INTRODUCTION
According to BDB (classical Hebrew lexicon) the root ק.ד.מ is attested in Akkadian,
Arabic, Ethiopic, Sabean, Phoenician, old Aramaic, Palestinian Aramaic, Syriac,
and Ugaritic. Unlike biblical Hebrew the
temporal significance dominates; the only possibly directional meanings listed
in many of the cognate languages is before, in the presence of. The meaning of east is not attested in
any of these cognates except for Palestinian Aramaic (200 BCE to 200 CE), which
does attest the directional meanings before and east. Biblical Hebrew preserves both the common
Semitic temporal significance of this root as well as the directional meanings (east,
before, in front of, in the presence of), but use of this root to express
directional relationships is more frequent than the temporal significance for some
forms, at least according to BDB. There
is inadequate evidence to determine how or when the directional/spatial
significance became expanded in biblical Hebrew to include east, but
this examination will attempt to determine what syntactic clues were used to
indicate which meaning was intended by the author/speaker.
LEXICAL EVIDENCE
The following entries summarize the information from standard
lexicons, glossaries, and word lists for the languages to be examined as well
as the general Semitic language family.
These meanings represent the considered opinion of Semitic experts on
the meaning and usage of qedem as it appears in the Hebrew bible, its
representation in the major ancient translations, and in its equivalent forms
of cognate Semitic languages. Though
editors of lexicons are surely capable scholars, they are capable of error in
individual instances due to lack of data or due to personal bias. Consequently, such lists can only serve as a
starting point of any serious examination.
Hebrew and
English Lexicon of the Old Testament, Brown, Driver, and Briggs (BDB)
o¤s¤e 1.
Front; 2. East; 3. Ancient time, afore time; beginning
Hebrew Aramaic English Dictionary,
Jastrow (primarily post biblical era)
o¤s¤e olden time; before (targumic use
same as biblical Hebrew)
oŠs„e 1. Before (time and place); 2a. before (dir), 2b. מן ק' – since, because
h‹n‰s‹e (various forms) first, former previous,
ancient times
A Manual of Palestinian Aramaic Texts,
Fitzmyer and Harrington (glossary)
ose 1. before; 2. east
hnse first
,nse before
A Compendious Syriac Dictionary,
Payne Smith (letters transcribed into Hebrew characters)
oh‡se first, former
tŠhŠnhˆs‹e former, pristine
o‹se before (temp), in the presence of; ק' מן – from the presence of
tŠns‹e first, early, primeaval
tŠnŠse front, presence
hŠns‹e first, fore, early, primitive, ancient
Lexicon to the
Syriac New Testament, Jennings (forms
transcribed into Hebrew characters)
o‹se before (temp)
oŠse before, in front of, in the presence of
tŠns‹e first
Ethiopic
qdem before;
precede, former time
A Grammar of
the Phoenician Language, Harris
ose be in front; aforetime
An Aramaic
Handbook, Rosenthal
qdm Monumental
inscriptions: before (local), former condition
qdm Achaemenid
times: before, formerly
qdm Palmyrene,
Hatran, Nabataean: before, former
qwdm Jewish
Palestinian Aramaic: before, from before
ihˆn§s‹e§Kˆn - from of old
qdm Samaritan:
before
osue Palestinean Syriac: before
Babylonian
Talmud: root not listed
qdm Mandaic:
qadmaia first, primeval; qadmia from eternity
A Dictionary of
the Ugaritic Language, Lete and San
Martin
qdm (I)
n. m., "front, front part"
qdm II)
prep, "in front of"
qdmy Madj. m. "ancient, ancestral"
A Concise
Dictionary of Akkadian, Black,
George, and Postgate
qudmu (1) front, before, in presence of
(2) primeval
The above lexical evidence is sufficient to indicate that the root ק.ד.מ was used throughout
the Semitic language family, and the fundamental root significance is temporal
with various fine shades of meaning. The
range of meaning extends from before to former to antiquity
to eternity past. Distinctions within
this broad semantic range is determined jointly by differences in word
formation, vocalization, and literary context.
In contrast, the spatial significance of the root is attested among the
north-west Semitic languages alone. The
restricted geographical distribution of this usage suggests that o¤sœ¤e meaning before, in front of, east, eastward
was derived from the common Semitic temporal meaning of before for the
root. However, because the same, or
similar word forms in these languages were used to express quite different meanings,
particular syntactic combinations and overall context must have been the basis for distinguishing one meaning from the other.
ANALYSIS
The article in
BDB for o¤sœ¤e lists all 61
occurrences of the term in the תנ''כ, and these occurrences are almost evenly split between temporal
and spatial meanings. However, a
detailed examination of the text references indicates that this question is not
quite so simple as it might first appear.
Major challenges are as follows:
· The 61 occurrences of o¤sœ¤e are found in 60 different verses, and out of these 60 verses, the
most ancient translations differ from one another 22 times on how this word should be understood. In most of these cases one translation
provides a different interpretation from the other two, and occasionally all
three differ from one another. In some
cases the LXX text omits a particular verse in the תנ''כ entirely; additionally, since I do not have access to targums for the
Writings portion of the תנ''כ, I cannot assess the targumic interpretations for these passages.
· The general breakdown of the remaining 38 occurrences is as
follows: temporal 25 poetic passages; directional – 4 poetic passages and 9
prose passages. Since poetry commonly
includes more archaic forms of a given language, this result is consistent with
the idea that the temporal meanings are the more ancient.
· I started the assessment of each of the above passages on the basis of the semantic categories provided by BDB. Even when the LXX, targum, and Syriac texts all supported the same interpretation I found some constructions to be inherently ambiguous, some whose accepted interpretation at best was debatable, and some that directly contradicted the overall context of the narrative. This being the case, identifying syntactic constructions that express a directional versus temporal semantic content is expedient. For those constructions that are ambiguous, differentiation between temporal and directional meanings can only be found in the overall context of the narrative.
DIRECTIONAL CONSTRUCTIONS
I found a total
of 14 verses in which all three ancient translations as well as modern versions
contained the directional interpretation.
This suggest that at least some of these passages should contain
syntactical constructions that are unambiguously directional.
· i¤s‡g›i³d‰k
o¤sΤE¦n -- This type of construction is always
directional. It consists of o¤sΤE¦n
followed by a לpreposition
with either a place name or geographic feature as object. The meaning could be in front of, before,
or eastward, depending on context.
Examples: Gen 3:24, Gen 12:8 (first occurrence), Num 34:11, Jud 8:11, Ez
11:23, Zech 14:4, Jonah 4:5.
· o¤sœ¤E©v rË©v -- This construction consists of a place name or geographical
feature followed by a form of o¤sœ¤E
in a construct relation. In this case, o¤sœ¤E© becomes descriptive of its governing noun. Examples: Gen 10:30, Gen 12:8 (second
occurrence).
· v¨n§sœ¥e
,¤r¼®BˆF›o²h -- This construction consists of a place
name followed by o¤sœ¤E with a directional he,
which always indicates direction or destination. Examples: Nu 34:11.
· o¤s½¤E¦n oɨr£t -- This construction consists of the name for a location or people
group followed by a form of o¤sœ¤E. The expression by itself
would be ambiguous unless there is a specifically directional expression in the
same context. This one example occurs in
Is 9:11 and is usually translated Aram from the east and Philistines to the
west, but the words actually mean Aram in front and Philisines behind.
· o¤s·¤e›h¯b‰C -- This construction by itself is inherently ambiguous. It could mean eastern peoples or ancient peoples with equal plausibility. Here the immediate context must indicate whether the author intended a contemporary (directional) or an ancient (temporal) reference. Examples: Is 14:11, Ez 25:4, Job 1:3.
TEMPORAL CONSTRUCTIONS
I found 25
verses in which all three ancient translations interpreted the Hebrew text in a
temporal sense. As before, this suggests
that certain syntactic constructions express a temporal sense unambiguously.
· o¤sœ¤e›h‡f‰k©n›i†C -- This construction consists of a construct chain with o¤sœ¤e being descriptive of its governing noun, which may have no
particularly temporal reference. Like the
similar construction above, this expression is inherently ambiguous. In this particular case (Is 19:11) the
context is referring to advisors to pharaoh, so a reference to kings from
the east would have no relevance from a geographical standpoint. Examples:
Is 19:11, Ps 74:12, Ps 78:2
· zœ¨t¥n uhÉŠkŠg‰p¦n
o¤s¼¤e -- This construction consists of o¤s¼¤e used absolutely with zœ¨t¥n establishing the temporal context.
Examples: Prov 8:22, Is 23:7 (second occurrence), Is 45:21, Lam 5:1, Jer
30:20, Ps 55:20
· o¤sʤe›h¥nhœ¦n
-- Structurally this expression is
identical to o¤sœ¤e›h‡f‰k©n,
except the governing term is a temporal reference -- days. This construction and others like it are
always temporal. Examples: Is 23:7
(first occurrence), Is 37:26, Is 51:9, Mic 7:20, Ps 44:2, Ps 77:6, Ps 77:12,
Job 29:2, Lam 1:7, Lam 2:17
·
o¤s½¤E¦n vɨT©t
tIÍk£v -- Here the form of o¤s½¤E¦ is used predicate complement in a verbless clause without any
other temporal reference in the verse or even in the context. Since the temporal sense is the primary root
meaning, the clause must be understood from that standpoint. Examples: Hab 1:12, Mic 5:1, Ps 74:2, Ps
119:152, Ps143:5,
· :.¤rœ¨t›h¥n§s©E¦n Jt«½r¥n h¦T‰fË©X°b oŠkIgœ¥Ón -- Here h¥n§s©E¦n is the governing word of a construct chain, and the temporal significance is established by both oŠkIgœ¥Ón and Jt«½r¥n, implying that all three terms have the same scope. Examples: Prov 8:23
CONFLICTING INTERPRETATIONS
I included all verses whose translation in the LXX, targum, and Syriac differed from one another. Sources of difference included different interpretations of the Hebrew text, a translation that appears to have been based on a different Hebrew source, and my lack of access to targums for particular books. In each instance I sought to use the syntactic constructions listed to determine what meaning the Hebrew author probably intended to convey.
Prose Passages
I found 14 verses of prose text whose interpretations differ.
Genesis
2:8
:rœŠm²h
rˤJ£t o¼¨s¨tœ¨v›,¤t oº¨J o¤GɲH³u o¤s·¤E¦n i¤s¼‡g‰C›i˳D ohÁ¦vO¡t vͲIv±h
gÄ©Y°H³u
Hebrew text: YHWH God
planted a garden in Eden o¤s·¤E¦n, and he put the man that he formed there.
This passage is extremely interesting and peculiar. First, the expression i¤s¼‡g‰C›i˳D is odd. The term i¤s¼‡g is typically understood as the name of the garden, but the presence of the prefixed preposition suggests that a different meaning may have been intended. The construction isgc occurs just twice in the bible – here and Ez 28:13. The text in Ezekiel is ohvkt id isgc, in Eden, the garden of God, and the subsequent text indicates that the prophet is speaking about a spirit being and that the event in question did not occur in earthly Eden. This construction is not semantically equivalent to that in Gen 2:8.
That being the case, there are two possibilities for the usage here in Genesis: 1) i¤s¼‡g‰C is a name for the location where the garden was placed (preposition used with locative sense), and the garden took its name from that place; 2) i¤s¼‡g is a noun meaning delight, so the combination i¤s¼‡g‰C is an adverbial prepositional phrase meaning with delight. There are three problems with the second option. First, the expression i¤s¼‡g‰C›i˳D is joined together with a maqqef (›) indicating that i¤s¼‡g‰C should have an adjectival, not adverbial force. Second, in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Syriac, the noun i¤s¼‡g is used for something that brings delight, not for the attitude of delight itself. Third, this particular homonym of עדן is connected with an Arabic root spelled with a ‘gayin, not an ‘ayin. The best explanation I have found for the etymology and significance of this name was provided by Cassuto (A Commentary on the Book of Genesis, Part 1, p 107 f.): a place that is well watered. This understanding is supported by Gen 13:10 where Lot considered the Jordan rift valley to be well watered like the garden of God.
The LXX text is unambiguously directional – eastward – in its interpretation, and that has been the source for most modern English translations. Where this particular interpretation came from is impossible to determine, but it is not supported by the targum, the Peshitta, or even the Vulgate. Both the targum and the Peshitta deviate from their typical translations for o¤s·¤E¦n, whether understood as temporal or directional, making their intended meaning somewhat ambiguous on the basis of word forms alone; however, the sense of to the east is not possible from either. The sense of before, in front of is possible, but this sense does not fit the context or grammatical structure of the verse. The sense of from antiquity does fit the context and is supported by the Vulgate rendering. The interpretation of before the start of creation might fit the context and is supported by Talmudic references Pesachim 54a, Sanhedrin 96b, but to this point I have found no other place in the MT where this sense for o¤s·¤E¦n is unambiguously present.
Genesis 11:2, 13:11
:oϬJ
Uc§J˯H³u r¼Šg±b¦J .¤rˤt‰C vÁŠg§eˆc UËt‰m§n°H³u o¤s·¤E¦n oÉŠg§x²b‰C h¼¦v±h³u
Hebrew text: As
they traveled eastward (from antiquity), they found a valley in the land of
Shinar and settled there.
This passage is also interesting because, as in Gen 2:8, o¤s·¤E¦n is stated without any reference to indicate a starting point, which normally should be expected for a directional meaning of kedem. In Gen 2:8 the LXX translates this form with κατὰ ἀνατολὰς (eastward) and here with ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν (from the east). The mountains of Ararat are northwest of Mesopotamia, so if the starting point is this location the direction of travel would have to be eastward. BDB give a meaning of eastward for o¤s·¤E¦n, which fits the context but not the form. The term t,hnsec in the targum is normally temporal (in ancient times), but tjbsn in Syriac is always directional. A meaning of from antiquity could fit both the context and the form in the Hebrew text.
Genesis 25:6
v¨n§s¼¥e hº©j UBɤsIg‰C ¿Ib‰C eʨj‰m°h k΋g¥n
oÄ¥j‰K©J±hœ³u ,«·b¨T©n o¼¨v¨r‰c©t iË©,²b oº¨v¨r‰c©t‰k rɤJ£t ¿oh¦J±d‹khœˆP©v
hʯb‰cˆk±u
:o¤sœ¤e
.¤rˤt›k¤t
Hebrew
text: And Abraham gave gifts to his
sons by concubines, and while he was still alive he sent them away from Isaac
his son eastward to the land of the east.
The תנ''כ text contains two occurrences of o¤sœ¤e: the first has the directional he suffix, and the second is in a prepositional phrase that restates the first. All three translations render the second term specifically as east. The Greek text renders the first occurrence as eastward, and the Aramaic texts render it by first. Considering Abraham’s location at that time, he would have been sending them to the region east of the Dead Sea or beyond.
Genesis 29:1
:o¤sœ¤e›h¯b‰c vŠm§rË©t Q†k¼¯H³u uh·Šk±d©r c«¼e
Hebrew Text: So Jacob picked up his feet and walked towards the
land of the sons of the east (or of the ancient people).
The expression o¤sœ¤e›h¯b‰c could be either directional or temporal, and both uses occur in the תנ''כ. The translations all interpret the expression in this verse as directional east, but Jacob was traveling almost directly northward from where he started, not eastward. Note that the LXX changed the text from sons of the east to land of the east. In my opinion, a better translation of the phrase would be toward the land of former relatives. In this case he was headed toward his relatives living near Haran, not ancient, but relatives from former times.
Numbers 23:7
hɈK›v¨rœ¨t ¿vŠf‰k o¤sº¤e›h¥r§rœ©vœ¥n ¿c¨tIn›Q†kœ¤n eÊŠkŠc h°bÎ¥j±b³h oƨr£Æt›i¦n r·©nt«H³u I¼k¨J§n t˨¬°H³u
:kœ¥t¨r§G°h v˨n…g«œz v¼Šf‰kU c«ºe…gœ³h
Hebrew Text: Then he took up his oracle and said, "Balak,
the king of Moab, brought me from Aram, from the eastern mountains (or from the
ancient mountains). Come, curse Jacob
for me; yes, denounce Israel."
All three translations render the expression o¤sº¤e›h¥r§rœ©vœ¥n as eastern mountains, but Aram, the Euphrates, and Mesopotamia in general, are directly north of Moab, not eastward. The meaning could just as easily be from the ancient mountains, and the expression could be metaphorical, not literal. The ancient mountains could be a reference to the general local where people first settled after the flood before moving down into the Mesopotamian plain, and that geographical reference then be used in place of northward. References like ימה (seaward), מדברה (toward the wilderness), מזרחה (toward the sun rise) are used with some frequency in the Torah.
Joshua 7:2
UÉk±D©r±u U¼k…g r«ºntk ¿o¤vh‡k£t r¤nt«ÊH ³ukº¥t›,hœ‡c‰k o¤sɤE¦n ¿i®uΨt ,hˇC›oˆg rΤJ£t hÄ‹g¨v I½jh¦rhœ¦n oh¦J²b£t ‹gΪJIv±h Ïj‹k§J°H³u c
:hœŠg¨v›,¤t U¼k±D©r±hœ³u ohº¦J²b£tœ¨v ¿Uk…gœ³Hœ³u .¤r·¨t¨v›,¤t
Hebrew
text: And Joshua sent men from
Jericho to Ai, which is near Beth-Aven east of Beth-El, and he said to them,
“Go up and spy out the land.” So the men
went up and spied out Ai.
The construction kº¥t›,hœ‡c‰k o¤sɤE¦n was one of those identified as always directional. The Greek text renders this phrase by κατὰ Βαιθήλ, down from Beth-El, but both Aramaic versions specifically state east of Beth-El.
Judges 6:3,
6:33, 7:12, 8:10
:uhœŠkŠg UËkŠg±u o¤s¼¤e›h¯b‰cU eÁ‡k¨n…gœ³u iͲh§s¦n vΊkŠg±u k·¥t¨r§G°h gÉ©r²z›o¦t v¼²h¨v±u
Hebrew
Text: Now when Israel was sowing, Midean, that is Amelek and the eastern
peoples, would come up against them.
The expression o¤s¼¤e›h¯b‰cU could be temporal or directional. Midean is eastward from Israel, so a better translation might be Midean and Amelek, even peoples from the east. Alternatively, the intended meaning could be Midean even Amelek, peoples of antiquity. The LXX contains a temporal reference, and the targum contains a directional interpretation. Midean dates back to the time of Abraham at least and so qualifies as ancient from the writer's perspective. In contrast, the Peshitta renders the term as sons of the robe, referring to a distinctive style of garment. This particular reading could have arisen due to a scribal error, or it could have been a regional term for marauding desert tribes. In my opinion, the expression o¤s¼¤e›h¯b‰cU eÁ‡k¨n…gœ³u iͲh§s¦n is probably intended to be a reference to one, not three groups of raiders, whether qedem is understood as directional or temporal.
1 Kings 5:10
:o°hœ¨r‰m¦n
,Ë©n‰f¨j k«¼F¦nU o¤s·¤e›hœ¯b‰C›kŠF ,¼©n‰f¨jœ¥n v«ºnO§J ,É©n‰f¨j
¿c¤rÎ¥T³u h
Hebrew Text: So the
wisdom of Solomon exceeded that of all the ancient peoples and that of Egypt (or even all the wisdom of Egypt).
This verse asserts that Solomon's wisdom exceeded that of two groups. One of these groups is the Egyptians, who clearly excelled in certain pursuits. The other is identified as o¤s·¤e›hœ¯b‰C›kŠF, which could be interpreted as all eastern peoples (targum and Peshitta) or as all ancient peoples (LXX). Since there is little indication in the MT that the peoples to the east of Israel were especially noted for their wisdom in any respect, I think that the temporal interpretation is more likely the author's intended meaning.
Jeremiah 49:28
UnUÀe v·²u«v±h rÉ©n¨t v¼«F kº†cŠC›Q†kœ¤n [rÉ‹Mt¤r§s‹fUœc±b] ruÉ‹Mt¤r§s‹fUœc±b ¿vŠF¦v rʤJ£t ru½«m¨j ,uÉ«f‰k§n©n‰kU | rɨs¥e‰k
:o¤sœ¤e›hœ¯b‰C›,¤t U¼s§s¨J±u rº¨s¥e›k¤t UÉk…g
Hebrew Text: Concerning
Kedar and to the kingdoms of Hazor which Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon,
struck. Thus says YHWH: "Arise, go up to Kedar and despoil the people of
the east."
The verse appears to equate Qedar with o¤sœ¤e›hœ¯b‰C, which could mean sons of the east or sons of antiquity. The LXX interprets Qedem as a place name, and both the targum and the Peshitta interpret the term as east. The usage is ambiguous: however, because Hazor is west of Babylon, I suspect that the reference is intended to be temporal.
Nehemiah 12:46
ohœ¦vOtœ‡k
,I¼s«v±u vËŠK¦v§T›rhœ¦J±u ohº¦r§r«œJ§nœ©v [¿h¥Jt¨r] ¿¥Jt¨r o¤s·¤E¦n ;¼¨x¨t±u
shÁ°u¨S hË¥nhˆc›hœˆF
Hebrew text: For in the days of David and Asaph of old,
there were leaders of the singers and songs of praise and thanksgiving to God.
The construction o¤s·¤E¦n /// hË¥nhˆc demands a temporal meaning. The targum text is not available, and the Syriac text changes the meaning of the text. The Hebrew text talks about the ancient practices of the leader of the Levitical singers. The Syriac text refers to ancient songs to God. In contrast, the LXX text follows the sense of the Hebrew closely.
Poetic Passages
I found 15 passages in which the three translations differed materially from one another. In many cases the nature of the deviation was the same as those in the prose passages.
Deuteronemy 33:15
:oœŠkIg
,IËg‰c°D s®d¼¤N¦nU o¤s·¤e›h¥r£rœ©v Jt«¼r¥nU
Hebrew Text: From the head of the
ancient mountains and from the choicest things of the eternal hills.
This verse is taken from Moses’ blessing for Joseph. As previously mentioned, an expression like o¤s·¤e›h¥r£rœ©v is by itself ambiguous; however, the term oœŠkIg in the parallel part of the verse should remove all ambiguity. The LXX text has ὀρέων ἀρχῆς, which is a straight-forward temporal translation for o¤s·¤e›h¥r£rœ©v. The targum text has thrhfc thruy, which is a bit more obscure but means the first mountains. The Syriac text has the eastern mountains.
2 Kings 19:25,
Isaiah 37:26
oh¼ˆM°b ohˈK³D
,IÁJ§v‹k h½¦v§,U ¨vh½¦,th‡c£v vɨT‹g ¨vh·¦T§r‹mhœ°u o¤s¼¤e h¥nh˦n‰k h¦,hº¦GŠg
Vɨ,«t ¿eIj¨rœ¥n‰k T‰gÊ©n¨J›tœO£v
:,IœrŒm‰C
oh˦rŠg
Hebrew Text: Have
you not heard from afar? I did it from the days of antiquity and planned
it. Now I have brought it about, and you
will smash fortified cities into heaps of rubble.
The passage from 2 Kings duplicates Is 37:26. It is clearly referring to great antiquity and possibly to the earliest days of Israel as a people. The LXX omits any temporal reference equivalent to o¤s¼¤e h¥nh˦n‰k, though the sense of the passage is similar. The targum reduces the first two clauses into a single temporal reference, inserts a reference to the destruction of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and then repeats the temporal reference as a revelation from antiquity ose hnuhn hnse thzj tsu. The Syriac text is an almost word for word rendering of the Hebrew text.
Isaiah 2:6
:UehœˆP§G³h oh¼¦r‰f²b hË¥s‰k³h‰cU oh·¦T§Jˆk‰P‹F oh¼°b±b«œg±u o¤sº¤E¦n ¿Ut‰kœ¨n hʈF c«ºe…gœ³h ,hɇC ¿W§N‹g v¨T§J½©y²b hɈF
Hebrew Text: For you have abandoned your people, the
house of Jacob, because they are filled from antiquity, soothsayers like the
Philistines, and they join in league with strangers.
The Hebrew passage is difficult, and that difficulty is mirrored by the translations. The Hebrew text seems incomplete, because the verb ¿Ut‰kœ¨n requires a compliment to indicate with what the people were filled. The LXX supplies like the (people) from antiquity, and the Targum and Syriac follow this approach. If the text is defective, no variant has been preserved. Regardless, the translation filled from the east is no help. As a guess, for they have been filled from antiquity (with wickedness) might be appropriate.
Isaiah 46:10
:vœ¤Gƒg¤t h¼ˆm‰p¤j›kŠf±u oUºe¨, hɦ,Šm…g ¿r¥n«t U·G…gœ³b›tO rɤJ£t o¤s¼¤E¦nU ,hº¦r£jœ©t ¿,h¦Jt¥rœ¥n shʰD©n
Hebrew text: Declaring the end from the beginning and
from antiquity what has not been done.
Saying my counsel will stand, and I will do all my desire.
The first three words ,hº¦r£jœ©t ¿,h¦Jt¥rœ¥n shʰD©n (Declaring the end from the beginning) implies that the entire verse requires a temporal interpretation. The LXX renders o¤s¼¤E¦n by πρὶν αὐτὰ γενέσθαι (before it came into being), which occurs only here. Both the targum and the Syriac text have the more common rendering for from ancient times.
Jeremiah 46:26
o¤s¼¤e›h¥nhœˆF iË«F§J¦T iÁ‡f›h¥r£jœ©t±u uh·¨sŠc…g›s³h‰cU k¼†cŠC›Q†kœ¤n rË‹Mt¤r§s‹fUœc±b sÁ³h‰cU oº¨J‰p³b hÉ¥J§e‹c§n ¿s³h‰C oh½¦T©,±bU
:vœ²u«v±h›oªt±b
Hebrew Text: I
have given them (Egypt and her gods) into the hands of those who seek
their life, even Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and his servants, but
afterwards she will be inhabited as in former days, says YHWH.
The LXX omits this verse. The scope of the MT verse is judgement on Egypt and all of her gods along with a promise of subsequent restoration to be like former days. The Syriac changes the scope of this promise: you will dwell as days of the first man. The context requires o¤s¼¤e h¥nh˦n h¦,hº¦GŠg to refer to the ancient times of Egypt.
Jeremiah 49:28, Ezekiel 25:4, 25:10
UnUÀe v·²u«v±h rÉ©n¨t v¼«F kº†cŠC›Q†kœ¤n [rÉ‹Mt¤r§s‹fUœc±b] ruÉ‹Mt¤r§s‹fUœc±b ¿vŠF¦v rʤJ£t ru½«m¨j ,uÉ«f‰k§n©n‰kU | rɨs¥e‰k
ע…o¤sœ¤e›hœ¯b‰C›,¤t U¼s§s¨J±u rº¨s¥e›k¤t UÉk
Hebrew Text: To
Kedar and to the kingdoms of Hazor which Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon,
struck. Thus says YHWH: "Arise, go up to Kedar and despoil the people of
the east."
This verse is predicting the Babylonian destruction of Hazor. The significance of o¤sœ¤e›hœ¯b‰C is ambiguous and depends on the geographic location of Hazor relative to Babylon. Since Hazor is west of Babylon, the intended meaning was probably the ancient people. However, the LXX interprets Keder as a place name, and both Aramaic versions have the eastern people.
Psalm 68:34
:z«œg
kIÉe IkIe‰ÃC iË¥T°h›i¥v o¤s·¤e›h¥n§J hÉ¥n§JˆC c‡f«œrŠÓk
Hebrew Text: To him who rides the most ancient heavens;
see he gives his voice, a mighty voice.
The passage describes God as the one who rides through the heavens. The Hebrew text is interesting because the phrase o¤s·¤e›h¥n§J hÉ¥n§JˆC repeats the construct form for heaven, violating the standard syntactical arrangement of a construct chain. The result is poetic and emphatic. The LXX and the Syriac texts interpret the words to mean that God comes riding from the east; the targum interprets the description temporally.
Psalm 139:5
:vŠfœ†P‹F
hÉ‹kŠg ,¤J¼¨T³u h°b·¨T§r‹m o¤sɤe²u rIÉj¨t
Hebrew Text: You have
encompassed me behind and in front, and you have set your hand on me.
The Hebrew text seems to be clearly directional – behind and in front, but the early translations diverge from one another. The LXX changes the entire force of the verse – Behold, O Lord, you know everything, the ancient and the last; you formed me and placed your hand on me. The targum and the Syriac use equivalent terms to that of the Hebrew text, but the Syriac verb means you have formed me.
Job 23:8
:Iœk ihˈc¨t›tOœ±u
rI½j¨t±Ãu UB·®bh¥t±u QÉO¡v¤t o¤sɤe iÊ¥v
Hebrew Text: Look, should I go forward, he will not be
not there; backward and I do not discern him. Or: Look, I should come
before (him), he will not be not there; if I should go behind (him), I will not
discern him.
The Hebrew use of o¤sɤe here is peculiar. It could be rendered by either first or before, but it is parallel to rI½j¨t, which unambiguously means behind, backward. The Greek interpretation is completely different: For should I go to the first (time, place, or dignity), I will no longer be; and at the last, what do I know? (The Greek text is reading hB·®bh¥t±u instead of UB·®bh¥t±u.) The targum specifically uses the term for east, and the Syriac has the term for before or first. It is safe to say that the peculiar usage of the Hebrew text is the reason for the divergence between the translations.
CONCLUSIONS
The lexical data is sufficient to demonstrate that the original
root meaning of the root ק.ד.מ was temporal,
and this sense is attested in essentially all of the ancient Semitic
languages. The directional sense of the
root was restricted to the North-Western Semitic languages, and this usage was
almost certainly developed from the temporal sense of before.
This mode of development resulted in the same forms of the word being used to express both temporal and directional concepts. In order for a language to communicate, terms developed from this root must have syntactic combinations that are not ambiguous. Several syntactic combinations were identified that were unambiguously directional and several that were unambiguously temporal. There were also several expressions that were inherently ambiguous by themselves. The existence of this ambiguity was demonstrated by divergences in interpretations that existed among the three most ancient translations. Such divergences were found in almost 1/3 of the occurrences of o¤sɤe in the Hebrew bible. Nevertheless, the most probable intended meaning could almost always be established by careful examination of the near context.
BIBLIOGRAPY
A Concise
Dictionary of Akkadian, Jeremy Black,
Andrew George, and Nicholas Postgate; Harrassowitz Verlag, 2000
A Dictionary of
the Ugaritic Language, Gregorio Del
Olmo Lete and Joaquine Sanmartín, translated by Wilfred G. E. Watson,
Korninklijke Brill 2003
A Grammar of
the Phoenician Language, Zellig Harris,
American Oriental Society, 1936
A Grammar of
Biblical Aramaic, Franz Rosenthal,
Otto Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden, 1968
A Manual of
Palestinian Aramaic Texts, Joseph A. Fitzmyer
and Daniel Harrington, Biblical Institute Press 1978
A Compendious
Syriac Dictionary, J. Payne
Smith, Oxford at the Clarendon Press, first ed. 1903, reprinted 1967
An Aramaic
Handbook, Franz Rosenthal, Otto
Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden, 1967
Biblia Hebraica
Stuttgartensia, O. Eissfeldt,
P. Kahle ed., Deusche Bibelgesellschaft, 1967, 1968
Biblia Sacra, Robertus Weber ed., Würenttembergische Bibelanstalt Stuttgart, 1969,
reprint 1975
Cassuto, Umberto, A Commentary on
the Book of Genesis, Part 1, translated by Isreal Abrahams, the Magnes
Press, reprint 1972
Hebrew and
English Lexicon of the Old Testament, Brown, Driver, and Briggs; Clarendon Press, reprint 1974
Hebrew Aramaic
English Dictionary, Marcus
Jastrow, P. Shalom Publishers, Inc., 1967
Lexicon to the
Syriac New Testament (Peshitta),
William Jennings revised by Ulric Gantillon, Oxford at the Clarendon Press,
1926, reprinted 1962
Septuagenta, Alfred Rahlfs ed., Würenttembergische Bibelanstalt Stuttgart,
1935
Syriac Bible, United Bible Societies, 1979
The Bible in
Aramaic, Alexander Sperber ed., Koninklijke
Brill NV, 2004
Veteris
Testamenti Concordantiae, Solomon
Mandelkern, Schocken Publishing House Ltd., 1971
No comments:
Post a Comment