And the same may be said of the Song of
the Three, and Bel and the Dragon. But in such short pieces it is not
wise to build much on the absence of these traces.
_Of LXX Greek._ That this was made at Alexandria admits of little doubt.
From the similarity of style, too, it would appear that the translator
(or editor) was identical with the translator of the canonical Daniel.
This is the opinion of Rothstein (in Kautzsch, I. 178). Sch??rer
(_H.J.P._ II. III.), who denies the existence of a Semitic original,
classes this (with the other additions) not in his
'Palestinian-Jewish,' but in his 'Graeco-Jewish' section.
The mention of Sidon in v. 56 (where ?? has Canaan) may perhaps suggest a
writer in the original, whatever language he may have used, who was
connected with the north of Palestine. But it is quite as probable that
the writer (or translator) had some idea of Gen. x. 15 in his mind,
"Canaan begat Sidon his firstborn." After him, according to Josephus
(_Ant._ I. VI. 2), the city was named: ???????????????‚ ????‚ ???±??¶ ?????»???? ?????????????????
??”???„?????µ?? ????? ?„??‡ ?¦?????????????, ??????????? ????? ??‘?†??? ??™?»?»?®???‰?? ???±?»?µ??–?„?±??.
Pages:
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136