An Analysis of the Revisional Process in Theodotion's Greek Text of Daniel

This study aims to advance our knowledge of the character of Th-Dan within the larger framework of the Theodotionic problem. Chapter 1 ascertained the necessity of the inquiry. For decades scholars had routinely referred to Th-Dan as a revision. There had been, however, no methodical study undertaken to substantiate this claim. Noting this deficiency, the first analyses carried out to address the issue concluded that Th-Dan does reflect an independent translation. The present study represents the first comprehensive and systematic investigation to demonstrate the character of Th-Dan as a revision, seeking to fill this critical gap in the research.
The case for Th-Dan as a revision is built within the methodological framework laid by previous revisional studies. Chapter 2 highlights our present knowledge regarding recensional activity in late antiquity. The study of the pre-Hexaplaric revisions led to the crystallization of principles that test the quality of a text as a revision. My working hypothesis is controlled by two criteria: the demonstration of a common basis that genetically connects the texts alleged to stand in a translation-revision relationship, and the substantiation of recensional techniques in the text alleged to reflect a revision. The contrastive analysis of both the commonalities and the dissimilarities between Th-Dan and OG-Dan affirmed both criteria.
Chapter 3 investigated the commonalities and found evidence for the presence of a common basis between Th-Dan and OG-Dan. The two texts frequently share long strings of words, at times presenting whole verses almost verbatim. However, we applied a methodological stricture, theorizing that the most compelling evidence in this direction is significant agreements: hapax Greek words; rare Greek words; unique equivalents; and rare equivalents. Such lexical choices could hardly have been replicated by two translators working independently. They rather imply that Th-Dan employed OG-Dan as its base text for selecting equivalents.
The characterization of the revisional process is dealt with in chapter 4. Section A demonstrates that Th-Dan reflects a systematic, literal revision. The analysis of the dissimilarities between OG-Dan and Th-Dan indicates that they emerged from systematic corrections applied to OG-Dan. To conform it quantitatively and qualitatively to the Semitic text, the reviser employed recensional norms such as stereotyping, quantitative representation, linguistic accuracy, word order, and transliteration. By means of these techniques, the reviser achieved consistency.
Section B of chapter 4 points to further mechanical, recensional techniques which reflect the reviser’s attitude toward the base text; he constantly referred to the base text when selecting his equivalents. This can be seen in the way he manipulated the first-found OG renditions, partly maintained and partly revised, the use of the immediate and wider OG context, the replacement of OG equivalents with synonyms, and the replacement of rare OG words with standard equivalents. Such procedures provide additional evidence for the character of Th-Dan as a revision.
Section C of chapter 4 discusses inconsistencies of Th-Dan, which reflect exceptions to the reviser’s recensional techniques. The influence of the OG’s style on Th-Dan and the sometimes problematic nature of MT-Dan constituted the most important circumstances that caused the reviser to deviate from his agenda of consistency in translation equivalents.
Chapter 5 investigates the nature of Th-Dan’s underlying Semitic text. The reviser’s Vorlage resembled MT-Dan but was not identical to it. This situation accounts for certain differences extant between Th-Dan and MT-Dan. Furthermore, the investigation of these differences led to the conclusion that Th-Dan’s Vorlage frequently featured readings preferable to MT-Dan, especially when the latter contained harmonistic and exegetical expansions or subtractions. At times, it reflects a better-preserved text, free of haplographies.
The results are summarized in chapter 6. They are followed by a tentative explanation for the replacement of OG-Dan with Th-Dan in the textual history of the Greek Bible. The historical circumstances that formed the backdrop for such a decision were apologetic in nature and regarded the high status of the book as well as its frequent use in arguments between Jews and Christians.