4. Pac-simile edition of the Codex Alexiuidriuus, by Ba- ber (tSlG).
5. Fac-simile edition of theCodexSinaiticns,by Tischen- dorf (St. Petersburg, 1802, 4 vols. ful.).
The texts of (1) and (2) were probably formed by collation of several MSS. The Roman edition (3) is printed from the venerable Codex Vaticanus, but not without man)' errors. This text has been followed in most of the modern editions. A transcript of the Co- dex Vaticanus, prepared by cardinal Mai, was lately published at Rome by Vereelloni. It is much to be regretted that this edition is not so accurate as to pre- clude the necessity of consulting the MS. The text of the codex, and the parts added by a later hand, to com- plete the codex (among them nearly all of Genesis), are printed in the same Greek t3'pe, with distinguishing notes. The fac-simile edition b}' Baber (4) is print- ed with tj'pes made after the form of the letters in the Codex Alexandrinus ( British Museum Library ) for the fac-simile edition of the New Test, by Woide ill 1786. Great care was bestowed upon the sheets as they passed through the press. The Codex Sinaiticus (5) was published in fac-simile type at tlie expense of the emperor of Russia, and a very limited edition was printed. See Sinaitic MS.
2. Other important editions are the following: The Septuagint in Walton's Polyglot (1()57) is the Roman text, with the various readings of the Codex Alexandri- nus. The Cambridge edition (1G65) (Roman text) is only valuable for the preface by Pearson. An edition of the Codex Alexandrinus was published by Grabe (Oxford; 1707-20), but its critical value is far below that of Baber's. It is printed in common type, and the editor has exercised his judgment on the text, putting some words of the codex in the margin, and replacing them by what he thought better readings, distinguished by a smaller type. This edition was reproduced bv Breitinger (Zurich, 1730-32, 4 vols. 4to), with the vari- ous readings of the Vatican text. The edition of Bos (Franeq. 1709) follows the Roman text, with its scholia, and the various readings given in Walton's Polyglot, especially those of the Codex Alexandrinus. This has often been reprinted, and is now the commonest text. The valuable critical edition of Holmes, continued by Parsons, is similar in plan to the Hebrew Bible of Ken- nicott; it has the Roman text, with a large body of various readings from numerous MSS. and editions (Ox- ford, 1798-1827). The Oxford edition by Gaisford (1848) has the Roman text, witli the various readings of the Codex Alexandrinus below. Tischendorf's edi- tions (the 5th, 1875) are on the same plan ; he has added readings from some other MSS. discovered by himself, with very useful Prolegomena. Some con- venient editions have been publislied bj- Bagster, one in 8vo, others of smaller size, forming part of his Polyglot series of Bibles. His text is the Roman. The latest edition, l^y Field (1859), differs from anj' of the preceding. He takes as his basis the Codex Alexandrinus, but corrects all the manifest errors of transcription Ijj' the help of other MSS., and brings the dislocated portions of the Septuagint into agree- ment with the order of the Hebrew Bible. The text in Stier and Thiele's Polyr/htten Bihel (Bielefield, 1854) is revised arbitrarily, and without the aid of the Codex Sinaiticus. Scrivener has promised a new critical edition.
3. Editions of paiiicular books, more or less critically prepared, have occasionally been issued : Genesis, by Lagarde (Lips. 18G8); Esther, by Fritzsche (Turici, 1848); Ruth, by the same (ibid. 1867); Jeremiah, by Spohn (Lips. 1794-1828); Ezekiel, by Vincent (Rom. 1840) ; Jonah, by Hohncr (Lips. 1787"-88). The genu- ine text of Daniel (which was long supposed to be lost, the translation of Theodotion having been substituted for it in the common MSS.) was first published sepa- rately by Simon de Magistris in 1772, from the Codex Chigianus ; and it was reprinted by J. D. Michaelis
(1773-74), Segaar (1775), and more critically by Hahn (1845), from the Codex Ambrosianus.
Tlie best Lexicon to the Septuagint is that of Schleusner, published at Leipsic (1820-21, 5 pts.), and reprinted at Glasgow (1822, 3 vols. 8vo). An earlier one is that of Biel (Hag. 1779-80, 3 vols.). The best for the Apocrypha is Wahl's Clavis (Lips. 1863). The best Cvncofdance is that of Trommius (Amst. 1718, 2 vols. fol.). An earlier one is that of Kircher (1607). Winer's jV. T. Grammar serves an excellent purpose for philological comparison. The student may also consult Sturz, De IHalecto 3faceclonicu (Lips. 1808); Maltby, Two Sermons before the University of Durham (1843), See Greek Language.
X. Literature. — In addition to the works named by Walch, Bibl. Theol. iv, 31 sq., 156 sq. ; Rosenmiiller, Handb. d. Literatur, ii, 279 sq. ; and Danz, WOrterb. d. Theol. s. V. "Alex. Vers.," the following are important : Cappelli Critica Sacra (Par. 1650) ; Walton! Proleg. ad Bibl. Poli/f/lott. (Lond. 1657); Pearsoni [Bp.] Picpf. Panenetica ad LXX (ibid. 1655); Vossius, De LXX Interp. (Hag. 1661 ; app. 1663) ; Montfaucon, Hexaplo- rum Ori(/enis qum Siipersunt (Par. 1710; Lips. 1740); Hody, De Bibl. Teat. Oritjhial. Vers. Greeds, et Latina Vul(jata (Oxf. 1704) ; Hottinger, Thesaurus (Zur. 1649) ; Owen, Inquiry into the Sept. (Lond. 1769) ; Brief Ac- count, etc. (ibid. 1787) ; Kennicott, Dissertationes to his Vet. Test. (Oxon. 1776-80) ; Worner, De LXX Interpre- tibus (Hamb. 1617, 8vo) ; Knapp, />e Versione Alex. (Hal. 1775-76, 4to); Hasenkamp, Z'e Pentat. LXX Jn- terp. (Marb. 1765, 4to); Stroth, Symbolee Criticm (Lips. 1778-83); Sulzner, De LXX Interp. {l{&\. 1700, 4to) ; Weyhenmeyer, De Versione LXX (Ulm. 1719, 4to); Reineke, De Dissensu Vers. Alea^. ab Archefypo (Magd. 1771, 4to) ; Holmes, Prolecjg. ad LXX (Oxf. 1798-1827) ; Valckenaer, Diatribe de A ristobulo Judceo (L. B. 1806) ; Schleusner, Opusc. Crit.ad Veiss. Gr.V. T. (Lips. 1812); Dahne, Jildisch-alexandrinische Pkilosophie (Hal. 1831- 34) ; Topler, De Pentat. Interp. A lex. Indole Crit. et Her- nien. (Hal. Sax. 1830); Gfrrirer, Urchristenthum (Stuttg. 1831, 8vo); Fabricii Bibliotheca <§««•«, ed. Harless, vol. iii ; Studer, De Versionis Alexandrines Oriyine, Historia, Usu, et Abusu Critico (Berna;, 1823, 8vo) ; Credner, Bei- traye zur Einleitung, etc. ( Halle, 1838, 2 vols. 8vo ) ; Amersfoordt, Dissertatio de Va?-iis Lectionibus Bolmesia- nis (Lugd. Bat. 1815, 4to) ; Pliischke, Lectiones Alex, et Ilebr. (Bonn, 1837) ; Thiersch, De Pent. Vers. A lex. (Er- lang. 1841); V ranke], Vo7-stndien zu der Septuaginta ( Leips. 1841 ) ; Ueber den Einfluss der paldstinischen Exeyese uiif die alex. Ilermeneutik (ibid. 1851) ; Grin- lield, N. T. Editio Hellenistica (ibid. 1848), and Apology for the Septuagint (ibid. 1850) ; Selwyn, Notm Criticm in Ex. i-xxiv, Nvmei'os, Deuteronomium (ibid. 1856-58) ; also Hor. Hebr. on Isa. ix (ibid. 1848); Churton, Hul- sean Essay (ibid. 1861); Pearson [G.], Papers, in the Journal of Sacred Lit. i, iv, vii, 3d series.