"... Amos 5:26 ... The meaning of these two terms has long eluded translators and commentators. The Masoretes were not able to identify the terms and therefore vocalized both terms with the vowels of שִׁקּוּץ (“abomination, idol”). This uncertainty made its way into the early translations as well. The versions do not treat סכּות as a proper noun at all but as the common noun סֻכּוֹת (“sukkot,” “tent, tabernacle”). Thus, the Septagint reads τὴν σκηνήν, while the Vulgate reads tabernaculum, both indicating סֻכּוֹת (“sukkot,” “tent, tabernacle”) as the Hebrew Vorlage. The Peshitta also follows this interpretation, translating מִשְׁכָּנָה (“mishkanah,” “tent”). The author of the Damascus Document also chooses to read סכּות as סֻכּוֹת (“sukkot,” “tent, tabernacle”) in his interpretation of Amos 5:26 ..."

"... In Amos 5:26 סכות (סִכּוּת) and כִּיּוּן (כִּיּוּן) are proper names for foreign Gods. This is clear from the context of the passage: Sikkuth and Kaiwan are synonymous with ‘your images’; the final clause of verse 26 reads (‘that you made for yourselves’). Although both the Old Greek and Damascus Document interpret the proper name Sikkuth in terms of the construct form סֻכַּת (that is, סֻכָּה), neither identifies the proper name as the noun ‘tabernacle’. First of all, the respective plene forms of the proper name and construct noun (סִכּוּת and סֻכַּת) are morphologically distinct and cannot be confused ..."

"... Amos 5:26–27, a somewhat obscure allegation (in the form of a rhetorical question), followed by a prediction of deportation “beyond Damascus,” has here been transformed into a prophecy concerning rescue for the faithful in “the land of the north.” This midrash-like interpretation takes as its point of departure two enigmatic words in Amos 5:26: תוכס and ןויכ, which have been vocalized sikkut and kiyyun, respectively, in the Masoretic text. According to modern scholarship, these expressions most likely represent pejorative forms of the names of two Mesopotamian astral deities, Sakkut and Kaiwan. It is unlikely, though, that the author of the Damascus Document was aware of that. His interpretation seems to have been guided by ambition to find a contextually relevant meaning, and the observation that these strange names appear together with the Hebrew words for “king” (ךלמ) and “star” (בכוכ). Further, reading sukkôt (tents, tabernacles) rather than sikkut/ sakkut, this early interpreter managed to establish a connection to the promise in Amos 9:11, concerning the future restoration of “David’s fallen hut / tent ..."