Johann Cook, «Are the Additions in LXX Job 2,9a-e to be deemed as the Old Greek text?», Vol. 91 (2010) 275-284
The LXX version of Job is described as an abbreviated, shortened text. However, it does contain two prominent additions in Job 2,9a-e and 42,17b-e. As far as the first is concerned this article argues that it is not the result of a later hand, nor of a differing Hebrew parent text. Based on a contextual analysis combined with an analysis of lexical items found in the additions, it reaches the conclusion that the translator of the Old Greek in fact is the work of the original translator.
Are the Additions in LXX Job 2,9a-e to be deemed
as the Old Greek text? *
The Greek version of the book of Job is substantially shorter than the
Massoretic Text (MT) 1. Compared to LXX Proverbs, another freely 2
translated unit, it can be deemed as a shortened, abbreviated text 3. LXX
Proverbs, to the contrary, is an expansionistic text with a multitude of
additions, transpositions and very significant, the difference of the order
of chapters 24–31 in the LXX 4. It remains a difficult issue to determine
the origin of these differences. One way of doing this is to describe the
translation technique of the translated units. According to Cox LXX Job is
unique since “It is not just free or paraphrastic, it is also something of an
epitome of the longer and often difficult original. OG Job is one of a kind
in the Septuagint corpus (my italics — JC). We can typify it as among the
least literal, both in its attitude toward abbreviating the parent text and in
the way the translator worked with that portion of the text for which we
have a translation†5. This less faithful translation naturally impedes
endeavours to determine whether any given passage should be taken as
the Old Greek (OG) text, or whether it should be seen as the work of later
* This article was completed during my research stay at the University of
Leiden as guest of Prof. Arie van der Kooij. I discussed various aspects in this
contribution with him.
H.M. ORLINSKY, “Studies in the LXX of the Book of Jobâ€, HUCA 28
1
(1957) 53, thinks it is but five-sixth of the MT.
The terms “literal†and “free†are problematic, however, for the want of
2
more appropriate concepts, I apply them in order to define the free, less
faithful and even paraphrastic way these translators rendered their parent texts.
See also the proposals by B. LEMMELIJN, “Free and yet faithful: on the
translation technique of LXX Exod 7:14-11:10â€, JNSL 33 (2007) 1-32,
regarding definitions in translation technique.
C.E. COX, “Jobâ€, A New English Translation of the Septuagint. A New
3
Translation of the Septuagint and the Other Greek Translations traditionally
included under that title, A. PIETERSMA – B.G. WRIGHT (eds.) (Oxford –
London 2007) 667. According to Cox this abbreviation increases as one reads
through the book.
J. COOK, The Septuagint of Proverbs Jewish and/or Hellenistic
4
Proverbs ? Concerning the Hellenistic Colouring of LXX Proverbs (VTS 69;
Leiden 1997) 332.
COX, “Jobâ€, 667.
5
FOLLOW US