Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Brian Roberts <formoria AT carolina.rr.com>]

George,

Yes I was referring to the "Letter of Aristeas". I thought that was 
understood, considering the source. Refuted on what grounds?

Brian


On Sunday, June 6, 2004, at 11:30  AM, George F. Somsel wrote:

> I don't know what Book XII, Chapter II, Section 'X' you are referring 
> to,
> but this sounds very much like the "Letter of Aristeas."  This letter 
> has
> been categorically refuted as regards any historical accuracy.  I would
> not recommend reliance on it.  There are other (modern) works in which
> scholars who have studied the LXX draw some conclusions regarding its
> translation.  A good place to begin would be _Textual Criticism of the
> Hebrew Bible_ by Emanuel Tov.  He also deals with the proto-Masoretic 
> and
> proto-Samaritan texts.
>
> gfsomsel
> _________
>
> On Sun, 6 Jun 2004 09:57:15 -0400 Brian Roberts
> <formoria AT carolina.rr.com> writes:
> > Dear Listmembers,
> >
> > Thank you for your help with my previous questions. I have another,
> >
> > related line of thought to present to you for consideration and
> > comments.
> >
> > The Book of the Acts of Solomon (as well as other “lost books”) was
> >
> > translated into Greek and kept in the Alexandria Library beginning
> > in
> > the reign of Ptolemy I Philadelphus, during the translation of the
> > LXX.
> > To state unequivocally that this record was preserved requires one
> > of
> > two pieces of evidence:
> >
> > a Extant physical manuscript or similar haghiographical evidence
> > that
> > fits the biblical description of “the book of the Acts of Solomon”;
> > b Undeniable evidence of the existence of this text, based on either
> > the
> > comments and/or actions of others in proceeding years.
> >
> > The only reliable method by which these records could have been
> > preserved was through the canonization of the Hebrew Bible.  That
> > process was a two-fold one:
> > 1.  Oral traditions were preserved among the Hebrews, describing
> > events
> > from their earliest history , were passed from  father to son, from
> >
> > mother to daughter, as a sign of their heritage, for centuries;
> > 2.  While the Israelites dutifully maintained records on the
> > activities
> > of their kings, royal families, and religious leaders, there was not
> >
> > much attention given the knowledge they possessed as a people.  The
> >
> > Babylonian Captivity changed all that.  In 587 BCE, the nobility,
> > priests, and wealthy among Israelite society were shuffled off in
> > multitudes to Babylon for what would be 70 years of slavery.
> > With the realization that they could lose their identity in
> > Babylonia
> > came a new desire to prevent that loss at all costs.  The Israelite
> >
> > scholars were spurred into action.  “History was written, poetry was
> >
> > collected, and the words of the great prophets were arranged and
> > preserved” (Tullock 5).
> > The process of canonization had begun.  Of course, it took many
> > years
> > for all of the available books and manuscripts to be collected, and
> > it
> > is obvious that the source material used, including the “Book of the
> >
> > Acts of Solomon” was being preserved during the Exilic Period.
> > After
> > much effort and time, there was finally composed a rudimentary
> > Hebrew
> > Bible.
> > After the Israelite citizens were allowed to return to their
> > homeland,
> > released by a sympathetic Persian monarch, they took their sacred
> > writings with them.  It is actually superfluous to mention the
> > extreme
> > care that they took in preserving these manuscripts.  It is a
> > historical
> > fact that many texts survived the Exile, or else there would be no
> > Hebrew Bible today. There are multitudinous references by the
> > biblical
> > redactors to other sources in addition to the “Book of the Acts of
> > Solomon”, eg., “The Book of the Kings of Judah”. The offhand manner
> > in
> > which these sources are cited suggest in the strongest manner that
> > they
> > were still available to be read in some form during the 6th
> > century.
> >
> > The Septuagint in Alexandria
> >
> > During the intervening years, from 515 BCE to the late third century
> >
> > BCE, there was obviously some work done at reorganizing the material
> > in
> > the Hebrew Canon, but it wasn’t until 275 BCE that the first attempt
> > was
> > made at translating the scriptures; that task was performed at the
> > library in Alexandria, Egypt.  The Alexandria Library was the
> > penultimate learning center on the African continent, indeed in the
> >
> > whole Greek empire. Josephus records a significant event in the
> > process
> > of the library’s expansion which took place around 275 BCE:
> >
> > The occasion was this: -Demetrius Phalerius, who was library-keeper
> > to
> > the king, was now endeavoring, if it were possible, to gather
> > together
> > all the books that were in the habitable earth, and buying
> > whatsoever
> > was anywhere valuable, or agreeable to the king’s inclination...and
> > when
> > Ptolemy asked him how many ten thousands of books he had collected,
> > he
> > replied, that he had already about twenty times ten thousand; but
> > that,
> > in a little time, he should have fifty times ten thousand.  But he
> > said
> > he had been informed that there were many books of laws among the
> > Jews
> > worthy of inquiring after, and worthy of the king’s library...
> > (Book
> > XII, Chapter II, Section 1).
> >
> > It was this occasion and interest that prompted the Librarian to
> > write a
> > letter to Ptolemy, which expressed his own desire to acquire the
> > Jewish
> > books (Book XII, Chapter II, section 4).  After corresponding with
> > other
> > scholars, Demetrius discovered that many of the Jewish writings were
> >
> > written in Hebrew, not Greek, and were considered by the Jews to be
> >
> > “Holy Law”; so, the librarian suggested that the king, Ptolemy,
> > “...mayest write to the high priest of the Jews, to send six of the
> >
> > elders out of every tribe, and those such as are most skillful of
> > the
> > laws, that by their means we may learn the clear and agreeing sense
> > of
> > those books...”  (Book XII, Chapter II, section 4).
> >
> > This series of narratives obviously describes the events which
> > preceded
> > the translation of the LXX.  The relevance here is clear:
> > Everything,
> > as far as religious texts, was there in Alexandria - the laws and
> > prophetic writings - all came, en masse and uncontested, from
> > Israel.
> > That is an historical fact, and requires no hypothesizing at all.
> > From
> > these facts, it becomes simple and logical to conclude that the
> > manuscript referred to as “the Book of the Acts of Solomon” in II
> > Kings
> > 11:41 was also conveyed to Egypt.  In fact, it is to be expected, as
> >
> > Greek interest in foreign manuscripts, especially the writings from
> >
> > Israel, was not an idle one, as the king himself, Ptolemy
> > Philadelphus,
> > actively supported both this action and the library’s continued
> > expansion.  The Hebrew texts remained in Egypt for a period of
> > years,
> > long enough to be copied, translated, and studied by Greek scholars;
> >
> > then, they were returned home, along with the 70 translators. That
> > such
> > a large number of unfiltered, unedited manuscripts were removed to
> > Alexandria shows up clearly in  the Alexandrian canon, where we find
> > the
> > dozen-plus extra books not included in the MT. This is good evidence
> >
> > that the MT we have is a later version, prepared after additional
> > canonical considerations were made.
> >
> > Any input?
> >
> > Brian Roberts
> > _______________________________________________
> > b-hebrew mailing list
> > b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
> Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
> Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!