Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Interior Yods and Vavs

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: JimStinehart AT aol.com
  • To: JimStinehart AT aol.com, jkilmon AT historian.net, b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Interior Yods and Vavs
  • Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 09:40:35 EDT


The Hebrew alphabet has no vowels. In the defective spelling of the oldest
Biblical Hebrew (prior to the 1st millennium BCE), it is likely that no
vowel indicators were used either. Most proper names in early parts of the
Bible have no vowel indicators, having no interior yod or vav. But there are
some notable exceptions. Is that of great significance?

Consider first that in the beginning, before interior vavs or yods were
added, it is likely that: (1) Genesis 6: 3 had (LM, meaning “eternal”; (2)
Genesis 21: 33 had )L (LM, meaning “Lord Eternal” as a grand title for
YHWH; and (3) Genesis 14: 1 had MLK (LM as Chedorlaomer’s kingly title,
whose
meaning is uncertain, but possibly could have been “King Eternal”. To 1st
millennium BCE scribes, Genesis 14: 1 looked potentially blasphemous. Why
should Chedorlaomer, an enemy of Abraham and Lot, have a title, namely MLK
(LM, that looked suspiciously like beloved YHWH’s grand epithet, )L (LM?
For
the rational reason of ruling out that potential blasphemy (not randomly!),
1st millennium BCE scribes changed two of those three references under the
pretense of updating defective spelling to full spelling. (1) Genesis 6: 3
was left as (LM, meaning “eternal”, not needing to be changed; (2) an
internal vav was added to Genesis 21: 33, making YHWH’s title )L (WLM,
thereby
confirming/re-confirming that the meaning was “Lord Eternal”; and (3) most
importantly, an internal yod was added to Genesis 14: 1, making Chedorlaomer’
s title MLK (YLM, thereby neatly precluding a meaning of “King Eternal”
[which was the whole point of adding an interior vav at Genesis 21: 33 and
adding an interior yod at Genesis 14: 1 in the first place]. [Interestingly,
the last word of Jeremiah 49: 36 reads (WLM, but this is often viewed as
being a mistake for an intended (YLM.]

The key points I am starting to make here are as follows.

1. When 1st millennium BCE scribes put an interior vav or yod into a
proper name in an old part of the Bible, in my opinion that was not done
randomly, but rather had a rational, discernible purpose. The clearest case
was
when post-exilic scribes thought that they were thereby deftly avoiding a
potential blasphemy.

2. We should examine the original version of these proper names, deleting
the interior vavs and yods, to discover what the pre-exilic authors actually
intended.

3. Yet of equal importance (though this further point has not been
illustrated on this thread yet), if an interior vav in a proper name in an
old part
of the Bible has no discernible purpose, then it likely was there from day
#1, and may have absolutely nothing to do with updating defective spelling
to full-spelling, in which case the interior vav/W may be a true ancient
consonant for all purposes.

The broader point is that if we closely examine every proper name in an old
part of the Bible that has an interior vav or yod and ask why that is the
case, we may be able to make great discoveries. Here, the original version
of Chedorlaomer’s kingly title [without the later-added interior yod], namely
MLK (LM, is of great help in figuring out who King Chedorlaomer is
historically, because the six-letter kingly title MLK (LM is historically
attested
(at Ugarit) in the Late Bronze Age.

One important linguistic key to understanding the Patriarchal narratives is
to focus on the interior vavs and yods in proper names in the text.

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page