Jim: On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 6:53 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Yitzhak Sapir: > > You just made my point. Outside of the Bible, there’s n-o-t-h-i-n-g in > the secular history of the ancient world that documents use of the word > Kasdim, or anything similar to Kasdim, to refer to the Kaldu/Chaldeans. > That’s > my point exactly. If people learn nothing else from this thread, this > thread > will have done invaluable service. > > Isn’t it a bit scary that scholars consistently “forget” to mention that > there is no inscription from the ancient world [outside of the Bible] that > refers to the Chaldeans as Kasdim? > In Italian they refer to a people known as “Tedesco” which is mentioned by no other language or country. Isn’t it scary that no other language or people knows about this people? There is n-o-t-h-i-n-g in other Romance languages (French, Spanish, Romanian, etc.) that even remotely resembles this name. Now wouldn’t it be a great service to show how the Scandinavians learned their word “Tysk” from the Italians? To the best of my knowledge, no scholar has ever attempted a serious comparison of Tedesco with Tysk as mentioned here. Isn’t that a bit scary? If anyone mentioned the theory as proposed in the above three paragraphs, he would be the laughing stock of the scholarly world, especially were he to word it in the terms used above. At least in this example, the Scandinavians and Italians refer to the same people. Now we come to your theory… > > 3. To the best of my knowledge, no scholar has ever attempted a serious > comparison of K$DYM at Genesis 11: 28, 31 to Karaduniash [as I set forth on > this thread]. Isn’t that a bit scary? > > Jim Stinehart > Evanston, Illinois Karl W. Randolph. _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
