Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/182

serpents, and the whole race of men.—He shall bruise thee on the head, etc.] In the first clause the subj. ((Hebrew characters)) is the 'seed' of the woman individualised (or collectively), in the second ((Hebrew characters)) it is the serpent himself, acting through his 'seed.' The current reading of V (ipsa) may have been prompted by a feeling that the proper antithesis to the serpent is the woman herself. The general meaning of the sentence is clear: in the war between men and serpents the former will crush the head of the foe, while the latter can only wound in the heel. The difficulty is in the vb. (Hebrew characters), which in the sense 'bruise' is inappropriate to the serpent's mode of attack. We may speak of a serpent striking a man (as in Lat. feriri a serpente), but hardly of bruising. Hence many comm. (following G al.) take the vb. as a by-form of (Hebrew characters) (strictly 'pant'), in the sense of 'be eager for,' 'aim at' (Ges. Ew. Di. al.); while others (Gu. al.) suppose that by paronomasia the word means 'bruise' in the first clause, and 'aim at' in the second. But it may be questioned whether this idea is not even less suitable than the other (Dri.). A perfectly satisfactory interpretation cannot be given (v.i.).

The Messianic interpretation of the 'seed of the woman' appears in T^J and Targ. Jer., where the v. is explained of the Jewish com-

(Ezk. 36³, Am. 2⁷ 8⁴, Ps. 56^{2. 3} 57⁴) (Hebrew characters) is disguised under the by-form (Hebrew characters). But the only places where the assumption is at all necessary are Am. 2⁷ 8⁴, where the (Hebrew characters) may be simply mater lectionis for the â of the ptcp. (cf. (Hebrew characters), Ho. 10¹⁴); in the other cases the proper sense of (Hebrew characters) 'pant' or metaph. 'long for') suffices. The reverse process (substitution of (Hebrew characters) for (Hebrew characters)) is much less likely; and the only possible instance would be Jb. 9¹⁷, which is too uncertain to count for anything. There is thus not much ground for supposing a confusion in this v.; and De. points out that vbs. of hostile endeavour, as distinct from hostile achievement (Hebrew characters), (Hebrew characters), etc.), are never construed with double acc. The gain in sense is so doubtful that it is better to adhere to the meaning 'crush.' The old Vns. felt the difficulty and ambiguity. The idea of crushing is represented by Aq. προστρίψει, Σ. θλίψει, G ^{Coisl. mg.} τρίψει (see Field) and Jer. (Quæst.) conterere; 'pant after' by G^{A al.} τηρήσει[ς] (if not a mistake for τρήσει[ς] or τειρήσει[ς]). A double sense is given by V conteret . . . insidiaberis, and perhaps S (Syriac characters) . . . (Syriac characters); while T^O paraphrases: (Hebrew characters).