Sea-monster (Hastings' Dictionary)

This Eng. term occurs only twice in RV (text) : Gn 1" ' God created the great Bea-moiisters ' (AV 'great whales,' LXX t4 k^t?;), and Job 7'- ' Am I a sea or a sea-monster (AV ' whale,' LXX SpiKwv), that tliou settest a watch over me ? ' The Heb. in both these passages is p;B (plur. cj';j3 and crjn), which has been supposed to come from an (unused) root jjn = ' stretch,' 'ex- tend,' an<l so to signify properly an elongated animal (see (Jes. TItes. 1511).

The word \'in, in addition to these two occurrences, is used of ser- pents or serpent-like creatures in Ex l'"- [P ; JE and R use rnj, LXX J^u, in the similar passages 4^ and ""], Dt 32", Ps 91" ; perhaps the crocodile is in view in Is 27' 51', Ezk 29 32^ (see small type below), Ps 74" ; large water animals of .some kind are designated by it in Jer 51 [Gr. 28]**, Ps 148'. In all these pa.ssages the LXX tr. j-je by SpiKuv, RV has ' dragon,' except in Ex "i"- ' ser- |ient' (RVm, 'Heb.

tannin, any large reptile'); and I's 91" 'serj)ent' ; in Ps 74" RVm has 'sea- monsters,' in 14S' 'or sea-monsters or waterspouts.' In Neh 2" we hear also of the '/!n hattannln (' well of the dragon,' LXX inrW) '^^' ovkQv, ' fountain of the hgs,' evidently confusing pjn Willi z-;fa ' figs'). Quite a difTerent t«nn, aIthou(;h it has sometimes been con* fuwd t witli it botli by copyinta (p;n, LXX };«j«.

tm, o( La 4^ is a iixiual error tor D';n, wliile, conversely, D';n ot Ezli 29> 32' (LXX in ali )/>•«•>) should be |';?J and by interpreters, is O'JS ' Tile creature wliich is said to have swailowed Jonah (see roi. iL p. 750) is called simply a great llah ("^nj jl), Jon 1" lUeb. and Ur. 21J. The familiar ' whale' comes from LXX xifnf *,jMym.\ rfpro<luced in the xr,tM of Mt Vi^.

t Pooouk in \i\s Commentary oti Mic l^* (1077)flrbt8howed that tlijse two worls hwl been confused, and pointed out that O'JJ must denote some kind of jackal. (once Mai 13, if the text is correct, Mia, LXX d«'juaT« = Heb. niK3 ; cf. Jer 99 ('"I, Ps 6513), the plur. ol Cunusi.il) [f, which means some beast that haunts solitary placcji, )»rol)ablv the jackal. Its occurrences are Is 13'^^ 34i» 35' 432<i_ Jer g'"!''

10'^ U» 493S 6137, Mic 18, Ps 4420(19) (i( the text U correct, but sf-e Cheyne or Wellh.), Job 3022 (in all these passages AV has ' dragons," • KV 'jackals'], La 4^ (AV [wrongly] ' sea-monsters," f m. * sea-calves,' RV ' Jackals "X Another monster, belonging to the same cate- gory as tannin, is Leviathan (jci;;^ liwydthun, prob. = ' wreathed,' 'coiled'), which appears as a denizen of the waters in Ps 104^ ' liwyatliun whom thou hast formed (if\i'.)

to play therein ' (or ' with him,' 'la-pns"^, LXX ^/xTra/feiv a-uTif), and Job 41"'- [Heb. 40^""]. In the first of these passages the whale is often supposed to be referred to, in the second the crocodile, which last may be the reference also in I's 74', where liwyatlidn is ajj- parently symbolical of Egypt. In Job 3 [where it is not necessary to read, with Gunkel, d; ' sea' for Di' ' day '] magicians are supposed to be able to ' rouse up ' (-nj/ ; B x^^P'^'""'^''^'-) this monster.

On Is 27' see below. [LXX in ali these passages tr. IC'l^ by bf>6.Kwv, except in Job 3", where it has ri (o^o K77TOS ; Aq., Symm., and Tlieod., where they are extant, always transliterate XcmaBav, except in this same passage in Job, where Theod. has opditui"]. Leviathan is referred to also in Enoch 60'-9, 2 Es 6»-" ; cf. Apoc. Bar 29. It has been coiucuoed that, in most of the OT passages where tannin and liwydthdn occur, a mythological or semi, mythological allusion is present.

Such an allusion is discovered, for in- stance, in Is 27' ' In that day the LoKD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish liwydthdn the fleeing serpent (oi; s^'Ci, LXX t^is ^fiVywc, Aq. 6<pi^ fjLOx^is, Symm. 40(5 ffvyKXeiuf) and liwydthdn tlio coiled serpent (pn^iTi:, oqj, LXX i<pis anoXiis, Aq. and Symm. c0ij iveaKiauiiiinos), and he shall slay the tannin that is in the sea.'

The language here cer- tainly recalls the Babylonian mytliology with its account of the primeval conflict between Marduk and Tiamat (see art. Cosmogony). The ' fleeing serpent ' (cf. Job 26'-'-) is portrayed on a Bab. seal, with Marduk in pursuit ; the ' coiled serpent ' mi;;hl be the earth-encircling ocean. These two lixr yutlulns are held to be simply ditterentiations of Tiamat, whose con.sort, Kiiigu, may be 'the dragon in the sea' (so tiunkel, followed by Cheyne, et at.)

At the same time Gunkel (p. 40) admits that they are employed by ' Isaiah ' to symbolize kingdoms. In Is 51' (on which see art. Rahab) the " dragon' (symbolical, as the context shows, of Egypt at tlie time of the Exodus) appears, as in the Bab. cos- mogony, as having been destroyed by God long ago (so also in Ps 74'^'" ' Thou brakest tlie heads ot the tanninS7n in the waters, thou didst crush the heads of liwyathdn in pieces,' 89'" al.)

, whereas in 27' the monster is thought of aiiparently as im- prisoned in the sea, and destined to ue destroj'cd at last by Jahweh's sword (cf.

Job 3", where, as was noted above, magicians have the power to ' rouse up ' liivydt/idn ; 7'^, where watchers are set over the tannin ; and Am 9', where the serpent [oiji, opaKuf] is in any case no venomous marine snake, for such are not found in the Mediterranean, but 'an imaginary monster, supposed by the Hebrews to have its home at the bottom of the ocean, and to be at the disposal of the Almighty ' [Driver, ad loc; similarly Nowack, who has no doubt that there is a reference to the sea-monster of myth- ology])- Again, in Kzk "29'"" and 3'J"" the tannin to which Pharaoh is compared, althoujjh it has points in common with the crocodile, is held to • The word • dra^'on * In A V should probably be viewed merely as an old and poc-tical word for a lur^'e (tcn>ent (not necessarily a fabulous monster).

See exain(>les uf its use in this sense in old writers as quoted by Murray in Ojif. limj. Dictionary^ »,v. t This is the only occurrence of ' sea-moubtor' in AV. 128 SEBA SECUKDUS find its only true equivalent in the monster Tiamat. The treatment to be meted out by God to E^liaraoh recalls, we are told, the way in which Tiamat and her allies were vanquished and afterwards treated by Marduk ; compare, for instance, EzU 3'2" ' I will spread out my net for thee,' etc., with Creation tablet iv. 11.

95, 112, ' Bel (Marduk) threw wide his net, made it encompass her ' ; ' In the net they lay, in the meslies they eat.' But the net is a common OT figure, and may be used here independently. Upon the whole, while it is practically certain tliat the Tiamat myth had reached Palestine and tliat there are allusions to it in the OT, it will liardly be questioned that Guukel exaggerates its inlluence.

The 'dragon' of Neh 2" is probably a serpent regarded as tlie tutelary deity of the spring, and believed to give living power, perhaps healing virtues, to its waters (of. W. K. Smith, RS^ 156, IGl P 172, 176]). It does not fall within the scope of the present article to discuss the ' dragon ' of tlie Greek Book of Daniel (see art. BEL and the Dragon), the ' dragons ' of Ad.

Est 10' 11" or of Ps-Sol 2^"-, or the 'dragon ' of Rev 12'''- 13- *• " 16'^ 20=, for which last see Revelation (Book of), p. 256, and Bousset's Comm. ad loc. See also art. Raiiab. Literature. — Giinkel, SckGp/un/j u. Chaos, esp. pp. 2&-90; Chevne'8 artt. 'Behemoth and Leviathan' and 'Dragon' in Enci/c. BibL: Weber, Jiid. Theol^ 160, 202, 402, 404 (ou Jewish fancies about Leviathan); the Comin., esp. those of A. B. Davidson, Dillm., Budde, and Duhra on Job ; of Cheyne, Dillm.

Kittel, and Marti on Isaiah \ and of Bertholet and Kraetzschmar (both disinclined to admit in Ezk 293 322 the mythological allusioas contended for by Gunkel) on EzekieL J. A. Selbie.