Before we close this branch of our inquiry, let us examine into the
significancy and composition of the name “Naamah,” as applied to the
daughter of Lamech: and we take occasion here to say how deeply we are
indebted to the labours of the Rev. Dr. Lee, the regius professor of
Hebrew in the University of Cambridge, England, and whom we have no
question in believing to be among the most penetrating oriental scholars
of the age. By an intimate knowledge of the Asiatic languages, he
discovered that in many instances where, in a cognate case, the Heemanti
would be used in Hebrew, in them the word was supplied with a particle,
changing or influencing the sense. Upon full research, he determined
that the Heemanti, in Hebrew, were the fragments of ancient or obsolete
particles, still influencing the significance as would have done the
particles themselves. Let us take an example in our own language: _able_
implies fulness of power; add to it the prefix _un_, and you reverse the
sense wholly. Yet we do not perceive, without reflection, that the
prefix really is a contraction of something similar to “_I am not_,” &c.
With this door open to a constitutional knowledge of the language, let
us take the word צם _am_. The terminating aspirate of the word Naamah
will be readily formed from this by the usual feminine, as a fragment of
the בּוּת later בַּת _bath_. And for the prefix _nun_, we beg leave to
quote from Lee’s Lectures, pages 123 and 124:
“We come now to propose a conjecture on the prefix _nun_, and on the
modification of sense which primitive words undergo in consequence of
its influence. If then we take this (נ) as the defective form of some
primitive word, appearing sometimes in the form of הנ, at other times as
נ only, we may suppose it to have been derived from the (Arabic) root,
which, had it been preserved in Hebrew, might have been written הָנָֽה
_hanah_, אָנָה _anah_, or אָנָא _ana_. The senses attributed to it by
Castell (in his Arabic Lexicon) are, among others, ‘ad extremum
perfectionis terminum pervenit—assecutus fuit, seu percepit—retinuit,
detinuit, coercuit,—lenitate, modestia et patientia usus fuit,’ &c.
Supposing this word, or some defective form of it, to be construed with
any other, the sense of both taken together would, in general, give the
force of the forms thus compounded. And as this form of compound is
often in the leading word of one of the conjugations, it becomes the
more important to ascertain its properties. Primitive words receiving
this particle will have a sort of passive sense, or will exhibit
subjection to the action implied by the primitive accidentally, but not
habitually. Words receiving this augment, subjecting them to the action
implied by the primitive word, may, when the context requires it, also
be construed as having a reciprocal sense, or as implying possibility,”
&c.
Now then, let us present examples of the influence of this particular
Heemanti: —שָׂכּוּר _sakur_, _a hireling_, one whose habit is to be
hired, one whose occupation is that of being hired by others. Add נ
_nun_, and we have נִשְׂכָּ֔רוּ _niskkaru_, as in 1 _Sam._ ii. 5, and
translated thus: “They that were full have hired out themselves for
bread.” The idea in Hebrew is: They who were habitually full, from the
force of the circumstances influencing the case, have been compelled to
hire themselves to others for bread. The _sakur_ is a hireling from
habit, from constitution, from custom, &c., and which idea enters into
the meaning of the word. But the prefix of the proposed Heemanti at once
destroys all idea of habit, fitness, constitution, or custom; but yet
the individual is a “hireling,” but only as the force of circumstances
influencing the case compelled him to be so. Thus this Heemanti gives a
reflective quality, reflecting back upon the agent or actor, as thus:
שָׁמַר _shamar_, _he guards_, נִשְׁמַר _nishmar_, _he guards himself_;
that is, under the force of circumstances affecting the case, he was
compelled to guard himself. Thus כּמר _chemar_ is sometimes used to
express the idea _black_, as a constant, habitual quality. In _Lam._ v.
10, we find it with this Heemanti, thus, נִכְמָ֔רוּ _nichemaru_, “our
skin was black;” not that their skin was naturally and habitually black,
but made so by the facts of the case: and this same word, with this
Heemanti, is used in _Gen._ xliii. 30, and translated, by attempting to
express a Hebrew cognate idea, into “_yearn_.” The idea is, his bowels
did not habitually “yearn,” but the action was forced upon him by the
facts of the case; and the same again in 1 _Kings_ iii. 26. In _Hosea_
xi. 8, we find it again translated “my repentings are kindled:” because
his people were bent on backsliding, which would cause the Assyrian to
be their king, and war to be in their cities continually, and their bad
counsels themselves to be destroyed, his repentings were forced to be
“kindled.” See the passage.
This particle then prefixed to the word עם _am_, with its feminine
termination, makes the word נעמה _Naamah_, with the meaning, under the
condition of things, she was to become a people distinct to herself; not
that she would be a people absolutely, by the habitual action of
constituent ability, but she would be a people distinct to herself, only
as the peculiar influencing causes made her so,—showing also that these
causes gave distinction and character to her posterity. Thus her very
name shadowed forth the condition of her race. A Frenchman goes to
England, or _vice versa_: a generation passes and nationality is lost.
Not so with the Ethiopian. For “though thou wash thee with nitre and
take thee much soap, yet thine iniquity is marked before me, saith the
Lord God.” _Jer._ ii. 22.
A form of the word “Naamah” is used in character of a masculine plural,
in _Isa._ xvii. 10, and translated “pleasant,” as if from נעם _nam_.
Forced to differ from this translation, we beg leave to place the whole
passage before the scholars of the day:
כִּ֤י שָׁכַ֙חַתְּ֙ אֱלֹהֵ֣י יִשְׁעֵ֔ךְ וְצ֖וּר מָֽעֻזֵּ֭ךְ לֹ֣א זָכָ֑רְתְּ עַל־כֵּׄן תִּטְּעִי֨
נִטְעֵ֣י נַֽעֲמנִים וּזְמ֥רַׄת זָ֖ד תִּזרָעֶֽנּוּ׃
It is translated thus: “Because thou hast forgotten the God of thy
salvation, and hast not been mindful of the rock of thy strength,
therefore shalt thou plant pleasant plants and shalt set it with strange
slips.”
We beg to inquire whether there is not a material defect in the latter
clause of this translation? The verb “to plant,” in Hebrew, governs two
accusatives, to wit, the plantation and the thing planted. In English,
we are compelled to render one of the names as governed by a
preposition. Thus, he planted a field with corn, or he planted corn in a
field. The word זְמֹרַה _zemorath_, is often translated a song, as “The
Lord Jehovah is my strength and song.” See _Ps._ cxviii. 14 and _Isa._
xii. 2. But the idea is more comprehensive than is our idea expressed by
the term “song.” It includes the result of a course of conduct. Thus the
result of a devout worship of God is that Jehovah becomes the
“_Zemorath_” of the worshipper; and we doubt not our term _result_,
although imperfect, will give a better view of the prophet’s idea in
this place than the _song_. In this sense this word is used in _Gen._
xliii. 11, and translated “fruits:” thus, “take of the best fruits of
the land,” that is, the best results of our cultivation. The prophet
informs his people that they intermix and amalgamate with the
Naamathites because they have forgot God, and that the result is the two
last words in the passage, to wit, the “_zar_” and “_tizera-ennu_” that
is, a “stranger.” See _Exod._ xxx. 33; _Levit._ xxii. 10, 12, 13, where
“_zar_” is translated “stranger;” also, _Job_ xix. 15, 17; also, _Prov._
v. 10, 17, and 20; and many other places, surely enough to determine its
meaning here. The original sense of the last word in the passage was to
_sow seed_, hence to _scatter_ and _destroy_. The result of such
amalgamation then is, their posterity will be a deteriorated race, and
the pure Hebrew stock sown to the winds, scattered, wasted away and
destroyed.
In these highly excited and poetic effusions of the prophet, we are to
notice the chain of thought and mode of expression by which he reaches
the object in view. This chapter commences with the information that
Damascus shall cease to be a city; that Aroer shall be forsaken, and
Ephraim be without a fortress to protect her; and finally that Jacob
shall be made thin, like a few scattering grapes found by the gleaner,
or a few berries of the olive left in the top of the bough, and the
house of Jacob become desolate. In the passage under consideration the
causes of this condition of Jacob are announced. If our view of the word
“Naamah” be correct, in the masculine plural, as here used, it will be
quite analogous to Ethiopians. But we have no one word of its meaning;
perhaps the idea will be more correctly expressed by Naamathites.
Evidently the idea intended to be conveyed by the prophet by the word
נַ֥עֲמָנִ֔ים _Naamanim_, is, a people whose cultivation would be
abortive as to them and injurious to the cultivator; that is, a people
with whom intermarriage will produce nothing but injury and destruction
to the house of Jacob.
By the use of some such paraphrasis the idea of the prophet will be
brought to mind: “Because thou hast forgotten the God of thy salvation,
and hast not been mindful of the rock of thy strength, therefore shalt
thou (or therefore dost thou) plant _Naamathites_,” (that is, amalgamate
with the descendants of Ham and Naamah,) “and the fruits of the land
shall be a stranger” (that is, their adulterated posterity will be
heathen) “scattering thee away;” that is, wasting away not only the
purity of the Hebrew blood, but their worship also.
Repeat: “Because thou hast forgotten the God of thy salvation, and hast
not been mindful of the rock of thy strength.” Therefore dost thou
cohabit with the heathen, and thy posterity, O Jacob, shall be an enemy,
and thou scattered away and destroyed! Such is the announcement of the
prophet.
One of the most bitter specimens of irony contained in the Scriptures is
the answer of Job to the Naamathite: “No doubt but ye are the people,
and wisdom shall die with you.” The passage needs no comment.
The view we take of the word “_Naamanim_,” as used by Isaiah, we think
warranted by the succeeding sentence, which we ask the scholar to
notice.
“For a day thou shalt make thy plant to grow, for a morning thou shalt
make thy seed to flourish, but the harvest shall be a heap” (a burden
unbearable) “in the days of grief and desperate sorrow.” And such has
ever been the lot of the white parent who has amalgamated with the
negro; as to posterity, it is ruin.
The prophet borrowed his figure from agriculture. His intention was to
present to the mind the abortiveness of such a course of sin, by
presenting a bold and distinct view of the mental and moral character of
the descendants of Naamah; and is on a par with—“Are ye not as the
children of the Ethiopians unto me, O children of Israel? saith the
Lord.” _Amos_ ix. 7.
------------------