Nov.6] PROCEEDINGS. [1894.I pass nowto the other portion containingthe legend of the
Dragon. As has already beenremarked,this legend was found long
ago in an ancient Midrash,but this differs so much fromthe Greek
versions thatit could not be the probable original of these latter.
Notso, however, is the case withJerahmeel'stext, which follows
immediatelyupon the Song. Thiscorresponds exactlyto the true
text of Theodotion, and thisabsolute identityhelpsus to restore
thatverytext,whichas appears now,has been a little curtailedand
made to fit better withthat of the LXX. Hereand therea few
wordsare omitted in the Greek, andin one verse a very important
detail is not to be found in the latter, whichhowever musthave
been in the original, as we find it also in the parallel in Josippon.
Both these texts contain a more detailed description of the in
gredientswhichDanielput into the lump of food for the dragon.
Pitch, fat and hairalone would not kill a dragon suchas that
worshippedby the Babylonians, accustomedas it must havebeen
accordingto legend to devour wholeanimals. In both textsDaniel
usedthesemerelyas blinds, as " he rolled themroundironhatchets
andmadeone big lump of it, which he threw intothe mouth of the
dragon. When the dragon had swallowedit, the fat and pitch
melted away in the stomach, andthe sharp points of the iron
hatchetscausedthe dragon to linger and die." It is not likely that
this should be a later interpolation,as we find it in two independent
texts, alsoin the Midrash Rabbaon Genesis lxviii,f. 77 c, d (ed.
Fcft)ad Genes, xxviii, 12. I cannot finda satisfactory reasonfor
the omission, unlessin the desire of reducing the divinity of that
dragonto a still smaller scale. TheLXXhavefelt the incongruity
betweenthe things usedby Daniel in the making up of that lump,
and have addedthereforethat " the weight of the pitch usedwas very
great,no less than 30 manehs," the cause of death wasthus this
greatquantity.
Withthe assistance of the Aramaic versionwe shall get rid also
of the remarkable bowlwithbread,whichremindsone of the Bud
dhistmonkswiththeirbeggingbowl. In the Aramaic, the prophet
putshis bread in his sac, which he carries probablyon his back, as
he perforce mustkeepin his hands the pottage sod by him for the
reapers. One can easily increase the number of such instances
where ourtextgivesa proper meaning,and shows its incontestable
superiority overall the other versions, the Greek included. The
language is the same as that of the other piece,the same gram
289