⁴ tc The BHS editors propose redividing the singular MT reading וְנוֹדַד (v^enodad, “and it flees”) to the plural וְנוֹדְדוּ (v^enod^edu, “and they flee”) due to the difficulty of a singular verb. However, the LXX supports the singular MT reading. The subject is גוֹב (gov, “swarm”), not individual locusts.

² tc The BHS editors propose emending the MT reading גְּאוֹן (g^eʾon, “majesty; pride”) to גֶּפֶן (gefen, “vineyard”) due to the mention of “their branches” (וּזְמֹרֵיהֶם, uz^emorehem) in the following line (so HALOT 169 s.v. גָּאוֹן [2.b]). However, the LXX supports the MT.

² tc The BHS editors suggest emending MT “power” (כֹּחַ, koakh) to “mercy” (חֶסֶד, khesed) as in Exod 34:6; Num 14:18; Joel 2:13; Jonah 4:2; Ps 103:8; Neh 9:17. However, this is unnecessary, it has no textual support, and it misses the rhetorical point intended by Nahum’s modification of the traditional expression.

¹ sn The expression have nothing is difficult. Presumably it refers to an absence of support or assistance for the anointed one at the time of his “cutting off.” The KJV rendering “but not for himself,” apparently suggesting a vicarious death, cannot be defended.

³ tn Aram “and visions of his head.” The Aramaic is difficult here. Some scholars add a verb thought to be missing (e.g., “the visions of his head [were alarming him]”), but there is no external evidence to support such a decision, and the awkwardness of the text at this point may be original.

¹ tc Heb “I.” The reading is due to the confusion of yod (י, indicating a first person pronoun) and vav (ו, indicating a third person pronoun). A few medieval Hebrew mss, Theodotion’s Greek version, and the Latin Vulgate support a third person pronoun here.

¹ tc Many Hebrew mss, Aquila’s Greek translation, and the Syriac version read “Edom.” The LXX reads “man,” a translation that assumes the same consonants as Edom. This reading is supported from the context as the text deals with Damascus, the capital of Syria (Aram), later (in v. 18).

¹ tc The MT reads לַעֲשׂוֹת אֱמֶת (laʿasot ʾemet, “to do with integrity”), while the LXX reads “to do them,” presupposing לַעֲשׂוֹת אֹתָם (laʿasot ʾotam). The ם (mem) and ת (tav) have been reversed in the MT. The LXX reflects the original, supported by similar phrasing in Ezekiel 11:20; 20:19.

¹ tc This reading is supported by the versions and by the Dead Sea Scrolls (11QEzek). Most Masoretic Hebrew mss read: “it will be,” but if the final he (ה) is read as a mater lectionis, as it can be with the second masculine singular perfect, then they are in agreement. In either case the subject refers to Jerusalem.

¹ tc Heb “each had two wings covering and each had two wings covering,” a case of dittography. On the analogy of v. 11 and the support of the LXX, which reads the same for v. 11 and this verse, one should perhaps read “each had two wings touching another being and each had two wings covering.”

¹ tc The MT reads: “and the form of the creatures” (וּדְמוּת הַחַיּוֹת, ud^emut hakhayyot). The LXX reads: “and in the midst of the creatures,” suggesting an underlying Hebrew text of וּמִתּוֹךְ הַחַיּוֹת (umittokh hakhayyot). The subsequent description of something moving among the creatures supports the LXX.

³ tc The Kethib is written אֲנַחְנוּ (ʾanakhnu, “we”), but the Qere reads וַאֲנַחְנוּ (vaʾanakhnu, “but we”). The Qere is supported by many medieval Hebrew mss, as well as most of the ancient versions (Aramaic Targum, Syriac Peshitta, Latin Vulgate). The ו (vav) prefixed to וַאֲנַחְנוּ (vaʾanakhnu) functions either in a disjunctive sense (“but”) or resultant sense (“so”).

² tn Heb “How is the strong staff broken, the beautiful rod!” “How” introduces a lament that is here rendered by “Alas.” The staff and rod refer to the support that Moab gave to others, not to the fact that she ruled over others, which was never the case. According to BDB 739 s.v. עוֹז 1, the “strong staff” is figurative of political power.

¹ sn Elasah son of Shaphan may have been the brother of Ahikam, who supported Jeremiah when the priests and the prophets in Jerusalem sought to kill Jeremiah for preaching that the temple and the city would be destroyed (cf. 26:24).

² tn Heb “Nevertheless, the hand of Ahikam son of Shaphan was with Jeremiah so that he would not be given [even more literally, “so as not to give him”] into the hand of the people to kill him.” “Hand” is often used for “aid,” “support,” “influence,” “power,” or “control.”

³ tn Heb “carry loads on the Sabbath and bring [them] in through.” The two verbs “carry” and “bring in” are an example of hendiadys (see the note on “Be careful…by carrying”). This is supported by the next line, where only “carry out” of the houses is mentioned.

² sn The identity and location of the People’s Gate is uncertain since it is mentioned nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible. Some identify it with the Benjamin Gate mentioned in Jer 37:13 and 38:7 (cf. NAB), but there is no textual support for this in the Hebrew Bible or in any of the ancient versions.

² tn Heb “double.” However, usage in Deut 15:18 and probably Isa 40:2 argues for “full compensation.” This is supported also by usage in a tablet from Alalakh in Syria. See P. C. Craigie, P. H. Kelley, J. F. Drinkard, Jeremiah 1-25 (WBC), 218, for bibliography.

¹ tn Heb “be trapped.” However, the word “trapped” generally carries with it the connotation of divine judgment. See BDB 540 s.v. לָכַד Niph.2, and compare usage in Jer 6:11 for support. The verbs in the first two lines are again the form of the Hebrew verb that emphasizes that the action is as good as done (Hebrew prophetic perfects).

³ tc MT reads דְּרָכַיִךְ (d^erakhayikh, “your ways”), but the BHS editors suggest דּוֹדַיִךְ (dodayikh, “your breasts”) as an example of orthographic confusion. While the proposal makes sense, it remains a conjectural emendation since it is not supported by any actual manuscripts or ancient versions.