TESTIMONIA IN VETERES INTERPRETES
[Irenæus lib. III, cap. 24.] The interpretation is not true: Behold, a young woman, has been interpreted; hence the Ebionites say [it is of] Joseph, as do Theodotion of Ephesus and Aquila of Pontus.
[Orig. Comment. in Matthæum, Huet. p. 381, tom. I.] A Now, however, a great difference is detected in the manuscripts, whether through the negligence of some scribes, or through the audacity of some in a wicked "correction" of the text, or also through those who, in correcting, added or subtracted what they pleased. Moreover, this difference which occurs in the manuscripts of the Old Testament, God-helping, we have found a remedy for, by using the remaining editions so that we might make a judgment from them. For things that were dubious among the Seventy on account of the variety of manuscripts, we have made a judgment from the remaining editions, and have retained that which agreed with them; and some things, indeed, which were not in the Hebrew, we marked with obeli, not daring to remove them entirely, but others we added with asterisks, so that it might be indicated from this that we, because they were not found in the Seventy, had added them from the remaining editions as they were in the Hebrew.
[Ibid., p. 439.] But if you wish to learn the sense of what is said accurately, hear Aquila thus interpreting.
[Orig. Comment. in Joan., Huet. tom. II, p. 131.] He notes that Gergasa has been changed by a scribal error into Gerasa. And he says that *Gergasa* in Hebrew signifies "an abode of those who cast out." Then he proceeds thus:
B A similar error is frequently to be seen concerning names in the Law and the Prophets, as we have accurately learned, having been instructed by the Hebrews, and by comparing our manuscripts with theirs; which [names] have the testimony of the editions of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, which have not yet been corrupted.
[Origen. in Cantica, edit. Genebrardi.] Aquila expressing the Hebrew truth.
[Origen. epist. ad Africanum, edit. Wetsten., p. 224.] For thus Aquila, by serving the Hebrew reading, published his edition; whom the Jews believe to have translated the Scripture more accurately than all others, and whom those who are C ignorant of the Hebrew dialect are most accustomed to use, as though he had attained the meaning most of all.
[Orig. ad Africanum, p. 226.] Again, very many things are found inserted throughout the middle of the whole of Job among the Hebrews, but not among us; sometimes fourteen, elsewhere nineteen, sometimes sixteen verses. And what is the need for me to enumerate these things, which we have collected with much labor, so that the D difference which exists between the Jewish manuscripts and ours might not escape us?
ON THE HEXAPLA OF ORIGEN
A Origen applied such great care to the investigation of the divine Scriptures, that he even learned the Hebrew language, and procured for himself the original Scriptures which were held by the Jews, written in Hebrew characters. He also investigated the editions of other translators of the sacred Scriptures besides the four, and discovered certain others that differed from those commonly accepted: namely, the editions of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion. These, having been long hidden in I know not what corners, he unearthed and brought to light. And, as he did not know who their authors were, he noted only this: that he had found one at Nicopolis by Actium, and another in another designated place. Furthermore, in the Hexapla of the Psalms, after the four notable editions, he appended not only a Fifth, but also a Sixth and a Seventh edition, and noted concerning one of them that it was found at Jericho in a jar during the times of Antoninus, the son of Severus. Having collected all of these together, having divided them into clauses, and having set them opposite one another alongside the Hebrew text itself, he left us the copies of what are called the Hexapla; having separately arranged in the Tetrapla the edition of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, together with that of the Seventy.
C It is, moreover, to be known that Symmachus, who was one of those translators, was an Ebionite. The heresy of the Ebionites is so called, consisting of those who say that Christ was born of Joseph and Mary, and who consider Him to be a mere man, and contend that the law should be observed in the Jewish manner, as we have related in our earlier books. There are, indeed, still extant Commentaries by Symmachus, in which, by leaning upon the Gospel according to Matthew, he seems to bolster the aforementioned heresy. Origen testifies that he received these Commentaries of Symmachus, together with other interpretations of sacred Scripture prepared by the same man, from a certain Juliana, whom he says had received these books by right of inheritance from Symmachus himself.
D The Scripture of the Hebrews exhibits this more clearly, which Aquila, having translated it with accuracy, set forth in this way. Proselyte was Aquila, not by nature a Jew. And a little later: Furthermore, Symmachus is said to have been an Ebionite: which heresy was that of certain Jews who were said to believe in Christ, and of whose number Symmachus was. Aquila, serving the Hebrew letter. Aquila and Symmachus have set forth the interpretation more according to the Jewish view, approaching it more closely in their understanding of the doctrine of the...
Highest and concerning the Lord which has been handed down to us A while entertaining suspicions about it. *Ibid. p. 86.* Symmachus is exceedingly wonderful. *Ibid. p. 199.* Symmachus has interpreted wonderfully. *Ibid.* Theodotion also, who is himself one of the more careful interpreters.
Jerome, Prologue to Genesis, beginning of the first volume.
That I might dare this, I was provoked by the study of Origen, who mingled the translation of Theodotion with the ancient edition, distinguishing the whole work with an asterisk ☀ and an obelus †, that is, a star and a spit: while he makes shine forth what had been less apparent before, or cuts away and strikes through everything superfluous, especially those things which the authority of the evangelists and apostles has promulgated, in which we read many things from the Old Testament that are not in our codices, such as: *Out of Egypt have I called my Son*; and: *He shall be called a Nazarene*; and: *They shall look on him whom they pierced*; and: *Rivers of living water shall flow from his belly*; and: *What eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, what God hath prepared for them that love him*, etc. *And below:* And I do not know who the first author was who fabricated the story of the seventy cells at Alexandria, in which being separated they wrote the same things—since Aristaeus, belonging to the same Ptolemy B, and Josephus long after, reported no such thing, but wrote that they were gathered together in one basilica and conferred, not that they prophesied. For it is one thing for a prophet to speak, and another for an interpreter. There, the Spirit predicts future events; here, learning and an abundance of words translate what is understood. Unless one must think that Tully translated Xenophon’s *Oeconomicus*, and Plato’s *Protagoras*, and Demosthenes’ *On the Crown*, having been inspired by a rhetorical spirit. Or that the Holy Spirit wove testimonies about the same books in one way through the Seventy, and in another through the apostles; so that what the former refrained from, the latter falsely claimed to have been written.Jerome, Preface to the book of Joshua, col. 247, tom. I.
And that in the first place, as I have often testified, let them know that I am not fabricating new things in criticism of the ancients, as my friends accuse me, but that I am striving as much as a man can to offer to the men of my own language (who are nevertheless delighted by our own things C) an edition which they might possess in place of the Greek *Hexapla*, which requires great expense and labor. *Ibid.* Wherefore the churches have accepted Daniel according to Theodotion’s translation.The same, in the Preface to all the books of the Old Testament, p. 317, tome I.
The Samaritans also write the Pentateuch of Moses in the same number of letters, differing only in the shapes and characters of the letters. And it is certain that Ezra the scribe and teacher of the law, after the capture of Jerusalem and the restoration of the temple under Zerubbabel, discovered other letters which we use now, whereas up to that time the characters of the Samaritans and Hebrews had been the same. In the book of Numbers, too, this same calculation is shown mystically under the sense of the Levites and priests. And even today we find in certain Greek volumes the name of the Lord, the tetragrammaton, expressed in ancient letters.The same, Preface to the book of Isaiah, col. 474, tom. I.
Just as the Greeks after the LXX translators read Aquila and Symmachus and Theodotion, whether for the sake of their own learning D or that they might understand [the text] better from their comparison; so these also at least deign to possess one interpreter after the former ones.Jerome, Preface to Job, col. 595, tom. I.
I am compelled through the individual books of sacred Scripture to respond to the calumnies of my adversaries, who accuse my translation [of being] a criticism of the seventy interpreters: as if Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion did not also, among the Greeks, express [the text] either word for word, or sense for sense, or a mixture of both, and a moderately tempered kind of translation, and as if Origen had not distinguished all the volumes of the Old Testament with obeli and asterisks, which he inserted into the ancient translation, whether added or taken from Theodotion, proving that what was added had been missing. Let my detractors therefore learn to accept in whole what they accepted in part, or else strike out my translation along with their asterisks. NorA can it be that those who undertook to supply many omissions would avoid admitting that they had fallen into error in certain places—above all in Job, from which if you subtract what has been added under asterisks, a great part of the volume will be cut short, it being the case that only among the Greeks B does this occur. But among the Latins, before that translation which we have recently edited with asterisks and obeli, there are nearly seven or eight hundred verses missing; so that the book, curtailed, lacerated, and eaten away, presents a deformity to those who read it publicly.
*And below:* I remember that for the sake of understanding this volume, I redeemed at no small price a certain teacher from Lydda, who was thought to hold the first rank among the Hebrews, though as to what profit his doctrine provided, I do not know.
*And below:* But if among the Greeks, after the edition of the Seventy, with the Gospel of Christ already shining forth, the Jewish heretics Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion—who Judaize—have been accepted, and whose cryptic translations have hidden many mysteries of the Savior, and who are nevertheless held among the churches in the Hexapla and explained by ecclesiastical men: how much more should I—a Christian, born of Christian parents, and bearing the sign of the cross upon my forehead, whose ambition it has been to seek out what was omitted—etc.
*Jerome, Preface to the Book of Psalms according to the Hebrew Truth, Vol. I, col. 835.* Since, therefore, I was recently arguing with a Hebrew about certain testimonies from the Psalms you brought forward for the Lord Savior, and he, wishing to mock you, asserted through B almost every word that they were not so in the Hebrew, as you raised objections regarding the Seventy Translators, you most earnestly requested that, after Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, I should translate the new edition into the Latin tongue, etc.
*The same, Preface to Daniel, Vol. I, col. 987.* The churches of our Lord Savior do not read the prophet Daniel according to the Seventy Translators, using [instead] the edition of Theodotion; and why this has happened, I do not know.
*The same, Preface to Chronicles, Vol. I, col. 1002.* If the edition of the Seventy Translators remained pure and translated into Greek as it was by them, most holy and learned Chromatius of the bishops, you would be laboring in vain in urging me to translate Hebrew volumes into the Latin tongue. For what had once occupied the ears of men and had strengthened the faith of the nascent Church, it was right to confirm even by our silence. But now, when that genuine and ancient translation is corrupted and violated, do you think it is my decision either to judge from among many which is the true one, or to forge a new work upon an old one, and—as the saying goes—to pierce the eyes of the crow C while the Jews mock us? Alexandria and Egypt praise their Hesychius as an authority among the Seventy; Constantinople as far as Antioch approves the copies of Lucian the martyr; the provinces between these read the Palestinian codices, which Eusebius and Pamphilus published, having been worked over by Origen; and the whole world struggles with this conflicting variety among them. And certainly, Origen not only composed copies of four editions, writing the individual words side by side so that one lone dissenter might be immediately refuted by the others that agree among themselves; but, what is of greater audacity, in the edition of the Seventy he mixed in the edition of Theodotion, marking with asterisks what was missing before, and with virgulae [obeli] what seemed to be added as superfluous.
*Jerome, Preface to Ezra, Vol. I, col. 1107.* Furthermore, it is another matter if with closed eyes, as they say, they wish to slander me and do not imitate the zeal and kindness of the Greeks, who, after the Seventy Translators, with the Gospel of Christ now shining forth, curiously read the Jews and Ebionites who interpreted the Old Law—namely Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion—and, through the labor of Origen in the Hexapla, have dedicated them to the churches.
*The same, Preface to the Book of Psalms, Vol. I, col. 1222.* Let everyone note for himself either the horizontal line or the radiant signs, that is, the obeli ÷ or the asterisks ☀; and wherever he sees the preceding virgula ÷, let him know that from there up to the two points are matters which we have impressed, and which were added in the Seventy Translators. But where he sees the likeness of a star ☀, let him know that it was added from the Hebrew volumes, and [is] up to the two points, according only to the edition of Theodotion, which in the simplicity of its language does not differ from the Seventy Translators.
*The same, Preface to the Book of Chronicles according to the Seventy Translators, Vol. I, col. 1418.* Finally, when you had recently requested by letter that I should translate Chronicles into the Latin tongue for you, I took in a certain doctor of the Law from Tiberias, who D was held in admiration among the Hebrews, and I conferred with him from the top, as they say, to the very nail.
*Ibid., col. 1419.* Wherever, therefore, you see asterisks, that is, stars ☀, in this volume, there you know that something was added from the Hebrews which is not found in the Latin codices. But where the obelus, that is to say the horizontal line ÷,
÷, is prefixed, it indicates what the LXX Translators added A either for the sake of beauty or because of the Spirit, even though it is not read in the Hebrew volumes. Jerome, *Preface to the Books of Solomon*, Vol. I, col. 1419.
"I have restored the three books of Solomon—that is, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs—to the ancient authority of the LXX Translators; either by placing the horizontal line ÷ before what is superfluous, or by marking with the asterisk * what was missing, which I have inserted: so that you, Paula and Eustochius, might more fully know what is lacking in our books and what is redundant."
Same, *Preface to the four Evangelists*, Vol. I, col. 1426.
"I do not seek what Aquila or Symmachus think, nor why Theodotion proceeds between the new and the old. Let that be the true interpretation which the apostles have approved."
Same, *Preface to the Book of Hebrew Questions*, Vol. II, col. 505.
"Nor indeed do the LXX Translators not exist in our codices, as the envious bark. We argue regarding their errors; nor do we consider our labor to be a reproach of them, since they did not wish to reveal to Ptolemy, King of Alexandria, everything mystical in the Holy Scriptures: and especially those things which promised the coming of Christ, lest the Jews be seen to worship another God: whom he, a follower of Plato, valued greatly because it was said they worshiped one God. But both the evangelists, and our Lord and Savior himself, and also the Apostle Paul, bring forth many things as if from the Old Testament, which we shall discuss more fully in their own places. From which it is clear that those are the more truthful exemplars which accord with the authority of the New Testament. Added to this is the fact that Josephus, who records the history of the LXX Translators, relates that only five books of Moses were translated by them: which we also confess to be in greater agreement with the Hebrew than the rest. But those who were interpreters afterward—I speak of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion—have things far differently than we read B them."
Ibid., col. 542, on Gen. xL, v. 16. "Symmachus translated it more openly in his own manner."
In *Epistle to Damasus*, Vol. II, col. 567. "For Aquila, who does not interpret word for word in a contentious manner, as some think, but more studiously."
And below: "But all Judaea proclaims that Aquila, as in other things, so too in this place most especially, translated it properly."
*Epistle to Evangelus*, col. 574, Vol. II. *Epistle to Sunia and Fretela*, Vol. II, p. 627.
"Nor does it matter whether it is called Salem or Salim, [or] whether the same words are pronounced with different sounds and accents. For the Hebrews very rarely use vowels in the middle of letters, and it depends on the will of the readers and the variety of the region.
"In which I briefly caution that, so that you may know, there is one edition that Origen, and Eusebius of Caesarea, and all the teachers of Greece call κoινή, that is, the 'common' and 'vulgate' [edition], and which by many is now called the Lucianic; and another of the LXX Translators, which is found in the 'Hexapla' codices, and which has been faithfully translated by us into the Latin language, and is chanted at Jerusalem and in the Churches of the East... Now this κoινή, which is the common edition, is itself that which is also the LXX. But this is the difference between the two: that the κoινή, according to locations and times and the will of the writers, is a corrupt edition; but that which is held in the 'Hexapla', and which we translate, is itself that which is reserved in the books of the learned as the incorrupt and immaculate translation of the LXX interpreters. Whatever, therefore, differs from this, there is no doubt that it also disagrees with the authority of the Hebrews." C
Jerome, *Letter to Marcella*, Vol. II, col. 707. "Aquila, who is the most diligent explicator of Hebrew words."
Jerome, *Letter to Marcella*, Vol. II, col. 711. "Theodotion, who in other matters agrees with the Seventy Translators."
Jerome, *Commentary on Ecclesiastes*, Vol. II, col. 740. "My Hebrew source, whom I often mention, when reading Ecclesiastes with me, [explained] this *Baracibam*, whom they admire as one or most of all (a)."
Jerome, *Preface to the Homilies of Origen on the Canticle*, Vol. II, col. 87. "Origen, having surpassed everyone in the other books, in the *Song of Songs* he surpassed himself. For with ten volumes completed, which reach almost to twenty thousand verses; first the LXX Interpreters; then Aquila and Symmachus and Theodotion; and at the end the Fifth edition, which he writes that he found at Actium, etc."
(a) Concerning Symmachus, Jerome often says that he interpreted things more openly and clearly.
Jerome, Commentary on Isaiah, vol. III, col. 24.* The Hebrew language has no letter P; but they use the Greek Pi for it.
*Jerome, Commentary on Isaiah, ch. VIII, vol. III, col. 79.* "The two houses of the Nazarenes," (who receive Christ in such a way that they do not drop the observances of the Old Law) A they interpret as two families, Shammai and Hillel, from whom the Scribes and Pharisees arose. Akiba took up their school, whom the proselytes deem to be Aquila's master; and after him, Meir, to whom Johanan ben Zakkai succeeded; and after him, Eliezer, until the captivity of Jerusalem, Joshua. Therefore, Shammai and Hillel arose in Judea not long before the Lord was born; the former is interpreted as "dissipator," and the latter "profane," because by their traditions and *deuteroseis* they have dissipated and defiled the precepts of the Law.
*Jerome, Commentary on Isaiah, col. 352.* For my part, I do not wonder that Aquila, a man most learned in the Hebrew language and expressing word for word, either feigned ignorance in this passage, or was deceived by the perverse exposition of the Pharisees, who wished to interpret it: "And Israel shall be gathered to him."
*Jerome, Commentary on Ezekiel, vol. III, col. 716.* But Aquila's second edition, which the Hebrews call *kat' akribeian* [according to exactness], translated it *hēmazōn*, that is, quiescent and set apart.
*Jerome, Preface to the Commentary on Daniel, vol. III, col. 1073.* I also warn the reader of this: that he should read Daniel not according to the LXX Interpreters, but according to Theodotion, who certainly was an unbeliever after the coming of Christ, although some say he was an Ebionite, who is in another sense a Jew. B But Origen also placed asterisks in the Vulgate edition regarding the work of Theodotion, teaching what had been added that was missing, and on the other hand, marked with obeli certain verses that were superfluous. And since all the Churches of Christ, as much of the Greeks as of the Latins, Syrians, and Egyptians, read this edition under asterisks and obeli, let those who are envious forgive my labor, as I wanted to have in our language what the Greeks read in the editions of Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus.
*Jerome, Commentary on Daniel, ch. I, col. 1075.* Which we translate "against the tyrants" according to the Hebrew edition which is read *kat' akribeian*.
*The same author, Commentary on Hosea, ch. II, vol. III, col. 1252.* Aquila is a diligent and curious interpreter.
*Jerome, Commentary on Habakkuk, vol. III, col. 1633.* It must be known, as we said above, that where the LXX established the plural number, so that it might say "your christs," there it is in the Hebrew *LAIESUA ETH MESSIACH*, which Aquila translated "for salvation with your Christ." Not that God went forth to save the people and to save his Christ, but that he came for the salvation of his people with his Christ, according to that word of the Gospel: "The Father is in me, and I in the Father, and the Father remaining in me does his works." But the Fifth edition also translated similarly: "You went forth for the salvation of your people, for salvation with your Christ." C Theodotion, however, truly, as if he were poor and an Ebionite: but those also of the same dogma, following a meager sense, translated judaically: "You went forth for the salvation of your people, that you might save your Christ; and you went forth to save your people, to save your Christ." I am about to say something incredible, but nevertheless true. These semi-Christians translated in a Jewish manner, and the Jew Aquila interpreted as a Christian. The Sixth edition, showing the mystery most manifest, translated it thus from the Hebrew: "You went forth that you might save your people through your Jesus Christ," which in Greek is said: *ἐξῆλθες τοῦ σῶσαι τὸν λαόν σου διὰ Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν σου*.
*Jerome, Commentary on the Epistle to Titus, vol. IV, col. 437.* Hence, it was our concern to correct from the authentic manuscripts all the books of the Old Law which the learned man Adamantius had arranged in the Hexapla, copied from the Cæsarean library, in which the very Hebrew words are described in their own characters, and set forth in a parallel track in Greek letters. Aquila and Symmachus, and also the Septuagint and Theodotion, keep their own order. D Moreover, some books, especially those that are composed in verse among the Hebrews, have three other editions added; which they call the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh translation, having attained authority without the names of the interpreters. This immortal temperament [Origen] bestowed upon us by his labor, so that we should not greatly fear the superciliousness of the Jews, who rejoice with loose lips, grinding saliva, and scraped throats.
*The same author, Epistle 24 to Marcella, vol. II, col. 61.* For a long time now, I have been comparing the edition of Aquila with the volumes of the Hebrews, lest by chance the Synagogue might have changed anything on account of the hatred of Christ; and to speak to a friendly mind, I find many things that pertain to the strengthening of our faith.
*The same author, Epistle 29 to Paula, vol. IV, col. 68.* To what purpose is the mention of Varro and Chalcenterus made, you ask? Clearly that to Adamantius...
A we might come: who labored with such zeal in the work of the Holy Scriptures that he rightly received the name Adamantius. *The same author, in the Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers, on Origen, vol. IV, col. 116.*
Who is unaware how much zeal he had in the Divine Scriptures, so that he even learned the Hebrew language against the nature of his age and race; and, having accepted the Seventy Interpreters, he gathered other editions into one volume as well—namely those of Aquila the Pontian proselyte, of Theodotion the Ebionite, and of Symmachus. Of the same dogma: he who also wrote Commentaries on the Gospel according to Matthew, from which he tries to confirm his own dogma too. Furthermore, the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh editions, which we also have from his library, he discovered with wondrous labor and compared with the other editions. *Jerome, Epistle 33 to Pammachius, vol. III, col. 25.*
But what shall we do regarding the authentic books, in which these things are not found written, and other similar things which, if we were to attempt to produce them, would require infinite books? Moreover, the asterisks are witnesses, as I said, to how much they left out, or our translation, if it be compared by a diligent reader with the ancient translation: and yet the edition of the Seventy rightly prevailed in the Churches, either because it is the first and was made before the advent of Christ; or because it was used by the apostles (in which, however, it does not differ from the Hebrew). But Aquila, a proselyte and contentious interpreter, who attempted to translate not only words but also the etymologies of words, is rightly cast aside by us. For who, in place of wheat and wine and oil, could either read or understand *cheuma*, *aporismos*, *stilnotēta*—things we cannot even pronounce: fusion, and pouring, and splendor? Or because the Hebrews have not only articles but also pronouns, he, in his own ill-favored way, interprets both syllables and letters, and says *syn ton ouranon, kai syn tēn gēn*, something which the Greek and Latin tongue does not receive at all. *Jerome, Apology against Rufinus, vol. IV, col. 363.*
Certainly Origen also names the patriarch Huillus, who was in his time; and his exposition on the thirtieth chapter of Isaiah, at the end of which he discourses: *Woe to thee, city Ariel, which David besieged*, he concludes with his own exposition; and though he says he had thought otherwise before, he confesses that he was taught by him that which is more true. *The same author, Against Rufinus, book II, vol. IV, col. 423.*
B The eighty-ninth psalm also, which is written: *A prayer of Moses the man of God*, and the remaining eleven which have no titles, he considers to belong to the same Moses, according to the exposition of Huillus; nor does he disdain, while interpreting the Hebrew Scripture, to insert throughout individual places what seems to be the case to the Hebrews.
That I might dare this, the zeal of Origen provoked me, who mixed the translation of Theodotion with the ancient edition, distinguishing the whole work with an asterisk * and an obelisk +, that is, with a star and a spit: while either he brings to light that which was less apparent before; or he slays and confounds all that was superfluous: and especially those things which the authority of the evangelists and the apostles promulgated. *Jerome, Epistle 45 to Marcella, vol. II, col. 552.*
Ambrose, while providing parchment, expenses, and scribes, kept so many countless books truly translated by our Adamantius and Chalcenterus—in a certain epistle which he had written to him from Athens—reports that he never took food in Origen’s presence without reading, and never went to sleep unless one of the brothers was reciting the Holy Scriptures. *Jerome, Epistle 74 to Augustine, vol. IV, col. 626.*
But as for what you ask in other epistles, why my prior translation in the canonical books has asterisks and little marks noted in advance, and later I published another translation without these signs—you seem to me not to understand what you asked. For that translation is of the Seventy Interpreters: and wherever there are little lines, that is to say obeli, it is signified that the Seventy said more than is contained in the Hebrew; but where there are asterisks, that is to say, little shining stars, they were added by Origen from the edition of Theodotion. And there we did translate the Greek; here, however, we expressed what we understood from the Hebrew itself, sometimes preserving the sense of the truth rather than the order of the words. *Jerome, Epistle to Vincent and Gallienus, vol. IV, col. 808.*
And I marvel how you ask for the books of the Seventy Interpreters, not pure as they were published by them, but those emended—or rather corrupted—by Origen through obeli and asterisks; and that you do not follow the poor little translation of a Christian man, especially since he translated those things which were added from the edition of a man who was a Jew and a blasphemer after the passion of Christ. Do you wish to be a true lover of the Seventy Interpreters? Do not read those things which are under the asterisks; nay, rather scrape them from the volumes, that you may prove yourself a supporter of the ancients. But if you do this, you will be forced to condemn the libraries of all the churches. For hardly one or another book will be found that does not have these things.
Wherefore Aquila, and Symmachus, and Theodotion were stirred to produce a work almost different in the same labor; one striving to express word for word, another preferring to follow the sense, the third not deviating much from the ancients. But the Fifth, and Sixth, and Seventh edition, although the authors by whom they are considered to be produced are unknown, yet they hold such a probable diversity of their own, that they deserve authority without names.
From Rufinus, *Ecclesiastical History*, Book VI, Chapter 13
A Origen was the first to compose those most famous codices, in which he set out the Hebrew words themselves in individual columns, and in the second place, following that order, the same work of each interpreter in Greek letters.Philastrius of Brescia, *On Heresies*, No. 90
There are heretics who, rejecting the interpretation of the seventy-two holy and most wise men, welcome the edification of a certain man named Aquila, a man from Pontus, who produced his interpretation many years later. Because they were constrained at that time by urgent necessity to omit certain things, their text is thought to have prompted disagreement. For example, he is praised by some Jews for having understood more, because concerning the Father and the Son, he did not dictate as did those earlier ones according to the Law; for the seventy-two said: *Against the Lord, and against his Christ*; but Aquila: *Against the Lord, and against his army.* And again the seventy-two said: *Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and shall bear a son; and his name [is] God with us.* But Aquila said: *Behold, a young woman shall conceive, and shall bear a son; and his name [is] powerful with men.* If these things are understood in a pious sense of reading—that no one is strong and powerful unless it be Christ, the Son of God—it is rightly understood; but if one doubts this concerning Him, such an edition is to be cast aside and spurned. Hence the Jews do not possess the interpretations of the seventy-two, who, feeling rightly concerning the Father and the Son B and the Holy Spirit, declared one substance, divinity, and majesty; but they possess that of Aquila, who does not feel so rightly concerning the Son of God, but announced it as if of a prophet. Hence his interpretations are never placed in the middle of books, but are assigned to the right and left; and as contradictory and not of full truth, they are read by many, etc.*Soon after, No. 91.* There is a heresy which again, after Aquila, accepts the interpretation of thirty men, not that of those most blessed seventy-two, who, feeling integrally and inviolably concerning the Trinity, handed down the most certain foundations of the Catholic Church while interpreting the Scriptures. These thirty followed Aquila in many things, whence the interpretation of these men, which is contained in the authentic books, is not accepted by the Catholic Church.
*Ibid., No. 92.* There is a heresy which hereafter wishes to follow the interpretation of six men—not of those former holy ones—who desire to interpret the seventy-two in other ways; and it incurs no small error, feeling likewise differently concerning the Catholic faith.
*Ibid., No. 93.* There are other heretics who follow Theodotion and Symmachus, C and not the interpretation of those most blessed earlier ones, which the Catholic Church likewise honors and preaches as having been set forth in a different way.
Augustine, *On the City of God*, Book XV, Chapter 23, Vol. VII, p. 408
But Aquila, the interpreter whom the Jews prefer to the others, did not interpret "angels of God" or "sons of God," but "sons of gods."Aug., *On the City of God*, Book XVIII, Chapter 48, p. 526
For since there were also other interpreters who translated those sacred utterances from the Hebrew language into Greek, such as Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion; and just as there is also an interpretation whose author does not appear, and on this account is called the Fifth, without the name of an interpreter: yet the Church has received this one which is the Seventy, as if it were the only one, and the Greek Christian peoples use it, most of whom do not know that there is any other.From the *Chronicon Paschale*, ed. Cangius, p. 255
In the 14th year of Hadrian, in the 14th indiction, during the consulship of Augurinus and Sergianus, Aquila flourished, the father-in-law of the Emperor Hadrian. He was a gentile like Hadrian, hailing from the city of Sinope in Pontus. Later, however, he was instructed by the apostles and baptized. He was an astronomer, and for this reason, he was accused by the Christians, but he did not relent. D Having later spurned the Christian religion, he became a proselyte to the Jews and, having been circumcised, he became a Jew. With great labor, he was taught their language and produced an interpretation according to the elements—that is, word for word—not with a right mind, but so that he might pervert some of the sayings of the Scriptures. Epiphanius the Cyprian narrates these things in his book *On Weights and Measures*.TESTIMONIES CONCERNING THE ANCIENT INTERPRETERS
From the same Chronicle, p. 263. In the year of Commodus, the seventh indiction, in the consulship of Marcellus and Aelianus. A During these consuls, a certain Theodotion of Pontus, from the succession of the heresiarch Marcion—who himself was also a native of Sinope—renounced that same heresy and inclined toward Judaism; and when he had learned their elements and language, he himself also published a translation for the most part in agreement with the Seventy Interpreters, as Epiphanius the Cyprian relates concerning him.
From the same Chronicle, p. 266. In the ninth year of Severus, the eighth indiction, in the consulship of Severus Augustus for the third time and Antoninus. In these times, a certain Symmachus, a Samaritan, who was numbered among the wise men of his people, since he was not held in honor by his own nation, suffering from the disease of ambition and seeking after leadership, and being incensed against his own tribe, went over to the Jews and became a proselyte and was circumcised a second time. B This man, therefore, in order to overturn the interpretations held by the Samaritans, published a third interpretation. Epiphanius the Cyprian set forth these things concerning the three interpreters, Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion.
From the Synopsis of Sacred Scripture, which is held among the Athanasian works, Vol. II, p. 103. What and how many are the transmissions of Holy Scripture; whether, therefore, are the interpretations from the Hebrew into the Greek, and who are those who translated these, and when? First is, etc.
These, inasmuch as they are taken from Epiphanius and are rather lengthy, are passed over.
Ado in his Chronicle, concerning the time of Hadrian. During the same time, Aquila of Pontus arises as the second interpreter after the Seventy.
The same in his Chronicle, under Commodus. Theodotion, an Ephesian, appeared as the third interpreter.
The same in his Chronicle, under the Emperor Severus, p. 790. Symmachus is acknowledged as the fourth interpreter.