Blaz0ej S0trba, «hn#$w#$ of the Canticle», Vol. 85 (2004) 475-502
The term hn#$w#$ is revisited
primarily in the Canticle of Solomon. The most ancient translation –– "lily" ––
of this flower though questioned in recent decades is still widely used. The
LXX’s rendering kri/non is examined and found as the
best translation for the lexeme N#$w#$ –– meaning
"lotus" –– being an Egyptian loan word. This translation fits to the OT
references better than "lily". The textual employment of
hn#$w#$ in the poetry of the Canticle is a chief and commanding proof for
"lotus". The "lily" translation for both hn#$w#$
and kri/non for the majority of the OT cases is seen
as incorrect since it does not pay due attention to the literary and historical
context of the Canticle.
of the Canticle 485
hnvwv
III. The usage of (h)nvwv in its own context
If then the lexeme ˆvwv is of Egyptian origin, we can assume that
not only the morpheme but also its meaning –– lotus or rose of the
sea (50) –– comes from the Egyptian language. I hope to show in the
following examination that this assumption is more reasonable than
the common translation “lilyâ€. The scholarly opinions are quite
unanimous about the understanding of ˆv/v/ˆvWv/hnvwv when employed
in the construction of the Solomon’s Temple. When hnvwv/µynvwv appear
in the flower imagery phrases the agreement falls apart and the lily
versus lotus tension takes over. In the case of the superscriptions of
Psalms the scholarship is in an unknown area.
First, I present the evidence of the lexeme ˆvwv regarding the
Temple which is the least debated and the most eloquent. Secondly,
the examination of the term hnvwv and its plural form µynvwv is the core
both of this chapter and of this essay. A debated usage of this lexeme
in the flower imagery of the Canticle with the support of a single
occurrence in Hosea will become a corner stone of the understanding
of this term. However, this inspection does not solve the enigma of the
usage of this lexeme in Psalms.
1. The capitals and the basin in the Temple
In the construction of the Temple by Solomon according to 1 Kgs
7,19a.22a, the capitals which were put upon the pillars of the Temple
had the “form of πûπan†ˆv'Wv hce[}m' (1 Kgs 7,19a.22a). The exterior
details of this work remain obscure until now (51).
The brim of the sea (basin) of the cast metal was shaped like the
brim of the cup, “(like) the flower of πôπan†ˆv;/v jr"P,, 7,26. The
parallel version in 2 Chr 4,5 has the feminine form “(like) the flower
πôπannah†hN:v'/v jr"P. M. Noth had already suggested that the exterior
,
shape of the basin was like the flower of the open lotus (52). These are
the only instances of hnvwv/krivnon in which some recent translations
read “lotus†and not “lilyâ€.
Before running into any kind of misunderstanding about my
consideration regarding the first chapters of 1 Kgs I want to make
explicit that I am not arguing for historical relations between Israel
(50) KEEL, Hohelied, 79-80.
(51) Cf. M. GÖRG, „Zur Dekoration der Tempelsäulen“, BN 13 (1980) 17-20.
(52) M. NOTH, Könige (BKAT 9/1; Neukirchen 1968) 155.