Sometimes have to catch myself from using "LXX" or Septuagint without qualifications. I've settled on Lxx for the Pentateuch and OG for the Greek translation of the "Old Testament" in early Christian Codices. The exception is that later codices of "Old Testament" OG Daniel was swapped out for Theodotion's translation (as being more faithful to the Hebrew - it was - but also easier to use for defending views that the number symbolism in Daniel points to Jesus Cjhrist and not some figure like Vespasian).Oh great, you can read the full text as it is! The PDF is paywalled, but that hardly matters as I already have it and can pass it along if needed. It's incredibly comprehensive (and the full online bibliography is amazing).
The only thing I'd note as an independent guy is that I don't like how scholars use the word Septuagint nor the phrase the Septuagint. What you have today is really the Christian Old Testament. The Jewish "LXX" that existed at the time the NT writers were authoring their works and referring to it is lost to time. That was not a single document either - it was on a series of scrolls, not in a codex. It's really a library of translations and not a single translation. So it makes me uncomfortable that scholars use the term to mean "the LXX" that we have today, but the "original" is actually lost and no longer exists.
DCH
Statistics: Posted by DCHindley — Sat Dec 21, 2024 6:26 am