[b-hebrew] H-XT-Y at II Samuel 11: 3

jimstinehart at aol.com jimstinehart at aol.com
Sat Jul 31 17:05:56 EDT 2010


Dr. Arnaud Fournet:
 
You wrote:  “The only thing i can say is that Hurrian ebri "lord" or erbi "dog" and Uriyah cannot be the same name [even though Uriyah may be a distortion of Urhiya, which remains an optional speculation] and the XeTh and the Xiti cannot be the same name [in addition there is a millenium gap in between]. The rest is darkness.”
 
Those linguistic issues are the key here, and are the type of issues that are fitting for the b-hebrew list..  Biblical scholars have been unable to make any sense out of any of the following names:  BR(;  $M-)BR;  BR-%(;  B)RY;  (PR-W-N;  )RYW-K;  and )WRY-H.  But with your help, we can see that all 7 of these names have the identical non-Semitic root, and that all these people are the Biblical “Hittites” -- that is, an historical non-Semitic people in Canaan who are not the Hittites from eastern Anatolia, but whose homeland is immediately south of the Hittites, and who for 300 years contended with the Hittites for control of Syria, until their catastrophic defeat by the Hittites near the end of the Amarna Age.
 
The key is that in this non-Semitic language, B and P and W are often interchangeable, especially regarding this common word.  In addition, the eastern version of this non-Semitic language had metathesis, where the order of the two consonants in this basic common word is reversed.
 
1.  BR
 
(a)  At Genesis 14: 2:  (i) BR(;  (ii) $M-)BR, where $M- is a well-known prefix;  and (iii) BR-%(, where -%( is a well-known suffix.  We know from the example of (LM at Genesis 14: 1 that a Hebrew ayin can be used to represent the true vowel E in this non-Semitic language, because (LM is usually viewed as being Elam, a word that is essentially the same as Elami in this non-Semitic language, and that is similar to Elammatum in Akkadian.  So viewing Hebrew aleph and Hebrew ayin as being used here to represent true vowels in this non-Semitic language, we see these three personal names as being common words in this non-Semitic language based on ebri, meaning “lord” or “princeling”.
 
(b)  B)RY at Genesis 26: 34.  I view that as [)]-B-)R-Y, representing the Hurrian e-bi-ir-i.  Where the final suffix –ni is added, meaning “the”, we have e-bi-ir-ni attested (at p. 19 of the Fournet/Bomhard website).  If one focuses on the true consonants B-R, and sees the rest as Hebrew attempts at vowel indicators for this non-Semitic language, it’s clear.
 
2.  PR
 
At Genesis 23: 8:  ‘PRWN = ‘PR-W-N = e-pi-ri-wu-ni = “of the lord/princeling”.  The vav/W there is genitive case.  Epri is a slight variant in spelling of ebri, here with P instead of B, a genitive case ending, and the common suffix “the”.
 
3.  WR
 
)WRY-H at II Samuel 11: 3.  That’s ewri, being the same word, but being spelled with a W rather than a B or P.     

4.  RW
 
)RYW-K at Genesis 14: 1.  This has the W [instead of B or P], like “Uriah”.  But here’s the famous metathesis from the east, where instead of WR as above, we now see RW in this attested non-Semitic name.  Per Richard Hess at p. 37 of “Amarna Personal Names”:  “The language represented by this PN is Hurrian.  A-ra-wa-na­ may contain the element ewri ‘lord’ if one allows for a metathesis of the r and the w.”  A 2003 source confirms the 1941 insight of E.A. Speiser as to this metathesis in the east:  “Ras Shamra examples of Hurrian names [at Ugarit] indicate a tendency in Syria-Palestine for the West Hurrian dialect. The clearest evidence is in the names compounded with the noun iwri “lord, king” as the initial element. This is consistently spelled iwri, indicating the West Hurrian dialect. In the East Hurrian (Nuzi) dialect, the noun appeared with the metathesis of w and r as irwi.  The following statement of Speiser (1941: 68) is helpful:  ‘. . . the parade example of the metathesis is ewri “lord,” which common-Hurrian form is opposed only by Nuzi erwi. Here the choice of this or that phonologic alternant has become characteristic of a dialectal division which separates Eastern Hurrian from other groups which are predominantly western.’”  Thomas F. McDaniel, “The Song of Deborah:  Poetry in Dialect -- A Philological Study of Judges 5” (2003), at p. 48.
 
Conclusion.  These are the Biblical “Hittites”.  These are the XT people, H-XT-Y, and they’re also the H-XR-Y and the H-XW-Y as well, with H-XT-Y and H-XW-Y being appropriate Biblical nicknames for these people.  The Syrian “brothers” of these Biblical “Hittites” out east have attested names featuring XT/XW.  Xu-Ti-b-Te$$ub, which features X-T as the first two consonants, and X-W as the first two letters [where the W here represents the vowel U].  The classic generic theophoric name of all time for this non-Semitic people is Xu-Ti-ya, which likewise features X-T as the first two consonants, and X-W as the first two letters.
 
The Hebrew author re-cycled the simple non-Semitic word ebri in many different variations, because his contemporary Hebrew audience knew only a tiny handful of non-Semitic words.  They knew ebri, and knew it could be epri or ewri or erwi.  The foregoing linguistic analysis (i) explains who the Biblical “Hittites” were, and (ii) explains all 7 above names.  One cannot understand what the Hebrew Bible is saying here absent a basic knowledge of this non-Semitic language.
 
Jim Stinehart
Shanghai, China (temporarily)






-----Original Message-----
From: Arnaud Fournet <fournet.arnaud at wanadoo.fr>
To: kwrandolph at gmail.com; jimstinehart at aol.com
Cc: b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Sat, Jul 31, 2010 10:33 am
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] H-XT-Y at II Samuel 11: 3


----- Original Message ----- From: jimstinehart at aol.com 
To: fournet.arnaud at wanadoo.fr ; kwrandolph at gmail.com 
Cc: b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org 
Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2010 3:58 PM 
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] H-XT-Y at II Samuel 11: 3 
 
1. You wrote: “Assuming that Hiti can have a relationship with some kind of Hurro-Urartian population, How do you explain that a person of that kind could ever be commander of an *Egyptian* garrison? [NB: as far as I'm concerned the idea can be discarded at first glimpse.]” 
 
We know from the Amarna Letters that Egypt often used non-Semitic maryannu as its military agents. 
*** 
This very much sounds your own interpretation. 
Who else writes that? 
A. 
*** 
 
Not only was Arawa-na the commander of the Egyptian garrison at Kumidu, but also Biryawaza was Pharaoh’s military man in the Transjordan, per Amarna Letters EA 196 and EA 197. 
*** 
I have two problems with that name Biryawaza in EA 196 and 197. 
The first one is that the first syllable was originally read nam- instead of bir-, so there's a doubt on the reading. The second one is that the last syllable is -zi not -za. 
So in fact, this **Biryawaza is in fact at least Bir-ia-wa-zi and maybe even Nam-ia-wa-zi. 
All this makes the Hurrianicity of that person seriously dubious (either as a Mitanni Aryan or a Hurrian properly). 
 
In addition this dubious name was succeeded by another dubious A-ri-wa-na, of dubious ethnicity. 
I agree that A-ri-wa-na includes A-ri- which can be a Hurrian formative of Person names, but -wana is not. 
 
The data is not clean. 
A. 
*** 
 
 
The civil war in Canaan in Year 13, which accounts for the bulk of the Amarna Letters from the southern half of Canaan, pitted one coalition, which included princeling rulers with non-Semitic names, against another coalition, which was made up almost exclusively of princeling rulers with non-Semitic names. 
 
If people with non-Semitic names like that are the Biblical “Hittites”, then in the 14th century BCE, everywhere one looked, the ruling class was primarily such people. No wonder those fully historical non-Semitic people made it into the Bible. 
 
 
2. You wrote: “Moreover it seems that Uriyah the Hiti belongs to a period *younger* than this time, doesn't he?” 
 
Yes, but the phrase H-XT-Y goes back to the first Hebrews. 
*** 
On account of what? 
A. 
*** 
 
Who are the H-XT-Y? 
*** 
(1) Unknown, or (2) maybe some Hurro-Urartian people as we discussed before. 
Hatti remains potentially comparable with Xiti as a is not infrequently rendered by e or i. 
A. 
*** 
 
Is H-XT-Y a nickname for a people who are properly called H-XR-Y, and who have a second nickname in this same text: H-XW-Y? Many of the Syrian “brothers” of the non-Semitic princelings in 14th century BCE Canaan had names whose first two consonants were XT, and whose first two letters in those same names were XW (if W in that context is viewed as being the vowel U). So all three names may be referring to the same non-Semitic people, who were so prominent throughout Canaan in the Amarna Age: H-XT-Y and H-XR-Y and H-XW-Y. In all 3 cases, there’s only one letter different in the Biblical name/nickname. And in all 3 cases, the name or nickname fits these particular non-Semitic people linguistically. Are they the Biblical “Hittites”, being fully historical, and not having west Semitic names? 
*** 
I don't understand the way you are using "historical" and "non historical". 
What do these words mean? 
A. 
*** 
 
3. You wrote: “I cannot see the "similarity" between Aryokh and Arawa[xx]. Less than 25% match.” 
 
The suffix in the first case is –ka, meaning “son” or “Junior”, etc. The suffix in the second case is –na, meaning “the”. So the suffixes differ. 
*** 
1. I can see no -a in Aryokh. 
2. Aryo- and Arawa are obvious not the same root. 
3. These two persons are apparently separated by half a millenium. 
A. 
*** 
 
The Akkadian-style spelling of )RYW-K is Arawa-ka [whereas a non-Semitic spelling of that same name would be Eriwi-ka]. 
*** 
Do you have a reference for these two claims? 
A. 
*** 
 
The other name is Arawa-na (per the Akkadian-style spelling which seems to be favored for this name). There’s only one letter difference. The root is identical. It’s the same root, having the identical meaning, but with different suffixes, that’s all. 
*** 
Actually the name Aryokh and Arawa[na?] have two letters in common -a- and -r- and maybe three if we kindly add the initial consonant. 
A. 
*** 
 
Don’t you see that the critical importance of the name Arawa-na in the Amarna Letters, regarding the southern Beqa Valley, is that it means that the consonant reversal (metathesis) from the east was known in Canaan? Erwi, eriwi, arawa -- they’re all the same as “Uriah”, once the metathesis from the east is recognized. It’s the same non-Semitic word, being one of the few non-Semitic words that the early Hebrews could be expected to know. Indeed, that particular non-Semitic word, in many different forms, seems to be the linguistic hallmark of the Biblical “Hittites”, the XT people, H-XT-Y, a fully historical people in Canaan who did not have west Semitic names. 
Jim Stinehart 
*** 
I believe in good data, properly discussed as far it is possible to do so, descriptive neutral words with preferably no hidden premices and step-by-step reasoning. 
We are very far from that here: unclear names, quite demonstrably different whatever they were and conclusions popping out of the hat, that wasn't there the step before. To be more precise it seems to be procrustean hat that transforms Uriyah, Arawa[xx] and erwi into the same thing. 
I cannot even describe what your line of reasoning is and i would not be able to explain to somebody else what you wanted to say. 
The only thing i can say is that Hurrian ebri "lord" or erbi "dog" and Uriyah cannot be the same name [even though Uriyah may be a distortion of Urhiya, which remains an optional speculation] and the XeTh and the Xiti cannot be the same name [in addition there is a millenium gap in between]. The rest is darkness. 
 
Arnaud Fournet 




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list