Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Arnaud Fournet" <fournet.arnaud AT wanadoo.fr>]

From: JimStinehart AT aol.com

Prof. Yigal Levin wrote:  “Jim, since I don't know Hurrian I can't argue 
with you, but there is no reference to "Amorites" in EA 175, and what in the 
world does anything there have to do with Hazazon-Tamar?”

My prior two posts focused on the Hurrian issue of Hazazon-Tamar/XCC-N TMR 
being xa-tsi-tsi-ni tam-ri in Hurrian.
***
I did not respond to one of your previous mails
but hassissi or hazizi are obviously borrowings from Akkadian and not native 
"Hurrian" words.
Again you chose a Semitic loanword to explain a Semitic word.
There's nothing Hurrian in there.
A.
***



But perhaps the real focus of Prof. Levin’s question is whether the name of 
the princeling ruler in Amana Letter EA 175 is an Amorite name [with Genesis 
14: 7 explicitly mentioning the Amorites in connection with XCC-N TMR]. 
Although I touched upon that issue in my prior post, let me focus on that 
key issue here.  It will also give us a chance to take a controversial look 
at the name of a little-known grandson of Asher.

Most scholars, including Anson Rainey, Wm. Moran and Richard Hess, see the 
name of the princeling ruler of Hasi in Amarna Letter EA 175 as being west 
Semitic.  A west Semitic princeling in the Beqa Valley in the Amarna Age 
would be expected to be an Amorite, since Lebanon was the homeland of the 
Amorites at that time.
***
??

Amorites were about everywhere, as early as the beginning of the 2nd 
millennium !?

A.
***



Anson Rainey and Wm. Moran see the first element of this princeling’s name 
as being Ilu or Il.  That’s the classic indication of an Amorite name, since 
“Ilu” is the Amorite name for their deity.  The full name of the Amorite 
deity was probably “Ilu Amurru”, but the “Amurru” portion of such deity’s 
name virtually never appears in names, whereas “Ilu” is common in Amorite 
names.  Frank Moore Cross, “Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic” (1997), at pp. 
57-58.

The classic Amorite princeling name in the Amarna Letters is Milk-ilu. 
Although there are many possible interpretations of this name, one is: 
“(The Amorite God) Ilu (Is) King”, or simply:  “Ilu King”.  Milk-ilu is 
associated with Rubutu and Gezer in the Aijalon Valley.  He likely 
represents the furthest southern extent of the historical Amorites in the 
mid-14th century BCE.

Startlingly, at p. 114 of “Amarna Personal Names” (1993), Richard S. Hess 
cites a Biblical attestation of what might be this same name:  “Hebrew malki’el, 
Genesis 46: 17….”  That’s MLKY)L, a grandson of Asher.  The Blue Letter 
Bible gives the innocuous meaning of this name as “my king is God”.  But 
another possible interpretation would be that this is an historical name of 
an Amorite princeling, and as such might have [or at least might originally 
have had] the seemingly blasphemous meaning of “(The Amorite God) Ilu (Is) 
King”, or simply:  “Ilu King”.

Why would the Hebrew author of the Patriarchal narratives risk blasphemy in 
order to memorialize this particular name?  Historical Milk-ilu in the 
Amarna Letters has the same name as MLKY)L at Genesis 46: 17, but more 
importantly he may be the historical model for Biblical Mamre in chapter 14 
of Genesis.  Asher’s grandson MLKY)L is named after the historical Amorite 
princeling Milk-ilu (Biblical nickname ‘Mamre’, meaning “The Amorite”) in 
the Aijalon Valley with whom Abraham was allied and who helped Abraham 
rescue Lot on that dangerous mission into Syria.  When we look at Genesis 
46: 17, we are seeing the actual historical name of the historical Amorite 
princeling in the Aijalon Valley with whom the first Hebrews were 
historically allied.  Rather than being Biblical fiction, as scholars would 
have it, this is attested historical fact, as verified by the Amarna 
Letters.

In my considered opinion, the princeling ruler of Hasi in Amarna Letter EA 
175 has the name Ilu-da-a-ya, which is an Amorite name, featuring Ilu as the 
name of the Amorite deity.  There was in fact an enclave of Amorite 
princelings at and near Hasi in the Hurrian-dominated Beqa Valley in Year 14 
(of Akhenaten’s reign), exactly as the second half of Genesis 14: 7 states 
the matter to be.  The p-i-n-p-o-i-n-t  historical accuracy of the 
Patriarchal narratives in a mid-14th century BCE context is utterly 
astonishing.
***
hm
this is not the most astonishing part of that "theory".

Arnaud Fournet