The Talmud Bavli Megillah 9a and 9b discusses the Greek Septuagint Torah translation at length.
The Septuagint (LXX) is the oldest Greek translation. Its first part, the Chumash, the Divine Laws given to Moses, was translated c. 250 BCE in Egypt. The rest of the Hebrew Bible from Joshua through 2 Chronicles was translated in Egypt over the ensuing century and a half.[i]
The Gemara continues: And this was
due to the incident of King Ptolemy, as it is taught in a baraita:
There was an incident involving King Ptolemy of Egypt, who assembled
seventy-two Elders from the Sages of Israel, and put them into seventy-two
separate rooms, and did not reveal to them for what purpose he assembled them,
so that they would not coordinate their responses. He entered and approached
each and every one, and said to each of them: Write for me a translation of the
Torah of Moses your teacher. The Holy One, Blessed be He, placed wisdom in the
heart of each and every one, and they all agreed to one common understanding.
Not only did they all translate the text correctly, they all introduced the
same changes into the translated text.
The above account from the oral
baraita tradition dates back to the era of the Mishna (c. 200 CE) or
earlier.[iii]
It is one variation of the Septuagint’s
origin first recorded in the Letter of Aristeas.
Some 20 manuscript copies of the Letter have survived from the medieval and later Christian scriptoria. But they contain ‘variations’ and the oldest, most reliable source for Aristeas Septuagint account is –according to J. Davila – Josephus’ paraphrase[iv].
The story is also mentioned by
a number of early Christian Church leaders who relied on the Aristeas account
to confirm the Greek Septuagint’s ‘accuracy’ as the Divine words
dictated to Moses.[v]
This was essential as both Western Catholic and Eastern (Greek Orthodox) Christianity relied totally on the Greek Septuagint for the so-called Old Testament.
Only two Christian scholars: Origen (died c. 253 CE) and Jerome (who published the Latin Vulgate in 405 CE) ever bothered to learn Hebrew and how to read the Torah and Nach scrolls which only show the consonants. The proper vowel sounds were passed down orally from teacher to pupil until the Middle Ages and work of the Masoretes[vi].
Over time, the Aristeas account gained extra details, embellishments
and factual impossibilities.
The earliest Christian account by Justin Martyr (died 165 CE) incorrectly stated King Herod was involved (died c. 4 BCE) and claimed the entire Hebrew Canon was translated at once rather than just the Chumash in c. 250 BCE.
Irenaeus (c. 175 CE) had the number of translators as 70 rather than 72 and was the first Christian to mention that each translator was isolated in a separate room and, also, that by divine inspiration all 70 translations were identical.
Epiphanius (c. 315-405 CE) stated the 72 translators worked in pairs. Each pair were locked away and required to translate the entire Septuagint canon (the Tanach and 22 additional Apocrypha texts).
Augustine (by 427 CE) wrote that the Egyptian Pharaoh was Ptolemy (II) Philadelphus and that the 72 translators were two from each of the 12 tribes of Israel. He also noted that in his day the Greek text was called the Septuagint (LXX) even though 72 translators were involved.
Jerome’s
view
Jerome, Augustine’s contemporary, rejected the idea that the Greek Septuagint – even its original Chumash section – was ‘100% accurate’, and consequently, challenged the idea of the Divine inspiration of the Septuagint’s translation. (In this he concurred with Origen.)
He had been commissioned by Pope Damasus to create a scholarly, accurate translation in Latin – the universal language of the Western Roman Empire and the Catholic Church.
When Jerome began his translation of the so-called Old Testament, he used the Septuagint texts as his sources: starting with the Psalms, Job and a few other short works.[vii]
However, after these were published, he moved to Bethlehem to start a monastery, met a Jew named bar Anina[viii] who taught him to read and understand Hebrew Bible scroll script (which only shows the consonants). Jerome soon realized the Septuagint texts were at times inaccurate. So, he started over using the Hebrew texts to create his Latin Vulgate (published 405 CE).
The above review of Christian accounts highlights how the Septuagint’s origin -- first recorded in the Letter of Aristeas -- became embellished or altered over time, and how modern scholars find determining the original, core account difficult[ix].
And, as stated earlier, the most reliable source for Aristeas Septuagint account is Josephus’ paraphrase in the Antiquities of the Jews.
Jewish accounts
Philo of Alexandria (died c. 50 CE) is the oldest Jewish reference. He names the king as Ptolemy (II) Philadelphus, and states the translators – no number given – were kept apart in isolation and produced identical Greek translations by Divine inspiration.[x]
In his Antiquities of the Jews (c. 94 CE) Book 12, he paraphrases the parts of the Letter of Aristeas relating to the Septuagint’s origin.[xii]
The High priest eagerly agreed and notified the Pharaoh:
“We have also chosen six elders out of
every tribe; whom we have sent, and the law with them. It will be thy part, out
of thy piety and justice, to send back the law, when it hath been translated;
and to return those to us that bring it in safety. Farewell.” (Bk 12, ch.2:6)
Josephus’ text states TWICE that there were 70 translators. (Bk 12 ch.2:7, 11) but this is probably a later scribal error as 6 elders from 12 tribes = 72.
Josephus also stresses that The Laws were on long rolled up parchment with gold lettering, and there was more than one Hebrew Torah scroll involved -- all brought from Jerusalem. (Bk 12, ch.2:11)
As well, Josephus states the translators were moved to an isolated house on an island, where
they would live, eat and do their translating: “a quiet place, and fit for
their discoursing together about their work.” (Bk 12, ch.2:13)
Note that
Josephus does NOT say they were forced to live and work separately. Just the
opposite.
Josephus adds they completed their
translations in 72 days. (Bk 12: ch.2: 13)
Thereafter, the Jewish community of
Alexandria was invited to a gathering with the translators where the Greek text
was read aloud. The Jewish
community asked for copies (for use in their religious services).
And a curse was
pronounced on anyone who, in future, dared to add or delete words from this holy
Greek translation. (Bk 12 ch 2:13)
Finally, the king was very pleased with the
Greek translation “books”. Note the plural.
(bk 12 ch.2:15)
The Letter of Aristeas
I.e., it claims to be a first-hand account.
The text, in English, as found at http://www.attalus.org/translate/aristeas1.html has the following additions not mentioned or stressed by Josephus:
2. The names of all 72 experts are listed: arranged as six per tribe. But the names are only their first names: no surname or ‘son of …’ as was normal practice, and no tribal name is ever given. They are all anonymous: simply numbers as “the first tribe”, “the second tribe”, etc. (47-50)
This suggests the section is a feeble effort to add ‘important details’.
Josephus seems to have realized this as he adroitly avoids renaming the elders (and their tribes). He simply states that giving their names is “not necessary” (Bk12, ch.2:7) and immediately redirects his reader to a detailed description of the valuable objects the Pharaoh sent to Jerusalem that takes up three – often lengthy -- paragraphs (Bk.12, ch.2:8-9-10).
Also, Josephus, as a native of Judea and a highly educated member of its upper priestly cast would have known the 10 northern tribes had been exiled and ‘disappeared’ from Jewish history hundreds of years before Ptolemy II reigned. He gives the exact date of the end of the Northern Kingdom and their replacement with the Samaritan peoples in the preceding Antiquities, Bk 9, ch. 14:1. Namely, 947 years after the Exodus, 800 years after Joshua’s death and exactly 240 years, 7 months and 7 days after the kingdom of David and Solomon was split.
He merely states: “… when they had explained all the problems that had been proposed by the King, about every point, he was well pleased with their answers. This took up the twelve days in which they were treated. And he that pleases may learn the particular questions in that book of Aristeus’s, which he wrote on this very occasion.” (Bk 12, ch 2:12)
While Josephus downplays the reason for multiple experts and multiple Torah scrolls, he still acknowledges that the experts were housed together and given time to discuss readings and interpretations.
So multiple Torah scrolls were needed for cross-comparison, and so too multiple Torah experts who would be given time and opportunity to talk and discuss ‘differences’ and related ‘interpretations’. And to decide – by majority vote – where needed, what was the ‘original’ Hebrew wording and intent.
According to Aristeas’ letter and as accepted by Josephus, the mission was not just to create a Greek translation for the Alexandria library collection, but to ensure that that translation was true and accurate; reflecting the ‘original’ Divine words and ideas as dictated to Moses.
Having 72 or 70 translators working in isolation makes no sense based on the reality of Hebrew text variations. And the idea that all 72 or 70 produced the exact same Greek wording’ when in total isolation from each other, would have been an even greater miracle than if all 72 or 70 had identical Hebrew texts – word for word.
If the size of the expert group is to be believed: 72 or 70, it was a very, very large assembly.
Comparable
to the Great Sanhedrin with its 71 members which constituted the rabbinic
parliament and high court in Judea[xiii].
As to the number of assembled Torah scrolls for this project, neither the Letter nor Josephus states -- nor even suggests -- 70 or 72 Torah scrolls were needed and used. As Torah scrolls were always very time consuming to write and thus costly, having such a large number available – let alone ones written with “gold lettering” – is highly unlikely and implausible.
In brief, then, the tradition that 70 or 72 translators worked independently and produced 70 or 72 identical Greek translations is a later ‘misreading’ and ‘embellishment’ of Aristeas’ letter and Josephus’ paraphrase: illogical pious, wishful thinking.
Whether
stated by Jewish Philo at the start of the Common Era or by Irenaeus in mid-2nd
century,
or
repeated by the Talmud, Megillah 9a, it simply makes no sense.
The Talmud’s
Megillah 9a origin account adds a twist not mentioned by any
other source: namely, that the final Greek text was NOT identical to the Hebrew
but rather had significant ‘changes’. ‘Changes’
which the Talmud highly commends!
The ‘changes’ will be discussed in Part II.
Problems with Aristeas’ account
Aristeas’ letter and
later ‘retellings’ seem to have overlooked and ignored certain obvious
difficulties:
- Even
if commissioned by a Pharoah, why need 72 or 70 copies for a library?
- How
do you find 60 experts from 10 Tribes who were ‘lost’ to history when exiled in
722 BCE by the Assyrians? Almost 500
years beforehand?
- Greek
was not common in the area of Judea.
People spoke Aramaic. Only the
Hellenizing Jews who rejected traditional Judaism and its practices used Greek,
studied its literature and philosophical works.
This growing ‘clash of cultures’ was the background that triggered
Antiochus IV Epiphanes’ banning of Judaism in 168 BCE and the resultant Maccabee
revolt.[xiv]
- Sefer Torahs were rare. They are time consuming to copy over and are consequently very expensive. So how could the High Priest in Jerusalem have access to 72 copies – with “gold lettering” no less -- to send to Egypt for the translators to use?
So having 72 or 70 translators working with 72 or 70 Hebrew Torah scrolls independently would not possibly end up with 72 identical copies of a single translation.
- Lastly, the Latin title Septuagint -
short form LXX, mean seventy and not seventy-two.
- At most, a few Hebrew Torah scrolls were imported from Jerusalem
- At
most, a few translators were imported.
- The
translators ‘collaborated’ and by majority vote decided on the final Greek
wording wherever there was diverse Hebrew text spelling/wording/meaning issues
in their Torah scrolls.
All else are embellishments and later misunderstandings: namely, the numbers of 72 or 70 translators representing the 12 tribes, their expertise in Greek philosophy, and their working in isolation from each other – using 72 or 70 Hebrew Torah scrolls with “gold lettering”.
Alternative Origin
But public readings from the Chumash/Torah were a key element of religious services: both weekly and on Holy Days, and this was the method through which the Divine laws recorded by Moses would be shared to the assembled masses.
So a Greek translation became crucial. [xvi]
Historians point out that the Letter of Aristeas claims to be written by a pagan Greek Egyptian who was involved in the first Septuagint translation project. But the Letter has such a high regard for Judaism, its monotheistic God and even its dietary laws (which are elaborated at length) – that it seems to be written by a Jew. [xvii]
The excessive praise for the Jewish translators and recounting their lengthy philosophical discussions with Ptolemy II, also seem odd in a letter supposedly written by a pagan to his brother: to update the brother as to his own recent activities. (Opening sentence of the Letter.)
And the large number of 72 translators in the Letter also make the account seem fanciful.
Consequently, historians suggest the Letter was concocted by a Jew to defend Judaism and/or trigger a more positive and tolerant attitude among Egypt’s pagan elite to its Jewish minority (most of whom were recently emancipated captive slaves: Letter 35 and Antiquities Bk12:2-3) and/or to promote the Septuagint as the ‘fully accurate’ holy words of God.
Lastly, they variously date the Letter to the 2nd or 1st century BCE or early 1st century CE – i.e., just before Josephus’ lifetime.[xviii]
Legends and Truth
The various traditions that developed around the Greek translation of the Septuagint Chumash portion c. 250 BCE are all simply pious legends and bogus: including the ‘facts’ in Aristeas’ letter and Josephus’ paraphrase.
While the Aristeas and Josephus accounts of multiple translators working collaboratively and discussing differences from Hebrew Torah scroll to Torah scroll – to create a single Greek text true to the ‘original Torah text as dictated by God to Moses long ago -- seems reasonable and ideal, as diversity among Torah scrolls was well known in Second Temple times, no such massive undertaking was done.
The best proof is the Septuagint section of Exodus 20.
Mount Sinai "10 Speakings", the Septuagint and the Nash
Papyrus
In a previous blog: “Masoretic Torah, the Septuagint and Nash Papyrus”, I have discussed in detail how the Greek Septuagint for Exodus ch 20: 2 -13: the Divine 10 speakings that were also etched into stone tablets at Mount Sinai, is identical to a Hebrew prayer scroll called the Nash Papyrus which dates from some 100 years after the Septuagint Chumash translation.
So, we now have the Hebrew wording from the source Torah used here by the Septuagint. And it proves the Greek is an exact and faithful copy of the Hebrew source text.
But both the Septuagint text and Nash Papyrus are radically different from the Masoretic Torah tradition.
Their version of the Exod. Ch. 20 Mount Sinai 10 Commandments has a number of significant changes:
- It adds to Commandment #5 extra details: “it may be well with thee” and “good” land. As in Deut. 5: 15.
- It lists ‘adultery’ as Commandment #6 instead of #7, and makes ‘murder’ #8 instead of #6. Stealing switches from #8 to #7 – ahead of murder
- In Commandment #10, coveting a neighbour’s wife is separates out and given its own sentence – placed first -- instead of being in the middle of the husband’s possessions. As such, it mimics Deut. 5: 17.
- Commandment #10 has extra specifics: “[nor] his fields” and “nor any of his cattle/beasts”. Again, as in Deut. 5: 17.
What the above show is the Hebrew Torah scroll used in Egypt for the Nash Papyrus and for the Greek Septuagint Mount Sinai Decalogue some 100 years beforehand, was NOT a standard Masoretic Torah scroll.
The Nash Papyrus confirms that a non-standard Hebrew Torah scroll was used for the Greek translation of the Septuagint Mount Sinai Decalogue. That the Greek was a faithful translation, and, most importantly, that no cross-comparison of different Torah scroll was involved.
The common Septuagint and Nash Papyrus Decalogue at Sinai is so radically different that it would never have been uses if cross-compared with other, standard Torahs -- by a ‘majority vote’.
Put simple, only ONE Torah scroll was used to create the Septuagint Chumash translation.
A
Torah scroll composed in the late 4th or early 3rd
centuries BCE in Hellenized Egypt.
At most, just a few translators would have been needed for a quick translation: working on separate – seams opened -- scroll sections, and to compare ideas and interpretation.
Whether
initiated by Pharaoh Ptolemy II and his librarian or the Jewish community of
Alexandria, the Septuagint’s creation process has always been
exaggerated, embellished and falsely glorified as Divinely inspired.
The Letter of Aristeas, Joesphus’ paraphrase and all references by later Christian or Jewish accounts are bogus, pious fictions.
Just either a single translator or a handful at most.
And
the legends of both Christian and Jews that 72 or 70 master translators all
worked independently and produced a single translation by Divine influence,
i.e., a miracle, is also a false pious fiction.
Origen and Jerome, the only two early Christian scholars who bothered to learn Hebrew and how to read and understand Torah and Nach scrolls, rejected such accounts because they knew the Septuagint was not always accurate. They had read the Hebrew originals.
During the 2nd century CE, three additional Jewish Greek translations were produced: all known to and admired by Origen and Jerome; thereby attesting to the Septuagint’s lack of Divine ‘correctness”[xix].
But the Septuagint alone has survived. The Christian Churches of the West and East had long ago given it their august approval ‘as the correct, holy translation of God’s words dictated to Moses’.
The early Christian scholar, Origen of Alexandria (died c. 253 CE) created the Hexapla to better understand and identify ‘correct’ Greek translations of the Hebrew as he knew the Septuagint of his day had been ‘adjusted’ over time and was not always a correct and faithful translation.[xx] He read and understood Biblical Hebrew and had access to Torah and Nach scrolls.
The Hexapla’s parallel columns compared the Hebrew original with the (contemporary) Septuagint and three more recent Greek translations – word by word[xxi].
The three others were by Aquila of Sinope, a convert to Judaism and student of Rabbi Akiva (c. 130 CE)[xxii] , by a Jewish scholar known as Theodotion (c. 150 CE)[xxiii] and by Symmachus, another convert to Judaism (late 2nd century CE).[xxiv]
Each of these later Jewish translations were highly regarded[xxv], but only the Septuagint has survived.
Origen’s project – covering the entire Hebrew Canon or Tanach – took almost 30 years.[xxvi]
It
was stored in the library of the church of Caesarea where Origen had worked.[xxvii]
Origen
never published a ‘revised/corrected’ copy of the Septuagint text. [xxviii]
But
in 331 CE, Emperor Constantine the Great ordered Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea to
produce 50 copies of the Septuagint for distribution across the Roman Empire.
Eusebius was aware of Origen’s Hexapla
project stored at Caesarea and used Origen annotated Septuagint as the
prototype.
This so-called Origen Septuagint became the source of the 50 copies and three of the oldest surviving Septuagint manuscripts used for today’s Septuagint texts.[xxx]
Today’s Septuagint text is a composite: based on the 4th century Christian manuscripts Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, the 5th century Codex Alexandrinus and 6th century Codex Marchalianus – plus earlier fragments.[xxxi]
Reconstructing
the ‘original’ Greek version of the Septuagint Canon has been a major challenge
and scholars at Gottingen University, Germany, have work on it for at least 75 years.
Their conclusions are published in German as The Gottingen Septuagint
(24 volumes) 2006.[xxxii]
That is, the Septuagint ‘changes’ in wording/ meaning and even clauses may well be – at times -- accurate translations, from a single source Torah scroll that differed from the Masoretic text that we have.
As I have already noted above and argued in greater detail in the blog “Masoretic Torah, the Septuagint and Nash Papyrus” the Decalogue at Mount Sinai (Exod. 20: 2-13) as found in the Septuagint Greek is radically different from the Masoretic Torah tradition, and the differences cannot be blamed on a poor Greek translation. The same radical changes appear in the Hebrew Nash Papyrus prayer scroll which is some 100 years later!
That is, a Torah scroll that was far from ‘standard’ by any Masoretic tradition standard.
Why make changes?
Its changes to Exod. 20: 2-13 were designed to create greater consistency between the Decalogues of Exod. 20:2-13 and Moses’ repeat in Deut. 5: 6 – 17.
Changes to prevent ‘critics’ complaining that the two decalogues are from ‘different’ sources and that the Torah is not a single text of God’s words as dictated to Moses.
Such concerns: regarding other verses that could be misconstrued and even lead to heretical views, may well have been in the mind of the Hebrew scribe who wrote this Hebrew Torah text; the sole Hebrew Torah scroll used for the Septuagint Greek translation and preserved in the Hebrew Nash Papyrus.
And it would not surprise me if this Hebrew scribe made other ‘alterations’ as well in his Hebrew Torah scroll.
Living in Egypt during the late fourth or early third centuries and thereafter, would have been challenging as since Alexander the Great’s conquest of Egypt in 332 BCE,[xxxiv] Hellenistic Greek language, education, values and philosophy rushed over Egypt like a Tsunami.
Within 80 years, the Jews of Egypt by and large no longer could read or understand Hebrew and needed a Greek Torah translation.
After
all, Greek math (e.g., Euclid), science and astronomy and biology (e.g.,
Aristotle), medicine (e.g., Hypocrites), literature and theatre (e.g., Homer, Sophocles),
history (Thucydides), geography and anthropology (Herodotus), naturalistic
painting and sculpture (e.g. Venus de Milo), architecture (e.g., Parthenon) and
philosophy (e.g., Socrates, Plato, Aristotle) all became the bedrock of all
Western civilizations.
And much of Greek ‘learning’ took place in their Gymnasium – originally athletic/sports training centres (done in the nude), but long before Alexander they became simultaneous centres of higher education and socialization as well.
The
effort by the High priest of Judea, Jason (175-71 BCE)[xxxv]
to build a gymnasium stadium in Jerusalem and have Jews participate in its
athletics (in the nude) and even have young (Levites and) Priests participate
in international competitions in honour of one Greek god or another (2
Maccabees 4:7-17) was part of a Hellenization movement that gained some
support even in Judea: even within Jerusalem and Temple circles. This clash of
cultures ultimately resulted in Antiochus IV’s anti-Judaism decrees and the
Maccabee revolt of 167 BCE.
It is therefore not unreasonable to envision similar cultural diffusion and assimilation pressures in Egypt, and the challenge of defending Judaism and Torah to gentiles.
Legend and Truth
The various traditions that developed around the Greek translation of the Septuagint Chumash portion c. 250 BCE are all simply pious legends and bogus.
Whatever the origin of the Latin name Septuagint (LXX), no 72 or 70 translators were involved as there were no 72 or 70 source Torah scrolls used: just ONE Hebrew Torah scroll.
A Torah scroll composed in the late 4th or early 3rd centuries BCE in Hellenized Egypt.
And no 72 or 70 final ‘Divinely inspired’ identical Greek copies: just ONE actual translation which was then recopied many times.
At most, just a few translators would have been needed for a quick translation: working on separate – seams opened -- scroll sections, and to compare ideas and interpretation.
Whether
initiated by Pharaoh Ptolemy II and his librarian or the Jewish community of
Alexandria, the Septuagint’s origin and creation process has always been
exaggerated, embellished and falsely glorified as Divinely inspired.
The
Letter of Aristeas, Joesphus’ paraphrase and all references by later
Christian or Jewish accounts are bogus, pious fictions.
No 72 or 70 Hebrew Torah scrolls, no 72 or 70 master translators all of whom worked independently and produced a single translation by Divine influence.
Origen and Jerome, the only two early Christian scholars who bothered to learn Hebrew and how to read and understand Torah and Nach scrolls, rejected such accounts because they knew the Septuagint was not always accurate. They had read the Hebrew originals.
And the need for three additional Jewish Greek translations – all known to and admired by Origen and Jerome -- attests to the Septuagint’s lack of Divine ‘correctness’.
But the Septuagint alone has survived.
The
Christian Churches of the West and East had long ago given it their august
approval ‘as the correct, holy translation of God’s words
dictated to Moses’.
But in
reality, the books of the Septuagint: from the Chumash translation c.
250 BCE on, have been under ‘adjustment’ and ‘modifications’ for some 500 years
by the time of Origen’s Hexapla.
And the current version is based on Origen’s Hexapla as interpreted by Bishop Eusebius -- who knew no Hebrew -- and the 50 copies he produced for Emperor Constantine the Great.
Lastly,
the Gottingen Septuagint Project has spent decades trying to reconstruct
the original Greek text.
But until Septuagint researchers take into account the Septuagint Chumash ‘changes’ list in Talmud Bavli Megillah 9a-9b, they will miss out on key information about the earliest Septuagint texts.
Yes, the Talmud records 14 ‘changes’ between the Hebrew and Greek from a comparison project that dates back to 145 BCE if not earlier.
[iv]
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_of_Aristeas
and especially https://otp.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/abstracts-lectures/aristeas-to-philocrates/
[vi]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masoretes#:~:text=The%20Masoretes%20(Hebrew%3A%20%D7%91%D7%A2%D7% 9C%D7%99%20%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%A1%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%94,as%20in%20Iraq%20(Babylonia)
[x] Ibid.
[xiv]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maccabean_Revolt See also I Maccabees ch 1 and ch 13:49
at https://bible.usccb.org/bible/1maccabees/1 and 2 Maccabees ch. 4, 6, 7 and 8 at https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Maccabees%201&version=GNT
[xv] The respected Rabbi Meir in his
Torah scrolls for Gen. 3: 21 (where God clothes the naked Adam and Eve) wrote
the word וֹר א= LIGHT instead
of the normal עוֹר which means ANIMAL SKIN.
[xxv] See Wikipedia entries above.
[xxxii]
https://www.logos.com/product/4951/gottingen-septuagint and also https://brill.com/view/journals/text/29/2/article-p201_5.xml?language=en
[xxxiii]
http://daatemet.org.il/en/torah-talmud/torah-text/a-comparison-between-the-modern-text-of-genesis-and-the-septuagint
/
