• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Ecclesiastes 2:8 - two thousand years of hiding polygamy

FollowingHim

Administrator
Staff member
Real Person
Male
Ecclesiastes 2:8 discusses the many things that Solomon collected for himself. At the end of the verse it mentions to something described as "the delights of the sons of men". But what precisely these delights are differ enormously between translations, for instance:

KJV: I gathered me also silver and gold, and the peculiar treasure of kings and of the provinces: I gat me men singers and women singers, and the delights of the sons of men, as musical instruments, and that of all sorts.

DRV: I heaped together for myself silver and gold, and the wealth of kings, and provinces: I made me singing men, and singing women, and the delights of the sons of men, cups and vessels to serve to pour out wine:

ESV: I also gathered for myself silver and gold and the treasure of kings and provinces. I got singers, both men and women, and many concubines, the delight of the sons of man.


Musical instruments, cups and vessels for wine, concubines? How come there is so much disagreement? It's rather fascinating when you dig into it.

The Hebrew words in question are the last two in the verse:
שִׁדָּ֥ה וְשִׁדֹּֽות׃
These are (reading right to left) the singular and plural form of the word "shiddah" (Strongs H7705). This is the only time this word appears in all of scripture, making it an obscure term with a debatable meaning.

When the meaning of a word is unclear, it can be helpful to refer to the LXX. The LXX renders these words "οἰνοχόον καὶ οἰνοχόας", literally "cupbearers and jugs". That might be correct. But James Aitken suggests that the LXX translator may have understood the Hebrew to mean something like "male and female cupbearers", and also noted that the Hebrew was a poetic pair of similar words. The translator may have put poetic sound ahead of meaning, and chosen a pair of Greek words that maintained the poetry at the expense of accuracy.

The Latin Vulgate renders the end of this verse "scyphos et urceos in ministerio ad vina fundenda". I can't read Latin, but the word "vina" in here clearly shows that it refers to wine, so this verse appears to have been either translated from the LXX or used the LXX to dictate the meaning of the Hebrew.

The Douay-Rheims version is the classic Catholic English bible, an 1899 translation of the Vulgate. So the DRV refers to "cups and vessels to serve out wine". Essentially, the Douay-Rheims here seems to be the end of a chain of Chinese whispers from Hebrew -> Greek -> Latin -> English, where the meaning has developed with each translation.

The KJV on the other hand renders it "musical instruments". I can find no ancient textual support for this whatsoever, it appears to have been invented by the English translators. The best argument for it I could find from KJV-only apologetics was essentially that despite the earlier Bishops Bible and Geneva Bible both translating this "women taken captive", it actually means "musical instruments" simply because the verse talks about singers just before this, and obviously singers need musical instruments. This seems to be clutching at straws.

So let's have a look at the Hebrew words themselves. Note that I am not a Hebrew scholar, I just know enough of the basics to get myself into trouble, but I do think that this is rather clear. Hebrew is fascinating in that each letter originally had a meaning. The meaning of a word is often related to the meaning of the letters within that word.

The three letters in shiddah (right to left) are Shin, Resh, Hey. In the original pictographic Hebrew:
Shin = Two front teeth. Meanings: Sharp, Press, Eat, Two
Resh = Head of a man. Meanings: First, Top, Beginning
Hey = Man with arms raised. Meanings: Look, Reveal, Breath

Shin and Resh together make the word shad (שַׁד, H7699), meaning breast. Shin = eat, Resh = beginning, what you eat in the beginning = breast milk. The word is clearly strongly related to the meanings of the letters in that word.

So shiddah = Breast (shin + resh) + Hey... Which, completely crudely, sounds to me like "one who reveals the breast" or "look at the breast". The fact that the letter "Hey" is a stick figure with their arms raised only adds to the vivid mental imagery... In other words, a wife or concubine.

Supporting the LXX rendering, the Brown-Driver-Briggs concordance suggests that shiddah could be related to the Aramaic word שְׁדָא meaning "pour out". This is Shin - Resh - Aleph, with Aleph being originally a picture of an ox head meaning strong, power, or leader. So Shin - Resh (what you eat first) plus strong leader would suggest a word meaning something like "what the strong leader wants to drink" or "how the strong leader now drinks". So the LXX and Vulgate translations are somewhat understandable. But shiddah is not שְׁדָא , it is שִׁדָּ֥ה. It does not contain the word שְׁדָא, but it does contain the word שַׁד, or breast. So it makes far more sense that it would be related to breasts, than related to wine.

Strongs suggests that it is derived from shaddad (שָׁדַד, H7703), meaning "spoil" or "destroy". But I can't see how anything relating to the delights of men could be derived from that word, and once again a letter has to be removed before this word can be transformed into shiddah. It still seems more closely related to shad. This suggestion seems to be simply obfuscation, hiding the relationship with breast.

This verse seems to very clearly refer to Solomon's many wives and concubines, and call these clearly "the delights of men". Even the early Bishops and Geneva English Bibles recognised that they had something to do with women. Yet this was then covered up for hundreds of years. Protestants using the KJV read "musical instruments". Catholics reading the DRV read "cups and vessels". Only in the 19th century did a few obsure versions mention this, with Youngs Literal rendering it accurately (in my opinion) as "a wife and wives", and the Darby bible using the term "concubines". Only in the 20th century did mainstream versions such as the NASB, ESV and NIV start to translate this "concubines". Even now, every mainstream version sticks with the term "concubines" to give a negative spin on the passage, since all Western Christians have been conditioned to see concubines as wrong, no translation I have seen other than Youngs Literal uses the neutral term "wives".

It's a fascinating and ancient cover-up operation. Can't have men thinking that "the delights of men" are many wives, have to redirect them into thinking it's cupbearers and cups (LXX), better keep the priests thinking about alcohol rather than women (Vulgate), redirect the general English-speaking public to think musical instruments or cups (KJV, DRV)... Oh bother, now the general public has access to lexicons and might start to see through it, fortunately we prepared them for this by teaching them concubines are evil, so use that word. Can't have anyone tempted to delight in many wives...

In conclusion, just in case you forgot: Shin, Resh, Hey. Breasts, arms raised (look!). The delights of men. Hebrew is wonderful! :)
 
Forgot to add that Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon states that the meaning is "lady, mistress, wife", being the feminine form of "lord" for husband, and aligns it with an Arabic word for lady / mistress that is similar.
 
I did a little exploration of my own on this today, and low and behold, the NET version has an interesting translation: a harem of beautiful concubines! Here is the text of the note for this word in the NET translation:

2:8 d tn The meaning of the superlative construction שִׁדָּה וְשִׁדּוֹת (shiddah véshiddot) is uncertain because the term שִׁדָּה (shiddah) occurs only here in the OT. There are four basic approaches to the phrase: (1) Most scholars suggest that it refers to a royal harem and that it is in apposition to "the sensual delights of man" (וְתַעֲנוּגֹת בְּנֵי הָאָדָם, véta'anugot béne ha'adam). There are four variations of this approach: (a) There is a possible connection to the Ugaritic sht "mistress, lady" and the Arabic sitt "lady" (HALOT 1420 s.v. שִׁדָּה). (b) German scholars relate it to Assyrian sadadu"love" (Delitzsch, Konig, Wildeboer, Siegfried); however, BDB questions this connection (BDB 994 s.v. שׁדה). (c) Ibn Ezra relates it to II שַׁד (shad) "plunder; spoil" or שׁדה "[women] taken by violence," and suggests that it refers to the occupants of the royal harem. (d) BDB connects it to the Hebrew noun I שַׁד (shad, "breast"; e.g., Isa 28:9; Ezek 16:7; 23:3, 21, 34; Hos 2:4; 9:14; Song 1:13; 4:5; 7:4, 8, 9; 8:1, 8, 10; Job 3:12) adding that שׁדה is related to the cognate Arabic and Aramaic roots meaning "breast" (BDB 994 s.v.). This would be a synecdoche of part (i.e., breast) for the whole (i.e., woman), similar to the idiom "one womb, two wombs" (רַחַם רַחֲמָתַיִם, rakham rakhamatayim) where "womb" = woman (Judg 5:30). This is the approach taken by most English versions: "many concubines" (NASB, RSV, NRSV), "a wife and wives" (YLT), "mistresses galore" (MLB), "many a mistress" (Moffatt), and "a harem" (NIV). This is the approach suggested by the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project: "une femme et des femmes" = one or two women (e.g., Judg 5:30); see D. Barthélemy, ed., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, 3:566. (2) The NJPS connects it to the Mishnaic Hebrew noun שִׁדָּה which became שִׁידָּה ("a strong box, chest"; Jastrow 1558 s.v. שִׁידָּה) and renders the phrase "coffers and coffers of them" in apposition to the phrase "the luxuries of commoners" (וְתַעֲנוּגֹת בְּנֵי הָאָדָם). (3) KJV and ASV take the phrase in apposition to "male and female singers" and translate it as "musical instruments." However, there is no known Hebrew term that would justify this approach. (4) The LXX related the term to the Aramaic root שׁדא ("to pour out [wine]") and rendered the phrase as οἰνοχόον καὶ οἰνοχόας (oinochoon kai oinochoas), "a male-butler and female cupbearers." Aquila took a similar approach: κυλίκιον καὶ κυλίκια (kulikion kai kulikia), "wine cups and wine vessels." This is reflected in the Vulgate and Douay: "cups and vessels to serve to pour out wine." Although the semantic meaning of the term שִׁדָּה וְשִׁדּוֹת ("a breast of breasts") is uncertain, the grammatical/syntactical form of the phrase is straightforward: (1) It is in apposition to the preceding line, "the delights of the son of men" (וְתַעֲנוּגֹת בְּנֵי הָאָדָם). (2) The phrase is a superlative construction. When the second word is plural and it follows a noun from the same root which is singular, it indicates the best or most outstanding example of the person or thing so described. In addition to the Judg 5:30 parallel cited above, see the expression "a generation, generations" in Pss 72:5; 102:25; Isa 51:8. Unlike, Eccl 2:8, this juxtapositioning of the singular and plural to express the superlative usually involves a construct form. See קֹדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים (qodesh haqqodashim, "the holy of holies," i.e., the most holy place"; Exod 26:33), שִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים (shir hashirim, "the song of songs," i.e., "the most excellent song"; Song 1:1), אֱלֹהֵי הָאֱלֹהִים וַאֲדֹנֵי הַאֲדֹנִים ('elohe ha'elohim va'adone ha'adonim, "the God of gods and Lord of lords," i.e., "the Highest God and the Supreme Lord"; Deut 10:17), and עֶבֶד עֲבָדִים ('eved 'avadim, "a slave of slaves," i.e., "the most abject slave"; Gen 9:25). See GKC 431 §133.i; R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 17-18, §80; IBHS 154 §9.5.3j. If the semantic meaning of the terms שִׁדָּה וְשִׁדּוֹת denotes "a breast (among) breasts" or "a lady (among) ladies" (Eccl 2:8, but see the previous note on the phrase "a man's sensual delights"), the superlative construction may connote "the most beautiful breasts" (metonymy of part for the whole) or "the most beautiful woman." This might refer to a harem of concubines or to one woman (the wife of the king?) who was the most beautiful woman in the land.
sn Concubines were slave women in ancient Near Eastern societies who were the legal property of their master, but who could have legitimate sexual relations with their master. A concubine's status was more elevated than a mere servant, but she was not free and did not have the legal rights of a free wife. The children of a concubine could, in some instances, become equal heirs with the children of the free wife. After the period of the Judges concubines may have become more of a royal prerogative (2 Sam 21:10-14; 1 Kgs 11:3).
 
Interesting - the NET version also translates "the pleasures of men" as "what gives men sensual delight".
 
I smiled at the CJB's translation: "a good many concubines".
 
And The Holy Scriptures According To The Masoretic Text (The JPS Version by Jewish Scholars) translates it; "I got me men-singers and women-singers, and the delights of the sons of men, women very many."

Isn't it fascinating that there is such variation in these translations and how that has impacted people's thoughts about marriage! Thank you for pointing this out to us Samuel. Blessings
 
Back
Top