1

THE LAMENT OVER TYRE IN EZEKIEL 27:1-25

INTRODUCTION

Grief is universal. In this world east of Eden, people grieve and mourn loss. Whether

the death of a pet, the loss of a job, or the end of a stage in life, people experience grief

repeatedly in a variety of circumstances. The most serious instances of grief—such as the

murder of a child—are frequently very traumatic, life-altering, and sometimes lifelong.

People’s response to such overwhelming experiences will be different from those that are

less drastic.

Sometimes, however, grief may not be what it seems to be. Mourning the death of

one’s enemies might mean something different. Several of the Hebrew prophets (Isaiah,

Jeremiah (LXX), Ezekiel, and Amos) wrote laments about the destruction of foreign cities.

These laments—merely rhetorical in all likelihood—occur in the middle section of a tri-

partite macro-structure. They follow announcements of divine judgment on Israel and Judah,

and precede announcements of forgiveness and restoration. For this reason, they seem to

have functioned as literary harbingers of hope for the ancient Israelites. The essence of such

hope was that Israel's political enemies would indeed be punished for wrongdoing, while

God would have mercy on repentant Israel. One of these enemies was the Phoenician city-

state Tyre.

Tyre was built on a small island in the Mediterranean some 700 yards off the coast of

Phoenicia.1 This defense gave them great security from invaders, and rendered them virtually

1H. J. Katzenstein, “Tyre,” in ABD, 6:686–92; Brian Peckham, “Phoenicia, History Of,” in

ABD, 5:349–57; William A. Ward, “Phoenicians,” in Peoples of the Old Testament World, ed. Alfred J. Hoerth, Gerald L. Mattingly, and Edwin M. Yamauchi (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1994), 183–206.

2

invincible for centuries. From this vantage point, they plied a profitable maritime trade with a

vast network of international partners around the Mediterranean. Such was the historical

context of Ezekiel’s oracles against Tyre.

Ezekiel recorded a series of three oracles against Tyre in the sixth-century B. C.

(Ezek 26-28). The first oracle announces that Tyre will be punished and destroyed, and

instructs the prophet to lament over it. The reason for this divine approbation is that instead

of trying to help their southern neighbors who were suffering from foreign invaders, they

rejoiced at Israel and Judah’s loss. They engaged in opportunistic economic expansion. In a

word, greed and lust for power replaced mercy and kindness. The second oracle (chap 27)

takes up the lament that had been announced (26:16–17) and uses the metaphor of a premiere

Phoenician merchant vessel. Although the ship epitomizes perfection, it is nevertheless

condemned to sink on the high seas under the fierceness of God’s judgment. In this way,

Ezekiel uses the universal pain of grief to capture the emotional impact of the coming

destruction of this great city. While the Israelites might not mourn for Tyre, they would have

perceived this impact: what was once unimaginable in its likelihood was certain beyond

doubt from the divine perspective. God’s judgment as well as possible restoration were

indeed future activities. The third oracle (Ezek 28) takes the form of an address to the king of

Tyre (and very briefly, to Sidon also). The Tyrian king will be judged because of his hubris

and overstepping his place in the divine economy. The chapter concludes with a brief

message of future restoration for Israel and a clear statement that the purpose for the

judgments was to cause people to know that Yahweh was God.2

2Block sees these verses as the center of the oracles against foreign nations. He believes that they

function as a literary and theological fulcrum of sorts that highlights the purpose of the oracles as more than nationalistic tracts. Daniel I. Block, The Book of Ezekiel: Chapter 25–48, NICOT (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1998), 4–5.

3

This study deals with part of the second oracle (27:1-25). The primary goal is to

explore the text of these verses, since there are many differences in the ancient versions. The

MT provides a generally reliable text, even though it should be corrected in some instances

by other ancient witnesses or emendation.

Genre of City Lament

City laments such as Ezekiel 27 have historical and literary predecessors in the

ancient Near East (ANE). The earliest extant ones are the five Sumerian city laments, which

stem from the late third to early second millenniums.3 In both cultures, the lament brings

together social, physical, and spiritual concerns in the context of grief. The city’s g/God was

believed to have abandoned the city for some reason, and this abandonment was the ultimate

cause of its destruction.4 For this reason, city laments often include an element of

supplication to the g/God to return and restore blessing.

The Text of Ezekiel

The text of Ezekiel is frequently difficult, but in spite of that has generally been well-

preserved in the ancient Greek, Latin, and Syriac versions, and in the medieval Hebrew

manuscripts collectively known as the Masoretic Text (MT). The texts from the Judean

Desert, commonly known as the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), included a few fragments. While

these are highly valuable, none includes chapter 27. In addition, early rabbinic writings

contain (Hebrew) quotations. But like the texts from the Judean Desert, they do not quote

from Ezekiel 27. The result is that the oldest complete (or nearly complete) manuscripts of

3Delbert R. Hillers, “Lamentations, Book Of,” in ABD, 4:140; COS 1:535–539; ANET, 611–619.

4For a study of the concept of divine abandonment in relation to national identity, see Daniel I. Block, The Gods of the Nations: Studies in Ancient Near Eastern National Theology, Evangelical Theological Society Monograph Series 2 (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic; Leicester, England: Apollos, 2000).

4

Ezekiel are in Greek. The most important of these are P967, P988, B, and Q. Of these, P967

is the earliest (late second or early third century). It is a relatively literal translation that is

highly regarded by many text critics.5 The extant papyrus leaves contain Ezek 11:25—48:35.

The translation from Hebrew into Greek has been estimated to have taken place about 150

B.C. in Egypt.6 P988 is a fourth century papyrus that includes parts of Ezekiel 33—34. B

(Vaticanus), also a fourth century manuscript, has preserved the whole text of Ezekiel. Q is a

sixth century Hexaplaric manuscript, but is valuable for its many Lucianic readings in the

margins.7

Overall the text of MT Ezekiel is 4–5% longer than LXX Ezekiel.8 This is largely the

result of many additional short readings found in the MT but not in the LXX. The “pluses,”

as these short readings are called, do not contain new information, but merely expand on

what is already being said in the passage.9 An example in Ezekiel is using a longer form of

5Ingrid E. Lilly, Two Books of Ezekiel: Papyrus 967 and the Masoretic Text as Variant Literary

Editions, VTSupp 150 (Leiden: Brill, 2012), 50–51.

6John W. Olley, Ezekiel: A Commentary Based on Iezekiael in Codex Vaticanus, Septuagint Commentary Series (Leiden: Brill, 2009), 15.

7The Hexapla was a text critical version of the Old Testament compiled by the third century scholar Origen. Later, it had the effect of adding MT-like readings into the LXX tradition. D. C. Parker, “Hexapla of Origen, The,” in ABD, 3:189.

Lucian was an early reviser of the LXX (died A. D. 312). Also of interest to text critics are possible proto-Lucianic texts. Melvin K. H. Peters, “Septuagint,” in ABD, 5:1099–1100.

Another important work is the early Christian writer Theodoret of Cyrus, whose commentary on Ezekiel is the earliest surviving study of it. It contains valuable Greek transliterations of rare or obscure Hebrew terms as well as Latin translations and interpretations. Theodoret of Cyrus, Beati Theodoreti Cyrensis Episcopi in Divini Ezechielis Prophetiam Interpretatio, vol. 2 of Theodoreti Cyrensis Episcopi Opera Omnia, PG 81, ed. J. L. Shultze (Paris: Migne, 1864).

8Jake Stromberg, “Observations on Inner-Scriptural Scribal Expansion in MT Ezekiel,” Vetus Testamentum 58 (2008): 68–70.

9“Pluses” and “minuses” are terms that are sometimes used by text critics. Although the terms do imply that a given difference between two texts is a change from an original, that is not always their intent. As a general trend, text critics have become more cautious about their views in recent years. This is due in at least in part to their increasing recognition of the element of subjectivity inherent in the practice of textual criticism.

5

the divine name (LXX: kyrios “Yahweh”; MT: Adonai YHWH “Lord Yahweh”).10 While

older writers considered the pluses in the MT to be interpolations or “glosses,” more recent

scholars such as Tov have argued that these should be considered rescensional differences

that are characteristic of different literary editions.11 Thus, instead of trying to determine

what mistakes were made, it should be recognized that this is a case of two slightly different

versions of the same work. This does not obviate the need to deal with mistakes in the textual

tradition(s), but it does clarify the relationship for some kinds of differences. The

preponderance of different readings occur in LXX Ezekiel, with smaller numbers being

found in the Vulgate and Syriac.

The standard critical text for MT Ezekiel is Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS).

Completed in 1977 and quietly updated from time to time since, it is based on codex L and

has a single text critical apparatus. The apparatus is helpful on a cursory level, but devotes

too much space to unimportant manuscripts while not including others at all.12 Therefore, for

more complete study of textual issues, it is preferable to use other tools. In the case of MT

Ezekiel, the most helpful tool is Ezekiel in the Hebrew University Bible (HUB) series. Unlike

Thus, text critics more recently have opted for more descriptive and neutral terminology if they did not believe that a clear textual problem and solution could be identified.

10The issues of names was recognized by Zimmerli, though he held the longer forms may have been original. Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel Chapters 25–48, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983), 556–562.

However the issue since that time has been recognized as occurring on a broader scale both within Ezekiel and in other books. More recently see Timothy P. Mackie, “Expanding Ezekiel: The Hermeneutics of Scribal Addition in the Ancient Text Witnesses of the Book of Ezekiel” (Ph.D. diss.: University of Wisconsin—Madison, 2010), 281–85; Timothy P. Mackie, “Transformation in Ezekiel’s Textual History: Ezekiel 7 in the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint,” in Transforming Visions: Transformations of Text, Tradition, and Theology in Ezekiel, ed. William A. Tooman and Michael A. Lyons, Princeton Theological Monograph Series (Eugene, Ore.: Pickwick, 2010), 249–78.

11Emanuel Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 3rd ed. (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress, 2012), 299–301; Lilly, Two Books of Ezekiel; Mackie, “Expanding Ezekiel.”

12Tov, TCHB3, 354–55.

6

the Göttingen editions which draw on many manuscripts to produce an eclectic text, the HUB

is a diplomatic text based on the Aleppo codex. HUB differs from the more well-known BHS

in that it provides a much more comprehensive list of many kinds of textual and manuscript

differences. These are given in four apparatuses. Many text critics also appreciate the fact

that HUB lists individual readings without making a judgment as to what the text actually

should read (unlike BHS). The place of human subjectivity thus lies with the editors deciding

which variants to include in the critical apparatuses. For this paper, HUB is utilized both as

the base text representing MT, and also as the primary source for locating variants. In the

case of the LXX, since the variants listed in HUB reflect Ziegler, they may be adjusted in

view of evidence elsewhere, especially in P967.

The standard critical edition of LXX Ezekiel is Ezechiel by Joseph Ziegler.13 Ziegler's

edition is fine in many ways, but it has been faulted for being overly-dependent on the

Masoretic text. This stems from Ziegler’s belief that B faithfully represented the Old Greek

(OG) more so than P967. He believed that P967 had been adjusted towards proto-MT.14 The

importance of P967 was recognized slightly in the second edition of 1977, which added a

section dealing with additional papyrus leaves of P967 that had been found. Since that time,

further study has confirmed the importance of P967 for the study of Ezekiel in several areas.

These include both textual decisions and text delimiting decisions (i.e., paragraphing).15

13Joseph Ziegler, ed., Ezechiel, vol. XVI of Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum, 2nd edition

(Göttingen: Vandehoeck & Ruprecht, 1977).

14The Old Greek translation (OG) is the reconstructed original text of the LXX. Ziegler minimized the importance of P967 because he believed that B rather than P967 best represented the OG. See Lilly’s account of the matter. Lilly, Two Books of Ezekiel, 50–82.

15The practice of dividing texts into units stems from antiquity. It has been now been identified in some of the texts from the Judean Desert, which show similarity (though not uniformity) to the later MT manuscripts of the medieval period. While text delimiting has been known for some time, its importance for exegesis and interpretation has been more recently recognized by scholars. For instance, see the fascinating discussion and bibliography by Olley. Olley, Ezekiel, 43–47, 554.

7

The Latin Vulgate and the Syriac Peshitta are the two other primary witnesses to

Ezekiel. The Vulgate (V) is the fourth/fifth-century Latin translation by Jerome. It generally

agrees with the MT, so it tends to be more important for the history of exegesis than for text

criticism.16 The Peshitta (“the simple <translation>”; SyrP) is the second-century (?) Syriac

translation of the Bible. It generally agrees with the MT, though not always. In this paper, the

text is cited according to the Leiden critical edition courtesy of the Peshitta Institute. This

online edition of the Leiden Peshitta critical text is cited from the Comprehensive Aramaic

Lexicon (CAL) website.17 The online critical text is the same as the printed volumes (where

available), but does not include critical or textual apparatuses.

Method of Text Criticism

The text critical method employed in this paper seeks to be guided principally by the

philosophy of Tov.18 In practice, the first critical apparatus in HUB is generally quoted,

together with any notes that are needed.19 Often, this provides the evidence and the rationale

for a given textual decision. Ziegler is generally followed for OG. P967 and B will

occasionally be noted if they differ from OG and that difference has significant bearing on

the issue. The English translations are literal to the point of being wooden at times. Though

the base translation is the ESV for MT and either HUB, Brenton, or NETS for the Greek,

16Tov, TCHB3, 153.

17http://cal1.cn.huc.edu/.

18Ibid. The field of OT textual criticism is in a state of flux, and I have not fully grappled with some of the more recent proposals, such as are found in Gary D. Martin, Multiple Originals: New Approaches to Hebrew Bible Textual Criticism, SBLTCS 7 (Atlanta, Ga.: SBL, 2010); Bénédicte Lemmelijn, A Plague of Texts?: A Text-Critical Study of the So-Called ‘Plagues Narrative’ in Exodus 7:14–11:10, OS 56 (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2009).

19There are four critical apparatuses in HUB. Both #1-2 deal with the text. However, there are no entries for #2 in Ezek 27, so only #1 is used. (#2 contains references to the text from the Judean Desert as well as quotations in rabbinic writings.)

8

frequently these are revised to be more “literal” in order to assist the reader with identifying

the difference in the readings (especially the ESV). Retroversions (i. e., the hypothetical

Hebrew original text) will not be made in many cases. The general rule is that they will be

made if it is deemed that they will elucidate the difference being considered. In that case,

retroversions will generally (but not always) be from HUB or the revised CATSS (2004), the

Computer-Assisted Tools for Septuagint Studies Project by Emanual Tov and Frank Polak.20

This same principle applies matters of citation and formatting as well. Minor changes

in the formatting, such as items may occasionally be moved or aligned in order to clarify

exactly the difference between the readings, will be made as needed. All evidence, including

modern versions, is not generally cited because of the large number of text differences. Only

evidence that is important for making the decision is given. In addition, the parsing is given

only when it makes a difference in the reading.

For the Syriac Peshitta (SyrP), HUB is generally cited, though recourse is sometimes

made to the Leiden Critical Text on the CAL website. Typically, the paper will interact with

conclusions of major text-critical studies of Ezek 27 in the body of the text rather than in the

text critical discussion.

EXEGESIS

Ancient manuscript evidence indicates that this chapter was believed to be a distinct

unit. The earliest extant manuscripts of both the MT and LXX traditions contain sectional

divisions that mark off chapter 27 as a complete unit. In addition, there is also a minor

division in these manuscripts in mid-verse at 27:3a. In addition to these, modern scholars

tend to recognize sections extending from 27:3b–11, 12–25, and 26–36. Verses 26–36, which

20This was accessed as a module in the Bibleworks 8 computer program.

9

are not covered in this study, deal with the wreck of the ship and the lament proper over her

loss.

The chief difficulty throughout this section is the number of rare terms and textual

difficulties, making it one of the densest sections of the book in terms of variety of textual

readings. Many of the terms in the vessel’s “manifest” reflect a Phoenician background.

Others are loan words stretching back to a Sumerian origin, but common throughout the

region in several different languages by the time Ezekiel wrote. Besides being foreign, some

of the terms reflect a technical or specialized background of sorts, such as metallurgy,

shipbuilding, or botany. These issues and others will be dealt with below.

Section 1: 27:1–3a

This short section announces the divine command for the prophet to raise a lament.

As noted above, it is marked in early manuscripts by a major division separating it from

chapter 26, and by a minor division between 3a and 3b.21

Ezekiel 27:1

:The word of Yahweh came to me ויהי דבר־יהוה אלי לאמר:

Verse 1 contains the announcement of a new oracle. This new oracle may also be an

expansion of the previous oracle in chap. 26. There are three reasons to support this. Besides

the lack of date notice in v1, verse 2 begins with ואתה (weʾattâ), which elsewhere in Ezekiel

points to a subdivision. Also, the mention of a lament in v2 is similar to 26:17, which speaks

of raising a qinah (ך קינה י ל ע א   ש נ ו ).22 The date must then be reckoned by appeal to the

21Olley, Ezekiel, 54.

22These are suggested by Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 54.

10

date of the prior oracle, and to contextual indicators. Chapter 26 is dated to the eleventh year

of Jehoiachin’s Babylonian imprisonment, which would be late 587 or early 586. The fall of

Tyre seems to be future, and Judah and Israel still seem to be trading partners. Since Nebu-

chadnezzar beseiged Tyre from 585–573/2 B.C., these chapters would have pre-dated the

seige (AgAp 1.156; Ant 10.228).

Ezekiel 27:2

,And you, human (lit. “son of man”) ואתה בן־אדם שא על־צר קינה:lift over Tyre a lament.

2ms pronoun + waw, “and you”; MT, P967, B ,ואתה .1 ʾnt, 2ms pronoun - waw “you”; SyrP [אתה] [ ] OG > Conclusion: Since there is no similar phrasing nearby nor does there seem to be any reason for theological change, it is best to take this as a simple omission, perhaps by the scribe responsible for the Vorlage of LXX Ezekiel.23 over Tyre a lament”; MT“ על־צר קינה .2 a lament over Tyre” OGvar, SyrP (cf. 28:12; 32:2; 19:1)“[קינה על־צר] Conclusion: This may be an aural mistake, or one based on the memory of an

inattentive scribe, or of one thinking of another passage that uses similar language. The masoretic note states that the opening phrase ואתה בן־אדם occurs 23 times in the

book of Ezekiel. The city of Tyre has already been mentioned in the introduction. The qinah

is mentioned for the first time in this chapter. The qinah is a kind of Hebrew lament poetry,

though not all laments are in the qinah form. As such, it is something like a Hebrew genre

term.24 It is characterized by a 3+2 metrical pattern.25

23For a discussion of scribal omissions, see Tov, TCHB3, 221–22.

24For an overview of Hebrew form and genre terms in the Old Testament, see Martin Rösel, “Forms and Genres: Old Testament,” in RPP, 5:168.

25 K. Budde, “Das hebräische Klagelied,” ZAW 2 (1882): 1–52.

11

Ezekiel 27:3a ת לצור הישבתי על־מבואת ר מ א ו

:ים רכלת העמים אל־איים רבים You will say, ‘Tyre, ruler at entrances of (the) sea, a trader of the peoples to many coasts’

entrances of a sea”; n mpl constr, MT“ מבואת ים .1 τῆς εἰσόδου τῆς θαλάσσης, “the entrance of the sea”; OG = V, SyrP [מבוא הים ] Conclusion: The LXX reading is smoother, though both readings are linguistically possible. The external evidence supports the OG, but external evidence is ultimately dependent on the readings themselves (internal evidence). The difference probably stems from a misreading of ה\ת (the last letter of מבואת and the first letter of הים) and wrong word division. A change from MT to OG would be more understandable than vice versa. The plural מבואת could be explained as referring to the two harbors of Tyre.26 Commentators are divided; the MT is reflected above.27 ל .2 כ תר “the merchant/trader (of)”; qal act ptc fs, MT τῷ ἐμπορίῳ “to the market (of)”; OG ≈ V, SyrP (parallel 28:5, 16, 18) [רכלת] Conclusion: The difference between these two readings stems from a difference in pronunciation, that is, a difference in the reading tradition, rather than a difference in the consonants themselves. to”; MT“ אל .3 .ἀπὸ OG SyrP a difference pertaining to a preposition [מן] Conclusion: Apparently this reflects a difference in the Vorlage of the LXX (different literary edition).

The weqatal form ת ר מ א ו continues the imperatival thought of שא (“lift”) in v2. The

prepostion ל indicates a vocative (WO 212). The word הישבתי is an archaic form of the

active fem participle (cf. Jer 10:17; Lam 4:21). Although the standard Biblical Hebrew (BH)

form הישבת is noted in the qere reading, it is not necessary to update this form.28 מבואת

26Leslie C. Allen, Ezekiel 20–48, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 29 (Dallas, Tx.: Word, 1990), 80.

27For textual issues #1-2, part of the debate involves gender agreement between construct forms and their objects.

28Paul Joüon and T. Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, Subsidia Biblica 27 (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 2006), 260. Joüon believes these examples are authentic. All subsequent references to JM are to the 2006 edition. See also GKC, §90m, n. For arguments supporting the qere reading, see Marcus Saur, Der Tyroszyklus des Ezechielbuches, BZAW 386 (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2008), 19. The sense of “ruling” for ש בי draws on the connection between the senses of “sitting (on a throne)” and picturing a city as a queen. This

is attractive and certainly fits with the context of Tyre being an economic powerhouse of the Mediterranean. This idea has precedence in other biblical passages. H. J. van Dijk, Ezekiel’s Prophecy on Tyre (Ez. 26,1—28,19): A New Approach, Biblica et Orientalia, no. 20 (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1968), 50–55.

12

(“entrances”), a hapax, is a mpl noun in construct with ים (“sea”). רכלת, a qal act fem sg

ptc, (“trader”) is a favorite root of Ezekiel (from רכל), and occurs several other times in this

chapter as well as throughout the book.

Section 2: verses3b–11

Ezekiel 27:3b ת לצור הישבתי על־מבואת ר מ א ו

עמים אל־איים רבים :ים רכלת ה You will say, ‘Tyre, ruler at entrances of (the) sea, a trader of the peoples to many coasts’.

v.3b :ני כלילת יפי ת א ר מ א ת   א הו ה צ ר   י דנ י  א  אמ ר Thus says Lord“ כ ה

Yahweh, ‘Tyre, you said, “I am a perfect beauty” ’ .” Adonai YHWH” MT“ אדני יהוה .1 κύριος “YHWH” OG [ יהוה] Conclusion: אדני was added in a different/later revision of proto-MT. This would make MT and OG different literary editions.29 Alternatively, one would have to argue that the translators of OG omited דניא (parablepsis).

Medieval manuscripts will not be given weight in text critical matters unless the reading has intrinsic

value. This is a change from the methodology earlier used for textual criticism in the Old Testament. This is because they are so much later than the earlier texts that we now have, as found in the Judean Desert texts, and also the main ancient versions: the Greek Septuagint (LXX), the pre-Samaritan version (pre-Sam), the Vulgate (V), and the Syriac Peshitta (SyrP). For a defense of this method, see Tov, TCHB3, 38–39, 116–17.

29The theory behind this interpretation is that some kind of textual updating was practiced during the time of the OT itself. Presumably, this was done by authoritative figures, such as scribes working in the temple. This resulted in newer editions of individual books of the OT. It appears that older copies of the books of the OT were not destroyed or removed from use even after a newer version was developed. Presumably, the older editions did not lose their authoritative status as God’s prophetic Word just because a newer edition was available. The point that obtains for this text critical decision is that it appears that OG was translated from one of the earlier editions of Ezekiel. In general, there are four main points of evidence that support this theory. First, the fact that OG is 4-5% shorter than MT supports this theory. Second, there is a difference with a block of material in chap 36. Third, the differences are either expansions rather than changes, or whole blocks of material, generally ina different order. These changes cannot easily be explained by normal text critical decisions, but fit well in an understanding of different literary editions. Fourth, a similar situation exists for Jeremiah, Joshua/Judges, Samuel, and other books to a lesser extent.

There are two general responses to this situation. A conservative response (though not necessarily evangelical or even Christian) would posit that such changes were made by inspired scribal activity. Thus, there would be a difference between inspired scribal activity and non-inspired scribal activity. While there would more than one literary editions of the authoritative work, there would not be unlimited authoritative works. Evangelical response to this has been mixed. See William D. Barrick, “‘Ur of the Chaldeans’ (Genesis 11:28–31): A Model for Dealing with Difficult Texts,” MSJ 20 (Spring 2009): 7–18; Michael A. Grisanti, “Inspiration,

13

Tyre . . .” MT, P967 (omits τῇ) [break]“ ∧צור ∪ .2 τῇ Σορ∧ “ . . . to the Tyre [break]” OG ∪ [ ∪ לצור]

Conclusion: HUB suggests that this is a misreading [in B] due to a parallel form earlier in the verse לצור. Thus, the LXX incorrectly links לצור to the citation formula. It is better to understand the citation formula as separate, following the MT. This mistake by the LXX provides the basis for text critical problem #3.30 adj fs constr, “[I am the] perfection [of beauty]”, MT כלילת .3 περιέθκα ἐμαυτῇ aor act ind 1s, “I have put on myself [my beauty]” OG [כללתי] Conclusion: The LXX misunderstood כלילת to be a verb.

Section 2 begins in the middle of v 3 with the speech of Yahweh. This probably

accounts for the minor break. This delimitation is indicated in the early Greek manuscripts

P967 and B, and accords with the medieval MT. It is characterized by a qinah meter (3+2)

(HALOT 1097).31 Ezekiel does not hold strictly to this meter throughout. Here, the text has a

3+3 meter. This is a problem for some scholars, who point out that not only is the meter

violated, but also the new metaphor (“ship,” אני) is not introduced at the beginning of the

new section. In an effort to correct these two problems, ני ני is re-vocalized as (”I“) א א

(“ship”).32 Although this does make sense linguistically, it depends on the assumptions that

Ezekiel never deviated from a strict meter, and that he always introduced his figures of

speech before developing them. It also fails to explain the 2nd person verb ת ר מ א (“you

said”). Since the assumptions are questionable and the MT makes sense as it is, it is not

necessary to emend the Hebrew text.

Inerrancy, and the OT Canon: The Place of Textual Updating in an Inerrant View of Scripture,” JETS 44 (2001): 577–98; Bruce K. Waltke, “Aims of Textual Criticism,” WTJ 51 (1989): 93–108.

In contrast to this, a non-conservative (postmodern) response would be that ancient communities had their own authoritative texts, and that scribes made changes to authoritative texts at will, cleverly subverting previous meanings to new meanings that were more desirable.

30Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2, 42.

31Ibid., 53.

32Ibid., 42. Zimmerli lists other biblical references for this spelling, and also points to Amarna glosses which support it.

14

The verse ends with the clause ני כלילת יפי which is known as a verbless clause ,א

in Hebrew grammar. Verbless clauses are extremely common in Hebrew. The difficulty with

them is determining which part is the subject and which is the predicate. Thankfully, much

progress has been made in this area, and it has been shown that the typical order is predicate-

subject (WO 132).33 In the case of this verse, though, it is something of an exception, because

the subject is the pronoun ני .and also because it precedes the predicate (WO 132 fn17) ,א

Ezekiel 27:4 ך כללו י נ ב ך   לי ו  גב ם מ  י ב בל

ך: י פ י In the heart of the seas are your borders. Your builders perfected your beauty.

your borders”; MT, σ’ [οἱ ὅμοροί σου], V“ גבוליך .1 Γωβελιν“ ”OG [not including B, P967] [גובלין/מ] Conclusion: The LXX misreads “your borders” as a topographical name—Gobelin.34 your builders ” MT“ בניך .2 υἱοί σου “your sons” OG, SyrP [HUB note: see Isa 49:17; 54:13 cross ref in [בניך] another apparatus] Conclusion: The consonants for “your builders” are the same as for “your sons.” The LXX mistakenly read “your sons.” The whole phrase, although incorrect, is understandable in light of the mistake in v3b: “your sons have wrapped you with beauty.”

This verse begins with a verbless clause about the vastness of the Tyrian empire. In

the mention of borders, some scholars have seen a sudden shift from developing the

metaphor of a ship to addressing the geographical borders of their realm.35 However, a case

33For the seminal study of this phenomenon, see Francis I. Andersen, The Hebrew Verbless Clause in

the Pentateuch, JBLMS 14 (Nashville: Abingdon Press, for Society of Biblical Literature, 1970). For a more recent work, see Cynthia L. Miller, ed., The Verbless Clause in Biblical Hebrew: Linguistic Approaches, LSAWS 1 (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1999).

34Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2, 42–43.

35Ibid., 42–43. Zimmerli comments on this text critical issue. He believes that the text’s reference to the Tyrian ship having boundaries cannot be correct, since ships cannot have boundaries. For this reason, he follows Driver in emending the text to גבלוך “they have formed you.” Block argues that this logic is wrong, and takes ך י ל בו ג as “frontiers.” Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 55.

15

can be made that ships have limits too, especially when understood as traveling the limits (or

“frontiers”) of the trading area. Ezekiel then essentially repeats and recognizes the validity of

the claim in v.3, that the city has “perfect beauty.”

Ezekiel 27:5 ך את ל בנ   ני   ש מ שי   רו ב

לבנון לקחו לעשות כל־לחתים ארז מך: י ל ע ר   ת

With fir trees from Senir they built for you all the planks; they took a cedar from Lebanon to make a mast for you.

with firs . . . cedar” MT“ ברושים . . . ארז .1 [ ] κέδρος . . . κυπαρίσσου “cedar . . . fir/cypress” OG- Conclusion: The order is transposed for cedar and fir trees in the LXX. they built . . . they took” MT“ בנו . . . לקחו .2 ᾠκοδομήθη . . . ἐλήμφθησαν “were built . . . were taken” OG Conclusion: The LXX uses passive verb forms, while the MT uses active forms. all” MT“ את כל .3 ταινίαι “board, strip of wood ” OG Conclusion: There is a textual doublet in the LXX, since the next word ( לחתים; σανίδων) means “board, plank.” The editors of HUB believe that the translators of the LXX used the etymology of כל(י)ל, cf. Lam 2:15 (στέφανος). They suggest to see the work of Schleusner 5:256 from 1821, a rare antiquarian, concordance-like book written in Latin.36 It was not available to this writer. MT לחתים ∧ .4 OG- ∪ tabulatis maris “tablets of (the) sea”, V [לחת ים ] + 3rd person pronoun Targ Conclusion: Together with the previous textual difference, the LXX translators seem to have linked words together that would naturally be separated in Hebrew. תרן ~ עליך .5 OG, V, SyrP [עליך ~ תרן] preposition, parallel בנו לך

36For more information about Schleusner’s important work, and how to use it and other concordances

in reconstructing the Vorlage of the LXX, see Emanuel Tov, “The Use of Concordances in the Reconstruction of the Vorlage of the LXX,” CBQ 40 (January 1978): 28–36.

16

Conclusion: Even though LXX-Ezekiel is a highly literal translation in terms of word order (90.1% in chapter 1–39), here the LXX inverts the word order because of the presence of a preposition near the verb in Greek.37 תרן .6 OG, Targ, SyrP interchange of sing/plural pronouns Conclusion: The MT has singular “mast” while the alternate versions have plural “masts.”

Senir is the Amorite name for Mt. Hermon (Deut 3:8). The “fir” tree, like most of the

kinds of trees in this chapter, is not as certain as one might wish.38 Sometimes it is taken as

“cypress” (cf. LXX). Cedar is one of the few trees that can be clearly identified.

Ezekiel 27:6 ך אלונים ש ר ק טיך   ו  מש  ע ו ש ן מב

עשו־שן בת־אשרים מאיי כתים:Of oaks of Bashan they made your oars; your deck they made—(inlaid with) ivory—daughter of pines from the coasts of Cyprus.

”oaks“ ∧אלונים .1 OG- ∪ Conclusion: The LXX divides the clause differently. It understands the first word of v.6 to be the last word of v.5 your deck” MT“ קרשך .2 ”τὰ ἱερά σου “your sanctuary [קדשך] *τὸ κέρας “your horns” α*, θ [קרשיך] Conclusion: Graphic confusion. The LXX mis-read an “r” as a “d.” This changed the meaning from “your deck” to “your holy things,” which may also mean “your sanctuaries/temples.” Aquila and Theodotian then corrected the text back to a meaning that reflected the consonants qdsk, which they apparently changed (perhaps based on etymology) to krsk, the consonants for “your horns.” 3. second occurrence of עשו they made” MT“ עשו + tibi V

37On the issue of word order and how this phrase can be explained even though it constitutes an

“exception,” see Galen Marquis, “Word Order as a Criterion of Translation Technique in the LXX and the Evaluation of Word-Order Variants as Exemplified in LXX-Ezekiel,” Textus 13 (1986): 79.

38Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, The Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 1997), 549.

17

Conclusion: The Vulgate mistakenly adds tibi in v.6, probably because of a parallel occurrence in v.5. daughter, i.e., made of, steps” MT“ ∪בת אשרים .4בית ] οἴκος ἀλσώδεις “buildings on sacred precincts” OG ≈ Targ [בת אשרים ]

see Targ below39 ,[חופאה לא(י)תיטרון ∧ et praeteriola V [ רים ש את ב Targ (textual doublet) דאשכרעין ... בית חופאה לא(י)תיטרון [ [ ]> SyrP

Conclusion: This difficult reading vexed the ancient translators and modern lexicographers, as shown in the textual differences. The MT probably needs to be emended in this instance to

רים שאתב , which is the root רים ש את (“cypresses”) + ב (“with”).

Regarding the textual reading רים שבתא , the origin of the term is not clear, nor is the

kind of tree certain. For instance, all three major lexicons give the literal translation of the

MT, and two of them recommend emending. BDB translates it as “box-tree” (BDB 81a).

HALOT lists options of “box tree,” “cedar,” and “cypress,” and strongly recommends

“cypress” because the tree is known to be native to Lebanon and because there are two

instances of the same noun in Isa (HALOT 99, 1677). DCH gives “cypress,” or “box wood”

as an alternative (DCH 1:436; 8:585). DCH does not make a recommendation to emend, but

rather lists the meanings obtained both by emending and not emending it.

There is also the cognate evidence to consider. Ugaritic contains the noun “tišr” n.m.

“cypress” (Cupressus sempervirens L.), which is cognate to the Hebrew noun רש את .40 It also

cognate to a Hittite word for “cypress.” Although Hittite is non-Semitic and is farther

removed from Israel than is Ugarit, such linguistic distribution also demonstrates geographic

distribution of a cognate term. The greater the distribution, the greater the opportunity for use

in another culture and language. In conjunction with the idea of geographic distribution, both

Ugaritic and Hittite were used north of Israel, which is to say close to Phoenicia and Tyre.

39The translation of the Greek is taken from GELS, 30.

40DULAT, 2nd ed., 855.

18

While the existence of a clear cognate never proves a textual answer to a problem of this sort,

it does provide solid evidence that the possibility of shared meaning exists.

Another option that blends cognates with revocalization is taken by van Dijk. He

thinks the Hebrew בת could be revocalized as בת like Phoenician or Ugaritic.41 אשר, which

also occurs in Exod 31:3, is taken as identical to תאשר, the same word that occurs in Isa

41:19 and 60:13. The ת is then regarded as a preformative. The noun then is identified as

“sherbin,” a kind of cedar. This view is attractive because it retains the consonants. It is

questionable, though, whether ש רא should be identified with sherbin.

A further complication to the issue is the relation of ש\אשר רתא to ך ש ר ק “your

planks,” in all likelihood. (The term is used frequently in Exodus in the narrative of the

construction of the tabernacle.) Some have taken ך ש ר ק as referring to the hull of the ship, or

even a cabin in the ship. Also, a similar term occurs in the Ugaritic myths that refers to a

dwelling.42 This allows שן “ivory” to then be read as inlaid ivory.43 Moving from “plank” to

“cabin” in meaning is less likely, though not impossible. Certainly it is a bit of a gamble.

If the text of the MT is emended to read בתאשרים, it does result in a textual doublet,

as noted above. שן must then be regarded as a kind of graphic error (dittography) that

resulted from the scribe writing down the last two letters of the previous word a second time

are not identical, they had similar forms in square or Aramaic ־נ and final ו While .(שו)

script, so this possibility is not out of the question either. Yet, against this, it is unanimously

attested in the versions.44

41van Dijk, Ezekiel’s Prophecy on Tyre, 63–65.

42Several writers have dealt with this, including Pope, van Dijk, and Block.

43Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 59–60; van Dijk, Ezekiel’s Prophecy on Tyre, 64–65.

44Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2, 44.

19

In short, there is no answer that completely addresses all the textual, grammatical, and

conceptual issues involved. Emending the text to read ש תא רים ב does make sense of the

passage and does have support of the Targum.

Ezekiel 27:7 ך ש ר פ מ י   ה י   ר צ מ מ מ   ק ר ב שש־

ך לנס תכלת וארגמן מאיי ל היו   לך: ס כ מ י   ה ש   לי א

Of fine embroidered linen from Egypt was your sail, serving as your banner; blue and purple from the coasts of Elishah was your awning.

< violet MT“ תכלת [ ] .1 καὶ περιβαλεῖν σε [ ]“and wrapped around you violet” OG- Conclusion: The LXX is influenced by the following verse, so this difference should be interpreted as an LXX-plus rather than an MT-minus.

ש ש is a homograph in Ancient Hebrew. There are several different words with the

same spelling. In this instance, it is classified as שש III, an Egyptian loanword (HALOT

1663) for linen. Ezekiel further defines this prized, white fabric as “woven” or

“embroidered,” the same word that occurs often in the narratives of the tabernacle

construction. Nor was this expensive material alone: blue and purple were also used, not for

royal clothing, but for the ship’s awning. Elishah was a geographical region associated with

Greece (Gen 10:4), so a location on the Aegean is likely.45 Earlier, in the second millennium,

it had been associated with the island of Cypress. Since Tyre itself was known for its purple

dye, it is a reasonable guess that the dye from Elisha must have been of highest quality.

Ezekiel 27:8 ך ל טי   ש הי   ו   ר א ו   דו צי ב   ש יך: י ל ב ח מ   ה  בך   ה ו    צ ר י מ כ ח

The elders of Sidon and Arvad were your rowers; your wise/skilled men, O Tyre, were in you; they were your pilots.

45David W. Baker, “Elishah (Person) [#2],” in ABD, 2:473.

20

The sitting ones/inhabitants” MT“ [ ] ישבי .1 καὶ οἱ ἄρχοντές σου οἱ κατοικοῦντες “And your leaders, the inhabitants” OG- Conclusion: The LXX is an expansion (“leaders”).

Sidon was another major Phoenician city that excelled in maritime trade. It was

farther up the coast from Israel, and is mentioned connection with several OT figures,

sometimes in addition to Tyre. Indeed the names of the two cities frequently form a

collocation (“Tyre and Sidon”), with Tyre being mentioned first. Arvad was the northernmost

city in Tyre, and is mentioned in various ancient texts such as the Amarna letters. Like Tyre,

it was located on an island in the Mediterranean adjacent to the coast.46

can indicate either the leaders of city (i. e., those (”ones sitting, ones dwelling“) ישבי

who “sit in the gate” to make decisions and transact business) or simply the inhabitants (i.e.,

those who dwell in the city). Context here leads some commentators to take it in the sense of

“elders,” since the next group is the חכמים (“wise,” “skilled”).47 In the tabernacle narratives

in Exodus, the term is used of those who were skillful in arts and crafts. Here, however, they

see that the meaning of this text is to demonstrate the greatness of Tyre, and having lowly

workers mentioned would hardly prove the author’s point.48

Ezekiel 27:9 זיקי ך מח ב הי   ה   י מ  וחכ ל  גב קנ י ז

ך ב הי   ה   חי ל מ  ו י ה יו   נ א כל־ בדקך  ר ע ך:ל ב ר ע מ  

The elders of Gebal and her skilled men were in you, caulking your seams; all the ships of the sea with their mariners were in you to barter for your wares.

46Richard S. Hess, “Arvad (Person),” in ABD, 1:468.

47Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 62–63; Allen, Ezekiel 20–48, 81. Allen emends the text slightly (שבי, “gray”) to increase this understanding.

48JM §146a 6) fn4.

21

זיקי .1 hiph ptc mpl constr, “make strong, rigid” MT [ ] מחזקי] -οὗτοι ἑνίσχυον impf, act, ind 3 pl “these ” OG [המה מחConclusion: חזק with בדק (“fissures”) occurs elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible (e. g., 2 Kings 12:9; 22:5), though in the piel instead of hiph. The LXX misunderstands בדק and guesses that it means “purposes” (βουλήν), perhaps under the influence of “elders” and “wise ones.” occurs elsewhere in this chapter (e.g., 8, 13, 17), but apparently οὗτοι has been added המהhere by the LXX. MT כל .2 και” OG“ [וכל] Conclusion: The LXX or its Vorlage has added a waw to its base text. in you” MT“ בך .3 σοι (ἐν + dat.) “to/with you” OG [לך] Conclusion: HUB believes that this represents a change in the Vorlage of the LXX. to trade your wares” MT“ לערב מערבך .4 ἑπὶ δυσμὰς δυσμῶν “unto the west of the wests” OG Conclusion: The Hebrew consonants ערב are reckoned as 5 different verbs and 9 nouns (HALOT 876-79). Unfortunately for the translator of the LXX, the meanings of these two words are not common. It is pretty clear that the translator of the LXX misunderstood the meaning of his Vorlage.49

The city of Gebal is better known by the name Byblos, which is the name found in the

LXX.50 The mention of elders and wise men supports the interpretation of “those who sit” in

v 8 as “leaders/those who sit at the gate” rather than “dwellers/inhabitants.” The word for

“sailors” (לה is a loan word, originally Sumerian, that is found throughout the ANE.51 (מ

Ezekiel 27:10 ך אנשי ל חי ב הי   פו    ו לו ו   ר פ

ך המה נתנו ב לו־ ת ב   כו ו   ג מ תך   מלחמך: ר ד ה

Paras and Lud and Put were in your army as your men of war. They hung the shield and helmet in you; they gave you splendor.

49J. Lust, E. Eynikel, and Katrin Hauspie, A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint, A-I (Stuttgart:

Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1992), 1:122–23. This translation as “west” also occurs in Pentateuch in the LXX as well. See Marguerite Harl, trans. and ed., La Genèse, 2nd ed., La Bible d’Alexandrie (Paris: Cerf, 1994), 65.

50Ray Lee Roth, “Gebal,” in ABD, 2:922–23.

51HALOT, 588; CAD M/1, 149-52; Jeremy Black, Andrew George, and Nicholas Postgate, A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian, SANTAG, vol. 10 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2000), 192. Subsequently cited as CDA.

22

they (were) your splendor” MT“ המה־הדרך .1 pro ornatu tuo; ≈ “for your decoration” V, “and to be something most splendid”

SyrP Conclusion: The Vulgate and Peshitta have expressions differing from the MT and

LXX.

Verses 10–11 are treated together; see below.

Ezekiel 27:11 ך י ת מו חו על־ ך   יל ח  ו ד רו א בנ י 

ך היו שלטיהם י ת לו ד ג מ ב די   מ ג ו   בי סך סביב המה כללו י ת מו חו על־ ל   ת

ך: י פ י

Sons of Arvad and Helech were on your walls all around, and men of Gamad were in your towers. They hung their shields on your walls all around; they made perfect your beauty.

around” MT“ (occurrence #1)סביב .1 OG- SyrP > Conclusion: Ziegler’s main text and the Peshitta lack this word. men of Gamad” MT“ וגמדים .2 φύλακες “guards” OG = SyrP τετελεσμένοι α* “completed ones” (HUB suggests etymology, from the root גמר ἀλλὰ καὶ Μῆδοι, σ* ≈ Targ (ואף קפוטקאי) “and also Cappadocians” κ*αι γομαδειμ°,θ * “Gomadim [men of Gamad]” Conclusion: HUB notes that there is a problematic lexicographic identification of this

term in the Hebrew. Apparently this was so for the ancient translators as well, shields” MT“ שלטיהם .3 τὰς φαρέτρας αὐτῶν “quiver for arrows” (LSJ) OG ≈ V (pharetras suas) Conclusion: The LXX translator guessed that it was a military item that would be

hung on the wall. on your walls” MT“ על חומותיך .4 [ ] ἐπὶ τῶν ὅρμων σου “on your impulses” OG- Conclusion: The translator of the LXX found a Greek word that was pronounced

similarly to the Hebrew word. MT כללו .5 ”ἑτελείωσαν ms150 (pm) “to be finished [כלכלו] Conclusion: Evidently the LXX translator interpreted this word as if its root were

.(to be finished) כלה

In v10, Ezekiel continues on the theme of the occupants on the Tyrian vessel. This

time he introduces a further category: soldiers. Since these soldiers are of foreign origin, it is

likely that they were mercenaries. Beginning with the last country, Put is mentioned in Gen

23

10:6 and elsewhere in Scripture. Although its identification has been debated, there is good

evidence it refers to Libya.52 Like Put, the identification of Lud is also debated. Lud occurs

as the name of two different peoples in the OT, one Semitic and the other Hamitic (Semitic:

Gen 10:22; Hamitic: Gen 10:13). Josephus mentions the Lydians in Asia Minor, and some

scholars have opted for this interpretation (Ant.1.16.4, §144).53

The description of naval military personnel continues in v 11. The focus of the

military in Ezekiel’s message is not their skill in battle, but the splendor (הדר) they bring to

the city. Round shields are clearly visible in some ancient reliefs from the period.54 Like v

10, this verse also gives three place names. Only the first is certain (Arvad). Helech and

Gamad may be northern neighbors.55

The sad description of Tyre at the height of its beauty ends here, as does the qinah

meter. The meter will resume in v 26 when the prophet describes the shock and profound

horror future observers will experience when they see the sudden destruction of Tyre.56 At

this point, though, the profit pauses to take account of the commercial trading activities and

partners of this Mediterranean hub.

52David W. Baker, “Put,” in ABD, 5:560.

53Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 64; Mario Liverani, “The Trade Network of Tyre According to Ezek 27,” in Ah, Assyria...: Studies in Assyrian History and Ancient Near Eastern Historiography Presented to Hayim Tadmor, ed. Mordechai Cogan and Israel Ephʿal, Scripta Hierosolymitana, vol. 33 (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1991), 67; Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2, 59

Regarding the genitive being used like a dative, see JM §129h.

54ANEP, #372, 373.

55Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 65; Henry O. Thompson, “Gamad,” in ABD, 2:903.

56Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2, 62.

24

Section 3: 12–25

Section 3 contains a list of the trading partners and the wares that were loaded on the

metaphorical ship of Tyre. They are generally arranged by geographical concerns: vv 12–15,

Mediterranean areas and Asia Minor; vv 16–17, Palestinian regions from south to north; vv

18–19, Syria; vv 20–22, Arabia; and vv 23–24, Mesopotamia.57 Because of the list-like

nature of the passage, some general discussion will follow the text critical discussion.

Ezekiel 27:12 ך מרב כל־הון ת ר ח ס שי   ר ת

סף ברזל בדיל ועופרת נתנו בכך: י נ בו ז ע

Tarshish did business with you because of your great wealth of every kind; silver, iron, tin, and lead they exchanged for your wares.

MT תרשיש .1 from the sea” Targ“ [מן ימא] Conclusion: HUB notes that this is linguistic/exegetical habit of the Targumic translator, and so presents no significant reading. However, this phenomenon occurs elsewhere in both OG and Targ. See the relevant note for v 25. וןה .2 “wealth” MT your wealth” SyrP“ [הונך] [ און(כ)\הון(כ) ] ἰσχύος σου “your strength” OG Conclusion: The LXX retroversion is suggested as a possibility by HUB. The source of this difference is not clear, though it occurs similarly twice more in this chapter: v ך ) and v 27 (πλήθους πάσης δυνάμεώς σου ;הון) 18 נ הו ; δυνάμεις σου). In the Hebrew, the pronoun (2fs) only in v 27.58 The issue is somewhat further complicated by the 2s suff pron in vv 16(?), 27 (again), and 33.59

Alternatively, this writer suggests that perhaps the source of the LXX reading may be a word that is far more common in the Hebrew Bible. It means either “wealth” or ,חיל“strength,” depending on the context. In this view, the Vorlage of the LXX had חיל, to which the LXX added a 2sg pronoun. A variation of this which would not require a different

57Allen, Ezekiel 20–48, 86; Jan Jozef Simons, Geographical and Topographical Texts of the Old

Testament, 2nd ed., Studia Francisci Scholten Memoriae Dicata (Leiden: Brill, 1959), 456; Liverani, “The Trade Network of Tyre According to Ezek 27,” esp. 71–73.

58See Paul Joüon, “Notes philologiques sur le texte hébreu d’Ezéchiel 4, 17; 13, 6; 27, 12–24; 27, 32; 28, 7; 28, 12; 29, 12; 30, 22; 31, 4; 31, 13; 32, 9; 32, 10; 32, 30,” Biblica 10 (1929): 304–12.

59Block lists LXX support for reading ך נ הו . But the LXX has “strength,” not “wealth,” so this seems to be questionable. Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 66.

25

reading in the Vorlage of the LXX would be that the translator of the LXX thought that הון and היל were completely synonymous rather than partially synonymous. This solves the problem of the different meaning for הון, but does not address the addition of the 2nd person pronouns.60

The external evidence for the LXX reading is strong, since it includes both B and P967, the second-century papyrus.61 with silver” MT“ בכסף .3 [ כסף ] ἀργύριον “silver” OGSyrP > prep [ ] + καὶ χρυσίον “and gold” OG- Conclusion: The LXX and Syr translators omitted the prep because they thought they did not need it. In Hebrew, it fulfills multiple functions, including showing equivalance of price, sometimes referred by the Latin term beth pretii.62 The LXX added καὶ χρυσίον “and gold.” “Silver and gold” occurs in MT Ezek 38:13, if the translator was thinking of the wording of that passage. iron tin” MT“ ברזל בדיל .4 [ ] καὶ χαλκόν “and ” OG var (minor manuscript in Ziegler’s text) Conclusion: This is a minor variant that does not affect our ability to determine the text. they gave your wares” MT“ נתנו עזבוניך .5 [ ] ἔδωκαν τὴν ἀγοράν σου “they gave your marketplace” OG Conclusion: Following HUB, it seems that the most likely explanation is that the LXX translator replaced a difficult and redundant Hebrew word with a Greek word reflecting new content. Cf. vv 14, 16, 22.

Tarshish’ location is not known. Several possible locations are known from antiquity.

One of the best possibilities may be in southwestern Spain, where the Phoenician colony

Tartessus was associated with metals and smelting.63 This activity fits with the description of

“Tarshish ships” in Isa 60:9 as well as etymological suggestions by modern scholars. In the

end, it is possible that it may have been a generic term for “smelting/refining city.” In the

case of Ezek 27:12, it seems to have been a Mediterranean trading partner.

60This hypothesis could be evaluated in part by determining how the LXX translated the occurrences of

ח*יל .

61Olley, Ezekiel, 150; Lilly, Two Books of Ezekiel, 328.

62Joüon and Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, 457; Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 66.

63David W. Baker, “Tarshish (Place),” in ABD, 6:331–33.

26

The grammar of this verse also deserves comment. The Hebrew has נתנו “to give,” a

qal perf. verb. Since this is clearly one of several terms in this section that is being used in a

financial sense, it may be understood with a sense of “to offer, to deliver.”64 There are many

occurrences in the Bible of נתן in contexts of giving, bestowing, and paying (DCH 786). One

of these is used for payments in Ps 49:8. It may be possible to see here and in the following

verses a global perfect followed by imperfect with a frequentative sense: “they (constantly)

gave you.”65

Ezekiel 27:13 ך בנפש י ל כ ר מ   ה ך    ומש ל  תב יו ן

ך: ב ר ע מ תנ   נ   ש ח נ   ל כ  ו ד א Javan, Tubal, and Meshech, they traded with you; human lives and vessels of bronze they gave for your merchandise.

Tubal and Meshek” MT“ תבל ומשך .1 καὶ ἡ σύμπασα καὶ τὰ παρατείνοντα “[Greece] and its entirety and its [תבל ומשך] neighboring regions” (trans.: NETS) OG (includes P967) Conclusion: The best reason to follow OG is because of the early date of the manuscripts (external evidence). However, all external evidence rests upon the quality of the texts themselves (internal evidence). When the readings are “weighed,” the MT is preferable here, essentially because a reasonable case can be made that the LXX translator misunderstood his Vorlage. For the first word, the LXX is based on a different vocalization than that of the MT. תבל developed from the sense of “dry land” to being roughly synonymous with “earth” or “world,” though HALOT notes that it is not fully synonymous. (HALOT 1682-83). (The translator of Nahum translated an occurrence of תבל MT with σύμπασα just as here in Ezek 27:13. This increases the likelikhood that σύμπασα was an acceptable translation for תבל.) The second word is translated using etymological means: משך is interpreted as being derived from ך ש מ “to draw out, to extend.” ך ש מ occurs in Ps 36:11 as a qal impv, thus having the same consonants ( ך ש מ ). The translator of LXX Ezek apparently used this meaning in a nominal sense in Ezek 27:13. One might speculate that the LXX translator mis-vocalized תבל first, which led to σύμπασα, but then was unable to make sense of משך, and so resorted to etymologically-derived translation. One other bit of evidence indicating that this was probably a misunderstanding is that fact that in the other occurrences of this collocation in Ezekiel, the LXX translates them both as place names (32:26; 38:2, 3; 39:1). If he really thought that the way he translated

64Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 70.

65JM 333 fn12. See also the grammar note in GKC§93uu.

27

them in 27:13 was the best, then he probably would have also tried to do so elsewhere. MT נתנו מערבך .2 [ ] SyrP < advexerunt populo tuo V Conclusion: It is not clear why these two translations had difficulty at this point. HUB notes that V is completely different in this section. The MT and LXX agree.

This verse deals with three related nations. “Javan” is the ancient name for Greece

(Gen 10:2). Specifically, Gen 10:5 associates the eponymous ancestor with “islands of the

nations,” and thus includes Elishah, Crete, and Kittim/Cyprus (Gen 10:4). Originally, Javan

seems to have referred to Ionia, a geographical area of southwest Asia Minor that was

associated with Greece.66 Assyrian records from the 8th century (Sargon II) record mention

of an area called Jawan or Jaman. In Ezek 27:13, the LXX simply translates it as ἡ Ἑλλὰς

(“Greece”). Tubal is mentioned in Gen 10:2 with his siblings Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan,

Meshech, and Tiras. Tubal’s location exact location is not known, but its sibling nations are

all geographically north of Israel in Greece, Asia Minor, and northern Syria. This is therefore

the area of greatest likelihood.67 Tubal is always mentioned in connection with Meshech in

Scripture, with only one exception (Isa 66:19), and even this passage has a textual problem,

which the LXX revocalizes to read Mosoch (Meshech).

More is known about Meshech than some of the other nations. Akkadian sources

from the time of Tiglath-pileser I (c. 1100 B.C.) mention Meschech, and they paid tribute to

Assurnasirpal II (c. 882 B.C.).68 Significantly for Ezek 27:13, which mentions their

metalworking skill with bronze, their tribute included bronze items. Their capital was in

eastern Asia Minor. A letter survives from Mita the king of Meshech, known in legend as

66David W. Baker, “Javan (Person),” in ABD, 3:650.

67David W. Baker, “Tubal (Person),” in ABD, 6:670.

68David W. Baker, “Meschech (Person),” in ABD, 4:711.

28

King Midas, to Sargon II in 709 B.C. seeking peaceful relations with the Assyrians. Josephus

locates them in eastern Asia Minor in the area later known as Cappadocia. Herodotus

associates them with the Phrygians who were somewhat farther west. In addition to these

references, 1 Chr 1:17 identifies another Meshech who is Semitic. Little can be gleaned about

this group.

Besides their geographical location, this verse mentions two other salient points about

Meshech: they were skilled bronze workers, and they trafficked in human slaves. Little is

known about international slave trade in antiquity, though Greece and Tyre are mentioned in

Joel 4:6 (ET 3:6) for their cooperation in trading slaves. “You have sold the people of Judah

and Jerusalem to the Greeks in order to remove them far from their own border” (ESV). Joel

mentions that this slave trading was with prisoners of war, and was for purely thoughtless

and materialistic reasons.69 Farther on in Ezekiel, Meschech and Tubal are both shamed for

their role (along with other nations) as international “terrors” (32:26).

Ezekiel 27:14 מבית תוגרמה סוסים ופרשים

ך י נ בו ז ע תנ   נ   די ר פ וFrom Beth-Togarmah, horses, war horses, and mules they gave for your wares.

Torgamah” MT“ תוגרמה .1 θεγραμ “Thegram” P967 [תגרם] θαιγραμα “Thaigrama” B [תגרמה] Conclusion: There is no question of the correct reading here. Rather, the issue is one

of spelling. While the ancients were not always as concerned about keeping identical spelling as people in the printing-press age are, in this instance, these two different readings seem to indicate that the Vorlage of P967 was made before the introduction of ו (waw) and ה (he). B would then seem to have been copied after the introduction of ה (he) as a mater, but not ו (waw). Other texts from later times display additional readings, the reasons for which are not immediately clear.

and mules” MT“ ופרדים .2 [ ] OG- > Conclusion: This word is missing from the LXX for no apparent reason.

69Douglas Stuart, Hosea—Jonah, WBC 31 (Nashville, Tenn.: Thomas Nelson, 1987), 267–268.

29

Beth-Togarmah means “House of Togarmah” in Hebrew. This people group, which is

mentioned in Gen 10:3, is descended Noah’s son Japheth and grandson Gomar. They lived in

Asia Minor east of Tubal, in the area of the upper Euphrates River.70 They were well known

for their horse breeding, as evidenced by the records of the Neo-Assyrian kings Ashurbanipal

and Sargon II.71

Ezekiel 27:15 ך איים רבים י ל כ ר ד   ד נ   ב

ך קרנות שן והובנים השיבו ד י   ר ח סך: ר כ ש א

The sons of Dedan traded with you. Many coastlands were markets of your hands; ivory tusks and ebony they brought (for) your payment.

ddn “(sons of) Dedan” MT דדן .1 rdn (υἱοὶ) *Ροδίων “(sons of the) Rhodians” OG-, P967 (> υἱοὶ) [רדן] drn “(sons) of Deran” SyrP [דרן] Conclusion: This vexing textual issue is played out also in Gen 10:4 and 1 Chron 1:7.

The change happened in antiquity, judging by P967. In this case, textual emendation may be the best course, reading דנן (dnn). This emendation is suggested by several ancient texts and inscriptions from different locales, languages, and periods, all of which speak of a people in Mediterranean area north of Tyre. See the discussion below.

fsg constr w/yad “merchandise of your hand” MT סחרת ידך .2 [ ] ἐμπορίαν σου fsg “your merchandise” OG (> “hand”) Conclusion: Both the MT and the LXX make sense as they are. In v 21 the same

phrase occurs again, though with סחר being mpl constr instead of fsg constr. Since the LXX fully translates יד/yd “hand” there and since the translator of Ezekiel is usually literal, it appears that either he overlooked “hand” here (parablepsis), or else it was missing from his Vorlage.

והובנים ∪ .3 “and ebonies” MT καὶ τοῖς εἰσαγομένοις “and the ones entering” OG ∧ בוא √ Conclusion: This hapax legomenon was unknown to the translator of the LXX, who

made a reasonable (but incorrect) guess that the word was derived from the Hebrew בוא “to enter.” The other matter that contributed to the LXX misinterpreting והובנים was his misunderstanding of the clausal structure, and thus beginning a new phrase when he should have been adding to the previous one.

70David W. Baker, “Togarmah (Person),” in ABD, 6:594–95.

71Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 74.

30

The identification of Dedan in this verse is notoriously difficult. The Hebrew reads

dedan easily enough, but there are two Dedan’s in Scripture. The first Dedan is a site in

central Arabia. This is eliminated by the Mediterranean nature of the context, and also by the

appearance of Dedan again in v 20 (the Arabian one). This brings us to the second difficulty.

There is the well-known Dodanim/Rodanim textual problem caused by graphic confusion of

d/r in Hebrew, dodanîm/rodanîm (Gen 10:4; 1 Chron 1:7). The MT reads dodanîm in Gen

10:4, but rodanîm in 1 Chron 1:7. The LXX reads rodanîm in both cases, and is joined by the

Samaritan Pentateuch (SamP) in Gen 10:4.72 This leads to an identification of “Rhodes,”

which fits the Mediterranean island context in Ezekiel and is followed by some scholars.73

Nevertheless, there are a couple other possibilities. There is mention of a people known as

the Danuna (dnn), mentioned in the Amarna letters, Homer (“Danaeans”), and Rameses III

(“Dnn”), and Sargon II (Yadanāna).74 This area was apparently north of Tyre, possibly on

Cyprus. The other possibility is the Dodanoi, of Dodona, the location of the oldest Greek

oracle.75

However, the mention of qarnôt šēm, “horns of ivory” and ebony provides key

information that potentially clarifies the textual decision here. Ivory (שן, “tooth”) was prized

in the ANE even as it is today. At that time, there were two sources of ivory, Syria (ארם,

Aram) and India.76 Even in the eighth century, though, elephants were becoming an

endangered species in Syria, making it less likely. Ebony was also found in India and Ceylon.

Together, these point to India as the more likely candidate.

72Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1–15, WBC, vol. 1 (Waco, Tx.: Word, 1987), 212, 219.

73Allen, Ezekiel 20–48, 82; Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2, 47.

74The Phoenician Kulamuwa inscription also mentions the “king of the Danunians,” which E. Lipinski reportedly prefers. Hallo and Younger, COS 2, 147; Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 74 fn125.

75Wenham, Genesis 1–15, 219.

76Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 74.

31

Returning to the textual question, Rhodes would not be a likely candidate for

elephants and ivory, nor would any of the actual islands of the Aegean. But an area in

Anatolia would be much better suited for this kind of trade. And this points to the ancient

land known as Danuna.

Ezekiel 27:16 ך פ נ ב שיך   ע  מ  מר ב ת ר ח ס ם  א

ארגמן ורקמה ובוץ וראמת וכדכד נתנו ך: י נ בו ז ע ב

Aram did business with you because of your abundant goods; for your [unknown precious stone #1], purple, embroidered work, fine linen, coral, and [unknown precious stone #2] they exchanged.

ʾaram“Aram/Syria” MT Targ77 ארם .1 ʾadam ἀνθρώπους “human” OG [אדם] ʾedom “Edom” SyrP, BHS, NRSV [אדם] Conclusion: The graphic confusion of ר\ד is evident in this difference. The evidence

is balanced, and there is no clearly correct choice. BHS and several modern translations follow the Syriac in reading “Edom.” The above choice reflects the support of the targum.

kodkod MT(w) (ו)כדכד .2 Χορχορ korkor OG- (including P967, B) Χοδχοδ kodkod OG var = V Conclusion: This textual difference seems to have arisen from a combination of two

errors. First, complete ignorance of the Hebrew word. This is evident, since each of the items in this list is translated as a toponym/place name. Second, the delicate difference between ר\ד was yet again mistaken (i.e., graphic confusion). The care and respect of the

scribes/translators is shown in the preservation of the text chodchod, which makes no sense in either Greek or Latin.

Aram was located north of Tyre in southern Syria. Its capital was Damascus, though

there were also smaller groups. Records of the Arameans themselves have not survived,

except for a few inscriptions, so current knowledge of them draws heavily on foreign

sources, especially Israelite (i. e., biblical) and Assyrian.78 Their civilization prospered from

the 11th to the 8th centuries. They were defeated by the Assyrians in 732 B.C.

77Alexander Sperber, ed., The Latter Prophets According to Targum Jonathan, vol. 3 of The Bible in

Aramaic: Based on Old Manuscripts and Printed Texts, 2nd impression (Leiden: Brill, 1992), 328.

78Wayne T. Pitard, “Aram (Place),” in ABD, 1:338; Alan R. Millard, “Arameans,” in ABD, 1:346–347.

32

The precious stones were among the cargo traded, though they cannot be identified

with certainty. Nophek is unknown, but since it is listed with known precious stones in both

the high priest’s vestments and also on the garments of the King of Tyre (chap 28), it can be

reasonably deduced that it was some kind of precious stone. Chadchod likewise is unknown.

The targum guessed that it meant “pearl,” which is what is found in the LXX. HALOT

guesses that it is associated with the color red, and therefore might be ruby (HALOT 460-

61). This, however, is not sound. DCH glosses it as “agate” (DCH 4.362). “Coral” is also an

unknown term. Linguistic cognates occur in Ugaritic, Arabic, and Akkadian, but they do not

help with the identification of this material. (The Akkadian and perhaps the Ugaritic have

semantic range of “love.”)79

Luxury textiles are also found on board the ship. ארגמן “purple” could be derived

from insects or plants, but the most prized source was from marine snails, of which there

were several related types.80 This dark hue was not only beautiful in sunlight, but was also

colorfast. The word ארגמן itself was a common cognate in Northwest Semitic languages

(Aramaic, Ugaritic, Akkadian), and had related color terms in Greek and Latin. The earliest

mention of the dye is in Nuzi texts from 1500 B. C. The dye was identified with the

Phoenicians to such an extent that the name “Phoenicia” may be cognate with one of the

Greek words for red-purple phoenix. Surprisingly, however, this text seems to indicate that

Tyre itself had competitors, even superiors, in purple-dyed cloth. In addition to purple

(cloth), embroidered cloth (found frequently in the tabernacle construction narratives) and

linen. The linen mentioned here (בוץ) is a second, later word for linen. It seems to have

replaced the earlier word of Egyptian derivation, ששIII (HALOT 115-16).

79HALOT 1164; DULAT 724; CAD R 136-45.

80Frederick W. Danker, “Purple,” in ABD, 5:557–558. See also the standard work in the field, John E. Hartley, The Semantics of Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes, Ancient Near Eastern Studies Supplement Series, no. 33 (Louvain; Walpole, Mass.: Peeters, 2010).

33

Ezekiel 27:17 י   ר א ו   ד הו ך י י ל כ ר מ   ה א   ר ש

ג ודבש ושמן וצרי נתנו נ נית ופ בחטי מך: ב ר ע מ

Judah and the land of Israel traded with you; wheat of Minnith, meal, honey, oil, and balm they exchanged for your merchandise.

The mention Judah and the land of Israel as trading partners helps to date this oracle,

since it would have preceded Babylonian conquest. This is also unusual for two other

reasons: Ezekiel more often uses the collocation ʾadamat yisraʾel rather than ʾeretz yisraʾel

as here. Second, the nation of Israel had been deported more than 100 years earlier.81 Several

food items are mentioned. Wheat from Minnith leads the list. Minnith was an area in the

Trans-Jordan in the area of Ammon. It is mentioned in Judg 11:33, and was later stated to be

in that same vicinity by Eusebius in his Onomosticon.82 The other items were found in the

Cis-Jordan, though “meal” (pannag) is a hapax of unknown meaning.83 “Balm” is a word

that occurs only six times in the OT, though it occurs widely in cognate languages (Old

South Arabic, Arabic, Ugaritic, El Amarna letters) and was mentioned by Pliny (HALOT

1055).

Ezekiel 27:18 ך מרב י ש ע מ ר   ב ך    סחרת ש ק דמ

חר: כל־הון ביין חלבון וצמר צDamascus did business with you for your abundant goods, all wealth of every kind: wine of Ḥelbon and wool of Sahar,

ḥlbwn . . . ṣḥr” MT“ חלבון . . . צחר .1 ”ἐκ Χελβων . . . ἐκ Μιλήτου “from Ḥelbōn . . . from Milit [חלבון . . . מ(י)לת]

OG- mêlat “fine wool” TargJ [מילת] Conclusion: The word in question was understood by the LXX translators as a

toponym (place name). There are no clear text critical reasons for prefering one over the other. The targum reads the same consonants as the LXX, but the word means “fine wool.”

81Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 75; Daniel I. Block, The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 1–24, NICOT (Grand

Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1997), 248, 352 fn39.

82Randall W. Younker, “Minnith (Place),” in ABD, 4:842.

83Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 75–76.

34

Aram had been mentioned alone previously, and now Damascus joins it. While the

former mention of Aram included other trading goods, the items in v18 are premium luxury

items. “Wine from Ḥelbon” was a premium wine. It is mentioned in Babylonian records

(KURḫi-il-bu-nim), where it is linked with the royal fare.84 Strabo also mentions it in

connection with the kings of Persia:

Their habits are in general temperate. But their kings, from the great wealth which they possessed, degenerated into a luxurious way of life. They sent for wheat from Assos in Æolia, for Chalybonian wine from Syria, and water from the Eulæus, which is the lightest of all, for an Attic cotylus measure of it weighs less by a drachm (than the same quantity of any other water) (Strabo 15.3.22).85

Ḥelbon itself was probably in Syria about 10 miles northwest of Damascus, although another

location may also be possible.86

Identifying the wool from Ṣaḥar is uncertain. Clearly, the item is wool, but the

meaning of Ṣaḥar is unknown. There are two options. Assuming it is a toponym, various

locations have been proposed. Some are simply too far. Wool from Athens would not go to

84Alan R. Millard, “Ezekiel 27:19: The Wine Trade of Damascus,” JSS 7 (1962): 201–02.

85Strabo, The Geography of Strabo: Literally Translated, with Notes, in Three Volumes, trans. H. C. Hamilton and W. Falconer (London: George Bell & Sons, 1903). The Greek reads thus: τὰ μὲν οὖν ἔθη σωφρονικὰ τὰ πλείω, διὰ δὲ τὸν πλοῦτον εἰς τρυφὴν ἐξέπεσον οἱ βασιλεῖς, ὥστε πυρὸν μὲν ἐξ Ἄσσου τῆς Αἰολίδος μετῄεσαν, οἶνον δ’ ἐκ Συρίας τὸν Χαλυβώνιον, ὕδωρ δὲ ἐκ τοῦ Εὐλαίου πάντων ἐλαφρότατον ὥστ’ ἐν Ἀττικῇ κοτύλῃ δραχμῇ ἀφολκότερον εἶναι. Strabo, Geographica, ed. A. Meineke (Leipzig: Teubner, 1877), 1025. Both English translation and Greek text referenced April 9, 2014: http://www.perseus.turfts.edu

Some commentators contained references to this text in Strabo, though their texts were somewhat different, and their reference was 15.735. I also came across another reference to “Chalybonian wine” in a classical author: “The Chalybonean wine, Posidonius says, is made in Damascus in Syria, from vines which were planted there by the Persians.” Athenœus, b. i page 46, Bohn's Classical Library. I was not able to verify the reference.

86Alan R. Millard, “Ezekiel 27:19: The Wine Trade of Damascus,” JSS 7 (1962): 202; Jan Jozef Simons, Geographical and Topographical Texts of the Old Testament, 2nd ed., Studia Francisci Scholten Memoriae Dicata (Leiden: Brill, 1959), §1428 c).

35

Tyre via Damascus.87 Zuchru, mentioned in the Amarna letters or aṣ-Ṣāḥar, northwest of

Damascus, are legitimate possibilities.88 The LXX translates it as “Milit,” a town on the coast

of Asia Minor. The other option is to take צחר as an adjective modifying wool, as the targum

does. Linguistically, this might work, based on cognates meaning “white” (צחר*, HALOT

1019). Certainly, this could also be appealing However, the linguistic link is not as strong as

one might wish, and the pattern in Ezekiel makes a place name more likely. There seems to

be no good solution to this problem in spite different attempts.89

Ezekiel 27:19 נו ודן ויון ך נת י נ בו ז ע ב ז   או מ

ך היה: ב ר ע מ ב נ   ק ו   ד ק שו   ע ז   ר ב and casks of wine from Uzal for your wares they gave: wrought iron, cassia, and calamus were bartered for your merchandise.

and Dan” MT“ ודן .1 [ ] OG- > [ דדן(ו) ] Δαιδαν “ ” OGvar Conclusion: The MT does not make sense, because v 19 seems to be a continuation of

v 18. (Verse 18 does not have the closing formula found in other verses.) Context would logically suggest that “Dan” should be an item. The LXX has nothing, and a later Greek variant tried to correct the MT.

The MT appears to be corrupt in some way, perhaps missing something. Any emendation should take into account the letters that are preserved and try to make sense of them. See #2.

and Javan” MT“ ויון .2 καὶ οἶνον “and wine” OG [ויין] מאוזל ~ בעזבוניך נתנו .3 MT [ ] OG ~

87Saur, Der Tyroszyklus des Ezechielbuches, 205–06. Saur agrees with and quotes Rüger’s 1962

dissertation Tyrusorakel (82), which was not available to me.

88Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 76–77.

89Diether Kellermann, “Überlieferungsprobleme alttestamentliecher Ortsnamen,” VT 4 (1978): 423–24. Kellermann notes that it appears that the LXX translator engaged in speculation to find a place name that his readers would understand, and that would work in the passage.

36

Conclusion: If the textual emendation is accepted, then it is clear that the LXX has transposed the words here.

pual ptc. “woven material” MT מאוזל .4 prep. + toponym ἐξ Ασηλ “from Asel ” OG = α *, SyrP [מאוזל] with caravans,” Targ“ [בשירן] Conclusion: The LXX, supported by Aquila and the Peshitta, understand this to be the

preposition מן and a toponym. The targum has used etymological exegesis from √ אזל (Heb: “to go away”; Aram: “to be gone”) (so HUB). The LXX has the best reading, based on the context.

The MT literally reads, “And Dan and Javan from [place name],” which does not fit

the context at all. It seems that because something happened to the first word, changing it

from an item of trade to a toponym, that the MT has misread and miscopied the second word,

changing it into a toponym as well.

The LXX is missing the first word. As for the second word, in the period of square or

Aramaic script, there was a strong similarity between ו\י to the extent that they cannot

always be easily distinguished. In this case, it first appears that the translator misjudged a י

for a ו. The difference can be seen in the two translations. However, the LXX reading should

be considered because it contains an item of trade. The LXX reads “and wine from [place

name].” HUB suggests that the targum reading is derived etymologically from √ אזל (Heb:

“to go away”; Aram: “to be gone”).90 In sum, the combination of multiple errors (apparently

in all the ancient versions) makes this textual problem particularly complex.

In 1962, A. Millard proposed simple emendation that involved changing only three

y’s to w’s.91 d(a)n is a common word that is cognate to several West Semitic languages for

90HALOT, 27; Marcus Jastrow, ed., A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi,

and the Midrashic Literature, previously published: New York: Title Publishing (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2005), 37.

91Alan R. Millard, “Ezekiel 27:19: The Wine Trade of Damascus,” JSS 7 (1962): 201–203. See also Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 67.

37

over a millennium and a half.92 It means something like “cask, cyclindrical jar,” and was

used to hold wine and other items. Knowing that י/ו can be easily mixed up, A. Millard

proposed that the text had originally read ודני יין wdny yyn. If this is true, then an MT

scribe copying the text mistook the י (y) on the end of the first, and thought it was a ו (waw)

on the beginning of the second word, with the meaning “and.” In this situation, he first made

an error of graphic confusion, and then an error of word division. Although no manuscript

has been recovered with this reading, this theory makes excellent sense of the passage, both

in terms of the actual words in the manuscripts, the kinds of errors scribes were prone to

make, and the logically-expected content of the passage.

As for the items themselves, the list of luxury items continues in v 19, assuming the

textual emendation suggested above is accepted. Uzal should probably be identified with an

area in Asia Minor north of Damascus that was known as Izalla by the Babylonians.93

Babylonian documents list “wine from Ḥelbon” (cf v18) as a kind of parallel or equivalent to

“wine of Izalla.” This is another link between the two verses. The “wrought iron” at this

period of history would have been softer than cast iron since it was heated in lower-

temperature furnaces. Cassia and calamus that were traded by Damascus probably had their

source much farther east. Cassia, a plant that yields a perfume, is native to east Asia.

Calamus does grow wild in Israel, but this aromatic grass likely came from India. It was used

in a variety of things, including perfumes, cosmetics, flavoring, and medicine.94

92Akkadian: masc. “dannu II . . . “large” vat, barrel” j/NB, NA; for bread, spices, dates, beer, etc.”

Black, Andrew George, and Nicholas Postgate, CDA, 56; CAD D 98; Ugaritic: dn (II) masc. “vessel, vat,” DULAT 276; Arabic, dann; Aramaic: danʾa, Jastrow, Dictionary, 315; HALOT 228.

93W. W. Müller, “Uzal (Person),” in ABD, 6:775–76.

94Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 77.

38

As for the spelling, GKC notes the dagesh forte in נו and says it is to add emphasis ,נת

(GKC §20i).

Ezekiel 27:20 גדי־חפש לרכבה: ך בב ת ל כ ר ד   ד Dedan traded with you in saddlecloths for

riding.

Unlike the previous nations (with the exception of Judah and Israel), the next tier of

nations is located to the south of Tyre. Dedan II heads the group. It is located in Arabia. The

term “saddle-cloths” (lit. “spreading garments”) is approximate. Both are hapax. Various

derivations have been proposed for the second word, one of which works particularly well

(Akk. taḫapšu, “felt; felt [rug],” used for horses).95 The verse is unusually short for this

passage. Even though Ezekiel used variety in the different elements of this list-like passage,

there is an absence of any of them at the end. This may be a case where the text is lost.96 If

so, it must have happened in antiquity, given the early date of the MT and probably the LXX

for that matter.

Ezekiel 27:21 חרי ערב וכל־נשיאי קדר המה סך בכרים ואילים ועתודים בם ד י

ך: י ר ח ס

Arabia and all the princes of Kedar were your favored dealers in lambs, rams, and goats; in these they did business with you.

Ancient Arabia is fairly easy to identify, since it largely overlaps with the borders of

the modern state of Saudia Arabia. The people groups mentioned in vv20-22 are all known to

have lived in this area. At times, there is some overlap in Scripture with the desert area south

95CDA, 392; Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 77. Another possibility mentioned by commentators is ḫibšu

(ḫipšu) I “a rough wool” (CDA 115), “wool of a certain quality” (CAD Ḫ 181).

96Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 67.

39

of Israel known as the Negev.97 Kedar was a tribe descended from Ishmael’s second son,

whose name they bore (Gen 25:13; 1 Chron 1:29). Together with the descendents of the other

sons, these tribes lived in north Arabia. Cuneiform records mention dealings with Assyrian

and Neo-Babylonian rulers. These show a powerful tribe from the 8th to the 4th centuries B.

C.98 “Princes” in this context can have a variety of translations that may be more appropriate,

such as “chieftains” or “sheiks” (HALOT 727). This desert tribe was involved in

international trade, which is the point that was important to Ezekiel. It is perhaps noteworthy

that food came from traders that were closer to Tyre.99

Ezekiel 27:22 ך י ל כ ר מ   ה מ   ע ר ו   ב ש ל   כ ר

בראש כל־בשם ובכל־אבן יקרה וזהב ך: י נ בו ז ע תנ   נ

The traders of Sheba and Raamah traded with you; they exchanged for your wares the best of all kinds of spices and all precious stones and gold.

Sheba was a tribe in southwest Arabia that developed an advanced culture that

included irrigation and international trade. Sheba is mentioned twice in Gen 10, once as a

descendent of Ham (via Cush) and once as a descendent of Joktan (Gen 10:7, 28; cf. 1 Chron

1:9, 22). In Gen 10:7, it also mentions a descendent of Cush named סבא (Seba), which plays

into the scholarly confusion for determining the exact location and identity of the tribe (s).

Some have interpreted these as a single Arabian tribe. However, in light of the name Seba

being attested in the topography of east Africa, it is better to see Seba in Africa as distinct

from the Semitic descendent of Joktan in Arabia.100

97Carl Rasmussen, “Arabia,” in NIDOTTE, 4:409; Richard Houston Smith, “Arabia,” in ABD, 1:324–

326.

98Ernst Axel Knauf, “Kedar,” in ABD, 4:9. For additional comment, see Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 77–78.

99Liverani, “The Trade Network of Tyre According to Ezek 27,” 68 fig. 2.

100Stephen D. Ricks, “Sheba (Person) (1),” in ABD, 5:1169–70; W. W. Müller, “Seba,” in ABD, 5:1064.

40

Raamah is listed as the progenitor of Sheba (Gen 10:7), though not with a birth

formula. They also lived in south Arabia. This is suggested by the list of trade items in Ezek

27, which would fit well with known trade routes and items. A likely location would be the

oasis (and later town) of Ragmatum in what is today southwestern Saudia Arabia. The

evidence for this location includes local topographical inscriptions (dating to as early as 500

B.C.), renderings in the LXX, and references by classical and Christian writers.101

Ezekiel 27:23 נה ועדן רכלי שבא אשור חרן וכ

ך: ת ל כ ר מ   ל כ Haran, Canneh, Eden, traders of Sheba, Asshur, and Chilmad, (she was your trader).

traders” MT“ רכלי שבא .1 -οὗτοι ἔμποροί σου “these (were) your traders” OG [אלה רכליך ] Conclusion: The appearance of the Hebrew word רכל twice in this verse is unusual in this text. The first occurrence has רכלי שבא, which is the same as the beginning of v 22. The LXX does not have שבא. Since Sheba is a known Arabian tribe, and this verse deals with Mesopotamian cities and nations, it would be reasonable to see the LXX as supporting the original text, and the MT addition as a scribal error (parablepsis/ dittography). Kilmad” MT“ כלמד .2 [ וכרמן ] καὶ Χαρμαν “and Karman” OG- and Media” Targ“ [ומדי] Conclusion: The MT has the place name Kilmad, which the LXX tried to make sense of. The Hebrew could easily be divided (and pointed) as (י) ד מ כ   “all Media.” This is apparently what the Targum has read, though it dropped kol “all.” Either (י) ד מ כ   or possibly כלמר (less preferable) is more likely to be correct.102 your trader v24 they your traders” MT“ רכלתך המה רכליך .3 [ ] ἔμποροί σου φέροντες ἐμπορίαν “your traders bearing merchandise ” OG Conclusion: The MT ends v 23 with a fem. sg. participle of rkl which does not fit with the preceding words. The same thing occurred earlier in v 20, but there it had a

101W. W. Müller, “Raamah,” in ABD, 5:597.

102Saur, Der Tyroszyklus des Ezechielbuches, 212; Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 79; Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2, 50–51.

41

single place name/toponym (no gender) preceding it.103 As v 24 begins, it then has a demonstrative pronoun, followed by a masc. pl. participle of rkl, which does match the preceding words. The fem. sg. participle at the end of v 23 may have been caused by an oversight that resulted in the participle accidentally being written an extra time at the end of v. 23 (parablepsis/ dittography). If this is so, then it should be deleted.104

The inclusion of Haran and Asshur clearly mark this part of the oracle as a new

geographical section dealing with Mesopotamia. Haran is perhaps best known as the stopping

point of Abraham in his journey to the land of promise. Its name in Akk was Ḫarrānu

(“highway, road, path”). It is situated roughly in the top and center of the Fertile Crescent at

the southern edge of Anatolia, approximately 60 miles north of the confluence Euphrates

River and its tributary, the Balikh. Haran was both a town and a district.105 Canneh, the

second city, is mentioned frequently in economic texts from the eighth and seventh centuries.

Its location is unknown to us, and partly for this reason has sometimes been mis-identified

with Calneh. The Assyrian sources that it was located on a royal highway, which doubtless

contributed to their trade in hundreds of horses for the Assyrians as well as trading slaves.106

Beth-Eden (identified in Ezek 27 as “Eden”) was an Aramean kingdom located 200 miles

northeast of Israel. It is attested in Assyrian inscriptions as early as 884 B.C. in connection

with quelling a rebellion there.107

Asshur is the name of the land, people, and king of Assyria, as well as their

eponymous ancestor (Gen 10:22; 1 Chron 1:17). Beginning in the fourteenth century, the city

Asshur was the capital for much of the history of the Middle Assyrian Empire. It was ideally

103Block writes that the toponym in v 20 (דדן) is fem. However, according to HALOT and DCH, it is

gender neutral/ no gender. Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 67 fn96; HALOT 214; DCH 2.417).

104Ibid., 67.

105Yoshitaka Kobayashi, “Haran (Place),” in ABD, 3:58.

106Samuel A. Meier, “Canneh,” in ABD, 1:837.

107Samuel A. Meier, “Beth-Eden,” in ABD, 1:684.

42

located on both the north-south trade route on the Tigris River, and on the east-west trade

route where camels forded the Tigris because of a pass in the nearby mountain range. The

spur of the mountain provided natural protection on the north from invaders. Geographically,

this location was at the southern edge of the zone of regular rainfall. Combined with the other

factors, this contributed to its commercial success.108 Media was a collection of small

political entities in (the northern part of) ancient Iran that were unified and grew to power in

the seventh century B.C. when they allied with Babylon to overthrow the Neo-Assyrian

Empire.109

Ezekiel 27:24 גלומי ך במכללים ב י ל כ ר מ   ה

חבלים גנזי ברמים ב תכלת ורקמה ובך: ת ל כ ר מ ב זי   ר א ו   שי ב ח

These (were) your traders. In choicest garments, in clothes of blue and embroidered work, and in carpets of colored material, bound securely with cords, for these were your brokers.

MT במכללים בגלומי .1 [ ] OG < Conclusion: The LXX is missing “choicest garments.” It may simply a difference of litarary version, and not an error of omission (or addition on the part of the MT). זים .2 MT (ו)א [ ] OG, V, SyrP, Targ Conclusion: This is a difference of reading tradition, not mistake. The consonants are the same; only the vowels are different. The major versions read “cedars, cypresses” presumably for special wooden boxes. The MT points it differently to read “strong” in their merchandising” prep. + noun common fem sg. constr MT“ במרכלתך .3 [ ] OG <

108A. Kirk Grayson, “Asshur,” in ABD, 1:500.

109T. Cuyler Young, Jr., “Media,” in ABD, 4:659.

43

Conclusion: This difficult word is a hapax that is missing from the MT. Following BHS & Zimmerli, Block suggests that this has been a case of wrong word division, and that it can be divided and repointed בם רכלתך, “for these (were) your brokers.” There is support for this interpretation in v 21, which has the same structure as the one proposed, except with the verb 110.סחר

If the rarity of the words for the items in v 24 is any indication of their cost, they must

have been expensive. “Choicest garments,” a hapax based on the root כליל “perfect,” was a

kind of specialty garment of unknown description. The cloaks were blue-purple and

embroidered, and the fine woolen garments were multi-colored. Although the translation

above interprets the bound cords as securing the goods, it is difficult from the syntax to tell if

that is the correct reading, or if they should be regarded as a separate luxury item. This ends

the “bill of lading” section describing the wares and trading partners of the city of Tyre.

Ezekiel 27:25 ך ב ר ע מ ך   תי ו  שר ש ש  תר אני ת

בלב ימים:ותמלאי ותכבדי מאד “ The ships of Tarshish caravanned your merchandise for you. So you were filled and heavily laden in the heart of the seas.

boats of Tarshish” MT“ אניות תרשיש .1 πλοῖα Καρχηδόνιοι “Carthaginian” OG-SyrP [אניות כרתג] naves maris “boats of the sea” V ≈ T (בספיני ימא) “ships of the sea” Conclusion: By the time of the LXX, Tarshish was not a well-known place name, if it ever was more than a descriptive term. Note that the LXX translates it as “Carthaginian,” and V and Targ have “boats of the sea” and “ships of the sea.” This same Hebrew collocation occurs in Isa 2:16, but there the LXX has πλοῖον θαλάσσης “boats of the sea” while the Targum has ספיני ימא “ships of the sea”—exactly the same terms reflected by V and T in Ezek 27:25. Wildberger attributes the LXX reading in Isa 2:16 to show “little more than that the translator no longer understood the meaning of תרשיש (“Tarshish”).”111 The same phenomenon appears to be at work in Ezek 27:25.

110Block, Ezekiel 25–48, 67 fn99.

111Hans Wildberger, Isaiah 1–12: A Commentary, Continental (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress, 1991), 101.

44

Verse 25 transitions from the list format to the final section of the chapter (vv 16–26).

It sums up the passage with a survey of the vessels in the first half, and then addresses the

city directly, using personification to resume the metaphor of shipping vessel that had been

used earlier in the chapter. The preterite verbs in the second half denote past time, and in so

doing, denote a bit of wistful sadness for glory that will be gone. The identical phrase “in the

heart of the seas” both reflects the location of Tyre mentioned in v 4, and prepares for the

disaster covered in vv 16–26.

Two linguistic/grammatical issues complicate this verse. The difficulty of the

versions with the identity of Tarshish supports the idea that at least by the time they were

made, “ships of Tarshish” simply meant “sea-going vessels.”112 Second, the construction

suffixed participle + suffixed noun is unusual in Hebrew. Zimmerli (relying on Gesenius)

says that in this construction, the “second word must be understood . . . as a more precise

definition in apposition to the first: ‘Your ships of Tarshish—your caravans with goods’”

(GKC §128d).113

CONCLUSION

Ezekiel, who is best known for having “seen the wheel” at the beginning of his

prophetic ministry, received many other visions and oracles from God throughout his

prophetic ministry. This paper has examined part of an oracle in chapter 27, the central one in

a cluster of three addressed to Israel’s northern neighbor Tyre. The chapter carefully studies

the accomplishments and successes of the city using the metaphor of an ancient sailing

vessel. It also includes list of trading partners and wares. The combination of foreign terms,

rare words, and difficult constructions has led to many small textual differences in the

112Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37, 561.

113Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2, 51.

45

ancient manuscripts and versions. This paper concentrated on clarifying the reason for many

of these differences and determining what the original reading most likely was.

This paper found that overall the MT was accurate and dependable. This finding

should be couched within the realization that the other ancient versions and manuscripts are

also fairly literal and accurate as well, especially the Septuagint. The best examples of this

are P967 and B for the Septuagint. On a close comparison of texts, however, there are indeed

many differences between the manuscripts. This study showed reasons to believe that the

scribes were careful and respected the need to accurately translate the texts before them.

Even though the number of differences was relatively high, most of them could be easily

explained as reasons for the errors were identified. On a few occasions, textual emendation

was cautiously used to suggest changes that would meet the needs of the context since none

of the available evidence seemed to do so.

The climax of the chapter was not included in this study because of space limitations.

The chapter up to this point builds up a great description of the glory that was Tyre’s. Such

great glory would become equally great loss. The final section anticipates the utter dismay

and astonishment at the demise of Tyre. The purpose of this judgment (in conjunction with

the other two oracles) seems to have been to punish Tyre for being greedy instead of showing

mercy to their southern neighbors, and also to help the Israelites someday “know that I am

Yahweh their God (:ני יהוה אלהיהם ”.(28:26 ;וידעו כי א

46

WORKS CITED

Allen, Leslie C. Ezekiel 20–48. Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 29. Dallas, Tx.: Word, 1990.

Andersen, Francis I. The Hebrew Verbless Clause in the Pentateuch. Journal of Biblical Literature Monograph Series 14. Nashville: Abingdon Press, for Society of Biblical Literature, 1970.

Baker, David W. “Elishah (Person) [#2].” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 2, edited by David Noel Freedman, 473. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Baker, David W. “Javan (Person).” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 3, edited by David Noel Freedman, 650. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Baker, David W. “Meschech (Person).” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 4, edited by David Noel Freedman, 711. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Baker, David W. “Put.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 5, edited by David Noel Freedman, 560. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Baker, David W. “Tarshish (Place).” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 6, edited by David Noel Freedman, 331–33. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Baker, David W. “Togarmah (Person).” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 6, edited by David Noel Freedman, 594–95. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Baker, David W. “Tubal (Person).” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 6, edited by David Noel Freedman, 670. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Barrick, William D. “‘Ur of the Chaldeans’ (Genesis 11:28–31): A Model for Dealing with Difficult Texts.” The Masters Seminary Journal 20 (Spring 2009): 7–18.

Black, Jeremy, Andrew George, and Nicholas Postgate. A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian. SANTAG, vol. 10. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2000.

Block, Daniel I. The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 1–24. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1997.

Block, Daniel I. The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 25–48. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1998.

47

Block, Daniel I. The Gods of the Nations: Studies in Ancient Near Eastern National Theology. Evangelical Theological Society Monograph Series 2. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic; Leicester, England: Apollos, 2000.

Budde, K. “Das hebräische Klagelied.” Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschafte 2 (1882): 1–52.

Danker, Frederick W. “Purple.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 5, edited by David Noel Freedman, 557–60. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

del Olmo Lete, Gregorio, and Joaquín Sanmartín, A Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language in the Alphabetic Tradition, 2nd ed., trans. Wilfred G.E. Watson, Handbuch der Orientalistik, vol. 67 (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2004).

Gesenius, W., and E. Kautzsch. Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. 2d ed. Translated by A. E. Cowley. Oxford; New York: Clarendon Press, 1910.

Grayson, A. Kirk. “Asshur.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 1, edited by David Noel Freedman, 500. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Greenberg, Moshe. Ezekiel 21–37: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. The Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 1997.

Grisanti, Michael A. “Inspiration, Inerrancy, and the OT Canon: The Place of Textual Updating in an Inerrant View of Scripture.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 44 (2001): 577–98.

Hallo, William W., ed., K. Lawson Younger, associate editor. Monumental Inscriptions from the Biblical World. Vol. 2 of Context of Scripture. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2000.

Hallo, William W., and K. Lawson Younger, eds. Canonical Compositions from the Biblical World. Vol. 1 of The Context of Scripture. Leiden: Brill, 1997.

Harl, Marguerite, trans. and ed. La Genèse. 2nd ed. La Bible d’Alexandrie. Paris: Cerf, 1994.

Hartley, John E. The Semantics of Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes. Ancient Near Eastern Studies Supplement Series, no. 33. Louvain; Walpole, Mass.: Peeters, 2010.

Hess, Richard S. “Arvad (Person).” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 1, 468. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Hillers, Delbert R. “Lamentations, Book Of.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 4, 137–41. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Jastrow, Marcus, ed. A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature. Previously published: New York: Title Publishing. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2005.

Joüon, Paul. “Notes philologiques sur le texte hébreu d’Ezéchiel 4, 17; 13, 6; 27, 12–24; 27, 32; 28, 7; 28, 12; 29, 12; 30, 22; 31, 4; 31, 13; 32, 9; 32, 10; 32, 30.” Biblica 10 (1929): 304–12.

48

Joüon, Paul, and T. Muraoka. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Subsidia Biblica 27. Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 2006.

Katzenstein, H. J. “Tyre.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 6, edited by David Noel Freedman, 686–92. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Kellermann, Diether. “Überlieferungsprobleme alttestamentliecher Ortsnamen.” Vetus Testamentum 4 (1978): 423–32.

Knauf, Ernst Axel. “Kedar.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 4, edited by David Noel Freedman, 9–10. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Kobayashi, Yoshitaka. “Haran (Place).” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 3, edited by David Noel Freedman, 58–59. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Koehler, Ludwig, and Walter Baumgartner. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Translated from Hebräisches und aramäisches Lexicon zum Alten Testament, translated and edited by M. E. J. Richardson. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2001.

Lemmelijn, Bénédicte. A Plague of Texts?: A Text-Critical Study of the So-Called ‘Plagues Narrative’ in Exodus 7:14–11:10. Oudtestamentische Studiën, no. 56. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2009.

Lilly, Ingrid E. Two Books of Ezekiel: Papyrus 967 and the Masoretic Text as Variant Literary Editions. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum, vol. 150. Leiden: Brill, 2012.

Liverani, Mario. “The Trade Network of Tyre According to Ezek 27.” In Ah, Assyria...: Studies in Assyrian History and Ancient Near Eastern Historiography Presented to Hayim Tadmor, edited by Mordechai Cogan and Israel Ephʿal. Scripta Hierosolymitana, vol. 33, 65–79. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1991.

Lust, J., E. Eynikel, and Katrin Hauspie. A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint. Vol. 1. A-I. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1992.

Mackie, Timothy P. “Expanding Ezekiel: The Hermeneutics of Scribal Addition in the Ancient Text Witnesses of the Book of Ezekiel.” Ph.D. diss.: University of Wisconsin—Madison, 2010.

———. “Transformation in Ezekiel’s Textual History: Ezekiel 7 in the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint.” In Transforming Visions: Transformations of Text, Tradition, and Theology in Ezekiel, edited by William A. Tooman and Michael A. Lyons. Princeton Theological Monograph Series, 249–78. Eugene, Ore.: Pickwick, 2010.

Marquis, Galen. “Word Order as a Criterion of Translation Technique in the LXX and the Evaluation of Word-Order Variants as Exemplified in LXX-Ezekiel.” Textus 13 (1986): 59–84.

Martin, Gary D. Multiple Originals: New Approaches to Hebrew Bible Textual Criticism. Society of Biblical Literature: Text-Critical Studies, vol. 7. Atlanta, Ga.: Society of Biblical Literature, 2010.

49

Meier, Samuel A. “Beth-Eden.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 1, edited by David Noel Freedman, 684. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Meier, Samuel A. “Canneh.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 1, edited by David Noel Freedman, 837. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Millard, Alan R. “Arameans.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 1, edited by David Noel Freedman, 345–50. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Millard, Alan R. “Ezekiel 27:19: The Wine Trade of Damascus.” Journal of Semitic Studies 7 (1962): 201–03.

Miller, Cynthia L., ed. The Verbless Clause in Biblical Hebrew: Linguistic Approaches. Linguistic Studies in Ancient West Semitic, vol. 1. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1999.

Muraoka, T. A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint. Louvain; Walpole, Mass.: Peeters, 2009.

Müller, W. W. “Raamah.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 5, edited by David Noel Freedman, 597. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Müller, W. W. “Seba.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 5, edited by David Noel Freedman, 1064. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Müller, W. W. “Uzal (Person).” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 6, edited by David Noel Freedman, 775–76. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Olley, John W. Ezekiel: A Commentary Based on Iezekiael in Codex Vaticanus. Septuagint Commentary Series. Leiden: Brill, 2009.

Oppenheim, A. Leo, Erica Reiner, and Martha T. Roth, eds. The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Chicago: Oriental Institute, 1956–2010.

Parker, D. C. “Hexapla of Origen, The.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 3, edited by David Noel Freedman, 188–89. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Peckham, Brian. “Phoenicia, History Of.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 5, edited by David Noel Freedman, 349–57. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Peters, Melvin K. H. “Septuagint.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 5, edited by David Noel Freedman, 1093–104. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Pitard, Wayne T. “Aram (Place).” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 1, edited by David Noel Freedman, 338–41. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Pritchard, James B., ed. Ancient Near Eastern Texts: Relating to the Old Testament. 3rd ed. with suppl. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1969.

Pritchard, James B. The Ancient Near East in Pictures Relating to the Old Testament. 2nd ed. with suppl. Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, 1969.

50

Rasmussen, Carl. “Arabia.” In New Internationial Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis. Vol. 4, edited by Willem A. VanGemeren, 408–10. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1997.

Ricks, Stephen D. “Sheba (Person) (1).” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 5, edited by David Noel Freedman, 1169–70. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Roth, Ray Lee. “Gebal.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 2, edited by David Noel Freedman, 922–23. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Rösel, Martin. “Forms and Genres: Old Testament.” In Religion Past and Present. Vol. 5, edited by Hans Dieter Betz, Don S. Browning, Bernd Janowski, and Eberhard Jüngel, 167–70. Leiden: Brill, 2009.

Saur, Marcus. Der Tyroszyklus des Ezechielbuches. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, vol. 386. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2008.

Simons, Jan Jozef. Geographical and Topographical Texts of the Old Testament. 2nd ed. Studia Francisci Scholten Memoriae Dicata. Leiden: Brill, 1959.

Smith, Richard Houston. “Arabia.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 1, edited by David Noel Freedman, 324–27. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Sperber, Alexander, ed. The Latter Prophets According to Targum Jonathan. Vol. 3 of The Bible in Aramaic: Based on Old Manuscripts and Printed Texts. 2nd impression. Leiden: Brill, 1992.

Strabo. Geographica. Edited by A. Meineke. Leipzig: Teubner, 1877.

———. The Geography of Strabo: Literally Translated, with Notes, in Three Volumes. Translated by H. C. Hamilton and W. Falconer. London: George Bell & Sons, 1903.

Stromberg, Jake. “Observations on Inner-Scriptural Scribal Expansion in MT Ezekiel.” Vetus Testamentum 58 (2008): 68–86.

Stuart, Douglas. Hosea—Jonah. Word Biblical Commentary 31. Nashville, Tenn.: Thomas Nelson, 1987.

Theodoret of Cyrus. Beati Theodoreti Cyrensis Episcopi in Divini Ezechielis Prophetiam Interpretatio. Vol. 2 of Theodoreti Cyrensis Episcopi Opera Omnia. PG 81. Edited by J. L. Shultze. Paris: Migne, 1864.

Thompson, Henry O. “Gamad.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 2, edited by David Noel Freedman, 903. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Tov, Emanuel. Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. 3rd ed. Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress, 2012.

Tov, Emanuel. “The Use of Concordances in the Reconstruction of the Vorlage of the LXX.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 40 (January 1978): 28–36.

51

van Dijk, H. J. Ezekiel’s Prophecy on Tyre (Ez. 26,1—28,19): A New Approach. Biblica et Orientalia, no. 20. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1968.

Waltke, Bruce K. “Aims of Textual Criticism.” Westminster Theological Journal 51 (1989): 93–108.

Ward, William A. “Phoenicians.” In Peoples of the Old Testament World, edited by Alfred J. Hoerth, Gerald L. Mattingly, and Edwin M. Yamauchi, 183–206. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1994.

Wenham, Gordon J. Genesis 1–15. Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 1. Waco, Tx.: Word, 1987.

Wildberger, Hans. Isaiah 1–12: A Commentary. Translated by Thomas H. Trapp. Continental. Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 1991.

Young, T. Cuyler, Jr. “Media.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 4, edited by David Noel Freedman, 659. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Younker, Randall W. “Minnith (Place).” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 4, edited by David Noel Freedman, 842. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1992.

Ziegler, Joseph, ed. Ezechiel. Vol. XVI of Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum. 2nd edition. Göttingen: Vandehoeck & Ruprecht, 1977.

Zimmerli, Walther. Ezekiel 2: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel Chapters 25–48. Translated by Ronald E. Clements. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983.