Exodus 10:19 (UASV): “And Jehovah turned a very strong west wind, which took up the locusts, and drove them into the Sea of Reeds; there remained not one locust in all the territory of Egypt.”

The verse in question describes the removal of the eighth plague, the locusts, through a divine act in which Jehovah caused a strong west wind to blow the locusts into the “Sea of Reeds.” This passage offers a significant textual issue for study, particularly surrounding the phrase יָ֣מָּה סּ֑וּף (yam suph), translated in the Masoretic Text as “Sea of Reeds,” but represented in the Septuagint (LXX) as ἐρυθρὰ θάλασσα (eruthra thalassa, “Red Sea”). This textual matter is important not only for Exodus 10:19 itself but also for broader discussions of Israel’s journey and the crossing narrative in Exodus 14.

---

The Hebrew Text: יָ֣מָּה סּ֑וּף

The Masoretic Text (MT) contains the phrase יָ֣מָּה סּ֑וּף (yam suph). The first element, יָ֣מָּה, is the directional accusative of יָם (“sea”), here used with the ending –ה (he locale) to indicate “toward the sea.” The second word, סּ֑וּף (suph), is generally understood to mean “reeds” or “papyrus plants.” Thus, the most literal rendering of the Hebrew text is “toward the Sea of Reeds.”

The root סוּף occurs in Hebrew in reference to vegetation, as seen in Exodus 2:3 and Isaiah 19:6, where it describes the reeds or rushes growing in marshy areas. This indicates that the body of water in question was not characterized primarily by its saltwater expanse but rather by its association with reedy growth. This makes good sense in light of the geography of the northeastern Nile Delta, which was filled with lakes, lagoons, and marshlands where reeds and papyrus thrived.

---

The Septuagint’s Rendering: “Red Sea”

The Septuagint translators rendered yam suph with ἐρυθρὰ θάλασσα (“Red Sea”). This translation appears consistently throughout the Pentateuch and other Old Testament passages where yam suph occurs. The Greek translators’ choice was not based on a misreading of the Hebrew consonantal text, for the Hebrew word suph could not naturally yield “red.” Instead, their rendering reflects either an interpretive decision or an established geographic identification known in their day.

From the standpoint of the Septuagint translators in Egypt (3rd century B.C.E.), the familiar body of water east of Egypt that Israel crossed was the Red Sea. Thus, their rendering reflects a geographic interpretation rather than a philological one. By their time, yam suph had become synonymous with the Red Sea, which was the major recognizable body of water in the region. In later Jewish and Christian traditions, this interpretation was carried forward, explaining why translations such as the Vulgate (mare Rubrum) and most early English versions followed the LXX rather than preserving “Sea of Reeds.”

---

Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Witnesses

The Dead Sea Scrolls provide no alternate reading for Exodus 10:19. The available Hebrew fragments that preserve references to yam suph, such as in Exodus 13–15, confirm the Masoretic reading. Thus, the Hebrew wording “Sea of Reeds” is firmly established in the earliest textual tradition. There is no textual evidence from Qumran that suggests “Red Sea” was ever present in the Hebrew Vorlage.

The Samaritan Pentateuch also preserves yam suph without variation, again demonstrating the stability of the phrase in the Hebrew transmission line. This stability supports the conclusion that the original text of Exodus 10:19 referred to the “Sea of Reeds.”

---

The Syriac Peshitta and Aramaic Targums

The Syriac Peshitta generally follows the Septuagintal tradition in geographical identifications. In Exodus 10:19, it aligns with the Greek rendering and refers to the Red Sea. Likewise, the Aramaic Targums, particularly Onkelos, also translate yam suph with an equivalent that reflects the Red Sea identification. These versions show how interpretive tradition, rather than lexical accuracy, influenced translation choices.

---

The Vulgate’s Rendering

Jerome, in his Latin Vulgate, rendered the term as “mare Rubrum” (“Red Sea”), following the Septuagint and the established Christian tradition of his day. This again confirms that the interpretive trajectory beginning with the LXX became dominant in the transmission of the Old Testament into other languages, even though the Hebrew term was more precise.

---

Geographic Considerations

The phrase “Sea of Reeds” naturally corresponds to a marshy or reedy body of water, which would fit the geography of northern Egypt. This suggests that the “Sea of Reeds” in Exodus 10:19, as in the later account of the Israelites’ crossing in Exodus 14, likely referred to one of the shallow lakes or lagoons in the northeastern Nile Delta region, such as Lake Ballah or Lake Timsah, which were known in antiquity for papyrus growth.

The locusts being driven into the “Sea of Reeds” is a detail consistent with the Nile Delta setting. A strong west wind would naturally drive the locusts eastward, carrying them off into the marshy waters where they would drown and sink, leaving “not one locust” in Egypt’s territory. This geographical logic affirms the accuracy of the Hebrew text as it stands.

---

Textual Evaluation

The Masoretic Text reading יָ֣מָּה סּ֑וּף (“Sea of Reeds”) is supported by:

1. Internal linguistic evidence (the root suph meaning “reeds”).

2. Geographical plausibility within Egypt.

3. Confirmation by the Samaritan Pentateuch and Dead Sea Scrolls.

The Septuagint’s rendering “Red Sea” represents a later interpretive identification, one that shaped Jewish and Christian tradition but does not reflect the original Hebrew wording. The versions dependent on the Septuagint (Peshitta, Targums, Vulgate) perpetuated this interpretive shift. Thus, the Masoretic Text is correct in its preservation of “Sea of Reeds,” while “Red Sea” represents an interpretive gloss rather than a variant reading.

---

Implications for Translation

Faithful translations should retain “Sea of Reeds” in Exodus 10:19 to reflect the Hebrew accurately. Rendering it as “Red Sea” obscures the original geographic reference and imposes a later interpretive tradition onto the text. Since textual criticism affirms that the Hebrew wording is original, translators must not allow the LXX tradition to override the evidence.

This does not diminish the theological or historical significance of the event. Rather, it underscores the importance of restoring the precise wording of the inspired text. Jehovah drove the locusts into the “Sea of Reeds,” and this accords with both the Hebrew vocabulary and the natural geography of the land of Egypt at the time.

You May Also Enjoy

The Transmission of the Old Testament Text: Masoretic Precision, Dead Sea Scrolls, Ancient Versions, and the Reliability of the Hebrew Bible

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS