The Jewish Quarterly Review, NS 61 (1970) 167-171 -- Review by Robert A. Kraft of The Septuagint and Modern Study, by SIDNEY JELLICOE. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968. Pp. ixx + 424. 65/-. A WEALTH OF VALUABLE INFORMATION is presented in this contribution to the revival of "Septuagintal" studies by the Dean of Bishop's University (Lennoxville, Quebec) who is also a founding father of and the editor for the new "International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies" (see New Testament Studies 16, 1969/70, 384-96). Jellicoe does not presume to replace or to revise the standard Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek published at the beginning of this century by H. B. Swete (1900, 1902; supplemented reprint by R. R. Ottley, 1914), but attempts to provide a selective treatment of "the principal features of Septuagintal studies since the time of Swete, to offers one contribution towards the solution of current problems, and to indicate those lines along which...future studies might be expected profitable to proceed" (vi). Understandably, there is considerable overlapping with Swete's treatment especially in such basic matters as description of manuscripts and discussion of the versions based on Jewish Greek scriptures and of the so-called "revisions" and "recensions" identified with Aquila, Lucian, and others. But Jellicoe updates the discussion in a manner that moves far beyond anything available elsewhere under a single cover. This breadth of content is itself more than ample justification for recommending the book to students and scholars, even though this reviewer has serious reservations about certain aspects of its form (organization, cohesion). The primary strength of the book lies more with its descriptive summaries of the work of others -- including some critical comments (usually at a relatively general level) -- rather than with detailed analyses of basic problems or with the presentation of a flood of exciting new ideas. It is not always clear that the author has himself worked through the specific details of a given issue to his own satisfaction, and thus his own viewpoint is not always obvious. Not that the book is devoid of new, or at least relatively unfamiliar ideas -- e.g. Jellicoe suggests that ancient references to ho Symmachos might refer to a version of anonymous authorship used by an Ebionite sect of that name (compare ho Syros or ho HebraiosPart I begins with a lengthy chapter on the Letter of Aristeas (which is a special interest of the author -- he has written on it elsewhere), followed by a discussion of certain modern theories of "Septuagintal" origins (Kahle, M. Gaster, Thackeray, Tychsen-Wutz) and three chapters on "revisions" (Aquila, Theodotion, Symmachus) and "recensions" (Origen and the Hexapla, Hesychius, Lucian). Part 2 offers descriptions of "Septagugint" manuscripts and fragments (uncials and papyri at some length, cursives rather briefly) and of other ancient versions of Jewish scriptures (rather brief, including Samaritan Pentateuch), then a survey of modern editions and text-critical studies for each scriptural book or section. The final two chapters deal briefly with "Language and Style" (translation technique, relation of the Greek scriptures to the Masoretic text, grammar and lexicography) and with "The Current Situation" and future prospects. Two useful appendices listing and correlating the manuscripts and sigla employed in the Cambridge and Go%ttingen editions follow (pp. 360-369), then a thirty page bibliography arranged topically and covering literature from ca. 1900-1965/66 (unfortunately, it does not necessarily repeat relevant material mentioned in the body of the book), and finally, relatively complete indices of subjects, modern authors, biblical and other ancient sources, and Greek and Semitic words. There is no real discussion of such topics (see Swete) as ancient quotations from Jewish Greek scriptures, nor of the problems of canon and order of books in the preserved witnesses. From the viewpoint of this reviewer, the discussion of translation technique also is lamentably restricted (pp. 314-318), given the purposes of the book and the important contributions by Thackeray, Barthe(/)lemy, S. Daniel, and others. The ways in which the material is distributed (organized) within these chapters and sections is not always helpful, and is sometimes quite distracting. Some topics for which a unified treatment in one place, to which cross-reference could be made as necessary, would seem preferable are dealt with in various forms in different portions [Page 169] of the book: e.g. modern editions and textual classifications are discussed partly in the introductory chapter, partly in the long section on manuscripts, and partly in the chapter on modern editions and text-critical studies of each biblical book. Thus Ziegler's work on Jeremiah (see also his Isaiah) is described on pp. 18-21 (general overview and specific studies), 219 (manuscript groupings in section on cursives; not noted in index under "Jeremiah"), and 300 f. (manuscript groupings repeated in section on Jeremiah, with a cross reference to pp. 19-21). The general problem of Theodotion and the text of Daniel comes up in slightly different forms (with overlap) on pp. 86 ff. (section on Theodotion) and again on p. 232 (on the Chester Beatty papyrus of Daniel). The possible value of even a late cursive manuscript for text-critical purposes is emphasized by different means on pp. 175, 215 ff., 243, and 342. The relationship of Josephus to the so-called Lucianic text is discussed on pp. 286-290 (concerning Samuel- Kings) rather than on pp. 157 ff., where the Lucianic recension is treated in some detail. Ziegler's Alexandrian group of manuscripts for the minor prophets is listed in detail on p. 234 n. 4(discussing the Freer-Washington papyrus) rather than on p. 299 where it belongs. Sometimes, relatively extensive footnote material is repeated unnecessarily -- e.g. p. 61 n. 4 = p. 343 n. 4 (on supporters of Kahle's position); p. 84 n. 2 = p. 126 n. 5 (on the old Greek of Daniel; cf. p. 231); p. 107 n. 2 = p. 230 n. 4 (on Melito's Paschal Homily, the study of which has been furthered by the publication of the Bodmer papyrus in 1960, which is not noted). In short, the organization seems to be rather haphazard and the material not always fully digested before presentation --as a final example, note the oft repeated (cf. pp. 161, 169, 290, 346) but never critically evaluated (even on p. 238, where the payrus is described as such) claim that one of the oldest extant Greek payrus fragments of Jewish scriptures (P. Ryl. 458 to Deuteronomy = LXX 957) has significant "Lucianic" affinities, despite the recognition elsewhere (pp. 166, 276) of current pessimism about the possibility of isolating any "Lucianic" group of manuscripts in the book of Deuteronomy! Judicious use of the indices can, of course, help alleviate such problems -- but this does not make the volume any less frustrating to read, at times. As would be expected, various criticisms or corrections also are possible at the level of pedantic detail. Jellicoe's inconsistent practice of usually referring to W. P. M. Walter, "better known to scholarship as Peter Katz" (p. 338), by the former rather than the latter name may prove distressing to beginners since the notes and bibliography normally list "Katz" (without explanation) -- in fact, the mystery is not really resolved until p. 338 (see also 20 n. I and 287) and in the index, where the entry for "Walters" reads "see Katz"! The Barthe(/)lemy scroll [Page 170] of the minor prophets is incorrectly described as "Qumra(^)n" material (pp. 93, 312, 358, 388 -- it actually came from Nahal Hever), and Barthe(/)lemy's contributions to the study of Samuel-Kings are not even noted in the latter connection. There are some distressing typographical and similar errors, although considering the demanding contents of the book, they are relatively few: e.g. the dates given on p. 117 (at n. 3) are incompatible; p. 211 n. 3 is somewhat confused and confusing (see pp. 365 and 367 for omitted sigla); the statistics on pp. 223f. cannot be correct; p. 238 line 19 should read 958 not 957; p. 363 to manuscript 108 add the siglum "a" in Esther; p. 364 to manuscript 370 add reference to Esther. Nor is it difficult to suggest additional bibliographic references in such a broad field -- I limit myself to only two of somewhat general significance: on p. 375 of the bibliography, under "Grammar", the important volume on Semitische Syntax im Neuen Testament (I. I, 1962, 19682) by K. Beyer deserves mention, as does A. H. R. E. Paap's supplement (1959) to Traube's work on Nomina Sacra mentioned on p. 377. But despite such suggested additions, the bibliographical value of the book alone will be worth its price to many users. It would indeed be amazing if, with a volume of this nature and scope, a reviewer did not also find some points of substance at which to react with some degree of skepticism. They exist. For example, despite Jellicoe's carefulness in dealing with "Septuagint" origins and early developments, I sometimes felt very uncomfortable about what seemed to be an overly simplistic approach to questions such as the relationship between textual developments, canonical consciousness (at the level of a recognized and unified collection, "under one cover" so to speak), and what was or was not possible prior to the development of largescale codices in the late third and subsequent centuries (see pp. 89-93, 123, 316, 341, 352-354; despite the caution implied in statements on pp. 93, 119 f., 315). Or again, the idea that perhaps the main reason why "official Jewry" (?) came to "abandon" or correct the older "official" (?) Greek translation was because of Christian (mis-)use of those writings (cf. pp. 74-76; also 44,46) is to me very unconvincing as such; possibly much more important were the inner Jewish developments with regard to the Semitic text and to Pharasaic hegemony (see p. 76). And whether there is any point in attempting to speak about a "Septuagint" Vorlage (cf. e.g. pp. 61f., 343f., 359) at any more extensive level than the origin of individual books or units (see quite rightly p. 315) seems to me to be quite questionable -- in which case the whole Lagarde-Kahle "debate" as carried out in some quarters might well dissolve by being shifted from the realm of broad generalizations to specific, more controllable data! [Page 171}] But such hesitations, whether large or small, should not be allowed to obscure the general carefulness with which Jellicoe approaches this difficult subject area and presents the various pertinent opinions and options. Although to my way of thinking it is a book that would have profited from considerable "tightening up" before it was released, it is still the most comprehensive general work to appear on these subjects in recent decades, and should prove useful for many years as a companion volume to Swete (and/or others) in introducing students to the larger field of Septuagintal and cognate studies, as well as providing a ready reference tool for those already engaged in such work. University of Pennsylvania ROBERT A. KRAFT [[end]]