See also:good specimen of the religious novel, a
See also:form of literature invented by the Jews . The
See also:romance may be read in a beautiful
See also:dress in the Revised Version of the
See also:English Apocrypha . It was never admitted into the Jewish
See also:canon, but it was admitted into the Christian Canon at the Council of
See also:Carthage (A.D . 397) . In the
See also:Church it still forms a
See also:part of the Bible, but by the Church of England it is relegated to the position of those other books which " the Church
See also:cloth read for example of
See also:life and instruction of
See also:manners, but yet doth it not apply them to establish any
See also:doctrine " (
See also:art. vi.) . Some verses (Tob. iv . 7-9), however, are read in the
See also:offertory; and Tobias and Sarah once occupied the position now held by Abraham and Sarah in the
See also:marriage service . The
See also:Book of
See also:Tobit has reached us in Greek, Latin,
See also:Syriac, Aramaic and
See also:Hebrew versions; of these the Hebrew are the latest, and need not be considered . Of the Greek there are three forms . One is in the Vatican and Alexandrian
See also:MSS.; another is in the Sinaitic . Both these texts are to be found in Swete's Septuagint, the former denoted by B, and the latter by a .
B is the
See also:common text, which is followed in the English Apocrypha . Nevertheless s is
See also:fuller, except in ch. iv., and more intelligible; it is also more Semitic than B . The two must have behind them a common
See also:original, for they throw
See also:light upon one another, and the full meaning of a passage is sometimes only to be got from a combination of both . The fullness of a often runs into superfluities, which are' retrenched in B . The third Greek text is only a partial one (vi . 9-xiii . 8) . It may be derived from a study of Codices 44, 1o6, 107 in
See also:Holmes and Parsons, which diverge from the Vatican text throughout the part indicated . Of the Latin there are two chief forms, the old
See also:translation, sometimes called the Itala, and that of
See also:Jerome in the Vulgate . The Itala was published by
See also:Sabatier at
See also:Paris in 1751, and is reproduced in the Book of Tobit by Neubauer (
See also:Press, 1878) . It agrees very fairly with a, except in the
See also:matter of proper names . Jerome's version is from the Aramaic, or, as it used to be called, the
See also:Chaldee .
It cost the
See also:saint one
See also:work . He describes in his preface the method of its production . He procured the services of a man who was
See also:familiar with Chaldee and Hebrew . This man translated to him out of Chaldee into Hebrew, while Jerome dictated to a shorthand writer his own translation into Latin . The workwas done at the
See also:request of two Christian bishops, Chromatius and
See also:Heliodorus . Jerome does not mention the Itala, but it is plain that he was indebted to it . The Syriac text is said to be based on a Greek version . It was only in 1878 that the Aramaic version was brought to light, being published by Adolph Neubauer from a unique MS. in the Bodleian Library . It agrees with ti and the Itala, but resembles the Vulgate in having nothing in the first
See also:person . According to Neubauer, it is the very text which was used by Jerome, after
See also:allowance has been made for the arbitrary methods of the Rabbis and of Jerome himself . But the Aramaic version has Greek birthmarks (see especially p . 7,
See also:line 18), which other scholars than its editor have thought decisive against its originality .
It was held by
See also:Smith (after Noldeke) to be " in the highest degree probable that the Greek text is original." But the Greek text appears to be itself a translation from some Semitic source . Was this source Hebrew or Aramaic ? The forms 'AOilP and 'AOoupeias in xiv . 4, 15 of show that, at least, that
See also:chapter is
See also:drawn from Aramaic, not from Hebrew . But that chapter does not appear in all the versions, and so may be later than the
See also:rest . With regard to the date of composition there is the widest difference of opinion . Ewald refers it to the end of the Persian
See also:period, about 350 B.C . (an opinion which
See also:Westcott declared to be " almost certainly correct ") ; Kohut thinks that the book was composed in
See also:Persia under the Sassanid
See also:Dynasty, about A.D . 250 . But Tobit is already quoted as " scripture " by
See also:Clement of Alexandria (Strom. ii . 139, p . 503 Pott) .
The words of Tobit (xii . 8, 9) seem almost to have been
See also:present to the writer of ii . Clement (xvi . 4) . The date of this document is uncertain; but in
See also:Irenaeus (i . 28, § 5) in his refutation of the Kabbalistic
See also:heresy of the Ophites, we find Tobias figuring as a
See also:prophet, on the same level as
See also:Haggai . Earlier still the Book of Tobit is quoted, though not by name, in the
See also:Epistle of
See also:Polycarp to the
See also:Philippians (x . 2; Tob. iv. ro . Cf . Prov. xii . 2; Ecclus.
See also:xxix . 12) .
Now the martyrdom of Polycarp is assigned by C . H .
See also:Turner to the
See also:year A.D . 156 . We seem to have even a
See also:quotation by St Paul from the Book of Tobit (I Tim. vi . 19; Tob. iv . 9), in which the identity amid difference seems to show that the Apostle is
See also:drawing, not from the Greek, but from the Semitic original .
See also:Josephus displays no knowledge of the work, but he may have been animated by the same
See also:prejudice as the
See also:Pharisees of St Jerome's day, whose displeasure, that
See also:father tells us, he had to
See also:face in giving to Latin readers a book which was against their canon . (Preface to Tobit.)
See also:Internal evidence shows that the writer of the 14th chapter lived after the
See also:building of the Second
See also:Temple, which was " not as the first." In vv . 5 and 6 of that chapter Tobit is made to predict a glorious building of Jerusalem and the Temple, which was to be followed by the conversion of all the Gentiles . Such a passage might well have been penned when the idea of Herod's Temple was already in the air . If so, this chapter may be supposed to have been written a little before 19 B.C., while the bulk of the work may have been indefinitely earlier .
As to theplace of composition Persia,
See also:Egypt and
See also:Palestine have each had
See also:advocates . One thing only appears fairly certain, namely, that the Greek versions were composed in Egypt . This conclusion could, we think, be established by an examination of the language, especially of some technical terms of administration . But the
See also:tale itself carries us back to Persia . It has what
See also:Moulton called an " Iranian background." The evil demon
See also:Asmodeus (q.v.) is the Persian Aeshma Daeva .
See also:Raphael, " one of the seven
See also:holy angels, which present the prayers of the
See also:saints, and go in before the
See also:glory of the Holy One," resembles the protecting spirit Sraosha . And the
See also:dog, the
See also:companion of Sraosha, is there too . For Tobit differs from all other books of the Bible in containing the only polite reference to the dog . Tobias's dog indeed does nothing but accompany his
See also:master on his
See also:journey to
See also:Ecbatana and back . But he is there as the companion and friend of man, which is
See also:Aryan and not Semitic . So
See also:alien indeed is this from the Semitic mind that in the Aramaic and Hebrew versions the dog does not appear . Even in s, the more Semitic of the two Greek versions, the dog has evidently been found an offence .
Mention of him is suppressed in v . 17, while in xi . 4, 6 Kbptos is made to go behind Tobias, instead of 6 Kbcov ! The
See also:motive of the
See also:story has been variously regarded as a
See also:desire to insist upon the
See also:duty of tithe-paying, upon that of
See also:alms-giving, and upon that of burying the dead . The
See also:Midrash given by Neubauer has no doubts on this point, as the story is immediately followed by the remark—" Behold we learn how
See also:great is the power of alms and
See also:tithes!" But the third motive is equally apparent . Accordingly some have insisted that the story must have been composed at some period when Jewish dead were
See also:left unburied, either in the
See also:time of
See also:Antiochus Epiphanes (2 Macc. v. ro), or in that of
See also:Hadrian, after the revolt of
See also:Bar-Cochebas . If our choice were limited to these two periods, we should certainly prefer the former . For the book carries within itself signs of early date . It contains no Messianic expectation nor any reference to a future life . The last fact is obscured by the Vulgate . Even in the Itala the word aelerna is added in xii . 9 after saturabuntur vita .
See also:interest has been added recently to the study of Tobit by the publication of the Wisdom of Ahikar (Ahigar) . In the Book of Tobit Ahikar is represented as the
See also:minister of Sennacherib and his son Esar-Haddon, and is claimed by Tobit as his
See also:nephew . There is a desire manifested to bring in Ahikar wherever possible (i . 21, 22; ii . 10; xi . 18; xiv. ro) . The intention evidently is to bestow authority upon the fiction by connecting it with a story already known . See K . D . Ilgen, Die' Geschichte Tobias nach drei verschiedenen Originalen (
See also:Jena, 1800); Fritzsche, Handbuch zu den Apocryphen (
See also:Leipzig, 1853); F . H . Reusch, Das Buch Tobias (
See also:Freiburg, 1857); Scharer, Geschichte, 3rd edition; Ad .
Neubauer, The Book of Tobit (Ox;ord, 1878); Fuller in
See also:Speaker's Commentary (1888); E . J . Dillon, Contemporary Review (
See also:March 1898); The Story of Ahikar, by Conybeare,
See also:Harris and
See also:Lewis (Cambridge, 1898) ; J . Rendel Harris, " The
See also:Double Text of Tobit,"
See also:American Journal of
See also:Theology (
See also:July 1899), PP- 541–554; Moulton, " The Iranian Background of Tobit," Expository Times (March 1900), pp . 257–260; B . F . Westcott in Smith's Dict . Bible; I . T .
See also:Marshall in Hastings's Dict . Bible; W . Erbt in Ency .
Bib.;Toy in Jewish Encyclopedia; Johannes
See also:Muller, Beitrage zur Erklarung and Kritik
See also:des Buches Tobit; and in the same
See also:volume Alter and Herkunft des Achicar-Romans and sein Verhdltniss zu
See also:Aesop, by Rudolf Smend . (ST G .
JOHN TOBIN (1770-18o4)
TOBOGGANING (Micmac Indian, tobaakan, sledge)
There are no comments yet for this article.
Do not copy, download, transfer, or otherwise replicate the site content in whole or in part.
Links to articles and home page are encouraged.