Abstract
According to the Bible, the categorisation of nature is as old as humankind (Gen 2.19-20). The modern binominal nomenclature system was pioneered by Carl Linnaeus and is now universally used. Translators should be encouraged to use these names to identify terms in their receptor languages. However, it is not foolproof, and there is some evidence within the biblical texts of lexical items being identifiable with a plurality of names. It is these examples that are outlined here.
Adam
Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field. (Gen 2.19-20 NIV)
The second chapter of the Bible records that the first man Adam named the living creatures that he could see around him. What names he assigned to each creature we know not, but it involved three categories: (1) domestic animals (behemah “livestock”), (2) birds, and (3) wild animals (hayyat hassadeh “beasts of the field”). Whether this categorisation was extended to other living organisms such as fish, insects, plants, and trees we also do not know.
Linnaeus
The modern botanical classification system stems from the work of Carl Linnaeus (1707–1778), professor of medicine at Uppsala University, Sweden. Each species was given a double Latin name, with the first element indicating the genus and the second the species. This “binominal nomenclature” has been adopted by scientists worldwide. Take, for example, the genus Allium, the so-called alliaceous plants, with the varying species Allium porrum (leek), Allium cepa (onion), and Allium sativum (garlic)—tasty vegetables that the Israelites wandering in the Sinai desert remembered with fondness from their years in Egypt (Num 11.5).
Lexicography
One would think that if a Hebrew or Greek dictionary offers a binominal Linnaean name for any given biblical species, it should be straightforward to find an equivalent in any receptor language. When working with translation teams I sometimes ask them to google the binominal Linnaean name and identify any resulting images in their own language. Such a method generally works, but humankind in general, ancient or modern, is not trained in Linnaean nomenclature, so it is unrealistic to expect it to work in all cases. It should also be remembered that the Bible, especially the Hebrew Bible, was written over many centuries and in different locations, so it is again unrealistic to expect total unanimity of usage.
For non-specialists the differences of definition that one sometimes encounters in the standard Hebrew dictionaries can be baffling. But help is at hand! Zohary and Hepper are scholars who have pioneered the field of the flora of the Bible. Their work is often cited in the handbook Plants and Trees in the Bible (Koops 2012, available in the Bible translation software ParaTExt). The companion volume, Animals in the Bible (Hope 2005, also in ParaTExt), seems to make less use of the pioneering scholars in that field, such as Bodenheimer and Cansdale, but is useful all the same. This brief article lists some examples where items of biblical flora and fauna would appear to be identifiable with a plurality of Linnaean names. The following examples should be noted.
Flora
There are a number of examples where a Hebrew word seems to be used for more than one species of flora. Thus:
Heb. ’erez has traditionally been rendered “cedar (of Lebanon)” = Cedrus libani (HALOT, with reservation, noting that cedar trunks are not sufficiently long for building purposes). This prince of trees, famed for its aromatic and durable wood, was used most famously in the construction of Solomon’s temple (1 Kgs 6.15-18) and palace (1 Kgs 7.2, 3, 7, 11, 12). Given the wood’s aromatic properties required for the rituals of Lev 14.4-6, 49-52, and Num 19.6, it may be that resinous twigs of some smaller type of conifer are in view there. Both Zohary and Hepper suggest Juniperus phoenicia “Phoenician juniper,” also known as “Phoenician cedar” (Hepper 1992, 64a; Zohary 1982, 105a; see also DCH; Koops 2012, §1.5).
Heb. berosh is sometimes also rendered Juniperus phoenicia “juniper” (so HALOT). As I argued in an earlier issue of The Bible Translator (Lawrence 2004), the wide range of contexts in which it was used may suggest a broader meaning such as “conifer” or “evergreen.”
Heb. hatsir is Allium porrum “leek” in Num 11.5 (HALOT), but “grass” or “reed” elsewhere (HALOT; DCH; Zohary 1982, 95). Hepper more specifically advances Allium kurrat “salad leek” for Num 11.5 (1992, 127c).
Heb. libneh, from the root lbn “white,” is a tree mentioned in Gen 30.37 and Hos 4.13; HALOT glosses the word as “storax-tree” and identifies it as Styrax officinalis, but given the different geographical locations of these two references, Zohary would seem to be correct in distinguishing two species: Styrax officinalis in Gen 30.37 and Populus alba “white poplar” in Hos 4.13 (1982, 118, 132; Koops 2012, §1.22).
Heb. ‘aravah in the Babylonian context of Ps 137.1 would appear to be Populus euphratica “Euphrates poplar” (Hepper 1992, 72b; Koops 2012, §1.26; Zohary 1982, 131a), but “willow” elsewhere (Zohary 1982, 131a). It should be noted that the foliage of the two trees is similar (Zohary 1982, 131a), with the Euphrates poplar producing two different kinds of leaves, of which the younger shoots are narrow like the willow (Koops 2012, §1.26). Hepper thinks that ‘aravah in Lev 23.40 is Nerium oleander “oleander” (1992, 73a).
Heb. tappuah is generally Malus domestica “apple,” but this is questioned in Prov 25.11, where it is modified by zahav “gold.” Long ago Toy suggested other fruits in this reference such as the “apricot,” “quince,” “citron,” or “orange” (1899, 462). “Apricot” even made it into NEB, but was replaced by “apple” in REB. “Quince” was taken up as a suggestion by Kidner (1964, 158), but it should be noted that apples are by far the best attested of these fruits in the Old Testament period.
A papyrus from the reign of the Egyptian king Ramesses II (1279–1213 B.C.) discloses that the fields of the Delta were full of tph “apples” (Zohary 1982, 70). Excavations of a nine-century layer at Kadesh Barnea in Sinai have revealed carbonised apples (Hepper 1992, 118), whereas apricots, which originated in China, appear to have only reached the Roman world following a military campaign in Armenia in A.D. 63 (Hünemörder 2002, 525) and oranges were only imported from India in the tenth century A.D. (Hünemörder 2003, 370).
On occasion there is also a difference between the Old and New Testaments. Thus:
“Aloes” occurs in both the Old and New Testaments, but the plants in question are two different species. In the Old Testament (Num 24.6; Ps 45.8; Prov 7.17; Song 4.14), Heb. ’ahalot (variant ’ahalim) is identified as either Aloexyllon agallochum “eaglewood” or Aquilaria agallocha “lign aloes” (HALOT). But in John 19.39-40, Gk. aloē “aloes” is a different plant, Aloe vera (LSJ; BDAG; Hepper 1992, 152c; Koops 2012, §4.2.1; Zohary 1982, 204a).
Similarly “hyssop” may be different in both testaments. Heb. ’ezov is Origanum maru (DCH) or now more correctly Origanum syriacum (HALOT; Hepper 1992, 140b; Zohary 1982, 96a), with 1 Kgs 4.33 “the ’ezov that grows out of walls” possibly being Capparis spinosa or “caper” (Hepper 1992, 50b). It is argued that Gk. hyssōpos “hyssop” in John 19.29, where a long stalk is required to support a sponge soaked in wine vinegar, may be Sorghum vulgare (Walker 1957, 100).
Fauna
Similar lexical plurality can also be seen in the bird and animal kingdoms.
Heb. nesher is generally a word for “eagle,” arguably the most distinguished bird of antiquity. However, in Mic 1.16 where baldness is mentioned, Gyps fulvus “(Griffon) vulture” would seem to be in view (Cansdale 1970, 142). Job 39.27-28 better describes a typical nesting site of the vulture (Cansdale 1970, 144). Similarly, in Prov 30.17 the context of feeding on carrion better fits the “vulture.” Consequently, HALOT and DCH list both “eagle” and “vulture” in their definitions of nesher. A similar distinction seems also to have been carried through to the New Testament. In Matt 24.28 the Gk. aetos can also be read “vulture” (BDAG).
Heb. tinshemet in Lev 11.18 || Deut 14.6 is a bird, perhaps “some kind of owl” (so HALOT, NIV, TNIV, NASB, NEB, REB, ESV; RSV and NRSV “water hen” is somewhat different). The same word occurs in a different context in Lev 11.30, where it is “a kind of lizard” (HALOT), perhaps more exactly, “chameleon” (DCH), as in all English versions.
Heb. namer is generally “leopard” Felis pardus (HALOT); however, given the need to keep up pace in pursuit of a quarry in Hab 1.8 the “cheetah” may perhaps be preferred there (Cansdale 1970, 113; Hope 2005, §2.23).
Among the flora and fauna discussed in this section, it is perhaps worth remarking that both ’erez “cedar” and nesher “eagle,” which both seem to have had special status as the most prestigious items in their lexical class, also had wider meaning.
Conclusion
As we have seen, according to the book of Genesis, the naming and categorisation of the natural world can be traced to the very first man. Carl Linnaeus pioneered the universally used modern system. Lexicographers and translators need to be aware of this, but, as I hope I have been able to demonstrate, they should also be aware of the limitations outlined above.
Footnotes
Abbreviations
BDAG Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Edited by W. Bauer, F. W. Danker, W. F. Arndt, and F. W. Gingrich. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.
DCH Dictionary of Classical Hebrew. Edited by David J. A. Clines. 8 vols. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press and Sheffield Phoenix Press, 1993–2011.
ESV English Standard Version
HALOT The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Edited by Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner. 4 vols. Leiden: Brill, 2001.
LSJ A Greek-English Lexicon. Edited by H. G. Liddell, R. Scott, and H. S. Jones. 9th ed. with revised supplement. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
NASB New American Standard Bible
NEB New English Bible
NIV New International Version
NRSV New Revised Standard Version
REB Revised English Bible
RSV Revised Standard Version
TNIV Today’s New International Version