SEP TUAGINT (Gr. Hoi ton 0, or 0; Let. Septuaginta; Seventy, LXX., Alexan drine version, etc.), the most ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament that lies come down to us, and the one commonly in use among the Jews at the time of Christ. Its origin is shrouded in deep obscurity. The principal myth about it—repeated by Philo, .losephus, the Talmud, and the church fathers (Justin, Clement of Alexandria, Epiphanius, and the rest), with individual variations—is contained in a letter purporting to be written by a Greek, Aristeas, to his brother, Philokrates, during the reign of Ptol emy Piilladelphus (28-1-247 u.c.). This king, it is stated. anxious to embody in a collec tion the laws of all nations on which he was engaged. also those of the Jews, invited, by the advice of his librarian, Demetrius Phalereus, '1"2 men of learning and eminence from Palestine, who performed the task of translation (on the isle of Pharos) in 72 days. The facts upon which this legend—utterly rejected now as a piece of history—rests, cannot well be ascertained now. So much, however, seems clear from another anterior testimony (Aristobalus), that Ptqlemy, aided by Demetrius, did cause a Greek version of the Penta teuch to be executed, probably during the time of his being coregent of Ptolemy Lagi. That the translator or translators, however, were not Palestinian but Egyptian Jews, appears equally clear both from the state of the text from which tee transtation must have b:en made, anti from the intimate acquaintance with Egyptian manners and cus toms which it evinces. Tliis text differs, especially in the Pentateuch, considerably from our received text, but agrees in many instances with the Samaritan (q.v.). The question of the nil:111)er of translators has been much and warmly discussed, but with little positive result. So much only seems certain, that different hands were employed iu the render ing of the different parts of the Pentateuch, upon which infinite care was be,otowed. as well Is of the other books of the Old Testament, which, indeed, do not seem to have been done at the same time. In some instances, it would appear as if the translation hid
bcea made before the non-pentatenehial books were united with the others into one canon. This seem; particularly evident in the case of the book of Jeremiah. which, in the translation, appears in a more primitive form than in the state in which we possess it now. In a less degree does this discrepancy appear in Job, the Proverbs, Daniel, and Esther; of these, however, our canon probably contains the original form, while the LXX. shows later variants. It is, however, in neither of these books to be decided now whether the discrepancies observable are due to an already altered text upon which the translators worked, or whether they were their own emendations; or even whether many of them are not due to a lunch later period. The translation of the book of Daniel is the most flagrant instance of subsequently introduced "corrections" and additions. Apart from the apocryphal pieces attached to it. its obscure passages were "emendated " to such an extent by both Jews and Christians, that it was by the authority of the early church utterly rejected, and replaced by the version of TheOcintion. The translator of Job, though less arbitrary, has yet altered. added to, and abbreviated considerably, his text. Esther has many apocryphal additions, which owe their origin probably to the Alexandrine period, and never existed in Hebrew. Of exaggerated literalness is the version of Ecclesiastes and the Psalms. Among the most successful books are to be mentioned the Psalms and Ezekiel. Bnt, on the whole, there is to he noticed throueth out, a lack of an exact knowledge of the original, a striving after minute fidelity in one part, and an unbridled arbitrariness in another; further, a desire to tone down or to utterly eliminate antbropomorphisms or anything that appeared objectionable to the refined taste of the time.