Reviewed by: The SBL Commentary on the Septuagint: An Introduction ed. by Dirk Büchner Stephen A. Long dirk büchner (ed.), The SBL Commentary on the Septuagint: An Introduction (SCS 67; Atlanta: SBL Press, 2017). Pp. xviii + 259. Paper $37.95. This volume provides the basic principles for the Society of Biblical Literature Commentary on the Septuagint (SBLCS) and offers seven studies to illustrate the approach of the series. Albert Pietersma writes an introductory essay, "The Society of Biblical Literature Commentary on the Septuagint: Basic Principles," which expounds the Preamble to the Guidelines for the SBLCS. The illustrative studies are the following: Robert J. V. Hiebert, "In the Beginning: A Commentary on the Old Greek Text of Genesis 1.1–2.3"; Larry Perkins, "'Drawn from the Water': A Commentary on the Old Greek Text of Exodus 2.1-10"; Dirk Büchner, "Leuitikon 3.1-17: The Sacrifice of Deliverance"; Spencer A. Jones, "Balaam, Pagan Prophet of God: A Commentary on Greek Numbers 22.1-21"; Cameron Boyd-Taylor, "A Tale of Two Eunuchs: A Commentary on Greek Esther 2.19-23 and A.12-17"; Claude E. Cox, "It's a Question of Intelligence: Iob 34"; and Jannes Smith, "God, Judges, Snakes, and Sinners: A Commentary on the Old Greek Text of Psalm 57 (MT 58)." Finally, an appendix contains the text of the "Preamble to the Guidelines for the Contributors to the SBL Commentary on the Septuagint." Pietersma's essay explains the distinction—fundamental to the SBLCS—between the text-as-received and the text-as-produced. Applied to translation literature such as the Septuagint, the text-as-produced refers to the translated text "as an entity dependent on its source text … in distinction from the translated text, cut loose from its historical moorings, and therefore a free standing text, or 'the text in its own right,' as it is sometimes called" (p. 2; emphasis original). As Pietersma repeatedly emphasizes, the SBLCS aims to elucidate only the text-as-produced—that is, it studies the Old Greek solely qua translation. "Crucial for determining the linguistic make-up of the text-as-produced, or rather its constitutive character, is, on the one hand, to map the translated text onto its source text, in order to establish what sort of translation one is dealing with, and, on the other, to consult Greek composition literature of the period in order to determine what sort of Greek document it is" (pp. 7-8; emphasis original). Put differently, the only "meaning" of significant interest to the SBLCS is defined by the Preamble to the Guidelines (section 1.4.1) as follows: "The [End Page 741] meaning of the text is best understood as encompassing both what the translator did and why" (emphasis original). More on this in a moment. Apart from Pietersma's essay, three chapters stood out for me. First, Büchner's commentary argues that the Greek translator of Leviticus 3 was concerned not with a culturally or technically accurate portrayal of ritual but with providing "a conduit to the language units of the original through etymologizing or through existing translational precedent" (p. 121). In so doing, the translator was often guided by terminology related to Greek θυσία—resulting in some curious renderings of the source language. Second, the essay by Boyd-Taylor on Esther is worthy of mention as an example of tackling problems raised by a composite text when the aim is solely to comment on the text-as-produced. Finally, the essay by Cox illustrates the extent of the editing, abbreviating, and interpretation present in Greek Job. These 256 pages relentlessly pursue the question of translational "meaning" as defined above. What this entails practically is perhaps best illustrated by quoting some typical examples. Consider the comment on the first clause of Gen 1:18, explaining the translation adopted for the heavenly luminaries' "rule over" the day and night: "In his choice of ἄρχω + genitive direct object, G fashions an acceptable translation that conforms to the norms of the target language rather than attempting to replicate the Hebrew idiom ב לשמ" (p. 43). Or, consider the comment on lexical innovation with regard to the "blessing" pronounced in Gen 1:22: "G...