There can be no doubt that this version was much used by Christians : prol)ably many changes in the text of the Sept. were adopted from Tlieodotion : this may have begun before tlie Biblical labors of Origen brought the various versions into one conspectus. The translation of the book of Daniel In' Theodotion was substituted for that of the Sept. in ecclesiastical use as early at least as the first part of the 3d century. Hence I
I Daniel, as rendered or revised by Theodotion, has so I long taken the place of the true Sept. that the latter j version of this book was supposed not to be extant, ! and it has only been found in one MS. In most edi- tions of the Sept. Theodotion's version of Daniel is still I substituted for that which really belongs to that trans- j lation. By the Jews Theodotion's version seems never to have been much esteemed. For literature, see Fiirst, Bibliotheca Judaica, iii, 420 sq. See Theodotiok.
IV. Symmachus is stated by Eusebius {Hist. Eccles. vi, 17; Demonstr. Evang. vii, 1) and Jerome {Pnrf. in Ezram) to have been an Ebionite ; so, too, in the Syr- ian accounts given by Assemani {Bibl. Orient, ii, 278 ; iii, 1, 17) ; Epiphanius, however, and others style him a Samaritan. There may have been Ebionites from among the Samaritans who constituted a kind of sep- arate sect, and these may have desired a version of their own ; or it may be that, as a Samaritan, he made this version for some of that people who emploj'cd Greek, and who had learned to receive more than the Pentateuch. But perhaps to such motives was added (if, indeed, this were not the only cause of the version) a desire for a Greek translation not so unintelligibly bald as that of Aquila, and not disphning such a want of Hebrew learning as that of Theodotion. It is prob- able that if this translation of Symmachus had ap- peared prior to the time of Irena-us, it would have been mentioned by him ; and this agrees with what Epiphanius says, namely, that he lived under the em- peror Severus.
The style of the work is good, and the diction per- spicuous, pure, and elegant (Tliieme, De pinitate Sym- machi, Lips. 1755 ; Hody, Be Bibl. text, original.^. It is of less benefit in criticism than that of Aquila, but of greater advantage in interpretation. It would seem from Jerome that there was a second edition of it {Cmn- iwrJ. ill. Jerem. xxxii ; in Nah. iii). For literature, sec luirst, Bibl. Jud. iii, 399 sq. See Symmachus.
V. The Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Versions. — • Besides the translations of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, the great critic:)l work of Origen comprised as to portions of the Old Test, three other versions, placed for comparison with the Sept., which, from their being anonymous, are onh' known as the fifth, sixth, and seventh, designations taken from the places which they respectively occupied in Origen's columnar arran.:;ement. Ancient writers seem not to have been uniform in the notation which they applied to these versions, and thus what is cited from one bj' its num- ber of reference is quoted by others under a different numeral.
These three partial translations were discovered liy Origen in the course of his travels in connection with his great work of Biblical criticism. Eusebius says that two of these versions (but without designating precisely which) were found, the one at Jericho, and the other at Nicopolis, on the gulf of Actium. Epipha- nius saj'S that what he terms the fifth was found at Jericho, and the sixth at Nicopolis, while Jerome speaks of the fifth as having been found at the latter place.
The contents of the fifth version appear to have been the Pentateuch, Psalms, Canticles, and tlie minor prophets : it seems also to have been referred to in the Syro-Hexaplar text of the second book of Kings : it may be doubted if in all these books it was complete, or at least if so much were adopted bj' Origen. The existing fragments prove that the translator nsed the Hebrew original ; but it is also certain that he was aided by the work of former translators.
The sixth version seems to have been just the same in its contents as the fifth (except 2 Kings), and thus the two may have been confused : this translator also seems to have had the other versions before him. Je- rome calls the authors of the fifth and sixth "Judnicos translatores," probably meaning Jewish Christians, for the translator of this must have been a Christian
GREEN
990
GREEN
when he executed his work, or else the hand of a Chris- thin reviser must have meddled with it before it was employed by Origen, which seems, from the small in- terval" of time, to be hardly probable. I'or in Hab. iii, 15, the translation runs, i^fiXOec tou auxrai tuv Xauv aov cia'\t]niw Tov xpinTOV aov.
Of the seventh vtrdon veiy few fragments remain. It seems to have contained the Psalms and minor prophets, and tlie translator was probably a Jew.
From the references given by Origen, or by those who copied from his columnar arrangement and its results (or who added to such extracts), it has been thought that other Greek versions were spoken of. Of these, 6 'EiiptnoQ probablj' refers to the Hebrew text, or to something drawn from it; o 2('poc, to the Old Syriac version ; to 'iLafiapiiTit:ov,\>roha.\Ay a reference to" tiie Samaritan text, or some Samaritan gloss ; o ' E\\)]inKb(: i) "AXAoc, 6 uviniypafpoQ, some unspecified version or versions.