Biblical Hebrew Forum

[JimStinehart AT aol.com]

Where Did Judah Sire Twins by His Daughter-in-Law Tamar?
 
A close analysis of the Hebrew letters in the names of three geographical 
sites in chapter 38 of Genesis may enable us to determine where Judah sired 
twins 
by his daughter-in-law Tamar (after Tamar dressed as a prostitute).
 
The only chapter of Genesis devoted to Jacob’s son Judah is chapter 38.  
Where did Judah go when he left his father’s family to strike out on his own? 
 It 
is usually presumed that Judah wandered south.  But if my theory of the case 
is right that Judah’s father Jacob had grown up in northern Canaan, not in 
southern Canaan, then we might expect Judah to wander back up north, almost 
as far 
as Sur/“Tyre”.  Let’s examine the three geographical sites named in chapter 
38 of Genesis with that in mind.
 
In two cases, chapter 38 of Genesis seems to cut off part or all of the first 
syllable of the city names it cites.  As with other non-Hebrew names, the 
author of the Patriarchal narratives frequently leaves out one syllable.  We 
are 
looking for prominent Late Bronze Age sites, whose names pre-date the Hebrews.
 
1.  Most scholars see “Chezib” at Genesis 38: 5 as being an alternative 
rendering of “Achzib”.  While agreeing fully with that linguistic argument, I 
will depart from the scholars and look to historical Achzib, in northern 
Canaan, 
as the likely place where Judah sojourned after leaving his father’s family. 
 
Historical Achzib, a prominent site in the Late Bronze age south of Sur/“Tyre”
, is:  aleph-kaf-zayin-yod-bet.
 
At Genesis 38: 5, this comes out as:  kaf-zayin-yod-bet.
 
The only difference in spelling is that chapter 38 of Genesis drops the 
initial aleph, thereby dropping the initial syllable.
 
2.  More surprisingly, Genesis 38: 14 seems to leave off part of the first 
syllable of historical “Shikimona”, which is a prominent Late Bronze Age site 
fairly near historical Achzib.  
 
We first note the confusion in the ancient languages between S or SH and T, 
as in “Sur” coming out in Greek, Latin and English as “Tyre”.  Sur/“Tyre” is 
usually spelled in Hebrew with a tsade, which started out sounding like an 
emphatic S, but much later on became a TS sound.  Another example of T 
replacing 
earlier S is that s-s-ayin-nu in the Egyptian of the Execration Texts is 
thought to be “Tasi-ayin-anu”.  Rainey, “The Sacred Bridge”, at p. 58.  Since 
the name “Shikimona” pre-dates the Hebrews and pre-dates 1200 BCE, it is 
possible that it originally started with an archaic glottalized S, an extinct 
sound 
that can come out in later languages as either S or SH or T.  In analyzing 
pre-Hebrew (or non-Hebrew) names, the Biblical Hebrew spellings often differ.
 
Here, perhaps the SH or S could become a T/tav.  The “-ik” portion of the 
first syllable is then dropped.  So starting with “Shikimona”, we end up with 
Timona, or “Timnah”.
 
At Genesis 38: 14, this name is spelled tav-mem-nun-tav-he (“Timnath”), but 
elsewhere in the Bible the second tav is dropped, resulting in “Timnah”.  
(Note that a tav is often optional in the last syllable of a city’s name that 
ends with an “-ah” sound.  Thus Egyptian Ga-sa-t[a] and Qa-s[a-t]a are 
presumed 
to be Gaza.  Rainey, “The Sacred Bridge”, at pp. 110 and 101.  Likewise, 
Biblical “Ephrathah” at Genesis 35: 7 could be historical Afula, in northern 
Canaan, once the optional tav is dropped from the final syllable of 
“Ephrathah”, 
and the R is seen as often being confused with L.  [Afula is within eyesight 
of Shunem, a prominent Late Bronze Age site, and the author of the 
Patriarchal 
narratives may have known that in the Middle Bronze Age, it had been 
now-deserted Afula that was the major city in this area of northern Canaan.  
Likewise, 
the author appears to have known that the ruins of long-deserted Ai lay east 
of thriving Bethel, south of Shechem.  Note that the text never states that 
any 
people actually live at the well-known sites of Afula/Ephrathah or Ai, 
neither of which seems to have been inhabited in the Late Bronze Age.])
 
(Ancient historical Shikimona is “Shiqmona” in modern Hebrew.)
 
As noted below, historical Nami (Biblical Enaim) is on the road to historical 
Shikimona
(Biblical Timnah).  Here is Genesis 38: 14:  “[Judah’s daughter-in-law 
Tamar] sat in the entrance of Enaim, which is by the way to Timnah….”
 
3.  Biblical “Enaim” at Genesis 38: 14 seems to be historical “Nami” (or “
Tel Nami”), another prominent Late Bronze Age site fairly near Achzib, in 
northwestern Canaan.
 
Here, the introductory ayin, or ayin-yod, probably is a prefix meaning “
fountain”, which as such is optional as being part of the name.  So if the 
optional 
prefix ayin (in the form of ayin-yod) is added to historical Nami, we get 
Biblical Enaim.
 
At Genesis 38: 14, “Enaim” is ayin-yod-nun-yod-mem.
 
This compares to historical “Nami”.  Note that the only two true consonants, 
N + M, are the same, and are in the same order.
 
4.  Thus in looking for the whereabouts of Jacob’s son Judah in chapter 38 of 
Genesis, the key is to look in northwestern Canaan, just south of Sur/“Tyre”
.  The Late Bronze Age equivalents of Biblical Chezib, Timnah and Enaim are 
right there, namely historical Achzib, Shikimona and Nami.
 
As usual, the northern pre-Hebrew author of the Patriarchal narratives knows 
northern Canaan in the Late Bronze Age like the back of his hand, while 
knowing shockingly little about the detailed geography of southern Canaan.  
As such, 
the author of the Patriarchal narratives is the exact opposite of JEPD, who 
knew dozens, if not hundreds, of specific geographical sites in Iron Age 
southern Canaan.
 
Nami/Enaim is 10 miles south of Shikimona/Timnah, which in turn is 20 miles 
south of Achzib/Chezib, with all three sites being on the Mediterranean Sea 
in 
northwest Canaan.  Achzib itself is 30 miles south of Sur/“Tyre”.  As I see 
it, all these prominent Late Bronze Age sites are in northwest Canaan, not in 
the later country of Judah in southern Canaan, as traditionally believed for 
the last 2,500 years.
 
This is not bad news;  this is good news.  This means that the concept of the 
Promised Land always included land well north of modern Haifa, dating all the 
long way back to the historical Patriarchal Age.  The notion that the divine 
promises of the Promised Land in the Patriarchal narratives focus on the 
unappealing Negev Desert not only is illogical and non-historical, but also 
cannot 
be squared with a fresh reading of the received text of the Patriarchal 
narratives in Genesis.  The Patriarchal narratives are replete with names of 
Late 
Bronze Age sites (along with a handful of earlier sites) in   n-o-r-t-h-e-r-n 
 
Canaan, where the Patriarchs are often portrayed as sojourning.  The Promised 
Land in the Patriarchal narratives is, first and foremost, the fine land in 
northern Canaan, from Shechem to Sur/“Tyre”.  
 
Shockingly enough, the only historical site in southern Canaan between 
historical Bethel and historical Beersheba mentioned in the entirety of the 
Patriarchal narratives is, believe it or not, Hebron.  When Jerusalem does 
not make it 
into the text even a single time, you know that this text was neither 
composed nor edited by southern Hebrews like JEPD.  (“Salim” in the text is 
historical Salim, a tiny hamlet east of Shechem, which was of great symbolic 
importance because it was where the Hebrews crossed over into the Promised 
Land of 
Canaan after traveling through the Transjordan.  “Salim” is not a nickname 
for 
Jerusalem.)  Based on the geographical sites referenced in the text, this 
text 
can only be coming from a        
n-o-r-t-h-e-r-n  pre-Hebrew in the Late Bronze Age.  In the Patriarchal 
narratives, the Promised Land is, first and foremost, northern Canaan.
 
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois




**************Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL 
Home.      
(http://home.aol.com/diy/home-improvement-eric-stromer?video=15&ncid=aolhom00030000000001)