she'-shak (sheshakh, as if "humiliation"; compare shakhakh, "to crouch"): The general explanation is that this is "a cypherform of `Babel' (Babylon)" which is the word given as equivalent to "Sheshach" by the Targum (Jer 25:26; 51:41; the Septuagint omits in both passages). By the device known as Atbas 'atbas, i.e. disguising a name by substituting the last letter of the alphabet for the first, the letter next to the last for the second, etc., sh-sh-k is substituted for babhel. This theory has not failed of opposition. Delitzsch holds that "Sheshach" represents Sis-ku-KI of an old Babylonian regal register, which may have stood for a part of the city of Babylon. (For a refutation of this interpretation see Schrader, KAT 2, 415; COT,II , 108 f.) Lauth, too, takes "Sheshach" to be a Hebraization of Siska, a Babylonian district. Winckler and Sayce read Uru-azagga. Finally, Cheyne and a number of critics hold that the word has crept into the text, being "a conceit of later editors."
See further JEREMIAH, 6.
Horace J. Wolf