Editorial theory and the range of translations for ‘cedars of Lebanon’ in the Septuagint

Cynthia L Miller-Naudé,Jacobus A Naudé

doi:10.4102/hts.v74i3.5059

Cynthia L Miller-Naudé, Jacobus A Naudé

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v74i3.5059

Copy DOI

Abstract

Although the Hebrew source text term אֶרֶז [cedar] is translated in the majority of cases as κέδρος [cedar] or its adjective κέδρινος in the Septuagint, there are cases where the following translations and strategies are used: (1) κυπάρισσος [cypress] or the related adjective κυπαρίσσινος, (2) ξύλον [wood, tree] and (3) non-translation and deletion of the source text item. This article focuses on these range of translations. Using a complexity theoretical approach in the context of editorial theory (the new science of exploring texts in their manuscript contexts), this article seeks to provide explanations for the various translation choices (other than κέδρος and κέδρινος). It further aims to determine which cultural values of the translators have influenced those choices and how they shape the metaphorical and symbolic meaning of plants as determined by Biblical Plant Hermeneutics, which has placed the taxonomy of flora on a strong ethnological and ethnobotanical basis.

Highlights

As shown in Naudé and Miller-Naudé (2018), the Hebrew term ‫[ ֶא ֶרז‬cedar] is translated in the Septuagint as κέδρος [cedar] or with the adjectival form κέδρινος in 65 cases
It was further shown that the metaphorical and symbolic meanings of plants needs to be determined by Biblical Plant Hermeneutics, which has placed the taxonomy of flora on a strong ethnological and ethnobotanical basis consonant with the Israelite classification and valorisation of plants (Musselman 2012)
There must, be an interpretive reason for his use of generalisation as a translation strategy in verse 20. (The remainder of the passage has additional complexities in the Septuagint concerning the translation of ‫ ְברֹוׁש‬, which will be explored in a subsequent article.) We suggest that because cypress timber is mentioned alongside cedars in Hiram’s agreement to Solomon’s proposal and in Hiram’s compliance, the Septuagint translator used generalisation as a translation strategy in verse 20 in order to avoid a contradiction between Solomon’s proposal and Hiram’s agreement and compliance

Summary

Introduction

As shown in Naudé and Miller-Naudé (2018), the Hebrew term ‫[ ֶא ֶרז‬cedar] is translated in the Septuagint as κέδρος [cedar] or with the adjectival form κέδρινος in 65 cases. According to Hatch and Redpath (1998/1902:758) the translations of Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion have κέδρος, renderings which bring the Greek into greater alignment with the Hebrew To summarise, it seems that in the cases where the term ‫ ֶא ֶרז‬in the Hebrew Bible is translated as κυπάρισσος in the Septuagint the translator does not want to associate κέδρος and its metaphoric and symbolic qualities of power and majesty to ideologically negative entities that are described with the term ‫ ֶא ֶרז‬in the Hebrew text. Other cases of non-translation in the Septuagint of the term ‫ ֶא ֶרז‬in the Hebrew Bible occur in 1 Kings 6:16, 18 (the entire verse is omitted) and 22. One verse (1 Ki 6:18) in which ‫ ֶא ֶרז‬occurs in the Hebrew is not translated in the Septuagint

Kings 6:18

Conclusion