Rodrigo F. de Sousa Eschatology and Messianism in LXX Isaiah 1-12

LIBRARY OF HEBREW BIBLE/
OLD TESTAMENT STUDIES
516
Formerly Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series
Editors
Claudia V. Camp, Texas Christian University
Andrew Mein, Westcott House, Cambridge
Founding Editors
David J. A. Clines, Philip R. Davies and David M. Gunn
Editorial Board
Richard J. Coggins, Alan Cooper, John Goldingay, Robert P. Gordon,
Norman K. Gottwald, Gina Hens-Piazza, John Jarick, Andrew D. H. Mayes,
Carol Meyers, Patrick D. Miller, Yvonne Sherwood
THE HEBREW BIBLE AND ITS VERSIONS
4
Editor
Robert P. Gordon, St Catharine's College, Cambridge
This page intentionally left blank
ESCHATOLOGY AND MESSIANISM
IN LXX ISAIAH 112
Rodrigo Franklin de Sousa

Copyright 2010 by Rodrigo Franklin de Sousa
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, including photocopying,
recording, or otherwise, without the written permission of the publisher, T & T Clark
International.
T & T Clark International, 80 Maiden Lane, New York, NY 10038
T & T Clark International, The Tower Building, 11 York Road, London SE1 7NX
T & T Clark International is a Continuum imprint.
Visit the T & T Clark blog at www.tandtclarkblog.com
A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.
ISBN-13: 978-0-567-25819-9
ISBN-10: 0-567-25819-X
06 07 08 09 10 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
CONTENTS
Acknowledgments ix
Abbreviations xi
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION 1
1. The Nature and Purpose of this Study 2
2. The State of the Discussion 4
3. The Method of this Study 7
Chapter 2
THE TRANSLATOR AS READER 13
1. Actualizing Interpretation and Contextual Readings
in LXX Isaiah 13
2. Pericope Delimitation in LXX Isaiah
and Early Textual Witnesses 19
2.1. LXX Isaiah 1:2127 20
2.2. LXX Isaiah 2:5, 10; 3:13 21
2.3. LXX Isaiah 6:1 23
2.4. Pericope Delimitation and Reading 23
3. Contextual Awareness as Reading Strategy 25
4. Reading Strategy and Ideological Imprints 26
5. A Case Study: LXX Isaiah 8:1116 31
5.1. Parallel Translation 32
5.2. Analysis 33
6. Summary 40
Chapter 3
ESCHATOLOGICAL TRADITIONS IN LXX ISAIAH 112 41
1. LXX Isaiah 2:24 43
1.1. The Mount of the Lord 44
1.2. The Way of the Lord 48
2. LXX Isaiah 4:26 50
2.1. The Rendering of 52
2.2. The of God 54
2.3. The Manifestation of the Lords
with glory upon the earth 56
2.4. The Limited Duration of Gods Wrath 58
vi Eschatology and Messianism in LXX Isaiah 112
2.5. The Exaltation and Glorication of the Remnant 63

2.6. Exaltation and Security in the Lords Mountain 66
3. Summary 68
Chapter 4
THE MESSIANIC ORACLES (1): LXX ISAIAH 7:1416 70
1. LXX Isaiah 7:1416: Translation and Analysis 70
1.1. The Rendering of by
71
1.2. The Futuristic Rendering of 75
1.3. The Naming of the Child 76
1.4. The Heightened Character of Immanuel 77
2. LXX Isaiah 7:1416 in Context 84
2.1. The Eschatological Dimension 86
2.2. Immanuel as the Inaugurator of an Eschatological Era? 90
2.3. Historical References and Reading Strategies 93
2.4. The Systematic Toning Down of LXX Isaiah 7 96
2.5. The Portrayal of Ahaz 100
3. Summary 101
Chapter 5
THE MESSIANIC ORACLES (2): LXX ISAIAH 9:56(67) 103
1. LXX Isaiah 9:56(67): Translation and Analysis 105
1.1. The Futuristic Casting of the Oracle 106
1.2. The Angel of Great Counsel 106
1.3. The Bringer of Peace upon the Rulers 115
2. LXX Isaiah 9:56(67) in Context 119
2.1. The Spatiality of the Messianic Kingdom 119
2.2. The Judean Setting of the Oracle 120
2.3. LXX Isaiah and Maccabean Ideology 124
2.4. The Temple in Leontopolis and Judean Ideology 126
2.5. Actualization, Ideology, and the Socio-Economic Context
of the Translation 129
3. Summary 136
Chapter 6
THE MESSIANIC ORACLES (3): LXX ISAIAH 11:15 138
1. LXX Isaiah 11:15: Translation and Analysis 138
1.1. The Sceptre of Jesse 140
1.2. The Flower from the Root 142
1.3. Fulness of the Spirit and Godliness 145
1.4. The Sceptre of the Mouth and the Slaying of the Wicked 147
2. LXX Isaiah 11:15 in Context 149
2.1. Future Bliss 149
2.2. The Hope of Return from Exile 151
3. Summary 155
Contents vii
Chapter 7
CONCLUSION 157
Bibliography 163
Index of References 175
Index of Authors 187
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The present work is a revised version of my doctoral dissertation, which

was submitted to the University of Cambridge. Thanks are due, rst, to
Professor Robert P. Gordon, who has offered the rst-rate academic
advice and the genuine care and concern which are suggested by the
word Doktorvater. I also express my gratitude to my examiners, Dr
James Aitken and Professor Carmel McCarthy, for their insightful and
helpful remarks.
I would also like to thank Linleigh and Laverne Roberts, from whom I
received the initial and still most signicant inspiration and motivation
to study of the Bible. My interest in doing doctoral work was also
encouraged by Drs David Chapman, C. J. Collins, Hans Bayer, and
Robert Peterson. The board and staff of Biblical Foundations, Interna-
tional provided the bulk of our nancial and personal support in
Cambridge. My studies would also not have been possible without the
generous support of the Langham Partnership International, Cambridge
Overseas Trust, St. Catharines College, the Southwest Belo Horizonte
Presbytery (Presbyterian Church of Brazil), and the Spalding Trust.
Part of this study was conducted during a short DAAD funded research
visit to Eberhard Karls Universitt Tbingen. Professor Dr Hermann
Lichtenberger, Monika Merkle, and Marietta Hmmerle have indeed
provided a welcoming environment which made my time in Tbingen
extremely pleasant and protable. Professor Lichtenberger and Dr Scott
Caulley are also thanked for the gracious invitation to present part of this
research at the GermanEnglish Colloquium in New Testament in
Tbingen. I also thank Herr Fahrner and the staff of the Wilhelmsstift for
the hospitality.
Some research was also carried out at the Universit de Paris IV
Sorbonne, where Professor Olivier Munnich offered his personal expert
advice and did everything in his power to make my stay in Paris worth-
while. A special mention is also made of Professor Ccile Dogniez, who
has not only made invaluable comments on my research but also gave
me the opportunity to present part of my results to her students at the
Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes.
1
x Eschatology and Messianism in LXX Isaiah 112
Others have been kind enough to discuss aspects of this work, whether
in a formal academic setting, or in personal conversation. Their insights
certainly enriched the nal product. In particular, I would like to mention
Professors Arie van der Kooij, Emanuel Tov, Martin Hengel, Marguerite
Harl, Allain Le Boulluec, Philippe Le Moigne, and Drs Michael van der
Meer, Cameron Boyd-Taylor, Jennifer Dines, Andrew Macintosh, and
David Instone-Brewer.
Tyndale House in Cambridge has been a fertile ground for the
maturing of this research and the development of cherished friendships.
Particular appreciation is expressed to the librarian, Dr Elizabeth Magba.
The companionship of William (Bill) Barker, T. Ryan Jackson, Onesimus
Ngundu, Kevin Conway, and Stephen Witmer will always be immensely
treasured. Charles, Erin, and Jack Anderson were our family away from
home. Cambridge Presbyterian Church was also instrumental in our
personal growth. I thank, in particular, Ian and Joan Hamilton, Chad and
Emily van Dixhoorn, Andy and Davinia Young, and Andy and Polly
Batchelor.
Though geographically distant, Nicolas and Alison Farelly, and
Alexander and Debbie Bukovietski proved to be constant companions.
The occasional opportunities of mutual visit were a great source of
encouragement and signicant signposts without which life would have
been rather colourless. Great encouragement and support were also given
by the Reverend Valdir Cunha. Luciano and Luciene Pires provided
friendship and hospitality, especially at the crucial time of the conclusion
of this research. My wife and I also owe a special debt of gratitude to our
familiesalways gracious, generous, and unwavering in their love.
By far, the most precious gift I received in Cambridge is my son,
Gabriel, who was born there at the beginning of my second year of
research. Though too young to offer any direct input on Septuagintal
matters, he has enriched my work beyond any expectation and added an
entirely new dimension of signicance and joy, not only to my work, but
to my life. My daughter, Nicole, was born while I revised the manuscript
for publication, making my joy even fuller.
I save for last my deepest thanks, which are obviously due to my wife,
Ana, who has made tremendous sacrices so I could pursue these studies.
Ana, throughout all this time, your love has been like a lily among
brambles and a truly gentle breeze. You inspire me to do and be my best.
It is to you that I dedicate this work.
Soli Deo Gloria
1
ABBREVIATIONS
AB Anchor Bible
ABRL Anchor Bible Reference Library
AGAJU Arbeiten zur Geschichte des Sptjudentums und Urchristentums
ArBib The Aramaic Bible
ASP American Studies in Papyrology
ATA Alttestamentliche Abhandlungen
AUM Andrews University Monographs
BA Biblical Archaeologist
BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research
BDB Brown, F., S. R. Driver, and C. A. Briggs. A Hebrew and
English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Oxford, 1907
BCR Biblioteca di cultura religiosa
BETL Bibliotheca ephemeridium theologicarum lovaniensium
BHS Biblia hebraica stuttgartensia
Bib Biblica
BIOSCS Bulletin of the International Organization for Septuagint and
Cognate Studies
BJS Brown Judaic Studies
BO Bibliotheca Orientalis
BTB Biblical Theology Bulletin
BWAT Beitrge zur Wissenschaft vom Alten Testament
BZNW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fr die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft
CBET Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology
CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly
CBQMS Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series
CC Continental Commentaries
CRINT Compendia rerum iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum
CTL Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics
DJD Discoveries in the Judaean Desert
EDSS Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Ed. L. H. Schiffman and
J. C. Vanderkam, 2 vols. Oxford, 2000
ESV English Standard Version
ETL Ephemerides theologicae lovanienses
FB Forschung zur Bibel
FOTL Forms of the Old Testament Literature
FRLANT NF Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen
Testaments. Neue Folge.
xii Eschatology and Messianism in LXX Isaiah 112
GKC Gesenius Hebrew Grammar. Edited by E. Kautzsch. Translated

by A. E. Cowley. 2d ed. Oxford, 1910
GTS Gettysburg Theological Studies
HTR Harvard Theological Review
HUCA Hebrew Union College Annual
ICC International Critical Commentary
IEJ Israel Exploration Journal
Int Interpretation
JBQ Jewish Bible Quarterly
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JBTh Jarbuch fr biblische Theologie
JETS Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
JJS Journal of Jewish Studies
JNSL Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages
Joon Joon, P. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Translated and
revised by T. Muraoka. 2 vols. SubBi 14/12. Rome,
1991
JSJ Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and
Roman Periods
JSJSup Journal for the Study of Judaism Supplement Series
JSNT Journal for the Study of the New Testament
JSOTSup Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series
JSP Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha
JSPSup Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha: Supplement Series
JSS Journal of Semitic Studies
JSSSup Journal of Semitic Studies Supplements Series
JTS Journal of Theological Studies
KBL Koehler, L., and W. Baumgartner, Lexicon in Veteris
Testamenti libros. 2d ed. Leiden, 1958
KJV King James Version
LEH Lust, J., E. Eynikel, and K. Hauspie. GreekEnglish Lexicon of the
Septuagint. Stuttgart, 2003.
LSJ Liddell, H. G., R. Scott, H. S. Jones, A GreekEnglish Lexicon.
9th ed. with revised supplement. Oxford, 1996
LXX Septuagint
MSU Mitteilungen des Septuaginta-Unternehmens
MT Masoretic text
NAC New American Commentary
OBO Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis
OTL Old Testament Library
OtSt Oudtestamentische Studin
RevAnt Revealing Antiquity
RB Revue biblique
RevQ Revue de Qumran
RivBSup Supplementi alla rivista biblica
RRef La revue rforme
Abbreviations xiii
RSV Revised Standard Version

SBLMS Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series
SBLSP Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers
SBS Stuttgarter Bibelstudien
SCS Septuagint and Cognate Studies
SOTSMS Society for Old Testament Studies Monograph Series
SSN Studia semitica neerlandica
STAC Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum
STDJ Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah
SubBi Subsidia biblica
SVTG Septuaginta vetus testamentum graecum
TBN Themes in Biblical Narrative
TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by G. Kittel
and G. Friedrich. Translated by G. W. Bromiley. 10 vols.
Grand Rapids, 196476
TDOT Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Edited by G. J.
Botterweck and H. Ringgren. Translated by J. T. Willis, G. W.
Bromiley, and D. E. Green. 8 vols. Grand Rapids, 1974
Text Textus
Theod. Theodotion
TLOT Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament. Edited by E. Jenni,
with assistance from C. Westermann. Translated by M. E.
Biddle. 3 vols. Peabody, Mass., 1997
VT Vetus Testamentum
VTSup Supplements to Vetus Testamentum
VWGH Verffentlichungen der wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft fr
Theologie
WBC Word Biblical Commentary
WUNT Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament
WUNT 2 Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe
ZAW Zeitschrift fr die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Following signicant developments in research, the LXX books in

general and LXX Isaiah in particular are increasingly being taken not
simply as ancient witnesses to the Hebrew text, but also as theological
documents in their own right.1 The publication of Isaac Leo Seelig-
manns groundbreaking monograph, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah,2
opened new vistas by introducing the concept of actualizing inter-
pretation of prophecy into the eld of LXX Isaiah.3 This is the idea that
the version contains free renderings which were inuenced by the
translators belief that he and his community were living at the time of
the fullment of the Isaianic prophecies.4 Seeligmanns contribution is a
watershed in the study of LXX Isaiah. The important works from the late
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, such as those of Zillessen,
1. Surveys of major developments in the study of LXX Isaiah since the nineteenth
century are found in A. van der Kooij, Isaiah in the Septuagint, in Writing and
Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an Interpretive Tradition (ed. C. C. Broyles
and C. A. Evans; VTSup 70/2; Leiden: Brill, 1997), 51329, and in D. Baer, When
We All Go Home: Translation and Theology in LXX Isaiah 5666 (JSOTSup 318;
Shefeld: Shefeld Academic, 2001), 1117.
2. I. L. Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah: A Discussion of Its
Problems (Ex Oriente Lux; Leiden: Brill, 1948); repr. in The Septuagint Version of
Isaiah and Cognate Studies (ed. R. Hanhart and H. Spieckermann; Tbingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 2004), 119294.
3. Cf. R. Hanhart, Die Septuaginta als Interpretation und Aktualisierung: Jesaja
9:1(8:23)7(6), in Isaac Leo Seeligmann Volume (ed. A. Rof and Y. Zakovitch;
Essays on the Bible and the Ancient World 3; Jerusalem: E. Rubinsteins, 1983),
33146 (331).
4. The classic formulation of this idea is found in Seeligmann, Isaiah, 4. For
methodological simplication, I adopt the position that LXX Isaiah is overall the
work of one translator, following the current consensus. In reality, the situation is
much more complex and nuanced, as acknowledged by Seeligmann (ibid., 3969).
See Baer, When We All Go Home, 19, for renements and questions regarding dis-
crete sections which seem to come from a different translator.
1
2 Eschatology and Messianism in LXX Isaiah 112
Ottley, Fischer, and Ziegler,5 do not accord much signicance to the role
of the translator as interpreter of his Hebrew text. The situation today is
signicantly different, with the pendulum swung in the opposite direc-
tion and an almost exclusive focus on the theology of the translator.6
While the theological element in LXX Isaiah has been recognized, its
precise contours are not well dened, particularly with regard to the
questions of eschatology and messianism. This is a signicant gap, as
the book of Isaiah, not least in its Greek version, occupied a prominent
place in the shaping of messianic expectations in early Judaism and
Christianity.
1. The Nature and Purpose of this Study

The purpose of the present study is to understand further the eschatologi-
cal and messianic elements of LXX Isaiah, by means of exegetical study
of its rst twelve chapters. Isaiah 112 gives evidence of being a
coherent and distinct unit within the larger book, immediately preceding
the oracles against foreign nations. These chapters were widely inuen-
tial for different groups within early Judaismincluding the rst Chris-
tiansand constitute a signicant corpus to be focused on. While there
has been much attention devoted to the composition of this section of
Isaiah in the Hebrew, there is still need for systematic study of these
chapters in the LXX.7 Isaiah 112 is also signicant because it contains
5. A. Zillessen, Bemerkungen zur alexandrinischen bersetzung des Jesaja (c.

4066), ZAW 22 (1902): 23863; R. R. Ottley, The Book of Isaiah according to the
Septuagint (Codex Alexandrinus) (2 vols.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1906); J. Fischer, In welcher Schrift lag das Buch Isaias den LXX vor? (Giessen:
Tpelmann, 1930); J. Ziegler, Untersuchungen zur Septuaginta des Buches Isaias
(ATA 12/3; Mnster: Verlag der aschendorffschen Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1934).
6. Some examples are L. H. Brockington, The Greek Translator of Isaiah and
His Interest in , VT 1 (1951): 2332; P. Winter,
Isa 63:9
(Gk) and the Passover Haggadah, VT 4 (1954): 43941; C. T. Fritsch, The
Concept of God in the Greek Translation of Isaiah, in Biblical Studies in Memory of
H. C. Alleman (ed. J. M. Myers et al.; GTS 1; New York: Augustin, 1960), 12269;
J. W. Olley, Righteousness in the Septuagint of Isaiah: A Contextual Study
(Missoula: Scholars Press, 1979); idem, The Translator of the Septuagint of Isaiah
and Righteousness, BIOSCS 13 (1980): 5874; R. L. Troxel, Exegesis and
Theology in the LXXIsaiah 5:2630, VT 43 (1993): 10211; S. J. Schweitzer,
Mythology in the Old Greek of IsaiahThe Technique of Translation, CBQ 66
(2004): 21430; and the work of A. van der Kooij.
7. Besides what can be found in commentaries, some signicant studies of Isa
112 include: P. Ackroyd, Isaiah IXII: Presentation of a Prophet, in Congress
1
1. Introduction 3
three very important messianic texts, namely, the well-known oracles in

7:1416; 8:239:6(9:17), and 11:15. These three texts occupy a central
place in the development of early Jewish and Christian messianism, and
therefore deserve close inspection. Again, while the LXX version of these
passages has received some attention, a thorough comparative study of
them is still needed.
For the purposes of the present study, I shall conne my denition of
messianism strictly to the expectation of an individual who inaugurates
an era of salvation.8 Within this denition, messianic texts are those
which either refer to such a gure or came to be interpreted as doing so.
The questions of eschatology and messianism are closely intertwined,
and inform each other.9 While the present discussion is intended to focus
primarily on the messianic question, a study of eschatological elements
in the translation is necessary, as eschatological traditions often appear
connected with messianic expectations. Therefore, to the exegetical study
of the messianic passages I add a study of eschatology in LXX Isaiah,
primarily in connection with the important oracles in 2:14 and 4:26,
whose content furnishes the material necessary for a better understanding
of eschatological conceptions present in the rendering of Isaiah into
Greek. While attention has been given to the entire span of chs. 112 and
to the rest of the book, my focus will be on the aforementioned passages.
Volume Gttingen 1977 (ed. J. A. Emerton; VTSup 29; Leiden: Brill, 1978), 1648;
A. H. Bartelt, The Book around Immanuel: Style and Structure in Isaiah 212 (BJS
4; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1996); E. Blum, Jesajas prophetisches Testament.
Beobachtungen zu Jes 111, ZAW 108 (1996): 54768; 109 (1997): 1229. For a
survey of the current state of research on the section, see P. Hffken, Jesaja: der
Stand der theologischen Diskussion (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesell-
schaft, 2004), 11523.
8. See the denitions of J. Lust, Septuagint and Messianism with a Special
Emphasis on the Pentateuch, in Theologische Probleme der Septuaginta und der
hellenistischen Hermeneutik (ed. H. G. Reventlow; VWGH 11; Gtersloh:
Gtersloher Verlagshaus, 1997), 2645 (37); repr. in Messianism and the Septua-
gint: Collected Essays (ed. K. Hauspie; BETL 178; Leuven: Peeters, 2004), 12951
(142); W. Horbury, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ (London: SCM,
1998), 67; M. A. Knibb, The Septuagint and Messianism: Problems and Issues,
in The Septuagint and Messianism (ed. M. A. Knibb; BETL 195; Leuven: Peeters,
2006), 119 (10); J. A. Fitzmyer, The One Who is to Come (Grand Rapids: Eerd-
mans, 2007).
9. Cf. P. Sacchi, Lapocalittica giudaica e la sua storia (BCR 55; Brescia:
Paideia, 1990). English translation: P. Sacchi, Jewish Apocalyptic and Its History
(trans. W. J. Short; JSPSup 20; Shefeld: Shefeld Academic, 1990).
1
2. The State of the Discussion

The wide spectrum of positions with regard to messianic expectation in
LXX Isaiah illustrates the complexities involved in this study. The
approaches range from the maximalist to the minimalist. The rst
view is exemplied by Joachim Schaper, who, on the basis of the LXX
versions of Num 24:17; Isa 7:1425; 8:239:6(9:17); 11:19, and
19:1625, and following the lead of what he calls messianic language,
argues that there is a coherent concept of messianic thought permeating
the whole of the Septuagint of Isaiah and that this concept was in turn
inuenced by earlier Septuagint texts.10 His view is that LXX Isaiah
gives us insight not only into the messianic systematization established
by the translator, but also into the wider system of what one may call
messianic intertextuality within the whole of the Septuagint.11
The second view is represented by Johan Lust. His basic thesis is that
the LXX neither witnesses to an increased interest in messianism nor adds
to the individual royal character of the classical messianic prophecies,
and that any accentuation of messianism in the LXX is most likely due to
later Christian users and interpreters. Particularly with regard to LXX
Isaiah, Lust argues that the translation either points in the direction of a
collectivization of the messianic gure (7:1416; 42:1), or to the
downplaying of his role (9:5[6]). Either way, the LXX eschews, in his
view, any reference to an individual royal messiah.12
These two more extreme views involve difculties that need to be
addressed and which stem from a lack of proper appreciation of co-
textual issues related to the study of the LXX. By co-textual issues I mean
matters of language, text, history, and translation technique. Paying
adequate attention to these issues is the best way to ensure sound results
in any Septuagintal investigation.
For instance, there are some apparent linguistic connections between
LXX Isa 7 and 8:23b9:6(9:17), and on the basis of these Schaper argues
that it is beyond reasonable doubt that here we encounter a strong
messianic belief, centred on the expectation of an upright Davidic ruler
supposed to have Israel restored through the announcement of the
10. J. Schaper, Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah and Messianic Intertextu-

ality in the Greek Bible, in Knibb, ed., The Septuagint and Messianism, 37180
(372).
11. Ibid., 378.
12. J. Lust, A Septuagint Christ Preceding Jesus Christ? Messianism in the
Septuagint Exemplied in Isa 7,1017, in Hauspie, ed., Messianism and the
Septuagint, 21126 (217).
1
1. Introduction 5
of the Lord.13 Upon close scrutiny, however, the

evidence does not allow Schapers conclusion. One of the links on
which he builds his argument is the use of terms such as and
in chs. 7 and 9. He notes that translates in 7:16 and

in 9:5, and this use of the same Greek word for different Hebrew
equivalents is for him an indication of the translators wish to systema-
tize the use of terms referring to the expected ruler rst announced in
chapter 7.14 He nds support for his thesis in Troxels suggestion that
the possible rendering of
by
in 7:14 is addressed to the
house of David and thus points to the royal character of the child.15 We
shall see that while the reading
(if original) could indicate an
address to the house of David, this does not need to be taken as a
messianic interpretation. As for seeing in the use of an attempt
to systematize the references to the messianic gure, we can say that this
fails to take into account the general character of these terms and the
freedom with which the Isaiah translatorand the LXX in generaldeals
with them.
Lusts work provides a very important corrective to maximalist
approaches to messianism in the LXX, but it also has its difculties. Some
of these simply have to do with particular exegetical conclusions, which
I shall deal with in the course of my analysis of the discrete passages.
However, a more fundamental problem lies at the methodological level.
In his argument against the individual messianic interpretation of pas-
sages in LXX Isaiah, Lust afrms that [i]f we bracket the Christian
interpretation for a moment and endeavour to read the text from the
perspective of the reader living in the second or rst century before
Christ, then the suspicion is bound to arise that preference should be
given to an alternative interpretation.16
Of course, Lust is correct in pointing to the Jewish character of the
LXX. Yet his method suggests that he is still operating within the frame-
work of a Christian theology. Lusts starting point, at least in his treat-
ment of some Isaianic texts, is the question whether the early Christian
interpretation of the LXX is correct, with the basic assumption being that
the Jewish character of the LXX necessarily speaks against the presence
of individual messianic elements in the translation. There is, however, no
reason why a recognition that the LXX is a Jewish product is bound to
13. Schaper, Messianic Intertextuality, 374.

14. Ibid., 37273.
15. R. L. Troxel, Isaiah 7,1416 through the Eyes of the Septuagint, ETL 79
(2003): 122 (9, 20).
1
16. Lust, A Septuagint Christ, 221.
raise suspicion against the presence of messianic elements in LXX Isaiah

that are not the fruit of Christian misinterpretation.
The fundamental question that needs to be raised is whether it is
possible to detect elements in the LXX translation of eschatological and
messianic passages of Isaiah that reect developments in the theology
and ideology of ancient Judaism. In other words: What particular theo-
logical imprints are left on the reading of the messianic oracles in LXX
Isaiah, and are these consistent with wider streams of Jewish eschato-
logical and messianic expectation in the period?
The eschatological interpretation of Isaiah is well attested in the
second century B.C.E. by texts such as Sir 48:2425.17 Several passages
in LXX Isaiah employ terminology which indicates that the translator
held a similar approach (cf. 41:4, 2223; 42:23; 44:68; 45:11). These
texts speak of (the coming events), which could also
be referred to as (the last things) that are constitutive of the
nal period of history, die Endzeit.18
17. The Greek of Sir 48:2425 reads ! " #
$ % & ' % () *
+
# ,- # .
/ (In a powerful spirit he saw the last
things and comforted the mourners in Zion; he revealed the things that will be at the
end and the hidden things before they came to pass). Several elements in these
verses are worthy of note. First, there is the notion of the supernatural inspiration of
Isaiahs prophecy. Second, we nd the statement that Isaiah saw (the
last things). Third, we note the afrmation that this consolation was directed to the
mourners in Zion. Fourth, it is said that Isaiah revealed things to come at the end.
Finally, Isaiah is thought to have revealed things that were hidden, before they
happened. For a study of the role of Isaiah as revealer of the hidden things in
Sirach, see P. C. Beentjes, Prophets and Prophecy in the Book of Ben Sira, in
Prophets, Prophecy, and Prophetic Texts in Second Temple Judaism (ed. M. Floyd
and R. D. Haak; LHBOTS 427; New York: T&T Clark International, 2006), 13550
(14344); repr. in Happy the One who Meditates on Wisdom (SIR. 14,20):
Collected Essays on the Book of Ben Sira (CBET 43; Leuven: Peeters, 2006),
20729 (21718).
18. Cf. A. van der Kooij, Die alten Textzeugen des Jesajabuches (OBO 35;
Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1981), 21, 6364. See also LXX Isa 41:26;
42:9; 43:9, 1819; 46:910; 48:56. An attempt at downplaying the eschatological
element of LXX Isaiah has been made by R. L. Troxel,
and Eschatology
in LXX-Isaiah, BIOSCS 25 (1992): 1827 (27), who afrms that when
appears in temporal expressions in LXX Isaiah, it connotes the future only in a
general sense. While he concedes the possibility that there may be eschatology in
LXX Isaiah, the translation does not use as a technical term of eschatology,
nor does its use of reect a translator dominated by expectation of die
Endzeit. One can respond to Troxel by pointing out that the question is not
1
1. Introduction 7
To be sure, the presence of a word such as is not necessary

for a rendering to be eschatological. Certain elements in the Vorlage
and a sense of the nature of the text would have prompted specic
reading strategies on the part of the translator. In the case of LXX Isaiah,
reading assumptions and strategies would have been informed by the
sense that one was dealing with prophecies, that is, with utterances that
ultimately came from God himself. This point has been highlighted by
Barton, who, discussing specically the time of the New Testament,
argues that prophecy was increasingly regarded as prediction and that
for most people in New Testament times by far the most interesting and
important feature of the holy books that had come to them from their
hallowed past was their divine origin.19 These observations are certainly
also valid for the Judaism of the rst two centuries B.C.E., and for
interpretations of Isaiah in this context.20
In this connection, Isaiah is lled with themes around which eschato-
logical and messianic traditions developed, such as the way of the Lord,
the coming exaltation of the Lord and the humiliation of his enemies, the
glorication of Zion, the universal spread of Torah teaching, the exalta-
tion and glorication of the remnant, and the expectation of a coming
righteous king. The question is whether the LXX translator was inu-
enced by these traditions when approaching the book.
3. The Method of this Study

Treatments of eschatology and messianism in the LXX will be seriously
hindered if proper methodological caution is not exercised.21 As we
whether the translator is dominated by an expectation of die Endzeit, but whether,

in the light of the available evidence, an eschatological interpretation of at least
some prophetic oracles is likely.
19. J. Barton, Oracles of God: Perceptions of Ancient Prophecy in Israel after
the Exile (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1986), 142. See also L. A. Schkel,
A Manual of Hebrew Poetics (trans. L. A. Schkel and A. Graffy; SubBi 11; Rome:
Editrice Ponticio Istituto Biblico, 1988), 1, and F. F. Bruce, Prophetic Interpre-
tation in the Septuagint, BIOSCS 12 (1979): 1726, repr. in The Place is Too Small
for Us: The Israelite Prophets in Recent Scholarship (ed. R. P. Gordon; Winona
Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1995), 53946.
20. For interesting surveys of the interpretation of Isaiah in antiquity, see B. S.
Childs, The Struggle to Understand Isaiah as Christian Scripture (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2004), and J. Blenkinsopp, Opening the Sealed Book: Interpretations of
the Book of Isaiah in Late Antiquity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006).
21. A telling example in this regard is the work of J. Schaper, Eschatology in
the Greek Psalter (WUNT 2/76; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995), which, although
1
approach the received version as a theological document, it is important

to bear in mind that, unlike other compositions (such as, e.g., the Qumran
pesharim), it is primarily a translation.22 Though the axiom that every
translation is an interpretation is well known, this is a statement that
needs to be qualied. Unlike an original composition, a translation is
bound to its source text. Even though there will be variations in the
degree of attachment to the Vorlage, the LXX books in general seem to
have at their heart the intent to reproduce or transmit the original Hebrew
or Aramaic text into Greek in a way that is meaningful to their recipients.
Therefore, when studying a given LXX book as a witness to Jewish
exegesis and theology, it is of primary importance to account for how the
translator engaged with the original text before him.23 That is why a
study of his translation technique is required.
While the concept of translation technique has been used by a
number of LXX students in recent years, there is no common denition.
Broadly speaking, the study of translation technique refers to the ways in
which the translator wrestled with his source text to produce a meaning-
ful translation.24 This study is concerned with the translators knowledge
and use of Hebrew and Greek, his lexical and syntactical choices, his
level of attachment to the Vorlage (being mindful of all the inherent
problems in trying to reconstruct it), and his exegetical techniques and
assumptions. Only after conducting such a comprehensive study of the
highlighting some interesting elements of LXX Psalms, suffers from some serious
methodological difculties. See the critical analysis of A. Pietersma, Review of
J. Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, BO 54 (1997): 18590, and C. E.
Cox, Schapers Eschatology meets Krauss Theology of the Psalms, in The Old
Greek Psalter: Studies in Honour of Albert Pietersma (ed. R. J. V. Hiebert et al.;
JSOTSup 332; Shefeld: Shefeld Academic, 2001), 289311.
22. For a good introduction to the complex social factors involved in translation,
and to how they should inuence our assessment of LXX texts, see C. Boyd-Taylor,
Toward the Analysis of Translational Norms: A Sighting Shot, BIOSCS 39 (2006):
2746, and idem, In a Mirror, DimlyReading the Septuagint as a Document of Its
Times, in Septuagint Research: Issues and Challenges in the Study of the Greek
Jewish Scriptures (ed. W. Kraus and R. G. Wooden; SCS 53; Atlanta: Society of
Biblical Literature, 2006), 1531.
23. The Hebrew and Greek texts used for the present study were, respectively,
M. H. Goshen-Gottstein, The Book of Isaiah (The Hebrew University Bible;
Jerusalem: Magnes, 1995), and J. Ziegler, Isaias (3d ed.; SVTG 14; Gttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983).
24. See the denition in E. Tov, The Nature and Study of the Translation Tech-
nique of the Septuagint, in The Greek and Hebrew Bible: Collected Essays on the
Septuagint (VTSup 72; Leiden: Brill, 1999), 23946 (240).
1
1. Introduction 9
overall character of the translation will the scholar be in a position to

evaluate its particular exegetical and theological features.25
The challenges involved in LXX study are intensied when we address
the question of messianism. To the difculty in interpreting the texts
themselves is added the challenge of mapping the wide range of messi-
anic ideas attested between the third and rst centuries B.C.E.26 In the
light of these issues, Salvesen makes the important distinction between
several possible situations: messianic ideas in the original Hebrew text
that were faithfully represented in the Greek translation; concepts not
present in the Hebrew but introduced by the translator; support for
messianic beliefs read into the Greek text by later generations but not
originating with the translator. She adds: Distinguishing these possi-
bilities involves an awareness of the surrounding context of each text,
and of the translation techniques of each specic book.27 These observa-
tions, of course, also apply to the question of eschatology.
While we are faced with several examples of transformations in LXX
Isaiah, these should not always be taken as a window into actualizing
exegesis or theological Tendenz.28 My exegetical analysis of the selected
25. See E. Tov, The Text-Critical Use of the Septuagint in Biblical Research (2d
ed.; Jerusalem: Simor, 1997), 20, and A. Pietersma, Exegesis in the Septuagint:
Possibilities and Limits (The Psalter as a Case in Point), in Kraus and Wooden,
eds., Septuagint Research, 3445.
26. Knibb, The Septuagint and Messianism, 1317, afrms that the Apocrypha
and Pseudepigrapha and the scrolls provide strong evidence for messianic belief in
the rst century B.C.E., but that the data are much less plentiful in the second century.
As for his comments on the lack of indication that messianism ever ourished in
Alexandria, it can be noted that this is not necessarily a problem in the particular
case of LXX Isaiah, if we follow the consensus view that the translator was a
Palestinian scholar working in Egypt. Horbury, Jewish Messianism, 4748, argues
that messianism was already developed in the third century B.C.E., even in
Alexandria, and that this is reected throughout the LXX. This view is inuenced by
Z. Frankel, ber den Einuss der palstinischen Exegese auf die alexandrinische
Hermeneutik (Leipzig: Verlag von Joh. Ambr. Barth., 1831), but while Frankel saw
these traditions originating in Alexandria, Horbury gives greater weight to the
possibility that they may have originated in Palestine. I nd myself in agreement
with Horburys view of the Palestinian origin of messianic traditions, but the early
date he assigns to the development of messianic ideas is more difcult to defend,
especially on the basis of his analysis of particular LXX texts.
27. A. Salvesen, Messianism in Ancient Bible Translations in Greek and Latin,
in Redemption and Resistance: The Messianic Hopes of Jews and Christians in
Antiquity (ed. M. Bockmuehl and J. Carleton Paget; New York: T&T Clark Inter-
national, 2007), 24561 (245).
28. It is worth quoting in full the important insight of T. van der Louw, Trans-
formations in the Septuagint: Towards an Interaction of Septuagint Studies and
1
passages in LXX Isa 112 is carried out according to a framework that

tries to take into account seriously the co-textual matters mentioned
above. Within my model, differences between the Hebrew and Greek
versions of Isaiah will be approached initially in the light of the various
factors that come into play in the work of a translator committed to the
faithful representation of his Vorlage, but who read it in the light of
certain presuppositions and traditions.29
This is the main focus of Chapter 2. Since aspects of the translation
technique of LXX Isaiah have been surveyed by Ziegler, Seeligmann, van
der Kooij, and others, my analysis will focus on what we have called the
translators contextual awareness. In a series of insightful articles and
monographs, Arie van der Kooij has pointed to elements which indicate
a measure of coherence in the pericopes of LXX Isaiah.30 He takes these
to mean that the translator went beyond the simple act of translating and
was effectively engaged in producing oracles in their own right. My
contention is, however, that the indicators of contextual awareness in the
version should not be described primarily in terms of the production of
discrete textual units in Greek. This is not only because of the inconsis-
tency of these indicatorswhich incidentally point to a high degree of
atomization in the translators method, as argued by Seeligmannbut
because of the nature of the translational character of LXX Isaiah.
Van der Kooij himself has correctly suggested that the translator of
Isaiah should be seen as a scribe well versed in the book, a scribe who
had a thorough knowledge of his text and who was possessed of a series
of exegetical presuppositions and techniques. That being the case, it
would not be surprising if the translator employed normal reading
strategies, which included an awareness of context, and allowed this
Translation Studies (CBET 47; Leuven: Peeters, 2007), 9: Certain free renderings
are sometimes regarded as raw material for the historian, viz. as visible traces of the
translator, in which his (midrashic or actualizing) exegesis shows. This is why cer-
tain types of free renderings have become a focus of interest for scholars who try to
reconstruct the historical background of the Septuagint and the translators
Hellenistic and/or Jewish ideology. Yet this concern can easily miss the fact that free
renderings are rst of all linguistic material.
29. See O. Munnich, Le messianisme la lumire des livres prophtiques de la
bible grecque, in Knibb, ed., The Septuagint and Messianism, 32755 (33640), for
the important observations that the Isaiah translator does not seem to reserve a
special place for messianic words, and that in the LXX as well as in other Jewish
literaturee.g. Josephuslexical considerations took primacy over messianic.
30. His most signicant contribution in this regard is A. van der Kooij, The
Oracle of Tyre: The Septuagint of Isaiah XXIII as Version and Vision (VTSup 71;
Leiden: Brill, 1998).
1
1. Introduction 11
awareness to inform his translational decisions at several points.31 My

suggestion is strengthened by the observation of the connection between
text division techniques of the Isaiah translator and mechanisms of
pericope delimitation in ancient manuscripts. This connection indicates
that a sense of text division and pericope coherence was commonplace in
the context of the translator, and traces of this awareness left in the
rendering are more fruitfully described as reections of simple linguistic
processes.
In Chapter 3 I proceed to examine traces of eschatological traditions
which seem to have made their way into the translation of LXX Isaiah.
The observations in the previous chapter with regard to reading strategies
provide the background for the present analysis, as it should be noted
that certain elements in the text, such as section breaks and particular
terminology, could prompt specic ideological and theological expecta-
tions that would inform translational choices. The present study will
focus particularly on LXX Isa 2:14 and 4:26, because of their signi-
cance as eschatological oracles.
Chapters 46 are devoted to the messianic oracles in Isa 112.
Together with an exegetical study of each specic oracle, I offer an
analysis of their immediate context in the light of the discussion in the
rst chapters of this study. This is done in order to make some observa-
tions regarding the eschatological and messianic conceptions displayed
in the rendering. Chapter 4 focuses on the Immanuel oracle in LXX Isa
7:1416, arguably the most intensely debated LXX text in history. Treat-
ments of the passage, whether ancient or modern, tend to centre on the
use of
in v. 14, but there have been signicant recent studies
which take the broader context of the oracle into consideration. My
discussion is carried out in dialogue with these studies. Chapter 5 deals
with LXX Isa 9:56(67). Of the passages surveyed, this is the one
with the highest number of renderings which can properly be called
31. One can here evoke the identication by J. Barr, The Typology of Literalism
in Ancient Biblical Translation (MSU 15; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
1979), 29697, of two sides in the process of translation: the input side and the
expression side. The translator most probably did, as a normal reader, understand the
unit he was translating contextually (input). His choice of expressing segments in a
connected or unconnected manner belongs to the expression side. The assumption
that on the input side the translator read his text as a coherent meaningful unit is
certainly correct, but I would like to suggest that, on the expression side, the inser-
tion of several connecting elements as well as the contextual nature of some vocabu-
lary choices result from attempts to produce a good representation of the perceived
meaning of the Vorlage, without necessarily making a conscious effort at achieving
a new coherence.
1
actualizing or messianic. These are displayed not only in the transla-

tion of the birth/enthronement titles of the promised child, but in a series
of exegetical manoeuvres throughout 8:239:6(9:17). In Chapter 6, I
turn to LXX Isa 11:15, which, although widely interpreted in a messi-
anic sense in early Judaism, offers very few insights into the translators
thinking. This is because, of all the sections analyzed, LXX Isa 11 follows
its Vorlage the closest. However, the chapter as a whole still has some
sparse but signicant examples of actualization that shed light on the
eschatological hopes of the translator and his community. Chapter 7
closes the study with a summary and conclusions.
Once a thorough linguistic analysis of the eschatological and messi-
anic oracles of LXX Isa 112 is carried out, we shall see that theological
elements in the rendering are generally in step with other trends of
Second Temple Judaism, indicating that the translator shared some exe-
getical and theological conceptions with other early Jewish groups. At
the same time, it is possible to detect some features which seem to be
unique to the translator or his community. However, because of the
complexities involved in the study of an ancient translation, and in the
light of the framework outlined above, we suggest that many renderings
that have been seen as theologically motivated should not be understood
as such; nor is it possible to detect any kind of systematization.
1
Chapter 2
THE TRANSLATOR AS READER
1. Actualizing Interpretation and Contextual Readings

in LXX Isaiah
While contemporary scholarship on LXX Isaiah is indebted to Seelig-
manns observations on the theology of the translator, it has departed
signicantly from one of the distinctive hallmarks of his approach,
namely, his contention that actualizing exegesis is to be found in
isolated free renderings.1 While acknowledging that LXX Isaiah gave
indications of a preference for certain terms and theological notions,
Seeligmann was sceptical with regard to particularly ingenious and
particularly purposeful efforts to discover logical connexions in any
chapter or part of a chapter in our Septuagint-text.2 This is a very
important factor in Seeligmanns approach. For him, it is related to a
primitive feature of ancient Jewish exegesis, particularly of the Targums:
the atomistic reading of passages without regard for their immediate
context.
The most signicant point of departure noticeable in contemporary
scholarship of LXX Isaiah vis--vis Seeligmanns work is precisely the
attempt to read actualizing renderings in context. In this regard, the
contribution of A. van der Kooij deserves special mention. He draws
on the studies of J. M. Coste and J. C. M. das Neves3 and afrms that
actualizing renderings should not be viewed in isolation but within their
larger settings. The Greek is thus conceived as a literary and theological
unit, a text in its own right.4 Van der Kooij argues that the studies of
Coste and das Neves raise the issue of coherence in pericopes or even
1. Seeligmann, Isaiah, 4.
2. Ibid., 4142.
3. J. M. Coste, Le texte grec dIsae, XXV, 15, RB 61 (1954): 3666; J. C. M.
das Neves, A Teologia dos Setenta no Livro de Isaas (Lisbon: Universidade
Catlica Portuguesa, 1973).
1
4. Van der Kooij, Isaiah in the Septuagint, 51516.
chapters of LXX Isaiah, and this would mean a criticism of the view of
Seeligmann that exegetical free renderings should be considered isolated
from their context.5 Reading the version in this way, he argues, prevents
one from analyzing LXX Isaiah in an atomistic or fragmentary way.6
It is interesting to note that, like Seeligmann, van der Kooij also seeks
to t the work of the translator within a wider exegetical context, afrm-
ing that he prefers the pericope to single word or single verse analysis in
view of the scribal and reading practices of the ancient world.7 He
argues that the translator of LXX Isaiah is a learned scribe, someone
trained in the reading ( / ,) of the text.8 The practice of
reading the text involves its study and interpretation, which indicates
that the translator read his text in the light of current exegetical traditions
within the scribal milieu. This implies the occurrence of some inter-
pretation, on the basic level, at least, of a Hebrew text like that of the
book of Isaiah.9 This, for van der Kooij, shows that one is not to look at
the word level only. The reading is the rst step, the second is the level
of interpretation (-), which might refer to several types of
interpretation, pertaining to words, idioms, and clauses. Van der Kooij
argues that this is in line not only with the practice of reading texts in
the context of a scribal school, but also with what is known about the
skill of the grammarian in Alexandria. He schematizes the model as
reading + interpretation = translation.10
5. Ibid., 516.
6. Van der Kooij, The Oracle of Tyre, 17. There are two different systematic
outlines of his method for the study of LXX Isaiah. They appear in A. van der Kooij,
Accident or Method? On Analogical Interpretation in the Old Greek of Isaiah and
in 1QIsa, BO 43 (1986): 36675, and in pp. 819 of The Oracle of Tyre.
7. Van der Kooij, Accident or Method?, 367. This is taken up again in idem,
The Oracle of Tyre, 15.
8. Van der Kooij, The Oracle of Tyre, 116, denes reading as a clear pronunci-
ation of each word, and a clear intonation related to a division of words into clauses
and sentences. In the case of Hebrew texts which were unpointed and unaccented,
such a reading implies an interpretation of the text, not only of single words, but also
on the level of clauses and sentences Elements of syntax and semantics are clearly
involved. His emphasis on the oral reading of verses is signicant. A. Lonas,
Laube des traducteurs: De lhbreu au grec: traducteurs et lecteurs de la Bible des
Septante (Paris: Cerf, 2007), 11326, has demonstrated that while oral reading was
not the exclusive way of reading texts in antiquity, it was very important. This
practice helps to explain many deviations in the LXX, as in the rendering of by
% in 8:15, which could have been prompted by confusion with the sound of
(draw near). This verse will be examined later in the present chapter.
9. Van der Kooij, The Oracle of Tyre, 113.
1
10. Ibid., 117.
2. The Translator as Reader 15
The contribution of van der Kooij in directing our attention to a more

contextual reading of LXX Isaiah is invaluable, and, as we shall see, the
translator gives repeated evidence of a basic awareness of context when
producing his renderings. There is, however, one important qualication
to be made, and that concerns van der Kooijs view of the translators
reading of Isaiah as a prophecy. He argues: The underlying issue here
is that of the genre of the text: has a prophetic passage from the book of
Isaiah been translated into Greek as a text only from a linguistic or
philological point of view, or as a text which was understood as making
sense as prophecy at the time of the translator?11
Van der Kooij sees a free translation as the attempt to produce a ver-
sion which is idiomatically adequate in the target language. Therefore, he
argues that this is not an appropriate qualication for LXX Isaiah. For
him, a passage such as LXX Isa 25:15 is not to be seen as an adequate
version, but a type of rewritten or rephrased text, which is best under-
stood as expressing an actualizing interpretation of this oracular pas-
sage.12 He thus sees actualizing interpretation as a reworking of the
original Hebrew that virtually creates a new oracle, or pericope.
Van der Kooijs starting point is the observation that Isa 1:1 makes
reference to the (vision) of Isaiah, which is rendered in the LXX by
0. Whether or not this is intended as a designation for the whole
book, the general understanding of as a prophecy or prophetic
collection seems to be reected in LXX usage.13 This is more clearly
seen, for example, in LXX Dan 11:14, where is rendered by --
(Theodotion has 0), and in the consistent practice in the
Targum of rendering with .14 In the light of these observations,
van der Kooij argues that through the designation the Isaiah trans-
11. Van der Kooij, Isaiah in the Septuagint, 516 (original emphasis).
12. Ibid., 519.
13. For a discussion of the meaning and signicance of the superscription in Isa
1:1, see H. Wildberger, Isaiah 112: A Commentary (trans. T. H. Trapp; CC;
Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 6.
14. Elsewhere in Daniel, both 0 and 0 are used. The relationship
between and verbal communication is clear in texts in which and are
connected, namely, Ps 89:19(88:20); Isa 2:1; Jer 14:14; Hos 12:11(10). Whether or
not A. Jepsen, , TDOT 4:28890, is correct in downplaying the visual element
in the Hebrew usages of , the LXX consistently resorts to derivates of the 1-
root. The Greek term 0 is the most common LXX equivalent for , as in
1 Sam 3:1; Jer 14:14; 23:16; Lam 2:9; Ezek 7:26; 12:22, 23, 24; Hos 12:11; Obad 1;
Nah 1:1, and Hab 2:2. In general, 0 can refer simply to the act of seeing (LXX
Gen 2:9), but also to a supernatural or prophetic vision (LXX Jer 14:14; Dan 8:1).
0 is another common equivalent (cf. LXX Dan 8:2, 13, 15, 17; 9:24).
1
lator sees the individual prophecies within the book also as visions.
Van der Kooij suggests that both the writer of Daniel and the translator
of LXX Isaiah perceived themselves to be endowed with an inspired
insight into the interpretation of these visions (cf. Dan 2:21). For van
der Kooij, the insight of the translator enabled him to see the fullment
of Isaianic predictions in events of the rst half of the second century
B.C.E. In his capacity as a scribe endowed with special insight, the trans-
lator reads his pericopes and, in the process of translation, in practice
rewrites the oracle into Greek.
It is my contention that, while correct in pointing to an awareness of
context and to a sense of reading prophecy on the part of the translator,
van der Kooij seems to overstretch the evidence in claiming that the
translator is rewriting his oracle into Greek. It is true that, analyzed in
their own right, the Greek oracles could make sense as literary and theo-
logical units. The question is how much of this resides in the translators
intention and how much depends on the subsequent reader, ancient or
modern, of the Greek translation.
In other words, are there any mechanisms that enable the student to
ascertain whether the translator simply intended to render a particular
pericope into Greek in a meaningful way or whether he had the intention
of producing a new oracular unit in Greek? This is a very important
question, because van der Kooij is right in his contention that the context
is signicant for understanding renderings of LXX Isaiah.15 However,
there will be signicant differences in our perception of the work of the
translator if we also see him as a kind of Daniel, engaged in the
production of fresh prophecies based on older ones.
In dealing with ch. 23 of Isaiah (The Oracle of Tyre), van der Kooij
relies on the following elements to determine whether it constitutes a
text in its own right.16 First, he draws on stylistic data (such as parallel-
ism, vocabulary, and the use of specic coordinating clauses); second, on
renderings which are characteristic of ch. 23 but not of the rest of LXX
Isaiah or the LXX as a whole; and third, on passages constituting a syn-
tactic unit different from the MT.
However, these criteria do not seem in themselves to indicate an
attempt to rewrite the prophecies. All the phenomena adduced by van
der Kooij could arguably be explained on linguistic grounds, simply as
15. Van der Kooij, The Oracle of Tyre, 16, states that it is crucial to the method
applied to LXX Isaiah not to isolate Greek words from their actual context, but to try
to understand them as part of their given context.
1
16. Ibid., 7587.
attempts to represent and communicate the basic meaning of the text, as

understood by the translator. With regard to the rst of van der Kooijs
criteria (stylistic data), one might explain parallelism in structure and
vocabulary consistency (or the lack thereof) in terms of the translation
technical questions faced by the translator in his rendering into Greek
such as the usage of words in the original, the need to write meaningful
Koin, and so on.and not necessarily as attempts to produce coherent
textual units. The same could be said about the criterion of uncommon
renderings. Another consideration is the character of the translational
work of LXX Isaiah and the inconsistencies that it presents.17
As far as syntactical deviations are concerned, a preliminary survey of
LXX Isaiah seems to indicate that the most signicant deviations occur
precisely at the points where the Hebrew is most difcult (e.g. 1:6; 8:11
16, 23[9:1]). This could simply mean that sometimes there is no con-
scious effort to produce actualizing renderings and that these would
come across as the translator attempts to represent what he thinks is the
sense of the original, in which case Seeligmanns contention that actual-
izing passages are to be found in isolated free renderings would make
sense.
In this connection, we may recall Zieglers programmatic remark that,
in order to understand the relationship between LXX and MT Isaiah, the
entire Persnlichkeit of the translator needs to be taken into account.18 In
his comprehensive collation of the variants in the version, Ziegler made
many important observations about the translators paraphrastic tenden-
cies, the nature of the minuses (which for him are most often caused by
the omission of synonymous words or clauses), additions (which are
often inserted to add clarity to the rendering), the connection between
the versions vocabulary and the Greek of Hellenistic Egypt, and the
thorough knowledge that the translator seems to have had of his Isaiah
text as well as of other parts of Scripture, to which he often had recourse
when dealing with difcult passages.19 These features indicate that LXX
Isaiah can be called a free translation in the sense that it seeks to repre-
sent its text in a non-literal, albeit faithful manner. This is the opposite
of van der Kooijs perception of the nature of the translation.
17. See Seeligmann, Isaiah, 4143, for a summary of his view of the linguistic
character of LXX Isaiah. Barr, Typology, 284, 302, espouses a very negative view of
the translator, referring to him as careless.
18. Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 7.
19. See a helpful summary of Zieglers contribution in van der Kooij, Isaiah in
the Septuagint, 51314.
1
Zieglers insights are still to a large extent useful, particularly in

providing a framework for dealing with the character of LXX Isaiah from
a linguistic standpoint. From Ziegler onwards, the standard view of the
version is that the translator displays a characteristically good Koin, but
also that he has some difculty with his Hebrew text and is very incon-
sistent in his approach. My research has conrmed this consensus. In the
light of these observations, I would like to propose a more fruitful way of
looking at the signicant differences between the MT and LXX versions of
Isaiah. These should not be attributed to a translator bent on producing
fresh prophecies using his Hebrew text as a sort of springboard; rather,
they are born out of the fact that the translator of LXX Isaiah, while
displaying a marked commitment to his Vorlage,20 belonged within an
interpretative and ideological context which shaped his reading in
particular ways. In other words, van der Kooij may be correct in arguing
that passages of LXX Isaiah can be read as new oracles in their own right
vis--vis the Hebrew text, but it is quite another thing to say that this is
the intention of the translator.
To be sure, eschatology and messianism are the spheres in which the
intentionality of the translator would be more marked. I am by no
means denying that the translator, at points, intended some translational
deviation. There are numerous examples of various types of adjust-
ments throughout the translation, as we shall see in the course of the
present study. My point is simply that the evidence of some level of
contextual awareness by the translator should not be described in terms
of the rewriting of prophetic pericopes in Greek. If we take into account
the fact that mechanisms of pericope delimitation are evident in ancient
texts together with van der Kooijs observations on the reading and
interpretation skills of the ancient scribe, we can afrm that a level of
contextual awareness was an integral part of the process of reading. It
would not, therefore, be surprising to detect traces of this awareness,
even if inconsistently, in a translated text. These traces would then not be
a necessary indication of an attempt to produce a coherent composition
in Greek, but a reection of the translators reading strategies when
interpreting his Hebrew text. To illustrate this, this study proceeds to a
comparison between systems of text division in early Isaianic textual
witnesses and features of the LXX version.
1
20. Cf. Baer, When We All Go Home, 1516, 278.
2. Pericope Delimitation in LXX Isaiah

and Early Textual Witnesses
In recent years attention has been given to text division markers in
ancient manuscripts and their signicance for exegesis, particularly of
Isaiah.21 This study can potentially help illuminate the translation tech-
nique and interpretative methods of the LXX, since, as Tov has noted, it is
likely that at least some of the translators transferred the sense divisions
from the Hebrew manuscripts to the manuscripts of the translations. He
also observes that in the course of the transmission of these translations,
the original sense divisions were often obliterated.22
This is important to keep in mind because, in the case of Isaiah, there
are instances, such as 7:5 and 10:10b, where the divergence between the
Hebrew manuscript tradition and Greek texts such as Codex Alexandri-
nus and Codex Vaticanus could be explained as having originated in
peculiarities of the Greek translation. The fact that the Greek manuscript
evidence has been transmitted mostly by Christians should also be taken
into account whenever an attempt is made to reconstruct the translators
exegesis.
We shall attempt, therefore, to ascertain whether clues to the reading
method of the translator can be perceived in the wording of the translation
21. Cf. J. M. Oesch, Petucha und Setuma (OBO 27; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1979); idem, Textgliederung im Alten Testament und in den Qumran-
handschriften, Henoch 5 (1983): 289321; M. C. A. Korpel and J. M. Oesch,
Delimitation Criticism: A New Tool in Biblical Scholarship (Pericope 1; Assen: Van
Gorcum, 2000), and Studies in Scriptural Unit Division (Pericope 3; Assen: Van
Gorcum, 2002); J. W. Olley, Hear the Word of Yahweh: The Structure of the
Book of Isaiah in 1QIsaa, VT 43 (1993): 1949; idem, Texts Have Paragraphs
TooA Plea for Inclusion in Critical Editions, Text 19 (1998): 11125; idem, No
Peace in a Book of Consolation: A Framework for the Book of Isaiah, VT 49
(1999): 35170; O. H. Steck, Die Erste Jesajarolle von Qumran (1QIsa). Schreib-
weise als Leseanleitung fr ein Prophetenbuch (2 vols.; SBS 173; Stuttgart:
Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1998); idem, Bemerkungen zur Abschnittgliederung der
ersten Jesajarolle von Qumran (IQIsa) im Vergleich mit redaktionsgeschichtlichen
Beobachtungen im Jesajabuch, in Antikes Judentum und Frhes Christentum.
Festschrift fr Hartmut Stegemann zum 65. Geburtstag (ed. B. Kollmann et al.;
BZNW 97; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1999), 1228; idem, Bemerkungen zur Abschnitt-
gliederung in den Jesaja-Handschriften aus der Wste Juda. Ein Vergleich auf der
Grundlage von 1QIsaa, in Die Textfunde vom Toten Meer und der Text der
Hebrischen Bibel (ed. U. Dahmen et al.; NeukirchenVluyn: Neukirchener Verlag,
2000), 5390.
22. E. Tov, The Background of the Sense Divisions in the Biblical Texts, in
Korpel and Oesch, eds., Delimitation Criticism, 31250 (312).
1
itself, when compared with Hebrew texts, primarily Masoretic or from

the Judean desertwhich latter can be seen as roughly contemporary
with our translation, if the current consensus of mid-second century
B.C.E. holds. When such a comparison is made, some interesting results
appear.
2.1. LXX Isaiah 1:2127

We rst look at Isa 1:2127. In modern commentaries, it is common to
read these verses with a break, established on form-critical grounds,
between vv. 26 and 27, thus determining vv. 2126 as a prophecy of
doom. However, 1QIsaa, as well as Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Alexan-
drinus, presents text divisions at vv. 20, 23, and 27, but not at 26. The
break after v. 27 is signicant, because it changes the reading of the
oracle from a prophecy of doom to a prophecy of conditional healing and
restoration. This is all the more interesting in the light of the practice in
the early synagogue of ending the reading of units with a reference to
restoration rather than doom.23 If we look at the pericope with our form-
critical lenses, we shall be concerned at the destruction of the poetic
structure of the section. However, the question of the meaning of the
prophecy took priority at the time of the copying of the manuscript.24
Now, in the LXX rendering, v. 27 is syntactically connected with v. 26
by means of the insertion of , which would not have been
authorized by a Vorlage of a Masoretic type. This indicates that the
translator also saw v. 27 as bound with the previous verse, in accordance
with text division traditions in vogue in his time.
23. Cf. J. Mann, The Bible as Read and Preached in the Old Synagogue: A Study
in the Cycles of the Readings from Torah and Prophets, as well as from Psalms, and
in the Structure of the Midrashic Homilies (2 vols.; Cincinnati: Mann-Sonne
Publication Committee, 194066). Although the evidence studied by Mann is late,
Philos treatment of the biblical text in Questions on Genesis and On Exodus could
be an indication that the Hellenistic Synagogue followed some text divisions which
would later correspond to parashiyyot and haftarot. Cf. F. Siegert, Hellenistic
Jewish Midrash I: Beginnings, in Encyclopedia of Midrash: Biblical Interpretation
in Formative Judaism (ed. J. Neusner and A. J. Avery Peck; 2 vols.; Leiden: Brill,
2005), 1:199220 (202). See further, idem, Drei hellenistisch-jdische Predigten.
PS.-Philon, ber Jona, ber Simson. Vol. 2, Kommentar nebst Beobachtungen
zur hellenistischen Vorgeschichte der Bibelhermeneutik (WUNT 61; Tbingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 1992), 2931.
24. See the analysis of M. C. A. Korpel, Introduction to the Series Pericope, in
Korpel and Oesch, eds., Delimitation Criticism, 150 (12).
1
2.2. LXX Isaiah 2:5, 10; 3:13

LXX Isa 112 gives other linguistic indications of possible section breaks
at 2:5, 10 and 3:13, which also seem to correspond with the text division
tradition of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the MT. At the opening of 2:5 and
2:10 we nd the addition # %, which seems to introduce a new
thought, syntactical unit, or section. Cazelles suggests that the # % in
2:5, which is not authorized by the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic
tradition, was inuenced by Mic 4:4. The is not authorized by the MT
of Isaiah, but it is by the MT of Mic 4:4, which begins with

.25 However, in view of the freedom of the Isaiah translator to
make insertions, literary relationships between the texts of Isaiah and
Micah do not seem to be the issue at this point. # % possibly indi-
cates that, for the translator, v. 5 is the beginning of a new thought/syn-
tactical unit, if not a new section. Though many modern commentators
disregard the petua at the end of v. 4 in MT, the LXX addition supports
the text division at this point, as also do, in particular, 1QIsaa and 4QIsab
(fragment 2), which have line breaks.
In 2:10, which is separated from v. 9 by text breaks in the MT and the
Dead Sea Scrolls, # % again does not have a Hebrew counterpart and
could be an indicator of a section break, as in 2:5. The pericope in 2:10
22 is characterized by the announcement of a coming day of the Lord,
when he will be exalted and in the process will humiliate and destroy all
that stands against him. The translation of v. 10 is particularly interesting
because it is overall quite literal, but with the peculiar addition of 0
,2! % 3 2 (when he rises to shatter the earth) at the end
of the verse. The weight of textual evidence in favour of the MT and the
fact that the wording is exactly as that of the refrains in vv. 19 and 21
could point in the direction of an attempt at harmonization.
It is also interesting to note that, in the LXX of 2:1021,26 the various
terms used to describe exaltation and humiliation are translated with a
much more restricted and consistent vocabulary in Greek. In the section,
the humiliation of man is conveyed with the use of the / -
group to translate the Hebrew roots and .27 The section is
prefaced by 2:9, where (to be low) is rendered as (to
25. H. Cazelles, Texte massortique et Septante en Is. 2,15, in Festschrift

Dominique Barthlemy (ed. P. Casetti; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1981),
5159 (56).
26. Verse 22 is entirely omitted in the LXX.
27. See further Ottley, Isaiah, 2:113. Here the perfective form is rendered with
the future, which could indicate a distinct understanding of a prophetic perfect, in
a way followed by most modern versions.
1
humble), as is also the case in v. 12. The same Hebrew term is rendered
by (humble) in 2:11 and by the verb (to fall) in 2:17.
The root - is, in fact, the most common equivalent for
throughout the LXX, and it is also preferred in Isaiah.28 The verb -
refers to humiliation, whether specically the plight of the Jewish
people under foreign oppressors, or the coming punishment of the
wicked. It renders a variety of Hebrew terms: (2:9, 12; 5:15; 10:33;
13:11; 25:1112; 29:4; 40:4; 57:9); (2:11, 17; 5:15; 25:1112;
26:5); (3:25[26]; 51:23; 58:3; 60:14; 64:11[12]). It is also employed
in some particularly free renderings with no apparent Hebrew counter-
parts (1:25; 3:9[8], 17; 25:11), which indicates the translators preference
for the term. Words derived from *6 are favoured to convey the idea
of elevation or exaltation. *6 renders in 2:11, (with

) in 2:12 and 14, in 2:13, and and in 2:15. 86
translates in 2:11 and 17. *6 translates (Niphal) in 2:11 and
17.29
If we take the section as a whole, we can see that the translator con-
gures the contrast exaltation/humiliation somewhat differently from
the MT. In the Hebrew it is expressed by a number of literary devices,
such as wordplay, parallelism, and, primarily, choice of vocabulary. In
the LXX the general thrust of the Hebrew is preserved, but on a formal
level there are signicant changes, characterized mainly by the use of a
much simpler vocabulary employed for a variety of different Hebrew
terms. The opposition between words derived from the groups *6 and
sets the tone of the passage. The choice of terms would have
been prompted simply by the translators observation that the Greek
equivalents were the most adequate in the light of the meaning of the
different Hebrew words, without much regard for the structure of the
text. Even with the apparent disregard for Hebrew literary features, an
apparent new coherence emerges, one which can be seen in the preserva-
tion of refrains in vv. 11 and 17, and their harmonization in vv. 10, 19,
21. This new coherence, however, does not seem to be intentional.
Moving on to 3:13, we nd the addition , % at the beginning of
the verse, introducing the rising of the Lord in judgment. If insertions
such as # % and , % can be seen as opening new syntactic or
28. However, see the interesting choice of , 9 in 5:15.

29. In spite of this preference noted above, the translator is not absolutely con-
sistent. , renders in 2:9, which reects the understanding of the word with
the sense of forgive (also with the possibility of inner Greek corruption), *
translates in 2:12, *- translates in 2:12, and
translates
in 2:13.
1
thought units, or new sections, 3:13 becomes signicant in the light of

the fact that 1QIsaa has a long paragraph break, and the MT has a setuma
before this verse.
2.3. LXX Isaiah 6:1

Also interesting is the apparent insertion of #
at the beginning
of 6:1. In LXX Isaiah the construction #
occurs nine times
(6:1; 7:1; 12:2; 36:1; 37:1; 38:4; 42:22; 48:19; 63:8). It can be seen as a
standard (stereotyped) equivalent of the Hebrew

.30 In 7:1; 36:1; 37:1,
and 38:4 it appears at the head of a narrative section, in standard Hebrew
fashion.31 It is well known that #
is the most basic way of
introducing narratives throughout the LXX, as well as in the New Testa-
ment, there undoubtedly under the inuence of LXX usage.32 Its employ-
ment at 6:1 without an underlying Hebrew equivalent33 could have been
prompted by the narrative framework of ch. 6.34
2.4. Pericope Delimitation and Reading

The examples discussed above could indicate that the translator had a
sense of text divisions and took them into account when producing his
renderings. As we shall see later, the text breaks could also have func-
tioned as frames, triggering certain expectations regarding the content of
the passage being read and prompting particular translational choices.
This will become clearer when we deal with the eschatological and
messianic oracles.35
30. See the literal rendering of

by #
(
in 12:2, and of

by #
/: ( in 63:8. Isa
48:19 is another instance in which #
translates

not introducing a
narrative section.
31. A signicant verse is 42:22, which in the LXX is cast into a narrative frame-
workhere the actualization points to the past instead of the present or future.
This recasting is effected by a peculiar reading of the verb tenses and by the
insertion of #
at the beginning of the verse.
32. Cf. Matt 7:28; Mark 4:4; Luke 1:23. For further discussion on the inuence
of the LXX on the New Testament, see N. Fernndez Marcos, The Septuagint in
Context: Introduction to the Greek Versions of the Bible (trans. W. G. E. Watson;
Leiden: Brill, 2000), 32037.
33. Although Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 62, suggests that the Vorlage may have
contained

.
34. For a summary of the narrative and thematic cohesiveness of the section, see
M. A. Sweeney, Isaiah 139: With an Introduction to Prophetic Literature (FOTL
16; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 132.
35. Perhaps a signicant example already comes to light when comparing the
superscriptions in 1:1 and 2:1. In both superscriptions, the vision (or word) of Isaiah
1
However, a few caveats are in order. First, one notes that distinctive
markers of text breaks, or the lack of them, in the wording of the trans-
lation are characteristic only of this short section of Isaiah. In the rest of
the book, the Greek wording follows the Hebrew closely at all the
important section breaks, so that specic conclusions regarding the trans-
lators text division system cannot be so easily drawn.
Moreover, if the analogy between the work of the translator and of the
scribe holds, we do not know to what extent scribes were engaged in in-
depth analysis of the content of pericopes.36 In spite of the attempts of
scholars such as Olley and Steck, there is no certainty as to what ration-
ale lies behind the system(s) of text division in the Hebrew manuscript
tradition. Similarly, even if we acknowledge that the translator followed,
at least to some degree, scribal traditions of text delimitation, we are still
not sure how he would conceptualize pericopes or textual units.
There are considerable differences between the way the ancients
conceived units of text and modern conceptual categories of paragraph,
pericope or, even, book.37 The evidence that the copying of longer
textual passages was part of the education of young pupils in Graeco-
Roman Egypt indicates that the notion of textual units was a normal part
of the reading of texts in antiquity, though the precise understanding of
these units was probably conceptualized differently.38 This is more clearly
indicated in the teaching of the grammarian in Hellenistic Egypt, which
included a strong rhetorical component and stressed punctuation and
is said to be

. In 1:1 this is rendered by 2 ; #
; , while 2:1 has # 2 ; # # ; . Syntacti-
cally, the two renderings are identical, sharing the repetition of the preposition even
though occurs only once in the Hebrew. This highlights the only conceivably
signicant difference, namely, the change from (against) to what could be a
more neutral (concerning) as renderings of in the two verses. It is quite
possible that this is due to the differences in the content of the oracles following the
superscriptions, and this could be an indication that the translator took the context
into account. In his translation of 2:1, Ottley, Isaiah, 2:105, opts for concerning,
while also entertaining the possibility of against, on the basis of 2 Sam 1:17; Matt
5:11; Acts 6:13, and the data presented by LSJ.
36. Tov, Background, 314.
37. Cf. J. Barton, What is a Book? Modern Exegesis and the Literary
Conventions of Ancient Israel, in Intertextuality in Ugarit and Israel (ed. J. C.
de Moor; OtSt 40; Leiden: Brill, 1998), 114.
38. See the survey of school exercises progressing from the level of the letter, the
syllable, the sentence, and nally the longer text unit by R. Cribiore, Writings,
Teachers, and Students in Graeco-Roman Egypt (ASP 36; Atlanta: Scholars Press,
1996).
1
other devices, such as the use of paragraphos signs, to help the student
decode texts and break them down into meaningful units. These units
were different from the modern notion of pericope, and were under-
stood more in terms of sentence breaks, dialogue delimiters, or prosodic
categories, such as tropes.39
The comparison between ancient text division systems and trans-
lational marks of LXX Isaiah is very signicant in giving us an insight
into how texts were read and translated in antiquity. It also gives us a
new perspective to approach the apparent internal coherence of pericopes
in LXX Isaiah. If it is true that the Isaiah translator took notice of the
pericope delimitations in his Vorlage and, consequently, read his text
with a sense of contextual coherence, then we should not be surprised if
this awareness is felt in the translation. In other words, indications of
contextual awareness or internal coherence in the Greek text, even if
different from the Hebrew, do not point to a supposed intention to pro-
duce a Greek oracle in its own right, but simply give insight into how the
translator read the text and tried to represent it. Also, since the notion of
pericope was conceptualized differently in antiquity, an awareness of text
delimitation is no guarantee against readings that we would consider
atomistic, but which could comfortably co-exist with more contextual
ones. The question is how best to explain these indications of coherence
or contextual awareness.
3. Contextual Awareness as Reading Strategy

An important insight to be gained from cognitive linguistic approaches
is the notion that comprehension of meaning does not come simply from
understanding the meaning of words and sentences, or solely on the
literal decoding of linguistic structures.40 Brown and Yule, for instance,
argue convincingly that, besides the linguistic knowledge necessary for
understanding, one also draws from other cognitive factors, such as the
assumption of coherence, the principles of analogy, local interpretation
and general features of context, the regularities of discourse structure,
and the regular features of information structure. Besides these rules
that govern the functioning of discourse, the reader is informed, on a
39. R. Cribiore, Gymnastics of the Mind: Greek Education in Hellenistic and

Roman Egypt (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001), 19091. Cf. G. W.
Rutherford, A Chapter in the History of Annotation, being Scholia Aristophanica
(3 vols.; London: Macmillan, 1905), 3:200203.
40. G. Brown and G. Yule, Discourse Analysis (CTL; Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1983), 223.
1
fundamental level, by socio-cultural knowledge that shapes the inter-

pretation in particular ways.41
Let us go back to Isa 2:1021(22). It is readily noticeable that this
section forms a coherent unit in Hebrew. Its contents as well as the text
division indicators in manuscripts would have invited the translator to
read the text with at least some assumption of coherence, as cognitive
linguists would express it. Even though the atomistic reading of verses
was largely a feature of ancient exegesis, the fact that texts were written
as discrete units makes it reasonable to assume that, at least to some
degree, they were also read as such. The assumption of coherence,
together with other expectations with regard to the functioning of a
passage such as Isa 2:1021, is the most likely explanation of the attempt
to harmonize the refrains in the section. It is a quite natural move for an
interpreter immersed in the Hebrew text to expect that the repeated
refrains display a certain unity and for him to express this in his trans-
lation.
4. Reading Strategy and Ideological Imprints

The mechanisms of actualizing interpretation are intimately connected
with cognitive reading strategies. It is likely that, in line with other
streams of ancient Jewish exegesis, the LXX Isaiah translator held certain
expectations and assumptions regarding his text, and interpreted it
according to certain socially inherited norms, among which was the idea
that the text prophetically addressed his contemporary situation.
Certain passages offer themselves more readily to be read in an
actualizing manner, particularly those with eschatological and messianic
themes, and those which somehow address the plight of the Jewish
community. In such texts it is easier to perceive ideological imprints of
a translator who, while trying to represent his Vorlage faithfully, inter-
preted it in particular ways. This is clearly seen, for instance, in the
rendering of Isa 1:25:

# + 3 : # <

# = (

$ < , % ,

# ,-) , ,> %
# *- =
1
41. Ibid., 225.
And I shall turn my hand against you; And I shall bring my hand upon you;
and I shall smelt your dross away And I shall burn you into pure,
like lye,
and I shall remove all your alloy. but the disobedient I shall destroy,
and I shall remove all the lawless
from you,
and all the proud I shall humble.
In 1:25, the translator bypasses the metaphor of metallurgy and gives the
meaning in clear terms, including a signicant explanatory addition at
the end of the verse (represented in italics). It is not entirely clear
whether he understood the words in the Hebrew precisely, but it is likely
that he could grasp at least the general sense of the allusion to a puri-
cation process.42 The rendering gives a clear example of the ideological
presuppositions of the translator and the process by which they are
imprinted in the translation.43
42. The rendering of

! by # = ( is worthy
of note. There is a measure of uncertainty with regard to the meaning of and
,
but the ancient versions seem to envisage a process of purifying silver. by
= is a good translation that reects the translators understanding of the
process. The same can be said of the rendering of the nal portion of the sentence,
which departs from a strict representation of form but clearly reects the process of
purication of metals. Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 81, sees in the rendering of and
examples of the translators use of familiar terms to represent words whose
meaning is unknown to him. For Ziegler, the rendering of

by , in
1:22 is further evidence of the translators ignorance of the meaning of
.
However, the fact that in LXX Prov 25:4 we have the expression , ,
could indicate that the Isaiah translators use of , displays some awareness
of the metallurgical application of the terms. Awareness of the metallurgical
meaning of the words could also be gleaned from the rendering of . Wildberger,
Isaiah 112, 60, suggests that means potash, lye, pointing out that the Greek
( indicates that the translator understood the Hebrew to denote purity,
as is also the case with Vulgates ad purum.
43. The rendering of the Targum contains an explicit clarication of the sense of
the metaphor, as the Lord states that
!
(I will separate, as
those who purify with lye), adding the object
! (all your wicked), and
also stating that he will remove all
(your sinners). B. D. Chilton, The Isaiah

Targum: Introduction, Translation, Apparatus, and Notes (ArBib 11; Edinburgh:
T. & T. Clark, 1987), 5, notes that in 1:27 the Targum makes explicit that the separa-
tion of the wicked envisaged in v. 25 is in the interests of the ones who have
performed the law (original emphasis). The question whether the LXX and the
Targum are following general linguistic conventions or a common exegetical tradi-
tion is left open. For a more detailed discussion, see J. Koenig, LHermneutique
analogique du judasme antique daprs les tmoins textuels dIsae (VTSup 33;
Leiden: Brill, 1982), 8384.
1
With the addition of after # =, which is obviously inu-

enced by
previously in the verse, the translator explicitly directs the
Lords rening activity to the people. Apparently, the free rendering $
< , % ,
(And I shall destroy the disobedient) reects

, with the addition of the verb.44
The meaning of

was possibly obscure to the translator. It is not
obvious whether

underlies , % or , . The rst
rendering would have been made possible via a reading of or
(cf. v. 23). In favour of the latter possibility there is the presence of ,>
%, which connects with the sufx of the Hebrew word.45 The difculty
in identifying a possible formal connection between
and ? is
balanced by the observation that the Greek term is repeatedly preferred
by the translator, being used as an equivalent of in 1:28; 48:8;
53:12, in 3:11, in 9:14(15) and 57:4, in 9:16(17); 10:6;
32:6, in 13:11, "
in 29:20, in 31:6, in 32:7, # in 33:14,
in 55:7, in 57:3, and it is added with no equivalent in 1:31 and
66:3. The rendering of

by , seemed adequate to the
translator in the light of the content of the verse and the expectations that
it triggered.46
,
is also a term preferred by the translator, and it is employed
in a variety of contexts. In 1:23, this verb was used to translate with
reference to the ? of Jerusalem.47 The verb renders also in
65:2. Other equivalents are (30:12), (3:8; 50:5; 63:10), and
(36:5).
44. As for the possibility of , the Hiphil of is never rendered by ,

but is rendered by ,-
in Gen 48:17; Exod 33:23; Lev 1:16; Num 21:7; 1 Sam
17:26, 39, 46; 2 Sam 4:7; 16:9; 1 Kgs 21(20):41; 2 Kgs 6:32; Isa 1:16; 3:1, 18; 5:5;
10:13; 25:8; 27:9; 58:9, and Zech 3:4.
45. Koenig, LHermneutique analogique, 83, leaves the question of the
translators precise comprehension of the Hebrew words open, but argues that the
renderings of

by , % and of

by , were reached, not
simply by extrapolating the meaning of the metallurgical metaphor, but by exe-
getical reection on the presumed meaning of the roots (discard) and
(separate).
46. D. Levene and B. Rothenberg, Tin and Tin-Lead Alloys in Hebrew and
Jewish Aramaic, in Biblical Hebrew, Biblical Texts: Essays in Honour of Michael
P. Weitzman (ed. A. Rapaport-Albert and G. Greenberg; JSOTSup 333; Shefeld:
Shefeld Academic, 2001), 100112 (1045, 12) suggest that

could mean
[your] alloys, but that the meaning of the word is uncertain. The addition ,> %
comes from the nal
.
1
47. In 8:11, it renders
, understood as derived from .
More signicant is the addition of the last two lines in the Greek, with
the mention of the , (lawless) and the *- (proud).
The last term appears four times in LXX Isaiah. Besides 1:25, it is seen in
2:12 ( ),48 13:11 ("
), and 29:20 ("). It was a signicant term in
Hellenistic Judaism, as is attested, for instance, by Sir 3:28; 21:4, and
23:4.
The idea encompassed by ? is discussed by Seeligmann,
following Flashars study of LXX Psalms, in which it is argued that
? and , are used with a variety of Hebrew equivalents to
indicate various forms of irreligiousness. Seeligmann demonstrates that
the translator frequently employs terms such as , and ? for a
variety of Hebrew equivalents, often in contexts where there is some
difculty in understanding the Vorlage, in connection with words denot-
ing evil practices, or enmity against God or Israel.49 Signicant examples
in this regard are 33:2 and 66:14.
The term ? is connected with @ (sinners) in 1:28, as

#
is rendered by ? # @ . This draws
attention to the rendering, in 1:31, of
by ? # @ -
# A . It is clear that lawless and sinners were conceptual catego-
ries that pertained to the ideological background of the translator and
repeatedly made their way into his renderings, as the objects of divine
wrath. In this connection we note that the addition of # *-
- = in the last line of 1:25 points to what seems to be a
theme on which the translator is keen: the humiliation of the proud.50
Koenig argues that the additions in 1:25 were prompted by LXX Isa
13:11, where

(And I shall put an
end to the pride of the arrogant and I shall abase the haughtiness of the
ruthless) is rendered by # ,) 8 , # 8 *--
= (And I shall destroy the pride of the lawless and the
pride of the exalted I shall humble).51 There are, however, a number of
formal differences between 1:25 and 13:11, so that, as Koenigs analysis
48. The Qal participle is used adjectivally to mean lofty, high, literally or
metaphorically. This is generally rendered in the LXX with the *6/86
group. Isa 2:12 is the only clear instance of the use of the term in Isaiah with a
negative connotation and it is thus uniquely translated by *-.
49. Seeligmann, Isaiah, 105. Cf. M. Flashar, Exegetische Studien zum
Septuagintapsalter, ZAW 32 (1912): 16574 (16970).
50. Incidentally, this is the same theme that underlies 2:1021.
51. Cf. Koenig, LHermneutique analogique, 8486. Ziegler, Untersuchungen,
61, suggests that the inuence is from 1:25 to 13:11. The connection with 13:11 was
previously noted by Ottley, Isaiah, 2:110.
1
itself indicates, such dependence would necessarily imply a number of

formal adjustments. Instead of searching for a detailed explanation of the
precise rationale behind these adjustments, it is best to locate the
afnity between the two verses simply on the conceptual and termi-
nological levels.
We are dealing here with the imprint of elements from the translators
ideological background in the translation. This imprint does not neces-
sarily indicate a conscious desire to update or rewrite the Isaianic
prophecies. We may recall Seeligmann, who, while acknowledging the
interpretative tendency of the translator, was mindful that there are
considerable differences in the origin of the deviations between original
and translation, as well as in the degree of consciousness with which
these deviations were introduced.52 Seeligmann is referring to the far
from infrequent cases where the translator did not understand the Hebrew
text before him, and arbitrarily altered it, or gave an erroneous interpre-
tation of it, and he rightly notes that in essence, such errors in the
translation may be regarded as having been introducedprobably uncon-
sciouslyas a result of the theological attitude in which the translator
approached the Hebrew text, and which, in effect, suggested certain
misrepresentations to his mind.53 The contents of ch. 1, as well as of
sections such as 2:1021; 3:118, and 5:823, provide ample ground for
the translator to visualize references to his contemporary situation, since
they speak of Gods displeasure with wickedness, the evil that results
from godlessness, and the plight of a people living under the yoke of
unrighteousness.
In order to grasp more precisely the mechanisms by which ideological
imprints are left in the translation, we can turn to the distinction between
levels of interpretation. Barr, for instance, distinguishes two types of
interpretation: the basic syntactic/semantic comprehension of the
meaning of the text; and the higher level of interpretation, concerning
matters of content, of reference, or of theological exegesis.54 Tov also
distinguishes two analogous types of exegesis: linguistic exegesis (deal-
ing with the basic comprehension of words) and contextual exegesis
(dealing with the relationship between words in a wider context).55

53. Ibid., 96.
54. Barr, Typology, 291.
55. Tov, Text-Critical Use, 45. Tovs view of exegesis in the LXX is also found in
idem, The Septuagint, in Mikra: Text, Translation, Reading, and Interpretation of
the Hebrew Bible in Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity (ed. M. J. Mulder;
CRINT 1; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988), 16188 (17374); idem, Textual Criticism
of the Hebrew Bible (2d ed.; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001), 12428; and idem,
1
Although articial, this distinction can be useful. First of all, one

needs to make clear that the higher (contextual) level of interpretation
does not occur as a successive stage to the rst but lies behind it all the
way, informing and shaping the comprehension of linguistic structures at
the basic level. One should locate in this higher level of interpretation the
translators presuppositions, theology, and methods. In this way we can
conceptualize a translator who attempts to produce a faithful rendering of
his Vorlage but who, consciously or not, left such ideological marks on
his text as to give it a markedly different outlook for subsequent readers.
5. A Case Study: LXX Isaiah 8:1116

To complete the discussion of the reading mechanisms evident in LXX
Isaiah, I proceed to an examination of LXX Isa 8:1116. This is an
extremely signicant passage for two primary reasons: rst, both Seelig-
mann and Koenig, who tend to emphasize the atomistic character of
interpretation in LXX Isaiah, recognize some form of coherence in the
Greek text.56 Also, this is an important passage in van der Kooijs argu-
ment for the rewriting of oracles in LXX Isaiah. Noticing its indications
of contextual awareness, van der Kooij argues that LXX Isa 8:1116 is
well organized and therefore on the textual level, constitutes a new
composition in comparison to MT (and 1QIsaa). It is for him, in effect, a
new prophecy that could (and should) be read as predicting the policy of
Hellenistic leaders in Jerusalem, in the rst half of the second century
BCE, and its failure.57
Below I offer a parallel translation of the MT and LXX Isa 8:1116, and
a brief analysis of the translation in the light of our argumentation so far.
Van der Kooij offers a very plausible reconstruction of the historical
background of the LXX rendering. However, I shall argue that, from a
methodological standpoint, it is better to describe the form of the Greek
oracle in terms of reading strategies and ideological imprints than as a
new composition. My view is that the signicant deviations between
the LXX and MT versions of Isa 8:1116 do not originate in an insightful
rewriting of the oracle, but in the misreading of a difcult Hebrew text.
The translators expectation that the prophecy was directed to his genera-
tion, his theological and ideological worldview, and actual encounters
Theologically Motivated Exegesis Embedded in the Septuagint, in The Greek and

Hebrew Bible, 25769.
56. See Seeligmann, Isaiah, 1056, and Koenig, LHermneutique analogique,
11835.
1
with opposition to the law, would have provided the necessary backdrop
against which his reading would have made sense.
5.1. Parallel Translation

8:11

$
!
B8
CD (E #

! %
$
, % D F 2 1% %
%
$

For thus spoke Yahweh to me with a Thus says the Lord: With a strong hand
strong hand
and instructed me not to walk in the they refuse the path of the way of this
way of this people people
(saying): (saying):
8:12

G

& ! H I GJ 1 > K

> < - /% / 3 - 2

& /< 3 2
Do not say conspiracy Do not say It is hard;

of all that this people call conspiracy; For all that this people ever say is hard,
and do not fear what they fear, and do not fear their fear,
and do not be frightened. and do not be troubled.
8:13

/> @
! & # /> -
! &
Yahweh of hosts, him you shall sanctify; The Lord, sanctify him
And he (shall be) your fear, and he shall be your fear.
and he (shall be) your fright.
8:14
# /L M N
'
( @

# / O
/L
! /< O
=
$

($
$ 1 < " ;
$ #
&%

$
;
1
And if you are trusting in him,

And he shall be a sanctuary, he shall be to you for a sanctuary,
and a stone of offence, and not as an offence of a stone you
shall meet him
and a rock of stumbling or as a stumbling of a rock,
for the two houses of Israel; but the house of Jacob
trap and snare in a trap and in a hollow
to the inhabitant of Jerusalem. sits in Jerusalem.
8:15

! % , /:
#
# % #

# % # @=
? ,-F P
And many shall stumble on them (?); Therefore, many shall be unable in
themselves;
they shall fall and be broken; and shall fall and be broken;
they shall be snared and taken. and shall approach and be taken,
men in security.
8:16

( C -#

*) ( & -9 > % 3
:
Bind the testimony; Then, will be manifest

seal the Torah among my disciples. those who seal the law lest they should
learn.
5.2. Analysis
The syntactical structure of the Greek in 8:11 is markedly different from
the Hebrew. The rendering 2! (H! for
! is not
connected to the Lord who speaks, but to those who refuse the path of
the way of this people.58 Therefore, instead of the prophets reference to
the instruction he has received from the Lord, we nd a description of a
situation in which a group disturbs the people (% % ) that
intends to walk in the path, presumably, of the law.59
58. That is true if the divine speech begins after . It is still grammatically
possible that 2! (H! # is connected to the Lord.
59. Van der Kooij, Isaiah in the Septuagint, 52324. He makes the important
observation that the use of ,
implies that the course of the way of this
people is meant in a positive way, noting further that is the mode of
walking in the sense of a way of life seen from the moral point of view.
1
This rendering is conspicuously reminiscent of 1:24, where

is not understood as an epithet of the Lord, but as a reference to
the powerful of Israel. This is remarkable because
is a singular
form read as plural, and, more signicantly, because while
(Woe)
comes after the construction it is still put by the translator at the begin-
ning of the sentence. Seeligmann suggests that the change in 1:24 was
made possible by the translators familiarity with the social preaching of
the prophets.60 This is in line with my argumentation, and it can be noted
that also in 8:11 the rarity of the Hebrew phrase, together with the trans-
lators immersion in his milieu, would have made such a deviating
rendering possible.
For van der Kooij, 2! (H! points to the position of power of
those who disobey. He refers to texts such as Isa 23:11; LXX Num 20:20,
and 1 Macc 11:15, and highlights the use of ,
in 1:23, where

is rendered by ?
, %. He sees this as
enough evidence that the rendering refers to leaders of Jerusalem.61 While
this is certainly plausible, one must not forget that 2! (H!
simply represents
! and one must, therefore, be careful about
drawing specic conclusions. As for the rendering of
by , %-
, it is likely that, instead of
, the translator could have read a dif-
ferent verb form, such as , which is rendered by ,
in LXX Isa
1:23, and also in Ps 68(67):19 and Neh 9:29.62
Following the peculiar understanding of the syntactical structure of
8:11,
does not introduce the speech of the Lord, but of the
antagonistic group. Seeligmann assumes that the direct speech goes to
the end of v. 14, its end being marked by # % at the head of v. 15.
This idea is followed by Koenig and van der Kooij. For the latter, the
opening of 8:15 with % structures the passage as a prophecy of
doom, in the form of a quote from the antagonistic group + therefore +
a threat against the group because of what they said.63

62. So, also, ibid., 524. Other possible verbs which are also rendered by ,

are (Isa 36:5) and (Deut 1:26; 9:7, 2324; Isa 3:8; 50:5; 63:10).
63. Ibid., 523. In fact, the presence of
before - /% in v. 12
(presumably representing ) makes it possible that the direct discourse is limited to
the rst two lines of v. 2. If this interpretation is correct, then the speech of the
antagonists is simply Do not say it is hard for all that this people say is hard.
According to this interpretation, the second half of v. 12 would then represent the
Lords discourse of encouragement to the prophet, with used positively
(see similar formulations in Deut 1:29; 7:21; 20:3; 31:6; Josh 1:9). Van der Kooij
(pp. 52425) argues that the use not only of but also of
1
Verse 12 follows the Hebrew quite literally, with the exception of the
rendering of by . The best explanation is that the translator
read for , since in v. 21 renders .64 The under-
standing of the path of the way of this people (v. 11) as a walking in
the path of obedience to the law suggested to Seeligmann, Koenig, and
van der Kooij that is a reference to the negative view that those
who disobey hold with regard to the austere way of life under the
yoke of the law. This is radically different from the sense of the
Hebrew. Along the lines of the present discussion, I suggest that this
deviation can be more fruitfully described not simply as a rewriting, or
alteration of the original, but as an attempt to represent the meaning of
the Hebrew as understood by the translator. In both the misinterpretation
of the syntactic structure of 8:11 and the erroneous reading of , the
translator misread his Vorlageyet his ideological presuppositions
enabled him to make sense of this misreading.
The translators commitment to his Vorlage is seen in v. 13, as the
Hebrew and Greek are very similar.65 A signicant change occurs only in
the nal line (v. 14 in modern editions), where ! is rendered
by # Q /)! M R!. Koenig argues that the translator or
his Vorlage, under the inuence of Aramaic, read " for ", after
which, by a process of metathesis, he nally reached the Aramaic verb
" (to trust).66 Van der Kooij is open to this possibility, but nds it
preferable to argue that, since the rendering of the same verb in v. 12 by
has practically the opposite meaning, the choice of term
was made for reasons of context and content.67 The phenomenon of
expresses a negative view of the fear of God and the way of life of this people. For
him, this sheds light on the statement in v. 11 that thesupposedlymen of power
dispute [his translation] the course of the way of this people. Of course, this is the
case for only if it can be established that the second half of v. 12 is still
part of the discourse of the opposing faction.
64. Another possibility is that was connected to Aramaic (via
metathesis). Koenig, LHermneutique analogique, 13032, favours this option, in
the light of the translators familiarity with lexical traditions of Hebrew and
Aramaic, although he is also open to the unlikely possibility that the translator could
have held both ideas at the same time.
65. A minor change is the omission of in the rst line. Also, Ottley,
Isaiah, 2:149, suggests that the reading in Codex Alexandrinus of for -
could indicate a duplicate in the place of the following clause, if the LXX read
!
as some form from the root , help.
66. Koenig, LHermneutique analogique, 12324. See, especially, n. 21, where
he points to the targumic practice of rendering the Hebrew # by ", as in Deut
28:52 and Isa 36:5.
1
rendering the same Hebrew term by different equivalents in close

proximity is characteristic of LXX Isaiah, as the simple example of the
rendering of in 11:13 illustrates.68 Yet, as I have argued earlier, the
translators contextual awareness is not evidence of a conscious
production of a new textual unit in Greek.69
Other deviations in 8:1116 can be attributed to the ad hoc attempt to
make sense of a difcult Hebrew text. This is seen in the rendering of
8:14. A survey of Isaiah commentaries highlights the difculty in under-
standing the verse in Hebrew. The MT of 8:14 consists of a parallel struc-
ture, the rst clause speaking of God as a rock of stumbling to both
houses of Israel and the second speaking of him as a trap and a snare to
the inhabitants of Jerusalem. In the LXX, the last part of the verse is
disconnected from the rst (cf.
). Now, the rst clause speaks of the
security enjoyed by those who trust in the rock as opposed to the House
of Jacob, which sits in Jerusalem, in a trap () and a hollow
( ).70 If the translators Vorlage was like the MT at this point,
the differences can be seen as attempts to make sense of the complex
Hebrew.
Koenig is probably correct in arguing that the change in genitival
relationship in (offence of a stone) and

= (stumbling of a rock), together with the addition of -
(you shall meet), could have been motivated by the concern to
avoid a litholatrous interpretation of the Hebrew construction with

+. The adjustment would have led the translator to pursue
larger alterations that affected the whole verse. The addition of / could
have originated in the reading of .71 Otherwise, it could simply be an
68. In 11:13, while the translator consistently renders the two occurrences of
with 92 and 9, he misses the emphatic repetition of the root . The rst
instance is in the plural noun
, which is rendered by the semantically appro-
priate term . The second is the Qal imperfect
, which is rendered by the
future 6. In both cases, the translator employed adequate terms, but his choice
demonstrates that conveying meaning is more important than is the precise repre-
sentation of form.
69. It is conceivable that the rendering # Q /)! M R! could
have been inuenced by the call to steadfast trust in 7:9, but the lack of direct verbal
parallels makes this association difcult to ascertain.
70. In 8:14, the rendering of '

by 1 < " ; is interest-
ing, rst because of the omission of the two (which is a unique occurrence in
the Hebrew Bible), but also because at 2:6 the reverse rendering happened, with

being rendered by > " % ;.
71. Koenig, LHermneutique analogique, 12930, argues that the negations
come from the two occurrences of , which are dissociated from their substantives
1
example of converse translation.72 In order to move further away from

theologically objectionable connotations of the Hebrew construction, the
translator supplied the comparative adverb O, and thus reformulated the
sentence by introducing a relationship of situation ( ) and
of comparison (O).73 The addition of /L after -
could also represent a double translation of .74
The addition of % (therefore) connects vv. 14 and 15 syn-
tactically. The rendering of
! by , /:
is sensible if was understood as referring to the rock.75 The
syntactical connection between vv. 15 and 14 would have been felt by
the translator after the syntactical disjoining of the two halves of v. 14.
Van der Kooij argues that the /: (many among them)
in v. 15 were seen by the translator as the same agitators as in v. 11. For
him, this is supported by the use of ,, which would
reinforce the idea that the translator is referring to powerful men, espe-
cially as this is the only instance in the LXX where ,
is used as
an equivalent of !. He argues that this particular rendering has been
chosen for reasons of context.76 Again, I would argue that such a move
would be in step with the translators reading strategies and his antici-
pation of textual coherence, without indicating the attempt to present a
new, self-contained, composition.
and analogically read as abbreviated forms of . He points to Symmachuss version

of 28:13, where the exact phenomenon of reading the preposition as an abbre-
viated negation is attested, and to the contrast with the use of the same preposition
before the rst substantive of 8:14, where it is interpreted normally. See n. 38 ad
loc., where he points to several examples of abbreviation in antiquity.
72. Cf. Ottley, Isaiah, 2:149. In pp. 5253 of his rst volume, Ottley gives a list
of all the cases where the negatives differ in Hebrew and Greek, although not all of
these could be classed as converse translations. The phenomenon is observed by
Seeligmann, Isaiah, 57. For a detailed discussion of the question in the ancient
versions, see R. P. Gordon, Converse Translation in the Targums and Beyond,
JSP 19 (1999): 321, repr. in Hebrew Bible and Ancient Versions: Selected Essays
of Robert P. Gordon (SOTSMS; Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006), 26377.
73. Koenig, LHermneutique analogique, 12526.
74. Ottley, Isaiah, 2:149, had already noticed that renders a
nominal derivation of in Exod 9:14 (
), representing plagues. See Koenig,
LHermneutique analogique, 126, who argues that the possibility of a double
translation lies in the familiarity of the Alexandrian synagogue with LXX Exod 9:14.
75. The plural sufx could refer back to the two occurrences of Rock. Cf. G.
B. Gray, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Book of Isaiah IXXVII
(ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1912), 154.
1
Van der Kooij examines the rendering of by % in

connection with v. 14, explaining that the idea is that the men who are
convinced to be in security, will approach God, but will, in contrast to
their own view, be taken.77This is an interestingly nuanced interpreta-
tion. However, since the rendering could reect confusion originating in
the similarity in sound between and (draw near),78 or an
idiomatic rendering, be ensnared, with the sense of approach, it
needs to be regarded with caution.
The end of v. 15 contains the paraphrase ? ,-!
P. Scholars have connected this with at the beginning of v. 16,
which the translator could have understood as rock, used metaphori-
cally.79 The paraphrase can be seen as an explanatory note on the weak-
ening and inability of the many at the beginning of the verse.80 LXX
Isaiah displays numerous examples of paraphrastic additions intended to
clarify obscure passages. This is probably one such example.
We nally come to v. 16 and note that the opening -#
connects it with v. 15. The MT has v. 16 at the head of a new
section and connects it with v. 17. It also has a setuma before it. Text
division markers before v. 16 are also found in 1QIsaa and Codex
Sinaiticus. This might, then, if we could but know, be an example of the
translator disregarding visual text delimiters, which would point to the
inconsistent character of the version, as far as the contextual reading of
pericopes is concerned.
As for the rendering of the verse, it is difcult to see how
-# could represent , apart from the relation
between and -.81 The rendering of by -9-
is probably intended negatively, with the sealing understood as
hindrance or suppression of the law.82 The translation of
by % 3
77. Ibid., 527.

78. See Ottley, Isaiah, 2:149, citing A. Scholz.
79. Ibid.
80. Koenig, LHermneutique analogique, 133. This is seen by van der Kooij,
Isaiah in the Septuagint, 52627, as an irony, underlying the idea that they think
they are in security, when not in fact.
81. Koenig, LHermneutique analogique, 133, acknowledges the difculty in
nding formal justication for the rendering > -# , but he offers
some possibilities. He suggests a double translation, of as and of a possible
Hophal form of
( ) interpreted as a prophetic perfect. The absence of a nal
would be explained as the attributing of a collective value to the singular. Another
possibility envisaged by Koenig is a rearrangement of the consonants, producing

. is read by metathesis as , and rendered by -9 .
1
82. Cf. Ottley, Isaiah, 2:149.
: could have originated in misreading for . It is also con-

ceivable that the translator read the nal
as and placed it before the
(again by metathesis), forming an innitive. If the was read twice,
could then have been detached and interpreted as a negative, accounting
for the Greek reading as it stands.83
For van der Kooij, this is the most signicant verse for understanding
the whole passage, as it gives the answer to the taunt of the antagonistic
group. Noticing in particular that , an important marker on the level
of the Greek text, is a plus,84 he summarizes the idea of the verse as
follows: the men who are in security are the same ones sealing up the
law that no one should study it and who disobey the course of the way
of this people in v. 11, so that the idea expressed here is that God will
protect those who adhere to the law, whereasthose who do not, will
perish.85
Van der Kooij disagrees with Seeligmanns view that the translator is
confronting an anti-dogmatic movement in Alexandria,86 because the
references to the house of Jacob and the inhabitants of Jerusalem
would make it more likely that this text is actually dealing with the
Hellenization of Jerusalem in the second century B.C.E.87 This is in line
with his overall thesis that the LXX Isaiah translation was made by
Jewish scholars who ed from Jerusalem and took refuge in Egypt.88
83. Cf. Koenig, LHermneutique analogique, 13233.

84. Van der Kooij, Isaiah in the Septuagint, 527. Here he is indebted to
Koenig, LHermneutique analogique, 133.
86. Cf. Seeligmann, Isaiah, 1056. Besides identifying the coherence of the
Greek passage, Seeligmann was also the rst to suggest a possible historical back-
ground, arguing that the translator was engaged in polemics against an antinomian
group which would qualify the precepts of orthodox Judaism as hard and oppres-
sive, and consider those who adhered to these precepts as having been caught in a
snare, and in a cave; for men such as these, God has become a stone of offence, a
stumbling-block. Man should not let himself be confused and led into a superstitious
fear (of all these precepts and laws), but only worship God in His holiness, and place
ones trust in Him. Koenig, LHermneutique analogique, 12023, basically agrees
with Seeligmann in his identication of the background issue of the passage,
although he suggests that Seeligmann did not stress in strong enough terms the
nature of the divergence between the translator and the antagonistic group.
87. Van der Kooij, Isaiah in the Septuagint, 52829, refers to 1 Macc 1:1115
as a parallel to LXX Isa 8:1116.
88. Ibid., 528. For his view of the origin of the translation, see idem, Textzeugen,
5061.
1
Van der Kooijs reconstruction of the historical background of LXX Isa

8:1116 is probably more commendable than Seeligmanns.89 And yet
his attempt to read the Greek oracle as a new, coherent unit in its own
right does not take enough account of the fact that the apparent coher-
ence indicators were prompted by the translators struggle to understand
and represent the Hebrew text before him, as I have attempted to show in
my analysis.
6. Summary
In the discussion above I have argued that the translator had some
awareness of cohesion and coherence in the sections that he translated
and could have perceived them as discrete sense units. However, the
identication of signs of this awareness in the LXX does not allow us to
afrm that the translator is composing a new oracle in Greek, nor that it
is, in itself, a necessary indication of an actualizing rendering of the
passages. Rather, these indications can be described in terms of normal
processes of reading.
The translators sense of textual coherence is indicated by the insertion
of connecting elements which seem to correspond somehow to traditions
of pericope delimitation identiable in Qumran and in the MT. Along
similar lines, there are also indications of what appear to be distinct but
inconsistent attempts to achieve coherence on the pericope level. These
were noticed particularly in the harmonization of refrains in 2:10, 19, 21,
and the apparent contextual rendering of some terms and expressions
throughout the translation, and specically in 8:1116. In keeping with
van der Kooijs analogy between the work of the translator and that of
the learned scribe, I afrm that the awareness of text markers and the
contextual reading of passages is by no means surprising, but a sense of
cohesion in the rendering does not necessarily imply the intention to
create a new oracle, and could be explained as the result of an attempt to
produce a good and readable version. With these observations in mind,
we can proceed to examine the elements of eschatology and messianism
in LXX Isa 112.
89. Van der Kooijs view is strengthened further if in 8:14 is under-
stood as hollow in the sense of a geographical reference to the topography of
Jerusalem, as in the case of !, understood as a reference to the Kidron Valley in
Tg. Zeph. 1:11. Cf. K. J. Cathcart and R. P. Gordon, The Targum of the Minor
Prophets: Translated, with a Critical Introduction, Apparatus, and Notes (ArBib 14;
Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1989), 166.
1
Chapter 3
ESCHATOLOGICAL TRADITIONS IN LXX ISAIAH 112
In the previous chapter it was seen that there are elements in LXX Isaiah
which indicate that the translator displayed some sense of pericope
coherence. In particular, I pointed to the indications of text division
which the translator seems to share with ancient manuscripts, and to the
presence of renderings which seem to be motivated or determined by the
near context. I argued that these elements are best described in terms of
reading strategies and that the translators immersion in a certain ideo-
logical and exegetical context would have prompted certain readings and
exegetical manoeuvres.
Going back to ancient manuscript traditions, it can be noted that a text
break is frequently inserted before phrases such as

/
: S
or
/ D S
F J. The fol-
lowing table enables the visualization of how text breaks before such
expressions were a common feature of the Isaiah manuscript tradition in
antiquity both in Hebrew and in Greek.1
Verse MT / LXX Text LXXMss 1QIsaa MT
2:1

/ : SBAQ ** p/s
S
(v. 2)
2:20
/ D S
F J AQ **
3:18
/ D S
F J A * p/s
4:2
/ D S
F J SA ** p/s
7:18
/ D S
F J S p/s
7:20
/ D S
F J SAQ (p)
1. The LXX, 1QIsaa, and MT columns are adapted from the table in S. P. Brock,
Text Divisions in the Syriac Translations of Isaiah, in Rapaport-Albert and
Greenberg, eds., Biblical Hebrew, Biblical Texts, 200221. In the LXX Mss column,
A = Codex Alexandrinus, B = Codex Vaticanus, Q = Codex Marchalianus, S =
Codex Sinaiticus. In the 1QIsaa column, ** and * indicate longer and shorter breaks,
respectively. In the MT column, p = petua, b = setuma, s/p or p/s indicate variation
in the witnesses, the rst item being the better attested, (p) or (s) indicate poor
attestation of the petua or setuma.
1
7:21
/ D S
F J SA ** s/p
7:23
/ D S
F J A ** (s)
10:20
/ D S
F J Q ** p/s
10:27
/ D S
F J SAQ ** (s)
11:10
/ D S
F J SA ** p/s
11:11
/ D S
F J A * p/s
12:1
/ D S
F J SA **
14:3
/ D S
F J SA * s
17:4
/ D S
F J SA ** s/p
17:7
/ D S
F J A * s
17:9
/ D S
F J SA ** (s)
18:7
/ )! )! ! AQ * (s)
19:16
/ D S
F J A * s
19:18
/ D S
F J SA ** s
19:19
/ D S
F J A * s
19:23
/ D S
F J A * s
19:24
/ D S
F J SAQ *
22:20
/ D S
F J A **
22:25
/ D S
F J SQ
24:21
/ Omitted in the LXX ** s/p
26:1
/ D S
F J BAQ ** p/s
27:1
/ D S
F J AQ ** s/p
27:2
/ D S
F J AQ ** s/p
27:11b # added in the LXX SAQ *(11a)
27:12
/ D S
F J SAQ ** s/p
27:13
/ D S
F J AQ ** s/p
28:5
/ D S
F J SBA ** s/p
29:18
/ D S
F J AQ *
31:7
/ D S
F J **
In the light of the evidence above, it is possible that these phrases were
commonly perceived as section delimiters. The framing of sections as
prophetic announcements of the future would have triggered specic
reading strategies. In other words, the presence of these phrases evoked
particular frames, connected with the expectations of the reader/transla-
tor about eschatological times, and prompted particular interpretation of
passages in the light of notions and presuppositions already held. Taken
together with the evidence presented above of a tendency to read
prophetic texts eschatologically, we have a good indication that the
Isaiah translator would be liable to read certain pericopes in the light of
eschatological traditions.
It is my contention, therefore, that indications in the translation itself,
as well as the evidence in other examples in ancient Judaism, suggest
that the translator of LXX Isaiah was imbued with certain ideological
presuppositions connected to eschatology and brought these to bear in
1
3. Eschatological Traditions in LXX Isaiah 112 43
his rendering of particular oracles. With this in mind, we proceed to

examine eschatological traditions identiable in two of the most signi-
cant passages of LXX Isa 112.
1. LXX Isaiah 2:24

Commenting on 2:2, Troxel argues that the LXX depiction of Jerusalem
as the centre of the earth is just as eschatological as the MTs, and that
this in itself does not indicate that : S
is an idiom
of eschatology.2 It is true that the tonal similarity of the expressions in
itself does not allow one to see : S
as employed
by the translator in an eschatological manner. However, this is the
most likely understanding given the nature of the oracle in 2:24, the
way in which prophecy was generally read, and clues within the trans-
lation of the verses.
2:2

&
W : S

$

! -< > P %
# 1 " % %

? ) X
#
*6
* ) )

$ & # Y+ />
And it will be in days to come, It will be in the last days,

The mountain of the House of Yahweh manifested the mountain of the Lord,
will be established
and the house of God,
as the head of the mountains, upon the uppermost of the mountains,
and elevated more than the hills; and it will be elevated above the hills;
and will stream to it all the nations. and will come upon it all the nations.
2:3

* ! # #
%

& ! Z% # ,) ( > P

&

$ +
$ # ( > " % % ;

! $
# ,: S : 3 1> /%

! $ # /D
$ ($
& +
&%

# + ;
1
2. Troxel,
[ , 27.
And many peoples will come and say: And many nations will come and say:
Come, and let us go up to the Come and3 let us go up to the
Mountain of Yahweh, Mountain of the Lord,
to the House of the God of Jacob, and into the House of the God of
Jacob,
and he will instruct us from his ways and he will announce to us his way
and we shall walk in his paths. and we shall walk in it.
For from Zion the Torah will come For out of Zion the Law will come
and the word of Yahweh from and the word of the Lord out of
Jerusalem. Jerusalem.
2:4

$ # # : ,
) )

*
!
#
+ >

( ( ! # 6
/) ( ?
$

$
& # 9 /) (

# / 6

# / 3 :
And he will judge between the And he will judge between the
nations, nations,
and decide for many peoples; and convince many people;
and they will beat their swords into and they will beat their swords into
ploughshares, ploughshares,
and their spears into pruning hooks; and their spears into pruning hooks;
a nation will not lift up a sword and a nation will not lift up a sword
against a nation, against a nation,
and they will not learn again war. and indeed they will not learn again
to wage war.
1.1. The Mount of the Lord

In the light of the eschatological connotations of

/ :
S
, particularly in Dan 2:28 and 10:14, with their
references to Antiochus Epiphanes, a noteworthy vocabulary choice in
LXX Isa 2:2 is the declaration that the mount is -
(revealed) not
! (established). In the LXX as a whole, and in Isaiah in particular,
' is the direct equivalent of ! (cf. Exod 19:11; Josh 4:3). Aquila,
Symmachus and Theodotion have ' in this verse. LXX Micah 4:1
has -< > P % .4 -
carries the idea of
3. This is rejected by Ziegler in his Gttingen edition, on the basis of several
witnesses, many of which are citations. It is retained in Rahlfs edition.
4. In MT Mic 4:1, ! follows as a predicate of the Mountain of the House of
Yahweh, and has an additional personal pronoun, (masculinereferring to the
1
being seen, revealed or manifest, not only in the ordinary sense of

something becoming known (e.g. Moses killing of the Egyptian in Exod
2:14), but also with a markedly theological connotation. It is used in LXX
Isaiah again in 65:1,5 in the context of God making himself manifest, or
revealing himself, to a people who did not know or seek him. The term is
also used of the manifestation of wisdom as a divine entity in Wis 6:22
and 7:21.6 Apart from the possible theological overtones of the termis
there a manifestation theology in LXX Isaiah?there is the question of
the ideological/political connotations that it may carry.7
mountain), after in the following parallel. If both -

and ' can be
seen as alternative renderings of !, then this is a doublet. The question of double
translation is very complex, as is well demonstrated by Z. Talshir, Double Transla-
tions in the Septuagint, in VI Congress of the International Organization for
Septuagint and Cognate StudiesJerusalem 1986 (ed. C. E. Cox; Atlanta: Scholars
Press, 1987), 2163; see also Tov, Text-Critical Use, 12930. Talshir essentially
denes double translations as a phenomenon pertaining to translation technique
and originating in the creative activity of the translator. J. G. Janzen, Double Read-
ings in the Text of Jeremiah, HTR 60 (1967): 43347 (434), envisages a question of
a different nature, namely, variants in different manuscripts that are combined in
order to preserve correct readings. The manuscript evidence points in the direction of
this doublet originating with the translator and not in the transmission history of LXX
Micah. Since -
is a unique rendering and ' is much more a part of the
LXX tradition, it is likely that LXX Micah was inuenced by LXX Isaiah at this point.
5. In an interpretative expansion of the Hebrew, which has the Niphal of .
6. See Acts 10:40 and the application of the term to Jesus.
7. The idea of the divine character of kings in late antiquity, particularly in the
Hellenistic and Greco-Roman period, is perhaps propos. G. H. R. Horsley, New
Documents Illustrating Early Christianity. Vol. 4, A Review of the Greek Inscrip-
tions and Papyri Published in 1979 (North Ryde: The Ancient History Documentary
Research Centre, 1987), 148, points out that in the rst century C.E. Claudius is
described as -3 after his death (P.Oxy 7 1021.2) and that there may be a
close connection between the terms - and -, the latter so much in
vogue among Hellenistic rulers, notable among whom is Antiochus Epiphanes. If the
connection between the LXX translator and the Oniad Dynasty is established, as it
has been suggested by Seeligmann, Isaiah, 8194, and van der Kooij, Textzeugen,
6065, it is possible that there is an interesting polemical note in this passage. But
the scepticism of R. de Vaux, Les Philistins dans la Septante, in Wort, Lied und
Gottespruch: Festschrift fr Joseph Ziegler (ed. J. Schreiner; FB 1; Wrzburg:
Echter Verlag/Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1972), 18594, on the possibility of making
historical connections that are too specic is well founded and should be kept in
mind here. At this stage no specic connections between - and Antiochuss
rule will be drawn.
1
The text envisions a manifestation, or exaltation, of the mountain of

the Lord. In 2:2, the elevation8 of the mount
has generated
different interpretations, particularly with regard to its being a symbolic
or an actual physical elevation. If a physical elevation is envisaged there
is also the question whether the mount is placed on top of all the
mountains or will merely be taller, and thus greater in importance.9 The
exegetical tradition that views the mountain being placed on top of the
others is very old, and can be seen in Pesiq. Rab Kah. 144b. Several
indicators in LXX Isaiah point in the direction of its tting within this
tradition. On their own, neither the use of the preposition 10 nor the
use of ? to translate is decisive, but the translation with
could indicate that the translator understood the mountain as being
placed on top of the others. The use of the same preposition to describe
the movement of the nations in the next clause strengthens this view, and
the relationship between Micah and Isaiah is again evoked. In the MT,
they differ in the use of the prepositions: in Isaiah, in Micah.
Cazelles notes that though is more adversative in principle, it could
be used synonymously with because in Late and Post-Biblical
Hebrew could have the same value as . He also notes that the LXX
of both Isaiah and Micah respects the nuance, but inversely: the Greek of
Micah seems to read the of Isaiah (> /)corrected in the
recensions of Origen and Lucianand the Greek of Isaiah with Q /
represents .11 For Cazelles, the Isaiah rendering of with Y+
(will come) is not sufcient in itself to explain the choice of the
preposition, so literary dependence would be the key.12
8. For , rendered as *6 in Isaiah, Micah has ,

which points in the direction of the interchangeability of the Greek roots. The idea
of the exaltation of the mountain suits the context well and relates to the future
exaltation of the Lord and the abasement of the arrogant. Cf. R. P. Gordon, Holy
Land, Holy City: Sacred Geography and the Interpretation of the Bible (The Dids-
bury Lectures; Carlisle: Paternoster, 2004), 64. The Greek terminology follows
accordingly.
9. Cf. GKC 119i; F. Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of
Isaiah (trans. J. Martin; 2 vols.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1881), 1:114; Gray,
Isaiah IXXVII, 4445, and Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 89.
10. Cf. A. Jannaris, An Historical Greek Grammar: Chiey of the Attic Dialect
as Written and Spoken from Classical Antiquity Down to the Present Time, Founded
upon the Ancient Texts, Inscriptions, Papyri and Present Popular Greek (Hildesheim:
Olms, 1987), 157282.
11. translates with the sense of ascending also in Isa 40:9.
1
12. Cazelles, Texte massortique, 54.
In 2:2, the change from

to 1 P # 1 " %
% could have been inspired by the construction in the following
verse.13 Yet the fact that the LXX of both Isaiah and Micah omits house
from the construction, rendering -< > P % , could
lend credibility to the view that the house in the MT is secondary.14 It is
possible that LXX Isaiah attempts to incorporate the supplemental
house in a later stage of textual transmission, by re-establishing it as a
second complement.15 The singular verb *6 is inappropriate for
the implied double subject in the LXX.16
In 2:3, the nations resolve to ascend the mountain. The rendering of
! as % is reminiscent of 1:18. The goal of the summons,

,17 is rendered ( > P # (
> " % % ;. Some important witnesses, such as 4QIsae,
and the Targum, Vulgate, and Peshitta attest the presence of the con-
junction before
. It is likely that the Vorlage of LXX Isaiah did
contain the conjunction, although we should be mindful of the trans-
lators tendency to insert even if not present in the original (cf. 1:1;
2:4). The MT of Micah contains the before
, and could have
inuenced LXX Isaiahs rendering of v. 3. It is also noteworthy that, as in
the case of the omission of

after ! in v. 2, LXX Isa 2:3 agrees with
4QIsae against the MT.18
Baer has recently suggested that the translation of the resumptive

with the neuter Q /, together with the addition of before ( >
" % % ; could indicate that the translator had two
13. Where ( > P # ( > " % % ; corresponds to
MTS

.
14. See Gray, Isaiah IXXVII, 47, and Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 82.
15. A survey of issues concerning the interplay between the history of the
Hebrew text and the translation/revision activity of ancient versions is found in S.
Talmon, Double Readings in the Massoretic Text, Text 1 (1960): 14484; see also
R. Gordis, The Biblical Text in the Making: A Study of the KethibQere (New York:
Ktav, 1971), 4143, for further information on the incorporation of variant readings
in the Masoretic tradition. See also Baer, When We All Go Home, 199276.
16. A similar use of singular verb for two subjects occurs in LXX Isa 40:4, where
we nd the reading H P # > (every mountain and hill
shall be brought low).
17. The uniqueness of the Hebrew phrase has been highlighted at least since
R. Lowth, Isaiah: A New Translation with a Preliminary Dissertation and Notes
(London: William Tegg, 1868), 147; cf. Delitzsch, Isaiah, 1:115; Gray, Isaiah
IXXVII, 46. Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 83, suggests that it may be original.
18. 1QIsaa omits
, possibly by haplography. Cf. Gordon, Holy Land,
66 n. 6.
1
destinations in mind for Gentiles and Jews. The rst could go up the
mountain, but only the latter could enter the Temple.19 This proposal fails
to take into account the linguistic and textual evidence presented above.
1.2. The Way of the Lord

Contours of the translators concept of the Way of the Lord can be
gleaned from 2:3. ,
is most commonly used in the LXX for
speech verbs such as (Hiphil), , , and also for
. Its use
as a rendering of
(Hiphil) is peculiar to LXX Deut 24:8; Isa 2:3; 28:9,
and Job 27:11. The Hebrew possibly indicates the source of the
teaching: the Lord will instruct from his ways.20 This unique construc-
tion does not nd a direct equivalent in the Greek. Instead of using a
phrase with (literal), the translator uses a direct object construction:
the Lord will announce his way.21
It is signicant that the plural
! is changed to the singular 3
1> /%.22 1 is the standard equivalent for in LXX Isaiah, and
it is used in both its singular and plural forms. It seems that Isa 40:15 is
particularly signicant here.23 Isaiah 40:15 speaks of the consolation of
the return from exile in Babylon in connection with the preparation of
the way of the Lord (MT ; LXX 1).
This preparation is accompanied by a signicant physical trans-
formation, a levelling of all the earth, which includes every mountain and
hill being made low. Isaiah 40:4 reads, in the MT, !

!

(Every valley shall be lifted up, and every mountain and
hill shall be made low). This is rendered in the LXX by H -+
# H P # > (Every
19. D. Baer, Its all about us! Nationalistic Exegesis in the Greek Isaiah
(Chapters 112), SBLSP 40 (2001): 197219 (200201).
20. Delitzsch, Isaiah, 1:115.
21. LXX Micah has +. LXX Isaiah translates
as ,
in 28:9
(but not elsewhere).
22. The LXX of both Isaiah and Micah translate the Hebrew plural
! with the
singular of 1. They diverge in the translation of the parallel
. While
Micah maintains the parallelism with : /%, Isaiah chooses not to
render
, but instead uses /!, referring back to 3 1>. This can be
explained by the fact that 1 occurs elsewhere in Isaiah as an equivalent for
(26:78; 41:3). He therefore equates the two terms and eliminates the parallelism.
This elimination is untouched by the revisions which could indicate that the trans-
lation is not particularly striking, but ts expected standards.
23. The relationship between Isa 2 and 4055 is spelled out further in D. W. Pao,
Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus (WUNT 2/130; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000),
15659. For specic nuances in the term 1 and its usage in early Judaism, see
W. Michaelis, 1, TDNT 6:4296.
1
ravine shall be lled up and every mountain and hill shall be brought
low). This element of eschatological transformation and humiliation
(note the use of ) of the high and lofty hills ts well with the
contents of ch. 2, especially vv. 1021, and it is possible that associations
were made in the mind of a translator immersed in the book of Isaiah.
Isaiah 40:15 became signicant for diverse early Jewish groups, and
fresh interpretations and applications of it were developed. There is a
visible intertextual relationship between Isa 40 and Mic 4:15. This is
particularly clear in Mic 4:4, where the beatic vision of eschatological
peace is guaranteed because the mouth of Yahweh (+ in Micah)
has spoken (cf. Isa 40:5).24 That the LXX translator would also have the
relationship in mind is indicated by LXX Mic 4:5. There, in describing
the opposition between the peoples marching in the name of their gods,
and us marching in the name of the Lord, the translator renders

by 3 1> /%. Isaiah 40:15 is also quoted in the texts from
the Judean desert, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, the New Testament,
and rabbinic sources. The ideas of return from exile and of Gods special
activity gave rise to special eschatological interpretations, helping to
shape the self-understanding of different groups within early Judaism
that viewed themselves eschatologically and as somehow connected with
the way of the Lord.25
The idea of the way of the Lord could have been prompted by the
reference to Torah teaching in v. 3: the Torah will come forth from the
Lords exalted mountain. Tradition connecting the way of the Lord and
the teaching of Torah can be seen as early as 1QS 8:15, where the
interpretation of Isa 40 is distinctly applied to the communitys role as
law interpreters. Making straight the way of the Lord is connected to
the study of Torah and all that had been revealed to the prophets by the
Holy Spirit.
24. Note that here the reference is made to intertextual relationship and not to
dependence. No particular direction of literary dependence between Isa 40 and Mic 4
is presupposed at this point.
25. Cf. K. Snodgrass, Streams of Tradition Emerging from Isaiah 40:15 and
their Adaptation in the New Testament, JSNT 8 (1980): 2445 (31). In discussing
the interpretation of Isa 40:3 in Marks Gospel, J. Marcus, The Way of the Lord:
Christological Exegesis of the Old Testament in the Gospel of Mark (Edinburgh:
T. & T. Clark, 1993), 2930, argues that the original context of Isa 40 suggests that
the genitive % (of the Lord) should be taken as a subjective rather than an
objective genitive, so that the focus is on the divine activity, Yahwehs own way
through the wildernesswhich has implications for human actionand not simply
on an ethical way to be followed. In so doing he disagrees with Snodgrasss inter-
pretation of both Mark and 1QS 8:1216 and 9:1720.
1
Here the question of the interplay between LXX Isaiah and Jewish
interpretative traditions also involves the versions of Aquila and Theodo-
tion, as both have - (a more usual LXX equivalent for
). It is
possible that in such cases a connection was made between
and .
Cazelles is sceptical of this connection, since the root
reappears in
in the same verse. Yet the connection could have been prompted by
the summons to walk in the light of the Lord, ) )! -#
, in 2:5. The notion that the instruction of the Lord is light and
the way of life is seen in Prov 6:23. This connection between way
Torahlight occupies a prominent place in later rabbinic exegesis, as can
be seen in b. B. Bat. IVa, where Prov 6:23 is linked with Isa 2:2, through
the root II, cognate with Aramaic , meaning shine, beam.26 In
this text both the rabbis and the temple are designated as the light of the
world because of their roles in teaching: the rabbis as teachers of Torah,
the temple as the place from where all nations will be enlightened by it
(Isa 2:2).27 It is therefore likely that the LXX translation of Isa 2:23, like
the rendering in the minor Greek versions, took shape in the context of
wider streams of exegetical tradition in early Judaism.
2. LXX Isaiah 4:26

Another signicant section that sheds light on the eschatological notions
of the translator is LXX Isa 4:26. The Greek version of the oracle is
considerably different from the Hebrew, and, while one can perceive
some coherence in the LXX version, we do not seem to be dealing with a
rewritten prophecy but with an attempt to give sense to the original
text. As the translator struggles with its meaning, he offers a paraphrased
version, inuenced by the content of the oracle as a whole.28
26. Cf. BDB, II, 626.

27. The change from singular to the plural
in 1QIsaa may have been
effected for exegetical reasons to refer to the teaching role of a group. The
observations made on 1QS could conceivably strengthen the case of P. Pulikottil,
Transmission of Biblical Texts in Qumran: The Case of the Large Isaiah Scroll
1QIsaa (JSPSup 34; Shefeld: Shefeld Academic, 2001), 144, 146, 173, that the
group could be identied with the Qumran community. But there are problems
with Pulikottils view, especially with regard to his treatment of the Hebrew of the
verse. See the critique by Gordon, Holy Land, 66 n. 6, who suggests that the group
is better seen as priests, following Mal 2:7.
28. Cf. Seeligmann, Isaiah, 116. This has also recently been stated well by
H. G. M. Williamson, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 127. Vol.
1, Isaiah 15 (ICC; London: T&T Clark International, 2006), 302.
1
4:2
D < S
F J
!

6 1 > D
+ # 2 2

"
% *6) # +
$
#
$ > - < % ;
On that day, On that day,

the branch of Yahweh shall be God will shine in counsel with glory
beautiful and glorious, upon the earth,
and the fruit of the land (shall be) to exalt and glorify
pride and honour
to the survivors of Israel. the remnant of Israel.
4:3
&

# > *- < &
# > - <
$
; A
&

-
( 93
;
And the one left in Zion and the one And it will be the one left in Zion
left in Jerusalem and the remnant
will be called holy, in Jerusalem, will be called holy,
everyone that is written for life in all who have been written for life in
Jerusalem. Jerusalem.
4:4

& " 0 :

$ > \ ) ) # )

&

&

$
# > ] :

/)
$
#.
#

When the Lord has washed away For the Lord shall wash away
the lth of the daughters of Zion, the lth of the sons and of the
daughters of Zion,
and rinsed the blood of Jerusalem and he will purge the blood out of
from her midst, their midst,
by a spirit of judgment and by a in a spirit of judgment and a spirit of
spirit of burning. burning.
1
4:5

# Y+, #

! H % P &

# ^ /2

-
S

$ # O % # O -> >

. )

J D +J
And Yahweh shall create And he will come and it will be

upon every place of Mount Zion, every place of Mount Zion,
and upon her assemblies, and all the (her) surrounding area,
a cloud by day a cloud will overshadow by day
and smoke and the brightness of and as smoke and as light of burning
aming re by night, re by night,
for over all the glory (there will be) in all glory will be sheltered.
a shelter.
4:6

( ) #
$
$ ( ,>
(
#
J # ,-^
# * ,> # *%
And there will be a booth And it will be

for shade by day from the heat, for a shadow from the heat,
and for a refuge and shelter and as a shelter and as a hiding place
from the storm and rain. from hard (weather) and rain.
2.1. The Rendering of

In Biblical Hebrew, the verb has the meaning of grow, sprout,
bloom.29 The noun means something like vegetation, greenery,
growth.30 Out of this usage, metaphorical ones were developed,31 special
among which are the possibly messianic uses in Jer 23:5; 33:15; Zech
3:8, and 6:12. Whichever position one takes regarding the messianic
29. Cf. Gen 2:5; Exod 10:5; Isa 55:10; Ezek 17:6; Hos 8:7; Pss 105(104):14;
147(146):8; Eccl 2:6; 1 Chr 19:5.
30. For this meaning, see the extensive discussion of W. H. Rose, Zemah and
Zerubbabel: Messianic Expectations in the Early Postexilic Period (JSOTSup 304;
Shefeld: Shefeld Academic, 2000), 91120.
31. See Isa 42:9; 43:19, referring to Gods action on the earth; 44:4, speaking of
the springing up of Gods redeemed people; 45:8, referring to salvation and
righteousness; 58:8, in a metaphor of healing for Gods people. See also 61:11 (3);
Ezek 16:7 (2).
1
signicance of these verses, it is clear that in early Judaism a concept of

a messianic (shoot) was developed on the basis of such texts.32
It is thus interesting to note that the translator completely by-passed
this tradition in his rendering of . This does not mean that Ziegler is
wrong in afrming that the translator saw in this verse a theophany in
the eschatological-messianic sense, and shaped his translation in the
light of this impression.33 It simply indicates that he wasin this parti-
cular case, at leastoblivious of the tradition of the messianic shoot.
In fact, the vegetation meaning of the root completely escapes the
translator, in a departure from normal LXX practice.34 Ottley suggests that
the rendering with indicates that the translator could have read

, a form of (dazzle), following Lam 4:7, where is used
as an equivalent of the term.35 It is more likely, however, that the transla-
tor understood as a verbal form with the Aramaic meaning shine.36
Brockington notes that 6 1 _ clearly represents Gods
breaking forth upon the world. He points to LXX Isa 9:1(2); Wis 5:6,
and Luke 2:9 for similar uses of the verb.37 The use in Wis 5:6 is parti-
cularly relevant as it mentions > 2 -) (the light of
righteousness)shorthand for the Lordand its restorative effects
upon the people.
The rendering of by 6 is thus motivated by a combi-
nation of an understanding of the root based on Aramaic and contextual
clues, especially the theophanic manifestation in v. 5. This rendering
would have made particular sense to the translator if he had any escha-
tological notions that could support it. An interesting, albeit late, parallel
to the idea of Gods shining to redeem Israel is found in Midr. Ps 36:6,
where R. Johanan is credited as saying,
We have grown weary of being enslaved and redeemed, only to be
enslaved once again. Now let us pray not for redemption through esh
and blood, but through our redeemer, the Lord of hosts whose name is the
32. See the discussion in Williamson, Isaiah 15, 30610.

33. So Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 107.
34. The verb is rendered by , in Job 5:6 and 8:19, ,
in
Isa 42:9; 43:19; 44:4; 45:8; 58:8; 61:11, ,- in Gen 41:6, 23, in Judg
16:22; 2 Sam 23:5; Isa 55:10, and Eccl 2:6. The noun is translated with a form
of the verb ,
in Gen 19:25 and Ps 65(64):11, , in Jer 23:5; Ezek
16:7; 17:10; Zech 3:8; 6:12. Other signicant LXX renderings are ? in Isa 61:11,
and ( in Hos 7:9.
35. Ottley, Isaiah, 2:121.
36. Cf. Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 107. Here he is quoting Fischer, In welcher
Schrift, 20. See also BDB, , 285, and Seeligmann, Isaiah, 50.
1
37. Brockington, , 28.
Holy One of Israel. Now let us pray not that esh and blood give us light,
but that the Holy One, blessed be He, give us light, as is said, For with
Thee is the fountain of life; in Thy light we shall see light, and also The
Lord is God, and he will give us light.38
The Greek rendering of 4:2 indicates the mode and the purpose of this
divine manifestation, namely, that God will shine in counsel with glory
upon the earth (or land) and will do so in order to exalt and glorify the
remnant of Israel. Each of these elements needs to be investigated more
closely.
2.2. The of God

For Ziegler, the Aramaic underlies 2! in 4:2, just as in Theod.
Dan 5:19 is rendered by . He suggests that the translator
may be thinking about the manifestation of the counsel ( ) of God, in
connection with Ps 89(88):8.39 Other possibilities are that the translator
saw in
some form of , or that 2! is simply an addition, in
line with the translators practice of introducing elements which for him
clarify or expand the meaning of passages to his readers.40 In the light of
the Aramaic inuence in the rendering of , Zieglers suggestion of
is the most likely.
More important is the question of the meaning and signicance of the
term for the translator. The uses of in LXX Isaiah reect the more
general usages of Hellenistic Jewish literature,41 where the term is
38. Following the translation of W. G. Braude, The Midrash on Psalms (2 vols.;

New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959), 1:418 (emphasis added). Note the allu-
sions and citation of Isa 54:5 and Ps 118:27, and see the comments on the midrash
by Horbury, Jewish Messianism, 78.
40. Additions in LXX Isaiah have been surveyed thoroughly by Ziegler,
Untersuchungen, 5680.
41. On the basic level it can mean simply thought or intention (Ps
20[19]:5; Isa 55:7; 1 Macc 4:45; 2 Macc 14:5). Cf. G. Schrenk, , TDNT
1:633. A more specialized meaning is that of plan or deliberation (Neh 4:9; Est
9:31; Jud 2:2, 4; Sir 37:16). There is also a use of the term in a more generalized
sense of wisdom, or of a wise way of life (Prov 2:11; 3:21; 8:12; 9:10; 15:22;
1 Macc 2:65; Sir 32:18). It can be applied to whole nations, referring to the body of
their cultural notions, practices, or to their plans and deliberations, whether positively
or negatively (Deut 32:28; Ps 33[32]:10). More signicant for the present study are
the uses of the term with political overtones. is attested with a more technical
sense of counsellor or (ofcial) counsel (Num 16:2; Prov 11:14; Ezra 4:5). The
possible sense of assembly is attested in Sir 38:33 (see the reference to the council
of the holy ones in Pss 89[88]:7 and 111[110]:1). The sense of political advice is
1
employed with a wide range of meanings, connected to thinking, plan-

ning, or political deliberations.42 In the LXX, is the most common
Hebrew term underlying (76 of 127 occurrences). LXX Isaiah
makes the connection in 14 of 32 cases. is added twice as a
complement to in the set phrase in 3:9 and
7:5. It is also added in 7:7; 10:25; 25:7; 28:8 (2); 29:15 (in addition to
= ), and 31:6. It renders "
in 32:8, in 44:25, and
in 55:78 (3). The use of with a variety of Hebrew equivalents
indicates that this is a term preferred by the Isaiah translator. The special
signicance of for him is particularly felt in texts where it is
somehow associated with the Lord.43 References to the of the Lord
are seen in LXX Isa 4:2; 5:19; 14:2627; 19:17; 23:9; 25:1, 7; 46:10.
These examples indicate that notions of judgment and restoration for
Israel are comprised in the divine . In 5:19; 14:2627, and 23:9,
the Lords refers to his judgment against sinners and those who
oppress his people (rendering ). While it is difcult to ascertain
whether the translator has this content in mind in the rendering of 11:2,
where the messianic gure is said to be lled with the spirit of
(here the term could just mean wisdom in a general sense), the refer-
ence to the angel of great counsel in LXX Isa 9:5(6) could be connected
to 44:26, where the counsel of Jerusalems ,
represents a
restoration of the city.44
attested in 2 Sam 16:20, 23; 17:7, 14, 23; 1 Kgs 12:8, 1314, 24; 1 Chr 12:20; 2 Chr
10:8, 13, 14, and 22:5, and of political deliberation or decree in Ezra 10:8 and 1 Macc
14:22. For political conspiracy, see 2 Sam 15:31, 34; 3 Macc. 5:8. Also signicant
are references to the of God in Ps 66(65):5; Prov 19:21; Mic 4:12.
42. See 8:10 and 32:8 for the meaning plan. Isa 3:9 has the set phrase 3
added with no Hebrew equivalent. Here the term expresses the idea of
design. The set phrase also appears in 7:5, where is an addition (the
Hebrew is simply ). Isa 29:15 and 30:1 speak negatively of taking counsel apart
from the Lord. In 10:25 Gods wrath is directed against 3 3 /), render-
ing
. God is said to confound the counsel of the Egyptians in 19:3.
References to sinful counsel are found in the loose rendering of 28:8; 31:6, and 32:7.
God makes the of the diviners foolishness in 44:25. In 47:13, is
connected to divination and astrology. In 55:78 the term is used in the sense of
mindset, contrasting human and divine . The political connotation is par-
ticularly present in Isaiah. In 7:5 and 7, the term has the political nuance of delib-
eration. appears as political advice in 19:11, as military strategy in 36:5. In
41:21, could mean plans or counsellors.
43. See the discussion in Troxel, Isaiah 7,1416, 21.
44. Other, more signicant, elements of 9:5(6) and 11:2 will be discussed in
greater detail in Chapters 5 and 6, respectively.
1
Perhaps the most illuminating occurrences are in 25:17.45 In 25:1 we

read
(You have done a wonder,
counsels from of old, faithful [and] sure). The LXX renders the phrase
by 3 , ,

(You have done wonderful deeds, an ancient true counsel. B
Lord, let it come to pass).46 Verses 26 esh out the great deeds and
ancient counsel47 for which the Lord is praised (introduced by
!/0): the
destruction of Israels enemies and the exaltation of the lowly and suffer-
ing people, which culminates in a feast on Mount Zion (the mount is
unnamed in the Hebrew text, but & is added in the LXX). The free
rendering at the end of v. 7 provides a closure to the section and claries
that the previous verses contain a description of Gods design: S
3 8 # (for this is the [Lords] counsel against
all the nations).
It thus seems clear that, for the LXX Isaiah translator, the Lords
can encompass judgment upon his people, their subsequent nal exalta-
tion, the humiliation of their enemies, and the spread of the dominion of
the Lord.48 Seeligmann explicitly connects the rendering of 4:2 with the
of 25:1. He argues that the translator here sees that Gods glory
will descend upon the earth in those days, in order to honour and exalt
the remnant of the people of Israel.49
2.3. The Manifestation of the Lords with glory upon the earth
Having considered the content of the of God, I proceed to
investigate the signicance of its manifestation with glory upon the
earth in 4:2. This is visible primarily in the choice of terms. As is the
case with , it is clear that the LXX Isaiah translator showed a
45. In spite of numerous emendations proposed for this text (cf. BHS, Wild-
berger), I follow the contention of Coste, Le texte grec, 37, corroborated by
evidence from Qumran, that the translators Vorlage was similar to the MT.
46. Coste, Le texte grec, 38, is probably correct in his suggestion that the trans-
lation of by
may have been inuenced by liturgical readings, with
being an addition to support the optative.
47. The passage of the plural to the singular was most probably
determined by linguistic constraints of Hebrew and Greek. Cf. ibid.
48. This is similar to the model presented by A. van der Kooij, Zur Theologie
des Jesajabuches in der Septuaginta, in Reventlow, ed., Theologische Probleme, 9
25, according to which the content of the divine includes three primary
notions: calamity for the people of Israel due to iniquity (5:19); destruction of the
foreign powers (25:2); salvation for Israel or the remnant (4:2). See also Schaper,
Messianic Intertextuality, 375.
1
marked preference for +, and employed it for a large number of

different Hebrew equivalents.50
The following # 2 2 is easily explained if the translator (or his
Vorlage) read
(or similar) for
.51 # 2 2 is a set phrase in
Greek, used for a variety of Hebrew constructions. Isaiah 19:17 is of
interest, since the LXX rendering says that the country of the Jews (S
= ) ;) will be a terror to the Egyptians because of the
() that the Lord purposed Q /, referring to the land, as
opposed to the Hebrew
(against him [them]).52 The idea parallels
in some degree the notion of God manifesting his counsel # 2 2 in
4:2. Of course, = could simply mean district.
Brockington aptly notes that the rendering of 4:2 in its entirety was
inuenced by the reference to the theophanic manifestation of God in the
pillar of cloud and re in 4:5.53 According to Brockington, + had a
special theological signicance for the translator, associated, directly or
indirectly, with Gods redemptive work among men.54 This connection
between + and Gods saving activity towards Israel is evoked by the
rendering of 4:2.
Other examples of the use of + in LXX Isaiah help to clarify the
signicance that the term had for the translator. In 6:1, for instance, the
phrase !

(and his skirts lled the temple) is
rendered by # 1 " 2 + /% (and the house was
full of his glory). It is clear that the root refers to the skirt of a robe
(cf. Exod 28:34; Jer 13:26; Nah 3:5; Lam 1:9).55 The use of + to
render could have been prompted by ignorance of the meaning of the
Hebrew word, which led the translator to employ a favoured term. It
50. Brockington, , 26. He notes that, in the translated books of the LXX,
+ appears about 270 times. In 180 of these instances it corresponds to the
Hebrew !. There is still a signicant proportion of the usage of + for other
Hebrew equivalents. The situation is more marked in Isaiah, where out of 68
instances of +, only 28 correspond to !.
51. Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 108, suggests "
().
52. For a detailed discussion of this verse, see A. van der Kooij, The Old Greek
of Isaiah 19:1625: Translation and Interpretation, in Cox, ed., VI Congress, 127
66 (13235, 15758).
53. Brockington, , 28.
54. Ibid., 26.
55. While the observations of Driver give a fresh perspective on the prophets
perception of the meaning of the term, the basic apprehension of it as skirt remains
unchanged. Cf. G. R. Driver, His Train Filled the Temple, in Near Eastern Studies
in Honor of William Foxwell Albright (ed. H. Goedicke; Baltimore: The Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1971), 8796.
1
could also be an attempt to avoid the anthropomorphism in the reference

to Gods skirt.56 The use of + in 6:1 also tallies with the afrmation,
in v. 3, that the whole earth is lled with Gods +.57
We may, therefore, detect a trace of the same ideology behind the
rendering + # 2 2 in 4:2, an ideology which encompassed
the notions of Gods manifesting himself in glory and of his glory lling
the earth.
2.4. The Limited Duration of Gods Wrath

Ziegler suggests that the use of + in 4:2 is reminiscent of 30:27
and 33:17, where we also have theophanies.58 While the rendering of

by + in 33:17 seems to be simply a good idiomatic ren-
dering without any further signicance, 30:27 deserves to be considered
in closer detail:
*
$ $ ($ > P
%
. $ 1
! + > )

/%

> X2 2
! $
# S X3 % % O %

Behold, the name of the Lord comes Behold the name of the Lord comes
from far, after much time,
his anger burning the wrath burning,
and (his) smoke dense; the word of his lips with Glory,
his lips are full of fury, the word full of anger,
and his tongue like a consuming re. and the anger of his wrath shall
consume like re.
The rendering of by % comes from under-

standing the Hebrew expression in a temporal sense, as in 25:1.59
56. For a discussion on the avoidance of anthropomorphism and the rendering of

metaphors, see S. Olofsson, God is my Rock: A Study of Translation Technique and
Theological Exegesis in the Septuagint (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1990).
57. Brockington, , 28, notes that in 30:27 the Isaiah translator also
incorporates the term in his paraphrase: Behold the name of the Lord coming after a
long time, the anger burned, the word of his lips is with glory (+). Brockington
also connects the rendering of 33:17 with the Targum. This is because the MT reads
Your eyes will see the king in his beauty, the LXX You will see a king with
glory, and the Targum The glory of the Shekinah of the everlasting king in his
beauty your eyes will see.
58. Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 1078, 137.
1
59. % is probably an explanatory addition. Cf. Ottley, Isaiah, 2:258.
+ renders ! , and while it is conceivable that the translator saw it

as predicating 1 , the lack of another suitable com-
plement to > )
/% suggests that + is
connected by the translator with the word of his lips. This in turn
indicates that the rst > renders , which the translator
appears to have read as a form of (oracle). The second >
is either a repeated renderingconnected also to
or, most likely,
an explicative addition, providing a subject to . In the last
segment of the verse, is translated freely by S X3 % %.60
! is rendered by a verbal form (third feminine perfect) cast in the
future, in line with the translators practice when dealing with prophetic
announcements (cf. 4:4). The expression S X3 % % appears
again in the free rendering of 7:4, where we read:
#$ $
$ ( # : /L `+ %
S
$
/

(
# 3 -%, < S 6
,
% $
$ &

$ ,> ) + ) ) )
9

&

0 0 X3 % %

, (
And say to him, Watch out and be And say to him, Watch out to be
quiet, quiet,
do not fear and do not let your heart and do not fear nor let your soul
be faint be faint
before these two stumps of smoking before these two stumps of smoking
rebrand, rebrand,
for the burning anger of Rezin and for when the anger of my wrath
Aram and the son of Remaliah. comes, I will heal again.
For the nal portion of 7:4 (

) the LXX
has 0 X3 % %
, ( . If the words
in the MT are taken as an addition, it is conceivable that the Vorlage of
LXX Isaiah did not contain them. This would generate the remarkable
situation of having both MT and LXX provide different editorial comments
on the verse. However, there are enough formal pointers to suggest that
the Vorlage of LXX Isaiah read as MT at this point.
60. is normally rendered by ) in LXX Isaiah (cf. 3:8; 28:11; 32:4;
35:6; 41:17; 45:23; 50:4; 57:4; 59:3; 66:18), but it is treated idiomatically in the
paraphrased 33:19, where is rendered by -
, and in 54:17,
where it is rendered by -. The term is omitted in 5:24 and 11:15.
1
0 possibly originates from reading the preposition in a temporal

sense. Ottley suggests that represents a misreading of
(violence) for
. However, while the LXX a in v. 1 indeed
suggests the possibility that its Vorlage contained ,61 a noun
with the meaning offered by Ottley does not exist. It is conceivable that
Ottley is thinking of a noun derived from the root ", but this is not
clear.62 Most probably, the translator ascribed the burning wrath (

) to the Lord, as in Isaiah exclusively denotes Gods anger (cf.
5:25; 9:11, 16, 20; 10:4, 25; 12:1). Outside LXX Isaiah, some signicant
examples of the rendering of
by X2! %not neces-
sarily referring to Godoccur in 1 Sam 20:34; Lam 2:3, and 2 Chr 25:10.
( in 7:4 is reminiscent of LXX Isa 6:10, where it renders the
verb .63 If Ziegler and Ottley are correct in their assertion that the
translator read the verb for
in v. 5, this would explain both
the insertion of ( here and the absence of an equivalent for

there.64 However,
is probably too far removed from this sentence
to have been perceived by the translator as belonging to it. For Rsel, the
nal words of v. 4 in the LXX loosen the intrinsic tension of MT as they
anticipate the nal fate of Judah, made explicit in v. 9. They make it
clear that the period of Gods wrath is short and is to be followed by a
time of healing. Rsel notes further that ( as a translation of
and is a terminus technicus for the restoring and saving hand of God
in LXX Isaiah (cf. 6:10; 19:22; 30:26; 61:1).65
In connection with the LXX rendering for in Isa 57:17,
Gordon demonstrates that LXX Isaiah could have been inuenced by the
immediate context of the verse and other texts such as Ps 30:5; Isa 10:25,
and 54:78, which stress the limited duration of Gods wrath against his
people (cf. also LXX Isa 26:16).66 It is plausible that the concept of the
61. The name a in 7:1 could lend credence to the view that the reading
of the Hebrew name should be 1 in the light of the name raunnu that appears in
the annals of Tiglath-pileser. See the discussion in Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 283.
a in the same verse seems to be connected with the tradition reected in
1QIsaa, which reads
. Cf. S. H. Horn, An Inscribed Seal from Jordan,
BASOR 189 (1968): 4143 (42).
65. M. Rsel, Die Jungfrauengeburt des endzeitlichen Immanuel, JBTh 6
(1991): 13551 (138).
66. R. P. Gordon, The Legacy of Lowth: Robert Lowth and the Book of Isaiah
in Particular, in Rapaport-Albert and Greenberg, eds., Biblical Hebrew, 5776
(6467).
1
short duration of Gods wrath underlies the rendering at 7:4. This idea
envisions a period of judgment, depicted by various metaphors related to
burning, purging, or cleansing, after which healing and salvation
for Gods people would follow.
In this connection we move back to 4:34. The translator connects
syntactically 4:3 and 4 by translating with 0. The connection makes
explicit that the remnant that has been written for life in Jerusalem will
be called holy because God will have purged the lth and blood of the
sons and daughters of Jerusalem by a spirit and judgment and burn-
ing.67 The futuristic casting of the perfects in v. 4 is in keeping with the
reading of the oracle as prophecy.
The imagery of cleansing by a spirit of judgment and burning is
reminiscent of 1:2527. After the peculiar rendering of the metaphor of
purication by re in 1:25 (see Chapter 2), we read a description of the
restoration of Zion and its remnant (vv. 2627).68 The phrase #

in v. 27 is rendered by -
S ( /2 # (for by judgment her
captivity will be saved and with mercy).69 Having read
, the rst
word in v. 27, with the previous verse, the translator nds a subject in

, which is rendered by S ( /b.70 ( appears
67. The addition of ) ) has survived virtually untouched by later revisers.
It is possible that the translator employed a set phrase sons and daughters, as in
45:11 and 56:5. Cf. Goshen-Gottstein, Isaiah, ad loc.
68. There is nothing particularly signicant in 1:26, apart from the rendering of

by 3 &. The last word here is not an addition but is
the rst word of v. 27, which is appended to what precedes and not to what follows.
The translation of
by is signicant, because in LXX Isaiah the
Hebrew term is normally rendered by (1:21; 24:10; 25:2; 26:5; 29:1; 32:13;
33:20). was used as a technical term in Hellenistic Judaism. In Josh
10:2, it renders !
. It appears again in Josh 14:15; 15:13, and 21:11, as the
translator struggles with the obscure geographical reference to Hebron / Kiriath-arba.
Another attestation is in the rendering of the Hebrew
by > #
in 2 Sam 20:19. We also see it in the plural form in Esth
9:19. Seeligmann, Isaiah, 11314, argues that the translator of Isaiah is the rst Jew
in the diaspora whom we know to have used the term , a typically Greek
term both in formulation and signication. He suggests that the translation recalls
Ps 87(86):5, where

is rendered by & : ? .
Noticing that Philo also uses with reference to Jerusalem, Seeligmann
afrms that this could be part of the lexical currency of Alexandrian Judaism.
69. functions as a syntactical connector ( represents twice in the
verse). is correctly understood by the translator as a Niphal third person
feminine singular.
70. The before
seems to be connected with . This rearranging of
syntactical elements is not too different from the relocation of
in v. 24.
1
in the LXX connected with a variety of Hebrew equivalents, but primarily

derivates of and . The term appears three times in LXX Isaiah.
Besides 1:27, it is also found in 20:4 (
) and 45:13 ( ).71
To pursue this question further, we must turn to LXX Isa 6:1113,
where we have an exchange between Isaiah and the Lord in which the
prophet asks about the duration of the calamity brought upon the people.
The verses are translated quite literally in the LXX,72 apart from the
simplied explicative rendering of 6:1373 and, more signicantly, the
translation of 6:12, which reads:

# % : 1 >
$ , =
"
& # -

# 2 2
And the Lord sends man far away, And after these things God will send
man far away,
and (there is) a great forsaking in the and the remainder will be multiplied
midst of the land. upon the land.
The insertion of % (after these things)an expression also

present in 1:27at the beginning of 6:12 is worthy of note, as it makes
explicit that the restoration, or multiplication, of the people follows
the purging of the land.74 The rst clause of the Hebrew in 6:12 was
71. As for the rendering of by , one notes that of the four
occurrences of the Greek term in LXX Isaiah (1:27; 28:17; 38:18; 59:16), 38:18 is the
only case where it does not correspond to , but to .
72. Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 25051, argues that the Niphal in 6:11 does
not t well with the Qal , and that the LXX rendering, which for him presumes the
reading , is to be preferred. Cf. 24:12 and Ottley, Isaiah, 2:136. The choice of
forms derived from - (a verb for and a noun for ) shows that there is
no concern to reproduce form precisely.
by
in 6:13 is, according to Seeligmann,
Isaiah, 45, derived from sacricial terminology which, in its turn, had adopted the
word in a gurative sense, from the economic vocabulary of Egyptian Hellenism,
where it was understood to mean as much as: additional payment, interest, and capi-
tal increment.
74. The expression is normally connected with in narratives, such as Gen
23:19; 45:15; Exod 5:1; Josh 24:5; Judg 1:9; 2 Sam 2:1; 3:28; 2 Kgs 6:24. It is also
used in some legal contexts (Lev 14:8, 36; Num 4:15; 31:24; 32:22; Deut 21:13).
Signicant uses of the expression % in prophetic passages are found in
LXX Jer 16:16; Ezek 20:39; Hos 3:5; Joel 3:1; Theod. Dan 2:29, 45, and Ep Jer 1:50.
While sometimes it can simply refer to the future (Jer 5:31; Sir 3:31), it could have
been understood as an eschatological term. It is used in some actualizing
renderings, such as Pss 16(15):4 and 49(48):14. Possibly the use of % in
1
understood by the translator as a reference to Gods expelling of the

Gentiles from the Land, after which the remnant would be multiplied.75
According to Seeligmann, the translator conceives of the multiplica-
tion of the remnant envisaged in 6:12 as a restoration in which the com-
munity will increase in numbers, rejoice in the contemplation of God,
be reunited and regain their former exalted position.76 The multipli-
cation of the remnant is also envisaged in 14:2, where
appears in connection with = (rendering in 14:1), a term which
is probably derived from Aramaic
. Seeligmann aptly observes that
this rendering suggests that the translator viewed the multiplication of the
remnant as being achieved by means of the proselytizing of Gentiles.77
2.5. The Exaltation and Glorication of the Remnant

The notion of the limited duration of Gods wrath thus inevitably leads to
the question of the subsequent exaltation and glorication of the rem-
nant.78 Seeligmanns important suggestion is that the translators interest
in the idea of the remnant cannot have been just incidental, butorigi-
nated in the way in which he combined Isaiahs expectations regarding
the future with his own. He refers, in this connection, to 11:16 (cf. 28:5)
and 19:2425.
LXX Isa 44:6 with reference to the Lords identity has an eschatological dimension.
Noteworthy New Testament occurrences are John 13:7; Acts 7:7; 15:16; Heb 4:8;
Rev 1:19; 4:1 (2), and 9:12.
75. The use of a plural form % , % for reects the Greek mean-
ing of humankind.
76. Seeligmann, Isaiah, 116. He draws his conclusion from looking at texts such
as 4:2; 24:14; 25:1; 44:23; 49:15, and 52:13. Cf. Ps 37(36):20.
78. For further studies on the question of the remnant, see J. C. Campbell,
Gods People and the Remnant, SJT 3 (1950): 7885; J. Fichtner, Jahves Plan in
der Botschaft des Jesaja, ZAW 63 (1951): 1633; J. M. Allegro, The Root r and
the Doctrine of the Remnant, JTS 3 (1952): 2739; G. F. Hasel, The Remnant: The
History and Theology of the Remnant Idea from Genesis to Isaiah (2d ed.; AUM 5;
Berrien Springs: Andrews University Press, 1974); L. T. Brodie, The Children and
the Prince: The Structure, Nature and Date of Isaiah 612, BTB 9 (1979): 2731; J.
Day, Shear-Jashub (Isaiah 7:3) and the Remnant of Wrath (Psalm 76:11), VT 31
(1981): 7678; G. Widengren, Yahwehs Gathering of the Dispersed, in In the
Shelter of Elyon: Essays on Ancient Palestinian Life and Literature in Honor of
G. W. Ahlstrm (ed. W. B. Barrick and J. R. Spencer; JSOTSup 31; Shefeld: JSOT,
1984), 22745; O. Carena, Il resto di Israele: studio storico-comparativo delle
iscrizioni reali assire e dei testi profetici sul tema del resto (RivBSup 13; Bologna:
Edizioni Dehoniane, 1985); C. A. Evans, Isa 6:913 in the Context of Isaiahs
Theology, JETS 29 (1986): 13946; J. Willits, The Remnant of Israel in
4QpIsaiaha (4Q161) and the Dead Sea Scrolls, JJS 57 (2006): 1125.
1
The concept of a surviving remnant indeed occupies a signicant

place in the Hebrew Isaiah. The centrality of the concept in the book is
evidenced by its presence in the narrative of the call of the prophet in
6:1113, supplemented by the command to Isaiah to name his son Shear
Jashub, a remnant will return.79 There are debates on whether the
concept is to be understood as an expression of grace or of judgment.
However, it is likely that there are elements of both, as these are brought
together in texts such as Isa 1:2527; 4:26, and 10:2022, which speak
of Gods purging of his people by means of a catastrophe. Other
signicant texts are 1:9; 11:1016; 16:14; 17:16; 21:1617; 28:56, and
30:1517.80
According to Isa 4:2, the purpose of the glorious divine manifestation
on the earth is to exalt and glorify the remnant of Israel. Of fundamen-
tal importance for Seeligmann is the juxtaposition of the terms *6%
and +9, which indicate, when having humans as their object,
deliverance from notions of humiliation and misery represented by the
term . He mentions in this connection 44:23 and 49:1, 5.81
The notion of salvation (expressed in the verb =!9) in LXX Isaiah,
according to Seeligmann, occurs in close connection with one of the
most notable thoughts in Isaiahs preaching, i.e. the proclaiming of the
return of the Remnant of Israel.82 The connection between salvation and
the increase in numbers of the faithful remnant, their reunion and the
restitution of their exalted status, is derived from the theology of the
Hebrew Isaiah, but is recongured in the light of the actual experiences
of exile.83
Drawing on the use of and -
in texts such
as Isa 10:20, 22, and 37:32, Seeligmann argues that the translator makes
this remnant into the bearer of the promises of future salvation.84 The
rendering -
in 6:12 was probably employed because
the word is not conceived in its abstract but in its concrete
meaning, i.e. the community which was left behind and spared.85 This
79. On the meaning of

, see Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 29697.
80. Cf. L. V. Meyer, Remnant, ABD 5:669671 (670).
82. Ibid., 115.
83. Ibid., 11418.
84. Ibid., 11516.
85. Ibid., 117. Cf. Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 139. The subsequent adjustment of
the verb to the plural is in keeping with a tendency seen else-
where in the chapter. In ch. 6, whenever the activity of the angelic beings is described
there is a systematic change in the verb tenses from singular to plural (this is seen in
vv. 2, 3, and 4). Of course it is also conceivable that the translator had a different
1
concrete meaning is also evidenced in Hag 1:12, 14; 2:2, and Zech 8:6,
11, 12.86
From a strictly linguistic standpoint it is very difcult to ascertain
precisely the meaning intended by the translator in each case. For
instance, in Isa 4:23 there is nothing remarkable in the rendering of
terminology related to the remnant. #
(v. 2) is most often asso-
ciated in the LXX with the root !9-.87 * (v. 3) is more often
seen in the LXX as an equivalent of (cf. 2 Kgs 19:30).
(v. 3) is a frequent term in the LXX and is connected with a number of
different equivalents, so that its choice for the rendering of is not
particularly remarkable.88 The root appears in Biblical Hebrew with
the basic meaning of being left, remaining, surviving.89 The semantic
eld covered by
is very similar to that of , and the terms
employed in the LXX overlap.90
In fact, these terms are often employed in their general sense with no
theological implications, as in Isa 14:22, where renders
Vorlage, but we also see this adjustment of number in 7:1 and 7:5. The choice of a
passive form is probably intended to keep the focus on Gods redemptive activity
(cf. 1:18; 6:2; 9:5[6]).
86. Cf. Meyer, Remnant, 5:671.
87. =!9 in Gen 32:9; Isa 10:20; 37:32; Neh 1:2; 2 Chr 20:24; in 2 Sam
15:14; Jer 25(32):35; Obad 17; Ezra 9:8, 13; 2 Chr 12:7; Theod. Dan 11:42;
,=9 in 2 Kgs 19:31; Jer 50(27):29; Joel 2:3; 2 Chr 30:6; =9 in Judg
21:17; 2 Kgs 19:30; Dan 11:42; Ezra 9:1415. The root is used of the deliverance of
the Jewish people from foreign threat in 1 Macc 4:26; 9:46, and 2 Macc 1:25. Some-
times, terminology that is more formally connected to the remnant notion is
employed (see in Isa 37:31 and 1 Chr 4:43). 6 is a term used
exclusively with #
(cf. Gen 45:7).
88. The most frequent equivalents in LXX Isaiah are
(as in this verse, 7:22;
30:17; 39:6) and (7:3; 10:1921; 11:11 [2]; 16:14; 17:6; 24:6, 12; 28:5; 37:4,
32; 49:21). It is also used for in 38:10; in 6:11; in 6:12; 7:16; 10:3, 14;
17:2, 9; 18:6; 27:10; 54:67; 62:4, 12;
in 66:19; ! in 17:10; 23:15; in
21:10; #
in 4:2; 37:31; in 65:15. It is added with no equivalent in 24:14;
28:6; 30:18. Cf. also 38:12.
89. Cf. Gen 7:23; 14:10; 32:9; 42:38; Exod 8:7; 10:12; Lev 26:36; Num 9:12;
11:26; 21:35; Deut 2:34; Josh 8:17, 22; Ruth 1:3, 5.
90. Normally, derivates of are used. In 10:21, the phrase

is rendered by # > - < % ; # >
(. In 10:22, where we read that, in spite of the people of Israel being as the
sand of the sea, yet only a remnant would return from exile, the LXX renders

by > . In 11:11, we read about the remnant of his
people that is left (
), which the LXX renders by > - <
* % % 0 c - 2!.
1
with reference to the Babylonians. It is, therefore, difcult to decide in

certain cases, such as the rendering of by 1 - in Isa
7:22, whether we are dealing with an evocation of the important theolo-
gical notion of the remnant.91 In most cases, decisions have to be made
on the basis of context.
2.6. Exaltation and Security in the Lords Mountain

In 4:5, the translator (or his Vorlage) most probably read for .92
In turn, the use of Y to render echoes 3:14, which speaks of the
Lords intervention against sin and oppression. The theophanic reference
also tallies with 4:2, as I argued earlier.93 It has to be decided whether

is represented by # or is altogether omitted, with #
being simply an addition. The latter option is plausible in the light of the
frequent additions that the translator makes when there is the need to
clarify something or to make the sentence structure more acceptable. In
this same verse we have the example of the addition of before
-
.94 An omission of
could be explained as being due to the
reference in the previous verse, which would have made a repetition
unnecessary for the translator. Yet Seeligmann is probably correct in
arguing that the translator simply misrepresented the tetragrammaton by
# , as in 8:18 and 28:21.95
Again in v. 5, the rendering of by # -
! /2 originates in the translators attempt to give the meaning of
his Vorlage, which was probably obscure to him, according to a familiar
idea of the surrounding area of Mount Zion, reected in 2 Kgs 23:5
and Ezek 34:26.96 The idea could also derive from the fortications of the
Temple Mount at the time of the Maccabean revolt. In 1 Macc 4:60,
91. A. van der Kooij, Die Septuaginta Jesajas als Document jdischer Exegese.
Einige Notize zu LXX-Jes 7, in bersetzung und Deutung. Studien zu dem Alten
Testament und seiner Umwelt: Alexander Reinard Hulst gewidmet (ed. D.
Barthlemy; Nijkerk: Callenbach, 1977), 91102 (98). Cf. Troxel, Isaiah 7,1416,
14 n. 64.
92. An important discussion of the textual issues in 4:5 is to be found in Seelig-
mann, Isaiah, 6263.
93. See also Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 108.
94. Ibid., 62, suggests a possible inuence from LXX Exod 40:35, where we read
0 Q /3 S -
. In LXX Isa 4:5, the translator makes explicit
his interpretation of the cloud and shining ame by night as metaphorical, by adding
twice the comparative O.
95. Seeligmann, Isaiah, 62, 66.
1
10:11 and 45 we read that Mount Zion was fortied with high walls
and strong towers around it ( ). In 1 Macc 6:7 a verbal form
() is used to describe the fortication of the sanctuary with
high walls.
It is hard to see the place of /2, as it does not agree with the neuter
P. Perhaps the translator is thinking in feminine terms because of the
reference to Mount Zion. The reference to protection and security in the
area of the Lords mount could be connected to wider traditions referring
to the eschatological state of the Mount of the Lord, according to which
the mount would be the special locus of divine protection and presence.
This tradition could also be reected in the rendering of 11:9:
$
# / 3

/< 3 ,
/

! # > P > A

$ "
0 S % )

>

!
* O 8 $ 6
They will not harm And they will not do evil

and they will not destroy nor will they be able to destroy anyone
in all my holy mountain; upon my holy mountain;
for the earth will be lled with because the whole world has been
knowledge of Yahweh lled with knowing the Lord
as the waters cover the sea. as much water covers the seas.
The rendering of the parallel occurrences of by / 3 and /< 3

adds emphasis in the LXX. The same can be said for the additions of
and /
. Perhaps the addition of + /

implies that, in the view of the translator, there will be attempts to
destroy the people living in the vicinity of the holy mountain of the Lord.
(which here renders ") is a Hellenistic designation of the
whole world (cf. LXX Ezek 7:14; 27:13; Job 2:2).
The noun is rendered with the combination of genitive + innitive
% ). While this is a grammatically acceptable construction in
Greek, it is the only time the equivalence is used in the LXX. The form
% ) is usually a rendering of the Hebrew (Gen 24:21;
38:26; 2 Sam 14:20; Isa 50:4; Ezek 20:12; Hos 6:3; Mic 3:1; Pss
67[66]:3; 73[72]:16; Eccl 1:17; 7:25; 8:16; 2 Chr 6:33; Theod. Dan 2:3).
Especially worthy of note is Hab 2:14, where we read "
!

!

!
! (For the earth shall be lled with
the knowledge of the glory of Yahweh, as the waters cover the sea).
This is rendered in the LXX by 0 S 2 % ) 3
1
+ O 8 6 / (For the earth shall be

lled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as water covers
them).
The phrase 8 appears again in LXX Isa 17:13, rendering

, in a reference to the nations rushing like much water. There are
signicant uses of the Hebrew expression

commonly ren-
dered as many watersthat could have become part of the religious
vocabulary of Jewish messianic and eschatological expectation. We read,
for example, in Num 24:7,

! ! (Water will ow from his buckets, and his seed [will
be] in many waters, and his king will be more exalted than Agag, and his
kingdom will be lifted up). Also signicant are Ps 29(28):3, which
speaks of Yahweh being

(upon many waters), and Ezek
43:2, which says that the voice of God was

! (like the
sound of many waters).97
3. Summary
In the discussion above, I have attempted to identify the imprint of
eschatological traditions in the renderings of LXX Isa 2:24 and 4:26. I
suggested that the framing of the two pericopes with In the last days
(2:2) and On that day (4:2) would have prompted peculiar eschatolo-
gical notions that can be felt in the rendering, and that a measure of
contextual awareness would inform translational decisions in these sec-
tions. Besides this observation, it was noted that several of the eschato-
logical ideas identiable in the rendering are in common with other LXX
texts, in both Isaiah and the larger LXX corpus. Furthermore, links with
other traditional streams in early Judaism were also identied.
At the same time, while the repetition of some preferred ideas and
themes (e.g. +; the limited duration of Gods wrath) was noted, the
present survey did not reveal any overt attempts to achieve systematiza-
tion. It was also observed that in the case of some themes (such as the
remnant), linguistic and co-textual considerations often impeded the
identication of a particular eschatological rendering of a passage. The
repetition of themes is best understood as the repeated interjection of
ideological presuppositions of the translator, as he struggled with the
meaning of the Hebrew text. In this regard, I point to the fact that all the
echoes of eschatological traditions supposedly identiable can nd some
explanation in the translators rendering of the Vorlage.
1
97. The metaphor of abundant water is also found in 1QpHab 11:12.
In the following chapters, I proceed to dealing with the rendering of

the well-known messianic oracles of LXX Isa 112. The survey of escha-
tological passages in this chapter forms the background of the subsequent
analysis, since some of the themes explored here will resurface in my
discussion. These will be particularly signicant as I try to delineate the
relationship between eschatology and messianism in the translators
thinking.
1
Chapter 4
THE MESSIANIC ORACLES (1): LXX ISAIAH 7:1416
The Immanuel sign in LXX Isa 7:1416 is an extremely signicant

passage to be studied in connection with the theme of eschatology and
messianism in LXX Isaiah. While discussions of the text tend to focus
erroneously on the use of
in v. 14, there are other elements that
are much more signicant.1 Below I offer an exegetical analysis of LXX
Isa 7:1416, followed by notes on the overall context of these verses.
Throughout this study, focus will be kept on the translators reading and
translating strategies, in order to ascertain what the passage really reveals
about his messianic conceptions.
1. LXX Isaiah 7:1416: Translation and Analysis

7:14
!
& ($
!$ % = /> * :
:
$
$ ($ S
# '+ #

+
$ * #
> P /%
d

Therefore the Lord himself will give Therefore the Lord himself will give
you a sign: you a sign:
See, the girl is pregnant and bears See, the virgin will be pregnant and
a son, bear a son,
and she calls his name Immanuel. and you will call his name Immanuel.
7:15
!
$ #
-
( # . ) /> .

+ > ,
1
1. See the critique of Troxel, Isaiah 7,1416, 1, 22.
4. The Messianic Oracles (1): LXX Isaiah 7:1416 71
He will eat curds and honey, He will eat butter and honey,
to know to reject evil Before his either knowing or
preferring evil
and choose good. he will choose the good.
7:16
$
#
# . ) >
, > . >

, : F %
+
> ,
& $ ($ # - S 2
" ( & e $ -D

!
$
$. ,> = )

For before the boy knows For before the boy knows
good or evil,
to reject evil and to choose the good, he refuses evil in order to choose the
good;
the land will be deserted and the land will be deserted
that you dread that you fear
because of its two kings. because of its two kings.
1.1. The Rendering of by

I begin with the rendering of by
in 7:14. Since its
adoption in early Christianity as a proof text for the virgin birth of Jesus
(Matt 1:23), this has been a hotly debated verse.2 In modern treatments of
LXX Isaiah, it is common to argue that the rendering displays a special
theological manoeuvre.3 Scholars who hold this view can be divided into
two broad groups.
In the rst group are those who argue that the choice of
was
inuenced by notions of a supernatural virginal conception of a divine,
or messianic, gure. This has been championed by such scholars as
2. For the history of interpretation of

in LXX Isa 7:14 in antiquity, see
A. Kamesar, The Virgin of Isaiah 7:14: The Philological Argument from the
Second to the Fifth Century, JTS 41 (1990): 5175, and J. G. Cook, The Interpre-
tation of the Old Testament in Greco-Roman Paganism (STAC 23; Tbingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 2004), 32325.
3. The identication of some kind of theological background to the choice of

is found in a few commentaries on the Gospel of Matthew. See, for
instance, W. F. Albright and C. S. Mann, Matthew (AB 26; Garden City: Doubleday,
1971), 8; C. Blomberg, Matthew (NAC 22; Nashville: Broadman, 1992), 60; D. C.
Hagner, Matthew 113 (WBC 33A; Dallas: Word, 1993), 20. Contrast with the more
sober view of R. E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy
Narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (new updated ed.; ABRL; New
York: Doubleday, 1993), 14849.
1
Kittel and Gressmann.4 More recently, the hypothesis has been revived
and developed by Martin Rsel.5 He argues that there was a xed mental
connection between the term
and the notion of supernatural
generation. There was also, in his view, a connection between this super-
natural birth and the expectation of times of salvation. Rsel believes
that this eschatological dimension of the
birth is evident
throughout LXX Isa 7.6
The second group of scholars downplays the meaning virgin for

and argues that the translator associates
with Lady
Zion, so that the theological reference in LXX Isa 7:14 is not to a
supposed virgin birth of the messiah, but to the collective birth of the
children of mother Zion. This group is represented by Arie van der Kooij
and Johann Lust,7 who follow a similar path in their analyses. Both schol-
ars notice that, in two of the four Isaianic passages in which
is
employed to render the Hebrew , its use refers to a collective
entity rather than to an individual: the virgin ( /
) Zion
in 37:22, and the virgin ( /
) Babylon in 47:1. Lust also
notes that the Hebrew term refers in other instances in the Old Testament
to Lady Zion, Judah, and Israel.8 They also perceive a similarity in the
content of Isa 7 and 37. In Lusts words, In both instances God prom-
ises assistance to his people and a remnant returns.9 On the basis of
these observations, both van der Kooij and Lust conclude that the trans-
lator identied the
in Isa 7 and 37 with Lady Zion.
There are signicant problems with both lines of argumentation. With
regard to the rst group, a basic difculty is that the evidence for the
4. R. Kittel, Die hellenistische Mysterienreligion und das Alte Testament

(BWAT 32; Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1924), 1748; H. Gressmann, Der Messias
(FRLANT NF 26; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1929), 23542. See also
Seeligmann, Isaiah, 120.
5. Rsel, Jungfrauengeburt.
6. Ibid., 148. According to Rsel (p. 150), the heightened supernatural character
of the child in LXX Isa 7:1516 would correspond to his miraculous birth. According
to these verses, the child would be incapable of choosing evil, a conception which,
for Rsel, can be traced back to Jer 31:3134 and Ezek 11:19 and their view of the
eschatological Israel. He further connects this description of the virgins son with
the name of the child Angel of Great Counsel announced in the LXX rendering of
Isa 9:6(5). The idea is that the messiah will always practice right conduct before
God, and so will give eternal peace. The LXX translator would have altered the
messianic ideal of the Hebrew text and conceptualizes the messiah as a supernatural,
sinless being, to whom a supernatural origin must be attributed.
7. Van der Kooij, Septuaginta; Lust, A Septuagint Christ.
1
9. Ibid., 222.
supposed celebrations of the virginal conception of the saviour-gure is

late.10 Also, the notion of a xed mental connection of
with
either supernatural generation or an expectation of times of salvation is
by no means as obvious as Rsel suggests. It certainly fails to take into
account the negatively perceived concept of
birth with refer-
ence to the birth of children by unmarried mothers.11 The existence of
such a negative connotation makes the connection between the
-
birth of LXX Isa 7:14 and Hellenistic myths about a coming saviour
much less straightforward than Rsel supposes.
As for the view that
refers to Lady Zion, besides the
inherent problems in a simple equation of the contexts of Isa 7 and 37, it
should also be borne in mind that we are dealing with a translation
attempting to represent its Vorlage. This means that one should be care-
ful in drawing any special conclusions from the use of
in LXX
Isa 37:22 and 47:1, since in both cases the translator is representing the
underlying Hebrew term .12
The discussions by scholars in both groups suffer from a basic failure
to appreciate the semantic complexities inherent in the Greek term

and the dynamics of its relationship with its Hebrew equiva-
lents where it occurs in the LXX.
With regard to the semantic aspect, we note that denite borders
between the meanings young woman and virgin are difcult to
ascertain in both Hebrew and Greek, so that determining whether the
LXX translation has a special theological signicance is an unfruitful
task. The meaning of
corresponds largely to that of and
covers a similarly broad range of meaning.13 Just as with the Hebrew
, the notions of youth and virginity are closely connected in
the word
.14 Yet there are examples of the use of both terms
10. Attestation for traditions relating to the supernatural birth of a saviour gure
dates from the fourth century C.E.i.e. ca. 450 years after the standard accepted date
of LXX Isaiah.
11. G. Sissa, Greek Virginity (trans. A. Goldhammer; RevAnt 3; Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1990), 8187, demonstrates that there is abundant
evidence in Greek literature of a negative connotation appended to the notion of

birth. Besides the (in)famous
of Sparta (children of unknown
fathers, born in the context of warfare), Sissa mentions the traditions about the

, a mountain on the border between Argolis and Arcadia, reserved for
clandestine virgin births. She refers specically to Pausanias 8.54.6; Callimachuss
Hymn to Delos 70; Hyginuss Fabulae 99; Aelians Varia Historia 13.1; and
Serviuss Ad Virgili Bucolica 10.57.
12. See Troxel, Isaiah 7,1416, 18, for a similar line of reasoning.
13. Cf. G. Delling,
, TDNT 5:82637 (831).
1
14. Ibid., 5:828.
where virginity is not specically implied.15 In texts coming from Helle-

nistic Judaism, we nd
attested with the same meanings as in
general Greek literature (cf. Jdt 9:2; 1 Macc 1:26; 2 Macc 3:19; 5:13).
As for , one must note Barrs assertion that the simple identi-
cation of as young woman is misleading, as it fails to take
account of the rarity of the word and the very limited range of usage that
is relevant for the elucidation of the Isaiah passage.16 In fact, the root
occurs only ten times in the MT.17 The singular occurs only
four times, namely, in Gen 24:43; Exod 2:8; Isa 7:14, and Prov 30:19. In
the rst three examples, we nd the articular form . In Exod 2:8,
refers to the maidservant of pharaohs daughter. Although the
text does not mention anything regarding her sexuality or marital status,
it is reasonable to assume that she was single and thus probably expected
to be a virgin. In Gen 24:43, the term appears in the context of the mis-
sion of Abrahams servant to nd a suitable wife for Isaac. In the text, a
variety of terms referring to women is used. Rebekah is described as ,
but most often as (ve times: 24:14, 16, 28, 55, 57), once as
(24:16), and once as (24:43). My survey of the uses of does
not enable us to perceive anything particularly signicant about the term,
apart from the already mentioned connotations of youth and, conceiva-
bly, subordination and virginity. Interestingly, at Gen 24:43, is also
rendered by
.
As for LXX usage, it is well known that, in the LXX,
is a
standard equivalent of . The LXX has 43 occurrences of

15. In the Hebrew Bible, the term occurs 51 times. In many cases, the
meaning virgin is quite clear (Lev 21:13; Deut 22:19; Ezek 44:22), while in others
it is completely ruled out (Joel 1:8). Cf. M. Tzevat, , TDOT 2:33843 (341).
16. J. Barr, The Most Famous Word in the Septuagint, in Studia Semitica: The
Journal of Semitic Studies Jubilee Volume (ed. P. S. Alexander et al.; JSSSup 16;
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 5972 (66).
17. Ibid., 63, reckons nine cases, leaving Ps 9:1 out. In Pss 9:1; 46(45):1, and 1
Chr 15:20 it appears in the technical musical term , which is irrelevant for the
present purposes. In Ps 68:25, is the plural of and refers to players of
tambourines. In Song 1:3 and 6:8, the plural clearly refers to young women. In
1:3, in the context of the praises of the groom anointed with fragrant oil, we read that
the love (or desire) him. In 6:8, the groom is exalting his object of desire above
all the other women who, presumably, were available to him. While Barr argues
that the erotic connotation of these verses speaks against the meaning virgin, it has
to be stressed that the use of the term in 6:8, in distinction to

(concubines),
makes the connotation virgin quite possible. Besides the question of the virginity
of the , the use of the term in these verses seems to evoke youth, and to
designate some kind of ofcial or recognized social category of courtly servants
(see the use of in Ps 45:14).
1
where is the underlying Hebrew term. The only other case in the
LXX where
renders is Gen 24:43.
occurs ve
times in LXX Isaiah (7:14; 23:4; 37:22; 47:1; 62:5), with 7:14 being the
only case in which the term does not correspond to .18
However, a more careful look at the way in which the LXX treats
should put the uniqueness of the Isa 7:14 rendering in perspective,
particularly as one notes that, for the ve relevant occurrences of
in the LXX, H is used three times while
is used twice.19
The difference, in fact, is not very signicant, and analyses that capitalize
on the unique use of
as a rendering for should be
evaluated in this light. My suggestion is that the rendering of by

does not offer any solid evidence of a special messianic
reading of the Immanuel oracle.20
1.2. The Futuristic Rendering of

A much more interesting aspect of 7:14 is the rendering of by
# '+. It is possible to understand the adjective in 7:14 as
having a present connotation, depending on the tense of the verb to be
supplied. In this case, the would be pregnant at the time of the
announcement and the birth of the child is imminent. The LXX, therefore,
could indicate a bent towards a futuristic reading of the verse. This in
itself obviously does not constitute signicant evidence of an eschato-
logical understanding of the sign, but could simply have been prompted
by the following
(rendered by #
+), since giving birth is
future in relation to conception.21 It also needs to be borne in mind that
the presence of at the opening of the verse would call for a futuristic
interpretation of .22
18. In 23:4 the term is employed in a lament, in which the fallen Sidon cries that
she has not reared young men () or young women (
). In
37:22 it appears in the phrase
&. In 47:1, the term appears in
the similar phrase
f). Finally, in 62:5 the term is used
in connection with joining a in marriage.
19. In both Song 1:3 and 6:8, the LXX renders by H. In Prov 30:19 we
nd a form of (youth). The articular occurrence in Exod 2:8 is rendered by
H (girl). As mentioned previously, only Gen 24:43 and Isa 7:14 have

as an equivalent.
20. A fuller version of my argument is found in R. F. de Sousa, Is the Choice of

in LXX Isa 7:14 Theologically Motivated?, JSS 53 (2008): 21132.
21. Aquila and Symmachus read . Cf. L. Ltkemann and A. Rahlfs,
Hexaplarische Randnoten zu Isaias 116, aus einer Sinai-Handschrift (Berlin:
de Gruyter, 1915), 26970.
1
22. Cf. Joon, 119n.
1.3. The Naming of the Child

Another signicant issue concerns the identication of the one who
names the child. The unusual form can be construed as either
second or third person singular, producing the renderings
or

, respectively.23 The Masoretic vocalization takes up the second
option and has the mother name the child. The witness of the LXX manu-
script tradition is divided. Ziegler follows the reading
, citing
Matt 1:21; Luke 1:31, Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion. One needs
to note, however, that both New Testament references given by Ziegler
are not direct quotes but indirect allusions to the text. The actual quota-
tion is in Matt 1:23 and reads
. The reading
appears
in Codex Sinaiticus and a few late manuscripts of the Lucianic family. If
Zieglers reconstruction is correct, the translator understood as
second person masculine singular and saw Ahaz as the one responsible
for naming the child.
However, many manuscripts, particularly of the Lucianic group, read a
second person plural,
. This reading was also known to Tertul-
lian, Cyprian, and Irenaeus. If this is the original rendering, it would be
an interesting display of the translators ideological and theological
background. It could indicate that he conceived the house of David
(addressed in 7:13) as responsible for the naming, thus possibly height-
ening the royal character of the child.24 This is the view of Troxel, who
argues that this must be seen in connection with the emphasis on the
childs special character in the next two verses, and with passages
anticipating a new, upright Davidic ruler.25 He has in mind the transla-
tion of 11:24, and particularly of 32:1, which changes the focus of the
text from kingly rule to the king himself. It is conceivable that

could be the original reading, for although texts of the Lucianic family
would tend to correct towards the MT, this is decidedly not the case
here.26 However, even if this reading is original, the address to the house
23. For the reading of as third person feminine singular perfect, see GKC
74g. For a detailed discussion regarding the pointing and interpretation of the word,
see Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 286.
24. Cf. Troxel, Isaiah 7,1416, 9 n. 37. The view that the original Hebrew
might have been addressed to the house of David is held by R. Bergey, La
prophtie dEsae 7:1416, RRef 184 (1995): 914.
25. Troxel, Isaiah 7,1416, 20.
26. For a detailed study of issues surrounding the Lucianic text of LXX Isaiah, see
O. Munnich, Le texte lucianique dIsae-Septante, in Interpreting Translation:
Studies on the LXX and Ezekiel in Honour of Johan Lust (ed. F. Garca Martnez and
M. Vervenne; Leuven: Peeters, 2005), 26999.
1
of David, with a possible stress on the childs royal character cannot be

proven, and must be regarded simply as a plausible conjecture.
The rendering of by the proper name d is interest-
ing, especially when compared with the translation of the same phrase in
8:8 by S ) and in 8:10 by Q S ) 1 .27 One
should be very careful in attempting to draw any implications from this,
particularly in the light of the translators inconsistency in rendering the
proper name
by 1 - # ; in 7:3 and the phrase

by > /) in 10:22. It is enough
to note that in Isa 7:14 the translator clearly conceives of as a
proper name.
1.4. The Heightened Character of Immanuel

Even if the elements explored above do not evince a special messianic
reading of the oracle, it is noteworthy that in vv. 15 and 16 there is
noticeable divergence as compared with the MT. While in the MT the
signicance of the child seems to lie primarily in the connection between
his age and the deliverance from Aram and Ephraim, the LXX severs this
connection and focuses on, and heightens, the childs specially righteous
character.28
In v. 15, the precise meaning of is very difcult to ascertain.29
The rendering of by (before) could be taken as an attempt on
the part of the translator to solve the unusual syntax on the basis of the
following verse, where # is used. ) / is a quite literal
rendering of . The full chain is read as . ) />
.
(to know or to prefer).30 The result is that the LXX reads
as a statement that the child will choose the good before reaching a
certain age at which he would know or prefer evil.
Verse 16 is translated quite literally, except for the addition of , >
g .31 The rendering # g ) > , > g
27. Perhaps contextual considerations prompted the renderings in 8:8 and 8:10.
For the importance of context in translating the phrase , see J. D. W. Watts,
Isaiah 133 (WBC 24; Waco: Word, 1985), 100.
28. Cf. Troxel, Isaiah 7,1416, 20.
29. Wildberger remarks that with innitive can have a temporal sense (at that
time, when), but concludes that the best interpretation is to take the innitive con-
struct in the nal sense. Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 286.
30. The choice to render idiomatically is interesting in the light of the use of
, : in v. 16.
31. Troxel (Isaiah 7,1416, 2) argues that the translator renders the bulk of the
verses literally, on the basis of two of Barrs criteria, namely, following the MTs
1
> , : ! %

+ > , probably indicates
that the in # was understood syntactically as a
copulative introducing # as a nal clause, thus producing the
meaning He rejects evil in order to choose the good.32
The phrase , > g appears elsewhere in the LXX only in
Deut 1:39 (rendering #).33 However, conspicuously similar formu-
lations appear in additions to LXX Numbers:
Num 14:23

( & "

R 3 / P6 3 2 e
& h : /)
, .
/) A
% i, 0 / G , >
/< H = ?,
= 3 2

&
! < +
/
P6 /

(They) shall (not) see the land which and they shall not see the land which
I swore (to give) to their fathers, I promised to their fathers,
but their children, who are with me
here, as many as do not know good
or evil, every inexperienced youth, to
them I shall give the land,
and none who despised me shall see it. but none who have provoked me
shall see it.
word order (with a one-to-one correspondence between its terms and the LXX, apart
from the addition of , > . in v. 16), and the use of lexical equivalents,
the correspondence between Hebrew and Greek terms being standard in the LXX,
apart from
for , and # . [) /] for [ ]. He thus
states, Whatever conclusions we reach about the translators free style must take
into consideration these signs of diligent translation. Even if we conclude that the
translator worked freely in some respects, we cannot doubt his desire to convey the
meaning of his Vorlage accurately. The criteria discussed by Troxel are found in
Barr, Typology, 2029 and 3140.
32. Cf. GKC 165a and Lev 14:36.
33. Seeligmann, Isaiah, 34, argues that the reading could indicate a possible
double translation. The older would be ) , > g (inuenced by Gen
2:9 and 17:35), the later could have originally read , : ! #

+ (
) > , and have been later adapted to t into the
context. He later states that the rendering is probably original and is surely a reminis-
cence of Gen 3:5 and 22, where #
is rendered as = > #
. Cf. ibid., 46.
1
Num 32:11

*

&
d( P6 ? K
, + j(

,> (% #
> > # >
, >

( & & $ 3 2 e h L j #
&

; # ; /

&

X

Surely none of the men who came Surely none of these men, who came
out of Egypt, up out of Egypt,34
from twenty years and above, from twenty years and above,
who understand evil and good,
shall see the land which I swore (to shall see the land which I promised
give) to Abraham, to Isaac, and to to Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, for
Jacob, for they did not follow me fully. they did not follow me closely.
In both texts, the additions explicitly connect age with the knowledge of
good and evil. A possible link between these additions and LXX Isa 7:14
has been explored recently by Troxel and, subsequently, Lust.
Troxel sees in ) /> .
(v. 15) a
specication of two forms of engagement and argues that the translator
here insinuates a human predilection for evil. He afrms that the
juxtaposition of preferring to knowing suggests that a preference for
is, in the translators view, a common corollary to knowing.
In this connection, Troxel argues that the plus , > . derives
from LXX Deut 1:3935 and is connected with a speculation or ideol-
ogy contemporary to the translator and characterized by exegetical
reection on the meaning of knowing good and evil, nding in it an
adolescence-era threshold leading from innocence to accountability.36
34. For the understanding of ( to express the certainty of a negative outcome,

see LXX Gen 14:2223. See also M. Harl, La Bible dAlexandrie: La Gense (Paris:
Cerf, 1986), 76, and G. Dorival, La Bible dAlexandrie: Les Nombres (Paris: Cerf,
1994), 56.
35. Troxel is here disagreeing with both J. W. Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text
of Numbers (SCS 46; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1998), 223, and Dorival, Nombres,
323 (as well as G. Dorival, Les phnomnes dintertextualit dans le livre Grec des
Nombres, in Selon les Septante: Trente tudes sur la Bible grecque
des Septante. Festschrift Marguerite Harl [ed. G. Dorival and O. Munnich; Paris:
Cerf, 1995], 25385 [266]), who argue for the inuence of the latter part of the
chapter (vv. 2635) on the addition.
36. Troxel, Isaiah 7,1416, 23. He states further (p. 2 n. 7): Whether the
translator was exposed to such speculation as a member of the Alexandrian
1
In spite of the problems in Troxels argument,37 he is right in con-

cluding that the LXX heightens the moral character of the child and that
the depiction of a categorical rejection of evil in favour of the good
characterizes the child as not merely precocious, but unique, since he
eludes the allure of evil.38 It is very likely that the translators of
community or by virtue of his reading the LXX-Torah need not be resolved here.
Whichever be the case, the subtle changes he makes to infuse these verses with this
ideology attest that it had become so native to his own thought that divining its
presence here was intuitive.
37. Ibid., 9, argues that the translation of in v. 15 as # . ) /,
and of
# as # . ) in v. 16, equates the period before the child
knows or prefers evil with the time before the child knows good or evil. As for
the rendering
(prefer) for (reject)in contrast to the
translation of with the more suitable , : in v. 16Troxel notes that there
are occasions in the LXX when is rendered by negating a Greek antonym, and
that the translator of LXX Isaiah sometimes suppresses a negative for the sake of the
sense (he mentions 3:9; 30:19, and 31:4). So, after using an antonym for in
7:15, it would have been a short step for [the translator] to omit the negative with

. This move would be, for Troxel, consistent with the interpolation of
, > . in v. 16, under a supposed ideology of youthful innocence that
included a belief that acquiring knowledge of , > . entailed an attraction
to evil. Moreover, Troxel argues that the use of in v. 16 is unusual both in
terms of vocabulary frequency in chs. 112 ( is used elsewhere) and in
semantic use (every other occurrence of in the whole of LXX Isaiah is in the
neuter plural and denotes calamities rather than the abstract notion of evil), which
seems to indicate that , . was imported by the translator as a set phrase
in Greek; secondly, Troxel argues that the notion of choice between good or evil
(manifested by the use of .) is reminiscent of the interpolations in Numbers and the
translation of # in Deut 1:39. It seems that Troxels description of the trans-
lators craftiness at this point outstretches the evidence. The path followed to arrive
at
does not seem to be as straight as Troxel supposes. Although the use
of an antonym for is noteworthy, it is by no means clear how the deletion of the
negative particle would be such a short step for the translator in this case. When
is rendered by an antonym in the LXX, the meaning of the Greek sentence
normally remains the same as the Hebrew. This is clearly seen in Prov 21:25; Isa
5:24, and 8:6 (all cited by Troxel), in which the LXX renders with negative forms
of :,
, and
, respectively. I propose that in LXX Isa 7:15
is basically left untranslated and the rendering of the verse is one of the examples in
the chapter in which a complex syntactical structure is not rendered on the basis of a
one-to-one correspondence of terms but is simplied to convey the meaning of the
verse as a whole (as it is the case in 7:3). The phrase , . is the same as
is found in LXX Deut 1:39, but the formulations in Numbers are quite distinct, which
points more in the direction of a shared assumption than to the import of a set phrase
in Greek.
1
38. Ibid.
Numbers and Isaiah draw from some contemporary ideology regarding

an age of maturity, but one does not need to accept Troxels idea of an
innate preference for evil to reach this conclusion.
A much more problematic view is that of Lust, who argues that the
reference to eating curds and honey (v. 15) might have stimulated
memories of the Promised Land that owed with milk and honey. LXX
Deut 1:39 in turn would allude to the narrative of the spies sent to
explore the land and their account of its riches and dangers (cf. Num
13:2728; 14:7).39 Drawing from LXX Deut 1:39; LXX Num 14:23, and
32:11, Lust suggests that the translator associates not yet knowing good
or evil with the promise of the giving of the land to the patriarchs, and
not with the expectation of a Davidic messiah.40 Immanuel would thus be
identied with the innocent generation that is to see the fullment of the
promise of land. Lust acknowledges that the peculiar nuances of LXX Isa
7:1516 heighten the presentation of the child, but in his view this
heightening has the effect of ascribing a markedly positive signicance
to the innocent generation, particularly in that it implies rather a deter-
mined option for the good. This innocent generation shall be given the
land overowing with milk and honey.41
Lust also argues that the LXX Isaiah translator sees a parallel between
the fear displayed by the generation of Moses in relation to entering the
Promised Land and the fear of the generation of Ahaz in the face of the
foreign threat. This would explain the additional nuances and altered
syntax introduced into the second part of v. 16. In particular, he afrms
that the insertion of splits the Hebrew verse and introduces a new
main clause, which seems to correlate the extraordinary character of the
child and the subsequent abandoning of the enemy land. Furthermore,
Lust translates the Hebrew " as despise and argues that the translator
changed the nuance of contempt of the Hebrew for the notion of fear in
Greek (-
). For him, this establishes even stronger associations
with the narrative of the exploration of the Promised Land in the time of
Moses: The innocent generation has nothing to fear. They shall enter the
promised land. He therefore concludes: Such allusions serve to iden-
tify Immanuel as a collective, as a generation of innocent ones, comp-
arable with the second generation in the wilderness.42

40. Ibid., 223.
41. Ibid.
42. Ibid., 224. It needs to be noted that contempt does not represent well the
meaning of " .
1
None of the arguments set forth by Lust help his case. First, while the
insertion of indeed seems to correlate the character of the child and
the victory over the enemy, this is perfectly compatible with under-
standing the child as an individual. Secondly, fear is a quite reasonable
rendering of " , in the light of texts such as Exod 1:12 and (especially)
Num 22:3. Therefore, there does not seem to be any intentional change
of nuance. Most importantly, Isa 7 does not have any allusion whatso-
ever to entering, inheriting, or possessing the land. All these allusions are
drawn from LXX Deut 1:39; LXX Num 14:23, and 32:11 and their sup-
posed inuence on our passage. It is only on the basis of this inuence
that possible allusions to the motif of the promise of the land to the
patriarchs can be perceived. This is not sufcient ground on which to
build a convincing argument.
The only noticeable change in the Greek is the one alluded to before,
that the character of an extraordinary child is the focus of the LXX
rendering. Troxel seems to be on the right track in highlighting the
possible connections between LXX Deut 1:39; LXX Num 14:23, and
32:11, but these do not seem to be ultimately the result of either direct
literary dependence or of a common speculation about an age of inno-
cence, although they could reect particular Jewish cultural ideas. An
interesting parallel, overlooked by both Troxel and Lust, is found in
1QSa 1:811, which reads:

]'
' [] And at twenty ye[ars (of age) he shall
cross over

[ to the] commissioned to go in the lot,
' [ ]
[]' amid his family to join the holy
congregation.
' [] [
] And he shall not [approach] a woman
to know her

! !
!!' by lying down with her until the
' [
]' completion of twe[nty] years (of age),
[ #] when he knows [good] and evil.
Barthlemy observed that the age of twenty can be seen as a late mini-
mum age for marriage in biblical and Talmudic texts, and argued that the
emphasis there is not on physical puberty but on the maturity of moral
judgment.43 Buchanan argues that the reference in 1QSa to the age of
43. D. Barthlemy and J. T. Milik, Qumran Cave I (DJD 1; Oxford: Clarendon,

1955), 113. He adds: Le mariage est donc envisag avec un srieux rchi quil
importe de souligner. See also the reconstruction of the text in D. W. Parry and E.
Tov, eds., The Dead Sea Scrolls Reader. Part 1: Texts Concerned with Religious
Law (Leiden: Brill, 2004), 194.
1
twenty as the age # reects earlier tradition and that all the
biblical texts where reference to the knowledge of good and evil is
made could envisage the same age of twenty.44
Schiffman demonstrates that 1QSa 1:811 establishes the minimum
age for full-edged membership in the sect, pointing out that the age of
twenty plays a major role in Jewish legal sources.45 If this idea of
reaching maturity at a certain age, at which point one knows good and
evil, was so widespread culturally, it is not surprising to nd traces of
the tradition in different texts, without necessarily having to assume a
literary relationship or their reecting some particular ideological specu-
lation.
This constitutes further evidence for the characterization of LXX Isaiah
that is being presenting in this study. I have sought to demonstrate that
the alterations to safeguard the character of the child in vv. 15 and 16
nd justication in elements of a Masoretic-type Vorlage, but these are
transformed in the light of the reading strategies and ideological
background of the translator.
As observed earlier, the birth announcement in the Hebrew has the
primary function of setting a time-frame for the divine intervention on
behalf of the people and the removal of the foreign threat. It is clear that
the text envisages a very young child, and so the reference to his ability
to choose between good and evil is probably not to be understood in a
moral sense but is intended to highlight his very young age.46
However, it is not difcult for subsequent readers engaged in the inter-
pretation of the text to nd this moral sense in the words. That being the
case, the translator could have been exercised by the possibility, left open
by the wording of the Hebrew, that the child might choose the evil, and
44. G. W. Buchanan, The Old Testament Meaning of the Knowledge of Good

and Evil, JBL 75 (1956): 11420. One notes that R. Gordis, The Knowledge of
Good and Evil in the Old Testament and the Dead Sea Scrolls, in his Poets,
Prophets, and Sages: Essays in Biblical Interpretation (Bloomington: Indiana Uni-
versity Press, 1971), 198217 (2045), interacts with both Barthlemy and Buchanan,
and draws on a vast array of sources and arguments to suggest that the phrase
# is a stereotyped idiom encompassing the entire range of sexual experi-
ence. He then tries to apply this meaning to all the biblical places where the phrase
appears. Besides the merit of his overall argument, Gordis is right in noting that the
phrase does allude to the acquiring of experience.
45. L. H. Schiffman, The Eschatological Community of the Dead Sea Scrolls: A
Study of the Rule of the Congregation (SBLMS 38; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989),
1620. He cites Ezra 3:8; Jub. 49:17; 11QTemple 17:8; Gen. Rab. 58:1; t. H ag 1:3;
y. Bik. 2:1 (64c); y. Sanh. 4:7 (9, 22b); 11:7 (30b); b. abb. 89b; b. H ul. 24b.
46. Cf. W. McKane, The Interpretation of Isaiah VII 1425, VT 17 (1967):
20819 (21415).
1
he therefore sought to safeguard his character for the reader. He thus

produced a text that is markedly different from the original, and did so
by inserting elements that were thoroughly ingrained in his cultural
assumptions but that do not do justice to the text. In particular, if he
indeed had in mind the later age of twenty for Immanuel, he was con-
ceiving of a child quite different from the one envisaged by the prophet.
To be sure, the lack of explicit mention of twenty years prevents us from
being sure that this is the case. But there is enough evidence that the
choice between good and evil is a strong and widespread motif in early
Judaism, and it could have made its way into the translation and contri-
buted to a reading that deviates from the original.47
The question then arises why the translator was interested in safe-
guarding the character of the child in this way. This interest in high-
lighting the purity of the child and the understanding of Immanuel as a
proper name are the elements in the rendering of LXX Isa 7:1417 that
point more clearly in the direction of some kind of messianic interpreta-
tion. If the decision is taken in favour of the Davidic naming of the child,
then we would have another signicant clue as to the translators think-
ing. We can, therefore, afrm that the elements available are noteworthy.
However, they do not amount to any major messianic Tendenz in the
translation, but simply to the existence of certain ideas that were enter-
tained at key points.
2. LXX Isaiah 7:1416 in Context

I now explore the remainder of LXX Isa 7 in the search for more clues as
to the translators messianic outlook. This is important because, while
markedly different in their conclusions, the studies of van der Kooij,
Rsel, Troxel, and Lust share the common assumption that the correct
interpretation of the Greek Immanuel oracle lies in understanding its
relationship to the broader context of LXX Isa 7 as a whole, as well as its
connection with broader strands of Jewish interpretative tradition. In
47. For further studies on the idea of good and evil in the Bible and ancient
Judaism, see L. J. Kuyper, To Know Good and Evil, Int 1 (1947): 49092; H. S.
Stern, Knowledge of Good and Evil, VT 8 (1958): 40518; J. F. A. Sawyer, The
Image of God, the Wisdom of Serpents and the Knowledge of Good and Evil, in
A Walk in the Garden: Biblical, Iconographical, and Literary Images of Eden (ed.
P. Morris and D. Sawyer; JSOTSup 136; Shefeld: JSOT, 1992), 6473 (6873);
M. H. Narrowe, Another Look at the Tree of Good and Evil, JBQ 26 (1998): 184
88; W. J. van Bekkum, Paradise Interpreted: Good and Evil in Rabbinica and Kab-
balah, in Paradise Interpreted: Representations of Biblical Paradise in Judaism
and Christianity (ed. G. P. Luttikhuizen; TBN 2; Leiden: Brill, 1999), 11627.
1
what follows, I examine elements that have been singled out as indica-
tive of an actualizing rendering of the chapter as a whole.
Not surprisingly, some of the suggestions rest on more solid ground
than others. For example, it is difcult to see whether the theological
theme of the remnant is evoked in the chapter. There are two possible
instances, in vv. 3 and 22. The rendering of the name
by 1
- # ;48 in v. 3 is seen by Rsel as introducing the topic
of the remnant, in line with his thesis of an eschatological reading of
LXX Isa 7.49 However, as was argued earlier, the lack of consistency in
understanding the so-called sign names in Isaiah makes this kind of
decision difcult (see 10:22 and the rendering of in 7:14 and 8:8,
10).50Another difculty, treated in the previous chapter, is the semantic
overlap between Greek and Hebrew terminology, which can prevent the
detecting of a special theological use. This is illustrated in v. 22, where
the rendering of by 1 - is fairly literal,51 making it
difcult to decide whether this has any theological signicance.52
However, there are noteworthy features in the LXX rendering of the
section and, in line with my argumentation so far, the presence of the
phrase D S
F J in vv. 18, 20, and 23, could have provided an
eschatological frame of reference for the translation. But, as usual, any
such features must be taken cum grano salis. While the presence of
eschatological vocabulary and the deviating renderings are worthy of
48. See Vulgate qui derelictus est Iasub.

49. Rsel, Jungfrauengeburt, 13738.
50. Cf. Troxel, Isaiah 7,1416, 14.
51. The MT of 7:22 can be read either as And it will be because of the abundant
production of milk (with the innitive understood as a noun), or as And it
will be because of the producing of much milk (using as a verb, and con-
necting to ). The Greek , + genitive article (%) means because of but it
has to be ascertained whether this is connected to the immediately following accusa-
tive adjective (:) or to the innitive (:). The variant :, attested by
Chrysostom and some Hexaplaric witnesses, is secondary, but it is interesting in the
light of 8:23(9:1). The second option above is more likely, so that :
(much milk) is the object of the innitive and the LXX reads because of producing
much milk. The elimination of the clause
! !
could conceivably be
explained as originating from haplographydue to confusion with the two occur-
rences of !
. The translator could also have omitted the clause for stylistic reasons.
The possibility of a different Vorlage also exists, although there is no support for this
in other textual witnesses. Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 48, argues that either the LXX
strayed from the second !
, or the MT is a gloss. The Lucianic group tends to sup-
ply - 0. Cf. Ottley, Isaiah, 2:146.
52. See the suggestion of van der Kooij, Septuaginta, 98, and the critique of
Troxel, Isaiah 7,1416, 14 n. 64.
1
note, the chapters special features are better explained as the resurfacing
of the translators tendencies at particularly difcult verses rather than as
an attempt to offer a harmonized or unied re-reading of the chapter. It
needs to be stressed that in all these cases the change is never arbitrary
or random, but always nds some kind of linguistic or formal justi-
cation from the Hebrew text, read in accordance with certain assumptions
and strategies.
2.1. The Eschatological Dimension

After the prophetic announcement in 7:7 that the hostile deliberation
() of the enemy kings would not stand,53 vv. 89 follow with an
enigmatic note:
7:8
* &
, S -3 j Z

*
$
, k+ #
)
$
$
6 S d- ,>
%,
For the head of Aram is Damascus, But the head of Aram is Damascus,
and the head of Damascus is Rezin,
and before sixty-ve years but still sixty-ve years,
Ephraim will cease to be a people the kingdom of Ephraim will cease
(will be shattered from [being a] from [being a] people.
people).
7:9

# S -3 d- &

# S -3 & > %
a
$ $

& # 3 , /< 3
2
53. The phrase

in v. 7 is difcult and has generated much
debate among interpreters. O. Kaiser, Isaiah 112 (trans. J. Bowden; OTL; London:
SCM, 1983), 13536 n. 9, suggests that the
! at the beginning of v. 8 should be
translated as that and that vv. 8a and 9a should be seen as subject clauses of v. 7a.
The section would then read, It will not stand and it will not be that the head of
Aram is Damascus and the head of Damascus is Rezin etc. He also ascribes a
durative sense to
, producing the sense It shall not stand, and it shall not last
longer. Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 300301, is opposed to this. The LXX does not
support it either, since, with the addition of the clause S 3 8, the translator
indicates his need for a subject in the sentence (cf. 8:10; 32:8), which demonstrates
his siding with the traditional interpretation of the sequence. Cf. Ziegler, Unter-
suchungen, 62. The addition also serves to thread the narrative together (cf. 7:5).
1
and the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Ephraim is Samaria,
and the head of Samaria is the son of and the head of Samaria is the son of
Remaliah; Remaliah;
if you do not trust then you will not and if you do not believe you will
be rm. not understand.
In the Hebrew text, the superimposition of the different heads has the
purpose of highlighting the failure of the hostile intent against Judah.
This announcement is connected with the divine promise of victory to
Ahaz, if the king remained steadfast in trust and obedience to the Lord.54
The LXX renders the opening of v. 8 with ,, instead of the more
predictable 0. Therefore, in the LXX, v. 8 is connected to v. 7, not by
giving the grounds for the failure of the wicked counsel against Judah,55
but as an adversative clause focusing on the upcoming depopulation of
the enemy kingdom of Ephraim.56 The insertion of in the last line of
v. 9 makes the injunction to believe and understand more explicitly
connected with the announcement of the future demise of Ephraim.
Rsel sees the rendering of 7:89 as indicating that the translator read
those verses as an enigmatic, eschatological mystery.57 He seeks to
support this afrmation primarily with the latter part of v. 9, where

& is rendered by and $ $ is rendered by 2.
Rsel draws attention to the fact that the verb (Hiphil) is normally
translated by ,58 and to the use of in LXX Isaiah, which
can be negative (Israel is said not to understand in 1:3; 6:910; 59:15),
and positive, denoting supernatural insight from God (52:13, 15).59 He
points to the sense of supernatural or revelatory insight, which the term
54. Regardless of whether Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 290, is correct in pointing

out that the lines lead to the conclusion For the head of Judah is Jerusalem, and the
head of Jerusalem is the Davidic king.
55. In v. 9, the vocalization & is unique, as the LXX Isaiah translator has
& in several other places. Seeligmann, Isaiah, 80, suggests that this could
indicate a different translator for ch. 7.
56. Other changes in the verse are the omission of the line
, and
the addition of S . While there is no straightforward explanation for the
rst, the latter is to be seen, with Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 62, as an explanatory
addition.
58. The Old Latin reads intellegetis, while the Syriac has (you will
[not] perceive). Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 285, allows for the possibility that these
versions shared with the LXX a common Vorlage reading
. However, it is more
likely that these renderings derive from the LXX or witness to a similar interpretative
tradition.
1
shares with the Hebrew

, as in Dan 9:2; 10:14; 12:10, and at Qumran
(e.g. 1QM 10:16; 1QS 4:3).60 This is, for Rsel, an indication that
in LXX Isa 7:9 denotes apocalyptic insight, and that LXX Isaiah
is to be read typologically. Though Rsel is not wrong in identifying a
use of
for supernaturally imparted knowledge in both Daniel and
Qumran (and arguably in Isaiah), he errs in seeing this as the only or
dominant meaning. He fails to take into consideration the full scope of
connotations of both
and .
While appears in eschatological contexts, it is normally attested
in the LXX with the simple meanings to understand, to have wisdom,
or to regard (cf. Exod 35:35; 36:1; Deut 29:8; 32:7, 29; 2 Sam 12:19;
Isa 1:1; Ps 28[27]:5; Ezra 8:16).61 Most commonly it translates
or
!, but it also (less often) renders
. The meanings of these Hebrew
terms overlap, so that it is difcult to ascertain particular nuances of
in relation to its Hebrew equivalents. In LXX Isaiah it renders
almost exclusively
, apart from 7:9 and 52:13 (!).
Pointing to the correlation between and
does not help
Rsels argument either. It is true that in Daniel
is used for the
understanding of visions and auditions (1:17; 8:5, 1517, 27; 9:22; 10:1,
11, 14; 11:33; 12:8, 10).62 However, the term also denotes understanding
in a general sense. Even when used in a religious context, it can refer to
ones simple understanding (or lack thereof) of God and divine activity
in history (Deut 32:7; Isa 43:18; 52:15 [cf. Jer 2:10]; Ps 73[72]:17; Job
37:14; 38:18). While often viewed as a divine gift, it is at the same time
seen as something that can be acquired through seeking. This is particu-
larly signicant where
has more specically Torah as its object (Deut
4:6; Ps 119[118]:27, 95, 100, 130, 144, 169; Neh 8:2, 12).63
This religious but non-eschatological use is also attested in the Dead
Sea Scrolls, where !,
, and
are practically synonymous. In
accordance with the development seen in Biblical Hebrew,
is con-
nected with the reading and practice of Torah (cf. 1QS 5:21), whose
divine origin is also stressed (cf. 1QS 2:3; 3:15; 4:3, 22; 1QM 10:16).64
Both and
, therefore, cover diverse religious usages and do
not necessarily indicate apocalyptic insight. Moreover, the rendering of
60. Ibid., 140.

61. Cf. LEH, , 593.
62. Cf. H. Ringgren,
, TDOT 2:99107 (102), and H. Schmid,
, TLOT
2:23032 (232).
63. Schmid, TLOT 2:231. Cf. H. Conzelmann, , , TDNT 7:88896
(89091).
1
64. Cf. Schmid, TLOT 2:232, and Ringgren, TDOT 2:107.
the repeated root by different Greek verbs in 7:9 is noteworthy, but

not out of step with the translators practice elsewhere.
Troxel suggests that the choice of 2 for was inuenced by
the translators interpretation of 6:910:65
6:9
( $
# " l # " L
L ^

(

mD , # / 3 2
(
$ #

6 # / 3
G

And he said: Go and say to this And he said, Go and say to this
people, people,
Go on hearing and do not understand, In hearing, hear and do not
understand,
and go on seeing and do not know; and looking, look and do not see;
6:10

$ $ S % %

$ !
# : n# /)
g

$ # $ X- $ /)

$
. G : X- :

# : n# ,

# D F ) #

6 # ( /

make the heart of this people fat, for the heart of this people has
become dull,
and make their ears heavy, and with their ears they hear with
difculty,
and blind their eyes, and they have closed their eyes,
lest they see with their eyes, lest they would see with the eyes,
and with their ears hear, and hear with the ears,
and their heart understand and turn and with the heart understand
and they should be healed. and turn so I will heal them.
In these verses the LXX attributes the obduracy of the people to their own
fault rather than to divine agency.66 Troxel afrms that the translator
65. For a full critique of Rsels argument, see Troxel, Isaiah 7,1416, 1013.
66. In 6:10, the Hebrew has a clear tripartite chiastic structure in which the
prophet is commanded to harden the hearts, and close the ears and eyes of the
people. The translation alters markedly the tenor of the verse primarily by the way it
renders the three Hiphil imperatives that form the core of the prophets charge.
1
rendered 7:9 in the light of this interpretation, which stresses the peoples
failure to understand Isaiahs message. The point of connection between
6:910 and 7:9 would be the prophets announcement to the king that
without faith he will not understand the enigmatic chain of names.67
Troxel seems to be on the right track in seeing a connection with the
use of in 6:910. Even if the translator is not thinking speci-
cally of these verses when rendering 7:9, the (literal) use of in
6:910 indicates that there is a correlation between the idea of under-
standing comprised in the verb and the averting of divine wrath.
In this regard, one notes the use of ( in 6:10, directly connecting
Gods healing of the people with their understanding. This is especially
signicant as ( appears in the deviating rendering of 7:4 (which I
discussed in the previous chapter) in connection with the idea of the
short duration of Gods wrath.
In the light of my survey of the uses of
and , and of these
examples in LXX Isaiah, we can see the correlation between both the
Hebrew and Greek terms and ideas of salvation and restoration. Yet there
is no need to understand the terms in any apocalyptic sense, as they
can simply refer to a right relationship with God described in terms of
religious devotion and insight.
2.2. Immanuel as the Inaugurator of an Eschatological Era?

In the previous chapter I indicated that LXX Isa 7:4 could reect an
eschatological idea of the limited duration of Gods wrath against his
people. Scholars who advocate a contextual reading of LXX Isa 7 have
noticed the signicance of this verse. Rsel builds much of his argu-
ment for a connection between the birth of the special child in 7:14 with
is rendered by the aorist passive and ! by the combination of the third
person plural aorist active g with the adverb
in this case, the
Hebrew
was rendered by the dative construction : n# /). is
rendered by another third person plural aorist active ( ). In this way, the
translator removes the producing of the obduracy from God and casts the respon-
sibility for it entirely on the people. Cf. C. A. Evans, To See and Not Perceive:
Isaiah 6.910 in Early Jewish and Christian Interpretation (JSOTSup 64; Shefeld:
Shefeld Academic, 1989), 6168. L. H. Brockington, The Hebrew Text of the Old
Testament: The Readings Adopted by the Translators of the New English Bible
(Oxford: Clarendon, 1973), presents the view that , !, and , could be
read, not as Hiphil imperatives, but as Hophal perfects. This is not a new suggestion,
however, and can be traced back to sixteenth-century commentators. For a survey
and critique of this view, see D. Barthlemy, Critique textuelle de lAncien Testa-
ment 2. Isae, Jrmie, Lamentations (OBO 50/2; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1986), 36.
1
the motif of the virginal conception of a hero in Hellenism from the

announcement of salvation added to v. 4. For him, this announcement
would be tied in with the actualizing interpretation in the rest of the
chapter, by means of which the translator understands the events narrated
in the text as events of his own time. He argues that the child to be born
to the
signals the onset of an eschatological era marked by
Israels wholehearted obedience to the Torah.68
Particular attention has been drawn to a possible relationship between
the promise of healing after a time of wrath in 7:4 and the translation of
7:17, which reads:
/*
/

, + 1 > # < # #
/

$ > # # > " %

&

S
, o p Y

$

,- q S
,-: d- ,>
;
$ >
) m

Yahweh will bring upon you and But God will bring upon you and
upon your people, upon your people,
and upon the house of your father, and upon the house of your father,
days that did not come days which have not yet come
since the day Ephraim turned away since the day in which Ephraim
from Judah, removed from Judah
(namely) the king of Assyria. the king of the Assyrians.
I noted earlier how the rst half of 7:16 was considerably altered in the
LXX. The insertion of in 7:16b served a grammatical function of
uniting the two parts of the verse after the alteration. The syntactical
disjoining of vv. 16 and 17 is enhanced by the use of , in the begin-
ning of v. 17, which seems to distinguish the sign of d and the
prediction of another divine intervention. Troxel argues that the days
which the Lord will bring are another crisis, distinguished by the syntac-
tical disjoining of these verses from the sign of Immanuel, and that this
sign is posited for the subsequent era of healing foreseen by verse 4.69
Lust sees v. 17 as having a positive twist, that is, the days which the
Lord is about to bring upon the people are not referring to a catastrophe,

69. Troxel, Isaiah 7,1416, 19. He contends that the specic realization of this
threat is claried by LXX Isa 8:7, where the people wanted the rule of Rezin and the
Son of Remaliah rather than their own king. The peoples complicity in the coup
(which for him is envisaged in LXX Isa 7:6) would be punished through an attack by
the king of Assyria and his forces, announced in v. 17.
1
but to an era of restoration and bliss.70 This would be reinforced by the

apparently positive reading of the prophetic announcement in 7:1825.71
That the announcement was understood positively is made particularly
clear by v. 25:
$ $
$ * &
! # H P ,=
,
*
# / 3
J : -

,> 2
#
,

(
# (

And all the mountains that are hoed And every hoed mountain will be
with the hoe, hoed,
you will not go there and fear shall not go there,
for fear of briers and thorns; for it shall turn from the barren land
and thorns
and it will be for cattle to graze freely, into food for the sheep
and for the sheep to tread. and a trampling place for the ox.
The rendering of by
J would have originated in the trans-
lators construal of the Hebrew form as third person feminine singular,
with
(fear) as subject. The LXX paints a very different picture
from that of the MT. While the Hebrew refers to the utter desolation of
the mountainswhich become so inhospitable as to cause fearthe LXX
envisages a future in which fear will be kept from the mountains because
of their restoration from their desolate state as wastelands to become
fertile pasturelands.
Of course, the rendering does not need to be seen as deliberately
against the grain of the Hebrew. First, we have seen that it nds justi-
cation in the (mis)reading of the Vorlage. Moreover, the plausible
positive interpretation of v. 20,72 together with the announcement of
salvation in v. 21, could easily suggest a positive reading of v. 25 to our
contextually sensitive translator.73

72. Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 325.
73. In 7:21, we have the straightforward use of % for and for
. In v. 25, the LXX inverts the order of the animals mentioned, so that while the MT
has the sequence (cattle) and (sheep), the Greek has (sheep)
and (ox). Rsel, Jungfrauengeburt, 144, sees this as further evidence of
the inuence of v. 21 on the LXX reading of v. 25 and of an eschatological reading of
the passage as a whole. Of course, one does not need to go as far as Rsel in his
1
It needs to be borne in mind that the renderings of v. 4 and v. 17 come

across as attempts to make sense of a complex Vorlage, before any con-
clusion is reached regarding a supposed systematic attempt at harmoni-
zation. However, if I am correct in the line of argumentation given in the
previous chapter, that the reading of 7:4 displays an idea of the limited
duration of Gods wrath against his people, and that this idea was some-
times expressed in the translation, we have evidence that the translator
had an eschatological perspective that envisaged restoration after a crisis.
The contents of 7:1725 easily lend themselves to be read from this
perspective, so that it is quite plausible that the translator would have, at
some level, connected the contents of vv. 4 and 17.
If a correlation could be established between Immanuel and the
inauguration of the eschatological era of bliss announced in vv. 1725,
we would have signicant evidence of a messianic reading of the text.
However, the radical disjoining of vv. 16 and 17 with the use of ,
actually seems to speak against such a relationship.
2.3. Historical References and Reading Strategies

The promise of salvation in v. 21, together with the positive recasting of
v. 25, are, for Rsel, indications that LXX Isa 7 reects the context of the
later time of the Maccabees and its concrete hopesand provides the
framework in which the rendering of 7:14 is to be understood. In fact,
Lusts reluctance in identifying a specic historical reference in the mind
of the translator is commendable,74 as there are no historical allusions
sufciently clear to establish the kind of link envisaged by Rsel.
The typological viewing of the contemporary situation in historical
references in the biblical text is well attested in early Judaism, particu-
larly in the Qumran Pesharim.75 Yet, since we are dealing with a trans-
lation, we cannot draw any specic conclusions in this direction unless
we have solid clues in the translated text. These clues are not found in
conclusions, but the example again illustrates a measure of contextual awareness by

the translator. One also needs to be careful because the signicance of inverted
renderings is not clear. Ottley, Isaiah, 2:146, refers to Scholzs listing of such cases.
Cf. LXX Isa 28:15; 34:6; 60:3.
74. Lust, A Septuagint Christ, 224. He writes The specic event that the
translator had in mind at this juncture is not clear. Indeed, it remains possible that he
introduced a positive twist into the difcult Hebrew text without having any specic
historical reference in mind.
75. A signicant example of the complex relationship between reading historical
references as such and as typological references to the interpreters contemporary
situation is found in 4QpNah (4Q 169). Cf. J. D. Amoussine, phraim et Manass
dans le Pshr de Nahum (4QpNahum), RevQ 4 (1963): 38996.
1
LXX Isa 7. There are some elements in the text that have been singled out
as signicant, but upon closer scrutiny they are indicative simply of
features in the translators reading strategies and translation technique.
An example is the addition of I in 7:18:76

# D S
F J
:

$
$ & I
%
j(
" & # D J Y =F
m
And on that day Yahweh will whistle And on that day the Lord will whistle
for the y that is at the end of the for the ies that rules the district of
streams of Egypt, the river of Egypt,
and for the bee that is in the land of and for the bee that is in the country
Assyria. of the Assyrians.
Attempts at locating the source of the addition in the Vorlage are unfruit-
ful, as it was most likely prompted by the inference that the y was the
ruler of Egypt.77 Verse 18 describes the union of the superpowers Egypt
and Assyria, and through the insertion of the political level is
envisaged. Rsel is correct in highlighting this, but fails in his conclusion
that this is evidence of an actualizing rendering. Rather, while the
reference to ruling could perhaps have been inuenced by a reminiscence
of (cf. 2 Kgs 1:23, 6, 16), the inference that the y was the
ruler of Egypt is simply a logical deduction to be drawn by any reader of
the Hebrew text, without any actualizing value.78
76. The plural rendering (ies) for MT nds no support in Hebrew
witnesses, and is especially noteworthy since the addition I , which
presumably is intended as a designator of the ies, is masculine and singular. Most
Lucianic witnesses read o (or ), which is most likely a
correction of the difcult original reading. The best explanation for the phenomenon
is given by Ottley, Isaiah, 2:145, who argues that the frequent Hebrew phenomenon
of looseness of agreement in gender may have affected the rendering, noting that
Hebraisms are sometimes found without warrant from the immediate original. Cf.
LXX Isa 1:21 and A. B. Davidson, Hebrew Syntax (2d ed.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark,
1896), 112.
77. Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 62, suggested that prompted the rendering
through , or that the Vorlage could have contained
. The term
could also lie behind the use of , as in LXX Exod 15:9 and Jer 30(37):3. Cf.
Fischer, In welcher Schrift, 22.
78. Cf. Rsel, Jungfrauengeburt, 143. In the parallel clause, "
, and to the bee that is in the land of Assyria, the translator renders by Y
. The addition of the verb is necessary for the construction of the predicate
1
A similar question related to the actualization of the passage concerns

the identication of the razor in 7:20:

& %
D S
F J +

$
! L +L L ^ # -

^ 0
% %

m

3 -3 # )
)
. (
# > = ,-:

On that day the Lord will shave On that day the Lord will shave
with the razor hired beyond the river, with the great and drunken razor that
is beyond the river
with the king of Assyria, of the king of the Assyrians,
the head and the hair of the feet, the head and the hair of the feet,
and it will also sweep away the and the beard he will remove.
beard.
After the peculiar rendering of

! ,79 the addition 0
changes the syntactical structure of the verse by creating a dependent
clause focusing more sharply on the identity of the razor, possibly
sentence in Greek. It is not clear why was supplied for instead of
simply the verb to be. The simplest explanation is that the translator sought to
avoid the repetition of Greek terms. The rendering of the differing terms and
by words derived from the same root (+
/+) in 7:20 speaks against this
suggestion, but this choice of terms in 7:20 is very adequate to convey the meanings
of the Hebrew terms. The verb is added again in 7:20.
79. The Hebrew
! (hired) is rendered by L ^ #
^
(great and drunken). The translator (or his Vorlage) could have read here either a
noun derived from ! (drunken [the
being misread as a ]), or a noun
!'
with
, constructed from the root !. Ottley, Isaiah, 2:146, calls the possible asso-
ciation of the roots ! and ! in 7:20 a curious coincidence and does not seem
to think this to be the case here. There is also a remarkable similarity, however,
between the Greek
^ (drunk) and
! (hired). The latter
term is attested by B, Aquila, and Theodotion (710), besides other witnesses.
Symmachus has $
$ )!
% % >

m. Cf. Ltkemann and Rahlfs, Randnoten, 28689. The similarity between
both Greek and Hebrew terms makes this a specially difcult case. See 14:21 for a
similar situation. Both Ottley, Isaiah, 2:146, and Seeligmann, Isaiah, 11 n. 8, argue
that the reading of A (
^) is to be preferred. Ottley points out that the
converse misreading occurs at 28:1, 3, and believes that it was almost possible that
both readings may have existed originally and independently. That being the case, he
suggests that L ^ may have been inserted when
! was displaced,
from a sense that something was missing.
1
indicating that it has different signicances in the Hebrew and Greek.

The Hebrew epexegetical clause ' is changed into the genitive
chain
m, which itself is connected to % %.
This rendering suggests a reference to another power beyond the Assyr-
ians. Rsel capitalizes on this and argues that v. 20b means that both
foreign adversaries that dwell in the land are to be destroyed, thereby
opening up the way to salvation. According to Rsel, this correlates well
with the context of the rst half of the second century B.C.E. and the
conict between the Seleucids and Ptolemies over Israel.80 On the other
hand, the rendering could have originated in a misreading, inuenced by
Aramaic, of for , with no further signicance.
2.4. The Systematic Toning Down of LXX Isaiah 7

A signicant question in the attempt to read LXX Isa 7 as a whole is the
afrmation, in particular by Rsel and Lust, that the LXX systematically
tones down the threat posed in Isa 7. Evidence is found in 7:2, in the
rendering of (settled) by -=, which suggests the idea of
agreement, reinforced by the rendering of the preposition by ,
which seems to reduce the aggressiveness of the move towards Judah.
Evidence of toning down is also found in the rendering of the Hiphil of
" (fear, loathe, abhor) by
(confer with) in 7:6, which
has to do with persuading, rather than assaulting. Rsel and Lust argue
that this toning down is to be explained by the translators intention to
reect events of his own day in his translation. This evidence needs to be
weighed in more detail. I turn rst to 7:2:
$
$ ) # ,
( > " Z

& &-= j > >
d-
*
# +
S 63 /% # S
63 % % /%

$.

$ &
I 0 L + *>
D

And it was reported to the house of And it was reported to the house of
David: David:
Aram rests upon Ephraim; Aram is in league with Ephraim;
and his heart was shaken and the and his soul was distraught and the
heart of his people, soul of his people,
as the trees of the forest shake before as when in the forest a tree is shaken
the wind. by the wind.
1
Seeing here a toning down of the threat, Rsel argues that this is an indi-
cation that the translator has in mind events of his own day, identifying
j with the Seleucids (Syria) and d- with the Jews who allied
themselves with the Seleucids. The main evidence adduced by Rsel that
is to be identied with the Seleucids is the rendering & in
9:11(12) and 17:3. The connection between d- and apostate Jews is
established in 9:20(21); 17:3; 28:1, 3, and in Qumran (e.g. 4QpNah 1:12;
2:2, 8; 3:8; 4QpPs 37 2:18; CD 8:13).81 And yet, if the identication
between and the Seleucids were so certain, one would expect the
rendering & here. That the equivalence was employed elsewhere but
avoided here has more to say against Rsels thesis than for it. Also,
while there is evidence that Ephraim was used later to indicate apostate
Jews, this in itself does not prove that the LXX displays an actualizing
interpretation here, since we simply have a straightforward rendering of
the Vorlage.
Troxel has correctly refuted Rsels argument by noting that the
Hebrew and Greek versions refer to events in the days of the prophet
Isaiah, so that it would seem strained to read the events as merely pre-
guring events in the translators day, especially since the correlations
needed to do so are by no means explicitly signalled in the text.82
Perceiving any intention to update the prophecy or represent events of
the translators day is very difcult with the kind of evidence offered by
this chapter. As for the systematic toning down, I suggest that it can be
explained simply on linguistic grounds, in terms of the translators read-
ing and interpretative strategies.
There are different suggestions about the actual meaning of the
Hebrew which could shed light on the LXX rendering. Seeligmann
sees in the translation of by -= the possibility that
was understood as a Niphal form of the hypothetical verb * (to
fraternize).83 Driver suggested, on the basis of the Arabic na
(lean
oneself upon), the meaning has inclined towards = become allied
with.84 Eissfeldt argued, on the basis of the Akkadian nu in the
inscription on the stele of Idrimi of Alalakh, become reconciled, enter
into a treaty agreement.85 The Peshitta has ~ (bind oneself/make
81. Ibid., 137. Cf. Troxel, Isaiah 7,1416, 10.

83. Seeligmann, Isaiah, 50. The problem with this suggestion is accounting for
the elimination of .
84. G. R. Driver, Studies in the Vocabulary of the Old Testament VI, JTS 34
(1933): 37585 (377).
85. O. Eissfeldt, na sich vertragen, in Otto Eissfeldt - Kleine Schriften
(ed. R. Sellheim and F. Maass; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1966), 12428. Cf.
1
an agreement with), followed by preposition . Wildberger objects to

all these explanations because of the use of the preposition (upon)
with , and also on the ground that a political agreement between
these two states would not explain the reason for such a panic in Jeru-
salem. On the other hand, that would be very easy to understand if an
Aramaic army had already established its own base of operations in
Israel.86 One can reply to Wildberger by suggesting that here is used
for (following Eissfeldt) and that it is too much to assume that a
political agreement would not have caused panic in Israel. There is
simply not enough information on the connotations that a political agree-
ment might have carried. Nevertheless, the LXX translator may have
thought that the idea of a political agreement was indicated in the
Hebrew text, even though he may not have been capturing the precise
nuance of MTs .
Ziegler argues convincingly that the choice of term on the part of the
translator is because he understood that there was a political alliance
between the kings, and that he could have been inuenced by Gen 14:3
(where the Greek verb renders ). While -
generally has the
meaning to agree, in Gen 14:3 it has the connotation of a coalition of
forces joining against a common enemy. The same idea seems to lie
behind both the Targum reading and the Peshitta ~.
The reading strategies triggered by the pericopes reference to a
political alliance would also explain the rendering
/: in 7:6:

& , ( 3 ;

# /:

$ $ ,
6 /$ > S H
!

# /2
#
$ > > C

Let us go up against Judah Let us go up to Judea,
and terrify it, and, having conferred with them,
and split it up for ourselves; we will turn them to us,
and let us enthrone a king in its midst, and enthrone over it
(namely) Ben Tabeal. the son of Tabeel.
As mentioned previously, the rendering of " by

in 7:6
represents for Rsel (as well as Lust and Troxel) evidence that the LXX
alters the nuance of the MT. While the Hebrew speaks of terrifying (or
J. A. Emerton, Notes on Jeremiah 12:9 and on Some Suggestions of J. D. Michaelis

about the Hebrew words na
, !br
, and jad!, ZAW 81 (1969): 18291 (18889).
1
something equally negative) Judah, the Greek speaks of conferring

with its leaders. The meaning fear for " is plausible, although it has
no clear attestation in the Hebrew Bible and is by no means certain (cf.
7:16 and LXX ad loc.). For Eitan,
could be explained on the basis
of the Arabic root qy (to be broken, split).87 Speier, following
Orlinsky, postulates a root " II (tear apart) for this occurrence in
7:6.88 The lack of support for these proposals leads Wildberger to afrm
that fear (Furcht) still constitutes the best translation and to state that
the opponents do not at all have in mind to destroy Jerusalem, but only
to put their own plans into effect.89
An interesting option is offered by Driver, who suggests, on the basis
of the LXX and Arabic
a (negotiated, bargained with), the reading
let us open negotiations with it.90 This could explain the LXX rendering
quite well. On the other hand, if fearor something comparably nega-
tiveis the correct interpretation of the Hebrew, the poor attestation of
the term makes it plausible that the translator would not have understood
it and made a contextual guess based on the political situation described
in Isa 7.91
It thus seems more likely that the readings at 7:2 and 7:6, which seem
to indicate to the modern reader some kind of toning down of the threat
described in Isa 7, were not prompted by any desire to reect a con-
temporary situation; rather, they were motivated by a perception of the
oracle as dealing with a political situation in the eighth century. A reader
aware of the content of the narrative in ch. 7 would attempt to translate
the passage with terms that were well suited for the situation being
described.
87. I. Eitan, A Contribution to Isaiah Exegesis, HUCA 1213 (193738):

5588 (5758).
88. S. Speier, UNEQIENNAH, Isaiah 7:6a, JBL 72 (1953): 1415. Cf. KBL,
" II, 834.
90. G. R. Driver, Isaiah IXXXIX: Textual and Linguistic Problems, JSS 13
(1968): 3657 (39).
91. One also notes that, in 7:6, the Hiphil of (to cleave, split) is rendered
by ,
- (to turn away, turn back) (see Vulgate avellamus ad nos). For
Eitan, Contribution, 58, this rendering ts well with the context and tallies with
the Arabic baqa!a (to go away) in the causative. His translation of 7:6 is: Let us
go up to Judah, and break it up and make it go over to our side and set up a king in
the midst of it, even the son of Tabeel. He states further: The objective of the two
allied kings of Aram and Ephraim is not to properly conquer Judah but to force upon
the country their anti-Assyrian policy by a change of government. Cf. Seeligmann,
Isaiah, 50.
1
2.5. The Portrayal of Ahaz

It has also been suggested, on the basis of 7:13, that the LXX paints a
much more positive picture of Ahaz than does the Hebrew text:

$
# " m , " Z

& # 3 > * : ,)

, =

+
# ) ^
,)r

And he said, Hear, House of David, And he said, Hear then, House of
David,
Is it too little for you to weary men, Is it little for you to provoke men?
that you weary also my God? And how do you provoke the Lord?
Lust argues that the systematic toning down of the threat in ch. 7 is
reinforced by 7:13 because the MT my God would imply that the God
in question cannot be said to be Ahazs God, whereas the LXX omits the
pronoun and does not give this impression. He also argues that the
translator tones down the Isaianic indictment against Ahaz, by rendering
(which Lust translates as taunt) with
,) (which he
translates as doing battle or entering into competition).92 For Lust,
the framing of the last sentence in the verse with ) (how) reinforces
this idea, as the possibility of such a battle is called into question rather
than rejected.93
With regard to the rendering of by
,), Rsel takes
much further than Lust the idea that the LXX steers the text in a more
positive direction, and argues that in the LXX Ahazs action is portrayed
as a positive act of compliance with Deut 6:16. Rsel seeks to sub-
stantiate his claim by pointing out that the term ,=, which in the LXX
has the basic sense of struggle, contest, had in Hellenistic Jewish lit-
erature the connotation of a virtuous struggle against the love of the
world (cf. Esth 4:17; Wis 4:2; 10:12). Noting that the translator renders
accurately elsewhere (cf. Isa 1:14; 16:12; 47:13), Rsel afrms that
in 7:3 the Greek term is employed with an intentionally positive conno-
tation, following the examples in the Maccabean literature where ,= is
also used positively for the struggle in defense of true religion.94
According to Rsels typological reading of the chapter, the rst part
of the verse relates to the people who were at war with the Seleucids.
The second part deals with the rejected offer of a sign. As Ahaz argued
with God, he engaged in a worthy struggle with him. Therefore the Lord

93. Ibid., 220.
1
(as a reward) decides to give him a sign: the birth of a Saviour (vv. 14
17). It would thus be clear that the offer of a sign in v. 11 was not seen as
a trial of faith but as a temptation, rather like Matt 4:111, with its
similarities to LXX Isa 7:12.95
However, it is difcult to see how Ahaz could be portrayed in such
a positive light. Not only is his portrayal in the Hebrew Bible very
negative, but there is also no evidence of any positive Jewish tradition
concerning him (cf., e.g., b. Ber. 10b; Pesa. 56a; 119a; Sanh. 96a; 103b,
the latter text interpreting Isa 8:16 as an indictment against Ahazs
wicked attitude towards the Torah; and b. Sanh. 104a, which has an
explicit reference to the narrative of Isa 7, stressing that Ahaz was
ashamed of the prophet).
It is much more likely that the idea of wearying God was objection-
able to the LXX translator, who opted for a term that was less likely to
sound unorthodox. This would be in line with a tendency repeatedly
displayed in LXX Isaiah, to make minor alterations in texts referring to
God, with the purpose of safeguarding his character or removing
elements that could be seen as theologically problematicas I noted in
Chapter 2, in connection with the rendering of 8:14.
Examples of this tendency for theologically ameliorative alterations
are also found in ch. 6.96 In 6:2, for instance, the rendering of the Hebrew
by the Greek ! probably serves the purpose of avoiding the
notion that the angels could be above God. Isaiah 6:8 is, overall, a very
literal translation, apart from the rendering of by > > >
%. It is conceivable that the translator read
for .97 Most
probably, however, he was at the same time inuenced by in the
next verse, and by a desire to safeguard monotheism.98
3. Summary
In spite of a few noteworthy features in the overall context of LXX Isa 7,
Troxel is probably correct in arguing that there is insufcient evidence
to conclude that this passage, as a whole, envisions an eschatological
age.99 In this connection, I suggest that the rendering of LXX Isa 7:1416
does not give sufciently strong evidence of a conscious, systematic
messianic reading of the passage.
95. Ibid., 142.

96. For this terminology and a discussion of the phenomenon in LXX Isaiah, see
Baer, When We All Go Home.
97. Cf. Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 250.
98. Cf. Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 139.
1
The choice of

does not seem to have any special signi-
cance, the futuristic rendering of was possibly prompted by a
propensity for reading prophecies futuristically on the basis of linguistic
indications in the text, and the question whether the translator gave a
Davidic interpretation to the naming of the child was left open.
Although Troxel could be right in his suggestion that a royal, Davidic
child is envisaged, this cannot be proven, at least not on the basis of this
text alone.100
What can be afrmed with certainty is simply that there is much more
exegetical support for the position that an individual is in view, and not a
collective entity, and that the clues offered by the translation are not out
of step with developments in messianism in Early Judaism. The impor-
tant points to note are that the translator of LXX Isa 7:16 understood the
promised child of Isa 7 as having a proper name (d ), even
though he does not treat as such in 8:8 and 10, and that he sought
to safeguard his extraordinary moral character. In so doing, he inserted
elements that belonged to wider streams of Jewish thought.
100. That the messiah does not necessarily need to be a Davidic gure has been
argued by H. Lichtenberger, Messianic Expectations and Messianic Figures During
the Second Temple Period, in Qumran-Messianism (ed. J. H. Charlesworth et al.;
Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998), 920.
1
Chapter 5
THE MESSIANIC ORACLES (2):

LXX ISAIAH 9:56(67)
The messianic interpretation of these verses in early Judaism is well

attested, so there should be no surprise in nding traces of messianic
ideas in the LXX rendering.1 The primary difculty is ascertaining their
precise nature. In order to do so, scholars have focused on the most
remarkable feature of the rendering, namely, the translation of the titles
ascribed to the child. Instead of the four throne/adoption names in the
Hebrew,2 the LXX of 9:5(6) restricts the naming to the one expression,
2 ?, which reects the pair "
,3
and renders the remaining titles by what seems to be a formula of a
blessing bestowed upon the ?.4
The expression 2 ? nds no direct counterpart
in early Jewish messianic texts, and its use in early Christianity is solely
1. Munnich, Le messianisme, 343, makes a similar comment when discussing

the addition of
in the Targum.
2. For discussions on the number and character of the throne names in Hebrew,
see W. Zimmerli, Vier oder fnf Thronnamen des messianischen Herrschers von
Jes. IX, 5 b.6, VT 22 (1972): 24952; R. D. Schunck, Der fnfte Thronname des
Messias, VT 23 (1973): 10810; J. Goldingay, The Compound Name in Isaiah
9:5(6), CBQ 61 (1999): 23944.
3. Aquila translates "
as > . See LXX Isa 3:3 and
Seeligmann, Isaiah, 12, 23.
4. It is interesting to observe, in this connection, the Targum rendering The
prophet said to the house of David, For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and
he will accept the law upon himself to keep it, and his name will be called before the
Wonderful Counsellor, the Mighty God, existing forever, The messiah in whose
days peace will increase upon us following Chilton, The Isaiah Targum, 21. The
Targum here leaves only mighty counsellor to the child, while the other titles are
reserved for God himself. For a discussion of the Targumic rendering of Isa 9:5(6),
see R. P. Gordon, Messianism in Ancient Bible Translations in Aramaic and
Syriac, in Bockmuehl and Carleton Paget, eds., Redemption and Resistance, 262
73 (26263).
1
derived from LXX Isaiah.5 Lust sees in the LXX rendering an attempt at
downplaying the messianic character of the oracle. He argues that
through the insertion of messenger, with the obliteration of the divine
titles of the child, the emphasis is taken away from the child and put on
the Lord.6 Lust suggests that the insertion was made in order to avoid any
indication that the child might be divine, and in the process the names
that follow thus no longer apply to the human crown prince and expected
saviour, but rather to the God of whom he is the messenger. Seeing this
in connection with the view that God is the one bringing peace and
health upon his messenger, Lust concludes that a messianic reading of
the oracle becomes less plausible in the Greek text in which the reader
is directed to God and his intervention on behalf of the people.7
Several observations are in order. First, if Lust is correct in arguing
that the rendering of 9:5(6) seeks to stress the activity of the Lord over
that of his messenger or angel, this is to be seen in connection with
the translators technique, in particular, his tendency to stress divine
primacy. This is visible in 1:18, where the rendering of

!
(they shall be white as snow) by O b (I shall make
[them] white as snow) and of

! (they shall be like wool) by
O ' b (I shall make [them] white as wool) makes explicit
that the Lord himself is responsible for the purication of the sins of the
people. A more signicant example is 6:6, where we have the rendering
of
by the passive ,. Here the translator avoids the idea of
an active initiative of the angel and puts the stress on the activity of God,
who sends the angel.8 I have also pointed earlier to examples where the
translator seeks to avoid renderings that could be theologically prob-
lematic, such as 6:910; 7:11, and 8:14.
If a messianic gure is, by denition, a mediator, then it would not be
surprising that the translator attempted to afrm the distinction between
this gure and the Lord, safeguarding his monotheistic views, without
5. Cf. J. E. Fossum, The Name of God and the Angel of the Lord (WUNT 36;
Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1985), 318; D. D. Hannah, Michael and Christ: Michael
Traditions and Angel Christology in Early Christianity (WUNT 2/109; Tbingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 1999), 20912.
6. J. Lust, Messianism in the Septuagint: Isaiah 8:23b9:6 (9:17), in The
Interpretation of the Bible (ed. J. Kraovec; JSOTSup 289; Shefeld: Shefeld
Academic, 1998), 14763 (160), repr. in Messianism and the Septuagint, 15370.
Lust also suggests that, while the title ? might perhaps be apocalyptic in
nature, it does not seem to be messianic.
7. Ibid., 218.
8. In this regard, one is reminded of Philos observations on the transcendental
nature of God and the need to employ angels as mediators to full his work, in Conf.
169, 18082; Fug. 67, all referring to Gen 48:15.
1
5. The Messianic Oracles (2): LXX Isaiah 9:56(67) 105
necessarily implying a desire to downplay the role of the mediator.9 In

fact, as Troxel correctly points out, Lust undervalues the role of the mes-
senger and fails to recognize that in spite of the retreat from ascribing
some of the divine epithets to the child, his role as messenger of the
Lords is substantial.10 In what follows, we examine the process
by which the rendering was achieved and its possible meaning, in order
to ascertain whether it can be considered messianic, and, if so, what it
reveals about the translators thinking.
1. LXX Isaiah 9:56(67): Translation and Analysis

9:5(6)

% )

0 S :
( $ > # S :
!
*
( K S ,3 # % h
/%
# : > P /%
$ " $
. s 2 ?

& M ?+ ( # $
?
( # * /L
For a child was born to us, For a child was born to us,
a son was given to us, a son was given to us,
and the dominion shall be upon his on whose shoulder the rule came;
shoulder;
and one will call his name, and his name is called
Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Messenger of Great Counsel;
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. For I will bring peace to the rulers,
peace and health to him.
9:6(7)
"
$ $
* $ 11 S ,3 /%, # 2
( /% /
$
0
(!
# > Z
9. Moreover, in spite of problems in his methodology and conclusions, Horbury,

Jewish Messianism, 7883, argues convincingly that slogans on unmediated
redemption by God himself do not necessarily imply that messianic deliverance is
not in view. He has in mind texts such as LXX Isa 34:5; 63:9, and the Passover
Haggadah, where, to the afrmation of Deut 26:8 that the Lord brought us forth, is
appended

(not by the hands of
an angel and not by the hands of a seraph and not by the hands of a legate).
10. Troxel, Isaiah 7,1416, 2021.
1
11. Following the Qere.
&

! # 3 /%

#. ) /3 #
,
/2

( $ J #
& (
,> % % # ( > ()

1 92
%
To the increase of his dominion and Great is his rule and to his peace
of peace there shall be no end; there is no border;
upon the throne of David, upon the throne of David,
and upon his kingdom, and his kingdom,
to establish and to uphold it to establish it and to sustain it
with justice and with righteousness, in righteousness and in judgment,
from henceforth and unto eternity. from now and until the eternal age.
The zeal of the Lord of Hosts will The zeal of the Lord Sabaoth will do
do this. these things.
1.1. The Futuristic Casting of the Oracle

The LXX rendering of 9:5(6) can be seen in the larger context of the
question whether these verses envision the past or the future. The rst
option is connected with the tradition that the child is to be identied
with Hezekiah, while the second would indicate an expectation of a
messiah in the future. In this connection, Munnich notes that in v. 5

and
are rendered in the past by the Targum (
and
) and
Aquila (
and
), while in the LXX we have an aorist in the
rst case ( ) but a presentwith possible futuristic connotationin
the second (:),12 which could be an indication of a preference for
a futuristic interpretation. This is particularly interesting in the light of
the translators tendency to give a futuristic frame to his oracles, as in the
rendering of by # '+ in 7:14. Bearing in mind the impor-
tant caveats I made about the rendering in 7:14 in the previous chapter, I
note that the futuristic rendering of 9:6 is interesting but should be
approached with care. A much more signicant question is the identity of
the 2 ?, to which we now turn.
1.2. The Angel of Great Counsel

It is conceivable that ? is here connected to .13 If this is the
case, then the translator could have understood "
as a
12. Munnich, Le messianisme, 34344.

13. The Hebrew root often connotes that which is transcendent, or supernatural.
Cf. J. Conrad, , TDOT 11: 53346 (53435). A connection between and
1
construct chain, so that the whole clause was read as The angel of the
counsel of the great God.14 An attempt to avoid mention of God would
then explain the Greek rendering.
While this is a possibility, a more likely option is that ? repre-
sents , as in Job 20:15.15 The translator could have understood in an
angelic sense,16 or may have had problems with the name Mighty God
being applied to a human being,17 and so eschewed the use of the divine
title.
While the representation of "
by does not occur elsewhere in
LXX Isaiah,18 it is attested in Mic 4:9 and Prov 11:14. The terms and
would have been absorbed in the Greek rendering, in keeping
with the paraphrastic tendencies of the translator that we encountered
earlier.
The question is, however, what the rendering might have meant for the
translator. Both Seeligmann and Hanhart see the great counsel as
correlated to the ancient counsel ( ,) of LXX Isa 25:1 and
suggest that the rendering here supports a comparison with Jer 32(39):19,
where the MT says of the Lord

(Great in
counsel and mighty in deed), for which the LXX has
2 # > : (the Lord of great counsel and power-
ful in [his] works). On this basis, they offer the interpretation: the
Delegate who carries out the Divine Dispensation of the age-old plan,19
an angelic gure could perhaps be established on the basis of the narrative of the
birth announcement of Samson in Judges. The form appears in the difcult
Hebrew text of Judg 13:19. It is possible that a reader could connect the obscure
occurrence of to the mysterious angelic gure who announces the birth of
Samson. The angel himself states in 13:18 that his name is
(wonderful). The
LXX A text interprets as connected to the Lord and renders it by ,
while the B text understands the term etymologically in the sense of separate and
uses
.
14. is often explained as having been left untranslated. Cf. Van der Kooij,
Theologie, 17.
15. Cf. ibid., 17.
16. Hanhart, Die Septuaginta als Interpretation, 335.
17. Cf. Gray, Isaiah IXXVII, 173. The sense of with reference to a divine or
angelic assembly is well established by examples from the Hebrew Bible and
Qumran in DCH 1:25354.
18. We nd the rendering in LXX Isa 1:26 and 19:11, and >
in 3:3, which is a standard LXX equivalence. The verb "
is rendered by
in 40:14 and by in all other instances (cf. 7:5; 14:24; 19:12;
23:8; 32:7, 8). This is also in accordance with general LXX usage. It is also worth
pointing out that in the LXX "
is rendered by a great variety of equivalents.
1
or the messenger that is commissioned to implement Gods ancient

counsel.20 This suggestion is similar to that of Schaper, who argues that
the translator viewed the establishment of the Davidic messianic king-
dom as a direct result of the .21
The problem with this view is that it ascribes to the ? a very
active role in implementing or bringing into effect the divine counsel,
something which the rendering does not explicitly suggest and against
which the meaning of the Greek term speaks. This is in line with the
view of van der Kooij, who, while accepting the connection with Isa
25:1, disagrees with the reading of 9:5(6) in the light of LXX Jer
32(39):19, because there it is God himself who is endowed with the
, while here we are dealing with his messenger. He
rightly argues that the messenger is better seen as a teacher, and is not to
be confused with the Lord, the Ausfhrer of the great counsel.22
Van der Kooijs insightful observation gives us the starting point for
determining the character of the ?. Scholars are divided as to
whether we are dealing with a priestly or an angelic gure. In line with
the argumentation adopted in the present study, I shall try to ascertain
what traditions or ideologies might conceivably underlie the rendering
and which possibility does more justice to the evidence.
1.2.1. The ? as Priestly Figure. In the light of the overall context
of the oracle, van der Kooij argues for the Davidic nature of the messi-
anic gure envisaged in 9:5(6). Yet he also suggests that the rendering
2 ? gives him a priestly character.
He points to the prophecy against Shebna in Isa 25:1519, noting that
while the MT of Isa 36:3 presents Shebna as a high-ranking ofcer in the
kings court, the LXX understands him to be a high-priestly gure.23 This
is because in LXX Isa 22:15, Shebna is addressed from the -
(a temple room; cf. LXX Jer 42[35]:4; 1 Chr 9:26; 23:28), and is called a
, which, according to van der Kooij, means the Temple treasurer.24
The LXX also describes Shebna as wearing a
- + (the
20. Hanhart, Die Septuaginta als Interpretation, 345: Der Bote, der beauftragt
ist, den uralten Ratschlu Gottes auszufhren.
22. Van der Kooij, Theologie, 1718.
23. A. van der Kooij, Wie heit der Messias? Zu Jes 9,5 in den alten griechisen
Versionen, in Vergegenwrtigung des Alten Testaments: Beitrge zur biblischen
Hermeneutik. Festschrift fr Rudolf Smend zum 70. Geburtstag (ed. C. Bultmann et
al.; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2002), 15669 (16061).
24. Ibid., 161. He shows that in 36:3 the translation is different, describing
Shebna as ( .
1
translation of , perhaps via the reading

, in 25:17). Van der
Kooij afrms that
- is a term reserved for the head ornament of
the high priest (1 Macc 10:20; 13:37; 2 Macc 14:4; Sir 45:12), whereas
would be the equivalent used for kings (LXX Isa 62:3 [rendering

]; 1 Macc 1:9; 6:15; Sir 4:6). Signicantly, the tradition of Shebna as
high priest is also known in later sources, such as Eusebius in his Isaiah
commentary, and Tg Isa 22:15.25
In trying to understand the rendering of LXX Isa 9:5(6), van der Kooij
accords even greater signicance to LXX Isa 25:2025, especially v. 22,
where Eliakim is referred to in terms that combine his status as a high
priest with the promise of kingship to the line of David.26 In the light of
this evidence, van der Kooij suggests that the messiah depicted in LXX
Isa 9:56(67) is conceived as a high priest with a royal status.
Van der Kooij sees in Sir 45:2425, which correlates the Lords
covenant with the line of Phinehas and the covenant of eternal kingship
with David, as evidence of a priestly theological tradition according to
which the promise to the line of Phinehas is included in the Davidic
covenant, so that the high priest was understood to be connected with
the glory of David (hence the connection with LXX Isa 22:22).27
If the connection between the priestly ideology of Sirach and LXX
Isaiah stands, it would constitute signicant information about the trans-
lators ideological background. However, there are some difculties with
van der Kooijs proposal. First, Sirachs view of the relationship between
the covenant with David and the priestly covenant is complex and does
not allow the simple explanation suggested by van der Kooij.28
25. Ibid., 16162.

26. In 22:22, the MT says, with reference to Eliakim,

! (And I will put upon his shoulder the key of
the house of David, and he will open and no one will close, and he will close and no
one will open). The LXX gives a characteristically explicative rendering, # =
3 + Z /)! # ?+ # / 1 ,
(And I shall give
him the glory of David, and he will rule and there shall be no one in opposition).
28. The Davidic expectation, while clearly held, is not emphasized, with much
more stress being given to the priesthood, as argued by S. M. Olyan, Ben Siras
Relationship to the Priesthood, HTR 80 (1987): 26186. Perhaps J. J. Collins,
Messianism in the Maccabean Period, in Judaisms and their Messiahs at the Turn
of the Christian Era (ed. J. Neusner et al.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1987), 97109 (98), is correct in arguing that his disinterest in emphasizing Davidic
messianism comes from his satisfaction with the priestly regime of Simon, as
evidenced by his focus on Simon in 50:121. Besides Aaron and Phinehas, Sirach
mentions Simon as high priest, connecting him with the covenant of peace
(45:24), or the covenant with Phinehas (50:24). Cf. O. Mulder, Simon the High
1
More signicantly, even if van der Kooij is correct with regard to the
presence of priestly ideology in LXX Isa 22, connecting this evidence
with the rendering of LXX Isa 9:5(6) still requires a leap. In this regard,
one notes that although the characterization of the child as a
2 ? can indicate that he has a revelatory role, evidence of
application of the term ? with reference to a priest is scarce, and a
connection between and priestly instruction can normally be made
only in an indirect manner.29 This view could be strengthened if an
allusion to the priesthood is found in LXX Isa 1:1, but, as we shall see (cf.
Chapter 6, section 1.2), the indications there are also scarce and oblique.
This last point leads us to another suggestion made by van der Kooij.
He sees a connection between the messianic portrait of LXX Isa 9:5(6)
and the Teacher of Righteousness of the Qumran texts. Van der Kooijs
identication is achieved by correlating the knowledge of the Lords
in LXX Isaiah with the Teachers insight into the revealed words
of the Prophets (1QpHab 7:45) and arguing that both are possessed with
supernatural, eschatological wisdom.30
Priest in Sirach 50: An Exegetical Study of the Signicance of Simon the High Priest
as Climax to the Praise of the Fathers in Ben Siras Concept of the History of Israel
(JSJSup 78; Leiden: Brill, 2003), 337. The question of the historical identity of
Simon is also complex. The option of Simon II has been preferred. This hypothe-
sis was recently challenged by J. C. VanderKam, From Joshua to Caiaphas: High
Priests after the Exile (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2004), 13757, who argues, following
Josephus, for Simon I. Cf. Mulder, Simon, 34552, for a defense of the traditional
view. The important thing, however, is to note the association between Simon and
the Davidic covenant. It is also important to note his de facto quasi-royal status. The
high priest Simon is described in Sir 50 as exercising great authority beyond strictly
priestly functions, in spite of the contrary arguments of D. W. Rooke, Zadoks Heirs:
The Role and Development of the High Priesthood in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2000). At the same time, it is possible that the Greek form of Sir
50, with the omission of any mention of Simon and the covenant with Phinehas
downplays the image of Simon because of polemics at the time of the translator
against the priesthood, which could no longer be seen as belonging to the covenant
with Phinehas. For an analysis of the differences between the Hebrew and Greek
versions of Sir 50, see M. Brutti, The Development of the High Priesthood during
the Pre-Hasmonean Period (JSJSup 108; Leiden: Brill, 2004), 2014.
29. A signicant exception is T. Levi 4:26, especially as v. 3 states that Levi
will kindle in Jacob the light of knowledge (-: -) =). Verse 5
complements that picture by stating:
3 # %
$ (counsel and understanding have been given to you so that you
might instruct your sons).
1
It goes without saying that the Teacher of Righteousness ( )

is a complex gure, and any identication with the ? of LXX
Isa 9:5(6) must be weighed very carefully. Regarding the connection
between the ? and the Teacher on the grounds of their eschato-
logical insight, two things need to be noted. First, I have argued in
Chapter 3 that, notwithstanding the interesting use of in LXX
Isa 25:1, the term does not necessarily denote eschatological insight
in every case, and can refer more generally to wisdom. Secondly, the
Teachers insight is not to be taken simply as a supernatural, eschato-
logical revelation. This last point deserves further comment.
To be sure, little is known about the historical gure to which the
sobriquet refers.31 However, we glean from the Qumran texts that the
historical Teacher was given a status comparable to that of a priest to
whom God had granted the power to interpret all the words of his
servants the prophets (1QpHab 2:89) and to whom God made known
all the mysteries of the words of his servants the prophets (1QpHab
7:45), and whose words were from the mouth of God (1QpHab 2:23).32
The Teacher of Righteousness is probably also to be identied with the
(interpreter of the law) in CD 6:7 and the "

(mediator [or interpreter] of knowledge) in 4Q171 1:19.33
A basic survey of the evidence indicates that the content of the
Teachers ministry had an important eschatological dimension but was
not limited to eschatological revelation. His insight into the divine word
had much to do with the ability to offer an authoritative explanation and
application of divine oracles and legal matters. In fact, much of the con-
troversy surrounding the appearance of the teacher and his rst followers
centred on his interpretation of the Law (cf. CD 1:82:1).34 This is in line
with more general perceptions regarding the priestly ministry. We note,
for instance, that in the praise of Simon and the Phinehas line in Sirach,
the concept of insight into the hidden things does not simply refer to
eschatology but also has its practical aspect in the priestly tradition of
correctly arranging the sacricial portions (50:14) and maintaining the
prescriptions of the temple liturgy (50:19) and thereby preserving the
31. M. Knibb, Teacher of Righteousness, EDSS 2:91821 (92021), is open to

the possibility that the teacher could be the high priest who followed Alcimus in 159
B.C.E. (1 Macc 9:56) and was deposed in 152 B.C.E. by Jonathan (1 Macc 10:1821).
However, the historical evidence for this view is scant. Cf. J. J. Collins, The Scepter
and the Star: The Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Ancient Literature
(ABRL; New York: Doubleday, 1995), 112.
32. Collins, Scepter, 112.
33. Knibb, Teacher, 2:918. Knibbs reference for 4Q171 1:19 is i.27.
1
34. Ibid., 1:919.
quality of the High Priesthood and the continuum of the covenant with
Phinehas (45:24d; 50:1a, 24).35
In trying to ascertain a possible connection between the ? and
the Teacher of Righteousness, another signicant question is whether the
Teacher was perceived as an eschatological gure. CD 5:206:11 states
that the teachings of the interpreter of the Law are valid until there
appears the one who will teach righteousness at the end of days. Some
have argued that this one is the same as the historical Teacher of Right-
eousness.36 Knibb opposes this idea and suggests that the one is to be
taken as a messianic gure, one whose role as a teacher would be the
counterpart to that of the historical Teacher of Righteousness (identied
with the interpreter of the law of CD 1). Knibb sees this messianic
gure as priestly and suggests that it could be the Messiah of Aaron.37
This discussion is complex and does not need to be resolved here. It
sufces to note with Collins that the expectations of the Dead Sea sect
were inconsistent and that the prophet and eschatological priest may not
always have been clearly distinguished.38 Another important feature of
the eschatology of the Scrolls that is highlighted by Collins is that it has
a restorative aspect and involves the fullment and perfection of the
institutions of past and present. In particular, Collins refers to the ofces
of king, high priest, and teacher, with thin dividing walls between their
past, present, and future dimensions.39
As is well known, the relationship between high priesthood and
kingship underwent a complex development in post-exilic Israel.40 The
35. Mulder, Simon, 336.

36. Cf. J. Murphy OConnor, The Damascus Document Revisited, RB 92
(1985): 22346; P. R. Davies, The Teacher of Righteousness and the End of
Days, RevQ 13 (1988): 31317.
37. Knibb, Teacher, 2:921. Cf. Collins, Scepter, 1023. The connection
between the eschatological priestly teacher and the Messiah of Aaron has also
been suggested by G. J. Brooke, Exegesis at Qumran: 4QFlorilegium in its Jewish
Context (JSOTSup 29; Shefeld: JSOT, 1985), 204, and Collins, Scepter, 114. The
relationship is established on the basis of the reference to Deut 33:10 in 4QFlor 611.
38. Collins, Scepter, 115.
39. Ibid., 112.
40. This is well exemplied in the Qumran development of the notion of the
separate messiahs of Aaron and of Israel (David). The historical circumstances
underlying the development of this dual messiahship concept are persuasively
sketched by S. Talmon, Waiting for the Messiah: The Spiritual Universe of the
Qumran Covenanters, in Neusner et al., eds., Judaisms and their Messiahs, 11137.
The question of the primacy of the high priestly messiah is also complex. Cf.
E. Puech, Prsance sacerdotale et messie-roi dans la Rgle de la Congrgation
(1QSa ii 1122), RevQ 16 (1996): 35165.
1
historical-ideological background to the growth of conict between

Sadducean authority, the MaccabeanHasmoneans, and Essenes bred the
notion of an ideal priest who was to exert spiritual leadership over Israel
and have the function of expounding the Torah and knowledge more
generally (1QS 9:11; 4QFlorilegium).41 If the identication of LXX Isaiah
with the Oniad circle were to stand, it would be quite natural that priestly
conceptions ltered into the translation. However, the complexity of the
conceptions themselves, together with the absence of strong indications
in the translation, creates many difculties in assigning a priestly char-
acter to the messenger of LXX Isa 9:5(6). Below, another possibility is
considered.
1.2.2. The ? as Angelic Figure. The fact that in Hellenistic

Judaism ? frequently refers to an angel could suggest that in using
the term here the translator also envisaged this supernatural gure. In this
connection, I note the view of Horbury, who, following Bousset,42 argues
that the rendering 2 ? indicates that the messiah
of the biblical oracles was envisaged as a pre-existent angelic gure.43
Whether or not Horbury and Bousset are correct in arguing for an early
Jewish conception of pre-existence of the messiah derived from the
biblical texts, the wording of MT Isa 9:5(6)the term , for instance
is quite likely to suggest to our translator a supernatural, angelic gure.
Another question is whether this angelic gure could be properly
called messianic. Horbury argues that some material which can be
classied as angel-speculation can also properly be called messianic for
the messiah could be understood as the embodiment of an angel-like
spirit. He afrms that texts such as 4 Ezra (2 Esdras) should not be seen
as exceptional in their supernatural depiction of the messianic gure and
points out that human and transcendental features are often combined in
messianic descriptions.44
41. A. Hultgrd, The Ideal Levite, the Davidic Messiah, and the Saviour Priest
in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, in Ideal Figures in Ancient Judaism:
Proles and Paradigms (ed. J. J. Collins and G. W. E. Nickelsburg; SCS 12; Chico:
Scholars Press, 1980), 93110 (93).
42. D. W. Bousset, Die Religion des Judentums in Spthellenistischen Zeitalter
(Tbingen: Mohr, 1926).
43. Horbury, Jewish Messianism, 8990. He suggests that the concept of a pre-
existent messiah would have been engendered by texts such as Isa 9:5(6) and Mic
5:1(2), and would be visible in the gures depicted in the Parables of Enoch, 4 Ezra
(2 Esdras), and the Fifth Sibylline Oracle.
44. Ibid., 8687. To this one might add the instances in which human biblical
gures were depicted as angels, on which see J. H. Charlesworth, The Portrayal of
1
It can be difcult to ascertain the precise nature of some of the

supernatural gures which appear in texts such as 4 Ezra. Therefore, one
should perhaps refrain from speaking of the messiah as the embodiment
of an angel-like spirit. Horbury is certainly on more solid ground when
he speaks of the coordination of earthly and angelic gures in a picture
of messianic deliverance.45 This concept is clearly useful when dealing
with cases such as 1QM, where the victory of Michael, who is to be
identied with the Prince of Light,46 coexists with hopes for priestly
and royal deliverers (cf. 5:1; 11:17). Taken in connection with instances
in the Psalter where angelic activity is presented in the service of the
Davidic kingship (Pss 2:49; 18:50; 21:17, 13; 22:21; 35:56), and with
the references to angelic beings in Dan 7 and 12:1, this example shows
that angelic deliverers can be associated with the line of Israelite rulers
which is central to messianic expectation.47
Horbury probably goes too far in arguing that the depiction of the
messiah as an angel in LXX Isa 9:5(6) forms part of a broader Septua-
gintal interpretation of Isaianic messianic oracles displaying a consistent
emphasis on spiritual gifts and in connecting this rendering with that of
11:24. He suggests that the reference to the messianic gure being lled
with the spirit of the fear of God in the latter passage has probably been
inuenced by the angelic and spirit-inspired biblical image of David
the Righteous as an Angel, in Collins and Nickelsburg, eds., Ideal Figures in

Ancient Judaism, 13551; C. H. T. Fletcher-Louis, LukeActs: Angels, Christology
and Soteriology (WUNT 2/94; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1997), 109215; K. P.
Sullivan, Wrestling with Angels: A Study of the Relationship between Angels and
Humans in Ancient Jewish Literature and the New Testament (AGAJU 55; Leiden:
Brill, 2004), 27141.
45. Horbury, Jewish Messianism, 8384. Horbury suggests that this would be
partly due to the gaining of angelic status by human beings such as Enoch, Moses, or
Melchizedek (cf. Philo, Qumran literature, 1 Enoch), and partly due to the existence
of gures that are essentially ambiguous (the one like a son of man in Daniel, the
messengers in Exod 23:20, Mal 3 and the Assumption of Moses). He highlights the
important place that angelic deliverers occupied in Second Temple Jewish sources
(Dan 12:1), and points to the degree of coordination between angelic and earthly
deliverers, a coordination which had received particularly inuential emphasis in the
Hexateuch, mentioning especially Exod 3:2; 14:19; 32:34; 33:2.
46. Cf. 1QM 13:10. The identication of Michael with the Prince of Light has
been established in the work of Y. Yadin, The Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light
against the Sons of Darkness (trans. B. Rabin and C. Rabin; Oxford: Oxford Uni-
versity Press, 1962), 23536. Cf. M. J. Davidson, Angels at Qumran: A Comparative
Study of 1 Enoch 136, 72108 and Sectarian Writings from Qumran (JSPSup 11;
Shefeld: JSOT, 1992), 227.
1
47. Horbury, Jewish Messianism, 8586.
himself.48 He is thinking of the explicit comparison between David and

the Angel of the Lord in 2 Sam 14:17, 20; 19:28(27), and of Davids last
speech in 23:24, where the king declares that the spirit of God speaks
through him, and that the of God is upon his tongue. Correlating
this with the statement in LXX Isa 11:4 that the messianic gure will
strike the earth by the of his mouth, Horbury argues that the title
angel of great counsel can then readily be taken as an acknowledgement
of the spirit of wisdom upon and within the child. 49 This connection is
certainly interesting, but in the absence of stronger linguistic parallels,
and in the light of the fact that we are dealing with the translators
attempts to represent his Vorlage, it should not be overstated.
1.3. The Bringer of Peace upon the Rulers

The last part of the rendering in 9:5(6) gives further clues to the identi-
cation of the ?. As mentioned earlier, after the translation of
"
by 2 ?, the LXX renders the epithets

and by what seems to be a formulaic blessing. The
epithets in question are substituted by M ?+ ( # $
? (for I will bring peace to the rulers), to which is added the
formula ( # * /)!. The best explanation for M
?+ ( # $ ? is that the LXX presupposes the reading
1 (
) ()
.50
One needs, in any case, to decide whether the speaker is God, who
claims that he is himself bringing peace upon the rulers, or the messen-
ger/angel, who assumes the role of the announcer and bringer of peace.
While Schaper prefers the second option,51 most scholars follow the rst,
which, in the light of the translators tendency to stress divine activity, is
more likely. This would also t well with the suggestion that we are
dealing with an angelic gure, since early Jewish sources tended to stress
Gods primacy over the angels (Sir 16:14; Jub. 15:3132; 1 En. 41:9;
1QM 13:14).52
48. Ibid., 91.

49. Ibid.
52. Cf. Collins, Messianism in the Maccabean Period, 103; Yadin, The Scroll
of the War, 23435. The constant stress on the supremacy of God is possibly
intended to avoid the veneration of the angels, a complex feature in some early
Jewish groups. For a study of the question of angel veneration in Early Judaism, cf.
L. T. Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology (WUNT 2/70; Tbingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 1995).
1
The addition is more difcult to explain. Several solutions have been

proposed. It has been suggested that the rendering represents a double
translation of 53 or the translation of a fth name missing from the
MT.54 Seeligmann argues that was understood in the singular as the
messiah and that the addition was formulated to express Gods blessing
upon him.55 As for the form of the addition itself, Seeligmann suggests
that the expression was probably borrowed from Sir 1:18 as a later addi-
tion to the Isaiah tradition. Sirach 1:18 reads
- - -
, ( # * ( (The fear of the Lord
is the crown of wisdom making ourish peace and wholesome health).
The phrase ( # * provides a suggestive parallel to LXX
Isa 9:5(6). For Seeligmann, it is possible that in both places the expres-
sion is derived from some Hellenistic formula in honour of sovereigns.56
However, this suggestion does not t the context of Sirach, and the
absence of attestation of any such formulas for Hellenistic sovereigns
speaks against it.
It may be signicant that a similar formula is found in 1QM 17:6b8a:
[]

He will send eternal support to the
lot of his [re]deemed
!

by the power of the majestic angel
of the authority of Michael.

By eternal light he shall joyfully

light up the covenant of Israel,
! peace and blessing for the lot of God,
!

to exalt the authority of Michael
among the elim,
!
and the dominion of Israel among
all esh.
Several verbal parallels are worthy of note. The reference to eternal light
( ) and joy () are reminiscent of Isa 9:12(23), while the use of
in connection with the angel and the association of Michael and
the
reect elements akin to those in our passage. However, the most
signicant feature of the section is the presence of the formula
! (peace and blessing for the lot of God). Syntactically,
it appears somewhat detached from the structure of the verse and reads
like an insertion, much as the addition to LXX Isa 9:5(6). The wording of

54. Lust, Messianism, 160.
1
56. Ibid., 75.
the formula is also reminiscent of the LXX addition, although two points
need to be taken into account. First, the LXX never connects * with
!. Again, the peace and blessing in 1QM are applied to the lot of
God and not to the individual angel.57 On this last issue, however, it is
worth noting that some witnesses actually have a plural reading /)
instead of the singular /)!.58 Of course, matters are complicated when
we note that the plural reading is in the genitive and not in the dative.
It may be too far-fetched to suggest a literary dependence involving
1QM and LXX Isaiah. However, it is possible that at least the ideas
reected in the War Scroll represent the same ideological thought-world
as that expressed by the Isaiah translator. In particular, we may think of
the signicance accorded to an angelic gure in relation to messianic
liberation.
While 1QM can be described, in a broad sense, as eschatological, it
does not make any explicit mention of a single, prominent, messianic
gure.59 However, regardless of whether his identication as the Prince
of Light holds, Michael not only occupies a special role in the text but is
also a prominent gure in other early Jewish sources.60 With Michaels
importance in mind, we may return to the question of correlation between
angelic activity and messianic expectation. While the messianic out-
look of 1QM is very difcult to reconstruct,61 Hannah is probably correct
in arguing that, as Michaels victory correlates with messianic victory, he
appears to have been held to be the heavenly counterpart to the earthly
Messiahs.62
I am not here suggesting that the translator of LXX Isaiah was speci-
cally thinking of Michael when rendering 9:5(6). My point is that, if
there was a widespread concept of a correlation between angelic activity
and messianic deliverance, it would not be surprising to nd traces of
this inserted into the translation at the prompt of linguistic elements in
the Hebrew, even if that implies a degree of atomization in the trans-
lators approach. That the translator had an angelic being in mind is
much more likely in view of the terminology of the Hebrew text before
57. A discussion of the usage of (lot) in 1QM is found in Davidson,

Angels at Qumran, 22425.
58. Cf. Zieglers apparatus.
59. Cf. Davidson, Angels at Qumran, 21415.
60. Michael is the primary assistant against Belial in 1QM 13:10; 17:68, and
CD 5:1819. Cf. the survey of other examples in Yadin, The Scroll of the War, 236.
61. For a short summary of the textual and redactional complexities involving
1QM and related fragments, see Sullivan, Wrestling with Angels, 15556.
1
62. Hannah, Michael and Christ, 75.
him. The Greek wording itself also ts this suggestion better, since it is
not simply a question of the use of ?, but also of the expression
2. While we nd no literary parallels of angels being
credited with announcing the great counsel of God, angels are often
assigned a revelatory function. In this regard, it is noteworthy that the
Angel of the Presence reveals secret mysteries in Jub 2:1,63 and that in
4Q400 2:1 the Glory of God is referred to as
(a wonder
among the elim of knowledge). Throughout lines 19, the glory and
knowledge of God are praised in connection with those of the elim, who
are, presumably, angelic beings.64
The wording of Isa 9:5(6) could therefore very reasonably have evoked
ideas involving angelic gures, and these ideas could be correlated with
the expectation of a Davidic messiah, thus shaping the rendering as it
stands. The possible Davidic elements in the remainder of the trans-
lation are dealt with in the following section of this chapter.
A serious objection that can be raised to the view that the ? of
LXX Isa 9:5(6) is an angelic gure is obviously the reference to his birth
(a child was born to us). On the other hand, as stated previously, the
connection of ? with the Hebrew does not sit comfortably with
the view that a human high priest is being envisaged by the translator,
especially in the light of a text such as Job 20:15. Perhaps the idea of
correlation outlined above is also helpful here, as it would enable us to
make sense of what appears to be the coexistence of inconsistent messi-
anic concepts.
Ultimately, it is very difcult to decide. While my analysis tends to
point in the direction of the view that the ? was understood as an
angelic gure, van der Kooijs proposal for a high priestly gure also has
convincing elements. The difculty in reaching a conclusion at this point
serves as an illustration of how our statements about messianic concep-
tions in LXX Isaiah often need to be tentative and highly conjectural.
63. That Michael was counted among the Angels of the Presence can be estab-
lished on the basis of texts such as 1 En. 40. For a discussion of the importance of
Michael as revealer of knowledge, mysteries, and law in early Judaism, see Fossum,
The Name of God, 25766; Hannah, Michael and Christ, 4748. A good general
survey of representations of Michael in early Jewish literature is found in C. A.
Gieschen, Angelomorphic Christology: Antecedents and Early Evidence (AGAJU
42; Leiden: Brill, 1998), 12631.
64. Cf. B. G. Wold, Women, Men and Angels (WUNT 2/201; Tbingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 2005), 17476.
1
2. LXX Isaiah 9:56(67) in Context

2.1. The Spatiality of the Messianic Kingdom
The Hebrew form of the oracle presents a clear expression of belief in the
eternality of the Davidic kingdom. In the LXX, this eternal consummation
of the promised kingdom nds expression in 9:6(7) where we read that it
will stand ( > () (for MT ) and that it will have
no border. This latter is effected via the rendering of " by 0. It is
possible that the translator had difculties with the meaning of the
Hebrew word.65 With the choice of 0, he offers a territorial inter-
pretation of the oracle which is unique in early Jewish readings of the
verse.66 This raises the issue of how the translator conceived the spatiality
of this eternal kingdom.67
The question of the spatiality of the kingdom naturally leads us to a
closer observation of the geographical references in the broader context
of the oracle. As is the case with other texts in LXX Isaiah, scholars have
argued that the entire oracle in 8:239:6(9:17) needs to be taken into
account.68 In this regard, Hanharts previously mentioned study is sig-
nicant since he interprets the whole pericope in the light of Davidic
65. , in 2:7 is a hapax equivalent in the LXX. appears in Isa 7:3,
where the difcult phrase involving the term is left completely untranslated, and
again in 48:20; 49:6, and 63:11, in the crystallized phrase " , where the
consistent equivalent 2 2 is used. is normally translated as

(Symmachus and Theodotion use it here, according to manuscript 710). In
geographical references, it is common to nd
(borders); see, e.g., Josh 3:8;
13:27; Jer 25:31. When referring to the end, or tip of objects, such as staffs or
sceptres, it is common to nd ?; see, e.g., Judg. 6:21; 1 Sam. 14:27. Seelig-
mann, Isaiah, 49, demonstrates in connection with 41:9 that the original meaning of
had almost vanished from the translators conscious knowledge.
66. Munnich, Le messianisme, 344. The Targum presents a non-territorial
formulation: Great pride will belong to those who perform the law, and for those
who keep peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David and upon his
kingdom, to establish it and to build it with judgement and with virtue from this time
forth and foreverfollowing Chilton, The Isaiah Targum, 21.
67. A territorial conception of the messianic kingdom is found in Ps 72(71):8
with a reference to the kingdom extending "

(from
sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth). This is rendered in the LXX
by ,> # ,> % ' 2 (

(from sea to sea and from a river until the limits of the commonwealth).
68. One notes, for instance, the observation of Horbury, Jewish Messianism, 90,
that the messianic picture would be strengthened in the association of the child with
the -)
(great light) in 9:1(2).
1
messianic hopes in the Maccabean period.69 This suggestion serves as the

starting point of my investigation.
2.2. The Judean Setting of the Oracle

The rendering of the rst verse of the pericope (8:23b[9:1]) is very
signicant:
$ $ C% ) , $
) = t

( S 2 u-

! &
1>
# # 3
%
$ $ #
% ;,

v ) ),

2 ;
In the former time he treated lightly Do this rst, do it quickly,

the land of Zebulun country of Zebulun,
and the land of Naphthali; land of Naphthali,
and in the last time he gloried
the way of the sea, way of the Sea,
and the remainder of the inhabitants
of the shore,
beyond the Jordan, and beyond the Jordan,
Galilee of the Nations. Galilee of the Nations,
the district of Judea.
The Hebrew of the verse is markedly difcult and this has created the
conditions for many of the exegetical manoeuvres of the translator.70 As
is well known, the perfect tense of the verbs and
! gives rise
to discussion. The traditional interpretation of the second verb as a
prophetic perfect71 has been challenged on the grounds that it is
unlikely that the same tenses would have such divergent connotations
in such a conned context. Assigning a preterite interpretation to both
69. Hanhart, Die Septuaginta als Interpretation. See also Horbury, Jewish
Messianism, 90.
70. For a full discussion of the difculties in the Hebrew text, see J. A. Emerton,
Some Linguistic and Historical Problems in Isaiah VIII.23, JSS 14 (1969): 15175.
71. For a more precise denition of the prophetic perfect, see G. L. Klein, The
Prophetic Perfect, JNSL 16 (1990): 4560. For a nuanced critique of the concept,
see M. Rogland, Alleged Non-Past Uses of the Qatal in Classical Hebrew (SSN 44;
Assen: Van Gorcum, 2003), 53114.
1
verbs, however, generates the difculty of identifying the historical

situation to which the text alludes.72
The meaning of the verbs has also been debated. The LXX rendering of
8:23b seems to take with the meaning quickly, by employing
. This is a unique correspondence in the LXX, and may reect the
association of the Hebrew root with swiftness.73 The Greek also
seems to leave
! untranslated.
With regard to syntax, the options for understanding the structure of
the Hebrew are summarized by Emerton as: (a) the words from the way
of the sea to the end of the verse could be in apposition to the land of
Zebulun and the land of Naphthali; (b) they may be an accusative of
place; (c) the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphthali is the object of
, and the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the nations is
parallel to it and the object of
!. At the same time, the LXX render-
ing % ) 74 $ deviates signicantly from the
syntactic structure of MT in whatever way it may be conceived,75 but it
clearly reects an adverbial understanding of .76
Lust points out that the occurrences of in 8:23b(9:1) could also
be read as indicatives in the unaccented Greek and, because they are in a
prophetic context, even the indicative mood could have the value of a
prophetic future.77 In this interpretation the logical subject of the sen-
tence is the Lord. It is he who will do it rst, do it quickly. In support
of this view we may note the nal verse of the pericope where it is said
that the zeal of the Lord of Hosts will do this.78
On the other hand, if the translator read as an imperative, the
sentence can be understood as a calling to the land (comprising all the
geographical regions mentioned) to perform a specic task (%) rst
and quickly.79 This interpretation is supported by the imperative reading
of in 9:1(2) (G). This imperative reading of is followed by a
change in the pronominal sufx from the third to the second person in
72. An example of this is found in Emerton, Problems, 15758.

73. However, it should be noted that in Isa 18:2 and 19:1 the LXX renders swift
() by %-.
74. The variant could be better explained as an early mistake caused by
itacism. Cf. Hanhart, Die Septuaginta als Interpretation, 333.
75. Emerton, Problems, 154.
76. Cf. Hanhart, Die Septuaginta als Interpretation, 333.
78. The solution is not altogether different from the assertion of Watts, Isaiah 1
33, 133, that the tenses are here independent of a time context (see his subsequent
translation of the verbs with the present tense).
1
79. So Hanhart, Die Septuaginta als Interpretation, 33233.

and thus indicates an attempt to continue with the imperativizing
thrust present in the Greek rendering of the oracle. In the same context,
translating the perfect form of the verb with the future active reects
the prophetic understanding of the oracle, but it is also intended as a
reinforcement of the imperative: it provides a reason to look and see.
This would indicate that the work which the recipients are commanded to
perform could be construed as seeing the great light.80 Moreover, the
imperative reading of (G) occurs near a cluster of imperatives,
and the syntactical structure of the verse becomes awkward if is
understood as an indicative. In this latter reading the two occurrences of
have to become attached to the imperative G in the following
verse, thus leaving the opening statement in isolation. The imperative
understanding of is therefore to be preferred, so that the oracle
opens with a call to the land to perform the task of seeing the great light
to come. But which land does the translator have in mind?
The rendering of the geographical regions in 8:23b(9:1) is a primary
indication that, whatever the original historical situation alluded to in the
Hebrew, the translator clearly has his own historical setting in mind
when interpreting the text. First, there is the apparent double translation
of
by 1> , together with # # 3
%. It is difcult to determine whether these two
renderings originally stood alone and were subsequently connected in the
course of the texts transmission, or whether they were a double transla-
tion in the original LXX Isaiah.
Some witnesses have only the literal rendering 1> , as in
the quotation in Matt 4:16, and in the Origenic and Lucianic recensions.
All these witnesses give indication of attempting to bring the Greek into
conformity with the Hebrew, so they could simply have deleted or
replaced # 3 %. Conversely, this latter
reading stands alone in other witnesses. It is interesting to note that 1>
is lacking in Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, although
in the latter case it appears in a marginal note.81 One also notes that the
accusative form of 1 is somewhat problematic, as a nominative would
be the most likely choice for the rendering of in this context.
80. Ibid., 337.

81. This could indicate that the reading is secondary and that the note in S
represents a later correction in the light of a different text. However, the hand of the
marginal note seems to be that of the original copyist and the same hand marks the
text after 3 with an arrow and notes at the bottom of the page that
% should be inserted at that point. This suggests that the text from which
S was copied did contain 1> but that the scribe encountered difculties
when copying this verse.
1
The phrase # # 3 % is remarka-

bly reminiscent of Ezek 25:16,82 where we read that the Lord will strike
down $ $ % 3 (

).83 Seeligmann sees here an instance of direct literary dependence.
However, the fact that the two instances do not have an identical word-
ing, together with the recognition that is the technical name for
one of the parts of Palestine under Seleucid rule,84 could indicate that
here we have an instance not of direct literary dependence but of parallel
drawing upon a common cultural designation.
Hanhart observes that # 3 % is
syntactically well incorporated into the verses structure, with its combi-
nation of accusative and nominative and the use of .85 Of course, the
could also have been inserted when the two readings were conated.
However, Lusts suggestion that is a rendition of , and
the examples of double translation which I have already noted in LXX
Isaiah, do lend strength to this view.86
In the end, while absolute certainty is impossible, the most likely
conclusions are that 1> is secondary or that we have a case
of double translation in the original. Both renderings would t with the
translators tendencies and could well be attempts to represent the rather
rare
.87 As noted above, the accusative case of 1 does not t
a translation of as road, as in this case a nominative would be
required. Thus, it possibly indicates the motional understanding of in
the direction of the sea, that is, westwards. The rendering #
3 % also seems to indicate that
was not
understood as a road, or highway, but merely in the sense of a coastal
region.88

83. Three overlapping groups are envisaged as the objects of the divine wrath in
Ezek 25:16: the Philistines (
/ ,-), the Cherites (
! / w2),
and the inhabitants of the coastlands (

/ $ $
% 3 ). The rendering ,- is a standard LXX desig-
nation for Hellenized Jews. The use of w2 evokes a contemporizing designation
of Crete, and the same actualizing spirit could lie behind the rather straightforward
translation $ $ % 3 .
84. As Seeligmann, Isaiah, 80, points out in connection with 1 Macc 11:8 and
15:38.
87. The form appears elsewhere only in Ezek 41:12. Cf. 1 Kgs 18:43 for
.
88. The existence of a highway in pre-Christian Palestine which came to be
designated Via Maris lacks a solid archaeological foundation and is probably a
1
The rendering of

as v ) ) ts the trans-
lators practice, pace Lust, who nds the reading slightly puzzling. His
problem with the rendering comes from noticing that in 1 Macc 5:15 the
Greek expression for Hellenized/heathen Galilee is v ,--
. He argues that the Isaiah rendering is probably to be explained
on the basis of Joel 4:3, where it is used to render
(the
regions of Philistia), bearing in mind that in Hellenistic times the term
Philistine was used as another word for a Hellenized Jew.89 However,
there is no reason why the reading in 1 Macc 5:15 should pose a problem
for the reading of LXX Isa 8:23(9:1). Both v ) ) and
v ,- could be current interchangeable designations for
a Hellenized Galilee.

2 ; is the clearest actualizing element in the verse.
It is an addition with no support from the Hebrew, and seems to be
intended as a summary statement encompassing all the geographical
regions mentioned. This is very signicant. In the Hebrew, the oracle is
primarily directed to the northern regions of Palestine. The addition not
only transports the oracle to the south,90 but it seems to imply that the
district of Judea encompasses the regions envisaged in the oracle and is
the land called upon to see the saving light of the liberating Messiah. If
this suggestion is correct, there are signicant implications related both
to the question of the connection between LXX Isaiah and Maccabean
ideology and to the question of the Palestinian element in LXX Isaiah.
2.3. LXX Isaiah and Maccabean Ideology

Hanhart provides a detailed correlation between the geographical descrip-
tions in LXX Isa 8:23b(9:1) and events connected with the Maccabean
campaigns.91 He argues that the Greek rendering is to be seen as a rough
outline of what would later be the borders of the state under Alexander
Jannaeus, and that the terminology used is akin to that of the Seleucid
provincial system, as Seeligmann had already pointed out.
According to this view, the Maccabean campaigns would t with the
descriptions in the verse and would explain why the northern regions of
Ephraim or Samaria are left out, as the campaigns and wars of this time
did not occur in these areas. In Hanharts view, the victories of Simon in
medieval idea based on the Vulgates translation of

, as argued by Z. Meshel,
Was there a Via Maris?, IEJ 23 (1973): 16266. See also B. J. Beitzel, The Via
Maris in Literary and Cartographic Sources, BA 54, no. 2 (June 1991): 6475.
90. Cf. Ibid., 155.
1
the north and northeast, rst of all in Galilee (1 Macc 5:923), would
correspond to = t, S 2 u- 1> . The
simultaneous advance of Judas and Jonathan to Gilead (1 Macc 5:954),
together with the previous push toward Idumea and Ammon (1 Macc
5:15; 2 Macc 10:1423) would be identied with
% ;.
The progressive push against the Seleucids in Judea itself (2 Macc
10:2438; 11:15) and the march of Judas against the Philistine cities
(1 Macc 5:6568) would then be represented by
2 ;.
Hanharts parallels are certainly noteworthy, but they should be treated
with caution. Apart from the addition at the end of the verse and the
possibly deviant rendering of
, the other geographical regions
appear as very close renditions of the geographical names, as they will
have appeared in the Vorlage of the translator. When such is the case, it
is certainly more difcult to substantiate claims about peculiarities in the
translators exegesis.
Nevertheless, a connection between LXX Isaiah and historical events
of the Maccabean period is apparent throughout the translation and has
been noted earlier by Seeligmann. A starting point for his argument is the
rendering of 11:14 (see Chapter 6, below) and its reference to the ships
of the ,- (LXX code for Philistines). Observing also LXX 1 Sam
5:6, Seeligmann states that the notion of Philistine ships was a familiar
and contemporary one and reects the period when the Maccabees sub-
jected the coastal lines to their dominion (1 Macc 10:7489; 11:6162).
Seeligmann also thinks that LXX Isa 10:56 alludes to Maccabean con-
quests, and that 23:1112 refers to the anti-Jewish movement in the
Phoenician cities during the time of the Maccabean wars.92
Connections could also exist not simply on the level of historical ref-
erences but of underlying ideological concepts. These are, however,
much more difcult to ascertain. For instance, the reference in texts such
as 1 Macc 2:44 to the sinners (@ ) and lawless men
(? , ) bears interesting similarities to the vocabulary of
LXX Isaiah, but is not especially signicant and was probably shared
by Jewish groups across the board.
A further issue concerns Davidic messianic expectation. Hanhart
sees a parallel between belief in the eternality of the Davidic kingship in
LXX Isa 9:5(6) and Maccabean ideology. He thinks specically of
92. Seeligmann, Isaiah, 8691. Seeligmann argues that the translator envisions
not only events pertaining to Maccabean history, but in some cases also has in mind
events related to the territories bordering Palestine (e.g. the reference to Arabs in
the rendering of 15:7) and the broader international scene (Egypt in 20:45; 22:5;
and Carthage in ch. 23).
1
Mattathias recalling of the promise of Nathan in 1 Macc 2:57.93 This is

also a difcult connection to establish. First, I have already noted that the
Davidic evocation belongs to the Hebrew Isaiah, without necessarily
inferring that the translator held the same view. Of course the Judean
transposition in 8:23b(9:1) would strengthen this possibility, but caution
is appropriate. Moreover, the extent to which the Davidic hope is opera-
tive in 1 Maccabees is a matter of debate among scholars, and while
there are good grounds to support the view that the different circles which
produced 1 and 2 Maccabees held to a Davidic messianic expectation, its
precise contours are not fully clear.94
2.4. The Temple in Leontopolis and Judean Ideology

The translator of LXX Isaiah has frequently been associated with the
presumably anti-Hasmonean circle of Onias and the temple in Leonto-
polis (Heliopolis).95 Upon this understanding, one then needs to ascertain
how traditions reecting Maccabean campaigns and ideology can also
exist in the version.
The connection between LXX Isaiah and the Oniad Dynasty has had its
supporters from Seeligmann. Since Seeligmann refers to the translators
dual milieu of Egypt and Palestine.96 He argues that the tradition that
supported the legitimacy of the Leontopolis temple on the basis of Isa
19:19 (cf. Ant. 13.3.1 68) could be reected in the rendering of 10:24.97
Van der Kooij develops this idea further, and also sees the translator of
LXX Isaiah as a refugee priest from Jerusalem connected with the Onias
temple in Leontopolis. He notes readings that could suggest a defense of

94. J. A. Goldstein, How the Authors of 1 and 2 Maccabees Treated the
Messianic Promises, in Neusner et al., eds., Judaisms and their Messiahs, 6996
(7888), suggests that the author of 1 Maccabees avoided the messianic or dynastic
texts because the Hasmoneans did not actually belong to the Davidic line, and argues
that the groups behind 1 and 2 Maccabees did not believe in the coming of a Davidic
messiah. He seeks to ground this argument partly on the dubious suggestion that (
() in 1 Macc 2:57 does not mean eternally. See the criticism of Collins,
Messianism in the Maccabean Period, 104.
95. The location of the temple at Leontopolis is suggested primarily on the basis
of Ant. 13.3.1 6570. But there are a number of difculties regarding the precise
location of the site. Cf. J. E. Taylor, A Second Temple in Egypt: The Evidence for
the Zadokite Temple of Onias, JSJ 29 (1998): 297321.
97. Ibid., 86. Seeligmann argues further that is possible to consider the Helio-
polis temple as a place through which Palestinian exegetical traditions were
mediated to the Jewish community in Egypt and to LXX Isaiah.
1
this temple (e.g. 19:18), and the insertion of : in LXX Isa 40:2,
which seems to highlight the role of priests.98
There is some confusion as to whether the Onias credited with the
founding of the Leontopolis temple is Onias III or IV.99 This question
does not need to be solved here, as what really matters is that, regardless
of who precisely is the Onias we are dealing with, the Oniad Dynasty
exerted signicant inuence in Egypt,100 and the circles connected with it
could be classed as decidedly anti-Hasmonean.
A connection between the translator and the Oniads would t well
with renderings such as that of 8:1116, which espouses a negative per-
ception of the leaders of Jerusalem. However, how is it possible to
explain the renderings which indicate a positive perception of the
Maccabean campaigns? The simplest way forward is to see a connection
with the circles behind 2 Maccabees. While 1 Maccabees is charac-
terized by a staunch pro-Hasmonean stance, 2 Maccabees presents a
much more nuanced picture.101 A signicant indication in this direction is
the contrast between the complete ignoring of Onias III in 1 Maccabees
and his prominent place in 2 Maccabees.102 As Seeligmann had already
noted, 2 Maccabees, or the work of Jason of Cyrene which is represented
in it, incorporated the Oniad ideology which claimed the legitimacy of
the dynasty and gloried Onias III.103
98. Van der Kooij, Textzeugen, 6065.

99. The confusion largely comes from Josephus, Ant. 12.9.7 387; 13.3.1 62
73, and 20.10.3 236, which state that the temple was founded by Onias IV in 161
B.C.E., while B.J. 7.10.23 423432 credits the foundation to Onias III.
Seeligmann favours the second option, but most scholars today favour Onias IV. Cf.
V. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1966);
M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during
the Early Hellenistic Period (trans. J. Bowden; 2 vols.; London: SCM, 1974); J. J.
Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora
(2d ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000).
100. An epitaph from Leontopolis (Tell el-Yehoudieh) suggests that the
designation of a territory of Onias ( B) existed, highlighting the Oniads
considerable political importance. Cf. W. Horbury and D. Noy, Jewish Inscriptions
of Graeco-Roman Egypt (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 9094.
101. A measure of animosity between the author of 2 Maccabees and Hyrcanus,
son of Simon, is possibly detected in the negative portrayal of Simon in 2 Macc
10:1922 and 14:1518. This could be evidence of policy debate during the early
years of Hyrcanus I, as argued by R. Doran, Temple Propaganda: The Purpose and
Character of 2 Maccabees (CBQMS 12; Washington: The Catholic Biblical Asso-
ciation of America, 1981), 112.
102. Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 7778.
1
The positive portrayal of Onias III is to be seen in the context of the

bridge-building effort of 2 Maccabees. Although there have been sugges-
tions that 2 Maccabees was written primarily with a polemical intent
against the Egyptian temple,104 it is much more likely that the book has a
conciliatory intent, and that Seeligmann is correct in suggesting that the
purpose of its author was to muster Egyptian Jews to pledge undivided
allegiance to the Jerusalem temple, without rejecting the legitimacy of the
Oniads.105 This would tally well with Collinss suggestion that 2 Macca-
bees is probably intended to muster support from diaspora communities
for the Maccabean movement in Palestine.106 It seems that diaspora Jews
were being invited to see their common ground with Palestinian Jews
without necessarily acknowledging the legitimacy of the Hasmoneans.107
Collins argues convincingly not only that 2 Maccabees gives no
evidence of a polemic against the temple of Leontopolis, but also that
Onias himself never intended to rival the Jerusalem temple.108 Moreover,
he successfully points out in connection with 2:18 that there is no reason
why Onias IV and his followers would not have nourished dreams of a
future ingathering of all Jews to the Jerusalem temple. It is also possible
that the purpose of the composition of 2 Maccabees is to bridge the gap
and overcome the estrangement of Egyptian Jews from Jerusalem and
104. Goldstein, How the Authors, 82, argues that the fundamental message
of 2 Maccabees is that the temple of Jerusalem was still Gods Chosen Place, so
that the Jews of Egypt were sinning in accepting or even tolerating the temple in
Leontopolis, and that the author sought to glorify unconditionally the priests,
princes and kings of the Hasmonean Dynasty.
105. Seeligmann, Isaiah, 9293. Seeligmann suggests that the author/redactor
of 2 Maccabees deliberately omitted the details of Onias ight to Egypt and the
establishment of the sanctuary in Heliopolis for this reason.
106. Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 7879. Cf. Hengel, Judaism and
Hellenism, 1:97.
107. Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 8384.
108. Ibid., 7177, argues successfully that Onias did not intend his temple to
rival the one in Jerusalem. The ties between Oniass descendants and the Hasmone-
ans would be indicated by the bond between Ananias (Oniass son) and Alexander
Jannaeus (cf. Ant. 13.13.2 354), and there is evidence in early Judaism for a high
degree of tolerance for the Leontopolis temple. Collins also suggests that the evi-
dence from the Tale of the Tobiads indicates that Onias III would have been on good
terms with the Tobiad temple, giving further indication of a self-serving but not
schismatic motivation in the building of the temple by Onias IV. The animosity
would be against the Hasmonean priesthood, but not against the Jerusalem temple.
To be sure, one needs to be aware of the potential pitfalls in using the Tale of the
Tobiads as a historical source, as demonstrated by D. Gera, Judaea and Mediterra-
nean Politics 219 to 161 B.C.E. (BSJS 8; Leiden: Brill, 1998), 3658. However,
Collinss argument is overall very solid.
1
its illegitimate priesthood, by assuring them of the purication of the

temple.109
This provides a suitable ideological background in which the sympathy
with the Oniads, the presence of a degree of support for the Maccabean
campaigns, and the hope for the restoration of the Jerusalem temple
could co-exist in LXX Isaiah.
2.5. Actualization, Ideology, and the Socio-Economic Context of the

Translation
As the translator transports the geographical data, he also transports
the social situation of the oracle to his day, and gives evidence of an
expectation of liberation from foreign powers. It is not necessary to agree
with the suggestion of Hanhart that the rededication of the desecrated
temple and the death of Antiochus Epiphanes would have been perceived
by the translator as signs that the day of liberation was near, and thus
lie behind the deviating renderings in 9:24(35).110 There are no clear
indications in this direction. However, the longing for liberation was an
ideological tenet common to various groups in early Judaism, and its
resurfacing in connection with the hopes of Isa 8:23b9:6(9:17) is,
therefore, not surprising. This is clear beginning with 9:2(3):

> : % %
( I /-J
/
# /- =

O /- , ^
%

& # I %
You have increased the nation, The majority of the people,

you have not made its joy great;111 whom you brought down in your joy,
they rejoice before you, will be made to rejoice before you,
like the joy in the harvest, as those who rejoice in harvest,
just as they rejoice when they divide and in the manner of those dividing
spoil. spoil.
109. Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 8081. The central theme of
2 Maccabees has been helpfully summarized by Doran, Temple Propaganda, 114:
It is primarily temple propagandathe defense of the temple and its surroundings
by the patron deity. But religion reects and inuences the political and the social.
By downplaying the heroism of the Maccabean family, by upgrading the role of
pious observers of the Law, and by placing God as the truly decisive actor in the
divine drama, the author provides his readers with the proper religious perspective
from which they can assess their present leaders.
111. The LXX seems to follow the Qere reading, . The question of Kethib/Qere
should be briey addressed here. There is the well-known proposal, usually associated
1
It is clear that the rst part of 9:2(3), > : % % 0
/-! , corresponds to the Hebrew

, but only through a series of particular exegetical manoeuvres.
Two emendations have been proposed to explain the LXX reading.
First, to explain the choice of > : to represent the verb
, it
has been suggested that the translator read
for
.112 Secondly,
it has been argued that 0 reects a reading of for MT
(cf. Hos 11:3).113 Although , is used in the LXX with a wide
variety of Hebrew equivalents,114 a much simpler possibility is that the
translator read for . This reading could have prompted
with the names of Selwyn, Gray, and Duhm, to emend

to
or
and to
consider the waw of the Qere as belonging to the following word (thus producing the
reading '

). See Gray, Isaiah IXXVII, 175, and B. Duhm,
Das Buch Jesaia (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1892), 8889. All such
emendations are rejected by Barthlemy on the ground that there is no textual
support for them. He concludes that the only viable discussion is whether one should
follow the Kethib or the Qere, and nally opts for the Qere. MTs reading, , has
shown itself to be troublesome to many interpreters. The Qere, , could be taken
either as the original reading subsequently lost due to confusion generated by a plene
spelling, such as the one found in 1QIsaa ( ), or as an early conjectural emendation
trying to make sense of the difcult reading (the latter option is endorsed by Gray,
Isaiah IXXVII, 169). The history of the interplay between Kethib/Qere in this
instance is a remarkable tale in the history of biblical interpretation. The ancient
versions are divided in their witness to the Kethib or the Qere. Aquila, Symmachus,
and Theodotion read / 3 /-, following the Kethib
(which is in line with the tendency to bring the text closer to a proto-MT form). The
Peshitta and Targum seem to follow the Qere. Some early rabbinic sources also
mention the Qere. Barthlemy also highlights the remarkable situation wherein the
medieval Jewish commentators are practically unanimous in following the Qere,
while the Christian translators of the sixteenth century are unanimous in following
the Kethib. The Christian position has, according to Barthlemy, a twofold expla-
nation: the inuence of the Vulgate and the fact that the earlier editions of MT did not
contain any Qere. The association of the Qere with a corrupt rabbinic reading
would have encouraged the preference in the Western exegetical tradition for the
Kethib. The prevalence of the Kethib in the German and English traditions of Bible
translation is, for Barthlemy, a strong reason why the emendation associated with
SelwynDuhm became so popular. Cf. Barthlemy, Critique textuelle, 6163.
113. See Ottley, Isaiah, 2:154, citing Scholz. Ottley views this emendation as
unnecessary if one considers that 0 is a corruption of / (thus following the Kethib).
114. Not only is the variation great but there are also some hapax equivalents,
some of which do not seem to carry any semantic connection with the Greek term,
namely, (Ps 31[30]:18), '
(1 Kgs 6:35), (Isa 26:5). In Isa 26:5, it is used of
the humiliation of the exalted ones.
1
signicant exegetical associations in the mind of the translator. Goshen-

Gottstein, for instance, argues, on the grounds of exegetical association,
that the expression /-! is a perfect expression for
leading back the people from exile.115
The verb , is most often an equivalent of
(Hiphil) and has a
good measure of semantic overlap with it, carrying the general sense of
bring down (with a variety of objects and complements, e.g., 1 Sam
19:12; Pss 56[55]:8; 78[77]:16; Sir 22:19; 48:6; 3 Macc. 7:5). The most
noteworthy cases are in Gen 37:25, 28, which refer to the leading of the
people into Egypt.116 It is most likely that LXX Isa 9:1(2) refers to
bringing people down from somewhere else to Judah. In this connection
Hanhart postulates that the return of suffering Jews from outside Judah to
Jerusalem is for the translator a sign of the forthcoming nal liberation
prophesied in the future tense rendering of 9:1(2) and disclosed at the
end of the pericope.117
The remainder of 9:2(3) is closer to the MT in meaning even if not in
word-for-word correspondence.118 However, there are still important
115. M. H. Goshen-Gottstein, Theory and Practice of Textual Criticism: The

Text-Critical Use of the Septuagint, Text 3 (1963): 13058 (150). See also his
discussion of LXX Isa 55:12 ad loc.
116. The possible connection with Josephs story and the bringing of the people
down to Egypt implies, for Lust, a distinction between the people mentioned in v.
2(3) and the people mentioned in the foregoing verse, as the former are supposed
to live in Palestine and the latter would have been brought down somewhere else,
possibly to Egypt. The distinction is, according to Lust, further supported by the fact
that the rst are directly addressed and called upon to see, whereas the second are
referred to in the third person. Lust ultimately offers as an objection to this view the
fact that the nal part of the sentence does not seem to t the reading, as there is
no reason why the Lord would bring the people to Egypt in his joy. Lust,
Messianism, 158.
117. Hanhart, Die Septuaginta als Interpretation, 343. /-!
corresponds to '. The wording is remarkably reminiscent of 1 Macc 5:23,
which describes the liberation of the oppressed people of Galilee, and reads: #
g ( 3 x Q /- (and he led them into Judea
with great joy).
118. The people are said to rejoice before the Lord O /-
, ! (as those who rejoice in the harvest), which corresponds to the Hebrew

'! (like the joy in the harvest). The noun ' here is rendered with a
verbal form. One notices that the group /-- corresponds twice to the root '.
The occurrence of a parallel term for joy in MT (

) is left untranslatedalthough
Origen asterisks the passage and adds , according to 710. The translated
verse runs in smooth Greek, with the common I for '!. The idiomatic
translation of the construction ' (lit. in their dividing of the spoil) with
the participial % slightly alters the gist of the sentence.
1
changes in nuance. The verb /- corresponds to the Hebrew
its future tense highlighting the prophetic character that the oracle
has for the translator, tting in with a translational tendency to which I
have already pointed. Further transformations are found in 9:3(4):
0 )
,- 1 9> 1
/)
! $ $ # S \ S # %
/)
$ # $ 3 \ ) ,
(

O D S
F D # s
For the yoke of his burden Because the yoke lying on them will
be removed,
and the staff of his shoulder, and the sceptre that is upon their neck,
the sceptre of the oppressor, for the sceptre of the tax-collectors
you have shattered (it), the Lord has scattered,
as in the day of Midian. as in the day that was upon Midian.
Isaiah 9:3(4) begins in the MT with the particle

!, introducing the expla-
nation for the rejoicing of the people.119 A pair of accusatives (marked by
) follows: the yoke of his burden, and the staff of his shoulder.
These two are then summarized in an epexegetical clause: the sceptre of
the oppressor. The implicit subject is the Lord, addressed in the second
person, who shatters the oppressor as in the day of Midian. In the MT,
the uniformity in verb tenses indicates that the verse is intended either as
a statement of Gods past faithfulness or, most likely, as a prophetic
announcement of a nal liberation. This liberation is to be compared to
Gods deliverance on the day of Midian.120
Whereas in the Hebrew there is a rhetorical appeal to the memories of the people and
their own historical experiences of victory in war (their own dividing of the spoil),
the Greek reads more like a general statement of comparison: they shall rejoice in
the manner of any who divide the spoil.
119. The LXX certainly witnesses against Wattss translation of
! as if.
Although this is a grammatical possibility, it disregards the prophetic character of
the passage and allows for a shift from understanding the passage as sure prediction
to wishful thinking or, to put it in the authors own terms, as an attempt to
assemble from the resources of faith and doctrine words to bolster hope. Watts,
Isaiah 133, 135.
120. Lust, Messianism, 157, argues that a liking for the earlier period of the
Judges is a particularly Isaianic trait. This is clearly seen in the reference to Midian,
and is enforced by the mention of Zebulun and Naphthali together, which were the
only faithful tribes during the days of the Judges (Judg 4:10), and which are only
mentioned together in Judg 5:18. Here he follows Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 370.
1
In the LXX the different tenses of the verbs as well as the diverging
syntactical structure cause a transformation in meaning. The accusatives
paired in the MT become subjects in a passive sentence in the LXX
(1 9> 1 Q /) for and S \ S # %
/) for ! #).121 The verb in this new structure is
,-
, which is without an equivalent in the Hebrew.122 ,-
is a
very versatile term in the LXX, attested with approximately 35 different
Hebrew equivalents. In LXX Isaiah, it often renders (Qal or Hiphil).123
In most of these a future form is used. In some, the futuristic element is
added in spite of the original (cf. esp. 3:1). The basic sense is that of
removing. In LXX Isaiah it denitely carries the connotation of the
removal or purging of the wicked, particularly the foreign oppressors of
the Jewish people. In LXX Isa 1:25, which I discussed earlier, we nd an
explicit reference to the divine removal of the lawless onespresuma-
bly Gentile oppressorsfrom the midst of the people.124
Continuing the syntactical transformation of the verse, the epexege-
tical # is dissociated from the previous pair and stands in its own
right as the accusative of the next clause, in which the subject, the Lord,
is explicitly stated. To t this new syntactical structure, the person of the
verb has been changed from second to third (
). This is
the only instance in the LXX where 9 (to scatter abroad) is
121. The rendering of !' with (neck) is reminiscent of 3 Macc.

4:9, where we read of the Jews being led captive and fastened against the benches
(: 9:) of the boats by their necks ($ ).
122. The textual tradition of LXX Isaiah is uniform in including this verse, but it
is not uniform with regard to its precise tense. Several witnesses read -
(adopted by Rahlfs). There are several reasons that could be adduced to justify a
choice for the future passive rendering. First, the past tense is attested primarily in
Hexaplaric and Lucianic texts, which have a characteristic tendency of harmoniza-
tion with the MT; secondly, the pericope as a whole assumes a futuristic tone in the
LXX; thirdly, Hanhart, Die Septuaginta als Interpretation, 338, points out the
important balancing between past and future deliverance witnessed throughout the
section. He grants the possibility that one and the same event, the shattering of the
yoke, is being spoken of in Isa 9:3(4), both as forthcoming (,- ) and as
consummated in the resolution of God (
), which could be explained as
a Greek use of the prophetic perfect substantiated by the fact that the of God
elsewhere in LXX Isaiah appears to be the subject-matter of an announcement of the
coming Friedensknig. Against it, however, speaks the fact that the same difference
between forms in the future and the past appears in the preceding sentence of this
promise (9:2[3]) in a way that precludes a perfect and futuristic formulation of one
and the same event.
123. Cf. 1:16, 25; 3:1, 18; 5:5; 6:7; 7:17; 9:4(3); 10:27; 11:13; 14:25; 16:2; 58:9.
1
124. Cf. also LEH, ,-
, 96.
equivalent to (Hiphil). Most commonly, the verb (or its by-form
) is an equivalent of (split, divide) or .125
The verb occurs again in LXX Isa 9:10(11), this time as an equivalent
of !. The MTs reading,

!
(And Yahweh raises the adversaries of Rezin against him, and
stirs up his enemies), is rendered by # \+ 1 > $ -

P & /$ # $ $
(And God shall strike those who rise against Mount Zion against them,
and shall scatter the[ir] enemies).126 Here a contemporizing adaptation
of the verse contains a reference to the enemies of Mount Zion, who will
be destroyed and dispersed by God. These enemies are identied in the
following verse (9:11[12]). While the MT clearly speaks of the distress of
the Israelite kingdom between Aram/Damascus in the northeast and the
Philistines in the southwest, the LXX replaces the Hebrew terms with
& and y. Seeligmann considers this all the more remarkable
since , in a similar context, is rendered everywhere else by j ,
and
' is only here rendered as y. He argues that the trans-
lator is referring to the hostility of the Greek cities on the west coast
towards the Jewish population of Palestine, and that & would here
be the name for the realm of the Seleucids, as elsewhere.127
So 9 is a verb that in LXX Isaiah has the connotation of
liberation from a foreign adversary or oppressor. In this case it is note-
worthy that the object of the verb is 3 \ ) , (for
#).128 The use of , (exactors, tax-collectors) is
connected with the following verse and is reminiscent of 3:12, where

(women rule over them) is rendered by ,%
* ) (your exactors rule over you). In this deviating
renderingwhich was prompted by reading
' for
we see a cry
against nancial oppression endured at the hands of tax-collectors.129
125. A noteworthy example is LXX Exod 32:5, where the translator conveys the
idea that Aaron is responsible for letting the people become loose, scattered, and
vulnerable to their enemy. Cf. A. Le Boulluec and P. Sandevoir, La Bible dAlex-
andrie: LExode (Paris: Cerf, 1989), 32526.
126. Commenting on this verse, Seeligmann (Isaiah, 81) thinks that

is
probably a corruption, noting that it is difcult to decide why the translator avoids
the habitual version a.
127. Ibid., 8081.
128. \ appears as the equivalent of both # and #. The Greek term can
simply denote a staff or rod, but it is frequently used as a symbol of power and
authority. This could inform its use later in LXX Isa 11:1.
129. See further R. L. Troxel, Economic Plunder as a Leitmotif in LXX Isaiah,
Bib 83 (2002): 37591.
1
In altering the verb tenses and syntactical structure of the verse, the
translator actualizes the old Isaianic prophecy. In the LXX, the Day of
Midian therefore serves as a paradigm for ultimate deliverance, but it
also seems to be related to an event that has already taken place. This
event is characterized by deliverance from socio-economic exploitation
at the hand of foreign tax-collectors.130
The socio-economic theme carries on to 9:4(5), where we witness a
remarkable difference between the MT and the LXX. In the MT, we see the
destruction of military apparatus as a sign of a coming reign of perfect
peace. The LXX, however, converts the verse into an announcement of
reparation of social and economic abuse:
$
!
0 H 3

^

# 2
$
, #
$ !& (
For every boot of one treading in For every garment which was gathered
turmoil, in guile
and (every) mantle rolled over in and coat with usury,
blood,
will be burned, they will pay back and wish
fuel for the re. that they had been burnt in re.
The change is effected by means of a series of exegetical manoeuvres

prompted by the difcult Hebrew of the verse. The rst is the rendering
of ' ! with H 3
^. The
apparent lack of semantic connection between the phrases is rooted in the
fact that is a hapax legomenon of uncertain meaning. Fischer sug-
gests that the translator was inuenced by Aramaic and misread as in
the rst word, thus producing the Aramaic word (garment), and
that the following word was misread as the Aramaic/Syriac (to
gather/accumulate).131 Against this view, Hanhart proposes that the LXX
rendering of was simply based on a guess from the second half
of the parallelism.132 The rendering of
by 2 is
explained by both Ziegler133 and Seeligmann134 as deriving from the later
Hebrew signication of
as money. Against this proposal, Hanhart

131. Fischer, In welcher Schrift, 24.
1
connects
with
, as if the translator had understood
as a
participial form of (intend). The association of
and
is
seen in Judg 20:5.135 From this perspective, 2 becomes
an exegetical addition which would t well with the translators tendency
toward clarication.
While a decision on detail is difcult to make, it is clear that the
primary impact of the translation of these two verses is to redene the
locus of the messianic liberating activity. Rather than envisioning the
destruction of the military apparatus of the foreign enemy, located
outside the borders of the kingdom but trying to break into it, the trans-
lator has in mind liberation from foreign enemies that oppress within the
borders of
2 ;. This oppression appears to him
primarily in social and economic garb.
3. Summary
In comparison with LXX Isa 7, the rendering of Isa 9:56(67) gives
much more evidence of actualizing interpretative elements. However, the
particulars of these elements and their usefulness in illuminating the
question of the translators messianic conceptions are still elusive. My
observations regarding the lack of any systematizing effort apply to this
section, while we also have new indications of a sense of contextual
awareness informing translational choices. This last point is particularly
evident in the transposition of geographical and social references to the
translators time; these seem to be informed to some degree by the
overall sense of the pericope in 8:23b9:6(9:17).
Elements of a Davidic messianic hope were identied particularly in
the apparent redirection of the oracle to
2 ;, connected
with the territorial rendering of v. 6(7). However, there is not much
more that we can say about the Davidic character of the translators
messianic expectation, since the content of the Hebrew oracle itself
features this hope prominently, and since the translator simply represents
the Davidic references in his Vorlage.
As for the rendering 2 ?, I highlighted the
difculty in determining what kind of messianic ideas could have shaped
the LXX reading, but my analysis tended towards the identication of the
? with an angelic gure. This in turn generates a series of other
questions, primarily related to whether the translator held any eschato-
logical or messianic notions which included a transcendent gure. If
1
that were the case, the translator would be operating within quite well-
established parameters, as there is abundant evidence that the concept of
a transcendent saviour gure gained impetus sometime in the second
century B.C.E.136
In this connection, I have argued that the idea of correlation between
angelic gures and messianic expectation provides a good framework for
approaching the question, since it allows for the looseness required in
the identication of complex and variegated messianic ideas which may
be imprinted in the translation.
1
136. Collins, Messianism in the Maccabean Period, 1013.
Chapter 6
THE MESSIANIC ORACLES (3):

LXX ISAIAH 11:15
The last of the passages to be studied is LXX Isa 11:15, one which was
widely read as a messianic prophecy in early Judaism. However, in
comparison with texts such as Pss. Sol. 17:2125 and the Pesharim, the
LXX has much less to say about messianism. This could illustrate how
messianic ideas were more developed in the rst as compared with the
second century B.C.E., but it is much more likely that the explanation lies
in the fact that the translator simply intended to transmit the sense of the
Hebrew Vorlage as closely as possible, without any desire to promote a
more messianic reading of the passage.1
Below, I proceed to a study of the pericope, highlighting some signi-
cant issues, and investigating its place in the overall context of the
chapter. In order to avoid reaching conclusions before a full analysis has
been carried out, I shall refer to the gure envisaged by LXX Isa 11:1
simply as the sceptre, in accordance with the choice of the translator.
Once my analysis is complete, we should be in a position to assess what
kind of eschatological conceptions are present in the rendering, whether
the sceptre was seen by the translator as a messianic gure, and, if so,
how.
1. LXX Isaiah 11:15: Translation and Analysis

11:1

$ #
w# + \ 2
\9 ;

$ # ? 2 \9 ,
1. Cf. R. Sollamo, Messianism and the Branch of David: Isaiah 11,15 and
Genesis 49,812, in Knibb, ed., The Septuagint and Messianism, 35770 (36267).
1
And a shoot will go out from the And a sceptre will go out from the
stump of Jesse, root of Jesse,
and a branch will bear fruit from its and a ower will come up from the
roots. root.
11:2

# , /> %
% %

! % - #

$ % 2 # (

% = # /
And the spirit of Yahweh will rest And the spirit of God will rest upon
upon him, him,
a spirit of wisdom and understanding, a spirit of wisdom and understanding,
a spirit of counsel and strength, a Spirit of counsel and strength,
a spirit of knowledge and fear of a Spirit of knowledge and godliness.
Yahweh.
11:3

& /> % - %
# .

$ $
/ 3 + :

!

/< 3
+
And his delight (will be) in the fear The spirit of the fear of God will ll
of Yahweh, him,
and he will not judge by the sight of He will not judge by appearance,
his eyes,
and he will not decide by the report nor decide by report.
of his ears.
11:4

% # , : L
"
$

!
#
+ $ $ 2 2

. # $ " # + 2 L ^ %
/%

#
,:
,2
And he will judge the poor with But he will judge judgment for the
righteousness, humble,
and decide with equity for the and decide for the humble of the
humble of the land; earth;
and he will smite the land with the and he will smite the earth with the
sceptre of his mouth, word of his mouth,
and by the breath of his lips he will and in the spirit, through the lips, he
1
slay the wicked. will slay the ungodly.
11:5

$
# J 9

3 X-$

& $ + # , F (

And righteousness will be the girdle And in righteousness he will be girt

of his waist, round the waist,
and faithfulness the girdle of his loins. and with truth he will be wrapped
about the loins.
1.1. The Sceptre of Jesse

The rst noteworthy feature of this passage is the rendering of # by
\. # is rare, appearing elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible only in
Prov 14:3, denoting a rod or some other device for physical punish-
ment. The LXX renders it there by . Contextually, the term here
represents a plant or shoot. The Greek \ never refers to a shoot
or any other natural object, but only to human-made devices (a staff, rod,
sceptre, shing-rod, or even a plectrum for a rhapsode). The translator
understands # as a rod, or sceptre, and in this he could simply have
been inuenced by the use of the word in Proverbs.2
However, the choice of terms is conspicuous because of the asso-
ciations of \ with power, rule, and kingship (cf. LXX Isa 9:3[4]; Jer
48[31]:17; Ezek 19:1112, 14; Ps 45[44]:7). The use of the word in this
context is particularly suggestive because of the well-known designation
of the messiah as a sceptre, derived from Num 24:17 (#) and shared
by various texts from the Second Temple period.3
There are various cases where Isa 11 and Num 24 have been read in
conjunction. 1QSb 5:27 combines Balaams oracle with Isa 11 in its
description of the messiah. Numbers 24:7 was read in conjunction with
Isa 11:4 in 4Q161 3:1823, and Pss. Sol. 17:2124 connects the two
texts.4 It is quite plausible that the link between Isa 11 and Num 24
existed in the mind of the translator and made its way into the rendering
of 11:1.
There is, however, no evidence at the translational level of a connec-
tion having been made between LXX Isa 11 and LXX Num 24. In the rst
instance, it is noteworthy that LXX Num 24:17 does not render # by
2. The LXX Isaiah translator connects \ elsewhere with # (9:3[4]; 10:5,
15, 24), # (9:3[4]; 10:15; 28:27), and (36:6).
3. For the messianic interpretation of Num 24:17 in early Judaism, see K. J.
Cathcart, Numbers 24:17 in Ancient Translations and Interpretations, in Kraovec,
ed., Interpretation of the Bible, 51120.
4. W. Horbury, Monarchy and Messianism in the Greek Pentateuch, in Knibb,
ed., The Septuagint and Messianism, 79128 (123).
1
\ but by ? . It has often been suggested that this is a

messianic interpretation.5 However, we could be dealing with a simple
explanatory rendering,6 since in the same verse another metaphor is also
personalized, in the rendering of
(the brows of Moab) by
$ ,$ s (the rulers of Moab).7 Regardless of how one
5. Horbury, Jewish Messianism, 50, in particular, seeks to afrm the messianic

value of this rendering by connecting it with LXX Isa 19:20. In Isa 19:20 we nd a
prophecy about the forthcoming liberation of Egyptian Jews, in which the Lord
promises that he would send

(a saviour, and he shall contend and
deliver them). The LXX renders this by ? P = / =
/ (a man who will save them; judging he will save them). Horbury argues
that the use of ? in this verse indicates that, for the translator, the saviour
of Egyptian Jews is evidently identied with the star-man of Balaams prophecy.
However, in the light of the explicative tendencies of the Isaiah translator, this could
simply be an explanatory rendering of
without any special messianic signi-
cance attached to ? .
6. Horbury, Monarchy and Messianism, 122, suggests that the choice of
? in v. 17 is intended to identify the star-victor of verse 17 with the
emperor of verse 7. Cf. M. Rsel, Jakob, Bileam und der Messias: messianische
Erwartungen in Gen 49 und Num 2224, in Knibb, ed., The Septuagint and
Messianism, 15175 (169). In Num 24:7a the MT reads

(Water shall ow from his buckets, and his seed shall be in many waters).
This is rendered in the LXX by + ? %
/% #
) ) (A man shall come out of his seed and shall rule many
nations). Dorival, Nombres, 13940, argues that this rendering is more messianic
than the MT or the Targums, suggesting that the messianic conception of LXX
Numbers is close to that of early Christianity. However, it could have originated in a
reading of

, with the rst word understood as a form of the verb
and
read as , as acknowledged by Horbury, Monarchy and Messianism,
121. Cf. A. Salvesen, Symmachus in the Pentateuch (JSSSup 15; Manchester:
University of Manchester Press, 1991), 13435. It is ultimately quite difcult to
ascertain the reason why ? was used in both v. 7 and v. 17. What can be
afrmed is that, while the widespread messianic interpretation of Num 24:7 and 17
in early Judaism would speak in favour of a messianic interpretation in the LXX,
? cannot be said to be a messianic terminus technicus in the LXX. Cf. J. J.
Collins, Messianism and Exegetical Tradition: The Evidence of LXX Pentateuch,
in Knibb, ed., The Septuagint and Messianism, 12949 (14546). A very interesting
analysis, but one which also does not offer a denitive answer, is that of J. Lust,
The Greek Version of Balaams Third and Fourth Oracles. The ? in Num
24:7 and 17. Messianism and Lexicography, in VIII Congress of the International
Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies. Paris 1992 (ed. L. J. Greenspoon
and O. Munnich; SCS 41; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995), 23352, repr. in Messian-
ism and the Septuagint, 6986.
7. Fitzmyer, The One Who is to Come, 71. Fitzmyer may be correct in criticizing
authors such as Hengel, Cathcart and Dorival for imposing a later messianic reading
of the verse on the LXX rendering, but his argument that the man is not given an
1
understands the rendering of the Balaam Oracle in the LXX, any asso-
ciations in the mind of the translator seem also to have existed only on
the level of the texts in Hebrew.8
An association between Num 24 and Isa 11 by the translator, however,
is not enough to support Schapers contention that the rendering is an
indication of a Davidic messianic concept permeating the Greek
Isaiah.9 Of course, a Davidic messianism is evoked by the Hebrew text
itself, and the possible association with the Balaam Oracle suggests that
messianic ideas inuenced the translator. However, we lack stronger
evidence of the kind of systematizing attempts that would justify
Schapers view. Even if we acknowledge that the Targumic use of !
(king) for #10 makes more explicit what is already present in the
Septuagint, the question remains whether one should see, with Schaper,
that the LXX translator used royal language to tease out the potential for
a messianic interpretation of the Hebrew text.11
A more precise way of explaining the use of \ in LXX Isa 11:1 is
simply to point out that the translator operated in an exegetical climate
that interpreted Isa 11 messianically and that associated the chapter with
the Balaam oracle in Num 24. The messianic character of Isa 11 is
certainly Davidic, but the LXX rendering in itself does not necessarily
point to a Davidic messianic hope permeating the Greek Isaiah.
1.2. The Flower from the Root

The imagery of the shoot that springs out from the stump of Jesse is lost
in translation, as the LXX renders (stump) by \9 (root). The
parallel structure of the verse is also lost because the translator repeats
identiable messianic designation because that concept has not yet emerged in
ancient Judaism, somewhat begs the question.
8. The only other passage that reects 24:11 and also uses ? is T. Judah
24:16. This text, however, was probably inuenced by the LXX, as argued by
Collins, Messianism and Exegetical Tradition, 14546.
9. Schaper, Messianic Intertextuality, 376. He argues that \ was used
metonymically, as a reference to the instrument of military might/the royal
sceptre in order to designate the military leader/king, the expected Davidic messiah.
He states that \ is a term denoting the royal sceptre, while a few lines later
he also afrms that twice, it refers, metaphorically, to nations as instruments of
(military) violence, as rods, in the hands of God The acknowledgment of the
variety of meanings for the terms should caution against hasty conclusions.
10. The Targum reads here

'
'

!

(And a king will come from the sons of Jesse, and the messiah will be exalted from
the sons of his sons), which highlights the messianic character of later Jewish
interpretation of the passage.
1
the term \9 to render (root). While the latter can be seen as a
straightforward translation, the former is more unusual. This rendering of
could have been inuenced by the presence of \9 at the end of the
verse, but the equivalence / \9 is also attested at 40:24, which could
indicate that the translator simply understood the Hebrew term to mean
root.
More signicantly, the LXX rendering severs the connection between
11:1 and 10:3334. These last verses in ch. 10 provide the necessary
backdrop for the imagery of the budding stump, as they speak of destruc-
tion in terms of deforestation.12 The imagery of bringing down the proud
and arrogant is reminiscent of 2:622.13 Noting the close connection
between the end of Isa 10 and the metaphor of the stump in 11:1, Sollamo
observes that the LXX skips the metaphor and gives an interpretation
referring to the humiliation of the proud and powerful, in accordance
with the spirit of the translator.14 We are reminded of texts such as LXX
Isa 1:2527 and 2:1019, which were studied above.
The lack of connection between Isa 10:3334 and 11:1 in the LXX is
noteworthy for two reasons. First, it contrasts with the interpretation in
4Q285 (frg. 7), where Isa 10:34 and 11:1 are taken together to refer to an
attack against the Prince of the Congregation (
), who is identi-
ed with the Branch of David (
).15 Secondly, the idea in 4Q285
that this passage refers to the Branch was most probably inuenced
by references to vegetation in the Isaianic passages. The term of
Isa 11:1 was perhaps thought to be connected with the reference to the
12. It is not certain whether the verses refer to a foreign adversary (most
probably Assyria) or the leaders and policy makers of Judah. See the discussion in
Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 45657.
13. Cf. ibid., 457.
14. Sollamo, Messianism and the Branch of David, 360. In 10:33,
(bough) is rendered by $ +. In 10:34,

! (the thickets of the
forest) is rendered by *6. The expression

can be inter-
preted differently if one understands
as a complement (see RSV and Lebanon
with its majestic trees will fall) or as instrumental (see KJV Lebanon shall fall by a
Majestic one; ESV Lebanon will fall by the Majestic One). The rst interpretation
is followed by the LXX, which either does not understand the
as trees or skips
the meaning of the metaphor. A decision is difcult to reach because the Greek only
gives the equivalent *6, rendering the expression by 1 < z $ :
*6: : (and Lebanon with the exalted ones will fall).
15. The identication of the Branch of David with the Prince of the Congregation
is also signicant in that CD 7:19 identies the Prince with the sceptre. Cf.
Collins, Messianism and Exegetical Tradition, 145. 4QTest (4Q175) 1:1113,
which cites Num 24:1517, states that the
will arise with the Interpreter of
the Law.
1

! (thickets of the forestthis part of the text is recon-
structed) in 10:34, and both were in turn connected with . It is also
plausible that this association was made in 4QpIsaa (4Q161, frgs. 810),
where the gure envisaged by Isa 11:15 is also identied with the

who will arise at the end of days.16 The use of \, together
with the rendering of by ? , does not draw upon the possible
association between and , detected in the Qumranic interpre-
tations of LXX Isa 11 noted above. This is signicant because it
strengthens the view that the translator was oblivious of traditions of the
messianic of David, as we have argued in connection with the
rendering of Isa 4:2 (cf. Chapter 3, above).
It is difcult to ascertain why the translator chose ? to render
.17 Munnich suggests that the rendering could represent an attempt to
relate Isa 11:1 to the budding staff of Aaron in Num 17:23, a symbol of
the election of the tribe of Levi for the priesthood.18 In this way, the
concept of a royal messiah would be combined with that of a priestly
messiah.19 The linking of priestly and royal functions in a messianic
gure is a recurring theme in the Second Temple period. Munnichs
suggestion is particularly interesting if taken in connection with the
praise of Simon in Sir 50:8, where the high priest is said to be O ?
\ S

(as the ower [of roses] in spring time).
Throughout the praise of Simon, he is described in exalted language
which is elsewhere applied to David, perhaps pointing to the fact that
Sirach conceived the priesthood as the true heir of the Davidic promises.20
16. Provided that one can accept the reconstruction of line 17 by J. M. Allegro
and A. A. Anderson, Qumrn Cave 4 I (4Q1584Q186) (DJD 5; Oxford: Clarendon,
1968), 14. It is to be noted that, in this Pesher, Isa 10:3334 is understood as a refer-
ence to the Kittim, and not to an attack against the Prince/Branch, as in 4Q285.
17. The rendering of the rare noun by ? is paralleled in the LXX only in
Theod. Dan 11:7.
18. Num 17:23 reads #

"
"

(And on the next day Moses entered the
tent of the testimony, and behold the rod of Aaron for the house of Levi had sprouted
and put forth buds, and produced blossoms, and yielded almonds). The LXX renders
this verse by #
2! # (2 s2 # j ( 3
3 % # ($ S \ j ( G z #
+ > # + ? # (And on the
next day also Moses and Aaron entered the tent of the testimony and behold the
sceptre of Aaron for the house of Levi had sprouted, and put forth a bud, and
produced blossoms, and yielded almonds).
19. Munnich, Le messianisme, 34546.
20. Brutti, The Development of the High Priesthood, 279, suggests that with the
section of Aaron and Phinehas Ben Sira is trying to demonstrate that the succession
1
A link between the priestly conceptions underlying Sirach and LXX

Isaiah is possible (bearing in mind the caveats made in our previous
chapter) and, if Munnichs proposal is correct, van der Kooijs view of
the ? in LXX Isa 9:5(6) as a priestly gure could be strengthened.
But the linguistic evidence provided by the use of ? in LXX Isa 11:1
is ultimately not enough to prove the parallel suggested by Munnich, so
that it should be left simply as an interesting conjecture.
1.3. Fulness of the Spirit and Godliness

In v. 2 we read that the Spirit of God will rest upon the sceptre.21 The
phrase % (%) % appears in the LXX in Gen 1:2; 41:38; Num
23:7; 24:2; Judg (A) 6:34; 1 Sam 10:10; 19:9, 20, 23; 2 Chr 24:20;
Theod. Dan 4:8, 18; 5:11, 14. Apart from Gen 1:2, which speaks of
creation, and 1 Sam 19:9, which speaks of an evil spirit from God, all the
other texts refer to someone being lled or endowed with the spirit of
God to perform a specic taskusually to prophesy.22
With regard to the attributes of the spirit resting upon the sceptre, the
rendering of

by / is particularly noteworthy. The
expression

is rendered somewhat literally in 11:3 by -
%, with the addition of the spirit of. In 33:6, it is rendered by
/
> > (devotion before the Lord). /
is
also used once for
(3:8). Seeligmann suggests that / and
/
are among the terms that the Isaiah translator may have
introduced into the religious terminology of Hellenistic Judaism. They
are employed in a signicant way in 1 Ezra, 2, 3, and 4 Maccabees,
Sirach, and Philo. In fact, the widespread use of the term probably
suggests that one should speak of the LXX Isaiah translator as adopting a
current term of Hellenistic Judaism, rather than introducing the term.
of the Davidic dynasty has been transferred onto the dynastic high priesthood of
Aaron and his descendants. In this she is following P. C. Beentjes, The Concept of
Brother in the Book of Ben Sira: A Semantical and Exegetical Investigation, in
Treasures of Wisdom: Studies in Ben Sira and the Book of Wisdom (ed. N. Calduch
Benages and J. Vermeylen; BETL 143; Leuven: Peeters, 1999), 7589.
by is quite frequent in the LXX and occurs about
251 times, with most of the examples occurring in the Pentateuch (cf., e.g., Gen
38:7; Exod 4:3031; Lev 21:21; 22:18; Num 9:19; 15:30; Deut 9:26; 12:21). In
Isaiah, the equivalence is also common and is found, for instance, in 4:2; 6:12; 7:17;
8:1718; 9:10(11); 10:20, 26; 14:23, 5, 27; 23:17; 24:21; 25:8, 10; 27:1; 30:9, 18,
30; 31:1; 33:5; 36:15, 18, 20.
22. The Targum, in keeping with its general tendency, makes the sense of the
expression slightly more indenite by rendering
with

(a
spirit from before the Lord). Cf. Chilton, The Isaiah Targum, 28.
1
Seeligmann is correct in observing that the evidence in LXX Isaiah

does not allow for an accurate estimate of the translators religious ideas,
but is on less solid ground when he tries to connect them with some form
of pre-Gnosticism.23 He is certainly not justied in afrming that %
= # / in LXX Isa 11:2 contains the nucleus of entire
Gnostic systems.24 Our observation of the widespread use of the term in
Hellenistic Judaism also prevents us from making a more direct parallel
with specic Gnostic ideas. The signicance of the concept of /

in early Judaism is made particularly clear by Josephus statement in Ag.
Ap. 2.170 that Moses ordained other virtues to be parts of /
.25
Therefore, the best we can say is that the translator rendered the expres-
sion

idiomatically, employing a term that was widely used in
Hellenistic Judaism to denote religion, piety, and the fear of the Lord.
In v. 3,

(And his delight will be in the fear of the
Lord) is rendered by /> % - % (Che spirit
of the fear of God will ll him).26 This is best seen as another example
of an explanatory paraphrastic rendering, probably inuenced by the
afrmation, in 11:2, that the spirit of God would rest upon him. It is
also possible that the rendering could have been inuenced by Isa 61:1.
This latter text has proved inuential in later strands of Jewish and early
Christian messianic expectations (cf. Luke 4:18). It is important to note
23. Seeligmann, Isaiah, 103. On the basis of the use of /

in connection
with terms such as ), , and - (cf. 11:2; 32:8; 33:6), Seeligmann
envisages a slight touch of pre-Gnosticism in the translators way of thinking.
Noticing that / occurs in parallelism with and : (26:7 and
32:8) and in contrast to , % > (24:16), he also argues that in these
terms, elements of ethics and ritual practice are intermixed. What comes into play
here is the association of poverty, humility, and oppression with godliness, which is
set against the connection of wealth and power with ungodliness.
24. Ibid., 108. On the same page, Seeligmann suggests that the idea that the
practice of leads to the light of knowledge of God is similar to what is
found in LXX Isa 53:10, 11, where the Greek differs markedly from the Hebrew and
underscores the point that the light of knowledge is a divine gift. For Seeligmann,
the identication of the Law with -) indicates that at the time of LXX Isaiah the
Law was connected to the concept of ) %, and that the terms and
not only denote the content of worldly life, but also show the way to the
true, super-worldly life, i.e. the contemplation of -) =.
25. See Brutti, The Development of the High Priesthood, 28487, particularly her
discussion of the concept of /
in connection with Onias virtues, and her
reference, on p. 287, to S. Mason, Flavius Josephus on the Pharisees: A Compo-
sition-critical Study (SPB 39; Leiden: Brill, 1991), 86, who afrmed that /

is a one word summary of the whole Jewish system of religion.
1
26. See the similarity of the use of in LXX Exod 31:3.
that in 61:1 the LXX renders

by % and that there
are no other noteworthy verbal parallels with 11:15. This indicates that,
if the translator connected the two texts, he did so on the level of general
ideas rather than on the literary level.
The connection of the afrmation in v. 3 that the sceptre is lled
with the spirit of the fear of God with the statement in v. 2 that the
spirit of God will rest upon him is another good indication of the trans-
lators contextual awareness and its signicant role in the translation
process. This indication is probably strengthened when seen in connec-
tion with the idea of the sceptre slaying the wicked by the word of his
mouth (v. 4), as we shall see below. At the same time, it is further evi-
dence that indications of contextual awareness and cognitive reading
strategies are not necessarily to be equated with particularly theologi-
cal or actualizing renderings.
Contextual awareness is also evidenced at the beginning of 11:4,
where the is rendered by ,, preserving the reading ow of the text
and connecting vv. 3 and 4 syntactically. The translators sense of con-
text went beyond the pericope level and included the use of preferred
terminology that he considered adequate to express certain ideas. The
rendering of
(poor) and (humble, aficted) by
(humble) reects the translators preference for this particular Greek
term, attested elsewhere (cf., for instance, 2:1019).27 Conversely, the
rendering of # by : : is enigmatic, since the trans-
lator obviously knows the meaning of (cf. v. 5) and could con-
ceivably have used ! here, just as he uses at
the end of the verse.28 The Greek could therefore reect a contemporary
idiomatic expression.
1.4. The Sceptre of the Mouth and the Slaying of the Wicked
In 11:4, the expression
# is rendered by )! ! %
/%. The use of is interesting both because the translator
normally connected # with \29 and because of the choice of
27. In this connection, one notes that by rendering " with , the Targum
focuses on the humble (poor) of the people, in a strikingly nationalistic reading.
Barthlemy, Critique textuelle, 81, argues that the anarthrous use of " in Isa 11:4
indicates that the text refers to lensemble des habitants du pays, as opposed to the
more universalistic use of "! in texts such as Gen 11:1, and 9. It is not
possible to determine whether there is a difference in nuance between " and 2.
28. In this connection, the absence of a straightforward rendering of is
noteworthy. The correlation between the terms and
is analyzed by H.
Ringgren and B. Johnson, , TDOT 12:23964 (24849).
1
29. See 9:3(4); 10:5, 15, and 24.
\ in 11:1 to render #. The simplest explanation is that the trans-
lator opted for a characteristic explanatory rendering, giving the meaning
of the metaphor. The rendering could also have been inuenced by the
parallelism with
.
The possibility of a messianic reading is not ruled out. Barthlemy
argued that the expression sceptre of the mouth in Isa 11:4 is likely to
evoke the idea of teaching, in the light of the notion of the disciplining
rod in Prov 23:13.30 The translator could have picked up on this concept
and stressed the teaching function of the messiah by employing the term
.
Psalms of Solomon 17:24 states that one of the functions of the
messiah is X % ! /% (to
destroy lawless nations by the word of his mouth). As Collins already
pointed out, Pss. Sol. 17:24 is probably inuenced by LXX Isaiah at this
point.31 However, the fact that the verbal parallel between the two texts is
not exact could suggest the existence of a common tradition on which
both the author of the Psalms of Solomon and the translator of LXX
Isaiah drew. This is an hypothesis that cannot be proved on the basis of
the evidence that we possess, so it should also be left simply as a con-
jecture.
The expression #
,: ,2 at the end
of v. 4 can be read as a somewhat at-footed translation of

(and by the breath of his lips he will slay the wicked). This is
so if is understood as by with as an instrumental dative
with the sense of breath,32 and if is taken to mean through, so
that the Greek would read and by the breath (that goes) through the lips
he will destroy the wicked. However, a more natural way of reading the
sentence is to take as meaning in the spirit. Besides being
a viable translation of , it tallies well with the afrmation that the
spirit of God will rest upon the sceptre (v. 2) and that the spirit of the
fear of God will ll him. , then, assumes an instrumental function in
relation to
: the sceptre will slay the wicked, in the Spirit, by
means of his lips, that is, by the word () that springs from them.
30. Barthlemy, Critique textuelle, 82. Barthlemy afrms that Ici, on veut dire
que le rejeton de Jess redressera, rformera par ses dcrets la population du pays.
Pour complter cette action, il liminera le mchant par le verdict de condamnation
quil lui inigera.
31. Cf. Collins, Scepter, 54.
1
32. Cf. Jannaris, Greek Grammar, 1379.
2. LXX Isaiah 11:15 in Context

The most signicant question related to the context of LXX Isa 11:15
has been dealt with above, namely, the dissociation of the pericope from
Isa 10:3334. There are, however, a few signicant observations to be
made with regard to the remainder of ch. 11. Its depiction of an ideal
future and the promise of restoration and return from exile have often
been regarded as connected with the oracle in vv. 15. In what follows I
seek to ascertain whether this connection was perceived by the LXX
translator and whether the translation contains elements that shed more
light on the translators eschatological and messianic hope.
2.1. Future Bliss

In the Hebrew Isaiah, the depiction of a future era of bliss in 11:69 can
be seen as intricately connected with the oracle in vv. 15.33 The con-
nection is also evidenced by the messianic interpretation of this passage
in early Judaism, clearly attested in the Targum, which adds an entire
clause at the beginning of v. 6, explicitly situating this new era in the
days of the messiah: '

'

'

(In the
days of the messiah of Israel, peace will increase in the land). Identify-
ing any messianic tenets in LXX Isaiah is more difcult as it follows the
Hebrew quite closely.34 However, there are some renderings that are
worthy of note, beginning with v. 6:

$ #
,
"

$ # -^

! $ # # % #

A
$ # # > ?+ /
33. While this view has been challenged by many authors, it has been defended
convincingly by Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 46569, who delimits the pericope as
11:110, but sees v. 10 as a late addition.
34. The order of animals is changed in the last section of v. 6. In the MT, we have
the order (calf),
! (young lion), and
(bull), represented by the
Greek (calf), % (bull), and
(lion). This can be seen as
an instance of the loose rendering of lists in LXX Isaiah, already noted by H. G. M.
Williamson, Isaiah 1.11 and the Septuagint of Isaiah, in Understanding Poets and
Prophets: Essays in Honour of George Wishart Anderson (ed. A. G. Auld; JSOTSup
152; Shefeld: Shefeld Academic, 1993), 40112. The translator could also have
read
for
and
! as [!].
1
And wolf will dwell with lamb, And wolf will graze together with
lamb,
and leopard will lie down with kid; and leopard will rest together with kid;
and calf, and young lion, and bull and calf, and bull, and lion will graze
together, together,
and a small child leads them. and a small child will lead them.
The choice of (graze) to render (dwell) is

noteworthy. While the future tense of the Greek reects the weqatal form
of the Hebrew, the meaning of the terms is quite different. The choice
could have been prompted by mere observation of the contextthe ani-
mals dwelling together naturally encompasses their grazing together.35
But the remarkable picture of a wolf grazing is distinctive of an expec-
tation of an era of salvation and bliss. In that regard, one looks at other
texts in Isaiah where a similar picture is painted, such as 14:30; 30:23;
34:17,36 and 49:9. Most signicant is 65:25, where we have a parallel
version of this vision. There we read that !
# (wolf
and lamb will feed together). There the LXX appropriately renders
(feed) by . It is likely that the Greekor a reminis-

cence of the Hebrew of 65:25inuenced the rendering of 11:6. The
translation of
later in the verse by A also echoes
vividly 65:25 and can be seen as further evidence of the inuence of this
latter passage in this rendering.37
The LXX follows the Hebrew very closely in the remainder of 11:69,
so that detecting any special eschatological or messianic ideas is very
difcult. The possible connection between this passage and Isa 65 could
illuminate the translators eschatological ideas, by showing how the
different passages were taken to represent the same future era of bliss.
However, determining whether the depiction of the sceptre in vv. 15
is connected with this vision of the future cannot be based upon
linguistic evidence in the Greek rendering.
35. Later, the rendering of the participle by the future ?+ maintains the
futuristic frame of the verse, in keeping with the opening weqatal form .
36. The LXX here displays a free rendering that speaks of the Lord distributing
pastures in the ideal future.
37. In this latter case, some have proposed that the translator read
as a
verbal form (either []
or
) derived from the root III (fatten), with
% being later inserted in the light of the MT. This would be similar to what
happened with both the Vulgates vitulus et leo et ovis sivul morabuntur and the
Peshittas ~ ~ . Cf. Ziegler, Untersuchungen,
64; Seeligmann, Isaiah, 18 n. 17; Goshen-Gottstein, Isaiah, ad loc.; and Barthlemy,
Critique textuelle, 8283.
1
2.2. The Hope of Return from Exile

Isaiah 11:1016 is a coherent section focusing on the return from exile.
While the LXX interpretation of the passage does not directly indicate a
connection with vv. 19, the theme of the exile was sure to evoke
particular eschatological ideas of the translator.38 There are also some
indications of a contextually aware reading of the section.39 It is possible
that the phrase On that day in vv. 10 and 11 prompted particular
eschatological associations that would be expressed in the rendering.
However, linguistic indications in this direction are very scarce, as a
closer look at the verses reveals.40 Of the two verses, v. 11 is the one that
offers slightly more signicant clues:

# D S
F J

$
&

% :+ 3
: /%
*
% 9) > - <
* % %

*
$ $
& I c - D ,> ) m
# ,> j(

$
$
.
# f # j( #
,> j )

$
$ &
$
# ,> S ,) # +
m
38. Wildberger, Isaiah 112, 48889, argues that 11:1116 is a late addition
which reveals no interest in the messiah. Regardless of whether or not he is correct,
the coherent expectation of restoration in the passage is the noteworthy point.
39. From the standpoint of contextual awareness, it is interesting to note that
the idiomatic expression Y ,) is used to render in 11:11 and

in 11:14. This suggests that the translator read the section with a sense of
coherence and allowed this to inform his translational choices.
40. For the rendering of by ? in 11:10, we observe that the meaning of
is quite clear for the translator, who renders it by : in 11:12; 13:2; 18:3,
and 33:23; in 5:26; 49:22, and 62:10; and in 30:17. It is con-
ceivable that he understood the term here metaphorically, to denote power, rule, and
authority. This rendering is noteworthy, especially taken together with the trans-
lation of (seek) by 9 (hope), which nullies the important sign /
seek connection of the Hebrew verse. This is the only case in the LXX where the
Hebrew is rendered by 9. The Greek term is most commonly an
equivalent of # (cf. Pss 9:10; 26[25]:1; 27[26]:3). 9 was used in Hellenistic
times as a synonym of trust. It was part of the stock of religious terms of Hellenistic
Jews, as seen in texts such as 1 Macc 2:61; 2 Macc 2:18; 7:11; Ps. Sol. 6:6; Theod.
Sus 1:60, and primarily in the LXX version of the Psalms (cf. LXX Pss 5:12; 17[16]:7;
18[17]:31; 26[25]:1). While the connection of with 9 is unique, it is
probable that it simply picks up on the general sense of as religious devotion
attested in Late Biblical Hebrew and in Qumran sources. Cf. G. Gerleman and
E. Ruprecht, , TLOT 1:34651 (34951).
1
And it will be on that day, And it will be on that day,

the Lord will set for a second time the Lord will again show his hand
his hand
to recover the remnant of his people, to be zealous for the remnant left
from the people,
which is left from Assyria, and from which is left from the Assyrians, and
Egypt, from Egypt,
and from Pathros, and from Cush, and Babylon, and Ethiopia, and from
and from Elam, the Elamites,
and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the east, and out of Arabia.
and from the coastlands of the Sea.
The phrase - < * expands the meaning of . This

could be an example of double translation. As we have seen already
(Chapters 3 and 4), the topic of the remnant could have had a central
importance for the Isaiah translator, but the nature of the language and
terminology employed seldom gives more direct evidence in this direc-
tion. In the case of 11:11, the context naturally indicates that this impor-
tant theological motif was being evoked, and that the translator saw his
own situation reected in the passage.
The verse has some indications of contemporizing, reected in
exegetical traditions about the names of places41 and in the use of certain
41. is rendered by f. The Hebrew appears elsewhere in

the Hebrew Bible in Jer 44(51):1, 15; Ezek 29:14, and 30:14, undoubtedly referring
to a region in Upper Egypt. The LXX renders it in all these cases by l . It is
unclear why the translator opted for f here. For the rendering of ! by
j( , we observe that, apart from the parallel texts of LXX Gen 10:68 and 1 Chr
1:810, where the transliterated form is attested, and excluding the proper
name ! in Ps 7:1 (LXX ), every occurrence of ! in the LXX is rendered by
j( (Ezek 30:5 is a free rendering dependent on 38:5). In LXX Isaiah the
correspondence appears also in 18:1; 20:35; 37:9; 43:3, and 45:14.
is rendered
by j ). The connection of
with j is common in the LXX (cf. LXX
Gen 10:22; 14:1, 9; Jer 25[32]:25; Ezra 2:7; Neh 12:42; 1 Chr 1:17). LXX Isaiah is
unique in that, instead of employing the name of the country j , it refers to the
ethnic group the Elamites (see ( : in 21:2 and 22:6). The rendering of
by the suggestive idiom Y ,) (the rising sun, meaning east) is
specially worthy of note. The inuence of the story of the Tower of Babel (Gen
11:19) on the LXX Isaiah translator is well known from texts such as 10:9. See
Koenig, LHermneutique analogique, 87103, for a detailed study of the inuence
of the Babel episode on LXX Isaiah. Seeligmann, Isaiah, 47, points out that is
rendered elsewhere in the LXX as &() or , and argues that the
rendering here is inuenced by Gen 11:2. Seeligmann hesitates to decide whether
the translator formulated the phrase ,> S ,) independently on the basis
of a reminiscence of the Hebrew text of Genesis, or derived his version from a
translation of Genesis which got lost in the course of time. He does not consider a
1
vocabulary. The rendering of by % 9) is noteworthy as it

indicates that the translator possibly read some form related to
(zeal). While he could have been inuenced by v. 13, the choice of
Greek term could have ideological implications as the concept of zeal
developed in signicant ways in the Second Temple period. While this
development is primarily related to human zeal for God and his Law,42
the idea of the divine zeal for his people was also signicant (LXX
Deut 32:19 [Odes Sol. 2:19]; Ezek 39:25; Joel 2:18; Zech 1:14; 8:2).
The examples of actualization in 11:11 are ultimately quite meagre.
More signicant instances are found in 11:14:
#
*

( . $ ! ,-

A

$ # $ ,- S ,)

+ # ; # # s

) : %
( *
$ < # j ) *

And they will y And they will spread out

on the shoulder of the Philistines to in ships of strangers to the sea,
the west,
together they will plunder together they will plunder
the sons of the east, even those from the east,
Edom and Moab, and Idumea and on Moab,
stretching out their hand; they wll rst lay their hand;
and the sons of Ammon will obey and the sons of Ammon will obey
them. rst.
The rendering of (y) by (spread out) could be

an indication of some sensitivity to metaphor, as in the treatment of in
11:10.43 The sense intended by the translator is possibly claried in the
rendering of
! by ,-, which seems to
third option, namely, that Y ,) is simply a traditionally inherited

expression that refers to the east, as could be the case also in 11:14. is rendered
in LXX Isa 36:19 and 37:13 by the transliterated form j (a common LXX
equivalent; but see { in LXX Jer 30:29[49:23] and 1 Chr 18:3). Both here and in
the free rendering of 10:9 it seems to be represented by m. Cf. Seeligmann,
Isaiah, 79.

is left untranslated, or is simply subsumed under m.

42. C. Batsch, La guerre et les rites de guerre dans le judasme du deuxime
Temple (JSJSup 93; Leiden: Brill, 2005), 13651, for instance, argues that in
Maccabean circles the concept of zeal encompassed militant, violent engagement,
and that in the Qumran community it denoted sectarian devotion to the Law.
1
43. See n. 40, above.
envisage a sort of maritime expansion of the Jewish people carried out

by means of Philistine ships.44 Seeligmann points to the rendering of 1
Sam 5:6 to demonstrate that the ships of Philistines were familiar gures
around the time of the translators, so that they found their way into these
LXX renderings.45 The specic historical situation that the Isaiah trans-
lator may have in mind is, according to Seeligmann, the Jewish use of
Philistine ships in trading, which could reect the time of the Macca-
bees.46 Seeligmann specically mentions the references in 1 Macc
10:4789 and 11:6162 to the capture of Jaffa, Ashdod, Ashkelon, and
Gaza by Jonathan and his ruling over Ekron, as well as the reference, in
14:34, to Simons reinforcement of the port of Jaffa, together with the
towns of the Philistines.47
While this is a plausible suggestion, it is not possible to identify with
condence the particular historical situation envisaged by the translator.
This is all the more true with regard to the enigmatic statement that the
people will stretch out their hand against Moab rst, and that the sons of
Ammon will obey rst. These could refer to specic historic events, such
as the Maccabean campaigns, but it is not possible to have any certainty.
The difculty in identifying precise historical events reected in the
translation does not prevent us, however, from identifying signicant
ideological tenets. These are more visible in 11:16:
%
#
$ $
& * L -
L
j(^
$

& # L ;

" $ &
O S S
0 +2 2
j(
And there will be a highway, And there will be a thoroughfare,

for the remnant of his people that is for the remnant of my people in
left from Assyria, Egypt;48
just as there was for Israel and it will be for Israel
in the day they came up from the as the day when it came out of the
land of Egypt. land of Egypt.

45. 1 Sam 5:6 speaks of the Lord aficting the people of Ashdod. The LXX
translator adds that they were aficted ( % #
2 = /2 (in
the ships and in the midst of their territory).
47. Ibid., 8687. He uses these associations to support his dating of LXX Isaiah
around 140 B.C.E.
1
48. Or for my people left in Egypt.
The rendering of by j(! is a remarkable example of actuali-

zation, changing the focus of the original text on the Jewish exiles of
Assyria to the Jewish community of Egypt, contemporary with the
translator. It is also signicant that, while ! is represented by O, the
syntactical order is different. The difference in syntax also changes the
nuance and focus of the verse. The Hebrew text announces a return from
exile in Assyria, comparing it to the exodus from Egypt. In the LXX the
verse is congured as an expectation of a second Egyptian exodus, a
longing for a new deliverance from the present unsatisfactory state of
affairs.49 The Greek displays the yearning for restoration characteristic of
Jews living in the Egyptian Diaspora in the second century.50
3. Summary
The rendering of # by \ could have been inuenced by an
association with the Balaam Oracle of Num 24, a connection made by
several other texts in the Second Temple period. The Davidic character
of the oracle in Isa 11:15 is evident, but the absence of more explicit
Davidic elements in the translation does not enable us to envisage the
overarching systematizing effort proposed by Schaper.
In fact, as I noted, the translator bypasses the opportunity to capitalize
on the idea of a Branch of David, in contrast with other texts which
connect Isa 11 and Num 24. Together with the absence of any trace of
the Branch of David idea in the rendering of Isa 4:2, this could suggest
that, if the translator had any coherent Davidic messianic expectation, it
was not the same as that attested for other Jewish groups, and he had no
intention of highlighting that expectation beyond what he could regard as
a faithful rendering of the original Hebrew text. The use of / in
11:2 is itself an indication that the translator often inserted terminology
that was part of the conceptual currency of Hellenistic Judaism more as
an attempt to offer an accurate translation than to introduce actualizing or
theological renderings.
49. See the comments of I. L. Seeligmann, Phases of Jewish Historical

Consciousness, in The Septuagint Version of Isaiah and Cognate Studies, 83118
(101). The identication of the remnant of the people of Israel with the Jewish
Diaspora in Egypt is a key leitmotif in LXX Isaiah according to Seeligmann, who
points, in particular, to texts such as 19:2425 and 28:5. Cf. idem, Isaiah, 11517.
50. For an excellent survey of the concept of restoration in early Judaism, see S.
Talmon, Exile and Restoration in the Conceptual World of Ancient Judaism, in
Restoration: Old Testament, Jewish, and Christian Perspectives (ed. J. M. Scott;
JSJSup 72; Leiden: Brill, 2001), 10746.
1
This tallies well with the indications of contextual awareness in the

chapter. The paraphrastic rendering of

by
/> % - % in 11:3 seems to be connected both with the
afrmation in v. 2 that the spirit of God rests upon him and with the
idea, in v. 4, that the sceptre would be endowed with spiritual power to
slay the wicked by the word of his mouth.
From the standpoint of contextual awareness it is also interesting that
the translator did not seem to connect 11:15 with 10:3334, and that
verbal indications of a coherent reading between the rst ve verses of
Isa 11 and the remainder of the chapter are lacking, as the translation
follows the Hebrew very closely. Of course, this does not rule out the
possibility that such was the case. There are, in effect, slight indications
of a somewhat coherent reading of vv. 69 and 1016.
I also noted that the reading of the latter part of Isa 11 gives us some
glimpses into the eschatological conceptions of the translator. In
particular, I pointed to the possible connection with Isa 65 and to the
actualizing renderings found in the latter part of the chapter.
Is the sceptre of LXX Isa 11:1, then, a messianic gure? The content
of the Hebrew oracle, the internal evidence of the translation, and the
witness of early Jewish interpretation of Isa 11:15 suggest that the
answer is yes. Yet the overall close rendering of the passage in the LXX
prevents us from progressing much further in our understanding of the
translators eschatological and messianic hope.
1
Chapter 7
CONCLUSION
It is now possible to summarize the ndings of the present study and

to make a few suggestions regarding the eschatological and messianic
character of LXX Isaiah, which, I believe, will also inform the question of
messianism in the LXX as a whole. In this regard, the summarizing
remarks of Michael Knibb deserve to be quoted in full:
Determining in individual cases where the Greek has interpreted the
Hebrew in a messianic sense is one thing, assessing correctly the impli-
cations of such references as a whole is another. In view of the varied
nature of the translations of the individual books it seems difcult to
make any comments that would apply to the Septuagint as a whole, but
even in the case of individual books, it may be wondered how far it is
possible from isolated instances of change to develop a coherent view of
the intellectual and theological world of the translator such that one can
speak of the theology of the translation. At a minimum there needs to be a
sufcient number of cases in an individual book where the Greek, for
whatever reason, provides evidence of a different interpretation of the
text from the Hebrew; the passages need to display a coherent, not a
random, pattern of interpretation; and, above all, discussion of such cases
needs to be based on sound exegesis and to be rooted in a proper
understanding of the methods followed by the individual translator.1
In the light of Knibbs comments, a few observations can be made about

LXX Isaiah. I begin by noting that the translator has been depicted as a
scribe immersed in the biblical text, one who interpreted his Vorlage
according to certain exegetical techniques and assumptions. This descrip-
tion does justice to the evidence provided by the translation itself. The
translator gives several indications of an awareness of context when ren-
dering the book of Isaiah into Greek. This awareness is not only of the
immediate linguistic context of a particular pericope, but also includes
other texts within Isaiah and the remainder of the biblical corpus. There
1
1. Knibb, The Septuagint and Messianism, 19.
is also evidence that he approached the pericopes with a level of expec-

tation of their coherence. I have observed that the translators sense of
pericope delimitation seemed to correspond with some traditions of
manuscript division present in the Qumran Isaiah manuscripts, the
Masoretic tradition, and early Greek witnesses, particularly in the cases
of LXX Isa 1:2127; 2:5, 10; 3:13, and 6:1.
The present study has also challenged the idea that the signs of
contextual awareness in the rendering should necessarily be interpreted
as attempts to produce a new textual unit in Greek (see my analysis of
8:1116 in Chapter 2) or as evidence of an actualizing interpretation of
the prophecies. I noted, for instance, how contextual awareness was
evidenced in the apparent systematic toning down of the foreign threat
in LXX Isa 7:2 and 6, and in the depiction of the spiritual endowment of
the sceptre in 11:24, without pointing to a special theological reading
of the passages. My contention is that the translators purpose was to
offer an intelligible and reliable representation of the Hebrew text as he
understood it. I thus chose to describe the translators perceived aware-
ness of context and his use of contextual clues to inform his renderings in
terms of reading processes and strategies.
The study of LXX Isaiah in the light of the reading processes described
above also helps us to have a better grasp of the way in which cultural or
ideological elements were inserted into the translation. In this regard, the
use of /
in 11:2 can be seen in connection with the depiction of
the extraordinary moral character of Immanuel in 7:1516. In both cases,
the translator gives evidence of reading his text under the inuence of his
ideological context. The choice of /
is signicant because the
translator offers an idiomatic translation of

by a term that
encompassed the Jewish ideal of piety in the Second Temple period. This
can be seen in connection with 7:1516 because here the safeguarding of
the character of Immanuel was effected with the use of concepts of the
age of accountability and the choice of good and evil, which were
also part of the ideological currency of early Judaism.
All the examples of actualization or insertion of eschatological and
messianic traditions surveyed in the present work can be described under
a similar light. The translator of LXX Isaiah was interested in conveying
the sense of his Hebrew text faithfully, but as he read it according to
certain exegetical traditions, some elements which we may consider
foreign are bound to be perceived in the translated text.
In this connection, it was noted that the presence of certain vocabu-
lary, and particularly expressions that could be read eschatologically,
such as on that day, could prompt specic eschatological frames,
1
7. Conclusion 159
expectations, and traditions. I noted the evocation of conceptions related

to the Mount of the Lord, and the Way of the Lord in LXX Isa 2:24.
Similar traditions were identied in 4:26. Particular attention was
drawn to the manifestation of the Lords with glory upon the
earth, and to the ideological notions potentially evoked by the Greek
term. The translator of LXX Isaiah also seemed to be inuenced by the
idea of the limited duration of Gods wrath derived from texts such as Ps
30:6(5); Isa 10:25, and 54:78, and this was particularly felt in LXX Isa
7:4; 26:16, and 57:17. I also noted the possible link that the translator
established between the depictions of an era of bliss in Isa 11 and 65.
Also reected in the translation are the ideas of the exaltation and
glorication of the remnant, a prominent theme in the Second Temple
period, largely through the inuence of the book of Isaiah itself. In this
latter case we also urged caution because terminology related to the
theme of the remnant was frequently used without any particular theo-
logical purpose.
This ideological insertion is related to Seeligmanns contention that
the theology reected in the LXX is derived partly from the Bible, partly
from popular Jewish traditions that grew outside, and simultaneously
with, the Bible and gradually became authoritative, and partly in con-
scious or unconscious borrowing from the Hellenistic thought world.2
These traditions could make their way into the renderings even if the
translator did not have the intention of producing a text that was in any
way different from his Hebrew Vorlage. This observation has impor-
tant implications for how we understand eschatology and messianism in
LXX Isaiah. Fabry has observed correctly that the messianisms of the
LXX are not closely related to the original socio-cultural and political
conditions of their source texts, but he is not justied in asserting that
the translators tried to free messianic belief from the original cultural,
liturgical, etc., background and to transfer it into a new framework within
Hellenistic culture.3 The kind of conscious cultural transfer envisioned
by Fabry does not do justice to the accidental character of the insertion of
ideological and cultural factors in the translation of the LXX books in
general, and Isaiah in particular.
Many of the eschatological ideas identiable in LXX Isaiah could be
seen as belonging within larger traditions in early Judaism. My exami-
nation did not detect, however, any attempt at systematization in the

3. H.-J. Fabry, Messianism in the Septuagint, in Kraus and Wooden, eds.,
Septuagint Research, 193205 (204).
1
translation, and suggested that the resurfacing of certain theological ideas

at different points simply reects the translators awareness of them in
the course of seeking to communicate the meaning of the Hebrew. This
analysis served as the background for my study of the messianic pas-
sages in chs. 7, 9, and 11.
In spite of the attention that LXX Isa 7 has attracted, I have argued that
it does not offer sufcient evidence that it is an eschatological and actual-
izing rendering. I also suggested that the Immanuel oracle in 7:1416 has
some signicant features, in particular the depiction of the promised
child with an interest in safeguarding his righteous character, which could
point in the direction of a messianic interpretation. However, it was not
possible to support, on the basis of the evidence offered by the chapter,
any of the elaborate recent proposals which afrm that the Immanuel of
LXX Isa 7:14 was seen either as a saviour gure derived from Hellenistic
mysteries or as a representation of the children of mother Zion. I also
argued that the translator could have connected the idea of the short
duration of Gods wrath in 7:4 with the announcement of an era of
salvation in 7:1725, but syntactical elements in vv. 16 and 17 witnessed
against the view that the Immanuel of v. 14 was seen as the inaugurator
of an eschatological era.
As for the translation of 9:56(67), I argued that the presence of
messianic elements in the LXX rendering was not a surprise, in the light
of the existence of messianic interpretation of these verses in early
Judaism. Pace Lust, I proposed that the rendering 2
? does not imply an attempt to eschew a messianic interpretation
of the verse. On the contrary, the dissociation of the child from God is
best seen as an attempt to avoid any idolatrous or unorthodox identi-
cation between a mediator and God himself. The safeguarding of the
role of the child as a mediator, with the important function of announcing
the divine , makes it quite plausible that a messianic gure is in
view.
However, while the rendering of Isa 9:56(67) was more deviating
than that of ch. 7, it was still difcult to retrieve the precise contours of
the translators messianic conceptuality. We suggested that the view that
the ? of LXX Isa 9:5(6) was conceived as an angelic gure nds
good support, and that the rendering was probably inuenced by the
language of the Hebrew text. The idea of correlation between angelic
gures and messianic expectation provided a good framework for
approaching the question, and situated the translator within well-estab-
lished currents in the Second Temple period.
1
7. Conclusion 161
A signicant element was detected in LXX Isa 11:15, in the possible

link established by the translator between Isa 11 and the Balaam Oracle
of Num 24. This connection is signicant because it is also reected in
other texts of the Second Temple period, thus placing the translator
within a well-recognized interpretative paradigm and tradition. However,
unlike other texts which made the connection, LXX Isaiah does not
capitalize on the possible association between the shoot of Isa 11 and
the concept of the Branch of David. We had noted earlier that the
translator also bypasses the connection when rendering in Isa 4:2.
This could suggest that the translator was oblivious ofor antagonistic
tothe messianic tradition of the Branch of David. It could also simply
be an indication that his main goal was the representation of his Vorlage
without any concern to present a coherent or systematic portrayal of the
messiah in line with any traditions in vogue in his time.
The question was left open whether the reading
for in
7:14 was original and whether it could suggest that the translator
understood that the house of David was responsible for the naming of
the promised child. If this were the case, we could have an indication that
the translator stressed the Davidic character of the anticipated saviour,
but on the basis of LXX Isa 7 alone a conclusion could not be reached.
Having examined the other messianic oracles in LXX Isa 112, we can
say that the many instances in which the translator failed to capitalize on
a possible Davidic messianism would speak against any intention to
highlight the Davidic character of the child at this point. That does not
rule out the possibility that the translator could have been inuenced by
the context (especially 7:13) to use
. This would then be a good
example of his contextual awareness and the kind of presuppositions that
he would bring to the translation, without necessarily implying any
actualization or particularly messianic reading.
Any elements in the chapters studied that can be properly called
Davidic are already present in the Hebrew text. This is certainly the
case for 8:239:6(9:17). We have identied possible indications of a
Davidic messianic hope in the transposition of the oracle to the south,
effected by means of the insertion
2 ; (8:23[9:1]). We
connected this with the territorial translation of 9:6(7). The translator
transposed not only geographical but also social references to his own
time (9:13[24]), in what has been the most signicant example of the
combination of contextual awareness and actualizing interpretation which
we encountered in our work. We did not nd, however, any indication of
a desire to highlight consistently a coherent messianic expectation.
1
In sum, on the basis of our exegetical study of LXX Isa 112, it was
possible to determine the presence of messianic and eschatological inter-
pretation in individual cases, although a large number of renderings that
have been seen as theologically motivated could be explained simply in
what we called linguistic and co-textual terms. It was not possible to
detect a coherent or systematic messianic expectation throughout the
version, as this features among Knibbs criteria. If this is the case for
LXX Isa 112, our study serves to highlight the difculty in attempting
any coherent description of an eschatology or messianism of the LXX, or,
more generally, of a theology of the LXX.
1
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ackroyd, P. Isaiah IXII: Presentation of a Prophet. Pages 1648 in Congress Volume

Gttingen 1977. Edited by J. A. Emerton. VTSup 29. Leiden: Brill, 1978.
Albright, W. F., and C. S. Mann. Matthew. AB 26. Garden City: Doubleday, 1971.
Allegro, J. M. The Root r and the Doctrine of the Remnant. JTS 3 (1952): 2739.
Allegro, J. M., and A. A. Anderson. Qumrn Cave 4 I (4Q1584Q186). DJD 5. Oxford:
Clarendon, 1968.
Amoussine, J. D. phraim et Manass dans le Pshr de Nahum (4QpNahum). RevQ 4
(1963): 38996.
Baer, D. Its all about us! Nationalistic Exegesis in the Greek Isaiah (Chapters 112).
SBLSP 40 (2001): 197219.
. When We All Go Home: Translation and Theology in LXX Isaiah 5666.
JSOTSup 318. Shefeld: Shefeld Academic, 2001.
Barr, J. The Most Famous Word in the Septuagint. Pages 5972 in Studia Semitica: The
Journal of Semitic Studies Jubilee Volume. Edited by P. S. Alexander et al. JSSSup
16. Oxford: Oxford University, 2005.
.The Typology of Literalism in Ancient Biblical Translation. MSU 15. Gttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979.
Bartelt, A. H. The Book around Immanuel: Style and Structure in Isaiah 212. BJS 4.
Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1996.
Barthlemy, D. Critique textuelle de lAncien Testament 2. Isae, Jrmie, Lamentations.
OBO 50.2. Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986.
Barthlemy, D., and J. T. Milik. Qumran Cave I. DJD 1. Oxford: Clarendon, 1955.
Barton, J. Oracles of God: Perceptions of Ancient Prophecy in Israel after the Exile.
London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1986.
. What is a Book? Modern Exegesis and the Literary Conventions of Ancient
Israel. Pages 114 in Intertextuality in Ugarit and Israel. Edited by J. C. de Moor.
OtSt 40. Leiden: Brill, 1998.
Batsch, C. La guerre et les rites de guerre dans le judasme du deuxime Temple. JSJSup
93. Leiden: Brill, 2005.
Beentjes, P. C. The Concept of Brother in the Book of Ben Sira. A Semantical and
Exegetical Investigation. Pages 7589 in Treasures of Wisdom: Studies in Ben Sira
and the Book of Wisdom. Edited by N. Calduch Benages and J. Vermeylen. BETL
143. Leuven: Peeters, 1999.
. Prophets and Prophecy in the Book of Ben Sira. Pages 13550 in Prophets,
Prophecy, and Prophetic Texts in Second Temple Judaism. Edited by M. Floyd and
R. D. Haak. New York: T&T Clark, 2006. Repr. pages 20729 in Happy the One
who Meditates on Wisdom (SIR. 14,20): Collected Essays on the Book of Ben Sira.
CBET 43. Leuven: Peeters, 2006.
1
Beitzel, B. J. The Via Maris in Literary and Cartographic Sources. BA 54, no. 2 (June
1991): 6475.
Bergey, R. La prophtie dEsae 7:1416. RRef 184 (1995): 914.
Blenkinsopp, J. Opening the Sealed Book: Interpretations of the Book of Isaiah in Late
Antiquity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006.
Blomberg, C. Matthew. NAC 22. Nashville: Broadman, 1992.
Blum, E. Jesajas prophetisches Testament. Beobachtungen zu Jes 111 (I). ZAW 108
(1996): 54768; (II) 109 (1997): 1229.
Bockmuehl, M., and J. Carleton Paget, eds. Redemption and Resistance: The Messianic
Hopes of Jews and Christians in Antiquity. New York: T&T Clark, 2007.
Botterweck, G. J., ed. Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. 15 vols. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 19742006.
Bousset, W. Die Religion des Judentums im Spthellenistischen Zeitalter. Tbingen:
Mohr, 1926.
Boyd-Taylor, C. In a Mirror, Dimly: Reading the Septuagint as a Document of Its
Times. Pages 1531 in Kraus and Wooden, eds., Septuagint Research.
. Toward the Analysis of Translational Norms: A Sighting Shot. BIOSCS 39
(2006): 2746.
Braude, W. G. The Midrash on Psalms. 2 vols. New Haven: Yale University, 1959.
Brock, S. P. Isaiah. The Old Testament in Syriac 3/1. Leiden: Brill, 1993.
. Text Divisions in the Syriac Translations of Isaiah. Pages 200221 in
Rapaport-Albert and Greenberg, eds., Biblical Hebrew.
Brockington, L. H. The Hebrew Text of the Old Testament. The Readings Adopted by the
Translators of the New English Bible. Oxford: Clarendon, 1973.
. The Greek Translator of Isaiah and His Interest in . VT 1 (1951): 2332.
Brodie, L. T. The Children and the Prince: The Structure, Nature and Date of Isaiah
612. BTB 9 (1979): 2731.
Brooke, G. J. Exegesis at Qumran: 4QFlorilegium in Its Jewish Context. JSOTSup 29.
Shefeld: JSOT, 1985.
Brown, F., S. R. Driver, and C. A. Briggs, eds. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old
Testament. Oxford: Clarendon, 1907. Reprinted as F. Brown, ed., The New Brown,
Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon: with an Appendix
Containing the Biblical Aramaic. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1979.
Brown, G., and G. Yule. Discourse Analysis. CTL. Cambridge: Cambridge University,
1983.
Brown, R. E. The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in the
Gospels of Matthew and Luke. New updated ed. ABRL. New York: Doubleday,
1993.
Bruce, F. F. Prophetic Interpretation in the Septuagint. Bulletin of the International
Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies 12 (1979): 1726. Repr. pages
53946 in The Place is Too Small for Us: The Israelite Prophets in Recent
Scholarship. Edited by R. P. Gordon. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns.
Brutti, M. The Development of the High Priesthood during the pre-Hasmonean Period.
JSJSup 108. Leiden: Brill, 2004.
Buchanan, G. W. The Old Testament Meaning of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.
JBL 75 (1956): 11420.
Campbell, J. C. Gods People and the Remnant. SJT 3 (1950): 7885.
1
Bibliography 165
Carena, O. Il resto di Israele: studio storico-comparativo delle iscrizioni reali assire e dei
testi profetici sul tema del resto. RivBSup 13. Bologna: Edizioni Dehoniane, 1985.
Cathcart, K. J. Numbers 24:17 in Ancient Translations and Interpretations. Pages
51120 in Kraovec, ed., Interpretation of the Bible.
Cathcart, K. J., and R. P. Gordon. The Targum of the Minor Prophets: Translated, with a
Critical Introduction, Apparatus, and Notes. ArBib 14. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark,
1989.
Cazelles, H. Texte massortique et Septante en Is. 2,15. Pages 5159 in Festschrift
Dominique Barthlemy. Edited by P. Casetti. Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
1981.
Charlesworth, J. H. The Portrayal of the Righteous as an Angel. Pages 13551 in
Collins and Nickelsburg, eds., Ideal Figures in Ancient Judaism.
Childs, B. S. The Struggle to Understand Isaiah as Christian Scripture. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2004.
Chilton, B. D. The Isaiah Targum: Introduction, Translation, Apparatus, and Notes.
ArBib 11. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1987.
Collins, J. J. Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora.
2d ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000.
. Messianism and Exegetical Tradition: The Evidence of LXX Pentateuch. Pages
12949 in Knibb, ed., The Septuagint and Messianism.
. Messianism in the Maccabean Period. Pages 97109 in Neusner et al., eds.,
Judaisms and Their Messiahs.
. The Scepter and the Star: The Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other
Ancient Literature. ABRL. New York: Doubleday, 1995.
Collins, J. J., and G. W. E. Nickelsburg, eds. Ideal Figures in Ancient Judaism: Proles
and Paradigms. SCS 12. Chico: Scholars Press, 1980.
Cook, J. G. The Interpretation of the Old Testament in Greco-Roman Paganism. STAC
23. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004.
Coste, J. M. Le texte grec dIsae, XXV, 15. RB 61 (1954): 3666.
Cox, C. E., ed. VI Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate
Studies: Jerusalem 1986. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987.
. Schapers Eschatology meets Krauss Theology of the Psalms. Pages 289311
in The Old Greek Psalter: Studies in Honour of Albert Pietersma. Edited by R. J. V.
Hiebert et al. JSOTSup 332. Shefeld: Shefeld Academic, 2001.
Cribiore, R. Gymnastics of the Mind: Greek Education in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001.
. Writings, Teachers, and Students in Graeco-Roman Egypt. ASP 36. Atlanta:
Scholars Press, 1996.
das Neves, J. C. M. A Teologia dos Setenta no Livro de Isaas. Lisbon: Universidade
Catlica Portuguesa, 1973.
Davidson, A. B. Hebrew Syntax. 2d ed. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1896.
Davidson, M. J. Angels at Qumran: A Comparative Study of 1 Enoch 136, 72108 and
Sectarian Writings from Qumran. JSPSup 11. Shefeld: JSOT, 1992.
Davies, P. R. The Teacher of Righteousness and the End of Days. RevQ 13 (1988):
31317.
Day, J. Shear-Jashub (Isaiah 7:3) and the Remnant of Wrath (Psalm 76:11). VT 31
(1981): 7678.
1
de Sousa, R. F. Is the Choice of

in LXX Isa 7:14 Theologically Motivated?
JSS (Forthcoming).
de Vaux, R. Les Philistins dans la Septante. Pages 18594 in Wort, Lied und
Gottespruch: Festschrift fr Joseph Ziegler. Edited by J. Schreiner. FB 1.
Wrzburg: Echter Verlag/Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1972.
Delitzsch, F. Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah. Translated by J. Martin.
2 vols. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1881.
Doran, R. Temple Propaganda: The Purpose and Character of 2 Maccabees. CBQMS 12.
Washington: The Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1981.
Dorival, G. La Bible dAlexandrie: Les Nombres. Paris: Cerf, 1994.
. Les phnomnes dintertextualit dans le livre Grec des Nombres. Pages 253
85 in Selon les Septante: Trente tudes sur la Bible grecque des
Septante. Edited by G. Dorival and O. Munnich. Festschrift Marguerite Harl. Paris:
Cerf, 1995.
Driver, G. R. His Train Filled the Temple. Pages 8796 in Near Eastern Studies in
Honor of William Foxwell Albright. Edited by H. Goedicke. Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1971.
. Isaiah IXXXIX: Textual and Linguistic Problems. JSS 13 (1968): 3657.
. Studies in the Vocabulary of the Old Testament VI. JTS 34 (1933): 37585.
Duhm, B. Das Buch Jesaia. Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1892.
Eissfeldt, O. na sich vertragen. Pages 12428 in Otto Eissfeldt - Kleine Schriften.
Edited by R. Sellheim and F. Maass. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1966.
Eitan, I. A Contribution to Isaiah Exegesis. HUCA 1213 (19371938): 5588.
Elliger, K., and W. Rudolph. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Stuttgart: Deutsche
Bibelgesellschaft, 1990.
Emerton, J. A. Notes on Jeremiah 12:9 and on Some Suggestions of J. D. Michaelis
about the Hebrew words na
, !br
, and jad!. ZAW 81 (1969): 18291.
. Some Linguistic and Historical Problems in Isaiah VIII.23. JSS 14 (1969):
15175.
Evans, C. A. Isa 6:913 in the Context of Isaiahs Theology. JETS 29 (1986): 13946.
. To See and Not Perceive: Isaiah 6.910 in Early Jewish and Christian
Interpretation. JSOTSup 64. Shefeld: Shefeld Academic, 1989.
Fabry, H.-J. Messianism in the Septuagint. Pages 193205 in Kraus and Wooden, eds.,
Septuagint Research.
Fernndez Marcos, N. The Septuagint in Context: Introduction to the Greek Versions of
the Bible. Translated by W. G. E. Watson. Leiden: Brill, 2000.
Fichtner, J. Jahves Plan in der Botschaft des Jesaja. ZAW 63 (1951): 1633.
Fischer, J. In welcher Schrift lag das Buch Isaias den LXX vor? Giessen: Tpelmann,
1930.
Fitzmyer, J. A. The One Who is to Come. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007.
Flashar, M. Exegetische Studien zum Septuagintapsalter. ZAW 32 (1912): 16574.
Fletcher-Louis, C. H. T. LukeActs: Angels, Christology and Soteriology. WUNT 2.94.
Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1997.
Fossum, J. E. The Name of God and the Angel of the Lord. WUNT 36. Tbingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 1985.
Frankel, Z. ber den Einuss der palstinischen Exegese auf die alexandrinische
Hermeneutik. Leipzig: Verlag von Joh. Ambr. Barth., 1831.
1
Bibliography 167
Fritsch, C. T. The Concept of God in the Greek Translation of Isaiah. Pages 12269 in
Biblical Studies in Memory of H. C. Alleman. Edited by J. M. Myers et al. GTS 1.
New York: Augustin, 1960.
Gera, D. Judaea and Mediterranean Politics 219 to 161 B.C.E. BSJS 8. Leiden: Brill,
1998.
Gieschen, C. A. Angelomorphic Christology: Antecedents and Early Evidence. AGAJU
42. Leiden: Brill, 1998.
Goldingay, J. The Compound Name in Isaiah 9:5(6). CBQ 61 (1999): 23944.
Goldstein, J. A. How the Authors of 1 and 2 Maccabees Treated the Messianic
Promises. Pages 6996 in Neusner et al., eds., Judaisms and Their Messiahs.
Gordis, R. The Biblical Text in the Making: A Study of the Kethib-Qere. New York: Ktav,
1971.
. The Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Old Testament and the Dead Sea
Scrolls. Pages 198217 in Poets, Prophets, and Sages: Essays in Biblical
Interpretation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1971.
Gordon, R. P. Converse Translation in the Targums and Beyond. JSP 19 (1999):
321. Repr. pages 26377 in Hebrew Bible and Ancient Versions: Selected Essays
of Robert P. Gordon. SOTSMS. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006.
. The Legacy of Lowth: Robert Lowth and the Book of Isaiah in Particular.
Pages 5776 in Rapaport-Albert and Greenberg, eds., Biblical Hebrew.
. Holy Land, Holy City: Sacred Geography and the Interpretation of the Bible.
The Didsbury Lectures. Carlisle: Paternoster, 2004.
. Messianism in Ancient Bible Translations in Aramaic and Syriac. Pages 262
73 in Bockmuehl and Carleton Paget, eds., Redemption and Resistance.
Goshen-Gottstein, M. H. The Book of Isaiah. The Hebrew University Bible. Jerusalem:
Magnes, 1995.
. Theory and Practice of Textual Criticism: The Text-Critical Use of the
Septuagint. Text 3 (1963): 13058.
Gray, G. B. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Isaiah IXXVII. ICC.
Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1912.
Gressmann, H. Der Messias. FRLANT NF 26. Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
1929.
Gryson, R. Esaias. Vetus Latina: die Reste der altlateinischen Bibel 12.1. Freiburg im
Breisgau: Herder, 1993.
Hagner, D. C. Matthew 113. WBC 33A. Dallas: Word, 1993.
Hanhart, R. Die Septuaginta als Interpretation und Aktualisierung: Jesaja 9:1(8:23)
7(6). Pages 33146 in Isaac Leo Seeligmann Volume. Edited by A. Rof and
Y. Zakovitch. Essays on the Bible and the Ancient World 3. Jerusalem: E. Rubin-
steins Publishing House, 1983.
Hannah, D. D. Michael and Christ: Michael Traditions and Angel Christology in Early
Christianity. WUNT 2/109. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999.
Harl, M. La Bible dAlexandrie: La Gense. Paris: Cerf, 1986.
Hasel, G. F. The Remnant: The History and Theology of the Remnant Idea from Genesis
to Isaiah. 2d ed. AUM 5. Berrien Springs: Andrews University Press, 1974.
Hatch, E., and H. A. Redpath. A Concordance to the Septuagint and the Other Greek
Versions of the Old Testament (Including the Apocryphal Books). 2d ed. Grand
Rapids: Baker, 1998.
1
Hauspie, K., ed. Messianism and the Septuagint: Collected Essays. BETL 178. Leuven:
Peeters, 2004.
Hengel, M. Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the
Early Hellenistic Period. Translated by J. Bowden. 2 vols. London: SCM, 1974.
Hffken, P. Jesaja: der Stand der theologischen Diskussion. Darmstadt: Wissenschaft-
liche Buchgesellschaft, 2004.
Horbury, W. Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ. London: SCM, 1998.
. Monarchy and Messianism in the Greek Pentateuch. Pages 79128 in Knibb,
ed., The Septuagint and Messianism.
Horbury, W., and D. Noy. Jewish Inscriptions of Graeco-Roman Egypt. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1992.
Horn, S. H. An Inscribed Seal from Jordan. BASOR 189 (1968): 4143.
Horsley, G. H. R. New Documents Illustrating early Christianity. Vol. 4, A Review of the
Greek Inscriptions and Papyri Published in 1979. North Ryde: The Ancient History
Documentary Research Centre, 1987.
Hultgrd, A. The Ideal Levite, the Davidic Messiah, and the Saviour Priest in the
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. Pages 93110 in Collins and Nickelsburg,
eds., Ideal Figures in Ancient Judaism.
Jannaris, A. An Historical Greek Grammar: Chiey of the Attic Dialect as Written and
Spoken from Classical Antiquity Down to the Present Time, Founded upon the
Ancient Texts, Inscriptions, Papyri and Present Popular Greek. Hildesheim: Olms,
1987.
Janzen, J. G. Double Readings in the Text of Jeremiah. HTR 60 (1967): 43347.
Jenni, E., and C. Westermann, ed. Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament. 3 vols.
Peabody: Hendrickson, 1997.
Joon, P., and T. Muraoka. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. SubBi 27. Rome: Editrice
Ponticio Istituto Biblico, 2006.
Kaiser, O. Isaiah 112. Translated by J. Bowden. OTL. London: SCM, 1983.
Kamesar, A. The Virgin of Isaiah 7:14: The Philological Argument from the Second to
the Fifth Century. JTS 41 (1990): 5175.
Kautzsch, E., ed. Gesenius Hebrew Grammar. Translated by A. Cowley. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1910.
Kittel, R. Die hellenistische Mysterienreligion und das Alte Testament. BWAT 32.
Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1924.
Kittel, R., and G. Freidrich, eds. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. 10 vols.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.
Klein, G. L. The Prophetic Perfect. JNSL 16 (1990): 4560.
Knibb, M. A., ed. The Septuagint and Messianism. BETL 195. Leuven: Peeters, 2006.
. The Septuagint and Messianism: Problems and Issues. Pages 119 in Knibb,
ed., The Septuagint and Messianism.
. Teacher of Righteousness. Pages 91821 in vol. 2 of the Encyclopedia of the
Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by L. H. Schiffman and J. C. VanderKam. 2 vols. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2000.
Koehler, L., and W. Baumgartner. Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti libros. 2d ed. Leiden:
Brill, 1958.
Koenig, J. LHermneutique analogique du judasme antique daprs les tmoins textuels
dIsae. VTSup 33. Leiden: Brill, 1982.
1
Bibliography 169
Korpel, M. C. A. Introduction to the Series Pericope. Pages 150 in Korpel and Oesch,
eds., Delimitation Criticism.
Korpel, M. C. A., and J. M. Oesch, eds. Delimitation Criticism: A New Tool in Biblical
Scholarship. Pericope 1. Assen: Van Gorcum, 2000.
. Studies in Scriptural Unit Division. Pericope 3. Assen: Van Gorcum, 2002.
Kraovec, J., ed. The Interpretation of the Bible. JSOTSup 289. Shefeld: Shefeld
Academic, 1998.
Kraus, W., and R. G. Wooden, eds. Septuagint Research: Issues and Challenges in the
Study of the Greek Jewish Scriptures. SCS 53. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Litera-
ture, 2006.
Kuyper, L. J. To Know Good and Evil. Int 1 (1947): 49092.
Le Boulluec, A., and P. Sandevoir. La Bible dAlexandrie: LExode. Paris: Cerf, 1989.
Lonas, A. Laube des traducteurs: De lhbreu au grec: traducteurs et lecteurs de la
Bible des Septante. Paris: Cerf, 2007.
Levene, D., and B. Rothenberg. Tin and Tin-Lead Alloys in Hebrew and Jewish
Aramaic. Pages 10012 in Rapaport-Albert and Greenberg, eds., Biblical Hebrew
2001.
Lichtenberger, H. Messianic Expectations and Messianic Figures During the Second
Temple Period. Pages 920 in Qumran-Messianism. Edited by J. H. Charlesworth
et al. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998.
Liddell, H. G., R. Scott, and H. S. Jones, eds. A Greek English Lexicon. 9th ed. with
revised supplement. Oxford: Clarendon, 1996.
Lowth, R. Isaiah: A New Translation with a Preliminary Dissertation and Notes. London:
William Tegg, 1868.
Lust, J. The Greek Version of Balaams Third and Fourth Oracles: The in
Num 24:7 and 17: Messianism and Lexicography. Pages 23352 in VIII Congress
of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies: Paris 1992.
Edited by L. J. Greenspoon and O. Munnich. SCS 41. Atlanta: Scholars, 1995. Repr.
pages 6986 in Hauspie, ed., Messianism and the Septuagint.
. Messianism in the Septuagint: Isaiah 8:23b9:6 (9:17). Pages 14763 in
Kraovec, ed., The Interpretation of the Bible. Repr. pages 15370 in Hauspie, ed.,
Messianism and the Septuagint.
. Septuagint and Messianism with a Special Emphasis on the Pentateuch. Pages
2645 in Reventlow, ed., Theologische Probleme. Repr. pages 12951 in Hauspie,
ed., Messianism and the Septuagint.
. A Septuagint Christ Preceding Jesus Christ? Messianism in the Septuagint
Exemplied in Isa 7,1017. Pages 21126 in Hauspie, ed., Messianism and the
Septuagint.
Lust, J., E. Eynikel, and K. Hauspie. Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint. Stuttgart:
Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2003.
Ltkemann, L., and A. Rahlfs. Hexaplarische Randnoten zu Isaias 116, aus einer Sinai-
Handschrift. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1915.
Mann, J. The Bible as Read and Preached in the Old Synagogue: A Study in the Cycles of
the Readings from Torah and Prophets, as well as from Psalms, and in the Structure
of the Midrashic Homilies. 2 vols. Cincinnati: Mann-Sonne Publication Committee,
194066.
Marcus, J. The Way of the Lord: Christological Exegesis of the Old Testament in the
Gospel of Mark. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1993.
1
Mason, S. Flavius Josephus on the Pharisees: A Composition-critical Study. SPB 39.

Leiden: Brill, 1991.
McKane, W. The Interpretation of Isaiah VII 1425. VT 17 (1967): 20819.
Meshel, Z. Was there a Via Maris? IEJ 23 (1973): 16266.
Meyer, L. V. Remnant. Pages 66971 in vol. 5 of The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited
by D. N. Freedman. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Mulder, O. Simon the High Priest in Sirach 50: An Exegetical Study of the Signicance of
Simon the High Priest as Climax to the Praise of the Fathers in Ben Siras Concept
of the History of Israel. JSJSup 78. Leiden: Brill, 2003.
Munnich, O. Le messianisme la lumire des livres prophtiques de la bible grecque.
Pages 32755 in Knibb, ed., The Septuagint and Messianism.
. Le texte lucianique dIsae-Septante. Pages 26999 in Interpreting
Translation: Studies on the LXX and Ezekiel in Honour of Johan Lust. Edited by
F. Garca Martnez and M. Vervenne. Leuven: Peeters, 2005.
Murphy OConnor, J. The Damascus Document Revisited. RB 92 (1985): 22346.
Narrowe, M. H. Another Look at the Tree of Good and Evil. JBQ 26 (1998): 18488.
Neusner, J. et al., eds. Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
Oesch, J. M. Petucha und Setuma. OBO 27. Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979.
. Textgliederung im Alten Testament und in den Qumranhandschriften. Henoch
5 (1983): 289321.
Olley, J. W. Righteousness in the Septuagint of Isaiah: a Contextual Study. Missoula:
Scholars Press, 1979.
. The Translator of the Septuagint of Isaiah and Righteousness. BIOSCS 13
(1980): 5874.
. Hear the Word of Yahweh: The Structure of the Book of Isaiah in 1QIsaa. VT
43 (1993): 1949.
. Texts Have Paragraphs Too A Plea for Inclusion in Critical Editions. Text 19
(1998): 11125.
. No Peace in a Book of Consolation: A Framework for the Book of Isaiah. VT
49 (1999): 35170.
Olofsson, S. God is my Rock: A Study of Translation Technique and Theological Exegesis
in the Septuagint. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1990.
Olyan, S. M. Ben Siras Relationship to the Priesthood. HTR 80 (1987): 26186.
Ottley, R. R. The Book of Isaiah according to the Septuagint (Codex Alexandrinus).
2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1906.
Pao, D. W. Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus. WUNT 2.130. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck,
2000.
Parry, D. W., and E. Qimron. The Great Isaiah Scroll (1QIsaa): A New Edition. STDJ 32.
Parry, D. W., and E. Tov, eds. The Dead Sea Scrolls Reader. Part 1: Texts Concerned
with Religious Law. Leiden: Brill, 2004.
. The Dead Sea Scrolls Reader. Part 2: Exegetical Texts. Leiden: Brill, 2004.
Pietersma, A. Review of J. Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter. BO 54 (1997):
18590.
. Exegesis in the Septuagint: Possibilities and Limits (The Psalter as a Case in
Point). Pages 3445 in Kraus and Wooden, eds., Septuagint Research.
1
Bibliography 171
Puech, . Prsance sacerdotale et messie-roi dans la Rgle de la Congrgation (1QSa ii

1122). RevQ 16 (1996): 35165.
Pulikottil, P. Transmission of Biblical Texts in Qumran: The Case of the Large Isaiah
Scroll 1QIsaa. JSPSup 34. Shefeld: Shefeld Academic, 2001.
Rahlfs, A. Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum graece iuxta LXX interpretes. Stuttgart:
Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1935.
Rapaport-Albert, A., and G. Greenberg, eds. Biblical Hebrew, Biblical Texts: Essays in
Memory of Michael P. Weitzman. JSOTSup 333. Shefeld: Shefeld Academic,
2001.
Reventlow, H. G., ed. Theologische Probleme der Septuaginta und der hellenistischen
Hermeneutik. VWGH 11. Gtersloh: Gtersloher Verlagshaus, 1997.
Rogland, M. Alleged Non-Past Uses of the Qatal in Classical Hebrew. SSN 44. Assen:
Van Gorcum, 2003.
Rooke, D. W. Zadoks Heirs: The Role and Development of the High Priesthood in
Ancient Israel. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Rose, W. H. Zemah and Zerubbabel: Messianic Expectations in the Early Postexilic
Period. JSOTSup 304. Shefeld: Shefeld Academic, 2000.
Rsel, M. Die Jungfrauengeburt des endzeitlichen Immanuel. JBTh 6 (1991): 13551.
. Jakob, Bileam und der Messias: messianiche Erwartungen in Gen 49 und Num
2224. Pages 15175 in Knibb, ed., The Septuagint and Messianism.
Rutherford, G. W. A Chapter in the History of Annotation, being Scholia Aristophanica.
3 vols. London: Macmillan, 1905.
Sacchi, P. Lapocalittica giudaica e la sua storia. BCR 55. Brescia: Paideia, 1990.
. Jewish Apocalyptic and its History. Translated by W. J. Short. JSPSup 20.
Shefeld: Shefeld Academic Press, 1990.
Salvesen, A. Messianism in Ancient Bible Translations in Greek and Latin. Pages
24561 in Bockmuehl and Carleton Paget, eds., Redemption and Resistance.
. Symmachus in the Pentateuch. JSSSup 15. Manchester: University of Manchester
Press, 1991.
Sawyer, J. F. A. The Image of God, the Wisdom of Serpents and the Knowledge of Good
and Evil. Pages 6473 in A Walk in the Garden: Biblical, Iconographical, and
Literary Images of Eden. Edited by P. Morris and D. Sawyer. JSOTSup 136.
Shefeld: JSOT, 1992.
Schaper, J. Eschatology in the Greek Psalter. WUNT 2.76. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck,
1995.
. Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah and Messianic Intertextuality in the
Greek Bible. Pages 37180 in Knibb, ed., The Septuagint and Messianism.
Schiffman, L. H. The Eschatological Community of the Dead Sea Scrolls: A Study of the
Rule of the Congregation. SBLMS 38. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989.
Schkel, L. A. A Manual of Hebrew Poetics. Translated by L. A. Schkel and A. Graffy.
SubBi 11. Rome: Editrice Ponticio Istituto Biblico, 1988.
Schunck, R. D. Der fnfte Thronname des Messias. VT 23 (1973): 10810.
Schweitzer, S. J. Mythology in the Old Greek of Isaiah The Technique of Translation.
CBQ 66 (2004): 21430.
Seeligmann, I. L. Phases of Jewish Historical Consciousness. Pages 83118 in The
Septuagint Version of Isaiah and Cognate Studies. Edited by R. Hanhart and
H. Spieckermann. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004.
1
. The Septuagint Version of Isaiah: a Discussion of its Problems. Ex Oriente Lux.

Leiden: Brill, 1948. Repr. pages 119294 in The Septuagint Version of Isaiah and
Cognate Studies. Edited by R. Hanhart and H. Spieckermann. Tbingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 2004.
Siegert, F. Drei hellenistisch-jdische Predigten. PS.-Philon, ber Jona, ber
Simson. Vol. 2, Kommentar nebst Beobachtungen zur hellenistischen Vor-
geschichte der Bibelhermeneutik. WUNT 61. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1992.
. Hellenistic Jewish Midrash I: Beginnings. Pages 199220 in vol. 1 of the
Encyclopedia of Midrash: Biblical Interpretation in Formative Judaism. Edited by
J. Neusner and A. J. Avery Peck. 2 vols. Leiden: Brill, 2005.
Sissa, G. Greek Virginity. Translated by A. Goldhammer. RevAnt 3. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press, 1990.
Snodgrass, K. Streams of Tradition Emerging from Isaiah 40:15 and their Adaptation in
the New Testament. JSNT 8 (1980): 2445.
Sokoloff, M. A Dictionary of Judean Aramaic. Ramat-Gan: Bar Ilan University Press,
2003.
Sollamo, R. Messianism and the Branch of David: Isaiah 11,15 and Genesis 49,812.
Pages 35770 in Knibb, ed., The Septuagint and Messianism.
Speier, S. UNEQIENNAH, Isaiah 7:6a. JBL 72 (1953): 1415.
Sperber, A. The Bible in Aramaic Based on Old Manuscripts and Printed Texts. Vols. 13,
The Pentateuch according to the Targum Onkelos; The Former Prophets according
to Targum Jonathan; The Latter Prophets according to Targum Jonathan. Leiden:
Brill, 195973. Repr. 2004.
Steck, O. H. Bemerkungen zur Abschnittgliederung der ersten Jesajarolle von Qumran
(IQIsa) im Vergleich mit redaktionsgeschichtlichen Beobachtungen im Jesajabuch.
Pages 1228 in Antikes Judentum und Frhes Christentum. Festschrift fr Hartmut
Stegemann zum 65. Geburtstag. Edited by B. Kollmann et al. BZNW 97. Berlin: De
Gruyter, 1999.
. Bemerkungen zur Abschnittgliederung in den Jesaja-Handschriften aus der
Wste Juda. Ein Vergleich auf der Grundlage von 1QIsaa. Pages 5390 in Die
Textfunde vom Toten Meer und der Text der Hebrischen Bibel. Edited by
U. Dahmen et al. NeukirchenVluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2000.
. Die Erste Jesajarolle von Qumran (1QIsa). Schreibweise als Leseanleitung fr
ein Prophetenbuch. 2 vols. SBS 173. Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk,
1998.
Stern, H. S. Knowledge of Good and Evil. VT 8 (1958): 40518.
Stuckenbruck, L. T. Angel Veneration and Christology. WUNT 2/70. Tbingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 1995.
Sullivan, K. P. Wrestling with Angels: A Study of the Relationship between Angels and
Humans in Ancient Jewish Literature and the New Testament. AGAJU 55. Leiden:
Brill, 2004.
Sweeney, M. A. Isaiah 139: With an Introduction to Prophetic Literature. FOTL 16.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.
Talmon, S. Double Readings in the Massoretic Text. Text 1 (1960): 14484.
. Exile and Restoration in the Conceptual World of Ancient Judaism. Pages
10746 in Restoration: Old Testament, Jewish, and Christian Perspectives. Edited
by J. M. Scott. JSJSup 72. Leiden: Brill, 2001.
1
Bibliography 173
. Waiting for the Messiah: The Spiritual Universe of the Qumran Covenanters.
Pages 11137 in Neusner et al., eds., Judaisms and Their Messiahs.
Talshir, Z. Double Translations in the Septuagint. Pages 2163 in Cox. ed., VI
Congress.
Taylor, J. E. A Second Temple in Egypt: The Evidence for the Zadokite Temple of
Onias. JSJ 29 (1998): 297321.
Tcherikover, V. Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1966.
Tov, E. The Background of the Sense Divisions in the Biblical Texts. Pages 31250 in
Korpel and Oesch, eds., Delimitation Criticism.
. The Greek and Hebrew Bible: Collected Essays on the Septuagint. VTSup 72.
. The Nature and Study of the Translation Technique of the Septuagint. Pages
23946 in The Greek and Hebrew Bible.
. The Septuagint. Pages 16188 in Mikra: Text, Translation, Reading, and
Interpretation of the Hebrew Bible in Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity.
Edited by M. J. Mulder. CRINT 1. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988.
. The Text-Critical Use of the Septuagint in Biblical Research. 2d ed. Jerusalem:
Simor, 1997.
. Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. 2d ed. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001.
. Theologically Motivated Exegesis Embedded in the Septuagint. Pages 25769
in The Greek and Hebrew Bible.
Troxel, R. L.
and Eschatology in LXXIsaiah. BIOSCS 25 (1992): 1827.
. Economic Plunder as a Leitmotif in LXX Isaiah. Bib 83 (2002): 37591.
. Exegesis and Theology in the LXXIsaiah 5:2630. VT 43 (1993): 10211.
. Isaiah 7,1416 through the Eyes of the Septuagint. ETL 79 (2003): 122.
van Bekkum, W. J. Paradise Interpreted: Good and Evil in Rabbinica and Kabbalah.
Pages 11627 in Paradise Interpreted: Representations of Biblical Paradise in
Judaism and Christianity. Edited by G. P. Luttikhuizen. TBN 2. Leiden: Brill, 1999.
van der Kooij, A. Accident or Method? On Analogical Interpretation in the Old Greek
of Isaiah and in 1QIsa. BO 43 (1986): 36675.
. Die alten Textzeugen des Jesajabuches. OBO 35. Gttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1981.
. Isaiah in the Septuagint. Pages 51329 in Writing and Reading the Scroll of
Isaiah: Studies of an Interpretive Tradition. Edited by C. C. Broyles and C. A.
Evans. 2 vols. VTSup 70. Leiden: Brill, 1997.
. The Old Greek of Isaiah 19:1625: Translation and Interpretation. Pages 127
66 in Cox, ed., VI Congress.
. The Oracle of Tyre: The Septuagint of Isaiah XXIII as Version and Vision.
VTSup 71. Leiden: Brill, 1998.
. Die Septuaginta Jesajas als Document jdischer Exegese. Einige Notize zu LXX
Jes 7. Pages 91102 in bersetzung und Deutung: Studien zu dem Alten Testament
und seiner Umwelt: Alexander Reinard Hulst gewidmet. Edited by D. Barthlemy.
Nijkerk: Callenbach, 1977.
. Wie heit der Messias? Zu Jes 9,5 in den alten griechisen Versionen. Pages
15669 in Vergegenwrtigung des Alten Testaments: Beitrge zur biblischen
Hermeneutik. Festschrift fr Rudolf Smend zum 70. Geburtstag. Edited by C. Bult-
mann et al. Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2002.
1
. Zur Theologie des Jesajabuches in der Septuaginta. Pages 925 in Reventlow,

ed., Theologische Probleme.
van der Louw, T. Transformations in the Septuagint: Towards an Interaction of
Septuagint Studies and Translation Studies. CBET 47. Leuven: Peeters, 2007.
VanderKam, J. C. From Joshua to Caiaphas: High Priests after the Exile. Minneapolis:
Fortress, 2004.
Watts, J. D. W. Isaiah 133. WBC 24. Waco: Word Books, 1985.
Weber, R., et al. Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibel-
gesellschaft, 1983.
Wevers, J. W. Notes on the Greek Text of Numbers. SCS 46. Atlanta: Scholars Press,
1998.
Widengren, G. Yahwehs Gathering of the Dispersed. Pages 22745 in In the Shelter of
Elyon: Essays on Ancient Palestinian Life and Literature in Honor of G. W.
Ahlstrm. Edited by W. B. Barrick and J. R. Spencer. JSOTSup 31. Shefeld: JSOT,
1984.
Wildberger, H. Isaiah 112: A Commentary. Translated by T. H. Trapp. CC. Minneapolis:
Fortress, 1991.
Williamson, H. G. M. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 127. Vol. 1,
Isaiah 15. ICC. London: T&T Clark International, 2006.
. Isaiah 1.11 and the Septuagint of Isaiah. Pages 40112 in Understanding Poets
and Prophets: Essays in Honour of George Wishart Anderson. Edited by A. G.
Auld. JSOTSup 152. Shefeld: Shefeld Academic, 1993.
Willits, J. The Remnant of Israel in 4QpIsaiaha (4Q161) and the Dead Sea Scrolls. JJS
57 (2006): 1125.
Winter, P.
Isa 63:9 (Gk) and the Passover Haggadah. VT 4 (1954):
43941.
Wold, B. G. Women, Men and Angels. WUNT 2/201. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005.
Yadin, Y. The Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness.
Translated by B. Rabin and C. Rabin. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962.
Ziegler, J. Untersuchungen zur Septuaginta des Buches Isaias. ATA 12/3. Mnster:
Verlag der aschendorffschen Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1934.
. Isaias. 3d ed. SVTG 14. Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983.
Zillessen, A. Bemerkungen zur alexandrinischen bersetzung des Jesaja (c. 4066).
ZAW 22 (1902): 23863.
Zimmerli, W. Vier oder fnf Thronnamen des messianischen Herrschers von Jes. IX,
5 b.6. VT 22 (1972): 24952.
1
INDEXES
INDEX OF REFERENCES
HEBREW BIBLE/ 42:38 65 21:13 74

OLD TESTAMENT 45:7 65 21:21 145
Genesis 45:15 62 22:18 145
1:2 145 48:15 104 26:36 65
2:5 52 48:17 28
2:9 15, 78 Numbers
3:5 78 Exodus 4:15 62
3:22 78 1:12 82 9:12 65
7:23 65 2:8 74, 75 9:19 145
10:68 152 2:14 45 11:26 65
10:22 152 3:2 114 13:2728 81
11:19 152 4:3031 145 14:7 81
11:1 147 5:1 62 14:23 78, 81,
11:2 152 8:7 65 82
11:9 147 9:14 37 15:30 145
14:1 152 10:5 52 16:2 54
14:3 98 10:12 65 17:23 144
14:9 152 14:19 114 20:20 34
14:10 65 15:9 94 21:7 28
14:2223 79 19:11 44 21:35 65
17:35 78 23:20 114 22:3 82
19:25 53 28:34 57 23:7 145
23:19 62 31:3 146 24 140, 142,
24:14 74 32:5 134 155, 161
24:16 74 32:34 114 24:2 145
24:21 67 33:2 114 24:7 68, 140,
24:28 74 33:23 28 141
24:43 74, 75 35:35 88 24:11 142
24:55 74 36:1 88 24:1517 143
24:57 74 40:35 66 24:17 4, 140,
32:9 65 65:1 45 141
38:7 145 31:24 62
38:26 67 Leviticus 32:11 79, 81,
41:6 53 1:16 28 82
41:23 53 14:8 62 32:22 62
41:38 145 14:36 62, 78
Deuteronomy 13:19 107 1 Kings

1:26 34 16:22 53 6:35 130
1:29 34 20:5 136 12:8 55
1:39 7882 21:17 65 12:1314 55
2:34 65 12:24 55
4:6 88 Ruth 18:43 123
6:16 100 1:3 65 20:41 LXX 28
7:21 34 1:5 65 21:41 28
9:7 34
9:2324 34 1 Samuel 2 Kings
9:26 145 3:1 15 1:23 94
12:21 145 5:6 125, 154 1:6 94
20:3 34 10:10 145 1:16 94
21:13 62 17:26 28 6:24 62
22:19 74 17:39 28 6:32 28
24:8 48 17:46 28 19:30 65
26:8 105 19:9 145 19:31 65
28:52 35 19:12 131 23:5 66
29:8 88 19:20 145
31:6 34 19:23 145 1 Chronicles
32:7 88 20:34 60 1:810 152
32:19 153 1:17 152
32:28 54 2 Samuel 4:43 65
32:29 88 1:17 24 9:26 108
33:10 112 2:1 62 12:20 55
3:28 62 15:20 74
Joshua 4:7 28 18:3 153
1:9 34 12:19 88 19:5 52
3:8 119 14:17 115 23:28 108
4:3 44 14:20 67, 115
8:17 65 15:14 65 2 Chronicles
8:22 65 15:31 55 6:33 67
10:2 61 15:34 55 10:8 55
13:27 119 16:9 28 10:13 55
14:15 61 16:20 55 10:14 55
15:13 61 16:23 55 12:7 65
21:11 61 17:7 55 20:24 65
24:5 62 17:14 55 22:5 55
17:23 55 24:20 145
Judges 19:27 LXX 115 25:10 60
1:9 62 19:28 115 30:6 65
4:10 132 20:19 61
5:18 132 23:24 115 Ezra
6:34 145 23:5 53 2:7 152
13:18 107 3:8 83
Ezra (cont.) 27:3 151 89:19 15

4:5 54 27:5 LXX 88 104:14 LXX 52
8:16 88 28:5 88 105:14 52
9:8 65 29:3 68 110:1 LXX 54
9:13 65 30:5 60 111:1 54
9:1415 65 30:5 LXX 159 118:100 LXX 88
10:8 55 30:6 159 118:130 LXX 88
30:15 LXX 130 118:144 LXX 88
Nehemiah 31:18 130 118:169 LXX 88
1:2 65 32:10 LXX 54 118:27 54
4:9 54 33:2 29 118:27 LXX 88
8:2 88 33:10 54 118:95 LXX 88
8:12 88 44:7 LXX 140 119:100 88
9:29 34 45:1 74 119:130 88
12:42 152 45:7 140 119:144 88
45:14 74 119:169 88
Esther 46:1 74 119:27 88
4:17 100 48:14 LXX 62 119:95 88
9:19 61 49:14 62 146:8 LXX 52
9:31 54 55:8 LXX 131 147:8 52
56:8 131
Job 64:11 LXX 53 Proverbs
2:2 67 65:5 LXX 55 2:11 54
5:6 53 65:11 53 3:21 54
8:19 53 66:3 LXX 67 6:23 50
20:15 107, 118 66:5 55 8:12 54
27:11 48 66:14 29 9:10 54
37:14 88 67:3 67 11:14 54, 107
38:18 88 67:19 LXX 34 14:3 140
68:19 34 15:22 54
Psalms 68:25 74 19:21 55
5:12 151 71:8 LXX 119 21:25 80
7:1 152 72:8 119 23:13 148
9:1 74 72:16 LXX 67 30:19 74, 75
9:10 151 72:17 LXX 88
10:5 54 73:16 67 Ecclesiastes
15:4 LXX 62 73:17 88 1:17 67
16:4 62 78:16 131 2:6 52, 53
16:7 LXX 151 78:16 LXX 131 7:25 67
17:7 151 86:5 LXX 61 8:16 67
17:31 LXX 151 87:5 61
18:31 151 88:7 LXX 54 Song of Songs
19:5 LXX 54 88:8 LXX 54 1:3 74, 75
25:1 LXX 151 88:20 LXX 15 6:8 74, 75
26:1 151 89:7 54
26:3 LXX 151 89:8 54
Isaiah 2:2 43, 46, 3:18 28, 41,

112 2, 3, 10 47, 50, 133
12, 21, 68 3:25 22
40, 41, 2:3 43, 47 3:26 LXX 22
43, 69, 49 4:26 3, 11, 50,
80, 161, 2:4 21, 44, 64, 68,
162 47 159
1:1 15, 23, 2:5 21, 50, 4:23 65
24, 47, 158 4:2 41, 51,
88, 110 2:622 143 5458,
1:3 87 2:6 36 63, 65,
1:6 17 2:7 119 66, 68,
1:9 64 2:9 21, 22 144, 145,
1:14 100 2:1022 LXX 26 155, 161
1:16 28, 133 2:1022 21 4:34 61
1:18 47, 65, 2:1021 21, 26, 4:3 51, 61,
104 29, 30, 65
1:20 20, 42 49 4:4 51, 59,
1:2127 20, 158 2:1019 143, 147 61
1:2126 20 2:10 21, 22, 4:5 52, 53,
1:21 61, 94 40, 158 57, 66
1:22 27 2:11 22 4:6 52
1:23 20, 28, 2:12 22, 29 5:5 28, 133
34 2:13 22 5:823 30
1:24 34, 61 2:14 22 5:15 22
1:2527 61, 64, 2:15 22 5:19 55, 56
143 2:17 22 5:24 59, 80
1:25 22, 26, 2:19 21, 22, 5:25 60
27, 29, 40 5:26 151
61, 133 2:20 41 6 64, 101
1:2627 61 2:21 21, 22, 6:1 23, 57,
1:26 20, 61, 40 58, 158
107 3:118 30 6:2 64, 65,
1:27 20, 27, 3:1 28, 133 101
42, 61, 3:3 103, 107 6:3 58, 64
62 3:8 28, 34, 6:4 64
1:28 28, 29 59, 145 6:6 104
1:31 28, 29 3:8 LXX 22 6:7 133
2 48, 49 3:9 22, 55, 6:8 101
2:14 3, 11 80 6:910 87, 89,
2:1 15, 23, 3:11 28 90, 104
24, 41 3:12 134 6:9 89
2:24 43, 68, 3:13 2123, 6:10 60, 89,
159 158 90
2:23 50 3:17 22 6:1113 62, 64
6:11 62, 65
6:12 6265, 77, 79, 8:13 32, 35

145 85, 90, 8:14 32, 34
6:13 62 93, 106, 38, 40,
7 4, 5, 72, 160, 161 101, 104
73, 82, 7:1516 72, 81, 8:15 14, 33,
84, 85, 158 34, 37,
87, 90, 7:15 70, 77, 38
94, 96, 80, 81, 8:16 33, 38,
99101, 83 101
136, 160, 7:16 5, 65, 71, 8:1718 145
161 77, 78, 8:17 38
7:1 23, 60, 80, 81, 8:18 66
65 83, 91, 8:21 35
7:2 96, 99, 93, 102, 8:239:6 3, 4, 12,
158 160 119, 129,
7:3 65, 77, 7:1725 93, 160 136, 161
80, 85, 7:17 91, 93, 8:23 17, 85,
100, 119 133, 145, 12022,
7:4 5961, 160 124, 126,
90, 91, 7:1825 92 161
93, 159, 7:18 41, 85, 8:23b9:6 4
160 94 9 5, 160
7:5 19, 55, 7:20 41, 85, 9:1 53, 85,
60, 65, 92, 95, 119, 121,
86, 107 96 131
7:6 91, 96, 7:21 42, 92, 9:1 LXX 12022,
98, 99, 93 124, 126,
158 7:22 65, 85 161
7:7 55, 86, 7:23 42, 85 9:1 LXX 17
87 7:25 92, 93 9:17 LXX 3, 4, 12
7:89 86, 87 8:2 34 9:17 LXX 119, 129,
7:8 86, 87 8:6 80 136, 161
7:9 36, 60, 8:7 91 9:13 161
8690 8:8 77, 85, 9:12 116
7:1116 40 102 9:2 129, 131,
7:11 101, 104 8:10 55, 77, 133
7:12 101 85, 86, 9:2 LXX 119
7:13 76, 100, 102 9:2 LXX 121, 131
101, 161 8:1116 17, 31, 9:2 LXX 53
7:1425 4 36, 39, 9:24 LXX 161
7:1417 84, 101 40, 127, 9:24 129
7:1416 3, 4, 11, 158 9:23 LXX 116
70, 84, 8:11 3235, 9:3 132, 140,
101, 160 37, 39 147
7:14 5, 11, 8:12 32, 34, 9:3 LXX 129, 131,
7075, 35 133
Isaiah (cont.) 10:2 64 11:2 55, 139,

9:35 LXX 129 10:3 65 14548,
9:4 133, 135 10:4 60 155, 156,
9:4 LXX 132, 140, 10:56 125 158
147 10:5 140, 147 11:3 139,
9:5 4, 5, 55, 10:6 28 14547,
65, 72, 10:9 152 156
103, 104, 10:10b 19 11:4 115, 139,
106, 10:13 28 140, 147,
10811, 10:14 65 148, 156
11316, 10:15 140, 147 11:5 140, 147
118, 125, 10:1921 65 11:69 149, 150,
145, 160 10:2022 64 156
9:5 LXX 135 10:20 64, 65, 11:6 149, 150
9:56 11, 103, 145 11:9 67
105, 109, 10:21 65 11:1016 64, 151,
119, 136, 10:22 65, 77, 156
160 85 11:10 42, 149,
9:6 72, 105, 10:24 126, 140, 151, 153
106, 119, 147 11:1116 151
136, 161 10:25 55, 60, 11:11 42, 65,
9:6 LXX 103, 104, 159 15153
106, 10:26 145 11:12 151
10811, 10:27 133 11:13 36, 133,
11318, 10:3334 143, 144, 153
125, 145, 149, 156 11:14 151, 153
160 10:33 22, 143 11:15 59
9:6 LXX 4, 55, 65 10:34 143, 144 11:16 63, 154
9:67 LXX 11 11 12, 140, 12:1 42, 60
9:67 LXX 103, 105, 142, 144, 12:2 23
109, 119, 149, 155, 13:2 151
136, 160 156, 160, 13:11 22, 28,
9:7 LXX 105, 119, 161 29
136, 161 11:110 149 14:1 63
9:10 134, 145 11:19 4, 151 14:23 145
9:11 60, 97, 11:15 3, 12, 14:2 63
134 138, 147, 14:3 42
9:11 LXX 134, 145 149, 150, 14:5 145
9:12 LXX 97, 134 155, 156, 14:21 95
9:14 28 161 14:22 65
9:15 LXX 28 11:1 134, 138, 14:24 107
9:16 28, 60 14245, 14:25 133
9:17 LXX 28 148 14:2627 55
9:20 60, 97 11:24 76, 114, 14:27 145
9:21 LXX 97 158 14:30 150
10 143 15:7 125
16:2 133 23:1112 125 28:8 55

16:12 100 23:11 34 28:9 48
16:14 64, 65 23:15 65 28:10 65
17:16 64 23:17 145 28:11 59
17:2 65 24:6 65 28:13 37
17:3 97 24:10 61 28:15 93
17:4 42 24:12 62, 65 28:17 62
17:6 65 24:14 63, 65 28:21 66
17:7 42 24:16 146 28:27 140
17:9 42, 65 24:21 42, 145 29:1 61
17:10 65 25:17 56 29:4 22
17:13 68 25:15 15 29:15 55
18:1 152 25:1 55, 56, 29:18 42
18:2 121 58, 63, 29:20 28, 29
18:3 151 107, 108, 30:1 55
18:6 65 111 30:9 145
18:7 42 25:26 56 30:12 28
19:1 121 25:2 56, 61 30:1517 64
19:3 55 25:7 55, 56 30:17 65, 151
19:11 55, 107 25:8 28, 145 30:18 65, 145
19:12 107 25:10 145 30:19 80
19:1625 4 25:1112 22 30:23 150
19:16 42 25:11 22 30:26 60
19:17 55, 57 25:1519 108 30:27 58
19:18 42, 127 25:17 109 30:30 145
19:19 42, 126 25:2025 109 31:1 145
19:20 141 25:22 109 31:4 80
19:22 60 26:1 42 31:6 28, 55
19:23 42 26:5 22, 61, 31:7 42
19:2425 63, 155 130 32:1 76
19:24 42 26:78 48 32:4 59
20:35 152 26:7 146 32:6 28
20:45 125 26:16 60, 159 32:7 28, 55,
20:4 62 27:1 42, 145 107
21:10 65 27:2 42 32:8 55, 86,
21:1617 64 27:9 28 107, 146
22 110 27:10 65 32:13 61
22:5 125 27:11b 42 33:5 145
22:15 108, 109 27:12 42 33:6 145, 146
22:20 42 27:13 42 33:14 28
22:22 109 28:1 95, 97 33:17 58
22:25 42 28:3 95, 97 33:19 59
23 16, 125 28:56 64 33:20 61
23:4 75 28:5 63, 65, 33:23 151
23:8 107 155 34:5 105
23:9 55 28:6 65 34:6 93
Isaiah (cont.) 43:9 6 55:10 52, 53

34:17 150 43:1819 6 55:12 131
35:6 59 43:18 88 56:5 61
36:1 23 43:19 52, 53 57:3 28
36:3 108 44:4 52, 53 57:4 28, 59
36:5 28, 34, 44:68 6 57:9 22
35, 55 44:6 63 57:17 60, 159
36:6 140 44:23 63, 64 58:3 22
36:15 145 44:25 55 58:8 52, 53
36:18 145 44:26 55 58:9 28, 133
36:19 153 45:8 52, 53 59:3 59
36:20 145 45:11 6, 61 59:15 87
36:20 LXX 63 45:13 62 59:16 62
37 72, 73 45:14 152 60:3 93
37:1 23 45:23 59 60:14 22
37:4 65 46:910 6 61:1 60, 146,
37:9 152 46:10 55 147
37:13 153 47:1 72, 73, 61:11 52, 53
37:20 63 75 62:3 109
37:22 72, 73, 47:13 55, 100 62:4 65
75 48:56 6 62:5 75
37:31 65 48:8 28 62:10 151
37:32 64, 65 48:19 23 62:12 65
38:4 23 48:20 119 63:8 23
38:12 65 49:15 63 63:9 105
38:18 62 49:1 64 63:10 28, 34
39:6 65 49:5 64 63:11 119
4055 48 49:6 119 64:11 22
40 49 49:9 150 64:12 LXX 22
40:15 48, 49 49:21 65 65 150, 156
40:2 127 49:22 151 65:2 28
40:4 22, 48 50:4 59, 67 65:15 65
40:5 49 50:5 28, 34 65:25 150
40:9 46 51:23 22 66:3 28
40:14 107 52:13 63, 87, 66:18 59
40:24 143 88 66:19 65
41:3 48 52:15 87, 88
41:4 6 53:10 146 Jeremiah
41:17 59 53:11 146 2:10 88
41:21 55 53:12 28 5:31 62
41:26 6 54:5 54 13:26 57
42:1 4 54:67 65 14:14 15
42:9 6, 52, 53 54:78 60, 159 16:16 62
42:22 23 54:17 59 23:5 52, 53
42:23 6 55:78 55 23:16 15
43:3 152 55:7 28, 54 25:25 152
25:31 119 29:14 152 Hosea

25:35 65 30:5 152 3:5 62
27:29 LXX 65 30:14 152 6:3 67
30:3 94 34:26 66 7:9 53
30:29 153 38:5 152 8:7 52
31:17 LXX 140 39:25 153 11:3 130
31:3134 72 41:12 123 12:10 LXX 15
32:19 107, 108 43:2 68 12:11 15
32:25 LXX 152 44:22 74
32:35 LXX 65 Joel
33:15 52 Daniel 1:8 74
35:4 LXX 108 1:17 88 2:3 65
37:3 LXX 94 2:2 44 2:18 153
39:19 LXX 107, 108 2:3 67 3:1 62
42:4 108 2:21 16 4:3 124
44:1 152 2:28 44
44:15 152 2:29 62 Obadiah
48:17 140 2:45 62 1 15
49:23 LXX 153 4:8 145 17 65
50:29 65 4:18 145
51:1 LXX 152 5:11 145 Micah
51:15 LXX 152 5:14 145 3:1 67
5:19 54 4 49
Lamentations 7 114 4:15 49
1:9 57 8:1 15 4:1 44
2:3 60 8:2 15 4:4 21, 49
2:9 15 8:5 88 4:5 49
4:7 53 8:13 15 4:9 107
8:1517 88 4:12 55
Ezekiel 8:15 15 5:1 113
2:9 15 8:17 15 5:2 LXX 113
7:14 67 8:27 88
7:26 15 9:2 88 Nahum
11:19 72 9:22 88 1:1 15
12:2 15 9:24 15 3:5 57
12:23 15 10:1 88
12:24 15 10:11 88 Habakkuk
16:7 52, 53 10:14 44, 88 2:2 15
17:6 52 11:7 144 2:14 67
17:10 53 11:14 15
19:1112 140 11:33 88 Haggai
19:14 140 11:42 65 1:12 65
20:12 67 12:1 114 1:14 65
20:39 62 12:8 88 2:2 65
25:16 123 12:10 88
27:13 67
Zechariah 48:2425 6 2 Maccabees

1:14 153 50 110 1:25 65
3:4 28 50:121 109 2:18 128, 151
3:8 52, 53 50:1 112 3:19 74
6:12 52, 53 50:8 144 5:13 74
8:2 153 50:14 111 7:11 151
8:6 65 50:19 111 10:1423 125
8:11 28, 65 50:24 109, 112 10:1922 127
8:12 65 10:2438 125
Epistle of Jeremiah 11:15 125
Malachi 1:5 62 11:14 125
3 114 14:4 109
1 Maccabees 14:5 54
APOCRYPHA/DEUTERO- 1:9 109 14:1518 127
CANONICAL BOOKS 1:1115 39
Susanna 1:26 74 NEW TESTAMENT
1:60 151 2:44 125 Matthew
2:57 126 1:21 76
Judith 2:61 151 1:23 71, 76
2:2 54 2:65 54 4:111 101
2:4 54 4:26 65 4:16 122
9:2 74 4:45 54 5:11 24
4:60 66 7:28 23
Wisdom of Solomon 5:15 125
4:2 100 5:954 125 Mark
5:6 53 5:923 125 4:4 23
6:22 45 5:15 124
7:21 45 5:23 131 Luke
10:12 100 5:6568 125 1:23 23
6:7 67 1:31 76
Sirach 6:15 109 2:9 53
1:18 116 9:46 65 4:18 146
3:28 29 9:56 111
3:31 62 10:11 67 John
4:6 109 10:1821 111 13:7 63
16:14 115 10:20 109
21:4 29 10:45 67 Acts
22:19 131 10:4749 154 6:13 24
23:4 29 10:7489 125 7:7 63
32:18 54 11:8 123 10:40 45
37:16 54 11:15 34 15:16 63
38:33 54 11:6162 125, 154
45:12 109 13:37 109 Hebrews
45:2425 109 14:22 55 4:8 63
45:24 109, 112 14:34 154
48:6 131
Revelation 11:17 114 4QpIsaa

1:19 63 13:10 114, 117 810 144
4:1 63 13:14 115
9:12 63 17:68 116, 117 4QpNah
1:12 97
PSEUDEPIGRAPHA 1QS 2:2 97
1 Enoch 2:3 88 2:8 97
40 118 3:15 88 3:8 97
41:9 115 4:3 88
4:22 88 4QpPs
3 Maccabees 5:21 88 37 2:18 97
4:9 133 8:1216 49
5:8 55 8:15 49 CD
7:5 131 9:11 113 1 112
9:1720 49 1:82:1 111
Jubilees 5:1819 117
2:1 118 1QSa 5:206:11 112
15:3132 115 1:811 82, 83 6:7 111
49:17 83 7:19 143
1QpHab 8:13 97
Odes of Solomon 2:23 111
2:19 153 BABYLONIAN TALMUD
1QpHab Berakot
Psalms of Solomon 2:89 111 10a 101
6:6 151 7:45 110, 111
17:2125 138 11:12 68 ullin
17:2124 140 24b 83
17:24 148 4Q161
3:1823 140 Pesaim
Testament of Judah 56a 101
24:16 142 4Q171 119a 101
1:19 111
Testament of Levi abbat
4:26 110 4Q285 89b 83
4:3 110 frg. 7 143
4:5 110 Sanhedrin
4Q400 96a 101
DEAD SEA SCROLLS 2:19 118 103b 101
11QTemple 2:1 118 104a 101
17:8 83
4QFlor JERUSALEM TALMUD
1QM 611 112 Bikkurim
5:1 114 2:1 83
9:5 117 4QTest
10:16 88 1:1113 143
Sanhedrin PHILO CLASSICAL WORKS

11:7 83 De confusione linguarum Callimachus
4:7 83 169 104 Hymn to Delos
18082 104 70 73
TOSEPHTA TALMUD
agigah De fuga et invention Hyginus
1:3 83 67 104 Fabulae
99 73
MIDRASH JOSEPHUS
Genesis Rabbah Antiquities Pausanius
58:1 83 12.9.7 127 8:54:6 73
13.3.1 126, 127
Midrash Psalms 13.13.2 128 Aelian
36:6 53 20.10.3 127 Varia Historia
13:1 73
TARGUMS Against Apion
Targum of Zephaniah 2.170 146 Servius
1:11 40 Ad Virgili Bucolica
Jewish War 10:57 73
RABBINIC WORKS 7.10.23 127
Pesiqta de Rab Kahana
144b 46
INDEX OF AUTHORS
Ackroyd, P. 2, 3 Collins, J. J. 109, 111, 112, 115, 126

Albright, W. F. 71 29, 137, 14143, 148
Allegro, J. M. 63, 144 Conrad, J. 106
Amoussine, J. D. 93 Conzelmann, H. 88
Anderson, A. A. 144 Cook, J. G. 71
Coste, J. M. 13, 56
Baer, D. 1, 18, 47, 48, 101 Cox, C. E. 8
Barr, J. 11, 30, 74, 78 Cribiore, R. 24, 25
Bartelt, A. H. 3
Barthlemy, D. 82, 90, 130, 147, 148, das Neves, J. C. M. 13
150 Davidson, A. B. 94
Barton, J. 7, 24 Davidson, M. J. 114, 117
Batsch, C. 153 Davies, P. R. 112
Beentjes, P. C. 6, 145 Day, J. 63
Beitzel, B. J. 124 de Sousa, R. F. 75
Bergey, R. 76 de Vaux, R. 45
Blenkinsopp, J. 7 Delitzsch, F. 4648
Blomberg, C. 71 Delling, G. 73
Blum, E. 3 Doran, R. 127, 129
Bousset, W. 113 Dorival, G. 79, 141
Boyd-Taylor, C. 8 Driver, G. R. 57, 97, 99
Braude, W. G. 54 Duhm, B. 130
Brock, S. P. 41
Brockington, L. H. 2, 53, 57, 58, 90 Eissfeldt, O. 97
Brodie, L. T. 63 Eitan, I. 99
Brooke, G. J. 112 Emerton, J. A. 98, 120, 121
Brown, G. 25, 26 Evans, C. A. 63, 90
Brown, R. E. 71
Bruce, F. F. 7 Fabry, H.-J. 159
Brutti, M. 110, 144, 146 Fernndez Marcos, N. 23
Buchanan, G. W. 83 Fichtner, J. 63
Fischer, J. 2, 53, 94, 135
Campbell, J. C. 63 Fitzmyer, J. A. 3, 141
Carena, O. 63 Flashar, M. 29
Cathcart, K. J. 40, 140 Fletcher-Louis, C. H. T. 114
Cazelles, H. 21, 46 Fossum, J. E. 104, 118
Charlesworth, J. H. 113, 114 Frankel, Z. 9
Childs, B. S. 7 Fritsch, C. T. 2
Chilton, B. D. 27, 103, 119, 145
Gera, D. 128 Mann, C. S. 71

Gerleman, G. 151 Mann, J. 20
Gieschen, C. A. 118 Marcus, J. 49
Goldingay, J. 103 Mason, S. 146
Goldstein, J. A. 126, 128 McKane, W. 83
Gordis, R. 47, 83 Meshel, Z. 124
Gordon, R. P. 37, 40, 46, 47, 50, 60, 103 Meyer, L. V. 64, 65
Goshen-Gottstein, M. H. 8, 61, 131, 150 Michaelis, W. 48
Gray, G. B. 37, 46, 47, 107, 130 Milik, J. T. 82
Gressmann, H. 72 Mulder, O. 109, 110, 112
Munnich, O. 10, 76, 103, 106, 119, 144
Hagner, D. C. 71 Murphy OConnor, J. 112
Hanhart, R. 1, 107, 108, 115, 116, 120
24, 126, 129, 131, 133, 135, 136 Narrowe, M. H. 84
Hannah, D. D. 104, 117, 118 Noy, D. 127
Harl, M. 79
Hasel, G. F. 63 Oesch, J. M. 19
Hengel, M. 127, 128 Olley, J. W. 2, 19
Hffken, P. 3 Olofsson, S. 58
Horbury, W. 3, 9, 54, 105, 11315, 119, Olyan, S. M. 109
120, 127, 140, 141 Ottley, R. R. 2, 21, 29, 35, 37, 38, 53,
Horn, S. H. 60 58, 60, 62, 85, 9395, 130
Horsley, G. H. R. 45
Hultgrd, A. 113 Pao, D. W. 48
Parry, D. W. 82
Jannaris, A. 46, 148 Pietersma, A. 8, 9
Janzen, J. G. 45 Puech, E. 112
Jepsen, A. 15 Pulikottil, P. 50
Johnson, B. 147
Rahlfs, A. 75, 95
Kaiser, O. 86 Ringgren, H. 88, 147
Kamesar, A. 71 Rogland, M. 120
Kittel, R. 72 Rooke, D. W. 110
Klein, G. L. 120 Rose, W. H. 52
Knibb, M. A. 3, 9, 111, 112, 157 Rsel, M. 60, 72, 85, 87, 88, 91, 92, 94,
Koenig, J. 2729, 31, 3539, 152 96, 97, 100, 101, 141
Korpel, M. C. A. 19, 20 Rothenberg, B. 28
Kuyper, L. J. 84 Ruprecht, E. 151
Rutherford, G. W. 25
Le Boulluec, A. 134
Lonas, A. 14 Sacchi, P. 3
Levene, D. 28 Salvesen, A. 9, 141
Lichtenberger, H. 102 Sandevoir, P. 134
Lowth, R. 47 Sawyer, J. F. A. 84
Lust, J. 35, 72, 81, 92, 93, 100, 104, Schaper, J. 4, 5, 7, 56, 108, 115, 142
116, 121, 123, 124, 13032, 141 Schiffman, L. H. 83
Ltkemann, L. 75, 95 Schmid, H. 88
Index of Authors 189
Schkel, L. A. 7 van Bekkum, W. J. 84

Schrenk, G. 54 van der Kooij, A. 1, 6, 10, 1317, 31,
Schunck, R. D. 103 3335, 3740, 45, 56, 57, 66, 72,
Schweitzer, S. J. 2 85, 10710, 127
Seeligmann, I. L. 1, 13, 17, 2931, 34, van der Louw, T. 9, 10
37, 39, 45, 50, 53, 56, 6164, 66, VanderKam, J. C. 110
72, 78, 95, 97, 99, 103, 107, 116,
119, 123, 12528, 134, 135, 146, Watts, J. D. W. 77, 121, 132
150, 15255, 159 Wevers, J. W. 79
Siegert, F. 20 Widengren, G. 63
Sissa, G. 73 Wildberger, H. 15, 27, 46, 47, 60, 62,
Snodgrass, K. 49 64, 76, 77, 86, 87, 92, 98, 99,
Sollamo, R. 138, 143 101, 132, 143, 149, 151
Speier, S. 99 Williamson, H. G. M. 50, 53, 149
Steck, O. H. 19 Willits, J. 63
Stern, H. S. 84 Winter, P. 2
Stuckenbruck, L. T. 115 Wold, B. G. 118
Sullivan, K. P. 114, 117
Sweeney, M. A. 23 Yadin, Y. 114, 115, 117
Yule, G. 25, 26
Talmon, S. 47, 112, 155
Talshir, Z. 45 Ziegler, J. 2, 8, 17, 23, 27, 53, 54, 57,
Taylor, J. E. 126 58, 60, 64, 66, 85, 86, 94, 101,
Tcherikover, V. 127 135, 150
Tov, E. 8, 9, 19, 24, 30, 31, 45, 82 Zillessen, A. 2
Troxel, R. L. 2, 5, 6, 43, 55, 66, 70, 73, Zimmerli, W. 103
76, 77, 79, 80, 85, 8991, 97,
101, 105, 134
Tzevat, M. 74

Rodrigo F. de Sousa Eschatology and Messianism in LXX Isaiah 1-12

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rodrigo F. de Sousa Eschatology and Messianism in LXX Isaiah 1-12

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LIBRARY OF HEBREW BIBLE/

OLD TESTAMENT STUDIES

THE HEBREW BIBLE AND ITS VERSIONS

Rodrigo Franklin de Sousa

T & T Clark International, 80 Maiden Lane, New York, NY 10038

T & T Clark International is a Continuum imprint.

Visit the T & T Clark blog at www.tandtclarkblog.com

2.5. The Exaltation and Glorication of the Remnant 63

The present work is a revised version of my doctoral dissertation, which

Soli Deo Gloria

GKC Gesenius Hebrew Grammar. Edited by E. Kautzsch. Translated

RSV Revised Standard Version

Following signicant developments in research, the LXX books in

1. The Nature and Purpose of this Study

5. A. Zillessen, Bemerkungen zur alexandrinischen bersetzung des Jesaja (c.

three very important messianic texts, namely, the well-known oracles in

2. The State of the Discussion

10. J. Schaper, Messianism in the Septuagint of Isaiah and Messianic Intertextu-

  of the Lord.13 Upon close scrutiny, however, the

13. Schaper, Messianic Intertextuality, 374.

raise suspicion against the presence of messianic elements in LXX Isaiah

To be sure, the presence of a word such as  is not necessary

3. The Method of this Study

whether the translator is dominated by an expectation of die Endzeit, but whether,

approach the received version as a theological document, it is important

overall character of the translation will the scholar be in a position to

passages in LXX Isa 112 is carried out according to a framework that

awareness to inform his translational decisions at several points.31 My

actualizing or messianic. These are displayed not only in the transla-

THE TRANSLATOR AS READER

1. Actualizing Interpretation and Contextual Readings

The contribution of van der Kooij in directing our attention to a more

attempts to represent and communicate the basic meaning of the text, as

Zieglers insights are still to a large extent useful, particularly in

2. Pericope Delimitation in LXX Isaiah

itself, when compared with Hebrew texts, primarily Masoretic or from

2.1. LXX Isaiah 1:2127

2.2. LXX Isaiah 2:5, 10; 3:13

25. H. Cazelles, Texte massortique et Septante en Is. 2,15, in Festschrift

28. However, see the interesting choice of , 9 in 5:15.

thought units, or new sections, 3:13 becomes signicant in the light of

2.3. LXX Isaiah 6:1

2.4. Pericope Delimitation and Reading

30. See the literal rendering of 

3. Contextual Awareness as Reading Strategy

39. R. Cribiore, Gymnastics of the Mind: Greek Education in Hellenistic and

fundamental level, by socio-cultural knowledge that shapes the inter-

4. Reading Strategy and Ideological Imprints

    # + 3 : # <

42. The rendering of 

(your sinners). B. D. Chilton, The Isaiah

With the addition of  after # =, which is obviously inu-

44. As for the possibility of  , the Hiphil of   is never rendered by , 

itself indicates, such dependence would necessarily imply a number of

52. Seeligmann, Isaiah, 95.

Although articial, this distinction can be useful. First of all, one

5. A Case Study: LXX Isaiah 8:1116

Theologically Motivated Exegesis Embedded in the Septuagint, in The Greek and

5.1. Parallel Translation

Do not say conspiracy Do not say It is hard;

And if you are trusting in him,

Bind the testimony; Then, will be manifest

This rendering is conspicuously reminiscent of 1:24, where 

60. Seeligmann, Isaiah, 104.

of the Lord.13 Upon close scrutiny, however, the

To be sure, the presence of a word such as is not necessary

28. However, see the interesting choice of , 9 in 5:15.

30. See the literal rendering of

# + 3 : # <

42. The rendering of

With the addition of after # =, which is obviously inu-

44. As for the possibility of , the Hiphil of is never rendered by ,

This rendering is conspicuously reminiscent of 1:24, where

and analogically read as abbreviated forms of . He points to Symmachuss version

Van der Kooij examines the rendering of by % in

: could have originated in misreading for . It is also con-

mountain), after in the following parallel. If both -

8. For , rendered as *6 in Isaiah, Micah has ,

26. Cf. BDB, II, 626.

2.2. The of God

marked preference for +, and employed it for a large number of

The rendering of by % comes from under-

+ renders ! , and while it is conceivable that the translator saw it

0 0 X3 % %

0 possibly originates from reading the preposition in a temporal

The insertion of % (after these things)an expression also

79. On the meaning of

0 S % )

The rendering of the parallel occurrences of by / 3 and /< 3

+ O 8 6 / (For the earth shall be

1.1. The Rendering of by

2. For the history of interpretation of

1.2. The Futuristic Rendering of

> , : ! %

34. For the understanding of ( to express the certainty of a negative outcome,