Karl wrote: “Jimdoesn’t take Genesis to be an accurate historical record.” Let’s evaluate that claim by comparing my view of Genesis26: 34-35 and 27: 46 with the scholarly view. Unlike university scholars, I myself interpret Genesis 26: 34-35 and 27:46 on the basis of the first seven XTY names in the Patriarchal narratives beingHurrian names: “And Esau was fortyshanah old [age 20 in 12-month years] when he took to wife A-xu-ú-di-ia-T/YHWDY-T [“Judith”]the daughter of Bi-ir-ia/B-)R-Y [“Beeri”] the XTY/Xu-ti-ya/Hurrian [“Hittite”],and Ba-$i-ma-T/B$M-T [“Bashemath”] the daughter of I-la-nu/)Y-L-N theXTY/Xu-ti-ya/Hurrian [“Hittite”]. Whichwere a grief of mind unto Isaac and to Rebekah. …And Rebekah said to Isaac, I am weary of my life because of the Hurrian[XT] girls [who are Esau’s wives]: if[younger twin son] Jacob were to take a Hurrian girl as wife, such as these whoare daughters of the land [that is, lifelong residents of Canaan], what goodshall my life be to me?” Genesis 26: 34-35; 27: 46 1. Esau was the realisticage of 20 years [in 12-month years] when his father Isaac arranges for Isaac’sfavorite, firstborn son Esau to marry two Hurrian women who have lived theirentire lives in Canaan, and who are desirable brides because they are of theruling class of Canaan. [Per Mark E. Cohen, “The Cultic Calendarsof the Ancient Near East” (1993), which is the leading scholarly work on thissubject, the archaic meaning of shanah is “the turn of theyear”, which effectively designates a 6-month period. In my view [being a matter not mentioned byCohen one way or the other], all stated ages in shanah in the truly ancient Patriarchalnarratives use this archaic meaning of shanah, and need simply to be un-doubledto convert them into 12-month year ages.] The only time when Hurrians lived in Canaan on a regular basis was in themid-14th century BCE, when Hurrian charioteers dominated the rulingclass of Canaan [per the Amarna Letters]. Accordingly, that is the only time period when it would make sense forIsaac to arrange for his favorite, firstborn son Esau to marry women named A-xu-ú-di-ia-T/YHWDY-Tand Ba-$i-ma-T/B$M-T, whose fathers are named Bi-ir-ia/B-)R-Y and I-la-nu/)Y-L-N,all of whom are XTY/Xu-ti-ya/Hurrians. 2. But while initially appearing to be verydesirable brides for Isaac’s favorite, firstborn son Esau, why would womennamed YHWDY-T and B$M-T soon turn out tobe “a grief of mind unto Isaac and to Rebekah”, to the point that Esau’s motherRebekah specifically asks “what good shall my life be to me”? The answer lies in the underlying meanings ofthese Hurrian women’s names. The final-T in both names is the Hurrian feminine ending. Y-HWD-Y is effectively ia – xuti – ia, whereia is the Hurrian theophoric, which for these XTY/Hurrian women implies“Teshup”, and xuti is the Hurrian word “to praise”. The name of Esau’s first Hurrian wife thus means“Teshup, Praise Teshup”, which by implication is telling us why bothdomineering Rebekah and mild-mannered Isaac are so grieved by these Hurriandaughters-in-law. Instead of cleaving totheir husband Esau and adopting Esau’s culture and religion, this woman named“Teshup, Praise Teshup” is attempting to foist her Hurrian culture and religionupon Esau and their sons. B$M-T means“Sent by Teshup”, with the same implications. * * * Now let’s compare myHurrian-based view of the above key Biblical passages to the “scholarly” viewthat is taught to the freshmen at university every fall. 1. Isaac waited until his firstborn son, hisfavorite son Esau, was age 40 years before arranging for his marriages. [That does not make good sense.] 2. Esau’s marriages are characterized byscholars in one of the following two ways: (i) Esau married two Hittite women from easternAnatolia. [But they’re expressly statedto be “daughters of the land [of Canaan]”, and no Hittites ever lived in Canaan,so that makes no sense.] Esau’s firstHittite wife inexplicably has a west Semitic name that means “Jewess”. [No Hittite woman would have a west Semiticname, and no woman on planet Earth would have a name in the Patriarchal Agethat means “Jewess”, since the state of Judah was centuries in the future.] Nothing could make less sense than that; e-x-c-e-p-t : (ii) Or, Esau married twoCanaanite women, with the XTY being an unattested Canaanite tribe. But why on earth would Isaac do for hisfavorite, firstborn son Esau exactly what Abraham had said was forbidden forhis son Isaac? “[T]hou shalt not take awife unto my son [Isaac] of the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom Idwell”. Genesis 24: 3 Ouch! Note that the scholarly view of the abovepassages makes no sense linguistically, historically or textually. By sharp contrast, everything makes perfectsense, on all levels, if and only if one realizes that all 7 of the first 7references to the XTY in the Patriarchal narratives are utilizing attestedHurrian personal names from the Late Bronze Age Hurrian province of Nuzi. The XTY are neither Hittites nor Canaanites; rather, they’re the “Praise Teshup people”/Xuti-ia/XTY,i.e. the Hurrians, who dominated the ruling class of Canaan only in the mid-14thcentury BCE, which is the historical Patriarchal Age. The p-i-n-p-o-i-n-t historical accuracy of the Patriarchalnarratives in that one particular, well-attested historical context isbreathtaking. Jim Stinehart Evanston, Illinois
_______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
