Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-rkxrd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-22T04:31:17.206Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Original Language of Pseudo-Philo's Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2011

Daniel J. Harrington
Daniel J. Harrington
Affiliation:
Weston College, Cambridge, Mass. 02138
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

For all practical purposes, the lengthy and comprehensive essay of Leopold Cohn published in 1898 introduced Pseudo-Philo's Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum to modern scholars. To demonstrate that the existing Latin text was a translation from the Greek, Cohn listed individual words presumably transliterated from the Greek (metra, holocaustomata, epomis, cataracte, eremus, etc.), noted that many biblical names were written according to their Greek forms (Abel, Enoc, Noe, Jesus, etc.), and pointed out a few LXX readings implying, as he thought, the use of the Greek Bible. However, on the basis of other names, the frequent use of et to join sentences, as well as the occurrence of idioms as et factum est, responderunt dicentes, etc., Cohn concluded that the work must have been originally written in Hebrew. While these considerations may have some indicative force, they do not really prove the point at issue. It is imperative, therefore, that we uncover more decisive proofs for determining the languages in which LAB has been transmitted.

Type
Research Article
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 63 , Issue 4 , October 1970 , pp. 503 - 514
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Cohn, Leopold, An Apocryphal Work Ascribed to Philo of Alexandria, Jewish Quarterly Review (Old Series) 10 (1898), 277–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Pseudo-Philo's Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum is hereafter cited as LAB. The text is cited as it stands in the edition of Kisch, Guido, Pseudo-Philo's Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum, Publications in Mediaeval Studies, X (Notre Dame, 1949)Google Scholar, except where our own collation of manuscripts has led us to adopt another reading. I would like to acknowledge with profound gratitude the encouragement and direction given me in my work on LAB by Professor John Strugnell of Harvard University.

2 Cohn, ibid., 327. See also Delcor, M., Philon (Pseudo), in Supplement au dictionnaire de la Bible, VII (Paris, 1966), 1368.Google Scholar The following schema is based on Rönsch, Hermann, Itala und Vulgata (Leipzig, 1869), 471ft.Google Scholar, and Plater, W. E. and White, H. J., A Grammar of the Vulgate (Oxford, 1926), 41ffGoogle Scholar.

3 See Cohn, ibid., 327–31. See also Meershoek, G. Q. A., Le latin biblique d'après saint Jérôme. Aspects linguistiques de la rencontre entre la Bible et le monde classique, Latinitas Christianorum primaeva, XX (Utrecht, 1966).Google Scholar While our remarks on the Latinity of LAB are general but sufficient for our purposes here, a thorough analysis of this subject remains as one of the most necessary tasks yet to be undertaken on this work.

4 The method of determining a Semitic original underlying Greek or other texts has often been discussed in connection with the New Testament. For a survey of research, see Black, Matthew, An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts, 3rd edition (Oxford, 1967).Google Scholar Also of import here is Mottlton, J. H. and Howard, W. F., A Grammar of New Testament Greek, II (Edinburgh, 1920), 411–85.Google Scholar Recently P. Bogaert has surveyed the evidence for a Hebrew original of 2 Baruch (Syriac) with the conclusion that the arguments advanced so far are not decisive; see his Apocalypse syriaque de Baruch, I, Sources chrétiennes, 144 (Paris, 1969), 353–80Google Scholar.

5 James, M. R., The Biblical Antiquities of Philo, Translations of Early Documents, I: Palestinian Jewish Texts (London, 1917), 248.Google Scholar For the interchange of δ and θ, see Thackeray, Henry St. John, A Grammar of the Old Testament in Greek according to the Septuagint, I (Cambridge, 1909), 103–05Google Scholar.

6 Blass, F., Debrunner, A., Funk, R. W., A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago, 1961), 38Google Scholar.

7 A suggestion of D. Hillers in Strugnell, John, More Psalms of “David,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 27 (1965), 210.Google Scholar

8 , James, op. cit., 269–71.Google Scholar It would be indeed useful to analyze the affinities of the Greek translator of LAB with reference to the known translation tendencies of the LXX and its various revisers.

9 See Souter, A., A Glossary of Later Latin to 600 A.D. (Oxford, 1949)Google Scholar; Blaise, A., Dictionnaire latin-français des auteurs chrétiens (Strasbourg, 1954)Google Scholar; Cange, D. Du, Glossarium ad scriptores mediae et infimae Latinitatis (Paris, 1733-1736)Google Scholar.

10 Sartatti, G., Semantics of Mishnaic Hebrew and Interpretation of the Bible by the Tanna'im, Lešoněnu 30 (1965), 35–36.Google Scholar

11 Reider, Joseph, An Index to Aquila, revised by Nigel Turner. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum, 12. (Leiden 1966), 182Google Scholar.

12 Ginzberg, Louis, The Legends of the Jews, VI (Philadelphia, 1916), 103Google Scholar.

13 Ibid., 248.

14 Ibid., 252.

15 See Beyer, Klaus, Semitische Syntax im Neuen Testament. Studien zur Umwelt des NT, I (Göttingen, 1962).Google Scholar

16 Artapanus in , Eusebius'Preparatio Evangelica, 9.18.2Google Scholar.