinr-Qa naoi-na is xr? :fnsn ia'iB''-bD ns m»yi nbroD-is nbD id* " m€ mni'DTl ; as above, Marti (perhaps). 12 jKSn ^nti ! as above, Wellhausen, Nowack, Marti. i3j]HE ^^p ; as above, Marti, Nowack (perhaps). UM^ "yU ; as above, Nowack, Marti. i' Transpose 15c ; so Marti. isNotiniwa:. "jwa: mni niny. I'lmsinsap. Charles Peospbeo Fagnani 265 IX "Yahweh is no help, neither is he a hindrance." 13a Their riches will become a prey and their houses a desolation. 18i> And they shall build houses and not inhabit (them) , And plant vineyards and not drink the wine thereof. X 14 Near is my great day, near and hastening exceedingly ; Near is my bitter day, the mighty man there will cry aloud. XI 15 A day of wrath is that day, a day of trouble and of distress, A day of darkness and murk, a day of clouds and thick darkness, XII 15c, 16 A day of destruction and desolation, a day of trumpets and battle cries, Against the fortified cities, and against the lofty battle- ments. xin n And I will bring anguish upon men, and they will walk as the blind,* And their blood will be poured out as dust, and their bowels (?) as dung. * because against Yahweh they have sinned XIV 18 Neither their silver nor their gold will be able to deliver them, For in the day of my wrath and in the fire of my jealousy the whole earth will be devoured.* * for a complete destruction will he make of all the inhabitants of the earth. 266 Text of the Book of Zephaniah b. the judgments against the nations, 2:1-15 mi* nini-ns 22 mi nD^by sini"xb onta 26, c :mn"'-nx dt3 "nnon ibis msy i»pi pisj-ntopa naairb pbpTUi^i I n^nn naiTJ nry-^s * n npyn -jinpyi I nTiTir D-'-m^s in^i^ ^DTi^s 115 1 D'Ti bnn 13121 iin 5a m DDiby mni— an* 5b ■jyDDt i^iiiE M^ijil D-'yi ^"tnii ''*ni^f-i'i « iv ■jiisnni ;:i^yn ^'toinan 1 pyni "Djrrb? ™ nin ban* n-iDt TlbpTBSt mini nil niisinb [Qin: bnn nim 7a ^'Dniaia aim nninbs mni mpsi id ic 19 jjaJI llBipl ITBlDipnn ; as above, Graetz, Cheyne, Budde, Nowaok, Driver. 20iE5i; ph JTlb I as above, ^i/s cauoaii/s A^^ ^^^f = ur-murub , ^cdlffu/rMtu \Sn oroceisus pcuimris *~iA- mas '/itrum {jjlprocesius/jyram/aah^ *►— TT-su-si uoanu{ (l idctUS CUSttCUS * — O = NA ( O (Mctus nepatlcus r-r^ilT = oir.= r^tQ [rtlc&Hac/aeixc/us r~ ►??■ mc-ni II ] vena cava cauctaffs (K.) venaport3e^^\\^YSttS V ► : GAR-TAB i/Mtf/WO/rf ^J\ /i^mpno phncLiae < 1^+ — ^oi'su/mu THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE OF THE PARABLES OF ENOCH NATHANIEL SCHMIDT THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE OP THE PARABLES OF ENOCH Nathaniel Schmidt Guillaume Postel, who in Rome was shown a copy of the Ethiopic Book of Enoch by an Abyssinian priest^ and had its contents explained to him,'' seems to have regarded it as a genuine work of the patriarch with interpolations from a Book of Noah.' It was his opinion, based partly on the testimony of Josephus concerning the two inscribed stelae erected by Seth,* partly on general considerations, that Enoch wrote this book in Hebrew." The same view appears to have been held by Gilbert G6n6brard.° Joseph Scaliger had no knowledge of the Ethiopic text, but he inferred from the character of the Greek fragments preserved in the Chronographia of Georgius Syncellus, which he published for the first time, that they were translated from the Hebrew. He deemed it necessary to apologize for introducing so tedious and indelicate a work on the ground that it was a translation from the Hebrew, possessed a high age, and had been quoted by Jude.' Like Erasmus, Clarius, and Nicolas Zegers," he evidently looked upon it as an apocryphal writing. His statement, 'vetus- tissimus est liber' should be considered in the light of this esti- mate, and it is possible that 'ex hebraismo' should be interpreted as broadly as Jerome's 'ab hebraeo sermone' generally is. 1 ' Contextnm mihi a Bacerdote Aethiope expositum,' De Oriffinibus^ 1553, II, p. 11, in Fabrioixis, Codex Pseudepigraphus V. T. 2, 1722, II, p. 215; cf. Conrad Gesner, ' Enochi librum Guilelmus Postellus invenit,' Appendix to Bibliotheca Universalia^ 1555, p. 32. 2 See D, Q. Morhof , ' ejusdem libri ezemplnm forte f aisse quis credat, quo usus est, sed alio interpretaute, Postellus,' Polyhietor (1687),* 1747, p. 46. 3 ' Ex libris Noachi et HenocM coUecto,' De Originibus, loc* eit. * Ant. lud. i, 70, ed. Niese. * ' Hpbraioa sanctave aut Foenix lingua .... quae primo fuerlt toti generi humano in usu,' De Foenicum Uteris^ 1551, reprinted in Havercamp, Sylloge Scriptoruyn, II, 1740, pp. 706 f., 715. 6 Chronographia., 1580, 1, p. 14. 7 Animadvemimies in Chronologiam Eusebii, 1606, p. 245. 8 In Critici Sacri, VIII, 303 S. 329 330 Original Language op the Parables of Enoch Drusius may, at one time, have thought of the Aramaic, as he explained 'Venit Dominus' in Jude's quotation: 'id sonat in lingua Syrorum, Maranatha, extremum genus excommunicationis apud Ebraeos, quod et Samatha dicitur quasi J^lTlS^ ^"WOi .' ' But in emending 'cum Sanctis millibus suis' into 'cum decern millibus Sanctis suis,' he recurred to the Hebrew Tlfllp inlllSiS ,'° rather than to the Aramaic ^niTB'^'Tp fll3"Q," and in his last note he translated the whole passage into Hebrew.'^ Scaliger's view was accepted by Louis Cappel.'' Grrotius, also," looked for a Hebrew or Aramaic original, as he ascribed the apocryphon to the Kabbis, mentioned its quotation in Zohar, and repeated the linguistic ex- planations of Drusius. Less important was the defense of a Hebrew original by Jean Boulduc,''' Joachim Mader,'° and William Whiston," who believed in the Enochian authorship. On the other hand, J. H. Hottinger'" maintained that the book was written in Greek by a Hellenistic Jew. This would explain both Hebraisms and Greek paronomasias, like ^apfiapo'i (for r]\€ifi and E\tou8.^° He was followed by Heidegger," Morhof appar- ently ,''' and Fabricius.^' The arguments could not easily be met as long as the patristic quotations and the Syncellus fragments 9 Henoch, 1615, in Critici Sacri, I, 2, p. 383. On the phrase KfliC VVQ^ misinterpreted by Drusius, and the imperative, SflS . of. Schmidt, JBL, 1894, pp. 50 fi.; 1896, p. 44; on SPBffl for XnTaiC . of. Buxtorf and Levy «. v. win Cntici Sacri, VIII, p. 312. "The original Aramaic text in £;?ioc7i 1:9 probably read 11'0"'np m3"13 ittlX Sil i and was suggested by the author's Aramaic rendering of niH^ ''D'^DIQ itS and n23"l Hi? tSIp (soOSftiBE) inDeut. 33:2. He, of course, did not know any of the Aramaic, Greek, or Latin versions familiar to us. 12 Notae in Parallela Sacra, p. 55 in Critici Sacri, VIII. yiSpicilegium, 1629, pp. 136 f. nin Critici Sacri, VIII, 315, 317. HEcclesia ante legem, 1630, 1, u. 14. 16 De scriptis et bibliothecis antediluvianis, 1666, pp. 19 ff . " A Collection of Authentic^ Becorde, 1, 1727, p. 288. 18 2)e prophetia Henochi in Primitiae Heidelbergenses, 1659, pp. 7 f . 198 : 3. The Akhmim text reads Apjuapws and omits tjiapfLaKeias. 20 7:2. The Aramaic text probably read 5(111 vJ , 'majestates,' on which the follow- ing word translated fieyaKetorrj^ was a paronomasia. It is omitted in the recension exhibited by the Eth. and Akhmim texts. 21 Historia patriarcharum, 1671, pp. 267 ff . ^''Polyhistor *, 1747, p. 46. 23ioc. cit., pp. 179, 185. Nathaniel Schmidt 331 were the only sources ; and they undoubtedly influenced not only Hermann Witsius," who, following Cave and Dodwell, ascribed the work to some 'Hellenistic Cabbalist,' or Christian heretic of the second century, but also Richard Simon,^* John Toland,''" Jean Astruc, who declared ' j'avoue que les 6crits attribuez aux anciens patriarches me paroissent supposez,'" and Johann Salomo Semler who held that 'die Beschreibungen in Brief e Juda und 2 Petri sind aus Apocryphis griechischer Juden.'^' In 1769, the Ethiopia Enoch which until then had apparently been seen by only three Europeans, Pico della Mirandola, G-uil- laume Postal, and Gilles de Loches, was discovered in Abyssinia by James Bruce. In harmony with local tradition, he seems to have looked upon the book as a part of the Scriptures possessed by the Jews in Abyssinia before the introduction of Christianity and translated by them from the Hebrew.™ He regarded it, in fact, as having been held in high authority even "among the pagans,'" and identified it with the Sabaean book ascribed to Enoch," while distinguishing it from that quoted by Jude as well as from that possessed by the Rabbis.''' Nevertheless, he con- sidered it a Gnostic work, and was so disgusted with it that he could at first read only a few chapters.** J. G-. Eichhom,'* in commenting upon his account, suggested that Egyptian Jews may, in the time of the Ptolemies, have emigrated to Abyssinia, ^Meletemata Leidenses, 1703, pp. 501 ff. ^Note sur Jude 14, in Fabrlcius, loc, cit., pp. 204 f. ^^ Books ascribed to the Apostles, etc., in A Collection of Several Pieces, 1726, p. 383. 27 Conjectures sur les m&moires originaux dont ilparoit que Moyse s^est servi pour com- poser le Livre de la Qenkse, 1753, p. 287. 28 Anhang zu dent Versuch einer biblischen D&itionologie, 1776, pp. 321, 330 f . 29 Travels to Discover the Source of the Nile, 1790, 1, pp. 489 S. soioc. cit., p. 500. 31 The neo-Flatonic philosophers of Harran, surrounded on all sides by Christians, may very well have been familiar with Enoch, and identified him with Hermes, long before they were obliged to seelc toleration as raonotheists and * people of a boolc ^ under the shelter of the name 'Sabaeans,' by which Muhammad had meant the Mandaeans. Chwolson, Die Ssabier, 1856, I, 627 £E. exaggerates the wickedness of these pagan philosophers, leans too heavily upon his theory of craftiness and fraud, and underestimates the honest syncretism as well as the genuine theistic unitarianism of this movement. 32 An Account of the Book of Enoch by James Bruce in Laurence, lAbri Enoch Prophetae Versio Ethiopica, 1838, pp. x f . 33 Travels, I, 499. ^* Allgemeine Bibliothek der biblischen Literatur, III, 1790, pp. 123 f. 332 Obiginal Language of the Parables op Enoch and made a translation of the Alexandrian version into Geez. Ten years later, Sylvestre de Sacy*^ introduced some chapters of the book in a Latin translation. He was the first scholar clearly to express the opinion that it was originally written in Aramaic. In a review of Laurence's translation, he observed, 'je partage enti^rement son opinion, pourvu qu'on prenne le nom de langue h6braique ici avec quelque latitude ; car il se pourrait que 1' origi- nal eut 6t6 6crit en chald6en, ou dans I'idiome que parloient les habitans de la Palestine au temps de J. 0. et des apQtres, et qui ne nous est que bien imparfaitement connu."° Laurence had, indeed, himself stated that the lost Greek copy was 'perhaps nothing more than a mere translation from some Hebrew or Chaldee original;'" but the alternative did not seem to the French orientalist to be strongly enough emphasized. Even after the publication of the English version, the argu- ments of Hottinger appeared to Lticke^* sufficient to warrant the assumption of a Greek original. Against this view, A. G. Hoff- mann^ urged the Hebrew names of the angels and the quotations in Zohar, and maintained that the Greek book was translated from Hebrew or Aramaic. It is the merit of Edward Murray*" to have first presented the important reasons for a Semitic origi- nal found in the paronomasias of Enoch 77:1-8. This was subse- quently recognized by Hoffmann, who added new arguments.*' Murray was forced by his untenable theories to think of Hebrew; some interpolations he ascribed to an Abyssinian author.*'' GfrOrer*' was not familiar with Murray's arguments when he sided with Lticke. Bruno Bauer,** who regarded the 'Son of s^Magasin EncyclopSdique^ VI, 1800, pp. 382 ff., reprinted by Laurence, The Book of Enoch, 1821, pp. 169-80. 36 Journal des Savans, 1822, p. 548. 3' The Book of Enoch, 1821, p. iv. In the introduction to the last edition of this work, 1883, pp. viii ff. the anonymous author of ' The Evolution of Christianity,' who had access to Laurence's latest notes, understands him to favor 'the theory of an Aramaic or Syro- Chaldaean origin,' and himself adds an argument drawn from the identity of names of angels in this book and those in Aramaic inscriptions on Babylonian terra-cotta bowls found by Layard. 38 Versuch einer vollstdndigen Einleitung in die Qffenbarung des Johannes, 1832, pp. 52 lEE. j 2ded.l852, pp. 110£E. 39 Das Buch Henoch, 1, 1833, pp. 22, 30. ^0 Enoch Bestitutus, 1836, pp. 43 ff. *l Loc. cit., II, 1838, pp. 929 f . 42 Loc. cit., pp. 63 ff., 74. 43 Das Jahrhundert des Beils, 1838, 1, pp. 95 1. 44 Kritik der evangelischen Geschichte, 1841, pp. 401 ff. Nathaniel Schmidt 333 Man' passages and 90 : 37 f. as of Christian origin, probably assumed that they were written in Greek. This was distinctly affirmed by Friedrich Bfittcher" in regard to the Christian inter- polations, while he deemed the earlier text to have been translated from Hebrew. His suggestion that the name of the sun +'^rt in 78 : 1 was in Aramaic ^^'BT\ should not have been overlooked by all exegetes. Less felicitous was his "Q'l = aliquid for J7C 'word' in 90 : 38, where Aram. K^it"! was transliterated pr/fia.*^ August Dillmann decided that the original must have been either Hebrew or Aramaic." He criticized Laurence for not pos- sessing the necessary qualifications 'properly to translate and understand such a work translated from the Aramaic into the Greek and from the Greek into the Ethiopic.'*' But even after the discovery of the Akhmim text, he did not absolutely commit himself beyond the statement that a ' Hebrew- Aramaic original' had been proved at least for chaps. 1-36." Jellinek'" maintained that the book was originally written in Hebrew; while Ewald" held that it was a translation of an Aramaic or Hebrew original. The authority of these scholars did not, however, deter C. H. Weisse*'' from considering the entire work as a Greek production; and even KOstlin^' thought it possible that the Parables were written in Greek. Hilgenfeld" voted for Hebrew, Volkmar," Michel Nicolas,'" and Philippi" for Greek. A decided step forward was taken when Joseph Hal6vy'' pre- sented his suggestive essay on the subject. But in spite of his arguments, Maurice Vernes*' assumed an Aramaic origin for the groundwork, while he thought that the interpolations, to which 45 Oe inferie, 1846, pp. 259, 261 f. He apparently also thoaght of possible Ethiopic inter- polations, as he looked for a critical edition to help in settling ' quae mendosa, qnae ex graecis hebraisve male reddita, quae alienis locis collocata,' p. 261, « Loc. cit., p. 262. *' Das Buch Henoch, 1853, pp. li ff . *» £.oc. cit., p. Iviii. *9 Sitzungeberichte d. k. preuBS. Akad. d. Wieeensch,, 1892, p. 16. soZilMG, 1853, p. 249. ^1 Abhandlung ilber des dthiopischen Buches Henokh Entstehung, Sinn und Zusammen- aetzung, 1851, p. 8. 62 Die Evangelienfrage, 1856, p. 223. '3 Theologiache Jahrbilcher, 1856, p. 376. 54 Diejildische Apokalyptik, 1857, p. 95. 65 ZDMG, 1860, pp. 131 f . 66 J)es doctrines religieuses des Juife, 1860, pp. 262 £E. 67 Bat Buch Henoch, 1868, pp. 124 ff. 68 Journal Asiatique, 1867, pp. 352 ff . 69 Histoire des id&es messianiques, 1874, p. 72. 62 334 Original Language of the Parables op Enoch lie reckoned the Parables and about half of the work, were written in Greek.*" Subsequently he abandoned the latter theory, and left the question open between Hebrew or Aramaic.'" Hausrath followed Dillmann, as did also Schodde.'^ Eug6ne de Faye°* regarded the Parables as the work of a Hellenistic Jew with Christian interpolations, and consequently as written in Greek. Hebrew was favored by Lazarus Goldschmidt,'* who translated Dillmann's version into this language, with sometimes very valu- able notes. In editing the Akhmim text, Adolphe Lods"* dis- cussed the original language, but was not able to decide between Hebrew and Aramaic; and Dieterich*' still inclined to the Greek. Charles, however, strongly held that the author wrote in Hebrew, and often repeated this view."' It is a significant fact that this scholar, to whom students of Enoch are so deeply indebted, has recently reached the conclusion that chaps. 6-86 and probably 72-82 were written in Aramaic, while 37-71, 83-104, and prob- ably 1-5 were written in Hebrew. °' Arguments in favor of an Aramaic original were drawn by Schttrer'" from the presence in the Akhmim text of such words as ^ovKa = X51S (18:8), MavBo^apa (28:1) and Ba^Srjpa (29:1), corrupt for MaS/Sapa = H"13"1H . Israel L6vi" pointed out that any Jew would know the meaning of Hebrew words like Jared and Hermon, while only one speaking Aramaic would write Xnm:!3 , >551S , and bitplX . B. D. Eerdmans" added to these Miabn (31:1) l^iain (6:6), which would be preferable to Heb. ip'^'itlfl, and K^^Sli in the 'Son of Man' passages; and he was fortified in his position by De Goeje," who called attention to the 60 Oscar Gebhardt also expressed a certain scepticism as to "einen etwaigen hebr&ischen Ortext," Marx's Archivf. wisa. Erforechung d. A. T., II, 1872, p. 241. 61 In Lichtenberger's Encyclopedic des sciejices religieuses, 1877, I, 409, and La grande encyclopedic, art, "Apocalypses juives." 62 Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte^, I, p. 185. 63 The Book of Enoch, 1882, pp. 43 f ., B9 f . ^Lcs apocalypses juivcs, 1892, pp. 205 if. 65 2)as Buch Henoch, 1892, pp. xiiif. 66 Le livre d' Enoch : Fragments grecs, 1892, pp. Ivi ff . 67 Nekyia, 1893, p. 216. 68 The Boole of Enoch, 1893, p. 21; Encyclopedia Biblica, 1899, 1, cols. 220 f.; DB, 1902, 1, pp. 705 f . 69 The Ethiopic Version of the Book of Enoch, 1906, pp. x, xxvii ff. TO Theologische Literaturzeitung, 1893, col. 75 ; Oeschichte d. jUd. Volkes^, 1898, III, 203. '1 Beviie des itudes juives, 1893, p. 149. '2 Theologisch Tijdschrift, 1895, pp. 51 ff . 73 Ibid., p. 53, Nathaniel Schmidt 335 term US (/Saroi;? 10:19) in our oldest Aramaic inscription. In a paper presented to the Society for Biblical Literature in 1895, I expressed my conviction that the original was written in Aramaic.'* Hans Lietzmann'* reached the same conclusion. Wellhausen'^ quoted the plural ;y;ej0ot;/8tj' (14:11, 18) and several cases of the status emphaticus in favor of an Aramaic original. Theodor Zahn" expressed his belief that Jude quoted, not from the Greek, but from the Hebrew or Aramaic Enoch. G. Beer™ thought of Hebrew or Aramaic, with an evident leaning toward the latter, strengthened by Pratorius," whose judgment is indi- cated by his suggestion that the Grreek translator read ^Tll for S^n-'-n in 29:1. Paul Fiebig'" and J. Van Loon'' declared for the Aramaic. But Johannes Plemming*^ was not ready to decide between Hebrew and Aramaic. Enno Littmann*^ favored the former, and Francois Martin," on the whole, thought Hebrew more probable. Finally, F. C. Burkitt*' drew from the analogy of o'A.C Orhd and Vr^-^ <"r^ inferences that seem to indicate that he regarded the author of the Parables as having written in Aramaic. The view that the Parables of Enoch were originally written in Grreek, held by Hottinger, Heidegger, Fabricius, Semler, Lticke, GfrOrer, Bottcher, Weisse, KOstlin, Volkmar, Nicolas, Philippi, Vernes, De Faye, and Dieterich, is not likely to be seriously defended again. Every competent scholar today recog- nizes that they must originally have been written in a Semitic language, and that none other than Hebrew or Aramaic can be considered, as was seen by Scaliger, Drusius, Grotius, Laurence, 7* "Was t{lB5"ia a Messianic title?" JSi, 1896, p. 47 ; Encyclopedia BibUca,rf, 1903, col. 4710; The Prophet of Nazareth, 1905, p. 117. 75 Der Menschen^ohn, 1896, p. 45. ^6Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, VI, 1899, p. 241. Tf EinleitUTig in d. N. T., II, 1899, pp. 105 f. ''^Das Buch Henoch in Kautzsch, Pseudepigraphen, 1900, pp. 217 f., 235; Guthe's Bibel- wOrterbuch, 1903, p. 253. In Hauck's Prot. BealencyhlopOdie, 1905, VI, 239, he suggested the possibility of some parts having been written in Hebrew, others in Aramaic. 79Quoted by Beer, Das Bitch Henoch, p. 256. 80 Der Menschensohn, 1901, p. 86. 81 Th. Tijdschrift, 1902, p. 441. 82 Das Buch Henoch, 1901, pp. 1, 33, 59, 87, 121, 133. 83 The Jewish EncyclopcKdia, V, 180. 8* Le livre d' Enoch, 1906, p. Mi. 85 Journal of Theological Studies, 1907, p. 447. 336 Original Language of the Parables of Enoch Hoffmann, Dillmann, Ewald, Hausrath, Schodde, Lods, Beer, and Flamming. But is it possible to go farther and to affirm that the author or authors wrote in Hebrew, as especially Whiston, Murray, Jellinek, Hilgenfeld, Hal6vy, Goldschmidt, Charles, Littmann, and Martin have done? Or can it be maintained that these chapters were written in Aramaic, as De Sacy, Schtirer, L6vi, Eerdmans, De Goeje, Schmidt, Lietzmann, Wellhausen, PrStorius, Fiebig, Van Loon, and Burkitt seem to have done ? The answer must depend upon the possibility of explaining by the Aramaic those peculiar- ities for which hitherto recourse was had to the Hebrew, and of discovering new indications of one language or the other behind the Ethiopia text. Hal^vy*^ cited three instances from the Parables themselves (40:9; 51:3; and 62:16) and a large number from the interpo- lations (41:5, 44; 60:6, 14, 15; 65:8, 10a, b, 11; 67:13; 68:2, 3; and 69: 1, 6, 8, 13), in which he deemed it necessary to assume a Hebrew original; Charles" called attention to five from the Parables (40:9; 45:3; 46:46; 52:9; and 56:7) and five from the interpolations (65:10a, 6, 11; 67:13; and 69:13), which seemed to him conclusively to point in the same direction. To begin with the Parables, both of these scholars regarded the statement concerning Raphael (40: 9) as containing a refer- ence to the derivation of the name Raphael which is possible only in Hebrew — !S3"l='to heal."' But Ncldeke declares that 'itS"l ist gemeinsemitisch' and refers to Ephr. Syr. II, 447 C, and the Palmyrene names bl3iS91 and SS"!"!! for the Aramaic.*' In 45:3 we should read: 'and he will try their works;' the Aramaic was probably inn'' . There is no reason to regard 46 : 5a as a dittograph of 46 : 46. If the text has suffered expansion, it is more natural to suppose that Shfhao' ; rtf7>"^ ; aiA^f /J"} : Ay" fthntlFff"* : (OdK^'i'i : \aoq^\ct\Fa^ : is a reminiscence of Luke 1:52, mv^af : A:^£^'i : Haoq-aCtO'ao' . In 51:3 Hal6vy's in- stinct led him rightly to Micah 7 : 5. But V3 TtHS does not solve the riddle. For DTinS has no such meaning as 'thought' or ^Loc. ci«., pp. 364 fit. 8' The Ethiopic Venion of the Book of Enoch, 1906, pp. xxx S. 88 Haldvy, loc. cit., p. 364 ; Charles, loc, cit., p. xxx. 89 ZDMG, XL, 1886, 723. Nathaniel Schmidt 337 'intellect' in Hebrew. The author probably wrote tl'^IS t*llb"'bH = 'the eloquence of his mouth.' °° But fllb'^b^J has the sense of 'rationality' as well as 'eloquence;' and the translator gave the Ethiopic equivalent for the latter, Xy"AA.9 , thus introducing 'the thoughts of his mouth' which have caused so much trouble. A similar mistake was made by the translator in 52 : 9 where he rendered ■j11<73in'' by fi.'VhdiKi 'will be denied,' not observing that i/Si7J"i also means 'destroy' and should have been so trans- lated here."" In 56:7 an excellent text is secured by itacising X^+fl"* , not found in g, and accepting the negative of f (/LjahtD-l). The h-ahiloD' of the older group of MSS has re- moved the occasion for Hal6vy's speculations in 62: 16. None of these passages shows that the Parables were written in Hebrew. In fact, the difficulties for which Hal6vy and Charles have resorted to Hebrew can in some instances be met only on the theory that the work was written in Aramaic. As the Apocalypse of Noah seems to have been translated from the Greek, and parts of it were probably interpolated in the Parables by the Ethiopic editor, there is, indeed, no necessity a priori for supposing that it was originally written in the same language as the Enoch books. But a consideration of the pas- sages quoted from the interpolations points even here to the Aramaic. It is not certain that 41 : 3-8 ; 44, belonged to the Apocalypse of Noah, but the secondary character is unmistakable, and the ultimate source of these verses may quite probably have been the apocalyptic writing quoted elsewhere in the Parables. According to Hal6vy's conjecture, (\tf>ih^ : Hfft?- in 41:5 goes back to m nayUJ yinrn which in the dialect of the Mishna signifies 'to be bound by an oath.' If this is so, an Aramaic speaking Jew may have known and used the phrase, and ^^4" : might be due to a confusion of 1533? and ^5ay , ' to dwell.' Un- fortunately, Hal6vy quotes no instance of this usage. Charles thinks of 135113 being mistaken for IJllTBD . This would be pos- sible also in Aramaic; but the mistake is not very probable. Radermacher suggests a corruption of oypKiadrjo-av into fOMiadrjaav, ' 90 In Mioah 7 : 5 Pesh. and Trg. both have ^MIB 'hi'O ■ 91 The root XIOT has the meaning of 'deny' in Afel, and probably also in Ittafel. 338 Obiginal Language or the Parables of Enoch but this would not explain the Ethiopic text. The text accepted by Flemming and Charles seems to be a compromise of two variants Qlfl ; H:5>^4" : and no»di'l : Hl-di- : The former may represent 1"lMyT "IflKl 'wherever their position may be,' the latter is probably a gloss suggested by yjEy"?t smiia^H , iXWVOD. m ll^nnXT 'because of the oath by which they were united.' In 44 the partitive "1^ is as natural in Aramaic as in Hebrew. In 60:6 the MS u has the negative which was missed; hence there is no reason for thinking of a confusion of in^ with "iny . In 60 : 14 the Aramaic &1'^tl would give the same sense as the Hebrew "nC; but the idea of 'pauses' (Aram. J^niHTlJS) in the thunder is quite as plausible as 'arrangements' ^f the thunder; and this applies also to 60: 15. In 65: 8, there is no objection to the text fi.'VttAC^^ia pre-eminent.' Charles conjectures that (va.fi.'fXA^ in 65 : 10a goes back to a misreading of TjIBfT] for ntpn"' . It is far more probable that the Aramaic yS^afl'' ' will be withheld' was mistaken for !!<3'Jtl^ 'will be counted.' Hal6vy suggested that in 65:106 Aahd."} , 'months,' is a trans- lation of D^Tflin , corrupted from d^TU^H , ' sorceries,' and Charles thinks that this alone 'restores sanity to the text.' In itself, it would not be impossible that the text read S''T23"irn Pip blD, which became corrupted into, or was mistaken for, H"''Ciri , a word sometimes used by Aramaic-speaking Jews (Pal. Taanith iii, 69a) instead of the regular STIT' . But would this really give an acceptable sense? Charles translates: "because of the sorceries which they have searched out, and through which they know that the earth and those who dwell upon it will be destroyed." It certainly is a strange idea that the terrible judgment of the flood would come because men had succeeded in discovering that the earth with its inhabitants would be destroyed. Scarcely less peculiar in this book would be the notion that men had them- selves searched out such sorceries, and that they would use them to find out that they were to be severely punished. It seems to me probable that the Aramaic text read: "l^.'ST)'' VlnVWni b'D.p bS nn pinn iCnst int^nn '^^X: "because of their violence their judgment will be carried out, and will not be withheld by me, on Nathaniel Schmidt 339 account of the months during which they will inquire and learn how the earth and its inhahitants are to be destroyed." The 'months' may refer to the short period in the six hundredth year of Noah's life, when men learned through him how the earth was to perish, and enhanced their guilt by nof repenting ' while the longsuffering of God waited.""' To this interpretation it may be objected that the episode, in order to fall within the earthly life of Enoch, cannot have been thought of as occurring later than the one hundred and fortieth year of Noah's life (Charles). But why cannot this consultation have taken place after Enoch's translation ? Before that event, there was no necessity of going to 'the ends of the earth' to consult him. As Martin™ has pointed out, Gilgamesh also goes to the ends of the earth to visit Ut Napishtim. That is where paradise was. Noah has to cry three times for Enoch. Then an earthquake occurs, a voice is heard from heaven, and Enoch appears, asking why he has been called in this manner. Chapter 60 is dated in the five hundredth year of Noah (Enoch is corrupt for Noah). It is noticeable that there is no revelation at that time in regard to the flood. He hears that a judgment is coming, and learns some secrets concerning Leviathan, Behemoth, the winds and the thunder, but nothing about a deluge. Chapter 65 is consequently later. Now he hears of the angels coming to let loose the waters. This communication apparently came not long before the catastrophe. It is in harmony with this that the disclosures to Noah in Gen., chaps. 6 and 7, seem to be made in the six hundredth year of his life. In 65:11 the translator rendered i^31^n by y"7nJi, 'return,' instead of by TJrti. , ' repentance,' the Aramaic word having both meanings. Since tw^vAh means both 'prince' and 'angel,' there is no need, as Plemming has pointed out," of supposing a confu- sion of Heb. D"'Si5bl3 and Drib's , or Aram. y^nS-O and 'pib^a , in 67:13. Hal6vy's suggestion of a TH pTtl meaning 'punish- ment' and misunderstood 'inspiration,' in 68:2 is not convincing. In Gnostic thought, each spirit had its hvvaiu'; (the Christ on the 921 Pet. 3:20. 93 ioc. cj<., p. 138. 94 Dos Buch Henoch, 1901, p. 86. 340 Original Language of the Parables op Enoch cross cries r) Svvafik fiov, r) Svvafih (lov, KaTe\eiyjfd(\oa. . The original of the latter phrase was probably KiriUJ"^ xbl 'without being destroyed,' K^Tfl meaning 'destructus est' in Ethpael, and 'liquef actus est' in Ethpeel. A large number of MSS give the text in 68:3' whose heart is not touched with pity?' (Hab Omn^ xb pi) which is in harmony with the following 'and whose reins are not moved?' (TlirbS I'lnb'Tri"' Xb "j'^Tl). The author seems to have had in mind Ps. 73:21. The older group of MSS, however, reads H}Lfi.dI\fh , 'whose heart does not condemn him?' This phrase is clearly a reminiscence of I John 3:20, 'if our heart condemns us,' where the Ethiopic version uses the same term ^Ctiihtldil : ^fl} . This should serve as a warning against too much confi- dence in one group of our very young MSS. The end of the verse may have read: ]''T2'D ■j''p"'272T IIH^by pSDT N^JanS -j^nn p i means 'to help,' probably also in Genza, left, p. 21, 1. 21 (ed. Petermann), where rib^nns^lTlX no doubt represents nbll^TlK . If it ever had the shade of meaning of the Arabic \(^ 'to become a traitor,' a name signi- fying 'God's helper' that also conveyed the suggestion of 'God's traitor' would be very suitable. Penemue(l) in 69:8 is, no doubt, from the same root as ^H'^DS, but 'the interior of God' is not a Nathaniel Schmidt 341 probable name. Panamu occurs as a name among the Aramaic- speaking kings of Zenjirli. Hal6vy assumes that the original text in 69 : 13 had HTlpS , which he thinks the translator took in the sense of 'number,' as in I Chron. 23:11, while he ought to have understood it to mean 'function, charge,' as in Num. 4:16. But mpS in I Chron. 28:11 means 'class,' not 'number,' and there seems to be no other passage where it has this significance. It is not impossible that the Greek translator of the Noah apocalypse misunderstood WiaSi, 'negotium,' as though it came from iXyu, 'to count,' or mistook ^T'i^ for iC'i)2 . But the whole context has manifestly suffered in transmission. I would suggest that the Ethiopic originally read: a)fl£:il : ftern* : tOO^ : "HTF : co-ixV : 'iiV* : flrt^ : /i-flO : CXrt : "Vrfil : . . . . a)flin» ; thf!b{ii), and was a rendering of TB^n s^y^mr xni^a n s^in ■j-'in ny^ti risiir xTi-^mai naiBi xn-^ats xai^/oa i^in lay "li K^Tfl-'ipb nifl-^BT i , 'tumult; l-flO may have become corrupted into fl-ah6i ; HWinifflT IC*! means 'keeper, administrator of the oath,' as N^tlit 123^"! means 'toparch,' ii"l''l Tfl"'"! 'abbot;' itnyinTB may have been an inten- tional paronomasia on K''y^3T25 . The description, drawn indi- rectly from the Book of Enoch by Leon of Modena, that is quoted by Goldschmidt,"'' is not so strange when 'the son of the serpent' has been removed. Hal6vy rightly maintains that fl.^ and hhh go back to bxpri , and that this is the name of an angel, and not of an oath. There are many indications of an Aramaic original beside the instances to which attention has been called where the difficulties i^Dai Buck Henoch, 1892, p. 85. 342 Original Language of the Paeables of Enoch are better explained by Aramaic than by Hebrew. The plurals Kiruben, Surafen, and Ophanin (61:10; 71:7), certainly repre- sent the Aramaic 'pallD , T'BIIS and ■]"'DSiy . The anticipatory pronominal suffix, which Charles'" rightly regards as showing dependence on the Aramaic in 9:8 and 19:2, is used very fre- quently in the Parables, and the prolepsis of object or adverbial clauses before the predicate occurs more often than in books originally written in Hebrew. Of considerable importance is the peculiar use of d'PAtf or j^yn^^flD . While in many passages it is employed like the Hebrew ""DSlb or "'DSb'J , there are not a few instances in which the Aramaic D^p ip furnishes a closer analogy. In 37:4 the text probably read: N-^lTm HOTZ Dip ]'U nin^riK «b -j^S IS X5S b';:rn atrm Ji"l7J Dip p !(5^pln!!< n^Olir , 'in that hour his name was called by the Lord of Spirits,' and similarly in 48 : 3 ; and in 48 : 6, STim t