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-1st
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 18th 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-15th 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 5th 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 StinehartEvanston, Illinois
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
