25 forbid this view. (As to a possible subsequent
insertion of the prayer, see 'Integr. and State of Text,' p. 42.)
Theodotion also precludes this idea by his insertion of ????? ???????? ?„??†?‚
?†?»????????‚ in v. 24 itself, as well as ????? ???????? ?„????¦ ???…??????‚ in v. 25. The
slight change in the case of the last two words lessens the likelihood
of their having been transferred from v. 25 of one version to v. 25
of the other. But it is quite possible that ?? may have purposely omitted
the clause in v. 24 of ?????, beginning ??…?„?µ ?±????„??????‚, in order to shut out
the idea of these devotions having taken place in the interval suggested
above.
Dean Farrar even says that the Song is "not very apposite" (_Expositor's
Bible_, Daniel, Lond. 1895, p. 180), though other minds find it
remarkably so. In writing on v. 27 (50) he erroneously substitutes
?????„?????? for ????????????. This is probably copied from Ball's note _in loc._ If
the latter part of v. 66 (88) was in the original Song, the reference
to their own position is of course apposite enough.
Pages:
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54