The Language of Colour in the Bible: Embodied Colour Terms related to Green 9783110767704, 9783110766394, 9783110767735, 2021950447

Citation preview

Lourdes García Ureña et al. The Language of Colour in the Bible

Fontes et Subsidia ad Bibliam pertinentes (FoSub)

Edited by James K. Aitken, David S. du Toit, and Loren T. Stuckenbruck

Volume 11

Lourdes García Ureña, Emanuela Valeriani, Anna Angelini, Carlos Santos Carretero and Marina Salvador Gimeno

The Language of Colour in the Bible Embodied Colour Terms Related to Green Translated by Donald Murphy

ISBN 978-3-11-076639-4 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-076770-4 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-076773-5 ISSN 1861-602X DOI https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704 Library of Congress Control Number: 2021950447 Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston. Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck www.degruyter.com

To all those who, in one way or another, have contributed to the observation, analysis and contemplation of the beautiful enigmas of how the colour green is used in the Scriptures.

Acknowledgements Any path of research that one undertakes is a long journey in search of the Promised Land. Like the people of Israel, the researcher, anxious to reach his/her goal, experiences darkness, solitude, exhaustion and the suffocating heat of the desert, but also moments of light and joy, at the water that springs from the rock, the manna that falls from heaven, and then, glimpsed from afar, the vision of the promised land itself (the truth contained in one’s research). Those are the moments that I want to recall here, in expressing my thanks to the individuals and institutions that have made it possible to realize the first stage of this research project. First of all, I would like to thank Prof. Adela Yarbro Collins for her continued inspiration and guidance. If there is anything that we who have been fortunate enough to study under her are grateful for, it is her openness, her constant availability, along with the astute questions and precise observations which have always been invaluable for improving our work. I would also like to thank Prof. Natalio Fernández Marcos for his ability to discern and appreciate the possibilities of this project from its inception, as well as Prof. Vanni, sadly no longer with us, who encouraged me to work with the language of colour in the book of Revelation at a time when I had not even considered such a thing. Secondly, I want to thank the members of my research group (Emanuela, Anna, Carlos and Marina), who embarked on this chromatic adventure when it was still in its gestation phase and who have dedicated so much of their time, patience and effort to it. Particular thanks go to Emanuela, who, from the moment we met at the 64th Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense (July 23 – 25, 2015), understood the depth of this project and brought to it all of her expertise, rigour, critical spirit, courage and sense of humour. All of these qualities have benefitted not only this study, but the functioning of the group itself. Many thanks, my friend! Also crucial has been the welcome I received from Prof. Giovanni Bazzana at Harvard University’s Divinity School during my three-month research stay there in the summer of 2019, an essential and somewhat “monastic” period of reflection during which I had access to the university library’s bibliographical resources. The wealth of material there and the extraordinary helpfulness of the staff made all manner of resources available to me for my research. I also thank Prof. Bazzana for organizing a seminar for students, as this was an excellent opportunity to re-think and nuance certain aspects of this study. In this respect, I am also indebted to the Universidad CEU–San Pablo, which in collaboration with Banco Santander provided me with a grant to fund that particular research stay.

Note: This monograph forms part of the research being carried out by the study group ʻThe Language of Colour in the Bibleʼ, LECOBI (PC06/0720) of the Universidad San Pablo – CEU. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-001

VIII

Acknowledgements

Similarly relevant was another research stay, this time at the Centro de Humanidades del Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, at the invitation of José Manuel Cañas Reíllo. The use of the center’s library, as well the discussions and interactions that I enjoyed with other researchers there (Natalio Fernández Marcos, María Victoria Spottorno, Mariano Gómez Aranda, Esperanza Alfonso, Ignacio Márquez Rowe) played a great part in the development of the present study, as have the suggestions and comments of members of L’Association pour l’étude de la littérature apocryphe chrétienne (AELAC), in particular Prof. Enrico Norelli, who invited me to present the project at the association’s annual meeting in January 2019 in Bex (Switzerland). Nor can I forget to mention the members of the Asociación Española de Estudios Hebreos y Judíos (AEEHJ), who at least every two years have attentively reviewed the progress of my research and offered valuable suggestions, nor the Instituto de Humanidades Ángel Ayala of the Universidad CEU–San Pablo, which has made it possible for me to participate in a number of conferences and research stays through the financial assistance it has provided. Additional thanks go to the translator of this monograph, Donald Murphy, and to Silvano de las Heras. To Donald how little applies the Italian adage traduttore, traditore! I thank him for his availability, for striving to find the right word and the correct interpretation, for his suggestions, for being another member of this research group. Silvano de las Heras, doctor, professor, editor, humanist, friend…, I thank warmly for his contributions to this research during the long and intense summer of 2021, for revising, correcting, suggesting…, for making enjoyable and gratifying what seemed at first a grim and daunting task. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the support and encouragement of my family and friends, who have stood by me in the oases, but more importantly in the harsh moments of the desert, especially when I have come to take refuge in Soto. Madrid, 2 December, 2021

Preface In recent years, the fields of art, history and anthropology in Western culture have shown a growing interest in what we might call the chromatic life of objects. The techniques of producing colours and their relation to modern artistic practices have come under examination, along with the material dimension of colour, its inherently social character and the genesis of colours through the fabrication of contemporary art objects. What has been lacking, however, is an exploration of the dimension of the colours of creation from a philological and anthropological point of view. This is the new perspective which has begun to open with the monographic study that I have the honour to present here, The Language of Colour in the Bible. Embodied Colour Terms Related to Green. It focuses on the three semantic universes that have most influenced our Western culture: the corpus of the Hebrew Bible, which condenses and transmits the wisdom legacy of the Ancient Near East, and the two most important biblical translations of antiquity –the Greek Bible or Septuagint, and the Vulgate, Jerome’s Latin translation of the late 4th century AD. To create the Septuagint, a group of bilingual Hellenistic Jewish scholars would translate this collection of Eastern wisdom into the common language of their day, koiné Greek. In contrast, the Latin Bible was the work of a single author whose task was to translate the Scriptures into the Latin of the Roman Empire. Obviously, the semantic field of the Hebrew version is limited to the books written in that language –the Jewish and Christian Bible– while the semantic fields of Greek and Latin also include the Christian New Testament. The far-ranging lexicographical research in the present volume comes to us through an international team of scholars under the direction of Lourdes García Ureña. This is the same author who some years ago guided us through the symbolic world of the book of Revelation in another study, also published in English, which used discourse analysis to reveal eye-opening new strategies and interpretative keys for approaching the final book of the Bible. This new book is a work of philological and linguistic analysis. It represents a beginning, one limited for the moment to the colour green, but presages a promising future when this working method is extended to the linguistic domains of other colours as well. Every language structures and defines reality in its own singular and differentiated manner. In few fields is this principle so evident as in the area of colours and their corresponding distribution. In effect, the universe of colour that we find in the Bible was given form by the principal native languages in which it was transmitted in antiquity (apart from the Syriac of the Eastern Church’s Peshitta), a symphony in three voices, as Cardinal Cisneros took it upon himself to demonstrate by creating the first polyglot Bible in history, the Complutense de Alcalá, which featured all three texts printed synoptically. The objective of The Language of Colour in the Bible https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-002

X

Preface

is to examine the worldview that the listener/reader in biblical times, rather than the modern reader, had of this particular dimension of colour, the conclusions of which will serve to illuminate our own cognitive universe. It can thus be seen that the Vulgate (not counting the earlier attempts of the Vetus Latina) uses seven different lexemes to translate the four colour terms that we find in the Hebrew corpus. In the same way, the Greek Bible had made explicit a chromatism that is only latent in the Hebrew version. This chromatic sensitivity would increase with the passage of time and the supplantation of one language by another, and so the biblical corpus would become more and more adorned with colour as it developed from the original Hebrew through the Greek to the Latin of the Vulgate. The primacy accorded here to the colour green is justified by the biblical texts themselves, as it is this colour which both opens and closes the pages of the Bible. Indeed, the Scriptures fill with colour the two great moments in the history of humanity: the first chapter of Genesis, with its creation narrative; and the announcement of the end of the world in the book of Revelation. The story of Genesis depicts a state of ripeness, of freshness, vitality and lushness in plants and vegetation that suggests the springtime. Meanwhile, the portrayal of destruction that we find in the book of Revelation has the figure of Death riding upon a horse with a sickly, death-like colour (Rev 6.8). This vision of the green dimension of creation, as seen through the narratives of the various biblical languages, is more than a study of colour from the perspective of cognitive linguistics. It goes hand in hand with one of the most pressing issues of our own time: the concern for the environment, and the recovery and preservation of the planet, our common home. Thanks to the contribution of Dr. García Ureña and her team, we are now closer to understanding our world with regard to the linguistic roots that have most helped to shape it. Natalio Fernández Marcos Instituto de Lenguas y Culturas del Mediterráneo y Oriente Próximo Centro de Ciencias Humanas y Sociales Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC), Madrid

Contents I Colour Terms: object, study and method Understanding colour in the Bible 3 I. 3 I.. Introduction and objective I.. Obstacles to the present research 5 8 I.. Status quaestionis I.. Colour in the biblical corpus 11 I... The concept of colour in the Bible and in Greco-Latin antiquity 18 I... The linguistics of colour in the biblical corpus I... Specific demands for modern research 19 Theoretical framework 21 I.. I... Structuralism: the componential analysis of meaning 21 24 Cognitive linguistics I... I.. Methodology 29 I.. The presentation of lexicographical articles on colour 34

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus II. II.. II.. II... II... II... II.. II... II... II.. II.. II.

‫ ירק‬yereq and its polysemy: ‘verdure’, ‘the colour of grass in the 39 spring’ 39 Introduction Encyclopaedic knowledge 39 Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries 39 Early versions of the Bible 41 42 Synthesis Semantic analysis of ‫ ירק‬yereq 42 ‫ ירק‬yereq I (nominal function) 44 47 ‫ ירק‬yereq II (adjectival function) Conclusions 49 Bibliography 50

‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq and its polysemy: ‘the colour of mould’, ‘the colour of 51 gold’ II.. Introduction 51 II.. Encyclopaedic knowledge 52 II... Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries 52

11

XII

II... II... II.. II... II... II.. II..

Contents

Early versions of the Bible 52 Synthesis 53 Semantic analysis of ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq 53 ‫ נגע‬negaʿ ‘spot’ (cognitive domain of sickness) ‫ חרוץ‬ḥārûṣ (cognitive domain of metals) 58 Conclusions 64 Bibliography 65

II. ‫ ירוק‬yārôq: ‘greenery’ 68 II.. Introduction 68 II.. Encyclopaedic knowledge 69 II... Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries II... Early versions of the Bible 69 70 II... Synthesis 70 II.. Semantic analysis of ‫ ירוק‬yārôq II.. Conclusions 72 II.. Bibliography 72 II. ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn: ‘the colour of fear’ 74 II.. Introduction 74 II.. Encyclopaedic knowledge 74 II... Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries II... Early versions of the Bible 75 76 II... Synthesis 77 II.. Semantic analysis of ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn II.. Conclusions 79 79 II.. Bibliography

54

69

74

III The Greek Bible Corpus (LXX and NT) III.

Χλωρός and its polysemy: ‘the colour of vegetation’, ‘the colour of 83 death’, ‘greenness’ III.. Introduction 83 84 III.. Encyclopaedic knowledge III... Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries 84 85 III... Early versions of the Bible 86 III... Synthesis III.. Semantic analysis of χλωρός 87 87 III... Χλωρός I (adjectival function) III... Χλωρός II (nominal function) 100 III.. Conclusions 104 III.. Bibliography 106

Contents

III. Χλωρότης: ‘the colour of a kind of gold’ 109 III.. 109 Introduction III.. 110 Encyclopaedic knowledge III... Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries III... Early versions of the Bible 113 III... Synthesis 113 III.. 113 Semantic analysis of χλωρότης III.. Conclusions 115 Bibliography 115 III.. III. Χλωρίζω: ‘to turn greenish’ 117 117 III.. Introduction III.. Encyclopaedic knowledge 117 III... Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries 118 III... Early versions of the Bible III... Synthesis 119 III.. Semantic analysis of χλωρίζω 119 III.. Conclusions 122 122 Bibliography III.. III. Πράσινος: ‘stone as a colour’ 123 123 III.. Introduction III.. Encyclopaedic knowledge 124 III... Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries 124 III... Early versions of the Bible III... Synthesis 125 Semantic analysis of πράσινος 126 III.. III.. Conclusions 128 III.. Bibliography 129

XIII

110

117

124

IV The Latin Bible Corpus IV.

Viridis and its polysemy: ‘the colour of grass’, ‘the colour of the almond, 133 poplar and plane trees’, ‘greenness’ IV.. Introduction 133 133 IV.. Encyclopaedic knowledge 133 IV... Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries IV... Early versions of the Bible 140 141 IV... Synthesis IV.. Semantic analysis of uiridis 141 IV... Viridis I (adjectival function) 144 IV... Viridis II (nominal function) 147

XIV

IV.. IV..

Contents

Conclusions Bibliography

149 150

IV. Viriditas: ‘greenery’ 152 IV.. Introduction 152 IV.. Encyclopaedic knowledge 153 IV... Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries IV... Early versions of the Bible 155 Synthesis 156 IV... IV.. Semantic analysis of uiriditas 157 IV.. 158 Conclusions 158 IV.. Bibliography

153

IV.

Viror and its polysemy: ‘the colour of calamus and reeds’, ‘the colour of a 160 type of gold’, ‘verdure’ IV.. Introduction 160 IV.. Encyclopaedic knowledge 161 IV... Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries 161 162 Early versions of the Bible IV... IV... Synthesis 163 IV.. Semantic analysis of uiror 163 164 IV... Viror in the cognitive domain of plants IV... Viror in the cognitive domain of metals 166 Conclusions 168 IV.. 169 IV.. Bibliography IV. Vireo: ‘to show the colour of plants’ 170 IV.. Introduction 170 IV.. Encyclopaedic knowledge 170 IV... Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries IV... Early versions of the Bible 172 IV... Synthesis 172 IV.. Semantic analysis of uireo 173 IV.. Conclusions 178 179 IV.. Bibliography

170

IV. Viresco: ‘to become the colour of a tree or the new fresh grass’ 180 IV.. Introduction IV.. Encyclopaedic knowledge 181 181 IV... Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries IV... Early versions of the Bible 181 IV... Synthesis 182 IV.. Semantic analysis of uiresco 182

180

Contents

IV.. IV..

Conclusions Bibliography

183 184

IV. Pallidus: ‘the colour of death’ 185 IV.. Introduction 185 IV.. Encyclopaedic knowledge 185 IV... Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries IV... Early versions of the Bible 190 Synthesis 190 IV... IV.. Semantic analysis of pallidus 190 IV.. 192 Conclusions 192 IV.. Bibliography IV.

185

Pallor and its polysemy: ‘mould’, ‘the colour of a type of gold’, ‘the co193 lour of fear’ IV.. Introduction 193 IV.. Encyclopaedic knowledge 194 IV... Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries 194 196 Early versions of the Bible IV... IV... Synthesis 197 IV.. Semantic analysis of pallor 197 197 IV... Pallor in the cognitive domain of sickness IV... Pallor in the cognitive domain of metals 199 Pallor in the cognitive domains of human beings and IV... 201 emotions IV.. Conclusions 203 Bibliography 203 IV..

V The language of Colour in the Bible V.

Conclusion

Abbreviations Bibliography

207

214 217

Index of Ancient Sources

226

XV

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

I.1 Understanding colour in the Bible I.1.1 Introduction and objective The first question that will no doubt come to mind on reading the title of this research project is why study the language of colour in the Bible at all. The answer to this is clear: since the discovery of Greek polychrome sculptures in the late 19th century, colour has become a subject of growing interest in a variety of scientific disciplines, from physics and anthropology to art history and psychology, to philology and design and many others,¹ as well as an essential medium of communication in the visual culture in which we are currently immersed. Surprisingly, the Bible, one of the pillars upon which European culture has been built, has figured hardly at all in such research. Michel Pastoureau, in his book Green: The History of a Colour, mentions only ‘the silences of the Bible’.² A void has thus been created that deserves to be filled. The Bible, as we know, is widely held to be the book that has most influenced Western thought, and so the study of colour language in the biblical corpus is not a minor issue. Indeed, such language has forged a host of icons and motifs that have gone on to shape later literature, art (think only of the Beatus manuscripts or the medieval Bible), and our own daily lives as a medium for transmitting not only knowledge but feelings and emotions. Present-day scholarship tends to adhere closely to the biblical text, examining the plurality of languages and testimonies that it encompasses. To some extent, there has been a revival of the spirit which in the 16th century produced the Complutensian Polyglot Bible and brought the Hebrew, Greek and Latin texts together in a single volume. Any study of the language of colour in the Bible must have a similar focus, as colour is the expression of a given culture.³ This is a determining factor in the way populations perceive colour, with each having a specific sensibility towards it. In fact, the Hebrew version is frugal in its use of colour lexemes, although colour is latent in the text even when it is not mentioned directly; the Septuagint, meanwhile, would reinterpret the Hebrew colour terms, adding new shades to them, and the still more colour-sensitive Vulgate would further increase the lexemes absent from the original Hebrew. In this sense, as time passes and the text is re-read in another cultural space with a different chromatic sensibility and language, the Bible becomes more and more infused with colour.  A significant example of the importance and diffusion of this subject of study is the foundation in 1967 of the International Association of Colour (AIC), in which researchers from a variety of disciplines hold conferences and publish diverse materials on the topic: www.aic-color.org/page-18077; 17/08/ 2019.  Michel Pastoureau, Green: The History of a Colour (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2014), p. 36.  Anna Wierzbicka, ‘The Meaning of Color Terms: Semantics, Culture, and Cognition’, Cognitive Linguistics (includes Cognitive Linguistic Bibliography) 1 (1, 1990), 99 – 150, at 103. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-003

4

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

At the same time, there are no perfect parallels among the three versions of the Bible, partly because we do not have access to the Hebrew or Greek manuscripts from which the Greek and Latin translations were made, and partly because all translation is in effect an interpretation. In the case of both the LXX and the Vulgate, it is clear that neither is a literal, word-for-word translation. This affects the study of colour terms, since, as this monograph will show, the various versions are not always equivalent. Each corpus, then, must be examined individually, as each one presents its chromatism according to its own lexicon and culture. A comparative study of the three versions can only take place once the analysis of all of the colour terms used has been concluded. Of all the colours in the chromatic spectrum, we have chosen to begin our study with the first colour term that appears in the Hebrew Bible, ‫ ירק‬yereq (Gen 1.30), whose presence might at first be considered superfluous. When, after the story of the creation of the world has been told, God addresses Adam and Eve to give them his blessing, he explains how both they and the animals will be fed. The latter will eat grass –not any type of grass, but that which is ‫ ירק‬yereq (Gen 1.30), χλωρός in the Septuagint (Gen 1.30) and ‘green’, ‘verde’, ‘verte’ in the modern versions of the Bible. However, given the austerity of the biblical text in the use of colour language and the fact that green is the classic epithet for grass, it is logical to wonder if the Hebrew lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq and the Greek χλωρός simply denote the colour of grass. Is the narrator of the priestly tale in Genesis merely adding a chromatic touch to his story and is it his intention to say something more? Not only this, but if ‫ירק‬ yereq does indeed denote the colour green, why does the Greek text use χλωρός and not πράσινος, as in Gen 2.12? Do they perhaps denote different hues? Unlike πράσινος, the lexemes ‫ ירק‬yereq and χλωρός reappear in different contexts throughout the biblical corpus with a surprising, paradoxical symbolism: life, fecundity and prosperity, in opposition to death, destruction and punishment. This even occurs within a single book, as it does in the book of Revelation. How can such a paradox be explained? The answers to these questions concern not only the lexemes we have just mentioned, but their lexical families as these appear in the biblical corpus. Thus, in the Hebrew version we find ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq, ‫ ירוק‬yārôq and ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn; in the Greek version χλωρότης and χλωρίζω; and in the Latin uiridis, uiriditas, uiror, uireo and uiresco. We have also included the lexical family of pallor, as these are the colour terms chosen in the Vulgate to translate the controversial colour of gold (Ps 67.14) and the enigmatic χλωρός of the fourth horse of the book of Revelation (Rev 6.8). The objective of the present study is to provide the modern reader with the meaning of colour terms from those lexical families related to what we might call ‘the green dimension of the Bible’ or ‘the green dimension of creation’, with the aim of determining whether they denote only colour and, if that is the case, the hue they express, or whether, along with this chromatic denotation, they indicate some underlying reality that is inseparable from colour. We will also analyze the

I.1.2 Obstacles to the present research

5

symbolism which underpins some of these colour terms and which European culture has inherited. This is the moment, then, to examine the language of colour in the Bible, a song sung in three voices,⁴ and delight in its chromatic symphony.

I.1.2 Obstacles to the present research Before embarking on this fascinating task, it should be remembered that the study of colour is not an easy one. While it has been shown that the human being, barring some physical pathology, is able to perceive colour, not all of us perceive it with the same level of sensitivity, much less are we able to discern the same tonalities in a given object. I recall a discussion in a colour communication workshop organized by the Universidad Rey Juan Carlos a few years ago, when the speaker showed the group an image of a running shoe dominated by shades of grey. Half of the participants argued that it was bluish grey and the other half pinkish grey. The debate concluded when the speaker revealed the real colour of the shoe. This same difficulty increases when, rather than visual perception, we turn our attention to the language of colour, where visual perception and culture are inseparably fused. Consider, for example, the fact that Spanish, according to the Diccionario Akal del color, includes more than 100 types of green, from lime green to sumac green.⁵ The task becomes greater still when we study the language of colour in antiquity, within specific corpora that reflect three different cultures (Semitic, Greek and Latin), each with a specific manner of perceiving colour. However, we feel that the main obstacle is our own modern-day perception of colour, which is different from that of both Semitic and Greco-Roman civilization. Today, colour is defined according to Newtonian theory as a ‘sensation produced by luminous rays which make impressions on the visual organs and which depend on wavelength’.⁶ This sensation consists of three elements: hue (the length of the wave; that is to say, its colouration); luminosity (the quantity of light emitted, by which we may refer to darker or lighter colours); and saturation (the intensity of that aspect which causes colours to appear bolder or more faded). At present, the fundamental element for determining colour is hue. This conception, however, is far removed from that of Semitic and Greco-Roman culture. Linguistic studies of colour have in general been influenced by the theory of Brent Berlin and Paul Kay in their work Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evo-

 Ignacio Carbajosa and Andrés García Serrano (eds.), Una Biblia a varias voces. Estudio textual de la Biblia Políglota Complutense (Madrid: Ediciones Universidad de San Dámaso, 2014), pp. 11– 12, refer to the Polyglot Bible as a ‘Bible in three voices’.  Diccionario Akal del color, pp. 931– 951.  DLE, s.v. color; available at https://dle.rae.es/?id=9qYXXhD; 19/04/2019.

6

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

lution ⁷. According to these authors, colours have appeared progressively and universally in the languages and cultures of the world. In fact, all languages, according to their degree of evolution, include within their chromatic lexical repertory between two and eleven ‘basic colour terms’ (BCT). These BCT are characterized by three traits: being used to describe a wide range of objects; being monolexematic (red, blue, green, etc.); and being used by the majority of native speakers. While this theory, along with the improvements introduced by the World Color Survey (WCS),⁸ is suited to modern languages (although not without arousing criticism),⁹ it does not seem applicable to the languages of antiquity for a variety of reasons: a) No native speakers survive who might allow us to know which of these terms were most used, research only being possible through the (literary and administrative) texts that have been preserved, whose nature and the scarcity of testimonies prevent a determination of which were most used in daily speech. b) From research carried out into the languages of antiquity (Sumerian, Akkadian, Egyptian, Greek and Chinese) it has been determined that the language of colour did not develop independently in each location, but as the result of an exchange of materials, concepts and terms.¹⁰ c) The language of colour in antiquity is not abstract, but appears linked to specific materials (fabrics, dyes, precious stones and other objects).¹¹ d) The ancient conception of colour resides more in what today we understand as luminosity and saturation than in hue.¹²  Brent Berlin and Paul Kay, Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution (Stanford, CA: CSLI, 1999).  This was formulated in 1976. See: John E. Hartley, The Semantics of Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes (Louvain; Paris; Walpole, MA: Peeters, 2010), pp. 13 – 14.  Clyde Hardin and Luisa Maffi (eds.), Color Categories in Thought and Language (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997); Paul Kay and Terry Regier, ‘Language, Thought, and Color’, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10 (2, 2006), 51– 54; Seija Kerttula, ‘Relative Basicness of Color Terms. Modeling and Measurement’, in Robert E. MacLaury et al. (eds.), Anthropology of Color, Interdisciplinary Multilevel Modeling (Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2007), pp. 151– 169.  David A. Warburton, ‘Basic Color Term Evolution in Light of Ancient Evidence from the Near East’, in Anthropology of Color, pp. 229 – 246; David A. Warburton, ‘The Theoretical Implications of Ancient Egyptian Colour Vocabulary for Anthropological and Cognitive Theory’, Lingua Aegyptia 16 (2008), 213 – 259; David A. Warburton, ‘Ancient Color Categories’, in Ming Ronnier Luo (ed.), Encyclopedia of Color Science and Technology (New York: Springer, 2014), pp. 1– 9.  Warburton, ‘Basic Color Term Evolution’, p. 242.  Antoine Guillaumont, ‘La désignation des couleurs en hébreu et en araméen’, in Ignace Meyerson (ed.), Problèmes de la couleur (Paris: S. E.V.P.E.N., 1957), pp. 339 – 348, at 344– 346; Harold Hosborne, ‘Colour Concepts of the Ancient Greek’, The British Journal of Aesthetics 8 (3, 1968), 269 – 283, at 274; Warburton, ‘The Theoretical Implications’, p. 241; Maria Bulakh, ‘Basic Color Terms from Proto-Semitic to Old Ethiopic’, in Anthropology of Color, pp. 247– 261. Interesting in the area of Greco-Latin studies is the article by Maria Michela Sassi, ‘Il problema della definizione antica del colore, fra storia e antropologia’ in Simone Beta and Maria Michela Sassi (eds.), I colori nel mondo antico. Esperienze linguistiche e quadri simbolici. Atti della giornata di studio, Siena, 28 marzo 2001 (Fiesole: Cadmo, 2003), pp. 9 – 23; and also Giampiera Raina, ‘Considerazioni sul vocabolario greco del colore’, in I colori nel

I.1.2 Obstacles to the present research

7

e) Colour terms in antiquity are not referential, as they are in modern languages, for example, when in English or Spanish ‘orange/naranja’ denotes the colour of the fruit from which it gets its name, or when ‘sea-green’ specifies the colour of the sea. Instead, they include a wide spectrum of colours and meanings, and so a lexeme such as χλωρός may indicate a range of hues from yellow to various shades of green. f) In ancient languages, colour terms were more lexicalized and grammaticalized than in modern languages.¹³ And so, for example, from the Greek root λευκ* a great number of adjectives, nouns and verbs can be derived, of which we include here only a small sample: λευκός, ‘white’; λευκάμπυξ, ‘with a white headband’; λεύκινος, ‘of white poplar’; λευκάκανθα, ‘white thistle’; λευκάνθεμον, ‘white flower’; λευκαντής, ‘one who makes or paints white’; λεύκη, ‘a cutaneous disease, so called from its colour’; λευκότης, ‘whiteness’; λευκαίνω, ‘to be or become white’; λευκο-γραφέω, ‘to paint in white’.¹⁴ To overcome these obstacles it is necessary to find both an appropriate linguistic theoretical framework and a methodology that will enable us to approach the meaning of colour lexemes in biblical texts, while avoiding the danger of turning this research into simply an updated taxonomy of possible translations that in the end would merely adapt the ancient concept of colour to our own nomenclature. This nomenclature is, moreover, the reflection of a culture¹⁵ in a state of constant change due to new technologies and globalization, fomenting the continual incorporation and movement of new terms from one language to another. On this note, we feel it is useful here to cite the experience of the celebrated author Gabriel García Márquez in looking up the lexeme ‘amarillo’ (yellow) in a Spanish dictionary, as it is one that might be familiar to our own readers: It occurred to me to look up the word ‘yellow’, which was described in this simple way: the colour of a lemon. I remained in the dark, as in the Americas lemons are green. I was still more disconcerted when I read in the Romancero Gitano of Federico García Lorca these unforgettable verses: ‘In the middle of the road he cut round lemons and threw them into the water until it turned to gold’. With the passing of years, the Diccionario de la Real Academia –although it maintained the reference to the lemon– would make the corresponding modification: ‘the colour of gold’. It was only when I was in my twenties, when I went to Europe, that I discovered that, sure enough, lemons are yellow. But by then I had already made a fascinating exploration of the third colour of the solar spectrum through other dictionaries, both past and present. The Larousse and the Vox –like that of the Academy of 1780– likewise offered their references to lemons

mondo antico, 25 – 39. Both maintain that, while Berlin and Kay place Greek in the evolutionary stage IIIB, the existence of brown and grey documented by Raina situates it in the penultimate or final stage.  Hartley, Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes, pp. 16 – 25.  For the complete list: LSJ.  In the case of the present study, the problem is compounded by the fact that, while the original text was written in Spanish, it will be published in English.

8

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

and to gold, while only María Moliner, in 1976, gave the implicit refinement that the colour yellow is not that of the whole lemon but only of its rind. She would, however, avoid the poetry of the Diccionario de Autoridades, the Academy’s first in 1726, which described yellow with a lyrical candour: ‘Colour which, when intense, imitates that of gold, and that of broom straw when pale and subdued’. Of course, all of these dictionaries put together, could not hold a candle to the oldest of all, compiled in 1611 by Don Sebastián de Covarrubias, who had gone further than any other in propriety and inspiration in his definition of yellow: ‘Of the colours, this is considered the unhappiest, for being that of death and of long, dangerous illness, and the colour of lovers’.¹⁶

I.1.3 Status quaestionis Until now, there has been no specific polyglot study of the colour language used in the Bible. The studies of biblical colour language which do exist have focused on the Hebrew version, and to a lesser extent on the Greek. They include those by Anna Passoni dell’Acqua (1998, 2001, 2008),¹⁷ which seek to establish a relationship between some chromatic terms in the Septuagint and those found in Egypt in papyri and ostraca during the Hellenistic period, as well as those by our own research group on the LXX¹⁸ and the New Testament.¹⁹ So far, there has been no such research done on the Vulgate.

 Gabriel García Márquez, ‘Prólogo’ to: Concepción Maldonado and Nieves Almarza Acedo (eds.), Clave: Diccionario de uso del español actual. 3rd edn (Madrid: Ediciones SM, 1996), pp. vii–x, at viii.  Anna Passoni dell’Acqua, ‘Notazioni cromatiche dall’Egitto greco-romano. La versione dei LXX e i papiri’, Aegyptus 78 (1998), 77– 115; ‘Appunti sulla terminologia dei colori nella Bibbia e nei papiri’, in Isabella Andorlini et al. (eds.), Atti del XXII Congresso Internazionale di Papirologia, Firenze 23 – 29 agosto 1998 (Firenze: Istituto papirologico, 2001), pp. 1067– 1075; ‘Colori e trasparenze nella haute couture dell’Egitto greco-romano’, Semitica et Classica 1 (2008), 113 – 138.  Lourdes García Ureña, ‘Χλωρός y su riqueza cromática en la Septuaginta’, in τί ἡμῖν καὶ σοί; Lo que hay entre tú y nosotros. Estudios en honor de María Victoria Spottorno (Córdoba: UCOPress, 2016), pp. 119 – 131; Anna Angelini, ‘Translating Colors in Antiquity: the Semantics of Κόκκινος in the Septuagint’, Semitica et Classica 10 (2017), 49 – 58; Anna Rambiert-Kwaśniewska, ‘What Do Byssus and Crimson Imply about the Hebrew Bible and the Septuagint?’, The Biblical Annals 8 (3, 2018), 297– 317.  Lourdes García Ureña, ‘Colour Adjectives in the New Testament’, NTS 61 (2, 2015), 219 – 238; Lourdes García Ureña, ‘El oro: metal y color en el Nuevo Testamento’, in Israel Muñoz Gallarte and Dámaris Romero (eds.), Nova et vetera. Homenaje al Prof. Antonio Piñero (Córdoba: El Almendro, 2016), pp. 279 – 292; Lourdes García Ureña, ‘The Book of Revelation: a Chromatic Story’, in Adela Yarbro Collins (ed.), Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense LXIV. New Perspectives on the Book of Revelation, Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 291 (Leuven; Paris; Bristol, CT: Peeters, 2017), pp. 393 – 419. In any case, the study of the four horses of the book of Revelation has always aroused the interest of specialists: Allen Kerkeslager, ‘Apollo, Greco-Roman Prophecy, and the Rider on the White Horse in Rev 6:2’, JBL 112 (1, 1993), 116 – 121; Henri Volohonsky, ‘Is the Color of That Horse Really Pale?’, The International Journal of Transpersonal Studies 18 (2, 1999), 167– 168.

I.1.3 Status quaestionis

9

With respect to the Hebrew version, the bibliography is wider, although monographs are still scarce. In 1957, Antoine Guillaumont carried out the first synchronic study, establishing a distinction between designations that are direct (white, black, red and greenish-yellow) and indirect (words used to denote colour, for example, in precious stones, pigments, metals, etc.).²⁰ Some aspects of this approach would be continued some years later by Pelio Fronzaroli, who focused his attention on the analysis of colour adjectives.²¹ After this would come studies based on Berlin and Kay’s theory of BCT: in 1994, A New Approach to Basic Hebrew Colour Terms and in 2006, Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew in Diachronic Aspect. ²² In 2009, François Jacquesson, using a new approach of addressing only those words which appear in the biblical text and analyzing how and why they are grouped together, would publish Les mots de la couleur dans les textes bibliques. ²³ Lastly, we must mention some of the recent studies of specific colour lexemes or groups of lexemes belonging to similar tonalities, such as Scarlet and Harlots: Seeing Red in the Hebrew Bible; Un estudio sobre el color: los usos de ‫ ָלָבן‬en la Biblia hebrea and the catalogue of the exhibition Out of the Blue, ‫אל עומק התכלת‬, on the occasion of the 70th anniversary of the state of Israel.²⁴ Of the monographs, I will mention only the three principal studies done so far, with their respective contributions and limitations: Roland Gradwohl, with his Die Farben im Alten Testament: Eine terminologische Studie (1963),²⁵ was a pioneer in the field. Gradwohl analyzed the terms with precision, taking into account both the Septuagint and the Vulgate, but did not examine the literary genre in which a colour term appears, nor did he focus on the entity described, something which is often essential for determining the colour expressed by a colour adjective or noun. Besides this, since he wrote before the biblical texts from Qumran were made public, those texts are not addressed in his study.

 Guillaumont, ‘La désignation des couleurs en hébreu’, 339 – 348.  Pelio Fronzaroli, ‘Sulla struttura dei colori in ebraico biblico’, in Vittore Pisani (ed.), Studi linguistici in onore di Vittore Pisani (Brescia: Paideia, 1969), pp. 377– 389.  Kevin Massey-Gillespie, ‘A New Approach to Basic Hebrew Colour Terms’, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 20 (1, 1994), 1– 11; Maria Bulakh, ‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew in Diachronic Aspect’, in Leonid E. Kogan et al. (eds.), Babel und Bibel 3. Annual of Ancient Near Eastern, Old Testament, and Semitic Studies (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006), pp. 181– 216.  François Jacquesson, ‘Les mots de la couleur dans les textes bibliques’, 2009. Online in Research Project Histoire et géographie de la couleur (CNRS-ISCC 2008 – 2009), available at: www.academia. edu/33347300/Les_mots_de_couleurs_dans_les_textes_bibliques_2008_; 15/04/2019.  Mukti Barton, ‘I Am Black and Beautiful’, Black Theology: An International Journal 2 (2, 2004), 167– 187; Scott B. Noegel, ‘Scarlet and Harlots: Seeing Red in the Hebrew Bible’, HUCA 87 (1, 2016), 1– 47; Carlos Santos Carretero, ‘Un estudio sobre el color: los usos de ‫ ָלָבן‬en la Biblia hebrea’, Sefarad 77 (1, 2017), 39 – 64; Oree Meiri et al., Out of the Blue, ‫( אל עומק התכלת‬Jerusalem: Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem, 2018).  Roland Gradwohl, Die Farben im Alten Testament: Eine terminologische Studie (Berlin: A. Töpelmann, 1963).

10

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

Athalya Brenner, in Colour Terms in the Old Testament (1982), takes as a starting point the theory of Berlin and Kay, in Basic Color Terms: their Universality and Evolution, on the universal character of colour and its progressive acquisition in languages according to their cultural development. This theory, however, cannot be applied with rigour to the Hebrew Bible, on the one hand because we cannot be certain of the date the books were written, and on the other because the modern concept of colour inherited from Newtonian colour theory confers an abstract value that did not exist in antiquity. In our opinion, Brenner’s work is determined by her desire to ratify Berlin and Kay’s theory using the Hebrew Bible. In her favour, however, it should be noted that her work addresses not only what today we know as colour terms, but also what have been denominated as indirect colour connotations, which include toponyms, metals and precious stones. John E. Hartley, in The Semantics of Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes (2010), also echoes the proposal of Berlin and Kay and its re-formulation in the research project World Colour Survey (WCS). ²⁶ However, he points out its limitations when applied to the languages of antiquity, as we have mentioned earlier.²⁷ He then follows the methodology of the Semantics in Ancient Hebrew Database, in which each lexeme must be analyzed according to seven different factors (‘root and comparative material; formal characteristics; syntagmatics; the Versions; lexical/semantic fields; exegesis; and conclusion’). Hartley carries out a serious, rigorous study that examines the colour terms as found in the Hebrew Bible up to Rabbinic Hebrew. On occasion, however, he does not study the root of the term in its totality, and gives too much weight to cognate languages as a determining factor in the expression of colour in Hebrew. He also introduces categories that are anachronistic to Semitic culture, such as the division of colours into chromatic and achromatic, or Berlin and Kay’s proposal regarding basic colours. Finally, his classification for presenting lexical entries is not clear, as this does not have a single criterion (the Munsell classification is included, with the addition of three more sections: colour terms of reduced use; foreign lexemes that serve as colour lexemes in Hebrew; and non-colour lexemes), requiring the user of the lexicon to have previously analyzed a perhaps unknown colour term. We cannot close this section without briefly evaluating the contributions of the principal lexicons and dictionaries to the language of colour. The lexicons have been the pioneers in the arduous task of determining the meanings of colour terms in cultures which are so unlike our own, often by focusing attention on the entities being described. Many of these lexicons have the merit of demonstrating the polysemy present in such terms, as well as recognizing the symbolism that some colour terms possess. However, they have the same deficiency as the studies we have just mentioned: for the meanings of these colour terms they provide the user with a variety of differ-

 This was done in 1976 with the aim of mitigating some of the deficiencies in Berlin and Kay’s thesis.  Vid. supra, pp. 6 – 7.

I.1.4 Colour in the biblical corpus

11

ent translations from which he must choose the one that seems the most appropriate for a given pericope. The sole exception to this is the Semantic Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew, edited by Reinier de Blois.²⁸ In that dictionary, along with the definitions of these lexemes, the linguist offers what he calls glosses; that is to say, possible translations that the user may choose from freely. In any case, the definitions of colour terms in the SDBH are at times redundant, as they include the translations of colours in the definitions. This is the case, for example, of ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq, which is defined as a ‘state whereby an object has a pale green or yellowish-green color’ and for which ‘greenish’ and ‘yellowish-green’ are given as translations.²⁹ The question the user will have is which translation is the most appropriate and why. It is therefore necessary to define colours with greater precision and to transmit this knowledge to the scholar/translator so that he or she is the one who decides which translation to use, based on the definition.

I.1.4 Colour in the biblical corpus I.1.4.1 The concept of colour in the Bible and in Greco-Latin antiquity As we have already stated, before analyzing colour terms in the Bible, it is necessary to examine the concept of colour that characterizes the biblical corpus. A first step in this is to look at the word for ‘colour’ itself and how this corresponds to its respective cultures: the Hebrew, the Greek and the Latin. A lexeme (a lexical unit endowed with meaning) for ‘colour’ does not appear as such in the Hebrew version. According to The Jewish Encyclopedia, ‫ עין‬ʿayin, ‘eye’ (Lev 13.55; Num 11.7; Prov 23.31; Ezek 1.4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8.2; 10.9; Dan 10.6) and ‫ מראה‬marʾeh, ‘appearance’ (Ezek 40.3) are used as synonyms for colour terms when the Hebrew writer compares one object to another with respect to colour.³⁰ However, when each of the contexts in which this parallelism is affirmed is analyzed, it does not seem that an allusion to colour can necessarily be deduced. More properly, ‫עין‬ ʿayin and ‫ מראה‬marʾeh refer to general aspect, i. e. appearance, rather than similitude. This is the case of the spot in Lev 13.55, the manna in Num 11.7 and the wine in Prov 23.31. The LXX interprets these as such, while in the Vulgate they are seen as colour and translated accordingly. As for the prophetic books, Ezekiel and Daniel use ‫ מראה‬marʾeh (Ezek 40.3) and ‫ עין‬ʿayin to precede bronze (Ezek 1.7; Dan 10.6), as if this were an idiomatic expression for describing the subjects of their vi-

 Reinier de Blois (ed.), Semantic Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew; © United Bible Societies 2000 – 2019; latest update: 29/11/2017; available at: http://www.sdbh.org/dictionary/main.php?language=en.  SDBH, s.v. ‫ ;ירקרק‬available at: http://www.sdbh.org/dictionary/main.php?language=en; 10/07/ 2018.  Emil G. Hirsch and Caspar Levias, ‘Color’, in Jewish Encyclopedia; available at: https://www.je wishencyclopedia.com/articles/4557-color; 12/11/2017.

12

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

sions. Ezekiel widens this use of ‫ עין‬ʿayin when referring to precious stones such as amber (Ezek 1.4, 27; 8.2), beryl (Ezek 1.16; 10.9) and crystal (Ezek 1.22). In the LXX, on the other hand, there are two lexemes which do denote colour, although their presence is sporadic: χρῶμα (4x) and χρόα (3x).³¹ These appear in books written directly in Greek (Wisdom [Wis 13.14; 15.4], 2 Maccabees and the Greek additions to Esther), and in translations of the book of Exodus: Exod 4.7; 34.29 – 30. Both are used in the same contexts to describe objects and people, and so they function as synonyms. In the first case, χρῶμα and χρόα refer to the various hues, produced by pigments and dyes, with which the statues of idols are decorated (Wis 15.4):³²

[…] εἶδος σπιλωθὲν χρώμασιν διηλλαγμένοις […] a figure stained with varied colours

In the second case, for the description of people, χρῶμα and χρόα are used to describe the visual effect caused in one’s face by intense emotions such as fear (Esth 15.7;³³ 2 Macc 3.16), by the recovery of health (Exod 4.7)³⁴ or by a personal religious experience (Exod 34.29 – 30). It is surprising that in these pericopes the translator of the LXX both lengthens the text and gives a more detailed description, when this is not the case in the Hebrew version.³⁵ We will now look more closely at Esth 15.7 and Exod 34.29, as these show clearly the conception that was held of χρῶμα/χρόα: Esth 15.7 narrates the famous episode in which the queen Esther faints when she appears before her husband the king: […] καὶ ἔπεσεν ἡ βασίλισσα καὶ μετέβαλεν τὸ χρῶμα αὐτῆς ἐν ἐκλύσει […] […] the queen fainted and her χρῶμα faded from this fainting […]

 Both lexemes denote colour by referring to the surface, principally the skin or face: Hartley, Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes, p. 69.  It might be considered that χρόα in Wis 13.14 has the meaning of ‘surface’; however, the Vulgate interprets this as ‘colour’ and therefore translates it with the lexeme color. For a more detailed study: Lourdes García Ureña, ‘Χλωρός in the Septuagint: colour or state?’, in press.  Esth 15.7 corresponds to one of the Greek additions to the book of Esther denominated ‘D’ and absent from the Hebrew Masoretic Text: Natalio Fernández Marcos and María Victoria Spottorno, La Biblia griega. Septuaginta. II. Libros históricos (Salamanca: Sígueme, 2011), p. 648.  LXX describes the disappearance of leprosy from Moses’ hand by referring to the change in skin colour: πάλιν ἀπεκατέστη εἰς τὴν χρόαν τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ. The verses before the leprosy episode had employed chromatic terms: γενήθη ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ ὡσεὶ χιών.  In Exod 4.7, the MT presents a much more concise text, using three words as opposed to the nine of the Greek version, and mentions only the disappearance of the leprosy, explaining that the hand recovered its initial aspect: ‫( והנה שבה כבשרו‬it was restored like his flesh). The same occurs in Exod 34.29 – 30; the MT version is briefer in both v. 29 and v. 30: ‫קרן עור פניו‬, ‘the skin of his face shone’.

I.1.4 Colour in the biblical corpus

13

The narrator of the Septuagint tells us not only of the queen’s fainting spell, but describes her aspect, with the expression μεταβάλλω τὸ χρῶμα, ‘to change/fade in χρῶμα’. The question that arises is whether χρῶμα refers to colour or to complexion.³⁶ The context helps to clarify this. Some verses earlier, the narrator had extolled the queen’s beauty (Esth 15.5): αὐτὴ ἐρυθριῶσα ἀκμῇ κάλλους αὐτῆς she blushing in the flower of her beauty

For this he employs a colour term, the verb ἐρυθριάω, ‘to blush’ (Esth 15.5). Thus, by creating a chromatic context, i. e. that of her rosy hue, he presents the queen’s robust, healthy aspect. It is not surprising, then, that he goes on to explain the effect that the queen’s fainting has on this aspect: μετέβαλεν τὸ χρῶμα αὐτῆς, ‘her χρῶμα faded’; that is to say, the rosy hue of the queen’s complexion has disappeared, since, as we know, when a person faints paleness occurs as the flow of blood diminishes in their face. This is how it is interpreted in the Vulgate: in pallorem colore mutato (Esth 15.10). Χρῶμα, therefore, denotes the hue of the queen’s countenance, as Muraoka has already suggested.³⁷ What is more, the expression μετέβαλεν τὸ χρῶμα αὐτῆς indicates not only the change in the queen’s colouration, but also a change in state, as the tonality of her face changes through fainting. Esther, terrified by the presence of the king, faints and μετέβαλεν τὸ χρῶμα αὐτῆς, ‘her colour fades’; that is, she becomes pale. We might take this a step further and conclude that in Esth 15.5 χρῶμα denotes the natural skin tone of a person’s face as the result of health or well-being.³⁸ Χρῶμα simultaneously expresses this facial colouring and the state of that person. Indeed, a change in χρῶμα implies a corresponding change in state: well-being as opposed to fainting from fear. The change in colour, then, is a symptom of the panic being experienced³⁹ and as a result of this intense emotion the individual faints. In Exod 34.29 the situation is very different.⁴⁰ The narrator of Exodus describes the aspect of Moses after the face-to-face encounter with God in which he receives the tablets of the law:

 Meanings proposed by LSJ and LEH, s.v. χρῶμα.  GELS, s.v. χρῶμα: ‘colour of skin’.  Currently, this colour term is also used to refer to the natural colouration of the skin, principally that of the face (Diccionario Akal del color, pp. 258 – 259, at 259, s.v. color,), although a person’s state is not mentioned.  The same occurs with the high priest in 2 Macc 3.16, when his panic is made visible by the colour of his face.  It is uncertain which Hebrew text (Vorlage) underlies the Greek translation: Nahum M. Sarna, ‘Exodus, Book Of. E. Textual Traditions’, ABD 2.

14

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

[…] Μωυσῆς οὐκ ᾔδει ὅ τι δεδόξασται ἡ ὄψις τοῦ χρώματος τοῦ προσώπου αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ λαλεῖν αὐτὸν αὐτῷ. […] Moses did not know that the appearance of the χρῶμα of his face was glorified, when God spoke to him.

The translator of Exodus uses the verbal lexeme δοξάζω, ‘to glorify’, a term of deep theological content that carries the biblical meaning of δόξα, ‘the divine radiance’, to express the divine nature of God in both his perceptible and imperceptible forms.⁴¹ However, making the subject ἡ ὄψις τοῦ χρώματος τοῦ προσώπου αὐτοῦ indicates that Moses himself is a participant in this divine splendour, as it emanates from his face, more precisely from the χρῶμα of his face. Although NETS, Brenton and the Biblia griega. Septuaginta translate χρῶμα as ‘skin’ and ‘complexion’, one of the meanings of this term according to the LSJ, the earlier definition of χρῶμα as the natural hue of a person’s face as the result of health or well-being also fits this context, as what we are told is that brightness is emitted from this natural skin tone; that is to say, his colouring has become luminous.⁴² As we have already commented,⁴³ in antiquity colour did not only express a specific tonality, but also luminosity, a good example of which can be found in Euripides’ The Phoenician Women, when Polyneces and Eteocles are described before their battle: ἔσταν δὲ λαμπρὼ χρῶμά τ᾽ οὐκ ἠλλαξάτην they stood radiant and with their colour unfaded (1246)

The fact that χρῶμα conveys luminosity allows us to go a step further, as it reveals the state of Moses: that of being in communion with God. This special communion with God is thus reflected in Moses’ face, and the natural hue of his skin now glows with a unique radiance. After analyzing these terms, we can affirm that χρῶμα and χρόα are used in the LXX as synonyms and describe both objects and people. When they describe objects (the idols), they denote a hue produced by a pigment or dye, what is nowadays known as a ‘material colour’ or ‘pigment colour’, the result of subtractive mixing.⁴⁴ On the other hand, when χρῶμα and χρόα describe a person, they denote a chromatic characteristic of the state of the individual’s well-being as reflected in his face. Depending on the context, χρῶμα and χρόα in some cases suggest what is known today as hue and/or degree of saturation (Exod 4.7; Esth 15.7; 2 Macc 3.16), and in other cases luminosity (Exod 34.29 – 30). In these pericopes, colour is presented

 Gerhard Kittel, ‘δοκέω δόξα δοξάζω συνδοξάζω ἔνδοξος ἐνδοξάζω παράδοξος’, TDNT 2, 232– 255, at 244, 253.  Today, the term ‘self-luminous colour’ refers to the light emitted by a luminous body that acts as a stimulus to chromatic perception: Diccionario Akal del color, p. 259, s.v. color autoluminoso.  Vid. supra, p. 6.  Diccionario Akal del color, p. 260, s.v. color materia.

I.1.4 Colour in the biblical corpus

15

not as an intrinsic quality of a person, but as a state, and a change in this state carries with it a change of colour, whether this is with regard to health (Exod 4.7),⁴⁵ fainting (Esth 15.7), fear (2 Macc 3.16) or communion with God (Exod 34.29 – 30). The Septuagint, then, uses both χρῶμα and χρόα to designate what is visible on the surface of a person (in which case it indicates a state) or an object, whose origin may be either natural, such as that which characterizes the face or outer appearance of a person, or artificial, i. e. obtained from pigments. In the Vulgate,⁴⁶ we find that the lexeme color is used more frequently (31x).⁴⁷ It is sometimes used to translate Hebrew terms such as ‫ עין‬ʿayin, ‘eye’ or ‘appearance’, referring to manna or wine (Num 11.7; Prov 23.31), ‫ צבע‬tseba, ‘coloured cloth’ (Judg 5.30), ‫ רקמה‬riqmah, ‘embroidery’ (1 Chr 29.2) and perhaps Greek terms such as ποικίλος, in the episode of the flock raised by Jacob to free himself from Laban (Gen 30.37, 39; 31.10), especially since the Hebrew version lacks an equivalent term.⁴⁸ It is also used for the previously mentioned χρόα (2 Macc 3.16; Wis 13.14) and χρῶμα (Wis 15.4), which refer to a change in skin colour due to fright and to the colours used for painting idols. At other times, color is not used to translate any specific chromatic term, but is a way of: a) giving emphasis in the Latin version to the varied colouring of the textiles enumerated in the Hebrew text (Exod 39.3, 5); b) clarifying, for example, when changes in the clinical signs of leprosy are described in Leviticus (Lev 13.2, 3, 4, 21, 26, 32; 14.56), or when the quality of gold is altered (Lam 4.1); c) making explicit reference to the presence of colour in expressions whose chromatic content is unknown to the reader; for example, when ‘the wool of Sajar’ in Ezek 27.18 is translated as in lanis coloris optimi. ⁴⁹ Finally, there is a tendency in the Vulgate to add the word color to colour adjectives like red, white and blue (Lev 13.10, 36, 39, 42; Esth 1.6; 15.8), to substitute color for

 Moses knows that his hand is cured of leprosy because the colour white, a symptom of the disease (Exod 4.6), has disappeared. The translator of the LXX comments: ἀπεκατέστη εἰς τὴν χρόαν τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ, ‘it was again restored to the colour of his flesh’ (Exod 4.7).  As in the case of the Septuagint, we do not know the Hebrew source that was used for the Vulgate. In any case, it does not always coincide with the MT. Exod 39.3, 5 could be one example of this.  31x: Gen 30.37, 39; 31.10; Exod 39.3, 5; Lev 13.2, 3, 4, 10, 21, 26, 32, 36, 39, 42; 14.56; Num 11.7; Judg 5.30; 1 Chr 29.2; Esth 1.6; 15:8, 10; 2 Macc 3.16; Job 28.16; Prov 23.31; Wis 13.14; 15.4; Ecclus (Sir) 43.20; Lam 4.1; Ezek 23.14; 27.18. In the Vulgate, color appears two more times: 4 Esd 6.44; 14.39. These have been temporarily excluded from this study, as explained in note 107.  We do not know whether the Vulgate is following the LXX here or, by introducing maculosa et uaria to translate the Hebrew lexemes, it is the Latin language itself that determines the use of diuerso colore (Gen 30.39) or diuersorum colorum (Gen 31.10).  The Vulgate also distances itself here from the Vetus Latina, which logically follows the LXX in translating this as: lana a Meleto or lanas de Mileto (Vetus Latina Database: Ezek 27.18).

16

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

chromatic terms such as λευκότης (Sir 43.20) or ‫ שׁשׁר‬shashar, ‘vermilion’ (Ezek 23.14) and to vary the source text by adding a chromatic gloss that is found in neither the Hebrew nor the Greek versions (Job 28.16). Similar to what occurs in the LXX, the Vulgate uses color to denote the natural or artificial colour that appears in both people and objects. In people, the presence of colour indicates a state, a sign of experiencing fear or anxiety (2 Macc 3.16 Esth 15.10), as it does in the Septuagint. In the Vulgate, however, color is also used to express the symptoms of happiness (Esth 15.8) and an illness, such as leprosy. Here color is applied to people (Lev 13.2– 4, 10, 21, 26, 32, 36, 39, 42) and to objects, clothing or houses (Lev 14.56). Finally, in contrast to the chromatic sobriety of the Hebrew and Greek versions, the Vulgate is more sensitive to the perception of colour, occasionally revealing it where in the Hebrew and Greek versions it is merely latent, whether this is to highlight, to clarify or to give a general emphasis to the text itself. In light of this, it can be concluded that χρῶμα, χρόα and color designate natural tonalities (a change in facial colour, the colour of wine, etc.) as well as artificial ones derived from dyes or pigments. They describe the outer appearance of a person, which in this case coincides with his or her state, or of an object. To a great extent, this concept of colour is similar to that found in the first treatises on colour that have come down to us from the Greeks. While not even Plato or Aristotle would elaborate a systematic theory of colour, in these early studies we can already detect attempts to define colour, to classify colours and to analyze their origins. Plato defined colour as that which is perceived first visually (Chrm. 167c-d). A similar definition proposed by Aristotle –τὸ γὰρ ὁρατὸν ἐστι χρώμα, ‘what is visible is colour’ (De An. 418a27)– has been maintained throughout history. From this, the stoic Zeno would affirm that τὰ χρώματα ἐπίχρωσιν τῆς ὕλης ὑπέλαβεν, ‘colours are the surface tint of matter’.⁵⁰ The author of De Coloribus characterized them in much the same way, arguing that colour is a tool for knowing the world around us.⁵¹ He also perceived that colour is present in plants, animals and people, to which it is intrinsically linked (792b). At the same time, he realized that colour is not permanent, but changes according to the season of the year, degree of humidity and stage of development (794b–799b). In other words, he was aware that this type of colour is directly related to state. Finally, he studied the colour that is produced by the mixing of substances, that is to say, which has its origin in dyes and pigments. Centuries later, χρῶμα would be defined in the Suda as τὸ ἐν τοῖς σώμασιν, ὡς τὸ λευκὸν καὶ τὸ μέλαν καὶ τὰ τούτων μεταξύ, ‘what exists in bodies, such as “white”,

 Hans Von Arnim, ed., Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta, vol. 1 (Leipzig: Teubner, 1905), pp. 3 – 71.  De Coloribus is the first specific treatise on color, dating from the late 4th century–early 3rd century BC. Its authorship has long been attributed to Aristotle, although this is contested today, as its style and the manner of presenting its content are quite removed from the usual Aristotelian dialectical and speculative discourse (Aristotele, I colori e i suoni, Maria Fernanda Ferrini, ed. [Milano: Bompiani, 2008], pp. 41– 42; 56; 67, note 3).

I.1.4 Colour in the biblical corpus

17

“black”, and the intermediates to these’.⁵² We may conclude that, for the Greeks, the concept of colour was not abstract, but concrete; i. e. that which is visible and found on the surface of an object. To paraphrase Sandra Busatta, colour is what ‘covers’ an object or a person, an aspect of the surface, and in particular the indicator of an internal state, as in one’s complexion.⁵³ With respect to the classification of colours and their origins, the pre-Socratics distinguished four simple (ἁπλᾶ) colours –white, black, red and ochre– and related them to the four elements of air, water, earth and fire. What is more, they postulated that all the other colours arose from mixing these (Democritus). Aristotle, meanwhile, distinguished seven simple colours⁵⁴ and proposed that the rest came from mixing light and darkness (Arist. Sens. 442a). We can deduce, then, that the modern classification that distinguishes between achromatic colours (white, grey and black) and chromatic ones (all the others) did not then exist. Light, nevertheless, was considered to be a fundamental element of colour. The Romans would also examine colour to a profound degree. In general lines, their concept of colour is similar to that found in Greece. Lucretius, for example, in De Rerum Natura, defined colour as the first property of an object to be perceived visually: the visible property, or simulacrum (outer appearance). Pliny the Elder, for his part, would argue in his Historia Naturalis that colour was the key for classifying the natural world. He included pigments and dyes in his study of colour, as well as that which defines the material identity of a precious stone.⁵⁵ It is, for example, colour that makes an emerald an emerald and not a ruby. From this, we can see that colour had not only a descriptive function, but a cognitive one.⁵⁶ That is to say, it was a question not only of seeing, but knowing. In conclusion, colour in Greco-Latin culture was not an abstract notion, but a concrete one; i. e. colour is what covers an object or a human being, often indicating an internal state. It is captured by the sense of vision through the presence of light and has a cognitive as well as descriptive function.

 Suda, n. 538, 539.  Sandra Busatta, ‘The Perception of Color and the Meaning of Brilliance Among Archaic and Ancient Populations and Its Reflections on Language’, Antrocom Online Journal of Anthropology 10 (2, 2014), 309 – 347, at 312.  These are: φαιός or ξανθός, φοῖνιξ, ἁλουργός, πράσινος, κυάνεος, λευκός and μέλας.  For a more detailed study: Mark Bradley, Colour and Meaning in Ancient Rome (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009), pp. 74– 86; 87– 110.  Angelini, ‘Translating Colors in Antiquity’, 49 – 58.

18

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

I.1.4.2 The linguistics of colour in the biblical corpus This concept of colour is not merely theoretical, as we find it in the chromatic language of the biblical corpus itself, where it determines some of its characteristics, among which we can point out the following:⁵⁷ 1. Colour lexemes do not appear as abstract colours in the biblical corpus; in fact, red, blue, green and so on are not mentioned. Biblical colour terms always refer to specific visual aspects (hue/luminosity/saturation) that describe an entity (a person or object). In this sense, we can say that they are embodied colour terms because they appear inseparably linked to concrete entities.⁵⁸ Thus, for example, ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq is embodied in ‫ נגע‬nega, ‘spot (of mould)’ (Lev 13.49; 14.37) and ‫ חרוץ‬ḥārûṣ, ‘gold’ (Ps 68.14); χλωρός in ἄχι, ‘herb’ (Isa 19.7) and βοτάνη, ‘vegetation, pasture grass’ (2 Kgs 19.26), χόρτος, ‘herb, grass’(Gen 1.30; Isa 15.6), etc.; and uiridis in arbor, ‘tree’ (Ecclus [Sir] 14.18), lignum, ‘wood, tree’ (Ezek 17.24; 20.47; Luke 23.31), holus, ‘vegetable, grass, herb’ (Ps 36.2 VulgHeb [37.2 MT]), faenum, ‘hay, grass’ (Mark 6.39; Rev 8.7), satio, ‘sowed fields’ (Ecclus [Sir] 40.22) and so on. This embodiment is a clear reflection of the concept of colour that we have just described, as being that which ‘covers something’ and is perceived by the eyes thanks to the presence of light. In this sense, it is interesting that the first colour term in Bible appears on the sixth day of creation (Gen 1.30), when light has already been created. 2. Colour terms express the visible aspect of objects, not only what today we refer to as hue, but also the qualities of luminosity and saturation. The chromatic variations that result from a greater or lesser amount of light were often expressed in antiquity by a single lexeme.⁵⁹ Each term, then, can encompass a wide range of colours, or in current terminology, its particular ‘pantone’ (colour spectrum). For example, χλωρός and uiridis denote a chromatic spectrum of their own which may include hues with different degrees of saturation, ranging from a generic green to a pale or yellowish green, or different hues altogether, such as yellow.⁶⁰

 In this section, we are not limiting ourselves to only those colour terms related to green but to the entire chromatic spectrum as it appears in the biblical corpus.  The concept of embodiment expressed here is completely different from that used in cognitive linguistics, which stresses that bodily experience plays a fundamental role in our thinking: ‘The centrality of human embodiment directly influences what and how things can be meaningful for us, the ways in which these meanings can be developed and articulated, the ways we are able to comprehend and reason about our experience, and the actions we take’ (Mark Johnson, The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason [Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1987], p. xix).  Guillaumont, ‘La désignation des couleurs en hébreu’, pp. 344– 346; Jacques Andre´, E´tude sur les termes de couleur dans la langue latine (Paris: Librairie C. Klincksieck, 1949), pp. 12– 13.  Vid. infra, pp. 84– 85, 130 – 135.

I.1.4 Colour in the biblical corpus

3.

4.

19

Colour in the Hebrew text, and in the Greek and Latin versions as well, is expressed by terms that denote not only colour but the material of which an object is made. This is true of textiles, precious stones,⁶¹ metals or even the source from which a colour originates (insects, molluscs, etc.). On some occasions, these terms are used simply to denote colour, as in Isa 1.18, where sin is likened to scarlet and its purification to wool. However, at other times it is difficult to say precisely whether the term designates only the material or its colour as well, as in the enumerations of the textiles that adorn the temple (Exod 26.31, 36; 27.16; etc.) or of priestly vestments (Exod 28.8, 15, 33, etc.). These are what Guillaumont calls ‘indirect designations’,⁶² while Kuschel and Monberg refer to them as ‘contextualized colour lexemes’; that is to say, ‘terms that are ineludibly linked to a specific natural or cultural object’.⁶³ As a result, the chromatic spectrum of colour terms linked to textiles, precious stones and metals becomes enriched as it encompasses the various tonalities that the material object itself may have. An example of this is the case of πορφυροῦς and its Latin counterpart purpureus. Although the dictionaries and translations use the adjective ‘purple’, it is well known that, according to the process used for obtaining dyes, πορφυροῦς and purpureus can refer to various shades of purple. These may be tinted with red, blue, violet or black.

I.1.4.3 Specific demands for modern research Because of this, the study of chromatic lexis in antiquity and, more specifically, in the biblical corpus, poses a series of specific demands that must be taken into consideration by modern researchers. These are:

 Up to now, it has proven an arduous task to identify the precious stones mentioned in both the Old and New Testaments, as attested to by James A. Harrell et al., ‘Hebrew Gemstones in the Old Testament: A Lexical, Geological, and Archaeological Analysis’, Bulletin for Biblical Research 27 (1, 2017), 1– 52; James A. Harrell, ‘Old Testament Gemstones: a Philological, Geological, and Archaeological Assessment of the Septuagint’, Bulletin for Biblical Research 21 (2, 2011), 141– 171; Cynthia L. MillerNaudé and Jacobus A. Naudé, ‘Textual Interrelationships Involving the Septuagint Translations of the Precious Stones in the Breastpiece of the High Priest’, HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 76 (4, 2020), a6141. https://doi. org/10.4102/hts.v76i4.6141 and Una Jart, ‘The Precious Stones in the Revelation of St. John xxi.18 – 21’, Studia Theologica 24 (1970), 150 – 181. As the entity cannot be determined with certainty, it is difficult to know the precise colour of each stone. For this reason, those that refer to green have for the moment been excluded from our study. We have only included the one mentioned in Gen 2.12 in the Septuagint –the adjective πράσινος– as it is in fact a Greek colour term. Vid. infra, pp. 123 – 129.  Guillaumont, ‘La désignation des couleurs en hébreu’, p. 340.  Rolf Kuschel and Torben Monberg, ‘We Don’t Talk Much about Colour Here: A Study of Colour Semantics on Bellona Island’, Man New Series 9 (2, 1974), 213 – 242, at 217.

20

1.

2.

3.

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

The need to adopt a concept of colour closer to that which existed in antiquity. On this point, one of the definitions of colour that appears in the Diccionario Akal del color may be helpful, as it is similar to the Greek and Latin definitions: ‘name used in common speech […] something which can be seen in things which have it’;⁶⁴ or that proposed by Lyons:⁶⁵ ‘colour is that property of physical entities and substances which is describable in terms of hue, luminosity (or brightness) and saturation and which makes it possible for human beings to differentiate between otherwise perceptually identical entities and substances, more especially between entities and substances that are perceptually identical with respect to size, shape and texture’. This definition has the advantage of respecting the colour concept of antiquity (as that which is visible in objects and human beings), considering that the chromatic lexicon of antiquity is characterized especially by luminosity, while at the same time providing an approach to the current canons of colour, in which the determining factor is tone or hue. However, both of these definitions overlook the fact that colour in antiquity could also indicate a state. Therefore, following part of Lyons’s definition, we propose the following: ‘what covers a person or object, in many cases reflecting a state, and is describable in terms of hue, luminosity (or brightness) and saturation, making it possible for human beings to differentiate between otherwise perceptually identical entities and substances, and more especially between entities and substances that are perceptually identical with respect to size, shape and texture’. As biblical colour terms are embodied, the first step in discovering the meaning of a colour is to consider the entity described in the context that it appears. This entity will provide essential information for determining the tonality expressed by a given chromatic lexeme in its specific context. It is essential, therefore, not to undervalue connotation, but rather to grant it as much importance as denotation, to which it will provide useful nuances. As chromatic terms encompass a specific pantone that would have been obvious to the biblical author and his audience, the modern reader/translator must be aware that the majority of colour terms are polysemic. This polysemy is generally no more than a linguistic reflection of the chromatic variations present in nature, some produced by the diverse degrees of luminosity or saturation that these entities possess. That is to say, it is a motivated polysemy; and so, for example, χλωρός, depending on whether it expresses hue, brightness or saturation, possesses various meanings: green or yellow when referring to hue, light green when referring to brightness, and greyish green when referring to saturation, de-

 Diccionario Akal del color, p. 258, s.v. color.  John Lyons, ‘The Vocabulary of Color with Particular Reference to Ancient Greek and Classical Latin’, in Alexander Borg (ed.), The Language of Color in the Mediterranean: an Anthology on Linguistic and Ethnographic Aspects of Color Terms, vol. 1 (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1999), pp. 38 – 75, at 42.

I.1.5 Theoretical framework

4.

5.

6.

21

pending on the entity being described (plants, sand, honey, a sick person, etc.).⁶⁶ As some chromatic terms fall into the category of ‘indirect designations’ or ‘contextualized colour lexemes’, it is necessary to know the characteristics of the material to which they are linked (metal, textile, precious stone, etc.). In other words, the linguistic study of chromatic language in the biblical corpus (which can be extended to the languages of antiquity in general) implies the inclusion of knowledge which is not strictly linguistic, but drawn from fields such as archaeology, history, mineralogy or botany. It is essential, then, to aim for an interdisciplinary study that will illuminate the meaning of these colour terms.⁶⁷ In the case of the Bible, such an approach becomes wider still, as to a certain extent it spans three different cultures: the Hebrew, the Greek and the Latin. The modern researcher must acquire a wide-ranging knowledge that will embrace all of these dimensions if he hopes to understand the thought of antiquity. The study of colour terms is done from the texts themselves. The biblical corpus comprises a series of books in a variety of literary genres, and so the question of genre or literary form may be a determining factor. For example, when studying the term ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq, it is not the same to analyze this lexeme as it appears in poetic texts such as Ps 68.14, where the colour adjective is used as a motif, as when in Leviticus, a legal text, it is used as a clinical sign of health or illness. Given that the chromatic lexis of the Septuagint and the Vulgate is the specific manifestation of a long chromatic tradition, it is essential to identify the chromatic spectrum that colour lexemes possess in their respective languages before proceeding to examine the specific tonalities that appear in each corpus. With the aim of respecting the language of colour as it appears in the biblical corpus and not simply providing the reader with an updated semantic typology of this language, the meaning of a colour term must be expressed according to a definition; that is to say, a statement which reflects the features that define it in the precise context in which it appears.

I.1.5 Theoretical framework I.1.5.1 Structuralism: the componential analysis of meaning From the beginning, it seemed to us that componential analysis could provide the crucial theoretical framework needed for this research, following the method proposed by the Spanish exegete Juan Mateos in Método de análisis semántico: aplicado  LSJ, s.v. χλωρός. We are using the LSJ here for the clarity of the examples given.  Mark S. Smith, ‘Words and Their Worlds’, in Eberhard Bons et al. (eds.), Biblical Lexicology: Hebrew and Greek: Semantics – Exegesis – Translation (Berlin; Boston: De Gruyter, 2015), pp. 3 – 31, at 31, points out that, without the cultural context, the lexicographer may overlook crucial aspects that lie deep within the meaning of the words themselves.

22

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

al griego del Nuevo Testamento ⁶⁸ and revised by his disciple Jesús Peláez del Rosal (2018).⁶⁹ We felt that some of Mateos’s ideas would facilitate the study of colour language and to these the present study is greatly indebted, specifically: a) The important role of the contextual factor in the meaning of a word, as it enables us to distinguish the different meanings possessed by a single lexeme.⁷⁰ b) The difference between meaning (‘the information contained in and transmitted by a term in isolation or in context’;⁷¹ ‘expressed in a definition that is clearly formulated and joins together a word’s semantic features’⁷²) and translation (‘the statement in another language [the language of the term] of what is stated in the language of origin, preserving semantic and stylistic equivalences’).⁷³ c) The constant reference to the entity as a connoted element when colour adjectives are analyzed.⁷⁴ This proven methodology⁷⁵ presents some nevertheless insurmountable obstacles for the study of colour language. First of all, colour is thought of as an intrinsic quality  Juan Mateos, Método de análisis semántico: aplicado al griego del Nuevo Testamento (Córdoba: El Almendro, 1989). The director and coordinator of this study had the good fortune to work with this exegete in the final two years of his life.  Jesús Pela´ez del Rosal, New Testament Lexicography: Introduction, Theory, Method (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2018).  Jesús Peláez del Rosal, ‘El factor contextual como elemento determinante del significado de los lexemas. El caso de ἀπολείπω’, in Vicente Balaguer and Vicente Collado (eds.), V Simposio Bíblico Español. La Biblia en el Arte y la Literatura. I: Literatura (Valencia: Fundación Bíblica Española, 1999), pp. 411– 418, at 411: ‘The context has a determining value in the formation of new meanings for a lexeme, as it introduces changes in its formula and in its semic development, generating new meanings and, consequently, new translations’.  DGENT 4, p. iii.  Pela´ez del Rosal, New Testament Lexicography, p. 14.  DGENT 4, p. iii.  Pela´ez del Rosal, New Testament Lexicography, p. 14. This aspect has also been pointed out from the perspective of cognitive linguistics by Eve Sweetser, ‘Compositionality and Blending: Semantic Composition in a Cognitively Realistic Framework’, in Theo Janssen and Gisela Redeker (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Foundations, Scope, and Methodology, Cognitive Linguistics Research 15 (Berlin; New York: De Gruyter, 1999), pp. 129 – 162, at 139.  In relation to New Testament Greek, two great dictionaries will serve as examples of this: Johannes P. Louw and Eugene A. Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains, 2nd edn, 2 vols. (New York: United Bible Societies, 1989); and Juan Mateos and Jesús Pela´ez del Rosal (dirs.), Diccionario griego-español del Nuevo Testamento (DGENT). Análisis semántico de los vocablos, 5 vols. (Cordoba, El Almendro, 2000 – 2012), in which the director of the present work has participated. In the Semitic area: Franceso Zanella, ‘The Contribution of Componential Analysis to the Semantic Analysis of a Lexical Field of Ancient Hebrew: Some Concrete Examples from the Lexical Field of the Substantives of Gift’, European Journal of Jewish Studies 2 (2, 2008), 189 – 212; Gerrit J. Van Steenbergen, Semantics, World View and Bible Translation: an Integrated Analysis of a Selection of Hebrew Lexical Items Referring to Negative Moral Behaviour in the Book of Isaiah (Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS, 2006); Gerrit J. Van Steenbergen, ‘Componential Analysis of Meaning and Cognitive Linguistics: Some Prospects for Biblical Hebrew Lexicology (Part 1)’, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages

I.1.5 Theoretical framework

23

(‘that by which something is and what it is like’).⁷⁶ However, as has just been shown, colour in both the Septuagint and the Vulgate is, on many occasions, the indication of a state. With regard to the Hebrew Bible, Reinier de Blois, from the perspective of cognitive linguistics, considers that Hebrew colour terms indicate a state/process,⁷⁷ and for this reason he includes them in the cognitive category of events (‘all states, processes, actions, and causative actions featuring one or more objects or other events’).⁷⁸ The second obstacle to componential analysis is that the type of definition used to express the meaning of a colour adjective is in the end a tautology, as the element defined forms part of the definition. Thus, for example, λευκός is defined as ‘white colouration (A) attributed to (R) entity’.⁷⁹ Not only this, but can it be affirmed that λευκός in the New Testament is a monosemic term that always denotes what in English or Spanish we understand as ‘white’? Could it not be a polysemic term with at least two meanings, ‘bright’ and ‘white’, as proposed by the BDAG or Louw and Nida? The problem is a deeper one that lies at the very foundation of componential analysis. In this approach, the meaning of a lexeme is ‘a set of distinctive features’.⁸⁰ These semantic features, according to the method of semantic analysis, constitute the set of semes (the semantic components) of a lexeme.⁸¹ In the case of the colour white, the specific semes that constitute its meaning are: quality, colouration and whiteness. However, when it is affirmed that ‘the specific semes of colour (e. g. whiteness, blackness) are data of immediate experience and cannot be analyzed’,⁸² a tautology is produced. Componential analysis overlooks the fact that ‘our bodily configuration is capable of determining the categories that we can establish’.⁸³ As Anna

28 (1, 2002), 19 – 38; Gerrit J. Van Steenbergen, ‘Componential Analysis of Meaning and Cognitive Linguistics: Some Prospects for Biblical Hebrew Lexicology (Part 2)’, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 29 (1, 2003), 109 – 126. This last author uses componential analysis within the framework of cognitive linguistics. For a general evaluation of componential analysis: John Lyons, Linguistic Semantics: an Introduction (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995).  Dámaris Romero González, El adjetivo en el Nuevo Testamento: Clasificación semántica. Tesis Doctoral (Córdoba: Universidad de Córdoba, 2007), p. 110; available at: http://biblioteca.universia.net/ htmlbura/verColeccion/params/id/32080.html; 07/08/2019; Pela´ez del Rosal, New Testament Lexicography, p. 126.  In fact, De Blois uses the expression ‘colour (state/process)’ as the lexical domain of each of the different colour terms: SDBH, s.v. ‫ ;ירק‬s.v. ‫ ;אדמדם‬s.v. ‫ ;לבן‬etc.; available at: http://www.sdbh.org/ dictionary/main.php?language=en; 7/08/2019.  SDBH, ‘Lexical Domain’; available at: http://www.sdbh.org/dictionary/main.php?language=en; 6/ 08/2019.  Pela´ez del Rosal, New Testament Lexicography, p. 127.  Pela´ez del Rosal, New Testament Lexicography, p. 14.  Pela´ez del Rosal, New Testament Lexicography, p. 14.  Pela´ez del Rosal, New Testament Lexicography, p. 127.  Iraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano, ‘Lingüística cognitiva: origen, principios y tendencias’, in Iraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano et al. (eds.), Lingüística cognitiva, 2nd edn (Barcelona: Anthropos, 2016), pp. 13 – 38, at 20.

24

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

Wierzbicka proposes, colour is perceived by the brain through sensations that are personal and therefore incommunicable. However, the brain is capable of connecting these sensations to something that is found outside of us, in our surroundings, such as fire, the sky, the earth, day/night, the sun and so forth. This ‘something’ is in turn transformed into a concept (fire, sky, sun, etc.) that we relate to directly with our colour vision. It is precisely through such concepts that we can communicate to others the colour we perceive. Indeed, in ancient texts we find that colours are defined through entities, as in the Corpus Hippocraticum, which describes the colour ὑπόχλωρος with the lexeme λεκιθώδης, ‘like egg yolk’ (Epid. 4.14). Colours are, in the words of the Polish linguist, ‘environmental concepts’.⁸⁴ Faced with such obstacles, it was necessary to find another theoretical framework that would be suitable for addressing the language of colour in the Bible.

I.1.5.2 Cognitive linguistics In 2010, Iraide Ibarretxe pointed out that cognitive linguistics provides a series of useful principles for lexicographical research.⁸⁵ Some of these seem to us particularly relevant for the study of colour language in the biblical corpus: – Meaning is the essence of language, and so the entire linguistic and grammatical mechanism is semantically motivated. – Linguistic meaning (the information relevant to the speaker when a word is used) is insufficient: an ‘encyclopaedic’ meaning is also required, based on a knowledge of the speaker’s world.⁸⁶ – The continuum of semantics and pragmatics: these are not different disciplines but rather extremes of the same perspective, i. e. meaning. – Usage-based: the language knowledge possessed by speakers is based on the abstraction of symbolic units taken from regular use. As we speak, we learn which contexts a term is used in, the linguistic constructions in which it appears and what words usually appear with it, so that from this linguistic experience we extrapolate grammar.⁸⁷

 Wierzbicka, ‘The Meaning of Color Terms’, 140 – 142. A similar explanation is proposed by Eve Sweetser, who affirms that colours ‘are conceptualized […] as being colors of visually perceived surfaces of objects’ (‘Compositionality and Blending’, p. 139).  Iraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano, ‘Lexicografía y lingüística cognitiva’, Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 23 (2010), 195 – 213.  In the field of cognitive linguistics, encyclopaedic knowledge is understood as ‘the overall knowledge that typical members of the speech community have’: Ronald W. Langacker, ‘Context, Cognition and Semantics: A Unified Dynamic Approach’, in Ellen J. Van Wolde (ed.), Job 28: Cognition in Context, Biblical Interpretation Series v. 64 (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2003), pp. 179 – 230, at 187.  Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Lingüística cognitiva, p. 22.

I.1.5 Theoretical framework

– – –

25

Polysemy: one element may have various meanings which are interrelated not by words but by a conceptual motivation. Idiomaticity: idiomatic/proverbial phrases are not mere ornaments of language, but reflect fundamental patterns of human thought.⁸⁸ The theory of prototypes: this tool is related to the cognitive ability of the individual, who tends to organize the information obtained from the perception of reality into groups. The members of such groups are distributed along a scale, with the element that best represents the category (the prototype) at one extreme, and at the other the marginal element, which, while still belonging to the group, has a more reduced usage.⁸⁹ Although this theory as applied to lexicography is achieving significant results,⁹⁰ we have not included it in our study, as the colour terms that refer to the green dimension of the Bible are few in number. We lack, therefore, sufficient examples to be able to apply it with precision, at least for the time being.

These epistemological principles are manifested in a variety of methodological tools. Those most useful for elaborating a chromatic lexicon of the Bible are the following: 1. Domains: in the words of one of the fathers of cognitive linguistics, a domain is ‘a coherent area of conceptualization relative to which semantic units may be characterized’.⁹¹ It includes a variety of cognitive entities, from mental experiences to representational spaces, concepts and conceptual complexes.⁹² To clarify this concept, Maria Josep Cuenca and Joseph Hilferty use the colour red as an example. According to these authors, the colour red is polysemic, as it has different meanings when it describes a car and when it describes someone’s hair. The

 A detailed study can be found in Raymond W. Gibbs Jr., ‘Idioms and Formulaic Language’, in Dirk Geeraerts and Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), pp. 697– 725.  For a detailed study of this, see: Dirk Geeraerts, ‘Lexicography’, in The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, pp. 1160 – 1174; Dirk Geeraerts, Diachronic Prototype Semantics: A Contribution to Historical Lexicology (Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 1997); William Croft, Typology and Universals (Cambridge, United Kingdom; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990); John R. Taylor, Linguistic Categorization: Prototypes in Linguistic Theory, 2nd edn (London: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 1995).  In relation to the Hebrew Bible, the following works can be cited: Christo H. J. Van der Merwe, ‘Lexical Meaning in Biblical Hebrew and Cognitive Semantics: a Case Study’, Biblica 87 (2006), 85 – 95; Van Steenbergen, Semantics, World View and Bible Translation; Kjell M. Yri, My Father Taught Me How to Cry, but Now I Have Forgotten: The Semantics of Religious Concepts with an Emphasis on Meaning, Interpretation, and Translatability (Oslo; Cambridge, MA: Scandinavian University Press, 1998).  Ronald W. Langacker, Foundations of Cognitive Grammar (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1987), p. 488. For a more detailed study: Alan Cienki, ‘Frames, Idealised Cognitive Models, and Domains’, in The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, pp. 170 – 187.  Langacker, Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, p. 147. Langacker proposes as basic domains (among others): colour, smell, three-dimensional space and emotion (p. 488).

26

2.

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

reason for this is that red is being used in two different cognitive domains: that of physical objects (the car) and that of hair, which has its own spectrum of natural colours. Therefore, say Cuenca and Hilferty, it is ‘the different conceptual contextualization that helps to determine what type of red is being referred to’.⁹³ Cognitive domains thus constitute an essential part of the semantic structure. Although for the reader the domain concept might resemble the notion of semantic fields, it does not coincide exactly as the latter are organizational principles, while domains are structures of knowledge implicit in the meaning of an expression.⁹⁴ Cognitive mechanisms: metaphor and metonymy,⁹⁵ the second of these being essential to the study of colour language in the biblical corpus. The concept of conceptual metonymy is not the figure of speech that the name suggests. In fact, it is written in small capitals to show this differentiation. Conceptual metonymy is a cognitive mechanism that an individual uses more or less consciously in his everyday language to allow the mental access of one element to another within the same conceptual domain. Conceptual metonymies are classified according to various criteria.⁹⁶ One of these is the pragmatic function, within which we can define different types, such as location and located (‘London has named a new ambassador’), object and origin (‘I bought an exquisite Rioja’) and salient property and entity. This last is what can be observed in the neuter use of the adjective χλωρός in the Septuagint, in both the singular –πᾶν χλωρόν (Gen 2.5; Deut 29.22; Job 39.8), τὸ χλωρόν (Gen 30.37b), χλωρόν (Exod 10.15)– and the plural –τὰ χλωρά (Num 22.4; Prov 27.25). Χλωρόν appears in the same context as χλωρός: that of plants and vegetation. However, its meaning changes to ‘verdure’ or ‘greenery’. What happens is that, in the daily use of the language, χλωρόν is chosen to designate an entity, in this case all plants, based on a salient property found in all of them, i. e. the colour green. This type of metonymy is particularly relevant to the study of colour in the biblical corpus.

Although the theoretical framework provided by cognitive linguistics seems to us adequate for the study of biblical colour language, there is an obstacle to be overcome in applying it, and this is that there are no longer any native speakers of the biblical Hebrew in which the Bible was written, nor of the Greek of the Septuagint or the Latin of the Vulgate⁹⁷. At the same time, the Bible does not necessarily contain the

 Maria Josep Cuenca and Joseph Hilferty, Introducción a la lingüística cognitiva, 2nd printing (Barcelona: Planeta, 2018), pp. 72– 73.  Cuenca and Hilferty, Introducción a la lingüística cognitiva, p. 73, note 4.  George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, Metaphors We Live by (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980).  Antonio Barcelona, ‘La metonimia conceptual’, in Lingüística cognitiva, pp. 123 – 146.  Vid. supra, p. 6.

I.1.5 Theoretical framework

27

language spoken in the community. However, these problems can be compensated for in two ways: 1. By approximating the worldview of the community that heard/read, meditated and commented on the Bible before, during and after its being set down in writing, in the period we refer to as biblical times. In this way, we are able to participate in the type of encyclopaedic knowledge that the listener/reader of those times possessed. The instruments we have for accessing this particular worldview are: a) The information compiled and presented by the principal dictionaries, which provides a first approach to the languages of antiquity and synthesizes the use of colour terms in their respective literatures. However, we recognize that the value of these dictionaries and lexicons is limited, as they are based on a concept of colour which is removed from that of antiquity and what we find in them are in effect merely taxonomies. b) The early versions of the Bible, which transmit in their corpora the Jewish tradition,⁹⁸ as, when these versions were written in Hebrew or in Greek (in the case of the Septuagint and the New Testament), these were living and spoken languages. c) The context in which the colour term and the entity described appear. d) Other extra-linguistic disciplines (archaeology, ancient metallurgy, ancient medicine, mineralogy, history or botany) that complete our knowledge of a given colour term when the knowledge provided by our primary sources is found to be insufficient. 2. By carrying out a corpus study, which was our objective from the outset. According to Stephan Thomas Gries, such studies provide us with the natural context in which lexemes and their collocations appear, enable us to analyze all of the possible uses of a lexeme within the corpus and, above all, allow the results to be evaluated not only quantitatively but qualitatively (‘mainly based on which categories are observed’). Without question, corpus-based research allows this language to be studied exhaustively and systematically.⁹⁹

 Wilhelm Gesenius, Hebräisches und Aramäisches Handwörterbuch über das Alte Testament, 5th edn (Leipzig: Vogel, 1957), p. iii.  Stefan Th. Gries, ‘Introduction’, in Stefan Th. Gries and Anatol Stefanowitsch (eds.), Corpora in Cognitive Linguistics: Corpus-based Approaches to Syntax and Lexis. Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 172 (Berlin; New York: De Gruyter, 2006), pp. 1– 17. In the volume cited, concrete applications of this proposal can be found. Recently published are: Marilyn E. Burton, The Semantics of Glory: A Cognitive, Corpus-based Approach to Hebrew Word Meaning, Studia Semitica Neerlandica 68 (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2017); Réka Benczes and Erzsébet Tóth-Czifra, ‘The Hungarian Colour Terms Piros and Vörös: A Corpus and Cognitive Linguistic Account’, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 61 (2, 2014), 123 – 152; Stephen L. Shead, Radical Frame Semantics and Biblical Hebrew: Exploring Lexical Semantics, Biblical Interpretation Series 108 (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2011).

28

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

The texts that comprise our corpus here are the following:¹⁰⁰ For the Hebrew Bible Corpus: − The Masoretic Text.¹⁰¹ − The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible.¹⁰² For − − − −

the Greek Bible Corpus (Septuagint and New Testament): The Septuagint (Greek edition) by Alfred Rahlfs.¹⁰³ The Göttingen Septuagint (edition still unfinished).¹⁰⁴ The Dead Sea Scrolls Greek Bible.¹⁰⁵ Novum Testamentum Graece. ¹⁰⁶

For the Latin Bible Corpus: − The Biblia Sacra Vulgata (5th edition, edited by Robert Weber and Roger Gryson)¹⁰⁷. It should be made clear to the reader that this edition includes two of the translations that Jerome did of the Psalter – the Psalterium Gallicanum and the Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos– as these were part of the Vulgate. The Psalterium Gallicanum received its name from its being widely used in Gaul. It was

 The lexeme searches here have been done with Accordance Bible Software v. 12, which includes the texts mentioned in notes 101– 107, except for the Göttingen Septuagint (for this we have consulted the print edition).  Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, Karl Elliger and William Rudolph, eds., 4th edn (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1983); Copyright © 1991– 2010 The J. Alan Groves Center for Advanced Biblical Research (The Groves Center); Version 4.35 [Electronic source: Accordance edition].  The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible: The Oldest Known Bible Translated for the First Time into English; Copyright © 1999 by Martin Abegg et al. (eds.); Version 1.1 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Reconstructed fragments are excluded from the study, as are those which in the Accordance module appear within brackets.  Septuaginta, Alfred Rahlfs and Robert Hanhart, eds. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2006); Copyright © 2007 by Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart; Version 3.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition].  Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum, Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, ed., (Gö ttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1931– 2015).  Dead Sea Scrolls Greek Biblical Corpus (Canonical order); Copyright © 2014 by OakTree Software, Inc.; Version 1.3 [Electronic source: Accordance edition].  Novum Testamentum Graece, Barbara Aland and Kurt Aland, eds., 28th rev. edn (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012); Copyright © 2007 by Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart; Version 3.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition].  Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam, Robert Weber and Roger Gryson, eds., 5th edn (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2007). Copyright © 2007 by Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart; Version 3.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. For the moment, we are excluding from the lexicon those Apocryphal books included in the Vulgate but not found in the Septuagint: Paul’s Epistle to the Laodiceans, the Prayer of Manasseh and 1– 2 Esdras (in the Vulgate referred to as 3 – 4 Esdras). The study of these will be done after that of the biblical corpus, in conjunction with the Early Christian literature. For the NT translation to Latin, see: Hugh A. G. Houghton, The Latin New Testament: A Guide to Its Early History, Texts, and Manuscripts (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2016).

I.1.6 Methodology

29

Alcuin of York who determined that it should be added to the Vulgate as part of the liturgical reform undertaken during the reign of Charlemagne. The Psalterium Gallicanum was the second of the two translations, dating from around 380 – 392 AD, while Jerome was living in Bethlehem. In the words of Theresa Gross-Diaz, it was ‘a thorough revision of existing Latin translations (possibly the Romanum). [Jerome] based it on the critical edition of the Greek Septuagint as included in Origen’s Hexapla, and possibly on other materials available to him in Caesareum revision’.¹⁰⁸ The Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos, meanwhile, was the third Latin translation of the Psalter that Jerome did from the Hebrew version –taking into account Aquila and Symmachus–¹⁰⁹ in around 391 AD. Although its dependence on the Hebrew text is not always appreciable, for the exegete himself it was his ‘most accurate’ translation.¹¹⁰ It formed part of the Vulgate for centuries, particularly in Spain, where the Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos was brought thanks to Lucinius, a nobleman of Baetica who had sent an expedition of copyists to copy the complete works of Jerome.¹¹¹ Finally, we must point out that, given the difficulty of dating biblical texts and the lack of agreement in determining exactly when they were written or translated, our goal here is not to trace the evolution of colour terms throughout history, as other studies of colour have done.¹¹² It is, rather, to present what the corpus actually contains.

I.1.6 Methodology Now that we have established the theoretical framework necessary for achieving our objective, which is to provide the modern reader with the meaning (both literal and symbolic) of the colour lexemes found in the biblical corpus (in Hebrew, Greek and Latin), and thereby approximating the worldview of the listener/reader in biblical times, we must now explain the specific methodology of this research.

 Theresa Gross-Diaz, ‘The Latin Psalter’, in Richard Marsden & E. Ann Matter (eds.), The New Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 427– 445, at 428 – 429.  Pierre-Maurice Bogaert, ‘The Latin Bible’, in James Carleton Paget and Joachim Schaper (eds.), The New Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 505 – 526, at 515.  Gross-Diaz, ‘The Latin Psalter’, p. 430.  Ieronimus, Psalterium S. Hieronymi de Hebraica Veritate Interpretatum, Teófilo Ayuso Marezuela, ed., Biblia Polyglotta Matritensia series VIII, Vulgata Hispana L., 21 (Matriti: CSIC, 1960), pp. 2– 7. Ayuso Marezuela points out that the Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos was not included in Spanish codices of the Vulgate until the 13th century.  Athalya Brenner, Colour Terms in the Old Testament (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1982); Massey-Gillespie, ‘A New Approach to Basic Hebrew Colour Terms’, 1– 11.

30

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

According to cognitive linguistics, the study of language must be based on usage. Therefore, the first step in this research was to group together the pericopes in which the colour terms appear in each corpus (Hebrew, Greek and Latin). Usage is a vital aspect of this, so much so that we have included all of the biblical references for each meaning, following the proposal of Iraide Ibarretxe:¹¹³ It is necessary to include the greatest number of examples possible for each meaning. These examples provide the empirical data that illustrates each meaning; they are, then, not secondary, but indispensible.

Secondly, as colours in the biblical corpus appear embodied in entities and therefore may be considered ‘embodied colour terms’, we have identified the entities in which they are embodied. In the case of the nominal colour lexemes, as these refer to entities that are imbued with colour, an analysis was done of the entities related to them. This establishes a conceptual connection with the visual experience produced by the colour,¹¹⁴ and provides us with the knowledge that the listener/reader in biblical times had of this same colour. Once the entities have been analyzed, they are grouped according to their corresponding cognitive domains. The identification of cognitive domains is nothing more than the practical application of Ronald Langacker’s proposal for determining the meaning of a word. According to this North American linguist, an expression acquires a meaning through what he denominates as profile and base. ¹¹⁵ The base is ‘part of the domain matrix needed for understanding the profile of a linguistic unit’,¹¹⁶ while the profile is the substructure built upon the base that the expression designates conceptually. In the case of colour language, each colour lexeme constitutes a profile and its base, and this is the cognitive domain of the entity which is imbued with colour. According to our own research, the cognitive domains of the colour terms that are the subject of our study are: plants, land, food, sickness, clothing, buildings, gemstones, metals, human beings and emotions. While it is true that these categories of knowledge are not universal, but depend on culture, in these three corpora the cognitive domains coincide, although the lexemes included logically vary in each corpus. The reason for this is simply that the Greek and Latin versions arose as translations that were meant to be faithful to the original. Remember the principle of ueritas Hebraica that Jerome followed in the Vulgate and the legend regarding the proc-

 Ibarretxe-Antuñano, ‘Lexicografía y lingüística cognitiva’, 201.  Wierzbicka, ‘The Meaning of Color Terms’.  Ronald W. Langacker, ‘Introduction to Concept, Image, and Symbol’, in Dirk Geeraerts et al. (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Basic Readings (New York; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2006), pp. 29 – 67, at 34.  Vyvyan Evans, A Glossary of Cognitive Linguistics (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2007), p. 9.

I.1.6 Methodology

31

ess of translating the LXX. As for the New Testament, the echo of the LXX is undeniable.¹¹⁷ Once the pericopes have been grouped according to their cognitive domains, we can then begin to acquire the needed encyclopaedic knowledge through the resources available to us. As we have said, these are: 1. The information provided by the principal lexicons, dictionaries and specialized studies of the term and its meaning in each corpus.¹¹⁸ As we have already mentioned, this is especially relevant in the case of the Greek and Latin corpora. In these, we find language at an advanced stage, at which the meanings of colour terms have had a wide usage, enabling an identification of the various meanings they have acquired. It is thus especially relevant to determine the meaning of a given colour term within the context of Greek or Latin culture. Despite some debate on the subject,¹¹⁹ Latin possesses a wider chromatic lexicon than Greek and has sought to add precision and nuancing to the colours denoted through the use of other terms.¹²⁰ For this reason, when establishing the status quaestionis of colour terms in the principal Latin lexicons, we have taken the liberty of ap-

 We are aware that these categories are not universal, as each culture has its own, with their own specific lexemes, which depend on the degree of knowledge which that culture possesses of them. Thus, Ellen Roy explains that if a population does not know the category ‘tree’, it cannot be included in its cognitive domain: ‘Variation and Uniformity in the Construction of Biological Knowledge Across Cultures’, in Helaine Selin (ed.), Nature Across Cultures: Views of Nature and the Environment in NonWestern Cultures (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2003), pp. 47– 74, at 53. On the other hand, it is inarguable that both the Greek of the Septuagint, like the Greek of the New Testament and the Latin of the Vulgate, are closely analogous to the Hebrew Bible, cf. James A. Swanson, A Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Hebrew (Old Testament) (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems Inc., 1997); Natalio Fernández Marcos, ‘Las traducciones en la antigüedad’, in Natalio Fernández Marcos, Filología bíblica y humanismo, Textos y estudios Cardenal Cisneros 78 (Madrid: CSIC, 2012), pp. 29 – 45; Natalio Fernández Marcos, Introducción a las versiones griegas de la Biblia, Textos y estudios Cardenal Cisneros 23 (Madrid: CSIC, 1979); Jan Joosten, ‘Varieties of Greek in the Septuagint and the New Testament’, in The New Cambridge History of the Bible 1, pp. 22– 45; Bogaert, ‘The Latin Bible’, in The New Cambridge History of the Bible 1, pp. 505 – 526; Jan Joosten, ‘The Interplay between Hebrew and Greek in Biblical Lexicology: Language, Text, and Interpretation’, in Biblical Lexicology: Hebrew and Greek, pp. 209 – 223.  In the case of the Hebrew, the leading dictionaries are BDB, HALOT, DBHE and SDBH, and the principal studies are: Gradwohl, Die Farben; Brenner, Colour Terms; Hartley, Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes; Bulakh, ‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew’; etc. In the case of the Greek: LSJ; DELG; BDAG; Bailly; The Brill Dictionary; GELS; LEH; Thayer; Louw and Nida; Eleanor Irwin, Colour Terms in Greek Poetry (Toronto: Hakkert, 1974). For the Latin: OLD, DELL, Forcellini, Gaffiot, Lewis and Short, André, Étude sur les termes de couleur, and Carmen Arias Abellán, Estructura semántica de los adjetivos de color en los tratadistas latinos de agricultura y parte de la enciclopedia de Plinio (Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, 1994).  Rachael Goldman, Color-Terms in Social and Cultural Context in Ancient Rome, Gorgias Studies in Classical and Late Antiquity 3 (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2013), pp. 9 – 24.  The Vulgate uses seven different lexemes to translate the four colour terms related to the green dimension of the Bible.

32

2.

3.

4.

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

plying our own method (that of determining the meaning of a colour term by analyzing the entity in which it is embodied and its cognitive domain) in order to specify more exactly the chromatic spectrum that is reflected in these texts.¹²¹ The interpretations that the early versions of the Bible give to each colour lexeme. While neither the LXX nor the Vulgate offer standard translations of colour terms, they are sometimes translated by specific lexemes or expressions. It is therefore important to analyze, together with the meaning of the colour lexeme chosen by the translator, the grammatical category that is employed, as these do not always coincide.¹²² In other cases, the Septuagint and the Vulgate omit the translation of the colour lexeme altogether¹²³ or even add a colour lexeme not found in the original.¹²⁴ All of this information provides significant data for carrying out a semantic analysis of the term, as it reconstructs the interpretation of the listener/reader in biblical times, when biblical Hebrew, Greek and Latin were living languages. The overall context, which allows a more in-depth examination of all the textual elements that are significant for our study. It is here that the continuity of semantics and pragmatics proposed by cognitive linguistics becomes especially relevant. To obtain a global vision of a given pericope, it is first necessary: a) to study its literary form, as, for example, the use of colour language is different in a legal text from its use in a poetic or narrative text; and b) to enter, if only superficially, into the general subject matter of the book under study and, above all, to study the predominant theme of the pericope, as well as the images used by the author. After this, we focus on all of those elements that the context of the pericope provides: the presence of a peculiar syntax; an anomalous grammatical use which might prove crucial to discovering the meaning of a colour term; the use of parallelism, etc. On occasion, the work done in the above stages may prove insufficient for revealing the meaning of the term. This is the moment to turn to other sources (in the fields of medicine, botany, biology, metallurgy, archaeology, mineralogy, etc.) for the extra-linguistic knowledge that will complete the worldview of the listener/ reader in biblical times.

 In any case, the creation of definitions for terms in classical Latin is beyond the scope of our research, at least for the moment.  For example, ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq is translated with both a verbal lexeme (χλωρίζω, Lev 13.49; 14.37) and a nominal lexeme (χλωρότης, Ps 67.14 [68.14 MT]) in the LXX, while the Vulgate uses an adjectival lexeme (albus, Lev 13.49) and two nominal lexemes (pallor, Lev 14.37; uiror, Ps 67.14 VulgHeb). Vid. infra, pp. 52– 53.  The Septuagint, for example, does not translate the lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq in Isa 37.27: vid. infra, pp. 41– 42.  An example of this is the use that the Vulgate makes of uiriditas (Ecclus [Sir] 40.16), with a clearly chromatic denotation that is absent in the Septuagint, which instead uses ἄχι: vid. infra, p. 156.

I.1.6 Methodology

33

Once we have acquired this encyclopaedic knowledge, we can offer to the reader the meanings of these terms as they appear in the pericopes studied. Finally, when the literal meaning of a colour lexeme has been identified, we can take this a step further and determine whether the term also has a symbolic connotation and what it is that motivates such a connotation. It remains, then, to explain to the reader how the meanings of these terms will be presented. Meaning, according to Geeraerts, is ‘a conceptual description of the things […] that correlate with the words’.¹²⁵ For this reason, presenting the meaning of a colour lexeme involves elaborating a definition.¹²⁶ The problem is how to create a definition based on the encyclopaedic knowledge obtained from the semantic analysis of each colour lexeme and how to make this definition correspond to the knowledge of the listener/reader in biblical times. It is not merely a question of compiling all of the available knowledge about the denotata,¹²⁷ but rather that which will enable the modern reader to accede to the knowledge of the Hebrew, Greek or Latin listener/ reader in biblical times. The answer is a simple one: the meanings of a colour lexeme, whatever its gramatical form, must denote the entity in which the colour term is embodied. The entity constitutes the ‘cognitive anchor’¹²⁸ between the listener/reader in biblical times and the modern reader, by which the precise meaning of a colour may be obtained. Therefore, adjectives of colour cannot include another colour adjective in the definition, as in that case we would be offering a mere translation adapted to our own categories of colour and not a true definition. In any case, as colour lexemes are expressed through different grammatical categories, the definition of each category has its own specific characteristics:¹²⁹ – The definition of an adjectival colour lexeme must describe its category, which is colour (understood in Hebrew and Latin, and most of the time in Greek, as a state), and the entity or entities in which it is embodied, as well as provide whatever information the modern reader needs to identify the entity as it was understood by the listener/reader in biblical times. – The definition of a nominal colour lexeme must indicate what it is: an entity imbued with colour, which in the case of green is the visible sign of a state. Thus, the definition must include the category, the entity and the description of its state. On occasion, if the pericope also provides us with the function performed

 Dirk Geeraerts, ‘Meaning and Definition’, in Piet van Sterkenburg (ed.), A Practical Guide to Lexicography (Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2003), pp. 83 – 93, at 86.  Anna Wierzbicka, Lexicography and Conceptual Analysis (Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma, 1985), p. 5: ‘When it comes to concepts encoded in words of a foreign language, especially a culturally distant one, the intuitive link between a word and a concept is missing, and a full definition is the only way of ensuring true understanding of the cultural universe encoded in the language’s lexicon.’  Wierzbicka, Lexicography and Conceptual Analysis, pp. 37– 40.  Wierzbicka, ‘The Meaning of Color Terms’, 141.  Geeraerts, ‘Meaning and Definition’, p. 88.

34

–

I Colour Terms: object, study and method

by the entity, this is added with the aim of giving all of the information needed to understand the entity. The definition of a verbal lexeme must show the state of an entity or the process by which an entity acquires its colour. Thus, the definition includes both the verbal action and the entity affected, that is to say, the entity which acquires or possesses the colour, as this is again what enables us to identify its tonality.

As we have just said, colour lexemes may also have symbolic connotations. This forms part of the meaning of these lexemes and so this is also included in the definition. Lastly, as colour lexemes appear in specific corpora and each lexeme in specific pericopes, definitions are adapted to the information provided by each corpus, since, as Anna Wierzbicka rightly observes, ‘the meanings of colour terms are cultural artefactors’.¹³⁰

I.1.7 The presentation of lexicographical articles on colour To facilitate the reading and comprehension of this study by a broad public (biblical specialists who may or may not be familiar with cognitive linguistics; linguistic specialists unfamiliar with the biblical world; scholars of other disciplines with an interest in the subject of colour; students; translators; etc.), we have chosen to present our research in a discursive format divided into five sections: introduction; encyclopaedic knowledge; semantic analysis; conclusion; bibliography. The introduction presents to the reader the grammatical category of the colour lexeme and its usage. When the term is used infrequently, this is followed by a brief overview of the biblical books in which the lexeme appears and their subject matter. When the term is one that appears in significant number of pericopes, it is included in the semantic analysis section. The section dedicated to encyclopaedic knowledge presents only two of the resources which comprise this: the status quaestionis of the principal biblical dictionaries; and the early versions of the biblical text. We have not included here a section specifically dedicated to the context or the extra-linguistic knowledge required. This is in order to avoid an excessive segmentation that might obscure our arguments. A synthesis follows in which our principal findings with regard to these colour terms are presented. In the semantic analysis, the context is explored in depth and the biblical references¹³¹ are presented, together with all of the elements necessary for determining  Wierzbicka, ‘The Meaning of Color Terms’, 142.  The translations of biblical texts are by: Carlos Santos Carretero (Hebrew corpus); Lourdes García Ureña, Anna Angelini and Emanuela Valeriani (Greek corpus); and Marina Salvador Gimeno (Latin corpus).

I.1.7 The presentation of lexicographical articles on colour

35

the meaning of the colour lexeme: a) the entity in which the lexeme is embodied, together with its respective cognitive domain(s);¹³² b) the ways in which the presence of these entities affects the colour terms; c) relevant grammatical or syntactic aspects; d) the extra-linguistic knowledge needed when the previous analysis is insufficient; e) a study of the cognitive mechanisms, such as metonymy, that affect the colour term; and, finally, f) the symbolic connotation of the colour term, when this exists, and an explanation of its motivation. In general, the symbolism of colour terms originates in the Hebrew biblical corpus. The other two corpora, the Greek and the Latin, simply echo this, except in the New Testament, where occasional innovations are found. For this reason, the reader is referred to the corresponding entries for the Hebrew corpus. The conclusion synthesizes the results of our study. It includes, therefore, a definition of the colour term and its glosses. Given that the majority of colour lexemes are polysemic, the conclusion also includes the semantic motivation of this polysemy. In some cases, this is because the colour lexeme is embodied in entities belonging to different cognitive domains; in others, it is the result of a conceptual metonymy. As for the glosses, we offer those that we think correspond best to the meaning of the word. This is not the most important contribution of our study, however. It should not be forgotten that glosses, like translations, are the results of interpretation. It is therefore possible that the reader, in light of the meaning we have provided, will opt for some other gloss that is better adapted to his or her own language, to the type of translation that he or she wants to offer for the pericope, or to the language of his or her own readers/listeners. More importantly, if with the passing of time these categories of colour continue to evolve, other possible translations may arise in relation to the meanings we present here. Finally, the bibliography for each chapter lists the specific works drawn upon for the creation of each entry. At the end of the study, another more general bibliography lists the sources (theoretical works, bibles and dictionaries) upon which this study of colour language has been based.

 In the case of nominal lexemes, related entities in the context where the colour term appears are also studied, along with their respective cognitive domains.

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

II.1 ‫ ירק‬yereq and its polysemy: ‘verdure’, ‘the colour of grass in the spring’ II.1.1 Introduction Perhaps to the reader’s surprise, the first term to be presented in this study is a noun¹, ‫ ירק‬yereq, rather than an adjective, which is the usual grammatical form used to express colour in modern languages such as English, Italian, Spanish or French. What is more, at first glance it would not appear to be an embodied term, as it is a nominal lexeme and does not need to describe a particular entity. This is not the case, however. As will be shown here, the lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq always appears embodied in an entity, specifically in plants, regardless of whether its function is nominal or adjectival. In fact, the lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq never denotes what we understand as an abstract colour; i. e. ‘(the colour) green’. The nominal lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq is the most used colour term in the Hebrew biblical corpus, appearing 10x in the narrative and poetic books: – 8x in the Masoretic Text: Gen 1.30; 9.3; Exod 10.15; Num 22.4; 2 Kgs 19.26; Isa 15.6; 37.27; Ps 37.2. – 2x in Qumran: 4Q14 3.19 (Exod 10.15); 1QIsaa 31.6 (Isa 37.27). The predominant context in all of these is that of plants, whether the purpose is to lament the destruction of nature or to describe a landscape. As the biblical references are numerous, to facilitate the work of the reader, we present here a status quaestionis on the meaning of the term according to the leading dictionaries of biblical Hebrew and how ‫ ירק‬yereq has been translated in the early versions of the Bible, given their closeness to the original sources. Both the lexicons and the early translations constitute the primary resources that we have for obtaining the encyclopaedic knowledge needed for approximating the worldview of the listener/reader in biblical times.²

II.1.2 Encyclopaedic knowledge II.1.2.1 Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries Maria Bulakh maintains that the root ‫ ירק‬yrq dates back to the proto-Semitic wrḳ, meaning ‘to be shiny yellow –with– green’, which is found in Akkadian, Ugaritic, He-

 BDB, s.v. ‫ירק‬, and HALOT, s.v. ‫ירק‬.  Vid. supra, pp. 26 – 27. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-004

40

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

brew, Aramaic, Syriac, Mandaean, Arabic and Ge’ez.³ In a similar line is the proposal of John E. Hartley, who holds that the root ‫ ירק‬yrq in the Semitic languages denotes a spectrum ranging from green to yellow.⁴ In the leading dictionaries, however, this variety of chromatic nuances is not found for the nominal lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq. The lexicons emphasize two aspects in their denotations: a) the colour, specifically, green; b) a green entity (plant), as can be observed in the following: ‘green’, ‘greenness’, ‘green thing’, ‘grass’;⁵ ‘vegetables or greenery (plants)’;⁶ ‘green’,⁷ ‘new growth (i. e. sprouting grass)’, ‘grass’, ‘pasture grass’, ‘hay’.⁸ The exception is the SDBH, which proposes only an entity covered with colour: ‘the green leaves ◄ of a plant or tree ► eaten by both animals and humans’.⁹ The meaning of the lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq, however, is still a subject of debate among colour specialists and remains an open question: Roland Gradwohl was the first to propose that ‫ ירק‬yereq is a colour term that denotes greenness in a broad sense; i. e. new green plants in that phase of growth and maturity which transforms them into food for humans and animals.¹⁰ Athalya Brenner, on the other hand, after a close study of the pericopes in which ‫ ירק‬yereq appears, insists that it denotes ‘pure colour’,¹¹ and specifically the colour green,¹² while François Jacquesson upholds the meaning of ‘grass’.¹³ Finally, Kevin Massey-Gillespie, building upon the colour term theory of Berlin and Kay, proposes that ‫ ירק‬yereq denotes yellow, basing his argument on the principle of linguistic economy, according to which two terms cannot have the same meaning. Thus, for Massey-Gillespie, green is denoted by ‫ רענן‬raʿǎnān. ¹⁴ This proposal is not convincing, however. Along with the principle of economy, Massey-Gillespie bases his idea on the presence of water in Jer 17.8, maintaining that it is the water source which determines the chromatism of ‫רענן‬ raʿǎnān; i. e. the greenness of the leaves of the trees planted along the river. However, the water source is not mentioned in the other pericopes that contain ‫ רענן‬raʿǎnān: (18x: Deut 12.2; 1 Kgs 14.23; 2 Kgs 16.4; 17.10; Isa 57.5; Jer 2.20; 3.6, 13; 11.16; 17.2; Ezek 6.13; Hos 14.9; Ps 37.35; 52.10; 92.11, 15; Song 1.16; 2 Chr 28.4). What is more, when the pericopes are analyzed in detail, it can be observed that ‫ רענן‬raʿǎnān is an adjective used to describe lexemes belonging to three different cognitive domains:

 Bulakh, ‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew’, p. 205.  Hartley, Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes, p. 130.  BDB, s.v. ‫ירק‬.  HALOT, s.v. ‫ירק‬.  DBHE, s.v. ‫ ;ירק‬Sol Panush, The Theology of Color (USA, 1993), p. 372.  DBHE, s.v. ‫ירק‬.  SDBH, nº 3418, s.v. ‫ירק‬.  Gradwohl, Die Farben, p. 28.  Brenner, Colour Terms, p. 101.  In the same line, Guillaumont, ‘La désignation des couleurs en hébreu’, p. 342.  Jacquesson, ‘Les mots de la couleur dans les textes bibliques’.  Massey-Gillespie, ‘A New Approach to Basic Hebrew Colour Terms’, 9.

II.1 ‫ ירק‬yereq and its polysemy

41

a) plants: the olive (Jer 11.16; Ps 52.10), the cedar (Ps 37.35), the cypress (Hos 14.9), or the generic ‘trees’ (‫)כל עץ רענן‬, an expression that refers to the place where idolatrous rites are celebrated (Deut 12.2; 1 Kgs 14.23; 2 Kgs 16.4; 17.10; Isa 57.5; Jer 2.20; Jer 3.6, 13; 17.2; Ezek 6.13; 2 Chr 28.4), or to the marriage bed of the bride in the Song of Songs (Song 1.16). b) liquids: oil (Ps 92.11). c) human beings: the elders (Ps 92.15). The meaning is the same in the three domains: a state of lushness and vigour rather than colour itself. The chromatic connotation seems to have been added by Kevin Massey-Gillespie, as ‘green’ in modern languages may also have a definition of freshness.¹⁵ This does not occur in the Septuagint, as it does not use χλωρός, which denotes both colour and a state of lushness, to translate ‫ רענן‬raʿǎnān,¹⁶ but other lexemes that lack a chromatic connotation: δασύς, ‘bushy’ (Deut 12.2; Isa 57.5); σύσκιος, ‘closely shaded’ (1 Kgs 14.23; Song 1.16; Ezek 6.13); ἀλσώδης, ‘woodland’ (2 Kgs 16.4; 17.10; 2 Chr 28.4; Jer 3.6, 13; 17.8); κατάσκιος, ‘shaded’ (Jer 2.20); ὡραῖος, ‘beautiful’ (Jer 11.16); πυκάζουσα, ‘overshadowing’ (Hos 14.9); κατάκαρπος, ‘fruitful’ (Ps 51.10 [52.10 MT]); πίων, ‘fertile’ (Ps 91.11 [92.11 MT]); and εὐπαθοῦντες, ‘being prosperous’ (Ps 91.15 [92.15 MT]). In Ps 36.35 [37.35 MT], the adjective is omitted altogether and the expression κέδρος τοῦ Λιβάνου is used. Thus, ‫ רענן‬raʿǎnān is not a colour term, as Gradwohl affirms¹⁷. Indeed, neither Brenner nor Hartley include it in their studies of colour terms in biblical Hebrew.

II.1.2.2 Early versions of the Bible The LXX does not show a regularized form for the translation of ‫ ירק‬yereq. Most of the times (4x) that it is used, ‫ ירק‬yereq is considered to function as an adjective and is translated as χλωρός (Gen 1.30; Exod 10.15; 2 Kgs 19.26; Isa 15.6). On other occasions, the nominal value of the Hebrew lexeme is respected and similar lexemes such as λάχανα, ‘the first green shoots [of plants] in spring’ (Gen 9.3 and Ps 36.2 [37.2 MT]), or the nominalized form of χλωρός, τὰ χλωρά (Num 22.4), are chosen. Finally, in Isa 37.27, the Septuagint simplifies the Hebrew text by omitting part of the prophet’s enumeration¹⁸ and does not translate ‫ ירק‬yereq at all. In conclusion, in the LXX it

 OED, s.v. green, adj. and n. (June 2019. Oxford University Press); https://www-oed-com.ezpprod1.hul.harvard.edu/view/Entry/81167?rskey=6 l3TFX&result=2; 4/09/19; DLE, s.v. green.  Vid. infra, p. 85.  Gradwohl, Die Farben, p. 33, n. 50.  In contrast to the three elements of the enumeration –‫עשב שדה וירק דשא חציר גגות‬, ‘like the herb of the field, like the greenness of tender grass and the grass of the rooftops dry ’–, in the Hebrew version, the LXX mentions two: ὡς χόρτος ξηρὸς ἐπὶ δωμάτων καὶ ὡς ἄγρωστις, ‘like dry grass on the

42

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

seems to be understood that the lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq has a dual function (the adjectival, which predominates, as well as the nominal) and the text is interpreted accordingly, with two meanings: colour, expressed with the adjectival lexeme χλωρός; and entity, hence the use of λάχανα and τὰ χλωρά.¹⁹ The Vulgate, meanwhile, recurs principally to the lexical family of uiridis ²⁰ to translate the lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq. At times it inclines toward the verb uireo in its participial form, uirens, ‘turning green’, ‘being green’ (Gen 9.3; Exod 10.15; 2 Kgs 19.26) and at others for nominal lexemes such as uiror (Isa 15.6) and gramen pascuae, ‘pasture grass’ (Isa 37.27), or, in the Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos, the adjectival lexeme uiridis (Ps 36.2 [37.2 MT]).²¹ Finally, in two cases (Gen 1.30 and Num 22.4), the Vulgate omits the translation altogether, despite the fact that the Vetus Latina uses uiridis and the participle form uirentia,²² as it interprets the Hebrew term differently.²³

II.1.2.3 Synthesis The leading dictionaries, like the Septuagint and the Vulgate, recognize two different uses for ‫ ירק‬yereq: as a noun and as an adjective. As a result, ‫ ירק‬yereq is considered to be a polysemous term with at least two different meanings depending on its function in the text: ‘green thing’ when the function is nominal; and ‘green’ when it functions as an adjective.

II.1.3 Semantic analysis of ‫ ירק‬yereq When the pericopes in which ‫ ירק‬yereq is mentioned are analyzed one by one, it is observed that in Exod 10.15 (4Q14 3.19) and Isa 15.6 this lexeme is part of an enumeration made by juxtaposing circumstantial objects or clauses, ‫ ירק‬yereq being the subject of some of these: Exod 10.15 ‫ויכס את־עין כל־הארץ ותחשך הארץ ויאכל את־כל־עשב הארץ ואת כל־פרי העץ אשר הותיר הברד ולא־נותר כל־ירק‬ ‫בעץ ובעשב השדה בכל־ארץ מצרים‬

rooftops and like pasture grass’. Ziegler notes the presence of χλωρός in only the Alexandrian codices (A): Joseph Ziegler, Septuaginta. Isaia, 3rd edn, SVTG XIV (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983).  Vid. infra, p. 85.  As will be seen later, uiridis is related both to colour and to the state of lushness. Vid. infra, pp. 136 – 140.  In contrast, the Psalterium Gallicanum opts for a nominal lexeme with a weaker chromatic connotation: holera, ‘vegetables’ (Ps 36.2).  Vetus Latina Database: Gen 1.30; Num 22.4.  Gen 1.30: et cunctis animantibus terrae […] ut habeant ad uescendum et factum est ita. Num 22.4: … quomodo solet bos herbas usque ad radices carpere […]

II.1 ‫ ירק‬yereq and its polysemy

43

And [the swarm] covered the face of all the land, darkening the whole territory. It consumed all the herbs of the land, as well as the fruit of the trees which the hail had left. No verdure was left, not on the trees, nor in the fields throughout all the land of Egypt. Cf. 4Q14 3.19 (Exod 10.15).

Isa 15.6 ‫כי־מי נמרים משמות יהיו כי־יבש חציר כלה דשא ירק לא היה‬ Truly, the waters of Nimrim have been devastated, causing the new growth to dry up, the grass to wither and the verdure to perish.

In Num 22.4 there is no enumeration at all, but ‫ ירק‬yereq precedes ‫ שדה‬sādeh, forming a construction similar to ‫ עשב השדה‬ʿēseb hasādeh, ‘the herb of the field’, which is found in other pericopes (Gen 2.5; 3.18; Exod 9.22, 25): […] ‫ויאמר מואב אל־זקני מדין עתה ילחכו הקהל את־כל־סביבתינו כלחך השור את ירק השדה‬ And Moab said to the elders of Mid’ian, ‘Now this multitude will graze all around us in the same way that an ox grazes on the grass of the field’ […]

It can thus be concluded that in these pericopes (Exod 10.15; Num 22.4; Isa 15.6; 4Q14 3.19 [Exod 10.15]) ‫ ירק‬yereq is used as a noun. However, in the other pericopes (Gen 1.30; 9.3; 2 Kgs 19.26; Isa 37.27; Ps 37.2; 1QIsaa 31.6 [Isa 37.27]), it precedes nominal lexemes for which it has, according to Athalya Brenner,²⁴ an adjectival function: Gen 1.30 ‫ולכל־חית הארץ ולכל־עוף השמים ולכל רומש על־הארץ אשר־בו נפש חיה את־כל־ירק עשב לאכלה ויהי־כן‬ And to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, all the green herb was given to them for food. And so it was.

Gen 9.3 ‫כל־רמש אשר הוא חי לכם יהיה לאכלה כירק עשב נתתי לכם את־כל‬ Everything that moves and lives will serve you as food; as I gave you all the green herb, I give you everything.

2 Kgs 19.26 ‫וישביהן קצרי־יד חתו ויבשו היו עשב שדה וירק דשא חציר גגות ושדפה לפני קמה‬ Their dwellers, shorn of strength, broken and confused, are like the herb of the field, like green grass and brushwood on the housetops, dry grain before it is gleaned. Cf. Isa 37.27; 1QIsaa 31.6 (Isa 37.27).

 Brenner, Colour Terms, p. 101.

44

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

Ps 37.2 ‫כי כחציר מהרה ימלו וכירק דשא יבולון׃‬ For like the hay they quickly dry up and they wither like the green grass.

In light of the data provided by syntax, we can conclude that ‫ ירק‬yereq is used in the Hebrew Bible corpus as both a noun and an adjective. We will now proceed to analyze the term semantically and, as will be shown, this analysis will illuminate its various syntactic uses.

II.1.3.1 ‫ ירק‬yereq I (nominal function) The books of Exodus, Numbers and Isaiah contain the three pericopes in which the lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq is used with its specific (i. e. nominal) function. These three books belong to different literary genres. Exodus is a narrative text that recounts the flight of the people of Israel from Egypt to Mount Sinai, with Exodus 10.15 belonging to that part of the story which describes the eighth plague, of the locusts. The book of Numbers tells of the march of the Israelites from Sinai to the steppes of Moab, where the narration is interrupted by the giving of the law.²⁵ Num 22.4, although it falls within the book’s narrative section, forms part of the pericope of Balaam, an independent literary unit that presents poetic texts in oracular form, in this case proclaiming the future glory of Israel.²⁶ Finally, Isaiah is a prophetic book predominated by oracles; Isa 15.6, specifically, is part of a judgment oracle that announces the punishment to be suffered by Moab, the bitter enemy of Judah.²⁷ Despite the different literary forms of Exod 10.15 and Isa 15.6, the context of the pericopes is the same: the devastation of the natural environment, whether caused by the locusts (Exod 10.15), by the drought that withers the vegetation (Isa 15.6) or by the invasion of Israelites (Num 22.4). In this context, the nominal lexeme ‫ירק‬ yereq appears in relation to other entities from the cognitive domains of plants:²⁸

 Francisco Varo, Moisés y Elías hablan con Jesús. Pentateuco y libros históricos: de su composición a su recepción (Estella: Verbo Divino, 2016), pp. 163 – 164; Félix García López, El Pentateuco. Introducción a la lectura de los cinco primeros libros de la Biblia (Estella: Verbo Divino, 2002), pp. 241– 243; Jacob Milgrom, ‘Numbers, Book of’, ABD 4.  García López, El Pentateuco, p. 262.  Frederick L. Moriarty, ‘Isaiah 1– 39’, in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 262– 282, at 274.  It is difficult to translate the Hebrew terms that refer to the herbs and grasses as these appear in the various versions of the Bible. In the aim of standardizing their translation, we have relied on the study of plants done by Harold and Alma Moldenke (Plants of the Bible [Waltham, MA: Chronica Botanica, 1952], pp. 28 – 29 and 251– 254). According to these authors, all such terms refer to ‘all tender green herbaceous plants’, although they establish slight differences among them:

II.1 ‫ ירק‬yereq and its polysemy

45

‫ עץ‬ʿēṣ, ‘tree’; ‫עשב‬ʿēśeb, ‘herb’ (Exod 10.15); ‫ חציר‬ḥāṣȋr, ‘new growth’; ‫ דשא‬dešeʾ, ‘grass’ (Isa 15.6); b) land: ‫ שדה‬sādeh,‘field’ (Num 22.4); ‫ ארץ מצרים‬ʾereṣ Miṣraȋm, ‘the land of Egypt’ (Exod 10.15) and with verbs related to the cognitive domain of food (‫ לחך‬lāḥak,‘to lick up’). Each pericope will be analyzed in relation to these cognitive domains. Exod 10.15 tells the story of the destruction wrought by the locusts. Three varieties of this insect are known to have existed in Palestine: the European locust (Locusta migratoria, Linnaeus); the Moroccan locust (Dociostaurus moroccanus, Thunberg); and the desert locust (Schistocerca gregaria, Forsskål). The last of these was the most common. While in the biblical world the locust was generally known for its voracity,²⁹ we know today that Schistocerca gregaria is a polyphagous species which feeds on up to 400 different plants.³⁰ This perhaps explains the way in which the book of Exodus describes its devastating effects. First, the quantifier ‫ כל‬kōl (‘all’/ ‘each’, or its opposite ‘nothing’/‘none’) is repeated as many as five times, preceding ‘land’, ‘grass’, ‘fruits’ (cognitive domain of plants and land) and ‫ ירק‬yereq itself; it is then made clear that the locusts eat not only the grass which is their principal food, but also the fruits of the trees; finally, in a brief concluding gloss, the narrator confirms the devastation of the land of Egypt: nothing remains ‫ ירק‬yereq in either the trees or the grass (cognitive domain of plants). The lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq is used, then, in a collective sense, alluding to the fact that the locusts have razed everything which was for them edible. Given this conclusive nuance and the collective sense transmitted by the text, the lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq would seem to include the branches, leaves and trunks of the trees, as well as the wide range of grasses that grew wild in Israel (some one hundred different species), all of which shared this characteristic of being edible for the locusts. That is to say, the plants mentioned were not withered, as Roland Gradwohl claimed,³¹ but rather had an aspect of freshness, lushness and greenness. As is well known, the state of plants (at least for those with a chlorophyllic function) is indicated by their colour. In the case of trees and generic

– ‫ עשב‬ʿēśeb is identified as ‘herbs for humans’ (Gen 1.30; 2.5; Exod 9.22; Isa 42.15; Ps 104.14) and ‘fodder for cattle’ (Deut 11.15; Jer 14.6). At the end of the Moldenkes’ study this is included in the group of plants they denominate as ‘unidentified plant references’, by which they categorize those plants whose identification lacks a solid scientific foundation. – ‫ דשא‬dešeʾ corresponds to our ‘grass’. – ‫ חציר‬ḥāṣȋr carries several meanings: ‘fodder’ in Isa 15.6 and 35.7; ‘hay’ in Prov 27.25; ‘leek’ in Num 11.5; and finally ‘the stems of tall grass’ in all other cases. However, given that Isa 15.6 and 35.7 enumerate different plants withered by drought, and in consideration of this last meaning of ‘the stems of tall grasses’, we have chosen for the present study the translation offered in the NRSV –‘new growth’– for Isa 15.6, and ‘hay’ for Ps 37.2; finally, we have translated it as ‘brushwood’ in 2 Kgs 19.26 for contextual reasons.  Ronald A. Simkins, EDB, s.v. locust.  Elizabeth A. Bernays and Reginald F. Chapman, Host-Plant Selection by Phytophagous Insects (London: Chapman and Hall, 1994), pp. 6, 139.  Gradwohl, Die Farben, p. 28. In fact, the Targum uses yārōq.

46

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

grasses, green signifies freshness while a brownish tone is a sign that the plant is withering or wilting, and thus drying up. Exod 10.15 does not refer to this aspect, but instead insists that the locusts consumed these plants as food. The nominal lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq would therefore denote vegetation or plants in general, in that state of freshness, lushness and greenness which makes them edible. The colouration that includes ‫ ירק‬yereq is thus a generic green that also includes the variety that exists in plants: yellowish green when the plant is first sprouting; the intense green of plants in the spring and, finally, the various shades of green specific to each plant or tree –brownish, bluish, greyish, olive-coloured, etc. As for Isa 15.6, the prophet contemplates a great drought and the ensuing famine as divine punishment. Nimrim, a place known for its abundant water resources,³² has become parched and barren. The effect is immediate and the new growth and grasses wither. The prophet then concludes with a laconic expression: there is no ‫ ירק‬yereq at all, no food for either men or animals. Once again, ‫ ירק‬yereq is used with a nuance which is both conclusive and inclusive, as in Exod 10.15, where it denotes vegetation in general; that is, all the green (i. e. healthy) plants that grew in the lands of Moab and which served as food for humans and animals. Num 22.4 reports the words of Moab to the elders when he sees that the people of Israel have made their camp on his plains and announces that they will be fed by the land (of the Moabites). For this, he uses a simile that would have been familiar to his listeners: ‘like an ox grazes on the grass of the field’. It is here that the lexeme ‫ירק‬ yereq appears in reference to the food of the ox. In the biblical world, this animal was considered to be the quintessential herbivore,³³ and so once again the lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq is used to refer to plants in a state appropriate for eating: fresh, lush and green. Thus, ‫ ירק‬yereq in its nominal form denotes an ‘assemblage of plants or parts of the same (leaves, stems, etc.) proper to a region or territory in their state of verdure, freshness and lushness; it serves as food for animals and humans’. Symbolism: As already mentioned, the disappearance of ‫ ירק‬yereq (Exod 10.15; Isa 15.6; Num 22.4) is linked to the contexts of devastation and destruction. These calamities, however, have a theological explanation: God has pronounced his judgment on the actions of men (the Pharaoh in Exodus and the people of Moab in Isaiah). As this judgment is negative, it calls for punishment and therefore destruction. Thus, the disappearance of ‫ ירק‬yereq is a manifestation of divine punishment,³⁴ bringing with it terrible consequences: drought, scarcity of food and, ultimately, famine and death.

 Friedbert Ninow, EDB, s.v. Nimrim, waters of.  DBIm, s.v. ox.  Megan B. Moore, EDB, s.v. grass.

II.1 ‫ ירק‬yereq and its polysemy

47

II.1.3.2 ‫ ירק‬yereq II (adjectival function) This definition appears when the lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq is used as an adjective. Before carrying out a semantic analysis of the term, it is necessary to look more closely at what books it appears in and in what contexts. Although the pericopes that appear in Genesis have the same narrative form, there are slight differences between them. Gen 1.30 is part of the priestly narrative of the creation, while Gen 9.3 belongs to the message that God addresses to Noah to re-establish his covenant after the flood. In the historical books, we find 2 Kgs 19.26, in which the narrative form predominates. However, we know that the author did not intend to give a concise account of the facts, but rather a theological interpretation of the events.³⁵ In this, stories alternate with speeches and oracles, and 2 Kgs 19.26 is part of a judgment oracle pronounced by Isaiah, the son of Amos, and addressed to the king, Hezekiah. This explains the fact that the pericope is repeated both in Isa 37.27 and in the version found in Qumran (1QIsaa 31.6). Finally, Ps 37.2 is part of that Israelite prayer book in which poetry as a literary form is used to its maximum expression. A wisdom psalm, Ps 37 contains a collection of sayings which resembles the book of Proverbs.³⁶ These pericopes, then, appear in completely different contexts: the creation, specifically in reference to food for animals (Gen 1.30) and men (Gen 9.3); and, in contrast, the destruction or punishment of both the people of Israel (2 Kgs 19.26; Isa 37.27; 1QIsaa 31.6) and the wicked (Ps 37.2). In the second context, the prophet employs the simile of a plant to illustrate the annihilation of the Israelites and the destruction of the wicked. Unlike what occurs when the lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq is used with its nominal function, where it comes at the end of an enumeration of plants, in all of these pericopes it immediately precedes another nominal lexeme from the plant domain: ‫ עשב‬ʿēśeb, ‘herb’ (Gen 1.30; 9.3) or ‫ דשא‬dešeʾ, ‘grass’ (2 Kgs 19.26; Isa 37.27; 1QIsaa 31.6; Ps 37.2). It does not seem logical that ‫ ירק‬yereq would here fulfill a nominal function, as it is not coherent that a collective noun would be mentioned and then followed by only a specific noun, rather than an enumeration of these. This particular use of the nominal lexeme corresponds more properly to a case of conceptual metonymy of the whole for part type. In this case, the part is the salient property³⁷ (the colour green). The reason is clear: colour is the most outstanding visually perceptible feature of plants, since it is by its colouring that a plant reveals its state (lush and

 Peter F. Ellis, ‘1– 2 Kings’, in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 177– 209, at 179.  Luis Alonso Schökel and Cecilia Carniti, Salmos I (Salmos 1 – 72): traducción, introducciones y comentario (Estella: Verbo Divino, 1992), p. 551.  Barcelona, ‘La metonimia conceptual’, p. 131.

48

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

fresh).³⁸ It is conceptual metonymy that leads the lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq to be used in these pericopes with a particular syntax:³⁹ ‫ ירק‬yereq always precedes an entity from the cognitive domain of plants (‫ עשב‬ʿēśeb, ‘herb’ [Gen 1.30; 9.3] and ‫ דשא‬dešeʾ, ‘grass’ [2 Kgs 19.26; Isa 37.27; 1QIsaa 31.6; Ps 37.2]) and has an attributive adjectival function.⁴⁰ In this way, ‫ ירק‬yereq restricts the meaning of the lexeme that it accompanies, and so it is not grass in general which is being referred to, but rather that which is currently fresh, lush and therefore green; that is to say, grass that can be eaten (Gen 1.30; 9.3). The tonality expressed by ‫ ירק‬yereq, then, is that which is proper to grass in springtime, the time when it appears in its most appetizing state to men and animals. The meaning of ‫ ירק‬yereq, then, is ‘the colour of grass when it sprouts and grows in the spring, a sign of freshness and lushness’. Symbolism: The symbolism of ‫ ירק‬yereq in its adjectival function is different from that of its nominal function. As an adjective, the term has a double symbolic connotation which is both positive and negative.⁴¹ The positive is found in the context of the creation, in Gen 1.30 and Gen 9.3. Gen 1.30 is in fact the first pericope of the biblical text to contain a colour term. The narrator chooses ‫ ירק‬yereq to give a further nuance to his explanation, and so its presence here is particularly relevant. The previous verse, Gen 1.29, contains the words that God speaks to the first couple about the food he has given them; i. e. plants and fruit trees. However, when he then explains what the animals will eat, the characteristics of this food are made specific: the grass is ‫ ירק‬yereq –green, fresh and leafy. The qualities which make grass an attractive source of nourishment for wild beasts, birds and reptiles are in a sense synthesized and the loving care of God for his creations is thus revealed. The idea is repeated in Gen 9.3 when, after the flood, God establishes his covenant with Noah as the new Adam. Once again, the narrator mentions the food that man has received from his Creator: animals and green (healthy) grass. The term ‫ ירק‬yereq, therefore, symbolizes the loving care of God and, along with this, the qualities of fertility and prosperity.⁴² In contrast, the expression ‫ ירק דשא‬yereq dešeʾ (2 Kgs 19.26; Isa 37.27; 1QIsaa 31.6; Ps 37.2) carries a negative symbolism that arises from both the plant described and its state. ‫ דשא‬dešeʾ, according to Harold Moldenke, is a generic term that refers to the grass in question. It is characterized by its tender stalks and shallow roots, growing rapidly with rainwater and dew, but withering with the same celerity in the heat. The

 This explains the LXX translation of Gen 1.9: λάχανα χλόης, ‘the first green shoots of plants in spring’ (Gradwohl, Die Farben, p. 28).  This phenomenon of grammaticalization is present in modern languages, as shown by Cuenca and Hilferty, Introducción a la lingüística cognitiva, pp. 151– 153.  Brenner, Colour Terms, p. 101, was the first to point out that the nucleus of these syntagmas was the second element, while ‫ ירק‬yereq fulfills an adjectival function.  DBIm, s.v. grass and green.  This in turn explains why the disappearance of ‫ ירק‬yereq was considered a punishment. Vid. supra, p. 46.

II.1 ‫ ירק‬yereq and its polysemy

49

extreme temperatures in Palestine make the lifespan of grass very short indeed⁴³ and so its state of ‫ ירק‬yereq is completely transitory. For this reason, the prophets and psalmists would choose the image of ‫ ירק דשא‬yereq dešeʾ to express the ephemeral, transitory and perishable.⁴⁴ The field of cognitive linguistics explains the origin of this metaphor as the correlation of two domains: plant life and human life, both of which are brief. The perishability of plants in desert regions expresses both visually and synthetically man’s own perception of the briefness of his life⁴⁵ and his lack of control over this. If the hyperbole ‫ ירק דשא‬yereq dešeʾ is added, this becomes an effective metaphor for expressing the ephemeral character of human life.

II.1.4 Conclusions From this semantic analysis it can be concluded that the nominal lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq is a polysemous term with two different meanings: I. In the first meaning, colour and entity are fused together in the denotation of the lexeme and are inseparable: the ‘assemblage of plants or parts of the same (leaves, stems, etc.) proper to a region or territory in their state of verdure, freshness and lushness; serves as food for animals and humans; its destruction is a sign of divine punishment, connoting famine and, with this, death’: Exod 10.15; Num 22.4; Isa 15.6; 4Q14 19.3 (Exod 10.15). As glosses we propose: ‘verdure; vegetation; grass’. II. In the second meaning, as the product of conceptual metonymy (whole for the part) the denotation of entity disappears, leaving colour, which in turn reflects a particular state (freshness and lushness): ‘the colour of grass when it sprouts and grows in the spring, a sign of freshness and lushness; symbolizes, in a positive sense, prosperity, the loving care of God (Gen 1.30; 9.3), and in a negative sense: the ephemeral, transitory or perishable (2 Kgs 19.26; Isa 37.27; Ps 37.2; 1QIsaa 31.6)’. As the result of conceptual metonymy, the syntax of ‫ ירק‬yereq in this second meaning changes: here it precedes other nouns and has an attributive function. As glosses we suggest: ‘green; yellowish green; grass-green’.⁴⁶

 Moldenke and Moldenke, Plants of the Bible, p. 28, s.v. Aegilops variabilis Eig.  In the same line: Göran Eidevall, ‘Metaphorical Landscapes in the Psalms’, in Pierre Van Hecke and Antje Labahn (eds.), Metaphors in the Psalms, Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 231 (Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters, 2010), pp. 13 – 21, at 18.  The aphorism attributed to Hippocrates is well known: Ὁ βίος βραχύς (Hpp. Aph. 1.1).  When we use the term ‘green’ we are referring to the tonality that reflects the state of freshness of a plant. In this sense, we are not departing from the meanings found in the leading modern dictionaries, both in Spanish and in English, which tend to disassociate colour from state (OED, s.v. green; DLE, s.v. verde), the only exception being the OED’s explanation that ‘green’ may describe a person’s complexion, for which it offers the meaning of ‘pale and sickly-looking’.

50

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

II.1.5 Bibliography Alonso Schökel, Luis and Cecilia Carniti, Salmos I (Salmos 1 – 72): traducción, introducciones y comentario (Estella: Verbo Divino, 1992). Bernays, Elizabeth A. and Reginald F. Chapman, Host-Plant Selection by Phytophagous Insects (London: Chapman and Hall, 1994). Brenner, Athalya, Colour Terms in the Old Testament (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1982). Bulakh, Maria, ‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew in Diachronic Aspect’, in Leonid E. Kogan et al. (eds.), Babel und Bibel 3. Annual of Ancient Near Eastern, Old Testament, and Semitic Studies (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006), pp. 181 – 216. Eidevall, Göran, ‘Metaphorical Landscapes in the Psalms’ in Pier Van Hecke and Antje Labahn (eds.), Metaphors in the Psalms, Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 231 (Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters, 2010), pp. 13 – 21. Ellis, Peter F., ‘1 – 2 Kings’, in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 177 – 209. García López, Félix, El Pentateuco. Introducción a la lectura de los cinco primeros libros de la Biblia (Estella: Verbo Divino, 2002). Gradwohl, Roland, Die Farben im Alten Testament: Eine Terminologische Studie (Berlin: A. Töpelmann, 1963). Guillaumont, Antoine, ‘La désignation des couleurs en hébreu et en araméen’, in Ignace Meyerson (ed.), Problèmes de la couleur (Paris: S. E.V.P.E.N, 1957), pp. 339 – 348. Hartley, John E., The Semantics of Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes (Louvain; Paris; Walpole, MA: Peeters, 2010). Jacquesson, François, ‘Les mots de la couleur dans les textes bibliques’, 2009. Online in Research Project Histoire et géographie de la couleur (CNRS-ISCC 2008 – 2009). Massey-Gillespie, Kevin, ‘A New Approach to Basic Hebrew Colour Terms’, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 20 (1, 1994), 1 – 11. Milgrom, Jacob, ‘Numbers, Book of’, ABD 4. Moldenke, Harold N. and Alma L. Moldenke, Plants of the Bible (Waltham, MA: Chronica Botanica, 1952). Moore, Megan B., EDB, s.v. grass. Moriarty, Frederick L., ‘Isaiah 1 – 39’, in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol.1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 262 – 282. Ninow, Friedbert, EDB, s.v. Nimrim, waters of. Panush, Sol, The Theology of Color (USA, 1993). Simkins, Ronald A., EDB, s.v. locust. Varo, Francisco, Moisés y Elías hablan con Jesús. Pentateuco y libros históricos: de su composición a su recepción (Estella: Verbo Divino, 2016).

II.2 ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq and its polysemy: ‘the colour of mould’, ‘the colour of gold’ II.2.1 Introduction ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq is an adjective used 3x in the MT (Lev 13.49; 14.37; Ps 68.14). In the Qumran texts, this adjectival lexeme is not found. However, some trace of it can be detected in 11Q8 f11.1 (Ps 68.14), where the final ‫ ק‬of the lexeme is visible. ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq appears in two completely different biblical books, Leviticus and the Psalms. The first is a legal text which gathers together the norms and prescriptions relative to the worship of God and conduct in the temple, structured in various thematic blocks. Among these is a section dedicated to the law of ritual purity, specifying what is pure and what is impure, and in the case of the latter, how purity can be recovered. One sign of impurity, according to Leviticus, is leprosy,⁴⁷ and here the book goes on to describe its types and symptoms (Lev 13.1– 59) and how purification from it can be attained (Lev 14.1– 57). It is in these sections that the pericopes studied here are found: Lev 13.49 describes a type of leprosy that appears on cloth and leather objects, while Lev 14.37 begins to detail the procedure that should be carried out in the case of a dwelling that presents such impurities. In both pericopes, the adjectival lexeme ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq is used as a sign or symptom of leprosy. Psalms is one of the poetic books of the Bible, and metaphor, symbolism and parallelism are its dominant features. Ps 68 is a particularly difficult poetic text, as the lack of unanimity regarding its classification well reflects.⁴⁸ According to Francisco Cantera, it recounts the triumphal march of God from Egypt to Zion.⁴⁹ In it, God, while addressing some words of triumph to his people, makes mention of a dove (a symbol of peace),⁵⁰ which is described by means of a parallelism: its wings are silver and its feathers gold, a gold further nuanced by the presence of the adjectival lexeme ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq. The poet takes the opportunity here to recreate a chromatic context that will culminate in the following verse with the mention of

 ‘Leprosy’ in Leviticus is not the same disease that the term designates in modern English (vid. infra, p. 55).  William F. Albright, ‘A Catalogue of Early Hebrew Lyric Poems (Psalm LXVII)’, HUCA 23 (1950), 1– 39; Benedikt S. J. Isserlin, ‘Psalm 68, Verse 14: an Archaeological Gloss’, PEQ 103 (1971), 5 – 8, at 5; Roland E. Murphy, ‘Psalms’, in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 569 – 602, at 588. The latter gives a concise presentation of the various proposals: coronation song, eschatological hymn, or even a diverse collection of songs.  Cantera and Iglesias, Ps 68.  DBIm, s.v. dove. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-004

52

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

snow falling on Zalmon, the name of which is derived from ‫ צלם‬ṣelem, ‘the black mountain’,⁵¹ or ‘the shady mountain’ (Ps 68.15).⁵² ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq appears, then, in two very different contexts: leprosy/impurity (Lev 13.49; 14.37) and victory (Ps 68.14). Before we can look more closely at each of these pericopes, it is necessary, as we have said in the introduction, to acquire an encyclopaedic knowledge of the term. For this, we will be utilizing the leading dictionaries as well as the early translations of the Bible.

II.2.2 Encyclopaedic knowledge II.2.2.1 Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq is a colour adjective derived from ‫ ירקון‬yerāqȏn. ⁵³ It is characterized by a doubling of the two final radical consonants,⁵⁴ which gives it an intensive force similar to that of ‫ אדמדם‬ʾǎdamdam, derived from ‫ אדם‬ʾādōm. ⁵⁵ From this, John E. Hartley has argued that it expresses ‘a brilliant green or yellow’.⁵⁶ However, the opinio communis is that it denotes, together with a greenish hue,⁵⁷ several chromatic variations that indicate a lack of luminosity or saturation:⁵⁸ greenish or dark greenish,⁵⁹ pale green,⁶⁰ yellowish green⁶¹ and yellow.⁶²

II.2.2.2 Early versions of the Bible The Septuagint uses two different lexemes to translate ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq:  HALOT, s.v. II ‫צלמון‬.  Biblia del Peregrino, Ps 68.15, note. Neither the NRSV nor the NET include this chromatic connotation (Ps 68.14).  Hartley, Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes, p. 131.  Guillaumont, ‘La désignation des couleurs en hébreu’, p. 345.  Hartley, Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes, p. 131.  Hartley, Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes, p. 135. Some medieval exegetes, however, considered reduplication as an indicator that the hue has softened, that is, has lost intensity: Dunaš ben Labrat. Tešubot de Dunaš ben Labrat: edición crítica y traducción española, Ángel Sáenz-Badillos, ed. (Granada: Universidad de Granada, 1980), p. 49.  BDB, Strong’s Dictionary, DBHE, s.v. ‫ ;ירקרק‬Guillaumont, ‘La désignation des couleurs en hébreu’, p. 345; Bulakh, ‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew’, p. 204.  Brenner, Colour Terms, p. 124.  Gradwohl, Die Farben, p. 31 (in reference to Lev 13.49; 14.37); DBHE, p. 337, s.v. ‫ ;ירקרק‬Jacquesson, ‘Les mots de la couleur dans les textes bibliques’.  BDB s.v. ‫ ;ירקרק‬Gradwohl, Die Farben, p. 30 (in reference to Ps 68.14).  HALOT, s.v. ‫ ;ירקרק‬Brenner, Colour Terms, p. 124.  Strong’s Dictionary, s.v. ‫ ;ירקרק‬Bulakh, ‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew’, p. 204.

II.2 ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq and its polysemy

53

a) The verbal lexeme χλωρίζω, ‘to be greenish or pale’,⁶³ in its present participle form χλωρίζουσα, emphasizing the moment and the process in which a spot of leprosy (Lev 13.49; 14.37) acquires a specific tonality.⁶⁴ b) The nominal lexeme χλωρότης, ‘greenness, yellowness’⁶⁵ (Ps 67.14 [68.14 MT]). The translator of the LXX has reinterpreted the syntax of the Hebrew text and chosen a term of later origin as a translation.⁶⁶ The Vulgate, however, uses three different lexemes to translate ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq: a) The adjectival lexeme albus, ‘pale’ in Lev 13.49. The Vulgate thus respects the use of the adjectival lexeme in Hebrew. b) The nominal lexeme pallor, ‘paleness’, in Lev 14.37. The appearance of this lexeme is perhaps due to the context of this pericope: that of mould growing on walls. In Latin, pallor is in fact used to indicate this particular context, where humidity causes the growth of mould: quod uenti humidi […] infundentesque humidos spiritus, pallore uolumina corrumptunt (Vitr. 6.4.1).⁶⁷ The Vulgate also uses pallor to translate χλωρότης from the Greek version of Ps 67.14. c) The nominal lexeme uiror, ‘greenness, verdure’, is the term chosen to translate the Hebrew colour adjective in the Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos. ⁶⁸

II.2.2.3 Synthesis Given this variety of interpretations in the lexicons and in the early translations of the Bible, we must turn again to the text to discover the clues that make clear the meaning of ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq.

II.2.3 Semantic analysis of ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq The adjectival lexeme ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq appears in: Lev 13.49: ‫והיה הנגע ירקרק או אדמדם בבגד או בעור או־בשׁתי או־בערב או בכל־כלי־עור נגע צרעת הוא והראה את־הכהן‬ And if the spot is greenish or reddish, on garment or skin, whether in warp or woof or in any object made of leather, then it is leprosy and must be shown to the priest.

     

LSJ, s.v. χλωρίζω. Vid. infra, pp. 117– 122. Vid. infra, p. 109; LSJ, s.v. χλωρότης. Vid. infra, pp. 113 – 115. Vid. infra, p. 198. Vid. infra, p. 162.

54

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

Lev 14.37: ‫וראה את־הנגע והנה הנגע בקירת הבית שׁקערורת ירקרקת או אדמדמת ומראיהן שׁפל מן־הקיר‬ And he will examine the spot, and if it appears on the walls of a house as greenish or reddish cavities, which seem to be deeper than [the surface of] the wall […]

Ps 68.14: ‫אם־תשׁכבון בין שׁפתים‬ ‫כנפי יונה נחפה בכסף‬ ‫ואברותיה בירקרק חרוץ‬ When you rest among the sheepfolds, wings of a dove covered in silver, with its feathers of golden green gold.

In the biblical references above, ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq is embodied in entities belonging to two different cognitive domains: a) ‫ נגע‬negaʿ, ‘spot’ (cognitive domain of sickness), referring to two different entities: ‫נגע בבגד או בעור‬, ‘spot on cloth or leather objects’ (Lev 13.49); and ‫]…[ שׁקערורת‬ ‫בקירת‬,‘wall cavities’ (Lev 14.37). The first belongs to the cognitive domain of clothing and the second to that of buildings; b) a type of gold denominated ‫ חרוץ‬ḥārûṣ, which belongs to the domain of metals. It is necessary, then, to study the meaning of ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq in relation to these entities and their respective cognitive domains.

II.2.3.1 ‫ נגע‬negaʿ ‘spot’ (cognitive domain of sickness) The first question that faces the modern reader is whether ‫צרעת‬, ṣāraʿat, ‘leprosy’,⁶⁹ corresponds to its present definition: i. e. an infectious disease of the skin, also known as Hansen’s disease, which is caused by the bacterium Mycobacterium leprae and produces serious bodily deformations.⁷⁰ The nominal lexeme ‫ צרעת‬ṣāraʿat appears 35 times in the MT, 29 of which are found in the book of Leviticus. Up until the 1960s, ‫ צרעת‬ṣāraʿat was thought to

 This is the translation found frequently in modern versions of the Bible: ASV; Navarra Bible; RVR60; Cantera and Iglesias; BDS; SG21; CEI.  Richard M. Heller et al., ‘Mold: “Tsara’at,” Leviticus, and the History of a Confusion’, Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 46 (2003), 588 – 591, at 589; Shin Sasaki et al., ‘Mycobacterium leprae and Leprosy: a Compendium’, Microbiology and Immunology 45 (2001), 729 – 736; Hector Avalos, EDB, s.v. leprosy.

II.2 ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq and its polysemy

55

have been the disease we know today as leprosy. Currently, however, this thesis is no longer held, as, in the words of E. V. Hulse: From the medical, historical and paleopathological evidence it is clear that biblical ‘leprosy’ is not modern leprosy. There are no indications whatsoever that the disease we now know as leprosy was present in the Near East in Old Testament times and decryptions of ṣāraʿat are not accepted by experienced leprologists as having any relationships to modern leprosy.⁷¹

What is more, ‫ צרעת‬ṣāraʿat is used in a context of ritual (to determine the purity or impurity of an object or person with regard to religious practice), rather than medicine or science, fulfilling a descriptive and not an aetiological⁷² role. Its meaning, therefore, depends on where the disease is manifest; that is to say, on the entity affected by leprosy: 1) If the entity is the skin (Lev 13.2, 3, 9, 11, 12…), ‫ צרעת‬ṣāraʿat denotes a dermatological illness. This is today postulated as being vitiligo, psoriasis, etc.⁷³ 2) If the entity is cloth or leather (Lev 13.49) or the walls of a house (Lev 14.37), ‫צרעת‬ ṣāraʿat denotes a type of mould, fungus or rot.⁷⁴ This is the case of Leviticus 13.49 and 14.37, where the adjectival lexeme ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq is used to indicate the appearance of mould on various objects.

 E.V. Hulse, ‘The Nature of Biblical Leprosy and the Use of Alternative Medical Terms in Modern Translations of the Bible’, PEQ (1975), 87– 105, at 91; years later, Desmond W. Beckett showed that the disease was first recorded in the Far East and would have spread through Europe after the time of Hippocrates (467 BC) (‘The Striking Hand of God: Leprosy in History’, New Zealand Medical Journal 100 [1987], 494– 497).  John Wilkinson, ‘Leprosy and Leviticus: A Problem of Semantics and Translations’, SJT 31 (1977), 153– 166, at 155; Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 1 – 16: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, 1st edn, AB 3 (New York: Doubleday, 1991), p. 888. Recently, Annette Weissenrieder, Images of Illness in the Gospel of Luke: Insights from Ancient Medical Texts (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003), pp. 137– 138, has insisted on the functional aspect of ‫ צרעת‬ṣāraʿat: it is used with ritualistic cultic implications, but also social and medical ones. Perhaps the reason that ‫ צרעת‬ṣāraʿat, ‘leprosy’ is applied to both people and objects is that a discolouration is produced in both cases: David Baker et al., Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy (Caroll Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 2009), p. 92.  Julius Preuss, Biblical and Talmudic Medicine, trans. Fred Rosner (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2004), p. 326; Wilkinson, ‘Leprosy and Leviticus’, 159; Hulse, ‘The Nature of Biblical Leprosy’, 99. Heller, ‘Tsara’at Leviticus’, 590, proposes that ‫ צרעת‬ṣāraʿat is a general term denoting a type of mould known as Stachybotys. This affects the walls of houses and may cause health problems such as fatigue, lung infections, memory loss and skin sores (vid. infra, pp. 56 – 57).  Wilkinson, ‘Leprosy and Leviticus’, 165; DBIm, s.v. Leper, leprosy; Douglas R. Edwards, ‘Dress and Ornamentation’, ABD 2; Milgrom, Leviticus 1 – 16, pp. 809 and 863 – 864; John E. Hartley, Leviticus, WBC 4 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992); Version 2.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]; Christopher J. H. Wright, Leviticus, in Donald A. Carson (ed.), New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition, 4th edn (Leicester, United Kingdom; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1994); Version 2.0 [Electronic source: Accordance edition], Lev 14.33 – 53.

56

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

The book of Leviticus does not provide any further information about the mould or fungus that affected cloth or leather objects. Rust or blight⁷⁵ have been proposed for this in Lev 13.49, but the textiles used in that period were mainly linen and wool⁷⁶ and these parasites usually attack grains, giving them a darker tone.⁷⁷ There is, then, no certainty that these are ones being referred to. What is known is that some moulds and fungi in their various phases of growth acquire both green and yellowish hues.⁷⁸ This perhaps explains the different translations proposed by the dictionaries (greenish, green, yellowish),⁷⁹ whose ambiguity, given their distance in time, is impossible to resolve.⁸⁰ Something similar occurs with respect to the discolouration of walls. Hartley has suggested that such staining could be the result of ‘a fungus, a mold, or dry rot or it might be the piling up of calcium nitrate, which results from the gases of decaying material on the lime of the plaster. Another possibility could be the activity of some insects within the walls’.⁸¹ Given that Israelite houses, although built on stone foundations, had walls of brick,⁸² a porous material, it seems plausible that in Leviticus the reference is to mould and not to the presence of insects. Some wood-destroying or wood-staining fungus has also been suggested,⁸³ one which could have had a variety of hues: pinks, reds and greyish olives.⁸⁴ ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq would therefore denote a greyish olive colour such as ‫ אדמדם‬ʾǎdamdam, perhaps with pink and reddish tones. This hypothesis, however, is not conclusive. The walls of houses, as we have said, were made of brick and not wood; indeed, Leviticus itself prescribes the removal of stones as a way of restoring the purity of a dwelling (Lev 14.40) and mentions wood only at the end, when explaining what to do in the extreme case that the mould has spread to all of the house (Lev 14.45). More convincing, however, is the proposal offered by Richard Heller and his team, according to whom ‫ צרעת‬ṣāraʿat can be identified as a specific type of mould: Stachybotys. This is a mould that has existed for millennia, with a greenish-black colour that may  Natalio Fernández Marcos and María Victoria Spottorno, La Biblia griega. Septuaginta, I. Pentateuco (Salamanca: Ediciones Sígueme, 2008), Lev 13.49, nota b: ‘tizón y añublo’.  Baker, Leviticus, p. 92.  https://boletinagrario.com/ap-6,anublo,1402.html; DLE, s.v. añublo; available at: http://dle.rae. es/srv/fetch?id=ZuR0ZNm; 5/11/2018.  Today, for example, it is known that the moulds Aspergillus and Penicillium can grow on leather, among other materials, and may have a yellow or bluish-green hue as well as white and black: Henry Des Abbayes et al., Botánica: vegetales inferiores, 2nd edn (Barcelona: Reverté, 1989), p. 445.  Modern versions of the Bible incline toward shades of green: ‘greenish’ (ASV; NIV; NKJV; NRSV); ‘verdosa’ (RVR60; Navarra Bible) or ‘verdusca’ (Cantera and Iglesias, Biblia del Peregrino); ‘verdastra’ (CEI; NR2006); and ‘verdâtre’ (BDS; SG21).  Bulakh, ‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew’, p. 204.  Hartley, Leviticus, Lev 13.37– 42.  John S. Holladay, ‘House, Israelite’, ABD 3; Hartley, Leviticus, Lev 13.37– 42.  David P. Wright, ‘Leprosy’, ABD 4.  George M. Hunt and George A. Garratt, Wood Preservation, 3rd edn (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967), pp. 23 – 43, cited by Wright in ‘Leprosy’, ABD 4.

II.2 ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq and its polysemy

57

well have been denoted by ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq. The product of damp environments, it grows on walls and household items and its presence may affect the health of a dwelling’s inhabitants. It is also difficult to eliminate; indeed, some experts believe that it cannot be destroyed.⁸⁵ This may explain why the author of Leviticus states that a house must be demolished when ‫ צרעת‬ṣāraʿat has extended to every part of it (Lev 14.45). Despite the efforts by scientists to discover what type of mould is mentioned in the book of Leviticus, and given the temporal remoteness of the text, the difficulty of dating and the lack of archaeological testimonies prior to the 4th century BC, it may be concluded that the type of mould mentioned by the author of Leviticus cannot be determined with certainty. Considering that ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq is used indiscriminately for the fungus on fabrics, leather or walls in a pericope dedicated to the laws concerning leprosy, we may also conclude that ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq denotes a hue similar to that in Lev 13.49 and 14.37. It is understood in the same way in the Septuagint, which uses the same lexeme to translate these elements: χλωρίζουσα, that is, somewhere between greenish (tending toward green), dark greenish (tending toward dark green or greyish green)⁸⁶ or perhaps yellowish green, hence the definition ‘the colour of mould when it grows on walls or on cloth and leather’. As glosses, we propose ‘greyish olive, yellowish green, greenish’. Symbolism: The fact that the adjectival lexeme ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq is found in the context of laws on purity and impurity, indicating something which is impure and contaminating to humans, and is thus banned from religious practice, gives this colour term a negative symbolic connotation. It has been postulated that the appearance of impurity is a punishment by God for the sins of mankind,⁸⁷ as in some cases leprosy appears in response to these sins:⁸⁸ Miriam is punished by God (Num 12.10) for criticizing Moses’ marriage (Num 12.1) and questioning his leadership (Num 12.2); similarly, King Uzzi’ah is punished with leprosy for his arrogance in burning incense on the altar (2 Chr 26.19); the same occurs in the case of King Azari’ah, for the disloyalty of his people (2 Kgs 15.4– 5). Indeed, in Lev 14.19, 31 it is stated explicitly that a sacrifice must be offered in the case of sin, as this is the way to purify what is impure.⁸⁹ From this point of view, the colour term ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq would symbolize impurity as a divine punishment for sin. However, when the leprosy laws regarding clothing, leather objects or the home are given, sin is not

 Heller, ‘Tsara’at Leviticus’, 590.  Diccionario Akal del color, p. 951, s.v. verdoso and verdusco.  Hartley, Leviticus, Lev 13.48 – 53.  This is not always the case, however, the clearest example being the appearance of leprosy on the hand of Moses as a sign of God’s omnipotence over the Egyptians (Exod 4.6).  Lev 14.19 and 14.31 refer to advertent or deliberate sins. The one who commits them must be purified, but this expiation can only be effected by a priest. This is not the case of inadvertent sins, which can be expiated by the one who commits them (Milgrom, Leviticus 1 – 16, pp. 228, 857– 858; 887– 889).

58

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

mentioned; these simply establish what is pure (‫ טהור‬ṭahôr) and what is impure (‫טמא‬ ṭāmēʾ) as a norm for participation or non-participation in religious worship (Lev 13.59; 14.54– 57). The pure is what is clean, healthy, normal and unharmful,⁹⁰ as opposed to the impure, which implies whatever is defective, unclean, weak or harmful. For this reason, in the context of ‫ צרעת‬ṣāraʿat, ‘leprosy’, ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq symbolizes impurity and filth but not necessarily sin. From the perspective of cognitive linguistics, the explanation for this would be the following: ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq is a sign of impurity because it shows deterioration, whether this is of walls, cloth or leather objects. The subdomains in which ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq appears –cloth and buildings– connect us with the larger domain of leprosy, which in turn belongs to a still broader domain, that of ritual purity. The colour lexeme ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq thus becomes the most notable term in its subdomains (clothing and buildings),⁹¹ as it is a sign of leprosy and therefore of impurity. In this way, ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq comes to acquire a negative connotation for all who read the biblical text.

II.2.3.2 ‫ חרוץ‬ḥārûṣ (cognitive domain of metals) The gold colour expressed by the adjectival lexeme ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq has been widely discussed. Indeed, modern versions of the Bible and the commentaries on the Psalms offer a variety of translations: ‘yellow’,⁹² ‘green’,⁹³ ‘bright’ or ‘radiant’⁹⁴ or simply ‘gold’.⁹⁵ All of these may be applied to gold, for either its hue or its brightness. With respect to hue, yellow,⁹⁶ the usual colour of gold, is its classic epithet but would make the text somewhat redundant by underscoring an aspect already contained in the term ‘gold’, while ‘green/greenish’ is the hue of gold when alloyed with other metals such as silver or bronze.⁹⁷ As for the quality of brightness, while this is anoth-

 Baruch A. Levine, ‘Leviticus, Book of. B. Contexts and Structure of Leviticus.1. Cult and Purity (Chaps. 1– 16)’, ABD 4.  Barcelona, ‘La metonimia conceptual,’ p. 140, explains how the symbol is usually the most notable subdomain of a given domain.  ASV; NKJV; RVR60 (‘amarillez del oro’); BDS; SG21.  NRSV; Cantera and Iglesias (‘verdoso’); Hans-Joachim Kraus, Psalms 60 – 150: A Commentary (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1989), p. 44; Marvin E. Tate, Psalms 51 – 100, WBC 20 (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1990); Version 2.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition].  Hartley, Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes, p. 135; NIV (‘shining gold’); Cantera and Iglesias (‘resplandeciente’), Navarra Bible (‘con destellos de oro’); Biblia del Peregrino (‘irisadas de oro’); CEI (‘riflessi d’oro’).  NR2006: Ps 68.13; available at: https://www.bible.com/es/bible/122/PSA.68.NR06; 20/08/2019.  In fact, Bulakh (‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew’, p. 204) affirms that testimonies from the proto-Semitic period show the use of this root and its derivations to designate gold.  Currently, the denomination ‘green gold’ is applied to an alloy of gold with 25 % silver (Diccionario Akal del color, p. 945, s.v. verde oro). As will be seen later, in antiquity green gold had a lower percentage of silver (vid. infra, pp. 63 – 64).

II.2 ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq and its polysemy

59

er characteristic proper to gold,⁹⁸ it seems strange that a quality it shares with silver would be emphasized here.⁹⁹ Such a diversity of interpretations is nothing new; the same difficulty seems also to have existed in antiquity, as the ancient versions of the Bible show. As mentioned earlier, the Septuagint would reinterpret the syntax of the Hebrew text.¹⁰⁰ The adjective ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq was thought to have a nominal function, while the nominal lexeme ‫ חרוץ‬ḥārûṣ functioned as an adjective. Thus, ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq was translated as the nominal lexeme χλωρότης, rather than the adjectival lexeme χλωρός, used frequently in the LXX, and the nominal lexeme ‫ חרוץ‬ḥārûṣ as a nominal lexeme, χρυσίου, but in an adjectival position. Hence the modern translations of the LXX: ‘con verdor de oro’ (Biblia griega. Septuaginta),¹⁰¹ ‘golden greenness’ (NETS).¹⁰² With respect to the two translations of the Vulgate, both maintain the syntactic interpretation found in the LXX, with ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq functioning as a noun and ‫חרוץ‬ ḥārûṣ as an adjective. The Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos translates ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq with the term uiror, ‘green colour’, ‘greenness’,¹⁰³ while the Psalterium Gallicanum uses pallor, ‘paleness’,¹⁰⁴ for χλωρότης, which is also the translation found in the Vetus Latina. ¹⁰⁵ Finally, the Targum of Psalms omits the chromatic description of the adjective ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq in favour of a gloss: ‫ אובריזין סנין‬ʾôvrȋzȋn sānȋn, ‘pure gold’.¹⁰⁶ Faced with this disparity, the modern reader may feel perplexed, and obliged to search the text for some interpretative guideline to clarify the meaning of ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq. It is at this point that a key question arises: What type of dove is the poet referring to? Is it a real bird or an artistic representation? The answer to this question may prove to be crucial, as a greater approximation to the entity described could provide a more precise definition of the colour expressed by the adjectival lexeme ‫ירקרק‬ yǝraqraq. Throughout the history of this particular exegetical issue, various hypotheses have been proposed: a) The poet was referring to a real dove: John E. Hartley has proposed that the poet was evoking the liberation of doves during a victory celebration,¹⁰⁷ a frequent custom in Egypt that might have been adopted

 Elizabeth E. Platt, ‘Jewelry, Ancient Israelite B. How Metals Are Used in the Bible. Gold’, ABD 3.  Alan R. Buescher, EDB, s.v. gold.  Vid. infra, p. 53.  Natalio Fernández Marcos and María Victoria Spottorno, La Biblia griega. Septuaginta, III. Libros poéticos y sapienciales (Salamanca: Ediciones Sígueme, 2013), Ps 67.14.  Brenton’s translation (‘yellow gold’) does not respect the Greek text.  Lewis and Short, s.v. uiror.  Lewis and Short, s.v. pallor.  Vetus Latina Database.  Luis Díez Merino, ‘Exégesis targúmica del salmo 68’, MEAH sección Hebreo 53 (2004), 97– 122, at 102.  Hartley, Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes, pp. 134– 135.

60

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

by the people of Israel.¹⁰⁸ According to Hartley, as the doves ascended into the sky their feathers would have shone with a yellowish hue from the rays of reflected sunlight. This would explain the silver and gold colours described in the psalm. His proposal is supported by the observations of Benedikt S. J. Isserlin: 1) The ivory plaque of Megiddo shows the king receiving a tribute and surrounded by flying birds that appear to be doves. 2) The representations of doves in Egyptian palaces may indicate another custom that could have been transferred to the Israelite world.¹⁰⁹ However, there may have been other motives for the presence of doves in these palaces, as they were sometimes used as a symbol of love.¹¹⁰ The Illustrated Bible Dictionary, on the other hand, proposes that there is a species of dove in Damascus whose characteristic colour, with the exception of the wings, is yellow.¹¹¹ In the same line, Lourdes García Ureña has suggested that this could be Treron phoenicoptera. ¹¹² The colours of this dove pertain to the spectrum of yellow and grey. Its neck, breast and the edges of its wings are predominately a bright yellow or mustard hue that becomes darker on the lower part of the neck; these colours can appear on the tibiotarsi and feet as well, along with an orange tending toward yellow, while the head and throat are a yellowish green. Grey appears in a bluish shade on the upper part of the head –on the back and sides–, as a greyish white or light grey on the beak, as a pale grey band on the mantle, a blackish grey with light yellow edges on the median coverts and scapulars of the wings, and a silvergrey on the tail.¹¹³ These colours are in close accordance with the psalmist’s description: the wings of silver would correspond to the grey head and tail of Treron phoenicoptera, and the golden (‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq) plumage could well allude to the mustard, yellowish green and yellow tones of the real dove (Figure 1). b) The poet was referring to an artistic representation: The opinio communis is that this was a military trophy in the form of a dove. John Gray proposes some valuable winged object captured in war, such as a standard of Astarte or an anthropoid figure in the form of a dove, like the winged Anat in Ugar-

 Tate, Psalms 51 – 100, following Eerdmans and Keel-Leu, believes that the doves were released as messengers of victory.  Isserlin, ‘Psalm 68, Verse 14’, 7.  In the Papyrus Harris 500 we find a love poem that seems to associate the cooing of the doves with love: Miriam Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature: The New Kingdom, vol. 2 (Berkeley; Los Angeles; London: University of California Press, 1973), p. 190. (We thank Prof. Sanchiz for this reference).  Easton, s.v. dove.  García Ureña, ‘Χλωρός y su riqueza cromática en la Septuaginta’, p. 129.  Josep del Hoyo et al. (eds.), Handbook of the Birds of the World. Vol. 4. Sandgrouse to Cuckoos, (Barcelona: Lynx Edicions, 1997), p. 198.

II.2 ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq and its polysemy

61

Figure 1: See the colour grey in the head and tail and the variety of green shades in the rest of the body. Yellow-footed Green Pigeon Treron phoenicoptera. Photograped by Dr. Raju Kasamble at Keoladeo National Park, Bharatpur, Rajasthan; available at: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Yellow-footed_Green_Pigeon_Treron_phoenicoptera_by_Dr._Raju_Kasambe_DSCN2282_(20).jpg

itic iconography.¹¹⁴ Edward Lipiński inclines for a religious symbol of silver and gold in the form of a dove, representing a divinity, perhaps Anat, that was worshipped in Canaan,¹¹⁵ while William O. E. Oesterley suggests that it might have been an object of feminine adornment.¹¹⁶ Despite these various proposals, there is no unanimity among these exegetes as to the interpretation of ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq. Some think that it is a greenish colour,¹¹⁷ as this is the hue that results when the paleness of gold is inlaid with bronze (as found in the excavation of Minet al-Beida) or, more properly, the colour of silver-plated gold.¹¹⁸ Luis Alonso Schökel and the Polish orientalist Edward Lipiński propose that it refers to yellow or to the brightness that characterizes gold.¹¹⁹ Although much effort has been made to determine the type of dove the poet had in mind, the proposals offered are still no more than hypotheses, as no dove-shaped ornament or military insignia has been found whose dating could be related to that

 John Gray, ‘A Cantata of the Autumn Festival: Psalm LXVIII’, Journal of Semitic Studies 22 (1977), 2– 26, at 14.  Édouard Lipiński, ‘La colombe du Psaume LXVIII, 14’, VT 23 (1973), 365 – 368, at 367.  William O. E. Oesterley, The Psalms (London: S.P.C.K., 1962), p. 324.  Kraus, Psalms 60 – 150, pp. 44 and 52.  Gray, ‘Psalm LXVIII’, 14.  Lipiński, ‘La colombe’, 367; Alonso Schökel and Carniti, Salmos, pp. 882 and 885.

62

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

of the psalm’s composition, nor do we have any certainty that the poet was referring to a real dove. In this case, therefore, the dove itself does not serve to clarify the tonality of ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq. It is once more necessary to focus on a specific entity described through ‫ירקרק‬ yǝraqraq: ‫ חרוץ‬ḥārûṣ (gold). We need, then, to first look more closely at the knowledge that the listener/reader in biblical times might have had of gold itself before going back to the text. Gold is a precious metal known from the earliest of times (Gen 2.11), even though it is rarely discovered among archaelogical findings. It came originally from Arabia, Sheba and Ophir¹²⁰ (1 Kgs 9.28; 10.2; Job 28.16), but not from Palestine. Its natural characteristics (brightness, form and quality) were well known, as were its various types.¹²¹ It is mentioned frequently in the Bible, as it was used for priestly vestments, objects of worship, jewellery, decoration, temple construction and trade. Indeed, along with ‫ חרוץ‬ḥārûṣ, the Bible uses a variety of terms to refer to gold: ‫ זהב‬zāhāb, ‘yellow gold’ (Exod 25.11; 1 Chr 28.18; 2 Chr 3.5);¹²² ‫ כתם‬ketem, ‘gold as pure as it was extracted’ (Job 28.19);¹²³ ‫ פז‬pāz, ‘pure gold’ (Ps 19.11; Prov 8.19). Types of gold are nuanced by: a) nouns (‫ זהב סגור‬zāhāb sāgûr, ‘solid gold’, 1 Kgs 6.20); b) adjectives (‫ טהור זהב‬zāhāb tāhôr, ‘pure gold’, 2 Chr 3.4); ‫ זהב טוב‬zāhāb tôb, ‘good gold’, 2 Chr 3.8); c) verbs (‫ נבחר‬nibḥar, ‘chosen’, Prov 8.10);¹²⁴ or even their place of origin (‫זהב פרוים‬ zāhāb parwayim, ‘gold from Parvaim’,¹²⁵ 2 Chr 3.6). As this shows, it is not the first time that gold is highlighted by the use of an adjectival lexeme. Returning to the pericope in question, if it is analyzed in detail we can observe that the parallelism created by the poet is supported by a literary motif that is recurrent in the biblical corpus, and this is the binomial pair ‘silver and gold’, found in Zech 9.3; Prov 3.14; 8.10, 19; 16.16, as well as in other ancient literary corpora, for example, the Ugaritic.¹²⁶ According to Mitchell Dahood,¹²⁷ the poet uses an expression found in KTU 1.14 III 22: ksp wyrq ḫrṣi. Gray, however, rejects this idea because, he says, ‘in the Krt legend the two nouns are to be taken as parallels, “electrum” and

 Sheba was located geographically in southern Arabia, while the location of Ophir is debated (southern Arabia, Malaya, Somaliland). Robert J. Forbes, Studies in Ancient Technology. Vol. 8. Metallurgy in Antiquity, 2nd edn (Leiden: Brill, 1971), p. 164.  Easton, s.v. gold; Platt, ‘Jewelry, Ancient Israelite. Gold’, ABD 3; Buescher, EDB, s.v. gold.  Easton, s.v. gold.  Strong’s Dictionary, s.v. ‫כתם‬.  As Raymond B. Dillard affirms in 2 Chronicles, WBC 15 (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987; Version 2.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition], 2 Chr 3.3 – 4, our knowledge of ancient metallurgy does not allow us to specify these differences with exactitude.  The geographical location of Parvaim is unknown: Forbes, Ancient Technology, p. 164.  Gregorio del Olmo Lete and Joaquín Sanmartín, A Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language in the Alphabetic Tradition. Part One, A/I/U – K, 3rd edn (Leiden, Netherlands; Boston, MA: Brill, 2015), pp. 458 – 461, at 459, s.v. ksp.  Mitchell Dahood, Psalms II 51 – 100, AB 17 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1968), p. 142.

II.2 ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq and its polysemy

63

“gold”, rather than as a construct and absolute’.¹²⁸ In any case, what is peculiar about Ps 68.14 is that the poet seeks to highlight the presence of ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq. He uses two strategies to accomplish this: a) The parallelism of the verse is altered by assigning the preposition ‫ ב‬bǝ to the colour term ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq, rather than placing it before the noun ‫ חרוץ‬ḥārûṣ, which would have been more expected, as this is the construction with silver (‫ בכסף‬bakesep) found in the preceding verse. b) ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq is used to precede the embodying entity, in contrast to Lev 13.49 and 14.37 and perhaps due to the Ugaritic influence.¹²⁹ It may be that this interest in emphasizing the presence of ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq stems from the fact that its function is not to indicate an objective quality of gold (gold is the colour green, yellow, etc.), but to classify it;¹³⁰ that is to say, the poet is referring to a type of gold. Given the triumphal context of the psalm, it would have been one that was highly appreciated and well known to the community that chanted it. This hypothesis is confirmed by Dunaš ben Labrat, the Hebrew commentator of Al Andalus (10th c. AD), who in his commentary on Ps 68.14, describes not only the colour of this gold, but its origin, value and the change in colour when silver is added, even if this does not change its name: ‫ חרוץ ירקרק‬is the gold brought from the country of Hawilah and from the country of Kuš: an extraordinarily fine gold, which is neither green nor red, and therefore it is called ‫‘ ירקרק‬greenish’, like ‘reddish’ white ‫אדמדם‬, which is neither red nor white. For this reason, there is a reduplication in ‫ ירקרק‬and ‫אדמדם‬. And it is well known that ‫ חרוץ ירקרק‬does not take on the aspect of red gold more than when silver is added in the oven upon refining.¹³¹

The commentary of this Hebrew scholar does not seem to contradict studies of metallurgy in the Ancient Near East. It has been demonstrated that gold rarely appeared in its full purity. Indeed, the usual case was that the ‘gold used in the Ancient Near East was mainly the native alloy’.¹³² Such alloys modified the colour of gold, giving it other hues –red, green or a shade between yellow and white– and different names according to the culture and period. In Egypt, the colour red-purple was obtained by ‘dipping the gold object in a solution of an iron salt and heating it afterwards’.¹³³  Gray, ‘Psalm LXVIII’, 14.  The Ugaritic term ‘wyrq’, corresponding to ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq in Hebrew, is used to precede gold when it accompanies it; for example, to describe the colour of the moon in its ascension (KTU 1.163.14). It is translated as ‘greenish yellow’ (Del Olmo Lete and Sanmartín, A Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language, pp. 966 – 967, at 967, s.v. yrq).  Cuenca and Hilferty, Introducción a la lingüística cognitiva, pp. 151– 152.  Dunaš, Tešubot, p. 49. We are grateful for the assistance of Prof. Gómez Aranda in researching this reference in the works of medieval exegetes.  Forbes, Ancient Technology, p. 170.  Forbes, Ancient Technology, p. 171. However, in the Roman period red-purple gold was an alloy containing 25 % copper and was called pyropos: Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, ‘Antiche tecniche di colo-

64

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

A green tonality was the result of adding copper to an alloy of gold and silver (this last comprising some 10 %).¹³⁴ Today, such an alloy is known as green gold, but in antiquity it was also referred to as Corinthian bronze¹³⁵ and was highly valued.¹³⁶ The hue between yellow and white was the product of mixing gold and silver, and was given the name electrum, a term which, together with the expression ‘white gold’, is still used today. This alloy may be of a natural origin, but, given its scarcity, on many occasions the gold found in objects of jewellery must be seen as the result of the artificial alloys known in antiquity.¹³⁷ From the present study, it may be concluded that ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq denotes the colour acquired by gold after adding copper to an alloy of gold and silver (10 %). Such a hue would conform to that of the two types of dove mentioned: the Treron phoenicoptera, whose yellow and mustard tones might make its green appear similar to the ‘green gold’ of the Bible; and a war trophy with a dove motif, which might have been forged with green gold. It is, then, a different hue from that of ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq in the context of fungus (Lev 13.49; 14.37). This perhaps explains the alteration of syntax found in Ps 68.14; that is, the fact that ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq precedes the entity that embodies it, rather than follows it, as in Lev 13.49; 14.37, and where the meaning is different as well. Indeed, the denominations ‘golden green’ and ‘green gold’ are still used in modern terminology.¹³⁸

II.2.4 Conclusions From the semantic analysis we have carried out, it can be concluded that ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq is a colour adjective that indicates a state of being, as in Leviticus it refers to the appearance of mould growing on cloth or in houses, and in Ps 68.14 to a type of razione dei metalli’, in Mauro Bacci (ed.), Atti del convegno ‘Colore e arte: storia e tecnologia del colore nei secoli’ (Firenze, 28 Febbraio–2 Marzo 2007) dell’Associazione Nazionale di Archeometria (Bologna: Pàtron Editore, 2008), pp. 259 – 69, at 266.  The presence of this type of alloy may perhaps explain the translation of the Ugaritic term wyrq as ‘greenish yellow’ (see note 129) which is still the accepted translation (from Del Olmo Lete and Sanmartín, A Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language, p. 967). It was recently translated in this way by Dennis Pardee ‘Epic. The Kirta Epic’, in William W. Hallo and K. Lawson Younger, Jr. (eds.), The Context of Scripture, vol. 1 (Leiden; New York: Brill, 2003), p. 335. We are grateful for the assistance of Prof. Mark Smith and Prof. Ignacio Márquez Rowe in researching Ugaritic texts.  Forbes, Ancient Technology, pp.171– 2. In any case, Corinthian bronze has been a subject of debate among scholars: Paul T. Craddock and Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, ‘The Identity of Corinthian Bronze: Rome’s Shakudo Alloy’, in Stephanus T. A. M. Mols et al. (eds.), Acta of the 12th International Congress on Ancient Bronzes (Nijmegen, Museum Kam, May 1992), Nederlandse Archeologische Rapporten Nummer 18 (Nijmegen: Provincaal Museum, 1995), pp. 137– 148.  Giumlia-Mair, ‘Antiche tecniche di colorazione dei metalli’, p. 264.  Inés Ortega-Feliu et al., ‘Gold and Electrum Jewellery in the Strategic Area of Gadir in Phoenician Period’, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 260 (2007), 329 – 335, at 333.  Diccionario Akal del color, p. 945, s.v. verde oro.

II.2 ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq and its polysemy

65

metal alloy. Each of these entities (mould and gold) is characterized as having a specific hue. For this reason, we can affirm that ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq is a polysemic colour term with two different meanings in the MT, according to the cognitive domain in which ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq is embodied. I. In the cognitive domain of sickness, ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq means ‘the colour of mould when it grows on walls or on cloth (Lev 13.49) and leather (Lev 14.37); associated with impurity, which carries with it the exclusion from public worship’. As glosses, we propose: ‘greenish, yellowish green, greyish olive’. II. In the cognitive domain of metals, ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq means ‘the hue of a type of gold produced by adding copper to a gold and silver (10 %) alloy, highly appreciated in antiquity, similar to the plumage of Treron phoenicoptera or to the gold used to make commemorative trophies (Ps 68.14)’. It can be translated as ‘green gold’ or ‘golden green’.

II.2.5 Bibliography Albright, William F., ‘A Catalogue of Early Hebrew Lyric Poems (Psalm LXVII)’, HUCA 23 (1950), 1 – 39. Alonso Schökel, Luis and Cecilia Carniti, Salmos I (Salmos 1 – 72): traducción, introducciones y comentario, (Estella: Verbo Divino, 1992). Avalos, Hector, EDB, s.v. leprosy. Baker, David et al., Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy (Caroll Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 2009). Beckett, Desmond W., ‘The Striking Hand of God: Leprosy in History’, New Zealand Medical Journal 100 (1987), 494 – 497. Brenner, Athalya, Colour Terms in the Old Testament (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1982). Buescher, Alan R., EDB, s.v. gold. Bulakh, Maria, ‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew in Diachronic Aspect’, in Leonid E. Kogan et al. (eds.), Babel und Bibel 3. Annual of Ancient Near Eastern, Old Testament, and Semitic Studies (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006), pp. 181 – 216. Craddock, Paul T. and Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, ‘The Identity of Corinthian Bronze: Rome’s Shakudo Alloy’, in Stephanus T. A. M. Mols et al. (eds.), Acta of the 12th International Congress on Ancient Bronzes (Nijmegen, Museum Kam, May 1992), Nederlandse Archeologische Rapporten Nummer 18 (Nijmegen: Provincaal Museum, 1995), pp. 137 – 148. Dahood, Mitchell, Psalms II 51 – 100, AB 17 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1968). Del Hoyo, Josep et al. (eds.), Handbook of the Birds of the World. Vol. 4. Sandgrouse to Cuckoos (Barcelona: Lynx Edicions, 1997). Del Olmo Lete, Gregorio and Joaquín Sanmartín, A Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language in the Alphabetic Tradition. Part One, A/I/U – K, 3rd edn (Leiden, Netherlands; Boston, MA: Brill, 2015). Des Abbayes, Henry et al., Botánica: vegetales inferiores, 2nd edn (Barcelona: Reverté, 1989). Díez Merino, Luis, ‘Exégesis targúmica del salmo 68’, MEAH sección Hebreo 53 (2004), 97 – 122. Dillard, Raymond B., 2 Chronicles, WBC 15 (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987); Version 2.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Douglas R., Edwards, ‘Dress and Ornamentation’, ABD 2. Dunaš ben Labrat. Tešubot de Dunaš ben Labrat: edición crítica y traducción española, Ángel Sáenz-Badillos, ed. (Granada: Universidad de Granada, 1980).

66

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

Easton, Matthew G., Easton’s Bible Dictionary, Illustrated Bible Dictionary, 3rd edn (Thomas Nelson, 1897); OakTree Software, Inc.; Version 3.4 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Forbes, Robert J., Studies in Ancient Technology. Vol. 8. Metallurgy in Antiquity, 2nd edn (Leiden: Brill, 1971). García Ureña, Lourdes, ‘Χλωρός y su riqueza cromática en la Septuaginta’ in τί ἡμῖν καὶ σοί; Lo que hay entre tú y nosotros. Estudios en honor de María Victoria Spottorno (Córdoba: UCOPress, 2016), pp. 119 – 131. Giumlia-Mair, Alessandra, ‘Antiche tecniche di colorazione dei metalli’, in Mauro Bacci (ed.), Atti del Convegno ‘Colore e arte: storia e tecnologia del colore nei secoli’ (Firenze, 28 Febbraio–2 Marzo 2007) dell’Associazione Nazionale di Archeometria (Bologna: Pàtron Editore, 2008), pp. 259 – 269. Gradwohl, Roland, Die Farben im Alten Testament: Eine Terminologische Studie (Berlin: A. Töpelmann, 1963). Gray, John, ‘A Cantata of the Autumn Festival: Psalm LXVIII’, Journal of Semitic Studies 22 (1977), 2 – 26. Guillaumont, Antoine, ‘La désignation des couleurs en hébreu et en araméen’, in I. Meyerson (ed.), Problèmes de la couleur (Paris: S. E.V.P.E.N, 1957), pp. 339 – 348. Hartley, John E., Leviticus, WBC 4 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992); Version 2.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition). Hartley, John E., The Semantics of Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes (Louvain; Paris; Walpole, MA: Peeters, 2010). Heller, Richard M. et al., ‘Mold: “Tsara’at,” Leviticus, and the History of a Confusion’, Medicine 46 (2003), 588 – 591. Holladay, John S., ‘House, Israelite’, ABD 3. Hulse, E. V., ‘The Nature of Biblical Leprosy and the Use of Alternative Medical Terms in Modern Translations of the Bible’, PEQ (1975), 87 – 105. Hunt, George M. and George A. Garratt, Wood Preservation, 3rd edn (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967). International Union for Conservation of Nature, ‘Species range: Aves: > Columbiformes > Columbidae: Treron phoenicopterus’; available at: http://maps.iucnredlist.org/map.html?id=22691203; 10/02/2017. Isserlin, Benedikt S. J., ‘Psalm 68, Verse 14: an Archaeological Gloss’, PEQ 103 (1971), 5 – 8. Jacquesson, François, ‘Les mots de la couleur dans les textes bibliques’, 2009. Online in Research Project Histoire et géographie de la couleur (CNRS-ISCC 2008 – 2009). Kraus, Hans-Joachim, Psalms 60 – 150: A Commentary (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1989). Levine, Baruch A., ‘Leviticus, Book of. B. Contexts and Structure of Leviticus.1. Cult and Purity (Chaps. 1 – 16)’, ABD 4. Lichtheim, Miriam, Ancient Egyptian Literature: The New Kingdom, vol. 2 (Berkeley; Los Angeles; London: University of California Press, 1973). Lipiński, Édouard, ‘La colombe du Psaume LXVIII, 14’, VT 23 (1973), 365 – 368. Milgrom, Jacob, Leviticus 1 – 16: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, 1st edn, AB 3 (New York: Doubleday, 1991). Murphy, Roland E., ‘Psalms’, in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 569 – 602. Oesterley, William O. E., The Psalms (London: S.P.C.K., 1962). Ortega-Feliu, Inés et al., ‘Gold and Electrum Jewellery in the Strategic Area of Gadir in Phoenician Period’, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 260 (2007), 329 – 335. Pardee, Dennis, ‘Epic. The Kirta Epic’, in William W. Hallo and K. Lawson Younger, Jr. (eds.), The Context of Scripture, vol. 1 (Leiden; New York: Brill, 2003). Platt, Elizabeth E., ‘Jewelry, Ancient Israelite B. How Metals Are Used in the Bible. Gold’, ABD 3.

II.2 ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq and its polysemy

67

Preuss, Julius, Biblical and Talmudic Medicine, trans. Fred Rosner (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2004). Sasaki, Shin et al., ‘Mycobacterium leprae and Leprosy: a Compendium’, Microbiology and Immunology 45 (2001), 729 – 736. Tate, Marvin E., Psalms 51 – 100, WBC 20 (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1990); Version 2.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Weissenrieder, Annette, Images of Illness in the Gospel of Luke: Insights from Ancient Medical Texts (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003). Wilkinson, John, ‘Leprosy and Leviticus: A Problem of Semantics and Translations’, SJT 31 (1977), 153 – 166. Wright, David P., ‘Leprosy’, ABD 4. Wright, Christopher J. H., Leviticus, in Donald A. Carson (ed.), New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition, 4th edn (Leicester, United Kingdom; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1994); Version 2.0 [Electronic source: Accordance edition].

II.3 ‫ ירוק‬yārôq: ‘greenery’ II.3.1 Introduction ‫ ירוק‬yārôq is a noun.¹³⁹ It appears 1x in the MT (Job 39.8) and another time in 1QIsaa 13.13 – 14 (Isa 15.6). Within the wide thematic range of wisdom literature, the book of Job is especially well known, as it addresses one of humankind’s greatest questions: the meaning of suffering. The complexity of this theme is reflected in both its form and its content. With respect to the former, the book comprises two clearly differentiated parts: one in prose (the prologue, 1– 2; and the epilogue, 42.7– 17) and the other, the main body of the book, in verse (3 – 42.6). The literary genre of the work –didactic poem, drama, judicial debate, etc.– is still being debated today. Indeed, the book of Job is considered unique in terms of genre, as it includes to a certain degree all of the various literary forms that have been attributed to it.¹⁴⁰ As for its content, the difficulty of the chosen theme (suffering) is manifested in the behaviours of the various friends of Job who come to visit and comfort him. After their harshness and lack of answers (3 – 37), God hears Job’s plea and then responds (38 – 41). The pericope studied here, Job 39.8, belongs precisely to this final section, in which God reveals himself within the whirlwind to Job and formulates a series of questions that demonstrate the smallness of the human intellect before the knowledge and omnipotence of the Creator. Some of these questions refer to the varied behaviour of animals. This is the case of Job 39.5 – 8, in which God enquires about the freedom of the wild ass in its search for food (39.8). 1QIsaa 13.13 reproduces Isa 15.6, a pericope examined in detail in our study of ‫ירק‬ yereq, to which the reader may refer.¹⁴¹ Job 39.8 and 1QIsaa 13.13 (Isa 15.6) coincide not only in the poetic language they employ, but also in the fact that both describe scenes in which nature, i. e. vegetation (greenness), plays a primordial role. With the aim of bringing us closer to the worldview of the listener/reader in biblical times, we will first turn to the leading dictionaries as well as the early translations of the Bible.

 BDB, s.v. ‫ ;ירוק‬HALOT, s.v. ‫ ;ירוק‬Brenner, Colour Terms, p. 55. More recently, however, John E. Hartley, Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes, p. 127, has considered ‫ ירוק‬yārôq to be an adjective that fulfills a nominal function, as does Maria Bulakh, ‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew’, p. 204.  Víctor Morla, Libros sapienciales y otros escritos (Estella: Verbo Divino, 1994), pp. 167– 8; Miguel Ángel Tábet, Introducción al Antiguo Testamento III. Libros poéticos y sapienciales (Madrid: Palabra, 2007), pp. 173 – 174; James L. Crenshaw, ‘Job’, ABD 3.  Vid. supra, p. 44. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-004

II.3 ‫ ירוק‬yārôq: ‘greenery’

69

II.3.2 Encyclopaedic knowledge II.3.2.1 Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries ‫ ירוק‬yārôq belongs to the root ‫ ירק‬and presents a vocalic pattern analogous to other colour adjectives such as ‫אדם‬ʾādōm, ‫ צהב‬ṣāhōb and ‫ שחר‬šāḥōr. ¹⁴² ‫ ירוק‬yārôq, like its root ‫ ירק‬yrq comes from the proto-semitic wrḳ, both of which belong to the root group known as pe-yod, whose first radical consonant would originally have been waw. In a variety of semitic languages (Akkadian, Ugaritic, Hebrew, Aramaic, Syriac, Mandaean, Arabic), the proto-semitic form wrḳ designated a chromatic spectrum ranging from green to yellow, and denoting, as we have already mentioned,¹⁴³ ‘to be shiny yellow-green’.¹⁴⁴ As for the meaning of ‫ ירוק‬yārôq, Roland Gradwohl gives this as ‘Grüner der Natur’. ¹⁴⁵ This is also the meaning given by the leading dictionaries (‘green thing’,¹⁴⁶ ‘greenery’¹⁴⁷) and in a recent study by John E. Hartley (‘greens’, ‘vegetation’).¹⁴⁸ There are, however, discordant voices which hold that ‫ ירוק‬yārôq denotes a shade of green with low saturation: ‘tan’, ‘yellowish green’, ‘green’, ‘greenish’¹⁴⁹ or ‘light yellow with green’.¹⁵⁰ This is the shade that will later be found in Rabbinic Hebrew.¹⁵¹

II.3.2.2 Early versions of the Bible Of the books of the OT, the book of Job is among those with the greatest number of textual alterations. After the discoveries made at Qumran, scholars have confirmed the relative reliability of the Hebrew text, despite the transpositions of verses, omissions and various corruptions that can be observed in the manuscripts. The LXX, in contrast, presents a noticeably shorter text containing paraphrases and re-interpretation. On perceiving the difficulty of the original Hebrew text, St. Jerome opted for literality, although on occasion he was satisfied to give only the general sense of a particular phrase. In any case, the influence of the Greek versions (Aquila, The-

 Brenner, Colour Terms, pp. 40, 56 and 101.  Vid. supra, pp. 39 – 40.  Bulakh, ‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew’, p. 205.  Gradwohl, Die Farben, p. 30.  BDB, s.v. ‫ ;ירוק‬Strong’s Dictionary, s.v. ‫ירוק‬.  HALOT, s.v. ‫ירוק‬.  Hartley, Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes, p. 130.  Brenner, Colour Terms, p. 102. The author maintains that ‫ ירוק‬yārôq arose as a substitute for the pre-exilic ‫ ירק‬yereq. In the same vein, Fronzaroli, ‘Sulla struttura dei colori’, p. 385. However, this preexilic dating (of Num 22.4; Exod 10, etc.) is today a subject of debate.  Bulakh, ‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew’, p. 205.  Hartley, Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes, p. 128.

70

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

odotion, Symmachus and the LXX) must not be overlooked; for this reason, critical studies of the Vulgate demand a cautious approach.¹⁵² In any case, Job 39.8 is a pericope that does not present the alterations and variants mentioned above. Indeed, a certain literality can be observed in the translations in both the Septuagint and the Vulgate. As for the nominal lexeme ‫ירוק‬ yārôq, this is rendered in the Septuagint by a term with a similar meaning –χλωρός in its neuter form¹⁵³– and the same is true of the Vulgate, although, rather than employing the Latin equivalent –the adjectival lexeme uiridis–, it uses the verbal lexeme uireo in its neuter form uirentia. ¹⁵⁴ Jerome perhaps had a preference for this verbal form, as uiridis was the form he chose to translate other Hebrew lexemes such as ‫ ירק‬yereq, ‘green’ ([36.2 VulgHeb]), and for adjectives that express state, like ‫ לח‬laḥ, ‘moist’ (Ezek 17.24; 21.3) and ‫ רענן‬raʿǎnān, ‘fresh’ (Jer 17.8). Furthermore, he uses the neuter form uiride to translate Ecclus (Sir) 40.22¹⁵⁵ and some pericopes of the NT (Mark 6.39; Rev 8.7; 9.4). With respect to 1QIsaa 13.13 (Isa 15.6), the corresponding pericope in the Dead Sea Scrolls Greek Bible corpus has not been found in Qumran.

II.3.2.3 Synthesis Although there is no unanimity in the dictionaries as to the specific hue expressed by ‫ ירוק‬yārôq, all agree that it denotes green foliage or the greenness of flourishing vegetation. This is similarly reflected in both the Septuagint and the Vulgate, which use terms (χλωρόν and uirentia) that permit the simultaneous expression of colour and entity, or rather, an entity imbued with colour.

II.3.3 Semantic analysis of ‫ ירוק‬yārôq As we have just mentioned, the nominal lexeme ‫ ירוק‬yārôq is used in two pericopes that describe natural settings: Job 39.8 ‫יתור הרים מרעהו ואחר כל־ירוק ידרוש‬ [The wild ass] roams the mountains looking for pasture, in search of greenery.

 Tabet, Introducción al Antiguo Testamento III, p. 163; Morla, Libros sapienciales, pp. 144– 145; Crenshaw, ‘Job’, ABD 3. For the Greek version, see the introduction to the work by Joseph Ziegler, Septuaginta. Iob, SVTG XI.4 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1982).  Vid. infra, p. 85.  Vid. infra, p. 172.  Vid. infra, p. 143.

II.3 ‫ ירוק‬yārôq: ‘greenery’

71

1QIsaa 13.13 (Isa 15.6) ‫כי מי נמרים משמות יהיו כי יבש חציר כלה דשא ירוק לוא‬ .‫אהיא‬ The waters of Nimrim have been devastated causing the new growth to dry up, the grass to wither and the verdure to perish.

It therefore appears together with entities belonging to the cognitive domains of animals (‫ ערוד‬ʿārōd, ‘wild ass’, Job 39.5), land (‫ הרים‬hārȋm, ‘mountains’, Job 39.8), food (‫ מרעה‬mirʿeh, ‘pasture’, Job 39.8) and, finally, plants (‫ דשא‬dešeʾ, ‘grass’, and ‫חציר‬ ḥāṣȋr, ‘new growth’,¹⁵⁶ 1QIsaa 13.13 [Isa 15.6]). The verses of Job describe the freedom of the wild ass¹⁵⁷ to search out and choose its nourishment in the natural world. They depict a context that we recognize –a wild, mountainous area– and the search for food by a herbivorous animal. This food consists of lush, fresh grasses or bushes which are therefore green, as yellow would indicate that they are withered and unsuitable for grazing. This, then, is the meaning of ‫ ירוק‬yārôq. The nominal lexeme ‫ ירוק‬yārôq includes in its meaning the colour green, although generically, as it does not refer to a specific green, but to the various shades of green found in vegetation, some lighter or almost yellow, others brighter or darker, depending on the type of plant. Essentially, it is the particular green of each plant when shown to be tender, fresh and appetizing as food. As for 1QIsaa 13.13 (Isa 15.6), while the reader may also refer on this point to the semantic analysis for the lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq I,¹⁵⁸ it is obvious that the nominal lexeme ‫ ירוק‬yārôq has a similar meaning there as in Job 39.8, although the context of Isaiah includes the nuance that ‫ ירוק‬yārôq is also food for human beings. Thus, ‫ ירוק‬yārôq would seem to be a synonym of ‫ ירק‬yereq I, that is to say, with the meaning: an ‘assemblage of plants or parts of the same (leaves, stalks, etc.) proper to a region or territory in their state of verdure, freshness and lushness; serves as food for animals and humans; its destruction is a sign of divine punishment, connoting famine and, with this, death’. The difference lies in the fact that, given the rarity with which ‫ ירוק‬yārôq is used, its meaning is more restricted, as we cannot interpret it as referring to the parts of plants. Finally, the change of lexeme that we find in the Qumran texts when ‫ ירוק‬yārôq is chosen instead of ‫ ירק‬yereq I should not be overlooked. One possible explanation is that this is simply a variation in spelling. In Qumran, the full written form is generally found, rather than the defective one used in the Hebrew Bible. Perhaps the com-

 Vid. supra, note 28, pp. 44– 45.  There were two species of wild ass in Israel: Equus africanus asinus, the Nubian Wild Ass (living near the Red Sea) and Equus hemionus, the Persian Wild Ass (common to Israel, Syria and Mesopotamia): Edward R. Hope, All Creatures Great and Small: Living Things in the Bible (New York: United Bible Societies, 2005), pp. 98 – 99, s.v. wild ass.  Vid. supra, p. 44.

72

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

munity read ‫ ירק‬yereq, but wrote it as ‫ ירוק‬yārôq, which is the vocalic pattern more proper to colour adjectives. It may also be that the adjectival pattern ‫ ירוק‬yārôq is more ‘regular’ and more similar to other colour adjectives, and therefore became standard in Second Temple times. Symbolism: The pericope from Job does not provide us with enough elements to affirm the presence of a symbolic meaning for ‫ ירוק‬yārôq. This is not the case, however, of 1QIsaa 13.13 (Isa 15.6), where the symbology of hunger and death can be deduced from a poetic text (vid. symbolism of the lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq I).¹⁵⁹

II.3.4 Conclusions The lexeme ‫ ירוק‬yārôq appears 2x in the biblical corpus. As we have no certainty as to whether ‫ ירוק‬yārôq in 1QIsaa 13.13 (Isa 15.6) is used as such, or whether this is simply a spelling variation of ‫ ירק‬yereq I, it seems best to exclude this pericope from the definition. In light of our analysis of Job 39.8, it can be concluded that the nominal lexeme ‫ ירוק‬yārôq includes in its denotation an entity which is imbued with colour, with colour and entity comprising two inseparable features of the colour term. Animals search for what is edible; i. e. green pasture grass. Green is a state which implies colour and, along with this, lushness. It is a generic green because the grass that animals graze upon for food is also generic. We cannot determine what type of plants are included in the term ‫ ירוק‬yārôq, and, as the entity cannot be specified, neither can the exact hue of green be determined. From this, the definition of ‫ ירוק‬yārôq should be: ‘plants in their state of verdure, freshness and lushness which serve as food for animals’. As possible glosses, we propose ‘greenery’, ‘verdure’ and ‘green plants’.

II.3.5 Bibliography Brenner, Athalya, Colour Terms in the Old Testament (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1982). Bulakh, Maria, ‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew in Diachronic Aspect’, in Leonid E. Kogan et al. (eds.), Babel und Bibel 3. Annual of Ancient Near Eastern, Old Testament, and Semitic Studies (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006), pp. 181 – 216. Crenshaw, James L., ‘Job’, ABD 3. Fronzaroli, Pelio, ‘Sulla struttura dei colori in ebraico biblico’, in Vittore Pisani (ed.), Studi linguistici in onore di Vittore Pisani (Brescia: Paideia, 1969), pp. 377 – 389. Gradwohl, Roland, Die Farben im Alten Testament: Eine Terminologische Studie (Berlin: A. Töpelmann, 1963). Hartley, John E., The Semantics of Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes (Louvain; Paris; Walpole, MA: Peeters, 2010).

 Vid. supra, p. 46.

II.3 ‫ ירוק‬yārôq: ‘greenery’

73

Hope, Edward R., All Creatures Great and Small: Living Things in the Bible (New York: United Bible Societies, 2005). Morla, Víctor, Libros sapienciales y otros escritos (Estella: Verbo Divino, 1994). Tábet, Miguel Ángel, Introducción al Antiguo Testamento III. Libros poéticos y sapienciales (Madrid: Palabra, 2007).

II.4 ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn: ‘the colour of fear’ II.4.1 Introduction ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn is a nominal lexeme.¹⁶⁰ In the Hebrew Bible corpus it appears 6x in the MT (Deut 28.22; 1 Kgs 8.37; Jer 30.6; Amos 4.9; Hag 2.17; 2 Chr 6.28) and 2x in Qumran (4Q34 f10.2 [Deut 28.22]; 4Q72 f34i_35.3 [Jer 30.6]). Unlike the colour terms described previously, ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn denotes colour in only one case: Jer 30.6. Jer 30.6 is part of a literary unit referred to as the ‘Book of Consolation’ (Jer 30.1– 33.26), written during the late reign of Zedekiah (587 BC) or shortly after. It is characterized by its strong internal cohesion, as both the oracles in verse and the passages in prose are intended to console the people in their exile; however, it also contains allusions that alternate between imminent judgment and punishment (30.5 – 7, 12 – 15, 23 – 24). The pericope under study here belongs to one of these sections, which describes the suffering and anguish of the people (Jer 30.5 – 7).¹⁶¹ Jer 30.6, specifically, establishes a parallel between soldiers and women in labour, an image used in that book (Jer 30.6; 48.41) and also in Isaiah (Isa 13.8; 21.3).¹⁶² Before analyzing ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn from the semantic point of view, we will first examine the meaning proposed by the leading dictionaries of biblical Hebrew, as well as how this particular lexeme was rendered in the early translations of the Bible. As we have mentioned before, these are the primary resources that we have for obtaining the encyclopaedic knowledge necessary for approximating the worldview of the listener/reader in biblical times.

II.4.2 Encyclopaedic knowledge II.4.2.1 Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn is derived from the root ‫ ירק‬yereq, and like that term comes from the protosemitic wrḳ. Both belong to the group of roots known as pe-yod, whose first radical consonant would have originally been waw. The protosemitic wrḳ designated, in a variety of semitic languages (Akkadian, Ugaritic, Hebrew, Aramaic, Syriac, Mandaean, Arabic), a chromatic spectrum ranging from green to yellow.¹⁶³ The principal dictionaries are unanimous in considering that ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn has two meanings: an achromatic one, ‘mildew’, when it is accompanied by ‫שדפון‬ šidāpôn, ‘blight’ (Deut 28.22; 1 Kgs 8.37; Amos 4.9; Hag 2.17; 2 Chr 6.28); and a chro-

   

BDB, s.v. ‫ ;ירקון‬HALOT, s.v. ‫ירקון‬. Jack R. Lundbom, ‘Jeremiah, book of’, ABD 3. DBIm, s.v. fear. Bulakh, ‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew’, p. 205.

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-004

II.4 ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn: ‘the colour of fear’

75

matic one, ‘paleness’ (Jer 30.6).¹⁶⁴ Specific colour studies such as those by Athalya Brenner¹⁶⁵ and Maria Bulakh,¹⁶⁶ follow this same line. Robert Gradwohl, however, offers an interesting analysis of this particular nominal lexeme, in which he considers ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn to be a term related to the world of plants, together with the rest of its lexical family. In any case, ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn refers to a specific state that occurs during the process of constant change undergone by vegetation. While ‫ ירק‬yereq expresses the phase of growth and maturity in cereal crops, ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn refers to the phase of ageing and, therefore, yellowing. According to Gradwohl, ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn is in fact the name of a crop disease. From this arises the meaning of ‘paleness’, as ‫ירקון‬ yērāqôn loses its original connection with plants and indicates, rather, the change in the colour of someone’s face as the result of fear.¹⁶⁷

II.4.2.2 Early versions of the Bible The book of Jeremiah has come down to us through two different textual traditions: the Hebrew (MT) and the Greek (LXX), the latter an eighth shorter and ordered differently. The oracles against the nations in chapters 46 to 51 are found in the LXX after 25.13, with the nations mentioned in another order. The content, however, is practically the same. In light of the texts discovered in the caves of Qumran, including three manuscripts of Jeremiah –two longer ones (4QJera and 4QJerc) and one shorter (4QJerb)–, it can be concluded that the Septuagint translated a shorter Hebrew text that was different from the MT and similar to 4QJerb. The Vulgate instead followed the longer text.¹⁶⁸ Jer 37.6 (30.6 MT; 4Q72 f34i_35.3) is, in any case, a longer text than that of the Hebrew version.¹⁶⁹ While the second part of the pericope (Jer 37.6b) does maintain some similarity to the MT, it transforms the rhetorical question into an affirmation, omits the express mention of women in childbirth and translates ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn with the nominal lexeme ἴκτερος, ‘jaundice’: Jer 37.6b-7 (30.6b MT) […] διότι ἑώρακα πάντα ἄνθρωπον καὶ αἱ χεῖρες αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τῆς ὀσφύος αὐτοῦ, ἐστράφησαν πρόσωπα, εἰς ἴκτερον 7 ἐγενήθη.

 BDB, HALOT, DBHE y SDBH, s.v. ‫ירקון‬.  Brenner, Colour Terms, p. 100.  Bulakh, ‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew’, p. 204. Hartley, Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes does not include it in his study.  Gradwohl, Die Farben, p. 33.  Tremper Longman III, Jeremiah, Lamentations (Peabody, MS: Hendrickson; Milton Keynes, UK: Paternoster Press, 2008), pp. 8 – 9; Jack R. Lundbom, ‘Jeremiah, book of’, ABD 3.  In the case of Jer 30.6, the Hebrew version found in Qumran coincides with the Masoretic Text.

76

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

[…] for I have seen all the men and their hands on their loins, their faces turned away, into jaundice 7 they were transformed.¹⁷⁰

The Vulgate, like the LXX, presents affirmations rather than questions and translates ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn in a similar way, as aurugo, ‘jaundice’. It is, however, more faithful to the Hebrew text (both the MT and that found in Qumran) in its allusion to women in childbirth: Jer 30.6 […] ergo uidi omnis uiri manum super lumbum suum quasi parientis et conuersae sunt uniuersae facies in auruginem. […] for I have seen the hand of every man on his loins like a woman giving birth and all their faces covered with jaundice.

Neither the Septuagint nor the Vulgate uses a colour lexeme to translate ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn, which seems strange as both possess specific colour lexemes for similar contexts in their respective languages: χλωρός or χλωρότης, pallidus or pallor (indeed, the Vulgate uses this term to describe terror-stricken faces, Jdt 6.5; Esth 15.10).¹⁷¹ Both versions use lexemes (ἴκτερος, aurugo) that denote both a disease of plants, as ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn originally meant in Hebrew (1 Kgs 8.37; Hag 2.17; 2 Chr 6.28), and human beings, i. e. jaundice, which is characterized by its yellow colour.¹⁷²

II.4.2.3 Synthesis The dictionaries of biblical Hebrew and the specialized studies of colour are unanimous in considering ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn to be a polysemic lexeme that denotes a disease of plants (‘mildew’) as well as the aspect of a person (‘paleness’). Gradwohl explains the process by which ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn acquired this second meaning in which the link to the plant context is lost. Curiously, neither the Septuagint nor the Vulgate recognizes the chromatic value of the Hebrew lexeme and both opt for lexemes (ἴκτερος, aurugo) that in classical Greek and Latin denote a disease of the skin characterized by the sufferer’s taking on a yellowish colour, as occurs with mould. In any case, the lexicons specializing in the Septuagint consider that ἴκτερος denotes a disease that affects both plants and human beings.  The NETS proposes ‘they became jaundiced’ and the Biblia griega. Septuaginta, ‘en herrumbre se convirtieron’.  Vid. infra, pp. 201– 203.  Forcellini, s.v. aurugo: ‘[…] arquatus; ita dictus a colore auri, quo aeger inficitur, flava bile ad cutem sese effundente (It. itterizia; Fr. jaunisse; Hisp. tiricia, ictericia; Germ. die Gelbsucht; Angl. jaundice).’ OLD, s.v. aurugo: ‘jaundice’; DELG, s.v. ἴκτερος and LSJ, s.v. ἴκτερος: ‘jaundice’. However, the two lexicons specializing in the Septuagint consider that ἴκτερος refers to two diseases, one of plants (‘rust’) and the other of human beings (‘jaundice’) (LEH, s.v. ἴκτερος; GELS, s.v. ἴκτερος ).

II.4 ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn: ‘the colour of fear’

77

II.4.3 Semantic analysis of ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn With great dramatic effect, Jeremiah describes the aspect of soldiers facing an enemy attack: Jer 30.6 ‫שאלו־נא וראו אם ילד זכר מדוע ראיתי כל־גבר ידיו על־חלציו כיולדה ונהפכו כל פנים לירקון‬ Ask and see if a man has ever given birth. Why, then, do I see every man with his hands on his loins like a woman in labour, and all their faces turned pale? Cf. 4Q72 f34i_35.3 (Jer 30.6)

Unlike the other pericopes in which the prophet uses the image of a woman giving birth to underscore the idea of physical pain (Jer 4.31; Jer 22.23), on this occasion the image describes not only pain (the hands placed on the kidneys), but also the fear which characterizes childbirth, from not knowing when it will take place and because it is inevitable once labour has begun.¹⁷³ Jeremiah compares the fear of childbirth to the fear felt by men faced with punishment. Paradoxically, it is they who must defend and protect their people militarily.¹⁷⁴ However, the panic they feel is so great that it cannot be concealed, and so they shrink back. In ancient Israel, as in our own time,¹⁷⁵ a person’s face was felt to reflect emotions by its expressions¹⁷⁶ or a change in colour, e. g. becoming red or pale. On repeated occasions, the Hebrew version of the Bible indeed uses the language of colour to describe intense emotions expressed in one’s face.¹⁷⁷ The authors employ a variety of terms to denote colour through the device of metonymy;¹⁷⁸ for example, the verbal lexeme ‫ חמר‬ḥāmar, ‘to boil or burn’ (Job 16.16: ‘my face is burnt [is reddened]’) denotes a reddish colour in the face, the result of weeping, and expresses a feeling of sadness or grief; meanwhile, the nominal lexeme ‫ להב‬lahab, ‘flame’, while also denoting the colour red, expresses mistrust and suspicion (Isa 13.8: ‘their faces are faces of flame’). In contrast, white or paleness denotes shame through the use of ‫ חור‬ḥūr, ‘to be or grow white, pale’ (Isa 29.22: ‘his face will no longer grow pale’). Jeremiah, for his part, heightens this feeling of terror with the nominal lexeme ‫ירקון‬ yērāqôn embodied in ‫ פנים‬pānȋm, ‘face’, from the cognitive domain of human beings.

 Gerald L. Keown et al., Jeremiah 26 – 52, WBC 27 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1995), Jer 30.6; Jack R. Lundbom, Jeremiah 21 – 36: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB 21B (New York: Doubleday, 1964), p. 384.  Longman III, Jeremiah, p. 199.  In Spain there is a popular refrain that says ‘la cara es el reflejo del alma’ (‘the face is the reflection of the soul’), echoing the famous words of Cicero in De Oratore 3.221.4: imago animi uultus, indices oculi (‘the countenance is the image of the soul, the eyes its interpreters’).  Thus, for example, anger caused by a feeling of rejection was for the Hebrews expressed by a fallen face or countenance: Joel F. Drinkard, ‘Face’, ABD 2.  DBIm, s.v. Face, Facial Expressions.  Barcelona, ‘La metonimia conceptual’, p. 131.

78

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

Surprisingly, this lexeme is used in the MT 5x in a context similar to that of divine judgment, but in a different cognitive domain (plants-disease), in which the blights which ravage the fields and bring famine are enumerated. In all of these cases, ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn is preceded by and coordinated with ‫ שדפון‬šidāpôn, ‘blight’ (Deut 28.22; 1 Kgs 8.37; Amos 4.9; Hag 2.17; 2 Chr 6.28).¹⁷⁹ Both lexemes are included in the list of ‘unidentified plants’ elaborated by Harold and Alma Moldenke. According to these authors, the biblical writer does not bother to specify exactly what type of plants are affected; rather, the terms are used to indicate diseases that can attack any type of plant. They therefore conclude that ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn and ‫ שדפון‬šidāpôn were plant diseases caused by ‘parasitic fungi such as cause blights and mildews on our garden crops today’.¹⁸⁰ Indeed, the medieval exegete Rashi considered that ‫ירקון‬ yērāqôn was a disease that affected grain, a symptom of which is that the grain acquires a yellowish green tonality.¹⁸¹ Today we know that mildew is a disease characterized by the appearance of spots on the lower faces of plant leaves, ranging from light yellowish green to yellows and browns, while their upper faces may have a grey, downy coating.¹⁸² There is no certainty, however, that ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn can be identified with this.¹⁸³ In any case, it does not appear that Jeremiah uses ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn either to refer to a plant disease or to any other type of affliction.¹⁸⁴ Rather, he chooses the lexeme because it suits the context of divine punishment and because it establishes the colour of ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn, a hue of low saturation between green and yellow, which, when applied to a person, functions in a similar way to when it is applied to plants, as Gradwohl proposed. It is, then, a metaphor in which, just as a plant loses its natural colouring and acquires a tone of low saturation, the natural colour of the soldiers’ faces changes through fear to what we would call a ‘sickly’ tone. Jeremiah seems to be giving ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn a new meaning through the use of a conceptual metonymy, entity and salient property, of the whole for the part type, and of a metaphor that

 Discovered in Qumran were: 4Q30 f45ii.1 and 4Q34 f10.2 (Deut 28.22); 4Q82 f47ai_48.20 (Amos 4.8 – 9); Mur88 23.15 (Hag 2.17).  Moldenke and Moldenke, Plants of the Bible, p. 254.  Fred Rosner, ‘Yerakon in the Bible and Talmud: Jaundice or Anaemia?’, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 25 (1972) 626 – 628, at 626, where it is also pointed out that the Talmud refers to ‫ירקון‬ yērāqôn as an epidemic.  German Ribera Coto, Conceptos introductorios a la Fitopatología (San José de Costa Rica: EUNED, 2007), p. 306, s.v. mildiu.  Joel E. Lunceford, EDB, s.v. mildew.  Some authors who have interpreted ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn as a specific disease; i. e. jaundice or anaemia, following the medieval commentators (Max Sussman, ‘Sickness and Disease. B. Infectious and Communicable Diseases, Yerā qō n’, ABD 6; Preuss, Biblical and Talmudic Medicine, p. 166. For Rosner, however (‘Yerakon in the Bible and Talmud: Jaundice or Anaemia?’, 626 – 628), it is an open question. In any case, the context is clear; Jeremiah is not referring to an illness but rather to an emotion, that is, to a feeling of intense terror. In the same line: Keown et al., Jeremiah 26 – 52, Jer 30.6; Longman III, Jeremiah, p. 199.

II.4 ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn: ‘the colour of fear’

79

enables him to correlate domains: diseases of plants and diseases of human beings. Therefore, the meaning of ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn is no longer one of illness, but rather ‘the colour acquired by the face of a person stricken with fear.’ As glosses, we propose ‘paleness’ and ‘yellowish green paleness’.

II.4.4 Conclusions In light of the above, it can be concluded that ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn is a lexeme that appears in a context of divine punishment and has two different meanings, according to the cognitive domain with which it is related. If this is the cognitive domain of plants, it indicates a ‘disease that attacks plants, changing their colour to one of low saturation’ (Deut 28.22; 1 Kgs 8.37; Amos 4.9; Hag 2.17; 2 Chr 6.28). If, on the other hand, it appears in the cognitive domain of human beings and emotions, its meaning is ‘the colour acquired by the face of a person stricken with fear’ (Jer 30.6). This second meaning is produced by a conceptual metonymy, used frequently in biblical language to express emotions, and a metaphor. The metonymy is of the entity and salient property type, in which ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn shows its presence in plants through colour and it is this which is used to describe the soldiers. The metaphor, meanwhile, allows Jeremiah to apply the lexeme ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn to the soldiers, who, like plants whose colour becomes faded when affected with mildew, lose their own natural colour when overcome by fear and take on another of low saturation which is well represented by the use of ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn. As glosses, we propose ‘paleness’ and ‘yellowish green paleness’. The lexeme ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn constitutes the first and only example in the Hebrew corpus in which a term pertaining to the green dimension of the Bible is used to describe a strong emotion; i. e. fear, terror expressed through the language of colour. The lexical family of ‫ ירק‬yereq is thus used not only to clothe creation in green, but to infuse human emotions with colour.

II.4.5 Bibliography Brenner, Athalya, Colour Terms in the Old Testament (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1982). Bulakh, Maria, ‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew in Diachronic Aspect’, in Leonid E. Kogan et al. (eds.), Babel und Bibel 3. Annual of Ancient Near Eastern, Old Testament, and Semitic Studies (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006), pp. 181 – 216. Drinkard, Joel F., ‘Face’, ABD 2. Gradwohl, Roland, Die Farben im Alten Testament: Eine Terminologische Studie (Berlin: A. Töpelmann, 1963). Hartley, John E., The Semantics of Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes (Louvain; Paris; Walpole, MA: Peeters, 2010). Keown, Gerald L. et al., Jeremiah 26 – 52, WBC 27 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1995). Longman III, Tremper, Jeremiah, Lamentations (Peabody, MS: Hendrickson, 2008). Lunceford, Joel E., EDB, s.v. mildew.

80

II The Hebrew Bible Corpus

Lundbom, Jack R., ‘Jeremiah, book of’, ABD 3. Lundbom, Jack R., Jeremiah 21 – 36: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB 21B (New York: Doubleday, 1964). Moldenke, Harold N. and Alma L. Moldenke, Plants of the Bible (Waltham, MA: Chronica Botanica, 1952). Preuss, Julius, Biblical and Talmudic Medicine, trans. Fred Rosner (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2004). Ribera Coto, German, Conceptos introductorios a la Fitopatología (San José de Costa Rica: EUNED, 2007). Rosner, Fred, ‘Yerakon in the Bible and Talmud: Jaundice or Anaemia?’, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 25 (1972), 626 – 8. Sussman, Max, ‘Sickness and Disease. B. Infectious and Communicable Diseases, Yerā qō n’, ABD 6.

III The Greek Bible Corpus (LXX and NT)

III.1 Χλωρός and its polysemy: ‘the colour of vegetation’, ‘the colour of death’, ‘greenness’ III.1.1 Introduction Χλωρός is an adjective of colour. Its etymology has been debated and, as will be shown here, it is difficult to establish an unequivocal meaning for the term. The leading hypotheses are: a) χλωρός has its origin in the root *ghel-, which would explain the existence of terms such as those included in the groups χλόη-χολή, γλουρός-χρυσός and γλούρεα-χρύσεα and would give it the meaning of ‘yellow or bright green colour’; b) χλωρός is derived from the root *ghlo-, meaning ‘brightness, splendour’; and, finally, c) the root gloiu, from ancient Gaelic, has been proposed, which would have the meaning of ‘liquid’.¹ In medical or naturalist texts, the adjectival lexeme χλωρός is often used in combination with other words: ὑπόχλωρος, ‘yellowish’, ‘greenish’; μελίχλωρος, ‘yellow like honey’; ἔγχλωρος, ‘greenish’; χλωρόπτιλος, ‘with green feathers’; χλωροειδής, ‘of a greenish appearance’, etc. This is not the case, however, in the Greek Bible corpus, where only χλωρός appears. Its use is frequent (19x):² – 15x in the Septuagint: Gen 1.30; 2.5; 30.37 (2x); Exod 10.15; Num 22.4; Deut 29.22; 2 Kgs 19.26; Job 39.8; Prov 27.25; Isa 15.6; 19.7; 27.11; Ezek 17.24; 21.3. – 4x in the New Testament: Mark 6.39; Rev 6.8; 8.7; 9.4. It is not, however, found in Greek texts of the Dead Sea Scrolls. As with the Hebrew lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq, and considering the great number of biblical references in which χλωρός appears, before examining its specific usage more closely, we will first present the primary resources available for approximating the worldview of the listener/reader in biblical times (encyclopaedic knowledge), with relation to the Greek. These are the leading dictionaries of Greek and the early versions of the Bible, as, when the LXX was being assembled and the books of the New Testament written, the ancient forms of Hebrew and Greek were living languages.

 DELG, s.v. χλωρός; Irwin, Colour Terms in Greek Poetry, pp. 32– 33; José María Pajón Martínez, Luz y oscuridad en la épica arcaica. Tesis Doctoral (Madrid: Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 1993), pp. 150 – 151.  DELG, s.v. χλωρός. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-005

84

III The Greek Bible Corpus

III.1.2 Encyclopaedic knowledge III.1.2.1 Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries The BDAG describes the adjectival lexeme χλωρός as ‘an adjective of color somewhat indeterminate in sense, but generally as part of the spectrum lying between blue and yellow, with shade more closely defined through context’.³ Indeed, this indetermination appears in almost all of the dictionaries, which propose a wide chromatic spectrum as meanings: a) ‘yellow’ when applied to honey (Il. 11.631, Od. 10.234), sand (S. Ai. 1064) or egg yolk (Orib. 14.61.1); b) ‘yellowish green’ or ‘pale green’ when describing certain plants (σίτου ἔτι χλωροῦ ὄντος, ‘the grain still being green’, Th. 4.6.1) or when referring to one of the colours of the rainbow (Xenoph. Fr. 28d); c) the ‘green’ of grass and plants (σῦκα, ‘the green fig’, E. Fr. 907), although this is also applied to water (AP. 9.669.3 [Marian.]); and d) ‘greenish yellow’, ‘pale’ or ‘greenish gray’, when applied to the skin colour of someone who is afraid (χλωρὸς ὑπαὶ δείους, ‘pale with fear’, Il.10.376, 15.4) or suffering from a serious illness (Hpp. Prog. 2; Th. 2.49.5; Max. Tyr. 20.5b).⁴ The DELG does not provide such a variety of colours, naming only ‘green’ and ‘yellow’. It does, however, point out that χλωρός can denote the vigour of vegetation and therefore be applied to what is fresh or recent, such as cheese, blood or tears.⁵ There is also the proposal by Eleanor Irwin in Colour Terms in Greek Poetry (pp. 31– 78), according to which the Homeric sense of χλωρός is ‘liquid, moist’, giving rise to other metaphorical meanings such as ‘blooming’, ‘living’, ‘young’ and ‘fresh’. As for the chromatic denotation of χλωρός, Irwin considers this not to be an original meaning of the term, but one acquired secondarily.⁶ Despite this status quaestionis, when we consult the lexicons specializing in the Septuagint the polysemy of χλωρός becomes reduced, along with its denoted chromatic spectrum, with only the meanings of ‘green’⁷ and ‘light green’⁸ being apparent. However, these lexicons note the neuter use of χλωρός to denote ‘green herbs, herbage’ and ‘greenery, green thing’. The same occurs in specific lexicons of the New Testament, with the difference that these maintain the colours ‘yellowish’, ‘pale’⁹ and ‘pale greenish gray’¹⁰ to describe the fourth horse of the book of Revelation

 BDAG, s.v. χλωρός.  LSJ, s.v. χλωρός; BDAG, s.v. χλωρός; Bailly, s.v. χλωρός; The Brill Dictionary, s.v. χλωρός. A detailed study can be found in: Irwin, Colour Terms in Greek Poetry, pp. 31– 77.  DELG, s.v. χλωρός.  This nuance is also found in: LSJ, s.v. χλωρός; The Brill Dictionary, s.v. χλωρός.  GELS, s.v. χλωρός.  LEH, s.v. χλωρός.  Thayer, s.v. 5515 χλωρός.  Louw and Nida, s.v. 79.35 χλωρός.

III.1 Χλωρός and its polysemy

85

(Rev 6.8). Finally, and unlike the other lexicons, the Louw and Nida considers that the neuter form of χλωρός is a new lexeme meaning ‘plant’.¹¹

III.1.2.2 Early versions of the Bible In the LXX, χλωρός is used primarily to translate Hebrew nouns that denote or connote colour. In the first case, i. e. the denotation of colour, χλωρός is the translation of ‫ ירק‬yereq in both its nominal function, ‘verdure’ (Exod 10.15; Num 22.4; Isa 15.6) and its adjectival function, ‘green’ (Gen 1.30; 2 Kgs 19.26),¹² and of ‫ ירוק‬yārôq ‘greenery’ (Job 39.8). In the second case, i. e. the connotation of colour, we see χλωρός used to translate ‫ שׂיח‬śȋaḥ, ‘bush’ (Gen 2.5), ‫עשׂב‬ʿ ēseb, ‘herb’ (Deut 29.22), ‫ חציר‬ḥāṣȋr, ‘hay’ (Prov 27.25), ‫‘ ערות‬ārôt, ‘meadow’ (Isa 19.7) and ‫ קציר‬qāṣȋr, ‘branch’ (Isa 27.11), all of which belong to the cognitive domain of plants. Χλωρός is also used to translate an adjective from a different cognitive domain, one which indicates state: ‫ לח‬laḥ, ‘moist’, ‘fresh’¹³ (Gen 30.37a; Ezek 17.24; 21.3).¹⁴ Finally, χλωρός is used in Gen 30.37b with no parallel term in the Hebrew version. In those pericopes where χλωρός is used to translate ‫ לח‬laḥ, ‘moist’, following the proposal of Eleanor Irwin (‘moist’ being one of the original meanings of χλωρός),¹⁵ the doubt arises as to whether the Greek adjective lacks a chromatic connotation and expresses only that particular state. Even today, in some modern languages, the adjective ‘green’ also possesses this achromatic meaning of ‘fresh or unripe’.¹⁶ On analyzing the pericopes in detail, we find that in Gen 30.37 the term χλωρός appears on two occasions: the first as the equivalent of ‫ לח‬laḥ, and the second, as we have said, lacking a parallel in Hebrew. Here, however, the chromatic context of Gen 30.37b is very clear, as along with χλωρός we find the adjectival lexeme λευκός, ‘white’, used to express the change in the colour of a branch when the part which is τὸ χλωρόν (‘green’) is stripped off. What is more, it is evident that here both λευκός and χλωρός are colours that reveal the lushness of trees. Most probably, the chromatism of χλωρός in Gen 30.37a influenced that of Gen 30.37b. Indeed, in plant contexts, as José María Pajón has demonstrated in his study of the Homeric use of χλω Louw and Nida, s.v. 3.13 χλωρόν.  Of the eight times that ‫ ירק‬yereq appears, on only three occasions does the LXX not use χλωρός, omitting it altogether (Isa 37.27) or using λάχανα χόρτοὐ (Gen 9.3) and λάχανα (Ps 36.2 [37.2 MT]).  BDB, s.v. ‫לח‬.  ‫ לח‬laḥ is also translated as πρόσφατος (Num 6.3) and ὑγρός (Judg 16.7– 8).  Irwin, Colour Terms in Greek Poetry, pp. 33 – 52. In the same line: LSJ, s.v. χλωρός. For a more detailed discussion: Marta González Gonzñaez, ‘Homérico χλωρός. El significado de χλωρός en la poesía griega arcaica’, Minerva. Revista de Filología Clásica 18 (2005), 11– 23.  DLE, s.v. verde; available at: http://dle.rae.es/?id=bbs8NTC; 14/4/2017; OED, s.v. green; available at: https://www-oed-com.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/view/Entry/81167?rskey=tf2YuD&result=2&isAd vanced=false#eid; 23/08/2019.

86

III The Greek Bible Corpus

ρός to describe branches, it is sometimes difficult to establish whether χλωρός expresses freshness or colour.¹⁷ That is to say, χλωρός (Gen 30.37a) seems to denote a state of these plants, that of the verdure, lushness and freshness proper to plants in the springtime when they have reached maturity, as will be demonstrated in the next section.¹⁸ For this reason, we consider that colour is indeed part of its denotation.¹⁹ With regard to Ezek 17.24; 21.3, it is surprising that the translator of the Septuagint, having at his disposal ὑγρός, ‘fresh, moist’, which in the LXX is at times used as an equivalent of ‫ לח‬laḥ (Judg 16.7, 8), and other terms to denote the lushness or leafiness of plants (Job 8.16), instead opts for χλωρός. Indeed, in the New Testament, Luke uses the same opposition that we find in Ezek 17.24; Ezek 21.3, but with ὑγρός: ὑγρόν ξύλον/ξηρόν ξύλον (Luke 23.31). Perhaps the presence of χλωρός can be explained by its describing an entity belonging to the cognitive domain of plants: ξύλον, ‘tree’, as in Gen 30.37a. In any case, as we will explore further in the semantic analysis, Ezek 17.24 and 21.3 present contexts in which the expression of colour and state are inseparable, and it is for this reason that we have included these pericopes in our study.²⁰

III.1.2.3 Synthesis The lexicons and dictionaries agree that χλωρός is a polysemic term with a variety of meanings. Two of these are relevant for our study: the achromatic, which for Eleanor Irwin is the primordial meaning, and the chromatic. In the first case, χλωρός denotes ‘moist’, ‘fresh’, ‘unripe’. In contrast, as a colour adjective, χλωρός possesses a wide chromatic spectrum ranging from yellow to various shades of green. However, this chromatic spectrum is absent from the LXX, which only specifies a tonality of ‘green’ or ‘bright green’, as well as from the New Testament, although the latter does preserve the colour ‘pale greenish grey’. Lastly, both the Septuagint and the New Testament make particular use of the neuter form of χλωρός, which simultaneously denotes colour and entity as ‘green herb’. A comparative study of the LXX and the Hebrew version reveals the double meaning noted by the dictionaries: χλωρός is used, on the one hand, to translate terms that denote or connote the colour green and, on the other, to translate ‫לח‬ laḥ, ‘moist’, ‘fresh’, an adjectival lexeme denoting state.

 Pajón Martínez, Luz y oscuridad, pp. 158 – 159.  Vid. infra, p. 87– 92.  In fact, BDAG s.v. χλωρός and the lexicons specializing in the LXX propose only meanings that refer to the various hues that may be denoted.  GELS, p. 733, s.v. χλωρός, notes the chromatic value of χλωρός in this pericope.

III.1 Χλωρός and its polysemy

87

III.1.3 Semantic analysis of χλωρός Although χλωρός appears in both the narrative and poetic books, in each case it is the plant context which is depicted, whether the term is used to describe a plant (Gen 1.30; 30.37a), a landscape (Gen 2.5; Prov 27.25; Job 39.8; Mark 6.39) or the destruction of the earth (Exod 10.15; Deut 29.22; Isa 15.6; 19.7; 27.11; Rev 8.7; 9.4), or whether it is used as a metaphor (Num 22.4; 2 Kgs 19.26; Ezek 17.24; 21.3). The only exception is Rev 6.8, which describes one of the four horses that appear during the opening of the first four seals. In some cases, these pericopes have a double meaning: a literal meaning (the action as it is described in the text); and a symbolic one (which explains a prophecy or wisdom reflection). After analyzing one by one the pericopes in which χλωρός is mentioned, we find that on 10 occasions it has an adjectival function, as it accompanies a noun (Gen 1.30; 30.37a; 2 Kgs 19.26; Isa 15.6; 19.7; Ezek 17.24; 21.3; Mark 6.39; Rev 6.8; 8.7). This does not always occur, however. At times, χλωρός appears without embodying a noun, in neuter form, as one element more in an enumeration (Gen 2.5; Exod 10.15; Num 22.4; Job 39.8; Rev 9.4) or in coordinated clauses between which a parallelism is established (Prov 27.25); or, finally, accompanied by πᾶν (Deut 29.22; Isa 27.11) or the article (Gen 30.37b). It can thus be concluded that in these cases χλωρός has a nominal function.²¹ Given that χλωρός performs two different functions, as an adjective and as a noun, we will conduct our semantic analysis of χλωρός accordingly. As in the case of ‫ ירק‬yereq, such an analysis will explain the various uses of syntax.²²

III.1.3.1 Χλωρός I (adjectival function) Within its adjectival function, χλωρός is embodied in two different cognitive domains: plants and animals. As we stated in the introduction, the cognitive domain in which χλωρός is embodied determines its meaning, as it is the entity that allows a cognitive anchor to reality to be established. We will thus analyze the adjectival lexeme χλωρός in the light of these two domains.

III.1.3.1.1 Χλωρός embodied in the cognitive domain of plants The lexeme χλωρός embodied in the cognitive domain of plants is found in the Septuagint (7x) in texts with a variety of literary forms, most of which have already been examined in the chapter dedicated to ‫ ירק‬yereq. ²³ Thus, Gen 1.30 is part of the crea-

 García Ureña, ‘Χλωρός y su riqueza croma´tica en la Septuaginta’, pp. 119 – 131.  Vid. supra, pp. 44– 49.  Vid. supra, p. 47.

88

III The Greek Bible Corpus

tion narrative, Isa 15.6 is a prophetic text that appears in the judgment oracle against Moab and 2 Kgs 19.26 is a historical text which likewise forms part of a judgment oracle. With respect to the other pericopes, Gen 30.37a has a clearly narrative character. It belongs to the story of the patriarch Jacob and his ruse to obtain greater profit from his livestock; in the course of this, he strips the bark from some branches where his animals will breed. Isa 19.7, meanwhile, is found in the oracle against Egypt, when the power of God over nature and the weather becomes manifest.²⁴ Ezek 17.24 is one of the pericopes that present the allegory of the cedar and the eagles, specifically the part dealing with messianic restoration. Here the author uses the image of a tree to show the power of God over men.²⁵ In contrast to this, Ezek 21.3 is from one of the three oracles against Israel,²⁶ in which God uses the image of fire in the trees to announce the punishment to be received by Israel. In the New Testament, χλωρός appears in the gospel of Mark and the book of Revelation, two completely different narrative texts, exemplifying gospel and apocalyptic literature. The first transmits what Jesus did and said, compiling a large part of the oral tradition. The pericope under study here, Mark 6.39, belongs to the story of the multiplication of the bread and fish, in the section describing the place where the miracle took place. Rev 1.9 describes a state of religious ecstasy centred around the visual and auditory revelations experienced by John. The pericope in which χλωρός appears (Rev 8.7) tells of the fire that breaks out after the first trumpet blast, accompanied by fire and hail that fall from the sky. Although these pericopes come from different texts with different subject matter, they all depict, in either a real or figurative sense, a context of plants. This explains the fact that χλωρός appears embodied in entities from the cognitive domain of plants, such as: ἄχι, ‘grass, herb’;²⁷ βοτάνη, ‘pasture grass’; χόρτος, ‘grass’; ξύλον, ‘tree’; and ῥάβδος στῠράκινη καὶ καρυίνη καὶ πλατάνου, ‘rod from a storax, almond or plane tree’, as may be observed in the following verses: Gen 1.30 καὶ πᾶσι τοῖς θηρίοις τῆς γῆς καὶ πᾶσι τοῖς πετεινοῖς τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ παντὶ ἑρπετῷ τῷ ἕρποντι ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ὃ ἔχει ἐν ἑαυτῷ ψυχὴν ζωῆς, πάντα χόρτον χλωρὸν εἰς βρῶσιν. καὶ ἐγένετο οὕτως. And to all of the beasts of the earth, and all of the birds of the sky, and all the reptiles that crawl upon the earth, which is a living being, also all the green grass for food. And so it was.

 John D. W. Watts, Isaiah 1 – 33, WBC 24, rev. edn (Nashville, TN: Nelson Reference & Electronic, 2004); Version 2.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition], vv. 5 – 10.  Arnold J. Tkacik, ‘Ezekiel’, in R. E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall, 1968), pp. 344– 365, at pp. 354– 355.  Tkacik, ‘Ezekiel’, p. 356.  A loan-word from Egyptian: Natalio Fernández Marcos and María Victoria Spottorno, La Biblia griega, Septuaginta. IV Libros Proféticos (Salamanca: Sígueme, 2015), p. 162, Isa 19.7, nota c. Vid. infra, p. 156.

III.1 Χλωρός and its polysemy

89

Gen 30.37a ἔλαβεν δὲ ἑαυτῷ Ιακωβ ῥάβδον στυρακίνην χλωρὰν καὶ καρυίνην καὶ πλατάνου. And Jacob took one green rod of storax, one from an almond and one from a plane tree.

2 Kgs 19.26 καὶ οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες ἐν αὐταῖς ἠσθένησαν τῇ χειρί, ἔπτηξαν καὶ κατῃσχύνθησαν, ἐγένοντο χόρτος ἀγροῦ ἢ χλωρὰ βοτάνη, χλόη δωμάτων καὶ πάτημα ἀπέναντι ἑστηκότος. And those who lived in them were weak with the hand, they cowered and were ashamed, were like the herb of the field and green pasture, like grass on the housetops and that which is trodden down by him that stands upon it.

Isa 15.6 τὸ ὕδωρ τῆς Νεμριμ ἔρημον ἔσται, καὶ ὁ χόρτος αὐτῆς ἐκλείψει· χόρτος γὰρ χλωρὸς οὐκ ἔσται. The water of Nimrim will dry up and its herb will disappear; and then there will be no green grass.

Isa 19.7 καὶ τὸ ἄχι τὸ χλωρὸν πᾶν τὸ κύκλῳ τοῦ ποταμοῦ καὶ πᾶν τὸ σπειρόμενον διὰ τοῦ ποταμοῦ ξηρανθήσεται ἀνεμόφθορον. And all the green grass along the river and all that is planted next to the river will wither from the wind.

Ezek 17.24 καὶ γνώσονται πάντα τὰ ξύλα τοῦ πεδίου διότι ἐγὼ κύριος ὁ ταπεινῶν ξύλον ὑψηλὸν καὶ ὑψῶν ξύλον ταπεινὸν καὶ ξηραίνων ξύλον χλωρὸν καὶ ἀναθάλλων ξύλον ξηρόν· And all of the trees of the field will know that I am the Lord, he who brings down a tall tree and raises up a low tree and withers a green tree and makes flower a dry tree.

Ezek 21.3²⁸ καὶ ἐρεῖς τῷ δρυμῷ Ναγεβ Ἄκουε λόγον κυρίου Τάδε λέγει κύριος κύριος Ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἀνάπτω ἐν σοὶ πῦρ, καὶ καταφάγεται ἐν σοὶ πᾶν ξύλον χλωρὸν καὶ πᾶν ξύλον ξηρόν, οὐ σβεσθήσεται ἡ φλὸξ ἡ ἐξαφθεῖσα, καὶ κατακαυθήσεται ἐν αὐτῇ πᾶν πρόσωπον ἀπὸ ἀπηλιώτου ἕως βορρᾶ· And you will say to the forest of Negeb: Listen to the word of the Lord: This is what the Lord says: Behold, I light the fire in you and it will devour in you every green tree and every dry tree, the flame that burns will not go out, and in it will be burnt every face from the east wind to the north.

 Joseph Ziegler, Septuaginta. Ezechiel, SVTG XVI.1 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1952), Ezek 20.47.

90

III The Greek Bible Corpus

Mark 6.39 καὶ ἐπέταξεν αὐτοῖς ἀνακλῖναι πάντας συμπόσια συμπόσια ἐπὶ τῷ χλωρῷ χόρτῳ. He commanded them all to sit in groups on the green grass.

Rev 8.7 […] καὶ τὸ τρίτον τῆς γῆς κατεκάη καὶ τὸ τρίτον τῶν δένδρων κατεκάη καὶ πᾶς χόρτος χλωρὸς κατεκάη. […] A third of the earth was scorched, a third of the trees were scorched, and all the green grass was scorched.

If we consider the proposals of the Greek dictionaries, χλωρός in these pericopes is ‘green colour’,²⁹ as it describes plants. If we analyze one by one the entities mentioned (grass, the branches of the storax,³⁰ almond³¹ and plane trees,³² pasture grass and trees in general), all of these are in effect characterized by their green colour. This colour in vegetation is not permanent, however. When plants dry up or wither, their tonality changes and they acquire a yellowish or brownish colour. This experiential fact was an object of reflection for the author of De Coloribus,

 Vid. supra, p. 84.  Storax is the translation of στύραξ. According to LSJ, στύραξ is equivalent to Styrax officinalis. The Hebrew term used in the MT is ‫ לבנה‬libneh, which is also identifed with Styrax officinalis (BDB, s.v. ‫ ;לבנה‬HALOT s.v. ‫)לבנה‬, as its flowers and the reverse side of its leaves are white in colour. Currently, however, the tree mentioned in Gen 30.37 is identified as Populus alba (white poplar), common in humid places like Syria, Lebanon and Palestine, as Styrax officinalis does not grow in the place where the episode of Jacob occurs: Santiago Segura Munguía and Javier Torres Ripa, Las plantas en la Biblia (Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto; Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 2011), p. 55, s.v. álamo blanco; James A. Duke et al., Duke’s Handbook of Medicinal Plants of the Bible (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2008), s.v. white poplar, pp. 348 – 349; M. Zohary, Plants of the Bible (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), p. 118, s.v. styrax; p. 132, s.v. white poplar; Moldenke and Moldenke, Plants of the Bible, pp. 181– 182, s.v. Populus alba. Its leaves are a brilliant green colour on the upper face and white on the lower, and its bark a greyish-white (Moldenke and Moldenke, Plants of the Bible, p. 182; Segura Munguía and Torres Ripa, Las plantas en la Biblia, p. 55; Duke, Duke’s Handbook, p. 348, s.v. white poplar).  Καρύϊνος, in Hebrew ‫ לוז‬lȗz is identified with Amygdalus communis L., also called Prunus dulcis Miller. Its green leaves are long and oval-shaped. Its trunk, when the tree is young, has a smooth green bark that turns a greyish colour upon ageing. Its flowers are white and pink: Segura Munguía and Torres Ripa, Las plantas en la Biblia, pp. 88 – 90, s.v. almendro; Zohary, Plants of the Bible, pp. 66 – 67, s.v. almond.  The scientific name of this tree is Platanus orientalis, in Hebrew ‫ ערמון‬ʿarmôn. Common in the north of Israel, it grows along rivers. Its flowers are small and greenish in colour, its wood is white, tinged with yellow or red (Segura Munguía and Torres Ripa, Las plantas en la Biblia, pp. 74– 76, s.v. plátano; Zohary, Plants of the Bible, p. 129, s.v. oriental plane; Moldenke and Moldenke, Plants of the Bible, pp. 180 – 181, s.v. platanus orientalis; Duke’s Handbook, pp. 346 – 348, at 347, s.v. oriental plane tree).

III.1 Χλωρός and its polysemy

91

who observed that plants change colour according to their degree of maturity. Thus, upon sprouting, they are green (διό καί τὰ μεν ὑπὲρ γῆς χλωρὰ παντῶν τῶν φυομένων τὸ πρῶτὸν εστι, 795a), both leaves and fruit (794b). Even water acquires this tonality (τὰ γάρ ὕδατα πάντα […] γίνεται χλωρά […] 794b). It is the loss of moisture that produces dryness and modifies the colour; in fact, to express it he uses the verb μελαίνω, ‘to make black’ (τὸ ὑγρόν […] καθ’ ἑαυτὸ παλαιούμενον καὶ καταξηραινόμενον μελαίνεται, 794b) or the colour term ξανθός, ‘yellow’ (τὰ δὲ φύλλα τῶν πλειστῶν δένδρων τὸ τελεθταῖον γίνεται ξανθά […] 797a). This reflection is of great importance for our study, in that a writer of the late 4th c. or early 3rd c. BC³³ is giving us a glimpse into the knowledge he had of the colour of plants. Within this, two ideas are clear: 1. All plants are initially τὰ χλωρά (795a). A few paragraphs before this, he explains what this tonality consists of (794b), as he affirms that: ἐν πᾶσι δὴ τοῖς φυτοῖς ἀρχὴ τὸ ποῶδές ἐστι τῶν χρωματῶν At first, all plants are the colour of the green grass.

That is to say, χλωρός denotes the colour of τὸ ποῶδές (grass). 2. The colour of plants arises from their moisture. When this disappears, they lose their colour and darken. Accordingly, we can conclude that χλωρός, when it describes plants, does not denote their colour exclusively, but also their freshness and lushness. The green tonality of plants, then, is inseparable from their moistness and freshness, as José María Pajón intuited in his study of the Homeric use of χλωρός,³⁴ and so, when this term is embodied in the cognitive domain of plants, it denotes a state of freshness, moistness and lushness that can be observed on the plant’s surface by the presence of the colour green. According to this proposal, the two different meanings proposed by the leading dictionaries and by Eleanor Irwin for χλωρός (‘green colour’ and ‘moist’) do not correspond to the concept of colour that was held in antiquity, but rather to the modern concept of colour inherited from Newton (‘any of the constituents into which light can be separated as in a spectrum or rainbow’).³⁵ This leads one to think that χλωρός cannot simultaneously include colour and lushness, colour and freshness, or colour and moistness, as this is an abstract notion which is separate from concrete objects. Different meanings are thus proposed. This is not the case of Greek thought itself, however; colour is what covers an object and often reveals its state,³⁶ as the author  Vid. supra, note 51, p. 16.  Pajón Martínez, Luz y oscuridad, pp. 158 – 159.  OED, s.v. colour; avaible at: https://www-oed-com.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/view/Entry/36596? rskey=mEg7W8&result=1&isAdvanced=false#eid; 26/8/2019.  On the concept of colour in antiquity, vid. supra, pp. 16 – 17.

92

III The Greek Bible Corpus

of De Coloribus makes clear. In the case of χλωρός, when it is embodied in entities from the cognitive domain of plants, greenness and moistness, or greenness and lushness, are inseparable qualities of a plant, as colour is the visible sign of its state. This explains the fact that the translator of the Septuagint does not hesitate to translate the Hebrew lexeme ‫ לח‬laḥ, ‘moist’, ‘fresh’ (Gen 30.37a; Ezek 17.24; 21.3) as χλωρός. From our analysis, then, we can conclude that the meaning of χλωρός is ‘the colour that plants acquire in their phase of growth and/or maturity, simultaneously revealing their vitality, freshness and lushness’, and as a translation we propose ‘green’. At the same time, depending on the type of plant in which χλωρός is embodied, the astute translator may also nuance the expression of its hue as being ‘light green’, ‘grass green’, ‘forest green’, etc.³⁷ Symbolism: That χλωρός is used to translate the Hebrew lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq explains the fact that the Septuagint echoes the symbolic connotation of ‫ ירק‬yereq in the Hebrew version. As we have mentioned, ‫ ירק‬yereq has a double symbology, according to whether it performs a nominal or adjectival function:³⁸ – As a noun, ‫ ירק‬yereq is linked to contexts of devastation. Destruction and its consequences (famine and death) are a manifestation of divine punishment, and this is what we find in Isa 15.6, 19.7 and Rev 8.7, where the lack of τὸ ἄχι τὸ χλωρὸν πᾶν o χόρτος χλωρός is a sign of death and divine punishment. – As an adjective, it acquires opposing symbolic connotations depending on the context: in that of the creation, ‫ ירק‬yereq symbolizes the loving care of God and, with this, fertility. This symbology is also found in the Septuagint (in Gen 1.30, the first time that a colour adjective appears in the Hebrew biblical corpus), as the context is the same. However, in the context of the judgment of God, both the expression ‫ ירק דשא‬yereq dešeʾ and the Greek χλωρὰ βοτάνη (2 Kgs 19.26) have negative connotations, suggesting that which is ephemeral, transitory and perishable. We cannot conclude without referring to Mark 6.39. Mark is sparing in his use of colour, using hardly any colour adjectives at all in his narrative; when he does, it is because colour is an appropriate linguistic means for evoking another reality.³⁹ Although diverse possibilities have been contemplated,⁴⁰ we are inclined to think that χλωρός, by expressing on its own the greenness and freshness of grass, allows additional information to be transmitted as well, for example, the time of year at which the multiplication of the bread and fishes took place. As in Palestine the grass withers early from the intense sunshine, the fact that Mark describes it as χλω-

   

Irwin, Colour Terms in Greek Poetry, pp. 44– 46, points out these nuances in Greek poetry. Vid. supra, pp. 46 and 48 – 49. García Ureña, ‘Colour Adjectives in the New Testament’, 230. García Ureña, ‘Colour Adjectives in the New Testament’, 231– 232.

III.1 Χλωρός and its polysemy

93

ρός enables the reader to know that the miracle occurred in the spring.⁴¹ Its expressive function, then, points to the temporality of Jesus’ action.

III.1.3.1.2 Χλωρός embodied in the cognitive domain of animals Χλωρός embodied in the cognitive domain of animals is used in Rev 6.8 to describe the fourth horse that appears in one of John’s first visions, with the opening of the four seals (Rev 6.1– 8): Rev 6.8 καὶ εἶδον, καὶ ἰδοὺ ἵππος χλωρός, καὶ ὁ καθήμενος ἐπάνω αὐτοῦ ὄνομα αὐτῷ [ὁ] θάνατος, καὶ ὁ ᾅδης ἠκολούθει μετ᾿ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐδόθη αὐτοῖς ἐξουσία ἐπὶ τὸ τέταρτον τῆς γῆς ἀποκτεῖναι ἐν ῥομφαίᾳ καὶ ἐν λιμῷ καὶ ἐν θανάτῳ καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν θηρίων τῆς γῆς. And I saw: behold, a death-green horse and a rider named Death! He was followed by the Abyss. And he was given authority over a fourth of the world, to kill by the sword, famine and plague, and by the wild beasts of the earth.

The narrative does not describe something that happens at the moment, in the here and now of the story, but rather within a mystical experience arising from the action of the Spirit (Rev 1.9) and transcending space and time, but with the desire for the listener/reader to visualize it along with the writer.⁴² The interpretative framework must here take into account the supernatural aura in which the vision occurs and which is manifested not only in the formula of visual perception καὶ εἶδον, but in the solemnity with which the vision is recounted, combining the senses of sight and hearing.⁴³ At the opening of the seals, a succession of different-coloured horses enter the scene: λευκός, ‘white’ (Rev 6.2); πυρρός, ‘fiery red’ (Rev 6.4); μέλας, ‘black’ (Rev 6.5); and χλωρός (Rev 6.8). The first three colours coincide with the colouring of horses in the real world –white, sorrel, and black –, although each one carries its own symbolism: white/victory;⁴⁴ red/war; black/famine. The colour of these three horses has not been debated, unlike that of the χλωρός horse, whose colour has been the

 In the same line: Ezra P. Gould, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Mark (reprinted, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1975), p. 118; Henry Barclay Swete, Commentary on Mark: the Greek Text with Introduction, Notes, and Indexes (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1977), p. 133; Simon Le´gasse, L’Evangile de Marc (Paris: Les E´ditions du Cerf, 1997), p. 401.  Lourdes García Ureña, Narrative and Drama in the Book of Revelation. A Literary Approach (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019).  Indirect speech is used, along with the repetition of parallel structures: καὶ ἤκουσα ἑνὸς ἐκ τῶν τεσσάρων ζῴων λέγοντος ὡς φωνὴ βροντῆς· ἔρχου (Rev 6.1; cf. Rev 6.3, 5, 7).  The white horse has been interpreted in a variety of ways. A good status quaestionis can be found in: David E. Aune, Revelation 6 – 16 (Nashville, TN: T. Nelson, 1998), pp. 393 – 394.

94

III The Greek Bible Corpus

subject of much controversy. Some authors propose the colour green,⁴⁵ while others incline toward ‘pale-coloured’⁴⁶ or ‘pale yellow’;⁴⁷ still others do not recognize χλωρός as having a chromatic connotation at all and, in light of Zech 6.2– 6, propose one of its metaphorical meanings (‘vigorous’, ‘ardent’).⁴⁸ We find this last proposal unacceptable, however, as it ignores the chromatic context of the pericope Rev 6.2– 8, in which appear no fewer than four colour terms. The problem that we logically encounter is that, unlike the first three horses that appear in the book of Revelation, we cannot find in the real world a greenish hue in any breed of horse.⁴⁹ At the same time, the horse of the fourth rider has no direct parallel with any of the horses in the vision described in Zech 6.2– 6.⁵⁰ The fact is that the colour denoted by χλωρός is directly related to the horse’s rider, Death; indeed, this is the only name that the listener/reader is given. We must not forget that the seer, when describing the horse’s colour, is also describing the rider, revealing to

 Ugo Vanni, Apocalisse di Giovanni, vol. 2 (Assisi: Citadella, 2018), p. 273; Alessandro Belano, Apocalisse, traduzione e analisi filologica (Roma: Aracne, 2013), p. 296; Annie Mollard-Desfour, Le vert: dictionnaire de la couleur, mots et expressions d’aujourd’hui XXe–XXIe (Paris: CNRS Éditions, 2012), p. 28, explains that in French the green horse is translated as being pâle, the colour of a horse in a state of decomposition; Ian Boxall, The Revelation of Saint John (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers; London; New York: Continuum, 2006), p. 111: ‘sickly green’; Erik Peterson, Offenbarung des Johannes und Politisch-Theologische Texte, Band 4 (Würzburg: Echter Verlag, 2004), p. 82; Ernst Lohmeyer, Die Offenbarung des Johannes (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [P. Siebeck], 1926), p. 59 maintains that the colour green is a free translation from the LXX reading of Zech 1.8.  Wilfrid J. Harrington, Revelation (Colleville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2008) p. 8; Stephen S. Smalley, The Revelation to John: A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Apocalypse (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005), p. 155; Aune, Revelation 6 – 16, p. 400; Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 1977), pp. 152 and 156.  Pier Prigent, Commentary on the Apocalypse of St. John, trans. Wendy Pradels (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001), p. 271; Robert H. Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St. John: with Introduction, Notes, and Indices, also the Greek Text and English Translation, vol. 1 (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1920), pp. 168 – 169.  Volohonsky, ‘Is the Color of That Horse Really Pale?’, 167– 168. See Lourdes García Ureña, ‘Ἵππος χλωρός (Rev 6.8): A Methodology for the Study of Colour Terms in the New Testament’, NTS 67 (2021), 205 – 29, at 208 n. 15.  The author of De Coloribus states that horses may be white, grey, reddish or black: λευκά καὶ φαιὰ καὶ πυρρὰ καὶ μέλανα (797a).  Recently, Garrick V. Allen, ‘Zechariah’s Horse Visions and Angelic Intermediaries: Translation, Allusion, and Transmission in Early Judaism’, CBQ 79 (2, 2017), 222– 39, at 231– 232, has disputed this proposal. He argues that, in describing the fourth horse of the book of Revelation, John is not recalling Zech 6.3 but rather Zech 1.8, in which ‫ שרק‬šārōq, ‘sorrel’ appears. This term is translated as ἄμπελος in OG (Isa 5.2; 16.8; Jer 2.21), which in some way is connected with χλωρός. To support his proposal he notes that Galen uses χλωρός to describe ἄμπελος. John would have known the two versions of the visions of Zechariah and used χλωρός as well, as it is the colour term with which ἄμπελος is usually described. In any case, although the visions of Zechariah seem to have influenced the author of the book of Revelation, this is difficult to prove as John innovates in his description of the fourth horseman. He was perhaps familiar with the use of χλωρός in the context of grim foreboding that we find in both texts.

III.1 Χλωρός and its polysemy

95

the audience who this is, as in the book of Revelation colour has an informative function. It is the repeated use of a particular colour throughout the narrative that, for its auditory effect, enables the listener/reader to identify its characters; and so λευκός, ‘white’, is the colour of the Lamb and his followers, while πυρρός, ‘fiery red’, is the colour of the Lamb’s enemies, and μέλας, ‘black’, the colour of the various cataclysms.⁵¹ This is not the first time in Greek literature that χλωρός is embodied in a sinister figure. In The Shield of Heracles, falsely attributed to Hesiod,⁵² we find that χλωρός describes ᾿Aχλύς, the ‘Darkness of Death’ (Sc. 264 – 265).⁵³ The question, then, is what tonality is denoted by χλωρός that could serve to describe both the horse and its sinister rider, and perhaps also ᾿Aχλύς, the ‘Darkness of Death’. As we saw in section 2.1, χλωρός can denote a ‘greenish yellow’, ‘pale’ or ‘greenish grey’ colour. This appears in the descriptions of individuals who are stricken with fear,⁵⁴ as in Homer (Il. 10.376, 15.4) or in contexts where the effects of an illness are described. The first context we will exclude, as this is not the case of Death in Rev 6.8. As for the second, we will explore this in more detail, for the close link that exists between illness and death.⁵⁵ In the Corpus Hippocraticum, χλωρός is used in the cognitive domain of plants to denote their characteristic colour, ‘green’, for example, in: δάφνης φύλλα χλωρά, ‘green laurel leaves’ (Superf. 32); μυρσίνης κόψας φύλλα χλωρά, ‘pounded green leaves of myrtle’ (Superf. 32), or μίνθην χλωρήν, ‘green mint’ (Morb. 2.28). However, in the majority of cases χλωρός is used in the cognitive domain of sickness to describe the symptoms of illnesses such as jaundice, pleurisy (Morb. 2.46) or high fever (Morb. 2.63). Χλωρός is thus embodied in various parts or fluids of the human body: χροιή, ‘skin’ (Morb. 3.11; Dieb. Iudic. 9); ὀφθαλμοί, ‘eyes’ (Morb. 2.37,

 García Ureña, ‘The Book of Revelation: a Chromatic Story’, 219 – 238.  Richard Janko, ‘The Shield of Heracles and the Legend of Cycnus’, The Classical Quarterly 36 (1, 1986), 38 – 59, at 38 – 39. Exact dating is in question, but thought to be the mid- or late 6th c. BC: J. Signes Cordoñer, Escritura y literatura en la Grecia arcaica (Tres Cantos, España: Akal, 2004), pp. 213 – 214.  Translation by Hugh G. Evelyn-White, The Homeric Hymns and Homerica, new and rev. edn, Loeb Classical Library 57 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London: W. Heinemann, 1936).  Irwin, Colour Terms in Greek Poetry, p. 67, explains that χλωρός is used to describe fear or frightened persons ‘because bile was stirred by fear’, according to medical treatises.  We have drawn upon data provided by the Loeb Classical Library Database: J. Loeb and J. Henderson, Loeb Classical Library (Harvard University Press, 2014); 28/8/2019. As is well known, the dating of the books that comprise the corpus is in debate, but we offer the latest contributions in this regard: Morb 2 and Morb 3 are thought to be from the mid-5th c. BC; Loc. Hom. from around 450 BC; Prog. from the late 5th c. BC; Dieb. Iudic. a late work of uncertain date; Epid. 2 from around 410 BC; and Mul. 1 and 2 from the late 5th or or early 4th c. BC, Elizabeth M. Craik, The ‘Hippocratic’ Corpus: Content and Context (Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge, 2015), pp. 180, 184, 162, 237, 144, 90 and 206. A preliminary version of this analysis of χλωρός in the Corpus Hippocraticum was published in García Ureña, ‘Ἵππος χλωρός (Rev 6.8)’, 214– 216.

96

III The Greek Bible Corpus

39); γλῶσσα, ‘tongue’ (Morb. 2.37, 63); ὄνυχες, ‘nails’ (Morb. 2.77); χολή, ‘bile’ (Morb. 2.73); πύον, ‘pus’ (Morb. 2.57); and in the physical aspect of a woman (Mul.1.25, 34, 39), etc. Determining the tonality expressed by χλωρός in these texts is problematic, given the distance in time which makes it difficult to establish a correspondence between modern illnesses and those described in the Corpus Hippocraticum. It is nevertheless clear that, in the texts studied here, χλωρός does not denote a loss of colour for several reasons: a) Χλωρός functions like any adjective of colour, i. e. by colouring a particular entity. A good example of this can be found in Morb. 2.63. The text describes the symptoms of an illness that can lead to pneumonia; among these is that the aspect of the tongue may acquire three tonalities: ἡ γλῶσσα τρηχέη καὶ μέλαινα καὶ χλωρὴ καὶ ξηρὴ καὶ ἐξέρυθρος ἰσχυρῶς The tongue is rough, dark, greenish, dry and severely reddened

As can be observed, χλωρός appears as one more hue of the tongue, along with μέλας and ἐξέρυθρος. In this case, χλωρός does not indicate the degree of saturation,⁵⁶ but rather a colour; and so after this the adjective is repeated to describe the colour of eyes (οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ χλωροί). In contrast, when in Morb. 2.63 a shade with a greater saturation is described, the adjective of colour is accompanied by an adverb, ἰσχυρῶς. Thus, ἐξέρυθρος ἰσχυρῶς expresses not only a reddening of the tongue, but also its intensity: ‘severely reddened’. The same occurs in Prog. 11, although in that case the hue of ἐρυθρός is further nuanced.⁵⁷ Other examples of the use of χλωρός to express colour are Prog. 24, where the physical aspect of children is described,⁵⁸ or Dieb. Iudic. 9, in reference to skin colour.⁵⁹

 In contrast to what was believed in the Hellenistic world, today we consider saturation to be an element of colour (vid. supra, p. 5). In modern languages, saturation is expressed by the use of adjectives such as pale: pale blue, pale green, etc.  In the Corpus we also find compound forms used to express degrees of colour saturation: ἐρυθρόχλωρος, ‘pale red’ (Epid. 6.3); ὑπέρλευκος ‘exceedingly white’ (Mul. 2.111); ὑπόλευκος (Epid. 3.14). This phenomenon is frequent in Greek medical literature –ξανθόλευκος, ‘pale yellow’ (Gal. Hpp. Epid. VI. 17a.835.14); ὠχρόξανθος, ‘of a pale yellow colour’ (Gal. Ant. 14.81; San. Tu. 6.250.14; 6.336.3, 14– 15, although not exclusive to it –μελίχλωρος, ‘honey-yellow’ (Pl. R. 474e, Arist. Phgn. 812a19, Theoc. Idyl. 10.27).  καὶ τὸ χρῶμα μεταβάλλωσι, καὶ χλωρὸν ἢ πελιὸν ἢ ἐρυθρὸν ἴσχωσιν.  In the edition by Paul Potter: Hippocrates, vol. IX, Loeb Classical Library 509 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1994), p. 308: χλωροτέρη ἢ οἱ σαῦροι οἱ χλωρότεροι· παρόμοιος δὲ καὶ ὠχρός. However, Émile Littré (Oeuvres complètes d’Hippocrate, vol. 9 [Paris: Baillière, 1811; repr. Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1962] 298 – 306) proposes ὁ χρώς instead of ὠχρός, because the fragment appears in Morb. 3.11.1– 3 with this reading. It is well known that in the Corpus Hippocraticum some fragments are repeated.

III.1 Χλωρός and its polysemy

97

b) In some writings we find the use of ὑπόχλωρος. This is an adjective that appears in medical or naturalist texts.⁶⁰ Specifically, it describes the ‘livid disease’ (Morb. 2.68) and other illnesses (Morb. 2.74; Mul. 2.9, 11). As we have already mentioned, degrees of saturation in Greek are sometimes expressed by adding prepositions to the colour terms:⁶¹ ὑπόλευκος, ‘whitish’ (Epid. 3.14); ὕ πωχρος, ‘pale yellow’; ὑποπόρφυρος, ‘somewhat purple’; ὑπερέρυθρος, ‘very red’; ὑπέρξανθος, ‘very yellow’.⁶² The presence of ὑπό and ὑπέρ modifies the degree of saturation expressed by the term, with ὑπό reducing its intensity and ὑπέρ increasing it. Thus, ὑπόχλωρος diminishes the intensity expressed by χλωρός. In the Corpus Hippocraticum, however, the preposition seems to indicate not only a change in saturation, but also in hue, as ὑπόχλωρος is defined as being like λεκιθώδης (Epid. 4.14) or οἷον ἐξ ᾠόν, ‘like the content of an egg’ (Mul. 2.11), while χλωρός will be defined differently, as we will see later. The difference between χλωρός and ὑπόχλωρος can also be observed in the usage of these terms. Thus, for example, in Prog. 11, when the aspects of excrement that indicate a danger to health are described, these show changes in colour depending on their state, and the colour adjectives are alternated accordingly. When the stool is watery, the colours it presents are: ἢ λευκὸν, ἢ χλωρὸν, ἢ ἐρυθρὸν ἰσχυρῶς White, or green, or very red

When the texture is viscous, λευκός is repeated, but not χλωρός; in its place appears ὑπόχλωρος, which indicates a different nuance to the physician: καὶ λευκὸν, καὶ ὑπόχλωρον. White, and greenish yellow.

c)

On occasion, χλωρός is even accompanied by terms that express what today we would refer to as paleness, such as: ἄχρους, ‘colourless’⁶³ (2x) (Loc. Hom. 41);⁶⁴ πελιός, ‘discoloured by extravasated blood’, ‘livid’;⁶⁵ or πελιδνός, ‘livid’ (Morb. 2.46, 47).⁶⁶

In any case, Morb. 3.11.1– 3 may shed some light on the meaning of χλωρός. This fragment contains an explanation of the symptoms and deadly nature of jaundice (a suf-

      

DELG, s.v. ὑπόχλωρος. Vid. supra, note 57, p. 96. LSJ, s.vv. ὑπόλευκος, ὕ πωχρος, ὑποπόρφυρος, ὑπερέρυθρος and ὑπέρξανθος. LSJ, s.v. ἄχρους. This decribes a person’s physical aspect. LSJ, s.v. πελιός. LSJ, s.v. πελιδνός.

98

III The Greek Bible Corpus

ferer who does not recover from the disease dies within 14 days). The most notable symptom is the colour that the skin acquires (χροιή), and this is therefore described in meticulous detail: Ἴκτερος δὲ ἐστιν ὀξύς τε καὶ ταχέως ἀποκτείνων· ἡ χροιὴ δὲ ὅλη σιδιοειδὴς σφόδρα ἐστί, χλωροτέρη ἢ οἱ σαῦροι οἱ χλωρότεροι· παρόμοιος δὲ καὶ ὁ χρώς· Jaundice is both acute and rapidly fatal. The whole skin is very much the colour of pomegranatepeel, greener than quite green lizards, and the body the same.⁶⁷

Morb. 3.11.1– 3 employs an adjectival lexeme which in turn refers to an entity –σιδιοειδής, ‘like pomegranate-peel’– and, were this not clear enough, specifies its colour with the colour term χλωρός, which likens it to ‘quite green lizards’. We do not know with certainty what colour this might have been, as lizards today are usually green, but may be a yellowish colour as well. If we consider that in Hdt. 4.192 lizards are compared to crocodiles and that Pliny uses the adjective uiridis to describe lizards (Plin. HN. 29.130.1), we can deduce that χλωρός denotes a green hue which, in a person’s skin, is logically modified and perceived as greenish or yellowish green, i. e. a green of low saturation.⁶⁸ It can be concluded, then, that χλωρός in Morb. 3.11 (Dieb. Iudic. 9) denotes the colour of the skin of a sick person who is about to die. This hue may well be related to that of Hes. Sc. 264 – 265 and to the colour of the horse ridden by Death in Rev 6.8, since, when humans or animals are in the throes of death, their skin colour changes due to lack of blood supply. Thus, according to our study, χλωρός in Rev 6.8 indicates ‘the colour of the skin of an animal when death is near; associated with death’. With the aim of avoiding the adaptation of χλωρός to our own categories of colour, which would modify the chromatism of the text, as a gloss we propose ‘death-green’. This denomination appears in the Middle Ages in the motto on the shield of René d’An-

 Text and translation by Émile Littré: Oeuvres complètes d’Hippocrate. Vid. supra, note 59, p. 96.  This explains Galen’s commentary in which χλωρός is used to describe people. According to the Hippocratic commentarist (XVII1 928S. K.), χλωρός is not as intense as the green of grass, and so he affirms that it possesses lower saturation; for this reason, he uses the colour term ὠχρός: οὐκ ἒχοντας ὁμοίαν τῇ χλόῃ τὴν χρόαν, αλλὰ μᾶλλον ὠχράν. This is supported by Alberta Lorenzoni, who notes that Galen emphasizes that χλωρός, when applied to people in the Corpus Hippocraticum, primarily denotes the colour green (‘Eustazio: paura “verde” e oro “pallido” [Ar. Pax 1176, Eup. Fr. 253 K.-A., Com. adesp. frr. 390 e 1380 A E.]’, Eikasmos [5, 1994], 139 – 163, at 144). It may also be relevant that 16th century translations of On the Disease of Virgins were instrumental to the incorporation of ‘pale’ into English medical vernacular. According to Helen King: ‘the green skin, adopted from green jaundice, was replaced by claims for the paleness of the sufferer’s complexion’ (Helen King, The Disease of Virgins: Green Sickness, Chlorosis, and the Problems of Puberty [London; New York: Routledge, 2004], p. 42).

III.1 Χλωρός and its polysemy

99

jou⁶⁹ and, curiously, in his work Horae ad usum Parisiensem, Death is depicted as having a colour similar to χλωρός (Figure 2).⁷⁰

Figure 2: Death is depicted as having a colour similar to χλωρός in Horae ad usum Parisiensem; Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Horae ad usum Parisiensem, folio 113v; available at: https://gal lica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b6000466t/f238.item; 25/09/2020.

 Laurent Hablot, ‘L’orange et le vert au Moyen Age’, in Jérôme Grévy et al. (eds.), Vert et orange: deux couleurs à travers l’histoire (Limoges: PULIM Presses Universitaires Limoges, 2013), pp. 21– 42, at 42.  Horae ad usum Parisiensem, folio 113v; available at: BnF https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/ btv1b6000466t/f238.item; 25/09/2020.

100

III The Greek Bible Corpus

Symbolism: In light of the above, the symbolism of χλωρός is clear, as it is the colour of the horse that the figure of Death rides. Χλωρός and Death thus appear to be intrinsically united.

III.1.3.2 Χλωρός II (nominal function) As we have mentioned, χλωρός in its neuter form has a nominal function, both in the Septuagint (8x) and in the New Testament (1x): Gen 2.5 καὶ πᾶν χλωρὸν ἀγροῦ πρὸ τοῦ γενέσθαι ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς καὶ πάντα χόρτον ἀγροῦ πρὸ τοῦ ἀνατεῖλαι· οὐ γὰρ ἔβρεξεν ὁ θεὸς ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν, καὶ ἄνθρωπος οὐκ ἦν ἐργάζεσθαι τὴν γῆν. Before all the green plants of the fields sprouted upon the earth and before all the grass of the fields began to grow. Because God had not sent down rain upon the earth, and there was no man to work the land.

Gen 30.37b […] καὶ ἐλέπισεν αὐτὰς Ιακωβ λεπίσματα λευκὰ περισύρων τὸ χλωρόν· […] Jacob stripped them, leaving the rods white and then pulling off the greenness.

Exod 10.15 καὶ ἐκάλυψεν τὴν ὄψιν τῆς γῆς, καὶ ἐφθάρη ἡ γῆ· καὶ κατέφαγεν πᾶσαν βοτάνην τῆς γῆς καὶ πάντα τὸν καρπὸν τῶν ξύλων, ὃς ὑπελείφθη ἀπὸ τῆς χαλάζης· οὐχ ὑπελείφθη χλωρὸν οὐδὲν ἐν τοῖς ξύλοις καὶ ἐν πάσῃ βοτάνῃ τοῦ πεδίου ἐν πάσῃ γῇ Αἰγύπτου. And [the locust] covered the surface of the earth and the land was devastated. [The locust] devoured all of the pasture grass on the earth and all the fruit of the trees that was left from the hail; no greenness remained on the trees nor in any field in all of the land of Egypt.

Num 22.4 καὶ εἶπεν Μωαβ τῇ γερουσίᾳ Μαδιαμ Νῦν ἐκλείξει ἡ συναγωγὴ αὕτη πάντας τοὺς κύκλῳ ἡμῶν, ὡς ἐκλείξαι ὁ μόσχος τὰ χλωρὰ ἐκ τοῦ πεδίου[…] And Moab said to the council of the elders of Mid’ian: Now this gathering will lick up all that is around us, like the calf licks up the green plants of the plain[…]

Deut 29.22 θεῖον καὶ ἅλα κατακεκαυμένον, πᾶσα ἡ γῆ αὐτῆς οὐ σπαρήσεται οὐδὲ ἀνατελεῖ, οὐδὲ μὴ ἀναβῇ ἐπ᾿ αὐτὴν πᾶν χλωρόν, ὥσπερ κατεστράφη Σοδομα καὶ Γομορρα, Αδαμα καὶ Σεβωιμ ἃς κατέστρεψεν κύριος ἐν θυμῷ καὶ ὀργῇ

III.1 Χλωρός and its polysemy

101

Sulphur and burnt salt, nothing of the earth will be sown nor will it produce, nor will any green plant grow on it, in the same way that Sodom and Gomorrah, Adama and Seboim, were destroyed, which the Lord destroyed with anger and wrath.

Job 39.8 κατασκέψεται ὄρη νομὴν αὐτοῦ καὶ ὀπίσω παντὸς χλωροῦ ζητεῖ. It [the wild ass] will inspect the mountains, its pastures and it will go in search of greenness.

Prov 27.25 ἐπιμελοῦ τῶν ἐν τῷ πεδίῳ χλωρῶν καὶ κερεῖς πόαν καὶ σύναγε χόρτον ὀρεινόν Concern yourself with the greenness of the plain and you will cut the herb, and gather the herb of the mountains.

Isa 27.11 καὶ μετὰ χρόνον οὐκ ἔσται ἐν αὐτῇ πᾶν χλωρὸν διὰ τὸ ξηρανθῆναι. γυναῖκες ἐρχόμεναι ἀπὸ θέας, δεῦτε· οὐ γὰρ λαός ἐστιν ἔχων σύνεσιν, διὰ τοῦτο οὐ μὴ οἰκτιρήσῃ ὁ ποιήσας αὐτούς, οὐδὲ ὁ πλάσας αὐτοὺς οὐ μὴ ἐλεήσῃ. And after a time there will be no greenness in it for its having dried up. You women who are coming back from a spectacle, come! because this is not a people who have understanding, for that reason he who has made them will have no pity on them, nor will he who formed them have mercy.

Rev 9.4 καὶ ἐρρέθη αὐταῖς ἵνα μὴ ἀδικήσουσιν τὸν χόρτον τῆς γῆς οὐδὲ πᾶν χλωρὸν οὐδὲ πᾶν δένδρον, εἰ μὴ τοὺς ἀνθρώπους οἵτινες οὐκ ἔχουσιν τὴν σφραγῖδα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπὶ τῶν μετώπων. He told them not to ravage the herb of the earth, nor any green plant or any tree, but [only] those men who do not wear the mark of God on their foreheads.

The pericopes from the Septuagint (8x) pertain to texts of diverse literary forms and subject matter, although this is always within a context of plants, whether in a real or figurative sense. Thus, Gen 2.5 forms part of the second creation narrative, before God begins to display his creative powers; Gen 30.37b is from the episode of Jacob on which we have just commented;⁷¹ Exod 10.15 tells of the plague of locusts that ravaged Egypt;⁷² Num 22.4, as we have said, is from the oracle of Balaam⁷³ and Deut

 Vid. supra, p. 88.  Vid. supra, p. 44.  Vid. supra, p. 44.

102

III The Greek Bible Corpus

29.22 is a narrative text from the final discourse of Moses, in the section that recounts the homiletic renewal of the covenant⁷⁴ and in fact includes the reflection that later generations will make. As for the poetic and prophetic books, Job 39.8, as we have mentioned,⁷⁵ is from God’s speech to Job regarding the behaviour of animals, while Prov 27.25 is from the second collection of the proverbs of Solomon, specifically from a small collection that gives advice on the life of the farmer and is predominated by a synthetic parallelism.⁷⁶ Finally, Isa 27.11 is part of a more extensive section (Isa 24.1– 27.13) that gives the conclusion of the oracles against the nations,⁷⁷ known as the Apocalypse of Isaiah.⁷⁸ Isa 27.10 – 11 describes the destruction of a fortified city, the identity of which has been disputed.⁷⁹ In v. 11, this is described using an image of tree branches. In the New Testament, Rev 9.4 comes from the well-known episode of the seven trumpet blasts (Rev 8.3 – 9.21) during which take place some of the catastrophes that afflict humanity as divine punishment. Rev 9.4 corresponds specifically to the fifth trumpet blast and the plague of locusts. It presents one of the commands given to the locusts: to attack only human beings, and not the vegetation that covers the fields. By analyzing these contexts, it can be observed that χλωρόν is usually accompanied by quantifiers in both a positive sense, such as πᾶς, ‘all’ (Gen 2.5; Deut 29.22; Job 39.8; Isa 27.11; Rev 9.4), and a negative sense, such as ‘no’, ‘neither’ (Exod 10.15). This confers the collective quality possessed by its plural form: τὰ χλωρά. What is more, χλωρόν is intimately connected with terms from the cognitive domain of plants: χόρτος, ‘grass’ (Gen 2.5; Prov 27.25; Rev 9.4); λέπισμα, ‘peel’ (Gen 30.37b); βοτάνη, ‘pasture’ and καρπός, ‘fruit’ (Exod 10.15); ξύλον, ‘tree’ (Exod 10.15; Rev 9.4); πόα, ‘grass’ (Prov 27.25); νομή, ‘pasture’ (Job 39.8); and δένδρον, ‘tree’ (Rev 9.4). Χλωρόν maintains a close link with these terms, expressed through a variety of syntactic relationships, such as that of the circumstantial complement: χλωρὸν οὐδὲν ἐν τοῖς ξύλοις καὶ ἐν πάσῃ βοτάνῃ τοῦ πεδίου (Exod 10.15), or coordination within an enumeration: καὶ κερεῖς πόαν καὶ σύναγε χόρτον ὀρεινόν (Prov 27.25); τὸν χόρτον τῆς γῆς οὐδὲ πᾶν χλωρὸν οὐδὲ πᾶν δένδρον (Rev 9.4). In these last examples, it can be observed that χλωρόν is used as one more entity from the cognitive domain of plants, appearing at the same level as πόα, ‘grass’ (Prov 27.25) or χόρτος, ‘grass’, and  Joseph Blenkinsopp, ‘Deuteronomy’, in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 101– 122, at 119.  Vid. supra, p. 68.  J. Terence Forrestell, ‘Proverbs’, in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 495 – 555, at 504; R. E. Murphy, Proverbs, WBC 22 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1998); Version 2.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition].  Edward J. Young, The Book of Isaiah: the English Text, with Introduction, Exposition, and Notes, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1972), p. 146.  Frederick L. Moriarty, ‘Isaiah 1– 39’, in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 265 – 282, at 277.  Young, The Book of Isaiah, pp. 247– 248.

III.1 Χλωρός and its polysemy

103

δένδρον, ‘tree’ (Rev 9.4). However, in Exod 10.15, it is evident that χλωρόν refers not only to an entity, but also to a colour, as it is part of the trees and the plants.⁸⁰ The same is true of Gen 30.37b, as the rods are made white once τὸ χλωρόν is stripped away. Χλωρόν also appears in relation to terms from other cognitive domains, such as land (where vegetation is present in all its diversity), animals, food and agriculture: – Land: ἀγρός, ‘field’ (Gen 2.5); γῆ, ‘arable land’ (Exod 10.15; Deut 29.22); ὄρη, ‘mountains’ (Job 39.8); πεδίον, ‘plain’ (Num 22.4; Prov 27.25); and ὀρεινός, ‘hilly’ (Prov 27.25). – Animals: ἀκρίς, ‘locust’ (Exod 10.14); μόσχος, ‘calf’ (Num 22.4); ὄνος, ‘wild ass’ (Job 39.5). – Food: κατεσθίω, ‘to eat up/devour’ (Exod 10.15); ἐκλείχω, ‘to lick up’ (Num 22.4); νομή, ‘pasture’ (Job 39.8). – Agriculture: σπείρω, ‘to sow’; ἀνατέλλω, ‘to sprout’; ἀναβαίνω, ‘to shoot up’ (Deut 29.22); κείρω, ‘to cut’; and συνάγω, ‘to gather’ (Prov 27.25). Upon analyzing the relationship that χλωρόν has with these cognitive domains, it can be observed that terms from the cognitive domain of ‘land’ show the habitat of χλωρόν, while those of animals and food demonstrate that χλωρόν is a food appropriate and desirable for animals and therefore in a healthy state (green, fresh, lush). The domain of agriculture, meanwhile, highlights its state of growth and maturity and, finally, Isa 27.11 shows that it can wither and die. It can thus be concluded that χλωρόν simultaneously denotes an entity and the colour which covers it; that is to say, a coloured entity or a colour embodied in an entity which in turn presents a state of vigour. In these pericopes, therefore, the meaning of χλωρόν is the ‘assemblage of plants or parts of plants growing in a given territory, showing their state of verdure, lushness and freshness and serving as food for animals’. As glosses, we propose ‘greenness’, ‘verdure’, ‘green plants’. This new meaning arises from a conceptual metonymy of the part for the whole type, or more specifically salient property and entity.⁸¹ The narrator perceives that in his daily use of the language all plants possess a common characteristic, which is the salient property: χλωρός, the colour of vegetation (green). From this, it begins to refer not only to the colour, but to the entity itself, i. e. to vegetation in general, encompassing the various shades of green found in nature, with greater or lesser luminosity and diverse degrees of saturation. Χλωρόν, by denoting the green colouring common to all of these elements, eventually comes to include all plant life in a single term. We are witnessing, then, in the Septuagint, a process of

 Benjamin Austin, Plant Metaphors in the Old Greek of Isaiah, Septuagint and Cognate Studies 69 (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2019), p. 159, suggests that χλωρόν in Isa 27.11 refers to the branches.  Cuenca and Hilferty, Introducción a la lingüística cognitiva, p. 113; Barcelona, ‘La metonimia conceptual’, p. 131.

104

III The Greek Bible Corpus

grammaticalization⁸² for this lexeme, which will also be found in later works such as Ezek. Trag. 93,⁸³ Gad 2.2 or Rev 9.4.⁸⁴ Symbolism: The Septuagint once again echoes the chromatic symbolism of the Hebrew version. Thus, χλωρόν in Gen 2.5, the second creation narrative, carries the symbolism we find in Gen 1.30: the loving care of God for his creatures and as a result prosperity. However, in the contexts of devastation or when punishment is announced (Exod 10.15; Num 22.4; Deut 29.22; Isa 27.11), the disappearance of χλωρόν connotes destruction and death.

III.1.4 Conclusions The lexeme χλωρός appears 19x in the Greek Bible corpus. Given the various instances of this in the Septuagint and the New Testament, we will present here the conclusions we have reached for each. There is a prodigious use of the lexeme χλωρός in the Septuagint (15x), as opposed to the Hebrew version, which uses two colour terms (9x):⁸⁵ ‫ ירק‬yereq (8x) and ‫ ירוק‬yārôq (1x). This chromatic intensification in the Septuagint reveals that the Greek translators had a greater chromatic sensitivity in perceiving colour in pericopes where it was only latent (indeed, χλωρός is used to translate terms that do not denote colour at all). Χλωρός in the Septuagint is only embodied in entities belonging to the cognitive domain of plants. From the pericopes we have studied and the reflections on the colour of plants found in De Coloribus, we can conclude that χλωρός denotes a specific state of these plants (fresh, moist, lush) that is made visible through their colour. The repeated use of the term in pericopes with similar contexts leads χλωρός to acquire a symbolic meaning. Thus, the meaning of χλωρός in the LXX is ‘the colour that plants acquire in their phase of growth and/or maturity, showing simultaneously their vitality, freshness and lushness; symbolizes, in a positive sense, the loving care of God, prosperity and fecundity (Gen 1.30) and in a negative sense divine punishment; i. e. famine and death (Isa 15.6; 19.7) or, together with βοτάνη, that which is ephemeral or transitory (2 Kgs 19.26)’. As a gloss, we propose ‘green’.  Cuenca and Hilferty, Introducción a la lingüística cognitiva, pp. 151– 178.  The dating of this work is controversial. According to Ioseph Wieneke, Ezechielis judaei poetae Alexandrini fabulae quae inscribitur EXAGŌGĒ fragmenta recensuit atque enarravit (Monasterii Westfalorum, 1931), p. 126, and Pierluigi Lanfranchi, L’exagoge d’Ezéchiel le Tragique (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2006), p. 10, it was written some time between the second half of the 3rd c. and the first half of the 2nd c. BC. Other authors, however, have inclined for the second half of the 2nd c. BC: Howard Jacobson, The Exagoge of Ezekiel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983) p. 13; Giovanni Frulla, ‘The Exagoge of Ezekiel. A Jewish Tragedy from the Helenistic Period’, Theatralia 7 (2005), 87– 108, at 92.  A re-reading of Exod 10.15.  Instances found in the Qumran texts are excluded as the colour terms coincide with the MT.

III.1 Χλωρός and its polysemy

105

This use of χλωρός, however, evolves from a conceptual metonymy (part for the whole/salient property and entity), acquiring a new grammatical form, χλωρόν, and with it a new meaning within the cognitive domain of plants while retaining its symbolic meaning: ‘assemblage of plants or parts of plants growing in a given territory, showing their state of verdure, lushness and freshness and serving as food for animals; in a positive sense, the loving care of God, prosperity, fecundity (Gen 2.5) and in the negative, when it is destroyed, divine punishment, famine and death (Exod 10.15; Num 22.4; Deut 29.22; Isa 27.11)’.⁸⁶ As glosses, we propose ‘greenness’, ‘verdure’, ‘green plants’. This use, which begins with the Septuagint, also appears in the New Testament (Rev 9.4), as the Louw and Nida has established, and in other texts as well (Ezek. Trag. 93, Gad 2.2). As for the New Testament, χλωρός is embodied in entities from two different cognitive domains: plants and animals. When embodied in plants (Mark 6.39; Rev 8.7), it has the same meaning as in the LXX, although with its own symbolism, such as in Mark 6.39, where χλωρός connotes the season of the year. In addition, as we have just noted, it inherits the grammaticalized form χλωρόν (Rev 9.4). However, when χλωρός is embodied in an entity from the cognitive domain of animals in a context of impending death, it once again denotes not only a colour but a state, in this case one of agony, of the nearness of death, made visible through colour. The fourth horse of the book of Revelation is thus linked to death not only because Death is its rider but because, through χλωρός, it reflects its own decay. This explains the colour’s new meaning and symbolism: ‘the colour of the skin of a dying animal; associated with death’ (Rev 6.8). The gloss that we propose to approximate the colour described in the book of Revelation is ‘death-green’, a colour used in Hipprocratic texts to describe illness and death, and in The Shield of Heracles to describe ᾿Aχλύς (Hes. Sc. 264 – 265). Although the Bible does not include the varied chromatic spectrum of χλωρός, the term does fulfill an important function in the biblical text, for its own particular presence and because it suggests two opposing hues: on the one hand, a bright green, highly saturated and luminous, the colour of plants, of nature when it fills the fields with green in the springtime; and on the other, a deathly green, subdued and of low saturation, the reflection of a natural process; i. e. illness and the end of life, a colour that fortells an imminent and definitive end. We can affirm, then, that χλωρός both opens and closes the pages of the Bible, giving colour to the two great moments in the story of humankind: creation and destruction, the beginning and the end of the world.

 From the study we have carried out, it can be deduced that χλωρός and χλωρόν do not always have a symbolic meaning whenever they appear.

106

III The Greek Bible Corpus

III.1.5 Bibliography Allen, Garrick V., ‘Zechariah’s Horse Visions and Angelic Intermediaries: Translation, Allusion, and Transmission in Early Judaism’, CBQ 79 (2, 2017), 222 – 239. Aune, David E., Revelation 6 – 16 (Nashville, TN: T. Nelson, 1998). Austin, Benjamin, Plant Metaphors in the Old Greek of Isaiah, Septuagint and Cognate Studies 69 (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2019). Belano, Alessandro, Apocalisse, traduzione e analisi filologica (Roma: Aracne, 2013). Blenkinsopp, Joseph, ‘Deuteronomy’, in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 101 – 122. Boxall, Ian, The Revelation of Saint John (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers; London; New York: Continuum, 2006). Charles, Robert H., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St. John: with Introduction, Notes, and Indices, also the Greek Text and English Translation, vol. 1 (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1920). Craik, Elizabeth M., The ‘Hippocratic’ Corpus: Content and Context (Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge, 2015). Duke, James A. et al., Duke’s Handbook of Medicinal Plants of the Bible (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2008). Forrestell, J. Terence, ‘Proverbs’, in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 495 – 505. Frulla, Giovanni, ‘The Exagoge of Ezekiel. A Jewish Tragedy from the Helenistic Period’, Theatralia 7 (2005), 87 – 108. García Ureña, Lourdes, ‘Colour Adjectives in the New Testament’, NTS (2, 2015), 219 – 238. García Ureña, Lourdes ‘Ἵππος χλωρός (Rev 6.8): A Methodology for the Study of Colour Terms in the New Testament’, NTS 67 (2021), 205 – 229. García Ureña, Lourdes, Narrative and Drama in the Book of Revelation. A Literary Approach (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019). García Ureña, Lourdes, ‘Χλωρός y su riqueza croma´tica en la Septuaginta’, in τί ἡμῖν καὶ σοί; Lo que hay entre tú y nosotros. Estudios en honor de María Victoria Spottorno (Córdoba: UCOPress, 2016), pp. 119 – 131. García Ureña, Lourdes, ‘The Book of Revelation: a Chromatic Story’, in Adela Yarbro Collins (ed.), Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense LXIV. New Perspectives on the Book of Revelation, Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 291 (Leuven; Paris; Bristol, CT: Peeters, 2017), pp. 393 – 419. González González, Marta, ‘Homérico χλωρός. El significado de χλωρός en la poesía griega arcaica’, Minerva. Revista de Filología Clásica 18 (2005), 11 – 23. Gould, Ezra P., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Mark (reprinted, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1975). Harrington, Wilfrid J., Revelation (Colleville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2008). Hablot, Laurent, ‘L’orange et le vert au Moyen Age’, in Jérôme Grévy et al. (eds.), Vert et orange: deux couleurs à travers l’histoire (Limoges: PULIM Presses Universitaires Limoges, 2013), pp. 21 – 42. Hesiodus, Hesiod, G. W. Most, ed., rev. edn, Loeb Classical Library 503 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2018). Hesiodus, The Homeric Hymns and Homerica, new and rev. edn., trans Hugh G. Evelyn-White, Loeb Classical Library 57 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London: W. Heinemann, 1936). Hippocrates, Hippocrates, vol. IX, Paul Potter, ed., Loeb Classical Library 509 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1994).

III.1 Χλωρός and its polysemy

107

Hippocrates, Oeuvres complètes d’Hippocrate, vol. 6, Émile Littré, ed. (Paris: Baillière, 1849; repr. Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1962). Hippocrates, Oeuvres complètes d’Hippocrate, vol. 7, Émile Littré, ed. (Paris: Baillière, 1851; repr. Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1962). Hippocrates, Oeuvres complètes d’Hippocrate, vol. 9, Émile Littré, ed. (Paris: Baillière, 1811; repr. Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1962). Irwin, Eleanor, Colour Terms in Greek Poetry (Toronto: Hakkert, 1974). Jacobson, Howard, The Exagoge of Ezekiel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983). Janko, Richard, ‘The Shield of Heracles and the Legend of Cycnus’, The Classical Quarterly 36 (1, 1986), 38 – 59. King, Helen, The Disease of Virgins: Green Sickness, Chlorosis, and the Problems of Puberty (London; New York: Routledge, 2004). Lanfranchi, Pierluigi, L’exagoge d’Ezéchiel le Tragique (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2006). Le´gasse, Simon, L’Evangile de Marc (Paris: Les E´ditions du Cerf, 1997). Lohmeyer, Ernst, Die Offenbarung des Johannes (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [P. Siebeck], 1926). Lorenzoni, Alberta, ‘Eustazio: paura ‘verde’ e oro ‘pallido’ (Ar. Pax 1176, Eup. fr. 253 K.-A., Com. adesp. frr. 390 e 1380 A E.)’, Eikasmos (5, 1994) 139 – 163. Moldenke, Harold N. and Alma L. Moldenke, Plants of the Bible (Waltham, MA: Chronica Botanica, 1952). Mollard-Desfour, Annie, Le vert: dictionnaire de la couleur, mots et expressions d’aujourd’hui XXe-XXIe (Paris: CNRS Éditions, 2012). Moriarty, Frederick L., ‘Isaiah 1 – 39’, in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 265 – 282. Mounce, Robert H., The Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 1977). Murphy, Roland E., Proverbs, WBC 22 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1998); Version 2.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Pajón Martínez, José María, Luz y oscuridad en la épica arcaica, Tesis Doctoral (Madrid: Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 1993). Peterson, Erik, Offenbarung des Johannes und Politisch-Theologische Texte, Band 4 (Würzburg: Echter Verlag, 2004). Prigent, Pierre, Commentary on the Apocalypse of St. John, trans. Wendy Pradels (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001). Segura Munguía, Santiago and Javier Torres Ripa, Las plantas en la Biblia (Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto; Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 2011). Signes Cordoñer, Juan, Escritura y literatura en la Grecia arcaica (Tres Cantos, España: Akal, 2004). Smalley, Sthephen S., The Revelation to John: A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Apocalypse (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005). Swete, Henry Barclay, Commentary on Mark: the Greek Text with Introduction, Notes, and Indexes (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1977). Tkacik, Arnold J., ‘Ezekiel’, in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 344 – 365. Vanni, Ugo, Apocalisse di Giovanni, vol. 2 (Assisi: Citadella, 2018). Volohonsky, Henri, ‘Is the Color of That Horse Really Pale?’, The International Journal of Transpersonal Studies 18 (2, 1999), 167 – 168. Watts, John D. W., Isaiah 1 – 33, WBC 24, rev. edn (Nasville, TN: Nelson Reference & Electronic, 2004); Version 2.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Wieneke, Ioseph, Ezechielis Judaei Poetae Alexandrini Fabulae Quae Inscribitur EXAGŌGĒ Fragmenta Recensuit Atque Enarravit (Monasterii Westfalorum, 1931).

108

III The Greek Bible Corpus

Young, Edward J., The Book of Isaiah: the English Text, with Introduction, Exposition, and Notes, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1972). Zohary, Michael, Plants of the Bible (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982).

III.2 Χλωρότης: ‘the colour of a kind of gold’ III.2.1 Introduction Χλωρότης is a noun derived from χλωρός, and attested 99 times in the Greek literary corpus.⁸⁷ The word is rare in classical literature and unattested in papyri and inscriptions. It appears in a fragment from Empedocles,⁸⁸ and occasionally in the Hippocratic Corpus. ⁸⁹ In late Hellenistic and Roman times, χλωρότης is found in Plutarch as well as in medical literature, especially in Galen. However, the majority of its attestations are found among the Christian Fathers, who relied on the LXX text. In the LXX, χλωρότης appears once (Ps 67.14 [68.14 MT]), where it denotes a golden colour, compared to the feathers of a dove. It does not appear among the Greek texts of Qumran, nor in the NT. The difficulties in understanding the Hebrew text of Psalm 68 are well known.⁹⁰ The Greek translation presents a more sophisticated text, with some variants. First, in the Greek version the dove is not so much a sign of the divine triumph over the enemy; indeed, the Greek translation of vv. 11– 12 does not refer to the birds as messengers of victory as in the MT (‫ המבשרות‬hamevašerôt). It is rather a sign of fruitfulness and the restoration of the land to the people.⁹¹ The imagery is especially prominent in the Greek text of v. 14a, and conveys a notion of Israel’s heritage (κλῆρος, see also vv. 10 – 11 ) which is not so explicit in the Hebrew text.⁹² Second, in the Hebrew verse 14 the expression ‫ בירקרק חרוץ‬bîraqraq ḥārûṣ may refer, suggests Hartley, to the glaring of the sun’s rays on the dove’s feathers.⁹³ This explanation is reasonable if we consider that the predominant colours of the Treron phoenicoptera, the species which this verse may be referring to, are precisely yellow, light yellowish green and greenish.⁹⁴ The reference to gold is paired with the mention of silver on the wings of the dove in verse 14b, and both metals underscore the impression of the glaring reflection produced by the bird’s feathers. The Greek translation, however, slightly modifies the Hebrew expressions. While the Hebrew describes the dove’s plumage by  TLG; available at: http://stephanus.tlg.uci.edu/Iris/inst/lexica; 28/10/2019.  Emp. Fr. 80.12 (Diels and Kranz, 1951).  Hpp. Prorrh. 2.42.24; Epid. 6.3.18; Hum. 9.13. See infra.  See Isserlin, ‘Psalm 68, Verse 14’, pp. 5 – 8, and the discussion under ‫ירקרק‬, p. 56. On verse 14b-c see also Renate Egger-Wenzel, ‘Du Taube mit silbernenen Schwingen, mit goldenem Flügel!’ (Ps 68.14b.c)’, in Markus Witte (ed.), Gott und Mensch im Dialog. Festschrift für Otto Kaiser zum 80. Geburtstag, BZAW 345 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2004), pp. 591– 599.  See, e. g., Gen 8.8 – 14.  Consider also the differences in the Greek rendering of verse 13. Here the Qal of the verb, ‫ידדון‬ yiddōdûn, ‘to flee’ (referred to the enemy kings), is understood as derived from the form ‫ דוד‬dôd, ‘beloved’ and translated as τοῦ ἀγαπητοῦ.  Hartley, Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes, p. 134.  For a detailed discussion, see García Ureña, ‘Χλωρός y su riqueza cromática en la Septuaginta,’ pp. 128 – 30, and here, p. 60. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-005

110

III The Greek Bible Corpus

speaking generically of ‘wings’, indicated by the common noun ‫ כנף‬kānāp and the rarer ‫’ אברה‬ebrǎ (lit. ‘pinion’), the translator gives a more precise picture of the bird’s anatomy by distinguishing between its πτέρυγες ‘wings’ and τὰ μετάφρενα ‘back’. To describe the colours of its feathers the translator not only maintains the Hebrew metaphor which associates the plumage to silver and gold, but places it in the foreground by drawing from the specialized lexicon of metallurgy and gold-working. The participle περιηργυρωμέναι, from περιαργυρόω, referring to πτέρυγες in verse 14bα, occurs elsewhere in the book of Exodus to describe the silver plating wrought by the highly skilled artisans who built the tabernacle court (Exod 27.11; 37.15, 17, 18; 38.18, 20). After the variants of Psalm 67 in the Septuagint have been studied, and before proceeding to the semantic analysis, we will now examine χλωρότης in greater depth with regard to the leading dictionaries and the early translations of the Bible in order to acquire the necessary encyclopaedic knowledge.

III.2.2 Encyclopaedic knowledge III.2.2.1 Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries According to the DELG, χλωρότης is an abstract noun that expresses the two main states or properties conveyed by the colour green: ‘vigour’ and ‘paleness’.⁹⁵ The LSJ considers that χλωρότης can mean ‘greenness’ and ‘freshness’, as well as ‘yellowness’ or ‘pale colour’.⁹⁶ It covers a semantic range similar to that of χλωρός. As such, it expresses: a) ‘greenness’, understood as the fresh, brilliant and vigorous condition of vegetation; and b) a paleness or yellowness of the human face, especially in medical literature. It is important to note that the different hues expressed by χλωρότης can coexist within the same period and are attested within the work of a single author (e. g. Plutarch).⁹⁷ The hue conveyed by the substantive can therefore be established only on a contextual basis. Lust, based on the occurrence of the word in the LXX, defines χλωρότης as a ‘pale green-yellow’,⁹⁸ while Muraoka considers it ‘a kind of green’.⁹⁹ Contrary to what has been proposed by Lust, χλωρότης cannot be a neologism as the noun is found in Greek literature from early Hellenistic or even late

 DELG, s.v. χλωρός.  LSJ, s.v. χλωρότης; these four meanings are also listed in The Brill Dictionary, s.v. χλωρότης; Rocci, s.v. χλωρότης: ‘greenness’; ‘paleness’.  Χλωρότης means ‘greenness’ in Plu. Aet. Rom. et Gr. 290 and De Prim. Frig. 952c. A different meaning is found in De Pyth. Or. 395b.  LEH, s.v. χλωρότης.  GELS, s.v. χλωρότης.

III.2 Χλωρότης: ‘the colour of a kind of gold’

111

classical times. Indeed, one of the most ancient attestations is the Hippocratic treatise Prorrheticon (2.42), usually dated around 400 BC.¹⁰⁰ Given that the status quaestionis offered by the principal lexicons does not address the various entities in which χλωρότης appears, it is necessary to study these entities in depth and according to their cognitive domains to clarify the meaning of χλωρότης in Psalm 67.14. We find χλωρότης in: 1. The cognitive domain of plants. In this domain, χλωρότης is embodied in: a) trees (Ps.-Arist. De Plantis 2.827), b) grass and forest trees (ὕλη, Plu. De Prim. Frig. 952c), forest trees (ὕλη, Plu. Aem. 14.1),¹⁰¹ ivy (Plu. Aet. Rom. et Gr. 290 f) and any type of flourishing vegetation (Plu. Quaest. Conv. 683 f.).¹⁰² It expresses the fresh, humid and vigorous state of this vegetation, close to the principal meaning expressed by the adjective χλωρός.¹⁰³ It might therefore be translated as ‘greenery’. This is in fact the most frequent meaning for χλωρότης in classical literature. 2. The cognitive domain of human beings/illness. Χλωρότης is found especially in medical literature, and is first attested in Hippocratic treatises,¹⁰⁴ where it is used to describe urine (Prorrh. 2.42.24) as an indicator of chronic illness, and to refer to human complexion, although in two different contexts: illness (Epid. 6.3.18) and fear (Hum.9.13). 2.1 In the context of illness, χλωρότης accompanies other terms that refer to colour when describing the appearance of someone who is ill: ἔρευθος, πελίωσις, χλωρότης (Epid. 6.3.18). The meaning of ἔρευθος is ‘redness’, which alludes to the colour of blood, while πελίωσις refers to lividness and χλωρότης seems to denote the colour a person acquires when close to death. In fact, the text describes the symptoms that have caused the death of a patient as the result of poor medical treatment.¹⁰⁵ The nominal lexeme χλωρότης, then, would have the meaning that χλωρός carries in a medical setting, extending to contexts in which death is personified.¹⁰⁶ In such cases, χλωρότης denotes a colour of low saturation, as it is embodied in entities whose natural colour has changed and been replaced by a different hue due to illness. 2.1 In the context of fear, χλωρότης is the term chosen to describe the aspect of a person terrified by the presence of a snake (Hum. 9.13). In this case, χλωρότης seems to have the meaning of χλωρός, as a visible sign of fear man-

   (its)    

See e. g. Craik, The ‘Hippocratic’ Corpus, pp. 238 – 240. Plu. Flam. 3.5; De Sera Num. Vind. 565e. Sch. Opp. Hal. 2.495: ἀπομαραίνεται τῆς λαμπρότητος, ἐκπίπτει δὲ τῆς χλωρότητος: ‘it wastes splendour, and loses the freshness’. Vid. supra, pp. 90 – 92. E. g. Gal. Hpp. Epid. VI. 17b.101.13; Voc. Hpp. Gloss. 19.155.8, 10 (Kühn). Vid. infra, p. 187. Vid. supra, pp. 95 – 100.

112

3.

III The Greek Bible Corpus

ifested in a paleness of complexion.¹⁰⁷ With this same meaning, it was reported by ancient lexicographers as a synonym of ὦχρος, ‘pallor’.¹⁰⁸ In any case, the Corpus Hippocraticum also uses other lexemes to express paleness, such as ἄχροια (Prorrh. 2.30; Vict. 3.76). Χλωρότης can also be applied to the cognitive domain of metals, as in a passage from Plutarch’s Pythian Oracle, where it is used to qualify the colour of a specific alloy, somewhat similar to the colour of bronze, that is obtained by mixing gold with silver. The description appears in a fictitious dialogue within a larger discussion about the origins of Corinthian bronze. This was an alloy obtained by mixing bronze, gold and silver, one that was widely known and much appreciated in antiquity and, according to an ancient tradition, was obtained by chance for the first time during the fire of Corinth in 146 BC.¹⁰⁹ This particular passage provides information which is useful for reconstructing the hue expressed by χλωρότης. The quality of the gold described by Theon in Plutarch’s dialogue is said to be ‘unique and refined’ (ἰδίαν καὶ περιττά). Even so, Theon is displeased (φθορὰν ἀκαλλῆ παρέχουσι, ‘they offer an unlovely perversion’) with the colour of Corinthian bronze, describing it as νοσώδη χλωρότητα. It is clear that in this context Theon is not using χλωρότης to refer to the intense colour of plants, as he describes this hue as νοσώδης, ‘sickly’, a term related to medical language and illness, and the very opposite of health and life. In this sense, we might better link the tonality of χλωρότης with the colour of a person who is ill; and this is indeed one of the meanings of the adjectival lexeme χλωρός.¹¹⁰ Thus, χλωρότης would denote the colour of a gold-silver alloy, a faded green of low saturation, hence Theon’s description of it as νοσώδης, ‘sickly’. The translation of Plutarch’s text (De Pyth. Or. 395c) would be as follows: ἦν δέ τις ὡς ἔοικε μῖξις καὶ ἄρτυσις, ὥς που καὶ νῦν ἀνακεραννύντες ἀργύρῳ χρυσὸν ἰδίαν τινὰ καὶ περιττὴν ἐμοὶ δὲ φαινομένην νοσώδη χλωρότητα καὶ φθορὰν ἀκαλλῆ παρέχουσι in all likelihood [scil. this Corinthian bronze] was a certain mixture and temperature of metals; just as today artisans mix gold with silver, and produce a colour unique and refined; however, to me it appears as a sickly green [νοσώδη χλωρότητα] and corrupt [καὶ φθοράν], without any beauty.

4.

The cognitive domain of gemstones. In late Hellenistic and late antique literature, χλωρότης is occasionally applied to precious stones characterized by

 Vid. supra, p. 84.  Hsych. s.v. : ὠχρίασις, χλωρότης.  Plu. De Pyth. Or. 395b; Plin. HN. 34.1– 6. On this, see e. g. Alessandra Giumlia-Mair and Paul T. Craddock, Corinthium aes. Das schwartze Gold des Alchimisten (Mainz: von Zabern, 1993); Craddock and Giumlia-Mair, ‘The Identity of Corinthian Bronze: Rome’s Shakudo Alloy’, pp. 137– 148, and ‘Antiche tecniche di colorazione dei metalli’, pp. 265 – 276.  Vid. supra, pp. 93 – 99.

III.2 Χλωρότης: ‘the colour of a kind of gold’

5.

113

their bright green colour, such as the emerald (Phot. Bibl. 277)¹¹¹ or the gem called prasinos (Io. Chrysost. Ep. Pri. Tim. 62.578.21). The cognitive domain of animals. In the writings of the late-Hellenistic writer Aelianus, χλωρότης is used 1x to describe one of the colours which can be assumed by the chameleon (Ael. NA. 2.14): this seems again to be a bright shade of green, similar to that of fresh vegetation.

III.2.2.2 Early versions of the Bible In the LXX, χλωρότης occurs only 1x as an equivalent for the Hebrew adjective ‫ירקרק‬ yǝraqraq. The latter is attested 3x in the Hebrew Bible (Lev 13.49; 14.37; Ps 68.14 [67.14 LXX]). Two of the three occurrences of ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq are found in Leviticus, where the Hebrew adjective is rendered by the Greek verb χλωρίζω.¹¹² The Latin version offers two different equivalents: pallor (Psalterium Gallicanum) and uiror (Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos).¹¹³

III.2.2.3 Synthesis In light of the study we have carried out, following our established methodology, we have concluded that χλωρότης means: a) an entity imbued with colour that reflects a state of freshness (‘greenery’), when χλωρότης appears in the cognitive domain of plants; this is the meaning most often found in classical Greek; and b) a colour with two different hues: b.1) ‘vivid green’ or ‘bright green’ when it appears in the cognitive domains of animals and gemstones; b.2) ‘dull green’ or ‘faded green’, a hue of low saturation, when it appears in the cognitive domains of human beings, sickness, emotions and metals. Finally, the translator of the Psalms in the Septuagint uses χλωρότης as an equivalent for the Hebrew adjective ‫ ירקרק‬yəraqraq, while the translator of Leviticus uses χλωρίζω.

III.2.3 Semantic analysis of χλωρότης The poetic passage of Ps 67.14 (68.14 MT) describes the bright, delicate feathers of a dove:

 Photius, Photii Bibliotheca, Immanuel Bekker, ed. (Berolini: G. Reimeri, 1824– 1825), p. 521 b.  For the discussion of these translational choices, vid. supra, pp. 52– 65 and infra, pp. 117– 122.  For a discussion, vid. infra, pp. 199 – 201; 166 – 168.

114

III The Greek Bible Corpus

ἐὰν κοιμηθῆτε ἀνὰ μέσον τῶν κλήρων, πτέρυγες περιστερᾶς περιηργυρωμέναι, καὶ τὰ μετάφρενα αὐτῆς ἐν χλωρότητι χρυσίου. διάψαλμα. If you fall asleep in the midst of the farms, wings of a dove plated with silver, and its back feathers with golden greenness (interlude)

The expression ἐν χλωρότητι χρυσίου (Ps 67.14) translates the Hebrew expression ‫ בירקרק חרוץ‬bîraqraq ḥārûṣ to describe the back feathers of a dove. The Greek translation is in perfect accordance with the number of Hebrew items (3) as well as the Hebrew syntax. It seems clear that the translator aims to reproduce closely and faithfully the chromatic context of the Hebrew text, which metaphorically parallels the dove’s wings and feathers to precious metals such as gold and silver. Within this framework, the translation proposed by the Greek translator of Leviticus to describe skin or leather infections (the present participle of the verb χλωρίζω) was not considered to suit the literary context of Psalm 67, which is completely different from that of Leviticus. Instead, in looking for the most appropriate equivalent for the Hebrew ‫ ירקרק‬yəraqraq, derived from ‫ ירק‬yereq, χλωρότης, from χλωρός, was a natural choice, especially as χλωρότης could well refer to precious metals (see supra). However, the translator introduces a change, as morphologically the substantive χλωρότης is not a literal translation of ‫ ירקרק‬yəraqraq, a compound adjective. As we will see, this is not the only difference between the Greek and the Hebrew texts.¹¹⁴ In this regard, we cannot be sure whether the translator had a slightly different version or was interpreting differently the same, very difficult Hebrew text as the MT. On the other hand, the entity to which the colour term χλωρότης refers is χρυσίον ‘gold’, which belongs to the cognitive domain of metals. The wording of the Greek text, (χρυσίον in the genitive case, depending on χλωρότης) makes it clear that χλωρότης is embodied in gold, even if the DELG considers it an abstract noun. Among the different entities to which χλωρότης can be applied –plants, animals, stones, human skin and metals–, metals are the most relevant for the interpretation of the biblical passage. The occurrence of χλωρότης in the passage from the Pythian Oracles discussed above suggests that this noun belongs to a context of goldworking. Although χλωρότης is found in two different contexts in the Plutarchian passage and in Psalm 67, it is worth noting that both draw from a similar description of a kind of gold. As we have already said, Corinthian bronze was widely known and highly appreciated in antiquity, and was referred to as ‘green gold’.¹¹⁵ Against this background, the Greek expression ἐν χλωρότητι χρυσίου in Psalm 67.14 might well denote a green with a low saturation of gold, the result of alloying gold with silver.¹¹⁶  For a more detailed introduction to this passage in the Hebrew text, see yǝraqraq in this volume pp. 53 – 58.  Forbes, Ancient Technology, pp. 171– 172. Vid. supra, p. 64.  Centuries later, the Homeric commentator, Eustazio (1115 – 95), will use this expression to describe the grapes (Lorenzoni, ‘Eustazio: paura “verde” e oro “pallido”’, 148).

III.2 Χλωρότης: ‘the colour of a kind of gold’

115

It is also possible that the adjective νοσώδης used by Plutarch points indirectly to the original medical use of χλωρότης. The lexical family of χλωρός is widely attested in Greek medical literature,¹¹⁷ and we can therefore advance the hypothesis that the original context of use for χλωρότης, as expressing a green of low saturation, was medical. Subsequently, the item was applied metaphorically to other natural entities characterized by this same aspect of low saturation.

III.2.4 Conclusions From our analysis, we can affirm that χλωρότης is not used in Greek literature as an abstract noun, as it is always embodied in a variety of entities primarily from the cognitive domain of plants. In all of the domains in which it appears, χλωρότης expresses both colour (the hue of vegetation or individual plants) and state (the freshness and lushness of vegetation). Thus, χλωρότης denotes a high degree of saturation that we can translate ‘vivid green’ or ‘bright green’, a hue similar to that found in the cognitive domains of animals and perhaps of gemstones. However, in the cognitive domains of human beings, illness and fear, and in the cognitive domain of metals, the intense green tonality proper to living things disappears and, as the result of illness or the lack of purity in metals, we find a faded green of low saturation. This is the case of χλωρότης in Ps 67.14, where it embodies an entity –gold– belonging to the cognitive domain of metals. Its meaning, therefore, is ‘the colour of a kind of gold, the product of an alloy (Ps 67.14), used to describe the back feathers of a dove’. This low saturation would explain the translation in the Psalterium Gallicanum (pallor).¹¹⁸ As glosses, we propose ‘golden greenness’,¹¹⁹ ‘golden green’, and ‘faded green’.

III.2.5 Bibliography Craddock, Paul T. and Alessandra Giumlia-Mair, ‘The Identity of Corinthian Bronze: Rome’s Shakudo Alloy’, in Stephanus T. A. M. Mols et al. (eds.), Acta of the 12th International Congress on Ancient Bronzes (Nijmegen, Museum Kam, May 1992), Nederlandse Archeologische Rapporten Nummer 18 (Nijmegen: Provincaal Museum, 1995), pp. 137 – 148. Craik, Elizabeth, The ‘Hippocratic’ Corpus: Content and Context (Abingdon: Oxon; New York: Routledge, 2015). Diels, Hermann and Walther Kranz, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, vol. 1, 6th edn (Berlin: Weidmann, 1951).

 See e. g. Gilles Maloney and Winnie Frohn (eds.), Concordantia in Corpus Hippocraticum = Concordance Des Oeuvres Hippocratiques, vol. 5 (Hildesheim: Olms-Weidmann, 1986), s.v. χλωρός.  Vid. infra, pp. 199 – 201.  So Pietersma in NETS, Psalms 67.14; Spottorno in the Biblia griega. Septuaginta, Ps 67.14: el verdor del oro.

116

III The Greek Bible Corpus

Egger-Wenzel, Renate, ‘Du Taube mit silbernenen Schwingen, mit goldenem Flügel! (Ps 68.14b.c)’, in Markus Witte (ed.), Gott und Mensch im Dialog. Festschrift für Otto Kaiser zum 80. Geburtstag, BZAW 345 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2004), pp. 591 – 599. García Ureña, Lourdes, ‘Χλωρός y su riqueza cromática en la Septuaginta’, in τί ἡμῖν καὶ σοί; Lo que hay entre tú y nosotros. Estudios en honor de María Victoria Spottorno (Córdoba: UCOPress, 2016), pp. 119 – 131. Giumlia-Mair, Alessandra and Paul T. Craddock, Corinthium aes. Das schwartze Gold des Alchimisten (Mainz: von Zabern, 1993). Giumlia-Mair, Alessandra, ‘Antiche tecniche di colorazione dei metalli’, in Mauro Bacci (ed.), Atti del convegno ‘Colore e arte: storia e tecnologia del colore nei secoli’ (Firenze, 28 Febbraio-2 Marzo 2007) dell’Associazione Nazionale di Archeometria (Bologna: Pàtron Editore, 2008), pp. 259 – 269. Hartley, John E., The Semantics of Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes (Louvain; Paris; Walpole, MA: Peeters, 2010). Isserlin, Benedikt S. J., ‘Psalm 68, Verse 14: an Archaeological Gloss’, PEQ 103 (1971), 5 – 8. Lorenzoni, Alberta, ‘Eustazio: paura “verde” e oro “pallido” (Ar. Pax 1176, Eup. fr. 253 K.-A., Com. adesp. frr. 390 e 1380 A E.)’, Eikasmos 5 (1994), 139 – 163. Maloney, Gilles and Winnie Frohn (eds.), Concordantia in Corpus Hippocraticum = Concordance Des Oeuvres Hippocratiques, vol. 5 (Hildesheim: Olms-Weidmann, 1986). Photius, Photii Bibliotheca, Immanuel Bekker, ed. (Berolini: G. Reimeri, 1824 – 1825). Plutarchus, L’origine del freddo. Se sia più utile l’acqua o Il fuoco, Gennaro D’Ippolito e Gianfranco Nuzzo, eds. (Napoli: M. D’Auria Editore, 2012).

III.3 Χλωρίζω: ‘to turn greenish’ III.3.1 Introduction χλωρίζω is a colour verb. It is derived from χλωρός with the addition of the factitive suffix -izō, and describes a change in colour more than a definite state of colour or a precise hue. The LXX contains the most ancient occurrence of the word, and the verbal lexeme has very scarce attestation in ancient Greek, appearing only 27x in the extant Greek literary corpus.¹²⁰ It is not found in papyri or in inscriptions. In the Greek post-classical tradition, this verbal lexeme is used in two different contexts (medical texts and lapidaries), and is applied to two entities from two different cognitive domains (body and gemstones). In the Septuagint, χλωρίζω occurs only in two passages from the purity laws of Leviticus: Lev 13.49 and 14.37. It does not appear in either the Dead Sea Scrolls or the New Testament.¹²¹ Before carrying out a semantic analysis of the term, we will first examine the main dictionaries of the Bible, as well as information provided by the early versions of the Bible, to acquire the encyclopaedic knowledge needed to approximate the worldview of the listener/reader in biblical times.

III.3.2 Encyclopaedic knowledge III.3.2.1 Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries According to the DELG, the verb indicates the process of turning greenish or becoming pale.¹²² Other Greek dictionaries simply report the meaning ‘to be greenish or pale’.¹²³ According to the LSJ, the meaning of this verbal lexeme in post-classical Greek is ‘to be greenish’ or ‘to be pale’.¹²⁴ Lust considers χλωρίζω to be a neologism used by the translator of Leviticus.¹²⁵ In fact, χλωρίζω is mostly attested in traditions derived from or related to the LXX.¹²⁶ It is worth observing, however, that the word appears in scholia (Sch. Aesch. Prom.

 TLG; available at: http://stephanus.tlg.uci.edu/Iris/inst/lexica; 27/10/2019.  So as to avoid unnecessary repetitions, the study of the literary form of Leviticus that appears at p. 51 is omitted here.  DELG, s.v. χλωρός.  LSJ, s.v. χλωρίζω; GELS, s.v. χλωρίζω; LEH, s.v. χλωρίζω; Rocci, s.v. χλωρίζω: ‘to be or become yellowish or greenish,’ ‘to pale’; The Brill Dictionary, s.v. χλωρίζω: ‘to be pale’.  LSJ, s.v. χλωρίζω; The word is not listed in the BDAG, Friberg, Lampe.  So LEH, s.v. χλωρίζω.  E. g., Ph. Det. 16.2; Cyr. Al. Glaph. in Pent. 69.56; Nil. Ep. 1.224. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-005

118

III The Greek Bible Corpus

134a) as well as in Byzantine medical texts,¹²⁷ two traditions which are not directly connected with the LXX. The possibility that this lexeme was a Hellenistic form rather than a neologism created by the translators of the LXX should therefore be seriously considered.¹²⁸ In the Greek post-classical tradition, χλωρίζω is related to two main cognitive domains. On the one hand, in the scholia it is applied to the human skin and describes the very pale aspect of a pregnant woman, ‘as the blood abandons her and is feeding the foetus’.¹²⁹ The scholiasts therefore consider χλωρίζω to be very similar in meaning to the rare verbal form χλωριάω, which in Hippocratic literature as well as in Hellenistic texts describes the process of the face turning pale due to serious illness or severe pain.¹³⁰ On the other hand, in late ancient and Byzantine literature the verb is applied to precious stones, where it indicates the colour of jasper.¹³¹ In particular, it defines a specific variety of jasper which tends toward green and is similar to the emerald (κατὰ τὸν σμάραγδον).¹³² As is often the case with precious stones, which are inherently characterized by iridescent qualities, it is difficult to detect the precise hue of this type of jasper. However, from ancient as well as modern evidence green jasper is usually a quite dark and opaque green. Overall, the evidence from ancient Greek witnesses shows that the chromatic spectrum of χλωρίζω varies between different shades of greenish, dark green and pale green. When compared with the adjectival lexeme χλωρός, the verb therefore shows a more restricted variety of hues.

III.3.2.2 Early versions of the Bible In the LXX, this verbal lexeme appears twice as an equivalent of the adjective ‫ירקרק‬ yǝraqraq. Both times it occurs in a ritual context in which the priest must establish the degree of impurity of an object (Lev 13.49) or a house (Lev 14.37).¹³³ The state of impurity results in an attack of mould (ἁφὴ λέπρας, in Hebrew ‫ )נגע צרעת‬which changes its colour, turning it greenish (χλωρίζουσα) or reddish (πυρρίζουσα). The Vulgate translates ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq with two different lexemes: albus (Lev 13.49) and pallor (Lev 14.37). The textual tradition is stable for Lev 13.49, except for  E. g., Aet. Iatric. 4.9.26; Actuarius De Urinis 4.11.3; 6.8.3.  On the methodological criteria for detecting neologisms in the LXX, see the important essay by James K. Aitken, ‘Neologism: A Septuagint Problem’, in James K. Aitken et al. (eds.), Interested Readers: Essays on the Hebrew Bible in Honor of David J. A. Clines (Atlanta, GA: SBL Press, 2013), pp. 315 – 329.  Sch. Aesch. Prom. 134a.  Hpp. Epid. 4.35 (ἐχλωρίασε); Long. 4.31 (χλωριῶντα).  Epiph. Gemm. 1.3.4; 1.6.4; see also Aet. Iatric. 4.9.26.  See especially Aet. Iatric. 4.9.26: τὸν χλωρίζοντα ἴαϲπιν. Andr. Comm. in Apoc. 23.67 (verse 21.19b).  Vid. supra, p. 55.

III.3 Χλωρίζω: ‘to turn greenish’

119

a minuscule which bears the lesson χρωτος λευκη, probably a correction based on the Latin version.¹³⁴ Lev 14.37 has a more difficult syntax and a more complex textual tradition in Hebrew.¹³⁵ However, the participle χλωριζούσας is preserved in the great majority of the Greek manuscripts.¹³⁶

III.3.2.3 Synthesis Χλωρίζω is a verbal lexeme attested for the first time in the LXX, although it need not be considered a neologism. It is, rather, a technical term belonging to the medical lexicon and to the specialized vocabulary of lapidaries, where it highlights a change in colour more than a definite and stable hue. It covers a more restricted colour spectrum than χλωρός. In Greek literature the verb is applied to the human body as well as to inorganic surfaces. As we will see, both of these entities are attested in the Septuagint.

III.3.3 Semantic analysis of χλωρίζω Both Lev 13.49 and Lev 14.37 describe the results of an affliction (λέπρα) on organic surfaces (δέρμα, ‘leather’; στήμων,‘warp’, and κρόκη, ‘thread’ in Lev 13.49) and inorganic ones (τοῖς τοίχοις, ‘walls of the house’), by using the verb χλωρίζω, in analogy with πυρρίζω (Lev 13.49; Lev 14.37):¹³⁷ Lev 13.49 καὶ γένηται ἡ ἁφὴ χλωρίζουσα ἢ πυρρίζουσα ἐν τῷ δέρματι ἢ ἐν τῷ ἱματίῳ ἢ ἐν τῷ στήμονι ἢ ἐν τῇ κρόκῃ ἢ ἐν παντὶ σκεύει ἐργασίμῳ δέρματος ἁφὴ λέπρας ἐστίν καὶ δείξει τῷ ἱερεῖ And the attack becomes greenish or reddish on the skin or on the garment, whether in warp or weft, or on any article made of skin, it is an attack of mould, and one shall show it to the priest.

 John W. Wevers, Leviticus, SVTG II.2 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986), p. 426, ad loc.  E. g., the SP repeats the subject ‫הכהן‬, absent in the MT.  See Wevers, Leviticus, Apparatus ad loc. The Byzantine tradition has the expression κοιλαδες χλωριζουσαι η πυρριζουσαι in the nominative case. See John W. Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Leviticus, Septuagint and Cognate Studies 44 (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1997), pp. 214– 215. A few minuscules have the lesson χωριζουσας, ‘separated’, i. e. ‘distinguishable’, and one has the reading χλωαζουσας, ‘to be bright green’.  Although the use of πυρρίζω is not attested before the LXX, the presence of the compound ὑπυρρίζω in Athenaeus (Deipn. 9.39; 7.91), and Dioscorides (Mat. Med. 2.146) does imply the existence of the verb.

120

III The Greek Bible Corpus

Lev 14.37 καὶ ὄψεται τὴν ἁφὴν ἐν τοῖς τοίχοις τῆς οἰκίας κοιλάδας χλωριζούσας ἢ πυρριζούσας καὶ ἡ ὄψις αὐτῶν ταπεινοτέρα τῶν τοίχων And he shall look at the attack in the walls of the house, as greenish or reddish hollows, and their appearance is deeper than the walls.

Both verbal lexemes, used in the present participle form, indicate the process of colour change on a surface due to a fungus or infection (ἁφή). Χλωρίζω indicates a hue which must be well distinguishable from that suggested by πυρρίζω (‘to turn reddish or brownish’).¹³⁸ In the case of the wall in Leviticus, the mention of κοιλάδας (Lev 14.37), literally ‘hollows,’ suggests that the infection has penetrated deeply into the stone, corroding the original surface. In Lev 13.49, the participle refers to attacks or stains (ἁφὴ λέπρας), with the lexeme ἁφή belonging to the cognitive domain of sickness. Hence, an initial question to be asked when addressing the Greek version of Leviticus 13.49 and 14.37 is how to explain the equivalence between the Hebrew nominal lexeme ‫ צרעת‬ṣāraʿat and its Greek counterpart λέπρα. As demonstrated by several studies, the Hebrew term does not denote the disease commonly known today as leprosy. Instead, it probably refers to a mould capable not only of causing human diseases, but of contaminating buildings and textiles.¹³⁹ However, despite the derivation of the modern term ‘leprosy’ from the Greek λέπρα, it can be observed that in ancient Greek λέπρα had also a broader meaning. It was not restricted to leprosy, which was commonly designated in Greek Hellenistic literature as ἐλεφαντίασις. In Greek medical literature, λέπρα can instead refer to various skin diseases characterized by scaliness, such as psoriasis, scabies and others.¹⁴⁰ The nominal lexeme is derived from the adjectival λεπρός, ‘scaly’ or ‘rough’, which is in turn connected with the verb λέπω, ‘to peel.’ Although λέπρα is found exclusively in the context of human skin affections, the verb λεπράω and the adjective λεπρός are occasionally applied to other surfaces belonging to other cognitive domains. The oldest example is a fragment from Aristophanes, in which a vinegar jar is said ‘to be leprous’; i. e. to be rotten (λεπρᾶν κεράμιον ὀξηρόν).¹⁴¹ However, we are dealing here with a metaphorical usage that aims to ach-

 For further details see García Ureña, ‘Χλωρός y su riqueza cromática en la Septuaginta’, pp. 126 – 128.  See, for example, Wilkinson, ‘Leprosy and Leviticus’, 153 – 166; Heller, ‘Tsara’at Leviticus’, 588 – 591; and the detailed discussion in this volume, pp. 56 – 57.  Hdt. 1.138; Hpp. Aph. 3.20; Prorrh. 2.43; Epid. 5.9; Morb. 1.3. See also the meaning of λεπράω in Herod. Mimiambi 3.50; also Johs G. Andersen, ‘Leprosy in Translations of the Bible’, BT 31 (1980), 207– 212, at 208 – 209; Paul Harlé and Didier Pralon, La Bible d’Alexandrie. 3, Le Lévitique (Paris: Cerf, 1988), pp. 44– 45.  Ar. Fr. 743 (ed. Kassel-Austin, PCG III.2).

III.3 Χλωρίζω: ‘to turn greenish’

121

ieve comic effects through the personification of inanimate objects.¹⁴² Another possible attestation comes from The Acharnians. Verse 724 speaks of τούσδ’ ἱμάντας ἐκ λεπρῶν, possibly ‘mantles made of rough (leather)’: according to some scholia this expression subtends δερμάτων or βοῶν and refers to particularly tough leathers.¹⁴³ Moreover, in a 2nd century BC papyrus from Arsinoites the adjective λεπρός is used in reference to a horse, probably with the meaning of ‘rough’ or ‘hirsute’.¹⁴⁴ Such contextual uses of λεπράω and λεπρός applied to surfaces other than human skin might have contributed to the choice of λέπρα as a good equivalent for the Hebrew ṣāraʿat in Leviticus. As the attack (ἁφή) appears on organic and inorganic surfaces that are susceptible to mould, ἁφή also becomes associated with the cognitive domains of clothing and buildings: – clothing: δέρμα, ‘leather’, ἱμάτιον, ‘garment’, στήμων, ‘warp’ and κρόκη, ‘thread’ in Lev 13.49. – buildings: ἐν τοῖς τοίχοις τῆς οἰκίας κοιλάδας, ‘hollows in the walls of the house’ in Lev 14.37. In light of these remarks, the fact that the translator chose to render a Hebrew adjective with a verb, rather than an equivalent Greek adjective, is not surprising when the context is taken into consideration. Χλωρίζω is derived from χλωρός, which is used quite frequently by LXX translators in other books of the Pentateuch (Gen 1.30; 2.5; 30.37ab; Exod 10.15; Num 22.4; Deut 29.22) and elsewhere (2 Kgs 19.26; Isa 15.6; Ezek 17.24; 21.3; Job 39.8; Prov 27.25). In all of these occurrences, the context of usage for χλωρός is always vegetal, and therefore different from that found in Leviticus. While the term usually describes entities belonging to the cognitive domain of plants, such as trees, plants and bushes,¹⁴⁵ the context of Lev 13.49 and 14.37 is entirely different, as it is concerned with the appearance of a surface affected by mould, which produces a spot on the skin or on a wall. The presence of such a mould consequently determines the state of impurity of that person or dwelling.¹⁴⁶ This change of context and cognitive domain implies a change in hue which could not be conveyed by the adjective χλωρός in the Septuagint, but is instead well expressed by the choice of χλωρίζω.

 See Aristophanes, Aristofane. Frammenti, Matteo Pellegrino, ed. (Lecce: Pensa, 2015), p. 418, and related bibliography.  Ar. Ach. 724 and Sch. Ar. Ach. 724 (ed. Wilson, Groningen 1975). However, according to other interpretations reported in the scholia, λεπρῶν could also be the name of a town or a place. The expression would then mean ‘mantles coming from Leprea’. For a short discussion of this, see Aristophanes, Les Acharniens, Pascal Thiercy, ed. (Montpellier: Université Paul Valéry, 1988), p. 103.  Pap. P. Petr. 2.35.11.  Vid. supra, p. 104.  Vid. supra, p. 55.

122

III The Greek Bible Corpus

With a somewhat similar logic, the Vulgate uses the adjective albus (Lev 13.49) and the noun pallor (Lev 14.37), instead of uiridis (Gen 30.37; Ezek 17.24; 20.47), uireo (Deut 29.23; 2 Kgs 19.26; Prov 27.25; Job 39.8) or uiror (Isa 15.6), which are the typical equivalents of χλωρός.

III.3.4 Conclusions In the LXX, the verb χλωρίζω is applied to the skin and to organic materials, especially leather, wool and weaving, as well as to inorganic surfaces, namely the stones of a wall. Both of the domains found in later Greek literature (organic and inorganic surfaces) are represented. Moreover, the fact that the change in colour is ultimately produced by an affection (ἁφὴ λέπρας) connects the verb with the cognitive domain of sickness. This domain is also well represented by χλωρίζω in later Greek attestations. This could therefore strengthen the hypothesis that the LXX translator borrowed χλωρίζω from contemporary medical literature. From this analysis, we can confirm that χλωρίζω denotes ‘a process in which an organic (leather, weaving, Lev 13.49) or inorganic (stone, Lev 14.37) surface loses its original colour and acquires a greenish hue when it has been affected by mould or other infections’. Unlike the case of ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq ¹⁴⁷ in the Hebrew version, it is not possible to determine the exact hue expressed by χλωρίζω, but, as it is derived from χλωρός, we propose as glosses ‘to turn greenish’, ‘to be pale green’.

III.3.5 Bibliography Aitken, James K., ‘Neologism: A Septuagint Problem’, in James K. Aitken et al. (eds.), Interested Readers: Essays on the Hebrew Bible in Honor of David J. A. Clines (Atlanta, GA: SBL Press, 2013), pp. 315 – 329. Andersen, Johs G., ‘Leprosy in Translations of the Bible’, BT 31 (1980), 207 – 212. Aristophanes, Frammenti, Matteo Pellegrino, ed. (Lecce: Pensa, 2015). Aristophanes, Les Acharniens, Thiercy, Pascal, ed. (Montpellier: Université Paul Valéry, 1988). García Ureña, Lourdes, ‘Χλωρός y su riqueza cromática en la Septuaginta’, in τί ἡμῖν καὶ σοί; Lo que hay entre tú y nosotros. Estudios en honor de María Victoria Spottorno (Córdoba: UCOPress, 2016), pp. 119 – 131. Heller, Richard M. et al., ‘Mold: “Tsara’at,” Leviticus, and the History of a Confusion’, Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 46 (2003), 588 – 591. Wevers, John W., Leviticus, SVTG II.2 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986). Wevers, John W., Notes on the Greek Text of Leviticus, Septuagint and Cognate Studies 44 (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1997). Wilkinson, John, ‘Leprosy and Leviticus: A Problem of Semantics and Translations’, SJT 31 (1977), 153 – 166.

 Vid. supra, p. 57.

III.4 Πράσινος: ‘stone as a colour’ III.4.1 Introduction Πράσινος is a colour adjective which has an equivalent in πράσιος-α-ον, an adjective derived from the noun τὸ πράσιον ‘horehound’ (Marrubium), a medicinal herb. From πράσινος is derived the adjective πρασινώδης and its equivalent form πρασινοειδής, attested in Sch. Theoc. 4.28. In all of these cases a reference to the green of the leek is mentioned in the dictionaries.¹⁴⁸ The verbal lexeme πρασίζω and its equivalent πρασίνιζω are used in the sense of ‘to be greenish’,¹⁴⁹ ‘to be green (leek)’.¹⁵⁰ The noun τὸ πράσιον, both as a wild plant and as a colour (χρῶμα),¹⁵¹ is attested in the Suda. According to the dictionaries, from this substantive is derived the masculine noun ὁ πρασίτης, which refers to a wine flavoured with horehound; this is the term used by Diοscorides (Mat. Med. 5.48), while Theophrastus employs the feminine substantive ἡ πρασῖτις as the name of a copper-coloured stone (Lap. 37.4).¹⁵² Πράσινος is found 1x in the LXX (Gen 2.12), although it does not appear in either the Dead Sea Scrolls or the New Testament. It is used in a narrative/descriptive literary context, that of the second account of creation (Gen 2.4b–3.24). This introduces the beginning of human history, in language that is intentionally mythical, typical of such creation narratives, and infuses the text with a highly symbolic value. The focus of the narrative is the relationship of man to the garden in which he has been placed and from which the four primordial rivers flow to the rest of the earth (Gen 2.8 – 14). The first of these is the Pison, described as encircling ‘the entire land of Havilah’. To underscore its riches, the account goes on to describe this land as containing gold (χρύσιον) and two kinds of gemstones (ἄνθραξ and ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος). Before carrying out a semantic analysis of the lexeme πράσινος, we will first turn to the main dictionaries of Greek and the early versions of the Bible in order to assemble the encyclopaedic knowledge needed to enable a true understanding of the term.

 DELG, s.v. πράσινος; Rocci, s.v. πράσινος; LSJ; The Brill Dictionary, s.v. πράσινος, πρασινοειδής, πρασινώδης.  LSJ, s.v. πρασίζω and πρασίνιζω.  The Brill Dictionary, s.v. πρασίζω and πρασίνιζω.  Suda, n. 2226, 2227.  LSJ, s.v. πρασίτης. Cf. A. Pociña Pérez, ‘Prasinos, prasinus: historia de un adjetivo’, Symbolae Ludovico Mitxelena septuagenario oblatae 1 (1985), 119 – 124. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-005

124

III The Greek Bible Corpus

III.4.2 Encyclopaedic knowledge III.4.2.1 Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries The LSJ, Rocci and The Brill Dictionary propose three different tonalities for πράσινος: a) leek green; b) light green; and c) the colour associated with a faction of the public that participated in circus games (οἱ πράσινοι ‘the greens, the green faction’).¹⁵³ In this case, however, we believe that it expresses a generic green. What is more, the dictionaries add still another meaning, as they suggest that in Gen 2.12 πράσινος refers to a precious stone; the LSJ and Rocci identify this with ἡ πρασῖτις, while The Brill Dictionary proposes emerald. This proposal is found in one of the dictionaries specializing in the Septuagint, the LEH,¹⁵⁴ although the GELS maintains that πράσινος is a colour adjective –leek green– used to describe a gemstone.¹⁵⁵ Πράσινος is well attested in Greek literature as a colour adjective signifying ‘green’ and referring to entities from several different cognitive domains: a) colours (Democr. Testim. Fr. 135.235 = Thphr. Sens. 1.77;¹⁵⁶ Arist. Sens. 442a24; b) stones (Ps.Hpp. Ἑρμηνεία 7.2; 15.1; Alchem. Καταβαφὴ λίθων 2.354); c) animals: the plumage of birds (Arist. Col. 799b4), body parts (Ael. NA. 11.24; 17.36; Ar. Byz. HA. 2.474.5; Physiol. 10.3); d) the rainbow (Arist. Meteor. 372a9; 374b32; Ps.-Plu. Plac. 894d.9); and e) blood (Anon.Med. Περὶ χροιᾶς 3.4).

III.4.2.2 Early versions of the Bible The equivalent term in Hebrew is ‫ שׁהם‬šōham. As the BDB has pointed out, this refers to a gem of problematic identification, for which a variety of precious stones have been proposed: onyx or chrysoprasus;¹⁵⁷ beryl; malachite;¹⁵⁸ and carnelian.¹⁵⁹ Nor can we know with certainty what colour this was, with some suggesting a red colour,¹⁶⁰ and others a mixture of white, black, brown or red.¹⁶¹ The Septuagint reveals this same indetermination, offering various translations for ‫ שׁהם‬šōham that reflect stones of different colours (green, blue, red, black):

 LSJ, s.v. πράσινος; Rocci, s.v. πράσινος; The Brill Dictionary, s.v. πράσινος. Michel Pastoureau, Green, pp. 30 – 35, explains in detail the role of the factio pristina in Rome and Byzantium.  LEH, s.v. πράσινος.  GELS, s.v. πράσινος.  Democritus explains its origin as a mixture of purple and woad (the colour of a plant from which a dark blue dye is produced), or green and purple (τὸ δὲ πράσινον ἐκ πορφυροῦ καὶ τῆς ἰσάτιδος, ἢ ἐκ χλωροῦ καὶ πορφυροειδοῦς).  This is also proposed by the SDBH, s.v. ‫שׁהם‬.  BDB, s.v. ‫שׁהם‬.  HALOT, s.v. ‫ ;שׁהם‬Brenner, Colour Terms, p. 166.  HALOT, s.v. ‫ ;שׁהם‬Brenner, Colour Terms, p. 166.  SDBH, s.v. ‫שׁהם‬.

III.4 Πράσινος: ‘stone as a colour’

125

λίθοι σμαράγδου (Exod 28.9); λίθους τῆς σμαράγδου (Exod 35.27; 36.13); σάπφειρος (Ezek 28.13); βηρύλλιον¹⁶² (Exod 28.20; 36.20); λίθοι σαρδίου (Exod 25.7; 35.9); ὄνυξ (Job 28.16); λίθους σοομ¹⁶³ (1 Chr 29.2). As for Gen 2.12, the Aramaic version is also indeterminate, as in the case of the Targum Onqelos and the Palestinian Targum: Onqelos and Ps. Jonathan refer to the stone as ‘precious stones of beryl’, while Neofiti I renders it as ‘precious stones and pearl’.¹⁶⁴

III.4.2.3 Synthesis The leading dictionaries consider πράσινος to be a polysemic adjectival lexeme, as it includes both the denotation of a colour used frequently in classical Greek (the colour of the leek) and that of a stone in Gen 2.12. There is currently no agreement regarding its identification, although in antiquity we have the testimony of Theophrastus, who refers to ἡ πρασῖτις as the name of a copper-coloured stone (Thphr. Lap. 37.4). The Septuagint translates the Hebrew lexeme ‫ שׁהם‬šōham (a stone of uncertain identity and colour, as found also in the Targum) with the novel expression λίθος ὁ πράσινος, which does not appear in other biblical texts.

 This may have been known to the LXX translators as a luminescent gemstone. Posidippus of Pella and Addaeus of Macedon do not comment on its colour, while Diodorus Siculus in the 1st century BC mentions it as a stone that comes from copper mines together with σμάραγδος; his contemporary Strabo states that σμάραγδος and βηρύλλιον are found together in gold mines (James A. Harrell, ‘Old Testament Gemstones: a Philological, Geological, and Archaeological Assessment of the Septuagint’, Bulletin for Biblical Research 21 [2, 2011], 141– 172, at 154– 155). Jacobus Naudé and Cinthia Miller-Naudé identify βηρύλλιον with beryl: ‘a silicate of the metals aluminium and beryllium. The different varieties of beryl include aquamarine, emerald and common beryl’ (‘The Septuagint translation as the key to the etymology and identification of precious stones in the Bible’, HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 76 (4, 2020), a6142. https://doi.org/ 10.4102/hts.v76i4.6142).  The translation λίθους σοομ clearly uses a loan word for ‫ שׁהם‬šōham (cf. Eth. sō m and sā wĕ m: August Dillman and Werner Munzinger, Lexicon Linguae Aethiopicae cum Indice Latino (Lipsiae [Leipzig]: T.O. Weigel, 1865) and does not provide any further information about this gemstone (Monique Alexandre, Le commencement du livre Genèse I-V: la version grecque de la Septante et sa réception, Christianisme Antique 3 [Paris: Beauchesne, 1988], p. 262– 264).  The Targum of Onqelos to the Torah: Genesis, Bernard Grossfeld, ed., in Martin McNamara et al., eds., The Aramaic Bible. The Targums, vol. 6 (Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1988), pp. 1– 40; Targum Pseudo-Jonathan: Genesis, Michael Maher, ed., in The Aramaic Bible, vol. 1B (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1992), p. 23; Targum Neofiti I: Genesis, Martin McNamara, ed., in The Aramaic Bible, vol. 1 A (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1992), pp. 57– 58. Cfr.: Targum du Pentateuque, Roger Le Déaut and Jacques Robert, eds., vol. 1 (Paris, Éditions Du Cerf, 1978).

126

III The Greek Bible Corpus

III.4.3 Semantic analysis of πράσινος As we have mentioned, Gen 2.12 describes the land of Havilah, whose wealth is depicted by the quality of the gold found there and the enumeration of precious stones. At first glance, πράσινος would seem to describe one of these, λίθος (from the cognitive domain of gemstones), in which it is embodied. However, it has an attributive position, as we can see here: Gen 2.12 τὸ δὲ χρυσίον τῆς γῆς ἐκείνης καλόν· καὶ ἐκεῖ ἐστιν ὁ ἄνθραξ καὶ ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος. And the gold of that land is good: the carbuncle and the prasinus stone are also there.

Such a position causes πράσινος, together with the noun λίθος, to form a single concept that distinguishes it from other types of stones.¹⁶⁵ The colour term, then, is not describing the colour of the stone, but identifying it, and so it appears in coordination with ἄνθραξ. Thus, ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος is a lexicalized expression that refers to a specific precious stone, one that was known to the LXX translator and perhaps also to his listeners/readers. Indeed, Gen 2.12 offers no further details about either ἄνθραξ¹⁶⁶ or ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος, which makes it plausible to think that these gemstones were commonly known and considered to be very precious. At the same time, the expression ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος, indicating a specific type of precious stone, is widely attested. Philo of Alexandria refers to it in the first book of Legum Allegoriarum Librii, in his allegorical exegesis of Genesis 2 (1.63, 66, 68, 79, 81, 84). His interpretation of Gen 2.12 identifies the two stones, respectively, with Judah as ‘the man who has wisdom’ (ἄνθραξ) and Issachar as ‘the man who exercises wisdom’ (ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος) (Leg. 1.68, 79, 81). Philo tries also to explain why the biblical text, when referring to the two gemstones, in one case uses the expression ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος, and in the other uses ἄνθραξ, rather than λίθος ἀνθράκινος. Although his explanation is not concerned with the type of stone indicated by the expression ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος, its opening question indirectly confirms that this expression is understood as a specific gemstone (Leg. 1.84). Much later, in the first chapter of the De XII Gemmis,¹⁶⁷ the term πράσινος would be used as a synonym of σμάραγδος (emerald). In the same passage, it is precisely

 In Ph. Leg. 1.81 we find an example of πράσινος in a predicative position, where it certainly denotes colour as it is embodied in λίθος (ὁ δὲ σάπφειρος πράσινος λίθος ἐστίν, ‘the lapis lazuli is a green stone’).  For a study of ἄνθραξ: Harrell, ‘Old Testament Gemstones’, 153 – 154.  Epiph. Gemm. 1.3: Λίθος σμάραγδος. Οὗτος καλεῖται καὶ πράσινος· ἔστι δὲ καὶ χλωρὸς τῷ εἴδει, καὶ διαφορά τις ἐν αὐτοῖς.

III.4 Πράσινος: ‘stone as a colour’

127

Gen 2.12 that Epiphanius mentions to strengthen the identification of λίθος σμάραγδος with ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος.¹⁶⁸ In three passages of the Testamentum Salomonis (Sol_A 10.5, 6, 7), although there is no direct reference to Gen 2.12, the expression ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος is used in reference to a precious stone with magical-esoteric properties that Solomon receives from a demon while building the temple of Jerusalem. Finally, the Vetus Latina uses the expression lapis prasinus, which seems to be a literal rendering of the Greek expression in the LXX,¹⁶⁹ and which can be understood as referring to a specific stone. We find this use of the expression lapis prasinus (Ambr. Parad. 1.3.21– 23) in later works as well; even Bede, in the first book of his Hexameron, when commenting on Gen 2.12, cites the Vetus and describes the colour of the stone: Est lapis prasinus uiridantis aspectus: unde et Graece a porro, quod apud eos prason dicitur, nomen accepit (PL 91.46C). Although the expression ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος refers to a type of stone, it does not cease to denote the tonality of this stone, since, as Brenner’s study has shown, the names of precious stones in antiquity were assigned according to the characteristics of each that are perceptible to the senses of sight (colour and brightness) or touch (roughness).¹⁷⁰ With the exception of Philo of Alexandria, who explains the hue of πράσινος with the colour term ὠχρός, ‘pale’, as typical of one who is weary or frightened (Ph. Leg. 1.84), the later identifications of ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος with the emerald also indicate a specific hue of green. In the Cyranides, a Greek lapidary written between the 1st and 2nd centuries AD that lists the magical and curative properties of plants, animals and stones, πράσινος and χλωρός are used as two synonymous colour adjectives to indicate the green of the emerald.¹⁷¹ Epiphanius, on the other hand, in the passage mentioned above, where πράσινος is given as a proper noun for the emerald, indicates only χλωρός as the colour of this gemstone. According to archaeological studies of gemstones and geology, the first emerald mines opened in the late 1st century BC, emeralds being rarely used in the earlier Hellenistic period.¹⁷² This completely excludes any possible identification of the stone in Gen 2.12 with the emerald, or likewise with a hue of πράσινος similar to emerald green. Nor does the mention by Theophrastus of a stone called ἡ πρασῖτις, whose col Epiph. Gemm. 1.3: ἐκεῖ (Gen 2.12) γάρ, φησὶν , ὁ ἄνθραξ καὶ ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος. Ἡ δὲ δύναμις, φασί, τοῦ λίθου, δηλαδὴ τοῦ σμαράγδου πρὸς τὸ ἐνοπτρίζεσθαι πρόσωπον.  In the Vulgate we find the term lapis onychinus. On the identification of lapis prasinus and lapis onychinus with the emerald: cfr. TLL X.2.1129, 67 ss., s.v. prasinus and TLL IX.653.33 ss., s.v. onychinus.  On this topic: Brenner, Colour Terms, p. 165 and Jart, ‘Precious Stones in the Revelation’, 156 – 161.  Cyranides 1.6: ζμάραγδος λίθος τίμιος πράσινος. […] δὲ ζμάραγδος, λίθος ἐστὶ χλωρὸς βαρύτιμος.  Harrell, ‘Old Testament Gemstones’, 152; James A. Harrell, ‘Archeological Geology of the World’s First Emerald Mine’, Geoscience Canada 31 (2, 2004), 69 – 76; Steven E. Sidebotham et al., ‘Preliminary Report on Archaeological Fieldwork at Sikait (Eastern Desert of Egypt) and Environs: 2002– 2003’, Sahara 15 (2004), 7– 30.

128

III The Greek Bible Corpus

our is like the greenish patina that forms on copper (Thphr. Lap. 37.4), insofar as this is an isolated instance, allow us to say with absolute certainty that there is a correspondence between ἡ πρασῖτις and ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος of Gen 2.12. It should be remembered, however, that the stone mentioned by Theophrastus could in fact have been known to the Greek translator of the book of Genesis. Indeed, that Theophrastus also knew of other blue-green stones (σμάραγδος)¹⁷³ that came from copper mines and which he believed to be of a different type than ἡ πρασῖτις seems to confirm this hypothesis. In any case, it is very important to try to understand the possible hue of green suggested by the term πράσινος in this pericope. Even though the etymology of the term πράσινος clearly refers to the colour of the leek, the context of the pericope must be considered together with the geological identities of the gemstones that were known at the time when the book of Genesis was translated into Greek. In this sense, the ancient lapidaries are the most authoritative sources and, in the case of Gen 2.12, Theophrastus’ work De Lapidibus would have been widely known. Thus, the hue of green indicated by the adjective πράσινος when referring to a stone would most likely be that of the greenish patina that forms on copper. It can be concluded that ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος is a lexicalized expression undoubtedly used to indicate a type of stone; indeed, this expression appears 3x in the Testamentum Salomonis (Sol_A 10.5, 6, 7) with the meaning ‘precious stone with a colour similar to that of the patina on copper, or of the emerald’. As for glosses, ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος cannot be identified with a specific stone –indeed, this would contradict our findings–, and so it seems that the best option is to follow the Vetus Latina (‘lapis prasinus’). We thus propose ‘the prasinus stone’.

III.4.4 Conclusions Although πράσινος is a colour adjective widely used in Greek literature, in Gen 2.12 it designates a precious stone, as some dictionaries have proposed. Our study, however, shows that πράσινος in Gen 2.12, for its attributive position, forms with λίθος a compound term with a single meaning. That is to say, what denotes the precious stone is not merely πράσινος, but rather the expression ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος. This appears lexicalized for the first time in the Septuagint, but is found in later literature as well (Sol_A 10.5, 6, 7). The presence of the adjective πράσινος, ‘leek green’, may explain the fact that in the 4th century Epiphanius would identify it with the emerald, an identification that has persisted to the present day. However, as Harrell has demonstrated, emeralds were rarely used in the Hellenistic period, the first mines for this stone being dug

 Plinius gives the same description of the different types of smaragdos, as a well as a list of different types of βηρύλλιον that he considers to be very similar to the emerald (HN. 37.20.76 – 79).

III.4 Πράσινος: ‘stone as a colour’

129

in the late 1st century BC. For this reason, we believe that ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος may refer to ἡ πρασῖτις, the stone mentioned by Theophrastus in De Lapidibus 37.4, whose colour is described as being like the greenish patina that forms on copper. Although we cannot be certain about this, we conclude that ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος denotes a ‘precious stone with a colour similar to that of the patina on copper, or of the emerald’. As a gloss, following the Vetus Latina, we propose ‘the prasinus stone’. The study of the adjectival lexeme πράσινος reveals once again that colour terms in the biblical corpus are always linked to specific entities, whether such terms are embodied in these entities or because they come to denote an entity that is in effect ‘clothed’ with colour. In the case of πράσινος, it is clear that the function of colour is not merely ornamental, but serves a definatory purpose.

III.4.5 Bibliography Alexandre, Monique, Le commencement du livre Genèse I-V: La version grecque de la Septante et sa réception, Christianisme Antique 3 (Paris: Beauchesne, 1988). Brenner, Athalya, Colour Terms in the Old Testament (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1982). Harrell, James A., ‘Archeological Geology of the World’s First Emerald Mine’, Geoscience Canada 31 (2, 2004), 69 – 76. Harrell, James A., ‘Old Testament Gemstones: a Philological, Geological, and Archaeological Assessment of the Septuagint’, Bulletin for Biblical Research 21 (2, 2011), 141 – 172. Jart, Una, ‘The Precious Stones in the Revelation of St. John xxi.18 – 21’, Studia Theologica 24 (1970), 150 – 181. Naudé, Jacobus A. and Cynthia L. Miller-Naudé, ‘The Septuagint translation as the key to the etymology and identification of precious stones in the Bible’, HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 76 (4, 2020), a6142. https://doi.org/ 10.4102/hts.v76i4.6142. Pastoureau, Michel, Green: the History of a Colour (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2014). Pociña Pérez, Andrés, ‘Prasinos, prasinus: historia de un adjetivo’, Symbolae Ludovico Mitxelena septuagenario oblatae (1, 1985), 119 – 124. Sidebotham, Steven E. et al., ‘Preliminary Report on Archaeological Fieldwork at Sikait (Eastern Desert of Egypt) and Environs: 2002 – 2003’, Sahara 15 (2004), 7 – 30

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

IV.1 Viridis and its polysemy: ‘the colour of grass’, ‘the colour of the almond, poplar and plane trees’, ‘greenness’ IV.1.1 Introduction Viridis, used frequently in Latin literature, is a colour adjective derived from uireo. ¹ Its varied chromatic spectrum was noted in antiquity: simplices isti rufus et uiridis colores singula quidem uocabula, multas autem species differentis habent, ‘two simple colours, red and green, each have only one name, but at the same time many different hues’ (Gell. 2.26.4). Of the colour terms used in the Vulgate for the colour green, uiridis is the second most frequent (14x), after uireo (20x). It appears in both the Old and New Testaments: – 10x in the Old Testament: Gen 30.37 (2x); Ps 36.2 VulgHeb (Ps 37.2 MT); Ecclus (Sir) 14.18; 40.22; 43.23 (Sir 43.21); Jer 17.8; Ezek 17.24; 20.47; 2 Macc 10.7. – 4x in the New Testament: Mark 6.39; Luke 23.31; Rev 8.7; 9.4. As with the Hebrew lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq and the Greek χλωρός, and considering the great number of biblical references in which uiridis appears, before examining its specific usage more closely, we will first present the primary resources available for approximating the worldview of the listener/reader in biblical times (encyclopaedic knowledge), in this case of Latin. These are the leading dictionaries of Latin and the early versions of the Bible.

IV.1.2 Encyclopaedic knowledge IV.1.2.1 Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries The leading dictionaries are not unanimous with regard to the meaning of uiridis. OLD and Lewis and Short consider it a polysemic term; indeed, they each identify three different hues for uiridis. The OLD mentions ‘green’, ‘yellowish green’ and ‘greyish green’;² while Lewis and Short identifies ‘green’, ‘bluish green’ and ‘reddish green’.³ The Gaffiot, on the other hand, records a single meaning of ‘green’, without specifying any other chromatic variation.⁴

   

DELL, s.v. vireo; OLD, s.v. viridis; Lewis and Short, s.v. viridis; Gaffiot, s.v. viridis. OLD, s.v. viridis. Lewis and Short, s.v. viridis. Gaffiot, s.v. viridis.

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-006

134

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

Given this disparity, we will examine the meaning of uiridis according to the entity described and the cognitive domain in which it is embodied:⁵ a) Viridis is used to describe entities from the cognitive domain of animals, such as lizards, frogs or snakes (uiridis […] lacertos, Verg. B. 2.9; uirides […] ranas, Ou. Met. 15.375; uiridis […] colubras, Hor. C. 1.17.8). b) Viridis is also embodied in emerald (uirides […] smaragdos, Tibul. 2.4.27), which belongs to the cognitive domain of gemstones.⁶ For St. Isidore of Seville (Etym. 16.7.1), emerald was the most valuable of the green gemstones (omnium gemmarum uirentium smaragdus principatum habet, ‘of all the green gemstones, emerald is preeminent’), as its verdure is purer than any other (nullis enim gemmis […] maior huic austeritas est, ‘no other gem […] possesses greater purity’), surpassing in tonality even that of fresh grass (nam herbas uirentes frondesque exsuperat, ‘greater than the green and leafy grasses’). According to Isidore, it was this brilliant greenness which gave rise to the term smaragdus (smaragdus a nimia uiriditate uocatus, ‘it is called smaragdus for its extreme greenness’). Pliny the Elder compares the sea to emerald precisely to express its green colouring (smaragdi uirens mare, ‘sea green of the emerald’, HN. 37.80.6). While it is true that it may include bluish hues as well, this is only, says Lucretius, from the effect of sunlight ([sc. color] lumine […] mutatur […] uideatur / inter caeruleum uiridis miscere zmaragdos, ‘[sc. the colour] changes with the light […] seeming to mix together emerald green with blue’, Lucr. 2.805).⁷ Brightness, on the other hand, is perceived in terms that denote radiance or clarity, as in the case of the participle lucens and the adjective clarus (claris lucente smaragdi, ‘radiant for its light-coloured emeralds’, Ou. Met. 2.24), the nouns lux (grandes uiridi cum luce zmaragdi auro includuntur, ‘large emeralds with their green light set in gold’, Lucr. 4.1126) and nitor (nitor smaragdi, ‘brightness of the emerald’, Phaedr. Fab. 3.18.7), and the prefix per- (quia peruiride est, smaragdinum […] appellatur, ‘because it is very bright green, it is called […] emerald’, Cels. 5.19.4).⁸

 In the Lewis and Short dictionary, s.v. viridis, we find the colour ‘reddish green’, exemplified in a fragment from Pliny the Elder (HN. 15.127.7): ([sc. laurus Delphicus] maximis bacis atque e uiridi rubentibus, ‘[sc. Delphic laurel] with very large berries and of a red colour tending toward green’. We disagree with this interpretation, however, as the red colouring is expressed by the participle rubentibus without interfering semantically with the adjective uiridis, which means ‘green’. This would explain the absence of a reddish tonality in the definitions of uiriditas, uiror, uireo and uiresco, all of which are derived from uiridis.  Here uiridis possesses a similar value to that of the adjective smaragdinus (Cels. 5.19.4).  This reference appears in Lewis and Short, s.v. uiridis, as an example of the tonality ‘green’.  The prefix per- has here an intensifying value (José A. Beltrán, Introducción a la morfología latina [Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza, 1999] p. 32), as in the adjectives perbreuis (‘very brief’), perfacilis (‘very simple’), perfrigidus (‘very cold’) and peramplus (‘of very large proportions’), the verbs perdoleo (‘to feel a deep pain’), perfruor (‘to enjoy intensely’), perdoceo (‘to give minute instruction’) and percrucio (‘to torment ruthlessly’), and the adverbs perbene (‘very well’), peramice (‘in a very friendly way’), perdiu (‘for a very long time’) and perdiligenter (‘with great exactitude’).

IV.1 Viridis and its polysemy

c)

135

Viridis appears frequently in the cognitive domain of plants, especially grass (uiridis herba, Colum. 11.2.48; herba […] uiridi, Verg. B. 6.59; uirides […] herbas, Ou. Met. 3.86). Indeed, green is today defined as the characteristic colour of grass.⁹ In the cognitive domain of plants, uiridis is used in a general sense to describe entities characterized by their green colour, although their hues may differ in luminosity and in saturation. Thus, uiridis may denote what today we refer to as ‘light green’, ‘dark green’ or ‘faded green’:¹⁰ – ‘Light green’ is the case of the poplar (uirides, Stat. Silu. 1.2.124) and the willow (salix…uiridis, Seru. Georg. 2.13.3), as these are trees (i. e. plants) to which the colour white is usually applied. Thus, for the poplar, we find alba (populea […] albentia, Stat. Silu. 3.1.185), glauca (populus […] glauca, Verg. G. 2.13), candida (candida populus, Verg. B. 9.41) and cana (cana […] populo, Sen. Herc.Oet. 578 and 789); and for the willow, alba (salix […] alba, Seru. Georg. 2.13.3), glauca (glauca […] salicta, Verg. G. 2.13) and cana (cana salix, Lucan. 4.131).¹¹ – ‘Dark green’ refers to the oak (uiridem […] ex ilice, Verg. Aen. 5.129; ilicibus […] uirentem, Verg. G. 3.146), the cypress (uirente […] trunco [sc. cupressus], Sen. Oed. 533) and the myrtle (uiridi myrto, Ou. Fast. 4.139), as these are trees to which black is often applied. For the cypress, we find atra (atra […] cupresso, Verg. Aen. 3.64), and for the oak atra (ilicis atrum, Ou. Epist. 12.67) and nigra (ilice […] nigra, Verg. B. 6.54).¹² − ‘Faded green’ appears in trees whose greenness is nuanced by pallidus or pallens,¹³ indicators of low chromatic intensity when these accompany colour terms, in this case ‘green’ (olive trees: uiridi […] oliua, Verg. Aen. 5.494; pallenti […] oliua, Verg. B. 5.16; and ivy: hedera uirenti, Hor. C. 1.25.17; hedera […] pallente, Verg. B. 3.39).¹⁴

 DLE, s.v. verde: ‘dicho de un color: semejante al de la hierba fresca’ (‘said of a colour: similar to that of fresh grass’); available at: http://dle.rae.es/?id=bbs8NTC; 10/06/2017; Diccionario Akal del color, p. 931, s.v. verde: ‘color semejante al característico de las hojas de hierba’ (‘colour similar to the characteristic of leaves of grass’); Cambridge Dictionary, s.v. green: ‘of the colour of grass’; available at: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/es/diccionario/ingles/green; 10/06/2017.  ‘Faded’ can be understood in the sense that the colour has undergone an attenuation of luminosity or a weakening of saturation (Diccionario Akal del color, p. 79, s.v. apagado). Synonyms might include ‘subdued’, ‘dull’, ‘attenuated’, ‘death-like’, etc.  In these cases, uiridis is semantically approximate to glaucus (‘light green’, Plin. HN. 25.106.3) and hederaceus (‘ivy green’, Plin. HN. 16.153.4).  In these cases, uiridis denotes a tonality similar to that expressed by peruiridis (‘dark green’, Plin. HN. 6.87.2), myrteus (‘myrtle-green’, Ou. AA. 3.181; Colum. 12.38.1) and porraceus (‘leek-green’, Plin. HN. 37.160.7, 37.165.2 and 37.173.6).  Vid. infra, p. 189.  André, Étude sur les termes de couleur, p. 144: ‘sens de “décoloré”’.

136

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

For their close connection with plants, green may also refer to grottoes (uiridis spelunca, Prop. 3.3.27; uiridi […] antro, Verg. B. 1.75), shadows (uiridi […] umbra, Verg. B. 9.20; uiridem […] umbram, Stat. Theb. 9.592; uiridante […] umbra, Sil. Ital. 15.18) and riverbanks (uiridis […] ripas, Verg. B. 7.12). d) Viridis is also used to describe the sun when it rises (uiridis gelidis et Phoebus ab undis enatat, ‘greenish Phoebus arises from the cold waters’, Manil. 2.941), or sets (uiridem […] mundum, ‘green […] firmament’, App.Verg.Lydia 39).¹⁵ Its meaning is semantically approximate to galbinus (‘yellowish green’, Juu. 2.97; Mart. 3.82.5; Petron. Satyr. 67.4), and so it is embodied in crops (uiridis […] aristas, Juu. 14.147), oil (oleum uiride, Cat. Agr. 65.1), the juice or sap of plants (uiridior […] succus [sc. fici], Pall. Agr. 4.10.23), and cheese whey (caseus […] uiridis succum retinet, Colum. 7.8.1). e) Viridis describes the colour of the sea (uirides […] aquae, Ou. AA. 2.92).¹⁶ f) Viridis is applied to the pallor of a particular individual as the result of anger – cognitive domain of emotion– (uiden tu ille oculos uirere? ut uiridis exoritur colos / ex temporibus […] / […] uide, ‘Don’t you see how his eyes have a greenish colour? Behold […] how a green colour is arising on his temples […]’, Plaut. Men. 828 – 829).¹⁷ g) Viridis is used when the entity described is the bark of a tree trunk (uiridissima parte corticis, ‘the greenest part of the bark’, Cels. 4.22.3; si uero trunci pars senecta solis adflatu peraruit […] conueniet expurgare quicquid emortuum est, deinde falce eradi uiuo tenus, ut a uiridi cortice ducat cicatricem, ‘but if the old part of the trunk is completely dried from the hot breath of the sun […] the dead part should be cleaned away with the mattock, and then scraped down to the living part with the pruning knife, so that the green bark forms a callus’, Colum. 4.24.5). Viridis, then, expresses a hue which is so indeterminate that the authors who employed it felt the need to nuance its tonality by means of: – adjectives: uiridi […] aurei (‘golden green’, Isid. Etym. 16.7.16); uiridi […] suaui (‘soft green’, Isid. Etym. 17.7.66);

 There are usually only two colours seen in the sky: blue (during the day) and red (when the sun rises or sets). It is logical that between these two hues green also appears, as it is an intermediate shade between red and blue, although visibly less frequent, as has been shown in a study on innovation and improvement in teaching standards: Alfredo L. Aina (dir), Imágenes de fenómenos ópticos cotidianos como apoyo de la docencia en óptica. Proyecto de innovación y mejora de la calidad docente 2008 nº 35 UCM, s.v. cielo verde; available at: http://pendientedemigracion.ucm.es/info/gioq/ fenopt/imagenes/cieloverde/index.htm; 12/10/2019. The fact that sunlight has a yellow tonality leads us to think that green applied to this entity produces a yellowish green colour.  Viridis is in these cases similar to caeruleus (Enn. Ann. 32.15 Traglia), caerulus (Lucr. 5.1374), cumatilis (Non. 584.10), thalassinus (Lucr. 4.1127; Ou. AA. 3.177), uitreus (Stat. Silu. 1.5.16) and callainus (Mart. 14.140.2; Plin. HN. 37.110.2 and 37.111.8).  Vid. infra, pp. 195 – 196.

IV.1 Viridis and its polysemy

– –

137

nouns: uiridem ferrugine (‘rust-green’, Ou. Met. 13.960); uiridis […] pallor (‘pale green’, App.Verg.Cir. 225)¹⁸, etc.; prefixes: peruiride (‘dark green’, Plin. HN. 6.87.2; ‘very bright green’, Cels. 5.19.4), praeuiridis (‘intense green’, Front. Aq. 7.7) and subuiride (‘dull green’, Cels. 5.28.13b).

The meanings of uiridis branch into areas other than the chromatic, as the dictionaries clearly show. Lewis and Short and the Gaffiot list the meanings ‘young’, ‘fresh’ and ‘vigorous’;¹⁹ while OLD adds to these the values of ‘immature’, ‘recent’, ‘tender’, ‘healthy’ and ‘serene’.²⁰ Carmen Arias Abellán denominates the linguistic process by which uiridis loses its chromatism in certain contexts as a ‘transitory condition’.²¹ In some cases, this hypothesis is certainly true; for example, when uiridis describes entities belonging to the cognitive domain of people, as it reinforces the idea of ‘youth’ (uiridi […] iuuenta, Verg. Aen. 5.295),²² together with those of ‘beauty’ and ‘full of strength’ (uiridem aetatem cum rubore corporis, Colum. 1. Praef. 12.8; uiridis senectus, Sen. Ep. 66.1; Tac. Agr. 29; Plin. Ep. 7.24.1), or when it is applied to clay (uiridis limus, ²³ ‘underfired clay’, Pers. 3.22) or to a time of prosperity and splendour (uiridis […] annus, ‘flourishing […] year’, Calp. B. 5.21). However, it is not clear that, when uiridis describes entities from the cognitive domain of plants, it ceases to denote colour when it expresses a state. According to Carmen Arias Abellán, the presence of specific lexemes determines the expression of state. In the plant context, therefore, the state of ‘freshness’ ap-

 Vid., infra, pp. 195 – 196.  Lewis and Short, s.v. viridis; Gaffiot, s.v. viridis.  OLD, s.v. viridis.  Carmen Arias Abellán, ‘La sustantivación del adjetivo en latín’, Estudios humanísticos. Filología 8 (1986), 79 – 86, at 80 – 1; and Estructura semántica de los adjetivos de color, pp. 124– 130.  Contrasted with canus, ‘grey-haired’, canities, ‘greyness’: donec uirenti canities abest morosa (‘while your vigour is not overcome by hoary greyness’, Hor. C. 1.9.17). The link between ‘green/ youth’ and the idea of vigour, in opposition to the binomial ‘white/age’, is also noted by Lydia Pelletier-Michaud, Couleurs, lumière et contrastes chez les lyriques grecs et les élégiaques latins (Québec: Universitè Laval, 2007), p. 156; available at: https://corpus.ulaval.ca › jspui › bitstream; 12/10/2019.  The Latin noun limus has two meanings: ‘mud’ and ‘clay’. Viridis would denote colour if limus were interpreted as ‘mud’, as the mud which forms on the ground when it rains usually has a greenish hue. However, in Persius 3.22, limus refers to clay, specifically to fresh clay (uiridis), as it is employed to describe a terracotta jug (fidelia) that has not been sufficiently baked (non cocta). We feel that here uiridis loses its chromatic value and indicates state exclusively: ‘uiridis, dicono i commentatori, è uguale a recens’ (Persius Flaccus, Saturae, Nino Scivoletto, ed. [Florence: La Nuova Italia, 1964] p. 20); uiridi non cocta fidelia limo: ‘fidelia non cocta cum limus uiridis esset’. Viridi: non ad colorem referendum ‘uiridi limo’, id est cruda, non cocta. Schol. nam uiride etiam id dicitur, quod recens est atque adhuc non arefactum (Persius Flaccus, Saturae: Accedunt Varia de Persio Iudicia Saec. XVI – XX / Commentario atque Indice Rerum Notabilium, Helgus Nikitinski, ed. [Munich-Leipzig: K. G. Saur, 2002], p. 140).

138

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

pears when uiridis is shown in opposition to adjectives such as aridus or siccus,²⁴ or to verbal syntagmas which allude to these meanings.²⁵ A state of ‘immaturity’ is indicated when it is presented in relation to maturus, immaturus ²⁶ or even niger (Cat. Agr. 7.4), while ‘tenderness’ is meant when it is used with tener or mollis. ²⁷ It should be noted that the prose texts she has selected –i. e. agricultural treatises and part of Pliny’s encyclopaedia– are intended to depict reality in order to improve agricultural production. As such, they describe that which is observable through the senses; specifically, that plants are uirides. If we consider this encyclopaedic knowledge, it is clear that every farmer knows the state (fresh, dry, mature or immature) of his crops by their colour. Indeed, this is a primary indicator of their state. Thus, green grass presents us not only with its colour but its freshness and vigour, just as a banana which is green reveals its state of unripeness. A similar example appears in Columella: (uiridi […] pabulo uti postea arido, ‘like grass […] green, but later dry’, Colum. 5.12.1). Indeed, if there is some change in the state of plants (such as maturing or drying), a chromatic change is also perceived. The green hue disappears and is replaced by yellow, black or a colour specific to the plant in question. One of the examples proposed by Carmen Arias Abellán is especially relevant here, and this is the fact that green reveals the immature, unripe state of the olive and black its maturity: oleas orchites, posias; eae optime conduntur uel uirides in muria uel in lentisco contusae, uel orchites ubi nigrae erunt et siccae, sale confriato dies V. Orcite and posea olives; these keep very well in brine when green, and in mastic oil when bruised; the orcites, when black and dried, in crushed salt for five days. (Cat. Agr. 7.4.4)

The colour green, then, is an indicator of another, latent, reality; i. e. a state of freshness, vigour, tenderness²⁸ or immaturity. This empirically unbreakable link is recorded by authors such as Varro (uiride est id quod habet uires, ‘green is all that which has strength’)²⁹ and later St. Isidore of Seville, in whose own definition of the term

 One example of this is found in Colum. 7.4.2: aut siccam uel uiridem, ‘either dry or green’.  This is the case of arescere ‘to dry up’ (Plin. HN. 13.140.3), inarescere ‘to parch’ (Colum. 2.13.1) and uiescere ‘to wither’ (Colum. 12.15.5).  in uiridi et adhuc stirpe inmatura (‘in a green plant which is still immature’, Colum. 4.7.1). Cf. Cat. Agr. 17.1; Colum. 12.17.1 and 44.4.  bracchia [sc. uitis] tenera et uiridia seruato, ‘conserves the tender, green branches [sc. of the grapevine]’ (Colum. 4.24.7); uiridemque frondem uel aliud molle pabulum, ‘and green leaves or other tender forage’ (Colum. 6.14.2).  As can be observed in the texts in note 27, the state of the plant is indicated not only by uiridis but by the adjectives tener, ‘tender’, and mollis, ‘soft’.  The quote from Varro appears in Michel Pastoureau’s book, Green: p. 21. We also find it in an article by Elettra Carletti, ‘Il colore del Paradiso’, La rassegna d’Ischia 3 (2016), 51– 7, at 52, reinforcing the idea that in Latin ‘il colore verde, viridis […] si ricollega a un’amplia classe semantica che esprime i concetti di vita, crescita, vigore’. This association of uiridis with tenderness can also be observed in Seneca’s study of the colour, in which he judges qualities such as ‘tender’ and ‘delicate’ to be inher-

IV.1 Viridis and its polysemy

139

the idea of state is intrinsic (uiridis: ui et suco plenus, ‘green: full of strength and sap’ (Etym. 10.277.u). Thus, when uiridis appears in the cognitive domain of plants, it denotes a state of freshness, moistness and lushness that is manifested through colour. In the context of liquids, primarily oil (oleum) and sometimes the juice (succus) of plants or the whey (succus) of cheese, Carmen Arias Abellán holds that the state of ‘non-alteration’ or ‘good’ is determined by the presence of adjectives like optimus (‘optimal’), egregious (‘magnificent’) or recens (‘recent’), or the counterposing of terms such as malus (‘bad’) or corruptus (‘rotten’). However, if again we turn to the encyclopaedic knowledge for this term, we gain additional relevant information. The Romans made three different types of oil. The most notable of these was oleum uiride, which was made from newly ripe olives harvested in December. It was golden yellow in colour, and of such high quality that its use was the reserve of the very highest social classes. Viride would at first seem to refer to the colour of this type of oil, as distinct from that made from nigrae olives, called cibarium or maturum, or from albae olives, called aestivum. ³⁰ However, the texts selected by Carmen Arias Abellán do not always refer to oleum uiride as a variety itself; uiride is instead used to describe the characteristics of this oil,³¹ as in the case of sap or cheese whey. In all three instances, uiride connotes a state indicated by colour, as occurs in the plant context. Colour here, then, is an indicator of state, as in the following examples: Posi[t]ae tamen oleum saporis egregii, dum uiride est, intra annum corrumpitur. Although the oil of the posiae olive has an exquisite flavour when green, it spoils in less than a year (Colum. 5.8.4). is [sc. caseus] porro si tenui liquore conficitur, quam celerrime uendendus est, dum adhuc uiridis succum retinet, si pingui et opimo, longiorem patitur custodiam. Cheese, in turn, if made with lean milk, must be sold as quickly as possible, while it is still yellowish green and retains its whey; if made with high-quality fatty milk, it can be kept for longer periods (Colum. 7.8.1). calidis locis fici planta radicata Nouembri mense, temperatis Februario, frigidis melius Martio uel Aprili ponenda est: si taleam uel cacumen ponas, ultimo Aprili, cum ei se uiridior succus infuderit.

ent in the colour green. It is precisely this quality of softness that the philosopher believed to be restful to the eyes of the elderly (confusis oculis prosunt uirentia, ‘the colour green is good for tired eyes’, De Ira 3.9.2).  Juan Eslava Galán, ‘Entre olivos’ in José María Sillero Ferna´ndez de Can˜ ete et al. (eds.), I Congreso de la cultura del olivo (Jaén: Instituto de Estudios Giennenses, 2007), pp. 31– 39, at 34; Jean-Pierre Brun, ‘Los usos antiguos de los productos de la viña y el olivo y sus implicaciones arqueológicas’, Anales de Prehistoria y Arqueología, 27– 28 (2011– 2012), 19 – 35, at 26.  Oleum uiridius et melius (‘greener and better oil’, Cat. Agr. 3.3); [o]leum uiridius et bonum (‘good and greener oil’, Cat. Agr. 3.4); oleum […] dum uiride est, optimum (‘oil […] while green, of better quality’, Pall. Agr. 3.18.4); in optimo uiridi [sc. oleo] (‘in green [sc. oil] of better quality’, Pall. Agr. 12.18). In another text, however, uiride oleum does seem to refer to a type of oil: uiride oleum […] optimum (‘green oil […] of the best quality’, Colum. 11.2.83).

140

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

In warm places, a fig sapling with roots should be planted in the month of November; in more temperate places, in February; in cold places, March or April; if you plant a cutting or a spray, this should be at the end of April, when the sap that flows from it is more yellow-green (Pall. Agr. 4.10.23).

To conclude, in both the cognitive domains of plants and liquids uiridis denotes a colour, and with it the state of freshness, vigour or immaturity of the entity described.

IV.1.2.2 Early versions of the Bible Viridis is an adjectival lexeme used in the Vulgate to translate a number of Hebrew and Greek terms. From the Hebrew, it is the translation of the colour lexeme ‫ירק‬ yereq, ‘green’ (Ps 37.2 [36.2 VulgHeb]), as well as adjectival lexemes that express state, such as ‫ לח‬laḥ, ‘moist’ (Ezek 17.24; 21.3) and ‫ רענן‬raʿǎnān, ‘fresh’ (Jer 17.8). From the LXX and the New Testament, uiridis is the translation of the nominal lexeme χλόη, ‘grass shoot’ (Sir 40.22; 43.21 [Ecclus 43.23]),³² with its underlying connotation of a green hue, as this is the colouring of grass.³³ It is likewise used for the colour adjective χλωρός, ‘green’ (Gen 30.37ab;³⁴ Mark 6.39; Rev 8.7), for its nominal form χλωρόν, ‘greenness’ (Rev 9.4) and the adjectival state lexemes δασύς, ‘leafy’ (Sir 14.18), ὡραῖος, ‘seasonal’ or ‘mature/ripe’ (2 Macc 10.7) and ὑγρός, ‘humid’ (Luke 23.31). From what has just been said, it is little wonder that uiridis is used both to translate terms that denote the colour green and those which express state, as in the plant context there is an empirically inseparable link between colour and state. At the same time, the fact that uiridis is used in place of other state adjectives, such as frondosus, ‘leafy’, which appear in the Vulgate,³⁵ leads us to think that this

 As we explain in more detail in pp. 155 – 156, Jerome did not translate the book of Sirach from the Hebrew version as he doubted its canonicity. The exegete instead adapted the translation in the Vetus Latina of the GII, the long Greek text. Of the three pericopes studied, only Sir 43.21 is preserved in the Hebrew version, specifically in MS B (the most extensive manuscript, found in the synagogue of Cairo and dating from the 12th century). It is interesting to note that MS B reads Sir 43.21 as ‫צמחים שדה‬, ‘sprouts of the field’ (Víctor Morla, Los manuscritos hebreos de Ben Sira: traducción y notas [Estella: Verbo Divino, 2012], p. 245; Maria Carmela Palmisano, Siracide: Introduzione, traduzione e commento, Nuova Versione della Bibbia dai Testi Antichi 34 [Cinisello Balsamo, Milano: San Paolo, 2016], p. 404).  DELL, p. 1218, s.v. viridis, adds the notion of colour (‘light green’) to the definition of the term: ‘verdure naissante, pousse nouvelle d’un vert clair’.  Although Jerome translated the books of the OT from the Hebrew, his work was not uniform. One clear example is Gen 30.37, where the translation does not correspond to the Hebrew version, but instead to the Greek. It is there that we find the final colophon, which is absent from the Hebrew text. The translation of this pericope in the Vetus Latina also differs from that of the Vulgate: Vetus Latina Database: Gen 30.37.  Deut 12.2; 1 Kgs 14.23; 2 Kgs 16.4; 2 Chr 28.4; Ps 117.27 VulgHeb; Isa 57.5; Jer 2.20; 3.6, 13; Ezek 6.13; 31.14; Hos 10.1.

IV.1 Viridis and its polysemy

141

reflects an attempt to express the semantic duality of the term. The fragments in which uiridis and frondosus coexist (hic uiridem Aeneas frondenti ex ilice metam / constituit […] pater, ‘here Father Aeneas set […] a green marker taken from a leafy oak’, Verg. Aen. 5.129 – 130) add weight to this conjecture.

IV.1.2.3 Synthesis Although the principal dictionaries do not provide a unanimous criteria regarding the polysemic character of uiridis and its chromatic spectrum, after our study of the entities in which uiridis is embodied and their cognitive domains, we can conclude that uiridis is a polysemic term that denotes various hues of green according to the entity described (‘the colour of emerald’, ‘the colour of plants’, ‘the colour of the sea’, etc). In addition to this, when uiridis is embodied in the cognitive domains of plants and liquids, it denotes by its hue the state of these entities. This explains why in the Vulgate uiridis is used not only to translate terms that in Hebrew and Greek denote green, such as ‫ ירק‬yereq (Ps 37.2 [36.2 VulgHeb]) and χλωρός (Gen 30.37ab; Mark 6.39; Rev 8.7), but also terms that specifically indicate the moist, leafy or lush state of the entity described, such as: ‫ לח‬laḥ, ‘moist’ (Ezek 17.24; 21.3); ‫ רענן‬raʿǎnān, ‘fresh’ (Jer 17.8); δασύς, ‘leafy’ (Sir 14.18); ὡραῖος, ‘seasonal’, ‘mature/ripe’ (2 Macc 10.7); and ὑγρός, ‘humid’ (Luke 23.31).

IV.1.3 Semantic analysis of uiridis When we analyze one by one the pericopes in the Vulgate in which uiridis appears, we find that in the majority of cases (12x) it accompanies a nominal lexeme with two types of syntactic construction: a) Viridis agrees with the noun in gender, number and case, as in: Gen 30.37 tollens ergo Iacob uirgas populeas uirides et amigdalinas et ex platanis ex parte decorticauit eas detractisque corticibus in his quae spoliata fuerant candor apparuit illa uero quae integra erant uiridia permanserunt atque in hunc modum color effectus est uarius. And Jacob took green rods of poplar, almond plane trees, and peeled part of these; and when the bark was stripped off, there appeared a radiant whiteness in the parts that had been peeled: but the untouched parts remained green: and in this way the colour was made diverse.

2 Macc 10.7 propter quod tyrsos et ramos uirides et palmas praeferebant ei qui prosperavit mundari locum suum

142

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

So they carried stalks, green branches and palms, for him that caused their place to be purified.

Ps 36.2 VulgHeb (37.2 MT) quoniam sicut herba uelociter conterentur et sicut holus uiride arescent ³⁶ As, like the grass, they will soon dry up, and like the green herbs wither.

Ecclus (Sir) 14.18 omnis caro sicut faenum ueterescit et sicut folium fructificans in arbore uiridi All flesh ages, like the hay and like the leaf that grows on a green tree.³⁷

Jer 17.8 et erit quasi lignum quod transplantatur super aquas quod ad humorem mittit radices suas et non timebit cum uenerit aestus et erit folium eius uiride et in tempore siccitatis non erit sollicitum nec aliquando desinet facere fructum. And he will be like a tree that is planted by the waters, that spreads its roots towards the moisture: and will not fear when the heat comes. And its leaf will be green, and in time of drought will not be afflicted, nor will it ever cease to bear fruit.

Ezek 17.24 et scient omnia ligna regiones quia ego Dominus humiliaui lignum sublime et exaltaui lignum humile et siccaui lignum uiride et frondere feci lignum aridum ego Dominus locutus sum et feci And all the trees of the country will know that I, the Lord, have brought down the high tree, and exalted the low tree; I dried up the green tree and made the dry tree flourish. I, the Lord, have spoken and have done this.

Ezek Vulg. 20.47 (21.3 MT) et dices saltui meridiano audi uerbum Domini haec dicit Dominus Deus ecce ego succendam in te ignem et conburam in te omne lignum uiride et omne lignum aridum non extinguetur flamma succensionis et conburetur in ea omnis facies ab austro usque ad aquilonem And you will say to the forest of midday: Hear the word of the Lord: this is what the Lord God says: Behold, I will kindle a fire in you and I will burn in you all green wood and all dry wood: the flame of this fire will not be put out: and every face will be burned in it, from the north to the south.

 This text is from the Psalterium iuxta Hebreos, in which the expression sicut holus uiride is a translation of the Hebrew ‫ וכירק דשׁא‬wkǝyereq deše’ (Ps 37.2). The Psalterium Gallicanum, translated from the Greek, does not include the adjective for ‘green’. Instead, we find λάχανα χλόης from LXX (Ps 36.2) translated as holera herbarum (quoniam tamquam faenum velociter arescent et quemadmodum holera herbarum cito decident).  This verse is not preserved in the Vetus Latina (Vetus Latina Database: Ecclus 14.18).

IV.1 Viridis and its polysemy

143

Mark 6.39 et praecepit illis ut accumbere facerent omnes secundum contubernia super uiride faenum And he commanded them all to lie down by sections upon the green grass.

Luke 23.31 quia si in uiridi ligno haec faciunt in arido quid fiet For if in the green wood they do this, what is it that will be done in the dry?

Rev 8.7 et primus [angelus] tuba cecinit et facta est grando et ignis mixta in sanguine et missum est in terram et tertia pars terrae conbusta est et tertia pars arborum conbusta est et omne faenum uiride conbustum est And the first [angel] sounded the trumpet: and this caused hail and fire, mingled with blood, to fall upon the earth. And a third part of the earth was burnt up: and a third part of the trees was burnt up: and all green grass was burnt up.

b) Viridis is completed by a nominal lexeme in the genitive: Ecclus (Sir) 40.22 gratiam et speciem desiderabit oculus tuus et super hoc uiride sationis Your eye desires kindness and beauty, but more than these, the green sown fields.

In this pericope, uiridis appears in neuter form with a nominal function, for which at first glance it should be excluded from this section. However, uiridis stationis presents a peculiar syntactic structure: a noun followed by another in the genitive which acts as the nucleus of the syntagma.³⁸ This structure, as will be seen in our study of uiror,³⁹ is used to indicate that the nominal lexeme denotes colour. Thus, uiridis stationis can be compared with uiridis sationes, the form found in the ACΛΦc codices. The Vetus Latina has a similar reading: uerides sationes. ⁴⁰ Viridis, therefore, performs the adjectival function of which it is characteristic when it agrees with a noun and when it appears in the noun + noun in the genitive structure.

 Marcelo Martínez Pastor, ‘Adjetivo y genitivo adnominal en latín’, Durius 2 (4, 1974), 221– 257, at 232 and 234.  Vid. infra, p. 165.  Vetus Latina Database: Ecclus 40.22.

144

c)

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

Viridis without a nominal lexeme: This does not occur, however, in Ecclus 43.23 (Sir 43.21) and Rev 9.4. In these pericopes, uiridis is part of an enumeration of clauses juxtaposed as the direct objects of a verb or as the direct objects of principal verbs. Here uiridis has a nominal function: Ecclus 43.23 (Sir 43.21) deuorabit montes et exuret desertum et extinguet uiridem sicut ignem ⁴¹ It will devour the mountains, burn the wilderness and dry up all greenness, as with fire.

Rev 9.4 et praeceptum est illis ne laederent faenum terrae neque omne uiride neque omnem arborem nisi tantum homines qui non habent signum Dei in frontibus And they were commanded not to hurt the grass of the earth, nor any greenness nor any tree: but only the men who do not have the sign of God on their foreheads.

It can thus be concluded that, while uiridis is used as an adjective most of the time in the Vulgate, it also appears as a noun. The semantic analysis, then, is carried out according to these different functions. As on other occasions, this analysis sheds light on the term’s different syntactic uses:

IV.1.3.1 Viridis I (adjectival function) The adjectival lexeme uiridis, as occurs with χλωρός, is used in books of the biblical corpus that present a variety of literary forms and specific contexts. Thus, Gen 30.37 belongs to one of the patriarchal narratives; i. e. the story of Jacob. As the reader will remember,⁴² this pericope tells of the moment when the patriarch begins to strip the bark from some rods that he will later place at the trough where the goats will drink and breed (Gen 30.39 – 41). The second book of Maccabees is a historical book, despite the fact that the author is perhaps more concerned with creating an emotional reaction in the reader than with recounting a historical truth. The pericope under study here (2 Macc 10.7) is found in the story of the purification of the temple by Judah Maccabee and his men, on their not being able to celebrate the Feast of the Tabernacles.⁴³

   NJ:

This coincides, as would be expected, with the Vetus Latina (Vetus Latina Database: Ecclus 43.23). Vid. supra, p. 88. Neil J. McEleney, ‘1– 2 Maccabees’ in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 461– 486, at pp. 463 and 484.

IV.1 Viridis and its polysemy

145

Ps 36.2 VulgHeb (37.2 MT), meanwhile, is an acrostic poem with roots in the wisdom tradition, for which it should be interpreted as an ‘instructional poem’ that constitutes ‘a kind of anthology of wisdom sayings’.⁴⁴ The verse that concerns us here forms a unit with the one preceding it and is centred on the transitory character of the wicked, who are portrayed as withering quickly like the grass.⁴⁵ As for the book of Sirach, this is examined in detail in our study of uiriditas, and so we will refer the reader to those pages.⁴⁶ Here, we will only situate Ecclus (Sir) 14.18 and Ecclus (Sir) 40.22 in their immediate context: – Ecclus (Sir) 14.18 comes from the part of the poem in which Ben Sira advises generous behaviour in face of the ephemerality of life (Sir 14.11– 21).⁴⁷ The poet uses plant metaphors to express this, thus employing what could be considered a traditional device in the biblical text.⁴⁸ – In Ecclus (Sir) 40.22, Ben Sira reflects on the blessings that fill a man with beauty and joy (40.17– 28), in counterpoint to the punishment mentioned in the preceding verses (40.12– 17).⁴⁹ He focuses on that which gives the greatest pleasure to the senses: taste (v. 20), hearing (v. 21) and sight (v. 22). In relation to the last of these (in the Greek version), he affirms that contemplating the grass of the field (χλόη σπόρου)⁵⁰ is what provides man with beauty and joy.⁵¹ Jer 17.8 corresponds to a poetic section of the book of the prophet Jeremiah; i. e. the wisdom sayings, which are characterized by their parallelism. The prophet puts into the mouth of God himself words that contrast the behaviour of the foolish man and the wise man. To illustrate this, he uses the image of a tree planted by the water in a similar fashion to what we find in Ps 1.⁵² The first of the pericopes from Ezekiel (Ezek 17.24) belongs to the previously mentioned allegory of the cedar tree and the eagles, with which the prophet evokes historical figures and events.⁵³ In contrast, Ezek 20.47 is part of an oracle against Israel

 Peter C. Craigie, Psalms 1 – 50, WBC 19 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1983); Version 2.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition].  Vid. supra, pp. 48 and 49.  Vid. infra, pp. 152– 153; 157.  Palmisano, Siracide, pp. 150 – 151.  Vid. supra, pp. 48 – 49.  Vid. infra, pp. 152– 153.  According to the edition by J. Ziegler. In contrast to this, the edition by Rahlfs reads: χλόην σπόρου.  Palmisano, Siracide, pp. 368 – 369.  For the relationship of this pericope to Psalm 1, see Peter C. Craigie et al., Jeremiah 1 – 25, WBC 26 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1991); Version 2.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]; Guy P. Couturier, ‘Jeremiah’ in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 300 – 336, at 316.  Tkacik, ‘Ezekiel’, pp. 354– 355.

146

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

in which the parable of a fire in the woods is used to transmit the prophet’s message.⁵⁴ As for the books of the New Testament, Mark 6.39 and Rev 8.7 have been commented on in our analysis of χλωρός, to which we will refer the reader on this point.⁵⁵ With respect to Luke 23.31, this verse from the Passion reproduces some of the words that Jesus addresses to the daughters of Jerusalem when he finds them weeping at his crucifixion. They recall Ezek 17.24, on which we have just commented, although the sense of the image used is a different one: ‘green wood versus dry is applied to the innocence of Jesus versus the guilt of those who have sent him to his death, and to the fullness of life that Jesus represents and offers versus the lack of life of the Judaism that sends him to his death’.⁵⁶ Despite the differences in literary forms and specific contexts in which the Vulgate translator uses uiridis, the fact that the authors present, either literally or figuratively, a plant context is something common to all of these pericopes. Indeed, the adjectival lexeme uiridis is used to describe entities belonging to the cognitive domain of plants, whether this is vegetation in general, parts of the same or specific types of plants: – Vegetation in general: arbor, ‘tree’ (Ecclus [Sir] 14.18); lignum, ‘wood/tree’ (Ezek 17.24; 20.47; Luke 23.31); holus, ‘vegetable/herb’,⁵⁷ ‘grass/herb’ (Ps 36.2 VulgHeb [37.2 MT] ), faenum, ‘grass’⁵⁸ (Mark 6.39; Rev 8.7); satio, ‘sowed fields’ (Ecclus [Sir] 40.22). – Parts of plants in general: ramus, ‘branch’ (2 Macc 10.7). – Parts of specific types of plants: uirgae populeae et amigdalinae et ex platanis, ‘robs of poplar, and of almond, and of plane trees’ (Gen 30.37). It is not difficult in these cases to determine the tonality to which uiridis refers, as it is applied to elements that have a green colouring,⁵⁹ but, as we have already explained,⁶⁰ it reveals at the same time their vigour and freshness. Viridis, then, de-

 Tkacik, ‘Ezekiel’, p. 356.  Vid. supra, p. 88, on Mark 6.39 and Rev 8.7.  John Nolland, Luke 18:35 – 24:53, WBC 35C (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1993); Version 2.2 [Electronic source: Accordance edition].  holus: from the Indo-European root *ghel-, ‘yellow, green’, common in the sense of ‘green vegetable’.  If we consider that the scene in Mark 6.39 appears in John 6.3, contextualized as taking place on a hill (montem) and that Rev 8.7 is an echo of the plagues in Exod 9.25 where only the grass of the fields (herbam campi, Exod 9.25) is mentioned, it is logical to think that in both Mark 6.39 and Rev 8.7 faenum does not mean ‘hay’, but ‘grass’. This synecdochic value is further reinforced if we examine the original Greek, which in both pericopes uses the noun χόρτος, ‘grass’.  For the association of green with vegetation, see André, Étude sur les termes de couleur, p. 184 and Bartolomé Segura Ramos, ‘El color de Virgilio’, Cuadernos de Filología Clásica. Estudios Latinos 26 (2, 2006), 37– 69, at 55.  Vid. supra, pp. 137– 141.

IV.1 Viridis and its polysemy

147

notes ‘the characteristic colour of fresh grass, of trees and of plants or parts of these that grow full of light, intensity and freshness’.⁶¹ Finally, considering the wide chromatic spectrum that uiridis possesses in Latin, the tonality of the adjectival lexeme in Gen 30.37 can be determined more precisely since uiridis is embodied in concrete entities (poplar, almond and plane trees). What is more, its chromatic context is very clear, as, along with uiridis, candor, ‘radiant whiteness’, is also mentioned, and a short explicative gloss is added on the change of colour (color effectus est uarius, ‘the colour was made diverse’). This is also found in St. Jerome’s commentary on the same passage (uarium uirgarum fecit colorem, ‘he made the rods multi-coloured’, St. Jerome, Hebrew Questions on Genesis 30.37).⁶² These entities lead us to suggest that the hue expressed by uiridis is here the characteristic colour of the trees in which it is embodied; i. e. ‘light green’. Indeed, the studies consulted attribute this tonality to poplar,⁶³ almond⁶⁴ and plane trees.⁶⁵ Symbolism: While the symbolism of uiridis is reduced in Vulgate, there is an echo of the Hebrew and Greek versions⁶⁶ in Ps 36.2 VulgHeb [37.2 MT] and Ezek 17.24; 20.47 [21.3 MT]. In this sense, the expression holus uiride connotes the fleeting nature of life, while lignum uiride, by mentioning destruction, suggests divine punishment. In the New Testament, the Vulgate maintains the symbolism of the Greek text of Mark 6.39, in which uiride faenum indicates the time of year when the multiplication of the bread took place.

IV.1.3.2 Viridis II (nominal function) The lexeme uiridis has a nominal function in one book of the Old Testament (Ecclus 43.23 [Sir 43.21]), and in one of the New Testament (Rev 9.4). Ecclus 43.23 (Sir 43.21) is part of a hymn praising the works of God (Sir 43.1– 26), in which Ben Sira lists the various elements of the creation (the firmament, the sun, the moon, etc.) and with these praises the Creator.⁶⁷ In v. 23, he describes the devastation of the mountains and fields, revealing the omnipotent power of a God whose word is capable of creation or destruction.

 Pelletier-Michaud, Couleurs, lumière et contrastes, p. 156.  Jerónimo, Obras completas de San Jerónimo IV: Cuestiones relativas al Antiguo Testamento, introd., trans. and notes Rosa María Herrera García (Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 2004), 30.37.  Moldenke and Moldenke, Plants of the Bible, pp. 181– 182. The luminosity of their colour is also noted in those cases in which it appears accompanied by adjectives denoting whiteness, such as albus, ‘white’ (Varro RR. 1.46; Cels. 6.9.2; Vitr. 2.9.9; Plin. HN. 16.86.1; Ou. Epist. 9.64), canus, ‘bright white’ (Sen. Herc.Oet. 578 and 789) and candidus, ‘radiant white’ (Verg. B. 9.41). Vid. supra, note 30, p. 90.  Segura Munguía and Torres Ripa, Las plantas en la Biblia, pp. 88 – 90. Vid. supra, note 31, p. 90.  Segura Munguía and Torres Ripa, Las plantas en la Biblia, pp. 74– 76. Vid. supra, note 32, p. 90.  Vid. supra, Ps 37.2 MT, pp. 48 – 49; for Ezek 17.24; 20.47 [21.3 MT], and for Mark 6.39, pp. 92– 93.  Palmisano, Siracide, pp. 404– 405.

148

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

As we have already mentioned,⁶⁸ Rev 9.4 is from the account of the fifth trumpet blast and the plague of locusts. It reproduces in indirect speech the order given to respect nature and, by contrast, to destroy those who bear the mark of the beast. The translator follows the Greek text of the book of Revelation faithfully in translating οὐδὲ πᾶν χλωρόν as neque omne uiride. Once again, although the literary forms of the books in which uiridis appears are different, the context of these pericopes is the same; i. e. the destruction of nature. In fact, in both pericopes uiridis is closely related to other nominal lexemes from the cognitive domains of plants and land (the place where the former grow and develop): 1. Plants: faenum, ‘grass’; and arbor, ‘tree’ (Rev 9.4). 2. Land: montes, ‘mountains’; and desertum, ‘desert places’ (Ecclus 43.23 [Sir 43.21]). The syntactic relationship between these terms and the nominal function performed by uiridem (Ecclus 43.23 [Sir 43.21]) and uiride (Rev 9.4) indicate that what is denoted is no longer a specific green, proper to some particular plant, but rather the vegetation –green, fresh and lush– that grows in the fields. This can thus be seen, like the term χλωρός, as another example of what in cognitive linguistics is known as a conceptual metonymy of the part for the whole, salient property and entity type.⁶⁹ The salient property is the characteristic green colour of plants and vegetation in general when this is found in a state of freshness and lushness. This is denoted by uiridis; and so, when the intention is to express not the colour but plants in general, the salient property of the entity is chosen (green) and the adjectival lexeme uiridis is grammaticalized in neuter form to express this entity.⁷⁰ Thus, uiride denotes an ‘assemblage of plants that grow on the land in their state of verdure, freshness and lushness’. As in the case of χλωρός, the colour green denoted is not a specific hue, but a generic green common to plants in general.⁷¹ As glosses, we propose ‘greenness’ and ‘all green things’. Symbolism: As the destruction of plants, of ‘greenness’, is presented in the Hebrew and Greek corpora as a sign of divine punishment,⁷² one might suppose that in Ecclus 43.23 (Sir 43.21) the expression extinguet uiridem sicut ignem would carry the same symbolic connotation. However, if we consider this section within its context, we should exclude it here, as Ben Sira aims merely to show the omnipotent

 Vid. supra, p. 102.  Cuenca and Hilferty, Introducción a la lingüística cognitiva, p. 113; Barcelona, ‘La metonimia conceptual’, p. 131.  A comment by Bartolomé Segura Ramos on uiridis in the works of Vergil is interesting in this sense: ‘“[that which is] green” in Vergil is pure vegetation, vegetal nature’ (‘El color de Virgilio’, 55).  Lewis and Short, s.v. viridis, cites Ecclus 43.23 as an example of the generic green designated by uiridis when nominalized: ‘2. A green color, of plants, trees, etc. (late Lat.), Vulg. Ecclus. 43.23’.  Vid. supra, pp. 46 and 104.

IV.1 Viridis and its polysemy

149

power of God, revealed in terms of both creation and destruction but without further connotation.

IV.1.4 Conclusions The use of uiridis in the Vulgate confirms its polysemy, as it denotes both colour and an entity imbued with colour. The first meaning, colour, is the most frequent (12x). It appears in the cognitive domain of plants, applied to vegetation in general (grass, trees, forests) and to specific types of plants (poplar, almond and plane trees). In this cognitive domain, it is clear that colour once again indicates a state of maturity, freshness and lushness in plants, as we have shown that it indicated in classical Latin in general. Its meaning, then, is ‘the characteristic colour of fresh grass, of trees and of the plants or parts of these that grow full of light, intensity and freshness’ (2 Macc 10.7; Ps 36.2 VulgHeb; Ecclus [Sir] 14.18; 40.22; Jer 17.8; Ezek 17.24; 20.47; Mark 6.39; Luke 23.31; Rev 8.7). As a gloss, we propose ‘green’. Given that in Gen 30.37 the author mentions specific plants, and considering that in Latin the expression of colour is precisely nuanced, uiridis, when it describes the rods of almond, poplar and plane, refers to a more specific green; i. e. the green of these plants. Thus, the meaning of uiridis would be ‘the colour of almond, poplar and plane trees, characterized by its luminosity’ (Gen 30.37). As a gloss, we propose ‘light green’, although we cannot be certain that the translator of the Vulgate sought to nuance this colour to such an extent. The second meaning –an entity having this colour– is also situated in the cognitive domain of plants. In this case, however, the grammaticalization of uiridis is changed, as it adopts a neuter form or presents a particular syntactic use, omitting entirely the entity that it is used to describe. We have here a new instance of conceptual metonymy of the part for the whole, salient property and entity type. The meaning, therefore, is an ‘assemblage of plants that grow on the land in their state of verdure, freshness and lushness (Ecclus 43.23 [Sir 43.21]; Rev 9.4)’. As a gloss, we propose ‘greenness’. Despite the frequent use of uiridis in the Vulgate, its symbolism is reduced, perhaps because it is used in pericopes in which the only intention is to highlight the colour and the state of the plants described. Nevertheless, a symbolic meaning can indeed be found in some pericopes. Ps 36.2 VulgHeb (37.2 MT), for example, translates the Hebrew version quite faithfully; thus, holus uiride arescent can be seen as connoting the fleeting nature of life. Similarly, in the New Testament, Mark seems to use the adjective not so much to add chromatism to the text but to suggest the time of year (Mark 6.39). Although uiridis in the Vulgate presents a reduced chromatic spectrum, the texts studied here show that uiridis as an adjective of colour expresses colour as well as state when it appears in the cognitive domain of plants. This explains the fact that

150

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

it is used not only to translate colour terms from the Hebrew and Greek versions, but also terms that denote state rather than colour.

IV.1.5 Bibliography Aina, Alfredo L. (dir.), Imágenes de fenómenos ópticos cotidianos como apoyo de la docencia en óptica. Proyecto de innovación y mejora de la calidad docente 2008 nº 35 UCM (http://pen dientedemigracion.ucm.es/info/gioq/fenopt/imagenes/cieloverde/index.htm; 12/10/2019). André, Jacques, Étude sur les termes de couleur dans la langue latine (Paris: Klincksieck, 1949). Arias Abellán, Carmen, Estructura semántica de los adjetivos de color en los tratadistas latinos de agricultura y parte de la enciclopedia de Plinio (Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, 1994). Arias Abellán, Carmen, ‘La sustantivación del adjetivo en latín’, Estudios humanísticos. Filología 8 (1986), 79 – 86. Beltrán, José A., Introducción a la morfología latina (Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza, 1999). Brun, Jean-Pierre, ‘Los usos antiguos de los productos de la viña y el olivo y sus implicaciones arqueológicas’, Anales de Prehistoria y Arqueología, 27 – 28 (2011 – 2012), 19 – 35. Carletti, Elettra, ‘Il colore del Paradiso’, La rassegna d’Ischia 3 (2016), 51 – 7. Couturier, Guy P., ‘Jeremiah’, in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 300 – 336. Craigie, Peter C., Psalms 1 – 50, WBC 19 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1983); Version 2.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Craigie, Peter C. et al., Jeremiah 1 – 25, WBC 26 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1991); Version 2.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Eslava Galán, Juan, ‘Entre olivos’ in José María Sillero Ferna´ndez de Can˜ete et al. (eds.), I Congreso de la cultura del olivo (Jaén: Instituto de Estudios Giennenses, 2007), pp. 31 – 39. Isidoro de Sevilla, Etimologías, José Oroz Reta and Manuel A. Marcos Casquero, eds. (Madrid: BAC, 2004). Jerónimo, Obras completas de San Jerónimo IV: Cuestiones relativas al Antiguo Testamento, introd., trans. and notes Rosa María Herrera García (Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 2004). Martínez Pastor, Marcelo, ‘Adjetivo y genitivo adnominal en latín. Discusión y aportaciones’, Durius 2 (4, 1974), 221 – 257. McEleney, Neil J., ‘1 – 2 Maccabees’ in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 461 – 486. Moldenke, Harold N. and Alma L. Moldenke, Plants of the Bible (Waltham, MA: Chronica Botanica, 1952). Morla, Víctor, Los manuscritos hebreos de Ben Sira: traducción y notas (Estella: Verbo Divino, 2012). Nolland, John, Luke 18:35 – 24:53, WBC 35C (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1993); Version 2.2 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Palmisano, Maria Carmela, Siracide: Introduzione, traduzione e commento, Nuova Versione della Bibbia dai Testi Antichi 34 (Cinisello Balsamo, Milano: San Paolo, 2016). Pastoureau, Michel, Green: The History of a Colour (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2014). Pelletier-Michaud, Lydia, Couleurs, lumière et contrastes chez les lyriques grecs et les élégiaques latins (Québec: Universitè Laval, 2007), available at: https://corpus.ulaval.ca › jspui › bit stream; 12/10/2019. Persius Flaccus, Saturae, Nino Scivoletto, ed. (Florence: La Nuova Italia, 1964).

IV.1 Viridis and its polysemy

151

Persius Flaccus, Saturae: Accedunt Varia de Persio Iudicia Saec. XIV – XX/ Commentario atque Indice Rerum Notabilium, Helgus Nikitinski, ed. (Munich-Leipzig: K. G. Saur, 2002). Segura Ramos, Bartolomé, ‘El color de Virgilio’, Cuadernos de Filología Clásica. Estudios Latinos 26 (2, 2006), 37 – 69. Segura Munguía, Santiago and Javier Torres Ripa, Las plantas en la Biblia (Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto; Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 2011). Tkacik, Arnold J., ‘Ezekiel’ in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 344 – 365.

IV.2 Viriditas: ‘greenery’ IV.2.1 Introduction Viriditas is a colour noun derived from the adjective uiridis, to which has been added the suffix -tat (nom. -tas suauitas; humilis > humilitas; similis > similitas; etc.), we might suppose that the ‘green’ registered in the principal Latin dictionaries as the definition of the nominal lexeme uiriditas is identical to that denoted by the adjectival lexeme uiridis. However, after carrying out a detailed study of the Latin texts and identifying the entities described by uiriditas, we have determined that the polysemy of uiriditas is more reduced. 1) Viriditas denotes the colour and state of vegetation when it describes entities belonging to the cognitive domain of plants, whether these are terms that refer to plants in general, such as ‘fields’, ‘meadows’ or ‘forests’, or terms that denote specific plants, e. g. ‘cypress’. In the first case, uiriditas denotes a generic green that includes within it the freshness and lushness of these plants: pratorum uiriditate, ‘with the verdure of the meadows’ (Cic. Sen. 57); siluarum uiriditate, ‘with the verdure of the forests’ (Apul. Mun. 4). However, when uiriditas refers to a specific plant, it may denote the specific hue of that plant, for example: cupressorum uiriditate, ‘with the verdure of the cypresses’ (Amm. Marc. 24.6). In this case, uiriditas would seem to refer to the dark green colour of the cypress, since, as has been mentioned, this tree is frequently described in Latin literature by means of adjectival lexemes that denote a dark colouration (atra […] cupresso, Verg. Aen. 3.64).⁹¹ 2) Viriditas denotes the colour of the sea, when the entity described is the sea, from the cognitive domain of water. The presence of the sea nuances the hue expressed by uiriditas: uiriditatem maris puri, ‘the verdure of the pure sea’ (Plin. HN. 37.76.6). 3) Viriditas denotes the colour of an ill person, the meaning found in a Renaissance Latin translation of the Treatise on Hippocrates (Gal. Hpp. Morb. 32.3), a work traditionally attributed to Galen. The translated passage makes reference to the exercise imprudently prescribed by Herodicus of Selymbria for those suffering from fever. It is in the physical description of the patients that we find the term uiriditas used together with the noun liuor to indicate the greenish pallor of their

   

OLD, s.v. viriditas. Lewis and Short, s.v. viriditas. Gaffiot, s.v. viriditas. Vid. supra, p. 135.

IV.2 Viriditas: ‘greenery’

155

faces: ‘uenarum rubor, liuor, uiriditas’, ‘redness of the veins, lividness, greenish pallor of the face’. ⁹² The chromatic range of uiriditas is therefore not exactly the same as that of the adjectival lexeme from which it is derived, but rather more reduced.⁹³

IV.2.2.2 Early versions of the Bible Before examining a Hebrew and a Greek term which are parallel to uiriditas, given the complexity of the textual history of Sirach and its versions, we will first present a synthesis of its development.⁹⁴ The book of Sirach was written originally in Hebrew, as Ben Sira’s grandson and translator tells us in the prologue. The original text, however, disappeared and the Hebrew version was considered to be lost until 1896. It was in that year that twothirds of it was found in the geniza of the Ben Ezra Synagogue in Cairo. Manuscripts of it would later be found in other locations as well: in Cairo; in two of the caves in Qumran (2Q18 and 11QPsa); and in Masada. The last of these is the oldest (100 – 70 BC) that we possess. It is close to the Greek text translated by the grandson of Ben Sira and contains 26 fragments of the book, running from 39.27 to 44.17, although 39.33, 40.9 – 10, 20 – 25 are missing due to deterioration. The Greek version comprises two families of codices: GI and GII. GI is considered to be the textus receptus; i. e. the translation done by Ben Sira’s grandson,⁹⁵ and this is the one found in the majority of the uncial codices. GII, on the other hand, is a translation based on the GI and, when necessary, on an amplified Hebrew version of the text (HTII).⁹⁶ Jerome was familiar with the Hebrew version of Sirach. However, as he challenged its canonicity, he did not undertake a new Latin translation of the book, but rather adopted the one contained in the Vetus Latina. ⁹⁷ This translation was done from the GII, the longer Greek text (with 150 more verses), rather than the GI.

 See the edition by Karl G. Kühn, Claudii Galeni. Opera Omnia, vol. 17.2 (Lipsiae [Leipzig]: Officina Libraria Car. Cnoblochii, 1829), pp. 101– 102.  Vid. supra, pp. 133 – 137.  Palmisano, Siracide, pp. 19 – 21; Morla, Los manuscritos hebreos de Ben Sira, pp. 17– 19; Morla, Libros sapienciales, pp. 218 – 219; Di Lella, ‘Wisdom of Ben Sira’, ABD 6. For a detailed study: Rudolf Smend, Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach: Hebräisch und Deutsch (Berlin, Georg Reimer, 1906); Patrick W. Skehan and Alexander A. Di Lella, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, AB 39 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1987).  According to Palmisano, Siracide, p. 20, this is the translation found in the edition by Alfred Rahlfs and Robert Hanhart (2006).  Edited by Joseph Ziegler (1965). See Palmisano, Siracide, p. 21.  The translation of the pericope under study here, Ecclus (Sir) 40.16, is the same in the Vetus Latina as in the Vulgate.

156

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

From the above, the term equivalent to uiriditas (Ecclus [Sir] 40.16) is the nominal lexeme ἄχι, ‘reed-grass’, of the Greek version (GII).⁹⁸ This in turn seems to be a transliteration of ‫אחו‬/‫ אחי‬ʾachuw/ʾachy, ‘sedge’, although the Hebrew text found in MS B is unclear in meaning (‘like axes to the bank of a river’). The scroll of Masada has this as ‫קרמית‬, ‘reed’.⁹⁹ The textual complexity of these versions makes conjecture difficult, but one has the impression that the Latin translator was unfamiliar with the meaning of ἄχι. It is, indeed, a term used infrequently in the LXX. Johan Lust wonders whether it is a neologism,¹⁰⁰ while Takamitsu Muraoka considers it to be a loan-word from Egypt,¹⁰¹ as proposed by the LSJ.¹⁰² In fact, the form ἄχι appears only twice in the Septuagint, in Sir 40.16 and Isa 19.7, to translate the Hebrew nominal lexeme ‫‘ ערות‬ārôt, ‘reed’.¹⁰³ What would be more expected is for the Latin translator to have used iuncus, which seems more appropriate and is what appears in other pericopes (Isa 19.6; 35.7).¹⁰⁴ However, he chooses uiriditas. To explain this, it may be ventured that it was the translator’s desire to add a chromatic touch, given the poetic character of the text. In any case, it is not possible to be certain about any of these hypotheses.

IV.2.2.3 Synthesis The leading Latin dictionaries give three meanings for uiriditas, depending on whether it expresses colour, entity or is used metaphorically. For our study, two meanings are relevant: colour and entity. With regard to colour, from the semantic analysis we have carried out, various hues have been identified according to the cognitive domain of the entity being described (vegetation, the sea, an ill person). As for entity, the denotations of the entity itself and the colour which determines it become fused together (green vegetation). In the early versions of the Bible, both the LXX and the Hebrew text found at Masada use a nominal lexeme in Sir 40.16, although with different meanings: ἄχι ‘reedgrass’ and ‫‘ קרמית‬reed’, in neither of which does the chromatic connotation seem particularly relevant.

 However, this pericope also appears in the GI in the Rahlfs edition of the Septuagint.  Yigael Yadin, The Ben Sira Scroll from Masada (Jerusalem: The Israel Exploration Society, 1965), n.6, 14; Morla, Los manuscritos hebreos de Ben Sira, pp. 243 and 418.  LEH, s.v ἄχι.  GELS, s.v ἄχι. Vid. supra note 27, p. 88.  LSJ, s.v ἄχι, documents the appearance of the lexeme in PMag.Par. 1.1091, 1101.  In the form ἄχει, it appears in Gen 41.2 and 41.18.  Patrick W. Skehan, ‘Sirach 40:11– 17’, CBQ 30 (4, 1968), 570 – 572, at 571 proposes calamus, suggesting a Greek form, κάλαμος, which is not found in the Greek version.

IV.2 Viriditas: ‘greenery’

157

IV.2.3 Semantic analysis of uiriditas Ecclus (Sir) 40.16 is part of one of the similes that Ben Sira uses to describe the fleeting nature of the success of the impious. The simile refers to the context of plants; i. e. the quickness with which the plants along the riverbanks dry up, faster than other plants, as these are the first to be plucked up by men and animals. This is compared to the speed with which the unjust and the riches they covet will perish: Ecclus (Sir) 40.16 uiriditas super omnem aquam et ad oram fluminis ante omne foenum euelletur The greenery that grows on the waters and on the riverbank is pulled up before any other herb.

The plant context depicted here determines that the nominal lexeme uiriditas appears in relation to other entities belonging to the cognitive domains of plants (foenus), water (aqua, flumen) and land (ora). The nominal lexeme uiriditas, then, lends itself to a dual interpretation, depending on the presence of two dominant cognitive domains (plants and water), which in classical Latin indicated different tonalities: ‘green’ and ‘sea-green’. In this sense, uiriditas may refer to an entity, i. e. the fresh, green plants that grow on riverbanks and on the surface of the water, with the cognitive domain of plants taking priority; on the other hand, it may refer to colour, to the greenness of such plants as reflected in the aquatic surface described. In this case, the predominant cognitive domain would be that of water and the term’s chromatism would take on the bluish tints of the entity upon which it is projected. However, if the passage under study here is analyzed from a lexico-semantic and syntactic viewpoint, the second of these interpretative alternatives is not possible: a) To express the greenness of water, it would be more logical to employ a nominal genitive construction: aquae uiriditas (‘the greenness of water’), present in the majority of examples in which the greenish hue of the sea is indicated by this nominal lexeme (uiriditatem maris, ‘the greenness of the sea’, Plin. HN. 37.76.6). b) The Latin version uses the verbal lexeme euello, -es, -ere, -elli o euulsi, ‘to pluck/ pull up by the root’, of which the nominal lexeme uiriditas is the subject. The prefix e(x)-, having an elative value,¹⁰⁵ reinforces the idea of ‘extraction’ indicated by the simple verb uello, ‘to pull out/take out’. In Latin, euello is generally applied to elements that are firmly attached to a surface, such as parts of the body (the tongue: linguam se euelisse, Cic. Sest. 60.9; hair: capillum sibi euellere, Cic. Tusc. 3.62.7), trees (cypress: cupressos evelles, Cat. Agr. 48.2, roots: quas [sc. suas radices] […] euellerem, Cic. Att. 10.11.3) and fruit (poma ex arboribus […] uix euelluntur, Cic. Sen. 71).

 Beltrán, Introducción a la morfología latina, p. 31.

158

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

The nominal lexeme uiriditas is directly related to faenum (cognitive domain of plants), as both can be plucked up or out, and bodies of water are the places where uiriditas grows. d) As we have already mentioned, the lexeme uiriditas is the translation of a Greek term that refers to a plant entity: ἄχι, ‘herb/grass’.

c)

From this analysis, we can conclude that uiriditas in Ecclus (Sir) 40.16 does not denominate colour exclusively, but rather an entity imbued with colour, and with this its state of freshness and lushness, a meaning with which it was already used in classical Latin. We can thus define uiriditas as an ‘assemblage of plants that grow near the water and show a state of greenness, freshness and lushness’. Symbolism: In these poetic verses, the nominal lexeme uiriditas echoes the positive symbolism that ‫ ירק‬yereq II possesses in the Hebrew version, where it connotes prosperity.¹⁰⁶ However, in this case, it refers not to the great reward that God gives to his chosen, but rather to the riches obtained by the wicked. The image continues as the poet again takes up the metaphor of the ephemerality of grass (which we have already discussed in relation to the Hebrew version)¹⁰⁷ to complete his thought. The prosperity of the wicked is fleeting, like the plants that grow along the rivers, which, not having roots deeply sunk into the soil, are plucked up and quickly wither.

IV.2.4 Conclusions Viriditas is a nominal lexeme that appears only 1x in the Vulgate. Given that it appears in the plant context, referring to entities from the cognitive domain of plants, and considering the text’s syntax and the semantics of euello, we can conclude that uiriditas denotes, as in classical Latin, an entity which is imbued with colour, and whose meaning is an ‘assemblage of plants that grow near the water and show a state of greenness, freshness and lushness; their presence connotes prosperity: Ecclus (Sir) 40.16’. As glosses, we propose ‘greenery’, ‘vegetation’ or ‘green plants’. Finally, the Vulgate respects the grammatical form that appears in the Septuagint, but departs from this by using a term that denotes colour, thus infusing the pericope with a chromatism that is absent from both the Greek and Hebrew versions.

IV.2.5 Bibliography André, Jacques, Étude sur les termes de couleur dans la langue latine (Paris: Klincksieck, 1949). Arias Abellán, Carmen, ‘La sustantivación del adjetivo en latín’, Estudios humanísticos. Filología 8 (1986), 79 – 86.

 Vid. supra, p. 48.  Vid. supra, pp. 48 – 49.

IV.2 Viriditas: ‘greenery’

159

Beltrán, José A., Introducción a la morfología latina (Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza, 1999). Claudius Galenus, Claudii Galeni. Opera Omnia, Karl. G. Kühn, ed., vol. 17.2 (Lipsiae [Leipzig]: Officina Libraria Car. Cnoblochii, 1829). Coggins, Richard J., Sirach (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998). Crenshaw, James L., ‘Sirach’ in Leander E. Keck et al. (eds.), The New Interpreter’s Bible: General Articles & Introduction, Commentary, & Reflections for Each Book of the Bible, including the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books in Twelve Volumes, vol. 5 (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1994), pp. 601 – 867. Di Lella, Alexander A., ‘Wisdom of Ben Sira’, ABD 6. García Cordero, Maximiliano and Gabriel Pérez Rodríguez, Biblia comentada: texto de la Nácar-Colunga. IV, Libros sapienciales (Madrid: BAC, 1962). Mollard-Desfour, Annie, Le vert: dictionnaire de la couleur, mots et expressions d’aujourd’hui XXe-XXIe (Paris: CNRS Éditions, 2012). Morla, Víctor, Libros sapienciales y otros escritos (Estella: Verbo Divino, 1994). Morla, Víctor, Los manuscritos hebreos de Ben Sira: traducción y notas (Estella: Verbo Divino, 2012). Palmisano, Maria Carmela, Siracide: Introduzione, traduzione e commento, Nuova Versione della Bibbia dai Testi Antichi 34 (Cinisello Balsamo, Milano: San Paolo, 2016). Skehan, Patrick W., ‘Sirach 40:11 – 17’, CBQ 30 (4, 1968), 570 – 572. Skehan, Patrick W. and Alexander A. Di Lella, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, AB 39 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1987). Smend, Rudolf, Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach: Hebräisch und Deutsch (Berlin, Georg Reimer, 1906). Tábet, Miguel Ángel, Introducción al Antiguo Testamento III. Libros poéticos y sapienciales (Madrid: Palabra, 2007). Yadin, Yigael, The Ben Sira Scroll from Masada (Jerusalem: The Israel Exploration Society, 1965).

IV.3 Viror and its polysemy: ‘the colour of calamus and reeds’, ‘the colour of a type of gold’, ‘verdure’ IV.3.1 Introduction Viror is a colour noun derived from the verb uireo,¹⁰⁸ to which has been added the suffix –or, from the ancient suffix *–e/os, which in Indo-European was used to form action nouns of an inanimate type. In Latin this was highly productive, but the majority of forms in –os (>–us), such as onus, ‘load, weight’, opus, ‘work, effort’, etc., have ceased to be related to a living verbal theme, unlike others (much in the minority) where the ancient value of action noun can still be perceived, such as foedus, ‘treaty, alliance’ (fido) and genus, ‘lineage, stock’ (geno). When the –r obtained by rhotacism in oblique cases (alb-us-is>albur-is [rhotacism] >alboris [apophony before –r]) is extended to the nominative, a series of masculine nouns in –or, –oris is produced, among which, together with nouns of physical state (ardour, ‘ardour’; languor, ‘languor, dejection’; liquor, ‘fluidity’; tepor, ‘tepidity’; terror, ‘terror’; etc.), we also find nouns of colour (albor, ‘whiteness’; liuor, ‘lividness’; pallor, ‘pallor’; rubor, ‘redness’, etc.).¹⁰⁹ The nominal lexeme uiror appears 3x in the Vulgate, in books of the Old Testament: Isa 15.6 and 35.7, and Ps 67.14. Isa 15.6 and Ps 67.14 (68.14 MT; 67.14 LXX) will be familiar to the reader as they are the pericopes already examined in our study of the Hebrew and Greek corpora.¹¹⁰ Isa 15.6 is part of a judgment oracle announcing the punishment of Moab, while Ps 67.14, as we have said, is one of the more obscure and heterogeneous psalms in the Psalter, and for this reason has been given multiple interpretations. Isa 35.7 comes from the later chapters of Isaiah, specifically the joyful announcement of restoration (Isa 35.1– 10)¹¹¹ and the enumeration of the changes that the manifestation of Yaweh will bring about in both human beings (Isa 35.5 – 6) and in nature (Isa 35.7– 10). The contexts of these pericopes, however, are very different: Isa 15.6 describes the destruction of the natural environment caused by drought, while Isa 35.7 announces precisely the contrary, i. e. the transformation of the desert into an oasis of vegetation. Finally, Ps 67.14 describes the wings of a dove, as the reader will remem-

 DELL, s.v. vireo; OLD, s.v. viror; Lewis and Short, s.v. viror; Gaffiot, s.v. viror.  Pierre Monteil, Elementos de fonética y morfología del latín, trans. Concepción Fernández Martínez (Sevilla: Publicaciones de la Universidad de Sevilla, 1992), pp. 204– 205.  Vid. supra, pp. 44– 46; 58 – 64; 109 – 115.  Moriarty, ‘Isaiah 1– 39’, p. 280. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-006

IV.3 Viror and its polysemy

161

ber,¹¹² using silver and gold as a literary motíf. The lexeme uiror appears in Jerome’s third Latin translation of the Psalter,¹¹³ the Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos. ¹¹⁴ Before we can examine each of these pericopes more closely, it is necessary once again to acquire an encyclopaedic knowledge of the term. For this, we will turn to the leading dictionaries as well as the early translations of the Bible.

IV.3.2 Encyclopaedic knowledge IV.3.2.1 Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries The principal Latin dictionaries consider uiror to be a polysemic term, as it has two meanings: ‘the colour green’ (with no special nuance); and ‘vegetation’, a later meaning,¹¹⁵ and so we find: ‘green quality (of vegetation), verdure’;¹¹⁶ ‘green color, greenness, verdure’;¹¹⁷ and ‘vert, couleur verte’.¹¹⁸ Both meanings appear in contexts predominated by terms from the cognitive domain of plants: – A meaning of ‘the colour green’ is present when uiror is embodied in plant entities (with different syntactic constructions), such as pratorum uiror, ‘the greenness of the meadows’ (Apul. Flor. 10.11) or hordeum ‘barley’, cui [hordeum] super est aliquid de uirore, ‘something green stands out’ (Pall. Agr. 7.12).¹¹⁹ – The meaning of ‘greenness/verdure’ appears when uiror does not describe any type of plant entity directly: Circus ad siluae consitus speciem gratia noui uiroris effronduit, ‘Circus, planted to look like a wood, thanks to its new verdure put forth leaves’ (Vopisc. Prob. 19).¹²⁰ Over time, the meaning of uiror as a colour became enriched chromatically through the other adjectival lexemes that accompanied it. This is the case of aureus or pallidus, which give added nuances to the shade of green being expressed: a) Viror aureus appears already in late Latin, in Boethius, in reference to the cognitive domain of gemstones. The celebrated poet and philosopher used the expres-

 Vid. supra, pp. 58 – 64 and 109 – 115.  Bogaert, ‘The Latin Bible’, pp. 505 – 526; Gross-Diaz, ‘The Latin Psalter’, pp. 427– 445.  Vid supra, pp. 28 – 29.  According to Lewis and Short, s.v. viror, this meaning emerges in the post-classical period for uiriditas.  OLD, s.v. viror.  Lewis and Short, s.v. viror.  Gaffiot, s.v. viror.  Hordeum, ‘barley’, is an entity characterized by its yellow colour, as Cato remarks (hordeum fauescit, ‘the barley turns yellow’, Cat. Agr. 151.2). It is well accepted that fauesco denotes ‘to turn yellow, become golden’ (OLD, s.v. flauesco), and so uiror may denote a yellowish green colour, although the maturation process of this plant may also include a green without additional nuances.  Roman historian (4th century AD), one of the six authors of the Historia Augusta.

162

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

sion uiror aureus to describe chrysopasus, a gemstone characterized by its golden green hue: Topazius […] ueterum fuit gemma uiridis ac diaphana: si aureo quodam fulgore ¹²¹ splendebat, chrysopatius appellabatur […] Huic dum uiror aureus est Chrysopatii nomen tribuitur, ‘Topaz […] was the diaphanous green gemstone of the ancients: if it shone with a certain golden sheen, it was called “Chrysopasus”’ ‘[…] this, when its green tone is golden, was given the name “Chrysopasus”’ (A. Boethius, Gemmarum et Lapidum Historia, 2.62). b) Viror pallidus is found centuries later in scientific Latin, in J. Swammerdam’s Historia Insectorum, to describe the colour of the shell of a snail (cognitive domain of animals).¹²² Viror is accompanied here by the adjectival lexeme pallidus, which indicates the low saturation of the green described.

IV.3.2.2 Early versions of the Bible In the Vulgate, uiror is the term chosen to translate two different Hebrew colour terms: – In Isa 15.6, uiror is the translation of ‫ ירק‬yereq, meaning the ‘assemblage of plants or parts of the same [leaves, stems, etc.] proper to a region or territory in their state of verdure, freshness and lushness; serves as food for animals and humans; its destruction is a sign of divine punishment, connoting famine and with this, death’; – In Ps 67.14 VulgHeb, uiror is used to translate the adjectival lexeme ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq II, meaning ‘the hue of a type of gold produced by adding copper to a gold and silver (10 %) alloy, highly appreciated in antiquity, similar to the plumage of Treron phoenicoptera or to the gold used to make commemorative trophies (Ps 68.14)’. However, in Isa 35.7, it seems that uiror is the translation of ‫ חציר‬ḥāṣȋr, ‘grass’,¹²³ which in the Hebrew version lacks any expressly chromatic connotation. One has the impression that the translator chose a term that allowed him to express both the entity and its colour, and in this way was able to infuse with colour the vegetation he was describing.

 In the syntagma aureo quodam fulgore, the chromatic value of the adjective aureus, ‘golden’, is unquestionable, in that its brilliance is already expressed by the noun fulgore. Thus, in Étude sur les termes de couleur, p. 155, André would affirm that ‘Aureus est principalement le jaune éclatant que nous rendons par “doré”’.  Jan Swammerdam, Bybel der Natuure, of Historie der Insecten, vol 1 (Leiden: Isaak Severinus, Boudewyn Vander Aa & Pieter Vander Aa, 1737), p. 112.  Vid. supra, note 28, pp. 44– 45.

IV.3 Viror and its polysemy

163

IV.3.2.3 Synthesis The main dictionaries highlight the presence of these two different meanings for uiror: ‘green colour’ and the later meaning, ‘vegetation’. It is, then, a polysemic term. Indeed, this polysemy seems to be reflected in a comparative study with the Hebrew version, as uiror is used to translate both an adjectival colour lexeme (‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq) and two nominal lexemes: one that designates a coloured entity (‫ ירק‬yereq) and another an entity without any explicit chromatism (‫ חציר‬ḥāṣȋr, ‘grass’).

IV.3.3 Semantic analysis of uiror As we said in the Introduction, uiror appears in Isaiah in two opposing contexts: devastation and restoration. However, in both of these the prophet uses the description of a natural landscape to convey his message: Isa 15.6 aquae enim Nemrim desertae erunt quia aruit herba defecit germen uiror omnis interiit And the waters of Nimrim have dried up, because the grass has withered, the new sprouts have failed and all the verdure has disappeared.

Isa 35.7 et quae erat arida in stagnum et sitiens in fontes aquarum; in cubilibus in quibus prius dracones habitabant orietur uiror calami et iunci And what was arid, into a pond, and dry, into fountains of water; in the places where before serpents dwelt, green calamus and reeds will sprout.

In both of these pericopes, uiror is associated with terms from the cognitive domain of plants: herba, ‘grass’, and germen, ‘sprout’, in Isa 15.6; calami, ‘calamus’, and iunci, ‘reed’, in Isa 35.7. In Ps 67.14 VulgHeb, however, although it is inserted among verses that also describe a landscape (inter medios terminos, 67.14 ; nix, 67.15; mons, 67.16), in the second part of this particular verse it is focused only on the wings of the mysterious dove whose dominant cognitive domain is that of metals: deargentata, ‘covered with silver’, and aurum, ‘gold’: Ps 67.14 VulgHeb si dormieritis inter medios terminos pinnae columbae deargentatae et posteriora ¹²⁴ eius in uirore auri

 St Jerome translates the Hebrew term ‫’ אברה‬ebrâ, ‘feather’, as posteriora rather than ala, which

164

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

If you slept within the boundaries, wings of a dove covered with silver and the back part of golden green.

As uiror is associated with different cognitive domains, the semantic analysis will be based on these.

IV.3.3.1 Viror in the cognitive domain of plants Although uiror appears in the cognitive domain of plants in Isa 15.6 and 35.7, the syntactic relationships established with regard to these terms are different in each pericope. As we will show, these varied syntactic uses will be determining factors for studying the meaning of uiror. In Isa 15.6, uiror is part of an enumeration in which there is a succession of three juxtaposed clauses with a verb + subject structure, except for the third, where the subject (uiror) precedes the verb. The translator simply reproduces the syntactic structure of the Hebrew version, although he adds a small change by using the adjective omnis to modify uiror. Viror omnis, then, appears in parallel to herba and germen as the subject of the clause, and so uiror cannot refer to the colour of the plants mentioned, but rather to an entity, to the plant itself, so as to conclude in a coherent fashion the enumeration of natural elements devastated by drought. In this sense, uiror is similar to the Hebrew term it translates (‫ ירק‬yereq I, ‘verdure, vegetable’). What is more, if uiror was in effect used in place of uiriditas in later times,¹²⁵ it must have denoted not only an entity, but an entity imbued with colour. We would have here once again a case of conceptual metonymy of the part for the whole, salient property and entity type.¹²⁶ The ancient native speaker, perceiving that the colour green reflects the state of a variety of plants which individually are difficult to identify, used this salient property –colour– to create a new concept or meaning. Thus, uiror means the ‘assemblage of plants proper to a region or territory in their state of verdure, freshness and lushness’, which may be translated as ‘verdure, vegetable, green vegetation’. Its meaning, then, reproduces that of the Hebrew term ‫ ירק‬yereq. ¹²⁷

appears in other books of the Bible (Exod 19.4; 1 Kgs 6.24, 27; etc). We do not know whether this refers to tailfeathers (rectrices) or to primary feathers (remiges): Pigeon Control Resource Centre; available at: https://www.pigeoncontrolresourcecentre.org/html/about-pigeons.html; 9/10/2019. It seems that Jerome is following here the Vetus Latina, which generally translates this as posteriora dorsi (Vetus Latina Database: Ps 67.14), closely aligned with the interpretation in the Septuagint (vid. supra., p. 110).  Lewis and Short, s.v. viror.  Cuenca and Hilferty, Introducción a la lingüística cognitiva, p. 113; Barcelona, ‘La metonimia conceptual’, p. 131.  Vid. supra, p. 49.

IV.3 Viror and its polysemy

165

In Isa 35.7, however, uiror, although it functions as subject, has a different relationship to terms from the cognitive domain of plants than what we find in Isa 15.6, as calamus and iuncus are used in the genitive. The syntax here is similar to that of Apul. Flor. 10.11 (pratorum uiror, ‘the verdure of the meadows’); i. e. a noun complemented by another in the genitive. The nucleus of the syntagma is the genitive and not the nominative, uiror, and so uiror is given an adjectival function.¹²⁸ This particular syntax seems to indicate that uiror does not designate the totality of green plants as it does in Isa 15.6, but rather colour: green reeds, green calamus. As the context alludes to the presence of water and the regeneration of nature, uiror, like the adjectival lexeme uiridis, denotes not only colour but the state of freshness and lushness of these reeds and the calamus, since, as we have said on numerous occasions,¹²⁹ colour in the cognitive domain of plants is inseparable from state. The meaning of uiror, therefore, is ‘the colour of the calamus and the reed and when these are fresh and lush’. In any case, to indicate precisely what colour is denoted by uiror, it is necessary to determine the colour possessed by the calamus and reed plants: The term calamus refers to the stalk of the cane plant or to the plant itself,¹³⁰ a type of marshland reed (Thphr. HP. 4.8.1; 4.10.1) often used in country hedges (Varro RR. 1.8; Colum. 5.4.1.5) or to make flutes (Thphr. HP. 4.11.1– 2; Dsc. Mat. Med. 1.85; Ou. Met. 1.689 – 712), canes, arrows (Dsc. Mat. Med. 1.85; Hor. C. 1.15.17; 4.9.10; Plin. HN. 16.166.1),¹³¹ writing implements (Mart. 14.38.1– 2 and Aus. Epit. 4.77 and 5.50), roofs (Plin. HN. 16.156 – 158.1) and a variety of domestic objects, such as yokes (Plin. HN. 17.166.1). Among the many types of cane,¹³² Arundo donax L. seems to be the one referred to in the Vulgate, as calamus is used to translate the Hebrew term ‫ קנה‬qāneh, which has been identified as Arundo donax L.¹³³ Its leaves are blue-green.¹³⁴ Iuncus in the plural generally denotes a group of plants of two different genera: Scirpus L. and Iuncus L.¹³⁵ It corresponds to the Hebrew term ‫ גמא‬gōme’, which is also identified as Scirpus L.¹³⁶ This reed grows in wet, swampy areas and its dark green¹³⁷

 Martínez Pastor, ‘Adjetivo y genitivo adnominal en latín’, 232 and 234.  Vid. supra, pp. 47– 48; 90 – 91; 144– 147.  Santiago Segura Munguía and Javier Torres Ripa, Historia de las plantas en el mundo antiguo (Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto; Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 2009), pp. 373 – 377, s.v. cañas; Segura Munguía and Torres Ripa, Las plantas en la Biblia, pp. 138 – 139, s.v. caña.  Segura Munguía and Torres Ripa, Historia de las plantas, pp. 373 – 377, s.v. cañas; Segura Munguía and Torres Ripa, Las plantas en la Biblia, pp. 138 – 139, s.v. caña.  Segura Munguía and Torres Ripa, Historia de las plantas, pp. 373 – 374, s.v. cañas.  HALOT, s.v. ‫קנה‬.  Hans A. Jensen, Plant World of the Bible (Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse, 2012), p. 120.  Segura Munguía and Torres Ripa, Historia de las plantas, pp. 296 – 297, s.v. junco.  HALOT, s.v. ‫גמא‬.  Segura Munguía and Torres Ripa, Historia de las plantas, p. 296, s.v. junco.

166

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

stalks are known for their flexibility (Isa 58.5).¹³⁸ In comparison with the considerably larger palm, it is usually employed metaphorically as a symbol of the small and insignificant, rather than the rich and powerful, who are often symbolized by the latter.¹³⁹ In the pericope under study, however, iuncus is used in the literal sense. Although the cane and the reed express two different hues of green (‘blue-green’ and ‘dark green’), both entities are complemented in the same syntagma by uiror (uiror calami et iunci), and so we can conclude that uiror refers to a colour which is common to both, a green of undefined luminosity. Thus, as a gloss we propose ‘green’. Symbolism: In the case of Isa 15.6, the absence of green vegetation (uiror […]interiit), like the absence of water (aquae […] desertae erunt), connotes a shortage of food and with this implies death and destruction. The symbolism of the Hebrew version, to which we refer the reader on this point,¹⁴⁰ is once again maintained. In Isa 35.7, as the text announces the restoration of the people and thus of the space they inhabit, the presence of green vegetation (uiror calami et iunci) and water (stagnum, fontes aquarum) connotes prosperity, abundance and life, as also occurs in the Hebrew version with the meaning of ‫ ירק‬yereq II and in the Greek with χλωρός.¹⁴¹

IV.3.3.2 Viror in the cognitive domain of metals In Ps 67.14, uiror appears in the Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos, Jerome’s third translation of the book of Psalms from the Hebrew text. In his earlier translation, the Psalterium Gallicanum, he instead uses pallor (Ps 67.14).¹⁴² In the Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos, therefore, Jerome is taking a completely different approach, one removed from the more common translations of the Vetus Latina, where we find terms such as pallor, species and fulgor, although in a few cases there does appear a term from the same lexical family as uiror (uiriditas). ¹⁴³ Viror is used in relation to a term from the cognitive domain of metals: aurum. We find here the same syntactic relationship that appears in Isa 35.7; that is, uiror is complemented by another nominal lexeme, aurum, in the genitive, which functions as the nucleus of the syntagma.¹⁴⁴ Given the cognitive domain in which uiror appears

 For a more detailed exploration of this, see the ancient testimonies on reeds: Thphr. HP. 4.7.3; Thphr. HP. 4.12.2; Dsc. Mat. Med. 1.17; 4.52; Plin. HN. 12.104– 106.6.  Segura Munguía and Torres Ripa, Las plantas en la Biblia, p. 142, s.v. junco.  Vid. supra, p. 46.  Vid. supra, pp. 48 and 92.  Vid. infra, pp. 199 – 201.  Vetus Latina Database: Ps 67.15.  In this way, the reinterpretation found in the Hebrew text is maintained, in which the word for gold appears as a noun and ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq as an adjective.

IV.3 Viror and its polysemy

167

and this peculiar syntactic construction, we can conclude that uiror denotes colour, and not an entity imbued with colour. The difficulty lies in determining what type of hue is denoted, as in classical Latin uiror denotes the colour green, as it does in the Vulgate (Isa 35.7). However, the usual colour of gold is yellow. In the words of colour scholar Jacques André: ‘le jaune […] est la nuance de l’or’.¹⁴⁵ This can be seen in those Latin texts where aurum is accompanied by the verbal lexeme flauesco, highlighting its yellow tonality (spicis […] flauentibus auro, ‘with spikes […] that yellowed like gold’, Ou. Met. 9.689; flauescere […] auro, ‘turn yellow […] gold’, Mart. 9.23.1; flauo […] auro, ‘with yellow […] gold’, Verg. Aen. 1.592), and where the adjectival lexeme aureus is used to express a golden or yellow colour (igni solis […] aureo, ‘with the golden ray of sun’, Varro LL. 7.83; barbae color aureus, ‘the yellowish colour of his beard’, Ou. Met. 12.395; auricomus, ‘with blonde or golden hair’, Sil. Ital. 3.608, Val. Flac. 4.92).¹⁴⁶ A golden green tonality is not uncommon in Latin literature, as we have testimonies of a type of gold described as uiride. Pliny uses it to describe a precious stone (Choaspitis a flumine dicta est, ex uiridi fulgoris aurei, ‘Choaspitis receives this name from a river [Choaspes]; it is the colour green of shining gold’, Plin. HN. 37.156.3) and this is the way Isidore of Seville reproduces it in his Etymologiae (gemma a flumine Persarum dicta est, ex uiridi fulgoris aurei, ‘the gemstone receives this name from a river of the Persians; it is the colour green of shining gold’, Isid. Etym. 16.7.16). It is possible that uiride aurum is a way of referring to the already-mentioned ‘green gold’ or aes corythium,¹⁴⁷ which was well known to Pliny (argentum auro confundere, ut electra fiant, addere his aera, ut Corinthia, ‘[…] combine silver with gold to form electrum, and by adding copper to these, to produce the Corinthian metal’, Plin. HN. 9.139.3). Although we have no proof of this, it cannot be dismissed, as the colour of gold does in fact change when mixed with silver. In any case, the green hue of gold cannot be the same that we find in calamus and reeds, as it is a green embodied in a combination of metals (gold, silver and copper) of different colours (golden, silvery and coppery). Viror embodied in gold cannot, then, denote a colour that expresses a state of freshness and lushness, but rather the result of an alloy in which gold is altered. More specifically, the presence of a grey-coloured silver gives the product of the alloy a hue of low saturation,¹⁴⁸ as reflected in the Septuagint by the choice of χλωρότης and not χλωρός. In consideration of this, the meaning of uiror is ‘the colour of a type of gold, similar to the colour of plants, but of lower saturation; the product of an alloy’. As a gloss, we propose ‘golden green’ and ‘green gold’. In this way, as

 André, Étude sur les termes de couleur, p. 132.  Reminiscent of the Greek epithets χρυσοχαίτης, ‘with blonde or golden hair’ (Pind. Pyth. 2.29), and χρυσοκόμης, ‘with blonde or golden hair’ (Anacr. Fr. 358.2 [PMG]; Alc. Fr. 327.3 [LP]).  Vid. supra, p. 64.  Carole P. Biggam, The Semantics of Colour: A Historical Approach (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012), p. 3.

168

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

we have already said,¹⁴⁹ we can approximate the category of colour that we find in the text and which is recognized as such, at least in Spanish.¹⁵⁰

IV.3.4 Conclusions The nominal lexeme uiror in the Vulgate confirms the proposals of the main Latin dictionaries regarding the polysemy of uiror. In effect, uiror is a polysemic lexeme that may denote both colour and an entity imbued with colour. However, when it denotes colour, it has a particular syntactic structure (noun + noun in the genitive) and its own pantone, as our study of the Vulgate has shown. Thus, depending on the cognitive domain and the entity in which uiror is embodied, it denotes two different chromatic nuances: – When embodied in an entity from the cognitive domain of plants, it denotes the colour of that entity. Viror thus expresses not only colour, but also the state of freshness and lushness that is inseparable from the colour. Given the context of restoration in which uiror appears, it seems to carry the positive symbolism of ‫ ירק‬yereq II and of χλωρός, connoting prosperity and the loving care of God for his creatures. The meaning of uiror is ‘the colour of calamus and reeds when these are fresh; associated with prosperity and the loving care of God (Isa 35.7)’. As a gloss, we propose ‘green’. – When embodied in an entity from the cognitive domain of metals, such as gold, it denotes the colour of that entity, which in the case of gold is produced by alloying gold with silver, resulting in a colour of lower saturation. The meaning, then, is ‘the colour of a type of gold, similar to that of plants but of lower saturation; the product of an alloy (Ps 67.14 VulgHeb)’. As glosses, we propose ‘golden green’ and ‘green gold’. Finally, uiror may appear in the cognitive domain of plants in coordination with other plant elements (Isa 15.6). In this case, uiror denotes an entity from the cognitive domain of plants, but one which is imbued with colour. What is more, this meaning has its origin in a conceptual metonymy of the part for the whole, salient property and entity type, as found in the post-classical period.¹⁵¹ It also maintains the negative symbolism that the pericope possesses in the Hebrew version; i. e. death and destruction as a manifestation of divine punishment. The meaning is an ‘assemblage of plants proper to a region or territory in their state of verdure, freshness and lushness; associated with divine punishment (Isa 15.6)’. As glosses, we propose ‘verdure, greenery’ and ‘green vegetation’.

 Vid. supra, p. 65.  Diccionario Akal del color, p. 945, s.v. verde oro.  In fact, some testimonies of the Vetus Latina contain uiriditas (Vetus Latina Database: Ps 67.14).

IV.3 Viror and its polysemy

169

Our semantic analysis of the Vulgate has enabled us both to confirm the proposals of the main dictionaries and to provide a more complete vision of the chromatism that the lexeme contains. We find that the Vulgate not only echoes the chromatic symbolism of the Hebrew version, but expands upon those pericopes in which colour terms are absent in the Hebrew corpus, but whose context is similar to others where these terms do appear.

IV.3.5 Bibliography André, Jacques, Étude sur les termes de couleur dans la langue latine (Paris: Klincksieck, 1949). Biggam, Carole P., The Semantics of Colour: A Historical Approach (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012). Bogaert, Pierre-Maurice, ‘The Latin Bible’, in James Carleton Paget and Joachim Schaper (eds.), The New Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 505 – 526. Gross-Diaz, Theresa, ‘The Latin Psalter’, in Richard Marsden and E. Ann Matter (eds.), The New Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 427 – 445. Jensen, Hans A., Plant World of the Bible (Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse, 2012). Martínez Pastor, Marcelo, ‘Adjetivo y genitivo adnominal en latín’, Durius 2 (4, 1974), 221 – 257. Monteil, Pierre, Elementos de fonética y morfología del latín, trans. Concepción Fernández Martínez (Sevilla: Publicaciones de la Universidad de Sevilla, 1992). Moriarty, Frederick L., ‘Isaiah 1 – 39’, in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 265 – 282. Pigeon Control Resource Centre, available at: https://www.pigeoncontrolresourcecentre.org/html/ about-pigeons.html; 9/10/2019 Segura Munguía, Santiago and Javier Torres Ripa, Las plantas en la Biblia (Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto; Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 2011). Segura Munguía, Santiago and Javier Torres Ripa, Historia de las plantas en el mundo antiguo (Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto; Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 2009). Swammerdam, Jan, Bybel der Natuure, of Historie der Insecten, vol. 1 (Leiden: Isaak Severinus, Boudewyn Vander Aa & Pieter Vander Aa, 1737).

IV.4 Vireo: ‘to show the colour of plants’ IV.4.1 Introduction Vireo is a verbal lexeme of frequent use in Latin literature, in both its personal and participial forms. In the Vulgate, uireo is the colour term related to green which appears most often (20x), always in its participial form: Gen 1.11, 12; 8.11; 9.3; 19.25; 41.3; Exod 9.31; 10.15; Lev 2.14; Deut 29.23; 2 Kgs 19.26; Job 38.27; 39.8; Ps 36.35 VulgHeb; 51.10 VulgHeb; Prov 11.28; 27.25; Ezek 31.10; 34.14; Hos 14.9. As uireo appears in a great number of biblical references, before examining its specific usage in greater detail, we will first present the primary resources we have used to approximate the worldview of the listener/reader in biblical times (encyclopaedic knowledge). These, once again, are the leading dictionaries of Latin and the early versions of the Bible.

IV.4.2 Encyclopaedic knowledge IV.4.2.1 Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries The principal dictionaries do not perceive any chromatic variation at all in the term uireo, as they present only the tonality ‘green’, without any specification of luminosity (light green) or intensity (faded green): ‘(of plants, etc.) to show green growth (of places), to be green with vegetation or foliage, be verdant (in general application), to be green’;¹⁵² ‘to be green or verdant’;¹⁵³ ‘vert, couleur verte’.¹⁵⁴ However, uireo denotes various shades of green according to the entities to which it and its corresponding cognitive domains are applied: 1) Vireo denotes the colour of plants when the subject of the verbal lexeme is an entity from the cognitive domain of plants. In this sense, the shade of the hue depends on the kind of plant in which uireo appears: a. When the affected entity is not a specific plant, but rather plants in general, as in the case of certain grasses (uirentibus herbis, ‘of grasses that have a green colour’, Ou. Met. 4.301; cespite uirenti, ‘the grass that has a green colour’, Apul. Met. 7.10.24), places where such grasses grow (camposque uirentis, ‘and the fields that are green’, Lucr. 1.18; uirentis agelli, ‘of the small green field’, Hor. AP. 117) and forests (siluarumque uirentium, ‘of the

 OLD, s.v. vireo,  Lewis and Short, s.v. vireo.  Gaffiot, s.v. vireo. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-006

IV.4 Vireo: ‘to show the colour of plants’

171

woods that are green’, Cat. 34.10), uireo denotes the generic green of these plants. b. When the entity affected is a plant to which are applied adjectival lexemes that suggest a dark colouring, such as the oak (ilicibusque uirentem, ‘the oaks are green’, Verg. G. 3.146) or the cypress (uirente […] trunco [sc. cupressus], Sen. Oed. 533; cupressus […] uirebat, ‘the cypress […] was green’, Tac. Hist. 2.78),¹⁵⁵ uireo may reflect this dark tonality. c. When the entity affected is a plant to which are applied adjectival lexemes of a light colouring (salix […] alba, Seru. Georg. 2.13.3; glauca […] salicta, Verg. G. 2.13; cana salix, Lucan. 4.131), such as the willow (salices […] uirent, ‘the willows […] are green’, Ou. Pont. 1.3.52), uireo perhaps denotes this lighter tonality. d. When the affected entity is a plant to which are applied terms such as pallidus or pallens (for example, ivy, hedera uirenti, Hor. C. 1.25.17; hedera […] pallente, Verg. B. 3.39), uireo may show this faded tonality, as this is the colour of ivy. The present active participle of uireo gives a nuance of temporality to the green described which reinforces its value. It is therefore not surprising that the participial form is used to designate the green proper to springtime, characterized by its great intensity: uirens buxum (Ou. Met. 10.97). In this passage, Ovid links and juxtaposes uirens with the adjectives frondibus, molles, innuba, fragiles and tenues; like these, it expresses the freshness of the plants to which it is applied. The difference lies in the fact that uirens, unlike the other terms, does this through the quality of colour and its intensity, this type of intense green being an indicator of the state of a given plant; i. e. lush and vigourous. Nor should it be surprising that the participle is used in the description of trees which, nourished by nearby streams, exude freshness and vitality (stagna uirentia musco, ‘ponds green with moss’, Verg. G. 4.18; [sc. prata] uirentia, riuorum […] causa, ‘[sc. meadows] that are made green by streams’, Seru. Aen. 6.674.1). 2) Vireo denotes the colour of the sea when it describes the waters of the sea (spumas uirentis maris, ‘the foam of the green sea’, Gell. 2.26.23). 3) Vireo denotes the colour of anger or envy; this shade is indicated when uireo appears in the cognitive domain of human beings-emotions, specifically, anger and envy. An example of anger is found in the words that the sister-in-law of Menaechmus 2 uses to describe him to her father (uiden tu ille oculos uirere?, ‘don’t you see how his eyes have a greenish colour?’, Plaut. Men. 828). Envy is

 Vid. supra, p. 135.

172

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

vividly described as having a green tonality in Ovid’s Metamorphosis ([…] pectora felle uirent, ‘breast green with gall’, 2.777).¹⁵⁶

IV.4.2.2 Early versions of the Bible The Vulgate uses the present participle of uireo to translate a wide range of Hebrew terms. Some of these denote the colour green, such as ‫ ירק‬yereq in its adjectival form (Gen 9.3; 2 Kgs 19.26) or as a noun (Exod 10.15), and ‫ ירוק‬yārôq (Job 39.8). Other terms connote the colour green, because they reflect a state of freshness and lushness in plants, as in the case of ‫ רענן‬raʿǎnān, ‘fresh’ (Ps 36.35 VulgHeb [37.35 MT]; 51.10 VulgHeb [52.10 MT]; Hos 14.9), ‫’ אביב‬ābîb, ‘young ears of barley’¹⁵⁷ (Exod 9.31; Lev 2.14) or even ‫ טוב‬tôb, ‘good’ (Ezek 34.14) and ‫ מצא‬mōṣā’, ‘growth’¹⁵⁸ (Job 38.27), or because they are lexemes that belong to the cognitive domain of plants, such as ‫צמח‬ ṣemaḥ, ‘vegetation’ (Gen 19.25), ‫ עשב‬ʿēśeb, ‘herb’ (Deut 29.22), ‫‘ עלה‬āleh, ‘leaf’ (Prov 11.28) or ‫ דשׁא‬deše’, ‘grass’ (Prov 27.25). What is more, in some pericopes of the Vulgate the present participle of uireo is added even when there is no corresponding term in the Hebrew version (Gen 1.11, 12; Job 38.27; Ezek 31.10), to the point that the Vulgate in effect lengthens the pericope, giving it greater expressiveness. This is the case of Gen 8.11 and 41.3. Gen 8.11 completes the expression ramum oliuae (in Hebrew ‫ )עלה־זית‬with uirentibus foliis, while Gen 41.3 adds in locis uirentibus to in ipsa amnis ripa, which corresponds to a different Hebrew and Greek text (‫על־שפת היאר‬, ‘on the banks of the Nile’; παρὰ τὸ χεῖλος τοῦ ποταμοῦ, ‘on the banks of the river’) and is conserved in the Vetus Latina. Both tendencies (to reinterpret and to translate) are found again when the Vulgate translates the Psalms from the MT in the Psalterium Iuxta Hebraeos. Thus, in Ps 36.35 the expression indigenam uirentem is used to translate the Hebrew lexeme ‫רענן‬ raʿǎnān,‘fresh’ (Ps 37.35), while in Ps 51.10 (52.10 MT) the Latin translator chooses only the participle uirens.

IV.4.2.3 Synthesis The verbal lexeme uireo appears frequently in Latin literature, where it is used as a polysemic term that expresses various shades of green, according to the entity being described (plants, the sea, human beings and their emotions). For the study of the Vulgate, the use of uireo in the cognitive domain of plants is especially relevant.  Curiously, in English, Italian and Spanish, envy continues to be associated with the colour green, in expressions such as: ‘to be green with envy’, ‘essere verde dall’invidia’, ‘estar verde de envidia’.  BDB, s.v. ‫אביב‬.  HALOT, s.v. ‫מצא‬.

IV.4 Vireo: ‘to show the colour of plants’

173

The hue denoted is the colour of these plants; i. e. green, with various shades of this perceived depending on the kind of plant. In this domain, the verbal lexeme usually appears in its participial form, specifically in the present, reinforcing not only the colour, but the state of freshness and lushness connoted by the object described. The Vulgate utilizes the present active participle of uireo to translate Hebrew lexemes which belong to the cognitive domain of plants or which denote the colour green or the state that it reflects; i. e. the freshness and lushness of plants. Moreover, the translator of the Vulgate feels the necessity to include it in some pericopes where there is no explicit chromatism in the Hebrew version. Both of these approaches are maintained in translating the Psalms from the MT to the Vulgate.

IV.4.3 Semantic analysis of uireo Vireo appears throughout the entire Old Testament in the Vulgate, in books whose genre is narrative (Genesis, Exodus, 2 Kings¹⁵⁹), legal (Leviticus, Deuteronomy), poetic or wisdom (Job, Psalms and Proverbs) and prophetic (Ezekiel, Hosea). Although the themes of these books are different, in all of these pericopes the Vulgate uses uireo to recreate, literally or figuratively, plant contexts predominated by lexemes from the cognitive domain of plants, such as: herba, ‘grass’ (Gen 1.11, 12; 2 Kgs 19.26; Job 38.27; Prov. 27.25); Ezek 34.14); folium, ‘leaf’ (Gen 8.11; Prov 11.28; holera, ‘vegetables’ (Gen 9.3); locus, ‘place’ (Gen 41.3); hordeum, ‘barley’ (Exod 9.31); indigena, ‘every tree that remains in the place where it was planted’ (Ps 36.35 VulgHeb); arbor, ‘tree’ (Ezek 31.10); etc.: Gen 1.11 et ait germinet terra herbam uirentem et facientem semen et lignum pomiferum faciens fructum iuxta genus suum cuius semen in semet ipso sit super terram et factum est ita And he said: ‘Let the earth bring forth green herb showing growth and producing seed; the tree abundant in fruit according to its kind, the seed of which is in it upon the earth’ and it was done.¹⁶⁰

Gen 1.12 et protulit terra herbam uirentem et adferentem semen iuxta genus suum lignumque faciens fructum et habens unumquodque sementem secundum speciem suam et uidit Deus quod esset bonum

 For 2 Kgs 19.26, see p. 47.  As the reader will have observed, it is difficult to render in this English translation the shades of meaning expressed by the present participle here, as English lacks a verb equivalent to ‘verdear’ in Spanish or ‘verdeggiare’ in Italian. For this reason, although we have on occasion used a verb form (‘sprouting’ or ‘flourishing’), in the majority of cases we have opted simply to use the adjective ‘green’.

174

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

And the earth produced green herb, sprouting up and giving seed according to the type and the tree which bears fruit, each one having its own seed according to its species, and God saw that it was good.

Gen 8.11 at illa uenit ad eum ad uesperam portans ramum oliuae uirentibus foliis in ore suo intellexit ergo Noe quod cessassent aquae super terram But she [the dove] came back to him in the evening, carrying in her beak an olive twig with green leaves; and so Noah knew that the waters had subsided from the earth.

Gen 9.3 et omne quod mouetur et uiuit erit uobis in cibum quasi holera uirentia tradidi uobis omnia And all that moves and lives you will have as food; as well as the green plants, I have given you all things.

Gen 41.3 aliae quoque septem emergebant de flumine foedae confectaeque macie et pascebantur in ipsa amnis ripa in locis uirentibus And another seven [cows] came out of the river, unsightly and overcome by gauntness, and grazed upon the same river banks in places showing green growth.

Exod 9.31 linum ergo et hordeum laesum est eo quod hordeum esset uirens et linum iam folliculos germinaret And so the flax and the barley were ruined because the barley was green, and the flax had now bolled.

Lev 2.14 si autem obtuleris munus primarum frugum tuarum Domino de spicis adhuc uirentibus torres eas igni et confringes in morem farris et sic offeres primitias tuas Domino If, however, you were to offer to the Lord a gift of the first fruits of the grain that are still sprouting green, you will toast them over the fire and crush them like spelt, and like this will make your offerings to the Lord.

2 Kgs 19.26 et qui sedent in eis humiles manu contremuerunt et confusi sunt facti sunt quasi faenum agri et uirens herba tectorum quae arefacta est antequam ueniret ad maturitatem And those who sat in them, weak of hand, were dismayed and confused; were like the hay of the field and the green grass sprouting on the housetops that has withered before it matures.

IV.4 Vireo: ‘to show the colour of plants’

175

Job 38.27 ut impleret inuiam et desolatam et produceret herbas uirentes So as to flood it, inaccessible and desolate, and produce green grasses.

Ps 36.35 VulgHeb [37.35 MT] uidi impium robustum et fortissimum sicut indigenam uirentem I saw the impious, robust and very strong, like the indigenous green tree.

Ps 51.10 VulgHeb [52.10 MT] ego sicut oliva uirens in domo Dei speraui in misericordia Dei in saeculum sempiternum But I, like a green olive tree in the house of God, trust in the mercy of God for ever and ever.

Prov 11.28 qui confidit in diuitiis suis corruet iusti autem quasi uirens folium germinabunt He who trusts in his riches will fall; the righteous, however, will flourish like the green leaf.

Prov 27.25 aperta sunt prata et apparuerunt herbae uirentes et collecta sunt faena de montibus The fields were cleared, green grass sprouted up and the hay of the mountains was gathered.

Ezek 31.10 propterea hæc dicit Dominus Deus pro eo quod sublimatus est in altitudine et dedit summitatem suam uirentem atque condensam et eleuatum est cor ejus in altitudine sua Therefore this is what the Lord God says: because he towered high, showing his top green and leafy and his heart was lifted up in his height.

Ezek 34.14 in pascuis uberrimis pascam eas et in montibus excelsis Israhel erunt pascua earum ibi requiescent in herbis uirentibus et in pascuis pinguibus pascentur super montes Israhel In fertile pastures I will feed them and in the high mountains of Israel will be their pastures: there they will lie down in green grass and in fertile pastures they will graze on the mountains of Israel.

Hos 14.9 Ephraim quid mihi ultra idola ego exaudiam et dirigam eum ego ut abietem uirentem ex me fructus tuus inuentus est

176

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

Ephraim, what have I to do with idols? I will hear him and straighten him, I am like the green fir tree flourishing; from me your fruit is found.

In any case, the entity is sometimes presented as indeterminate through the use of the neuter form of the adjective cuncta or pronouns such as nihil, quippiam or quaeque. In these cases, the presence of the participle of uireo indicates that it alludes to plants in general, to all that is characterized by its green colour: Gen 19.25 et subuertit ciuitates has et omnem circa regionem uniuersos habitatores urbium et cuncta terrae uirentia and he vanquished these cities and all the region around them, all the inhabitants of the cities and all the greenery of the land

Exod 10.15 operueruntque universam superficiem terrae uastantes omnia deuorata est igitur herba terrae et quicquid pomorum in arboribus fuit quae grando dimiserat nihilque omnino uirens relictum est in lignis et in herbis terrae in cuncta Aegypto And they covered all the face of the land, vanquishing everything. And so the herb of the land was devoured and all the fruit on the trees that the hail had left, and nothing was left green on the trees nor in the grasses of the land in all of Egypt.

Deut 29.23 sulphure et salis ardore conburens ita ut ultra non seratur nec uirens quippiam germinet in exemplum subuersionis Sodomae et Gomorrae Adamae et Seboim quas subuertit Dominus in ira et furore suo Scorching the land with sulphur and with burning of salt, so that there was nothing sown nor did any green thing sprout, like the destruction of Sodom, Gomor’ra, Admah and Zebo’im, which the Lord overthrew in his wrath and fury.

Job 39.8 circumspicit montes pascuae suae et uirentia quaeque perquirit [The wild ass] looks around the mountains and for its food searches all that is green.

As for the meaning of uireo in the Vulgate, aside from the entity being described, it should be pointed out that in all of these pericopes the present active participle of the verb uireo is used. This sense of the present gives a particular nuance of temporality that reinforces the tonality of green. In the plant context, this brings with it a greater intensity of lushness than what is connoted by green itself (summitatem […] uirentem atque condensam, Ezek 31.10; robustum et fortissimum sicut indigenam uirentem, Ps 36.35 VulgHeb). As can be deduced from the extraverbal context, it is a

IV.4 Vireo: ‘to show the colour of plants’

177

very vivid green, characteristic of spring, and one that reveals in turn the great freshness of the tree to which it is applied. In this light, it is not surprising that the participial form is used when referring to the new plants which sprout from the earth (germinet […] herbam uirentem, Gen 1.11; uirens […] germinet, Deut 29.23; uirens folium germinabunt, Prov 11.28; and, with a value similar to germino, protulit herbam uirentem, Gen 1.12; apparuerunt herbae uirentes, Prov 27.25), those which have not fully matured (uirens herba […] antequam ueniret ad maturitatem, 2 Kgs 19.26) or those which, for being found along the riverbanks, have an aspect of even greater lushness (in ipsa amnis ripa in locis uirentibus, Gen 41.3). If we focus our attention on the chromaticity denoted by uireo, we can observe that when this is embodied in plants of uncertain identity, such as leaves (Prov 11.28; 27.25), grass (Gen 1.11– 12; 2 Kgs 19.26; Job 38.27; Ezek 34.14), wheat spikes (Lev 2.14), vegetation (Gen 9.3; 19.25; Exod 10.15; Deut 29.23 Job 39.8; Ezek 31.10), indigenous trees (Ps 36.35 VulgHeb)¹⁶¹ and the places where these grow (Gen 41.3), uireo denotes the colour characteristic of plants when they are fresh and lush; that is to say, green. The indetermination of the plants mentioned also supposes an indefinition with regard to colour, making it impossible to determine their exact hues. Accordingly, the definition of uireo in the Vulgate is ‘showing the colour of plants when they are fresh and lush’. As glosses, we propose ’to sprout’, ’to be green’. The chromatism expressed by uirens is therefore that of a green common to the entities described, which would include all the varieties of ‘green’ that the term might encompass. As will be shown, a precise chromatism for uireo is not possible to determine with certainty, although in Gen 8.11, Exod 9.31 and Hos 14.9, the term is embodied in specific plants with specific hues: In Gen 8.11, uireo is embodied in the leaves of the olive tree (portans ramum oliuae uirentibus foliis), which is described in Latin with the participle pallens (pallenti […] oliua, Verg. B. 5.16), an indicator of low chromatic intensity. In this case, it might then be suggested that this is a faded green; however, considering that the context of the pericope alludes to the end of the flood and that the participial form confers to the hue described a sense of temporality that reinforces it, it seems rather that it would refer to the newly sprouting growth on land after the flood.¹⁶² In this sense,

 In the Spanish translation by Felipe Scio de S. Miguel, La Santa Biblia: traducida al español de la Vulgata latina y anotada conforme al sentido de los Santos Padres y expositores católicos, vol. 3 (Madrid: Gaspar y Roig, Editores, 1852), p. 55, n. 6, we find the translation ‘como un verde laurel’ (‘like a green laurel’). In reality, the term indigena does not refer to the laurel, but to all trees that remain standing in the places they were planted: indi (‘from there’) + gena (‘originating’); we can thus include this verse within the category of a generic green.  The fact that uirens is used instead of pallens reveals that the entity described is not mature, but rather has just sprouted, its faded hue being less intense (in its early phase, as we know, a plant is characterized by a lushness and freshness that increase the intensity of its colour). Focusing on the plant’s verdure (uirens) and not on a tone of lesser saturation (pallens) would therefore indicate this incipient state.

178

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

it does not seem possible to define the colour expressed more precisely, as Gen 8.11 refers to the moment at which the olive trees begin to grow. In Exod 9.31 uireo is embodied in hordeum, ‘barley’, which as we have said has a yellow colour (Cat. Agr. 151.2).¹⁶³ However, the type of barley referred to (probably Hordeum spontaneum, the type that grows in the Fertile Crescent) cannot be determined with exactitude. The fact that the Vulgate focuses on the verdure (uirens) of the plant and not on its yellowish shades (flauens) must stem from a desire to show barley in its early phase, when it is just beginning to grow, as this transitional verdure is a revealing sign of incomplete maturation. For this reason, it is not possible for us to specify the colour of uireo in greater detail. In Hos 14.9, uireo is embodied in abies, ‘spruce’. This is one of the trees that Vergil describes with the adjective niger (nigra […] abiete, Verg. Aen. 8.599), suggesting that uireo perhaps denotes a dark tonality. As we cannot establish the colour of the spruces that the Vulgate translator refers to,¹⁶⁴ it seems to us preferable to maintain that in Hos 14.9 this is a generic green. After our analysis, we can conclude that uireo in the Vulgate denotes ‘showing the colour proper to plants when they are fresh and lush’.

IV.4.4 Conclusions The verbal lexeme uireo appears throughout the various books of the Vulgate, giving to the Latin version an intense chromatism not found in either the Greek or the Hebrew versions. Vireo is the colour term most used in the Vulgate within the range of greens. It always appears as the present participle, which gives a sense of temporality and intensity to the colour expressed. In contrast to what usually occurs in classical Latin, it has always an adjectival function, and is thus embodied in a variety of entities. These belong to a single cognitive domain; i. e. plants, whether these are mentioned explicitly (arbor, herba, folium, etc.) or because this can be deduced from expressions such as cuncta uirentia (Gen 19.25), uirens quippiam (Deut 29.23) and so on. In the majority of the pericopes where uireo is used, it is not possible to determine the identity of the plants in which it is embodied and specified, as we lack sufficient certainty to identify further nuances. Its meaning, therefore, would be ‘showing the colour proper to plants when they are fresh and lush’. As glosses, we propose ‘to sprout’, ‘to be green’.

 Vid. supra, note 119, p. 161.  Segura Munguía and Torres Ripa, Historia de las plantas, pp. 111– 112, s.v. abeto, do not specify the colour of abies. Nor do we know why the Vulgate chooses abies, as this appears in the Hebrew version as ‫ ברוש‬bǝrôš (we are uncertain which tree this refers to, BDB, s.v. ‫ )ברוש‬and in the Greek as ἄρκευθος, ‘juniper’. In other pericopes, however, cedrus is used (2 Kgs 19.23; Isa 14.8).

IV.4 Vireo: ‘to show the colour of plants’

IV.4.5 Bibliography Segura Munguía, Santiago and Javier Torres Ripa, Historia de las plantas en el mundo antiguo (Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto; Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 2009).

179

IV.5 Viresco: ‘to become the colour of a tree or the new fresh grass’ IV.5.1 Introduction Viresco is a verbal lexeme derived from the verb uireo, to which has been added the suffix –*sk-e/o–, ¹⁶⁵ quite productive in Indo-Iranian, Armenian and Greek. In IndoEuropean, the value of this suffix was two-fold: iterative, indicating the repetition of an action (φά-σκω: ‘to say again and again’ > ‘repeat’; disco, ‘not to stop learning’); and inchoative, describing the process in its advance towards an end (γηρά-σκω, ‘to age’, ‘become old’; uiesco ‘to curve’, ‘to become curved’). In Latin, there are more than five hundred verbs characterized by the ending –ēsco, many of which form pairs with state verbs ending in –ēo. To this group belong a series of chromatic verbs: albēo, ‘to be white’/albēsco, ‘to turn or become white’; rubēo, ‘to be red’/rubēsco, ‘to turn or become red’; uirēo, ‘to be green’/uirēsco, ‘to turn or become green’.¹⁶⁶ Viresco is a verbal lexeme which is rarely (2x) used in the Vulgate, appearing in Job 14.7 and Ps 128.6 (Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos). The two pericopes under study here belong to two of the poetic books: Job and Psalms. Job 14.7 is part of the response that Job gives to Sofar, specifically when he laments over the ephemeral nature of human life (Job 13.28 – 14.12): unlike other elements of creation, the life of a man comes to an unavoidable end. It is here that the pericope in question appears, as Job expresses the fact that the tree, although its roots and trunk are withered, may still sprout new leaves. It seems that this is an allusion to a custom that existed to the east of Jordan, near Damascus, where trees were cut down when they bore little fruit. The tree would be renewed in this way and the following year its production would be bountiful.¹⁶⁷ Ps 128.6 VulgHeb is from an ascension psalm in which the psalmist opens his heart by praising the way God has protected him again and again from his enemies (which he denominates as ‘the impious’ [Ps 128.4 VulgHeb]) and expressing aloud his desire for them to disappear from his life. To do this, he turns to the image of grass, now well known to the reader,¹⁶⁸ although it possesses a slightly different character here. The psalmist refers to grass that grows on the rooftops and, not hav-

 OLD, s.v. viresco; Lewis and Short, s.v. viresco; Gaffiot, s.v. viresco.  For a more in-depth examination of this: Monteil, Elementos de fonética, pp. 332– 334.  Samuel R. Driver and George B. Gray, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Job: Together with a New Translation (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1921), p. 128; Marvin H. Pope. Job, Introd., Translation, and Notes, 3rd edn, AB 15 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday 1973), p. 106.  Vid. supra, pp. 48, 92, etc. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-006

IV.5 Viresco: ‘to become the colour of a tree or the new fresh grass’

181

ing enough soil to take root, is unable to develop a green hue, the sign of maturity, before the sun of Palestine causes it to burn and wither.¹⁶⁹ Before proceeding to a semantic analysis of the term, we will first examine the information provided by the leading dictionaries and the early versions of the Bible, with the aim of acquiring some of the worldview that the listener/reader in biblical times possessed.

IV.5.2 Encyclopaedic knowledge IV.5.2.1 Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries The principal Latin dictionaries attribute to the verbal lexeme uiresco only the ‘green’ hue of plants and vegetation in general, without alluding to more subtle distinctions: ‘to begin to bear green growth; ‘(in general application) to turn green’;¹⁷⁰ ‘to grow or become green or verdant’;¹⁷¹ ‘devenir vert, verdir’.¹⁷² Thus, uiresco is used to refer to the undefined green of the fields (nemus loquitur frondemque uirescit in omnem, ‘the forest becomes green in every leaf’, Manil. 3.656), meadows (uirescunt gramina, ‘the meadows turn green’, Verg. G. 1.55) or branches (ramique uirescunt, ‘the branches become green’, Lucr. 1.252) or to the acquisition of a green hue in specific plants such as the oak, which, as we have said, is known for its blackish colouring¹⁷³ (querqueto uirescenti, ‘oak forest that turns green’, Sextus Pompeius Festus, De Verborum Significatione 261.19).

IV.5.2.2 Early versions of the Bible As we mentioned in our study of ‫ ירוק‬yārôq,¹⁷⁴ the book of Job is characterized by frequent alterations. Nevertheless, the pericope that concerns us here, Job 14.7, paraphrases the Hebrew version, as also occurs in the Septuagint, while it is not preserved at all in the Qumran text. Viresco, then, is used to translate the Hebrew lexeme ‫ חלף‬ḥālap, which means not only ‘to pass away’, but, when referring to trees, acquires other meanings as well: ‘to show newness; of a tree, putting forth

 Charles A. Briggs, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms, vol. 2 (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1906 – 7), p. 463; Mitchell Dahood, Psalms III: 101 – 150, AB 17 A (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1970), p. 232.  OLD, s.v. viresco.  Lewis and Short, s.v. viresco.  Gaffiot, s.v. viresco.  Vid. supra, p. 135.  Vid. supra, p. 70.

182

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

fresh shoots’.¹⁷⁵ The SDBH defines it as a ‘process whereby an object appears in a certain location’.¹⁷⁶ As may be deduced from this, the chromatic connotation is absent from the Hebrew lexeme. However, the Vulgate translator,¹⁷⁷ while having at his disposal an ample repertory of Latin lexemes that he could have used (enascor, cresco or any of their compounds: accresco, excresco, incresco, recresco), opts for uiresco, which, combining the meanings of earlier lexemes, adds colour to the term; that is, the green hue of the new growth that sprouts from a tree. Perhaps because this green colour is a state, the translator, knowing the state of lushness reflected by ‫ חלף‬ḥālap in Hebrew, does not hesitate to use uiresco, denoting the process by which this state is acquired. As for Ps 128.6 VulgHeb (129.6 MT), uiresco is the translation of the verbal lexeme ‫ שלף‬šālap, whose meaning (‘to shoot up; i.e draw out, a blade’)¹⁷⁸ does not have a chromatic aspect when used in the context of vegetation. Here, the translator once again chooses uiresco, which gives a clearly chromatic value to the text.¹⁷⁹ The choice is a surprising one, as a similar metaphor is used in Isa 37.27 and, while the colour lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq appears in the Hebrew version, the Vulgate avoids the chromatic connotation in favour of gramen pascuae.

IV.5.2.3 Synthesis According to the dictionaries, the verbal lexeme uiresco appears as an inchoative verb and is applied to plants. It denotes the process by which a plant acquires the colour green. In the early versions of the Bible, the source text (the Hebrew version) uses verbal lexemes that explicitly lack both the inchoative value and the chromatic connotation.

IV.5.3 Semantic analysis of uiresco The verbal lexeme uiresco is used in two different pericopes: in Job 14.7, to state a fact; and in Ps 128.6 VulgHeb to describe the ephemerality of the riches of the  BDB, s.v. ‫חלף‬. In the same line, HALOT s.v. ‫חלף‬, which deals with the use of the lexeme in this context.  SDBH, s.v. ‫ ;חלף‬available at: http://www.sdbh.org/dictionary/main.php?language=en; 18/06/2019.  The testimonies in the Vetus Latina fluctuate between uirescit and floriet (Vetus Latina Database: Job 14.7).  BDB, s.v. ‫שלף‬. HALOT, s.v. ‫שלף‬, states that ‘commentators are divided here between the translation “before it sprouts (or shoots up)” and “before it is plucked up”. The latter would seem to be preferable (to the LXX)’.  Also absent from the Psalterium Gallicanum, which uses the verbal lexeme euellatur ‘to tear out, pluck out’: fiant sicut faenum tectorum quod priusquam euellatur exaruit, ‘let them be like the grass on the housetops, which withers before it is gleaned’.

IV.5 Viresco: ‘to become the colour of a tree or the new fresh grass’

183

wicked. Both instances, however, depict a similar context as they describe a natural setting dominated by plants: Job 14.7 lignum habet spem si praecisum fuerit rursum uirescit et rami eius pullulant. A tree has hope; if it is cut down, it becomes green again, and multiplies its branches.

Ps 128.6 VulgHeb fiant sicut faenum tectorum quod statim ut uiruerit arescet. Let them be like the grass on the housetops, which withers before it becomes green.

In these pericopes, uiresco connotes two entities as subjects, both from the cognitive domain of plants: lignum, ‘tree’ (Job 14.8) and faenum, ‘grass’ (Ps 128.6 VulgHeb). These entities each have an indefinite character: lignum, a tree representing all the existing types of trees (Job 14.7) and faenum, representing the various grasses that grow on the roofs of houses (Ps 128.6). In neither case is it possible to access any extra-linguistic knowledge, as both referents lack a concrete identity. The indeterminate nature of the plants referred to thus implies a generic conception of the green thing described, one common to all of these plants and without specific nuances. This hue is nothing less than the final result of a process of chromatic transformation (implicit in the suffix –sc) in a plant (trees and grasses) whose initial hue is gradually modified until the colour proper to plants in their state of maturity is acquired (green). The use of the verbal lexeme uiresco in these two pericopes is conceived not as a state (the plant which is green being expressed by uireo), but rather as a process (the plant becoming green), expressed by uiresco. Job 14.7 refers to a tree which, once cut down, regains its verdure (praecisum fuerit rursum uirescit), and Ps 128.6 VulgHeb to a grass that withers before becoming green (statim ut uiruerit).

IV.5.4 Conclusions From our analysis, it can be concluded that uiresco in the Vulgate is used in the plant context and connotes as its subject entities from the cognitive domain of plants. This coincides with its use in classical Latin. Although it is used very infrequently, the pericopes themselves provide us with the information needed to determine its meaning: ‘to become the colour of a tree that, after being cut down, grows anew full of strength and sap (Job 14.7), and of the new grass that sprouts on the roofs of houses (Ps 128.6 VulgHeb).’ As glosses, we propose ‘to become green’ and ‘to turn green’.

184

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

IV.5.5 Bibliography Briggs, Charles A., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms, vol. 2 (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1906 – 7). Dahood, Mitchell, Psalms III: 101 – 150, AB 17 A (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1970). Driver, Samuel R. and George B. Gray, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Job: Together with a New Translation (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1921). Monteil, Pierre, Elementos de fonética y morfología del latín, trans. Concepción Fernández Martínez (Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, 2003). Pope, Marvin H., Job, Introd., Translation, and Notes, 3rd edn, AB 15 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1973).

IV.6 Pallidus: ‘the colour of death’ IV.6.1 Introduction Pallidus is an adjective derived from the verbal lexeme palleo. The ‘ll’ that appears in both palleo and pallidus belongs to a series of expressive geminates and, as in Greek with the lexeme πελλός, denotes a pale, bluish or light bluish hue.¹⁸⁰ It also features the suffix –idus, which is used to form adjectives from verbs ending in –ere and usually designates a permanent quality (aridus, cupidus, gelidus, etc.).¹⁸¹ Although it is used frequently in Latin,¹⁸² it appears only once in the Vulgate, in the last book of the biblical corpus, Revelation (Rev 6.8). As the reader will recall,¹⁸³ Rev 6.8 is part of the opening of the four seals that takes place after the vision of the Lamb. As each seal is opened, a horse of a different colour appears –white, sorrel and black for the first three, the fourth being the focus of our study here as it is described with the adjectival lexeme pallidus. Before examining in greater depth the chromatic value of this lexeme in the Vulgate, we will first look more closely at the chromatic spectrum suggested by the adjectival lexeme pallidus in Latin according to the leading dictionaries, as well as the information provided by the early versions of the Bible, in this case the Greek version of the New Testament.

IV.6.2 Encyclopaedic knowledge IV.6.2.1 Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries The leading Latin dictionaries give four meanings for the adjectival lexeme pallidus: 1) Pale : ‘having a pale colour, pallid’;¹⁸⁴ ‘de couleur pâle’;¹⁸⁵ ‘pale, ‘pallid’.¹⁸⁶ 2) Yellowish: ‘de couleur […] jaunâtre’.¹⁸⁷ 3) Dim or dull:¹⁸⁸ ‘(of light, etc.) pale, dim’;¹⁸⁹ ‘pâle, terne, peu lumineux’.¹⁹⁰ 4) Mouldy: ‘musty, mouldy’.¹⁹¹

 DELL, p. 476, s.v. palleo.  Beltrán, Introducción a la morfología latina, p. 35.  Posner, Philip et al. (eds.), Logeion 2, ΛΟΓΕΙΟΝ, s.v. pallidus; latest update: September 2018; available at: https://logeion.uchicago.edu/pallidus; 15/11/19.  Vid. supra, p. 93.  OLD, s.v. pallidus.  Gaffiot, s.v. pallidus.  Lewis and Short, s.v. pallidus.  Gaffiot, s.v. pallidus.  André, Étude sur les termes de couleur, p. 139: ‘[sc. “pâle”] il marque, dans chaque teinte, un degré plus ou moins faible de coloration, ainsi dans “bleu-pâle”, “jaune-pâle”, etc’. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-006

186

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

As pallidus appears only once in the Vulgate, in the cognitive domain of animals, we feel it is necessary to analyze in detail its chromatic spectrum with our established methodology, i. e. studying the meaning of the adjective on the basis of the entity described and its cognitive domain. Before detailing its varied chromatic spectrum, we offer here two particularly relevant conclusions obtained from our study: – In antiquity, the adjective pallidus designated not only the low degree of saturation of a particular hue, but also a colour itself, as can be seen in Seneca, who in explaining the effect of a flash of lightning on an object, speaks of de-colouration and colouration. According to Seneca, the latter of these affects the object (the entity) in such a way that it acquires a diversity of colours, among them pallidus (caerulea uel nigra uel pallida, ‘bluish, black or pale’, Sen. QN. 2.40.6). The chromatic value of pallidus is therefore indisputable. – The tonality expressed by this adjective is not the same as that denoted by albus, ‘white’, or liuidus, ‘livid’, as there are testimonies in medical texts in which these terms are juxtaposed with pallidus, making it clear that they have different nuances ([sc. sputum] siue album […] siue pallidum, ‘[sc. sputum] white […] or pale white’, Cels. 2.8.22; callus […] albus aut pallidus, ‘white or pale […] callus’, Cels. 5.28.12; quod descendit est […] albidum aut pallidum, ‘the evacuation is […] white or pale’, Cels. 2.4.9; [sc. color uulneris] liuidus aut pallidus, ‘[sc. the colour of the wound] […] livid or pale’, Cels. 5.26 – 27a.4).¹⁹² We find this same juxtaposition of terms in contexts which are purely vegetal (sc. folia hederae […] subalbida a terra, superne pallida, ‘sc. leaves of ivy […] whitish on the upper face and pale on the lower’, Plin. HN. 26.30.4; Arsenogonon et thelygonon herbae sunt habentes uuas floribus oleae similes, pallidioris tamen, semen album papaueris modo, (‘Arsenogonon and thelygonon are plants that produce grapes similar to olive flowers, but paler, with a white seed similar to the poppy’, Plin. HN. 26.162.1). When the texts are analyzed, it can be observed that pallidus is embodied in specific entities from different cognitive domains: 1) When embodied in a person, pallidus expresses a variety of hues according to the cognitive domains with which that person is connected. Thus, for example, it may describe the aspect of person experiencing fatigue (exsangues ac pallidos, ‘bloodless and pale’, Quint. DM. 12.2.21; pallida est, ut peperit puerum, ‘She is pale, because she has given birth’, Plaut. Truc. 576) or cold (color pallidissimus, sudores frigidi, ‘a very pale colour, cold sweats’, Cels. 5.26.8).¹⁹³ Such an aspect

 OLD, s.v. pallidus.  Gaffiot, s.v. pallidus.  Lewis and Short, s.v. pallidus.  André, Étude sur les termes de couleur, p. 140.  By metonymy (effect by cause), pallidus refers also to cold: pallida Rheni / frigora, ‘the pale coldnesses of the Rhine’, Stat. Silu. 5.1.128.

IV.6 Pallidus: ‘the colour of death’

187

may also be the effect of emotions such as fear (nomine in Hectoreo pallida semper eram, ‘at the name of Hector I turned pale’, Ou. Epist. 1.14; ipsa ego […] pallida sedi, cum uidi subitos arma tenere uiros, ‘I sat down myself, pale, when I saw men suddenly gripping their weapons’ Ou. Epist. 12.97), astonishment (sua crimina pallidus audit, ‘listening palely to his own crimes’, Calp. B. 6.82), worry (curis et pallida nutrix, ‘and the wetnurse, pale from worry’, Prop. 4.3.41)¹⁹⁴ or falling in love (pallidus in lenta Naïde Daphnis erat, ‘pale [sc. with love] for the fleeing Naiad was Daphne’, Ou. AA. 1.732).¹⁹⁵ In these domains, our research shows that pallidus seems to express a whitish-yellowish shade as shown in our study of pallor. ¹⁹⁶ The content of pallor, then, is complemented by the use of adjectival or verbal lexemes (albus, luteus, exalbesco) that denote a whitish or yellowish tonality (Hor. Epod. 7.1; 10.16; Enn. Trag. 16.5 Traglia). However, when together with the person there appears the cognitive domain of sickness, pallidus seems to denote another tonality. According to Jacques André, it is used to translate the adjectives χλωρός and χλοερός in the practically literal translations by Celsus of some passages from Hippocrates. Indeed, the French scholar sees pallidus and χλωρός as equivalent terms.¹⁹⁷ Among the examples he gives are: ‘Cels. 2.6.5 ulcus […] aridum et aut pallidum aut liuidum, et Hippocr., Progn. IX, p. 82, 9, [ἔλκος] ξηρόν τε καὶ χλωρὸν; Cels. 2.8.23, si pus est liuidum et pallidum et Hippocr., Progn. XVII, p. 97, 7, καὶ τὸ πῦον χλωρὸν ἢ καὶ πελιδνόν’.¹⁹⁸ Logically, the meaning of χλωρός in these texts is not the colour that sprouts on the trees with the arrival of spring, but rather, we have discovered, the colour of a sick person,¹⁹⁹ a green of low saturation which is what χλωρός denotes in the cognitive domain of sickness. A greenish hue used to indicate a symptom of sickness is observed in a number of authors. Celsus (2.7.11) tells us that greenness (uiridis) applied to urine is a sign of abdominal pain (uiscerum dolorem), the existence of a tumour (tumorem) or a general lack of health (corpus integrum non esse). Varro uses euiro to indicate the greenish colour that the body acquires from sickness: exsanguibus dolore euirescat colos, ‘the colour becomes green from the pain [of his joints] bled dry’ (Prometheus Liber 425 [Non. 101M]). Pliny, meanwhile, uses uiridis to  Again by metonymy (effect by cause), the adjective is used to qualify preoccupation (non uenit ad duros pallida cura toros, ‘pale worry comes not to hard beds’, Mart. 14.162.2).  The elegiac poets used the term pallidus to intensify the commitment of a lover to his beloved; to this effect, the torments, suffering and insomnia caused by love are made visible in the paleness of the one in love: Lydia Pelletier-Michaud, Évolution du sens des termes de couleur et de leur traitement poétique. L’élégie romaine et ses modèles grecs, Thèse de doctorat (Québec: Universitè Laval, 2016), pp. 86, 274– 276 and 359.  Vid. infra, p. 195.  André, Étude sur les terms de couleur, p. 141.  André, Étude sur les terms de couleur, p. 141.  Vid. supra, pp. 93 – 100.

188

2)

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

refer to afflictions of the intestines: uiridis morbum uiscerum, ‘green from intestinal diseases’ (HN. 28.68.7). This tonality, as will be seen in our study of pallor, ²⁰⁰ is also present in corpses, as it is one of the colours that a body acquires after death:²⁰¹ pallidis cadaueribus, ‘pale corpses’ (Quint. DM. 12.27.6). It is perhaps for this reason that pallidus is used to describe death itself (pallida morte futura, ‘in pale future death’, Verg. Aen. 4.644; pallida Mors, ‘pale Death’, Hor. C. 1.4.13), becoming one of its epithets (together with atra)²⁰² and of other entities associated with death, such as the gods, dwellings and inhabitants of the underworld (pallidus Orcus, ‘pale Orc’, Verg. G. 1.277; pallida leti […] loca, ‘the pale places of death’, Enn. Trag. 46.3 Traglia; regna/pallida, ‘the pale regions’, Verg. Aen. 8.245; pallida turba, ‘pale tumult’, Tibul. 1.10.38; Ditis […] profundi pallida regna petunt, ‘they seek the pale kingdoms of the profound Dite’, Lucan. 1.456). Modern studies, however, tend to consider pallidus as denoting a lack of colour;²⁰³ in our opinion, this is due to our applying the chromatic categories of modern languages to Latin. When pallidus is embodied in the cognitive domain of plants and metals characterized by a yellow colour, it indicates the specific tonalities of those entities: this is the case of the boxwood tree (ora buxo/pallidiora, ‘faces paler than the boxwood tree’, Ou. Met. 4.134– 135)²⁰⁴ or common gold (inaurata pallidior statua, ‘paler than a golden statue’, Cat. 81.4).²⁰⁵ Aside from this, in our consideration, the achromatic meanings given by the dictionaries, i. e. ‘tenuous, without light’, when referring to planets and constellations (stellae, quae sunt omnium pallidissimae, ‘stars, which are the palest of

 Vid. infra, p. 196.  S. Erin Presnell, ‘Postmortem Changes. Overview, Definitions, Scene Findings’; available at: https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1680032-overview; 13/10/2015. We are grateful to Prof. Bandrés Moya, Director of the Cátedra Extraordinaria de Diagnóstico e Innovación, UCM, for the biographical information provided.  This is the epithet most used by the elegiac poets: Jacqueline Clarke, Imagery of Colour and Shining in Catulus, Propertius, and Horace, Lang Classical Studies v. 13 (New York: Peter Lang, 2003), p. 123.  Although the bibliography is scarce, Bernardo Alemany Selfa (Q. Horati Flacci Carmina [Madrid: Gredos, 1957], p. 33) cites: ‘pallida mors: death, which produces paleness’; similarly, César Chesneau Du Marsais (Los tropos de Du-Marsais [Valladolid: Fernando Santaren, 1830], pp. 30 – 31) comments: ‘the poets say: pale death, pale sicknesses, not because death, or sicknesses, are pale, but because they cause paleness: pallentes habitant morbi, tristisque senectutu’; finally, Clarke (Imagery of Colour, p. 123) states that ‘Horace depicts death as pale like a corpse’.  Gaffiot, s.v. pallidus. In Latin, the adjective buxeus is derived from buxu, ‘boxwood’, with the value of ‘the colour of the boxwood tree; yellow’: Agustín Blánquez Fraile, Diccionario latino-español (Barcelona: Ramón Sopena, 1954), s.v. buxeus.  Other examples that testify to the existence of a pale gold include: Tagus auriferis pallet turbatus harenis, ‘The Tagus, agitated, pales along its gold-bearing banks’, Sil. Ital. 16.560; and saxum quoque palluit auro, ‘the rock also became pale from gold’, Ou. Met. 11.110.

IV.6 Pallidus: ‘the colour of death’

189

all’, Plin. HN. 2.89.11; sidera […] pallida, ‘stars […] pale’, App.Verg.Lydia 39; pallida astra, ‘pale (celestial) bodies’, Stat. Theb. 7.286) are simply meanings derived from the faded yellow colour that such entities have in their less vigourous state. The yellowish hue of these heavenly bodies is noticeable in texts where adjectives that denote this colouring are applied:²⁰⁶ aureus (Verg. Aen. 2.488; Ou. Met. 10.448); fuluus ²⁰⁷ (Tibul. 2.1.88). 3) When pallidus is embodied in the dawn (ubi pallida surget […] Aurora, ‘where pale rises […] Aurora’, Verg. G. 1.446), invariably identified by its pinkish tones (roseus, Lucr. 5.656; ruber, Prop. 3.13.16; rubescere, Verg. Aen. 3.521 or Ou. Met. 3.600 – 601; subrubere, Ou. Am. 2.5.36; rosa, Ou. AA. 3.84; roseo, Ou. Met. 7.705; roseis crinibus, App.Verg.Cul. 44; rubicundus, Sen. Apocol. 4.1.28; rubefacere, Sil. Ital. 16.136),²⁰⁸ pallidus acquires this hue. Jacques André considers that the use of pallidus in this context is a reference to the Hellenic epithet λεύκιππος, ‘of white horses’.²⁰⁹ We disagree with this interpretation however, as the denotation of colour in the term λεύκιππος is derived from λευκός (λευκός-ἵππος), which denotes whiteness and brightness. The Latin term that includes both meanings is candidus, which is used to qualify the aurora in Tibullus (1.3.94), together with roseus. The reddish shade of pallidus is also used to designate wine (cum insidiis pallida uina bibi, ‘I drank the wine, pale with the poison’, Prop. 4.7.36) and lips (pallida labra, ‘pale lips’, Juu. 10.229). 4) When pallidus is embodied in the bark of trees or the stalks of plants, it acquires their colour: cortice pallido, radice lata lignosaque, ‘with pale bark and woody root’ (Plin. HN. 12.30.5); cortex […] intus pallidus, ‘bark […] pale on the inside’ (Plin. HN. 27.133.8). When associated with myrrh, in the syntagma murra pallidum, ‘pale from myrrh’ (Plin. HN. 13.17.4), pallidum is a reference to a particular ointment, and specifically to the colour derived from the myrrh to which it is applied. The chromatic breadth of the adjectival lexeme pallidus is accompanied by a wide range of intensities (pale, very pale, a bit pale, extremely pale, etc.) that oblige the author to use certain prefixes in order to specify the exact shade he wants to express: subpallidum, ‘a bit pale’ (Cels. 2.4.9.6); perpallidus, ‘very pale’ (Cels. 2.6.2); uepallida leto, ‘paler than a corpse’ (Hor. Sat. 1.2.129); colore expallido, ‘of a very pale colour’ (Suet. Cal. 50.1.1); semipallidis oliuis, ‘semi-pallid olive trees’ (Zen. Trac. 1.4.6.2).

   

André, Étude sur les termes de couleur, pp. 338 and 356. Gaffiot, s.v. fuluus. Vid. infra, p. 196. André, Étude sur les termes de couleur, p. 336.

190

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

IV.6.2.2 Early versions of the Bible Pallidus is used to translate the adjectival lexeme χλωρός, with which the author of Revelation describes the horse ridden by Death. This same lexeme appears in the Vetus Latina, although Tertullian used uiridis for this (Pudic. 2.1022C),²¹⁰ to the disconcertment of later scholars.²¹¹

IV.6.2.3 Synthesis Pallidus is an adjectival lexeme that appears frequently in Latin literature to designate not only the loss of colour, but also a specific colour itself, unlike what occurs in modern languages such as English, Italian or Spanish. When pallidus denotes colour, it expresses a varied chromatic spectrum that depends on the entity described and its cognitive domain; however, it always refers to a tonality characterized by low saturation and attenuated luminosity. Thus, pallidus in the cognitive domain of human beings and emotions such as fear, anger, worry or infatuation denotes the colour of the face of someone dominated by these emotions, which the Latin authors describe as pale whitish-yellowish. The same hue is indicated when, rather than emotions, it refers to states such as fatigue or cold. In the domain of sickness and death, however, pallidus indicates the colour of a corpse. When embodied in plants and metals that have a yellow colour, it expresses this colour but adds the quality of low saturation; the same happens when it is embodied in entities with a red or pink colouring, or brown as in the case of tree bark. Despite the term’s wide-ranging chromatism, this is largely ignored in the Vulgate. It is used only once, to translate the adjectival lexeme χλωρός in the description of the horse ridden by Death in the book of Revelation (Rev 6.8).

IV.6.3 Semantic analysis of pallidus As we have just mentioned, Rev 6.8 describes the last of the four horses, which is qualified by the term pallidus: Rev 6.8

 Corpus Corporum, a work in progress by the University of Zurich under the direction of Philipp Roelli; available at: www.mlat.uzh.ch/MLS/advsuchergebnis.php?suchbegriff=viridi%20equo&table=&level2_ name=&from_year=&to_year=&mode=SPH_MATCH_EXTENDED2&lang=0&corpus=2&verses=&lem matised=&suchenin=corpus; 18/11/2019.  Diego José Carrasco del Saz y Saavedra, Discursos morales sobre las dos historias sagradas de Josue, y de David: en doze sermones (Madrid: Julián de Paredes, 1696), p. 423.

IV.6 Pallidus: ‘the colour of death’

191

et ecce equus pallidus et qui sedebat desuper nomen illi Mors et inferus sequebatur eum et data est illi potestas super quattuor partes terrae interficere gladio fame et morte et bestiis terrae And behold a death-green horse, and he who was mounted upon it [had] the name Death and hell followed him. And he was given power over a quarter of the earth to kill by sword, famine, plague and the wild beasts of the earth.

The embodying entity differs from those studied in the previous section, as it concerns an entity from the cognitive domain of animals. However, as this is an apocalyptic text filled with peculiar visions, the rider of the fourth horse would seem to be a determining factor in the meaning of pallidus. As we mentioned earlier,²¹² the real colours of horses and their symbolic values are intrinsically united. Therefore, the colour denoted by pallidus must express a shade that encompasses this duality, leading us to exclude the achromatic meaning of pallidus as the loss of colour. What is more, Rev 6.8 is part of a broader pericope in which there is in fact a succession of colours (albus, Rev 6.2; rufus, Rev 6.4; niger, Rev 6.5). We are thus faced with a case similar to that of Seneca (QN. 2.40.6),²¹³ in which pallidus is used as a specific colour. Pallidus in Rev 6.8 is embodied, then, in the cognitive domain of animals but in relation with the cognitive domain of death. Therefore, as we have seen,²¹⁴ pallidus is the appropriate colour lexeme for translating, on the one hand, χλωρός (used in the cognitive domain of sickness as the Latin equivalent of χλωρός), and on the other, it is the epithet of Death and of entities associated with death. It would seem that the translator of the Vulgate understood the meaning of χλωρός correctly and for this reason did not choose uiridis, as did Tertullian. As previously noted,²¹⁵ uiridis is the epithet that characterizes the foliage of trees and bushes. Given that in a plant context greenness is a sign that reveals the freshness, lushness and vigour of the plants described, the adjective uiridis carries with it a positive connotation, connected with the fertility of crops and, through this, with rebirth and life itself,²¹⁶ unlike pallidus, whose connotation is negative.²¹⁷ The meaning of pallidus, then, is ‘the colour of the skin of a dead animal or one whose death is imminent’. As a gloss, we propose ‘death-green’. Symbolism: Pallidus maintains the symbology that χλωρός²¹⁸ possesses in Rev 6.8, becoming, in effect, the colour of death.

 Vid supra, pp. 93 – 94.  Vid. supra, p. 186.  Vid. supra, pp. 187– 188.  Vid. supra, pp. 146 – 147.  Vid. supra, p. 146. In the same line, Pelletier-Michaud, Évolution du sens des termes de couleur, p. 345.  Pelletier-Michaud, Évolution du sens des termes de couleur, p. 86.  Vid. supra, p. 100.

192

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

IV.6.4 Conclusions Pallidus, like pallor, is used in classical Latin as a polysemic term that denotes both the loss of colour and a colour in its own right. In the latter case, it encompasses a wide spectrum of hues, depending on the entity in which it is embodied, although the common element in each case is a low degree of saturation. Despite the various possible meanings possessed by this adjectival lexeme, the Vulgate uses pallidus on only one occasion (Rev 6.8), and this is to translate the Greek adjectival lexeme χλωρός. The chromatic meaning of pallidus is inarguable, as Rev 6.8 is part of a broader pericope in which other colour adjectives are used to describe the different horses that appear with the opening of the first four seals (Rev 6.2– 8). The colour helps the listener/reader to identify both the horse and the scope of its symbolism. Although pallidus is embodied in a horse (cognitive domain of animals), the presence of Death as its rider conditions its chromatism. When this appears in the cognitive domain of sickness and death, it denotes the colour acquired by someone for whom death is near, or death itself when this is personified. In addition, pallidus is used in that particular domain as a term equivalent to χλωρός. Thus, the meaning of pallidus would be ‘the colour of the skin of a dead animal or one whose death is imminent; associated with sickness and death’. As a gloss, we propose ‘death-green’. As with the majority of the colour lexemes we have studied, pallidus in the Vulgate expresses colour and, through this, a state (in this case, death). Therefore, equus pallidus (Rev 6.8) is not only a faithful rendering of the Greek term ἵππος χλωρός, but one which gives continuity to the pallida mors motif that we find in Vergil and in Horace.

IV.6.5 Bibliography Alemany Selfa, Bernardo, Q. Horati Flacci Carmina (Madrid: Gredos, 1957). André, Jacques, Étude sur les termes de couleur dans la langue latine (Paris: Klincksieck, 1949). Beltrán, José A., Introducción a la morfología latina (Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza, 1999). Carrasco del Saz y Saavedra, Diego José, Discursos morales sobre las dos historias sagradas de Josue, y de David: en doze sermones (Madrid: Julián de Paredes, 1696). Chesneau Du Marsais, César, Los tropos de Du-Marsais (Valladolid: Fernando Santaren, 1830). Clarke, Jacqueline, Imagery of Colour and Shining in Catulus, Propertius, and Horace, Lang Classical Studies v. 13 (New York: Peter Lang, 2003). Pelletier-Michaud, Lydia, Évolution du sens des termes de couleur et de leur traitement poétique. L’élégie romaine et ses modèles grecs, Thése de doctorat (Québec: Universitè Laval, 2016). Presnell, S. Erin, ‘Postmortem Changes. Overview, Definitions, Scene Findings’; available at: https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1680032-overview; 13/10/2015.

IV.7 Pallor and its polysemy: ‘mould’, ‘the colour of a type of gold’, ‘the colour of fear’ IV.7.1 Introduction Pallor is a colour noun derived from the verb palleo, to which has been added the ending –or. Originating in the ancient suffix *-e/os, this ending is highly productive in Latin, and in Indo-European serves to form action nouns of the inanimate type. As we have already commented in our study of uiror,²¹⁹ Latin, by extending the –r to the nominative in cases where the original –s is intervocalic, forms a series of masculine nouns ending in –or, -oris, among which we find some that express physical state, and others that express colour (albor, ‘whiteness’; liuor, ‘lividness’; rubor, ‘redness’).²²⁰ The use of pallor in the Vulgate is reduced, as it appears in only four pericopes of the Old Testament: Lev 14.37, Jdt 6.5, Esth 15.10 and Ps 67.14. These pericopes are from books which differ both in their literary forms and in their content. Leviticus is a legal text, as we have explained in detail elsewhere.²²¹ The pericope we have analyzed, Lev 14.37, is from the section dedicated to the purification required for worship ceremonies. It describes what should be done in the event that ‘leprosy’ appears on the walls of a house. The books of Judith and Esther are narrative texts. The book of Judith was not included in the Hebrew canon as it was compiled during the diaspora.²²² It has come down to us in Greek and only in late versions.²²³ It tells the story of Judith, a widow of high social standing, who conquers the army of Holofernes and liberates Israel from its siege. Judith 6.5 is part of the speech that Holofernes addresses to Achior, the chief of the Ammonites, announcing the destruction of Israel. The book of Esther, meanwhile, takes its name from its heroine, the wife of the king Ahasuerus, who prevents the extermination of the people of Israel. This book has been preserved in two different forms: in Hebrew (considered to be the original text) and in Greek (in two different versions: the LXX, and that of Lucian). The Greek text is a free translation from the Hebrew and adds six long sections. When Jerome translated the book of Esther, he placed these at the end of the book.²²⁴ Esth 15.10 is

 Vid. supra, p. 160.  Monteil, Elementos de fonética, pp. 204– 205.  Vid. supra, p. 51.  Morton S. Enslin and Solomon Zeitlin, The Book of Judith: The Greek Text with an English Translation, Jewish Apocryphal Literature 7 (Leiden: Brill, 1973), p. 26.  Demetrius R. Dumm, ‘Tobit, Judith, Esther’, in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 620 – 632, at 624.  Dumm, ‘Tobit, Judith, Esther’, p. 628. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-006

194

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

found in one of these additions,²²⁵ which, rather than presenting us with the image of a courageous queen, tells of the fear that she felt in the presence of the king. Ps 67.14 is a poetic text which will also be familiar to the reader, as this is the fourth time we have referenced it in this volume.²²⁶ The pericope we are using for our study here is from the Psalterium Gallicanum. Before proceeding to a semantic analysis of pallor, we will look first at the data provided by the principal Latin dictionaries, as well as the early versions of the Bible, so as to better understand the worldview of the listener/reader in biblical times.

IV.7.2 Encyclopaedic knowledge IV.7.2.1 Status quaestionis of the main dictionaries Egidio Forcellini considers pallor to be the equivalent of ὠχρότης and gives its principal meaning as ‘color ille, qui in pelle accidit, decendente sanguine, uel [sic] ex metu, uel [sic] ex morbo’.²²⁷ He does not, however, detail the lexeme’s various chromatic nuances, unlike the proposals of the Lewis and Short, OLD and Gaffiot, which consider pallor to possess five principal meanings: 1) ‘Pale’ or ‘yellowish’: ‘yellowish […] tinge’;²²⁸ ‘pale color, paleness, wanness, pallor’;²²⁹ ‘pâleur, teint pale, teint blême’.²³⁰ 2) ‘Greenish’: ‘greenish tinge’.²³¹ 3) ‘Discoloured’, ‘musty’: ‘discoloration […] dimness, faintness’;²³² ‘mustiness, mouldiness’.²³³ 4) ‘Mould: ‘mildew’;²³⁴ ‘moisissure, moisi’.²³⁵ 5) ‘Terror’, or its personification ‘the god of fear’.²³⁶ If we analyze directly some of the texts in which the term pallor appears, in consideration of the contexts and cognitive domains with which it is linked the meaning of pallor becomes wider still, as shown by the following:

 This forms part of what is referred to as Add D 1– 16, an expansion of 5.1– 2 of the MT: Carey A. Moore, ‘Esther, Additions to’, ABD 2.  Vid. supra, pp. 50; 58 – 64; 109 – 115; 166 – 169.  Forcellini, s.v. pallor.  OLD, s.v. pallor.  Lewis and Short, s.v. pallor.  Gaffiot, s.v. pallor.  OLD, s.v. pallor.  OLD, s.v. pallor.  Lewis and Short, s.v. pallor.  OLD, s.v. pallor; Forcellini, s.v. pallor.  Gaffiot, s.v. pallor.  Lewis and Short, s.v. pallor; OLD, s.v. pallor; Gaffiot, s.v. pallor.

IV.7 Pallor and its polysemy

195

a) Pallor used in the cognitive domains of ‘human beings/emotions’ and ‘human beings/sickness’. In the first of these, ‘human beings/emotions’, pallor describes the general aspect of a person, specifically his/her face, which, for diverse emotional causes, experiences a reduction in blood flow and becomes pale, as Forcellini explained.²³⁷ Among these emotions are fear (sudoresque ita palloremque existere toto / corpore, ‘sweating and paleness arise in all the body’, Lucr. 3.154– 155;²³⁸ exsangui pallore, ‘by a paleness from loss of blood’, Apul. Met. 9.27.15;²³⁹ confessus gelidum pallore timorem, ‘revealing a frozen panic by his paleness’, Ou. Trist. 1.4.11),²⁴⁰ astonishment (pallor in attonitae uirginis ore fuit, ‘there was paleness in the face of the astonished maiden’, Ou. Trist. 3.9.18) and sadness (pallor et gemitus, ‘paleness and grief’, Quint. Inst. 6.2.31.6; pallor et […] dolor, ‘paleness and […] pain’, Quint. Inst. 6.2.36).²⁴¹ Horace used pallor to show amazement, by means of the adjectival lexeme albus, ‘white’: tacent et albus ora pallor inficit, ‘they fall silent and a whitish pallor shrouds their faces’ (Hor. Epod. 7.1). To this we can add a fragment of Ennius, in which we find the verb exalbesco, derived from albus, used to refer to the whitening effect caused by fear: exalbescat metu (‘turned pale with fear’, Enn. Trag. 15.5 Traglia).²⁴² A yellow hue is a shade which is also present in the manifestation of fear and grief, to judge by the use of pallor luteus, ‘yellowish pallor’, in another verse from Horace (Hor. Epod. 10.16) in which the poet addresses Mevius directly to prophesize weeping when the crashing of the waves destroys his ship. In the second case, when pallor is used in the cognitive domain of human beings/sickness in medical literature, the nominal lexeme denotes a whitish hue, as in the description that Celsus gives of a patient suffering from arquatum ‘jaundice’, where he utilizes inalbesco (totum corpus cum pallore quodam inalbescit, ‘the whole body whitens with a sort of pallor’, Cels. 3.24.2), or decolorat when he describes the effects of pallor in the lips and nostrils (idem pallor labra et nares decolorat, ‘a similar pallor renders colourless the lips and nostrils’, Cels. 2.6.4). However, in the cognitive domain of sickness, pallor is sometimes described through the use of uiridis: o […] alumna, / non tibi nequiquam uiridis per uiscera pallor / aegroto tenuis suffundit sanguine uenas, ‘oh […] child, / not without reason does a greenish pallor from the viscera flood the tenuous veins with a fever-

 Forcellini, s.v. pallor.  This text is particularly interesting as Lucretius describes the physical effects that cause fear in someone. For a study on the moral significance of paleness in the satires, see Sari Kivistö, Medical Analogy in Latin Satire (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), pp. 25 – 27.  Apuleius describes the aspect of a child who is abused by a baker.  Ovid describes the reaction of a sailor to a storm.  Quintilian explains how to move an audience with the aim of persuasion.  This expression is used later by Cicero: Orat. 3.218; Fin. 5.11.31.

196

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

ish blood’, App.Verg.Cir. 224– 226. This fragment is particularly relevant because, although it does not belong to the corpus of medical literature, it indicates the tonality acquired by the sick body of a young girl, and uses terms related to the cognitive domains of human beings (uiscera, sanguine and uenas) and sickness (aegrotus, associated etymologically with ager, ‘sick, ailing’, and tenuis, ‘delicate, fragile, brittle’). We might also include those texts in which pallor describes the colour of a corpse, as in medicine this is the colour of dead bodies.²⁴³ A text of Quintilian’s is illustrative in this sense: cadauerum […] pallorem, ‘the pallor of corpses’ (Quint. DM. 2.19.4). Finally, this same greenish hue seems also to appear in the cognitive domain of human beings/emotions (ab ira / pallor […], ‘paleness […] with anger’, Stat. Theb. 5.264). As we have already seen,²⁴⁴ Plautus describes this emotion with uiridis and uireo (Plaut. Men. 828 – 829). b) Pallor is also used to describe the dawn, which is always characterized by its pinkish tonality²⁴⁵ (aurorae pallore, ‘with the paleness of the dawn’, Stat. Theb. 2.334). c) Pallor appears in the cognitive domain of metals to describe silver (pallor argenti, ‘the paleness of silver’, Plin. HN. 37.56.8).

IV.7.2.2 Early versions of the Bible In the Vulgate, pallor is the lexeme chosen to translate the Hebrew adjectival lexeme ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq, which describes the colour of a spot of mould on a wall (Lev 14.37), as well as the Greek nominal lexeme χλωρότης, which appears in the Septuagint for a type of gold used to describe a dove (Ps 67.14).²⁴⁶ In the books of Judith and Esther, however, pallor does not have an equivalent term in any of the Greek versions, but rather is an addition found in the Latin text. Thus, in the Septuagint there is a shorter text for Jdt 6.5 (οὐκ ὄψει ἔτι τὸ πρόσωπόν μου), as well as for Esth 15.10. The Rahlfs edition of the Septuagint reads μετέβαλεν τὸ χρῶμα (Esth 15.7), which coincides with that of Robert Hanhart in the Gottin-

 Presnell, ‘Postmortem Changes’.  Vid. supra, pp. 136, 171– 172.  The Latin authors would continue the Greek poetic tradition of describing the Aurora as having this pinkish tonality (ροδοδάκτυλος, ‘rosy-fingered’, Hom. Il. 6.175; ροδόπαχυς, ‘rosy-armed’, Theoc. Idyl. 2.148), for example: roseis Aurora quadrigis (Verg. Aen. 6.535); ab Aurorae populis et litore rubro (Verg. Aen. 8.686); croceis Aurora capillis (Ou. Am. 2.4.43). For more information, vid. supra, p. 185.  Vid. supra, ppp. 54– 58; 114– 115.

IV.7 Pallor and its polysemy

197

gen critical edition of the LXX (μετέβαλεν τὸ χρῶμα, Esth 15.10)²⁴⁷. Lucian’s text, meanwhile, omits the chromatic reference entirely, as it has πρόσωπον instead of χρῶμα (μετέβαλε τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτῆς, Esth 15.10).

IV.7.2.3 Synthesis The principal lexicons present several different meanings for pallor: ‘pale or yellowish’, ‘greenish tinge’, ‘faded’, ‘mould’ and ‘the god of fear’. To these meanings must be added other tonalities found for the term that have come to light through analyzing the various Latin texts with the methodology chosen for this study; i. e. examining the entity described and its cognitive domain. Thus, pallor may denote, depending on the entity, a variety of colours and nuances. With regard to the early versions of the Bible, the Vulgate uses pallor to translate two lexemes (Hebrew and Greek) that describe entities from two different cognitive domains: sickness, in Lev 14.37, where it describes a spot of mould on a wall; and metals, in the case of the gold colouring of the dove’s wings in Ps 67.14 VulgGal. It is also used simply to infuse the text with colour, given that it appears in two pericopes where the chromatic aspect is absent from the Greek version (Jdt 6.5) or is not specified (Esth 15.10).

IV.7.3 Semantic analysis of pallor As pallor appears in three different cognitive domains, we will perform a semantic analysis for each of these.

IV.7.3.1 Pallor in the cognitive domain of sickness In Lev 14.37, the function of pallor, together with rubor, is to describe what the author of Leviticus refers to as leprosy. It is thus associated with the cognitive domain of sickness. As we have seen in our study of the Hebrew corpus, leprosy here is the corrosion produced by a fungus or mould, water seepage or a concentration of calcium nitrate on certain surfaces:²⁴⁸ Lev 14.37 et cum viderit in parietibus illius quasi ualliculas pallore sive rubore deformes et humiliores superficie reliqua

 Robert Hanhart, Septuaginta. Esther, 2nd edn, SVTG VIII, 3 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983).  Vid. supra, pp. 56 – 57.

198

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

And if he sees on the walls [of a house] how cavities [are] made unsightly by mould or by a reddish spot and deeper than the rest of the surface […]

The translator of the Vulgate here chooses two nominal lexemes to translate two Hebrew adjectival colour lexemes: ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq, ‘yellowish green’, and ‫ אדמדם‬ʾǎdamdam, ‘reddish’. In both cases, the colour lexemes chosen denote not only the colour of the eruption that appears on contaminated walls, but also the state of these surfaces, in that the colour that the surface acquires is a revealing sign of infection, and therefore of impurity. As we have just seen, the OLD and Gaffiot propose ‘mildew’²⁴⁹ and ‘moisissure, moisi’²⁵⁰ as meanings for pallor. Forcellini defines this as marcor, qui ex situ et humore provenit, ‘putrefaction caused by mould and humidity’.²⁵¹ If we analyze the texts in which it appears, we can observe that pallor is used, for example, to denote the rotting that causes the deterioration of books in a library (quod uenti humidi […] infundentesque humidos spiritus, pallore uolumina corrumptunt, ‘as the humid winds […] bringing damp vapours corrupt books with mould’, Vitr. 6.4.1), the effect of which is also described (de pallore, quo litterae decolores fiunt et uanescunt, ‘mould, by which the letters are discoloured and disappear’),²⁵² or various types of containers, such as amphorae (ne [dolia] pallorem […] capiant, ‘so that [the jars] do not collect mould […]’, Colum. 12.50.16).²⁵³ It seems, then, that pallor was the technical name used to designate the mould that appears on surfaces from the effect of humidity.²⁵⁴ This would explain the choice of the nominal lexeme pallor to translate ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq (adjective), rather than an adjectival lexeme like albus, which had been used earlier to describe the colour of leprosy in human beings (skin infection, Lev 13.3, 10, 19, 24, 42) and on clothing (Lev 13.49). The presence of rubor leads us to think that, despite this technical use, pallor also connoted colour, like other colour terms. Indeed, when it appears on a surface, it causes a discolouring, and the emergence of a new tonality, one proper to mould. This, as we have already mentioned, and depending on the type of fungus and the degree of its development, may be greyish olive, yellowish green, greenish or yellowish.²⁵⁵ Curiously, the Spanish Biblias romanceadas of the Middle Ages, which base their translations on the Latin version,²⁵⁶ incline towards a yellowish hue: ‘amariei OLD, s.v. pallor.  Gaffiot, s.v. pallor.  Forcellini, s.v. pallor.  Forcellini, s.v. pallor cites Colum. 12.50, but we have not been able to find this reference.  Columella uses it frequently: Colum. 12.41.4; Colum. 12.42.3; etc.  Latin possesses various lexemes for referring to mould, such as: mucor (mould that forms on food, especially bread); muscus (that which grows on trees and rocks); and aerugo or rubigo (that which appears on metals, mainly copper).  Vid. supra, p. 56.  Andrés Enrique-Arias (dir.), Biblia Medieval, Lev 14.37; available at: http://corpus.bib liamedieval.es/; 18/10/2019.

IV.7 Pallor and its polysemy

199

llos’ (E8/E6);²⁵⁷ ‘amariellas’ (GE);²⁵⁸ and ‘amarillas’ (E4).²⁵⁹ However, E19²⁶⁰, based on the Hebrew version, uses ‘verde’ for ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq. It thus becomes impossible to determine with certainty which colour is represented by pallor in such cases. Nevertheless, in the light of our study, we can affirm that pallor denotes a ‘rust that appears on the walls of houses and changes their colour by giving them a hue of low saturation’. As a gloss, we propose ‘mould’. Lastly, we must not fail to mention that this meaning for pallor arises from a conceptual metonymy of the part for the whole type, more specifically that of salient property and entity.²⁶¹ It is from colour, the salient property that indicates the rotting of a surface, that a new concept was created; i. e. an entity imbued with this colour (mould, fungus).

IV.7.3.2 Pallor in the cognitive domain of metals As occurs in classical Latin, pallor is also used in the cognitive domain of metals. In this case, it refers to gold, to which the back feathers of a dove are compared: Ps 67.14 VulgGal si dormiatis inter medios cleros pinnae columbae deargentatae et posteriora dorsi eius in pallore auri If you sleep within the enclosures, wings of a dove covered with silver, the tailfeathers²⁶² a pale green gold […]

 Codices I.i.8 (=E8) and I.i.6 (=E6) of the Biblioteca del Monasterio del Escorial allow us to reconstruct a nearly complete text of the Bible in Romance from the Latin, the original of which can be traced back to the 13th century. This would be earlier than the creation of the great prose works of the Scriptorium Alfonsí: Enrique-Arias, Biblia Medieval, Biblia Prealfonsí (E8/E6); available at http://bibliamedieval.es/index.php/indice-manuscritos/e6-e8; 4/10/2019.  Alfonso X (1252– 1284) sponsored translations of the Latin Bible into Spanish for his General Estoria (=GE). These versions do not always follow the Bible literally and often insert glosses and digressions: Enrique-Arias, Biblia Medieval, General Estoria; available at http://bibliamedieval.es/index. php/general-estoria; 4/10/2019.  Escorial I.i.4 (E4) corresponds to manuscript I.i.4 of the Monasterio del Escorial (E4). Although this codex includes translations from the Hebrew, the Psalms were translated from Latin. The date of composition of the lost original is unknown, while the copy which contains this corpus dates from somewhere between 1400 and 1430 AD: Enrique-Arias, Biblia Medieval, Escorial I.i.4 (E4); available at http://bibliamedieval.es/index.php/indice-manuscritos/e4; 4/10/2019.  Escorial J.ii.19 (E19) is a translation from Hebrew dating from the late 13th or early 14th century. Enrique-Arias, Biblia Medieval, Escorial J.ii.19 (E19); available at http://bibliamedieval.es/index.php/ indice-manuscritos/e19; 18/10/2019.  Cuenca and Hilferty, Introducción a la lingüística cognitiva, p. 113; Barcelona, ‘La metonimia conceptual’, p. 131.  St Jerome translates τὰ μετάφρενα αὐτῆς (‘its back feathers’) with the terms posteriora dorsi eius (here ‘tailfeathers’), following to some extent the translation found in the Vetus Latina (Vetus Latina Database: Ps 67.14: vid. supra note 124, pp. 163 – 164.

200

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

The Latin syntax employed reproduces a construction which will be familiar to the reader: two nouns, the second of which appears in the genitive as the nucleus of the syntagma. In these type of constructions, the first term denotes colour.²⁶³ At the same time, the Latin expression is faithful to the text of the Septuagint (ἐν χλωρότητι χρυσίου). What is curious is that Jerome uses pallor, which according to Forcellini is the Latin equivalent of ὠχρότης²⁶⁴ and not of uiriditas, the Latin equivalent of χλωρότης.²⁶⁵ As we have already mentioned, χλωρότης denotes the colour of a type of gold, the result of an alloy that gives it a greenish tone of low saturation.²⁶⁶ We might suppose that pallor was chosen instead of uiriditas for two motives: a) pallor expresses well the faded, low-saturation tonality denoted by χλωρότης (indeed, the dictionaries give ‘pale’ and ‘faded’ as meanings); b) pallor and its lexical family are used frequently in Latin literature to describe gold. We find this in Ovid (saxum quoque palluit auro, ‘stone that is made pale by gold’, Met. 11.110); in Catullus (inaurata pallidior statua, ‘paler than a golden statue’, 81.4); and in Silius Italicus (Tagus auriferis pallet turbatus harenis, ‘the restless Tagus pales along its golden banks’, 16.560). As for the specific hue of pallor in this pericope, this is more difficult to determine. We might suppose that it denotes a pale yellow, as it is applied to gold, a metal generally characterized by its yellowish hue. Indeed, the medieval Bibles translate it in this way: ‘en color doro’ (E8/E6: 68.14), ‘amarilledumbre del oro’ (GE: 68.14); ‘amarelle|za de oro’ (E4: 68.14).²⁶⁷ The same tonality is maintained in the translation done by Felipe Scio in 1792: ‘amarillez de oro’. In the 8th century AD, the Venerable Bede would expound upon this verse in his Commentary to the Psalms: ²⁶⁸ Pallor autem auri uiror est auri, quia aurum natiuum habet ruborem, et ideo si pallor ei accedat, ex rubore et pallore conficitur uiror. However, the paleness of gold is the greenness of gold, because native gold is red in colour; in contrast, if paleness is added, from the red and this paleness greenness arises.

 Cf. supra, pp. 143 and 165. Martínez Pastor, ‘Adjetivo y genitivo adnominal en latín’, 232 and 234.  Forcellini, s.v. pallor.  Forcellini, s.v. viriditas.  Vid. supra, pp. 114– 115.  As we have said (vid. infra, pp. 28 – 29), the Psalterium Gallicanum was included in Spanish Bibles beginning in the 13th century AD.  ‘Pallor’ in Beda_Incertus, De libro Psalmorum, 67, p. 204 in Corpus Corporum; available at: http:// www.mlat.uzh.ch/MLS/xfromcc.php?tabelle=Beda_Incertus_cps2&rumpfid=Beda_Incertus_cps2,% 20De%20libro%20Psalmorum,%20%2067,%20%20%20p204&id=Beda_Incertus_cps2,%20De% 20libro%20Psalmorum,%20%2067,%20%20%20p204,%20%20%20%20183&level=99&level9798= &satz=183&hilite_id=Beda_Incertus_cps2,%20De%20libro%20Psalmorum,%20%2067,%20%20% 20p204,%20%20%20%20183&string=viror&binary=&corpus=&target=&lang=0&home=&von=sucher gebnis&hide_apparatus=1&inframe=1&jumpto=183#183; 11/12/2019.

IV.7 Pallor and its polysemy

201

Although this text is confusing (what is meant by the expression si pallor ei accedat is unclear), it recalls the commentary of Dunaš ben Labrat two centuries later regarding the colour of the gold in Ps 68.14 by affirming that it is not red.²⁶⁹ What is understood by pallor, however, is clear: auri uiror, ‘green gold’ or the ‘greenness of gold’. This interpretation would be corroborated still later by Herbert of Bosham in his commentary to the Hebrew version of the book of Psalms.²⁷⁰ Herbert explains that the colour adjective ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq is rendered as pallide uirens et uiride pallens, id es subpallidum,²⁷¹ ‘pale green and greenish pale, that is to say, slightly pale’. He is following here the exegesis of Dunaš Ben Labrat in the Tešubot, which maintains that the colour of the gold in Ps 68.14 was characteristic of a gold imported to Israel from Havilah and Ethiopia.²⁷² At the end of the gloss, Herbert explains: unde et codices nostri uarie habent: alii in pallore, alii in uirore auri quo tale auri genus designetur and so our codices have different versions: some in pallore, others in uirore auri, with which is designated this type of gold.²⁷³

We can thus conclude that pallor was perhaps chosen for Ps 67.14 VulgGal because it seemed to correspond to this same shade of pale green, the hue of low saturation reflected in the Septuagint by χλωρότης.²⁷⁴ As we have noted, pallor may indeed indicate this type of greenish paleness,²⁷⁵ and so we can say that it denotes a ‘colour of low saturation characteristic of a type of gold appreciated in antiquity’. As glosses, we propose ‘pale’, ‘pale green’ and ‘faded’.

IV.7.3.3 Pallor in the cognitive domains of human beings and emotions In the Vulgate, as in classical Latin in general, pallor is used in the cognitive domain of human beings/emotions: Jdt 6.5

 Dunaš, Tešubot, p. 49. Vid. supra, p. 63.  Herbert of Bosham (1120 – 1194) was one of the few Christian biblicists north of the Alps to embrace the study of Hebrew and the acceptance of Jewish exegesis. He would undertake a revision of the Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos at a time when the Psalterium Gallicanum was more extended in the north. His revision was accompanied by a commentary that followed the literal sense of the text: Eva de Visscher, Reading the Rabbis: Christian Hebraism in the Works of Herbert of Bosham (Leiden: Brill, 2014), pp. 2– 3.  De Visscher, Reading the Rabbis, p. 129.  Dunaš, Tešubot, p. 49 (vid. supra, p. 63). It is probable that Herbert of Bosham knew the quote from the Tešubot through Rashi, whose commentary he reproduces verbatim (De Visscher, Reading the Rabbis, p. 129).  De Visscher, Reading the Rabbis, p. 128 – 129 and n. 157.  Vid. supra, p. 114.  Vid. supra, pp. 195 – 196.

202

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

porro autem si prophetiam tuam ueram existimas non concidat uultus tuus et pallor qui faciem tuam obtinuit abscedat a te si verba mea haec putas impleri non posse But, if you consider your prophecy to be true, do not let your face change colour, and the paleness that has covered your face, cast it away, if you think that my words will not be accomplished.

Esth 15.10 cumque eleuasset faciem et ardentibus oculis furorem pectoris indicasset regina corruit et in pallorem colore mutato lassum super ancillulam reclinauit caput And after having lifted up his face [the king] and revealed by his burning eyes the fury of his breast, the queen fell into a faint and, her colour having become pale, rested her nodding head upon the small slave.

The term pallor appears in these pericopes to describe the face of a man, Achior (pallor qui faciem tuam obtinuit, Jdt 6.5), and that of a woman, the queen Esther (in pallorem colore mutato, Esth 15.10) Within the broad cognitive domain of emotions, pallor is used in the Vulgate to express the fear felt by certain characters: Jdt 6.5 describes vividly how Achior turns pale with fear at the threats of Holofernes, while in Esth 15.10 we are told how the young woman’s face changes colour before the furious gaze of the king. What is more, pallor is a sign that precedes a fear-induced fainting spell (corruit et […] lassum super ancillulam reclinauit caput). The interpretation of pallor as a colour (‘pale’) and not merely an indicator of low chromatic saturation (‘faded’) is made very clear in the book of Esther by the use of the term colore in the pericope under study here, and by the contrast of the pinkish tonality (roseo colore uultum) with the quality of paleness (pallorem) that we find in Esth 15.8²⁷⁶ and Esth 15.10. Both passages describe the young woman’s face; in Esth 15.8 her beauty is exalted and the reddish tone of her complexion (roseo colore) is noted, while Esth 15.10 refers to the paleness that has replaced this initial reddish colouring. In v. 8, there is already an allusion to fear as the direct cause of this change in facial colour (animum […] nimio timore contractum, ‘spirit […] quite tense from fear’, Esth 15.8). The poetic image of ‘burning eyes’ (ardentibus oculis) adds pathos to the young woman’s reaction. With regard to the exact hue expressed by pallor, as it concerns the emotion of fear, there is a fluctuation between white and yellow, which, as we have already seen, is characteristic of this type of emotion.²⁷⁷ We can thus conclude that pallor denotes

 Esth 15.8: Ipsa autem roseo colore uultum perfusa, et gratis ac nitentibus oculis, tristem celabat animum, et nimio timore contractum.  Vid. supra, p. 187. A study of the Greek version of Esther 15.10 can be found in the introduction to the present work, pp. 12– 13.

IV.7 Pallor and its polysemy

203

the ‘colour of a face beset with fear’. As glosses we propose ‘pale’ and ‘whitish-yellowish paleness’. The chromatic nuance that we find in Jdt 6.5 and Esth 15.10 reveals the inclination of the Vulgate towards chromatism. The greater dramatism in the Latin version stems from this reference to colour, which intensifies both the violent aspect of Holofernes (Jdt 6.5) and the cruel gaze of the monarch (Esth 15.10).

IV.7.4 Conclusions Pallor appears in classical Latin as a polysemic term with a wide chromatic range. However, it always indicates a colour with a low degree of saturation. In the Vulgate, pallor is found in texts with a variety of literary forms and diverse content, whether these are legal (Lev 14.37), narrative (Jdt 6.5 and Esth 15.10) or poetic (Ps 67.14 VulgGal). At the same time, pallor is related to terms from various cognitive domains that will be determining factors for its different meanings. Thus, when pallor appears in the cognitive domain of human beings/sickness, it denotes an entity imbued with colour, e. g. ‘rust that appears on the walls of houses, changing their colour and giving them a colour of low saturation’ (Lev 14.37). As a gloss, we propose ‘mould’. In contrast to this, when pallor appears in the cognitive domain of metals, its syntactic structure reveals its use as a colour term to describe gold. Its meaning is ‘a colour of low saturation, characteristic of a type of gold that was highly appreciated in antiquity (Ps 67.14 VulgGal)’. As a gloss, we propose ‘faded green’. Finally, when pallor is related to the cognitive domain of human beings/emotions, it expresses visually the effect of a certain emotion in a person’s face. In the pericopes studied here, that emotion is fear. Its meaning is ‘the colour of a face beset with fear (Jdt 6.5; Esth 15.10)’. As glosses, we propose ‘pale’ and ‘whitish-yellowish paleness’. In the Vulgate, pallor, like other chromatic terms, is used to express colour and through this a state; i. e. putrefaction or fear. What is more, the presence of pallor in the Vulgate reveals a tendency to infuse the biblical text with colour, enriching it with these added nuances.

IV.7.5 Bibliography De Visscher, Eva, Reading the Rabbis: Christian Hebraism in the Works of Herbert of Bosham (Leiden: Brill, 2014). Dumm, Demetrius R., ‘Tobit, Judith, Esther’ in Raymond E. Brown et al. (eds.), JBC, vol. 1 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 620 – 632. Dunaš ben Labrat, Tešubot de Dunaš ben Labrat: edición crítica y traducción española, Ángel Sáenz-Badillos, ed. (Granada: Universidad de Granada, 1980).

204

IV The Latin Bible Corpus

Enslin, Morton S. and Solomon Zeitlin, The Book of Judith: The Greek Text with an English Translation, Jewish Apocryphal Literature 7 (Leiden: Brill, 1973). Kivistö, Sari, Medical Analogy in Latin Satire (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009). Martínez Pastor, Marcelo, ‘Adjetivo y genitivo adnominal en latín’, Durius 2 (4, 1974), 221 – 257. Monteil, Pierre, Elementos de fonética y morfología del latín, trans. Concepción Fernández Martínez (Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, 2003). Moore, Carey A., ‘Esther, Additions to’, ABD 2. Presnell, S. Erin et al., ‘Postmortem Changes: Overview, Definitions, Scene Findings’, available at: https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1680032-overview; 13/10/2015.

V The language of Colour in the Bible

V.1 Conclusion Although the present research is not a pioneering work on the study of colour in the Bible, it is indeed groundbreaking with regard to both the content of the biblical corpus and the methodology we have employed. First of all, we took as our starting point the fact that the Bible cannot be identified with a single corpus. Its impact in Western culture has come from its three versions –the Hebrew, the Greek and the Latin–, whose influence has been felt throughout history. As Cardinal Cisneros demonstrated in assembling the Complutensian Polyglot Bible, the Bible is in effect a song sung in three voices (Hebrew, Greek and Latin) and, indeed, viewing it in this way is the current tendency in biblical exegesis. Each voice reflects a different culture, no small matter when it comes to the language of colour, as colour reflects the specific culture within which it grows and develops. Thus, from the outset of our research, we realized the necessity of studying each version of the Bible separately, as –to continue the song metaphor– the highs and lows of the three melodies vary from one to the other. The objective we proposed was to study the significance and symbology of colour language in the Bible; specifically, the lexical families related to the colour green, which comprise what we have denominated as ‘the green dimension of the Bible’ or ‘the green dimension of creation’. The reason for this choice is that green is the first colour to appear in the biblical corpus and its presence gives rise to the series of questions to which we have been responding over the course of this monograph. From the beginning, however, this research was carried out from a perspective unlike previous approaches in the field of biblical studies, and this was to examine the language of colour not according to our own categories of colour, but to those that existed in antiquity. In this way, we would not be simply providing a chromatic taxonomy of terms related to the colour green, which the reader could find himself in other dictionaries or specialized sources. The first step, therefore, was to determine whether or not our current concept of colour coincided with the concept reflected in the biblical text. We began by examining whether the text contained a lexeme for the word ‘colour’. We found that this was absent from the Hebrew text, but did appear in the Greek and Latin versions. The Septuagint featured χρῶμα (4x) and χρόα (3x), while the Vulgate employed color (31x). After analyzing each one of the pericopes in which these lexemes appeared, we concluded that colour in the Septuagint and the Vulgate is that which is visible on the surface of an object or person, whether this is natural or artificial (i. e. pigments), and in most cases indicates not only colour but a state as well. This is the concept that we find in the Hebrew version, where the lexical family of ‫ ירק‬yereq is used to reflect the relative vitality of plants (Gen 1.30; 9.3; 2 Kgs 19.26; etc.) or the unease of someone affected by fear (Jer 30.6). At the same time, we saw that this conception did not pertain exclusively to the Bible, but was a way of thinking formulated by Greek and Roman authors in genhttps://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-007

208

V.1 Conclusion

eral. From this, we elaborated a definition of colour that would serve as a bridge between the ancient concept of colour (concrete, visible) and ours today (abstract, Newtonian): ‘what covers a person or object, in many cases reflecting a state, and is describable in terms of hue, luminosity (or brightness) and saturation, making it possible for human beings to differentiate between otherwise perceptually identical entities and substances, and more especially between entities and substances that are perceptually identical with respect to size, shape and texture’. This definition reflects two of the essential characteristics of colour language in the biblical corpus: 1. colour lexemes in the Bible are never used in isolation, but are instead intimately linked to the entities they describe. From this, it can be affirmed that colour terms are embodied lexemes and it is therefore necessary to analyze each of the pericopes in which a given lexeme appears, together with the entity it describes; 2. each colour lexeme typically suggests a broad chromatic spectrum or pantone, from which it may be deduced that most are polysemic. These two aspects demanded a specific methodology with a theoretical framework that addressed, on the one hand, the entity –which acts as a cognitive link for determining the meaning of the colour term–, and on the other, its polysemy and, ultimately, its usage. The first two areas have been expanded upon by Maria Josep Cuenca and Joseph Hilferty in their study of the adjective ‘rojo’ in Spanish from the perspective of cognitive linguistics, while the third is in fact one of that field’s basic principles. Cognitive linguistics, therefore, seemed to us an appropriate path to follow. As we delved deeper into this new discipline, we discovered that it provided contributions to the meanings of the words that were especially relevant to the lexicographical study we had undertaken. Chief among these was the idea that meaning is the essence of language. Meaning, however, cannot be construed from a mere list of similar words, as this only describes a concept based on words; that is to say, a definition. To arrive at the meaning of a term, it is necessary to study the use that the native speaker made of it. Thus, in the field of cognitive linguistics, it is sometimes proposed that specific corpora be studied, in which the lexemes appear in their natural contexts and can be analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. However, cognitive linguistics also enables the awareness that linguistic meaning is insufficient and that the encyclopaedic knowledge of the ancient native speaker –the knowledge of the world he or she lived in– must also be taken into account, as it is this which causes a specific lexeme to be used in one context and not in another. In this sense, a mechanism such as conceptual metonymy, which allows the speaker to mentally link one element with another within the same cognitive domain, is particularly relevant to our study. Using this theoretical framework, we defined certain guidelines for our study:

V.1 Conclusion

209

Firstly, given that there are no longer any native speakers with whom we might study their use of language, we needed to carry out a corpus study that would enable us to analyze the use of the colour terms that such a corpus would include. Secondly, as the Bible itself does not reflect the language spoken by a given community, we needed to acquire the encyclopaedic knowledge of the listener/speaker in biblical times. For this, we had four tools at our disposal: 1. the information provided by the principal dictionaries of biblical Hebrew, Greek and Latin; 2. a detailed study of the early versions of the Bible, which transmitted the Jewish tradition when biblical Hebrew, Greek and Latin were living languages. Indeed, on occasion these texts faithfully reflect the various meanings that a colour lexeme possessed in its respective language, confirming the information given in the dictionaries; 3. a detailed analysis of the context in which the colour lexeme and the entity it describes appear. This would involve, on the one hand, studying the literary form of the book in which it is contained, as well as the immediate context of the pericope and the cognitive domains that predominate in it; and, on the other, looking deeper into the meaning of the entity from the perspective of the listener/reader in biblical times, paying attention to its relevant grammatical and syntactic features; 4. consultation with a variety of extralinguistic disciplines (archaeology, ancient metallurgy, medicine, mineralogy, history and botany) that would serve to complete our knowledge of the entity described or the colour lexeme itself. Thirdly, we wanted to create a definition for each colour term. Given that these terms are always intrinsically linked to entities –that is, they are ‘embodied colour terms’–, it was essential to include the entity in which each colour term is embodied, to exclude adjectives of colour and to add any symbolic connotations that the lexeme might possess. The reason for this is clear: it is the entity which constitutes the cognitive anchor between the listener/speaker in biblical times and the modern reader with respect to colour. It is thus the nucleus of meaning for these colour lexemes. As they present different grammatical categories which essentially reflect different cognitive concepts, the definition had to include these nuances as well. Although adjectival lexemes denote the cognitive category, colours, and entities in which they are embodied, the inclusion of colour adjectives in our definitions would have meant adapting their meanings to our own categories of colour and this we had determined not to do. In contrast, nominal lexemes denote entities which are imbued with colour, which in most cases is the visible sign of a particular state. Finally, verbal lexemes denote the verbal action through which an entity possesses or acquires colour. The definition thus includes both the verbal action and the entity affected, since, as we have said, it is this which tells us what tonality a given lexeme expresses. One of the principal novelties of this study, then, is to offer the meanings of these colour lexemes through a definition that draws upon several contributions from the

210

V.1 Conclusion

field of cognitive linguistics. In this sense, the translations proposed here are simply suggestions that may serve to enlighten the scholar or translator. We are convinced that with the passage of time new translations will be proposed which better reflect the meanings of these lexemes and respond more accurately to the cultural context in which the biblical text is read. Starting from these premises, then, it was shown that the green dimension of creation emerges in the Hebrew, Greek and Latin corpora with certain affinities and differences. In all three versions, the colour lexemes referring to this dimension make it clear that colour is revealed not as a mere intrinsic quality of entities, whatever these may be, but principally as a state, of which colour is the first sign to be perceived. The specific state indicated by these colour lexemes is one of life and fecundity, and with this comes a symbolism that refers to prosperity and the loving care of God for his creatures. Therefore, the cognitive domain in which these colour lexemes (‫ירק‬ yereq, χλωρός, uiridis, uiror, uireo and uiresco) are embodied is that of plants. It is in this domain that they express their characteristic chromatism, which, simultaneously and inseparably, reflects the state of maturity, vitality, freshness and lushness that plants and vegetation reach in springtime. These lexemes also appear in the cognitive domain of gemstones, as in the case of πράσινος, which unlike other lexemes has the function of defining a precious stone through its colour. However, these lexemes also appear in contexts of destruction, contexts associated with sickness and death and understood as divine punishment. The biblical corpus does this not only by referring to the destruction of nature, its fragility or the absence of ‫ ירק‬yereq, χλωρός and uiridis, but also by using colour lexemes that denote a change in state and with this a new tonality. For example, ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq in Leviticus describes the spots of mould that were seen as a symptom of sickness (‘leprosy’), causing an alteration of the natural colour of textiles or walls and the emergence of a new colour: that of mould (Lev 13.49; Lev 14.37). The Septuagint thus uses the verbal lexeme χλωρίζω to express the process by which the natural colour of an object deteriorates and is replaced by a new, less saturated, tone. In contrast, the Vulgate bypasses this process and focuses attention only on the fact that the entity has acquired a hue of low saturation. This would explain the use of albus (Lev 13.49) or the technical term pallor (Lev 14.37). The Hebrew term ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq (Ps 68.14) also described the colour of a type of gold, an alloy that was highly appreciated in antiquity but, as it was not pure but adulterated, in the Greek world was qualified as νοσώδης, ‘sickly’ (Plu. De Pyth. Or. 395c). The Septuagint, then, utilizes the nominal lexeme χλωρότης (Ps 67.14), which gives it the meaning of ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq by emphasizing its low saturation. This explains the fact that the Psalterium Gallicanum uses pallor (Ps 67.14) to stress this low saturation, while the Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos (Ps 67.14), following the Hebrew text, revives the peculiar tonality for which this type of gold was still known in the Middle Ages: uiror. Within this same context of death, in which colour loses its vigour and intensity, χλωρός is used to describe the horse of the fourth rider in the book of Revelation (Rev

V.1 Conclusion

211

6.8), a meaning that appears in medical literature as a symptom of sickness and death and in the epithet ᾿Aχλύς, the ‘Darkness of Death’ (Hes. Sc. 264– 265), a use not found, however, in the Septuagint. In the Vulgate, the meaning of the Greek lexeme was understood and pallidus was chosen, a term used in medical literature to translate χλωρός in such contexts and in the famous descriptions of death in Horace (pallida Mors, Hor. C. 1.4.13) and Vergil (Verg. Aen. 4.644). In Latin, however, in contrast to modern languages, this term denotes a specific colour itself, again one of low intensity or saturation. In the Hebrew corpus, we find the term ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn, a nominal lexeme that usually denotes a fungus that causes the deterioration of plants and the loss of their natural colour. Jeremiah, however, employing a conceptual metonymy, uses it to describe the faces of a group of terrified soldiers (Jer 30.6). This, once again, is an instance of colour loss, in the case of individuals experiencing a strong emotion such as fear. Surprisingly, in both the LXX and the Vulgate, although their respective languages possess specific lexemes for such contexts –χλωρός or χλωρότης, pallidus or pallor (which in fact is used to describe frightened faces in Jdt 6.5 and Esth 15.10)–, these terms are replaced by lexemes that underscore the presence of illness –ἴκτερος (Jer 37.6) and aurugo (Jer 30.6)–, perhaps in an attempt to reproduce the literal sense of ‫ ירקון‬yērāqôn, ‘mildew’. Another of the affinities that exists among the three corpora with regard to the green dimension of creation is the fact that these colour lexemes tend to be polysemic. The exception to this is when the lexeme appears in only one pericope (χλωρότης, uiriditas, pallidus) or when the entity is so generic as not to allow greater precision (χλωρίζω, uireo, uiresco). On many occasions, the various meanings of colour lexemes are motivated by cognitive metonymies of the salient property and entity type, as in the case of the nominal lexeme ‫ ירק‬yereq, whose colour, as it predominates in vegetation in general, captures the attention of the narrator. It is then that he focuses exclusively on the colour ‫ ירק‬yereq, leaves behind the generic entity that embodies it and uses it to describe the hue of other plants such as ‫ עשב‬ʿēśeb, ‘herb’ (Gen 1.30; 9.3) and ‫ דשא‬dešeʾ, ‘grass’ (2 Kgs 19.26; Ps 37.2; Isa 37.27; 1QIsaa 31.6). This change in meaning is reflected by a change in syntax, with ‫ ירק‬yereq preceding the nominal lexemes in which it is embodied and displaying its adjectival function (Gen 1.30; 9.3; 2 Kgs 19.26; Ps 37.2; Isa 37.27; 1QIsaa 31.6). The same occurs in the Septuagint with χλωρός, though in an inverse fashion. The adjective is used to refer to an entity which is ‘clothed’ in colour. This change in meaning is reflected in a morphological change, as χλωρός is used in its neuter form in both the singular and the plural: χλωρόν and τὰ χλωρά (Gen 2.5; 30.37b; Exod 10.15; Num 22.4; Deut 29.22; Job 39.8; Prov 27.25; Isa 27.11). This phenomenon is found for the first time in the Septuagint, and then in later texts (Ezek. Trag. 93; Gad 2.2) and in the New Testament (Rev 9.4). As for the differences, the Hebrew corpus is characterized by its sobriety in the use of colour lexemes. It uses only four (‫ ירק‬yereq, ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq, ‫ ירוק‬yārôq and ‫ירקון‬

212

V.1 Conclusion

yērāqôn), which appear 17x (13x – MT; 4x – Qumran) in texts of varying literary forms (narrative, legal, poetic and prophetic). While the Greek corpus maintains the same number of lexemes (χλωρός, χλωρότης, χλωρίζω and πράσινος), it makes use of them on more occasions: 23x (76.92 % more than in the Hebrew version). In effect, the Septuagint perceives the chromatism which is latent in the Hebrew corpus and makes it explicit. This is what occurs, for example, with χλωρός, which is used not only to translate ‫ירק‬ yereq (Gen 1.30; Exod 10.15; Num 22.4; 2 Kgs 19.26; Isa 15.6) and ‫ ירוק‬yārôq, ‘greenery’ (Job 39.8), but also lexemes from the cognitive domain of plants (‫ שׂיח‬śȋaḥ, ‘bush’, or ‫ עשׂב‬ʿēseb, ‘herb’ [Gen 2.5; Deut 29.22], etc.) or those which indicate state (‫ לח‬laḥ, ‘moist’, [Gen 30.37a; Ezek 17.24; 21.3]). Furthermore, there is sometimes in the Septuagint an attempt to nuance the colour denoted in the Hebrew text, or even to transmit the polysemy of the Hebrew lexeme. The clearest example of this is that ‫ ירקרק‬yǝraqraq is translated as χλωρίζω in the texts that refer to mould in Leviticus (Lev 13.49; 14.37), while χλωρότης is used to describe the colour of the dove’s wings in Ps 67.14 (68.14 MT). The chromatic sensitivity that we now perceive in the translators of the Septuagint is further intensified in the Vulgate, in which we find seven colour lexemes in different grammatical categories (uiridis, uiriditas, uiror, uireo, uiresco, pallidus and pallor), used a total of 45x (246.15 % more than in the Hebrew corpus). It is not possible, however, to establish the criteria by which a given adjectival or verbal lexeme is chosen to translate the corresponding Hebrew term. In both the Vulgate and the Septuagint, these colour terms sometimes appear in texts where they are absent from the Hebrew version, as happens, for example, with uiridis, which is used to translate not only ‫ ירק‬yereq (Ps 37.2 [36.2 VulgHeb]), but also lexemes that denote a state of freshness, such as ‫ לח‬laḥ, ‘moist’ (Ezek 17.24; 21.3), and ‫ רענן‬raʿǎnān, ‘fresh’ (Jer 17.8). The same occurs with uireo, which is used to translate ‫ ירק‬yereq (Gen 9.3; Exod 10.15; 2 Kgs 19.26), and ‫ ירוק‬yārôq (Job 39.8), as well as other terms that connote colour by a state of freshness and lushness, such as ‫ רענן‬raʿǎnān, ‘fresh’ (Ps 37.35; Ps 52.10; Hos 14.9), ‫’ אביב‬ābîb, ‘young ears of barley’ (Exod 9.31 and Lev 2.14), etc., or for belonging to the cognitive domain of plants, such as ‫צמח‬ ṣemaḥ,‘vegetation’ (Gen 19.25), ‫ עשב‬ʿēśeb, ‘herb’ (Deut 29.22), or ‫ עלה‬ʿāleh, ‘leaf’ (Prov 11.28), and ‫ דשא‬dešeʾ, ‘grass’ (Prov 27.25). The inclination for colour that we find in the Vulgate extends also to its translations from the Greek. While the Septuagint does not always specify the hue expressly, the Vulgate infers it ‘between the lines’. Thus, for example, pallor is used to describe the fear felt by Achior (Jdt 6.5) and Esther (Esth 15.10), even if the Septuagint does not mention this directly (Jdt 6.5) or simply uses the expression μετέβαλεν τὸ χρῶμα (Esth 15.7). The chromatic sensitivity of the Vulgate is also evident when it seeks to nuance the expression of colour. Hence the use of pallor and uiror in Ps 67.14, depending on which version, the Hebrew or the Greek, is being translated, and pallidus in Rev 6.8 rather than uiridis, as Tertullian rendered it (Tert. Pudic. 2.1022C).

V.1 Conclusion

213

These differences in the use of colour language in the Polyglot Bible reveal that the biblical corpus, with the passage of time, became more and more ‘coloured’:¹ creation is in effect clad in green, while emotions cloud the faces of men with their colour and pale death devours colour itself. This does not prevent the green dimension of creation from expressing, in all three corpora, the reality of creation: life and death; the splendour of the created world and its destruction; the vigour of nature and its decrepitude; and, always latent within this, the fleeting quality of present time. Finally, we cannot conclude without noting that the study of colour terms in the Greek Bible corpus has allowed us to make some important lexicographical observations regarding the development of Greek in the Hellenistic period, which are: – The lexicalization of χλωρόν in the Septuagint to express vegetation in general and of the expression ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος to denote a precious stone. – The verbal lexeme χλωρίζω, which appears in the Septuagint, should not be considered a neologism, as it is a technical term that was used in medical literature as well as lapidaries. – The use of χλωρότης to describe entities from different cognitive domains shows that it is not used as an abstract noun in Greek literature. We began this investigation with the desire to fill a gap in modern studies of colour; we will end with the hope that not only have we contributed to this, but that the use of this new methodology in the field of biblical lexicography will in turn have enriched the possibilities of cognitive linguistics.

 We will leave for future research the study of the modern translations of the Bible, in which the use of colour lexemes is multiplied further still, albeit less so than in the Vulgate. Thus, for example, the NRSV uses the adjectival lexeme ‘green’ 36x and ‘greenish’ 2x, while the Navarra Bible uses six different lexemes, a total of 34x: ‘verde/s’ 16x/7x, ‘verdosa’ 1x, ‘verdeante’ 1x, ‘verdor’ 6x, ‘verduras’ 2x and ‘verduscas’ 1x. The CEI 2008, for its part, uses five lexemes 49x: ‘verde/i’ 29x/10x, ‘verdastra/e’ 1x/1x, ‘verdeggiante/i’ 2x/2x, ‘verdetto’ 1x and ‘verdura/e’ 1x/2x.

Abbreviations 1 General LXX MS MT NT OT VL Vulg VulgGal VulgHeb

Septuagint manuscript Masoretic Text New Testament Old Testament Vetus Latina Vulgate Psalterium Gallicanum Psalterium iuxta Hebreos

2 Bible editions and reference works ABD ASV Bailly BDAG BDB BDS Biblia del Peregrino Biblia griega. Septuaginta Brenton The Brill Dictionary Cantera and Iglesias CEI DBHE DBIm DELG DELL DGE DGENT Diccionario Akal del color DLE Easton EDB Forcellini Friberg Gaffiot GELS HALOT JBC

The Anchor Bible Dictionary The Holy Bible. American Standard Version Dictionnaire grec-français A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament La Bible du Semeur Biblia del Peregrino. Edición de Estudio Biblia griega. Septuaginta The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English The Brill Dictionary of Ancient Greek Sagrada Biblia. Versión crítica sobre los textos hebreo, arameo y griego La Sacra Bibbia, Conferenza episcopale italiana, edn 2008 Diccionario bíblico hebreo-español Dictionary of Biblical Imagery Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue latine Diccionario griego-español Diccionario griego-español del Nuevo Testamento Diccionario Akal del color Diccionario de la lengua española Illustrated Bible Dictionary Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible Totius Latinitatis Lexicon Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament Dictionnaire Latin Français A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint (Muraoka) The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament Jerome Biblical Commentary

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-008

Abbreviations

KTU Lampe LEH Lewis and Short Louw and Nida LSJ Navarra Bible NET NETS NIV NKJV NR2006 NRSV OED OLD Rocci RVR60 SDBH SG21 SP Strong’s Dictionary SVTG Thayer TDNT TLG TLL

The Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani and Other Places A Patristic Greek Lexicon A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint (Lust) A Latin Dictionary Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains A Greek-English Lexicon with a Supplement 1968 Sagrada Biblia, Professors of the University of Navarra School of Theology New English Translation New English Translation of the Septuagint The Holy Bible. New International Version New King James Version of the Bible La sacra Bibbia nuova riveduta 2006 New Revised Standard Version of the Bible Oxford English Dictionary Oxford Latin Dictionary Vocabolario greco-italiano Reina-Valera 1960 Semantic Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew La Bible Segond 21 Samaritan Pentateuch Strong’s Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary of the Old Testament Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Thesaurus Linguae Graecae Thesaurus Linguae Latinae

3 Journals BT CBQ HUCA JBL MEAH NT NTS PEQ SJT VT

215

The Bible Translator The Catholic Biblical Quarterly Hebrew Union College Annual Journal of Biblical Literature Miscelánea de estudios árabes y hebraicos Novum Testamentum New Testament Studies Palestine Exploration Quarterly Scottish Journal of Theology Vetus Testamentum

216

Abbreviations

4 Books of the Bible 4.1 Old Testament Amos 1 – 2 Chronicles Daniel Deuteronomy Ecclesiasticus (Vulg) Esther Exodus Ezekiel Genesis Haggai Hosea Isaiah Jeremiah Job Judges Judith 1 – 2 Kings Lamentations Leviticus 2 Maccabees Numbers Proverbs Psalms Sirach (LXX) Song of Songs Wisdom Zechariah

Amos 1 – 2 Chr Dan Deut Ecclus (Sir) Esth Exod Ezek Gen Hag Hos Isa Jer Job Judg Jdt 1 – 2 Kgs Lam Lev 2 Macc Num Prov Ps Sir Song Wis Zech

4.2 New Testament John Luke Mark Revelation

John Luke Mark Rev

Bibliography* Accordance Bible Software® version 12.3.6: Oaktree Software, Inc., 2019. Alonso Schökel, Luis, Biblia del Peregrino. Edición de Estudio (Estella: Verbo Divino, 2003). Alonso Schökel, Luis, Diccionario bíblico hebreo-español (Madrid: Trotta, 1994). Andre´, Jacques, E´tude sur les termes de couleur dans la langue latine (Paris: Librairie C. Klincksieck, 1949). Angelini, Anna, ‘Translating Colors in Antiquity: the Semantics of Κόκκινος in the Septuagint’, Semitica et Classica 10 (2017), 49 – 58. Arias Abellán, Carmen, Estructura semántica de los adjetivos de color en los tratadistas latinos de agricultura y parte de la enciclopedia de Plinio (Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, 1994). Aristotele, I colori e i suoni, Maria Fernanda Ferrini, ed. (Milano: Bompiani, 2008). Bailly, Anatole and Emile Egger, Dictionnaire grec-français, 2nd rev. edn (Paris: Hachette, 1897). Barcelona, Antonio, ‘La metonimia conceptual’, in Iraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano et al. (eds.), Lingüística cognitiva, 2nd edn (Barcelona: Anthropos, 2016), pp. 123 – 146. Barton, Mukti, ‘I Am Black and Beautiful,’ Black Theology: An International Journal 2 (2, 2004), 167 – 187. Bauer, Walther, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (19585), trans. and expanded rev. by Frederick W. Danker, 3rd edn (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000) [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Benczes, Réka and Erzsébet Tóth-Czifra, ‘The Hungarian Colour Terms Piros and Vörös. A Corpus and Cognitive Linguistic Account’, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 61 (2, 2014), 123 – 152. Berlin, Brent and Paul Kay, Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution (Stanford, CA: CSLI, 1999). Bible Segond 21 (Société Biblique de Genève, 2007); Copyright © 2007 by Société Biblique de Genève; available at: https://www.bible.com/es/versions/152-s21-bible-segond-21. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, Karl Elliger and William Rudolph, eds., 4th edn (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1983); Copyright © 1991 – 2010 The J. Alan Groves Center for Advanced Biblical Research (The Groves Center); Version 4.35 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam, Robert Weber and Roger Gryson, eds., 5th edn (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2007); Copyright © 2007 by Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart; Version 3.6 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Blánquez Fraile, Agustín, Diccionario latino-español (Barcelona: Ramón Sopena, 1954). Bogaert, Pierre-Maurice, ‘The Latin Bible’, in James Carleton Paget and Joachim Schaper (eds.), The New Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 505 – 526. Bradley, Mark, Colour and Meaning in Ancient Rome (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009). Brenner, Athalya, Colour Terms in the Old Testament (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1982). Brenton, Lancelot C. L., The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1986).

* The fact that some of these works have been studied electronically has at times made it impossible to detail the specific page numbers consulted. However, the complete bibliographical data for these works is given here, with an indication as to whether they have been referenced electronically. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-009

218

Bibliography

Brown, Francis et al., A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament; Original electronic text Copyright © Scribe, Inc., Dania Beach, FL; electronic text corrected, hypertexted, and prepared by OakTree Software, Inc.; Version 4.5 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Brown, Raymond E. et al., The Jerome Biblical Commentary (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968). Bulakh, Maria, ‘Basic Color Terms from Proto-Semitic to Old Ethiopic’, in Robert E. MacLaury et al. (eds.), Anthropology of Color: Interdisciplinary Multilevel Modeling (Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2007), pp. 247 – 261. Bulakh, Maria, ‘Basic Color Terms of Biblical Hebrew in Diachronic Aspect’, in Leonid E. Kogan et al. (eds.), Babel und Bibel 3. Annual of Ancient Near Eastern, Old Testament, and Semitic Studies (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006), pp. 181 – 216. Burton, Marilyn E., The Semantics of Glory: A Cognitive, Corpus-based Approach to Hebrew Word Meaning, Studia Semitica Neerlandica 68 (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2017). Busatta, Sandra, ‘The Perception of Color and the Meaning of Brilliance Among Archaic and Ancient Populations and Its Reflections on Language’, Antrocom Online Journal of Anthropology 10 (2, 2014), 309 – 347. Cambridge Dictionary; available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/es/. Carbajosa, Ignacio and Andrés García Serrano (eds.), Una Biblia a varias voces. Estudio textual de la Biblia Políglota Complutense (Madrid: Ediciones Universidad de San Dámaso, 2014). Chantraine, Pierre, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque: histoire des mots (Paris: Klincksieck, 1968). Cienki, Alan, ‘Frames, Idealised Cognitive Models, and Domains’, in Dirk Geeraerts and Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), pp. 170 – 187. Croft, William, Typology and Universals (Cambridge, United Kingdom; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990). Cuenca, Maria Josep and Joseph Hilferty, Introducción a la lingüística cognitiva, 2nd printing (Barcelona: Planeta, 2018). De Blois, Reinier (ed.), Semantic Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew; Copyright © United Bible Societies 2000 – 2019; latest update: 29/11/2017; available at: http://www.sdbh.org/dictionary/main. php?language=en. Dead Sea Scrolls Greek Biblical Corpus (Canonical order); Copyright ©2014 by OakTree Software, Inc.; Version 1.3 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Dietrich, Manfried et al., The Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani, and Other Places (Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1995). Dillman, August and Werner Munzinger, Lexicon Linguae Aethiopicae cum Indice Latino (Lipsiae [Leipzig]: T.O. Weigel, 1865). Easton, Matthew G., Illustrated Bible Dictionary, 3rd edn (Thomas Nelson, 1897); OakTree Software, Inc.; Version 3.4 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Enrique-Arias, Andrés (dir.), Biblia Medieval; available at: http://corpus.bibliamedieval.es/. Ernout, Alfred and Antoine Meillet, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue latine: histoire des mots (Paris: Klincksieck, 2001). Evans, Vyvyan, A Glossary of Cognitive Linguistics (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2007). Fernández Marcos, Natalio, Introducción a las versiones griegas de la Biblia, Textos y estudios Cardenal Cisneros 23 (Madrid: CSIC, 1979). Fernández Marcos, Natalio, ‘Las traducciones en la antigüedad’, in Natalio Fernández Marcos, Filologi´a bi´blica y humanismo, Textos y estudios Cardenal Cisneros 78 (Madrid: CSIC, 2012), pp. 29 – 45. Fernández Marcos, Natalio and María Victoria Spottorno, La Biblia griega. Septuaginta, 4 vols. (Salamanca: Sígueme, 2008 – 2015).

Bibliography

219

Forcellini, Egidio et al., Totius Latinitatis Lexicon (Prati: Typis Aldinianis, 1875); available at: http:// lexica.linguax.com/forc2.php. Freedman, David N. (ed.), Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible (Eerdmans Dictionary); Copyright © Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.; electronic text hypertexted and prepared by OakTree Software, Inc.; Version 3.8 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Freedman, David N. (ed.), The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 6 vols. (New York: Doubleday, 1992); Version 4.1 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Friberg, Timothy et al., Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament (Victoria, BC: Trafford, 2005). Fronzaroli, Pelio, ‘Sulla struttura dei colori in ebraico biblico’, in Vittore Pisani (ed.), Studi linguistici in onore di Vittore Pisani (Brescia: Paideia, 1969), pp. 377 – 389. Gaffiot, Félix, Dictionnaire latin français (Paris: Hachette–Livre, 2016). García Márquez, Gabriel, ‘Prólogo’ to: Concepción Maldonado and Nieves Almarza Acedo (eds.), Clave: Diccionario de uso del español actual, 3rd edn (Madrid: Ediciones SM, 1996). García Ureña, Lourdes, ‘Colour Adjectives in the New Testament’, NTS 61 (2, 2015), 219 – 238. García Ureña, Lourdes, ‘El oro: metal y color en el Nuevo Testamento’, in Israel Muñoz Gallarte and Dámaris Romero (eds.), Nova et vetera. Homenaje al Prof. Antonio Piñero (Córdoba: El Almendro, 2016), pp. 279 – 292. García Ureña, Lourdes, Narrative and Drama in the Book of Revelation. A Literary Approach (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019). García Ureña, Lourdes, ‘The Book of Revelation: a Chromatic Story’, in Adela Yarbro Collins (ed.), Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense LXIV. New Perspectives on the Book of Revelation, Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 291 (Leuven; Paris; Bristol, CT: Peeters, 2017), pp. 393 – 419. García Ureña, Lourdes, ‘Χλωρός in the Septuagint: colour or state?’, in press. García Ureña, Lourdes, ‘Χλωρός y su riqueza cromática en la Septuaginta’, in τί ἡμῖν καὶ σοί; Lo que hay entre tú y nosotros. Estudios en honor de María Victoria Spottorno (Córdoba: UCOPress, 2016), pp. 119 – 131. Geeraerts, Dirk, Diachronic Prototype Semantics: A Contribution to Historical Lexicology (Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 1997). Geeraerts, Dirk, ‘Lexicography’, in Dirk Geeraerts and Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), pp. 1160 – 1174. Geeraerts, Dirk, ‘Meaning and Definition’, in Piet van Sterkenburg (ed.), A Practical Guide to Lexicography (Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2003), pp. 83 – 93. Gesenius, Wilhelm, Hebräisches und Aramäisches Handwörterbuch über das Alte Testament, 5th edn (Leipzig: Vogel, 1957). Gibbs Jr., Raymond W., ‘Idioms and Formulaic Language’, in Dirk Geeraerts and Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), pp. 697 – 725. Glare, Peter G. W., Oxford Latin Dictionary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968). Goldman, Rachael, Color-Terms in Social and Cultural Context in Ancient Rome, Gorgias Studies in Classical and Late Antiquity 3 (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2013). Gradwohl, Roland, Die Farben im Alten Testament: Eine terminologische Studie (Berlin: A. Töpelmann, 1963). Gries, Stefan Th., ‘Introduction’, in Stefan Th. Gries and Anatol Stefanowitsch (eds.), Corpora in Cognitive Linguistics: Corpus-based Approaches to Syntax and Lexis. Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 172 (Berlin; New York: De Gruyter, 2006), pp. 1 – 17. Gross-Diaz, Theresa, ‘The Latin Psalter’, in R. Marsden & E. Matter (eds.), The New Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 427 – 445.

220

Bibliography

Guillaumont, Antoine, ‘La désignation des couleurs en hébreu et en araméen’, in Ignace Meyerson (ed.), Problèmes de la couleur (Paris: S. E.V.P.E.N., 1957), pp. 339 – 348. Hardin, Clyde and Luisa Maffi (eds.), Color Categories in Thought and Language (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997). Harlé, Paul and Didier Pralon, La Bible d’Alexandrie. 3, Le Lévitique (Paris: Cerf, 1988). Harrell, James A., ‘Old Testament Gemstones: a Philological, Geological, and Archaeological Assessment of the Septuagint’, Bulletin for Biblical Research 21 (2, 2011), 141 – 171. Harrell, James A. et al., ‘Hebrew Gemstones in the Old Testament: A Lexical, Geological, and Archaeological Analysis’, Bulletin for Biblical Research 27 (1, 2017), 1 – 52. Hartley, John E., The Semantics of Ancient Hebrew Colour Lexemes (Louvain; Paris; Walpole, MA: Peeters, 2010). Hirsch, Emil G. and Caspar Levias, ‘Color’, in Jewish Encyclopedia; available at: https://www.je wishencyclopedia.com/articles/4557-color. Hosborne, Harold, ‘Colour Concepts of the Ancient Greek’, The British Journal of Aesthetics 8 (3, 1968), 269 – 283. Houghton, Hugh A. G., The Latin New Testament: A Guide to Its Early History, Texts, and Manuscripts (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2016). Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide, ‘Lexicografía y lingüística cognitiva’, Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 23 (2010), 195 – 213. Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide, ‘Lingüística cognitiva: origen, principios y tendencias’, in Iraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano et al. (eds.), Lingüística cognitiva, 2nd edn (Barcelona: Anthropos, 2016), pp. 13 – 38. Ieronimus, Psalterium S. Hieronymi de Hebraica Veritate Interpretatum, Teófilo Ayuso Marezuela, ed., Biblia Polyglotta Matritensia series VIII, Vulgata Hispana L., 21 (Matriti: CSIC, 1960). International Association of Colour (AIC); available at: www.aic-color.org/page-18077. Irwin, Eleanor, Colour Terms in Greek Poetry (Toronto: Hakkert, 1974). Jacquesson, François, ‘Les mots de la couleur dans les textes bibliques’, 2009. Online in Research Project Histoire et géographie de la couleur (CNRS-ISCC 2008 – 2009); available at: www.academia.edu/33347300/Les_mots_de_couleurs_dans_les_textes_bibliques_2008_. Jart, Una, ‘The Precious Stones in the Revelation of St. John 21:18 – 21’, Studia Theologica 24 (1970), 150 – 181. Johnson, Mark, The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1987). Joosten, Jan, ‘The Interplay between Hebrew and Greek in Biblical Lexicology: Language, Text, and Interpretation’, in Eberhard Bons et al. (eds.), Biblical Lexicology: Hebrew and Greek. Semantics, Exegesis, Translation (Berlin; Boston: De Gruyter, 2015), pp. 209 – 223. Joosten, Jan, ‘Varieties of Greek in the Septuagint and the New Testament’, in James Carleton Paget and Joachim Schaper (eds.), The New Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 22 – 45. Kay, Paul and Terry Regier, ‘Language, Thought, and Color’, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10 (2, 2006), 51 – 54. Kerkeslager, Allen, ‘Apollo, Greco-Roman Prophecy, and the Rider on the White Horse in Rev 6:2’, JBL 112 (1, 1993), 116 – 121. Kerttula, Seija, ‘Relative Basicness of Color Terms. Modeling and Measurement’, in Robert E. MacLaury et al. (eds.), Anthropology of Color, Interdisciplinary Multilevel Modeling (Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2007), pp. 151 – 169. Kittel, Gerhard, ‘δοκέω δόξα δοξάζω συνδοξάζω ἔνδοξος ἐνδοξάζω παράδοξος’, TDNT 2, 232 – 255. Kittel, Gerhard, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 10 vols. (Grand Rapids, Mich., Eerdmans 1964 – 1976).

Bibliography

221

Köhler, Ludwig and Walter Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, trans. and edn Mervyn E. J. Richardson; © 1994, 1995, 1996, 1999, 2000 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands; Electronic text hypertexted and prepared by OakTree Software, Inc.; Version 3.5 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Kuschel, Rolf and Torben Monberg, ‘We Don’t Talk Much about Colour Here: A Study of Colour Semantics on Bellona Island’, Man New Series 9 (2, 1974), 213 – 242. La Bible du Semeur (The Internatinal Bible Society, 1992); available at: https://www.biblica.com/bible/bds/gen%C3 %A8se/1/. La Sacra Bibbia, Conferenza Episcopale Italiana, ed., edn 2008; Copyright © 2008 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. La Sacra Bibbia Nuova Riveduta 2006, Società Biblica di Ginevra, ed.; Copyright © 2008 Società Biblica di Ginevra. Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson, Metaphors We Live by (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980). Lampe, Geoffrey W. H., A Patristic Greek Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1961). Langacker, Ronald W., ‘Context, Cognition and Semantics: A Unified Dynamic Approach’, in Ellen J. Van Wolde (ed.), Job 28: Cognition in Context, Biblical Interpretation Series v. 64 (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2003), pp. 179 – 230. Langacker, Ronald W., Foundations of Cognitive Grammar (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1987). Langacker, Ronald W., ‘Introduction to Concept, Image, and Symbol’, in Dirk Geeraets et al. (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Basic Readings (New York; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2006), pp. 29 – 67. Lewis, Charlton T. and Charles Short, A Latin Dictionary (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1891). Liddell, Henry G. et al. (eds.), A Greek-English Lexicon with a Supplement 1968, 9th edn, with a revised supplement (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1940); OakTree Software, Inc.; Version 2.8 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Loeb Classical Library Database, James Loeb and Jeffrey Henderson (eds.), Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2014); 28/8/2019. Louw, Johannes P. and Eugene A. Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains, 2nd edn, 2 vols. (New York: United Bible Societies, 1989); Copyright © 1989 by the United Bible Societies; OakTree Software, Inc.; Version 4.2 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Lust, Johan et al. (eds.), A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2003). Lyons, John, Linguistic Semantics: an Introduction (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995). Lyons, John, ‘The Vocabulary of Color with Particular Reference to Ancient Greek and Classical Latin’, in Alexander Borg (ed.), The Language of Color in the Mediterranean: an Anthology on Linguistic and Ethnographic Aspects of Color Terms, vol. 1 (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1999), pp. 38 – 75. Massey-Gillespie, Kevin, ‘A New Approach to Basic Hebrew Colour Terms’, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 20 (1, 1994), 1 – 11. Mateos, Juan, Método de análisis semántico: aplicado al griego del Nuevo Testamento (Córdoba: El Almendro, 1989). Mateos, Juan and Jesús Peláez del Rosal (dirs.), Diccionario griego-español del Nuevo Testamento (DGENT). Análisis semántico de los vocablos, 5 vols. (Córdoba: El Almendro, 2000 – 2012). Meiri, Oree et al., Out of the Blue, ‫( אל עומק התכלת‬Jerusalem: Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem, 2018). Miller-Naudé, Cynthia L. and Jacobus A. Naudé, ‘Textual Interrelationships Involving the Septuagint Translations of the Precious Stones in the Breastpiece of the High Priest’, HTS

222

Bibliography

Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 76 (4, 2020), a6141. https://doi. org/10.4102/hts.v76i4.6141. Montanari, Franco et al., The Brill Dictionary of Ancient Greek (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2015). Muraoka, Takamitsu, A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint (Louvain; Paris; Walpole MA: Peeters, 2009). New English Translation, The Translation That Explains Itself™; Copyright © 1996 – 2005 by Biblical Studies Press, LLC; Version 3.4; [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. New King James Version of the Bible (Thomas Nelson, 1975); Copyright © 1982, Thomas Nelson, Inc. [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. New Revised Standard Version of the Bible (National Council of the Churches of Christ, 1989) [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Noegel, Scott B., ‘Scarlet and Harlots: Seeing Red in the Hebrew Bible’, HUCA 87 (1, 2016), 1 – 47. Novum Testamentum Graece, Barbara Aland and Kurt Aland, eds., 28th rev. edn (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012); Copyright © 2007 by Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart; Version 3.6; [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Oxford English Dictionary (OED Online) (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000); available at: wwwoed-com.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/view/Entry/81167?rskey=tf2YuD&result=2&isAdvanced= false#eid. Pantelia, Maria (dir.), The Thesaurus Linguae Graecae; available at: http://stephanus.tlg.uci.edu/ Iris/inst/lexica. Passoni dell’Acqua, Anna, ‘Appunti sulla terminologia dei colori nella Bibbia e nei papiri’, in Isabella Andorlini et al. (eds.), Atti del XXII Congresso Internazionale di Papirologia, Firenze 23 – 29 agosto 1998 (Firenze: Istituto papirologico, 2001), pp. 1067 – 1075. Passoni dell’Acqua, Anna, ‘Colori e trasparenze nella haute couture dell’Egitto greco-romano’, Semitica et Classica 1 (2008), 113 – 138. Passoni dell’Acqua, Anna, ‘Notazioni cromatiche dall’Egitto greco-romano. La versione dei LXX e i papiri’, Aegyptus 78 (1998), 77 – 115. Pastoureau, Michel, Green: The History of a Colour (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2014). Peláez del Rosal, Jesús, ‘El factor contextual como elemento determinante del significado de los lexemas. El caso de ἀπολείπω’, in Vicente Balaguer and Vicente Collado (eds.), V Simposio Bíblico Español. La Biblia en el Arte y la Literatura. I: Literatura (Valencia: Fundación Bíblica Española, 1999), pp. 411 – 418. Pela´ez del Rosal, Jesús, New Testament Lexicography: Introduction, Theory, Method (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2018). Pietersma, Albert and Benjamin G. Wright, A New English Translation of the Septuagint: And the Other Greek Translations Traditionally Included under That Title; NETS Text Edition: 2014; Copyright © 2007 by the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies, Inc.; used by permission of Oxford University Press; Version 3.9 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Posner, Philip et al. (eds.), Logeion 2, ΛΟΓΕΙΟΝ; latest update: September 2018; available at: https://logeion.uchicago.edu/%CE%BB%CE%BF%CE%B3%CE%B5%E1%BF%96%CE%BF%CE% BD. Pseudo-Jonathan (Thargum Jonathan Ben Usiel zum Pentateuch). Nach der londoner Handschrift, Moses Ginsburger, ed. (Hildesheim; New York: Georg Olms, 1971). Raina, Giampiera, ‘Considerazioni sul vocabolario greco del colore’, in Simone Beta and Maria Michela Sassi (eds.), I colori nel mondo antico. Esperienze linguistiche e quadri simbolici. Atti della giornata di studio, Siena, 28 marzo 2001 (Fiesole: Cadmo, 2003), pp. 25 – 39. Rambiert-Kwaśniewska, Anna, ‘What Do Byssus and Crimson Imply about the Hebrew Bible and the Septuagint?’, The Biblical Annals 8 (3, 2018), 297 – 317.

Bibliography

223

Real Academia Española, Diccionario de la lengua española, 23rd edn (Madrid: Planeta, 2014); available at: https://dle.rae.es/. Rocci, Lorenzo, Vocabolario greco-italiano, 4th edn (Roma: Società Editrice Dante Alighieri, 2011). Rodríguez Adrados, Francisco (dir.), Diccionario griego-español, 7 vols. (Madrid: CSIC, 1980 – 2009); available at: http://dge.cchs.csic.es/xdge/. Roelli, Philipp (dir.), Corpus Corporum Repositorium Operum Latinonrum Apud Universitatem Turicensem; available at: www.mlat.uzh.ch/MLS/index.php?lang=0. Romero González, Dámaris, El adjetivo en el Nuevo Testamento: Clasificación semántica. Tesis Doctoral (Córdoba: Universidad de Córdoba, 2007). Roy, Ellen, ‘Variation and Uniformity in the Construction of Biological Knowledge Across Cultures’, in Helaine Selin (ed.), Nature Across Cultures: Views of Nature and the Environment in Non-Western Cultures (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2003), pp. 47 – 74. Ryken, Leland et al. (eds.), Dictionary of Biblical Imagery (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1998). Sagrada Biblia, Facultad de Teología de la Universidad de Navarra, eds., 5 vols. (Pamplona: EUNSA, 1999 – 2004). Sagrada Biblia. Versión crítica sobre los textos hebreo, arameo y griego, Francisco Cantera Burgos and Manuel Iglesias González, eds., 3rd edn (Madrid: BAC, 2000). Santa Biblia, Reina-Valera Revisión de 1960; Copyright © Sociedades Bíblicas en América Latina, 1960; Version 2.2 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Santos Carretero, Carlos, ‘Un estudio sobre el color: los usos de ‫ ָלָבן‬en la Biblia hebrea’, Sefarad 77 (1, 2017), 39 – 64. Sanz, Juan Carlos and Rosa Gallego, Diccionario Akal del color (Madrid: Akal, 2001). Sarna, Nahum M., ‘Exodus, Book Of. E. Textual Traditions’, ABD 2. Sassi, Maria Michela, ‘Il problema della definizione antica del colore, fra storia e antropologia’, in Simone Beta and Maria Michela Sassi (eds.), I colori nel mondo antico. Esperienze linguistiche e quadri simbolici. Atti della giornata di studio, Siena, 28 marzo 2001 (Fiesole: Cadmo, 2003), pp. 9 – 23. Scio de S. Miguel, Felipe, La Santa Biblia: traducida al español de la Vulgata latina y anotada conforme al sentido de los Santos Padres y expositores católicos, 3 vols. (Madrid: Gaspar y Roig, Editores, 1852). Septuaginta, Alfred Rahlfs and Robert Hanhart, eds. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2006); Copyright © 2007 by Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart; Version 3.6; [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum, Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Gö ttingen, ed. (Gö ttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1931 – 2015). Shead, Stephen L., Radical Frame Semantics and Biblical Hebrew: Exploring Lexical Semantics, Biblical Interpretation Series 108 (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2011). Smith, Mark S., ‘Words and Their Worlds’, in Eberhard Bons et al. (eds.), Biblical Lexicology: Hebrew and Greek: Semantics – Exegesis – Translation (Berlin; Boston: De Gruyter, 2015), pp. 3 – 31. Strong, James, Strong’s Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary of the Old Testament; Public Domain; Electronic text downloaded from the Bible Foundation e-Text Library: http://www.bf.org/bfetexts.htm; Hypertexted and formatted by OakTree Software, Inc. Hebrew text added by OakTree Software, Inc. Version 3.1 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. Suidas, Suda On Line: Byzantine Lexicography, David Whitehead et al., eds. (Stoa Consortium, 2014); available at: https://www.cs.uky.edu/~raphael/sol/sol-html/. Swanson, James A., A Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Hebrew (Old Testament) (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems Inc., 1997). Sweetser, Eve, ‘Compositionality and Blending: Semantic Composition in a Cognitively Realistic Framework’, in Theo Janssen and Gisela Redeker (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Foundations,

224

Bibliography

Scope, and Methodology, Cognitive Linguistics Research 15 (Berlin; New York: De Gruyter, 1999), pp. 129 – 162. Targum du Pentateuque, Roger Le Déaut and Jacques Robert, eds., vol. 1 (Paris, Éditions Du Cerf, 1978). Targum Neofiti I: Genesis, Martin McNamara, ed., in Martin McNamara et al., eds., The Aramaic Bible. The Targums, vol. 1 A (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1992). Targum Neophyti 1: Targum Palestinense Ms. De La Biblioteca Vaticana, Alejandro Díez Macho, ed. (Madrid: Consejo Superior De Investigaciones Científicas, 1968). Targum Pseudo-Jonathan: Genesis, Michael Maher, ed., in Martin McNamara et al., eds., The Aramaic Bible. The Targums, vol. 1B (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1992). Taylor, John R., Linguistic Categorization: Prototypes in Linguistic Theory, 2nd edn (London: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 1995). Thayer, Joseph H., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Being Grimm’s Wilke’s Clavis Novi Testamenti (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1889); Version 1.7 [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. The Bible in Aramaic Based on Old Manuscripts and Printed Texts, Alexander Sperber, ed. (Leiden: Brill, 1959). The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible: The Oldest Known Bible Translated for the First Time into English; Copyright © 1999 by Martin Abegg et al.; Version 1.1; [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. The Holy Bible. American Standard Version (Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1901) [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. The Holy Bible: New International Version. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society. [Electronic source: Accordance edition]. The Packard Humanities Institute, PHI Latin Texts; available at: https://latin.packhum.org/search? q=%23abies%23&first=31. The Samaritan Pentateuch: A Critical Editio Maior, Leviticus, Stefan Schorch, ed., vol. 3 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2018). The Targum of Onqelos to the Torah: Genesis, Bernard Grossfeld, ed., in Martin McNamara et al., eds., The Aramaic Bible. The Targums, vol. 6 (Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1988). Thesaurus Linguae Latinae: Index Librorum Scriptorum Inscriptionum Ex Quibus Exempla Adferuntur (Lipsiae: In Aedibus B.G. Teubneri, 1904). Van der Merwe, Christo H. J., ‘Lexical Meaning in Biblical Hebrew and Cognitive Semantics: a Case Study’, Biblica 87 (2006), 85 – 95. Van Steenbergen, Gerrit J., ‘Componential Analysis of Meaning and Cognitive Linguistics: Some Prospects for Biblical Hebrew Lexicology (Part 1)’, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 28 (1, 2002), 19 – 38. Van Steenbergen, Gerrit J., ‘Componential Analysis of Meaning and Cognitive Linguistics: Some Prospects for Biblical Hebrew Lexicology (Part 2)’, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 29 (1, 2003), 109 – 126. Van Steenbergen, Gerrit J., Semantics, World View and Bible Translation: an Integrated Analysis of a Selection of Hebrew Lexical Items Referring to Negative Moral Behaviour in the Book of Isaiah (Stellenbosch: SUN PRESS, 2006). Vetus Latina Institut and Brepols, Vetus Latina Database (Turnout, Belgium: Brepols Publishers, 2002). Volohonsky, Henri, ‘Is the Color of That Horse Really Pale?’, The International Journal of Transpersonal Studies 18 (2, 1999), 167 – 168. Von Arnim, Hans ed., Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta, vol. 1 (Leipzig: Teubner, 1905). Warburton, David A., ‘Ancient Color Categories’, in Ming Ronnier Luo (ed.), Encyclopedia of Color Science and Technology (New York: Springer, 2014), pp. 1 – 9.

Bibliography

225

Warburton, David A., ‘Basic Color Term Evolution in Light of Ancient Evidence from the Near East’, in Robert E. MacLaury et al. (eds.), Anthropology of Color, Interdisciplinary Multilevel Modeling (Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2007), pp. 229 – 246. Warburton, David A., ‘The Theoretical Implications of Ancient Egyptian Colour Vocabulary for Anthropological and Cognitive Theory,’ Lingua Aegyptia 16 (2008), 213 – 259. Wierzbicka, Anna, Lexicography and Conceptual Analysis (Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma, 1985). Wierzbicka, Anna, ‘The Meaning of Color Terms: Semantics, Culture, and Cognition’, Cognitive Linguistics (includes Cognitive Linguistic Bibliography) 1 (1, 1990), 99 – 150. Yri, Kjell M., My Father Taught Me How to Cry, but Now I Have Forgotten: The Semantics of Religious Concepts with an Emphasis on Meaning, Interpretation, and Translatability (Oslo; Cambridge, MA: Scandinavian University Press, 1998). Zanella, Francesco, ‘The Contribution of Componential Analysis to the Semantic Analysis of a Lexical Field of Ancient Hebrew: Some Concrete Examples from the Lexical Field of the Substantives of Gift’, European Journal of Jewish Studies 2 (2, 2008), 189 – 212.

Index of Ancient Sources Old Testament Genesis Gen 1.11 – 12 Gen 1.11 Gen 1.12 Gen 1.29 Gen 1.30

Gen 1.30 VL Gen 2.4b–3.24 Gen 2.5 Gen Gen Gen Gen Gen Gen Gen

2.8 – 14 2.11 2.12 3.18 8.8 – 14 8.11 9.3

Gen 19.25 Gen 30.37

Gen Gen Gen Gen Gen Gen Gen Gen Gen Gen

30.37ab 30.37a 30.37b 30.37 VL 30.39 – 41 30.39 31.10 41.2 41.3 41.18

Exodus Exod 4.6 Exod 4.7 Exod 9.22 Exod 9.25 Exod 9.31 Exod 10.14

Exod 10.15

177 170, 172 f., 177 170, 172 f., 177 48 4, 18, 39, 41 – 43, 42 n.23, 45 n.28, 47 – 49, 83, 85, 87 f., 92, 104, 121, 207, 211 f. 42 123 26, 43, 45 n.28, 83, 85, 87, 100 – 105, 121, 211 f. 123 62 4, 123 – 128, 127 n.168 43 109 n.91 170, 172 – 174, 177 f. 39, 41 – 43, 47 f., 85 n.12, 170, 172 – 174, 177, 207, 211 f. 170, 172, 176 – 178, 212 15, 15 n.47, 83, 85, 122, 133, 140 n.34, 141, 144, 146 f., 149 121, 140 f. 85 – 89, 92, 212 26, 85, 87, 100 – 103, 211 140 n.34 144 15 n.47, n.48 15, 15 n.47, n.48 156 n.103 170, 172 – 174, 177 156 n.103

15 n.45 12, 12 n.35, 14 f. 43, 45 n.28 43, 146 n.58 170, 172 – 174, 177 f., 212 103

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110767704-010

Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod Exod

19.4 25.7 25.11 26.31 26.36 27.11 27.16 28.8 28.9 28.15 28.20 28.33 34.29 – 30 34.29 35.9 35.27 36.13 36.20 37.15 37.17 37.18 38.18 38.20 39.3 39.5

Leviticus Lev 2.14 Lev 13.1 – 59 Lev 13.2 – 4 Lev 13.2 Lev 13.3 Lev 13.4 Lev 13.9 Lev 13.10 Lev 13.11 Lev 13.12 Lev 13.19 Lev 13.21 Lev 13.24 Lev 13.26 Lev 13.32 Lev 13.36 Lev 13.39

26, 39, 41 – 46, 49, 83, 85, 87, 100 – 105, 121, 170, 172, 176 f., 211 f. 164 n.124 125 62 19 19 110 19 19 125 19 125 19 12, 12 n.35, 14 f. 12 – 15 125 125 125 125 110 110 110 110 110 15, 15 n.46, n.47 15, 15 n.46, n.47

170, 172, 174, 177, 212 51 16 15, 15 n.47, 55 15, 15 n.47, 55, 198 15, 15 n.47, 121 55 15 f., 15 n.47, 198 55 55 198 15 f., 15 n.47 198 15 f., 15 n.47 15 f., 15 n.47 15 f., 15 n.47 15 f., 15 n.47

Index of Ancient Sources

Lev 13.42 Lev 13.49

Lev Lev Lev Lev Lev Lev

13.55 13.59 14.1 – 57 14.19 14.31 14.37

Lev Lev Lev Lev

14.40 14.45 14.54 – 57 14.56

Numbers Num 6.3 Num 11.5 Num 11.7 Num 12.1 Num 12.2 Num 12.10 Num 22.4

Num 22.4 VL Deuteronomy Deut 11.15 Deut 12.2 Deut 28.22 Deut 29.22 Deut 29.23 Judges Judg 5.30 Judg 16.7 – 8

15 f., 15 n.47, 198 18, 32 n.122, 51 – 57, 52 n.59, 63 – 65, 113, 117 – 122, 198, 210, 212 11 58 51 57, 57 n.89 57, 57 n.89 18, 32 n.122, 51 – 55, 52 n.59, 57, 63 – 65, 113, 117 – 122, 193, 196 f., 203, 210, 212 56 56 f. 58 15 f., 15 n.47

85 n.14 45 n.28 11, 15, 15 n.47 57 57 57 26, 39, 41 – 46, 42 n.23, 49, 69 n.149, 83, 85, 87, 100 f., 103 – 105, 121, 211 f. 42

45 n.28 40 f., 140 n.35 74, 78 f. 26, 83, 85, 87, 100, 102 – 105, 121, 172, 211 f. 122, 170, 176 – 178

15, 15 n.47 85 n.14

1 Kgs 14.23 2 Kings 2 Kgs 15.4 – 5 2 Kgs 16.4 2 Kgs 17.10 2 Kgs 19.23 2 Kgs 19.26

62 164 n.17 164 n.17 74, 76, 78 f. 62 62

57 40 f., 140 n.35 40 f. 178 n.12 18, 39, 41 – 43, 45 n.28, 47 – 49, 83, 85, 87 – 89, 92, 104, 121 f., 170, 172 – 174, 173 n.59, 177, 207, 211 f.

62 15, 15 n.47, 125

2 Chronicles 2 Chr 3.4 2 Chr 3.5 2 Chr 3.6 2 Chr 3.8 2 Chr 6.28 2 Chr 26.19 2 Chr 28.4

62 62 62 62 74, 76, 78 f. 57 40 f., 140 n.35

Esther Esth 1.6 Esth 15.5 Esth 15.7 Esth 15.8 Esth 15.10

2 Maccabees 2 Macc 3.16 2 Macc 10.7

1 Kings 1 Kgs 6.20 1 Kgs 6.24 1 Kgs 6.27 1 Kgs 8.37 1 Kgs 9.28 1 Kgs 10.2

40 f., 140 n.35

1 Chronicles 1 Chr 28.18 1 Chr 29.2

Judith Jdt 6.5

Job Job Job Job Job Job

1–2 3 – 37 3 – 42.6 8.16 13.28 – 14.12

227

76, 193, 196 f., 201, 203, 211 f.

15, 15 n.47 13 12, 12 n.33, 14 f., 196, 212 202, 202 n.276 13, 76, 193, 196 f., 202 f., 211 f.

12, 13 n.39, 14 – 16, 15 n.47 133, 140 f., 144, 146, 149

68 68 68 86 180

228

Index of Ancient Sources

Job Job Job Job Job Job Job Job Job Job

14.7 14.8 16.16 28.16 28.19 38 – 41 38.27 39.5 – 8 39.5 39.8

Job 42.7 – 17 Psalms Ps 1 Ps 19.11 Ps 36.2 (37.2 MT) Ps 36.2 VulgGal Ps 36.2 VulgHeb

Ps Ps Ps Ps

Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps

180 – 183 183 77 15 n.47, 16, 62, 125 62 68 170, 172 f., 175, 177 68 71, 103 26, 68, 70 – 72, 83, 85, 87, 101 – 103, 121, 170, 172, 176 f., 211 f. 68

145 62 41, 85 n.12, 142 n.36 42 n.21 18, 42, 70, 133, 140 – 142, 142 n.36, 145 – 147, 149, 212 36.35 (37.35 MT) 41 36.35 VulgHeb 170, 172 f., 175 – 177 37 47 37.2 39, 43 f., 45 n.28, 47 – 49, 70, 140 f., 142 n.36, 211 37.35 40 f., 172, 212 51.10 (52.10 MT) 41 51.10 VulgHeb 170, 172, 175 52.10 40 f., 212 67 (68 MT) 110, 114 67.10 – 11 (68.10 – 11 MT) 109 67.11 – 12 (68.11 – 12 MT) 109 67.14 (68.14 MT) 32 n.122, 53, 109, 111, 113 – 115, 196, 210, 212 67.14 VulgGal 4, 166, 193 f., 197, 199, 201, 203, 210, 212 67.14 VulgHeb 4, 32 n.122, 160, 162 f., 166, 168, 210, 212 67.14a (68.14a MT) 109 67.14b (68.14b MT) 109 67.15 VL 166 n.143 67.15 VulgHeb 163 67.16 VulgHeb 163 68 51, 109 68.14 18, 21, 51 f., 54, 63 – 65, 113, 162, 201, 210 68.15 52

Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps Ps

91.11 (92.11 MT) 91.15 (92.15 MT) 92.11 92.15 104.14 117.27 VulgHeb 128.4 VulgHeb 128.6 VulgHeb

Proverbs Prov 3.14 Prov 8.10 Prov 8.19 Prov 11.28 Prov 16.16 Prov 23.31 Prov 27.25

41 41 40 f. 40 f. 45 n.28 140 n.35 180 180, 182 f.

62 62 62 170, 172 f., 175, 177, 212 62 11, 15, 15 n.47 26, 45 n.28, 83, 85, 87, 101 – 103, 121 f., 170, 172 f., 175, 177, 211 f.

Song of Songs Song 1.16

40 f.

Wisdom Wis 13.14 Wis 15.4

12, 12 n.32, 15, 15 n.47 12, 15, 15 n.47

Sirach Sir 14.11 – 21 Sir 14.18 Sir 40 Sir 40.1 – 7 Sir 40.8 – 10 Sir 40.11 – 14 Sir 40.16 Sir 40.22 Sir 43.1 – 26 Sir 43.20 Sir 43.21 Sir 44.1 – 50.24

145 140 f. 152 152 152 152 156 140 147 16 140, 140 n.32 152

Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) Ecclus 14.18 VL 142 Ecclus 40.22 VL 143 n.40 Ecclus 43.23 (Sir 43.21) 133, 144, 147 – 149 Ecclus 43.23 VL 144 n.41 Ecclus (Sir) 14.18 18, 133, 142, 145 f., 149 Ecclus (Sir) 40.12 – 17 145 Ecclus (Sir) 40.16 32 n.124, 152, 155 n.97, 156 – 158

Index of Ancient Sources

Ecclus Ecclus Ecclus Ecclus

(Sir) (Sir) (Sir) (Sir)

40.17 – 28 145 40.20 145 40.21 145 40.22 18, 70, 133, 143, 145 f., 149 Ecclus (Sir) 43.20 15 n.47

Isaiah Isa 1.18 Isa 5.2 Isa 13.8 Isa 14.8 Isa 15.6

Isa 16.8 Isa 19.6 Isa 19.7 Isa Isa Isa Isa Isa Isa Isa Isa Isa

21.3 24.1 – 27.13 27.10 – 11 27.11 29.22 35.1 – 10 35.5 – 6 35.7 – 10 35.7

Isa 37.27 Isa 42.15 Isa 57.5 Isa 58.5 Jeremiah Jer 2.20 Jer 2.21 Jer 3.6 Jer 3.13 Jer 4.31 Jer 11.16 Jer 14.6 Jer 17.2 Jer 17.8 Jer 22.23 Jer 30.1 – 33.26 Jer 30.5 – 7

19 94 n.50 74, 77 178 n.12 18, 39, 41 – 46, 45 n.28, 49, 83, 85, 87 – 89, 92, 104, 121 f., 160, 162 – 166, 168, 212 94 n.50 156 18, 83, 85, 87 – 89, 92, 104, 156 74 102 102 83, 85, 87, 101 – 105, 211 77 160 160 160 45 n.28, 156, 160, 162 – 168 32 n.123, 39, 41 – 43, 47 – 49, 85 n.12, 182, 211 45 n.28 40 f., 140 n.35 166

Jer Jer Jer Jer Jer Jer

30.6 74 – 77, 79, 207, 211 30.12 – 15 74 30.23 – 24 74 37.6 (30.6 MT) 75 37.6b (30.6b MT) 75 48.41 74

Lamentations Lam 4.1

15, 15 n.47

Ezekiel Ezek 1.4 Ezek 1.7 Ezek 1.16 Ezek 1.22 Ezek 1.27 Ezek 6.13 Ezek 8.2 Ezek 10.9 Ezek 17.24

11 f. 11 11 f. 11 f. 11 f. 40 f., 140 n.35 11 f. 11 f. 18, 70, 83, 85 – 89, 92, 121 f., 133, 140 – 142, 145 – 147, 149, 212 Ezek 20.47 Vulg (21.3 MT) 18, 89 n.28, 122, 133, 142, 145 – 147, 149 Ezek 21.3 70, 83, 85 – 89, 92, 121, 140 f., 212 Ezek 23.14 15 n.47, 16 Ezek 27.18 15, 15 n.47 Ezek 27.18 VL 15 n.49 Ezek 28.13 125 Ezek 31.10 170, 172 f., 175 – 177 Ezek 31.14 140 n.35 Ezek 34.14 170, 172 f., 175, 177 Ezek 40.3 11

Daniel Dan 10.6 40 f., 140 n.35 94 n.50 40 f., 140 n.35 40 f., 140 n.35 77 40 f. 45 n.28 40 f. 40 f., 133, 140 – 142, 145, 149, 212 77 74 74

229

Hosea Hos 10.1 Hos 14.9

11

140 n.35 40 f., 170, 172, 175, 177 f., 212

Amos Amos 4.9

74, 78 f.

Haggai Hag 2.17

74, 76, 78 f.

230

Index of Ancient Sources

Zechariah Zech 1.8 Zech 6.2 – 6 Zech 6.3 Zech 9.3

94 n.45, n.50 94 94 n.50 62

New Testament Mark Mark 6.39

Luke Luke 23.31

John John 6.3 Revelation Rev 1.9 Rev 6.1 – 8 Rev 6.1 Rev 6.2 – 8 Rev 6.2 Rev 6.3 Rev 6.4 Rev 6.5 Rev 6.5 Rev 6.7 Rev 6.8 Rev 8.3 – 9.21 Rev 8.7

Rev 9.4

Qumran 1QIsaa 13.13 – 14 1QIsaa 13.13 1QIsaa 31.6 4Q14 3.19 4Q30 f45ii.1

18, 70, 83, 87 f., 90, 92, 105, 133, 140 f., 143, 146 f., 146 n.58, 149

18, 86, 133, 140 f., 143, 146, 149

146 n.58

88, 93 93 93 n.43 94, 192 93, 191 93 n.43 93, 191 93, 191 93 n.43 93 n.43 4, 83, 85, 87, 93, 95, 98, 105, 185, 190 – 192, 211 f. 102 18, 70, 83, 87 f., 90, 92, 105, 133, 140 f., 143, 146, 146 n.58, 149 70, 83, 87, 101 – 105, 133, 140, 144, 147 – 149, 211

68 68, 70 – 72 39, 43, 47 – 49, 211 39, 42 f., 49 78 n.179

4Q34 f10.2 4Q72 f34i_35.3 4Q82 f47ai_48.20 4QJera 4QJerb 4QJerc 11Q8 f11.1 Mur88 23.15

74, 78 n.179 74 f., 77 78 n.179 75 75 75 51 78 n.179

Greek Literature* Actuarius, Ioannes Actuarius De Urinis Actuarius De Urinis 4.11.3 118 n.127 Actuarius De Urinis 6.8.3 118 n.127 Aelianus, Claudius Aelianus De Natura Animalium Ael. NA. 2.14 113 Ael. NA. 11.24 124 Ael. NA. 17.36 124 Aetius, Medicus Iatricorum liber Aet. Iatric. 4.9.26 Aet. Iatric. 4.9.26 Aet. Iatric. 4.9.26

118 n.127 118 n.131 118 n.132

Alcaeus, Lyricus Poeta Poemata (Poetarum Lesbiorum Fragmenta [LP]) Alc. Fr. 327.3 (LP) 167 n.146 Alchemica, Fragmenta Alchemica Καταβαφὴ λίθων καὶ σμαράγδων καὶ λιχνιτῶν καὶ ὑακίνθων Alchem. Καταβαφὴ λίθων 2.354 124 Anacreon, Lyricus Poeta Poemata (Poetae Melici Graeci) Anacr. Fr. 358.2 (PMG) 167 n.146 Andreas Caesariensis Commentarius in Apocalypsin Andr. Comm. in Apoc. 23.67 118 n.132

* Most of the literary sources come from the editions given by the digital edition of the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae, University of California, Irvine; http://stephanus.tlg.uci.edu.

Index of Ancient Sources

Anonymi Medici Περὶ χροιᾶς τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ ἀπὸ φλεβοτομίας ἐκ τῆς ἰατρικῆς τῶν Περσῶν Anon.Med. Περὶ χροιᾶς 3.4 124 Anthologia Graeca Marianus Epigrammaticus AP. 9.669.3 (Marian.) 84 Aristophanes Acharnenses Ar. Ach. 724 Fragmenta Ar. Fr. 743

121 n.143 120 n.141

Aristophanes Byzantinus Historiae Animalium Ar. Byz. HA. 2.474.5 124 Aristoteles De Anima Arist. De An. 418a27 16 De Coloribus Arist. Col. 792b 16 Arist. Col. 794b–799b 16 Arist. Col. 799b4 124 De Plantis [Dub.] Ps.-Arist. De Plantis 2.827 111 De Sensu et Sensibilibus Arist. Sens. 442a 17 Arist. Sens. 442a24 124 Meteorologica Arist. Meteor. 372a9 124 Arist. Meteor. 374b32 124 Physiognomonica Arist. Phgn. 812a19 96 n.57 Athenaeus Naucratita Deipnosophistae Ath. Deipn. 7.91 119 n.137 Ath. Deipn. 9.39 119 n.137 Ioannes Chrysostomus In Epistulam Primam ad Timotheum Io. Chrysost. Ep. Pri. Tim. 62.578.21 113 Cyranides Cyranides 1.6

127 n.171

Cyrillus Alexandrinus Glaphyra in Pentateuchum Cyr. Al. Glaph. in Pent. 69.56 117 n.126 Democritus, Philosophus Testimonia Democr. Testim.Fr. 135.235 124 Dioscorides Pedanius, Medicus De Materia Medica Dsc. Mat. Med. 1.17 166 n.138 Dsc. Mat. Med. 1.85 165 Dsc. Mat. Med. 2.146 119 n.137 Dsc. Mat. Med. 4.52 166 n.138 Dsc. Mat. Med. 5.48 123 Empedocles Fragmenta Emp. Fr. 80.12

109 n.88

Epiphanius Constantiensis De XII Gemmis Epiph. Gemm. 126 Epiph. Gemm. 1.3 1 126 n.167 Epiph. Gemm. 1.3.4 118 n.131 Epiph. Gemm. 1.6.4 118 n.131 Euripides Fragmenta E. Fr. 907 Phoenissae E. Ph. 1246 Ezechiel, Tragicus Ἐξαγωγή Ezek. Trag. 93

84 14

104 f., 211

Herodas Mimiambi Herod. Mimiambi 3.50 120 n.140 Herodotus, Historicus Historiae Hdt. 1.138 120 n.140 Hdt. 4.192 98 Hesiodus Scutum Hes. Sc. 264 – 265 95, 98, 105, 211

231

232

Index of Ancient Sources

Hesychius Lexicon Hsych. ὦχρος

112 n.22

Hippocrates Aphorismi 49 n.45 Hpp. Aph. 1.1 Hpp. Aph. 3.20 120 n.140 De Diebus Iudicatoriis Hpp. Dieb. Iudic. 9 95 f., 98 De Humoribus Hpp. Hum. 9.13 109 n.3, 111 De Locis in Homine Hpp. Loc. Hom. 41 97 De Morbis Hpp. Morb. 1.3 120 n.140 Hpp. Morb. 2.28 95 Hpp. Morb. 2.37 95 f. Hpp. Morb. 2.39 96 Hpp. Morb. 2.46 95, 97 Hpp. Morb. 2.47 97 Hpp. Morb. 2.57 96 Hpp. Morb. 2.63 95 f. Hpp. Morb. 2.68 97 Hpp. Morb. 2.73 96 Hpp. Morb. 2.74 97 Hpp. Morb. 2.77 96 Hpp. Morb. 3.11.1 – 3 97 f. Hpp. Morb. 3.11 95, 98 De Mulierum Affectibus Hpp. Mul. 1.25 96 Hpp. Mul. 1.34 96 Hpp. Mul. 1.39 96 Hpp. Mul. 2.9 97 Hpp. Mul. 2.11 97 Hpp. Mul. 2.111 96 n.57 De Superfetatione Hpp. Superf. 32 95 De Victu Hpp. Vict. 3.76 112 Epidemia Hpp. Epid. 3.14 96 n.57, 97 Hpp. Epid. 4.14 24, 97 Hpp. Epid. 4.35 118 n.130 Hpp. Epid. 5.9 120 n.140 Hpp. Epid. 6.3 96 n.57 Hpp. Epid. 6.3.18 109 n.89, 111 Prognosticum Hpp. Prog. 2 84 Hpp. Prog. 11 96 f.

Hpp. Prog. 24 96 Prorrheticus Hpp. Prorrh. 2.30 112 Hpp. Prorrh. 2.42 111 Hpp. Prorrh. 2.42.24 109 n.89, 111 Hpp. Prorrh. 2.43 120 n.140 Homerus Ilias Il. 6.175 Il. 10.376 Il. 11.631 Il. 15.4 Odyssea Od. 10.234

196 n245 84, 95 84 84, 95 84

Longus Daphnis et Chloe Long. 4.31

118 n.130

Maximus Tyrius Philosophumena Max. Tyr. 20.5b

84

Nilus Ancyranus Epistulae Nil. Ep. 1.224

117 n.126

Oribasius, Medicus Collectiones Medicae Orib. 14.61.1 84 Papyri Petriae (London, British Library pap. 537) Pap. P. Petr. 2.35.11 121 n.144 Philo Iudaeus Legum Allegoriarum Librii Ph. Leg. 1.63 126 Ph. Leg. 1.66 126 Ph. Leg. 1.68 126 Ph. Leg. 1.79 126 Ph. Leg. 1.81 126, 126 n.165 Ph. Leg. 1.84 126 f. Quod Deterius Potiori Insidiari Soleat Ph. Det. 16.2 117 n.126 Photius Bibliotheca Phot. Bibl. 277

113

Index of Ancient Sources

Physiologus Physiol. 10.3

124

Pindarus, Lyricus Poeta Pythia Pind. Pyth. 2.29 167 n.146 Plato Charmides Pl. Chrm. 167c-d Respublica Pl. R. 474e

16 96 n.57

Plutarchus Aetia Romana et Graeca Plu. Aet. Rom. et Gr. 290 f 111 Plu. Aet. Rom. et Gr. 290 110 n.97 De Primo Frigido Plu. De Prim. Frig. 952c 110 n.97, 111 De Pythiae Oraculis Plu. De Pyth. Or. 395b 110 n.97, 112 n.109 Plu. De Pyth. Or. 395c 112, 210 De Sera Numini Vindicta Plu. De Sera Num. Vind. 565e 111 n.101 Quaestiones Convivales Plu. Quaest. Conv. 683 f 111 Vitae Parallelae, Aemilius Paullus Plu. Aem. 14.1 111 Vitae Parallelae, Titus Flamininus Plu. Flam. 3.5 111 n.101 Pseudo-Hippocrates Ἑρμηνεία περὶ ἐνεργῶν λίθων Ps.-Hpp. Ἑρμηνεία 7.2 124 Ps.-Hpp. Ἑρμηνεία 15.1 124 Pseudo-Plutarchus Placita philosophorum Ps.-Plu. Plac. 894d.9 124 Scholia in Aeschylum Scholia in Prometheum Vinctum Sch. Aesch. Prom. 134a 118, 118 n.129 Scholia in Aristophanem Scholia in Acharnenses Sch. Ar. Ach. 121 n.143

Scholia in Oppianum Scholia et Glossae in Halieutica Sch. Opp. Hal. 2.495 111 n.102 Scholia in Theocritum Sch. Theoc. 4.28 123 Sophocles Aiax S. Ai. 1064

84

Suidas Suda Lexicon Suda, 16 Suda, n. 538, 539 17 n.52 Suda, n. 2226, 2227 123 n.151 Testamenta XII Patriarcharum Testamentum Gad Gad 2.2 104 f., 211 Testamentum Salomonis Recensio A Sol_A 10.5 127 f. Sol_A 10.6 127 f. Sol_A 10.7 127 f. Theocritus Idyllia Theoc. Idyl. 2.148 Theoc. Idyl. 10.27

196 n.245 96 n.57

Theophrastus De Lapidibus Thphr. Lap. 37.4 123, 125, 128 f. De Sensu et Sensibilibus Thphr. Sens. 1.77 124 Historia Plantarum Thphr. HP. 4.7.3 166 n.138 Thphr. HP. 4.8.1 165 Thphr. HP. 4.10.1 165 Thphr. HP. 4.11.1 – 2 165 Thphr. HP. 4.12.2 166 n.138 Thucydides Historiae Th. 2.49.5 Th. 4.6.1

84 84

233

234

Index of Ancient Sources

Xenophanes Fragmenta Xenoph. Fr. 28d

84

Calpurnius Siculus, Titus Calpurnius Siculus Bucolica Calp. B. 5.21 137 Calp. B. 6.82 187

Latin Literature* Ambrosius Mediolanensis De Paradiso Ambr. Parad. 1.3.21 – 23 127 Ammianus Marcellinus Rerum Gestarum Libri Amm.Marc. 24.6 154 Appendix Vergiliana Ciris App.Verg.Cir. 224 – 226 196 App.Verg.Cir. 225 137 Culex App.Verg.Cul. 44 189 Lydia App.Verg.Lydia 39 136, 189 Apuleius Madaurensis De Mundo Apul. Mun. 4 154 Florida Apul. Flor. 10.11 161, 165 Metamorphoses Apul. Met. 7.10.24 170 Apul. Met. 9.27.15 195 Ausonius, Decimus Magnus Ausonius Epitaphia Aus. Epit. 4.77 165 Aus. Epit. 5.50 165 Beda, Beda Venerabilis De Libro Psalmorum De Libro Psalmorum, 67 200, 200 n.50, 268 In Genesim PL 91.46C 127

Cato, Marcus Porcius De Agri Cultura Cat. Agr. 3.3 Cat. Agr. 3.4 Cat. Agr. 7.4 Cat. Agr. 7.4.4 Cat. Agr. 17.1 Cat. Agr. 48.2 Cat. Agr. 65.1 Cat. Agr. 151.2

Cato 139 n.31 139 n.31 138 138 138 n.26 157 136 161 n.119, 178

Catullus, Gaius Valerius Catullus Carmina Cat. 34.10 171 Cat. 81.4 188, 200 Celsus, Aulus Cornelius Celsus De Medicina Cels. 2.4.9 186 Cels. 2.4.9.6 189 Cels. 2.6.2 189 Cels. 2.6.4 195 Cels. 2.6.5 187 Cels. 2.7.11 187 Cels. 2.8.22 186 Cels. 2.8.23 187 Cels. 3.24.2 195 Cels. 4.22.3 136 Cels. 5.19.4 134, 134 n.6, 137 Cels. 5.26 – 27a.4 186 Cels. 5.26.8 186 Cels. 5.28.12 186 Cels. 5.28.13b 137 Cels. 6.9.2 147 n.63 Cicero, Marcus Tullius Cicero De Finibus Bonorum et Malorum Cic. Fin. 5.11.31 195 n.242 De Oratore Cic. Orat. 3.218 195 n.242

* Most of the literary sources come from the editions given by the digital edition of the PHI Latin Texts, The Packard Humanities Institute; available at: https://latin.packhum.org/search?q=% 23abies%23&first=31.

Index of Ancient Sources

De Senectute Cic. Sen. 51 153 Cic. Sen. 57 154 Cic. Sen. 71 157 Epistulae ad Atticum Cic. Att. 10.11.3 157 Laelius. De Amicitia Cic. Lael. 11.18 154 Pro Sestio Cic. Sest. 60.9 157 Tusculanae Disputationes 157 Cic. Tusc. 3.62.7 Cic. Tusc. 3.75.6 154 Columella, Lucius Iunius Moderatus Columella De Re Rustica Colum. 1.Praef.12.8 137 Colum. 2.13.1 138 n.25 Colum. 4.7.1 138 n.26 Colum. 4.24.5 136 Colum. 4.24.7 138 n.27 Colum. 5.4.1.5 165 Colum. 5.8.4 139 Colum. 5.12.1 138 Colum. 6.14.2 138 n.27 Colum. 7.4.2 138 n.24 Colum. 7.8.1 136, 139 Colum. 11.2.48 135 Colum. 11.2.83 139 n.31 Colum. 12.15.5 138 n.25 Colum. 12.17.1 138 n.26 Colum. 12.38.1 135 n.12 Colum. 12.41.4 198 n.253 Colum. 12.42.3 198 n.253 Colum. 12.44.4 138 n.26 Colum. 12.50.16 198 Ennius, Quintus Ennius Annales (Traglia) Enn. Ann. 32.15 Traglia 136 n.16 Tragoediae (Traglia) Enn. Trag. 15.5 Traglia 195 Enn. Trag. 16.5 Traglia 187 Enn. Trag. 46.3 Traglia 188 Festus, Sextus Pompeius Festus De Verborum Significatione 261.19 181

235

Frontinus, Sextus Iulius Frontinus De Aquaeductu Urbis Romae Front. Aq. 7.7 137 Galenus, Claudius Galenus De Antidotis Libri II: Gal. Ant. 14.81 96 n.57 De Sanitate Tuenda Libri VI: Gal. San. Tu. 6.250.14 96 n.57 Gal. San. Tu. 6.336.14 – 15 96 n.57 In Hippocratis Epidemias. De Morbis Vulgaribus (Latin translation) Gal. Hpp. Morb. 32.3 154 In Hippocratis Sextum Librum Epidemiarum Commentaria Gal. Hpp. Epid. VI. 17a.835.14 96 n.57 Gal. Hpp. Epid. VI. 17b.101.13 111 n.104 Vocum Hippocraticis Glossarium Gal. Voc. Hpp. Gloss. 19.155.8 111 n.104 Gellius, Aulus Gellius Noctes Atticae Gell. 2.26.4 133 Gell. 2.26.23 171 Hieronymus Liber Hebraicarum Quaestionum in Genesim Hebrew Questions on Genesis 30.37 147 Horatius, Quintus Horatius Flaccus Ars Poetica Hor. AP. 117 170 Carmina Hor. C. 1.4.13 188, 211 Hor. C. 1.9.17 137 n.22 Hor. C. 1.15.17 165 Hor. C. 1.17.8 134 Hor. C. 1.25.17 135, 171 Hor. C. 4.9.10 165 Epodi Hor. Epod. 7.1 187, 195 Hor. Epod. 10.16 187, 195 Saturae Hor. Sat. 1.2.129 189 Isidorus, Isidorus Hispalensis Etymologiae Isid. Etym. 10.277.u 139 Isid. Etym. 16.7.1 134

236

Index of Ancient Sources

Isid. Etym. 16.7.16 136, 167 Isid. Etym. 17.7.66 136 Iuuenalis, Decimus Iunius Iuuenalis Saturae Juu. 2.97 136 189 Juu. 10.229 Juu. 14.147 136 Lucanus, Marcus Annaeus Lucanus Bellum Ciuile Lucan. 1.456 188 Lucan. 4.131 135, 171 Lucretius, Titus Lucretius Carus De Rerum Natura Lucr. 1.18 170 Lucr. 1.252 181 Lucr. 2.805 134 Lucr. 3.154 – 155 195 Lucr. 4.1126 134 Lucr. 4.1127 136 n.16 Lucr. 5.656 189 Lucr. 5.1374 136 n.16 Manilius, Marcus Manilius Astronomicon Manil. 2.941 136 Manil. 3.656 181

Ou. AA. 3.177 136 n.16 Ou. AA. 3.181 135 n.12 Epistulae (uel Heroides) Ou. Epist. 1.14 187 Ou. Epist. 9.64 147 n.63 Ou. Epist. 12.67 135 Ou. Epist. 12.97 187 Epistulae ex Ponto Ou. Pont. 1.3.52 171 Fasti Ou. Fast. 4.139 135 Metamorphoses Ou. Met. 1.689 – 712 165 Ou. Met. 2.24 134 Ou. Met. 2.777 172 Ou. Met. 3.86 135 Ou. Met. 3.600 – 601 189 Ou. Met. 4.134 – 135 188 Ou. Met. 4.301 170 Ou. Met. 7.705 189 Ou. Met. 9.689 167 Ou. Met. 10.97 171 Ou. Met. 10.448 189 Ou. Met. 11.110 188 n.205, 200 Ou. Met. 12.395 167 Ou. Met. 13.960 137 Ou. Met. 15.375 134 Tristia Ou. Trist. 1.4.11 195 Ou. Trist. 3.9.18 195

Martialis, Marcus Valerius Martialis Epigrammata Mart. 3.82.5 136 Mart. 9.23.1 167 Mart. 14.38.1 – 2 165 Mart. 14.140.2 136 n.16 Mart. 14.162.2 187 n.194

Palladius, Rutilius Taurus Aemilianus Palladius Opus Agriculturae Pall. Agr. 3.18.4 139 n.31 Pall. Agr. 4.10.23 136, 140 Pall. Agr. 7.12 161 Pall. Agr. 12.18 139 n.31

Nonius, Nonius Marcellus De Compendiosa Doctrina Non. 584.10 136 n.16

Persius, Aulus Persius Flaccus Saturae Pers. 3.22 137, 137 n.23

Ouidius, Publius Ouidius Naso Amores Ou. Am. 2.4.43 196 n.245 Ou. Am. 2.5.36 189 Ars Amandi Ou. AA. 1.732 187 Ou. AA. 2.92 136 Ou. AA. 3.84 189

Petronius, Gaius Petronius Arbiter Satyricon Petron. Satyr. 67.4 136 Phaedrus, Gaius Iulius Phaedrus Fabulae Aesopiae Phaedr. Fab. 3.18.7 134

Index of Ancient Sources

Plautus, Titus Maccius Plautus Menaechmi Plaut. Men. 828 – 829 136, 196 Plaut. Men. 828 171 Poenulus Plaut. Poen. 1290 152 Truculentus Plaut. Truc. 576 186 Plinius Maior, Gaius Plinius Secundus Historia Naturalis Plin. HN. 2.89.11 189 Plin. HN. 6.87.2 137 Plin. HN. 6.87.2 135 n.12 Plin. HN. 9.139.3 167 Plin. HN. 12.30.5 189 Plin. HN. 12.104 – 106.6 166 n.138 Plin. HN. 13.17.4 189 Plin. HN. 13.140.3 138 n.25 Plin. HN. 15.127.7 134 n.5 Plin. HN. 16.86.1 147 n.63 Plin. HN. 16.153.4 135 n.11 Plin. HN. 16.156 – 158.1 165 Plin. HN. 16.166.1 165 Plin. HN. 17.166.1 165 Plin. HN. 25.106.3 135 n.11 Plin. HN. 26.30.4 186 Plin. HN. 26.162.1 186 Plin. HN. 27.133.8 189 Plin. HN. 28.68.7 188 Plin. HN. 29.130.1 98 Plin. HN. 34.1 – 6 112 n.109 Plin. HN. 37.20.76 – 79 128 n.173 Plin. HN. 37.56.8 196 Plin. HN. 37.76.6 154, 157 Plin. HN. 37.80.6 134 Plin. HN. 37.84.8 153 Plin. HN. 37.110.2 136 n.16 Plin. HN. 37.111.8 136 n.16 Plin. HN. 37.156.3 167 Plin. HN. 37.160.7 135 n.12 Plin. HN. 37.165.2 135 n.12 Plin. HN. 37.173.6 135 n.12 Plinius Minor, Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus Epistulae Plin. Ep. 7.24.1 137, 172

237

Propertius, Sextus Propertius Elegiae Prop. 3.3.27 136 Prop. 3.13.16 189 Prop. 4.3.41 187 Prop. 4.7.36 189 Quintilianus, Marcus Fabius Quintilianus Declamationes Maiores Quint. DM. 2.19.4 196 Quint. DM. 12.2.21 186 Quint. DM. 12.27.6 188 Institutio Oratoria Quint. Inst. 6.2.31.6 195 Quint. Inst. 6.2.36 195 Seneca Iunior, Lucius Annaeus Seneca De Ira Sen. De Ira 3.9.2 139 n.29 Diui Claudii Apocolocyntosis Sen. Apocol. 4.1.28 189 Epistulae Morales ad Lucilium Sen. Ep. 66.1 137 Hercules Oeteus Sen. Herc.Oet. 578 147 n.63 Sen. Herc.Oet. 789 147 n.63 Naturales Quaestiones Sen. QN. 2.40.6 186, 191 Oedipus Sen. Oed. 533 135, 171 Seruius, Maurus Seruius Honoratus Commentarii in Aeneidem Seru. Aen. 6.674.1 171 Commentarii in Georgica Seru. Georg. 2.13.3 135, 171 Silius Italicus, Tiberius Catius Asconius Silius Italicus Punica Sil. Ital. 3.608 167 Sil. Ital. 15.18 136 Sil. Ital. 16.136 189 Sil. Ital. 16.560 188 n.205, 200 Statius, Publius Papinius Statius Siluae Stat. Silu. 1.2.124 135

238

Index of Ancient Sources

Stat. Silu. 1.5.16 Stat. Silu. 3.1.185 Stat. Silu. 5.1.128 Thebais Stat. Theb. 2.334 Stat. Theb. 5.264 Stat. Theb. 7.286 Stat. Theb. 9.592

136 n.16 135 186 n.193 196 196 189 136

Suetonius, Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus De Vita Caesarum lib. IV: C. Caligula Suet. Cal. 50.1.1 189 Tacitus, Publius Cornelius Tacitus Agricola Tac. Agr. 29 137 Historiae Tac. Hist. 2.78 171 Tertullianus, Quintius Septimus Florens Tertullianus De Pudicitia Tert. Pudic. 2.1022C 190, 212 Tibullus, Albius Tibullus Elegiae Tibul. 1.3.94 189 Tibul. 1.10.38 188 Tibul. 2.1.88 189 Tibul. 2.4.27 134 Valerius Flaccus, Gaius Valerius Flaccus Argonautica Val. Flac. 4.92 167 Varro, Marcus Terentius Varro De Lingua Latina Varro LL. 7.83 167 Prometheus Liber Varro Prometheus Liber 425 187 Res Rusticae Varro RR. 1.8 165 Varro RR. 1.46 147 n.63

Vergilius, Publius Vergilius Maro Aeneida Verg. Aen. 1.592 167 Verg. Aen. 2.488 189 Verg. Aen. 3.64 135, 154 Verg. Aen. 3.521 189 Verg. Aen. 4.644 188, 211 Verg. Aen. 5.129 – 130 141 Verg. Aen. 5.129 135 Verg. Aen. 5.295 137 Verg. Aen. 5.494 135 Verg. Aen. 6.535 196 n.245 Verg. Aen. 8.245 188 Verg. Aen. 8.599 178 Verg. Aen. 8.686 196 n.245 Bucolica Verg. B. 1.75 136 Verg. B. 2.9 134 Verg. B. 3.39 135, 171 Verg. B. 5.16 135, 177 Verg. B. 6.54 135 Verg. B. 6.59 135 Verg. B. 7.12 136 Verg. B. 9.20 136 Verg. B. 9.41 135, 147 n.63 Georgica Verg. G. 1.55 181 Verg. G. 1.277 188 Verg. G. 1.446 189 Verg. G. 2.13 135, 171 Verg. G. 3.146 135, 171 Verg. G. 4.18 171 Vitruvius, Marcus Vitruvius Pollio De Architectura Vitr. 2.9.9 147 n.63 Vitr. 6.4.1 53, 198 Vopiscus, Flauius Vopiscus Syracusius De Probo Vopisc. Prob. 19 161 Zeno, Episcopus Veronensis Tractatus Zen. Trac. 1.4.6.2 189