ivory

The Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “ivory” in English was translated in the 1900 Kalaallisut (Greenlandic) translation (a newer version was published in 2000) as tûgânigdlo or “(narwhal) tusks.” “The word tûgâĸ (modern tuugaaq) ‘tusk’ does not refer specifically to the tusk of an elephant; rather, it is most closely associated with the noun tûgâlik (modern tuugaalik) ‘narwhal,’ which literally means ‘tusked one.’ The narwhal (Monodon monoceros ) is a medium-sized whale with a single long tusk, and is native to the Arctic region, including Greenland. The use of the word tûgâĸ (modern tuugaaq) as an equivalent of ‘ivory’ has the unmistakable effect of situating the Greenlandic version in an Arctic context.” (Source: Lily Kahn & Riitta-Liisa Valijärvi in The Bible Translator 2019, p. 125ff.)

elephant

Although the first definite reference to elephants in the Bible is in the Greek deuterocanonical book of 1 Maccabees, ivory (literally “tooth”) is mentioned first in the time of Solomon. By this date there were already ivory trade routes from the Sudan down the Nile and by sea from where Djibouti is now on the African Red Sea coast to where Eilat is now on the Gulf of Aqaba. Some of the ivory may have been made from the teeth of the hippopotamus but two references, 1 Kings 10:22 and 2 Chronicles 9:21, specifically refer to elephant ivory (literally “elephant’s tooth”). Ivory was probably known even much earlier than this since ornaments dating from around 2300 B.C. have been found in Palestine.

The Indian Elephant Elephas maximus was domesticated and trained for use in war very early well before the second millennium B.C. When Alexander the Great extended his empire into India in the fourth century B.C. he obtained war elephants to incorporate into his army. The idea of using elephants in war then spread to the Middle East. There was a smaller variety of this elephant found in Syria and Mesopotamia. By the third century B.C. domestic Indian elephants had been introduced into Egypt. Ptolemy II is reported to have had ninety-six elephants, four to a chariot, and later that same century when Ptolemy IV defeated the Seleucid king of Syria, Antiochus III, he is reported to have captured Syrians’ elephants. However, the Seleucid kings continued to use war elephants, and the next king, Epiphanes, attacked Egypt with elephants. He and his son then used them in their campaign against the Jews. According to 1Maccabees each elephant with thirty-two soldiers mounted on it, besides the Indian handler went into battle ahead of one thousand Syrian soldiers and five hundred horsemen. One of Maccabeus’ brothers was able to kill the largest elephant by getting under it and stabbing it, but he was himself killed when the elephant fell on him. At a later time probably because the Indian elephants were difficult to obtain the African Elephant Loxodonta africana was tamed for use in war. Coins show that the elephants used by the Roman Emperor Hadrian to cross the Alps were African probably brought from North Africa.

Elephas is the word most commonly used in the deuterocanonical books although elephantarchēs which means commander of an elephant squadron is used in 2 Maccabees 14:12 and 3 Maccabees 5:4 and 3 Maccabees 5:45 and thērion which means “monster” is used in 2 Maccabees 15:20f.

Elephants are the largest land animals on earth, the males of the Indian species being about 3 meters (10 feet) in height and weighing almost 4,000 kilograms (8,800 pounds). The African species is about half a meter (20 inches) higher and weighs up to 6,000 kilograms (13,200 pounds). The elephant’s trunk is basically an elongated nose, but it has muscles that make it a very useful feature. With it the elephant can not only smell but can pull down branches to eat, pick berries off bushes, draw up water to squirt into its mouth or over its body, and can use it as a weapon. On either side of the trunk the males grow long tusks that are often over 2 meters (6 feet) in length. These are used for digging up roots, gouging bark off trees, and lifting logs. These tusks are made of ivory. Elephants have large ears, which they use to fan themselves.

They are a dark gray color and have no fur. Their body looks almost hairless but in fact they are covered with bristly hairs. They feed on vegetation such as leaves roots shoots bark and fruit.

There are local words for elephant in most African, Middle Eastern, and Asian languages, and many international languages use a word derived from the Greek name elephas. In some areas even though there are no elephants, the fossilized bones of mammoths, the ancient relative of the elephant, are known, and this local name is used for modern elephants too. In most other areas the word for elephant is a word that is borrowed from the dominant language of the area.

Source: All Creatures Great and Small: Living things in the Bible (UBS Helps for Translators)

king

Some languages do not have a concept of kingship and therefore no immediate equivalent for the Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Latin that is translated as “king” in English. Here are some (back-) translations:

(Click or tap here to see details)

  • Piro: “a great one”
  • Highland Totonac: “the big boss”
  • Huichol: “the one who commanded” (source for this and above: Bratcher / Nida)
  • Ekari: “the one who holds the country” (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
  • Una: weik sienyi: “big headman” (source: Kroneman 2004, p. 407)
  • Pass Valley Yali: “Big Man” (source: Daud Soesilo)
  • Ninia Yali: “big brother with the uplifted name” (source: Daud Soesilio in Noss 2007, p. 175)
  • Nyamwezi: mutemi: generic word for ruler, by specifying the city or nation it becomes clear what kind of ruler (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
  • Ghomála’: Fo (“The word Fo refers to the paramount ruler in the kingdoms of West Cameroon. He holds administrative, political, and religious power over his own people, who are divided into two categories: princes (descendants of royalty) and servants (everyone else).” (Source: Michel Kenmogne in Theologizing in Context: An Example from the Study of a Ghomala’ Christian Hymn))

Faye Edgerton retells how the term in Navajo (Dinė) was determined:

“[This term was] easily expressed in the language of Biblical culture, which had kings and noblemen with their brilliant trappings and their position of honor and praise. But leadership among the Navajos is not accompanied by any such titles or distinctions of dress. Those most respected, especially in earlier days, were their headmen, who were the leaders in raids, and the shaman, who was able to serve the people by appealing for them to the gods, or by exorcising evil spirits. Neither of these made any outward show. Neither held his position by political intrigue or heredity. If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior. If the shaman failed many times in his healing ceremonies, it was considered that he was making mistakes in the chants, or had lost favor with the gods, and another was sought. The term Navajos use for headman is derived from a verb meaning ‘to move the head from side to side as in making an oration.’ The headman must be a good orator, able to move the people to go to war, or to follow him in any important decision. This word is naat’áanii which now means ‘one who rules or bosses.’ It is employed now for a foreman or boss of any kind of labor, as well as for the chairman of the tribal council. So in order to show that the king is not just a common boss but the highest ruler, the word ‘aláahgo, which expresses the superlative degree, was put before naat’áanii, and so ‘aláahgo naat’áanii ‘anyone-more-than-being around-he-moves-his-head-the-one-who’ means ‘the highest ruler.’ Naat’áanii was used for governor as the context usually shows that the person was a ruler of a country or associated with kings.”

(Source: Faye Edgerton in The Bible Translator 1962, p. 25ff. )

See also king (Japanese honorifics).

Translation commentary on 2 Chronicles 9:17

The king also made a great ivory throne: As in the two previous verses, the verb made is to be understood in the sense of having something made or commissioning the making of an object. The Hebrew here is most naturally understood to mean that the throne was made of ivory, but archaeological discoveries make it more likely that the throne was a wooden chair covered in part with ivory (so Good News Translation), “decorated with ivory” (Bible en français courant), or “inlaid with ivory” (Traduction œcuménique de la Bible footnote). Similarly, the reference to an ivory house in 1 Kgs 22.39 must be understood to mean “decorated with ivory” and not made entirely from ivory. The Hebrew word for ivory is the same as “tooth”; in this context ivory is the “tooth” of an elephant. If a word for ivory does not exist in the receptor language, this may perhaps be rendered “elephants’ teeth.”

And overlaid it with pure gold: See the comments on 1 Chr 28.17 and 2 Chr 3.4. It is not likely that the expensive ivory would have been covered with gold so that the ivory did not show, so Good News Translation makes this clear by saying “Part of it was covered with ivory and the rest of it was covered with pure gold.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .