inherited by his son, Ptolemy II. (Philadelphus), who had for two years been co-regent.20 In
fact, ultimately that monarch became literally book-mad, and the sums spent on rare MSS.,
which too often proved spurious, almost pass belief. The same may be said of the third of these
monarchs, Ptolemy III. (Euergetes). It would have been strange, indeed, if these monarchs had
not sought to enrich their library with an authentic rendering of the Jewish sacred books, or not
encouraged such a translation.
19. Aristobulus in Euseb. Præpar. Evang. ix. 6; xiii. 12. The doubts raised by Hody against this testimony
have been generally repudiated by critics since the treatise by Valkenaer (Diatr. de Aristob. Jud.
appended to Gaisford's ed. of the Præpar. Evang.).
20. 286-284 b.c.
These circumstances will account for the different elements which we can trace in the Greek
version of the Old Testament, and explain the historical, or rather legendary, notices which we
have of its composition. To begin with the latter. Josephus has preserved what, no doubt in its
present form, is a spurious letter from one Aristeas to his brother Philocrates,21 in which we are
told how, by the advice of his librarian (?), Demetrius Phalereus, Ptolemy II. had sent by him
(Aristeas) and another officer, a letter, with rich presents, to Eleazar, the High-Priest at
Jerusalem; who in turn had selected seventy-two translators (six out of each tribe), and
furnished them with a most valuable manuscript of the Old Testament. The letter then gives
further details of their splendid reception at the Egyptian court, and of their sojourn in the island
of Pharos, where they accomplished their work in seventy-two days, when they returned to
Jerusalem laden with rich presents, their translation having received the formal approval of the
Jewish Sanhedrin at Alexandria. From this account we may at least derive as historical these
facts: that the Pentateuch - for to it only the testimony refers - was translated into Greek, at the
suggestion of Demetrius Phalareus, in the reign and under the patronage - if not by direction - of
Ptolemy II. (Philadelphus).22 With this the Jewish accounts agree, which describe the translation
of the Pentateuch under Ptolemy - the Jerusalem Talmud23 in a simpler narrative, the
Babylonian24 with additions apparently derived from the Alexandrian legends; the former
expressly noting thirteen, the latter marking fifteen, variations from the original text.25
21. Comp. Josephi Opera, ed. Havercamp, vol. ii. App. pp. 103-132. The best and most critical edition of
this letter by Prof. M. Schmidt, in Merx' Archiv. i. pp. 252-310. The story is found in Jos. Ant. xii. 2. 2;
Ag. Ap. ii. 4; Philo, de Vita Mosis, lib. ii. section 5-7. The extracts are most fully given in Euseb. Præpar.
Evang. Some of the Fathers give the story, with additional embellishments. It was first critically called in
question by Hody (Contra Historiam Aristeæ de L. X. interpret. dissert. Oxon. 1685), and has since been
generally regarded as legendary. But its foundation in fact has of late been recognized by well nigh all
critics, though the letter itself is pseudonymic, and full of fabulous details.
22. This is also otherwise attested. See Keil, Lehrb. d. hist. kr. Einl. d. A. T., p. 551, note 5.
23. Meg. i.
24. Meg. 9 a.
25. It is scarcely worth while to refute the view of Tychsen, Jost (Gesch. d. Judenth.), and others, that
the Jewish writers only wrote down for Ptolemy the Hebrew words in Greek letters. But the word