Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Niels Peter Lemche <npl AT teol.ku.dk>]

GAG, W. von Soden, Grudriss der akkadischen Grammatik, 1952, 2. ed. 1969,
still the standard Ggrammer of Akkadian. I guess that Safran means
Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian.

The argument about Ur-Kasdim as an anachronism has been around for several
generations of scholars. I do not know who proposed it the first time. Maybe
Westermann has it.


NPL

> -----Original Message-----
> From: peter_kirk AT sil.org [SMTP:peter_kirk AT sil.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, 04 January, 2000 21:33
> To:   Biblical Hebrew
> Subject:      Re[2]: Ur Kasdim II
> 
> Please can you explain "before NB and NA". And what is GAG?
> 
> Of course even if we can date the expression "Ur Kasdim", it tells us 
> nothing about where Abraham may have come from, and not much about the 
> dating of Genesis or the relevant part of it (11:28,31). No doubt the 
> author would have used the name in use at his/her own time for the 
> city which (according to his/her narration) Abraham came from, at 
> least if it was still a well-known place. I doubt if the author had 
> the sense of anachronism which some of us have now, which stops us 
> saying that these places are in Turkey or Iraq (though apparently it's 
> OK to use Greek names like Syria and Mesopotamia anachronistically). 
> And the name may have been further updated by editors after the 
> original composition of Genesis.
> 
> Genesis 11:31 also seems to imply that (in the author's mind at least) 
> Ur was quite a long way from Haran. It would be rather ridiculous to 
> set out on a long journey to Canaan only to abandon it at the next 
> town!
        [Niels Peter Lemche]  Fine point.

> On the other hand, we have the data, new to this thread, that 
> according to Deuteronomy 26:5 Abraham was an Aramean [Niels Peter Lemche]
> No, it is Jacob who became a great nation. In Genesis, 
> Bethuel and Laban are described as Arameans (25:20, 28:5, 31:20,24 - 
> Aramaic words are put on the latter's lips, 31:47) and also presented 
> as Abraham's nephew (compare 24:47 with 11:27,29) and great-nephew. 
> This name may seem to be anachronistic for the traditional patriarchal 
> age, but perhaps was given in the sense of "inhabitants of the area 
> known as Aram", or maybe they were indeed the ancestors of the people 
> who later became well-known as the Arameans. Note that none of them 
> are ever described as Kasdim. The data would fit with Terah's clan 
> being (proto-)Arameans who had migrated to a southern Ur (later known 
> as Ur Kasdim) but later migrated northwards, perhaps back to their 
> place of origin in what later become known as Aram or Paddan-Aram.
> 
> Peter Kirk
> 
> 
> ______________________________ Reply Separator
> _________________________________
> Subject: Re: Ur Kasdim II
> Author:  <yonsaf AT beitberl.beitberl.ac.il> at Internet
> Date:    04/01/2000 12:23
> 
> 
> Niels Peter Lemche wrote:
> 
> > By the way, CANE does not have anything about Arameans before the Iron
> Age
> > (Vol II, the overview of Aramean history and civilization by Paul Dion).
> Nor 
> > does Liverani, Stora (1988), nor Kuhrt, The Ancient Near East, 1995.
> 
> [JDSafren] True, that is what I claimed. The 12th century BCE is the
> beginning o
> f the
> Iron Age.
> 
> > Kuhrt
> > dos not reckon any source mentioning the Chaldeans before the 9th
> century
> > (but says that they probably were in southern Mesopotamia befofre that
> date.
> 
> [JDSafren] I am not talking about Southern Mesopotamia, and am oposed to
> the 
> groundless claim that Ur Kasdim was located in Southern Mesootamia.
> The Aramaic-speaking Chaldeans entered Southern Mesopotamia around the
> same time
>  that
> the Aramaic-speaking Arameans entered Syria, It was because of this that
> Babylon
> ia
> slowly went over from Akkadian to Aramean. It is to be concluded that both
> kindr
> ed
> peoples had originatedin the same area.
> 
> BTW, you must take into account that in the Bible the Chaldeans are called
> kasdi
> m
> <kasdu, whereas in the Babtlonian inscriptions they are already called
> kaldu - s
> hift
> of $d . ld like the  shift of $t > lt, as in  i$stu > ultu). In other
> words, the
> gentilic kasdim entered the Hebrew vocabulary before the consonantal shift
> had 
> occurred, which is, I believe (my GAG is not handy) before NB and NA.
> Sincerely,
> --
> Jonathan D. Safren
> Dept. of Biblical Studies
> Beit Berl College
> Beit Berl Post Office 44905
> Israel
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: Peter_Kirk AT sil.org
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to
> leave-b-hebrew-14207U AT franklin.oit.unc.e
> du
> To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.
> 
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: npl AT teol.ku.dk
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to
> $subst('Email.Unsub')
> To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.