the fragmentary state of preservation of the text also makes statements about the textual character difficult. however, the editors agree that this is an early revision of the septuagint in alignment with the hebrew text. dominique barthélemy established that text found "is neither a new translation nor an independent one, but raher a recension of the septuagint text". according tuukka kauhanen, a postdoctoral researcher at the faculty of theology at university of helsinki, this manuscript is an early hebraizing revision (i.e. in b-text of books such as joshua, judges, and samuel-kings), eugene c. ulrich wrote "attests the recension commonly referred to as proto-theodotion or καιγε" recension, which is reaffirmed by pavlos vasileiadis, a doctor of theology at the aristotle university of thessaloniki. james a.e. mulroney quoting emanuel tov, robert a. kraft and peter j. parsons claim that "although 8hevxiigr was a revision of og towards the proto-mt, it retained significant continuity with the og text… was a revision, not a new translation". david l. washburn wrote that is a direct translation from an mt-type manuscript into greek, i.e. not part of the septuagint tradition.