Introduction

I. Overview

For anyone familiar with original Greek compositions, reading the translation Greek of the Septuagint (lxx) for the first time can be a surprising experience. While the words are Greek, for the most part their order reflects the underlying idiomatic Hebrew and (in portions of Ezra and Daniel) Aramaic, and parataxis is the norm. Beneath the surface, however, the general syntax is that of Koiné Greek. At the same time, lxx Greek has much in common with classical or Attic Greek. For the most part, one may use either classical or New Testament (nt) grammatical paradigms in one’s study of the lxx, since those paradigms share so much in common. While several lxx grammars exist, they are far from complete. Indeed, the primary focus of such grammars has been upon the grammatical differences between classical and Koiné Greek. This emphasis on the differences makes them appear to be numerous and hides the commonality that exists between the two. Appreciating the extent of this commonality simplified the process of checking the data, since many apparent exceptions could be recognized as errors in parsing.

a. The Rahlfs Text In retrospect, the publication of the Rahlfs text1 in 1935 was a watershed in Sep- tuagint studies. Its immediate predecessor, the three volume Swete text,2 which formed the running text for the Larger Cambridge Septuagint,3 was based on Codex Vaticanus, supplemented from other uncial manuscripts. In contrast, the Rahlfs text is a (semi)criti-

1 A. Rahlfs, Septuaginta, id est Vetus Testmentum Graece iuxta lxx Interpretes (2 vols.; Stuttgart, 1935). 2 H. B. Swete, The Old Testament in Greek according to the Septuagint (3 vols.; Cambridge 1887–1912). 3 A. E. Brooke, and N. McLean, with H. St J. Thackeray, The Old Testament in Greek Ac- cording to the Text of Codex Vaticanus, Supplemented from Other Uncial Manuscripts, with a Critical Apparatus containing the Variants of the Chief Ancient Authorities for the Text of the Septuagint (3 vols.; 1906–1940). Analytical Lexicon to the Septuagint

cal edition based on the three uncial manuscripts Alexandrinus (A), Vaticanus (B), and but also citing the evidence of other sources such as Origen’s Hexapla, the ,(א) Sinaiticus Complutensian Polyglot, and the Lucianic text. Like the Swete text, the Rahlfs text is complete and to this date is still the only complete critical text.4 The Analytical Lexicon to the Septuagint (ALS) is based on the Rahlfs text, not including the variants listed in the critical apparatus. In the analytical listings of the ALS, all words and forms, including those of declining proper nouns, are parsed, and parsed in the context of the Rahlfs text. There are, however, certain anomalies within that text. For the most part, ancient manuscripts do not have accents, breathing marks, or punctuation. Rather, these are supplied by the editors of the modern texts. While in the main the meaning is clear, inevitably some readings are open to alternative interpretations.5 Furthermore, as is perhaps inevitable, the Rahlfs text is not without typographical errors. The existence of such errors can be established by first of all checking to see whether the Rahlfs text itself has a note in the apparatus to account for the particular form. Where they are included, these notes are a mine of information since at times they go beyond simply recording the manuscript evidence to citing page numbers in works such as Thackeray’s Grammar.6 Where there is no such note, or where the evidence is inconclusive, the other relevant and available texts7 have been compared for the word in question. On the basis of the Rahlfs notes and comparisons with other texts, it has been possible to determine which words in the Rahlfs text contain errors,8 and these are noted in ALS using the formula “xxx see yyy”:

4 The Rahlfs text is being superseded book by book by the volumes of the Göttingen Sep- tuagint, a full critical edition, as they become available. In the meantime, Septuaginta: Editio altera of the Rahlfs text, edited by Robert Hanhart, has been published (Stuttgart: German Bible Society, 2006). The result is a light revision that leaves “the text established by Alfred Rahlfs largely untouched” and restricts “revisionary activity to the most inevitable changes” (p. xi). Three distinct areas are included: correcting errors and misprints; changes of accentuation (within the context of the original text), and three substantive changes of the text wording; corrections and clarifications within the apparatus. Only one form needed to be added to this work in the light of the new text wording. 5 An example of this is found in 1 Rgns 24:17 (with the same expression found in 1 Rgns 26:17): Rahlfs: ἦ φωνῆ σου Cambridge: ἡ φωνῆ σου.

6 Henry St. John Thackeray,A Grammar of the Old Testament in Greek (Cambridge, 1909). 7 Göttingen, The Larger Cambridge Septuagint, the portions of text included in Hatch and Redpath, and Bagster. The last, The Septuagint Version of the Old Testament, with an English Translation; and with various readings and critical notes (Samuel Bagster & Sons, 1851), in- cludes the translation by Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton, and was republished by Hendrickson as The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English in 1986. 8 While these sorts of anomalies have been corrected in the new edition of the Rahlfs text (see n. 5, above), no list of the minor changes made currently exists.

xvi

Introduction

ἐπελειώθη see ἐπελιώθη αὑτός see αὐτός

In addition to citing errors, this formula is also used to list the full word for elided forms, such as: ἀλλ᾽ see ἀλλά In the case of crasis, forms are listed in the text in the following manner: τἀνδρός = τοῦ + ἀνδρός The parsing of each element is found elsewhere at the appropriate place in the alphabetical listing.

b. Lexical Forms For each analytical entry in ALS, the root form is listed so that the user is able to locate the word and its meanings in a lexicon. While it was in print and available, the work of Schle- usner9 helped in this regard, though it was not without its problems. In the final analysis, its forte was in the area of Greek/Hebrew parallels, rather than precise meanings of words. Were it still in print, it would be of little practical use for most, since it was in Latin. Some progress can be made using the standard nt lexicons, especially BDAG10; but according to G. Abbott-Smith, whose Manual Lexicon was a pioneer in sensitivity to the importance of the lxx in understanding nt vocabulary, these cover only forty percent of the lxx words.11 Since the publication of the first edition ofALS in 1994, the Lust-Eynikel- Hauspie lxx lexicon has been completed, and its word glosses are being used in this expanded edition.12 In addition, the Muraoka lexicon, which originally covered the Minor Prophets and then added the Pentateuch, is now complete.13 For a long time the only available work was the standard classical Greek lexicon of Liddell, Scott, and Jones (LSJ).14 While LSJ does not ignore Koiné Greek, it does not do it justice. First, Hebrew meanings are too easily transferred to the correspond-

9 J. F. Schleusner, Novus Thesaurus philologicocriticus, sive Lexicon in lxx et reliquos Inter- pretes Graecos ac Scriptores Apocryphos Veteris Testamenti. Post Bielium, et alios viros doctos congessit et edidit Joh. Fried. Schleusner (3 vols.; Leipzig, 1820–21). 10 A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (third revised edition; ed. Frederick W. Danker; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000). 11 G. Abbott-Smith, A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament (Edinburgh, 1937). 12 Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint (revised edition; compiled by J. Lust, E. Eynikel and K. Hauspie; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1992). 13 T. Muraoka, A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint (Louvain: Peeters, 2009). 14 A Greek-English Lexicon, compiled by Henry George Liddell and Robert Scott, rev. and augmented throughout by Sir Henry Stuart Jones, with the assistance of Roderick McKenzie and with the cooperation of many scholars, 19th ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1940, ninth

xvii Analytical Lexicon to the Septuagint

ing Greek words, even though there is no evidence in non-translation Greek that the word ever had that meaning. Second, lxx forms are subsumed under the classical headwords, even when the lxx forms are clearly different. Coupled with this is the penchant of Hatch and Redpath to typically list classical forms ahead of Koiné forms in their Concordance. For instance, they list νεομηνία under νουμηνία. So long as classical (Attic) forms are perceived as the norm, this approach can be defended. The problem is that lxx lexicography is thereby easily subsumed under the classical ru- brics as some sort of illegitimate stepchild. What to LSJ are “later forms” are for the lxx often normative. Contrariwise, the manifest classicism of 1–4 Maccabees, and especially 4 Maccabees, is a reversion to classical Greek; it is not normative. lxx Greek is first and foremost Koiné Greek. In the ALS analytical listings, then, words are listed in the form in which they actually occur in the lxx rather than forcing them into a classical mold. The form ἐπανιστανόμενοι, for instance, derives from ἐπανιστάνω, not the earlier—and classical—ἐπανίστημι.

c. Entries In the analytical listings there is only one part of speech (noun, verb, etc.) per lemma. If a particular form has more than one parsing or shares more than one part of speech, the form—along with its parsing—is listed once for each parsing.15 Thus when an adjective is used adverbially, or when a verb may be parsed either as a future indicative or an aorist subjunctive, the forms have separate parsings. An exception is made for words with multiple one-word parsings such as adverbs that also function as prepositions. In this case only one line is used to list the appropriate parts of speech.16 Where two essentially identical forms exist, only the more complete one is retained.17 Where two forms are identical except for a movable nu, then the nu is enclosed in parentheses. Where only one or the other form occurs, that form is listed with or without the nu as it occurs. Sequencing within the parsing itself varies from lexicon to lexicon. For ALS, a top down approach was adopted since this is the sequence one follows when looking up a word in a paradigm or on a verb chart.18 Although there is a definite move towards computer-

edition); Revised Supplement, ed. P. G. W. Glare, with the assistance of A. A. Thompson (Ox- ford: Clarendon Press, 1996). 15 ὑπάρξει noun fem dat sg ὕπαρξις ὑπάρξει vb fut act ind 3rd pers sg ὑπάρχω 16 ἔμπροσθεν adverb and preposition 17 In the following examples only the former is retained each time:

ῥοΐσκους ῥοίσκους ῥοΐσκων ῥοίσκων.

18 For nouns, pronouns and adjectives: part of speech, gender, case, and number; for verbs: part of speech, tense, voice, mood, person, and number; or for participles: part of speech, tense, voice, mood, gender, case, and number.

xviii

Introduction

oriented forms for the parsing itself where letter—and even number—codes are used, in the analytical listings of ALS, simple English abbreviations are used since they are much more intuitive.

d. Greek Word Definitions The Greek word definitions included in this expanded edition of the ALS are drawn from the Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint (GELS), revised edition, compiled by Johan Lust, Erik Eynikel, and Katrin Hauspie.19 Like ALS, GELS was compiled using the electronic files of the Computer Assisted Tools for Septuagint Studies (CATSS). It covers all the words in the Rahlfs edition of the lxx. For a complete description of the history, methods, and features of GELS, see that work’s Introduction. Spellings of lexical forms have sometimes been brought into conformity with ALS to avoid confusion. In some cases, multiple spellings are listed. Lexical forms of verbs are shown as active wherever active or passive forms are used in the lxx. Middle-voice lexical forms are reserved for cases in which the verb is used exclusively in the middle voice. The abridged GELS entries in this volume include only the basic word definitions, not the contextual meanings found in the subsequent paragraphs of many of that work’s entries. The word definitions included are glosses, or translation equivalents, rather than descriptions of each word’s meaning. While lexicographers often distinguish between glosses and definitions (descriptions of meaning), the cover and title page of this volume use the word “definitions” in a less technical sense to refer to word meanings. Rather than relying exclusively on the meanings of the Hebrew words from which the lxx was translated, each Greek word has been examined in context and compared with the meanings given in LSJ and other standard Greek lexica. The inclusion of the word definitions affords the user of theALS the convenience of tracing each parsed word back to its lexical form in order to review the word’s basic English meanings. References to classical Greek and Hebrew words and idioms, when part of the basic word meaning, have been retained. In the interest of brevity, the morphological information, statistical data, biblical references, and bibliographic citations from GELS have not been included in this work. Simple forms of verbs that occur in the lxx only as compounds have also been omitted. Where needed, abbreviations have been brought into conformity with those used in the analytical listings. Features of the GELS word definition entries include the following: • Translation equivalents (word meanings) are represented in italicized text. • For verbs that have multiple meanings, literal meanings are given first, followed by metaphorical and other special meanings. • Where relevant, the meanings of verbs are grouped together according active, middle, and passive voices using the headings: A (active voice), M (middle voice), and/or P (passive voice).

19 Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2003. Used by permission.

xix Analytical Lexicon to the Septuagint

• Various forms of the indefinite pronoun τις (meaning “someone,” “something”) are used to indicate the case of verbal and propositional objects, rather than stating the cases explicitly. For example, under the preposition κατά, the bracketed genitive form τινoς introduces the meanings the word expresses when followed by the genitive case: down from, down upon, etc. Likewise, the bracketed accusative forms τινα and τι introduce the accusative meanings: (downwards) to, down into, etc. • Explanatory information related to the word, its context, and its grammatical usage, is sometimes included with the word definitions in parentheses or brackets.

The following symbols are used in conjunction with the basic word definitions: • An equals sign (=) followed by a Hebrew word indicates that the Greek word .אחר = is a transliteration. E.g., ααρ • A diamond (♦) to the left of a Hebrew word designates it as a “root” rather .to know ידע♦ ידעני than the form in which it occurs in the text. E.g., transl. of • A slash (/) in a Hebrew (or Aramaic) word indicates prefixed and attached elements. As a rule, prefixes and suffixes are marked only when useful for the .ה/במה ,.argument. E.g • A hyphen (-) to the left of a Hebrew (or Aramaic) word indicates that the translator probably read or wished to read that word instead of the word .ה/דברים for mt הבדרין- ,.found in the Masoretic Text. E.g

II. Nouns For most nouns, the vocative form is the same as the nominative. This is always the case with plurals. When singular vocatives are different from their nominative, they are listed separately. In those instances where it is not possible to ascertain the gender of a word from the context, the gender is assumed to be that found elsewhere.20 Some ambiguous forms occur, such as ζυγός, which also has a neuter form ζυγόν. In the accusative, genitive, and dative cases these two forms cannot be distinguished one from the other, whether or not the definite article or an adjective is present, so both genders are supplied in the analysis.21

20 For the most part this occurs with proper nouns. 21 For nouns, where at times two genders are in use, both are listed using “or” as in: “masc or fem.” This is in contrast to adjectives, where ambiguous forms are listed, for instance, as “masc and fem.”

Introduction

One of the most neglected areas of lxx study is that of proper nouns. Most lexicons ex- clude names or at best treat them separately. However, it was decided to include them in the analytical listings of ALS to maximize its usefulness. TheGELS glosses include proper nouns only when they are transliterations of recognizable Hebrew nouns or phrases. Only proper nouns have been capitalized, making it easy to distinguish them from common nouns. How- ever, the standard texts include syntactical capitalization, and this can make it difficult for the beginning student to separate these two types of nouns. The intermediate-to-advanced student/scholar will seldom reference them; the beginner will reference them often. One of the biggest problems with proper nouns in any language is the wide variation in spelling, and those proper nouns found in the lxx are no exception. However, Rahlfs strove to standardize ittacisms such as ει versus ι, etc. In accord with this, the lexical forms of names have been brought into accord with the lemma form, or underlying lemma form for the oblique cases.22 Rahlfs often did not match form and function for proper nouns in his text. For instance, iota subscripts are omitted for second declension dative singular proper nouns that clearly are inflected, since the separate nominative singular form is usually also found, or the article is present. The resulting hybrid form is very confusing. For instance, (τῷ) Χελκία (2 Chr 34:20) is clearly dative singular in its context, and so appears in the analytical listing as Χελκίᾳ. In all such instances all diacriticals are supplied. At the same time (contra the original CATSS schema and the Hatch and Redpath Concordance upon which CATSS was based), diacriticals are not included for proper nouns that do not decline and are not in any recognizable Greek form, except that the diaeresis is retained where neces- sary to indicate syllabification of these Hebrew-Greek transliterations. Further, indeclinable proper nouns are not parsed, even when the parsing is clear from the context. For instance, in Tobit 5:6 (a text) Ραγα is feminine accusative singular, but it is an indeclinable noun, so it is simply listed as a proper noun.

III. Transliterations Though not part of the original CATSS plan, by manipulating the information in the database, it was possible to isolate and identify the category of transliteration.23 However, except for the transliteration of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet,24 no Hebrew equivalents are supplied in the analytical listings. The word meaning listings do, however, often include Hebrew equivalents.

22 For instance, in the context of the Rahlfs text, Χελκιου is the genitive singular of Χελ- κιας not Χελκειας, even though the latter is the preferred form in Hatch and Redpath. Simi- larly, Σουσοις, an indeclinable noun, is thereby not a form of Σουσα, whether or not they refer to the same geographical location. 23 Both for proper nouns and common nouns, the first letter of the CATSS database parsing is “N” for noun. (For some proper nouns, the parsing was originally one letter: .) In contrast to those names parsed in this way, transliterations never begin with a capital letter. Thus they were able to be isolated and identified. 24 These occur as headings in Psalm 118 (Heb. 119), an acrostic.

xxi Analytical Lexicon to the Septuagint

IV. Adjectives

For the most part, the parsing of adjectives is straightforward. The lexical form is the masculine nominative singular. However, one parsing in particular invites explanation: the rather terse “adj acc sg, neut nom sg.” This occurs in connection with two-termination adjectives where the feminine form is always the same as the corresponding masculine form. In this case the masculine, feminine, and neuter forms are all the same in the accusative singular, and the neuter nominative singular also shares this form. The above parsing is shorter than writing “masc and fem acc sg, neut nom and acc sg.” Similarly, for these adjectives the genitive and dative singular and plural have shared forms through all three genders. In these cases no gender is listed, as in “dat sg,” “gen pl.” In general, adjectives used as substantives, such as τρισαλιτῆριος (2 Macc 15:3), are parsed as adjectives. However, when the noun form has a life of its own, this has been recognized as much as possible. The adjective ἐπίπεμπτος only occurs in Leviticus and once in Numbers, and only as the neuter substantive ἐπίπεμπτον as the translation of yv*ymij}: “the fifth part,” so it is parsed as a (neuter) noun.

V. Verbs a. Lexical Forms In accord with most Greek lexica (but not Hatch and Redpath), the lexical form for verbs is the present indicative first person singular, rather than the arguably more logical present (or aorist) infinitive. Where they existed, prefixes were separated from the root verb in the original CATSS database. These have been recombined into the standard for- mat for the lexicon. In previous lxx lexica, for words appearing in the lxx in both Koiné and classical (Attic) forms, it has sometimes been difficult to predict which form would be used as the lexical form. In ALS, verbs (as with nouns) are characteristically listed in their Koiné form when this differs from the classical form. Accordingly, the listed form is γίνομαι, not γίγνομαι, and γινώσκω, not γιγνώσκω, etc. However, in cases where two similar but clearly different lexical forms are used, these have been kept distinct in the analytical listings in order to maintain a higher level of morphological precision even in cases where the forms and meanings of words are similar. In this way, the distinctive flavor of lxx Greek vis-à-vis both classical and Koiné (including nt) Greek is maintained. For example, the lxx uses ἔσθετε (etc.), which is obviously not a form of ἐσθίω, but rather from the poetic form ἔσθω. Similarly, GELS (following Hatch and Redpath) list ῥῆσσω under ῥήγνυμι, and although the two words are closely related, they are morphologically different and thus are listed separately in the analytical listings. Since GELS combines these two words under a single lexical entry, a listing for ῥῆσσω has been added that refers the reader to the glosses listed under ῥήγνυμι. Again, the analytical listings include two related yet distinct lexical forms, ἐξόλλυμι and ἐξολλύω, while GELS lists only ἐξόλλυμι. As in the previous example, a listing for ἐξολλύω has been added that refers the reader to the glosses under ἐξόλλυμι.

xxii

Introduction

b. Ambiguity of Form While there is some ambiguity with nouns and related parts of speech, for verbs it is more extensive. One set of forms that illustrates this well are the verbs that share the ending σαι: first aorist active optative third person singular, first aorist active infinitive, and first aorist middle imperative second person singular. Not every verb can have all of these permutations, since one must also take into account differences in accentuation. For instance, in the first aorist paradigm for λύω, the infinitive active and the imperative middle are λῦσαι, while the optative active is λύσαι. However, with some verbs the vowels do not take the circumflex accent. Also, when the verb has enough syllables, the accent is recessive for the imperative, but not for the other two. In time, lxx Greek moved towards removing some of the ambiguities. One of these ambiguities concerns identical forms in the first person singular of the imperfect and second aorist active indicative. To distinguish it from the singular ending ον, the plural is at times οσαν.25 Another way to make the same distinction was to use first aorist endings on second aorist verbs, such as εἶπα, ἦλθαν, etc. A longstanding problem in lxx analysis is the confusion of inflected verb forms that may be parsed in more then one way. For example, the first aorist active subjunctive first person singular has the same form as the future indicative active first person singular. Likewise, the first aorist active subjunctive third person singular has the same form as the future middle indicative second person singular. In the database, many such forms that have previously been incorrectly parsed have been corrected by looking at the contexts in which those verbs occur. A significant number of verbs, such as ἐκτείνω, use the same root for the present/ imperfect and the aorist forms. Thus while some of the forms are unambiguous, others are ambiguous. In cases like this, the forms are parsed as both present/imperfect and aorist as appropriate.

c. Optative Students of nt Greek will be surprised by the number of optative forms in the lxx, while students of classical Greek will be surprised by their paucity. Since the accent on these forms is not recessive and the final syllable in the 3rd person singular is considered long, they are easy to distinguish in the first aorist active from the infinitive which, while also not being recessive, has a short final syllable and so is able to take a long accent on the penult if the verbal stem permits. If this is not the case, then context is determinative.

d. Middle Verbs Aside from the addition of word definitions, the major difference between this and the previous edition of the ALS is that in this edition no recourse is had to the notion of deponency. The association of this Latin term with Greek morphology, though time-honored,

25 At first glance, the aorist ending σαν looks like the typical first aorist active indicative 3rd person plural ending. In fact it is the ο that is determinative, and it is second aorist.

xxiii Analytical Lexicon to the Septuagint

was misplaced. What gave rise to it was the presence in both languages of non-active voice verbs that nevertheless translate in the active voice. In Latin these are passive in form, and as per the name deponent, are considered to have laid something aside, though grammar- ians disagree as to what was laid aside. In Greek they are middle verbs, so called by the Greeks themselves (Dionysius Thrax [2d c. b.c.e.], μεσότης; Apollonius Dyscolus [2d c. c.e.], μέση), since they lie between active and passive, sharing characteristics of each: like the active, the subject is the doer of the action; like the passive, the subject is in some sense the receiver of the action. This phenomenon has no counterpart in English.26 In the transition from Attic to Koiné Greek, change inevitably occurred; however, the basic verb patterns and paradigms did not change. The parameters of tense, voice, and mood remained constant. On the one hand, the middle voice remained; on the other hand, form distinguished it from the passive only in the aorist and the future tenses. In those tenses that have no forms distinguishing middle from passive,27 such verbs are listed as “m/p.”

e. Verbal Adjectives The student ofnt Greek is not prepared for the form of verbal adjectives in -τέον/τέα found in the lxx, since only one occurs in the nt.28 In contrast, forms from ten different words are found in the lxx.29 CATSS did not make separate provision for these, choos- ing to parse them as adjectives. However, this does not do them justice since they do not decline in the usual way and can be used as the main verb in a sentence. The LSJ lexicon simply lists them separately, without analysis, in the frozen form -τέον and uniformly translates as “one must. . . .” GELS sometimes lists them as part of the verb (ἐλευστέον under ἔρχομαι as ἐλευστέος), and other times separately (γνωστέος, α, ον). In the ALS parsing they are listed either as “verbal adj sg” or “verbal adj pl.”

26 For further details, see the author’s “Deponency and Greek Lexicography” in Biblical Greek Language and Lexicography: Essays in Honor of Frederick W. Danker (ed. Bernard A. Taylor, et al.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 167–176. 27 Present, imperfect, perfect, pluperfect, and future perfect. 28 Luke 5:38 βλητέον. 29 ἀναλημτέος, γνωστέος, ἐκδεκτέος, ἐλευστέος, ἐξεταστέος, ἡγητέος, κλητέος, νομιστέος, συγχρωτέος, φροντιστέος. Only ἀναλημπτέος occurs in the plural.

xxiv