Left-handed = ambidextrous

[James Cuénod]

In Judges 3:15, Ehud (from the tribe of Benjamin) is described as "אִישׁ אִטֵּר יַד־יְמִינוֹ". In Judges 20:16 where there are 700 left handed soldiers (from the tribe of Benjamin) each described as "אִישׁ בָּחוּר אִטֵּר יַד־יְמִינוֹ".
I am wondering whether this idiom for left-handedness could mean ambidextrous because in 1 Chronicles 12:2 soldiers from Benjamin are again known for using their left hands but in this case they are described as being able to shoot "מַיְמִינִים וּמַשְׂמִאלִים".

[kwrandolph]

First of all, these are a different set of people. The ones mentioned in Judges were slingers who had long before died before those archers who came to David.

You didn’t include the complete context: נשקי קשת מימינים. A right-handed person holds a bow in his left hand, these are holding their bows in their right hands. משמאלים באבנים ובחצים בקשת and the arrows in their left hands — normal stance for a left-handed archer.

I read a study done years ago indicating that those who shoot left-eyed and left-handed tend to be more accurate than those who shoot right-handed. The reason for that is unknown. Apparently that isn’t just a modern discovery, as the slingers mentioned in Judges 20:16 are mentioned as ולא יחטא “do not err” or miss the mark. Apparently there was a greater incidence of left-handedness than normal among those who were from the tribe of Benjamin, and they tended towards the art of shooting which demands accuracy.

Karl W. Randolph.

[James Cuénod]

Hi Karl,
Thanks very much. I realise that the group in Chronicles is different.
What I'm wondering is whether "bound in his right hand" may literally mean the Benjaminites were the Spartans of ancient Israel and forced children to use their left hands to train them - making them ambidextrous and superior in battle. In other words, I'm does the Hebrew text excludes the possibility of drawing a cultural conclusion rather than a genetic one (I.e. That Benjaminites were genetically predisposed to being left-handed)?

To my mind there is no problem with "bound in his right hand" meaning "ambidextrous" but perhaps there should be...

[James Cuénod]

Something I should have done first is check the lxx and it adds to the discussion. It's translation of the idiom is "ἀμφοτεροδέξιον". So in my mind the question is shifting from whether the Hebrew allows this meaning to whether this is the intended meaning...

[kwrandolph]

Hi Karl,
…What I'm wondering is whether "bound in his right hand" may literally mean the Benjaminites were the Spartans of ancient Israel and forced children to use their left hands to train them - making them ambidextrous and superior in battle. In other words, I'm does the Hebrew text excludes the possibility of drawing a cultural conclusion rather than a genetic one (I.e. That Benjaminites were genetically predisposed to being left-handed)?

To my mind there is no problem with "bound in his right hand" meaning "ambidextrous" but perhaps there should be...

The word אטר is used only three times, once as a verb in Psalms 69:16 where the meaning is apparently “restricted, close off access to” or something like that, and twice, in Judges 3:15 and 20:16, in the phrase אטר יד ימינו meaning that the person had restricted use of his right hand, both examples being from the tribe of Benjamin.

There’s no evidence that the Benjaminites were the Spartans of ancient Israel, neither in the language used nor any other source. That leaves us with the conclusion that it was probably something genetic, that possibly a greater prevalence of left-handedness was found than normal.

Karl W. Randolph.

[kwrandolph]

Something I should have done first is check the lxx …

The LXX sometimes clears things up, sometimes it’s obvious that the translators of the LXX were just guessing as to the meaning of the Hebrew. That becomes obvious for words used only a few times, and each time a different and unrelated definition is given that term.

By the time of the LXX, Biblical Hebrew had not been spoken as a native tongue for at least a couple of centuries, or for several generations. By that time, the meanings of uncommon terms had been forgotten. That includes unusual phrases. So when the translators of the LXX came to these terms and phrases, they had no choice but to do as we do today — guess. Today we have tools to help us in our guessing that the LXX translators didn’t have, so the work of the lexicographer is more of an educated guess, but it’s a guess nonetheless.

(I’m admitting to a dirty little secret of Biblical Hebrew lexicography — that many of those confident sounding glosses in Gesenius, BDB, and other lexicons are just guesses. True, educated guesses, but still guesses. The choice of which glosses to publish often depends more on the lexicographer’s philosophy than the paltry evidence before us.)

… and it adds to the discussion. It's translation of the idiom is "ἀμφοτεροδέξιον".

Yes, that indicates that in Hellenistic Egypt, the Jews of that time and place understood it to mean something akin to ambidextrous. But was the translator of Judges just guessing?

So in my mind the question is shifting from whether the Hebrew allows this meaning to whether this is the intended meaning...

The question still remains, does the Hebrew allow this? Right now I see no evidence that it does.

Karl W. Randolph.

[SteveMiller]

I am right-handed, but I would play ping pong left-handed against my kids to give them a chance. I found that after playing left-handed, my right-handed accuracy would improve. I think this was because I had to concentrate much harder to play with my left hand, which carried over to my right hand.

I tried it for pitching in baseball, but I could not train myself to throw with my left hand.