Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Asher again

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: JimStinehart AT aol.com
  • To: fournet.arnaud AT wanadoo.fr, uzisilber AT gmail.com
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Asher again
  • Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 10:13:15 EDT


Dr. Fournet:

The key to the exact dating of the composition of chapter 14 of Genesis is
to determine whether or not the four personal names of the five rebellious
parties at Genesis 14: 2 are Hurrian names (that is, Hurrian common words
being used as apt nicknames for Hurrian princelings). If the league of five
rebellious parties consists of Hurrian princelings, then that would be a
perfect match to the Great Syrian War in western Syria in the mid-14th
century
BCE. Determining whether the four names at Genesis 14: 2 are Hurrian common
words, which are being used as apt nicknames for Hurrian princelings, in turn
depends primarily upon figuring out what Hebrew letter an early Hebrew
author would choose to represent the Hurrian vowel i. As you note, the most
obvious choice would be yod, because the sound is somewhat similar. But that
would not be the best choice, as we will now see.

First let’s look at pp. 20-22 of the Fournet/Bomhard Hurrian language
website, where we see the following: “RS 24.261 in Laroche (1968:499—504) “
Sacrifice to Astarte-Šauška”: “…iyd…to E(y)a….” “iydm…and to Ea….”

The god Ea was important, being mentioned repeatedly in the Mitanni Letter
[Amarna Letter EA 24, from the mid-14th century BCE]. If the Hebrew author
had picked yod to represent Hurrian i, then he could not have written the
name Ea! YY won’t work. YYD won’t work as meaning “to Ea”. But if the
ayin were picked to represent Hurrian i, then everything works perfectly, as
(Y
means “Ea”, spelled iy in Hurrian.

The common Hurrian word for “which” is the same problem. Per p. 90 of the
Fournet/Bomhard Hurrian language website: “*[ija]/[iji] ‘which’. EL
ya/ye <i-ya->. Often used with andi. Derivative: yame-, yeme- ‘anyone’.”

The spelling is i-ya. If Hebrew yod represented Hurrian i, then what
Hebrew letter would represent Hurrian y?

We see that it is not self-evident that it would be superior to use Hebrew
yod to represent Hurrian i, rather than, as on my view, using Hebrew ayin to
represent Hurrian i.

Note also that many, many Hurrian words feature an i as the initial letter,
which is a syllable in and of itself. For all of the following Hurrian
words, an initial Hebrew yod would work very poorly, because in Hebrew an
initial yod is a true consonant, not a vowel indicator. Per pp. 89-91 of
F/B:
(i) i-ya, (ii) i-t-, (iii) i-ki, (iv) i-$a-a-we, (v) i-$a-a$, (vi)
i-$i-ik-ku-un-n, and (vii) i-zu-u-zi

So although a Hebrew yod is the “obvious” choice to represent the Hurrian
vowel i, in fact it’s not the best choice. The early Hebrew author made a
much superior choice: he decided to use ayin to represent Hurrian i, because
the Hebrew ayin (unlike Hebrew yod) was not otherwise needed to represent
any other Hurrian letter. It was a brilliant choice.

Hurrian was usually recorded in Akkadian cuneiform, which had no ayin.
Hurrian itself seems to have had no ayin, except in occasional foreign proper
names used in Hurrian. To quote the F/B website at p. 13: “The Ugaritic
writing indicates that the goddess Anat, of Cananean origin, was *[«anat]
with
«ayin. There is another instance of that letter in the obscure word [t « n].
This is not a sufficient basis to posit that Hurrian may have had
pharyngeal phonemes.”

Since neither Hurrian itself, nor the writing system usually used to record
Hurrian, had an ayin, the Hebrew ayin had no natural role to play in
recording Hurrian words. Yet Hurrian often uses the commonplace vowel i, as
to
which there is no direct equivalent in Hebrew. The two choices here were
probably ayin or yod. Although centuries later yod came to be routinely used
as
a vowel indicator in full spelling, yod did not usually function in that
way in the old Biblical Hebrew defective spelling originally used in the
Patriarchal narratives. Yod as an initial letter was a true consonant in
Hebrew;
an interior yod in the days of old defective spelling often was simply a
way to ease pronunciation, with )BYRM likely having the identical meaning as
)BRM, but being easier to pronounce; and in final position it meant
possessive or “a people”. Moreover, as noted above regarding the Hurrian
word for
“which”, Hurrian does have y in ordinary Hurrian words, sometimes paired
with i (!), so it would be awkward to have Hebrew yod consistently represent
Hurrian i. But with Hebrew ayin otherwise having no role to play in setting
forth Hurrian words, it made sense to choose Hebrew ayin, rather than
Hebrew yod, to represent Hurrian i.

Once one realizes that Hebrew ayin is being used to represent Hurrian i,
then it’s easy to see all four names at Genesis 14: 2 as being simple Hurrian
common words (which are being used as appropriate nicknames for the Hurrian
princelings who historically made up the league of five rebellious parties
in the Great Syrian War in the Orontes River Valley in western Syria in the
mid-14th century BCE). Look at those four names at Genesis 14: 2, assume
that Hebrew ayin is Hurrian i, and further assume that the Hebrew author is
using Hurrian common words as nicknames for these Hurrian princelings. On
those straightforward assumptions, all four names make perfect sense as
Hurrian
common words. BR( is ebri. BR%( is ebri-ssi. $M)BR is $umi-ebri. [The
aleph there indicates a discrete syllable ‘eb’, which is how we know to imply
an e at the beginning of the first two words in Hurrian. All three of
those words are based on ebri.] And $N)B is $ana-b. [Note that the final
vowel
in $ani or $eni would normally be i, but for the meaning “your brother” it
changes to a (per p. 19 of the F/B website), which is why we see the aleph
there, not an ayin.] The first three names effectively mean “lord” or “
Hurrian princeling”, and the fourth name means “your brother” or, in effect, “
Hurrian princeling” [because Hurrian princelings historically referred to
each other as “brothers”]. Thus all four names at Genesis 14: 2 effectively
mean: “Hurrian princeling”. The early Hebrew author is telling us that
the league of five rebellious parties consisted of Hurrian princelings.

Analysts have missed this Hurrian analysis because, like you, they have
always assumed that a Hurrian i would naturally be represented by Hebrew yod.

Although that’s an “obvious” choice, it would have been a bad choice. The
actual decision to use Hebrew ayin to represent Hurrian i was a far superior
choice, albeit admittedly not an obvious choice (because the sounds don’t
match).

So take a look at the four names at Genesis 14: 2 and think “lord” and “
brother” in Hurrian. It’s super-simple Hurrian. The key is simply to
recognize that the early Hebrew author made the brilliant decision to
represent
Hurrian i by Hebrew ayin, not by Hebrew yod.

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page