Aron Pinker, «The Lord’s Bow in Habakkuk 3,9a», Vol. 84 (2003) 417-420

This note suggests that the enigmatic tw$+%m tw$(b# refers to the Lord’s bow, which in the Hebrew Bible is associated with the rainbow. Habakkuk views symbolically the Lord’s bow as an unusually powerful composite bow of seven rods, as the rainbow consists of seven colors. Hab 3,9a K1t@#q rw$(t hyr( hls rm) tw$+%m tw$(b# is understood in the sense Naked bare Your bow, of seven strips! (say Selah), where say Selah is a later editorial instruction to the person who recites the Psalm to say the word hls at this point, and thereby indicate an interlude, or distinction from what follows.

one piece of wood (h+m), which formed the Lord’s laminated "composite bow³," made of seven (tw$+%m).

        The standard meaning of the feminine noun (plural) tw$(b#, in the construct state, is "oaths" or "seven". In each of these meanings it occurs in Ezekiel (21,28 and 45,21, respectively). The variant t(b# occurs in Jer 5,24, where it probably refers to the seven weeks between the harvest of wheat and that of barley, though the Septuagint reads there t(b#& (plhrw/sewj) but in Ezek 45,21 tw$(b# (e(pta/).

        The original reading of the Septuagint here was apparently ? e(pta (=(b#, rather than sou e)pi) "seven". The Vulgate and Targum take it as the word for "oath or covenant"⁴, and Barberini (e)xo/rtasaj) and Peshitta (Nw(bsnw) read it as from the root (b#&. Thus Barberini translates, "You sated the arrows of his quiver". Many followed this understanding using various grammatical forms of the root (b#&. Duhm deemed the Barberini version a bold conjecture of the past ("Jene griechische Õbersetzung ist eher ein interessante Beispiel einer kühnen Konjektur aus alter Zeit"). He emended tw$(b# to t(p# ("abundance")⁵.

        Followers of the Peshitta and Barberini assumed that the verb (b#& can be used in Hebrew for describing the satiety of a weapon, as it ‘devours’ its victims in battle⁶. However, nowhere in the Hebrew Bible is it alluded that arrows consume anything or are sated, while there are numerous such references to the sword (Jer 46,10). Followers of the Vulgate and Targum, who take tw$(b# as the Qal passive participle from the root (b# ("to swear"), assume that weapons were ‘empowered’ by an oath prior to battle⁷. They find support in the fact that the Hebrew Bible mentions magical shafts (Exod 7-8, Num 17, etc. Cf. 2 Kgs 4,29 and 31), which conferred victory in battle (cf. Exod 17,8-13)⁸. Yet, in no case mentioned in the Hebrew Bible were the tw$+%m empowered by any prior oath or incantation⁹. Indeed, it would seem