locust / grasshopper / cricket

The locust is the most important insect in the Bible, being mentioned many more times than any other insect. Although there are nine Hebrew words in the Bible which refer to locusts, the most common one is ’arbeh. The equivalent in Greek is akris, and in Latin it is locusta. These words certainly refer to the locust rather than to the grasshopper. All locusts and grasshoppers belong to the family Acrididae, which is a family within the order Orthoptera, or “straight-winged” insects. Many species are found in the land of Israel and Egypt, but the most important are the Migratory Locust Locusta migratoria, the Desert Locust Schistocerca gregaria, and the Moroccan Locust Dociostaurus moroccanus. All three species are an important local food and are probably all called ’arbeh in the Bible.

Grasshoppers and locusts are both six-legged, winged insects that are characterized by the fact that their third pair of legs is elongated and adapted to hopping. The lower portion of these legs has a row of spikes that are used both for making sounds and as a means of defense. The front wings are narrow, straight, and stiff. When not being used to fly, they function as a cover for thin, membrane-like hind wings, which are much larger and colored, and which are folded together like a Chinese fan. When the locust or grasshopper flies, it hops into the air spreading out its wings as it does so. It flies with a slight clattering sound, made by the stiff front wings striking each other.

Locusts differ from grasshoppers mainly in that they form swarms at certain periods and migrate to new areas, which they colonize. At other times they live either solitary or in small groups. Their reproduction rate varies with the climatic conditions. Eggs are laid in the soil in small packets, and hatching is related to the degree of humidity. In dry periods only a few hatch, but in periods of good rainfall they suddenly hatch out in exceptionally large numbers.

Unlike most other insects, locusts do not go through stages in which they exist as larvae or caterpillars. They emerge from the eggs as nymphs, which are simply tiny wingless locusts with undeveloped hopper legs. The nymphs, which can only crawl around, feed on green vegetation, consuming many times their own body weight each day. As they grow bigger and develop, they shed their skins. Their hopping legs develop before their wings, so that they pass through a stage when they can hop but not fly. At this stage, when they are referred to as “hoppers”, they exist in less dense masses than as nymphs, having spread out a little, but since they are now eating even more than before, they can still cause considerable damage to crops. Once they develop into adults they can both hop and fly. If the climatic conditions are right and exceptionally large numbers have developed to this stage, they completely devastate the vegetation where they have been developing. When this happens they begin to congregate in preparation for swarming. In other words they come together and migrate as a group to greener pastures, flying together in large swarms. At this congregating stage, during the migration and immediately after it, they present a major threat to crops and other vegetation, on which they feed unceasingly.

A locust swarm may consist of billions of locusts. A report of a single swarm in 1889 estimated for that swarm to cover 5,500 square kilometers (about 2,000 square miles). Certainly even in recent times swarms have been known large enough to blot out the sun like a large black cloud. The clattering of wings as the locusts approach is a sound hard to forget. Where the swarm lands, even temporarily, every green bush or clump of grass in sight is attacked by the locusts, and the sound of them munching on the leaves is clearly audible, sometimes for hours. Afterwards, hardly a single green leaf or blade of grass can be seen, and many bushes even have the bark eaten off, leaving them bare.

Against such enormous numbers ancient peoples felt absolutely helpless. There was no way they could stop the destruction. The lighting of grass fires helped only in a very small way. Ironically it is when locusts swarm like this that they can be easily caught in large numbers for eating. They are often caught in blankets, fishing nets, and baskets. The lower part of the hopping legs is snapped off, and they are cooked by toasting, grilling, frying, or broiling. In some places they are also eaten raw. When toasted and salted they taste a little like salted peanuts.

Some commentators have pointed out that the plague of locusts in Egypt probably provided the Israelites with food in the Arabian and Sinai deserts, since this is the usual migration route of locusts in that part of the world.

Following is a summary of the development cycle of the major locust species: Nymphs, which can only crawl, develop to a hopping stage; the hoppers develop wings and become adult locusts; if climatic conditions are right, these adults gather into swarms and migrate to new locations; the females lay eggs, and the whole cycle is repeated. There are thus four discernible phases: nymphs, hoppers, resident adults, and swarming or migrating adults. It is possible that chasil refers to the crawling nymph, yeleq to the juvenile hopper, ’arbeh to the resident adult, and gazam to the swarming adult. However, this is far from proven, as the words seem to be used almost interchangeably when referring to locust plagues.

Crickets and katydids: Crickets are a nocturnal relative of the locusts and grasshoppers. Some types have wings, others do not. They are usually black or brown, with shorter rounder bodies, and they shelter during the day under rocks or logs, or, in the case of the so-called mole crickets, in holes that they dig. At night they make characteristic high-pitched chirping sounds, which carry a surprisingly long way. Each species makes a slightly different sound. Like locusts and grasshoppers they feed on vegetation, usually leaves.

Katydids are similar to crickets but are usually green and have wings. They are active at night, when they make cricket-like chirping sounds, but settle during the day underneath leaves in trees. Their wings are leaf-shaped, and with their green color they have excellent camouflage. Some katydids eat other insects.

Both crickets and katydids have extremely long feelers.

Given their large numbers and swarming characteristics, it is small wonder that locusts were a symbol of a vast attacking army against which there was no defense. They were also a symbol of divine punishment.

The Migratory Locust Locusta migratoria is found in many parts of the world, except North America. In these areas it should be easy to find a local word. However, in some countries with high rainfall this and other species of locust do not swarm in the same way that they do in the Middle East and the drier parts of Africa. In these countries it may be necessary in some contexts to use a phrase such as “swarms of locusts” rather than simply “locusts”. In areas where locusts are not known, a phrase like “large/giant grasshopper” can usually be substituted.

The Hebrew words gev, gov and govay are related to a verb meaning “to swarm” or “to gather together”, and thus the reference is almost certainly to the locust.

The word tselatsal (Deuteronomy 28:42; Isaiah 18:1) represents the sound of insects’ wings, and the reference is most likely to the sound made by a swarm of locusts. The English versions that have “whirring” or “buzzing” make some attempt at reflecting this, but “buzzing” is inadequate as a description of the sound such a swarm makes. “Clattering”, “chirping”, “whirring”, or “fluttering” comes closest in English to representing the sound represented by the Hebrew word.

In many Bantu languages in Africa, and in other languages where ideophones occur which express the sound of thousands of whirring wings, such ideophones are a good equivalent. Elsewhere a noun phrase, modified by an adverbial expression similar to the English, can be used.

In most contexts the word chagav seems to mean “grasshopper”, the exception being 2 Chronicles 7:13, where the reference is to locusts. In the two passages where the grasshopper symbolizes something small and insignificant (Numbers 13:33 and Isaiah 40:22), it may not be possible to capture the right inference by translating literally. In such cases the translator is free to use some other insect that is symbolic of small size and insignificance in the local culture, such as “ant”, “louse”, “flea”, and others. In cases where no insect name carries this symbolism, the name of an animal with the correct connotations can be used; for example, “mouse” or “squirrel”.

Source: All Creatures Great and Small: Living things in the Bible (UBS Helps for Translators)

See also locust, locust (different kinds in Joel 1:4 and 2:25), and as thick as locusts.

Scriptures Plain & Simple (Mark 1:1-8)

Barclay Newman, a translator on the teams for both the Good News Bible and the Contemporary English Version, translated passages of the New Testament into English and published them in 2014, “in a publication brief enough to be non-threatening, yet long enough to be taken seriously, and interesting enough to appeal to believers and un-believers alike.” The following is the translation of Mark 1:1-8:

This is the Best News Ever,
       and it’s about Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

It began, just as God had announced
       in the book by the prophet Isaiah:

              I’m sending my messenger
                     to prepare the way for you.
              Listen to the voice shouting in the desert,
                     “Make a straight path for the Coming One’.”

So John Dipper showed up in the desert,
shouting for everyone to hear: “It’s turn around time!
       Do this and be baptized, if you hope to be forgiven!”

From Jerusalem and all over Judea,

       multitudes swarmed around John like flies —
they openly confessed their sins,
       and he baptized them in the River Jordan.

John Dipper wore garments of camel hair
with a leather strap around his waist —
       his food was locusts and honey from the fields.

His message: “Someone more powerful will come,
       and I’m not worthy to be his lowest slave.
My baptism is merely with water —
       his baptism is with the Holy Spirit!”

Translation commentary on Mark 1:6

Exegesis:

ēn … endedumenos ‘was clothed’; this verbal phrase, consisting of the auxiliary verb eimi ‘to be’ plus the participle of the main verb enduō ‘to clothe’ does not mean, as it would in classical Greek, ‘had been clothed’; it rather denotes the habitual nature of John’s dress. ‘And John clothed himself,’ or ‘was clothed.’

enduō (6.9; 15.20) ‘clothe,’ ‘dress’: the forerunner’s dress and diet mark him as a man of the wilderness, an ascetic, a Nazirite (Lk. 1.15); his clothing is similar to that worn by Elijah (2 Kings 1.8; cf. Zech. 13.4). Such simple and hardy manner of life was characteristic of one who lived in the wilderness (Lk. 1.80) and was the object of comment by Jesus (Mt. 11.8, Lk. 7.25).

trichas kamēlou ‘hairs of a camel’ does not mean a camel’s skin. It stands for a robe, long and loose (cf. Mt. 3.4, to enduma autou ‘his garment’) woven from camel’s hair (cf. Moulton & Milligan; cf. Zürcher Bibel: Und Johannes war bekleidet, mit [einem Gewand aus] Kamelhaaren).

zōnēn dermatinēn ‘leather girdle’: a waistband, or girdle, which holds the robe at the waist, enabling it to be tucked up for rapid walking. The zōnē is not exactly a belt, such as used by modern Western men, but more in the nature of a waistband wherein money (cf. Mk. 6.8) and other things could be kept.

osphus (only here in Mark) ‘waist’: the place where a belt or girdle is fastened.

kai (ēn) ēsthōn ‘and was eating’: this verbal phrase, consisting of the imperfect of the verb eimi ‘to be’ plus the present participle of the main verb is quite common in Mark (16 instances in all – cf. Taylor, 45). ‘He (habitually) ate,’ ‘his food was….’

akris ‘locust’: to this day the locust is eaten especially by the poorer people in Arabia, Africa, and Syria.

meli agrion ‘wild honey’: there is no need to think of vegetable substances which are found on the leaves of certain trees. Natural wild honey is meant.

Translation:

The word now used to introduce this verse in the Revised Standard Version (cf. “and” in American Standard Version and King James Version), is an attempt to represent the transitional value of Greek kai, literally ‘and.’ It should not, of course, be taken in any temporal sense. In most translations it is probably best to omit any transition, though if some appropriate particle can be found to soften the abrupt transition between verses 5 and 6, such would be justified.

In parts of the world in which camels are not known, one is immediately confronted with the problem of what to do with the name of this strange animal. Some people have thought that Eskimos would want to say ‘cloth made of polar bear fur’ and people from the South Pacific would understand most satisfactorily if one used ‘rough cloth made from palm fiber.’ These types of adaptations can be meaningful, but they do not solve the real problems. In the first place, even the most isolated peoples after the introduction of reading, soon become familiar with many areas of the world around them, and very quickly they learn that people in other parts of the world are quite different. Even a very rudimentary education soon teaches them that the life of the Middle East is not similar to their own. Accordingly, they tend to react to such artificially adapted translations as being paternalistic, since they seem to imply that the native people would never learn about the differences in the outside world. On the other hand, it is not very meaningful simply to borrow the word camel in transliterated form and give the people no idea what sort of creature this is. One way to solve this problem is to employ certain descriptive classifiers, which may be used in initial translations and then discarded as the level of education in an area rises. For example, one may say ‘hair of an animal called camel,’ which helps to identify the transliterated form as a name and specifies the class of objects involved. In some of the Quechua dialects of South America translators have used ‘hair of a llama-like animal called camel,’ a somewhat fuller descriptive classifier. In general, however, it is preferable to use the shortest possible expression which will provide the basis for correct, even though partial, understanding.

Since many different peoples in the world eat one or more varieties of locusts or grasshoppers, this verse does not seem to them so strange as it does to us. However, it is important that in obtaining a word for locusts one be sure an edible variety is specified. In some languages, for example, there must be as many as ten different words for such insects, and only certain classes are regarded as edible.

In regions where such insects are not known, one can likewise use a descriptive device, e.g. ‘insects called locusts’ or simply a generic term ‘a kind of insect.’

‘Wild honey’ is most often translated ‘honey from the forest’ (cf. Indonesian ‘wood-honey’). In Copainalá Zoque it is actually called ‘gentle honey,’ since it is made by wild bees in the forest, which, however, are stingless.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

SIL Translator's Notes on Mark 1:6

1:6a

John was clothed in camel’s hair: John probably wore a long, loose robe made with a rough kind of cloth that was woven from the hair of a camel. It was not made from camel skin with the hair still on it. Clothing made from camel’s hair was commonly worn by poor people and by prophets.

In some languages, it may sound like John had expensive fur clothes. If that is true in your language, it may be necessary to add a word such as “only” or “simple” to indicate that John did not wear fancy clothes. For example:

John’s clothes were only made from woven camel hair
-or-
John wore a simple robe made from woven camel hair
-or-
John was dressed in a rough coat of camel’s hair (Revised English Bible)

See the General Comment on 1:6a–b at the end of the notes for 1:6b for another suggestion.

was clothed in camel’s hair: The phrase was clothed in camel’s hair is passive. In some languages it may be more natural to use an active phrase. For example, the CSB says:

wore a camel-hair garment (CSB)

camel: If a camel is an unknown animal in your language, consider using one of the following options:

• Use a loan word plus a general term. For example:

an animal called camel

• Use a general word such as “animal.” For example:

clothes made of animal hair

• Omit the reference to an animal or camel and just translate the significance of this kind of clothing. For example:

simple clothes/robe like a prophet

Avoid using a phrase that describes the appearance or usefulness of a camel. That may distract your readers from the actual significance of the clothing.

1:6b

with a leather belt around his waist: This belt was probably a piece of animal skin that John tied around his robe at the waist. It was not like the leather belts that can be bought in a store.

Here are some other ways to translate this:

strip of rawhide
-or-
belt made of animal skin

In some languages the word belt may already imply that it is worn around the waist. In such languages, you may not need to translate the words “around the waist” explicitly.

General Comment on 1:6a–b

It may be helpful to include a footnote with information about the clothes and belt in 1:6a–b. For example:

This kind of clothing/robe was worn by poor people and by prophets. The prophet Elijah also wore a leather belt (2 Kings 1:8).

1:6c

In Greek this sentence begins with a common conjunction that is often translated as “and” (see the New International Version). This conjunction connects 1:6c to 1:6a–b. 1:6a–b describes John’s clothing and 1:6c describes John’s food. Connect these facts in a natural way in your language.

His food was locusts and wild honey: The Greek verb that the Berean Standard Bible translates as His food was indicates that John ate locusts and wild honey as his regular food. In some languages, a word like food is not used with things such as honey. If your language is like this, you will need to use a different word that fits with the word “honey.” For example:

His food was locusts and his drink was wild honey.

locusts: The word locusts refers to insects that resemble very large grasshoppers. If you have a word for “locust” or “grasshopper,” be sure that it refers to a type that people can eat. If locusts or grasshoppers are not known in the language area, you may use one of the following options:

• Use a general term plus a loan word. For example:

insects called locusts

• Use a general term. For example:

insects/bugs

• Use a phrase that describes the significance of this kind of food. For example:

simple food that he could find in the wilderness

If you use this option, the description will include “wild honey.” You may want to add a footnote to describe both foods.

It may be helpful to include a footnote that explains the significance of these foods. For example:

In Palestine, people who wandered from place to place with their flocks often ate locusts and wild honey. People who lived in cities or towns did not usually eat these kinds of food.

wild honey: The words wild honey refer to honey that wild bees make. It contrasts with honey that people get by keeping bees to produce honey for them. If people do not keep bees in your culture, the word “wild” may not be necessary. Use a natural expression in your language. For example:

water of wild-bees
-or-
honey that he found

© 2008 by SIL International®

Made available under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License (CC BY-SA) creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0

All Scripture quotations in this publication, unless otherwise indicated, are from The Holy Bible, Berean Standard Bible.
BSB is produced in cooperation with Bible Hub, Discovery Bible, OpenBible.com, and the Berean Bible Translation Committee.