[B-Greek] Correct reading in Philo.....

Palm, David dpalm at trane.com
Tue Oct 14 12:44:43 EDT 2003


Hi all,
 
This is my first post to the group.  A little background about me,
Greek-wise.  I have a Master's in New Testament so I have a working
knowledge of the language.  I am by no means an expert.  I am looking at a
text in Philo's "Legatio ad Gaium" and the reading of one word has me
puzzled.  The context is this.  Philo is relating a petition to one
Petronius not to suppress the religious practices of the Jews in the region
under his control until an embassy (PRESBEIAN) is sent to seek to persuade
him otherwise.  It may be, they say, that he will change his mind after
hearing what they have to say.  Therefore, they beg him:
 
hEWS OU PEPRESBEUMEQA, MH APOKOYHS TAS AMEINOUS ELPIDAS MURIADWN TOSOUTWN,
hAIS OUX hUPER KERDOUS ALL hUPER EUSEBEIAS ESTIN hH SPOUDH.
 
(The H at the end of APOKOYHS has the iota subscript.)
 
Now the syntax of the sentence is straightforward and its meaning is clear
enough, but I am confused by the second word, OU.  It doesn't make sense to
me, given the negative MH immediately following.  OU is what is printed in
the Loeb volume, but I'm wondering if perhaps it shouldn't be hOU instead,
thus, hEWS hOU PEPRESBEUMEQA.  I wouldn't dare "amend" such a printed text
on my own authority, so I'm looking to see what others think of this.  Is
hEWS OU or hEWS hOU the correct reading?
 
Thanks in advance for your help,
 
David
 



More information about the B-Greek mailing list