Hillel I. Newman, «A Hippodrome on the Road to Ephrath», Vol. 86 (2005) 213-228
LXX to Gen 48,7 refers to a hippodrome in the vicinity of
Rachel’s Tomb. This cannot be satisfactorily explained as an exegetical creation
of the translator’s imagination and probably refers to a genuine structure. This
is also true of the stadium or hippodrome mentioned in Tg. Onq. to Gen
14,17, as the meeting place of Abram, the king of Sodom, and Melchizedek. Since
1QapGen locates the same meeting in the Valley of Beth Hakerem, which should be
identified as the valley between Ramat Rahel and Bethlehem, it is reasonable to
assume that both versions refer to the same hippodrome. There is no textual
justification for assuming a late interpolation in LXX and no geographical or
archeological justification for explaining these passages as allusions to a
Herodian hippodrome. LXX may attest to a case of profound Hellenistic influence
in Judea already under Ptolemaic rule.
214 Hillel I. Newman
which is Bethlehemâ€. What is the source of this oddity, a hippodrome
on the road to Ephrath?
Juxtaposing MT and LXX, we note the difficulty of establishing a
one-to-one correspondence of sense units when we come to the curious
hippodrome. To facilitate the comparison let us break up the verse as
follows (3):
(a) MT: ˆ[nk ≈rab ljr yl[ htm ˆdpm yabb ynaw
LXX: ejgw; dev hJnivka hjrcovmhn ejk Mesopotamiva" th'" Suriva"
apeqanen ∆Rach;l hJ mhvthr sou ejn gh'" Canavan
jv
(b) MT: htrpa abl ≈ra trbk dw[b ˚rdb
LXX: ejggivzontov" mou kata; to;n iJppovdromon cabraqa; th'" gh'" tou'
elqein ∆Efravqa
j '
(c) MT: µjl tyb awh trpa ˚rdb µç hrbqaw
LXX: kai; katwvruxa aujth;n ejn th/' oJdw/' tou' iJppodrovmou au{th ejstivn
Bhqleem
v
While “hippodrome†in (c) seems to come in place of “Ephrathâ€,
no such correspondence is found in (b). The situation is complicated
by the fact that MT of Gen 35,16.19 is reminiscent of the Hebrew in
(b) and (c), but LXX there lacks any reference to a hippodrome (4).
Jerome was aware of the problem but had to concede that he had no
idea what possessed the translators of LXX to render the verse as they
did (5). Modern interpreters have not fared much better. Some take the
hippodrome of LXX in (b) to be a translation of Hebrew trbk (in
which case it is seen as a doublet of the transliteration cabraqa),
others regard it as coming in place of Ëšrdb (6). In either case, special
(3) I deliberately deviate from the Masoretic division at the end of (a).
(4) Manuscript variants mentioning the hippodrome are patently secondary.
See J.W. WEVERS, Genesis (Septuaginta. Vetus Testamentum Graecum 1;
Göttingen 1974) 335-336. The Jewish historian Demetrius (quoted by Eusebius,
Praeparatio evangelica 9.21.10) apparently had the LXX of Gen 35,16 before
him when he wrote, in the latter part of the third century BCE, of the birth of
Benjamin and the death of Rachel. He makes no mention of a hippodrome. See E.
BICKERMAN, “Some Notes on the Transmission of the Septuagintâ€, Studies in
Jewish and Christian History (AGJU 9; Leiden 1976) I, 142; C.R. HOLLADAY,
Fragments from Hellenistic Jewish Authors (SBLTT 20. Pseudepigrapha Series
10; Chico, CA 1983) I, 68-69.
(5) Hebraicae quaestiones in libro Geneseos to Gen 35,16-19, in S.
Hieronymi Presbyteri Opera. Pars I. Opera exegetica (CChrSL 72; Turnhout
1959) 43.
(6) See for example Z. FRANKEL, Ueber den Einfluss der palästinischen
Exegese auf die alexandrinische Hermeneutik (Leipzig 1831) 18; S. KRAUSS,
Talmudische Archäologie (Leipzig 1911) II, 392; VOGT, “Benjaminâ€, 30.