As a Deer Longs for Flowing Streams: A Study of the Septuagint Version of Psalm 42-43 in Its Relation to the Hebrew Text 9783525533833, 9783647533834

Citation preview

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

De Septuaginta Investigationes (DSI) Edited by Anneli Aejmelaeus, Kristin De Troyer, Wolfgang Kraus, Emanuel Tov In Co-operation with Kai Brodersen (Erfurt, Germany), Cécile Dogniez (Paris, France), Peter Gentry (Louisville, USA), Anna Kharanauli (Tbilisi, Georgia), Armin Lange (Wien, Austria), Alison Salvesen (Oxford, UK), David Andrew Teeter (Cambridge, USA), Julio Trebolle (Madrid, Spain), Florian Wilk (Göttingen, Germany)

Volume 1

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

Staffan Olofsson

As a Deer Longs for Flowing Streams A Study of the Septuagint Version of Psalm 42–43 in its Relation to the Hebrew Text

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data available in the Internet: http://dnb.d-nb.de. ISBN 978-3-525-53383-3 ISBN 978-3-647-53383-4 (e-book)

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen/ Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht LLC, Oakville, CT, U.S.A. www.v-r.de All rights reserved. No part of his work may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without prior written permission from the publisher. Printed and bound in Germany by b Hubert & Co., Göttingen Printed on non-aging paper.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

Table of Contents

Preface..........................................................................................................9 1 Introduction .............................................................................................11 1.1 The aim of the study .......................................................................11 1.2 The presuppositions and the method used.......................................12 1.3 The structure of the study................................................................13 1.4 The origin of the Psalter..................................................................17 1.5 Previous studies of the LXX Psalms ...............................................18 1.6 Textual criticism .............................................................................30 2 Exegesis of Psalm 42–43.........................................................................35 2.1 Unique features in Ps 42–43 and its position in the Psalter.............35 2.2 The unity, form, and structure of the psalm in Hebrew...................37 2.2.1 Unity and form.....................................................................37 2.2.2 Structure ..............................................................................39 2.3 Repetitions and synonymous expressions .......................................44 2.4 The close context ............................................................................48 2.5 An interpretation of the psalm in Hebrew .......................................48 2.6 An interpretation of the psalm in Greek ..........................................63 3 Verse for verse commentary on Psalm 42–43 .........................................68 3.1 Text 41 (42):1 “To the leader” ........................................................68 3.1.1 Textual criticism ..................................................................68 3.1.2 Commentary ........................................................................68 3.2 Text 41 (42):2 “Flowing streams”...................................................73 3.2.1 Textual criticism ..................................................................73 3.2.2 Commentary ........................................................................74 3.3 Text 41 (42):3 “The living God”.....................................................81 3.3.1 Textual criticism ..................................................................82 3.3.2 Commentary ........................................................................82 3.4 Text 41 (42):4 “Where is your God?” .............................................88 3.4.1 Textual criticism ..................................................................88 3.4.2 Commentary ........................................................................89 3.5 Text 41 (42):5 “I pour out my soul”................................................93 3.5.1 Textual criticism ..................................................................93 3.5.2 Commentary ........................................................................95 3.6 Text 41 (42):6 “Hope in God” ......................................................110

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

6

Table of Contents

 7H[WXDOFULWLFLVP   &RPPHQWDU\  7H[W ³0\VRXOLVFDVWGRZQ´   7H[WXDOFULWLFLVP   &RPPHQWDU\  7H[W ³'HHSFDOOVWRGHHS´  7H[WXDOFULWLFLVP   &RPPHQWDU\  7H[W ³*RGRIP\OLIH´  7H[WXDOFULWLFLVP   &RPPHQWDU\  7H[W ³:K\KDYH\RXIRUJRWWHQPH"´   7H[WXDOFULWLFLVP   &RPPHQWDU\  7H[W ³:KHUHLV\RXU*RG"´   7H[WXDOFULWLFLVP   &RPPHQWDU\  7H[W ³+RSHLQ*RG´  7H[WXDOFULWLFLVP  7H[W ³9LQGLFDWHPH´  7H[WXDOFULWLFLVP   &RPPHQWDU\  7H[W ³:K\KDYH\RXFDVWPHRII"´  7H[WXDOFULWLFLVP   &RPPHQWDU\  7H[W ³6HQGRXW\RXUOLJKW´  7H[WXDOFULWLFLVP   &RPPHQWDU\  7H[W ³*RGP\H[FHHGLQJMR\´   7H[WXDOFULWLFLVP   &RPPHQWDU\  7H[W ³+RSHLQ*RG´  7H[WXDOFULWLFLVP  &RQFOXVLRQVDQGVXPPDU\RQWUDQVODWLRQWHFKQLTXHDQGWH[WXDO FULWLFLVP  0DLQIDFWRUVRIWUDQVODWLRQWHFKQLTXH  &RQVLVWHQF\RULQFRQVLVWHQF\LQWKHUHQGHULQJ   $FFXUDF\DQGOHYHORIVHPDQWLFLQIRUPDWLRQ  'LYLVLRQLQWRHOHPHQWVDQGWKHVHTXHQFHLQZKLFKWKHVHDUH UHSUHVHQWHG

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

Table of Contents

7



&RGHG³HW\PRORJLFDO´LQGLFDWLRQRIIRUPDOVHPDQWLF UHODWLRQVKLSV  4XDQWLWDWLYHDGGLWLRQDQGVXEWUDFWLRQRIHOHPHQWV   /HYHORIWH[WDQGOHYHORIDQDO\VLVVorlage 2WKHUIDFWRUVRIWUDQVODWLRQWHFKQLTXH   7UDQVODWLRQRIFROOHFWLYHZRUGV  $OSKDEHWLFDODUUDQJHPHQW   5HQGHULQJRIDOOLWHUDWLRQRUDVVRQDQFH   )DYRXULWHZRUGV   5HQGHULQJRIWKHVRFDOOHGKHQGLDG\V   (PSOR\PHQWRIGRXEOHWUDQVODWLRQ   8VHRIFRPSRVLWHWHUPV  8VHRIWUDQVFULSWLRQ  6W\OLVWLFGHPDQGVRIWKHWDUJHWODQJXDJH  8VHRUQRQXVHRIWKHWHFKQLTXHRIKDUPRQL]DWLRQ  'HSHQGHQFHRQWKH3HQWDWHXFK  (TXLYDOHQWVRIWKH3VDOPVGHSDUWLQJIURPWKHRWKHU /;;ERRNV  7KHRORJLFDOUHIOHFWLRQ  7H[WXDOFULWLFLVP   2OG*UHHNWH[W  +HEUHZVorlage %LEOLRJUDSK\ ,QGH[RI$XWKRUV

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

Preface The choice of a psalm from the Psalter for a monograph on the Hebrew text and the Septuagint translation is an easy choice. At least for me! One reason is obvious; I have to a high degree focused on the LXX Psalms in my work with the LXX translation. My thesis and most of my articles on the Septuagint are related to the Psalter. Furthermore, I am not aware of any other monograph with a detailed discussion of the Hebrew and the Greek text of a specific psalm, and with an emphasis on the translation technique of the Septuagint. Each book has its history. This one has a long history. I started the work in connection with my doctoral studies when I had an ambition to write about the translation technique of book two in the LXX book of Psalms. Nevertheless, this was an undertaking too extensive for a doctoral thesis. From the beginning, it was a translation-technical study but it has grown into a commentary on the Hebrew and the Greek texts, even if the emphasis on translation technique remains the backbone of this monograph. I will express my gratitude to my colleagues at Uppsala University, as well as in the Old Testament seminar at Uppsala, from whom I have learned much. The conversation and friendly discussion with Samuel Byrskog, Lennart Thörn, Rosmari Lillas, Gunnar Samuelsson and Tobias Hägerland, my colleagues at the University of Gothenburg as teachers of the Old and the New Testament, have provided a great stimulus for me in my research work. I have presented some of the material included in this book in the Old Testament seminar at the University of Gothenburg where it received a stimulating response that has improved my presentation. My heartfelt thanks go to the doctoral student in New Testaments Exegetics, Tobias Hägerland, who has checked my Greek in parts of the book with great patience and accuracy. A special word of thanks is also due to Jon van Leuven and Heather A. McKay, who undertook to correct my English. However, I am fully responsible for all remaining faults. I am also grateful for all the works that have contributed to my understanding of the Septuagint version. I recognize that I am dependent on other scholars in many respects but I take the responsibility for the views expressed in this book. A part of this monograph has been translated into Swedish and published in Svensk Exegetisk Årsbok 2005 with the title “’Som hjorten längtar till bäckens vatten’. En studie av metaforspråk och teologi i Ps 42–43.” Gothenburgh, June 2011

Staffan Olofsson

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

1 Introduction

1.1 The aim of the study There are several goals which I have tried to attain with this study. First and foremost I have made a comprehensive investigation of Hebrew and Greek translation equivalents in Ps 42–43 in the Psalter and in LXX as a whole. Studies of translation technique have a value of their own but they can also be utilized for several different purposes. They can be of importance for grammars of the Septuagint and for dictionaries of the Old and the New Testaments and for the preparation of a critical Septuagint text. The extensive translation-technical emphasis and the discussion of textcritical matters make it possible to use this book to present a more accurate Old Greek text and it may thus contribute to a new critical edition of the Greek Psalter. Although Psalmi cum Odis, the critical text in the Göttingen edition, was an excellent accomplishment for its time and represents a high standard of scholarship, it can be improved upon. Several Mss were unknown to A. Rahlfs and he did not have systematic studies of translation technique to build on; and the Lucianic manuscripts, which were not highly regarded by Rahlfs, are now regarded as important text witnesses for establishing the Old Greek. Rahlfs relied mainly upon a combination of manuscripts when he presented the Greek text in Psalmi cum Odis. However, it is not enough to build on manuscripts – a systematic investigation of the translator’s method must be carried out before one can use the manuscripts in a proper way. Thus, a more consistent use of translation-technical studies would make it possible to come closer to the Old Greek text. This book is also in some respects in itself a text-critical study, since all variants in Rahlfs’ edition are referred to and studied. The book is also a commentary on the Hebrew and the Greek texts of Ps 42–43. Like other commentaries, it describes the position of the psalm as part of the Korah psalms; it presents the unity and form of the psalm, its structure and its relation to the close context. As a commentary on both the Hebrew Bible and the Septuagint, it gives an overall interpretation of the psalm in Hebrew and in Greek. The commentary is especially focused on the meaning of the metaphors and the reflection of temple theology. This detailed study does not only include the translation equivalents, the seman-

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

12

Introduction

tic meanings of the Hebrew and Greek words are also discussed and parallels in the LXX and in the Hebrew Bible are cited.

1.2 The presuppositions and the method used LXX Psalms is a translation where the word-for-word character is conspicuous; it is a version that tried to render every single word of the original, preferably with one single word in Greek and, wherever possible, to follow the exact word order of the original. The study of such a translation must focus to a high degree on the Hebrew parent text, since sometimes this is the only way to make it possible to understand the meaning of the Greek text. Accordingly, the Hebrew text at times ought to be used as an arbiter of meaning. The translation of the LXX text in my work is, if nothing else is suggested, from the latest Accordance version of A New English translation of the Septuagint: and the other Greek translations traditionally included under that title, for which I will use the abbreviation NETS. NETS has a certain official character for the academic community, and it is supported by the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies. The translation of the Hebrew is mainly taken from the NRSV but I have felt free to discuss different possibilities to interpret the Hebrew and the Greek texts and to depart from the textual choices in NETS. The choice of NRSV accords with the presuppositions in NETS, since NETS is consciously built on the translation NRSV. Several new translations of the LXX version of the book of Psalms from which I have benefited have appeared in recent years. These are: the translation by A. Lazarus, The Holy Psalter from the Septuagint, the one by the Fathers of the Holy Transfiguration Monastery, The Psalter According to the Seventy, and the translation by J.M. de Vinck and Leonidas C. Contos, The Psalms Translated from the Greek Septuagint. The basis for this study is the Masoretic text, as is in fact the basis for nearly all investigations of the translation technique of a LXX translator. To be honest, the investigations, whether explicitly or implicitly, refer to the exact vocalization and thus the derivation of the terms by the Masoretes. I have decided to make this state of affairs transparent in my discussion by citing MT, i.e. the fully vocalized Hebrew text of Codex Leningradensis, as the point of departure. This does not suggest that I have made a decision regarding the Vorlage of the LXX text. On the contrary, it rather makes the initial position from which deviations are measured as clear as possible.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

The structure of the study

13

It is, actually, the same point of departure as that used in works of textual criticism or in discussions regarding the textual basis of modern translations where all make the vocalized MT the norm for the description of textual variants. See e.g. BHK, BHS, BHQ and the text-critical appendix of NAB, of NEB and of the Swedish translation of the Bible (Bibel 2000). While Psalmi cum Odis is the textual basis for the discussion of Ps 42– 43, I have otherwise used Rahlfs’ manual edition of the Septuagint for the scriptural references. When I have employed the text of the concordance of E. Hatch and H.A. Redpath, I have taken into account the corrections made by T. Muraoka.1 The Greek text is used with accents, apart from the citation of Greek variants in the textual apparatus. I will, however, employ the accents in the text-critical discussion that follows the textual apparatus. The Septuagint can be described as a combination of different kinds of translations, from a strictly literal translation to a paraphrase. Therefore, one cannot apply the experience from one translation unit, mostly a book, to any other unit in the LXX. In fact, the study of the methods of translation in the translation units in the LXX is the pivotal point not only for   
the Vorlage of the LXX but also as regards the Old Greek. Comparisons made between equivalents in the Psalms and equivalents outside the Psalms, of a specific Hebrew word in a certain meaning, can be used only with great caution. The comparisons measure interesting differences if counterparts that are common in the Psalms occur rarely, or not at all, in other LXX books. Furthermore, such comparisons identify significant similarities when consistent renderings that are found in the book of Psalms are identical with such renderings in the whole of the LXX. However, the opposite is not true. Thus, one cannot treat inconsistent renderings in LXX as a whole and inconsistent renderings in the book of Psalms in the same way. A broad spectrum of equivalents in the LXX may be a collection of consistent translations from many different translators. Accordingly, one can only employ the comparison made in my study between the book of Psalms and the rest of the Septuagint with caution because it can at times be misleading. Frequently, therefore, I have looked separately at equivalents in specific translation units, e.g. Genesis and Isaiah.

1.3 The structure of the study The structure of the monograph is as follows. Apart from the preface and the presentation of the aim of the study, I provide a background to the study 1

T. Muraoka, Hebrew/Aramaic Index to the Septuagint … (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 1998).

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

14

Introduction

that includes an overview of translation-technical studies and a discussion of textual criticism in the book of Psalms. Then I describe the position of the psalm in the Psalter as part of the collections of Korah psalms. The next section is directed to the interpretation and structure of the psalm in Hebrew


into account the unity and form of the psalm, the structure, including refrains, repetitions and synonymous expressions, and the relation to the close context. This is then followed by a general interpretation of the psalm in Hebrew and in Greek. The next section, a detailed commentary of the Hebrew and the Greek text, is the main part of the monograph. The last part of the book is a compilation of results from the study regarding translation techniques and textual criticism. It is mainly structured according to the different aspects of literalism presented by J. Barr. Since the translation technique is unified in the LXX Psalms, the results of the study have a bearing on the translation technique of the LXX Psalms generally. Each verse in the main part is dealt with under three headings, Text, Textual Criticism, and Commentary, apart from the repetition of the major refrain in 41 (42):12 and 42 (43):5. The heading Text reproduces the MT with translation from NRSV and Rahlfs’ Greek text in Psalmi cum Odis with the NETS translation. Minor adjustments to the Hebrew and Greek texts are made, which occasionally result in modifications to the translations. Textual Criticism presents Rahlfs’ text-critical apparatus, with the addition of manuscript 2110 and comments on all the variants to Rahlfs’ text, some of them in brief, others in detail. The question of a deviant Vorlage is discussed in my comments on Rahlfs’ textual apparatus in the order of the words in the Greek text. Since the question of the Vorlage has a bearing on the translation equivalents, it is often touched upon in the Commentary as well. The section entitled Commentary deals with the semantic as well as translation-technical aspects of the words and phrases, paying attention to both the Hebrew and the Greek. I will refer to all Hebrew words extant in the verse and their translation. The order of the discussion in the Commentary section is, in general terms, first questions related to broader aspects of the Hebrew text, then questions regarding semantic aspects and, last but not least, translation-technical issues which follow from the previous discussion. All translation-technical discussions are based on complete statistics of equivalents in LXX Psalms – and often referring to the LXX as a whole. My primary aim is to discuss the original meaning of the LXX Psalms, i.e. what the translator intended with his rendering. Therefore, my book does not include an investigation of possible readings of the Greek text not related to the Hebrew, or questions concerning the religious influence that the LXX version exercised. “The intention of the translator” should not be

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

The structure of the study

15

understood at face value. It is of course not possible to probe into the mind of the translator and my suggestions are based on the kind of translation that he actually made, his translation technique. Words such as “rendering”, “translation”, “equivalent”, and “counterpart” have the same meaning and are thus used as synonyms for the sake of variation. I have also employed “Septuagint” as well as “LXX” for the same reason. “Old Greek” as well as OG are used without discrimination and “Vorlage” or the synonymous term “Hebrew Vorlage” are used in their traditional sense. “Translation technique” is here, as is common in translation-technical studies of the Septuagint, used for the characteristics of the translation as it left the hands of the translator. Therefore, it does not presuppose that the translator used consciously adopted principles in the translation, let alone a theory of translation technique. The LXX Psalms may have been literal partly for the practical reason that this was the easiest way to make a translation, especially for translators who embarked upon a pioneer enterprise and partly as a means to reflect the actual wording of the Hebrew Vorlage. Although I use the term “translator”, it by no means implies that I exclude the possibility that the translation of the Psalms was a joint enterprise. The LXX Psalms appears to be the work of a single translator, or perhaps of coordinated teamwork, because no significant differences in the vocabulary or style within the Psalter can be seen.2 I adhere to the convention in LXX studies to present the reference in LXX as well as in MT when both texts are discussed, and when the numbers depart from each other. I always give the LXX numbering first and then the number in MT in parenthesis. The order of the books follows the Christian tradition and with the Apocrypha separately in the end. The exact scriptural references are often given rather than the numbers, which makes it easy to see the textual basis for my statistics. When a certain equivalent occurs very frequently, however, I have confined myself to the number but in which case I give the other equivalents with exact references. This makes it simple to secure the references of the main equivalent with a glance at, for example, the concordance of Lisowsky. I will discuss the doubtful cases in the footnotes because the Greek text and the Vorlage are sometimes uncertain. The scriptural references are as much as possible 2

Thus, e.g. T.F. Williams, “Towards a Date for the Old Greek Psalter”, in R.J.V. Hiebert/C. Cox/P.J. Gentry (ed.), The Old Greek Psalter: Studies in Honour of Albert Pietersma (JSOTSup 332; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 255–60; A. Soffer, “The Treatment of Anthropomorphisms and Anthropopathisms in the Septuagint of Psalms”, in S. Jellicoe, Studies in the Septuagint: Origins, Recensions, and Interpretations. Selected Essays with a Prolegomenon by S. Jellicoe (Library of Biblical Studies; New York: Ktav, 1974), 417; J. Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter (WUNT 76; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995), 33.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

16

Introduction

given in the footnotes to enhance the readability of the monograph and to make the overall choice of translation equivalents visible in the main text. I fully recognize that I am dependent on other scholars in many respects, which the references in the footnotes amply testify, even though I have tried to make my own conclusions. The most original part of the book is my methodology. When I discuss translation technique, textual criticism, and theological exegesis, I will employ methods congruent with the outlook that is presented in my dissertation and my scholarly articles. The translationtechnical groundwork in this monograph is mainly based on my own investigation of the text and is seldom dependent on the work of others.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

The origin of the Psalter

17

1.4 The origin of the Psalter The book of Psalms is one of the most discussed books in the Septuagint. Therefore, the origin of the LXX book of Psalms is much studied but no consensus has been attained so far. Consequently, it is difficult to give a date and a place of origin for the LXX translation. I myself would favour a date in the second century BCE.1 The translation of the Psalter has been associated with Palestine by H.-J. Venetz on the basis of some lexical choices in common with the so-called kaige group, which, according to the studies of D. Barthélemy, was at home in Palestine.2 The text of the LXX Psalms would in that case be connected with a Palestinian hermeneutic tradition,3 because it has several lexical choices in common with the kaige group.4 However, the LXX Psalms is by no means part of the kaige group or influenced by it which is clearly shown in the studies of O. Munnich and S. Olofsson. The similarity in the choice of equivalents between the Psalter and the kaige group, which does exist, can be explained otherwise. The revision has in some cases been based on the vocabulary of the book of Psalms, in a similar way but not so thoroughly, as later LXX books were drawing on the Greek Pentateuch for their choice of vocabulary.5 Since the kaige group is based on the fact that the revisers took up extant Hebrew-Greek correspondences from LXX books, it is no surprise that 1

See especially the discussion in Williams, “Towards a Date”, 261–76. Regarding the date of the translation of the book of Psalms, a date early in the second century BCE is favoured in e.g. G. Dorival/M. Harl/O. Munnich, La Bible Grecque des Septante… (Éditions de CERF – Éditions de C.N.R.S.; Paris: Le Cerf, 1988), 111, the second century BCE, without being more specific, is suggested in O. Munnich, “La Septante des Psaumes et le groupe kaige”, VT 33 (1983), 75–89 and the second half of the second century BCE in Schaper, Eschatology, 45; J. Schaper, “Der Septuaginta-Psalter als Dokument jüdischer Eschatologie”, in M. Hengel/A.M. Schwemer (ed.), Die Septuaginta zwischen Judentum und Christentum (WUNT 7; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1994), 60–1. This dating presupposes that the translation of the Pentateuch is placed in the middle of the third century BCE, a common understanding, which I adhere to. There are, however, divergent voices suggesting a later date for the whole translation project, e.g. F. Clancy, “The Date of the LXX”, SJOT 16 (2002), 207–25, who argues that one cannot assume that the earliest LXX translations were being made before 150 BCE. Idem, 223. A. van der Kooij suggests a date for LXX Psalms in the first century BCE in his article “On the Place of Origin of the Old Greek of Psalms”, VT 33 (1983), 73.s 2 H.–J. Venetz, Die Quinta des Psalteriums. Ein Beitrag zur Septuaginta- und Hexaplaforschung (PIRHT, Sect. Biblique et Masorétique 1:2; Hildesheim: Gerstenberg, 1974), 72–84, especially p. 80; D. Barthélemy, Les Devanciers d’Aquila (VTSup 11; Leiden: Brill, 1963), 4–10. 3 Venetz, Quinta, 72–84, especially 83–4; van der Kooij, “Origin”, 69–71. 4 For a detailed investigation, see S. Olofsson, “Kaige Group and the Septuagint Book of Psalms”, in S. Olofsson, Translation Technique and Theological Exegesis. Collected Essays on the Septuagint Version (ConBOT 57; Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 2009), 134–75. 5 See Olofsson, Translation Technique and Theological Exegesis, 169.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

18

Introduction

Hebrew-Greek equivalences from inter alia the book of Psalms are used. Certainly, they have employed the translation choices from several LXX books. The kaige group is after all a revisionary activity based on the extant LXX material, that is, their Hebrew-Greek equivalences use existing LXX books as their point of departure. Nonetheless, these are used in a more consistent way. Thus, existing standard Hebrew-Greek counterparts are the backbone of the revision. This does not suggest by any means that these books are connected with the kaige group in any true sense of the word.6 The translation choices in the kaige group were conditioned by their principles of translation rather than by exegetical or theological principles. With this in mind, Palestine as the suggested geographical milieu in which the LXX Psalms was translated,7 as well as the supposed connection with Palestinian hermeneutic, remain unproven premises.8

1.5 Previous studies of the LXX Psalms I will now turn to the general translation technique of the Psalter as characterized by different scholars, and look at a representative selection of scholarly opinion. The evaluation of J.E. Berg that, “the version as a whole must be pronounced to be a fairly literal one; too idiomatic to be slavishly so, too faithful to its archetype to in any way resemble a paraphrase,”9 is a common description of LXX Psalms. “Fairly literal” seems to be a general label to which many scholars can subscribe. J. Barr characterizes the translator as “normally a fairly sober and literal worker”.10 A. Pietersma regards the

6

My position in this regard was unfortunately not expressed in a straightforward manner, and thus not fully understood by P.J. Gentry in his discussion of my article “The Kaige-Group and the Septuagint Book of Psalms” in B.A. Taylor (ed.), IX Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies in Cambridge 1995 (SBLSCS
45, Atlanta, Georgia 1997), 189–230. See P.J. Gentry, “The Greek Psalter and the kaivge Tradition”, in Hiebert/Cox/Gentry, The Old Greek Psalter, 78–80. See also the revised edition of my article “Kaige Group and the Septuagint Book of Psalms” in Olofsson, Translation Technique and Theological Exegesis, 134– 75. Therefore, I have here stated my case in a more explicit way than I did in my original article. 7 See e.g. Munnich, “La Septante des Psaumes”, 80–3. 8 Venetz, Quinta, 80–4; van der Kooij, “Origin”, 70–1. The place of origin of the book of Psalms remains uncertain. The arguments for a Palestinian provenance are not decisive. See e.g. S. Olofsson, The LXX Version. A Guide to the Translation Technique of the Septuagint (ConBOT 30; Stockholm: Almquist&Wiksell, 1990), 54. 9 J.E. Berg, The Influence of the LXX upon the Peshitta Psalter (New York: W. Drugulin, 1895), 43. 10 J. Barr, Comparative Philology and the Text of the OT (Oxford: Clarendon, 1968), 249.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

Previous studies of the LXX Psalms

19

version as “a fairly literal translation of the Hebrew”.11 C.A. Briggs is an exception to this evaluation since he argues that the translator “was concerned ... to give the sense of the original in intelligible Greek”.12 The great majority of the scholars describe the translation technique in the Psalms as literal, rather than free, if such a dichotomy is allowed. A literal translation has several features; thus a general description of the literality of the LXX Psalms may have focused on one or a couple of these characteristics. J. Barr depicts a way to distinguish among different aspects of literalism which is especially applicable to biblical translation.13 These aspects are as follows: The division into elements or segments, and the sequence in which these elements are represented. The quantitative addition or subtraction of elements. Consistency or non-consistency in the rendering. Accuracy and level of semantic information. Coded “etymological” indication of formal/semantic relationships obtaining in the vocabulary of the original language. Level of text and level of analysis.14

A translation often consists of a combination of literal and free traits, and the different aspects of literality could sometimes be adversely, rather than complementarily, related to each other. It is thus of primary importance that aspects of literality that more or less contradict each other are not combined when one tries to describe the literality of a translation. The manner of translation of any given translator is not constant. Accordingly, the translators show different capabilities in separate fields. Therefore, one must, in the words of A. Aejmelaeus, “strive to provide as many-sided a documentation of his working habits and abilities as possible”.15

11

A. Pietersma, “David in the Greek Psalms”, VT 30 (1980), 214–15. Cf. also I. SoisalonSoininen, “Die Konstruktion des Verbs bei einem Neutrum Plural im griechischen Pentateuch”, VT 29 (1979), 190, who writes that “dieses Buch aber sehr wortgetreu übersetzt ist.“ 12 C.A. Briggs, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms, vol. I (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1906), XXV. 13 J. Barr, The Typology of Literalism in Ancient Biblical Translations (MSU 15; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck&Ruprecht, 1979), 294. Criteria for literalism are much easier to put forward than for free translation technique. Regarding the need of useful criteria, see E. Tov, “Compound Words in the LXX Representing Two or More Hebrew Words”, Bib 58 (1977), 195. 14 Barr, “Typology”, 294. Some of these criteria can also be found in J.M. Rife, “The Mechanics of Translation Greek”, JBL 52 (1933), 245–6. See also J. Beekman/J. Callow, Translating the Word of God. With Scripture and Topical Indexes (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1974), 19–23. 15 A. Aejmelaeus, “Characterizing Criteria for the Characterization of the Septuagint Translators: Experimenting on the Greek Psalter”, in Hiebert/Cox/Gentry, The Old Greek Psalter, 55.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

20

Introduction

Subservience to the word order of the Hebrew text is a prime characteristic or even the primary characteristic of a literal translation.16 G. Marquis has studied the word order of the LXX version of the book of Ezekiel in relation to MT. The study also includes statistics concerning the word order of Ps 1–78 in the LXX and in the MT, as well as representative samples from other books, i.e. Isaiah, Jeremiah, Job, 1 Samuel and 2 Kings.17 That the Psalter is described as one of the most literal books in the sample studied, as regards the subservience of the Hebrew word order, is one result of the enquiry.18 A study of LXX Psalms by Olofsson confirms this evaluation. The translation of the book of Psalms is evidently extremely literal as concerns the word order.19 The same is true as regards quantitative additions and subtractions of elements in relation to the MT. Such elements can be found and a few of them are long additions. However, they are probably reflections of a different Hebrew Vorlage and thus have no bearing on the translation technique. Additions making implicit information explicit in LXX Psalms are rare. The translation is consistent but not rigorously consistent, concerning lexical consistency.20 Often it has one main equivalent for a certain Hebrew lexeme but it is also common that two or more counterparts are used. Furthermore, it repeatedly uses one Greek word for the rendering of several Hebrew words. Or to express it another way, although the translation often is consistent it is seldom reciprocally consistent.21 The translator chose an approach where consistency in the Hebrew-Greek equivalents can clearly be seen but he from time to time uses one Greek equivalent for a number of non-synonymous Hebrew counterparts. This technique is sometimes labelled “favourite words”, and there are several favourite words in the book of Psalms, ajnomiva, a[rcwn, boulhv, ejpipoqei'n, eujdokiva, qaumastov", qumov", kaqistavnai, kakou'n, kataigiv", ojrghv, rJuvesqai, saleuvesqai, sunavgein, suntaravssein, swv/zein, tapeinou'n, taravssein, to mention only a few. Some of these can be found in Psalms 41–42: ejpipoqei'n, 16

See e.g. Olofsson, The LXX Version, 13 and n. 115, 14 and n. 119, 120. See also G. Marquis, “Word Order as a Criterion for the Evaluation of Translation Technique in the LXX and the Evaluation of Word-Order Variants as Exemplified in LXX-Ezekiel”, Text 13 (1986), 61 and n. 6. 17 Marquis, “Word Order in LXX-Ezekiel”, 63–7. 18 Marquis, “Word Order in LXX-Ezekiel”, 64. Only 2 Kings displays a higher percentage. 19 See Marquis, “Word Order in LXX-Ezekiel”, passim; S. Olofsson, “Studying the Word Order of the Septuagint”, in Olofsson, Translation Technique and Theological Exegesis, 105–33. 20 For examples, see e.g. Williams, “Towards a Date”, 256–60. 21 A reciprocally consistent translation refers to an equivalent in Greek that is the only counterpart to a certain Hebrew word that is never employed for any other Hebrew term. For the background and the necessity of this term, see Olofsson, Translation Technique and Theological Exegesis, 50– 66.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

Previous studies of the LXX Psalms

21

qaumastov", rJuvesqai, and suntaravssein. Consequently, the translation exhibits a considerable degree of semantic levelling.22 It is also common that one specific Greek equivalent is chosen in LXX Psalms, even though the Hebrew word has several meanings that are not natural to the Greek counterpart. This is a trait typical for literal translations and I will employ the term “stereotypical rendering” for this trait. In terms of grammatical consistency, the LXX Psalms is often literal but free renderings do occur. J.H. Sailhamer, who has studied the translation of Hebrew verbs and participles, concludes that, although the translator strove for a literal translation, he “was not guided in his work by a commitment to a formal equivalency translation technique in his treatment of the verb. He apparently sought to give to the verbal forms in the LXX Psalms the Greek form required by their sense”,23 and he was guided primarily by a dynamic equivalency translation technique in this regard.24 The translator of the Psalms used a kind of rule of thumb: for verbs in the suffix conjugation in the indicative, he used the aorist, and for verbs in the prefix conjugation, he used mainly the future. Nearly 85% of the indicatives in the suffix conjugation are translated by the aorist, the present indicative does occur but is not common (less than 4%), the future, the imperfect and the perfect indicative approximately 2% and other counterparts even less. For the verb in the prefix conjugation, the translator used the future in approximately half of the cases but the present tense is also common and verbs in aorist indicative also occur (more than 20%); the perfect tense is used in 5-10% of the cases, while the imperfect is employed in less than 5%. In three cases in Ps 3–41 a noun renders a verb in the prefix conjugation. The most common translation of the active participle is the present participle in Greek but the use of the 22 See e.g. the obvious semantic levelling in words for anger, T. Muraoka, “Pairs of Synonyms in the Septuagint Psalms”, in Hiebert/Cox/Gentry, The Old Greek Psalter, 37–9, words for sin, Olofsson, Translation Technique and Theological Exegesis, 50–66, words for hope, A. Aejmelaeus, “Faith, Hope and Interpretation: A Lexical and Syntactical Study of the Semantic Field of Hope in the Greek Psalter”, in P.W. Flint/E. Tov/J.C. VanderKam (ed.), Studies in the Hebrew Bible, Qumran, and the Septuagint. Presented to Eugene Ulrich (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2006), 360–4. 23 J.H. Sailhamer, The Translational Technique of the Greek Septuagint for the Hebrew Verbs and Participles in Psalms 3–41, diss. (Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1981), 213. 24 Sailhamer, Psalms 3–41, XVI. But this is perhaps a somewhat misleading employment of the label dynamic equivalence, since not even Aquila had exact formal equivalences to the tenses of the verb. K. Hyvärinen, Die Übersetzung von Aquila (ConBOT 10; Lund: Liber Läromedel/Gleerup, 1977), 62. Concerning the LXX Psalms, see F.W. Mozley, The Psalter of the Church. The Psalms Compared with the Hebrew, with Various Notes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1905), XVII; A. Rahlfs, Psalmi cum Odis (Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum 3 Gottingensis editum X; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck&Ruprecht, 1979), 23–4. For the definition of dynamic equivalence, see e.g. E.A. Nida/C.R. Taber, The Theory and Practice of Translation (Helps for Translators 8. Prepared under the Auspices of the United Bible Societies; Leiden: Brill, 1974), 200. See also idem, 22–8.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

22

Introduction

present indicative sometimes occurs. It appears in 9% of the cases in Ps 3– 41.25 In other aspects of grammatical consistency, the translation can be very literal indeed; e.g. it displays a very high degree of consistency as regards repetition of possessive suffixes of the Hebrew, which is contrary to good Greek style.26 Causal yKi is regularly rendered by o{ti and very seldom by gavr, B] with infinitive is as a rule translated by ejn tw'/ with infinitive, rather than with a temporal clause or a participial construction.27 In other cases the translator achieved a better understanding comparable to the translators of the Pentateuch, e.g. in the case of the rendering of comparative ˜mi.28 LXX Psalms now and then displays an “etymological” indication of relationships obtaining in the vocabulary of the original language. This means that it employs similar forms between words in Greek where the Hebrew forms are similar. Thus, grammatical relations in Hebrew are imitated in the translation but this is not pursued in a systematic way, as is the case in Aquila. The book of Psalms often departs from the vocalization in MT, and thus has a different interpretation of a Hebrew consonantal text in cases where the consonantal text is identical with the proto-Masoretic text.29 This is less convincingly described as a free trait by Barr and is discussed by him under the label “Level of text and level of analysis.”30 Nevertheless, literal versus free translation technique is only one way to characterize the translation; another is to judge the translator’s competence. The opinions regarding his competence are varied. M. Flashar summarizes his view of the translator’s competence and his translation: Der Mann ... war für seine große Aufgabe nicht ungeschickt. Wo seine Übersetzung nicht durch Fesseln und Rücksichten behindert ist, atmet sie Geist und Geschmack. Aber freilich, von diesen Fesseln, die ihn drückten, ist er nicht losgekommen, und sie drücken seiner Übersetzung oft genug den Stempel der Unbeholfenheit und Ungeschicklichkeit auf.31

25

See Sailhamer, Psalms 3–41. See R. Sollamo, “Repetition of Possessive Pronouns in the Greek Psalter: The Use and Non-Use of Possessive Pronouns in Renderings of Hebrew Coordinate Items with Possessive Suffixes”, in Hiebert/Cox/Gentry, The Old Greek Psalter, passim, especially p. 53. 27 See Aejmelaeus, “Characterizing Criteria”, 59. 28 Aejmelaeus, “Characterizing Criteria”, 63–70. 29 I define the proto-Masoretic text as a Hebrew consonantal text identical with that of the MT. 30 Barr, “Typology”, 322–3. 31 M. Flashar, “Exegetische Studien zum LXX-Psalter”, ZAW 32 (1912), 265–6. Swete even argues that the translator to a certain degree “shew obvious signs of incompetence”. H.B. Swete, An Introduction to the OT in Greek (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1900), 316. In this evaluation, he was obviously dependent on Sinker. See Swete, Introduction, 315 n. 2. 26

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

Previous studies of the LXX Psalms

23

Generally speaking, most scholars give a positive evaluation of the fidelity of the translation as compared with other LXX books. F.X. Wutz compares it favourably with the Greek Pentateuch which is considered the best translation, or one of the best translations, in the LXX.32 He emphasized that “die Psalmenübersetzung eine der sorgfältigsten Arbeiten der Übersetzer ist, die mit der Pentateuch zum mindestens konkurriert!”33 S. Jellicoe asserts that the Psalter is distinguished among the Writings, the third group in the Hebrew canon, as “the one book in this category which the translators treated with respect.”34 The style of LXX Psalms can be accounted for in different ways. It is of course partly a consequence of the translation technique adopted. A.E. Goodman states that the style that characterizes the LXX Psalms hardly can be described as elegant: “in some ways it is clumsy, even at times to the point of being uncouth.”35 R. Sollamo portrays the language of the Greek Psalter, based on the extremely literal character of the rendering of Hebrew possessive pronouns, as “unidiomatic and clumsy” and as having a “peculiarly Hebraistic character”.36 F. Baethgen depicted the LXX version of Psalms as standing halfway between Ecclesiastes and Job as regards the style and elegance of the Greek, in his investigation of the value of the old translations of the Psalms. An extremely wide characterization! He described the translation as follows: Die Uebersetzung der Psalmen hält die Mitte zwischen diesen beiden Extremen; schlichte Treue ohne Haschen nach eleganten Ausdrücken aber auch ohne ängstliches Haften am Buchstaben charakterisirt diese Uebersetzung ... Die Besonderheiten der semitischen Grammatik sind grösstentheils (sic!) genau und mit Verständniss (sic!) wiedergegeben. Da das Streben nach Genauigkeit den Uebersetzer in erster Linie

32

The translation of the Pentateuch cannot be regarded as a single undertaking by one translator. The differences in translation technique between the five books are in fact great. See e.g. A. Aejmelaeus, Parataxis in the Septuagint. A Study of the Renderings of the Hebrew Coordinate Clauses in the Greek Pentateuch (AASF; Dissertationes Humanarum Litterarum 31: Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, 1982), 176–81. See also R. Sollamo, Renderings of Hebrew Semiprepositions in the Septuagint (AASF; Dissertationes Humanarum Litterarum 19: Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia 1982), 281–3, and A. Wifstrand, “Die Stellung der enklitischen Personalpronomina bei den Septuaginta” (Årsberättelse för Kungliga Humanistiska Vetenskapssamfundet i Lund 1949–1950, II; Lund 1950), 50–5. 33 F.X. Wutz, Die Psalmen textkritisch untersucht (München 1925), III. 34 S. Jellicoe, The Septuagint and Modern Study (Oxford: Clarendon, 1968), 66. Cf. H.St.J. Thackeray, The Septuagint and Jewish Worship: A Study in Origins (The Schweich Lectures 1920; London: Oxford University Press, 1921), 12–13. 35 A.E. Goodman, “ds,j, and hd:/T in the Linguistic Tradition of the Psalter”, in P.R. Ackroyd/B. Lindars (ed.), Words and Meanings. Essays presented to D.W. Thomas on his retirement from the Regius professorship of Hebrew in the University of Cambridge 1968 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968), 111. 36 Sollamo, “Possessive Pronouns”, 53.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

24

Introduction

leitete, so hat allerdings das griechische Wortgefüge durchgehend ein eigenthümlich semitisches Kolorit erhalten, welches nur selten durch den Versuch, dem griechischen Sprachgeist Rechnung zu tragen, gemildert ist.37

Deviations from a literal rendering of the Hebrew have many different motives. The most common motives are that the translator did not know the exact meaning of a certain word or construction, that he for one reason or the other misunderstood a passage, or that he tried to interpret the text in the light of a faulty comprehension of the context. He may sometimes have had dogmatic reasons for his rendering and therefore shows a predilection for certain Greek terms or notions.38 The combination of the striving for a literal translation and the knowledge, in some respects less than adequate, of the Hebrew could result in a so-called Verlegenheitsübersetzung, “a purely mechanical translation of embarrassment”,39 thus leaving it to the reader to discover the meaning of the phrase.40 In the words of Flashar: Seinen Änderungen liegt, so paradox das klingt, das Bestreben zu Grunde, dem überlieferten Text möglichst treu zu bleiben. Nur so erklärt sich die Tatsache, daß man so vielfach der Übersetzung trotz (oder infolge) der Änderung des Sinnes keinen rechten Sinn abgewinnen kann.41

F. Siegert asserts another important aspect of the translation: “Die Psalmen haben in sich eine sehr einheitliche Sprache, stark hebraisierend und völlig frei von allen typisch-griechischen Dichtervokabeln.“42 The preference for the employment of uncommon terms, neologisms and words not laden with associations to foreign gods was, for example, also evident in the translation of inanimate metaphors used as designations of God.43 The opinions regarding the translator’s knowledge of Hebrew are varied. Some scholars emphasize that the translator was well acquainted with the Hebrew language. For example, A. Soffer writes concerning the translator that he seems to have had “a very good knowledge of the Hebrew language”.44 Cf. the opinion of Baethgen: 37

F. Baethgen, “Der textkritische Werth der alten Übersetzungen zu den Psalmen”, JahrbProtTheol 8 (1882), 413. Mozley supports this general evaluation by Baethgen. See Mozley, The Psalter, XI–XII. 38 Cf. Flashar, “LXX-Psalter”, 252. 39 C. Rabin, “The Translation Process and the Character of the Septuagint”, Text 6 (1968), 24. 40 Flashar, “LXX-Psalter”, 94–5. 41 Flashar, “LXX-Psalter”, 252. 42 F. Siegert, Zwischen Hebräischer Bibel und Alten Testament. Eine Einführung in die Septuaginta (Münsteraner Judaistische Studien 9; Münster: Lit Verlag, 2001), 75. 43 S. Olofsson, God is my Rock. A Study of Translation Technique and Theological Exegesis in the Septuagint (ConBOT 31; Stockholm: Almquist&Wiksell, 1990), 84–5; S. Olofsson, “Death Shall Be their Shepherd: An interpretation of Ps. 49.15 in the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint”, in Olofsson, Translation Technique and Theological Exegesis, 193–223. 44 Soffer, “Anthropomorphisms”, 417.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

Previous studies of the LXX Psalms

25

Die grammatischen Kenntnisse des Uebersetzers müssen, wenn man die Schwierigkeiten in Betracht zieht, mit denen er zu kämpfen hatte, trotz der hin und wieder hervortretenden Verlegenheit und Unsicherheit, recht bedeutende genannt werden.45

Berg holds that, unlike the Peshitta, “the Septuagint is guilty of no errors which may be ascribed to ignorance. Real lexicographical errors are never found; although some words are curiously interpreted.”46 Other scholars are more critical of the knowledge of Hebrew. Thus, Flashar takes for granted that Hebrew was not the mother tongue of the translator: “er hatte diese Sprache gelernt und beherrschte sie nur als eine fremde.”47 T.H. Robinson and W.O.E. Oesterley argued that the many instances of fantastic renderings show “that the translator could by no means be relied upon for his knowledge of Hebrew”.48 Such diverging opinions can be explained by the criteria employed for the evaluation. It is not relevant to compare the translator with modern standards. In that regard, he falls short of all the modern translations of the Hebrew. He definitely did not have access to the scholarship and exact definitions reflected in the modern lexica. Probably he did not have access to lexica at all. There are no signs that the translators of the LXX were dependent on, or even knew of, the work done by the philological specialists in Alexandria.49 It is hardly likely that they always should make the same rendering of the vocabulary of their Vorlage as the one made in the modern lexica. Therefore, the best way to judge a translator’s competence is to compare him with other LXX translators.50 Furthermore, one has to take the opaque character of the Hebrew text into account. The book of Psalms is in some passages hard to interpret even for a modern translator.51 It is not possible to engage in a discussion with all the modern articles devoted to text and translation technique in the LXX book of Psalms, although they reflect several important issues.52 45

Baethgen, “Textkritische Werth”, 416. Berg, Peshitta-Psalter, 60. 47 Flashar, “LXX-Psalter”, 113. 48 W.O.E. Oesterley/T.H. Robinson, An Introduction to the Books of the Old Testament (London: Macmillan, 1934), 200. 49 Siegert, Septuaginta, 32. 50 Cf. e.g. Aejmelaeus, “Characterizing Criteria”, 56, “the portrait of a translator always needs the background provided by other translators.” 51 For some interesting discussions concerning the exegesis of the LXX Psalms translator, see A. van der Kooij, “Zur Frage der Exegese im LXX-Psalter. Ein Beitrag zur Verhältnisbestimmung zwischen Original und Übersetzung”, in A. Aejmelaeus/U. Quast (ed.), Der Septuaginta–Psalter und seine Tochterübersetzungen (Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-historische Klasse F. 3, 230, MSU 24; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck&Ruprecht, 2000), 366–79. 52 See e.g. the several important articles in Hiebert/Cox/Gentry, The Old Greek Psalter: J.W. Wevers, “The Rendering of the Tetragram in the Psalter and Pentateuch: A Comparative Study”, 46

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

26

Introduction

The influence of theological exegesis on the choice of equivalents in LXX Psalms and in LXX taken together ought to be discussed in association with translation technique. I define theological exegesis as the conscious lexical choice made by the translator, which reflects his religious convictions or the theological convictions prevalent in his milieu. The translation is more influenced by the translator’s religious outlook than by the philological or, shall I say, semantic interpretation of the Hebrew words in question.53 Translation technique is primarily concerned with the actual equivalents themselves, rather than the motives behind the translation. However, appreciations of possible theological motives, as well as the translator’s knowledge of Hebrew, are crucial for the evaluation of his translation technique. This topic has had a renaissance in recent years. It is generally agreed upon that an exclusive preoccupation with translation technique does not lead to a full understanding of the Septuagint translation, and that the interpretative dimension of the LXX books is of great interest for comprehending the work of the translator. However, scholars’ methodological awareness has increased. Thus, a more simplistic understanding of theology as directly reflected in the translator’s choice of equivalents has long since been severely undermined by several scholars, not least by the well-judged criticism of Barr as to the usage in ThWNT. This has, among other things, led to reluctance to posit a theological motivation for the ordinary choice of equivalents in LXX. Theological studies of the Septuagint have been influenced by, and sometimes corrected by, translation-technical studies and different levels of interpretation have been described in more and more sophisticated ways. For example, scholars, when focusing on the theology of the Septuagint, must decide whether their interpretation is based on the Greek text per se, without reference to the translator, or if it applies to the fact that the translator may reflect, without being aware of this, a religious outlook prevalent in his milieu, or if it is based on the intention of the translator or the translators. Therefore I agree with F. Austermann: “Spätere Interpretationen der Vorlage und Übersetzung und spätere Methoden der Interpretation können 21–35; E. Tov, “Scribal Features of Early Witnesses of Greek Scripture”, 125–48; J. Lust, “The pisqah be’emsa‘ pasuq, the Psalms, and Ezekiel 3.16”, 149–62; R.A. Kraft/B.G. Wright III, “Coptic/Sahidic Fragments of the Biblical Psalms in the University of Pennsylvania Museum”, 163–77; R.J.V Hiebert, “Syriac Biblical Textual History and the Greek Psalter”, 178–204; N. Fernández Marcos, “David the Adolescent: On Psalm 151”, 205–17, J. Cook, “Intertextual Relationships between the Septuagint of Psalms and Proverbs”, 218–28; A. van der Kooij, “The Septuagint of Psalms and the First Book of Maccabees”, 229–47; M. Silva, “The Greek Psalter in Paul’s Letters: A Textual Study”, 277–88; C.E. Cox, “Schaper’s Eschatology Meets Kraus’s Theology of the Psalms”, in Hiebert/Cox/Gentry, The Old Greek Psalter, 289–311. 53 For a discussion of theological exegesis, see further Olofsson, Rock, 11–14.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

Previous studies of the LXX Psalms

27

nicht ohne weiteres zur Erklärung der Deutung der Vorlage durch den Übersetzer herangezogen werden.“54 To investigate this type of exegesis is of course an important task for the scholar. However, as I have argued elsewhere, theological exegesis is an explanation that presupposes that all other simpler, and in a way less exciting, explanations have been ruled out. Furthermore, the presupposition of theological exegesis must be consistent with the translator’s attitude towards the Hebrew text.55 As a result, for example explanations that presume an extensive theological rewriting of the source text are not relevant for the translator of the Psalms because he made a serious endeavour to translate what he believed to be the meaning of the Hebrew text. He frequently abstained from a contextual exegesis when he did not really understand the Hebrew. One cannot expect a translator who sometimes employs Verlegenheitsübersetzungen to be heavily influenced by theological exegesis. To be sure, in reality, the translator often had an opportunity to introduce contextual renderings that suited his theological presuppositions. Yet he usually refrained from it, even in a book as hard to interpret as the book of Psalms. Theological exegesis is, in many respects, contrary to the intentions behind a literal translation technique, and the Septuagint is, not least in the book of Psalms, a literal translation of the Hebrew. Theological exegesis is easiest to detect in places where the translator does not employ his usual equivalent, which could imply that a conscious choice has been made. One cannot rule out the possibility that the translator’s theology is reflected in the ordinary choice of equivalents in the book he translated but such suggestions ought to be made with great caution. Methodological discussions have been intense. Important literature in the study of Septuagint theology during the period are related to methodology of theological exegesis,56 names and epithets of God,57 messianism,58 54

F. Austermann, “Thesen zur Septuaginta-Exegese am Beispiel der Untersuchung des SeptuagintaPsalters”, in Aejmelaeus/Quast, Der Septuaginta–Psalter und seine Tochterübersetzungen, 385. 55 See now e.g. C.E. Cox, “Schaper’s Eschatology”, 310. 56 See e.g. A. Aejmelaeus, “Von Sprache zur Theologie: Methodologische Überlegungen zur Theologie der Septuaginta”, in M.A. Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism (BETL 195; Leuven, Paris, Dudley, MA: Peeters, 2006), 21–48; J. Joosten, “Une théologie de la Septante. Réflections méthodologiques sur l’interprétation de la version grecque”, Revue de théologie et de philosophie 132 (2000), 31–46; A. Aejmelaeus, “Übersetzungstechnik und theologische Interpretation. Zur Methodik der Septuaginta-Forschung”, in E. Zenger (ed.), Der Septuaginta-Psalter: sprachliche und theologische Aspekte (Herders Biblische Studien 32, Freiburg/Göttingen: Herder, 2001), 3–18; A. Cordes, “Theologische Interpretation in der Septuaginta, Beobachtungen am Beispiel von Psalm 76 LXX”, in Zenger, Der Septuaginta-Psalter: sprachliche und theologische Aspekte, 105–21. 57 See Olofsson, Rock, 149–51 and passim. 58 See the following articles in Knibb, The Septuagint and Messianism: A. Pietersma, “Messianism and the Greek Psalter: In Search of the Messiah”, 49–75; J.–M. Auwers, “Une tente dans ou pour le soleil? Ps 18(19),5 dans la LXX et le TM”, 195–202; M. Bauks, “‘Auf die Hörner der Einhörner

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

28

Introduction

eschatology,59 the law of Moses,60 and other aspects of theological exegesis.61 As concerns names and epithets of God I have argued: Two kinds of theological motives may have been involved in the rendering of the divine names or epithets under discussion. One is based on the similarity or identity with archaic or contemporary titles of divine beings outside the religion of Israel, which could create doubts regarding the exclusivity of Yahweh, the other is based on a tendency to emphasize his transcendence, and thereby free him from associations with material objects.62

I will above all interact with articles by A. Cordes, F. Austermann, and M. Rösel, who discuss important issues in the Psalms pertaining to theological exegesis. Cordes argues for a theological interpretation in her investigation of Ps 76 in LXX Psalms. She argues that the translator’s theology has influenced the overall composition as well as his choice of renderings in Ps 76. She says that the interpretation here “durchaus als theologisch bezeichnet werden kann”.63 This refers especially to the use of verbs from the two conceptual fields, “reflection” and “remembrance” and from the movement in the psalm through the time-dimensions, “past”, “present”, “future”.64 However, these aspects mainly refer to the Greek hin…’: Hinweise auf eine messianische Relecture des Ps 21 (LXX)?”, 203–15; E. Bons, “Le Psautier de la Septante est-il influencé par des idées eschatologiques et messianiques? Le cas des Psaumes 22LXX et 71LXX”, 217–38; H. Ausloos, “Psalm 45, Messianism and the Septuagint”, 239–52; A. Cordes, “Spricht Ps 109 LXX von einem Messias oder nicht?”, 253–60. 59 H. Gzella, “Das Kalb und das Einhorn. Endzeittheophanie und Messianismus in der Septuaginta-Fassung von Ps 29 (28)”, in Zenger, Der Septuaginta-Psalter: sprachliche und theologische Aspekte, 257–90. 60 Olofsson, Translation Technique and Theological Exegesis, 224–68; F. Austermann, “Von der Tora im hebräischen Psalm 119 zum Nomos im griechischen Psalm 118. Was die Wiedergabe über die Gesetzestheologie des Übersetzers verrät und was nicht”, in Zenger, Der Septuaginta-Psalter: sprachliche und theologische Aspekte, 331–47. 61 See e.g. the following articles in Zenger, Der Septuaginta-Psalter: sprachliche und theologische Aspekte: R. Stichel, “Zur Herkunft der Psalmenüberschriften in der Septuaginta”, 149–61; F.–L. Hossfeld, “Akzentsetzungen der Septuaginta im vierten Psalmenbuch. Ps 90–106 (Ps 89–105 bzw. 106 LXX)”, 163–9; J. Schaper, “Die Renaissance der Mythologie im hellenistischen Judentum und der Septuaginta-Psalter”, 171–83; A. Schenker, “Götter und Engel im Septuaginta-Psalter. Text– und Religionsgeschichtliche Ergebnisse aus drei textkritischen Untersuchungen”, 185–95; S. Seiler, “Theologische Konzepte in der Septuaginta. Das theologische Profil von 1 Chr 16,8ff. LXX im Vergleich mit Ps 104; 95; 105 LXX”, 197–225; E. Zenger, “Götter– und Götterbildpolemik in Ps 112–113 LXX = Ps 113–115 MT”, 229–55. Other important articles are e.g. A. Schenker, “Gewollt dunkle Wiedergaben in LXX: Zu den scheinbar unverständlichen Übersetzungen im Psalter der LXX. Am Beispiel von Ps 28 (29),6”, in H.G. Reventlow (ed.), Theologische Probleme der Septuaginta und der hellenistischen Hermeneutik (Veröffentlichungen der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft für Theologie 11; Gütersloh: Kaiser, Gütersloher Verl.Haus, 1997), 63–71. 62 Olofsson, Rock, 151. 63 Cordes, “Theologische Interpretation in der Septuaginta”, 119. 64 In German “Nachdenken”, “Erinnern”, “Vergangenheit”, “Gegenwart”, “Zukunft”. Cordes, “Theologische Interpretation in der Septuaginta”, 119.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

Previous studies of the LXX Psalms

29

psalm per se without specific references to the Hebrew text. Thus, they concern an interpretation of the LXX text by later readers of the Greek text rather than theological exegesis reflecting the translator’s intentions. A more or less systematic translation of a complete conceptual field can be evidenced when different terms for misbehaviour are without warrant systematically rendered by words related to the law. This tendency can be found in LXX as a whole. Nonetheless, it is even more emphasized in the LXX Psalms because the equivalents repeatedly differ from those used in the other LXX books, at least as regards proportions. This was one of the conclusions in my investigation of terms related to novmo", “The LXX translators repeatedly understood sin with reference to the laws and regulations in general and especially the law of Moses. This is especially manifest in the book of Psalms, but this understanding can quite often also be found in other parts of the LXX.”65 In this case, I have a different interpretation of the material from Austermann, who writes, “PsLXXs Übersetzung spiegelt nicht etwa einen angeblichen Nomismus oder nomisierende Umdeutungsabsichten, sondern beruht auf einer konservativen und bewahrenden Interpretation der torabezogenen Texte in den hebräischen Psalmen.”66 However, Austermann sometimes seems to give hints of cases where the translator does not work solely as a translator: “Wo PsLXX sich darauf beschränkt, wie ein Übersetzer und als ein Übersetzer zu arbeiten, der seine Vorlage wort- und sinngetreu wiedergibt, sind Schlüsse auf ein spezifisches Toraverständnis oder auf eine besondere Gesetzestheologie nicht angebracht.“67 Austermann gives interesting and plausible explanations for several choices of words connected with the law.68 But even if the explanations are plausible in many of the cases, why should nearly all unexpected choices of equivalents for sin and bad behaviour in the Hebrew be translated by words connected with novmo"? This clearly reflects a tendency which cannot only be explained by necessary steps taken by the translator as part of his translation work. Rösel makes a case for an eschatological interpretation of certain terms in the psalm-headings in LXX Psalms, eij" to; tevlo" and suvnesi". Regarding the eschatological associations of eij" to; tevlo" he refers to its use for the end of times in Ezek 15:5; 20:40; 36:10 and in Dan 3:34 (LXX and Th), and his interpretation of suvnesi" is based on the proposed 65 See Olofsson, “Law and Law-breaking in the LXX Psalms – a Case of Theological Exegesis”, in Olofsson, Translation Technique and Theological Exegesis, 239. 66 F., Austermann, Von der Tora zum Nomos. Untersuchungen zur Übersetzungsweise und Interpretation im Septuaginta-Psalter (MSU 27; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck&Ruprecht, 2003), 209. 67 Austermann, “Hebräischen Psalm 119”, 336. 68 Austermann, Nomos, 174–203.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

30

Introduction

eschatological use of suvnesi" and the cognate verb in Daniel and Isaiah. However, in neither of these cases can an eschatological understanding of the Septuagint in contrast to the MT be substantiated.69

1.6 Textual criticism The Vorlage of LXX Psalms, according to Rahlfs’ text, stands fairly close to the text of MT, i.e. there are no substantial deviations in scope or content. This does not mean that the Vorlage was identical with MT, since there are deviations in details, which are based on a different Vorlage. It is also a question of definition, since the translator had an unvocalized Hebrew text in front of him. Thus, deviations based on a different vocalization and derivation of a Hebrew word can equally well be regarded as interpretations of a Hebrew text as a deviant Vorlage. However, in text-critical discussions one must always be aware that the Vorlage may have differed from MT.70 The main object of the text-critical investigation is, nevertheless, the Greek text. Even if this is not a text-critical treatise per se, the discussion of the Greek text is important for the study of translation technique – which is a primary task in this book – and conversely.71 Rahlfs’ text, Psalmi cum Odis, is the basic Greek text employed in this monograph. Furthermore, although it is part of the Göttingen series, it is one of the first in the series, with a smaller textual apparatus, so it has the potential to be improved in many respects. Consequently, serious criticism can be launched against the principles behind Rahlfs’ text. Although it was an outstanding achievement for its time, it has methodological shortcomings.72 A full-fledged critical edition of the Greek Psalter is a priority of

69

M. Rösel, “Die Psalmüberschriften des Septuaginta-Psalters”, in Zenger, Der SeptuagintaPsalter: sprachliche und theologische Aspekte, 125–48. A discussion with Rösel will soon be published. 70 For Hebrew variants in the book of Psalms, see e.g. P.W. Flint, The Dead Sea Psalms Scrolls and the Book of Psalms (STDJ 17; Leiden: Brill, 1997); P.W. Flint, “Variant Readings of the Dead Sea Psalms Scrolls against the Massoretic Text and the Septuagint Psalter”, in Aejmelaeus/Quast, Der Septuaginta–Psalter und seine Tochterübersetzungen, 337–65; E. Ulrich, “The Dead Sea Scrolls and Their Implications for an Edition of the Septuagint Psalter”, in Aejmelaeus/Quast, Der Septuaginta–Psalter und seine Tochterübersetzungen, 323–36. 71 See the discussion in Olofsson, LXX Version, 65–70. 72 See e.g. Jellicoe, Septuagint, 297–8; P.L. Hedley, “The Göttingen Investigation and Edition of the Septuagint”, HTR 26 (1933), 61–2; P. Katz, “Septuagintal Studies in the Mid-Century. Their Links with the Past and their Present Tendencies”, in Jellicoe, Studies in the Septuagint, 35; Pietersma, “David”, 213–14; Flint, “Variant Readings”, 338; A. Cordes, “Der Septuaginta-Psalter? Zur Geschichte des griechischen Psalmentextes und seiner Edition”, in Zenger, Der Septuaginta-Psalter: sprachliche und theologische Aspekte, 57–9. For a far-reaching methodological criticism, see

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

Textual criticism

31

the first order, and one may hope that this book in some respects contributes to such an undertaking. Therefore, the relation between Rahlfs’ text and the Old Greek is open to discussion. Textual witnesses are of course indispensable for the establishment of the Old Greek text, and Rahlfs relied mainly upon a combination of manuscripts when he tried to establish the Old Greek text. The principles behind the edition of Rahlfs are well known. When the three old text families, the Upper Egypt text, the Lower Egypt text and the Western text (UE, LE, WE), have an identical text, this text is as a rule chosen, even if it does not reflect the MT. When they do not have identical texts, the text that reflects MT is employed.73 But if they are the only support for a reading, he prefers to follow the majority of the Mss.74 Rahlfs’ preference for the older textual groups in the Psalter is understandable. But Rahlfs did not rely solely upon a combination of textual witnesses. He employed essentially a two-pronged approach in order to strip away the layers of tradition and to uncover the pristine text of the Psalter. He had his eye firmly focused on the Hebrew text while, at the same time; he traced the inner-Greek path that the variant travelled. Thus, he often regarded Greek variants that match MT as the Old Greek, if they are reflected in one of the old text families. However, Rahlfs was not completely hamstrung by his own rules because some readings in Rahlfs’ text are contrary to the principles he laid down.75 Although Rahlfs’ text represents a high standard of scholarship, the new Mss and a more consistent use of translation-technical studies make it possible to come closer to the Old Greek text. Nowadays, translation-technical studies are of primary importance for the establishment of a critical text. Rahlfs did not have systematic studies of translation technique to build on. A thorough investigation of the translation method of the LXX must be carried out before one can rely on combinations of manuscripts.76 In Pietersma’s words: “rather than assigning configurations of manuscript groupings … pride of place in one’s list of criteria for especially A. Pietersma, “The Present State of the Critical Text of the Greek Psalter”, in Aejmelaeus/Quast, Der Septuaginta–Psalter und seine Tochterübersetzungen, 12–32. 73 In doubtful cases, the text of Vaticanus is preferred. Rahlfs also seems to have adopted the advice of R. Helbing to choose the reading of the older Mss, Vaticanus (B) and Sinaiticus (S). See e.g. 3:5 in Rahlfs, Psalmi cum Odis. 74 See further C. Boyd-Taylor/P.C. Austin/A. Feuerverger, “The Assessment of Manuscript Affiliation within a Probabilistic Framework: A Study of Alfred Rahlfs’s Core Manuscript Groupings for the Greek Psalter”, in Hiebert/Cox/Gentry, The Old Greek Psalter, 99–102. For other important discussions regarding the textual transmission of LXX Psalms, see U. Quast, “Einführung in die Editionsarbeit”, in Aejmelaeus/Quast, Der Septuaginta-Psalter und seine Tochterübersetzungen, 387–99; U. Rüsen-Weinhold, “Der Septuaginta-Psalter”, 61–87. 75 See e.g. Pietersma, “The Present State”, 25. 76 In this regard, I agree with Pietersma’s evaluation. See e.g. Pietersma, “The Present State”, 24.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

32

Introduction

establishing the critical text, one ought to begin with an exhaustive analysis of translation technique.”77 This is one of the justifications for the extensive translation-technical emphasis in this book. We may also note that the Psalter is extant in well over a thousand Greek manuscripts, and new manuscripts appear in a steady stream. This total may be compared with the next most popular book in the LXX, Genesis, for which we have some 130 Greek witnesses, which is roughly one-tenth the number for Psalms. But it is not only the number of manuscripts that counts, several important manuscripts for the LXX Psalms have recently appeared, manuscripts which partly change the picture of the textual tradition. As a result, all text-critical discussions must consider the fact that the manuscript situation has changed since Rahlfs’ text was published because some old and valuable LXX manuscripts have recently been found – especially Chester Beatty XIII (Rahlfs 2149), and Chester Beatty XIV (Rahlfs 2150) from the fourth century CE, which however, does not include Ps 41–42 (42–43).78 The greatest find since Psalmi cum Odis was published is P. Bodmer XXIV (Rahlfs 2110), a manuscript of the 3rd/4th century CE (or even earlier) containing approx. Ps 17–118, and a member of Rahlfs’ Upper Egyptian text group. This text is always taken into account in the monograph.79 Although it was published long ago no full-scale textual analysis of this manuscript has yet appeared.80 The LXX Psalms was probably subject to numerous revisions in the course of its history because of its liturgical use. In the words of Pietersma: To be sure, tradition plays a distorting role on any piece of literature handed down from antiquity but among the books of the LXX this is true to an extraordinary degree for the Psalms. That this should be so might be expected on a priori grounds. For most of its life, the Greek Psalter functioned as the Church’s liturgical text par excellence and so, from ancient times onward, it was copied far more frequently and misconstrued by a larger number of scribes than is true for any other book of the LXX. That texts change in transmission is not a point of contention and that they change more the more they are transmitted is equally true. Accordingly, we might anticipate thick layers of traditional material in the Greek Psalms. Vis-à-vis the rest of

77

Pietersma, “The Present State”, 24. For an analysis of these manuscripts, see A. Pietersma, Two Manuscripts of the Greek Psalter…, (AnBib 77; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1978). 79 See also Cordes, “Dennoch muß der Text von Rahlfs sicher kritisch benutzt und abweichende Lesarten, vor allem auch die des Papyrus Bodmer XXIV, jeweils berücksichtigt werden.” Cordes, “Zur Geschichte des griechischen Psalmentextes”, 58. I use the critical edition, R. Kasser/M. Testuz (ed.), Papyrus Bodmer XXIV. Psaumes XVII-CXVII (Cologny-Geneve: Bibliotheca Bodmeriana, 1967). All variants are included except simple errors of writing corrected by the editor. 80 In Pietersma, “The Present State”, 29, the preparation for such a study is mentioned. 78

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

Textual criticism

33

the LXX, we may note that the Psalter is extant in well over a thousand Greek manuscripts.81

The question regarding how close the extant texts are to the Old Greek is by no means simple because all of the Greek manuscripts were written after the beginning of our era. Therefore, it cannot be excluded that most of the extant Mss reflect a revision of the Old Greek towards the Masoretic text, and that the Old Greek of the Psalter has been lost, or that it is only extant in a few disregarded manuscripts.82 That the LXX Psalms, as reflected in Rahlfs’ Psalmi cum Odis, does not adhere exactly to the proto-Masoretic text speaks against the suggestion by U. Rüsen-Weinhold that it is a revision towards that text.83 In that case it ought to reflect a pre-proto-Masoretic text, since it has several additions and other differences based on a Hebrew Vorlage, not least the addition of kuvrio". Moreover, the LXX Psalms has not been formed in as systematic a way as one would have expected if it had been a revision towards the protoMasoretic text. A revisionary character of the text would also make it hard to explain many characteristic traits that can be found in Rahlfs’ text of the LXX Psalms, e.g. diverse renderings, favourite words as well as Verlegenheitsübersetzungen. It is unlikely, to say the least, to presuppose that the Old Greek text has been lost without leaving any traces in the extant manuscript material. No texts that more or less systematically deviate from Rahlfs’ text have been found. Thus, based on the manuscripts available to us taken with the fact that the manuscripts to LXX Psalms are more numerous than to any other LXX book, we can with some confidence suggest that extant manuscripts reflect the Old Greek text which in turn is close to the proto-Masoretic text. The newly found manuscripts and the investigation of translation technique make it possible to take a step further towards recovering the Old Greek text and identifying the Vorlage of the Old Greek in details where it deviates from the MT. Pietersma’s investigations also suggest that many readings which have been conceived as Hebraizing corrections are, indeed, the Old Greek. Although corrections towards the Hebrew text may have started earlier than hitherto imagined, one must realize that most Mss were written without reference to the Hebrew.84 The manuscripts labelled Lucianic by Rahlfs are 81

A. Pietersma, “Ra 2110 (P. Bodmer XXIV) and the Text of the Greek Psalter”, in D. Fraenkel/U. Quast/J.W. Wevers (ed.), Studien zur Septuaginta – Robert Hanhart zu Ehren ... (MSU XX; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck&Ruprecht, 1990), 263. 82 See e.g. the discussion in Ulrich, “The Dead Sea Scrolls”, 323–24, 333–36; Rüsen-Weinhold, “Der Septuaginta-Psalter”, 82–3. 83 See Rüsen-Weinhold, “Der Septuaginta-Psalter”, 82–3. 84 See e.g. Pietersma, “Greek Psalter”, 301–2.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

34

Introduction

now also considered of value in the search for the Old Greek because 2110 has approximately 230 secondary readings (according to Rahlfs) in common with the Lucianic group (the vulgar text) and approximately 50 with the Lucianic text alone.85

85

Pietersma, “The Present State”, 16.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

2 Exegesis of Psalm 42–43

2.1 Unique features in Ps 42–43 and its position in the Psalter Ps 42–43 has an interesting theological perspective. It is clearly a good exponent for the genre of individual lamentations but it also has some unique features. It reflects temple theology with a predominance of symbolic language but also depicts concrete geographical references in a way unique for individual laments. Furthermore, there are important differences in the overall interpretation of the psalm as well as the interpretation of details in the Hebrew text.1 This is the only psalm in the Psalter that commences with a comparison.2 Another interesting feature in the psalm is the recurrence of refrains. Psalms with a clear structure based on refrains mainly occur in the second book of the Psalter (42–72). Ps 42–43 is a remarkable example of a psalm with two kinds of refrains, major refrains and minor refrains. While the major refrain (42:6, 12; 43:5) has the same wording throughout, the minor refrains (42:4 and 42:11, 42:10 and 43:2) show considerable variation in the exact wording. The minor refrains are more closely integrated into the psalm text, while the major refrain is structurally distinct from it, although it also has terminological and thematic connections with the stanzas (sections in between the major refrains). Ps 42–43 as a whole can readily be segmented into three sections, each with a lament and a major refrain, and interspersed by minor refrains. It is also the first psalm in a main division of psalms in the Psalter; it opens the second book of the regular division of the Psalter into five books, and has a central position shared only by four other psalms in the whole psalms collection. The psalm is also the starting point of the Elohistic Psalter (42–83) since it is the first psalm of the two collections of Korah psalms, that is, psalms with a heading referring to the Korahites (Ps 42–49,

1 An important monograph about this psalm has been written: T. Dockner, »Sicut cerva …«. Text, Struktur und Bedeutung von Psalm 42 und 43 (Arbeiten zu Text und Sprache im Alten Testament 67; St. Ottilien: EOS-Verlag, 2001. Concerning the diverging interpretations of significant details in the psalm, see especially Dockner, Sicut cerva, 1–3. 2 Regarding the importance of the fact that the psalm is the first psalm in different units of the Psalter, see e.g. Dockner, Sicut cerva, 250–54.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

36

Exegesis of Psalm 42–43

and 84–85, 87–88).3 The first part of the collections of Korahite psalms (Ps 42–49) reflects an arrangement around the idea of God as refuge and “the collection begins (Pss. 42–43, 44) and ends (Ps 49) with words focused on the conflict between confidence in Yahweh’s refuge and the reality of Yahweh’s rejection.”4 Ps 42–43 shares the description of God and reveals general similarities to the other Psalms of Korah. In fact, some psalms employ the same terminology concerning God, who resides on Zion, his holy mountain whence he gives life and sends out his salvation so, therefore, the congregation praises him.5 Several motifs are found exclusively or predominantly in the Korah psalms.6 That the psalm is part of the Korah psalms is also reflected by the many expressions in common with Ps 44–49, 84–88.7 This refers to phrases such as “living God”, “the face of God”, “day and night”, “the soul as the place for a person’s longing”, “God as saviour” or “God as salvation”, “God’s saving chæsæd”, “the chaotic waters”, “the attacking enemy”, “the taunting of the enemy”, “God’s saving interference as judge”, “lament over that God has abandoned the people”, “God as refuge”, “God’s holy mountain”, “God’s altar” or “God’s dwelling”.8 Goulder argues that the order of the psalms reflects the celebration of the autumn festival at Dan in the eighth and ninth centuries BCE.9 Ps 42–43 then mirrors the first liturgical occasion in the rites of Tabernacles at Dan, the arrival of the festal procession before the feast, and Ps 44 the second

3 Ps 89 is sometimes associated with the Korah psalms, although technically speaking it is not part of the collection of Korah psalms. See M.D. Goulder, The Psalms of the Sons of Korah (JSOT 20; Sheffield 1982), 2. 4 J.F.D. Creach, Yahweh as Refuge and the Editing of the Hebrew Psalter (JSOTSup 217; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), 88. 5 F.–L. Hossfeld/E. Zenger, Die Psalmen I. Psalm 1–50 (NEchtB 29; Würzburg: Echter Verlag, 1993), 266; Dockner, Sicut cerva, 250–51. 6 See especially Goulder, Sons of Korah, 3–4. 7 For a description of the motifs and expressions in the Korah psalms, see Hossfeld/Zenger, Psalm 1–50, 266 and Goulder, Sons of Korah, 85–6. The similarities can also be seen by the many references to Ps 44–9, 84–8 in this book. 8 “Living God” 42:3; 84:3, “the face of God” 42:3; 44:25; 88:15, “day and night” 42:4, 9; 88:2, “the soul as the place for a person’s longing” 42 passim and 84:3, “God as saviour” or “God as salvation” 42:6, 12; 43:5; 85:5, 8, 10; 88:2, “chaotic waters” 42:8; 46:4; 88:18, “God’s saving chæsæd” 42:9; 44:27; 48:10; 85:8, 11; 88:12, “the attacking enemy” 42:10; 43:2; 44:17, 25, “the taunting of the enemy” 42:11; 44:14–17, “God’s saving interference as judge” 43:1; 48:12, “lament over that God has abandoned the people” 43:2; 44:10; 88:15, “God as refuge” 43:2; 46:2, 8, “God’s holy mountain” 43:3; 48:2 and “God’s altar” or “God’s dwelling” 43:3–4; 46:5; 84:2, 4. See especially Hossfeld/Zenger, Psalm 1–50, 266. 9 See Goulder, Sons of Korah, 86.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

The unity, form, and structure of the psalm in Hebrew

37

liturgical occasion of the feast.10 However, this suggestion is too speculative and without other scholarly support.

2.2 The unity, form, and structure of the psalm in Hebrew 2.2.1 Unity and form Although Ps 41 and 42 are two psalms in the MT, the majority of the interpreters regard Ps 42 and 43 as a literary unity, that is, as a single poem. Some Hebrew Mss (37 codd. Kenn., 9 codd. de Rossi) present the psalm as a literary unit. The main reasons for this suggestion are: 1. Ps 43 has no title or superscription, which is astonishing; together with Ps 71 it provides the only exception in this regard in the second book of the Psalter.11 2. The two psalms are joined by a common major refrain (42:6, 12; 43:5), and a similar minor refrain (42:10 and 43:2) and they are mainly written in a common metre, the Qinah (3+2).12 3. There is an obvious similarity in thought as well as in language.13 4. Each psalm can be regarded as incomplete without the other.14 The reason for the separation into two units is unknown; perhaps the purpose was liturgical. The separation probably originates with LXX, which has a title for Ps (42) 43, “A Psalm. Pertaining to Dauid” that is lacking in MT. It may reflect a distinction between lament (Ps 42), described as a 10

Goulder, Sons of Korah, 86. The suggested literal references in the psalm to the environments of Dan and the festival there are farfetched. Goulder, Sons of Korah, 28–37. 11 See e.g. Hossfeld/Zenger, Psalm 1–50, 265; Dockner, Sicut cerva, 23. 12 See C.C. Broyles, Psalms (NIBCOT 78; Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1999), 195; H.–J. Kraus, Psalmen (BKAT 15:1, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 51978), 472; Hossfeld/Zenger, Psalm 1–50, 265; Goulder, Sons of Korah, 23; Dockner, Sicut cerva, 23. The refrain in 42:6, 12; 43:5 has the metre 3+2, 4+3 and thus departs from the dominant metre of the psalm. The same is true for 42:2 (2+2; 2+2) and 43:1 (2+2+2; 2+2). Kraus, Psalmen, 472. 13 A.A. Anderson, The Book of Psalms (2 vol.; NCB; London: Eerdmans, 1972), 328. The psalms presuppose that the one who prays is in the same situation. Hossfeld/Zenger, Psalm 1–50, 265. 14 See e.g. Broyles, Psalms, 195. Thus, e.g. the theme of the visit to the temple to meet Yahweh is common to both psalms. Dockner, Sicut cerva, 23. Without Ps 43, the longing would have no fulfilment, which is uncommon in laments. Individual laments begin with the lament proper (Ps 42) and end with petitions and vows of praise (Ps 43). The element of prayer, as in Ps 43, is a distinctive element in this genre. For further arguments, see Dockner, Sicut cerva, 23 and Hossfeld/Zenger, Psalm 1–50, 265.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

38

Exegesis of Psalm 42–43

lyKic]m' in the superscription, and prayer (Ps 43).15 There are also some other obvious differences between the two; the concept of God as a judge nowhere appears in Ps 42,16 and the motif of the psalmist’s soul, which would have been appropriate in 43:4, is lacking in Ps 43, apart from the refrain.17 The beginning of Ps 43 shows similarities in thought as well as expression with Ps 26:1 and 35:1, and is therefore an appropriate opening of a psalm.18 Vindicate me, O LORD, (hw:hy“ ynIfep]v;) for I have walked in my integrity, and I have trusted in the LORD without wavering. (Ps 26:1) Contend, O LORD, with those who contend with me; (yb'yrIy“Ata, hw:hy“ hb;yrI) fight against those who fight against me! (Ps 35:1) Vindicate me, O God, and defend my cause (ybiyrI hb;yrIw“ Kyhiløa‘ ynIfep]v;) against an ungodly people; from those who are deceitful and unjust deliver me! (Ps 43:1)

There is no form of address to God/Yahweh in the imperative 2nd person singular with names or epithets of God in the vocative in Ps 42 which is the case in Ps 43. Ps 43 is regarded as a psalm in its own right when the psalms were numbered. Therefore, we have 150 psalms in the Psalter.19 The genre of the whole psalm is, according to traditional terminology, an individual lament or perhaps a national psalm of lamentation.20 However, since lament is only one of several form elements in this type of psalm an alternative designation, prayer psalms of the individual, has at times been suggested.21 It is interesting to note that the psalm is more or less devoid of 15

Certainly one can present several reasons for the separation of the psalms. See e.g. Hossfeld/Zenger, Psalm 1–50, 265; Dockner, Sicut cerva, 22. 16 However, the arguments for a connection between the psalms, which even in this regard, are strong. Dockner, Sicut cerva, 29. 17 Thus, Hossfeld/Zenger, Psalm 1–50, 265; Dockner, Sicut cerva, 22. 18 Hossfeld/Zenger, Psalm 1–50, 265. However, the lexemes can also be found in other parts of the psalm, apart from the beginnings, e.g. Ps 7:9; 35:24; 74:22, and 119:154. Dockner, Sicut cerva, 23. It is very common to have a form of address to Yahweh in imperative 2nd person singular with names or epithets of God in the book of Psalms. See e.g. the references given in Dockner, Sicut cerva, 24 n. 12. 19 Dockner, Sicut cerva, 22. 20 See the commentaries generally. The description of the genre as a national psalm of lamentation, reflecting the temple mysticism of the Jewish congregation, is sometimes even suggested as the most probable understanding of the psalm when the book of Psalms as a whole was edited. Hossfeld/Zenger, Psalm 1–50, 265–6. Sometimes the designation “pilgrimage song” appears. Note especially the close resemblance to Ps 84. See e.g. Hossfeld/Zenger, Psalm 1–50, 265; Goulder, Sons of Korah, 86. 21 Broyles, Psalms, 16. Prayer is also one of the form elements in the psalm but it is also the underlying motive for the whole genre; the lament is made in order to appeal to God in prayer and ask for his help. Thus, the prayer psalms are characterized by faith under the most contrary circumstances. Cf. Broyles, Psalms, 33. Exceptions in this regard are few, e.g. Ps 89, and even in Ps 89 a prayer to God to intervene is implicit. See e.g. v. 48–52. Zenger emphasizes the connection with Ps 84 and is not foreign to regard it as a pilgrimage song. Hossfeld/Zenger, Psalm 1–50, 265.

© 2011, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525533833 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647533834

The unity, form, and structure of the psalm in Hebrew

39

formulaic language, which otherwise characterizes many of the individual laments.22 However, at least analogical expressions for yZIW[m; yheløa‘ hT;a'AyKi in 42:2 and Kyhiløa‘ r/Nkib] Úd“/aw“ in 43:4 exist in the Psalter.23 2.2.2 Structure The structure of the psalm is based on the refrains. They are of two kinds, major refrains, 42:6, 12; 43:5, and minor refrains, 42:4, 11; 42:10; 43:2. Ps 42–43 taken together can be segmented into three sections, comprising a lament (or a prayer) and a major refrain, and interspersed by minor refrains. The sections in between the major refrains are usually called stanzas.24 A stanza is “a major subdivision of a poem which comprises one or more strophes; in our corpus a stanza is the block of material preceding and/or following each refrain” and strophes are usually “a combination of two or more verses that exhibits a semantic and/or syntactic unity” but sometimes only “a bicolon or tricolon”.25 There are thus three sections in the poem. 1. 42:2–6 Stanza I (Lament) (v. 2–5) Minor refrain A (v. 4) Major refrain (v. 6) 2. 42:7–12 Stanza II (Lament) (v. 7–11) Minor refrain B (v. 10) Minor refrain A´ (v. 11) Major refrain (v. 12) 3. 43:1–5 Stanza III (Prayer) (v. 1–4) Minor refrain B´ (v. 2) Major refrain (v. 5) The major refrain has probably the same wording throughout, even though the MT in v. 6–7 has “his help (wyn:P; t/[Wvy“). My God (yh'løa,), (my soul is cast

22

Cf. R.C. Culley, Oral Formulaic Language in the Biblical Psalms (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967), passim, and I. Ljung, Tradition and Interpretation (ConBOT 12; Lund: Liber Läromedel/Gleerup, 1978), 19 and passim. 23 For analogical expressions to yZIW [m; yhe l ø a ‘ hT; a 'A yKi , see especially Ps 22:10 ˜f,B ;m i yjig O hT;a 'A yKi , 23:5 y[iv ]y I yhel øa ‘ hT;a 'A yKi , 30:5 yZIW [m; hT; a ' A yKi , 71:5 yn: d o a } yti w : q ] t i hT;a 'A yKi , 91:9 ysij ]m ' hw:h y“ hT;a 'A yKi , 97:9 ˜wyol ][ , hw: h y“ hT;a 'A yKi , and 143:10 yh;/ la‘ hT; a 'A yKi , and to Kyhi l ø a ‘ r/Nkib ] Úd“/ aw“ see 35:18 br: lh;q ;B ] Úd“/ a, 57:10 yn:d oa } KyMi[ 'b ; Úd“ / a, and 71:22 yh; l ø a ‘ ÚT] m i a } lb, n