Page:02.BCOT.KD.HistoricalBooks.A.vol.2.EarlyProphets.djvu/1018

This page needs to be proofread.

text. At the same time, it can hardly be a copyist's error for מבחר (selection), as Bertheau supposes, but must be attributable to the fact that, according to 2Sa 23:13, 2Sa 23:23, and 2Sa 23:24, these heroes constituted a corps which was named from the number of which it originally consisted. The first, Jashobeam, is called “the chief of the thirty” in the Chronicles. Instead of ישׁבעם (Jashobeam), the reading in the Chronicles, we have here בּשּׁבת ישׁב (Josheb-basshebeth), unquestionably a spurious reading, which probably arose, according to Kennicott's conjecture, from the circumstance that the last two letters of ישׁבעם were written in one MS under בּשּׁבת in the line above (2Sa 23:7), and a copyist took בשׁבת from that line by mistake for עם. The correctness of the reading Jashobeam is established by 1Ch 27:2. The word תּחכּמני is also faulty, and should be corrected, according to the Chronicles, into בּן־חכמוני (Ben-hachmoni); for the statement that Jashobeam was a son (or descendant) of the family of Hachmon (1Ch 27:32) can easily be reconciled with that in 1Ch 27:2, to the effect that he was a son of Zabdiel. Instead of השּׁלשׁים ראשׁ (head of the thirty), the reading in the Chronicles, we have here השּׁלשׁי ראשׁ (head of the three). Bertheau would alter our text in accordance with the Chronicles, whilst Thenius proposes to bring the text of the Chronicles into accordance with ours. But although the many unquestionable corruptions in the verse before us may appear to favour Bertheau's assumption, we cannot regard either of the emendations as necessary, or even warrantable. The proposed alteration of השּׁלשׁי is decidedly precluded by the recurrence of השּׁלשׁי ראשׁ in 2Sa 23:18, and the alteration of השּׁלשׁים in the Chronicles by the repeated allusion to the שׁלשׁים, not only in 2Sa 23:15, 42; 2Sa 12:4, and 1Ch 27:6 of the Chronicles, but also in 2Sa 23:13, 2Sa 23:23, and 2Sa 23:24 of the chapter before us. The explanation given of שׁלשׁי and שׁלשׁים, as signifying chariot-warriors, is decidedly erroneous;[1] for the singular השּׁלישׁ is used in all the passages in which the word occurs to signify the royal aide-de-camp (2Ki 7:2, 2Ki 7:17, 2Ki 7:19; 2Ki 9:25;

  1. This explanation, which we find in Gesenius (Thes. and Lex.) and Bertheau, rests upon no other authority than the testimony of Origen, to the effect that an obscure writer gives this interpretation of τριστάτης, the rendering of שׁלישׁ, an authority which is completely overthrown by the writer of the gloss in Octateuch.  (Schleussner, Lex. in lxx t. v. p. 338), who gives this explanation of τριστάτας: τοὺς παρὰ χεῖρα τοῦ βασιλέως ἀριστερὰν τρίτης μοίρας ἄρχοντας. Suidas and Hesychius give the same explanation (s. v. τριστάται). Jerome also observes (ad Ezek 23): “It is the name of the second rank next to the king.”