New Test. Stud. 16 (1969/70), 384-396
(1) The creation in 1968 of the "International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies" (= IOSCS), and
(2) The establishment of a continuing seminar group on ‘The Greek NT and the Septuagint' at the 1969 meeting of SNTS [Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas].
other aspects and related developments on the continent and in
THE CREATION OF THE IOSCS
In December of
mimeographed letter was circulated by Dean Sidney Jellicoe of
University (Lennoxville, Quebec, Canada) 'to all who are known to be engaged in LXX and
cognate studies' proposing
that ‘some means of coordination and communication between
in this general area was sorely needed,' and requesting
information (present projects
and interests, suggestions
for future work, bibliography) from each recipient of the
Jellicoe promised in return to collect
and circulate the results, and invited further suggestions. He had already
received encouragement through
discussions with various interested parties at the 1967 annual
meetings of SOTS
(at York) and SNTS (at Gwatt), as well as through other
and the fact that he had recently sent to the publisher a
manuscript for a book
entitled The Septuagint
and Modern Study
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968)
placed him in an excellent position for initiating and
\1/ Dr. Jellicoe's letter made reference to the comments by B. J. Roberts in a review in JTS 18 (1967), 184.
The results of this inquiry were
mimeographed form in June 1968 as Bulletin
1 of the 'Coordination Project for Septuagintal and
[] Cognate Studies.’\2/
The responses of 29 scholars were summarized,
and Dean Jellicoe commented briefly on the need for (1) as complete a bibliography as possible for LXX
subjects, and (2) an
lexicon covering this material.
Subsequently, the decision to publish A Septuagint Bibliography compiled by Dean
Jellicoe, Sebastian P.
\2/ This material has been reprinted,
with a few very
minor changes and with an appended list of corrigenda and
addenda, in IOSCS Bulletin
2, pp. 12-16 (see below;
correct also the last line on p. 12 to read 1964, not 1960). Requests for Bulletin 2 should be addressed to Professor Charles T. Fritsch.
\3/ IOSCS Bulletin 2, P. I5. Although this announcement states that the bibliography will appear in the series Studies and Documents, that is not a firm commitment, and other possibilities also are under consideration. The ALGHJ series (below, n. 11) has expressed interest. [It appeared there, as A Classified Bibliography of the Septuagint (Arbeiten zur Literatur und Geschichte des hellenistischen Judentums, 6), Leiden, Brill, 1973]
August of 1968, Dean Jellicoe met with C. T.
Fritsch and Harry M. Orlinsky (Hebrew Union College-Jewish
\4/ This material is taken from a mimeographed letter dated to September 1968, and circulated from the office of Harry M. Orlinksy as acting president of the convening committee. C. T. Fritsch assumed the duties of secretary, and Dean Jellicoe continued as editor at this organizational stage.
In 1969, the executive committee met
twice (5 June in
\5/ A list of the papers presented in
Among the other recommendations made by the IOSCS executive committee in 1969 were (1) to investigate the possibility of arranging future meetings in conjunction with international congresses in which members of IOSCS would be participating; (2) to designate the University of Toronto and Princeton Theological Seminary as official centres for Septuagint and Cognate Studies in North America, where complete catalogues and other pertinent materials could be available for scholarly research (as also at Göttingen); (3) to continue serious discussion concerning the possibilities of producing a Septuagint-oriented lexicon (see below); and (4) to pledge 'full co-operation with kindred societies and organizations,’ especially the pseudepigrapha project proposed, with the encouragement of the SBL Committee on Research and Publications and under the chairmanship of Dean Walter Harrelson (Vanderbilt Divinity School), at the 1969 Toronto meeting of SBL.\6/
From the minutes of the IOSCS executive committee meeting of 5
June 1969. The
initial proposal circulated by Professor Harrelson calls for
of critical editions of the major ‘pseudepigraphs' and for 'an
edition of English translations of the works, with brief
notes.' At the
organizational meeting of
interested scholars on 17 November in
the invitation of the SNTS Committee, Dean Jellicoe organized
and chaired a
Seminar group on the above topic for the 1969 annual meeting at
\7/Taken from a mimeographed letter dated June 1969, which Dean Jellicoe circulated to those who had expressed interest in participating in the seminar. This letter also included some examples of possible topics for consideration e.g. (i) OT citations in the NT [which might be expanded with profit to include quotations in other early Christian literature as well]; (2) LXX daughter versions; (3) textual history of MSS that contain both LXX and NT; (4) LXX ‘Western’ text outside of the Psalter; and (5) the Greek OT 'recensions.'
[] The seminar met during three mornings (12 - 14 August), with an average of ten participants present each session.' Although Dr Hill was not able to attend, copies of the paper he prepared were made available to each member of the seminar. In the paper he summarized the arguments of his monograph, which was primarily concerned with (1) showing that James Barr had overstated the case in his book The Semantics of Biblical Language  when he criticizes a 'word'-centered (rather than concept- or sentence-centered), etymologically oriented approach to language which tends to make a rather sharp contrast between 'Hebraic' and 'hellenistic' ways of thought; and (2) offering a new study of the background of five soteriologically oriented word groups in the NT (ιλασκομαι, λύτρον, δικαιοσύνη, ζωη, and πνεῦμα). Hill concludes that 'the meaning of theological words in the NT bears the impress of a special Hebraic influence; they have overtones of meaning, and extra content, which comes to them out of the biblical tradition and is related especially to the language of the LXX, the locus of that extension or change of meaning which is due to their Hebrew background.’
Hill then discusses three areas in which his positions have been criticized and/or questioned by philologically oriented reviewers (especially Barr): (1) The nature of NT and LXX Greek was, as Hill is inclined to believe, 'a special Greek, with a pronounced Semitic cast, used and understood in religious circles and finding literary expression in the LXX, i.e. a "Jewish Greek," a vernacular Jews' Greek, perhaps still current among Jews in NT times'? (2) What is 'the relation of the LXX to the Hebrew original'? Were special Semitic nuances recognized by the translators and, as it were, taken over by them into the meaning of the Greek word they chose as a rendering, as Hill sometimes suggests? (3) Is 'the LXX' really the main channel through which 'Hebraic meanings' made their impact on NT Greek, as Hill claimed? Unfortunately, the seminar never did find sufficient opportunity to discuss these detailed issues at length as a group, although individual members expressed their appreciation for the paper and made appropriate general comments to that end. Hopefully, future sessions of the seminar can return to the important problems raised by Hill, Barr, and others.\8/
\8/ The regular participants were
(chairman), Matthew Black (St. Andrews), Barnabas Lindars
(Cambridge), Bruce M.
Metzger (Princeton Seminary), Peter Pajor (Göttingen), K. H.
J.R.Richards (Bishop of St David's, Walm), Allen Wikgren
(Chicago; he could not
be present for the final session), and the author, who agreed
to serve as
recording secretary. In
Margaret Thrall (
Speaking for myself, I would encourage Dr Hill and others interested in these problem areas to consider whether the use of such simplistic terminology as 'the biblical tradition,' 'the language of the LXX,’ 'the Hebrew of the OT,’ 'a special Greek,’ 'the LXX translation,’ and the like serves any helpful purpose in discussion of such complicated (linguistically, conceptually, chronologically geographically, and historically) issues. What may be true for one term or idea may not apply to another. What is true for the old Greek Pentateuch ('LXX' properly speaking) may not be so for Greek renderings of Psalms or Isaiah, or Daniel; or for the approach represented by an Aquila or a Theodotion -- to say nothing of the varieties of outlook already present in the Hebrew Vorlage [Vorlagen?!], and so on. Contemporary scholarship can ill afford to be imprecise at this basic level! Nor should we neglect to re-examine the basic suppositions inherited from past generations.
[] Several oral reports were
presented at the
seminar meetings. Dean
about the formation of the IOSCS (see above) and introduced
the subject which
was to occupy much of the seminar's discussion, the proposal
that a 'LXX
lexicon' project be inaugurated.
Professor Rengstorf gave a detailed report on relevant
aspects of the
work at the Münster Institute, particularly its projects
dealing with Josephus
and Philo,\9/ and Professor H. Moehring (
\9/ For details, see below. Additional information about the current work of the Institute is conveniently available in the 'Arbeitsbericht für das Jahr 1968/69,' which Professor Rengstorf made available to interested parties. See also the IOSCS Bulletin 2, p. 10 (under Rengstorf).
I. Josephus, Philo and Jewish hellenistic literature in general
Various projects dealing with various aspects of Jewish hellenistic literature are currently under way, and are producing or hope to produce a variety of basic tools for working in this area. The first installment of a concordance to Josephus appeared early in 1969, by Abraham Schalit of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem,\10/ and Professor Rengstorf reported that the volume covering A-D was already in proof (over 400 pages; [it appeared in 1973]) while the material for E-K was almost ready to go to press [it appeared in 1975]. A closely related project also supported by the Delitzsch Institute is Heinz Schreckenberg's analytical bibliography to Josephus, which appeared in 1968 as the first volume in a new series on the literature and history of hellenistic Judaism.\11/ Schreckenberg also is at work on a new critical edition of Josephus; meanwhile, however, the editions by B. Niese (major and minor) and the Loeb Classical Library edition by Thackeray and Marcus (with A. Wikgren and L. H. Feldman) have been used in preparing the Münster concordance.\12/
\10/ A Compete Cconcordance to Flavius Josephus edited by Karl Heinrich Rengstorf, Supplement I: Namenwörterbuch zu Flavius Josephus, by A. Schalit (Leiden: Brill, 1968). Pp. xvi + 143.
\11/ Arbeiten zur
Literatur und Geschichte des Hellenistichen Judentums (= ALGHJ), edited by K. H. Rengstorf in
conjunction with J. Daniélou,
G. Delling (Halle), H. R. Moehring, B. Noack (Copenhagen), H.
M. Orlinsky, H.
\12/ B. Niese, editio
maior (with full critical apparatus) in 6 volumes
(Berlin, 1887-9); editio
minor (revised text but no
apparatus) in 6 volumes (Berlin, 1885-95).
[] Older lexicographical work on Josephus includes (1) the incomplete word list begun by A. Schlatter in connection with his work for Kittel's Theological Dictionary of the NT, a list available to Rengstorf but found to be 'in poor condition,' and (2) the incomplete lexicon to Josephus begun by Thackeray (at first as a private tool; fascicle 1 appeared in 1930) and taken over by Ralph Marcus (fasc. 2-4, 1934-55) and then by Horst Moehring. Some air of mystery seemed to surround the latter project, which in published form presently extends only to the letter E. Professor Rengstorf was under the impression that the Thackeray lexicon had been abandoned,\13/ and proposed that it be completed and supplemented at the Delitzsch Institute. When Professor Moehring was invited to report on this matter, however, he affirmed that work on the lexicon was continuing and that Professor Salo Baron recently had been instrumental in securing a small grant to this end (as he had helped secure a more sizeable grant years ago when Marcus took over).\14/ This discussion resulted in a pledge of co-operation from the Münster Institute in helping to complete the Thackeray-Marcus lexicon; the problem of methodology (e.g. Thackeray's inadequate theories concerning various redactors)\n/ was mentioned briefly in this connection.
\13/ This may have been due partly to the suggestion made by L. H. Fcldman that the lexicon would no longer be needed in view of the concordance proposed by the Münster Institute; see Fcldman's critical bibliography titled Scholarship on Philo and Josephus (1937-62), Which appeared originally in sections in the Classical World, 54-55 (1960-2), and then separately in 1963.
\14/ Moehring referred to unpublished philological investigations by R.J. H. Shutt, which werc not included in his Studies in Josephus (London: SPCK 1961) – see p. 116 in Thackeray's lexicon. It was mentioned in this connection that the Deutsche Bibliothek is starting a centre for listing competent but unpublished materials on various subjects (e.g. papers read at conferences but never published).
-- Professor Rengstorf also referred in passing to the investigations by Guttmann on the relationship of Josephus to midrashic traditions (Josephus sometimes seems to have used a Greek targum similar to that reflected in the Old Latin version), and to his own work on the testimonium Flavianum. He also lamented how little real first-hand knowledge of Josephus has been presented in the scholarly world over the years (exceptions include Eisler and Schlatter), and noted how much influence Schürer's treatment had exerted.
on Philo also is being undertaken at the Delitzsch Institute. The second volume of
Series (ALGHJ) deals
cosmological outlook, especially as reflected in his
interpretation of Genesis.\15/
A third volume, Philo's use of the categories Male and Female,
by Richard Baer
\15/ Ursula Früchtel, Die kosmologischen Vorstellungen bei Philo von Alexandrien: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Genesisexegese, ALGHJ 2 (1968). Pp. x+ 198+ 11 diagrams.
work on Jewish hellenistic literature is by no means limited
to Philo and Josephus.\16/
The bibliographical handbook for the work of
the Corpus Judaeo-Hellenisticum, edited by G. Delling of
Halle, has just made its
appearance,\17/ and extensive work on the so-called Greek
pseudepigrapha of the
OT is being carried out under the direction of Albert-Marie
Denis (Louvain) and
M. de Jonge (Leiden).\18/ The latter project was partly
inspired by the Qumran
finds, which accentuated the need for more adequate texts and
pre-Rabbinic Jewish literature.\18/
extensive textual problems for much of this literature
preparation of definitive editions; instead, preliminary
encouraged and the new series entitled 'Pseudepigrapha Veteris
was launched in 1964 with de Jonge's edition of an important
MS of the
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.\19/ Volume 2 (1967)
editions of the Testament of Job (by S. P. Brock) and of the
Greek Apocalypse of
Baruch (by J.-C. Picard).
reported that the third volume was in the press, containing
the Greek fragments
of 1 Enoch (ed.
M. Black) and
the various quotations from Jewish Greek literature preserved
in the Christian
fathers, etc. (ed. Denis). Also in the press
were Père Denis'
introductory volume to the Greek Jewish materials,\20/ as well
as a partial
complete concordance is
on cards at
\16/ Perhaps this is the place to allude in passing to the French conference on Philo held in Lyons on 11-15 September 1966; the papers were published in 1967 by the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique under the title Philon d'Alexandrie. Professor Rengstorf also mentioned that a new German edition of Philo is under way at Zürich; a new French edition under the direction of C. Mondesert is noted in IOSCS Bulletin 2, p. 10 (under Rengstorf), cf. also p. 11 (under Daniel).
zur jüdisch-hellenistichen and intertestamentalarischen
edited by G. Delling, TU
(1969) pp. 240ff.
Delling's part in the work of the Corpus Hellenisticum
is outlined in
his article in ZNW 54
(1963), 1-15. Other
centres for this project are at
\18/ For detailed background information see the published reports by Denis in Novum Testamentum 6 (1963), 310-19, 7 (1965), 319–28, and 10 (1968), 313-18 and above, p. 348 ff.
\19/ Testamenta XII Patriarcharum, edited according to Cambridge University Library MS Ff I.24 fol. 204a -262b, with apparatus critticus, by M. de Jonge (Leiden: Brill, 1964). Pp. xviii + 86.
\20/ Introduction aux Pseudépigraphes grecs d’Ancien Testament, Studia in VT Pseudepigrapha I (Leiden: Brill, 1970). Pp. xxvii +343.
\21/ Among relevant related projects
known to this
author are: (i) preperation of a 'new Kautzsch’ for the
by C. Burchard (Gottingen); (2) a new English translation of
under the direction of H. F. D. Sparks (
2. Greek Jewish scriptural material in general
[] At the SNTS seminar several questions were raised concerning the present status of various projects relating directly to the study of Greek Jewish scriptures. What ever became of the materials from the 'Larger Cambridgc Septuagint' project? Apparently T. W. Manson (died in 1958) was in charge of them after the deaths of the original editors,\22/ but sporadic attempts by participants of the seminar to determine their present location have been unsuccessful. They do not seem to be at Manchester, nor are they among the Manson materials entrusted to M. Black, nor is A. J. B. Higgins (Leeds) aware of their whereabouts; it was suggested that they may be somewhere in Cambridge.
\22/ Brooke died in 1939,
as noted in the last fascicle
to appear in the
Considerably more information was available about the relevant material left by the late W. P. M. Walters (Peter Katz), who died in 1962. At least part of it is stored in boxes at the Oriental Language Library at Cambridge.\23/ It was further reported that the Göttingen Septuagint project was continuing actively under the leadership of Robert Hanhart, and that a revision of Rahlfs' Verzeichnis der griechischen Handschriften des Alten Testaments (1914) was in progress. Dr. Wevers of Toronto is at work on an edition of Genesis for this series (he is also scheduled to edit Exodus and Leviticus), and Donald W. Gooding of Belfast is preparing Numbers and Deuteronomy.\24/ Professor Wikgren noted that some work on LXX lectionaries is under way at Chicago, and Professor Metzger wondered whether the occurrence of 'Septuagintal' quotations in inscriptions might not provide some clues to localizing certain textual types, or tracing their influence. The presence of a wealth of material for LXX and related study in the old four-volume work by Konstantinos Oikonomos in modern Greek also was mentioned,\25/ as was the work presently being done by K. Weitzmann at Princeton on the history of art in LXX MSS.
\23/ Professor Winton Thomas at
\24/ See IOSCS Bulletin 2, pp. 6, 13 (Gooding), and 15 (Wevers). The Bulletin contains a wealth of material on these and other projects in progress.
\25/ Περί των Ο [Εβδομήκοντα] Ερμηνευτών της Παλαιάς Θείας Γραφής [Concerning the 70 Translators of the Ancient Divine Scripture] I-IV (Athens, 1844-9). Princeton Seminary Library has a copy [and it is freely available online].
to which the SNTS seminar returned again and again was the
possibility of a
Greek lexicon that would include Septuagintal and related
material in a
systematic and comprehensive way.\26/ The
question already had been raised in connection with the
of the IOSCS (see above), and specific proposals were
submitted by Dr Lorman
Petersen (on behalf of the Committee for Research of the
Missouri Synod) to a meeting of the executive committee of
IOSCS at New York on
5 June 1969. Subsequently,
executive committee also discussed the matter at length in
their meetings at
\26/ Professor Metzger mentioned a recent Czech lexicon to the Greek NT, edited by J. B. Souček, which includes material from LXX.
The Petersen proposals include a general discussion of objectives and of finances, and raise the problem of whether such a long-range project is really feasible at the present time. It is probable that the necessary funds could be obtained if a scholarly and ecumenically based sponsoring group or groups (such as IOSCS, SNTS, SBL, etc.) were able to organize and coordinate such an endeavor. But would this sort of project be justified in terms of the necessary time, effort, and finances; or indeed, are satisfactory personnel available in sufficient numbers for the task? What would be the scope of the lexicon? What would be the best way to approach the task? What sort of preliminary work would be necessary in order to produce a definitive, comprehensive lexicon, and what work has already been done? In what follows, I shall attempt to summarize and synthesize the comments and suggestions made at the SNTS and various IOSCS meetings relating to these subjects.
Support, Sponsorship. Interest in such an undertaking is by no means new. It has been a century and a half since J. F. Schleusner produced his Septuagint oriented lexicon, and generations of scholars have struggled with the Jewish Greek materials in various connections and with varying degrees of success over the years. The concordance by Hatch and Redpath was a long step in the direction of a lexicon, but also served to warn the careful user how difficult such an undertaking would be. At one point, Oxford University Press raised the question of such a project, but nothing seems to have come of this. Various individuals have collected materials for such a lexicon -- notably H. S. Gehman and his students at Princeton Seminary.\27/ Most recently, G. B. Caird at Oxford has pointed up the need for a 'Lexicon of the Septuagint' [] and has attempted to illustrate methods of procedure by discussing some 127 entries from Liddell-Scott-Jones (9th edition, 1940) in which LXX evidence is misused.\28/ It is clear from their publications that a number of other scholars have relevant lexicographical interests and/or materials to offer -- see e.g. the IOSCS Bulletin 2, passim. Whether all would agree on matters of methodology and presentation of the evidence is quite another question.
\27/ See Gehman.,
'Adventures in Septuagint Lexicography,'
Textus 5 (1966),
p. 125 and the bibliographical note there) -- this article
deals with some 24
words or expressions, divided into two categories: (1)
'literalisms' in which
the Greek preserves 'a clear Hebrew usage,' and (2) cases in
which the Greek
reflects 'an extension of meaning or semantic development by assimilating to the
meaning of the Hebrew
sometimes leaves a false impression by being extremely
selective and overly
mechanical at points, and failing to note varying translation
the preserved Greek materials.
\28/ Caird, 'Towards a Lexicon of the Septuagint,' JTS 19 (1968), 453-75, and 20 (1969), 21-40. A few of the problems noted by Caird have been rectified in the 1968 supplement to Liddell-Scott-Jones (edited by E. A. Barber); see Caird, p. 475.
Scope of the lexicon. Ultimately, of course, what is desirable is a unified lexicon of Greek as used in all extant sources of whatever type -- a comprehensive Greek lexicon in the Liddell-Scott-Jones tradition. But what is the most desirable and/or practical way of supplementing and correcting that tradition from the Jewish side? We do not yet seem to be in a position to produce a comprehensive lexicon of Jewish Greek -- that is, of Greek as spoken and written by Jews in the ancient world, in so far as that can be ascertained -- much less of Jewish and early Christian Greek. The lexicon to Josephus (see above) is a long step in this direction; a similar lexicon to Philo is needed, and to the other extant literary remains of Jewish (and early Christian) materials composed originally in Greek.\29/
\29/ The problems of definition aid scope are acute even at this stage, since it would be difficult to make any useful distinction between sources of strictly 'Jewish' origin and certain 'Jewish' oriented Christian materials (e.g. reworked texts of various sorts; and does not Paul qualify as 'Jewish'?).
From a theologically defined point of
view, one might
consider the possibility of producing at this stage a lexicon
Greek,' which would isolate a more manageable sub-section of
the Jewish and
early Christian material.
philological or historical defensibility of including only
is open to dispute, even as a first step.
A more limited undertaking, which also seems more
would be a lexicon of Jewish translation Greek (apart from the
Josephus). Roughly speaking, this would coincide with the
suggestion of a
'Septuagint lexicon,' although the problem of exactly which
documents (or, in
works like Daniel or Esther, which passages) are translations
and which were
composed in Greek requires some attention -- e.g. Wisdom of
there are some
translation documents that are not normally included in Greek
-- e.g. parts of the Testaments of the Patriarchs, 1 Enoch,
Lives of the
Prophets, Paralipomena Jeremiou, etc.\30/ Such a lexicon
could, of course, limit
itself to materials for which a Semitic text is still extant,
and thus avoid
the problem of making decisions in these fringe areas.
\30/ For an attempt to classify preserved Jewish literature according to language of composition see R. H. Pfeiffer, A History of NT Times with an Introduction to the Apocrypha (New York: Harper's, 1949). The writings of Josephus (or at least his Jewish War) are also relevant here. A further problem is the difficulty of dealing with some of the 'non-Greek' phenomena encountered in such 'translation Greek' especially when no systematic analysis of grammar and syntax is available (see below, n. 34).
[] But even within the materials that are clearly translational in character, a variety of techniques appear which must be taken into account in such a lexicographical project. There is no homogeneity in the translation Greek of Jewish Greek scriptures as they have been collected and transmitted to us. The Greek usages in the Pentateuch (LXX proper) differ quite markedly from what is found in, for example, Psalms or Isaiah. Furthermore, it is clear that different translation techniques sometimes appear within the extant texts of certain books like Samuel-Kings or Ezekiel, while for some books or passages more than one translation tradition has been preserved (e.g. Judges, parts of Samuel-Kings, Habakkuk 3, Tobit), even apart from the question of Theodotion, Aquila, Symmachus, etc. To what extent should a 'Septuagint lexicon' include this variety of material? How could it avoid being comprehensive at this point, and still justify its existence as a scholarly tool, I would ask? One alternative would seem to be to select smaller units in which a roughly homogeneous translation can be isolated (like the Pentateuch, or the Minor Prophets, or Isaiah) and prepare separate lexica for each of them; but the synthesizing of the data from such individual lexica into a comprehensive lexicon of translation Greek ultimately should reflect all the known evidence, including the variety of techniques referred to above. And in the process our knowledge of the textual and translational situation in each part of these materials will be greatly enriched.'
Possible Approaches. 'The problem of 'scope' flows over naturally into questions about what would be the most efficient and helpful manner by which to approach the materials. Several suggestions were discussed:
unit-by-unit approach mentioned in
the preceding paragraph, where a fairly homogeneous section
for which an
adequate critical text is available (or an adequate crtical
provide the basic material for analysis.\31/
At a larger level, a lexicon to
(2) A more or less topical approach, whereby various groups of related words would be assigned to various workers, on the basis of content or some similar criterion -- as, e.g., the recent study of cultic terminology by Suzanne Daniel,\33/ or the materials in Kittel's 'theological' dictionary.
\31/ See e.g. Caird, p. 453: 'It is now ... coming to be recognized that textual problems can rarely be settled without appeal to internal evidence; and for the LXX this includes a wide knowledge of the usage of the various translators who produced it. The need for a sound dictionary of the LXX is therefore greater than ever today.'
\32/ The recent Index to Aquila by Joseph Reider, completed and revised by Nigel Turner (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 12; Leiden: Brill, 1966; online in 2016), provides a useful beginning for such an enterprise. See also the work of D. Barthélemy on the so-called 'kaige' recension in his Devanciers d'Aquila (Supplements to Vetus Testamtentum 10; 1963), and the related efforts of Frank M. Gross and his students listed in IOSCS Bulletin 2, pp. 12 f (Cross), and especially p. 10 (O'Connell).
\33/ Recherches sur le vocabulaire du culte dans la Septante. Études et Commenttaires 61 (Paris, 1966); see also her continuing work noted in IOSCS Bulletin 2, p. 11, and her paper at the 1969 Toronto meeting of IOSCS, which will be noted in Bulletin 3.
(3) [] An alphabetic approach, in which the material is assigned to various contributors according to the alphabetic sequence of words in Greek. The listings in Hatch and Redpath could serve as the basis of such an approach, or the material in available dictionaries like Schleusner or Liddell-Scott-Jones could be corrected and supplemented (see above, nn. 26-28).
It was also suggested that
an inquiry should be made
into the procedures employed in compiling the new Patristic Lexicon (ed. G.
H. Lampe, 1961). The
'Septuagintal' grammar also was raised for its obvious
relevance to questions
of lexicography. Thackeray's
grammatical lines seems to have been abandoned.\34/ Finally,
the question of the
possible usefulness of computer facilities for the
lexicographical project was
posed, with specific mention of the preliminary investigations
by Mr. Kent Smith
at Princeton\35/ and of the Tübingen computer centre which
already is being consulted
in connection with various projects associated with religious
\34/ A Grammar
of the OT in Greek according to the Septuagint, vol. I :
Introduction, Orthography and Accidence (Cambridge:
University Press, 1909). According
to IOSCS Bulletin 2, p. 10, Dr R. A. Martin is interested
in pursuing this
works on various aspects
of LXX grammar are listed by Jellicoe, Septuagint
and Modem Study, pp. 375 f. (note especially R. Helbing
and M. Johannessohn),
to which should be added the important work of Klaus Beyer, Semitische Syntax im NT
I; Satzlehre I, Studien zur Umwelt des NTs I (G6ttingen:
Ruprecht, 1962, 1968\2)
\35/ See IOSCS Bulletin 3 for a summary of his paper at the Toronto IOSCS meeting in 1969:
Kent L. Smith, "Data Processing the Bible: A Consideration of the Potential. Use of the
Computer in Biblical Studies."
In the light of the above discussions, several recommendations were made with the general consent of the SNTS seminar participants, who also requested that the seminar be continued in 1970:
(1) It was recommended that the possibility of an institute for Septuagint and Cognate Study, with a director, staff, and funding, be investigated and encouraged.
(2) The need for lexicographical and grammatical work relating to Jewish Greek was strongly affirmed, and it was recommended that the project be initiated in as practical a manner as possible. To this end, the following steps were suggested:
(a) Some sample probes into researching and composing lexicographical entries for particular words should be prepared for presentation at the 1970 SNTS meeting. The author agreed to attempt this.
(b) Information should be gathered from individuals who are or have been engaged in related lexicographical activities e.g. Nigel Turner, G. B. Caird, [] G.W. H. Lampe, H. S. Gehman. Dean Jellicoe and the author agreed to pursue this matter.\36/
(c) Collaborators should be sought who would be willing to begin systematic lexical work with one of the Göttingen volumes of the prophets -- perhaps the Minor Prophets, or Jeremiah, or Ezekiel.
To these should be added the following related recommendation made by the IOSCS executive committee:
(3) A preliminary grammar and dictionary for the Greek Pentateuch should be encouraged as a start towards the larger project, and also some grammatical and lexicographical probes into the Greek of Aquila's version.\37/
\37/ The IOSCS executive committee meetings in Toronto in 1969 provided an additional item of interest for discussion: in preparing his doctoral dissertation entitled An Analysis of the Lexicographic Resources used by American Biblical Scholars Today (Toronto, under the direction of H. A. Gleason), Edward Gates circulated questionnaires to gather information. His mimeographed report to those who answered the questionnaire, dated November 1969, notes that a new Septuagint lexicon was among the tools desired by several respondents, and that there were some complaints about the 'lack of indication of the Hebrew background of Greek words' in the Bauer-Arndt-Gingrich lexicon.
[[proofed and lightly edited/supplemented from a rough computer scan, 19ja2016 by RAK]]