Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] Baal-Hermon, Part II

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: JimStinehart AT aol.com
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] Baal-Hermon, Part II
  • Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 10:24:23 EDT


Baal-Hermon, Part II

6. Based on the scholarly quotation typed below, it is very likely that JEPD
would have been familiar with the phrase “Baal Hamon”, which is attested in
1st millennium BCE Phoenician and Punic inscriptions. Is “Baal Hamon”
related to “Baal Hermon”? For my own linguistic analysis that both “Hamon”
and “
Hermon” should be viewed as being simple plays on the ancient verbal root
M-N,
see #7 below. The scholarly quotation below also shows that ’amn and hmn
were
present at Ugarit, and that all three words (including Baal Hamon) probably
referred to a towering mountain. I myself see M-N as being the root of all
of
these words, including “Amana” in Hebrew.

It is likely that these secular inscriptions from Ugarit and the Phoenicians
were not referring to the Mt. Hermon area. But since they were referring to
a
towering mountain, which was viewed as having divine grandeur, the Hebrews
could easily have picked up such appropriate phrases and applied them to the
one
towering mountain to the north that was relevant to the Hebrews: Mt. Hermon.

Here is what Prof. Mark S. Smith of New York University has to say at p. 138
of “The Origins of Biblical Monotheism” (2001):

“The Phoenician and Punic inscriptions [from the 1st millennium BCE, in JEPD
days] attest…to Baal Hamon…. F.M. Cross…sees the name of El’s mountain
behind the epithet b‘l hmn, ‘lord of the Amanus’, and follows [B.]
Landsberger in
viewing it as a title of El in the Phoenician-Punic world [of the 1st
millennium BCE]. According to Cross, the title b‘l hmn would fit El, as his
home is
located in the Amanus. …[T]he attestation of both ’amn and hmn in Ugaritic
(the latter in proper names and in a Hurrian text discovered at Ugarit) seems
to represent a difficulty for identifying hmn with the Amanus [because why
would there be two different names for the same mountain?]. M. Cogan and P.
Xella
prefer to take ’amn as Mount Amanus, but not hmn. Cross attempts to
reconcile this problem by claiming that hmn specifically refers to Mount
Amanus
whereas ’amn in CAT 2.33.16 is a different mountain though ‘in the same
general
region’. …[O]ne fact favors the claim that Ugaritic hmn is Mount Amanus.
The
place-name p‘rhmn appears in a Phoenician seal dating to the eighth century
[which is vintage JEPD times]. According to P. Bordreuil, p‘rhmn is to be
understood as the town of Pagras of the Amanus region, corresponding to the
modern
village of Bagras located in the Amanus [in south-central modern Turkey, just
north of the west coast of modern Syria]. In view of this evidence, the
sources from Ugarit that give the spelling hmn and ’amn should be
reconsidered. As
I noted, hmn appears in a Hurrian text and some proper names from Ugarit,
whereas ’amn is attested in a single Ugaritic text. The disparate character
of
these sources may suggest that hmn and ’amn represent two spellings for the
same
mountain, a phenomenon not without parallel among geographical names in the
texts from Ugarit.”

In #7 below I set forth my own view that ’amn in Ugaritic and Amana in
Hebrew, and hmn in Ugaritic and Baal Hamon in Phoenician and Baal-Hermon in
Hebrew,
along with Hermon and Mt. Hermon in Hebrew, are all mountain imagery words
and
phrases that are based on the ancient verbal root M-N, which has as one of
its key meanings “to be appointed to oversee”.

7. In considering whether ’amn and hmn in Ugaritic, and Baal Hamon in
Phoenician, may be linked linguistically with Amana, Baal-Hermon, Hermon and
Mt.
Hermon in Biblical Hebrew, consider the following proposed linguistic
analysis.
M-N/mem-nun may be the true root of (i) Ugaritic ’amn, (ii) Hebrew
aleph-mem-nun-he/Amana, (iii) Ugaritic hmn and Phoenician Hamon, (iv) Hebrew
heth-resh-mem-vav-nun/Ch-r-m-o-n/Hermon, (v) Hebrew he-resh
heth-resh-mem-vav-nun/H-r
Ch-r-m-o-n/Mt. Hermon, and (vi) though referring to a different geographical
place, tav-mem-nun-he/Timnah (to which Judah goes “up” at Genesis 38: 12,
13).
As to M-N, the standard view is that the root is M-N-H/mem-nun-he, meaning
“to
weigh out, to be allotted a proper share, to count, to number”. But the
final
he/H may not be part of the true root, as Gesenius notes a final nun or a
final heth as being “kindred” words. Equally importantly, the ancient verb
M-N
may have also had the meaning of “to be appointed to oversee”. In the Bible,
we see that most clearly at I Chronicles 9: 29. But we must remember that in
ancient times, the power of a king to “count” the “number” of his subjects
(in preparation for taxing them individually) was considered to be a very
“high
” power. This power was so great and powerful that it was almost god-like in
nature, having overtones of towering grandeur.

If M-N means “to be appointed to oversee”, and has overtones of god-like,
towering grandeur, then the tallest mountain in greater Canaan (Mt. Hermon)
could easily have been envisioned by the Hebrews as being “appointed to
oversee”
Canaan. It makes sense for all seven of the above words for a towering
mountain to feature M-N. I will capitalize the M-N in these words for
emphasis:
(i) ’aMN and (ii) hMN in Ugaritic; Baal HaMoN in Phoenician; and in Hebrew,
(i) aleph-MEM-NUN-he/Amana, (ii) bet-ayin-lamed
heth-resh-MEM-vav-NUN/b-aa-l
ch-r-M-o-N/Baal HerMoN (and, per #iv below, this could be preceded by
he-resh/“
Mt.”), (iii) heth-resh-MEM-vav-NUN/ch-r-M-o-N/HerMoN, and (iv) he-resh
heth-resh-MEM-vav-NUN/h-r ch-r-M-o-N/Mt. HerMoN.

In Hebrew, the aleph in Amana could be a prosthetic aleph that has no
meaning, revealing the root to be M-N. Perhaps a similar analysis applies to
’amn in
Ugaritic. The Ugaritic H in hmn could have become first he/H, and then
heth-resh/Ch-R in Hebrew, as the sound is somewhat similar to he-resh/H-R,
which of
course means “mountain” in Hebrew. So hmn in Ugaritic could become
het-resh-MEM-vav-NUN/ch-r-M-o-N/HerMoN in Hebrew, and could mean he-resh
MEM-NUN/h-r
M-N/har-MoN/ “Hermon”, that is, “Mt. M-N”.

Once one sees the true root of all these words for a towering mountain as
being M-N, then the other letters can be seen as being for the most part
differing prefixes, with the Hebrew prefix heth-resh/Ch-R perhaps meaning
he-resh/H-R/“
mountain”.

The conventional linguistic analysis of “Hermon” is that its root is
heth-resh-mem/Ch-R-M, meaning “to destroy”, but that makes little sense to me
as
being the primary, much less the sole, root of “Hermon”. (As discussed
below,
however, Ch-R-M works well as a secondary, semi-root of “Hermon”.) It makes
much more sense to see “Hermon” as being heth-resh, for he-resh, meaning “Mt.”
, plus M-N, from the ancient pre-Hebrew verbal root meaning “to be appointed
to oversee” (or, in effect, “towering”). I see “Hermon” in Hebrew as
meaning “Mt. M-N”, that is, “the mountain that [per its divine, towering
grandeur]
is appointed to oversee [Canaan]”.

On this M-N analysis that I have proposed, all of a sudden one sees that “
Amana” and “Hermon” are virtually identical! They may look totally different
in
English, but each is a simple play on the ancient west Semitic root M-N, each
is referring to the same mountain (or nearby mountain summits), and the “Her”
in “Hermon” is a prefix that is an alterative (non-standard) spelling of “
har”, meaning “mountain”. (Perhaps the non-standard spelling of this prefix
served the nifty purpose of invoking heth-resh-mem/Ch-R-M, as a second
semi-root of this word. Now instead of merely meaning “towering”, per M-N,
it also
means that this majestic mountain looks so impressive and god-like that it
might be capable of “destroying” everything.)

My proposed linguistic analysis effortlessly ties together ’amn and hmn in
Ugaritic, Baal Hamon in Phoenician, and Amana and Baal-Hermon and Hermon and
Mt.
Hermon in Hebrew. All seven such words can be viewed as being simple plays
on the underlying west Semitic verbal root M-N, meaning “to be appointed to
oversee”, while having a clear overtone of towering, divine grandeur. I’m no
linguist, but it makes sense to me. I do not buy the traditional linguistic
analysis that “Hermon” is primarily from a root meaning “to destroy”.
Rather, “
Hermon” “Mt. Hermon”, “Baal-Hermon” and “Amana” in Hebrew are simple plays
on M-N, meaning “to be appointed to oversee”. To the Hebrews, that towering
mountain (Mt. Hermon) truly was divinely “appointed to oversee” all of
greater Canaan.



Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois




**************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog,
plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.
(http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page