Biblical Hebrew Forum

[JimStinehart AT aol.com]

Since the b-hebrew list focuses on linguistic considerations regarding words and names in the Hebrew Bible, perhaps the best way to show that the Amarna Age dates all the long way back to the Patriarchal Age in the Bronze Age is to compare the proper names in both sources.  Both the Patriarchal narratives and the Amarna Letters can be dated to a period pre-dating mid-1^st millennium BCE by centuries, by noting the non-Semitic names that dominate Canaan in both the Patriarchal narratives and the Amarna Letters, and the type of Egyptian names that predominate in both sources.

 

A.  Two of the Non-Semitic Names in the Amarna Letters Are Essentially the Same as Names in the Patriarchal Narratives

 

(1)  pi-ri-iz-zi at Amarna Letter EA 27: 93 is essentially the same non-Semitic name as PRZY at Genesis 13: 7.

 

(2)  xi-bi-ya at Amarna Letter EA 178: 2 is essentially the same non-Semitic name as XWY at Genesis 34: 2.

 

That is one leading indication that the Amarna Age and the Patriarchal Age are one and the same time period.

 

B.  Both the Amarna Letters and the Patriarchal Narratives Feature Dozens of Non-Semitic Names of a People Who Dominated the Ruling Class of Canaan Only in That One, Short-Lived Time Period

 

(1)  Non-Semitic names of ruling class people in Canaan in the Amarna Letters include:  Biridiya, Biryawaza, Yasdata, Shuwardata, Arsawuya, Mayarzana, Satatna, Turbazu, Endaruta, Yamiuta, Zirdamyasda.

 

(2)  Non-Semitic names of ruling class people in Canaan in the Patriarchal narratives include:  )RYWK at Genesis 14: 1, 9;  BR( at Genesis 14: 2;  BR$( at Genesis 14: 2:   $N)B at Genesis 14: 2;  $M)BR at Genesis 14: 2;  QYNY at Genesis 15: 19;  QNZY at Genesis 15: 19;  XTY at Genesis 15: 20;  23: 10;  25: 9;  26: 34;  36: 2;  49: 29-30;  50: 13;  (PRWN, at Genesis 23: 8, 10, 13-14, 16-17;  25: 9;  49: 29-30;  50: 13;  CXR at Genesis 23: 8 and Genesis 25: 9;  B)RY at Genesis 26: 34;  YBWSY at Genesis 15: 21.

 

That is further objective linguistic and historical evidence that the Amarna Age and the Patriarchal Age are one and the same time period.

 

C.  Egyptian Names in the Amarna Letters Are Likewise Similar to the Egyptian Names in the Patriarchal Narratives

 

(1)  pa-xa-na-te at Amarna Letter EA 60: 10 features pA at the beginning, meaning “the” in Egyptian, and then na-te, being the Late Bronze Age pronunciation of the Egyptian word for “god”.  After the first letter in Joseph’s Egyptian name at Genesis 41: 45, the next three Hebrew letters are P NT, with peh/P being pA as in pa-xa-na-te, and nun-tav/NT being the same as na-te in pa-xa-na-te.

 

(2)  We can even compare straight up the historical name at Amarna of the high-priest of Ra from On, which is Pawah, with the beginning of the name of Joseph’s Egyptian priestly father-in-law, who Biblically is the high-priest of Ra from On.  The first three letters of the name of Joseph’s Egyptian priestly father-in-law at Genesis 41: 45 are P W+, which is pA wAt.  Although the names are not identical, they are quite similar.  Furthermore, pA and wAt [which are the first two Egyptian words in the names of both Joseph’s initial Egyptian master and Joseph’s Egyptian priestly father-in-law] are key Egyptian words in Akhenaten’s Great Hymn to the Aten.

 

(3)  G$-N [“Goshen”] appears 10 times in the Patriarchal narratives as the Egyptian name of the place where the Hebrews sojourned while in Egypt.  The final -N is a west Semitic ending that effectively means “place”.  G$-N refers to the largely rural area in the general vicinity of G$.  The only Egyptian locale that fits Hebrew G$ linguistically is Qis, the capital city of nome #14, south of Akhenaten’s capital city of Amarna on the west bank of the Nile River.  The name Qis is prominent in the time of the Hyksos and continues to be mentioned sporadically throughout the 18^th Dynasty, which includes the Amarna era.  In Egyptian, the name “Qis” consists of the following four Gardiner hieroglyphic signs:  N29;  M17;  S29;  O49.  The final sign means “city” in Egyptian, so it would not be rendered in Hebrew.  The second sign is a vowel, so it will not be rendered by a separate Hebrew letter in the defective spelling of early Biblical Hebrew.  Thus the two relevant signs for our purposes are #1 and #3.  #1 is N29, which is equivalent to Hebrew gimel/G in Gezer, per item #104 for Gezer on the mid-15^th century BCE Thutmose III list of places in Canaan.  #3 is S29, which is $ for A$tartu at item 28 on the T III list.  Based on the foregoing, the Egyptian name “Qis” is a perfect linguistic match to the Hebrew word “Goshen”/G$-N that appears 10 times in the Patriarchal narratives.  [To the best of my knowledge, there is no other potential linguistic match to an Egyptian geographical locale, prior to the 5^th century BCE or so.]  Qis was a sleepy rural place near Egypt’s capital city of Akhetaten/Amarna under Akhenaten, and as such was the most logical place for the Hebrews to sojourn in Egypt, where they tended Pharaoh’s livestock.

 

*       *       *

 

If one looks at non-west Semitic proper names in the Patriarchal narratives and at Amarna, the logical conclusion is that both such sources must be coming out of the same historical time period, given the similarity of those non-west Semitic names in such two sources.  It’s also true that many west Semitic names from the two sources match, such as:  Milk-i-Ilu at Amarna Letter EA 249: 16 is MLK -Y- )L at Genesis 46: 17.  ia-lu-na at Amarna Letter EA 287: 57 is )LN as the first three letters at Genesis 13: 18, 14: 13 and 18: 1.  If one focuses on non-Hebrew proper names in the Patriarchal narratives, the close match with Amarna couldn’t be clearer.

 

Jim Stinehart

Evanston, Illinois