document_title: School corporal punishment

question_text: when was corporal punishment banned in schools in canada

question_tokens: when was corporal punishment banned in schools in canada

text: School corporal punishment

text: Definitions[edit]

text: Corporal punishment in the context of schools in the late 20th and early 21st centuries has been variously defined as: causing deliberate pain to a child in response to the child's undesired behavior and/or language,[5] "purposeful infliction of bodily pain or discomfort by an official in the educational system upon a student as a penalty for unacceptable behavior",[6] and "intentional application of physical pain as a means of changing behavior" (not the occasional use of physical restraint to protect student or others from immediate harm).[7]

text: Prevalence[edit]

text: Corporal punishment used to be prevalent in schools in many parts of the world, but in recent decades it has been outlawed in 128 countries including all of Europe, most of South America, as well as in Canada, Japan, South Africa, New Zealand and several other countries. It remains commonplace in a number of countries in Africa, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East (see list of countries, below).

text: While most U.S. states have outlawed corporal punishment in state schools, it continues to be allowed mainly in the Southern and Western United States.[8] According to the United States Department of Education, more than 216,000 students were subjected to corporal punishment during the 2008–09 school year.[9]

text: Much of the traditional culture that surrounds corporal punishment in school, at any rate in the English-speaking world, derives largely from British practice in the 19th and 20th centuries, particularly as regards the caning of teenage boys.[10] There is a vast amount of literature on this, in both popular and serious culture.[11][12] Britain itself outlawed the practice in 1987 for state schools[13][14][15] and more recently for all schools.[16][17]

text: The doctrine of in loco parentis lets school officials stand in for parents as comparable authority figures.[6] The doctrine has its origins in an English common-law precedent of 1770.[7]

text: Many schools in Singapore and Malaysia use caning (for boys) as a routine official punishment for misconduct, as also some African countries. In some Middle Eastern countries whipping is used. (See list of countries, below.)

text: In most of continental Europe, school corporal punishment has been banned for several decades or longer, depending on the country (see the list of countries below).

text: From the 1917 Russian revolution onwards, corporal punishment was outlawed in the Soviet Union, because it was deemed contrary to communist ideology.[18] Communists in other countries such as Britain took the lead in campaigning against school corporal punishment, which they viewed as a symptom of the decadence of capitalist education systems.[19] In the 1960s, Soviet visitors to western schools expressed shock at the caning of boys there.[20] Other communist regimes followed suit: for instance, corporal punishment was "unknown" by students in North Korea in 2007.[21] In mainland China, corporal punishment in schools was outlawed in 1986,[22] although the practice remains common, especially in rural areas.[23]

text: According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, there are three broad rationales for the use of corporal punishment in schools: beliefs, based in traditional religion, that adults have a right, if not a duty, to physically punish misbehaving children; a disciplinary philosophy that corporal punishment builds character, being necessary for the development of a child's conscience and their respect for adult authority figures; and beliefs concerning the needs and rights of teachers, specifically that corporal punishment is essential for maintaining order and control in the classroom.[6]

text: Effects on students[edit]

text: School officials and policymakers often rely on personal anecdotes to argue that school corporal punishment improves students' behavior and achievement.[24] However, there is a lack of empirical evidence showing that corporal punishment leads to better control in the classroom. In particular, evidence does not suggest that it enhances moral character development, increases students' respect for teachers or other authority figures, or offers greater security for teachers.[25]

text: A number of medical, pediatric or psychological societies have issued statements opposing all corporal punishment in schools, citing such outcomes as poorer academic achievement, increases in antisocial behaviour, injuries to students, and an unwelcoming learning environment. They include the American Medical Association,[26] the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,[5] the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP),[6][27][28] the Society for Adolescent Medicine,[7][29] the American Psychological Association,[30] the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health,[31][32] the Royal College of Psychiatrists,[33] the Canadian Paediatric Society[34] and the Australian Psychological Society,[35] as well as the United States' National Association of Secondary School Principals.[36]

text: According to the AAP, research shows that corporal punishment is less effective than other methods of behaviour management in schools, and "praise, discussions regarding values, and positive role models do more to develop character, respect, and values than does corporal punishment".[6] They say that evidence links corporal punishment of students to a number of adverse outcomes, including: "increased aggressive and destructive behaviour, increased disruptive classroom behaviour, vandalism, poor school achievement, poor attention span, increased drop-out rate, school avoidance and school phobia, low self-esteem, anxiety, somatic complaints, depression, suicide and retaliation against teachers".[6] The AAP recommends a number of alternatives to corporal punishment including various nonviolent behaviour-management strategies, modifications to the school environment, and increased support for teachers.[6]

text: Injuries to students[edit]

text: An estimated 1 to 2 percent of physically punished students in the United States are seriously injured, to the point of needing medical attention. According to the AAP and the Society for Adolescent Medicine, these injuries have included bruises, abrasions, broken bones, whiplash injury, muscle damage, brain injury, and even death.[6][7] Other reported injuries to students include "sciatic nerve damage"[6] "extensive hematomas", and "life-threatening fat hemorrhage".[7]

text: Promotion of violence[edit]

text: The AAP cautions that there is a risk of corporal punishment in schools fostering the impression among students that violence is an appropriate means for managing others' behaviour.[6] According to the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, "Corporal punishment signals to the child that a way to settle interpersonal conflicts is to use physical force and inflict pain".[5] And according to the Society for Adolescent Medicine, "The use of corporal punishment in schools promotes a very precarious message: that violence is an acceptable phenomenon in our society. It sanctions the notion that it is meritorious to be violent toward our children, thereby devaluing them in society's eyes. It encourages children to resort to violence because they see their authority figures or substitute parents doing it [...] Violence is not acceptable and we must not support it by sanctioning its use by such authority figures as school officials".[7]

text: Alternatives[edit]

text: The Society for Adolescent Medicine recommends developing "a milieu of effective communication, in which the teacher displays an attitude of respect for the students", as well as instruction that is stimulating and appropriate to student's abilities, various nonviolent behaviour modification techniques, and involving students and parents in making decisions about school matters such as rules and educational goals. They suggest that student self-governance can be an effective alternative for managing disruptive classroom behaviour, while stressing the importance of adequate training and support for teachers.[7]

text: The AAP remarks that there has been "no reported increase in disciplinary problems in schools following the elimination of corporal punishment" according to evidence.[6]

text: Student rights[edit]

text: A number of international human-rights organizations including the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights have stated that physical punishment of any kind is a violation of children's human rights.[37][38][39]

text: According to the Committee on the Rights of the Child, "Children do not lose their human rights by virtue of passing through the school gates [...] the use of corporal punishment does not respect the inherent dignity of the child nor the strict limits on school discipline".[40] The Committee interprets Article 19 of the Convention on the rights of the child, which obliges member states to "take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse […] while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child", to imply a prohibition on all forms of corporal punishment.

text: Other international human-rights bodies supporting prohibition of corporal punishment of children in all settings, including schools, include the European Committee of Social Rights and the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child. In addition, the obligation of member states to prohibit corporal punishment in schools and elsewhere was affirmed in the 2009 Cairo Declaration on the Convention on the Rights of the Child and Islamic Jurisprudence.[41]

text: By country[edit]

text: Corporal punishment of minors in the United States

text: According to the Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children, all forms of corporal punishment in schools are outlawed in 128 countries as of 2016.[4] (46 of these countries also prohibited corporal punishment of children in the home as of May 2015).[41]

text: Argentina[edit]

text: Banned in 1813, corporal punishment was re-legalised in 1817 and punishments by physical pain lasted until the 1980s. The instruments were rebenques, slappings in the face and others.[42][43] All corporal punishment has now been prohibited; the ban came into effect in 2016.[44]

text: Australia[edit]

text: In Australia, laws on corporal punishment in schools are determined at individual state or territory level.[45][46] While still legal in private schools in some states, in practice, very few schools impose corporal punishment.[47]

text:
State
Government schools
Non-government schools

Victoria
Banned in 1888.[48]
Banned in 1990.

Queensland[49]
Banned in 1994.[50]
Not banned.[51]

New South Wales[52]
First banned in 1987.[48][53][54] Ban repealed in 1989 but was in disuse.[55]Banned again in 1995.[56][57]
Banned in 1997.[56]

Tasmania[58]
Banned in 1999.[59][60]
Banned in 1999.[59]

Australian Capital Territory[61]
Banned in 1988.[62][63]
Banned in 1997.

Northern Territory[64]
Banned in 2016.[citation needed]
Banned in 2009.

South Australia
Banned in 1991.
Not banned

Western Australia
Banned in 1999.[65]Effectively abolished by Education Department policy in 1987.[66]
Banned in 2015.[67][68]

text: Austria[edit]

text: Corporal punishment in schools was banned in Austria in 1974.[69]

text: Bolivia[edit]

text: Corporal punishment in all settings, including schools, was prohibited in Bolivia in 2014. According to the Children and Adolescents Code, "The child and adolescent has the right to good treatment, comprising a non-violent upbringing and education... Any physical, violent and humiliating punishment is prohibited".[70]

text: Brazil[edit]

text: Corporal punishment in all settings, including schools, was prohibited in Brazil in 2014. According to an amendment to the Code on Children and Adolescents 1990, "Children and Adolescents are entitled to be educated and cared for without the use of physical punishment or cruel or degrading treatment as forms of correction, discipline, education or any other pretext".[71]

text: Burma (Myanmar)[edit]

text: Caning is commonly used by teachers as a punishment in schools.[72] The cane is applied on the students' buttocks, calves or palms of the hands in front of the class. Tramline cane marks could be left.  Sit-ups with ears pulled and arms crossed, kneeling, and standing on the bench in the classroom are other forms of corporal punishments used in schools. Common reasons for punishment include talking in class, not finishing homework, mistakes made with classwork, fighting and truancy.[73][74]

text: Canada[edit]

text: In Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law v. Canada (2004) the Supreme Court outlawed school corporal punishment.[75] In public schools, the usual implement was a rubber/canvas strap applied to the hands,[76] while private schools often used a paddle or cane administered to the student's posterior.[77][78] In many parts of Canada, 'the strap' had not been used in public schools since the 1970s or even earlier: thus, it has been claimed that it had not been used in Quebec since the 1960s,[79] and in Toronto it was banned in 1971.[2] However, some schools in Alberta had been using the strap up until the ban in 2004.[80]

text: School Corporal Punishment Bans in Canadian Provinces[edit]

text: In 2004, the Supreme Court of Canada outlawed corporal punishment in all schools, public or private. The practice itself had largely been abandoned in the 1970s when parents placed greater scrutiny on the treatment of children at school.[81] The subject received extensive media coverage, and corporal punishment became obsolete as the practice was widely seen as degrading and inhumane. Despite the fact that the tradition had been forgone for nearly 30 years, legislation banning the practice entirely by law was not implemented until 2004.[82]

text: Some Canadian provinces banned corporal punishment in public schools prior to the national ban in 2004. They are, in chronological order by year of provincial ban:[citation needed]

text:
British Columbia - 1973
Nova Scotia - 1989
New Brunswick - 1990
Yukon - 1990
Prince Edward Island - 1993
Northwest Territories - 1995
Nunavut - 1995* (banned while Nunavut was still part of Northwest Territories. Remained banned in Nunavut when it became a separate Territory in 1999.)
Newfoundland and Labrador - 1997
Quebec - 1998

text: China[edit]

text: Corporal punishment in China was officially banned after the communist revolution in 1949. The Compulsory Education Law of 1986 states: "It shall be forbidden to inflict physical punishment on students".[22] In practice, beatings by schoolteachers are common, especially in rural areas.[23][83]

text: Colombia[edit]

text: Colombian private and public schools were banned from using "penalties involving physical or psychological abuse" through the Children and Adolescents Code 2006, though it is not clear whether this also applies to indigenous communities.[84][better source needed]

text: Costa Rica[edit]

text: All corporal punishment, both in school and in the home, has been banned since 2008.[85]

text: Czech Republic[edit]

text: Corporal punishment is outlawed under Article 31 of the Education Act.[86]

text: Denmark[edit]

text: Corporal punishment was prohibited in the public schools in Copenhagen Municipality in 1951 and by law in all schools of Denmark in 1967.[87][88][89]

text: Egypt[edit]

text: A 1998 study found that random physical punishment (not proper formal corporal punishment) was being used extensively by teachers in Egypt to punish behavior they regarded as unacceptable. Around 80% of the boys and 60% of the girls were punished by teachers, using their hands, sticks, straps, shoes, punches and kicks as most common methods of administration. The most common reported injuries were bumps and contusions.[90]

text: Finland[edit]

text: Corporal punishment in public schools was banned in 1914, but remained de facto commonplace until 1984, when a law banning all corporal punishment of minors, even by parents, was introduced.[91][92]

text: France[edit]

text: The systematic use of corporal punishment has been absent from French schools since the 19th century.[93] There is no explicit legal ban on it,[94] but in 2008 a teacher was fined €500 for what some people describe as slapping a student.[95][96][97]

text: Germany[edit]

text: School corporal punishment, historically widespread, was outlawed in different states via their administrative law at different times. It was not completely abolished everywhere until 1983.[98] Since 1993, use of corporal punishment by a teacher has been a criminal offence. In that year a sentence by the Federal Court of Justice of Germany (Bundesgerichtshof, case number NStZ 1993.591) was published which overruled the previous powers enshrined in unofficial customary law (Gewohnheitsrecht) and upheld by some regional appeal courts (Oberlandesgericht, Superior State Court) even in the 1970s. They assumed a right of chastisement was a defense of justification against the accusation of "causing bodily harm" per Paragraph (=Section) 223 Strafgesetzbuch (Federal Penal Code).

text: Greece[edit]

text: Corporal punishment in Greek primary schools was banned in 1998, and in secondary schools in 2005.[99]

text: India[edit]

text: Corporal punishment is still used in most of India. The Delhi High Court banned its use in Delhi schools in 2000. 17 out of 29 states claim to apply the ban, though enforcement is lax.[100] A number of social and cultural groups, including Shankaracharya, are campaigning against corporal punishment in India. In many states, corporal punishment is still practised within most schools. Society for Prevention of Injuries & Corporal Punishment (SPIC) is actively running awareness campaigns to educate the teachers and students through conferences and scientific publications.[101]

text: Ireland[edit]

text: In the law of the Republic of Ireland, corporal punishment was prohibited in 1982 by an administrative decision of John Boland, the Minister for Education, which applied to national schools (most primary schools) and to secondary schools receiving public funding (practically all of them).[102] Teachers were not liable to criminal prosecution until 1997, when the rule of law allowing "physical chastisement" was explicitly abolished.[103]

text: Italy[edit]

text: Corporal punishment in Italian schools was banned in 1928.[104]

text: Japan[edit]

text: Although banned in 1947, corporal punishment is still commonly found in schools in the 2010s and particularly widespread in school sports clubs. In late 1987, about 60% of junior high school teachers felt it was necessary, with 7% believing it was necessary in all conditions, 59% believing it should be applied sometimes and 32% disapproving of it in all circumstances; while at elementary (primary) schools, 2% supported it unconditionally, 47% felt it was necessary and 49% disapproved.[105] As recent as December 2012, a high school student committed suicide after having been constantly beaten by his basketball coach.[106] An education ministry survey found that more than 10,000 students received illegal corporal punishment from more than 5,000 teachers across Japan in 2012 fiscal year alone.[107]

text: Luxembourg[edit]

text: Corporal punishment in schools was banned in 1845 and became a criminal offence in 1974 (Aggravated Assault on Minors under Authority). [108][109]

text: Malaysia[edit]

text: Caning is a common form of discipline in many Malaysian schools. Legally it should be applied only to male students, but the idea of making the caning of girls lawful has recently been debated. This would be applied to the palm of the hand, whereas boys are typically caned across the seat of the trousers.[110]

text: Netherlands[edit]

text: Banned in 1920.[111]

text: New Zealand[edit]

text: Corporal punishment in New Zealand schools was abolished in 1987, but wasn't abolished legislatively until 23 July 1990, when Section 139A of the Education Act 1989 was inserted by the Education Amendment Act 1990. Section 139A prohibits anyone employed by a school or ECE provider, or anyone supervising or controlling students on the school's behalf, from using force by way of correction or punishment towards any student at or in relation to the school or the student under their supervision or control.[112] Teachers who administer corporal punishment can be found guilty of physical assault, resulting in termination and cancellation of teacher registration, and possibly criminal charges, with a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment.[113]

text: As enacted, the law had a loophole: parents, provided they were not school staff, could still discipline their children on school grounds. In early 2007, a southern Auckland Christian school was found to be using this loophole to discipline students by corporal punishment, by making the student's parents administer the punishment.[114] This loophole was closed in May 2007 by the Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Act 2007, which enacted a blanket ban on parents administering corporal punishment to their children.

text: Norway[edit]

text: Corporal punishment in Norwegian schools was strongly restricted in 1889, and was prohibited outright in 1936.[citation needed]

text: Pakistan[edit]

text: School corporal punishment in Pakistan is not very common in modern educational institutions although it is still used in schools across the rural parts of the country as a means of enforcing student discipline. The method has been criticised by some children's rights activists who claim that many cases of corporal punishment in schools have resulted in physical and mental abuse of schoolchildren. According to one report, corporal punishment is a key reason for school dropouts and subsequently, street children, in Pakistan; as many as 35,000 high school pupils in Pakistan are said to drop out of the education system each year because they have been punished or abused in school.[115]

text: Philippines[edit]

text: Corporal punishment is prohibited in private and public schools.[116]

text: Poland[edit]

text: In 1783, Poland became the first country in the world to prohibit corporal punishment.[117] Peter Newell assumes that perhaps the most influential writer on the subject was the English philosopher John Locke, whose Some Thoughts Concerning Education explicitly criticised the central role of corporal punishment in education. Locke's work was highly influential, and may have helped influence Polish legislators to ban corporal punishment from Poland's schools in 1783. Today, the ban of corporal punishment in all forms is vested in Constitution of Poland[118][119]

text: Russia[edit]

text: Corporal punishment was banned in USSR (and hence, Russian) schools in 1917.[18] In addition, the Article 336 (since 2006) of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation states that any teacher who has used corporal punishment on a pupil shall be dismissed.

text: Serbia[edit]

text: Corporal punishment was first explicitly prohibited in schools in article 67 of the Law on Public Schools 1929, passed in the Kingdom of  Yugoslavia, of which Serbia was then a part. Other now independent countries which belonged to Yugoslavia then and to which the 1929 Law applied are: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Kosovo, and Slovenia. In Serbia, corporal punishment in schools is now unlawful under the Law on Secondary Schools 1992, the Law on Elementary Schools 1992 and the Law on the Foundations of Education and Upbringing 2003/2009.[120]

text: Singapore[edit]

text: Corporal punishment is legal in Singapore schools (for male students only, it is illegal to inflict it on female students) and fully encouraged by the government in order to maintain strict discipline.[121] Only a light rattan cane may be used.[122] This must be administered in a formal ceremony by the school management after due deliberation, not by classroom teachers. Most secondary schools (whether independent, autonomous or government-controlled), and also some primary schools, use caning to deal with misconduct by boys.[123] At the secondary level, the rattan strokes are nearly always delivered to the student's clothed buttocks. The Ministry of Education has stipulated a maximum of six strokes per occasion. In some cases the punishment is carried out in front of the rest of the school instead of in private.[124]

text: South Africa[edit]

text: The use of corporal punishment in schools was prohibited by the South African Schools Act, 1996. According to section 10 of the act:

text: (1) No person may administer corporal punishment at a school to a learner.

text: (2) Any person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a sentence which could be imposed for assault.[125]

text: In the case of Christian Education South Africa v Minister of Education the Constitutional Court rejected a claim that the constitutional right to religious freedom entitles private Christian schools to impose corporal punishment.

text: South Korea[edit]

text:
Liberal regions in South Korea have completely banned all forms of caning beginning with Gyeonggi Province in 2010, followed by Seoul Metropolitan City, Gangwon Province, Gwangju Metropolitan City and North Jeolla Province in 2011.[126] Other more conservative regions are governed by a national law enacted in 2011 which states that while caning is generally forbidden, it can be used indirectly to maintain school discipline.[127]
but it is still known to be practised[128]

text: Spain[edit]

text: Corporal punishment in Spanish schools was banned in 1985.[129]

text: Sweden[edit]

text: Corporal punishment at school has been prohibited in folkskolestadgan (the elementary school ordinance) since 1 January 1958. Its use by ordinary teachers in grammar schools had been outlawed in 1928.[130]

text: Taiwan[edit]

text: In 2006 Taiwan made corporal punishment in the school system illegal,[131] but it is still known to be practised (see Corporal punishment in Taiwan).

text: Thailand[edit]

text: Corporal punishment in schools is illegal under the Ministry of Education Regulation on Student Punishment (2005) and the National Committee on Child Protection Regulation on Working Procedures of Child Protection Officers Involved in Promoting Behaviour of Students (2005), pursuant to article 65 of the Child Protection Act.[132]

text: Thai proverb "If you love your cow, tie it up; if you love your child, beat him." is still considered "wisdom" and is held by many parents and teachers.[133]

text: Ukraine[edit]

text:
Corporal punishment was banned in USSR (and hence, Ukrainian) schools in 1917.[18]
In Ukraine, "physical or mental violence" against children is forbidden by the Constitution (Art.52.2) and the Law on Education (Art.51.1, since 1991) which states that students and other learners have the right “to the protection from any form of exploitation, physical and psychological violence, actions of pedagogical and other employees who violate the rights or humiliate their honour and dignity”.[134] Standard instructions for teachers provided by the Ministry of Science and Education state that a teacher who has used corporal punishment to a pupil (even once), shall be dismissed.

text: United Arab Emirates[edit]

text: A federal law was implemented in 1998 which banned school corporal punishment. The law applied to all schools, both public and private.[135][136] Any teacher who engages in the practice would not only lose their job and teaching license, but will also face criminal prosecution for engaging in violence against minors and will also face child abuse charges.[137]

text: United Kingdom[edit]

text: In state-run schools, and in private schools where at least part of the funding came from government, corporal punishment was outlawed by the British Parliament in 1986.[138] In other private schools, it was banned in 1998 (England and Wales), 2000 (Scotland) and 2003 (Northern Ireland).[139] Schools had to keep a record of punishments inflicted,[140] and there are occasional press reports of examples of these "punishment books" having survived.[141][142]

text: The implement used in many state and private schools in England and Wales was often a rattan cane, struck either across the student's hands or (especially in the case of teenage boys) the clothed buttocks. "Slippering"—striking the buttocks with a rubber-soled gym shoe, or plimsoll shoe—was widely used in many schools, for example King's School, Macclesfield, a boys grammar school in Cheshire.[143] In a few English cities, a strap was used instead of the cane.[144] In Scotland a leather strap, the tawse, administered to the palms of the hands, was universal in state schools,[145] but some private schools used the cane.[146]

text: Prior to the ban in private schools in England, the "slippering" of a student at an independent boarding school was challenged in 1993 before the European Court of Human Rights.[147] The Court ruled 5–4 in that case that the punishment was not severe enough to infringe the student's "freedom from degrading punishment" under article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The dissenting judges argued that the ritualised nature of the punishment, given after several days and without parental consent, should qualify it as "degrading punishment".[148]

text: R (Williamson) v Secretary of State for Education and Employment (2005) was an unsuccessful challenge to the prohibition of corporal punishment contained in the Education Act 1996, by several headmasters of private Christian schools who argued that it was a breach of their religious freedom.

text: In response to a 2008 poll of 6,162 UK teachers by the Times Educational Supplement, 22% of secondary school teachers and 16% of primary school teachers supported "the right to use corporal punishment in extreme cases". The National Union of Teachers said that it "could not support the views expressed by those in favour of hitting children".[149][150]

text: United States[edit]

text: There is no federal law addressing corporal punishment in public or private schools. In 1977, the Supreme Court ruling in Ingraham v. Wright held that the Eighth Amendment clause prohibiting "cruel and unusual punishments" did not apply to school students, and that teachers could punish children without parental permission.

text: As of 2015, 31 states and the District of Columbia have banned corporal punishment in public schools, though in some of these there is no explicit prohibition. Corporal punishment is also unlawful in private schools in Iowa and New Jersey. In 19 U.S. states, corporal punishment is lawful in both public and private schools.[151] It is still common in some schools in the South, and more than 167,000 students were paddled in the 2011-2012 school year in American public schools.[152] Students can be physically punished from kindergarten to the end of high school, meaning that even legal adults who have reached the age of majority are sometimes spanked by school officials.[153]

text: Venezuela[edit]

text: Corporal punishment in all settings, including schools, was prohibited in Venezuela in 2007. According to the Law for the Protection of Children and Adolescents, "All children and young people have a right to be treated well. This right includes a non-violent education and upbringing... Consequently, all forms of physical and humiliating punishment are prohibited".[154]

text: Uganda[edit]

text: In Uganda, teachers usually keep their huge classes calm by corporal punishment. However, there is some movement, who wants them to change disciplining methods by using positive discipline. Teachers should better teach them how to improve, when they performed badly[155]


document_title: Grey parrot

question_text: how many words can a grey parrot learn

question_tokens: how many words can a grey parrot learn

root

text: Grey parrot

text: Description[edit]

text: The grey parrot is a medium-sized, predominantly grey, black-billed parrot. Their average weight is 400 grams (0.88 lb), with an average length of 33 centimetres (13 in)[2] and an average wingspan of 46–52 cm.[3] The Congo species is a lighter grey, with darker grey over the head and both wings, while the head and body feathers have a slight white edge to them. The tail feathers are red. The Timneh is a darker grey and has a dark maroon coloured tail as well as having a portion of their beak being light pink in colour. Due to artificial selection by parrot breeders, some Congo grey parrots are partially or completely red.[4] Both sexes appear similar.[2] The colouration of juveniles is similar to that of adults, but the eye is typically dark grey to black, in comparison to the yellow irises around dark eyes of the adult birds.[5] The undertail coverts are also tinged with grey.[2] The adults weigh between 418 and 526 grams.[6]

tag: p

text: Grey parrots may live for 40–60 years in captivity, although their mean lifespan in the wild appears to be shorter at about 23 years.[3]

text: Distribution and habitat[edit]

text: The grey parrot is native to equatorial Africa, including Angola, Cameroon, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Ghana, Kenya, and Uganda. The species is found inside a range from Kenya to the eastern part of the Ivory Coast.[7] Between 120,100 and 259,000 Timneh African gray parrots remain worldwide.[8] Current estimates for the global population of Congo grey parrots are uncertain and range from 0.63 to 13 million birds. Populations are decreasing worldwide.[8] The species seems to favor dense forests, but can also be found at forest edges and in more open vegetation types (gallery and savanna forests).[1]

text: A population study published in 2015 found that the species had been ″virtually eliminated″ from Ghana with numbers declining 90 to 99% since 1992.[9] They were found in only 10 of 42 forested areas, and in three roosts that once held between 700 and 1200 birds each, now had only 18 in total. Local people mainly blamed the pet trade, and the felling of timber for the decline.[10] Populations are thought to be stable in Cameroon, and in the Congo an estimated 15,000 are taken every year for the pet trade, from the eastern part of the country. The annual quota is 5,000.[10]

text: Behavior and ecology[edit]

text: Breeding[edit]

text: Grey parrots are monogamous breeders which nest in tree cavities. Each couple of parrots needs its own tree to nest. The hen lays three to five eggs, which she incubates for 30 days while being fed by her mate. The adults defend their nesting sites.[7] Both parents help take care of the chicks until they can go off on their own.[11] Grey parrot chicks require feeding and care from their parents in the nest.[7] The parents take care of them until four or five weeks after they are fledged.[11] Young leave the nest at the age of 12 weeks. Little is known about the courtship behavior of this species in the wild.[3] They weigh between 12 and 14 g at hatching and between 372 and 526 g when they leave their parents.[6]

text: Diet[edit]

text: They are mostly frugivorous; most of their diet consists of fruit, nuts, and seeds. The species prefers oil palm fruit and also eat flowers and tree bark, as well as insects and snails.[4] In the wild, the grey is partly a ground feeder.[12] In captivity, it can eat sunflower seeds, bird pellets, a variety of fruits such as pears, orange, pomegranate, apple, and banana, and vegetables such as carrots, cooked sweet potato, celery, fresh kale, peas, and green beans.[6][12] They also need a source of calcium.[7]

text: Conservation[edit]

text: The natural predators for this species include palm-nut vultures, as well as a number of raptors; monkeys target eggs and the young for food. Grey parrots in captivity have been observed to be susceptible to fungal infections, bacterial infections, nutritional insufficiency, malignant tumors, psittacine beak and feather disease, tapeworms, and blood-worms.[7][12]

text: Humans are by far the largest threat to wild grey populations. Between 1994 and 2003, over 359,000 grey parrots were traded on the international market. Around 21% of the population of the wild birds are being harvested every year. Mortality rates are extremely high after they are captured until they reach market, ranging from 60 to 66%.[8] Mortality among imported birds is high.[13] This bird is also hunted for its meat and for its parts are used in traditional medicines.[14] As a result of the extensive harvest of wild birds, in addition to habitat loss, this species is believed to be undergoing a rapid decline in the wild and has therefore been rated as endangered by the IUCN.[1]

text: In October 2016, the Convention on the International Trade of Endangered Fauna and Flora (CITES) extended the highest level of protection to grey parrots by listing the species under appendix 1, which bans global and domestic trade in the species.[15]

text: Relationship to humans[edit]

text: The species is common in captivity and is regularly kept by humans as a companion parrot, prized for its ability to mimic human speech, which makes it one of the most popular avian pets.[1] An escaped pet in Japan was returned to his owner after repeating the owner's name and address.[16]

text: They are notorious for mimicking noises around their environment and using them tirelessly. While they are highly intelligent birds, they need enrichment and attention in captivity or they can become distressed; feather plucking is a common symptom.[12] However, they may be prone to behavioural problems due to their sensitive nature.[13]

text: Grey parrots are also highly intelligent, having been shown to perform at the cognitive level of a 4– to 6-year-old child in some tasks. New experiments have shown that grey parrots can learn number sequences and can associate human voices with those humans' faces.[17] Most notably, Dr Irene Pepperberg's work with Alex the parrot showed his ability to learn over 100 words, differentiating between objects, colours, materials, and shapes.[18]

text: Mutations[edit]

text: Grey mutations occur naturally in the wild, like the Blue Ino (albino), Incomplete Ino, and Blue varietals. The Blue Ino is all white. The Incomplete Ino has light pigmentation. The Blue has a white tail.

text: Breeders from South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, and Scandinavia have intensively bred greys since the 1800s. These bred varieties include the Red Pied, F2 Pied, Grizzles, Ino, Incomplete, Parino, Lutino, Cinnamon, and Red Factor. South African bird breeder Von van Antwerpen and New Zealand partner Jaco Bosman selected F2 Pieds and created the first Red Factor Greys. The Red Factor Greys are rare, can be predominantly red-pigmented, and range in price depending on the extent of the red plumage displayed.[19]


document_title: Septuagint

question_text: who ordered the translation of the old testament into greek

text: Septuagint

text: Name[edit]

text:
The Septuagint derives its name from the Latin versio septuaginta interpretum, "translation of the seventy interpreters", Greek: ἡ μετάφρασις τῶν ἑβδομήκοντα, hē metáphrasis tōn hebdomḗkonta, "translation of the seventy".[8] However, it was not until the time of Augustine of Hippo (354–430 CE) that the Greek translation of the Jewish scriptures came to be called by the Latin term Septuaginta.[9] The Roman numeral LXX (seventy) is commonly used as an abbreviation, as are

G

{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {G}}}

[10] or G.

text: Composition[edit]

text: Background[edit]

text: Seventy-two Jewish scholars were asked by the Greek King of Egypt Ptolemy II Philadelphus to translate the Torah from Biblical Hebrew into Greek, for inclusion in the Library of Alexandria.[11]

text: This narrative is found in the pseudepigraphic Letter of Aristeas to his brother Philocrates,[12] and is repeated by Philo of Alexandria, Josephus[13][14] and by various later sources, including St. Augustine.[15] The story is also found in the Tractate Megillah of the Babylonian Talmud:

text: King Ptolemy once gathered 72 Elders. He placed them in 72 chambers, each of them in a separate one, without revealing to them why they were summoned. He entered each one's room and said: "Write for me the Torah of Moshe, your teacher". God put it in the heart of each one to translate identically as all the others did.[5]

text: Philo of Alexandria, who relied extensively on the Septuagint,[16] says that the number of scholars was chosen by selecting six scholars from each of the twelve tribes of Israel.

text: History[edit]

text: The date of the 3rd century BCE is supported (for the Torah translation) by a number of factors, including the Greek being representative of early Koine, citations beginning as early as the 2nd century BCE, and early manuscripts datable to the 2nd century.[17][18]

text: After the Torah, other books were translated over the next two to three centuries. It is not altogether clear which was translated when, or where; some may even have been translated twice, into different versions, and then revised.[19] The quality and style of the different translators also varied considerably from book to book, from the literal to paraphrasing to interpretative.

text: The translation process of the Septuagint itself and from the Septuagint into other versions can be broken down into several distinct stages, during which the social milieu of the translators shifted from Hellenistic Judaism to Early Christianity. The translation of the Septuagint itself began in the 3rd century BCE and was completed by 132 BCE,[20][21][22] initially in Alexandria, but in time elsewhere as well.[8] The Septuagint is the basis for the Old Latin, Slavonic, Syriac, Old Armenian, Old Georgian and Coptic versions of the Christian Old Testament.[23]

text: Language[edit]

text: Some sections of the Septuagint may show Semiticisms, or idioms and phrases based on Semitic languages like Hebrew and Aramaic.[24] Other books, such as Daniel and Proverbs, show Greek influence more strongly.[11] Jewish Koine Greek exists primarily as a category of literature, or cultural category, but apart from some distinctive religious vocabulary is not so distinct from other varieties of Koine Greek as to be counted a separate dialect.

text: The Septuagint may also elucidate pronunciation of pre-Masoretic Hebrew: many proper nouns are spelled out with Greek vowels in the LXX, while contemporary Hebrew texts lacked vowel pointing.[25] However, it is extremely unlikely that all ancient Hebrew sounds had precise Greek equivalents.[26]

text: Disputes over canonicity[edit]

text: As the work of translation progressed, the canon of the Greek Bible expanded. The Torah (Pentateuch in Greek) always maintained its pre-eminence as the basis of the canon, but the collection of prophetic writings, based on the Jewish Nevi'im, had various hagiographical works[which?] incorporated into it.

text: In addition, some newer books were included in the Septuagint: those called anagignoskomena in Greek, known in English as Deuterocanonical ("second canon") because they are not included in the Jewish canon. Among these are the Maccabees and the Wisdom of Ben Sira. Also, the Septuagint version of some Biblical books, like Daniel and Esther, are longer than those in the Masoretic Text.[27]

text: It is not known when the Ketuvim ("writings"), the final part of the three part Canon, was established, although some sort of selective processes must have been employed because the Septuagint did not include other well-known Jewish documents such as Enoch or Jubilees or other writings that are not part of the Jewish canon, and which are now classified as Pseudepigrapha. However, the Psalms of Solomon, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, the Epistle of Jeremiah, the Book of Odes, the Prayer of Manasseh and Psalm 151 are included in some copies of the Septuagint,[28][better source needed] some of which are accepted as canonical by Eastern Orthodox and some other churches. (The differences can be seen here.)

text: Since Late Antiquity, once attributed to a Council of Jamnia, mainstream rabbinic Judaism rejected the Septuagint as valid Jewish scriptural texts. Several reasons have been given for this. First, some mistranslations were ascertained.[29] Second, the Hebrew source texts, in some cases (particularly the Book of Daniel), used for the Septuagint differed from the Masoretic tradition of Hebrew texts, which was affirmed as canonical by the Jewish rabbis. Third, the rabbis wanted to distinguish their tradition from the newly emerging tradition of Christianity.[22][30] Finally, the rabbis claimed for the Hebrew language a divine authority, in contrast to Aramaic or Greek—even though these languages were the lingua franca of Jews during this period.[31] As a result of this teaching, translations of the Torah into Koine Greek by early Jewish Rabbis have survived as rare fragments only.

text: In time the LXX became synonymous with the "Greek Old Testament", i.e. a Christian canon of writings which incorporated all the books of the Hebrew canon, along with additional texts. The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches include most of the books that are in the Septuagint in their canons. Protestant churches, however, usually do not. After the Protestant Reformation, many Protestant Bibles began to follow the Jewish canon and exclude the additional texts, which came to be called "Apocrypha" (originally meaning "hidden" but became synonymous with "of questionable authenticity"), with some arguing against them being classed as Scripture.[32][33][34][full citation needed] The Apocrypha are included under a separate heading in the King James Version of the Bible, the basis for the Revised Standard Version.[35]

text: Final form[edit]

text: All the books of western biblical canons of the Old Testament are found in the Septuagint, although the order does not always coincide with the Western ordering of the books. The Septuagint order for the Old Testament is evident in the earliest Christian Bibles (4th century).[11]

text: Some books that are set apart in the Masoretic text are grouped together. For example, the Books of Samuel and the Books of Kings are in the LXX one book in four parts called Βασιλειῶν ("Of Reigns"). In LXX, the Books of Chronicles supplement Reigns and it is called Paraleipoménon (Παραλειπομένων—things left out). The Septuagint organizes the minor prophets as twelve parts of one Book of Twelve.[11]

text: Some scriptures of ancient origin are found in the Septuagint but are not present in the Hebrew Bible. These additional books are Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach, Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah (which later became chapter 6 of Baruch in the Vulgate), additions to Daniel (The Prayer of Azarias, the Song of the Three Children, Susanna and Bel and the Dragon), additions to Esther, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, Odes, including the Prayer of Manasseh, the Psalms of Solomon, and Psalm 151.

text: Despite this, there are fragments of some deuterocanonical books that have been found in Hebrew among the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran:

text: Sirach, whose text in Hebrew was already known from the Cairo Geniza, has been found in two scrolls (2QSir or 2Q18, 11QPs_a or 11Q5) in Hebrew. Another Hebrew scroll of Sirach has been found in Masada (MasSir).[36]:597 Five fragments from the Book of Tobit have been found in Qumran written in Aramaic and in one written in Hebrew (papyri 4Q, nos. 196-200).[36][37]:636 Psalm 151 appears along with a number of canonical and non-canonical psalms in the Dead Sea scroll 11QPs(a) (named also 11Q5), a first-century AD scroll discovered in 1956.[38] This scroll contains two short Hebrew psalms which scholars now agree served as the basis for Psalm 151.[39]

text: The canonical acceptance of these books varies among different Christian traditions. For more information regarding these books, see the articles Biblical apocrypha, Biblical canon, Books of the Bible, and Deuterocanonical books.

text: Incorporations from Theodotion[edit]

text: In the most ancient copies of the Bible which contain the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, the Book of Daniel is not the original Septuagint version, but instead is a copy of Theodotion's translation from the Hebrew, which more closely resembles the Masoretic text. The Septuagint version was discarded in favor of Theodotion's version in the 2nd to 3rd centuries CE. In Greek-speaking areas, this happened near the end of the 2nd century, and in Latin-speaking areas (at least in North Africa), it occurred in the middle of the 3rd century. History does not record the reason for this, and St. Jerome reports, in the preface to the Vulgate version of Daniel, This thing 'just' happened.[40] Several Old Greek texts of the Book of Daniel have been rediscovered recently and work is ongoing in reconstructing the original form of the book.[11]

text: The canonical Ezra-Nehemiah is known in the Septuagint as "Esdras B", and 1 Esdras is "Esdras A". 1 Esdras is a very similar text to the books of Ezra-Nehemiah, and the two are widely thought by scholars to be derived from the same original text. It has been proposed, and is thought highly likely by scholars, that "Esdras B"—the canonical Ezra-Nehemiah—is Theodotion's version of this material, and "Esdras A" is the version which was previously in the Septuagint on its own.[40]

text: Use[edit]

text: Jewish use[edit]

text: Pre-Christian Jews Philo and Josephus considered the Septuagint on equal standing with the Hebrew text.[11][41] Manuscripts of the Septuagint have been found among the Qumran Scrolls in the Dead Sea, and were thought to have been in use among Jews at the time.

text: Starting approximately in the 2nd century CE, several factors led most Jews to abandon use of the LXX. The earliest gentile Christians of necessity used the LXX, as it was at the time the only Greek version of the Bible, and most, if not all, of these early non-Jewish Christians could not read Hebrew. The association of the LXX with a rival religion may have rendered it suspect in the eyes of the newer generation of Jews and Jewish scholars.[23] Instead, Jews used Hebrew/Aramaic Targum manuscripts later compiled by the Masoretes and authoritative Aramaic translations, such as those of Onkelos and Rabbi Yonathan ben Uziel.[42]

text: What was perhaps most significant for the LXX, as distinct from other Greek versions, was that the LXX began to lose Jewish sanction after[when?] differences between it and contemporary Hebrew scriptures were discovered (see Disputes over canonicity). Even Greek-speaking Jews tended less to the LXX, preferring other Jewish versions in Greek, such as that of the 2nd-century Aquila translation, which seemed to be more concordant with contemporary Hebrew texts.[23]

text: Christian use[edit]

text: The Early Christian Church used the Greek texts[43] since Greek was a lingua franca of the Roman Empire at the time, and the language of the Greco-Roman Church (Aramaic was the language of Syriac Christianity).

text: The relationship between the apostolic use of the Old Testament, for example, the Septuagint and the now lost Hebrew texts (though to some degree and in some form carried on in Masoretic tradition) is complicated. The Septuagint seems to have been a major source for the Apostles, but it is not the only one. St. Jerome offered, for example, Matt 2:15 and 2:23, John 19:37, John 7:38, 1 Cor. 2:9.[44] as examples not found in the Septuagint, but in Hebrew texts. (Matt 2:23 is not present in current Masoretic tradition either, though according to St. Jerome it was in Hosea 11:1.) The New Testament writers, when citing the Jewish scriptures, or when quoting Jesus doing so, freely used the Greek translation, implying that Jesus, his Apostles and their followers considered it reliable.[3][24][45]

text: In the Early Christian Church, the presumption that the Septuagint was translated by Jews before the era of Christ, and that the Septuagint at certain places gives itself more to a christological interpretation than 2nd-century Hebrew texts was taken as evidence that "Jews" had changed the Hebrew text in a way that made them less christological. For example, Irenaeus concerning Isaiah 7:14: The Septuagint clearly writes of a virgin (Greek παρθένος, bethulah in Hebrew) that shall conceive.,[46] while the word almah in the Hebrew text was, according to Irenaeus, at that time interpreted by Theodotion and Aquila (both proselytes of the Jewish faith) as a young woman that shall conceive. According to Irenaeus, the Ebionites used this to claim that Joseph was the (biological) father of Jesus. From Irenaeus' point of view that was pure heresy, facilitated by (late) anti-Christian alterations of the scripture in Hebrew, as evident by the older, pre-Christian, Septuagint.[47]

text: When Jerome undertook the revision of the Old Latin translations of the Septuagint, he checked the Septuagint against the Hebrew texts that were then available. He broke with church tradition and translated most of the Old Testament of his Vulgate from Hebrew rather than Greek. His choice was severely criticized by Augustine, his contemporary;[48] a flood of still less moderate criticism came from those who regarded Jerome as a forger. While on the one hand he argued for the superiority of the Hebrew texts in correcting the Septuagint on both philological and theological grounds, on the other, in the context of accusations of heresy against him, Jerome would acknowledge the Septuagint texts as well.[49] With the passage of time, acceptance of Jerome's version gradually increased until it displaced the Old Latin translations of the Septuagint.[23]

text: The Eastern Orthodox Church still prefers to use the LXX as the basis for translating the Old Testament into other languages. The Eastern Orthodox also use LXX untranslated where Greek is the liturgical language, e.g. in the Orthodox Church of Constantinople, the Church of Greece and the Cypriot Orthodox Church. Critical translations of the Old Testament, while using the Masoretic Text as their basis, consult the Septuagint as well as other versions in an attempt to reconstruct the meaning of the Hebrew text whenever the latter is unclear, undeniably corrupt, or ambiguous.[23] For example, the New Jerusalem Bible Foreword says, "Only when this (the Masoretic Text) presents insuperable difficulties have emendations or other versions, such as the ... LXX, been used."[50] The Translator's Preface to the New International Version says: "The translators also consulted the more important early versions (including) the Septuagint ... Readings from these versions were occasionally followed where the MT seemed doubtful ..."[51]

text: Textual history[edit]

text: Table of books[edit]

text:
Greek name [8][52][a]
Transliteration
English name

Law

Γένεσις
Genesis
Genesis

Ἔξοδος
Exodos
Exodus

Λευϊτικόν
Leuitikon
Leviticus

Ἀριθμοί
Arithmoi
Numbers

Δευτερονόμιον
Deuteronomion
Deuteronomy

History

Ἰησοῦς Nαυῆ
Iēsous Nauē
Joshua

Κριταί
Kritai
Judges

Ῥούθ
Routh
Ruth

Βασιλειῶν Αʹ[b]
1 Basileiōn
1 Samuel

Βασιλειῶν Βʹ
2 Basileiōn
2 Samuel

Βασιλειῶν Γʹ
3 Basileiōn
1 Kings

Βασιλειῶν Δʹ
4 Basileiōn
2 Kings

Παραλειπομένων Αʹ
I Paraleipomenōn[c]
I Chronicles

Παραλειπομένων Βʹ
2 Paraleipomenōn
II Chronicles

Ἔσδρας Αʹ
1 Esdras
1 Esdras

Ἔσδρας Βʹ
2 Esdras
Ezra-Nehemiah

Τωβίτ[d]
Tōbit[e]
Tobit or Tobias

Ἰουδίθ
Ioudith
Judith

Ἐσθήρ
Esthēr
Esther with additions

Μακκαβαίων Αʹ
1 Makkabaiōn
1 Maccabees

Μακκαβαίων Βʹ
2 Makkabaiōn
2 Maccabees

Μακκαβαίων Γʹ
3 Makkabaiōn
3 Maccabees

Wisdom

Ψαλμοί
Psalmoi
Psalms

Ψαλμός ΡΝΑʹ
Psalmos 151
Psalm 151

Προσευχὴ Μανασσῆ
Proseuchē Manassē
Prayer of Manasseh

Ἰώβ
Iōb
Job

Παροιμίαι
Paroimiai
Proverbs

Ἐκκλησιαστής
Ekklēsiastēs
Ecclesiastes

Ἆσμα Ἀσμάτων
Asma Asmatōn
Song of Songs or Song of Solomon or Canticle of Canticles

Σοφία Σαλoμῶντος
Sophia Salomōnios
Wisdom or Wisdom of Solomon

Σοφία Ἰησοῦ Σειράχ
Sophia Iēsou Seirach
Sirach or Ecclesiasticus

Ψαλμοί Σαλoμῶντος
Psalmoi Salomōnios
Psalms of Solomon[53]

Prophets

Δώδεκα
Dōdeka
Minor Prophets

Ὡσηέ Αʹ
I. Hōsēe
Hosea

Ἀμώς Βʹ
II. Āmōs
Amos

Μιχαίας Γʹ
III. Michaias
Micah

Ἰωήλ Δʹ
IV. Iōēl
Joel

Ὀβδιού Εʹ[f]
V. Obdiou
Obadiah

Ἰωνᾶς Ϛ'
VI. Iōnas
Jonah

Ναούμ Ζʹ
VII. Naoum
Nahum

Ἀμβακούμ Ηʹ
VIII. Ambakoum
Habakkuk

Σοφονίας Θʹ
IX. Sophonias
Zephaniah

Ἀγγαῖος Ιʹ
X. Angaios
Haggai

Ζαχαρίας ΙΑʹ
XI. Zacharias
Zachariah

Μαλαχίας ΙΒʹ
XII. Malachias
Malachi

Ἠσαΐας
Ēsaias
Isaiah

Ἱερεμίας
Hieremias
Jeremiah

Βαρούχ
Barouch
Baruch

Θρῆνοι
Thrēnoi
Lamentations

Ἐπιστολὴ Ἰερεμίου
Epistolē Ieremiou
Letter of Jeremiah

Ἰεζεκιήλ
Iezekiēl
Ezekiel

Δανιήλ
Daniēl
Daniel with additions

Appendix

Μακκαβαίων Δ' Παράρτημα
4 Makkabaiōn
4 Maccabees[g]

tag: table

text: Textual analysis[edit]

text: Modern scholarship holds that the LXX was written during the 3rd through 1st centuries BCE. But nearly all attempts at dating specific books, with the exception of the Pentateuch (early- to mid-3rd century BCE), are tentative and without consensus.[11]

text: Later Jewish revisions and recensions of the Greek against the Hebrew are well attested, the most famous of which include the Three: Aquila (128 CE), Symmachus, and Theodotion. These three, to varying degrees, are more literal renderings of their contemporary Hebrew scriptures as compared to the Old Greek. Modern scholars consider one or more of the 'three' to be totally new Greek versions of the Hebrew Bible.[54]

text: Around 235 CE, Origen, a Christian scholar in Alexandria, completed the Hexapla, a comprehensive comparison of the ancient versions and Hebrew text side-by-side in six columns, with diacritical markings (a.k.a. "editor's marks", "critical signs" or "Aristarchian signs"). Much of this work was lost, but several compilations of the fragments are available. In the first column was the contemporary Hebrew, in the second a Greek transliteration of it, then the newer Greek versions each in their own columns. Origen also kept a column for the Old Greek (the Septuagint), which included readings from all the Greek versions into a critical apparatus with diacritical marks indicating to which version each line (Gr. στίχος) belonged. Perhaps the voluminous Hexapla was never copied in its entirety, but Origen's combined text ("the fifth column") was copied frequently, eventually without the editing marks, and the older uncombined text of the LXX was neglected. Thus this combined text became the first major Christian recension of the LXX, often called the Hexaplar recension. In the century following Origen, two other major recensions were identified by Jerome, who attributed these to Lucian and Hesychius.[11]

text: Manuscripts[edit]

text: The oldest manuscripts of the LXX include 2nd century BCE fragments of Leviticus and Deuteronomy (Rahlfs nos. 801, 819, and 957), and 1st century BCE fragments of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and the Minor Prophets (Alfred Rahlfs nos. 802, 803, 805, 848, 942, and 943). Relatively complete manuscripts of the LXX postdate the Hexaplar rescension and include the Codex Vaticanus from the 4th century CE and the Codex Alexandrinus of the 5th century. These are indeed the oldest surviving nearly complete manuscripts of the Old Testament in any language; the oldest extant complete Hebrew texts date some 600 years later, from the first half of the 10th century.[23][55] The 4th century Codex Sinaiticus also partially survives, still containing many texts of the Old Testament.[56] While there are differences between these three codices, scholarly consensus today holds that one LXX—that is, the original pre-Christian translation—underlies all three. The various Jewish and later Christian revisions and recensions are largely responsible for the divergence of the codices.[11] The Codex Marchalianus is another notable manuscript.

text: Differences with the Latin Vulgate and the Masoretic text[edit]

text: The sources of the many differences between the Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate and the Masoretic text have long been discussed by scholars. Following the Renaissance, a common opinion among some humanists was that the LXX translators bungled the translation from the Hebrew and that the LXX became more corrupt with time. The most widely accepted view today is that the Septuagint provides a reasonably accurate record of an early Hebrew textual variant that differed from the ancestor of the Masoretic text as well as those of the Latin Vulgate, where both of the latter seem to have a more similar textual heritage. This view is supported by comparisons with Biblical texts found at the Essene settlement at Qumran (the Dead Sea Scrolls).[citation needed]

text: These issues notwithstanding, the text of the LXX is generally close to that of the Masoretes and Vulgate. For example, Genesis 4:1–6 is identical in both the LXX, Vulgate and the Masoretic Text. Likewise, Genesis 4:8 to the end of the chapter is the same. There is only one noticeable difference in that chapter, at 4:7, to wit:

text:
Genesis 4:7, LXX and English Translation (NETS)

Genesis 4:7, Masoretic and English Translation from MT (Judaica Press)

Genesis 4:7, Latin Vulgate and English Translation (Douay-Rheims)

οὐκ ἐὰν ὀρθῶς προσενέγκῃς, ὀρθῶς δὲ μὴ διέλῃς, ἥμαρτες; ἡσύχασον· πρὸς σὲ ἡ ἀποστροφὴ αὐτοῦ, καὶ σὺ ἄρξεις αὐτοῦ.

If you offer correctly but do not divide correctly, have you not sinned? Be still; his recourse is to you, and you will rule over him.
הֲלוֹא אִם תֵּיטִיב שְׂאֵת וְאִם לֹא תֵיטִיב לַפֶּתַח חַטָּאת רֹבֵץ וְאֵלֶיךָ תְּשׁוּקָתוֹ וְאַתָּה תִּמְשָׁל בּוֹ:

Is it not so that if you improve, it will be forgiven you? If you do not improve, however, at the entrance, sin is lying, and to you is its longing, but you can rule over it.
nonne si bene egeris, recipies : sin autem male, statim in foribus peccatum aderit? sed sub te erit appetitus ejus, et tu dominaberis illius.

If thou do well, shalt thou not receive? but if ill, shall not sin forthwith be present at the door? but the lust thereof shall be under thee, and thou shalt have dominion over it.

text: This instance illustrates the complexity of assessing differences between the LXX and the Masoretic Text as well as the Vulgate. Despite the striking divergence of meaning here between the Septuagint and later texts, nearly identical consonantal Hebrew source texts can be reconstructed. The readily apparent semantic differences result from alternative strategies for interpreting the difficult verse and relate to differences in vowelization and punctuation of the consonantal text.

text: The differences between the LXX and the MT thus fall into four categories.[57]

text:
Different Hebrew sources for the MT and the LXX. Evidence of this can be found throughout the Old Testament. Most obvious are major differences in Jeremiah and Job, where the LXX is much shorter and chapters appear in different order than in the MT, and Esther where almost one third of the verses in the LXX text have no parallel in the MT. A more subtle example may be found in Isaiah 36.11; the meaning ultimately remains the same, but the choice of words evidences a different text. The MT reads "...al tedaber yehudit be-'ozne ha`am al ha-homa" [speak not the Judean language in the ears of (or—which can be heard by) the people on the wall]. The same verse in the LXX reads according to the translation of Brenton "and speak not to us in the Jewish tongue: and wherefore speakest thou in the ears of the men on the wall." The MT reads "people" where the LXX reads "men". This difference is very minor and does not affect the meaning of the verse. Scholars at one time had used discrepancies such as this to claim that the LXX was a poor translation of the Hebrew original. With the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, variant Hebrew texts of the Bible were found. In fact this verse is found in Qumran (1QIsaa) where the Hebrew word "haanashim" (the men) is found in place of "haam" (the people). This discovery, and others like it, showed that even seemingly minor differences of translation could be the result of variant Hebrew source texts.
Differences in interpretation stemming from the same Hebrew text. A good example is Genesis 4.7, shown above.
Differences as a result of idiomatic translation issues (i.e. a Hebrew idiom may not easily translate into Greek, thus some difference is intentionally or unintentionally imparted). For example, in Psalm 47:10 the MT reads "The shields of the earth belong to God". The LXX reads "To God are the mighty ones of the earth." The metaphor "shields" would not have made much sense to a Greek speaker; thus the words "mighty ones" are substituted in order to retain the original meaning.
Transmission changes in Hebrew or Greek (Diverging revisionary/recensional changes and copyist errors)

tag: ol

text: Dead Sea Scrolls[edit]

text: The Biblical manuscripts found in Qumran, commonly known as the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), have prompted comparisons of the various texts associated with the Hebrew Bible, including the Septuagint.[58] Peter Flint[59] cites Emanuel Tov, the chief editor of the scrolls,[60] who identifies five broad variation categories of DSS texts:[61]

text:
Proto-Masoretic: This consists of a stable text and numerous and distinctive agreements with the Masoretic Text. About 60% of the Biblical scrolls fall into this category (e.g. 1QIsa-b)
Pre-Septuagint: These are the manuscripts which have distinctive affinities with the Greek Bible. These number only about 5% of the Biblical scrolls, for example, 4QDeut-q, 4QSam-a, and 4QJer-b, 4QJer-d. In addition to these manuscripts, several others share distinctive individual readings with the Septuagint, although they do not fall in this category.
The Qumran "Living Bible": These are the manuscripts which, according to Tov, were copied in accordance with the "Qumran practice" (i.e. with distinctive long orthography and morphology, frequent errors and corrections, and a free approach to the text. Such scrolls comprise about 20% of the Biblical corpus, including the Great Isaiah Scroll (1QIsa-a):
Pre-Samaritan: These are DSS manuscripts which reflect the textual form found in the Samaritan Pentateuch, although the Samaritan Bible itself is later and contains information not found in these earlier scrolls, (e.g. God's holy mountain at Shechem rather than Jerusalem). The Qumran witnesses—which are characterized by orthographic corrections and harmonizations with parallel texts elsewhere in the Pentateuch—comprise about 5% of the Biblical scrolls. (e.g. 4QpaleoExod-m)
Non-Aligned: This is a category which shows no consistent alignment with any of the other four text-types. These number approximately 10% of the Biblical scrolls, and include 4QDeut-b, 4QDeut-c, 4QDeut-h, 4QIsa-c, and 4QDan-a.[61][62][63]

text: The textual sources present a variety of readings. For example, Bastiaan Van Elderen compares three variations of Deuteronomy 32:43, the Song of Moses.[60]

text:
Deuteronomy 32.43, Masoretic

Deuteronomy 32.43, Qumran

Deuteronomy 32.43, Septuagint

1 Shout for joy, O nations, with his people

2 For he will avenge the blood of his servants
3 And will render vengeance to his adversaries
4 And will purge his land, his people.

1 Shout for joy, O heavens, with him
2 And worship him, all you divine ones
3 For he will avenge the blood of his sons
4 And he will render vengeance to his adversaries
5 And he will recompense the ones hating him
6 And he purges the land of his people.

1 Shout for joy, O heavens, with him
2 And let all the sons of God worship him
3 Shout for joy, O nations, with his people
4 And let all the angels of God be strong in him
5 Because he avenges the blood of his sons
6 And he will avenge and recompense justice to his enemies
7 And he will recompense the ones hating
8 And the Lord will cleanse the land of his people.

text: Printed editions[edit]

text: The texts of all printed editions are derived from the three recensions mentioned above, that of Origen, Lucian, or Hesychius.

text:
The editio princeps is the Complutensian Polyglot. It was based on manuscripts that are now lost and is one of the received texts used for the KJV like Textus Receptus, and seems to transmit quite early readings.[64]
Brian Walton Polyglot is one of the few versions that includes a Septuagint not based on the Egyptian Alexandria type text such as Vaticanus, Alexandrinus and Sinaiticus, but rather follows the vast majority which extremely agree like the Complutensian Polyglot.
The Aldine edition (begun by Aldus Manutius) appeared at Venice in 1518. The text is closer to Codex Vaticanus than the Complutensian. The editor says he collated ancient manuscripts but does not specify them. It has been reprinted several times.
The Roman or Sixtine Septuagint, which uses Codex Vaticanus as the base texts and various other later manuscripts for the lacunae in the uncial manuscript. It was published in 1587 under the direction of Cardinal Antonio Carafa, with the help of a group of Roman scholars (Cardinal Gugliemo Sirleto, Antonio Agelli and Petrus Morinus), by the authority of Sixtus V, to assist the revisers who were preparing the Latin Vulgate edition ordered by the Council of Trent. It has become the textus receptus of the Greek Old Testament and has had many new editions, such as that of Robert Holmes and James Parsons (Oxford, 1798–1827), the seven editions of Constantin von Tischendorf, which appeared at Leipzig between 1850 and 1887, the last two, published after the death of the author and revised by Nestle, the four editions of Henry Barclay Swete (Cambridge, 1887–95, 1901, 1909), etc. A detailed description of this edition has been made by H. B. Swete in his An Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek (1900), pp. 174–182.
Grabe's edition was published at Oxford, from 1707 to 1720, and reproduced, but imperfectly, the Codex Alexandrinus of London. For partial editions, see Fulcran Vigouroux, Dictionnaire de la Bible, 1643 sqq.
Alfred Rahlfs, a longtime Septuagint researcher at the University of Göttingen, began a manual edition of the Septuagint in 1917 or 1918. The completed Septuaginta was published in 1935. It relies mainly on Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and Alexandrinus, and presents a critical apparatus with variants from these and several other sources.[65]
The Göttingen Septuagint (Vetus Testamentum Graecum: Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum) is a major critical version, comprising multiple volumes published from 1931 to 2009 and not yet complete (the largest missing parts are the history books Joshua through Chronicles except Ruth, and the Solomonic books Proverbs through Song of Songs). Its two critical apparatuses present variant Septuagint readings and variants from other Greek versions.[66]
In 2006, a revision of Alfred Rahlfs's Septuaginta was published by the German Bible Society. This editio altera includes over a thousand changes to the text and apparatus.[67]
Apostolic Bible Polyglot contains a Septuagint text derived mainly from the agreement of any two of the Complutensian Polyglot, the Sixtine, and the Aldine texts.[68]

tag: ul

text: English translations[edit]

text: The Septuagint has been translated surprisingly few times into English. The first one, which excluded the Apocrypha, was Charles Thomson's in 1808, which was subsequently revised and enlarged by C.A. Muses in 1954. Many complain how C.A. Muses has corrupted the translation to match the Hebrew.[who?]

text: The translation of Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton, published in 1851, is a long-time standard. For most of the years since its publication it has been the only one readily available, and has continually been in print. It is based primarily upon the Codex Vaticanus and contains the Greek and English texts in parallel columns. Considering the dated English of Brenton's translation, there is also a revision of the Brenton Septuagint available through Stauros Ministries, called The Complete Apostles' Bible, translated by Paul W. Esposito, Th.D, and released in 2007. [2]

text: A New English Translation of the Septuagint and the Other Greek Translations Traditionally Included Under that Title (NETS), an academic translation based on standard critical editions of the Greek texts was published by the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies (IOSCS). It was published by Oxford University Press in October 2007. It used New Revised Standard version (which is based on the Hebrew) as the base text.

text: The Apostolic Bible Polyglot, published in 2003 is another, including the Greek books of the Hebrew canon along with the Greek New Testament, all numerically coded to the AB-Strong numbering system, and set in monotonic orthography. Included in the printed edition is a concordance and index.

text: The Orthodox Study Bible was released in early 2008 with a new translation of the Septuagint based on the Alfred Rahlfs edition of the Greek text. To this base they brought two additional major sources: first the Brenton translation of the Septuagint from 1851, and, second, Thomas Nelson Publishers granted use of the New King James Version text in the places where the translation of the LXX would match that of the Hebrew Masoretic text. This edition includes the New Testament as well, which also uses the New King James Version; and it includes, further, extensive commentary from an Eastern Orthodox perspective.[69]

text: Father Nicholas King, SJ has completed a Catholic translation of the Septuagint into English. The work is available in either four separate volumes or one single volume. Father King is a Jesuit priest who lectures in New Testament Studies at Oxford University. The translation began in 2010 and was finished in 2013; it is available from Kevin Mayhew Publishers, entitled The Old Testament (volumes 1 through 4), and The Bible in hardcover and presentation editions.[3] It contains a very useful mini commentary on each book which gives a flavour of what is hoped to be the start of accessible, reasonably priced individual commentaries for the general reader.

text: Brenton's Septuagint, Restored Names Version, (SRNV) is a two volume editing primarily based on Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton's translation. The Hebrew Names restoration is based on the Westminster Leningrad Codex with the prime focus being the restoration of the Divine Name. It is rendered in Modern English yet remains faithful to Brenton's translation. Additionally it features extensive Hebrew and Greek footnotes. [4]

text: Orthodox England on the net is a translation not in book form but online at http://orthodoxengland.org.uk/zot.htm. It used the King James Version as the base text and corrects where it differs from the Greek.

text: The Eastern Orthodox Bible (EOB) (in progress) is an extensive revision and correction of Brenton's translation which was primarily based on Codex Vaticanus. Its language and syntax have been modernized and simplified. It also includes extensive introductory material and footnotes featuring significant inter-LXX and LXX/MT variants.

text: Promotion[edit]

text: In 2006 the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies (IOSCS) - a non-profit, learned society formed to promote international research in and study of the Septuagint and related texts [70] - declared February 8 "International Septuagint Day",[71] a day to promote the discipline on campuses and in communities.[citation needed] The Organization also publishes the "Journal of Septuagint and Cognate Studies" (JSCS).