,الغصن baculus

, hastile ; and ,العصا

les (sounded 3x), baculus. And with which words are exactly the same in 1 Chron.

xi. 20. These two instances then, so exGolius, Schindler, and Castell agrees Gig- tremely pertinent, added to that third correct geius; who, in his Thesaurus, gives us instance in the corresponding place of ver. 11, ,


are certainly sufficient to show the necessity

of reading my in 2 Sam. xxiii. 8; instead thyrsus. To these several authorities may of a word at present unintelligible, begun be added that of St. Jerom, who in the Vulg. with the same remarkable letter as the has rendered the word by lignum; which, regular word, and carried on in letters that being nearly the same in sense with the are very easily mistaken for each other, and thyrsus, ramus, baculus, and hastile of the are confessedly so mistaken in other places. Arabians, is a strong argument that 139 was 6. The difficulty next occurring is in the an Hebrew noun so signifying, though (like number is now, eight hundred, since the many other words) it may occur but once in correct passage reads nina wkwy, three hunthe Bible.

dred. This we may account for by supIf then 1997 signifies thyrsum suum, has- posing, that as the Jews, in transcribing the tile suum, or hastam suam, as nun does; it Bible as well as in their own writings, frewill follow that_1979 has certainly been cor- quently expressed the numbers by single rupted from 771 as before observed. For letters; so, the letter ® which is 300, being the verb in Samuel, governing also the noun the first letter both of you and www, might hastile or hastam, must signify elevavit as (upon reducing that numeral letter back well as the verb in Chronicles; but there is into its word at length) for want of attention no other verb of that signification that has be writ you in Samuel instead of www as in any resemblance of letters. Wherefore, as Chronicles. the word 1977 preceding is the same in both That the transcribers of the Bible, in the passages, and the first letter of the next several translations, have sometimes exword in both is the remarkable letter ; we pressed the numbers by single letters, is must infer that the remainder of the word evident from Coverdale's translation of the in Samuel has been corrupted from the 11th verse of this chapter of Chronicles, remainder of the word in Chronicles.

smote thre C at one tyme ; and from Theodotion's It may also be observed, that the word jy version of the 8th verse of this chapter of is frequently used in conjunction with non, Samuel, where we read, PWTOs twv outos. as in this very chapter of Samuel, ver. 8, And that the Jewish transcribers did fremount yri, Evdov dopatos, LXX; so 2 Sam. quently express the Bible numbers, in the xxi. 19; and 1 Sam. xvii. 7; in which last original, by single letters is well known to place it is corrupted into yo. If then you the learned. be frequently used for the staff of a spear, Thus in Walton's Prolegom. de Textuum and is joined here and in many other places Orig. Integr., p. 42, we read, Ipse etiam with mont; we may reasonably suppose, that Scaliger sic scribit-literis numeralibus, non there was also such an Hebrew word as you verbis, antiquitus numeri concipiebantur. signifying a spear; especially as we find it And in the Hebrew Grammar printed with so in the Arabic language.

the Complutensian Bible, so long since as Or lastly (which is a solution that may be 1515, we are told, Hebræi per literas alphamore agreeable to some), it may easily be beti per ordinem numeros scribunt. Sunt, conceived, that in a corrupt place (as this qui 500 et deinceps per quinque literas finales confessedly is) the 9 might be inserted by designarent; sed hæc ratio numeros desigmistake (as it is evidently in Prov. xv. 14) nandi non ab omnibus recipitur, sed per so that the word would be then 1997; and literas alphabeti compositas id faciunt, ut had we found it so, we should naturally have 500 per pn, i. e., 400 et 100. acquiesced in the reading, and said, the This then being the case, there seems no word yv, which was frequently used for the doubt, but many of the numbers, which now staff of a spear, was used here for the spear appear almost incredible in some places and itself, &c.

contradictory in others (as in the place now I shall only add, with regard to the word before us), are owing to mistakes in some of my, that in the 18th verse of this same the similar letters. One or two material chapter we read of Abishai 1939 na mly 1971, /mistakes of this kind, rationally accounted

men in one tpme.

for, will sufficiently confirm this point, and ( reisede his Shatte (Spere) on thre hundrid woundid it is a point of no small importance.

Indeed our present English The first instance shall be the remarkable version in Samuel renders 5571, whom he slew, contradiction between 2 Kings viii. 26, and but such a version seems not to be defensible; 2 Chron. xxii. 2; which has so much per- and so the authors of it thought by putting the plexed the commentators, that Walton (Pro- word slain in the margin, and by translating legom., p. 36) puts it among the quædam it in Chronicles against 300 men slain. atropa (see notes on 2 Chron. xxii. 2]. The reasons against rendering 57, whom

Another very remarkable example of this he slew, are, first, that there being then no kind occurs in the 3d chapter of the Book noun after the numeral, the sentence would of Numbers. We read in ver. 11th, And be incomplete, he lift up his spear against these were the sons of Levi; Gershon, Ko- 300

whom he slew at one time. hath, and Merari.-22 The Gershonites And secondly, because of the almost inwere 7,500.—28 The Kohathites, 8,600.- credible nature of the action, a man's killing 34 The Merarites, 6,200.—39 All the Le- 300 men with his own single spear, which vites were 22,000. But the sum total of the incredibility is removed by considering 55 preceding numbers, instead of being really as a noun of the signification assigned it in 22,000, will be found to be 22,300, &c. (see the following observations. Were not these notes on Numb. iii. 22, vol. i., p. 514]. reasons strongly against it, 5577 might be ad

The Hebrew numbers having therefore mitted as a verb, with its signification of been certainly expressed formerly by letters, occidit; and we might suppose the pronoun this is a sufficient vindication of the pre- 708 understood before the verb here, as in ceding solution of the difficulty as to the other places. Thus Exod. iv. 13, 72 H3 ASU 800 and 300 men. And how easy a mistake nun, mitte, quæso, per manum (quam, vel of 500 might be in our way of expressing illius quem) mittes; and Exod. xv. 13, M°N numbers, will immediately appear upona 13 OPTION, duxisti in misericordia tua setting down the very same numbers 800 populum hunc (quem) redemisti. and 300. But that the number in Samuel But the true sense of the word 5507 in this was originally 300, as well as in Chronicles, place seems to have been preserved only in will be farther evident from an argument that the Vatican edition of the LXX in Samuel, falls more properly under the next article. where it is rendered ΣΤΡΑΤΙΩΤΑΣ [against

7 The word 597 is read the same in both this meaning of 5977 see note of Gesen. on passages, and properly. For though it 2 Sam. i. 19, p. 491]. For however some carries with it a difficulty at first sight, as lexicographers may refuse the active sense being singular ; yet there are many instances of occidere or vulnerare to the verb 590 in where a numeral, a conjunction of Kal, yet they all allow it in Pihel ; but these numerals, expressive of very many,

take two conjugations are the same in the preter after them and agree with a noun that is tenses without points; and indeed this active singular. One example of this we find in sense is allowed the word here according to Gen. v. 4, And the days of Adam, after he the common interpretationwhom he slew. begat Seth, were 800 year (not years) 1390 Castell informs us, that this verb in Arabic MJU IN, just as we say, 800 year, and 800 us signifies descendit, castrametatus fuit, pound; not years, and pounds. Another example may be 1 Sam. ix. 22, N d'em, verb is farther deducible from the nouns

grassatus fuit, protexit, &c. This idea of the about thirty man. The regularity of this

derived from it; and thus the following singular noun being admitted, the next con

nouns of this verb are rendered by Giggeius, sideration must be, the true meaning of it.

Here the versions are widely different; in his Thesaurus and the general run of them make strange statio, castra

aki telum, missile - and work, by rendering 557, occisus or vulneratus. For, according to this rendering, Jashobeam bilsi vir validus et audax ; which latter obtained his pre-eminence by bravely lifting remarkable signification is confirmed by his

spear against 300 men, after they Castell, and greatly recommends the Vat. were dead, or at least, after they were version of 560 by ETPATINTHE. This verb wounded. Thus we have the word rendered then having the ideas of fighting, warring, here in a MS. English version of 1408, this and wounding so evidently annexed to it;


المحله and المحل



and the Arabic noun from its verb signifying occisus nor that of vulneratus can take place vir validus et audax; the Hebrew noun here, if we consider the context. The Isfrom its verb will regularly answer to Etpa- raelites were assembled to attack the BenTiwrns, or miles. This then being some- jamites at Gibeah the third time, and the times the sense of this noun, we may con- sons of Benjamin went forth to meet the clude it to be the proper translation of it in people, and were drawn off from the citythis place; so that Jashobeam lifted up his then follow the words here cited; and what spear against three hundred fighting men propriety can there be in rendering them, and (or, three hundred soldiers) at one time. they began to smite of the people the wounded

But it may be said, if soldiers had been or slain? Can we suppose any of the Ishere meant, why was not the Hebrew noun raelites (who now advanced to attack the for soldiers here made use of? The answer Benjamites) to be slain or wounded, before is, that if Dobso be not that Hebrew noun, the battle begun? And yet we there seems to be no other for it in the obliged to suppose thus much, if the word Bible. In 2 Chron. xxv. 13, the two words can be taken here in the sense usually conwhich we translate by the term soldiers are tended for. Thus the Chaldee version is 71727 17, the sons of a troop; and what we here rendered, Et cæperunt ad occidendum term fighting men, 1 Kings xii. 21, are ex populo occisos ; and thus the LXX, by TOTSD Tuy literally those that do the war. rendering the original words, mp&avto TUTTELV The noun 5 then, coming from a verb, ek tov daou tpavmatias. The Vulgate enwhose sense in Hebrew is vulneravit, occidit, deavours to make sense here, by the inand which in Arabic has the military ideas sertion of three verbs, neither of which are which are always affixed to Etpatiwrns, or a in the original. And our English transsoldier, must be properly expressed by that lators, who were sensible how improper the word; especially as there is no other word word slain or wounded would be in this for it in the Hebrew language.

place, have inserted one verb by rendering But this is too material a point to be 567, and kill. passed over, without some farther observa- But this is endeavouring to make good tions; since many of the places, where this sense in English at the expense of the orinoun occurs, seem to have been misunder-ginal language, which (every one must see) stood by every interpreter, for want of con- will not admit such a translation; and it sidering it in the sense here contended for. must be observed, that the English transSuch an assertion as this will require some lators, being sensible also of the impropriety proofs to support it; and probably the several of this version, have rendered the words in texts here subjoined will be fully satisfactory. the margin, To smite of the people wounded.

We may previously remember, that the But this and every other impropriety will sense given at present to the noun 500 is the perhaps be removed by translating the word passive sense of interfectus or vulneratus ; cgn, milites; for the sentence will be then, which it is still allowed to have, where the Et Milites cæperunt percutere (or, et context requires it: but that the following cæperunt percutere Milites) ex populo, sicut texts are produced as requiring the active primo die et secundo, in stratis-quasi trisense of interficiens or vulnerans, or rather ginta viros in Israele. And that this is the miles, and that the including this latter sense, proper version of the word in this place where necessary, does no more exclude the seems to be farther evident from the 39th former, when necessary in other places, than verse; where we read Dis 5770 yo'gay the participle 567, confodiens, in Ezek. DN d'emws $270? ona, Et Benjamin percutere xxix. 9, prevents 579 from being confossus in cæpit Milites, inter viros Israelis, quasi Ezek. xxxii. 26.

triginta viros. The first instance may be Judges xx. 31, The next instance may be taken from

. ,

. The better to illustrate these NVI ZN, which words are rendered by the words, it must be observed, that in the Book LΧΧ, Και ηρξαντο τυπτειν εκ του λαου τραυ- | of Psalms and Proverbs each verse consists ματιας καθως απαξ και απαξ εν ταις οδοι-generally of two parts called hemisticks ; ωσει τριακοντα ανδρας εν τω Ισραηλ. Now | one of which is exegetical of the other, it seems evident, that neither the sense of either by expressing the same sense in dif

אתה דכאת כחלל רהב בזרוע עוך ,11 .occurs in the following inanner

, | Psalm lxxxix חללים where

.פורת איביך ויחלו להכות מהעם חללים כפעם בפעם במסלות כשלשים

ferent words, or explaining one assertion by! Tu confregisti, quasi occisum (vulneratum) its opposite or contrary. Let us now see Ægyptum ; how this rule has been observed as to this In brachio roboris tui, dispersisti inimicos verse; which is evidently of that kind, tuos. which expresses in its two parts the same But the translation here proposed will resense in different words.

ceive additional confirmation from observing, The LXX read, Ev ETATELvwoas, ws tpav- not only, that the Lord mighty in battle, the Matiav UTEPN Pavovo ev tw Bpaxlovi mns duva- Lord strong and mighty, &c., are frequent μεως σου διεσκορπισας τους εχθρους σου. appellations in the books of Scripture; but And I believe all the other versions render the that, as this part of the Psalm evidently word 5913 here either tanquam vulneratus or alludes to the destruction of the Egyptians tanquam occisus. But probably neither of in the Red Sea, so the images and ideas in these senses will be thought very applicable, this verse are evidently taken from the when we reflect that it, Rahab, here is a sublime ode, which was sung after that name for Egypt or the Egyptians ; and that wonderful event. For we read in Exod. the Psalmist in this verse alludes to the xv. 3, The Lord is a man of war (tu tan. destruction of the Egyptians in the Red quam miles). 6 Thy right hand, O Lord, is Sea. For, is there propriety in saying, that become glorious in power; thy right hand, O God destroyed the Egyptians like dead men, Lord, hath dashed in pieces the enemyTu, or like wounded men ? Were not the Egyp- tanquam miles, confregisti Ægyptum ; in tians destroyed ? Did they not perish? Did brachio roboris tui, dispersisti inimicos tuos. not Pharaoh and all his host die in the Red Thus again we read, of the strange Sea? And can their destruction by death woman, or harlot, in Prov. vii. 26, 1973 be compared to itself? Can it be said with 701375Obyr SON D560, which words the any dignity, that men slain were destroyed LXX have translated, Iolovs yap tpwoaga like men slain ? Or lastly, as these Egyp- καταβεβληκε, Και αναρίθμητοι εισιν ους πεφοtians were thus totally destroyed, can it be veuke. The learned reader will readily observe said, that they were destroyed like wounded that tpwoaga can no more be the true men ?—which certainly is to compare great version of bug here, than D'ost can be inthings with small, with a peculiar impro- terpreted by avapıÔuntot, which it never is priety. Our common English version is, but in this place; and here Symm. and Theod. Thou hast subdued Egypt, and DESTROYED render it to xupoi, as the sentence requires it It; thou hast scattered thine enemies abroad should be. Since the noun, which is exwith thy mighty arm. But the last trans- pressive of multitude in the second hemistick, lators, seeing the absolute unlawfulness of and answers to D'an, multos, in the first, is translating 590), and destroyed it; have ren- certainly 55, omnes, or plurimos, which in dered the verse, Thou hast broken Rahab in this version of the LXX is entirely omitted. pieces, as THAT IS SLAIN; thou hast The Arabic version, following the LXX, scattered thine enemies with thy strong arm. reads, Quoniam sauciavit multos et deprædata

Without any more previous observations est eos ; neque recensetur numerus illorum, then, let us now see how this verse will be quos enecuvit. The Syriac has, Quia copiam expressed, with the signification of 55 at occisorum prostravit, et fortissimi sunt omnes present contended for, Tu, tanquam miles, quos necavit. The Chaldee Paraphrase, confregisti Ægyptum; in brachio roboris tui Quonium multos interfectos dejecit, et fortes dispersisti inimicos tuos. It is impossible sunt omnes interfecti ejus. And the Vulnot to observe, how exactly the hemisticks gate, Multos enim vulneratos dejecit, et now answer to each other; since every fortissimi quique interfecti sunt ab ea.

This expression in one has its corresponding ex- last sense has been followed by our English pression in the other, Tu, tanquam miles, in translators thus, For she hath cast down brachio roboris tuiconfregisti, dispersisti— many wounded; yea, many strong men have Ægyptum, inimicos tuos.

been slain by her. But is the correspondency Tu, tanquam miles, confregisti Ægyptum; of the two hemisticks, which very perfectly In brachio roboris tui, dispersisti inimicos obtains in the original of this verse, at all tuos.

illustrated by any of these versions ? I For the more successful recommendation of leave the determination to the learned this translation, let us subjoin the former- reader; and shall observe, that the transla


, יפלו בחוריה ברחבתיה וכל אנשי מלחמתה ידמו ביום ההוא tion of this verse by the very learned Albert


whicli words have , וכל חלליה יפלו בתוכה read

(. ", Schultens is, Nam multos ad lanienam pro- Cadent Juvenes ejus in plateis ejus, et omnes jectos (profanatos ) cadere fecit, et numerosi viri EJUS succidentur in illo die. omnes trucidati ejus. We learn from hence, Here we see that in two texts prophetically that as this celebrated professor of the declaring the same circumstances of the oriental languages was not pleased with the same destruction, we have juvenes in one common translations of bossn, vulneratos or expressed by the same word for juvenes in occisos, by rendering it ad lanienam pro- the other; and then the word d', which jectos ; so neither was he pleased with that is here rendered milites in one, expressed by version of his own (as we may easily suppose viri belli in the other. he could not) and therefore we see he But, let us proceed to the other instances has rendered it by profanatos in a paren- in this same chapter. In verse the 47th we thesis.

, From all this uncommon fluctuation then been generally rendered et omnes interfecti in the best expositors we may be led to ejus cadent in medio ejus. But what can be suspect some general mistake; and perhaps the meaning of interfecti ejus or interfecti it will appear to have been, in the sense of Babylonis ? or is there propriety in sayingthe word diber. For if we here again render interfecti ejus interficientur ? The whole this word milites, we shall find every part of verse is, Propterea ecce dies veniunt, et the hemisticks perfectly to correspond; thus, visitabo super sculptilia Babylonis, et omnis multos agrees with omnes or plurimos, milites terra ejus confundetur ; and the next words with fortes or fortissimi, dejecit with inter- in this solemn denunciation of vengeance fecit or interfecti sunt ab ea :

seem only properly translated by--et omnes Multos enim milites cadere fecit ;

milites ejus cadent in medio ejus. There are Et fortissimi quique ab ea interfecti sunt. some commentators indeed, who seeing the

In Jeremiah li. we seem to have several impropriety of interfecti, have rendered the instances, where this word should be ren- word here saltatores; but this comment dered as before. In verse 4 we read 1509 seems to deserve no farther notice, than to Dign, which words have been usually ren- shew that the authors of it were not satisfied dered, et cadent interfecti. But, as the with the common interpretation. verb sa signifies to fall mortally, or to be If we proceed from this 47th only to the slain in battle (Josh. viii. 24, 25 ; Judg. 19th verse, we shall find farther reason for viii. 10; xii. 6; xx. 44, 46), the question is, allowing this translation of boss by milites. whether cadent (interficientur) interfecti is The intermediate verse is, Et laudabunt not an improper expression. Or rather, as super Babylonem cæli et terra, quia ab the words immediately preceding are maquilone venient ei vastatores, ait Dominus. 7138 5, penitus delete omnem ejus exercitum, Then follows verse 49th Swimmight sous ba? Da the question may be, whether nam cadent you so ugot 13 baas 2. These words have milites be not a much more significant and been variously interpreted, and yet have proper version than et cadent interfecti; been generally (perhaps it might be said when the substantive last preceding was the universally) misunderstood by commentators. singular noun exercitus or militia.

Our English translation is, As Babylon hath But let us take the context with it. The caused the slain of Israel to fall; so at prophet here foretells the fall of Babylon ; Babylon shall fall the slain of all the earth. and in the conclusion of the 3d verse we The impropriety of causing those who had read, 7833 55 Dino Tu Su osoana 501, Et ne been slain to fall, or to be slain, induced our parcalis super juvenibus ejus, penitus delete translators to place in the margin, Both omnem ejus exercitum. Then follows the Babylon is to fall, O ye slain of Israel; and 4th verse, itigin OTO) D'TD) yoxa dos 1837, with Babylon, &c. But this address to the Nam cadent milites in Chaldæorum terra, et slain is certainly the greater impropriety; transfigentes gladio (cadent) in plateis ejus. and the former English version is confirmed That the word d'inn should be here rendered by the LXX, who read, Kai ye Baßulov milites, seems farther deducible from the πεσειν εποιησε τους τραυματιας Ισραηλ, και εν 30th verse of the preceding chapter ; which Baßulwui TeCOUVTAL Tpaupatial maons mus verse, treating of the very same destruction yms. The English and Greek versions seem with the verse before us, has these words, I right here in the form and disposition of the

« ElőzőTovább »