Year: 2015

Review of the BHS Reader’s Edition

When the opportunity to review the new BHS: A Reader’s Edition came along, I grabbed it. One of the reasons being that I for some reason decided to leave my copy of the Zondervan Reader back in the United States and I have been kicking myself ever since. I have been using the Olivetree Bible Study app on my tablet for reading instead, but I was eager to get my hands on a real book again to study the original languages.

That being said, click here for my full review of the Reader’s Edition, which will eventually be published in BBR.

Of course, a project of this scale should always dissuade a mere reviewer from overly harsh critique. The number of hours required to create the apparatus and indices involved in this volume alone deserves high praise. Furthermore, considering the extent of the information that had to be corralled into a user-friendly format, it should be unsurprising to find the occasional typographical error. These sorts of things detract very little from the overall value of the Reader’s Edition. If you want to keep up your languages, at about $60 this volume is an investment worth making.

A Slight Grumble or Two

Nevertheless, I do have some complaints. As you’ll read about in my review, I find the notation system to be slightly ill-advised. Essentially, whatever words get a footnote and gloss in a given verse are marked with a superscripted letter, starting with ‘a’ in each verse. This basically means that when you hit a word you don’t know, you check the letter tagging it, and then glance at the bottom of the page to get the gloss … the catch being that you also have to know what number verse you are on at the moment.

Of course, if you are absorbed in your reading (as you should be), you have no idea what verse you are on. That means that, for me at least, I usually have to reroute back to the word I don’t know, scan back or forward to find what verse I’m on, then go to the apparatus and try again to find the gloss. This can be a significant distraction and slow down the reading process. Far easier, in my view, to use consecutive numerals for every gloss and start over on each page.

Parsing Headaches

Another slight grumble is the parsing system. At first glance it looks like a new coding language, and personally I was a bit daunted initially. And in fact, it took about a month to get used to it, which does not mean I totally understand it yet (nor do I care to, since I do my own parsing, thank you very much).

Part of my frustration also stems from the fact that apparently some early editions of the Reader’s Edition did not receive their bookmark insert, which contains a handy reference to the whole coded parsing system. Fortunately, there is a remedy. One of the editors, George Athas, has provided it via his website for personal printing. You can also find it by clicking here:

BHS Reader’s Edition Insert

LXX Commentary Series: Part I – Brill

A while back I began a series of posts to overview the major contemporary translation projects of the Septuagint. Thus far I have dealt with the recent English translation, known as NETS (see here). Before moving on to the French translation project, La Bible d’Alexandrie (BdA), however, it makes sense to discuss one of the commentary series that is associated with English projects in the Septuagint. Note that there are two Septuagint commentary series (that I know of), distinguished below.

Septuagint Commentaries

15723755As I have been thinking about preparing a post for BdA, it struck me that I will need to discuss the fact that it is not merely a translation into French, but also a commentary. So when it is time for that post I will most likely make it two parts, one treating the translational approach into French, the other dealing with principles underlying the commentary, although they are of course inseparable.

And if I am going to talk about the commentary in BdA, then I also need to mention the similar efforts in the ongoing in English. So that is what I will start here, to be completed in two parts. For one, there is the  IOSCS Septuagint Commentary Series (SBLCS), which I will treat at a later point, and which is associated with the NETS project and interlinearity as a method. In this post I discuss the Brill Septuagint Commentary series (BSC), which is under the general editorship of (who else?) Stan Porter. The first volume on Joshua came out over a decade ago, and since then a number of other installments have appeared, even though completion is in the remote future.

(As an aside, one of the contributors to the BSC, W. Edward Glenny, will be the subject of one of my future LXX Scholar Interviews)

Brill Commentary Series (BCS) Methodology

One of the major ways in which the BSC differs from the work of BdA and SBLCS is in terms of the text used. As I will discuss in more detail in other posts, BdA employs Rahlfs’s Septuaginta as its base text, while the SBLCS uses critical editions such as Göttingen or the Cambridge Larger Septuagint (for details on which see here). The BSC on the other hand uses one of three main uncial codices – Vaticanus (B), Alexandrinus (A), and Sinaiticus (א). For example, the Genesis commentary is based upon Alexandrinus, as the other two uncials are defective in much of the book.

The rationale here is the aim of BSC to be a “literary commentary” on the Septuagint, which is thus treated – rightly so in many respects – as itself an early commentary on the Hebrew Bible and a source for New Testament study. As such, the LXX represents the reception of the Old Testament in a given community, Jewish or Christian, in the Greco-Roman world.

To this end, the BSC aims to provide “a commentary on the Septuagint in its own right,” and therefore makes reference to the Hebrew text “only when necessary” (Brayford 2007, 25). As far as I can tell, making reference is “necessary” in order to discuss features of the Hebrew that agree with the Greek version to provide coherence, and also to understand occasional differences. While there are points at which the BSC deals with text critical issues, commentators never claim one text tradition is “better” than another. Rather, “the Commentary examines the text as it is and interprets it in its own right from literary, historical, social, and theological points of view” (ibid, 26). One of the primary stated goals of the BSC series in this sense is to determine how that Greek text of the Septuagint functioned in its literary and religious community, although drawing such conclusions is often quite speculative since it is difficult to know the details of a given textual community.

In any case, the BSC approach is motivated by the conviction that it is impossible to discern the intention of the author or translator (not to mention the readers) of the Greek version of the Old Testament, which by contrast is the distinct aim of the SBLCS. Instead of the text-as-produced by the translator, the BSC focuses on the text-as-received by a community, or the Greek version as it could have been read and interpreted, according to a given text tradition. In that way, while presuming for the most part that the Hebrew Vorlage of the Septuagint was a proto-MT, the actual relationship between the Hebrew and Greek versions is not of primary importance, as the BSC is essentially reception historical in its approach.

Others to Come

As mentioned, I will also outline the approach of the other Septuagint commentary series in due course. Doing so, I hope, will provide a useful primer for the uninitiated to the major contours of contemporary LXX scholarship.

____________

Brayford, Susan. Genesis. Septuagint Commentary Series (Leiden: Brill, 2007).

LXX Scholar Interview: Dr. Rob Hiebert

Not too long ago I posted an interview with Dr. Karen Jobes of Wheaton College in honor of International Septuagint Day. Obviously since Karen is such a wonderful person, the post was received very well. With the idea of hearing from active scholars in the field of Septuagint in mind, then, I thought I would carry on with other interviews.

One of the first people I thought of was Dr. Rob Hiebert. He is one of the fellows of The John William Wevers Institute for Septuagint Studies, which operates under the auspices of Trinity Western University just outside Vancouver, B.C. I’ve written about it a bit in this post, and some details about its history are in the interview below. Rob and his colleagues at TWU are also conducting a seminar in Septuagint exegesis this coming May that would be well worth the time (I attended one of these seminars in 2013).

The questions below are the same that I posed to Karen, more or less. If you have any particular questions you’d like to see asked of others in the future (or suggestions for particular scholars you’d like to hear from), then leave me a comment below. These are supposed to be helpful to newcomers!

And now, to hear from Dr. Hiebert.

The Interview

1) Can you describe how you first became interested in LXX studies, and your training in the discipline?

My interest in LXX studies began during my undergrad studies at the University of Toronto. At that time, the U of T had the only PhD program in this field, and it was headed up by John Wevers and Albert Pietersma who were leading specialists in that discipline. I began to see that LXX studies afforded the possibility of becoming equipped to do work that involved both the Hebrew Bible / Old Testament and the New Testament, and that was appealing to me.

2) How have you participated in the discipline over the course of your teaching and writing career? 

Teaching in this discipline began for me when I was still a grad student at U of T, as I had the opportunity to teach undergrad courses in which we read both Greek New Testament and LXX texts. Later, when I joined the faculty at what is now called Tyndale University College in Toronto, I taught some Greek New Testament and LXX courses. Finally, after coming to Trinity Western University (TWU), where I now teach, I came to realize that the presence of four LXX specialists (Larry Perkins, Peter Flint, Dirk Büchner, and myself) represented a wealth of expertise that should be exploited. So we founded the Septuagint Institute, which we renamed the John William Wevers Institute for Septuagint Studies after Prof. Wevers’ family made a generous donation in his memory.

The Wevers Institute took the initiative to advocate for the establishment of a specialization in LXX studies in a number of our graduate degree programs at TWU, and so now our Master of Theology and Master of Theological Studies programs do have such a specialization. In addition, the Master of Arts in Biblical Studies program has seen a number of students write theses in the area of LXX studies. The Wevers Institute has sponsored a number of international conferences and serves as a hub for a number of research initiatives.

The Wevers Institute fellows have been awarded research and conference grants, have produced numerous publications, and continue to be active in a variety of research and publication projects. These include collaboration with an international team of scholars to produce A New English Translation of the Septuagint (Oxford University Press, 2007) also known as NETS, and the forthcoming Society of Biblical Literature Commentary on the Septuagint series also know as SBLCS, for which I serve as co-editor. The four of us were responsible for translating the first four books of the Pentateuch for NETS and have been assigned the task of writing the SBLCS commentary volumes for those same books.

My publications include The “Syrohexaplaric” Psalter (Scholars Press, 1989); The Old Greek Psalter: Studies in Honour of Albert Pietersma (Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), which I co-edited; and “Translation Is Required”: The Septuagint in Retrospect and Prospect (Society of Biblical Literature, 2010), which I edited; as well as numerous book chapters, articles, and reviews. I am also currently preparing the critical edition of Greek IV Maccabees for the Göttingen Septuaginta series.

I should add that in the past few years TWU has established a collaborative agreement with the Green Scholars Initiative that affords TWU scholars and students the opportunity to work with papyri and manuscripts that are part of the Green collection of antiquities. 

3) How have you integrated LXX studies into your work as a seminary professor?

I teach a number of graduate level LXX courses, and I have hired a number of grad students as research assistants to work with me on my research projects. Funding for these hires has come from the research grants that I have been awarded as well as from a budget line at the seminary that allows for such opportunities. One of my research assistants, who has now graduated, collaborated with me to present papers at conferences in various parts of North America and Europe and to publish articles and book chapters. His thesis project grew out of his work with me on my IV Maccabees project. My current research assistant has similar opportunities and is doing the same type of work.

4) How has the field changed since you’ve been involved?

I think the emergence of LXX translation and commentary projects in various languages during the past number of years has opened up many opportunities for study and research. Many younger scholars have also entered into the field of LXX studies in recent years, which bodes well for the future of the discipline.

5) What issues do you focus on in your graduate courses in LXX studies?

I teach courses in “Exploring Septuagint Origins and Texts” and “The Septuagint in Early Jewish and Christian Traditions” as well as various special topics courses that relate to our work on our SBLCS volumes, sometimes in tandem with my Wevers Institute fellows. My colleagues also teach LXX courses. So we focus both on an introduction to the field of LXX studies and on specific textual, translation, and hermeneutical issues. We distinguish carefully between the meaning of the text-as-produced and the text-as-received.

6) For the benefit of graduate students who are potentially interested in LXX studies in doctoral work, what in your opinion are under-worked areas and topics in need of further research?

The production of commentaries on the text-as-produced is one area that will provide probably decades of work for those involved in the SBLCS series. But there will also be many opportunities for those interested in the reception history of the LXX.

8) What current projects in Septuagint are you working on? 

1. The critical edition of Greek IV Maccabees for the Göttingen Septuaginta series.

2. A commentary on Genesis for the SBLCS series.

3. Serving as joint-editor-in-chief of the SBLCS series.

4. A project in collaboration with the Green Scholars Initiative focused on Papyrus Bodmer XXIV, a very important LXX Psalms manuscript that dates to about the fourth century.

9) What is the future of Septuagint studies? 

It is a bright one, with much more work to be done. More academic institutions do, however, need to appreciate the significance of this discipline and to foster its development.

I’m grateful for Rob’s willingness to interact with my questions. Stay tuned for interviews with other LXX scholars in the future!