Text encoded in accordance with the latest EpiDoc standards (January 2014)
1. 1. Ἀμὼς] Not the same name as the prophet Amos. The final letter is in Heb. y, i.e. ts, sometimes represented by z, as in Zephaniah; or in Amaziah, of whom tradition makes this Amoz the brother, but on no ascertainable grounds. (The Heb. names of Tyre and Zidon both begin with this letter.
κατὰ] Either generally, ‘concerning Judah and ’: as Ezek. xix. 4; or more definitely, ‘against,’ as in 2 Sam. i. 17, Matt. 11, Acts vi. 13. See Liddell and Scott on κατά, Α. 11. 5, 6; where such instances as Plat. Apol. 37 B, Protag. 323 B (of persons) seem to imply condemnation.
2. On the use of the aorist, see Vol. 1. Introd. ‘Methods of Rendering,’ p. 43.
ἐγέννησα] Scholz considers that the Lxx. probably read a verb
from root ἢν instead of
3. Cf. Jerem. viii. 7.
4. σπέρμα πονηρὸν] The phrase recurs in Heb. and Gr., xiv. 20 (not elsewhere).
ἐγκατελείπετε, read by AQ, is probably intended for the aorist (itacism).
LXX. omits ‘they are gone away backward’: some cursives, mainly Lucianic and Q mg, supply the words from Aquila's version.
5. ‘Every head, every heart’: so the Greek, and Vulg. caput, omne cor.’ The Heb. has no article, and opinions vary between ‘every’ and ‘the whole,’ which Ewald, Lowth, Kay, Skinner, c. with A.V. (and R.V. text). Cheyne compares with the verse Jerem. xvii. 9, Gen. viii. 21. εἰς before πόνον corresponds to Heb.
Kay construed the first part of the verse, ‘Wherefore will ye be still smitten, that ye revolt yet more?’ which is not far from the mac. rendering.
6. The construction is broken; the negatives appear to be cumulative: ‘from feet to head, neither (to) wound, nor scar, nor inflamed hurt, is there any means to apply ... c.’ Most of the cursive MSS. (but not 26 49 106 144 301 ; 48 marks with an asterisk) supply the words οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν αὐτῷ ὁλοκληρία from Aquila, agreeing with the Hebrew; this however makes οὔτε before τραῦμα, μώλωψ, and πληγὴ no easier. For ὁλοκληρία, cf. Acts iii. 16. The word does not occur again in the LXX., but the adjective ὁλόκληρος is found, Lev. xxiii. 15, c.; in N.T. James i. 4, 1 Thess. v. 23.
With this verse compare Ps. xxxviii. 7. Lowth compares Euripides,
Herc. Fur. 1245,
8. ὀπωροφυλάκιον] Cf. xxiv. 20. Some temporary watching-place, lonely and frail. Cf. “as melancholy as a lodge in a warren,” Much Ado, Act II. Sc. i. 221. Here first occurs the mention of a vineyard; an idea worked out in chap. v., and recalled in chap. xxvii.
The Heb. in Ps. lxxix. 1 is different.
9. mm. omits ‘very small,’
σπέρμα] ‘remnant,’ A.V. and R.V. ; but not the same Heb. word as in vii. 3 (Shear-jashub), x. 21. The present word may be seen in Deut. ii. 34 (ζωγρείαν), Josh. x. 20 διασωζόμενοι διεσώθησαν), and ii. 32, where LXX. has εὐαγγελιζόμενοι. It is however rendered σπέρμα in Deut. iii. 3. This verse is quoted, Rom. ix. 29, according to the LXX. For the comparison to Sodom and Gomorrah, see Ezek. xvi. 46 Jerem. xxiii. 14, Matt. xi. 23, Luke x. 12, Jude 7.
10. προσέχετε] Same Heb. word as that rendered by ἐνωτίζου, ver. 2.
νόμος in the Lxx. regularly represents Heb. torah, meaning ‘direction’ or ‘instruction,’ and applied to the Mosaic ‘Law.’
11. The prophets constantly urge, by rebuke and otherwise, the importance of spiritual and practical religion above, and even against, mere ceremonies. Cf. xxix. 13, lviii. 2—6, lxvi. 3 : Joel ii. 13, Amos 21—24, Micah vi. 6—8, Jerem. vii. 3—6, Zech. vii. 510 and esp. Hosea vi. 6, quoted Matt. ix. 13, xii. 7.
12, 13. The Lxx. coincides in words, but not in syntax or divisions of clauses, with the Heb.
προσθήσεσθε] προστίθημι, in act. or mid., is used constantly in the
13. σεμίδαλιν] Heb. minchah, often rendered in A.V. ‘meat- (R.V. ‘meal-’) offerings, Levit. ii. 1, c. Of Jacob's ‘presents,’ Gen. 13, xliii. 11 δῶρα, δῶρον, as in lxvi. 20; but lxvi. 3 as here). It seems best to supply ἐὰν φέρητε again before θυμίαμα.
νηστοία A solemn fast, perhaps esp. of the Day of Atonement,
Acts xxvii. 9; ἀργία, Sabbatical (here hypocritical) doing of no work.
Lxx. differs from Heb., and Lowth suggested that they read
14. ἀνήσω. The meaning of the word seems to be to ‘let go’ whether favourably, to remit, let off; or unfavourably, to abandon, as in v.6. Kay compares Rom. iii. 25, πάρεσιν ἀμαρτημάτων; see also Eph. vi. 9, and Heb. xiii. 5, cf. Deut. xxxi. 6, 8.
The Heb. however has, ‘1 am weary of bearing]
16. παύσασθε...(17) μάθετε καλὸν ποιεῖν] The Greek clauses correspond less exactly than the Heb.
ἀπὸ ταῖν ψυχαῖν] Govett (Isaiah Unfulfilled) suggested that LXX.'s
reading was
17. κρίνειν with dat. is hardly classical or usual Greek; it seems to suggest the interest of the orphans in receiving justice. Also in Ps. X. 13 (ix. 39) κρῖναι ὀρφανῷ καὶ ταπεινῷ, and below, ver. 23.
χήραν] So most MSS.; iustificate viduam, Cyp. Test. i. 24, iii. 113 Iren.-lat. IV. xvii. 1 and Lucifer. B*Q* 144 147* read χήρᾳ, and so Clem. Rom. 15;). Car. viii. one MS. Perh. assimilated to preceding clause.
18. διελεγχθῷμεν] Either ‘let us be tested, to convict the one that is wrong’: or with middle force, ‘let us reason the matter out.’ the Hebrew. Q* reads διελέγχωμεν, perhaps dropping a letter by accident: but Cyp. Test. i. 24 has disputemus. Cf. xliii. 26, κριθῶμεν, where Heb. is also different.
καὶ δᾶν] Best taken separately, as in ver. 19; ‘and if,’ ‘although.
φοινικοῦν...κόκκινον...λευκανῶ] Cf. Ps. li. 7. If scarlet or crimson
ἔριον] Cf. Dan. vii. 9. Wool was most carefully bleached in ancient times, and so forms a parallel to snow: Virg. Georg. III. 391 “munere niveo lanae’
19. ἐὰν θέλητε] Cf. Matt. xxiii. 37, ποσάκις ἠθελήσα...καὶ οὐκ ἠθελήσατε φάγεσθε] φάγομαι is constantly used as a future form in LXX., and in N.T., as Luke xiv. 15.
21. Σιὼν] Not in the Heb.; perhaps added here from ver. 26.
ἐν ἦ...ἐν αὐτῇ] An imitation of the usual relative construction in Hebrew, which does not however occur here. See Introd. to vol. 1. ‘Methods of Rendering,’ p. 41.
22. ἀδόκιμον] Not bearing a test, rejected by it ; a paraphrase of the Heb. Compare Jerem. vi. 30, Ezek. xxii. 18 foll. The Greek word is often used by St Paul, Rom. i. 28, c. (‘reprobate’), I Cor. ix. 27, and in Heb. vi. 8; in the LXX., Prov. xxv. 4.
A repeats a clause here, obviously from ver. 7 ; forming a complete line of the MS.
oἱ κάπηλοί σου] Not in the Heb., and the syntax necessarily differs. The word might mean generally ‘traders,’ ‘hucksters,’ or more particularly ‘wine-merchants,’ ‘tavern-keepers.’ “Caupones,” Iren. (lat) Adv. Haer. IV. xii. 1 ; with the comment, “ostendens quod austero Dei praecepto miscerent aquatam traditionem.” Cf. Aesch. Agam. ὑδαρεῖ σαίνειν φιλότητι. The Heb. word ὅπη) means literally ‘cut,’ ‘mutilated’; according to Alexander, who compares Martial, Ep. 1. xix. 5, “scelus est iugulare Falernum.’
23. προσέχοντες] Cf. ver. 10. Originally προσέχειν νοῦν, followed by dative. Lat. animum advertere seems to have run a nearly similar course. The Heb. is paraphrased.
24. δεσπότης] Apparently used here, iii. 1, and x. 33, to render Heb. Adan, a title used, according to Kay, of God “as Supreme Administrator and Judge,” It occurs also Exod. xxiii. 17, xxxiv. Mal. iii. 1, and Isai. x. 16, xix. 4. Notice Jerem. xxii. 18.
σαβαὼθ] LXX. transliterates this word in Isaiah and in I Sam.,
renders by δυνάμεων in Psalms, as xxiv. 10, lix. 5, lxix. 6, and a few
other passages, as 2 Sam. vi. 18; generally by παντοκράτωρ elsewhere,
as Jerem. v. 14, Amos iv. 13, v. 15, ix. 15, Micah iv. 4, c. In
xlvi. (xxvi.) 10, AQ insert, in Zech. xiii. 2 they omit σαβαώθ, against
The title is variously explained as referring to
(a) the stars ; so Cheyne, and perhaps Delitzsch.
(b) armies, i.e. primarily those of Israel; so Schrader; Dominus exercituum, Vulgate; (K^p«oc) rrparni»¥, Aquila; dvrdpfMP, Symm., Theod.
(c) the angels ; Ewald.
Texts can be quoted in support of each view ; e.g., Deut. iv. 19, xvii. 3, Jerem. viii. 2, Zeph. i. 5; Gen. xxxii. 1, 2, Exod. vii. 4, Josh. v. 14, I Sam. xvii. 45, Isai. xiii. 4; I Kings xxii. 19, 2 Kings vi. 15, 16, Ps. xxxiv. 7, ciii. 21, civ. 4, cxlviii. 2. It is perhaps a mistake to limit the application ; and so I understand the notes of Bp Lowth and Alexander. See Cheyne's Comm., vol. I. p. II.
04aX] Not a classical Greek interjection, but common in LXX. and
N.T. In the LXX. it generally represents the Hebrew interjections
or of woe or warning ; which are followed usually by noun in
nomin. (or accus.?), in exclamation, or by dat. with
Oval in N.T. generally with dat.; Matt, xviii. 7, xxiii. 14, 15, 23, Luke vi. 24, 25 (nom.), x. 13, xxi. 23. MSS. vary between acc. and dat. in Rev. viii. 13. In Rev. ix. 12, xi. 14, ovai is used as indecl. substan- tive ; so in Ezek. ii. 10, vii. 26, cf. Jerem. xlvi. (xxvi.) 19, which differs from the Hebrew.
οἱ l^xvorm] The Heb. has this in singular, as a further attribute of the Lord.' Most Lucianic MSS. have roU laxCovau A reads Ἰݲλݲηݲμݲ for Ἰݲηݲλݲ, prob. an inadvertence.
25. At Kofopdv] The neut. adjective is equivalent to an abstract
substantive. This is found in classical Greek, especially Plato and.
ads] A late form of future.
πάντας ἀνόμους] Α paraphrase. Heb. ‘thine alloy.’ The addition at the end of the verse is not in B, but in most uncials and about twenty cursives, including most of the Lucianic and 106; the verb ταπεινώσω is omitted by κη] 109 301 305 and five others. It begins a fresh line in A; and perhaps comes from xiii. 11.
26. Σιὼν] belongs to following sentence in Heb., Lxx. inserts γάρ. The special idea in μητρόπολις is an addition.
27. The parallelism is lost, as Lxx. omits ‘her converts’ (returning ones); ℵ* 301 insert the ἡ ἀποστροφὴ αὐτῆς in strict order, and V at end of the verse.
28. ἐγκαταλείποντες A, but most likely meant for aorist, ει for ι. συντελέω in sense of Lat. conficere, ‘to make an end of.
29. ἐπὶ τοῖς εἰδώλοις] So ℵ* AQ, 106 301 and about ten more cursives, with Syro-hex. B reads αἰσχυνθησονται ἀπὸ τῶν εἰδώλων, ‘shall turn in shame from....’ This is nearer to the Hebrew, often uses prepositions of motion with verbs that in themselves express none; and sometimes the converse also. See Davidson, Heb. Syntax, § 101. The meaning of the verb is thus extended; as in 1 Sam. xxiv. 15, ‘judge me (and deliver me) out of thine hand.’ Isai. xxxviii. 17, ‘thou hast loved my soul (so as to save it) from the pit.’ Cf. the Greek of ii. 10, κρύπτεσθε εἷς τὴν γῆν, and perhaps XXV. 6, ἐπὶ τὸ ὅρος... πίονται, ‘they shall go to the mountain to drink.’ The construction is not unknown in classical Greek, especially with ἐκ and ἀπό: as Hom, Ιl. XIV. 153, 4, εἰσεῖδε. . .στᾶσ’ ἐξ Οὐλύμποιο ἀπὸ ῥίου. Plat. Sympos. 212 E, ἵνα ἀπὸ τῆς ἐμῆς κεφαλῆς τὴν τοῦ σοφωτάτου. . .κεφαλὴν ἀναδήσω Cf. Thucyd. 111. 22, παρανῖσχον δὲ καὶ οἱ ἐκ τῆς πόλεως Πλαταιῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ τείχους φρυκτοὺς πολλούς: and possibly Hor. Od. IV. i. “Τempestivius in domum Paulli. . .conissabere Maximi.’
εἰδώλοις] Heb. ‘terebinths,’ ABBRAVE to which ver. 30 retorts. LXX.
which also varies the word for ‘gardens,’ seems to have read
αὐτοὶ] Not in Heb. They followed ‘their own imaginations.’ Cf. 1 Kings xii. 33, ἀπὸ καρδίας αὐτοῦ αὑτοῦ ?).
ἐπαισχυνθήσονται] Α and six cursives have future, other MSS. the
aorist. Hebrew has 2nd pers. imperf. with ναν not conversive. Lxx.
30. ἀποβεβληκυῖα τὰ Φύλλα] Cf. xxxiv. 4, and Rev. vi. ὡς συκῆ βάλλει τοὺς ὀλύνθους αὐτῆς.
31. οἱ ἄνομοι καὶ οἱ ἁμαρτωλοὶ] Cf. ver. 28, but Heb. has simply ‘they two,’ i.e. the strong and his
ὁ σβέσον] Heb. has participle, but not article.
II. 1. The Lxx. paraphrases this heading to the chapter, and loses the important word ‘saw,’ for which cf. i. ι, xiii. 1, xxx. 10, and the opening words of Amos, Obadiah, Micah, Nahum, and Habakkuk. Ezekiel, i. 1, uses a different verb, the same as in Isai. vi. 1, Amos ix. 1 cf. 1 Sam. ix. 9.
2—4. Opinions differ as to these verses, as to whether they original here, or in Micah iv. 1—3, or copied by both prophets from earlier source. Many authorities think them more naturally placed in Micah, as regards sequence of thought: “the passage fits naturally into its context” (Sinker); “in any case they are not original in Isaiah” (Delitzsch). On the other hand, Micah appears to have been a younger contemporary of Isaiah, and Mic. iii., iv. to date from the time of Hezekiah; whereas Isa. ii.—iv. are placed by practically authorities not later than the beginning of Ahaz’ reign. The that both prophets borrowed from an earlier source is adopted by many critics as a way out of the dilemma; or else that the passage “was assigned by some collectors to Isaiah and by others to Micah” (Prof. A. B. Davidson, in the Temple ample Bible). Other passages are found, common to two prophets; in which case decision is difficult, but there is a tendency, if one prophet uses the words as a sort of starting- point, to suppose them original in the other; see, for instance, Joel iii. 16 and Amos i. 2. But the adapter of the words would be likely to take some care in placing them; as Micah may have done, see Prof. Cheyne, ad loan; and many commentators, later as well as earlier, think they detect likeness to the style of Isaiah here. Isaiah's transitions, moreover, are frequently and markedly abrupt. On the whole, his claim to the original authorship has scarcely been disproved.
2. τὸ ὅρος τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ ὅ οἶκος τοῦ Θεοῦ] Both here and in Micah the Heb. has this as one expression, ‘the mountain of the Lord's house,’ which is afterwards divided into a parallel.
ἐμφανὲς] ἕτοιμον in Micah has this as a duplicate rendering of
ἥξουσιν] In Micah, σπεύσουσιν. Vulgate, fluent, better gives the force of the Hebrew, shall ‘flow’ or ‘stream’; and so in Jerem. xxxi. (xxxviii.) 12 ἥξουσιν, li. xxviii.) 44 συναχθῶσιν, Vulg. confluent
3. ἀναγγελεῖ] δείξουσιν in Micah. Heb. ‘he will teach,’ verb from which Torah comes; see on i. 10.
4. συγκόψουσιν κ.τ.λ.] Cf. Hos. ii. 18, PS. xlvi. 9, c.; the in Joel iii. 10, just as the command of Luke ix. 3 gives place at another time to that of xxii. 36.
Lowth quotes some parallel expressions from the classics:
Virg. Georg. 1, 508,
Ov. Fast. 1. 699,
We may add Virg. Am. VII. 635, 6
5. πορευθῶμεν τῷ φωτὶ] Cf. l. 10, 11, where Lxx. has the same expression, but the Heb. is differently interpreted by most comm.
6. ἀνῆκεν] See above, on i. 14: but here Heb. is ‘for thou hast
forsaken’
ὥς τὸ ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς] Heb. from ‘before,’ used commonly to mean ‘the
East’; cf. ix. 12: also in the sense the LXX. gives, as Ps. lxxvii. 5.
Vulgate, ut olim, is with the Lxx., even to the conjunction. (Some
have wished to emend the Heb. by substituting or inserting a word
differing by one letter—
κληδονισμῶν] The Heb. syntax is lost, but the general sense remains.
ἀλλοφύλων. . .ἀλλόφυλα] This word is generally used, in the LXX. for ‘Philistines,’ from the book of Judges onward; cf. xiv. 29, 31 Exod. xv. I4 (‘Palestina’ in A.V.). In ix. 12, LXX. has Ἕλληνας. here, the second time τέκνα) ἀλλόφυλα is used for ‘children of strangers,’ and so for ‘sons of a stranger’ in lxi. 5, which are oftener ἀλλογενὴς, lVi. 6, lx. 10, Exod. xii. 43 ; υἱοὶ ἀλλότριοι, lxii. 8.
Diviners are mentioned among the Philistines, I Sam. vi. 2 ; Saul was the enemy of both, 1 Sam. xxviii. 3; riddles were popular with them, Judg. xiv. 12 ; Baal-zebub had an oracle at Ekron, 2 Kings i. 2.
τέκνα...ἑγενήθη αὐτοῖς] Heb. is very doubtful in meaning ; properly it would seem, to clap hands, or strike them together ; as Job xxvii. 23. Here interpreted of trading, or of alliance; ‘make bargains,’ or ‘make common cause with...’ Lxx. either interpreted it of personal or else guessed vaguely from τέκνα. Cf. Hosea v. 7. Vulgate ad haeserunt. (Others render, ‘find their sufficiency in...,’ with a noun used in Job xx. 22.)
7, 8. ἐνεπλήσθη....ἀργυρίου...χρυσίου..ἴππων] In direct defiance of Deut. xvii. 16, 17; for how should others be allowed what was forbidden the king ?
ἀριθμὸς] Α number that one can count. Cf. x. 19, which exactly with the Heb.
9. ἄνθρωπος . . .ἀνὴρ] These words answer well enough to Heb. adam. . .ish. So Lat. homo and Mr, Germ. Mensch and Mann. is obliged to fall back on phrases. Cf. v. 15, xxxi. 8 (where some explain differently) and Ps. xlix.
ἀνήσω] Perhaps ἀνοίσω, see on i. 14: ἔξω, ‘forgive,’ primarily ‘bear.’
10. κρύπτεσθε εἰς τήν γῆν] For the use of the preposition, see above, on i. 29. In Hebrew examples occur frequently, as Gen. xiv. 3, 15, Ps. xxviii. 1, lxxxix. 39, lsai. xiv. 17, c. For the idea of the verse Hosea x. 8, quoted Luke xxiii. 30, and Rev. vi. 16; actual instances of such hiding-places, Judg. vi. 2, 1 Sam. xiii. 6, xiv. 11, xxiv. 2, 3, cf. 1 Kings xviii. 13, 2 Kings xiii. 21.
ἀπὸ προσώπου] Α literal rendering of Heb. wan, which is almost as a simple preposition, sometimes meaning little more than ‘because οf’: here the original meaning is hardly lost. Cf. vi. 13 with xvi. 8. For the general idea Kay compares 2 Chron. xvii. 10. See the reference to this passage, 2 Thess. i. 9.
ὅταν. . .τὴν γῆν] This completion of the refrain is not in the Heb. of this verse, but would be easily supplied from ver. 19, 21. The recurring refrain is a feature, apparently, of Isaiah's earlier style, as in chaps. v., ix. 7—x. 4 : possibly due to the fluence of his great Amos; see Amos i. 3, 6, 9, c., iii. 1, iv. 1, v. 1, vii. 1, 4 Here it is twofold, as in Psalm cvii.
11. οἱ γὰρ ὀφθαλμοὶ κ.τ.λ.] The not. have preserved the rootmeanings
of the words, but Κυρίου is an addition, and the syntax is
changed, and with it the sense. Moreover, ταπεινὸς and its cognate
verb correspond to different Hebrew words
12. ἡμέρα γὰρ Κυρίου] LXX., following Hebrew, omits the verb;
but Hebrew has the dat., with
πάντα] So Vulg. omnem superbum,. . .omneni arrogantm, and A.V.; but most modems render by a neuter, as more general: R.V. ‘all that is...’
14, 15. The war. drops the parallelism, and baldly reiterates ὑψηλός. (Vol. 1. Introd. p. 36, note.)
16. πλοῖον θαλάσσης] Probably interpreting Heb. ‘ships of Tarshish’ as sea-going ships, in contrast to river-vessels, such as in xviii. 2. Cf. the Prayer Book rendering of Ps. xlviii. 7 (6).
Θέαν πλοίων κάλλους] πλοίων seems here to be a mistaken addition;
the rest is not far from the Heb., ‘images,’ or ‘objects of desire’: to the
root
18. πάντα] Modems generally construe Heb. ‘utterly’ or ‘the whole.’
κατακρύψουσιν] Rendered as plural in LXX., as if they read final 4 and by Vulg. contermtur, perhaps by grammatical necessity; it is more probably intransitive.
(Scholz suggests that LXX. read qbp for
19. εἰσενέγκαντος] Lxx. substitutes participle, causal, for ‘and they shall go.’ Cf. i. 23, προσέχοντες, for the same Heb. verb. The Greek brings us back to the refrain with a touch of artifice.
20. τοῖς ματαίοις] The Heb. word is believed to mean ‘moles’
(diggers), but was divided in most Mss., owing, probably, to its some-
what unusual form. The Greek may be a mere guess: if
[22.] The Lxx. omits this verse altogether; and probably on this ground in the first place, its genuineness has been suspected by some. It is inserted (from Aquila) by Q mg, and by the Lucianic cursives, and a few others: in 22 and 48 with asterisks, in 36 and 51, and with slight variations in 93, 90 147, 62 228 233 303 305 307 309.
Kay, in the Speaker's Commentary, has an important note on the correspondence of the language of this and the three following chapters to circumstances described in 2 Kings xiv. 22 and 2 Chron. xxvi. ‘Ships of Tarshish’ sailed from Elath, as comparison of 1 Kings ix. 26 and xxii. 48 shows; towers, vine dressing in the mountains, men of valour, cunning atificers, are all mentioned; while ii. 11, iii. 8, v. 15 might suggest the sin of Uzziah and its punishment.
III. 1. ἀπὸ τῆς Ἰουδαίας καὶ ἀπὸ Ἰερ.] So, against the Heb. order, ℵAQ and most cursives, and Old Latin (Cyp. T est. i. 22) ; B has as Heb.
ἰσχύοντα καὶ ἰσχύουσαν] Heb. has two words, masc. and fem. from
2. καὶ ἰσχύοντα] An addition of the not. LXX.: omitted by ℵ*,
doubtful in Q. γίγας=
στοχαστὴν] Heb. ‘diviner.’ The more usual representatives of
this Heb. word and those connected with it (root
3. θαυμαστὸν σύμβουλον] Cf. ix. 6 A. Heb. is not identical.
θαυμαστὸν] Heb. is literally ‘high’ or ’exalted of face.’ expression occurs again ix. 15, where Lxx. have taken it as active, τοὺς τὰ πρόσωπα θαυμάζοντας, in the sense ‘accepters of persons, which the phrase in the active commonly bears (Levit. xix. 15, Job xiii. 8, 10, &c.). The verbal noun in ver. 9 (cf. Deut. i. 17, &c.) different, but seems sometimes to convey very similar force. Its original meaning is probably to look, regard, observe: cf. Matt. xxii. 16, οὐ γὰρ βλέπεις εἷς πρόσωπον ἀνθρώπων.
ἀρχιτέκτονα] So Vulg. sapientem de architectis; very likely right, though some explain it, like the following phrase, of witchcraft; Hexenmeister, Ewald. The judgment did fall especially upon the craftsmen in Jehoiachin's time, 2 Kings xxiv. 14, 16, Jerem. xxiv. 1.
συνετὸν ἀκροατὴν] Heb. ‘skilled in whispering,’ i.e. in incantations. The word is used in plur., ver. 20, of charms or amulets; in xxvi. 16, of whispered prayer. The Greek is not easy to understand perhaps it transfers the idea to the listening for the sounds of mystic charms; or to secret initiation into mysteries: ἀκροᾶσθαι had something of this sense in regard to philosophy, Plutarch. Vit. Alex. vii.
4. νεανίσκους] Delitzsch remarks how the revival of the glory of Solomon (under Uzziah and Jotham) was followed by a repetition of Rehoboam-like folly. Cf. Eccles. x. 16. Many of the kings of Judah came to the throne early, Manasseh at twelve, Ahaz at twenty (?) Josiah at eight, Jehoiachin at eighteen. Ahaz seems to have been wayward (Isai. vii. 12, 13), and, Nero-like, concerned with artistic fripperies (2 Kings xvi. 10—12), instead of weightier matters, and despite of religion.
ἐμπαῖκται] The Heb. word is difficult; it recurs only in lxvi. 4
5. συμπεσεῖται] Heb. ‘shall oppress one another,’ best taken as
reflexive. Unless LXX. read
προσκόψει] Heb. ‘shall rage against,’ or ‘insult.’ The Greek stumbling, as though purposely, against a dignified or infirm elder, to make him fall; Lat. offendere. As an interpretation, it is not without merit : see Kay's note on ver. 6–8.
ἔντιμον] A.V. ‘honourable,’ but a different word from ver. 3. Delitzsch praises the rendering of this clause.
6.
βρῶμα] Α comparison of iv. 1 may have suggested this, and
ὑπὸ σὲ] Heb. ‘under thy hand,’ meaning little more than ‘in thy power,’ panes ta.
7. ἀρχηγὸς] Heb. has not properly ‘ruler’ as before, but a ‘binder up’: which LXX. may have paraphrased to assimilate answer, or taken the Heb. word in a secondary sense of ‘restraining’ or ‘governing.
οὔκ ἔσομαι] As in the former phrase: Heb. has ‘appoint me not...’
8. ἀνεῖται] See on i. 14 ; here= ‘is relaxed,’ vaguer than the Heb. ‘is fallen in ruin.’
Kay is disposed to see here a reference to ’s sin and its punishment: 2 Chron. xxvi. 20.
ἐταπεινώθη]
9. αἰσχύνη τοῦ προσώπου] Some, with R.V. margin, take this of their ‘respect of persons,’ see on ver. 3; but it is more probably the ‘look’ of the face, as revealed to any observer: the LXX. interprets well, though it is almost more shamelessness than shame that is implied. The genitive Σοδόμων gives a special force, which is hardly warranted by the Hebrew.
ἀντέστη] Doubtless implies coming forward in witness against: cf. lix. 12. The Heb. word usually means ‘answer’: Vulg. has responrlere in both passages, and in Hos. v. 5: but in Hos. vii. 10 takes it from a different root, and renders humiliabitur LXX. more consistently, if wrongly, ταπεινωθήσεται in both passages of Hosea.
10. εἰπόντες Δήσωμεν] Lxx. seem to have read the Heb. word for
‘Say ye’ as ‘Let us bind,’ with root-letters
δύσχρηστος] seems to have more force than the inutilis of Tertullian, which would be merely ἄχρηστος, as in Hosea viii. 8 ; compare also Wisd. xiii. 10 and 12 and ii. 11 with ii. 12. It is an unusually pointed phrase for the 1.101., implying ‘his goodness is no good, is ill to us’; appearing to adapt the Hebrew of this passage, ‘(it is) good,’ with some skill.
In Wisd. ii. 12 occurs ἐνεδρεύσωμεν δὲ Β) τὸν δίκαιον, ὅτι δύσχρη-
στος ἡμῖν ἐστιν ; ‘he is of disservice to us,’ R.V. Prof. Margoliouth, in
Line: of Defence of tire Biblical Revelation, chap. 1. p. 15 foll., and
chap. 11. p. 49 foll., argues for the priority of the Greek of Wisdom to
the Greek of Isaiah (as well as for a Hebrew original of Wisdom,
prior to Isaiah himself). The view usually held as to the Book of
Wisdom is however against this. There are many passages in Wisdom
with resemblances to the Lxx. of Isaiah and of other books of the
O.T. A few may be noticed here. Compare
Wisdom iii. 14 foll. with Isai. lvi. 4, lvii. 3
μακρόβιος, liii. 10).
Wisdom v. 16 (and xix. 8) with Isai. xlix. 2.
στήλη)
Psalm ix. 13, &c.)
Coincidences with descriptions of events in the Pentateuch and the Psalms, and with sentiments expressed in the Proverbs, are fairly numerous.
12. πράκτορες] Vulg. exactores. There are two similar roots in
Heb.,
ἀπαιτοῦντες] Heb. ‘women.’ One discrepancy in the mm. is often
followed by more, a wrong idea of the context perhaps influencing the
translator. Here it looks as if
μακαρίξοντες] Vulg. qui te beatum dicunt: the Heb. meaning either ‘guide,’ ‘lead,’ or ‘call happy,’ Gen. xxx. 13. The former is probably right, and generally adopted. Cf. ix. 16. ῥύσασθε, i. 17, represents the same word.
ταράσσουσιν] Ηeb. ‘swallow up,’ the root, perhaps, of the name
13. Cf. Psalm lxxxii. 1.
14. ἐνεπυρίσατι] Heb. word sometimes has this meaning; but Exod. xxii. 5, where it is rendered καταβοσκῆσαι, is strong evidence for its being here ‘to eat up.’ Vulg. depasti estis Another hint of coming parable of the vineyard, cf. i. 8.
15. mm. softens the Heb. verbs ‘crush’...‘grind.’ Vulg. atteritis commolitis. Cf. Amos ii. 6, Micah iii. 1—3, Ezek. xxxiv.
16, 17. Ver. 16 is slightly modified in the LXX. At the beginning of 17 καὶ represents the common Heb. conjunction 1, υ’—, here, often, used to mark the apodosis, as δέ sometimes is in Greek.
17. ταπεινώσα] Reading
18. The catalogue of female finery which follows produces considerable satirical effect by mere enumeration. So Juvenal will fill a line or two, as in Sat. 111. 76, 77, on the various professions of the “Graeculus esuriens”; or Plautus, Epidicus, v. 40 fall, on this subject. It is not surprising if some of the Hebrew terms are obscure and the correspondence of the Greek inexact; actually, the Heb. list contains 21 and the Greek 23 articles. It is scarcely necessary to examine all these. Prof. Skinner points out that many of the orna- ments were used as charms. Delitzsch mentions some monographs on the subject.
τοῦ αὐτόν καὶ τοὺς κόσμους αὐτῶν καὶ] Not in the Heb.; τοῦ ἱματισμοῦ αὐτῶν only, B. Cyp. De Ηabitu Virginum, xiii., quotes this passage, and has gloriam vestis illarum at omamenta eamm, but the correspondence in the later verses with mm. is not apparently exact.
μηνίσκους] See Judg. viii. 21, and 26 in B. Moon-shaped perhaps in series, graduated in size; something similar may be seen, in brass, on heavy draught-horses at the present day, and in pictures of the Indians who formerly inhabited Florida and Georgia, the Seminoles and Cherokees.
20. May] A reads σύνεσιν, inadvertently dropping a letter.
σύνθεσις was used of the lounging dress of the Romans under the late
22. διαφανῆ Λακωνικὰ] So διαφανῆ χιτωνία, Aristoph. Lysist. 48. Laconia, celebrated for its purples, produced delicate gauzes also; but the translator's phrase here can hardly be other than an ana- chronism.
23. θέριστρα κατάκλιτα] θέριστρον represents the same Heb. word, Song of Sol. v. 7; a scarf or mantle rather than a veil. It stands for another Heb. word, Genesis xxiv. 65, xxxviii. 14, 19, of similar meaning. Vulgate generally varies between pallium and theristrum, as here; omitting the epithet, which is probably to be rendered ‘reclining,’ accubitoria; but perhaps κατάκλειστα, κτάκλειστα, ℵ ca. cb Γ, is to be preferred : with the sense of ‘close-wrapping.
24. The mercy underlying these threatenings shows in iv. 4 the reversal for good in lxi. 3.
The syntax of the verse is altered, and mm. inserts ζώσῃ and ἕξεις διὰ τὰ ἔογα σου.
25. καὶ ὀ υἱός σου ὁ κάλλιστος] Different from the Heb., except that
κάλλιστος clearly corresponds to ‘beauty.’ The Heb. word
καὶ ταπεινωθήσονται] Coupled in LXX. to what precedes, in Heb. to
what follows. The Heb. verb is a rare one, meaning ‘lament’
possibly the LXX. read
26. Θῆκαι] Heb. ‘openings,’ i.e. gates: LXX. have attempted an
explanation. It seems just possible that they took
ἐδαφισθήσῃ] Cf. Luke xix. 44.
IV. 1. This verse is often taken in close connection with preceding chapter.
ἐπιλήμψονται] Cf. Zech. viii. 23 (same verb also in Heb.).
τὸ ὄνομα. τὸ σὸν κεκλίσθαι ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς] The Heb. phrase is literally
Nearly every commentator, from Calvin onwards, quotes Lucan,
Pizars. II. 342,
2. After the threats, comes a promise of blessing, with sudden transition, δὲ being inserted by the Lxx. Both the evil and the good beyond it are unexpected, and in the main unheeded by the hearers.
λάμψει ὅ θεὸς] Heb. ‘the sprout of the LORD shall be....’
apparently takes the Greek as representing a verbal form from the
same root
ἐν βουλῇ] This seems to be
ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς] LXX. apparently omits ‘the fruit.’ Probably they read
3. γραφέντες εἰς ζωὴν] Vulg. in vita. The Heb. word is a plural, which many commentators agree in taking as equivalent to an abstract substantive; Delitzsch compares Dan. xii. 2. The idea is frequent in both O.T. and N.T.; see Exod. xxxii. 32, Luke x. 20, Phil. iv. 3, Rev. xvii. 8, &c.
LXX. has ζωῆς in I Sam. xxv. 29, ζώντων in Ps. lxix. 28; Vulgate viventium in both places.
4. ὅτι] Not the particle
τῶν υἱῶν καὶ] An addition on the part of the Lxx.
αἷμα] ℵ*, with 21 cursives, including the Lucianic, adds Ἰερουσαλὴμ in agreement with the Heb. So Aq. Theod. Symm., according to Q mg.
ἐν πνεύματι κρίσεως] After these words, the clause καὶ πνεύματι καύσεως is found in all MSS. except A, and 106, which not seldom supports readings of A otherwise singular. We may compare Aesch. Agam. 849.
5. καὶ ἥξει, καὶ ἔσται] LXX. seem to have read
πᾶς τόπος] The sentence is hardly grammatical as it stands; for if πᾶς τόπος is the subject to ἔσται the clause appears unmeaning, and we should expect πάντα τόπον as object to σκιάσει, ἔσται meaning merely ‘it shall be,’ i.e. come to pass, as for instance in vii. 18, 21, 23. But σκιάσει is an addition of the LXX., and the sentence would be better without it, περικύκλῳ being then nominative. As the text stands, however, πᾶς τόπος is probably a cams pendent, filling the place of another object to σκιάσει, and perhaps changed to the nom. by the influence of ἔσται preceding, aided by the general influence syntax.
τὰ περικύκλῳ] Either a paraphrase of Heb. ‘her assemblies,’ or
possibly a misreading of
καπνοῦ] LXX., against Heb. accents, connects the smoke with the fire, and some authorities take the Heb. so. For the mention of smoke, cf. Exod. xix. 18, Psalm xxviii. 8; Kay compares Song of Sol. iii. 6 and notices the absence of any mention of smoke in Exod. xl. Numb. ix.
The Lord will reappear to judge, to defend, and in glory.
σκεπασθήσεται] The noun is taken by Lxx. as a passive verb.
6. Cf. xxv. 4, xxxii. 2.
V. Further denunciations are introduced by the Parable of the Vineyard. The theme of the arraignment and warning is as before, but the treatment is rich and varied. At ver. 26 a coming enemy is pointed out with new distinctness, but still not named.
The Vineyard and Vine furnish many similes and allusions in
the Bible; see Kay's note on this chapter, and cf. especially Psalm
lxxx. 8—16, and Song of Sol. viii. 11—14. The Parable of
1. ἀγαπημένῳ...ἀγαπητοῦ] The Heb. words are also different, akin. Kay points out their connection with the names David and Jedidiah (2 Sam. xii. 25); and the frequent use of the former word in the Song of Solomon; not elsewhere. The mat. use ἠγαπημένοι· also to render Heb. ‘Jeshurun’: see on xliv. 2.
[B inserts μου after ἀγαπητοῦ, with the Heb.]
κέρατι] So the Heb. literally, by a very usual metaphor for a hill or peak. Skinner compares the Alpine names, Matterhorn, Schreckhorn, ἃς. Hill-tops and slopes seem specially favourable for vines, as the names of many celebrated modern growths testify. Cf. Virg. Georg. 11. 112, “Apertos Bacchus amat colles.” ἐν τόπῳ πίονι phrases the bold Hebrew expression, for which cf. Zech. iv. 14.
2. περιέθηκα] The Hebrew does not turn to the first person till ver. 3.
ἄμπελον σωρὴχ] Lxx. transliterate ‘Sorek’ here, though not in chap. xvi. 8, Gen. xlix. 11, Jerem. ii. 21. There was a valley of the name in Philistia, Judg. xvi. 4, which perhaps gave its name to a variety of vine. It is however generally translated ‘choice vine’ from the colour, according to Delitzsch, Cheyne.
πύργον] To overlook the vineyard.
προλήνιον] Α vat, hewn or dug out (ὥρυξα) to receive juice. Matt. xxi. 33 has ληνόν, cf. Isai. lxiii. 2; Mark xii. 1 ὑπολήνιον, the more usual word; see Isai. xvi. 10, Joel iii. 13, Haggai ii. 16 Ζech. xiv. 10.
ἔμινα] Ηeb. ‘he looked, i.e. expected, hoped ‘for it to...’ compares James v. 7, ὁ γεωργὸς ἐκδέχεται τὸν τίμιον καρπὸν τῆς γῆς, μακροθυμῶν ἐπ’ αὐτῷ.
ποιῆσαι corresponds literally to the Heb. ‘Make’ is somewhat similarly used in some English phrases, as ‘to make flesh,’ ‘to make wood’ (of plants).
σταφυλὴν...ἀκάνθας] Matt. vii. 16, μήτι συλλέγουσιν ἀπὸ σταφυλάς; Heb. expresses the subtler contrast of the cultivated and the wild vine, with grateful and bitter fruit respectively. See Gen. iii. 18.
3. [B has the terms ‘inhabitants of Jerusalem’ and ‘men of Judah’ in same order as Heb.; other principal MSS. invert.]
The prophet invites his hearers to deliver judgment, as Nathan did David.
ἄνθρωπος] Heb. also singular (collective).
ἐν ἐμοὶ καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ ἀμπ. μου] Lit. ‘in my case’ (upon me) ‘and
between my vinegard.’ The Heb. word for ‘between’ is commonly
inserted before both words; and Lxx. usually renders this literally, as
in Gen. i. 4, 7; cf. Rev. v. 6. (Sometimes, instead of the second
‘between,’
4. τί ποιήσω;] Heb. What (is there) to do...?
5. “He shall miserably destroy....”
[A read originally οἶκον for τοῖχον, and repeats διαρπαγήν for καταπάτημα: both probably clerical errors. The photograph of the MS. looks almost as like οιχον as οικον.
6. ἀναβήσεται...ἄκανθα] Most Mss. have singular verb and noun, ℵ* B the plural.
ταῖς νεφέλαις ἐντελοῦμαι] Cf. Jerem. xiv. 22, Amos iv. 7, Ps. lxxviii. 23.
7. Cf. 2 Sam. xii. 7, Σὺ εἶ ὁ ἀνὴρ ό ποιήσας room: in a lower strain, Hor. Sat. 1. i. 69, “Mutato nomine de te Fabula narratur.’
There are remarkable assonances in the original of this verse:
‘judgment...oppression,’ mishpat, mispach; ‘righteousness...a city,’
tz’ dākah, tz’ ākah. These no translator could expect to reproduce
successfully. Compare ver. I of this chapter, kerem, ‘vineyard,’
qeren, ‘horn.’ Lowth gives a list of similar effects, xiii. 6, xxiv. 17
xxvii. 7, xxxiii. lvii. 6, lxi. 3, lxv. 11, 12. There are others, of perhaps
subtler character, recalling the alliterations of Virgil rather than of
Lucretius, a few letters recurring in various combinations. Chapters
xiv.. xvii., xxiv. are rich in these. Notice, e.g., the use of p,
ἀνομίαν] It seems hardly needful to suppose that LXX. read
ἔμεινα] The Ist person seems less natural here than in ver. 4 Vulg. however expectavi.
8. The danger to the character and welfare of a state, from
increasing luxury, which tends to separate the people into widely
distinct classes. Cf. Amos ii. 7, Micah ii. 2. See also Sallust, Catil. xx.
ἵνα τοῦ πλησίον ἀφέλωνταί τι] The verb must be due to Lxx. having
read
9. ἠκούσθη γὰρ...ταῦτα] Some verb is supplied in every of the Heb. The difference between ‘in mine ears’ and ‘in the of’ is one of vowel points only. ταῦτα is also an addition: cf. Vulg. in auribus meis sunt haec, dicit Dominus. The phrase ‘in the ears of the Lord of Hosts’ is not in itself impossible: for if God take counsel with Himself, He may be regarded as hearing, no less than as speaking Cf. xxii. 14.
ἐὰν γὰρ γίνωνται] The Heb. has ‘If there be not...,’ a idiomatic form of threat or asseveration, implying ‘There shall be...’ as in the familiar translation of Heb. iv. 3, 5, “If they shall enter into my rest.” Cf. iii. 11, 1 Sam. xix. 6, xxviii. 10, 2 Sam. xix. The Lxx. have taken it as an ordinary condition, and omitted the negative, in the endeavour to make sense; the inserted γὰρ apparently carries on the connection from ver. 8.
With the whole verse cf. Jerem. xxxiii. (xl.) 10.
10. ζεύγη βοῶν corresponds to the idea of the Heb. word trans.
lated ‘acres,’ the amount of land ploughed by a yoke of oxen being a
natural unit. οὗ...ἐργῶνται are by way of explanation, though
κεράμιον] Vulg. Iagunculam. Heb. bath, equivalent to an ephah
in dry measure, one-tenth of the homer, Ezek. xlv. 1014.
homer,
II. Cf. xxviii. 1, 3, 7, Habak. ii. Eccles. x. 17.
σίκερα] The Semitic word.
μένοντες τὸ ὀψὲ] For the phrase cf. Thucyd. III. 22, τηρήσαντες νύκτα χειμέριον ὕδατι καὶ ἀνέμῳ, ‘watching for a night that was stormy with rain and wind.’
ὁ γὰρ οἶνος συγκαύσει] Heb. the same, except that there is no conjunction: the best authorities interpret it as a circumstantial clause, ‘while wine inflames them’: in effect like those, generally ablative absolute, with which Tacitus interprets and weights the ends of many of his sentences: e.g. Ann. III. 16, “nec illum sponte extinctum, verum immisso percussore”; XII. 57, “quin et convivium lacus adpositum magna formidine cunctos adfecit, quia vis aquarum prorumpens proxima trahebat, convulsis ulterioribus aut fragore et sonitu exterritis.”
12. τὰ δὲ ἔργα κ.τ.λ.] Cf. i. 3, as well as for the next note.
13. τὸν κύριον] Not in Heb.
πλῆθος ἐγενήθη νεκρῶν διὰ λιμὸν] Heb. is literally, ‘its glory (is) men
of famine.’ πλῆθος may either be a different shade of meaning, or be
due to reading ‘33 for
δίψαν] δίψος· Β. Lid. and Scott consider δίψα the older Attic form, and its literary pedigree is more complete: Thucydides and Plato use both forms; Xenophon has δίψος.
14. ᾅδης] The regular rendering of Heb. Sheol, the Underworld: which is often regarded as personal. This use, according to Cheyne,—see his note here—is later. See Habak. ii. 5, Jonah Prov. xxx. 16 seems doubtful. So Θάνατος is a character in the Alcestis of Euripides: cf. Soph. Aj. 854, Hom. [1. XIV. 231, and even Psalm xlix. 14. In Greek, Ἅιδης is first personal, and the idea ofa place hence the genitive case after prepositions, a word being supplied. See xiv. 15, 19: this use is constant in classical Greek with different forms of the name: cf. Ventum erat ad Vestae, Hor. Sat. 1. ix. 35.
ψυχὴν] Heb. word for ‘soul’ often carries the meaning of ‘self,’ ‘inclination,’ ‘appetite.’ Cf. lvi. 11, Ps. xxxv. 25, &c. τοῦ μὴ διαλιπεῖν] ΑΓ 93vid [09 actually read διαλείπειν, but ι and are written almost interchangeably in our MSS., and the aorist seems preferable here.
Heb. here is literally ‘to absence of limit,’ expressing extent or consequence. τοῦ with infin. in Greek is generally final, but acquired, or more strictly regained, a wider range, and is here consequential or descriptive. Cf. Thucyd. VII. 42 εἷ πέρας μηδὲν ἔσται σφίσι τοῦ ἀπαλλαγῆναι τοῦ κινδύνου: perhaps also Luke iV. 42 ἵνα similarly, Gal. v. 17, 1 Thess. v. 4, &c.).
oi. ἔνδοξοι. . .οἱ λοιμοὶ] On this and ver. 17, 18, see my note in
Journal of Theol. Studies, Vol. iv. No. 14, p. 269. The abstract nouns of
the Heb. are represented by adjectives: the meaning is close in ἔνδοξοι,
and near in μεγάλοι, Heb. ‘multitude,’ or ‘uproar’: πλούσιοι seems
to be
Symm. and Theod. rendered καὶ ὁ ἀγαλλιώμενος ἐν αὐτῇ: and these words occur, as an addition or duplicate, in V and several cursives, the Lucianic and some Hesychian, with minor variants: 24 has καὶ ol νομεῖς αὐτῆς, 304 καὶ οἱ λογισμοὶ αὐτοῖς καὶ ὁ ἀγαλλόμενος ἐν αὐτῇ; 51 (90), 233 have οἶ ἀγαλλιώμενοι, of which οἶ λοιμοὶ might have been taken for a corruption, were it not otherwise accounted for.
15, 16. The refrain of ii. 9, 11, 17 sounds again, louder and nearer. Another refrain appears at ver. 25, to be taken up at ix. 12, 17, 21, x. 4 for which reason some critics have wished to place ix. 8—x. 4 25—26 of this chapter. The effect is, however, rather that of dominant thought recurring at intervals; the resemblance between the end of this chapter and that of ch. viii. is ummistakable.
17. οἱ διηρπασμένα ὡς ταῦροι] Heb. ‘the lambs as (in) their
pasture,’ or ‘after their manner.’ Scholz explains the discrepancy
by mistakes of sound rather than of sight: διηρπασμένα as a form
from ΑΒΒREV ταῦροι as
τῶν ἀπειλημμένων] Heb. ‘the fat ones,’
(I regret that I first put this forward as my own suggestion, not being aware that Schleusner had long ago pointed it out.)
ἄρνες] Probably
Compare with this verse vii. 21, xiv. 23, xviii. 6, xxix. 17, xxxiv. 13
—15, &c.; xliii. 20 gives the converse picture; Ps.
contrasts both. So Horace, Od. III. iii. 40,
18. σχοινίῳ μακρῷ] Heb. ‘cords of vanity.’ ματαιω for μακρω
would be close to the original: Symmachus indeed has ὡς σχοινίῳ
ματαιότητος. The word is rendered ‘lies’ in lix. 4, cf. Exod. xx. 7, ἐπὶ
ματαίῳ. The Syriac (Peshitta) also has ‘long’: and Lowth suggested
that Lxx. read not
ζυγοῦ ἱμάντι δαμάλεως] Might be taken to mean, ‘a thong of a heifer's yoke’; but the order of the words suggests that it means ‘a cow-hide chariot-trace,’ ζυγοῦ being, so to speak, the inner, and δαμάλεως the outer genitive. Cf. Hom. Il. ΙΙΙ. 375, ἥ οἱ ῥῆξεν ἱμάντα βοὸς· ἶφι κταμένοιο.
The idea seems to be of men sinning deliberately and laboriously,
δαμάλεις] The word for ‘cart’ and that for ‘heifer’ differ in vowel-points only.
19. Cf. Ps. x. lxxiii. 11.
Τὸ τάχος] Cf. l Kings xxii. 9.
ἐγγισάτω] Here prob. transitive, as the Heb.; cf. ver. 8.
ἴδωμεν] Β and six cursives read ειδ-, but ι is prob. right. The sense of Heb. is not absolutely decisive, see xxvi. 11.
ἔλθοι] 50 Α, and possibly the original reading: ℵQV and most cursives ἐλθέτω, Β ἐλθάτω. Α omits Ἰσραήλ, with 106, against Heb. probably by inadvertence.
20. Delitzsch compares Matt. vi. 23, James iii. ιι. Nearly all sagacious moralists have insisted on the duty of keeping the truth of terms in language: see, in the first place, xxxii. 5 Heb., and the implication in ix. 10, xxviii. 15, xxx. 9, 10, 15, 16.
Thucydides m. 82 marks how, in the disorganization of Greek society, τὴν εἰωθυῖαν ἀξίωσιν τῶν ὀνομάτων ἐς τὰ ἔργα ἀντήλλαξαν τῇ δικαιώσει. τόλμα μὲν γὰρ ἀλόγιστος ἀνδρία φιλέταιρος ἐνομίσθη, μέλλησις· δᾶ προμηθὴς δειλία εὐπρεπής, τὸ δὲ σῶφρον τοῦ ἀνάνδρου πρόσχημα, κ.τ.λ.
Cato, in Sallust, Catil. lii., “Jam pridem equidem nos vera rerum vocabula amisimus; quia bona aliena largiri, liberalitas; malarum rerum audacia fortitudo vocatur; eo respublica in extremo sita est.’
Tacitus, Ann. XIV. 21, “Pluribus ipsa licentia placebat, ac tamen honesta nomina praetendebant.’
Shakespeare finds the thievish mind saying, “convey the wise it
call,” Merry Wives, Act ι. Sc. 3; and the Witches in Macbeth
the eternal verities: “Fair is foul, and foul is ” On the
other hand, Achilles declares, Hom. ΙΙ. IX. 312:
The allusion in ‘Cyprian’ De ’ngulan’tate ’eomm is worth adding: when the writer speaks of those “qui secundum verbum lsaiae amaritudinem pro dulcedine devorantes, nudam foeditatem velamento boni nominis tegunt.”
Trench, On the Study of Words, constantly points the moral; he quotes Shakespeare, Twelfth Night, Act ιιι. Sc. ι, “Words are grown so false, I am loath to prove reason with them”: and “The mixture of those things by speech which by nature are divided, is the mother of all error.”
“Ruskin, notablyin Sesame ’lz’es, has striven for truth in language, by example as well as by precept.
So, our Lord upon earth warred against hypocrisy almost above all other sins (John iii. 19—21): and the New Testament, as the Old, ever purging language of its falsities, till at length we arrive at the point where the unjust and filthy are stamped finally as such (Rev. xxii. 11). Seeing the fatal consequences of such falseness, it is clearly one of the first duties of every student .of language and literature to combat it to the utmost.
22. κεραννύντες] Spicing the wine, not diluting it as the Greeks and Romans did, Allusions to drunkenness in Israel are frequent: e.g., xxiv. 9, xxxviii. 1, 3, 7, Hosea iv. 11, vii. 5, Amos vi. 6.
23. τὸ δίκαιον τοῦ δικ. αἴροντες] They remove from the righteous, or just man, all that the justice of his cause shall carry with it. We are reminded—not that the thought is entirely the same—of Repub. II. 361 C: γυμνωτέος δὴ πάντων πλὴν δικαιοσύνης. . .μηδὲν γὰρ ἀδικῶν δόξαν ἐχέτω τὴν μεγίστην ἀδικίας, ἵνα ᾖ βεβασανισμένος εἷς δικαιοσύνην, κ.τ.λ.
24. καυθήσεται] The fut. is apparently assimilated to the following verb, which represents a Heb. imperfect; it is not the tense that would be expected in Greek, as the comparison is clearly a general one. Cf. lxv. 8, and see note on vii. 2. See also Vol. I. Introd. ‘On Methods of Rendering,’ pp. 43—45.
LXX. slightly departs from Heb., substituting ‘coal’ for ῾tongue.
φλογὸς ἀνειμένης] The translator seems to have adapted the participle with some freedom. In xxxv. 3 it clearly means ‘relaxed,’ and the Heb. has much the same meaning here, ‘sinketh down’ but applied to flame, it seems to mean, necessarily, something like ‘streaming’: cf. Euripid. Andromache 598, πέπλοι ἀνειμένοι.
χνοῦς] Probably LXX. read
λόγιον] Heb. word is not the most usual one, though from an ordinary root. The Greek is perhaps intended to give an idea of formal solemnity: cf. xxviii. 13, xxx. 27 (different Heb.).
παρώξυναν] This verb, or παροργίζω, is often used in LXX., where
Heb. probably means rather ‘scorn,’ ‘despise,’ or ‘forsake.’ A kindred
word is rendered by ὀργή, xxviii. 3, and παροργισμὸς in the parallel
Kings xix. 3. In these places, and i. 4, Heb. has
25. ἐν πᾶσι] ἐπὶ is used for Heb. 3, where the refrain recurs.
26. The enemy, as yet unnamed, is probably the Assyrians μακρὰν, ἀπ’ ἄκρου τῆς γῆς) not Syria and Ephraim. Those who do not seek to limit the bearings of prophecy may see a further reference to the Babylonians, who followed Assyria as world-monarchs and oppressors. The description fits either well enough; cf. Habak. i. 6–11.
σύσσημον] Α sign agreed upon, esp. for battle. The appointed instruments are ready.
συπιεῖ αὐτοῖς] ℵΑQ* and eight cursives have dat.: so Heb., but singular throughout this passage. B ἃς. have αὐτοὺς, in which case we can only render, ‘hiss them on’: whereas A's text and Heb. mean ‘hiss to call them,’ cf. vii. 18, and Zech. x. 8 σημανῶ αὐτοῖς). Burkitt, Tyconius, ’us, p. lxiv., points out that the O. L. read acc. with συρεῖ, Cyp. Testim. 1. 21 having et adtrahet illos, and the ῾Speculum᾿ et trahet eas. This must be due to misreading the Greek; another instance occurs in the same chapter of the Testimonia, and in other Latin authorities, viz. Domino = Κυρίῳ for Κύρῳ in xlv. ι. See also xxx. 14.
27. Α omits πεινάσουσιν οὐδὲ; 106 omits οὐ πεινάσουσιν.
πεινάω often represents Heb. ‘be weary’ in Isai., as XI. 30, 3(??) ἐκλείπει, Jerem. iv. 31). Also naturally for ‘be hungry,’ as in xxix. 8 (see note), lxv. 13.
28. ἐλογίσθησαν] Seems best taken with the words that follow, though it is possible to join it with the preceding clause, as in the Heb.
29. ὁρμῶσιν] ὀργιῶσιν, read by B, is to me unintelligible, whether supposed to be a late form for ὀργῶσιν, or to come from ὀργίαζω or ὀργίζω, with ω for ου. The cursive 305 paraphrases νυ. 2830 and the word ὁρμὴ occurs in its paraphrase: Field pointed out in the Herapla that Syro-hex. has here a form of the word used for ‘leap’ in xxxv. 6. ὁρμῶσιν does not correspond to the Heb., but may be a guess of the translator. Had the LXX. originally written a late form such as ὤρυσαν, it would hardly have been lost, owing to Symm. and Theod.'s rendering.
30. ℵΓ supply, after ἐμβλέψονται, the words εἷς τὸν οὐρανὸν ἄνω καὶ... evidently from viii. 22.
ἀπορίᾳ] Probably due either to viii. 22, or to the resemblance in
letters to the Heb. ΑΒΒREV ‘clouds’ or ‘heavens thereof’: possibly a
confusion with
VI. With this vision compare that recorded in Amos ix. The scene was recognised in some way by the prophet as the Temple.
I. Καὶ ἐγένετο. . .εἶδον] Heb. literally ‘In the year...and I saw...’ the conjunction apparently marking the principal verb.
ὑψηλοῦ καὶ ἐπηρμένου] It is a question whether the epithets in the Heb. refer to the throne, as Delitzsch, Cheyne, and others, or as Kay thinks, to the Lord Himself.
The end of the verse seems a rather weak paraphrase in the Greek: cf. ver. 3. The Heb. word ‘train,’ represented by δόξης, is used Exod. xxviii. 33, &c. of the hem or skirt of ’s
2. σεραφεὶν] So ℵΑ, σεραφεὶμ BQ, while at ver. 6 A and B spell conversely, showing how little security the Greek MSS. give on these points. The Heb. pl. of course ends in -m, as a rule, the Aramaic in η
The word ‘seraph’ or ‘saraph’ is generally used of ‘fiery’ serpents, Numb. xxi. 6, 8, Dent. viii. 15, Isai. xiv. 29, xx. 6: in Isaiah without a separate word for ‘serpent,’ but with the epithet ‘flying’ attached; so here, ‘they did fly’: perhaps, as Delitzsch, Cheyne, of a hovering motion. The verb means ‘to burn,’ Lev. iv. 12, x. 6, Josh. vii. 25 Isai. i. 7, &c. Nowhere else are seraphim mentioned as angelic or attendants on God; cherubim and seraphim not being associated in the Bible. Here the seraphim have apparently some semblance of human form; there is no hint of anything serpent-like. Their fiery motion may be the reason for the name: cf. the ‘living creatures’ in Ezek. i. and x., especially i. 13: Dan. vii. 9, 10 Rev. iv. 3, and Ps. civ. 4, quoted Heb. i. 7. A connection has been sought between the seraphim and the flashing lightning, as between the cherubim and the storm-clouds: but of this the Bible shows no trace.
ἱστήκεισαν] Heb. has participle, as regularly in describing a state of continuous action.
κύκλῳ αὐτοῦ] Probably ‘around Him’ rather than ‘around it,’ the throne, in Greek; as Heb. has ‘above,’ or ‘from above Him,’ a regular way of describing attendants on one seated: Gen. xviii. 8, Exod. xviii. 13, I Kings xxii. 19.
(??)ξ πτέρυγος τῷ ἑνί, καὶ 3. πτ. τῷ ht] Heb. ‘six wings, six wings to ’ Cf. Rev. iv. 8.
ply] Only here and xli. 7 in Isaiah: never in Jeremiah: rare in the mac. generally, except Job (Wisdom and 2—4 Μaccabees): six times in Genesis, four times in Exodus.
κατεκάλυπτον] “W’ith two,” runs the famous explanation of the Targum, “he covered his face, that he might not see: with two his feet, that he might not be seen.᾿
3. ἐκέκραγον] Β reads ἐκέκραγεν, with Heb., which has pf. with wax frequentative. The Lxx. use many reduplicated forms of this verb, Numb. xi. 2, Job vi. 5, and frequently, esp. in the Psalms, as xxxiv. 6, 17, lv. 16, lvii. 3. Lightfoot, on Clem. Rom. Εp. Cor. i. 34 where this passage is quoted, treats ἐκέκραγον as the imperf. of a new verb κεκράγω, formed from κέκραγα.
Ἄγιος ἅγιος ἅγιος] Nothing is proved with regard to the Trinity by this threefold repetition, either here or in Rev. iv. 8.
4. ἐπήρθη τὸ ὑπέρθυρον] Heb. ‘the foundations of the thresholds were ’ Cf. Amos ix. 1, σεοσθήσεταο τὰ πρόπυλα. The Heb. verb here used occurs twice in vii. 2, where LXX. have ἐξέστη... σαλευθῇ.
καπνοῦ] See on iv. 5.
5. κατανένυγμαι] The word occurs in LXX., Gen. xxxiv. 7, ‘the men were ’; of Aaron, Lev. x. 3; of Ahab, I Kings xxi. 27, 29 in Psalms iv. 4, xxx. 12: in Leviticus and Psalms, the Heb. word is the same as, or akin to, that here used.
Liddell and Scott give for κατανύσσομαι νύσσω, ‘prick’) the meanings
(i) be sorely pricked, (ii) be stupefied, slumber: “in latter senses,
perhaps corrupted from κατανυστάζω.” Bengel on Acts ii. 37 quotes
the Vulgate ’ sunt, and on Rom. xi. 8, which quotes Isai.
xxix. 10, “κατάνυξις notat πάθος ex frequentissima punctione in stuporem
desinens.” The Heb. verb (or verbs)=(i) be silent, amazed, (ii) be
ruined. Consequently the Heb. and Greek words approach one
another only in the meanings of ‘stupefaction’ and ‘silence.’ Vulg.
has (and here: which Prof. Skinner, on this passage, in Camb. Bible
for 55110013, calls an impossible rendering; but it is hardly certain that
this is so of the Greek, even if it be of the Hebrew; for it is quite
possible that LXX. may have so interpreted the original; and it seems
as easy a sense as any to assign to κατανένυγμαι. The force of the
expression seems to have some similarity to Jerem. i. 6, ‘I cannot
’: and to ’ reluctance, Exod. iv. 10—13; but with Isaiah
it is not so much backwardness as overwhelming surprise and sense
6. λαβίδι ἔλαβεν] Heb. words also cognates.
7. Like Ezekiel (chap. ii., iii.) and St John (Revel. x. 8—10) Isaiah's experience shows that the work of an apostle or prophet, to whom the secrets of God are revealed—see Amos iii. 7—has a sweet and a bitter side. His lips are purified; but he will not be believed. Yet with Isaiah, more than any other, except St John, the exaltation of spirit remains dominant; we see no sign, after this, of his confidence failing. Jeremiah, by nature, seems to stand at the other end of the scale of temperament; near him, perhaps, Thomas, Hosea, Micah, Habakkuk.
περικαθαριεῖ] The force of the compound is as though the defilements peeled or sloughed off. The Heb. has passive verbs, or their equivalent: Vulg. auferetur. . .mundabitur: Aq. Symm. Theod. ἀποστή- σεται. . .ἐξιλασθήσεται.
8. πρὸς τὸν λαὸν τοῦτον] Heb. has ‘for us,’ ABBREV which LXX. perhaps
read as
Ἰδού εἰμι ἐγὼ] The Heb. has no verb expressed: so ἰδοὺ ἐγώ, Gen. xxii. I. II, &c. In some books, mainly Judges-Kings—but see chap. xliii. 25—ἐγώ εἰμι is frequently used for ‘I,’ even as the subject of a verb: e.g. Judg. vi. 18, xi. 27, 35, 37 (not A in xi.), Ruth iv. 4 2 Kings iv. 13 εἰμι ἐγὼ Α). In these passages Heb. has the longer form of pronoun ABBREV but not here.
ℵΓ, several cursives, and Sixtine text, read ἐγώ εἰμι here: 41 90 144 omit verb: text is that of ABQV 22 48 51 93, 62 147, 26 301 306.
9. ἀκούσετε] ἀκούσητε, read by ΑΓ and four or five cursives, will scarcely construe, does not match βλέψετε, and is not supported by N. T. quotation; probably corrupted by the proximity of συνῆτε.
Ἀκοῇ ἀκούσετε. . .βλέποντες βλέψετε] Heb. has imperative, and the
verbs are intensified, according to a frequent idiom, by repetition in the
‘absolute’ infinitive. This the LXX. represents by the participle, or
noun of kindred meaning. Opinions often differ as to the shade of
This verse is quoted in the N. T., Matt. xiii. 14, Mark iv. 12, Luke viii. to, John xii. 40, Acts xxviii. 26, 27. Cf. Rom. xi. 8. ’s text agrees practically with the LXX. Compare also Jerem. v. 21 Ezek. xii. 2.
10. βαρέος ἤκουσαν] They are dull of hearing; perhaps with a hint of their unwillingness, as βαρ. ἀκούειν in Xenoph. Anab. 11. 1 is ‘to hear with ’ cf. βαρέως φέρειν.
καμμύω=καταμύω, Aristoph. Vesp. 92.
καὶ ἰάσομαι] ἰάσωμαι, 24 109 306; in the N.T. quotations, the later
Mss. generally in Matt., John, Acts have ἰάσωμαι, but the principal
uncials ἰάσομαι. On the passage in Acts, Mr T. E. Page says: “The
fut. ind. after μὴ represents the action of the verb as more vividly
realized as possible and probable than is the case when the subj.
follows. The change from the subj. to the ind. here is very forcible
and vigorous.” It is, however, probably due, in the first place, to
literal representation of the Hebrew, here the “converted” perfect,
equivalent to the imperfect or future. The Greek translator may, it
is true, have felt καὶ to have some such force as is expressed in English
by ‘in which case....’ Cf. the use of ἵνα with past indic. in
Greek; though it is not suggested that the parallel is exact: as in
Eurip. frag. 442
Prof. Jebb, however, on Soph. 0. T. 1389, contends that the use of μὴ proves ἵνα to be here “essentially final.”
LXX.'s rendering seems to emphasize the responsibility of the people for their own blindness and deafness: “like the deaf adder that stoppeth her car.” Ps. lviii. 4.
11. Ἔως πότι] Hardly classical Greek, but renders the Hebrew
literally. Cf. Luke ix. 41. We have, however,
In LXX. ἕως is used frequently as a prepos. c. gen.; e.g., Ps. civ. 23 cvi. 48, cviii. 4.
παρὰ τὸ μὴ κατοικεῖσθαι] Were we dealing with classical Greek, this might be explained, ‘up to the point of not being inhabited,’ ‘till they are not...’ See Liddell and Scott, παρά, C. I. 5. As, however, the Hebrew has D, of origin or cause, it must be explained as ‘because they are not....’ Cf. Exod. xiv. 11; Numb. xiv. 16; Jerem. iv. 7 (xl.) 10, 12; Zeph. iii. 6, &c. διὰ is also used, Jerem. vii.
καταλειφθήσεται] If this depends on ἕως, it must be accounted for
like ἰάσομαι in ver. IO. The verb ‘be left’ for Heb. ‘be desolated’
suggests that LXX. read ‘ (cf. Shear-jashub, and mm. rendering,
vii. 3) for
12. oi. καταλειφθέντες πληθυνθήσονται] Heb. is rendered by Kay (and Delitzsch, Cheyne very similarly) ‘the forsaken (tract) be ’ from which the Greek differs mainly in referring to the population and not the land.
13. τὸ ἐπιδέκατον] The art. is inserted with fractions, as being related to the whole. For the decimation of the people, cf. Amos v. 3.
καὶ πάλιν] For the insertion of πάλιν cf. xxv. 8. LXX., whether rightly or not, emphasizes the idea of a fresh reverse of fortune.
ἔσται εἰς προνομὴν] This construction may be called a Hebraism. Cf. εἷς διαρπαγήν, ν. 5, where the Heb. word is the same, meaning to destroy or consume, esp. by fire: also in iv. 4, καύσεως. προνομὴ in Lxx. is regularly used of spoiling or plundering.
τερέβινθος] i. 30; βάλανος, ii. I 3.
ἐκσπασθῇ] So A alone, other MSS. ἐκπέσῃς which may be a substitution, to suit βάλανος in its usual meaning of ‘acorn.’
LXX. omits the last clause of the chapter; it is supplied from Theodotion by 17 cursives, Lucianic and others, including 301.
VII. I. According to Hebrew practice, βασιλέως Ἰούδα refers to Ahaz, not to Uzziah: as the Greek shows later in the verse, cf. for instance 2 Kings xviii. I. This Elah, and Remaliah, were not kings of Israel.
῾Ραασσὼν (Ῥασεὶν Β). . .Φάκεε] Lxx. often present proper names different forms from the Hebrew, and with wide variations among the MSS. These differences are passed by without comment, unless required for some special reason, e.g. where it seems probable that a different name altogether from the Hebrew is intended.
Ἀρὰμ] This name is generally transliterated in Isaiah; but not in
ix. 12, xvii. 3, where Συρία, Σύρος are used, as usually in the Lxx. In
Hebrew, Aram and Edom are closely alike in the consonantal text,
οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν πολιορκῆσαι] Could not make their siege effective. Cf. 2 Kings xvi. 5. Heb. has ‘went up to war against it, but succeeded not in warring against ’: which Lxx. may have deliberately paraphrased with πολιορκῆσαι to avoid a seeming contradiction.
2. ἀνηγγέλη. . .λέγοντες] λέγων ℵΒ, λεγόντων 14 cursives, including all the Lucianic but 144 233. The participle is intended to represent the Heb. infinitive ‘construct’ with 5, used explanatorily. Aquila in such cases uses τῷ λέγειν, in his literal fashion: see lvi. 6 (B) and 2 Kings xix. 10 (A). The nominative participle produces anacoluthon in Greek, but is not uncommon in phrases like the present: λεγόντων may be viewed as an attempt to save the grammar.
τὸν οἶκον Δαυεἰδ] Either the court circle, or the royal family. The latter, multiplied by polygamy and early marriages, seem at certain periods to have formed “a numerous and influential upper caste’ (Cheyne): probably most powerful when the king was weak. See 2 Kings x. 13, 14: Jerem. xxxvi. (xliii.) 12, xxxviii. (xlv.) 4, 5. Athaliah cut down the ‘seed royal,’ at any rate those nearly related to the king, till only the infant Joash remained, 2 Kings xi. I, 2: but the old causes would soon multiply them again.
Cheyne thinks that strictly the ‘house of David’ ought to include the ‘house of Nathan’ (Zech. xii. 12); but they had become very distant cousins of the king, and probably had ceased to be counted of the ‘seed royal’ in ’s time; being only brought back into the succession by later vicissitudes, cf. I Chr. iii. 17 with Luke iii. 2731 See below on ver. 14.
Συνεφώνησεν] Heb. ‘hath rested upon,’ same verb as in ver. 19. xi. 2: here, apparently, of making close alliance, in which case LXX gives a fair rendering: or else, literally, of encamping on the country of Israel. For the Greek verb see Gen. xiv. 3: Matt. xx. 13 Acts v. 9
ἐξέστη] ἐκστῆναι φρενῶν = μαίνεσθαι: ἐκστῆναι of a bone to go
ὃν τρόπον. . .σαλευθῇ] Α has ὅταν before ὃν τρόπον, Q 36 41 49 62 90 106 144 147 239 301 306 after. ’s order may be an error. The usual construction seems to be with ὅταν, as Amos iii. 12, Micah v. 8 or ἐὰν, Amos v. 19 ὅταν Α 62 147). See chap. xxxi. 4. When ἂν is not used, and generally when an actual rather than an imaginary action is compared, we have pres. or perf. indic., chap. xx. 3, Amos ii. 13, Ps. xlii. 1; aorist, as Micah iii. 3; or future, chap. v. 24, lxv. 8. Where the subjunctive follows without ἂν, there is generally, if not always, some uncertainty as to the text.
The following are most, if not all the occurrences of ὃν τρόπον in Isaiah: vii. 2, ix. 3 pres. ind. in NA, verb omitted in BQ, x. 10, 11 xiii. 19 aor. ind., xiv. 19 fut., xiv. 24 perf. ind., xvii. 5 ἐὰν c. subj., xx. 3 perf. indic., xxiv. 13 ἐὰν c. subj., xxxi. 4 aor. subj. (ℵ* has fut.) with ἐὰν NC-b A, with ὅταν Ο(Q), xxxiii. 4 ἐὰν c. subj., xxxviii. 19 verb omitted, lii. 14 fut., lxv. 8 fut., lxvi. 22 pres. or fut. μένει in Camb. LXX.)
For similar constructions see Job xxxiii. 15, ὡς ὅταν c. subj., Prov. xxvi. 11 (compare 14), xxvii. 8, ὥσπερ ὅταν c. subj.; in relative clauses the aor. indic. is frequent, as Ps. i. 1, xiv. 3, Prov. xviii. 22, Ecclus. xxxi. (xxxiv.) 8. Other passages worth noting are Job xxxiv. 19, ὃς οὐκ ἐπαισχυνθῇ, Ecclus. l. 19, ἕως· συντελεσθῇ κόσμος· Κυρίου, Eccles. ii. 3 Ps. cxii. 8, cf. Ps. cx. 1, and 1 Cor. xv. 25, with Heb. i. 13. Of εἷ with subj. I can find no clear instance in LXX. In Exod. iv. 23, viii. 2, MSS. vary, and in any case βούλῃ may be indic.; so in Jerem. xxxiii. (xlv.) 21, and perhaps Job xxxiv. 16: while in 2 Sam. xxiv. 13, 1 Kings xxii. 6, 15, Micah vi. 7, εἰ is interrogative and subj. deliberative, which might be the case even in Luke ix. 13. Conversely, ἂν occurs with indic. in Job i. 5 ὥς ἂν συνετελέσθησαν, PS. lxxviii. 34 ὅταν ἀπέκτεννεν, c. The mixture of tenses is remarkable in such passages as Lev. vi. 2, 3, Job xviii. 11 foll.; while the subj. hangs unconnected, Eccles. ix. 14.
See Goodwin, Greek Mood: and T ewes, for Homeric and Attic instances of omission of ἄν, §§ 50, 62, 63, 66; as Homer, Od. VIII. 523 ὣς δὲ γυνὴ κλαίῃσι, Soph. 0. C. 1442 εἴ σου στερηθῶ, Ajax 496, 0. T. 1231, Ο.C. 395, Thucyd. I. 137 μέχρι πλοῦς γένηται, iv. 17 οὗ μὲν βραχεῖς ἀρκῶσι, cf. VI. 21, Herod. IV. 46. Also Swete, Introd. to 0. T. in Greek, p. 306: Hort, Introd. to N.T. T. in Greek, Appendix, pp. 178, 179.
A good deal of uncertainty remains, as the MSS. often vary, and
For questions involving the optative, see notes on xi. 9, xxi. I.
3. εἰς συνάντησιν Ἀχὰζ] Vulg. in occurs-um A. Heb. has ordinary inf. with The Greek phrase is common, Gen. xviii. 2, Exod. iv. 27 Deut. i. 44, Judg. xv. 14, c.; cf. John xii. 13, εἷς ὑπάντησιν Ἀχὰζ may be regarded either as gen. or dat., as both constructions are found.
ὁ καταλαξθεἰς Ἰασσοὺβ] LXX. have translated the first part of the name, no doubt wrongly. Cf. x. 21.
ὅ υἱὸς] Α, unsupported, has the curious variant ἀδελφός, cf. ix. 20. The scribe may have been influenced by the idea that Isaiah's son would be too young to accompany him: in fact, Shear-jashub was probably only a boy at this time. Or again, he may have thought that the child of promise, soon to be spoken of, would be probably, by analogy, a first-born son (leaving aside vii. 14, there remains viii. 3).
πρὸς τὴν κολυμβήθραν] LXX. shortens the phtase here, but renders practically the same Heb. more fully in xxxvi. 2. The pool in question has not been certainly identified, but was probably on the W. or S. of the city; perhaps connected with Siloam (viii. 5, xxii. II).
The water supply was always a matter of difficulty when Jerusalem was threatened; not so much lest the city should run short, as that the besiegers might be too well supplied, or possibly obtain the control. Cf. 2 Kings xx. 20, 2 Chron. xxxii. 4.
4. Φύλαξαι τοῦ Mela-u] Heb. generally rendered ‘Take heed, and be ’ though the second verb can be taken as dependent, and so Cheyne, ‘Look that thou keep calm’: Vulg. vide αἱ
ξύλων] LXX. loses something of the picturesque force of the Hebrew.
Strong though Ephraim may seem to Judah, or to himself, he and his ally are near their end. Even Assyria is only to be dreaded, as the instrument of God, Who alone is to be feared (viii. 13). ’s besetting sin had long been self-confidence, without material or moral strength behind it. See chap. viii. 6 foll., ix. 9 14, xxviii. 1–4; Judg. viii. 1–3, xii. 1–6; Hosea v. 4 8, xiii. I, &c.
ὅταν γὰρ ὀργὴ. . .πάλιν ἰάσομαι] LXX. diverges here from the Heb.
the recurring proper names may have misled the eye and caused
confusion. θυμὸς seems to be
5. περὶ σοῦ, λέγοντες] Β omits these words, 8 places περὶ σοῦ before βουλήν. They are found in AOΓ and about a dozen (besides three with κατὰ σοῦ), as well as in the Syro-hexaplar version; and may be the true LXX., or a Hesychian correction. The Lucianic cursives read κατὰ σοῦ, prefixing Ἐφράιμ καὶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ Ῥομελίου; and so V 309, but with περί. See Vol. I., Introd. pp. 24, 25.
ὅ υἱὸς τοῦ Ῥομελίου] Isaiah, whether from pure contempt, or to lay stress on his descent, never names Pekah in his prophetic utterances. There may indeed be some special sting in the method of allusion, per- ceived by ’s hearers though not by us. It is at least curious that Pekah bore a name, however he came by it, so nearly resembling the predecessor whom he slew and replaced.
6. ’IouSatav] A reads Ἰδουμαίαν, an obvious mistake, but easily made. It belongs purely to the Greek; see on Ἀράμ, ver. 1. Cf. chap. xxxvi. I ℵ, xliv. 26 B, Amos i. 9, II, Β* once, Α* 106 twice, Joel iii. 19 ℵ.
συλλαλήσαντες] Scholz regards the Greek as a guess: Heb. has a verb meaning ‘terrify,’ ‘alarrn’: it is causal; the simple form occurs ver. 16 (φοβῆ).
ἀποστρέψωμεν. . .πρὸς ἡμᾶς] Vulg. avellamus ad nos. Heb. verb means ‘cleave,’ ‘divide,’ ‘break through’; rendered ἔρρηξαν, lix. The sense given by LXX. and Vulg. is easy, but how they came by it is less clear. Aquila has ἀποσχίσωμεν αὐτήν. The Lucianic cursives mostly add καὶ κακώσωμεν (or σομεν) αὐτήν, which may be a duplicate.
αὐτοῖς] Dat. of person interested: easier than αὐτῆς, read by ℵΒQ and most cursives, except 24 41 106 305.
τὸν υἱὸν Ταβεήλ] Nothing is known of him, not even whether he
8. ἀλλ’ ἔτι ἑξήκοντα. . .ἀπὸ λαοῦ] This clause in the Hebrew has been rejected by many critics as interpolated: Lxx. however contains it, the MSS. being in agreement.
ἐκλαίψει] Heb. more strongly, ‘shall be broken’: ἦ βασιλεία inserted by LXX., apparently by way of explanation.
ἀπὸ λαοῦ] Verbally literal, Heb. often using this terse idiom: chap. xvii. I, I Sam. xv. 23, μὴ εἶναι βασιλέα, PS. lxxxiii. 4, ἃς. Davidson, Heb. Syntax, § 101.
9. Σομορὼν] This form is very near the Heb. Shamron. It occurs, with slight variation, I Kings xvi. 24, recording ’s purchase of the site from its owner Shemer. The usual Greek form is Σαμάρεια(Β) or Σαμάρια.
ἑὰν μὴ πιστεύσητε, οὐδὲ μή συνῆτε] The Heb. is generally spoken
of as containing an assonance, the two verbs being being ta'aminu, teamenu
it is rather the employment of two aspects, or voices (Hiphil and
Niphal), of the same verb
συνῆτε] Seems to be a paraphrase; so apparently Scholz. The 0. Latin (made from LXX.) has nisi credideritis, non intelligetis: nec intell., Tert. adv. Marc. v., neque intell., Cyp. T est. 111. 42. Vulg. has non permanebitis. Augustine, De Doct. Christ. 11., comments on the fact of the difference. See Burkitt, The Old Latin and the Itala, p. 61. Possibly LXX. was influenced by vi. 9.
10. προσέθετο. . .λαλῆσαι] Usual Hebraism, see on i. 12.
11. εἰς βάθος ἣ ὕψος] The clause, as pointed in Heb. text,
reads, ‘Ask, going deep, or mounting high’: or, as A.V. marg. It
tempting—if necessary, which some think it is not—to
pointing from sh'ealah, ‘ask!’ (or, ‘thy petition’) to sh'eolah,
Sheol.’ See Delitzsch, and Skinner, in Camb. Bible. We then get
12. Ahaz colours his refusal of God’s offer with a show of obedience to the Law (Deut. vi. 16). This hypocrisy—it can hardly be anything else—is brushed aside. Possibly Ahaz thought by his to cast discredit on Isaiah and his mission; doubtless he wished to be undisturbed in his Assyrian policy. He is like King John as drawn by ShakeSpeare, weak, hypocritical, intriguing, false, and regardless of his ’s honour. It is quite possible that he had some ability, some original promise and capacity for good; but now he makes his ’ refusal. The utmost is predicted, promised, pressingly offered him: but it meets with no response.
13. καὶ εἶπεν] The subject is Isaiah.
μικρὸν ὑμῖν] Heb. literally, ‘little from you,’ i.e. in comparison with you: which phrase means generally either ‘less than you,’ or, as here, ’(too) little for you.
ἀγῶνα παρέχειν] Heb. ‘to weary’ or ‘vex.’ The Greek phrase recalls (a) πόνον παρέχειν, to cause trouble, Plat. Rep. VII. 526C, Herod. 1. 177 ὁ) ἀγῶνα ἀγῶνα τιθέναι, ποιεῖν, θc. to hold or propose a contest: it seems to mean the giving of trouble to the extent of a hard struggle, and almost. to suggest provoking a contest; as the English phrase goes, ‘to show fight.
14.. Though God will not be turned from His purposes of mercy, man can often deprive himself of the advantage of them. We can easily believe that this sign brought Ahaz little comfort.
ἡ παρθένος] Heb. has the article. The commentators have devoted pages to this verse. Many deny that the Heb. word necessarily means a virgin; but in practice it seems to be generally, if not always, used of such. The ultimate reference to our ’s birth of the Virgin Mary is guaranteed by Matt. i. 23, if it could be, in any case, disregarded. But those who look for a nearer reference in ’s own time have been sorely puzzled. They cannot find the mother, virgin or not, nor identify the child Immanuel. In their vain efforts—see Prof. ’s nots—Isaiah's own Hezekiah, and allegorical personification have all been pressed into the service. Better, perhaps, to allow that if there be (necessarily) an immediate reference to ’s own time—with regard to which the question of the virgin is possibly not— we can reach no certainty about it. And it is not well to deny the possibility that the sign was given in a deferred form, which would Comfort believers, and be—to
There may well have been, however, at this time, one who, though never recognised as a person of importance, was nevertheless destined to be the mother of a child, the direct ancestor of the parent (or parents, as reputed) of the final King of the House of David: namely, the wife, or wife to be, of the then representative of the family of Nathan, son of David, from whom our ’s descent is traced in Luke iii. This family has only once marked attention drawn to it in the O.T., viz. in Zech. xii. 12; its importance arose only with the failure of issue from Jehoiachin, Jerem. xxii. 30, nor did it, apparently, retain high station after Zerubbabel, but fell to humble circumstances. The idea of a reference to a member of it here is but a guess, and throws no light on the question of the παρθένος. It presents, however, no Special difficulties, and may perhaps be thought to provide a suitable contrast and, at the same time, relation to the ‘house of ’ of ’ day. It is perhaps worth noticing that all the names mentioned in Zech. xii. 12, 13 occur in the pedigree, Luke iii.1 The names Eliezer and Salathiel, or Shealtiel, ‘l have asked of God.’ may also, on this supposition, have special significance.
ἕξει] 50 ℵAQ 26 41 90mg 106 144 239 306: B and the rest λήμψεται.
καλέσεις] Heb. has 3rd pers. fem., but of an unusual form resembling 2nd pers., which Aq. Theod. Symm. give, as well as most MSS. of the Lxx. καλέσει R, καλέσετε or ται Q* ’with nine Luc. cursives and 301. καλέσουσιν is read by Γ) 26 106 144 233 90mg: and in Matt. i. 23 καλέσεις D): vocabunt, Iren. (Lat) adv. Haer. 111. 15. The text of Cyp. Test 11. 9 is uncertain, but the MS. L has vocabitis.
15, 16. The Greek text presents some difficulty. ’s reading
ἐκλέξεται is against the Heb., the balance of the clause, and the
repetition of the phrase in ver. 16 in the original. It is, however,
supported by ℵca cg ΟΓ; 22 24 36 48 49 51 90 93 106 144 147 228corr 233
301 304–6, and some MSS. of Cyp. Test. 11. 9 read commutabit,
to ἀλλάξεται, a future: and it is difficult to imagine it the result of any
but blind alteration. The omission of ἢ before προελέσθαι might be right:
if ἦ came from taking γνῶναι and προελέσθαι to be altematives; or it
may have followed on the reading ἐκλέξεται. The verb προελέσθαι is
itself awkward: Cyp. l.c. has pracferat; but is not the meaning of the
Heb., though a kind of sense can be made of the alternative of
choosing evil or good. But if it is not a duplicate of ἐκλέξασθαι which
has taken the place of the real verb before πονηρά, perhaps περιελέσθαι
(Josh. xxiv. 14, 23), in the sense of ‘to remove,’ may have been
These considerations point to some such text as
15. πρὶν ἢ γνῶναι] LXX., differing from Heb. in varying the subsequent words, reads here the same as in ver. 16, while Heb. varies: being here infin. with ζ, A.V. ‘that he may know,’ Vulg. u(??) αἰαῖ. Kay defends this, but most moderns take it gerundially, ‘when he knoweth’: or perhaps, ‘as he learneth.’ See Davidson, § 93.
βούτυρον καὶ μέλι] Butter (curdled milk) and honey seems to represent a simple kind of luxury issuing out of desolation. It is too near ‘milk and honey,’ the special blessing of the land long ago, to be pure hardship, though the ‘stay’ of bread and water has failed, iii. 1, and there are few men left, vi. 11, 12, xxiv. 6. Cf. Exod. iii. 8, Job xx. 17, θc.; and Eurip. Βαcchae, 142, ῥεῖ δὲ γάλακτι πέδον, ῥεῖ δ’ οἴνῳ, ῥεῖ μελισσᾶν Νέκταρι. See also Ecclus. xxxix. 26.
16. ἦν σὺ φοβῇ] The verb probably renders Heb. rightly. The rest of the verse is rendered by Delitzsch, Cheyne, c.. ‘the land before whose two kings thou fearest, shall be forsaken’: by Kay, as an exact rendering, ‘Forsaken shall be the land, as to which thou art in alarm, because of her two ’; inclining to connect ‘because c. with ‘forsaken,’ as in A.V. For ἀπὸ προσώπου, see on ii. 10.
17. ἀφεῖλεν] Could this be taken as intransitive, ‘broke off from, it would exactly represent the Heb. Failing this, and supposing that Lxx. took Heb. as transitive, which would require another letter, the subject must be God Himself. Cf. 1 Kings xi. 11, 13, διαρρήξω, λήμψομαι: and xii. 15, 24. The schism of the Ten Tribes was the greatest blow Danid's kingdom had yet suffered, νῦν βόσκε τὸν οἶκόν σου Δαυείδ, I Kings xii. 16.
τὸν βασιλέα τᾶν Ἀσσυρίων] Introduced for the first time, and with great force. Heb. ‘of Asshur,' Lxx. generally ‘of the Assyrians': but Ἀσσοὺρ Jerem. l. (xxvii.) 18, and also of the personified people, Ezek. xxxi. 3, Hos. xiv. 3, Ps. lxxxiii. 8; see also Num. xxiv. 22 and 24.
The mention of the king of Assyria at this moment would especially confound Ahaz, as he hoped to find a protector in him.
There is some question as to whether this chapter is a continuous prophecy. Probably it is, looking to ver. 22, and viii. 4, 610 Though marked by the abrupt transitions frequent in Isaiah, the contrast between Syria-Ephraim, the contemptible enemy, and Assyria, the terrible instrument of God, pervades it.
18. συροῖ] Cf. v. 26. Heb. ’: the translator may have fancied the words connected.
μυίαις, 8 κυριεύει] SO RAQ 49 90 106 109 144 305—8. κυριεύσει
Fourteen cursives, including most of the Lucianic, have αἳ κυριεύσουσι
or κυριεύουσι: 36 has ὃ κυριεύσουσι. The boldly ungrammatical text
is probably the real LXX., altered in various ways to secure agree-
ment. The verb is not expressed at all in Heb. text; but the influence
of Hebrew, with its frequent looseness of agreement—Davidson.
Syntax, § 112—may have affected the language, as Hebraisms
sometimes found without warrant from the immediate original; see on
i. 21. Here the indeclinable Heb. relative, and the collective use of
the Heb. word for ‘fly,’ may have produced their effect. (Cf. the use
of κυνάμυια in Exod. Viii. 20–24, PS. IXXViii. 45.) Possibly LXX.
have duplicated the rel.
The fly and the bee, abounding along the Nile and in the Assyrian mountains respectively, “aptly sybolized” says Kay, “the two between which Israel lay.” Each of these powers had a party Judah anxious to make alliance with it; and each, in its own way, was to be not a help, but a destruction (xxx. 5, Jerem. ii. 36).
μίμους] So RCAQV and eleven, mostly Lucianic, cursives; μέρος ℵ*B θc., a less usual construction. For μέρος· as representing ‘end,’ ‘border,’ cf. xxxvii. 24.
19. καὶ ἀναπαύσονται] Omitted by B: the other MSS., except
ℵAΟΓ 26 41 49 106 144, insert before πάντες. Cf. the omission of
πορεύσομαι in the best authorities, xxxviii. lo. τῆς χώρας and σπήλαια
do not show their relation to Heb.; ῥογάδα represents some word from
20. τῷ M] Heb. has the article. The instrument is formidable, sheer and sweeping in its action.
τᾷ μεγάλῳ καὶ μεθεθυσμένῳ] τῷ μεγ. τῷ μεμεθ. QV and eight cursives ;
21. δάμαλιν βοῶν] Literal, Heb. being collective.
22. The latter part of the verse is shortened by LXX., the trans- lator or one of the earliest scribes having omitted from the first to the second ‘shall eat’ of the original: the Lucianic MSS. mostly φάγεται βούτυρον ὅτι, but this is not very likely to have been the regular Lxx. text. With them agree 87 91 97 228 309, but with γάλα for μέλι.
23. χίλιαι ἄμπελοι χιλίων σίκλων] σίκλων gives the meaning cor- rectly. Heb. often omits the word ‘shekels,’ as a familiar unit: as in Gen. xx. 16, xxiv. 22, Judg. xvii. 2–4, &c. Here we seem to again to the prophetic parable of chap. v. With this verse cf. Song of Sol. viii. II, ἀνὴρ οἴσει ἐν καρπῷ αὐτοῦ χιλίους ἀργυρίου.
24, 25. The details are not very clear in the original. The ‘arrows and ’ are perhaps not of invaders, but of hunters in a desolate land. Kay, however, comparing chap. v. 28, takes the ‘briers and ’ metaphorically, of the bristling array of the enemy. This affords some explanation of ‘the fear,’ but it is not generally Lxx. rearranges the connection of the clauses, perhaps to make an easier sense: ἀροτριώμενον conveys an idea of more regular cultivation than Heb. seems to do, though cf. v. 6.
25. ἔσται...ἀπὸ...εἰς] ‘It shall be (turned) from . . . to . . .’
προβάτου...βοὸς] These terms have exchanged places, relatively to Heb. Scholz gives a list of such cases: e.g. xxviii. 15, xxxiv. 6,1x. 3.
VIII. 1. τόμον χάρτου κοινοῦ μεγάλου] χάρτου is found only in Α 26 90 109 144 30:; six Luc. MSS. and 4] 87 91 97 106 309 read καινὸν μέγαν, and 62 147 καινόν. χάρτου makes the grammar easier: cf. Jerem. xxxvi. (xliii.) 2. The Heb. should perhaps be rendered ‘a great ’ meaning one made of wood or of metal, the word being the same as the mirrors in iii. 23, rightly rendered ‘glasses’ by A.V., as ‘glass’ was regularly used in that sense in Elizabethan English: cf. the title of Gascoigne's poem, The Steel Glass.
γροᾴίδι ἀνθράκων] Α human pen. The ’finger of Gof' (Exod. xxxi. I8) is not to be used on this occasion.
τοῦ Lxx. translates the name, taking the prep. 7 ‘for,’ as introducing an infin. of purpose. The Heb. words, ‘Hurry. plunder-speed-spoil,´ are doubtful as to their syntactical the phrase being an enigma.
πάρεστιν γὰρ] Scholz thinks these words intended to render ’n; but if the meaning suits, the order is less strictly kept than usual. The rendering in ver. 3 certainly varies the order, and introduces ταχέως, which has nothing else here to correspond.
2. ὑρίαν] Lxx. omits ‘the priest,’ supplied from Aq. Symm. in Qmg and 16 cursives. For Uriah, see 2 Kings xvi. 1016 and cf. not. of Isai. xxi. 8. The identification with the priest of 2 Kings xvi. must be considered very probable, though not certain: a prominent man would be (a) a desirable witness, (b) likely to be named without much explanation. Blunt, in his Coincidences. Part 111. ii., points out the increased probability, especially if joined with another prominent person: for Zechariah was the name of ’ father-in-law, ’s grandfather, 2 Kings xviii. 2.
Βαραχίου] This would represent Heb. Berechiah, differing from jeberechiah by i only: a copyist or translator, acquainted with the name as father of a Zechariah (Zech. i. I), might easily mistake or alter.
3. τὴν προφῆτιν] Perhaps, but not certainly, so called only as ’s wife. προσῆλθεν ℵAQ 24 26 93 106 144: προσῆλθον Β θc. with Heb.
4. λήμψεται] ‘(One) shall take': Delitzsch and Cheyne take so, but most take it as pass.
δύναμιν Δ....σκῦλο, Σ.] Only the second of these alliterations is in the Heb.
6. τὸ ὕδωρ τοῦ Σιλωὰμ] There is a tunnel through the rock by
which water flows gently from a spring outside the wall to the pool of
Siloam. This work may be as old as the time of Isaiah, or even older.
βούλεσθαι ἕχειν...βασ·ιλέα ἐφ’ ὑμῶν] An explanation, unauthorised but practically true. The son of Tabeal would be a puppet-king; the real rule was to be in the hands of the dual alliance.
7. ᾠάραγγα...τεῖχος] Heb. the ‘channels’ and ‘banks’ of a river, keeping on the allusion.
8. Here Lxx. departs widely from Heb. The Greek strongly resembles, almost summarises iii. I. Α omits ὥστε πληρῶσαι (alone) and reads τὰ πλάτη with 24 26 49 90 106 I44 233 239vid 306: also, ℵct Α 106 have εἷ for ἢ before δυνατὸν, and A 24 συντελέσαι for συντε- λέσασθαι.
None of these readings of A, except τὰ πλάτη, are very likely to be right: εἶ for ἢ is either one of the common mistakes in vowels, or an intentional touching up: ὥστε πληρῶσαι is probably an accidental omission.
παρεμβολὴ] Α favourite word of LXX., generally rendering Heb. Mahanch, ‘camp,’ ‘host.’ It is said to be a Macedonian word, which would account for its Alexandrian use. Here it seems to be due to the LXX. taking ‘wings’ to refer to an army, and paraphrasing. Skinner doubts whether Heb. ever ‘wings’ this sense.
μεθ’ ἡμῶν ὁ Θεὸς] The name Immanuel is translated here by LXX.; but there is general agreement that it is best kept as a proper name until ver. 10.
9. γνῶτε] Clearly, Lxx. read um, Heb. having um. Aq. Symm. Theod. have συναθροίσθητε, Vulg. ’m’. There are, however, other Heb. roots much alike, and some think it should be from another, meaning ‘shout’ (as in wrath): while Cheyne and W. E. Barnes, with Lowth and Gratz, are inclined to follow the reading of Lxx. Others render, ‘Break!’ or, ‘be ’ Luther, Alexander; i.e. do your worst.
ἐὰν γὰρ πάλιν] Lxx. introduces words of connection. For ἰσχύω corresponding to Heb. ‘gird oneself,’ cf. κατισχύετε, 1. II, where however the Greek can hardly be so construed. See also Ps. xciii. I.
II. ἀπειθοῦσιν] In this word lies the discrepancy, Lxx. having
read it as from ΑBBREVE or
12. sklhr]on= Heb.
13, l4. καὶ ὃν ἐπ’ αὐτῷ πεποιθὸς ἧς] Heb. ‘(and let him be your) fear, and him your dream.’ ℵ reads βοηθὸς for φόβος: which suggests rather a duplicate in the place of the following clause, if the nor. read Dam as some form from the root πη), help. πέποιθα is one of those words which the Lxx. seem to have used as a stop-gap when in doubt, as in xxxii. 3: see Vol. I. Introd. p. 50.
The latter part of ver. 14 has nearly identical words in Gr. and Heb., except ‘house of Jacob ‘ ( ‘houses,’ B and many cursives) for ‘two houses of ’ a phrase not found elsewhere: but the syntax differs widely. On the negative, see below. The case-relation is reversed in λίθου προσκόμματι and πέτρας πτώματι, but this affects the sense little. The Heb. verb combines the meanings ‘dwell’ and ‘sit’: the ‘snare’ is rendered as a ‘hollow,’ a trap such as hill-countries often afford in warfare. Cf. ’s hasty conclusion, Exod. xiv. 3, ‘They are entangled in the land, the wilderness hath shut them ’
οὐχ ὅς λίθου mm] There are many places where um. and Heb.
differ by a negative: i. 6, θc.: see list, Vol. I. Introd. p. 52.
Scholz thinks
αυναντήσεσθε] Apparently not in Heb.; but cf. συναντήματα, Exod.
ix. I4, representing ‘plagues,’ root
15. διὰ τοῦτο ἀδ. . . . παλλοὶ] Cf. I Cor. xi. 30.
ἐγγλοῦσιν] Scholz thinks ’u, ‘be snared,’ was mistaken by sound, and read as win ‘come near.
15, 16. ἄνθρακα, ἂν ὄντες. Τότε φανεροὶ ἔσονται] These
words do not at first sight show any correspondence with Heb., which
has ΑΒΒREVE
16. τοῦ 003E; μαθεῖν] Lxx. has a verb for the Heb. noun, ’disciples.’ They seem to have read D, ‘from,’ at the beginning of the word, instead of 3. AV 26 106 omit μή, perhaps taking τοῦ μαθεῖν ‘from learning,’ the expression σφραγιζόμενοι τὸν νόμον counting one of hindrance; see Goodwin, Gr. Moods and Tenses, § 95, 2. Cypr. Test. i. 9, ne ’sazrzt. In Thuc. III. 75, τῇ τοῦ μὴ ξυμπλεῖν ἀπιστίᾳ, the μὴ is similarly omitted by at least one MS.; and in I. 16, κωλύματα μὴ αὐξηθῆναι, some read τοῦ for μή.
17. καὶ ἐρεῖ] Inserted by Lxx.
18. καὶ ἔσται] Inserted by LXX. from a mistaken view of the connection required. εἷς before σημεῖα found only in ℵAQΓ 24 26 41 106 144 233 (with Heb.).
ἑν τῷ Ἰσρ.] RB and all Mss. exc. ’ 26 41 106 306 insert οἴκῳ before Ἰσραήλ (against Heb.).
παρὰ Κυρίου] παρὰ c. gen. here well represents a compound Heb. preposition, ‘from with....’
19. τοὺς ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς φων. καὶ τοὺς ἐγγαστρ.] LXX. is more explanatory than Heb. as to the methods employed: the explanation is very likely right, though less suitable in the mouth of the speakers.
‘Peep’ in A.V. has its old meaning of a faint, chirping sound, such
as the shades were supposed to utter. The commentators compare
Hom. ΙΙ. XXIII. 100,
οὐκ ἔθνος πρὸς Θεὸν αὐτοῦ; τί ἐκζητῶσιν] Β, with scanty support, but with sense nearer to Heb., reads ἐκζητήσουσιν after αὐτοῦ. τί is in fact an insertion of mm. A, by a common confusion of vowels, reads ἐκητῶσιν: cf. xi. 9, xxix. 23; the converse in xl. 24., xlviii. 21. The verbal resemblance to Luke xxiv. 5 is noticeable.
By the “black ” of the necromancer, the dead are the consultant teachers of the living. Forbidden, Deut. xviii. 10, 11.
20. βοήθειαν] Apparently due to reading
περὶ οὗ...περὶ αὐτοῦ] Heb. prep. here is S, and the relative to be taken causally.
δῶρα δοῦναι] Heb.
21. ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς] Heb. has 3rd pers. sing, as in v. 26 foll. ; but perhaps to be taken collectively, through this and the following verse, which are otherwise followed fairly closely by LXX.
τὰ πάτρια] Perhaps a paraphrase to avoid an impious sounding expression. πάτρια seems to be used much as in Thucyd. II. 2, εἴ τις βούλεται κατὰ τὰ πάτρια τῶν πάντων Βοιωτῶν ζυμμαχεῖν: Plat. Politicu: 296 C, τῶν βιαέντων παρὰ τὰ γεγραμμένα καὶ πάτρια δρᾶν ἕτερα. The cursive 93, however, reads παταχρα: which agrees with a statement of Theodoret (Migne, II. 289). See Field, Hexapla, ad loc.; and Vol. I. pp. 29, 95 (note). Dr Nestle (art. Septuagint in Hastings' D.B.) approves this reading.
22. στενὴ] Cf. Lat. κνεφαία, English ‘straits.’ This sense is parcularly felt in στενοχωρία. See Horn. Οd. IX. 445, XVIII. 386, Eurip. Ion 721 (doubtful), στενομένα πόλις, Polyb. I. 67, and 2 Cor. vi. 4. θλίψεσιν, ἐν ἀνάγκαις, ἐν στενοχωρίας.
The order of words varies in the MSS.
ὅστε μὴ βλέπειν] Scholz thinks Lxx. read
καὶ οὐκ ἀπορηρ.] See next note.
IX. I. Τοῦτο πρᾶτον πίε] The Lxx. here differs markedly from
Heb., which is itself somewhat obscure: literally, ‘Yet (or, For) not
gloom, for whom (fem.) distress: as at the time at first he treated
lightly the land of Zabulon and land of N aphtali, so (lit. and) in the
time to come he treated heavily (i.e. honourably) the way by the sea,
&c.’ The idea of drinking is thus foreign to the original, as well
to the context; and such passages as chap. li. 17, 22, Jer. xxv. 15
27, 28 (xxxii. I, 13, 14 in Lxx.), Ps. 1x. 3, lxxv. 8, do not help: nor
does Habak. ii. 16, though the same words are used in the anti-
thesis of ‘shame’ and ‘honour,’ and the chapter seems full of Isaianic
language. πίε, indeed—though practically all documents support it,
well as Tertullian, adv. Marc. Iv. 7, “ Hoc primum bibito (v.1. obito. a
fairly evident corruption), facito” ”—is well-nigh hopeless. It
be best to compare the Greek, word by word, with the literal rendering
of Heb.:
The quotation, Matt. iv. 15, begins with γῆ Ζαβουλών, after the main
difficulty. I suspect that οἱ λοιποί, though looking like an attempt at
rendering ‘(time) to come,’ is an addition of the Greek, and κατοικοῦντες
also superfluous: οἱ τὴν παράλιον (κατοικοῦντες) and ὁδὸν θαλάσσης,
which is given by Aq. Theod., being in fact duplicate renderings. Apart
from this, we have words corresponding to all the Hebrew except ‘he
treated heavily,’ and to all the Greek except πίε. This Hebrew word,
‘heavy,’
If ταχὺ and παχὺ had both been in the original, their similarity might easily cause one to drop out; and πίε, which is scarcely intelligible, may be a corruption from some other arrangement of letters. Summing up these ideas, it may be suggested that the Greek text ran originally somewhat as follows:
καὶ οὐκ ἀπορηθήσεται ὁ ἐν στενοχωρίᾳ ὤν. Ὠς καιροῦ τοῦ τὸ πρῶτον ταχύ, ἔπειτα παχὺ ποιεῖ. Xώρα Ζαβουλὼν, κ.τ.λ.
Except ὡς for ἕως, the alteration from the ΜSS. consists of reading
This corresponds nearly word for word with the Heb, though not preserving much sense; and this kind of correspondence is frequent in the LXX. Χώρα following might be for χώραν, object to ποιεῖ; written as χωρᾶ; but the syntax must have been lost after that. St ’s quotation is hardly conclusive, because starting with the words ‘The land of Z.,’ he would naturally use the
ὁδὸν θαλάσσης] These words are read only by ℵ*ca AQ 24 26 90 106 144 233 239 306, and assigned to Aq. Theod. by Qmg. They are found in Matthew, and agree with Heb., while οἱ τὴν παράλιον κατοικοῦντες), as said above, appears to be a duplicate rendering. Were it not for the support of ’s text, the evidence would on the whole point to οἱ τὴν παράλων (or παραλίαν) the true LXX., its MS. evidence including ℵ*B and many cursives, while the more literal rendering might have come in from Aquila or Theodotion. The evidence of a N.T. writer is however almost conclusive, unless we suppose that ὁδὸν θαλάσσης came from Matthew into the MSS of the LXX.; as 301 reads ἀνέτειλεν for λάμψει in ver. 2. Finally, it might be supposed that there were alternative versions current, both of which our Mss. represent more or less faithfully, and perhaps with mixture; Matthew and Theodotion having both used that containing ὁδὸν θαλάσσης.
The ‘way of the ’ is generally taken to mean the western side of the Sea of Galilee: but it has also been referred to the track by the Mediterranean coast.
The ‘Via ’ of the Crusaders ran from Acre to Damascus.
τὰ μέρη τῆς Ἰουδαίας] Added after ἐθνῶν by ℵΑΒ Q 26 49 90 106 (301), while seven Lucianic MSS. have τὰ μέρη τῆς Γαλιλαίας τῶν ἐθνῶν. The mention of Judaea has no warrant from the original: the authorities for it are mainly Hesychian; and it suggests intentional insertion, by one who thought Judaea ought to have, or must have had, its share in the prophecy. The reading Ἰουδαίας in Luke iv. 44 has always seemed to the present writer suspicious, though so highly supported. ’
2. The quotation in Matthew continues: he reads καθήμενος with A against Heb., σκοτίᾳ for σκότει, εἶδεν with Heb. against tom- of LXX. this last is a matter of vowel points, Lxx. reading the word as am. imperat., for am, perf. 3 pl. Matthew seems either to have quoted with some independent use of the Heb., or else from a different Greek version, coming nearer to ’s than to B'd text: unless indeed A's text was affected by that of the Gospel. See Swete, Introd. to 0. T. in Gk, pp. 396–7. where the view taken is somewhat
3. 8 κατήγαγες] Scholz explains this verb as
There is a question, as to the Heb. itself, whether
This same question between
It seems possible that ὃ might have been corrupted from οὐ. In
what sense Scholz intends
ἐν ἀμήτῳ] The harvest, judging by the parallel clause, may be
metaphorical, of a victory and slaughter: as in Homer, Iliad
XIX. 222,
εὐφραίνονται ] So NA 106 144; εὐφρανθήσονται 24 36 49; other MSS. omit. Heb. has a different word from that used earlier in the verse. V ulg. laetanmr. . . .exultant.
4. ἀπαιτούντων] Cf. iii. 12. The Lxx. paraphrases. Κύριος after διεσκέδασεν is omitted by Β, probably rightly: διεσκέδασεν is itself not represented in the Hebrew; for the verb, in the sense of ‘destroy,’ ‘bring to nought,’ see chap. xxxii. 7, with διασπεῖραι in ver. 6.
τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἐπὶ Μαδιὰμ] Heb. simply ‘the day of Mindian.’ ‘Day’ is said to be used in Arabic with the implication of ‘battle’: but the phrase is natural enough, even without this. ’s victory re- mained decisive and memorable : see x. 26, Ps. lxxxiii. 9, II. In this case, affiliction did not ‘rise up the second ’
5. στολὴν] Heb. word is now generally taken to mean a ‘boot,’
but has been very variously interpreted. The next word is from the
same root, said to be Aramaic. ἐπισυνηγμένην seems to be little more
than a guess, and δόλῳ probably
The rest of the verse seems to have been beyond the ’ knowledge: no correspondence is visible between ἱμάτιον...πυρί- καυστοι.
6. x003E;] ὑμῖν ℵ*Α, by a not uncommon mistake.
καλέσαι] καλεῖτε ℵ*B*, probably for καλεῖται: confusion may have been introduced in the Greek from vii. 14. Heb. ‘and (one) calleth his name.’ i.e. his name is called.
Μεγάλης βουλῆς ἄγγελος] Lxx. paraphrases Heb. ἅγγελος may be intended to represent Heb. ΕΙ. Heb. has ‘Wonder, Counsellor’ which most modern autorities—but not Kay, Delitzsch, or —take as one expression, ‘wonder of a counsellor,’ i.e. Counsellor.
ὲγὼ γὰρ ἄξω εἰρήνην] Still paraphrasing: ἄξω perhaps=
θαυμαστὸς σύμβουλος. θσὸς] Ισχυρὸς ἐξουσιαστὴς ἄρχων εἰρήνην πατὴρ τοῦ μέλλοντος ἀιόνος] These words, a literal rendering of the Heb., for the most part, are found in athV 22 36 48 θ’) 51 62 87 9091 (93)97 106 147 233 309, and in 109 with slightly different order. A omits θεός, Θݲσݲ having dropped out perhaps after oc. This passage is in Vol. I. Introd. p. 25. Against its claim to stand as part of the true Lxx. text are the following reasons:
(a) It is not in ℵ*BQ, nor, e silentio, in other MSS. not named above: and is marked with an asterisk in 48.
(b) It is a duplicate rendering, in great part, of the text as standing without it.
(c) lts wording coincides to a great extent with Aq. Symm. Theod., though not identical with any one of these.
On the other hand, it is not a mere insertion from either of the later versions, due to the Hexapla: for it does not agree with any of them entirely, and ἐξουσιαστὴς, τοῦ μέλλοντος, differ from them all: and Clement of Alexandria (Paed. l. 24) quotes it in the form θαυμ συμβ. θεὸς δυναστὴς πατὴρ αἰώνιος· ὄρχων εἰρήνης, where δυναστὴς suggests remembrance both of ἐξουσιαστὴς and of the later ’ δυνατός. Irenaeus also (Adv. Haer. IV. 33. II), as preserved in the Latin version, has Admirabilis consiliarius Deus lortis; and θεὸς is not in Aq. Symm. Theod. The simplest explanation seems to be, that an alternative text of the LXX., of which Theodotion, followed probably by Symmachus, made use, has here left traces, which have been preserved side by side with the other, which in the present state of our evidence we must call the true Lxx. That this latter is inferior, viewed as a faithful rendering of the Heb., need cause no surprise, as the true mm. of Daniel is commonly agreed to be inferior to the version which Theodotion chose for his revision: naturally he would choose the best available. The relation to Aquila's version is, however, hardly clear.
Something similar, in the matter of alternatives, of which the better has not always prevailed, is described by Mr F. C. Burkitt, in Proceedings of tile Society of Bibl. Archaeology, June 1902, “The so-called Quinta of 4 Kings”: where the Quinta appears to (a) pretty closely literal, according to the ’s light, (5) “as a rule. . .cited in company with Aquila or Symmachus or Theodotion, or all three,” (c) a collection of variants, (d) perhaps the genuine This last is hardly the case here, perhaps: but on the whole, the appearances present considerable resemblance.
7. ὅ ξῆλος. . .ταῦτα] The phrase recurs, xxxvii. 32 : cf. also xlii. 13 lix. 17, Exod. xx. 5, θεὸς ζηλωτής, &c. This ‘zeal’ or ‘jealousy’ is a of activity of justice, vindicating especially ’s own holiness when outraged.
Plato seems to have had a glimpse of some such principle in his ‘spirited’ element in the soul, τὸ θυμοειδές, Repub. IV. 440 E, cf. Phaedra: 246 B, &c.
8. Θάνατον] Heb. has ‘a word,’ the same consonants,
For θάνατον ℵ*Γ 93 228 (not marg.) 239 304–8 309 marg. λόγον; so Symm. Theod.; Aq. ῥῆμα.
10. Typical brag with no solid strength behind it. Compare
’s boast in Ovid, Μetanmorph. VI. 194, 196,
οἰκοδ. ἑαυτοῖς πύργον] The translator seems to have been reminded,
perhaps by the mention of bricks, of Gen. xi. 4 (note ἐαυτοῖς): πύργον
would be in Heb. ΑΒΒREVE and the letters
Kay, without special reference to the LXX., observes: “Under Pekah, Ephraim had thoroughly adopted the God-defying policy of Babel.”
Scholz thinks λίθους due to reading
11. τοὺς ἐπανιστανομένους ἐπ’ ὅρους Σιὼν] Heb. ‘the adversaries of Rizin,’ referring apparently to the Assyrians, but ficult, or at unexpected, so that many modern authorities seek to alter it, and read the ‘princes of ’ with some MSS., or else omit ‘of ’ making it ‘his,’ i.e. ’s ‘adversaries.’ See, however, Kay, Delitzsch, W. E. Barnes on the other side.
According to Scholz, Lxx. read
12. Συρίαν] See on vii. 1. The verse corresponds with Heb., except in the substitution of ‘Greeks’ for ‘Philistines’: either the latter were supposed to have lost their old terror, though 2 Chron. xxviii. 18 shows how Ahaz suffered from them, and they are named, ii. 6, xiv. 29, 31 ; or else they were interpreted as merely typical of the Gentiles.
τούτοις tank] The refrain reenters from chap. v. 25.
13. ἀπεστράφη] So ℵAQΓ 49 90 106 109 144 301—8; mightbe thought inferior to ἐπεστράφη of B #x0026;c., and perhaps confused with ver. 12: cf. also 1 Kings xiii. 33. On the other hand see vii. 6.
ἴως ἐπλήγη] Heb. ΑΒBREVE ‘unto,’ ‘until,’ accounts for ἕως ; but Heb. has a participle, not a finite verb, and the sense is altered. ’
14. μέγαν καὶ μικρὸν] Α fied version of Heb. ‘palm-branch and ’ For κεφαλὴ and οὐρά, cf. Deut. xxviii. I 3, 44.
προσβύτην. . .οὐρά] This explanation has been rejected by many from the Heb. text: but Kay accepts it, Skinner pronounces at any rate for caution, and Delitzsch (ed. 3) defends it on grounds of style, character, and connection.
τοὺς τὰ πρόσωπα θαυμάζοντας] Heb. is passive, as in iii. 3, ’exalted
or accepted of i.e. honourable: Heb. has two phrases ‘to accept.
and ‘to ’
aim] ἡ ἀρχή] ἀρχὴ is perhaps used as a clearer explanation than
κεφαλή. If αὕτη is right, we have here the familiar idiom by which
demonstratives, and sometimes relatives also, agree with the noun of
the predicate. Cf. xxx. 21, 2 Kings vi. 19: and see Liddell and Scott
on οὗτος, B. 4 and II. This is frequent in Latin: as Virg. III. 660
15. ὄνομα] Heb. ‘falsehood.’
16. μακαρίζοντες] See on iii. 12. The second part of the verse has active for paSsive verb: ‘swallow’ is probably the right rendering.
17. ἄνομοι] Kay approves this rendering, and it is at any rate not far from the idea of Heb. which means ‘impious’ or ‘profane.’ See x. 6, xxiv. 5, xxxiii. 14 τοὺς ἀσεβεῖς), xxxii. 6. Cf. Jerem. xxiii. 15 μολυσμὸς) and Job viii. 13 ἀσεβοῦς), and xxxiv. 30, xxxvi. 13 where the rendering ὑποκριτὴς is due to Theodotion; A.V. often renders by ‘hypocrite’: see Hatch, Essays in Βibl. Gr. II. pp. 91—3.
18. ὲν τοῖς δάσεσιν] δάσυς is frequently used in Greek of thickly- leaved wood, or wooded country, opp. to wuss; Horn. Odyss. XIV. 49 Herod. IV. 21, 191, &c.
The second clause of the verse has βρωθήσεται where Heb. is pointed as active, and ἄγρωστις ξηρά, cf. xxxvii. 27, is a paraphrase, Heb. being as-vii. 24; so also x. 17: the last clause, which is difficult, is also loosely paraphrased.
19. συγκαυθήσεται] The reading συνκέκαυται, of ℵΒQ* &c., preferable: the future, read by A 144, has no warrant from Heb., and is probably due to the neighbouring tenses, esp. καυθήσεται in ver. 18. The Heb. word, not found elsewhere, probably means ‘is burnt up’: ‘burnt to a ’ acc. to Delitzsch, i.e. burnt black.
20. ἐκκλινεῖ] Perhaps a guess: Heb. verb means ‘cut,’ or ‘smite,’ according to Delitzsch: but has been variously interpreted.
τοῦ βραχίονος τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ] αὑτοῦ] τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ is inserted by A,
with αδελ small at the end of a line, and by its constant adherents
26 106. It is probably an addition to suit the following verse: though
Seeker and Lowth thought it a duplicate of βραχίονος, pointing to
a reading ΑΒΒREVE ‘neighbour’ for
A stop after ἐμπλησθῇ brings the Lxx. more into accordance with Heb.
21. There was hostility between Manasseh and Ephraim in the days of Gideon and Jephthah ; Kay also instances Pekah's Gileadite following, 2 Kings xv. 25.
ὅτι ἅμα πολιορκήσαντι] The verb is not in the Heb.; but is either
supplied to make the sense clear, as Scholz thinks: or possibly read
into the text, ΑΒΒREVE
X. The first four verses are connected with the preceding chapter
by the refrain. At ver. 5, the Assyrian is suddenly brought before us,
1. The LXX. has lost the parallelism: Heb. has two phrases, each with a root repeated in it: ‘decree’ or ‘inscribe ’ and ‘write ’: Lxx. repeats the one root three times, with the appearance of a familiar Hebraism, not used here, in γράφοντες γράφουσιν.
2. ἐκκλίνοντες] Here transitive, as, e.g., in Plato, Cratylu: 404 D, νῦν δὲ αὐτῆς ἐκκλίνουσι τὸ ὄνομα. Above, ix. 20, it is intrans., which is more usual: as Thuc. V. 73, ἐξέκλινεν ἀπὸ σφῶν τὸ στράτευμα.
πτωχῶν] See Hatch, Essay: in Βible. Greek, 11. p. 73, on the various
Heb. words thus rendered. Here, and in xiv. 30, it is
3. τί ποιήσουσιν;] Cf. Jerem. v. 31, Luke xxiii. 31.
τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐπισκοπῆς] Cf. Luke xix. 44: also 1 Pet. ii. 12, Job xxxi. 14, Jerem. xiii. 21.
4. τοῦ μή ἐμπεσεῖν εἰς ἐπαγωγήν;] The Heb. is difficult. Lagarde proposed to divide the words differently, and translate ‘Beltis bows down, Osiris is broken ’: cf. xlvi. 1. But there is nothing in the context to suggest Egyptian gods. Cheyne remarks, “The Sept. seems to have had a mutilated Heb. text, and renders by guess.” It difficult to decide between ἐπαγωγὴν, with ℵA 24 26 (41) 49 106 305 and ἀπαγωγήν, BQ θc.: perhaps the latter, as ἐπαυ. may have assimilated to xiv. 17. After these words RA and most cursives (and Syro-hex.) add, with Heb., καὶ ὑποκάτω ἀνῃρημένων πεσοῦνται. Qmg marks the clause with an asterisk, and it may be a Hexaplaric addition, though not assigned to any version in particular. The previous words, καὶ ποῦ καταλείψετε τὴν δόξαν ὑμῶν, are inserted by many MSS. at xxx. 18. See Vol. 1. Introd. p. 25.
5. ὑαὶ Ἀσσυρίοις] See on i. 24. We should naturally translate. ‘Woe to the ’; and even the Heb., which has Asshur in nom., has been so taken; but the context, up to the end of ver. 11 scarcely suits this rendering.
ὀργῆς] If this be right, Lxx. are simply paraphrasing: but B reads ἡ ὀργὴ, which has the more original look. It is probably an interpre- tation of ‘staff’: cf. πληγήν, ver. 24, θυμός, ver. 26; and the end of the verse has a different division of words.
6. ἄνομον] See on ix. 17.
ἀποστέλλω] The future is read by most MSS.: A alone ἀποστέλλω, which is hardly likely to be right. ἀποστρέψω ℵ* only.)
7. ἀπαλλάξει] ἀπαλλάξαι, in the sense of ‘remove,’ almost ‘destroy,
would agree with the Heb.; but LXX. are hardly likely to have used it
so, and they may have read some form from me) instead of from
8. καὶ ἐὰν εἴπωσιν αὐτῷ] ‘To him’ doubtless corresponds to Heb.
‘not.’ a difference of a letter, and both pronounced alike: see on ix. 3
but the Heb. text is not here in doubt. ‘If’ and ‘for,’ as well as ‘when.
are various renderings possible for Heb.
A state of things is described in the original, which is best illustrated in modern history by Napoleon's marshals, who rose, often from the ranks, to become dukes and princes, and even titular or actual kings, as in the case of Bernadette and Murat. In ancient times Alexander's generals founded dynasties in Egypt, Syria, &c. was almost like a king, and had kings under him, Judg. v. 19; Ben- hadad of Syria had first ‘kings,’ then ‘captains,’ in subordinate posts of leadership, I Kings xx. 1, 24.
9. Lxx. differs considerably from Heb., apparently explaining and paraphrasing: it can hardly be brought into any direct relation with the Heb. text. τὴν χώραν τὴν ἐπάνω Βαβυλῶνος may be taken to express generally the translator's idea of the position of Carchemish and Calno, but see below: ἔλαβον is a natural insertion, and Ἀραβίαν may have taken the place of Arpad, though the r is the only common to the two. Herodotus, II. 141, speaks of Σαναχάριβον βασιλέα Ἀραβίων τε καὶ Ἀσσυρίων.
For οὗ ὁ πύργος ᾠκοδομήθη, Cf. ix. 10. Here Cheyne thinks
It is well known that Stephen's speech, Acts vii. 43, finishes a
quotation from the LXX. of Amos v. 25—27 with a substitution of
10. πάσας] Not in the Heb.; on the other hand, Lxx. omits ‘my
’ Perhaps
χώρας] ἀρχὰς BQ mg, which, if not derived from a later version, seems preferable as a rendering of Heb. ‘kingdoms.’ Transpositions of χ and p would easily produce χώρας. The cursives are divided, the majority having χώρας: 301 has πόλεις.
ὀλολύξατε] Doubtless a misreading, probably
12. LXX omit ‘fruit.
13.
13, 14. πόλεις] Probably reading
The rest of ver. 14 is paraphrased, but the general sense is fairly near.
ἢ ἀντείπῃ] This may answer to ‘opened a mouth’ or to ‘peeped’=
chirped, the Heb. words being possibly confused, with their combinations
of
15. am] Heb. ζν. ‘upon,’ ‘against’: LXX. apparently softens the idea, substituting independence for mutinous opposition. ἄνευ how- ever sometimes conveys a hint of opposition, as in Soph. Oed. Cal. 926 Horn. Il. xv. 213. Cf. chap. xxxvi. 10.
15, 16. καὶ οὐχ οὕτως] The LXX. are fond of this phrase, and use
it sometimes by mistake: here οὕτως seems properly to belong to
ver. 16, and the negative has disappeared before ξύλον,
εἰς...τιμὴν ἀτιμίαν] Heb. ‘fat ones,’ ‘leanness.’
17. ὥς πῦρ] So A and nine cursives, mostly Lucianic. See Vol. 1. introd. p. 29. This reading is further from the Heb. than εἷς πῦρ read by B and most MSS. Tyconius, p. 48, has ibi ignis. This supports the nom. case: and ibi is very like ut, and pretty certainly corrupt, both on grounds of meaning, and because ‘African’ Latin versions appear to avoid ibi and use illic. (Burkitt, T ’us, pp. lxi., lxxxii.. O. L. and Itala, pp. 13, 14.) On this small point, therefore, A's reading appears right. εἷς and ὡς are liable to confusion, as appears, e.g.. in ℵ’s reading, Ii. 5. See also xvi. 12, xl. 23.
18. Τῆ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ] Heb. ‘in one day,' ending previous verse.
ἀποσβεσθήσεται τὰ ὅρη] Heb. ‘and the glory of his forest.' Scholz
suggests that LXX. read, by an error of sound,
This passage, quoted in Tyconius, p. 48, shows discrepancy both from Heb. and LXX.: in illo die ardebunt monies, εἰ per preripia fugient, quasi qui fugit, c. Before and after these words he gives, as usual, a close rendering of LXX.
ἀπὸ ψυχῆς ἕως σαρκῶν] So Heb., lit. ‘from soul and as far as flesh.
ὁ φεύγ. ὥς ὁ φεύγων ἀπὸ φλογὸς καιομένης] Heb.
19. οἱ καταλειφθ.] LXX. omits ‘of the trees of his forest.' Here Isaiah comes back to his favourite theme of the ‘remnant’ (Shear).
ἀριθμὸς] As Heb., meaning a number not too great to count. See on ii. 7, where Heb. does not mean ‘number.’
20. προστεθήσεται] It is just possible that this is intended to represent
the usual auxiliary sense of
21. καὶ ἐσταὶ...ἐπὶ] καὶ ἔσται is not in Heb., and LXX. omit ‘shall return.' It looks as if some word—perhaps πεποιθός—had out of the Greek, which also omits the repetition of ‘remnant.’ Γ reads λαὸν for θεόν, the scribe's eye perhaps travelling to the next verse. The meaning of the Greek as it stands is rather vague. ‘Shall be towards' seems possible, cf. πρὸς τὸν Κύριον, Ps. xxv. 15, cxli. 8, also cxllii. 6, ἡ ψυχή μου ὡς γῆ ἄνυδρός σοι.
22, 23. Quoted, Rom. ix. 27, where St Paul seems to compress the two similar clauses into one. Else his text is nearly with LXX.: he has γὰρ, omitted by B, but it takes the place of ὅτι in the compressed form, and the MSS. of the LXX. which contain it were possibly affected by the text of Romans. On the other hand, later MSS. of the N. T. add the omitted words to the quotation there.
22. τὸ κατάλημμα] Only the remnant. σωθήσεται explains ‘shall retum
λόγον] Heb. has two kindred words,
23. ἐν τῇ οἰκ. ὅλῃ] Heb. ‘in the midst of all the earth' or ‘land.’ LXX. here decides for the wider meaning: as, apparently, in chap. xxiv. ‘Midst’ is omitted, cf. xix. 3, 19, xxiv. 13, 18.
24. Ἀσσυρίων, Heb. has here no conjunction, but
the clause is to be taken probably as a relative or circumstantial clause:
‘who smiteth,' or ‘though,’ ‘when, he smite thee.' The change of
number in the Creek is most likely due to Asshur being singular in
Heb., though used for the people, whether personified or not, and for
ἐπάγω] Scholz thinks
26. τήν πληγὴν Μ.] See on ix. 4. ‘A scourge' is omitted just before: perhaps πληγὴν is to be supplied, or has dropped out.
ἐν τόπῳ Θλίψεως]
27. ἀφαιρεθήσεται 6 αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ σοῦ, καὶ ὁ ζυγ. αὐτ. ἀπὸ τοῦ
ὅμου σου] Β has a diff. order, ὁ ζ. αὐτ. ἀπὸ τ. ὦ. σου καὶ ὁ α. ἀπὸ
σοῦ. The text of NA is supported by 24 26 49 90 106 144 239 306
mainly Hesychian evidence: also by Q, except that it has φόβος in
both clauses. When the order of words or clauses differs thus, B is
generally nearer to the Hebrew: and so here τοῦ ὤμου agrees more
nearly with Heb., though as ‘neck’ is omitted altogether, on that
hypothesis, ὤμου might stand for it; in that case, ‘shoulder’ is the
word omitted, and the ζυγὸς of
ἀπὸ τῶν ὅμου ἡμῖν] Heb. ‘because of (lit. from the face of) oil' or
‘fatness.’ These Heb. words are obscure in meaning, and have been
suspected, as well as variously taken.
28 foll. The names of the places deviate, as usual, here and there
from Heb., which clearly describes an approach to Jerusalem from the
N. Aiath is generally identified with Ai. Γαί, of Josh. vii., viii., &c.,
Hai, Ἀγγαί, of Gen. xii. 8, xiii. 3, Ai. Αἰά, Ezra ii. 28, Ἀλειὰ B, Ἀἱ A,
Neh. vii. 32, omitted by Lxx., Neh. xi. 31: but not with Aiof Jer. xlix. 3
(xxx. 3 of LXX., omitted except by Q, Γαί), where many wish to read
cf. Numb. xxi. 15, 28. In 1 Chron. vii. 28, some MSS. read, and some
editors approve, Ayyah, i.e. Ai, for Gaza: B has Γαιάν, Α reads Γάζης.
Migron, 1 Sam. xiv. 2, Μαγών, has been read by LXX. here as Μαγεὸδὼ
or Μαγεδώ, doubtless intended for Megiddo, but wrongly read, with
32. παρακαλεἱτε] After Gebim LXX. departs from Heb., which has
τοῦ μεῖναι] Literal, Heb. having inf. with
33. The suddenly revealed glimpse of the Assyrian's march ends abruptly: as if a cloud or a curtain shut out the view.
συνταράσσει τοὺς ἐνδόξους] Explanatory of the figure in the original, ‘shall lop the bough.' The metaphor of the forest has been used, ver. 19, and the chapter ends with it. Cf. xxxiii. 9, Ezek. xxxi. 3; the Assgrian's own boast, xxxvii. 24, is turned against himself.
34. B gives the longest form of this verse, and A the shortest, among the leading uncials. The metaphor of the forest is still unrepresented: μαχαίρᾳ takes the place of ‘iron,’ and σὺν τοῖς ὑψηλοῖς alters the meaning of the preposition.
XI. 1. ῥάβδος] The Heb. word ἴοι· this is rare, occurring only here and Prov. xiv. 3; so is that represented by the first ῥίζης, found elsewhere only xl 24 and Job xiv. 8. The second ῥίζης represents a different word, the parallelism being lost.
ἄνθος] Heb. ‘branch,’ word used here, xiv. 19, IX. 21, and Dan. xi. 7: that in iv. lxi. 11 is different. ὄνθος is used ofa twig or shoot, Ηom. Od. lx. 449,
2. γνώσεως καὶ εὐσεβείας] The ‘fear of the Lord' is wisdom, Job xxviii. 28, as well as ‘the whole of man,' or, ‘(duty) of every man, Eccles. xii. 13. Wrong opinions are often due to faults of heart more than of head. So Aeschylus, Agam. 369,
3. ἐμλήσει...πωεῦμα] LXX. is vague, Heb. peculiar: lit. ‘his scent
.shall be in the fear of the Lord,'
δόξαν...λαλιὰν] The Heb. phrases are again explained and shortened, at the cost of losing the antithesis of ‘eyes,’ ‘ears,’ with ' mouth. ‘lips’ in the next verse. For κατὰ δόξαν, cf. Plat. Repub. 543 C, μὴ κατὰ δόξαν ἀλλὰ κατ’ οὐσίαν προθυμούμενος ἐλέγχειν.
4. ταπεινοὺς] The parallelism is lost: but the sense is clearly
better than ἐνδόξους, read by
γῆν] This supports Heb. text, which some have wished to emend,
5. The construction is altered to more regular Greek. In Eph. vi. 14 truth girds the loins, righteousness is the breastplate: in Col. iii. 14 ἀγάπη is σύνδεσμος τῆς τελειότητος whereas in PS. cix. 19 cursing is to the wicked ὥς ἱμάτιον ὃ περιβάλλεται, καὶ ὡσεὶ ζώνη ἦν διαπαντὸς περιζώννυται.
εἱλιγμένος, though spelt with μμ by ℵA, must come from εἱλέω.
Seeing that mm. more often drop than introduce a parallelism, it
has been suggested that for the second
6. In the reign of the Righteous King the sinless peace of his rule is flected in the animal world. The resemblance of a famous passage of Virgil is marked; many have wished to see in it a Messianic reference: others think it a case of indirect borrowing: Ed. ιν. 13,
Also Ecl. V. 60
And we may add Horace, Epod. XVI. 51
παιδίον μικρὸν] Man—the son of man—will dominate not in force, but in innocence.
7. LXX. is not far from Heb., but rather colourless and vague. βοσκήσονται, added in ver. 6, is repeated in ver. 7, where it is right, and A has it a third time, where the other MSS. have merely ἕσομαι can some more appropriate verb have disappeared? B has λέων ὡς βοῦς, nearer the Heb.; καὶ βοῦς ℵAO 24 106 233 301 306 may be alteration to suit the plural φάγονται.
ὅρκος seems to be the usual spelling in the best Mss. of LXX. and NT. (Rev. xiii. 2). ἄχυρα properly means chaff; Heb. is rather ‘straw,’ “i.e. the cut and pounded stalks of com" (Delitzsch). Cf. xxx. 24.
8. The verb of the first clause, ‘shall play,' is omitted by LXX
unless παιδίον (cf. παίζω) has taken its place. The subject of the
8, 9. Cf. lxv. 25. For σύμπασα, see Vol. 1. pp. 26, 109.
9. ὦς ὕδωρ πολὺ κατακαλύψαι Cf. Habak. ii. 14, where Heb.
is somewhat different in construction and order. Here πολὺ is an
addition of the LXX. Heb. literally is, ‘as the waters covering the
sea,' with the preposition
10. ἦ ῥίζα] The article gives the right sense: the word in Heb. is the same as the second one rendered by ῥίζης in ver. 1.
τιμὴ] Heb. is also a substantive. Kay compares 1 Pet. ii. 7.
11. τοῦ δεῖξαι] LXX. supplies τοῦ δεῖξαι, treating προσθήσει in its usual auxiliary sense. So, practically, most authorities, though see R.V. margin; but neither A.V. nor R.V. print ‘set’ in italics. Vulg. has 'adjiciet Dominus secundo manum suam ad possidendum...’
τοῖο ζηλῶσαι] Heb. to ‘purchase’ or ‘redeem,’
Βαβνληνίας] Here the list of names begins to diverge from Heb., which here has Pathros, i.e. Upper Egypt, Gen. x. 14, Ezek. xxix. 14 Jerem. xliv. 1, 15. LXX. more often uses Βαβυλὼν than Βαβυλωνία, though see xiv. 23, xxxix. 1; not the parallel passage in Kings. In Zech. v. 11 LXX. ἐν γῇ Βαβυλῶνος, Heb. has Shinar
Αἰθιοπίας] The regular equivalent for Heb. Cask.
καὶ ἀπὸ ἡλίου ἀναπλεῖν] Further divergence, Heb. having ‘and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the isles of the sea' Shinar may have been omitted in consequence of Βαβυλωνίας above. Hamath was possibly read as man, a poetic word for ‘sun,’ which the translator misreads in xxiv. 2 3, but translates rightly in xxx. 26; Ἀραβίας intrudes, as in x. 9, and ‘the isles of the sea' disappears.
Delitzsch pointed out that the dispersion implied did not exist till after Isaish's time. The places named were, in his day, divided between Assyria and Egypt. The name ‘Assyria’ seems to have survived to later times as meaning the great kingdom of W. Asia, even after the exile, Ezra vi. 22: just as Horace calls the Parthians Perm: and even Medan, 0d. 111. viii. 19. But to argue that the mention of Assyria here points to a late date or non-Isaianic authorship, is curiously unconvincing.
12. πτερύγων] Literally from Heb. Cf. xxiv. 16, Ezek. vii. 2 Job xxxvii. 3, xxxviii. 13. τὸ πτερύγιον τοῦ ἱεροῦ, Matt. iv. 5, Luke iv. 9 is uncertain in meaning, but would give a good sense if it meant a corner or end of some part of the building.
13. ζυγὸς] So A 106, but ζῆλος of the other MSS. can hardly be wrong. ζυγὸς may be due to the influence of x. 27.
The woeful antagonism of the tribes, ix. 21, is to cease.
14. πεισθήσονται] This form must be assigned to πέτομαι, not πετάννυμι here: cf. Habakkuk i. 8, and ἐπετάσθη, 2 Sam. xxii. 11 Ps. xviii. 10. In Ezek. xxxii. 10, Heb. has causal of verb ‘to fly, πέτασθαι BQ, πετασθῆναι Α.
ἂν πλοίοις] Apparently a paraphrase or guess: Heb. ‘on the shoulder,' referring to the sea-ward slope of Philistia. Cf. Numb. xxxiv. 11, Josh. xv. C. The idea of ‘ships’ intrudes also in Lxx. ii. 16, xviii. I. 'The which has the local suffix in Heb., is transferred to the following clause, in which ‘Edom’ is also included, against the Heb. accents.
πρῶτον...πρῶτοι] Not in Heb. Perhaps the translator remembered the early conquests of David. The glories of the Kingdom of the Twelve Tribes are to be renewed, and it is to triumph over its sometime oppressors.
15. ἐρημώσει] Apparently equivalent to ‘shall dry up': Vulg.
desolabit, cf. xliv. 27, l. 2. Thus it is probable that LXX. read the,
word as causal of
τὴν θάλασσαν] ‘The tongue Of' is omitted. For the expression,
cf. Josh. xv. 2, &c. Here the Gulf of Suez is doubtless
βιαίῳ] ‘Mighty,’ or rather ‘forcible,’ ‘violent.’ Heb. word, only
found here, is supposed to mean ‘parching heat.' Some wish to alter
ἑν ὑποδήμασιν] So the Heb. literally. Not in the account of the passage of the Red Sea: but cf. Exod. xii. II, τὰ ὑποδήματα ἐν τοῖς ποσὶν ὑμῶν.
16. ὁδὸς] A's unsupported reading, inferior in itself to δίοδος of other MSS. : cf. however xxxv. 8.
In the Song of Miriam, the Philistines, Edom, and Moab are named, Exod. xv. 14, 15
XII. A song of thanksgiving: cf. chap. xxv., xxvi., xxxv.
I. διότι] Heb.
2. The resemblance of 25 to Exod. xv. 2a is more marked in Heb. the rendering here is, on the whole, the more exact. LXX. has Κύριος only once, Heb. JAH JAHVEH; in Exod., JAH alone.
3. ἀντλήσετε] Doubtless right, though
τοῦ σωτηρίου] The sing. σωτήριον is not found in classical Greek.
4. μιμνήσκεσθε] ‘call to mind,' ‘make mention of': cf. Homer,
Iliad, II. 492,
6. οἱ κατοικοῦντες] Heb. has fern. sing., cities and peoples being personified in many languages, and usually feminine. Cf. xv. 5. Vulg. has habitatio. It is less usual to speak so of the inhabitants: but the phrase ‘daughter of...,' frequent in the Prophets, seems similar.
XIII. Ch. xiii.—xxiii. consist mainly of prophecies on the around Israel : chap. xxii. is the principal exception. Jeremiah (xlvi.—li.) and Ezekiel (xxv.—xxxii.) have considerable to the fate of other nations, and the books Obadiah, Jonah, and Nahum are mainly concerned with them. Indirectly, of course, the prophecies have their hearing on Judah and Israel.
1. Ορασις...Βαβθλῶνος] Many critics deny the authority of the heading of this chapter, as of many similar headings to prophecies or Psalms. Those who assign the chapter to a writer of a later time than Isaiah set it aside as a matter of course.
Ὄρασις] The Heb. Massa, translated ‘burden,’ according to its relation to verb to bear,' ‘lift up,' or ‘oracle.’ LXX. renders in Isaiah by ὅρασις, ὅραμα, or ῥῆμα: elsewhere generally by λῆμμα, according to Liddell and Scott first the matter of a sentence, as Opposed to its style, then the title or argument of a poem or book, and so for the poem or song itself. That the Heb. word is used in a derived sense, is shown, Kay says, by the addition of the words “which Isaiah the son of Amoz did see." and similarly in Habak. i. 1
Vulg. has generally arms: in Prov. xxx. 1, xxxi. 1, mirth, Lxx. in the latter passage χρηματισμός.
κατὰ Β.] See on i. 1; here probably ‘against B.
2. Ἐπ’ ὅρους πεδινοῦ] Heb. probably means a 'bare-topped' or conspicuous mountain; the Greek most likely a mountain in a plain, solitary and prominent: though it is difficult to prove that it might not mean ‘level,’ i.e. flat-topped. The τόπος πεδινὸς of Luke vi. 17 seems to mean a level space on a mountain side.
Α comparison of xxxii. 18, however, suggests that LXX. may have
read (or confused the word
μὴ φοβεῖσθε] Omitted by B: probably an intrusion from xl. 9.
παρακαλεῖτε τῇ ψυχῇ] This, A's unsupported reading, can hardly be right. Other MSS. τῇ χειρί: cf. x. 32.
ἀνοίξατε] Heb. ‘the gates' (openings): ‘open ye' differs by (??) for LXX. having thus found a verb, omitted ‘that they may go into....
Some render ‘the Noble GAtes,' supposing an allusion to the name Bab-El, ‘Gate of God.
γίγαντες, ὑβρίζοντες, impart a colour to the language which scarcely suits the original.
3. ἐγὼ συντάσσω, κ.τ.λ.] The text here is discussed by Mr Burkitt, Tyconius, p. cxiv. foll. He points out that the reading of the Lucianic cursives, with 62 147, is
εγω συντασσω γηιασμενοι εισιν και εγω αγω αυτους (α)
(So Tycon. p. 50 nearly, see below.) Β* omits ηγιασμενοι εισι and (according to Camb. LXX.) αγω (β)
ℵΑΒmgQ read
εγω συντασσω και εγω (αγω) αυτοθς·
ηγιασμενοι εισι και εγω αγω αιτους (β2)
A omits αγω the first time.
Of these he decides for (a) which Dr Field prints in his 1859
edition. “It has equivalents,” he says, “though they are unintelligent,
for each Hebrew word in its proper order.” αυτους he explains as due
to reading
γίγαντες ἔρχονται πληρῶσαι τὸν θυμόν μου] so ℵAB: 106 has παῦσαι
for πληρῶσαι, and the Luc. MSS., 62 147 have τὸν θυμόν μου παῦσαι.
So Tyconius p. 50 has gigantes veniunt iram meam lenire (v.l. mitigare).
Here ἔρχονται and the following infin. have no corresponding
Heb., and it may be inferred, that the version supplied them to give
sense (or to paraphrase
4. ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν] i. e. φωηῇ ἐθν. πολλῶν. Heb., with its
usual avoidance of adjectives, has, ‘the likeness of a great people,’ to
which LXX. comes very near. Classical Greek would have preferred
βασιλέων] βασιλειῶν is the rendering of the later Greek versions, and agrees with Heb. The change would be small, but the word in this sense, and in the plural, is not known in the LXX.
6. συντριβὴ παρὰ, τοῦ M] Heb. ‘like Shuōd from Shaddai,' meaning of which latter term is not very certain, but may mean ‘mighty to destroy,' with Delitzsch: the phrase occurs also Joel i. 15 where LXX. has ὧι· ταλαιπωρία ἐκ ταλαιπωρίας. The title Shaddai is not found again in Isaiah. In the Pentateuch LXX. represent it as, a rule simply by θεός, as Gen. xvii. 1, xxviii. 3, Exod. vi. 3, Numb. xxiv. 4, c. ὁ ἱκανὸς in Ruth i. 20, and Ezek. i. 24 AQ; B omits. παντοκράτωρ in Job v. 17, xi. 7, &c.; sometimes Κύριος, vi. 4., 14. θεοῦ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, Ps. xci. 1. We may compare 1 Cor. x. 10, ἀπώλλυντο ὑπὸ τοῦ ὀλοθρευτοῦ.
7. πᾶσι χεὶρ] Α has πᾶσαι χεῖρες.
8. οἱ πρέσβεις] Perhaps Lxx. originally meant this for ‘envoys,’
taking
συμφοράσουσιν] The word is found in the Schol. on Soph. Ant. 528. Heb. has ‘they shall writhe.' The clauses are differently divided in the Greek and Heb.
μεταβαλοῦσιν] Probably taking ‘faces’ as a verb,
9. ἡμέρα Κυρίου ἐρχεται] Cf. ver. 6, ii. 12, Joel i. 15, Zeph. i. 1416 ‘Dies irae dies illa.' It is a day of the Lord's victory over his enemies, and of judgment.
10. Ὠρίων] One of the chief constellations: called the Giant (Al-Jauza) by the Arabs; in the Greek mythology, Orion was a giant and hunter, concerning whom the legends vary widely. There are many references to him as a constellation in the classics: Hom. ΙΙ. XVIII. 488, Odyss. V. 274: Euripides, Jan, 1152, ὅ τε ξιφήρης Ὠρίων. The Hebrew is Chesil, the identification being at least exceedingly probable: it is rendered by Ὠρίων also in Job ix. 9, xxxviii. 31, Amos v. 8. The name means ‘fool’ or ‘confident’; the verb occurs, Jerem. x. 8. Here it is used in plural, probably meaning ‘such constellations as Orion
καὶ ὁ κόσμος τοῦ οὐρ.] Not in Heb.: probably a duplicate rendering or an explanation of Chesilim. κόσμοι· is properly the orderly array of the heavenly bodies.
11. τῇ οἰκ. ὅλῃ] Heb. has not the adjective, but uses a word here which means ‘the inhabited world'; also in xiv. 17, 21, xviii. 3, xxiv. 4 xxvi. 9, 18, xxvii. 6, xxxiv. I. LXX. generally renders by οἰκουμένη, unless οἰκέω or a compound of it occurs in the sentence: except xiv. 21 where Aq. Theod. Symm. use οἰκουμένη. Cf. Luke ii. 1, Acts xi. 28.
ἀπολῶ] Heb. ‘I will cause to cease.
ὑπερηφάνων] Heb. ‘the terrible ones': this word, or words from the same root, occur viii. 12, LXX. ταραχθῆτε, 13, omitted in Lxx., x. 33 μετὰ ἰσχύος, xxv. 3, 4, 5, ἀδικουμένων, ἀσεβῶν? xxix. 5, 20, 23, καταδυναστευόνων, ἄνομος, φοβηθήσονται, xlix. 25, ἰσχύοντος. In Ezek.
xxviii. 7, c. λοιμοί, see on v. 14. It appears therefore to be a favourite word with Isaiah, but for one which the Lxx. found no rendering in which they felt unvarying confidence. See also Ps. lxxxix. 7, ἐνδοξαζόμενος, Job xxx. 6 (where LXX. shortens the verse), for varieties in the meaning.
12. ἔσονται οἱ κατελιλιμμένοι] Not in the Heb., either here or in ver. 14. Here it may be an attempt at paraphrase, if not borrowed; see xxxvii. 31. In ver. 14 it certainly seems to be repeated from this place.
ἄπυρον] The idea is of native, not fined gold. Cf. Homer, Iliad, ΙΧ 122, of 'brand-new' vessels, ἕπτ’ ἅπυρους τρίποδας, and XXIII. 267 ἄπυρον κατέθηκε λέβητα; 270, ἀμφίθετον φιάλην ἀπύρωτον ἔθηκεν.
ὅ λίθος] Heb. has, not ‘stone,’ but a peculiar word for ‘gold,’
found also Job xxviii. 16. Here it may be that the translator guessed
or paraphrased. That LXX. read
Σουφείρ] Heb. Ophir,
14. πλανώμενον] Added by Lxx., apparently to balance the clauses. In verses 13—16 there is some tendency to paraphrase, softening of expressions, e.g. ἕξουσιν.
διῶξαι] Used intransitively, or virtually so: see Horn. Il. XXIII. 344, 424, Aesch. Septem 91. ℵ*B read ἅνθρωπος...ὃιώξεται, probably alteration, with fut. mid. in passive sense.
15. ἡττηθήσεται] The later Greek versions more literally ἐκκεντηθήσεται.
and so some Luc. cursives. Possibly the not. read
17. τοὺς Μήδους] They had a leading part in the overthrow of both Nineveh and Babylon. See Kay's note.
18. τοξεύματι]
These were their characteristic weapons, as the sword was of the Romans. The syntax differs from the Hebrew: τοξεύματα νεανίσκων is probably the object of the verb.
ἐπὶ....φεἰσονται] The constr. with preposition imitates the Heb.
19. ὑπὸ] ἀπὸ B. ὑπὸ βασιλέων 22 26 48 51 62 106 144 147 306.
21. ἤχου] Heb. word, not found elsewhere, is said to mean 'groaners.' Scholz thinks the Greek is an attempt to come near the sound of the Heb. word.
ἀρχηθήσονται is the form read by Α 306: ὀρχισθήσονται (!) 106: Luc. Mss. have verb in sing.
21, 22. The creatures intended cannot be precisely determined. Compare xxxiv. 11—15. σειρῆνες may be ‘owls,’ but Heb. is probably ‘daughters of the ostrich.
δαιμόνια] Heb. word means ‘goats’ (hairy ones): some have suggested ‘baboons,’ others think goat-shaped demons are meant. This mixture however of demons with animals would hardly seem reasonable in a heathen writer, for instance in Horace, 0d. 111. iii. 36 foll., or Epod. xvi.; how much less so in Isaiah!
ὀνοκένταυροι] Perhaps apes of some sort. The Heb., ‘wailers,’ may mean wolves, as in R.V.
ἐχίνοι] Heb. supposed to mean jackals.
The last verse is shortened by Lxx.
XIV. 1, 2. Delitzsch on these two verses says: “Here we have the consoling content of ch. xl.—lxvi. in nuce.”
1. γαόρας] Apparently the Semitic word
προστεθήσεται] Not here used as an auxiliary, but representing
two different Heb. words; the second of which, however, may very
likely have been taken for the Niphal of
2. καὶ πληθυνθήσονται] An addition by the LXX. It seems best
to keep ἔθνη as the subject of the verbs, in which case κατακληρονομή
σουσιν is causal, ‘shall make them to inherit.'
τοῦ Θεοῦ] Omitted by B. Heb. has ‘of the LORD.
3. θυμοῦ] The Heb. word means ‘vexation’ or ‘disquiet,’ but sometimes ‘fury,’ as in Habak. iii. 2.
4. Θρῆνον] Heb. word mdslzdl generally means a parable or parallel, and hence sometimes a ‘taunt-song.’ The poem which follows bears, by irony, the form of an elegy, which seems the justification of the LXX.'s rendering, found here only; though we may compare such passages as Lam. ii. 15 foll., Ezek. xxvi. 17 foll., xxxii. 18 foll., and almost the whole of xxvii. There seems to have been a tendency in other languages to employ the metres of elegy for satiric purposes: Horace's epodes, the Archilochian metres which he borrows, Martial's epigrams, the γνῶμαι of Theognis, and some of Propertius' poems, are instances, in varying degrees.
ὁ ἐπισπουδαστὴς] Heb. word occurs only here, and is obscure.
Many, including A.V., have taken it as connected with
5. ζυγὸν] The parallelism is lost by this loose rendering of 'staff and 'rod': the latter word so rendered again, ver. 29.
6. ἀνιάτῳ] Not the same Heb. expression as in xiii. 9, though the word for 'wrath,' close by, is the same.
παίων] Heb. rather ‘ruling,’ ‘subduing’: LXX. has thus for once increased the parallelism: but their rendering is loose, the vague θυμοῦ taking the place of ‘(with) a pursuit.' 'Restrained' is taken in another aspect as ‘spared,’ cf. Prov. xiii. 24, and in different syntax. The relative is probably right, see R.V.
ἀνεπαύσατο πεποιθὼς] These words belong in the Heb. to the next clause, with ‘earth’ as the subject.
7. εὐφροσύνης] Heb. words for joyful singing are often rendered thus. See ver. 11, xvi. 10. xliv. 23, and liv. I, εὐφράνθητι. Also, with different Heb., but in close connection with singing and music, xxiv. 7 8, II, lv. II, where the Heb. word here used is χαρά.
8. Here the trees of Lebanon are not the type of the conqueror's army, but his victims. The cedars were a valuable prize to any great warrior-builder. So in Ezek. xvii. 3, Babylon, in the likeness of an eagle, ἔχει τὸ ἥγημα εἰσελθεῖν εἷς τὸν Λίβανον, καὶ ἔλαβε τὰ ἐπίλεκτα τῆς κέδρου.
9. ὁ ᾅδης] See on v. 14.
ἐπικράνθη] Heb. ‘is disturbed,' whether with trembling or wrath: the same root as the word rendered by θυμοῦ, ver. 3; θυμωθήσεται is used for the verb, xiii. 13: παροξύνων, below, ver. 16.
συνηγέρθησαν] The voice of the verb and its number are different from the Heb., as well as the number of ἐγείραντες, so that both are made to refer to the giants, the meaning being hard to find: either the giants are first roused, and then rouse the kings, or perhaps more reasonably ἐγείραντες is more in the sense of the Heb. ‘disturbed.’ The giants are angered and appalled at the new arrival, as kings had been at them.
γίγαντας] Heb. Rephaim, a—or words, for there are probably at least two roots concerned—with several meanings, the cause much confusion in the versions:
(a) a people living apparently E. of Jordan, Gen. xiv. 5 (γίγαντας XV. 20 ('Ραφαείμ).
(b) giants, as resembling, or descended from (a). Deut. ii. 11 20 ('Ραφαεὶν or Ῥαφαείμ); sing., or a proper name, 2 Sam. xxi. (ὁ Ῥαφά, τῶν γιγάντων in 22 apparently a duplicate.
(c) healers (part. of verb
(d) the weak, i.e. the Shades of the dead, root um for
Mistakes between (a) and (b) are less important, and (c) is generally secured by the context: but (d) causes difficulty, hence ἰατροὶ wrongly twice in Lxx., and medici in Vulg. of Psalm lxxxviii. (The Psalter which appears in the Vulgate is not Jerome's version from the Heb., as in most O.T. books, but his second revision from the Old Latin. based therefore on the Septuagint, called the ‘Gallican Psalter.' The translation in our Book of Common Prayer, through the ‘Great Bible. was influenced in places by this version.) Elsewhere, except in the passages under (a) and (c), Vulg. has gigantes regularly.
οἱ ἄρξωσι] Lxx., like A.V. and Vulg., interprets the Heb., which is literally ‘he goats' ('bell-wethers,' Kay) as in xxxiv. 6. In Jerem. 1. 8 (LXX. xxvii. 8, δράκοντος) and Zech. x. 3 (ἀμνοὺς) the metaphor is worked out.
It is a question how far the Shades' address to the king of Babylon extends. Delitzsch allows only ver. 10; Skinner doubts as to ver. 11. and adds, “it certainly does not further.”
10. Καὶ σὺ ἑάλως] There is no interrogative particle in the Greek,
nor in the Hebrew. Many authorities, but not Kay, take the latter,
ἁλῶναι, in the sense ‘to be vanquished,' is near the Hebrew, but not exact.
κατελογίσθης] Heb. ‘art made like,' same root as māshāl, see on θρῆνον, ver. 4.
II. εἰς ᾅδου] Classical and correct Greek, Ἅιδης being firstly a
person; [the abode] of Hades. So, e.g., Aesch. Αgam. 1528,
ἠ πολλὴ εὐφροσύνη] πολλὴ suggests that LXX. interpreted
ὑποκάτω σου κ.τ.λ.] Compare Aesch. A gam. 870 foll.,
12. The dazzling apparition of Babylon among the nations is compared to the splendour of the morning star. Prof. Skinner is surely right in defending A.V.'s rendering ‘Lucifer’: he points out how this name came to be applied to the Devil, by connecting this passage with Luke x. 18, ἐθεώρουν τὸν Σατανᾶν ὡς ἀστραπὴν ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ πεσόντα. That our Lord was referring to this chapter is rendered probable by the resemblance of Luke x. 15 to ver. 13 and 15 εἷς τὸν οὐρανὸν ἀναβήσομαι...ὅμοιος τῷ ὑψίστῳ...εἰς ᾅδου καταβήσῃ.
Macaulay, in the Essay on the War of the Succession in Spain, brilliantly applies this passage to the Spanish power.
ὁ πρωὶ ἀνατέλλων] Α paraphrase of Heb. ‘son of the dawn.' the same word as used in viii. 20, xlvii. 11, unless, as Prof. Margoliouth thinks (Lines of Defence, p. 128), the word in one or both of those passages comes from another root, found in Arabic, and meaning 'witchcraft
ὁ ἀποστέλλων] Cf. xviii. 2; but evidently here Lxx. misread ΑBBREV
participle of
13, 14. We are reminded of the Tower of Babel, but it is not easy
to find a complete parallel to this enormous pride. See however the
ὑψηλῷ] This clause paraphrases the Heb.; it is just possible that
14. Tertullian, adv. Marc. ν. 23, quotes loosely, “Ero similis altissimi, ponam in nubibus thronum meum." Tyconius, pp. 72, 74, has “Ascendam super nubes, ero similis Altissimo." Mr Burkitt points out in his Introduction, p. lix., that in ver. 13 Tyconius agrees with Cyprian in reading ‘stellas Dei': “Is it possible," he asks, “that οݲυݲνݲοݲυݲ of the MSS. is a corruption of θυݲ, and that the original literal of the LXX. has been preserved only in the African Latin?”
15. θεμελια] Heb. ‘sides’ or ‘recesses’: word already used in ver. 13, but not directly rendered there: of a ship, jonah i. 5 (κοίλην).
16. Οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος] Heb. is interrogative. θαυμάσουσιν (θαυμάσονται B) is a rather loose rendering; but expresses the general sense.
Men gaze in half-frightened derision at the corpse on the battlefield. as the Shades do at the new comer among them.
17. <καὶ τὰς πόλεις (αὐτοῦ) καθεῖλεν>] αὐτοῦ is omitted 41 49 106 239 301 306, and there are other variations, the Lucianic cursives mostly reading καθελών. Α omits the whole clause, but this is probably an inadvertence.
τοὺς ἐν ἐπαγωγῇ] ‘Those in his train,' i.e. his prisoners. The long processions of prisoners are a common feature in the Assyrian conquerors' sculptures. Cf. x. 4. V and some cursives, mainly Lucianic, read ἀπαγωγῇ here. The usual rendering of ἐπαγωγή, ‘calamity’ R.V. of Ecclus. ii. 2 &c., does not seem applicable to place in Isaiah: and the idea of leading (captive) appears better suited. Cf. also Deut. xxxii. 36. In Plato, Repub. 364 B, the word is coupled with κατάδεσμοι, of invocations and binding spells.
18. ἕκαστος] 50 A 106 239 306 for ἅνθρωπος, of which it seems to
be an explanation, Heb. using ish, ‘a man,' in the sense of ‘each one.’
19. ἐν τοῖς ὄρεσιν] Heb. ‘from thy grave. ' Probably a guess of the LXX.
νεκρὸς] An explanation of Heb. netser, a branch; Scholz thinks suggested by the similar letters.
μετὰ πολλῶν τεθνηκότων] Although a similar metaphor occurs in ver. 11, LXX. have paraphrased ‘clothed with the slain': cf. Ps. lxv. 13 εἰς ᾅδου] Heb. has here ‘to the stones of the pit.
19, 20. The discrepancies increase. ὃν τρόπον ἱμάτιον must be
20. σπέρμα πονηρὸν] The same phrase (in Heb. also) as in i. 4 not found elsewhere.
21. τὸ, τέκνα, σου] Heb. 'his sons,' the difference of
πολέμων] Heb. ‘cities,’ ABREV or, as some render it ‘enemies’: so in
Dan. iv. 19 (16 Aramaic), Lxx. and Theodotion have τοῖς ἐχθροῖς σου.
Here the later Greek versions all have πόλεων, which is read by V 109
305 307 308. The evidence of Syro-hex. is divided. Cheyne (following
Hitizig?) wished to read
22, 23. αὑτῶν...Βαβυλωνίαν] The pronoun and proper name in Heb. have exchanged places.
22. σπέρμα] Heb. ‘issue and offspring,' an alliterative pair:
σπέρμα also in Gen. xxi. 23 but coupled with ὄνομα: in Job xviii. 19
ἐπίγνωστος. A.V. ‘nephew’ is doubtless used in its old sense, = ‘grand-
son' (nepos). Scholz thinks the second word of the pair has been read
into τάδε;
23. Cf. xiii. 21, 22.
ἐχίνους] Cf. xxxiv. 11, Zeph. ii. 14. Many support this rendering of the Heb.; others, with A.V., think the bittem is meant, a marshbird, formerly found in England. This seems on the whole preferable; its habits are suitable, and a bird seems necessary for the verse in Zephaniah. The bittern's alleged habit of rolling itself up like a hedgehog seems only worth mentioning on the chance that the name of one creature might be transferred to the other.
βάραθρον] Α reads βάθρον= 'foundation' or ‘pedestal’: probably here a slip, though found also in 109 305 : or for βόθρον, as Ezek. xxxi. 14 xxxii. 18, &c. The latter part of the verse is paraphrased, and two phrases, ‘The Lord of Hosts declareth,' and ‘The Lord of Hosts hath sworn,' are represented only once.
24. The next four verses, with a sudden transition, deal with Assyria's fall. From the point of view of those who maintain the unity of the Book of Isaiah. Delitzsch (ed. 3) explained thus: “Asshur perishes"... "Only after this had taken place could a prophecy against Babel, the inheritress of the broken world-power of Assyria, be appropriate. The two prophecies against Babel and Asshur, therefore, as they stand here, form a Hysteron proteron." He proceeds to compare Jer. 1. (xxvii.) 18: Ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἐκδικῶ ἐπὶ τὸν βασιλέα] Βαβυλῶνος καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν αὐτοῦ καθὼς ἐξεδίκησα ἐπὶ τὸν βασιλέα Ἀσσούρ “The one event is the guarantee of the other." Ver. 26, 27, he adds, have “quite the tone of epilogue.”
Most modern critics assign ver. 24—32 to Isaiah, while his authorship of xiii.. xiv. 1—23. They generally divide the dating 24—27 after, rather than before 28—32.
This verse, in itself, might have stood in connection with what precedes: cf. xxxii. 8.
εἰρηκα] Probably ΑBBREV read for
25. ἀπὸ...ἀπὸ] B reads ἐπὶ in both places, ℵ* ἐκ in the Α's reading is supported by 24 49 90 106 306 in both: 36 233 and 309 also in the former, 26 239 in the latter. But Tyconius, p. 25, has in term ma at in montihus mais.
κῦδος] See on ix. 1, x. 16, 27. Heb. ‘burden,’
26. Compare the refrain of v. 25, ix. 12, 17, 21, x. 4. Kay gives a list of verbal resemblances between chap. xiii., xiv. and ix., x.
27. ὃιασκεδάσει] Heb. verb primarily means ‘cleave,’ ‘divide’: another aspect or voice of it (Pilpel) in Job xvi. 12, εἰρηνεύοντα διεσκέδασέν με. The Heb. words in ix. 11, xxxii. 7 are different.
28. It is generally agreed that this verse is the heading to the passage that follows. The Heb. demonstrative used favours this view (Davidson, Heb. Syntax, § 4) and such indications of date stand elsewhere at the beginning rather than the end of a prOphecy. As far as the Greek is concerned, the LXX. cannot be said to maintain the old distinction in the use of οὗτος and ὅδε: see ver. 4, τὸν θρῆνον τοῦτον. Α further question is, whether ‘in the year that king A. died' means before or after his death. The same difficulty occurs in vi. 1. Kay thinks after, Cheyne and Delitzsch before. The point is probably impossible to decide: and the range of time is probably not great; what seems to be clearly indicated in each case is, that the king's death, either as imminent, or as recent, was the prominent event in the mind in connection with the utterance of the prophecy.
29. πάντες οἱ ἀλλόφυλοι] Heb. ‘Philistia, all of thee.' See on ii. 6. ‘Palestina’ of A.V. reminds us that that name for the country is derived from the Philistines; which, though curious, is not without parallel: England and France themselves bear their names under somewhat similar conditions.
ὅ ζυγὸς] See on ver. 5.
ἔγγονα ἀσπίδων] The phrase occurs also xi. 8 (same Heb.) and xxx. 6 (diff. Heb.) while present Heb. is ἀσπίδων, lix. 5.
The Philistines are warned not to exult over the death of some
enemy, because his successor will be more terrible; and the third
more terrible again (unless the ‘fiery serpent' is taken as simply
parallel to the ‘viper’). Delitzsch, following the Targum and Jerome,
interprets of the kings of the line of Judah, culminating in the
Messiah: his note should be consulted, to do his view justice; but
the reference to Gen. xlix. 17 and the Danite origin of Samson the
’s great enemy seems beside the mark, and on general grounds
the serpent is the last comparison to the Davidic dynasty that would
be expected. Most modems (Kay, Cheyne, Driver, Skinner, W. E.
Barnes, &c.) take it of Assyrian kings. According to the
as generally accepted as any at the present day, Tiglath-Pileser died
in the same year as Ahaz, or in the year before or after. ‘From the
30. (??) αὐτοῦ] Scholz thinks this is
31. πόλει πόλων] The phrase πύλαι τῶν πόλεων occurs also wrongly in Nah. ii. 6 ποταμῶν ℵ*). The Heb. word for ‘gate’ sometimes used for ‘city,’ so that a kind of duplicate may have arisen by confusion, or as an explanation. The Heb. word, to which τεταραγμέναι corresponds, refers to Philistia, so that the syntax differs considerably.
καπνὸς] Of fires along the invaders' track, according to some commentators: but see Jer. i. 13, 14.
τοῦ εἶναι] Some words seem to have dropped out from the Greek,
in rendering or in transmission. The Lucianic cursives generally read
τοῦ μεῖναι ἐν τοῖς συντεταγμένοις αὐτοῦ or similar words: and 106 301
(144 233) read μεῖναι, which is perhaps right, representing
32. βασιλεῖς] Heb. ‘messengers,’ an easy mistake for LXX. to
make, between
ταπεινοὶ] On this word, and πτωχοὶ in ver. 30, see on x. 2.
XV. The doom of Moab. With this and the following chapter compare Jerem. xlviii. (xxxi.); esp. Jerem. xlviii. 3, 5, with Isai. xv. 5 29, 30 with xvi. 6; 31—33 with xvi. 7—11; 34 with xv. 46 xvi. 11; 37 with xv. 2. Notice also the resemblance of Jerem. xlviii. 43, 44 to Isai. xxiv. 17, 18, and of 45, 46 to Numb. xxi. 28, 29.
Modern critics have their doubts as to Isaiah's authorship, gemerally however excepting xvi. (4 b) 5, and 13, 14. The style of the rest is considered somewhat archaic; Gesenius has been followed by many in his idea that Isaiah took up an older prophecy, adding an epilogue of his own: Hitzig guessed Jonah as the author: the occasion of the prophecy is unknown; a supposed invasion of Moab by Jeroboam II. of Israel has been suggested.
1. ὅραμα] ῥῆμα ℵBQ &c.; see on xiii. 1.
ἡ Μωαβῖτις] This fem. form occurs also in ver. 4, 5, 8, xvi. 7, and
ἀπολεῖται] Heb. has two verbs in each clause: Ar-Moab is represented by Μωαβῖτις only, Kir is translated by τεῖχος.
2. λυπεῖσθε ἑᾷ ἑαυτοῖς] ἑαυτοὺς Β. The connection with Heb. ‘he is gone up to the ’ (or, ‘to Bauyith') is obscure: the verb may be rendered elsewhere. See below.
ἀπολεῖται] Perhaps supplied to match the previous verse: οὗ ὁ
βωμὸς paraphrases ‘the high places': ἀναβήσεσθε is out of order, if it
corresponds to
Λαιβηδών] I believe this to be A's reading with 26 41 106 309 Λεβηδών QΓ, and several other variants.
βραχίονες] Lxx. is pretty clearly wrong, reading
3. ἐν ταῖς πλατείαις αὐτῆς καὶ ἐν ταῖς ῥύμαις αὐτῆς] Α duplicate
rendering, ἐν τ. πλατείαις belonging to Aq. Theod. Symm., probably
not to the Lxx.
4. <Ἐλεαλή>] ἐλάλησεν read by ΑΒab Q* and a few cursives here and in xvi. 9 doubtless a corruption in the Greek. ℵ* reads words, probably combining the readings, as e.g. in lxv. 2. In Jerem. xlviii. (xxxi.) 34, AQ have Ἐλεαλή, NB have not.
ἕως] Most MSS. read ἕως Ἰάσσα, the proper name being omitted only by ℵcacb AQ 24 26 106 233 301; unless it has been inserted the Greek text of Jeremiah it is probably right.
ὀσφὺς] Heb. ‘armed,’ lit. ‘loin-girt men': a difference of or, neglecting the number, of vowel-points only.
γνώσεται] Reading
5. ἐν ἑαυτῇ] αὐτῇ BQ. Heb. is uncertain in meaning, rendered
by some, ‘bars,’ interpreted by R.V. to mean ‘nobles’; by others,
‘fugitives,’ against the vowel-points. The actual letters are
δόμαλις...τριηής] So, in the main, A.V. Others, including R.V., treat it as a proper name, 'Eglath-shelishiyah,' i.e. ‘the third Eglath' nothing is known of such a place, however, nor is any town known of called ‘the third.
κλαίοντες ἀναβήσονται] 2 Sam. xv. 30, ἀναβαίνων καὶ κλαίων, twice repeated (in A).
Ἀδονίιιμ] Ἀρωνιείμ, read by most MSS., is nearer the Heb. A's
variant seems to go back to a MS. written with the Heb. before the
scribe, the confusion
καὶ σεισμὸς] Heb.
6. χόρτος...χλωρὸς] Cf. xix. 7, and Mark vi. 39, συμπόσια συμπόσια ἐπὶ τῷ χλωρῷ χόρτῳ.
7. μὴ καὶ οὗτος μέλλει σωθῆναι;] Lxx., taking the sentence as
interrogative, have supplied μὴ καῖε οὕτως corresponds to ‘therefore,’
σωθῆναι to ‘they have gotten,' probably read as from root
ἐπάξω] Heb. ‘their treasure,' read as a verb,
Ἄραβας] Same letters as ‘willows,’ though vowel-points would probably differ: ‘deserts’ is an unwarranted rendering of the Heb. form. φάραγγα is right for the torrent-stream; the syntax differs throughout the verse.
8. συνῆψεν] The Heb.verb often ‘set round,' but here governs only the place: ‘is gone round,' sometimes intrans. as Job i. 5 and prob. lsai. xxix. ι. Lxx., whether purposely or not, here also used a verb which passes from a transitive use to an intransitive: it is not far from the meaning.
ὅρος] ὅρων of
Mam] Translating the first part of 'Beer-elim.
9. Ρεμμὼν] Β, with Heb., Λειμών, which is only explained as
Ἄραβας] Apparently repeated from ver. 7, after ἐπάξω. Even if
the Heb. word for ‘more,’ lit. ‘additions—
σπέρμα] Used for ‘the escaped,' parallel to ‘remnant,’ cf. i. 9 where, however, the Heb. word differs.
Ἀριὴλ] Heb. Arieh, a lion: Lxx. perhaps influenced by xxix. 1. Jerome and Theodoret say that Ar-Moab was sometimes called Ariel.
Ἀδαμὰ] Heb. Adāmah=‘ground,’ ‘land’; treated by LXX. as proper name: it has been suggested that Moab, as descended from Lot, might be spoken of as a remnant of Admah, one of the neighbour cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. xiv. 2, Dent. xxix. 23)!
XVI. I. The divergence of LXX. from Heb. at the opening of this
chapter is curious, but easily explained. The words have been
differently divided: after the difference of person between ‘Send ye,
2. ἔσῃ] Heb. has 3rd pers. : B, with some cursives, repeats ἔσῃ
before θυγάτηρ, where Heb. has 3rd (or 2nd) pers. fem. plur.
ἐπὶ τάδε] The Heb. for ‘fords’ is a word which enters into various
adverbial or prepositional phrases meaning ‘beyond,’ ‘across,’ ‘because
of,' &c. Scholz, reading the Greek as ἔπειτα δέ, as most, if not
πλείονα may be to complete the sense of ἐπὶ τάδε, or a paraphrase of the Heb. verb with ‘counsel’: which means, ‘make to go,' 'adnace' : as in the phrase ‘stricken in years,' lit. ‘advanced in days.
3. ποίει τι σκέπην] The syntax differs here in Greek and Heb.,
and there seems to be some confusion. ποίει τε corresponds to
μὴ ἀχθῇς] μὴ ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς, ℵAB*Q*Γ 22corr 24 26 49 106 109 233 301 305 309: but the reading of B*b, μὴ ἀχθῇς, is most probably right,—see Vol. I. Introd., p. 130—as it appears to come from the Heb. not.' read with different vowel-points as a passive of the same verb, in the sense ‘be not led away' (captive). The readings ἀχθεσθείς, 62 147 and ἀχθεσθῇς, 93, seem to come from taking ἀχθῇς (intransitively) from ἀχθέω; ἐπειχθῇς, 41 306, might possibly be the true reading, but seems quite as likely to be a mixture of A's and B's texts. The Syrohexaplar version gives in its text, according to Field, the equivalent of μὴ ἀχθεσθῇς, in the margin that of μὴ ταραχθῇς, each of them fairly reasonable attempts to get sense. A's reading is puzzling: it may be (a) a corruption from ἀπαχθῇς, or some other verb : (b) ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς, an additional phrase of the Lxx., which has turned out the verb from the clause, owing to its being itself mistaken for a verb: it is not easy, however, to account for its presence in this character : (c) from ἀπόρχω, ‘rule afar off,' almost=rule in exile. Pind. Nem. IV. 76, ἔνθα Τεῦκρος ἀπάρχει. In this case we may render ‘lest thou be an exile,' or ‘see lest thou be,’ as the pres. subj. cannot properly be prohibitive.
4. Μωὰβ] On the whole, best taken as genitive after φυγάδες, and so also Heb.: some, however, treat it as a vocative in Heb., and if so, it might also be so in Greek.
ἤρθη] Perhaps can, ‘there is none,' read as
συμμαχία] Heb. ‘extortioner’; the discrepancy is hard to account for.
συνετελέσθη ταλαιπωρία] These words, found only in A 49 106, are perhaps Hexaplaric, inserted from Symmachus. They agree pretty well with Heb.
ὁ ἄρχων] An addition to explain ὁ καταπατῶν: probably not a. duplicate and periphrastic rendering, by the order of words.
ἐπὶ] So ℵAQ* 24 26 41 49 106 109 239 301 305 306 309: B ἀπὸ, which agrees with Heb., and may be Hexaplaric, from Aquila: otherwise, ἐπὶ may be an alteration to suit κατοπατῶν: in some ways this seems more likely.
ἔξῆρας] SO ℵcbABabQ* 26 49 106: ἐξῆρα ℵ*B*,
preferable, though as the word is in any case an error, there is little in
the context or otherwise to decide upon. Heb. has
οὐχ οὕτως] This is right the first time, Heb.
μαντεία] Heb. ‘boastings’ or ‘pratings’: Lxx. interprets of (lying) divinations, Cf. xliv. 25, ἐγγαστριμύθων.
7. τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Δέσεθ] Scholz, taking the division of words δὲ
Σέθ, as in the old editions, considers that LXX. read
μελετήσας] This verb in LXx. often represents
καὶ οὐκ ἐντραπήση] Heb. has no negative: Lowth suggested
therefore that LXX. read
8. καταπίνοντες] Reading
οὗ μὴ συνάψητε] Heb. has again no negative here; the verb in Heb. belongs to the previous clause, and is 3rd pers. plur., a difference of vowel-points
οἱ ἀπεσταλμένοι] Heb. ‘offshoots’ is from root meaning ‘send forth.’
Heb. verb ‘to be spread abroad' also means ‘to be left.
9. τὰ δένδρα σου] Scholz suggests, but doubtfully, that LXX. read
hat, i.e.
κατέβαλεν] Heb. ‘with my tears': what verb LXX. read is open
to doubt: perhaps
<Ἐλεαλὴ> ἐλάλησεν again ℵΑΒabQ* and about a mostly Hesychian (26 87 90 91 97 104 106 228 239 301 306 309); ἐλάλει 24, ἐλάλησεν ℵ*. Compare xv. 4. The corruption have taken place here first, as its support is somewhat wider: ἐλάλησεν is repeated in the Greek of ver. 13 below.
καταπατῆσαι] Heb. ‘shouting’: perhaps a loose interpretation or
guess, connecting the word with the treading of the grapes. Or
πέπανται γάμ] Some Lucianic MSS. add κέλευσμα. It is often said that Mark xvi. 8 breaks off in the middle of a sentence, γὰρ being unlikely to stand at the end of one. But if this verse be not an undoubted instance, Gen. xviii. 15, xlv. 3 are close parallels to Mark. See also chap. xxix. II.
11. ὤσεὶ τεὶχος ὄ ἐνεκαίνισας] Heb. ‘for Kir-hares,'
12. ὥς τὸ ἐντραπῆναι] Heb. ‘when...is seen,'
NBQ read εἷς for ὣς·
χειροποίητα] Probably an interpretation of Heb. 'sanctuary': though
it may be that LXX. read
οὐ μὴ δύνηται] This translates the Heb., except that the original verb is not here auxiliary ; so that ἐξελέσθαι αὐτὸν was probably added to complete the sentence.
13. ὁπότε καὶ ἐλάλησεν] An explanation of Heb. ‘hitherto’: lit. ‘from then,' i.e. from of old.
14. πλούτῳ] LXX. renders
καὶ οὐκ ἔντιμος] καὶ οὐκ suggests
XVII. Ver. 1—11 form a prophecy against Damascus and The chapter is diffcult and obscure.
1. ἀπὸ πόλεων] Heb. literally ‘from a city,' i.e. from existence as a city. The plural makes the Greek easier, but the singular is a regular idiom in Heb. ; as in xxiii. 1. Cf. 1 Sam. xv. 23 Heb.; LXX. is literal in Jerem. xlviii. (xxxi.) 2, and Ps. lxxxiii. 5, ἐξολεθρεύσωμεν αὐτοὺς ἐξ ἔθνους.
εἰς πτῶσιν] Heb. has two words, ‘a heap, a ruin.' There seems to
have been uncertainty as to the letter before ‘heap’: Heb. has the
prefix
2. εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα] This would be
εἰς κοίτην] Not in Heb.; but Lxx., already confused, might have
read
βουκολέων] Inserted only by ℵcaA 26 106 233 301 ; perhaps lxv. 10 ℵ* omits καὶ ἀνάπαυσιν
3. οὐκέτι ἔσται] An easy paraphrase for ‘shall cease': ὀχυρὰ
corresponds to ‘fortress,’ cf. ἐν ὀχυρώμασιν, Zech. ix. 12, same root:
καταφυγεῖν is an addition of LXX., perhaps to explain the
‘from Ephraim,' whether τοῦ was already written or not. ἀπολεῖται is
4. δόξης αὐτοῦ] Lxx. abandons the parallelism, probably preferring
to paraphrase ‘flesh.’ Scholz suggests that
σασθήσεται] Perhaps
5. δάν τις συναγάγῃ] Heb. has a comparative clause with infinitive
ἀμητὸν] It is possible so to render the word generally here translated ‘harvestman’: so Cheyne and some others: ἑστηκότα, though superfluous, interprets rightly.
σπέρμα] Doubtless read for ‘his arm,' the word being nearly the
same, except vowel-points, and ‘with’ not expressed in Heb. ἐν τῷ
βραχίονι αὐτοῦ, supplied by
ἂν φάραγγι στερεᾷ] Heb. ‘in the valley of Rephaim' (see on xiv. 9).
Lxx. may have loosely taken it as the ‘valley of healers,' and so,
'strong,' 'sound': or possibly read
ἐπ’ ἄκρον Wu] Cf. Aesch. Eumen. 43, ἐλαίας ὑψιγέννητος κλάδος.
8. τὰ ἄλση] Heb. #x772;rim; an Asherah was a “pole or artificial
tree" (Cheyne) set up as an emblem in the idolatrous worship of a
goddess: whether this goddess was named, or ever called, Asherah;
whether it was Ashtoreth that was thus worshipped ; and whether the
names, despite the difference of initial
βδελύγματα] The Heb. word refers to certain ‘sun-pillars’ or images of the (Phoenician) sun-god, Baal-Hamman, apparently the same as the African Ammon of the Roman poets (Lucan, Phar. III 292, c.: notice also IX. 511 foll., esp. 525, “solus nemus extulit Ammon")
See xxvii. 9, where LXX. has εἴδωλα.
9. ἑγκαταλελιμμέναι] LΧΧ. does not render ‘strong,’ perhaps confusing
it, owing to the similar letters
οἱ Ἀμορραῖοι καὶ οἱ Εὑαῖοι] The corresponding Hebrew words are
‘the woodland and the (mountain) crest.' Many commentators
propose to emend the Hebrew text in agreement with the Lxx.,
reading
10. ἄπιστον... ἄπιστον] Heb. has two phrases, to neither of which does LXX. correspond. The second clause of Heb. is strongly alliterative, with i.
Schleusner cut the knot by reading πιστὸν for ἄπιστον.
II. The syntax is entirely altered in the Greek, beside verbal differences.
πλανηθήσῃ] LXX. have read
κληρώση]
ὥσπερ πατὴρ]
ἀνθρώπου] Same letters,
12—14. On this short passage, a remarkable piece of wordpainting.
even for Isaiah, see Prof. G. A. Smith, in the Expositor's
Bible. Some think it connected with what precedes (Delitzsch,
Hizig), others with what follows (Gesenius, W. E. Barnes); with
both (Vitringa, and apparently Kay) : or as an independent fragment
12. ταραχθήσεσθε] LXX. is rather vague in the treatment of ver. 12, 13; here the Heb. verb is 3rd pers. plur. The constant repetition of words has probably confused the translators.
νῶτος] Heb. ‘tumult,’
13. ἀποσκορακιεῖ] Heb. ‘he checks,' ‘rebukes’: Lxx. may perhaps have perceived the sound-effect of the original, rough guttural word suddenly interrupting the foaming sibilants and nasals.
χοῦν] So Γ 22 26 36 97 104 106 301 308: but χνοῦν BQ Χνους
ἀχύρον] Probably explanatory, cf. xxx. 24.
λικμώντων] Possibly
14. πένθος] Heb. rather ‘terror.’ Cf. Job xviii. 11, 14. ἔσται will be mm read for rum ‘and behold': the correspondence of κληρονομία with the following participle is not in Heb. The spirit of this verse is, however, well caught in the translation. (Some Heb. MSS. and editions agree with LXX. and Vulg. in inserting ‘and’ before ‘he shall not be.'
XVlll. Opinions have differed as to the nature of the scene
depicted in this chapter. Some have thought that the ‘messengers’
are ambassadors from Ethiopia to Judah, hidden to return to their
own country, bearing the ’s saying as their answer. Less
favoured is the idea that the embassy is from Judah to Ethiopia
(though see xx. 4, 5, and Ezek. xxx. 9); while perhaps the majority of
modern commentators think that the ‘messengers’ are those of the
king of Ethiopia sent to muster his more distant forces. Again, some
The EthiOpians of this time would seem to have formed the best
element in the Egypt-Ethiopia combination. It is curious that ancient
testimony is generally favourable to them. ’s testimony to
their ‘blamelessness’ (Iliad, I. 423) must not be unduly pressed, nor
perhaps that of Aeschylus, Frag. 300,
Herodotus says of them, 111.20, λέγονται εἶναι μέγιστοι καὶ κάλ· λιστοι ἀνθρώπων πάντων, and the story in the following chapter gives a favourable impression of them. Isaiah himself has apparently neither fault to find, nor woe to predict against them: whereas several of his propheciesconcerning foreign nations are sympathetic, the tone is here almost respectful.
The Ethiopians, often important, were now becoming for the time dominant in Egypt. In ’s time, Tirhakah (xxxvii. 9) raised his peOple to great power, and was a vigorous opponent of Sennacherib. There are difficulties about the chronology here, as throughout the whole period: the destruction of the Assyrians is generally dated, since critics have placed their reliance on the Assyrian Eponym Canon, in 701 B.C.: but Tirhakah did not become king, according to students of Egyptian history, till from three to ten years after this: though an Ethiopian dynasty was ruling from an earlier date.
1. οὐαὶ γῆς πλοίων πτέρυγες] This verse begins obscurely in the Heb.: the word ’l-tsal (with ‘wings’ following) being rendered (a) ‘of the clangour (or rustling) of ’: so Gesenius, Delitzsch, Cheyne, c.: (b) ‘of the shadowing of wings,' Kay, A.V. nharly: (c) ‘where the shadow falls both ways' (i.e. within the tropics), Knobel, W. E. Barnes. The word is probably identical with that meaning ‘cymbal,’ and so Vulgate, Vac terrae cymbalo alarum.
In (a) the ‘rustling of wings’ is supposed to refer to the
swarms of insects: Kay explains (b) as the shadowing wings of
Aquila treated the word as a simple reduplication of
In translating the Greek it would be possible to take Οὐαὶ γῆς
together, see on i. 24: πλοίων πτέρυγες following as a can: pendent:
‘Ah for the land, the sails of the ’: but it seems more probable
that γῆς qualifies πλοίων, which is a mere guess. Lowth denies that
the Heb. word for ‘wings’ is ever used of the sails of ships: but so
obvious a metaphorical use can hardly be called impossible, and
Skinner mentions that the Targ. supports it. It may be noted that
Lxx. have already twice in the book used πλοίων somewhat at
random: namely, ii. 16, and xi. 14, where Heb. ‘shoulder,’
2. ὅμηρα] The neuter form is used (in plur.) by Lysias and Polybius, and Liddell and Scott suggest that there σώματα is to be supplied, ὅμηρα being adjectival. Heb. generally interpreted 'amhassadors
ἐπιστολὰς βυβλίνας] Heb. has ‘in vessels of papyrus,' i.e. boats, which several ancient writers mention as used on the Nile: e.g. Lucan, Phars. Iv. 136.
πορεύσονται γὰρ] Heb. has simple imperat.
μετέωρον] Cf. ii. 13. Heb. word is now generally rendered ‘tall’ (lit. ‘stretched out'). I cannot however find that μετέωρος is used in this sense of men. Below, ver. 7, the same Heb. is a good deal more closely rendered. ’
ξένον] Heb. ‘smooth’ or ‘polished,’ perhaps of the shining skins of the Ethiopians. ξένον, possibly a corruption of ξεστόν (50 Schleusner).
τί]
ἀνέλπιστον] ἐλπίζον in ver. 7. The negative here is curious,
perhaps ᾗ) for the first
καταπεπατημένον] Heb. ‘(of) treading down': LXX. and Vulg., like A.V., have interpreted it passively.
νῦν οἱ ποταμοὶ τῆς γῆς] LXX. have apparently lost the clue, or come upon some illegible words. Ver. 7 is differently attempted. The syntax forsakes the Heb. altogether.
3. ὡσεὶ σημεῖον...ἀρθῆ] Β* 26 91 97 104 106 147 309 read ὡς εἷς, and
4. Ἀσφάλεια] Not used elsewhere to translate the present Heb., to which it is moderately near in meaning (syntax differs): the Heb. verb is elsewhere ἡσυχάσαι, vii. 4, πεποιθώς, xiv. 7 (Cf. xxx. 15), ἀνήσω, lxii. I: conversely ἀσφάλεια is used with diff. Heb., viii. 15, xxxiv. 15 and cf. xli. 10.
The phrase ἀσφάλεια ἔσται may be due to uncertainty as to the
person. The next phrase ‘and I will behold' is not rendered by ’
Lxx. Possibly they took it (none) to come from
πόλει] Heb. 'place' or 'dwelling.
μεσημβρίας] Heb. word meaning ‘light,’ bears also, in its feminine form, the meaning ‘herbs.’ Cf. xxvi. 19. mm. may be right here, except in syntax.
δρόσου] Heb. word is said to mean a fine drizzling mist. ἡμέρας] LXX. read mm for ma.
5. ἀνθήσῃ ἄνθος ὀμφακίζουσα] RB read ἀνθήσει. The Heb. has not this duplicated expression.
6. The figure changes abruptly in ’s manner: and instead
of the metaphor of pruning, we have the reality of the corpses,
Aeschylus combines two somewhat similar ideas, Agamemnon, 659, 660.
συναχθήσεται...ἤξει] Lxx. takes refuge in vagueness, perhaps not
understanding the original. συναχθήσεται may however be due to
reading or guessing
7. τεθλιμμένων καὶ τετιλμένου] ℵ alone adds καὶ τοπεινοῦ; variants
among the cursives include τεθλιμμένου καὶ τεταπεινωμένου 49 239 306
(36 228 nearly). This rendering is nearer than that given in ver. 2, to
what was formerly thought the Heb. meaning: cf. Vulgate, ‘divulso
et dilacerato.' As to τεθλιμμένου we may conjecture that Lxx. here
read
ἂν μέρει] Heb. differs from vii. 18. Here μέρος seems to be used
with some reference to division, whether of spoil or otherwise: cf.
μερὶς above, xvii. 14, μεμιῶ σκῦλα, Exod. xv. 9, c. Yet we should
scarcely have discovered this from the Greek alone: it almost suggests
elementary lexical work on the ’s part. Moreover, it leaves
it uncertain whether Lxx. connected
With the prophecy of the offering of Ethiopia to God, though the precise meaning may be doubtful, it seems natural to compare Ps. lxviii. 31, and Zeph. iii. 10. It is at least worthy of remark, that the Copts and Abyssinians alone among African peoples have maintained at least a nominal Christianity in the midst of Mohammedans.
XIX. ’s burden. Egypt is spoken of with more condemnation than Ethiopia, and with some contempt. Isaiah felt it an especial charge to preach against Egyptian influence on Judah, cf. chaps. xxx., xxxi. Yet there is an under-current of sympathy: and ver. 21 (or even ver. 18) onward is in some ways an expanded parallel to xviii. 7. The teaching agrees with Deut. xvii. 16 and xxiii. 7.
The date is uncertain, many times up to the Assyrian crisis being suggested. If that is placed in 701, that year and 720 are perhaps the most favoured.
1. κάθηται] Heb. more forcibly ‘rideth’: generally in Lxx. ἐπιβαίνω, c. Ps. xviii. 10, lxviii. 4, Hosea x. 11, Habak. iii. 8, c.
ἡττηθήσονται] Heb. more particularly ‘shall melt.' Lxx. omits ‘the midst,' as in ver. 3, 14, 19, and xxiv. 18 (not always the same Heb. word).
ἡ καρδία ἡττηθήσεται is the reading of the MSS. except A 49 106.
2. ἐπεγερθήσονται] Heb. is causal (Pilpel) Ist pers. sing. (Aquila, στασιάσω); wrongly rendered also in ix. II, διασκεδάσει.
ἐπεγερθήσεται] Read by A, ℵca 36 106, and with καὶ preceding by six more cursives. ℵ* reads πολεμήσει καὶ... Bbividlm has καὶ and the verb in plural: Β* omits.
νομὸς ἐπὶ νομὸν] The Alexandrian translator shows his knowledge of Egypt. Herodotus uses this word of Egyptian divisions, II.— 166: κατὰ γὰρ δὴ νομοὺς· Αἴγυπτος· ἅπασα διαραίρηται. He uses it, however, of other countries, as in I. 192. The Ethiopian domination may have been assisted by this jealousy between the states.
Tyconius, whose Old Latin version mistook the word νομός, has lex supra legem: and some printed texts of LXX. accent the word wrongly.
3. ἀγάλματα] Cf. Aesch. Sapient, 258, παλινστομεῖς αὖ θιγγάνουσ’ ἀγαλμάτων; Εumen. 55, πρὸς· θεῶν ἀγάλματα φέρειν, and Plato, Phaedrus, 251 Α, θύοι ἂν ὡς ἀγάλματι καὶ θεῷ. (Not in Heb. : perhaps a duplicate, or τοὺς θεοὺς may be the insertion.)
καὶ τοὺς mamas] So ℵA (22) 36 41 49 106: other MSS. omit. It agrees with the Heb. well enough, but is coupled with ἐγγαστριμύθους in I Sam. xxviii. 3.
4. ἀνθρώπων] Inserted by Lxx., perhaps to indicate that the following expression does not refer to God: it may be due to an early scribe.
κυρίων σκληρῶν] Heb. is plural, so called, of ‘majesty’ (adj. in sing.). βασιλεῖς σκληραί, following, is sing. in Heb. with a different adjective, often meaning strong ('rex fortis,' Vulg.); here probably ‘harsh’ or 'stem.
What is meant by the ‘harsh lord' is very uncertain, whether a foreign oppressor or a king ruling over the country, by usurpation or otherwise. On the whole, the balance of opinion seems in favour of its being an Assyrian (Esarhaddon, who was not, however, for an Assyrian, a specially ‘harsh lord,' or Assurbanipal); or an Ethiopian (Pianchi Mer-Amon, whose date is probably too early, or Tirhakah). Delitzsch supports the Egyptian Psammetichus: and many others, as Cambyses, have been suggested.
5. πίονται] Cf. Exod. vii. 24. Lxx. apparently read their verb
from
6. ἐκλείψουσιν] So Vulgate, ‘deficient’: now generally rendered
‘shall stink': an exceptional verb-form
αἱ διώρυγες τοῦ ποταμοῦ] Quite a correct description: the trenches
dug from the Nile for irrigation are meant. Heb. uses the plural of
the word regularly standing in sing. for the Nile itself: but this does
not correspond in the order, the verb
The neglect of the machinery for irrigation in times of misrule or political disorder, or a natural failure of the annual overflow of the Nile, produced disastrous results in Egypt, where the crops depended entirely on the river water, the rain being very scanty. See Herod. II. 19, 92, 108, ἃς.
πᾶσι συναγωγὴ ὔδατος] This phrase occurs in xxxvii. 25, where
also Heb. has ‘canals of Mazor.' πᾶσα however is superfluous here.
The corresponding verse in 2 Kings (xix. 24) has πάντας τοὺς ποτα·
μοὺς περιοχῆς, which makes it look as if xxxvii. 25 had been translated
first. Whether Lxx. made συναγωγὴ from some supposed
meaning of
Mazor, a singular form of the dual name Mizraim, Egypt. Its literal meaning is probably ‘wall’ or ‘fortification.’ According to Delitzsch and others, it stands especially for Lower Egypt, Pathros being Upper Egypt, and the two together Mizraim. Cf. ‘the Two sicilies,' ‘all the Russias,' and many plural names of countries and cities in various languages.
The syntax of the rest of the verse differs from Heb.
7. τὸ ἄχι] Cf. Gen. xli. 2, 18 (and 19 in Lxx.). The Hebrew here
has
ἀνεμόφθορον] The Lxx. seem to have taken another hint from
Gen. xli., where this word occurs five times, ver. 6, 7, 23, 24, 27; not
in Heb. of 7 and 24. Here Heb. has
9. βύσσον] Heb. ‘white cloths,' perhaps cotton as well as linen. The local knowledge of the translator was probably equal to this rendering. (Gen. xli. 42 has στολὴν βυσσίνην.) There is probably no reference in the original to nets or fishing in this verse.
10. διαζόμενοι] Heb. probably ‘pillars’ or ‘foundations’ (Ps. xi. 3), but it has been very variously rendered, some supposing it to have to do with nets or weaving.
The LXX. reading is of interest. Most MSS., headed by ℵ*B, read ἐργαζόμενοι: AQ* have διαλογιζόμενοι, and διαζόμενοι is read by ℵcb(vid) 26 49 106 301. The last is, I cannot but think, the true reading. (διάζεσθαι and δίασμα occur in A's text of Judges, xvi. 13, 14.) ἐργαζόμενοι is either an attempt to explain the less known word, or simply repeated by inadvertence from the previous verse: and διαλογιζόμενοι a guess by a scribe, who, not knowing διάζεσθαι, supposed the letters to have fallen out. (See note, Vol. I. Introd. p. 30.)
ζῦθον] ‘beer’: evidently LXX. read
ψυχὰς] Heb. is singular. A. V. takes it collectively as living
creatures, i.e. in this connection ‘fish.’ But the meaning of the verse
is probably as in R. V.; the word redered ‘grieved’ is identical in
letters with ‘pools’ or ‘ponds’ in Heb. LXX. may have read it or
regarded it as the same word as
11. Τάνεως] Tanis is the Greek name of Zoan, an old and renowned city in the Delta. (30 miles S.W. of Port Said), and thus nearer than the other principal cities to the frontier of Judah (Numb. xiii. 22; Ps. lxxviii. 12). The capital of the Hyksos.
οἱ σοφοὶ σύμβουλοι] The casus pendens is according to the Hebrew.
The wise men of Egypt are challenged, like the magicians in Moses' day (Exod. vii. 11). So the idols are challenged in xli. 23, the astrologers, xlvii. 13; and any who profess to foretell or render void God's purpose (xliii. 9, xlv. 21, xlviii. 14, &c.).
13. ὑψώθησαν] Taking
Μέμφεως] Heb. Noph (Moph in Hos. ix. 6). The capital of the early dynasties of Egypt, including the Pyramid-builders. Psammetichus I. fixed the capital there again. Cairo is near the same site.
κατὰ φυλὰς] Heb. ‘the corner of her tribes’: Scholz explains the
discrepancy by referring to Exod. xxvii. 12, Levit. xiii. 41, where
14. αὐτοῖς] Heb. has fem. sing. LXX. again omits ‘the midst.’ πλανήσεως] Heb. rather ‘perverseness’: diff. word from xxix. 16.pb
15. ἀρχὴν καὶ τέλος] Heb. ‘palm branch and rush,' cf. ix. 14
17. πᾶς ὃς ἄν...φοβηθήσονται] The Heb. is variously rendered, but some, as A.V., have taken it substantially as LXX.
18. A most difficult verse. The number of ‘five cities' has never been explained, further than as a small, but appreciable, number, which shall, if Egyptian, be turned to the true God, or, if Jewish settlements, practise their religion in Egypt.
πάλη ἁσεδὲκ] In this phrase, and the corresponding Hebrew, lies
a special difficulty. The Heb. text has (City of) ha-heres, i.e. ‘of
destruction,' which seems inconsistent with the apparent meaning
of the verse. Some explain it from Arabic haris, as ‘of the Lion.
referring it to the temple built at Leontopolis by Onias IV., of the
high priestly line, for the Jewish exiles in Egypt. Others, again,
reading with some MSS.
So far there is little satisfaction. More recently, however, Mr F. C.
Burkitt has pointed out that the reading of ℵ*, ασεδ ἡλίου καί, admits
another explanation. ἡλίου is clearly a duplicate.) He therefore
proposes to read ασεδ in Lxx., and in the Heb.
Attention has already (note on iii. 10) been drawn to the numerous
verbal resemblances between the Book of Wisdom and the Greek
Isaiah. It is at any rate an odd coincidence that brings together, in
Wisd. x. 6, 7, the words Πενταπόλεως and στήλη. Several other words
19. στήλη] Whether an actual obelisk is meant or not, the idea of a prominent landmark as a memorial is easy to understand, in Egypt of all countries. It is to be a sign and witness, like Beth-e or Mizpah. Any reference to the ‘pillars’ of Canaanite idolatry, as in xvii. 8, seems flatly impossible here.
20. εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα] As though pointed
κεκράξονται...καὶ ἀποστελεῖ] Recalls Exod. ii. 23, Judg. iv. 3, PS. cvii. 19, 20, c.
ἄνθρωπον ὃς σώσει] Some refer this primarily to one of the Ptolemies, especially him who was surnamed Soter. The language, however, is like that of various Messianic references. And Egypt has undoubtedly received many blessings from Christianity. After so many centuries, her state to-day is happier than many lands: perhaps than any other part of Africa.
κρίνων] Heb. ‘a mighty one' or ‘a Champion' (Vulg. propugnatorem).
Lxx. seem to have taken
22. ἰάσει] Having taken ‘with a blow' ℵAQ 26 36 41 49 106 239 add μεγάλῃ after πληγῇ) as intensifying ‘will smite,' Lxx. balance the clauses with this insertion.
Cf. Deut. xxxii. 39, Hosea vi. 1, 2.
23. δουλεύσουσιν...τοῖς Ἀσσυρίοις] Heb. almost certainly ‘serve
with the Assyrians': Lxx. took
25. mm. omit ‘the work of my hands': perhaps they took it in the sense of idols, and did not perceive its relevance.
Prof. Barnes remarks that this, like xi. 6 foll., is a vision of a golden age. “The two ancient foes...shall be one at last, and Israel, whose land was so often their battlefield, shall be ‘a third with with them'. XX. 1. οὗ] Β reads ὅτε.
Ναθὰν] Heb. Tartan, said to be an Accadian word: used in Assyrian (Turtanu) as the title of a high military officer, commander- in-chief under the king.
Ἄζωτον] Heb. Ashdod, one of the five cities of the Philistines.
The Greek form of the name is of course used in Acts viii. 40, and
’Apva’] Heb. Sargon, mentioned only here in OT. by name, and otherwise quite unknown until the discovery of Assyrian monuments in which he appears as a great conqueror and builder: apparently an usurper, but the founder of the last Assyrian dynasty.
2. τὸν σάκκον] Either Isaiah habitually wore the ‘rough garment' of the prophets (cf. Zech. xiii. 4, Matt. iii. 4, and perhaps 2 Kings i. 8), or he had been wearing sackcloth as mourning during the dark days of his country: see xxxvii. ι, 2; 2 Kings vi. 30
γυμνὸς] l.e. in the undergarment only. So V irg. Georg. I. 299,
The explanation of the symbolic act follows in ver. 3. Cf. for the symbol Micah i. 8, for the thing signified 2 Sam. x. 4.
3. τρία ἔτη] Β (??)repeats these words, and has εἷς before σημεῖα (cf. xviii. 3), but practically all other MSS. agree with A. The Hebrew has ‘three vears' once only, and the accents connect the words with ‘a sign,' c. following. Vulg. trium annomm signum. Profs. Skinner and Cheyne, against most modern authorities, disapprove this, the former thinking it “very unnatural, and...evidently suggested by a desire to avoid the notion that the action was kept up for so long a time." Kay, however, points out that no time is named in the command, ver. 2. Vitringa's suggestion that the original ran ‘hath walked...three days, for three years a sign...' is a pure guess and rewriting, apparently by analogy from Ezek. iv. 5, 6.
4. ἐκκεκαλυμμένας] B's ἅμα, κεκαλυμμένους is probably a corruption, based on a mistaken punctuation. It is strange that printed editions continue to connect this participle with τὴν αἰσχύνην Αἰγύπτου. 5. οἰ Αἰγύπτιοι °, °] B omits these words after ἡττηθέντες: at their second occurrence the Heb. has a preposition (lit. ‘from’) preceding. The Lxx. have lost the syntax and with it the meaning.
ἦσαν γὰρ] Β reads οἱ ἦσαν, with the Lucianic MSS. generally.
6. Ἰδοὺ] Β precedes, in agreement with the Heb., with ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ, which is apparently a Hexaplaric addition (* οἱ γ’ Q mg).
οἳ οὔκ ἠδύναντο] The syntax again varies: the negative in LXX
may come from
XXI. 1. Lxx. omit ‘of the sea' in the title of the prophecy: and
use ἕρημος both for midbar, ‘wilderness’ or ‘desert,’ and for Negeb
Delitzsch's note should be consulted: he applies the title to the sea-like desert surrounding Babylon, which was moreover subject to inundation : and called the ‘sea-land’ by the monuments. So Herod. 1, 184, πρότερον δὲ ἐώθεε ὁ ποταμὸς ἀνὰ τὸ πεδίον πᾶν πελαγίζειν. Some modern critics, however, deny authority to this and similar titles. Opinions differ, but most commentators refer this chapter to the fall of Babylon when taken by Cyrus : some to an earlier siege in Isaiah's own time. Of those who refer it to the time of Cyrus, many, denying that prophecy may be expected to see into the far future in detail, attribute it to a later prophet about 540 B.C. Those who do not seek to impose such limits, will hardly doubt Isaiah's authorship.
Ὡς...διέλθοι] For διέλθοι Q* has merely θοι. The clause must be
comparative, see on xi. 9, xviii. 3. It seems probable that the Optative
might be used where, as here, Heb. has infin. with
ὁ ἀθετῶν ἀθετεῖ] Cf. xxiv. 16, xxxiii. 1, xlviii. 8; the root always emphatically repeated, and with the same parallel verb in xxxiii. 1. Kay explains the Heb. (rendered ‘deal treacherously’ or thus: “the faithless or unscrupulous man, who sets at nought the restraints of law, or the engagements he has himself made.'
ὁ ἀνομῶν ἀνομεῖ] Lxx. seem here to have chosen a word of parallel sound to the preceding clause, at the cost of exactness. Heb. ‘the spoiler spoileth' or ‘destroyer destroyeth.' In xxxiii. 1, ταλαιπωρεῖν is used, transitively.
Without implicitly following what is laid down by Dr Hatch (Essay: in Bibl. Greek, pp. 22, 30, c.) it may be said that Lxx. do not always preserve accurate distinctions among groups of words with somewhat similar meanings.
ἐπ’ ἐμοὶ]
οἱ πρέσβας] Reading
παρακαλέσει] Heb. ‘I have made to cease': Lxx. may have attempted
a paraphrase, or possibly taken
3. ἠδίκησα] Heb. is passive or flexive (Niphal) : word meaning ‘to be crooked' or ‘bent,’ so in active, ‘to do wrong.' ('Perverse, and 'wrong,' i.e. twisted, show the general prevalence of the metaphor contained in words of this sense.
τὸ μὴ ἀκοῦσαι...τὸ μὴ βλέπειν] For τό, Β reads τοῦ before βλέπειν,
and the Roman edition has it also before ἀκοῦσαι. The MS. support
is, for
The negatives evidently represent the Heb.
ἐσπούδασα] Heb. is again passive, as ἠδίκησα above: word meaning ‘be terrified,' ‘cast down,' and in causal voice or aspect to ‘hasten.’
4. ἡ ἀνομία με βαπτίζει] Heb. ‘horror affrights me.' The Lxx.
here reminds us of P5. xxxviii. 4, 6, lxix. 2, but bears no resemblance
to the Heb. They may possibly have read
ἢ ἡ ψυχή] Clearly due to reading
5. τράπεζαν] After this Heb. has ‘they set the watch' (or acc. to some, ‘they spread the carpets.' Lxx. omits this, but it was apparently supplied in the Hexapla and σκόπευσαν τὴν σκοπιὰν is found in 22 23 48 51 90 109 144 305 308 (Q mg with *). The Heb. verbs are infin absolute, which may be taken as equivalent to the imperative, or better, to a descriptive tense.
πίστι, φάγετε] So RAQ, with Heb.: B inverts the order.
ἑτοιμάσατε θυρεοὺς] Verb is an explanatory version of Heb., which
has ‘anoint the ’ (that blows might glance at? it). So Virg. Aen
VII. 626, “Pars leves clipeos et spicula lucida tergent
6. The relation of the prophet to the ‘watchman’ is interesting. Generally, the prophet is himself the watchman : as perhaps in ver. 11 (diff. Heb. word), and clearly in Ezek. iii. 17, xxxiii. 7, Habak. ii. I. The best view seems to be that of Delitzsch, that the prophet “divides himself into two ” : seeing, and yet not himself directly seeing the vivid scene of the next verse. He plays both parts, as in 2 Sam. xviii. 24, the watcher on the tower, and also the bearer below, making his comments.
σεαυτῷ] 'Go,'
7. καὶ ἴδον...ἀκρόασαι] Most authorities (as Ewald, Kay, Driver, Skinner, W. E. Barnes), but not Cheyne, translate the Heb. ‘And if (or, when) he see...let him hearken...' rather than ‘And he saw...and he hearkened...': making it still part of the command. mm. with Ist pers. sing. already abandons the distinction between prophet and watchman, as indeed in the previous clause ὃ ἂν ἴδῃς ἀνάγγειλον.
ἀναβάτας...ἀναβάτην] Heb. is said to mean here ‘a troop,' more probably than as AV. ‘a chariot': but the word often means 'rider' so Vulg. ascensorem. In the vision, bands and bodies of men, variously equipped, make their way across the plain.
ἀκρόασαι ἀκρόασιν πολλὴν] Heb. repeats the root-word thrice: ‘hearken with hearkening, a great hearkening.
8. καὶ. κάλεσον Οὐρείαν] Heb. ‘and he cried (called) as a lion' cf. Rev. x. 3. No more probable rendering is forthcoming. Arieh. ‘a lion,' differs from Uriah only in vowel-points, and the insertion of a after initial ℵ : which also might have been expressed in vowel-points. The translator probably thought of viii. 2.
Aquila has λέοντα, Symm. λέαιναν, Vulg. leo, Theod. ἀριήλ, which Prof. W. E. Barnes revives.
If the prophecy be Isaiah's, Uriah's presence as a witness would not be in itself impossible: but it cannot be said that that reading would make the sentence much easier.
εἰς τὴν σκοπιὰν Κυρίου. καὶ εἶπεν] So ℵAQΓ 26 41 49 90 91 97 106 198 228 233 301 306 308. B and the Luc. MSS. (e sil.) have a stop after σκοπιάν, followed by Κύριος εἶπεν, which hardly gives a probable sense. In any case, the syntax of the Heb. is lost.
διὰ παντὸς ἡμέρας καὶ...ὃλην τὴν νύκτα] We are reminded of the
watchman in Aeschylus, Agamemnon (which Alb. Barnes quotes) 2 foll.
9. αὐτὸς] οὗτος would represent Heb. more exactly: but there is no ground to think it ever stood in the text of LXX.
Πέπτωκεν] Heb. has this word repeated : but B is alone, or nearly 50, among the Gk MSS. in doubling it. In Rev. xiv. 8, it is doubled, but in the aorist: some MSS. however, including C and B (not the great Vatican MS., which does not contain Rev.), omit the second verb there, as well as R, according to Tischendorf: ℵ also omits it in xviii. 2.
ἀγάλματα] See xix. 3. The Heb. words are fairly represented, except for the addition of καὶ after αὐτῆς: it being understood that the 'gods' are false.
10. ἀκούσατε] Twice inserted by LXX.
οἱ καταλελιμ. καὶ δεικνύμενοι] Heb. ‘my threshing and the son of
my threshing-floor.' Lxx. gives the meaning fairly well (with which
Cf. Amos ix. 9) but καταλελιμμένοι is a little wide of the mark. Can
Lxx. have read some part of
(Cf. Jer. v. 10, where Heb. has
The MSS. have οἱ before ὀδυνώμενοι, except A 41 106.
παρὰ Κυρίου] The prep. with gen. very well represents the compound Heb. preposition (lit. ‘from with')
11. Apart from the questions of the date and authorship of ver. 1—10, it is a doubtful point among commentators whether the following verses contain companion prophecies to the first. In themselves they are hardly supposed to contain any clear indication of their date or occasion.
τῆς Ἰδουμαίας] Heb. Dumah, ‘silence,’ usually interpreted as standing for Edom. The resemblance of the Greek word must be regarded as a coincidence, in the present state of our knowledge, though the interpretation stands as correct.
Dumah appears in Gen. xxv. 14 as a son of Ishmael: Lxx. there has Ἰδουμά Ἰδουμάν E), as well as in 1 Chron. i. 29. In Josh. xv. 52 the place must be different; Lxx. has Ρεμνὰ Β, Ῥουμὰ A.
καλεῖτε] So A alone: Γ has ἐκάλεσεν, but ℵΒQ's reading καλεῖ seems preferable, and agrees with Heb. The person endings often differ in the MSS., and somewhat markedly in the case of this verb: see vii. 14 (cf. Matt. i. 23), and ix. 6.
Heb. should probably be rendered ‘One calleth....' This use of the third pers. sing. without subject expressed can hardly be exactly rendered, in point of effect, in Greek or English.
φυλάξετε] The imper. φυλάσσετε ℵBQ c.) is perhaps easier. The syntax is quite different from Heb., which has here a noun, not the same as in ver. 6, but connected with that for ‘post’ in ver. 8. (Vulg. ver. 6 fan: speculatorem, 8 super custodiam, 11 custos, quid de nocte?
ἐπάλξας] Perhaps
12. φυλάσσω τὸ πρωὶ] Lxx. first omits ‘saith’: then treats 'watchman'
as a verb: then possibly read mm, an unusual form for
‘cometh,’ as the sign of the accusative case,
The Heb. is obscure : cf. Zech. xiv. 6, 7.
καὶ παρ’ ἐμοὶ οἴκει] Lxx. seem to have read
13. Lxx. omits the title of this section : some Luc. MSS. supply it.
ἑσπέρας] The letters of
Delitzsch construes the title, but not this clause, ‘in the evening, with a hint of the double meaning. Vulg. conversely, Onus Arabiae In saltu ad vesperam ’etz’s. Cheyne also favours ‘in the evening.
κοιμηθήση] This seems on all grounds preferable to κοιμηθῇς, ἦ... of older editions. So the Camb. manual Lxx., and Field's 18 59 ed.
ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ] The word for 'caravan' is closely connected with that for 'way,' and in plur. the letters are identical.
Δαιδὰν] Α tribe of Arabs, Gen. x. 7, xxv. 3 ; merchants, like many of their race, Ezek. xxvii. 10, xxxviii. 13.
14. Θαιμὰν] Lxx. do not appear to distinguish Tema (Gen. xxv. 15, Job vi. 19, Jerem. xxv. 23) from Τ eman, Gen. xxxvi. 11, Jerem. xlix. 7, 20, Ezek. xxv. 13, Amos i. 12, Chad. 9, Habak. iii. 3.
Tema, like Kedar and Dumah, a son of Ishmael, seems to have given his name to a place on the road between Damascus and Mecca. Delitzsch distinguishes a second place of the name.
Teman was a grandson of Esau.
The subject of these Arabian tribes is obscure. Possibly tribes originally of Ishmaelite and of Keturaite descent coalesced with Hamitic stocks ; and may also have been joined by some descendants of Esau. See some suggestive remarks on the origin of peoples by the late Prof. Freeman, Historical Essays, 3rd Series, “Race and Language.
15. “Sept. is lucid but very different," Prof. Cheyne says. The
syntax differs; the repeated διὰ τὸ πλῆθος· is apparently an attempt to
[6. Lxx. omits ‘all’ before glory, and inserts 'sons.
XXII. 1—14. The exact occasion of this prophecy is and its date also. Many place it in 701, some earlier: it seems to refer to some relief of the city from threatening pressure by the Assyrians, and expresses the ’s strong disapproval of the ’s attitude. Verses 15—25, on Shebna, must be earlier Sennacherib's dispatch of Rabshakeh, as not Shebna, but Eliakim, is then 'over the house
1. ὅραμα] ℵBQ read ῥῆμα.
τῆς φάραγγος Σιὼν] Heb. ‘of the valley of vision,'
One of the ravines or valleys round Jerusalem seems to be enough to account for the phrase, though we usually think of the city more as a mountain fortress. Kay and Birks, alone among modern commentators, apply the passage and description to Samaria. It can scarcely be accepted, but the former's note (in the Speaker's Comm.) should be consulted.
Τί ἐγίνετό σοι] So the Heb., except that no verb is expressed.
δόματα] Heb. word means definitely 'roofs.
μάταια] Heb. 'tunmult'
2. βοώντων] Heb. has an abstract word, and Lxx. omits the parallel phrase ‘a jubilant town.' ἡ πόλις ἀγαυριῶσα, ἀγαυριῶσα, Q mg V and Luc. enigma] Heb. word, generally thus rendered in LXX., strictly means ‘pierced’ or ‘wounded,’ but, in practice, is said to be used of the slain, mortally stricken. Lxx. inserts οἱ νεκροί σου, balancing the clauses.
μαχαίρας...πολέμου] So most MSS. : but B has ἐν μαχαίραις πολέμῳ (Rom. ed. πολέμων).
3. καὶ οἱ ἁλόντες] Perhaps
σκληρῶς] Heb. ‘without (lit. from, D) the bow,’ or possibly, ‘by
bow’ (‘archer’ requires diff. vowel-points). Omitting D, see
letters are
δεδεμένοι] ’s δεδεγμένοι can scarcely be other than a ’s error.
οἱ ἰσχύοντες] Scholz explains this as
4. ”AΦετέ με] ‘Let me go ’: probably a paraphrase, for Heb. ‘look
away from ’ verb
5. ταραχῆς καὶ ἀπωλείας καὶ καταπατήματος] 50 all MSS. but B καταπάτημα). ΑΒ agree against ℵ*Q* in adding καὶ πλάνησις, which is found in Q mg, but seems probably right. As compared with Heb., which has three words of similar form and vowel sounds, καὶ ἀπωλείας seems to be the intrusive phrase in Lxx., the other three translating Heb. fairly well : for πλάνησις, cf. Exod. xiv. 3 (same Heb. verb), πλανῶνται οὗτοι ἐν τῇ γῇ.
ἐν Φάρ. Σιῶν] See on ver. I, title.
πλανῶνται, ἀπὸ μικροῦ ἕως μεγάλου] The verb is supplied before as well as after this phrase, which is peculiar here. Mr H. St J. Thackeray has pointed out (joum of Thai. Studies, July 1903, p. 583 n.) that μικρὸς καὶ μέγας is “a characteristic phrase of the Isaiah translator.... He seems to have, recourse to this when in doubt as to the meaning of the Hebrew.” He refers to ix. 14., the present passage, and ver. below, and xxxiii. 4, 19.
The Heb. here is certainly obscure, and at the same time a phrase
of marked appearance,
πλανῶνται] Another favourite word of the translator: see on xxi.
6. ἀναβάται] Cf. xxi. 7.
συναγωγή] Perhaps q) for Hip Kir: the Greek word sometimes
represents
παρατάξεως] Lxx. read
Elam (xxi. 2) in the S.E. of Assyrian Empire (Susiana); kir has not been satisfactorily identified, but was probably on the Tigris, within the Assyrian Empire.
7. ἔσονται] ἔσται would have corresponded with Heb.: but the verb was probably made plural, because of φάραγγες immediately following.
8. άνακαλύψουσιν] Lxx. continues the plural, and the fut. tense, losing the effect of Heb., which has sing. and impf. with υαυ con- versive, indicating somewhat of a transition here.
πύλας] Possibly an explanation of Heb. ‘covering,’ or ‘curtain’ ’ as of a fortress, but see below.
ἐκλακτοὺς οἴκους] Heb. corresponding to ἐκλεκτοὺς is
τῆς πόλεως] i.e.
9. ἀνακαλύψουσιν] in the Heb., the verb of which comes later, and is represented by εἴδοσαν. It may be simply repeated from ver. 8; but it is suspicious that three words, πύλας, ἐκλεκτοὺς, ἀνακα- λύψουσιν, each unwarranted by the Hebrew, are found rightly used just above at this point. It looks as if the ’s or a ’s eye had repeatedly strayed backward at some stage in the history of the text, or the lines been disordered. οἴκων, just below, may be a fourth instance.
τὰ τὰ κρυπτὰ] Probably a paraphrase, to suit ἀνακαλύψουσιν, for ‘the ’: ἄκρας expresses ‘the ’ with an added but appropriate touch ; on οἴκων see the last note.
καὶ ὅτι ἀπέστρεψαν] With the insertion of ὅτι, and the altered sense, cf. xxxvii. 8, 9, with the variants.
ἀρχαίας] Instead of ‘lower,’ apparently from ver. 11 ; the ‘old ’ is more generally supposed to be a distinct one, perhaps the same as Siloam. See note on vii. 3.
11. οὐκ ἐνεβλέψατε εἰς τὸν ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς ποιήσαντι] Cf. xxxvii. 26, with its context ; also xliii. 7, xlv. 16, c
12. ξύρησιν] In token of mourning.
13. αὐτοὶ δὲ] Probably
λέγοντες] Omitted by B.
Φάγωμεν καὶ πίωμεν] Quoted, I Cor. xv. 32. Their rejoicing was unreal, not to be justified.
14. ταῦτα. . . ἐν τοῖς ὠσὶν] Cf. chap. v. 9, where Lxx. varies simi- larly from Heb.
15. This onslaught on Shebna is of a peculiarly personal character for Isaiah. Shebna is supposed to be (a) the same person who appears, ch. xxxvi. foll., in the presumably lower office of ‘scribe’ or secretary : ὁ) a foreigner and upstart ; for his ’s name is not mentioned, the name is said to be Aramaic, and ’s derision of his newly-hewn sepulchre is thus explained.
παστοφόριον] Heb. ‘steward,’ perhaps more strictly an ‘administrator’ (from the Assyrian?) or a ‘counselor.’ The Heb. word is not elsewhere found applied to a person : a kindred word is used of ’ treasuries, Exod. i. II, 1 Kings ix. 19, 2 Chron. viii. 4., c.; whence probably the Lxx.’s rendering. It is hardly likely that they read ’) or (Nehem. xiii. 7–9, xii. 44).
ταμίαν] Cf. the Ἑλληνοταμίας Thuc. I. 96. Shebna may have com- bined two offices. Delitzsch considers that this officer (Heb. ‘which is over the ’ cf. I Kings xviii. 3) was the highest in the kingdom, and compares him to the ‘Mayors of the ’ who came to over- shadow the Merovingian puppet-kings.
A reads γραμματέα (-ταία), apparently from xxxvi. 3, c,; and Theodoret (II. 1022) quotes it so.
16. ‘What dost thou here,’ i.e. what business? and ‘what hast. ’ what rights? Heb. has ‘whom hast ’ meaning probably, what relatives or belongings? Notice the reiterated emphasis on here.'
ἐποίησας. . . ἔγραψας] Heb. has participles, used in a kind of descrip- tive sarcasm, and with 3rd pers. pronouns.
σκηνὴν] Α ‘habitation,’ as the context shows. For this use see
17. ἐκβαλσῖ καὶ ἐκτρίψα ἄνδρα] ἄνδρα] Heb. is rather difficult: ‘will hurl thee with a hurling (i.e. violently), ’ or, ‘...as a man (of might). Lxx. takes refuge in paraphrase, for this and the next clause.
ἀφελεῖ τὴν σπλήν σου] Heb. ‘will seize thee with a seizing,’ clutch thee tightly ; or perhaps, ‘wrap thee up ’ as a condemned criminal. So Kay: cf. Esth. vii. 8.
καὶ τὸν my σου τὸν ἔνδοξον] Heb. ‘will roll thee, rolling in a
roll, like a ’ In the two preceding phrases we have had the root
word twice, with the letter
ἔνδξον] Corresponds in place to ‘like a ’
18, 19 Lxx. continues to paraphrase, with considerable alteration of syntax.
οἰκονομίας] This word is said to occur only here in mm. Cf. Luke XVi. 3, ἀφαιρεῖται τὴν οἰκονομμίαν ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ. St Paul uses it Of his position as a minister of the Word (1 Cor. ix. 17, Eph. iii. 2, Coloss. i. 25). Cf. ἐπισκοπήν. PS. cix. 8.
20. παῖδα] παῖς and δοῦλος are both frequently used to translate
21. καὶ τὸ κράτος] So ℵAQ 24 26 41 51 87 91 97 106 301 309 κατὰ κράτος, Β c., is probably a corruption.
καὶ τοῖς ἐνοικοῦσιν ἐν Ἰούδᾳ] Heb. ‘and to the house of Judah ’: but QΓ 301 omit τοῖς ἐνοικοῦσιν, and Α* the whole clause.
22. From this verse, as given by A, QΓ 24 198 306 omit all after ἀντιλέγων, Β admitting the last clause, in the form καὶ κλείσει καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ ἀνοίγων. Field and Ceriani agree in approving the text as given by Q, with which the Syro-hexaplar agrees: thinking that the fuller reading, which duplicates the reading of Q in verbal accordance with Aq. Theod. Symm. and with the Hebrew, is Hexaplaric. (See Vol. 1. Introd. p. 31.) Β's last clause is pretty clearly inconsistent with the rest of its reading, and points to some confusion or inadvertence on the part of the scribe, who seems to have had both readings before him. ℵ has been repeatedly corrected: its original text agrees very nearly with the Heb. A combines, practically, the readings of Q and of ℵ*. The evidence of the Syro-hexaplar, and the intrinsic character of ’s text, a terse paraphrase, makes it almost certain that the view of Field and Ceriani is right. ’s view, that the sentence as given by Q is an “Unrichtige Erklarung des F Folgenden,” seems not to due account of the textual problem of the LXX.)
The Lucianic Mss. show further variants, some reading καὶ οὐδεὶς· κλείσει for κ. οὐκ ἔσται ὁ ἀποκλείσων.
It seems as though the quotation in Rev. iii. 7 were not made from the Lxx. at all.
23. στήσω] Β and Qmg have στηλῶ. The present Heb. word (occurs
again, ver. 25, ἐστηριγμένος) is represented by στῆσαι in Gen. xxxi. 25
and στῆσαι στήλην occurs in 45 and 48 of the same chapter. Both the
verbs are used to represent different Heb.,
στήσω is therefore supported here by usage as well as attestation ; στηλῶ may have come from one of the later versions.
ἄρχοντα] Explanatory of Heb. ‘nail’ or ‘peg.’
24. ἔσται πεποιθὼς] The explanatory method prevails through this verse, and to some extent in ver. 25 also. On ἀπὸ μικροῦ ἕως μεγάλου see above, on ver. 5.
ἐπικρεμάμενα] The usual sense is rather ‘overhang’ than ‘hang upon.’
25. The difficulty in this verse is well known, whether it is to be taken as returning to the subject of Shebna, or foretelling the turn of Eliakim to fall also. On the whole, probably the latter : for
(a) In this case, ver. 24 to some extent leads up to ver. 25.
ὁ) To-apply the simile of the peg first to Eliakim, then to Shebna, would be strange.
(c) To return for one verse to 8., without naming him, seems unnatural.
(d) Eliakim may have been personally faulty, and his relatives also, for anything that is said.
Lowth, Gesenius, Ewald, and W. E. Barnes refer the verse, how- ever, to Shebna: Delitzsch, Cheyne, Skinner, to Eliakim; also Kay, who endeavours to avoid the last objection.
πεσεῖται καὶ ἀφαιρεθήσεται] Β inverts these verbs, and adds καὶ ἐξολεθρευθήσεται, which by Q mg appears to come from Theodotion.
RAQ 24 26 41 49 87 91 106 198 228 233 301 306 309 reject the addition.
ἡ δόξα] Heb. Massa, ‘burden,’ xiii. I, c. LXX. may have simply
explained it in the light of ver. 24, ἔνδοξος. See, however, on ix. 1
xiv. 25 κῦδος). If
XXIII. 1. Καρχηδόνος] Heb. ‘of ’ In ii. 16, q.v., Lxx. has πλοῖα θαλάσσης, cf. P. B. rendering of Ps. xlviii. 7. In 1x. 9, lxvi.
19, the historical books, Jonah i., Jerem. x. 9 and Ezek. xxvii. 25, the
name is transliterated, Θαρσεῖς. But here and in Ezek. xxvii. 12
xxxviii. 13, LXX. renders by Καρχηδών, Καρχηδόνιοι. Authorities
generally agree that Tarshish is Tartessus, in Spain. (See Herod. 1.
163, IV. 152, 192 ; the meaning of ἀκήρατον is unfortunately doubtful in
W. 152.) Kay refers to Humboldt, Cosmos, 11. pp. 167, 413. It might
be thought that the 1.101. tradition was entitled to carry weight, and
the importance of Carthage (though this is a double-edged argument)
in commerce tallies with that which the Bible attributes to Tarshish.
But from Ezek. xxvii. it appears that Lxx. speak without certainty on
the point; in Isaiah we have such an anachronism as τὰ διαφανῆ
Λακωνικά, iii. 16, and such a guess as Περσῶν, xlix. 12. Cf. Καππαδοκία
for Caphtor, Deut. ii. 23, Amos ix. 7. (In Song of Sol. v. 13, where
Lxx. has the usual Θαρσεῖς, it is generally supposed that
καὶ οὐκέτι ἔρχονται] Lxx. omits ‘so that there is no house,’
The rest of the verse differs in clause-division and in other ways.
Κητιαίων] B's spelling, Κιτιαίων, is better. It is agreed that Heb. Chittim is Cyprus (Citium, a Phoenician trading-port on the S. side of the island).
According to the Heb., the ships, on arrival at Cyprus, or before touching there, learn the news of a disaster to Tyre: which is variously explained as its overthrow by N ebuchadnezzar, or an earlier siege by Shalmaneser or by Sennacherib, who appears to have ravaged Phoe- nicia so that the king of Zidon fled to Cyprus (cf. ver. 12). See Josephus, Antiq. 1x. 14. 2.
ἦκται αἰχμάλωτος] Heb. ‘it is ’; this verb,
2. τίνι] Lxx. read
ὄμοιοι γεγόνασιν] Heb.
At the end of the verse Lxx. have omitted ‘replenished thee,’ syntax being changed in consequence of these differences. ’
νήσῳ] Heb. ’ℵ; freq. in plur., in chap. xl.—xlvi., also in xi. xxiv. 15. In the plur. it is said to be used of ‘habitable ’ ‘coasts.’ and many render it ‘country’ or ‘coast-land’ in the singular, as here and xx. 6. I cannot see any real distinction of sense in the way that the sing. and plur. are used. There seems at least to be, in general, an implication that the lands are detached, separate, and maritime ; and as LXX. regularly renders by νῆσος, I have not departed from the old translation ‘isle,’ ‘isles.’ So Vulg. ’nsula, ’nsulae. That ‘coast-lands’ should be included is only in accordance with ancient habits of speech and thought, not yet entirely extinct.
3. μεταβόλων] This word occurs above and below, to render wno, participle meaning ‘trader,’ or with different pointing, noun meaning (trading) ‘porfits,' ‘gain,’ or perhaps ‘trading-port,’ ‘mart.’ Here the Heb. is ’, supposed to mean the Nile, while the regular word for ‘Nile’ is omitted between ‘harvest’ and ‘revenue,’ which are conse- quently joined in the Greek ; εἰσφερομένου, except for syntax, and English ‘income,’ render the Heb. noun almost literally.
4. αἰσχύνθητι, Σιδὼν] Not spoken by the sea, in the Heb.
ἢ ἰσχὺς] 50 Vulg. and A.V.; but most moderns render ‘stronghold’ here and in ver. I4, as well as in ver. 11.
οὐδὲ ὕψωσα] So practically all interpreters, applying the negative to this clause also, though not expressed in Heb. It is tempting, however, to render the Heb., as Cocceius (quoted by Alexander) did and make this clause affirmative: ‘I nourished not sons, 1 brought up ’; implying their woeful fate as expressed in ver. 12.
5. ὅταν δὲ. . . Αἰγύπτῳ] So Vulg., and prob. rightly ; R.V. similarly. There is probably no reference to the ‘report concerning ’ in the days of the Exodus. Egypt and Tyre here dread a common foe.
6. It is said that Tyre, when attacked by Alexander, sent refugees to Carthage : so Diod. Sic. XVII. Ι ; which may perhaps have induced the LXX. rendering of Τarshish (see on ver. 1). Strangely enough, Herodotus, I. 163—165, makes Arganthonius, king of Tartessus, the Phocaeans to settle in his land, when threatened by the Persians and eventually they did abandon their city, but, he being dead, went elsewhere.
7. ὕβρις] Abstract, for Heb. fern. adj. ‘jubilant.
πρὶν ἢ παραδοθῆναι αὐτήν ;] Heb. from days of old is her antiquity,
8. μὴ ἧσσον ἐστὶν] The letters nnmn out of the word
9. παραλῦσαι] Perhaps reading nSn (in causal sense) ‘weaken’
for
10. ἐργάζου] Le.
καὶ Heb. ‘as the Nile, daughter of Tarshish;
there is no girdle any ’ The difference between present Heb.
and mat. is not very great in point of letters, if we assume that the
Lxx. read their text as, literally, ‘for indeed, the daughter of Tarshish,
there are no ships from thence any ’ This would give
(Scholz classes καὶ γὰρ. . . Καρχηδόνος as an insertion of the Lxx., and ‘as the ’ Vulg. quasi flumen, as an insertion of Heb.)
It may be noticed, but apparently throws no light on the matter,
that οὐκέτι ἔρχονται occurs also in ver. ι, referring to πλοῖα : there we
have nun, and here
11. οὐκέτι ἰσχύει] The verb is explanatory of ‘stretched ’ cf. Deut. vii. 19, c., and esp. Numb. xi. 23, Μὴ χεὶρ Κυρίου οὐκ ἐξαρκέσας The coincidence with A.V. of the previous verse is nothing more : the order of words shows this, and there is no reason why Lxx. should have taken me (otherwise accounted for in the previous note) as ‘strength.
The negative in the Greek is a characteristic guess from the supposed context.
ἡ παροξύνουσα] See on v. 24.
περὶ Χανάαν] Probably rightly rendered, and so R.V. ‘A Cana- ’ often came to mean ‘a trader,’ as in ver. 8 above, where Lxx. omits it. Though ‘Canaan’ was the ’ name for their own land, it seems not to be certainly used elsewhere in Ο.Τ. in this restricted sense: see, however, the LXX. of Josh. v. 1 ; while in Matt. xv. 22 the γυνὴ Χαναναία comes from τὰ μέρη Τύρου καὶ Σιδῶνος.
τὴν ἰσχύν] See on ver. 4.
12. Σιὼν] So ℵΑΒ a Q 24 26 49 87 91 106 198 (228*) 233 239 301 306 (309 not marg.). With this attestation, it seems to be the true Lxx. text, that is to say an error in reading by the translator, or at any rate a very early scribe. Β* and the Luc. Mss. generally agree with the later versions in reading Σιδῶνος. As the difference in Greek includes the presence or not of the genitive termination, it is reasonable to suppose that the mistake was made in reading from the Heb., the phrase ‘daughter of ’ being familiar. Lxx. omit ‘virgin.’ Yet, as Kay points out, the original Heb. phrase might have conveyed an alarming suggestion.
ἐὰν ἀπέλθῃς εἰς ητιεὶμ] As actually happened, see above on ver. 1.
13. The LXX. have shortened, and attempted to simplify this verse, which is very obscure in Heb. The addition οὐδὲ ἐκεῖ. . . ὅτι in RA (24 26 49) 87 97 106 228 309 must be simply a repetition from ver. 12 in A the words form a complete line. The sense of Heb. seems to be, ‘the Chaldaeans, with all their power, have fallen before Assyria. (What better fate can you expect ?)
14. The refrain comes in from ver. 1. ὀχύρωμα is prob. correct, see on over. 4.
15—18 The seventy years of ’s eclipse correspond with time of ’s captivity ; not specified in Isaiah, but see Jerem. xxv. 9, 11. If the duration of the Babylonian empire, roughly 606—536 B. C., be considered, it is mainly ‘the days of one king ’—N ebuchadnezzar. He fills its stage : after him is nothing but a downhill course.
15. καταλειφθήσεται] Same Gr. and Heb. word as in xvii. 10.
ὡς χρόνος ἀνθρώπου] Heb. ‘as the days of one ’ It looks as though ἅνθρωπος had been used almost like τις, to render ‘one,’ and the second ὡς χρόνος added by some one who did not understand this. Ἄνθρωπος is somewhat similarly used for ’slt, in the sense of ‘each, e.g. xiii. 14; see also Bp ’s note on its use in St ’s Gospel, in Biblical Essays, 111. p. 134.
With the phrase, cf. xvi. 14.
ἑβδομήκοντα ἕτη] Α* omits ἔτη, possibly by inadvertence: in the next verse Β* omits it, but inserts the article.
ὡς ᾆσμα πόρνης] ᾆσμα πόρνῃ] It seems clear that some familiar song, or type of song, is referred to, at any rate in the Heb. : sung not by the harlot, but to her or of her ; in fact, the words appear to follow in ver. 16. and remind us of Horace, Od. I. xxv.
16. πόλις] Lxx. have altered the syntax of the Heb. with regard to this word. It is true that ℵ cb B ab read πόλεις, and so the 2nd ed. of the Camb. manual O.T. in Greek: but MSS. are hardly decisive as to ει and ι : ῥεμβεύω, if equivalent to ῥέμβομαι, is more probably in- transitive; and Tyconius, p. 46, has accipe citharam, vagulare, ’w’tas, c. πόλις also agrees with Heb. text in its actual wording, while πόλεις would differ in number; though this is probably of little weight.
εἰς τὸ ἀρχαῖον] Probably ‘to her ancient ’ the neuter adj. being a natural mode of expression: ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀρχαίου, Herod. IV. 117. is rather fl’erent. Heb. has ‘to her ’ the special meaning which carries on the figure being clear from Deut. xxiii. 18, Hos. ii. 14. viii. 9, ἃς. Lxx. is probably euphemistic. (The mercantile use of ἀρχαῖον=᾿principal,’ as in Aristoph. Cloud: 1156, does not seem to have point here.)
It is however possible that Lxx. connected the word with INN, which Theodotion renders by ἀρχαῖον in Jerem. v. 15, parallel to ἀπ αἰῶνος.
17. καὶ ἔσται ἐμπόριον] Explains the Heb., doubtless rightly. The ‘song ’ prepares the way for the metaphor in the original.
B, with Theodotion, adds at the end of the verse ἐπὶ πρόσωπον τῆς γῆς; Hexaplaric and the Luc. MSS. insert πάσης.
18. The verse is a puzzling one in the original, and has hardly been fully explained. In some way the restored Tyre is to be dedi- cated to the Lord; her commerce is to help the way of religion, or profit those who help it; her fits are not to be idly stored up and meet the fate of destruction without having served some useful purpose.
Lxx. treat with some freedom, omitting ‘nor stored ’ and the substantive verb ‘shall ’) in the next clause, thus altering the syntax. On the other hand, αὐτοῖς, πᾶσα, and καὶ πιεῖν καὶ... are inserted: as well as the final ἔναντι Κυρίου in all MSS. except, appa- rently, A*
ἐμπλησθῆναι] Heb.
συμβολὴν μνημόσυνον] The Heb. is obscure. The former word in
Heb. means ‘coverings’ (xxviii. 20) but is difficult, and likely to be
confused. μνημόσυνον must be an attempt at
XXIV.—XXVII. It is agreed by commentators that these chapters form a connected section of the book. They deal with a coming catastrophe for the ‘land’ or the ‘earth,’ judgment upon it, but joy and salvation for the righteous.
Many modern authorities hold that the prophecy is not ’s, assigning it to an unknown prophet: but opinions vary widely as to the date, on this supposition. Ewald placed it in ’ reign, 529--522 B.C.; Driver, writing in 1893 or 1894, “in the early years after the return of Israel. . . B.C. 536—c. 440”; and so 1890, after giving up ’s authorship. Cheyne, in 1870, and apparently as late at any rate as 1886, before the fall of Babylon ; but in 1895 brought it down to about—332 B.C.; which Prof. Skinner and others seem inclined to favour. The late Prof. Davidson, in the Temple Bible, “The date is post ” On the other hand, Prof. W. E. Barnes, while not disturbing the modern ’ position as to most most of the mainly disputed chapters, holds that xxiv.—xxvii. are Isaiah, the occasion being “the great convulsion which attended the invasion of Sennacherib.”
The view of Duhm, who refers these chapters, or most of them, to about 130—105 B.C., defies all generally-held views as to close of the Ο.Τ. Canon, and the production of the LXX. version itself.
XXIV. 1. τὴν οἰκουμένην] Cf. xiii. 5, c. LXX. is Clearly ‘world’ or ‘earth.’ So Heb., according to Cheyne, and cf. ver. 4 : while Ges., Hitzig, Lowth, and Prof. W. E. Barnes, make it the ‘land,’ the Heb. word in itself bearing either sense. Kay remarks on the frequency with which the word occurs, and says, “The truth appears to be this. The land of Israel was a miniature of the “ While the translator lator or reader is bound to consider the apparent intention of the LXX., their authority on the point counts for little.
ἀνακαλύψει] my for my ‘overturneth’ (so Scholz).
2. ὁ λαὸς] Is there an earlier use of λαὸς ‘lay’) in antithesis to ‘priest’ than the LXX.? (Cf. Hos. iv. 9, Levit. xvi. 24, c.)
ᾇ όΦιλα] The sentence is turned round in the Greek ; but a para- phrase was almost a necessity. Cf. l. l.
3. φθορᾷ φθαρήσεται, πρσν. Wm] Heb. has the verb strengthened by repetition in infin. abs., a common idiom.
τὸ γὰρ στόμα] ‘Mouth’ is not in Heb., but Lxx. use the familiar phrase: so also in xxv. 8, while omitting it in x1. 5. Cf. lviii. 14 Micah iv. 4 : not elsewhere.
4. ή οἰκουμένη] Here corresponds more accurately to Heb.
5. ήνόμησεν] Heb. ‘is become ’ or ‘profane.’ Cf. ἄνομος in ix. [7, x. 6, mi. 6, ἃς.
παρέβησαν] παρήλθοσαν ℵΒ, παρῆλθον Luc. MSS.
διαθήκην not. have no third verb in the verse διασ κέδασαν from Aquila, acc. to Q mg, inserted by ℵ 41 87 91 97 228 309).
For the ‘everlasting ’ cf. e.g. Gen. ix. 16, Ps. lxxxix. 34 35, 49, and chap. lv. 3. For the idea of these verses, Ps. xi. 3 (mm. differs), how. 3, ἐτάκη γῆ καὶ πάντες οἵ κατοικοῦντες αὐτήν, lxxxii. 5 σαλευθήσονται πάντα τὰ θεμέλια τῆς γῆς.
6. ἡμάρτοσαν] Nearly right, according to modems, who construe ‘bear their guilt' (Del., Kay) or ‘are found guilty' (R.V.).
πτωχοὶ ἔσονται] Probably ‘ read for
8. πέπανται] Repeated instead of a parallel verb.
αὐθαδία καὶ πλάτος ἀσεβεῖν] Heb. ‘the uproar of the ’
αὐθαδία is perhaps
(Scholz gives the second clause, ’rw’t ’tu: laetantium in Vulg., as an addition (Zusatz) to Heb., implying at least that it is not represented in Lxx. This I am unable to understand.)
9. ἠσχύνθησαν]
10 The syntax differs: Lxx. applies ‘every’ to ‘city’ instead of ‘house,’ and omits ‘of wasteness' (tohu)
11. πανταχῇ] More general than Heb. ‘in the places ’ i.e. the streets, or the fields outside the city.
The two latter clauses of the verse are merged by Lxx. in one : or
12. The syntax varies in the former clause: in the latter only a
general resemblanceis preserved: ἀπολοῦνται, though brought to the
end of the verse, may represent MM, the participle may be
13. πάντα] Prob. 53 read for
ἑόν τις καλαμήσηται] Heb. ‘as the beating ’ Cf. xvii. 6. word, in various senses, seems to be a favourite with Isaiah.
The apodosis in the Greek is perhaps due to the use of 3, as in ver. 2, for both members of a comparison, and the parallel words ‘beating,’ ‘gleaning’ are represented by the same Greek verb, αὐτοὺς being supplied in accordance with this rendering.
καὶ ἐὰν] To be taken as separate particles.
14. βοήσονται] Β and Luc. MSS. have βοῇ φωνήσουσιν. It is difficult to say which reading is intrinsically preferable. These words are elsewhere confused in MSS., as xxxiii. 7, Judith xvi. II (where see note in Variorum Apocrypha).
Vol δὲ καταλειφθέντες ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς] Probably an explanation, intended to be in accordance with the figure of the preceding verse. Cf. xiii. 12, 14. and again xvii. 6, 9, for the idea, which is specially familiar in Isaiah.
πραχθήσεται] Heb. ‘they shall cry aloud (from). . . ' Lxx. have
either misread or guessed : τὸ ὕδωρ is also inserted, as if
15. The verse has been recast, and
16. πτερύγων] So Heb., literally. See xi. 12.
τέρατα] Heb. ‘songs’: Lxx. may be a paraphrase, due to mis-
understanding : or perhaps, for
Ἐλπὶς] Heb. ‘glory’ or ‘honour.' LXX. may have fallen back on ἐλπὶς as a favourite word in a difficulty : or taken ‘33, by misreading, from the root may (rib: is sometimes rendered by ἐλπὶς, esp. with a preposition, as xxxii. 9, Zeph. ii. 15 ; but.the letters are hardly near enough to make this seem probable).
Oὐαὶ τοῖς ἀθετοῦσιν] Lxx. omit the repeated phrase, ‘Wasting for ’ perhaps considering it implied in the interjection. The Luc. MSS., with 62 147, have it, and Q mg with *, in the τὸ μυστήριόν μου ἐμοί (twice); cf. Vulg.'s rendering secretum mum mihi: and mac. and Theod. Dan. ii. 18. This interpretation is favoured by Prof. W. E. Barnes, but almost alone among modems. For α'θετέω. see on xxi. 2 it is here repeated, as Scholz notices, twice only as against five times in Heb. τὸν νόμον is an insertion of LXX. ; cf. Zeph. iii. 4, where a form from 133 also occurs, rendered by Lxx. καταφρονηταί. The resem- blances of Zeph. ii., iii. to this part, among others, of the Book of Isaiah are noteworthy. Cf. also ἀσύνθετος, Jer. iii. 7—11.
17. Heb. words are unmistakeably marked by sound-resemblances ; pahad, pahath, pah. With this and part of the following verse, Jer. xlviii. (LXX. xxxi.) 43, 44a are almost identical: see on chap. xv.
18. θυπίδες. . . γῆς] Cf. Gen. vii. 11, Psalm xviii. 15, lxxviii. 23.
19. LXX. has only two of these emphasized phrases to three of the Heb., which gives the ideas of (a) cracking and showing rents, ὁ) bursting open, (6) swaying and falling: completed in ver. 20. (More applicable, surely, to the ‘earth’ than the ‘land.’)
20. ὀπωροφυλάκιον] Cf. i. 8, same word, Heb. and Gk. Some construe it ‘hammock’ rather than ‘hut.’ Probably the structure consisted of a rude awning over comer-poles; such a thing as a gale would whirl contemptuously away.
κατίσχυσεν] Heb. ‘is heavy,’ 133, cf. Ps. xxxviii. 4. The idea in
not. more resembles Ps. lxv. 3, where omit ‘my’ of RB. Version:
Heb. is there
The order of clauses in B follows the Heb., whereas in NAQ it differs, the Heb. clauses being arranged as follows: the verbs of a and b come first, then the comparisons: then clause d, and lastly c, with a γὰρ which seems less natural in ’s order. Fourteen cursives support RAQ in the former, and twenty-four in the latter part of the verse.
21. τοῦ οὐρανοῦ] Heb. ‘of the height in the ’ Cf. Eph. vi. 12, ἐν τοῖς ἐπουρανίοις. Lxx. omits ‘in the ’ and the corre- sponding ‘on the earth' (or, ‘ground’).
22. NAQ again vary from the Heb. order, with modification of syntax; B retains it, with insertion of συναγωγὴν αὐτῆς; συναγωγὴν corresponds to the Heb. noun after its kindred verb: but αὐτῆς is awkward, γῆς being the only noun to which it can refer. RAQ are supported by 41 49 87 91 97 106 195 228 301 306 309 (26 partly).
23. τακήσεται] Heb. ‘shall blush': parallel to ‘be ashamed' in
i. 29, where LXX. does not distinguish. Here Scholz, following
Schleusner, suggests that LXX. read man (from
πλίνθος] Heb. ‘the moon,'
τεῖχος] Reading non ‘sun’ as
The correct rendering of Heb., from Symmachus, appears as a duplicate in ℵ*Q mg, most Luc. MSS. (exc. 22) and 87 91 109 305 309.
ὅτι] Heb. ‘3, probably rightly rendered here: means either ‘for,’ ‘that,’ or ‘when.’
XXV. I. Θεός μου] Β omits μου, and LXX. generally omit ‘thou’ (art).
ἀρχαίαν] Rightly interpreted: Heb. literally ‘from ’ (of time or place).
ἀληθινήν· γένοιτο] Heb. has two kindred words, ‘truth,’ true. LXX. translates the first rightly, except that it is rather to be taken as subst. than adj., while the second they took to be the familiar asse. ‘ ‘verily,’ ‘Amen’; so Vulg., but Heb. text points it differently here.
Κύριε] Not in Heb., but B is alone or nearly so in omitting it. It is frequently inserted in this and the following chapter.
2. τοῦ πεσεῖν] Paraphrase of Heb. ‘ruin.’ B inserts μὴ, some scribe having taken it as an explanation of ὀχυράς.
τῶν ἀσεβῶν] Heb. ‘strangers,’ often used in a bad sense: a “general
term for the enemies of ’s people," Delitzsch says. It is not the
same word as in Ps. xviii. 44, 45 (Lowth thought LXX. had read
πόλις] Α, with ℵ cb, actually reads πόλεις; this variation is of little importance in itself, see on xxiii. 16; but it is possible that εἷς has dropped out after πόλις : ℵ ca inserts it.
LXX. have apparently omitted the preposition before ‘city,’ τὸ θεμέλια corresponding to ‘castle’ in the order. In the Heb. the prepos. has the same force as in xvii. l, xxiii. I.
3. ὁ πτωχὸς] Reading
εὐλογήσουσίν σε] The verb is repeated, instead of the Heb. parallel.
4. βοηθὸς] The Lxx. seem to have been confused here. The
word for ‘stronghold.'
The total effect of LXX.'s misreadings would thus be
ἀπὸ ἀνθρώπων πονηρόν] It may be supposed that up to this point
the Greek corresponds sufficiently well with Heb. Here divergence
begins again LXX. Lxx. probably reading
ῥύσῃ αὐτοὺς] Probably
σκέπη] Either repeated from previous clause, or a duplicate
rendering of
διψώντων] This, and διψῶντες in ver. 5, appear to stand for Heb. ‘heat,' ‘drought.
καὶ πνεῦμα] Heb. has not ‘amd,’ but
εὐλογήσουσίν σε] Repeated by a slip from ver. 3 after ἀδικουμένων Β omits, but it is found in RAQW 24 26 36 48 49 87 91 97 106 228 309.
5. ὥς ἄνθρωποι] Again is difficult to reconcile with Heb.;
ἐν Σιὼν] Heb. here differs from ‘Zion’ in pointing, and means ‘a parched ’: Lxx. renders it Σιὼν also in xxxii. 2, its only other occurrence. Words from the same root occur, xiii. 21, xxxiv. 14 ‘desert creatures,' and Job xxiv. 19 ‘drought.
οἷς ἡμᾶς παρέδωκας] Assuming that ἀπὸ ἀνθ. ἀσεβῶν represents
either
6. Lxx. again shortens considerably; and though the translator appears confused by repetitions in the Heb., the possibility of inten- tional shortening must not be entirely overlooked.
ἐπὶ το ὅρος] Either the force of acc. with prep. is lost, =‘they shall go to this mountain to drink. . .' See on ii. 10.
7. χρίσονται μύρον] The two preceding phrases read like a short-
ening of the rest of ver. 6: yet it looks as if the translator had
somehow extracted what he took for
ἡ μὰρ βουλή] Heb. ‘the covering that ’ apparently: the preceding clause, παράδος πάντα ταῦτα, being another case of παρα- δίδωμι used to cover the ’s perplexity. With the Greek compare xxviii. 8, equally puzzling. The Heb. word is obscure, and belongs to a difficult group (see on xxii. 8) ; the noun or verb is found in xxix. IO, xxx. I, 22 : in xxx. ι, Lxx. has συνθήκας, and some authori- ties (Lowth, Gesenius) have assigned it the sense of libation attending a treaty or covenant. Here, at any rate, the Lxx. are obviously labouring amid difficulties, and may be merely guessing.
8. κατέπιεν ὅ Θάνατος ἰσχύσας] Except for
In 1 Cor. xv. 54, St Paul quotes the verse, in the words of Theo-
’s version, κατεπόθη ὁ θάνατος εἷς νῖκος, and couples it with a
quotation of Hosea xiii. 14, which is on the whole nearer to Lxx. than
to Heb., though νῖκος is apparently substituted for δίκη (Heb.
LXX.'s rendering of
πόλιν] Inserted by Lxx. to suit the contrast, according to their rendering: cf. xxx. 18.
ἀφεῖλεν] Perhaps the second verb has taken the place also of the first; where ἐξαλείψει (as in Rev. vii. 17, xxi. 4) would be more accurate.
στόμα] See on xxiv. 3.
9. ἠλπίζομεν] The words καὶ σώσει οὗτος Κύριος, ὑπεμείναμεν αὐτῷ, which follow in some MSS., are a Hexaplaric addition from Theodotion (and Symmachus). though found in B and several cursives. They are omitted by ℵAQΓ 26 49 87 91 106 198 301 309: so also Irenaeus (lat.) iv. 9. 2, reads, “in quem speravimus, et exsultavimus in salute ” See Introd. to O T. 417, and Field, Herapla, Vol. ll. ad lac. (Vol. 1. Introd. p. 26.)
10. ἀνάπαυσιν δόσει] Heb. is intrans. ‘rest’: this rendering, as Lowth pointed out, would require not man but nun. Perhaps Heb. has stronger sense, ‘alight,’ ‘swoop down ; cf. xxviii. 2, xxx. 30.
ἡ ωαβῖτις] See on xv. 1.
πατοῦσιν] πατῶσιν Α, by error of transcription.
ἅλωνα] Heb. ‘straw’: probably ’s licence.
ἐν ἁμάξαις] So Vulg. in plaustro. Heb. mmn
Madmen was the name of a town of Moab, Jer. xlviii. 2: and it may be referred to here, either directly, or with a play on words, for which mathben ‘straw') prepares the way.
11. ἐταπείνωσεν τοῦ ἀπολέσαι] Heb. ‘the swimmer. . . to swim.
’vS ’tvn, for which Lxx. perhaps read
The meaning of the original is not free from difficulty.
XXVI. 1. λέγοντες] Not in Heb., and omitted by ℵ*B: a natural addition, and sometimes in disagreement with the syntax, according to the Heb.: cf. vii. 2, 5.
ὀχυρὰ] Β and some cursives ἰσχυρά: the converse in xxvii. 3 MSS. often vary between the two words, as in Zeph. i. 16.
σωτήριον] Α common form in LXX.: the neut. plural is not un- common in class. Greek, and the sing. appears to be used in Aesch. Eumen. 701. B omits ἡμῖν, and many MSS. read ἡμῶν. In Heb. the pron. belongs to previous clause.
Θήσει] The subject is left unexpressed, a common practice in Heb., but less adapted to the Greek language.
περίτειχος] The primary meaning of Heb. is ‘strength,’ but the sense is correctly given: it is more probably an outer wall than a moat: προτείχισμα is used in Lam. ii. 8; antemurale, Vulg.
2. εἰσελθάτω] Heb. has its regular idiom, with copula, ‘and... shall come ’ Cf. Ps. xxiv. 7, 9, cxviii. 19, 20, Rev. xxii. 14.
φυλάσσων δικαιοσύνην] Made parallel to the next clause: Heb. simply ‘ α a righteous ’
3. Heb. ‘Α A steadfast mind thou keepest in peace, peace': ‘mind
and ‘keepest’ having an apparent play on words with ‘Rock’ in ver. 4.
LXX. apply the verse to the nation, and have altered the syntax,
taking ‘mind,’
4. ἤλπισαν] Β and Luc. Mss. prefix ἐλπίδι (a Hexaplar addition from Theod.), due to taking ‘is secure,' or ‘trusteth,’ at end of ver. 3 as inf. absol., strengthening the following verb, which they have taken as 3rd pers. plur. perf., instead of 2 pers. plur. imper. (only diff. one vowel-point) QV 24 26 41 49 87 91 97 228 309 read ἠλπίσαμεν.
The Lxx. here show their fondness for ἐλπίς, see note on xxiv. 16 which is used for this root, xxxii. 9, cf. Judg. xviii. 7 (9), 27, esp. ’s text, and Zeph. ii. 15 ‘carelessly,’ A.V. The Heb. word is not the same as in xxv. 9, and is better rendered by πεποιθὼς εἶ, xxxvi. 4.
With this verse cf. Ps. xxxi. 23, 24 (Phil. iv. 7).
ὁ Θεὸς ὁ μέγας] Heb. ‘for in lab Jahveh is a Rock. . . ' LXX. have an evident repugnance to the metaphor of the Rock, applied to God, and constantly omit or paraphrase it: see xvii. IO, xxx. 29, xliv. 8 Ps. xviii. 2 (=2 Sam. xxii. 2), xxxi. 3, lxi. 2, lxii. 2, 6, Habak. i. 12 Deut. xxxii. 5, 15, 18, 30,31, 37. It is even omitted in xxxii. 2, though not in xxxi. 9.
5. mm. keeps 2nd pers. throughout the verse, and shortens the latter part.
κατήγαγεσ. . . καταβαλεῖς. . . κατάξεις] Cf. lxiii. 3, 6, and Aesch. Agata.
1410,
6. Shortened in Lxx. by omission of repeated ‘feet' and ‘steps.’
On πραέων, ταπεινῶν, see Hatch's Essays in Bibl. Greek, 11. pp. 74—76 the final statement, however, goes rather far. See also Village Sermons, 1. p. 9.
7. The syntax is varied by LXX., εὐθεῖα ἐγένετο giving a more de- cided turn to the sense, though substantially right.
καὶ παρεσκευασμένη] These words are placed here, against Heb. order, by ℵ 1 vid AQ 24 26 41 49 87 97 106 198 228 233 301 306 309. B c. place them last in the verse, corresponding to Heb.
8. The words are identical in meaning, except for the insertion of ἦ: but the syntax continues to differ (see below).
Cf. Ps. cxix. 3o, 35, 44, 55 62.
9. έπιθυμεῖ ἢ ψυχὴ] The Heb. has this phrase at the end of ver. 8 and again, with change of order, at the beginning of 9. Lxx. have it only once, and omit ‘thee,’ which with ἡμῶν and the order of words, shows that it is the end of ver. 8 which is represented in the Greek.
ὁρθρίζα] Prob. the best word obtainable to render the Heb., which means ‘to do (anything) ’ Lxx. omit ‘within ’ same phrase as one of two meaning ‘in the ’ so frequently omitted: see on xix. 3, c
διότι Φῶς τὰ προστάγματα] Heb. ‘for when thy judgments. . . ' Lxx.
may have read
The following verb is in imperat., instead of 3rd pers. plur. impf.
10. πέπανται] Heb. ‘Let...be ’ Lxx. may have taken
the verb
οὗ μὴ μάθῃ] ℵ*B prefix πᾶι· ὃς, altering the sense : but ℵ c AQ and
most cursives (not 106, acc. to Holmes and Parsons) as well as Syrohex.,
omit the words, which are not in Heb.; though 53 might have
been read in duplicate as
The syntax again differs from Heb., and there are further dis-
crepancies. ἀλήθειαν apparently corresponds to ‘uprightness,’ which
is here not
ὁ ἀσεβὴς seems to stand in the place of the verb
11. ᾔδεισαν, γνόντες] Heb. has same word, meaning ‘see’ (i. 1 xxx. IO, c.) rather than ‘know.’
λήμψεται, ἀπαίδευτον] These words are added by Lxx., giving a
new colour to the sentence. ’s suggestion, apparently, is that
they read ppm δι’ ἀπαιδευσίαν, Hosea vii. 16) after
Cf. Aesch. Agam. 180, καὶ παρ’ ἄκοντας ἦλθε σωφρονεῖν. Also the conclusion of the passage quoted below, on ver. 13.
12. ὁ θεὸς] Added here by Lxx.; cf. ver. 13, where Β* omits Κύριε ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν.
πάντα. ἀπέδωκας ἡμῖν] Heb. ‘hast wrought all our works for ’ LXX.'s rendering erhaps comes from the use of the noun correspond- ing to the verb 175 here used, to mean ‘wages,’ ‘reward’ of work. See xl. Io, xlix. 4, lxii. 11 ; cf. Levit. xix. 13.
13. Lxx. has again different syntax, altering the sense consider- ably: 2 pers. sing. imperat. for 3rd pers. plur. perf., of verb, and ‘lords’ rendered as a vocative. ’
κτῆσαι] The Heb. verb is connected with Baal ‘lord’). Cf. the very different rendering in lxii. 5. The converse of this verse may be seen in iii. 18 ; but the verb, both in Heb. and Gr., is different.
ἄλλσ οὐκ οἴδαμεν] Heb. has ‘only by ’: ἄλλον may represent
With ver. 13, 14, there should be compared Aesch. Again. 168 foll., which represents an idea as near to ’s as a devout heathen warrior could compass:
14. ζωὴν οὐ μὴ ἴδωσιν] Heb. simply ‘shall not live.’ The Greek seems to combine the two ideas found in Ps. xxxiv. 8 and in xxxvi. 9.
ἰατροὶ] Heb. Rephaim: see on xiv. 9. Here rendered by most ‘shades,’ but referred by some (esp. Prof. W. E. Barnes) to the old inhabitants of the land, “once greatly feared, but extinct in Isaiah’s day.” Ver. ι8, 19 may be thought to favour this idea; on the other hand xiv. 9 and Ps. lxxxviii. 1O are against it.
LXX., with their mistaken rendering of the word, have proceeded to take ‘ rise’ as causal : ℵ* however seems to have read ἀναστήσονται.
ἐπήγαγες] Generally with τὴν χεῖρα, to render Heb.
πᾶν ἄρσιν] Heb. ‘all their memory’: or, ‘every memorial.’ Two
meanings are assigned to the root (or roots)
15. πρόσθη...κακὰ] Heb. ‘ thou hast added to the nation ’ (twice).
The insertion of κακὰ by the LXX. may be due to a misreading of
The rest of the verse is shortened by the omission of ‘thou’ hast enlarged all the borders’ supplied, doubtless from a later version, in V 109 305 (* Q mg). τοῖς ἐνδόξοις seems to correspond to the verb ‘ hast gotten thee glory.’
Scholz, however, thinks ἐνδόξοις represents
16. ἐμνήσην] Heb. 3rd per. plur.: the sense here is not far from
the Heb. verb, which is more properly ‘inquired for’:
ἐν θλίψει μικρᾷ] The previous θλίψει was correct for Heb.
17. τῷ ἀγαπητῷ σου] Nothing appears in the Heb. text to correspond to these words.
18. διὸ, τὸν Φόβον σου] Heb. (ver. 17) ‘at thy ’: lit. ‘from thy ’ often used in connection with fear: cf. ii. 10, 19, and Psalm lxxvi. 7.
καὶ ἐτέκομεν. πνεῦμα σωτηρίας σου ἐποιήσαμεν] If we place the stop after πνεῦμα, the sentence resembles the Heb. more nearly, as accented 7 and interpreted. Grabe supplied οὐ to the Greek text, which is other- wise in direct contradiction to the Hebrew: and if we suppose that σωτηρίας οὐ ποίησομεν was the original LXX., we have only the re- peated ς, the ε, and change of ο to a, which would follow as a matter of course, to explain, as probable corruptions.
πεσοῦνται] The Heb. word here, and its causal form at the end of the next verse (rendered intrans., πεσεῖται) are taken by some commen- tators of coming and bringing to the birth. It is not so used elsewhere in the Bible, but similar uses of corresponding words are found (see Prof. ’s note ad lac.) in various languages: English ‘drop' perhaps the Greek use of ἔρση (Horn. 0d. IX. 222) and δρόσος in Aesch. A am. 141.
οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες] Β perfixes πάντες, which is a likely addition, but,
were it genuine, might suggest
19. The answer, reversing the gloomy forebodings.
ἐγερθήσονται. . . μνημείοις] Α paraphrase: cf. Matth. xxvii. 52, John v. 28, 29, xi. 38, 44, Rev. xx. 13.
ἴαμα] Heb. word means (a) light, ὁ) joy, and (c) herbs, as in
2 Kings iv. 39. It might be that LXX. combined these into the notion
of ‘healing.’ Prof. Cheyne, however ’tz’ca (critica Biblica, 1., p. 33),
suggests the reading 011318, comparing lviii. 8, Jer. xxx. (Lxx. xxxvii.)
17, where Lxx. have ἰάματα, ἴαμα, for
The effect of the dew (Deut. xxxii. 2), of the lights (James i. 17), is like that of the breath from the four winds, Ezek. xxxvii. 9.
ἀσεβῶν] ἀσεβῶν] Heb. Rephaim, as ver. 14 ; possibly Lxx. here read
πεσεῖαι] See above, on ver. 18.
20. Matt. vi. 6 recalls both this passage and 2 Kings iv. 33. Ter- tullian quotes this verse, Resurr. Cam. 21 : “Populus meus, introito in cellas promas quantulum, donec ira mea praetereat.’
μικρὸν ὅσον ὅσον] The expression ὅσον ὅσον is rare: it occurs in Heb. x. 37, possibly a reference to this passage: see Bp ’s note in his Comm. on the Epistle. It is also found, AristOph. Vespae 213, ὅσον ὅσον στίλην, and in the Anthology οὐδ’ ὅσον ὅσσον, Philet. ap. Stobaeus, 1. 104, 12). l t may be compared with such Latin forms as ’sqm’s, utut, and with such phrases as ὅσον οὖν, θαυμαστὸν ὅσον, τυτθὸν. . .ὅσσον ἄπωθεν, Theocr. l. 145, βαιὸν ὅσον παραβάς, Anth. P. 12. 227. Clem. Rom. (Ep. i. 50) combines this passage in quotation with Ezek. xxxvii. 12. Vulg. has here modicum ad momentum: in Heb. x. 37, modicum ’quantulum.
21. ἁγίου] If not a paraphrase, perhaps mpon read for
<αἶμα> Α reads στόμα, apparently an inadvertence due to niscences of passages such as v. 14, Numb. xvi. 30 (cf. Rev. xii. 16). A is also alone in adding ἦ γῆ after κατακαλύψει, and ℵ* has ἐπ’ αὐτῆς· at the end of the verse.
XXVII. Though hitherto in this section there has been little specific mention of the surrounding nations, it is evident that they are symbolically referred to here. The questions are, how many creatures are spoken of, and, according to the number, which nations they represent. If one, it is most likely Egypt : if two, Assyria and Egypt: if three, Assyria-Babylon (Leviathan under two aspects), and Egypt. From the LXX. it would perhaps be thought that only one was spoken of: but the Hebrew suggests two, at any rate, and this idea is strengthened by a comparison of Ezek., esp. xvii. and xxxi., and by the consideration of ’s position between two greater powers. Then Ezek. xxiii. tends to show that Babylon may be regarded as a renewed and modified form of the Assyrian power, and the double description of Leviathan is thus accounted for. Delitzsch explains the ‘fleeing’ or ‘fleet’ serpent as emblematic of Nineveh on the “arrowy ” and the ‘coiled’ or ‘crooked’ of Babylon on the winding Euphrates.
The dragon, for Egypt, is referred to in li. 9, cf. Ezek. xxix. 3 xxxii. 2; and Ps. lxxiv. 13, 14, where, however, the separation of ‘leviathan ’ and the dragon is not so clear, if intended.
1. ἁγίαν] LXX., acc. to Scholz, read amp for mopn, ‘hard,’ ‘stern.’ Cf. viii. 12.
τὸν δράκοντα] ℵ as well as Q mg and some Luc. 1458., with 93 109 305, have the Hexaplaric addition τὸν ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ, from Aq. or Symm.
2. ἐπιθύμημα] Reading as do some Heb. MSS.,
ἐξάρχειν] Probably ‘to begin a song,’ as this word is frequently used of music, almost ‘to prelude’: generally with acc. of the song, but also absolutely, as Pind. Nam. 11. 40, ἁδυμελεῖ δ’ ἐξάρχετε φωνᾷ.
3. πολιορκουμένη] Perhaps another interpretation of verb ‘guard,’ or read as from a kindred word. πόλις, which takes the place of the Divine Name, may be a guess, and πόλις ἰσχυρὰ a duplicate.
μάτην] Perhaps
ἁλώσεται] Corresponds in place to ‘hurt,’ but with the voice
changed : ‘night’ and ‘day’ are separated in their clauses, and
πεσεῖται looks like a guess, the root ‘I will keep’ having the confusing
letters
τεῖχος] Belongs in the Heb. to the next verse, being obviously
4. ἥ οὐκ ἐπελάβετο αὐτῆς] Heb. has only ‘to me,’ see previous note, so that this clause is practically an addition of LΧΧ. The whole passage is exceedingly obscure, and the translator, not unnaturally, in difficulties.,
φυλάσσειν]
ἠθέτηκα] Reading ‘I would march against it’ from
κατακέκαυμαι] This seems to correspond with ‘I would burn it’: the preceding words, τοίνυν...συνέταξεν must therefore be an intrusion.
Cf. Lam. ii. 17, Dan. iv. 35 (Theod. 32), Ps. cxv. 3, cxxxv. 6.
5. βοήσονται...ἐν αὐτῇ] LΧΧ. still difi’ers from Heb., where nothing corresponding to these words occurs. Heb. ‘Or else let him take hold of me,’ suggests that the words from ver. 4, reading for ἣ, ἢ (οὐκ) ἐπελάβετο αὐτῆς, belong here. (For ἣ, Luc. MSS. vary between ὃς and ὅ.)
ποιήσωμεν εἰρήνην] Repeated in ℵAQ and most MSS., with Heb.: but not in B, 62. Kay points out the correspondence with xxvi. 12.
6. τέκνα] According to the order, this corresponds to
8. μαχόμενος] Heb. has a curious form, which is by some thought
to be a reduplication of the word seak, a measure: hence, ‘by
Scholz considers that not. read, by a mistake of sound, mm for
memo: cf. Habak. ii. 7; he further gets an equivalent for ὀνειδίζων
from the final n and a supposed repetition of w: from the beginning of
the next word. This however seems scarcely satisfactory: perhaps
Lxx. thought of one of the difficult words on,
ἐξαποστελῶ] Heb. ‘by (or, when) sending her ’: cf. xvi. 8.
οὗ σὺ ἦσθα. ὅ pansy] The syntax is altered, and ‘thou contendest
bears no apparent relation to οὐ σὺ ἦσθα. But ‘he driveth her away
is also, by some, rendered ‘he sigheth': and run,
ἀνελεῖν αὐτοὺς πνεύματι Mani] Heb. ‘in the day of the east ’ LXX.'s clause seems a made-up attempt from the context, and end of ver. 7. The east wind was strong (Ps. xlviii. 7, Ezek. xxvii. 26) and blighting (Gen. xli. 6, Hosea xiii. 15) or sultry and patching (Jonah iv. 8).
9. ἦ εὐλογία. . . ὅταν άψέλωμαι] εὐλογία is a natural interpretation of ‘fruit.’ St Paul combines part of this verse with lix. 19, in his quotation, Rom. xi. 26.
θῶ] Α’s θῶ can scarcely be right; probably assimilated to ἀφέλωμαι, unless θῶ σύνπαντας was the original Lxx. Heb. has 3rd pers. sing. pronoun, which might have been mistaken for 3rd pl. of verb. The rendering of the verse is periphrastic. For δένδρα and εἴδωλα, see on xvii. 8.
κονίαν λεπτὴν] Cf. Hom. ll. xxm. 505
ὅσπερ δρυμὸς] Prob. reading
διακεκομμένα] The correspondence between Heb. and Lxx. is still
far from exact, and this word seems to be for 711183, though not
exactly in the order: either taking the word in its primary sense of
‘cut off' ’ (used of pruning or cropping, or possibly with some confusion
with
10. τὸ κατοικούμενον and ποίμνιον might either of them render ma,
‘habitation,’ but more probably the former, as ποίμνιον recurs below,
The words καὶ ἔσται πολὺν χρόνον remain unaccounted for, as
answering to
11. ἀπὸ Θέας] The words ‘of her boughs, they shall be broken
off' are omitted by Lxx. The present Creek is mmn ‘from ’
misread for mwm ‘set on fire’: and δεῦτε is rm: ‘come ’
(masc.) for
οὔ γὰρ λαός ἐστιν κ.τ.λ.] The reason for the punishment: cf. i. 3 v. 13, xxii. II, c. (Amos iii. 2).
12. συμφράξει] N reads συνταράξει, Cf. variation in x. 33. Heb. ‘shall beat ’ same word as ‘beaten ’ in xxviii. 27. Can συντινάξει be the real word here? The idea is either of beating out grain, as xxviii. 27, Judg. vi. II ; or of beating off fruit, esp. olives, from the tree, xvii. 6, xxiv. 13, Deut. xxiv. 20.
(Cheyne supposes a double meaning in the word Shibboleth, cf. Judg. xii. 6 : ‘ear of ’ and ‘channel.’)
‘Ρινοκορούρων] Usually spelt ‘Ρινοκόλουρα. The Alexandrian translator naturally gives the Greek name for the ‘brook of Εgypt.’
13. οἱ ἀπολόμενοι] Α reads ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν, unsupported, and probably the result of corruption: though ’Ipb for own: is hardly beyond the limit of LXX.'s possible misreading.
A also reads, by a common mistake, προσκυνήσωσιν for σουσιν
XXVIII. The chapters xxviii.—xxxiii. are generally referred the time of the main Assyrian crisis. Some consider xxviii. earlier than the rest ; some suppose the first few verses, dealing with Samaria, to have been written before the fall of Samaria, and prefixed to the later-written main body of the prophecy. Some deny that chap. xxxiii. (and part of xxxii.) is Isaiah’s.
Many principal—each chapter except xxxii.—begin the word nn, ‘woe’ or ‘Ah.’
1. τῷ στεφάνῳ. . . οἱ μισθωτοὶ. . . τὸ ἄνθος] The cams pandem- is strongly marked in the Greek, the connection being even looser than in the Heb.
μισθωτοὶ] Haw ‘hirelings’ read for
τὸ ἄνθος] mat. is near Heb., but omits ‘glorious’ or ‘beauty’: δὲ supplies τὸ ὡραῖον.
κορυφῆς] Γ more literally κεφαλῆς.
τοῦ ὅρους] Heb. ‘valley’: but Lxx. were misled by the context
κορυφῆς), and possibly connected
ἄνευ οἴνου] Lxx., having lost the word ‘drunkards,’ interpreted in an opposite sense, as though in the light of xxix. 9, Ii. 21.
2. ἰσκυρὸν καὶ σκληρὸν] The neuter accords with ’s view: ‘something mighty and strong.’
ὅ θυμὸς Κυρίου] ὁ θυμὸς is an insertion, Greek hardly admitting the vague expression of Heb. Κυρίου in itself may represent the Heb. with 5, but the dat. would have been more absolutely literal. Lowth, indeed, took ‘strong to ’ (some MSS. read ‘to ’) as =exceeding strong, on the analogy of Gen. xxx. 8, Ps. xxxvi. 6, lxxx. IO, Jonah iii. 3: but in these instances, it is Εl or Elohim that is used: and dat. with 5 is used only in Jonah: while in Ii. 3, Gen. x. 9 Numb. xxiv. 6, Ps. civ. 16, it is improbable that the phrases ought to be thus rendered.
ὥς χάλαζα κ.τ.λ.] Cf. xxv. 4, xxx. 30. Despite the order χάλαζα
appears to represent 113, and καταφερομένη
ποιήσει ἀνάπαυσιν] ’s ἀνάπαυμα avoids the triple ending in σιν Heb. ‘casteth it ’: but the word is the causal of ‘lie ’ ‘rest,’ ‘alight,’ and comparatively seldom conveys any suggestion of violence: intrans. form in xxv. 10, where see note.
4. ἐπλίδος] Here and in ver. 5 prob. for
δόξης] Q exchanges the place of δόξης and ἐλπίδος; Β reads ζωῆς for δόξης.
ἄπ’ ἄκρου] Heb. is the same as above in ver. 1, κορυφῆς; and ὑψηλοῦ for the fairly correct παχέως looks like positive carelessness.
πρόδρομος] The regular word for an early fig. [Theophrastus, De Cami: Plantarum, v. i. 5.]
πρὶν λαβεῖν] This goes a little beyond the Heb., the verb being
Θελήσει] This periphrasis rather weakens the sentence. Compare with it μέλλει, below, ver. 24.
καταπιεῖν] Cf. xxv. 8: the regular rendering of
5. ὁ πλακεὶς] Heb. ‘and for a diadem ’: the word only elsewhere used in Ezek. vii. 7, IO, where it is thought to mean ‘fate’ or ‘doom,’ viewed as a circle, cf. Shakespeare, King Lear, v. iii. 174, “The wheel is come full circle: I am here'
6. καταλειφθήσονται] Repeating the word from καταληφθέντι in ver. 5, while omitting ‘to him that sitteth.
κωλύων] In itself, apart from number, a possible translation for
Hiphil of
7. πεπλανημένοι] The original hand Of B reads πεπλημμελημένοι,
In Levit. v., vi., c. πλημμελεῖν translates
The words διὰ τὸ σίκερα κατεπόθησαν, Omitted by ℵΑQΓ 26 49 86 87 91 106 228 301 306 309 mainly Hesychian authorities, follow in ’ Β c. after ἱερ. καὶ προφ. ἐξέστησαν. They may, under the circum- stances, be Hexaplaric, though not so recorded in Q mg; and Lxx. must have inadvertently omitted them. Or else the omission was made by the Hesychian Mss. original, in dealing with the passage. In itself, ’s text seems preferable.
φάντασμα] So A alone: other MSS. φάσμα: the same variety of
reading in Job xx. 8. Either reading would seem to be
8. This verse is as difficult to reconcile with the Heb. as any in
Isaiah. At the end of ver. 7, Lxx. seem to have omitted
πλεονεξία may be due to a confusion of
ταύτην] Grabe read τρίτην, for which Holmes and Parsons exhibit
no MS. authority: it would represent Heb.
9. κακὰ] nm for run ‘knowledge.
The repeated ἀνηγγείλαμεν, ἀγγελίαν, for three different Heb. words is in the LXX.'s balder manner: cf. ψεῦδος in ver. 15, πέπαυται in xxiv. 7, ὄνομα ὀνομάζομεν, xxvi. 13.
οἱ (bro-yank] Again the nominative appears, in loose connection. The absence of case-terminations in Heb. is clearly the cause.
Verse 9 is now generally taken as the scornful question of ’s hearers; and ver. 10 as their scoffing description of his message, retorted in earnest upon them in ver. 13.
10. θλίψεν ἐπὶ θλίψιν κ.τ.λ.] Heb. has here and in ver. 13 a series
of peculiar reiterated monosyllables. LXX. differs considerably, having
clearly misread and misunderstood several words. θλίψις is
ἔτι. . . ἔτι] Probably intended to render
11. Φαυλισμὸν]
12. πεινῶντι] This verb is constantly used by mm. of ‘ωεαρινεσσ as well as of hunger: see xl. 30, 31. So ‘starve' is used in the North of England of suffering from cold as well as of hunger.
σύντριμμα] Heb. ‘refreshing.’ Perhaps Lxx. misread mum, and
took it from m: συγκλάσω, xlv. 2) instead of
13. κινδυν. καὶ συντριβήσονται] This is the order of NAQ and
about a dozen cursives, mainly Hesychian, beside the Luc. MSS.,
which read κινδυνεύσωσιν. Β has συντ. καὶ κινδυνεύσουσιν, in agree.
On the rest of the verse see above, on ver. 10. λόγιον makes the utterance of the Lord more special and formal. προσδέχου is not read here, except as a Hexaplaric addition (Q mg), the sense not being felt to require a verb.
14. τεθλιμμένοι] Heb. ‘men of ’ 1135, which LXX. seem to
have read as from
15. συνθήκας] Heb. word for ‘agreement’ generally means a ‘vision.’ “An—an éclaircissement; so as to be on a per- fectly good understanding with ” (Kay). Ἅιδης as usual represents sheol.
Lowth compares Lucan, Pizars. IX. 891, 897
To which add Shakespeare, Rich. II. V. i. 20 (though the implica-
tion differs
It may be noticed that LXX. here succeeds in rendering the Heb. parallelism by a change of compound in the Greek.
φερομένη] Cf. ver. 2: Heb. has the word there rendered by συρον.
ψεῦδος] Heb. has parallel words in the two clauses, see above on ver. 9.
τὴν ἐλπίδα] Another Heb. word here; rendered πεποιθότες in
ver. 17, closely connected with that rendered ‘trust’ in xxx. 2, 3
πεποιθόσιν in ver. 3, perhaps merged in σκεπασθῆναι in ver. 2. Cf.
Joel iii. 16, A.V. ‘hope,’ where Lxx. φείσεται is due to taking the word
as though from
16. Ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ κ.τ.λ.] Quoted, I Pet. ii. 6, and also in a compound
quotation with viii. 14, by St Paul, Rom. ix. 33. On the whole, both
quotations agree with Lxx., especially in the use of καταισχύνομαι at
the end of the verse, whereas Heb. has
Scholz suggests that Lxx. read τὴν for ὑπ’, which seems pro-
bable: Cheyne suggested, as to the Heb. text, a confusion of D and n,
i.e.
The force of ‘be in ’ is perhaps to be gathered from the use Of a different word in xxxii. 4, xxxv. 4: ἀσθενούντων and ὀλιγόψυχοι in LXX.
17. Arm] Heb. ‘line,’ cf. ver. 10, 13. Lxx. after this changes the construction.
σταθμοὺς] As near as possible to Heb., ‘weighing’ lines, cf. 2 Kings xxi. 13 : the root being that of ‘shekel,’ the standard weight.
μάτην] Perhaps
ὅτι οὗ μὴ προέλθῃ] B omits οὐ. It is on the face of it easiest to regard this omission as a clerical error. On the other hand, the next clause, beginning ver. 18, μὴ καὶ ἀφέλῃ, gives some support to B's text, if it can be translated. The use of μή, in this case, appears to be elliptic (Goodwin, Gr. Μ. and T. § 46, Note 4) cf. Plat. Gorgia: 462 E, μὴ ἀγροικότερον ἦ τὸ ἀληθὲς εἰπεῖν, or Aristotle, EM. Nic. Χ. ix. 6, ὁ δὲ λόγος καὶ ἡ διδαχὴ μή ποτ’ οὐκ ἐν ἅπασιν ἰσχύῃ. See also the Textus Receptus of Rom. xi. 21. The difficulty is, that in these and similar passages, the ellipse amounts in practice to a qualified and cautious assertion, whereas here the assertion seems to be of full strength : and μὴ καὶ ἀφέλῃ is not necessarily the same construction as the previous clause. The Lxx. has certainly broken loose to some extent from the Heb., and the construction is rather broken: and μὴ καὶ ἀφέλῃ certainly seems to mean, ‘see lest it take ’ Either then, ὅτι οὐ μὴ παρέλθῃ may explain ψεύδεα ‘ye who vainly trust in a lying idea that the tempest will not pass over you, see that it take not away...and (certainly) your hope will not ’ This involves taking παρέλθῃ as practically equivalent to ἐπέλθῃ, which is not free from objection, though see ver. 15, 19. The only other course, apparently, is to take the words ὅτι οὐ μὴ. . . ἐμείνῃ as a simple parenthesis: ‘for the tempest shall not pass you by: take heed lest it even take away your covenant of death, and, &c.’ It is possible, that if ὅτι οὐ μὴ is the true text, the scribe of B or ’s predecessor might have dropped the οὐ, under the influence of the following clause.
παρέλθῃ. . . καταιγὶς] καταιγὶς is probably mum read as a noun, or
confused with
18. ἀφέλῃ] Heb. verb is passive.
ἐλπὶς] Α slightly varied form of the word rendered συνθήκας in ver. 15, and different from that rendered ἐλπίδα there, and also from that so rendered in ver. 17.
19. ἐλπὶς πονηρά] Yet again ἐλπὶς has to be accounted for: this
time it would seem that Lxx. read run
(Schola’s explanation, that ἐλπὶς is mm for rum, accounts less well for the letters, except that it keeps the τ, and does not really furnish any correspondence to the meaning of the Greek.)
μάθετε ἀκούειν] Heb. ‘to understand the ’ lit. hearing. The syntax only is changed.
20. στενοχωρούμενοι] The Heb. of this verse is rather difficult.
and mac. have evidently failed to comprehend its drift. This first
word of the Greek may represent the Heb. ‘short,’ or possibly some
form from
21. ἀσεβῶν] translates ’m, which is the same word rendered ‘ravenous’ of the beasts in πονηρῶν). In 1 Chron. xiv. 1116. Baal-perazim and Gibeon are mentioned togetherin an account of two of ’s battles: in the parallel account, 2 Sam. v., Heb., though not Lxx., has Geba : but the two places were only a few miles apart.
πικρίας ἔργον] So far the Heb. and Greek have tallied fairly well
πικρίας however differs, Heb. having
ὁ δὲ θυμὸς tank] It would seem that we have here duplicate render- ings of the Heb. clause, ‘and to work his work—alien is his ’ (a) ó δὲ θυμὸς αὑτοῦ ἀλλοτρίως χρήσεται, and (b) καὶ ἦ πικρία σαπρία Β) αὐτοῦ ἀλλοτρία, (That duplicate renderings do occur is admitted, and that from various causes : most, perhaps, being Hexaplaric renderings which have intruded into the text side by side with the true Lxx., but others being traces of different recensions of the mat. itself; one of which, in some cases, may have been used by Theodotion, notably in Daniel, while the other, in the present state of our knowledge, appears as the genuine LXX. See Vol. I. Introd. pp. 4, 5, 35.) That the thrice-repeated ‘work’ of Heb. is represented only once or twice will cause no surprise, after what we have seen of the LXX.'s methods.
As to the Greek, ἀλλοτρίως (a) and ἀλλοτρία ὁ) evidently represent
For the rest, in (a) θυμὸς is probably mar read as man, from
In (b) πικρία is perhaps due to the same misreading as θυμὸς in (a), as
It is curious that in Eph. iv. 29, 31, πᾶς λόγος σαπρὸς and πᾶσα πικρία stand at the head of successive injunctions : and from ’s Commentary XXL, xxu. (printed in foam. Iourn. Studies, July, 1902), we might guess at some confusion based on Joel ii. 20 and Isa. xxxvii. 29.
22. καὶ ὑμεῖς μὴ εὐφρανδάητε] ὑμεῖς, perhaps
συντετμημένα] The scribe of A wrote συντετελμημενα, apparently confusing the word with the participle preceding.
This verse recalls x. 22, 23. The ‘destruction and decision' draws nearer.
παρὰ] See on xxi. IO. Heb. nan; in ver. 29 it is um.
24. μέλλει. . . ἀροτριᾶν] So nearly all MSS., but B has ἀροτ ριάσει which would appear to be Hexaplaric (from Aq. Theod. Symm.). The periphrastic future phrase is perhaps to make it clear that μὴ is interro- gative. It is however curious that a mistranslation in xlv. 9 reproduces this clause as given in B; and there AQ* 26 106 109 305 omit, and later hands have obelized in NB the superfluous words ὅλην τὴν ἡμέραν.
25. A seems to have rearranged the particles in this verse; the scribe perhaps objected to τότε, overlooking its relation to ὅταν, and thinking it did not suit the first sowing described. Similarly, not seeing that the sentence was interrogative, he cancelled the οὐχ. In this point the Luc. MSS. agree with A: but otherwise, the Mss generally are united against it. The omission of the second σπείρει may be intended to harmonise with the other changes, or be simply accidental.
μελάνθιον. . . κύμινον] ‘Fennel,’ or rather ‘black cummin,' and ‘cummin,’ plants producing small seeds, used, like carraway seeds, for flavouring. The former, Nzlgella saliva, seems to have no more distinctive name in English. Kay calls it ‘anise,’ and Lowth ‘dill, neither of which is exact, though these plants are near akin.
κριθὴν] Β adds καὶ κέγχρον, with Luc. MSS. e sil,: Hexaplaric, Aq. Theod. QM. Lxx. omits the words rendered ‘in rows' and ‘in the appointed ’: the latter Heb. word occurs here only.
ἐν τοῖς ὁρίοις σου] Agrees with modern renderings, except σοῦ,
which would differ by
Kay records ’s notice of the mention of the three kinds
of grain in Homer, Odyss. IV. 604,
26. παιδευδήσει κρίματι Θεοῦ] The ancients generally attributed
the lessons of husbandry to the deities they worshipped. Lowth
quotes Lucretius v. 14,
εύφρανθήση] The persons and voice are changed in this as in the
previous verb: and not. here misread
27. k τινάσσεται] Of scattering, Horn. Odyss. v. 368,
28. μετὰ ἄρτου βρωθήσεται] Lxx. omit ‘with a ’ the Hexaplaric
supplement ἐν βακτηρίᾳ appearing in the Luc. MSS. generally. The
syntax is thus changed. κύμινον losing its connection with the verb
in ver. 27. βρωθήσεται then answers, but incorrectly, to ‘is ’
which is an imperfect (future) tense in Heb. The μετὰ betrays that
something is wrong. It is possible, however, that LXX. guessed at the
sense, and meant μετὰ ἄρτου to render ‘with a staff,' according to the
familiar saying: though the word is not
ἐγὼ. . . ὀργισθήσομαι] The person is changed to Ist, doubtless because
the verb here contains an initial R, the form
φωνὴ τῆς πικρίας] φωνὴ is
29. ματαίαν παράκλησιν] Syntax differs, but root-meanings of
words agree, until the end of the verse: ὑψώσατε corresponds to
‘maketh ’ to which verb it is used as a parallel in i. 2, xxiii. 4.
The last word in the Heb. verse is
The turn of phrase in the Greek reminds us of Judg. xix. 30, xx. 7 but it seems to be merely coincidence.
XXIX. 1. πόλις Ἀριὴλ] The Lxx. does not repeat ‘Ariel.’ B, with most MSS., keeps the Heb. order of words.
The meaning of ‘Ariel’ is generally held to be either ‘lion of God. or ‘hearth of God,' i.e. altar-hearth, where a fire burns, a kindred word occurring in Ezek. xliii. 15, 16. The word is obscure: but it may be taken as certain that the reference is to Jerusalem.
ἦν Δαυεὶδ ἐπολέμησεν] Heb. ‘where D. camped’: quam ’t David, Vulg. It is doubtful whether this camping of David was for attack or defence: most modems think the latter, but Kay and Prof. W. E. Barnes the former, referring to 2 Sam. v. 6, 7.
συναγάγετε γενήματα] Taking the verb wrongly from
φάγεσθε γὰρ σὺν Μωάβ] This strange phrase bears no resemblance to Heb., except the connection between Φαγέσθε and ‘feasts.’ The Luc. MSS. supply a Hexaplaric rendering, ἑορταὶ συγκρουσθήσονται and the LXX. text doubtless professes to translate these same words. The Old Latin is here extant in the VViirzburg fragment, beginning with the words manducate ’tz’: ’m cum Μοab. This sup- ports ’s text which repeats φάγεσθε; so also does ’s rendering of the Lxx.: and it is noteworthy that both treat the first φάγεσθε as imperative. Of this imperat. middle there are some possible instances elsewhere in Lxx., e.g. xxxvii. 30, but perhaps none which are certainly imperative.
As to σὺν Μωάβ, there are two questions. What is the meaning or reference? Is it the original Lxx. text? To the first, several attempts at an answer might be made, but none certain or convincing. It might be a reference to ’s parents, sojourning for safety in Moab; 1 Sam. xxii. 3; or to Elimelech and his family, taking refuge there from famine: Ruth i. I: or generally, in reference to these and other possible episodes (cf. xvi. 3, 4), meaning ‘you shall be reduced to seek food at ’s ’ But there is nothing to show what the translator, or the first writer, of these words intended.
Secondly, is the Greek text right? The error, if there be one, is
clearly shown to be old, by the O.L. and the agreement of the MSS.,
except as regards φάγεσθε. Yet this evidence does not exclude early
corruption: and σὺν Μωὰβ is unintelligible, especially as a duplicate
2. ἡ ἰσχὺς καὶ τὸ πλοῦτος] Heb. ‘lamentation and ’ which
Lxx has certainly mistaken in some way; perhaps mom for men,
or some word from the root rm, denoting strength. The last clause
is omitted, except ‘to me': probably by confusion of the two occurrences
of
3. ὥς Δαυεὶδ] 1113 for Heb. text
καὶ βαλῶ κ. τ. λ.] Cf. with this passage Luke xix. 43, 44: χάρακα, περικυκλώσουσιν, ἐδαφιοῦσιν, and τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς σου.
4. ol φανοῦνται k τῆς γῆς] Cf. viii. 19, xix. 3, Deut. xviii. 11.
5. ἀπὸ τροχοῦ] ἀπὸ τοίχου, Β 22 48 51 233 308 τυχου V 144), dc
pariete Wiirzb. Fr. This is most likely right, and accounted for if
1. xx. read
ὁ πλοῦτος] Heb.
άσεβῶν] Heb.
τὸ πλῆθος τῶν καταδυναστευόντων σε is added here by B and several cursives, but omitted by ℵAQΓ 26 49 87 97 104 106 198 301 306 309. Hexaplaric (Symm. Theod.).
6. The punctuation differs, and γὰρ is inserted as a consequence of the rearrangement.
κραυγῆς] So Α, but MSS. generally read βροντῆς: Heb. has ‘thunder.’ Würzb. Fr. has (um commotion: ’trm’ υοκ magma procella descendens, &c.
7. The MSS. vary in details at the beginning of this verse. ’B omit article before ἐνυπνιαζόμενος. For ’s ἐνύπνιον ℵQ* and about a dozen cursives have ἐν ὕπνῳ, 301 εν υπνιω, Β καθ’ ὕπνους, With which a few cursives nearly agree. Wiirzb. Fr. has sicut qui in somnis uidit B c. add νυκτὸς (Hexaplaric, from Aq.), which ℵAQΓ and 14 cursives omit. Α wrote πλουτως for πλοῦτος.
Ἰσραὴλ] So ℵΑQ*, Ιῆλ: and eight cursives. Probably Ιῆλ is corrupted from Ἀριήλ, or the Heb. was misread. B and most cursives interpret, Ἰερουσαλήμ.
οἱ συνηγμένοι ἆτ’ αὐτὴν] Heb. ‘her fortress' : the misunderstanding
8. πίνοντες is not an addition on the part of Lxx., as Scholz marks it: but the true reading is clearly πεινῶντες, as read by 22 41 48 49 51 93 104 144 (qui esuriunt, Würzb. Fr.). The confusion was here; B* reads reads and πεινοντες, later in the verse. 50 in xl. 29 Q has πινουσιν for πεινῶσιν.
With this verse Lowth compares Horn. Il. XXII. 199, Virg. Aen.
XII. 908, and a passage which bears more resemblance, Lucr. Iv.
1097 foll.
μάταιον τὸ ἐνύπνιον] Heb. ‘his soul is ’ ἐνύπνιον is probably
due to misreadings
ὥς ὁ πίνων] The article is omitted by ℵ*BQ 26 49 104 109 198 306 309. In that case the construction resembles the use of Lat. tamquam, frequent in Tacitus: e.g. Annals 111. 12, “differri per externos tamquam veneno interceptus ” ‘the spreading of a report that (Germanicus) had been’ &c.: XML 20, “Burrum demovere tamquam Agrippinae provectum.'
εἰς κενὸν ἤλπισεν] Heb. ‘craveth’; Lxx. seem to have misread,
rather than paraphrased, perhaps ‘ for
9. Shortened and paraphrased in Lxx. Heb. begins the verse with two pairs of verbs, the first of each a reflexive form, and either from the same root, or one connected with the second verb, or else used with a play on words and different meaning: the former alternative seems the more likely: ‘Astonish yourselves, and be astonished: blind yourselves, and be ’ (otherwise (most probably) ‘Tarry, and be astonished: take your pleasure, and be blind!'), Vulg. has ’te, εἰ ’ramz’m’, fluctuate, et uacillate.
It seems that Lxx. have attempted to translate the first pair only: the second being supplied, with variants, by the Luc. MSS. from the Hexapla (Symmachus). Their rendering, ἐκλύθητε καὶ Exams, resembles the treatment of a similarly obscure pair of verbs in Zeph. ii. 1, συνάχθητε καὶ συνδέθητε, Vulg. conuenite, congregamini which looks as though Jerome, and perhaps Lxx. also, regarded the verbs here as cognate pairs.
Scholz marks et uacillate; inebriamini, as an addition to the Heb. (Zusatz zum hebr. Texte); but whether this means an omission on the part of mm. or not, it hardly seems to represent the facts of the case. See Vol. I. lntrod. pp. 48, 49.
καραιπαλήσατε] Lxx. has imperat. instead of 3rd pers. plur. perf. the forms being identical in the unpointed text. They also omit the parallel verb. Some authorities, as Prof. Skinner, would point the verbs as imperatives here.
10. πεπότικεν] The Heb. verb, identical in root letters with that
meaning ‘cover’ in xxv. 7, here apparently means ‘pour ’: Lxx.
renders by ποτίζω, which freq. renders Heb. for ‘watering’ flocks
(Gen. xxiv. 14, c.) or irrigating land (xxvii. 3). Vulg. ’sau’t; is this
due to a confusion
κατανύξεως] ‘Stupefaction’: see on κατανένυγμαι, vi. 5. St Paul, Rom. xi. 8, joins this passage in quotation with Deut. xxix. 4, possibly also glancing at Isa. vi. 9.
καμμύσει] Cf. vi. 10
οἱ ὀρῶντες τὰ κρυπτὰ] The change of construction produces anacoluthon in the Greek: cf. xxviii. 1. The syntax differs from Heb., τὰ κρυπτὰ corresponding to the verb ‘he hath ’
Most modems make ‘prophets’ the explanation of ‘eges,' and ‘seers’ similarly of ‘heads’ (A.V. ‘rulers’); and many proceed to omit ‘prophets’ and ‘seers’ as glosses.
11, 12. Some will not, others cannot: between the two, the nation dies. Cf. iii. 6, 7. (Amos v. 13, vi. 10.
13. Quoted, Matt. xv. 8, 9, Mark vii. 6, 7. On the text see
Burkitt, T ’us, p. cviii.; and Hatch, Essays in Bibl. Greek, p. 177.
After ὁ λαὸς οὗτος Β, with Luc. MSS. and 62 I47, inserts ἐν τῷ στόματι
καὶ ἕνη.. These words agree with the Heb., and Q mg has them with
asterisk, as in Aq. Theod. Symm. Mr- Burkitt shows that Tyconius,
constructing ἐγγίζει with τοῖς χείλεσιν, could not have read the additional
words: labiis adpropihquet, cord: autem long: separatus sit. So the
Wurzb. Fragm., adpropiat mihi plebs haec labiis suis honorant me cor
autem, ἃς. Justin Martyr (Tryph. 27, 78) also supports the shorter
text, and Clement of Rome (Ep. ad Cor. xv. 2) Irenaeus (IV. xii. 4) and
Clement of Alexandria (Paed. 1. 76) are at any rate not against it.
In fact, the shorter text, as ’ven by RAQ, may be regarded as pretty
certainly right for the Lxx.; though, as Mr Burkitt again points out,
some confusion appears at first sight in estimating the evidence of the
Fathers, because it is sometimes doubtful whether they are not quoting
from the Gospels: where, in Matthew, most MSS., headed by CΔΦ
have the longer text, though RBDL 33 have the shorter, which the
μάτην δὲ σέβονταί με] LΧΧ. read (see Driver, Notes on the Book: of
Samuel, p. lxvi.; Swete, lntrod. to O. T. in Greek, p. 321)
14. προσθήσω] The usual idiom, i. 5, 12, &c. Heb. has here the
participle of
μεταθεῖναι...μεταθήσω] Heb. word
ἀπολῶ] Heb. ‘shall perish’: verb beginning with ℵ perhaps suggested Ist pers., cf. xxviii. 28: but there is not the same special reason here.
This passage is quoted, 1 Cor. i. 19, but with ἀθετήσω instead of κρύψω (301 reads ἀθετήσω, and Justin varies between the two). Würzb. Frag. has abscondam, but St Cypr. (de bono patient. 2, and the Speculum, have reprobabo (reprobari represents ἀθετέω, Tyconius 9, Isai. xlviii. 8: see Burkitt, Τ yc. p. xcvii.).
15. καὶ οὐ διὰ Κυρίου· οὐαὶ οἱ ἐν κρυφῇ βουλὴν ποιοῦντες] These words are omitted by B* and Jerome. The reading of A &c. is nearer the Heb. It is however over full, suggesting a duplicate rendering, or an addition based on xxx. 1.
ἢ ἃ. ἡμεῖς ποιοῦμεν] Heb. has at the beginning of ver. 16 ‘Your perverseness’ or ‘ subversion’ of things. The present Greek is superfluous, and looks like an addition or explanation. Possibly the real LXX. has dropped out, or been corrupted: ἡ ἀηθεία ὑμῶν suggests itself, but Lxx. are hardly, perhaps, likely to have written this, and scribes would have been apt to turn it into ἀλήθεια.
16. Cf. xlv. 9, Jerem. xviii. 4—6, Rom. ix. 21 : also chap. x. 15.
17. οὐκέτι] To be taken as two words ε Ζ reads οὐχὶ ἔτι.
Χερμὲλ] Not taken here as a proper name by A.V.; the word
Carmel means ‘garden’ or ‘ orchard-land’: applied, probably, in this
sense both to the district of Judah and the hill overlooking the Medi-
18. οἱ ὃν τῷ σκότει] Heb. has ‘from’ in this and the parallel
phrase : Lxx. may have read 3 for D.
ὀφθαλμοὶ τυφλῶν] lt strains the Greek to make the preceding article refer directly to ὀφθαλμοῖς but the phrase is, as far as the Creek is concerned, made to take up οἱ ἐν σκότει, κ.τ.λ., as though an ampler equivalent for τυφλοί.
Cf. Luke vii. 22. Between ὄψονται and βλέψονται, the evidence seems in favour of the former : B is here supported by κ’ and all MSS. except AQ 24 26 86 106 (239 306). Cypr. Test. 1. 4 has ’debunt.
19. Lxx. treats this verse rather loosely.
ἀπηλπισμένοι] Either ‘those that are despaired ’ or ‘that are driven to .’
20. ἄνομος] See ver. 5 καταδυναστευόντων), XXV. 2—5.
οἱ άνομοῦντες] Heb. has here ‘watchers,’
21. τοὺς ἐλέγχοντας ἂν πύλαις] Cf. Amos v. 10; the phrase seems to be used of them that stand up for justice. Lxx. place it here in apposition to πρόσκομμα, instead of dat. of person concerned.
καὶ ἐπλαγίασαν] B reads ὅτι for ml; which looks like an attempt to smooth the connection, on a wrong understanding.
ἄν ἀδίκοις] Heb. ‘with emptiness' (tohu). Words for ‘vanity, ‘emptiness,’ have often a bad sense attached: cf. v. 18, Ps. xxvi. 4 mi. 6, ἃς. The present instance. however, is not easy to parallel.
22. ὃν ἀφώρισεν ἐξ Ἀβραὰμ] The notion of the Heb. me, ‘redeem,
does apparently include ‘separation.’ Cf. Ps. cvi. lo, and Exod. viii.
23, where the text has however been suspected, and where Lxx.
render the noun me by διαστολή. Α confusion with
μεταβαλεῖ] Heb. ‘be white,' i.e. pale. The syntax is changed: and many MSS. (but not B) insert Ἰσραήλ, probably with an idea of balanc- ing the clauses as in the following verse.
23. τὰ ἔργα μου] Heb. ‘the work of my ’
ἁγιάσουσιν] ’s ἁγιάσωσιν seems to be a case of wrong assimila- tion to the previous verb ἴδωσιν.
24. ἱ τῷ πν. πλανεόμενος] Β has πλανώμενοι τῷ πνεύματι, agreeing with Heb. in order and absence of the article: the definiteness in Heb. being due to the construct state. The Greek of ’s text has presumably been touched up : but nearly all cursives agree with them.
ὑπακούειν] Heb. literally ‘receiving,’ but used specially of instruction. καὶ αἰ γλῶσσαι. . . εἰρήνην] The only reasonable explanation of these words, not in the Heb., and marked as doubtful in BQ, is that they have intruded from xxxii. 4 (where A* omits ταχύ). The presence of μαθήσονται in the balancing clause, and the ending of the previous clause with ἀκούειν in both passages, are the only apparent reasons to tempt the scribe to the insertion.
XXX. Specially against alliance with Egypt.
I. συνθήκας] Heb. has a very obscure phrase, with difficult
verb
προσθεῖναι. . . ἁμαρτίαις] Cf. Ecclus. iii. 27, v. 5.
2. ἐμὲ] Heb. ‘my mouth.
βοηθηθῆναι. . . σκεπασθῆναι] Each infinitive expresses a Heb. phrase, shortened into one idea: the Heb. words are differently rendered in the next verse.
3. σκέπη] Heb. 'stronghold' (xxiii. 4, H, 14).
τοῖς πεποιθόσιν] Heb. ‘trust,’ ‘confidence.’ ‘Shadow’ is omitted, prob. because of the paraphrasing above.
4. Τάνις=Ζοαn, see xix. II.
4, 5. πονηροί· μάτην κοπιάσουσιν] Heb. ‘have reached Hanes,'
Lxx. having thus obtained a verb for ver. 5, omit ‘(all) shall be ashamed.
6. ἐρήμῳ] Heb. Negeb (xxi. I).
Ἐν τῇ θλίψει] LXX. omit ‘land,’ ‘shoulder,' and ‘their treasures on the bunches of...’
ἔκγονα ἀσπίδων πετομένων] Cf. xi. 8, xiv. 29: the latter passage perhaps explains the introduction of ἔκγονα, which is otherwise superfluous: cf. the regular Heb. ‘daughters of the ’
B* omits πετομένων.
οἳ] The relative may sometimes be supplied in translating Heb.; but it gives no improvement here.
πρὸς ἔθνος] All versions and authorities agree in rendering ‘to’ but the preposition is the same as the previous ‘on,’ and seems at least to hint at the dependence against which the prophet inveighs.
ὠφελήσει αὐτοὺς] Here NAOQ 26 41 49 86 87 91 97 106 198 228 233 309 repeat εἷς βοήθειαν. . . ὄνειδος from ver. 5. It is clearly an inadvertence, but the attestation should be studied: it seems to be mainly Hesychian. Syro-hex. has it in the margin.
7. μάταια, καὶ κενὰ] Cf. Clem. Rom. Ερ. αd Cor. i. 7), κενὰς καὶ ματαίας.
ὑμᾶς]
ἀπάγγειλον] Heb. has perf. I pers. sing.
ματαία ἦ παράκλησις ὑμῶν αὕτη] For the Greek, cf. xxviii. 29, but there is no resemblance in the Heb. of the two passages. Here the Heb. is obscure: but there is general agreement among modems, that Rahab is a name applied to Egypt, meaning ‘arrogance’ or the like; Ii. 9, Ps. lxxxvii. 4, lxxxix. lo ὑπερήφανον). But Rallab seems also to have stood for a sea-monster, Job ix. I3, xxvi. 12 τὸ κῆτος); and it appears thus in parallelism to stand for the sea itself. As the monster, perhaps, cf. xxvii. I, it stands for Egypt : the great unwieldy river power, Ezek. xxix. 3.
This however brings us no nearer to the Lxx. rendering: ματαιότητας
appears to render mam ‘the proud' in Ps. xl. 4: παράκλησις
may be a guess (see above, on xxi. 2, c.) or on may have been read
as
The Syriac (Peshitta) has here ‘uain is this your confidence' (see editorial note in journal of Theol. ’cs, January 1903, p. 270): which certainly comes very near to the Lxx., however arrived at.
8. καὶ εἰς βίβλων] Lxx., as frequently, omits the second (parallel) verb.
καιρῶν] ‘Occasions,’ which in this case are future. Καιρὸς is not
usually put for ‘the day of the Lord,' or ‘In that day,’ though see
xviii. 7 : and in viii. 22 it may have been similarly meant; there is a
sense of crisis ἦ ἀπορίη ἔχει καιρόν τινά, Aristotle, Metaph. VII. iii. 7).
The Hebrew here has not this meaning, but merely ‘an after day,
used generally. B with Luc. MSS. reads καιρῷ, placing it after ταῦτα,
but this hardly improves matters; it may be a misunderstanding of
εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα] MSS. generally perfix ἕως, but A omits it. Heb.
10. Μὴ ἀναγγέλλετε] Heb. has ‘see,’ cognate with ‘seers.’ LXX.
may have read
The rest of the verse seems confused: τὰ ὁράματα ὁρῶσιν seems to take up the two cognate words ‘have ’ and λαλεῖτε is inserted (or substituted for ‘have ’ in the second place) to suit the supposed sense. The best MSS. omit ‘right ’ and ᾿ smooth ᾿; Luc. MSS. have ὀρθῶς, and other insertions λαλιάν, δόλια, c.).
ἑτέραν πλάνησιν] The order of words seems to forbid supposing
that ἑτέραν represents
11. ἀποστρέψατε. . .ἀφέλετε. . .ἀφέλετε] Heb. has two former verbs intransitive: the third is trans., but not the same as the second: it is in fact the causal of the verb to which ‘sitting ’ in ver. 7 belongs.
τὸ λόγιον] If this is not a corruption of τὸν ἅγιον (which Grabe printed, see below), it must be an interpretation, in the sense of the ‘oracle’ or place where answers were given to inquiries made of the Lord. Comparing Levit. xvi. 3, 16, 33 with 1 Kings vi. 5 c., vii. 49 the ‘Holy of ’ of the Tabernacle had, corresponding to it in ’s Temple, the ‘oracle’ ‘31, differing by and pointing from a ῾word.᾿ LXX. in Kings transliterate, δαβὶρ or δαβείρ. In this case, the drift, according to LXX., differs from Heb. ‘This’ ‘this path,: seem to mean the fixed religion of Judah, and τὸ λόγιον its hallowed place.
τὸν ἅγιον seems to have no MS. authority, unless the Slavonic version be counted: but the Lucianic cursives generally read τοῦ ἁγίου Ἰσραήλ.
12. ψεύδει] Not the same Heb. word as in ver. 9, or xxviii. 15 but ‘oppression’ (Ps. lxii. 10), or ‘fraud.’ Some wish to transpose two letters of Heb., and read ‘perverseness’: but LXX. though quoted in support of this, is not perceptibly nearer to it in meaning. The sense of the Heb. text, moreover, is supported by lix. 13.
ἐγόγγυσας] Reading some part of ΑΒΒREV (Niph. of 115, Exod. xv. 24
&c.) for
ἐπὶ τᾷ λόγῳ τούτῳ] Heb. has merely ῾thereon.᾿ Lxx. may have repeated the phrase from τοῖς λόγοις earlier in the verse, or used it according to the Hebrew use, by which ‘word’ and ‘fact,’ ῾thing, are almost synonymous. Cf. xlii. 16 ταῦτα τὰ ῥήματα ποιήσω. The Lxx. sometimes use Hebraisms, when not in the corresponding original: Scholz gives a list, No. 18, p. 42, of “Hebraismen, die der M. T. nicht mehr ”: but this and i. 21 are not included.
13. Cf. Ps. lxii. 3, Prov. xviii. 11, 12, Ezek. xiii. 12, Jerusalem had reason to know that strong walls might be broken, 2 Kings xiv. 13 cf. Amos iv. 3, vi. 11; the earthquake, Amos i. 1, Zech. xiv. 5, may have been an abiding cause of fear. Ordinary walls, of clay and straw, would be unstable at best, eSpecially if high.
Lxx. paraphrases to some extent, and introduces an unwarranted idea in ἑαλωκυίας: τεῖχος corresponds in place to ‘breach,’ perhaps because the translators hesitated at the half-abstract idea: πόλεως· corresponds to ῾wall,’ ὀχυρᾶς perhaps to ‘high’ (A is alone in omitting it): the second of two words meaning ‘suddenly’ is not rendered, or παραχρῆμα is considered a fair equivalent for both.
14. καὶ τὸ πτῶμα] Lxx. takes ‘and he shall ’ to be the noun
again, as at the end of ver. 13, and on the repetition of it changes to
the more exact σύντριμμα; the following words are loosely rendered,
and ἐκ κεραμίου λεπτὸν (unless a duplicate has taken the place of
the right words) looks like a guess, λεπτὸν (AO alone: other
generally λεπτὰ) perhaps with a vague notion of ΑΒΒREV ‘vanity’ for
πῦρ ἀραῖς] Lxx. omit ‘from the ’ ἀπὸ καύστρας supplied in Luc. MSS.).
ἀποσυρεῖς] This, the reading of 109 144 308 (and 104 106 198 309 ἀποσύρεις) is surely right. The reading of the ΜSS. generally, ἀποσυριεῖς, makes no sense; Aquila renders τοῦ ἀνασῦραι ὕδωρ ἀπὸ βοθύνου, and so in Gen. xxx. 37, περισύρων seems to render the same Heb. root. The meaning is to scrape or dredge up water. The Old Latin had the converse error in v. 26.
μικρὸν] Either an insertion of LXX., omitting ‘from a ’ or a
guess or misreading (
With this verse cf. ’s. ii. 9, jerem. xix. 10, 11.
15. στενάξῃς] Heb. ‘rest,’
[στεναξη read by A alone, an inadvertence.]
γνώσῃ ποῦ ἦσθα] Α curious difference, possibly intended to interpret ‘quietness’ cf. the Greek of li. 12 B.
ἐπὶ τοῖς ματαίοις, ματαία] Probably ὅτε ἐπεποίθεις renders ‘and in
᾿: ματαία is most likely ΑΒΒREV ‘shall ’ read as
ἀκούειν] Α natural but needless addition: cf. Matt. xxiii. 37.
16. ἀναβάται] This reading, found in ℵAO 106 198, is easier than the dative read by B c., and probably assimilated to κούφοις. The nom., moreover, agrees with the Heb.; whereas the dat. can only be explained as used with ἐπὶ in the sense of dependent upon (Liddell and Scott, 3111,13. I. If); and this use is rare with persons, though see Thuc. VI. 22, μὴ ἐπὶ ἑτέροις γίγνεσθαι, μάλιστα δὲ χρήματα αὐτόθεν ὡς· πλεῖστα ἔχειν.
17. φεύξονται] Inserted in the first clause, as in A.V. This idea and the converse are frequently found in O.T.; Levit. xxvi. 8, Dent. xxxii. 30, Josh. xxiii. 10. Historical instances are numerous: Sham- ’s and ’s deeds, ’s three hundred, Jonathan with his armour-bearer: we may add ’s victory over the Syrians, I Kings xx. 27, and the ’ panic, 2 Kings vii. 6: on the other hand, the ‘small ’ of the Syrians against Joash, 2 Chron. xxiv. 24 the men of Ai, Josh. vii. 4, 5, and perhaps the Philistines, 1 Sam. iv. 9, 10.
πολλοὶ] Supplied by LXX., and verb in 3rd instead of 2nd pers.
ἱστὸς] Α correct rendering; a mast or flagstafl’ is meant. See XXXIII. 23.
σημαίαν φέρων] Lxx. have taken D) of the standard-bearer, not the standard itself: which is possible, as far as the actual word is con- cerned: cf. A.V. rendering of x. 18.
18. κριτὴς Κύριος ὅ Θεὸς] Cf. I Sam. ii. 3.
ἡμῶν] ℵ*B* have ὑμῶν.
πάντες] Inserted by A only among the chief uncials, in agreement with Heb.
καὶ ποῦ. . .δόξαν ὑμῶν] This insertion from x. 3 occurs in ℵΑOQΓ and with slight variations in about 17 cursives, principally Hesychian: only 36 90 233 among the Luc. MSS. have it.
19. ἅγιος] Inserted by LXX.: cf. xxvi. 21; and see lxii. 12, Joel iii. 17, Obad. 17.
In the rest of the verse the syntax is changed, but the words
correspond closely, except for the omission of the negative: till the
20. Would almost correspond better with Heb. if interchanged. Vulg. panem arctum εἰ aquam brevem. Cf. I Kings xxii. 27, where the second of the Heb. words here (rnS) is used.
The rest of the verse departs from Heb., the teachers being
interpreted as false, πλανῶντες. (This seems more likely than that
21. τόν πλανησάντων. . . οἱ λέγοντες] Α strong case of defiance of the ordinary rules of case-apposition. τῶν πλανησάντων is inserted by LXX.
22. ξηραῖς] μιανεῖς ℵ*B, and Field prefers this. See Vol. I. lntrod. p. 32.
λεπτὰ ποιήσω] Cf. Exod. xxxii. 20, κατήλεσαν λεπτὸν καὶ ἔσπειρεν αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὸ ὕδωρ, and 2 Kings xxiii. 6, ἐλέπτυνεν εἰς χοῖν.
ὡς κόπρον] Reading ΑΒΒΕRV ‘filth’ for 88 ‘go ’ or so interpreting.
ὅσοις] Probably ABBERV for
2 3. (??)σται] Perhaps represents ‘he shall ’ taken as a passive. Cf. German (I giebt. Lxx. omits ‘(with) which thou shalt ’ probably overlooking from ῾seed᾿ ’ to ‘sow.’
πλησμονή καὶ λιπαρὸς] The coupling of an adj. and subst. in this way is unusual. Tacitus is alone among ancient stylists in his deliberate practice of coupling dissimilar words and phrases: see Holbrooke, Annals of Tacitus, lntrod. § 55. Instances are Arm. 1. 55 “quo crimina et innoxios discernerent”; VI. 30, “efi’usae clementiae, modicus severitate”; III. 4 “modo per silentium vastus, modo ploratibus inquies.᾿
τόπον πίονα] For the Greek, cf. v. I. Here it apparently trans- lates ΑΒΒREV ‘pasture,’ which seems to carry with it an implication of richness.
24. ἄχυρα] Usually ῾chaff,᾿ and so Delitzsch on the Heb. word ‘53, “usually barley or the like, mixed with chopped straw; but here it is the pure grain.” The original meaning of the Heb. seems to be ‘mixture’: the quality of which would doubtless vary according to circumstances.
ἀναπιποιημένα] More general than Heb.
ἐν κριθῇ] Scholz explains this as due to a mistake of sound,
λελικμημένα] This, the reading of ℵAQΓ 26 106 198 228 306 309 seems easier than ’s λελικμημένῃ. In either case the meaning of ἐν is somewhat strained.
ἰάσηται. . .ἰάσεται] Two different Heb. words, the first meaning rather ‘bind’ The fut. tense at the end of verse corresponds with Heb., and at that distance from ὅταν Lxx. probably inclined to represent the Heb., rather than carry on the Greek construction. Cf. vi. 10 and its quotation, in the best MSS. of N.T., Matt. xiii. 15, Acts xxviii.
27; also John xii. 40. The fut. may indeed have been preferred, as expressing a promise.
27. διὰ χρόνου. . .πολλοῦ] πολλοῦ only in ℵΒΟQΓ 41 86 106 perhaps an explanatory addition (Hesychian ?). Heb. expresses remoteness either of time or place: cf. xlix. 1.
μετὰ δόξης] Heb.
τὸ λόγιον] Heb. ’ma, ‘uplifting,’ here generally taken of rising smoke: closely akin to aim, A.V. commonly ‘burden,’ used of oracular utterances, xiii. 1, xxi. 1, c., and many prophetic headings. verse, as given in the Greek MSS., alters the syntax, and repeats τὸ λόγιον. For ὀργὴ τοῦ θυμοῦ, if meant for an interpretation of ‘tongue,’ cf. xi. 4. See also v. 24.
28. σῦρον] Cf. xxviii. 2. ὕδωρ ἐν φάραγγι seems to amplify
διαιρεθήσεται] Heb. verb, ‘reach’ in A.V. and R.V., is literally ‘divide,’ but cannot, as pointed, be passive, though the idea of water divided by a nearly submerged object is easy and practically right. ἥξει seems to be a colourless verb introduced to help the construction.
ταράξαι. . .πλανήσει] Heb. has a kindred verb and noun: verb means to ‘sprinkle,’ ‘shake’ or ‘wave’ to and fro: kindred noun occurs in ver. 32, and xix. 16: πλάνησις is in itself a poor rendering, and as it translates ‘leadeth ’ better, there is probably some confusion. Lxx. is a little loose in its treatment of such words: xxii. 5, xxxvii. 3, &c.
καὶ διώξεται] Probably
κατὰ πρόσωπον] Fairly near to Heb. ‘in the ’ (cheek-bones)
‘peoples,’ parallel to ‘nations,’ is rendered only by a pronoun: λήμψεται
is again a verb supplied to help the sense and construction: on
29. εὐφραίνεσθαι] Ofmusic, frequently, cf. xiv. 11, xxiv. 8. The not. text seems to have been corrupted, and the repetition of διὰ παντὸς. εἰσπορεύεσθαι. . .εἰσελθεῖν (but see below), ὡσεὶ ἑορτάζοντας καὶ ὡσεὶ εὐφραινομένους, suggests that some duplicate renderings have been embodied. The order seems to be somewhat confused, the usual practice of LXX. being to keep it strictly.
μὴ is the article before ‘song,’ taken as the interrog. particle: δεῖ
ὑμᾶς would seem to be for ‘shall be to you’; unless δι’ ὑμεῖς, as
was the original reading, representing 033 or ΑΒΒREV read for
A’s reading of τὸν οἶκον for τὸ ὅροι· suggests a reminiscence of Ps. cxxii. l.
30. ἀκουστὴν ποιήσει] Α regular rendering for the causal of verb ‘to ’: e.g. xlviii. 6. Cf. Ps. lxxvi. 8. where the verb ἀκοντίζω is used.
θυμὸν] Heb. the ‘alighting’ or ‘swooping ’; the verb in xxviii. 2 ποιήσει ἀνάπαυσιν), Cf. xxv. 10. Causal in ver. 32.
δεῖξαι] Here V and some of the Luc. MSS. have δείξει, which is not unlikely to be right, as it gives easier connection and represents Heb. closely. Field prints it in his 1859 (S.P.C.K.) edition, in which he seems to have paid much regard to the Lucianic readings.
31. τῇ πληγῇ ᾗ ἂν πατάξῃ] πατάξει (A) must be treated as erroneous. Heb. has simply ‘with the rod shall he ’ which Lxx. have endeavoured to bring into connection.
32. This and the following verse are obscure in the Heb., and it is not surprising to find nut. in difficulties.
κυκλόθεν] Almost a possible rendering, if
λπὶς] Perhaps no: read for nor) ‘staff’; for the rendering
cf. xxxii. 9. The syntax is altered, ὅθεν being an insertion. βοηθείας
is probably an attempt to render and explain ΑBBREV ‘destiny’ (lit.
‘foundation’); αὐτὸς possibly ℵ
ἐκ μεταβολῆς] This must be intended to represent ‘waving,’ ‘agitation,’ see on ver. 28, ταράξω.
33. ἀπατηθήσῃ] This, though found only in two cursives, 48 308
is clearly the right reading, ἀπαιτηθήσῃ (NABQ ἃς.) being an easy
corruption. Jerome renders the Lxx. here by decipieris. The main
proof, however, is that it evidently renders the Heb. nnan, taking it
as 2nd pers. imperf. from
The Heb. of the verse is obscure, and the Greek scarcely intelligible.
πρὸ ἡμερῶν corresponds to
Topheth or Tophet was a name given to a place in the valley of Hinnom, where sacrifices were offered to Moloch (2 Kings xxiii. IO, Jer. vii. 31, C.). There is possibly—see the quotation above M. Arnold—a play on words between Moloch and Melech, Of course no king of Assyria met his end at this Tophet, so far as is known. But, to those who do not seek to restrict the application of prophecy, it may not seem impossible that there may be a reference to the end of the last king of Nineveh, firing his palace over himself: the story familiar from ’s Sardcmapalus (=Assur-banipal), though later knowledge transfers the event to another king, whose name, however, is uncertain. See Nahum iii. 13, 15.
XXXI. Isaiah returns to his denunciation of Egypt as an ally.
This chapter echoes many previous passages: e.g., compare
5, xxix. 15, 23.
12–14. xxiv.
1. πεποιθότες I°] The parallel verb of Heb. is not
πλῆθος σφόδρα] C am: pendens.
πεποιθότες 2°] Heb. ‘look το᾿ (for help): probably a
this word,
2. καὶ αὐτὸς σοφὸς] Though almost exact, the Greek loses something
of the force of the Heb., by omitting ‘and,’ and merging this in
the main clause. Cf. Theognis, 201 foll.,
ἀθττηθῇ]
ἐλπίδα] Used, as we have seen, with some looseness in Lxx. Heb. is here the ordinary word for ‘help.’ The verb is rendered by βοηθοῦντες in ver. 3, but βοήθεια is used as an interpretation of Heb. ‘spirit,’ rather weakly.
3. σάρκας] Bodily, muscular strength. Cf. Jerem. xvii. 5
ἐπικατάρατος ὁ ἅνθρωπος ὃς τὴν ἐλπίδα ἔχει ἐπ᾿ ἄνθρωπον, καὶ στηρίσει
σάρκα βραχίονος αὐτοῦ ἐπ᾿ αὐτόν. So we find it in Aesch. Agam. 72,
βοηθοῦντες] Lxx. omits ‘and he that is holpen shall fall’ (supplied in Q mg καὶ πεσεῖται ὁ βοηθούμενος, with *: also in O, doubtless from some later version, through the Hexapla).
4. βοήση] Heb. ‘growleth,’ of depth rather than loudness: xxxviii. 14, lix. 11 (Heb.). The MSS. vary much in detail: ὃν τρόπον ℵ*B, Luc. MSS., + ἐὰν ℵ cb A 26 41 86 198 306, + ὅταν OQ corr (ραν Q*) 24 49 91 97 104 309. Cf. vii. 2. The verbs are also variously read as βοησει, αναβοησει (-ση), and κράξῃ, κράξει or κεκράξει.
ᾖ ἔλαβεν] Note the rel. attraction. Heb. ℵABBREV, ‘is called forth’.
LXX. have taken it from the similar root ℵABBREV,
ἕως ἂν] Either inserted for connection, or duplicated (ABBREV for
ἐμπλησθῆ] Heb. ‘a multitude,’ as in Gen. xlviii. 19; verb
τὰ ὅρη] Heb. ‘shepherds,’
ἡττήθησαν] Lxx. have carried on their idea of the meaning by making this and the next verb plural, and omitting the negatives.
τὸ πλῆθος τοῦ θυμοῦ] Heb. ‘uproar,’ ABBREV, often rendered by πλῆθος, as xvii. 12. τοῦ θυμοῦ added as explanation.
ἐπὶ τὸ ὅρος] It is a question, how the Heb. prep. ABBREV is to be taken:
whether the Lord of Hosts is represented as ‘for’ (upon) or ‘against’
5. ὡς ὅρνεα πετόμενα] Cf. Ps. xci. 4, and Matt. xxiii. 37 (context quoted on xxx. 15).
ὑπὲρ Ἱερ.] ℵ*ΒQ mg add ὑπεραστπιεῖ, but ℵ cb AOQ* omit: H.P. quote 26 41 86 106 109 198 306, probably for omission, but they have left out the mark A of omission. 26 reads ἐπὶ for ὑπέρ.
περιποιήσεται] The Heb. word to which this corresponds is 11135 used in Exod. xii. of the passover (Lxx. there has σκεπάζω and παρελεύσομαι for the verb, πάσχα for the noun).
6. Paraphrased. LXX. by adding βουλὴν have emphasized the connection with mix. 15.
υἱοὶ Ἰσραήλ, B
7. ἀπαρνηθήσονται] RBQ have νησονται, A’s scribe being inclined to insert the syllable θη-, cf. ὀρχηθήσονται xiii. 21, and (doubtless rightly) ἡττηθήσονται xxxiii. 1; while ΒQ* have λογισθήσεσθε, wrongly, xxxiii. 8 (Cf. 11). Heb. ‘reject.’
τὰ χρυσᾶ] Β
8. οὔ μάχαιρα ἀνδρὸς κ.τ.λ.] The negative in Heb. is here closely connected, by many good authorities, with each of the two words for man; i.e. ‘by the sword of no human ’ The two words ish and adam (cf. ii. 9, c.) are considered to supplement one another (Ps. xlix. 2) rather than to give a special contrast.
οὔκ ἀπὸ προσώπου] The negative is supplied by LXX. in accordance with what they took to be the meaning. διώκοντος follows, in A alone μαχαίρας other MSS.); probably a reminiscence from xvi. 4; cf. Lev. xxvi. 17, 36, Prov. xxviii. I.
9. περιλημφθήσονται] Heb. ‘shall pass away,’ or ‘pass by,’
It looks as though the sense of surrounding had been attached to
καὶ ἡττηθήσονται] Probably represents
φεύγων] Taking
ἀλώσπται] Perhaps reading some part of
Μακάριος ὃς]
σπίρμα . . . οίκείους] Heb. ‘a fire...a furnace’: LXX. have to interpret, more probably than misread, in this case. Cf. Ps. lxxxix. 29, 36, 37.
XXXII. The ’s work is not at its best in this chapter, so far as we can estimate the difficulties. If xxviii.-xxx. are worse, it is not surprising: but this chapter does not seem harder than xi. or xiv., which are on the whole far better done.
1. ἄρχοντες . . . ἄρξουσιν] Heb. verb and noun are cognate.
2. ὁ ἄνθρωπος] Heb. ish, rendered here (i) ‘a great man,’ (ii) νίν ille, Vitringa: (iii) ‘each one,’ Gesenius, Ewald, Delitzsch, (iv) ‘a man.,’ A.V. and Kay, who gives reasons against (iii).
κρύπτων] Lxx. have taken ‘hiding place’ as a participle, though an active partic. does not occur in this precise form.
τοὺς λόγους τούτους] For αὐτοῦ, Α alone reads τούτους. Heb. has ‘(from the) ’ and there is no very likely misreading; mm: warm for nwnnnn is perhaps not beyond the range of discrepancy, but it seems more likely that τοὺς λόγους interprets ‘breath’ somewhat as in xi. 4.
καὶ κρυβήσεται] Another departure from the syntax of Heb. The
next few words in the Creek are difficult to account for with exactness;
ὡς ἀφ’ ὕδατος φερομένου is perhaps for
For ἐν Σιών see on xxv. 5. ποταμὸς φερόμενος bears no visible
relation to ‘the shadow of a ’ and either it seems that Lxx. followed
the drift of parallelism, as they thought, or a duplicate rendering of
one clause has caused confusion, and partly taken the place of the
other. ’ith ἔνδοξος we are brought back to Heb.
It may be that ‘rock’ was purposely omitted, see on xxvi. 4.
3. ἔσονται matures] Heb. ‘shall be closed,’ lit. smeared, from
ἐπ’ ἀνθρώποις] rm: ὃν or
δώσουσιν] Α colourless verb, the clause being only vaguely rendered, and the syntax lost.
4. ταῖν ἀσθενῶν] So A, other MSS. ἀσθενούντων. Heb. ‘hasty,’ same root as ‘be ’ later in the verse. Cf. xxxv. 4, where Lxx. has ὀλιγόψυχοι.
προσέξει] B reads προσήξει, unsupported: προσάξει 109. Rom. Ed. has προσέξει.
εἰρήνην] Heb. lit. ‘clearnesses,’ almost ‘brightnesses.’ Can the Greek be a corruption from εἰλικρινῆ?
5. Heb. here foretells the removal of evils spoken of, v. 20: the falsifying of language, and through language of ideas, till weak minds are confused even as to elementary notions of right and wrong.
ἄρχειν] Interpreting Heb. ‘noble’ ‘the ’ ἄρχοντος, Job xxi.
28) as a verb. Notice εἴπωσιν first with indirect, then direct construction.
Heb. has two different verbs, the second passive (impers. with
οἱ ὑπηρέται σου] Heb. ‘mean’ or ‘knave,’ a word found only here and (in slightly different form) in ver. 7. mm. may not have known the word, and taken it here ‘means,’ ‘instruments,’ applied to persons.
Σίγα] Scholz thinks an attempt has been made to represent the
sound of Heb.
6. μάταια] Cf. xxxi. 2, xxix. 20 κακία). Heb. lit. ‘nothingness.’
ὄνομα] Heb. ‘impiety,’
πλάνησιν] Cf. xxix. 24: Heb. ‘error.’ According to Cheyne, this denotes “practical atheism”: in Rabbinic Heb. and “heresy.”
διαφθεῖραι] Heb. ‘to make empty,’ ‘pour out.’ A’s διαφθεῖραι probably an error, the ’s eye having strayed to καταφθεῖραι... διασκεδάσαι below, ver. 7. Most MSS. have διασπεῖραι.
ποιῆσαι] ποιήσει, Β, agrees with Heb.; but the Greek sentence is against it, and the weight of MS. evidence.
7. ἦ γὰρ If τῶν πονηρῶν corresponds to
διασκεδάσαι] This parallel verb is introduced by Lxx., the rest of the verse corresponding in words, though the syntax and sense are changed.
8. οἱ δὲ εὐσεβεῖς συνετὰ] Heb. has cognate words, from the root represented by ἄρχειν in ver. 5. εὐσεβεῖς is a fairly good rendering, inasmuch as the Heb. word is used of those who offered willingly for the tabernacle, Exod. xxv. 2, xxxv. 5, the first temple, 1 Chron. xxix. 6 and the second temple, Ezra vii. 16.
συνετὰ suggests that Lxx. read 111313) (root [13) for
αὕτη ἦ βουλὴ] This paraphrase–for the Greek, cf. xxv. 5, xxviii. avoids the third recurrence of the Heb. word. Possibly, however, it is due to misreading, as Heb. has a pronoun, though not fem., and the prep. ὃν might have been read as γυ.
μενεῖ] Rightly rendered: the same verb in ver. 9 is rendered (also rightly) by ἀνάστητε.
9. πλούσιαι] Heb. ‘at ease,’ ‘unconcerned,’ ‘secure’: used in bad sense, according to Cheyne, except in ver. 18 below, and xxxiii. 20. In Amos vi. 1, it has the same parallel word as here. See also Ps. cxxiii. 4, and Zech. i. 15. The fault seems to be, that some are well off who are not entitled so to be, while others suffer. cf. Ezek. xvi. 49, Luke xvi. 19: contrast 2 Cor. viii. 14.
ἂν ἐλπίδι] Heb. ‘confident,’ ‘trusting’: xii. 2, Amos vi. 1, Ps. xxvii. 3, Judg. xviii. 7, 27 (B), Zeph. iii. 1. When not translated by πεποιθώς, Lxx. sometimes use ἐλπὶς with a prep., as here, and in the next verse; the word, as we have seen, is a favourite with them, and they seem to give it something of the sense of ‘confidence’ upon occasion.
10. ἡμέρας ἐνιαυτοῦ] Heb. literally, ‘days upon a year’: i.e. to a vear,’ Delitzsch, but= over a year,’ acc. to most
μνείαν ποιήσασθε] Heb. ‘be troubled,’ ‘disquieted,’ as in ver.
Scholz explains LXX.'s rendering as due to reading
μετὰ ἐλπίδος] See on previous verse.
ἐν ὀδύνῃ] Probably a duplicate, either of μνείαν ποιήσασθε above,
or of
πέπαυται] Perhaps taking
ὅσπόρος καὶ] Read by RAQ 24 26 49 86 87 104 309, and without καὶ by 41 91 106 228 306. B c. omit: the Heb. seems to have nothing corresponding, unless the Greek were a (duplicate) guess for ‘gathering,’ as the parallelism would suggest another noun.
11. αἱ πεποιθυῖαι] Lxx. omit one of the parallel words: probably the former.
σάκκους] Added by RA and Luc. MSS.; but not Hexaplaric; cf. Α. V., R. V.
12. καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν μασθῶν κόπτεσθε] This rendering, except as to
’the tense and person, is as probable as any; most authorities, in-
cluding Delitzsch, support it. Heb. has a masc. participle, ‘they
’ assuming this to be the primary meaning of the verb. There is
an apparent play on words with
[Note.—In verses 11, 12, Heb. has first a verb in masc. plur., ’four in masc. sing., and lastly this masc. participle, while the apparent “reference and circumstances are to fem. subjects. This, at least, is the prevailing explanation of the verb-forms.]
ἀγροῦ ἐπιθυμήματος] So Heb., but plur., fields of ’ a common idiom.
13. ἦ γῆ] LXX. puts this in nom. case, omitting ‘upon.’ This use of the cams pendent is common in Heb., though it does not occur here. The Greek, moreover, does not here supply the expected prepos. and case of pronoun afterwards.
χόρτος] Here the long rank grass of waste land. Heb. ‘briers,’
but not with its usual parallel word, as in v. 26, vii. 23,
ἀρθήσεται] This verb is added by LXX., and ἐκ substituted for ‘upon.’ The syntax is altered. Cf. xvi. 10.
πλουσία] Heb. has the same expression as in xxii. 2, ‘jubilant ’ which Lxx. there does not render.
14. πλοῦτον] Here=Heb.
οἴκους ἐπιθυμήτους ἀφήσουσιν] The reading of ℵ*Β, ἀφήσουσιν, οἴκους ἐπιθυμήματος, looks preferable here. The cursives are divided ℵ cb AQ are supported by 24 26 106 233 (86 omitting preceding καὶ), and as to order, by 198 306, which have ἐπιθυμήματος; con- versely, 36 49 87 91 97 104 228 309 have ἐπιθυμήτους, but read otherwise as B.
Heb. ‘(is) deserted: hill and watchtower . . . .’
Scholz gives LXX.'s οἴκους as due to reading
ἐπιθυμήματος Scholz gives as an: ‘chosen’ for ma; it is however
ποιμένων] Heb. ‘flocks.’ ποιμνίων?
15. ἐπέλθη] Heb. is more descriptive, ‘be ’ Kay compares Luke xxiv. 49. ℵ agrees with Heb. in having ἡμᾶς for ὐμᾶς: but the Greek Mss. often confuse these pronouns.
ἔρημος ὁ KM] Cf. xxix. 17. The clause is inverted, altering the effect.
17. κρατήσει] Heb. ‘the effect,’ lit. ‘service,’ i.e. prob. result
service. Either Lxx. interpret, or possibly they read
πεποιθότες ἔσονται] ἔσονται ℵ cbA 26 41 49 51 91 97 104 106 198 228 233 309; omitted by ℵ*BQ (ℵc has οἱ πεπ.). Heb. ‘confidence,’ root as word rendered ἐν ἐλπίδι, ver. 9. Theodotion has ἐλπὶς here: Aq. and Symm. πεποίθησις.
18. πόλει] Heb. run, a ‘home,’ ‘resting-place.’ Cf. xxxiii. 20 πόλις πλουσία.
πλούτου] Same word as that rendered πλουσίω above; ver. 9, and a kindred form in xxxiii. 20. The true test is contrasted with the false, as the true and false confidence in xxx. 15 and 7.
19. This verse is almost made up in Heb. of strong assonances,
mu
οὔκ Hi ὑμᾶς ἥξει. καὶ ἔσονται οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες...] An insertion by
Lxx., cf. xxviii. 15. It falls between ‘descend’ and ‘forest,’ and the
sense and syntax are greatly altered. The rest of the verse seems
to be paraphrased, πεποιθότες inserted, and only ‘lowliness’
definitely represented, and that probably as though with diff. vowelpoints,
as
20. σπείροντες ἐπὶ πᾶν ὕδωρ] Cf. Eccles. xi. 1.
πατεῖ] Lxx. appear to have taken ‘ox’ and ‘ass’ as the subject,
and ‘send forth the ’ as a phrase like νέμειν ποδά. Lowth quotes
an account of rice-planting by treading over the ground with cattle
before it is flooded. But the scene is more probably of simple rural
Scholz, thinking of the overflow of the Nile, takes the verse as evidence of the Egyptian knowledge of the translator. But the argument is double-edged, and unnecessary. Palestine is a land of torrent-streams: “Jordan overfloweth all his banks all the time of harvest” (Josh. iii. 15; cf. I Chron. xii. 15).
XXXIII. This unprovoked aggressor is generally considered to be the Assyrian; for so, on the whole, he was, and Israel and Judah powerless before him.
I. LXX. have reduced this verse to something apparently widely different from Heb. Yet, if the first ὑμᾶς were omitted, and a stop inserted after ἀθετῶν, supplying an indefinite subject to ἀθετεῖ, it would bring the first part of the verse very near to the meaning of the original. There is no ground for supposing this to be the genuine Lxx. reading or intention; it merely shows how small the verbal departure is.
ὑμᾶς, ὑμᾶς] nnx ‘thou’ read as name,
ὅ ἀθετῶν] Cf. xxi. 2, xxiv. 16, xlviii. 8.
ἁλώσονται] The word for ‘cease ’ is apparently taken as equivalent to ‘be destroyed,’ ‘come to an
οἱ ἀθετοῦντες] This seems now to represent the other parallel verb, ‘spoileth,’ or ‘destroyeth’ ἀνομέω in xxi. 2).
καὶ παραδοθήσονται] Heb. has same verb again, ‘thou shalt be ’: Lxx. fall back on a stop-gap word, see on xxiii. 7, c.; and ἡττηθήσονται at the end of the verse seems to be intrOduced in much the same way to balance it.
ὥς σὴς ἐπὶ ἱματίου] ἐπὶ ἱματίου is evidently
2. An apparently abrupt transition, to a passage resembling especially xxvi. 8 (so Kay).
τὸ σπέρμα]
τῶν ἀπειθοῦντων] Scholz thinks
εἰς ἀπώλωαν] Inserted by LXX.; cf. xiv. 20, xxxiv. 12.
3. διὰ φωνὴν τοῦ φόβου] Here φόβου sees to represent
ἀπὸ τοῦ φόβου σου] Heb. ‘the lifting up of thyself.’ φόβος here
seems to mean ‘fearfulness,’ i.e. majesty: unless for
4. ἀπὸ μικροῦ καὶ μεγάλου] A lone among uncials inserts ἀπὸ, Luc. MSS. having ἕως μεγάλου, according to the usual phrase (ἐπὶ or εἰς? 22). Heb. has ‘the gathering of the caterpillar,’ or rather, some species of locust, as it would appear from Joel 4. Can LXX. have been thinking of different sizes of locusts, and the adjectives perhaps come from a marginal explanations? But Mr H. St J. Thackeray has pointed out that the Isaiah translator uses. this phrase when not warranted by the Heb. Journal of Theol. Studies, July 1903). See ix. 14, xxii. 5, 24, and ver. 19 below.
συναγάγῃ]Not the Heb. word used earlier in the verse, translated
once, and lost the second time, see previous note. Here Heb. has
ἀκρίδας] So ℵAQ c. B has ἀκρίδα. The collective is quite possible in itself, see Exod. x. 13—19. Here however, final c might easily be lost before following o.
ἐμπαίζονται] The word
5. δικαιοσύνης] So ℵAQ; B has δικαιοσύνῃ. The former agrees
6. ὲν νόμῳ παραδοθήσονται] ἐν νόμῳ may be an attempt to render
nJiDR, ‘faithfulness,’ a plural form: or can Lxx. have read more, in
the sense of ‘command,’ ‘appointment’? In Nehem. xi. 23,
ἐν Θησαυροῖς] Here stands for Ion, ‘power,’ ‘wealth.’ At the end
of the verse, it corresponds more directly to
ἐκεῖ] Not in Heb.; apparently takes up the sense of ἐν θησαυροῖς. BV 109 read ἥκει ’t, Jerome): 106 omits the verse.
δικαιοσύνης] Heb. has only the pronoun termination: ‘his ’
7. This verse is expanded, a somewhat unusual thing in LXX., though Cf. xxi. 15. ἐν τῷ φόβῳ . . . φοβηθήσονται (Cf. viii. 12) is not in Heb., except in so far as it appears to be a duplicate of what follows. Again, ἀξιοῦντες εἰρήνην, read after ἀποσταλήσονται by RA and many cursives, including the Lucianic, is duplicated by παρακαλοῦντες εἰρήνην, read by the uncials and some (but not the Luc.) cursives at the end of the verse. 87 97 228 have λαλοῦντες for ἀξιοῦντες. NA and some cursives also read γὰρ after ἄγγελοι, and BQ are nearly alone in reading οὗτοι for αὐτοί.
Removing these duplicates, which may have come, partly at least, from other versions, we are left with Ἰδοὺ δὴ οὓς ἐφοβεῖσθε, βοήσονται ἀφ’ ὑμῶν· ἄγγελοι ἀποσταλήσονται ἀξιοῦντες εἰρήνην πικρῶς κλαίοντες. This we must analyse, phrase by phrase.
οὓς ἐφοβεῖσθε] This seems to be
φοβηθήσονται] This is read by ℵ cb AQ* and about twenty cursives, but not by Syro-hex. ’s βοήσονται seems preferable, as (a) the con- struction is harder with this verb, (b) it agrees in meaning with Heb., (c) φοβηθ. may be due to confusion with the previous (duplicate) words. In the ’orum Apocryplza, in a note on Judith xvi. 11 Mr Ball points out a similar confusion between these verbs: to which we may add a very similar case in xxiv. 14 above.
ἀποσταλήσονται] This word, and ἀξιοῦντες, are additions of the
LXX., to complete the sense, as they have a participle for the verb
8. τούτων and πρὸς τούτους are not in Heb.; cf. οὗτοι in ver. 7 (but not in 6).
ὅ φόβος τὸν My] It is not very clear how Lxx. have dealt with
this verse. The easiest supposition seems to be, that, confusing the,
two expressions, ms
9. The Greek omits the second verb in the first clause, possibly in
the second also. ἕλη is difficult; by the order it would correspond to
Sop, ‘withereth,’ but no clue to any connection appears, unless LXX.
read was, see on xxxv. 7: there is also
φανερὰ ἔσται] This phrase suggests that
Γαλιλαία] Lxx. substitute this name for the neighbouring ‘Bashan,’ ’ perhaps to do it honour, in the light of ix. I, especially if φανερὰ was misunderstood.
11. νῦν] Repeated from ver. 10; not in Heb.
ὄψεσθε] It is hardly likely that Lxx. would render
αίσχυνθήσεσθε] So ℵ ca AV 62 87 93 97 106 147 228: ℵ*B (Q *fort)
have αἰσθηθήσεσθε: Q a 24 306 and some Luc. Mss. αἰσθήσεσθε. It is
difficult to decide, especially as Cypr. ’m. u. 26) quotes the,
passage with both verbs: mmc videbitis, nunc ’ntellz’getz’s, mmc
’m’. This gives three verbs answering to the three in
ver. 10: but it is most unlikely that all Greek MSS. would, if this were
the true text, have agreed in leaving out one verb of the two. Cyprian
may have quoted from a copy whose original had a correction in its
ματαία ἔσται ἢ ἰσχὺς] Heb. apparently ‘ye shall bring forth stubble.’ Lxx. do not seem to be paraphrasing this, but to be reduced to guesswork. ματαία might indeed be due to w ‘stubble’: but it is, strictly speaking, out of the order, and no plausible suggestion of a misreading occurs.
τοῦ πνεύματος] This connection of πνεύματος· with what precedes is against Heb. accents, and against the generally approved rendering of Heb.
12. ἐν ἀγρῷ] Scholz gives this as mia ‘field’ for Ἰὼ ‘lime.’ It
is again, however, out of the strict order. If
ἐρριμμένη] Heb. ‘cut down,’ or ‘cut up,’
13. Ἀκούσονται . . . γνώσονται] Lxx. take Heb. imperatives as 3rd pers. plur., which would require different pointing, and probably prefixed to the former verb.
14. ἀσεβεῖς] Heb.
ἀναγγελεῖ]
ὑμῖν. . . ὑμῖν] Heb. ‘among us,’
τόπον] Explained by Scholz as
15. μισῶν] Scholz thinks this word was chosen for its resemblance to Heb. DRD, ‘rejecting.’ Vulg. well projicit.
ἀνομίαν καὶ ἀδικίαν] The Heb. words occur together, Ezek. xxii. 12. Unjust, fraudulent gain is referred to.
16. Minor differences of syntax are to be observed.
17. γῆν πόρρωθεν] Heb. ‘a land of distances.’ Most modern authorities interpret this as meaning ‘a far-stretching land.’ ‘A land of distance’ (sing.) certainly seems to mean regularly ‘a distant land’ as in xiii. 5, xxxix. 3 (a fem. form), xlvi. 11; Jerem. viii. 19 is plur., as here, and Ezek. xii. 27, of time, has a fem. plur. form. In Zech. x. 9 a slightly different form (in pointing) of the word ‘distances’ is used as equivalent to ‘far countries.’ LXX., like A.V., seem to something like a Pisgah-sight.
Albert Barnes, taking in his commentary nearly the modern view,
quotes Virg. Aen. 11. 27:
18. ὑμῶν] So AQ and most MSS.; ἡμῶν RB ℵ Β; Heb. ‘thy.’
μελετήσει φόβον Κυρίου] Κυρίου is added by A 26, but is not in Heb., nor in MSS. generally of LXX.: it appears to be a ’s addition.
τοῦ εἰσιν...;] For the form of expression cf. xix. 12, xxxvii. 13 l. 1, and especially Ii. 13.
St Paul, having quoted in 1 Cor. i. 19, from lsai. xxix. 14, proceeds to combine this passage with touches from xix. 11, 12.
γραμματικοὶ . . . ἀριθμῶν] The same word in Heb., the participle of
συμβουλεύοντες] Heb. ‘that weighed,’ from which the sense of estimating or judging, but hardly that of sharing in counsel, would come.
come. τοὺς συστρεφομένους] ℵ ΑΟΓ 26 41 49 51 91 104 106 198 228 239 306 309 read thus: Luc. MSS. have ἀναστρεφομένους, Β τρεφομένους, which alone appears to give any sense in connection with the Heb., the word ‘towers’ being literally ‘a thing raised up,’ and the verb applied to ‘rearing up’: so in i. 2 Lxx. have ἐγέννησα, Aq. Theod. ἐξέθρεψα for it. Consequently it seems that συντρεφομένους is the original of A's reading, though even then the preposition is hard to account for. This, on a wrong idea of the intended meaning, was corrupted to συστρεφ., and later improved into ἀναστρεφ. But possibly cyc was wrongly written after τογc. 86 has συντρεφ., 144 ανατρεφομενους.
On this verse, in the Hebrew, the commentators quote Virg. Am.
1. 203,
19. This verse seems to have been amplified, with some from the meaning. μικρὸν καίω...ᾦ οὗ (συνεβουλεύσαν)...τῷ seem to be additions, and also the copula in οὐδέ: while λαὸς is repeated in a different place.
μικρὸν καὶ μέγαν] See on ver. 4. μέγαν might be due to taking
συνεβουλευσαν is the reading of A 41 86 106 198: ℵQΓ συνεβουλεύσαντο, Β συνεβουλεύσατο.
πεφαυλισμένος] Heb. ‘stammering’ is actually the passive of a verb meaning ‘deride.’ see on xxviii. 11.
20. πόλις πλουσία] See xxxii. 18, and for the adjective, also 9 13, 14 are different.
σκηναὶ . . . πάσσαλοι . . . σχοινία] Simile of a tent, with its pegs and ropes. Cf. liv. 2, and see below, on ver. 23.
21. τὸ ὄνομα] Taking
τόπος] Some have explained the Heb. ‘place’ as = ‘in place of. Delitzsch refers to I Kings xxi. 19 as proving, “if Hosea i. 10 does not,” that it may have that meaning; but disapproves it
Κυρίου . . . ἐστίν . . . ὑμῖν ἔσται] For A's ἐστίν, the MSS. generally have
ὑμῖν. Probably duplicate renderings of mm
πλατεῖς καὶ εὐρύχωροι] Heb. ‘wide stretching,’ ‘broad of lit. ‘of hands,
The latter part of the verse is somewhat different in Gr. and Heb.
At first sight, ‘gallant ’ appears to be omitted. But ‘gallant’ is the
same Heb. word as ‘in majesty’ earlier in the verse, and μέγας stands
for it in both places.
22. ἄρχον] Somewhat vague for ‘law-giver,’ which Scholz however seems to be wrong in classing as omitted by LXX., or rather, among his “Zusätze zum hebr. Texte.” After all, the Athens were ἄρχοντες.
23. Generally taken as a simile of a ship, as in Horace, Od. 1. xiv.,
σχοινία suits either interpretation, as does ἱστός, ‘mast’ or ‘tentpole’; while οὐ χαλάσει τὰ ἱστία and οὐκ ἀρεῖ σημεῖον are duplicates, one suiting the ship, the other the tent: raising and unfurling a. standard being closely connected. As it stands, Lxx. must necessarily be taken of the ship: but traces of another rendering, possibly of the other interpretation, survive.
οὖ . . . τοίνυν]
πολλοὶ] Epithet transferred from ‘plunder’ to ‘lame’: in Heb. it is a noun, ‘abundance.
24. ‘The inhabitant’ is omitted by lxx., and the sentence adjusted to a single subject.
ἀφέθη] Probably an aorist with augment omitted: cf. ἀνέθη, Judg. viii. 3. (See Swete, lutrod. to 0. T. in Greek, 11. iv. p. 305.) The Camb. manual edition, however, in its first two editions, prints ἀφεθῇ.
This subjunctive form offers greater difficulties; but is apparently approved by Blass; see on x. 14.
XXXIV. 1. ἄρχοντες] 50 Lxx. frequently renders
οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες ἂν αὐτῇ] Some cursives οἰκοῦντες: Luc. generally and RBQ omit participle: ℵ* has oi οἰκοῦντες for ἦ οἰκουμένη. Heb. ‘the fulness of it’ (Ps. xcvi. 11, xcviii. 7, τὸ πλήρωμα αὐτῆς, of the sea).
ὅ λαὸς ὁ ἂν αὐτῇ] A weakened rendering of ‘all that come forth of ’ This Heb. word, ‘outgoings,’ is found four times in Job, in the sense of ‘offspring,’ and in Isaiah, also xxii. 24, xlii. 5, xliv. 3, xlviii. 19, lxi. 9, lxv. 23; of which xlii. 5 most resembles the present passage.
2. ἀριθμὸν] ‘muster.’ Heb. ‘host,’ sing. of ‘Sabaoth’ again in ver. 4, where δυνάμεις is due to the later versions.
3. τραυματίαι] See on xxii. 2. Cf. with this verse Joel ii. 20.
βραχήσεται] Heb. rather ‘be melted.
4. καὶ ἑλιγήσεται] Before these words B and many cursives insert καὶ τακήσονται πᾶσαι αἱ δυνάμεις τῶν οὐρανῶν, which Q mg shows to be a Hexaplaric addition from the later versions. (The clause has been suspected in the Heb.) The late plurals of οὐρανὸς and coelum seem to be due to Hebrew influence.
φύλλα 2°] Supplied by Lxx. A. V. inserts
5. ἐμεθύσθη] Possibly a right rendering.
ἀπωλείας] Heb. ‘of my ban.’
6. στέατος 1°] After this B and Luc. Mss. have an nearly in the words of Symmachus, but with the order of ‘lambs’ and ‘goats’ inverted.
τράγων καὶ κριῶν] Here, in the true Lxx. text, we have ‘goats,’
7. οἱ ἁδροὶ] The Greek word occurs, 2 Kings x. 6. Heb. ‘wild oxen.’ Cf. οἱ ἄρξαντες, xiv. 9, and see also Amos iv. 1, Ezek. xxxiv. foll., xxxix. 18.
LXX. omits the parallel subject ‘their dust.’ Theodotion, τὸ αὐτῶν.
10. Lxx. omit ‘there shall be none passing through it’ (supplied from Theod. in some MSS., and with slight changes, by ℵ ca). Some commentators prefer to arrange the clauses in Heb. as in LXX. leaving the last unqualified.
Ver. 10b, 11, 13, 14 strongly resemble xiii. 20—22. The names the various creatures mentioned can hardly be expected to correspond in Heb. and Greek, and many are altogether uncertain.
11. κατοικήσονται] Lxx. has only one verb, instead of two, for four subjects, but the MSS. vary as to the place of the verb, and its terminaton, act. or mid. Only 106 agrees with A: the best supported text is possibly that of NQV 24 26 49 86 87 91 97 104 109 198 228 305 309 κατοικήσουσιν).
σπαρτίον γεωμετρίας ἐρήμου] Heb. ‘the line of desolation (tohu) and the plummet of emptiness’ (bohu). These two Heb. words together, Gen. i. 2, Jerem. iv. 23. The former especially is frequent in the Book of Isaiah. It occurs eleven times, ten of which are in passages which many moderns deny to Isaiah; the other is xxix. 21 which a majority of critics still retain: though not all, see Cheyne, Intr. to Me Book of Isaiah, p. 195.
The land shall be “laid waste with as much care and exactness as
The Lxx. paraphrase is not very remote: but it is doubtful how
much of the Hebrew it is intended to render. If the whole, then the
last clause in the Greek verse, καὶ ὀνοκένταυροι . . . αὐτῆ, is an addition of
LXX., perhaps from xiii. 22. If however σπαρτίον ἐρήμου corresponds
to the ‘line of desolation,’ γεωμετρίας might be an addition of Lxx. to
explain the phrase, and καὶ ὀνοκένταυροι ἐν αὐτῇ, with a verb supplied,
a misreading; perhaps
12. Heb. is very doubtful: not. is as near as could be expected, but either omit ‘they proclaim’ as ℵ*B, or have a noun in its place, as ℵcaAQ and about nine cursives, the order of words varying in MSS.
ale ἀτέλειαν] Heb. ‘nothingness.
13. πόλεις] Heb. ‘palaces,’ ‘castles.’
ἄκανθα] Α alone, MSS. generally ἀκάνθινα ξύλα. Lxx. omits ‘nettles and brambles.’ Luc. MSS. supply καὶ κνίδες καὶ ἄκανοι, probably Hexaplaric, though not in Q mg.
σειρήνων. . . στρουθῶν] As to these and other creatures, see on xiii. 21, 22. The correspondence between Heb. and Greek is not exact. The meaning of the original was probably hazy to the translators.
14. ὀνοκένταυροι] Here Heb. has Lilith. This was the name of a female demon of Chaldaic mythology, who deceived Adam, according to Rabbinic legends, and who murdered children. Perhaps here ‘the screech-owl,’ as Kay and W. E. Barnes. Cheyne renders, ‘the night-hag.’ The objections to supposing that Isaiah couples together wild beasts and demons are, however, serious.
15. ἐχῖνος] Apparently reading
ἡ γῆ] Not in Heb. Can
μετὰ ἀσφαλείας] Probably interpreting ‘in her shadow.
ἴλαφοι] The translation ‘hinds’ is an attempt to preserve some
consistency in the genders with ver. 16. Heb. ‘kites’; LXX. may
have guessed;
καὶ (Soy τὰ πρόσωπα ἀλλήλων] This again may be a paraphrase,
16. ἀριθμῷ] Evidently WED, ‘the book,’ taken in the sense of ‘number,’ which it does not, perhaps, bear with its present pointing, though the verb has that meaning, as well as kindred nouns. Some critics have sought to reconstruct the Heb. in the light of Lxx. (see Cheyne's commentary ad loc.).
Κύριος] Heb. has here ‘my mouth’: but ‘the Lord’ occurs in the verse, and may have been transferred.
17. βόσκεσθαι] Heb. ‘by line,’
This chapter and the following appear to be contrasted pictures of a judgment ending in desolation, and a joyful uprising and return of the ransomed. Edom, in ver. 5. may be a type of God's enemies, lxiii. I, Mal. i. 3, Rom. ix. 13: but the actual Edom had much to answer for, Amos i. 11, Obadiah, Psalm cxxxvii. 7, &c.
Many modern authorities consider these two chapters to date from the time of the Exile—or
XXXV. 1. Εὐφράνθητι] Cf. Ps. lxv. 13: also Virgil's “laetae segetes,” Georg. 1. 1. Ps. cxxvi. 5, 6, is on the way to this
διψῶσα] A1 inserts ἡ. The rendering is probably right.
κρίνον] The flower meant is, according to some, the narcissus, cf. Song of Sol. ii. 1; acc. to others, the crocus (‘autumn crocus,’ marg.). (Some meadow-flower, copious and beautiful, is necessary suit the passage.)
2. ἐξανθήσει] The Luc. MSS. add καὶ ὑλοχαρήσει, which Ruskin, a real lover of the Septuagint, translates ‘shall run wild with wood, at the head of the second chapter of Sesame and Lilies (‘of Gardens’).
τὸ, ἔρημα τοῦ Ἰορδάνου] Heb. ‘with joy and singing.’ τὰ
is due to taking
τοῦ Καρμήλου] Cf. xxix. 17, xxxiii. 9. Lxx. omit ‘Sharon.’
ὁ λαός μου] Perhaps
3. ἰσχύσατε] The Heb. verb is transitive.
4. παρακαλέσατε] Α comparison of Job iv. 3, 4, where παρακαλέα
renders the parallel verb, leaves little doubt that here it stands for
was, ‘confirm’; and probably was originally meant to govern γόνατα.
‘Say to’ has however dropped out from the translation or the
ὀλιγόψυχοι τῆ διανοίᾳ] Heb. lit. ‘hasty of heart’: see on ἀσθενούντων,
xxxii. 4. Ὀλιγόψυχος is used Prov. xiv. 29, where Heb. has ‘hasty of
spirit,’ or rather ‘cut short of spirit,’
κρίσιν ἀνταποδόσει καὶ ἀνταποδόσει] SO Α alone: other MSS.
generally ἀνταποδίδωσιν καὶ ἀνταποδώσω The correspondence with
Heb. is in any case not verbally exact, there being no repeated cognate
word. The similar passage, Iix. 18, is much shortened in Lxx. We
might conjecture κρίσιν καὶ ἀνταπόδοσιν ἀνταποδώσει. But it is perhaps
more likely that LXX. were confused by the recurrence of
αὑτὸς] Heb. has an emphatic pronoun.
5. ἀκούσονται] Heb. more difinitely, ‘shall be unstopped’ ‘opened.’ Cf. l. 5; but here ἀνοίγω has already been used.
6. τρανὴ ἔσται] Heb. ‘shall sing,’ implying a loud clear
The same word in ver. 2, where Lxx. had Ἰορδάνου. Scholz suggests
that the Greek word was suggested by its resemblance to Heb.
7. ἦ ἄνυδρος] Heb. Sharab, here and xlix. 10. Many interpret it, according to the Arabic usage of the word, as ‘mirage’: but it seems more proper to take it of the ‘burning ’ which causes the mirage, which, even if it could be said to ‘become a pool,’ could as in xlix. 10. ‘smite’ them. The immediate effect of the mirage, moreover, appears to be refreshing rather than oppressive, until the delusion is perceived. The Heb. word means properly “glowing, dazzling dryness”.
εὐφροσύνη] Heb. here ‘habitation,’ not as xxxii. 14. Perhaps a
confusion of m: with nu, ‘rest,’ to which, at least in the special form
used Gen. viii. 21, a sense of satisfaction seems to be attached (if it is
really from that root). But the Greek here may be a paraphrase—or
ὀρνέων] Heb. probably ‘jackals,’ xiii. 22, xxxiv. I 3, xliii. 20. Lxx. has no fixed translation; but frequently σειρῆνες.
καλάμου] The case may be wrong. ποιμνίων of N is apparently a careless reminiscence of lxv. 10, like xvii. 2: it is also found inserted or substituted elsewhere in the verse.
ἕλη] Earlier in the verse this stood for DIR, ‘reeds’ or ‘a marsh’ here it is am, which appears to mean ‘reed’ only: but confusion would be easy under the circumstances.
8. καθαρὰ] Not expressed in Heb., which has ‘a highway.’ adjective might be taken as meaning ‘clear,’ ‘open’: Pindar, 01. VI. 39, κελεύθῳ ἐν καθαρᾷ, also 01. x. (XI.) 5;. Cf. Hom. Iliad, VIII. 491 ἐν καθαρῷ, ὅθι δὴ νεκύων διεφαίνετο χῶρος, Soph. 0.C. 1575, ὃν κατεύχομαι ἐν καθαρῷ βῆναι. But from the rest of the verse it seems likely that καθαρὰ means ‘pure’ and is supplied as a parallel to ἁγία.
καὶ ὁδὸς ἁγία] Lxx. seem not to have read ‘and a way’ twice in Heb.
οὐδὲ ἐκεῖ ἔσται ὁδὸς ἀκάθαρτος] Not in the Heb.
οἱ διεσπαρμένοι] Perhaps
ἐπ’ αὐτῆς]
9. θηρίων πονηρῶν] πονηρὸς freq. renders
10. εὐφροσύνης] First representing
καταλήμψεται] ‘Joy’ is made by Lxx. the subj. of this verb, instead of the obj., as in Heb.
ἐπὶ γὰρ κεφαλῆς αὐτῶν αἴνεσις] Not in Heb. Β* omits all except αἴνεσις.
ὀδύνη καὶ λύπη καὶ στεναγμός] Again Heb. has two terms, Lxx. three. Λύπη seems to be the intruder, though in the parallel passage, li. II, Scholz gives στεναγμὸς as the addition.
XXXVI. Chapters xxxvi.—xxxix. give an account of certain
events in ’s reign, in which Isaiah took a principal part.
Historical passages somewhat similar in tone, and in their hearing on the
prophecies, occur in chap. vi.—viii., xx. See also Amos vii.
Jerem. xx., xxviii., xxxii., xxxv. foll., and Haggai. The first of these
These chapters stand between the two main portions of the book, setting the seal of history, so to speak, upon Isaiah's Assyrian prophecies. It is hardly needful to repeat that many modern critics deny Isaiah's authorship of chh. xl.—lxvi. On the whole it will found (whether there be any necessary connection between views held on these two questions, or no) that these deny also his authorship of xxxvi.—xxxix., and hold that the parallel passages in 2 Kings, 17—xx. 19, are there found in their original place and form; while supporters of the traditional view, that Isaiah is the author, substantially, of all the sixty-six chapters of the book bearing his name, make no exception here, and consider that the compiler of Kings borrowed from Isaiah. Thus Kay says, “These two chapters (viz., xxxvi., xxxvii.)... are the historical goal of chh. vii.—xxxv. The two following on the other hand, are the historical starting-point of chh. xl.—lxvi.’ And previously: “These chapters are referred to in 2 Chro. xxxii. 32 as a part of the VISION of Isaiah. Nearly the whole of them is embodied in 2 K. xviii—xx,’
Delitzsch, allowing that the text in Kings “is in many places the
better and more authentic,” warns us not to draw a hasty
from this, as “in the relation of Jer. Iii. to 2 Kings xxiv. 18—xxv.
have a proof that the text of a piece may be preserved more faithfully
in the secondary place than in the original.” He gives several
for thinking the passage original in Isaiah:
shown by comparing 2 Kings xvi. 5 with Isai. vii. 1.
reign (2 Chron. xxvi. 22).
Isaiah.
speaking sometimes in the first, sometimes in the third
person.
is copied in Kings.
Vitringa thought Isaiah the author.
Prof. Skinner (Isaiah, in Camb. Bible for Schools) says, “there is
no reasonable doubt that these chapters are an excerpt from the
Bp Lowth says, “We find the same narrative in the Second Book of Kings,...and these chapters of Isaiah,...for much the most part (the account of the sickness of Hezekiah only excepted), are but a different copy of that narration.” At the beginning of ch. xxxix. says, “Hitherto the copy of this history in the Second Book of Kings has been the most correct: in this chapter, that in Isaiah has the advantage.’
Prof. W. E. Barnes says of xxxvi., xxxvii., “These chapters correspond (save for a few omissions) with 2 Kings xviii. 13—xix. both passages are probably drawn from the same source, viz. a book of the Annals of Judah.” (And similarly of xxxviii. 1—8, 21, 22.)
On the whole, no hypothesis is free from difficulties. Probably it is a mistake to try to decide the question in the light of general theories as to the composition of the Book of Isaiah. The view that the original source of these chapters is to be sought in Isaiah seems rather the simpler.
On turning to the Septuagint, the verbal differences between Kings
and Isaiah will be found considerable; exceeding the differences in
the Hebrew, as though independently translated; following, however,
as a rule, differences of the Heb. text; and the version in Kings
generally closer than that in Isaiah. Hence, in some cases, when the
Heb. is identical in Kings and Isaiah, it may happen that the mm. of
Kings is closer than the Lxx. of Isaiah to the Hebrew of Isaiah.
See, for instance,
(Delitzsch carefully notes the differences between the Heb. texts of Kings and Isaiah throughout.)
The Hexaplaric additions to the Greek text in Isaiah, several of
The chronology of these chapters is of well-known difficulty, but cannot be discussed here. N o explanation has so far disposed of all awkwardness.
The Greek, in the narrative portions, presents comparatively little difficulty.
1. Σανναχηρεὶμ] Heb. Sanherib, Assyrian Sin-akhi-irib. Herodotus calls him Σανάριβος, which, except in the third vowel, is more accurate.
2. The narrative in Kings has an insertion before this, 2 Kings xviii. 14—16. Here, it adds ‘the Tartan and the Rabsaris’ Rabshakeh.’ Del. points out that xxxvii. 6 implies more envoys one. The names are official titles. For Tartan, see on xx. 1. Rab= saris= ‘chief eunuch,’ Rabshakeh = ‘chief flicer,’ or as modern has it ‘Chief of the Staff.’ It resembles the Hebrew for ‘chief butler, and may have been so understood by the Jews.
ἐν τῷ ὑδραγωγῷ, κ. τ. λ.] See on vii. 3. The Creek is nearer to the Heb. here. Cf. xxii. 9. The topography is still uncertain.
3. For Eliakim and Shebna cf. xxii. I 5, 20. The latter—the identity can hardly be doubted—appears here in a subordinate but not as entirely disgraced. But we know neither how great this fall was considered, nor whether more was to come.
4. Τί πεποιθὼς εἰ] Lxx. of Kings agrees with Heb. of both places, rendering Τίς ἦ πεποίθησις αὕτη ἣν πέποιθας.
5. LXX. of Kings again agrees nearly with Heb., which has in Kings ‘thou sayest,’ in Isaiah ‘1 say’ (difference only of t in consonantal text). Literally Heb. here reads: ‘1 say—only a word of —counsel and strength for war.’ If Lxx. took the verb interrogatively, the Greek might almost be considered to be accounted for, and it has been proposed (by Wellhausen and Seinecke) to render in Kings, ‘Thinkest thou that a mere word of the lips is counsel and strength for war?’ which comes, after all, somewhat near to nor. here.
6. τήν καλαμίνην τὴν τεθλασμένην] For the phrase compare xlii. 3
for the sentiments concerning Egypt, xix. 3, 11—16, xxx. 1–7, xxxi. 1–3.
εἰς τήν χεῖρα, αὐτοῦ] After these words Lxx. here omit ‘and will pierce ’: contained in both Heb. texts, LXX. of Kings, and Theodotion here καὶ τρήσει αὐτήν); so that it appears in many MSS. as a Hexaplaric insertion; 62 90 144 147 308 have τρυπήσει; RAQ 24 26 41 49 86 106 198 233 239 306 omit.
καὶ πάντες] Heb. (both) and Lxx. of Kings ‘to all that.’ LXX.
read
7. εἰ δὲ . . . πεποίθαμεν] Again, Lxx. of Isaiah omit all the verse after these words: the Hexaplaric insertion is almost in agreement with Lxx. of Kings, except that according to Q mg, we have here οὗτος· omitted, ὅς after ἐστίν, ἀφεῖλεν for ἀπέστησεν, κατὰ πρόσωπον for ἐνώπιον, and ἐν Ἰερουσαλὴμ omitted at the end. There are, however, many minor variants among the MSS. containing the words. The final omission of ἐν Ἰερ. corresponds with the Heb., as Kings but not Isaiah contains those words.
λέγετε] Heb. Isaiah has ‘thou sayest’: conversely Kings ‘ye LXX. εἶπας.
εἶπας. 8. μίχθητε] Aq. Theod. Symm. add δή, so do Lxx. Kings: also σεαυτῷ after δοῦναι, both additions agreeing with Heb.
The Heb. ‘pledge ’ ‘exchange ’ has in the reflexive aspect of the verb the meaning ‘intermingle’ also. Cf. Psalm cvi. 35 ἐμίγησαν. Some uses of the Greek verb in Homer approach this meaning.
ἵππον] Feminine and collective.
9. LXX. of Isai. has modified the syntax and with it the punctuation. ℵ*B read τῶν τοπαρχῶν; ℵ cb? AQ have τοπαρχοῦ ἑνός, which agrees with Kings: but this is not Hexaplaric, or at any rate not the complete Hexaplaric text, which as usual appears in Lucianic MSS., τοπ. ἑνὸς τῶν δουλῶν τοῦ Κυρίου μου τῶν μικρῶν. Kings has ἐλαχίστων, so that the Hexaplaric Isaiah again differs a little from it. At this point begins a fresh sentence, which seems due to misunderstanding the Oriental turn of expression; the stress on οἰκέται seems hardly ordinary.
τοπάρχου] The Heb. word is said to be borrowed from Assyrian, meaning a governor of a province.
10. πολεμῆσαι] Kings has διαφθεῖραι; so Heb. ℵ*Β adds Ηexaplaric, Aq. Th. Symm. Q mg) Κύριος· εἶπεν πρὸς μὲ Ἀνάβηθι ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν ταύτην καὶ διάφθειρον αὐτήν. So LXX. of Kings. ℵcbAQ 26 (483) 106 omit.
Compare Homer, Iliad, V. 185, Οὐκ ὁ γ’ ἄνευθε θεοῦ τάδε μαίνεται.
11. Συριστὶ] Aramaic, the usual language, in its Western form, of diplomatic intercourse at this time. The educated Jews knew it, but not Assyrian; the common people apparently understood none but their own tongue. The Rabshakeh seems to have been an accomplished linguist and orator.
12. The prepositions are varied in the different texts. Heb. has
‘to thy master’ (Is.
13. Ἰουδαιστὶ] The Rabshakeh spoke at first in Hebrew: when remonstrated with, he answered with a momentary compliance in Aramaic, in which he had been addressed; and then raised his voice again, and spoke in Hebrew, fully aware of the advantage it gave him.
τοῦ βασιλέως τοῦ μεγάλου] Here, and above, ver. 4, this phrase is an extra title, and βασιλεὺς· Ἀσσυρίων the ordinary designation. (Cf. βασιλεὺς of the king of Persia in Greek writers, e.g. Thucyd.1. 128 137, c.) This is in agreement with Heb., and the words are therefore best so divided in Greek. In this phrase LXX. of Kings is shortened, and less exact: otherwise, the LXX. in each book follows its own Heb. with fair exactness in ver. 13, 14.
15. καὶ μὴ λεγέτω] Lxx. Isai. shorten: Lxx. Kings is with Heb. of both: similarly ῥύσεται at end of verse: Lxx. Kings ἐξαιρούμενος ἐξελεῖται.
16. El βούλεσθε εὐλογηθῆναι] Heb. lit. ‘Make with me a blessing, i.e. come to terms, propitiate me: see Gen. xxxiii. II, where it may be seen to come nearly to mean ‘a present.’ Lxx. Isai. have Lxx. Kings is literal.
LXX. Kings have πίεται ἀνὴρ . . . φάγεται . . . πίεται But these might stand for 2 pers. plur., ἀνὴρ representing Ish in the sense of ‘each.’
λάκκον] So MSS. generally, and Lxx. Kings. B reads χαλκοῦ, which might be taken for ‘brazen vessel,’ as in Soph. El. 758 βραχεῖ χαλκῷ μέγιστον σῶμα δειλαίας σποδοῦ. In Ecclus. l. 3, conversely, A 55 l 5 5 254 296 306 read λάκκος for χαλκός;
17. The Heb. of Kings is fuller than that of Isaiah in this verse; adding after ‘vineyards,’ ‘a land of oil, olive and honey, that ye may live, and not die’: continuing ‘and hearken not unto Hezekiah, when he enticeth,’ in place of ‘Lest Hezekiah entice you.
LXX. of Kings and Isaiah follow each their own Heb. in the main:
each has γῆ in nomin. by a species of attraction, perhaps, rather than
casus pendent. Lxx. of Kings may be right in rendering
18. Cf. chap. x. 8—11, as well as xxxvii. 12, 13.
19. Sepharvaim, not named in chap. x., was probably in S. Mesopotamia, on the Euphrates, a little above Babylon. Heb. of Kings adds here ‘Hena and Ivah’ as in xxxvii. 13: in Lxx. of Kings B A inserts.
19, 20. The Greek differs considerably in Kings and Isai.
μὴ ἐδύναντο ῥύσασθαι] Heb. literally ‘and that they have delivered,’ i.e. ‘the idea of their delivering...’ Cf. such constructions as incepto desistere victam!” The same, without the ‘and,’ in ver. and in both verses in Kings. Lxx. of Kings, on the other hand, has in the first sentence καὶ ὅτι, according to B, A reading μή. This seems to point to B in Kings having preserved an old text, and A in Kings having modified or perhaps assimilated its Greek. But the resemblance, on this minute point, between B in Kings and Heb. in Isaiah is noteworthy.
20. τῶν ἐθνῶν . . . τὴν γῆν] Lxx. of Kings has τῶν γαιῶν...τὰς γᾶς,
γαιῶν representing
21. Heb. Kings alone, has ‘they, the people, held their peace.
διὰ τὸ προστάξαι . . . ἀποκριθῆναι] An unusually classical piece of Greek, with its correct oblique prohibition. Lxx. Kings, with both Heb., has Orat. Recta, and the common anacoluthon, ἐντολὴ . . . λέγων
22. mm. Kings has verbal differences: after ὁ γραμματεὺς it has not τῆς δυνάμεως, nor has either Heb.: ὁ ἀναμιμνήσκων for ὁ ὐπομνηματογράφος, and διερρηχότες τὰ ἱμάτια for ἐσχισμένοι τοὺς χιτῶνας.
τῆς δυνάμεως] Not in Heb.; it seems difficult to give it any other meaning than ‘the power’ or ‘the force,’ i.e. implying that the military secretary, or perhaps rather the secretary to Hezekiah's commission.
XXXVII. The variations in ver. 1—4 are not extensive, and Greek text mainly follows its own Heb.: as in the order of the phrase ‘Isaiah, the son of Amoz, the prophet’: where Heb. of Kings goes against the usual rule with regard to this kind of phrase.
3. ὀνειδισμοῦ] Lxx. of Isaiah is more periphrastic here than Kings,
4. Kings, Heb. and Greek, ‘all the words of R.
5—7. Lxx. Kings continues to show differences of παιδάρια, closer to Heb., for πρέσβεις, δίδωμι ἐν αὐτῷ for ἐμβαλῶ εἷς αὐτόν, καταβαλῶ αὐτὸν ἐν ῥομφαίᾳ for πεσεῦται μαχαίρᾳ, besides some minor points. The Hebraism μὴ φοβηθῇς ἀπὸ τῶν λόγων occurs in both.
8, 9. Here Heb. (both) and um. Kings are nearly in agreement, Kings (Heb. and LXX.) inserting ‘Behold’ before ‘he is come,’ Heb. of Kings alone being without another verb (‘turned’ in ‘heard’ Heb. lsai.) before ‘and (he) sent.
LXX. of Isaiah however presents considerable divergence; after ‘Libnah’ it continues in ℵAOQ, supported in the main by 24 26 49 86 106 198 and partially by some others (but the Lucianic MSS. are substantially in agreement with Heb. and Lxx. Kings): Kai ἤκουσεν βασιλεὺς Ἀσσυρίων ὅτι ἐξῆλθεν Θαράθα βασιλεὺς· Αἰθίοπων πολιορκῆσαι αὐτόν· καὶ ἀκούσας ἀπέστρεψεν καὶ ἀπέστειλεν ἀπέστρεψεν Α) κ.τ.λ. But B reads Kai ἤκουσεν ὅτι ἐπῆρεν ἀπὸ Λαχείς. Καὶ ἐξῆλθεν Θαράκα κ.τ·.λ.
These variations seem due to confusion of the two occurrences of
ἤκουσεν, aided by the first καὶ in place of ὅτι (Luc. MSS. ἤκουσε γὰρ...)
as Heb. has
Probably Lxx. lsai. originally read:
καὶ ἀκούσας ἀπέστρεψεν καὶ ἀπέστειλεν] Α by mistake repeats ἀπέστρεψεν instead of ἀπέστειλεν. Heb. lsai. reads what corresponds to καὶ ἀκούσας ἀπέστειλε. Delitzsch thinks that ‘heard’ is a mistake for ‘turned’ ἐπέστρεψεν Kings), but it can hardly be proved.
Θαράθα] ’s spelling Θαράκα is nearer. Tirhakah is named only here. Under him Ethiopia became the dominant power along the Nile, with influence extending over Egypt itself. See on chap. xviii.
10. Οὕτως ἑρεῖτε] Β of Kings omits all before Μή σε ἀπατάτω, for which it reads Μὴ (umpire: σε. A supplies the missing clause, but shows traces of ’s version in τῷ λέγειν.
The direct challenge, Μή σε ἀπατάτω ὁ θεός σου, crowns Sennacherib's impiety.
11. ὦς ἀπώλεσαν] LXX. Kings, with τοῦ ἀναθεματίσαι αὐτούς, is more exact.
12. Lxx. Isai., according to what appears to be the better text, omits ‘the children of Eden’ (though the Luc. Mss. insert), and the names ‘Gozan, H. and R.’ thus appear as the antecedents to the relative clause. The following proper name, Θαιμὰδ Α, Θεεμὰθ Β, Θαιμὰν Q, may have been conjecturally altered: but the Lxx. spelling of unfamiliar proper names is so erratic, that no inference can, as a rule, be drawn from it. The exact localities of ‘Eden’ and ‘Telassar’ are not certain: as Prof. Skinner points out, Til-Assuri (Hill of Asshur’) was likely to occur frequently. Eden is said to have been a small kingdom on the Upper Euphrates.
Θαιμὰδ] On Tema and Teman see above, on xxi. 14.
For Gozan, on the Chaboras or Chabur, see 2 Kings xvii. 6 Haran, Gen. xi. 31; Rezeph, between the Euphrates and Tadmor (Palmyra), about 20 m. south of the river. Lxx. would appear to have transposed the consonants.
13. Note the resemblance to x. 9.
Hena and Ivah are unknown: some identify the latter with Ava, 2 Kings xvii. 24.
14. ἤνοιξεν αὐτὸ ἐναντίον Κυρίου] “A prayer without words’ (Delitzsch). The preceding clauses in Heb., ‘and read it, and Hezekiah went up into the house of the Lord,’ appear to be due to the Hexapla (from Theod. Symm.) when they occur in Greek texts. Καὶ ἀνέγνω αὐτό, καὶ ἀνέβη εἷς οἶκον Κυρίου, ℵ*ΒQ mg. LXX. Kings has them: and has ἀνέπτυξεν for ἤνοιξεν.
16. πάσης βασιλείας] Lxx. Kings more closely ἐν πάσαις ταῖς βασιλείαις.
17. B reads κλῖνον, Κύριε τὸ οὖς· σου . . . ἀνοῖξον, Κύριε, τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς σου, in agreement with Heb. So Luc. ΜSS., and um. Kings: cf. Dan. ix. 18 (Theod. especially) and Baruch ii. 17. ℵAQ* 26 41 49 86 106 198 omit. Q mg has the words with asterisk.
εἴσβλεψον . . . καὶ ἴδε] LXX. Kings agrees with Heb., ἴδε . . . καὶ ἄκουσον. It cannot be denied that Lxx. Isaiah shows some force and fitness to the circumstances: but it may be merely due to a slight confusion, amid which καὶ ἄκουσον may have dropped out.
18. ἐπ’ ἀληθείας] The phrase is classical: Demosth. de Cor. 294
εἷ γ’ ἐπ’ ἀληθείας δέοι σκοπεῖσθαι, seems, however, to differ somewhat
in meaning. Lxx. Kings has ἀληθείᾳ: Plato, Protag. 343 D, οὐκ
τὴν οἰκουμένην ὅλη κ.τ.τ] Heb. lit. ‘all the lands and their land.’ Heb. of Kings has ‘the nations and their land,’ and so A of LXX. Kings: but B omits ‘and their land.’
19. ἐνέβαλον] Lxx. Kings more literally ἔδωκαν.
20. σὺ δὲ] So ℵAQ and many cursives (ABBREVℵ for ABBREV, apparently): B, with Kings LXX. and Heb., νῦν.
21. ἀπεστάλη] Lxx. Isaiah is alone in giving a passive verb.
Ἤκουσα] Not in Heb., which must be rendered, ‘As to what thou hast prayed...’: Kings, Heb. and Lxx. insert ‘Ι have heard’ at the end of each sentence.
22. Here we seem to have a genuine prophecy of Isaiah inserted in the historical account. The crisis is at hand, and the prophecy, with all its loftiness, is unusually close in its view and direct in its language.
Ἐφαύλισεν] Kings, ἐξουδένησεν.
23. παρώξυνας] Kings, ἐβλασφήμησας. There are other minor differences.
24. εἰς ὕψος ὀρέων] LXX. Kings continues, μηροὺς τοῦ Λιβάνου· καὶ ἔκοψα τὸ μέγεθος τῆς κέδρου αὐτοῦ, τὸ ἐκλεκτὰ κυπαρίσσων αὐτοῦ· καὶ ἦλθεν (ἦλθόν Bb, εισηλθον A) εἰς μέσον δρυμοῦ καὶ Καρμήλου. (A has εις μεσον τελους αυτου δρυμου Καρμηλου αυτου.)
τὰ ἔσχατα] Heb. ‘sides,’ often used in the sense of ‘recesses’: Cf. Jonah i. 5 (τὴν κοίλην τοῦ πλοίου).
25. His boast recalls the marvels actually wrought at the Exodus. Lxx. Isaiah shortens this verse. Lxx. Kings has ἐγὼ ἔψυξά (ἐφύλαξά ) καὶ ἔπιον ὕδατα ἀλλότρια, καὶ ἐξηρήμωσα τῷ ἴχνει τοῦ ποδός· μου πάντας ποταμοὺς περιοχῆς.
συναγαγὴν ὕδατός] See on xix. 6.
26. ἥκουσαι] ℵ*B have ἤκουσα. In Kings, B omits all previous to ‘I formed it,’ see Heb. of Isai. A inserts, apparently from Aquila. LXX. of Kings continues, ἔπλασα αὐτὴν, συνήγαγον αὐτήν· καὶ ἐγενήθη εἷς ἐπάρσεις ἀπὸ οἰκεσιῶν μαχίμων, πόλεις ὀχυράς.
27. χλωρὸς] So A 106, Cf. Kings χόρτος ἀγροῦ ἢ χλωρὰ βοτάνη, with xv. 6 and Mark vi. 39. Other MSS. here ξηρός.
With this passage cf. on the one hand vii. 20, x. 13—15; on the other, xl. 21 foll., xlv. 2|, xlviii. 6, &c.
ἄγρωστις] The Heb. of Kings has, instead of ‘a field,’ ABBREV,
‘a blight’ (of corn), ABBREV. Wellhausen (and others) proposed to put
a stop here, and read (primarily in Kings) ABBREV ABBREV, for ABBREV ABBREV, con-
LXX. of Isaiah omits
Compare, in any case, Psalm cxxxix. 2.
28. ἀνάπαυσιν] Taking the Heb. as from ABBREV rather than
30. In xxxii. 10 the people were warned of the loss of one harvest, perhaps two. Here they are assured that after two seasons, in which they must subsist on what the untilled ground produced, they shall return to sowing and harvest. The first term used is found in Lev. xxv. 5, 11 (αὐτόματα); the second only (in a varied form) in the parallel verse of Kings, which has, φάγε τοῦτον τὸν ἐνιαυτὸν αὐτόματα, καὶ τῷ ἔτει τῷ δευτέρῳ τὰ ἀνατέλλοντα. LXX. of Isaiah attempts to explain, and departs somewhat from the probable sense. The general application, however, is clear enough.
31. Cf. xvii. 6, xxiv. 13, xxvii. 6.
32. ἐξελεύσονται] So A (36) 91 97 228 309: other MSS. ἔσονται.
ὁ ζῆλος . . . ταῦτα] As ix. 7.
34. ἀποστραφήσεται] Β and most MSS. have the Hexaplar addition (from Theod.) καὶ εἰς τὴν πόλιν ταύτην οὐ μὴ ἐξέλθῃ. (Cf. Kings.) ℵAOQ 24 26 41 49 86 106 306 omit the words.
35. ὑπερασπιῶ] Cf. xxxi. 5, xxxviii. 6, and parallels in Kings: Gen. xv. 1, Zech. ix. 15, xii. 8.
36. εὗρον] An insertion of LΧΧ. Isaiah: the subject is left unexpressed: either the rare survivors, or inhabitants of the country.
37. The interval between Sennacherib's flight and his death is not known, but the statement that he ‘dwelt at Nineveh’ suggests some lapse of time; and his sons must have reached manhood at his death, which is placed by modern authorities, according to the Assyrian monuments, about 681 B.C. Nineveh is mentioned by Isaiah only in this place.
38. Ἀσαρὰχ] Νασαρὰχ Β (Ἐσδρὰχ Β, Ἐσθρὰχ Α of Kings), Heb.
Esarhaddon had been made king or viceroy of Babylon by his
The resemblance of names to those in Zech. vii. 2 is curious.
Compare with this chapter Herodotus’ account of Sennacherib's expedition in Bk 11. 141.
XXXVlll. The corresponding chapter of Kings is differently arranged, and does not contain ’s song of thanksgiving. The Heb. text of Kings is otherwise somewhat fuller. The two Lxx. versions differ frequently in choice of expressions, and each generally follows its own Heb. See, however, 2 Kings xx. 7 LXX. and lsai. xxxviii. 21 Heb.
The event of this chapter seems to have preceded Sennacherib's attack, or at any rate its final collapse: see ver. 6. The chronology we have seen to be a matter of great difficulty. The ‘fifteen years’ added to Hezekiah's life, and the twenty-nine years assigned to his reign, bring his illness to the fourteenth year. Modern authorities have put forward many schemes, generally in disagreement with some, at any rate, of the Biblical numbers, and with each other. Their most general agreement is in assigning the date 701 to Sennacherib's invasion: yet this, which satisfies Assyrian chronology, is too early for Egyptian authorities, who would put it as late as 687—6. Prof. W. Barnes, accepting this, ingeniously gets rid of a good many difficulties but is obliged to place Hezekiah's accession six years after the fall of Samaria, instead of before (2 Kings xviii. 10)!
1. ἐμαλακίσθη ἕως θανάτου . . . Τάξαι περὶ τ. οἶκον] LXX. Kings, ἠρρώστησεν εἷς θάνατον . . . Ἔντειλαι τῷ οἴκῳ.
3. μανὰ ἀληθείας . . . ἐνώπιόν σου] LXX. of Kings, ἐν ἀληθείᾳ καὶ καρδίᾳ πλήρει, καὶ τὸ ἀγαθόν σου) ἕν ὀφθαλμοῖς σου.
4. Heb. of Kings prefixes ‘And Isaiah had not yet gone out of the inner City (or, ’: LXX. of Kings, καὶ ἦν Ἠσαίας ἐν τῇ αὐλῇ τῇ μέσῃ.
5. Prof. Cheyne here quotes Jerome on Ezek. xxxiii.; “Nec statim
sequitur, ut, quia propheta praedicit, veniat quod praedixit. Non enim
praedixit ut veniat, sed ne ’ That prophecy is often conditional,
may be freely granted. It is indeed necessary to its moral
purpose that it should be so. Else the prophets would have been all
as helpless as Cassandra, whenever they had woe or punishment to
proclaim. But not all prophecy is conditional. In this chapter, we
6. σώσω σε] Β has the Hexaplaric addition καὶ τὴν πόλιν ταύτην, which ℵAQΓ 24 26 41 86 106 198 omit.
The parallel version in Kings inserts here the equivalent of ver. 21 22: see below.
8. ἀναβαθμοί] Used in two senses, for the whole dial, or set of
steps, and for the intervals upon it, or separate steps. (mm. of Kings
has βαθμοὶ in the latter sense.) So the Heb.
9. This Song of Hezekiah, which does not occur in Kings, is preserved by some copies of the LXX. also as one of the Ὠδαὶ or Canticles at the end of the Psalter. The principal MSS. containing it are A and the Zurich Psalter (T): A contains also xxvi. 920 the Verona Psalter, v. 1—9 In the present instance not much aid is obtained, ver. IO, 11 containing the only variants of note.
10. ’Ev τῷ Wm] Heb. literally ‘in the quiet’ or ‘stillness’:
some take ‘the noonday,’ ‘zenith’ (Kay, Cheyne, c.): Delitzsch
as ‘the peaceful course.’ Lxx. however may have read
ἐν πύλαις ᾅδου] Here ℵ ca Q mgT (no others) prefix πορεύσομαι, in agreement with Heb.: Q mg has it with it *, but Q has καταβήσομαι after ᾅδου. In the text of the canticle A has πορεύσομαι, Τ πορεύσωμαι. For the Lxx. text cf. lxvi. 18; but there Heb. has not the verb, and something must be supplied: here Lxx. omits it, but the sentence can be rendered without it.
καταλείψω] Heb. ‘I am deprived of,’ punished in the matter of....
As the Heb. verb
11. τὸ σωτήριον τοῦ Θεοῦ] Perhaps intended to interpret Heb. JAH (repeated).
ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς] Β reads ἐπὶ γῆς ζώντων, οὐκέτι μὴ ἴδω τὸ σωτήριον τοῦ
Ἰσραὴλ ἐπὶ γῆς, which seems to be a duplicate, with the exception of
ζώντων, which Q mg has with asterisk, and though the source is not
ἄνθρωπον] After this, QWV and many cursives have ἔτι μετὰ
κατοικούντων from Theodotion. This corresponds to Heb. ‘with the
’ After this the MSS. generally, except ℵAQΓ 49 86 198
239 306, have ἐξέλιπεν. which comes again from Theodotion, clearly
corresponding to Heb. ‘ceasing’ (for which some wish to read ‘time’
or ‘duration’ = this word,
In the Canticle, T has ζώντων, otherwise AT omit ζώντων . . . ἐπὶ γῆς. Τ inserts μετὰ κατοικούντων, and both have ἐξέλειπον.
12. ἐκ τῆς συγγενείας μου] Heb. ‘my habitation’ or cf. liii. 1: lit. ‘a circle,’ cf. xxix.
κατέλιπον . . . ζωῆς μου] An apparent duplicate of the preceding clause, or from ver. 10.
ἐξῆλθεν καὶ ἀπῆλθαν] Colourless verbs: Heb. ‘is plucked up and carried away’ (like a captive). The former is however used simply for ‘remove’ or ‘depart.’
ὅσπερ ὅ καταλύων σκηνὴν] B's order, σκήνην καταλύων, apparently
with Heb., as usually. The participles are not easy to account for,
καταλύων perhaps taking
ἐς ἱστὸς] ἱστὸς here = the ‘web,’ as though
The next words seem to be a guess on the part of LXX., inserted to
give a connection: ἐκτεμεῖν corresponding, except in syntax, to
13. ἐν τῆ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ] Heb. has here, as again below, ‘from day to night.
παρεδόθην] This word, as we have seen, on xxiii. 7, c. (Vol. I.
Introd. p. 50) is frequently used by mm. with doubtful propriety.
LXX., on this supposition, omit ‘I quieted myself,’ for which some
would read ‘I cried,’
14. The names of the birds are better inverted from A.V. They occur together in Heb. again (only) in Jerem. viii. 7.
ὥς περιστερὰ] Cf. lix. 11, and Ezek. vii. 16 AQ (Theod.).
μελετῆσαι] So nearly all MSS. and the Canticle text: B ab μελετῶ, B* uncertain.
ὃς ἐξείλατο] Heb. ‘I am oppressed,’
15. The principal Mss. of LXX. omit this verse altogether. It is supplied from Theodotion, in V.
16. ἀνηγγέλη] Probably represents
17. Q mgV 36 supply the missing clause, ἰδοὺ εἷς εἰρήνην πικρία μου. So ℵ ca nearly.
εἵλου] Seemingly 1152211 for ’n, a reading which some have proposed in the Heb. So also Vulg. eruisti. It may however be an interpretation of Heb., like A.V., the literal rendering being ‘thou hast loved my soul from the pit,’ i.e. with extension of the verb's meaning, ‘loved so as to deliver,
18. οἱ ἐν ᾅδου] Lxx. abandon the attempt at three parallels; this phrase stands the first time for ‘Sheol,’ the second time for ‘they that go down to the pit.
19. The latter part of the verse is paraphrased. Possibly the translator was thinking of Hezekiah's supposed childlessness up to the time of his illness.
δικαιοσύνην] Heb. ‘thy truth’ or ‘faithfulness’: rendered loosely by ἐλεημοσύνην at end of previous verse.
20. Κύριε τῆς cramping] θεὲ B (alone or nearly so) Heb. lit. ‘The Lord to save me.’ The rest of the verse is slightly paraphrased and extended by um.
21, 22. In Kings, these verses stand after ver. 6, and many modern authorities consider them misplaced here. The pluperfects of A. V are objected to, on grammatical grounds. Α wide view as to corresponding usages of language may be needed to justify them: but the order of ’s narrative is not bound to conform to modern ideas of arrangement.
The application of a lump of figs, used as a poultice, was a recog- nised mode of treatment. Yet here its use need not differ from that of the clay in the case of the blind man, John ix. 6. It may be as much sign as agent. The description of ’s disease has suggested to some the plague, supposed therefore to be the same that destroyed Sennacherib's army. The evidence is lacking in either case. Leprosy (Lev. xiii. 18) has also been suggested. Certainly this disease was especially to be regarded as directly inflicted by God, and as a type of sin, clinging and consuming, or removed.
Λάβε] Heb. of Isaiah ‘Let them take,’ with which Lxx. of Kings agrees. Heb. of Kings has imperat. 2nd pers. plur.
ΧΧΧΙΧ. I. Μαρωδὰχ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ Λααδὰν] Heb. ‘Μerodach-Baladan, son of Baladan,’ and so B very nearly. Heb. (but not LXX.) of Kings, ‘Berodach.’
This Merodach had a small principality in S. Babylonia, starting from which, by constant struggles, he made himself king of Babylonia, in the ancient capital. Under Sargon he maintained himself as a nominal but disobedient vassal of Assyria for eleven years, when he openly revolted: thenceforward he carried on intrigue and warfare for a long time, but seems to have reigned at Babylon again only for a few months during ’s reign, until finally crushed by him. His adventurous career lasted for something like thirty years; some authorities assign the later events of it to a son bearing the same name; but see F. “Un patriote Babylonien du VIII me Siècle.’ in Les premieres civilisations.
δῶρα] LXx. of Kings transliterate, though inexactly, μανάαν
(παναὰ Α). Heb.
ἔως Θανάτου] Added by LXX., probably from xxxviii. I. Kings, Heb. and Lxx. omit ‘and reconered.
2. ἐχάρη] So Heb., and Lxx. of Kings: but Heb. of Kings has
‘heard,’
χαρὰν μεγάλην] So ℵAQΓ and 14 cursives, mainly Hesychian; omit B, Luc. MSS. Cf. Matt. ii. 10, which precedes the description of the gifts of the Magi, with its obvious resemblance to the present verse.
τοῦ νεχωθὰ] Transliterated from the Heb. in both Lxx. texts. This practice is more common in other parts of the Bible, especially Kings, than in the Prophets. Theodotion was much given to it (see Swete, Introd. to 0. T. in Greek, p. 46). The Heb. word, according to the best authorities, means ‘treasury’; though some have taken it as equivalent to 11823, a kind of spice: hence, perhaps, the extra term τῆς στακτῆς in LXX. of Isaiah, which may be a duplicate. The order varies in the MSS., ℵAQ and some cursives, mostly Hesychian, placing the silver and gold after the spicery, instead of before it, as B, Luc. MSS., with Heb. and Kings.
τῆς στακτῆς καὶ τῶν θυμ. κ. τ. μύρου] Kings, τὰ ἀρώματα καὶ τὸ ἔλαιον τὸ ἀγαθόν.
7. ἐγέννησας] So NAQ ℵΑQ: B's γεννήσεις is more probably the meaning of Heb.
8. ὃν ἐλάλησεν· γενέσθω δὴ] Heb. ‘which thou hast spoken; and he said, For (or, surely) there shall be....’ Heb. of Kings has, ‘15 it (good?), if there be... ?’ B, in Kings, omits this whole clause, and supplies it, perhaps from Aquila or another of the later versions; καὶ εἶπεν, Μὴ οὐκ, ἐὰν εἰρήνη καὶ ἀληθεία ἔσται ἐν ἡμέραις μου;
Hezekiah's fault (2 Chron. xxxii. 25, 26) was pride, and that he owed all, his very existence, to God. His repentance was sincere, and the evil was not to fall in his day; his son's doings aggravated the ill beyond earthly pardon. His answer to Isaiah is simply resigned thankfulness for the postponement.
δικαιοσύνη] See on xxxviii. 19.
XL. The previous chapter of history has directed our attention to
Babylon. The portion of the Book which follows—chh. xl.—lxvi., or
the greater part of them—has been generally admitted to refer to
captivity in Babylonia, and the deliverance from it. Many modern
critics hold, as is well known, that these chapters were composed by
an unknown prophet (or prophets), long after ’s death, toward
the close of the Exile—some portions, indeed, later again.
allege differences of style, language, and standpoint, between these
chapters and those which they acknowledge as Isaiah's work;
consider it unlikely or impossible that he should have looked so far
into the future, and away from his own time; with so much detail,
moreover, as to mention Cyrus by name. The question is too wide
and complicated for discussion here: and it is not necessary for our
immediate purpose to enter upon it, as the Greek translator shows no
1. παρακαλεῖτε τὸν λαόν μου] The Heb. is transitive (Piel); the rendering of Α. V. is correct, and the punctuation should be observed. The vocative in Vulg., consolamini, popule ms, opens the door to some confusion. The persons addressed are perhaps the prophets; or, indeed, all who hear the message.
2. ἱερεῖς] An insertion by LXX., but without justification. The
pronoun ‘your God’) is not rendered at the end of ver. I; could
ταπείνωσις] Heb. word means (time of) ‘warfare,’ or of ‘hardship,’ ‘hard service’: see job vii. I πειρατήριον), xiv. 14. A comparison of the former passage suggests that Vulg. malitia should here also be militia.
λέλυται . . . ἡ ἁμαρτία] Cf. Aristoph. Frog: 691 λῦσαι τὰς πρότερον ἁμαρτίας.
διπλᾶ] Not, of course, double her deserts; but a specially heavy chastening, inasmuch as the Lord loved her. The heathen, by com- parison, were ‘at ease’ (Zech. i. 15). This is better than to render Heb. ‘she shall receive double,’ i.e. compensation.
3. Φωνὴ βοῶντος] Literal. Many take Heb. almost as if ‘voice’ were an interjection: ‘Hark ! one crying . . .
ἂν τῇ ἐρήμῳ] Lxx. (and Vulg.) connect this phrase with ‘crying,’ and so all four Evangelists quote it. So also Jewish interpreters and Targ., according to Delitzsch: but the Heb. accents join it with ‘Prepare,’ giving a parallelism.
εὐθείας ποιεῖτε] Lxx. omits ‘in the desert’ (Arabah).
4. πληρωθήσεται] Heb. ‘shall be exalted’ or ‘uplifted.
τὸ, σκολιὰ] MSS. generally prefix πάντας Α omits, with Heb. and Luke iii. 6. Cypr. Testim. estim. II. 6 ’a tortuosa.
εὐθεῖαν] In Luke BD have εὐθείας, but RA εὐθεῖαν.
εἰς ὁδοὺς λείας] So ℵ ca cb AQ 26 36 49 86 87 91 93 97 104 106 228 233 239 305 306 309. εἷς πεδία Β (πεδιαν ℵ*). Luke agrees with A. Cf. Zech. iv. 7.
5. τὸ σωτήρων τοῦ Θεοῦ] Inserted by LXX., which omits ‘together.’ Cf. xxxviii. II, and also lii. 10.
Κύριος] Heb. ‘the mouth of the Lord.
6. φωνὴ λέγοντος] See on ver. 3.
δόξα ἀνθρώπου] Heb. ‘the goodness of it,’ ‘goodness’ being won, generally rendered ‘loving-kindness’ or ‘mercy’: cf. Hosea xii. 4, 6 (AV. and R.V. marg.); quoted, I Pet. i. 24, δόξα αὐτῆς. Cf. also James i. II, ἡ εὐπρέπεια τοῦ προσώπου αὐτοῦ.
7. This verse is omitted by LXX.; or, as Camb. manual text represents it, the latter half of 7, and the beginning of 8, similar to 7 are omitted. (Q mg, and Luc. MSS. with many variations, supply from Symm. Theod.’
8. μένει] Generally printed as present; but fut. would agree with Heb.
9. ὁ εὐαγγ. Σιὼν] This rendering is preferable, so R.V., A.V. marg., and Vulg.; similarly in the parallel clause: Jerusalem is the receiver, not the publisher of the good tidings. Cf. xli. 27, lii. 7.
10. μετὰ κυρίας] Heb. has a participle, ‘ruling for him.
11. ποιμὴν ποιμανεῖ τὸ ποίμνιον] Only ‘shepherd’ and ‘feed’ are cognate words in the Heb.
παρακαλέσει] Might be due to reading
12. Τίς ἐμέτρησεν] Α sudden transition. The Creator's greatness, past compare, is contemplated: the idols held up to ridicule, briefly here, ver. 18—20; in more detail below, xliv. 9
Lxx. give only two verbs of the original four, and lose the connection of ‘meted out’ in this verse and the
13. Kay points out that St Paul, who quotes this passage, Rom. xi. 34, also quotes, in his argument, ix.—xi., from “Isai. i. 9, vi. viii. 14, x. 22, 23, xxviii. 16, 22, liii. 1, lxv. I, 2, to illustrate Israel's fall; and xxvii. 9, lii. 7, lix. 20, as evidence of their final reconery.” quotations are sometimes from LXX., sometimes from Heb. In 1 Cor. ii. 16 this verse is also quoted, after various allusions to Isaiah.
τίς ἔγνω] Heb. ‘who hath meted out,’ as in the previous verse,
though its metaphorical sense here is not very clear. It may be that
Lxx. here read
συμβιβάσει] ℵ ca AQ mg ΓV and about a dozen cursives: also in I Cor. ii. 16. συμβιβᾷ ℵ*BQ* 147.
14. ἢ τίς προίὄωκεν . . καὶ ἀντ. αὐτῷ;] This clause is found in ℵ*A and nine cursives, mainly Hesychian, and in others with variants: but not in BQ, and marked as wrong by ℵ cb. It occurs in the quotation, Rom. xi. 35, following σύμβουλος αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, and most probably intruded thence into the texts of this passage. The original source of the words may then be the Heb. of Job xli. 11.
The ‘path’ (of judgment), and the following clause, are omitted bv LXX.
15. ῥοπὴ [υγοῦ] Heb. ‘a grain of the scales.’ The regular Greek idea of the impulse which just turns the scale is successfully adapted. See Soph. Oed. Tyr. 961, Track. 82, Aesch. Perm: 437, c. The actual combination of ῥοπὴ and ζυγὸν in one phrase is not, however, familiar from classical literature.
ὃς σίελον λογισθ.] LXX., omitting ‘isles,’ evidently read σίελος
for
16. Λίβανος] Α type of earthly abundance, greatness, and magnificence: ii. 13, x. 34, xxxiii. 9, xxxv. 2; Ezek. xxxi. 3, &c.
17. Lxx. shortens the verse into a bald form, but presents the general sense.
18. As in ver. 11, only two of the three words are cognate in Heb.
19. μὴ] The article read as the interrog. prefix: similar in
form
περιεχρύσουν] The Heb. word is akin to that used above for ‘smelter’ χρυσοχόος). Lxx. omit ‘silver chains.’ The passage is difficult.
ὁμοίωμα] Heb. begins a fresh verse at this point, with the obscure
phrase noiwn pom, of which the best rendering forthcoming is,
‘He that is impoverished as to an offering.’ The not.
throws no light on this as it stands. Prof. Skinner suggests that
20. ξύλον...ἄστηπτον] Contrast ξύλον σαθρόν, Job xli. 27 (18, LXX.): with which cf. Wisdom xiv. 1, τοῦ φέροντος αὐτὸν πλοίου σαθρότερον ξύλον ἐπιβοᾶται.
αὐτοῦ] ℵ reads αὐτό. αὐτῷ would have more nearly represented Heb.
21. οὔκ ἔγνωτε τὸ, θεμὲλια] Heb. generally rendered ‘have ye not discerned from the foundations...’; but, as there is no preposition, LXX.’s view is possibly right, though against the accents. So Delitzsch, Kay, and Vulg. numquid non intellexistis fundamenta terrae
22. ὁ κατέχων] Probably of occupation, cf. Soph. Antigone 609, κατέχεις Ὀλύμπου μαρμαρόεσσαν αἴγλαν, Aristoph. Clouds 603. Heb. ‘that sitteth upon.’
καμάραν] Heb. ABBREV, ‘fine cloth,’ ‘gauze,’ is closely connected with the word used in ver. 15 for ‘dust.’
23. The syntax differs from Heb., ‘judges’ having been transferred, as a verb, to the first clause, with some misreading. εἰς οὐδὲν ℵAQ is nearer than ὡς of B: the confusion is easy, cf. e.g. x. 17. οὐδὲν represents here tohu, ‘waste,’ ‘chaos,’ ‘confusion,’ and so, nothingness.
24. σπείρουσιν of A must be wrong: σπεροῦσιν was probably intended, but most MSS. have this and the next verb in aor. subj. The Heb. has passive verbs, but one being Niphal of a verb beginning with ABBREV, and the other a Pual, they do not differ in the consonantal text from active forms.
25. ὑψωθήσομαι] Heb. ‘I shall be like,’ from ABBREV). LXX. probably took it from ABBREV ABBREV for ABBREV); perhaps confusion with the first word of ver. 26 tended to this.
26. ἀναβλέψατε...τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς] Α looseness of expression, between ἀναβ. τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς and ἄρατε τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς. βλέπω and ἀναβλέπω are sometimes used with a cognate accus. (as Eurip. Ion 1263, δράκοντ᾿ ἀναβλέποντα φοινίαν φλόγα), but not of the eye.
κατέδειξεν] So in xli. 20, xliii. 15, this verb is used to render ABBREV, ‘create.’ Cf. ἐπέδειξα, xxxvii. 26, for another Heb. verb, ‘brought to pass’: and Gen. iv. 21 οὗτος ἦν ὁ καταδείξας ψαλτήριον καὶ κιθάραν (a paraphrase,=‘invent’). In xlv. 18 the Heb. is ABBREV, in Zech. viii. 12 δείξω corresponds in place to Heb. ABBREV. See also 2 Tim. iv. 14 ἐνεδείξατο, Vulg. ostendit, with which compare 1 Tim. i. 16.
κατὰ ἀριθμὸν...ἐπ᾿ ὀνόματι] Cf. PS. cxlvii. 4, ὁ ἀριθμῶν πλήθη ἄστρων, καὶ πᾶσιν αὐτοῖς ὀνόματα καλῶν. Job xxxviii. 37, ὁ ἀριθμῶν νέφη σοφίᾳ.
27. Μὴ γὰρ εἴπῃς...καὶ τί ἐλάλησας] Α rather curious variation from the simpler Hebrew.
ἀφεῖλεν...ἀπέστη] LXX. have inverted the construction: and appa-
28. αἱ μὴ ἵκουσας] Again the opening clauses are varied. Εἰ μὴ seems to be compounded of the two interrogative forms, εἷ οὐκ ἤκουσας, and μὴ ἤκουσας; or the μὴ may have been substituted for οὐ, after εἰ. There is also the possibility that ἦ (or ἢ) may have been the original text.
πεινάσῃ] Used by LXX. to express faintness and weariness as well as hunger: also in the next three verses. Cf. ‘starve’ used in some parts of England, for suffering from cold as well as from hunger.
29. τοῖς μὴ ὀσυνωμάνοις λύπην] Reading
30. ἐκλεκτοὶ] Heb. ‘young men’ by usage, but literally Amos viii. 13, οἱ νεανίσκοι, where 0.1.. Fragm. Weingart. has iuvenes electi. See Oesterley, Studies in Amos, p. 101. Cf. A.V. renderings in PS. lxxviii. 31, 63.
ἀνίσχυες represents the meaning of Heb. very fairly. Symm. Th. ἀσθενήσουσιν.
31. ἀλλάξουσιν literally renders Heb.
πτιροθυήσουσιν] Correct, according to one view; so Lowth, and Cheyne, and Vulg. assument pennas. Gesen., Del., and Kay prefer ‘shall lift up wings.
XLI. 1. Ἐγκαινρσθε] i.e.
οἱ ἄρχοντος] As usual, for
κρίσεις] So A alone: other MSS. κρίσιν.
ἀναγγειλάτωσαν] Heb. ‘let us draw near together for....’
Lxx. took up the meanings of the wrong verb in the preceding pair
(cf. ver. 22, xliii. 9, &c.), or read
2. δικαιοσύνην] Lxx. is right in treating this word as abstract (A.V.
‘the righteous man,’ Vulg. iustum, cannot be maintained).
sentence is difficult, The best authorities take it either as ‘Who hath
raised up from the sun-risings him (whom) Righteousness calleth to
his foot ?’ (calleth to follow him, Cheyne), or, ‘whom he calleth in
Righteousness, &c.?’ Or, ‘...him whom Righteousness meeteth at
step?’ The forms of Heb. ‘meet’ and ‘call’ are often indistinguishable
Some take ‘Righteousness’ as here=a vindicated right, and so,
πορεύσεται] Most MSS. prefix καί : cf. ver. 25, where a similar clause appears to be omitted, but may have been misread.
δώσει ἐναντίον ἐθνῶν] Heb. ‘gave (up) nations before him.
εκστήσει] Heb. ‘μακετη him subdue,’ or perhaps, ‘subdueth.’
Greek may be a free rendering of this ; but ἐκστῆναι is frequently used
to render 113, as xvi. 3, xxxiii. 3; and LXX. may have here read the
Hiphil of this verb,
δώσει. εἰς γῆν τὰς μαχαίρας αὐτῶν] Nearly in verbal accordance with Heb. ‘giveth giveth them as dust of his sword.’ εἷς and ὡς in Greek, 3 and 3 in Heb., are easily confused, see on x1. 23.
3. Lxx. omit the difficult words ‘he shall not go,’ Vulg. apparebit, having already a verb, taking ‘way’ in nom. Heb. is explained of Cyrus’ strange career, or of his swift movements: neither is very natural.
4. ἐκάλεσεν] This and ὁ καλῶν are like duplicates, and γενεῶν ἀρχῆς is somewhat redundant. αὐτὴν must refer as before to δικαιοσύνην, and ἐκάλεσεν αὐτὴν may have simply been repeated from ver. 2.
5. ἔθνη] Apparently loosely for ‘isles’ it need scarcely be assumed
that Lxx. read
τὸ, ἄκρα τῆς γῆς] Lxx. (apart from Hexapl. addition, ἐξέστησαν Qmg) omit ‘tremhle’ after these
6. ἅμα Ι κρίνων] Not in Heb.: perh. confused with end of ver. 1.
7. Ἴσχυσεν] Heb. has word from this root twice, ‘Be strong’ ‘strengthened.’ Can ἴσχυσον have dropped out, or even be right instead of ἴσχυσεν? Ν* has ισχυσν.
τύπτων] Possibly
τότε μὲν] So A, 41: other MSS. ποτὲ μέν. Heb. is
μὲν in Isaiah only here and vi. 2.
8. παῖς μου] Heb. 131) is rendered by παῖς and δοῦλος, in Isaiah almost indifferently, see xx. 3, lii. 13, c. Mr H. St J. Thackeray, journal of Theol. Studies, Vol. IV., No. 14, p. 250, assigns παῖς to Isai. i.—lii., δοῦλος to the ‘last part’: but see xlii. 19, xlix.
9. σκοπιῶν] Heb. ‘corners.
10. μὴ πλανῶ] Heb. and again in ver. 23 θαυμασόμεθα) means
11. ἀντίδικοι] There is no special reference to law or except in so far as the idea ofjustice between man and man, or between God and man (i. 19, xliii. 26, to which we may almost add I. 1), is prominent in the Book of Isaiah. Cf. 1 Sam. ii. 10; Aesch. Again. 42 Πριάμου μέγας ἀντίδικος, Tasso, Gerus. Lib. 1x. 53, (of a fight) “son feri i litigi.” litigi.’ Heb. has a suggestion of the same idea: there is series of terms of enmity: threefold according to Delitzsch, fourfold according to Cheyne; and so Lxx. begin it with ἀντικείμενοι.
13. Lxx. omit ‘l have helped thee,’ the second ‘Fear not’ ‘worm’: supplied from Hexapla in Luc. MSS. (not 48).
14.
15. ὥς τροχοὺς ἀμάξης] Different Heb. words from xxviii. 27, where
σκληρότητος represents
χοῦν] 50 ΑΓ 41 93 104 306: but χνοῦν is more probable,
ℵBQ &c. for Heb.
16. ἂν τοῖς ἁγίοις Ἰσπαὴλ] Heb. has the singular. The Lxx. omit ‘in the Lord,’ transferring the second verb, as a plural, to the next subject, in ver. 17.
17. The syntax is altered, particles being inserted: the words practically the same as in Heb.
ἐξηράνθη] Correct. A.V. ‘faileth,’ as in xix.
18. ποιήσω...εἰς...ἐν] Heb. has same prep.,
ἔλη] Cf. xxxv. 7. ὑδάτων, added by ℵ*B c., is ℵc.bAQ 26 41 49 c. omit.)
19. Lxx. abandons the parallelism, and instead of series of four and three, gives one list of five trees.
20. κατέδειξεν] See above, on xl. 26.
21. Ἐγγρα...ἤγγισαν] Heb. has two different verbs, causal and imperative.
βουλαὶ] Heb. ‘strong arguments,’ lit. ‘strenghths,’ cf. the use
Greek of ἰσχυρίζομαι and διισχυρίζομαι. Lxx. may have paraphrased,
22. τὰ ἔσχατα] Rather stronger than Heb. ‘their issue,’ after-things’: and similarly ἐπ’ ἐσχάτου in the next
23. εὖ ποιήσατε καὶ κακώσατε] εὖ ποιέω, except with a participle, is usually, and κακόω regularly, transitive in classical Greek. The καὶ represents Heb. exactly, but as in various expressions, is almost alternative, = ‘or.
The general meaning is clear. If the trial of foreknowledge, or any knowledge, is too much, at least let these ‘gods’ show their power to do something of some sort. This whole passage seems decisive against those who deny or minimize the predictive element in prophecy. The claim, at least, is unmistakable, and those who reject it have equal grounds for rejecting what else they please in Scripture. The prophets, who interpret God's thoughts and purposes, must ipsot facto look beyond the past and the present moment.
Θαυμασόμεθα] See on ver. 10
καὶ ὀψόμεθα ἅμα at end of the verse omitted by A, perhaps in- inadvertently.
24. πόθεν] This is accounted for the first time, as
ἐκ γῆς] Reading
βδέλυγμα ἐξελέξαντο ὑμᾶς] A.V., Vulg., and most commentators supply a relative: ‘an abomination is lze tlzat chooseth you.’ verb is sing.
25. καὶ τὸν] LXX. does not render ‘and he came.’ Scholz
that they read
κληθήσονται] Α has κηήσονται, which is more likely an inadvertence (-θη- is often omitted) than due to any sense that Heb. verb is Heb. is now generally taken as a rel. clause, ‘one that calleth....
ἐρχέσθωσαν] Also made plural, ἄρχοντες being taken as the nominative
Cyrus belonged to Elam, in the Ε., and came, after conquering and uniting with the Medes, from the N. The reference, however, need not be to him individually.
The syntax of the latter part of the verse is altered, and οὕτως καταπατηθήσεσθε is added by Lxx. to complete the sense, as they took it.
26. ἀληθῆ] Heb. is the usual word for ‘righteous’: but Lxx. probably comes near the meaning here.
ὁ προλέγον] This renders ‘30, Hiph. (causal) partic. of
27. ἀρχὴν Σ. δόσει] ἀρχὴν corresponds to Heb. ‘the first’: standing in place of ‘Behold, behold them,’ is possibly due to as ‘I will give’ comes at the end of the verse in This interjection is certainly treated with some freedom by Lxx. in this part, see ver. 24, 29, xlii. 1: whereas the Greek has ἰδοὺ in ver. 28.
παρακαλέσαι] Either for
ℵdBabQ add αἰς ὁδόν, Α ἐν ὀδῷ. Cf. x. 32.
28. ἀπο...τῶν ἀθνῶν] Not in Heb. Perhaps from lxiii. 3, where Symm. has ἀπό.
ἀπὸ τάν εἰδώλων αὐταῖν] According to Scholz,
The translator appears to have been in difficulties with these verses.
πόθεν ἐστι] Not in Heb.; cf. ver. 24; perhaps taken from thence, and the extra negative added before ἀποκριθῶσιν to make sense. ‘A word’ is not in LXX., nor ‘me’ in
29. This verse is at least incomplete in Lxx. οἶ ποιοῦντες· ὑμᾶς
corresponds to ‘their works,’ but differs in voice, as if without initial
and with
XLII. 1—4. Ἰακὼβ...Ἰσραὴλ κ.τ.λ.] The discrepancy
Heb. and Lxx. here is well known, and the quotation, Matt. xii. 18 foll.,
complicates matters more. In the first place, Heb. has no mention
here of ‘jacob’ and ‘Istael.’ Scholz supports Lxx. here, holding that
the M.T. has been altered, and that LXX. have “die schwierigere, und
darum kritisch gesicherte Lesart”: but probably few will agree
him. The names might easily have come in from other passages, as
xli. 8, xliv. I, 2; whereas their omission from Heb. would be difficult
to explain, as it would be an unlikely accident, and in view of other
passages, a futile expedient, if intentional. ’s quotation is
here mainly with Heb.; the resemblance to Theodotion's version, to
which Prof. Swete refers (Introd. to O. T. in Greek, p. 395), is only
marked in εὐδόκησεν, and in the last clause, καὶ ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ
ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν, Matthew agrees, except for ἐπὶ, with LXX. εἷς νῖκος is
however found in Theod. (and Aq. also, xxv. 8), but also in LXX., as
2 Sam. ii. 26, Amos i. 11, viii. 7, c. for
This passage is discussed at length by Dr Hatch, Essay: in Bibl. Greek, IV. pp. 199 foIl., with special reference to the quotations in Justin, Dial. Tryph. 123, 135. These agree with Lxx. in inserting Ἰακώβ, Ἰσραήλ, and in some other respects, while varying generally between Lxx. and the text as given in ’s quotation. In estimating the evidence of Patristic quotations of the passage, the question must be taken into account, whether they quote from Isaiah or Mat. thew, or confuse the two. It is worth while to notice Tertullian, adv. Praxean, who is decidedly against LXX.; Accipe igitur et alias voces patris de filio per Esaiam: Ecce filius mus quem elegi, dilectus mat: in quem bane semi.
The conclusion seems to be, with regard to the main quotation: (a) that LXX. are wrong in inserting Ἰακώβ...Ἰσραήλ: (b) that Matthew quoted either loosely from Heb. and Lxx. alternately, or from an older form of Lxx., which Theodotion may have used. (This is more likely than an alternative Hebrew: but ’s source may have been a loosely put together collection of prophecies): (c) that later quotations of the passage are likely to be confused, either originally or in transcrition from the three main sources, Isai. Heb., Isai. Lxx., and Matthew.
1. προσεδέξατο] εὐδόκησεν Matt., Theod. Kay points out that the Heb. word is used of ’s acceptance of sacrifice (Lev. i. 3, 4, &c.).
κρίσιν] Heb. ‘judgment,’ the usual word: but high authorities give it here a rather special sense; as, substantially, the true religion viewed as a rule or system.
2. οὗ κράξαται οὐδὶ ὀνῆσαι] Matt. οὐκ ἐρίσει οὐδὲ κραυγάσει; the
second verb omitted by Cypr. (Testim. 11. 13). For ὀνήσει 308 has.
βοήσει, Tertull. (adu. Jud.) neque contendit vague clamavit. ἀνίημι
appears to be used for Heb.
ἀκουσθήσεται] Heb. verb is causal.
3. εἰς ἀλήθειαν] So the Heb.
4. ἀνακάμψα...οὐ θραυσθήσεται] Lxx. substitutes a positive expression for Heb. ‘he shall not burn dimly’: the two expressions ‘burn dimly,’ ‘be bruised,’ being repeated in Heb. from ver. 3. To Vulg, and A.V. give no clue.
καὶ ἐπὶ τῷ όνόματι αὐτοῦ ἔθνη ἐπλιοῦσιν] It is doubtful Whether this clause in Heb. is independent, or still subordinate to ‘until,’ but the former view is perhaps more usual. Here (see above) Matthew practically agrees with LXX., and so Justin, with ὄνομα, ἔθνη for ‘law,’ ‘isles. Aq. Symm. Theod. have νόμος, νῆσοι. ἔθνη is used above for ‘isles. Dim, xli. 5: and ὀνόματι is possibly corrupted from νόμῳ. More likely it is a paraphrase, cf. xxvi. 8, lxiii. 16, 19. Dr Hatch, in his discussion of the passage, remarks that the agreement of early recensions of the Lxx. “seems to point to a lost variant in the Hebrew text.” is perhaps more than the facts indicate.
5. στερεώσας] Heb.
6. εἰς ᾠοῖς ἐθνὼν] Β* omits. Cf. xlix. 6, 8.
8. ἀρετὰς] Here and in ver. 12, used much in the sense of Lat.
laudes=praiseworthy deeds. There is none like Him, or approaching
9. ἀνατεῖλαι] So AQ 26; ἀναγγεῖλαι is the usual reading, but pretty clearly due to carelessness or early corruption, and perhaps corrected again. Cf. xlv. 8.
ἐδηλώθη] Heb. has causal of
10 ἡ ἀρχὴ αὐτοῦ] ἀρχὴ is almost certainly, as Scholz gives it,
11. εὐθρανθητι] Perhaps
κῶμαι] LXX. seem to have thought that the ‘wilderness’ could not contain ‘cities.’ It is doubtful whether ‘Sela,’ if taken, with R.V., as a proper name—cf. xvi. I, is to be identified with Petra or not. also 2 Kings xiv. 7. Delitzsch takes the ‘Rock-city’ to be a instance of the cities meant: others think that settlements in the cases are referred to.
13. συντρίψει πόλεμον] Scholz gives ‘like a man of war’ as
matter in Heb. But Mr Thackeray has pointed out (foam. of Theol)
Studies, July 1903) that this phrase is used where Heb. has ‘a man of
war’ also in Exod. xv. 3, the Greek Isaiah and Exodus showing
certain affinities. (For the idea expressed by the Greek, cf. Ps. xlvi. 9
lxxvi. 3.) It is therefore scarcely needful to suggest that Lxx. read
14. ἀεὶ] Corresponds to Heb. ‘from of old’: and so Vulg. semper. The rhetorical question is not in Heb., though, with some confusion, the Hiphil prefix of the first verb may have been read as the interrogative sign. Lxx. are, however, very occasionally, prone to enliven the style of the original: see lxv. 24, ἐρῶ Τί ἐστίν.
ἐκστῆσαι] Heb. verb means ‘astonish’ as well as ‘lay waste.’ dissipato. R. V. however takes this and following verb as intrans.; ‘I gasp and pant.
15. The first part of this verse is omitted in LXX., according to
16. ῥήματα] Heb. 131 signifying a ‘thing,’ ‘matter,’ as well as a ‘word‘ (haec verba Vulg.). This is sometimes imitated in the Greek; compare λογόν, x. 22, 23, with πράγματα, xxviii. 22.
17. αὐτοὶ δὲ ἀπεστράφησαν...ὀπίαω] This clause is referred by LXX. to the τυφλοὶ of ver. 16, with a resemblance to i. 4, where it will be noted that Lxx. omitted the similar clause. In Heb. it refers to the idolaters, the verse being complete in itself: which seems clearly rig ht. ght.
18. ιδεῖν] Heb. inf. with 5.
19. καὶ τίει] καὶ seems to have something of its classical force
with the interrogative: ‘Ναγ, who...?’ The English ‘and’ has
a similar tendency: e.g. Spenser, Faerie Queene, Bk II.
Canto viii. l. 1,
οἱ κυριεύοωγες αὐτὸν] Heb. ‘my messenger that I send,’ the
being probably the not uncommon one between
20. The numbers and persons of the verbs are changed in Lxx.
21. ἐβουλεύσατο] Q and most cursives read ἐβούλετο, which in
some ways corresponds better with Heb.
ἵνα δικαιωθῇ] Either paraphrased, or taken as a verb: Vulg. ui sanctificaret cum.
αἴγεσιν] Probably
22. καὶ ἴδον, καὶ ἐγένετο] Ver. 21 in Heb. ends with ‘and make it
glorious,’ ‘18‘1. This Lxx. prob. read as
πεπρονομευμένος καὶ διηρπασμένος] Same Heb. verbs as in xvii. 14.
ἡ παγὶς] Heb. is now generally taken as a verb (infin.), whose form
It would be possible to punctuate as in Heb., with a stop after ἐξαιρούμενος, taking ἅρπαγμα as parallel to προνομὴν in construction.
24. τίς] B reads οἷς, but this gives no sense, and about 25 cursives support ℵAQ, whose text agrees with Heb. So Cypr., De Labsis. XXI. Quis dedit in direptionem Iacob, c.
ᾧ ἡμάρτοσαν αὐτῷ] Heb. has 1 pers. pl.; the rel. construction
imitates the Heb. (which has
οὐκ ἐβούλοντο κ.τ.λ,] Cf. PS. lxxviii. Io, ἐν τῷ νόμῳ αὐτοῦ οὐκ ἤθελον πορεύεσθαι.
ἀκούειν] Like Heb.
25. κατίσχυσεν...πόλεμος] The syntax is altered, and Lxx. omits ‘and kindled upon him.
XLIII. 3. For Heb. Seba (cf. xlv. 14) Lxx. has Σοήνη, Syene, cf.
Ezek. xxix. IO, xxx. 6. Seba is said to be Meroe, high up the Nile
in Ethiopia (near Khartoum), whence legend derived much of the
Egyptians’ priestly lore. Syene (Assouan) was in Upper Egypt, on
the Tropic of Cancer. Perhaps the geographical knowledge of the
translator placed Meroe in the right direction, but did not go far
enough. Scholz suggests that the name lurks, in a corrupted form, in
μέρος, vii. 18, xviii. 7: but the construction, and the general reference
in vii. 18, are against this. Milton couples the two names, Parad.
Regained, IV.:
These countries were conquered by Cambyses, son of Cyrus. As they were joined to the Persian Empire, they are spoken of as Israel's ransom.
4. ἄρχοντας] See on xxxiv. 1, xli. 1; and so in ver. 9.
7. ἑν γὰρ τῇ δόξῃ] Heb. has
8. ἐξήγαγον] Heb. has imperat., which ἐξάγαγον would represent, but there is no sign of its having been the Lxx. text. Tyconius, p. 9 at produxi plebem caemm. Probably the verb was assimilated to the previous ones, and the unauthorized καὶ strengthens this idea.
κωφοὶ] Q and sixteen cursives, including the Lucianic, κυφά. (Sarah: aura, Tycon.)
9. B has order of final clauses as in Heb., while ℵ*Q omit καὶ ἀκουσάτωσαν.
ἀληθῆ] The Heb. probably means, not, ‘let them speak truth,’ ‘Let them say, True! Vulg. ct diamt:
10. κάγὼ μάρτυς] These words are added here by Mix, and by AQ in ver. 12 also. Probably they come from a wrong idea of the drift: interpreted, it may be, in the light of John viii. 18.
12. ὡνάδισα] Heb. ‘I caused it to be heard.’ The sense of
Greek can scarcely be right. Some, indeed, have suspected that
the Heb. text should have either two, or four verbs: but Lxx. are
against this. Perhaps they read
κάγὼ μάρτυς, λίγα Κύριος] See above on ver. 10. NB c. omit μάρτυς, λέγει, but AQ 26 49 86 106 239 306 have them μάρτυς only, 233). The intrusion comes from ver. 10, no doubt: but the original reading here may have been ὑμεῖς ἐμοὶ μάρτυρες, λέγει Κύριος, καὶ ἐγὼ (??) θεὸς κ.τ.λ. Α confusion between λεγει and ӄεγω seems not impossible.
13. ἀποστρέψα] Α better rendering than that of A.V. here: it has ‘turn it back’ in xiv. 27. Compare also Numb. xxiii. 20 ‘I reverse it,’ οὐ μὴ
14. ἀποστελῶ] Heb. has the perfect, which some, however, interpret as prophetic.
ἐπεγερῶ]
φεύγοντας] So Heb. as pointed, RV. and many authorities. Others, however, read it (with alteration of vowel-point) as ‘bars’: Vulg. water, and Theodotion: and this A.V. interpretes as ‘nobles.’ See on xv. 5.
ἐν πλοίοις δεηθήσονται] ἐν κλοίοις δεθήσονται is the reading of ℵcaA
and A's faithful companions 26 and 106. κλαίοις is however
certainly a corruption, or rather an alteration, to suit δεθήσονται, which
is the reading of all MSS. but one. This one, 305, reads δεηθήσονται,
which Dr Field printed in his 1859 edition, pointing out that δέησις is
a regular rendering of
The passage is so obscure that a historical reference is hardly traceable, more than that some calamity to the Chaldaeans is indicated, previous to the setting free of Israel.
15. καταδείξας] See on xl. 26.
17. ἐσβέσθησαν...ἐσβεσμένον] Two parallel verbs in
18. Α omits Μὴ before μνημονεύετε, with 106 109 only. Cypr. Testim L. 12 Nolite...meminisse.
19. ἐν τῇ ἀνύδρῳ ποταμοὺς] Cp. xxxv. 6.
20. σειρῆνες...Θυγατέρες στρουθῶν] ‘Jackals and ostriches’ is approved rendering of Heb. ‘Daughters of ostriches’ is literal, that Heb. keeps ‘ostrich’ in sing. Cf. xxii. 21, 22, xxxiv. 13
ποτιῶ] So A: ποτίσω 106, ποτίσαι other MSS. adaquare, Cypr. Test. 1. 12. The inf. seems right.
21. ἀρετὰς] As xlii. 8, 12.
22. The Greek changes the person (and correspondingly the
object) of the verbs, and takes the second verb as causal. The
difference amounts only to that between
νῦν] Scholz gives this as
23. οὐκ ἐμοὶ] Heb. and the later versions have ‘Thou broughtest not to ’: but the omission of the verb is at least old, see the quotation from Irenaeus below.
οὐδὲ ἐδούλευσας ἐν ταῖς θυσίαις σου] So (ℵ ca)ΑΓ 26 (86 mg) 90 106 198: omit, ℵ*BQ* c. The text is doubtful; ἐποίησά σε below appears in Α* as εποιηα ε, and it may be that ἐδούλευσας...ἐποίησας is the true reading, c and ε having been confused and duplicated. (See Vol. I. Introd. p. 33.)
24. Θυμίαμα] So ℵΑQ: seems on the whole preferable to θυσίασμα (B).
προέστην σου] So ℵAQa: προέστης μου Q*, and B, which place
the words before καὶ ἐν ταῖς ἀδικίαις σου. This reading agrees better with
Heb., and the persons of the verbs, as already seen, may have been
confused. Moreover ’s order, generally so close to Heb., seems
right, as προέστης must be
25. ἀνομίας σου] Β, c. supply from Symmachus, ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ καὶ τὰς ἁμαρτίας σου, in general accord with Heb., though the syntax is changed by the καὶ. A's τὰς ἀδικίας σου at end of verse seems to be another attempt at agreement with Heb.; but not in order.
26. κριθῶμεν] Cf. i. 18, where Heb. verb is different. Vulg. iudicemur.
τὰς ἀνομίας] Inserted by Lxx., but unfortunately against the
27. ἄρχοντες] Either a loose rendering of ‘interpreters,’ ‘teachers,’
or
28. εμλαναν] Verb again inverted; a very natural guess, but requires different letters.
XLIV. 2. βοηθηοήσῃ] Heb. ‘will help thee,’ 3rd pers. relative to be supplied before it. This may have caused confusion or Lxx. may have originally written βοηθήσει, with absolute literalness.
ὁ ἠγαπημένη] So not. render Heb. Jeshurun also in the three other places where it occurs: Deut. xxxii. 15, xxxiii. 5, 26. This Heb. word is connected with Jashar, ‘upright’ (cf. Numb. xxiii. 10), and is. used of the nation apparently in an ideal aspect, going beyond the name Israel as that itself transcended Jacob. Lxx. here add ‘Israel.’
3. δώσω...ἐπιθήσω] Heb. each time ‘I will pour.
τοἱς πορευομένας] Prob. meant to render the word for ‘streams’ or ‘floods’: Cf. xvii. 12, ὕδατος· φερομένου, xxxii. 2, ποταμὸς φερόμενος, xxx. 25, ὕδωρ διαπορευόμενον, and PS. lviii. 7. (None of these are the same Heb. word as here.)
4. ὡσεὶ χόρτος ἀνὰ μέσον ἵδατος] Heb. ‘in the midst of the grass. Here some think that the Lxx. preserve in their rendering the better text. It is perhaps more symmetrical: but this argument cuts both ways.
5. βοήσεται] Α repeats ἐρεῖ here, by inadvertence.
ἐπιγράφει] ἐπιγράφει MSS., except Α. Β adds χειρὶ αὐτοῦ, based apparently on Aq. Th. καὶ βοήσεται at the end of verse ℵΒ but omitted by RCAQ, is probably of the same kind: in any case the parallelism is lost, as Heb. has a different verb, ‘shall entitle,’ ‘name himself
6. ῥυσάμενος] Heb. ‘redeemer,’
7. στήτω] Not in Heb. mm, ‘as I’, may have been
as
ἄνθρωπον] Perhaps intended as an explanation of ‘the people, taking it as: mankind. The rest of the verse is paraphrased.
8. μὴ παρακαλύπτεσθε] Heb. ‘Fear ye not’: the Greek seems
ἠνωτίσασθε] Heb. has Ist pers. of the causal verb, ‘make to hear.’
καὶ οὐκ ἦσαν τότε] So ℵA with seventeen cursives, Luc. 29 106 c For ἦσαν Β has ἤκουσαν. Heb. has, ‘And there is no Rock: I know not ’ Lxx. as usual get rid of ‘Rock,’ and have shortened the verse: whether ℵ’s text is an attempt at explanation, like οὐκ ᾔδειμεν, xlv. 15, or ’s ἤκουσαν represents ‘I know not,’ is hard to Tertullian, dc Idololatr. 4., near beginning, has et non erant tunc qui fingunt εἰ exsculpunt.
9, 10. The two verses begin somewhat alike in Heb.; and this seems to have caused Lxx. to omit, in confusion, a clause of 9, and slightly shorten 10, which appears almost as the beginning of 9, with πάντες prefixed (not in B) and ἀνωφελῆ instead of μάταιοι ℵcaAQ, or μάταια ℵ*B: which is of some weight in favour of the neuter.
11. ἐξηράνθησαν] Heb.
ὅθεν ἐγένοντο is difficult: perhaps
κωφοὶ] The word bears this meaning, as well as that of ‘craftsmen,’ ‘workers’: ἀπὸ ἀνθρώπων is literal; Cf. παρὰ πάντας ἀνθρώπους π. τοὺς· υἱοὺς· τῶν ἀνθρ. Β), Liii. 3.
ἐντραπήτωσαν] This verb is often used, parallel with ‘be ashamed
or ‘be confounded.’ It is here for
12. The details of this passage are less clear than the general drift. It is usually held that this verse speaks of a metal-worker, and the next of a carpenter, fashioning idols in their various ways. Lxx. seem not to make this distinction, and the present verse in the Greek might be supposed to describe the making of some craftsman's tool.
ὤξυνεν] Not in Heb., though some think it represents a lost word
of the true text: others think the ‘adze,’ A.V. ‘tongs,’ is a mistaken
ἐν τερέτρῳ ἕτρησεν] Heb. ‘with hammers,’ probably: but the means to ‘pierce’ or ‘bore’ through, and Lxx. probably intends ‘a gimlet’: ℵ*B and many cursives have ἔστησεν, ἔτρησεν being reading of ℵcbAQΓ 26 41 49 109 239 305 306: and if ἔστησεν be— the verb and noun are not cognate in Heb.—it perhaps means it on a lathe.’
Gesenius, to illustrate this passage, quoted Virg. Georg. IV. 174
(cf. Am. VIII. 452):
πεινάσα καὶ ἀσθενήσει] He labours and “exhausts his strength in the process: contrast xl. 31” (Skinner). The same contrast is in xlvi. 1–4.
This passage works out further the idea of XI. 19 foll.: just as, e.g., chaps. ν. and xxxi. deal with ideas previously introduced.
13. ἐκλαξεμενος] This word takes the place of ‘is faint’ at end
ver. 12 of Heb. It may be a guess, cf. xl. 20. (Can Lxx. have read
τίκτων ξύλον corresponds to Heb. ‘craftsman in wood,’ μέτρῳ to ‘stretcheth out a line.’ If ἐν κόλλῃ ἐρύθμισεν αὐτὸ stands, seems likely, for ‘marketh it with a pencil,’ the next two clauses omitted by not. (so Scholz); but there is so little verbal resemblance that even the correspondence of the clauses is scarcely beyond doubt.
14. This verse is mutilated in LXX., which perhaps skipped from
‘cedars’
15. ἵνα. This is a possible way of rendering Heb. (pf. with conversive), though it looks very different from A.V. ‘Then shall it be...’ It is not, however, the best way to render
αὐτοὺς] After this Lxx. omit the rest of the verse, which practically repeats the preceding clause in parallel phraseology. On the other hand, τὸ δὲ λοιπὸν is an insertion; there seems to be confusion with the beginning of ver. 17. In fact the rendering of ver. 1517 shows signs of general confusion, and the texts of the principal uncials vary considerably.
For αὐτοὺς Q* reads here αὐτοῖς; just before, AV 109 305 have εἰργάσατο, other MSS. σαντο: ℵΑQΓ 41 49 106 198 306 insert εἷς before θεοὺς (a Hesychian touch?). AQ, with which ℵ* nearly agrees, omit ἐπὶ τοῦ ἡμίσους in ver. 16, and B also has apparently a confused insertion from ver. 19, giving the appearance of a duplicate rendering.
The suggestion that ἐπ’ αὐτῶν is due to duplicating
16. Field's 1859 edition shows how, from among various Greek equivalent to the Hebrew can be made up, exactly on the principles of ’s Hexapla. What happens here is more or less the case in countless other passages of Isaiah.
See also ’s edition, with its critical marks, but the text somewhat arbitrarily constructed, inserting e.g. ὄπτον, but omitting ὤπτησεν in favour of ὀπτήσας.
17. Lxx. omit ‘falleth down unto it,’ as in ver. 15; and render by προσκυνοῦσιν, which has elsewhere been kept for the parallel verb, in ver. 19. In the only other passage where it occurs, xlvi. 6, they have κύψαντες.
Ἐξελοῦ με must be right, though all the leading MSS. ℵAB*Q*Γ agree in reading εξελουμαι. Cf. note on xii. 3.
Calvin, Lowth, ἃς. quote Horace, Sat. 1. viii. 1 foll.:
See also Wisdom xiii. 10 foll.
18. The construction varies from Heb.
19. The opening is literal, no subject being expressed in Heb.
τῇ καρδίᾳ οὐδὲ ἀνελογίσατο ἐν...] B omits these words, with several cursives: ℵ* has ἡ καρδία, and (with Q 109) omits ἐν: 87 97 104 have ἡ ψυχὴ; 106 233 306 are with A. ’s text is nearer Heb., though it alters the syntax: Α’s certainly suggests a duplicate worked into the sentence.
20. γνῶτε] 50 ℵΑ 26 106 198 239 306: γνῶθι BQ c., i.e.
δετε] Not in Heb.; perhaps reading
21. μὴ ἐπιλανθάνου μου] 50 Vulg., ne obliviscaris mei. “The Heb. construction, a passive verb with accus. suffix, is abnormal’ (Prof. Skinner, who refers to Davidson, Heb. Syntax, §73, Rem. 4). Most modern authorities are practically with A.V. The Heb. “passive,” Niphal, was originally flexive.
22. λυτρώσομαι] Α decided departure from the tense of Heb.;
as though Lxx. had read ΑΒΒREV, conversive, instead of
ὥς νεφέλην...ὡς γνόφον] Lowth refers to Longinus’ praise Demosth. De Cor. 188 (291. 13), Τοῦτο τὸ ψήφισμα τὸν τότε τῇ πόλει περιστάντα κίνδυνον παρελθεῖν ἐποίησεν ὥσπερ νέφος. Cf. PS. lxviii. 2.
23. εὐφράνθητε...εὐφροσύντην] Of music, as xiv. 7, c.
ἠλέησεν...τὸν Ἰσραὴλ] Heb. simply ‘hath done it,’ which expand. Below, A repeats ἠλέησεν in place of ἐλυτρώσατο.
trauma] Heb. verb sometimes used in this sense.
Ἰσραὴλ δοξασθήσεται] Heb. ‘and in Israel will he glorify himself.
24. ἐστερέωσα] See on xlii. 5.
25. τίς ἕτερος] Heb. (at end of 24) ’thib, i.e. written text,
διασκέδασεν] Heb. verb means primarily ‘divine,’ ‘cleave asunder.
ἀπὸ καρδίας] Heb. has a verb, ‘will madden.’ Possibly Lxx. lost a verb between καρδίας and ἀποστρέφων, taking ἀπὸ καρδίας as equivalent nearly to ἐκ φρενῶν. Or ἀπὸ καρδίας may be a corruption of a verb in the future tense, σει having been written σι and then the (??) lost.
μωρεύων] So ℵABQ, according to Camb. manual edition (1894, 1899): but the Roman and most editions print μωραίνων as the more usual verb.
26. Ἰουδαίας] Β has the clerical error Ἰδουμαίας; see on vii. 6.
ἀναπλεῖ] Heb. ‘I will set up’: Z reads ἀναστήσω, with cursives, mostly Lucianic.
27. Ἐρημωθήσῃ] This is sometimes used, of waters, where ‘dry
28. Κύρῳ] The climax is the naming of God’s chosen Yet no close personal details are vouchsafed concerning him. It is a. momentary distant glimpse by a sudden light amid obscurity. (On this question opinions will differ, and the view here given is opposed to the ideas of many at the present day.)
φρονεῖν] Inf. of
XLV. Cyrus, descended on one side from the royal line of Persia, is first known as king of Anzan, a petty kingdom in Elam. He conquered Media, 549 B.C., assimilated the Medians with his other subjects; appears as king of Media and Persia shortly after: conquered Croesus of Lydia by 540, and Babylon 538. Thus the Medo- Persian Empire arose, succeeding to the dominating position formerly held by Assyria and Babylon. The name Cyrus is said to mean ‘shepherd’ in Elamitic.
1. τῷ χριστῷ μου Κύρῳ] This title is applied to no heathen king other than Cyrus: though Nebuchadnezzar is called ‘my servant,’ Jerem. xxvii. 6, &c.
This verse is quoted by Tertullian, adv. Praxean 28, Haec dicit dominus domino meo Christo: domino=κυρίῳ for Κύρῳ. So xii. 11, Tyconius, p. 3, Cypr. Test. 1. 21. (See Vol. I. Introd. p. 3, note.) It seems likely that the mistake was aided by the remembrance of Ps. cx. 1.
ἐπακοῦσαι] An inversion: Heb. has ‘to subdue,’ with as obj.
πόλεις] The Heb. word for ‘gates’ is sometimes used as equivalent to ‘cities.’
2. The resemblance of this promise to xl. 3—but see also xlii. might assist the confusionof Κύρῳ with Κυρίῳ in ver. I.
ὅρη ὁμαλιῶ] Lowth compares Ovid, A mar. II. xvi. 51,
θύρας...συγκλάσω] Cf. PS. cvii. 16.
Prof. Skinner adds Milton P. L. VII. 288,
Also we may recall Virg. Am. VIII. 86 foll.,
ὅρη] LXX. seem to have read
3. ἀποκρύφους] This preserves the primary meaning of the Heb. word. The verb is used of the lepers hiding what they found, 2 Kings vii. 8.
A* is alone in omitting ἀοράτους, which would make it necessary to take ἀποκρύφους with ἀνοίξω: but is probably an inadvertence.
4. τῷ ὀνόματί μου] ℵ* reads σου, agreeing with Heb.: the MSS. are often very uncertain in the matter of pronouns.
καὶ προσδίξομαι] LXX., reading ΑBBREV for
Cyrus was specially favoured. Many commentators quote Aeschylus,
Persae, 735,
5. καὶ οὐκ ᾔδεισαν] c. prefix ἐνίσχυσά σε, apparently Hexaplaric, based on Theodotion (cf. Ps. xviii. 32, xciii. 1). ℵΑQ 26 (48) 49 106 239 omit.
ᾔδεισαν, in A alone, looks like a careless alteration; other MSS. ᾔδεις.
7. κτίζειν κακὰ] i.e. calamities, chastisements. Cf. iii. 11, xxxi. 2 Amos iii. 6. Delitzsch, however, remarks that this does not (perhaps) exhaust the truth.
8. εὐφρανθῆναι] Scholz gives LXX.'s reading as
ἀνατειλάτω 2°] This seems right by the sense, as against of B, cf. xlii. 9. On the other hand, A's δικαιοσύνη is probably wrong, as the verb in its former occurrence, and βλαστησάτω, are used transitively.
9. The thought of ’s omnipotence, as Creator and Director, recurs. For the figure of the potter and the clay, cf. xxix. 16. and more generally x. 16. Also jerem. xviii.; Rom. ix. 20.
Ποῖον] ‘ℵ, ‘Where is...?’ cf. 1. 1, lxvi. 1: read for the interjection
κατεσκεύασα] The syntax is changed, and this appears to correspond
to
ὅτι οὐκ ἐργάζῃ] The negative is not warranted by the Heb., and
must have been introduced, as frequently in LXX., in the interests of
the supposed meaning. See Vol. I. Introd. p. 52, where this passage
was inadvertently omitted. ὅ,τι ἐργάζῃ would agree with Heb., except
for the copula
10. ὁ λέγων] ℵ*B prefix, to begin this verse, the sentence from xxix. 16, μὴ ἀποκριθήσεται τὸ πλάσμα πρὸς τὸν πλάσαντα αὐτό; suggested, probably, by πηλὸν κεραμέως. It forms, in fact, another version of the part of ver. 9 already duplicated. But ἀποκριθήσεται for ἐρεῖ seems to come from the context of the quotation in Rom. ix. 20.
τῇ μητρί] Heb. ‘a woman’ or
ὠδινήσεις] ὠδίνεις Β; the fut. is nearer the Heb.
II. καὶ περὶ τῶν Θυγατέρων μου] SO ℵΑQ 26 49 86 106: the scribe of an older MS. must have completed the clause unthinkingly: B &c omit, with Heb.
ἐντείλασθέ μοι] This agrees with the wording of Heb., as it appears
on the surface. But what is the drift? Kay makes this second clause
depend on the first: ‘Ask me...concerning my sons, and (when ye
know) command me, &c.’ Delitzsch, and others, interpret
me’ as=‘leave in my charge the work, &c.’: cf. 1 Sam. xiii.
xvii. 23, ἃς. Prof. Davidson, in the brief note on this passage in the
T ample Bible, put a stop after ‘things to come’; continuing,
my children...command ye me,’ giving it the same sense
Delitzsch. This however leaves a sense of something not quite like
Hebrew: and Prof. Cheyne has pointed out that the sense given to
the Heb. ‘command,’
12. ἄστροις] Α natural paraphrase of Heb. ‘their host,
ἐνετειλάμην] Same verb as in ver. 11, as in Heb. The stars, and ’s sons, are alike His creatures and His care.
13. μετὰ δικαιοσύνης] ℵ*B add βασιλέα, not in Heb. Cf. xxxii. I.
εὐθεῖαι] Α verb in Heb. (active).
αἰχμαλωσίαν] This represents Heb. fairly, but τοῦ λαοῦ is an addition of Lxx. ’s. xiv. 7, liii. 6, whence perhaps ἐπιστρέψει for ‘send forth’).
14. Αἴγυπτος, κ.τ.λ.] Cf. xliii. 3. The parallel in thought is perhaps rather to such passages as xi. 11, xiv. 2, xlix. 22, 23, lx. 316 lxi. 5, 9, lxvl. 20.
σαβαὼθ is not in Heb. The syntax differs, ἐκοπίασεν taking the
place of the noun ‘labour’ ΑΒΒREV for
δοῦλοι] Perhaps a duplication of
δεδεμένοι χειροπέδαις] Like Vulg. vincti manicis, amplifies Heb. ‘in chanins
καὶ διαβήσονται πρὸς σέ. added by B c. is Hexaplaric, from Theodotion. ℵAQ 26 41 106 109 233 239 305 omit.
ἐν σοὶ προσεύξονται] Heb. ‘unto thee,’
15. καὶ οὔκ ἤδειμεν] Paraphrase: Heb. ‘that hidest thyself.’
σωτὴρ] Omitted by B, but not Hexaplaric, as Cypr. Τ estim. II. 6 has salvator. Tertullian's quotation, however, Adv. Praxean, short at Israel.
16. οἱ ἀντικείμενοι αὐτᾷ] Inserted by LXX., probably from xli. 11.
καὶ before πορεύσονται may be the final
ἐγκαινίζεσθε πρὸς μέ, νῆσοι] See note on xli. 1, where it appears
that LXX. read
18. Cf. διεχώρισεν, Gen. i, 4, 7, ἃς.
19. Μάταιον] Heb. tohu, ‘(as in) wasteness,’ same word εἷς κενὸν in ver. 18.
ἐγώ εἰμι. ἐγώ εἰμι] Repeated here, against Heb.; contrast xliii. 11
whereas xliii. 25 is right. ἐγώ εἶμι is frequently found for Ι in LXX.
more especially in Judges, Samuel and Kings, where it is used even
before a verb, particularly for the fuller form
20. βουλεύσασθε ἅμα] Heb. ‘Draw near together.’ The
prob. arises from a confusion with the beginning of ver. 21: where
22. A's scribe or corrector has repeated at the end of this all that followed ἄλλος in ver. 21.
23. εἰ μὴν] So ℵcbAQ* 62 86: but it is hardly possible. ἦ μὴν, read by QIL and about eight Luc. and other cursives, may be right, and εἷ μὴν, also εἰ μὴ, ℵ*B, corruptions due to the conditional formula of oaths in Heb.: see v. 9, xiv. 24, Ps. xcv. 11 (quoted, Heb. iii. 11, iv. 3, 5). Εἰ μὴ indeed would be possible: but such passages as Gen. xlii. 16, Numb. xiv. 23, εἷ μὴν οὐκ ὄψονταί..., are against it. (Wurz. Frag. has nisi exiuit.)
[See Davidson, Heb. Syntax, ἓ 120, Rem. 3.]
οὐκ ἀποστραφήσονται] Cf. lv. 11.
St Paul quotes this verse, Rom. xiv. 11, and refers to it also Phil. ii. 10, with (a: ἐγὼ for κατ’ ἐμαυτοῦ ὀμνύω, and ἐξομολογήσεται with ℵcb mg 26 106 109 233 305 306 against ὀμεῖται, ℵ*B &c.
23, 24. The syntax and division of clauses varies from Heb., which is itself uncertain as to ‘come,’ whether sing. or plur.: if the latter, it may be rendered ‘to him shall all...come, and be ashamed
ἥξουσιν] So ℵcb mg 26 41 106 239 306: ἥξει Β c
ἀφορίζοντες] So ℵcbAQ 26 41 49 86 106 239 306: διοριζ. ℵ*B.
Scholz says Lxx. here read a form from
25. ἐν τῶ Θεῷ, omitted by ℵ*, and τῶν υἱῶν, are not in Heb. A is alone in reading καὶ before πᾶν, perhaps to ease the construction if ἐνδοξασθήσονται is read, as in AQ, several Luc. MSS., 49 109 305.
XLVI. 1. Ἔπεσε Βήλ, συνετρίβη Δαγῶν] Δαγὼν is read by ℵAQ and almost all cursives: Νεγω 62, Νεβων 147? B, with Aq. Theod., Ναβώ, Heb. Nebo. The Old Latin has here a curious corruption; Cyprian, Test. III. 59, e.g., appears in ’s edition as Cecidit vel ’uolutus est draw. (Wiirz. Frag. has dagon.)
The Babylonian gods are helpless, may more, a burden. (See Prof. G. A. Smith, Expositor's Bible, Isaiah, Vol. II. “Bearing Borne.”) Bel (=Baal) was the Zeus of Babylonian mythology, (cf. nabi, ‘prophet’) the Hermes: some think that he was as the special patron of the dynasty of Nabo-polassar and Nebuchadnezzar. The LXX.’s Dagon seems to be a mere error, though Greek textual evidence for it is overwhelming.
συνετρίβη] The Heb. verb occurs only here and in ver. 2, and mm. may have guessed at the meaning; cf. xxi. 9.
αἴρετε] Α alone reads ἔδεται, which probably represents ἕλετε,
καταδεδεμένα] Heb. ‘borne heavily,’
κοπιῶντι] A.V. supplies ‘beast,’ but unnecessarily.
2. πεινῶντι καὶ ἐκλελυμένῳ] B has ἐκλελ. καὶ πεινῶντι, ℵ* placing ἐκλ. after ἰσχύοντι. The order being so uncertain, it may be suggested that κοπιῶντι and καὶ πεινῶντι have possibly been transposed, in which case πεινάω would answer to ΑΒΒREV as in xl. 28—30. Cypr. has sarcomam laborantes et esurientes et non valentes. Wiirz. Frag. ut arms laboranti et esurienti invalido simulque defecto.
οὐκ ἰσχύοντι] Not in Heb.; perhaps dupl. with οὐ δυνήσονται.
σωθῆναι ἀπὸ πολέμου] Heb. ‘deliver the burden.’ The verb
taken as passive by Lxx. ἀπὸ πολέμου is difficult to account for.
To suggest that Lxx. read
3. Lxx. omit ‘the house of (Israel).
4. ἀνέχομαι] Rather ‘I bear will: you,6 than ‘bear you.
ἀνήσω] Probably should be ἀνοίσω: see on i. 14, xlii. 2.
σώσω] Same Heb. verb as σωθῆναι above, ver. 2.
5. ἴδετε] Reading ΑΒΒRVE (or
τεχνάσασθε] Heb. uiStmn, ΑΒΒREV, ‘will ye compare me’: Lxx. may
taken this in the sense of ‘utter proverbs,’ and paraphrased:
possibly read
οἱ πλανώμενοι] Probably
6. ol. συμβαλλόμενοι] The participle imitates the Heb., in which this descriptive, almost exclamatory use is not uncommon.
στήσουσιν ἐν σταθμῷ] This whole phrase prob. represents
7. τόν ὤμων] So ℵAQ 26 49 86 106 109: B c. have sing., with Heb.
πορεύονται] Heb. ‘support,’ ‘carry’: rendered by ἀνέχομαι and ἀναλήμψομαι above, ver. 4.
ὀπὶ τοῦ τόπου] Heb. has here for ‘place’ a word meaning ‘that which is under it’; in the next clause it is different, and mm. omit it. Vulg., like A.V., makes no distinction: formula: in loco suo. et stabit. ac dc loco suo non movebitur.
8. στενάξατε] The Heb. word, which is obscure, is
Possibly, LXX. read
μετανοήσατε] Scholz marks this as not in Heb.: LXX. has certainly
a verb more than Heb., and ἐπιστρέψατε would naturally represent
οἱ πεπλανημένοι] Heb. ‘ye rebels’ or ‘transgressors.’ LXX. πλανάω frequently and with some looseness, see on xxii. 5, xxx. 20, &c.
9. LXX. does insert the final (parallel) clause.
10. καὶ ἅμα συνετελέσθη] Lxx. has missed the drift, and thought it needful to cancel the negative. If they read anything different, it is not clear what.
Πᾶσα] Not in Heb.
βεβούλευμαι] Heb. is not cognate with the word rendered βουλή. Either the writers of MSS., or the translators, seem to have been careless in distinguishing certain forms of βουλεύω and βούλομαιι see note on xlii. 21. The difference in meaning, however, is near vanishing- point in some passages. Cf. xiv. 24, xxxii. 8.
11. πετεινὸν] Heb. indicates a bird of prey, especially a swooping bird. The simile is too easy, and the eagle too common a military emblem, for any stress to be laid on Xenophon’s mention of the of gold as Cyrus’ ensign. Cf. Jerem. xlix. 22, Ezek. xvii., 2 Sam. i. Deut. xxviii. 49, &c.
ἤγαγον αὐτὸν...ὁδὸν αὐτοῦ] Inserted here by LXX. from xlviii. 15.
12. οἱ ἀπολελυκότες] Reading ΑΒΒREV for
13. The LXX. omit ‘it shall not be far off,’ and invert the clause.
εἰς δόξασμα] ‘Glory’ in Heb. is either in apposition to ‘Israel,’ object of ‘I will give’ (or ‘set,’ ‘place’). Heb. verb combines meaning of τίθημι and δίδωμι, and is rendered in many places by each.
XLVII. 1. παρθένος] Cf. xxiii. 12, xxxvii. 22. Babylon was hardly a virgin fortress in reality: but her pride may have claimed the title which serves to whet the coming sarcasms.
εἴσελθε είς τὸ σκότος] So ℵΑQ 26 49 86 106109 239 305 306. B has κάθισον ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν, in agreement with Heb.: but this appears to be very probably Hexaplaric, as is the addition οὐκ ἔστι θρόνος, though this is found, contrary to what is usual, in 41 (87) 91 104 309.
A's reading, however, appears to be wrongly inserted from ver.
or at least due to confusion, for if the two clauses ‘sit in the ’
‘sit on the earth,’ were inverted accidentally,
οὐκέτι προστεθήσῃ κληθῆναι] See on i. 13. To the passive use of προστίθημι we may note an analogy in the Latin use of the passive of σοφή with pass. infin.; not merely “disceptari coeptum est,” AdFam. IV. 4, but “vineae coeptae agi,” Livy, XXI. viii.
ἁπαλὴ καὶ Cf. Deut. xxviii. 56.
2. λάβε μύλον, ἄλεσον ἄλευρον] The lowest menial work of women, Exod. xi. 5, Job xxxi. 10; cf., with Delitzsch, Homer, Odyss. VII. 104 ἀλετρεύουσι μύλης ἔπι μήλοπα καρπόν, and XX. 105: and with Lowth, the phrase “Hominem pistrino dignum” (Terence, Heaut. III. ii.
τὸ κατακάλυμμα] Most likely right, and so in Song of Sol. iv. 1, 3.
ἀνακάλυψαι τὰς πολιὰς] Heb. (probably) ‘lift up thy train’ or
but the noun is obscure. Lxx. appear to have read
The verbs are differently varied in the Greek and Heb.
3. τὸ δίκαιον] Heb. ‘vengeance.’
οὐκέτι μὴ παραδῶ ἀνθρώποις] Lxx. fall back on their favourite
παραδίδωμι (xxiii. 7, xxv. 5, c.: Vol. I. Introd. p. 50), the Heb. being
here most obscure: its verb meaning ‘meet,’ ‘fall in with,’ generally
a hostile sense. It is here translated, ‘I will not spare any’
Hitzig, Ewald) or, ‘pardon any’ (Delitzsch); ‘I will not attack
LXX.’s rendering, however arrived at, may be supposed to ‘I will not give thee up to man, but Myself will execute judgment upon thee.
4. εἶπεν] 50 So ℵca cbAQ* (λεγει Q mg) 26 49 93 106 109 233 239 305 306: B &c. omit. This reading of A c. is appealed to in support Duhm's view above. It is, however, in itself not an unlikely the evidence for it is mainly Hesychian; and in any case it gives no authority for omitting ‘man’: Lxx. reads ἀνθρώποις without variant, and the dative is wanted.
5. κατανενυγμένη] More than ‘silent,’ almost ‘dumb-stricken’: see on vi. 5.
ἰσχὺς βασιλείας] The word for ‘strength’ in Heb. differs only by the insertion of I from that for ‘queen,’ ‘lady.’
6. παρωξύνθην (-θης ℵ*)...ἐμίανας (-να Q a)] Lxx., as so uncertain as to the person of the verbs. Cf. xliii. 28.
7. Quoted, but not according to Lxx., Rev. xviii. 7, κάθημαι βασίλισσα καὶ χήρα οὐκ εἰμὶ καὶ πένθος οὗ μὴ ἴδω.
Cf. ’s boasting, Ovid, Metamorph. VI. 193 foll. (the context
quoted above, on ix. 10):
Kay refers to the ‘Eternal City,’ and Virgil's “Imperium dedi” (Aen. I.
οὔκ ἐνόησας] Heb. literally, ‘until thou didst not....
8. τρυφερὰ] Α good translation, but a diff. Heb. word from that In ver. I.
ἦ πεποιθυῖα] Compare the γυναῖκες πλούσιαι, θυγατέρες ἐν ἐλπίδι,... αἶ πεποιθυῖαι, xxxii. 9–11
Ἐγώ εἰμι, καὶ οὔκ ἔστιν ἑτέρα] The blasphemy imitates such language as xli. 10, II, xlv. 5, xlvi. 9.
Kay quotes Martial, Engr. XII. viii.
Zephaniah (ii. 15) puts the same saying in Nineveh's mouth.
9. W k.t.Jl] The text of A, with which ℵQ nearly agree, comes nearer to Heb. than that of B, which seems to have omitted the words from one occurrence of ήζιι «ξαίφνηt to the other, and to have had them afterwards inserted in different order. A, as compared with Heb., omits 'to thee'; transposes 'childlessness' and 'widowhood,' repeats ι ξ 01 (fat instead of 'in full measure,' and omits 'the multitude of ''thy sorcerics).
The second ίξαίφνης may be
The prepos.
10. The syntax is altered, ikwldi—a verb in Heb.—continuing the last verse: cf. xxvi. 3, 4. Awir— 'security,' cf. xxxii. 9.
καλ σνκ Ιστχν fr4pa (ι0)] ertpa is probably a careless supplement
from the other occurrenccs of the phrase.
11. Reading nrw ' a pit' for
Ka6afxL γ«ν4σ*αι] Heb. to 1 avert' or 4 expiate' it.
12. 4μάν*αν««] Heb. 'hast laboured': did LXX. read
13. Jv rait βονλαΐ«] lxx. again omit 'the multitude of' as in ver. 9.
ol αστρολόγο* τον ονρανον is a good phrase for 'dividers of the
heavens,' the most probable meaning of the Hebrew, ol όρωντβε rovt
αστ/ρας is literal; αναγγηλάτωσαν is meant to correspond to 'who
make known,' and 'at the new moons' is apparently omitted: though
it is curious that μϊ\\«ι appears here in the Greek where
The Babylonians’ reputation for knowledge of astronomy, which old went hand in hand with astrology, is well known. Horace warns Leuconoë, od. I. xi., “nec Babylonios Tentaris numeros.” Seneca, Apocolocyntosis, In. § 2, has a hit at the monthly prognosticators: “patere mathematicos aliquando verum dicere, qui illum, ex quo princeps factus est, omnibus annis, omnibus mensibus efferunt.” Tacitus has many references to them, not always without some appearance of credulity: Suetonius and Juvenal bear witness to the importance attached to them under many emperors, from Tiberius, “cum grege Chaldaeo” (Juv. Χ. 94), onwards. See also Apolog. xxxv.: “quas artes ut ab angelis desertoribus proditas eta Deo interdictas ne suis quidem caussis adhibent Christiani.” But the references in the classics alone would fill pages.
See ’s note on the present passage: Prof. Driver on Deuteronomy xviii. 10 (in Internat. Critical Commentary): and Lenormant's La Magie chez les Chaldéens
14. The syntax differs to some extent.
ἐκ φλογὸς] Heb. ‘from the hand of the flame.’
ὅτι ἔχεις ἄνθρακας πυρός] Heb. ‘It is no coal to be warm (at).
κάθισαι] Might be inf. act. καθίσαι), nearer to Heb.: but O.L. has sedebis.
15. οὗτοι] οὕτω would have better represented Heb.
βοήθεια] Heb. has here the rel.,
μεταβολῇ] The word probably means ‘trafiic’ in Thucyd. VI. 31. Heb. root perhaps primarily means ‘move,’ ‘travel.’
καθ’ ἑαυτὸν] Heb. lit., ‘to his own side,’
σωτηρία] Heb. partic.=‘saviour.
XLVIII. I. τῷ ὀνόματι] Β and most MSS. prefix ἐπί. Heb.
has
οἱ ἐξ Ἰούδα] Β c. omit οἱ. LXX. omit ‘the waters of’ (Judah), or
read
2. ἀντεχόμενοι τῷ ὀνόματι] Heb. has simply ‘they are called,’
‘call themselves of’: the phrase has probably been worked up
3. ἀκουστὰ ἐγένετο] 50 Α, 41: other MSS. ἀκουστὸν, which is less smooth, but the mass of evidence is in its favour. Heb. ‘I made them heard
5. τό, πόλει] So ℵcb (omit τὰ, ℵ*) AQ and some cursives: nearer to Heb. than παλαιά (B c.).
6. καὶ ὑμεῖς οὐκ ἔγνωτε] Lxx. has omitted ‘see it all,’ and there
some further confusion: οὐκ ἔγνωτε might be taken as interrog., which
would bring it nearer Heb., but ἔγνωτε has not the causal meaning of
Heb.
7. προτέρως ἡμέρας] Heb. ‘before the day,’ i.e. formerly.
omitting
8. οὔτε...οὔτε] Heb. ‘Also not...also not.
ἤνοιξε τὸ, εἶτα] Inverted from Heb., whether by reading terminations differently, or for convenience. Vulg. aperta est auris tua.
ἀθετῶν ἀθετήσεις] Cp. xxi. 2, xxiv. 16, xxxiii. 1; in all these cases with emphatic duplication of the word.
9. δείξω σοι]
τὰ ἔνδοξα] Must be obj. to ἐπάξω: but Heb. is rendered ‘for my praise.
διάξω] Heb. ‘I will refrain it,’ a word found here
10. πέπρακά σε] Heb. ‘I have refined thee’ of course by
though Delitzsch connects the verb FD? with Arabic, “to turn, wind,
wring out,” and denies it all connection with
11. ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ] This phrase is duplicated in Heb.
τὸ ὄνομα] Lxx. insert this (as does A.V.), omitting
13. ἐστερέωσεν] Α diff. word in Heb. from that in xlii. 5, xliv. 24 the noun is found, e.g., Exod. xxxvii. 12, Ps. xxxix. 5 ‘handbreadth’).
14. συναχθήσονται] This and foll. verb are imperat. in Heb.
(alike in unpointed text, but
αὐτοῖς] Heb. has
ἀγαπῶν σε] Heb. equivalent, probably, to ‘he whom the LORD loveth,
ἐποίησα ταῦτα...τὸ Θέλημά σου] The MSS. generally have τὸ θέλ. σου directly after ἐποίησα. Α seems to have transposed these words, and ταῦτα has been inserted by inadvertence, or to take their place.
τοῦ ἆραι σπέρμα X.] Heb. lit. ‘and his arm (on?) the Chaldaeans’
which is difficult, and variously taken; as by Delitzsch, ‘and his arm
(shall do it),’ or, making ‘arm’ obj., ‘and will execute his arm,’
his judgment or purpose: or, ‘with his arm.’ σπέρμα is the
confusion between
15. ἐγὼ...ἐγὼ] Heb. repeats ‘I’ at the beginning of the verse, but has the particle ΑΒΒREV, not the pronoun, with the second verb.
16. οὐδὲ ἐν τόπῳ γῆς σκοτινῷ] So ℵ*Α 26 36 49 106 228 (239 306 nearly). An intrusion from xlv. 19; other MSS. omit.
καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα, αὐτοῦ] Is this to be coupled with the subject or the object of ἀπέσταλκεν? A.V., Luther, and Vulgate (et spiritus eius) are decisively on the side of the former. Lxx., as usual, keep the Heb. order: but as Kay says, “It has been generally assumed, on the authority of Origen. that the rendering of the LXX. is ambiguous. But even his great name is not sufficient to persuade one that...the enclitic με can be readily co-ordinated with the following noun.” asserts similarly that the suffix-pronoun in the Heb. cannot be so co-ordinated, and claims the support of Heb. accents, and of the Targum, which latter Cheyne considers probable but not certain. Lowth quotes Origen (adv. σεῖε. I.) and translates with intentional ambiguity. Calvin, Vitringa, Henderson, Alexander, Knobel, Gesenius, Hitzig, Ewald, Delitzsch, Cheyne (doubtfully, and he appears to suspect the passage), Davidson (note in Temple Bible), Skinner, and W. E. Barnes all take the Heb. as ‘hath sent me and His Spirit (obj). Prof. Driver seems, with some hesitation, to favour the opposite view: see his note in Isaiah, ‘Men of the Bible’ Series, p. 207.
It should be noted, that those who make ‘Spirit’ the subject, rely
mainly on the ordinary grammar, and usual arrangement of sentence
(Delitzsch instances only xxix. 7 as a parallel, and Kay denies it);
those who make it the object, do so on theological grounds, that the
Spirit must be the sent, not the sender (instancing 1 Kings xxii. 21, 22
and chap. xliv. 3, lxi. 1, lxiii. 10, 11). This view, however, has difficulties
of its own: lxi. 1. is not very clear in its influence: the accounts of the
The list of authorities against making ‘Spirit’ the subject is certainly an exceedingly strong one: yet the rules of language seem thoroughly in favour of it, and the theological arguments not such as to warrant the forsaking of the “literal and grammatical sense.’
17. τοῦ εύρεῖν σε τὴν ὁδὸν] εὑρεῖν seems to have been chosen as a
verb to suit ὁδὸν, Lxx. omitting ‘to profit,’ and perhaps rendering
the cognate (but causal) verb to ‘path’ = ‘make to tread,’ ‘lead.’ It
however possible that Lxx. omitted this cognate, the eye of the
translator straying at this point from
Delitzsch considered that with καὶ νῦν Κύριοι· κ.τ.λ., ver. 16, begins a kind of prelude to chap. xlix. and what follows. This, according to Prof. Skinner, “it cannot possibly be”: and the end of xlviii. has been thought to mark a division of the whole prophecy. Yet in these verses we do seem to be looking both back and forward, esp. at the throwing open of the gates in ver. 20.
18. καὶ εὶ] To be taken separately. Heb. ‘O that...’ best, taken of an unfulfilled wish, though opinions differ. (Driver, Heb. Tenses, § 140; Davidson, Heb. Syntax, § 134).
19. ὥς ὁ χοῦς] χνοῦς, ℵ alone. Heb. ‘the grains thereof’ τῆς is an unauthorised substitution for the pronoun by Lxx.). Some take it as ‘the entrails thereof,’ i.e. of the sea, or of the sand, regarding word as another form of the word for ‘bowels’: but the former formering is preferable, and the play on words is as likely as the parallelism. Vulg. lapilli eius: Aq. Symm. Theod. αἱ κέγχροι αὐτῆς.
20. There are differences of syntax, but they do not much affect the meaning.
Ἔξελθε In Βαβυλῶνος...Χαλδαίων] These names occur no more in the book: the curtain is dropped upon that act of the drama.
λαὸν] δοῦλον all MSS. but A 26. The Roman Missal has populum suvm.
21. καὶ ἐὰν διψήσωσιν] διψήσουσιν, Α only. Heb. ‘and they
thirsted not,’ Lxx. reading
ἄξοι αὐτοὺς] ℵBV read αὐτοῖς, but the accus. is pretty clearly required, and the dat. due to confusion with ἐξάξει αὐτοῖς following: ὕδωρ should go with the words after it.
σχισθήσεται] Heb. has an active verb, ‘he clave a rock.’
καὶ πίεται ὁ λαός μου] Inserted by LXX. from Exod. xvii. 6.
22. χαίρειν] Heb. ‘peace,’ Aq. Symm. Theod. εἰρήνη. Lxx. substitute the Greek word of greeting for the Hebrew. Paul's combination of the two, χάρις καὶ εἰρήνη, is familiar from the opening words of his Epistles.
XLIX. 1. ἔθνη] Heb. word for ‘peoples’ here is that rendered ἄρχοντες, xxxiv. 1, xli. 1, &c.
διὸ. χρόνον πολλοῦ] The Heb. phrase stands for distance either of time or place, but here doubtless of the latter, whereas Lxx. take it of the former, cf. xxx. 27, and supply στήσεται, and probably λέγει, condensing the two last clauses into one.
2. τὸ στόμα. μου ὡσεὶ μάχαιραν] Cf. xi. 4.
ὥς βέλος] Heb. has
ἐκλεκτὸν] Heb. verb bears this meaning, see Ezek. xx. 38, Dan. xi.
35 Lxx. and Theod. Yet Lxx. may have read
4. διὰ τοῦτο] Perhaps reading
ὁ πόνος] This is. the root-meaning of the Heb. word; but the modern view is to give it the secondary sense of ‘recompense,’ ‘wages.’ Cf. xl. 10, lxii. II. Vulg. opus.
5. Συναχ θήσομαι] Heb. has verb in 3rd person, and the negative,
which however the margin directs to be read
It should be observed that some Luc. Mss., 51 62 90 144 147 233 ’ 308, read συναχθήσεται, and Q* reads συναχθήσονται, a singular reading on its part which might have been deserving of more attention, were it not that δοξασθήσονται follows. The first verb, however, may be rightly 3rd pers. sing. or plural, and the two verbs may have been wrongly assimilated to Ist pers. in the usual text, and to 3rd pers. plur. in Q* the order of words tending to bring this about.
The question as to the negative in Heb., and the construing of it,
remains. Kay, supporting the negative, argues vigorously, here as on
ix. 3, that there was strong reason against its establishing itself in the
6. Μάγα] Scholz gives this as
διασπορὰν] Heb. probably, ‘the preserved.’ LXX.’s
might come from the meaning ‘branches,’ as in xvi. 8
τέθεικα] So ℵAQV and about twelve cursives, mostly Hesychian. B, δέδωκα. After σε ℵBQ mg insert εἷς διαθήκην γένους. Cf. xiii. 6, and ver. 8 below.
the former mainly, the latter partly, based on this passage.
7. mm. has similarity of words, but considerably different syntax: e.g. Ἁγιάσατε (omitting ΑBBREV) φαυλίζοντα active, the person of ἐξελεξάμην, &c. The piled up genitives, τῶν ἐθνῶν τῶν δούλων τῶν ἀρχόντων, are in agreement with Heb., and the subjects of the verbs are redistributed.
8. καὶ ἔπλασά σε is omitted after σοι by ℵAQ 26 49 86 106 198
and marked in Q mg with * (Hexaplaric?) The same word
The beginning of this verse is quoted, 2 Cor. vi. 2, in agreement with the Lxx. text; cf. lxi. 2, quoted Luke iv. 19.
κληρονομῆσαι] This seems to be causal here.
9. Ἐξέλθατε...ἀνακαλνφθῆναι] The construction is curiously varied, first direct, then indirect command following λέγοντες.
πάσαις] Inserted by Lxx., perhaps to balance the clauses.
τρίβοις] Heb. word translated by ὀρέων, xli. 18: meaning, prob., ‘bare heights.’ Cf. xiii. 2. Lxx. take it of trodden
10. Cf. lxv. 13, Rev. vii. 16.
καύσων] Heb. word only here and xxxv. 7, where see note ἡ ἄνυδρος).
ἐλεῶν] Heb. here not
παρακαλέσει] Perhaps reading
11 τρίβον] Another Heb. word for ‘raised highway.
βόσκημα] Heb. ‘shall be exalted,’
12. θαλάσσης] Literal.
ἐκ γῆς Περσῶν] Heb. ‘from the land of (the) sinim.’ Neither Sinites of Gen. x. 17, nor Sin=Pelusium, Ezek. xxx. 15, seems to be far enough away, as a distant reference is almost certainly required. Syene has been suggested, and Vulg., de terra australi, takes it as a place to the 8. China, Arab. Tsin, was strongly supported by Gesenius, and formerly by Cheyne: but there can be no certainty, and no reason can be discovered for the LXX.’s rendering. seems outside the probable scope of Isaiah's reference: yet we scarcely expect to find them four times referred to, as we do, in Horace (Odes 1. xii. 56, xxix. 9, 111. xxix. 27, Iv. xv. 23).
13 ἠλέησεν...παρεκάλεσεν] These verbs appear to have exchanged their order, acc. to the Heb. See on ver. 10.
τοῦ λαοῦ] Added by LXX.
17. ταχὺ οἰκοδομηθήσῃ] Heb. ‘thy sons shall make haste.’
‘thy builders’ differs only in pointing,
18. πάντας αὐτοὺς ἐνδύσῃ] So ℵAQ* 26 49 86 (106 -σει) 198 306. B inserts ὣς κόσμον before ἐνδύσῃ, and the Luc. MSS. generally ὧς στολήν. Tyconius, p. 82, agrees with A: quia omnibus illis indueris. Prof. Burkitt discusses this passage in his edition of Tyconius, p. cx., and points it out as an instance of Hexaplaric addition in B.
νύμφης] Α somewhat similar textual instance to the last: BV read ὧς νύμφη. Most cursives, Luc. and the better Hesychian, are with A: and Tyconius, sicut omamenlum nivae nuptae.
19. τὰ πεπτωκότα] Lxx. omits ‘land,’ but is otherwise near Heb.
ἀπὸ τῶν ἐνοικούντων] ἀπὸ is literal, the extended use of Greek prepositions being sometimes strained to match the similar but stronger use in Heb. See on ii. 10.
20. οὓς ἀπολέλαυκας] Heb. ‘sons of thy bereavement.
ποίησόν μοι τόνων] i.e. make room for me. Heb. word means usually ‘draw near.
21. χήρα] Scholz thinks this due to reading
Lxx. omit ‘exile and outcast’: many cursives, however, Luc. other, insert from Theodotion.
22. νήσους] As if reading
κόλπῳ is literal.
23. ποηνοὶ] The same word is used, 2 Kings x. 1, Heb. and Greek, of “them that brought up Ahab's children.” Cf. the verb in lx. 4 ἀρθήσονται).
M πρόσωπον τῆς γῆς] Probably not the intention of Heb.
οὐκ αὶσχυνθήσῃ] So ℵAQ (26 49 nearly) 86 106 198 239 306. B &c., with Heb., οὐκ αἰσχυνθήσονται οἱ ὑπομένοντές με. The is marked by Q mg with asterisk: A's text is prob. right, therefore: is not likely to be the result of alteration.
24. ἀδίκως] Heb. has ‘of the righteous,’
25. τὴν κρίσιν σου κρινεῖ] Heb. verb has the meaning ‘decide’ as well as ‘contend.’
26. why-nu] Inserted by Lxx., with καὶ added before next verb.
ἀντιλαμβ. ἰσχύος] Heb. ‘thy redeemer, the Mighty One.’ Cf. i. The reason for the Greek verb is not clear: but seexli. 9, Ii. 18.
L. 1. Ποῖον] used, as in lxvi. 1, to render
ᾦ] ‘With which,’ and so prob. the Heb. Vulg. quo dimisi
τίνι ὑπόχρεῳ] This word generally means not ‘a creditor,’ sense seems absolutely required, but ‘a debtor.’ Cf. 1 Sam. xxii. where πᾶς ὑπόχρεως stands for ‘everyone who hada creditor? Under the circumstances, the reading of the Lucianic MSS. (which is nearly that of Aquila) τίνι ὑπόχρεως ὧν, seems best. 22 36 48 51 62vid 86 90 144 308 (41 147 233 nearly) read thus. Cf. ἀναβάται, ℵ*AQ 106 198 against ἀναβάταις of B c., xxx. 16.
The alternative is to omit the word, and read with another group of cursives (87 91 97 109 305 309) τίνι τῶν πρασσόντων με πέπρακα ὑμᾶς; In this case, if ᾦ be read, it is due to the Hebrew relative in this place, and τίνι...ᾧ resembles the attraCIion in οὐδένας ὅτου οὐ πάντων ἂν ὑμῶν καθ’ ἡλικίαν πατὴρ εἴην, Plat. Protag. 317 C: though the phrase here is probably due to Heb. rather than Greek idiom.
2. οὔκ ἰσχύει] An easy paraphrase. Cf. lix. 1, and Numb. xi. 23 Μὴ χεῖρ Κυρίου οὐκ ἐξαρκέσει; where the answer to ἀρκέσει in ver. 22 should be noticed.
ξηρανθήσονται] Α misreading of
4. δίδωσιν] The historic present of this verb is common, when we
should scarcely expect it in another verb: e.g. Aesch. Eumm. 6, 7,
It may ’be due to the continued presence of the gift.
σοφίας] Heb. ‘of disciples,’ and so again, ver. 5; abstract concrete. A alone reads σοφίας, which looks as if an explanation had taken the place of the text.
ἡνίκα. δεῖ εἰπεῖν λόγον] This seems to be a paraphrase. A, with
26 86 106 233 306, prefix ἐν καιρῷ, apparently taking
ἔθηκεν...προσέθηκεν] The compound seems to be for rhetorical
emphasis at the repetition. Lxx. presumably read, each time,
5. καὶ ἡ παιδία] Carried on by Lxx. into ver. 5, with some difference
of reading, at any rate
6. ῥαπίσματα...ἐμπτυσμάτων] Plur. of repeated actions. Cf. Matt. xxvii. 29, John xix. 3, c. The Heb. word expresses not blows the flat of the hand, but plucking out of hair: cf. Ezra ix. 3, Nehem. xiii. 25.
7. ὡς στερεὰν πήραν] Cf. Ezek. iii. 9; in bad sense, Jerem. v. 3 Zech. vii. 12.
8. ὅ κρινόμενος] Heb. has, the first time, ‘(who) will contend with me?’ the second time, lit. ‘the master (or ‘lord’) of my So in Exod. xxiv. 14, ‘Who is a master of words?’ Lxx. rightly, rm συμβῇ κρίσις. Cf. 2 Kings i. 8, where ἀνὴρ δασὺς renders ‘a lord of hair.’ The word for ‘lord’ is Baal. Some may be reminded Euripides’ κωπῆς ἄνακτες, Cyclops,
9. κακώσει] Not ‘condemn,’ or ‘call vile,’ in classical Greek, ‘injure’ is the meaning of the verb: see on xli. 23. Heb. is definitely ‘condemn,’ declare wicked or guilty: St Paul, in his reference to this verse, Rom. vii. 34. has τίς· ὁ κατακρίνων.
11. κατισχύετε] Heb. ‘that gird yourselves.’ The notions
‘girding’ and ‘strength’ are so closely connected—see Ps. xviii.
39, xciii. l, and cf. the (Hexaplaric) rendering in xlv. 5—that
may be considered to support the present Heb. text, which some
have suspected, suggesting
φλόγα] Heb. is supposed to mean ‘firebrands,’ cf. a similar word in Prov. xxvi. 18.
φλόγα] Verb is transitive in classical Greek.
ὃν λυπῇ κοιμηθήσεσθε] Cheyne compares lxvi. 24: Vitringa, Luke xvi. 24, ὀδυνῶμαι ἐν τῇ φλογὶ ταύτῃ.
LI. 1. ἐλατομήσατε...ὠρύξατε] The Heb. verbs are passive, but the difference between passive and active is here one of vowel-points only. The relatives are not expressed in Heb.: this has been often pointed out as characteristic of the later chapters of Isaiah.
2. ἠγάπησα αὐτὸν] Probably reading ΑΒBREV for
Note the resemblance of εἷς ἦν to Ezek. xxxiii. 24.
3. παράδεισον] Represents, first Eden, secondly ‘the garden of the Lord,’ cf. ‘the garden of God,’ Ezek. xxviii. 13 Gen.
The name is transliterated in Gen. ii.: in Gen. iii. 23, 24, Ezek. xxviii. 13, xxxi. 9, xxxvi. 35, c., Joel ii. 3, LXX. give τρυφή, the word in Heb. meaning ‘pleasure.’
A omits the clause καὶ θήσω τὰ ἔρημα αὐτῆς, apparently missing it over from the recurrence of similar words. Q* 49 omit τὰ πρὸς δυσμὰς ὡς παράδεισον Κυρίου, and it seems possible that Κυρίου is a Hexaplaric addition, though found in practically all MSS.; and the two clauses may therefore have been thought to be an accidental duplication: ℵcb 305 306 omit almost the same words.
τὰ πρὸς δυσμὰς] Probably taking
ἐξομολόγησιν] Used not infrequently by Lxx. for Heb. ‘thanksgiving’ or ‘praise’: as Ps. c. 4, cvii. 8, c. αἴνεσις similarly, the Heb. meaning joyful singing. Is any light thrown on this use of ἐξομολογεῖν by the formula ‘Give God the glory’ or ‘the praise,’ Josh. vii. 19, 1 Sam. vi. 5, Jerem. xiii. 16: also in N.T., John ix. 24
4. ἀκούσατε] Not repeated in Heb.: ℵB c. add μου, which is not in AQ 49 106 198 306.
ἱ βασιλεῖς] Heb. has a word for ‘people’ which is considered to be a variant form of that used in the plur. ἄρχοντες) in xxxiv. 1 (see note there), xli. 1, c.
5. ταχὺ]
ἡ δικαιοσύνη] Α* follows this with σου, but this is corrected, and probably merely a clerical error.
ἐξελεύσεται] N 22 48 add εἷς φῶς, Β c. ὡς φῶς καὶ.... AQ 26 106 only omit. The words probably intruded from the previous verse: cf. lxii. I, and see also xlii. 6, 8 in comparison with xlix. 6.
ὑπομενοῦσιν] Cf. xlii. 4 and xlix. 23 in Heb.
6. ἐστερεώθη] This verb does not agree with Heb., nor does it
seem to suit the context, or even the phrase in which it occurs. The
apparent solidity of smoke seems the only possible idea to attach to
the word, and this does not seem satisfactory. Schleusner mentions
a conjecture ἐστρώθη, which however, even if accepted, lessens the
difficulty but slightly. The passive, Niphal, of ℵ
ὅσπερ ταῦτα] Vulg. sicut haec: A. V. ‘in like manner.’ modern authorities render, ‘like gnats’: but this can scarcely done, in the opinion of most, without alteration of the text. Delitzsch, keeping the text, interprets it as = ‘like that,’ a contemptuous, phrase, which ordinarily tone and gesture would explain: instancing the use in Latin comedy of “huius non facio.” that’ would then mean ‘like—a thing of
ἐκλίπῃ] The aorist is prob. right, after οὗ μή, and ἐκλείπῃ of AQ merely itacism. The Heb. word is the same as that rendered ἡττᾶσθε in ver. 7.
7. κρίσιν] Heb. ‘righteousness’ (usual word).
λαός μου] So ℵAQ and eighteen cursives of various classes. B omits: ‘my’ is not in Heb., but involves merely an additional Vulg. has popular mew: otherwise it might have been supposed due to the influence of ver. 4.
8. ὑπὸ χρόνον] The clauses are inverted. Heb. has my, ‘moth,’
which may have been read
σητὸς] Heb.
ἡ δὲ] δὲ seems here to mark the apodosis (Heb.
9. τοῦ βραχ. σου] Heb. ‘arm of the Lord.’ The pronoun doubtless substituted, on the insertion by lxx. of ‘Jerusalem’ (cf. lii. 1, lx. 1).
The last sentence of this verse begins with three words exactly alike, and a fourth word differing by one letter only from the opening words of ver. 10. Consequently it is not surprising that Lxx. omitted it, eSpecially as they may have thought it identical also in meaning. Several cursives supply the words, in various forms, mainly from Theodotion. On “Rahab” and “the dragon” see notes on xxvii. xxx. 7.
10. ἡ έρημοῦσα] See on xliv. 27.
11. Practically identical in Heb. with xxxv. 10, where see note.
lxx. has various differences, though ἀπέδρα occurs in both places,
whereas Heb. by omitting has here the perfect instead of virtually
the imperfect tense. It might be possible to perceive a reason for
B omits ἀγαλλίαμα καὶ . . . . ℵQ and nine cursives have ἀγαλλίασις. The place of γὰρ varies in MSS., and N omits it: but eighteen cursives agree with AQ.
12. ἐγώ εἰμι] Repeated, as is the Heb.
γνῶθι τίνα. εὐλαβηθεῖσα] γνῶθι seems to be inserted with the View
of helping the connection. B, in agreement with the Heb., has τίς οὖσα
for the next two words: as has Theodotion. It may, however, be
right. τίνα might have come from the Heb., by transposition,
ἐφοβήθης ἀπὸ ἀνθρώπου] The preposition rather strains the Greek
idiom; but it represents Heb.
ἐξηράνθησάν] Cf. xl. 8. Here Heb. has only ‘is given (up),’ or, made...
13. ἐπελάθου] Sometimes found with accus. in Lxx. Ps. ciii. 2 cxix. 83, 141, 176, ἃς. So occasionally in classical Greek, more especially perhaps when in antithesis with a verb taking acc.: Herod. 111. 46, Eur. Helen. 265.
τὸ πρόσωπον] Generally ἀπὸ προσώπου to translate literally the
Heb.
ὅν τρόπον γὰρ] The Heb. is the rel. particle preceded by
ἆραί τε] σε] ἀρέσαί σε, A, is doubtless dittography. [ℵ* has αρε, Γ αρε σαι.]
ποῦ ὁ θυμὸς] Α characteristic mode of expression throughout the book: see xix. 12, xxxiii. 18 (especially), xxxvi. 19, xxxvii. 13, l. 1 lxvi. I.
14. The Heb. is obscure: the first part of the verse runs, probably: ‘the bowed-down hasteneth to be set free.’ Of this seems to be a paraphrase, and the second part is omitted in the best texts, several cursives supplying it, as usual, from Theodotion, but with some variation.
out Wt] Quoted, with part of xxvi. 20, in Heb. x. 37. With the Greek compare xiii. 22, and Habak. ii. 3.
15. ὅ ταράσσον] Vulg. qui conturbo. R. V. and most moderns similarly. It might be taken as meaning ‘that calmeth’: see on ταχύ, ver. 5. Jerem. l. 34, however, seems against this.
16. ἔστησα] Heb. has here infin. of a verb ‘to plant’ (xl. Gen. ii. 8) which differs only in its final guttural from that used for ‘to stretch out,’ ver. 13, xl. 22, xlii. 5, c. Many critics substituting the more usual word. Whether the infin. is to mean ‘for Me to plant,’ as A.V. takes it, or ‘for thee...,’ as Vulg. the context must decide. Lxx. supports the former so far as an inexact rendering can, and it is on the whole the more approved.
σκιὰν τῆς χειρός. A's δεξιὸν in place of this is unsupported. ℵca has σκέπην for σκιὰν.
17. ἐξεγείρου] Α diff. form of the verb (here Hithpael, reflexive) from that in ver. 9, lii. 1.
τὸ ποτήριον . . . τὸ κόνδυ] Right, or nearly so. R.V. ‘the bowl of the cup,’ an unusually full expression. ‘Dregs’ in A.V. is said to from an error of Jewish interpreters.
πτώσεως] Heb. ‘bewilderment’ (οἶνον κατανύξεως; Ps. lx. Again in ver. 22.
τοῦ θυμοῦ 2°] Added by Lxx. ἐξέπιες, ℵΒ &c. seems than the simple verb, as given by A.
18. παρακαλῶν] lxx., reading
ῦψωσας] Cf. i. 2.
19. δύο ταῦτα] Cf. xlvii. 9. Two classes of calamity can be easily distinguished in the four terms that follow. We are reminded of ’s choice between three, 2 Sam. xxiv. 12.
The Roman edition had δίο for δύο: often reproduced in printed editions, but an error without MS. authority that can be ascertained.
συλλυπηθήσεται] Heb. verb=to ‘mourn’ or ‘condole with,’ ii. 11.
τίς σε παρακαλέσαι] Heb. ‘how,’ or more properly, ‘who shall 1 comfort thee?’ This is a difficulty: see Davidson's Syntax, Rem. 1. lxx. and Vulg. agree in reading 3rd pers., with prefix for ℵ.
20. οἱ ἀπορούμενα] Heb.
ὥς σευτλίον ἡμίεφθον] This discrepancy with the Heb. is well known
and of old date. Heb. is usually taken to mean, ‘like an antelope in
a net’: assuming that
Jerome remarks on the passage: “Pro beta semicocta reliqui interpretes orygem captum et ’llagueatum transtulerunt; qui Hebraice dicitur Tho . . . pro quo lxx. Syra lingua opinati sunt Thoreth quae dicitur beta.’
Prof. F. C. Burkitt suggests that for Thoreth, which does not mean
‘beet’ in Syriac or any known language, we should read Thomech
(a bitter herb used at the Passover): and that Jerome meant that the
translator, having the text woman: before him, thought of this, and
of
21. οὐκ ἀπὸ οἴνου] Cf. xxix. 9 (and Lxx. of xxviii. 1)
Lowth compares the phrase of Aeschylus, Eumenides 860,
23. τῶν ταπεινωσάντων] AQ profix καί. The phrase is not in Heb., and perhaps duplicates τῶν ἀδικησάντων.
For ἐμβαλῶ (AQ) B has δώσω; cf. ἐμβαλῶ in xxxvii. 29, θήσω in the corresponding verse of 2 Kings.
τὰ μετάφρενά σου] This looks like an explanation, which has turned out τὰ μέσα, read by B, which renders the Heb. literally.
ἔξω] rm, ‘open place’ or ‘street,’ means ‘without,’ ‘abroad,’
accompanied by certain prepositions. lxx. may have read
LII. 1. τὴν δόξαν σου] Heb. is almost more ‘beauty’ than ‘glory.’ Cf. Exod. xxviii. 2, where δόξα is used, as here. lxx. omits ‘garments of.’
2. ἔκδυσαι] So RA and several cursives; Q* has ἔνδυσαι, the Luc. Mss. ἔκλυσον, and B 109 305 (with Q mg) ἔκλυσαι. This last seems preferable, translating Heb. more closely, and accounting for the other readings, Δ and Λ being easily confused, and ἔνδυσαι having occurred twice in the previous verse. ‘Loose from thee’ is the Heb. reading, which seems to have been generally followed: so Aq. Symm. Theod. and Vulg. solve vincula. The Heb. text has ‘(the bands) are loosed.
3. ἐπρόθητε] Heb. is better rendered as passive than as reflexive cf. l. 1. δωρεὰν is 3 felicitous rendering.
4. βία ἤχθησαν] The termination, 3rd pers. sing. as object, has been read as 3rd pers. plur. personal suffix, and the verb taken as passive. Even so, ἤχθησαν is not an exact translation, the Heb. meaning not ‘led (captive)’ but ‘oppressed.’ Βίᾳ seems to convey idea of irresponsible tyranny: the Heb. expression when followed by a noun means simply ‘without,’ literally, ‘in nothingness.’ the use of βία = ‘in spite of,’ as Thucyd. 1. 43, ξυμμάχους δέχεσθε ἡμῶν; and with the whole phrase, Aesch. Persae 771, Ἰωνίαν τε πᾶσαν ἤλασεν βίᾳ.
5. τί ὅδε ἐστι] Α and seven cursives read ἔσται, but and pers. plur. is probably intended. τάδε following is not in Heb., in either place in the verse, but is supplied, as in iii. 16, v. 9 ταῦτα), xiv. 24,, xvii. 4, 6, &c.
θαυμάζετε] Perhaps
όλολύζετε] It is generally agreed that the Heb. verb is not causal (3rd pers. plur. indic. and 2nd pers. plur. imperat. are alike in consonants). The Heb. word is not generally used of joy: nor is it necessarily so here, but of loud noise. lxx. insert δι’ ὑμᾶς and ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, perhaps following out an independent idea of the meaning.
6. πάρειμι] The Heb. phrase, a very common one, is exactly Me voici.
7. ὅρα] No doubt expresses ‘beauty,’ esp. that of early prime, as in the spring, &c. This meaning comes out particularly in adjective. It has indeed been suggested that ver. 6 should be brought to a full stop, as in Heb., after πάρειμι, and ver. 7 read ὡς ὡραῖοι ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων οἱ πόδες κ.τ.λ. The syntax however is in any case different from Heb., and the text not of a kind without parallel in lxx.
Cf. with this verse Nah. i. 15.
8. ὀφθ. πρὸς ὀφθαλμοὺς] Apparently ὀφθαλμοὶ is intended to be
the subject of ὄψονται, but it is not so in Heb. In Numb. xiv. 14
B reads ὀφθαλμοῖς κατ’ ὀφθαλμούς. With the force of the expression
ἐλεήσῃ] The Heb., if causal, which more probably it is not, is to ‘bring back,’ and so occasionally to ‘refresh’ or ‘restore,’ when by ‘the soul’ as obj. Ps. xxiii. 3, and probably xix. 7: Prov. xxv. c. lxx. generally renders by ἐπιστρέφω, except in Prov. l.c. ὠφελεῖ). Here they paraphrase in familiar language.
9, 10. Cf. Ps. xcviii. 1, 2, 4.
11. ἀφορίσθητε] Heb. ‘purify yourselves’: the word has the force of setting apart: as in Ezek. xx. 38 ἐλέγξω ἐξ ὑμῶν τοὺς ἀσεβεῖς, Eccl. iii. 18 διακρινεῖ αὐτοὺς ὁ θεός. The passage is quoted, 2 Cor. vi. 17, in a compound quotation, with Ezek. xx. 34, Jerem. Ii. 45 and possibly a reference to Numb. xvi. 26.
φέροντες τὰ σκεύη] The Heb. phrase is the regular one for ‘armourbearer’ (1 Sam. xiv. 1, c.), but might also have this meaning, as Numb. iv. 15 shows: and the plural is perhaps in its favour, unless both meanings are combined.
12. ἐπισυνάγων] ἐπι- gives the required sense of closing the rear of a march: in Numb. x. 25 the same word is rendered by ἔσχατοι. Cf. Exod. xiv. 19, Josh. vi. 9. Also lviii. 8.
13. συνήσει] Literal, but the Heb. verb often indicates action as well as wisdom: as, perhaps, 1 Sam. xviii. 30, cf. ver. 5, 14 of the same chapter.
lxx. omit one of the four Heb. verbs: by general agreement, the last: supplied only as a Hexaplaric addition.
14. LXX. use 2nd person in the parenthetic clause, whereas Heb. has 3rd: but the changes of person in prophecy are often perplexing: see, for instance, i. 29.
15. θαυμάσονται] The Heb. is obscure: some render it, ‘he shall
astonish,’ or, ‘startle many nations’: of which Lxx. might seem
an inversion. It was formerly generally taken to mean, ‘he shall
sprinkle’; so A.V., Vulg. asperget, Aq. and Theod. ῥαντίσει: Kay
Pusey support this, but it is objected that the verb means, not to
sprinkle a person with a liquid, but to scatter as the liquid itself.
It is, however, going rather far to pronounce that the sense cannot be
transferred, as it evidently is in some languages. Lowth, favouring an
emendation,
Εἰτα παύσονται οἱ ἅνθρωποι πρὸς σέ μόνον ὁρῶντες, καὶ σὲ μόνον θαυμάζοντες.
συνάξουσιν] So Α, 305: other MSS. συνέξουσιν.
The syntax is somewhat altered.
LIII. 1. Κύριε] Quoted, both in John xii. 38 and Rom. x. 16 with this word, which is not in Heb.
2. ἀνηγγείλαμεν] One would suppose this to be a case of confusion between ἀναγγέλλω and ἀνατέλλω. Cf. xlii. 9, xlv. 8. The part of the verb is not one of the closest in point of resemblance, but the corruption might have taken place by stages. O. L. writers have annuntiavimus. Tert. adv. Marc. 111., Cypr. Testim. 11. 13, c. On the text see Essayw in Bibl. Greek. p. 178.
Prof. Cheyne writes on the tenses of this passage: “We ought clearly to carry either the perf. or the future (the latter would express the ideality, the prophetic imaginativeness of the point of view) throughout ver. 2—10a. The inconsistent future of A.V., ver. comes from the Vulgate (though in 2 b this version has the perf.). The not. mostly has aorists (pres. twice in 4, twice in 7, once in 10) Both um. and Vulg. strangely give the future in ver. 9.
παιδίον] Heb. a ‘sapling,’ or ‘sucker,’ the obvious meaning being that given by lxx., but the parallelism leads us to the former.
κάλλος] The Heb. word is from the same root as that in Haggai ii. 7, “the desirable thing: of all nations.”
3. LXX. insert ἀλλὰ τὸ εἶδος, giving a more specific connection with ver. 2. For πάντας ἀνθρώπους, read by AQ* 26 198 239 316 B c. read τοὺς υἱοὺς τῶν ἀνθρώπων, to which ℵ prefixes πάντας. Heb. has simply ‘men.’ Cypr. Testim. 11. 13 has deficiens praeter caeteros hammer.
ἐκλείπον] Heb., either ‘forsaken by men,’ or ‘ceasing from men,’ i.e. no longer to be counted among them. Vulg. virorum.
ἄνθ. ἐν πληγὴ· ὃν] Heb. ‘a man of pains.
φέρειν] Explanatory insertion by Lxx.
μαλακίαν] Constantly in Lxx. of sickness, as the Heb.
ὅτι] Heb. ‘And as...’ lxx. may have read
4. καὶ περὶ ἡμῖν minim] Virtually, Lxx. omit ‘he supported them.’ In Matt. viii. 17, the passage follows the Heb. more αὐτὸς τὰς ἀσθενείας ἡμῶν ἔλαβεν καὶ τὰς νόσους ἐβάστασεν.
ἐν πόνῳ κ.τ.λ.] Cf. ἐν πληγῇ in the previous verse: Heb. has three participles, which might have been read, with slight change, as nouns but it seems to be a case of freedom in rendering.
The Heb. word corresponding to ἐν πόνῳ is used in Leviticus, and in 2 Kings xv. 5, of leprosy: and so Vulg. Aq. and Symm. render it here, though there is no absolute necessity to make it specific.
5. μώλωπι] Cf. i. 6.
6. ἄνθρωπος] ‘Each,’ Heb. risk, which in this sense is generally represented by ἅνθρωπος, and not ἀνήρ: see however 2 Kings xviii. 31 whereas Isai. xxxvi. 16 has ἕκαστος, cf. variant in xiv. 18. Other instances are iii. 5, xiii. 14, xlvii. 15, with xxxi. 7 Heb., but prob. not xxxii. 2.
παρέδωκεν αὐτὸν ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις] In Heb., ‘sins’ is the direct obj., and the verb means ‘caused to meet,’ or, ‘to light on him.’ has Κύριος καταντῆσαι ἐποίησεν εἷς αὐτόν. Vulg. Vulg. posuit eo. LXX. omit ‘all.’
7. κεκακῶσθαι] The corresponding word in Heb. is from same root as in ver. 4, LXX. omitting the previous word ‘he was oppressed.’
7, 8. This passage is quoted, Acts viii. 32, 33, as read by the
Ethiopian eunuch. The quotation follows LXX., MSS. of the NT.
varying between κείραντος and κείροντος, and inserting αὐτὸν with
ℵca AQ and several cursives. (Clem. Rom. omits αὐτόν: Cypr. Testim.
11. 15, cf. Epist. VI., appears to read coram tondente se.) This differs
considerably from Heb., which is difficult: some render ‘From
oppression and from judgment he was taken ’ i.e. removed,
released: others, ‘Through oppression . . . he was taken away,’ i.e.
10 death, cut off. The Heb. preposition is
8. κρίσις αὐτοῦ ἤρθη] Possibly, ‘(by his humiliation) his sentence was done away ’: see Mr T. E. Page on Acts, l.c.
τήν γενεὰν αὐτοῦ τίς διηγήσεται;] LXX. in a sense is near Heb., but
the latter is again uncertain: the word ‘generation’ perhaps meaning
the period, and the men living in it, i.e. contemporaries: so Gesenius,
Cheyne, and Delitzsch, who says that the LXX. must mean ‘Who can
count his posterity? the Heb. being taken to mean ‘and as to his
generation, who considered that he was...?’ As to the sign of the
accus. thus used, see Davidson, Syntax, § 78: but this passage is not
instanced. Kay translates, ‘And his life who will consider?’ a lifetime,
that is, so short. Lowth, ‘And his manner of life who would declare?
referring to an alleged custom of inviting witnesses to character before
condemnation on a capital charge, and pointing out the bearing of
John xviii. 20, 21, and Acts xxvi. 4, 5. It is, however, denied by most
ἡ ζωὴ] Heb. ‘of the living.
άπὸ τᾶν άνομιῶν] Heb. has again the prep.
ἤχθη εἰς Θάνατον] Heb. ‘a stroke (was) upon him’: the form
regularly mean ‘upon them,’ but many authorities consider it equivalent
here to a singular: cf. xliv. 15, perhaps Ps. xi. 7 Job xxii. 2, c
For this pronoun,
9. καὶ δόσει] Heb. literally, ‘And (one) gave his grave with
wicked men, and with a rich man in his deaths.’ Some think
‘rich’ must, by parallelism with ‘wicked,’ be a term of evil meaning:
cf. Prov. xi. 28; Delitzsch thinks it rather to be antithetic: which
would seem to be a natural development of parallelism, but Prof.
Skinner calls this view ‘utterly unwarrantable.’ Partial antithesis
no doubt rarer, but see, e.g., Prov. xiii. 22. Some resort to emendation,
Ewald reading
τοὺς πλουσίους] Cf. Matt. xxvii. 57, ἅνθρωπος πλούσιος, and parallel passages. Note also Luke xvi. 23, ἀπέθανεν δὲ καὶ ὁ πλούσιος καὶ ἐτάφη.
ἀντὶ τοῦ θανάτου] “Clearly means in requital for his death,’ Bp Lightfoot on Clem. Rom. Epist. 1. 16.
οὐδὲ εὑρέθη δόλος] So ℵca AQ 26 36 41 49 51 86 90 91 (93) 104 106 144 147 198 228 233 239 306 308 309. οὐδὲ δόλος 87 97, οὐδὲ δόλον ℵ*B. 22 has εὑρέθη inserted and δόλος apparently altered from δόλον.
Clem. Rom. has εὑρέθη δόλος, also Justin Martyr. Cyprian, Testim. 11. 15 has insidias, August. de Civit. Dei XVIII. 29 dolum. The Adv. judaeos, attributed to Tertullian, has dolu: inventus est. See Vol. 1. Introd. p. 33. Also Hatch, Essays in. Biblical Greek, IV. p. 202.
‘Guile’ in the Heb. is nominative, and εὑρέθη would easily be
inserted, as in fact in some Latin evidence locum: est has come in
with the accusative. On the other hand δόλον is more likely than not
to have been altered to match ἀνομίαν. Dr Hatch is perhaps right in
considering οὐδὲ δόλος the original reading: but εὑρέθη must have been
inserted very early, and is probably due to the influence of the
10. καθαρίσαι] Scholz gives this as=ABBREV read by sound for ABBREV. τῆς πληγῆς is for the verb, ‘he laid sickness on him.’
ἐὰν δῶτε] Syntax differs again from Heb., which is either ‘if his soul should make a guilt-offering,’ or, ‘if thou shouldst make his soul.’ To read ‘if...’ or ‘when he shall make...’ with Ewald and Cheyne, a letter must be altered.
ἀφελεῖν] The connection of the words differs from Heb. LXX. omit ‘in his hand,’ and this infin. corresponds to ‘shall prosper.’ Whether as a paraphrase, or by reading ABBREV for ABBREV, the alteration of one letter to ὠφελεῖν would bring the Greek nearer to Heb. The construction and sense, however, would not, even with a change of punctuation, be improved thereby.
11. δεῖξαι] Represents ‘shall see,’ taken as causal, φῶς being a supplement on the part of LXX.
πλάσαι] Heb. ‘he shall be satisfied.’ Schleusner’s conjecture that πλῆσαι is the original LXX. reading seems most probable.
I2. κληρονομήσει...μεριεῖ] Heb. has the same verb in both clauses, but LXX. introduce a variety, perhaps being unable to dispense with it. It seems preferable to make κληρονομήσει causal, cf. xiv. 2, xlix. 8 and not render ‘shall inherit many,’ which gives, at the least, a difficult sense.
παρεδόθη] May be taken the first time as a paraphrase for ‘he poured out,’ though inverted: the second time the Heb. is quite different, being the same as that rendered by παρέδωκεν in ver. 6, but it seems scarcely possible to connect the two verses in translating. The primary meaning seems to be that of meeting or (bringing into) contact, and many renderings occur in different passages of A.V. See Albert Barnes on ver. 6, above. LXX. have probably guessed, falling back on their favourite word.
ἁμαρτίας πολλῶν ἀνήνεγκεν] Quoted, Heb. ix. 28: cf. ver. 4.
LIV. 1. Quoted, Gal. iv. 27, accurately from LXX., down to ἄνδρα. LXX. omit ‘singing.’
2. τῶν αὐλαιῶν σου] LXX. omit ‘of thy habitation’ (word used for the Tabernacle), which is also called a ‘tent,’ see Exod. xxvii. 19 (habitation) and 21 (tent).
3. ἔτι...ἐκπέτασον] Heb. ‘for thou shalt.’ If ἔτι were originally ὅτι, a future following might have been assimilated to the previous imperatives. Heb. has ‘break forth,’ which is softened by LXX.
4. κατῃσχύνθης...ὠνειδίσθης] LXX. taking these verbs in the past—
5. θεὸς αὐτὸς Ἰσραὴλ is the reading of A, alone, other Mss. having αὐτὸς θεὸς Ἰ. ἅγιος Ἰσ ραήλ, θεὸς would correspond to Heb. Grabe printed ἅγιος, but kept A's order.
6. Heb. has no negatives: the first time Lxx. may
have read
A* omits καὶ ὀλιγόψυχον, probably an inadvertence. The two
words ‘forsaken’ and ‘grieved’ are closely alike in Heb., differing only
by
7. έλεήσω] Heb. has ‘I will gather’: which (though a paraphrase is possible) looks as though the right word had been lost in the Greek, by confusion with ver. 8; where AQ*vid 26 106 306 have ἠλέησα, ℵcb ἐλέησα, but B c. ἐλεήσω.
8. ἂν θυμῷ μικρῷ] Heb. ‘in a gush,’ or ‘outburst of wrath,’ word for ‘outburst’ being unknown elsewhere, but supposed to be a variant of a word for ‘torrent.’ It forms a strong rhyming assonance with the word for ‘wrath.’ lxx. and A.V. explain the idea as of brief, passing anger, carrying on the idea of ver. 7. Vulg. has in momenta indignationis.
9. ἀπὸ τοῦ ὕδατος] The present Heb. text begins
τοῦ ἐπὶ Νῶε] ‘Which was in the time of Ν.,’ a familiar construction, the case after ἐπὶ being regularly genitive: e.g. Luke iii. 2, ἐπὶ ἀρχιερέως (v. l. ἀρχιερέων) Ἄννα καὶ Καϊάφα. Thucyd. 11. 2, ἐπὶ Χρυσίδος ἐν Ἄργει τότε πεντήκοντα δυοῖν δέοντα ἔτη ἱερωμένης, κ.τ.λ.
τῇ γῇ θυμ. ἐπὶ σοὶ] The confusion noted above is still in progress,
‘I have sworn’ being omitted the second time: the comparative
The connection of clauses continues to differ, into ver. 10.
ὤμοσα] Supposing the limitations of Heb.
μεταστήσασθαι] So ℵAQ*vid 106. B c. have μεταστήσεσθαι, which is easier in any case, and may be taken intransitively, as the Heb.
εἶπεν γὰρ Κύριος Ἵλεώς σοι] So ℵAQ and most cursives. B has Ἵλεώς σοι Κύριε, which is practically unsupported, and difficult. Cf. Matt. xvi. 22, and Gen. xliii. 23, where Heb. is ‘Peace unto you.’ Κύριος ἐλεῶν σε would be nearer to the usual rendering of Heb.; but the Greek is too near to make it likely that there is corruption.
11. ἄνθρακα] Generally ‘a hot coal,’ but, when speaking
precious stones, believed to be the ‘carbuncle,’ whose name has the
same meaning. It more generally corresponds, as Prof. Skinner
points out, to
Delitzsch's note supplies all that can well be said upon the symbolical heraldry of the passage. Cf. Tobit xiii. 16, 17, and Rev. xxi. 18–21.
12. ἐπάλξεις] Vulg. propugnacula, and so most modems.
ἴασπιν] So Vulg.; Heb.=‘rubies,’ R.V.
λίθους κρυστάλλου] Heb. ‘stones of fire,’ i.e. prob. ‘carbuncles,’ see above.
14. ἀπέχου] Heb. verb is now generally taken as imperat.
15. προσήλυτοι] This seems to be used, almost as a participle of
προσέρχομαι, to represent the emphatic or intensive repetition of the
Heb. verb. The negative word
16. σε] Inserted by LXX. as obj. to ‘I have created’: becomes nominative, and the sentence is converted into a simile, with negatives inserted against Heb.
17. πᾶν σκεῦος . . . οὐκ] Literal, and the negative at last agrees with
Heb. A's reading φθαρτὸν is supported by ℵca? cb Q 22 26 36 48 49 51
62 86 90 93 93 106 144 147 198 233 308. Yet it can hardly be right, for
B's reading σκευαστὸν is confirmed by the impossible τον of ℵ*, which
is accounted for by σκευας dropping out after σκεῦος; also it agrees
with the meaning of Heb., and imitates, though with different words,
the Heb. assonance in
ἀδικήσει] So A, 233: εὐοδώσω ℵBq*; εὐοδωθήσεται, with Heb., Q mg and sixteen cursives (Luc. and other).
πᾶσα φωνὴ ἦ . . . ] So ℵc AQ: B omits ἢ, which would easily drop out in transcription: but the rel. is not expressed here in Heb.
οἱ δὲ ἔνοχοί σου ἔσονται ἐν αὐτῇ] An insertion of mm.
LV. 1. LXX. omit the opening interjection: ‘all’ is also omitted, but ὅσοι before μὴ ἔχετε compensates to some extent: and ‘come, buy is not repeated.
πίση] So ℵAQ and several cursives, of which only 36 147 233 are Lucianic: Cypr. Test. 111. 100 has bibite, V 90 read πίεσθε: B has φάγετε, Heb. ‘eat’: the verb seems to have been changed to be more appropriate to wine, but στέαρ for ‘milk’ does not help this.
οἴνου] So ℵABQ 49 106 198; but the Rom. edition has οἶνον so Aq. Theod. Symm. Cf. xxv. 6.
2. ἀργυρίου] Lxx. omit ‘for no bread.
τὸν μόχθον] Heb. is generally interpreted of the result or earnings of the labour: cf. xlv. 14, and another Heb. word in xl. 10, lxii. 11.
ἀκούσατέ μοι] So ℵca A: there are several variants, and B omits.
ἐντρυφήσα] Cf. xlvii. 1, lvii. 4, lviii. 14 (ἔση πεποιθὼς), lxvi. xlvii. 9 is a diff. Heb. word.
ἐν ἀγαθοῖς] Cf. Ps. ciii. 5. Heb. here ‘in fatness.
3. ἐπακολουθήσατε ταῖς ὁδοῖς] Amplified from the original ‘Come unto me’: cf. such passages as ii. 4, xxx.
ἐν άγαθοῖς] Repeated from ver. 2; not in Heb.
διαθήσομαι . . . διαθήκην] The kindred words are not so in Heb., but
form a familiar and assonant phrase, no:
τὰ ὅσια] Heb. ‘loving-kindnesses.’ Quoted, Acts xiii. 34, δώσω ὑμῖν τὰ ὅσια Δαυεὶδ τὰ πιστά, and coupled with οὐ δώσεις τὸν ὅσιόν σου ἰδεῖν διαφθοράν (Ps. xvi. 10).
Cf. the promises in 2 Sam. vii. 15, 16, Ps. xviii. 50, lxxxix. 28, &c
4. μαρτύριον] The Heb. is said to be used here rather of the
bearer of witness than the witness borne. But the distinction is not
easy to maintain: cf. Horace, Odes IV. iv. 37,
5. ᾔδεισαν . . . ἐπικαλέσονται] The Heb. ‘thou knowest,’ ‘thou call,’ is less exactly parallel to the next
ᾔδεισαν AQ, and some cursives, mostly Hesychian, with variants. οἴδασιν ℵB. Cypr. Testim. 1. 21 noverunt, followed by ignorabant
A has ἐπικαλέσωνται.
καταφεύξονται] Heb. is used of hastening, either for refuge, or to welcome: cf. the causal use in Ps. lxviii. 32. προφθάσει χεῖρα.)
6. ἐν τῷ εὑρίσκειν] Heb. is passive: the καὶ preceding alters the connection, and most MSS. (but not A) have δὲ after ἡνίκα. Α has ἐγγίζει.
7. LXX. omit ‘and to our God.
ἐπὶ πολὺ ἀφήσει κ.τ.λ.] Α paraphrase: cf. Mic. vii. 19, Ps. ciii. 12.
8. ὥσπερ . . . ὤσπερ] Not in Heb.: the order of the expressions is made clearer, as the ordinary mode of distinguishing subject and predicate fails. The second clause is thus seen to differ from the Hebrew, which has a chiasmus. Even the comparative particle in ver. 9 is omitted in Heb.: but this is not unusual in Heb., cf. lxii. 5 and see Delitzsch's note here.
9. ἀπέχει . . . ἀπὸ] Heb. definitely ‘is higher than....’ Cf. Ps. 11, 12.
διανοήματα . . . διανοίας] The same Heb. word as βουλαὶ in ver. 8. Here the difference introduced in the Greek may be between the isolated attempts of human intelligence, and the eternal, sustained thought of God.
10. ἕως ἂν μεθύση] Heb. may be so construed: but perhaps rather, ‘without having watered...’: and so in ver.
ἐκτέκῃ . . . βλαστήσει] γῆ must be the subject: but the Heb. verbs are causal.
σπέρμα . . . βρῶσιν] Quoted, 2 Cor. ix. 10.
11. lxx. omits ‘void,’ and amplifies the following clause. For
·εὐοδώσω, Heb. has ‘it shall make to prosper,’ or ‘do
12. διδαχθήσεσθε] Perhaps
ἐξαλοῦνται προσδεχόμενοι] The metaphor is altered, and προσδεχ. expands ‘before you.’
ἐπικροτήσει] κροτεῖν is used of clapping hands, e.g. 2 Kings xi. 12 Ezek. xxv. 6. mix. do not allow hands to the trees here, as to the rivers in Psalm xcviii. 8, and κλάδοις somewhat impairs the effect of the phrase.
13. The trees cannot be certainly identified. The Heb. word rendered ‘thorn’ is found only here and vii. 19, that for ‘brier’ here only. The ‘fir’ and ‘myrtle’ occur, xli. 19.
Lowth quotes Virg. Ecl. v. 62 foll., to illustrate ver. 12:
So in Heine's Der Fichtenbaum, the trees have their feelings,
though not of joy:
And both feelings are imagined in Tennyson's Maud,
LVI. 1. ἔλεος] Heb. ‘righteousness,’ as in previous clause.
2. ἄνθρωπος] Rightly for Heb. ‘son of man,’ representing
3. Ἀφοριεῖ] Rightly future, as R.V.
5. τόπον ὀνομαστὸν] Heb. ‘a memorial (literally, ‘a hand’) and name.
6. τοῦ εἶναι] Β (alone) has τῷ εἶναι, in the style of Aquila: but ω and ου are often confused in MSS.
καὶ δούλας] Not in Heb.; Cf. the addition καὶ περὶ τῶν θυγατέρων μου in ℵAQ, xlv. 11
7. ὁ γὰρ οἶκος . . . κληθήσεται] Quoted in Mark xi. 16, less fully in Matt. xxi. 13, less accurately in Luke xix. 46. The contrasted phrase, σπήλαιον λῃστῶν, occurs, Jerem. vii. 11
8. ὅτι συνάξω . . . συναγωγὴν] Heb. ‘I will yet gather unto him, to his gathered ones’: i.e. probably, others beside, as A.V. (Should be ἔτι ?) Cf. John x. 16, xi. 52.
9. ἄγρια] Apparently ‘of the field.’ Heb. accents make ‘beasts of the forest’ the object of ‘devour’: but the sense parallelism are strongly against this.
10. ἴδετε] The Heb. text has a verb, which might be thus rendered: but the margin, ‘watchmen,’ is generally followed. The verb, in any case, would be not the usual one for ‘see,’ but rather ‘Look,’ or ‘look out !
φρονῆσαι] φρόνησιν Luc. MSS., cf. ver. 11; φωνῆσαι 49, Β omits, and it is not in Heb.; B* also omits πάντες before κύνες.
οὗ δυνήσονται] ℵ with 49 239 306 prefixes οἵ, and the Luc. MSS. have a participle.
ἐνυπνιαζόμενοι κοίτην] Heb. has here two participles: ‘dreaming’
(or, ‘raving’) and ‘lying down.’ The former,
With ἐνυπνιαζόμενοι cf. Jude 8. The Vulg. there omits the word.
11. ἀναιδεῖς τῇ ψυχῇ] Heb. ‘strong of soul,’ i.e. greedy. seems to have the sense of ‘unrestrained,’ by proper feeling, and so almost ‘insatiate’: as in Horn. Il. V. 593, κυδοιμὸν ἀναιδέα δηϊότητος and perhaps even in Il. 1. 158. So the corresponding Latin adjective, improbus anser, Virg. Georg. 1. 119, cf. 1. 388, 111. 431.
πονηροὶ] Taking
ἐξηκολούθησαν] Heb. ‘turned,’ ‘faced’: cf. lv. 3 (diff. Heb. verb).
usually render by παρακαλέω, in the sense of ‘comfort’: Vulg. has
qui consolamini. Yet παρακαλοῦντες can hardly here mean ‘comforting,’
nor anything nearer to it than ‘appease’ or ‘implore’: cf. the use
of
τὰ εἴδωλα] Heb.
ὑπὸ δένδρα δασέα] Cf. Deut. xii. 2, Jerem. iii. 13. δασὺς is used of thick foliage in Homer, Odyss. XIV. 49, ῥῶπας δ’ ὑπέχευε δασείας: τὸ δασὺ of wooded country, in Xenophon: in Herod. of a lettuce, 111. 32 περιτετιλμένη ἢ δασεῖα, also IV. 21, γῆν δασέην ὕλῃ παντοίῃ.
ἀνὰ μέσον] Shortens the Heb. ‘under the clefts of . . . .
6. lxx. (best texts) omit ‘Among the smooth (stones) of the torrent,’ the word for ‘smooth,’ plur., being from the same root as for ‘portion,’ perhaps a play on words in Heb. It has been doubted whether, as ‘smooth’ may mean ‘slippery,’ ‘deceitful’ (as in Ezek. xii. 24), stones are really meant. But it is most generally so taken: Delitzsch refers to Herod. III. 8, ἀλείφει τῷ αἵματι ἐν μέσῳ κειμένους λίθους ἑπτά· τοῦτο δὲ ποιέων ἐπικαλέει τόν τε Διόνυσον καὶ τὴν Οὐρανίην, and the worship of such objects seems to have been widely spread. See also Lowth's note.
ἐκείνη . . . ἡ μέρις, οὖτος . . . ὁ κλῆρος] The demonstratives do not exactly follow the Heb. arrangement. Their gender, agreeing with what follows, is classically correct: as in ’s familiar “Hoc opus, hic labor est” (Aen. VI. 129): Cf. Soph. Phil. 1034, αὕτη γὰρ ἦν σοι ἐκβαλεῖν ἐμέ.
οὐκ ὀργισθήσομαι] Heb.
7. ἐκεῖ 1°]
ἀνεβίβασας] Heb. ‘thou wentest up,’ either taken as causal
would need prefixed
8. ᾤου ὅτι ἐὰν] Heb. has merely
πλεῖόν τι ἕξεις] Heb. ‘thou art gone up,’
The next two clauses are omitted in the best MSS. of LXX.
9. καὶ ἐπλήθυνας τὴν πορνείαν σου μετ’ αὐτῶν] Heb. has ‘thou hast travelled to the king with οil.’ There seems no connection between the (ireck and this. Some duplication suggests itself, or, more likely, that a missing clause of ver. 8 is represented by these words.
Heb. refers either to sending presents to some sovereign: cf. Hosea, xii. 1, ἔλαιον εἰς Αἴγυπτον ἐνεπορεύετο, and xxx. 6; or to offerings to an idol, ‘Molech’ being the same word as ‘king’ with altered vowels. Delitzsch speaks strongly against this latter view.
τοὺς μικρὸν ἀπὸ σοῦ] Heb. ‘perfumes,’
ἐταπανώθης] The causal form in Heb. has generally been taken here as though with ‘thyself’ for object. Vulg. humiliata es.
10. ταῖς πολυοδίαις] Heb. would naturally mean ‘much journeying,’ or, ‘length of way’ as in Josh. ix. 13.
ἐκοπίασας] Α different Heb. word from xlvii. 13. “Lassata, necdum satiata,” Juv. VI.
Παύσομαι] Heb. ‘It is hopeless.
ἐνισχύουσα ὅτι ἔπραξας ταῦτα] Heb. obscure, perhaps ‘thou didst find revival of thy strength.’ The Greek shows little [Can ἐνισχύω here have the sense of ἰσχυρίζομαι, ‘insist strongly’?
κατεδεήθης] Heb. ‘thou wast not faint,’ freely rendered. σύ,
emphatic at the end, comes from the
11. ἐψεύσω με] Heb. verb is absolute, without obj.: cf. i. 3.
εἰς τὴν διάνοιαν οὐδὲ] Not in Heb.
ἰδὼν] ΑBBREV for
παρορῶ] Pointing the Heb. word ‘from of old’ as a participle,
with
12. κακὰ] interpreting Heb. ‘thy works,’ cf. Lxx. of xliii. The ‘righteousness’ is spurious. ℵ*B read δικ. σου, but ℵca cbAQ* and twenty cursives δικ. μου, altering the sense.
13. ἂν τῇ θλίψει σου] Reading
καταιγὶς] Parallelism has led LXX. to put a word of violence rather
than of slightness [or could they have read
14. Καθαρίσατε] Heb. ‘cast up!’ repeated. Perhaps
ἀπὸ προσώπου] Taking
Ἅγιος ἐν ἁγίοις] Heb. simply ‘holy,’ but the phrases in the context may account for LXX.'s amplifying. Many think that ‘Holy’ rightly a title, not an attribute of ‘name.
The rest of the verse is somewhat changed. διδοὺς ζωὴν corresponds to the second ‘to ’ of Heb. If διδοὺς be taken then as corresponding to the first ‘revive,’ ὀλιγοψύχοις represents ‘crushed and humble in spirit,’ μακροθυμίαν ‘the spirit of the humble,’ and καρδίαν συντετριμμένοις ‘the heart of the crushed ones.’ Lxx. are apt to lose exactness when dealing with passages in which the same words recur, as here.
16. ἐκδικήσω] Rather ‘punish,’ than as Heb. ‘contend.’ Vulg. litigabo.
πνοὴν πᾶσαν ἐγὼ ἐποίησα] πᾶσαν is not in Heb., which has plur., not found elsewhere, and does not express the relative. Vulg. flatus ego faciam.
17. βραχύ τι] Reading
ἐλύπησα...ἐλυπήθη] Heb. ‘I was wroth’ in both places: same as ὀργισθήσομαι in ver. 16.
ἀπέστρεψα. τὸ πρόσωπον] Heb. ‘hiding’ (myself)
στυγνὸς] Heb. ‘turning away,’ perverse, apostate. υἱοὶ υἱοὶ ἐπιστρέφοντες, Jerem. iii. 14, 22.
18. παρεκάλεσα] Reading
ἀληθινὴν] Heb. ‘and to his mourners,’ which Lxx. have
with
καὶ τοῖς παθεινοῖς αὐτοῦ, supplied in ngV 62 90 144 (147) 233 308 from Theodotion, is thus a duplicate.
19. Lxx. omits ‘Creating fruit of the lips’: it is supplied Aq. Symm. (Q mg). Cf. Hos. xiv. 2, Heb. xiii. 15.
20. οὕτως] Omitted by B: ℵAQ and 22 cursives have it.
Lxx. omit ‘as the sea’ (supplied in Luc. MSS.), and also the clause of the verse.
21. Practically identical with xlviii. 22. Heb. has ‘my God’
LVIII. 1. ἐν ἰσχύι] Heb. ‘with the throat,’ of which Lxx. a fair explanation.
σάλπιγγα] So AQ 26 41 49 86 87 91 97 106 198 306: σάλπιγγος ℵ, σάλπιγγι B and Luc. MSS. Theod. Symm. have gen. of a diff. word, Aq. probably dative. Cyprian has tuba twice, Lucifer perhaps tubae. The evidence for accus. is practically Hesychian, and it may be an attempt to touch up the Creek: the dative seems best attested as the original and harder reading.
2. ζητήσουσιν] So Α 41 87 97 106 147 308 309: other MSS. ζητοῦσιν. ℵ* has the following verb in the future. Cypr. Testim. m. 1 has quaerunt...concupiscunt, but the Latin evidence is less decisive on such a point. Heb. has imperf, of repeated actions, and the future is perhaps the original mm. for both verbs.
δικαιοσύνην θεοῦ] θεοῦ is an insertion by Α, of a kind to which this MS. is prone: cf. προστάγματα (+ κυπίου A), xxiv. 5.
3. λέγοντες] Inserted by Lxx.; cf. A.V.
τὸ, θελήματα] ‘Pleasure,’ A.V.: ‘business,’ most modern authorities, for the Heb. here.
τοὺς ὑποχειρίους ὑμῶν ὑπονύσσετε] 50, very nearly, Delitzsch and RV. marg. render the Heb.; while others take it as A.V., ‘exact all your labours.
4. εἰς κρίσεις] B prefixes εἰ, and some cursives have ἰδοὺ, with Heb. Cypr. l.c. has aut enim subiectos vobis subpungitis, aut ad iudicia at lite: ieiunatis, aut proximos caeditis pugnis.
ταπεινὸν] Perhaps
5. Heb. begins with an interrog., not negative clause.
ἡμέραν ταπεινοῦν] The infin. without some introduction, such as ὥστε or τοῦ, makes a very rough construction.
ὡς κρίκον] Heb. ‘as a bulrush,’ 0.1.. O.L. also Vulg. circulum. From Job xli. 2 (xl. 26 Heb., xl. 21 LXX. and Vulg.) it seems that the word mm is used also for a ‘ring’ of bulrushrope.
δεκτήν] LXX. omit ‘and a day...to the Lord,’ leaving the adj. agree With νηστείαν.
6. ἀλλὰ λῦε] Lxx. do not apparently begin this verse (or the
next) interrogatively: but treat the infinitives as imperatives; a
construction not uncommon in Heb., and sometimes found in Greek,
στραγγαλιὰς βιαίων συναλλαγμάτων] LXX. paraphrases with unusual boldness in the latter part of this verse.
7. ὐπερόψῃ] Again paraphrased: Heb. ‘hide thyself from.... ὑπερορῶ is sometimes ambiguous, see on παρορῶ, lvii. 11, where LXX. read the same Heb. verb: also Ps. x. l
8. ἰάματα] Clearly right: so Lucifer, Irenaeus (Lat.), and the Speculum, sanitates. But the evident corruption ἱμάτια is given by ℵca 91* 106* 147, and Cypr. (Testim. 111. 1 and elsewhere). Tertullian, de Resur. Carnis, XXVII., has vestimenta! also Barnabas (Cr. and Lat.) 3, Justin M. T Trypho xv. Except for its wide currency, especially in Latin, the mistake is of no importance. Compare A*’s of αἵματα for μάταια, Amos ii. 4. And in lxiii. 3, ℵ* has τὰ ἱμάτια for τὸ αἰμα.
περιστελεῖ σε] Heb. is almost as in lii. 12, which see. LXX. has here modified the idea: cf. Luke ii. 9.
9. Ἰδοὺ πάρειμι] Cf. lxv. 24, esp. in LXX.
χειροτονίαν] Heb. seems to mean ‘pointing the finger’ in scorn.
ῥῆμα γογγυσμοῦ] Heb. ‘a word of vanity
10. τὸν ἄρτον ἐκ ψυχῆς σου] Curiously, the Heb. has only ‘thy soul’ (cf. discrepancy in xliv. 4), the Peshitta only ‘thy (Prof. Skinner, as Lowth before him, thinks that ‘bread’ has dropped out of the Heb. text, and ‘soul’ taken its place.)
11. καθάπερ ἐπιθυμεῖ] Heb. ‘in dry places’ ‘in drought,’
καὶ τὰ ὀστᾶ, σου πιαθήσεται] The Heb. verb means ‘set free
(Vulg. liberabit) or ‘strengthen.’ A.V. has ‘make fat,’ and LXX.
generally considered to support, on the whole, the Heb. text, but with
pass. verb for act., which is not infrequent. They might, however,
have read
καὶ τὰ ὀστᾶ σου ὥς βοτάνη ἀνατελεῖ...γενεῶν] Omitted by ℵB and some other MSS., but found in ℵ ca AQ 26 49 86 87 c., eighteen cursives in all. It looks like a summary of parts of ver. 11, 12, which has come into the text, but is made up mainly from lxvi. 14 and xxxiv. 17.
12. Lxx. omit ‘thou shalt raise up,’ having already inserted
Above, the difficulty of Heb. ‘of thee,’
καὶ τοὺς τρίβους τοὺς ἀνὰ μίαν τούτοις] ἀνὰ μέσον, probably
13 τὰ θελήματι] As ver. 3.
τρυφερὰ] See on lv. 2.
ἄγω, τῷ θεᾷ σου] ℵ*Β omit the pronoun, for which the authorities are ℵca AQ and eleven, mostly Hesychian, cursives.
From this point Lxx. continue freely, omitting ‘honourable, and shall honour it.’ ἐν ὀργῇ ἐκ τοῦ στόματος has nothing in the Heb. Delitzsch takes ‘words’ here to mean ‘mere ’
14. ἔσῃ πεποιθὸς] Not the usual word, but from the same root as τρυφερὰ above. Either the καὶ here marks the apodosis, or else it begins at καλέσεις (in the Greek)
The injunctions as to keeping the Sabbath, as in lvi. 36 put it on an entirely different footing from ceremonial observance None of the other commandments in the Decalogue are ceremonial. Cf. Jerem. xvii. 22 foll., Ezek. xxii. 8, 2 Chron. xxxvi. 21.
ἀναβιβάσαι σε ἔπλ τὰ ἀγαθὰ] Heb. ‘cause thee to ride on the high ’ Cf. Deut. xxxii. 13
LIX. 1. Μὴ οὐκ ισχύει] Mr) is of course interrog., and οὗ
connected closely with the verb. Perhaps
τοῦ trim] Heb. ‘from saving,’ i.e. so as not to save, a
construction. Lxx. frequently use τοῦ with inf. to render this, no
doubt recognising an analogy between Heb.
ἐβάρυνεν] Heb. is intrans., said of the ear. (Kay points out, comparing vi. 10, that their (i.e. Israel’s ears were dull, not His: so, their hands, not His, were powerless to save.)
2. ἀνὰ μέσον] Repeated before the second substantive, according to the Heb. idiom: as Gen. i. 4, 7, c.: see note on v. 3.
διὰ τὰς ἀμαρτίας. . . ἀπέστρεψεν] In the Heb., the sins are the subject, as in the preceding clause.
ἐλεῆσαι] Heb. simply ‘hear.
3. μελετᾷ] Heb. to ‘growl.’ ‘murmur,’ and sometimes ‘meditate’: cf. xxvii. 8, xxxviii. 14, and ver. 13 below; also Heb. of viii. 19. Cf. Josh. i. 8, Ps. ii. I, xc. 9, δίε.
4. λαλεῖ δίκαιοι] Heb. ‘speaketh in righteousness’ (publicly): ‘pleadeth (his cause) in righteousness,’ perhaps
ἐπὶ ματαίοις] Cf. Exod. xx. 7.
πόνον] At least a possible rendering, instead of ‘mischief’: cf. Job xv. 35, Ps. vii. 14
5. ἔρρηξαν] literal.
The second part of the verse differs from Heb.: ὁ μέλλων φαγεῖν, and the insertion of εὗρεν...αὐτῷ, seem to be free treatment, and ‘dieth’ is omitted. συντρίψας is active for pass. ‘that which is crushed.
οὔριον] lit. ‘a wind-egg’; can Lxx. have read some part of ‘make ’ instead of ypnn? But the translation is here loose, in any case.
6. LXX. omit the final clause of the verse, which is parallel to the preceding one.
7, 8. Parts of these verses appear in the composite quotation, Rom. iii. 10 foll.; which begins with Ps. xiv.= liii. (in lxxx., xiii., lii.(??) and continues with Ps. v. 9, cxl. 3, x. 7, the present passage, perhaps a reminiscence of Prov. vi. 18, and Ps. xxxvi. I. The LXX. is generally followed with fair exactness, ὀξεῖς οἱ πόδες being perhaps as wide a departure as any. A comparison of the various contexts will show how easy the transitions generally are. δίκαιος in Romans perhaps from ver. 4, above.]
The whole of the composite passage appears in some texts of the Lxx. of Ps. xiv. (xiii.). Opinions differ, but the most usual explanation is that it has intruded from the text of Romans. (From Lxx. it passed into the O.L., and as Jerome’s “Gallican” Psalter, based on the O.L., is generally preserved in texts of the Vulgate, so into our Prayer-Book version.) Many cursives omit it, but the chief authorities for its omission are ℵcaA, which are the chief for inserting Prov. i. 16, in agreement with Heb., identical with the beginning of the present verse, lix. 7.
See Hatch, Essays in Bibl. Greek, V. p. 204 foll.
αἶμα] Lxx. omit ‘innocent.
ἐφρόνεον] Heb. ‘of ’ or ‘iniquity,’ the common word
σύντριμμα καὶ ταλαιπωρία] Heb. ‘wasting and destruction.’ second Greek term scarcely expresses the meaning.
8. ’a] Heb. am here, as in Amos v. 24, seems to mean the choice and practice of right.
διεστραμμέναι] Kay compares Acts xiii. 10, διαστρέφων τὰς ὁδοὺς τοῦ Κυρίου.
ἃς Wear] Heb. ‘he that goeth therein,’ connecting with what follows: participle, and no relative.
9. The pronouns and verbs are lst pers. plur. in Heb., 3rd pers. in Greek, and so to the middle of ver. H.
αὐτὸν] B* and A* omit: Tyconius, 74, dam sustinent ipsi
ἀορίφ] Generally followed by νυκτὸς to give this meaning.
10. τυφλοὶ] τυφλὸς, ℵc.bQ 26 36 49 87 91 97 106 147 233, and Tycon. caecus.
καὶ πεσοῦνται] om. καὶ, B 22 51 62 90 93 109 144 228 308: Tycon. et cadznt.
ὥς ἀποθνήσκοντος] The previous word is omitted by not. [I(??) would be possible to put the stop after ἀποθνήσκοντες, and connect the verb with ver. n, as in Heb] lts meaning is quite uncertain: ‘among the fat ones,’ i.e. the lusty and strong, Ewald, Delitzsch, Vitringa, Cheyne, and R.V. substantially: Gesenius and Hitzig, ‘in fruitful places’; Vulg. in caliginosis, and so Kay, following several Jewish authorities. What was in the lxx.'s copies of the Heb. we cannot tell: but the chance of its dropping out would probably be greatest, if they took its meaning to be similar or Parallel to ἐν μεσονυκτίῳ. For the general meaning, cf. Deut. xxviii. 29, Zeph. I. 17.
11. ἅμα πορεύσονται] Heb. ‘mourning we mourn,’ nan: run,
which is not very like
The dove is often chosen as an example of mourning, e.g. xxxviii. 14 Ezek. vii. 16, and probably Nah. ii. 7. The bear similarly is said to groan, Hor. Epod. XVl. 51, “circumgemit ursus ovile,” quoted many commentators: not elsewhere in the Bible. The explanation is simply the melancholy tone of the creatures‘ natural cries. cries.
σωτηρία] This is the object of the verb ‘wait for’ parallel ‘judgment,’ in Heb.
12. ἀντέστησαν] So Jerem. xiv. 7, same word in Heb. and Greek. Heb. is perhaps ‘speak ’: the Greek rather implies the witness than expresses it: as in English we speak of ‘appearing against' a
ἐν ἡμῖν] Heb. ‘with us’
13. ἀπὸ ὄπισθεν] Β omits ἀπὸ, which NAQ and 20 cursives have. It is literal, and coincides with the characteristic rendering of Aquila, to whom it is perhaps due. (Qmg denies it to the lxx.)
Vulg. supplies ne iremus (post tergum)
ἐμελετήσαμέν] See on ver. 3.
Lxx. omits ‘(against) the ’ the converse difference to lvii. 11 (diff. Heb. verb).
14. ἀπεστήσαμεν] Heb. has a clause with a passive verb, more nearly parallel to the next.
καταναλώθη] ‘is perished.’ Heb. ‘is driven
δι’ εὐθείας] Heb. is here ‘uprightness,’ which Lxx. take adverbially: this would probably represent a slightly different text.
15. Heb. ‘is ’
μετέστησαν] Heb. verb is sing. and intrans., and a relative is supplied with it.
τὴν διάνοιαν] Reading mm for
τοῦ συνιέναι] Heb. probably ‘is made,’ or ‘maketh himself a
Lxx. having missed the track with διάνοιαν, tried after some kindred
idea: συνιέναι is therefore probably a misreading, induced by the
former mistake, of
In the middle of this verse comes somewhat of a transition, with marked resemblances in the following passage to lxiii. 4, 5. Cf. also 1. 2 with which ver. I, 2 had something in common.
16. κατενόησεν] Heb. ‘was amazed.’ Scholz thinks the
represents pinnn for
ὃ ἀντιλημψόμενος] Heb. ‘that should interpose’: ‘a Cheyne: one to play such a part as, e.g., Phinehas, Num. xxv. 7, 11 Psalm cvi. 30 (ἐξιλάσατο): cf. also Ezek. xxii. 30. The Heb. in lxiii. differs.
ἠμύνατο αὐτοὺς] ἐρρύσατο αὐτοὺς in lxiii. 5. Heb. ‘his arm saved (or, wrought salvation) for ’ and the same expression in ist pers. in lxiii.
τί Woo-in] Heb. ‘his righteousness’ (cf. lvi. 1), which is subject of the verb: there are further differences of pronouns.
17. This verse seems to contain the main idea worked out by St Paul in Eph. vi. 13—17, and alluded to, t Thess. v. 8. passages from Isaiah are drawn upon, as xi. 4, 5, xlix. 2, lii. 7. Cf. Hosea vi. 5.
Lxx. omit ‘wrapped himself in jealousy,’ prob. as being a phrase.
περιβόλαιον] B adds αὐτοῦ, and eight Luc. cursives ζήλου.
18. This verse is much shortened by Lxx, only the Luc. cursives, with V, supplying the last clause from Theod. Symm. The word 5101 rendered ‘deeds’ and ‘recompense,’ is a word of correlative meaning, implying a deed, good or bad, and its return, in reference to each other. ὄνειδος hardly represents any term of the Heb. with exactness.
19. ἤξει. . . βίαιος] Heb. is difficult, and generally taken in one of two widely different ways: (i) ‘For He shall come as a pent-up stream, which the breath of the LORD driverth’: so Vulg., cum ’t quasi Auvius violentus. quem ’n’tu: Domini cogit: and so R.V. and most modern authorities, but against the Heb. accents. (ii) ‘When the adversary shall come in like a river, the Spirit of the LORD lifteth a banner against ’ So, practically A.V., Peshitta, and Jewish authorities: Kay defends it: Alexander rather strangely endeavours to combine the first clause of (i) with the second of(ii).
Βίαιος is meant to render
21. Lxx. omit ‘out of the mouth of thy seed's ’ either by inadvertence, or because the piled-up reiteration seemed cumbrous and difficult to render in Greek, besides being virtually implied. The later Greek versions have it, and the Luc. MSS. 22 51 62 90 93 supply it from them.
LX. 1. (be-raw φωτίζου] Heb. ‘Arise, shine.’ Perhaps
membrance of li. 9, lii. I, led to the doubling of the word here; it
seems unlikely that Lxx. read
Ἰερουσαλὴμ] Α natural insertion: also in Vulg.
Light breaks on the city, awaking at last from the night which has shrouded her, and still covers other peoples
2. ὄπ’ ἔθνη] The preposition is possibly due to the translator
confusing
The text is that of RAQ 26 87 91 97 106 198 228 239 306 309 mainly Hesychian authorities. A 306 alone read καλύπτει for the future. B c. have the words arranged in agreement with Heb.
3. βασιλεῖς...ἔθνη] Interchanged in order from Heb.
τῷ ᾠωτί...ῇ λαμπρότητι] The dat. here represents Heb. with it can scarcely be construed in the sense which Heb. bears, of ‘to thy light,’ c.; but as it stands, the Greek phrase recalls ii. 5
4. τὰ τέκνα σου] Inserted by lxx., and συνηγμένα made to agree with it, instead of ‘they all.’
ἥκαστιν] This verb is attached by LXX. to ‘thy sons,’ and second ‘they come’ is omitted, which belongs in Heb. another verb was not needed, and it begins somewhat like ‘and thy daughters.
ἐπ’ ὤμων] Heb. ‘on the side’: cf. lxvi. 12. The translator did perhaps, realize the reference to the Eastern way of carrying children on the hip. xlix. 22 is different in Heb.
5. ὄψῃ] LXX. omit ‘and shalt be bright,’ or, ‘be lightened’ (a better rendering than ’flow together’ some think the meanings belong to two distinct words, but Delitzsch does not: cf. Ps. xxxiv. 5). The other verbs are 2nd pers. in Greek, 3rd in Heb., with ‘heart’ for the subj.
ἐκστήσῃ] The idea is somewhat changed: Heb. ‘shall ’: on which Del. remarks that this expression is strange to the classical languages, though its converse, of straitening, ’ae, is familiar enough.
πλοῦτος] Heb. ‘abundance’: cf. xxix. 5, 7. Note St ’s use of the Greek phrase, Rom. xi. 12.
ἐθνῶν καὶ λαῶν] LXX. omit ‘wealth’ (lit. ‘strength’) in this clause, but duplicate the genitive. The verbs which follow are attached in the Greek each to the following instead of the preceding subject.
6. ἀγέλαι] Heb. ‘a stream’ or ‘inundation’: nearly the same word as in Deut. xxxiii. 19 (πλοῦτος), and more exactly that rendered ‘abundance’ in A.V., Job xxii. 11, Ezek. xxvi. 10
Μαδιὰμ...Γαιῲὰρ] If identity is assured by the names, these, as
well as Sheba, Kedar, and Nebaioth, were descended from Abraham,
Gen. xxv. 2—4 13. The spelling Γαιφὰρ in NAQ and many
(B and Aq. Th. Symm. Γαιφὰ) may point to an uncertainty in the
mind of the scribe or translator between ‘Ephah’ and ‘Epher,’ who
stand next one another in Genesis. It is a question whether N ebaioth
All the five appear to be nomadic tribes, and some, like the Midianites of old (Gen. xxxvii. 28) given to trading.
καὶ λίθον M] So IPA and several cursives, but not BQ or Lucianic cursives, except 36 147 233. Not in Heb.
τὸ σωττρίιον] Explanatory: cf. xxxviii. 11, xl. 5.
7. ἀνενεχ θἡσεται δεκτὰ] Heb. ‘They shall ascend upon (i.e. with, on a footing of) ’ Lxx. have inverted, altering the sense; the verb being taken as though passive of the causal form, nearly conversely with Judg. vi. 28.
ὁ οἰκος τῆς προσευχῆς] The remembrance of lvi. 7 probably helped
to confuse when ‘of my ’ with
8. τινες οἴδα ὥς νεφίλαι] It is not certain that the figures of the clouds, nebulae volucres, Ovid, illetamorplt. 1. 602, and of the doves, also white, ibid. 11. 536, 7, refer to the sails of the ships mentioned in ver. 9, though they form a beautiful and vivid mental picture: Delitzsch compares another line of Ovid alerts. . . . cavis se turribus abdunt
σὺν νεοσσοῖς] Reading probably
The word for ‘lattices’ or ‘windows’ is used in Gen. viii., but of the flood gates of heaven, not of the windows of the ark. Cf. also xxiv. 18.
9. πλοῖα Gaga-ch] See on ii. 16, xxiii. I.
ἐν τρώτοις] Generally in Greek= ‘first of all,’ which practically with Heb.; πρῶτοι, Num. x. [4, same Heb.
διὰ τὸ ὄνομα] καὶ τὸ ὄνομα, Β 109 305. The Roman text has καὶ διά, but this appears not to be read by any leading uncial.
τὸ ἅγιον] Lxx. substitute this for ‘thy God’: there is some confusion with the next clause, which departs from the Heb. syntax. Yet it may be an attempt to enforce, in a wider sense, the spirit of 1 Kings ix. 3 (cf. the clause in the ’s Prayer, Matt. vi. 9).
10. ἁλλογενεῖς] Cf. lvi. 3.
11. καὶ ἀναχθήσονται. αἱ πύλαι] See the description of the New Jerusalem, Rev. xxi. 25 c. There are many allusions to this chapter, and to other passages of Isaiah; the Divine Light, replacing sun and moon; the coming of the kings of the earth, the glory of the nations, the absence of all wickedness.
13. Cf. xxxv. 2, xli. 19.
LXX. omit the last clause: supplied from Aq. Theod. Symm. by V and several cursives (Hexaplaric).
14. So i. 26, xiv. 2, Ii. 23. The scattered promises are here bound up together, and former threats and judgments reversed.
LXX. omit ‘shall bow themselves to the soles of thy feet.’ a parallel clause: again supplied, with variants, from the Hexapla, by many cursives.
παροξυνάντων] This Greek verb represents many Heb. words. To provoke by scorn seems to be the idea. Cf. παροργίζω in i. 4, and see v. 24, xxxvii. 23.
15. οὐκ ἧν ὁ βοηθῶν] Perhaps reading
16. πλοῦτον . . .Φάγεσαι] Explanatory rendering. The Heb. expression is “intentionally spiritualized’
θεὸς Ἰσραὴλ] Heb. ‘Mighty one of Jacob.
17. As lxi. 3 reverses the curse of iii. 24, so here: the falling away of 1 Kings xiv. 27 is made good: the golden age of Solomon, I Kings x. 21, 27, returns in higher guise. See ’s and ’s notes.
καὶ δώσω τοὺς ἄρχοντας] Cf. i. 26. The evils of iii. 4, 12 are also reversed. The prepositional phrases ἐν εἰρήνῃ, ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ, give a possible rendering, but enfeeble the meaning (so Prof. Skinner).
ἄρχοντας . . . ἐπισκόπους] The Heb. words from these roots are generally of severe rule. Cf. for the first Judg. ix. 28 ἐπίσκοπος), Gen. xli. 34 ( τοπάρχας); for the second, Job iii. 18, xxxix. 7 (φορολόγου).
See a note on this verse in ’s Essay: in Biblical Greek, iv. p. 179.
18. σύντριμα. . . ταλαιπωρία] See on lix. 7 IV. p. 179.
Γλύμμα] Heb. ‘Praise.’ The discrepancy is curious. But probably, as suggested by Schleusner, the Greek is a corruption of ἀγαλλίαμα used to translate the same Heb. in lxi. It: or ἀγαυρίαμα, as in lxii. 7.
19. Again compare Rev. xxi. 23, xxii. 5.
φωτιεῖ σοι τὴν νύκτα] The insertion of τὴν νύκτα by LXX. modifies
the clause. Dr Hatch (Essay: in 8.6., p. 17) considered this a free
translation: possibly Lxx. duplicated
20. δίσεται] ℵ*Β* coincide in reading δυνήσεται! Cf. their ὑπὸ in Mark iv. 21.
σου] So Α 26: omit 62 90 144 308; other MSS. σοι.
uncut] Heb. is similarly rendered in Hosea iv. 3.
21. χειρῶν αὐτοῦ] Lxx. translate as though they read
φυλάσσω τὸ φύτευμα] φυλάσσων=
22. κατὰ καιρὸν] ‘in due season’: Heb. similarly, ‘in its time.
LXI. l. The reading of this passage by our Lord is recorded, Luke iv. 17—19. As there given, the mat. is mainly followed; the words ἰάσασθαι. . . καρδίαν are omitted (by most good authorities); and a clause from lviii. 6, lxx., is inserted at the end of ver. 1. returning to the last clause of the quotation with κηρῦξαι instead of καλέσαι. The inserted clause from lviii. 6 comes very near in meaning to that omitted.
τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν] Heb. ‘opening to the bound’: the word for
‘opening’ being a curious reduplicated form, printed, according to
tradition, as two words. (Cf. the word rendered ‘moles’ in ii. 20.)
The ordinary form of the word is used of opening, specially, the eyes
(or ears); as xxxv. 5, xlii. 7; hence Lxx. naturally took it so here, and
τυφλοῖς is either intended to explain ‘bound,’ regarded as a meta-
phorical phrase (mpti οψθλισ), or due to reading
2. ἀνταποδόσεις] After this, Lxx. omit ‘for our God.
3. δοθῆναι] Lxx. thus translate ‘to appoint,’ pass. for act., omitting the following ‘to give,’ which repeats the former verb in a widened sense.
ἀντὶ] Kay, in his Introduction, in ’s Comm., points out how the corresponding Heb. word, four times repeated here and in ver. 7, answers its five-fold use in iii. 24.
δόξαν] The ordinary meaning of the more usual Heb. noun from
this root: the present form is generally taken as=a head-dress of
honour, ‘turban’ or ‘diadem.’ The Heb. has here a play on words,
γενεαὶ] To explain ‘oaks,’ here as “an emblem of the life of the ” (Skinner). Cf. lxv. 22: Job viii. 16, PS. i. 3, Jerem. xvii. 8, ἃς.
4. ἀναστήσουσιν] The verb does not generally mean ‘raise up ’ but must have nearly that force here.
5. ἥξουσιν] Heb. ‘shall ’: possibly, but not necessarily, read
as
ποιμαίνοντες τὰ πρόβατα] So, in Acts vi., Hellenists and proselytes were chosen to ‘serve ’ while the Apostles were as ‘Priests of the ’
ἀλλόφυλοι] Not to be taken here of the Philistines: see on xiv. 29.
6. ὑμεῖς δὲ ἱερεῖς κ.τ.λ.] This was proclaimed in Exod. xix. 6. As the priests to the people, so now all Israel to the outer nations. And eventually all may rank among the true Israel: see I Pet. ii. 9, where there is a reference to xliii. 20, 21.
ἰσχὺν] Same word in Heb. as that rendered δύναμιν in IX. 11. A reads ἰσχυσ, which might be ἰσχῦς, acc. pl., as far as the form goes: Plato twice uses the plural, Rep. 618 D, and Laws 744 B, κατὰ σωμάτων ἰσχῦς καὶ εὐμορφίας: but the special aspect of the sense is wanting here, Heb. is sing., and A is unsupported.
πλούτῳ] Heb. 1133, ‘glory.’
θαυμασθήσεσθε] This verb, like παραδίδωμι, and a few others, has a tendency to occur in dubious passages: cf. lii. 15. Heb. has ‘ve shall boast (yourselves),’ Vulg. ’etz’s: so some Jewish Vitringa, Delitzsch: many modems however render, ‘to their glory shall ye succeed,’ with the idea of exchange. Del. thinks Lxx. is perhaps a free attempt at the fomier rendering, θαυμασθ. “in the sense of spectabiles eritis.’ For this use of θαυμάζω in pass. cf. Thucyd. I. ἐπὶ τῷ ἡγεμόνες τε εἶναι καὶ τὰ εἰκότα θαυμάζεσθαι.
Perhaps, however, Lxx. read Hithp. of non for that of
7. The first part of this verse is omitted by lxx; supplied from Hexapla (Theodotion) in Qmg and about a dozen cursives, mostly Lucianic. 106 has it, with ἡμῶν for ὑμῶν.
ὑπὲρ κεφαλῆς] Inserted by LXX., doubtless from xxxv. 10, Ii. 11.
8. e; ἀδικίας] Heb. text ’wa, and A.V. and Vulg. take it accordingly as ‘with a burnt-offering.’ Practically all moderns take it, like LXX., as though ‘with injustice,’ Delitzsch holding that the pointing resembles that in Job v. 16, Ps. lviii. 2, lxiv. 6.
δώσω] literal: μόχθον, Heb. perhaps= the reward of work, as in xl. 10, xlix. 4, lxii. 11; also xlv. 14, IV. 2 (lxv. 7).
δικαίοις] Heb. ‘with truth.
διαθήσομαι διαθήκην] See on lv. 3.
9. LXX., as represented by ’AQ 26 239 306, omit the parallel
10. The first clause, tst pers. in Heb., is 3rd pers. plur. in lxx., and attached to ver. 9.
χιτῶνα Heb. ‘ . . of ’ but Lxx. may have carelessly repeated the term from the opening of the verse.
περιέθηκεν. . . μίτραν] LXX. have shortened the sentence, omitting one verb. Heb. has ‘he hath wrapped me...as a bridegroom decketh himself with a (priestly) ’ Heb. for μίτραν the same word as δόξαν in ver. 3. The verb ‘decketh himself’ is peculiar: literally, ‘acts the priest.’ (Aquila, ἰερατευόμενον στεφάνῳ.)
νύμφην κατακὁσμησἱν με κόσμῳ] ln Heb. the words for ‘bride’ and ‘jewels’ resemble one another, if not actually akin.
11. Cf. IV. to, H. mix. omit the verb to which ‘garden’ is the subject: it is akin to the word ‘sprout’ in the previous clause.
LXII. 1. ἡ δικ. μου. . .τὸ σωτήριόν μου] For the first μου B, with a few Luc. cursives, but not 62 147, has αὐτῆς. Heb. ‘her...’ in both clauses.
2. τὸ ὄνομά am] So ℵAQ 62 147 and about adozen other cursives, mostly Hesychian: B c. omit
δ. . . ὀνομάσει αὐτὸ] The usual Hebraistic construction of the re- lative.
3. κάλλους] The Heb. for ‘beauty’ or ‘glory’ here is akin to that for ‘garland’ or ‘turban,’ lxi. 3, to. It occurs, e.g., Exod. xxviii. 2 ( δόξαν)
W] Heb. word is akin to that used of the ’s headdress, Exod. xxviii. 4, cf. Zech. iii. 6 ( κίδαρις); in Ezek. xxi. 26, it is doubtful whether it belongs to the high priest, or, as Del. thinks, to the king.
4. Lxx. translates all four names, two of woe, two of blessing: A.V. only the former two.
Καταλελιμιμένη] Heb. Azubah. ’s wife, ’s mother, bore this name (2 Chron. xx. 31). The word occurs, not as a proper name, vi. 12 καταλειφθέντες, liv. 6, καταλελιμμλένην. So Skemamalz, Desolate, occurs, i. 7, vi. 11. lxiv. to.
Θέλημα ἐμὸν] Heb. Hephzibah, ‘My delight is in ’ This was the name (2 Kings xxi. t) of ’s wife, mother of his successor Manasseh. See Blunt's Coincidences, m. v. p. 225.
Οἰκουμένη] Heb. Beulah, ‘married,’ ‘possessed,’ or ‘owned’: akin
to ’al, = ‘lord,’ ‘husband.’ Some have found the figure suggested
Jesus Christ, Perfect God and Perfect Man; Judge, Advocate, and Witness; Priest and Victim, King and Servant; lifts us out of the realm of Logic into that of Spirit.
Some have proposed to alter the Heb. text slightly, and read ‘thy builder’ for ‘thy sons’: cf. xlix. 17. But lxx., though they have endeavoured to soften the phrase, support the existing text.
The rest of the verse is omitted by NAQ 26 41 109 (198 partly) 239 305 306: B &c. contain it (Hexaplaric? Theod.
6. μιμνησκόμεναι Κυρίου] Heb. joins these words to ver. 7, and the participle is causal, ‘ye that put the LORD in remembrance. Eastern kings’ remembrancers often filled their office by word of mouth: as in the story of Darius, Herod. V. 105, προστάξαι ἑνὶ τῶν θεραπόντων, δείπνου προκειμένου αὐτῷ ἐς τρὶς ἑκάστοτε εἰπεῖν· Δέσποτα, μέμνεο τῶν Ἀθηναίων.
7. οὔκ ἔστιν γὰρ ὅμοιος] Literally, Heb. runs, ‘No rest to you,
and give not rest to ’ There are two similar roots,
ἐὰν] Perhaps= ‘to see if,’ the previous clause being parenthetic.
8. ὤμοσεν. . .κατὰ τῆς δόξης] κατὰ with gen. of that by which an oath is sworn is regular in classical Greek: e.g. Thucyd. v.47, ὀμνύντων δὲ τὸν ἐπιχώριον ὅρκον ἕκαστοι τὸν μέγιστον κατὰ ἱερῶν τελείων. Heb. has 3, Cf. Matt. v. 34, μὴ ὀμόσαι ὅλως· μήτε ἑν τῷ οὐρανῷ. . .μήτε ἐν τῇ γῇ.
The object sworn by was regarded as imperilled, if the oath were not kept. a
- δόξης] Α corruption, one would think, of δεξιᾶς, which is read by Ba, and Qmg gives it as Theod.'s Theod..'s reading, attributing LXX.
ἰσχύος] Here NQ are alone in reading δόξης: ἰσχύος corresponds with Heb., except that Lxx. have inverted the phrase.
El. ἔτι δώσω] Usual form of negative oath in Heb. is, ‘If I ’: of a positive one, ‘If I shall not...’ see on v.
καὶ τὰ] Inserted by lxx., modifying the sense.
9. συνάγοντος 1° 2°] So AQ, with fair, but varying, support: B συναγάγοντες each time. Heb. has two different but parallel verbs.
10. Not repeated, as in Heb.: and ‘cast up, cast
’ is omitted altogether, the sense being already given by ὁδοιποιήσατε
the next clause is rearranged; Heb. literally ‘clear it from a stone.
There may have been confusion between
11. εἰπατε τῇ θυγατρὶ Σ] ln Matt. xxi. 5, the quotation from Zech. ix. 9 is introduced thus, instead of, as in Zechariah, Χαῖρε σφόδρα.
σοι ὅ πατὴρ] Heb. ‘Thy salvation’ (personified)
ἔργον] See above, on lxi. 8.
12. Almost-desiderata. Vulg. has ’ta.
LXIII. This prophecy is generally regarded as separate from the foregoing, whether it is to be divided at ver. 7 or not. Prof. W. E. Barnes, however, thinks otherwise, connecting it with lxii. 1012 Edom is often the type of a special and bitter enemy of Israel: cf. xxxiv. (esp. 5—8), Ezek. xxv. 12—14, xxxv., Obadiah, 1—4, Amos i. 9, 11, 12, Ps. cxxxvii. 7. But it is also the whence God advances to manifest Himself in triumph: He comes from Seir and Edom, judg. v. 4 (cf. the next verse with lxiv. 1); from Teman and Paran, Habak. iii. 3; while Deut. xxxiii. 2 joins Paran and Teman with Sinai.
1. Ἐδὼμ. . . Βόσοπ] Edom is akin to the word meaning ‘red,’ and Bozrah to that for ‘vintage.’ Some have wished, therefore, to emend the Heb. accordingly; but not. evidently give no support to the idea.
ἐρωθήματα ἱματίων] Tert. adv. Marc. IV. 40 (60) has rubor vestimeniorum. Vulg. τίκτω· vestibus. Heb. ‘bright-red of garments. the adjective being more exactly a participle of a verb ‘to be bitter or ‘piercing,’ and hence, probably, vivid of colour. Evidently, from what follows, there is something strange and striking in the appearance.
οὗτος ἀραῖος] Perhaps οὗτος, as read by 41 48 62 87 93 106 147, is the right text: for ὡραΐος, Vulg. gives formosus, Tertull. decorus Originally the word means ‘swelling,’ the word used of the “tumid hills” in xlv. 2; the word is akin to that in Ps. civ. 1 εὐπρέπειαν.
Βίᾳ μετὰ ἰσχύος] Lxx. omit the word ‘travelling’ (so A.V.): which
is that used in Ii. 14 (Heb), in the sense of bowing down. Gesenius
and Cheyne render, ‘tossing the ’: Delitzsch, ‘bending,’ or
‘swaying to and fro,’ with which idea we may perhaps compare the
phrase in Judg. ix. 9, 11, 12, ‘to wave to and fro (?) over the trees.
βίᾳ corresponds to
κρίσιν] Here
2. ἐρυθρὰ τὰ ἱμάτια] Heb. has ‘Why is there red on thy ’
πατητοῦ] Q reads πατήματος, which might be a marginal note to show how πατητοῦ should be taken. But Cypr. Epist. lxiii. 7 has velut a ’one ’s: Jerome, on this passage, sicut calcantium Iorcular. ληνὸς seems to be by implication feminine in the next clause: but πατητοῦ might be regarded as of two terminations.
3. πλήρης καταπεπατημένης] LXX. have omitted ‘alone’: πλήρης corresponds in place to ‘wine-trough,’ which is a different word from ‘winepress’ in ver. 2, and occurs elsewhere only in Haggai ii. 16.
The only way to translate, if the verses be divided as in the Heb., will be, ‘(I am) full with the trodden (press).’ So (see Vol. I. p. 34) Sabatier on this passage quotes from Nobilius, “id est, oppletus sum,’ which he gives as a rendering with reserve as to the of the text.
But ℵQmg, and several cursives, read πλήρους. Cyprian's quotation continues (torccularis) pleni et conculcati, while Tertullian has sicut dc fora ’: piano conculcato, and JerOme tormlar plenum conculcatum. This evidence seems to converge in favour of reading πλήρους καταπεπατημένης, and carrying down the sentence to that point. The evidence for πλήρης however is very strong: and it is possible that whereas a genitive seems preferable, πλήρης may be taken as indeclinable. See Hort, Introd. to NT. in Greek, Appendix, p. 24, on Mark iv. 28, where he suggests that πλήρης is to be read, as indeclin able, there and in Acts vi. 5 (where A has it also in ver. 3). So Γ reads πλήρης in 1. 15, and B in Ii. 20; cf. A, in 2 Kings vi. 17. If then we place the stop after καταπεπατημένης, and regard πλήρης as genit., the resulting sentence is no doubt incoherent and ill-balanced. But this is not decisive against it, and the evidence is considerable that it was so taken in ancient times.
κατεπάτησα. . . κατέθλασα. . .κατήγαγον] There is general agreement
that the Heb. verbs are to be treated as past, the vowel-points being,
if necessary, altered to make the
For the repeated preposition, cf. Aesch. Agam. 1410, ἀπέδικες, ἀπέταμες, ἀπόπολις δ’ ἴση (MSS. ἄπολις): and 1553, κάππεσε, κάτθανε, καὶ καταθάψομεν.
κατέθλασα] See below, on ver. 6.
ὥς γῆν] Perhaps reading
κατήγαγον. . . εἰς γῆν] There is apparently some confusion with ver. 6. The Heb. word for ‘blood’ (literally ‘juice,’ keeping up the figure) occurs only in these two verses. B* omits εἷς γῆν.
4. ἐπῆλθεν αὐτοῖς] Heb. ‘(is) in my ’
λυτρώσεως] Heb. generally taken ‘of my redeemed ones': but many, including Del. and Cheyne, treat the plur. as equivalent to an abstract term: ‘of my redemption.’ With this Lxx. substantially agrees, and also Vulg. amm: ’om’: meat.
5. Cf. lix. 16.
Hm] Heb. ‘supported me’ ( ἐστηρίσατο, lix. 16). The Greek verb seems to be equivalent in meaning to ins-tare.
6. The middle clause, ‘and made them drunk in my fury.’ is
omitted by Lxx. (supplied in Luc. cursives from Hexaplaric text, due
to Th. Symm.). Many authorities, including several Heb. MSS., read
αἷμα] As above, ver. 3, though A.V. and Vulg. (sanguis. . . virtutem) both change their rendering.
7. ἐμνίσθην] Heb. has the impf.=future.
κριτὴς] Heb. ‘abundance,’
ὑπάγει] Heb. ‘bestows in ’: see on lix. 18.
δικαιοσύνῃ] Heb. ‘lovingkindnesses’: the converse of the difference in lvi. 1, lix. 16. Cf. δίκαιον in lvii. 1 1: also Gen. xx. 13, xxi. 23.
8. The negative, with a question, comes to the same sense as
Heb: but Lxx. may have read
ἀθετήσωσιν] Cf. i. 2, xxi. 2, c. This verb is used with
2 Kings i. 1; with εἷς, as 1 Kings xii. 19: often with simple accus., or
absolutely, as here. Heb. has here ‘deal falsely’: ἀθετέω also renders
9. ἐκ πόσης θλίψεως] LXX. connect this with ver. 8, and possibly read D for 3 before the noun.
οὔ πρέσβεις] All MSS. but A have the sing., i.e.
The quotations of this verse in the O.L. patristic writers are examined by Prof. Burkitt in his edition of T he Rule: of Tyconius. p. lv., lvii.
Possibly the right meaning, at any rate one which the pp. lv., lvii. Heb. verb can bear. Cf. i. 2 (a diff. Heb. verb. but of meaning very similar). The present Heb. word, Exod. xix. 4 ἀνέλαβον, Deut. xxxn. II.
11. Lxx. omit ‘Moses, his people’: which is considered a difficult phrase in the Heb., and Profs. Cheyne and Skinner think it is made up of marginal glosses on ‘the shepherd’ and ‘flock’ below. Hitzig, Ewald, Del., and Prof. W. E. Barnes make ‘people’ the subject of the verb, and construe, ‘Then remembered his people the ancient days of ’: the chief objection to which is, that it is a little too ingenious. Others have taken the phrase, ‘the Moses,’ i.e. the deliverer, ‘of his people.
ἐκ γῆς] So NA 22 36 48 51 87 91 97 106 147 228 233 309 Ba mg 26 4149 62 86 90 93 144 239 306 308 have ἐκ τῆς· γῆς: Β* is all but alone in reading ἐκ τῆς θαλάσσης, with Heb. and the later versions. ἐκ γῆς seems to be due to thinking of the land of Egypt, as in Exod. vi. I, xx. 2, rather than of the Red Sea.
τὸν ποιμένα] The Heb. MSS. are divided between the sing. and
plural, the highest modern authorities on the whole favouring the
latter. Del. supports A.V. in taking
12. Μωσῆ] ’s reading may be intended for the genitive case, which would be nearer to Heb. as it is generally construed: ‘that caused the arm of his glory to go at the right hand of Moses.’ LXX. have kept the words in their order, but altered the syntax. ( Μωσῆ would regularly be genitive: but no other MS. reads it, and the line over H may have disappeared in A: Luc. MSS. prefix τόν.)
κατίσχυσεν] Heb. verb=(i) cleave, divide, (it) subdue. It occurs,
13. δι’ ἐρημοῦ] Heb. ‘wilderness’ here seems mainly to imply open country: cf. Ps. evi. 9.
καὶ οὐκ ἐκοπίασαν] Lxx. supplies καί: Heb. has the simple imperfect with negative, serving as a circumstantial clause: weariness is implied in the verb ‘stumble.’
14. καὶ ἐς κτήνη διὰ πεδίου] Heb. has no connecting particle, and begins a new comparison here, at least according to most authorities.
πεδίον] Heb. ‘valley’ or ‘cleft,’ word akin to ‘dividing’ in ver. 12. LXX. however render elsewhere by πεδίον, as Josh. xi. 17, xii. 7.
κατέβη] ln Heb., the subject of this verb is ‘beast’ (sing); Lxx. transfer it to πνεῦμα, and couple the next verb by καί.
W] Reading untan, ‘gave him ’ probably as
15. Ἐπίστραψον] Heb. ‘loolt,’ ‘take notice.
πλῆθος] Often for Heb. non, ‘sound’ or ‘multitude,’ as xvii. 12 πλοῦτος is sometimes used; both words in xxix. 5, and a variant reading in ℵ of lx. 5. Here the Heb. idea, which is as in xvi. II, is softened down; έλέους being used for the supposed physical seat of compassion, the bowels (1 John iii. 17), and πλῆθος giving a different aspect to the phrase.
ἀνέσχου] The person of this verb, and consequently the sense, are altered from Heb.
16. ὅτι] The particle is
ῥῦσαι] Heb. has a participle, and Lxx. have divided the clauses differently: ἐστὶν ἐν ἡμῖν A, or ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς ἐστιν Β &c. is not in Heb., perhaps comes, in the latter form, from ver. 19.
18. κληρονομήσωμεν] 3rd pers. pl. in Heb., a diff. root from that rendered κληρονομίας just above. ἵνα is inserted, perhaps induced by 5 before ‘a little,’ which might seem to suggest purpose.
δρονι] As though reading
οἱ ὐπεναντίοι. . . ἀγίασμά σου] Omitted by RB, perhaps because their
original (the original Lxx. ?) missed out from the first to the second
19. τὸ ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς] In Heb. this goes with the following negative: ‘never.’ The particles ὡς, ὅτε are inserted, and ἡμᾶς is for a 3rd pers.
The Hebrew verse includes lxiv. I, as divided in LXX., Vulg., and A.V. The connection seems to be close: Del. defends the Heb. division of the verses, and the chapter-division is of later origin.
LXIV. ι. Ἐὰν] Conditional particles are used in Heb., as in many languages, to express wish: Davidson, Heb. Syntax, ἓ 135 Rem. 1, points out Gen. xxiv. 42, Exod. xxxii. 32, as instances of a transitional stage.
ἀνοίξῃς] Heb. is stronger, ‘rend,’ as in xxxvi. 22, ἐσχισμένον, Gen. χχχωιι. 29, 34
τρόμος λήμψεται] Scholz gives this as due to reading
τακήσονται] Heb. better ‘quake’: Cf. Judg. v. 5 ( ἐσαλεύθησαν)
2. ὥς κηρὸς ἀπὸ προσώπου πυρὸς τήκεται] LXX. took
κατακαύσει] Heb. ‘makes water to boil.’ Lxx. omit ‘water.
perhaps losing sight of D'D after D'DDΠ, and prob. read
τοὺς ὑπεναντίους] Supplied as object to the verb, from the next clause. καὶ φανερὸν ἔσται gives the sense of ‘to make ’
3. ἔνδοξα] For the same Heb., Ps. cvi. 22 has φοβερά.
4. In I Cor. ii. 9, St Paul is generally considered to be quoting freely from this passage, his quotation being neither exactly with Heb. nor with lxx., but fairly near the latter, with a clause incorporated from lxv. 17.
Clement of Rome has a quotation (Ep. Cor. xxxiv.), which resembles that of St Paul, but is nearer to Lxx. in having ὑπομένουσιν for ἀγαπῶσιν which indeed is read by N 87 91 97 228 309, in the next clause, for
ἠκούσαμεν] 3rd pers. in Heb., which has then another verb of ποιούσιν. parallel meaning; this Lxx. omits, but on the other hand supplies τὰ ἔργα σου 6.... ποιήσεις also corresponds to a 3rd pers. (sing.) in Heb.
θεὸν πλὴν σοῦ] A* omits, probably a mere clerical error.
τὰ ἔργα σου] Luc. MSS. add ἀληθινὰ. The old emendation, a λήθει, is disposed of by Field, in his Hexapla.
5. There are differences of person in the verbs. Lxx. omit ‘him
6. ἀκάθαρτοι] The Heb. word is used of the leper, Lev. xiii. 44 ἃς. Cf. xxxv. 8, lii. 1.
7. μνησθεὶς] Heb. ‘that rouseth himself.
παρέδωκας] Reading
διὰ] Heb. ‘by the hand of'=because
8. mm. omit ‘and thou our potter.
9. h καιρῷ] Perhaps reading nits or mm ‘in season' for
10. The clauses are divided differently in Heb. and Lxx. The phrase ‘thy holy ’ in Heb., does not occur elsewhere. Vulg. like not. has the singular. The difference is only that of’
εἰς κατάραν] Perhaps a free rendering of Heb. ‘a desolation’
11. ἔνδοξα] Heb. ‘desirable things,’ cf. a kindred form in Haggai ii. 7.
συνέπεσον] May be due to reading
12. πᾶσι] Not in Heb.
ἀνέσχου] Cf. lxiii. 15. The sentence is interrog. in Heb., and the verbs impf.=future
LXV. It is doubtful whether this chapter begins with an answer to the appeals at the end of lxiv., or whether lxv., lxvi. form a separate section of the prophecy.
1. ζητοῦσιν. . . ἔπερωτῶσιν] So RAQ and several cursives: B and most Lucianic cursives have the converse order, agreeing with Heb. Cypr. Testim. I. 21 has quaerunt. . . interrogabant, and the quotation in Rom. x. 20, 21 agrees with RA (ἐγενόμην also for ἐγενήθην), as to the participles, but is against all the uncials in the order of the verbs: εὑρέθην. . . ἐμφανὴς ἐγεν,, 62 90 308: but the ordinary not. text is nearer Heb. in this.
Ἰδού ειμι] Not repeated as in Heb.
ἐκάλεσαν] Heb. is pass., with different vowel-points: many support this, and also Vulg. quae non inucabat. Cf. however iv. 1, lxiii. 19, c.
2. καὶ ἀντιλέγοντα] Not in Heb., but so quoted in Romans.
οἳ οὐκ ἐπορεύθησαν ὁδῷ ἀληθινῇ] So ℵcbAQ* and about a dozen cursives, mainly Hesychian: B c. read τοῖς πορευομένοις ὁδῷ οὐ ℵ* οὐκ ἀληθη, the later versions having ὁδῷ οὐκ ἀγαθῇ. On the whole, AQ*'s reading, which is furthest from the Heb., seems most likely to be the real LXX., or near it; but the question is a nice one, most arguments being double-edged. See Vol. I. Introd. p. 35.
ἁμαρτιῶν] Points the moral, Heb. having simply ‘thoughts’ (lv.8,9).
3. θυσιάζουσιν] A 106 309 read θυμιάζουσιν, but this is probably a mistake, by confusion with the following verb.
τοῖς δαιμονίοις ἃ οὐκ ἔσται] Not in Heb., which has only ‘which sit ‘
in this place, belonging to ver. 4. Possibly LXX. read
4. δι’ ἐνύπνια] Not in Heb., but explains the verb, probably
rightly. “Ut somniis futura cognoscerent,’ is part of Jerome's
Prof. Driver compares Virg. Am. VII. 86 foll.
ζωμὸν] This will certainly render the reading of Heb. marg.,
θυσιῶν. μεμολυμμένα πάντα] Heb. has only ‘of abominations.’
which θυσιῶν agrees best in connection, but μεμολυμμένα in meaning.
πάντα would be an easy inadvertence before
5. καθαρὸς] LXX. omit the 2nd pers. suffix, which may make the Heb. expression mean ‘I sanctify thee,’ rendering the person incapable of the ordinary duties and associations of life: or, ‘I am holy as regards ’ which is grammatically a difficult use of the suffix.
Θυμοῦ] The word for ‘nose’ means also ‘amger’: Exod. xv. 8 PS. xviii. 15, Job iv. 9.
6. ἴως ἂν] ‘Until’ or ‘unless’ mean nearly the same; ‘except first’ perhaps expresses the meaning more fully: cf. Gen. xxxii. 26 and lv. 10. Del. explains the construction in Heb. as an ellipse, see his note.
ἀποδῶ] So Α, almost alone: ℵQ and nine cursives add καὶ ἀνταποδώσω, in agreement with Heb. and the later versions of Aq. Symm. B's ἀποδώσω may be due to confusion with ver. 7, or a mistake, by haplography, in copying the fuller text as in RQ.
7. LXX. omit ‘together.
ἀποδότω] Heb. here ‘measure,‘ a diff. verb from that in ver. 6.
ἴργα] See on lxi. 8. Lxx. omit ‘first.
8. Ὅν τρόπον Heb. has impt.-fut. See on vii. 2.
ῤὼξ] An alternative (late) form of ῥάξ, a ‘grape’ or ‘berry’ (xvii. 6) Heb. has ‘the the new wine’ or ‘must,’ meaning, however, in the sound grapes.
9. The subjects and verbs are again redistributed, but without affecting the general sense.
10 ἂν τῷ δρυμῷ] Heb. ‘the Sharon, lowland along the sea from
Carmel to Joppa: see xxxiii. 9, and xxxv. 2 (where LXX. omit). Scholz
gives LXX.,'s reading here as
φάραγξ Ἀχὼρ] See Josh. vii. 24, 26, xv. 7, Hosea ii. 15. The name meant ‘trouble’ or ‘sorrow’: the place was near Jericho, between the Western high ground, the Southern end of Mt Ephraim, and the Jordan.
11. τῷ δαιμονίῳ...τῆ τύχῃ] Heb. Gad...Meni, two heathen deities,
probably Syrian, the star-gods Jupiter and Venus, the ‘Greater and
Lesser Fortune’ of astrologers. See ’s note. What is
described is the making a feast to the idols, as in the story of Bel and
the Dragon: in various passages of jeremiah, as vii. 18, xix. 13: sc
also in Herodotus l. 183, at Babylon, ἄγαλμα μέγα τοῦ Διὸς ἔνι κατήμενον
χρύσεον, καί οἱ τράπεζα μεγάλη παρακέεται χρυσέη. At Rome the custom
of λεψτιστερνια was introduced, apparently in obedience to the Sibylline
books, about 396 H.C.; Livy v. 13, “per dies octo Apollinem Lato-
namque et Dianam, Herculem Mercurium atque Neptunum tribus,
quam amplissime tunc apparari poterat, stratis lectis placavere”:
also Livy xxx. 62, xxn. l, 10, xxvu. 4. Bar. Od. 1. xxxvii. 2,
Prof. Skinner also refers to I Cor. x. 2 I, ποτήριον...τραπέζης δαιμονίων,
Gadmeans ‘Fortune,‘ and Meni perhaps ‘number,’ and so ‘destiny’ cf. Jer. xxxiii. 13 Dan. v. 25. We might have expected Τύχη therefore to correspond to the former. Probably the two were regarded as near akin. Vulg. has qui ponitis Fortzmae memam et ’batz’: super eam. Some MSS., chiefly Lucianic, exchange the two.
12. παραδώσω] Heb. ‘I will destine,’ verb
οὐχ ὑπηκούσατε...παρηκούσατε] Heb. ‘ye did not answer...did not hear.
15. εἰς πλησμονὴν] Cf. i. 14. Here
ὄνομα καινὸν] Cf. lxii. 2. καινὸν is not quite exact, but may have been meant to harmonize with ver. 17.
16. The first clause is connected by LXX. with the previous verse,
the particle
τὸν Θεὸν τὸν ἀληθινὸν] Not, perhaps, exactly what is meant by Heb. See John iv. 23 (with Bp Westcott's note) xvii. 3, I John v. 20, Rev. iii. 14. 2 Cor. i. 20.
οὐκ ἀναβήσεται κ.τ.λ.] ἐπιλήσονται, active for passive, has given the verse already an increased likeness to ver. 17; and the final clause seems now to have been completely confused with it. Heb. ‘and because they are hid from mine eyes.
17. Cf. Rev. xxi. I with this verse and lxvi. 22.
18. εὑρήσουσιν] Heb.
LXX. omit ‘that which I create¹: V and Lucianic MSS. supply Theod. (Hexapl.)
20. There are some departures from the arrangement of Heb., e.g. ὁ δέ ἀποθνήσκων. ἄωρος is a fine translation of the freer kind. Heb. has ‘an infant of days,’ i.e. one who lives a few days Compare Ps. lv. 23. See also Aeschylus, Eumen. 956, ἀνδροκμῆτας δ’ ἀώρους ἀπεννέπω τύχας, Eurlp. Alcest. 168, μηδἐ...θανεῖν ἀώρους παῖδας, Orestes 1029 ὦ μέλεος ἥβης· σῆς...θανάτου δ’ ἀώρου. Contrast liii. 8–10.
[Kay translates the Heb., according to the accents, ‘There shall no more be any from thence, infant of days or old man, that shall not have fulfilled his days.’
ἔσται...ἑκατὸν ἔτῶν] Lowth rendered the Heb., ‘he, that dieth an hundred years, shall die a boy.
The myth in ’lato’s ’lz’cus, though differing in general idea, has some passages which remind us of this part of the chapter.
21. αὐτοὶ] Twice inserted, for clearncss.
22. τοῦ ξύλου τῆς ζωῆς] 50 the Targum also. The phrase occurs, of course, Gen. ii. 9, iii. 22, but we know of nothing that renders it really appropriate. Without the LXX.'s addition of τῆς ζωῆς, the idea is simple, and occurs also Ps. i. 3, xcii. 12, c. Possibly τῆς ζωῆς was originally placed after ἡμέραι, cf. the full expression, Gen. xlvii. 8, 9 also xxiii. l (1)), PS. xc. to, al ἡμέραι τῶν ἐτῶν ἡμῶν
κλαύσουσιν] Heb. is causal of verb to ‘grow old,’ and practically ‘ wear ’ (Job xxi. 13 συνετέλεσαν.)
23. οἱ ἐκλεκτοί μου] Belongs to the previous verse in Heb., as subj. of the last verb.
εἰς κατάραν] Heb. here difers from lxiv. to, and is ‘for ’ or
‘ruin.’ Scholz suggests that LXX. read
24. ἐρῶ Τί ἐστιν;] Cf. lviii. 9, Dan. ix. 20, 21, The touch of Greek liveliness, not very common in LXX., for Heb. ‘I will hear,’ more or less paralleled in Jonah i. 6, Τί συ ῥέγχεις; Exod. iii. 4.
25. Cf. xi. 6 foll. The new clause continues the sense of contrast between the chosen and the wicked in their fate. Del. remarks, the serpent ”will no more threaten man's life, but be content with the food assigned to it in Gen. iii. 14.” Yet the curse seems here to a milder sound.
LXVI. l. ποῖον] See on 1. t. Here most authorities render Heb. almost exactly as not. Vulg. qua: est ista domus...quis est isle locus...(??)
St Stephen's quotation, Acts vii. 49, 50, follows the LXX., with the particles ἦ δέ γῆ...ἤ τίς τόπος) as in RA. τίς before τόπος is however read by the best MSS. in N.T.: any other variations seem due to the. enforcing of the final words by the speaker: cf. Exod. iv. 11.
The omission of οἰκον by Α* is apparently mere inadvertence.
2. ἐστιν lid] The possessive pron. is not in Heb., which probably means ‘came to be’: Vulg.
ἐπὶ τίνα...ἀλλ᾿ ἢ ὀπὶ] The rhetorical question is not in Heb., which has ‘to his...(namely) to....
ἡσύχιον] Rather a free rendering for ‘contrite,’ ‘smitten’: but
3. DUI. omit the second part of the first clause, and the first part of the second, thus condensing the passage, though probably by inadvertence. The participial form of the clauses is as Heb.
ὁ δὲ ἄνομος] This addition by Lxx. is, according to Scholz, due
to reading nmw, ‘he that slaughtereth,’ in duplicate, the first time
σεμίδαλιν] The ‘meal-offering,‘ in particular: cf. i. 13.
ὥς βλάσφημος] Heb. ‘that blesseth vanity,’ or ‘iniquity,’ i.e. idol.
ἠθέλησεν] ‘Desired’: so ἠβούλοντο, i. 29, and cf. ver. 4 below.
4. ἐκλέξομαι] The same Heb. word as in ver. 3; ἐκδέξομαι, Β 109 is a confusion of Δ and A: cf. lii. 2.
ἐνπαίγματα] The Heb. word occurs only here and iii. 4, which see (the word for ‘children’ in iii. 12 is probably akin), and is variously rendered: ‘freaks of fortune,’ Cheyne: ‘puerilities,‘ Kay: Skinner: ‘mockeries,’ R.V. marg.: vexationes, Vulg.
ἁμαρτίας] Heb. ‘their fears,’ i.e. that which they fear. interpret, cf. lxv. 2.
5. The pronouns and syntax are changed, but the sense is not much affected, except as to the position of the ‘brethren.
βδελυσσομένοις] Represents the spirit of the Heb. well enough: the word, lit. ‘thrust ’ had later the sense of ‘banning,’ putting ‘out of the ’: Luke vi. 22, John ix. 22, c.
ἡμᾶς] So RAQ, and apparently alone. B ὑμᾶς. Tertullian, Adv. Marc. IV., has: Dicite, fratre: nostri estis, εἰς qui vos odenmt.
7. ἐξέφυγεν καὶ ἔτεκεν] This seems to duplicate the Heb.
8. εἰ...εἰ] Interrogative. ℵ reads ἦ in the first place, and B ἦ or ἦ in the second. A is alone in omitting καὶ before ἐτέχθη.
As a specimen of editing, editing, ℵca's γύνη for γῆ is worth notice.
καὶ ἔτεκεν] Heb. ‘Υea, Yea, brought ‘ (or ‘also...’).
9. ἔδωκα τὴν προσδοκίαν ταύτην] LXX. seem to have taken
ἑμνήσθης] If Lxx. read
10 πανηγυρισατε] lnterpreting ‘rejoice,’ as of a national celebration: ἐν αὐτῇ (which A omits) is intended to be literal for Heb. .13 and may be right: but many, including Del. and Cheyne, render ‘because of her.
οἱ ἑνοικοῦντες ἐν αὐτῇ] So A alone: BQ (and ℵ* nearly, but ἐν αὐτὴν, with some confusion) c. have οἷ ἀγαπῶντες αὐτὴν, which agrees with Heb., and seems preferable.
χάρητε χαρὰν] 50 A 239 305 306: other MSS. χαρᾷ; B and Luc. Mss. have the Hexaplaric ἅμα αὐτῇ after χάρητε.
11. τρυφήσητε] For the word compare lv. 2; with the general idea, lit. 16.
εἰσόδου] Heb.
12. ἐς ποταμὸς] Heb. is prob. accusative: cf. xlviii. 18 (xxxiii. 21).
τὰ παιδία αὑτόν] ‘Ye shall suck’ taken as a noun,
ἐπ’ ὤμων] See on lx. 3.
14. τοῖς σεβομένοις] So ℵΑQV 49 87 91 97 106 198 239 309. lrenaeus (Lat.), his qui colunt cum. B c. read φοβουμένοις, which seems inferior: the evidence for σεβομένοις is mainly Hesychian, but on a point like this perhaps the best. Heb. ‘his servants.
καὶ ἀπειλήσει] Taking
15. ἀποσκορακισμὸν] The cognate verb, Heb. and Gr., xvii. 13: this
Heb. noun, xxx. 17, Ii. 20 (with its parallel): also Ps. lxxx. 16, and
16. Α* inadvertently (cf. 17 fin.) has καταναλωθήσεται for κριθήσεται. Heb., though passive in form, has here a quasi-active meaning, ‘enter into judgment’: LXX., taking it as an ordinary passive, supplied πᾶσα ἡ γῆ as a subject. The Heb. in iii. 14, as in Ps. cxliii. 2 is a different form.
τραυματίαι] Heb. is regularly rendered ‘slain,‘ but is properly ‘smitten’ (see xxii. 2, c.). Cf. Zeph. ii. 12.
17. ἐν τοῖς προθύροις] Heb. has here a difficult phrase, ‘behind
one in the midst.’ ‘One,’ according to the Heb. text, is masc.
and this is generally taken to refer to a scene, as in Ezek. viii. 11, the
‘one’ being the officiating hierophant, followed by the worshippers,
or surrounded by them: “in the midst of them stood Jaazaniah the
son of Shaphan, with every man his censer in his hand.” (Some
tried to find the name of a heathen deity in the words, but this is
hardly satisfactory.) If the Heb. margin be taken, ‘one’ is feminine,
What Lxx. read is hard to guess: possibly
ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ] ‘Together’: Thucyd. I. 79, τῶν μὲν πλειόνων ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ αἱ γνῶμαι ἔφερον, i.e. tended in the same direction.
18. Κἀγὼ τὰ ἔργα κ.τ.λ.] This clause has no verb, and the Greek represents it accurately, except λογισμὸν sing. N and Luc. MSS. insert ἐπίσταμαι, cf. A.V. Kay thinks (and Del. more doubtfully), that it is an aposiopesis. “And I—as for their works and cometh to pass,’ &c.
ἔρχομαι] Heb. ‘it cometh,’ i.e. the
19. καταλείψω] Heb. ‘1 will set,’ or ‘place,’ almost with the
of ‘work’ or ‘perform’: the same Heb. phrase as in Exod. x. 2, Ps.
lxxviii. 43, cf. Ps. cv. 27. In these passages Lxx. use ποιέω or τίθημι;
here their rendering, though the idea is easy (cf. σημεῖον αἰώνιον, lv. 13),
is not what might be expected: nor is
θαρσεὶς] See on ii. 16.
θοὐθ] ℵQ* read θοὐθ. This seems to indicate let or Put, as in Gen. 11. 6, Jerem. xlvi. (LXX. xxvi.) 9, Ezek. xxvii. to, xxx. 5, xxxviii. 5 in these places it is nearly connected with Lud or Ludim, and supposed to be the Libyans, as Lxx. render in Jerem. and Ezek; or at least some African people, Lud being also African. it is thought, and not the Lydians of Asia Minor. Nah. iii. 9, however, couples Put with the Lubim as distinct.
Heb. has here ‘Pul.’ not elsewhere found as a tribal name. Most authorities incline to think that Put is the right form, and explain Pul as a collateral form so Hitzig and Ewald: but Cheyne objects that n and 5 are not known to be interchangeable). a mistake due to the name of the Assyrian king in 2 Kings xv. 19 (Margoliouth) or a clerical error. VVetzstein suggested Pun, i.e. the Carthaginiaris, but this involves alteration of both Heb. and Greek.
Without expressing any opinion as to Put being the right form here, it may be urged that the evidence of mm. does not really take us very far: for (a) except in Gen. x. 6, the name is not elsewhere transliterated in leading uncials, apart from Qmg in Ezek. xxvii. 10 (b) their spelling of proper names is often untrustworthy, not least in the Prophets: Pul himself appears in 2 Kings as Kings as θουά: θοὺδ is almost as much in favour of Pul as of Put, Δ and A being liable to confusion.
καὶ Μόσοχ] Heb. ‘that draw the ’
Meshech and Tubal' are said to be the Moschi and Tibareni of Herodotus, m. 94, VII. 78; components of ’ empire, who marched in ’ host: dwelling S.E. of the Black Sea.
τὴν Heb. Javan, which, it is hardly doubted, is the same
word as ’la’Fowr; Hom. ΙΙ. XIII. 685, ἔνθα δέ Βοιωτοὶ καὶ Ἰάονες·
ἑλκεχίτωνες. Cf. Herod. 1. 56, 57, 141, 142, ἃς. It is a question how
far Delitzsch is calling in calling them the ‘primitive stock.’
Asiatic lonians would be those most nearly concerned with the East:
Javan is named, Gen. x. 2 ( Ἰωυὰν): Ezek. xxvii. I 3, 19 (Lxx. omit in 19), Dan. viii. 21, x. 20, xi. 2, Joel iii. 6 ‘sons of the Iavanim’) Zech. ix. I 3, LXX. rendering, with the exceptions noted, by Ἑλλὰς or Ἕλληνες.
20. Cf. xviii. 7, lx. 7.
ἐν λαμπήναις ἡμιόνων] Heb. ‘in litters, and on mules.’ Cf. vii. 3. λαμπήνη implies a covered conveyance, and the same idea is carried on in μετὰ σκιαδίων; but Heb. there probably means ‘or dromedaries.
τὴν ἁγίαν πόλιν] Heb. ‘ my holy mountain.’ Lxx. may have
μετὰ ψαλμῶν] Heb. has ‘in a clean ’
21. ἱερεῖς καὶ Λευίτας] Lxx. seem to have read ‘and’ before
‘Levites,’ as Vulg., and many Heb. MSS., whereas the received Heb.
text has the prepos.
22. Cf. lxv. 17
23. Contrast i. I 3.
Lxx. insert ἐν Ἰερουσαλήμ, the order of words varying in diff. Mss.
24. κῶλα] Heb. ‘carcases’: so Lev. xxvi. 30, Numb. xiv. 32, 33
cf. Heb. iii. 17. The idea of the Greek seems to be that of “disiecta
membra.’ membra.” So Virg. Am. ii. 557
ὁ γὰρ σκώληξ κ.τ.λ.] Quoted Mark ix. 48, which has τελευτᾷ with A, against τελευτήσει of the other MSS. But ’s text may have ected A's.
allected A's. εἰς ὅρασιν] Heb. ‘a horror’ or ‘abomination,‘ used only elsewhere
in Dan. xii. 2 (AV. ‘contempt’). It may be that Lxx. read for
The directions for synagogue-readings of this passage, as with the end of Malachi, were, to repeat the last verse but one after the last, “in order to close with words of comfort.” not. in Malachi has final verses in the order 5, 6, 4; but there is no different arrangement here.