The Song of Devorah and Barak
 |
| Francesco Solimena, "Deborah and Barak", circa 1700 |
It must have given the Redactor an awful headache though, because there are some songs (many of the Psalms and all of the Song of Songs especially), which clearly do not belong in the classical repertoire, have nothing whatsoever to do with YHVH or the religion that will eventually become Judaism, but were so deeply embedded in the culture that they could not be avoided or ignored, and so had to be assimilated.
So the attempt to make Devorah into a heroine of the Beney Yisra-El, when she was really the oracular priestess of a serpent shrine, and Barak an epithet for the thunder-god - which of course was Ba'al himself. Christianity cannot get rid of Ishtar's eggs or Wotan's Yule logs either!
The song is a paean of triumph, in the manner of Spurs' fans singing "Glory Glory Hallelu-Yah" (click here) or those at the old Spion Kop at Anfield chanting "You'll Never Walk Alone". The form of the poem is not revealed in the standard English translation.
Nonetheless, though the Song of Devorah and Barak is the oldest known poem in the Yehudit language, it (the poem, not the history-mythology behind the poem) is unlikely to date earlier than the 8th century BCE, two hundred years after Sha'ul, and not the almost two-hundred-plus before him that the "historicity" of Judges would like to suggest. The verses are made up of three-word or four-word series, usually two and sometimes three of each in each verse. They also employ parallel words, as echo lines, which is a common technique in early Ugaritic poetry. Many of the Psalms use similar techniques. I have laid out the Yehudit text, and my transliteration and translation of it, as the form implies that it should be, rather than as it appears in traditional scrolls and books, but kept the traditional verse-form used by the King James.
5:1 VA TASHAR DEVORAH U VARAK BEN AVI-NO'AM BA YOM HA HU LEMOR
וַתָּשַׁר דְּבֹורָה וּבָרָק בֶּן אֲבִינֹעַם בַּיֹּום הַהוּא לֵאמֹר
BN (BibleNet translation): On that day Devorah and Barak ben Avi-No'am sang these words:
DEVORAH: See the link, and also my notes at Judges 4.
DEVORAH: See the link, and also my notes at Judges 4.
BARAK BEN AVI-NO'AM: See my notes in Judges 4.
VA TASHAR: 3rd person singular, feminine; and yet we are told that both of them sang. Given that Devorah was the priestess and Barak the god (in the original myth), the grammar is absolutely correct, and helps explain why the poem has always been known as "The Song of Devorah", and not, as I have chosen to do, "The Song of Devorah and Barak".
5:2
BIPHRO'A PERA'OT BE YISRA-EL
BE HITNADEV AM
BARACHU YHVH
5:2
BIPHRO'A PERA'OT BE YISRA-EL
BE HITNADEV AM
BARACHU YHVH
בִּפְרֹעַ פְּרָעֹות בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל
בְּהִתְנַדֵּב עָם
בָּרֲכוּ יְהוָה
בְּהִתְנַדֵּב עָם
בָּרֲכוּ יְהוָה
BN (provisional translation):
In the days when Yisra-El has no formal leadership
and the people voluntarily take on the responsibility themselves
then does YHVH bless the people
and the people bless YHVH
and the people voluntarily take on the responsibility themselves
then does YHVH bless the people
and the people bless YHVH
The first two words, BIPHRO'A PERA'OT, are missing from the KJ translation, and this is one of those occasions when it is worth surfing the Internet to see what other translations are offered. King James offers the version above, choosing not to translate the words at all; the Church of Latter Day Saints follows the example. Wycliffe, two hundred years before King James, has "Ye men of Israel, who have willingly offered your lives to peril, bless ye the Lord", which leaves it out, but differently. Academia.edu refuses to let you see what it thinks unless you sign up and allow it to manage your contacts etc, which is disgraceful, so I cannot tell you anything more than what the Google preview tells, which is a false recognition of the word PHARAOH in both PHERO'A and PERA'OT. The New International Version offers: "When the princes in Israel take the lead...", and you can find several other versions linked from that link. Mechon-Mamre, the orthodox Jewish version, offers "When men let grow their hair in Israel...", which is certainly different. How do we work this out?
PHERO'A:The root is PAR'A (פרע) which does indeed mean "to loose" or "to let go". Ezekiel 24:14 uses it for remittance of a penalty, and Proverbs use it repeatedly to mean "overlook" or "reject" advice. In Exodus 32:25 it means "lawless", in the sense of having letting yourself go, whereas Numbers 5:18 has the clothes being let go and the verb meaning "to become naked". Leviticus 10:6, 13:45 and 21:10 use it in the same meaning. The Mechon-Mamre translation comes from the idea of shaving the hair, which is to say making the scalp naked, for which the only textual references are Numbers 6:5 and Ezekiel 44:20. How does Pharaoh get into this debate? Because Pharaoh in Yehudit happens to be spelled with the same letters; but clearly this tale has nothing to do with Pharaohs or Egypt. A Per'a in Arabic is a prince or the head of a family, connected with Potiphar, which is really Poti-Phera, in the Yoseph story in Genesis 37ff.
The next level of exploration requires us to see how the two words are used grammatically. BI PHERO'A, in full, but ellided here to BIPHRO'A, gives us an active participle, "in the time of letting go" at its root level, ignoring the many usages of "letting go" described above. PERA'OT is a nominative plural, and appears the same way in Deuteronomy 32:42. The inference is a time of letting go of leadership, when Yisra-El was politically naked because it had shed the garments of leadership, a time of anarchy and men doing as they saw fit in their own eyes - which is exactly how Yisra-El will continuously be described in the pages to come of this Book of Judges.
BE HITNADEV: Having been one myself, twice in fact, civilian both times, in the Yom Kippur war of 1973, and the War of Peace for Galilee in 1982, the concept of Hitnadvut is most familiar to me, including the "risk of peril" that accompanies it. The root NADAV, when not an absolutely disgusting brand of non-filter cigarettes given out for free to soldiers and kibbutzniks (Nadiv), means "generosity", and the Hitpa'el form, which we have here, means "volunteer".
BARCHU YHVH: Could be, probably is, intended in both directions: you praise YHVH for providing leadership, YHVH blesses you, for taking up the fight. If it was just the men praising YHVH, there would be an ET to show that YHVH was in the accusative. The "U" on the end of BARUCH could be 3rd person plural imperative, from the men (BARCHU), or the masculine pronoun suffixed (BARUCH HU).
Which is how I reached my provisional translation
In the days when Yisra-El has no formal leadership
and the people voluntarily take on the responsibility themselves
then does YHVH bless the people
and the people bless YHVH
PHERO'A:The root is PAR'A (פרע) which does indeed mean "to loose" or "to let go". Ezekiel 24:14 uses it for remittance of a penalty, and Proverbs use it repeatedly to mean "overlook" or "reject" advice. In Exodus 32:25 it means "lawless", in the sense of having letting yourself go, whereas Numbers 5:18 has the clothes being let go and the verb meaning "to become naked". Leviticus 10:6, 13:45 and 21:10 use it in the same meaning. The Mechon-Mamre translation comes from the idea of shaving the hair, which is to say making the scalp naked, for which the only textual references are Numbers 6:5 and Ezekiel 44:20. How does Pharaoh get into this debate? Because Pharaoh in Yehudit happens to be spelled with the same letters; but clearly this tale has nothing to do with Pharaohs or Egypt. A Per'a in Arabic is a prince or the head of a family, connected with Potiphar, which is really Poti-Phera, in the Yoseph story in Genesis 37ff.
The next level of exploration requires us to see how the two words are used grammatically. BI PHERO'A, in full, but ellided here to BIPHRO'A, gives us an active participle, "in the time of letting go" at its root level, ignoring the many usages of "letting go" described above. PERA'OT is a nominative plural, and appears the same way in Deuteronomy 32:42. The inference is a time of letting go of leadership, when Yisra-El was politically naked because it had shed the garments of leadership, a time of anarchy and men doing as they saw fit in their own eyes - which is exactly how Yisra-El will continuously be described in the pages to come of this Book of Judges.
BE HITNADEV: Having been one myself, twice in fact, civilian both times, in the Yom Kippur war of 1973, and the War of Peace for Galilee in 1982, the concept of Hitnadvut is most familiar to me, including the "risk of peril" that accompanies it. The root NADAV, when not an absolutely disgusting brand of non-filter cigarettes given out for free to soldiers and kibbutzniks (Nadiv), means "generosity", and the Hitpa'el form, which we have here, means "volunteer".
BARCHU YHVH: Could be, probably is, intended in both directions: you praise YHVH for providing leadership, YHVH blesses you, for taking up the fight. If it was just the men praising YHVH, there would be an ET to show that YHVH was in the accusative. The "U" on the end of BARUCH could be 3rd person plural imperative, from the men (BARCHU), or the masculine pronoun suffixed (BARUCH HU).
Which is how I reached my provisional translation
In the days when Yisra-El has no formal leadership
and the people voluntarily take on the responsibility themselves
then does YHVH bless the people
and the people bless YHVH
which makes for an idealisation of democracy achieved in its most perfect state, but also provides an ancient non-Yisra-Eli hymn with a prologue that transforms it into one that now headlines YHVH.
But it is not what the original intended - see verse 9, which uses virtually identical language to praise the leaders - nor is it the intention of the Redactor.
BN (final translation):
You men of Yisra-El
who volunteered to risk your lives
in a time of great peril
give praise to YHVH
who likewise blesses you
But it is not what the original intended - see verse 9, which uses virtually identical language to praise the leaders - nor is it the intention of the Redactor.
BN (final translation):
You men of Yisra-El
who volunteered to risk your lives
in a time of great peril
give praise to YHVH
who likewise blesses you
5:3
SHIM'U MELACHIM
HA'AZIYNU ROZNIM
ANOCHI LA YHVH
ANOCHI ASHIYRAH
AZAMER LA YHVH ELOHEY YISRA-EL
SHIM'U MELACHIM
HA'AZIYNU ROZNIM
ANOCHI LA YHVH
ANOCHI ASHIYRAH
AZAMER LA YHVH ELOHEY YISRA-EL
שִׁמְעוּ מְלָכִים
הַאֲזִינוּ רֹזְנִים
אָנֹכִי לַיהוָה
אָנֹכִי אָשִׁירָה
אֲזַמֵּר לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל
הַאֲזִינוּ רֹזְנִים
אָנֹכִי לַיהוָה
אָנֹכִי אָשִׁירָה
אֲזַמֵּר לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל
BN:
Hear, O you kings
Give ear, O you princes
I even I
will sing to YHVH
I will sing praise to YHVH, the god of Yisra-El
SHIMU...HA'AZINU: Recalling two of the great poems of Mosheh, the Shem'a of Deuteronomy 6:4 ff and the Ha'azinu of Deuteronomy 32:1 ff.
KJ: LORD, when thou wentest out of Seir, when thou marchedst out of the field of Edom, the earth trembled, and the heavens dropped, the clouds also dropped water.
Hear, O you kings
Give ear, O you princes
I even I
will sing to YHVH
I will sing praise to YHVH, the god of Yisra-El
SHIMU...HA'AZINU: Recalling two of the great poems of Mosheh, the Shem'a of Deuteronomy 6:4 ff and the Ha'azinu of Deuteronomy 32:1 ff.
5:4
YHVH
BE TSE'T'CHA MI SE'IR
BE TSA'DCHA MISDEH EDOM
ERETS RA'ASHAH
GAM SHAMAYIM NATAPHU
GAM AVIM NATPHU MAYIM
YHVH
BE TSE'T'CHA MI SE'IR
BE TSA'DCHA MISDEH EDOM
ERETS RA'ASHAH
GAM SHAMAYIM NATAPHU
GAM AVIM NATPHU MAYIM
יְהוָה
בְּצֵאתְךָ מִשֵּׂעִיר
בְּצַעְדְּךָ מִשְּׂדֵה אֱדֹום
אֶרֶץ רָעָשָׁה
גַּם שָׁמַיִם נָטָפוּ
גַּם עָבִים נָטְפוּ מָיִם
בְּצֵאתְךָ מִשֵּׂעִיר
בְּצַעְדְּךָ מִשְּׂדֵה אֱדֹום
אֶרֶץ רָעָשָׁה
גַּם שָׁמַיִם נָטָפוּ
גַּם עָבִים נָטְפוּ מָיִם
BN:
YHVH
when you went out of Se'ir
when you marched out of the field of Edom
the Earth trembled
and the Heavens dropped
the clouds also dropped water
As described above, and in the previous chapter, the god in question is the storm god: earthquakes, thunder and lightning. Hurricane El!
YHVH
when you went out of Se'ir
when you marched out of the field of Edom
the Earth trembled
and the Heavens dropped
the clouds also dropped water
As described above, and in the previous chapter, the god in question is the storm god: earthquakes, thunder and lightning. Hurricane El!
There was a reference to Se'ir in the previous chapter which I allowed to go by. Se'ir is Edom, and "Esau is Edom" (Genesis 36:1); further confirmation that this was not originally a Yisra-Eli hymn, though clearly verse 2 has adapted it.
AVIM: Why is this "clouds" - is it not rather a long way to go for an error for ANANIM (עננים)?
a) AVAH (עבה): which means "fat" or "dense", the latter of which could certainly infer some serious nimbostratus. However, there are only two uses of this word in the Tanach, of which the first, by odd coincidence, is in Mosheh's Ha'azinu, in Deuteronomy 32:15, though there it definitely means "fat", as in fat; the other is 1 Kings 12:10, and there it is even fatter.
b) AVIY (עבי): probably from the same root, but in its Aramaic form, it is used to mean "dense" or "compact", and can be found in 1 Kings 7:26, Jeremiah 52:21, Job 15:26; 2 Chronicles 4:17 has AVIY ADAMAH for "deep soil", a different kind of "thickness".
c) I am afraid that I am sticking to my original contention, which appears to be what every other translator has done too, which is to take the word in context, and reckon that it either has to be an error for ANANIM, or this is a word for "clouds" that we simply don't encounter on any other occasion.
KJ: The mountains melted from before the LORD, even that Sinai from before the LORD God of Israel.
5:5
HARIM NAZLU MIPNEY YHVH
ZEH SINAI MIPNEY YHVH
ELOHEY YISRA'EL
HARIM NAZLU MIPNEY YHVH
ZEH SINAI MIPNEY YHVH
ELOHEY YISRA'EL
הָרִים נָזְלוּ מִפְּנֵי יְהוָה
זֶה סִינַי מִפְּנֵי יְהוָה
אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל
זֶה סִינַי מִפְּנֵי יְהוָה
אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל
BN:
The mountains melted -
yes, even this Sinai -
from before YHVH
from before YHVH the god of Yisra-El
Punctuation and syntax make this verse problematic; I have rearranged it slightly in my translation. But definitely "this" Sinai and not "that" Sinai - which tells us where this was being sung. However... it being sung at Sinai is itself a problem, unless, for some reason, Devorah and Barak took the Beney Yisra-El to Sinai for a special service of commemoration or festival ceremony or pilgrimage. Devorah, as we know from Judges 4:5, "dwelt under the palm tree of Devorah between Ha Ramah and Beit-El, on Mount Ephrayim", and verse 6 of that chapter tells us that the battle took place on Mount Tavor; neither of these venues are anywhere near Sinai. (But for the Redactor, Hebraising this... you can complete this sentence, I am sure, without needing further assistance from me).
The mountains melted -
yes, even this Sinai -
from before YHVH
from before YHVH the god of Yisra-El
Punctuation and syntax make this verse problematic; I have rearranged it slightly in my translation. But definitely "this" Sinai and not "that" Sinai - which tells us where this was being sung. However... it being sung at Sinai is itself a problem, unless, for some reason, Devorah and Barak took the Beney Yisra-El to Sinai for a special service of commemoration or festival ceremony or pilgrimage. Devorah, as we know from Judges 4:5, "dwelt under the palm tree of Devorah between Ha Ramah and Beit-El, on Mount Ephrayim", and verse 6 of that chapter tells us that the battle took place on Mount Tavor; neither of these venues are anywhere near Sinai. (But for the Redactor, Hebraising this... you can complete this sentence, I am sure, without needing further assistance from me).
5:6
BIYMEY SHAMGAR BEN ANAT
BIYMEY YA'EL
CHADLU ARACHOT
VE HOLCHEY NETIYVOT
YELCHU ARACHOT AKALKALOT
BIYMEY SHAMGAR BEN ANAT
BIYMEY YA'EL
CHADLU ARACHOT
VE HOLCHEY NETIYVOT
YELCHU ARACHOT AKALKALOT
בִּימֵי שַׁמְגַּר בֶּן עֲנָת
בִּימֵי יָעֵל
חָדְלוּ אֳרָחֹות
וְהֹלְכֵי נְתִיבֹות
יֵלְכוּ אֳרָחֹות עֲקַלְקַלֹּות
בִּימֵי יָעֵל
חָדְלוּ אֳרָחֹות
וְהֹלְכֵי נְתִיבֹות
יֵלְכוּ אֳרָחֹות עֲקַלְקַלֹּות
BN:
In the days of Shamgar ben Anat
in the days of Ya'el
the highways were unused
and travellers walked along byways
Seeming to make those two stories contemporary, though previous chapters suggested Shamgar preceded Ya'el by fully twenty years. However, if we are talking gods and goddesses, or tribal heroes, then time is transcended anyway.
And yet not. Devorah is also described as being contemporary - she it is who provides the strategy by oracle, and sings this song afterwards. But this verse speaks of a time long gone by - does that add weight to the oracle being a mythological account of the heavens, and not a historic event at all?
Shamgar ben Anat made a very brief appearance in Judges 3:31 - see my notes there, though I think I failed to comment there on the oddity of his name having his matronymic rather than his patronymic, after the "son of" - it indicates a priestly title, rather than his actual name. For the "mother" herself, Anat, follow the link - she was another ethnic variation of the moon-goddess, her shrine at Beit Anatot (Bethany). Anat's son would have been the sun-hero, the Risen Lord, confirming thereby Shamgar as a variant of Shimshon (Samson), David, Jesus et al. Anat herself was regarded - very Devorah-like! - as "goddess of war, ever-virgin sister-wife of Ba'al, honoured as a protector, agent of vengeance, and bearer of life" (click here).
KJ: The inhabitants of the villages ceased, they ceased in Israel, until that I Deborah arose, that I arose a mother in Israel.
In the days of Shamgar ben Anat
in the days of Ya'el
the highways were unused
and travellers walked along byways
Seeming to make those two stories contemporary, though previous chapters suggested Shamgar preceded Ya'el by fully twenty years. However, if we are talking gods and goddesses, or tribal heroes, then time is transcended anyway.
And yet not. Devorah is also described as being contemporary - she it is who provides the strategy by oracle, and sings this song afterwards. But this verse speaks of a time long gone by - does that add weight to the oracle being a mythological account of the heavens, and not a historic event at all?
Shamgar ben Anat made a very brief appearance in Judges 3:31 - see my notes there, though I think I failed to comment there on the oddity of his name having his matronymic rather than his patronymic, after the "son of" - it indicates a priestly title, rather than his actual name. For the "mother" herself, Anat, follow the link - she was another ethnic variation of the moon-goddess, her shrine at Beit Anatot (Bethany). Anat's son would have been the sun-hero, the Risen Lord, confirming thereby Shamgar as a variant of Shimshon (Samson), David, Jesus et al. Anat herself was regarded - very Devorah-like! - as "goddess of war, ever-virgin sister-wife of Ba'al, honoured as a protector, agent of vengeance, and bearer of life" (click here).
CHADLU ARACHOT: CHADAL means "unused", even "forsaken" or "abandoned", though we are not told why. But the next verse infers it: a state of lawlessness existed, and people were sacred to travel on the main roads, for fear of robbers, or worse; so they found back-tracks - AKALKALOT - literally "tortuous routes".
5:7
CHADLU PERAZON BE YISRA-EL
CHADELU AD SHA KAMTI DEVORAH
SHA KAMTI EM BE YISRA-EL
CHADLU PERAZON BE YISRA-EL
CHADELU AD SHA KAMTI DEVORAH
SHA KAMTI EM BE YISRA-EL
חָדְלוּ פְרָזֹון בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל
חָדֵלּוּ עַד שַׁקַּמְתִּי דְּבֹורָה
שַׁקַּמְתִּי אֵם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל
חָדֵלּוּ עַד שַׁקַּמְתִּי דְּבֹורָה
שַׁקַּמְתִּי אֵם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל
BN:
The inhabitants of the villages simply gave up
they gave up across the whole of Yisra-El
until I, Devorah, arose
I arose - a mother in Yisra-El
CHADLU: The same root as in the last verse, but "ceased" what exactly? Having babies, or life in general? Gesenius, in his explanation of the root, says that it "belongs to the family of roots cited at the word DALAL, which have the meaning of being pendulous and flaccid". The dozens of uses of this root throughout the Tanach all have to do with "ceasing", "desisting", "postponing", "suspending", and EM BE YISRA-EL at the end of this verse certainly infers fertility. We have noted previously that Devorah is connected to the bee-hive tumulus of the megalithic age, and perhaps it is no coincidence that the one and only mention of what may be Hades, in the entire Tanach, which you can find in Isaiah 38:11, names it in Yehudit as CHADEL (חָֽדֶל), from this same root (worth looking at the link to this with the Rashi commentary).
The inhabitants of the villages simply gave up
they gave up across the whole of Yisra-El
until I, Devorah, arose
I arose - a mother in Yisra-El
CHADLU: The same root as in the last verse, but "ceased" what exactly? Having babies, or life in general? Gesenius, in his explanation of the root, says that it "belongs to the family of roots cited at the word DALAL, which have the meaning of being pendulous and flaccid". The dozens of uses of this root throughout the Tanach all have to do with "ceasing", "desisting", "postponing", "suspending", and EM BE YISRA-EL at the end of this verse certainly infers fertility. We have noted previously that Devorah is connected to the bee-hive tumulus of the megalithic age, and perhaps it is no coincidence that the one and only mention of what may be Hades, in the entire Tanach, which you can find in Isaiah 38:11, names it in Yehudit as CHADEL (חָֽדֶל), from this same root (worth looking at the link to this with the Rashi commentary).
PERAZON: A Perez is an officer in the army, according to Habbakuk 3:14 - clearly not what is intended here. A Perizi is a member of the Perizite tribe, and you are advised to go to my notes at that link, as I am not going to repeat them here. Essentially it comes down to rural peasants from small villages moving in to fortified cities, presumably because of the threats, or even the conquests, of those like Yazin who Devorah and Barak have just defeated. See also PIRZONO in verse 11- and quite probably Perazon is the reason why ROZNIM (see verse 3) came to mean "princes", when the root (ROZEN) really means "leanness"" or even "destruction" (see Psalm 106:15, Micah 6:10 et al).
Then did they cease having babies, because they were temporary refugees in the cities? Or did they cease farming, because they were seeking refuge in the cities, and it was the fertility of the land that was suspended? Or both, the consequence of warlords and anarchy? And does this now confirm my explanation of why, in the previous verse, the main highways were empty and people travelled along back-roads?
AD SHA KAMTI: Most Yehudit versions make this a single word, where in fact SHA is a common abbreviation of ASHER, and AD ASHER KAMTI would mean "until I arose". Either way, most translations insist on "until you arose"; but Devorah is singing this herself, and the suffix is unquestionably first person singular. That is how it has been translated here. But why is it not AD SHE KAMTI?
And I ask only because AD SHAKAMTI would also be grammatically correct Ivrit, but with an entirely different meaning. Albeit unused in the Tanach, there is a root SHAKAM meaning "to be sick" - the same exists in Arabic; the meaning does not work in this verse however. There is also the sycamore tree, the SHIKMAH (שקמה), which occurs several times in the Tanach - but it too cannot be the intention here, and not only because Devorah lives under the palm trees (Judges 4.5) or the weeping oaks (Genesis 35:8).
5:8
YIVCHAR ELOHIM CHADASHIM
AZ LACHEM SHE'ARIM
MAGEN IM YERA'EH VA ROMACH
BE ARBA'IM ELEPH BE YISRA-EL
יִבְחַר אֱלֹהִים חֲדָשִׁים
אָז לָחֶם שְׁעָרִים
מָגֵן אִם יֵרָאֶה וָרֹמַח
בְּאַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל
אָז לָחֶם שְׁעָרִים
מָגֵן אִם יֵרָאֶה וָרֹמַח
בְּאַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל
BN:
They chose new gods
then there was war in the gates
Was there a shield or a spear
seen among forty thousand in Yisra-El?
ELOHIM: Gods, plural.
They chose new gods
then there was war in the gates
Was there a shield or a spear
seen among forty thousand in Yisra-El?
ELOHIM: Gods, plural.
LACHEM: fascinating word, sociologically. LECHEM is "bread" of course, as well as its use here, which is really MILCHAMAH - "war". Why else do men ever fight?
SHE'ARIM: The Perizim having moved for safety into the fortified cities, the fortified cities now come under siege.
MAGEN: Later we will hear about the Magen David, known to this day as "the Star of David", though in fact that is Lyra (see my note to OREPH at Joshua 7:8). The MAGEN is a shield, not a star.
KJ: My heart is toward the governors of Israel, that offered themselves willingly among the people. Bless ye the LORD.
SHE'ARIM: The Perizim having moved for safety into the fortified cities, the fortified cities now come under siege.
MAGEN: Later we will hear about the Magen David, known to this day as "the Star of David", though in fact that is Lyra (see my note to OREPH at Joshua 7:8). The MAGEN is a shield, not a star.
5:9
LIBI LE CHOKEKEY YISRA-EL
HA MITNADVIM BA AM
BARACHU YHVH
LIBI LE CHOKEKEY YISRA-EL
HA MITNADVIM BA AM
BARACHU YHVH
לִבִּי לְחֹוקְקֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל
הַמִּתְנַדְּבִים בָּעָם
בָּרֲכוּ יְהוָה
הַמִּתְנַדְּבִים בָּעָם
בָּרֲכוּ יְהוָה
BN (provisional translation constructed from several sources):
My heart is toward the governors of Yisra-El
who offered themselves willingly among the people
Bless YHVH.
CHOKEKEY: "governors" is an inadequate translation. A CHOK is a law, made separately from the laws given in the Torah. "The lawmakers of Yisra-El" would be better. It also endorses the absence of leadership implied by BIPHRO'A PERA'OT in verse 2; law-makers were indeed leaders, but of a civilian not a military persuasion, and it was the latter that was missing when the enemies came with troops.
BARUCH YHVH can only be a late addition to the text, part of the attempt to Yehudaise it. Its meaning here however is missed by both of the above translations. It is not an instruction, nor a separate sentence. It is an expression of gratitude to those who "offered themselves willingly", which is to say "volunteered". So, perhaps, like this
BN (revised translation):
My heart goes out to the law-makers of Yisra-El
who volunteered
- may YHVH bless them! -
to serve the people.
KJ: They that are delivered from the noise of archers in the places of drawing water, there shall they rehearse the righteous acts of the LORD, even the righteous acts toward the inhabitants of his villages in Israel: then shall the people of the LORD go down to the gates.
My heart is toward the governors of Yisra-El
who offered themselves willingly among the people
Bless YHVH.
CHOKEKEY: "governors" is an inadequate translation. A CHOK is a law, made separately from the laws given in the Torah. "The lawmakers of Yisra-El" would be better. It also endorses the absence of leadership implied by BIPHRO'A PERA'OT in verse 2; law-makers were indeed leaders, but of a civilian not a military persuasion, and it was the latter that was missing when the enemies came with troops.
BARUCH YHVH can only be a late addition to the text, part of the attempt to Yehudaise it. Its meaning here however is missed by both of the above translations. It is not an instruction, nor a separate sentence. It is an expression of gratitude to those who "offered themselves willingly", which is to say "volunteered". So, perhaps, like this
BN (revised translation):
My heart goes out to the law-makers of Yisra-El
who volunteered
- may YHVH bless them! -
to serve the people.
5:10
ROCHVEY ATONOT TSECHOROT
YOSHVEY AL MIDIN
VE HOLCHEY AD DERECH
SIYCHU
ROCHVEY ATONOT TSECHOROT
YOSHVEY AL MIDIN
VE HOLCHEY AD DERECH
SIYCHU
רֹכְבֵי אֲתֹנֹות צְחֹרֹות
יֹשְׁבֵי עַל מִדִּין
וְהֹלְכֵי עַל דֶּרֶךְ
שִׂיחוּ
יֹשְׁבֵי עַל מִדִּין
וְהֹלְכֵי עַל דֶּרֶךְ
שִׂיחוּ
KJ: Speak, ye that ride on white asses, ye that sit in judgment, and walk by the way.
BN:
Speak
you who ride on white asses
you who sit in judgment
and you who walk along byways
ROCHVEY ATONOT TSECHOROT: "You who ride on white asses" needs explaining, the zoological especially, because there are no white asses on planet Earth, unless the occasional albino-by-genetic-accident; but also the mythological distinction between asses and donkeys, which are zoologically the same animal. See under CHAMOR for the donkey part, but also under SHET, the Egyptian god depicted as a donkey, and under SHA'UL, King Saul, whose tale constantly makes clear that he was a Shet-worshipper and not a follower of YHVH. For the ass-cult, see under Bil'am, or Balaam as he is usually written in English, and in my notes to his tale in Numbers 22 ff. It was on a donkey that Jesus entered Yeru-Shala'im, according to both Matthew 21:4-5 and John 12:14-15; both are understood by Christian scholars to be allusions to Zechariah 9:9, but Zechariah 9:9 is a hugely problematic verse, because it has a donkey (CHAMOR) which is the foal of an ass (ATONOT), and therefore, presumably, a mule.
BN:
Speak
you who ride on white asses
you who sit in judgment
and you who walk along byways
ROCHVEY ATONOT TSECHOROT: "You who ride on white asses" needs explaining, the zoological especially, because there are no white asses on planet Earth, unless the occasional albino-by-genetic-accident; but also the mythological distinction between asses and donkeys, which are zoologically the same animal. See under CHAMOR for the donkey part, but also under SHET, the Egyptian god depicted as a donkey, and under SHA'UL, King Saul, whose tale constantly makes clear that he was a Shet-worshipper and not a follower of YHVH. For the ass-cult, see under Bil'am, or Balaam as he is usually written in English, and in my notes to his tale in Numbers 22 ff. It was on a donkey that Jesus entered Yeru-Shala'im, according to both Matthew 21:4-5 and John 12:14-15; both are understood by Christian scholars to be allusions to Zechariah 9:9, but Zechariah 9:9 is a hugely problematic verse, because it has a donkey (CHAMOR) which is the foal of an ass (ATONOT), and therefore, presumably, a mule.
So are they riding on white asses because they are followers of the Underworld god, and therefore doomed to death already? Or do white asses only exist, like Harry Potter and Alice in Wonderland, in the realm of fiction, and people need to get into reality, work out what's going on in the world, take the responsibility that was blessed a couple of verses previously, and sort out the mess without needing Devorah or any other Moshi'a? Or even both explanations.
Having said all of which, take a look at Judges 10:4, where the word for the asses is AYARIM, not ATONOT, yet it appears to have the same connotation.
YOSHVEY AL MIDIN: And while we are wondering how to resolve the above phrase definitively, let us try to fill in the time by explaining "you who sit in judgement"; the last word especially, because Devorah was herself, at least officially in this book, a "judge" - what exactly does SHOPHET really mean? And are they being praised or criticised? The "law-makers" have just been exalted, after all; and yet this has the tone of negative criticism. Is this an instance of the Judiciary, rather than the Executive or the Legislature, running the country, but still being open to criticism for their flaws, even in spite of their virtues? And of course, this is precisely the model with the Sanhedrin, and later the Beth Din, in the Jewish world through post-Biblical history.
AL MIDIN is generally given as "sit in judgement", but there is a case to be made, as in the Mechon-Mamre translation, for "sit on rich cloths" and Biblehub has several versions which offer "saddle blankets", which is more about the egotistic vanity and self-importance of the judges than the efficacy or otherwise of their performance. So definitely some negative criticism, however we take the first phrase. So, again, maybe it is both of the explanations hypothesised above. Not only do we need people to stand up and take responsibility, but we need them to do it for altruistic not egotistic reasons, morally not corruptly, for everyone's best interest, not just their party or their lobby-group.
VE HOLCHEY AD DERECH: Is this an allusion back to verse 6, where "the highways were unoccupied, and the travellers walked through byways"? The word there was the tortuous "AKALKALOT"; the word here is the straighter and narrower DERECH, but it is introduced by AD, which really means "until", so the people here are going towards the DERECH, not yet on it, but at least going there, and DERECH is a major road; both of the major trading routes, the one along the Mediterranean coast and the one over the Golan Heights to Damasek (Damascus) were Derachim - Derech Ha Yam, "Ocean Highway" for the coast road, and Derech Ha Melech, "Royal Highway" for the latter.
And given that the overall intent of this verse is an attack on those who did nothing, and that those were generally the wealthy and comfortable who prefer to look after number one, my question in the previous paragraph now appears to be answered.
YOSHVEY AL MIDIN: And while we are wondering how to resolve the above phrase definitively, let us try to fill in the time by explaining "you who sit in judgement"; the last word especially, because Devorah was herself, at least officially in this book, a "judge" - what exactly does SHOPHET really mean? And are they being praised or criticised? The "law-makers" have just been exalted, after all; and yet this has the tone of negative criticism. Is this an instance of the Judiciary, rather than the Executive or the Legislature, running the country, but still being open to criticism for their flaws, even in spite of their virtues? And of course, this is precisely the model with the Sanhedrin, and later the Beth Din, in the Jewish world through post-Biblical history.
AL MIDIN is generally given as "sit in judgement", but there is a case to be made, as in the Mechon-Mamre translation, for "sit on rich cloths" and Biblehub has several versions which offer "saddle blankets", which is more about the egotistic vanity and self-importance of the judges than the efficacy or otherwise of their performance. So definitely some negative criticism, however we take the first phrase. So, again, maybe it is both of the explanations hypothesised above. Not only do we need people to stand up and take responsibility, but we need them to do it for altruistic not egotistic reasons, morally not corruptly, for everyone's best interest, not just their party or their lobby-group.
VE HOLCHEY AD DERECH: Is this an allusion back to verse 6, where "the highways were unoccupied, and the travellers walked through byways"? The word there was the tortuous "AKALKALOT"; the word here is the straighter and narrower DERECH, but it is introduced by AD, which really means "until", so the people here are going towards the DERECH, not yet on it, but at least going there, and DERECH is a major road; both of the major trading routes, the one along the Mediterranean coast and the one over the Golan Heights to Damasek (Damascus) were Derachim - Derech Ha Yam, "Ocean Highway" for the coast road, and Derech Ha Melech, "Royal Highway" for the latter.
And given that the overall intent of this verse is an attack on those who did nothing, and that those were generally the wealthy and comfortable who prefer to look after number one, my question in the previous paragraph now appears to be answered.
5:11
MI KOL MECHATSETSIM BEYN MASH'ABIM
SHAM YETANU TSIDKOT PIRZONO BE YISRA-EL
AZ YARDU LA SHE'ARIM AM YHVH
MI KOL MECHATSETSIM BEYN MASH'ABIM
SHAM YETANU TSIDKOT PIRZONO BE YISRA-EL
AZ YARDU LA SHE'ARIM AM YHVH
מִקֹּול מְחַצְצִים בֵּין מַשְׁאַבִּים
שָׁם יְתַנּוּ צִדְקֹות יְהוָה צִדְקֹת פִּרְזֹנֹו בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל
אָז יָרְדוּ לַשְּׁעָרִים עַם יְהוָה
שָׁם יְתַנּוּ צִדְקֹות יְהוָה צִדְקֹת פִּרְזֹנֹו בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל
אָז יָרְדוּ לַשְּׁעָרִים עַם יְהוָה
BN (translation pending, see below).
MECHATSETSIM: The root means "to cut", usually in the sense of "dividing" - thus palm fronds, for example, appear to have slices in them. The town of Chatsatson-Tamar possibly takes its name from this meaning. A CHATSATS appears as a small stone in Proverbs 20:17 and Lamentations 3:16, probably because gravel breaks up that way. A CHETS is an arrow in Psalm 77:18, but only as a metaphor for the individual drops of rain, and this is the only occasion of its use with this meaning. A CHATSOTSRA is a trumpet, man-made where a SHOFAR is an actual ram's horn, and primarily used for military signals where the Shofar is used in religious ceremonies.
Which of these is the intention here? Most translators go for the arrows, despite the arrows being a simile for the rainfall, because we appear to be in a state of siege, and so there are probably arrows; and in order to make arrows they add vast amounts of additional language, as in the KJ translation here, which actually says most things twice, and still makes little sense. But in the verse MECHATSETSIM isn't a stand-alone word; the text says KOL MECHATSETSIM, a KOL being a "voice" - and even when lots of them are being fired, arrows don't actually make very much noise: a slight hiss at firing, but that would be a hundred yards away, and you wouldn't hear it in the gates.
And why would you be in the gates anyway, at a time of siege, with arrows flying into the city? And what does this have to do with the "righteous acts" of the second part of this verse?
And either way, what is that prefictual Mem there for? I shall come back to this, but first I want to follow that prefictual Mem into MASH'ABIM.
MASH'ABIM: The root is SHA'AV (שאב), and it means "to draw water" (cf Genesis 24:13, 1 Samuel 7:6 et al). When the MEM is a prefix, it means "from"; when the root is used as a verb in the Pi'el (intensive) form, there is again a MEM prefix, but it is the Pi'el indicator (thus HU KOTEV = "he writes", but HU MEKATEV = "he scribbles"). There are many verbs where the action is considered intrinsically intensive (LEDABER, "to speak", for example - and I use that example because of the following verse), and probably that is the intention here; at a time of siege, and with arrows flying, there is still the need to draw water, and I imagine people took their jar, ran, filled, ran back - intense intensity.
Which leaves, from that opening foursome, the word BEYN, which means "between".
BN (literal translation, first part): From the noise of the stones/arrows, between the drawings of water...
SHAM YETANU: SHAM means "there"; YETANU is the 3rd person plural, future tense, of LATET = "to give".
TSIDKOT: We have encountered TSEDEK many times - acts of "righteousness", the concept of Justice.
Which of these is the intention here? Most translators go for the arrows, despite the arrows being a simile for the rainfall, because we appear to be in a state of siege, and so there are probably arrows; and in order to make arrows they add vast amounts of additional language, as in the KJ translation here, which actually says most things twice, and still makes little sense. But in the verse MECHATSETSIM isn't a stand-alone word; the text says KOL MECHATSETSIM, a KOL being a "voice" - and even when lots of them are being fired, arrows don't actually make very much noise: a slight hiss at firing, but that would be a hundred yards away, and you wouldn't hear it in the gates.
And why would you be in the gates anyway, at a time of siege, with arrows flying into the city? And what does this have to do with the "righteous acts" of the second part of this verse?
And either way, what is that prefictual Mem there for? I shall come back to this, but first I want to follow that prefictual Mem into MASH'ABIM.
MASH'ABIM: The root is SHA'AV (שאב), and it means "to draw water" (cf Genesis 24:13, 1 Samuel 7:6 et al). When the MEM is a prefix, it means "from"; when the root is used as a verb in the Pi'el (intensive) form, there is again a MEM prefix, but it is the Pi'el indicator (thus HU KOTEV = "he writes", but HU MEKATEV = "he scribbles"). There are many verbs where the action is considered intrinsically intensive (LEDABER, "to speak", for example - and I use that example because of the following verse), and probably that is the intention here; at a time of siege, and with arrows flying, there is still the need to draw water, and I imagine people took their jar, ran, filled, ran back - intense intensity.
Which leaves, from that opening foursome, the word BEYN, which means "between".
BN (literal translation, first part): From the noise of the stones/arrows, between the drawings of water...
SHAM YETANU: SHAM means "there"; YETANU is the 3rd person plural, future tense, of LATET = "to give".
TSIDKOT: We have encountered TSEDEK many times - acts of "righteousness", the concept of Justice.
PIRZONO: See my note to PERAZON in verse 7. BE YISRA-EL needs no comment
BN (literal translation, second part): There will Justice be meted out to the Perizim/villagers of Yisra-El.
And the last six words are straightforward: "Then the people of YHVH will go down to the gates." Straightforward to translate, but still needful of an explanation. Middle eastern cities in those days were walled affairs, and immediately inside the gate was an open plaza, where the market was set up on Mondays and Thursdays, where the elders and the judges met for their public assemblies, to hear petitions and to deal with criminals, including the stoning of any for whom that was the decreed punishment. Later, the Prophets would deliver their pulpit sermons to the townsfolk, and Ezra would read the Redacted Torah there (Nehemiah 8). So if what you want is "righteousness" and "Justice", the gate is where you go.
BN (literal translation, second part): There will Justice be meted out to the Perizim/villagers of Yisra-El.
And the last six words are straightforward: "Then the people of YHVH will go down to the gates." Straightforward to translate, but still needful of an explanation. Middle eastern cities in those days were walled affairs, and immediately inside the gate was an open plaza, where the market was set up on Mondays and Thursdays, where the elders and the judges met for their public assemblies, to hear petitions and to deal with criminals, including the stoning of any for whom that was the decreed punishment. Later, the Prophets would deliver their pulpit sermons to the townsfolk, and Ezra would read the Redacted Torah there (Nehemiah 8). So if what you want is "righteousness" and "Justice", the gate is where you go.
BN (final translation):
Between the whistling of the arrows
and the times of drawing water
the people of YHVH will go down to the gates
and there they will bring the righteousness of Justice
to the villagers of Yisra-El
Which feels rather more likely for the meaning of this verse than the King James above, and has the tone of "wake-up call" that is at the core of the verse that follows.
5:12
URI URI DEVORAH
URI URI DABREY SHIR
KUM BARAK
U SHAVEH SHEVYECHA
BEN AVI-NO'AM
KJ: Awake, awake, Deborah: awake, awake, utter a song: arise, Barak, and lead thy captivity captive, thou son of Abinoam.
Between the whistling of the arrows
and the times of drawing water
the people of YHVH will go down to the gates
and there they will bring the righteousness of Justice
to the villagers of Yisra-El
Which feels rather more likely for the meaning of this verse than the King James above, and has the tone of "wake-up call" that is at the core of the verse that follows.
5:12
URI URI DEVORAH
URI URI DABREY SHIR
KUM BARAK
U SHAVEH SHEVYECHA
BEN AVI-NO'AM
עוּרִי עוּרִי דְּבֹורָה
עוּרִי עוּרִי דַּבְּרִי שִׁיר
קוּם בָּרָק
וּשֲׁבֵה שֶׁבְיְךָ
בֶּן אֲבִינֹעַם
עוּרִי עוּרִי דַּבְּרִי שִׁיר
קוּם בָּרָק
וּשֲׁבֵה שֶׁבְיְךָ
בֶּן אֲבִינֹעַם
BN:
Awake awake Devorah
Awake awake - utter a song
Arise Barak
lead your captives out of their captivity
you son of Avi-No'am
Has this song now changed singer, and a choir, or the congregation, have taken over, at least with this verse? It seems unlikely that either Devorah or Barak would address themselves.
Awake awake Devorah
Awake awake - utter a song
Arise Barak
lead your captives out of their captivity
you son of Avi-No'am
Has this song now changed singer, and a choir, or the congregation, have taken over, at least with this verse? It seems unlikely that either Devorah or Barak would address themselves.
URI, URI is reflected in the great welcoming hymn of the Jewish Sabbath, "Lecha Dodi", composed by Shlomo HaLevi Alkabetz in the early 16th century. "Uri, uri, shir daberi, kavod YHVH alayich nigla" he sings, in the 5th verse of that hymn, "Awake, awake, sing out a song; the glory of YHVH has been revealed to you." (I would link you to a playing of the song, but it has been set to music in literally dozens of versions, in every known style of music, so you will need to make your own selection; only Adon Olam has been set more often). And yes, I am aware that the vast majority of "Lecha Dodi" is taken from the Book of Yesha-Yah (Isaiah), but cannot ignore the parallel, and especially not when Alkabetz follows his "Uri Uri" with a somewhat ungrammatical phrase that feels like a determined effort to get in the name Devorah (shir daberi), and the DABREY that follows, by any means he could contrive.
DEVORAH... DABREY: Word-games! Endless, splendid word-games - the sophistication of Joyce and Nobokov, almost three thousand years ahead of them. The name DEVORAH is rooted in that multiply complex root DAVAR, which is sometimes a "word" and sometimes a "thing", and which yields "the Word of God" in the sense of Gospel John's logos. So too is DABREY, the call to her to "speak" - though in fact she is not going to speak at all, she is going to sing - a far more intensive form of speaking, as Shlomo Alkabetz clearly understood from the way he reorganised the wording in that phrase in Lecha Dodi. So Devorah, in singing, becomes the Word of the deity: physical expression through intellectual creation and verbal expression. Magnificent!
KJ: Then he made him that remaineth have dominion over the nobles among the people: the LORD made me have dominion over the mighty.
DEVORAH... DABREY: Word-games! Endless, splendid word-games - the sophistication of Joyce and Nobokov, almost three thousand years ahead of them. The name DEVORAH is rooted in that multiply complex root DAVAR, which is sometimes a "word" and sometimes a "thing", and which yields "the Word of God" in the sense of Gospel John's logos. So too is DABREY, the call to her to "speak" - though in fact she is not going to speak at all, she is going to sing - a far more intensive form of speaking, as Shlomo Alkabetz clearly understood from the way he reorganised the wording in that phrase in Lecha Dodi. So Devorah, in singing, becomes the Word of the deity: physical expression through intellectual creation and verbal expression. Magnificent!
5:13
AZ YERED SARIYD LE ADIYRIM
AM YHVH YERED LI BA GIBORIM
AZ YERED SARIYD LE ADIYRIM
AM YHVH YERED LI BA GIBORIM
אָז יְרַד שָׂרִיד לְאַדִּירִים
עָם יְהוָה יְרַד לִי בַּגִּבֹּורִים
עָם יְהוָה יְרַד לִי בַּגִּבֹּורִים
BN:
So he gave those who were left authority over the elders
The people of YHVH seized the garrison and took charge
AZ YERED SARIYD LE ADIYRIM... YERED...GIBORIM: Word-play in the previous verse, sound-play in this one - confirmation that this would have been sung, accompanied by musical instruments - you don't bother with these kinds of sound-play if you are writing for the page.
So he gave those who were left authority over the elders
The people of YHVH seized the garrison and took charge
AZ YERED SARIYD LE ADIYRIM... YERED...GIBORIM: Word-play in the previous verse, sound-play in this one - confirmation that this would have been sung, accompanied by musical instruments - you don't bother with these kinds of sound-play if you are writing for the page.
GIBORIM: Yes, the word means "heroes", and "mighty", but... see the notes at the link. The difficult piece is the word LI, which means "to me": Is this Devorah or Barak? The previous verse was addressed to both of them, even though this is supposedly "their" song; but the narrator is unnamed, and LI should, in the context, logically imply the narrator. Perhaps the narrator is Devorah, but she is speaking of herself in the 3rd person, as a rhetorical device to rouse the people?
There is an undercurrent of social revolution throughout these verses: complaints about the leaders not doing their jobs properly, but only worrying about themselves; the people praised for taking responsibility in the vacuum; and now a leadership emerging from among the people, taking charge, even over the heads of the tribal elders, the hereditary rulers, even, as I have suggested in my translation, taking over the garrison and leading the military response to the siege. And Devorah leading, or at least inspiring this - you can see why I used the Joan of Arc comparison earlier.
There is an undercurrent of social revolution throughout these verses: complaints about the leaders not doing their jobs properly, but only worrying about themselves; the people praised for taking responsibility in the vacuum; and now a leadership emerging from among the people, taking charge, even over the heads of the tribal elders, the hereditary rulers, even, as I have suggested in my translation, taking over the garrison and leading the military response to the siege. And Devorah leading, or at least inspiring this - you can see why I used the Joan of Arc comparison earlier.
5:14
MINI EPHRAYIM SHARSHAM BA AMALEK
ACHAREYCHA VIN-YAMIN BA AMAMEYCHA
MINI MACHIR YARDU MECHOKEKIM
U MI ZEVULUN MOSHCHIM BE SHEVET SOPHER
מִנִּי אֶפְרַיִם שָׁרְשָׁם בַּעֲמָלֵק
אַחֲרֶיךָ בִנְיָמִין בַּעֲמָמֶיךָ
מִנִּי מָכִיר יָרְדוּ מְחֹקְקִים
וּמִזְּבוּלֻן מֹשְׁכִים בְּשֵׁבֶט סֹפֵר
אַחֲרֶיךָ בִנְיָמִין בַּעֲמָמֶיךָ
מִנִּי מָכִיר יָרְדוּ מְחֹקְקִים
וּמִזְּבוּלֻן מֹשְׁכִים בְּשֵׁבֶט סֹפֵר
BN:
Some who came from Ephrayim
had their roots amongst the Beney Amalek
Others came from you, Bin-Yamin
from among your people
Some came from among the leaders of Machir
And from Zevulun Beney Meshech from the Guild of Carvers
I do, honestly, have great respect for the men who worked so hard to produce the King James, and so many other translations of these texts; but do you not sometimes find yourself thinking, that they didn't have the foggiest notion what this or that word, sometimes an entire verse, meant? But they had to put something, so they put this. The KJ here is, alas, completely incomprehensible. Whereas the Yehudit is actually perfectly straightforward.
AMALEK: See the link.
MACHIR: See the link.
MESHECH: See the link.
SHEVET SOPHER: "The pen of the writer" is a mistranslation, and not simply because it would be an anchronism, even if it were correct; we are talking about engraving on stone, and both the book, the act of writing, and the trade of scribe come at least two hundred years later in the development of written language. LISPOR also means "to count", and some translators, recognising the error in "scribe", have gone for the officials who carry out the census, and interpret this as Devorah talking about the establishment of the tribes. But that is not what she is saying. She is still praising the ordinary folks, who have taken up the fight, and naming those who joined the uprising. A Sopher is a Sopher - it is simply that they scratched in wax or carved in clay, and did not yet write with quills.
KJ: And the princes of Issachar were with Deborah; even Issachar, and also Barak: he was sent on foot into the valley. For the divisions of Reuben there were great thoughts of heart.
Some who came from Ephrayim
had their roots amongst the Beney Amalek
Others came from you, Bin-Yamin
from among your people
Some came from among the leaders of Machir
And from Zevulun Beney Meshech from the Guild of Carvers
I do, honestly, have great respect for the men who worked so hard to produce the King James, and so many other translations of these texts; but do you not sometimes find yourself thinking, that they didn't have the foggiest notion what this or that word, sometimes an entire verse, meant? But they had to put something, so they put this. The KJ here is, alas, completely incomprehensible. Whereas the Yehudit is actually perfectly straightforward.
AMALEK: See the link.
MACHIR: See the link.
MESHECH: See the link.
SHEVET SOPHER: "The pen of the writer" is a mistranslation, and not simply because it would be an anchronism, even if it were correct; we are talking about engraving on stone, and both the book, the act of writing, and the trade of scribe come at least two hundred years later in the development of written language. LISPOR also means "to count", and some translators, recognising the error in "scribe", have gone for the officials who carry out the census, and interpret this as Devorah talking about the establishment of the tribes. But that is not what she is saying. She is still praising the ordinary folks, who have taken up the fight, and naming those who joined the uprising. A Sopher is a Sopher - it is simply that they scratched in wax or carved in clay, and did not yet write with quills.
5:15
VE SAREY BE YISASCHAR IM DEVORAH
VE YISASCHAR KEN BARAK
BA EMEK SHULACH BE RAGLAV
BIPHLAGOT RE'U-VEN GEDOLIM CHIKEKEY-LEV
VE SAREY BE YISASCHAR IM DEVORAH
VE YISASCHAR KEN BARAK
BA EMEK SHULACH BE RAGLAV
BIPHLAGOT RE'U-VEN GEDOLIM CHIKEKEY-LEV
וְשָׂרַי בְּיִשָּׂשכָר עִם דְּבֹרָה
וְיִשָּׂשכָר כֵּן בָּרָק
בָּעֵמֶק שֻׁלַּח בְּרַגְלָיו
בִּפְלַגֹּות רְאוּבֵן גְּדֹלִים חִקְקֵי לֵב
וְיִשָּׂשכָר כֵּן בָּרָק
בָּעֵמֶק שֻׁלַּח בְּרַגְלָיו
בִּפְלַגֹּות רְאוּבֵן גְּדֹלִים חִקְקֵי לֵב
BN:
And the princes of Yisaschar were with Devorah
and the tribesmen of Yisaschar and - yes - Barak
He was sent on foot into the valley
The divisions of Re'u-Ven included some of their finest law-makers
In Judges 4:10 Barak summoned Naphtali and Zevulun to the war, and in my note I wondered why Yisaschar has not been summoned too, since it was the third tribe with a border close to Mount Tavor. Now it appears that Yisaschar was summoned, but by Devorah, not Barak. The comment about Re'u-Ven appears to suggest that all the tribes were indeed called to the fight, but that only some turned up - this would help explain the naming of their virtues in the previous verses: it becomes, by inference, a further criticism of those who failed to appear.
KEN VARAK: Does this infer that Barak was himself from the tribe of Yisaschar (assuming there ever was a human Barak)? Judges 4:6 finds him living in Kedesh Naphtali. But if he were living there, rather than from there, and if he were a Ben Yisaschar by tribe, the calling of his own tribe would be taken for granted. "And Churchill called on America and Canada to support the fight against Germany" would not leave us wondering why the British weren't fighting too.
CHIKEKEY-LEV: We have to go back to the CHOKEKEY of verse 9 to understand this: law-makers. The LEV is the heart, but the heart is the Biblical mind, unlike that useless bag of offal and tissue that we believe in today, and called the brain.
Note that the last line of this verse will be paralleled in the last line of the next verse.
5:16
LAMAH YASHAVTA BEYN HA MISHPETAYIM
LISHMO'A SHERIKOT ADARIM
LIPHLAGOT RE'U-VEN GEDOLIM CHIKREY-LEV
KJ: Why abodest thou among the sheepfolds, to hear the bleatings of the flocks? For the divisions of Reuben there were great searchings of heart.
And the princes of Yisaschar were with Devorah
and the tribesmen of Yisaschar and - yes - Barak
He was sent on foot into the valley
The divisions of Re'u-Ven included some of their finest law-makers
In Judges 4:10 Barak summoned Naphtali and Zevulun to the war, and in my note I wondered why Yisaschar has not been summoned too, since it was the third tribe with a border close to Mount Tavor. Now it appears that Yisaschar was summoned, but by Devorah, not Barak. The comment about Re'u-Ven appears to suggest that all the tribes were indeed called to the fight, but that only some turned up - this would help explain the naming of their virtues in the previous verses: it becomes, by inference, a further criticism of those who failed to appear.
KEN VARAK: Does this infer that Barak was himself from the tribe of Yisaschar (assuming there ever was a human Barak)? Judges 4:6 finds him living in Kedesh Naphtali. But if he were living there, rather than from there, and if he were a Ben Yisaschar by tribe, the calling of his own tribe would be taken for granted. "And Churchill called on America and Canada to support the fight against Germany" would not leave us wondering why the British weren't fighting too.
CHIKEKEY-LEV: We have to go back to the CHOKEKEY of verse 9 to understand this: law-makers. The LEV is the heart, but the heart is the Biblical mind, unlike that useless bag of offal and tissue that we believe in today, and called the brain.
Note that the last line of this verse will be paralleled in the last line of the next verse.
5:16
LAMAH YASHAVTA BEYN HA MISHPETAYIM
LISHMO'A SHERIKOT ADARIM
LIPHLAGOT RE'U-VEN GEDOLIM CHIKREY-LEV
לָמָּה יָשַׁבְתָּ בֵּין הַמִּשְׁפְּתַיִם
לִשְׁמֹעַ שְׁרִקֹות עֲדָרִים
לִפְלַגֹּות רְאוּבֵן גְּדֹולִים חִקְרֵי לֵב
לִשְׁמֹעַ שְׁרִקֹות עֲדָרִים
לִפְלַגֹּות רְאוּבֵן גְּדֹולִים חִקְרֵי לֵב
BN (version 1):
What were you doing
down there in the the sheepfolds
listening to the bleating of the flocks?
Among the divisions of Re'u-Ven
some most unusual laws were being made
BN (version 2):
What were you doing
sitting down there between the judges
listening to them anguishing about their law-suits?
Among the law-makers of Re'u-Ven
there was some serious anguishing going on
And for a final translation, can someone please assist me in merging those two versions, because the word-play of the Yehudit text clearly intends both of them, simultaneously.
RE'U-VEN: Like the eastern half of the tribe of Menasheh, and Gad, Re'u-Ven had promised both Mosheh and Yehoshu'a that they would come to the aid of the other tribes in times of war, as part of the agreement to let them settle outside mainland Yisra-El (see Numbers 32:16–17, which includes the source of Devorah's reference to "sheepfolds").
The English cannot easily catch the word play between CHIKEKEY in the last verse and CHIKREY in this one, a single change of consonant.
Nor between MISHPETAYIM and MISHPATAYIM, or is that MISHPATIM? Yes, sheepfolds, but aurally "laws", "ordinances", the work that is undertaken by the law-makers. The word-games continue, and maybe there were "great searchings of heart" as well, but the point here is that men accustomed to the dignity of their office are camping out in sheepfolds in order to do their bit for the struggle; and good on them for doing so.
ADARIM: Is that not the same ADIYRIM that we had in verse 13? No, there it was ADIYRIM with an Ayin (ע), here it is Adarim with an Aleph (א) - the same word-play, using the same letters, that we saw with URU and URI elsewhere in this song (see my note to verse 23).
5:17
GIL'AD BE EVER HA YARDEN SHACHEN
VE DAN LAMAH YAGUR ANIYOT
ASHER YASHAV LE CHOPH YAMIM
VE AL MIPHRATSAV YISHKUN
KJ: Gilead abode beyond Jordan: and why did Dan remain in ships? Asher continued on the sea shore, and abode in his breaches.
What were you doing
down there in the the sheepfolds
listening to the bleating of the flocks?
Among the divisions of Re'u-Ven
some most unusual laws were being made
BN (version 2):
What were you doing
sitting down there between the judges
listening to them anguishing about their law-suits?
Among the law-makers of Re'u-Ven
there was some serious anguishing going on
And for a final translation, can someone please assist me in merging those two versions, because the word-play of the Yehudit text clearly intends both of them, simultaneously.
RE'U-VEN: Like the eastern half of the tribe of Menasheh, and Gad, Re'u-Ven had promised both Mosheh and Yehoshu'a that they would come to the aid of the other tribes in times of war, as part of the agreement to let them settle outside mainland Yisra-El (see Numbers 32:16–17, which includes the source of Devorah's reference to "sheepfolds").
The English cannot easily catch the word play between CHIKEKEY in the last verse and CHIKREY in this one, a single change of consonant.
Nor between MISHPETAYIM and MISHPATAYIM, or is that MISHPATIM? Yes, sheepfolds, but aurally "laws", "ordinances", the work that is undertaken by the law-makers. The word-games continue, and maybe there were "great searchings of heart" as well, but the point here is that men accustomed to the dignity of their office are camping out in sheepfolds in order to do their bit for the struggle; and good on them for doing so.
ADARIM: Is that not the same ADIYRIM that we had in verse 13? No, there it was ADIYRIM with an Ayin (ע), here it is Adarim with an Aleph (א) - the same word-play, using the same letters, that we saw with URU and URI elsewhere in this song (see my note to verse 23).
5:17
GIL'AD BE EVER HA YARDEN SHACHEN
VE DAN LAMAH YAGUR ANIYOT
ASHER YASHAV LE CHOPH YAMIM
VE AL MIPHRATSAV YISHKUN
גִּלְעָד בְּעֵבֶר הַיַּרְדֵּן שָׁכֵן
וְדָן לָמָּה יָגוּר אֳנִיֹּות
אָשֵׁר יָשַׁב לְחֹוף יַמִּים
וְעַל מִפְרָצָיו יִשְׁכֹּון
וְדָן לָמָּה יָגוּר אֳנִיֹּות
אָשֵׁר יָשַׁב לְחֹוף יַמִּים
וְעַל מִפְרָצָיו יִשְׁכֹּון
BN:
Gil'ad stayed beyond Yarden
And why did Dan remain in ships?
Asher stayed on the sea shore
and sat tight in his breaches
Having extolled the virtues of those tribes who went to the war, she now derides the yeshiva buchers who stayed at home (no change there then!).
Dan remaining in ships is particularly interesting, because their original tribal territory was on the Mediterranean coast, but they were forced out (Judges 1:34) many years before the supposed time of this tale... though the story of their move to La'ish (which is very much inland) will not be told until the very last chapters of this Book of Judges. How does this impact on our ability to date the Devorah?
And if indeed, as I have suggested repeatedly, the Danites were colonists from the Aegean/Ionian, and given what we know of them from Homer and Virgil, can we assume that they came to Kena'an in ships as traders, and moving to La'ish would have placed them on the very edge of the biggest commercial industry in the world at that time, the trade in dyes procured from the murex sea-snail? It was precisely that which the early Danaans of Phoinix (Lebanon) were carrying when they established their trading colonies in Troy and Carthage.
KJ: Zebulun and Naphtali were a people that jeoparded their lives unto the death in the high places of the field.
Gil'ad stayed beyond Yarden
And why did Dan remain in ships?
Asher stayed on the sea shore
and sat tight in his breaches
Having extolled the virtues of those tribes who went to the war, she now derides the yeshiva buchers who stayed at home (no change there then!).
Dan remaining in ships is particularly interesting, because their original tribal territory was on the Mediterranean coast, but they were forced out (Judges 1:34) many years before the supposed time of this tale... though the story of their move to La'ish (which is very much inland) will not be told until the very last chapters of this Book of Judges. How does this impact on our ability to date the Devorah?
And if indeed, as I have suggested repeatedly, the Danites were colonists from the Aegean/Ionian, and given what we know of them from Homer and Virgil, can we assume that they came to Kena'an in ships as traders, and moving to La'ish would have placed them on the very edge of the biggest commercial industry in the world at that time, the trade in dyes procured from the murex sea-snail? It was precisely that which the early Danaans of Phoinix (Lebanon) were carrying when they established their trading colonies in Troy and Carthage.
5:18
ZEVULUN AM CHEREPH NAPHSHO LAMUT
VE NAPHTALI AL MEROMEY SADEH
ZEVULUN AM CHEREPH NAPHSHO LAMUT
VE NAPHTALI AL MEROMEY SADEH
זְבֻלוּן עַם חֵרֵף נַפְשֹׁו לָמוּת וְנַפְתָּלִי עַל מְרֹומֵי שָׂדֶה
BN:
Zevulun and Naphtali were the ones who put their lives in jeopardy
even to the point of death
on the high ground of the battlefield
Zevulun and Naphtali were the ones who put their lives in jeopardy
even to the point of death
on the high ground of the battlefield
After questioning the loyalty of the other tribes, Devorah returns to praising those who did come to fight; and does so with a neat little double entendre on the "high ground": the moral as well as the geographical.
We need to start reading this, as we have found ourselves doing so many times before, on a mythological level. The tone and language are becoming reminiscent of Ya'akov in the Hikavtsu of Genesis 49; she is going through the tribes one by one, and what she says about them may be an oracle, rather than a post-battle honouring.
5:19
BA'U MELACHIM NILCHAMU
AZ NILCHAMU MALCHEY CHENA'AN
BE TA'NACH AL MEY MEGIDO
BETS'A KESEPH LO LAKACHU
KJ: The kings came and fought, then fought the kings of Canaan in Taanach by the waters of Megiddo; they took no gain of money.
5:19
BA'U MELACHIM NILCHAMU
AZ NILCHAMU MALCHEY CHENA'AN
BE TA'NACH AL MEY MEGIDO
BETS'A KESEPH LO LAKACHU
בָּאוּ מְלָכִים נִלְחָמוּ
אָז נִלְחֲמוּ מַלְכֵי כְנַעַן
בְּתַעְנַךְ עַל מֵי מְגִדֹּו
בֶּצַע כֶּסֶף לֹא לָקָחוּ
אָז נִלְחֲמוּ מַלְכֵי כְנַעַן
בְּתַעְנַךְ עַל מֵי מְגִדֹּו
בֶּצַע כֶּסֶף לֹא לָקָחוּ
BN:
The kings came and fought
Then they fought the kings of Kena'an
at Ta'nach by the waters of Megido
They made no profit from this
TA'NACH: See the link, and my note at Joshua 21:25.
The kings came and fought
Then they fought the kings of Kena'an
at Ta'nach by the waters of Megido
They made no profit from this
TA'NACH: See the link, and my note at Joshua 21:25.
MEGIDO: which is really Har Megido, Megido Hill, and gives its name to the Christian concept of Armageddon, from the Revelation of Saint John (16:16).
Not taking money links back to MITNADVIM in verse 9. People came because they believed they should, to defend their land; not for money, not for conscription. This places altruism at the core of Yisra-Eli ethics - a point much to be emphasised to the contemporary acolytes of Ayn Rand.
KJ: They fought from heaven; the stars in their courses fought against Sisera.
Not taking money links back to MITNADVIM in verse 9. People came because they believed they should, to defend their land; not for money, not for conscription. This places altruism at the core of Yisra-Eli ethics - a point much to be emphasised to the contemporary acolytes of Ayn Rand.
5:20
MIN SHAMAYIM NILCHAMU HA KOCHAVIM
MIMSILOTAM NILCHAMU IM SIYSRA
MIN SHAMAYIM NILCHAMU HA KOCHAVIM
MIMSILOTAM NILCHAMU IM SIYSRA
מִן שָׁמַיִם נִלְחָמוּ הַכֹּוכָבִים
מִמְּסִלֹּותָם נִלְחֲמוּ עִם סִיסְרָא
מִמְּסִלֹּותָם נִלְחֲמוּ עִם סִיסְרָא
BN:
They fought from the heavens
The stars in their courses fought against Siysra
And when I raised the subject in my note to verse 18, you went - "oh no, Prashker's on his mythological trip again". I know. I know. And I could have written "see verse 20", but I chose not to. Yet this is a key line, confirming that, yet again, our tale is not literal but mythological. The battle was not among people at all; this is a cosmological war that is being described (though the phrasing is intended simply to demonstrate that the greater forces of Nature participated. Not YHVH mind!) Or maybe there was an actual war, but Devorah needed to place its outcome on the honours board in YHVHalla, on Mount ELympus, and so it has also to be both.
KJ: The river of Kishon swept them away, that ancient river, the river Kishon. O my soul, thou hast trodden down strength.
They fought from the heavens
The stars in their courses fought against Siysra
And when I raised the subject in my note to verse 18, you went - "oh no, Prashker's on his mythological trip again". I know. I know. And I could have written "see verse 20", but I chose not to. Yet this is a key line, confirming that, yet again, our tale is not literal but mythological. The battle was not among people at all; this is a cosmological war that is being described (though the phrasing is intended simply to demonstrate that the greater forces of Nature participated. Not YHVH mind!) Or maybe there was an actual war, but Devorah needed to place its outcome on the honours board in YHVHalla, on Mount ELympus, and so it has also to be both.
5:21
NACHAL KIYSHON GERAPHAM
NACHAL KEDUMIM
NACHAL KIYSHON
TIDRECHI NAPHSHI OZ
NACHAL KIYSHON GERAPHAM
NACHAL KEDUMIM
NACHAL KIYSHON
TIDRECHI NAPHSHI OZ
נַחַל קִישֹׁון גְּרָפָם
נַחַל קְדוּמִים
נַחַל קִישֹׁון
תִּדְרְכִי נַפְשִׁי עֹז
נַחַל קְדוּמִים
נַחַל קִישֹׁון
תִּדְרְכִי נַפְשִׁי עֹז
BN:
The river Kiyshon swept them away
that ancient river
the river Kiyshon
March on my soul
from strength to strength
This verse is constructed using similar poetic forms to several of the Psalms: echo lines, parallelisms, repetitions. And quite probably that is the musical structure as well, but alas the orchestral score has now come down to us.
The river Kiyshon swept them away
that ancient river
the river Kiyshon
March on my soul
from strength to strength
This verse is constructed using similar poetic forms to several of the Psalms: echo lines, parallelisms, repetitions. And quite probably that is the musical structure as well, but alas the orchestral score has now come down to us.
TIDRECHI: What does that last phrase actually mean? The root is DERECH, for which see verse 10 first of all, and then follow that note back to verse 6; the form is once again the Pi'el, for which see the note to verse 11. Note that the pronoun is attached to NAPHSHI, not to OZ. Is there a connection, even perhaps a textual error, between OZ here and MEROZ in verse 23?
5:22
AZ HALMU IKVEY SUS MI DAHAROT
DAHAROT AVIYRAV
KJ: Then were the horsehoofs broken by the means of the pransings, the pransings of their mighty ones.
אָז הָלְמוּ עִקְּבֵי סוּס מִדַּהֲרֹות
דַּהֲרֹות אַבִּירָיו
דַּהֲרֹות אַבִּירָיו
BN:
Then horses' hooves hammered the ground
the galloping of Siysra's mighty steeds
SUS: Given the name of the principal enemy in this story - Siysra - I have been wondering when there would be a play on his name; the only obvious option is SUS, a horse. And having pulled the SUS off the beginning, will the writer also pull the RA off the end? Spelled as per his name it means "wicked", the opposite of "righteous", and of course that has been the central theme throughout; so maybe an actual word-play isn't necessary.
My translation on this occasion is adapted from the New Living Translation, with many thanks; I particularly like the way NLI has imitated the style of the ancient sagas, the kind of language we find in poems like "Beowulf", using large amounts of alliteration to enhance the aural as well as the visual impact of the recital. Not at all a Biblical technique, but translating into English by way of parallel is an extremely effective way of illuminating both cultures. You can read the whole of Beowulf here, or listen to an excerpt in recital here.
5:23
ORU MEROZ AMAR MAL'ACH YHVH
ORU ARUR YOSHVEYHA
KI LO VA'U LE EZRAT YHVH
LE EZRAT YHVH BA GIBORIM
KJ: Curse ye Meroz, said the angel of the LORD, curse ye bitterly the inhabitants thereof; because they came not to the help of the LORD, to the help of the LORD against the mighty.
Then horses' hooves hammered the ground
the galloping of Siysra's mighty steeds
SUS: Given the name of the principal enemy in this story - Siysra - I have been wondering when there would be a play on his name; the only obvious option is SUS, a horse. And having pulled the SUS off the beginning, will the writer also pull the RA off the end? Spelled as per his name it means "wicked", the opposite of "righteous", and of course that has been the central theme throughout; so maybe an actual word-play isn't necessary.
My translation on this occasion is adapted from the New Living Translation, with many thanks; I particularly like the way NLI has imitated the style of the ancient sagas, the kind of language we find in poems like "Beowulf", using large amounts of alliteration to enhance the aural as well as the visual impact of the recital. Not at all a Biblical technique, but translating into English by way of parallel is an extremely effective way of illuminating both cultures. You can read the whole of Beowulf here, or listen to an excerpt in recital here.
5:23
ORU MEROZ AMAR MAL'ACH YHVH
ORU ARUR YOSHVEYHA
KI LO VA'U LE EZRAT YHVH
LE EZRAT YHVH BA GIBORIM
אֹורוּ מֵרֹוז אָמַר מַלְאַךְ יְהוָה
אֹרוּ אָרֹור יֹשְׁבֶיהָ
כִּי לֹא בָאוּ לְעֶזְרַת יְהוָה
לְעֶזְרַת יְהוָה בַּגִּבֹּורִים
אֹרוּ אָרֹור יֹשְׁבֶיהָ
כִּי לֹא בָאוּ לְעֶזְרַת יְהוָה
לְעֶזְרַת יְהוָה בַּגִּבֹּורִים
BN:
Curse Meroz said the messenger of YHVH
curse bitterly its inhabitants
Because they did not come to the assistance of YHVH
to the assistance of YHVH against the mighty
Curse Meroz said the messenger of YHVH
curse bitterly its inhabitants
Because they did not come to the assistance of YHVH
to the assistance of YHVH against the mighty
URU: Why is this "curse", when URI in verse 12 was "awake"? The answer lies, as so often in this book, in word-play, homophones and homonyms especially. URI at verse 12 was spelled with an Ayin (ע), where Uru here is spelled with an Aleph (א); two entirely different words, but you have to be literate to know that, and this was a song to hear sung, not a poem to peruse in a book.
MEROZ: Why is this town specifically named when surely many others also abstained? The root does not exist anywhere in Yehudit usage, though obviously a triliteral Mem-Reysh-Zayin could be made. There is an equivalent in Arabic, which is used to mean "steadfast" and is connected to the cedar tree, which may be an explanation of the town's name. See my last comment to verse 22.
5:24
TEVORACH MI NASHIM
YA-EL ESHET CHEVER HA KEYNI
MI NASHIM BA OHEL TEVORACH
KJ: Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be, blessed shall she be above women in the tent.
MEROZ: Why is this town specifically named when surely many others also abstained? The root does not exist anywhere in Yehudit usage, though obviously a triliteral Mem-Reysh-Zayin could be made. There is an equivalent in Arabic, which is used to mean "steadfast" and is connected to the cedar tree, which may be an explanation of the town's name. See my last comment to verse 22.
5:24
TEVORACH MI NASHIM
YA-EL ESHET CHEVER HA KEYNI
MI NASHIM BA OHEL TEVORACH
תְּבֹרַךְ מִנָּשִׁים
יָעֵל אֵשֶׁת חֶבֶר הַקֵּינִי
מִנָּשִׁים בָּאֹהֶל תְּבֹרָךְ
יָעֵל אֵשֶׁת חֶבֶר הַקֵּינִי
מִנָּשִׁים בָּאֹהֶל תְּבֹרָךְ
BN:
Blessed above women shall
Ya'el the wife of Chever the Keyni be
Blessed shall she be above women in the tent
NASHIM BA OHEL: Is that a Biblical equivalent of saying "blessed be she among housewives"? Or is the OHEL the shrine, and what it is really saying is: "blessed be she before YHVH" - or more likely Anat.
Blessed above women shall
Ya'el the wife of Chever the Keyni be
Blessed shall she be above women in the tent
NASHIM BA OHEL: Is that a Biblical equivalent of saying "blessed be she among housewives"? Or is the OHEL the shrine, and what it is really saying is: "blessed be she before YHVH" - or more likely Anat.
5:25
MAYIM SHA'AL CHALAV NATANAH
BE SEPHEL ADIYRIM HIKRIYVAH CHEM'AH
מַיִם שָׁאַל חָלָב נָתָנָה
בְּסֵפֶל אַדִּירִים הִקְרִיבָה חֶמְאָה
בְּסֵפֶל אַדִּירִים הִקְרִיבָה חֶמְאָה
BN:
He asked for water
and she gave him milk
She brought out butter
in a lordly dish
No mention of the butter in the previous chapter. The milk is definitely not in a bottle though! (see my note to Judges 4:19).
ADIYRIM: Definitely the second, though apparently the third appearance of this word. See my notes to verses 13 and 16; this one is ADIYRIM, as in verse 13, though it translates slightly differently because there it is a noun, here an adjective.
5:26
YADAH LA YATED TISHLACHNAH
VIYMIYNAH LE HALMUT AMELIM
VE HALMAH SIYSRA MACHAKAH RO'SHO
U MACHATSAH VE CHALPHAH RAKATO
KJ: She put her hand to the nail, and her right hand to the workmen's hammer; and with the hammer she smote Sisera, she smote off his head, when she had pierced and stricken through his temples.
He asked for water
and she gave him milk
She brought out butter
in a lordly dish
No mention of the butter in the previous chapter. The milk is definitely not in a bottle though! (see my note to Judges 4:19).
ADIYRIM: Definitely the second, though apparently the third appearance of this word. See my notes to verses 13 and 16; this one is ADIYRIM, as in verse 13, though it translates slightly differently because there it is a noun, here an adjective.
5:26
YADAH LA YATED TISHLACHNAH
VIYMIYNAH LE HALMUT AMELIM
VE HALMAH SIYSRA MACHAKAH RO'SHO
U MACHATSAH VE CHALPHAH RAKATO
יָדָהּ לַיָּתֵד תִּשְׁלַחְנָה
וִימִינָהּ לְהַלְמוּת עֲמֵלִים
וְהָלְמָה סִיסְרָא מָחֲקָה רֹאשֹׁו
וּמָחֲצָה וְחָלְפָה רַקָּתֹו
וִימִינָהּ לְהַלְמוּת עֲמֵלִים
וְהָלְמָה סִיסְרָא מָחֲקָה רֹאשֹׁו
וּמָחֲצָה וְחָלְפָה רַקָּתֹו
BN:
She stretched out one hand to find a nail
while her right hand picked up the workmen's hammer
And with the hammer she struck Siysra
she shattered his head
first splitting
then piercing
his temples
Putting it in her right hand is only interesting in the light of the left-handedness of Ehud previously (Judges 3:15). Generally we associate (quite unfairly) left-handedness with something "sinister" (the Latin for left) or simply "gauche" (the French for left); right-handedness is good (the Risen Lord always sits on the right hand of his father-god; the right hand in Yehudit yields Bin-Yamin).
She stretched out one hand to find a nail
while her right hand picked up the workmen's hammer
And with the hammer she struck Siysra
she shattered his head
first splitting
then piercing
his temples
Putting it in her right hand is only interesting in the light of the left-handedness of Ehud previously (Judges 3:15). Generally we associate (quite unfairly) left-handedness with something "sinister" (the Latin for left) or simply "gauche" (the French for left); right-handedness is good (the Risen Lord always sits on the right hand of his father-god; the right hand in Yehudit yields Bin-Yamin).
5:27
BEYN RAGLEYHA KAR'A NAPHAL
SHACHAV BEYN RAGLEYHA KAR'A NAPHAL
BA ASHER KAR'A SHAM NAPHAL SHADUD
בֵּין רַגְלֶיהָ כָּרַע נָפַל
שָׁכָב בֵּין רַגְלֶיהָ כָּרַע נָפָל
בַּאֲשֶׁר כָּרַע שָׁם נָפַל שָׁדוּד
שָׁכָב בֵּין רַגְלֶיהָ כָּרַע נָפָל
בַּאֲשֶׁר כָּרַע שָׁם נָפַל שָׁדוּד
BN:
Between her feet he bowed
he fell
he lay down
Between her feet he bowed
he fell
Where he bowed
there he fell down dead
BEYN RAGLEYHA: A REGEL is really a "leg", not a "foot", but translating him as lying down between her legs risks overstating a double entendre that the text may actually want us to consider. Why, after all, did she invite him to her tent, and she a married woman? Regardless of whether the tent was home or shrine, a woman inviting a lordship in this manner is always open to misunderstanding.
The structure of this verse merits some detailed commentary; these are not just psalmic echo-lines, but even more richly complex.
KAR'A: Repeated, and then a third time. He isn't simply falling dead at her feet; he is prostrate before her in a manner akin to worship.
Between her feet he bowed
he fell
he lay down
Between her feet he bowed
he fell
Where he bowed
there he fell down dead
BEYN RAGLEYHA: A REGEL is really a "leg", not a "foot", but translating him as lying down between her legs risks overstating a double entendre that the text may actually want us to consider. Why, after all, did she invite him to her tent, and she a married woman? Regardless of whether the tent was home or shrine, a woman inviting a lordship in this manner is always open to misunderstanding.
The structure of this verse merits some detailed commentary; these are not just psalmic echo-lines, but even more richly complex.
KAR'A: Repeated, and then a third time. He isn't simply falling dead at her feet; he is prostrate before her in a manner akin to worship.
And then, for the next verse, an extraordinary transition in the text, a change of scene indeed, as well as a shift from pure lyric to virtual prose.
5:28
BE AD HA CHALON NISHKEPHAH VA TEYABEV EM SIYSRA
BE AD HA ESHNAV
MADU'A BOSHESH RICHBO LAVO
MADU'A ECHERU PA'AMEY MARKEVOTAV
BE AD HA CHALON NISHKEPHAH VA TEYABEV EM SIYSRA
BE AD HA ESHNAV
MADU'A BOSHESH RICHBO LAVO
MADU'A ECHERU PA'AMEY MARKEVOTAV
בְּעַד הַחַלֹּון נִשְׁקְפָה וַתְּיַבֵּב אֵם סִיסְרָא
בְּעַד הָאֶשְׁנָב
מַדּוּעַ בֹּשֵׁשׁ רִכְבֹּו לָבֹוא
מַדּוּעַ אֶחֱרוּ פַּעֲמֵי מַרְכְּבֹותָיו
בְּעַד הָאֶשְׁנָב
מַדּוּעַ בֹּשֵׁשׁ רִכְבֹּו לָבֹוא
מַדּוּעַ אֶחֱרוּ פַּעֲמֵי מַרְכְּבֹותָיו
BN: Siysra's mother looked out of her window, and cried through the lattice, "Why is his chariot so long in coming? Why do the wheels of his chariots take so long?"
Is it just me, or is it odd that this should be his mummy, rather than his beloved, his wife?
But also, what lovely bathos and empathy, in a song by a woman. Even while she is praising Ya'el for what is in truth an act of terrible brutality, Devorah is also thinking of the dead man's poor mother, worrying, now; soon to be grieving.
That concept of bathos, of empathy, will be listed among the attributes of the deity in both Judaism and Islam, sung repeatedly in the modern synagogue, on Rosh ha Shana and Yom Kippur, stated every time the muezzin calls the Moslem congregation to prayer, "Adonay, Adonay, El rachum ve chanun", "bi-smi llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm", identical key-words in both religions, naming the deity as "compassionate" and "merciful" - the key-word in question being RECHEM, "the womb", the place where women nurture future life - and remember that the sacred number of the male deity is seven, the Sabbath number, the Jubilee number, and seven in Yehudit is "zayin", which is also the penis.
And now look at verse 30, below.
Is it just me, or is it odd that this should be his mummy, rather than his beloved, his wife?
But also, what lovely bathos and empathy, in a song by a woman. Even while she is praising Ya'el for what is in truth an act of terrible brutality, Devorah is also thinking of the dead man's poor mother, worrying, now; soon to be grieving.
That concept of bathos, of empathy, will be listed among the attributes of the deity in both Judaism and Islam, sung repeatedly in the modern synagogue, on Rosh ha Shana and Yom Kippur, stated every time the muezzin calls the Moslem congregation to prayer, "Adonay, Adonay, El rachum ve chanun", "bi-smi llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm", identical key-words in both religions, naming the deity as "compassionate" and "merciful" - the key-word in question being RECHEM, "the womb", the place where women nurture future life - and remember that the sacred number of the male deity is seven, the Sabbath number, the Jubilee number, and seven in Yehudit is "zayin", which is also the penis.
And now look at verse 30, below.
And once again I cannot help but note how very important it is to set out these poems according to their structure: this verse especially, with its double openings. And the rhyme in the next verse.
5:29
CHACHMOT SAROTEYHA TA'ANEYNAH
APH HI TASHIV AMAREYHA LAH
5:29
CHACHMOT SAROTEYHA TA'ANEYNAH
APH HI TASHIV AMAREYHA LAH
חַכְמֹות שָׂרֹותֶיהָ תַּעֲנֶינָּה
אַף הִיא תָּשִׁיב אֲמָרֶיהָ לָהּ
אַף הִיא תָּשִׁיב אֲמָרֶיהָ לָהּ
BN:
Her wise-women answered her
but she had already answered herself herself
I have to confess that I particularly like my translation of the second half of that line! The double-openings of the Yehudit paralleled, albeit in a double-closing.
5:30
HA LO YIMTSE'U YECHALKU SHALAL
RACHAM RACHAMATAYIM LE ROSH GEVER SHELAL
TSEVA'IM LE SIYSRA SHELAL
TSEVA'IM RIKMAH TSEVA RIKMATAYIM
LE TSAV'REY SHALAL
HA LO YIMTSE'U YECHALKU SHALAL
RACHAM RACHAMATAYIM LE ROSH GEVER SHELAL
TSEVA'IM LE SIYSRA SHELAL
TSEVA'IM RIKMAH TSEVA RIKMATAYIM
LE TSAV'REY SHALAL
הֲלֹא יִמְצְאוּ יְחַלְּקוּ שָׁלָל
רַחַם רַחֲמָתַיִם לְרֹאשׁ גֶּבֶר שְׁלַל
צְבָעִים לְסִיסְרָא שְׁלַל
צְבָעִים רִקְמָה צֶבַע רִקְמָתַיִם
לְצַוְּארֵי שָׁלָל
רַחַם רַחֲמָתַיִם לְרֹאשׁ גֶּבֶר שְׁלַל
צְבָעִים לְסִיסְרָא שְׁלַל
צְבָעִים רִקְמָה צֶבַע רִקְמָתַיִם
לְצַוְּארֵי שָׁלָל
BN (very provisional translation):
Are they not hurrying home? Have they not yet divided the spoil?
To every man a damsel or two
To Siysra some spoil of divers colours
some spoil of divers colours of needlework
of divers colours of needlework on both sides
meet for the necks of those who take the spoil
RACHAM: See my notes to verse 28. It is very difficult, given those notes, to translate these lines without reducing them to brutality or vulgarity (which they deserve), because RACHAM does not really mean "a damsel"; the translators are euphemising. Study Bible offers "a girl or two for each warrior", which gets closer. But the point is - and the contrast with the compassion is central to this - that the men are not interested in the girl, only in the access to the womb; and not really the womb either, but only its entry-point; plus their freedom, so to speak, to reach for a nail and hammer it.
Interesting that a woman - both Devorah and Siysra's mum - should speak in such a positive way about the seizing of the women; from the mouth of a man we would expect it: this, after all, is why men really go to war, as well as for the bread and for the glory!
By this stage of the song, we are almost beginning to feel sorry for poor Siysra! As we are expected to feel sorry for the Egyptians drowned in the Sea of Reeds (their mothers could have asked the same question about the delayed chariots). This is a peculiarly Jewish form of the concept "empathy". Or perhaps not. Might it be that this was not originally a Beney Yisrae-Eli, but in fact a Kena'ani song, telling the tale of Siysra's heroic end... but no, it can't be...
TSEVA'IM RIKMAH TSEVA RIKMATAYIM: Yoseph's coat of many colours, the traditional garments of priests and royalty? Or is this simply rich garments for general wear? Either way, the very colours of the murex snail that I noted in connection with verse 17.
But all this hangs on the RECHEM, which doubled into RACHAMATAYIM in line 2 of this verse, and then the parallel RIKMAH, doubling likewise into RIKMATAYIM, but also a play of another kind, the single letter alteration between the two words - and remember that the Chaf of Rechem is really a Kaf, softened because of its position in the word; so a homonym, if not fully a homophone.
KJ: So let all thine enemies perish, O LORD: but let them that love him be as the sun when he goeth forth in his might. And the land had rest forty years.
Are they not hurrying home? Have they not yet divided the spoil?
To every man a damsel or two
To Siysra some spoil of divers colours
some spoil of divers colours of needlework
of divers colours of needlework on both sides
meet for the necks of those who take the spoil
RACHAM: See my notes to verse 28. It is very difficult, given those notes, to translate these lines without reducing them to brutality or vulgarity (which they deserve), because RACHAM does not really mean "a damsel"; the translators are euphemising. Study Bible offers "a girl or two for each warrior", which gets closer. But the point is - and the contrast with the compassion is central to this - that the men are not interested in the girl, only in the access to the womb; and not really the womb either, but only its entry-point; plus their freedom, so to speak, to reach for a nail and hammer it.
Interesting that a woman - both Devorah and Siysra's mum - should speak in such a positive way about the seizing of the women; from the mouth of a man we would expect it: this, after all, is why men really go to war, as well as for the bread and for the glory!
By this stage of the song, we are almost beginning to feel sorry for poor Siysra! As we are expected to feel sorry for the Egyptians drowned in the Sea of Reeds (their mothers could have asked the same question about the delayed chariots). This is a peculiarly Jewish form of the concept "empathy". Or perhaps not. Might it be that this was not originally a Beney Yisrae-Eli, but in fact a Kena'ani song, telling the tale of Siysra's heroic end... but no, it can't be...
TSEVA'IM RIKMAH TSEVA RIKMATAYIM: Yoseph's coat of many colours, the traditional garments of priests and royalty? Or is this simply rich garments for general wear? Either way, the very colours of the murex snail that I noted in connection with verse 17.
But all this hangs on the RECHEM, which doubled into RACHAMATAYIM in line 2 of this verse, and then the parallel RIKMAH, doubling likewise into RIKMATAYIM, but also a play of another kind, the single letter alteration between the two words - and remember that the Chaf of Rechem is really a Kaf, softened because of its position in the word; so a homonym, if not fully a homophone.
5:31
KEN YO'VDU CHOL OYEVEYCHA YHVH VE OHAVAV KE TSE'T HA SHEMESH BIGVURATO VA TISHKOT HA ARETS ARBA'IM SHANAH
KEN YO'VDU CHOL OYEVEYCHA YHVH VE OHAVAV KE TSE'T HA SHEMESH BIGVURATO VA TISHKOT HA ARETS ARBA'IM SHANAH
כֵּן יֹאבְדוּ כָל אֹויְבֶיךָ יְהוָה
וְאֹהֲבָיו כְּצֵאת הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ בִּגְבֻרָתֹו
וַתִּשְׁקֹט הָאָרֶץ אַרְבָּעִים שָׁנָה
וְאֹהֲבָיו כְּצֵאת הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ בִּגְבֻרָתֹו
וַתִּשְׁקֹט הָאָרֶץ אַרְבָּעִים שָׁנָה
BN:
So let all your enemies perish, O YHVH.
But let those who love him be as the sun
when he goes forth in his might.
And there was peace in the land for the next forty years.
As with the opening verse, the metre and tone and structure of this last verse implies prose - perhaps, at the end of the recitation, the priest or actor went into prayer-mode, and perhaps there was even an Amen responsa from the congregation/audience.
KEN YOVDU CHOL OYEVEYCHA: Was this line in Rabban Gamliel's mind when he made his most unfortunate contribution to the Amidah, the horrible curse misnomered as a blessing VE LA MALSHINIM; though the actual words in the Yehudit are very different.
VA TISHKOT: And the land had rest for forty years - again the symbolic number. This last seems to be an addition to the song, which really ended with the previous sentence. A necessary addition when you are making it part of a historical narrative, and attributing it to the Beney Yisra-El.
The first version of the story, in the previous chapter, leaves out many details that are in the sung version, presumably because the Redactor felt no need to put down everything since everybody knew the poem. Yet the details alter and modify considerably. The reference to Se'ir in verse 4. The failure of some tribes to participate (verses 15-17). The role played by key tribes. The apparent treason of Meroz in verse 23. Ya'el's precise action in verses 24ff. Siysra's responses, and his mother. The expected coat of many colours to crown his victory. (But not the placing of the battle at Megido, where the apocalypse is prophesied, because that is exclusively a Christian construct).
What we have in the end is a post-battle hymn in commemoration of those who fought and the victory that was obtained.
pey break (note that the text of this chapter contains no samech breaks at all, but only this concluding pey break)
So let all your enemies perish, O YHVH.
But let those who love him be as the sun
when he goes forth in his might.
And there was peace in the land for the next forty years.
As with the opening verse, the metre and tone and structure of this last verse implies prose - perhaps, at the end of the recitation, the priest or actor went into prayer-mode, and perhaps there was even an Amen responsa from the congregation/audience.
KEN YOVDU CHOL OYEVEYCHA: Was this line in Rabban Gamliel's mind when he made his most unfortunate contribution to the Amidah, the horrible curse misnomered as a blessing VE LA MALSHINIM; though the actual words in the Yehudit are very different.
VA TISHKOT: And the land had rest for forty years - again the symbolic number. This last seems to be an addition to the song, which really ended with the previous sentence. A necessary addition when you are making it part of a historical narrative, and attributing it to the Beney Yisra-El.
The first version of the story, in the previous chapter, leaves out many details that are in the sung version, presumably because the Redactor felt no need to put down everything since everybody knew the poem. Yet the details alter and modify considerably. The reference to Se'ir in verse 4. The failure of some tribes to participate (verses 15-17). The role played by key tribes. The apparent treason of Meroz in verse 23. Ya'el's precise action in verses 24ff. Siysra's responses, and his mother. The expected coat of many colours to crown his victory. (But not the placing of the battle at Megido, where the apocalypse is prophesied, because that is exclusively a Christian construct).
What we have in the end is a post-battle hymn in commemoration of those who fought and the victory that was obtained.
pey break (note that the text of this chapter contains no samech breaks at all, but only this concluding pey break)
No comments:
Post a Comment