[b-hebrew] Seir and El Paran

Arnaud Fournet fournet.arnaud at wanadoo.fr
Tue Dec 14 16:04:04 EST 2010

From: JimStinehart at aol.com

1.  $e-e-ir-ri at the Mitanni Letter IV: 115-118 obviously is some kind of a 
divine reference, in context.
Obviously not, as the word does not have a Dingir determinative.

I will accept your analysis that the meaning, however, is not “(Divine) 
 King”, as I initially had thought.

2.  $e-e-ri in Amarna Letter EA 288: 26 is the same Hurrian word, but this 
time it’s referring to a city north of the Dead Sea.  The importance of this 
city name being a divine Hurrian reference in the Mitanni Letter is that it 
makes perfect sense for Genesis 14: 6 to be telling us that XR-Y lived 
there.  It’s no surprise that Hurrians live at a place with a Hurrian name.
How long will you keep asserting that kind of sheer absurdity?
You keep transforming into pseudo-Hurrian words, words that are borrowings 
from Semitic and Akkadian in the first place.
Sharri written SHAR-Ri "king" is obviously borrowed from Akkadian.
Nearly all the words that you want to be "Hurrian" are Semitic in the first 

3.  Each of $e-e-ir-ri and $e-e-ri is close to the Biblical rendering, which 
probably initially was $(-R, and in the received text is $(-YR.  Since 
Hurrian has so many vowels, it was necessary for the early Hebrew author to 
use a letter not found in Hurrian, ayin, to represent Hurrian vowels in 
order to show the multi-syllabic aspect of this Hurrian name.

4.  The Biblical name )L P-)R-N matches beautifully to the Hurrian word “eli 
eli is not a Hurrian word but a borrowing from Akkadian.

Once again, it makes sense for Genesis 14: 6 to be telling us that the 
Hurrians/XR-Y lived at a place with a Hurrian name.  The Hurrians were never 
south of the Dead Sea, but are attested in Amarna Letter EA 197 as being in 
the central Transjordan north of the Dead Sea.

5.  The point is that Genesis 14: 6 tells us that the XR-Y were living at 
two places that have Hurrian names (even though it seems that I initially 
misinterpreted the meaning of one of those Hurrian names).  Places with 
Hurrian names cannot be south of the Dead Sea, much less at the Gulf of 
Aqaba, so the traditional interpretation of Genesis 14: 6 needs to be 
jettisoned.  Genesis 14: 6 and Amarna Letter EA 197 are in fact reporting 
the same historical event, though naturally Genesis 14: 6 reports this from 
a Hebrew point of view.
When do you plan to quit that theory?
Everybody told you it just does not work in any possible way.
Do you understand the word "procrustean mould"?
You keep distorting and ripping apart the words to make them what they 
obviously are not.
Adding, erasing and changing the letters to achieve impossible equations.

Arnaud Fournet

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list