Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[lxx] Hexapla - evidence for the fifth column being the LXX ?

Expand Messages
  • Schmuel
    Hi LXX folks, Greetings.. Can anyone share what is the scholarly reason for calling the 5th column of the Hexapla the LXX ? Some folks claim otherwise,
    Message 1 of 23 , Aug 17, 2002
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi LXX folks,

      Greetings..

      Can anyone share what is the scholarly reason for calling the 5th column
      of the Hexapla the "LXX" ?

      Some folks claim otherwise, essentially that it was simply a translation of
      Origen's...

      ================================
      http://m2.aol.com/AVBibleTAB/pre/s7.htm
      #f34 Hexapla - A six columned critical work by Adamantius Origen
      (supposedly lived 185-254 A.D.,)

      <snip> 5. Origen's greek interpretation <snip>
      It is Origen's 5th column of the Hexapla that people claim was a
      pre-christian era Greek LXX old testament. There is no manuscript evidence
      for his 5th column further back than 100AD, which was AFTER the completion
      of the new testament. <snip> (The fact that the so-called LXX passed down
      to us contains the new testament, ought to alert you to the fact that
      Origen's Septuagint was written AFTER the new testament was finished. :)

      ===========================
      Additional such reference
      http://childrensbread.org/Books/WhichVersion/chap5p2.htm
      The fifth column (written in classical Greek) supposedly is Origen's
      revision of an older pre A.D. Greek Old Testament translation. Today, this
      5th column is referred to by text critics (though they are loathe to admit
      this) as the "LXX" or the "Septuagint".6 --

      reference is to the ebook at .. (haven't checked the exact wording in Jones
      book yet)

      http://www.floydjones.org/ebooks2.html
      The Septuagint - A Critical Analysis by Floyd Jones

      ===============================================
      What is the earliest citation of this fifth column as the LXX,
      Did Origen actually name the column ?
      Is it called the LXX by textual analysis, or by Early Church Writer
      citation, or some combination ?
      ===============================================

      Thank you....

      ===============================
      Steven Avery
      Bayside, NY

      Schmuel@...

      Messianic_Apologetic-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/
    • Michael Jay
      ... The bishop Africanas wrote a letter to Origen concerning the History of Susanna, questioning the fact that it was unknown in the Hebrew, and
      Message 2 of 23 , Nov 23, 2002
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        > ===============================================
        > What is the earliest citation of this fifth column as the LXX,
        > Did Origen actually name the column ?
        > Is it called the LXX by textual analysis, or by Early Church Writer
        > citation, or some combination ?
        > ==============================================

        The bishop Africanas <sp?> wrote a letter to Origen concerning
        the "History of Susanna," questioning the fact that it was unknown in
        the Hebrew, and suggesting that it was not genuine -- Origen of
        course wrote back, defending this passage as being a genuine part of
        Daniel :-). (even though his textural markings marked it has having
        no equivilant in the current Hebrew scriptures.) These letters
        between Africanas and Origen are the earliest comments I'm aware of
        that speak of Orgin's work.

        Several of the church fathers speak of the OT being marked symbols
        showing either sections in the old seventy however not in the Hebrew,
        and also sections in the Hebrew which though not in the LXX is added
        to the text (sort of like a footnote saying the Hebrew adds...) This
        revision is attributed to Origen, however it is a sign of textural
        analysis, not of translation.

        It is difficult for me to believe that Origen is responsible for the
        translation of the LXX because #1: parts of Daniel, of Job, and of
        Esther did not have a known Hebrew original at the time of Origen.
        #2: The translation style is different in different locations, for
        example, in Genesis the holy name YHWH is Kurios (Lord), in Exodus it
        is rendered On (translated being.) I would imagine that Origen would
        be consistant with the divine name. Also, in Genesis Elohim is often
        rendered Theos, but is sometimes rendered Kurios or Kurios Theos.


        The LXX lacks the consistancy necessary to be the work of a single
        man. Perhaps Origen's editing hand has confounded our present texts
        (explaining the textural differences between manuscripts.) Origen
        marked the parts of the text which were not in Hebrew -- and gave a
        greek rendering (likely borrowed from another text) of Hebrew not in
        the LXX. If Origen translated the work from Hebrew himself, this
        would have been unnecessary.

        Michael Jay
      • Schmuel
        Shalom LXX, Very helpful, Michael, thanks, I was just re-thinking and researching about this Hexapla fifth-column issue today :-)
        Message 3 of 23 , Nov 23, 2002
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Shalom LXX,

          Very helpful, Michael, thanks, I was just re-thinking and researching
          about this Hexapla fifth-column issue today :-)

          http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-04/anf04-50.htm#P7533_1720613
          A Letter to Origen from Africanus About the History of Susanna.
          http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-04/anf04-51.htm
          A Letter from Origen to Africanus.

          The letters show that Origen talks of the LXX, I didn't see
          him say anything about the fifth column being the LXX..
          (although it may be stated somewhere else clearly,
          or a reasonable conclusion)

          Africanus makes some good points, especially the rhyming words,
          and your points on the usage of Elohim, etc are interesting..

          Hopefully, more follow-up shortly

          Shalom,
          Steven Avery
          Bayside, NY

          Schmuel
          > > ===============================================
          > > What is the earliest citation of this fifth column as the LXX,
          > > Did Origen actually name the column ?
          > > Is it called the LXX by textual analysis, or by Early Church Writer
          > > citation, or some combination ?
          > > ==============================================

          Michael Jay
          >The bishop Africanas <sp?> wrote a letter to Origen concerning
          >the "History of Susanna," questioning the fact that it was unknown in
          >the Hebrew, and suggesting that it was not genuine -- Origen of
          >course wrote back, defending this passage as being a genuine part of
          >Daniel :-). (even though his textural markings marked it has having
          >no equivilant in the current Hebrew scriptures.) These letters
          >between Africanas and Origen are the earliest comments I'm aware of
          >that speak of Orgin's work.
          >
          >Several of the church fathers speak of the OT being marked symbols
          >showing either sections in the old seventy however not in the Hebrew,
          >and also sections in the Hebrew which though not in the LXX is added
          >to the text (sort of like a footnote saying the Hebrew adds...) This
          >revision is attributed to Origen, however it is a sign of textural
          >analysis, not of translation.
          >
          >It is difficult for me to believe that Origen is responsible for the
          >translation of the LXX because #1: parts of Daniel, of Job, and of
          >Esther did not have a known Hebrew original at the time of Origen.
          >#2: The translation style is different in different locations, for
          >example, in Genesis the holy name YHWH is Kurios (Lord), in Exodus it
          >is rendered On (translated being.) I would imagine that Origen would
          >be consistant with the divine name. Also, in Genesis Elohim is often
          >rendered Theos, but is sometimes rendered Kurios or Kurios Theos.
          >
          >The LXX lacks the consistancy necessary to be the work of a single
          >man. Perhaps Origen's editing hand has confounded our present texts
          >(explaining the textural differences between manuscripts.) Origen
          >marked the parts of the text which were not in Hebrew -- and gave a
          >greek rendering (likely borrowed from another text) of Hebrew not in
          >the LXX. If Origen translated the work from Hebrew himself, this
          >would have been unnecessary.

          Schmuel@...

          Messianic_Apologetic-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/
        • Michael Jay
          If you can find a physical copy of the Nicene and Ante-Nicene Fathers (which are currently in print,) in volume four there is an article introducing the work
          Message 4 of 23 , Nov 24, 2002
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            If you can find a physical copy of the Nicene and Ante-Nicene Fathers
            (which are currently in print,) in volume four there is an article
            introducing the work of Origen. This little paper speaks of the
            Hexapla text. I am not aware of how they found their source
            material. :-).

            I do not accept that Origen was the creator of the LXX, and that it
            did not exist before he made it (and thus it quotes the New
            Testament), but for absolute proof that the fifth colum of an
            unpublished work which is not extunt is a copy of the seventy, well
            that is asking quite a bit.

            This becomes even more difficult because Origen fell out of favor
            with the Church due to his speculative theology, and anathama's were
            written against several of his views. Because of this we have very
            little (and most of that only in translation) written by a man who
            "wrote more then any one could read." (Jerome in a letter to Rufus.)

            If you find some good information on the Hexapla -- I would be
            interested in knowing about it as well. :)
          • jucci
            Henry Barclay Swete, Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek Edition: 2nd, Cambridge University Press, 1914
            Message 5 of 23 , Nov 24, 2002
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Henry Barclay Swete, Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek
              Edition: 2nd, Cambridge University Press, 1914
              http://rosetta.reltech.org/cgi-bin/Ebind2html/TC/SweteIntro
              http://rosetta.reltech.org/cgi-bin/Ebind2html/TC/SweteIntro?seq=43
              http://rosetta.reltech.org/cgi-bin/Ebind2html/TC/SweteIntro?seq=73

              GILLES DORIVAL, MARGUERITE HARL, OLIVIER MUNNICH
              LA BIBLE GRECQUE DES SEPTANTE, Du judaïsme hellénistique au christianisme
              ancien
              Éditions du Cerf / Éditions du C.N.R.S. 1994
              http://www.tradere.org/biblio/lxx/frame.htm
              Les «Hexaples» et la recension d'Origène
              http://www.tradere.org/biblio/lxx/harl-04.htm#P2166_345016

              http://www.ccel.org/w/wace/biodict/htm/iii.xv.iv.htm


              ELio Jucci

              SETH - Semitica et Theologica
              http://dobc.unipv.it/SETH/index.htm
              http://lettere.unipv.it/SETH/newlinks.htm#Bibbia%20-%20Versione%20Greca%20dei%20Settanta

              "Ex magno amoris incendio tantus uirtutis decor in animo crescit ..."
              (Richard Rolle, Incendium Amoris)
            • Schmuel
              Shalom lxx, Thanks for the other assistance :-) Hope to follow up more on the Hexapla. ===================================================== Could you help us
              Message 6 of 23 , Nov 26, 2002
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Shalom lxx,

                Thanks for the other assistance :-)
                Hope to follow up more on the Hexapla.
                =====================================================

                Could you help us with the LXX version of

                Zechariah 6:12-13 (KJB)
                And speak unto him, saying,
                Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying,
                Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH;
                and he shall grow up out of his place,
                and he shall build the temple of the LORD:
                Even he shall build the temple of the LORD;
                and he shall bear the glory,
                and shall sit and rule upon his throne;
                **and he shall be a priest upon his throne: **
                and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.

                One friend gave me this...
                estau o iereus ek dexion
                he will be priest at his right hand - Rahlf's
                verb estau-fut mid ind 3rd per sing, from eimi.......be, exist; happen,
                take place, live....
                (note: It would appear that the "he" has to be "the man whose name is branch".)

                Would you have the LXX pronoun as "he" and is "he will be priest" the Branch,
                or is it another, or simply ambiguous, as in the Hebrew grammar,
                where people translate more by context or doctrine or feel....

                Much appreciated :-)

                Steven Avery,
                Bayside, NY

                PS.. Is there an English LXX, complete Tanach, online ? (interlinear or
                whatever)

                schmuel@...

                Messianic_Apologetic-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/



                Schmuel@...

                Messianic_Apologetic-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/
              • cimosa
                Greetings from Rome! If you wish you can read my contribution on LXX Zechariah: Observation on the Greek Translation of the Book of Zechariah , in B.A.Taylor
                Message 7 of 23 , Nov 26, 2002
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment

                  Greetings from Rome!

                  If you wish you can read my contribution on LXX Zechariah:
                  "Observation on the Greek Translation of the Book of Zechariah", in B.A.Taylor (ed.) IX Conngress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies (Cambridge, 1995), SCS 45, Scholar Press. Atlanta, Georgia.
                  Besides, you can find in "Bibleworks for Windows" the English LXX, complete Tanach, online of Brenton.
                  Cf. also the web: "Septuagint" of J. D. Kalvesmaki.
                  God bless you,

                  Mario


                  At 01.06 27/11/02 -0500, you wrote:
                  Shalom lxx,

                  Thanks for the other assistance :-)
                  Hope to follow up more on the Hexapla.
                  =====================================================

                  Could you help us with the LXX version of

                  Zechariah 6:12-13 (KJB)
                  And speak unto him, saying,
                  Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying,
                  Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH;
                     and he shall grow up out of his place,
                     and he shall build the temple of the LORD:
                  Even he shall build the temple of the LORD;
                     and he shall bear the glory,
                     and shall sit and rule upon his throne;
                     **and he shall be a priest upon his throne: **
                     and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.

                  One friend gave me this...
                  estau o iereus ek dexion
                  he will be priest at his right hand - Rahlf's
                  verb estau-fut mid ind 3rd per sing, from eimi.......be, exist; happen,
                  take place, live....
                  (note: It would appear that the "he" has to be "the man whose name is branch".)

                  Would you have the LXX pronoun as "he" and is "he will be priest" the Branch,
                  or is it another, or simply ambiguous, as in the Hebrew grammar,
                  where people translate more by context or doctrine or feel....

                  Much appreciated :-)

                  Steven Avery,
                  Bayside, NY

                  PS.. Is there an English LXX, complete Tanach, online ? (interlinear or
                  whatever)

                  schmuel@...

                  Messianic_Apologetic-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/



                  Schmuel@...

                  Messianic_Apologetic-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/


                   

                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

                  Prof. dr. don Mario Cimosa
                  Università Pontificia Salesiana
                  P.za Ateneo Salesiano, 1
                  I - 00139 ROMA
                  --------------------------------------------
                  Tel. diretto: 06-872.90.459
                  Centralino: 06-872.90.1
                  Fax comunità: 06-872.90.222
                  E-mail: cimosa@...
                              mcimosa@...
                  Web: http://giovani.ups.urbe.it/˜cimosa
                  Web: www.unisal.urbe.it

                • George Blaisdell
                  Be not troubling of you the heart... [From the Gospel of John, Chapter 14, verse 1.] ... What would be wrong with: There shall be a priest from his right
                  Message 8 of 23 , Nov 27, 2002
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    "Be not troubling of you the heart..."
                    [From the Gospel of John, Chapter 14, verse 1.]




                    >From: Steve
                    >Could you help us with the LXX version of
                    >Zechariah 6:12-13 (KJB)

                    >And speak unto him, saying,
                    >Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying,
                    >Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH;
                    > and he shall grow up out of his place,
                    > and he shall build the temple of the LORD:
                    >Even he shall build the temple of the LORD;
                    > and he shall bear the glory,
                    > and shall sit and rule upon his throne;
                    > **and he shall be a priest upon his throne: **
                    > and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.
                    >
                    >One friend gave me this...
                    >estau o iereus ek dexion
                    >he will be priest at his right hand - Rahlf's
                    >verb estau-fut mid ind 3rd per sing, from eimi.......be, exist; happen,
                    >take place, live....
                    >(note: It would appear that the "he" has to be "the man whose name is
                    >branch".)
                    >
                    >Would you have the LXX pronoun as "he" and is "he will be priest" the
                    >Branch,
                    >or is it another, or simply ambiguous, as in the Hebrew grammar,
                    >where people translate more by context or doctrine or feel....

                    What would be wrong with:
                    "There shall be a priest from his right hand."

                    Or: "Out of his right hand shall be a priest."

                    Branch would seem to be the possessor of the right hand, and the priest the
                    other party [other than the branch] of the "both"...

                    Just a couple of thoughts...

                    geo

                    _________________________________________________________________
                    Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
                    http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
                  • Philip Engmann
                    Dear Listees, I wish to do a PhD in LXX translation techniques or investigation into differences between the LXX and MT or proto-LXX and proto-MT. I know
                    Message 9 of 23 , Dec 1, 2002
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment

                      Dear Listees,

                      I wish to do a PhD in LXX translation techniques or investigation into differences between the LXX and MT or proto-LXX and proto-MT.

                      I know generally which area I wish to do it in, but are there any more specific suggestions?

                      I am at the tail end of my MPhil Thesis which was a COMPARISON OF SELECTED LXX and MT VERSES where there were differences (between LXX and MT).

                       



                      Do you Yahoo!?
                      Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
                    • kv.baker1
                      Dear Philip, L.C.Allen s work The Greek Chronicles: The Relation of the Septuagint of 1 and 2 Chronicles to the Massoretic Text would provide a very thorough
                      Message 10 of 23 , Dec 1, 2002
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Dear Philip,
                        L.C.Allen's work The Greek Chronicles: The Relation of the Septuagint of 1 and 2 Chronicles to the Massoretic Text would provide a very thorough base for the kind of work that you are proposing. It has often occurred to me that his (excellent) study could do with some updating. No one has developed his thesis since 1974, I think (??).
                        Dr Ken Baker
                        ----- Original Message -----
                        Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 10:04 PM
                        Subject: [lxx] LXX translation techniques or investigation into differences between the LXX and MT or proto-LXX and proto-MT.

                        Dear Listees,

                        I wish to do a PhD in LXX translation techniques or investigation into differences between the LXX and MT or proto-LXX and proto-MT.

                        I know generally which area I wish to do it in, but are there any more specific suggestions?

                        I am at the tail end of my MPhil Thesis which was a COMPARISON OF SELECTED LXX and MT VERSES where there were differences (between LXX and MT).

                         



                        Do you Yahoo!?
                        Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

                        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

                      • Michael Jay
                        This is interesting to me also... My language as a student was Greek -- and I ve started comparing the LXX to the MT in order to learn Hebrew (I ve now made a
                        Message 11 of 23 , Dec 2, 2002
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          This is interesting to me also... My language as a student was
                          Greek -- and I've started comparing the LXX to the MT in order to
                          learn Hebrew (I've now made a translation of almost half of Genesis,
                          with notes on differences and questions of whether the differences
                          were real, or a standard idiom of translation. (such as Enoch
                          pleased God (greek) and Enoch walked with God (hebrew.) I also
                          thought this would be a potential area of Ph.D. work; unfortunately
                          I'm still deep in language study and I've no solid proposal yet.

                          The most remarkable difference that I've found so far is the
                          difference in the years of life and of the birth children in the
                          lists -- both from Adam to Noe/ Noach, and from Noe to Abram. I
                          understand the the Samaritian text is different from both. If the
                          source materials could be found, this would be an interesting project.

                          I think it would be interesting to identify which areas, where the
                          translation to English would be different represent a different
                          textform, and which ones represent the translation of a standard
                          idiom (such as <name> walked with God all his days (hebrew) and
                          <Name> pleased God all his days... (Or even the use of the dual
                          Shamayim (heavens) while the Greek uses the singular Uranus. (heaven)

                          Michael Jay



                          >
                          > I wish to do a PhD in LXX translation techniques or investigation
                          into differences between the LXX and MT or proto-LXX and proto-MT.
                          >
                          > I know generally which area I wish to do it in, but are there any
                          more specific suggestions?
                          >
                          > I am at the tail end of my MPhil Thesis which was a COMPARISON OF
                          SELECTED LXX and MT VERSES where there were differences (between LXX
                          and MT).
                        • Schmuel
                          Shalom LXX Michael Jay ... This is discussed on a number of papers, fairly well represented on the Web.. Now I think the Doorway Papers, by Arthur Custance was
                          Message 12 of 23 , Dec 2, 2002
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Shalom LXX

                            Michael Jay
                            >The most remarkable difference that I've found so far is the
                            >difference in the years of life and of the birth children in the
                            >lists -- both from Adam to Noe/ Noach, and from Noe to Abram. I
                            >understand the the Samaritian text is different from both. If the
                            >source materials could be found, this would be an interesting project.

                            This is discussed on a number of papers, fairly well represented on the Web..

                            Now I think the Doorway Papers, by Arthur Custance was one of the ones
                            that I liked the most... many are on the Web, so it shouldn't be too hard
                            to find...... I could check around for some of the other better
                            discussions, too

                            Shalom,
                            Steven Avery
                            Bayside, NY


                            Schmuel@...

                            Messianic_Apologetic-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/
                          • Michael Jay <jaymichael@hotmail.com>
                            I had read comments on this back a couple hundred years -- I did not find it in the Church Father s, (yet) but I ve not found anything on the web I couldn t
                            Message 13 of 23 , Dec 12, 2002
                            View Source
                            • 0 Attachment
                              I had read comments on this back a couple hundred years -- I did not
                              find it in the Church Father's, (yet) but I've not found anything on
                              the web I couldn't find in Clarke's commentary. (A nice detailed
                              article pointing out what the difference is, and how they accumulate
                              to make for very different dates -- with a table or graph.) I also
                              made one of my own limited to LXX and MT.

                              By source material, I mean the things I would need to use to prepare
                              an ecclectic text, and to argue which reading was most authritative.
                              I only have the MT (both electronic and in print), two different
                              electronic LXX textforms, Brenton's LXX in print, and the Vulgate.

                              I do not know where to find a copy of the Samaritain Torah, a copy of
                              the Syric translation (which I've read was an early Christian
                              translation from the Hebrew) (and I don't read Syric.) I do not know
                              what I would learn from the Dead Sea Scrolls, nor where to find a
                              list of well cited Dead Sea variations, along whith the material I
                              needed to judge the meaning of the fragment numbers.

                              I would like to know what Origen thought of this (I guess that he
                              supported the LXX reading, but it would be nice to know how.)


                              Of course all the source material I speak of would be helpful for the
                              current location of my study (Genesis 20) as well, as there are some
                              textural issues here as well. (forcing me to attempt to translate
                              Greek into Hebrew.)

                              Michael
                            • Schmuel
                              Hi lxx, Michael ... Schmuel I had found a few good articles, I believe Arthur Custance of the Doorway Papers did an excellent one on the Genesis chronologies.
                              Message 14 of 23 , Dec 12, 2002
                              View Source
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Hi lxx,

                                Michael
                                >I've not found anything on the web I couldn't find in Clarke's commentary.
                                >(A nice detailed
                                >article pointing out what the difference is, and how they accumulate
                                >to make for very different dates -- with a table or graph.) I also
                                >made one of my own limited to LXX and MT.

                                Schmuel
                                I had found a few good articles, I believe Arthur Custance of the
                                Doorway Papers did an excellent one on the Genesis chronologies.

                                And Leslie McFall on the textcrit forum may have a paper on this
                                as well, although unpublished :-)

                                Shalom,
                                Schmuel

                                Schmuel@...

                                Messianic_Apologetic-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/
                              • Joel Kalvesmaki
                                Dear all, ... I m sorry if this is more tantalizing than informative, but I recall reading a study (was it in the Harvard Theological Review?), from the 80 s,
                                Message 15 of 23 , Dec 12, 2002
                                View Source
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Dear all,

                                  > I had read comments on this back a couple hundred years -- I did not
                                  > find it in the Church Father's, (yet) but I've not found anything on
                                  > the web I couldn't find in Clarke's commentary. (A nice detailed

                                  I'm sorry if this is more tantalizing than informative, but I recall reading
                                  a study (was it in the Harvard Theological Review?), from the 80's, I think,
                                  presenting a strong case for how the LXX, the MT, and the Samaritan text's
                                  version of the pre-Noahic genealogies depend on each other. Note, all three
                                  versions diverge from each other. If I recall correctly, the author
                                  suggested that no priority should be ascribed to any single text for an
                                  "Ur-genealogy." Each version has reflects a change from the autograph.

                                  I've lost this reference in my files, but I know that I passed it on to
                                  James Miller a couple of years back. Maybe he still has that reference.

                                  Best wishes,

                                  jk
                                  untitledJoel Kalvesmaki 16kalvesmaki@...
                                  http://students.cua.edu/16kalvesmaki/ Graduate Student, Early Christian
                                  Studies Catholic University of America Washington, DC
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.