21When Apollonius son of Menestheus was sent to Egypt for the coronation of Philometor as king, Antiochus learned that Philometor had become hostile to his government, and he took measures for his own security. Therefore upon arriving at Joppa he proceeded to Jerusalem.
The Greek and Hebrew that is translated as “son of” in English is translated in all Icelandic Bible versions of the Icelandic Bible Society (latest edition 2007) in parallel with the Icelandic naming system . This means that for instance in Matthew 16:17 the name that is transliterated and translated in English as “Simon son of Jonah” becomes “Simon Jónasson” or in Isaiah 8:2 “Zechariah son of Jeberechiah” becomes “Sakaría Jeberekíason” where in both cases the “-son” means “son of.”
In cases where “son of” does not refer to a literal father or perhaps stepfather but to lineage, however, this system is not used. So in Matthew 1:1 “Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham” is translated as “Jesú Krists, sonar Davíðs, sonar Abrahams.”
The referenced verses all have at least one instance where the Icelandic patronymic or matronymic naming system is used. (Source: Halldór Elías Guðmundsson)
The name that is transliterated as “Jerusalem” in English is signed in French Sign Language with a sign that depicts worshiping at the Western Wall in Jerusalem:
While a similar sign is also used in British Sign Language, another, more neutral sign that combines the sign “J” and the signs for “place” is used as well. (Source: Anna Smith)
“Jerusalem” in British Sign Language (source: Christian BSL, used with permission)
The name that is transliterated as “Joppa” (or: “Jaffa”) in English is translated in Libras (Brazilian Sign Language) with the sign for “whale,” referring to Joppa that is mentioned as the starting point of the sea voyage of Jonah that ends up in the belly of a large fish (see Jonah 1:3). (Source: Missão Kophós )
Some languages do not have a concept of kingship and therefore no immediate equivalent for the Greek, Hebrew, Ge’ez, Aramaic, and Latin that is translated as “king” in English. Here are some (back-) translations:
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.”
A paragraph break is appropriate here (so Revised Standard Version, Good News Bible).
When Apollonius the son of Menestheus was sent to Egypt for the coronation of Philometor as king: This event evidently took place around the same time as the previous story. So we may begin this verse with “On another occasion” or even “About this same time” (Contemporary English Version). For Apollonius see verse 4. The agent of the passive verb was sent is King Antiochus, so it may be rendered “King Antiochus sent.” As the Revised Standard Version footnote indicates, the meaning of the Greek word translated coronation is uncertain. Coronation is only a reasonable guess. Some suggest that it refers to a royal marriage, but that is also only a guess. Goldstein argues well that it refers to the first time that King Philometor (probably about 16 years old) presided at a formal banquet (Doran agrees), although in his translation he simply transliterates the Greek word. In our opinion this is the best sense, but translators may avoid the issue by rendering for the coronation of Philometor as king as “to attend an official ceremony for King Philometor.” Philometor is Ptolemy~VI (see the comments on 1Macc 1.18 and 10.51). An alternative model for the first half of this verse is “On another occasion King Antiochus sent Apollonius, the son of Menestheus, to Egypt to attend the first formal banquet given by King Philometor [or, an official ceremony for King Philometor].”
Antiochus learned that Philometor had become hostile to his government: Presumably Apollonius brought back word of Philometor’s attitude to Antiochus. For had become hostile to his government, Good News Bible has “was opposed to his policies,” which is closer to the Greek. Philometor no doubt believed that certain things Antiochus was doing (“his policies”) represented a threat to his rule in Egypt. Translators could follow Contemporary English Version‘s model, which reads “had become his enemy.”
And he took measures for his own security: On learning this, Antiochus felt that he must do something to protect his kingdom.
Therefore upon arriving at Joppa he proceeded to Jerusalem: So he decided to go to Joppa and to Jerusalem to make sure that he had the support of these cities. In case of an attack by Egypt, Antiochus would need that support. For Joppa see the comments on 1Macc 10.75-76. Good News Bible‘s translation of this sentence is good. Another possible model is “So he set out for Jerusalem, passing through the town of Joppa on the way.”
Quoted with permission from Bullard, Roger A. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on 1-2 Maccabees. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2011. For this and other handbooks for translators see here.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.