Page:Job and Solomon (1887).djvu/216

 sisting of 22 distichs (li. 1-12), in the Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie, 1882, pp. 326-332.

We must reserve our opinion on Bickell's theory till the appearance of a complete edition from his pen. Meantime three passages (xxiv. 27, xxv. 15, xlvi. 18) may be referred to as giving striking proof of the Hebrew original of the work. In xxiv. 27 the translator seems to have found in his Hebrew copy, i.e. properly 'as the Nile' (the weak letter  being elided in pronunciation as in , Am. viii. 8), but as he supposed 'as the light.' In xxv. 15, he found , which in the context can only mean 'poison,' but which he inappropriately rendered 'head.' In xlvi. 18, the Hebrew had, i.e. 'enemies,' but, according to the translator, 'Tyrians.' Compare also in this connection the allusions to the meanings of Hebrew words in vi. 22 ('wisdom') and xliii. 8 ('the month'). There are still questions to be decided which can only be adverted to briefly here. Did the translator make use of the Septuagint, and more particularly of the portion containing the prophets? He certainly refers to a translation of the Scriptures in his preface, but Frankel thinks that a Targum may be meant, and even doubts the genuineness of the passage; he explains the points of contact with the Septuagint which are sometimes so interesting in the Greek version of Sirach by Ueberarbeitung, i.e. the 'working over' of the version by later hands. This seems to me a forced view. It is more probable that a Greek version is meant, or perhaps we may say Greek versions; no special honour is given to any one translation. Next, as to the position accorded to the Wisdom of Sirach. It is often cited in the Talmud with formulæ which belong elsewhere to the Scriptures, and was therefore certainly regarded by many as worthy to be canonical (see Appendix). In strict theory, this was wrong. According to the Tosephta Yadayim, c. 2, the book of Ben Sira, though much esteemed, stood on the border between the canonical and extraneous or non-canonical books. Such books might be read cursorily, but were not to