OLDER PASSAGES $ 9. WROUGHT OVER AGAIN BY LATER WRITERS. PHILOLOGICO-CRITICAL RELATION OF THE PARALLEL PASSAGES IN THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL, KINGS, AND CHRONICLES. 1. It was remarked above, (§ 6, 3,) that in the productions of the second period, the language is commonly easier, more flowing, and intelligible, than in the more ancient compositions. The obvious reason of this is, that a language which has already gradually ceased to be the language of life can no longer be used with that originality and freedom which led to hard and difficult constructions; and, therefore, it will be obliged to resort to easy construction and greater clearness. This remark, and the fact that some expressions seemed too hard, or not intelligible or correct enough, for later times, is very easily established by recurrence to those parallel passages where later writers transferred sentences from an older text into their own works, and wrought them over anew. In the latter, the difficulties and hard constructions of the former are commonly removed." 2. The most instructive example of this kind is afforded by the parallel passages in the books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles.' The authors of the books of Chronicles may have had either our books of Samuel and Kings before them, or, at least, the text of these books in a different arrangement; but this is certain, that the Chronicles give us a recasting of the parallel passages in the books of Samuel and Kings, which was made several centuries after the original. In Chronicles, not only are later expressions and orthographies substituted for the earlier, but difficult and rare forms are exchanged for the common; hard words are explained, and other a Isa. xv. 5, (comp. Jer. xlviii. 5,) where, for the more difficult 7, there is a quid pro quo, ; Isa. xvi. 6, 7, (comp. Jer. xlviii. 29—31,), for Num. xxiv. 17, Jer. xlviii. 45, 7, for the more difficult; the common form of the singular, N, instead of the construct state of the dual, . See Rosenmüller, on Isa. xvi. 17. See De Wette, Com. on Ps. p. 25. The character of this philological recasting of old materials — with which we are alone concerned at this time—is parallel, in some respects, with the historical change of which De Wette treats, Beiträge, vol. i. p. 42. difficulties, hardnesses, and the like, are so softened and illustrated that the readings of the reviser often have the appearance of glosses.". 1. LATER ORTHOGRAPHY AND FORMS.-, for ; 2 Ch. vii. 18, 2, for 1 Kings ix. 5. pipe, for pia; 1 Ch. xviii. 5, 6. 2 Ch. xxii. 5, 2 Kings viii. 29; especially the prevalent scriptio plena, e. g. 7777, DIAJON, DI, &c., for "; 1 Ch. xi. 31, 2 Sam. xxiii. 29. v. 2, 1 Kings viii. 1. D and DN7; 2 Ch. vi. 10, 11, 1 Kings viii. 20, 21. Here, also, belongs 1, 2 Ch. xxiv., for Z, 2 Kings xii., and ♫♫ ,1 Ch. v. 6, 26, 2 Ch. xxviii. 20, for 2. WORDS OF THE LATER USAGE, WHICH WERE SUBSTITUTED FOR THE EARLIER.- , a corpse, for ; 1 Ch. x. 12, 1 Sam. xxxi. 12. 2 Sam. vi. 16, David is said to be 727 77, clothed with a linen shirt; 1 Ch. xv. v. 27, ; but, as it is often done in glosses, the words of the original are also left. Here, also, belongs i, for i, floats; 1 Kings v. 23. 3. GRAMMATICAL GLOSSES, EASIER READINGS, AND DESIGNED IMPROVEMENTS. —\", for "; 1 Ch. xi. 2, 2 Sam. v. 2., for 1 Ch. xvii. 21, 2 Sam. vii. 23. (Here is not to be construed with the plural. See the emendation of the Samaritan, on Gen. xx. 13, xxxi. 53, xxxv. 7, Ex. xxii. 9.) 7, for the anomalous xii. 12. 1, and 391, for the rarer form 1 Kings xxii. 34, 35, 2 Ch. xxi. 9, 2 Kings viii. 21. 7; 2 Ch. x. 12, 1 Kings ; 2 Ch. xviii. 34, 35, io, for 9, 2 Kings viii. 21. is, for "; 2 Ch. xxiii. 1, 2 Kings xi. 4. ; 2 Ch. xxi. 4. EXEGETICAL GLOSSES AND EXPLICATIONS OF THE OLDER TEXT.- -2 Sam. v. 18, 22, 27, they extended themselves; 1 Ch. xiv. 9, 13, vi. 16; -2 Sam. 2, leaping and dancing, (2. äñaž heyóμɛva;) 1 Ch. xv. 29, T (Right! for the question contains a refusal.) — xxiii. 8, 77;2 Ch. xi. 11, -, he threw his spear, (an explanation for xxiii. 18.) — xxiii. 19;, in truth. (This is entirely wanting in 1 Ch. xi. 21.) — xxiv. 12, I lay before thee; 1 Ch. xxi. 10,- 1 Kings viii. 7, , they covered; 2 Ch. v. 8, 177.-viii. 30, 31, 34, 39, 43, 45, 3, in heaven; 2 Ch. vi. 21, sqq.,, from heaven. -x. 18, 15, adorned; 2 Ch. ix. 17, n. —x. 26, ig, 1400 harnessed chariots ; 2 Ch. ix. 25, 4000 span of horses and chariots. (The gloss is correct; the number only is an exaggeration.)-x. 28. The most difficult part of the verse is omitted 3. Among the examples of this kind, there are many which render it plain that the language was becoming extinct at the time of the Chronicler, and, here and there, difficulties prevented the older text from being understood." in the parallel. — xii. 6, him ; 2 Ch. xviii. Ty, to stand before and serve some one ; 2 Ch. x. 6, 7727. —xxii. 32, 773 1777, they turned aside to 31,707.—2 Kings xv. 36, xx. 20, xxi. 17, xxiii. 28, aan? Do Nëŋ, ;) 2 Ch. xxvii. 7,. lo, this is written; (the Chronicler always has xvi. 3, 77; 2 Ch. xxviii. 3, ".-xxi. 3, EN E " T2, the high (altars) which Hezekiah destroyed; 2 Ch. xxxiii. 3, 75; לא אֹסִים לְהָנִיד 8 .is usually applied only to persons.) - xxi אִבּן because) I will no more CAUSE the feet of Israel to WANDER, אֶת רֶגֶל יִשְׂרָאֵל מִן אֲדָמָה Other names are pretty often substituted for the old geographical names. 5. EUPHEMISMS. — 2 Sam. x. 4, 7; 1 Ch. xix. 4, myideen 79. 6. CONJECTURE UPON A DIFFICULT TEXT, OR ON A TEXT NOT UNDERSTOOD.— 2 Sam. vi. 5, 7, all sorts of fir-tree (instruments ;) 1 Ch. xiii. 8, 777. — vi. 7, 33; Vulgate, propter temeritatem; 1 Ch. xiii. 10, so as to extend his power again; 1 Ch. xviii. 3, 77.8, at the opening of the gate; the Chronicle, 1 Ch. xix. 9. The authors of the Keri attempted to make similar corrections. So the readings in Chronicles often agree with the Keri in Samuel and Kings. The latter may have been borrowed from the former; but sometimes they contain, perhaps, an explanatory reading older than the Chronicler, which he has adopted. This will appear the more clearly from some examples where the Chronicler, instead of a gloss, which is probably false, upon a difficult text, gives a con jecture, or a quid pro quo. 1 Sam. xxxi. 13;. Although learned rabbins (Jona, Michlal Jophi, on Gen. xxi. 33, 1 Sam. xxii. 6) justly compare the Arabic l, tamariscus, yet this is one of those words, the signification of which, it seems, early became doubtful or was lost. Hence arises the different renderings of this word in the versions, and in the parallel passages referred to. Most of them call it tree, or wood, using the general term; thus Aquila, dɛrdova; Sym. qutov; Vulgate, nemus; which also is defended by Celsius, Hierobotan, i. p. 535, sqq. Others call it some special kind of tree; e. g. the Syriac, amygdalus; Theodotion, vas dous. So, in 1 Ch. x. 12, is used therefor; it is a 4. At the first glance, it may surprise us that these writers could have had an imperfect and uncritical acquaintance with a language well-known quid pro quo, put for a difficult word, and is certainly neither a correct gloss, nor a statement derived from another source, as Michaelis thinks. Supp. ad Lex. Heb. p. 136. [See Gesenius, Thesaurus, and Fürst, Concord. sub voce.] 2 Sam. v. 17; when David heard this, he drew down to the hill top. Instead of this very obscure word, the Chronicler has, (1 Ch. xiv. 18,) which by no means gives the true sense of the old reading. See De Wette, Beit. vol. i. p. 67. 2 Sam. v. 24; 7, then bestir thyself. (Compare 7, diligent, eager.) This sense of the word may have ceased to be common at an early period, and therefore the translators could only guess at the meaning. Seventy, zuteẞion лgos avrovs. Vulgate, tunc inibis prælium. Chald. Syr. confortaberis, sumes animos. So, in the parallel, 1 Ch. xiv. 15, it is an IN, which some erroneously regard as the correct explanation. TT: 2 Sam. viii. 1; David took, the bridle, i. e. the metropolis, from the hand of the Philistines, i. e. brought them under his dominion. See the Arabic phrases in Schultens, Job xxx. 11. In 1 Ch. xviii. 1, for this we read, , the city Gath and the circumjacent villages; but no interpreter has succeeded in showing this is the true meaning of the original term. See Dathe's Glass, Phil. sac. p. 783. 2 Sam. viii. 18; the sons of David were called D, priests, which, probably, is to be understood as meaning unlevitical priests of the king's house and palace, who are obviously upper officers of the king. (Compare verse 17 with 1 Sam. xxi. 2, xxii. 9.) The Chronicler, who would endure no unlevitical priest, (compare 1 Sam. i. 11 with 1 Ch. vi. 18,) explains it by 1 Ch. xviii. 17. So the Chaldee on Gen. xli. 45, Ps. cx. 4, translates by , chief, which can hardly be defended. Here the interpreter was led by one of his preponderating opinions. De Wette, 1. c. 81, 82. 2 Sam. xxiii. 11; a piece of ground full of, lentiles. 1 Ch. xi. 13; , barley. If this is not a (false) gloss for the former word, then it is a quid pro quo, a substitution of the known for the unknown. So the Samaritan, in Gen. xxv. 34, alters this term, which he did not understand, into, which the Samaritan translator, in a manner unintelligible to me, renders . עד שום 1 Kings x. 22; a ship of Tarshish, (,) i. e. a great sea-ship, brought, every three years, gold and silver, ivory, apes, and peacocks, (as it seems from ix. 28) from Ophir. According to 1 Kings xxii. 49, the ships of Tarshish set out from Ezion-Geber to go to Ophir. The Chronicler, who did not know that a ship of Tarshish meant any large merchant vessel in general, thus explains which had not then entirely ceased to be vernacular; but this will astonish us less when we consider that a grammatico-critical knowledge of the mother tongue and its etymologies was not sought for among the ancients; at least not so long as the language was a living one. Cicero's and Varro's unlucky etymologies of Latin words are well known. And we must place in the same category a number of attempts at etymology that occur in the old books, which can no more be justified, or admitted as correct, than they can be charged on their authors as great faults." Such etymologies are forced, in the former expression,-ships that go to Tarshish, ibi, and, in both passages, makes them go to Tarshish; but, in the second passage, where Ophir is expressly named, he omits it, to avoid the contradiction. See Bredow, Untersuch, &c. ii. 260-303. 1 Kings x. 13; Solomon gave the queen of Sheba all that she wished and desired, besides what he gave her, by Teen The, as it became King Solomon, i. e. a present worthy of King Solomon. The Chronicler, probably misunderstanding the last expression, gives this inappropriate term, - besides that which she brought to the king, bb NO TEN. 1 Kings x. 14; kings of the allies, or auxiliaries, This will scarcely suffice in . מַלְכֵי עֲרָב,Ch. ix. 14; for this 2 ; מַלְכֵי הַעֶבֶר this place, where only Solomon's subjects seem to be spoken of. (See Lexicon, sub voce.) 2 Kings xxii. 13, 17; the somewhat unusual expression, e, my anger is kindled, which the Chronicler (2 Ch. xxxiv. 21) expresses by my anger is poured out, the more usual form ; but so unsuitable in the last place, that he leaves out the addition - and shall not be quenched. He could not have understood the etymological sense of the latter. verse 13, according to all which is prescribed for us (in it;) 2 Ch. xxxiv. 21, banan - bab , according to all which is written in the book. I conjecture the ex pression, pre-scribed, was unknown to the later writer. « Gen. v. 29; he called his name, for he said, This shall console us, (122727.)—xix. 37; is explained by, from the father. — xxii. 8, 14; the name is so played upon that we see the author wished to derive it from, as it is clearly done in 2 Ch. iii. 2. Gen. xxix. 32; it is said of the etymology of Reuben, 7, (i. e. behold a son!) she called his name Reuben, for she said,, Jehovah has looked upon my affliction. Ex. ii. 22; is explained by, a stranger, and no respect seems paid to. See Vater, 1. c. p. 666. Compare the etymologies of Janus, Ovid, Fast. i. 125, sqq.; of Maius, ibid. v. 1-110; Lemuria, v. 481; Agonalia, i. 320, sqq. |