Part 66
exilic Exand the accomplishment of Jeh's amples purposes. This is the spirit of the great Messianic passage, Lsa 53 7: "He was oppressed, j'et when he was afflicted he opened not his mouth; as a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and as a sheep that before its shearers
authddcs): Found once in the OT (Gen 49 6, "In their self-will they hocked an ox") in the death song of Jacob (see Hock). The idea is found twice in the NT in the sense of "pleasing oneself": "not
is dumb, so he opened not his mouth." Nchemiah surrendered position in Shushan to help reestablish the returned exiles in Jerus (Neh 2 5). Esther was ready to surrender her life in pleading for the safety of her people (Est 4 16).
self-wflled, not soon angry" (Tit 1 7); and "daring,
self-willed, they tremble not to rail at dignities"
//. In the NT.—In the NT self-surrender is still more clearly set forth. Christ's teachings and example as presented in the Gospels, give
(2 Pet 2 10). In all these texts it stands for a false pride, for obstinacy, for "a pertinacious adherence to one's will or wish, esp. in opposition to the dictates of wisdom or propriety or the wishes of others." Henry E. Dosker
1. Christ's to it special emphasis. It is a prime Teaching requisite for becoming His disciple and Ex- (Mt 10 38 1; 16 24; Lk 9 23.24. ample 59 f; 14 27.33; cf Mt 19 27; Mk 8 34). When certain of the disciples were called they left all and foUowcd (Mt 4 20; 9 9; Mk 2 14; Lk 5 27 f). His followers must so completely surrender self, as that father, mother, kindred, and one's own life must be, as it were, hated for His sake (Lk 14 26). The rich young
SELL, SELLER, sel'er. See Trade; Lydia.
SELVEDGE, sel'vej (HSf; , kagah) : The word occurs only in the description of the tabernacle (Ex 26 4; 36 11). It has reference to the ten curtains which overhung the boards of the sanctuary. Five of these formed one set and five another.
2717 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Self-Surrender Semites
Euphrates. The greatest uncertainty is in the
These were "coupled" at the center by 50 loops of blue connected by "clasps" (q.v.) with 50 others on the opposite side. The "selvedge" (self-edge) is the extremity of the curtain in which the loops were.
identification of Arpachshad, the most prolific ancestor of the Semites, esp. of those
2. The of Bib. and more recent importance. Five Sons From him descended the Hebrews and
SEM, sem (Stuj., Stm) : AV from the Gr form of Shem; thus RV (Lk 3 36).
of Shem the Arab tribes, probably also some East African colonies (Gen 10 24-
30; 11 12-26). The form of his name (nTPPEnS ,
SEMACHIAH, sem-a-kl'a (in^DUD
, fmakhyahu, "Jeh has sustained"): A Korahite family of galekeepers (1 Ch 26 7). Perhaps the same name should be substituted for "Ismachiah" in 2 Ch 31 13 (see UPN, 291, 295).
' arpakhshadh) has given endless trouble to ethnographers. McCurdy divides into two words, Arpach
or Arpath, unidentified, and kesedh, the sing, of kasdim, i.e. the Chaldaeans; Schrader also holds to the Chaldaean interpretation, and the Chaldaeans themselves traced their descent from Arpachshad
SEMEI, sem'G-I:
(Jos, Ant, I, vi, 4); it has been suggested also to interpret as the "border of the Chaldaeans" (BDB; Dillmann, in loc). But the historic, ordinary and most satisfactory identification is with Arrapachilis,
(1) (A, Se^e(, Semei, B, Se/ieel, Seineel) : One of those who put away their "strange wives" (1 Esd 9 33) = "Shimei" "of thesonsof Hashum" in Ezr 10 33.
(2) AV = RV "Semeias" (Ad Est 11 2).
N.E. of Assyria at the headwaters of the Upper Zab
(3) AV form of RV "Semein" (Lk 3 26).
in the Armenian highlands (so Ptolemy, classical geographers, Gesenius, Delitzsch). Delitzsch calls attention to the Armenian termination shadh (Comm. on Gen, in loc).
SEMEIAS, se-mf'-i'as (X A, 2e|j.«Cas, Semeiaa; B, SefieeCas, jS'emeefas; AV Semei): An ancestor of Mordecai (Ad Est 11 2) = "Shimei" (Est 2 5).
If we accept, then, this identification of Arpachshad as the most northeasterly of the five Sem famihes (Gen 10 22), we are still
SEMEIN, se-me'in (N B, 2e(iee£v, Semeein, A,
2e|i£€t, iSemeei, TR, 2«|j.e£, Semet; AV Semei): An ancestor of Jesus in Lk's genealogy (Lk 3 26).
3. Original faced by the problem of the primitive Home of home and racial origin of the Semites. the Semites Various theories of course have been
SEMEIS, sem'g-is (A and Fritzsche, Sejiels, Semein; B, Sevo-tts, SenseU; AV Semis): One of the Levites who put away their "strange wives" (1 Esd 9 23) = "Shimei" in Ezr 10 23.
proposed; fancy and surmise have ranged from Africa to Central Asia. (1) The most common, almost generally accepted, theory places their beginnings in Arabia because of the conservative and primitive Semitic of the Arabic language, the desert characteristics of the various branches
SEMELLIUS, so-mel'i-us: AV = RV Samellius
(q.v.).
of the race, and the historic movements of Sem tribes northward and westward from Arabia. But this theory does not account for some of the most significant facts: e.g. that the Sem developments of Arabia are the last, not the first, in time, as must have been the case if Arabia was the cradle of the race. This theory does not explain the Sem origin of the Elamites, except by denial; much
SEMIS, se'mis: AV = RV Sembis (q.v.).
SEMITES, sem'its, SEMITIC, sem-it'ik, RELIGION:
1. Biblical Reference.s
2. The Five Sons of .Shem
3. Original Home of the Semites
4. Confusion with Other Races
less does it account for the location of Arpachshad still farther north. It is not difficult to understand a racial movement from the mountains of the N.E. into the lowlands of the South and West. But how primitive Arabs could have migrated uphill, as it were, to settle in the Median and Armenian hills is a much more difficult proposition.
5. Reliability of Gen 10 6. Semitic Languages 7. Semitic Religion
(1) Its Peculiar Theism
(2) Personality of God
(3) Its View of Nature
(4) The Moral Being of God LlTER.\TURE
(2) We must return to the historic and the more natural location of the ancient Sem home on the hillsides and in the fertile valleys of Armenia. Thence the eldest branch migrated in prehistoric times southward to become historic Elam; Lud moved westward into Asia Minor; Asshur found his way down the Tigris to become the sturdy pastoral people of the midfUe Mesopotamian plateau until the invasion of the Bab colonists and civilization; Aram found a home in Upper Mesopotamia; while Arpachshad, remaining longer in the original home, gave his name to at least a part of it. There in the fertile valleys among the high hills the ancient Semites developed their distinctively tribal life, emphasizing the beauty and close relationship of Nature, the sacredncss of the family, the moral obligation, and faith in a personal God of whom they thought as a member of the tribe or friend of the family. The confinement of the mountain valleys is just as adequate an explanation of the Sem traits as the isolation of the oasis. So from the purer life of their highland home, where had been developed the distinctive and virile elements which were to impress the Sem faith on the history of mankind, increasing multitudes of Semites poured over the mountain barriers into the broader levels of the plains. As
The words "Semites," "Semitic," do not occur in
the Bible, but are derived from the name of Noah's
oldest son, Shem (Gen 5 32; 6 10;
1. Biblical 9 18.23 ff; 10 1.21 f; lllOf; 1 Ch References 1). Formerly the designation was
limited to those who are mentioned in Gen 10, 11 as Shem's descendants, most of whom can be traced historically and geographically; but more recently the title has been expanded to apply
to others who are not specified in the Bible as
Semites, and indeed are plainly called Hamitic,
e.g. the Babylonians (Gen 10 10) and the Phoeni-
cians and Canaanitcs (vs 15-19). The grounds for
the inclusion of these Bib. Haraites among the
Senl+tes are chiefly linguistic, although political,
cbftfmercial and religious affinities arc also con-
sftfered. History and the study of comparative
ptiilology, however, suggest the inadequacy of a
Jjnguistio argument.
' The sons of Shem are given as Elam, Asshur,
Arpachshad, Lud and Aram (Gen 10 22). AU
except the third have been readily identified, Elam
as the historic narion in the highlands E. of the
Tigris, between Media and Persia; Asshur as the
Assyrians; Lud as the Lydians of Asia Minor; and Aram as the Syrians both E. and W. of the
Semites Senate, Senator THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2718
their own mountain springs and torrents sought a way to the sea down the Tigris and Euphrates beds, so the Sem tribes followed the same natural ways into their future homes: Elam, Babylonia, AssjTia, Mesopotamia, Arabia, Pal. Those who settled Arabia sent further migrations into Africa, as well as rebounding into the desert west of the Euphrates, Syria and Pal. Thus Western Asia became the arena of Sem life, whose influences also reached Egypt and, through Phoenicia, the far-away WestMediterranean.
to the Semites and neighboring races are not final. Out from that fruitful womb of nations, the Cau-
casus, the Semites, one branch of the Caucasian
peoples, went southwestward— as their cousins the Hamites went earlier toward the South and as their younger relatives, the Arj-ans, were to go northward and westward—with marked racial
traits and a pronounced religious development, to play a leading part in the life of man.
The phrase Sem Languages is used of a group of languages which have marked features in common, which
also set them off from other languages.
While we may properly call Western and Southwestern Asia the home of the Sem peoples, there
fi Semitic But we must avoid the unnecessary D. ociiuuiinference that nations using the same or Languages kindred languages are of the same ancestry. There are other explanations of linguistic affinity than racial, as the Indians of Mexico may speak Spanish, and the Germans of Milwaulvee, Enghsh. So also neighboring or intermingled nations may just as naturally have used Ijranches of the Sem language stock. However,
still remains the difficult j' of separating 4. Confuthem definitely from the other races sion with among whom they lived. The historic Other Babylonians, e.g., were Sem; yet Races they dispossessed an earlier non-Sem people, and were themselves frequently invaded by other races, such as the Hittites, and even the Egyptians. It is not certain therefore which gods, customs, laws, etc, of the Babylonians were Sem, and not adopted from those whom they superseded.
it is true that the nations which were truly Sem used languages wliich are strikingly akin. These have been grouped as (1) Eastern Sem, including Bab and Assyr;
(2) Northern, including Syriac and Aramaic; (3) Western, including Canaanite. or Phoenician, and Hebrew, and
(4) Southern, including Arabic. Sabaean and Ethiopic
(cf Geden. Intro to the Heb Bible, 14-28). The distinctive features of this family of languages are (1) the tri-literal root. (2) the consonantal writing, vowel indications being unnecessary so long as the language was spoken. (3) the meager use of moods and tenses in verbal inflection, every action being graphically viewed as belonging to one of two stages in time: completed or incomplete. (4) the paucity of parts of speech, verb and noun covering nearly aU the relations of words. (5) the frequent use of interiial change in the inflection of words, e.g. the doutiling of a consonant or the change of a vowel, and (6) the use of certain letters, called "serviles." as prefixes or suffixes in inflection; these are parts of pronoims or the worn-down residua of nouns and particles. The manner of writing was not uniform in these languages, Bab and Assyr being ideographic and syllabic, and written from left to right, while Aram. , Hob and Arab, were alphabetic and written from right to left. The primitive forms and inflections of the group are best preserved in the Arab, by reason of the conservatism of the desert peoples, and in the Assyr by the sudden destruction of that empire and the burial of the records of that language in a comparatively pure state, to be brought back to light by 19th-cent. exploration. All the characteristics given above are clearly manifest in the Heb of the OT.
AssjTia was racially purely Sem, but her laws, customs, literature, and many of licr gods were acquired from Babylonia: to such an extent was this true that we are indebted to the library of the Assyr Asshurbanipal for much that we know of Bab religion, literature and history. In Syria also the same mixed conditions prevailed, for'through Syria by the fords of the Euphrates lay the highway of tlie nations, and Hittite and INIitannian at times shared the land with her, and left their influence. Possibly in Arabia Sem blood ran purest, but even in Arabia there were tribes from other races; and the table of the nations in Gen divides that land among the descendants of both Ham and Shem (see Table of Nations). Last of all, in Pal, from the very beginning of its historic period, we find an intermingling and confusion of races and rehgions such as no otlier Sem center presents. A Hamitic people gave one of its common names to the country—Canaan, wliile the pagan and late-coming Philistine gave the most used name—Palestine. The archaic remains of Horite, Avite and Hivite are being uncovered by exploration; these races survived in places, no doubt, long after the Sem invasion, contributing their quota to the customs and religious practices of the land. The Hittite also was in the land, holding outposts from his northern empire, even in the extreme south of Pal. If the blue eyes and fair complexions of the Amorites pictured on Egyp monuments are true representations, we may believe that the gigantic Aryans of the North had their portion also in Pal.
In the study of Sem Religion there are two tendencies toward error: (1) the Western pragmatical and unsympathetic overtaxing
7. Semitic of oriental Nature-symbols and vividly Religion imaginative speech. Because the Sem-
It is customary now in Bib. ethnology to disregard the classification of Gen 10, and to group
ite used the figure of the rock (Dt 32 4.18.30) in describing God, or poetically conceived of the storm-cloud as Jeh's chariot (Ps 104 3), we must not be led into believing that his religion was a savage animism, or that Jeh of Israel was only the Zeus of the Greeks. How should an imaginative child of Nature speak of the unseen Spiritual Power, except in the richest analogies of Nature ? (2) The second error is the tendency to treat the accretions acquired by contact with other nations as of the essence of Sem religion, e.g. the golden calf following the Egyp bondage, and the sexual abominations of the Can. Baal and Astarte.
all the nations of Pal as Sem, esp.
5. Reliabilthe Canaanite and the Phoenician ity of along with the Hebrew. McCurdy Gen 10 in the Standard BD treats the various gods and religious customs of Pal as though they were all Sem, although uniformly these are represented in the OT as perversions and enormities of alien races which the Hebrews were commanded to extirpate. The adoption of them would be, and was, inimical to their own ancestral faith. Because the Hebrews took over eventually the language of the Phoenician, appropriated his art and conveniences, did traffic in his ships, and in Ahab's reign adopted his Baal and Astarte, we are not warranted at all in rushing to the conclusion that the Phoenicians represented a primitive Sem type. Racial identification by linguistic argument is always precarious, as history clearly shows. One might as well say that Latin and the gospel were Saxon. There are indications that the customs and even the early language of the Hebrews were different from those of the people whom they subdued and dispossessed. Such is the consistent tradition of their race, the Bible alwaj'S emphasizing the irreconcilable difference between their ancestral faith and the practices of the people of Canaan. We may conclude that the reasons for disregarding the classification of Gen with reference
The primitive and distinctive beliefs of the Sem peoples lie still in great uncertainty because of the long association with other peoples, whose practices they readily took over, and because of the lack of records of the primitive periods of Sem development, their origin and dispersion among the nations being prehistoric. Our sources of information are the Bab and Assyr tablets and monuments, the Egyp inscriptions, Phoen history, Arabian traditions and inscriptions, and principally the OT Scriptures. We can never know perhaps how much the pure Semitism of Babylonians and Assyrians was diverted and corrupted by the developed civilization which they invaded and appropriated; Egypt was only indirectly affected by Sem Ufe; Sem development in Arabia was the latest in all the group, besides which the monuments and resle of Arabian antiquity
2719 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Semites Senate, Senator
which have come down to us are comparatively few; and the Phoen development was corrupted ty the sensuality of the ancient Canaanitish cults, while the Bible of the Hebrews emphatically differentiated from the unwholesome rehgions of Pal their own faith, which was ancestral, revealed and pure. Was that Bible faith the primitive Sem cult? At least we must take the Heb tradition at its face value, finding in it the prominent features of an ancestral faith, preserved through one branch of the Sem group. We are met frequently in these Heb records by the claim that the religion they present is not a new development, nor a thing apart from the origin of their race, but rather the preservation of an ancient worship, Abraham, Moses and the prophets appearing not as originators, but reformers, or revivers, who sought to keep their people true to an inherited religion. Its elemental features are the following:
Causes received no emphasis; God worked directly
in Nature, which became to them therefore the continuous arena of signs and marvels. The thunder was His voice, the sunshine reflected the
light of His countenance, the winds were His messengers. And so through this imaginative view of the world the Semite dwelt in an enchanted realm
of the miraculous.
(4) The Semite believed in a God who is a moral
being. Such a faith in the nature of it was certain to influence profoundly their own moral development, making for them a racial character which has been distinctive and persistent through the changes of millenniums. By it also they have impressed other nations and religions, with which they have had contact. The CH is an expression of the moral issues of theism. The Law and the Prophets
of Israel arose out of the conviction of God's righteousness and of the moral order of His universe (Ex 19 5.6; Isa 1 16-20). The Decalogue is a coii-
(1) II was pronouncedly theistic; not that other religions do not affirm a god; but the theism of the Semites was such as to give their religion a unique place among all others. To say the least, it had the germ of or the tendency toward monotheism,
fession of faith in the unseen God; the Law of Holiness (Lev 17-26) is equally a moral code. While these elements are not absent altogether from other ancient rehgions, they are pronouncedly characteristic of the Sem to the extent that they have given to it its permanent form, its large development, and its primacy among the religions of the human race. To know God, to hear His eternal tread in Nature, to clothe Him with light as with a garment, to establish His throne in righteousness, to perceive that holiness is the all-pervading atmosphere of His presence—such convictions were bound to affect the life and progress of a race, and to consecrate them as a nation of priests for aU mankind.
if we have not sufficient evidence to affirm its monotheism, and to rate the later polytheistic representations of Babylonia and Assyria as local perversions. If the old view that Sem religion was essentially monotheistic be incapable of proof, it is true that the necessary development of their concept of God must ultimately arrive at monotheism. This came to verification in Abram the Hebrew, Jesus the Messiah (Jn 4 21-24) and Mohammed the false prophet. A city-state exclusively, a nation predominantly, worshipped one god, often through some Nature-symbol, as sun or star or element. With the coming of world-conquest, intercourse and vision, the one god of the city or the chief god of the nation became universalized. The ignorant and materialistic Hebrew might localize the God of Israel in a city or on a hilltop ; but to the spiritual mind of Amos or in the universal vision of Isaiah He was Jeh, Lord of all the earth.
LiTEKATUBE.—For discussion of the details of Sem peoples and religions reference must be made to the particuiar articles, such as Arpachshad; Eber; Abraham; Hammurabi; Assyria; Babylonia; Baal; Ashtoreth; Abherim; Moloch; Chemosh; Chitjn; Israel, Religion OF, etc. The lit. on the subject is vast, interesting and far from conclusive. Few of the Bible Diets, have arts, on this particular subject; reference should be made to those in the Standard and in the HDB, vol V, both by McCurdy; "Semites" in Catholic Bnc skims the surface; arts, in International Enc are good. In OT Theologies, Davidson, pp. 249-52; Schultz, eh ill of vol
(2) Closely related to this high conception of Deity was the apparently contradictory but really
I; Riehm, Altteslamentliche Theologie: Dehtzsch, Psychology of the OT. For language see Wright's Compara-
tive Grammar of Sem Languages. For history and religion: Maspero's three vols; McCurdy, HPU: Hommel, Ancient Heb Tradition, and Sem VOlker u. Sprache; •Jastrow, Comparative Sem Religion; Friedr. Delitzsch, Babel u. Bihel; W. R. Smith, Religion of the Semites.
potent idea of the Deity as a personality. The Semite did not grossly materiaUze his God as did the savage, nor vainly abstract and ethereahze Him and so ehminate Him from the experience of man as did the Greek; but to him God universal was
Edward Mack SENAAH, s6-na'a, sen'S-a (HXrO, s'na'ah; B, Saavd, Saand, Savavdr, Sanandt, A, Savavd, Sanand, Sewaa, Sennad, 'Ao-av, Hasan) : The children of Senaah are mentioned as having formed part of the company returning from the captivity with Zerubbabel (Ezr 2 35; Neh 7 38). The numbers vary as given by Ezr (3,630) and Neh
also God personal and intimate. ^ The Hebrew ran the risk of conditioning the spirituahty of God in order to maintain His real personality. Possibly
this has been the most potent element in Sem
religion; God was not far from every one of them. He came into the closest relations as father or friend. He was the companion of king and priest. The
(3,930), while 1 Esd 5 23 puts them at 3,330. In the last place the name is Sanaas, AV "Annaas" (B, 2a|ii(i, Samd, A, Sai/das, Sandas) . In Neh 3 3 the name occurs with the def. art., ha-senaah. The people may be identical with the Benjamite clan Hassenuah (1 Ch 9 7). Onom speaks of Magdalsenna, a village about 7 miles N. of Jericho, which may be the place intended; but the site is not known. W. Ewing
affairs of the nation were under His immediate care; He went to war with armies, was a partner in har-
vest rejoicings; the home was His abode. This
conception of Deity carried with it the necessary
implication of revelation (Am 3 8). The office, message and power of the Heb prophet were also the
logical consequence of knowing God as a Person.
(3) Its peculiar view of Nature was another
feature of Sem religion. God was everywhere and
always present in Nature; consequently its syni-
SENATE, sen'at, SENATOR, sen'a-ter: In Ps 105 22, "teach his senators [RV "elders"] wisdom." The Heb is ]pT , zdken, "elder" (LXX
bolism was the natural and ready expression of His
nature and presence. Simile, parable and Nature-
marvels cover the pages and tablets of their records.
wpeafiiTepoi, preshuteroi) . In Acts 6 21, "called the council together and all the senate of the children of
Unfortunately this poetic conception of Nature
quickly enough afforded a ready path m which wayward feet and carnal minds might travel
Israel." The Gr yepovula, gerous'ia, is here evidently used as a more precise equivalent of the foregoing "council" {avv^Spiov, sunedrion), to which it is added by Kal, kai, explicative. Reference is had to the Sanhedrin. See Sanhedein. This term gerousia
toward Nature-worship with all of its formalism and its degrading excesses. This feature of Sem
religion offers an interesting commentary on their
philosophy. With them the doctrine of Second
Seneh Sepharvaim THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2720
occurs in LXX Ex 3 16, etc, and in 1 Mace 12 6; 2 Mace 1 10; 4 44 of the supreme council of the Jews (see Government). In 1 Mace 8 15; 12 3, povXevTTipiov, bouleulerion, is used of the Rom senate, which is said to consist of 320 members meeting daily, consulting always for the people, to the end that they may be well governed. These statements are not quite accurate, since the senate consisted normally of 300 members, and met not daily, but on call of the magistrates. Originally, like the gerousia of the Jews, the representatives of families and clans
Sennacherib in his first campaign marched into Babylonia. He found Merodach-baladan intrenched at Kish, about 9 miles from Babylon, and defeated him; after which he entered the gates of Babylon, which had been thrown open to him. He placed a Babylonian, named Bel-ibni, on the throne.
This campaign was followed by an invasion of the country of the Cassites and lasubigalleans. In his third campaign he directed his attention to the W., where the people had become restless under the Assyr yoke. Hezekiah had been victorious over the Philis (2 K 18 8). In preparation to withstand a siege, Hezekiah had built a conduit to bring water within the city walls (2 K 20 20). Although strongly opposed by the prophet Isaiah, gifts were sent to Egypt, whence assistance was promised (Isa 30 1-4). Apparently also the Phoenicians and Philis, who had been sore pressed by Assyria, had made provision to resist Assyria. The first move was at Ekron, where the Assyr governor Padi was put into chains and sent to Hezekiah at Jerus.
(gentes), the senators were subsequently the exmagistrates, supplemented, to complete the tale of members, by representatives of patrician (in time also of plebeian) families selected by the censor. The tenure was ordinarily for life, though it might be terminated for cause by the censor. Although constitutionally the senate was only an advisory body, its advice (senatus considtiim, audoritas) in fact became in time a mandate which few dared to disregard. During the republican period the senate practically ruled Rome; under the empire it tended more and more to become the creature and subservient tool of the emperors. William Arthur Heidel
Sennacherib, in 701, moved against the cities in the W. He ravaged the environs of Tyre, but made no attempt to take the city, as he was without a naval force. After Elulaeus the king of Sidon fled, the city surrendered without a battle, and Ethbaal was appointed king. Numerous cities at once sent presents to the king of Assyria. Ashkelon and other cities were taken. The forces of Egypt were routed at Eltekeh, and Ekron was destroyed. He claims to have conquered 46 strongholds of Hezekiah's territory, but he did not capture Jerus, for concerning the king he said, in his annals, "him-
SENEH, se'ne (n3D , seneh; Sevva, Senna) This was the name attaching to the southern of the two great cliffs between which ran the gorge of Michmash (1 S 14 4). The name means "acacia," and may have been given to it from the thorn bushes growing upon it. Jos (BJ, V, ii, 1) mentions the "plain of thorns" near Gabathsaul. We may hear an echo of the old name in that of Wddy Suweinll, "valley of the little thorn tree," the name by which the gorge is known today. The chff must have stood on the right side of the wddy: see Bozez. Conder gives an excellent description of the place in Tent Work in Pal, II, 112-14. W. EwiNQ
self like a bird in a cage in Jerus, his royal city, I penned him." He states, also, how he reduced his territory, and how Hezekiah sent to him 30 talents of gold and 800 talents of silver, besides hostages.
The Bib. account of this invasion is found in 2 K 18 13—19 37; Isa 36, 37. The Assyr account differs considerably from it; but at the same time
SENIR, se'nir ("I'^jip, s'nir; Savetp, Sane'ir): This was the Amorite name of Mt. Hermon, according to Dt 3 9 (AV "Shenir"). But in 1 Ch 5 23; Cant 4 8, we have Senir and Hermon named as distinct mountains. It seems probable, however, that Senir applied to a definite part of the AntiLebanon or Hermon range. An inscription of Shalmaneser tells us that Hazael, king of Damascus,
it corroborates it in many details. One of the striking parallels is the exact amount of gold which Hezekiah sent to the Assyr king (see Expos T, XII, 225,405; XIII, 326). In the following year Sennacherib returned to Babylonia to put down a rebellion by Bel-ibni and Merodach-baladan. The former was sent to Assyria, and the latter soon afterward died. Ashurn^din-shum, the son of Sennacherib, was then crowned king of Babylon. A campaign into Cilicia and Cappadocia followed.
fortified Mt. Senir over against Mt. Lebanon. So in Ezk 27 5, Senir, whence the Tyrians got planks of fir trees, is set over against Lebanon, where cedars were obtained. The Arab geographers give the name Jebel Sanlr to the part of the Anti-Lebanon range which lies between Damascus and Horns (Yakut, c 1225 AD, quoted by Guy le Strange in Pal under the Moslems, 79. He also quotes Mas'udi, 943 AD, to the effect that Baalbek is in the district of Senir, 295). W. Ewing
In 694 Sennacherib attacked the Elamites, who were in league with the Babylonians. In revenge, the Elamites invaded Babylonia and carried off Ashur-nadin-shum to Elam, and made Nergalushezib king of Babylon. He was later captured and in turn carried off to Assyria. In 691 Sennacherib again directed his attention to the S., and at Khalute fought with the combined forces. Two years later he took Babylon, and razed it to the ground.
SENNACHERIB, se-nak'er-ib (3l"in3P, ?anheribh; SevvaxTipelji, Sennachereim, Assyr Sin-akhier6a,"themoon-god Sin has increased the brothers")
Sennacherib (704-682 BC) ascended the throne of Assyria after the death of his father Sargon. Appreciating the tact that Bab3don would be difficult to control, instead of endeavoring to conciliate the people he ignored them. The Babylonians, being indignant, crowned a man of humble origin, Marduk-zakir-shum by name. He ruled only a month, having been driven out by the irrepressible Merodach-baladan, who again appeared on the scene.
In 681 Sennacherib was murdered by his two sons (2 K 19 37; see Sharezer). Esar-haddon their younger brother, who was at the time conducting a campaign against Ararat, was declared king in his stead. A. T. Clay
SENSES, sen'siz: The tr of at<T8r}T'npi.ov, aisthettrion (He 5 14, "those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern good and evil"). The word means, primarily, the seat of the senses, the region of feeling; in the LXX of Jer 4 19, it represents the Heb kir, "the walls of the heart" (see RV), and is used to denote the internal sense or faculty of perceiving and judging, which in He 5
In order to fortify himself against As.syria the latter sent an embassy to Hezekiah, apparently for the purpose of inspiring the W. to rebel against Assyria (2 K 20 12-19).
2721 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Seneh Sepharvaim
SEPARATE, sep'a-rat: The tr of a number of Heb and Gr words, '"3, hcUlhal (Lev 20 24, etc), and atpopl^o}, aphorizo (Mt 25 32, etc), being the most common. "To separate" and "to consecrate" were originally not distinguished (e.g. Nu 6 2 m), and probably the majority of the uses of "separate" in EV connote "to set apart for God." But precisely the same term that is used in this sense may also denote the exact opposite (e.g. the use of nazar in Ezk 14 7 and Zee 7 3). See Holy; Nazirite; Saint.
14 is regarded as becominf!; perfected by use or exercise (cf Eph 4 12f; 1 l^ini 4 7; 2 Pet 3 18). In 2 Esd 10 30 we have "Or is iny sense deceived, or my soul in a dream?" Lat sensus, here "mind" rather than "sense." W. L. Walker
SENSUAL, scn'shoo-al (>|;uxik69, psuchikds, "animal," "natural"): Bib. psychology has no Eng. equivalent for this Gr original. Man subject to the lower appetites is a-apKiKds, sarhihus, "fleshly"; in the communion of his spirit with God he is irveu-
liariKbi, pneumatikos, "spiritual." Between the two
is the i/vx"//, psucht, "soul," the center of his personal being. This ego or "1" in each man is bound to the spirit, the higher nature; and to the body or lower nature.
SEPARATION, sep-a-ra'shun : In the Pent the word niddah specially points to a state of ceremonial uncleanness (Lev 12 2.5; 15 20ff; Nu 6 4ff; 12 13; 19 21). For a de.scription of the "water of purification," used for cleansing what was ceremonially unclean (Nu 19), see Heifer, Red; Uncleanness. For "separation" in the sense of nezer, see Nazirite.
The soul (^psuchf) as the seat of the senses, desires, affections, appetites, passions, i.e. the lower animal nature common to man with the beasts, was distinguished in the Pythagorean and Platonic philosophy from the higher rational nature {nous, pneuma).
The subjection of the soul to the animal nature is man's debasement, to the spirit indwelt of God is his exaltation. The Eng. equivalent for psuchilcos, "psychic," does not express this debasement. In the NT "sensual" indicates man's subjection to self and
SEPHAR, se'fiir: Only in Gen 10 30 (HISO
fpharah, "toward Sephar"), as the eastern limit of the territory of the sons of Yoktan (Joktan). From the similarity between the names of most of Yoktan's sons and the names of South Arabian towns or districts, it can hardly be doubted that Sephar is represented by the Arab. Zafdr. The appropriateness of the site seems to outweigh the discrepancy between Arab, z and Heb ?. But two important towns in South Arabia bear this name. The one lies a little to the S. of San'a' . According to tradition it was founded by Shiammir, one of the Sabaean kings, and for a long time served as the royal seat of the Tubbas. The other Zafdr stands on the coast in the district of Shihr, E. of Hadramaut. The latter is probably to be accepted as the Bib. site. A. S. Fulton
self-interest, whether animal or intellectual—the
selfish man in whom the spirit is degraded into subordination to the debased psuche, "soul." This debasement may be (1) intellectual, "not wisdom .... from above, but .... earthly, sensual" (Jas 3 1.5); (2) carnal (and of course moral), "sen-
sual, having not the Spirit" (Jude ver 19). It ranges aU the way from sensuous self-indulgence to gross immorality. In the utter subjection of the
spirit to sense it is the utter exclusion of God from the Ufe. Hence "the natural [psuchikos] man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God" (1 Cor 2 14). The term is equivalent to "the mind of the
flesh" (Rom 8 7) which "is not subject to the law
SEPHARAD, s6-fa'rad, sef'a-rad (TISO , .fp/iarddh) : Mentioned in Ob ver 20 as the place of captivity of certain "captives of Jerus," but no clear indication is given of locality. Many conjectures have been made. The Tg of Jonathan identifies with Spain; hence the Spanish Jews are called Sephardim. Others (Pusey, etc) have connected
of God." See Pstchologt. Dwight M. Pratt
SENT (nblB , shalah; diroo-T^XXu, aposlello) "Sent" in the OT is the tr of shalah, "to send" (of
presents, messengers, etc. Gen 32 18; 44 3; Jgs 6 14; 1 K 14 6; Est 3 13; Prov 17 11; Jer 49
14; Ezk 3 5; 23 40; Dnl 10 11; Ob ver 1); of
it with the "^parda" of the Behistun Inscription, and some have even identified it with "Sardis." The now generally accepted view is that which connects it with the "Saparda" of the Assyr inscrip-
sh'iah, Aram. (Ezr 7 14; Dnl 5 24); oi shilluhlm, "sending" (Ex 18 2); in the NT of aposlello, "to send off" or "away," "to send forth" (Jn 9 7, "the pool of Siloam [which is by interpretation. Sent]");
cf Lk 13 4; Neh 3 15, "the pool of Siloah," RV "Shelah"; Isa 8 6, "the waters of Shiloah that go
tions, though whether this is to be located to the E.
of Assyria or in Northern Asia Minor is not clear. See Schrader, Cuneiform Inscriptions, II, 145-46; Sayoe, HCM, 482-84; arts, in DB, HDB, EB, etc.
softly," where LXX has Siloam for Heb shiloah, "a
sending," which, rather than "Sent," is the original meaning—a sending forth of waters. See Siloam. "Sent" is also the tr of apdslolos, "one sent forth"
James Orr SEPHARVAIM, sef-ar-va'im, se-far-va'im (D'^IISO , fpharwayim: 2€<j><j>apou(lt(i, Sephpharoudim, 2«ir<j>apo«4in, iSeppharoudim, Seir-
(the original of the familiar word "apostle"); in Jn
13 16, "one that is sent" (m "Gr 'an apostle' "); cf He 1 14. W. L. Walker
1. Formerly <t>apovv, Seppharoun, 2eir(j>apoD|j.di.v,
Identified Seppharonmdin, 'Ei7<j>apoiidi)i, Epphawith the roudim, 2eir4>apc((j., Sepphareim, the Two Babyfirst two being the forms in MSS A and Ionian B respectively, of the passages in K, and Sippars the last two in Isa): This city, mentioned in 2 K 17 24; 18 34; 19 13; Isa 36 19; 37 13, is generally identified with the Sipip)ar of the Assyr-Bab inscriptions (Zimhir in
SENTENCE, sen'tens: Eight Heb and three Gr words are thus tr'' in AV. Sometimes it points to a mystery (Dnl 5 12; 8 23); then again to the con-
tents of the Law (Dt 17 11); then again to the
idea of judgment (Ps 17 2) or of a judicial sen-
tence (2 Cor 19; Lk 23 24), or of judicial advice
(Acts 15 19, ARV "judgment").
Sumerian), on the Euphrates, about 16 miles S.W.
of Bagdad. It was one of the two great seats of the worship of the Bab sun-god Samas, and also of the goddesses IStar and Anunit, and seems to have had two principal districts, Sippar of Samas, and Sippar of Anunit, which, if the identification were correct, would account for the dual termination -ayim,, in Heb. This site is the modern 'Abu-Habbah, which was first excavated by the late Hormuzd Rassam in
SENUAH, s6-nu'a, sen'a-a (HXIDP , s'nU'ah) : In AV "A Benjamite" (Neh 11 9); RV has "Has-
senuah," transliterating the def. art. AV is to be
preferred (cf 1 Ch 9 7).
SEORIM, sS-6'rim, sS-6r'im (D^l.is^to, s''orim): The name borne by one of the (post-exilic) priestly
courses (1 Ch 24 8).
Sepharvites Septuagint THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2722
among translations. Its importance is many-
18R1, and has furnished an enormous number of inscriptions, some of them of the highest importance.
sided. Its chief value lies in the fact that it is a VS of a Heb text earlier by about a millennium than the earhest dated Heb MS extant (916 AD), a VS,
Besides the fact tliat the deities of the two cities, Sippar and Sepharvaim, are not the same, it is to be noted that in 2 K 19 13 the king 2. Difficulof Sepharvaim is referred to, and, as ties of That far as is k;nomi, the Bab Sippar never Identiflhad a Icing of its own, nor had Alvlcad, cation with which it is in part identified, for at least 1,200 years before Sennacherib. The fact that Babylon and Cuthah head the Hst of cities mentioned is no indication that Sepharvaim was a Bab town—the composition of the list, indeed, points the other way, for the name comes after Ava and Hamath, implying that it lay in Syria.
in particular, prior to the formal rabbinical revision of the Heb which took place early in the 2d
cent. AD. It supplies the materials for the reconstruction of an older form of the Heb than the MT reproduced in our modern Bibles. It is, moreover, a pioneering work ; there was probably no precedent
in the world's history for a series of translations from one language into another on so extensive a
scale. It was the first attempt to reproduce the Heb Scriptures in another tongue. It is one of the outstanding results of the breaking-down of international barriers by the conquests of Alexander the Great and the dissemination of the Gr language, which were fraught with such vital consequences for the history of religion. The cosmopohtan city which he founded in the Delta witnessed the first attempt to bridge the gulf between Jewish and Gr thought. The Jewish commercial settlers at Alexandria, forced by circumstances to abandon their language, clung tenaciously to their faith; and the
Joseph Halevy therefore suggests (ZA, II, 401 S) that it should be identified with the Sibraim of Ezk 47 16, between Damascus and
3. Another Hamath (the dual implying a frontier Suggestion town), and the same as the Sahara'in of the Bab Chronicle, there referred to as having been captured by Shalmaneser. As, however, Sabara'in may be read Samara'in, it is more hkely to have been the Heb Shom'ron (Samaria), as pointed out by Fried. DeUtzsch.
tr of the Scriptures into their adopted language, produced to meet their own needs, had the further result of introducing the outside world to a knowledge of their history and religion. Then came the most momentous event in its history, the startingpoint of a new life; the tr was taken over from the Jews by the Christian church. It was the Bible of most writers of the NT. Not only are the majority of their express citations from Scripture borrowed from it, but their writings contain numerous reminiscences of its language. Its words are household words to them. It laid for them the foundations of a new religious terminology. It was a potent weapon for missionary work, and, when VSS of the Scriptures into other languages became necessary, it was in most cases the LXX and not the Heb from which they were made. Preeminent among these daughter VSS was the Old Lat which preceded the Vulg. Jerome's VS, for the most part a direct tr from the Heb, was in portions a mere revision of the Old Lat; our Prayer-book VS of the Psalter preserves peculiarities of the LXX, transmitted through the medium of the Old Lat. The LXX was also the Bible of the early Gr Fathers, and helped to mold dogma; it furnished prooftexts to both parties in the Arian controversy. Its language gives it another strong claim to recognition. Uncouth and unclassical as much of it appears, we now know that this is not wholly due to the hampering effects of translation. "Biblical Greek," once considered a distinct species, is now a rather discredited term. The hundreds of contemporary papyrus records (letters, business and legal documents, etc) recently discovered in Egypt illustrate much of the vocabulary and grammar and go to show that many so-called "Hebraisms" were in truth integral parts of the koini, or "common language," i.e. the international form of Gr which, since the time of Alexander, replaced the old dialects, and of which the spoken Gr of today is the lineal descendant. The VS was made for the populace and written in large measure in the language of their everyday life.
LiTEEATUHB.—See Schrader, COT, I, 71 f; Kittel on K; DilLmannKittel on Jsa, ad loc. ; HDB,s.y.
T. G. Pinches SEPHARVITES, se'far-vlts, s5-tar'vlts (a^1-)SD
, ^'pharwim): In 2 K 17 31, the inhabitants of Sepharvaim (q.v,), planted by the king of Assyria in Samaria. They continued there to burn their children to their native gods.
SEPPHORIS, sef'6-ris: A city of Galilee, taken by Josephus (Vita, IX, Ixvii, 71) and later destroyed by the son of Varus [Ant, XVII, x, 9).
SEPTUAGINT, sep'ta-a-jint:
I. Import.\nce II. N.iME III. Tradition.\l Origin
1. Letter of Aristeas 2. Evidence of Aristobulus and Philo 3. Later Accretions 4. Criticism of the Aristeas vStory
.5. Date 6. Credibility IV. Evidence op Prologue to Sirach V. Transmission of the LXX Text
1. Early Corruption of the Text 2. OEBcial Revision of Hebrew Text c 100 AD
.3. Adoption of LXX by Christians 4. Alternative 2d-Centiiry Greek Versions 5. Aquila 6. Theodotion 7. Symmachns and Others 8. OVigen and the Hexapla 9. Hexaplaric Manuscripts 10. Recensions Known to Jerome 11. Hesychian Recension 12. Lucianic Recension VI. Reconstruction of LXX Text; Versions, M.ANusCRiPTa and Printed Editions
1. Ancient Versions Made from LXX 2. Manuscripts 3. Printed Texts 4. Reconstruction of Original Te.xt VII. Number, Titles and Order of Books
1. Contents
2. Titles 3. Bipartition of Books 4. Grouping and Order of Books VIII. Characteristics of the Version and Its Component Parts
1. Grouping of Books on Internal Evidence (1) The Hexateuch (2) The "Latter" Prophets (3) Partial Version of the "Former" Prophets (4) The "Writings"
//. Name.—The name "Septuagint" is an abbreviation of Interpretalio secundum (or juxta) Sepluaginta seniores (or viros), i.e. the Gr tr of the OT of which the first instalment was, according to the Alexandrian legend (see III, below), contributed by 70 (or 72) elders sent from Jerus to Alexandria for the purpose at the request of Ptolemy II. The legend in its oldest form restricts their labors to the Pent, but they were afterward credited with the tr of the whole Bible, and before the 4th cent, it
(5) The Latest LXX Translations 2. General Characteristics IX. Salient Differences betwee.n Greek a.nd Hebrew Texts
1. Sequence 2. Subject-Matter Literature
/. Importance.—The Gr VS of the OT commonly known as the Septuagint holds a unique place
2723 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Sepharvites Septuagint
had become customary to apply the title to the whole collection: Aug., De Civ. Dei, xviii.42, "quorum interpretatio ut Septuaginta vocetur iam obtinuit consuetudo" ("whose tr is now by custom called the Septuagint"). The MSS refer to them under the abbreviation ol o', hoi o' ("the seventy"), or oi 0^', hoi oh' ("the seventy-two"). The "Septuagmt" and the abbreviated form "LXX" have been the usual designations hitherto, but, as these are based on a now discredited legend, they are coming to be replaced by "the OT in Greek," or "the Alexandrian version" with the abbreviation (6.
Philometor (182-146 BC), repeats the statement that the Pent was tr'^ under Philadelphus at the in-
stance of Demetrius Phalereus (Euseb.,
2. Evidence Praep. Ev., XIII, 12.6646); but the of Aristogenuineness of the passage is doubtful. bulus and If it is accepted, it appears that some Philo of the main features of the story were believed at Alexandria within a century of the date assigned by "Aristeas" to the tr. Philo (Vit. Mays, ii,5 ff) repeats the story of the sending of the translators by Eleazar at the request of Philadelphus, adding that in his day the completion of the undertaking was celebrated by an annual festival on the isle of Pharos. It is improbable that an artificial production like the Aristeas letter should have occasioned such an anniversary; Philo's evidence seems therefore to rest in part on an independent tradition. His account in one particular paves the way for later accretions; he hints at the inspiration of the translators and the miraculous agreement of their separate VSS : "They prophesied like men possessed, not one in one way and one in another, but all producing the same words and phrases as though some unseen prompter were at the ears of each," At the end of the 1st cent. AD Jos includes in his Antiquities (XII, ii,
///. Traditional Origin.—The traditional account of the tr of the Pent is contained in the so-called letter of Aristeas (edd Gr text, P. Wendland, Teubner series, 1900, and Thackeray in the App. to Swete's Inlro to the OT in Gr, 1900, etc; Wendland's sections cited below appear in Swete's hdro, ed 2; ET by Thackeray, Macmillan, 1904, reprinted from JQR, XV, 337, and by H. T. Andrews in Charles's Apocrypha and Pseudepigmpha of the OT, II, 83-122, Oxford, 1913).
The writer professes to be a high official at the court of Ptolemy Philadelphus (285-247 BC), a Greek interested in Jewish antiquities. 1. Letter of Addressing his brother Philocrates Aristeas he describes an embassy to Jerus on which he has recently been sent with another courtier Andreas. According to his narrative, Demetrius of Phalerum, a prominent figure in later Athenian history, who here appears as the royal librarian at Alexandria, convinced the king of the importance of securing for his library a tr of the Jewish Law. The king at the same time, to propitiate the nation from whom he was asking a favor, consented, on the suggestion of Aristeas, to liberate all Jewish slaves in Egypt. Copies follow of the letters which passed between Ptolemy and Eleazar, the high priest at Jerus. Ptolemy requests Eleazar to select and dispatch to Alexandria 72 elders, proficient in the Law, 6 from each tribe, to undertake the tr, the importance of the task requiring the services of a large number to secure an accurate VS. Eleazar complies with the request and the names of the selected translators are appended to his letter.
1 ff ) large portions of the letter, which he paraphrases, but does not embellish.
Christian writers accepted the story without suspicion and amplified it. A catena of their evidence
is given in an Appendix to Wend-
3. Later land's ed. The following are their Accretions principal additions to the narrative,
all clearly baseless fabrications.
(1) The translators worked independently, in separate cells, and produced identical versions, Ptolemy proposing this test of their trustworthiness. So Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Augustine, the Chronicon Paschale and the
Cohortatio ad Graecos (wrongly attributed to Justin)
the author of the last work asserts that he had seen the cells and heard the tradition on the spot. (2) A modiflcation of this legend says that the translators worked in pairs in 36 cells. So Epiphanius (d. 403 AD), and later G. Syncellus, Julius Pollux and Zonaras. Epiphanius' account is the most detailed. The translators were locked up in sky-lighted cells in pairs with attendants and shorthand writers; each pair was intrusted with one book, the books were then circulated, and 36 identical VSS of the whole Bible, canonical and apocryphal books, were produced; Ptolemy wrote two letters, one asking for the original Scriptures, the second for translators. (3) This story of the two embassies appears already in the 2d cent. AD, in Justin's
There follow: (1) a detailed description of votive offerings sent by Ptolemy for the temple; (2) a sketch of Jerus, the temple and its services, and the geography of Pal. doubtless reflecting in part the impressions of an eyewitness and giving a unique picture of the Jewish capital in the Ptolemaic era ; (3) an exposition by Eleazar of portions of the Law.
Apology, and (4) the extension of the translators' work to the Prophets or the whole Bible recurs in the two Cyrils and in Chrysostom. (.5) The miraculous agreement of the translators proved thera to be no less inspired than the authors (Irenaeus, etc; cf Philo). (6) As regards date, Clement of Alexandria quotes an alternative tradition referring the VS back to the time of the first Ptolemy (322-28.5 BC); while Chrysostom brings it down to "a hundred or more years [elsewhere
The translators arrive at Alexandria, bringing a copy of the Law written in letters of gold on rolls
of skins, and are honorably received by Ptolemy. A seven days' banquet follows, at which the king
' not many years"] before the coming of Christ." Justin absurdly states that Ptolemy's eml^assy was sent to King Herod; the Chronicon Paschale calls the high priest of the time Onias Simon, brother of Eleazar.
tests the proficiency of each in turn with hard ques-
tions. Three days later Demetrius conducts them
across the mole known as the Heptastadion to the
Jerome was the first to hold these later inventions up to ridicule, contrasting them with the older and more sober narrative. They indicate a growing oral tradition in Jewish circles at Alexandria. The origin of the legend of the miraculous consensus of the 70 translators has been reasonably sought in a passage in Ex 24 LXX to which Epiphanius expressly
island of Pharos, where, with all necessaries provided for their convenience, they complete their
task, as by a miracle, in 72 days; we are expressly
told that their work was the result of collaboration and comparison. The completed VS was read by Demetrius to the Jewish community, who received
it with enthusiasm and begged that a copy might be intrusted to their leaders; a solemn curse was pronounced on any who should venture to add to or
refers. We there read of 70 elders of Israel, not heard of again, who with Aaron, Nadab and Abihu form a hnk between Moses and the people. After reciting the Book of the Covenant Moses ascends to the top of the mount; the 70, however, ascend but a little way and are bidden to worship from afar: according to the LXX text "They saw the place where the God of Israel stood .... and of the
subtract from or m;ike any alteration in the tr. The whole VS was then read aloud to the king who
expressed his admiration and his surprise that Gr
writers had remained in ignorance of its contents; he directed that the books should be preserved with
scrupulous care. To set beside this account we have two pre-
elect of Israel not one perished" (ver 11), i.e. they were privileged to escape the usual effect of a vision of the Deity (Ex 33 20). But the vb. used for
Christian allusions in Jewish writings. Aristobulus,
addressing a Ptolemy who has been identified as
Septuagint THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2724
alter the tr (§ 311) points to divergences of text which the writer desired to check; cf §57, where he seems to insist on the correctness of the LXX text of Ex 25 22, "gold of pure gold," as against the Heb. (10) Allusions to current criticisms of the Pent (§§ 128, 144) presuppose a famiUarity with it on the part of non-Jewish readers only explicable if the LXX had long been current, (11) Yet details in the Gr orthography preclude a date much later than 100 BC.
"perish" (diaphdnein) was uncommon in this sense; "not one disagreed" would be the obvious meaning; hence apparently the legend of the agreement of the translators, the later intermediaries between Moses and Israel of the Dispersion. When the translations were recited, "no difference was discoverable," says Epiphanius, using the same vb. Cave-dwellings in the island of Pharos probably account for the legend of the cells. A curious phenomenon has recently suggested that there is an element of truth in one item of Epiphanius' obviously incredible narrative, viz. the working of the translators in pairs. The Gr books of Jer and Ezk fall into two nearly equal parts, apparently the work of separate translators (see VIII, 1, [2], below)
The probable amount of truth in the story is ably discussed by Swete (Intro, 16-22). The following statements in the letter may be
6. Crediaccepted: (1) The tr was produced at
bility Alexandria, as is conclusively proved by Egyp influence on its language.
(2) The Pent was tr'' first and, in view of the homogeneity of style, as a whole. (3) The Gr Pent goes back to thefir.st half of the 3d cent. BC; the style is akin to that of the 3d-cent. papyri, and the Gr Gen was used by the Hellenist Demetrius toward the end of the cent. (4) The Heb rolls were brought from Jerus. (5) Possibly Philadelphus, the patron of literature, with his religious impartiahty, may have countenanced the work. But the assertion that it owed its inception wholly to him and his librarian is incredible; it is known from other sources that Demetrius Phalereus did not fill the office of librarian under that monarch. The language is that of the people, not a literary style suitable to a work produced under royal patronage. The imi^ortation of Palestinian translators is likewise fictitious. Dr. Swete acutely observes that Aristeas, in stating that the tr was read to and welcomed by the Jewish community before being presented to the king, unconsciously reveals its true origin. It was no doubt produced to meet their own needs by the large Jewish colony at Alexandria. A demand that the Law should be read in the synagogues in a tongue "understanded of the people" was the originating impulse.
while in Ex, Lev and Pss orthographical details indicate a similar division of the books for clerical purposes. There was, it seems, a primitive custom of transcribing each book on 2 separate rolls, and in the case of Jer and Ezk the practice goes back to the time of tr (JTS, IV, 245 ff, 398 ff ; IX, 88 if). Beside the later extravagances, the story of Aristeas appears comparatively rational. Yet it has long been recognized that much of
4. Criticism it is unhistorical, ia particular the pro-
of the fessed date and nationality of the Aristeas writer. Its claims to authenticity Story were demolished by Dr. Hody two centuries ago (De hihliormn textibus
originalihus, Oxon., 1705) . Clearly the writer is not a Greek, but a Jew, whose aim is to glorify his race and to disseminate information about their sacred books. Yet the story is not wholly to be rejected, though it is difficult to disentangle truth from fiction. On one side his veracity has since Hody's time been established; his court titles, technical terms, epistolary formulae, etc, reappear in Egyp papyri and inscriptions, and all his references to Alexandrian
IV. Evidence of Prologue to Sirach.—The interesting, though in places tantalizingly obscure, prologue to Ecclus throws light on the progress made with the tr of the remaining Scriptures before the end of the 2d cent. BC.
life and customs are probably equally trustworthy
(§§ 28, 109 ff, measures to counteract the ill effects upon agriculture of migration from country to town
§ 167, treatment of informers [cf §25]; § 175 reception of foreign embassies [cf § 182]). The import of
this discovery has, however, since its announcement by Lombroso (Recherches sur I'economie politique
The translator dates his settlement in Egypt, during which he produced his VS of his grandfather's work, as "the 38th year under Euergetes tlie king." The words have been the subject of controversy, but, with the majority of critics, we may interpret this to mean the 38th year of Euergetes II, reckoning from ttie beginning (170 BC) of his joint reign with Philometor,
de I'Egypte, Turin, 1870), been somewhat modified by the new-found papyri which show that Aristeas'
titles and formulae are those of the later, not the
earlier, Ptolemaic age.
The letter was used by Jos and probably known to Philo. How much earlier is it? Schurer (HJP,
i.e. 132 BC. Euergetes I reigned for 2.5 years only. Others, in view of the superfluous preposition, suppose that the age of tlie translator is intended, but the cumbrous form of expression is not unparalleled. A recent explanation of tlie date (Hart, Ecclus in Gr) as the 38th year of Philadelphus Which was also the 1st year of Euergetes I (i.e. 247 BC) is more ingenious than convincing.
II, iii, 309 f [GJV\ III, 608-16]), rely-
5. Date ing on (1) the questionable Aristobulus passage, (2) the picture drawn of Pal as if still under Ptolemaic rule, from which it passed to the Seleucids c 200 BC, argued that the work could not be later than that date. But it is hard to believe that a fictitious story (as he regards it to be) could have gained credence within little more than half a century of the period to which it relates, and Wendland rightly rejects so ancient an origin. The following indications suggest a date about 100-80 BC.
The prologue implies the existence of a Gr VS of the Law, the Prophets and "the rest of the books." The translator, craving his readers' indulgence for the imperfections of his own work, due to the difficulty of reproducing Hob in Gr, adds that others have experienced the same difficulties: "The Law
itself and the prophecies and the rest of the books have no small difference when spoken in their original language." From these words we may understand that at the time of writing (132-100 BC) Alexandrian Jews possessed Gr VSS of a large part
(1) Many of Aristeas' formulae, etc (see above), only came into use in the 2d cent. BC (Strack, Rhein. Mus.. LV, IGSff: Thackeray, Aristeas. ET, pp. 3, 12). (2) The later Maccabean age or the end of the 2d cent. BC is suggested by some of the translators' names (Wendland, xxvi), and (.3) by tlie independent position of the high priest. (4) Some of Ptolemy's questions indicate a tottering dynasty (§187, etc). (.5) The writer occasionally forgets his rOie and distinguishes between his own time and that of Philadelphus (§§ 28, 182). (6) He appears to borrow his name from a Jewish historian of the 2d cent. BO and to wish to pass off the latter's history as his own (§ 6). (7) He is guilty of historical inaccuracies concerning Demetrius, etc. (S) The prologue to the Gr Ecclus (after 132 BC) ignores and contradicts tlie Aristeas story, whereas Aristeas possibly used this prologue (Wendland, xxvii; cf Hart, Ecclus in Qrcck. 1909). (9) The imprecation upon any wlio should
(probably not the whole) of "the Prophets," and of some of "the Writings" or Hagiographa. For some internal evidence as to the order in which the several books were tr"' see VIII, below.
V. Transmission of the LXX Text.—The main value of the LXX is its witness to an older Heb text than our own. But before we can reconstruct this Heb text we need to have a pure Gr text before us, and this we are at present far from possessing. The Gr text has had a long and complex history of
2725 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Septuaglnt
and Thcodotion, besides scanty remnants of further anonymous VSS.
its own. Used for centuries by both Jews and Christians it underwent corruption and interpolation, and, notwithstanding the multitude of materials for its restoration, the original text has yet to be recovered. We are much more certain of the ipsissima verba of the NT writers than of the original Alexandrian VS of the OT. This does not apply to all portions alike. The Or Pent, e.g., has survived in a relatively pure form. But everywhere we have to be on our guard against interpolations, sometimes extending to whole paragraphs. Not a verse is without its array of variant readings. An indication of the amount of "mixture" which has taken place is afforded by the numerous "doublets" or alternative renderings of a single Heb word or phrase which appear side by side in the transmitted text.
The earliest of "the three" was Aqulla, a proselyte to Judaism, and, lilte his NT namesalce, a native of Pontus. He flourished, according to K Aniiilfl Epiphanius (whose account of these later o. Aquiia translators in his De menn. et pond, is not wholly tru-stworthy), under Hadrian (11738 AD) and was related to that emperor; there is no probability in Epiphanius' further statement that Hadrian Intrusted to Aquila the superintendence of the building of Aelia CapitoMna on tho site of Jerus, that there he was converted to Christianity by Christian exiles returning from Pella, but that refusing to abandon astrology he was excommunicated, and in revenge turned Jew and was actuated by a bias against Christianity in his VS of the OT. What is certain is that he was a pupil of the new rabbinical school, in particular of Rabbi Akiba (9.5-135 AD), and that his VS was an attempt to reproduce exactly the revised official text. The result was an extraordinary production, unparalleled in Gr lit., if it can be classed under that category at all. No jot or tittleof the Heb might be neglected; uniformity in the tr of each Heb word must be preserved and the etymological kinship of different Heb words represented. Such were some of his leading principles. The opening words of his tr (Gen 1 1) may be rendered: "In heading founded God with the heavens and with the earth." "Heading" or "summary" was selected because the Heb word for "beginning" was a derivative of "head." "With" represents an untranslatable word ('fith) prefixed to the accusative case, but indistinguishable from the preposition "with." The Divine Name (the tetragrammaton) was not trd, but written in archaic Heb characters. "A slave to the letter," as Origen calls him, his work has aptly been described by a modem writer as "a colossal crib" (Burkitt, JQR. October, 1896, 207 fl). Yet it was a success. In Origen's time it was used by all Jews ignorant of Heb, and continued in use for several centuries; Justinian expressly sanctioned its use in the synagogues (.Nov., 146). Its lack.of style and violation of the laws of grammar were not due to ij^norance of Gr, of which the writer shows, in vocabulary at least, a considerable command. Its importance lay and lies (so far as it is preserved) in its exact reproduction of the rabbinical text of tiie 2d cent. AD; it may be regarded as the beginning of the scientific study of the Heb Scriptures. Though "a bold attempt to displace the LXX." it cannot be charged with being intentionally antagonistic to Christianity. Of the original work, previously known only from extracts in MSS, some palimpsest fragments were recovered from the Cairo Genizah in 1897 and edited by F. C. Bin-kitt (Fragments of the Books of Kings, 1897) and by C. Taylor (.Sayings of the Jewish Fathers'', 1897; Heb-Gr Cairo Genizah Palimpsests, 1900). The student of Swete's OT will trace Aquila's unmistaliable style in the footnotes to the Books of S and K; the older and shorter B te.xt in those books has constantly been supplemented in the A text from Aquila. A longer specimen of his work occurs in the Gr Eccl, which has no claim to be regarded as " Septuagint"; Jerome refers to a second ed of Aquila's VS, and the Gr Eccl is perhaps his first ed of that book, made on the basis of an unrevised Heb text (McNeile, Intro to Eccl. Cambridge, 1904, App. I). The suggested identification of Aquila with Onkelos, author of the Tg of that name, has not been generally accepted.
Textual corruption began eax'ly, before the Christian era. We have seen indications of this in the
letter of Aristeas (III, 5, [9] above).
1. Early Traces of corruption appear in Philo Corruption (e.g. his comment, in Quis Rer. Div. of Text Her. 56, on Gen 15 15, shows that already in his day taphels, "buried," had become traphels, "nurtured," as in all our MSS); doublets already exist. Similarly in the NT the author of He quotes (12 15) a corrupt form of the Or of Dt 29 18. But it was not until the beginning of the 2d cent. AD that the divergence between the Gr and the
Palestinian Heb text reached an acute
2. Official stage. One cause of this was the reviRevision of sion of the Heb text which took place Hebrew about this time. No actual record Text c 100 of this revision exists, but it is beyond AD doubt that it originated in the rab-
binical school, of which Rabbi Akiba was the chief representative, and which had its
center at Jamnia in the years following the destruc-
tion of Jerus. The Jewish doctors, their temple in
ruins, concentrated their attention on the settlement
of the text of the Scriptures which remained to them. This school of eminent critics, precursors of
the Massoretes, besides settling outstanding ques-
tions concerning the Canon, laid down strict rules
for Bib. interpretation, and in all probabihty estab-
lished an official text.
But another cause widened still farther the dis-
tance between the texts of Jerus and Alexandria.
This was the adoption of the LXX
3. Adoption by the Christian church. WhenChri.s-
of LXX by tians began to cite the Alexandrian VS
Epiphanius' account of the dates and history of Theodotion and Symmachus is untrustwortliy. He seems to have reversed their order, prob6 Theodo- ^^^y niisled by the order of the trf in the o. xiicu columns of the Hexapla (see below). He tion also apparently confused Aquila and Theodotion in calling the latter a native of Pontus. As regards date, Theodotion. critics are agreed, preceded Symmachus and probably flourished under M. Aurelius (161-80), whereas Symmachus Uved under Commodus (180-92); Irenaeus mentions only the VSS of Aquila and Theodotion, and that of Symmachus had in his day either not been produced or at least not widely circulated. According to the more credible account of Irenaeus, Theodotion was an Ephesian and a convert to Judaism. His VS constantly agrees with the LXX and was rather a revision of it, to bring it into accord with the current Heb text, than an independent work. The supplementing of lacunae in the LXX (due partly to the fact that the older VS of some books did not aim at completeness) gave scope for greater originality. These lacunae were greatest in Job and his VS of that book was much longer than the LXX. The text of Job printed in Swete's ed is a patchwork of old and new; the careful reader may detect tho Thcodotion portions by transliterations and other peculiarities. Long extracts from Theodotion are preserved in cod. Q in Jer. As regards the additional matter contained in LXX, Theodotion was inconsistent; he admitted, e.g., the additions to Dnl (Sus, Bel and the Three), but did not apparently admit the non-canonical books as a whole. The church adopted his Dnl in place of the inadequate LXX VS, which has survived in only one Gr MS; but the date when the change took place is imknown and the early
Christians in proof of their doctrines, the Jews began to question its accuracy. Hence mutual recriminations which are reflected in the
pages of Justin's Dialogue with Trypho. "They
dare to assert," says Justin (Dial, 68), "that the
interpretation produced by your seventy elders
under Ptolemy of Egypt is in some points inaccu-
rate " A crucial instance cited by the Jews was
the rendering "virgin" in Lsa 7 14, where they
claimed with justice that "young woman would
be more accurate. Justin retahates by charging
the Jews with deliberate excision of passages favor-
able to Christianity. • .v. That such accusations should be made in those
critical years was inevitable, yet there is no evi-
dence of any material interpolations
4. Alternahaving been introduced by either
tive 2dparty. But the Alexandrian \b, m
Century view of the revised text and the new