The lexeme ἀσυνθηκεῖν is to be considered a hapax legomenon of the entire Greek language. It occurs in the Symmachus version of LXX Psalm 77:57.[1] This verse reads in Hebrew (Psalm 78:57) as well as according to the Septuagint (Psalm 77:57):
|
LXX Ps 77:57a–b, ed. A. Rahlfs |
MT Ps 78:57a–b, ed. H. Bardtke (BHS) |
|
aακαὶ ἀπέστρεψαν aβκαὶ ἠσυνθέτησαν aγκαθὼς καὶ οἱ πατέρες αὐτῶν bκαὶ μετεστράφησαν εἰς τόξον στρεβλὸν |
וַיִּסֹּ֣גוּ וַֽ֭יִּבְגְּדוּ כַּאֲבוֹתָ֑ם נֶ֝הְפְּכ֗וּ כְּקֶ֣שֶׁת רְמִיָּֽה׃ |
|
English translation by NETS: |
English translation by NJPS: |
|
and turned away and were faithless as also their fathers; they were twisted into a crooked bow. |
They fell away, disloyal like their fathers; they played false like a treacherous bow. |
|
German translation by LXX.D: |
German translation by Elberfelder: |
|
Und sie wandten sich ab und brachen den Bund wie auch ihre Väter und verwandelten sich in einen krummen Bogen |
Sie wurden abtrünnig und handelten treulos wie ihre Väter. Sie versagten wie ein schlaffer Bogen. |
1. Hexaplaric Evidence for ἀσυνθηκεῖν (σ′ Ps 77:57aβ)
The Hexaplaric attestation for LXX Psalm 77:57a (in.) is as follows, and this can also be seen in the Beta version of our Göttingen Hexapla Database.
|
LXX Ps 77:57a α–β |
MT Ps 78:57a α–β |
|
|
|
|
LXX |
MT |
α′ ε′ |
σ′ |
|
|
aακαὶ ἀπέστρεψαν |
וַיִּסֹּגוּ |
– |
ἀπέ|νευον Ra 1173 |
|
|
aβκαὶ ἠσυνθέτησαν[2] |
וַיִּבְגְּדוּ |
καὶ ἠσυνθέτησαν Ra 1173 καὶ ἠσυνθέτησαν Field |
καὶ ἠσυνθήκουν Ra 1173 καὶ ἠσυνθέτησαν Field |
|
|
and were faithless |
and acted treacherously |
and were faithless |
and broke a covenant |
|
|
|
||||
The Masoretic Text reads וַיִּבְגְּדוּ (waw consecutive plus verb). It is a Qal form in the 3rd person masculine plural of the root בגד, “to act treacherously.” The LXX uses the verb ἀσυνθετέω (“to be unfaithful / faithless”) for its rendering ἠσυνθέτησαν (3rd person plural Indicative Aorist Active): “they were unfaithful,” or as NETS translates it: “were faithless.”
Aquila and the Quinta use the same rendering as the LXX, as testified by Field and manuscript Ra 1173. According to Field, Symmachus also reads ἠσυνθέτησαν in agreement with the LXX, with Aquila, and the Quinta. However, Ra 1173 (and Ra 1122) attests differently with ἠσυνθήκουν for Symmachus, which has been adopted by both José Ramón Busto Saiz and Johan Lust.[3]
The testimony of the Göttingen Hexapla Database in its Beta version is based so far on Field’s data as well as Schenker’s edition of the hexaplaric readings from the Psalter catena Ra 1173 (Cod. Vat. gr. 752).[4] Field notes for verse 57a: “Οἱ πάντες· καὶ ἠσυνθέτησαν.”[5] As the only evidence, Field quotes Jerome’s Epistle 106,50. The testimony of Jerome requires a thorough evaluation, which Michael Graves has recently undertaken in a monograph dedicated to this epistle.[6] When consulting Hilberg’s critical edition, it becomes apparent that consideration of the preceding context leads to a significant shift in meaning compared to Field. As the following comparison between Field (left column) and Hilberg (right column) shows:[7]
|
Quotation by Field – 1875 (used by Rahlfs in Septuaginta-Studien II – 1907) |
Jerome’s Epistle 106,50 ed. Hilberg (CSEL) – 1912 |
|
Et non servaverunt pactum. Scio quod pactum non habeat in Hebraeo; sed quando omnes voce simili transtulerunt, ἠσυνθέτησαν, |
ergo secundum Hebraicam proprietatem interpretatus est Symmachus: montem, quem adquisiuit dextera eius. in eodem: et auerterunt se et non seruauerunt pactum, quemadmodum patres eorum. scio, quod ‘pactum’ non habeat in Hebraeo, sed, quando omnes uoce simili transtulerunt ἠσυνθέτησαν |
|
et apud Graecos συνθήκη pactum dicitur, ex uno verbo significatur, non servaverunt pactum; |
et apud Graecos συνθήκη ‘pactum’ dicitur, ex uno uerbo significatur: non seruauerunt pactum, |
|
licet LXX ἠθέτησαν posuerint. |
licet Septuaginta ἠθέτησαν posuerint. |
Michael Graves translates this passage as follows:[8] “And so Symmachus translated according to the Hebrew idiom: ‘the mountain that his right hand acquired.’ 50.6. In the same (psalm): ‘They turned themselves away and they did not maintain the covenant, just like their fathers.’ I know that ‘covenant’ is not present in Hebrew, but since all with similar voice translated ἠσυνθέτησαν, and among the Greeks συνθήκη means ‘covenant,’ by this one word[9] it signifies: ‘they did not maintain the covenant.’ Yet the Seventy put ἠθέτησαν.”
In Field’s abbreviated presentation, it gives the impression that the reading “et non servaverunt pactum” is that of the Septuagint. However, the context shows that Jerome is quoting the Psalterium Gallicanum here:[10] “Therefore, according to the Hebrew peculiarity, Symmachus interpreted it as: the mountain, which his right hand acquired. In the same (in eodem) [i.e. Psalterium Gallicanum][11]: and they turned away and did not keep the covenant, as their fathers did. I know that ‘covenant’ is not in the Hebrew, however, since everyone has translated with a similar voice ἠσυνθέτησαν […].”
One point that, in our opinion, has been overlooked or not precisely captured is the fact that Jerome speaks of a “similar” rendering or voice (voce simili), but not that all Jewish recensions of the Hexapla would read the same. Graves translates “all with similar voice”[12], however, interprets it in his commentary as follows: “According to Jerome, ‘all’ the Greek versions rendered this word as ἠσυνθέτησαν.”[13] In our view, Graves’ and Field’s evaluations go significantly too far. The wording of Jerome’s letter as transmitted to us does not allow us to assume that α′, σ′, and ε′ all read ἠσυνθέτησαν without distinction.[14] What Jerome has preserved for us, however, is, in our opinion, the ο′ reading ἠθέτησαν, which is here not identical with the rendering of the Psalterium Gallicanum.
Jerome quotes “et non servaverunt pactum” as the translation of the Psalterium Gallicanum. The reading that he has adopted turns out to be the Symmachus reading. For him, this reading “et non servaverunt pactum” is the basis for his comparison with the Hebrew. Jerome explains that the word “pactum” is not explicitly mentioned in the Hebrew – I repeat: ‘Hebrew’ is here evaluated upon the basis of Symmachus – (“scio, quod ‘pactum’ non habeat in Hebraeo”). However, he states that the Greek rendering he has chosen (sc. based on Symmachus) – uses a single verb (unum verbum) to express the phrase “non servaverunt pactum.”[15] It is worth considering whether the Latin term verbum, typically translated neutrally as “word,” might in this context carry the grammatical meaning of “verb,” which verbum can also denote.[16] Consequently, Jerome’s statement can be interpreted as referring to “one single verb” with the meaning “non servaverunt pactum.”
The adversative sentence following Jerome’s statement “I know that ‘covenant’ is not in the Hebrew” requires closer analysis: “sed, quando omnes voce simili transtulerunt ἠσυνθέτησαν et apud Graecos συνθήκη ‘pactum’ dicitur, ex uno verbo significatur: non servaverunt pactum […].” The sentence reads “sed […] ex uno verbo significatur: non servaverunt pactum […].” Embedded in this sentence is a causal clause introduced by “quando,” which splits into two paratactic statements connected by the conjunction “et”:
- quando omnes voce simili transtulerunt ἠσυνθέτησαν
- et apud Graecos συνθήκη ‘pactum’ dicitur
In our opinion, the initial observation holds true that ἠσυνθέτησαν is only a “vox similis,” meaning similar but not equal rendering, and Jerome did indeed notice slight differences without detailing them. Regarding the second part of the sentence, Graves is right in highlighting that:[17] “Jerome’s point is that the Greek verb is etymologically related to the noun συνθήκη” and that “His argument […] is that the Greek verb ἀσυνθετέω entails the idea of ‘covenant.’”
What has caused considerable irritation – Graves speaks of a “surprising statement”[18] – is the fact that Jerome ultimately names ἠθέτησαν as the Septuagint reading: “yet the Septuagint has rendered it as ἠθέτησαν” (“licet Septuaginta ἠθέτησαν posuerint”). We believe that ἠθέτησαν can be identified here as the ο′ reading, i.e., the reading of the fifth column of the Hexapla. Even Alfred Rahlfs attributed this reading to the O-group, though he did not rule out an error: “O (teste Hi[eronymi], cf. S.-St.2, p. 121: per errorem?)”.[19] Rahlfs has mentioned this passage in his study on the text of the Septuagint Psalter explicitly as an example of cases where the Psalterium Gallicanum did not precisely preserve the Ηexaplaric Septuagint text, i.e., the ο′ reading.[20] Surprisingly without referring to Rahlfs, this is also cum grano salis the conclusion of Masséo Caloz.[21] In any case, the reading ἠθέτησαν (3rd person plural indicative aorist active of ἀθετέω[22]) is otherwise attested as a variant to ἠσυνθέτησαν (3rd person plural indicative aorist active of ἀσυνθετέω[23]) in the tradition.[24]
In a recently published study, the O-group in the Psalter has been more narrowly defined as:[25] Manuscripts Ra 1098(ο′)-1121-1209 plus Psalterium Gallicanum. Regarding manuscript Ra 1121, this witness covers only Psalms 1–50. Manuscript Ra 1209, on the other hand, contains Psalms 51–100, although fragmentarily, as this manuscript was severely damaged in the fire of the Turin National Library in 1904. However, this particular verse is fully preserved, so we have the reading from Ra 1209, allowing us to reconstruct the wording of the ο′-text.
It reads: καὶ ἀπέστρεψαν καὶ ἠθέτησαν (Ra 1209, f. 61r) – “and they turned away and dealt treacherously / broke faith.” Regarding Jerome, he has thus preserved for us not only indirectly the Symmachus reading (σ′) in his Psalterium Gallicanum but also the Hexaplaric text of the fifth column (ο′) in the Greek wording. The manuscript evidence and the Patristic testimony of Greek Ps 77:57a, will be summarised in the following.
2. Manuscript Attestation and Patristic Evidence (Hex Ps 77:57a)
Two catenae have preserved Aquila, Symmachus and Quinta readings; in addition, the previously mentioned testimony of Jerome and the Palestinian catena Ra 1209 should be added as witnesses to the ο′-text:
|
Ra 1173 |
f. 250r |
α′ ε′ Ps 77:57a βγ σ′ Ps 77:57a αβγ |
|
Ra 1122 |
f. 86v |
⟨σ′⟩ Ps 77:57a αβγ |
|
Ra 1209 |
f. 61r |
ο′ Ps 77:57a αβγ |
|
Hieronymus |
Ep. 106, ed. CSEL |
σ′ Ps 77:57a αβγ ο′ Ps 77:57a β |
A refined representation of the reading in question and its attestation looks like this:
|
LXX Ps 77:57a α–β |
MT Ps 78:57a α–β |
|
|
|
|
|
LXX |
MT |
ο′ |
α′ ε′ |
σ′ |
|
|
aακαὶ ἀπέστρεψαν |
וַיִּסֹּ֣גוּ |
καὶ ἀπέστρεψαν Ra 1209, f. 61r (s.n.) |
– |
ἀπένευον Ra 1173(p.1), f. 250r (c.n. σ′); Ra 1122, f. 86v (s.n.); Hi (et averterunt se) (c.n.) |
|
|
aβκαὶ ἠσυνθέτησαν |
וַֽ֭יִּבְגְּדוּ |
καὶ ἠθέτησαν Ra 1209, f. 61r (s.n.); Hi |
καὶ ἠσυνθέτησαν Ra 1173(p.1), f. 250r (c.n. α′ ε′) |
καὶ ἠσυνθήκουν Ra 1173(p.1), f. 250r (c.n. σ′); Ra 1122, f. 86v (s.n.); Hi (et non servaverunt pactum) (c.n.) |
|
|
and were faithless |
and acted treacherously |
and dealt treacherously / broke faith |
and were faithless |
and broke a/the covenant |
|
|
|
|||||
c.n. = cum nomine (nominibus), i.e. with the clear attestation to a certain column/recension/version.
s.n. = sine nomine (nominibus), i.e. without a clear attestation to a certain column/recension/version.
3. Analysis of σ′ καὶ ἠσυνθήκουν
Symmachus thus uses καὶ ἠσυνθήκουν instead of καὶ ἠσυνθέτησαν (LXX) to render the Hebrew וַיִּבְגְּדוּ. The Greek verb ἠσυνθήκουν can be traced back to the base form ἀ-συνθήκεω. This is composed of the alpha privativum (augmented in the aorist) and the verb συνθήκεω, which can be hypothetically reconstructed from the noun ἡ συνθήκη, “the convention, the covenant” (derived from συντίθημι, “to convene”).[26]
The verb ἀ-συνθήκεω had been discussed already by Bernard de Montfaucon in 1713.[27]
Afterwards, Schleusner, in 1788 and again in 1812, in the context of his studies on the Hexapla of the book of Isaiah, quoted Montfaucon but criticised his hypothesis of modifying ἀσυνθηκούντες to ἀσυνθετοῦντες.[28]
In his second study on the Hexapla of the book of Isaiah (1812), Schleusner used almost the same words[29], which we can find summarised – with the reference to the adjective ἀσύνθηκος – in his dictionaries (1820 and 1822) under the lemma ἀσυνθηκέω. This lemma is – again (s. above, ἀνατμητικός) – neither mentioned in Muraoka’s Lexicon (2009) nor in Lust–Eynikel–Hauspie’s Lexicon (11992/96, 22003, 32015), which is – once more – a clear shortcoming:[30]
|
(Schleusner, Thesaurus. 1–5.) I (1820), 478; (Schleusner, Thesaurus ed. altera. 1–3.) I (1822), 387 |
ἈΣΥΝΘΗΚΕ`Ω, fœdus frango, perfide ago. […] Symm. Ies. LXIII.8 […][…] Adj. Ἀσύνθηκος occurrit ap. Onesandrum Strateg. C. 37 Οὐκ ἀσύνθηκον ἐν σπονδαῖς εἶναι. |
|
(Stephanus, Thesaurus II. 2.) (1865), 2301 (with quotation from (Schleusner, Thesaurus ed. altera. 1–3.) I [1822], 387) |
[Ἀσυνθηκέω, Fœdus frango, Perfide ago. Symm. Es. 63, 8 […]] [Ἀσύνθηκος. V. Ἀσυνθηκέω.] |
|
(Bailly, Dictionnaire.) (2000; first published in 1895), 296 |
ἀσυνθηκέω–ῶ, c. ἀσυνθετέω, Symm. (ἀσύνθηκος). ἀ-σύνθηκος, ος, ον, infidèle à une convention, Onos. 37 (ἀ, συνθήκη). |
|
(Dimitrakos, Λεξικόν.) II (1949), 1106–1107 |
ἀσυνθηκεί πάπ. κατὰ παράβασιν τῆς συνθήκης ἢ τῶν συνθηκῶν ἀσύνθηκος -ον μτγν. ὁ παραβαίνων τῆν συνθήκην, ὁ παρασπονδῶν· Ὀνήσανδρ. 37,2 ἀσυνθηκῶ-έω μτγν. παραβαίνω τῆν συνθήκην. |
|
(Liddell and Scott, Lexicon.) (1996)[31], 265 s.v. ἀσυν-εχής κτλ. |
–θηκέω, = ἀσυνθετέω, Sm. Is. 63.8. –θηκος, ον, = ἀσύνθετος II, Onos.37.2. Adv. -θηκεί, through breach of contract, POxy.904.2 (V A.D.). |
|
(Adrados, et al., DGE I–VIII. 1–8.), here: vol. III (2006), 574 |
no entry for ἀσυνθηκέω. ἀσυνθηκεί adv. dolosa, fraudulentamente ἀ. διαπεπονθὼς καὶ χλεύην que ha sido objeto de dolo y hurla, POxy.904.2 (V d.C.). ἀσύνθηκος, -ον que falta a lo convenido δεῖ … οὐκ ἀσύνθηκον ἐν σπονδαῖς εἶναι Onas.37.2 |
|
(Montanari, GI.), 425[32] |
ἀσυνθηκέω, contr. [ἀσύνθηκος] VT. (Sym.) Is. 63.8. f[alsa] l[ezione] per ἀσυνθετέω. ἀσύνθηκος -ον [συνθήκη] fedifrago ONOS. 37.2. |
|
(Montanari, Dictionary.) (2015), 326 |
ἀσυνθηκέω, contr. [ἀσύνθηκος] VT. (Sym.) Is. 63.8. f[alsa] l[ectio] for ἀσυνθετέω. ἀσύνθηκος -ον [συνθήκη] oathbreaker Onasan. 37.2. |
|
(Montanari, Wörterbuch.) (2023), 309 |
ἀσυνθηκέω, kontr. [ἀσύνθηκος] VT. (Sym.) Is. 63.8. f[alsa] l[ectio] für ἀσυνθετέω. ἀσύνθηκος -ον [συνθήκη] wortbrüchig Onasan. 37.2. |
Montanari’s thesis – and previously Montfaucon’s hypothesis –, that ἀσυνθηκέω is a false reading (falsa lectio) for ἀσυνθετέω, is incorrect.[33] After all, Montanari lists ἀσύνθηκος as a separate lemma! (The same applies, incidentally, to LSJ, which list the verb and adjective as identical to ἀσυνθετέω and ἀσύνθητος, but provide the adverb (already mentioned in Dimitrakos), attested in Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 904.2 (5th century CE) as a separate lemma without such an indication). The derivation of the adverb ἀσυνθηκεί is supposedly from ἀσύνθηκος. [34]
Regarding Montanari’s lemma ἀσύνθηκος, there are also problematic discrepancies in the given meanings between the English and German versions of the lexicon. Montanari’s English version gives “oathbreaker,” a noun (German “Eidbrecher”), which is not the same as Montanari’s German “wortbrüchig.” A correct English rendering for ἀσύνθηκος would be “oathbreaking,” and a better German rendering for ἀσύνθηκος would be “eidbrüchig” or “bundbrüchig.” In this direction goes the meaning of this adjective in Onosander, as said by Ercolani in her study on the hapax legomena in this author.[35]
In any case, ἀσυνθηκέω is not a false reading (falsa lectio), as the Hexaplaric testimony for Psalm 77:57a shows, which recognizes ἀσυνθηκέω as the Symmachus reading, while Aquila and the Quinta have ἀσυνθετέω. Additionally, the hexaplaric evidence for Isaiah 63:8 (ἀθετήσωσι LXX [< ἀθετέω “to reject”]) shows that the verb ἀσυνθηκέω is also attested as the Symmachus reading there (ἀσυνθηκοῦντες σ′ [< ἀσυνθηκέω “to break a covenant”]; MT יְשַׁקֵּרוּ “they will lie / act falsely” [root שׁקר in the piel]).[36] Already Schleusner, as seen, defended this reading in his first studies on the Hexapla of the book of Isaiah against Montfaucon.
Finally, the aforementioned adjective ἀσύνθηκος is attested as the Symmachus reading for Isaiah 48:8 (LXX: ἄνομος).[37] However, this adjective should be treated in a separate lexicon entry.[38] It seems that Symmachus used ἀσύνθηκος instead of the common ἀσύνθετος in his vocabulary.[39]
[1] Cf. Busto Saiz, Traducción, 475.
[2] Ra 1173 provides ἠθέτησαν as LXX reading.
[3] See Busto Saiz, Traducción, 475; Lust, “Lexicon (2000)” s.v. ἀσυνθηκέω: “to break a covenant.”
[4] See Adrian Schenker, Hexaplarische Psalmenbruchstücke. Die hexaplarischen Psalmenfragmente der Handschriften Vaticanus graecus 752 und Canonicianus graecus 62, OBO 8 (Freiburg/ Göttingen: Universitätsverlag Freiburg/ Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1975), 75.
[5] Field, Origenis Hexaplorum fragmenta II, 229 with note 64.
[6] Cf. the commentary by Michael Graves, Jerome, Epistle 106 (On the Psalms). Introduction, Translation, and Commentary, Writings from the Greco-Roman World 47 (Atlanta: SBL, 2022), 238–240.
[7] Edited by Isidor Hilberg, ed., Sancti Eusebii Hieronymi epistulae, pars II: epistulae LXXI-CXX. Sancti Eusebii Hieronymi opera sectio I, pars II, CSEL 55 (Vienna et al.: F. Tempsky, 1912), 247–289 (Ep. 106), here: 273 (Ep. 106,50).
[8] Graves, Jerome, 119.
[9] I am translating “verb”, see below.
[10] The Psalterium Gallicanum, ed. Biblia sacra, Iuxta Latinam Vulgatam versionem ad codicum fidem […] Cura et studio monachorum Abbatiae pontificiae Sancti Hieronymi in urbe Ordinis Sancti Benedicti edita. Liber Psalmorum ex recensione sancti Hieronymi cum praefationibus et Epistula ad Sunniam et Fretelam (Rome: Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, 1953), 183, reads: “et averterunt se et non servaverunt pactum quemadmodum patres eorum.”
[11] Graves, Jerome, 119, understands “in eodem” as always referring to the Psalm.
[12] Graves, Jerome, 119.
[13] Graves, Jerome, 238–239. However, Graves continues (ibid. 239): “This appears to be a case where Jerome collapsed the hexaplaric versions together because he takes them all to support his general point, even though they do not read precisely the same. Manuscript evidence suggests that Aquila had ἠσυνθέτησαν, but Symmachus translated ἠσυνθήκουν (from ἀσυνθηκέω).”
[14] Rahlfs also apparently assumes that they all read the same text, cf. Alfred Rahlfs, Septuaginta-Studien I–III. Vermehrt um einen unveröffentlichten Aufsatz und eine Bibliographie, mit einem Nachruf von Walter Bauer, 2nd ed. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1965), 225 = Alfred Rahlfs, Der Text des Septuaginta-Psalters. Nebst einem Anhang, Griechische Psalterfragmente aus Oberägypten nach Abschriften von W.E. Crum, Septuaginta-Studien 2 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1907), 121: “In Ps. 7757 hat Hieronymus im Anschluß an »alle«, d. h. Ἀ etc., ησυνθετησαν ins Lateinische übersetzt, »licet Septuaginta ηθετησαν posuerint«.”
[15] Jerome’s dependence on Symmachus is a fundamental and well-known phenomenon. Graves, Jerome, 240, also pointed this out, although he did not mention Symmachus directly in his conclusion: “The most likely scenario is that for this passage in the Gallican Psalter Jerome followed the hexaplaric versions rather than the hexaplaric LXX.”
[16] See P.G.W. Glare, Oxford Latin Dictionary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 2032 s.v. uerbum: “2 (gram., spec.) A verb.”; cf. also Charlton T. Lewis and Charles Short, A Latin Dictionary. Founded on Andrews’ Edition of Freund’s Latin Dictionary, Revised, Enlarged, And in Great Part Rewritten (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975), 1972 s.v. verbum: “II. In partic. […] C. In gram., a verb.”
[17] Graves, Jerome, 239.
[18] Graves, Jerome, 239: “In a surprising statement at the conclusion of his discussion, Jerome says: licet Septuaginta ἠθέτησαν posuerint, ‘Yet the Seventy put ἠθέτησαν.’ Does Jerome mean by this that the authentic (i.e., hexaplaric) LXX gave ἠθέτησαν? […].” Graves does not understand the tradition correctly. He discusses Caloz’ assumption that “the hexaplaric LXX read ἠθέτησαν” (cf. Masséo Caloz, Étude sur la LXX origénienne du Psautier. Les relations entre les leçons des Psaumes du manuscrit Coislin 44, les fragments des Hexaples et le texte du Psautier gallican, OBO 19 [Freiburg/ Göttingen: Universitätsverlag Freiburg/ Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1978], 372–373) and continues (ibid. 239–240): “The only alternative interpretation would be to suggest that by Septuaginta Jerome means the ‘popular’ LXX; whereas the ‘true’ (= hexaplaric) LXX was included in the ‘all’ who gave ἠσυνθέτησαν.”
[19] Alfred Rahlfs, ed., Psalmi cum Odis 3rd ed., Septuaginta. Vetus Testamentum Graecum auctoritate Academiae Litterarum Gottingensis editum X (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979), 217 in the apparatus to LXX Ps 77:57.
[20] Rahlfs, Septuaginta-Studien 2nd ed. 1965, 225 = Rahlfs, Septuaginta-Studien II, 121: “Das zweite, was der völligen Genauigkeit des Gall etwas Eintrag tut, ist der Umstand, daß Hieronymus, wie wir gleichfalls aus seinem Briefe an Sunnia und Fretela nachweisen können, sich öfters an 𝔐 und die übrigen Hex.-Kolumnen gegen den hexaplarischen 𝔖-Text angeschlossen hat.”
[21] Caloz, Étude, 372–373, on Ps 77:57a, here 373: “[…] nous pouvons conclure que sur ce point, de l’aveu même de Jérôme, le Ga ne suit pas exactement la LXX hexaplaire.”
[22] Cf. Liddell and Scott, Lexicon, 31 s.v. ἀθετ-έω: “3. deal treacherously with, break faith with, τινά Plb. 9.36.10, LXX Is. 1.2, Ev.Marc. 6.26; εἴς τινα LXX 3 Ki. 12.19; ἐν Ἰσραήλ 4 Ki. 1.1: abs., IG 12(5).129 (Paros).”
[23] Cf. Liddell and Scott, Lexicon, 31 s.v. ἀσυν-εχής κτλ.: –θετεώ: “break covenant, be faithless, LXX Ps. 72(73).15, al.; opp. εὐσυνθετέω, Chrysipp.Stoic. 2.63.”
[24] Rahlfs, ed., Psalmi cum Odis, 217, cites the following text witnesses in the apparatus to LXX Ps 77:57, which read ἠθέτησαν: R O […] L′’Su-1046(uid.) 1219’.
[25] Cf. Felix Albrecht, “Origen’s Fifth Column/Old Greek of Psalms, Recovered from Two Important Witnesses of the Palestinian Catena,” in The Forerunners and Heirs of Origen’s Hexapla, ed. John D. Meade, De Septuaginta Investigationes 19 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2024), 93.
[26] The verb συν-θήκεω is not attested according to current knowledge. Yet, interestingly, a similar verbum συν-θηκίζω does exist, which, however, is rarely used: (1) ed. Eduard Schwartz, ed., Collectio Sabbaitica. Contra Acephalos et Origeniastas destinata. Insunt acta synodorum Constantinopolitanae et Hierosolymitanae a. 536, ACO 3 (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1940), 86: μετὰ σοῦ ἐστι καὶ συνθηκίζει τοὺς ἐπισκόπους (“he is with you and makes a commitment to the bishops”); and (2) Karl Wilhelm Ernst Heimbach, ed., Basilicorum libri LX (Leipzig: Joh. Ambrosius Barth, 1850), 415: ἐπὶ τούτοις γὰρ συνθηκίζειν ἔξεστιν. In my opinion, Heimbach’s Latin translation (in his namque sponsionem facere licet – “for in these matters, it is permitted to make a commitment”) is accurate, as “sponsionem facere” can indeed be understood in a legal context as making a legal obligation or promise. Lampe, Lexicon, 1331, however, suggests a different meaning (“to intrigue with”), which seems inconsistent with both the contexts in which this verb is used and its etymology.
[27] Bernard de Montfaucon, Hexaplorum Origenis quae supersunt, multis partibus auctiora, quam a Flaminio Nobilio & Joanne Drusio edita fuerint […] (Paris: apud Ludovicum Guerin, viduam Joannis Boudot, et Carolum Robustel, 1713) II, 189–190. In the notae et variae lectiones to πλὴν λαός μου εἰσὶν υἱοὶ ἀσυνθηκοῦντες (Ies. 63.8) Montfaucon says (p. 190): v. 8, Σ. πλὴν λαός etc. Curterius ex Ms. Jes. In versione Symmachi forte legendum, οὐκ ἀσυνθετοῦντες.
[28] See Johann Friedrich Schleusner, Observationes criticae in Versiones graecas Oraculorum Jesaiae (Göttingen: J. Christ. Dieterich, 1788), 21: “Cap. LXIII, 8. […] Σ. πλην λαος μου εισιν υιοι ασυνθηκουντες. Iam Montfaucon in notis subiectis monet fortasse in Symmacho legendum esse ουκ ασυνθετουντες quia nempe rationem, qua haec versio cum verbis hebraicis conciliari possit, non videbat. Sed quo ad illud ουκ attinet coniecturae non locus esse potest, sed potius ex Procopii Commentario p. 727. Necessario inserendum erit ante ασυνθηκουντες. Altera vero coniecturae e qua ασυνθηκουντες vocabulum in nullo scriptore graeco obvium in usitatius ασυνθετουντες mutandum esset, ideo non arridet, quia partim receptam lectionem Procopii auctoritas tuetur, partim in versionibus graecis multa vocabula nova et inusitata reperiri constat.” Cf. also Schleusner, Opuscula, 362–363.
[29] The only changes which should be noted can be found in the last sentence: “partim in versionibus graecis V. T. multa vocabula nova et inusitata reperiri satis constat”.
[30] Muraoka, Lexicon (2009), 99, however, does include the lemma ἀσυνθετέω, and adds at the end of this lemma entry: “Cf. ἀσυνθεσία, ἀσύνθετος, συνθήκη.” – The lemma ἀσυνθηκέω is also not attested in e.g. Lampe, Lexicon.
[31] However, the lemma is not included in Passow, Handwörterbuch I/1, “which the Oxford scholars took as the basis of their work” (Liddell and Scott, Lexicon, prefacve 1925, p. iii). It is therefore clear that LSJ have adopted this lemma from the revised TLG, which in turn is based on Schleusner. – Here it is the same as in the case of the lemma ἀνατμητικός, see above.
[32] 1995, 347; 22004, 365.
[33] Cf. also Henricus Stephanus, Thesaurus Graecae Linguae, vol. 2 (Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt, 1954), 2300; Bailly, Dictionnaire, 296. – This word occurs in LXX Ps 72:15.
[34] Cf. Bernard P. Grenfell and Arthur S. Hunt, eds., The Oxyrhynchus Papyri (London: Egypt Exploration Fund, 1908), 241–243, 243: “ἀσυνθηκεί is presumably an adverb from ἀσύνθηκος, a form occurring in Onesand. Strateg. I. 37. ἀσύνθηκα would have been more normal with καὶ χλεύην following.”
[35] L. Ercolani, “La lingua di Onasandro. Ricerche sugli ἅπαξ λεγόμενα,” Università di Siena. Annali della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia 18 (1997): 43–53, 49: “Durante la statuizione dei patti di tregua il generale dovrà guardarsi dall’assalire il nemico, ma non dovrà rilassarsi. Userà la stessa prudenza che osserverebbe in guerra, ma non deve venire meno ai patti stabiliti (= ἀσύνθηκος) e muovere per primo contro il nemico, travalicando così i limiti dell’onestà (Strateg. 37.2). Questo aggettivo in α privativa, presente soltanto nell’opera di Onasandro, è semanticamente equivalente alla forma ἀσύνθητος usata da Polibio in 29.21.5. Il sostantivo ἡ συνθήκη (= lat. pactum, foedus) è attestao già in Senofonte (p. es., HG 7.5.4).”
[36] Cf. Joseph Ziegler, ed., Isaias 3rd ed., Septuaginta. Vetus Testamentum Graecum auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum XIV (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983), 355, second apparatus with reference to Eusebius only. Eusebius, Commentarius in Isaiam II,54 (ed. J. Ziegler, GCS) reads the following: διὸ κατὰ τὸν Σύμμαχον εἴρηται· πλὴν λαός μού εἰσιν, υἱοὶ οὐκ ἀσυνθηκοῦντες. ἀπήλεγχεν δὲ αὐτοὺς κατ’ ἀρχὰς τῆς προφητείας λέγων· ‘υἱοὺς ἐγέννησα καὶ ὕψωσα, αὐτοὶ δέ με ἠθέτησαν’. – “Therefore, according to Symmachus, it is said: But they are my people, sons who do not break the covenant. He reproved them at the beginning of the prophecy, saying: ‘I have brought up and raised sons, but they have rejected me’.” Procopius of Gaza, Commentarii in Isaiam (PG 87/2, 2672), attests very similarly: Διὸ κατὰ Σύμμαχον εἴρηται· Πλὴν λαός μού εἰσιν υἱοὶ οὐκ ἀσυνθηκοῦντες. Οὓς ἀπήλεγχεν ἐν ἀρχῇ λέγων· ‘Υἱοὺς ἐγέννησα, καὶ ὕψωσα· αὐτοὶ δέ με ἠθέτησαν’. – “Therefore, according to Symmachus, it is said: But they are my people, sons who do not break the covenant. He reproved them at the beginning, saying: ‘I have brought up and raised sons, but they have rejected me’.”
[37] Cf. Ziegler, ed., Isaias, 302 second apparatus, with reference to Εusebius, Commentarius in Isaiam II,33 (ed. J. Ziegler, GCS): διὸ κατὰ τὸν Σύμμαχον εἴρηται· καὶ ἀσύνθηκος ἐκ κοιλίας ἐκλήθης· – “Therefore, according to Symmachus, it is said: And you were called a covenant breaker from the womb.”
[38] In the background stands Isa 48:8 MT with a Qal participle פֹשֵׁ֥עַ (root פשׁע “to rebel”). In the immediately preceding context, the Hebrew root בגד “to act treacherously” is used twice, which the Septuagint renders both times with ἀθετέω. Therefore, the use of the verb ἀθετέω in the Isaiah Septuagint must be addressed separately, as not only פשׁע (Isa 1:2; 27:4) and בגד (Isa 21:2 bis; 24:16 bis; 33:1 bis, but see in the same verse MT שׁוֹדֵד, LXX οἱ ἀθετοῦντες; Isa 48:8 bis) are in the background (see Isa 31:2 MT הֵסִיר, LXX ἀθετηθῇ; Isa 63:8 MT יְשַׁקֵּרוּ, LXX ἀθετήσωσι), making the situation more complex.
[39] On ἀσύνθετος, with the German meaning “bundbrüchig, treulos,” cf. Walter Bauer and Kurt Aland, Griechisch-deutsches Wörterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der frühchristlichen Literatur, 6th ed. (Berlin et al.: De Gruyter, 1988), 238.
