DANIEL ?

,13 A N D THE SECTUAGINT

The Text

The Septuagint presents us with s©me important variants in their

reading o f Dan., 7 , 3 ‫ ل‬. Until reeently this LXX-version was known
from one manuseript only: ms 88 and from the Syrohexaplar. For-
tunately the discovery and publication o f the ‘Kölner’ fragments o f
ms 967 offer us now one more important witness o f the same text*.
When j. Ziegler published his edition o f the Septuagint o f Daniel
in the ‘Göttinger’ series, he could not yet refer to this manuscript,
at least not with regard to the verse we consider here*. According
to j. Ziegler the L X X read as follow s: εθεωρουν εν όραμα™ της
νυκτος και ιδου επι των νεφελώ ν του ουρανου ως υιος ανθρώπου
ηρχετο, και εως παλαιού ήμερων παρην, και οι παρεστηκοτες προ-
σ η γα γον αυτόν. j. Ziegler basically follows ms 88, however not
without some important corrections. He reads εως παλαιού for ως
παλαιός and π ροσ ηγα γον αυτόν for παρησαν αυτω. For the sake o f
clarity we give here the unaltered text o f the LXX as it can be found
in A. Rahlfs edition o f the Septuagint3 : ως υιος ανθρώπου ηρχετο,
και ως παλαιός ήμερων παρην, και οι παρεστηκοτες παρησαν αυτω.
j. Ziegler’s first correction is based on patrological evidence only:
J u s t i n u s , Dial. Tryph., 31,2-7: εως του παλαιού τω ν‫ ؛‬T e r t u l l i a n u s ,
Adv. M arc., 3,7 = Adv. Jud. 14, CvRRiANUS, Test. 2,24 and Con-
sultationes Zacchaei et Apollonii (ed. M o r i n ) : εως παλαιού. In this,
j. Ziegler was inspired by J.A . M o n t g o m e r y , The Book o f Daniel,
ICC, Edinburgh, 1927, p. 304 and ID , Anent Dr. Rendel H arris’s
‘Testimonies', in the Expositor, 22 (1921), 214-217, where he states:
« . . . t h e εως was changed into ως, with the resulting change o f the
following genitive to the nominative. Hence the (erroneous) trans­

1. A. G e i s s e n , Der Septuaginta-T ext des Buches Daniel, Kap. 5-12, zusammen m it

Suzanna, Bel et D ra co : sow ie Esther, Kap. l,la -2 ,1 5 nach dem Kölner Teil des Papyrus
967, Bonn, 1968, p. 18. See further ٧ . H a m m , D er Septuaginta T ext des Buches
Daniel 1-2, Bonn, 1969 and ID , D er Septuaginta T ext des Buches D aniel 3-4, Bonn,
1977. Cf. R. R o c a P u ig, Daniel. D os ‫ةام‬/‫اا«ﺀﺀ‬ del codex 967. Papir de Barcelona,
Barcelona, 1974: Dan., 7, 25- 2838 -34 ,32-11,29 ;7-8,4 ‫ن‬.
2. j. Z i e g l e r , Susanna - D a n iel-B el et Draco, in G öttinger Septuaginta, 16,2, G öt-
tingen, 1954. The fragments o f ms 967 already edited at that time by P .G . K e n y o n ,
The Chester B eatty Biblical Papyri. Fasc. 7, L ondon, 1937, had a lacune from 7,11
Κ[£ρας to 7,14 της γη ς; F .F . B r u c e , The O ldest Greek Version o f Daniel, in
Instruction and Interpretation, in O T S, 30, Leiden 1977, 23-40 also refers to F. G.
K en yon ’s edition only.
3. Stuttgart, 1935.
 DANIEL ?,13 AND THE SEETUAGINT 63

formation o f a $on o f man into the Aneient o f Days. ... with the
Christian Apocalypse citing from Daniel (Ap. 1,14) and expressing
the very marrow o f this error, we must suppose that the apocalyptist
read our error in his Septuagint text».
The so-called ‘erroneous’ reading o f the LXX is now however
supported and confirmed by ms 967 which is one o f the earliest
manuscripts o f the Septuagint we possess*. If ‘error’ it be, then it
may well have been introduced on purpose by the translator himself.
It is not to be ‘corrected’ in an edition o f the text o f the LXX.
The patrological witnesses adduced by L Ziegler do not have much
weight. Justin, Tertullian and Cyprian appear to have quoted from the
same mixed version o f LX X and Theodotion*. Therefore, a ^٠ €٨ ‫־‬
struction o f foe original text o f foe LX X on the basis o f their
quotations is impossible in m ost cases.
For his second correction j. Ziegler seeks support in a marginal
reading o f foe Syrohexaplaric text^. Reconverted into Creek this
marginal note is supposed to read: προσηγα γον α υ τό ν ٦. This attempt
to retranslate the Syriac into the original Creek at least is risky.
The Syriac verb qrb is intransitive in the peal foim which seems
to be used here (part. act. plur. : qrbjn hww). c. Bugatus appears
to be more correct in his Latin translation: appropinquabant. Moreover
it should be noticed that the Syriac marginal readings® in the codex
Ambrosianus are not intended to correct foe text, but rather to interpret
i t 9. This means that they do not offer too much help to foe exegete
who seeks to reconstruct the original Greek text. The patrological
witnesses referred to by j. Ziegler are the same as foe ones called
upon for his first correction. Again we should call to mind that
probably all ٠٢ them quote from foe same mixed text, which here
corresponds to the so-called Theodotionic version as preserved in A
( ‫ ﺀ‬0 ‫ ﻤ ﺢ‬Alexandrinus)
‫ﻣ‬ and in 584; 26.

4. The ms is pr©bably fr©m the sec©nd eentury A .D . See A. G e i s s e n , Der S ept.-T ext
des Buches Daniel 5-12 ٠ p. 18.
5. F. C. B u r k i t t , The O ld Latin and the Itala, Gambridge, 1896, p. 28; A. B l u d a u ,
Die Alexandrinische Übersetzung des Buches Daniel, in Bibl. Stud., 11, 2/3, Freibu!‫־‬g-
im ‫־‬B 1‫־‬eisgau, 1897, p. 16vv.
6. Codex Syro-hexaplaris Ambrosianus photolithographice editus, in Monumento sacra
et profana, 7, ed. A .M . G e r i a n i , Milan©, 1874; Daniel, ex codice syro-estranghelo
bibliothecae Am brosianae, ed. c . B u g a t u s , Milan©, 1788.
7. S e e j . Z i e g l e r , op. cit., p. 170; F . F i e l d , Originis Hexaplarum quae supersunt,
O x f© rd , 1875, t© m . 2, p. 922, m e n ti© n s th e m a r g in a l r e a d in g b u t d© es n©t try t©
r e tr a n s la te it int© G r e e k ; c. B u g a t u s , op. cit., p. 73 tr a n s la t e s : appropinquabant.
8. There are G reek marginal n©tes as well in te same e©dex. They render the
©riginal Greek text ©f the LXX.
9. This is m©st clear in the n©te t© 6,13. W e give here c . Bugatus’ Latin translati©n:
non admireris pers©nam, id est, n©n sis pers©narum accept©r.
 ‫آلﻣﺂورلم؛‬

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may priut, dow nload, or send artieles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international eopyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your resp ective ATT,AS subscriber agreem ent.

No eontent may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)’ express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS eollection with permission
from the eopyright holder(s). The eopyright holder for an entire issue ٥ ۴ ajourna!
typieally is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, tbe author o fth e article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use ‫ آس‬covered by the fair use provisions o f tbe copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright hoider(s), please refer to the copyright iaformatioa in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initia‫ ؛‬funding from Liiiy Endowment !)٦٥.

The design and final form ofthis electronic document is the property o fthe American
Theological Library Association.