Septuagint: Wisdom of Joshua ben Sira and Odes


Book Description

The Wisdom of Joshua ben Sira was an independently translated early Jewish collection of wisdom proverbs, translated in 132 BC according to the prologue by the author, which was added the Septuagint. The translator claimed to be the grandson of Joshua ben Sira, who had moved to Egypt, and found that there were no books of minor wisdom among the Septuagint, and so translated his grandfather’s collection. In later centuries, additional books were sometimes added as appendixes, including the Book of Odes. The book is mostly a collection of older songs and prayers found in the Septuagint, however, it was not made from the Septuagint’s translations, but from Theodotion’s translation of circa 200 AD. Theodotion’s translation was not from the Aramaic texts, but the Hasmonean Dynasty’s Hebrew translation, resulting in some textual differences between the songs in Odes and the versions of them in the older books of the Septuagint, especially in Exodus. The Wisdom of Joshua ben Sira is known by several names, including Sirach, Wisdom of Sirach, Wisdom of Jesus Sirach, ben Sira, Ecclesiasticus, and the Book of the All-Virtuous Wisdom of Yeshua ben Sira. This diversity of names is based on the fact that the Masoretes did not copy the text, however, an Aramaic copy and some fragments of the ancient Hebrew version have survived. The conflicting names of Yehoshua ben Sira, used in Hebrew translations, and variations of Jesus Sirach, used in Christian translations, are derived from the Hebrew and Greek variants of his name.




Septuagint: Wisdom of Joshua ben Sira


Book Description

The Wisdom of Joshua ben Sira was likely the last book added to the Septuagint, in 132 BC, after Joshua ben Sira's grandson translated it in Alexandria. The book is known by several names, including Sirach, Wisdom of Sirach, Wisdom of Jesus Sirach, ben Sira, Ecclesiasticus, and the Book of the All-Virtuous Wisdom of Yeshua ben Sira. This diversity of names is based on the fact that the Masorites did not copy the text, however, an Aramaic copy and some fragments of the ancient Hebrew version have survived. As the Masorites did not copy the Wisdom of Solomon, it was ultimately dropped from most Protestant bibles, however, remains part of the Catholic, Orthodox, and Tewahedo Bibles. Hebrew and Aramaic fragments of the Wisdom of Joshua ben Sira were in circulation during the Herodian Dynasty, and fragments have survived among the Dead Sea Scrolls, including the 2QSir, 11QPsa, and MasSir scrolls, however, the fragments may not have been part of a book called the Wisdom of Joshua Ben Sira. The 2QSir and MasSir scrolls are so damaged that they are barely recognizable as being excerpts from Joshua ben Sira, and the 11QPsa scroll, while being one of the best-preserved scrolls found in the Qumran caves, includes random psalms and proverbs from multiple sources, including excerpts from Joshua ben Sira. As the Wisdom of Joshua ben Sira was itself a collection of proverbs that Joshua had collected, it is possible that these scrolls may have simply drawn on the same sources. Some elements of the hedonistic version of Judaism remain in the Wisdom of Joshua ben Sira, including the reference to Iaw reacquiring Israel as his portion when the Highest God divided the nations of humanity between the princes. This is a reference to the 70 or 72 Elohim who were placed over the 70 or 72 nations of humans, in the early Second Temple era hedonistic form of Judaism. This was first mentioned in the Song of Moses, in Deuteronomy chapter 32, and then again in the Talmud which mentions the story of Dobiel, the 'prince of Persia' who was once the proxy for Gabriel in heaven for 21 days after Gabriel angered God by allowing the Jews to leave Babylon, when God wanted the Babylonians to kill them. While be was Gabriel's proxy Dobiel allowed the Persians to conquer the known world, which was the explanation of the sudden rise of the Persian Empire in the early Second Temple era. Dobiel was again referred to as the 'Prince of Persia' in the Revelation of Metatron, which listed Samael as the 'Prince of Rome.'




Septuagint: Odes


Book Description

In the mid-3rd century BC, King Ptolemy II Philadelphus of Egypt ordered a translation of the ancient Hebrew scriptures for the Library of Alexandria. The creation of the Septuagint resulted from this order. It is generally accepted that there were several versions of the ancient Hebrew and Samaritan scriptures before the translation of the Septuagint. The Book of Odes is not believed to have been added until the 3rd-century AD, and is the only specifically Christian book to be added to the Septuagint. It includes the older Prayer of Manasseh, which was found in some copies of the Septuagint, but not all. The Prayer of Manasseh is believed to have been added in the 2nd-century BC, which is why it is not found in all copies. The current scholarly view is that it was likely written in Greek, and is not the original Prayer of Manasseh mentioned in the Septuagint's 2nd Paraleipomenon. Fragments of a different Prayer of Manasseh have been discovered among the dead sea scrolls, written in Hebrew, which could be the original, however, it is more likely that the original would have been written in Canaanite (Samaritan, Paleo-Hebrew) than Hebrew, and therefore it is still not clear which, if either, is the original Prayer of Manasseh. Most of the other songs and prayers in the Book of Odes are copied from other books found in the Septuagint, although not exactly word for word. These songs and prayers include works attributed to Moses, Hannah the mother of Samuel, King Hezekiah, the prophets Habakkuk, Isaiah, Jonah, Azariah, Hananiah, and Mishael. Additionally, the Odes includes specifically Christian prayers copied from either the Gospel of Luke, by Zechariah the father of John the Baptist, Simeon, and in some manuscripts Mary the God-Bearer.




A New English Translation of the Septuagint


Book Description

The Septuagint (the ancient Greek translation of Jewish sacred writings) is of great importance in the history of both Judaism and Christianity. The first translation of the books of the Hebrew Bible (plus additions) into the common language of the ancient Mediterranean world made the Jewish scriptures accessible to many outside Judaism. Not only did the Septuagint become Holy Writ to Greek speaking Jews but it was also the Bible of the early Christian communities: the scripture they cited and the textual foundation of the early Christian movement. Translated from Hebrew (and Aramaic) originals in the two centuries before Jesus, the Septuagint provides important information about the history of the text of the Bible. For centuries, scholars have looked to the Septuagint for information about the nature of the text and of how passages and specific words were understood. For students of the Bible, the New Testament in particular, the study of the Septuagint's influence is a vital part of the history of interpretation. But until now, the Septuagint has not been available to English readers in a modern and accurate translation. The New English Translation of the Septuagint fills this gap.




Septuagint: Joshua


Book Description

The general view of both historians and biblical scholars is that the Book of Joshua holds no historical value and is simply a book written during the life of Josiah, or during the Babylonian captivity, or even later by Ezra during the Second Temple Era, however, this is based on analysis of the Masoretic version of the book, which is quite different from the Septuagint's version. In Rabbinical history, as a century and a half have been redacted, Joshua's life is dated to the early 1300s BC, instead of the late 1500s BC. This era does not align with anything found in the archaeological record, and therefore the book reads like fiction. Likewise, the Masoretic version is about a god named Yahweh, a name not known to archaeology until around 800 BC, meaning that the Book of Joshua, if the Masoretic version were the original, would have to have been written after that time. The Septuagint's version is quite different in the details, as the god of the book is Lord God (Adon Elim), the God (El) of the ancient Canaanite religion, who was worshiped in the 2ⁿᵈ millennium BC. Joshua's invasion of Canaan circa 1508 BC, 42 years after the Minoan Eruption, would also place the Israelites at Jericho at around the time the walls were torn down. The ruins of Jericho were identified as the mound at Tell es-Sultan in 1869, and this is still generally accepted as ancient Jericho. The city was a major trading center, and heavily fortified city for thousands of years, until circa 1500 BC when the walls were torn down. The exact date when the walls were torn down is unclear, with estimates ranging from 1700 to 1400 BC, however, 1500 BC is the most widely quoted date. In approximately 1504 BC the Egyptian King Thutmose I led an expedition through Canaan and Syria to the Euphrates River, and it is assumed by many historians that he ripped down the walls of Jericho, however, that is not possible. Thutmose recorded that he found no one to fight him in Canaan, and the local peoples submitted to Egyptian power without conflict. Moreover, later the same year he launched his invasion of Nubia, to the south of Egypt, meaning he simply did not have time to secretly lay siege to Jericho. This pacified Canaan ruled by people who were afraid of the Egyptians is consistent with the account in Joshua, however, the Egyptian 'invasion' is not mentioned in Joshua. Given the history between the Israelites and Egyptians, it is not unlikely it would have been omitted, especially if there was no war, and the Israelites surrendered to the Egyptians without a fight. After 1500 BC the people in Canaan, whoever they were, began fortifying their cities. His heir, Thutmose II, also sent an expedition into Canaan and Syria, and crossed the Euphrates, however, only reported fighting nomads in the Sinai. There are no records of his successor, Queen Hatshepsut invading Canaan. Her heir Thutmose III did send multiple armies through Canaan demanding tribute, however, these campaigns appear to have been mostly peaceful until around 1450 BC, when he marched his army into northern Canaan to invade Syria and occupied all of Canaan in the process. The cities of Kadesh on the Orontes (in modern Syria), and Byblos in modern Lebanon, are mentioned as being major conquests of his campaigns, which laid the foundation for his later attack on the Mitanni Empire in Syria. After Tuthmose's campaign, the region was formally part of the Egyptian Empire for centuries, however, Egyptian records show they generally left the people alone and did not exert much control over the region beyond demanding regular tribute. The Egyptian records show there were many local chieftains during this era, sometimes fighting each other, or a people called the Habiru, which some believe to be an ancient reference to the Hebrews.




Septuagint: Wisdom of Solomon


Book Description

The final version of the Septuagint was published in 132 BC, which included the Wisdom of Solomon, a book of wisdom credited to King Solomon, circa 950 BC. This book was never copied by the Masoretes, and no fragments of it have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, indicating it was not used much in Judea, if at all. A Syriac version of it is included in the Peshitta, the Syrian Orthodox Bible, which the Syrian Orthodox Church has always claimed was transcribed from the Aramaic text that the Jews translated into Hebrew, however, most modern scholars believe the Peshitta was a Syriac translation of the Septuagint. As a result, Wisdom of Solomon is a text that cannot be proven to have existed earlier than 132 BC, when it appeared in the Septuagint, and some scholars have concluded it was written in Greek at the Library of Alexandria. Wherever it was written, it is a very un-Jewish Israelite text, which contradicts, and occasionally even attacks the Torah. These contradictions are often interpreted as indicators that the writer was not particularly knowledgeable regarding the Torah, suggesting a Hellenized Jew, and therefore, it is generally assumed the book was written shortly before its inclusion in the Septuagint. All of these assumptions are, of course, based on the underlying assumption that Judaism was already standardized before the Greek Era. The books of Maccabees tell a very story. Given the complex religious history of the Second Temple Era, and the fact that none of the Israelites in Elephantine appear to have even heard of Moses in the 5th-century BC, the Wisdom of Solomon does not seem out of place or anachronistic at all, and dismissing it based on contradictions with the Torah seems completely invalid. The Wisdom of Solomon itself appears to have been redacted before the Greek translation, as the first half is about the spirit of wisdom, Sophia in Greek, who is credited with actually doing most of what God (or Yahweh in the Masoretic Text) was credited with doing in the Torah, however, this changes abruptly to crediting the Lord in chapter 11, and Sophia disappears entirely from the rest of the book. Chapter 11 was also the beginning of what scholars call the ‘history’ section of the book, which generally retold the history found in the Torah up until the exodus from Egypt, however, with some differences. One significant difference was the identification of the Lord as the Sun in chapter 16.




The Amarna Letters


Book Description

The Amarna Letters are a collection of clay tablets found in the ruins of El Amarna, Egypt, in the 1880s. The city of El Amarna was built by the Pharaoh Akhenaten, during his religious reforms in the 1340s BC, but was then abandoned after he died and Egypt reverted to worshiping the old gods. These letters provide a unique glimpse into a period of Egyptian history, that the Egyptians themselves attempted to erase. After Akhenaten's heir Tutankhamen died, his successor Ay was only able to hold the throne for a few years before Horemheb seized it, and attempted to reunite the Egyptians by erasing all records of Akhenaten's reforms, which included erasing Akhenaten's name from almost every record in Egypt. By this period, El Amarna appears to have already been mostly abandoned, and therefore Egyptologists were able to reconstruct the strange story of Akhenaten's reign, in the middle of the New Kingdom era. The Amarna letters were recovered from the royal archives in El Amarna, where they appear to have been archived after having been translated for the royal court. The letters are inscribed on clay tablets in Cuneiform, the dominant form of writing in Mesopotamia, Canaan, and the neighboring cultures in Anatolia and Cyprus at the time. The shape of the Cuneiform logograms used is Akkadian, the parent form of the later Neo-Babylonian, Neo-Assyrian, and Ugaritic forms of Cuneiform, however, the language used in the Letters is not pure Akkadian. The Letters are between various members of the Egyptian royal court, and many different cities and nations across the Middle East, including Babylon, Assyria, Mitanni, and Cyprus, and therefore the language within the Letters is not consistent. Within the letters from Canaanite cities, all of which were subject to Egypt at the time, several transliterated names are also used, which appears to be a direct precursor to the later development of Ugaritic Cuneiform by 1200 BC, which was an abjad similar to the Canaanite script that was developed by 1000 BC, however, used Cuneiform logograms instead of alphabet-like letters. The surviving letters were mostly about trade and diplomacy, however, do include a great deal of information about what was happening in the Middle East at the time. In particular, they demonstrate how limited Egypt's actual control of its Canaanite holdings was, where the governors of cities were constantly requesting military help to defend themselves against each other, the marauding Habirus, and the Hittite-backed Amorites in northern Canaan. The Amarna Letters were written during the mid-1330s BC, during the reigns of the Pharaohs Amenhotep III and Akhenaten, although it is not always clear when in their respective reigns the letters were written, or even which pharaoh was on the throne at the time.




Autobiography of Ahmose pen-Nekhbet


Book Description

Ahmose pen-Nekhbet was a major figure during the early years of the New Kingdom, who, like his contemporary Ahmose pen-Ebana, appears to have been from the city of El Kab, where his tomb was found. His autobiography is much shorter than pen-Ebana’s autobiography, however, is also far more damaged. This translation follows the general reconstruction that most Egyptologists agree on, however, sections of the original text may have been lost entirely before it was rediscovered in the late 1800s. Like pen-Ebana, he served a series of kings, starting with Ahmose I, and continuing through Amenhotep I, Thutmose II, Hatshepsut, and finally Thutmose III, meaning he served for decades longer than Ahmose pen-Ebana. This difference in length of service is likely due to his higher position within Egyptian society, already reportedly the herald of the king at a battle in Djahy, which may have been the Battle of Sharuhen. Ahmose pen-Nekhbet’s autobiography does not mention the Battle of Avaris, which had taken place a few years earlier, implying he became the king’s herald after the Hyksos dynasty lost Avaris. Egyptologists debate what exactly pen-Nekhbet meant by Djahy, and some believe King Ahmose I may have marched his army north from Sharuhen through southern Canaan to restore order in the region, however, there is no corroborating evidence of this known, and there is no reason to assume he wasn’t talking about Sharuhen, as Sharuhen was in Djahy, the ancient Egyptian name for southern Canaan. Ahmose pen-Nekhbet then mentioned serving King Amenhotep I in the campaigns in Kush, where he captured slaves, like Ahmose pen-Ebana. Unlike pen-Ebana, however, pen-Nekhbet only mentioned one campaign in Kush, which implies that he did not partake in most of the campaigns in Nubia unless those stories were lost in the damaged sections. Pen-Nekhbet’s story also includes a reference to a campaign against what appear to be the Berber tribes of the Sahara. He referred to a campaign against the Iamu-Kehek, which includes the name Kehek, a Libyan tribe later mentioned during the reign of Ramesses III, circa 1188 BC. The Thebans are recorded to having occupied the five oases of the western desert during their war against the Hyksos, including the Kharga Oasis, Dakhla Oasis, now dry Farafra depression, Bahariya Oasis, and the Fayyum. This reference to the Iamu-Kehek implies the army of Amenhotep I pushed west through the Sahara desert, likely to Siwa Oasis, where an ancient oracle temple of Amen existed by the 10th century BC.




Judahite Apocalypse of Ezra


Book Description

In the early centuries of the Christian era, a number of texts called the Apocalypse of Ezra were in circulation among Jews, Christians, Gnostics, and related religious groups. The original is believed to have been written in Judahite or Aramaic, and is commonly known as the Jewish Apocalypse of Ezra, as Ezra is believed to have been an ancient Judahite. This translation is referred to as the Judahite Apocalypse of Ezra, as the book has nothing to do with modern Judaism. This version of the Apocalypse was translated into Greek sometime before 200 AD and circulated widely within the early Christian churches. In the book, it is claimed that the prophet Ezra wrote 904 books, and its popularity seems to have inspired a number of Christian-era Apocalypses of Ezra, presumably beginning with the ‘Latin’ Apocalypse of Ezra which claimed to be the ‘second book of the prophet Ezra.’ This prophet Ezra is not the scribe Ezra from the books of Ezra, but a prophet named Shealtiel who lived a couple of centuries earlier. In the apocalypse, he is called Ezra by the angel Uriel, which translates a ‘helper’ or ‘assistant.’ In 1592, Pope Clement VIII’s creation of a Catholic Bible added a version of the Apocalypse of Ezra into the Catholic Bible under the name 4ᵗʰ Esdras. Unfortunately, the Latin translation of the Apocalypse of Ezra that Clement added to the Catholic Vulgate included the shorter Latin Apocalypse of Ezra, resulting in the Catholic and Protestant Bibles having longer, and self-contradicting versions of the apocalypse in comparison to Orthodox Bibles. The identification of the author as ‘Shealtiel, who is also called Ezra,’ is found in most translations of the apocalypse, other than the longer Catholic version, where it is both redundant and conflicting, as the author is identified at the beginning of the longer text. The introduction of the Catholic version is the introduction of the shorter Latin Apocalypse of Ezra, which identifies the author as Ezra the Scribe and provides his genealogy. Ezra the Scribe was a Levite and son his genealogy has nothing to do with the line of David, a Judahite king. This translation is a translation of the Latin version's text that originated in the Judahite Apocalypse of Ezra, along with the restoration of short sections of text that were cut from the Catholic version but remain in the Armenian, Georgian, or Ethiopian translations.




Tale of Sinuhe


Book Description

The Tale of Sinuhe, also called the Story of Sanhat, is one of the most popular stories that has survived to the present from the Egyptian Middle Kingdom. Dozens of fragments of copies have been found, which is unusual and speaks volumes of how popular it was in the Middle Kingdom. Egyptologists are divided on how much of it is fictional, with some claiming it is a historical text, while others claim it is entirely fictional. The copies that have been found are not identical, with sections of text that were either added to the original, or dropped from the original, and therefore it was altered over time. As a result, the general view within Egyptology is that it likely started as a historical text that was embellished by later scribes. Unfortunately, the original author either did not see a reason to explain what had happened before Sinuhe’s flight from Egypt, or it was removed from the copies that have survived to the present. Sinuhe makes a point of claiming that he was not deserting the army in Libya, but later the king states that he knows that Sinuhe was not plotting against him when he fled Egypt. This suggests that someone had conspired against Senusret I at the beginning of his reign, however, the events of this plot have not survived to the present. It isn’t clear if the details were removed out of respect for the king, or if the author simply expected everyone to know what had happened. The identity of Sinuhe is also somewhat unclear from the surviving texts, however, he appears to be a relative of the Queen, who had grown up with the future king Senusret I. He may have been the army commander sent to conquer the Libyans at the end of Amenemhat I’s reign, as he begins his story there, however, he could have simply been a lieutenant. As a member of the nobility, he was unlikely to be a common soldier. Later, in Syria, he claimed to be a great hero, defeating many enemies on behalf of the local king, suggesting he was well-trained in combat.