Skip to content

shebanq
ubs

מַפְתֵּחַ maptēaḥ – key

Semantic Fields: Utensils   
Author(s): M.D. Koster
First published: 2014-07-08
Last update: May 2025 (Marten van Dam)
Citation: M.D. Koster, מַפְתֵּחַ maptēaḥ – key,
               Semantics of Ancient Hebrew Database (sahd-online.com), 2014 (update: May 2025 (Marten van Dam)) (WORK IN PROGRESS)

Introduction

Grammatical type: noun masc.
Occurrences: 3x HB (0/2/1); 0x Sir; 0x Qum; 0x Inscr. (Total: 3)

  • Nebiim: Judg 3:25; Isa 22:22.
  • Ketubim: 1 Chron 9:27.

1. Root and Comparative Material

A.1 Root. מַפְתֵּחַ is a maqtēl-form1 of √פתח, ‘to open’, which is common in most Semitic languages.2 Below only relatively close correspondences are noted.
In Isa 22:22 the stat. cstr. is מַפְתֵּחַ, not מַפְתַּח, as would be expected (dissimilation?3). In TeNaKh it is masc.,4 but Rosenberg shows that in the Talmud5 it is sometimes fem. (mss. Ven. and Lowe, respectively).5
Other terms for closing instruments are בְּרִיחַ, ‘bar’, Deut 3:5, 1 Sam 23:7; Judg 16:3, Ps 147:13, Neh 3:3, 6, 13-15 (on gates); 1 Kgs 4:13 (bronze), Isa 45:2, Ps 107:16 (iron), etc. (mostly of wood7); further *מִנְעַל, ‘lock’, Deut 33:25+, and מַנְעוּל, ‘lock, bolt’, Song 5:5 (!), Neh 3:3, 6, 13-15+, both from the root נָעַל ‘to lock’.8

A.2 Akkadian. Even though the etymologically related verb petû is often used with doors and gates, its derivatives naptētu ‘key, small saw’ and naptû ‘part of a lock’ occur in lexical texts only.9 The normal word for ‘key’ in Akkadian is namzaqu.

A.3 Ugaritic. In a scribal exercise mptḫ ‘key’ occurs.10 In this text ḫ represents ḥ.

A.4 Postbiblical Hebrew. מפתח ‘key’.11

A.5 Jewish Aramaic. מפתח ‘key’.12

A.6 Classical Arabic. miftaḥ, miftāḥ ‘key, instrument for opening’.13

A.7 Modern South Arabic. Soqoṭri miftāḥ ‘key’;14 Mehri mȩftēḥ ‘key’;15 Jibbāli muftȩḥ ‘key’.16

A.7 Modern Palestinian Arabic. muftāḥ ‘key’.17

A.8 Ethiopic. Geez maftȩḥ ‘instrument for opening (key)’.18

A.9 Rabbinical literature. The Masada Hebrew text of Sir 42:6b runs ‘(be not ashamed of a seal to keep a foolish wife at home)’, מפתח רבות ידים ומקום ‘and of a key where there are many hands’.19
Isa 22:22 underlies the crucial (‘key’-)text Matt 16:19 and similar texts about binding and unbinding in the N.T. (see 6.2. Figurative Use).20
Apart from the citation in Rev 3:7, the ‘keys of Death and Hades’ are mentioned in Rev 1:18, and the ‘key of the (pit [φρέαρ] of the) Abyssos (‘bottomless pit’, RSV)’ in Rev 9:1, 20:1, cf. Hen 42 Rec B.21 See also Luke 11:52 ‘you have taken away the key of knowledge’.22 Three keys are reserved exclusively for God (or his messenger, who are one, m. Ber. V.5): that for rain (cf. Deut 28:12 ‘The Lord will open to you his good treasury, the heavens, etc.’ ; 1 Kgs 17:1; 18:1 [Elijah]: ‘when the heaven was shut up three years and six months’, Luke 4:25); that for birth (cf. Gen 30:22 [Rachel]); and that for raising from death (cf. 1 Kgs 17:17; Ezek 37:13).23
As for 1 Chron 9:27, Dalman quotes m. Tam. I.1: the elder priests slept in the heating room of the sanctuary with the keys of the inner temple court in their hands. The door of the temple was opened with golden keys.24
The lock on a front door belonged to the house and was sold together with it, but the key was kept with the furniture.25 The lock has a case (בית), with a bolt or bar (נגר), in which the key (מפתח) could be stuck (shoven?).26 The key has taps (חפים) and holes (נקבים); with these the pins of the case, that fitted in the corresponding holes of the bolt/bar could be removed, so that the door could be opened.27

2. Formal Characteristics

A.1 [Discussion will be added later.]

3. Syntagmatics

A.1 [Discussion will be added later.]

4. Ancient Versions

a. Septuagint (LXX) and other Greek versions (αʹ, σʹ, θʹ):

  • τὴν κλεῖδα ‘the key’: Judg 3:25.
  • ἐπὶ τῶν κλειδῶν (plur.!): 1 Chron 9:27.
  • As to Isa 22:22, a double translation has been preserved: καὶ δώσω τὴν δόξαν Δαυιδ αὐτῷ, ‘and I will give him the glory of David’, and καὶ δώσω τὴν κλεῖδα[ν] οἴκου Δαυιδ ‘and I will give him the key of the house of David’. Cod. B has the first, figurative interpretation of מַפְתֵּחַ as δόξα.28 In LXXB the first half of v. 22b, סֹגֵר וְאֵין וּפָתַח, has been rendered interpretatively too: καὶ ἄρξει, καὶ οὐκ ἔσται ὁ ἀντιλέγων (continued literally with καὶ κλείσει καὶ οὐκ ἔσται ὁ ἀνοίγων). LXXa, LXXA and others have the literal translation (with καὶ ἀνοίξει καὶ οὐκ ἔσται ὁ ἀποκείων in v. 22ba), or combinations of the figurative and the literal translation (see the editions of Swete, Rahlfs and Ziegler for further details). As the literal translation figures already in Rev 3:7, this interpretation has old claims too.

b. Peshitta (Pesh):

  • ʾqlydʾ ‘keys’: Judg 3:25; Isa 22:22 (with seyamē, thus plur.; in Judg 3:25 12a1fam omits the seyamē, thus opting for sing.; no variants in Isa 22:22).
  • Pesh Chron, which has a very ‘wild’ text in Syriac, substitutes ʿl tarʿʾ ‘over the gate’ for הַמַפְתֵּחַעַל־: 1 Chron 9:27.

c. Targum (Tg):

  • TgJ מפתחא ‘key’: Judg 3:25.
  • Tg בידיה דוד בית ושׁלטן מקדשׁא בית מפתח ואתין, ‘I will give the key of the sanctuary and the power of the house of David in his hand’: Isa 22:22. Like LXX, Tg has an interpretative translation. Possibly this reflects the royal priesthood of the Hasmonean era.29
  • אקלידיא (Greek loanword: ‘the keys’, plur., cf. LXX and Pesh): 1 Chron 9:27 in Sperber’s edition.

d. Vulgate (Vg):

  • clavem ‘key’: Judg 3:25; Isa 22:22.
  • aperirent ‘they opened’: 1 Chron 9:27, interpretatively.

5. Lexical/Semantic Fields

A.1 [Discussion will be added later.]

6. Exegesis

6.1 Literal Use

A.1 In the dramatic events of Judges 3:15-30 a key-role is played by the מַפְתֵּחַ. Many details of the story and of its scene of action remain uncertain, as the Hebrew is not always clear. King Eglon of Moab is murdered by the left-handed Benjaminite Ehud, in the roof chamber (עַלִיָּה; cf. 2 Sam 19:1 [18:33]) of his palace. He had ordered his servants out when Ehud hinted at a secret message (דְּבַר ־סֵתֶר), and had risen from his seat (כִּסֵּא) as Ehud announced a word of God (דְּבַר ־אֱלׂהִים) - thus presenting him with the opportunity to kill him with the sword hidden on his right thigh (vv. 19-21). Eglon’s fat (cf. v. 17b) closed over the blade (לַהַב) of Ehud’s sword and Ehud closed the doors of the roof chamber upon him as he went out into the gallery [?] (vv. 22-23; both times בְּעַד סָגַר) and he bolted <them> (וְנָעַל). He had gone out when the servants came in; as they saw the doors of the roof chamber bolted (נְעֻלׂות), they waited reverently, supposing that he was relieving himself (v. 24). Finally, when - after an embarrassing (עַד ־בּׂושׁ, cf. 2 Kgs 2:17; 8:11) period of waiting - he did not open the doors, they took the key and opened <them> (וַיִּפְתָּחוּ הַמַּפְתָּחַאֶת־ וַיִּקְחוּ), and found their master laying dead on the floor (v. 25) - but Ehud had escaped while they tarried (v. 26).

A.2 In connection with locking doors, which could be opened with a מַפְתֵּחַ, both סָגַר (‘to close, shut’) and נָעַל (‘to lock, bolt’, cf. 2 Sam 13:17-18) are used. The problem is: did Ehud lock the main entrance of the room from within and then escaped through a back-door,30 or did he just go out, closed and bolted the doors, thereupon facing the waiting servants who, still ignorant of his deed, let him go unimpeded? The latter seems the preferable interpretation of בְּעַד סָגַר, as it usually seems to imply going on, after closing the doors, in the same direction (e.g., when entering, Judg 9:51 and 2 Kgs 4:4-5, after √נוס ‘to fly’, √בוא or √הלך; here, when leaving, after √יצא [v. 24]). In that case it must have been possible to close and bolt the doors inside when going out, so that thet could only be opened from the outside by means of a key.31 This seems to exclude the interpretation of נָעַל as ‘to lock a door with straps’ (German ‘zubinden’, cf. נַעַל in the sense of ‘to fix a sandal with straps’), as suggested by KBL and HALAT.32 Rather one is inclined to think of the closing system with bolt and key with corresponding pins and holes as described for more modern times by Dalman.33

A.3 1 Chron 9, ‘the closing chapter of the Chronicler’s introductory genealogies’, ‘gives a summary of the members of the restored community after the exile’.34 The text runs more or less parallel with Neh 11:3-19. However, when arriving at the gatekeepers (הַשֹּׁעֲרִים) in v. 17 (Neh 11:19), the agreement stops rather abruptly. Neh 11:20 switches over to the inhabitants of the other towns of Judah (returning, however, immediately to Ophel and Jerusalem in vv. 21ff.), whereas 1 Chron 9:17ff. dwell on the theme of the שֹׁעֲרִים, far beyond the scope of the foregoing summary. According to most scholars, this section ends with v. 26a, and is succeeded by a more general catalogue of temple dignitaries in vv. 26b-33. After v. 26b ‘They were in charge of the chambers and the treasures of the house of God’, v. 27 continues: ‘they passed the night (יָלִינוּ) round about (סְבִיבׂות, cf. Num 11:24, 1 Sam 26:5) the house of God, לַבֹּקֶר וְלַבֹּקֶר עַל ־הַמַּפְתָּחַ וְהֵם מִשְׁמֶרֶת כִּי ־עֲלֵיהֶם, ‘as they bore the duty of watching it and were responsible for opening it’,35 ‘and that every morning’.36 ‘They’ are the Levites of v. 26a and probably the מַפְתֵּחַ is the key on the doors at the entrance (פֶּּתַח) of the house of God (cf. 1 Kgs 6:33-34 and LXX [see 4. Ancient Versions]). But it is also possible to return once again to the theme of the gatekeepers: they were ‘lodging in the vicinity of the house of God’37 and the key, which they had to administer, was the key of the gates (שְׁעָרִים, v. 23 [and 26 LXX]).

A.4 In Egypt, the vizier ‘let open the gates of the house of the king so that all who wanted to enter could enter and all who wanted to go out could go out’.38

A.5 Now there is no mention of gates in the description of the temple of Solomon and its inner and outer courts (1 Kgs 6:36, 7:12), but so much the more in Ezekiel’s vision of a new temple (Ezek 40 [48x], etc.39). Moreover, the closing of gates is mentioned. The outer gate on the east side of the sanctuary is shut and shall remain shut (סָגוּר , Ezek 44:1-2), whereas the eastern gate of the inner court shall be closed on working days, but open on the sabbath (Ezek 46:1, 2, 12). Therefore the question of H.J. Kraus, when discussing the שְׁעָרִים of Psalm 24:7-10: ‘des heiligen Bezirkes oder des Tempels?’,40 also holds good for 1 Chron 9:27.

A.6 In fact, עַל ־הַמַּפְתָּחַ וְהֵם in 1 Chron 9:27 could also have been classified with the next section (6.2 Figurative Use), as not so much the key itself is meant as the daily opening of the doors/gates as first thing in the morning after passing the night in the precincts of the temple, as is explained expressis verbis in the LXX (see 4. Ancient Versions). Several modern translations have rendered in that sense, as a kind of verbal form of √פתח: ‘opening’, etc.

6.2 Figurative Use

A.1 The same question, but then the other way round, could be asked in connection with Isa 22:22 ‘And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David’ (עַל ־שִׁכְמׂו בֵּית ־דָּוִד מַפְתֵּחַ וְנָתַתִּי). Are we dealing here with only a symbolic mentioning of the key (‘I will lay on his shoulders the duty of the Davidic palace’41), or is a real key intended? According to many commentators the key in question must have been a wooden instrument of considerable size and weight, so that it had to be carried on the shoulder42 (‘Die Schlüssel der damaligen Zeit waren durchaus so groß, daß sie auf die Schulter gelegt werden konnten’43). In the case of Judges 3 there is no suggestion of such an impressive utensil. But 1 Chron 9:27 seems to underline the importance of opening the doors or the gates as an official function.

A.2 Here, in Isa 22:22, it is the token of dignity bestowed on Eliakim, son of Hilkiah, as he was destined to replace Shebna, who had fallen in disgrace, as סֹכֵן (steward, governor; both men also mentioned Isa 36:3, 11, 22; 37:2 par.). De Vaux quotes in this connection the instructions of an Egyptian vizier who has to take care of opening the gates of the palace, ‘so that could enter who had to enter and could leave who had to leave’ (see above). In the case of Eliakim the same idea has been formulated negatively, more emphasizing the social authority of his function (cf. v. 21) than its practicability: ‘when he opens, none shall shut, and when he shuts, none shall open’ (פֹּּתֵחַ וְאֵין וְסָגַר סֹגֵר וְאֵין וּפָתַח, v. 22b). These words were quoted literally in Rev 3:7 and also had their impact on Matt 16:19 (cf. 18:18, 23:13; John 20:23), the delegation of the keys of the kingdom of heaven by Jesus to Simon Peter.

A.3 Following v. 22, Isa 22:23 is spoken in purely figurative language; ‘I will fasten him (like) a peg (or: tent-pin, → יָתֵד) in a sure place (‘in a firm wall’44) and he will become a throne of honour to his father’s house’. On the other hand, v. 21 speaks realistically of Shebna’s robe and girdle (וְאַבְנֵטְךָ כֻּתָּנְתֶּךָ, ‘your vestment ... your sash’45), with which Eliakim will be clothed as a token of his new authority. Thus for the interpretation of מַפְתֵּחַ just in between these verses, both possibilities seem to remain open. In the same way ‘house of David’ could mean just plainly ‘the palace’46 (‘königlichen Wohnsitz’47), ‘the temple’, or even ‘the household of David’, but, already when spoken by the prophet, it could also have referred to the normative and formative past48 and for that reason the whole expression בֵּית ־דָּוִד מַפְתֵּחַ could have had an eschatological and messianic undertone from the beginning. Already in LXX both the figurative and the literal interpretation have got their expression (see 4. Ancient Versions).

6.3 Pictorial Material

A.1 Because there existed several different types of lock and key, some with big keys, others with small keys, it is impossible to offer illustrations covering all of them. Moreover, since reliable archaeological specimens from Israel are lacking, most reconstructions rest on some ancient Egyptian and modern Arabic parallels.49

6.4 Archeology

A.1 As far as I know, no keys from biblical times have been preserved in Israel which is no surprise since normally keys were made of wood. The little that can be said from an archaeological point of view is found in Galling & Rösel.50

7. Conclusion

A.1 In the Old Testament there is no lack of reference to opening (√פתח) or closing (√סגר) of doors, gates, a window (Gen 8:7), the sluices (Gen 7:11), or doors (Ps 78:23) of heaven (and of eyes, ears, etc.); in Isa 45:1 it is said of Kores that the Lord will open doors before him and gates will not be closed. Only twice, however, a key is mentioned in this connection: moreover, one of these places, 1 Chron 9:27, is rather dubious, as מַפְתֵּחַ could also be explained as a kind of verbal form of פתח. Besides, it is not clear whether the key of the house of God (vv. 26, 27a) or that of the gates of the temple court is meant. Thus there remains only Judg 3:25 as a clear case of a key used as an instrument: in order to open the doors of the ‘upper chamber’ that Ehud had closed on his escape from the murder of king Eglon of Moab. The fact that the doors could be opened from whithin and again closed and locked (from the outside?, v. 23), without making use of the key, whereas the servants could enter only with the aid of the key, forms a crucial point of the story. It also tells us something about the construction and the form of the lock in question, and perhaps also of the locks of those days in general.

A.2 Despite the general consensus with regard to the meaning ‘key’, the exact shape of keys remains elusive. If future archaeological evidence does not point into another direction, Dalman’s description and illustration of the locks in the Orient in his days still seems to give the most acceptable impression. Some archaeological evidence from Egypt supports the idea that not much can have been changed with regard to the construction of keys and locks.

A.3 Most exegetes add to this picture of the key in Old Testament times, that ‘the key of the House of David’ placed on the shoulder of Eliakim must have been of considerable weight and size. However, since several types of locks and keys seem to have existed, it is by no means certain that all keys were that big and heavy.

A.4 The key of Isa 22:22, whether taken literally or purely symbolically, in this context clearly has the connotation of authority, as a token of the high position of the maior domus. Some ancient versions betray that the translators were aware of this extra dimension (Tg and the double rendering of LXX).

A.5 Whereas the key of heaven as a symbol of authority figures only sporadically in later Jewish thought (1. Root and Comparitive Material, Rabbinical Literature), it has taken on considerable importance in the NT and in later Christianity.

A.6 Personal Note: While preparing this essay, I attended the investiture of the new vicar of the church of our village. He was given a big key, with the words: you can use this key in two ways, to close (the past) and to open (the future). This rather unexpected coincidence made me aware of what a powerful symbol the key always has been, and still can be for the way we are dealing with our religion: either for closing ourselves from the rest of the world, thus becoming a source of distrust and hate, death and destruction, or for opening ourselves to the world, employing our creative abilities for responsibility and love, justice and peace.

Bibliography

For the abbreviations see the List of Abbreviations.

Erman & Ranke, AALA, 205

Dalman, AuS, Bd. 7, 52-54, 68-73, 122, 172

Avitzur, 174

BDB, 836a: ‘key (opening instrument)’

Beuken 2007
W.A.M. Beuken, Jesaja 13-27 (HThKAT), 2007

BRL2, 349

Budde 1897
K. Budde, Das Buch der Richter (KHC, 7), Freiburg i. Br. 1897

Alonso Schökel, DBHE, 424: ‘Llave’

DCH, vol. 5, 434a: ‘key’

Deist 1996
F. Deist, ‘Murder in the Toilet’ (Judges 3:12-30): Translation and Transformation’, Scriptura 58 (1996), 263-272
Dirksen 1990
P.B. Dirksen, Richteren: Een praktische bijbelverklaring (Tekst en Toelichting), Kampen 1990

EM, vol. 5, 35-39

GB, 450a: ‘Schlüssel’; ad Isa. 22:22 they add: ‘als Zeichen d. Autorität’

HAHAT, 719: ‘Schlüssel ... z. Zeichen d. Autorität über d. Schulter getragen Jes22,22’

HALAT, 585b: ‘Schlüssel’ (but ad 1 Chron. 9:27: l. מפתחו ועליהם < *מִפְתָּח [585a]: ‘Öffnen’ [opening of the lips, Prov. 8:6]); ad Isa. 22:22: ‘als Amtszeichen auf d. Schulter getragen’ (carried upon the shoulder, sign of office)

HAWAT, 239a: ‘Schlüssel’

HCHAT, Bd. 1, 772: ‘Werkzeug zum Thüröffnen, Schlüssel’

HWAT, 370: ‘der Schlüssel ... als Zeichen der Amtswürde für den Hausmeister’

ISBE, vol. 3, 10-12

KBL, 553a: ‘Schlüssel’

Kraus 1960
H.J. Kraus, Psalmen, Bd. 1 (BK 15/1), Neukirchen 1960

LÄ, Bd. 5, 658-61 (see also 256-257)

King & Stager, LBI, 31-33

LHA, 462a: ‘clavis’; ad Isa 22:22: ‘ut symbolum officii potestatis administrandae in domo’

Kaddari, MHH, 650: דלת לפתיחת מכשיר

Moffatt 1935
J. Moffatt (ed.), A New Translation of the Bible Containing the Old and New Testaments, London 1935
Procksch 1930
O.Procksch, Jesaja, 1 (KAT, 9/1), Leipzig 1930

RLA, Bd. ?, 361-2

Schoors 1972
A. Schoors, Jesaja (BOT), Roermond 1972
Snijders 1979
L.A. Snijders, Jesaja (POT), deel 1, Nijkerk 1969
Strack & Billerbeck 1922
H.L. Strack & P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch, Bd. 1, München 1922

Gesenius & Roediger, TPC, 1140a: ‘clavis, qua aperitur ianua’

Van der Kooij 1981
A. van der Kooij, Die alten Textzeugen des Jesajabuches (OBO, 35), Freiburg 1981
Wildberger 1978
H. Wildberger, Jesaja (BK, 10/2), Neukirchen 1978
Williamson 1982
H.G.M. Williamson, 1 and 2 Chronicles (NCBC), London 1982.

  1. < *maqtil, GKC, § 85i; BL, 492q-r [‘מַפְתֵּחַ ‘‘Schlüssel’’ ... und eine Reihe anderer Werkzeuge’]; Joüon, GHB, § 88 L d,h. ↩

  2. Orel & Stolbova, HSED, 425-6. ↩

  3. Cf. BL 542m for both possibilities [HALAT, 585b]. ↩

  4. Cf. K. Albrecht, ‘Das Geschlecht der Hebräischen Hauptwörter’ (ZAW 15, 313-25, and 16, 41-121), (16) 93. ↩

  5. Tam. III 6 [189a6] and Kel. XIV 8 [198b29]. ↩

  6. H. Rosenberg, ‘Zum Geschlecht der hebräischen Hauptwörter’ (ZAW 25, 325-39), 334. ↩

  7. Cf. Josephus, Bell. Jud. 4, 4,6; 6, 5,3. ↩

  8. Cf. Dalman, AuS, Bd. 7, 70f. ↩

  9. CAD (N) 1, 324. ↩

  10. KTU 5.22:12, cf. Del Olmo Lete & Sanmartín, DULAT, 566-7. ↩

  11. Dalman, ANHT, 247. ↩

  12. Sokoloff, DJPA, 324. ↩

  13. Belot 570a; Lane, AEL, 2329. ↩

  14. Leslau, LSoq, 344. ↩

  15. Johnstone, ML, 106. ↩

  16. Johnstone, JL, 65. ↩

  17. Barthélemy, 592; Elihai, DAPP, 88. ↩

  18. Leslau, CDG, 170. ↩

  19. Cf. DCH, vol. 5, 434a. ↩

  20. Abundance of rabbinic quotations in Strack & Billerbeck 1922, 738-47. ↩

  21. ThWNT, Bd. 3, 745, with notes 24-26 for rabbinic references. ↩

  22. ibid., 746-7. ↩

  23. R. Jochanan, Taʿan. 2a, cf. Sanh. 113a; Gen R. 73 (46d), Deut R. 7 (204b), Midr. Ps 78.5 (173b), etc., Apoc. Bar 5:5, ARN 4, etc., cf. Strack & Billerbeck 1922, 737 (ad Matt 16:19). ↩

  24. m. Tam. III.6, 7; AuS, Bd. 7, 71, 73. ↩

  25. t. B. Bat. III.1, B. Bat. IV.3. ↩

  26. m. Kel. XVI.7; t. ʿErub. X.1. ↩

  27. m. Kel. XIV 8, etc.; Krauss, TA, BD. 1, 41; Dalman, AuS, Bd. 7, 73; see also 53-4. ↩

  28. GELS-L, 119b: ‘opinion, estimation, repute’, or [mostly] ‘richess, honour, glory; brightness, splendour’; cf. ThWNT, Bd. 2, 245-48. ↩

  29. Van der Kooij 1981, 162. ↩

  30. Budde 1897, 31. ↩

  31. Dirksen 1990, 35. ↩

  32. KBL, 621b, and HALAT, 666a. ↩

  33. Dalman, AuS, Bd. 7, 52-54 (cf. 122, 172; and 68-72 for Judg 3:25). ↩

  34. Williamson 1982, 87. ↩

  35. Moffatt 1935. ↩

  36. waw-explicativum cf. GKC, § 154a, n.(b). ↩

  37. Moffatt 1935. ↩

  38. De Vaux, IAT, t. 1, 200. ↩

  39. See the extensive article שַׁעַר in HALAT, 1491-94 [1493b]. ↩

  40. Kraus 1960, 205. ↩

  41. Moffatt 1935. ↩

  42. so e.g. Schoors 1972, 137; Snijders 1979, 220; Wildberger 1978, 849. ↩

  43. Beuken 2007, 278. ↩

  44. Moffatt 1935. ↩

  45. Moffatt 1935. ↩

  46. So e.g. Schoors 1972, 136; Snijders 1979, 220. ↩

  47. Beuken 2007, 278. ↩

  48. Cf. e.g. Procksch 1930, 291; Wildberger 1978, 849. ↩

  49. E.g. Dalman, AuS, Bd. 7, Fig. 12 and 13 (cf. pp. 122, 172); Avitzur, 164, Fig. 424; Shitran, EM, vol. 5, 38; King & Stager, LBI, 33, Fig. 18. ↩

  50. K. Galling & H.Rösel, BRL2, 349. Galling, BRL1 (1937), col. 460 (art. ‘Schlüssel’: ‘Man kann also von einem Hebe-Schl. im Gegensatz zu unserem Dreh-Schl. sprechen’ [omitted in BRL2, 349]). ↩

Semantics of Ancient Hebrew Database