The RSV’s handling of the verse is a bit unusual for they change the order of the parts of the sentence, in addition to going with a meaning that is different from most groups.
And if you are wondering here’s the English from the Septuagint.
1Sa 1:5 Complete Apostles’ Bible
(5) And to Anna he gave a prime portion, because she had no child, only Elkanah loved Anna more than the other; but the Lord had closed her womb.
JJ
This is the RSV: (one sentence).
“and although he loved Hannah, he would give Hannah only one portion, because the Lord had closed her womb.”
Could you explain your thoughts a little more?
------ My thoughts -----
I don’t have the Vatican’s or Tischendorf’s copy of this passage,
but a literal word order preserved translation (hyper-hyper literal)
of a commonly available Greek text goes this way:
1Samu 1:5 LXX
και τ-η*** `ανν-α ε-δω-κ-ε-ν μεριδ-α μιαν
and to-the Hanna [he]-has-kept-given/3Pf portion, one/fist,
and to Hanna he has given one/first portion
`οτι ουκ ην αυτ-η*** παιδι-ον πλην
because not had-been/were/3sImpf to-her/Ds child/A except/prep
that had not been to-her child except
οτι τ-ην ανν-αν ηγαπα `ελκανα υπερ ταυτ-ην
that the/A Hanna ? Helkana hyper/beyond this/As+
that the Hanna-n agapa(love/prefer) Helkana beyond this(female)
και κυρι-ος απε-κλει-σ-εν τα περι τ-ην μητρ-αν αυτ-ης
and Lord/Ns ?closed?/3Aor the/NA around/concerning the/As matron/womb of-her
and a Lord ?closed? the concerning the womb of her
*** Note:The text I use does not distinguish between η and ῃ which affects the possible cases of the marked word. The word is either in the nominative, or the dative, and always singular feminine. So it is either a feminine subject or to-a-feminine clause. I assume the latter.
Some notes:
The word for ‘love’ in the Greek is the selfless version – agapa.
English translations always seem to want to say that Helkanah loved Hannah more than another woman – but that is a very contorted reading of the Greek. The other examples I can find show that Hannah loves (agapa) Helkanah beyond (something else). There is a definite article at the beginning of the clause την – which could be used like a pronoun – Her. If so, there is a female exception to the child – which agrees with the “something else” – eg: Hannah had a girl, but not a boy.
Otherwise, the sentence seems to say that Hannah loved/preferred Helkanah beyond another female (rival? or perhaps the bearing of children altogether? ).
The Greek phrasing is really peculiar here, and it does support the idea of a female child. The Greek uses the word ‘except’ rather than the standard ‘but’ – and exceptions are to lists of things – in this case the list is just ‘child’ (either sex) – So I would expect the exception to also be a ‘child’ of some kind, in this case a female.
A couple of possibilities open up here: By analogy:
Sarah was Abraham’s wife of promise in preference to Hagar – there are two ways this comes about: First, Sarah was a closer kinswoman being of the same father as Abraham (or grandfather since father refers to ALL fathers.) which we know makes her preferred to Hagar who was a foreign Egyptian and a slave woman (παιδισκ-η) – so Sarah was considered the wife according to God’s preferred double blessing.
But now I have another idea — A firstborn daughter did not inherit the special messianic blessing and is ignored in the promise to Adam and Eve – however, I am not certain that having a female child would not have opened up a legal loophole as to which mother’s son deserved the double portion (eg: who is the real/first wife of Helkanah) – as Abraham and Sarah and Hagar show, since Hagar could be cast out and not receive the double portion of the physical inheritance – so does the issue arise here.
Hence bitter rivalry between women who were lawyers over who got the inheritance – just like Sarah and Hagar, but perhaps for a different reason.
