Septuagint: Esther (Alpha Version)


Book Description

There are two versions of the Book of Esther the various copies of the Septuagint, however, neither originated at the Library of Alexandria. The common version of Esther is found in almost all copies, while the rare version is only found in four know manuscripts, numbered as 19, 93, 108, and 319. This version follows the rare version, also known as the Alpha version, using the oldest surviving copy as a source text, the Septuagint manuscript 319, while also comparing the other surviving manuscripts: 19, 93, and 108 The Alpha Texts version only survives in a few copies of the Septuagint, and based on its dialect, it was translated somewhere in the Seleucid Empire. The Alpha version is probably the oldest of the four translations, as it includes several unique elements that appear to have disappeared in later translations. One of these unique elements is the use of the month name Adar-Nisan, which is then clarified in a scribal note as being Dystros-Xandicos. Dystros-Xandicos was not a month, but two months on the modified Macedonian calendar used by the Seleucid Empire. As the story is set in the Persian Empire, the calendar in use was either the Persian calendar, or the Babylonian calendar. The names are the same as the Hebrew calendar, which are themselves based on the Babylonian Calendar, suggesting that this was the calendar the author used.




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.




Vetus Latina: Esther


Book Description

The Vetus Latina is a collection of Latin language translations of the ancient Israelite texts, mainly based on the Greek language Septuagint translation. Not all of the Vetus Latina books were translated from the Septuagint though, as some were translated from versions of the ancient texts that do not otherwise survive to the present. The Vetus Latina’s version of Esther is one of the books not translated from either the Septuagint or proto-Masoretic versions of Esther, and therefore, is the fourth primary source for the Book of Esther. The Vetus Latina, which translates as ‘Old Latin,’ were the texts in use in the Latin-speaking regions of the Roman Empire, prior to the Orthodox Church ordering an official translation into Latin, which was created by Jerome, between 382 and 405 AD. The settling of the book is also an issue that has been debated over the centuries. The king in the story is called Artaxerxes in the Vaticanus and Vetus Latina versions, but Ahasuerus in the Masoretic and Alpha versions of the book. The name Ahasuerus is not the proper translation of Artaxerxes, but of Xerxes, and most modern scholars believe the classical translation of Artaxerxes was an error. There are many indicators in the story, that point to it being set in the era of Xerxes I, the first of which is the reference to him calling all the satraps (governors) of Persia to the capital of Susa in his third year. Both the Vaticanus and Masoretic versions of Esther agree that it was the third year, while the Vetus Latina reports it was in the twelfth year. As the years in the Vetus Latina are out of order, as the events in the seventh year follow the events of the twelfth, the chronology of the Vetus Latina is suspect, and therefore most scholars accept that the original year referenced by the author was regal year 3 of the king’s reign. In the case of Xerxes I, this was 483 BC, when Xerxes did call his satraps to Susa to plan the invasion of Greece.




Septuagint's Esther and the Vetus Latina Esther


Book Description

In addition to the two copies of the Book of Esther found in the Septuagint manuscripts, there are two additional surviving copies of the Book of Esther, one is found in the Masoretic texts, while the other is found among the Vetus Latina manuscripts. The Masoretic texts are the Hebrew translations of the ancient Israelite and Judahite books that form the core of the modern Tanakh which is used by Rabbinical Jews, while the Vetus Latina manuscripts are the Latin translations of the ancient books that were made before Jerome's official Latin translation of the Orthodox Christian Bible, published circa 405 AD. Each of these texts is unique, however, all appear to derive from earlier Aramaic texts. The oldest surviving physical copy of Esther is found in the Codex Vaticanus, which dates to circa 350 AD. The version of Esther in the Codex Vaticanus is generally accepted as being the original version added to the Septuagint sometime in the 2ⁿᵈ century BC, however, it claims to have not been translated in Alexandria, like the rest of the Septuagint. The next oldest version of Esther that survives is in the Leningrad Codex of the Masoretic Texts, with is dated to circa 1008 AD. This version is in Hebrew, and is the only one of the three copies that does not appear to have once been in Greek, and it is the only one of the three copies that does not mention God. This version was copied as part of the Masoretic Texts between the 7ᵗʰ and 10ᵗʰ centuries AD. With many Masoretic Texts, there are precursors found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, however, there are no known fragments of Esther found among the Dead Sea Scrolls to date. It is unclear where it originated, or why there is no reference to God in it. The Vetus Latina's version of Esther is one of the books not translated from either the Septuagint or proto-Masoretic versions of Esther, and therefore, is the fourth primary source for the Book of Esther. Dating the Vetus Latina is more difficult than the Septuagint, as it was the work of many individual translators over several centuries. The bulk of the work is believed to have been done between 330 BC and 50 AD by Judeans living within the expanding Roman Empire, however, around 50 AD the Latin-speaking Christians began using the texts as well. After Jerome translated the Vulgate bible, published in 405 AD, the Vetus Latina continued in use alongside the Vulgate in the Catholic countries until the 1300s. While the Vetus Latina is by nature a Latin translation of the ancient Israelite scriptures, the translations were generally made from existing Greek translations, and in the case of the Book of Esther, not from either the Vaticanus or Alpha versions.




Dream Stele of Thutmose IV


Book Description

Thutmose IV inherited the New Kingdom at its peak when his father Amenhotep II died. Amenhotep II had likewise inherited a strong empire from his father Thutmose III, and had organized a peace treaty with the Mitanni Empire to the north. Thutmose IV took the peace treaty one step further and married a Mitannian princess to secure a peaceful northern border. He is most famous for his activities at the great sphinx of Giza, and the Dream Stele he erected beneath its head. There is debate about why he erected the Dream Stele, and some Egyptologists have suggested it was intended as propaganda to validate his seizing the throne instead of it falling to his elder brother, as it states that the great god Haremakhet-Khepri-Ra-Atum spoke to him in a dream, in the form of the great sphinx, and promised he would be the king one day. It seems extremely unlikely that Amenhotep II would have allowed him to erect the stele while he was still alive, as Thutmose IV was not his chosen heir, and it is therefore assumed that he erected it after assuming the kingship. One of the things that Thutmose IV is most famous for, is digging the sphinx's body out of the sand that had filled the sphinx enclosure, which early Egyptologists interpreted as digging the enclosure itself and creating the sphinx's body. This is no longer the accepted reading of the Dream Stele, and it is now believed Thutmose IV merely restored the sphinx's body. Nevertheless, if the sphinx's enclosure was filled with sand, then the sphinx temple and the neighboring red granite temple must have also been filled with sand, and so Thutmose IV must have uncovered more than just the Great Sphinx. Unfortunately, the lower section of the Dream Stele is damaged, and so we do not know how it ended. Egyptologists generally assume it was a list of donations that Thutmose IV made to various temples, which would be consistent with other steles and biographies from the time.




The Life of Thutmose III


Book Description

Thutmose III was the king of Egypt between circa 1458 and 1425 BC, after inheriting the throne from his father Thutmose II and his aunt Hatshepsut, however, after Hatshepsut died Thutmose III claimed to have been the king of Egypt throughout Hatshepsut’s reign, meaning his regal years began circa 1479 BC when his father Thutmose II died. This attempt to erase Hatshepsut as a king of Egypt was likely not personal, as he did not attempt to usurp her authority during his life, but more likely an attempt to restore the respect for the kingship that appears to have been lost while Hatshepsut was on the throne. The graffiti of Hatshepsut dressed as the king and having sex with a man found near her mortuary temple clearly shows that she was not respected the way the previous god-like pharaohs had been, and Thutmose III was almost certainly trying to erase what many Egyptians viewed as a distasteful episode of their history. Ironically, her mortuary temple is viewed as one of the greatest architectural monuments of the New Kingdom and served as the basis of all later mortuary temples of the New Kingdom. Thutmose III did not attempt to erase Hatshepsut’s existence from Egyptian history, just her kingship, and she was still spoken of fondly as the ‘queen’ and ‘favorite wife of Thutmose II.’ Her reign seems to have been one of contracting frontiers, as Egypt appears to have lost control of Syria early in her reign, which Thutmose III quickly reversed, launching an invasion of Syria within his first year on the throne. This was the legendary Siege of Megiddo, against the king of Kadesh and his Syrian allies, inscribed in detail in the Annals of Thutmose III at Karnak. The details of the battle inscribed at Karnak were copied from Thutmose III’s scribe Tjaneni’s journal and is a far more detailed account than the subsequent list of battles and plunder taken during Thutmose III’s subsequent invasions of Northern Canaan and the Mitanni Empire in modern Syria, or his campaign against the Nubians. The Capture of Jaffa is another battle reported to have taken place during Thutmose III’s reign, although is generally considered a fictionalized account, as it was found with a copy of The Doomed Prince which is considered ancient Egyptian fiction. How much of the Capture of Jaffa is considered fiction, and how much is historical has been a matter of debate, largely because of the similarities to Homer’s account of the Battle of Troy. The surviving copy of this text was discovered on a papyrus scroll dating back to the Ramesside Period, hundreds of years before Homer wrote the oldest surviving account of the Trojan War. Moreover, the Capture of Jaffa is set centuries before the Trojan War, and while there is a similar story of soldiers being hidden inside a tribute taken into the city, the stories are different overall. Moreover, given Capture of Jaffa appears to have been a popular enough story that it was being copied in Egypt at the time of the Trojan War if the story of the wooden horse actually happened, the Achaeans may have gotten the idea from the Capture of Jaffa.




The Life of Harkhuf


Book Description

The life of Harkhuf is one of the better-documented lives from the era of the Old Kingdom era of Egyptian history. Harkhuf lived during the reigns of kings Merenre I and Pepi II of the 6ᵗʰ Dynasty, at the same time as the more famous Weni, whom he may have mentioned in his autobiography. Like Weni, he is primarily known from the inscriptions on his tomb, however, unlike Weni, he only seems to have had one tomb. On the front of his tomb were carved two inscriptions, one promising to intercede in the afterlife for those who prayed for him at his tomb, and the other was his autobiography, telling of his three expeditions into Nubia for King Merenre I. This appears to have been the original design of the tomb, as the front of the tomb was completely covered in the two inscriptions, however, like Weni, he later had more to add. Unlike Weni, Harkhuf did not build a second tomb, instead, he had one side of the tomb smoothed off so a letter to him from King Pepi II could be inscribed there, providing more information about the world he lived in. Harkhuf lived during the 6ᵗʰ Dynasty of the Old Kingdom, which would have been at the peak of the Old Kingdom’s international reach, but after the major pyramid-building feats of the 5ᵗʰ Dynasty were completed. Egypt had already built the tallest building in the world around a century before Harkhuf’s expeditions into Nubia, which would continue to be the tallest building in the world for thousands of years, until the completion of the Eiffel Tower in 1889. As Merenre I is only believed to have ruled for around 9 years, Harkhuf and Weni had to be active in Nubia at the same time. Weni’s Autobiography includes two lists of Nubian tribes, first a list of five tribes that fought in Canaan with the Egyptian army, and later a list of four tribes when he went to Nubia to dig five canals to open the region to trade via Egyptian barges. Nubia was the land to the south of Egypt, was Aswan and Elephantine at the First Cataract of the Nile. Elephantine, under its older Egyptian name Abu was mentioned as one of the mines that Weni visited, however, was considered Egyptian during the Old Kingdom, and marked the boundary between the two cultures. As only four of the five Nubian tribes that Weni mentioned are mentioned by Harkhuf, it allows both their routes through Nubia to be compared and tracked, establishing where the Nubian settlements were probably located.




Autobiography of Thoth the Nobleman


Book Description

Thoth the Nobleman was a herald of Queen Hatshepsut and her young son Thutmose III, who seems to have died while she was still ruling Egypt, as his autobiography refers to her as the King of Egypt. After she died, Thutmose III tried to remove all records of her being king, although she was still mentioned in newly written biographies as the 'divine wife' and 'chief royal wife' of Pharaoh Thutmose II. Thoth the Nobleman reports that he was trusted by Queen Hatshepsut more than anyone else, as he kept quiet about what was happening in the palace. This statement may not be entirely true as the architect Senenmut is generally considered to have been her lover. Another theory is that Senenmut may have been a homosexual friend of hers, which would then open the possibility that Thoth the Nobleman was her lover. Graffiti depicting a female or hermaphrodite pharaoh having sex with a man was discovered in an incomplete temple near the Mortuary Temple of Hatshepsut, which is generally assumed to have been a representation of Senenmut, however, only the image survives without any writing that identifies the man, who could have been any Egyptian man, including Thoth the Nobleman, or simply intended as a representative figure of a generic male intended to insult the 'king' by depicting 'him' as a female. As this graffiti is depicted close to the massive and iconic Mortuary Temple of Hatshepsut, it is clear that at least some of the men in Egypt did not view her as a 'king' even late in her reign, which supports the rebellion of the 'Wicked-Evil Kushite' in the Syrian Rivers province for the first eight years of her reign in the Septuagint's Book of Judges. Thoth the Nobleman described working on many major projects throughout the reign of Queen Hatshepsut, including her Mortuary Temple, the Temples at Karnak, and the mysterious Hahut, a great sanctuary of Amen on his horizon in the west, which may have been an early reference to the Oracle Temple of Amen in the Siwa Oasis. Thoth the Nobleman also reported working on the ceremonial boat of Amen called 'Amen's Mighty of Prow.' Three centuries later, when the High Priest of Amen Her-Heru attempted to replicate this deed, it led to the problematic Voyage of Wenamen.




Autobiography of Ahmose pen-Ebana


Book Description

Ahmose pen-Ebana was a major figure in the battles that forged Egypt’s empire during the New Kingdom era, in the late 1500 BC. According to his autobiography, he fought in the Battle of Avaris (circa 1550 BC), when the Theban Dynasty overthrew the Hyksos Dynasty, and then he fought at the Battle of Sharuhen a few years later, in which the last of the Hyksos Dynasty was destroyed. After these battles, the Thebans had gained political control over both Northern Egypt and Canaan, although the level of control exercised in Canaan is unclear. Then he reports fighting in a series of battles in Nubia as the Thebans conquered and enslaved northern Sudan. A canal had been dug through the shallow third cataract during the Middle Kingdom, which the Egyptians re-dug as soon as they took control of the region again during the campaigns of Ahmose I, who campaigned in Nubia between approximately 1540 and 1525 BC. The third cataract appears to also be the farthest south the Egyptians built a fortress during Ahmose pen-Ebana’s lifetime, the fortress at Tombos, which was more likely there to keep the canal clear for trade than to protect Egyptians from the Nubian tribes. Ahmose pen-Ebana then reports campaigns that were likely along the Yellow Nile in Darfur (modern Wadi Howar), and east past the fourth cataract of the Nile, before the Pharaoh Thutmose I declared victory in the south and marched his army as far north as it could go, invading the Mitanni Empire in Syria. His march through Canaan to the Euphrates was described as peaceful, and apparently, the Canaanite princes recognized his authority over the land. This march is believed to have happened in 1503 BC, and was his second peaceful march through Canaan, the first in 1505 BC, shortly after his coronation. Ahmose pen-Ebana does not report being part of that campaign, nor the earlier campaign of Ahmose I into Canaan after conquering Sharuhen, which strongly suggests that he did not take part in these campaigns. His long service in the Egyptian military includes service under three Pharaohs: Ahmose I (circa 1549 to 1524 BC), Amenhotep I (circa 1525 to 1504 BC), and Thutmose I (circa 1506 to 1493 BC), and included many of the most important battles that laid the foundation of the New Kingdom, allowing Egyptologists to understand the order of these battles, as well as the Egyptian view of the battles and their enemies. Ahmose pen-Ebana’s autobiography has survived to the present because it was cut into his tomb walls in El Kab, his hometown. About half of the text carved into the wall was destroyed when Egyptologists broke into the tomb in the 1800s, however, most of his biography seems to have survived. There is some damage to the wall the autobiography was carved on, resulting in short lacunas, however, Egyptologists believe their reconstructions of the missing texts are accurate, given how short the gaps are. In this translation, the Egyptologists’ reconstructions are treated as accurate, and their reconstructions are translated with the rest of the text. This may result in minor translation errors compared to the original text, however, it is better than reading sentences with missing words, especially when the words seem fairly obvious.




Syriac 6ᵗʰ Maccabees


Book Description

In addition to these five books of the Maccabees found within the Peshitta, there is additional Syriac literature associated with the woman and her seven sons, who were tortured to death by King Antiochus. The most famous of these Syriac works is the poem Lady Shamoni and the Maccabean Martyrs, which Western biblical scholars have dubbed 6ᵗʰ Maccabees. The poem goes into more detail regarding the torture of the sons of Shamoni than 2ⁿᵈ Maccabees, where the author skipped over most of the gruesome details and then ended the chapter with “This is enough about the eating of sacrifices and the extreme tortures.” The text of 6ᵗʰ Maccabees is itself somewhat confusing. Scholars agree the original text was the third-person perspective historical narrative that forms most of the text, however, this is repeatedly interrupted by an editor who interjects their own thoughts in first-person perspective. The editor was clearly a Christian, as he references Jesus, however, even the Christian edits use a mix of terms that confuse their dating. It is entirely plausible that more than one Christian editor handled the poem. The older third-person historical narrative appears to be pre-Christian, as it is consistent with Judean writings from the Second Temple era. The focus of the story returns consistently to the preservation of the Orit, the Aramaic version of the Torah that was in use before the Hasmonean dynasty translated and standardized the ancient Samaritan, Judahite, and Aramaic texts into Classical Hebrew. Some scholars believe that this older historical narrative is drawn from the same source the author of 2ⁿᵈ Maccabees used, which is why it retains more of the details. This is conjectural, as the details may be fictional additions to the story found in 2ⁿᵈ Maccabees. However, the author of 2ⁿᵈ Maccabees claimed to be condensing Jason of Cyrene’s five-volume work on the Maccabees and certainly skipped over some of the torture. Jason of Cyrene’s work is lost, and so this may be a section of his work that was later converted into a Syriac Christian poem.