[B-Greek] The value of the LXX
Albert Pietersma
albert.pietersma at sympatico.ca
Sun Feb 10 17:15:12 EST 2008
As you suggest, the central issue you raise is a large one and
likely beyond the scope of this forum. Moreover, as I am sure you
know, what role to ascribe to the LXX in biblical studies is not
without controversy. One only needs to read Jonathan Smith's Drudgery
Divine to become aware of at least some of its complexity. All I can
do here is to sketch, as briefly as I know how, my own view.
That the LXX plays a mediating role between the Hebrew Bible (OT) and
the NT is not subject to controversy, it seems to me. When one then
asks what the nature of that mediating role is, differences of
opinion come into view.
Some view the LXX effectively like a modern translation of a book in
a foreign language (say, a translation of War and Peace). Typically,
in that case, the translation replaces the original and to a degree
becomes a piece of literature in its own right, to some degree even
with its own point of view. From this perspective, one might then
characterize LXX as a sort of new edition of the Hebrew Bible in a
new language and, therefore, as an NGB (a New Greek Bible). Again
from this perspective, the LXX might then be seen as a (more or less)
deliberately expositional corpus in the direction of, say, the NT.
Let me call this role of the LXX as one of DIRECT MEDIATION between
the Hebrew Bible(OT) and the NT.
In a nutshell, Smith correctly argues that this kind of direct
mediation is not warranted by the LXX's textual-linguistic make-up,
in short the kind of translation it is, or the linguistic
relationship it bears to its original. In other words, the exegetical
dimension of the LXX must be firmly rooted in its textual-linguistic
make-up.
Notwithstanding this fundamental critique, many users of the LXX
continue to ascribe countless allegedly expositional items to the
exegetical intent of the translator-reviser, i.e. the Greek
translator and, moreover, tend to put the Greek of the LXX in as
favourable a (linguistic) light as possible. (Surely, the Greek
translator must have passed Greek 101! :-))
On the other hand, there are those, myself included, who, in view of
the LXX's textual-linguistic make-up, conclude that the LXX, AS
PRODUCED, was projected to be more of a crib to the authoritative
Hebrew text than any kind of revised edition with its own message and
profile. From this perspective, the expositional, exegetical
dimension of the LXX tends to be minimal, and in any case must be
demonstrated to exist rather than to be presupposed. Not unexpectedly
in such a translation, there are exegetical nuggets to be identified
but exegesis of the source text is typically disjointed and even
contradictory. From this perspective there is no attempt to read the
Greek as something other than what it is, since what it is is taken
to be expressive of its aim and intent. Most emphatically, from this
perspective one shuns reading into the LXX what is not warranted by
its linguistic make-up.
As I see it, there need be no antinomy between what might be called
the LXX AS PRODUCED (i.e. as translated) and the LXX AS RECEIVED
(i.e. as read at various points in its reception history———as long as
that basic distinction is considered axiomatic. From this
perspective, we might then speak of the LXX's role as one of INDIRECT
MEDIATION between the Hebrew Bible (OT) and the NT.
Though the LXX may not have been produced as a free-standing
composition, it did in time become precisely that. Or one might say,
though the LXX was not produced as Bible it did in time become Bible.
Yet again, one might thus speak of ARTICULATION of the text in
distinction from RE-ARTICULATION. As I understands Paul Ricoeur, he
speaks of con-figuration of the text in distinction from re-
figuration of the text. Whatever terms one chooses to use, the
distinction itself is axiomatic.
I have painted with a large brush but, I hope, not unintelligibly so.
Al
On Feb 10, 2008, at 2:47 PM, Hugh Donohoe Jr. wrote:
> I frankly get confused sometimes about the LXX. I read
> Dr. Pietersma say "we know enough about Septuagint
> Greek to know that what one typically gets is not
> straightforward use of Greek as language system." (I
> know your comment was made in a specific circumstance,
> I take that into account). I have read many times
> Septuagint scholars bemoan the neglect of the LXX.
> They often cite the excuse given for neglecting the
> LXX was that is was "translation Greek." So I have
> read several articles by scholars of the Septuagint
> downplaying the idea of translation Greek. I would
> give quotes if I was home right now. I know the issue
> is complicated by the fact that the Septuagint is not
> a homogeneous work. Metzger's little book, The Bible
> in Translation first brought this to my attention as
> an undergrad. I value the LXX as the oldest
> translation of Scripture in the Jewish/Christian
> tradition (Targums excluded). I know it is valuable as
> Rydbeck pointed out being "the most extensive text of
> the Hellenistic age." And like the NT untouched by
> Atticism. I guess my intellectual struggle is to
> understand how the LXX relates to what came before and
> after it. Its value in my mind is tied to
> understanding the NT and its relation to the great
> writers before it. Perhaps that is the rub to
> Septuagint scholars, I place its worth between Athens
> and Jesus. I guess I'm asking, why does it deserve to
> be studied in its own right"? I'm asking as someone
> who does value it. I just want to have a better
> understanding of why it deserves a prominent place in
> the study of ancient and biblical Greek?
>
> I hope asking such a large question about Biblical
> Greek is not out of order here.
>
> ex animo
>
> Hugh Donohoe
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ______________
> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list