^{page 144 note 1} ‘The Letter of Aristeas and the Greek Translation of the Pentateuch in Egypt’, N.T.S. XI (1964–1965), 154–8.Google Scholar

^{page 144 note 2} De Vita Mosis, II, 5–7.Google Scholar

^{page 144 note 3} An interesting ancillary question arises here: does Philo use the term Χαλδαïκῇ (four times in the passage under notice) rather than advisedly for the type of script of the Vorlage? (cf. Lietzmanns, , loc. cit. p. 157Google Scholar (ad init.) and n. 5 ibid.).

^{page 144 note 4} Antiq. XII, 2.Google Scholar

^{page 145 note 1} See the present writer, ‘St Luke and the Seventy(-two)’, N.T.S. VI (1959–60), 319–21Google Scholar; ‘St Luke and the Letter of Aristeas’, J.B.L. Lxxx (1961), 149–55.Google Scholar

^{page 145 note 2} Aristeae ad Philocratem Epistula (Leipzig, 1900), pp. 90–166.Google Scholar

^{page 145 note 3} Lettre d' Aristée à Philocrate (Paris, 1962), pp. 95 f.Google ScholarMetzger, B. M., N.T.S. v (1958–1959), p. 303Google Scholar, n. 3 (q.v. for full ref.) draws attention to the still wider-ranging list of Patristic references in Oikonomos.

^{page 145 note 4} Contra Historiam LXX Interpretum Aristeae…, republished as Lib. 1 of his De Bibliorum Textibus Originalibus… (Oxford, 1705), pp. 1–89.Google Scholar

^{page 145 note 5} Swete, H. B., Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek (Cambridge, 1902), pp. 15–22Google Scholar; John, H. St Thackeray, The Septuagint and Jewish Worship ² (London, 1923), pp. II f.Google Scholar

^{page 145 note 6} Op. cit. p. 52.

^{page 145 note 7} The Cairo Geniza ² (Oxford, 1959), p. 211.Google Scholar

^{page 146 note 1} Geschichte des Jüdischen Volkes…³ (Leipzig, 1898), pp. 420ff.Google Scholar

^{page 146 note 2} Lietzmanns, , op. cit. pp. 13, 16 ff., 28f., 45.Google Scholar

^{page 146 note 3} The Ancient Library of Qumran and Modern Biblical Studies² (New York, 1961), p. 177.Google Scholar

^{page 146 note 4} Lietzmanns, , A Historical Introduction to the Study of the Books of the New Testament (London, 1885, 1897), pp. 525–51Google Scholar; Lietzmanns, , ‘Theodotion’ in D.C.B. IV (1887), 970–9.Google Scholar

^{page 146 note 5} Beiträge zur Einleitung in die Bibl schen Schriften, II (Halle, 1838), 282ff.Google Scholar

^{page 146 note 6} Mez, Adam, Die Bibel des Josephus… (Basle, 1895)Google Scholar; Lietzmanns, , Josephus, the Man and the Historian (New York, 1929), pp. 81f.Google Scholar

^{page 146 note 7} This papyrus (957 in the Göttingen register) was published by Roberts, C. H., Two Biblical Papyri in the John Rylands Library, Manchester (Manchester, 1936), pp. 9–46.Google Scholar

^{page 147 note 1} B.A.S.O.R. 136 (1954), 12–15.Google Scholar

^{page 147 note 2} We say ‘some Hebrew authority’ advisedly as the original reading is still a matter of uncertainty. See further, Skehan, loc. cit. pp. 14f.; Cross, op. cit. pp. 182 f.; Sibinga, J. Smit, The Old Testament Text of Justin Martyr (Leiden, 1963), pp. 145f.Google Scholar Certainly LXX can no longer, as was formerly the tendency (e.g. Lietzmanns, , The Epistle to the Hebrews (London, 1889), pp. 19f.Google Scholar) be dismissed as a gloss.

^{page 147 note 3} Cf. for examples Cross, op. cit. pp. 184–7.

^{page 147 note 4} Les Devanciers d'aquila (Leiden, 1963).Google Scholar For a fuller appraisal of this important work see the present writer's extended review in J.A.O.S. LXXXIV (1964), 178–82,Google Scholar and Cross, F. M., ‘The History of the Biblical Text in the Light of the Discoveries in the Judean Desert’, H.T.R. LVII (1964), 281–99.Google Scholar

^{page 147 note 5} Lietzmanns, , H.T.R. LVII (1964), p. 283.Google Scholar

^{page 148 note 1} Op. cit. pp. 148–56.

^{page 148 note 2} Lietzmanns, , Antony, 58Google Scholar. The removal of the Pergamene Library has been disputed, but on no sufficient grounds. See further, Parsons, E. A., The Alexandrian Library (Amsterdam, London, New York, 1952), pp. 29–31.Google Scholar

^{page 148 note 3} Lietzmanns, , The LXX and Jewish Worship, pp. 16–28, 114f.Google Scholar

^{page 148 note 4} Ezra Studies (Chicago, 1910), pp. 66ff.Google Scholar, a view previously advanced by Grotius (1644), Whiston (1722), Pohlmann (1859), Howorth (1901).

^{page 148 note 5} C. Ap. I, 7Google Scholar; De Bell. Jud. I, IGoogle Scholar; VII, 10; Antiq. XII, 9, 7Google Scholar; XIII, 3, 1–3; 10, 4; XX, 10, 3.

^{page 148 note 6} De Bell. Jud. VII, 10.Google Scholar

^{page 148 note 7} Antiq. XIV, 8, I.Google Scholar

^{page 149 note 1} Cf. Albright, W. F., ‘New Light on Early Recensions of the Hebrew Bible’, B.A.S.O.R. 140 (1955), 27–33, esp. 30ff.Google Scholar

^{page 149 note 2} Cf. Lietzmanns, , loc. cit. pp. 156 f., 158 n. I.Google Scholar

^{page 149 note 3} De Bell. Jud. VII, 10Google Scholar; Antiq. XIII, 3.Google Scholar

^{page 149 note 4} Letter of Aristeas, 182–300, cf. also 121.

^{page 149 note 5} ibid. 50–82, 84–118.