Septuagint Translation Research Articles

Χλωρός in the Septuagint: Color or State?

AbstractThe adjective χλωρός appears in the Septuagint to translate Hebrew terms that not only denote color, but state as well. In fact, in biblical Hebrew color is not a quality, but rather a “state” of the entities it describes. It is logical to wonder, then, whether it also expresses this in the Septuagint or if it denotes only color. To answer this question, it is necessary to carry out an interdisciplinary study of color and color language. The methodology followed will first study the concept of color in the Hellenistic world and in the Septuagint, as well as the cultural context in which the Septuagint translators lived. Subsequently, an approximate account of the “encyclopedic knowledge” that those translators possessed will be given, followed, finally, by a semantic analysis of χλωρός in the Septuagint. After applying this methodology, it will be shown that in the Septuagint, as in the Hellenistic world in general, natural color expresses both color and state, with color being the visual reflection of that state.

The Textual Problem of Proverbs 30:19

A textual problem in Proverbs 30:19 provides difficulty to both ancient and contemporary texts. The ancient translators understand the last word of Proverbs 30:19 differently: b’lmh or b’lmyw. Symmachus in Greek, and the Aleppo codex, Leningrad codex, Babylonian tradition, Targum Aramaic, and Latin Codex 650 translate the term as “maiden” (woman). Other translations comprehend the last word of Proverbs 30:19 as in (his) “youth:” The LXX, Syro-Hexapla, Syriac Peshitta, Latin Vulgate, manuscript 31, Amiatinus manuscript, Salzburg manuscript, Cavensis manuscript, Greek Manuscript 333, 562, 329, 571, 636, 352, 485, 464, 447, and most Latin manuscripts. Modern English Bible translators are also perplexed by the textual problem of Proverbs 30:19. Although most modern Bible English translations prefer the reading with a maid (woman), certain English translations favor the reading “in his youth”. For example, the American Standard Version (ASV), New Heart English Bible (NHEB), New International Version (NIV), Amplified Bible (AB), World English Bible (WEB), English Standard Version (ESV), Berean Study Bible (BSB), King James Version (KJV), International Standard Version (ISV), and NET Bible favor the reading with a maid (woman). The Good News Translation (GNB) and Contemporary English Version (CEV) even interpret the last word of Proverbs 30:19 as the love between a man and a woman. On the other hand, the Brenton Septuagint Translation (Douay-Rheims Bible [DRB], Literal Standard Version [LST], and Aramaic Bible in Plain English Young’s Literal Translation [YLT] have the translation of in his youth. This article undertakes a syntactical analysis of the Prov. 30:19 in an attempt to resolve this textual ambiguity.

The Multifaceted Reception of the Torah by Early Church Fathers

This paper focuses on the reception of the Torah by the Church Fathers who lived up to the beginning of the third century. Christians, having received the whole Torah through the Septuagint translation, became selective in the way they accepted it, adhering to it only with reservations. Christological and ethical concerns were at the heart of their acceptance or rejection of various aspects of the Torah. This article will gauge whether Christians had a positive, negative, or neutral evaluation of the Torah and will seek to identify the ways in which they perceived the Torah. By analysing the ways in which the Torah and at times other Old Testament texts were handled, their presentation of these Jewish Scriptures will be brought to light, highlighting different approaches employed in this regard. One notes the following stances: the Torah’s commandments supplemented the Lord’s teachings (the Didache); the Torah was read allegorically and typologically despite a Midrashic approach (Epistle of Barnabas); certain laws were believed to have been instituted as a result of the people’s hardness of heart (Justin Martyr); natural law is distinct from the demands added to it after the Jews’ wayward actions (Irenaeus); the temporal aspects of the law were superseded by its eternal aspects (Tertullian); whilst upholding the promises of the Law, the prophets were seen as going beyond the Law (Tertullian) or as giving the Law a spiritual interpretation (Epistle of Barnabas); and, rarely, the Law was held in very high regard (Clement of Alexandria). This paper is not concerned with any blatant rejection of the Torah and, indeed, the Tanakh at large (as was the case with Marcion), but rather with the subtler nuances that can be detected in other writers who had to rethink the validity and role/place of the Torah in the faith.

The Debatable Ending: יו‎ or ה‎

Modern translations are influenced by the debatable ending of יו‎ or ה‎ of Proverbs 30:19. German Bible translations such as – Zürcher Bibel, the German Einheitsübersetzung der Heiligen Schrift, the German Elberfelder Bibel revidierte Fassung 1993, the German Darby Unrevidierte Elberfelder 1905, and Textbibel von Kautzsch und Weizsäcker – have Frau (woman) or Mädchen (girl) or Jungfrau (virgin). These translations demonstrate that the favorable reading is girl (woman or virgin) because it is influenced by the ending of ה‎. The debatale ending of יו‎ or ה‎ is noticeable in English Bible translations. The ending of ה‎ is followed by most of English Bible translations such as King James Version [KJV], American Standard Version [ASV], New International Version [NIV], English Standard Version [ESV]. Good News Translation [GNB] interprets it as the love story between a man and a woman. Aramaic Bible in Plain English, Young’s Literal Translation [YLT], Brenton Septuagint Translation, Douay-Rheims Bible [DRB], and Literal Standard Version [LST] read the ending of יו‎. Therefore, their translations are in his youth. This research argues for the ending of יו‎ or in his youth as the original reading with the usage of textual criticism and the syntactical analysis of Proverbs 30:19 as its methodology.

How Egyptian is the Greek of Septuagint?: Some Lexical Notes

Abstract This article explores the linguistic background of the Septuagint translation into Greek of the Old Testament, produced in Alexandria in the third century BCE, and thus likely to present some Egyptian traits. The main purpose is to examine the vocabulary of Egyptian origin, i.e., terms adopted by the Greek language. Since this is not an easy task, a number of methodologies of analysis and comparison with other text corpora are also discussed.

Evaluations of Karaite Scholar Jacob al-Qirqisânî on Torah Translations

Orta çağın önde gelen Yahudi mezhepleri olan Rabbaniler ve Karailer çeşitli dinî meseleler hakkında birbirlerine eleştiriler yöneltmişlerdir. Karailerin en temel itirazı, Rabbani Yahudilerin Sözlü Tora olarak gördükleri Mişna ve Talmud’un vahiy mahsulü olmasına yöneliktir. Bu hareketin önemli temsilcilerinden biri, 10. asırda Bağdat’ta yaşayan Ya‘kup el-Kirkisânî’dir. Onun kaleme aldığı Kitâbu’l-Envâr ve’l-Merâkıb, Karailikle ilgili günümüze ulaşan en hacimli eserdir. El-Kirkisânî, bu eserde kronolojik olarak Yahudi gruplar hakkında değerli bilgiler vermekte ve onları farklı açılardan eleştiriye tabi tutmaktadır. Eserin en temel gündemlerinden biri, Karailerin muarızları olan Rabbanilerin inanç ve uygulamalarındaki dine aykırı hususları ortaya koymaktır. El-Kirkisânî’nin eleştiri konularından biri de Rabbani kaynaklardaki Tevrat ve çevirileriyle ilgili görüşlerdir. Bu çerçevede Septuagint, Targum Onkelos ve Targum Yonatan hakkındaki Rabbani düşünceleri ele almaktadır. Septuagint’in yazılış hikâyesiyle ilgili Hıristiyan ve Rabbani kaynaklardaki nakilleri eleştiren el-Kirkisânî, Rabbanilerin Septuagint’te Tanrı’nın ilhamıyla değişiklikler yapıldığı iddialarına karşı çıkarak bunu Tanrı inançlarındaki bozukluk olarak nitelemektedir. Targum Onkelos ve Targum Yonatan’daki çeviri hatalarını göstererek Rabbanilerin bu çevirileri ve mütercimlerini yüceltmelerine tepki gösteren el-Kirkisânî, Targum Onkelos’u Tevrat’la birlikte liturjide kullanmalarına da karşı çıkmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, Kitâbu’l-Envâr’daki anlatımlar Rabbani literatürdeki bilgilerle ve Tevrat çevirileriyle karşılaştırılarak incelemeye tabi tutulmakta, aynı zamanda el-Kirkisânî’yi etkileyen İslami fikirler ortaya koyulmaktadır.

The T&T Clark Handbook of Septuagint Research ed. by William A. Ross and W. Edward Glenny

Reviewed by: The T&T Clark Handbook of Septuagint Research ed. by William A. Ross and W. Edward Glenny Bradley C. Gregory william a. ross and w. edward glenny (eds.), The T&T Clark Handbook of Septuagint Research (London: T&T Clark, 2021). Pp. xxvi + 486. $175. As scholarship on the Septuagint has continued to flourish in recent decades, there has been a need for an up-to-date work that not only introduces the Septuagint itself but introduces the field of Septuagint scholarship. This excellent volume, edited by William A. Ross and W. Edward Glenny, provides just such a status quaestionis and thus serves as the complement to the book-by-book introduction, The T&T Clark Companion to the Septuagint, edited by James A. Aitken (London: T&T Clark, 2015). In the "Introduction," R. orients the reader to the field by giving a brief overview of the history of Septuagint scholarship, noting landmark works, and then discusses the aims of this handbook. Each chapter follows a similar format and is "intended to introduce the reader to key research topics, familiarize the major views and debates, and equip readers to undertake research in that area of Septuagint scholarship themselves" (p. 4). Chapters also discuss important tools and current research questions in the field and conclude with a short, annotated bibliography that serves as an ideal starting point for further reading. Part 1 ("Origins") features two contributions: James K. Aitken, "The Origins and Social Context of the Septuagint"; and Marieke Dhont, "Septuagint Translation Technique and Jewish Hellenistic Exegesis." Part 2 ("Language") contains five essays: Pete Myers, "Septuagint Transcriptions and Phonology"; Patrick Pouchelle, "Septuagint Lexicography"; Christopher J. Fresch, "The Septuagint and Discourse Grammar"; Eberhard Bons, "The Septuagint and Greek Style"; and Myrto Theocharous, "The Septuagint and Biblical Intertextuality." Part 3 ("Text") includes seven essays: José Manuel Cañas Reíllo, "The Septuagint and Textual Criticism of the Greek Versions"; John Screnock, "The Septuagint and Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible"; Gideon R. Kotzé, "The Septuagint and Qumran"; Ville [End Page 527] Mäkipelto, "The Septuagint and the Major Recensions"; Claude Cox, "The Septuagint and the Secondary Versions"; Peter J. Gentry, "The Septuagint and Origen's Hexapla"; and John Meade, "The Septuagint and the Biblical Canon." Part 4 ("Reception") contains six essays: Benjamin G. Wright III, "The Septuagint and Second Temple Judaism"; Steve Moyise, "The Septuagint in the New Testament"; Edmon L. Gallagher, "The Septuagint in Patristic Sources"; Cameron Boyd-Taylor, "The Septuagint in Byzantine Judaism"; Mikhail G. Seleznev, "The Septuagint in the Eastern Orthodox Tradition"; and Scott Mandelbrote, "The Septuagint in Early Modern Europe." Part 5 ("Theology, Translation, and Commentary") includes four essays: Glenny, "The Septuagint and Theology"; Ross, "The Septuagint and Modern Language Translations"; Robert J. V. Hiebert, "The Septuagint: The Text as Produced"; and Stanley E. Porter, "The Septuagint: A Greek-Text Oriented Approach." Part 6 ("Survey of Literature") contains just one essay: Jennifer Brown Jones, "The Septuagint and Contemporary Study." This essay is a nice jumping off point for readers since it presents in an organized way how to find everything from text editions, to tools, to more extensive bibliographies and literature surveys, to electronic databases, and even to professional societies. The editors have also included an extensive glossary of terms found frequently in Septuagint research but which may be unfamiliar to some readers. By keeping the chapters relatively short (ca. 15 pages each), an impressive range of topics is able to be covered, especially for a one-volume work. Moreover, the authors of the essays, all highly regarded in the field, have also done an excellent job of distilling the most important issues and scholarship for the reader. The discussions are therefore crisp and concise without sacrificing depth or nuance. The allotment of a quarter of the volume to issues of reception, along with Meade's chapter on the issue of the biblical canon, is most welcome and will enable scholars in adjacent fields to enter into interdisciplinary dialogue with Septuagint studies. This volume will be particularly useful for graduate students preparing to enter the field as well as scholars who need to get up to speed on a particular area of scholarly discussion. But for anyone...

The naked truth or prophecy as folly? A performative interpretation of Isaiah 20

How does one make sense of a naked prophet who walked the streets of Jerusalem for no less than three years? This contribution interpreted the ambulatory naked prophet in Isaiah 20 as a sign-act by means of symbolic interactionism and performative interpretation according to which symbolic or sign-acts are multivalent entities. Isaiah 20 was interpreted as an embodied, multivalent text that invited ongoing appropriation among subsequent audiences while exploring the potential meaning(s) of the initial act within the parameters of text and context. It is presupposed that human beings reinterpret symbolic acts in different subsequent contexts and that a symbolic act should never be reduced to one single (original!) meaning – this reinterpretation process is illustrated by the Septuagint translation of Isaiah 20. Furthermore, the question will be posed how one could interpret and appropriate a disruptive and ‘foolish’ prophetic and symbolic act of public exposure – Isaiah as an ‘agent provocateur’?Contribution: The performative critique of Isaiah 20 drew attention to the neglected multivalent character of the initial sign-act that enabled ongoing appropriations (‘Fortschreibung’) in new contexts of competing power relations. At first the sign-act was relevant for its pre-exilic audience, then for the post-exilic and even later for a Hellenistic audience by means of the Septuagint version. It also illustrated that text interpretation can be a catalyst that unsettles and disrupts power (within and beyond academic and believing communities), even when it is considered folly.

St. Jerome and the horns of Moses: Do not judge hastily

This article addresses the issue of translation quality and translation errors. The aim of the study is to show that when translating certain types of text, one should be cautious about speaking of “elementary translation errors” because they may be interpretations or dogmatic requirements. Discussed is the widespread view that the horns of Moses in Exodus 34:29-30 and 34:35 in the Vulgate are the result of an “elementary” translation error by St. Jerome who “confused” the Hebrew words keren “horn” and its derivative karan “shining, emitting light.” The author supports the view that this is not a translation error, but a conscious translation decision by Jerome, who was aware of the two possible interpretations of the Hebrew text, but deliberately departed from the Hebrew tradition and the Septuagint translation, choosing the literal translation based on certain theological considerations and personal views.

Historical and legendary features in the Septuagint translation novel

Historical and legendary features in the Septuagint translation novel

The Vocabulary of the Septuagint and Its Hellenistic Background.

The Vocabulary of the Septuagint and Its Hellenistic Background.

THE STYLE OF THE SEPTUAGINT TRANSLATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT AND THE NEW TESTAMENT ) LITERATURE, CRITICISM AND TRANSLATION AXIS)

The Hebrew Torah of the Old Testament, is the first text sacred Known by history. Is the Septuagint translation for the Hebrew text of the oldest and most important translation was adopted by the Bible and the Religious language that borrowed directly to the Christian religion rituals and services. Also it considered later the main base for important translations in the old era , and still even now occupies a role important in the field of monetary, interpretive and historical studies. The original Hebrew contain more than one book, the septuagenarian translation, separated between them and made each book stand on its own. Our research deals with the Historical introduction to the Septuagint translation , The language of the Septuagint translation , The Septuagint Style ,The most important manuscripts of the Septuagint translation.The content and status of the Septuagint to the Jews and Christ, Difference and similarity with the original Hebrew text of the Old Testament in terms of the order , number and names of the books and we Shedding light on the most important translations of the Bible from the beginning of the Septuagint to the present day.

The Septuagint translation as the key to the etymology and identification of precious stones in the Bible

In the ancient world, precious stones (valuable stones and hard substances excluding gold, silver and copper) were distinguished in terms of appearance (beauty, colour), function (durability) and cost (rarity). As a result, there is considerable difficulty in determining how to correlate the inventory of lexical terms referring to precious stones in the ancient Near East with modern mineralogical identifications. In this article, the etymology and identification of precious stones in the Bible are revisited using editorial theory and complexity thinking. The starting point for lexicographical identification is the breastpiece of the high priest (Ex 28:17–20; 39:10–14) with its 12 precious stones and the translation of the Hebrew terms in the Septuagint. In the light of the considerable writings in the Hellenistic world on precious stones, especially Pliny’s Naturalis Historia and Theophrastus’ On Stones , the Septuagint provides the key for the etymology and identification of the precious stones in both the Old Testament and the New Testament. Contribution: The Septuagint translation of the precious stones in the high priest’s breastpiece is the Rosetta Stone for the identification all of the precious stones in the Hebrew Bible and New Testament. The subsequent translations of the terms indicate changes or substitutions of referents and their meanings.

마소라의 지리적 용어와 관련 지명에 대한 칠십인역의 번역 경향

There are many Hebrew toponyms in the Massora Text (MT) that reflect various geographical features. However, when such MT technical terms are rendered into other languages, it is not easy to translate them properly. For instance, the Septuagint (LXX) translators translated 129 technical Hebrew terms into 440 Greek equivalents, which is more than three times the number of Hebrew words in the original MT. This study therefore begins with a question of how 81 Hebrew MT terms (about 63% of the 129 original terms, which the LXX translated into 250 equivalents) reflecting Israel’s topography, water, and arable land were translated into later versions as based on A. Schwarzenbach’s list.<BR> This study further examines the trends and characteristics of the LXX translation. It also reviews the translation issues in modern versions of the Old Testament regarding terms that require geographical understanding, and also seeks the right understanding of the Old Testament for the revision of the Korean Bible.<BR> Geographical MT terms relating to topography, water, and arable land have traces of different names according to landscape, cause of formation, and place of topography. Among the 250 LXX equivalents for the 81 studied Hebrew terms, 80% match the original MT. The LXX translations also revealed stereotype equivalents, such as Har, Nahar, and Ain, and limitations in geographical knowledge, but by expressing the terms in Greek, the LXX enriched the MT’s interpretation and brought dynamics back to living languages.<BR> The LXX translators’ effort to understand the Hebrew terms were better revealed in discordance with the MT terms. Their different readings of the MT and transliteration occurred due to problems with the MT’s interpretation and textual corruption. These problems are not large in 20% of the LXX equivalents, but are also not small in terms of biblical hermeneutics and textual criticism.<BR> There are intentional cases that can be confirmed in examples of LXX transliteration, such as Bama, Nahal, and Araba, which are read or modified as a place name to harmonize with context. Aspects of different reading also vary, and some examples result from freely interpreting the context such as Bama, Ofel, and Gai. In some cases like Madrega, there are limitations of geographical knowledge, and examples that seem to be obvious errors like Ned and Shiha are also found.<BR> Comparing the LXX to modern MT translations, issues with the translations of geographical terms such as Nahal, Ashed (Ashedot), and Mishor still exist. The translations of these terms in the Korean Bible thus need to be reviewed professionally and carefully.

Numénius et la tradition judéo-hellénistique : une relecture du fragment 21 F (13 dP)

Numenius, a Platonic and Pythagorean philosopher of the 1st century, shows himself to be undeniably familiar with the Judeo-Hellenistic tradition. As proof, it is usual to refer to the fragment 21 F (fr. 13 dP) of his dialogue “De Bono.” In this text, it seems that he may have used the same formula as in the Bible, in the Septuagint translation (Ex 3:14a), with which God introduces himself to Moses: ὁ ὤν. Numenius thus apparently designated his first God as the “being par excellence” (τὸ ὄν, τὸ αὐτοόν), just as the Judeo-Hellenistic tradition does, and more specifically Philo of Alexandria, who called God “He who is.” However, the biblical meaning is not present in the sentence from which this formula is taken. This paper argues this point by analyzing the fragment and bringing out the true originality of Numenius which consists in rewriting Timæus (41 c - 42 a; 90 a) and more specifically the Platonic figure of the demiurge. It then appears that the parallel with Philo also cannot be drawn from the function that Numenius attributes in this fragment to his second God, to whom he entrusts the proper function of demiurge. If a connection between the two philosophers is possible, it is to be found above all in their shared appropriation of Plato. Numenius could indeed have encountered Philo and counted him among those Jews who, according to him, shared the master’s teaching (cf. 10 F = fr. 1 dP). Such a reasoning would nevertheless imply that Numenius sometimes summoned him in order to illustrate the correctness of his own interpretations. However, the Christian authors who quote him do not give any direct proof of this, and even if this does not exclude the possibility of an occasional inspiration, in the present state of my research, which will have to be continued, there is no evidence of it, at least not in the fragment 21 F.

The Use of Glossaries by the Translators of the Septuagint

Abstract This article proposes that the Septuagint translators made and used limited Hebrew-Greek glossaries. While these documents are not extant, this proposal explains the perplexing inconsistency of lexemic knowledge in the Septuagint of Samuel, and suggests a possible resolution to the scholarly debate regarding the translators’ use of the Pentateuch as a lexicon. Evidence of bilingual word lists from the ancient Near East and the Greco-Roman world supports the plausibility of the Septuagint translators having such tools as well.

Discovering the Septuagint: A Guided Reader ed. by Karen H. Jobes

Reviewed by: Discovering the Septuagint: A Guided Reader ed. by Karen H. Jobes Larry Perkins karen h. jobes (ed.), Discovering the Septuagint: A Guided Reader (Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2016). Pp. 351. $39.99. As senior editor, Karen H. Jobes has worked with nine former students and teaching assistants to produce a "guided reader" to the Septuagint for individuals who possess "proficiency in New Testament Greek." She has provided a useful tool to assist those interested in the Greek OT to find their initial way into this complex body of Hellenistic Jewish texts. [End Page 521] The contributors provide lexical and grammatical notes, as well as limited explanations where interference from a Hebrew Vorlage may have influenced a translator's choices. Annotated readings include portions of Greek Genesis and Exodus; the complete texts of Ruth, Jonah, and Malachi; selected Psalms; and portions of Hosea and Isaiah. In addition, segments from four of the six additions to Greek Esther are included, the only selections representing compositional Greek materials in the Septuagint. The various commentators note where NT writers incorporated quotations from the texts presented. For each selection the respective translation from A New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS) is provided. Jobes aims to introduce people to the Greek OT as people in the first century C.E. who had no access to the respective Hebrew texts would have encountered and understood it. In this respect the volume engages the Greek OT in its reception history. This is an important feature of the Septuagint's reality, yet individuals using this reader have no easy way to compare the Septuagint translation with a presumed Hebrew Vorlage to evaluate the Septuagint text as produced by the translator. Consequently, they cannot fully appreciate the decisions that the original translators faced in rendering their Hebrew texts. Moreover, it is difficult for readers to appreciate the translation "strategies" adopted by the respective translators. Some comments made regarding significant differences between the presumed Hebrew text and resultant translation lack context because the reader has little sense of the translation technique employed by the original translator. It is probably too much to expect that readers will also have proficiency in Hebrew, but it might be possible to use a modern English translation such as the NRSV, which tends to reflect Hebrew structure, as a means of encouraging readers to make comparisons. Otherwise, this dimension of the Septuagint's reality will not be appreciated. Generally, the volume is well produced, but occasional lapses occur. For example, on p. 152 there is no English translation provided for Esth 1:1s (1:1). The diaeresis is missing for πρόϊμος (Hos 6:3, pp. 219-20). Occasionally a relative clause is referred to as a "phrase" (Jonah 3:2, p. 249). Sometimes one looks for explanation but does not find it. For example, in Jonah 1:16 the sailors fear τὸν κύριον greatly, but nothing is said about why in this case the translator twice uses an article with κύριος, given its absence in v. 14 and 2:1. Perhaps it would be helpful to identify this as an anaphoric usage, given that pagan sailors are responding religiously to Yhwh. Sometimes the observations raise more questions. For example, the commentator at Ps 33:5 explains the choice of paroikiōn (παροικιῶν) as a modification made by the translator "to contextualize the translation for his audience" (p. 189). Perhaps, but the translator may have thought the nominal form was a derivative of the verbal root gûr I in his Hebrew text, referring in some way to living in a foreign country (see LXX Ps 54:15 [55:16]; LXX 118:54 [119:54]). The claim is made in the introduction (p. 11) that "the Septuagint is valuable for sketching the history of the Hebrew text during an era that is much earlier than any extant manuscripts." Given the challenges we have in dating when specific portions of the Hebrew Scriptures were translated, however, it is quite possible that we possess extant Hebrew texts roughly contemporaneous with several of the translations, for example, Isaiah. These are minor issues in an otherwise useful volume. [End Page 522] Larry Perkins 6296 189A Street, Surrey, BC V3S8S3, Canada Copyright © 2019 The...

Book Review: Beyond Barthélemy: Siegfried Kreuzer, The Bible in Greek: Translation, Transmission and Theology of the Septuagint

Book Review: Beyond Barthélemy: Siegfried Kreuzer, <i>The Bible in Greek: Translation, Transmission and Theology of the Septuagint</i>

Does Nature Abhor a Vacuum of Patriarchy?: Missing Fathers in the Films of Whit Stillman

AUTHOR'S PREFACE: Prior to publication, Mr. Whit Stillman was kind enough to read this essay and offer his comments, all of which were incorporated one way or another into the final draft. Nonetheless, the opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Mr. Stillman. HAILED AS THE Poet of the Urban Haute Bourgeoisie and the Jane Austen of indie filmmaker and author Whit Stillman has garnered critical acclaim for works that are rich, beautiful and surprisingly virtuous. (1) Stillman's first film, the low-budget Metropolitan (1990), was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay and also helped to launch the independent film industry as we know it today. Stillman's cinematic comedies of manner are known for their erudite and delightful dialogue, Austenian sensibilities, and gently ironic humor. (2) But one of the most recognizable features of Stillman's first four movies--Metropolitan (1990), Barcelona (1994), Last Days of Disco (1998), and Damsels in Distress (2011)--is not quality that they possess but demographic they lack. (3) Each film depicts young persons who are ill-equipped to face the challenges of becoming happy adults because they are bereft of significant adult guidance. This pattern appears to be especially true where fathers are concerned: while the main characters' mothers sometimes make an appearance (albeit briefly), fathers only appear as usually wistful subjects of conversation. The combination of youthful yearners and missing mentors produces, as one observer puts it, a world reminiscent of the Peanuts cartoon strip, where the adults are practically gone and the young are left on their own. (4) Stillman's movies may be light-hearted, but they have never been called light-headed. We may therefore rightly suspect deeper purpose to this paternal lacuna hidden behind the wit and whimsy of his art. To find out what that purpose might be, I will first trace the concept of as it was originally understood. Second, I will survey the modern backlash against and the more recent backlash against this backlash. Third, I will situate Stillman's earlier films within this historical framework. And fourth, I will speculate about the significance of Stillman's fatherless motif and what it reveals about his work. Patriarchy Properly Understood In contemporary usage, patriarchy designates any form of male headship over family, clan, or society. (5) More specifically, in feminist studies the term has become synonymous with men's systemic oppression of women: this pejorative connotation has also affected the word's meaning outside of academia. (6) Patriarchy, strictly speaking, however, denotes not male rule or misrule in general but specific form of male authority found only in the Judeo-Christian tradition. (7) The word [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is itself biblical neologism, appearing first in the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament in reference to: 1) the heads of the tribes of Israel; 2) the heads of families within tribe of Israel; and 3) Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. (8) In the New Testament, St. Stephen confirms this convention by referring to the sons of Jacob as the twelve patriarchs, and St. Peter, while preaching during the Church's first Pentecost, develops it further by also calling King David patriarch. (9) Later Christian usage expands the patriarchal franchise to include pre-Abrahamic figures such as Adam, Abel, and Noah (the so-called antediluvian patriarchs) and to postbiblical bishops presiding over the chief sees of the early Church--for example, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Constantinople. Today, number of prelates in the Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox churches continue to bear the ecclesiastical title of patriarch. Initially, neither the Greek [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] nor the Latin transliterations patriarcha and patriarches were adopted outside of Jewish and Christian circles. …

Tłumaczenia i interpretacje: "Ja jestem, który jestem" (Wj 3,14a)

God’s enigmatic answer to Moses’ question about his name - hy<h.a, rv,a] hy<h.a,,, usually translated “I am who I am” (Exod 3:14)— has provoked philological analysis for centuries, often coupled with philosophical and theological reflection. In this article there are taken in consideration two questions: the translation and the meaning of this sentence in Christian and Jewish tradition. At the very beginning there are presented the grammatical difficulties linked to the clause ehye asher ehye” (Exod 3:14). There are presented also the most popular proposals for the translations of the sentence. Indeed, the original construction of these words allows translating them in various ways. In the second part of this article there are presented in a syntactical way the interpretations of the words “ehye asher ehye” in Christian and Jewish tradition, which are different. This difference is probably caused by the translation of Septuagint's ἐγώ eἰμι ὁ ὤν (“I AM the existing Being”), which was influenced by Greek philosophy. Christians in the first centuries used to read basically this Greek translation. For this reason their interpretations understood these words usually in a metaphysical way, emphasizing the perfect existence of God. Meanwhile, in the ancient Jewish interpretations (Midrash Rabba, Talmud) there is no one ontological interpretation of the hebrew words hy<h.a, rv,a] hy<h.a,,. The Jews underlined not only the existence of God. They considered these words more as an assurance of the active presence of God among them in order to protect his people.