Monday, August 14, 2023

Isaac Kalimi on the phrase "Fleet/Ships of Tarshish" in the Books of Chronicles

  

20.12 The phrase אני/אניות תרשיש ‘fleet/ships of Tarshish’ serves as a technical idiom in the Bible, with a fixed linguistic structure, to denote a type of ship having specific dimensions, shape, strength, and carrying capacity. These ships served in the merchant fleets of Tyre and Israel and sailed the Mediterranean and the Red Sea (1 Kgs 10;22; 22:29; isa 2:16; 23:1, 14; Ezek 27;25; Ps 48:8).

 

1 Kgs 10:22, speaking of Solomon, relates “that the king had ships of Tarshish at sea. . . . Once every three years the ships of Tarshish would come, bearing gold and silver.” Similarly, we are told that Jehosophat, king of Judah, built “ships of Tarshish to sail to Ophir for gold. But he did not, for the ships broke at Ezion-geber” (1 Kgs 22:49).

 

These narratives are related in the parallel texts in Chronicles but with a change in the language: “fleet/ships of Tarshish” becomes “ships sailing to Tarshish”:

 

 

2 Chr 9:21

כי אניות למלך

הלכות תרשיש

For the king had ships
sailing to Tarshish.

2 Chr 20:36-37

ויתבהו עמו

לעשות אניות ללכת

תרשיש ויעשו

אניות בעציון גבר . . .

וישברו אניות

ולא עצרו

ללכת אל תרשיש

Then he joined him in
building ships to sail to
Tarshish and made the
ships in Ezion-geber. . . .
And the ships broke up, so
that they were not able to
sail to Tarshish.

 

Täckholm believes that here the Chronicler preserved and early, more accurate tradition. He claims that “Tarshish” is the name of a place in Africa on the coast of the Red Sea, where precious tones—“Tarshish” stones (Exod 28:20; 39:13)—were found. The name “Tarshish” was given to the ships because of their destination and their cargo (Tarshish stones and tropical goods). However, there is no supporting evidence for the claim that Solomon and Hiram imported “Tarshish” in vessels of Tarshish. See further below, especially in connection with the location of Tarshish. There is also no justification for Elat’s assumption that the reading תרשיש in 2 Chr 9:21; 20:36-37 “is an error made by a scribe or a copyist.” Elat does not explain just how this error came about, and there is no support for his claim in the various witnesses to the text. Furthermore, it is difficult to assume that one “scribe or copyist” made the same mistake in two verses that are connected with the reigns of two different kings.

 

It seems to me that this alteration was made deliberately by the Chronicler in order to clarify the meaning of the phrase אני)ות(תרשיש. As a late historian, he was no longer aware of the use of the technical idiom “ships of Tarshish” to denote a type of boat. He altered the fixed linguistic construction and turned the name “Tarshish” into the name of a place on the Red Sea coast. This was an early attempt to explain the term אניות תרשיש, similar to the attempts made in later Jewish literature. For instance:

 

a.     In the Septuagint of 1 Kgs 10:22, the translator wrote ωαυ εκ Θαρσις, ‘ships from Tarshish’ in place of the words “ships of Tarshish.” That is, “ships of Tarshish” were merely “ships coming from Tarshish.”

b.     In Ant. 8.181, Josephus wrote: “for the king [Solomon] had many ships stationed in the Sea of Tarshish (Ταρσικη θαλασσα), as it was called.” In other words, “ships of Tarshish” were merely ships that set sail in the Sea of Tarshish.

c.      In Tg. Jonathan on Isa 2:16 (ועל כל אניות תרשיש), we find ועל כל נחתי ספני ימא. The translator seems to have understood “Tarshish” to be related to θαλασσης ‘sea’; the Septuagint and already translated the phrase πλοιον θαλασσης ‘ships of the sea’.

d.     The Aramaic translation of 2 Chr 20;36 uses the name טורסוס (in place of תרשיש) and alongside it gives the explanation לימא ובא ‘to the great sea’.

 

These translators apparently attempted to explain the word “Tarshish” itself with reference to the most similar-sounding Greek word. Evidently, these explanations are far form being straightforward interpretations of the word.

 

The inaccuracy of the explanation proposed in Chronicles stands out prominently in light of the clear narrative of the earlier text: “Jehosophat built ships of Tarshish to sail to Ophir for gold” (1 Kgs 22:49)—“to Ophir,” not “to Tarshish!” Moreover, according to this text, the objective of the ships of Tarshish built by Jehoshaphat was to import gold. That gold was imported from Ophir is also clear from the narrative about the naval expeditions in the days of Solomon (1 Kgs 9:26-28/ // 2 Chr 8:17-18; 1 Kgs 10:11 // 2 Chr 9:10). On the other hand, from Tarshish, they used to import primarily silver but also iron, tin, and lead (Jer 10:9; Ezek 27:12).

 

The Chronicler’s explanation does not fit the historical and geographical facts of the First Temple period either. The fact is that there was a port (or ports) named Tarshish in the Mediterranean basin, not on the Red Sea coast, where Ezion-geber was located (near modern Elat), from Jehoshaphat wanted to set sail to Tarshish, according to the Chronicler. That Tarshish was on the Mediterranean coast is clear from the words of Esarhaddon, king of Assyria:

 

šarranimeš ša qabal tamtim kalîšunu ultu māt Iadanna māt
Iaman adi māt Tarsisi ana šēpeya iknušu

 

all the kings living on the sea, from Iadanan [= Cyprus] and
Greece to Tarshish, surrendered at my feet.

 

The narrative about the prophet Jonah, who fled from the Lord, also says, “Then he went down to Jaffa and found a boast sailing for Tarshish” (Jonah 1:3). The Table of Nations in Gen 10:4-5 (which the Chronicler copied into his work: 1 Chr 1:7!) lists Tarshish with the other descendants of Javan, who were Elishah (= Cyprus), Kittim, and Dodanim.

 

Source: Isaac Kalimi, The Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History in Chronicles (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2005), 393-96

Blog Archive