I. Wring in the ancient Near East (ANE)
A. Sumerian writing
1. 4000 BC
2. Pictographic
3. Strengths
i. Used to assist in running complex bureaucracies
ii. Relatively easy translate
4. Weaknesses
i. Large number of signs that were necessary to
express thought
ii. Polyphones/homophones (Polyphone is a single
sign that can have more than one phonetic value
[sound]. Homophones are phonetically identical
[same sound] but they have different meanings.
B. Akkadian writing
1. 3000 BC
2. Cuneform: wedge-shaped signs created by pressing a
triangular-shaped stylus into clay tablets
Strengths:
i. Earliest attested Sematic language
ii. Helps us understand Hebrew
3. Weaknesses:
i. Not exclusively syllabic
ii. 600-700 signs
C. Egyptian Writing
1. 3200 BC
2. Pictographic ideograms (things, actions, concepts) and
phonograms (sounds).
3. Weaknesses:
i. Restricted for specific uses
ii. Limited to administrative purposes
D. Alphabetic Writing
1. First half of 2nd Millennium BC by Canaanites in Egypt
2. Acrophobic writing- individual letters that look like an object
which began with that sound.
3. Strengths
i. Convenient and highly adaptable
ii. Easily taught, even to children
4. Weaknesses:
i. Not consistent in how it was read (right-left/left-
right)
ii. 600-700 signs
II. Hebrew Texts of the Old Testament
A. The biblical texts from Qumran (dead Sea Scrolls)
1. History/Origin
i. 3rd -1st century BC
ii. Qumran caves yielded biblical and non-biblical
writings
2. Character
i. There are at least fragments of all the OT books
except for the book of Esther
ii. Most of these were written in the square script,
and a minority are written in Paleo-Hebrew script
3. Evaluation of uselessness
i. These take the textual scholar back around 1000
years earlier than previously known Hebrew
manuscript evidence
ii. These have demonstrated large-scale agreement
with the later Masoretic texts
iii. These have provided more variant readings to
judge the text against
B. The Samaritan Pentateuch
1. History/Origin
i. 9th century AD
ii. Produced by off-shoot of traditional
Judaism/Jerusalemites
2. Character
i. Contains only the Torah as it was preserved by the
Samaritan community
ii. We now know of 150 manuscripts of the Samaritan
Pentateuch
3. Evaluation of usefulness
i. With the discovery of the Qumran scrolls, the place
and value of the SP has now been established
ii. The ideological additions of the SP need not cast
doubt on its text-critical value
iii. The SP may preserve some older readings that are
independent of the Masoretic Text, and it makes an
important contribution to the discussion of the
relationship between the major textual traditions
of the OT.
C. The Masoretic Text
1. History/Origin
i. 8th-10th century AD
ii. Hebrew text tradition that became normative
within Judaism, was carefully preserved, and is not
the most important witness of the text of the OT
2. Character
i. Includes accentuation, vocalization, and paratextual
elements
ii. It also includes helpful notes on translation and
interpretation
3. Evaluation of Usefulness
i. Because it is Hebrew, it has not undergone the
additional layer of changes that come with
translation.
ii. It is distinct from the Samaritan Pentateuch
iii. It has been carefully preserved and serves as the
basis of almost all of our English translations of the
OT and it is rightly the primary object of OT
exegesis
III. Ancient Translation of the Old Testament
A. The Septuagint (LXX)
1. History/Origin
i. Earliest known translation of the OT (285-246 BC)
ii. Created in Alexandria and Egypt
2. Character
i. Our most complete manuscripts of the LXX are
codices from late antiquity into the medieval
period.
ii. Codex Vaticanus (B) is complete and most
important (4th century AD); Sinaiticus contains
large portion of OT; Codex Alexandrius (A) complete
with small omissions
3. Evaluation of usefulness
i. Complete (unlike Qumran Scrolls)
ii. Because the original Old Greek translation was
made so early, it is a written to a Hebrew source
text before the standardization of the Hebrew
tradition.
B. Aramaic
1. History/Origin
i. Referred to as "targum" first formed around the
time of Ezra in postexilic community
ii. One reader would stand at the front of the
synagogue and read the Hebrew text from the
open scroll. Then a second man would translate
into Aramaic.
2. Character
i. Targums present a translation that recreates 85-
100% of the original linguistic information
ii. Sometimes a targum fills in exegetical details
3. Evaluation of usefulness
i. Although the basic translation might be quiet
literal, the many expansion s and harmonization
make it
C. Cyriac Peshitta
1. History/Origin
i. 1-2 Century AD
ii. Formed in Edessa in a largely pagan context by
people connected both the Christianity and
Judaism. (It was rejected by Jews because, like the
LXX, it had become the Bible of the Church).
2. Character
i. Like the LXX, it is a more literal translation of each
Hebrew word without additional comment
ii. Intended to serve as a replacement of the Hebrew
OT rather than a commentary
3. Evaluation of Usefulness
i. Not a significant as the LXX
ii. Not as welcomed as the Masoretic
D. Latin Vulgate
1. History/Origin
i. Written by Jerome/Eusebius Hieronmus
ii. 390-405 AD
2. Character
i. He translated the Hebrew text closely and carefully,
but he also translated according to theological
convictions
ii. Whenever the language was ambiguous or left
room for a Christological interpretation, Jerome
took the opportunity to translate in a way to
support that nuance.
3. Evaluation of Usefulness
i. Significance is lessened by interference from Old
Latin and the LXX
ii. It shares a Hebrew source with Masoretic and adds
little to understanding the original words--i.e. it is
of limited value for textual criticism.
