Friday, November 11, 2022

Seth Erlandsson on מדהבה meaning "golden city" in Isaiah 14:4

 As an example of a purported KJV error in the Book of Mormon, David P. Wright offered Isa 14:4 and “golden city” as one (of many):

 

Isaiah 14:4//2 Nephi 24:4: "The golden city." The word mdhbh is problematic since the root dhb is not attested in Hebrew. The KJV is apparently connecting it to Aramaic dhb "gold." This translation is therefore doubtful (it also does not fit the context). The text is probably defective, and mrhbh "boisterous behavior, frenzy, arrogance" is to be read.

 

David P. Wright, “Part 3: KJV Translation Errors in the BM Isaiah," in "Isaiah in the Book of Mormon, or, Joseph Smith in Isaiah"

 

The evidence supports the KJV (and the Book of Mormon) on this score. As Seth Erlandsson noted about מדהבה in Isa 14:4:

 

מדהבה is a much discussed word. The question is partly whether מדהבה is a scribal error for מרהבה and partly what both these words mean. Most scholars emend ד in מדהבה to ר. The reason given for such a view is that as נגש and רהב are used as parallels in Is. 3:5, it is probable that a similar parallelism may occur here. Furthermore, it is usually held that the LXX and Pesh. depend upon a Vorlage which contains the reading מהרבה.

 

The argument is not quite correct. The LXX translation ὁ ἐπισπουδαστής does not indicate that its Vorlage read מרהבה. רהב ב, which occurs in 3:5 means “storm again’. ἐπισπουδαστής means ‘goader’ and corresponds to the parallel word נגש, which means both ‘goader’ and ‘extractor of tribute’. The verb επισπουδαζω ‘urge on’ is never used in the LXX for any form of רהב. One cannot, therefore, contend that the LXX translator had מרהבה in his Vorlage. He has quite simply guessed what מדהבה means in the light of the context just as is the case even today. The same can be said of the Pesh. which is presumably influenced by the LXX. . . . The word מדהבה occurs in 1 QH 3:25 and 12:18 and the form מדהוב in CD 13:9, but unfortunately it does not cast any light on its meaning in these instances. It is obvious that the Hodayot obtained the word from Is. 14:4, but the reading מרהבה also occurs in Qumran i.e. 1QIsa. It is, however, easier to explain how the more difficult reading מדהבה has been changed to מרהבה, possibly influenced by 3:5, than the original מרהבה was read in error as מדהבה.

 

Various attempts to derive the root meaning of מדהבה have been made. Kimchi and Aben Esra understood it to be a derivation of רהב = זהב ‘gold’. Aben Esra associated it with זהב מס ‘gold tribute’, whilst Kimchi understood it to be an epithet for Babylon who compelled other nations to pay tribute in the form of gold. Others have taken the word to indicate the place where gold was accumulated or as hiph. part., meaning ‘gold extortionist’, or ‘gold extortion’. An argument against מדהבה being an epithet for Babylon is the fact that the verb שבת is never used of a locality which has found rest and that there is no allusion to the city of Babylon in the song. Orlinsky thinks that מדהבה is connected with the root רבא and that “the ancients recognized in ראב, רבא and רהב the common רב element, with the meaning ‘strong’”. He, therefore contends that מדהבה means ‘might, power, oppression’ or something similar.

 

If נגש in the parallelism has the meaning ‘exactor of tribute’, then it is quite possible that מדהבה is the word for the taxation which the tribute-collector inflicted on the people. The translation of the Vulg. (tributum) and Symm. and Theod. (φορολογια) appear therefore, to be nearer the original meaning. That מדהבה has the meaning can be explained if the word is an Aramaic ma-nomen stemming form רהב ‘gold’. The literal meaning would then be ‘gold tribute’.

 

It is quite conceivable that the occupying powers, Assyria and Babylonia, could have used this term. We know that Akkadian was the official language in Assyria proper but it proved difficult to use in the occupied areas. Mazar contends that, “with the spread and consolidation of Assyrian rule over Trans-Euphrates, and in particular over the provinces of Aram, the Assyrian administration inherited official Aramaic as one of the official languages of the empire”. Aramaic proved itself to be much more handy and “officials in the chancelleries, aware that Aramaic was far better known than Akkadian in the distant parts of the Empire, commenced using a single, standard form of Aramaic for correspondence with such areas”. “We shall merely point to the fact that already in the eighty century Aramaic had spread well beyond the boundaries of Aramaic-speaking countries. Assyrian documents from the eight-seventh century mention Aramean scribes in the service of the Assyrian government.” 2 Ki. 18:26-28 )= Is. 36:11-13) shows that the leaders in Jerusalem take it for granted that Sennacherib’s commander-in-chief can speak Aramaic. “That this was a reasonable expectation and that the incident is not an isolated one” is shown by “the impressive array of Aramaic bits written on durable materials”. This is further illustrated by “the military report sent back to Assyrian from Babylonian by Bel-etir, a captain of the Assyrian cavalry, written ink, in distinctive cursive Aramaic letters, on a large potsherd”. Also, an Aramaic seal impression, found in Khorsabad, shows “that the use of Aramaic had reached to the very palace officials themselves”.

 

The official status of Aramaic is shown by the sculptured relief portraying the taking of spoil from Nabu-mukinzer’s Aramean city Sapea (729 B.C.). On this relief an Aramean scribe is shown with a pen and parchment in his hands standing beside the usual Assyrian scribe who has a clay tablet and stylus. Here, too, we have the explanation as to why the Akkadian annals have survived to this day, whereas Aramaic discoveries are limited to a number of small inscriptions, treaties and letters on potsherds. The Aramaic inscriptions did not demand soft clay tablets and a stylus, but rather pen and ink are some form of material which could be rolled up, (see relief). This material has not survived until the present day though that which was written on more durable material such as potsherds and clay tablets has.

 

We have thus established that Aramaic “to a lesser degree was the official language of diplomacy, administration and business under the Assyrians and that the word מדהבה was used from the time of Tiglath-pileser III to indicate the heavy tribute inflicted on that portion of the population which was not deported. (Seth Erlandsson, The Burden of Babylon: A Study of Isaiah 13:2-14:23 [Coniectanea Biblica Old Testament Series 4; Lund, Sweden: Berlingska Boktryckeriet, 1970], 29-32)