Isaac Fried: 1. You wrote: “I would hate to spoilsuch pastoral, cute and naive names given by keen eyed herders to theirdaughters. So I would leave it at….” Isaac Fried, do you really think thatthese three Matriarchs are being called “cattle”? “Fat calf”, “jumpy young sheep”, and “heavy,pregnant sheep”, which are what you offer below, are not fitting names forthese three fine Hebrew Matriarchs. Rather than being passive and meek, all three are exactly theopposite! Rebekah wears the pants in thefamily, and unilaterally prohibits her husband Isaac from giving Isaac’s grandblessing to Isaac’s favorite son Esau. Leah forces her husband to impregnate her with yet another son by theadroit use of a mandrake her young son Reuben had gathered. And Rebekah assertively demands that herhusband Jacob provide her with sons. Inno way, shape or form are these three Matriarchs passive and meek like “cattle”. And why would you think their parents wouldgive them such unprepossessing names as that? Moreover, you’ve totally abandoned yourformer focus on looking for theophorics in ancient names. 2. You wrote: “RIBQAH from the rootRBQ, from which we have the עגל מרבק EGEL MARBEQ, 'fat calf?', of 1Sam. 28:24. MRBQ actually refers to “a stall in whichcattle are tied up”, with the root RBQ in turn referring to the “tying up” of animals. Why would that be a fitting name for Bethuelto give to his only daughter? And whatwould such a name tell us about Rebekah? I myself do not see how those Hebrew wordswould suggest that Rebekah will “ensnare” a man by her beauty. Moreover, Rebekah does not “ensnare” Isaacanyway. Rebekah volunteers to travel allthe long way to Canaan from eastern Syria, and Isaac joyfully accepts hispreviously unseen bride. As usual with so many personal names in the Patriarchal narratives, JohnMckenzie’s “Dictionary of the Bible” says as to the name “Rebekah”/RBQH: “etymology uncertain”. More likely is that Bethuel married aHurrian woman in Bronze Age eastern Syria, who gave their daughter a Hurrianname. RB is erbe in Hurrian, meaning “anoble”. -qa is an honorific Hurriansuffix. -H is a Biblical Hebrew conventionfor showing that a foreign, non-Semitic name has been Semiticized. So the Hurrian meaning of RB -Q -H fitsRebekah perfectly: “an honored noblewoman [who has adopted west Semitic-speaking Canaan as her new homeland]”. As to the west Semitic/Hebrew meaningthat Bethuel would appreciate [which I know is the only meaning you’re interestedin], consider that the qof/Q that is used in the Hurrian meaning might have tobe stretched a little bit for the west Semitic/Hebrew meaning. -Q sounds quite a bit like -)X. If that stretch is made, then the meaningbecomes apparent. RB means “great” inHebrew. )X means “brother” in Hebrew,and in a proper name means “the divine Brother”, that is, “God”. [Isaac Fried, you seem to have abandoned yourformer insistence on looking for theophorics, but I’m still doggedly following youroriginal advice.] -H is obviously theHebrew feminine ending for a woman’s name. So if -Q can be stretched a bit to be viewed here as representing -)X inHebrew [so that there will be a theophoric], then the meaning of the name RB -Q-H : RB -)X -H is: “Woman [who knows andasserts that] God Is Great”. That’s a much better westSemitic/Hebrew meaning for the name “Rebekah” than “fat calf”. And besides, neither RBQ nor MRBQ means “fatcalf” anyway, but rather refer in Hebrew to the “tying up” of an animal. 3. You wrote: “RAXEL, like רגלRAGEL, a jumpy young sheep.” At Psalm 15: 3, KJV translates RGLas: “backbiteth”. What a horrible name for lovely Rachel! Rachel’s name is not RGL, and it’s not RXL asa single word. Rather, it’s RX -L, wherethe final lamed is a theophoric: )L. Rachel is not a “backbiter”! 4. You wrote: “LEA, a heavy(pregnant?) sheep. Compare Is. 40:11. כרעהעדרו ירעה בזרעו יקבץ טלאים ובחיקו ישא עלות ינהל. KJV: ‘Heshall feed his flock like a shepherd: he shall gather the lambs with his arm,and carry them in his bosom, and shall gently lead those that are with young.’ ” Perhaps I misunderstand what you’resaying here. As I note in my response toNir Cohen’s post, you seem to be trying to tie L)H/“Leah” to (WL,meaning a “ewe” or “cow” that is nursing. But (WL is not at all like L)H as to the Hebrew letters involved. [However, perhaps I have completelymisunderstood you.] Much better is to analyze the name “Leah” as follows: L)H : L-)H : L -)X. Then we’ve got our theophoric, and Leah hasthe following fine Hebrew etymology and meaning of her name: “Belonging to God”. 5. You wrote: “I find it stillnoteworthy that there is an L in RAXEL, LEA, ZILPA and BILHAH.” Yet your explanations above involvenary a single theophoric. 6. You wrote: “The great challengeis the name נפתלי NAPTALIY.” Why don’t you think that the stated etymologyat Genesis 30: 8 makes sense? 7. I myself don’t see any of the Matriarchs as bearing names that signify “cattle”. One could not find a group of women who areless docile and meek than the revered Hebrew Matriarchs, who instead are, totheir credit, aggressive and assertive to a fault. With the Matriarchs’ names not being attestedoutside of the Bible in west Semitic, surely these Biblical names must have agrander meaning than “cattle”. JimStinehart Evanston,Illinois
_______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
