Biblical Hebrew Forum

[JimStinehart AT aol.com]

As I noted in my prior post, the interior vav in XBR-W-N may be a key clue 
that this name dates to the mid-14th century BCE, with the interior vav 
being a Hurrian genitive case marker, and the name meaning “Heaven” or “My 
Heaven”.  In that case, the root XBR is a noun, being the Hurrian noun 
meaning “
heaven” or “sky”.  So the linguistic pattern is Hurrian noun + Hurrian 
genitive case marker -W- + west Semitic ending –N.  The city 20 miles south 
of 
Jerusalem was spelled XBRN [with no interior vav] in the 1st half of the 1st 
millennium BCE, not XBR-W-N, per all those LMLK seals.  The Hebrews only 
interacted with the Hurrians in the 14th century BCE, primarily in the 
mid-14th century BCE, so the presence of a Hurrian name like XBR-W-N in the 
text is 
effectively dating both the composition of this Biblical text and the 
historical time period of the Patriarchal Age.  
 
Continuing on with that same line of linguistic analysis, consider now the 
name of the person from whom Abraham buys Sarah’s gravesite, which is 7 
times spelled (PRWN [with an interior vav], and 4 times is spelled (PRN [with 
no 
interior vav].  At least 22 men’s names in the Patriarchal narratives end 
in –N.  Of those 22 names, 7 end in –WN.  The only 2 well-known names ending 
in –WN are Jacob’s sons %M(WN and ZBLWN [with the name Zebulon having 3 
different spellings].  For certain for those two sons of Jacob, and likely 
for 
every name ending in –WN except (PR-W-N, the root is a west Semitic verb, 
for example %M( or ZBL.  What is unique about (PR-W-N is that the root is a 
noun, either Hebrew “fawn”, or Hurrian “lord”.  Note that in Hurrian [per 
the analysis in my prior post], one could start with a noun, such as (PR 
[being one Hurrian spelling of “lord”], and then add a –W genitive case 
marker. 
 Although Hurrian itself could then add a final –N, having various possible 
meanings, it seems more likely here that the final –N is a west Semitic 
standard suffix indicating that a word is a noun, or is a proper name.  We 
don’
t seem to see any other name in the Patriarchal narratives besides (PR-W-N 
that has the pattern of noun + W + N.  Quite common is west Semitic verb + 
WN, such as %M(-WN and ZBL-WN, with Hebrew being a verb-driven language.  But 
noun + W + N has a foreign, non-west Semitic feel to it.  The linguistic key 
is to look for noun + W + N.  That’s Hurrian!  
 
Also, the Hurrian meaning “lord” fits the situation here much better than 
the west Semitic meaning “fawn” or “Bambi”.  If we focus on the interior 
vav in (PR-W-N, we begin to see that all the clues suggest that (PR-W-N is a 
Hurrian name of a Hurrian princeling in mid-14th century BCE south-central 
Canaan.  On that Hurrian analysis, the name means “lord” or “lord of mine” 
or “my lord”.  (PR-W-N is called a “Hittite”, a term that does not fit 
indigenous west Semitic-speaking people, and the west Semitic traditional 
etymology “fawn” does not fit well either.  But the Hurrians for 3 centuries 
[ending in the mid-14th century BCE] had jousted with the historical Hittites 
for control of Syria, so that from the standpoint of a west Semitic-speaking 
person like Abraham in south-central Canaan in that time period [with 
Hurrian princelings constituting a majority of the rulers of city-states 
throughout Canaan in the mid-14th century BCE, per the Amarna Letters], the 
historical Hurrians had a connection to the historical Hittites.  All these 
clues, 
especially the linguistic clues, suggest that (PR-W-N is a Hurrian name.  The 
interior vav, when it follows a  n-o-u-n, is the telltale sign of the 
Hurrian genitive case marker.  (PR-W-N has the identical linguistic pattern 
as 
XBR-W-N:  Hurrian noun + W + N.  In my controversial opinion, the name 
(PR-W-N 
is coming straight out of the well-documented history of the mid-14th 
century BCE, and is a Hurrian name of a Hurrian princeling in mid-14th 
century BCE 
south-central Canaan.
 
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois