The Cup or Qôs?: Lost Prayer and Wordplay in Lamentations 4:21–22

The article discusses the reference to Edom at the end of Lam 4. It makes two proposals. First, it argues that we should understand nearly all of the clauses in Lam 4:21–22 as volitive expressions that convey the speaker’s wishes or prayers. Second, it argues that the Hebrew text of Lam 4:21 contain...

Descrizione completa

Salvato in:  
Dettagli Bibliografici
Autore principale: Granerød, Gard 1975- (Autore)
Tipo di documento: Elettronico Articolo
Lingua:Inglese
Verificare la disponibilità: HBZ Gateway
Interlibrary Loan:Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany)
Pubblicazione: 2022
In: Vetus Testamentum
Anno: 2022, Volume: 72, Fascicolo: 4/5, Pagine: 578-593
(sequenze di) soggetti normati:B Edomiti / Idumäa / Ironia / Gioco di parole / Qualità del servizio / Sintagma / Coppa <motivo> / Bibel. Klagelieder 4,21-22 / Edom (Paesaggio)
Notazioni IxTheo:HB Antico Testamento
HD Medio-giudaismo
Accesso online: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Descrizione
Riepilogo:The article discusses the reference to Edom at the end of Lam 4. It makes two proposals. First, it argues that we should understand nearly all of the clauses in Lam 4:21–22 as volitive expressions that convey the speaker’s wishes or prayers. Second, it argues that the Hebrew text of Lam 4:21 contains a wordplay lost in the ancient Greek translation and, thus, lost in the subsequent tradition. When Lam 4:21 uses the Hebrew word כּוֹס (“cup”) together with the syntagma עבר עַל in a context of irony and concerning “Daughter Edom,” כּוֹס alludes to Qôs (קוֹס), the patron god of the Edomites and the Idumaeans. The Septuagint understood the Hebrew text’s volitive expressions as ordinary indicatives. It “quenched” the Hebrew text’s ironic pun and made an unambiguous expression of what originally was ambiguous.
ISSN:1568-5330
Comprende:Enthalten in: Vetus Testamentum
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1163/15685330-bja10078