From: Edgar M. Krentz (emkrentz@mcs.com)
Date: Thu Dec 18 1997 - 17:02:06 EST
> Hi
> After I posted that comment to Andrew about Genesis
> being more "literal" (raw gut feeling) than, say Job,
> I looked it up to check and noticed that the example
> I picked doesn't prove the point very well:
>
> Gen6:2 hUIOI TOU QEOU may well be "literal" in Vaticanus
> (from which I believe Brenton's 1851 text is based?)
> but the footnote says that Alexandrian text (er, and
> I thought Vaticanus was from Alexandria?) says
> AGGELOI TOU QEOU just like Job1:6. Well well...
>
> Is this due to Brenton, or someone, correcting the
> text to fit the Hebrew MT (when perhaps it fitted the
> Samaritan before??)
>
> If anyone has anything interesting to say about a
> textual apparatus for LXX I'd be all ears.
Get to a large theological library and look up (1) the large edition of
Genesis by A. Rahlfs [the prototype for the present Goettingen Septuagint),
(2) the first volume of the Cambridge Septuagint ed. by Brooke, MacLean and
thackeray, and (3) the great edition of Holmes and Parsons, if you can find
it. these are the three LXX editions with more than a minimal apparatus
[ssuch as Rahlfs and Swete present].
*******************************
Edgar Krentz
Professor of New Testament
Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
1100 East 55th Street
Chicago, IL 60615
e-mail: office: ekrentz@lstc.edu
home: emkrentz@mcs.com
Tel: 0ff.: 773-256-0752; home 773-947-8105
********************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:39 EDT