Biblical Hebrew Forum

[jimstinehart AT aol.com]

Dr. Arnaud Fournet:
 
You wrote:  “The only thing i can say is that Hurrian ebri "lord" or erbi 
"dog" and Uriyah cannot be the same name [even though Uriyah may be a 
distortion of Urhiya, which remains an optional speculation] and the XeTh and 
the Xiti cannot be the same name [in addition there is a millenium gap in 
between]. The rest is darkness.”
 
Those linguistic issues are the key here, and are the type of issues that are 
fitting for the b-hebrew list..  Biblical scholars have been unable to make 
any sense out of any of the following names:  BR(;  $M-)BR;  BR-%(;  B)RY;  
(PR-W-N;  )RYW-K;  and )WRY-H.  But with your help, we can see that all 7 of 
these names have the identical non-Semitic root, and that all these people 
are the Biblical “Hittites” -- that is, an historical non-Semitic people in 
Canaan who are not the Hittites from eastern Anatolia, but whose homeland is 
immediately south of the Hittites, and who for 300 years contended with the 
Hittites for control of Syria, until their catastrophic defeat by the 
Hittites near the end of the Amarna Age.
 
The key is that in this non-Semitic language, B and P and W are often 
interchangeable, especially regarding this common word.  In addition, the 
eastern version of this non-Semitic language had metathesis, where the order 
of the two consonants in this basic common word is reversed.
 
1.  BR
 
(a)  At Genesis 14: 2:  (i) BR(;  (ii) $M-)BR, where $M- is a well-known 
prefix;  and (iii) BR-%(, where -%( is a well-known suffix.  We know from the 
example of (LM at Genesis 14: 1 that a Hebrew ayin can be used to represent 
the true vowel E in this non-Semitic language, because (LM is usually viewed 
as being Elam, a word that is essentially the same as Elami in this 
non-Semitic language, and that is similar to Elammatum in Akkadian.  So 
viewing Hebrew aleph and Hebrew ayin as being used here to represent true 
vowels in this non-Semitic language, we see these three personal names as 
being common words in this non-Semitic language based on ebri, meaning “lord” 
or “princeling”.
 
(b)  B)RY at Genesis 26: 34.  I view that as [)]-B-)R-Y, representing the 
Hurrian e-bi-ir-i.  Where the final suffix –ni is added, meaning “the”, we 
have e-bi-ir-ni attested (at p. 19 of the Fournet/Bomhard website).  If one 
focuses on the true consonants B-R, and sees the rest as Hebrew attempts at 
vowel indicators for this non-Semitic language, it’s clear.
 
2.  PR
 
At Genesis 23: 8:  ‘PRWN = ‘PR-W-N = e-pi-ri-wu-ni = “of the 
lord/princeling”.  The vav/W there is genitive case.  Epri is a slight 
variant in spelling of ebri, here with P instead of B, a genitive case 
ending, and the common suffix “the”.
 
3.  WR
 
)WRY-H at II Samuel 11: 3.  That’s ewri, being the same word, but being 
spelled with a W rather than a B or P.     

4.  RW
 
)RYW-K at Genesis 14: 1.  This has the W [instead of B or P], like “Uriah”.  
But here’s the famous metathesis from the east, where instead of WR as above, 
we now see RW in this attested non-Semitic name.  Per Richard Hess at p. 37 
of “Amarna Personal Names”:  “The language represented by this PN is Hurrian. 
 A-ra-wa-na­ may contain the element ewri ‘lord’ if one allows for a 
metathesis of the r and the w.”  A 2003 source confirms the 1941 insight of 
E.A. Speiser as to this metathesis in the east:  “Ras Shamra examples of 
Hurrian names [at Ugarit] indicate a tendency in Syria-Palestine for the West 
Hurrian dialect. The clearest evidence is in the names compounded with the 
noun iwri “lord, king” as the initial element. This is consistently spelled 
iwri, indicating the West Hurrian dialect. In the East Hurrian (Nuzi) 
dialect, the noun appeared with the metathesis of w and r as irwi.  The 
following statement of Speiser (1941: 68) is helpful:  ‘. . . the parade 
example of the metathesis is ewri “lord,” which common-Hurrian form is 
opposed only by Nuzi erwi. Here the choice of this or that phonologic 
alternant has become characteristic of a dialectal division which separates 
Eastern Hurrian from other groups which are predominantly western.’”  Thomas 
F. McDaniel, “The Song of Deborah:  Poetry in Dialect -- A Philological Study 
of Judges 5” (2003), at p. 48.
 
Conclusion.  These are the Biblical “Hittites”.  These are the XT people, 
H-XT-Y, and they’re also the H-XR-Y and the H-XW-Y as well, with H-XT-Y and 
H-XW-Y being appropriate Biblical nicknames for these people.  The Syrian 
“brothers” of these Biblical “Hittites” out east have attested names 
featuring XT/XW.  Xu-Ti-b-Te$$ub, which features X-T as the first two 
consonants, and X-W as the first two letters [where the W here represents the 
vowel U].  The classic generic theophoric name of all time for this 
non-Semitic people is Xu-Ti-ya, which likewise features X-T as the first two 
consonants, and X-W as the first two letters.
 
The Hebrew author re-cycled the simple non-Semitic word ebri in many 
different variations, because his contemporary Hebrew audience knew only a 
tiny handful of non-Semitic words.  They knew ebri, and knew it could be epri 
or ewri or erwi.  The foregoing linguistic analysis (i) explains who the 
Biblical “Hittites” were, and (ii) explains all 7 above names.  One cannot 
understand what the Hebrew Bible is saying here absent a basic knowledge of 
this non-Semitic language.
 
Jim Stinehart
Shanghai, China (temporarily)






-----Original Message-----
From: Arnaud Fournet <fournet.arnaud AT wanadoo.fr>
To: kwrandolph AT gmail.com; jimstinehart AT aol.com
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Sat, Jul 31, 2010 10:33 am
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] H-XT-Y at II Samuel 11: 3


----- Original Message ----- From: jimstinehart AT aol.com 
To: fournet.arnaud AT wanadoo.fr ; kwrandolph AT gmail.com 
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org 
Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2010 3:58 PM 
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] H-XT-Y at II Samuel 11: 3 
 
1. You wrote: “Assuming that Hiti can have a relationship with some kind of 
Hurro-Urartian population, How do you explain that a person of that kind 
could ever be commander of an *Egyptian* garrison? [NB: as far as I'm 
concerned the idea can be discarded at first glimpse.]” 
 
We know from the Amarna Letters that Egypt often used non-Semitic maryannu as 
its military agents. 
*** 
This very much sounds your own interpretation. 
Who else writes that? 
A. 
*** 
 
Not only was Arawa-na the commander of the Egyptian garrison at Kumidu, but 
also Biryawaza was Pharaoh’s military man in the Transjordan, per Amarna 
Letters EA 196 and EA 197. 
*** 
I have two problems with that name Biryawaza in EA 196 and 197. 
The first one is that the first syllable was originally read nam- instead of 
bir-, so there's a doubt on the reading. The second one is that the last 
syllable is -zi not -za. 
So in fact, this **Biryawaza is in fact at least Bir-ia-wa-zi and maybe even 
Nam-ia-wa-zi. 
All this makes the Hurrianicity of that person seriously dubious (either as a 
Mitanni Aryan or a Hurrian properly). 
 
In addition this dubious name was succeeded by another dubious A-ri-wa-na, of 
dubious ethnicity. 
I agree that A-ri-wa-na includes A-ri- which can be a Hurrian formative of 
Person names, but -wana is not. 
 
The data is not clean. 
A. 
*** 
 
 
The civil war in Canaan in Year 13, which accounts for the bulk of the Amarna 
Letters from the southern half of Canaan, pitted one coalition, which 
included princeling rulers with non-Semitic names, against another coalition, 
which was made up almost exclusively of princeling rulers with non-Semitic 
names. 
 
If people with non-Semitic names like that are the Biblical “Hittites”, then 
in the 14th century BCE, everywhere one looked, the ruling class was 
primarily such people. No wonder those fully historical non-Semitic people 
made it into the Bible. 
 
 
2. You wrote: “Moreover it seems that Uriyah the Hiti belongs to a period 
*younger* than this time, doesn't he?” 
 
Yes, but the phrase H-XT-Y goes back to the first Hebrews. 
*** 
On account of what? 
A. 
*** 
 
Who are the H-XT-Y? 
*** 
(1) Unknown, or (2) maybe some Hurro-Urartian people as we discussed before. 
Hatti remains potentially comparable with Xiti as a is not infrequently 
rendered by e or i. 
A. 
*** 
 
Is H-XT-Y a nickname for a people who are properly called H-XR-Y, and who 
have a second nickname in this same text: H-XW-Y? Many of the Syrian 
“brothers” of the non-Semitic princelings in 14th century BCE Canaan had 
names whose first two consonants were XT, and whose first two letters in 
those same names were XW (if W in that context is viewed as being the vowel 
U). So all three names may be referring to the same non-Semitic people, who 
were so prominent throughout Canaan in the Amarna Age: H-XT-Y and H-XR-Y and 
H-XW-Y. In all 3 cases, there’s only one letter different in the Biblical 
name/nickname. And in all 3 cases, the name or nickname fits these particular 
non-Semitic people linguistically. Are they the Biblical “Hittites”, being 
fully historical, and not having west Semitic names? 
*** 
I don't understand the way you are using "historical" and "non historical". 
What do these words mean? 
A. 
*** 
 
3. You wrote: “I cannot see the "similarity" between Aryokh and Arawa[xx]. 
Less than 25% match.” 
 
The suffix in the first case is –ka, meaning “son” or “Junior”, etc. The 
suffix in the second case is –na, meaning “the”. So the suffixes differ. 
*** 
1. I can see no -a in Aryokh. 
2. Aryo- and Arawa are obvious not the same root. 
3. These two persons are apparently separated by half a millenium. 
A. 
*** 
 
The Akkadian-style spelling of )RYW-K is Arawa-ka [whereas a non-Semitic 
spelling of that same name would be Eriwi-ka]. 
*** 
Do you have a reference for these two claims? 
A. 
*** 
 
The other name is Arawa-na (per the Akkadian-style spelling which seems to be 
favored for this name). There’s only one letter difference. The root is 
identical. It’s the same root, having the identical meaning, but with 
different suffixes, that’s all. 
*** 
Actually the name Aryokh and Arawa[na?] have two letters in common -a- and 
-r- and maybe three if we kindly add the initial consonant. 
A. 
*** 
 
Don’t you see that the critical importance of the name Arawa-na in the Amarna 
Letters, regarding the southern Beqa Valley, is that it means that the 
consonant reversal (metathesis) from the east was known in Canaan? Erwi, 
eriwi, arawa -- they’re all the same as “Uriah”, once the metathesis from the 
east is recognized. It’s the same non-Semitic word, being one of the few 
non-Semitic words that the early Hebrews could be expected to know. Indeed, 
that particular non-Semitic word, in many different forms, seems to be the 
linguistic hallmark of the Biblical “Hittites”, the XT people, H-XT-Y, a 
fully historical people in Canaan who did not have west Semitic names. 
Jim Stinehart 
*** 
I believe in good data, properly discussed as far it is possible to do so, 
descriptive neutral words with preferably no hidden premices and step-by-step 
reasoning. 
We are very far from that here: unclear names, quite demonstrably different 
whatever they were and conclusions popping out of the hat, that wasn't there 
the step before. To be more precise it seems to be procrustean hat that 
transforms Uriyah, Arawa[xx] and erwi into the same thing. 
I cannot even describe what your line of reasoning is and i would not be able 
to explain to somebody else what you wanted to say. 
The only thing i can say is that Hurrian ebri "lord" or erbi "dog" and Uriyah 
cannot be the same name [even though Uriyah may be a distortion of Urhiya, 
which remains an optional speculation] and the XeTh and the Xiti cannot be 
the same name [in addition there is a millenium gap in between]. The rest is 
darkness. 
 
Arnaud Fournet