Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 7.djvu/360

 HEXAPLA

316

HEXAPLA

six long periods in the six days of the Hexaemeron, and have endeavoured to establish an identity be- tween the product of each period and the work de- scribed in each day of Gen., i. Moreover, these scholars point out that the Hebrew word translated "day " does not necessarily mean a natural day; that, in the absence of the sun, the first three days of the Hexaemeron cannot be natural days, and that there- fore the second three days are not necessarily natural days; again, that the seventh day is certainly not a natural day, so that the first six days must be indefi- nite periods of time rather than natural days. Among the wTiters who favour this theory we may name: C. G. Hensler (" Bemerkungen iiber Stellen aus den Psal- men und der Genesis", Kiel, 1791), S.Turner ("Sacred History of the World", 3rd ed., London, 18.33), H. Miller ("The Testimony of the Rocks", Edinburgh, 18.57), I. Ebrard ("Der Glaube an die heilige Schrift und die Ergebnisse der Naturforschimg ", Konigsberg, 1861), Mgr Meignan ("Le monde et I'homme primi- tif", Paris, 1869), G. Molloy ("Geology and Revela- tion", London, )S70), M. Pozzy ("La terre et le r^cit biblique de la creation", Paris, 1874). On the other hand, it has been pointed out that more than 20,000 species of animal life are found in the old palaeozoic strata, while the fruit-bearing plants are found only in the mesozoic strata; moreover, that the plants found in the paleeozoic strata resemble the plants found in the more recent strata, so that they must have needed the light of the sun, though the sun ap- peared only in the period succeeding that of the palae- ozoic strata; finally, that, according to the obvious sense of the text, the work of each day of the Hexae- meron was complete before the next day commenced. Arguments like these are urged by such writers as H. Reusch ("Bibel und Natur", 3rd ed., Freiburg, 1870, pp. 23.5 sqq.; 4th ed., 1876, pp. 244 sqq.) and C. Cut- ler (" Naturforschung und Bibel ", Freiburg, 1877, pp. 91 sqq.).

(b) The Idealists.— We have seen that St. Augustine and a number of patristic writers maintained the si- multaneity of creation, and regarded the division into six days only as a clas.sification of the various things created. The Idealists take their start from the sec- ond part of St. Augustine's position, while for tlie great African Doctor's simultaneous creation they substitute the gradual development of the earth as demanded by the scientists. Among the first to pro- pose this theory was F. Michelis (" Natur und Offen- barung", Miinster, 1855). He believes that Moses narrates the creation story as an historian might write the life of Charlemagne by considering him succes- sively as king, as lawgiver, as Christian, as father of a family. Reusch, who had been a Concordist in the first editions of his great work, became an Idealist in the third edition (" Bibel und Natur ", Freiburg, 1870). Father Braun ("Ueber Kosmogonie vom Standpunkt christlicher Wissenschaft", Miinster, 18S9) endeavours to combine Concordism with IdeaUsm. I. B. Baltzer ("DiebiblischeSchopfungsgeschichte", Leipzig, 1867), Reusch ("Theol. Literatur-Blatt ", Bonn, 1867, p. 232), C. Guttler ("Naturforschung vmd Bibel", Frei- burg, 1877, pp. 101 sqq.), and Sehafer ("Bibel und Wissenschaft ", Munster, 1881, pp. 237 sq.) have writ- ten against Idealism either as a whole or in its various special forms. The cosmogonic days and their suc- cession, as exhibited in the Hexaemeron, appear to lose all meaning in the Idealists' theory.

Considering the foregoing theories without bias, and in the light of both science and Revelation,'a moderate form of Concordism or the theory of vision will be found to serve the Catholic interpreter most effectu- ally both from a .scientific and a critical point of view.

GuNKEL AND ZlMMERN, Srlu'pfun(j und Chaos (Gottingen, 1895); Delitzsch. Dns babylonische Wellsrhr.pfungsepos (heip- ziE. 1896); Jensen. Ui/lhen und Epen (Berlin. 1900); Loisy, L€s mt/tkcs bnhijlonievs (Paris. 1905): Damahcius, Qufrsiioncs de primis prinapiiii, ed. Kopp (1826); Abtdenus in EoaEBiDS,

Prtrpar. evang., IX, xli; Berosus in Eusebius. Chronicon^ Armenian version, according to Alexander Polyhistor; Davis, Genesis and Semitic Tradition (London, 1894); La- grange, Etudes sur tes religions scmitiques (2nd ed., Paris, 1905): ViGOUROUX, Manuel biblique (9th ed.), I, 448 sqq.; Idem, Les Livres saints et la critique rationaliste (4th ed.), iLt, 235 sqq.; Idem, La cosmogonic niosaiquc d'aprcs les Peres ia Les Melanges bibliques (2nd ed.), 11 sqq.; MoTAls, Moise, la science et Ve^cgcse (Paris, 1SS2). — Add all the authors and works cited in the body of the article.

A. J. Maas.

Hexapla, the name given to Origen's edition of the Old Testament in Hebrew and Greek, the most colos- sal critical production of antiquitj'. This work was urgently demanded by the confusion which prevailed in Origen's day regarding the true text of Scripture. The Church had adopted the Septuagint for its own; this differed from the Hebrew not only by the addition of several books and passages but also by innumerable variations of text, due partly to the ordinary process of corruption in the transcription of ancient books, partly to the culpable temerity, as Origen called it, of correctors who u.sed not a little freedom in making "corrections", additions, and suppressions, partly to mistakes in translation, and finally in great part to the fact that the original .Septuagint had been made from a Hebrew text quite different from that fixed at Jam- nia as the one standard by the Jewish Rabbis, under Akiba the founder of Ralibinical Judaism. Aquila, a proselyte from Christianity, gave (c. A. D. 130) a very accurate translation of this text, aiming above all at being literal; still he borrows quite freely from the Septuagint when its rendering is consistent with his own chief aim. Symmachusand Theodotion both flour- ished towards the end of the second century, but it is uncertain which had priority as translator. Symma- chus, who was an Ebionite according to Eusebius and Jerome, a Jewish proselyte from Samaritanism accord- ing to Epiphanius, gave a new translation which was to a considerable extent a more idiomatic and elegant rendering of Aquila. It was followed extensively by Jerome in his own work as translator of the Old Testa- ment. Both Aquila and Symmachus profluced two editions to which Jerome refers. Theodotion, who was an Ebionite or a Jew, and perhaps had Vieen a Christian, gave a version much closer than the others to the Septuagint.

The circulation of these versions, each so insistent in its claim to superiority, in so many instances differ- ing from the Septuagint and j-et so close to it in many others, made a comparison between them and the Septuagint imperative for a knowledge of the true text of Holy Scripture. The Hexapla, the concept of a great genius executed with unexampled patience and industry, is Origen's attempt to show the exact rela- tions of the Septuagint to these versions and especially to the Hebrew text. The work itself has perished ; its character, however, has been pretty well known to scholars through statements in early Church writers, through scholia on numerous manuscripts of the Bible, and through chance quotations found in the works of certain Fathers. Quite recently (1S96 and 1900) fragments of the Hexaplar Psalms were fortunately discovered, which give us our only specimens of con- nected portions of Orifjon's work ami afford a good idea of its general appearance. Our earliest authori- ties, Eusebius of Ca-sarca, St. Epiphanius, and St. Jerome, agree that Origen made a collection into one work of texts and versions of the entire Old Testa- ment, arranging them in parallel columns according to the following order: Fir.st, the Hclirew text in Helirew characters; second, the IIel)re\v text transliterated into Greek characters; thinl, the version of Aquila; fourth, that of Symmachus; fifth, the Septuagint; sixth, the version of Tlieodotion. The recovered fragments corroborate this testimony, though they lack the first column. Aquila's version was placed next to the Hebrew, most probably liecause it was the most literal rendering; Symmachus next to Aquila,