78 Michael L. Barré Both of the derivations mentioned above read t[bç in our passage and parse it as a verb. But there is no certainty that it is a verb here; hypothetically rma at the end of v. 9a could be the predicate in this colon. I agree with the LXX and a number of recent interpreters who take t[bç rather as t['b]vi, the feminine construct form of the numeral “seven” (21). Admittedly there is a problem with the form of the numeral here. In Hebrew numerals from one through ten, the feminine numeral is used with a masculine noun and vice-versa. Exceptions are rare, but three that are commonly noted also involve a feminine construct numeral preceding a feminine plural form: Gen 7,13; 1 Sam 10,3; Job 1,4 (22). Hence, although this usage is unusual it is not impossible; in general, unusual usages are more common in poetry than in prose. The next word, t/Fm', is the least controversial term in this colon. In this context, in parallelism with ˚tvq, it is unlikely that it denotes a “staff” or a “tribe” but rather some kind of weapon. The question here is whether the weapon in question is a mace or an arrow. The former interpretation is based on Akkadian mit≤t≤u (“mace”), which appears frequently in Akkadian literature as a divine weapon (23). But there appears to be no OT passage in which the Hebrew term must be translated “mace”. The most likely interpretation of t/Fm' in Hab 3,9a is that it is a rare, poetic term for arrows. This interpretation finds support in the parallelism of Ugaritic qπth with mt≤m in KTU 1.3 II 15- 16, where the same weapons are mentioned, and where they are likewise those of a deity (Anat). Finally, Hiebert offers two further plausible reasons why “arrows” is the better option here. The divine warrior is never pictured as carrying more than one mace into battle. Moreover, a mace would not “pierce,” nqb, the head of an enemy [3,14a], while arrows would (24). Thus the first two words of the colon are to be read as t/Fm' t['b]vi, “(your) seven arrows”. 3. The Heart of the Crux: rma We turn now to the most difficult term in the colon, rma, which the MT points as rm,ao from I rma, “to say”. No translation based on this derivation, however, yields good sense or fits well in the context. O’Connor reads it as a 1st singular verb from a putative root meaning “to see” (25), a translation of this root proposed by M. Dahood which has found few adherents (26). Instead of the troublesome rma several commentators opt for ˚tpva (“your quiver”), (21) J. DAY, “Echoes of Baal’s Seven Thunders and Lightnings in Psalm XXIX and Habakkuk III 9 and the Identity of the Seraphim in Isaiah VI”, VT 29 (1979) 143-51; M. O’CONNOR, Hebrew Verse Structure (Winona Lake, IN 1980) 236; F. I. ANDERSEN, Habakkuk (AB 25; New York 2001) 312. (22) GKC §97c; P. JOÜON – T. MURAOKA, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew: Part One: Orthography and Phonetics; Part Two: Morphology (Subsidia Biblica 14; Rome 1991) §100d. (23) CAD M/2, 147-48. (24) God of My Victory, 28. (25) Hebrew Verse Structure, 236. (26) E.g., see M. DAHOOD, Psalms I: 1-50 (AB 16; Garden City, NY 1961) 16, 24, 69.