Charles — Apocrypha & Pseudepigrapha Vol. I — Section 97
The reading, its source, and a dependable way back.
Work: The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament — Vol. I
Permanent passage identifier
hsu_3fce4db0-8dc6-4e8f-ad57-eb80e1467339This identity belongs to this edition’s reading. Cross-witness correspondence awaits review.
R. H. Charles ed. 1913, Vol. I
Excerpt · the full reading remains in Scripture Library.
(ὁ) The text in Z is certainly from an Aramaic original. Note the translation of DYY Pl ‘story-writer’ (mg. “recorder’) in 17, 25, but the transliteration in 16 and (with a doublet) 25; the different renderings in EG (e.g. ἐν εἰρήνῃ for MT Bishlam, / Belemus, τ. 16) ; and such variant renderings as ‘cities’ (v. 22 for ‘ provinces’), ‘ passage’ (Ὁ. 24 and Jos. ὃ 25; son for MT pbn ‘portion’). £, although free and paraphrastic, preserves (as noticed by Volz, 1490) some better readings: ‘our lord, the king’ (vv. 17 seq., 21, cf. vi. 8; in agreement with Aramaic diplomatic usage), “be it now …
- Source
- R. H. Charles, ed., 1913 — Internet Archive
- Rights
- Public-domain-era 1913 edition; unrestricted Internet Archive derivative required
- Reading language
- English
- Completeness
- Not established for this edition
- Review
- Review status not established by this card
Work translation availability: HSLT — No published edition · HSRT — No published edition. A translation of this Work may not cover this exact passage.
Evidence Intelligence
Know what kind of evidence you are looking at.
Helpful Saints keeps direct biblical text, language evidence, ancient witnesses, historical context, research models, and open questions visibly distinct.Direct Biblical Text
The explicit wording and literary context of canonical Scripture.
Original-Language Evidence
Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, morphology, lemmas, semantic range, and textual comparison.
Ancient Witness
Septuagint, Dead Sea Scrolls, ancient Jewish literature, and early Christian writings—clearly classified.
Historical Context
Geography, material culture, chronology ranges, institutions, customs, and reception history.
Research Model
A configured chronology, theological synthesis, typological pattern, or proposed relationship.
Open Question
Evidence is incomplete, debated, or insufficient for a settled conclusion.