475 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LXI N° 5-6, september-december 2004 476

THE SEPTUAGINT AND ITS LITERARY-CRITICAL this article a concise critical introduction to the complete edi- VALUE ACCORDING TO EMANUEL TOV*) tion. The third contribution “A Computerized Database for Sep- MICHAËL N. VAN DER MEER**) tuagint Research” originally formed a presentation of work in progress during the Septuagint conference held in Madrid One of the leading authorities in the field of the history of 1983. Now, twenty years later, it is published again in an the text of the Hebrew Bible, its ancient manuscripts (partic- extensively revised and updated form. The chapter offers a ularly those from Qumran) and translations (especially the manual to the parallel-aligned Hebrew-Greek database in the Old Greek or Septuagint version) is Emanuel Tov, professor Computer Assisted Tools for Septuagint Studies (CATSS) emeritus of the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Well-known now available in the Macintosh computer-program Accor- and widely used among biblical scholars are his standard dance. works on Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible (second, In chapter 4 “Glosses, Interpolations, and Other Types revised edition Minneapolis / Assen 2001) and on The Text- of Scribal Additions in the Text of the Hebrew Bible” Critical Use of the Septuagint in Biblical Research (revised (1994), Tov discusses the textual elements in the Hebrew and enlarged second edition Jerusalem 1997). The Greek and Bible that are usually regarded by biblical scholars as Hebrew Bible offers a companion volume to these handbooks Glosses or interpolations in the text, which were at a later and contains a collection of thirty-eight essays on the Septu- stage integrated into the main text, comparable to the agint written by Tov over a period of three decades. Many glossa and scholia in Sumerian and Akkadian texts and essays have had a great impact on the study of the Septuagint Classical Greek and Latin manuscripts. While the Greek and the history of the text of the Hebrew Bible, especially the and Latin texts provide only very rare evidence for this essays dealing with the literary history of biblical books such alleged process of text accretion, the Hebrew biblical man- as Jeremiah, Samuel, and Joshua. uscripts do not provide such evidence at all. The many Like the aforementioned handbooks the essays have been interlinear textual elements in the Qumran scrolls are not revised, enlarged and updated. Unfortunately, Tov has not clarifications, but corrections. Although many explanatory marked his editorial improvements. The essays have not been elements in the Hebrew text (such as geographical clarifi- arranged chronologically, but are grouped around certain top- cations) may be regarded as secondary elements, they are ics, such as lexicography (section II), translation technique not to be regarded, according to Tov, as isolated instances and exegesis (section III), the text-critical and redaction-crit- of interpolations, but as elements of a comprehensive re- ical value of the Septuagint (sections IV and V) and the revi- edition of a given book (Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Joshua). The sions of the Septuagint (section VI). Given the importance of present essay thus plays an important role in Tov’s double these studies and their impact on Septuagint research, a care- editions theory with respect to the literary history of the ful and critical discussion of each of these essays is justified. Hebrew Bible. The first essay “The Rabbinic Tradition concerning the In his review article of G. Veltri’s “Eine Tora für den ‘Alterations’ Inserted into the Greek Translation of the Torah König Talmai” (1995), Tov critizes Veltri — among other and Their Relation to the Original Text of the Septuagint” things — for not discussing the pre-Christian revisions of the (previously published in 1984) offers a discussion of some Septuagint in his thesis that the rejection of the Septuagint fifteen passages in the Pentateuch where, according to vari- by the rabbi’s took place only at a relatively late date. ous rabbinic sources, the rabbis altered the original Greek text. A study of these rabbinical emendations of the Septu- The second section, ‘Lexicography’, contains three stud- agint is hindered by the fact that the lists are not uniform and ies dealing with the prolegomena of a Lexicon of the Septu- therefore require a study of their own. Furthermore not every agint, one of the many projects Tov has been involved in. In retroverted Hebrew text in the rabbinic lists corresponds to “Some Thoughts on a Lexicon of the Septuagint” (chapter an extant Greek version of the same passage. Tov argues that 7, 1976), Tov explores the need for a Greek lexicon devoted these variant Hebrew readings in rabbinic literature in fact particularly to the literature of the Greek Old Testament, the reflect the original Old Greek text as opposed to all extant scope, and the intended public of such a lexicon. witnesses to the Septuagint text, a thesis that has found little Tov argues that “Three Dimensions of Words in the Sep- support in Septuagint scholarship. According to Tov, the tuagint” (chapter 6, 1976), should be discerned: [1] the alleged changes are in fact due to the translation technique meaning of the Greek word in secular Greek literature, [2] of the Greek translators or, alternatively, are misinterpreta- the meaning attached to it by the Greek translators who often tions of the Greek text by the rabbis. used the same Greek lexeme for various senses which rather The second contribution contains the introduction to “The reflect the semantic of the Hebrew than their natural Greek Fifth Fascicle of Margolis’ The Book of Joshua in Greek” meaning and reflect the stereotyping concordant translation (1981). This last fascicle of the critical edition of the Septu- technique of most Greek translations, and [3] the post-Sep- agint of Joshua by Max Margolis was prepared between 1931 tuagintal meaning attached to the word in patristic literature and 1938, but due to the Second World War was never pub- and daughter translations. In Tov’s approach to Septuagint lished and afterwards considered lost. Tov rediscovered it in lexicography full emphasis is placed on the second stage. 1980 in the Archives of the Dropsie College and provides in The problem of “Greek words and Hebrew meanings” is explored in a contribution to the ‘Melbourne Symposium on Septuagint Lexicography’ (chapter 8, 1990). Tov studies the *) E. TOV, The Greek and Hebrew Bible. Collected Essays on the Sep- meanings of four groups of Greek Septuagint lexemes tuagint. (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum, LXXII) E.J. Brill Publishers (dikaíwma, ömologéw and derivatives, êpifanßv and N.V., Leiden / Boston / Köln 1999. (24 cm, xxxviii, 570) ISBN 90 04 11309 ôrqríhwn) and makes clear that reference to the underlying 6; ISSN 0083-5889. $ 199.00 / / 169.00. tpwm edve arvn jkwe **) Leiden University. Hebrew lexemes ( , , , ) is indispensable 477 THE SEPTUAGINT AND ITS LITERARY-CRITICAL VALUE ACCORDING TO EMANUEL TOV 478 for a proper understanding of the otherwise unusual meaning For a long time scholars had postulated a certain amount of the Greek equivalents. of “Impact of the Septuagint Translation of the Torah on the Translation of the Other Books” (chapter 12, 1981). By The third section offers various contributions to the field means of long computer-generated lists of vocabulary shared of translation-technique and exegesis in the Greek Old Tes- by the Greek Pentateuch and later Greek translations, Tov tament. The history of this type of research is discussed in substantiates this impression. The cumulative strength of the chapter 16 “The Nature and Study of the Translation Tech- large number of examples and especially the examples of nique of the Septuagint” (1987) ‘in the past and present’ with influence on the exegetical level gives the essay its convinc- special attention to the pioneer studies published in 1841 by ing force. Thiersch and Z. Frankel. In chapter 18 Tov explains his reluctant attitude to alleged As argued by Tov, text-critical use of the Septuagint “Theologically Motivated Exegesis Embedded in the Septu- should start with distinguishing between variants and non- agint” (1990): a theology of the Septuagint as envisaged by variants. Non-variants may result from limitations in the com- Ziegler and put into practice in the Theologisches Wörter- petence of the Greek translators, as studied by Tov in chap- buch zum Neuen Testament fails to do justice to the fact that ter 14 “Did the Septuagint Translators Always Understand the Greek Old Testament is a very heterogeneous collection Their Hebrew Text?” (1984). of different translations. Nevertheless, several theologically Other examples of non-variants are the renderings of the motivated renderings can be detected within the individual Hebrew text for the sake of interpretation or theological con- translation units, and Tov provides a number of examples, cerns. In chapter 10 “Midrash-Type Exegesis in the Septu- such as the messianic interpretations in LXX-Numbers 24, agint of Joshua” (1978), Tov examines a number of exam- the theologoumena in LXX-Isaiah, and the avoidance of ples of exegesis in the Greek Joshua, introduced either by the antropomorphic renderings, with respect to the metaphor of Greek translator or earlier on the Hebrew level. Yet, the ques- God as rock. tion arises whether it is legitimate to separate these instances of interpretative renderings in the Greek Joshua from the The fourth and fifth sections deal with ‘The Septuagint and many other examples and whether it is necessary to postulate the Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible’ and ‘The Septu- an additional Hebrew exegetical layer between the original agint and the Literary Criticism of the Hebrew Bible’ respec- Hebrew as preserved in the MT and the Greek version. tively. In order to reduce the amount of subjectivity inherent to In chapter 19 “The Textual Affiliations of 4QSama” the distinction between variants and non-variants, Tov and (1979), Tov presents an extensive review article of Eugene others have developed computer-assisted tools that help quan- Ulrich’s The Qumran Text of Samuel and Josephus (1978). tify patterns in the translation technique employed by the This monograph contains a preliminary publication of Greek translators, such as the tools described in chapter 3 “A 4QSama and has had a considerable impact on Septuagint Computerized Database for Septuagint Research”. Results of studies. In spite of Ulrich’s stress on the agreements between this statistical research are offered by the lists of “Compound 4QSamuela and the hypothetical Old Greek version of Samuel Words in the Septuagint Representing Two or More Hebrew obscured by the recensions of kaige-Theodotion (in the B Words” (chapter 9, 1977), and the examples of “The Repre- text) and the historical Lucian (in the so-called Lucianic man- sentation of the Causative Aspects of the Hiph{il in the Sep- uscripts), Tov takes the various disagreements and indepen- tuagint” (chapter 13, 1982). dent readings of 4QSamuela as an indication of the relative A fine example of this kind of research is offered by the independent status of the text of 4QSamuela. article written jointly by Tov and B.G. Wright ‘Computer- Chapter 20 “The Contribution of the Qumran Scrolls to assisted Study for Assessing the Literalness of Translation the Understanding of the Septuagint” (1992) offers a survey Units in the Septuagint’ (chapter 15, 1985) in which com- of the biblical Qumran scrolls that contain agreements with puter-generated statistics provide information concerning the the LXX, such as 4QJerb.d, 4QDeutc.h.j.q, 4QSama, 4QNumb, literalness and consistency of the renderings grammatical 4QExodb, and 4QLevd. Tov concludes this overview with constructions. Another criterion for measuring the literalness some thoughts on the history of the biblical text, which in his of Greek version is the manner by which the translators view should not be narrowed to the three recensions assumed solved the problem of the “Renderings of Combinations of by Albright and Cross. The deviating Qumran scrolls are not the Infinitive Absolute and Finite Verbs in the Septuagint”, the result of a recension, but simply texts, just as the Hebrew a syntactical phenomenon (infinitive absolute followed by a Vorlagen of the LXX books represent individual copies in finite form of the same verb) peculiar to the Hebrew lan- the putative stemma of the biblical text. Hence the scrolls guage, which required a certain amount of creativity on the with agreements with LXX should not be called ‘Septuagin- part of the Greek translators. tal’ scrolls. With respect to the may Semitisms in the Septuagint, Tov In chapter 21, Tov discusses the “Interchanges of Con- argues that distinction should be made between “Loan- sonants between the Masoretic Text and the Vorlage of the Words, Homophony, and Transliterations in the Septuagint” Septuagint” (1992) and provides a table of the total of such (chapter 11, 1979), i.e., [1] the Semitic loan-words that had interchanges per book compared with the total number of been incorporated into Greek vocabulary long before the words of the individual books based on the CATSS data. Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible was made, [2] Greek One of the conclusions is that the high number of such inter- equivalents that correspond to the sound rather than the changes in a book such as Hosea points to the corrupt state meaning of the underlying Hebrew original, and [3] translit- of the present Hebrew text of that book, while the low num- eration of Hebrew proper nouns, technical terms and other ber of such interchanges in the Pentateuch and late books Hebrew words that were unknown or untranslatable for the such as Esther, 2 Chronicles and Haggai points to the oppo- Greek translators. site. 479 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LXI N° 5-6, september-december 2004 480

Section 5 ‘The Septuagint and the Literary Criticism of the thermore, the scroll also reflects harmonisation of the Hebrew Bible’ can be viewed as a companion to chapter 7 Samuel narratives to Chronicles, as shown by A. Rofé with and 8 respectively of Tov’s Textual criticism of the Hebrew respect to 2 Samuel 24.1) Finally, Tov does not explain the Bible and his The Text-critical Use of the Septuagint and purpose of this alleged originally independent alternative forms the nucleus of the present collection of essays. These story. essays substantiate Tov’s thesis that the Septuagint version Chapter 27, “Some Sequence Differences between the of particular books or specific sections in the biblical books Masoretic Text and the Septuagint and Their Ramifications reflect a stage in the literary history of these compositions for Literary Criticism” (1987) presents an interesting attempt that preceded the edition that eventually became the final to transform qualitative variants (viz. pertaining to sequence authorized edition accepted in the Masoretic Bible. differences of sections such as Joshua 8:30-35, 1 Kings 8:12- Chapters 24, 25, and 26 were previously published more 13 and 1 Kings 20-21) into quantitative variants. Tov argues or less simultaneously in 1985 and 1986 and deal with the that several of the passages now found at different positions pluses in MT of Jeremiah, Joshua, and Ezekiel. In Tov’s in the Hebrew and Greek Bible should be seen as secondary view, a study of the translation technique makes it improba- passages that were inserted by scribes at various positions in ble that the minuses in LXX should be seen as the result of the biblical compositions.2) deliberate shortening of the longer Hebrew text by the Greek In Chapter 28, “Recensional Differences in Proverbs” translator. They rather reflect the tendency of Second Tem- (1990), Tov applies to the Book of Proverbs the thesis of ple scribes to fill out the biblical texts. Occasionally these the previous chapter by which differences between MT and additions amount to substantial sections (Jeremiah 33:14-26; LXX in sequence of sections is ascribed to recensional activ- 39:4-13; Joshua 20:4-6; Ezekiel 36:23c-38). For the most ity on the Hebrew level. Although numerous deviations of part, the additions consist of only a single phrase and reflect the Greek version from the MT are demonstrably the result relatively harmless tendencies such as clarification and ampli- of literary initiatives by the Greek translator, Tov makes a fication. In a few cases, the MT pluses reflect deuterono- case for ascribing the pluses in LXX that have counterparts mistic phraseology. This would offer a firm point of contact in the Hebrew Bible, the various minuses in LXX, as well between the literary and textual history of the texts of these as the sequence differences throughout the book, to recen- books, since it is commonly accepted that at least the books sional activity on the Hebrew level. Nevertheless, Tov is of Joshua and Jeremiah (and possibly to a lesser extent silent about the chronological priority between the postu- Ezekiel as well) underwent one or more deuteronomistic lated two Hebrew versions (MT and the Hebrew Vorlage of redactions. LXX) and gives no motives for the alleged recensional In Tov’s opinion the book of Jeremiah and especially activity. Jeremiah 27 (LXX 34) serves as a prime example to sup- In the final essay of this section (chapter 29), the most port this view: the deviations of LXX from MT with respect recent of the present collection (1997), Tov argues that the to length (LXX-Jeremiah is almost one-seventh shorter than variants between MT, LXX, and 4QSamuela in 1 Sam.2:1- MT-Jeremiah) and order of the material (MT-Jeremiah 46- 10 should be seen as “Different Editions of the Song of Han- 51 is found in LXX in the middle of the book) are supported nah and Its Narrative Framework”. None of the extant tex- by 4QJerd and 4QJerb respectively. Although Jeremiah 27 tual witnesses (4QSama, MT, LXX) reflects the original (LXX 34) is not attested in these Septuagint-like Qumran shape of the Hannah-Samuel narrative (1 Samuel 1-2), which, manuscripts, the pluses of MT vis-à-vis LXX (verses 1, 5b, according to Tov, originally lacked the song of Hannah. The 7, 10b, 12b-14a, 17a, 18b, 19b, 20a-21, 22b) almost double fact that the poem occurs either before the statement that the length of the original version as reflected in LXX and, Samuel is left behind in the temple (thus LXX and moreover, introduce the distinctive idea of Israel’s restitu- 4QSamuela 2:11a) or afterwards (MT-1 Samuel 1:28), indi- tion (verses 5b, 19-22) which fits awkwardly in the oracles cates, according to Tov, that the song constitutes a later inser- of doom. After presenting a reconstruction of the Hebrew tion into the Hannah-Samuel narrative. In his view, a pristine Vorlage of LXX, Tov offers in chapter 22 “Exegetical version of the original song was editorially expanded in two Notes on the Hebrew Vorlage of the Septuagint of Jeremiah directions, attested by the extant witnesses, with the aim to 27 (34)” (1979) a running commentary to this shorter text integrate the originally independent poem more tightly into and its alleged accretions now found in MT. Interestingly, the context of the Samuel narrative and to actualize its theo- however, Tov offers at several points (verses 2, 3, 6, 14) logical message. reasons why the MT instead of the LXX should be pre- It is to be regretted that Tov presents the alleged editorial ferred. additions to the Hebrew text in English translation without Another passage that has attracted Tov’s interest for a paying due respect to the Hebrew and Greek contexts in long time is the David and Goliath narrative in 1 Samuel 16- which these quantitative variants appear. A study of the qual- 18 (chapter 32, 1985), where the Greek version is 44 % itative variants, for instance in Joshua 1:7 (mentioned on shorter than the MT. Again, Tov draws upon the argument from translation technique and goes to great lengths to show that the Greek version of 1 Samuel 16-18 is relatively lit- 1) A. ROFÉ, 4QSama in the Light of Historico-literary Criticism: The eral. Since several other deviations of LXX from MT now Case of 2 Sam 24 and 1 Chr 21, in A. VIVIAN (Hg.), Biblische und Judais- find support by 4QSamuela, it is, according to Tov, only log- tische Studien. Festschrift für Paolo Sacchi. (Judentum und Umwelt 29) Frankfurt am Main / Bern / New York / Paris 1990, pp.109-119) ical to conclude that the shorter version of the David and 2) For a different view regarding Joshua 8:30-35, see M.N. VAN DER Goliath pericope also reflects a Hebrew version different MEER, Formation and Reformulation. The Redaction of the Book of Joshua from MT. Yet, the scroll preserves of the relevant chapters 1 in the Light of the Oldest Textual Witnesses. (Supplements to Vetus Testa- Samuel 16-18 only parts of 1 Samuel 17:3-6, i.e. a passage mentum 102) Leiden / Boston 2004, pp.479-522. For a different view on 1 Kings 20-21, see D.W. GOODING, Ahab According to the Septuagint, in where the Hebrew and Greek texts fully correspond. Fur- ZAW 76 (1964), pp.269-280, not mentioned by Tov on page 417, note 9. 481 THE SEPTUAGINT AND ITS LITERARY-CRITICAL VALUE ACCORDING TO EMANUEL TOV 482 pages 390, 392, 394), makes it plausible that the quantita- untranslated was already used in the Old Greek translation, tive and qualitative variants alike should be attributed to the especially of the historical books. creative reinterpretation of the Hebrew text by the Greek In an early article related to his reconstruction of the translator.3) Hebrew text of Baruch, Tov demonstrates that ‘The relation between the Greek Versions of Baruch and Daniel’ (chapter The final section of the book contains a number of essays 35, 1976) should not be explained in terms of a literary on ‘Revisions of the Septuagint’, which originally were pub- dependence of Baruch upon (the Theodotionic version) of lished in the early seventies and occasionally the early eight- Daniel, but in terms of coincidence. ies of the previous century, i.e. the time when Septuagint In ‘The Textual History of the Song of Deborah in the A research was dominated by Barthélemy’s discovery of the Text of the Septuagint’ (chapter 36, 1978) Tov offers a kaige recension. The discovery of the Greek Minor Prophets detailed analysis of a number of difficulties and remote dou- scroll from NaÌal Îever with its clear traces of revisional blets in the A text of Judges 5:12-16. activity of the original Septuagint text towards the MT, According to Tov, “The ‘Lucianic’ Text of the Canonical marked by the stereotyped rendering of the Hebrew phrase and Apocryphal Sections of Esther” is “A Rewritten Bibli- wegam by the Greek kaige, led many scholars to discover cal Book” (chapter 37, 1982). Tov argues that the so-called similar revisions of the original Septuagint text. Lucianic version of Esther (also known as Alpha-text) is In chapter 30 “Pap.Giessen 13, 19, 22, 26: A Revision of dependent upon the Old Greek version, as is clear from the the Septuagint?” (the oldest of the essays collected in this book several translation idiosyncrasies and inner-Greek corrup- published in 1971), Tov questions the ascription of the afore- tions. Tov furthermore claims that the Lucianic version also mentioned papyrus to the so-called Samareitikon, i.e., the Greek presents a revision towards the Hebrew (or Aramaic) version translation of the Samaritan Pentateuch. According to Tov, the of Esther that occasionally differs from MT. If, however, the variants between the Greek text of this papyrus and the oldest ‘Lucianic’ revisor was able and willing to curtail and reor- text of the Greek version of Deuteronomy 24-29 could also be ganize the Old Greek in the drastic way we find it now, it ascribed to an anonymous Greek revision, comparable to the seems only natural that additions and alterations of the text anonymous recension of the Greek version of Numbers 6:22- should be ascribed to the same literary creativity as well.4) 27 as found on “Une inscription grecque d’origine samaritaine Tov draws a comparison between the type of reworking trouvée à Thessalonique” (chapter 34, 1974). reflected by (both the Hebrew Vorlage and) the Greek ver- In chapter 31 “Lucian and Proto-Lucian” (1972) Tov sion of Lucianic Esther and the Hebrew and Aramaic rewrit- adopts Cross’s correction of Barthélemy’s view of the so- ten Bible compositions found in Qumran (e.g. Genesis Apoc- called Lucianic manuscripts of the Greek version of Samuel- ryphon) and the Targumim, but does not mention the Kings (1-4 Reigns) by discerning two layers in its text: one inner-Greek rewriting of the book of Tobit. reflecting the changes introduced by historical Lucian (ca. In the final chapter of the book, Tov examines ‘The Sep- 300 CE) and an older proto-Lucian sub-stratum, but corrects tuagint Additions (‘Miscellanies’) in 1 Kings 2” (3 Reigns Cross with respect to the character of this proto-Lucianic 2)’ (chapter 38, 1984) and offers a Hebrew retroversion of layer. According to Cross this substratum itself already the so-called miscellanies after 2:35 and 2:46. The Hebrais- reflects a revision of the Old Greek translation of the Hebrew tic style of these pluses make it likely, according to Tov, that books Samuel-Kings as attested by 4QSamuela, while for Tov they were originally composed in Hebrew, rather than Greek. the designation of the substratum of this alternative Greek Similarities between the Greek translation equivalents in the text as a revision is questionable. Tov rather labels this sub- miscellanies and the main text make it clear that the same stratum as either the original Old Greek translation of 1-4 person translated the miscellanies and the main text. The pur- Reigns or any Old Greek translation rather than a proto- pose of these pluses remains unclear. Tov denies the claim Lucian revision (as Cross suggests). made by Gooding that the two miscellanies reflect a clear In “The Methodology of Textual Criticism in Jewish structure and inner coherence and prefers to return to the old Greek Scriptures” (chapter 32, 1972) Tov unravels the intri- idea of a ‘Variantensammlung’. cate “Problems in Samuel-Kings” by discussing “The State of the Question”. Tov modifies the Barthélemy-Cross The book is carefully edited and, given its size (570 pages) hypothesis by postulating a mechanical explanation for the and the enormous amount of lists and detailed descriptions, changes in translation sections. Whereas Barthélemy tried to contains only a very limited amount of errors. The reviewer find a rationale for the changes from Old Greek sections to found the following minor errors: p.78, line 22: a full stop kaige-Theodotion parts by assuming that the latter sections before ‘One major obstacle’ is absent; p.157, line 6: ‘Exod were only translated in a later stage, Tov assumes that the 23:10-14’ should be: ‘Lev.23:10-14’; p.232 lines 19-20, the variation is due to a combination of different scrolls at an accents on de and te are absent; p.241, line 38, a space is early stage of the transmission of 1-4 Reigns. lacking in the phrase ‘modern times,to the’; p.254, line 9, “Transliterations of Hebrew Words in the Greek Versions” there is a superfluous hyphen in ‘construc-tion; p.307, table (chapter 33, 1973): are they “A Further Characteristic of the 1 is incorrectly interrupted between the Habakkuk and Zepha- kaige-Th Revision?” ‘Not necessarily so,’ answers Tov, niah; p.316, line 11: Tov probably refers to the short text of since the technique of leaving unknown Hebrew words Joshua 8 instead of Joshua 12; p.338, note 8: ‘sqaure brack- ets’ should be ‘square brackets’; p.357 lists MT-1 Sam.18:6

3) See M.N. VAN DER MEER, Textual Criticism and Literary Criticism in Joshua 1:7 (MT and LXX), in B.A. TAYLOR (ed.), X Congress of the Inter- national Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies, Oslo 1998. 4) See K. DE TROYER, The End of the Alpha-Text of Esther. Translation (Society of Biblical Literature. Septuagint and Cognate Studies 51) Atlanta and narrative technique in MT 8:1-17, LXX 8:1-17, and AT 7:14-41. (Soci- 2001, pp.355-371. ety of Biblical Literature. Septuagint and Cognate Studies 48) Atlanta 1999. 483 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LXI N° 5-6, september-december 2004 484

çlme lvaw harql hvlcmev riwl as a plus vis-à-vis LXX, but the Greek text has aî xoreúousai eîv sunántjsin Dauid; p.385 line 6: ‘(see n.35).’ should be: ‘(see n.23).’; and p.444, line 13, the section head ‘f’ before the section dealing with 1 Sam 2:9 is missing.

Each of these articles is highly original, authoritative, and occasionally provocative. Most of them have already played an important role in the scientific study of the Septuagint dur- ing the past decades and undoubtedly will continue to do so for the next decades. The present collection of these essays on the Septuagint is thus a worthy monument to mark the retirement of their author. Without doubt, the book has found its rightful place already among the standard works on the Septuagint on the shelves of the institutional and private libraries.