Psalm 2/Variants

Variants

Kinds of variants

• v. 2. The LXX reads διάψαλμα (סלה) at the end of v. 2.
• v. 9a. The LXX reads “you will shepherd them” (ποιμανεῖς). This reading, quoted in the Greek text of the NT in Rev. 2:27, 12:5, and 19:15, assumes a different vocalization of the consonantal Hebrew text (תִּרְעֵם) and understands the verb as רָעָה (“to shepherd”) rather than רָעַע (“to break”). But the presence of נָפַץ (“to smash”) in the next line strongly favors the MT vocalization. Goldingay proposes a deliberate rhetorical ambiguity here, namely, that this line “lays alternative possibilities before the nations—either firm shepherding or devastating destruction.”
• vv. 11-12 וְגִילוּ בִרְעָדָה: נַשְּׁקוּ בַר {B} MT, α', σ', Hier, Gal, Hebr, S, T, // facil-styl: G, s
  • Traditionally, “kiss the son” (KJV)—“the crux interpretum of Ps 2.” But בַּר is the Aramaic word for “son,” not the Hebrew (cf. Prov. 31:2). For this reason many regard the reading as suspect. Some propose emendations of vv. 11-12. One of the more popular proposals is to read בִּרְעָדָה נַשְּקוּ לְרַגְלָיו (“in trembling kiss his feet”). It makes better sense to understand בַּר as an adjective meaning “pure” (see Pss. 24:4, 73:1 and BDB 141 s.v. 3 בַר) functioning here in an adverbial sense. If read this way, then the syntactical structure of exhortation (imperative followed by adverbial modifier) corresponds to the two preceding lines (see v. 11). The verb נשׂק (“kiss”) refers metonymically to showing homage (see 1 Sam. 10:1; Hos. 13:2). The exhortation in v. 12 advocates a genuine expression of allegiance and warns against insincerity. When swearing allegiance, vassal kings would sometimes do so insincerely, with the intent of rebelling when the time was right. The so-called “Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon” also warn against such an attitude. In this treaty the vassal is told: “If you, as you stand on the soil where this oath [is sworn], swear the oath with your words and lips [only], do not swear with your entire heart, do not transmit it to your sons who will live after this treaty, if you take this curse upon yourselves but do not plan to keep the treaty of Esarhaddon ...may your sons and grandsons because of this fear in the future.”
    • However, the proposal that בַּר should be read as ‘pure’ is not entirely satisfying. The verb נשׁק (‘to kiss’) is normally followed by ל to indicate the person kissed. The person kissed is rarely indicated without ל as a complement of the verb: 1 Sam 20:41, Hos 13:2, Prov 24:26. The person kissed may also be a pronominal suffix: 1 Sam 10:1, Cant 1:2, 8:1 and Gen 33:4. In Psalm 2:11, עבד has a direct object. The adverbial modifiers are clearly marked as such by prepositions. So, the parallel suggested is weak. Note that occurrences of נשׁק without ל are found in poetry and this is the case of Psalm 2.,

Likely solutions

• v.12 Why is reading בַּר as ‘son’ problematic? The main reason is that Aramaic was not a lingua franca until the Chaldean Kings of Babylon beginning around 600 B.C. Yet there are many Aramaic words in Classical Hebrew. An important example is Psalm 139 with more than half a dozen clear Aramaisms and this Psalm also is attributed to David in the superscription. There is also the same kind of admixture of Phoenician / Hebrew and Aramaic in the inscriptions of Panammu and Zenjirli from the Eighth Century BCE. Consideration of 2 Samuel 23 shows one might expect considerable dialectical variation among the heroes of David’s Army. The reading in the LXX, δράξασθε παιδείας is obviously based upon reading the word בַּר as ‘son’. Admittedly translators of the LXX were influenced by Late Hebrew and Aramaic, but it may also represent an interpretive tradition. Finally, it makes excellent sense to construe בַּר as ‘son’ since foreign kings are being addressed by the psalmist.

The phonological analysis above, which noted the alliteration of בר in vv.11-12, might also explain why the author used בַּר instead of בֵּן in v.12a.