Universität Duisburg-Essen, Institut für Evangelische Theologie
Schart, Aaron, Stand: 2007-04-05
An examination of the LXX Book of the Twelve Prophets reveals that the integrity of the translation is questionable. This suspicion is particularly justified in the Book of Amos /2/. In my <109:> opinion, a short section of this book, viii 12-ix 10, appears to be a translation independent of the rest. In order to facilitate the reading of the evidence supporting this observation, i 1-viii 11 shall be called section "Α", viii 12-ix 10 section "Β", and ix 11-15 section "C".
1. The author of section "Α" is very weak in geographical
knowledge, for he frequently fails to recognize place-names.
examples: Am 2,2 // Am 8,14
2. Among other problems which face the author of section
"Α" is the word
examples: Am 4,2; Am 8,10 // Am 9,1
3. There are also noticeable stylistic differences
between sections "Α" and "Β".
examples: Am 7,17; Am 5,5 // Am 9,8
4. Section "C" has affinities with section "Α".
The problem surrounding the origin of the Septuagint have
been among the most intriguing of those facing modern scholarship. Whether the
so-called Septuagint finds its prototype in one prechristian translation of the
Old Testament, or whether it is merely a standardization of many pre-christian
Greek renditions of the Bible has been α matter of heated discussion.
In the case of the Book of Amos it appears from an analysis of <112:> the translation that sections "Α" (i 1-viii 11) and "C" (ix 11-15) were done by one translator while section "Β" (viii 12-ix 10) was done by another. This phenomenon may be explained in terms of a targum theory or a lectionary theory. However, there is no absolute proof that the LXX arose from a targum or a lectionary background. Without conjecturing how the LXX came about it seems safe to say that the LXX Book of Amos represents a compilation or redaction rather than one single prototype.