Biblical Hebrew Forum

[jimstinehart AT aol.com]

If I may be allowed to address David Kolinsky’s initial questions: 
 
1.  “As far as I know, there is no root (NR in the semitic languages.”
 
I think we all agree with that.  (NR makes no sense in west Semitic.
 
2.  “It was striking to me that in the Samaritan version this character's 
name is 
Aniram ‘(NY-RM’ which may mean ‘he who is humble is exalted’."
 
Faced with a name that is inexplicable in west Semitic, (NR, one easy way to 
Semitize it is to add an M at the end, resulting in either (N-RM or (N-Y-RM.  
[The yod/Y in the middle of a proper name is a one-letter logogram that 
simply indicates a proper name.  Thus )B-RM is identical in meaning to 
)B-Y-RM.]  The logical conclusion is that the Samaritan version added an M at 
the end in order to make sense out of this name.  It would make no sense 
whatsoever for the Masoretic text to see (N-Y-RM, which makes perfect sense 
in west Semitic, and turn it into west Semitic jibberish as (NR.
 
3.  “Presumably, (NN was the original because there is little reason for the 
Greek text to have changed the name.”
 
I fail to see the logic there.  The Septuagint often changed the original, 
and is not as reliable as the unpointed Masoretic text.  An alternative way 
of making sense out of the strange (NR is to change the last letter to an N, 
resulting in (N-N, as a slightly shortened form of (NH-N.  Once again, if the 
original were (N-N, there would be no reason to change that name [which makes 
sense in west Semitic as (NH-N] to (NR, which does not make sense in west 
Semitic. 
 
4.  What the Samaritan version and the Septuagint are struggling with here is 
precisely what George Athas highlighted:  -R is not a Semitic suffix.
 
In a previous post, I suggested that -R might be a non-Semitic suffix on an 
Amorite root (N, with such root meaning the Amorite god An or Anu.  However, 
on reconsideration, an all-Hurrian analysis is much more straightforward, 
despite the fact that Aner is stated to be the “brother” of the Amorite Mamre 
at Genesis 14: 13.  Although rare in Hebrew, the word “brother”/)X can mean 
an “ally or confederate”.  Amos 1: 9  Of importance here, that meaning of the 
word “brother” is ubiquitous in the Amarna Letters.  Royal monarchs call the 
pharaoh “brother”.  Hurrian princelings in particular always call fellow 
Hurrian princelings “brother”, not meaning male blood sibling, but rather 
with “brother” meaning “fellow princeling”.  Accordingly, when (NR is stated 
to be the “brother” of the Amorite MMR), here that means that (NR is a fellow 
princeling, not necessarily an Amorite.
 
Though a west Semitic analysis of (NR is hopeless, a Hurrian analysis of (NR 
is child’s play.  If you look at p. 90 of Arnaud Fournet’s Hurrian language 
website, you will see these two entries:
 
(1) *[Øíni] [P x-] ‘god, deity’
EL eni <e-ni-> UG [Õ n]
UR <in> Subarean e-ne ‘god’
 
(2)  *[Øinarγa] (Essive) ‘looking or acting like a god’
CA <e-na-ar-xa>.
 
With the Hurrian consonantal root of “god” or “deity” apparently correlating 
to the Hebrew letters (N [where the initial Hurrian vowel must be 
represented], then adding the standard Hurrian comitative suffix -R, the 
resulting (N-R makes perfect sense as a Hurrian princeling name, meaning 
“with a god” in Hurrian.  
 
Note also that on this view, (N in Hurrian is not the name of a specific 
pagan god, so it would not be particularly offensive to the Hebrew author.
 
At Genesis 14: 1, we see )MR-PL as an Amorite princeling being paired with 
the Hurrian princeling Arawa-ka/)RYW-K.  So the Amorite M-MR)/Mamre could 
similarly be paired with a Hurrian “brother”/princeling:  (N-R. 
 
If we’re willing to consider that -R may possibly be a non-Semitic suffix, 
then (N-R makes good sense in a portion of text that not only references the 
Hurrian princeling Arawa-ka, but also references the Hurrians/H-XR-Y at 
Genesis 14: 6 as well.  For that matter, I see XCC-N at Genesis 14: 7 as 
being the Hurrian word for Xasi/Hasi, and I myself see all four names of the 
rebellious princelings at Genesis 14: 2 as being Hurrian common words, each 
of which effectively means “Hurrian princeling” in Hurrian, which are deftly 
used as nicknames for the historical league of Hurrian princelings.
 
If one is willing to consider the Hurrian aspects of chapter 14 of Genesis, 
the name (N-R makes perfect sense as a Hurrian name, while making no sense in 
west Semitic.
 
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois






-----Original Message-----
From: George Athas <George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>
To: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Sun, Aug 22, 2010 6:43 am
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] a mystery regarding gen14:24?


This thread needs to get back to addressing David's original question. I 
think 
e can drop the sideline issues.

EORGE ATHAS
o-Moderator, B-Hebrew
Sydney, Australia)
_______________________________________________
-hebrew mailing list
-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
ttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew