Re: Eli, Eloi (was: Passover/Easter (was: Italogallic in Zera,and other languages.))

At 11:03 am -0400 30/4/00, Steg Belsky wrote:
>On Sun, 30 Apr 2000 09:41:47 +0100 Raymond Brown <ray.brown@...>
>writes:
>> What's more remarkable to me is Matthew's use of an eta (long e) and
>> Mark's
>> use of epsilon (short e) in the name.
>-
>
>e:li << Hebrew [eli:]
>elo:i << Hebrew/Aramaic? [Elo:hi:]
Yep - fits exactly  - and the final -i of the Greek could be long; there
was no difference in spelling between long or short _i_.

>> (c) you-have-forsaken-me
>> Matthew: sabakhtanei, zaphthani
>> Mark: sabakhtanei, zabaphthani
>-
>
>i've seen the Aramaic root as ShBQ..."shevaqtani".
So the readings _sabakhthani_ or _sabakhtanei_ (remembering that {ei} was
pronounced [i:]) are fair Hellenistic Greek renderings of the Aramaic.

>> It's generally assumed that Jesus was quoting the openening verse of
>> Psalm
>> 20 (Septuagint & Vulgate numbering)/ 21 (Hebrew numbering).
>
>> No doubt one our other list members can give us the Hebrew to
>> compare with
>> the words quoted by the evangelists.
>-
>
>i found it in #22..."eili, eili, lama `azavtani" in Hebrew.
Ah, the different numbering systems - always get them confused :)
Sorry, I should've written: Psalm 21 (Sept. & Vulgate), 22 (Hebrew) - mea
culpa!

But the Hebrew `azavtani is interesting in that it obviously accounts for
the reading zaphthani: some copyist is "correcting" Matthew's sabakhthani.
And zabaphthani is presumably a 'muddled correction'.

>
>> So Matthew quotes the cry in Hebrew?
>-
>
>He quotes the cry in Aramaic, but the words _e:li_ and _elo:i_ can be
>either Aramaic or Hebrew.
Yep - and it is very unlikely either writer was an eyewitness of the
crucifixion, but was reporting what they had been told, it not suprising
that there might be a difference.  Indeed, the remarkable thing is the
similarity, both agreeing that the words were essentially in Aramaic though
Jesus would, presumably, have heard the Hebrew version when the psalm was
read/sung in the synagogue.

_e:li_ is, if I understand it, the strict Hebrew form, whilst _elo:i_ can
be only Aramaic.  In view of the fact that both evangelists refer to
bystanders thinking he was calling on Elijah, it would seem more likely
that Matthew is quoting more accurately; Mark is probably simply reporting
what someone told him in Aramaic.

Anyway, if what the evangelist quote is basically what Jesus cried out,
then he was calling on "My God".

Ray.




=========================================
A mind which thinks at its own expense
will always interfere with language.
                   [J.G. Hamann 1760]
=========================================