Theodotiaus, a name given to the Monarciiians (q. v.), from their founder, Theodotus (q. v.).
Theodotion is the name of one of the Greek trans- lators of the Old Test, after the time of the Septuagint ((J. v.). According to Epiphanius {De Pond, ct M<m. c. 17, 19), he was a native of Sinope, in Pontus, and for a time sided with the Marcionites, but left them after- wards and became a Jew. Irenreus, however, calls him Ephesitus, i.e. a native of Ephesus; while Jerome and Eusebius call him an Ebionite, or serai-Christian. P.leek thinks it tnost probable that Theodotion was a Juda- izing heretic, a semi-Christian and Ebionite, according to Jerome's prevailing description of him. His reasons for thinking it probable that he professed to belong to the Christian Church are these two: a. "We And no trace of the Jews ever making use of his translation, and still less of its having been held in esteem by them : much more was this the case in the Christian Church, which accepted his translation of Daniel for ecclesiasti- cal use. h. He has translated a clause in Isa. xxv, 8, KaTtiro^r] o ^dvaroQ ili; vIkoi:, precisely as in 1 Cor. XV, 54, but thoroughly deviating from the Sept. . . . This concurrence is probably not purely accidental, but is to be explained by Theodotion having appropriated to himself the Paidine translation of the passage; and this, again, makes it extremelj' probable that he was a Christian at the titne of making the translation."
As to the time when this translation was made, ac- cording to Epiphanius it was published under the em- peror Commodus (A.D. 180-182), which, as Keil re- marks, "is not impossible, and can perfectly well be reconciled with the mention of him by Irenreus; yet it is by no means certain. In any case, his translation is not so ancient as that of Aquila, but more ancient than that of Symmachus" (q. v.).
As to the character of the translation, if we receive the testimony of those who had the version in their hands, it approached the Sept. very nearly in sense and phraseology. 'I he mode of translation adopted by The- odotion holds an intermediate place between the scru- pulous literality of Aquila and the free interpretation of Symmachus. The translator appears, indeed, to have made the Alexandrian version the basis of his own, and to have abided by it as long as it represents the Hebrew faithfidly; departing from it and freely translating for himself ow/y where it inadequately expresses the sense of the original. His object was rather to supply the defects of that version than to give a new and inde- pendent one; hence the additions found onlv in tlie for- mer reappear in his work. From the remaining frag- ments, it ma3' be inferred that his knowledge of Hebrew was not great. He has retained Hebrew words not very difficult or obscure, expressing them in Greek letters from ignorance of their meaning: " Prreter alia minus docti interpretis signa quffi erudito lectori exploranda remittimus, persa>pe ilia verba Hebraica, quorum inter- pretatio non ita difficilis erat ut vertendi molestiam declinaret, Gr»cis literis expressit" (Monfaucon, Prceli- minaria, VII, iii, 129, ed. Bahrdt). Thus, Isa. iii, 24, bi5TS=^5(y(\; xix, 15, ■]'n:5X = ny/iwr ; xliii, 20, 0*^371 =3'jvi'iv ; Joel ii, 17, tD?1Nn = oii\n)[t ; Job viii, 11, iriSt = rt;;^)'. But Jahn [Einleitung, i, 178 sq.) con- jectures that they were used among the Ebionites, and therefore retained bj' him — a supposition as improbable as that of Owen, that they were left so for j)articular reasons, such as the honor of the Jewish nation {Diqnii-y into the Present State of tlie Sept. Version, p. 108). Among Christians the versioii of Theodotion was held in higher estimation than that of Aquila and Symmachus; and Origcn, in his Hexapla, supplied the omissions of the Sept. chiefly from it. At a later period his version of the book of Daniel w\as universally adopted in the (ireek Bible among Christians, instead of the Alexandrian ver- sion. According to Bleek, this change occurred some time between the age of Origeia and that of Jerome.
THEODOTUS
323
TIIEODULUS
The latter says, in his Prcef. in Daniel. " Daniolcm juxta LXX interpretes Domini Salvatoris ecclesire non legunt, uteutes Theodotionis editione, et cur hoc accident nescio. Sive enim quia sermo Chalilaieus est. et quibiisdam pro- prietatibusa nostro eloquio discrcpat, nokiermit Septua- ginta interpretes easdein linguiv lineas in translatione servare; sive sub nomine eorum a nescio quo non satis Chaldaicam linguam sciente editus est liber, sive aliud ([uid causte exstiterit ignorans; hoc unum affirmare pos- sum, quod midtum a veritate discordet, et recto judicio 7-epudiatus sit," Delitzsch {De f/abacuci Prophetce Vita atqiie yEtate Commentatio Historico-isar/of/ica [Grima?, 184-lJ, p. 28) says, " Quapropter ego (donee proferan- tur argumenta contrarii) versionem Danielis Theodo- tionianam ab ecclesia non prius adoptatam esse censeo, quam ab Origene tanquam castigata Alcxandrinje editio in Hexapla recepta et ab Eusebio et Pamphilio, cum ex his textum septuagintaviralem ederent, septuagintavi- rali substituta est." Credner thinks that the Christians were so long under the pressure of contradictions, as- saults, and mockeries, from Jews and heathens combined, that finally (though, to be sure, not in general before the end of the 3d century) they gave up their Greek translation of the Sept., and set that of Theodotion in its place. From a passage by Jerome on Jer. xxix, 17, "Theodotiointerpretatus est sudrinas; secunAa. pessiina ; Symmachus tiovissimas," it has been conjectured that there also existed a second edition of Theodotion's ver- sion; but Hody (De Bibliorum Textibus, p. 584) thinks that the text of Jerome here is corrupt, and that after sudrinas we should insert A quilce prima editio.