The Bacula Mystery II

Kage Baker actually read the Bible. Usually the King James Version – it was her favourite, because she liked the poetry of the translation.

However,  sometimes the beauty of the lines interfered with their meaning, in that the translations are not too precise. Perhaps the best known is “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.” The word actually used (“chasaph”) apparently means something more like “poisoner”; specifically, a poisoner of wells – which in a desert land is pretty serious. Unfortunately, this translation has led lots of people, including that Bible’s eponymous patron, James the 1st and 6th, to persecute a lot of people for witchcraft and blame the Bible for the nasty habit.

Words matter.

Sometimes, though, the translations in the King James Version are just plain fascinating. Did you know weasels are treff? According to the KJV, they are. But some scholars think the word should have been translated as “moles” – and, when Kage researched it, she did find that there is only one weasel native to the area: the Least Weasel. It’s a miniscule beastie and she couldn’t believe the little thing was worth eating anyway – but she couldn’t imagine anyone needing to be forbidden to eat them. Still, it was her favourite of the dietary rules.

Do Not Eat Me - It's The Law

Of course, the Least Weasel also has a bacula – the  Mustelidae are not among those mammals who lack them, unlike human beings – which gives us a nice segue into our previous topic. Or into accidentally offending people with Bible translation oddities; which I do hope I am not doing. I don’t invent these things, I just report them …

Most of you, Dear Readers, are probably  familiar with the Bible story that Eve was created by the Lord God out of Adam’s rib. In fact, Christian scholars – who were deep into theology long before topics like medicine and anatomy – habitually believed that men did have one less rib than women; few of them ever had a clear look at the originals to count them, after all, and once they did, there some pretty fancy footwork to explain the anomaly.

In our high school biology classes, there hung a skeleton, for display purposes. It was vandalized on a regular basis with fancy lingerie, phoney cigars, cigarettes and doobies, fake fingernails, sunglasses. Our exemplary biology teacher, Sister Marsha, would ask at the beginning of each year if anyone could guess what gender the bones had been. It was then an annual event for some devout and/or dim student to raise her hand and respond that it was female, as it had the same number of ribs on each side. That gave the very logical Sister M. the chance to  get all that Adam’s-rib nonsense out of the way right at the beginning. I think she introduced several years’ worth of Catholic maidens to the idea of secular scepticism when she explained that the Bible was not an anatomy text … although not everyone believed her.

Those young ladies had real problems with the Krebs cycle and evolution later on.

If only Sister Marsha had seen this explanation: http://tinyurl.com/3n52c97

It’s a translation problem again. The word used in the original is “tzela”. This can be translated as “rib” but doesn’t ordinarily mean a rib like the bones in your chest. It means a structural rib, an architectural rib, a supporting column … as I said, humans had undoubtedly noticed that most male animals had the things. (Especially if they were hunting Least Weasels with enough frequency to get them on the treff  list.) But humans don’t. The two ladies referenced in the link above think the original story of Adam’s rib may be been an origin myth designed to explain this lack in human males – certainly, the missing bacula would have had considerably more reproductive panache than a mere costal rib.

Whether or not this was intended to be serious or tongue in cheek, the words do mean what they say they mean – and what they don’t. This broadens the world. It widens our outlook! It might even explain a story that never made sense, one that has bothered theologians for 2,000 years. And I think it’s hilarious, besides.

I bet the Least Weasel is snickering, too.

About Kate

I am Kage Baker's sister. Kage was/is a well-known science fiction writer, who died on January 31, 2010. She told me to keep her work going - I'm doing that. This blog will document the process.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to The Bacula Mystery II

  1. Margaret says:

    I suppose that if you live in an desert, even a Least Weasel looks like good stew material. Look at some of the stuff native Australians yum down – witchetty grubs, anyone?

    Like

  2. Kate says:

    Well, I’m told that witchetty grubs compare favourably with peanut butter: so I guess I could choke them down. But all the Mustelidae smell like badly used socks, no matter how little and cute they are: I cannot imagine they taste much better. Skunk, I know, has a bad reputation as a meat animal. So does wolverine. Nonetheless, I have to agree with you – it’s a freaking desert, how much can there be there to eat? The same verse that forbids weasels also forbids “great lizards” – at which point one must begin to suspect that God is just being mean.

    Like

    • Margaret says:

      Oooh – great lizards?! A really cheesy B-movie plot just sprung to mind: T. rex, Moses, Egyptians, add your favorite inappropriate ingredients and stir well…How abourt a set-piece showing the Egyptians, under different dietary restrictions, madly chariot-hunting a herd of velociraptors. I think I’d better stop before my brain implodes.

      Once upon a time I was at the national anthropology annual meetings, famed for excessive comsumption of strong drink, and on the third day, went in to an early morning session of anthropological films, hoping for some soothing darkness. There on the screen was an Australian native kid, yumming down a live witchetty grub. Oh dear – no live food, please.

      Like

  3. JoyJoy says:

    I once gazed up at a lovely sliver of New Moon and mused that it looked like a rib … must have been Adam’s Rib … wait a minute …

    Like

  4. Marvin Harris had some neat things to say about why some foods are forbidden… I imagine weasels would count as not worth the calories to hunt

    Like

  5. Kate says:

    Atalanta – maybe. Weasels are carnivores, and I think those are pretty much forbidden. Kage and I thought it was an amusing restriction, though (them and the great lizards, too), even if the author of Leviticus did mean “moles” rather than weasels. Of course, if they did mean moles, then it’s a mystery again as to why they’re treff.

    Like

  6. Kate says:

    Margaret – anthropology is a tough science. If the hard booze doesn’t get you, the academic sniping will. Just about all the bone hunters are deadly fierce – such animosity!

    Like

  7. Margaret says:

    Yes indeed, often heard are many versions of ‘My extremely fragmentary fossil hominid was obviously smarter/had more upright posture/made better tools than yours/was clearly on the human evolutionary tree (and yours isn’t), nyah nyah!’ thinly disguised as academic discourse.

    Like

  8. Kate says:

    Not to mention grooming your lemur fossil for years before releasing it, under security fit for the debut of a Princess … or accidentally crushing the type skull of Homo floresiensis and then gluing it back together.

    Like

  9. PJ says:

    What a great post. I love this kind of stuff.

    But I’m looking at Scott Bakula in a slightly different light. (Yeah, I know, wrong spelling.)

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s