Re: [lxx] Need a source identified
- Actually, as Tyler Williams notes, you might want to have an "expanded"
interpretation of Rahlfs' fuller note in his Goettingen edition of Psalms:
by "La = MT" [i.e. of MT 31.15/16 in the different numbering] he apparently
means that both of his "old Latin" witnesses (R and G) have something equivalent
to KAIROI, and the Greek can be found in Aquila and Symmachus as well as being
attested by the Syriac (presumably made from the Greek) -- "sic etiam a' s'
on the other hand, KLHROI is in the remaining witnesses (including on the Latin
side Jerome's Gallican Psalter and Augustine -- "etiam GaAug").
Rahlfs then refers to similar ideas in Ps 4.8, Num 16.14 and Judges 21.22 end.
The edition of the Vulgate that I have at hand has "sortes" (fates?) at this
point, which presumably represents KLHROI. I think that the variation is most
easily understood textcritically as going back to the Greek, either to a misread
text (L and A are written similarly), or a misheard one (H and I can be
indistinguishable, and the hearer's expectations/guesses can lead astray),
although it would seem to me easier to get from KLHROI to KAIROI than vice versa
(textcritically, that is).
The Hebrew word used here (ayin tau -- represented by "(T" in the paralell text
does normally mean "time" (part of a day) and is regularly rendered by KAIROS
(see Pss 1.3, 4.8, 9.10, 10.1[9.22], 10.5 [9.26], 21/20.10, 32/31.6, 34/33.2,
37/36.19, 37/36.39, [[not 62/61.9]], 69/68.14, 71/70.9, 81/80.16, 102/101.14,
104/103.27, 105/104.19, 106/105.3, 119/118.20 & 126) but it could be a very
short interpretational step to take it to mean something like "lot" (which also
has a "partitive" sense) or "destiny." It is not impossible that KLHROI was the
older translation and that it was transformed into KAIROI in some Greek
witnesses either intentionally (for Greek editors aware of the Hebrew) or
coincidentally (textcritically speaking, without needing awareness of the
Hebrew). On the other hand, the frequency of Hebrew "(T" rendered as KAIROS in
the Psalms makes it difficult to resist the judgment that KAIROI was original
here, and that was corrupted into KLHROI (probably misread rather than misheard;
KAIROI > KLIROI > KLHROI). Presumably that's how Rahlfs argued (followed by
Pietersma in his NETS translation, without a footnote).
> Robert Kraft wrote:
> > Rahlfs seems to be reconstructing KAIROI from an Old Latin source (his sole
> > witness, as indicated by the dagger [not a plus sign]), while all the other
> > known witnesses have KLHROI (unless there is new evidence since his edition
> > appeared). As you say, it would be helpful to know what "La" witness or
> > witnesses are involved. Confusion of these Greek terms could happen at various
> > levels in transmission/translation.
> Since the symbol list indicates there are separate symbols for Latin,
> Old Latin and Vulgate, does not Latin then mean both Old Latin & Vulgate
> share the same reading?
> (Symbol list provided in my previous post.)
> Tyler Williams wrote:
> > In the apparatus in Psalmi cum Odis Rahlfs's notes that his reading =
> > La (Latin) = MT (Hebrew), so also a' s', while the remaining
> > witnesses have KLHROI. It appears that he preferred the reading that
> > was closer to the Hebrew against most LXX texts (he also provides a
> > cross reference to Ps 4.8, etc.).
> If I remember correctly, most of the Latin Psalter was not revised by
> Jerome to be closer to the Hebrew because the text was too well
> entrenched by his time. If so, then this reading would indicate a
> translation in the Old Latin from a Greek source. Or do you see this as
> a miss reading of the Greek by the Old Latin translator?
> Peter Papoutsis wrote:
> > Thanks Steve:
> > However, both Ralhfs and The AD text cite an actual Greek phrase. Does
> > Rahlfs mean that the Greek text that the Latin used is the only
> > reference for this phrase, and if so, why does he cite it in Greek?
> My understanding is that the use of versional evidence necessarily means
> that Rahlfs is retro translating the version into the Greek behind that
> translation. That would be the Greek cited in for the versional symbol
> in Rahlfs.
> I thought the base text for the Apostoliki Diakonia was Tischendorf. But
> I see that this variant is noted as a sole witness in Latin.
> Tischendorf does have a symbol in Rahlfs too. Is this reading in
> Tischendorf? If not, I wonder why this text is used by Apostoliki Diakonia.
> Steve Puluka
> Masters Student, SS Cyril & Methodius Seminary
> Cantor, Holy Ghost Church, Mckees Rocks PA
> Yahoo! Groups Links
Robert A. Kraft, Religious Studies, University of Pennsylvania
227 Logan Hall (Philadelphia PA 19104-6304); tel. 215 898-5827
- Thank you for your your thoughts, they are most welcomed. Although I solved my citation problem I cannot seem to get a handle on the underlying sources for the two editions (AD & Zoe). I will have to ask around. If I find an answer I will post it immediately, and let you know about it.I quite agree with your statements about the Prophetologion. I have found a wonderful site, though a university, I have to Check the URL to see what University its from, that publishes all the Greek Liturgical text, including the vesper readings which have the LXX readings for the Church. Its this liturgical text, as Published by PHOS that I am also using for my translation.Take care and have a good night.Peter
Peter A. Papoutsis
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour