Kaige revision
group of revisions to the Septuagint made in order to more closely align its translation with the proto-Masoretic Hebrew
The kaige revision, or simply kaige, is the group of revisions to the Septuagint made in order to more closely align its translation with the proto-Masoretic Hebrew. The name kaige derives from the revision's pervasive use of Koine Greek: και γε [kai ge] ("and indeed") to translate the Hebrew: וְגַם [wə gam] ("and also").
The importance of this revision lies in its status as a precursor to later revisions by 'the Three' (i.e., Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion) as well as the light it sheds on the origins of the Septuagint.
The individual revisions characteristic of kaige were first observed by Dominique Barthélemy in the Greek Minor Prophets Scroll from Nahal Hever. According to Arie Van Der Kooij "his thesis about the K[aige] T[ranslation] has been widely accepted, but his dating of Theodotion before Aquila has not."
Tetragrammaton
Ellis R. Brotzman and Eric J. Tully claim that a characteristic of the kaige translation is that it wrote YHWH (יהוה) in paleo-Hebrew script as 𐤉𐤄𐤅𐤄 instead of translating it into Greek. When referring to kaige recension in 8HevXII gr, Kristin De Troyer makes the following affirmation: "The problem with a recension is that one does not know what is the original form and what the recension. Hence, is the paleo-Hebrew Tetragrammaton secondary – a part of the recension – or proof of the Old Greek (OG) text? This debate has not yet been solved."
Influence on the New Testament
Emanuel Tov wrote that "in some books of the New Testament and in early Christian literature, Hebraizing revisions of the OG often were quoted rather than the OG version itself, reflecting the beginning of the decline of the LXX (the OG) in Judaism". According to Tuukka Kauhanen, the authors of the New Testament may also have known a kaige type Septuagint text. Some scholars have exposed different views to explain why in citation of Zechariah 12:10 in John 19:37 "with known forms of the text reveals that it demonstrates many similarities with the Hebrew Masoretic text", which includes Martin Hengel who "speak of possibly identifying John's citation with...
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Kaige revision” as group of revisions to the Septuagint made in order to more closely align its translation with the proto-Masoretic Hebrew. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as group of revisions to the Septuagint made in order to more closely align its translation with the proto-Masoretic Hebrew. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 4, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q19572345. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Kaige revision”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Kaige revision primary sources, Kaige revision archive and Kaige research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Kaige revision”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Kaige revision” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.