The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context
The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context
NORTON Jews, Greeks and the Hexapla of Origen 401 by the context in which these same patristic citations are found. From the point of view presented here, the Hexapla is of interest as a secondary source. The Hexapla was a work which assembled already existing texts (with the possible exception of the second column of transliteration). Its originality lay in the comparison of these texts, which are themselves a precious source of information concerning the history of the biblical text and its interpretation in the centuries preceding the work of Origen. With the discoveries of the Hebrew and Greek texts from the Judaean Desert, the focus of interest has been changed to the study of the revisions as such, and what they tell us about the status and state of the text in this crucial period for the history of Judaism and Christianity and the relations between them. In one sense, the work of Field confused the issues. By his assembly of all material relating to the revisions of the Old Greek, and by his inclusion of 'hexaplaric evidence' for books which may not have been in the Hexapla at all, he merged the specific work of Origen with a more general collection of fragments of Greek biblical translations and their revisions from the centuries preceding the work of Origen. Outline of the History of the Hexapla We start with the fact that there existed in the library at Caesarea a work of comparison of biblical texts arranged in columns attributed to Origen. There are several incomplete and tantalizing descriptions of the finished work, nearly all relating to the Psalter. These tell us someting about the appearance of the finished work but not how the work was fabricated, or its extent. 3 The attribution to Origen may mark his contribution in terms of initiative, organization, and even financial resources (surely through his patron Ambrosius), but tells us less concerning who actually executed the work. Practical considerations must lead us to doubt that Origen himself executed the work. We are familiar with the estimation of Swete that, if written in codex form, the Hexapla must have filled 3,250 leaves or 6,500 pages, exclusive of the Quinta and Sexta which would have swelled the total 3. Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 6.16; Epiphanius, Panarion 64.3.5 (GCS 31, p. 407, 3 f), de mensuris et ponderibus 15 (Aquila), 16 (Symmachus), and 17 (Theodotion) PG 43.3, coll 268c-269a. The texts are discussed in P. Nautin, Origene: Sa vie et son Oeuvre (Christianisme Antique, 1; Paris: Beauchesne, 1977).
402 The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context considerably. 4 Swete's estimation is based on a simple multiplication of the number of leaves used for the Old Testament section of the Codex Vaticanus. Given the word-by-word format which seems to be indicated by the samples of fragmentary copies of the Hexapla which have survived, this estimate may be very conservative. Patristic sources tell us that the Old Greek text commonly in use was included as were the well-known texts of Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion. In speaking of the Psalms Eusebius tells us that the four known translations were followed by others, but does not tell us the order of the four (Eccl. Hist. 6.16). The attribution of the order of the columns found in the modern manuals is recounted by Epiphanius of Constantinople (d. 403), whose gossipy information always needs to be checked, and is frequently inaccurate. He attributes the text found in each column of the first six to the following sources respectively: Hebrew text, transliteration of that text in Greek characters, Aquila, Symmachus, the seventy two, Theodotion (de Mens et Pond, PG 43.18, 268-69). Academic controversy surrounds each of these columns, but in general the attribution and ordering of the first four columns is accepted. One of the features of interest from the point of view of a textual critic is that the Hexapla demonstrates the existence of, and itself forges a link between, the Greek and Hebrew textual traditions long after they had acquired a certain textual independence. This poses problems for the present tendency of text critical studies, to recognize two distinct textual forms and the autonomy of each in its evolution. 5 This is exemplified by the work of D. Barthelemy, P.-M. Bogaert, and E. Tov. In the Hexapla, lines cross. Its catastrophic influence in scholarly terms by contamination of the textual transmission of the Greek Old Testament has been well stated by Barthelemy. 6 4. H.B. Swete, Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), p. 74. 5. M. Harl, La Bible Grecque des Septante (Paris: Cerf, 1988), pp. 202-203. 6. D. Barthelemy, 'Origene et le texte de 1'Ancien Testament', in Etudes d'Histoire du texte de l'A.T(OBO, 21; Fribourg / Gottingen: Editions Universitaires/ Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1978), pp. 203-17.
- Page 352 and 353: MANGAN Similarities between Targum
- Page 354 and 355: MANGAN Similarities between Tareum
- Page 356 and 357: EGO Targumization as Theologization
- Page 358 and 359: EGO Targumization as Theologization
- Page 360 and 361: EGO Targumization as Theologization
- Page 362 and 363: Part VI TARGUM AND NEW TESTAMENT
- Page 364 and 365: WlLCOX The Aramaic Background of th
- Page 366 and 367: WlLCOX The Aramaic Background of th
- Page 368 and 369: WlLCOX The Aramaic Background of th
- Page 370 and 371: WlLCOX The Aramaic Background of th
- Page 372 and 373: WlLCOX The Aramaic Background of th
- Page 374 and 375: WILCOX The Aramaic Background of th
- Page 376 and 377: WlLCOX The Aramaic Background of th
- Page 378 and 379: WILCOX The Aramaic Background of th
- Page 380 and 381: ARAMAIC AND TARGUMIC ANTECEDENTS OF
- Page 382 and 383: CHILTON Aramaic and Targumic Antece
- Page 384 and 385: CHILTON Aramaic and Targumic Antece
- Page 386 and 387: CHILTON Aramaic and Targumic Antece
- Page 388 and 389: CHILTON Aramaic and Targumic Antece
- Page 390 and 391: CHILTON Aramaic and Targumic Antece
- Page 392 and 393: CHILTON Aramaic and Targumic Antece
- Page 394 and 395: CHILTON Aramaic and Targumic Antece
- Page 396 and 397: CHILTON Aramaic and Targumic Antece
- Page 398 and 399: CHILTON Aramaic and Targumic Antece
- Page 400 and 401: Part VII JEWISH TRADITIONS AND CHRI
- Page 404 and 405: NORTON Jews, Greeks and the Hexapla
- Page 406 and 407: NORTON Jews, Greeks and the Hexapla
- Page 408 and 409: NORTON Jews, Greeks and the Hexapla
- Page 410 and 411: NORTON Jews, Greeks and the Hexapla
- Page 412 and 413: NORTON Jews, Greeks and the Hexapla
- Page 414 and 415: NORTON Jews, Greeks and the Hexapla
- Page 416 and 417: NORTON Jews, Greeks and the Hexapla
- Page 418 and 419: NORTON Jews, Greeks and the Hexapla
- Page 420 and 421: NORTON Jews, Greeks and the Hexapla
- Page 422 and 423: KOPFSTEIN Jewish Traditions in the
- Page 424 and 425: KOPFSTEIN Jewish Traditions in the
- Page 426 and 427: KOPFSTEIN Jewish Traditions in the
- Page 428 and 429: KOPFSTEIN Jewish Traditions in the
- Page 430 and 431: KOPFSTEIN Jewish Traditions in the
- Page 432 and 433: JEWISH TRADITION, THE PSEUDEPIGRAPH
- Page 434 and 435: STONE Jewish Tradition and the Chri
- Page 436 and 437: STONE Jewish Tradition and the Chri
- Page 438 and 439: STONE Jewish Tradition and the Chri
- Page 440 and 441: STONE Jewish Tradition and the Chri
- Page 442 and 443: STONE Jewish Tradition and the Chri
- Page 444 and 445: STONE Jewish Tradition and the Chri
- Page 446 and 447: STONE Jewish Tradition and the Chri
- Page 448 and 449: STONE Jewish Tradition and the Chri
- Page 450 and 451: STONE Jewish Tradition and the Chri
402 <strong>The</strong> <strong>Aramaic</strong> <strong>Bible</strong>: <strong>Targums</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>their</strong> <strong>Historical</strong> <strong>Context</strong><br />
considerably. 4 Swete's estimation is based on a simple multiplication<br />
of the number of leaves used for the Old Testament section of the<br />
Codex Vaticanus. Given the word-by-word format which seems to be<br />
<strong>in</strong>dicated by the samples of fragmentary copies of the Hexapla which<br />
have survived, this estimate may be very conservative.<br />
Patristic sources tell us that the Old Greek text commonly <strong>in</strong> use<br />
was <strong>in</strong>cluded as were the well-known texts of Aquila, Symmachus and<br />
<strong>The</strong>odotion. In speak<strong>in</strong>g of the Psalms Eusebius tells us that the four<br />
known translations were followed by others, but does not tell us the<br />
order of the four (Eccl. Hist. 6.16). <strong>The</strong> attribution of the order of<br />
the columns found <strong>in</strong> the modern manuals is recounted by Epiphanius<br />
of Constant<strong>in</strong>ople (d. 403), whose gossipy <strong>in</strong>formation always needs to<br />
be checked, and is frequently <strong>in</strong>accurate. He attributes the text found<br />
<strong>in</strong> each column of the first six to the follow<strong>in</strong>g sources respectively:<br />
Hebrew text, transliteration of that text <strong>in</strong> Greek characters, Aquila,<br />
Symmachus, the seventy two, <strong>The</strong>odotion (de Mens et Pond, PG<br />
43.18, 268-69). Academic controversy surrounds each of these<br />
columns, but <strong>in</strong> general the attribution and order<strong>in</strong>g of the first four<br />
columns is accepted.<br />
One of the features of <strong>in</strong>terest from the po<strong>in</strong>t of view of a textual<br />
critic is that the Hexapla demonstrates the existence of, and itself<br />
forges a l<strong>in</strong>k between, the Greek and Hebrew textual traditions long<br />
after they had acquired a certa<strong>in</strong> textual <strong>in</strong>dependence. This poses<br />
problems for the present tendency of text critical studies, to recognize<br />
two dist<strong>in</strong>ct textual forms and the autonomy of each <strong>in</strong> its evolution. 5<br />
This is exemplified by the work of D. Barthelemy, P.-M. Bogaert, and<br />
E. Tov. In the Hexapla, l<strong>in</strong>es cross. Its catastrophic <strong>in</strong>fluence <strong>in</strong> scholarly<br />
terms by contam<strong>in</strong>ation of the textual transmission of the Greek<br />
Old Testament has been well stated by Barthelemy. 6<br />
4. H.B. Swete, Introduction to the Old Testament <strong>in</strong> Greek (Cambridge:<br />
Cambridge University Press), p. 74.<br />
5. M. Harl, La <strong>Bible</strong> Grecque des Septante (Paris: Cerf, 1988), pp. 202-203.<br />
6. D. Barthelemy, 'Origene et le texte de 1'Ancien Testament', <strong>in</strong> Etudes<br />
d'Histoire du texte de l'A.T(OBO, 21; Fribourg / Gott<strong>in</strong>gen: Editions Universitaires/<br />
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1978), pp. 203-17.
Change language