Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Synoptic-L] Marcus: Mark v2

Expand Messages
  • E Bruce Brooks
    Karel, The James nonsense is nothing very profound, and in any case it was already explained in my note as quoted. But here is another explanation, since it
    Message 1 of 9 , Apr 13, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Karel,

      The "James nonsense" is nothing very profound, and in any case it was
      already explained in my note as quoted. But here is another explanation,
      since it was asked for.

      Where the Greek text of the NT has IAKWB or IAKWBOS, Continental scholars
      render as we might expect (eg, Dibelius, "Der Brief des Jakobus"). Anglo
      scholars invariably substitute "James." But only in the NT; when they are
      translating or discussing the OT, Bible readers instead encounter "Jacob."
      This business of de-Judaizing the NT has long been obsolete, especially in
      light of recent trends to restore Jewishness to Jesus (eg, Crossan, "The
      Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant"). So far so
      good. As for Jesus's brother, by way of tidying up the subject generally, it
      would be welcome if someone would take the first move in the right
      direction. Marcus in his preface to v1 notes the need to do so (articulated
      by David Noel Freedman - I am still paraphrasing my original note), but does
      not come up with sufficient nerve to follow through. Not that he would do so
      in the gap between his v1 and v2, but his v1 was disappointing in this
      regard.

      Perhaps, as I earlier suggested, it needs an initiative from on high. The
      English Queen, who as far as I am aware (and compared to Henry VIII) has so
      far done very little in support of scholarship, might rename a highly
      visible London entity, which in fact belongs to her, so that she can do with
      it as she likes, as "the Court of Saint Jacob." Thus emboldened, and with
      royal precedent and favor doing their bit, we might yet see something from
      the rank and file of the learned but timid.

      The roster of Jesus's brothers is an interesting one, and certainly implies
      a strongly patriarchal and nationalistic family. Jacob, Joseph, Simon,
      Judas. Half of these names, here and/or elsewhere (eg, "Epistle of Jude"),
      and their important historical significance, are systematically masked for
      the readers of English translations. I don't believe in keeping such
      information concealed within the Guild of the Greeked. I believe in letting
      it out. The public mind would need less correcting if it had been better
      supplied in the first place.

      Bruce

      E Bruce Brooks
      Warring States Project
      University of Massachusetts at Amherst
    • Karel Hanhart
      Thanks Bruce. My problem has been cleared up by your response.. Karel ... From: E Bruce Brooks To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 12:37
      Message 2 of 9 , Apr 13, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks Bruce. My problem has been cleared up by your response..

        Karel
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: E Bruce Brooks
        To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 12:37 PM
        Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Marcus: Mark v2





        Karel,

        The "James nonsense" is nothing very profound, and in any case it was
        already explained in my note as quoted. But here is another explanation,
        since it was asked for.

        Where the Greek text of the NT has IAKWB or IAKWBOS, Continental scholars
        render as we might expect (eg, Dibelius, "Der Brief des Jakobus"). Anglo
        scholars invariably substitute "James." But only in the NT; when they are
        translating or discussing the OT, Bible readers instead encounter "Jacob."
        This business of de-Judaizing the NT has long been obsolete, especially in
        light of recent trends to restore Jewishness to Jesus (eg, Crossan, "The
        Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant"). So far so
        good. As for Jesus's brother, by way of tidying up the subject generally, it
        would be welcome if someone would take the first move in the right
        direction. Marcus in his preface to v1 notes the need to do so (articulated
        by David Noel Freedman - I am still paraphrasing my original note), but does
        not come up with sufficient nerve to follow through. Not that he would do so
        in the gap between his v1 and v2, but his v1 was disappointing in this
        regard.

        Perhaps, as I earlier suggested, it needs an initiative from on high. The
        English Queen, who as far as I am aware (and compared to Henry VIII) has so
        far done very little in support of scholarship, might rename a highly
        visible London entity, which in fact belongs to her, so that she can do with
        it as she likes, as "the Court of Saint Jacob." Thus emboldened, and with
        royal precedent and favor doing their bit, we might yet see something from
        the rank and file of the learned but timid.

        The roster of Jesus's brothers is an interesting one, and certainly implies
        a strongly patriarchal and nationalistic family. Jacob, Joseph, Simon,
        Judas. Half of these names, here and/or elsewhere (eg, "Epistle of Jude"),
        and their important historical significance, are systematically masked for
        the readers of English translations. I don't believe in keeping such
        information concealed within the Guild of the Greeked. I believe in letting
        it out. The public mind would need less correcting if it had been better
        supplied in the first place.

        Bruce

        E Bruce Brooks
        Warring States Project
        University of Massachusetts at Amherst





        --
        I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
        We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
        SPAMfighter has removed 612 of my spam emails to date.
        Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len

        The Professional version does not have this message


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Jack Kilmon
        ... From: E Bruce Brooks To: Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 5:37 AM Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Marcus:
        Message 3 of 9 , Apr 13, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "E Bruce Brooks" <brooks@...>
          To: <Synoptic@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 5:37 AM
          Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Marcus: Mark v2


          > Karel,
          >
          > The "James nonsense" is nothing very profound, and in any case it was
          > already explained in my note as quoted. But here is another explanation,
          > since it was asked for.
          >
          > Where the Greek text of the NT has IAKWB or IAKWBOS, Continental scholars
          > render as we might expect (eg, Dibelius, "Der Brief des Jakobus"). Anglo
          > scholars invariably substitute "James." But only in the NT; when they are
          > translating or discussing the OT, Bible readers instead encounter "Jacob."
          > This business of de-Judaizing the NT has long been obsolete, especially in
          > light of recent trends to restore Jewishness to Jesus (eg, Crossan, "The
          > Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant"). So far so
          > good. As for Jesus's brother, by way of tidying up the subject generally,
          > it
          > would be welcome if someone would take the first move in the right
          > direction. Marcus in his preface to v1 notes the need to do so
          > (articulated
          > by David Noel Freedman - I am still paraphrasing my original note), but
          > does
          > not come up with sufficient nerve to follow through. Not that he would do
          > so
          > in the gap between his v1 and v2, but his v1 was disappointing in this
          > regard.
          >
          > Perhaps, as I earlier suggested, it needs an initiative from on high. The
          > English Queen, who as far as I am aware (and compared to Henry VIII) has
          > so
          > far done very little in support of scholarship, might rename a highly
          > visible London entity, which in fact belongs to her, so that she can do
          > with
          > it as she likes, as "the Court of Saint Jacob." Thus emboldened, and with
          > royal precedent and favor doing their bit, we might yet see something from
          > the rank and file of the learned but timid.
          >
          > The roster of Jesus's brothers is an interesting one, and certainly
          > implies
          > a strongly patriarchal and nationalistic family. Jacob, Joseph, Simon,
          > Judas. Half of these names, here and/or elsewhere (eg, "Epistle of Jude"),
          > and their important historical significance, are systematically masked for
          > the readers of English translations. I don't believe in keeping such
          > information concealed within the Guild of the Greeked. I believe in
          > letting
          > it out. The public mind would need less correcting if it had been better
          > supplied in the first place.
          >
          > Bruce
          >
          > E Bruce Brooks
          > Warring States Project
          > University of Massachusetts at Amherst


          Even "Jacob" is an English transliteration and mispronounciation of the
          Hebrew name Ya'qub. It was the single most popular name in the late 2nd
          temple period and Yahosef (Joseph) was the second. Yeshua was the sixth and
          in much the same manner as "James"being considered nonsense, you would have
          to include "Jesus" (DJEE-zus).

          Ya'qub (Yod-alef-qop-waw-beyt) was in Greek transliteration IAKOB (with the
          masculin -OS
          ending), hence IAKOBOS. The Hebrew/Aramaic YOD is represented in Greek by
          IOTA and the "J" sound for YOD came to Middle English from French where the
          phoneme exampled in "Jacques" was represented in English by the "DJ" sound.
          YAqub was therefore represented in English as Jacob (DJAYcub) but the
          trajectory of the Greek IAKOBOS passed through Old, Middle and Late Latin
          into European Celtic and wound up transliterating M for the B from Saxon
          use. So IACOBO, IAKOMO, IAGO and IAMES became JAMNES in French ("leg"
          refering to Esau's heel) and Middle English and into the KJV as JAMES.

          Now let's talk about James' brother, Jesus:

          In pre-exilic times, the name Yehoshua consisted of two roots. The first,
          yeho, is the theophoric referring to God. The second, shua, means "help"
          and the name meant, "Whose help is God." In 2nd temple times, it became a
          practice NOT to use full theophorics to prevent accidentally voicing the
          name of God so the theophorics were truncated and Yehoshua became Y'shua.
          In the Galilee, Aramaic was pronounced differently and Galileans dropped
          their alefs and ayins like Cockney English drop their H's. Jesus' Galilean
          friends would have called him Yeshu. Therefore, in Judea and formally, his
          name was Yeshua, yehSHOO-ah, and in the Galilee his name was pronounced
          Yeshu, pronounced YEHshoo. Because of strong Hellenistic influence in
          Palestine at the time, some Jews with the name of Yeshua used a Greek
          transliteration of the name. Yeshua ben Sirach was one of them who went by
          the name IESOUS, pronounced YAYsoos. Hence, Yeshua was rendered IHSOUS. Iota
          for yod, eta for the tsere voice, sigma for shin since Greek had no "sh" and
          the masculine Greek ending. The Greek was pronouced YAYsoos and so it was
          used in the Septuagint and Greek texts of the NT. The Latin IESVS followed
          the Greek, pronounced the same way YAYsoos. Now, what about that pesky "J?"
          The letter J was merely the CAPITAL i. It was pronounced as i and Isabel
          was spelled Jsabel and Iesus was spelled Jesus. We owe the separation of J
          and I to the French humanist Pierre de la Ramee in the 16th century and the
          sound of "DJ" to Middle French so that by the time the KJV came about,
          YAYsoos had become JAYsoos had become DJEEzus....or "Jesus."

          Accordingly the names of Jesus' brothers were Ya'qub, Yoses/f (Yahosef),
          Yehudah, Shymeon.

          I don't think the use of Jesus for Yeshua, James or Jakob for Ya'qub, Joseph
          for Yahosef, Jude for Yehudah or Simon for Shymeon or even Nebuchadnezzar
          for Nabu-Kudurri-Usur are "nonsense" because they are transliterated from
          the original language to modern languages.

          It would be literary chaos to try to use names of people or places in their
          original languages in scriptures, histories, etc., wouldn't you think?

          Jack

          Jack Kilmon
          San Antonio, TX
        • E Bruce Brooks
          To: Synoptic In Response To: Jack Kilmon On: Jacob From: Bruce [I had recommended that the rendering of original Jacob by James in the NT (but not in the
          Message 4 of 9 , Apr 13, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            To: Synoptic
            In Response To: Jack Kilmon
            On: Jacob
            From: Bruce

            [I had recommended that the rendering of original "Jacob" by "James" in the
            NT (but not in the OT) in the Anglophone world is an outmoded custom and
            should stop; I appealed to the Queen to intervene].

            Jack: Even "Jacob" is an English transliteration and mispronunciation of the
            Hebrew name Ya'qub.

            Bruce: Right. But short of teaching the whole populace Hebrew (I well
            remember when the little daughter of a fellow grad student, just returned
            from Taiwan, lined up her little playmates and undertook to drill them in
            Chinese - for about three days), I will take what I can get. If I can in
            fact get it. Here is what I think I can get:

            There was a movement a while back, among the Hellenists (classical variety),
            to render the names in the Iliad in a way more faithful to the Greek. This
            led to some very intimidating formations. In effect, the readers were being
            asked to absorb that part of the text in unmediated Greek. It is also not
            difficult to see why a practical translator would feel safer in writing Hera
            than Here. All this eventually brought on a relaxing of the original
            position. This restored the more familiar if abraded versions of Greek
            names, but continued to reject the Latin translation equivalents (in their
            Anglicized form), eg Ulysses ( < Lt Ulixes) for Odysseus. The cultural
            equilibrium point, so to speak, the best reachable deal between translator
            and reader, seems to me well represented by Lattimore's Iliad translation;
            see his headnote at p497. I would like to see the Lattimore Equilibrium
            reached in other areas also.

            So recommended.

            Bruce

            E Bruce Brooks
            Warring States Project
            University of Massachusetts at Amherst

            By the way, who has an in at Buckingham? Or more exactly at St James's (soon
            to be renamed St Jacob's)? I think the guy I want is the Palace Master of
            Ceremonies, but like one of Mark Twain's heroes, I can also accept an inside
            track to his cousin, or his valet, or his best friend on pub evenings.

            The present ruling house is of German origin, and an appeal to the precedent
            of German scholarship (I mention again the model of Dibelius, Der Brief des
            Jakobus) ought sooner or later to be cogent. That or money, but I am
            reserving money as the ultimate last resort.
          • Jack Kilmon
            ... From: E Bruce Brooks To: Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 11:19 PM Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Marcus:
            Message 5 of 9 , Apr 14, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "E Bruce Brooks" <brooks@...>
              To: <Synoptic@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 11:19 PM
              Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Marcus: Mark v2


              > To: Synoptic
              > In Response To: Jack Kilmon
              > On: Jacob
              > From: Bruce
              >
              > [I had recommended that the rendering of original "Jacob" by "James" in
              > the
              > NT (but not in the OT) in the Anglophone world is an outmoded custom and
              > should stop; I appealed to the Queen to intervene].
              >
              > Jack: Even "Jacob" is an English transliteration and mispronunciation of
              > the
              > Hebrew name Ya'qub.
              >
              > Bruce: Right. But short of teaching the whole populace Hebrew (I well
              > remember when the little daughter of a fellow grad student, just returned
              > from Taiwan, lined up her little playmates and undertook to drill them in
              > Chinese - for about three days), I will take what I can get. If I can in
              > fact get it. Here is what I think I can get:
              >
              > There was a movement a while back, among the Hellenists (classical
              > variety),
              > to render the names in the Iliad in a way more faithful to the Greek. This
              > led to some very intimidating formations. In effect, the readers were
              > being
              > asked to absorb that part of the text in unmediated Greek. It is also not
              > difficult to see why a practical translator would feel safer in writing
              > Hera
              > than Here. All this eventually brought on a relaxing of the original
              > position. This restored the more familiar if abraded versions of Greek
              > names, but continued to reject the Latin translation equivalents (in their
              > Anglicized form), eg Ulysses ( < Lt Ulixes) for Odysseus. The cultural
              > equilibrium point, so to speak, the best reachable deal between translator
              > and reader, seems to me well represented by Lattimore's Iliad translation;
              > see his headnote at p497. I would like to see the Lattimore Equilibrium
              > reached in other areas also.
              >
              > So recommended.
              >
              > Bruce
              >
              > E Bruce Brooks
              > Warring States Project
              > University of Massachusetts at Amherst
              >
              > By the way, who has an in at Buckingham? Or more exactly at St James's
              > (soon
              > to be renamed St Jacob's)? I think the guy I want is the Palace Master of
              > Ceremonies, but like one of Mark Twain's heroes, I can also accept an
              > inside
              > track to his cousin, or his valet, or his best friend on pub evenings.
              >
              > The present ruling house is of German origin, and an appeal to the
              > precedent
              > of German scholarship (I mention again the model of Dibelius, Der Brief
              > des
              > Jakobus) ought sooner or later to be cogent. That or money, but I am
              > reserving money as the ultimate last resort.


              To repeat the etymological trajectory, the Hebrew name Yaqub
              (Yod-ayin-qop-beyt) is IAKWBOS in Greek, IACOBUS inLatin and IACOMUS in Late
              Latin which gave to OLD FRENCH two variants, JAMES and JACQUES. Since
              Middle Englishspeakers were heavily influenced by Norman French, JAMES was
              preferred and first used in English in 1148 and used in the Wycliffe Bible
              (1382-1395) as well as the Tyndale (1534) and the King James Version (1611).
              It was not used in the KJV to suck up to James VI/I but it was the KJV that
              popularized the name. You have about 700 years of English convention behind
              the use of James in much the same as JOHN for the Hebrew Yehohanan. I would
              not bet the mayonnaise farm that the Court of St. James will become
              the"Sanhedrin of Reb Jakob" any time soon.

              Jack
            • Jack Kilmon
              ... From: E Bruce Brooks To: Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 11:19 PM Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Marcus:
              Message 6 of 9 , Apr 14, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "E Bruce Brooks" <brooks@...>
                To: <Synoptic@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 11:19 PM
                Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Marcus: Mark v2


                > To: Synoptic
                > In Response To: Jack Kilmon
                > On: Jacob
                > From: Bruce
                >
                > [I had recommended that the rendering of original "Jacob" by "James" in
                > the
                > NT (but not in the OT) in the Anglophone world is an outmoded custom and
                > should stop; I appealed to the Queen to intervene].
                >
                > Jack: Even "Jacob" is an English transliteration and mispronunciation of
                > the
                > Hebrew name Ya'qub.
                >
                > Bruce: Right. But short of teaching the whole populace Hebrew (I well
                > remember when the little daughter of a fellow grad student, just returned
                > from Taiwan, lined up her little playmates and undertook to drill them in
                > Chinese - for about three days), I will take what I can get. If I can in
                > fact get it. Here is what I think I can get:
                >
                > There was a movement a while back, among the Hellenists (classical
                > variety),
                > to render the names in the Iliad in a way more faithful to the Greek. This
                > led to some very intimidating formations. In effect, the readers were
                > being
                > asked to absorb that part of the text in unmediated Greek. It is also not
                > difficult to see why a practical translator would feel safer in writing
                > Hera
                > than Here. All this eventually brought on a relaxing of the original
                > position. This restored the more familiar if abraded versions of Greek
                > names, but continued to reject the Latin translation equivalents (in their
                > Anglicized form), eg Ulysses ( < Lt Ulixes) for Odysseus. The cultural
                > equilibrium point, so to speak, the best reachable deal between translator
                > and reader, seems to me well represented by Lattimore's Iliad translation;
                > see his headnote at p497. I would like to see the Lattimore Equilibrium
                > reached in other areas also.
                >
                > So recommended.
                >
                > Bruce
                >
                > E Bruce Brooks
                > Warring States Project
                > University of Massachusetts at Amherst
                >
                > By the way, who has an in at Buckingham? Or more exactly at St James's
                > (soon
                > to be renamed St Jacob's)? I think the guy I want is the Palace Master of
                > Ceremonies, but like one of Mark Twain's heroes, I can also accept an
                > inside
                > track to his cousin, or his valet, or his best friend on pub evenings.
                >
                > The present ruling house is of German origin, and an appeal to the
                > precedent
                > of German scholarship (I mention again the model of Dibelius, Der Brief
                > des
                > Jakobus) ought sooner or later to be cogent. That or money, but I am
                > reserving money as the ultimate last resort.

                To repeat the etymological trajectory, the Hebrew name Yaqub
                (Yod-ayin-qop-beyt) is IAKWBOS in Greek, IACOBUS inLatin and IACOMUS in Late
                Latin which gave to OLD FRENCH two variants, JAMES and JACQUES. Since
                Middle Englishspeakers were heavily influenced by Norman French, JAMES was
                preferred and first used in English in 1148 and used in the Wycliffe Bible
                (1382-1395) as well as the Tyndale (1534) and the King James Version (1611).
                It was not used in the KJV to suck up to James VI/I but it was the KJV that
                popularized the name. You have about 700 years of English convention behind
                the use of James in much the same as JOHN for the Hebrew Yehohanan. I would
                not bet the mayonnaise farm that the Court of St. James will become
                the"Sanhedrin of Reb Jakob" any time soon.

                Jack

                Jack Kilmon
                San Antonio, TX
              • David Mealand
                The exchange on biblical names has thrown up some interesting material on a) the political significance of the names of Jesus brothers and their relative
                Message 7 of 9 , Apr 15, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  The exchange on biblical names has
                  thrown up some interesting material
                  on a) the political significance
                  of the names of Jesus' brothers and
                  their relative frequencies in the
                  2nd Temple period and
                  on b) the older forms of several names and
                  their journey via Greek into English
                  Biblical translations.

                  I would be grateful if Bruce & Jack
                  could supply one or two specific
                  references to any published items
                  which may have informed either a) or b).
                  I am not requesting an exhaustive list
                  but just wish to know if the points made
                  are readily accessible in something
                  in print that can be cited when needed.

                  David M.


                  ---------
                  David Mealand (University of Edinburgh)





                  ------

                  --
                  The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
                  Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.