Biblical Hebrew Forum

[JimStinehart AT aol.com]

Yigal Levin:

Why do you see Kasdim/K%DYM at Genesis 11: 28 as being a late reference to “
Chaldeans”?

1.  “Kasdu” is an Old Babylonian name, dating all the long way back to the
Middle Bronze Age.  Kasdim/K%DYM at Genesis 11: 28 is a dead ringer for the
Old Babylonian word Kasdu.

Note that the Old Babylonian term Kasdu pre-dates the time when the
Chaldeans ruled southern Mesopotamia.

The ancient word “Kasdu” was used, more or less continuously, though
sporadically and in various forms, from the Middle Bronze Age until almost the
common era, usually referring to southern Mesopotamia.  As such, as I see it
the presence of the word Kasdu/ Kasdim/K%DYM in a text is consistent with the
text having been composed any time between the mid-2nd millennium BCE and
shortly before the common era.

Yes, at some point the Assyrians pronounced Kasdu as Kaldu, but what of it?

2.  If the Patriarchal narratives were composed in the mid-14th century BCE
(my controversial view), then there would be a very good reason for the
early Hebrew author to use the word Kasdim/K%DYM, being the Hebrew version of
the ancient Old Babylonian word Kasdu.

Consider the historical situation at Ur in the Late Bronze Age, in the
mid-14th century BCE.

(a)  The rulers were Kassites.  The  name Kassites features K%, just like
K%DYM.  We know little about the Kassite language.  The author of the
Patriarchal narratives probably did not know much about the Kassite language
either.  But note the K-% initial match.

(b)  The name of the country that included Ur was Karadunise (per the
Amarna Letters).  Once again, it starts with  K, and there’s a sin/% there, 
too.
There’s a D in the middle, as there is in K%DYM.

(c)  Finally, many Kassite rulers were named Kadasman, including the ruler
during the Amarna Letters period.  The first four letters of the name
Kadasman are a virtual anagram of K%DYM.  Both names feature K + D + % + M, 
though
the Biblical version has the order of the two middle letters reversed.

We cannot realistically expect a letter-for-letter equivalence in going
from Biblical Hebrew to the little known language of Kassite.  But all three
names that relate to who governed Ur in the mid-14th century BCE seem redolent
of Kasdim, namely:  Kassite, Karadunise, and Kadasman.  All four feature K
+ %, and three of the four also have a D in the middle.

If we now consider in addition the Old Babylonian word Kasdu, we have five
words for southern Mesopotamia in the mid-14th century BCE that feature K-%,
and four words that feature K + % + D [though in the latter case not
necessarily in that letter order]:  Kasdim/K%DYM [at Genesis 11: 28], Kassite,
Karadunise, Kadasman, and Kasdu.

3.  As to the argument that Ur Kasdim is a glaring historical anachronism,
here is what famed Biblical Minimalist Thomas L. Thompson said in a 2000
post on the b-Hebrew list:

“Granted that if the patriarchal stories are to be dated to the 12-11th
centuries,  the reference to Ur Kasdim--or to the Philistines--could not be
posed as an argument against that.”

The famed Copenhagen School of Biblical Minimalism (with Niels Peter Lemche
participating on that same thread) basically does not consider the
150-year-old attack on the historicity of Ur Kasdim at Genesis 11: 28 to be 
worth
mentioning.  Of course, the Biblical Minimalists think the Patriarchal
narratives are late, and fictional, but they seem to recognize that it is 
hard to
come up with a weaker argument against the antiquity and historicity of the
Patriarchal narratives than to focus on the phrase Ur Kasdim at Genesis 11:
28.

Yigal Levin, you’re no Biblical Minimalist.  Why are you repeating an
argument against the antiquity and historicity of the Patriarchal narratives 
that
even the Biblical Minimalists themselves seem reluctant to press?

4.  Why do you see Biblical Kasdim at Genesis 11: 28 as being the mid-1st
millennium BCE “Chaldeans”, instead of being redolent of Kasdu, Kassite,
Karadunise, and Kadasman in the Bronze Age?

If the author of the Patriarchal narratives was trying to reference Kasdu
(southern Mesopotamia), being the country called Karadunise in the Late
Bronze Age, ruled by the Kassite ruler Kadasman in the mid-14th century BCE, 
then
what would scholars expect to see at Genesis 11: 28 in connection with Ur,
instead of K%DYM?  In the mid-14th century BCE, Ur, though no longer a
political capital, was a wealthy provincial city that was still the #1 place 
in
the world to buy lapis lazuli at wholesale prices.  As I see it, “Ur Kasdim”
fits the world of the mid-14th century BCE perfectly, in the context of
buying lapis lazuli in southern Mesopotamia.

Given the documented presence of the words Kasdu, Kassite, Karadunise and
Kadasman in the mid-14th century BCE regarding southern Mesopotamia, and the
continued presence of Ur as the best place in the world to buy lapis lazuli
at wholesale at that time, on what objective basis can scholars point to Ur
Kasdim/K%DYM at Genesis 11: 28 as allegedly being a glaring historical
anachronism?  I am not arguing that a late author could not have used the word
Kasdim/K%DYM [being a word that doubtless was familiar to any Hebrew who was
in Babylon during the Exile].  But I honestly cannot see how the presence of
the word Kasdim/K%DYM in a Hebrew text is inconsistent in any way, shape or
form with a mid-14th century BCE composition date for such Hebrew text. 
Change the % to an L and there would be a problem.  But as is, Ur Kasdim seems
to me to be consistent with virtually any proposed date of composition, from
the Middle Bronze Age to the 4th century BCE, because Kasdim can be viewed,
but need not be viewed, as being “Chaldeans”.

The word Kasdim/K%DYM is perfectly compatible with a Late Bronze Age time
period, isn’t it, given the documented presence in the Late Bronze Age (in
connection with southern Mesopotamia) of Kasdu, Kassite, Karadunise, and
Kadasman?

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois

**************An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy
Steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221322948x1201367184/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=62&bcd=May
ExcfooterNO62)