History of the Septuagint (Full Script)

Too lazy to read?  Watch the video!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3f82WxIx5Q

History of the Septuagint

Post-Apostolic Church

INTRO

This is the second video in a series on the Septuagint.  If you haven't already, please see the introduction video.

Here, we will talk about the Letter of Aristeas, the Septuagint's translation process, where it was translated, and a popular legend behind it.

LETTER OF ARISTEAS

There are two ancient sources for the history of the Septuagint: the letter of Aristeas and the early Jewish writings such as the Babylonian Talmud, Philo of Alexandria, and Josephus.

The Letter of Aristeas is a primary source, which means it was written around the same time that the Septuagint was translated.  Aristeas lived in Alexandria, Egypt and was a witness to--and had a hand in--how the Septuagint came to be.  His letter goes into great detail on how this happened.  The letter is lengthy, having 322 verses.  To summarize it, the letter recounts the following:

(1) how he asked  Ptolemy II, king of Egypt, to translate the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek and add  them to his Library at Alexandria,

(2) how he persuaded Ptolemy to release the Jews who were taken captive by his father, Ptolemy I,

(3) the letters between Ptolemy II and Eleazar, the high priest, requesting the translation,

(4) Aristeas' travels to Jerusalem and his detailed account of the temple, Jerusalem, and the surrounding area,

(5) Aristeas' questions to Eleazar and Eleazar's answers concerning unclean things in the Law of Moses,

(6) Eleazar sending the 72 Jewish scholars to Ptolemy and the banquets they had with him where he posed each man a question and each of them gave his answer, and finally,

(7) the translation process of the Septuagint along with its enthusiastic approval.

Aristeas' descriptions of the temple, Jerusalem, and the surrounding area are particularly valuable because this was the same temple and same Jerusalem where Jesus spent time about 300 years later.  (However, the temple did suffer some damage under the siege of Pompey in 63 BC and the siege of Herod the Great in 37 BC.)  While in Jerusalem, Aristeas speaks with Eleazar, the high priest, and asks him questions regarding why God prohibited the use of unclean meats.

The middle one third of the letter records the questions which king Ptolemy asked each of the 72 scholars and the very wise answers they gave.

CRITICISMS

It would be unfair to continue without mentioning some criticisms against the letter of Aristeas.

Firstly, one of the answers that Eleazar gives in regard to unclean meats involves the weasel.  He says that the weasel conceives through its ears and gives birth through its mouth.  This seems to have been a popular view among the ancients, which even persisted into the Middle Ages.  From one perspective, you cannot blame them.  The weasel was unclean, so the Jews would have no reason to ever observe or handle weasels.  About this myth regarding the weasel, this was discussed in my video on the Letter of Barnabas, who, like Aristeas, was also from Alexandria.  Click here or in the description to jump to that video where I discuss this myth.

Secondly, because the Ptolemy dynasty reused their names over and over, this makes it hard to identify which Ptolemy ruled Egypt when the Septuagint’s translation began.  Aristeas says that Ptolemy's assistant was named Demetrius.  In secular history, as recorded by Hermippus of Smyrna, who also lived during this time (Lives of the Eminent Philosophers by Diogenes Laertius, Book 5, Verse 78), he wrote that Demetrius of Phalerum was an assistant to Ptolemy I and opposed the coming kingship of Ptolemy II.  As soon as Ptolemy II became king, he imprisoned Demetrius who died in prison.  So according to Hermippus, Demetrius was under Ptolemy I.  However, secular history shows that the Library of Alexandria did not begin until Ptolemy II.  So according to Aristeas, Demetrius and the Library were from the same time.  The accounts of Aristeas and Hermippus do not agree though both are primary sources.  Because of these contradicting sources, scholars have said that the letter of Aristeas is not an accurate account of history.  Now, both would be correct if there was a different man named Demetrius under Ptolemy II.  In the end, I agree with Aristeas for the following reasons.  Aristeas was a first-hand witness to these events while Hermippus was not.  The Jewish historian, Josephus, also agreed with Aristeas (Antiquities, book 12, verse 1).   Another who agreed was Tertullian who said that he had read Aristeas' letter [ANF, 3.32].  Further, there is a minor Pre-Nicene writer named Theonas of Alexandria who lived around AD 300 who also read Aristeas' letter and specifically said it was Ptolemy II.  (ANF, 6.160).  However, Irenaeus agreed with Hermippus, saying that it was during the reign of Ptolemy I (ANF, 1.451).  And Clement of Alexandria agreed with Hermippus, saying that it was Demetrius of Phalerum ( ANF, 2.334).  This matter was so confusing that Clement of Alexandria did not take a side and mentioned both kings, writing,

The Scriptures both of the law and of the prophets were translated from the dialect of the Hebrews into the Greek language in the reign of Ptolemy the son of Lagos [Ptolemy I], or, according to others, of Ptolemy surnamed Philadelphus [Ptolemy II].  (Clement of Alexandria.  AD 195.  ANF, vol 2, page 334.)

There is additional evidence within the letter of Aristeas to show that Ptolemy II was the king.  This included when Eleazar was high priest and when Ptolemy’s sea battles against other Greek kings [Antiochus I Soter and, especially, Antiochus II Theos] occurred.  All the evidence most strongly supports that the king of Aristeas’ day was Ptolemy II.

TRANSLATION PROCESS

Now, on to how the Septuagint’s translation began.  Aristeas describes the translation process of the Septuagint at Alexandria like this....

Demetrius lead the 72 Jewish scholars along a seawall which was 7 stadia long to a secluded house on the northern side of the island of Pharos.  The men lived there and translated the work in 72 days.  Each day before they resumed their work, they would go to Ptolemy's court and salute the king.  Then on their way back to the island, they washed their hands in the Mediterranean and prayed to God.  When the work was completed, Demetrius took the final copy and read it in the presence of the Jewish people, who were composed of the translators, priests, elders, and everyday Jews.  They all said it was so excellent, sacred, and accurate that they declared a curse be put on anyone who would change it or remove anything from it.  The Jewish elders asked for copies of it.  Then Demetrius took it to the king and read it to him.

The Jewish Mishnah, which is part of the Babylonian Talmud (Mishnah, book 10 (Megillah), page 9) says that the books translated at this time were only the books of Moses, that is, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.  Over the next 150 years, other scholars in Alexandria translated Old Testament books from the Hebrew and added them to the Septuagint.

About the island of Pharos, this is no longer an island today, but it was during this ancient time.  History records that Ptolemy I built a causeway from Egypt's mainland to the island, called the Heptastadion.  This causeway was 7 stadia long, exactly like the seawall that Aristeas described.  Aristeas said that the 72 Jewish scholars were taken to a secluded house on the northern part of the island.  Since the only building at that location is the famous Lighthouse of Alexandria, there is plenty of evidence to show that the Septuagint was translated there.  The Lighthouse is one of the Seven Wonders of the World! ...along with the Great Pyramid of Giza and Nebuchadnezzar's Hanging Gardens of Babylon.

From the time of its translation on, the Septuagint became the accepted Greek translation by all of Judaism.  Philo of Alexandria, a Jewish historian and a contemporary of Jesus, praised the translation (On the Life of Moses 2, chapters 5-7).  Josephus, a Jewish historian in the late first century AD, also praised the translation and gave a lengthy summary of the Letter of Aristeas (Antiquitites, book 12).

LEGEND

The Septuagint was so highly praised that there was a popular legend that the Septuagint was translated miraculously.  Irenaeus wrote,

Wishing to test them [the translators] individually and fearing that they might take counsel together and conceal the truth in the Scriptures in their interpretations, [Ptolemy I] separated them from each other and commanded them all to write the same translation.  He did this with respect to all the books.  When they came together in the same place before Ptolemy, each of them compared his own interpretation with that of the other.  God was indeed glorified and the Scriptures were acknowledged as truly divine.  For all of them read out [loud] the common translation in the very same words and the very same names, from beginning to end, so that even the Gentiles present perceived that the Scriptures had been interpreted by the inspiration of God.  (Irenaeus.  AD 180.  ANF, vol 1, page 151-152.)

Justin Martyr says something similar also.  He even wrote,

These things... are no fable, nor do we narrate fictions.  (Justin Martyr.  AD 160.  ANF, vol 1, page 279.)

This legend seems to have originated in Jewish tradition.  It is found in the Babylonian Talmud, an ancient set of Jewish writings from the 3^rd to 5^th centuries AD.  It is hard to say where this legend originated.  The earliest reference we have to the legend might be Philo of Alexandria, who supported it (On the Life of Moses 2, chapter 7).

However, Aristeas, who was a witness to these things, wrote that the translators went to great efforts in order to make the translation the best it could be,

So they [the translators] set to work comparing their several results and making them agree, and whatever they agreed upon was suitably copied out under the direction of Demetrius.  (Aristeas.  AD 250.  Verse 302.)

Josephus repeats this in his lengthy summary of Aristeas' letter.  Clement of Alexandria also agreed with Aristeas and Josephus, writing,

Demetrius Phalereus brought to this task the greatest earnestness and employed painstaking accuracy on the materials for the translation.  (Clement of Alexandria.  AD 195.  ANF, vol 2, page 334.)

So some ancient writers believed in this legend and some did not.  But based on the eye-witness account of Aristeas, it appears that this legend about the Septuagint being miraculously translated is an exaggeration.  Yet, the fact that this legend existed should stand as an example of how the ancient Jews and the early Christians praised the Septuagint.

Conclusion

And so, this is how the Septuagint came to be.

The next video in this series is about the differences between the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint.

The Septuagint's popularity certainly declined within 100 years after Jesus' coming.  For more history about the Septuagint and why it is not popular today, please see the fourth video in this series about differences between the Septuagint and the Masoretic Text in view of New Testament quotations from the Old Testament.

There are links to these on the screen and in the description.  Thank you for watching!

Update - March 2016

Starting this month, I will make monthly posts on this blog about what I am doing behind the scenes.  I will share specifics on what I'm studying and how the videos are going.

I may also share some little tidbits on things that I am learning outside of this channel.

So...

History of the Septuagint
The next video is the History of the Septuagint.  The script is written and the video is prepared.  I just need to do some final review on the script and then record the audio.  I plan to post it this Friday!

Notable Differences Between the Masoretic and the Septuagint
This is the following video, the third video in this series on the Septuagint.  For it, I'm working on getting familiar with the books in the Septuagint that are not in the Protestant Bible.  This includes the books of the Maccabees, Tobit, Wisdom, Sirach, Judith, and others.

As I have read through the non-Protestant books, I have been making detailed notes to their historicity.  (For example, I'm absolutely floored as to how accurate 1 Maccabees is to our current understanding of that period in history!)  I have read all of them except: half of Sirach, half of Baruch, and all of 4 Maccabees.  (I'm not sure if I will study 4 Maccabees or not.  It wasn't exactly included in the Septuagint.)  Part of the reason I want to read them is to be familiar with them.  I'm sure that I will get some comments asking about these books or challenging me on them.  So I need to be familiar with them.  I certainly don't want to share something inaccurate either.

Jews Under Persia
As far as what I'm studying outside of this channel is this.  I'm currently teaching a class on Sunday mornings on the Jews Under Persia.  We are going through Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi in chronological order.  I plan to post a video on this chronological order sometime later this year.  It's incredible!  In that class, we've covered most of those books.  As we study them, I have written commentaries on each one.  All we have left is half of Nehemiah and Malachi.  Once I am done with this class, I can devote more time to this channel.

-Andrew