Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible [14] 2018060046, 9781575067742

Citation preview

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible A Lexicon of Language Contact

Benjamin I. Noomm um ‘nccklucc': S hmnyk’ ‘nccklucc‘ Dan 5:7. 29 but lmuzyn

HG: ()Imn ""Ilulurn'umku- .-\[S;\’ l 1-H ]]

LINGUISTIC STUDIES IN ANCIENT WEST SEMITIC VOLUME 14

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

LINGUISTIC STUDIES IN ANCIENT WEST SEMITIC Editedby CYNTHIA L. MILLER-NAUDE’ andJACOBUS A. NAUDE'

The sen'es Linguistic Studies in Ancient West Semitic is devoted to the ancient West Semitic languages, including Hebrew, Aramaic, Ugaritic, and their near congeners. It includes monographs, collections of essays, and text editions informed by the approaches of linguistic science.

The material studied will span from the earliest texts to the rise of Islam.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible A Lexicon of Language Contact

Benjamin J. Noonan

EISENBRAUNS | University Park, Pennsylvania

mm. 171 nmov mmm mm mm

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

|

|

Names: Noonan, Benjamin J., author. Title: Non-semitic loanwords in the Hebrew Bible : a lexicon of language contact / Benjamin J. Noonan. Other titles: Linguistic studies in ancient West Semitic. Description: University Park, Pennsylvania : Eisenbrauns, [2019] Series: Linguistic studies in ancient West Semitic 1 Includes bibliographical references and index. Summary: “An analysis of the Hebrew Bible’s non-Semitic terminology, providing insight into foreign contact in ancient Israe ”—Provided by publisher. Identifiers: LCCN 2018060046 ISBN 9781575067742 (cloth) Subjects: LCSH.‘ Bible. Old Testament—Terminology. [ Hebrew language—Foreign words and phrases. Classification: LCC 135525 .N57 2019 | DDC 221.4—dc23 LC record available at httpsz/llccn.loc.gov/2018o60046 Copyright © 2019 The Pennsylvania State University All rights reserved Printed in the United States ofAmerica Published by The Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, PA 16802—1003

Eisenbrauns is an imprint of The Pennsylvania State University Press. The Pennsylvania State University Press is a member of the Association of University Presses. It is the policy ofThe Pennsylvania State University Press to use acid-free paper. Publications on uncoated stock satisfy the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Maten‘al, ANSI 239.48—1992.

For my two girls

Jenn (mm: mm mm N379? vs bm-nwx) Katy (ma "1? "W Baa-11.121170: nan.)

Contents

List of Tables ix Acknowledgments xi List ofAbbreviations xiii List ofEntries xxxi

1.7

Introduction ............................................ 3 History of Research 4 Corpus and Parameters of This Study Terminology 8 Identifying Loanwords 12 Mechanisms of Borrowing 14 Loanwords as Cultural Symbols 18 Conclusion 20 _

Chapter I. 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6

Chapter 2. Non-Semitic Contact in Ancient Palestine.................... 21 The Egyptians 21 2.1 The Greeks 23 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6

2.7

The Hittites and Luvians The Hum'ans 26 The Indo-Aryans 27 The Iranians 28 Conclusion 29

25

Chapter 3. Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible ................. 33 Chapter 4. Quantitative Analysis ................................... 235 235 Methodology and Terminology 4.1 4.2 General Distribution of the Hebrew Bible’s Loanwords 237 240 Loanwords and the Hebrew Bible’s Canonical Divisions 4-3 Loanwords and the Hebrew Bible’s Source-Critical Divisions 254 4-4 Loanwords and the Hebrew Bible’s Typological Divisions 259 45 4.6 266 Loanwords and Parts of Speech 267 Loanwords and Domain of Use 4-7

vii

viii

5.1 5.2 5.3

Phonology ()rlhogruphy Morphology

273 292 293

(‘hapter 6. lividenee lor l)inleet ol‘()rigin and Date of Borrowing......... 301 6.1 Egyptian 301 6.2 (lreek 307 llillile and Luviun 308 6.3 6.4 llurrian 300 ()ld Indie 309 6.5 6.6 ()ld Iranian 310 6.7 Synthesis 313

Chapter 7. Non-Semitic Loanwords as Evidence for Foreign Contact in Ancient Palestine .......................................... 314 7.1 The Egyptians 314 7.2 The Greeks 315 7.3 The llillites and Luvians 316 7.4 The Hurrians 316 7.5 The lndo-Aryans 316 7.6 The Iranians 317 Epilogue .................................................. 318 Appendix: Words Im'mveeltlr Identified as Non-Semitic Loans Bibliographv 359 Index (g/"Aulhors 425 Index q/‘Scripmre 437 Index ofAneient Soun'es 463 Index of Word‘s' 471

321

Tables

Table 4.1 Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table

4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 4.10 4.11 4.12 4.13

Table 4.14 Table 4.15 Table 4.16 Table 5.1 Table 5.2 Table 5.3 Table 5.4 Table 5.5 Table 5.6

Number of Loans and Their Frequency by Recipient Language ........................................... Number of Loans and Their Frequency by Donor Language . . . Number of Loans in the Torah ........................... Frequency of Loans in the Torah ......................... Number of Loans in the Former Prophets .................. Frequency of Loans in the Former Prophets ................ Number of Loans in the Latter Prophets ................... Frequency of Loans in the Latter Prophets ................. Number of Loans in the Writings ........................ Frequency of Loans in the Writings ...................... Number of Loans in J, E, D, P, H, & DtrH ................. Frequency of Loans in J, E, D, P, H, & Dtrl-l ............... Number of Loans in ABH, SBH, Core SBH, LBH, & Core LBH ........................................ Frequency of Loans in ABH, SBH, Core SBH, LBH, & Core LBH ........................................ Distribution of Parts of Speech .......................... Distribution of Semantic Categories ...................... Consonant Correspondences with Egyptian ................ Consonant Correspondences with Greek .................. Consonant Correspondences with Hittite & Luvian .......... Consonant Correspondences with Hurrian ................. Consonant Correspondences with Old lndic ................ Consonant Correspondences with Old Iranian ..............

ix

Acknowledgments

John Donne’s famous line “No man is an island” well expresses the individual and cooperative effort that has gone into the writing of this book. Academic research and scholarly pursuits are best undertaken within the context of community, and for this reason I offer my sincere gratitude to all who have contributed. This work represents a substantial revision and expansion of my Hebrew Union College—Jewish Institute of Religion (Cincinnati, Ohio) doctoral dissertation, which I could not have completed without either of my readers, Nili S. Fox and Stephen A. Kaufman. Both invested much time in this project and offered invaluable direction from beginning to end. Above all, they have taught me how to think critically and to recognize what can and cannot be concluded given the available evidence. My hope is that this book honors the lasting legacy they have passed on to me. I am grateful to Cynthia Miller-Naude’ and Jacobus Naude’ as well as Jim Eisenbraun for accepting my manuscript for publication in Eisenbrauns’ Linguistic Studies in Ancient West Semitic series. Throughout the editorial process they have worked diligently to see the manuscript to publication, and it has been a privilege to work with them. I am very grateful to Matthew Williams, my production editor, for shepherding this book through the production process. I would like to express special gratitude to Peter T. Daniels, whose superb skills as a copy editor resulted in many improvements in terms of readability and formatting. Sarah Cho and Stephen Koehn are also to be thanked for assisting with the formatting of the manuscript. The library staffs at Hebrew Union College—Jewish Institute of Religion and Columbia International University played a crucial role in this project. I would like to thank them for diligently fulfilling my many interlibrary loan requests. This project could not have been completed without their assistance in obtaining library resources. Throughout the course of this project I have enjoyed the privilege of corresponding with several individuals: James P. Allen, Michael Barre', Barry Blake, Ben Bryan, Claudia Ciancaglini, Francesco Gardani, Samuel Greengus, Mauro Giorgieri, Zev Joseph Handel, Lars Johanson, Aaron J. Koller, Joseph Lam, John Maku— jina, Ganesh Malla, H. Craig Melchert, Robert Rezetko, Frank Seifart, P. Oktor Skjaerva, Grant Testut, and Ian Young. I am grateful to each of these individuals xi

xii

Acknowledgmem;

for their assistance with various topics covered in the manuscn‘pt. I am especially thankful to Grant, who read over much of the manuscn'pt in its van'ous stages and offered many valuable insights. Finally, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my family. My wonderful wife J enn—who also has a Ph.D. in Hebrew Bible—read my entire manuscn‘pt, offered valuable feedback, and above all supported and encouraged me throughout the process. My precious daughter Katy graciously allowed her daddy to put time into this project at the occasional expense of playtime. Because their sacrifices ultimately made this book possible, I dedicate this book to Jenn and Katy. Having acknowledged all the assistance that was given to me in this project, I take full responsibility for whatever shortcomings may be found herein.

Abbreviations

Bible Texts and Versions (1’ Aquila BHS Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia BHQ Biblia Hebraica Quinta, ed. Adrian Schenker et al. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2004 6 Septuagint (Greek) MT Masoretic Text NIV New International Version NJPS Tanakh.‘ A New Translation of the Holy Scriptures according to the Traditional Hebrew Text NRSV New Revised Standard Version Old Greek OG 6 Peshitta (Syriac) Symmachus o’ SP Samaritan Pentateuch Targum(s) 1 55”“ Esther (11) Ne“ Neofiti 0‘“?- anelos P“- Pseudo-Jonathan 5”“ Samaritan Theodotion 6’ Vulgate (Latin) 13 VL Vetus Latina (Old Latin)

Abbreviations for Ancient Sources Biblical and Deuterocanonical Books Gen Exod Lev Num Deut Josh

Ezek Hos Zech Mal Neh

Judg

1—2 Sam

1—2 Kgs

Isa

Jer

Joel Amos Obad Jonah Mic Nah Hab Zeph Hag Ps Job Prov Ruth Song Qoh Lam Esth Dan Ezra

1—2 Chr

Sir

Luke

John

Gal xiii

Heb

Rev

Abbreviatiom

xiv

Classical Sources Aesop (6th c. B.C.E.) Fab. Fabulae (Fables) Agatharchides of Cnidus (2nd c. B.C.E.) M. Eryth. De mari Erythraeo (0n the Erythaean Sea) Alcaeus (7th—6th c. 13.01:.) Frag. Fragmenta (Fragments) Anacreon (6th c. B.C.E.) Frag. Fragmenta (Fragments) Antiphanes (4th c. B.C.E.) Com. Comicus (Comic) Arcadius (4th c. C.E.?) Acc. De accentibus (0n Accents) Am‘anus (2nd c. C.E.) Peripl. M. Eux. Periplus maris Euxini Athenaeus (2nd—3rd c. C.E.) Delp'n. Dezp'nosophistae (The Learned Banqueteers) Chamaeleon (4th—3rd c. B.C.E.) Frag. Fragmenta (Fragments) Cosmas Indicopleustes (6th c. C.E.) Top. Topographia Christiana (Christian Topography) Demosthenes (4th c. B.C.E.) Oral. Oratores (Orations) Diodorus Siculus (Ist c. B.C.E.) Bibl. hist. Bibliotheca historica Dioscorides Pedanius (Ist c. C.E.) Mat. med. De materia medica (0n Pharmacology) Euripides (5th 0. B.C.E.) Alc. Alcestis Festus (Sextus Pompeius Festus) (2nd c. C.E.) Verb. sign. De verborum significatione (0n the Sense of Words) Galen (2nd 0. CE.) Simp. med.

De simplicium medicamentorum temperamentis acfacultatibus (0n the Powers ofSimple Remedies)

Herodianus (2nd 0. CE.) Pros. cath. De prosodia catholica (General Prosody) Herodotus (5th c. B.C.E.) Hist. Historiae (Histories) Hesychius of Alexandria (5th—6th c. C.E.) Lex.

Lexicon (Lexicon)

Hippasus (6th c. B.C.E.) Test.

Testimonia(Testimonies)

Hippocrates (5th c. B.C.E.) Aer.

De aere aquis et locxs' (0n Airs, Waters, and Places)

.4 hhrm'tuttl mx

llunIcr (th c. luau.) ii. Iliux (Iliad) (M. ()L/l'SNl'N (()('Il‘.\'l\‘(_'l') lsncus (4m c. ll.(‘.l“.) ( )rat. ()mton'x ((iratl'on.\') |‘\.I‘doru'~.. |lispulcnsis ((llll 7l|I c. l‘.I'..) ( )rig. ( )rigim w (( )I'igi/M) Josephus (Isl c. (‘.l-.) Ant. .-lIIqunI'tat('.\'_/'m/ai('m' (.ll'wixit Antiquities) Ital. Bullion/Minn'um (.lc'lw'xh War) .luslininn (“"1 c. (‘.I'-.) I fix. Iliglns'ta (I )I'gl'xt) l’ulladl'u's. (4lh c. (‘.I-,'.) 0/). am: ()pux (I‘L’t'il‘ltillll'lll‘ (Work o./'I"arming) I’vriplu.\' Marix Ruhri (Isl c. (‘.|I‘.) (I'I'Iv i’vriplux oft/10 [aflrvthramn Sea) Plato (5th 4th c. ll.(‘.l.'-.) ( 'rat. ( 'ratl'lus Plaulus (2nd c. ll.(‘.l:‘.) Pom. l’ovnulus Pliny lhc lz‘ldcr (Isl c. (‘.I:‘.) Nat. Naturalis luls'toria (Natural History) Plularch (Isl 2nd c. (‘.Ia.) ('im. ('I'mon Pollux (2nd 0. (‘.l.‘-.) ()nom. ()nomaxtivon (()noma.\'ti('on) Polybius (3rd 2nd c. ll.(‘.l.-‘.) Ilist. I IIIs'toriae (IIiA'IUt‘il'S) Porphyrius (3rd 0. ('.li.) in IIarm. (‘ommcntariux in Harmonica I’toiemaei (Commentary on Ptolemy .'s' Harmonics) Properlius (Isl c. II.(:.I5.) El. [flog/ac (Iiiegics) Pseudo-Lucian (2nd c. (LIL) A m. A mores (Lovey) Publilius Syrus (Isl c. ILCJ-l.) Sent. Svntcntiac (.S'entences) Strabo (Isl c. II.(‘.I-:. Isl c. (:.I-:.) Geog. (J'cographica (Geography) Thcocrilus (4th 3rd c. II.c.II.) Id.

Iydvils (I’dylls') Thcophraslus (4lh-~3rd c. I3.C.II.) Hist. plant. II-istoria plantarum (Enquiry into Plants) Lap. De [apidibus

XV

xvi Abbreviation; M

Thucydides (5th c. B.C.E.) Hist. Historiae (Histories) Xenophon (5th—4th c. 13.015.) Anal). Anabasis (Ascent) Cyr. Cyropaedia Zonaras (12th c. C.E.) Lex. Lexicon (Lexicon) Patristic Sources Ishodad of Merv Comm. Dan. Commentariorum in Danielem (Commentary on Daniel) Jerome Epist. Epistulae (Letters) Theodoret of Cyrrhus Comm. Dan. Commentariorum in Danielem (Commentary on Daniel) Dead Sea Scrolls IQH Hymns of Thanksgiving (Hoyadot) IQM War Scroll (Milhamah) (1Q33) IQS Serek Hayah.ad (Rule ofthe Community) 4QpNah Pesher Nahum (4QI69) IIQT‘ Temple Scroll“ (11019) 11thJob Targum ofJob (11Q10) apGen Genesis Apocryphon (1Qap Gen") CD Cairo Geniza Damascus Document

Pseudepigrapha Odes Sol. Odes ofSolomon Pss. Sol. Psalms ofSolomon Rabbinic Sources b. Cant. Rab. Kelim

Babylonian Talmud Canticles Rabbah (Song ofSongs Rabbah) Kelim

m. Menah, Nid.

Mishnah Menahot Niddah Sanhedrin

Sanh. Sem.

Semahot

Sabb. Seb.

Sabbat Sebi‘it

Yoma

Yoma

xvii

Abbreviations

Abbreviations for Languages Akkadian Akk Alalakh Akkadian Alalakh Ammonite Ammon Amorite Amor Arabic Arab Aram Aramaic Arm Armenian Av Avestan BA Biblical Aramaic BH Biblical Hebrew Bogh B0ghazko“y Akkadian Can Canaanite Akkadian Chagar Chagar Bazar Akkadian CLuv Cuneiform Luvian Copt Coptic A Akhmimic B Bohairic S Sahidic Christian Palestinian Aramaic CPA culture word (Kulturwort) CW Demotic Dem Amama Akkadian EA Eblaite Ebla Egyptian Eg EH Epigraphic Hebrew Elamite Elam Emar Akkadian Emar Ethiopic (Ge‘ez) Eth Georgian Georg Gk Greek Hatra Hatran Aramaic Hattic Hart Hebrew Heb Hittite Hitt Hieroglyphic Luvian HLuv Hurrian Hurr Imperial Aramaic (Official Aramaic) lA lndo—Aryan of the Ancient Near East (Indoarisch im Alten IAV

JA Lat LB LinA

Vorderasien) Jewish Aramaic Latin Late Babylonian Akkadian Linear A

\Viii

LinB l.u\‘ MA Mand Manl\ll‘ei\: l\’lanl".irth Mari MB Med MK Munhaqa NA Nah NB N l\' N Pen: Nu/i N WS OA OAkk L)A1.i"iii OB Olnd Olran OK OPers OSA Pahl Palm Phoen Ptolm Pun QA Qatna QH RS SA Saite SB Seyth Sir Skt Sogd

Abbrevian‘om

Linear l3 Luvian Middle Assyrian Akkadian lylandaie Mimieliaezm Middle Persian lylamiehaean Parlhian Mari .I\l\'l\".idian Middle Babylonian Akkadian Median Egyptian ol'the Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period lVlunliaqa Akkadian Neo—Aswrian Akkadian Nalmlean Neo-BabyIonian Akkadian lz‘gyptian ol‘tlie New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period New Persian Nuzi Akkadian Northwest Semitic Old Assyrian Akkadian Old Akkadian Old Aramaie Old Babylonian Akkadian Old lndie Old Iranian [Egyptian ol' the Old Kingdom and First Intermediate Period Old Persian Old South Arabian Pahlavi Palmyrene Aramaic Phoenician Egyptian ofthe Ptolemaic Kingdom Punie Qumran Aramaic Qatna Akkadian Qumran Hebrew Ras Shamra Akkadian Samaritan Aramaic Egyptian of the Saite Dynasty (26th Dynasty) Standard Babylonian Akkadian Scythian Hebrew from Ben Sira Sanskrit Sogdian

xix

Abbreviations

Sum Syllepr Syr Ug Urar WSem

Sumerian Syllabic Cyprian Syriac Ugaritic Urartian West Semitic

Abbreviations for Reference Works Abbreviations for Dictionaries and Lexica AA T Arisches im A [ten Testament: Eine sprachwissenschaftliche und kulturhistorische Untersuchung, by Isidor Schefielowitz. 2 vols. Berlin: Calvary, 1901—1903 ABD The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992 AHw Akkadisches Handworterbuch, by Wolfram von Soden. 3 vols. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1965—1981 AIA The Akkadian Influences on Aramaic, by Stephen A. Kaufman. AS 19. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 1974 AISN Altiranisches Sprachgut der Nebenu"berlieferungen, by Walther Hinz. Go"ttinger Orientforschungen, 3. Reihe: Iranica 3. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1975 A]W Altiranisches Wo"rterbuch, by Christian Bartholomae. 2nd ed. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1961 ALBH Akkadian Loanwords in Biblical Hebrew, by Paul V. Mankowski. H88 47. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. 2000 A"W A'gy'ptisches Wo"rterbuch, by Rainer I-Iannig. Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 98, 112. Mainz: von Zabem, 2003— BDB Brown, Francis, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, with an Appendix Containing the Biblical Aramaic, based on the Lexicon of William Gesenius as Translated by Edward Robinson. Oxford: Clarendon, 1906 BGH Bibliographisches Glossar des Hurritischen, by Thomas Richter. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2012 CAD The Assyrian Dictionary ofthe Oriental Institute ofthe University of Chicago, ed. A. Leo Oppenheim, Erica Reiner, and Martha T. Roth 21 vols. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, CAL CDD

1956—2010 The Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon, ed. Stephen A. Kaufman. Cincinnati, OH: Hebrew Union College, 1986—. http://cal.huc.edu/ The Demotic Dictionary ofthe Oriental Institute ofthe University of Chicago, ed. Janet HJohnson. Chicago, IL: Oriental Institute of the

University of Chicago, 2001—

\\

Abbreviations M

(‘1)(7‘

CHD

CLL CPD CPED

Crum DCH

DCPA DELG

DELL

DJBA

DJPA

DLE DMMPP

DMSB

Corrrpar‘utive Dictionary of Ge‘ez (Classical Ethiopic): Ge‘ez— EnglishEnglish—Ge‘ez with an Index of the Semitic Roots, by Wolf Leslau. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1987 The Hittite Dictionary of the Oriental Institute ofthe University of Chicago. ed. Hans G.. Gu"terbock, Harry A. Hoffner, Jr., and Theo P. J. van den Hout. 5 vols. Chicago. IL: Oriental Institute of the Uni— versity ofChicago, 1980— (‘uneitor'm Lm'ian Lexicon, by H. Craig Melchert. Lexica Anatolica 2. Chapel Hill, NC: Author, 1993 A Concise Pahlavi Dictionary, by D. N. MacKenzie. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1971 .4 Comprehensive Persian—English Dictionary, Including the Arabic Winds and Phrases to Be Met with in Persian Literature, by Francis Joseph Steingass. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1892 A Coptic Dictionary, by W. E. Crum. Oxford: Clarendon, 1939 Dictionary of Classical Hebrew, ed. David J. A. Clines. 8 vols.

Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 1993—2011 A Dictionary of Christian Palestinian Aramaic, by Michael Sokoloff. OLA 234. Leuven: Peeters, 2014 Dictionnaire e'tymologique de la langue grecque.‘ histoire des mots, by Pierre Chantraine. 2nd ed. Librairie Klincksieck: Se'rie linguistique 20. Paris: Klinksiek. 2009 Dictionnaire énymologique de la langue latine.‘ histoire des mots, by Alfred Emout, Antoine Meillet, and Jacques Andre'. 5th ed. Paris: Klinksiek. 2001 Demotisches Glossar, by Wolja Erichsen. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1954 A Dictionary ofJewish Babylonian Aramaic ofthe Talmudic and Geonic Periods, by Michael Sokoloff. Publications of the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon Project. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002 A Dictionary ofJewish Palestinian Aramaic ofthe Byzantine Period, by Michael Sokoloff. 2nd ed. Dictionaries of the Talmud, Midrash, and Targum 2. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002 A Dictionary ofLate Egyprtian,by Leonard H. Lesko. 2nd ed. 2 vols. Berkeley. CA: B.C. Scribe Publications, 2002—2004 Dictionary ofMam‘chaean Middle Persian and Parthian, by Desmond Durkin-Meisteremst = Dictionary ofManichaean Texts 3/1. Corpus fontium manichaeorum: Subsidia. Tumhout: Brepols, 2004 Dictionary ofManichaean Sogdian and Bactrian, by Nicholas Sims-Williams and Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst = Dictionary of Manichaean Texts 3/2. 3 vols. Corpus fontium manichaeorum: Sub-

sidia. Tumhout: Brepols, 2012

A bbreviations

DNWSI DOSA DQA DRS

DSA DUL

EDE EDG

EHLL EIr

EPNL

EW

E WAia

FWOT'

GHwA"

GLH HAB

xxi

Dictionary ofthe North- West Semitic Inscriptions, by Jacob Hoftijzer and Karel Jongeling. 2 vols. HdO 21. Leiden: Brill, 1995 Dictionary of Old South Arabic: Sabaean Dialect, by Joan Copeland Biella H88 25. Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1982 Dictionary of Qumran Aramaic, by Edward M. Cook. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2015 Dictionnaire des racines sémitiques ou atteste'es dans les langues se'mitiques, by David Cohen, Francois Bron, and Antoine Lonnet Leuven: Peeters, 1970—

A Dictionary of Samaritan Aramaic, by Abraham Ta]. 2 vols. HdO 50. Leiden: Brill, 2000 A Dictionary ofthe Ugaritic Language in the Alphabetic Tradition, by Gregorio del Olmo Lete and J oaqin Sanmam'n, Ed. and trans. Wilfred G. E. Watson. 3rd ed. 2 vols. HdO 112. Leiden: Brill, 2015 Etymological Dictionary ofEgyptian, by Ga'bor Taka’cs. 3 vols. HdO 48. Leiden: Brill, 1999—2007 Etymological Dictionary of Greek, by Robert S. P. Beekes. 2 vols. Leiden Indo—European Etymological Dictionary Series 10. Leiden: Brill, 2010 Encyclopedia ofHebrew Language and Linguistics, ed. Geoffrey Khan. 4 vols. Leiden: Ed", 2013 Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater. New York: Encyclopedia Iranica Foundation, 1982—. http://www.iranicaonline.org/ Egyptian Proper Names and Loanwords in North- West Semitic, by Yoshiyuki Muchiki. SBLDS 173. Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 1999 Elamisches Wo"rterbuch, by Walther Hinz and Heidemarie Koch. 2 vols. Archa"ologische Mitteilungen aus Iran: Erga"nzungsband 17. Berlin: Reimer, 1987 Etymologisches Wo"rterbuch des Altindoarischen, by Manfred Mayrhofer. 3 vols. Indogermanische Bibliothek, 2. Reihe: W0"rterbu"cher. Heidelberg: Winter, 1986—2001 Foreign Words in the Old Testament: Their Origin and Etymolog, by Maximilian Ellenbogen. London: Luzac, I962 Grofles Handw0"rterbuch Agy.ptisch—Deutsch (2800 bis 950 v. Chr.).' die Sprache der Pharaonen, by Rainer Hannig. 6th ed. Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 64. Mainz: von Zabem, 2015 Glossaire de la langue hourrite, by Emmanuel Laroche. 2 vols. RHA 34—35. Paris: Klinksiek, 1978—1979 Hayeren armatakan bararan [Armenian Language Radical Dictionary], by Hrach‘eay H. Ach_arean. 4 vols. Hayagitakan usumnasrru‘t‘yunneri matenashar [Armenian Research Series]. Yerevan: Yerevani Hamalsarani Hratarakch‘ut‘yun, 1971—1979

xxii

HAL 0T

HED HEG

HHW

IAP

KE WA

LA" Lane LEW

L5”

L81

MD OEAE OLD OPG TL PSD

Abbreviations

The Hebrew and A r'amaic Lexicon ofthe Old Testament, by Ludwig J. Richardson. 2 vols. K0"hler and Walter Baumgartner. Trans. M. Leiden: Brill, 2001 Hittite Etymological Dictionary, by Jaan Puhvel. Trends in Linguistics: Documentation 1, 5, 14, 18, 22, 26, 32. Berlin: Mouton, 1984— Hethitisches etymologisches Glossar, by Johann Tischler. Ed. Gu"nter Neumann and Erich Neu. 16 vols. Innsbrucker Beitra"ge zur Sprachwissenschafi 20. Innsbruck: Institut fur Sprachwissenschafi der Universitat Innsbruck, 1983—2016 Hethitisches Handwo"rterbuch, by Johann Tischler. 2nd ed. Innsbrucker Beitra'ge zur Sprachwissenschaft 128. Innsbruck: Institut fii'r Sprachen und Literaturen der Universita't Innsbruck, 2008 Iranica in the Achaemenid Period (ca. 550—330 B. C.).' Lexicon of Old Iranian Proper Names and Loanwords Attested in Non-Iranian Texts, by Jan Tavemier. OLA 158. Leuven: Peeters, 2007 Kurzgefafltes etymologisches Wo"rterbuch des Altindischen, by Manfred Mayrhofer. 4 vols. Indogerrnanische Bibliothek, 2. Reihe: W0"rterbu"cher. Heidelberg: Winter, 1956—1980 Lexikon der Agy‘ptologie, ed. Wolfgang Helck, Eberhard Otto, and Wolflrart Westendorf. 7 vols. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1972—1992 Lane, Edward William. An Arabic—English Lexicon. 8 vols. London: Williams & Norgate, 1863—1893 Lateinisches etymologisches Wo"rterbuch, by Alois Walde. Ed. Johann Baptist Hofmann. 3rd ed. 2 vols. Indogerrnanische Bibliothek 1. Heidelberg: Winter 1938—1956 A Syriac Lexicon: A Translationfrom the Latin, Correction, Expansion, and Update ofC. Brockelmann s’ Lexicon Syriacum, by Michael Sokoloff. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2009 Liddel, Henry George, Robert Scott, Henry Stuart Jones, and Roderick McKenzie. A Greek—English Lexicon. 9th ed. Oxford: Clarendon, 1996 Drower, E. S., and Rudolf Macuch. A Mandaic Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon, 1963 The Oxford Encyclopedia ofAncient Egypt, ed. Donald B. Redford. 3 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001 Oxford Latin Dictionary, ed. P. G. W. Glare. 2nd ed. 2 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012 Old Persian: Grammar, Texts, Lexicon, by Roland G. Kent 2nd ed. A08 33. New Haven, CT: American Oriental Society, 1953 The Sumerian Dictionary of the University Museum ofthe University ofPennsylvania, ed. Ake W. Sjo”berg and Steve Tinney. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum ofArchaeology and

Anthropology, 1984—. http://psd.museum.upenn.edu/epsd/

Abbreviations

RlA

SLOB

SWET

TDOT

VE

WA’S‘ WKAS

xxiii

Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archaologie, ed. Ernst F. Weidner, Wolfram von Soden, and Dietz Otto Edzard. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1957— The Sumerian Loanwords in Old-Babylonian Akkadian.‘ Prolegomena and Evidence, by Stephen J. Lieberman. H88 22. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1977 Semitic Words in Egyptian Texts of the New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period, by James E. Hoch. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994 Theological Dictionary ofthe Old Testament, ed. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry. Trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, David E. Green, Douglas W. Stott, and John T. Willis. 16 vols. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974—2018 “11 vocabolario di Ebla,” pp. 115—343 in Testi lessicali bilingui della biblioteca L. 2769, by Giovanni Pettinato. MEE 4. Naples: Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli, 1982 Wo"rterbuch der a"gyptischen Sprache, by Adolf Erman and Hermann Grapow. 5 vols. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1926—1931 Wo"rterbuch der klassischen arabischen Sprache, by J o"rg Kraemer, Helmut Ga"tje, and Manfred Ullmann. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz,

I957— Abbreviations for Journals and Series AB Anchor Bible Commentary ABRL Anchor Bible Reference Library ABSA Annual ofthe British School at Athens AfO Archivfiir Orienftorschung AfOB Archiv fiir Orientforschung Beihefi AJSL American Journal ofSemitic Languages and Literatures AKM Abhandlungen fiir die Kunde des Morgenlandes ALASP Abhandlungen zur Literatur Alt-Syrien—Palastinas und Mesopotamiens AL UOS Annual ofLeeds University Oriental Society ANES Ancient Near Eastern Studies Supplement Series ANES Ancient Near Eastern Studies AnOr Analecta orientalia AnSt Anatolian Studies AOAT Alter Orient und Altes Testament AoF Altorientalische Forschungen AOS Amen'can Oriental Series ArOr Archiv orienta'lni AS Assyriological Studies AS Aramaic Studies

xxiy

ASAE ASAW ATA A uOr BA BaghM BASOR BASORSup BBR BEHEH Bib BibOr BKAT BLT BN BO BRev BSL BSOAS

BT BWAT BZ BZAW CAT CBQ CBQMS CC ChrEg C11 C18 DA DSD Erls EvQ FAT FBBS HANEM HAT HCOT

Abbreviations

Anna/es du service des antiquités de l 'E’gypte Abhandlungen der Sa"chsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften: Philologisch—Historische Klasse Alttestamentliche Abhandlungen Aula Orientalis Biblical Archaeologist Baghdader Mitteilungen Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement Studies Bulletin for Biblical Research Bibliothe‘que de l’E'cole des hautes études: Sciences historiques et philologiques Biblica Biblica et Orientalia Biblischer Kommentar Altes Testament Babylonische Texte (Leipzig) Biblische Notizen Bibliotheca Orientalis Bible Review Bulletin de la Socie’té linguistique de Paris Bulletin ofthe School of Oriental and African Studies, University ofLondon The Bible Translator Beitra”ge zur Wissenschaft vom Alten Testament Biblische Zeitschrtft‘ Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fiir die alttestamentliche Wissenschafi C ommentaire de l’Ancien Testament Catholic Biblical Quarterly Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series Continental Commentaries Chronique d 'E'gvpte Corpus inscriptionum iranicarum (London) Corpus inscriptionum semiticarum (Paris) Documenta Asiana Dead Sea Discoveries Eretz-Israel Evangelical Quarterly Forschungen zum Alten Testament Facet Books: Biblical Series History of the Ancient Near East Monographs Handbuch zum Alten Testament Historical Commentary on the Old Testament

Abbreviations

HdO HKAT HSS HTR HUCA ICC IEJ [F 108 [OS IUOSMi JA JANES JBL JCS JEA JEOL JHebS JHS JIES JJS JNES JNSL JQR JSOR JSOT' J SOTSup JSS JTS KAT KBo LANE Les“ LSAWS MAD MDAI MEE MS MSS MVAG

Handbook of Oriental Studies, Section One: The Near and Middle East Handkommentar zum Alten Testament Harvard Semitic Studies Harvard Theological Review Hebrew Union College Annual lntemational Critical Commentary Israel Exploration Journal Indogermanische Forschungen Israel Oriental Studies Israel Oriental Studies Istituto universitario orientale, Dipartimento di studio asiatici: Series minor Journal asiatique Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society Journal ofBiblical Literature Journal of Cunezf'orm Studies Journal ofEgyptian Archaeology Jaarbericht van het Vooraziatisch~Egyptisch Gezelschap Ex Oriente Lux Journal ofHebrew Scriptures Journal ofHellenic Studies Journal ofIndo—European Studies Journal ofJewish Studies Journal ofNear Eastern Studies Journal ofNorthwest Semitic Languages Jewish Quarterly Review Journal of the Society of Oriental Research Journalfor the Study ofthe Old Testament Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series Journal of Semitic Studies Journal of Theological Studies Kommentar zum Alten Testament Keilschrifttexte aus Boghazko”i (Leipzig/Berlin) Languages of the Ancient Near East Les'one'nu Linguistic Studies in Ancient West Semitic Materials for the Assyrian Dictionary Mitteilungen der Deutschen Archa'ologischen Instituts Materiali epigrafici di Ebla (Naples) Materialien zum sumerischen Lexikon (Rome) Mu"nchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft Mitteilungen der Vorderasiatische-Aegyptischen Gesellschafi

NABl t" N ICOT OBO

.\'ou\‘elle.\‘ as:\‘rriulog‘riques hre‘t‘es er utilitailm‘ New lntemntional Commentzmg on the Old Testament Orbis biblieus et orientnlis

OlP OLA

Oriental Institute Publications Oricnltllitl lovnniensia analectn t)ric‘ntalistist'lte Llh’l‘dflll.“t’lfllllg

OLZ Or 0124 m OTL OtSt PE Q PIASH PLO RB RBL REA REg RES RHA RSO SAA SAOC SBLABS SBLDS SBLRBS SBLWAW SBS SCCN H Scrl—lier Sef SEL Sem SIr SR StBoT StMed StOr TA TCL TGUOS TynBul TZ UF

Orientalia ()riens antiquus Old Testament Library Oudtestumentische Studién Palestine E\[')I()I‘(Ul0ll Quarterlt' Proceedings ofthe Israel .‘lCtldt’fll‘l‘ QfScienees and Humanities Portn Linguarum Orientalium Revue biblique Review ofBiblieal Literature Revue des etudes aneiennes Reme a' 'E'Kgrtlz‘itologie Revue a'es e't‘ua'es se'mitiques Revue hittite et asianique Rivista degli studi orientali State Archives ofAssyria (Helsinki) Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization Society- of Biblical Literature Archaeology and Biblical Studies Society ofBiblical Literature Dissertation Series Society ofBiblical Literature Resources for Biblical Study Society ofBiblical Literature Wn'tings from the Ancient World Stuttgarter Bibelstudien Studies on the Civilization and Culture of Nuzi and the Hurrians Scripta Hierosolymitana Sefarad Studi epigrafiei e linguistiei sul VIClflO Oriente antico Semitica Studia lranica Studies in Religion Studien zu den Bog‘azko"y-Texten Studia Mediterranea Studia Orientalia Tel Aviv Textes cune’ito‘rmes. Muse'e du Louvre (Paris) Transactions _0)"tlte Glasgow Universin.’ Oriental Society Tyndale Bulletin Theologisclte Zeitschrift Ugarit-Forschungen

.4 vaiam' m

\"AB \"T \"TSup WBC ll '0 \\'l‘\."T \\'\'DOG

YJS [A 7.41m 7.4 H zls‘ 14 H' 211m; ZDPI ' 21 'S

\Hl‘l

Vordeiasiatiselie Bibliotlwk li'rus li-smrnenruni Supplenu‘nts to \‘etns l‘estalnentnni \\'ord Biblical t‘otnlnentar) [he “("11 Jr‘s Urn-ms \\'issenselnttlliehe l'ntetsuelningen nan Nenen le‘stmnent \\'issensehalllielie \‘eto‘thentlielinnnen det' dentselten Drientgesellseltall Yale .lndaiea Series /.vim‘hrillfiir t".\‘.\“\"‘l'()ll i‘uii' [vim‘hr‘itifilr .4 Inn‘ic‘nmli‘xr‘he mod hihlisehc‘ Reeling,«seine/He /.l'l‘h‘t‘hl‘ifi‘fih' .4 Ilhebmi‘suk Zvim‘hr‘ifi‘h‘ir t)“\'\["”.\\‘ht' Spmvhe um! .4Ilerlmnxlunde /.z‘itst‘hrififiil‘ die d/Ilt1m um will} ‘he ll ilss‘ens'r‘hufl Zeilsclirifi der .lemswln'n mmg'enldndim‘hen (fave/[A‘t‘hujl Zeitsvhljifi tics ileurxrhen l‘uld‘xn‘nw l ivt‘im Zcincchri‘riflir wry/eicltende Spnit‘lilin‘si‘Imng ("ll/alt?" (p‘rhii'h' der indt)g"emmnixt‘hen Spml‘hen

A bbn’viutions and Siglufiir Am‘it'm Sutures A DD Assvriun Deeds and Documenlx Ix‘et‘miling the Timmy/("r «Vi/‘l’m/h em: lnvluding the So-(‘ulleri Private (‘onli‘m‘lsx [seminal Ilc'i‘l‘.\‘t'nn.\' and Prue/anmlimm I’n'serml in the Kain-unfit Fuller/inns of the British .\!uscum. (‘Iiie/‘h‘ (if/he ‘Ih (‘enrurt' lit by t'. H. W .lolins. 4 vols. Cambridge: Deighton. Bell. Ib‘ob' tog} A0 tablets in the collections ot‘tlie Muse'e dn 1 onue (Paris) AP] Altmrs‘isclu‘ Inseliritiem b\_‘ l"t‘nst ller/le‘ld. Areln‘iologiselie Mitteilnngen ans lmn: l.‘-nga'nlnngsbaml l. Berlin: Reinier. l‘flb' ARM An‘lthc‘S Males de Mari (Parts) AT The Alli/ukh Tablets. by Donald J. Wiselnan. (leeasional l’nblications ot‘the British lnstitnte ol‘.-‘\tx‘haeology at .-\nkara 3. l ondon: British Institute 0r:\l\‘ll.‘k‘0l0‘k\" at .-\nl\‘ara. 1053 A trahcm‘s .4!ru-_Im.\'.i\‘: The Ruhr/onion Srolji' ot‘r/u' l-‘lnml. by W. (i. lainbert and .-\lan R. Millard. Oslot‘d: (‘l.-n‘emlon. I000 Azatiwada [inscription of:\/ati\\“ada| (‘orymx «if/{ivm‘egliyilu'e lim'irm lnseriptirms. 45 oh“ by J. David Hawkins and llalet Cambel. Studies in lndo-l‘.‘umpean langnage and (‘nlttne New Series 8. Berlin: de (irn_\‘ter. mot) .‘ooo. l il.‘ l '2 plates 52 105 Babylon tablets in the eoll‘u‘tions ot‘ Bode (Kaiser-l"riedrieh) Mnsenln (Berlin) BD [Book ot‘the Deadl Dita (it'gi/‘ililvelie l‘iidlenhm‘h tier .\‘l '11]. his .\'.\'. Iii-name tms mat‘Iu'edenen Urkunden :usummi'm‘aisle/II um! liemusgeg‘when. by lidonat‘d Naville. 2 vols. Berlin: ASIK‘I‘. 1886

xxviii

BIN BM CA1

CIA

CIC

DNa

DSf

EA

ECT

Emar

Foundation Inscription

Abbreviations

Babylonian Inscriptions in the Collection of J. B. Nies (New Haven) tablets in the collections of the British Museum (London) A Cotp‘us ofAmmonite Inscriptions, by Walter E. Aufrecht. Ancient Near Eastern Texts and Studies 4. Lewiston, NY: Mellen, 1989 Corpus inscriptionum Atticarum, by Adolf Kirchhoff, Ulrich Leopold Koehler, Johannes Kirchner, Wilhelm Dittenberger, and Richard Wu"nsch. 4 vols. Berlin: Reimer, 1873—1897 Cuneiform in Canaan: The Next Generation, by Wayne Horowitz, Takayoshi Oshima, and Seth L. Sanders. University Park, PA: Eisenbrauns, 2018 Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum (London) Inschrfit'en von Cyrus, K0"nig von Babylon (538—529 v. Chr.), by J. N. Strassmaier. BLT 7. Leipzig: Pfeiffer, 1890 Inschrtft'en von Darius, Ko"nig von Babylon (521—485 v. Chr.), by J. N. Strassmaier. BLT 10—12. Leipzig: Pfeiffer, 1892—1897 The Bisitun Inscriptions ofDarius the Great: Old Persian Text, by Ru"diger Schmitt. CII I/I/Texts 1. London: Corpus Inscriptionum Iranicarum, 1991 [inscription a of Darius at Naqsh-i Rustam] The Old Persian Inscriptions ofNaqsh-i Rustam and Persepolis, 25—32, by Ru"di— ger Schmitt. C11 I/i/Texts 2. London: Corpus Inscriptionum Iranicarum, 2000 [inscription f of Darius at Susa] Nouveaux me’langes épigraphiques: inscriptions royales de Suse et de la Susiane, 64-77, by Marie-Joseph Steve. Me'moires de la De'le'gation arche’ologique en Iran 53. Nice: Serre, 1987 The El—Amarna Correspondence: A New Edition ofthe Cuneiform Letters from the Site ofEl-Amarna based on Collations of All Extant Tablets, by Anson F. Rainey. Ed. William M. Schniedewind and Zipora Cochavi-Rainey. 2 vols. HdO 110. Leiden: Brill, 2015 The Egyptian Cofiin Texts, by Adriaan De Buck, Alan H. Gardiner, and James P. Allen. 8 vols. OIP 34, 49, 64, 67, 73, 81, 87, 132. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 1935—2006 [tablets from Emar] Textes sume’riens et accadiens, by Daniel Amaud. 3 vols. Recherches au pays d’As'tata 6/1—3. Paris: Recherche sur les civilisations, 1985—1986 [Foundation Inscription of Yahvdun-Lim] “L’inscription de fon— dation de Iah_dun-Lim, roi de Mari,” by Georges Dossin. Syria 32

(I955) 1—28

Abbreviations

HAE

Hh. HT I gituh, KAI

KAJ KAR KBo Khalili

KTU

KUB KUKN

malku

NTA P An IV

PBS P Ch Beatty

P Edwin Smith

xxix

Handbuch der althebra"ischen Epigraphik by Johannes Renz and Wolfgang Ro"llig. 3 vols. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1995 lexical series HAR-ra = hyubullu (MSL 5—11) [Hagia Triada] Testi minoici trascritti con interpretaziane e glossario, 47—116, by Carlo Consani. Incunabula Graeca 100. Rome: Istituto per gli studi micenei ed egeo-anatolici, 1999 lexical series IGITUH_ = tamartu (MSL 18) Kanaana“ische una’ arama"ische Inschrfzt‘en, Band I: Texte, by Herbert Donner and Wolfgang Ro"llig. 5th ed. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2002 Keilschrfit'texte aus Assurjuristischen Inhalts, by Erich Ebeling. WVDOG 50. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1927 Keilschrfzt'texte aus Assur religio"sen Inhalts, by Erich Ebeling. 2 vols. WVDOG 28, 34. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1919—1923 Keilschrifttexte aus Boghazko"i (Leipzig/Berlin) Aramaic Documents from Ancient Bactria (Fourth Century B.C.E.) from the Khalili Collections, by Joseph Naveh and Shaul Shaked. London: Khalili Family Trust, 2012 Die keilaplhabetischen Texte aus Ugarit, Ras Ibn “Hani und anderen Orten, by Manfried Dietrich, Oswald Loretz, Joaqin Sanmartin, and Ingo Kottsieper. 3rd ed. 2 vols. AOAT 360. Mu"nster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2013—2014 Keilschrifiurkunden aus Boghazko"i (Berlin) Korpus urartskikh klinoobraznykh nadpisei' [Corpus of Urartian Cuneiform Inscriptions], by N. V. Arutiunian. Yerevan: Gitutiun, 2001 tablets from Mari in the collections of the Muse'e du Louvre (Paris) Die akkadische Synonymenliste malku = s'arru: eine Textedition mit Unbersetzung und Kommentar, by Ivan Hru°s'a. AOAT 50. Mu"nster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2010 Nouvelles tablettes arame'ennes, by Edward Lipin’ski. Moyen et Proche-Orient I. Geneva: Droz, 2001 [Papyrus Anastasi IV] Late—Egyptian Miscellanies, 34—56, by Alan H. Gardiner. Bibliotheca Aegyptiaca 7. Brussels: Fonda-

tion e’gyptologique reine E'lisabeth, 1937 Publications of the Babylonian Section, University Museum, University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Hieratic Papyri in the British Museum, Third Series: Chester Beatty Gfit', by Alan H. Gardiner. 2 vols. London: British Museum, 1935 The Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus, by James Henry Breasted. 2 vols. OIP 3—4. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 1930

XXX

PF PFNN P Harris I

P Jud Turin

PT

RES

RIMA RIME RINAP RS

Shpiwrecked Sailor Slurpu TAD

Abbreviations

Persepolis Fortification Tablets, by Richard T. Hallock. OIP 92. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 1969 Persepolis Fortification Tablets, unpublished but numbered and transliterated by Richard T. Hallock Papyrus Harris 1: Hieroglyphische Transkription, by Wolja Erichsen. Bibliotheca Aegyptiaca 6. Brussels: Fondation e’gyptologique reine Elisabeth, 1933 “Le Papyrus Judiciare de Turin,” by Théodule Deve’ria. JA ser. 6 vols. 6 (1865) 227—61, 331-77; 8 (1866) 154—95; 10(1867) 402-76 Persepolis Treasury Tablets, by George G. Cameron. OIP 65. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 1948; idem, “Persepolis Treasury Tablets Old and New,” JNES17 (1958) 161—76; George G. Cameron and Ilya Gershevitch, “New Tablets from the Persepolis Treasury,” JNES 24 (1965) 167—192 Repertoire d ’épigraphie se'mitique, ed. Charles ClermontGanneau and Jean Baptiste Chabot. 8 vols. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, I9oo—I963 Royal Inscn'ptions of Mesopotamia: Assyrian Periods (Toronto/ Winona Lake) Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia: Early Periods (Toronto/ Winona Lake) Royal Inscriptions of the Neo-Assyrian Period (Winona Lake) tablets from Ras Shamra in the collections of the Muse'e du Louvre (Paris) and the National Museum of Damascus (Damascus) [Shipwreched Sailor] Middle-Egyptian Stories, 41—48, by Aylward M. Blackman. Bibliotheca Aegyptiaca 2. Brussels: Fondation e'gyptologique reine Elisabeth, 1932 Syurpu: A Collection ofSumerian and Akkadian Incantations, by Erica Reiner. AfOB II, 1958 Textbook ofAramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt, by Bezalel Porten and Ada Yardeni. 4 vols. Jerusalem: Hebrew University,

TCL Urk

VAT VBoT

I98€H999 Textes cune’ifonnes, Muse'e du Louvre (Pan's) Urkunden des aegvptischen Altertums, by Kurt Sethe, Wolfgang Helck, Heinrich Scha"fer, Hermann Grapow, and Otto Firchow. 8 vols. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1903—1957 tablets in the collections of the Staatliche Museen (Berlin) Verstreute Boghazko"i-Texte, by Albrecht Goetze. Marburg: Universita"tsstadt Marburg, 1930

Entries

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible (pp. 33—231) man-73 : nu,~7g‘7x_ ours ‘stable’ 121113.173, nan-1.173 (a kind of tree valuable for timber) 179-3 ‘artisan’ 7|;th ‘lead, tin’ mg ‘walnut’ Knew, ‘in fiill, entirely’ am. ‘reed pool, marsh’ 753 ‘ephod’ 13-3 (a krater-like vessel) 115.8 ‘columned palace, audience 5:91.28, (a vessel) 1'18, 1% ‘ground flow’ 1.98, 1.5m; (a volume measure for “113-718 (a financial official) grain) K'J-I'I'IR. ‘diligently, wholeheartedly’ 113198 ‘litter, sedan chair’ 1'9198, ‘legal investigator’ 1131.78 => 117337?17,110198, (a chief oflicial) ni‘bas, aims, ‘aloe’ chars (a type of income, perhaps nix ‘spirit of the dead’ usufruct) 21m, 21m; ‘origanum’ x318 ‘certain, known’ NW5 => V9573 mg (a container or chest) Dim => :33 m5 ‘brazier’ 17931.3, 111173 (BH); 11117.3 (BA) ‘purple, purple cloth’ mg (a rush or reed plant) 1-.‘15 ‘fitting, proper’ mints ‘red jasper’ 118' ‘cedar’ WWWN (BH); 1511-2105 (BA) 1W5 ‘payment, tribute’ ‘satrap’ 151478 (an alkaline substance used WWW ‘royal’ .................. for washing) 11mg ‘fine linen’ ................. newts ‘quiver (for arrows)’ max ‘spirit’ on'rg ‘necessities, essentials’ 1.9»; => .193 1mg ‘kiln’ 13:; ‘farmer, plower’ W’:}-'7t;_, Wu;- (a dark-colored stone)

xxxi

'.\r\,\ll

n71;- ‘bdellium’ 0‘33 (a stone from Nubia) ma ‘tower. watchtower‘ .......... 1:323 ‘greywacke‘ W113, rm; (a conite’rous tree) mm: 2 m; ‘7113 (BH); 5113 (BA) ‘iron ore’. . . . 78 yua- ‘vessel, cup-shaped candleholder’ :» outfits '13]; ‘treasurer’ 133-; (BH); 1311- (BA) ‘treasurer’ . . . . 82 n17}: (a wrap or cloak) mg; (a rush or reed plant) 1;;— (BH); In; (BA) ‘treasury’ "41;;- ‘treasury’ 19: (a kind of wood, perhaps cypress) 1113 (an axe) 1‘3 ‘ink’ twang, ting-11,8, ‘drachma’......... 111- (BH, BA) ‘law, order’......... 1207- ‘judge’ our}; ‘Egyptian ebony, African blackwood’ 133.3 ‘assistant, aide’ D371, ‘limb’ ma ‘footstool’ bra (BH); 7'3‘3 (BA) ‘palace, temple’ 1‘; (a liquid volume measure) Kama ‘necklace’ my, my ‘appointed time’ 11(BH, BA) ‘kind, type’ I191 (a type of pitch) mil. ‘hand-span’ n'm‘n :5 anti W‘m-‘U ‘fiint rock’ Yl'lfll (a type of gold) mm (BH, BA) ‘magician’ ‘1?! (a type of cake) Wm (a cutting implement) wjg, om “earthenware vessel; potsherd’

‘7mp‘n ‘amber’ ban-n, ‘wool’ ................... anti, nm'n ‘seal, signet ring’ min-v ‘seal, signet ring’ 1m ‘course. row’ m (a basket for produce) 199:: (an official) ‘n‘x,’ => 'tx'j 1&3, 'n'x,‘ ‘the Nile River; river’ . . . . 1?: ‘wine’ .1er: ‘jasper’ 73 (a pithos or large jar) 13-"53, 1:73 (a gemstone, perhaps a type of jasper) 3:313, snip (a helmet)

'1‘: (an oven for cooking) ‘7'; ‘ship‘ ma ‘cumin’ 17;:- ‘pagan priest’ 11's; ‘Iyre’ N03 ‘seat, throne’ 193‘ ‘henna’ ‘1: (BH, BA) (a measure for volume) 717331,:- (a type of pointed cap) m; ‘herald’ £1313 ‘saffron’.................. 7“?)‘13 ‘crimson’ 0513 ‘cotton’ ma ‘belly, stomach’ an; (a type of fine gold) nan-"g- (an outer garment) N‘J'? ‘lion’ W7“? (3 female demon) W77 ‘lion’ 1‘9‘7 "torch; lightning’ HW'V, Tia-W: ‘room, chamber’ rag/"‘7 ‘feldspar, amazonite’ an? (a volume measure) ......... 1m ‘to give, give over’ ...........

Entries

rm ‘sailor, mariner’ 0‘70 (a kind of mortar) on ‘conscription for corve’e labor, tribute’ .................... 139?; ‘Indian rosewood’ “W7; (a luxury garment) mum ‘lamp’ 1‘}; (BH); 1?; (BA) ‘sheath’ m]: ‘power, strength’ 0‘03; (BH); rep: (BA) ‘wealth, property’ '49: ‘turquoise’ 'flJ ‘spikenard’ nag/'1 => rip-vi}? uni-cf: (BH, BA) ‘document, decree’ '10; ‘natron’ mo => Nag-W mo (a luxury garment) n31_9'p-to, nus-“‘0 ‘musical harmony’ . . mo ‘horse’ 1-1-0 (a rush or reed plant) music : nys‘mo no ‘shrine, sanctuary’ nip-o (an official) no (a type of bowl) ‘790 (a metal bowl) 7’310 (a type of trousers) ll’WO => ll‘W no (a chief oflicial) no (a Philistine official)

185. ‘headwrap’ 1119- ‘kohl, eye paint’ "1151 ‘lot’ n5 ‘trap, bird trap’ n9 ‘metal plating, metal foil’ 111.9, ‘potter’ 717th (a gemstone, perhaps peridot) W‘U-D- (a type of leg wrappings) . . . . W’TEJ => vim WEE), W's-7‘9 ‘concubine’

xxxiii

1,1719; ‘spindle’ 139- (a type of bread) n‘J‘w ‘pearls’ mmoa => l’WU'JOD; 1‘1n_-;D$, I’WJOD; (a stringed musical instrument) 1319- (a roofed structure) Off-")5 ‘garden’ 1179- (an enclosed area) b.119- => 51']:.'W"]D- ‘pharaoh’ tit/"19- ‘copy’ tan-'35 (an official of the royal court) 13,1153 ‘food allowance’ D305: (BH, BA) ‘decree’ bums) (a luxurious garment) 13.22.05 ‘copy’ :13 (a type of wagon) ‘3 ‘riverboat’ up (a volume measure) 17317. => v31:W ‘—> '1? Wu? ‘castor—oil plant’ ohnfip (a type of lyre) 1111?; (a type of cooking pot) 1173;? (a cinnamon-like plant) no; ‘scribal palette’ n.7, nip (an African monkey) 33's? (3 cassia-like plant) 0731? (an axe) 1.781179? ‘melon’ t1, (BH, BA) ‘secret, mystery’

191 ‘bridle, rein’ 83w, anl-o (a stringed musical instrument) I‘D-W (a type of knife) now (a ship) inw_' (a precious stone) 191:» => 19w" Wit-W, Witt!) ‘water lily, Egyptian

xxxiv

Enm‘a

M

may) (a fragrant plant, probably cress) new ‘acacia wood’ WW, W) ‘Egyptian alabaster, travertine’ W => 1m WQW’ ‘emery, corundum’ mam] ‘ivory’ 19W", 151W} (an instrument made from an animal horn) WW}, 11"]0 ‘scale armor, scale mail’ ‘W’W’W‘ ‘corporal punishment’ WW ‘Egyptian linen’ 1W8?)- (a coniferous tree) nan; ‘ark; basket’ win 3 Whx‘mn; (a type of leather vest)

208 208

Vinn- (a type of Egyptian leather). . .219 w‘ifi‘n; ‘grape: fresh wine’ ’31]- (a female African ape) ‘7n_~ ‘heap, ruin” mm (a type of oven) 1’90 (3 bread made from coarse mn- ‘lord, overseer’ fin', 'n'n- ‘stn'ng’ arm ‘to translate’ D‘Djn; ‘teraphim, divinatory figurines’ W’W'jm; (a precious stone, perhaps Spanish topaz or fool’s gold) . . 228 Rama (a supervisor of religious matters) 113m (an Assyrian official) .......

Words Incorrectly Identified as Non-Semitic Loans (pp. 321-358) War; ‘poor, needy’ 322 7473?; ‘blade, knife’ 1m [allegedly ‘equipment, 1.37;) (a unit of weight) tools’] mm ‘to rub, spread on’...........338 ’11-‘74; ‘tn'bal chief’ flu-tn; ‘gifi’ n'jqin [allegedly ‘fiery law’] 793 ‘shepherd’ wig (BH); WIN, (BA) ‘exorcist’ . . . . mgr; (a measure of volume) 11'4nt ‘war, conflict’ figoxo ‘expulsion’ 130. ‘spear-hilt’ 5‘72; ‘lead, tin’ r1213, hm; (a green gem) 1210 ‘neckstock’ .179 (a liturgical term) 3‘7-3 ‘barber’ 1150 ‘to forgive’ 'n'l- ‘pot, cauldron’ nun ‘spear’ 03779 (a species of locust) no (a fragrant spice) mm ‘to think, reckon’ 1mm [allegedly ‘bronze’ or ‘red 1'10 ‘threshold’..................345 $50 ‘lapis lazuli’ cloth’] New [allegedly ‘glaze’] Km: ‘to be unclean’ 19 (a type of fine gold) yix: ‘bed, couch’ '45 ‘vial, flask’ 113 ‘smelting furnace’ 315:; ‘bird cage; woven basket’ . . . . The [allegedly ‘steel’] nos ‘allotment, portion’ rim [allegedly ‘shipyard’] 1191's) ‘curtain’ mm, mm ‘belt, waistband’ 1‘3 ‘door—hinge’ 17,3973, my), mama ‘net’

AW»

XXXV

.13: ‘med‘ pc‘ ‘sack. sackcloth‘ ............. 353 up“ ‘gmin‘ ....................354 53m“ ‘lbx‘ .....................354 WW" (8 higharanking official) new ‘sycomore-fig tree‘ --------

’nw ‘warp (of woven material)’. . . 357 mam-n => 7mm ................. 357 m'ss‘m [allegedly ‘seen from afar, far away’] 7mm, naw'n- ‘abomination, taboo’

. Part 1: Loanwords and the Contexts of Contact

Chapter 1 Introduction

Without realizing it, most English-speakers today use a number of words that are not English in origin. In fact, nearly 75 percent of the words in English have been borrowed from other languages, including common words such as people (borrowed from French) and zero (borrowed from Italian).1 Words like these that have been borrowed from one language to another, or loanwords, are found frequently in the various languages of the world. The Semitic languages are no different and contain many words borrowed from non-Semitic languages such as Egyptian and Persian. Despite their prevalence, however, much work remains to be done on foreign (i.e., non-Semitic) loanwords in the Semitic languages. Wilfred G. E. Watson (2005, 195) notes that “the topic of loanwords is discussed only marginally” and that scholars “need to determine the reasons for the use of loanwords . . . their distribution and frequency, and how they fit into general theories of Semitics and linguistics”. Neglect of this topic is particularly evident with respect to the Hebrew Bible. More than 25 years ago Bruce Waltke and M. O’Connor (1990, 58) lamented that “there is no up-to-date study of loanwords in biblical Hebrew”. The situation today remains the same. The present study, an examination of foreign terminology in the Hebrew Bible, seeks to remedy this unfortunate situation by means of several steps. First, it formulates a methodology for identifying non-Semitic loanwords and culture words in Biblical Hebrew in light of recent developments in contact linguistics (chapter 1) and the sociohistorical context of ancient Palestine (chapter 2). Second, it presents an annotated lexicon of loan hypotheses, giving special attention to what might be known about these terms from ancient texts and archaeological finds (chapter 3). Lastly, it investigates the phonology, typology, and distribution patterns of these words (chapters 4—6). In doing so, this study draws many important I. Winford 2003, 29. Both of these are ultimately den‘ved from other languages. French peuple, earlier pople comes from Lat populus, and Italian zero comes from Arabic

Chapter I

conclusions regarding non-Semitic influence on the Hebrew Bible and ancient Palestine (chapter 7).

1.] HISTORY OF RESEARCH The ancient Israelites were certainly aware of the existence of different languages (see Gen 31:47; Neh 13:23—24), and some Israelites were even bilingual (2 Kgs 18:26). However, they have left us no discussions of loanwords.2 It is not until hundreds of years after the completion of the Hebrew Bible that the first evidence for an interest in loanwords appears in the Jewish community. David ben Abraham Alfasi, a 10th-century C.E. Karaite grammarian and commentator, argued in his Kita'b Ja'mi ‘al-Alfaz_ that words without a Hebrew etymology in Biblical Hebrew were probably Aramaic or Arabic in origin. Other gramman‘ans, such as Judah ibn Quraysh (eighth—ninth centuries C.E.), Menahem ben Saruq (ca. 920—970 C.E.), and Jonah ibn Jana’h (ca. 990—1050 C.E.), also discussed words that they thought were borrowed from Aramaic or Arabic. Although these and other Hebrew grammarians recognized the presence of loanwords in Hebrew, they never formulated clear principles for deciding whether a word was definitively a loanword, nor did they express how to determine the language from which a word was borrowed. Furthermore, they focused primarily on terminology borrowed from other Semitic languages rather than from non-Semitic languages.3 More than half a millennium later, Wilhelm Genesius published his Hebra"isch— deutsches Handwo"rterbuch u”ber die Schrrft‘en des Alten Testaments (later Hebra"isches und Aramdisches Handw0"rrerbuch fiber das Alte Testamen)t.4 Gesenius arranged his lexicon according to root, so many Hebrew terms that could not be 2. Texts from the Greco-Roman world, on the other hand, do contain discussions of loanwords. Plato, for example, mentions the topic of loanwords in his Cratylus, dating to the fourth century B.C.E. Within a lengthy dialogue with the philosopher Cratylus on etymology (390e—427d), Plato portrays Socrates as arguing that the Greeks—especially Greeks who lived abroad—adopted words from foreign languages. Socrates suggests that Gk m3p ‘fire’ is a foreign word because it is difficult to connect with the Greek language and because the Phrygians have a comparable but slightly di‘fierent term for fire. Socrates goes on to say that u"8 L2 —> L1). These loanwords are designated secondary-creation loanwords. Secondarycreation loanwords are relatively rare, and no clear examples of this type of loan occur in this study. A culture word (German Kulturwort), sometimes referred to as a Wanderwort, is a lexical item for which no ultimate lexical provenance, or even the direction and process of its borrowing between languages, can be assigned. This type of term is typically marked by a high degree of mobility and can be recognized in more than one language family in disparate geographical regions. Because culture words are typically imported along with the object they designate, these terms usually denote naturally occurring items such as plants, metals, and minerals or manufactured

[7. The symbol 1' prefixed to a Hebrew word indicates an entry in chapter 3, q.v. I8. For general discussions of intra-Semitic borrowing, see L. Edzard 2015; Pat-El 2013. [9. The tenninology here is adapted from that of L. Edzard (1998, 35—36) and Watson (2005, 193). 20. There are two main types of structural borrowing (Haspelmath 2009, 39). The first is the calque or loan translation, in which the meaning of a donor term is translated directly into the recipient language; a classic example of this is German Wolkenkratzer, which corresponds semantically to English skyscraper. The second is loan meaning extension, in which a semantic pattern is reproduced; a good example of this is German Kopf, which can refer to the main word in a syntactic phrase based on the use ofhead in English.

IO

Chapua,

m

products such as ceramics, textiles, and utensils.“ A good example of this type of word is the term ‘wine’, which shows up in numerous languages, both Semitic and non-Semitic: Hebrew 173 T, Ugaritic yn, Hittite wiyan-, wzy'ana-, Linear B wo-no, Greek oivog, and Latin vinum, through which this term has entered several modem Indo-European languages (English wine, Italian vino, etc.). Sometimes a native word and a foreign word are integrated into a single term. This is known as a loanblend (Haspelmath 2009, 39; Appel and Muysken 1987, 165). A good example of this is Hebrew G‘DUJWT ‘ivory’, a compound of the Hebrew word 1W ‘tooth’ and Egyptian t’bw ‘elephant’. Properly speaking, a loanblend is is only partly a loanword because it uses previously borrowed material to create a new word within a language.

1.3.3 Cultural vs. Core Borrowings Explaining why languages borrow lexemes from other languages is a complicated issue. Lexical borrowing rates vary greatly among languages, and some languages borrow more readily than others (U. Tadmor 2009, 55—58). Nevertheless, the two most common reasons for lexical borrowing among the world’s languages are necessity (i.e., lack ofa native term for a particular item) and prestige (i.e., because the foreign term is highly esteemed).22 These two motivations correspond with cultural borrowings and core borrowings, respectively (Myers-Scotton 2002, 239—40; Haspelmath 2009, 46—49). Cultural borrowings are words for objects and concepts new to a culture. Ina situation for which no native word exists to express a foreign object or concept native speakers will borrow the foreign word that denotes that foreign object or concept, unless ofcourse they choose to make up a new word or use an indigenous circumlocution. Hence, cultural borrowings are often rapidly integrated into the recipient language and often appear abruptly in a language; they can appear in either monolingual or bilingual contexts. Core borrowings, on the other hand, are words that more or less duplicate already existing words in the recipient language. Hence, core borrowed forms often enter the recipient language gradually. Unlike cultural borrowings, which can an’se in either monolingual or bilingual situations, core borrowings appear in bilingual contexts. It is important to point out that foreign tenninology can be taken on rapidly or gradually because biblical scholars sometimes make hasty generalizations ' about how quickly non-native words can be borrowed.23 21. Haspelmath 2009, 45; Hock and Joseph 2009, 242; Watson 2005, 193. Culture words, therefore. are defined at least in part by a negative and wholly extrinsic criten'on, namely, ignorance ofa words ongtn'. Although a negative claim, to call a term a culture word is also to make a claim that is syntacticallV,’ and semantically positive in that culture words tend to refer to concrete, physical objects. Cf. ALBH 7—8. 22. Haspelmath 2009, 46—51; Hock and Joseph 2009, 258—71; Matras Lzoog, 149—53; L. Campbell 2013, 58—59. 23. Even so excellent a Hebraist as Y. Kutscher (1984, 100) falls into this trap. He states: "Befom the influx of a foreign vocabulary becomes possible, a kind of language resistance must be overcome

Introduction

I.3.4 I.t'lmwu"rtr'r vs. I"/'¢via/Wilmer Sometimes a tin‘eign term may not be fully mlapted to the recipient language’s system. 'l‘hese Words renniin recogiii/‘ahlc as hmnwords to speakers ol'the recipient language and are known its/iii'rv'gn wants or I'I'v'mr/wr'irll'r (I laspelmath 2009, 42 43). As an example, consider the two terms .mlsu and Srhmlr'n/r'r'udw in American linglish. The term .m/su. a loanword, has largely assimilated to the native lz‘nglish lexicon. but the term St'lltlt/t’II/l‘t'lH/t‘, a loreign word, remains an obvious foreign term. A probable example ot'this in Hebrew is 1,-n'1n-T ‘Assyrian field marshal‘, which is always associated with Assyrian ollicials in Biblical Hebrew (cl‘. Akk mrlu'nu). The degree to which people recognize a word as loreign can be a complex matter. ()ne importact litclor that inlluences a word's recognition as a borrowing is adaptation, or the degree to which the donor term is made to fit the phonological. orthographic. morophological, and syntactic properties of the rcceipient language. The less adapted a term is, the more likely people are to recognize it as a tineignism. Another important lactor is novelty, in that older speakers are more likely to be aware of a recently borrowed word’s age. leading them to consider it a toreignism. whereas younger speakers will not recognize the word’s age and therett‘ne will not consider it a toreignism (I laspelmath 2009, 43). Thus, Le/nnMrrer and Frt'mdwfirlcr operate on a continuum rather than constituting a binary opposition. The degree to which a word has been adapted, the degree to which a word still rete'rs specifically to a foreign item or concept, and explicit designation ol'a word as a foreignism in a text all provide clues as to where that word ta‘lls along the spectrum. Unfortunately, the Hebrew Bible provides such clues only infrequently. making it difficult to separate Lehnw0"rter from Fremdwo"r(or confidently. For this reason. the technical distinction between loanwords and foreign words plays no substantial role in the present study. The burden of proof lies on establishing that a particular word is a Fremdwort, and each word is assumed to be a loanword unless clear evidence exists to the contrary.

1.3.5 Loanwords vs. Code-Switching Even less integrated into the recipient lexicon are single-word switches. These words constitute the phenomenon of code-switching, or the altemation between two languages in the same discourse-«perhaps even the same sentence—by bilingual speakers.24 Code-switching is certainly attested in the Semitic languages, and this takes time". In his defense. the study by which Kutscher comes to this conclusion is faulty. Kutscher rete‘rs to Otto Jcspersen ’s (I982. 86—87) analysis ofFrench words in English after the Norman Conquest, which assumes a problematic methodology. as Coleman (1995) demonstrates. As described below (§I.6). a peak of French linguistic borrowing during the 13th century C.E. reflects particular historical circumstances. not a universal language resistance that must be overcome over time. 24. Haspelmath 2009. 40. There are various types. of contact situations that can lead to codeswitehing in written documents such as the Hebrew Bible. including extensive contact between native

t2

Chapter I

. . -- .iwfifl

including lhblieal Ilebrcw. An example of intra-Semitic code switching is the 'l'rtmsitmlnnian like speech ol’thc prophetic oracle in lsa 21:11—12 (Kaufman 1988, 54 ss; t-l. Rendshttt'g 1996). An example ofnon-Semitic code-switching, on the other hand. is Joseph‘s exclamation “1.11M ‘pay attention!’ in Gen 41:43, a singleword switch ol‘ ligyptian *i'li—Itk. In theory. Ioanwm'ds can be distinguished from single-word switches by the degree of integration because loanwords typically display various kinds ofphonological and nun‘phological adaptation whereas code-switching does not. However, this distinction does not always apply. Relative frequency is a much more useful criterion in that il'particular concepts are very frequently or regularly expressed by a word originating in another language, whereas other concepts show much variability. the loriner constitute loanwords and the latter constitute code-switching.25 Nevertheless. we cannot look directly into a speaker’s mental lexicon and know whether or not a word is actually a part of that person’s bilingual vocabulary. Moreover. the criteria of adaptation and relative frequency are not foolproof, because Hebrew and Aramaic-spwkers are always free to adapt a term when they borrow it and because a low relative frequency in the Hebrew Bible may simply be due to the types ot‘texts and genres that have been preserved. For this reason, the technical distinction between loanwords and code-switches plays no substantial role in the present study. The burden of proof lies on establishing that a particular word is a code-switch. and that word is assumed to be a loanword unless clear evidence exists to the contrary.

L4 IDIth'l'lFYING LOANWORDS Ilaving discussed the tenninology of this study, we can now turn to the question ol'how to identity loanwords. The to‘llowing criteria provide excellent guidelines tor recognizing loanwords and determining their language of origin. However, because past lexical borrowing and its surrounding circumstances cannot be directly observed. the following criteria can only establish probability. Loanword identification operates like a cumulative case argument: the more criteria that are met by a particular word. the more likely it is that the word is a loanword. Furthermore. some criteria hold more weight than others. In general. the strongest evidence for identiying a loanword comes from abnormal phonology and morphology. Words that contain phonological or morphological pattems not nonnally expected in the recipient language are good candidates for and loreign speakens. contact with to‘reign languages through scn'bal education and exposure to wn'tten documents containing to‘reign terminology. and oral performance of texts. See Skafian' and Mak“ilah"de 2014. 25. lluspelmath 2009. 40 4t; Myers-Scotton i993, 191—205. It is probable that, similar to Lehnwo"rter and I’lvmi/wr'irlvr. lounwords and single-word switches operate on a continuum rather than a binary opposition In that many loanwords start out as singly occum'ng switches. See Myers-Scotton 1993. I63 207; ’lhonmson 2003. 695497; Sankotf 20x}, 508.

Introduction

I3

loans (Haspelmath 2009, 44; L. Campbell 2013, 62—63). When a word is borrowed from one language to another, foreign sounds or sound combinations are replaced by the nearest phonetic equivalent in the borrowing language, but the nearest equivalent may not always be common in the borrowing language; similarly, a nonnative word’s morphology may not be adapted fully to the typical morphological patterns of the borrowing language (Hock 1991, 390—97). Thus, if a Hebrew word contains an irregular cluster of phonemes or does not follow atypical Semitic noun pattern, it is probably a loan. Hebrew nine-T (a gemstone, perhaps peridot), for example, is a good candidate because it contains two consecutive dentals, a phenomenon that is highly unusual for a native Hebrew word. Indeed, this word is a loan from Egyptian. As a minor caveat, one should note that this criterion is not always foolproof. This is because borrowers sometimes nativize a foreign term, making it conform fully to the phonology and morphology of the borrowing language (cf. Bynon 1983, 226). A good example of this is Hebrew r077; T ‘sailor’. This word exhibits the typical Hebrew nominal pattern for professions (e.g., :53 ‘thief’ and 733 ‘hunter’), and there are thus no phonological or morphological indications that it is a loan. Closer investigation, however, reveals that 117-7; is a transmitted loan from Sumerian via Akkadian (ALBH 93). Thus, although atypical phonology and morphology is a strong criterion, one must also consider other criteria. A second criterion for identifying non-Semitic loans relates to etymology and cognates. If a word does not appear to be based on a Semitic root and has no Semitic etymology, it is a good candidate for a loan; similarly, if a word has no or few cognates in Semitic, it may be a loan. This is particularly true when a word is rare in Semitic but similar-looking terms occur commonly in a non-Semitic language family with perfectly good etymologies within that family (cf. L. Campbell 2013, 64—65). For example, the rare Hebrew term 10,17“ ‘bridle’ could be explained as a primary noun. However, it does not seem to be based on any Semitic root, it has a very limited distribution in Semitic, and similar-looking terms occur commonly in the Indo-Iranian languages (cf. Skt ras’ana"- and NPers resen, which have a perfectly good Indo-Iranian etymology). This strongly suggests that Hebrew 'm is a loan from Indo-Iranian. Sometimes a word has several cognates in Semitic and thereby appears to be Semitic. Nevertheless, information concerning the sound changes that the cognate languages have undergone can demonstrate a foreign loan. If a word has cognates in several Semitic languages but does not exhibit the consonant correspondences expected if it were Semitic, it most probably originates from a non-Semitic source. For example, Hebrew DWWT ‘cress’ has cognates in Akkadian (sahvlu', s'ehvla'tu), Ugaritic (shit), Old Aramaic (1“7nw), Jewish Aramaic (vbnn, "7nn), and Syn'ac (tah_la‘). However, the initial consonant varies unpredictably and cannot be explained as an intra-Semitic development. It therefore cannot be Semitic and instead constitutes an ancient culture word. A third criterion for identifying non- Semitic loanwords is variant spellings. There may be typical patterns of substitution for foreign sounds and phonological

[4

patterns. but substitutions in borrowed words are not always unilt‘inn: the same‘ foreign sound or pattern can be borrowed in one loanword one way and in another loanword a difie‘rent way. This could be because the words were borrowed a; different times. so that the older loan reflects older sound substitutions than the newer loan. Altematively. variance could be c ‘ated by a discrepancy between orthogra_phy and pronunciation (L. Campbell 2013. 60 or). or perhaps the lim‘ign sound was not easily represented by any native sounds so that several options were available to‘r representing it (Hock and Joseph 2000. 300 9:). Regardless“ ofthe specific reason. the general pn‘nciple remains that a word may be a loanword ifit has variant orthographical spellings. A good example is Hebrew 3‘31": 1‘ ‘helmet‘. written 3.13: in 1 Samuel 17:5 but $21)" in 1 Samuel 17:38. Indeed. this word comes from Human. A fourth cn'ten'on is the geographical or ecological assm‘iation of a word. These: associations can provide clues conceming the region than which it was borrowed and what the donor language might be (L. Campbell 2013. 65}. Hebrew .t‘mf 1‘ (a gemstone. perhaps peridot) once again provides a good example. Job 28:10 associates this gem with Nubia. Moreover. 6 and I} translate 713:3 as tottu'giov and topa:ius. respectively. a gemstone which classical sources associate with the island of Zabgaroad (St. Johns Island) in the Red Sea. This word‘s assm‘iation with northeastern Atn"ca suggests that .1339 on‘ginated tro‘m a language in this region. This hunch turns out to be correct. and tun‘her investigation reveals that this word comes from Egyptian. A fifth criten‘on is context. Ifa word occurs in a it‘ireign context. such as a list of items obtained from a foreign region by trade. it may well be a toreign loanword. This is especially true for words that occur amidst mention of other foreign loanwords. Hebrew D‘a._i“..‘§‘ “l ‘ivory‘. for example. occurs within a list ofimported items (I Kgs 10:22) and is thus a good candidate for a loanword. The likelihood that it is a foreign loan is increased by the presence of two other foreign loans in the context. “1-? 1"” (an African monkey) and ‘33 'l' (an Ain‘can ape). Lastly. the semantic domain of a word can sometimes indicate a loan (Haspelmath 2009. 45; L. Campbell 2013. 65—66). Because loanwords are most often nouns and ofien nouns associated with specific objects related to maten‘al culture. a technical term may be a loan.“ However. this cn'ten‘on is only a rough indication of possibilities, so one cannot automatically assume that a word must be a loan just because it refers to a specific aspect of maten‘al culture (L. Campbell 2013. 65).

1.5 MECHANISMS OF BORROWING Loanwords can be directly borrowed or transmitted via another language: loanwords can even be inherited from an earlier stage of a language. These mechanism“: 26. H. Tadmor 1999, 61-65; Hock and Joseph 2009. 245—46; Hock 1991. 334‘; Appel and Muyslt‘cfl 1987, 170—71.

Introduction

[5

of borrowing are important because they directly relate to the question of how loanwords can inform our understanding of contact between groups of people. Speakers oftwo different languages come into contact when a loan is directly borrowed from one language into another without any intermediary. However, when the immediate source and ultimate source are different, or when a loanword appears in a language because it was inherited, contact need not take place between the recipient language and the ultimate source language. Thus, in order to identify words that point to foreign contact in ancient Palestine and those that do not, it is important to be able to distinguish direct loanwords from transmitted loans or inherited loans.

1.5.1 Immediate vs. Ultimate Source The immediate source is the language from which the recipient language directly borrowed the term, and the ultimate source is the language in which the word itself on'ginated. In many cases the immediate source and ultimate source are the same (cf. Butts 2016, 53—54). The two are always identical when the loanword represents a direct borrowing. Thus, in the example of a direct loanword given above (§I.3.2), both the immediate and ultimate source of Hebrew 7:797:33 T ‘red jasper’ are Egyptian hvnmJ because this word originated in Egyptian and was transferred directly from Egyptian into Hebrew. However, in some cases the immediate source and ultimate source are not the same.27 For a transmitted loanword, or a loan borrowed via an intermediary, the immediate source and ultimate source will be different. Thus, for example, the immediate source of Hebrew 53TH ‘palace, temple’ is Akkadian ekallu whereas the ultimate source is Sumerian EGAL. Akkadian served as an intermediary, but this word is not native to Akkadian and instead originated in Sumerian. Two good critera for identifying a loanword as transmitted are phonology and morphology. If a borrowed word exhibits a phonology or morphology that differs from the source term but is characteristic ofa possible intermediate language, then there is a good chance that the word was borrowed via that language. For example, Hebrew 13-8 T (a krater-like vessel) exhibits gemination of the second consonant but not the third, which is unexpected given the Hurrian form of this word (aganm'-). This, however, is characteristic of Aramaic, indicating that Hebrew u-ts was borrowed from Hurrian via Aramaic and not directly. Another excellent criterion for determining whether a word has been transmitted or borrowed directly is the degree to which it has been integrated into the lexicon. If a word is portrayed as foreign, then it is likely to have been borrowed directly, whereas a transmitted loanword will not display any foreign associations. Paying attention to the geographical associations of a word is particularly helpful here. If the item denoted by a word is said to come from a particular region, then the 27. For culture words, the ultimate source is unknown and therefore the relationship between the loanword and the ultimate source is unknown. Thus, in the example of a culture word given above (§I.3.2), both the immediate source and the ultimate source of Heb 173T are unknown.

lb

Chapter 1

word is most probably a direct loan from that region even if similar forms exist in other languages. For example. Hebrew rip ‘t (an African monkey) occurs in a number of different languages. including Sumerian (UGUBI), Akkadian (uqu’pu). Aramaic (mp). Greek (K‘fiBOQ. m‘nog). and even Sanskrit (kapz’-). Despite its wide distribution. however. this word is consistently considered foreign. The Hebrew Bible claims that the monkey it refers to comes from Egypt (1 Kgs 10:22; 2 Ch: 9.2!). as do Akkadian texts and Classical sources. Thus. '17; is most probablya dir'ect rather than a transmitted loanword. A final criterion for identity‘ing a loanword as transmitted is known historical circumstances. lfa word can be traced back to a particular source but no known evidence exists for contact between the recipient language and that source language. then it may have been borrowed via an intermediary. For example, given the lack ofevidence for contact between Sumerian and Hebrew or Aramaic, it can safely be assumed that words such as 7‘97} 1' that have a Sumerian on'gin were borrowed via Akkadian (cf.A1A 20). Unfortunately, many past studies of loanwords in the Hebrew Bible have paid little attention to criteria for determining transmission, invoking various languages as intermediaries when there is insufficient evidence to do so. For example, Max Wagner (1966, 97 [#243]) includes Hebrew twins) “t ‘copy’ in his study of Aramaisms in the Hebrew Bible. The form of Biblical Hebrew [mas is clearly different from that of Biblical Aramaic W79- T ‘copy’, however, indicating two separate borrowings from two different donor terms (*patc'agna- and *pac'c'agna-, respectively) rather than a Hebrew adaptation of the Aramaic form. Thus, when determining whether a foreign loanword is transmitted or not, this study errs on the side of direct loans. By default, a loanword is considered a direct loan unless clear evidence provided by these criteria exists to categorize it otherwise, and the burden of proof lies on establishing that it is a transmitted loan. 1.5.2 Lexical Inheritance An important issue related to a loanword’s source is lexical inheritance. All languges change over time, and most can be traced back to a proto-language or language family. A word can be borrowed into that proto-language or language family and appear later in a daughter language descended from it. An inherited loanword is a loan that appears in a language by virtue of its descent from an earlier lingmistic ancestor, while an independent loanword is a loan that was independently borrowed from a given source language (i.e, it was not inherited). For example, Proto-Indo- European *kfn ‘horn’ was loaned very early into Proto-Semitic (cf. Akk qarnu, Ug qrn, Heb 1'12, Phoen 117., Aram 117., Arab qarn, and Eth qarn). That the Semitic forms must be of Indo-European origin and not vice versa is evident from the observation that Proto-Indo-European *kf'-n- is clearly derived from *k'er- ‘top, head’ (Nussbaum I986). Hebrew n? is not a loan from Proto-Indo-European, but is instead an inherited loan because Hebrew has inherited it from Proto-Semitic.

Introduction

I7

Once again, phonology and morphology provide good criteria for identifying a loan as inherited rather than independent. If a loanword possesses variant phonology or morphology in various Semitic languages, particularly a phonology or morphology that cannot be explained as a development of an earlier stage of Semitic or a branch thereof, that word was probably borrowed independently. For example, although one might initially think that Hebrew 01.33, Akkadian abu'su, and Ugaritic ibsn represent a single borrowing from Hurrian, this cannot be the case. Hebrew 01an T ‘stable’ cannot readily be derived from Akkadian abu'su because the latter should yield 01-323“, not max; Ugaritic ibsn possesses the Hurrian derivational suffix -m', -nni whereas Hebrew 01-213 does not. Thus, each form must represent an independent, separate borrowing. A second criterion for identifying a loanword as inherited is distribution. If a word occurs in several Semitic languages other than Hebrew, there is the chance that it entered into Semitic or a branch thereofand was subsequently inherited into Hebrew, particularly if there is evidence that it was borrowed early. For example, Egyptian h_tm ‘seal’ appears in many of the West Semitic languages (Heb Duh, Phoen Dnn, Aram am, and Arab vha'tm). That this borrowing took place very early is indicated by the wide distribution ofthis word in West Semitic as well as the archaic Egyptian phonology exhibited in some of its West Semitic forms. Accordingly, the appearance of the term nan" T ‘seal, signet ring’ in Hebrew probably does not represent a direct loan from Egyptian into Hebrew, but a loan inherited from West Semitic. This criterion of distribution is not foolproof, because many of the Semitic languages—not only Hebrew—had contact with non-Semitic-speakers over the course of history. Thus it is possible that a word was independently borrowed multiple times. This is especially plausible given the Levant’s historical role as a land bridge frequented by merchants, traveling armies, and the like; these individuals would have had multiple contacts with speakers of diflerent Semitic languages over the course of their travels. Nevertheless, the criterion remains useful. Finally, the degree to which a word is integrated into the lexicon once again plays a role in determining whether a word is inherited or not. If a word does not carry any foreign association and is well integrated—as evidenced through its full morphological adaptation, its use in forming denominal verbs, and the like—then it may have been inherited from a linguistic ancestor (Ciancaglini 2008, 27—28). The potential problem with this criterion is that the integration of a word may only indicate that the word was borrowed significantly earlier than the date of the text in which the loanword is preserved. This criterion must thus be used carefully and is best utilized in conjunction with the other criteria. The term Utah 1' again serves as a good example of how to use this criterion. This word has no strong Egyptian associations in the Hebrew Bible, and the feminine form npph as well as a denominal verb mm are attested. By itself, these obervations are suggestive of an inherited loan but not necessarily conclusive. Taken in conjunction with the wide distribution of this word in West Semitic, however, the integration of man into the Hebrew lexicon makes it even more likely that it is a loan inherited from West Semitic rather than a direct loan into Hebrew.

Il'l

(r'hapter /

'lo sum up, there are several criteria that can be used to determine whethera word is an inherited loan: phonology and morphology, distribution, and the degree of integration into the lexicon. As with determining a loanword’s possible trans mission, this study considers a loanword to be independent rather than inherited unless good evidence exists to categorize it otherwise; the burden ofprooflies on csltlblislting that it is an inherited loan.

L6 lr()ANW()RI)S AS CULTURAL SYMBOLS Our discussion of the various mechanisms of borrowing lays the groundwork tor discussing the value of loanwords as cultural symbols. Loanwords can be extremely useful because they illuminate our understanding of cultural contact (Hope I962, i963). By their very definition, loanwords provide evidence of contact between groups of people. Loanwords can therefore reveal a great deal about past historical, cultural, and social relationships as well as the kinds of contacts that have taken place among different people. In many cases, these relationships can be confirmed by what is known from history and archaeology (L. Campbell 2013, 432'33). The role of loanwords as cultural symbols is determined by breaking down borrowed vocabulary into categories of meaning. Then, those categories of meaning can be arranged in a hierarchical order that represents a progression of increasingly important influences (Hope [962, 112—13). When certain semantic domains from a particular donor language emerge as prominent, it can be assumed that speakers of the recipient language were significantly influenced by contact with speakers of that donor language in the realm of culture represented by that semantic domain (cf. L. Campbell 2013, 72—74). Such historical reconstruction must be undertaken carefully. Some loans (i.e., transmitted loans) enter a language via an intermediate language, and sometimes a loanword may enter a language despite contact being very limited between speakers of the donor and recipient languages. One cannot always assume, therefore, that loanwords provide evidence of extensive contact and can facilitate historical reconstruction (L. Campbell 2013, 434). Furthermore, it would be a mistake to conclude from the complete or relative absence of loanwords in a particular domain that no contact occurred because people are never obligated to borrow foreign terminology. This last point is particularly important because scholars oflen assume that the absence of foreign loanwords in a biblical text reflects a historical situation in which there would have been little or no foreign influence (e.g., Eskhult 2003, 23). Despite these cautions, in many cases loanwords are extremely useful tools for establishing points of cultural contact between groups of people (Hope 1963, 36). Let us consider a concrete example from the English language. Between ca. [050 and 1400 CE, and peaking in relative terms during the mid-13th century, thousands of French loanwords entered the English language (Coleman 1995). Pn'or to

Introduction

I9

ca. 1250, these loans from French were largely limited to words associated with the nobility, but after this period there was an influx of French loans in other semantic domains, including law and administration as well as words related to everyday life (e.g., food, fashion, society, and art). We can infer from all this that some— thing must have happened during this 350-year time period for English-speakers to have adopted such a large quantity of French vocabulary. Specifically, we might infer that French-speakers exerted significant influence upon the nobility prior to ca. 1250 but that French somehow extended its influence in the realms of law and administration as well as everyday life after ca. 1250. Indeed, something did happen in history, something that well explains the significant increase of French loanwords as well as the shift in the domain of influence. Duke William II of Normandy conquered England in 1066. However, when the Normans first conquered England, they consciously avoided French in order to maintain an air of legitimacy and did not formally teach it. Accordingly, French words entered English only through those in contact with the French-speaking nobility. It was not until two centuries later that French was declared the official language ofthe government and instruction in French began. This opened the door for the widespread adoption of French loanwords in the realms of law and administration as well as everyday life. Accordingly, beginning ca. 1250, French exerted a much more significant influence on English than it had previously (Kibbee 1991, 186—88; Baugh and Cable 2013, 104—21, 163—69; Kastovsky 2006, 249—50). Similarly, we may observe that the book of Ezra contains a significant number of Old Iranian loanwords, more than any other book of the Hebrew Bible except Esther and Daniel. Of these loanwords, half belong to the semantic domain of law and administration and another handful belong to the domain of finance and commerce, which naturally was related to the administration.28 From this we might infer that the circumstances described in the book of Ezra were significantly influenced by Old Iranian peoples, especially in the realm of law and administration. Ezra led a group of exiled Jews back to Yehud ca. 458 8.013. The Hebrew Bible portrays Ezra as a priest and scribe (Ezra 726, 11—12, 21; Neh 8:1, 4, 9, 13; 12:26, 36). He was, furthermore, endorsed by the Achaemenid Empire (Ezra 7:11—26), whose policy was to establish officials throughout the empire who would maintain order and good relations with the Persian administration. As a local official established by the Achaemenids, he would have been proficient in Old Persian and would have been responsible for administering Yehud on the Persian king’s behalf (Lipschits 2006; Blenkinsopp 1987; cf. Wilson-Wright 2015, 161). Archaeological evidence for contact between Yehud and Persia is plentiful for this era, reflecting the historical situation that the book of Ezra describes (Stern 1984a; 2001, 353—582). This situation more than adequately explains the high number of Old Iranian loanwords in the

28. The book of Ezra contains 20 Old Iranian loanwords. Of these, the following 10 belong to the legal-administrative domain". ij_,n§, 310198,, $100,195, 113 (in both Hebrew and Aramaic), 13;an (in both Hebrew and Aramaic), 13mg, isms, *m‘wj. Words belonging to the commercial domain are D7153, wan.

131:1, and 111;.

('hapler I *H --———~——\

hook ot‘ l-‘Irn as well as the high percentage ot‘those words that relate to law and ndrninistration.” :\s these examples demonstrate. lonnwords cart reflect cultural influence in the semantic domains the) represent and illuminate our understanding of history.

[.7 CONCLUSION The preceding discussion has outlined the history of research. the corpus and parameters of this study. the tenninology of lexical borrowing. methodology for identit\_"ing loamvords. motivation tor borrowing. and the significance of loanwords as evidence tor cultural contact. The tt‘illowing chapter investigates the sociohistorical context ol‘toreign contact in ancient Palestine. Together these two chapters proVide a lt‘iundation tor the lt‘ireign temiinology discussed in Chapter 3.

29. Nehemiah, on the other hand. contains only two Old Iranian loanwords (031.9 and “UV-l” We would not conclude from the relative absence ofOld Iranian loanwords in the book that no cont?!Cl between Yehud and the Achaemenid Empire took place, demonstrating that it is a mistake to assume the absence of contact from the absence of loanwords.

Chapter 2 Non-Semitic Contact in Ancient Palestine

Ancient Palestine served as a land bridge between the three continents of Asia, Africa, and Europe. Speakers of non-Semitic languages ofien passed through the land, exposing it to foreign influence, and any investigation of non-Semitic lexical borrowing in the Hebrew Bible must take this sociohistorical context into account. Accordingly, the present chapter surveys the evidence for historical contact between ancient Palestine and groups of non-Semitic people, focusing on the cultures that spoke the primary donor languages encountered in this study: the Egyptians, Greeks, Hittites and Luvians, Hum'ans, Indo—Aryans, and Iranians. This chapter thereby provides a sociohistorical framework within which to discuss the loanwords found in chapter 3 as well as the analyses and conclusions of chapters 4—7.

2.1 THE EGYPTIANS Egypt and Palestine remained in close contact throughout much of their ancient history due to their geographical proximity. Peaceful trade was sometimes a factor, but Egypt often sought to extend its influence into Palestine through military campaigns. Egypt’s contact with Palestine was often motivated by seeming threats from other peoples, such as the Hittites, Hum'ans, Assyrians, Babylonians, and the inhabitants of Palestine themselves. Textual and archaeological evidence points to contact between Egypt and Palestine as early as the Chalcolithic period.I Beginning with the Early Bronze Age, however, evidence for contact between Egypt and Palestine becomes much more plentiful. Egyptian cultural goods—particularly pottery—appear at sites in southern Palestine (e.g., ‘En Besor) and sites in the northern Sinai. Egyptian texts testify that several Old Kingdom Egyptian pharaohs conducted military campaigns in Palestine, but these military incursions were of a temporary nature and did not I . Ceramic potsherds bearing the Egyptian ruler Narmer’s name at sites such as Arad and Tell Erani, for example, attest to early contact between Egypt and Palestine. 2]

22

Chapter 2

significantly affect ties between Egypt and the Levant. Egypt’s interests dun'ng the Old Kingdom largely focused on Byblos to the north of Palestine, a source of timber, and the southern Sinai, a source of copper and turquoise (Redford 1992, 17—24, 29—55; Hoffmeier 1998, 255—64; W. Ward 1992, 400—401). Beginning with the First Intermediate Period and continuing into Egypt’s Middle Kingdom, Asiatics began infiltrating the Delta, as indicated by Egyptian texts (e.g., The Instruction ofMerikare) as well as archaeological evidence at sites such as Tel el-Dab‘a (Avaris). A tomb painting from the Tomb of Amenemhat at Beni Hasan, moreover, depicts Semitic traders entering Egypt. During this same time, Egypt renewed both its contact with the Levant, particularly Byblos, and its mining expeditions in the Sinai. Semitic infiltration reached its culmination during Egypt’s Second Intennediate Period, when the Hyksos—Canaanites became rulers of Lower Egypt. Similarities in material culture, such as scarabs of Hyksos kings and officials, point to significant connections between Egypt and the Levant during this pen'od (Redford 1992, 57—70, 98—122; Hoffmeier 1998, 264—71; W. Ward 1992, 401—2). The Egyptians drove the Hyksos out ca. 1540 B.C.E., initiating the New Kingdom and reestablishing native rule over Egypt. With this change in leadership came Egyptian campaigns into southern Palestine under pharaohs Ahmose, Amenho tep I, and Thutmoses I. Egypt’s establishment of a lasting presence in the Levant, however, did not come until the military campaigns of Thutmoses III during the latter part of the 15th century. As a result of Thutmoses III’s campaigns, Egypt took control of all Palestine and extended Egyptian rule to the borders of Hurrian control in northern Syria. By the 14th century, the Hittites had wrested control of the northernmost of Egypt’s territory, and Egyptian control of Palestine waned due to civil unrest. Accordingly, Seti I and Ramesses II campaigned in Palestine and reestablished Egyptian control of the region during the Late Bronze 11 period. The existence of Egyptian-style governors’ residences, administrative centers, and burial practices at certain sites (Tell es-Sa‘idiyeh, Deir el-Balah, Beth-Shean) indicates that Egypt’s presence in Palestine was imperialistic in nature (Redford 1992, 192—213; Hoffmeier 1998, 271—79; W. Ward 1992, 403—4). It was during this period of Egyptian hegemony that Canaanite scribes adopted the Egyptian system of hieratic numerals, a system eventually adopted and further developed by scribes and administrators of the Israelite monarchy (N. S. Fox 2000, 250—68). By the end of the Late Bronze Age, Egypt had to withdraw from Palestine due to intemal unrest, economic problems, its exploitation of Palestine, and the arrival ofthe Sea Peoples during the reigns of Memeptah and Ramesses III. The result was a decline in Egyptian—Levantine relations, a phenomenon reflected in the weakening of ties between Byblos and Egypt (see the Report of Wenamun). Egypt did not significantly interact again with Palestine until the Third Intermediate Period. Sheshonq I, the founder of the Twenty-Second Dynasty, conducted a military carnpaign into Palestine (1 Kgs 14:25—26), as recorded in the temple ofAmun at Thebes. However, his campaigns did not establish a lasting Egyptian presence in Palestine. in part due to intemal divisions of the Twenty-Second through Twenty-Fourth Dynasties (Redford 1992, 312—15; Hoffmeier 1998, 281, 289; W. Ward 1992. 405)-

Non-Semitic Contact in A m‘ien! Palestine

23

When the Neo-Assyrian and Neo—Babylonian Empires came on the scene during the mid-first millennium B.C.E., Palestine became a battleground between Egypt and Mesopotamia. Hoshea, the Northern Kingdom’s last king, unsuccessfully attempted to make an alliance with Egypt against Assyria ca. 726 B.C.E. (2 Kgs 17:4). The Nubian pharaoh Taharqa challenged Assyrian power in Palestine only a few decades later (ca. 701), causing Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal to drive him from Egypt. Psamtik I broke free from Assyrian rule and exerted Egyptian control in the Levant as far as Phoenicia in 656. After Assyria fell and Babylon rose to power, Pharaoh Necho ll sought to reestablish Egyptian control in Palestine. He defeated Josiah, king of Judah, at Megiddo in 609, enabling Egypt to expand into Palestine. Necho ll subsequently installed Jehoiakim as king of Judah (2 Kgs 23:31—37), maintaining influence on Palestine. However, in 605 Necho ll was defeated at Carchemish by Nebuchadnezzar II and was forced to return to Egypt, ending Egyptian control of Judah’s throne. With the impending threat of Babylon, many Judeans fled to Egypt in hopes offinding safe haven there (Jer 43:1—7) (Redford 1992, 351—64, 431—69; Hoffmeier 1998, 281—82, 289; W. Ward 1992, 405—6). Egypt became a satrapy of the Persian Empire in 525 B.C.E. under Cambyses2 and later passed into the hands of Alexander the Great in 332. After its conquest by Persia, Egypt played a much less significant role in the events of the ancient Near East, and as it declined, contact between Egypt and Palestine became far less significant than previously. Yet, archaeological evidence of contact with Egypt, such as Egyptian—style jewelry, scarabs, and imported Egyptian seals, exists (Stern 1984a; cf. 2001, 353—582). The Egyptians even briefly occupied the coastlands of Palestine during the earlier part of the fourth century, while Persia struggled with the Greeks (Stern 1984b, 75; 2001, 358). Moreover, during the Persian and Hellenistic periods Egypt continued to play a role in the shaping of Judaism in that Jews settled there, most notably at Elephantine, where a temple to Yahweh was constructed, and at Alexandria, the birthplace of the Septuagint (Hoffmeier 1998, 282—83, 289; W. Ward 1992, 406—7).

2.2 THE GREEKS Significant contact between the Aegean and the Levant is attested as early as the Middle Bronze Age. This early evidence, however, indicates contact with Minoans rather than with Greeks proper.3 It is not until the Late Bronze Age that evidence for contact between the Greeks and Palestine begins to appear. The Cape Gelidonya and Uluburun shipwrecks

2. Egypt briefly regained its independence during the Twenty-Eighth through Thirtieth Dynasties (404—343 B.C.E.) but subsequently returned to Persian control. 3. Minoan Kamares Ware appears throughout the Levant during the Middle Bronze Age. and the

Middle Bronze Age palace discovered at Tel Kabn' in the Galilee contains several frescoes paralleled by those of Minoan Crete.

24

Chapter 2

attest to widespread Mediterranean trade during the Late Bronze Age, includ. ing trade between the Mycenaean Greeks and Palestine (Sasson 1966). Ceramic remains likewise indicate trade between Greece and Palestine during the Late Bronze Age: Canaanite pottery is found at sites throughout the Greek mainland (e. g.. Mycenae. Athens, and Tiryns), and Mycenaean pottery appears at sites in Pa]estine (e.g.. Tell Abu Hawam, Lachish, Tel Dan; Cline 2009, 48—59; Wijngaarden 2002. 31424; Stubbings 1951. 53—89). After the crisis years of the Late Bronze Age, contact between Greece and Palestine is first attested during the late tenth century B.C.E., when Protogeometn’c Greek pottery appears at Tel Hadar in the Galilee. Early Geometric Greek pottery is attested throughout the Iron Age at northern sites (e. g., Tell Abu Hawam, Megiddo, Samaria. Dor, Tel Dan, and Tel Kabri) as well as southern sites (e.g., Tel Miqne [Ekron]. Ashkelon. Arad, and Me_sad Has'avyahu). Most of the pottery forms represented are kitchen vessels (e.g., skyphoi, kraters, oinochoai, jugs). This strongly suggests the presence of Greek-speakers in these areas because vessels of this type would normally not be imported from Greece.4 At some of these sites, particularly Mesad ,Has'avyahu and Tel Kabri, these Greeks were almost certainly mercenan'es. Classical sources attest to the presence of Greek mercenaries at Palestine during the Iron Age (Alcaeus, Frag. 48 LP; 350 LP), as does the Hebrew Bible, which notes that Carians (‘13-) served as bodyguards for Athaliah (2 Kgs 11:4, 19).5 Thus, although little evidence exists for a substantial Greek population in Palestine during the Iron Age, there is good evidence for the presence of Greeks in Palestine, many of whom were probably traders, artisans. and mercenaries (Hagedom 2005, 89—93). These traders. artisans. and mercenaries continued to live in mixed communities in Palestine into the Persian period (cf. lsaeus, Oral. 4.7; Demosthenes, Orat. 52.20). Greek pottery appears in even greater quantities in Palestine throughout the Persian period at sites such as Dor, Akko, Tel Dan, Samaria, Tell el-H,esi, TellAbu Hawam, Tell Jemmeh. and Ashkelon; and commonly attested in Palestine dun'ng the Persian period are Greek currency and its local imitations, particularly the drachma (Wenning 2001, 344—57; Auscher 1967, 9—27). Lastly, there is significant evidence of Greek cultural influence, particularly in the realms of technology and religion, during the Persian period (Ambar—Armon and Kloner 2009). Contact between the Greeks and Palestine reached its zenith during the Hellenistic period. The Persian period came to an end in 332 B.C.E. when Alexander the Great conquered the Achaemenid Empire. After Alexander’s death, rule of Palestine fell into the hands of Ptolemy, establishing a dynasty that lasted until the second century 3.0.5., when the Seleucids took control of Palestine. The practice 4. Hagedom 2005, 87—89; Wenning 2001, 341—44; Waldbaum 1994; Auscher 1967. 9—21. 5. Hagedom 2005. 76—87; Niemeier 2002. The Arad ostraca frequently refer to the Kittim within a military context (HAEArad (6):1:2; (6):2:2; (6):4:1; (6):7:2; (6).:822; (6):10:2; (6):11:2; (6):17:9).Although originally connected with Kition and Cyprus (Josephus, Am. 1.28), Kittim seems to have expanded its referent to include Greece (1 Macc 1:1; 8:5) and even Rome (cf. tom‘s rendering ofNum 24:24 and 13's translations of Ezek 27:6 and Dan 11:30). If “Kittim” indeed refers to Greeks in the Arad ostraca, this would provide additional evidence of Greek mercenaries in Palestine during the Iron Age.

Non-Semitic Contact in Ancient Palestine

25

of establishing mixed communities in Palestine with Greek traders, artisans, and mercenaries continued, as is evident at sites such as Marisa (Maresha). However, during the Hellenistic period much more significant Greek influence on Palestine took place through Hellenism, the spread of the Greek language and Greek culture as a result of Alexander the Great’s conquests (Hengel 1974).

Some of the earliest evidence of contact between Semitic peoples and Anatolian peoples—including Hittites and Luvians—comes from the Old Assyrian period, when private entrepreneurs from Assyria established trading colonies in Anatolia (cf. Veenhof 1995). However, there is no evidence for contact between Anatolia and the Levant until the latter half of the second millennium B.C.E., and even then little evidence exists for direct contact between the Hittites and Luvians and the inhabitants of Palestine.

2.3.1 The Hittites During the second millennium B.C.E. there is much evidence for contact between the Hittites and northern Syria, particularly at sites such as Ugan't, Minet el-Beida, Alalakh, Tell Kazel, Ebla, Tell Fray, and Emar. Less evidence exists for a relationship between the Hittites and Palestine further south during the second millennium. Nevertheless, the signing of a peace treaty in 1258 B.C.E. between Ramesses II of Egypt and Muwatalli ofHyatti opened the possibility of contact because the Hittites had to pass through Palestine to get to Egypt. The Hittites who passed through Palestine were from a variety of trades (e.g., diplomats, soldiers, merchants, doctors, and artisans) and stopped at major Egyptian strongholds in Palestine (e.g., BethShean, Megiddo, Aphek, Jafia, and Gaza) on their joumeys. A number of Hittite objects—including an ivory plaque of Hittite style found at Megiddo, as well as Hittite—style seals, bullae, and signet rings found at sites such as Megiddo, Aphek, and Tel el-Farah (South)—point to Hittite contact with Palestine during the Late Bronze Age (Genz 2011, 316-17; Lebrun 1998). This contact was never substantial in that no significant Hittite population ever lived in Palestine, but it did result in the transmission of Hittite culture to Palestine during the second millennium (Singer 2006; B. J. Collins 2007, 213—18; Hoffner 2002). After the collapse of _Hatti ca. 1200 B.C.E. and until the advent of the NeoAssyrian Empire, a small portion ofthe Hittite population established several NeoHittite states in northern Syria, including Carchemish, Melid, Que, and Karatepe— Aslantas. The existence oftexts from northern Syria written in Hieroglyphic Luvian (the official language of the Neo—Hittite states) and Northwest Semitic points to contact with the Neo—Hittite states, as does the Hebrew Bible’s references to them (Josh 1:4; 1 Kgs 10:29; 2 Kgs 7:6; 2 Chr 1:17; Hoffner 1969, 28—37; cf. McMahon 1992, 231—33). Aside from mention of Solomon’s horse trade with the north (1 Kgs

26

Chapter 2

10:29; 2 Chr 1:17),6 however, little evidence exists for direct contact between the Neo-Hittite states and Palestine. Nevertheless. various points of continuity between Neo-Hittite and Israelite culture (e.g., political and judicial affairs, architecture religion and ideology. and linguistic and literary forms of expression) suggest that contact did occur during the first millennium 13.015. (Hess 2008; Kitchen 2003). 2.3.2 The Luvians The Luvians primarily inhabited western Anatolia (mostly in the region ofArzawa and the Lukka lands) and were politically subservient to 'Hatti, giving them few opportunities for direct contact with the Levant, much less Palestine. The spread of Luvians to the east during the Late Bronze Age opened the door for the possibility of contact between Luvians and Northwest Semitic—speaking peoples. If the Lk of the Sea Peoples are to be identified as the Luvian-speaking Lukka people, then it is conceivable that Luvians were displaced as far south as Egypt and that the inhabitants of ancient Palestine encountered them during the latter half of the second millennium 3.0.5. (Bryce 2003, 87—88). Eastward movements of Luvian peoples continued after the fall ofthe kingdom of Hyatti, leading to the establishment of Luvian regions in southeastern Anatolia during the first millennium B.C.E. at Hartapu and Tabal as well as in Lycia in the southwest and Cilicia Aspera (Tracheai) in the southeast. Multilingual inscriptions, such as the Azatiwada Inscription from Karatepe—Aslantas and the Xanthos (Letoon) Trilingual, indicate contact between Luvian— and Northwest Semitic— speaking peoples who settled in southeastern Anatolia (Bryce 2003, 93—124). There is less evidence of direct contact between Luvian-speaking peoples and the inhabitants of ancient Palestine dun'ng the first millennium. However, events such as the deportation of Luvian-speaking peoples from Neo-Hittite states (e. g., Hamath) to Palestine after 722 B.C.E. provide a plausible means of the transmission of Luvian culture to Palestine (Hutter 2004). Moreover, the above-mentioned points of continuity between Palestine and the Neo-Hittite states (§2.3.1), the latter of which probably contained substantial Luvian populations,7 suggest that contact between Luvians and the inhabitants of ancient Palestine did exist during the first millennium (Hess 2008; Kitchen 2003).

2.4 THE HURRIANS Similar to the Hittites and Luvians, most evidence of contact between the Humans and Northwest Semitic—speakers is limited to the north, specifically northern Syria. In contrast to the Hittites and Luvians, however, more substantial evidence exists for direct contact between the Humans and the inhabitants of Palestine. 6. On the Hebrew Bible‘s mention of Solomon trading horses with the Neo-Hittite states, See Ikeda 1982. 7. However, cf. Bryce 2003, 124—27.

Non-Semitic Contact in Ancient Palestine

27

The Hurrians had a significant role politically as well as culturally in northern Syria beginning in the Middle Bronze Age, particularly at sites such as Ugarit, Alalakh, VHalab, Urs'um, Has's'um, and Carchemish. Their influence was not limited to northern Syria, however, and as early as the 17th century B.C.E., Hurrian names appear in cuneiform tablets from Palestine. Hurrian names, as well as Hurrian loanwords, continue to be attested in cuneiform texts from Palestine into the Late Bronze Age. In fact, as evidenced by the Amama letters, individuals with Hurrian names (e.g., Abdi-vheba of Jerusalem) even came to rule several cities in Palestine by the Late Bronze Age. It is during this same time that the Egyptians begin to apply the term Hvirw (Hvurru) to the inhabitants of Syria—Palestine, indicating that enough Hurrians lived in Palestine to justify its designation as “Hurru. Moreover, New Kingdom Egyptian texts (e.g., the Memphis and Kamak Stelae of Amenhotep II) mention taking captive Hurrian men and their wives from Palestine (Na’aman 1994; Hess 1997; Lebrun 1998). The Hebrew Bible, moreover, indicates the presence of Hurrians in the land of Palestine during the late second millennium in that it refers to several individuals with Hurrian names in Palestine, including the Jebusite mg (2 Sam 24:16, 18, 20—24; 1 Chr 21:15, 18; 2 Chr 3:1)8 and several local rulers during Joshua’s conquest, including main and £1,819 (Josh 10:3), and “WW and min (Josh 15:15) (Hess 2015, 5—12; 1996, 209—12; Holfner 1973, 224—25). Similarities between centers of Hurrian culture (e.g., Nuzi and Alalakh) and Palestine with respect to social customs and literary forms likewise point to contact between Hurrians and the inhabitants of ancient Palestine during the late second millennium (Hess 2002; Hoffner 1973, 225—26).

2.5 THE INDO-ARYANS Although evidence exists for early trade and cultural contact between Mesopotamia and what is now India (e.g., Meluh'hva and Harappa; Ratnagar 2004), these cultures were not ethnically Indie. Indie-speaking peoples (Indo—Aryans) did not arn‘ve in ancient India until the earlier part of the second millennium B.C.E. (Kulke and Rothermund 2010, 12—14). During the latter half of the second millennium, evidence for Indie-speaking peoples appears in the ancient Near East: Indie names and vocabulary appear in texts connected with Mittani, particularly literature from these regions on hippiatrics (e.g., the Kikkuli Texts), and Indic linguistic elements also appear in several personal names of Hurrian—influenced areas in southern Syria and Palestine.9 Scholars debate, however, what exactly these Indic elements imply. They may reflect fossilized elements, indicating past contact with Indicspeaking peoples, or they may reflect the actual presence of a small population of

8. 6 (Opva) as well as the parallel account in Chronicles indicate that the spelling nmg found in I Sam 24 is a transposition of mg, a Hurrian name. 9. Mayrhofer 1966. Annelies Kammenhuber (1968) and I. M. Diakonoff (1972), however, dispute the identification of the linguistic elements as Indo-Aryan (i.e., Indic).

Chapter .,,e,____________\\2

Indie peoples (not an [ado-Aryan superstrate, as sometimes contended) in these regions.” \.‘ulwsequently the ancient Near East was largely isolated from Indie-speaking peoples until the latter half of the first millennium B.C.E., when Cyrus the Great and Darius I brought much of the northwestern subcontinent of India under Per. sian rule and Alexander the Great expanded Greek territory into India. Classical sourees indicate that the Aehaemenids and Greeks traded with India dun'ng this lime (e.g.. Herodotus. Hist. 4.44). Nevertheless, it was not until the first century (11,-: that regular trade and contact took place between India and the west (Rawlinson 1926, 16 154; Margabandhu 1983; Crone 1987, 30-50). That the inhabitants of ancient Palestine were aware of Indic~speaking peoples is clear from occasional rete‘reneos to India in the Hebrew Bible (Esth 1:1, 8:9) and Apocrypha (I Esdr 3:2: Add Iisth 13:1. 16:1; I Mace 6:37). However, these references always mention India incidentally within the context of the Persian and Greek Empires, and there is no evidence—linguistic, historical, archaeological, or otherwise—of any direct contact between India and Palestine during the first millennium B.C.E.“

2.6 THE IRANIANS Iranian-speaking peoples migrated to the Iranian plateau beginning in the second millennium B.C.E. and continuing into the early first millennium B.C.E. The first clear reference to Iranian peoples in ancient Near Eastern sources is found in texts from the reign of Shalmaneser III (ca. 840 B.C.E.), who mentions the presence of Persians and Medes in the Zagros Mountains region (Waters 1999). The inhabitants of ancient Palestine likewise were aware of Iranian peoples and undoubtedly came into contact with them prior to the Exile (Young, Rezetko, and Ehrensva"rd 2008, 1:296—98). The Hebrew Bible mentions Iranian mercenaries serving in the army of Tyre just to the north of Palestine (Ezek 27:10), as well as the deportation of Iranian-speaking peoples to Samaria by Ashurbanipal (Ezra 4:9—10). Neo-Assyrian texts note that Sargon II settled peoples of the east—most probably Iranian peoples, because he had previously conducted campaigns agaln'st Iran (ca. 716—713)—in Samaria ca. 712.12 The use of Iranian names such as Bigvai in Palestine prior to the Exile (Ezra 2:12; Neh 7:7) provides additional evidence for contact between Iranian peoples and the inhabitants of Palestine before the advent of the Achaemenid Empire. Contact may have been minimal prior to the Exilic period, but it did exist (cf. Wilson-Wright 2015).

10. Wilhelm 1989, 17—19; Kuhn 1997, 296—98; Stiebing 2009, 112; cf. Kulke and Rothennund 2010. 13—14. 11. Cf. Lott 1992. For refutation of the relatively common notion that Solomon traded with Indian see Luke 1994. 12. Na’aman 1993, 108—9. This is supported by the presence of Iranian names in eighth-“Venm century ostraca from Tell Jemmeh. See Na’aman and Zadok 1988, 40—42.

Non-Semitic Contact in Ancient Palestine

29

Cyrus the Great’s conquest of Babylon in 539 B.C.E. ushered in a new age of contact between Iranian peoples—particularly the Persians and Medes—and the Jews. The Hebrew Bible records that Cyrus permitted the Jews to return to their land under the leadership of Sheshbazzar ca. 539 (2 Chr 32:23; Ezra 1:2—4), an event not explicitly mentioned in any other ancient Near Eastern text but supported by the Cyrus Cylinder. Later waves of returnees were permitted by Persia to return to Palestine under the leadership of Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah, the last of whom was the cupbearer ofArtaxerxes I (Neh 1:11) before he became governor of the province Yehud within the satrapy of Eber—Na‘ri (Trans-Euphrates). The Hebrew Bible thus attests to close contacts between Persia and Palestine.13 Various archaeological finds from Palestine confirm contact with Persia during the sixth—fourth centuries B.C.E., including Achaemenid—style architecture (e.g., at the Lachish Residence), pottery inspired by Achaemenid metal vessels (e.g., rhytons) and metal vessels of Persian style, Irano-Scythian weaponry, Achaemenid-style seals and seal impressions, and Persian coins (e.g., darics) (Stern 1984a; cf. 2001, 353—82). In addition to contact between Iranian-speaking peoples and the inhabitants of Palestine, textual sources also provide evidence for contact between Iranianspeaking peoples and the Jews of the Diaspora. The Elephantine papyri provide evidence for the Persian govemment’s involvement in the politics and religious practices ofthe Jews at Elephantine, and the book of Esther provides a window into Jewish life in Achaemenid Persia (Longman 2005, 490—92). Texts such as these, therefore, provide additional evidence of contact between the Jews and Iranianspeaking peoples, albeit outside the land of Palestine.

2.7 CONCLUSION In antiquity, just as today, foreign contact often led to contact-induced change (Thomason 2004). The discussion in this chapter demonstrates that ancient Palestine was in varying levels of contact with its non-Semitic neighbors, specifically the Egyptians, Greeks, Hittites and Luvians, Hurrians, Indo-Aryans, and Iranians. This contact with non-Semitic peoples undoubtedly provided many opportunities for borrowing (cf. Gowen 1922). The dominant language of the ancient Israelites was Hebrew, in that they remained most proficient and fluent in that language. No evidence exists that the ancient Israelites as a whole ever became more proficient in a non-Semitic language than they were in Hebrew. Because their dominant language remained Hebrew, it is expected that the primary form ofborrowing that took place in ancient Palestine was lexical borrowing, or the adoption of loanwords. The next chapter investigates the non-Semitic loanwords in the Hebrew Bible in light of this socio— historical framework. 13. Williamson 2004; Stem 1984b; Longman 2005, 485—90. The Persian govemment’s endorsement and financial support ofYehud was due, in part, to desrr'es for a loyal ally in the west. See Hoglund 1989.

Part 2: Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

Chapter 3 Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

This chapter presents foreign loans or culture words as individual lexical entries. The words are listed alphabetically, according to the order ofthe Hebrew alphabet,

with cross references provided when necessary. Each entry begins with the term in question, a brief gloss, and its occurrences. In most cases, if a term has multiple spellings it is listed under its most common form unless both a defective and a plene spelling exist, in which case the word is listed under its defective spelling; additionally, if a word occurs in both Biblical Hebrew and Biblical Aramaic, the specific forms are marked as such.l Precise definitions or synonyms are given in single quotation marks; general definitions are given in parentheses. References to the term in Ko"hler and Baumgartner’s and Clines’s lexica follow, and the word’s attestations in the biblical text. In many cases, there follow the translations of the ancient versions, especially for rare words

whose precise meaning may be in doubt. Following these basic data is a summary of the loan relationships for the term. The loan relationships are first marked for type with a capital letter in square brackets: [D] for a direct loan, [T] for a transmitted loan, [1] for an inherited loan, [N] for a denominal verb derived from a foreign noun, and [‘2] for a loanword whose type is uncertain. An arrow (—>) indicates a loan from one language to another, an angle bracket (>) indicates a denominal verb created from a foreign noun, and a semicolon (,') marks co-receptors of a loan. The loan relationship information is arranged on multiple lines when a word is loaned into two or more languages, each with further, distinct development. After the loan relationship information is a list of words pertinent to the establishment of cognate and loan relations. Unless otherwise noted, all words from languages with case endings—excluding Greek and Latin—are provided without declined endings.

I. In rare cases, the consonants and/or vowels of a word are reconstructed on the basis of its donor term, causing it to differ from the form found in HALOTand/or DCH.

33

Chapter 3

A discussion of the linguistic, cultural, and historical data conceming the word makes up the bulk of each entry. By necessity, some terms require more discussion than others; depending on the word, the nature and direction of the discussion varies. 0138 ‘stable’ HALOT 4; DCH 1:102 (Isa 1:3; Job 39:9; Prov 14:4) (5 (pawn ‘feeding trough’; ‘B praesaepes ‘pen, feeding trough’; 6 ’wry’ ‘animal pen’; ‘I "fix ‘animal pen’ [D] Hurr —» Akk; Ug; Heb; Hitt Akk abu‘su (OB, Nuzi, MA, RS, SB, NA) CAD A/I 92—93; AHw 9; Ug ibsn DUL 14; Hitt apuzzi— HHw 21; Hurr abuzi— BGH 41 The word 0133 occurs three times, always in conjunction with animals. Although commonly defined as ‘feeding trough’, it seems to denote an enclosed area for animals, such as a stable, as many of the ancient versions recognized. One may compare Akkadian abu‘su ‘storehouse, stable’.2 However, Akkadian abu'su is probably not cognate with Hebrew 0133, nor is the latter a loan from the former. Hebrew 0135 indicates an earlier qz‘tu‘I-pattem noun, but this nominal pattern is rare in Hebrew and does not exist in Proto-Semitic. Furthermore, Akkadian abu'su should yield 0133*, not 01:18, in Hebrew. Neither Akkadian abu‘su nor Hebrew our; has a good Semitic etymology, and this word is most probably a

foreign loan.3 Morphological markers indicate that this word comes from Hurrian. Hittite apuzzi— ‘storehouse’ contains the Hurrian noun-formation suffix -zi (often used to create words for buildings), and the final -n of Ugaritic z’bsn can be explained as the Hurrian derivational suffix —ni, -nni.4 In Nuzi Akkadian, moreover, the term abu‘su can denote a more specific type of storehouse, a stable, where livestock and related materials were kept (e.g., HSS 19.527, 16, 29). This perfectly matches the definition of Biblical Hebrew 01315 and the contexts in which it occurs. It is likely. therefore, that Semitic- and Hittite-speakers adopted a Hurrian term abuzi- meaning ‘storehouse, stable’ (cf. Albright 1955b, 11). Hebrew probably borrowed this term independently from Hurrian because both Akkadian and Ugaritic preserve forms that could not have been the source of Hebrew 01:18.

2. When attested in Middle and Neo-Assyrian texts, Akk abu'su can mean ‘feeding trough’. and the expression bf! abusati can mean ‘stable’ (Weidner 1963, 123). 3. Cf. ALBH 15—16. The verb DJN ‘to feed livestock’, which occurs only in I Kgs 5:3 and Prov 15:17, is denominal (cf. Bauer and Leander 1922. 472 [§61wa]). The noun 0128,?) does occur in Jer 50:26, but

it is probably a late noun created from the denominal verb 021R. 4. HEDA 102—3; HEGA—K 48. On the noun-formation suffix -zi, see Wegner 2007, 56—57; Giorgieri 2000, 202—4; Wilhelm 2008, 90. On the derivational suffix —ni, —nni, see Wegner 2007, 53; Giorgieri 2000, 210—12; Wilhelm 2008, 92.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

35

[[20:13 ‘watermelon’ HALOT4; DCH 1:102 (Num 11:5) (5 ne'imw ‘gourd, melon’; fl! pepo ‘gourd, melon’; 6, I both use their corresponding form of this word (p_tyh_’ and moan, respectively) [?] CW JA n20: DJPA 91; Syr pat_t,1'h,a‘ LS’ 1181; Arab bat/.171, Lane 216—17; Eg bda‘w-kf (MK) A"W 2:830; GHwA" 283; WA'S' 1:488 This word occurs only in Num 11:5, a list of fruits and vegetables that the Israelites ate in Egypt as slaves. Through comparison with related Semitic forms such as Arabic bartz'vh, many scholars identify the fruit denoted by Hebrew CPU-3x, as the watermelon (Citrullus Ianatus) (e. g., Musselman 2012, 143; Paris and Janick 2008, 48; Low 1924-1934, 1:55 Heb; Aram; Arab; Eth JA, CPA 111 DJPA 122; DCPA 69; Syr gawza' LS? 213; Arab g'awz Lane 485; Eth gawz CDG 207; OIran *agauza-, *gauzaThe word 11'1th is attested only in Song 6:11. Its meaning is not entirely clear from the context, but its definition ‘walnut’ (Juglans regia) is established by the ancient versions and by comparison with related terms in Semitic, especially Arabic g'awz (Musselman 2012, 142; L0"w 1924—1934, 2:29—59). It comes from Old Iranian *agauza-, *gauza- (cf. Gilaki a°yuz and Pashto oyz, which have an initial vowel, as well as Pahl go'z and NPers gauz, gu‘z, goz, which have no initial vowel).12 It is formed from the Old Iranian root *gauz— ‘to hide’ (Gharib 1975; cf. OPers gaud— and Av gauz-z OPGTL 182; A1W 485). The latter is a productive root for seed plants in the Iranian languages and provides a fitting etymology for a nut, which can be thought of as hidden inside its shell. An Old Iranian origin, moreover, is consistent with the known origin of the walnut. Archaeobotanical evidence points to northeastern Turkey, the Caucasus, and northern Iran as the earliest regions of the walnut’s domestication (D. Zohary and Hopf 2000, 188—89). face phonological problems, and it is difficult to see how they fit the meaning requu’ed by the use of “mtg in Gen 41:13 (cf. ALBH 19—20). Vergote (1959, 135—41) derives 1,1138 from an Egyptian imperative *brk ‘kneell' with prothetic ’. However, the verb *brk does not occur in Egyptian with the meaning ‘to kneel’, and a prothetic ’ is not characteristic of three-radical verbs in Egyptian (cf. Lambdin 1953b, 146; Couroyer 1959, 594). Finally, Ellenbogen (1962, 3-5) compares 'ms with Eg bfk ‘servant’. This, however, is problematic on phonological and semantic grounds. 12. Cf. Ciancaglini 2008, 136. On the Gilaki, Pashto, Pahlavi, and New Persian forms, see Ken'mova, Mamedzade and Rastorgueva 1980, 38; Aslanov 1985, 91; CPD 37; CPED 1102.

Chapter 3

Hebrew probably borrowed this term independently, as indicated by the prothetic ’alep not found in the other Semitic forms. As indicated by the use of z rather than d for Proto-Iranian *j,” this word must have been borrowed from an Old Iranian language other than Old Persian. This other dialect of origin remains unclear.14 However, the long 0' indicates a borrowing some time during the Achaemenid period, when the Old Iranian diphthong au monophthongized to 0‘.15 Some scholars contend that Ugaritic ‘rgz, which primarily occurs in hippiatric texts (KTU 1.71:5, 10; 1.72:7, 14; 1.85:5, 10), also means ‘walnut."6 They claim that use of the verb 1'1” with reference to 11115 in Song 6:11 provides a verbal parallel to KTU 1.24:23, which uses the verb yrd with reference to ‘rgz. However, the use of this verb in both texts is hardly enough basis for associating the two terms, especially since it is so common. Additionally, there is a potential phonological problem: Hebrew m8 begins with ’alep, but Ugaritic ‘rgz begins with ‘ and contains an r absent in the Hebrew form.17 These problems cast doubt on a relationship between 1118 and ‘rgz, especially because there is no clear indication that ‘rgz means ‘walnut’ (cf. DUL 179) and because the parallels between Song 6:11 and KTU 1.24:23 are superficial. mg ‘reed pool, marsh’ HALOTII; DCH1:116—17 (Exod 7:19; 8:1 [8:5]; Isa 14:23; 35:7; 41:18; 42:15; Jer 51:32; Ps 107235; 114:8) 6 ékog ‘marsh’ Exod 7:19; 8:1; Isa 35:7; 41:8; 42:15, unko'g ‘mud, clay’ Isa 14:23, ou'otsua ‘company’ Jer 51:32, Muvn ‘lake’ Ps 107235; 114:8; 13 palus ‘marsh’ except stagnum ‘pool’ Isa 35:7; 41:18; 42:15; 6 ’gm’ [Syriac form]; 1 am [Aramaic form] except 713:1 ‘pond’ Isa 14:23, nfix ‘stream’ Ps 107:35; 114:8 [T] Sum ~+ Akk —> —> Heb —> Aram —> Arab Sum AGAM PSD; Akk agammu (OB, SB) CAD A/1 142; AHw 15; IA, JA, SA, CPA tux DNWSI 9; DJPA 34; DSA 6; DCPA 79; Syr ’ag'ma', ’eg'ma' LS2 7; Mand agma, agama MD 5; Arab ’ag'ama Lane 26

The word um appears several times in the Hebrew Bible. By virtue of its association with reed plants, Hebrew-speakers added the individualizing sufiix 11- to 13. On the phonological development of Proto-Iranian ‘1', see Skjarvo 2009, 51; Schmitt 2008‘ 84—85; Testen 1997, 575; OPGTL 33—34 (§88). 14. Edel'man and Klimov 1987, 163—64; Steblin-Kamenskii' 1982, 110. JA rum and Mand anguza contain a nasal and instead come from 01mm ‘hamgauza- (’gauza- and the prefix ham- ‘together, with”) just like Os setic (engu‘z, amgozaz and Arm :2an (DJBA 138; Am 25; Abaev 1958—1989, 1:160—61; HA8 2:130—31). 15. On the monophthongization of au to 0', see Skjaarvo 2009, 58; Schmitt 2008, 83. 16. E.g., Pope 1977, 574—79; Dahood 1964, 98; 1963, 292; Dietrich and Loretz 1986, 118—20. 17. Pardee 1985, 54; C. Cohen and Sivan 1983, 20. Pope (1977, 574—75) explains the ‘by comparing various plant and animal terms in Semitic that begin with ‘ and explains the presence of the r by pointing to later nasalized forms of this word, arguing that the r of Ug ‘rgz reflects the n of these fonnS-

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

39

denote a reed rather than the terrain in which this plant is found, producing the form 11mg ‘reed, rush’ (Isa 9:13; 19:15; 58:5; Job 40:26) (HALOT 11; DCH 1:117; cf. Bauer and Leander 1922, 500 [§61q9]). Hebrew am. has several cognates in Semitic, including Akkadian and Aramaic. Yet, despite its relatively widespread distribution in Semitic, this term is ultimately non-Semitic in origin (AIA 33). Akkadian agammu comes from Sumerian AGAM, as indicated by the double final consonant, indicative of non-Semitic loans into Akkadian (SLOB 140 [#34]). Akkadian subsequently loaned this Sumerian word into Hebrew and Aramaic, making Hebrew mg a transmitted loan.18 Arabic ’agVama is a loan from Aramaic (Fra'nkel 1886, 68—69).

13-8 (a krater-like vessel) HALOTII; DCH 1:117 (Exod 24:6; Isa 22:24; Song 7:3 [722]) (5 Kpam'p ‘bowl’; QB cratera ‘bowl’; (5 lqn’ ‘platter’ Exod 24:6, m’n’ ‘vessel’ Isa 22:24, ’gn’ [Syriac form] Song 7:3; 2: mm ‘bowl’ Exod 24:6, omits Isa 22:24, 1m [Aramaic form] Song 7:3 [T] Hurr —> —; Akk; Ug; Eg; Hitt; Gk —+ Aram —> Heb; Arab; Eth Akk agannu (Qatna, Nuzi, MA, EA, SB, NA, NB) CAD A/I 142—43; AHw 15; Ug a’gn DUL 26; EH 1m DNWSI 9—10; IA, JA, SA, CPA 118 DNWSI 9—10; DJPA 34; DJBA 79; DSA 6; DCPA 4; Syr ’agga'na' LS2 7—8; Mand agana MD 5; Arab ’ig'g‘anat Lane 26; Eth ‘aygan CD0 79; Eg z’kn (NK) GHwA" 121; WA'S' 1:140; SWET 42—43 (#36); Hitt aganm'- HHw 13; Hurr aganm'- BGH 7; GLH 37; Gk 67109 LSJ 7 The word 13?; occurs only three times in the Hebrew Bible, each time referring to a vessel (Exod 24:6; Isa 22:24; Song 7:3). In Epigraphic Hebrew, this word is also attested once in an early sixth century ostracon from Tel Arad (HAE Arad(6)2:10). Additional Semitic forms exist in Akkadian, Ugaritic, Aramaic, and Arabic. In nonSemitic, this word occurs in New Kingdom Egyptian,l9 Hittite, Hurrian, and Greek. Notably, in at least one case Egyptian texts associate the term with northern Syria: ’ 8’ m bi’k n VHi’rw ‘a large basin of Syrian manufacture’ (Urk 4:665,I6). The geographical association of this item with northern Syria and this word’s attestation in Nuzi Akkadian suggests a Hurrian origin. Indeed, Hurrian agannihas a perfectly good Hurrian etymology: it is formed from the verb ag- ‘to carry’ 18. FW0T6-7; ALBH 20—21. The plural absolute form ova-m in Biblical Hebrew (Exod 8:1; Isa 42:15; Jer 51:32) preserves the final double consonant, and the patah, of the singular absolute form also indicates a doubled final consonant. 19. The representation ofz’kn by group writing indicates a loan into Egyptian (contra W. Ward 1996, 27; Lambdm‘ 1953a, 363). This word is probably not related to the older Eg z'kn ‘ladle, scoop, cup’ derived from the verb [kn ‘to draw water’ (cf. SWET 42—43), although Hannig (GHwA" 121) does connect the older 1701 with Akk agannu and Hitt aganm'-.

4o

Chapter 3

(BGH 4—6; GLH 36), the thematic vowel -a, and the derivational suffix -ni, -nni (ag—‘a—rnm').2° Hebrew 138, which exhibits gemination ofthe second root consonant but not the third, is most probably a loan from Hurrian via Aramaic, as is Arabic ’ig'g’anar (ALBH 22; AIA 33; Fra"nkel 1886, 68). Archaeological data indicate that the vessel denoted by this term was a squat, n'ng-based bowl with a large mouth and two handles, similar to a krater (Amadasi Guzzo 1990, 21—23; Kelso 1948, 15—16; Honeyman 1939, 78—79). A Late Bronze Age stone bowl fragment (8.4 X 8.1 X 7.25 cm) from Hazor contains a dedicatory inscription on this type of vessel, specifically mentioning it by name (CIC Hazor 13:1). A Ugaritic text from Sarepta (KTU 6.70:1), also a dedicatory inscription, is inscribed on a wide krater handle (Pritchard 1975, 102—4; Greenstein 1976). Lastly, nine krater—like stone vessels from the Palmyrene sanctuary at Khirbet Semrin inscribed with dedicatory formulae label the vessels by this term. The only intact vessel discovered at this sanctuary was 49 cm in height and had an inside diameter of 56 cm (Milik 1972, 108—11). 50735 (a vessel) HALOTII; DCH12118 (Ezra 1:9 [2X]) 6 \VvKréov ‘wine-cooler’; 13 phiala ‘saucer’; C5 ’gn’ ‘basin’ [D] ?? —+ Heb This word appears twice with reference to items taken from the temple, kept by Nebuchadnezzar, and finally released by Cyrus. According to Ezra 1:9, included within the temple inventory were 30 59138, of gold (WWW) :13} {719138) and 1000 5mm of silver (TM nervous). The next verse mentions vessels made of gold (:31 7119:9) and silver (‘19; "1193, paralleling Ezra 1:9 and indicating that 5mm denotes a container of some sort. This word does not look Semitic and is almost certainly a foreign loan.21 It could be an Old Iranian or Greek loan, given the historical context of the book of Ezra, but a convincing hypothesis regarding either remains to be proposed.22 Thus, while 20. De Martino and Giorgieri 2008—, 1:34. On the thematic vowel -a, see Wegner 2007, 52; Giorgien' 2000, 199; Wilhelm 2008, 90. On the den'vational sufl‘ix -m', -nm‘, see Wegner 2007, 55; Giorgien’ 2000, 210—12; Wilhelm 2008, 92. 21. JA, CPA '7mp and Syr qarla'la' are late loans from Gk m’pmMog, Ka’pruXOg and do not prove that this word is Semitic. Their representation has perhaps been influenced by that of BH bung (DJPA 504; DCPA 381; LS’ 1406). 22. Schefielowitz (AAT1268) compares Gk Ka'pmuog, m’praMg. However, this is problematic on several counts. First, Gk Kapt'aMog denotes a basket or wicker basket, especially one used for holding foodstufi‘s, which is difficult to reconcile with the fact that the vessel denoted by 70113 was made of metal. Second, (5 does not translate 50118, as Ka'pmllog as expected if the former were borrowed from the latter. Third, the initial ’alep 090118 indicates an initial consonant cluster, which Gk detuMOa' does not have. Humbert (1950, 199—200), on the other hand, compares NPers khirta‘l, which denotes a leather puI‘Se filled with gold or silver. However, this hardly suits the meaning of 50125 m' Ezra 1:9. If‘mjm is from

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

a non-Semitic origin is almost certain, the donor language and donor term behind this word escape identification at present (FWOT 11). fig, 18 ‘ground flow’ HALOTII; DCH 1:118 (Gen 2:6; Job 36:27) (51131711 ‘spring, fountain’ Gen 2:6, varpéln ‘cloud’ Job 36:27; iBfons ‘spring’ Gen 2:6, gurges ‘eddy’ Job 36:27; 5 mbw" ‘spring, source’ Gen 2:6, blh,wdwhy ‘by itself’ Job 36:27; I 1117 ‘cloud’ [T] Sum —> Akk —> Heb Sum ADEA PSD; Akk edu‘ (OB, SB) CAD B 35—36; AHw 187

This word is a dis legomenon. The MT preserves two different forms of this word, 73 (Gen 2:6) and 178 (Job 36:27). It refers to water, whether water that swells up from the ground as in Gen 2:6 (Y'Jlgtn'm .‘I‘QyE m) or the product of purified rain as in Job 36:27 (118.7 1197; 17,-1'3). Albright (1939, 102) attempted to connect 1'18 with Sumerian 1D ‘river’. Speiser, however, demonstrated that Hebrew 1'18 instead comes from Akkadian edu‘ ‘ground flow, flood’.23 The latter is a loan from Sumerian ADEA of the same meaning (SLOB 215—16 [#161]; contra Hasel and Hasel 2000, 328—29). At least one lexical list equates Sumerian A.DE'.A with e-du-u among mention of terms such as esigu ‘low water’ and mz‘lu ‘flood’ (Igituh_ ivz45). At first glance Job 36:27 may not seem to fit the meaning ‘flood’ very well, but the Assyrian version ofthe epic ofAtra_hasis (ivz44—45) links the term mz‘lu with rain. Hence, rising ground water and rain water were thought to be connected in ancient Near Eastern thought (cf. Gen 7:11; 8:2). Based on comparative evidence in the Aramaic treatment of Akkadian loanwords, as well as scant evidence from Biblical Hebrew (cf. BH 1‘32}, from Akk s'ubu‘), the final long -u‘ of Akkadian edu‘ should be represented as _holem-waw in Hebrew. Accordingly, the form 125 in Gen 2:6 should probably be emended to 1'18, as in Job 36:27 (ALBH 26; AIA 47). 113338 (a financial official) HALOT 1807 (Dan 3:2—3)

Old Iranian, it must come from a non-standard dialect because the liquids r and [merged in most Old Iranian dialects (cf. Schmitt 2008, 83; Testen 1997, 582; OPGTL 38 [§1o7]). Lastly, Rabin (1963, 126—28; 1964, 164) connects 5%:th with Hitt kurtal-, kurtali-, kurtalli-. However, Hitt kurtal- denotes a wooden crate or wicker basket and faces the same problems as Schefielowitz’s derivation from Gk Ka’praMog, Ka’prakog. 23. Speiser 1955; cf. ALBH 26—27; FWOT 13. Dahood (1981; cf. Rogland 2010) instead associates in; with Ebla i.DU (i-tu’m), a name for one of the late autumn months. Because this is the rainy season, he contends that the month-name, and also BH 1'78, means ‘rain cloud’. However, this is quite speculative, and the reading of the Eblaite month name is in doubt (Pettinato 1974—1977, 30).

42

Chapter 3

(5, I; omit one of the officials in the lists of Dan 3:2—3, so it is difficult to tell how they translate BA 1131.18,, if at all; 6 ’rgafv, an erroneous rendering of BA WINK [D] Olran —> Aram Olran *a'dranga'z'ara-

Biblical Aramaic 1mm occurs within a list of officials summoned by Nebuchadnezzar (Dan 3:2—3). It does not look Semitic and has no cognates or Semitic etymology, so it is almost certainly a foreign loan.24 Because it appears within a list of primarily Persian ofiicials, Old Iranian is the probable candidate. Brown, Driver, and Briggs (BDB 1078) as well as Ko"hler and Baumgartner (HALOT 1807) compare a hypothetical Old Iranian *handarzakara- ‘counselor’, formed from *handarza- ‘instruction, order’ and the element kara- ‘doer, maker’ (cf. F. Rosenthal 2006, 62; AAT2:57—58). However, the Middle Persian compound they cite in favor of this loan hypothesis does not exist, and their derivation makes several problematic assumptions. It requires the initial h of Old Iranian *handarza— to be omitted in Biblical Aramaic even though it is otherwise represented in Imperial Aramaic h'url.25 Their etymology cannot explain the lack of representation of Old Iranian n unless the MT is presumed to be in error. Finally, this loan hypothesis requires that gimel rather than the usual kap appear for Old Iranian k and that the gimel and zayin have metathesized inexplicably.26 I propose that Biblical Aramaic 113me instead comes from Old Iranian *a'dranga'z'ara-, which denotes a financial official (cf. Szemere’nyi 1975, 387). This word consists of *a'dranga- ‘financial obligation’ and *az"ara— ‘announcer’.27 Old Iranian *a'drangaz"ara- matches 1131.115 well phonologically. Furthermore, its meaning fits well within the context since the financial title 137;. ‘treasurer’ directly follows 1mm in the lists of Dan 3:2—3. Based on its etymology, the financial offi— cial denoted by 11mm probably supervised loans, credit, and debt obligations.28 24. JA 1mm occurs only in Cant. Rab. 7:9 and is adopted from BA 11’3'1'18,(Jastrow 1903, 18). 25. Of course, initial h can sometimes be lost, especially if the recipient language has no cormsponding phoneme (cf. Gk afl’nlouta‘”, from Heb FITHWJ). One may also compare the Haphel-Aphel variants of the Semitic S-stem in Aramaic. 26. Rundgren 1967, 93; Szemere’nyi 1975, 387. Hinz (AISN 115) doubts the existence of Olran ‘handarzakara-, and Tavemier (AIP) does not reconstruct an Olran *handarzakara-. Given these difficulties, Rundgren (1967, 93, 96) instead den'ves mam fi'om a hypothetical Olran *hadargaz'ar- ‘chiliarch’, formed from hadahra— ‘thousand’ and the verb *gaz'ar— ‘to determine, decree’. borrowed from Semitic. However, this suggestion is just as unlikely. Rundgren‘s loan hypothesis is phonologically problematic, assumes the existence of an Old Iranian verb *gaz‘ar- for which there is little evidence, and erroneously connects Gk a'Capunateig with Olran "hazahrapari- (Szemere'nyi 1975‘ 383—89; Schmitt 2007, 356—57). 27. Olran ‘a‘dranga- literally has to do with making something firm, as in Av drang-, a‘drang(A!W 772), but it is used with reference to financial obligations in IA mm (AISN 22—23; [AP 442). The element *az"ara— is found in Gk u'Captmaratg", which Hesychius of Alexandria (Lex. (11441) defines as oi eioayyakatg‘ napa‘ Hépooug ‘those who announce before Persians‘ (Szemere’nyi 1975, 387—89; HuySC I999, 134)28. For a detailed analysis of this word, see Noonan 2018.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

43

871178 ‘diligently, wholeheartedly’ HALOT1808 (Ezra 7:23) 6, 6 do not directly represent this word; I? diligenter ‘diligently, carefully’ [D] OIran —> Aram Olran *drazda'- AISN 92—93 Biblical Aramaic 831178 occurs only in Ezra 7:23, where Artaxerxes instructs Ezra to do whatever God commands in the manner of 81-1178 (133107 83731? 7175 DVU'VJ ’7“??81-1173). The context indicates that M1118 is an adverb and means something like ‘diligently’ or ‘wholeheartedly’, a definition supported by 23 (diligenter). This word certainly does not look Semitic, and it has no apparent Semitic etymology. Thus, it is most certainly a foreign loan. The donor term is Old Iranian *drazda'- ‘diligently, wholeheartedly’ (cf. Av zarazda'— ‘faithful’: A1 W 1702—3).29 Old Iranian *drazda‘- has a perfectly good etymology: it is composed of *draz‘heart’ (cf. Av zarad—z AIW1692) and da'- ‘to give’ (cf. OPers, Av 515-: OPGTL 188;

A1 W 711—23), literally meaning ‘to give the heart to’.30 113118 => [Pm-Tl:

nibazg, 017,71th ‘aloe’ HALOT19; DCH 1:146 (Ps 45:9 [45:8]; Prov 7:17; Song 4:14“) (5 oraKrn' ‘myrrh oil’ Ps 45:9, oiKog ‘dwelling’ Prov 7:17, transliterates as 0111139 Song 4:14; 23 gutta ‘drop’ Ps 45:9, aloe [Latin form] Prov 7:17; Song 4:14; 6 ’st,qt’, ‘myrrh oil’ Ps 45:9, kwrkm’ ‘saffron’ Prov 7:17, ‘lwy [Syriac form] Song 4:14; I 118158 510px ‘aloewood’ Ps 45:9; Song 4:14, 13:11: ‘saffron’ Prov 7-‘17 [D] ?? —’ —+ Heb —+ Gk —> Aram; Lat JA, CPA 815x DJBA 115; DCPA 310; Syr ‘alway, ’alwa‘ L5” 48, 1100; Mand ‘luaia W 351; Arab ’uluwwa, ’alwa Lane 2651; Eth ‘alwa', ‘a‘lwa', ra'law, ’alaw, ’alaw CDG 62; Gk axon LSJ 72; Lat aloe OLD 117 This word shows up only three times in the Hebrew Bible, twice in the plural form nibag (Ps 45:9; Song 4:14) and once in the plural form 1:1“7'l.,§ (Prov 7:17). It always appears in conjunction with fragrant plants: always with 1?) ‘myrrh’, but also along with the fragrant plants 7133‘? ‘frankincense’, 71: ‘spikenard’, and DD): ‘safi‘ron’ 29. FWOT16; F. Rosenthal 2006, 63; AA T 1:68—69; Schaeder 1930, 75. 3o. Rundgren 1982—1983, 143—46; Nober 1958, 134—38. 31. In light of the parallelism with mm; ‘cedars’, amt: in Num 24:6 should be emended to Mrs or Dub-rs (cf. BHS). The ancient versions unanimously understood this as a reference to tents, readin’g D‘TJR.

44

Chapter 3

(Song 4:14) as well as Mrs? (a cassia-like plant) (Ps 45:9) and 11735? (a cinnamonlike spice) (Prov 7:17). Since many of these terms are foreign, it is probable that D1533 is also a non-Semitic loan. Hebrew 1115313 is sometimes derived from post—Vedic Sanskrit agaru-, aguru-, ‘agarwood’ (E WAia 3:4; KEWA 1:17—18),32 but this is problematic on at least two counts. First, significant phonological differences exist between the Hebrew and Sanskrit forms. In particular, advocates of this loan relationship cannot offer any convincing explanation for the use of Hebrew he for Sanskrit g.33 Second, Hebrew mm most probably means ‘aloe’ (genus Aloe) rather than ‘agarwood’ (Aquilaria malaccensis). Ancient texts associate aloe—not agarwood—with myrrh (e.g., John 19:39), just as the Hebrew Bible associates 111233, with myrrh (Ps 45:9; Prov 7:17; Song 4: 14). It is telling that, although they sometimes struggled to translate Hebrew Thing, the ancient versions took it as ‘aloe’ more often than ‘agarwood’.34 Instead, Hebrew 1115.38, probably comes from a term native to the region encompassing the Horn of Africa and Arabia Felix. Many of the products elsewhere associated with Ming (e.g, Va, .1337, ramp, and 11m?) come from this region. Moreover, both Greco-Roman sources (e.g., Dioscorides, Mat. med. 3.22; Perzp'l. M. Rubr. 28) and classical Muslim authors associate aloe with the region encompassing the Horn of Africa and Arabia Felix (Crone 1987, 59—60, 267—69). The aloe plant is native to this region (Heinrich, Pieroni and Bremner 2005, 208), and the term would have been borrowed along with the plant. The same word behind Hebrew 11157.3 is undoubtedly behind Greek a'lto'n. The Greek form is the origin of this term in Aramaic (JA, CPA 8158 and Syr ralway, ’alwa'), Arabic (’uluwwa, ’alwa), and Ethiopic (‘alwa‘, ‘a'Iaw, ‘a'lwa', ’alaw, ’alaw) as well as Latin (aloe). 31x ‘spirit of the dead’ HALOT 20; DCH 1:148 (Lev 19:31; passim”) [D] Hurr —> —-> Akk —> Sum —> Heb 32. E.g., Rabin 1962, 1079; FWOT19—20; Powels 1992, 186—88; Low 1924—1934,3:411—14;Greppm‘ 1988, 33—48. 33. Greppin (1988, 34—35) compares the weakening of the voiceless stop k (or k') to h in Grimm's Law (cf. Lat centum and English hundred, Lat cam's and English hound). However, this reflects a linguistic development within Indo-European. There is no evidence that the velar of the Indie forms was weakened, so this explanation does not account for why Hebrew-speakers would represent a velar as a laryngeal. It is significant that Gk a‘yako'xov, a‘yu’kkoxov (cf. Syr ’aga‘lo'k_o'n), which does mean ‘agarwood’ and is a loan from Indic, clearly preserves the velar. 34. Dioscorides (Mat. Med. 1.22; 3.22) distinguishes agarwood (a'ydkkoxov) from the true aloe (down), demonstrating that these plants were not confused even as late as the first century C.E. It was not until several centun'es later that Gk axon and Lat aloe came to be confused with agarwood (e.g., C05' mas, Top. 11.15 and perhaps also Justinian, Dig. 39.4.167). See Crone 1987, 267—69. 35. Lev 20:6, 27; Deut 18:11; 1 Sam 28:3, 7 (2X), 8—9; 2 Kgs 21:6; 23:24; Isa 8:19; 19:3; 29:4; 1 Chr 10:13; 2 Chr 33:6.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

45

—» Luv —’ Hitt Sum ABUM PSD; Akk apu (NA) CAD A/2 201; AHw 62; OH 318; Hitt api- HHw 21; Luv a'pz't- (CLuv) CLL 23; Hurr abi— BGH 37—38; GLH 34—3536 The word 31x occurs 16 times, frequently in conjunction with USU-7 ‘familiar spirit’. This usage, as well as its association with crux. ‘ghost’ in Isa 19:3, demonstrates that it denotes a spirit. Notably, the necromancer from Endor is called a 'nbya nix ‘mistress of m’x’ (1 Sam 28:7).That this type of spirit was associated with the ground is clear from passages such as Isa 29:4 and 1 Sam 28:8 (cf. I Sam 28:13). In the Damascus Document, :18 appears parallel to “11:7”, similar to its use in the Hebrew Bible (CD xiiz3). One may compare various forms in Sumerian (ABUM), Akkadian (apu), Hittite (api-), and Cuneiform Luvian (a'pit—), all of which mean ‘necromantic pit’. However, there is no evidence that any of these forms is native to their respective languages. Cuneiform Luvian a‘pit— clearly comes from Hurrian. Furthermore, Hittite api- occurs in Hurrian contexts (e.g., KBo 17.98 V.'IO-II, 17) even though it is borrowed from Luvian (HED A 100—101; Starke 1990, 211—12). Thus, this word is native to Hurrian, and the Semitic and Indo-European forms must all come from Human abi-. Hebrew probably borrowed this word independently in light of its use of bet rather than the p found in Akkadian, Hittite, and Luvian. Sumerian ABUM, which preserves mimation, must be a loan from Akkadian.37 Hittite and Luvian texts use this term within the context of placing objects, including food, before a necromantic pit when consulting the gods. This divine association led to this term’s personification, and sometimes it appears with the DIG‘IR determinative—which is occasionally used even when no particular deity is in mind. The few Sumerian and Akkadian texts that use this word likewise describe pits in the ground from which spirits come forth, but they do not personify the term as in Hurro-Anatolian texts. All these texts reflect the ancient association of ritual pits and necromancy, an association found particularly in the Mediterranean world (cf. Homer, 0d. 11.23-29, 34—43). These ritual holes Served as a bridge between the living and the dead, an individual who offered food or libations to elicit the spirits of the dead from the pit (Hoffner 1967). Notably, Hebrew :n‘x exhibits the same semantic development from ‘necro— mantic pit’ to ‘spirit of the dead’ seen in Hurro-Anatolian texts, likewise retaining a connection with the ground (cf. Isa 29:4; 1 Sam 28:8). This provides further confirmation of its Hurrian origin. 36. JA, SA am, used in biblical—related contexts, are adopted from Biblical Hebrew (DJBA 84; BSA 12). 37. Singer 2006, 750—51; Hoffner 1967; Rabin 1963, 115—16; 1964, 155—56; Vieyra 1961. Other loan hypotheses remain unconvincing. Albright (1968, 203) defines mix as ‘revenant’ on the basis of Arab ’a‘ba ‘to come back’. This derivation, however, has no support from cognates. Hays and LeMon (2009) postulate a den'vation from Eg {b.t ‘clan, extended family’ and suggest that BH nix relates to the ancestor cult. However, Eg 3b.! has no explicit connection with spirits of the dead. This loan hypothesis largely rests on an alleged but unsubstantiated connection between Eg s’bJ ‘clan, extended family’ and Eg fwa ‘form’ as well as an unproven meaning of ‘cultic image’ for am in 2 Kgs 23:24.

46

Chapter 3

31‘s, Ding ‘origanum’ HALOT 27; DCH 1:168 (Exod 12:22; Lev 14:4, 6, 49, 51—52; Num 19:6, 18; 1 Kgs 5:13 [4:33]; Ps 51:9 [5127]) (5 boownog [Greek form]; ‘3 hysopus [Latin form]; 6 zwp’ [Syriac form] except lwp’ ‘pellitory’ 1 Kgs 5:13; 5! mm [Aramaic form] except omits I Kgs 5:13 ['2] CW Akk zu’pu (NB) CAD Z 163; AHw 1538; Ug u’zb DUL 133; OH 3118; Syr zo'pa' LS’ 375; Eth ’aza'b, ’azab, ’azo'b CD0 52; Hitt zu'pu- HHw 337; Gk booomo-g LSJ 190538 This word, also spelled with h_olem-waw as 3113, occurs 10 times. Most often it appears within the context of Israel’s cult (Exod 12:22; Lev 14:4, 6, 49, 51—52; Num 19:6, 18). Although commonly translated as ‘hyssop’, this species is not true hyssop (Hyssopus oflicinalils), but origanum (Origanum spp. L.). Sa‘adia Gaon renders Hebrew :mz~ as za‘atar ‘origanum’ (Judeo-Arabic 111173) in his translation of Exod 12:22, and Maimonides (Pirus' Hamisnayot, ed. Biton 2009, 441) states that biblical hyssop is the same as za‘atar is in his commentary on m. Neg 14:6 (S. Joseph 1969, 99). Dioscon‘des’ description of11"00w1t0g likewise indicates that he identified this substance with origanum (Mat. med. 3.25). Origanum has curative properties, hence its association with purification (Lev 14:4, 6, 49, 51—52; Num 19:6, 18; Ps 51:9). It is common to the Mediterranean basin and western Asia, including Arabia, where it would have been accessible to the Israelites during their wildemess joumeys.39 One may compare Hebrew 3h; with a number of other Semitic forms (Akk zu'pu, Syr zo’_pa', and Eth ’aza'b, ’azab, ’azo’b) as well as Hittite zu'pu- and Greek 0"oomnog. The latter is commonly thought to be a loan from Semitic (e.g., EDG 1538—39; DELG 1122; Roso’l 2013, 102—4), but this is unlikely given its rough breathing and differing vocalization. The variant treatment of this word’s initial pronunciation points to a foreign loan, and Rabin suggests that this ancient term originated somewhere in Asia Minor (1964, 151; cf. Mayer 1960, 325). In favor of this loan hypothesis is the existence of Hittite zu'pu- as well as Dioscorides’ claim that the best origanum comes from Cilicia (Mat. med. 3.25). Thus, this culture word probably originated in the place of origanum’s first cultivation and then spread from Asia Minor to other regions. 8318 ‘certain, known’ HALOT1808 (Dan 2:5, 8) 38. JA, SA 3111: are used in biblical-related contexts and are loans from Biblical Hebrew (DJPA 48; BSA 15): CPA 01mm: is a clear loan from Greek (DCPA 22). 39. Musselman 2012, 73—75; Fleisher and Fleisher 1988; Harrison 1954; Lb'w 1924—1934, 2:84—10!Despite the widespread consensus in identifying 3118 as origanum, it remains difficult to explain the comment in 1 Kgs 5:13 that this plant grew out of cracks in a wall.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

47

OG departs somewhat from the MT but 6’ a’cpio‘mui ‘to be removed’ (reading 0' 16709 a’it’ s’uov~ a’néom Dan 2:5 and a’néom a’it’ 9111013 to‘ p'fiua Dan 2:8); I; likewise recedo ‘to recede, withdraw’ in both instances; 6 s'ryr ‘firm, true’ [D] OIran —> Aram IA 'im DNWSI 25; OIran azda' AISN 52; [AP 411 Biblical Aramaic Nil-1:3 occurs twice, both times with reference to Nebuchadnezzar’s decree conceming his statue dream. Nebuchadnezzar describes his decree as 83-18 (Dan 2:5, 8), and the contexts of both instances demonstrate that this word is an adjective.40 This word has no apparent Semitic etymology and is therefore a good candidate for a foreign loan. The donor term is Old Iranian azda' ‘known’, which can also mean ‘certain, sure’ (cf. OPers, Av azda‘ and Pahl azd: OPGTL 173—74; AIW228—29; CPD 16).41 The latter especially fits the contexts in which 83-13 occurs. Nebuchadnezzar’s magicians think the king’s decree and threat of punishment are certain or sure (K318), which is why they try to stall for additional time (cf. Dan 2:8). Because this word occurs in both West (i.e., Old Persian) and East (i.e., Avestan) Iranian texts, and because it has no distinctive dialectal features, it is impossible to know the exact Old Iranian dialect from which Biblical Aramaic 87-18 comes. Nevertheless, an Old Persian or Median source is likely given the high number of Old Persian and Median loanwords elsewhere in the book of Daniel as well as the significant influence these two languages had on the ancient Near East. Old Iranian azda' is also the source of Imperial Aramaic "fix, attested twice in the Aramaic papyri from Elephantine (TAD A4. 5.8; B8.II:4) and once in the Aramaic documents from fourth century B.C.E. Bactria (Khalili B123). SILK Q 3T3

mg ‘brazier’ HALOT 29; DCH 1:179 (Jer 36:22, 23 [2x]) 6 s’oxa'pu ‘hearth, fireplace’; 1? arula ‘small altar’; G nwr’ ‘fire’ Jer 36:22, qmyn’ ‘brazier, fire place’ Jer 36:23; 1 11: ‘fire’ Jer 36:22, mm; ‘buming coals’ Jer 36:23 [D] Eg —+ Heb Eg ‘hv (since OK) A"W 1:288, 2:564; GHwA"17o; WA"S 1:223 The word n8 appears only three times, in the narrative which recounts Jehoiakim buming the scroll containing Jeremiah’s prophecies (Jer 36:22~23). This word’s

40. The expressions used are R318 ‘37: W3 (Dan 235) and RD‘P-D ‘3?) 8318 (Dan 2:8). 41. F. Rosenthal 2006, 63. Ohm azda‘ is not a substantive meaning ‘announcement‘ (Huyse 1998, 32-37; Rundgren 1978; contra AISN 52).

48

Chapter 3

limited appearance and its lack of apparent Semitic etymology together point to a foreign origin. The donor term is Egyptian "h ‘brazier’, which specifically denotes a brazier used for burnt offerings and buming incense (cf. Dem ‘hv and Copt as': CDD ‘ 125—27; DG 69; Crum 22).42 This Egyptian word first appears in the Old Kingdom. The use of Hebrew ’alep for Egyptian ‘ does not present any problems because Egyptian ‘ often dissimilates to z’ in the presence of [1.43 The brazier denoted by Hebrew ms was probably made of metal because it was the property of the king. As indicated by the Egyptian origin of Hebrew 113, this particular brazier was probably imported from Egypt or manufactured according to Egyptian design (Kelso 1948, 46). The Egyptian pharaoh Necho II installed Jehoiakim, whose birth name was Eliakim, as king of Judah (cf. 2 Kgs 23:31—37). Given Egypt’s influence over Judah during the late monarchy, it is not surprising that an Egyptian brazier was used in the royal Judahite court. 1113 (a rush or reed plant) HAL0T3o—31;DCH1:183 (Gen 41:2, 18; Job 8:11) (5 transliterates as (1”)(1 Gen 41:2, 18, fiov’touov ‘reed’ Job 8:11; fi3 locus palustri— bus ‘marshy place’ Gen 41:2, pastus paludis ‘swampland’ Gen 41:18, carectum ‘sedgy spot’ Job 8:11; 6 mrg’ ‘meadow, marsh’ Gen 41:2, 18, ’rbn’ ‘bulrush’ Job 8:11; 52: um [Aramaic form] Gen 41:2, 18, p117 ‘reed’ Job 8:11 [D] Eg —> Heb; Aram OAram 111x, JA 'mrm DNWSI 35; DJPA 46; DJBA 103; Eg 33h (MK, NK), {why (NK) A"W 2:42; GHwA"13; WA'S' 1:18; DLE 1:844

This word occurs only three times in Biblical Hebrew, each time with reference to a rush or reed plant (Low 1924—1934, 12571—72). It appears twice within the Joseph cycle, denoting the reeds along the banks of the Nile in Pharaoh’s dream (Gen 41:2, 18). It also appears once in the book of Job, where it is parallel with the Egyptian loanword x793 (Job 8:11). Elsewhere in Semitic, this word occurs in the Old Aramaic Sefire Treaty inscription (KAI 222A:29, 32) and in Jewish Aramaic (e.g., b. Syabb. 203) with the more general meaning ‘grass, vegetation’. The specific use of this word with reference to reeds growing along the Nile in Gen 41:2, 18 indicates an Egyptian loan referring to an Egyptian marsh plant. Without doubt the donor term is Egyptian )fihw, the plural form of 33/2, fhwv, which denotes a papyrus thicket beginning with the Middle Kingdom (cf. Dem J’h_y.‘ 42. EPNL 238; Lambdin 1953b, 146; FWOT21. 43. EPNL 238. On the dissimilation of ‘ to 1', see Peust 1999, 104; Osing 1980a. 44. (5’5 transliteration of1118 as 611 is the source ofthis word in Greek, and, in turn, Copt Babi. Balthi (LSJ 295; Crum 25). It is unclear whether Ug a'h' is related. It lacks the final w of the Biblical Hebrew and Old Aramaic forms and could be taken as meaning ‘shore’ (cf. Akk ah'u) in the few contexts in which it occurs (KTU 1.10 ii:9, 12)

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

49

CDD 1’ 68; DG 10).45 During the New Kingdom, the term 33}: came to denote the rushes and reeds found in this papyrus thicket. The retention of the final waw indicates an early borrowing when the Egyptian masculine plural ending -w, -aw was still pronounced.46 The final waw, moreover, simultaneously excludes a loan from Akkadian ahvu ‘side, shore’ (contra Mazzini 2004, 84). Notably, Biblical Hebrew in“; preserves the original referent of an Egyptian marsh plant in its occurrences in the book of Genesis. This observation indicates that it was a direct borrowing into Hebrew and not a loan inherited from early Northwest Semitic. Egyptian 1’th must also have entered Aramaic early because the Aramaic forms preserve the final semivowel, but their more general meaning indicates a separate borrowing. mains ‘red jasper’ HALOT 34; DCH 1:191 (Exod 28:19; 39:12) 6 a’péeocnog, 23 amethystus ‘amethyst’; G y(n g‘l’, 10”” PM '71171‘57 (a precious stone) [D] Eg —» Heb Eg thmJ‘ (since NK) GHwA" 649—50; WA'S' 3:294; DLE 1:364 Exodus 28:17—20; 39:10—13 mention this dis legomena along with several gemstones found on the high priest’s breastplate. Hebrew fining is not based on any Semitic root, and it does not occur in any of the other Semitic languages. Thus, its identification as a non-Semitic loanword is virtually certain.47 The donor term is Egyptian hvnm.t, first attested in Egyptian texts during the Eigtheenth Dynasty.48 Egyptian n can represent both the nasal [n] and the lateral [l] (J. Allen 2013, 39; Loprieno 1995, 33). Thus, the use of lamed for Egyptian n presents no problems. The Berlin Amulet Board, which contains a number ofjasper amulets described as made ofhvnm. t, supports the identification of hvnmJ as red jasper.49 Jasper, a type of fine-grained quartz containing significant amounts of other minerals (particularly iron oxides), is typically a dark brownish red in color but can also be yellow, black, or green (O’Donoghue 2006c, 312). Veins of red jasper existed in various regions of the Eastern Desert of Egypt, particularly to the northwest and west of 45. EPNL 165, 238, 280—81; Lambdin 1953b, 146; Spiegelberg 1902. Eg 33h and {by come from the verb wfvhy ‘to be flooded, be green’, which is not surprising since the annual inundation of the Nile was an important water source for Egypt’s vegetation. 46. EPNL 238; Lambdin 1953b, 146. On the Egyptian masculine plural ending -w, -aw and its Ienition by the end of the New Kingdom, see Loprieno 2008, 168; 1995, 56, 58—61. 47. Aside from 0') and 13, there is no evidence to identify .1737‘08 with the amethyst. Thus, little basis exists for the notion that this word is based on the root 0511 because the amethyst stone was associated with dreams (contra J. S. Ham's 1963—1965, 54—55). 48. EPNL 238—39; Lambdin 1953b, I47; FWOT 22; Grintz 1975a, 8. 49. Putter and Karlshausen 1992, 102; Aufi'e‘re 1991, 2553—54; J. R. Ham‘s 1961, 123; cf. Harrell, Hofimeier and Williams 2017, 24—25.

5o

Chapler 3

Quseir (Aston, Harrell and Shaw 2000, 29; Putter and Karlshausen 1992, 103). In Predynastic Egypt, beads were made from red and green jasper beginning with the Badarian period; later, red and green jasper came to be used for amulets, jewelry inlay, scarabs, small vessels, and parts of composite statues. The Egyptians employed brown jasper exclusively during the Middle Kingdom, primarily for scarabs, and yellow jasper was used for sculpture from the Eighteenth Dynasty onward.50 19TIWU§ (BH); 151‘TV/M (BA) isatrap’ HALOT37, 1811; DCH 1:201 (Esth 3:12; 8:9; 9:3; Dan 322—3, 27; 622—5, 7—8; Ezra 8:36) (5 orparnyo'g ‘captain, chief’ Esth 3:12, oatpa’rmg [Greek form] Esth 8:9; 9:3; Dan 3:2; 632—5, 7—8, tona’pxng ‘govemor’ Dan 3:3, 0"1ratog ‘consul’ Dan 3:27, 81011011131; ‘governor, administrator’ Ezra 8:36; I; satrapes [Latin form] Esth 3:12; Dan 322—3, 27; 6:2—5, 7—8; Ezra 8:36, princeps ‘chie,f leader’ Esth 8:9, dux ‘leader, chief’ Esth 9:3; C5 rb h_yl’ ‘army commander’ Esth 3:12; 8:9; 9:3; Dan 3-2—3, 27; 622—3, 5, 7—8, omits Dan 6:4, rb mlk’ Ezra 8:36; i Dib‘mno‘x ‘army commander’ Esth 3:12; 8:9; 923 [D] OIran (Med) —» Akk; Heb; Aram Akk ahvs'adrapa’nu 01B) CAD A/I 195; AHw 21; IA 191mm DNWSI412; Olran *xs'afirapaVIa- (Med) AISN 136; [AP 436—375] Hebrew tern-Writ; ‘satrap’ occurs four times (Esth 3:12; 8:9; 9:3; Ezra 8:36). The Biblical Aramaic form of this word, 19131;)08, appears nine times (Dan 322—3, 27,‘ 6:2—5, 7—8). Both forms ofthis word possess a non-Semitic morphology and always refer to a ruler in the Persian Empire, just like the related Akkadian ahvs'adrapa‘nu (e.g., PBS 2/1 2:6; 21:7, 11) and Imperial Aramaic 191nm (KAI 319:4). Naturally, then, one suspects an Old Iranian loan. The donor term is Old Iranian *xs'afirapa'na-, which means ‘protector of the kingdom’ and is composed ofxs'a6ra- ‘kingdom’ (cf. OPers xs'aca- and Av xs'a6ra-z OPGTL 181; A]W 542—46), pa’- ‘to protect’ (cf. OPers, Av pa'-: OPGTL 194; AIW 885—87), and the suffix -na.52 Representation of the consonant cluster 6r rather than c (as in OPers xs'ag‘apa‘van-Z OPGTL 181) indicates a loan from an Old Iranian dialect other than Old Persian, most probably Median given the influence of the Medes on Achaemenid administration.” The initial consonant cluster xs' was

50. Hanni g 1980; Aston. Harrell and Shaw 2000, 29—30; Putter and Karlshausen 1992, 103—4: Lucas 1962,397—98. 51. J A 191mm is adopted from Biblical Aramaic (Jastrow 1903, 42). Also related are Gk oatpdmg. gatpa'nng, ééa‘tpa'm]; and Lycian )(ssadrapa-, used with reference to Persian officials (LSJ 1585; Melchert 2004, 85; Schmitt 1976, 378—79). 52. FWOT23; F. Rosenthal 2006, 62; AA T 1:38; Haug 1853, 153—54. On the suffix -na, see Skjacrw 2007, 902; OPGTL 51 (§i47). 53. On the phonological development of Prom-Iranian *0r, see Skjaervo 2009, 51; Schmitt 2008, 84—85; Testen 1997, 575; OPGTL 33 (§87).

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

51

difficult for non-Iranian-speakers to pronounce, hence its representation with a prothetic vowel in Biblical Hebrew and Biblical Aramaic. Satraps were the rulers of the Persian Empire’s primary administrative unit, the satrapy. Each satrap was responsible for ruling his satrapy, raising taxes and forwarding them to the king, recruiting a military, and controlling local bureaucracies. The title of satrap was also held by rulers of minor satrapies that made up part of a main satrapy. Depending on how a satrap was counted, ancient sources justifiably record different numbers of satrapies in the Persian Empire: the Hebrew Bible mentions more than 127 satrapies (Esth 1:1), whereas the Bisotun (Behistun) Inscription gives 23 (DB i:12—17) and Herodotus lists 20 (Hist. 3.89—94). This system of satrapies arose due to Achaemenid expansion: as the Persian kings conquered new tem'tories, they adapted prior political structures, replacing the conquered king with a new ruler and adding new satrapies as needed (Briant 2002, 338—47; Dandamaev and Lukonin 1989, 96—103). mm ‘royal’ HALOT 37; DCH 1:201 (Esth 8:10, 14) (5'), 98, 6, 1 each do not directly represent this term [D] Olran (Med) —> Heb OIran *xs'aBrana- (Med) This word occurs twice in the book of Esther with reference to King Ahasuerus’s horses (D’nln-Wmn, W'Qja “:31’) (Esth 8:10, 14). It has no Semitic etymology and certainly does not look Semitic. Accordingly, scholars have long identified it as a loan from Old Iranian *xs’aBrana- ‘royal’.54 It is formed from the noun xs'aflra‘kingdom’ (cf. OPers xs'aca— and Av xs'a6ra-z OPGTL 181; AIW 542—46) and the suflix -na, used to create nouns and adjectives from roots.55 Like Hebrew 1311-W'ng, the use of the consonant cluster Or rather than c indicates a borrowing from an Old Iranian dialect other than Old Persian, probably Median.56 1108 ‘fine linen’ HALOT 37; DCH 1:202 (Prov 7:16) (5 duoimnoc, ‘double-sided rug’; ‘13 tapete pictus ‘painted tapestry’; C5 qrm’, 1 mp ‘fine cloth’ [D] Eg —> —> Heb —> Phoen —+ Gk Eg idmz’ (since OK) A"W 1:244, 2:455; GHwA"13o; WA-IS 1:153; Gk o’eo’vn LSJ 1200 54. FWOT 24; AAT 1:39; Haug 1853, 154. 55. On the suffix -na, see Skjaarva 2007, 902; OPGTL 51 (§147). 56. On the phonological development of Proto-lranian Va 566 Skjafl'VG 2009, SI; SChmifl 2008. 84—85; Testen 1997, 575; OPGTL 33 (§87).

52

Chapter 3

This word occurs only in Prov 7:16, which describes a prostitute’s bed as decked with m‘npg ‘multicolored coverings’ and 11-138, from Egypt. Because Tim; is explicitly described as a type of cloth from Egypt, this word is probably an Egyptian loan. This supposition is supported by the non— Semitic nominal pattern of this word as well the surrounding context, which mentions the foreign luxury goods map (a cinnamon-like spice) and 1112713 ‘aloe’ in the very next verse (Prov 7:17). The donor term is Egyptian idmz’, a word meaning ‘red linen’ attested as early as the Old Kingdom.57 Notably, Hebrew 11-133 exhibits dissimilation of m to n. Greek 0'90'vn, a term for fine linen, also exhibits dissimilation. This indicates that Greek-speakers adopted o’eo'vn from Northwest Semitic, probably via Phoenician even though no form is attested in extant Phoenician texts. Transmission through Northwest Semitic would explain why Greek texts do not associate o'Oo’vn with Egypt.58 max ‘spirit’ HALOT 37; DCH 1:202 (Isa 19:3) 6 (1"7004101 ‘image, statue’; i3 dz'vinus ‘soothsayer’; G mgws" ‘magician’; ‘1 W111 ‘sorcerer’ [T] Sum -> Akk ——> Heb Sum GIDIM PSD; Akk etemmu, ejammu, zltemmu (OA, OB, Mari, Nuzi, MB, SB, NB) CAD E 397—401; AHw 263—64

This hapax occurs in Isa 19:3 within a list of necromantic objects consulted by the Egyptians, including idols (0‘7‘7tz,_..j), spirits from the pit (111383), and familiar spiri'ts (awn-32.1). Hence, the definition ‘spirit’ is certain. Perles and J irku were the first to identify max as a loan from Akkadian e_temmu ‘spirit of the dead’, in turn a loan from Sumerian GIDIM of the same meaning.59 The doubling of the second consonant implies a loan from Aramaic, but no forms of this word are attested in Aramaic. The Masoretic pointing may therefore be in error, especially since this word occurs nowhere else in Biblical Hebrew. Moreover, D‘U-S is presumably plural in light of the parallelism and context. Accordingly, haplography must have occurred unless one assumes that Hebrew-speakers mistakenly identified the singular Akkadian eremmu as a plural (AIA 5o; ALBH 31—32).

71923. => .1915 57. EPNL 239; Lambdin 1953b, 147. A feminine form z'dmi.t is also attested in Egyptian beginning with the Old Kingdom (A W 1:245, 2:455; GHwA 13o; WA'S' 1:153). This feminm‘e form appears in DemotiC as z'lm.t (CDD 243; DC 47). All these Egyptian terms are, ofcourse, connected with the common Semitic root ’dm ‘to be red’. 58- DELG 750; R0501 2013. '34; M3550“ [967. 89—90. Some scholars, however, contend that Gk o'Oo’vn is a direct loan from Egyptian (e.g., EDG 1051; Spiegelberg 1907, 129—30)_ 59- Perks 19143; I914b; “ka 1914; Cf. ALBH 31—32; FWOT 25. On the Sumerian origin of Akk etemmu, see SLOB 353—54 (#401).

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

53

138 ‘farmer, plower’ HALOT 48; DCH 1:249 (Isa 61:5; Jer 14:4; 31:24; 51:23; Joel 1:11; Amos 5:16; 2 Chr 26:10) (5 yempyo'g ‘farmer’ except a’pom'p ‘farmer, plowman’ Isa 61:5, omits 2 Chr 26:10; I3 agricola ‘farmer’ except omits 2 Chr 26:10; 6 ’kr’ [Syriac form]; 1 138 or 13‘?! [Aramaic forms] except does not directly represent this word 2 Chr 26:10 [T] Sum —> Akk —+ —> Heb —+ Aram —> Arab Sum ENGAR PSD; Akk ikkaru (OAkk, OB, Mari, Alalakh, Nuzi, MA, MB, NA, NB) CAD I—J 49—54; AHw 368; QH 13x; IA, JA, CPA 132x DNWSI 53; DJBA 114; DCPA I5; Syr ’ikka'ra’, ’akka’ra' LS2 46; Mand ‘kara MD 349; Arab ’akka'r Lane 71 This word occurs seven times, primarily in the Prophets (Isa 61:5; Jer 14:4; 31:24; 51:23; Joel 1:11; Amos 5:16; 2 Chr 26:10). Zimmem was the first to derive this word from Akkadian ikkaru, in turn a loan from Sumerian ENGAR, and there is no reason to dispute this loan hypothesis.60 Akkadian-speakers also lent this word to Aramaic, through which it entered Arabic (AIA 58; Fra"nkel 1886, 128—29).

vim-[7,8, W23 (a dark- colored stone) HAL0T51, 173; DCH1:271—72, 308 (Ezek 13:11, 13; 38:22; Job 28:18) (5 ntpofio'Mg ‘throwing stone’ Ezek 13:11, 13, xala'gng ‘hail, hailstone’ Ezek 38:22, transliterates as yaBLg Job 28:18; 23 praegrandis ‘Very great’ Ezek 13:11, grandis ‘great’ Ezek 13:13, inmensus ‘immense, immeasurable’ Ezek 38:22, eminentia ‘excellence’ Job 28:18; 6 dh_r’ ‘hard stone, flint’ Ezek 13:11, 13; 38:22, does not directly represent this word Job 28:18; 1 wm‘vx [Aramaic form] except 11311": ‘precious stone’ Job 28:18 [?] CW Sum ALGAMES‘ PSD; Ebla urgubasu; Akk algames’u, algamis'u (OAkk, OB), alkabas'u (RS), game'su (NA) CAD A/I 337—38, G 32; AHw 35, 278; Ug a’lgb; DUL 52; Eg irqbs, z’rgbs (NK) GHwA" 106; WA'S' 1:116; SWET 30 (#22); DLE 1:4161 The word Vina-'78, appears only in Exilic Hebrew, where it denotes a kind of stone that looks like hail (Ezek 13:11, 13; 38:22). Hebrew W‘na, mentioned in Job 28:18 along with other precious stones, could be an error for Vita-‘78 but is probably a shortened form of the same word (cf. Akk game'su). 60. Zimmem 1917, 40; cf. ALBH 32-33; Lipin’ski 1988, 62—63; FW0T27—28. On the Sumerian origin" ofAkk ikkaru, see SLOB 329—30 (#360). Salonen instead contends that this word ultimately comes from a pre-Sumerian substrate (Salonen 1969, 109—10, 115; 1952, 10). 6|. JA 112*:sz is adopted from Biblical Hebrew (Jastrow 1903, 66).

54

Chapter 3

Outside Hebrew, this word occurs quite early. Sumerian ALGAMES' appears already in pre-Sargonic lexical texts but also occurs later in literary texts, and Eblaite urgubasu appears solely in the Early Dynastic Practical Vocabulary. Beginning with the Old Akkadian period, Akkadian texts mention algames'u, algamis'u as a mineral or stone; the alternate form game'su appears in Neo-Assyrian. Ugaritic a’lgbt_ occurs once in an economic text with reference to a mineral or stone (KTU 4.158zl5). Lastly, this word appears in Egyptian as z’rqbs during the Nineteenth Dynasty and as irgbs during the Third Intermediate Period (cf. Meeks 1997,34). The unusual nominal pattern of this word and lack of a known Semitic root upon which it could be based are both good indications that it has a foreign source. Furthermore, the altemation of b and m between the West and East Semitic terms reflects the transmission ofa non-Semitic culture word into West and East Semitic separately (Boyd 1975, 31). As indicated by its early presence in Sumerian and Eblaite, this ancient culture word may have originated somewhere to the north. Evidence from Akkadian literature indicates that this stone was employed for a variety of everyday objects, including bowls, flasks, and spindle-whorls. This suggests an inexpensive and easily carved stone. Use of the logogram G135 ‘dark, black’ before this word in Ras Shamra Akkadian implies that this stone was darkcolored (RS 20.225A). This same text contrasts it with the kabdu-stone, which is preceded by the logogram for the color white (BABBAR). The formation or color of the hailstones mentioned in Ezekiel must have been similar to this stone.62 DVD-H78 => D’l-D._.'78 D’l_'_-7J,?N_, man-‘73 (a kind of tree valuable for timber) HALOT 57—58; DCH 1:294 (1Kgs10:11,12[2> Akk; Heb; Aram Akk appada'nu (LB) CAD N2 178; AHw 59; JA 1198 DJBA 154; Syr ’a‘ppad_na' LS2 81; Olran apada'na- [AP 35; Elam ha-ba-da-na E W 583

The hapax 135.3 occurs in Dan 11:45. The king of the south is described as pitching the tents of his 1158 (1179?; tax 57:97]). It is not possible to determine precisely the meaning of Hebrew 17.525 based solely on Dan 11:45, but, its meaning is evident through comparison with the related Akkadian appada'nu. The latter occurs only once in a Late Babylonian text describing the columned palace that Darius built (VAB 3 AZSa22—3). Its use with reference to an Achaemenid building points to an Old Iranian origin. The donor term is Old Iranian apada'na- ‘columned audience hall, columned palace’ (cf. OPers apaa’a’na-z OPGTL 168; A1W 74).76 Two interesting phonological issues are ofnote. First, unless the Masoretes have incorrectly pointed this word, we must assume that Hebrew-speakers adopted this word as a segolate-pattem noun—similar to Aramaic—rather than the expected non-segolate form. Second, as noted by Jerome, only here is Hebrew pe rendered as Latin p rather than ph.77 75. Cf. Hoffner 1996, 154—55; Singer 2006, 2750—51. Noting the existence ofNew Kingdom Egyptian garments that resemble the priestly ephod, several scholars connect this word with Eg zf'd, which can denote rectangular textiles or garments (Grintz 1975a, 10—13; I. Fn'edrich 1968, 31—33; Tvedtnes I982, 218). However, Eg fid does not refer to the same type of garment as the ephod, and the ephodlike gannents from Egypt are not associated with the term zf'd (cf. J. J. Janssen 2008, 21—23). Hence, the phonological similarity between BH “Ibtg and Eg zf'd is only coincidental (cf. Kogan 2003: 260). 76. FWOT35; Ai'khenval’d 1987, 5; AA T2:58; Tisdall 1912, 370. The etymology ofthis Old Iranian form has thus far escaped consensus (cf. Schmitt 1987, 2:145—46). On the one hand, Kent and Tavemier (OPGTL 168; [AP 35) derive it from apa- ‘away’ and da'na-, an element found in several architectural terms based the root da'- ‘to put, make, create’. In their view, Olran apada'na- is thus formed analogously to Gk a‘noGn'icn ‘storehouse’. On the other hand, Szemere’nyi (1980, 233—37; cf. Henning 1944, 110) thinks that the initial element should be spelled *appa- and that it reflects Akk aptu ‘window’. In his view, Olran apada'na- therefore means ‘window—house’. 77. In light ofthis, R. Steiner (1993) contends that the pe of 1798 is not just a voiceless stop, but is actually an emphatic consonant.

60

Chapter 3

The structure denoted by Old Iranian apada'na- was first introduced by Darius I and quickly became a distinctive part of Achaemenid architecture. It had a large main hall with stone columns as well as comer towers and porticoes on at least three sides. The best preserved example of this structure is from Persepolis, although archaeological remains have also been discovered at other sites, such as Susa (Stronach 1987). 1.93, Hours (a volume measure for grain) HALOT43; DCH 1:221 (Exod 16:36; passim78) [D] Eg —» Heb Sir, QH new; Eg 1p’.t (since MK) ANW 2:165; GHwA" 43; WA-S' 1:67; DLE 1:25 The word 1.9x, also spelled news, appears 40 times in the Hebrew Bible, almost exclusively with reference to a unit of dry measure. The only exception is Zech 5:6—10, where it denotes a container of the same measure. It was one-tenth of one argn' (Ezek 45:11) and equaled 10 of the measures denoted by my (Exod 16:36). Its precise modern equivalent is unknown, but in pre- Exilic Israel it probably was about 10—20 liters (Powell 1992, 903). Hebrew .193 has no Semitic cognates; scholars commonly identify the donor term as Egyptian zp’.t, a volume measure for grain (approximately 19 liters) that first appears during the Middle Kingdom (cf. Dem zp'y. t, zp’.t and Copt oezp'e: CDD i 96. 101—2; DG 29; Crum 256).79 There is no reason to question this loan hypothesis, and Hebrew .193 is undoubtedly an Egyptian loan. fins-8 ‘litter, sedan chair’ HALOT 80; DCH 1:361 (Song 3-'9) 6 (popeiov [Greek form]; fiferculum ‘carrier’; 6 mgdl’ ‘tower’; I 811217, 7'3‘1. ‘holy temple’ [D] Gk ——> Heb; Aram IA ‘115, 1‘119 DJPA 426; DJBA 891; Syrperyawwa'n LS2 1170; Mand puria MD 368; Gk (popsiov LS] 1950 This word occurs only in Song 3:9. After describing the approach of Solomon on his litter (Song 3:6—8), an object denoted as 11‘1st is mentioned. This object is said to be made of the wood of Lebanon along with silver, gold, and purple (Song 329—10). Following the ancient versions, it is natural to assume that 11093 is another term for the litter referred to earlier as .1073 in Song 3:7.80 78. Lev 5:11; 6:13; 19:36; Num 5:15; 28:5; Deut 25:14 (2X), 15; Judg 6:19; 1 Sam 1:24; 17:17; Isa 5.10; Elek 45110. H (2"). 13 (2"). 24 (3*); 4635 (2"), 7 (3"), 11 (3X), 14; Amos 8:5; Mic 6:10; Zech 526-101 Prov 20:10 (2*); Ruth 2:17. 79. EPNL 239—40; Lambdin 1953b, 147; FWOT 26; Grintz 1975a. 10; Sethe 1927. 80. Because the wood is said to come from from Lebanon, lbn Ezra long ago argued that Song 3:9—10 denotes a palace rather than a litter. Several scholars have followed in his footsteps, emending the

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

61

Hebrew 113793 has no apparent Semitic cognates and does not look Semitic. For this reason, scholars have proposed a number of different loan hypotheses. Most probably, Hebrew 11“]93 comes from Greek oopei”ov.8‘ This is exactly how (5 translates 11‘1‘38, indicating that at least 6’s translators recognized a connection between 1121.98 and cpopet‘ov. Dobbs-Allsop (2005, 67—68) objects to this loan hypothesis, citing the prothetic vowel, the doubled pe, and the hireq as problematic. Although somewhat unexpected, the prothetic vowel with doubled pe is a possible representation of the Greek consonant (p. The fact that Aramaic-speakers represent this word without any prothetic vowel presents no problems because the Greek aspirate (p has no exact correspondent in Semitic; it is entirely conceivable that Hebrew- and Aramaic-speakers would represent it differently.82 Furthermore, the ,hireq is easily explainable: Hebrew dislikes two u-class vowels in a word, frequently changing the first one to i via dissimilation (cf. BH 11ij and 1193). There is therefore little reason to question the Greek origin of Hebrew tins-t5. 170,198: ‘legal investigator’ HALOT 1822 (Ezra 5:6; 6:8) (5, 13 both translate as a proper name; 6 omits [D] Olran (Med) a Akk; Aram; Elam Akk iprasakku (LB) CAD I—J 165—66; AHw 385; Olran fr*asaka— (Med) AISN 97; [AP 420—21; Elam pl'r-ra—I'SCSVaCik-ka4 E W 214 The Biblical Aramaic word 1&ng is found only twice, both times in the book of Ezra (Ezra 5:6; 6:8). (5 and it understand it as a proper name, but in both cases Home. follows up; ‘associate, colleague’. This indicates that, like n33, WWW, is a title for an official. Biblical Aramaic 30153 has no Semitic etymology. The donor term is Old Iranian fr*asaka- ‘legal investigator’, an abbreviated form of fr*askara-.83 The latter is a compound noun made up of the root fras- ‘to examine, investigate, punish’ text here to 1198 ‘palace’ (e.g., Winckler 1897—1906). However, this conclusion is largely unsupported by either the context or the ancient versions. 81. Rundgren 1962. Gordis (1944, 270) connects 11‘758 with Sktparyan‘ka-, palyan‘ka- ‘litter’. However, this does not adequately explain the prothetic ’alep, and it must be assumed that Hebrew-speakers borrowed a form without the suffix -ka. Widengren (1952, 112) offers an Old Iranian etymology, deriving 11")98 tr'om a hypothetical *upariy'va'naa However, such a form does not occur in Old Iranian texts and has no suitable meaning as reconstructed (cf. Rundgren 1962). Gerleman (1965, 139—42), lastly, derives W153?! from Eg pr ‘house’ with a prothetic ’alep and W- sufi‘ix. However, he offers no plausible reason for the addition of the preformative and suffix. 82. Rundgren 1962. A given language does not always borrow a foreign phoneme the same way, and in this case we are comparing two different—albeit similar—languages. Complicating the matter is the fact that Gk (p changed from an aspirate ([p"]) to a voiceless fricative ([f]) after the Classical Pen'od, a process that was probably complete in most Greek-speaking regions by the first or second centuries C.E. 83. F. Rosenthal 2006, 62; A'khienval’d 1987, 5; Eilers 1985, 29; 1940, 30.

62

Chapter 3

(cf. OPers fra6- and Avfras-: OPGTL 198; A1W 997—1000) and kara-, which literally means ‘doer, maker’ but is used to form compound nouns of professions (OPGTL 53 [§I6o], 179). The use of s rather than (9 reflects a phonology other than Old Persian, most probably Median.84 The Akkadian form of *frasaka- is iprasakku, a loan from Old Iranian that occurs only in Late Babylonian texts (e.g., PBS 2/1 189216). The Elamite form is pir-ra-is'-s'a'-ik-ka4 (PFNN 54013—4). Semitic-speakers found the initial consonant cluster of fr*asaka- difi’icult to pronounce, hence the prothetic vowel in both the Biblical Aramaic and Akkadian forms. 1'13ij (a chief official) HALOT1822-23 (Ezra 4:9) (5’ 23 bOth tranSIate as a proper name; 5 ’spry, an erroneous rendering of BA 7'001915 [D] OIran —> Aram OIran fi'*asta'ka- AISN 97 Biblical Aramaic 171301.93, appears only in Ezra 4:9. The mention of 1:130198, after two nouns for officials strongly suggests that it is a title for an official even though (5 and 98 both understand it as a proper name. This word does not seem Semitic and is most probably an Iranian loan. It comes from Old Iranian fr*asta'ka-, a term for a chief oflicial. This word does not appear in extant Old Iranian texts but has a perfectly good Iranian etymology: it is composed offra- ‘before, forth’ (cf. OPers, Avfra-: OPGTL 197; A]W 974), the root std‘to set, stand’ (of. OPers, Av 516-: OPGTL 210; A1W 1600—1605), and the suflix -ka.85 Hence, fi*asta'ka- is formed analogously to Greek npoow'mg ‘leader, chief, guardian’ (literally ‘one who stands before’). Despite any apparent similarity, wanes has no etymological connection with Biblical Aramaic flown: ‘legal investigator’. chat; (a type of income, perhaps usufruct) HALOT 1823 (Ezra 4:13) (5 101310 ‘this’; I; usque ad ‘all the way up to’; 6 omits86 [D] OIran —-> Akk; Aram Akk aptumu (LB); OIran *aptauma-

Biblical Aramaic chat; is a hapax occurring in Ezra 4:13. The retumees’ opponents contend that if Jerusalem is rebuilt and the walls are completed, the Jews will not 84. On the phonological development of Proto-Iranian *c', see Skjaerve 2009, 51; Schmitt 2008, 84—85; Testen 1997, 575; OPGTL 33 (§87). 85. F. Rosenthal 2006, 62. On the suffix -ka, see Skjaarva 2007, 903; OPGTL 51 (§146). 86. Several Hebrew manuscripts have ohm! or 01n$8 instead of Emmi, but these variants are undoubtedly errors in which final mem has been mistaken for samek.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

63

pay various taxes (denoted by 717473, 153-, and .173) and that the 0‘37?) aha-t; would sufi’er harm. Within this context, aha-g is most probably the first noun of a construct chain (‘nhex of kings’) that describes a form of income similar to the terms 711-373, 1'7'3, and 1973.87 Attempts to derive ans-ts from Akkadian encounter difficulties.88 More plausible is a derivation from Old Iranian *aptauma-. This Old Iranian word does not appear in extant texts, but its existence is confirmed by the attestation of the word aptumu in a Late Babylonian text from the reign of Darius I (BM 29447:I5).89 Within the context of this text, Akkadian aptumu denotes a kind of income, perhaps usufruct. The Achaemenid context in which Akkadian aptumu occurs indicates that aptumu comes from Old Iranian, even if its etymology remains unclear. Old Iranian *aptauma- perfectly matches Biblical Aramaic Ether; phonologically and semantically and is undoubtedly the latter’s source as well.90 The holem of Biblical Aramaic 1311538 and the u of Akkadian aptumu point to a borrowing during the Achamenid period, when the diphthong au monophthongized to 6.91

Ill'lN— 3 WW. mtg (a container or chest) HALOT 84; DCH 1:370 (1 Sam 6:8, 11, 15) (5 partially translates as Betta Bepoaxeav ‘coffer of Bepoexeav’ I Sam 6:8, Betta spyaB ‘coffer of apyotB’ 1 Sam 6:11, 15; ‘3 capsella ‘small box’; 6 uses the Aramaicized form ’rgzt’; I um ‘chest, box’ [D] Philistine —> Heb

87. C.f H. Tadmor 1999, 143*. The terms 713.17), in, and 1.7:] are loans from Akk maddattu, biltu, and ilku, respectively (AM 44, 58, 67). 88. Henning compares Akk appim'mma ‘accordingly, just as’ (F. Rosenthal 2006, 63). However, this does not provide a good match phonologically or semantically (cf. AIA 47). H. Tadmor (1999) instead connects chat: with Akk zp'tu ‘tribute’. However, this is unlikely because mimation was lost long before the Achaemenid period. 89. Zadok 2002, 64. As Zadok notes, the word is spelled ap-pu-tu’-mu, but the doubling of the p is probably motivated by the ambiguity of the orthographic sequence abp/-bp/u—. Hence, it can be normalized as aptumu in Akkadian. 90. Zadok 2002, 65; 2007, 260—61. Scholars have proposed a variety of other Iranian etymologies, but they remain problematic. Both Haug and Schaeder contend that ones means ‘finally’. The former connects ones with Pahl abdom ‘finally’, whereas the latter postulates an OIran *apatama- of the same meaning (Haug 1853, 156; Schaeder 1930, 74; cf. Ai'khenval’d 1987, 5). However, the context indicates that chat! is a noun rather than an adverb, and Hinz (AISN 31) rightly questions this etymology. Scheflelowitz(AAT1:78—79; cf. FWOT 36—37) instead compares Av pa6a'm. However, pat9a‘- means ‘road’, not ‘treasury’, and the case ending should not be borrowed along with the word. Lastly, Tisdall (1912, 369—70) postulates an Olran *apatauma- ‘progeny’, literally meaning ‘from family‘. While this is possible, Dh$t5 more plausibly relates to money than to ofispring. 91. On the monophthongization of rm to 0‘, see Skjasrve 2009, 58; Schmitt 2008, 83.

Chapter 3

64

The word T318 occurs only three times in the Hebrew Bible, each time within the narrative describing the Philistines’ return of the ark of the covenant (1 Sam 6:8, II, 15). Within this context it refers to some type of container or chest. At least two clues indicate that this is not a Hebrew word. First, 1178,, not ms, is the common Hebrew word meaning ‘chest’. Second, this word has no apparent Semitic etymology or cognates.92 Because this word specifically refers to an item of Philistine realia, and because it first occurs within the speech of the Philistines, a Philistine loanword is likely. The precise Philistine donor term is unknown,93 but there is little reason to question this loan hypothesis given the exclusive association of this word with the Philistines. Thus, Hebrew 7313 is most probably a Philistine loanword. V3318, WW (BH); 11373 (BA) ‘Purples Purple 010th, HALOT 84, 1823; DCH1:37o—71 (Exod 25:4; passimg“) [D] Hitt, Luv —> —> Akk —> Aram —> Ug; Heb Akk argamannu (Bogh, SB, NB, NA) CAD N2 253; AHw 67; Ug a’rgmn, irgmn DUL 96—97; QH 173118; QA 11mm, Palm, JA, CPA 1111a DQA 22; DNWSI1o3; DJPA 73; DJBA I64; DCPA 28; Syr )argawa'na" L52 95; Hitt arkama-, arkaman-, arkamman- HHw 24; Luv arkamman- (CLuv) CLL 28; Laroche 1959, 31195 Hebrew 1793-18 appears 38 times, most frequently in conjunction with 11,7311; ‘blue’ when describing the fabrics of the tabernacle or the garments of its priests (e.g., Exod 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16; 2825—6, 8, 15, 33). In its remaining occurrences, Hebrew 1793-18 refers to a valued commodity or a luxurious textile (e.g., Judg 8:26; Ezek 27:7, 16; Song 3:10; 7:6; Esth 1:6). Biblical Aramaic 113-78 occurs only in the book of Daniel (Dan 5:7, 16, 29). Both the Hebrew and Aramaic forms also appear at Qumran. Related forms exist in Semitic, but not all have the same meaning. On the one hand, Akkadian argamannu means ‘purple cloth’ in Standard Babylonian,

92. Syr ’arga'zta' ‘chest, wallet’, which occurs in 6 of 1 Samuel, is an obvious adoption from BH mg (LS? 1432). 93. Sapir 1936. Sapir reconstructs (ibid., 279-81) the Philistine word as *argaz, based on an older *arkos in turn derived from Proto-[ndo-European *hzerkl ‘to hold, contain’. This same Indo-European root is the basis for Lat arca ‘chest, box' (from Lat arceo ‘to shut, enclose, protect from’). This etymology is conceivable, but at present the Indo-European affiliation of Philistine remains uncertain. 94. Exod 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16; 2825—6, 8, 15, 33: 35:6, 23, 25, 35; 36:8, 35, 37; 38:18, 23; 391—3, 5, 8. 24, 29; Num 4:13; Judg 8:26; Jer 10:9; Ezek 27:7, 16; Prov 31:22; Song 3:10; 7:6 [7:5]; Esth 1:6; 8:15; Dan 5:7, 16, 29; 2 Chr 2:6 [2:7], 13 [2:14]; 3:14. 95. SA max is adopted from the Hebrew form, as indicated by its use of mem rather than waw (BSA 59)-

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

65

Neo-Assyrian, and Neo-Babylonian just as in Biblical Hebrew. B0ghazko"y Akkadian argamannu, on the other hand, means ‘tribute’ just like Ugaritic a’rgmn, irgmn.% All the Aramaic forms, which mean ‘purple cloth’ just like Akkadian argamannu, come from Babylonian Akkadian, as indicated by the representation of intervocalic m as w. Biblical Hebrew 11318, which occurs only in 2 Chr 2:6, is therefore an Aramaicized fonn (AIA 35—36; M. Wagner 1966, 28—29 [#27]). Despite its wide attestation in Semitic, this word has no clear Semitic etymology, its nominal pattern is not typical of Semitic nouns, and the final double consonant ofAkkadian argamannu indicates a foreign loan. The Semitic forms can be traced back to Hittite arkama-, arkaman-, arkamman- and Luvian arkamman—, both of which mean ‘tribute’.97 These Indo-European Anatolian terms most likely derive from Proto-Indo-European *hlerk- ‘to divide’, analogous to Latin erctum, herctum ‘inheritance’ and ercisco, hercisco ‘divide an estate’.98 Growing evidence points to the origin of the purple dye industry in ancient Anatolia. Accordingly, it is easy to see how ‘tribute’ could come to mean ‘purple cloth’ because expensive purple cloth was antiquity’s tribute par excellence (Singer 2008; Reese 1987; cf. Dietrich and Loretz 1964—1966, 218—19). 7013 "fitting, proper’ HAL0T1825 (Ezra 4:14) (5 ééscmv, the present infinitive of ééetut ‘to go out, come out’; ‘8 nefas ducimus ‘we think it a crime’; 6 omits [D] Olran —> Aram JA Tux DJPA 74; DJBA I67; Olran *arz'ka-

The Biblical Aramaic term WWI occurs only in Ezra 4:14, where the returnees claim that it is not 3‘18, for them to see the dishonor of the king (Rab‘n‘w, 8‘; 8377;) mm; R1507). The context makes it clear that ‘|="‘1_,x is an adjective, but within the context it makes no sense to take 1‘18: as a passive participle from a verb 118* ‘to be long’. In lieu of a native Aramaic form, scholars have turned to the Iranian languages for a donor term. Hinz (AISN 36) thinks that 7mg derives from Old Iranian 96. There are no clear cases in which Ug a'rgmn means ‘purple cloth’. Rather, the parallel use of Akk mandaltu and Ug a'rgmn in RS 17.227:20 and KTU 3.1218 clearly establishes the meaning ‘tribute’. See Knoppers 1993, 86; van Soldt 1990, 344—45; Pardee 1974, 277—78. 97. Other derivations remain unconvincing. Ellenbogen (FWOT 38—39) connects 10313 with Proto-Indo-European *hzerg'- ‘brilliant, white’. However, mmx has nothing to do with the color white. Rabin (1963, 116—18; 1964, 156—57) instead derives "(new from Gk a’meum'vn ‘wind-rose’. However, Gk a‘prysum'vn comes from timeuov ‘white spot in the eye’ and is not attested until the second—first centuries B.C.E. (cf. £00 125; DELG 99—100). 98. Starke 1990, 263; Kronasser 1962—1966, 1:180, 271. Although Hitt arkamman— is a Luvianism, the differences in spelling, gender, and morphology demonstrate that Hitt arkama-, arkaman- and Luv arlmmman- are cognate (Melchert 1992, 311; Neu 1974, 123—24). Furthermore, it is unlikely on semantic grounds that the Hittite and Luvian forms come from Skt argha'- ‘value, price’ (contra KE WA 1:50). I am grateful to H. Craig Melchert for his assistance with this entry.

Chapter 3

66

*arz'ka- ‘evil, faithless’. While this could suit the context of Ezra 4:14, this explanation is awkward and does not explain the clear meaning of ‘fitting, proper’ for later Jewish Aramaic Tax. Scheftelowitz (AA T 1:79) more plausibly suggests that 1013, comes from Old Iranian *arz‘ka-, formed from *arz'- ‘Aryan’ (cf. OPers ariya- and Av airya-: OPGTL 170; A1 W 198) and the adjectival suffix -ka.99 The returnees’ opponents appeal to Artaxerxes by stating that to see the king’s dishonor would be to act in an ‘un-Aryan’ (T18, x‘y) manner. In other words, they claim solidarity with the king and the Persian Empire, contending that they are Persian in attitude even if not ethnically Persian, and hence unlike the allegedly rebellious returnees. 11R ‘cedar’ HALOT 90; DCH 1:383 (1521 44314) 6 0" étpu'tauoev Ku'ptog ‘that which the Lord planted’ (apparently reading 37193113, rather than 171:); 1'18); 513 pinus ‘pine’; 6 paraphrases the entire verse as lqys’ dpsyq mn ‘b’ dbmt_r’ ’trby ‘for wood that is cut from the forest, which with rain is nourished’; 1 1'18 [Aramaic form] ['2] CW Sum EREN PSD; Akk ere'nu, erinnu (OAkk, 0A, OB, Mari, Nuzi, MA, EA, SB, NA, NB), url'nu (Nuzi), urnu (OAkk, Mari, RS, SB) CAD E 274—79, U—W 227, 234; AHw 237, 1430—32; Hitt arimpa- HHw 24; Luv irimpit—, irippit(CLuv) CLL 93; Hurr erippi-, irippi-, irimpi- BGH 98—99100

This word occurs only in Isa 44:14, where it denotes a species of tree. It appears amidst mention of various trees, including Us ‘cedar’, finn- (an unknown species of tree), and 115-8 (a large tree).“)1 Given this word’s referent and its phonological similarity with Akkadian ere'nu, erinnu, which also denotes a species of tree, there is a relationship between the two. There can be no direct loan relationship, however, because a qutl—pattem noun cannot be den'ved readily from the Akkadian forms. On the other hand, Akkadian urnu, attested in Old Akkadian and Standard Babylonian as well as at peripheral sites such as Mari (e.g., ARM 6.63 rev. 5'; 14.31.15) and Ugarit (RS 19.7121), provides an excellent morphological match and demonstrates that this ancient term meaning ‘cedar’ had a variety of forms (ALBH 39—40; Huehnergard 2008, 110; Rainey 1973, 46). The varying spellings of these different forms point to an ancient culture word, which undoubtedly originated in the Amanus region of southeastern Anatolia where the cedar tree grew. An Anatolian origin is fithher suggested by the ending -innu

99. The -iya- of ariya has contracted to -z'—, a phenomenon which tends to appear in Old Persian texts after the time of Darius I and Xerxes l (Skjaarve 2009, 59; Schmitt 2008, 85; OPGTL 13-14, 47-48 [§§23, 140]). On the suffix -ka, see Skjaerve 2007, 903; OPGTL 51 (§I46). 100. JA1'1R is adopted from Biblical Hebrew (Jastrow 1903, 123). 101. Most extant Masoretic manuscripts preserve this word as 11R, with a reduced final nun, perhal)S to avoid confiJsion with T'JN‘ earlier in the verse (C. Cohen 1978, 83).

1'

‘

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

67

(cf. Akk erinnu), which is commonly found in ancient Anatolian terms (Dercksen 2007, 39-42). That this word was used in Asia Minor is also demonstrated by the existence of several related terms in ancient Anatolia, including Hittite arimpa-, Cuneiform Luvian irimpit-, irippit-, and Hurrian erippi-, irippi—, irimpi-, which all relate in some way to cedar. The ultimate origin of this culture word meaning ‘cedar’ remains uncertain.102 13% ‘payment, tribute’ HALOT 95; DCH 1:414 (Ezek 27:15; Ps 72:10) (5 1110609 ‘wages’ Ezek 27:15, 603p0v ‘gifi’ Ps 72:10; 98 pretium ‘wages’ Ezek 27:15, donum ‘gift’ Ps 72:10; 6 qwrbn’ ‘gifi’; I 12117; ‘gift, offering’ Ezek 27:15, 71111 ‘gifi’ Ps 72:10 [T] Sum —> Akk —> Heb; Aram Sum ES'GAR PSD; Akk is’karu (OAkk, OB, Nuzi, MA, MB, SB, NA, NB) CAD I—J 244—49; AHw 395—96; EH 13w DNWSI 123—24; IA 131128, JA 'DW‘K DNW51123—24; DJBA 126; Syr ’e’s’ka‘ra‘ LS2 107 This word occurs only twice. In Ezek 27:15 it appears within mention of commerce, and in Ps 72:10 it appears parallel to .1077: ‘gifi’ as offered tribute. Based on these two occurrences, it can be concluded that 19% denotes something given as payment or tribute. It is widely recognized that this word has been borrowed from Akkadian is'karu.103 This Akkadian word has a variety of meanings. Its basic meaning is ‘work assignment’, but through semantic extension it can refer to the materials used for this type of work, the products produced by workers, a delivery of these products, a field for conducting work (only in Old Akkadian and Old Babylonian), or a tax (only in Neo-Assyn'an). Akkadian is'karu is, in turn, probably a loan from Sumerian ES’GAR ‘work assignment’.104 The use of Hebrew sin for Akkadian s' points to a loan from Neo-Babylonian, which fits well with the use of is'karu with reference to a delivery of products in Neo-Babylonian texts. The Aramaic forms have also been borrowed from Neo-Babylonian Akkadian. 1wa (an alkaline substance used for washing) HALOT1503; DCH 8:364 (Job 9:30) 102. Cf. Fortes Fortes 2001, 76—77. Some scholars derive Akk ere'nu, erinnu from Sum EREN, but this does not adequately explain the morphology of all the Semitic forms, and it is clear that Sum EREN is itself a loan from Akkadian (Civil 1983, 3). Rabin (1964, 164—65) makes the intriguing but unproven suggestion that the same basic element behind BH nx and Akk ere'nu, erinnu is also behind BH tins and its related Northwest Semitic forms. 103. ALBH 42; Lipin’ski 1988, 64; FWOT 42; AIA 59. 104. On the Sumerian origin ofAkk is'karu, see SLOB 235—36 (#192). It is possible, however, that Sumen'an borrowed this word from Akkadian.

68

Chapter 3

6 xto'Vt ‘with snow’ follows the reading lw'ina (Ketiv); ‘B quasi aquis nivis, 6 bmy’ dtlg’, 3 Wm 73: can each be translated ‘with snow water’ following the reading J‘N'm (Qere) Sum —> Akk —> Heb Sum AZLAG PSD; Akk as‘la'ku (OAkk, OA, OB, Mari, MA, MB, SB, NA, NB) CAD A/2 445—47; AHw 81‘05 In Job 9:30, Hebrew 117W occurs parallel to 13 ‘lye’ and denotes a purifying substance used for washing (Lo"w 1924—1934, 12648—49; J. Preuss 1911, 431). This is different from the way 17v). appears everywhere else in the Hebrew Bible, where it has the meaning ‘snow’ (2 Sam 23:20; Isa 55:10; Jer 18:14; Ps 147:16; 148:8; Prov 25:13; 26:1; 31:21; Job 6:16; 24:19; 37:6; 38:22; 1 Chr 11:22).'06 A connection between snow and soap is readily apparent, but it is unlikely that this word was simply derived from the common term for ‘snow’. Notably, a similar-looking term that denotes an alkaline substance, 15278, occurs in Rabbinic Hebrew (m. Nid. 9:6; Svabb. 9:5).‘07 This word can be traced back to Akkadian as’la'ku ‘fuller’, which is in turn a loan from Sumerian AZLAG.108 The preservation ofAkkadian s“ as sin (rather than samek) indicates that Hebrew-speakers borrowed this word from Babylonian rather than Assyrian Akkadian. The use of final gimel is unusual because typically syllable-final k is continued in Hebrew, but the final gimel may be due to contamination with 1'22), and some manuscripts (e.g., Codex Munich 95) preserve the form 7914):; rather than 17th (Jastrow 1903, 129). It is likely that the 1W, of Job 9:30 has the same origin as that of Rabbinic Hebrew 17273, having acquired its referent of an alkaline substance—used by a fuller for washing—by metonymy (Rabin 1962, 1073; Zimmem 1917, 28). It may be written as J?!) rather than 151473 in Job 9:30 due a folk etymology connecting this alkaline substance with snow, but more likely its form is due to textual corruption, and it should be corrected to J‘mw‘” new ‘quiver (for arrows)’ HALOT 96; DCH 1:418 (Isa 22:6; 49:2; Jer 5:16; Ps 127:5; Job 39:23; Lam 3:13) 6 (pupé‘cpa ‘quiver’ Isa 22:6; 49:2; Lam 3:13, omits Jer 5:16, émfiuui’a ‘desire’ Ps 127:5, to’éov ‘bow’ Job 39:23; flifaretra ‘quiver’; G qt_rq’ ‘quiver’ Isa 22:6; 105. JA 1")th is adopted from BH 17%: (CAL; DJBA 173). 106. In a few other instances, 17W is used as a comparison for whiteness and purity (Exod 4:6; Num 12:10; 2 Kgs 5:27; Isa 1:18; Ps 51:9; Lam 4:7). In these cases it may also denote a purifying substance, but the context does not specifically require it. 107. Jastrow (1903, 129) vocalizes the Hebrew form as 17%, with sere rather than palah. However, Codex Kaufmann A. 50 reveals that the vocalization is was as expected. 108. On the Sumerian origin of Akk as‘Ia'ku, see SLOB 160—61 (#70). 109. The Qere-Keliv variant reflects some uncertainty in the text, although not enough to warrant emendation. To conclude that 17W in Job 9:30 is an error for 17%, one must also conclude that any other instance in which 17W denotes an alkaline substance is also in error.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

49:2; Ps 127:5, ggrt’ ‘throat’ Jer 5:16, s'lhbyt’ ‘flame’ Job 39:23, g’r’ ‘arrow’ Lam 3:13; I 1‘1 ‘weapon’ Isa 22:6; Job 39:23, rm ‘weapon’ Isa 49:2; Jer 5:16, 1121773 17‘: ‘school’ Ps 127:5, p‘n ‘sheath’ Lam 3:13 [I] Hurr —> ——> Akk; Eg; Hitt —, NWS (Ug; Heb) Akk is"patu (OB, Alalakh, Nuzi, EA, SB, NA) CAD I—J 257—58; AHw 397; Ug u’t_pt DUL 123; EH, OH :1wa DNW51124; Eg z'spt (MK), z’sp.t (NK) A"W 2:411; GHwA" 116; WA'S‘ 1:132; SWET4o—41 (#34); DLE 1:47; Hitt is'pati-, is'panti- HHw 72; Hurr ispadi-, ispandi- BGH 106; GLH 127 The word 1.5sz occurs six times with the meaning ‘quiver’, commonly occurring amidst mention of weapons and armor.”0 Ko"hler and Baumgartner (HALOT 96) claim it is a loan from Akkadian is'patu, but this cannot be correct. The t_ of Ugaritic u’tpt argues against this origin because Akkadian s' should have been borrowed as s’ by Northwest Semitic during the second millennium B.C.E.'“ Attempts to derive this word from Sumerian are likewise problematic.”2 Instead, the various spellings of this word in Semitic suggest a borrowing from a foreign source. This word is associated consistently with the Hurrians, which points to a Human origin.113 It first appears in Akkadian texts during the Old Babylonian period, but otherwise it occurs in peripheral dialects (Alalakh, Nuzi, and Amama). AtAlalakh and Nuzi, elaborate quivers mounted with precious metals and gems are commonly mentioned (e.g., AT 427:4; HSS 15.17z4—7), and according to the Amama letters Tus'ratta gives quivers inlaid with gold as a gift (EA 29:184). Hittite texts, moreover, contain the term isvpatig is'panti— within Hurrian contexts (e.g., KBo 15 iv:23).“4

110. This word also appears once with the same meaning in the Lachish ostraca (HAE Lak(6)1.13:3). 111. ALBH 45. Definitive Akkadian loanwords in Ugan'tic are relatively rare, but they consistently represent Akk s' as 5' rather than _I (e.g., u’s'r from us'a'ru ‘penis’, rs'y from ras'u‘ ‘to receive, have’, and s'br from s'uburru ‘rump, anus’). 112. Ehelolf (1924) tries to etymologize Akk is'patu as Sum *ES'BAN (written E‘s'.BAN), allegedly ‘house of arrows”, noting that is'patu is written gigE’BAN in the lexical series H'AR-ra = ,hubullu (Hh vii/1:51) and assuming that 13‘s is the equivalent of E'. However, the two are not equivalent. Ellenbogen (FWOT 45—46) instead connects Akk is'patu with Sum BANDUDU, which he alleges means ‘quiver’. However, Sum BANDUDU means ‘seeding basket’, not ‘quiver’, and the phonological changes required by Ellenbogen’s loan hypothesis are speculative. 113. This word has no apparent etymology in Human, so Hurr ispadi-, ispandi- may come from a reconstructed IAV *isbandha— ‘quiver’ (Rabin 1970, 482—83). This Indo-Aryan word would mean ‘arrow container’, being a compound of isu- ‘arrow’ (cf. Skt 1's,u-) and bandha- ‘container’ (cf. Skt bandha’-, which typically means ‘binding’ but can also mean ‘container‘ similar to how Lat receptaculum ‘container’ comes from reczp‘io ‘to hold back’). One may compare the reconstructed ‘z'_sbandha— ‘quiver’ with Skt is,um'bandha’na-, essentially the same term but with bandha'- expanded via a prefix and a suffix (Monier-Williams 1899, 1321). 114. Some scholars contend that Hitt is'pati-, is'panti- is a loan from Akkadian, but this is by no means certain (Kammenhuber 1968, 130; contra GLH 127; Kronasser1962-1966, 1:244).

Chapter 3

70

Human must have loaned this word early on to Akkadian and Northwest Semitic separately, hence the s' in Akkadian but t_ in Ugaritic.”5 Egyptian zs’pt, zs'pj is written syllabically during the Middle and New Kingdoms and probably also comes from Human. especially since it is difficult to reconcile its vocalization with the Semitic forms (cf. Hoch 1994, 40—41). Semitic- and Egyptian-speakers originally considered the Hurrian form’s final dental part of the word, but it was later reanalyzed as the feminine ending. At Nuzi and Alalakh, the plural forms are written as is'pata'tu and is'patena respectively, both of which exhibit a plural suflix added to the base form is’patu. Similarly, Egyptian ispt is treated as a masculine noun during the Middle Kingdom, but by the time of the New Kingdom it is treated as a feminine noun, z’sp.t. Raw ‘necessities, essentials’ HALOT 1827—28 (Ezra 5:3, 9) 6 xopmlia ‘supplies’; SB murus ‘wall’; 6 s'wr’ ‘wall’ [D] OIran —> Aram; Elam IA 111W DNWSI 129—30; OIran *a'c'arna- AISN 21; [AP 437; Elam ha-za-irna-um, ha-za-ra-an—na E W 653

Biblical Aramaic arm occurs only twice, both times in the book of Ezra. In Ezra 5:3, the returnees’ opponents ask who gave the decree permitting the Jews to build the temple (Kn-'7 1.37 81333 mm 057' DW'VJ) and to complete its xnw (1.37 831% .1’7‘79111‘7). The second occurrence in Ezra 5:9 simply recounts a second asking of the same question. Scholars have offered several different Semitic etymologies for this term, but none is convincing, and this word certainly looks foreign.“6 Imperial Aramaic 11198, the only other form of this word in Semitic, appears in Achaemenid-period texts that suggest an Old Iranian origin (e.g., TAD A6.2:5, 9, 21; Khalili C1:2o). Elamite ha-za-ir-rza-um, ha-za-ra-an-na occurs in the Persepolis texts (e.g., PF 821:4—6; 864214—15; 865216), again pointing to an Old Iranian origin. All these terms come from Old Iranian *a'c'arna- ‘necessities, essentials’.117 This Old Iranian word can

115. Cf. ALBH 45. Hurr s typically appears as s' in Akkadian and t_ in Ugan'tic (e.g., Akk unus's'u vs. Ug u’n_t ‘state service’ from H urr unussi— and Akk h_uprus'vhu vs. Ug Vhbr; from Hurr bubrus(hj)— ‘incense bumer’). 116. Brown, Dn'ver, and Briggs (BDB 1083) compare Akk *as'urru‘. However, this is a ghost word that does not actually appear in Akkadian texts. Ko"hler and Baumgartner (HALOT 1828) instead com— pare KJW’B to Akk ajru, which typically means ‘place, site’ but can also denote a building complex or a sacred site. However, the vocalization and morphology of Ram’s are not at all what one would expect if it were borrowed from Akk as'ru. Lastly, Jou'on (1941) compares Arab ’as'ara ‘to saw’, contending that Rnw denotes wooden equipment. However, this etymology does not adequately explain' the morphology of 831W, either. 117. F. Rosenthal 2006, 63; Nyberg 1930, 138—39; cf. Naveh and Shaked 2012, 182—83; Tuland 1953: 271—72. The Iranian languages lent this word to Armenian as ac'ar', awéar' (HAB 12139—40).

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

7]

be etymologized as *c'ar- ‘to be necessary’ (cf. ManParth c’r: DMMPP 124) with the adverbial prefix a'- and the suffix -na.”8 The meaning ‘necessities, essentials’ suits the two occurrences of Biblical Aramaic 837198 well and indicates that the temple was not nearing completion when the returnees’ opponents asked what they were doing, but was instead still in the initial stages of preparation (Tuland 1958, 271—74). tints ‘kiln’ HALOT 1829 (Dan 3:6, 11, 15, 17, 19—23, 26) OG,9’Ka'u1v0g ‘fumace’; 23fornax ‘furnace’ Dan 3:6, 11, 15, 19—22, 26, caminus ‘furnace, forge’ Dan 3:17, 23; G ’twn’ [Syriac form] [T] Sum —> Akk —> Aram —> Arab; Eth Sum UDUN PSD; Akk utu‘nu, atu'nu, itu'nu (OB, Nuzi, MA, MB, EA, SB, NB), adu'gu (NB) CAD U—W 346—47; AHw 1445—46; JA, CPA unx DJPA 79; DJBA 176; DCPA 33; Syr ’attu‘na' LS2 109; Mand atuna 1WD 43; Arab ’attu'n Lane 14; Eth ’aton CD0 46

Biblical Aramaic 1-1118 occurs 10 times in the third chapter of the book of Daniel with reference to the fiery fiimace used as punishment for those who do not bow down to Nebuchadnezzar’s newly-constructed image. Although this word has many forms in Aramaic, all the Aramaic forms—including Biblical Aramaic tins—are borrowed from Akkadian utu'nu, atu'nu, itu'nu, adu'gu, which denotes a kiln used for making pottery and glass. The initial a- rather than u-class vowel of the Aramaic forms indicates that the Akkadian form atu‘nu was the specific source of borrowing; Aramaic later loaned this word to Arabic (AIA 110; Frankel 1886, 26). The Akkadian forms are most probably borrowed from Sumen'an UDUN.119 Accordingly, this term follows the typical pattern of many words of Sumerian origin that enter Akkadian, pass from Akkadian into Aramaic, and then are loaned from Aramaic to Arabic. Notably, Akkadian texts note that this kiln was used as punishment, exactly as it is in Daniel (e.g., VAT 9652+9655+10402 r. 19 // VAT 914o+12959 r. 16; BIN 7.10:9).120 The oven denoted by this word must have been large enough to fit a person, making it appropriate for such a punishment. '1:- ‘pole’ HALOT 109; DCH 2:93—94 (Exod 25:13—15, 27—28; passimm) 118. On the prefix a'—, see OPGTL 164. On the suffix -na, see Skjaerva 2007, 902; OPGTL 51 (§147). 119. SLOB 321 (#344). Salonen (1964, 114—18), however, suggests that both the Sumerian and Akka-

dian forms represent an ancient culture word. 120. For discussion of VAT 9652+9655+10402 // VAT 9140+12959, see Weidner 1954—1956, 285. 1“- Exod 27:6 (2X), 7 (2*); 304—5; 35:12—13, 15-16; 3714-5, 14—15. 27—28; 38:5—7; 39:35, 39; 40:20; Num416,811, 14; 1 Kgs 8:7, 8 (2X); Ezek 19:14; Job 17:16; 2 Ch: 5:8, 9 (2X).

72

Chapter 3

[D] Eg —> Heb Eg bdj (MK, NK) A"W2:83o; GHwA" 284; WA'S’ 1:488122 The word '1:- occurs a total of 40 times. Nearly all these occurrences are found within the description ofthe Israelite sanctuary, in which it refers to poles for carrying the ark of the covenant (e.g., Exod 25:13—15), altar (e.g., Exod 27:6—7), and the table for bread (e.g., Exod 25:27—28). The only attestations outside mention of the tabernacle are Ezek 19:14, where ‘1:- denotes a shoot of a vine, and Job 17:16, where it denotes a bar holding shut Sheol’s gates. This word has no known cognates and no apparent Semitic etymology.123 The almost exclusive use within the context ofthe Israelite tabernacle, whose materials were putatively Egyptian, suggests an Egyptian origin. The likely donor term is Egyptian bdj, ‘spar, pole’. This word shows up in the Coffin Texts as well as the Book of the Dead with reference to the spar of a ship (ECT 5,132a—b [Spell 398]; 5,190e [Spell 404]; 5,205f [Spell 405]; BD 99,20 Aa [Chapter 99]). In some ofthese cases, the spar ofthe ship is compared with a phallus, reflecting the rod-like nature of this word’s referent (ECT 5,13za—b [Spell 398]; BD 99,20 Aa [Chapter 99]).“ Egyptian d_ merged with d via palatal fronting, and Egyptian f commonly elided in final position,125 which would have produced a suitable donor term for Hebrew '13. In sum, Egyptian bdj provides a good match on phonological and semantic grounds.

'1:- ‘linen’ HALOT 109; DCH 2:93 (Exod 28:42; passimlz") (5 MVOD~Q ‘made from linen’ Exod 28:42; Lev 6:3; 16:4, 23, 32, Bu'ooog ‘fine linen’ or Bu'oowog ‘made from linen’ Exod 39:28; Dan 10:5; 12:6—7; 1 Chr 15:27, transliterates as Bap (reading '1:- for '13-) I Sam 2:18, omits 1 Sam 22:18,

122. JA 7:, used to refer to poles in the Israelite sanctuary, is adopted from BH ‘1:- (Jastrow 1903, 138). 123. Traditionally, Hebrew lexicographers have connected '1: with the root “11:1, ‘to separate’. comparing Arab badda ‘to separate’ and its den'vative budd, which refers to a part or portion of something (cf. HALOT 109; BDB 94; Gesenius, Thesaurus 179). ‘13 is used in this way with reference to limbs (Job 18:13; 41:4) and shoots of a vine (Ezek 17:6; 19:14), but these occurrences seem to be homonyms that have no relationship with ‘13 ‘pole’. Arab badd, cited by Ko’hler and Baumgartner with the meaning ‘beam’, occurs only in Palestinian Arabic and provides no evidence that this word was native to Semitic in antiquity. 124. There is some debate among Egyptologists as to whether b_d)’ refers to a spar or the top of a mast. However, the former is more likely in light of potential etymology and its comparison with a phallus (cf. EDE 2:368). 125. On the depalatalization of _d, see J. Allen 2013, 48—50; Loprieno 1995, 38; Peust 1999. 123—25; Junge 2005, 36. On the elision of 1’, see J. Allen 2013, 40—42; Loprieno 1995, 33, 38; Peust 1999, 127—29, 142—51. 126. Exod 39:28; Lev 6:3 [6:10] (2x); 16:4 (4X), 23, 32; 1 Sam 2:18; 22:18; 2 Sam 6:14; Ezek 9:2'3» 11; 10:2, 6—7; Dan 10:5; 126—7; 1 Chr 15:27.

Non—Semitic Loanwords in (he Hebrew Bible

73

ééaMog ‘special’ 2 Sam 6:14, noén'png ‘long robe’ Ezek 922—3, 11, orokn' ‘robe’ Ezek 10:2, 6—7; 28 lineus ‘made of linen’ except omits Lev 16:23; 6 bws,’ ‘fine linen’ except y’qr’ ‘honor’ Dan 10:5; 1226—7; I FD ‘fine linen’ except W135 ‘clothing’ Ezek 922—3, 11; 10:2, 6—7 [D] Eg a Heb QH 1:,— Eg bd_; (MK) A'W 2:830; GHwA" 284; WA'S' 1:488 This word occurs with reference to priestly or cultic gaments. It appears, for example, in conjunction with the terms “1‘38 ‘ephod’ (1 Sam 2:18; 22:18; 2 Sam 6:14; 1 Chr 15:27) as well as n_Jh-;>- (a garment) (Lev 16:4). Parallels in the Dead Sea Scrolls use the term "1:1 in a similar manner (e.g., IQM vii:10). Hebrew '13- also occurs in Ezekiel and Daniel with reference to the garments of angelic messengers (Ezek 9:2—3, 11; 10:2, 6—7; Dan 10:5; 12:6—7). This word has no Semitic cognates and no clear Semitic etymology, suggesting a loan from a foreign source.‘27 Grintz (1975a, 14—15) postulates that Hebrew 7:comes from Egyptian bdj, a word found in the Second Intermediate Period Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus that denotes a linen fabric utilized for a splint (bdj n hbsw) (P Edwin Smith 5,13). This same word also seems to occur in the plural form (b_d§w) with reference to linens in the Coffin Texts (ECT 6,12d [Spell 473]; 6,38x [Spell 479])-‘28 Egyptian _d merged with d via palatal fronting, and Egyptian 3 commonly elided in final position.’29 This would produce a suitable donor term for Hebrew '13-. In light of the putative Egyptian context of the tabernacle, an Egyptian origin remains the best explanation for Hebrew '13. 11‘7"};- ‘bdellium’ HALOTIIO; DCH 2:96 (Gen 2:12; Num 11:7) (5 a’vepaé ‘dark red stone’ Gen 2:12, va’otaMog ‘rock crystal’ Num 11:7; fl}, 6, I each use their corresponding forms of the word (bdellium, brwlh,’, and H5113, respectively) [D] Havilite —> Akk; Heb; Phoen; Gk; Lat Akk budulvhu, bidurvhu, buddarvhu (SB, NB) CAD B 305—6; AHw 136; Phoen n51: DNWSI 145; Gk BSéMrov, Bfiokxo'v, Bée’kka, ua'fiaitxov LSJ 312, 1077; Lat bdellium, maldacum OLD 248, 1173130

127. Ko"hler and Baumgartner (HALOT 109) state that the etymology of '13 is uncertain and suggest comparing it with Arab bait, a rough-cut garment, derived from batta ‘to cut’. This etymology remains unconvincm'g, however, because '13 has no clear association with roughness or cutting. 128. On the usage of Eg by; in the Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus, see Breasted 1930, 1:239. 129. On the depalatalization of _d, see J. Allen 2013, 48—50; Loprieno 1995, 38; Peust 1999, 123—25; Junge 2005, 36. On the elision of 3, see J. Allen 2013, 40—42; Lopn'eno 1995, 33, 38; Peust 1999, 127-29, 14251. 130. JA 1177:, 11151:, which occurs only in I, is adopted from Biblical Hebrew (DJPA 85).

74

Chapter 3

The word n'm occurs only twice. It appears within the description of the four rivers encompassing Eden (Gen 2:12), and its color is compared with that of manna (Num 11:7). The term 1151: is mentioned along with 173 ‘myrrh’ in a sixth—fifth century B.C.E. Phoenician text (KAI 280:1), indicating that it denotes a fragrant product. Comparison with related terms in Semitic (Akkadian) as well as nonSemitic (Greek and Latin) confirm this understanding and demonstrate that Hebrew n‘7'1';1- denotes bdellium, an aromatic gum resin derived from flowering plants ofthe genus Commrp‘hora.131 This word does not look Semitic and is undoubtedly a foreign loan. Its geographical association with Havilah (Gen 2:11—12), a region in the Horn of Africa or Felix Arabia, indicates that this “Havilite” word comes from the same region.132 The Egyptians are known to have obtained Commzp'hora from Africa as well as Arabia (Serpico and White 2000, 439—42). Classical sources bear similar witness. Dioscorides (Mat. med. 1.67), for example, says that bdellium comes from the sap ofan Arabian tree, and Pliny (Nat. 12.19. 3536) likewise associates it with Arabia.I33 Classicists frequently claim that Northwest Semitic loaned this term directly to Greek and Latin (cf. EDG 208; DELG 163; LEW 1:99), but the numerous vanant forms of this word in Greek and Latin and its geographical associations with Africa and Arabia suggest that—like Hebrew—Greek and Latin borrowed this term directly from the original source. 1933 (a stone from Nubia) HALOT 111; DCH 2:97 (Esth 1:6) (5 ouapayoimg, 13 smaragdinus ‘of emerald’; 6 translates the collocation "1371.3-

WW] as s'ys" wts'wyt’ ‘marble and covering’; I 117311 ‘pillar’ [D] Eg —+ Heb; Arab Arab baht Dozy 1927, 1:121,- Eg z'bhty (NK), bht (Ptolm) GHwAn41; WA‘S’ 1:64

131. Harrell, Hofi‘meier and Williams 2017, 36—37. This evidence proves conclusively that 1177'? does not refer to a precious stone as understood by (5 and later Jewish interpreters (e.g., Sa‘adiah Gaon, Jonah Ibn Janah, and Ibn Ezra). Such a misunderstanding led to the use of JA 11‘7'13, m‘m with the meaning ‘precious stone’ in I. 132. Cf. FWOT47. On the location ofHavilah, see W. W. Muller 1992. Frequent attempts to connect BH r171;- with Sanskrit are speculative. Brown, Driver, and Briggs (BDB 95) connect n71;- with Skt ulu"kha1a-. However, this Sanskrit word typically means ‘mortar’ and refers to bdellium only in lexical texts (E WAia 1:231; KEWA 1:111). Low (1924-1934, 1:304) instead den’ves n'm from Skt *maa'a’laka—. However, *mada'laka- is not even attested in Sanskrit, and the word with which it is allegedly connected, mada'ra-, means ‘thom-apple’ and appears only in late Sanskn’t lexical texts (E WAia 3385—86: [(5 WA 2:568—69). 133. Some Classical sources connect bdellium with Bactria and India (e.g., Peripl. M. Rubr. 37. 39‘ 48-49; cf. Pliny. Nat. 12.19.35—36). These sources are probably confused because the Red Sea region and India could be referred to with the same term. Nevertheless, regardless ofany potential confusion, it is clear that bdellium is an Arabian product. See Crone 1987, 67—70.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

75

The word UEJJ- occurs only in Esth 1:6, where it appears amidst various luxury items adoming Ahasuerus’s palace. Its mention along with my ‘Egyptian alabaster’, T1‘pearl’, and 11ng (a type of stone) indicate that it denotes a mineral of some kind. The mention of DJ:- in conjunction with WW7, an Egyptian loan, suggests that 19:13 may also be Egyptian.134 The likely donor term is Egyptian z'bhty, bht (Harrell, Hofi‘meier and Williams 2017, 42—43). This Egyptian word describes a stone, possibly a kind of anorthosite gneiss, that comes from the region of Ibhat (Ibhi’t) in Nubia. The form z’bhty occurs during the New Kingdom, whereas the form bht is only attested during the Ptolemaic period (I. R. Harris 1961, 96—97). Hebrewspeakers presumably borrowed the latter form, which reflects the Later Egyptian elision of i and y and more closely matches Hebrew van-J35 Lambdin (1953b, 147) and Muchiki (EPNL 240—41) reject any connection between Hebrew 13:13- and Egyptian bht on the basis that Hebrew .te; and Egyptian t do not typically correspond. However, this contention assumes an overly rigid view of linguistic borrowing that disregards the complexity of the opposition between Egyptian t and d. Contrary to their claims, the presence of the term baht in Arabic does not demonstrate that this word is Semitic. In fact, the irregular correspondence between Hebrew t,et_ and Arabic t argues against a cognate relationship, and Arabic texts associate baht with northeastern Africa. Hence, Arabic baht probably also comes from Egyptian. VJ:- ‘tower, watchtower’ HALOT 119; DCH 2:137 (Isa 23:13; 32:14) 6, 13, 6, 1 do not directly represent this word Isa 23:13; (5 translates 113315937 as (11' mum ‘the villages’, Ii palpatio ‘terror’, 6 translates 10315937 as s’wprhwn dbt’ ‘his beauty of the house’, 1 1173073 ‘hidden treasure’ Isa 32:14 [D] Eg —> Heb OH 111:; Eg bvhn (NK) GHwA" 275; WA'S' 1:471; DLE 1:139 This word occurs only twice in the Bible, both times in Isaiah. In Isa 32:14, 1113 appears along with 55187 ‘citadel’. Nehemiah 3:27, which uses similar language to Isa 32:14, refers to a great tower (5173.3 bun-a) located on the Ophel, implying that U]:- denotes a fortified structure such as a tower or watchtower. This word probably also appears in Isa 23:13, where the Assyrians are said to set up a 113:!- (Qere 11-113 and Ketiv 1’03) for besieging.

134. Ko“hler and Baumgartner (HALOT 750) compare BH 111mb, also mentioned in Esth 1:6, with Eg *shxt. If this were correct, it would further support an Egyptian origin for 13:13. However, the Egyptian term they presumably have in mind is not the nonexistent *shrJ, but shr.t, which cannot be connected With 111,110 unless the MT is in error. I35. On the elision of 1' and y in Later Egyptian, see J. Allen 2013, 37—38, 43; Ipprieno 1995, 33—35, 38; Peust 1999, 4950, 142—51; Junge 2005, 33.

Chapter 3

Gesenius (Thesaurus 246) derives 103 from the root 1113, which he alleges means ‘to watch, look out’. However, this root clearly means ‘to test, examine’ in Biblical Hebrew as it does elsewhere in the Semitic languages (e.g., IA, JA, QA 1n: and Syr bhn: DNWSI 15o; DQA 32; DJPA 90; L52 135; cf. DRS 57). Thus, the root 111: does not provide a suitable derivation for a noun meaning ‘watchtower’. There is, however, evidence for the existence of a root *b'hn meaning ‘to watch, be watchqu in Egyptian.136 This verb is the basis for New Kingdom Egyptian bhvn ‘citadel, tower’ and bh_n.t ‘pylon, gatehouse building’. It likely, therefore, that Hebrew-speakers borrowed this word from Egyptian. Hebrew 1133 does not seem to represent the Egyptian feminine ending, so Hebrew-speakers presumably borrowed the masculine rather than feminine form of this Egyptian noun.I37

10:11 ‘greywacke’ HALOT 119; DCH 2:137 (Isa 28:16) OG translates 103' 13.13 as Meog nolvrsln‘g éKMK‘tO’Q ‘costly chosen stone’; (1’, 0', 0' M'Gog oo’Ktuog, 8 lapis probatum, 6 k’p’ bh,yr ’ ‘tested stone’; I does not directly represent this word [D] Eg —’ Heb Eg bh_n (since MK) A"W 2:821; GHwA" 275; WA'S' 1:471 This word, which occurs only in Isa 28:16, has been explained in at least two ways. Some scholars associate it with the root in: ‘to test, examine’, understanding m as a ‘tested stone’ (i.e., a sturdy and reliable stone) (e.g., Wildberger 1991—2002, 1:28, 30—31, 40—42; Watts 1985, 366—67, 370). Others connect it with Egyptian bh_n ‘tower’ and take the collocation 103' 13.5 to mean ‘stone of a fortress’ (i.e., a foundation stone used in constructing a fortress or a fortified watchtower).I38 However, neither of these is convincing (Noonan 2013b, 315—16). Conceming the first view, the Masoretic vocalization is not the passive form 1m:- that one would expect for such an origin, and nowhere in antiquity is a stone described as ‘tested’ or ‘proved’ in the sense advocated. Conceming the second view, the Masoretes explicitly distinguished this term from m: ‘watchtower’, and one would expect a collocation such as 191?: 1387 or 7103 1:125 rather than 113:- mg to express the meaning ‘foundation stone’. Instead, Hebrew 1133' is probably a loan from Egyptian bh'n.'39 The latter, first attested during the Middle Kingdom, denotes greywacke, a dark-colored stone.I40

136. Osing 1976, 258, 833. Both Semitic bh,n and Eg "bfihn can be traced back to a common Afroasiatic root (EDE 2:286—87). 137. EPNL 241; Lambdin 1953b, 148—49; Rabin 1962, 1076. On bh'n. t, which occurs beginning with the New Kingdom, see GHwA' 275—76; WA'S' 1:471; DLE 1:139. 138. E.g., Childs 2001, 202, 208,- Beuken 2000—, 2:12, 15; Roberts 1987, 29—34; Tsevat 1975, 2:69—72139. Noonan 2013b; Lambdin 1953b, 148; FWOT48; Kohler 1947b, 391—93. 140. Eg bhyn is probably unrelated to Gk Bu’oavog ‘Lydian touchstone’ and therefore has no inherent connection with the concept of testing. See Noonan 2013b, 316—17.

77 Ao'n-Semiric Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible W

This stone was used to make statues, stelae, sarcophagi, and temples and would have been well suited for the construction described in Isa 2816'“ Additional support for this loan hypothesis comes from the Egyptian context of Isa 28:1—22: the covenant with death (mp-11:5 n‘ja) and the agreement (nth) with Sheol of Isa 28:15 probably refer to Judahite reliance upon Egypt for protection from the Neo-Assyr— ian Empire (cf. Isa 3021—5; 3111—3), and the mention of death and Sheol may very well reflect the well-known Egyptian preoccupation with death and the afterlife”?First Isaiah often uses foreign language elements or foreign motifs in its prophetic addresses that relate to foreign nations (Rabin 1967, 304—5). Accordingly, it is not surprising to find an Egyptian loanword within such an Egyptian context.I43 W113, n11; (a coniferous tree) HALOT 155; DCH 2:261 (1 Kgs 5:22 [5:8], 24 [5:10];passim'44) [D] ?? —> Ebla; Akk; Heb; Aram; Gk; Lat Ebla baras‘um VE 241 (#374); Krebernik 1983, 14; Akk bura's'u (OAkk, OB, NA, NB) CAD B 326—27; AHw 139; QH 122m,- QA 1111:, JA, CPA ma, 11m, 11m: DQA 39; DJPA 112; DJBA 25o; DCPA 62; Syr bro-1a— L52 187; Gk Bpa’fh), Bo’parov LS] 328, 322; Lat bratus OLD 263145

The word 1911; occurs a number of times, most frequently referring to a type of wood imported from Lebanon. The variant form 1111;, with a final dental rather than a sibilant, occurs in Song 1:17. The ancient versions struggled to translate this word consistently, and Wm seems to refer to a variety of coniferous trees (e.g., juniper and cypress) rather than one particular species (Lawrence 2004). This word has no Semitic etymology, and Semitic texts consistently portray it as a non-native commodity. Similar to the Hebrew Bible’s association of this tree with the north, Akkadian texts locate this tree in the Amanus region of southern Turkey (e.g., RIMA 3.102.10 ivz8) and Urartu (e.g., TCL 3 iii:280). Accordingly, this term must have come from the north where this tree grew. Because Hebrew trim is explicitly said to come from the north and because its form differs significantly from that ofAkkadian and Aramaic, it must have been borrowed independently.146 141. Cf. Aston, Harrell and Shaw 2000, 57-58; Gundlach 1977; J. R. Ham's 1961, 78—81; Lucas and Rowe 1938. 142. Dekker 2007, 115—23; Blenkinsopp 2000, 393. Hays (2010) even contends that Isa 2811-22 should be read against the cult ofthe Egyptian goddess Mut (Eg th). If this suggestion is correct, Isaiah‘s mention of11]?) ‘death’ creates a clever and effective wordplay with the name of the goddess Mut. 143. For a detailed analysis of this word, see Noonan 2013b. I44. 1 Kgs 6:15, 34; 9:11; 2 Kgs 19:23; Isa 14:8; 37:24; 41:19; 55:13; 60:13; Ezek 27:5; 31:8; Hos 14:9 [1418]; Nah 2:4 [2:3]; Zech 11:2; Ps 104.17; 2 Chr 2:7 [2:8]; 3:5. The occurrence of W11;- in 2 Sam 6:5 Shsould probably be emended to n‘W/m in accordance with its parallel in I Chr 13:8 and 6 (McCarter 19 4,164). I45. JA W113, which occurs only in late literary texts, is adopted from Biblical Hebrew (Jastrow I9031191)146- One could try to explain the Semitic forms from a hypothetical *bura‘t_u, with *1 yieldm'g s' m' Akkadiand in Ugan'tic, and s in Hebrew. This, however, does not explain the s of Eblaite unless one

78

Chapter 3

Greek- and Latin-speakers most likely borrowed this word via Anatolia rather than from Semitic, especially since they claimed that the tree it denotes grew in Asia Minor (e.g., Pliny, Nat. 12.38.78) (EDG 234-35). This particular tree was commonly used as a building material in antiquity. Akkadian texts describe its use for columns, roof construction, and interior work (Moorey 1999, 355—58; cf. Meiggs 1982, 417—20). Its value for construction is reflected in its use for building Solomon’s temple (1 Kgs 5:22, 24; 6:15, 34; 9:11; 2 Chr 2:7; 3:5). 1111; => 1911;51']:- (BH); 5115 (BA) ‘iron ore’ HALOT155—56, 1958; DCH 2:261—62 (Gen 4:22; passimm) [I] Luv —> -+ Akk —» Aram —» NWS (Ug; Heb; Phoen) Akkparzillu (OA, OB, Qatna, Bogh, MA, MB, EA, NA, NB) CAD P 212—16; AHw 837—38; Ug brd_1DUL 234; Sir, OH '7113; Phoen 57‘): DNW51196; IA, QA, JA 5119, CPA $7115 DNWSI 196; DQA 194; DJPA 445; DJBA 930; DCPA 326; Syrparzla' LS) 1235; Mand parzla MD 364; Luv *parzilli- (CLuv)148 Hebrew ‘7113 occurs frequently in the Hebrew Bible, both in lists of metals (e.g., Num 31:22) and with reference to objects made of iron (e.g., Gen 4:22). Its Biblical Aramaic form, 5175, occurs 20 times, all in the book of Daniel. Related forms also occur in many of the other Semitic languages, including Akkadian, Ugaritic, Phoenician, and Aramaic. Notably, the Akkadian and Aramaic forms have initial p whereas all the other forms have initial b. Despite its widespread distribution in Semitic, this word’s atypical morphology makes its identification as a foreign loan virtually certain.149 Notably, Old Assyrian parzillu bears similarity to several Old Assyrian terms with final -l/-ll that entered Akkadian as a result of contact between Assyrian traders and the inhabitants of postulates a loan from Akkadian into Eblaite. Furthermore, it does not explain the varying vocalization. Thus, it is better to consider this a direct loan into each language, especially because these languages preserve memory of where the word on'ginated (contra ALBH 49). 147. Lev 26:19; Num 31:22; 35:16; Deut 3:11; 4:20; 8:9; 19:5; 27:5; 28:23, 48; 33:25; Josh 6:19, 24: 8:31; 17:16, 18; 22:8; Judg 1:19:43, 13; 1 Sam 17:7; 2 Sam 12:31 (2X); 23:7; 1 Kgs 6:7; 8:51; 22:11; 2 Kgs 6:5—6; Isa 10:34; 44:12; 45:2; 48:4; 60:17 (2x); Jer 1:18; 6:28; 11:4; 15:12 (2x); 17:1; 28:13—14; Ezek 4:3 (2x); 22:18, 20; 27:12, 19; Amos 1:3; Mic 4:13; Ps 2:9; 105:18; 107:10, 16: 149:8; Job 20:24; 28:2; 40:18; 41:19 [41:27]; Prov 27:17 (2X); Qoh 10:10; Dan 2:33 (2x), 34—35, 40 (3x), 41 (3X), 42, 43 (2X), 45; 4:12: 20 [4:15. 23]; 5:4, 23; 7:7, 19; 1Chr 20:3; 22:3, 14, 16; 29:2, 7 (2X); 2 Chr 2:6 [2:7], 13 [2:14]; 18:10; 24:12. 148. It is possible that OSAfrzn is also related (DOSA 409). 149. Some scholars compare the nominal pattern of BH 5791:- ‘vineyard. orchard” from u'p- of the same meaning (e.g., Bauer and Leander 1922, 503—4 [§§56Iil—ll]). However, this nominal pattern is quite rare in Biblical Hebrew and does not seem to be a productive, or even native, formation.

ham-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

79

Anatolia.150 The donor term is Cuneiform Luvian *parzilli— ‘iron ore’, formed from *parza- (cf. parzas's'a ‘of iron’ and parzagulliya ‘having loops of iron’) and the substantivizing adjectival suffix -alli, -alla.‘5' Use of related terms indicates that *parzilli— refers not to iron per se, but its natural source in the form of iron ore (i.e., either black magnetite or black hematite).152 The altemation of the initial consonant between p and b reflects Luvian’s lack of phonemic contrast in word-initial position.153 It also indicates that two separate paths of borrowing occurred, one into Ugaritic, Hebrew, and Phoenician, which is also reflected in “western” cuneiform spellings of this word; and a second into Akkadian (through which it entered Aramaic) reflected in its “eastern” cuneiform spellings (Artzi 1969). The Ugaritic spelling of this word with _d indicates that the Northwest Semitic forms with z are secondary.154 Thus, Biblical Hebrew 517;:- is probably an inherited loan from early Canaanite rather than a direct borrowing from Luvian. Extant textual sources from the ancient Near East indicate that most iron came from either the northwest (Anatolia and Syria) or the north (Urartu).I55 Technology necessary for iron-smelting was firmly in place in Anatolia at least by the Hittite period and possibly even during the early second millennium B.C.E. (Yalcin 1999, 184—86; Waldbaum 1999, 28—31 ,' Muhly, et a1. 1985), hence the adoption of this word from Anatolia. Naturally, this Luvian term would have subsequently spread to other regions and languages along with the product and its associated technology. was) ‘vessel, cup-shaped candleholder’ HALOT 173; DCH 2:307 (Gen 44:2 [2X], 12, 16—17;Ex0d 25:31, 33 [2x], 34; 37:17, 19 [2x], 20; Jer 35:5) 6 Ko'vén ‘drinking vessel’ in Genesis, Kpum'p ‘hollow of a candlestick’ in Exodus, Kepa'utov ‘earthenware jar’ Jer 35:5; 23 scyphus ‘cup, goblet’; 6 ’sqp’ ‘cup’ except ’gn’ ‘basin’ Jer 35:5; 1 7‘5: ‘cup’ [D] Eg —> Heb QH 172:1; Eg th,w (since OK) A"W 121330, 222513; GHwA" 922—23; WA'S' 5:30; DLE

2:149 This word occurs 14 times, and its distribution is limited to three contexts. The first is the Joseph cycle, in which was- appears with reference to the vessel Joseph 150. Dercksen 2007, 36—37. Examples include padallu ‘fetter’, is'padallu, is'pandallu ‘lodging’, and is'_hiulu ‘contract’. 151. On the Luvian suffix -alli, -a11a, see Starke 1990, 63—64; Melchert 2003, 195. 152. Valc'rio and Yakubovich 2010; contra Rendsburg 1982. Luv parzas's'a occurs in KUB 13.35 lIii-'46-47; KBo 48.262 ii:22—23, and parzagulliya appears in KUB 12.1 iii22—3. 153. On the lack of phonemic contrast in word-initial position in Luvian, see Melchert 2003, 177; 2008, 34. I54. ALBH 49—50. Thus, BH ‘7113 and the other forms beginning with b cannot be loans from Akkadian (contra FWOT 52—53; Zimmem 1917, 59). 155. McConchie 2004, 42—43; Moorey 1999, 280—82; Reiter 1997, 361—75; Maxwell-Hyslop 1974.

80

Chapter 3

used for divination (Gen 44:2, 12, 16—17). In the second, V‘na occurs with reference to the vessel—shaped candleholders of the tabemacle’s lampstand (Exod 2531,33, 34; 37:17. 19—20).”“ Lastly, 37:1;- occurs once in the book of Jeremiah along with 013 ‘cup‘, denoting a vessel filled with wine (Jer 35:5). In the Dead Sea Scrolls, 3m occurs in contexts clearly influenced by the biblical descriptions of the tabernacle (e.g.. 11QT"' ix:2, 5). The standard Hebrew lexica derive rug from the root 37:11 that is behind the term 71:73.13 ‘hill‘ (HALOT 173; BDB 149; Gesenius, Thesaurus 336—37). However, this etymology is conceivable only if Hebrew-speakers thought of the shape of the vessel as upside-down because a drinking vessel is otherwise concave rather than convex like a hill. The limitation of this word to Hebrew among the Semitic languages as well as the very specific contexts in which it occurs suggest another possibility. Based on the Egyptian setting of the Joseph cycle as well as the Egyptian literary context of the tabernacle, a more plausible etymology is Egyptian th.w ‘libation vessel, which first appears during the Old Kingdom (cf. Dem th: CDD Q 23; DG 535).157 The vessel denoted by Egyptian qblrw was made ofmetal and may have been shaped like the hieroglyph I because the same vessel with water poured from it (depicted with the hieroglyph ll) is frequently used to write thhw (J. J. Janssen I975, 433). Notably, the Babylonian Talmud preserves a tradition associating Hebrew W;with Egypt, comparing the menorah’s cup-shaped candleholders with cups from Alexandria, Egypt (on-mafia mm: 1733 mm 1.1 nm‘ ry‘az) (b. Menah_. 28b) (Meyers 1976, 38). More generally, the adoption of this term from Egypt reflects Egyptian influence on the construction of the tabemacle’s lampstand.‘58 1m 2; 1mm 1:];- ‘treasurer’ HALOT 1842 (Dan 3:2) (5, Q3 omit one of the terms in the lists of officials in Dan 322—3, so it is diflicult to tell how they translate BA 1371;, if at all; 6 grbdy, an erroneous rendering of BA 1373 [D] Olran (OPers) —> Aram; Elam Olran *gandabara— (OPers) AISN 102; [AP 422; Elam ka'n-da-bar—ra E W 430 156. The semantic connection between a vessel and a flower bud is a natural one. 157. Kohler 1940, 36. A feminine form, thyJ. also occurs during the Old, Middle. and New Kingdoms and appears in Demoti'c as qb_h.t (Ai'W 1:1330, 212513; GHwA" 922—23; W'S 5:30; CDD Q 23—242 DO 535). However, Hebrew- speakers presumably adopted the masculine rather than feminine form because there is no representation of the Egyptian feminine ending in that“. Ko"hler also connects map with Eg thw. However, as the initial consonant demonstrates, W32 does not come from Egyptian. It is instead a perfectly good Semitic term for a dn'nking vessel (cf. Akk qahu‘m and Ug qb‘t). 158. Hoffmeier 2005, 214—15; Meyers 1976, 39. 1 am grateful to James P. Allen for his assistance with this entry.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

81

Biblical Aramaic 13?}- occurs twice in Dan 322—3. It exhibits a non-Semitic morphology and has no Semitic root on which it could be based, making it a good candidate for a foreign loan. It is most probably Old Iranian because it occurs amidst a number of titles borrowed from Old Iranian, namely 13,117 ‘judge’, vagin‘lord, overseer’, 157719138 ‘satrap’, and 113-178 (a financial official). The donor term is Old Iranian *gandabara- ‘treasurer’, formed from *ganda-, ‘treasury’ (cf. Pahl ganj, ManParth gnz, Sogd yzn, and NPers ganj: CPD 35; DMMPP I63; DMSB 91; CPED 1098) and bara- ‘bearer’ (cf. OPers, Av bum-t OPGTL 53 [§16o], 200; A1W 943).”9 This official managed the treasuries of regional centers, distributed monies, collected tribute, and recorded relevant commercial operations and transactions (Stolper 2001). The use of dalet for Proto- Iranian 7*' indicates that this word is a loan from Old Persian because 7*' became 0’ only in Old Persian.160 This Old Persian form is attested in Elamite texts as ka’n-da-bar—ra (PF 1947:19; PFNN 544:3; 2356:12). Biblical Hebrew 13;;- and Biblical Aramaic 1311;, which appear identical except in their use of zayin rather than dalet, come from Median *ganzabara- rather than Old Persian *gana’abara—. Thus, there is no need to try to explain the use of dalet as a case of scribal updating or an intemal Aramaic development (contra Kitchen 1965, 62—63; Mancini 1987, 49; Schaeder 1930, 47—48). 1312- (BH); 1273 (BA) ‘treasurer’ HALOT185—86, 1843—44; DCH 2:339 (Ezra 1:8; 7:21) 6 transliterates as yaofiapnvo'g Ezra 1:8, yu'Ca ‘treasury’ Ezra 7:21; 28 translates as a proper name Ezra 1:8, custos arcae publicae ‘keeper of the public chest’ Ezra 7:21; (5 gzbr’ [Syriac form] [D] OIran (Med) —r Akk; Heb; Aram; Elam Akk ganzabaru (LB) CAD G 43; AHw 281; IA 31111, Hatra, JA 1311 DNWSI 229; DJBA 273; Syr ge'zab_ra' LS2 223—24; Mand ganzz'bra MD 77; OIran *ganzabara— (Med) AISN 102; [AP 422; Elam ka4-an-za-ba-ra, ka4-in—za-ba—ra, ka'n-za-ba-ra, ka'n-za-bar—ra, ka4-za-ba-ra E W 406, 415, 433, 456 Biblical Hebrew 131:1 occurs only in Ezra 1:8, and Biblical Aramaic '13]:- appears only in Ezra 7:21. In both instances this word has the meaning ‘treasurer’. Related forms occur in Akkadian, Aramaic, and Elamite. The use of this word with reference to Persian officials in both Late Babylonian Akkadian (Dar 296:2; 527:5) and Elamite (e.g., PT 10a:1; 31:1; 33:1; 49a-211; PFNN 1564.4) indicates that it comes from Old Iranian. The donor term is Old Iranian *ganzabara- ‘treasurer’ (cf. Pahl ganjwar, ManParth gznbr, and NPers ganjwar, ganju'r: CPD 35; DMMPP

159- FWOT 54; F. Rosenthal 2006, 62; Haug 1853, 156; AAT2257—58. The Iranian languages also lent this word to Armenian as ganjawor (HAB 1:518). 160. On the phonological development of Proto—Iranian 7", see Skaerve 2009, 51; Schmitt 2008, 84-85; Testen 1997, 575; OPGTL 33—34 (§88).

Chapter 3

82

17o; CPED 1099)."" This compound is formed from *ganza— ‘treasury’ (cf. Pahl ganj, ManParth gnz, Sogd yzn, and NPers ganj: CPD 35; DMMPP I63; DMSB 91; CPED 1098) and bara- ‘bearer’ (cf. OPers, Av bara-: OPGTL 53 [§160], 200; A]W 943). In contrast with Biblical Aramaic 2374-, which uses dale! for Proto-lranian 7’" and thereby represents the Old Persian form ofthis word, Biblical Hebrew 1311,- and Biblical Aramaic 13-111 use zqvin. Both Biblical Hebrew 131-1, and Biblical Aramaic ‘13};- thereby represent Median *ganzabara-. The Median form of this word is also attested in Elamite texts (PT 10a:I; 22:1; 31:1; 33:1; 59:1; 49a—211; 134223; PFNN I56414)m'bg- (a wrap or cloak) HALOT192—93; DCH 2:353 (Ezek 27:24) 6 translates 117311; 73151:,- as o'a'rchog ‘blue’; 13 involucrum ‘wrap’; G m’n’ ‘garment’; 1 nu ‘woolen garment’ [9.] CW Akk gule‘nu, gula'nu (NA, NB) CAD G 127; AHw 296—97; JA 0‘51 DJPA 130; DJBA 287—88; Syr glz'ma' L52 237; Gk xhapv'g, flaiva LS] 1993 This word occurs only in Ezek 27:24 among a list of items obtained from the northern cities of Harran, Kanneh, and Eden.“ Hebrew £117;- is often derived from the root 1:51, but this verb occurs only in 2 Kgs 2:8 and is otherwise unattested in the Semitic languages. Most probably, then. the root 0‘71 is denominal. The observations that 1:17;- represents a traded item and has a relatively limited distribution in Semitic suggest the likelihood of a foreign loan. Akkadian gule'nu, gula'nu is limited to Nee-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian. The garment it denotes is associated with the north in Akkadian texts similar to Ezek 27:24, and its Northwest Semitic origin is by no means clear. Furthermore, Greek xlupv'g, which is connected but has a foreign, non-Semitic origin,I63 is associated with the non-Greek inhabitants of Thrace (e.g., Xenophon, Anab. 7.4.4). The base stem of xlapv'g, xmuo'8-, contains the afformative -8 which occurs in some words that have entered Greek via Anatolia (cf. i'aomg ‘jasper’ with base stem t'aomo-, naMarctg’ ‘concubine’ with base stem naMmct’S—, and opo’ptg ‘emery’ with base stem ouu'015-). The alternate form XMWG further confirms a foreign but nonSemitic origin of the Greek term. Thus, Hebrew 015,; most probably represents a culture word (cf. Hoch 1994, 326). This term must have originated in the north, in Anatolia, as Ezek 27:24 claims and the evidence surrounding this word otherwise suggests.I64 161. FW0T54—55; F. Rosenthal 2006, 62; Ai‘khenval'd 1987, 5; Eilers 1940, 123—24; Schaeder1930, 47—48; AAT 1:81. The Iranian languages also lent this word to Annenian as ganjawor (HAB 1:518). 162. Both Hanan and Eden are mentioned together with Gozan, Rezeph, and Tel Assar in Isa 37111 163. E06 1635-36; DELG 1216—17; Rosol’ 2013, 107—9; contra Szemere’nyi 1974, 148. 164. This foreign word may also be the source of NPers gilr'm, which can denote a garment of goat hair or wool as well as a rug (CPED 1096).

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

>

up: (a rush or reed plant) HALOT 196; DCH 2:362 (Exod 2:3; Isa 18:2; 35:7; Job 8:11) 6 omits Exod 2:3, Bu’Bkwog ‘of papyrus’ Isa 18:2, smog ‘marsh’ Isa 35:7, m'impog ‘papyrus’ Job 8:11; Q3 scirpeus ‘of reeds’ Exod 2:3, papyrus ‘papyrus’ Isa 18:2, iuncus ‘reed’ Isa 35:7, scirpus ‘reed, bulrush’ Job 8:11; E5 ‘rq’ ‘boxwood’ Exod 2:3,ppyrwn ‘papyrus’ Isa 18:2, ’rbn’ ‘bulrush’ Isa 35:7, ’gm’ ‘pool’ Job 8:11; SI mu [Aramaic form] except 31mm ‘and in skiffs’ for MT’s xpl'flpm Isa 18:2 [D] Eg —> Heb; Aram IA x731 DNWSI 225; JA Rm, 1731, SA 3731 DJPA 131; DJBA 289; DSA 149—50; Eg qm)’, gmy (NK, Ptolm) GHwA" 925, 970; WA"S 5:37, 170; DLE 2:151, 189I65

This word, which denotes a rush or reed plant, appears only four times in Biblical Hebrew. In three of its four occurrences it appears within an Egyptian context: Exod 2:3 mentions it with reference to the basket of Egyptian reeds in which Moses was placed, Isa 18:12 notes its use in making Egyptian boats, and 8791- is parallel with the Egyptian loanword arm, (also a rush or reed plant) in Job 8:11. This association with Egypt points to an Egyptian loan, and the donor term is Egyptian qms’, also spelled gmy (cf. Dem qm)’ and Copt kam: CDD Q 43; DC 537,Crum 108).166 Notably, Egyptian texts describe the use of the reed denoted by qu, gmy to make mats as well as baskets, which is congruent with the use of this reed to make a basket for the baby Moses in Exod 2:3. Egyptian also loaned this word to Imperial Aramaic, where it is attested in the Elephantine papyri. 1;;- (BH); 1131. (BA) ‘treasury’ HALOT 199, 1846; DCH 2:368 (Esth 3:9; 4:7; Ezra 5:17; 6:1; 7:20‘67) 6 ya’Cu [Greek form] except yaComula'Ktov ‘treasury’ Esth 3:9; ‘8 gaza [Latin form] Esth 3:9, thesaurus ‘treasure’ Esth 4:7; Ezra 7:20, bibliotheca ‘library’ Ezra 5:17; 6:1; 6 gz’ [Syriac form]; ‘1 m [Aramaic form] Esth 3:9; 4:7 [D] OIran (Med) —> Heb; Aram; Elam IA 111, JA 1:, 1‘1 DNWSI 229; DJBA 273; Syr gazza' LS2 223; Mand ginza MD 90—91; OIran *ganza- (Med) AISN 102; [AP 443; Elam ka4-an-za, ka4—in—zaum, ka'n-za—um E W 406, 415, 433

165. Eth gome‘ is a transcn'ption of BH Km- (CDG 193). 166. EPNL 241-42; Lambdin 1953b, 149; FWOT 56. Muchiki and Lambdin object that Eg q most commonly appears as Heb qop, not gimel. However, this is insufficient reason to reject a possible loan from Eg qmi’, especially because the opposition between Eg k, g, and q is not fully understood. 167- (5 Gnoaupo'g ‘treasure’, I} pretiosus ‘costly’, and 6 symt’ ‘treasure’ understand 1;; (without dages) in Ezek 27:24 as 133- (with dages') ‘treasury’, but 1 reads 1;; as 111121: ‘cloak’. It is unlikely a word meaning ‘treasury’ would be used in Ezek 27:24, so us is probably unconnected with 13;.

84

Chapter 3

Hebrew 75,}- ‘treasury‘ occurs twice in the book of Esther (Esth 3:9; 4:7). The Biblical Aramaic form of this word. 111,-. appears three times in the book of Ezra (Ezra 5:17; 6:1; 7:20). Although sometimes thought to be a late equivalent of 131x, the contexts in which this word occurs suggest it refers to a different kind of treasury than “131?: (Rezetko 2007. 396—97). Scholars generally agree that this word is a loan from Old Iranian *ganza—, ‘treasury‘. This term does not occur in extant texts but can be reconstructed on the basis of attested Iranian forms such as Pahlavi ganj, Manichaean Parthian gnz, Sogdian yzn, and New Persian ganj (CPD 35; DMMPP 163; DMSB 91; CPED 1098).168 The use of 2 rather than d for Proto—Iranian j*' reflects a Median form.169 Old Iranian *ganza- is also the source of the Elamite and various Aramaic (Imperial and Jewish Aramaic. Syriac. and Mandaic) forms. Modern English gem’zah can even be traced back to Old Iranian. having been borrowed via Semitic. As discussed below in the entry for ma. Biblical Hebrew u;- and Biblical Ara— maic u; have an origin that is similar to but separate from it, though it also means ‘treasury’ and looks nearly identical in form. 1-13,}; ‘treasury’ HALOT199; DCH 2:368 (1 Chr 28:11) 6 Cakxw, an erroneous rendering of BH um; Q cellarium ‘storehouse, storeroom’; S kssjrwrf ‘balcony, portico’; ‘I 111311.? ‘storehouse’ [D] Olran (Med) —> Heb Olran *ganzaka— (Med)

Biblical Hebrew 1m, which occurs only in I Chr 28:11, means ‘treasury’ and is therefore very similar to Biblical Hebrew t3;- and Biblical Aramaic U;- of the same meaning. Like these two terms, it also comes from Old Iranian. However, it comes not from Old Iranian *ganza- but from Old Iranian *ganzaka- ‘treasury’.170 The latter can be analyzed as *ganza— ‘treasury’ (cf. Pahl ganj, ManParth gnz, Sogd yzn, and NPers ganj: CPD 35; DMMPP 163; DMSB 91; CPED 1098) with the suffix -ka.‘7' Like Old Iranian *ganza-, the use of 2 rather than d for Proto-Iranian j*' reflects a Median form.I72 Hebrew-speakers undoubtedly borrowed Tlm- separately from I33, given the former’s use only in Chronicles and the latter’s use only in the book of Esther (Esth 168. FWOT 57; F. Rosenthal 2006, 62; AAT 1:42. Arm ganj-also comes from Iranian (HAB 1:516-17). 169. On the phonological development of Proto-Iranian 7", see Skjaervo 2009, 51; Schmitt 2008. 84—85; Testen 1997, 575; OPGTL 33—34 (§88), 170. Cf. FWOT 57; Haug 1853, 156—57. Olran *ganzaka- is not attested in Old Iranian texts but is represented in Armenian as ganjanak (HAB 1:517—18). 171. Ann ganj comes from Iranian (HAB 12516—17). On the suffix -ka, see Skjaerva 2007. 903; OPGTL 51(§146). 172. On the phonological development of Proto-Iranian 1"“, see Skjarrvo 2009, 51; Schmitt 2008. 84—85; Testen 1997. 575; OPGTL 33—34 t§88).

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

85

3:9; 4:7). In order to consider 1;;- and “41;;- a single borrowing, one would have to assume one of two options, both of which are unlikely: either Hebrew-speakers borrowed *ganzaka- and, recognizing -ka as an Old Iranian sufiix, produced the shortened form 133; within Hebrew; or, altematively, Hebrew-speakers borrowed *ganza- and, recognizing -ka as an Old Iranian suffix, produced the form 1.1;;- via hyper-foreignization. '19; (a kind of wood, perhaps cypress) HALOT 200; DCH 2:372 (Gen 6:14) 6 éu'kov ratpa'ymvov ‘rectangular wood’; 98 lignum levigatum ‘smooth wood’; 6 ‘rq’ ‘boxwood’; 20ml" PH 0117?. ‘cedar’ [D] Pre-Greek —’ Heb; Gk; Lat Gk Kurta’ptooog LS] 1011; Lat cupressus OLD 519 The hapax 1.921 occurs in Genesis 6:14, which describes God’s command to Noah to make an ark out of '19:"1357. It is clear from this phrase that 15;:- refers to a type of wood, but the context does not permit a more specific identification. Nevertheless, it seems likely that it refers to a resinous wood such as that of the cypress tree. The 17th- century French biblical scholar Samuel Bochart long ago postulated a connection between Hebrew 1.9-} and Greek Kurta'piooog and Latin cupressus, both meaning ‘cypress’ (Bochart I681, 25). This identification is almost certainly correct.173 The ending -tooog/—essus of the Greek and Latin forms reflects a Pre-Greek term, also the probable source of Hebrew 193.174 Notably, resinous woods such as cypress were utilized for shipbuilding in antiquity: Theophrastus mentions several resinous woods, including cedar, with reference to shipbuilding (Hist. plant. 571—2), and the Late Roman writer Vegetius (De re militarz' 4.34) similarly notes that cypress was used to construct warships. m;- (an axe) HALOT202—3; DCH 2:375 (Deut1925; 20:19; 1 Kgs 6:7; Isa 10:15) (5 d’éivn ‘axe’ Deut 19:5; Isa 10:15, 01'8npog ‘iron, iron instrument’ Deut 20:19, ne'laicvg ‘axe’ I Kgs 6:7; 58 securis ‘axe, hatchet’; 6 nrg’ ‘axe’ Deut 19:5; Isa 10:15, przl’ ‘iron, iron instrument’ Deut 20:19, mgzr’ ‘axe’ I Kgs 6:7; 1 1111

173. C. Murphy (1946) instead compares ‘19} with Akk gibaru‘, gibarbarru‘ ‘reed’, in turn a loan from Sumerian. However, Akk gibaru‘ is only attested in lexical lists (cf. CAD G 64; AHw 287), and it is unlikely that Hebrew-speakers would have borrowed this rare word. Furthermore, '19}- cannot represent Akk gibaru‘ because the i-class vowel ofgibaru" should be represented as such if it were an Akkadian loanword and because ‘19; exhibits a segolate pattem whereas gibaru‘ does not. 174. EDG 803—4; DELL 159; LEW 1:313; Schrader 1911, 469. The identity of “Pre-Greek” remains uncertain, although there is the possibility that Pre-Greek represents an Indo-European Anatolian language, specifically Luvian (Finkelberg 2014).

Chapter 3

86

[Aramaic form] Deut 19:5, '711: ‘iron, iron instrument’ Deut 20:19, I7"71n ‘auger’ 1 Kgs 6:7; Isa 10:15 [?] CW Sum VHAZIN PSD; Akk bassinnu (OAkk, OB, Mari, Nuzi, Bogh, MB, EA, NB) CAD 5H 133—34; AHw 332; EH 1111 DNWSI 234; JA rxn DJBA 479; Syr h,as.s_z'na' L52 483; Arab karzan, kirzin, karzam, kirzim WKAS K 125; Eth vh_asz'n CDG 267; Eg qr_dn (NK) GHwA" 933; WA'S‘ 5:66; DLE 2:158; SWET3o3—4 (#438); Gk a’éivn LSJ 170; Lat ascia OLD 197—98; Arm kac 'in HAB 2560—61 The word 11'];- occurs only four times in Biblical Hebrew, each time with the meaning ‘axe’ (Deut 19:5; 20:19; I Kgs 6:7; Isa 10:15). In Epigraphic Hebrew, this word appears in the Siloam Tunnel Inscription with reference to an axe used by the workers to hew the tunnel (KAI 189:2, 4). Hebrew 11'];- may appear to be derived from the Semitic root grz/gzr ‘to cut, divide’ (cf. Heb 111/111), but it is undoubtedly a non-Semitic term. If Hebrewspeakers were to create a noun meaning ‘axe’ based on the verbal root 'in/m, they probably would have used the typical Hebrew nominal pattern (maqte'l) for a tool; indeed, the form 711137: is already attested in Biblical Hebrew. Furthermore, the nominal pattern of m;- is extremely rare in Semitic and elsewhere is used for foreign loans such as 5112- ‘iron’ (cf. Bauer and Leander 1922, 503—4 [§§61i1—l1]). Comparison of similar-looking forms in both Semitic and non-Semitic points to a connection with Anatolia. Akkadian bassinnu is attested at B0ghazko"y and contains the ending -innu, which is commonly found in terms from ancient Anatolia (Dercksen 2007, 39—42). Furthermore, the -w component of Greek a’éi’vn likewise probably points to an Anatolian term (EDG 111; Ruijgh 1997, 540; cf. Szemere’nyi 1971, 656). The second consonant’s altemation between [2] (cf. BH 1112- and Sum VHAZIN), [,5] (cf. Akk ghassinnu and JA r311), [ks] (cf. Gk a’éivn), and [tsAh] (cf. Arm kac ’in) reflects a consonant foreign to both Semitic- and Indo-European—speakers. Some Semitic-speakers dissimilated the second consonant to aid pronunciation (cf. Arab karzan, karzam), just as Hebrew-speakers did with this word. The similarity between 1111- and the Hebrew root fiu/hl is only coincidental unless it reflects a folk etymologization of this foreign word, which is quite possible.175 In sum, Hebrew 11'];- represents an ancient culture word that probably originated in Anatolia but has a wide distribution in many different language families.“ As discussed below under its entry, Hebrew D7")? represents another form of this Anatolian culture word, which is also attested in Eblaite gurdumum and Emar Akkadian gurdimu. 1‘7 ‘ink’ HAL0T220; DCH 2:433 (Jer 36:18) 175. I am grateful to Aaron J. Koller for his assistance with this entry. 176. Cf. AIA 54; Frankel 1886, 84—87; Rubio 1999, 12; Salonen 1952, 8—9.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

G omits: 8 atramentum ‘ink’; C5, ‘3: both use their corresponding forms of this word (dw't’ and mu, respectively) [D] Eg ——> Heb; Aram JA m‘7, m”? DJBA 328; Syr dayu't_a' LS’ 294; Mand diuta MD 107; Eg ryt (since MK) AuW2:1455; GHwA" 489; WA'S’ 2:399; DLE 1:266 This word is a hapax meaning ‘ink’ that occurs in Baruch’s reply to Jehoiakim’s officials. Baruch says that Jeremiah dictated his prophecies, and he wrote them down on a scroll with ink (127-3). Related forms exist in Aramaic (Jewish Aramaic, Syriac, and Mandaic). Nevertheless, this word has a limited distribution in Semitic. Thus, Schneider and Quack plausibly postulate that Hebrew 1’7- is a loan from Egyptian ryt, ‘1'nk’ (Quack 2000; Schneider 2001, 162; cf. Hoch 1994, 430). The use of Hebrew dale! for Egyptian r does not present any problems because Egyptian r had a dental-like, tapped pronunciation during the Middle and New Kingdoms. This indicates an early borrowing into Northwest Semitic, as does this word’s attestation in both Hebrew and Aramaic.177 Hebrew and Aramaic must have borrowed this word independently because they preserve the Egyptian form differently. The Egyptians regularly used black ink for pen-wn'tten material, and red ink was also used alongside for various purposes (e.g., distinguishing headings). Black ink was made from carbon (derived from partially burned organic materials such as oil or wood) that was mixed with a binder, probably some sort of gum. Red ink, on the other hand, was made from hematite (red iron oxide) (Leach and Tait 2000, 238—39). This type of iron-based ink is probably what was used to write the Lachish Letters, whose ink contains chemical traces of iron (A. Lewis 1938b; 1938a). llDDz'l'i, 117333178 ‘drachma’ HALOT17, 232; DCH 2:473 (Ezra 2:69; 8:27; Neh 7:69—71 [7:70—72]; 1 Chr 29:7) (5 xpvot'ov ‘gold, gold coin’ except 0'50'9 ‘way, road’ (probably confusion with 1:13 ‘way’) Ezra 8:27; 23 solidus ‘gold coin’ except dragma ‘drachma’ Neh 7:69—71; 6 drykwn’ [Syriac form]; 1 m (a weight) 1 Chr 29:7 [D] Gk —> Heb; Phoen; Aram Phoen 173311 DNWSI 262; JA 1173311 DJPA 156; Gk Spaxun' LS] 449 This word occurs four times. In each instance, it denotes a coin given by the retumees for the rebuilding of the temple (Ezra 2:69; Neh 7:69—71). Because the coin it

177. Schneider 1999, 155—58; Quack 1992, 76—77; Ro"ssler 1966, 220—23, 227. On the tapped pronunciation of Hg r, see J. Allen 2013, 40,- Loprieno 1995, 33; Peust 1999, 127—29. Lambdin (1953b, 149) suggests that 1‘7 is an orthographical error for 1")". However, Muchiki (EPNL 242) rightly points out that if 1‘3 on'ginated as a scribal error for 1‘3}, one would have to assume that the Jewish Aramaic, Syriac, and Mandaic forms—which have an initial d rather than r—all originated from a Hebrew manuscript with this error.

88

Chapter 3

denotes was in use during the Persian pen'od, one might think that it comes from Old Iranian and means ‘daric’. However, this loan hypothesis falls short whether one derives the Old Iranian word for ‘daric‘ from the name of Darius (*da'rdavakad or from a reconstructed Old Iranian term for ‘gold’ ("‘darika—).‘78 The morphology of 11730-17- indicates that the donor term begins with two consonants with no vowel between them, unlike *da‘rayaka- or *a’arika-, and the mem is inexplicable as a loan from either *da'rayaka- or *darika-. A borrowing from Greek Spaxun' ‘drachma’ , on the other hand, perfectly explains the initial consonant cluster and the presence of the mem. This word occurs as 1:011 in a Phoenician—Greek bilingual inscription from Athens (KAI 60:6; cf. CIA 2/521335b), undoubtedly a loan from Greek in light ofthe inscription’s provenance, as well as in Jewish Aramaic. Greek coinage, which included locally minted coins bean'ng Athenian motifs, was common in Palestine during the Persian period. It is likely, therefore, that Hebrew-speakers adopted this term for a Greek coin, applying it to their own local adaptations of Greek drachmae.179 The ending 11'could be a Semitic innovation, but it more probably represents the Greek genitive plural ending -(hv because the genitive case frequently expresses price and value in ancient Greek. Hence, Semitic-speakers borrowed the genitive plural Spaxpww rather than the nominative singular Spaxun'.'8° Investigation of1mm necessarily entails examination of Hebrew 0215118, which occurs with reference to the value of gold bowls donated for the second temple (Ezra 8:27) but also appears anachronistically with reference to money given for the building of the first temple (1 Chr 29:7). Ellenbogen derives D‘mm from Old Iranian (FWOT 17—18; cf. Schwyzer 1931, 14—16), but it cannot be a loan from *da'rayaka- or *darika- for the same reasons mentioned above regarding ting-T1. The best solution is to read 0‘33'1'15 as a corrupted form of Gum-Tn; (singular 11'n;~1'1§).'8' That the text originally read D‘prt't'mj rather than among}? is indicated by (5’s renditions of Ezra 8:27: OG reads sig tn‘v o'So‘v xapawp, reflecting a consonantal text D‘Jm T115, and Codex Alexandriunus and the Lucianic recension read eig m‘v o'So‘v Spaxuwvew and gig m‘v o'80‘v Spaxua‘g. The ’alep of ting-m reflects the initial consonant cluster of Greek Spaxpn', represented differently in Ezra 8:27; 1 Chr 29:7 than in Ezra 2:69; Neh 7:69—71.182 178. The ancients derived the Old Iranian word for ‘daric’ from the name of Darius (cf. Pollux. Onom. 3.87, 7.98), whereas some modern scholars derive it from darika- (Alram 1996). 179. Albright 1951, 21—22; 1950b, 64—65. On these coins, see Meshorer 2001, 1—19; Mildenberg1979; Stem 2001, 562—69. Because these coins were local versions, one need not object that Greek drachmae were typically made of silver, not gold as Ezra 2:69 and Neh 7:69—71 claim. For the same reason, these coins’ gold composition does not prove that imp-17 must refer to a Persian daric, commonly made of gold. Gold darics did circulate in Palestine during the Persian pen'od but were much less common than Greek or Greek—influenced coinage. 18o. Schwyzer 1931, 17—18. On the use of the genitive to express price and value, see Schwyzer 1939—1971, 2:122. 181. Albright 1960, 242. As Albright notes, a similar error seems to occur 1n' KAI 60:3, which has 01:11 for 13mm (contra Gibson 1982, 150). 182. Perhaps significantly, the form Dung-T1 always appears alone whereas D‘JJ'Tm occurs with either the inseparable preposition lamea’ (Ezra 8:27) or the conjunction waw (1 Chr 29:7).

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

n3 (BH, BA) ‘law, order’ HALOT 234, 1855; DCH 2:478 (Dan 2:9, 13, 15; passimm) 6 often vo’uog ‘law’ or 8614101 ‘statement, decree’ when translated as a noun; SB most ofien [ex ‘law’, sententia ‘sentence, judgment’, or edictum ‘decree’; 6 most often nmws’ ‘law, ordinance’ or pwqdn’ ‘command’; 3 most frequently m‘u ‘decree, command’ in Esther [D] Olran —> Akk; Heb; Phoen; Aram; Elam Akk da'tu (NB, LB) CAD D 122—23; AHw 165; Phoen m DNWSI 263; IA, QA, IA 117 DNWSI 263; DQA 59; DJBA 356; Syr da_ta‘ LSZ 326; Olran da'ta- AISN 84; [AP 80—81; Elam da-lams E W 298 Hebrew nj- ‘law, order’ occurs 21 times in the Bible. The Biblical Aramaic form, 111-, appears 14 times (Dan 2:9, 13, 15; 6:6, 9, 13, 16; 7:25; Ezra 7:12, 14, 21, 25, 26 [2x]). Related forms exist in Akkadian, Phoenician, and various dialects of Aramaic (Impen'al and Jewish Aramaic and Syriac), but these related forms only occur in late texts, some of which have Old Iranian contexts; this word is also attested in Elamite (PF 1980231). Not surprisingly, then, already Gesenius (Thesaurus 469) identified 113 as a loan from Old Iranian. The donor term is Old Iranian da'ta-, a passive past participle of the verb da’- ‘to give’ (cf. OPers, Av da'ta- and Pahl da'd: OPG TL 189; A1W 726—27; CPD 23).184 No reason exists to reject this loan hypothesis, and Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic 113- undoubtedly come from Old Iranian da'ta-.

1311,73 ‘judge’ HALOT1855 (Dan 3:2—3) (5, 13 omit one of the terms in the lists of officials found in Dan 3:2—3, so it is difficult to tell how they translate BA "1307-, if at all; (5 trbdy, an erroneous rendering of BA 1213‘;[D] OIran —> Akk; Aram; Elam Akk da'tabara (LB) CAD D 122; AHw 165; IA 121111 DNWSI 263; Olran *da’tabara- AISN 85; [AP 418—19; Elam da-ud—da-bar—ra E W 300185 Biblical Aramaic 13,117 occurs twice, both times with reference to one of the officials whom Nebuchadnezzar summons to worship his newly set up statue (Dan 322—3). The majority of the terms mentioned in this list, including jam-Watt ‘satrap’, 115718 (a financial oflicial), 1311,- ‘treasurer’, and Vagin- ‘lord, overseer’, are derived from Old Iranian. Given this observation as well as this word’s quadriliteral, non-Semitic morphology, 13,1131 must also be an Old Iranian loan. 183. Dan 6:6, 9, 13, 16; 7:25; Esth 1:8, 13, 15, 19; 2:8, 12; 3:8 (2x), 14—15; 4:3, 8, 11, 16; 8:13—14, 17; 911, 13-14; Ezra 7:12, 14, 21, 25, 26 (2X); 8:36. The expression MW in Deut 33:2 is problematic and does not provide an additional attestation of BH 117-; see its entry in the Appendix. 184. FWOT61; F. Rosenthal 2006, 62; AAT 1:43. Arm dat also comes from Iranian (HAB 1:629). 185. JA mm, which occurs in i, is adopted from Biblical Aramaic.

90

Chapter 3

The donor term is *da'tabara-. formed from da‘ta- ‘law’ (cf. OPers, Av damand Pahl da'd: OPGTL 189; A] W 726—27; CPD 23) and bara- ‘bearer’ (cf. OPers, Av bara-z OPGTL 53 [§16o], 200; AIW 943).”‘5 Although not attested in Old Iranian, this word clearly occurs in later Iranian as Pahlavi da'dwar and Manichaean Parthian d’dbr.‘87 Old Iranian *da‘rabara- is also the source of Late Babylonian Akkadian da'rabara and Imperial Aramaic 13111, the first of which clearly occurs in Iranian contexts (PBS 2/1 1:14; 34:13; 185:15). The official denoted by Old Iranian *da‘tabara- was a high official in the Achaemenid legal and juridical system. In later times its cognates clearly refer to a judge, but during the Achaemenid period it can also refer more generally to a lawyer. In the Muras‘u‘ archives, this official simply appears as a witness to van'ous transactions (e.g., PBS 2/1 34:13) (Schmitt 1996; Dandamaev 1992, 9, 41—42). Dug]. ‘Egyptian ebony, African blackwood’ HALOT 237; DCH 2:486 (Ezek 27:15) (5 aioayouev'og ‘one who comes’; ‘8 ebenus ‘ebony’; 6 lbwnt’ ‘frankincense’; 1 0113 ‘peacock’ [D] Eg —> Ug; Heb; Gk; Lat Ug hbn DUL 328; Eg hbny (since OK) A"W 1:748, 2:1562; GHwA" 523; WA'S' 2:487; DLE 1:287; Gk Elievog LSJ 466—67; Lat hebenus, ebenus OLD 866 This word, a plurale tamum, occurs once with reference to a traded commodity (Ezek 27:15). Its mention amidst various imported items indicates a foreign loanword, as does its atypical vocalization pattern (cf. Bauer and Leander 1922, 571 [§72u]). Hebrew D‘qul is undoubtedly a loan from Egyptian hbny ‘Egyptian ebony’, which occurs as early as the Old Kingdom.188 The qames,-h,atup of Hebrew 0‘33; permits the reconstruction *hu'bney in Egyptian and indicates that this word was borrowed into Hebrew afier the loss of final y that took place beginning with the New Kingdom but prior to ca. 700 13.05., when Egyptian u had become e in accented syllables.189 An early loan is supported, although not confirmed, by the attestation of hbn amidst imported woods in a Late Bronze Age Ugaritic economic text (KTU 4.40226). The use of an i-class vowel in 186. FWOT 62; F. Rosenthal 2006, 62;A1’khenval’d 1987, 5; AAT 2:58; Haug 1853, 157. 187. CPD 23; DMMPP 133. Arm datawor comes from Iranian (HA3 12630—31). 188. EPNL 281—82; Lambdin 1953b, 149; FWOT63. Eg hbny, in turn, is probably a loan from some African language, perhaps Nubian. Egyptian texts note that the wood denoted by this term was imported from Genebteyew as well as Nubia and Punt. Similarly, Herodotus (Hist. 3.97) describes ebony as an item of tn'bute from Ethiopia, and Diodorus Siculus (Bibliotheca historica 1-33) and Strabo (Geogr. 17.2.2) both claim that ebony trees grow in Ethiopia. 189. Lambdin 1953b, 149. On the lenition ofy in final position, see J. Allen 2013, 37—38. 43; Lopn‘eno 1995, 33, 38; Peust 1999, 49—50, 142—51; Junge 2005, 33. On the change of u to e in stressed syllablcssee J. Allen 2013, 24—26; Loprieno 1995, 38—39; Peust 1999, 222—26, 250—59.

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

91

Greek EBSVOQ and Latin hebenus, ebenus, on the other hand, indicates that these languages borrowed this word from Egyptian after the shift of Egyptian u to e.’90 Ebony in ancient Egypt was a different species from modern ebony (Diospyros ebenum, native to East Asia, and D. dendo from West Africa). Egyptian ebony was Dalbergia melanoxylon, or African blackwood, which is native to the drier parts of tropical Africa, including the Sudan.“” This particular wood was a luxury item used primarily for fumiture in antiquity. Small ebony objects such as tables have been discovered in Egyptian tombs from the First Dynasty, and during the New Kingdom Egyptian ebony was used to make figurines (including shabti figurines), statuettes, and door paneling in addition to fumiture.192 The Late Bronze Age in particular was characterized by widespread trading of ebony obtained from Africa (Moorey 1999, 352—53; Meiggs 1982, 282—84; Pulak 1998, 203), but ebony continued to be in great demand during the first millennium. It was commonly used along with ivory (cf. Ezek 27:15) as veneer and inlay for the omamentation of fumiture, boxes, and other obj ects.193 1333 ‘assistant, aide’ HALOT 1856 (Dan 3:24, 27; 4:33 [4:36]; 6:8 [6:71) 0G (pil'og ‘friend’ Dan 3:24, 27, omits Dan 4:33; 6:8; 9’ usytow’v ‘magnate, courtier’ Dan 3:24, Suva'otng ‘ruler’ Dan 3:27, ru'pavvog ‘tyrant’ Dan 4:33, finatog ‘consul’ Dan 6:8; 23 optimas ‘aristocrat’ Dan 3:24, potens ‘powerful one’ Dan 3:27; 4:33, senator ‘senator’ Dan 6:8; 6 rb’ ‘chief, master’ [D] OIran —’ Aram OIran *hadabara- AISN 109 Biblical Aramaic 137.], which denotes a royal ofiicial, occurs four times. This official seems to have been high-ranking and to have administered in close conjunction with the king: Nebuchadnezzar questions these officials conceming the number of men in the fiery fumace (Dan 3:24), and along with the nobles (17:32.1) they seek out Nebuchadnezzar after his mind is restored (Dan 4:33). Based on their position in the lists of officials found in Dan 3:27; 6:8, they may have been less important than the king’s governors. This word occurs nowhere else in the Semitic languages and certainly does not look Semitic. The donor term is Old Iranian *hadabara- ‘assistant, aide’ (literally ‘one who carries with’), which is formed from the preposition hada ‘with’

190. Roso’12013, 17o; Foumet 1989, 59; contra EDG 368; DELG 294—95; DELL 190; LEW 1:387. 191. Gale, et al. 2000, 338; Hepper 1977, 129—30. The referent ‘ebony‘ was only later transferred to the species Diospyros ebenum and Diospyros dendo. There is no evidence for these latter species’ presence in ancient Egypt. 192. Gale, et a1. 2000, 338—39; Vartavan 1997, 103; Germer1985, 97-98; Lucas 1962, 434—35. 193- Gale, et al. 2000, 339; Germer 1985, 97—98; Meiggs 1982, 284—85; Lucas 1962, 435—36.

92

Chapter 3

(cf. OPers hada' and Av hada', haéa: OPGTL 212—13; AIW 1755—56) and bam‘bearer’ (cf. OPers, Av bara-: OPGTL 53 [§160], 200; AIW943),194 This word does not occur in extant Old Iranian texts, but one may compare later Iranian forms such as Manichaean Parthian ’dy’wr ‘helper, friend’ (DMMPP 26). The definition ‘assistant, aide’ suits 123:! well, for this official served in close conjunction with the king (cf. Dan 3:24; 4:33). 03:! ‘limb’ HALOT1856—57 (Dan 2:5; 3:29) OG napaoewuatigw ‘to disgrace someone publicly’ Dan 2: 5, 5111112)»ij ‘to dismember’ Dan 3:29; 6’ gig a’rtw'ketav 8"68068 ‘you will be destroyed’ Dan 2:5, Sig a'rrm’ketav éoovwi ‘they will be destroyed’ Dan 3:29; fl? peribitis vos ‘you shall be destroyed’ Dan 2:5, dispereat ‘he shall be destroyed’ Dan 3:29; 6 hdm’ [Syriac form] [D] OIran —> Aram JA 0771 DJBA 362—63; Syr hadda'ma' LS2 331—32; Mand handama MD 124; Ohm *handa‘ma— AISN [15 Biblical Aramaic Dj-j. ‘limb’ only occurs twice, both times in descriptions ofpunishment and mutilation (Dan 2: 5; 3:29). This word has no Semitic etymology and does not seem to be native to Semitic, so scholars are right to derive it from Old Iranian *handa'ma— ‘limb, part’ (cf. Pahl handa'm and NPers anda‘m: CPD 41; CPED 108).I95 Nasal assimilation has taken place, as commonly occurs in Iranian loanwords in Aramaic, particularly those containing the consonant cluster nd (Shaked 2005, 169—70). Its later Aramaic forms (JA D'm, Syr hadda‘ma’, and Mand handama) are probably inherited from earlier Aramaic (cf. Ciancaglini 2008, 331). The two expressions in which this word occurs, 117301311; I‘m-J (Dan 2:5) and mm with? (Dan 3:29), are unique in that the Biblical Aramaic verb "1311 does not elsewhere occur in a double-object construction describing the transformation of one thing to another. On the other hand, Old Persian kar- ‘to do, make’ does appear in this type of construction, notably in descriptions of execution following mutilation (e.g., DB ii:73—76, 88—91). The associated expressions mtg/’5? "7]; 113211; (Dan 2:5) and nan-W"? “‘71; 3137: (Dan 3:29), moreover, may be Old Persian calques. Accordingly, Makujina convincingly shows that the expressions Humm- rm-j. and 1:51an min are calques of an Old Persian expression *handa'ma- kar-.‘9"

194. FWOT 64; F. Rosenthal 2006, 62; Ai'khenval’d 1987, 5; AAT 2:58. 195. FWOT 65; F. Rosenthal 2006, 63; AAT 2:58—59. The Iranian languages also lent this word to Armenian as andam (HAB 1:187). 196. Makujina 2001, 178—79; 1999. This phrase does not occur in Old Persian texts, but its equivalent does occur in New Persian.

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

93

0m ‘footstool’ HALOT 239; DCH 2:490—91 (Isa 66:1; Ps 99:5; 110:1; 132:7; Lam 2:1; 1 Chr 28:2) (5 v'ttono’étov ‘footstool’ Isa 66:1; Ps 99:5; 110:1; Lam 2:1, 0' 10mg 013’ éomoav oi 1:66.99 moron~ ‘the place where his feet stand’ Ps 132:7, ow’otg noéw’v ‘standing of the feet’ I Chr 28:2; $3 scabillum ‘footstool’ except locus ubi steterunt pedes eius ‘the place where his feet stand’ Ps 132:7; 6 kwbs" ‘footstool’ except s’kyn’ ‘dwelling’ 1 Chr 28:2; 511 WP: ‘footstool’ except 711121.773 11*: ‘house of his s'anctuary’ Ps 99:5; Lam 2:1 [?] CW Akk atmu‘ (Nuzi) CAD A/2 498; AHw 87; Ug hdm DUL 329; OH 01.1; Eg hdm, hdmw (since NK) GHwA" 532; WA'S' 2:505; SWET221—22 (#304); DLE 1:293; Hurr admi- BGH 66 This word appears only six times, always in conjunction with mm ‘feet’. In several instances it refers to God’s dwelling place on earth, the ark of the covenant (Isa 66:1; Ps 99:5; 132:7; 1 Chr 28:2), whereas in P5 110:1 mg is an image of the subjection of the Israelite king’s enemies. Notably, the related Ugaritic term hdm appears in mythological texts with the same meaning and similar associations.197 Two related words can be found in non-Semitic. The first is Hurrian admi‘footstool’. This Hurrian term occurs in a Hurro—Hittite bilingual that describes the god Tes'ub sitting on a footstool (admi-) of enormous size (KBo 32.13 vs. i:4—6, ii:5—8).198 Akkadian texts from Nuzi mention this word as atmu‘, which occurs with the wood determinative GISV, amidst different pieces of fumiture (HSS 15.13222—4, 7). The second is Egyptian hdm, hdmw, a foreign loan into Egyptian during the New Kingdom (cf. Dem htm ‘throne’: CDD H 100—101; DG 282). The absence of any native etymology for any of these terms indicates an ancient culture word, as do the key phonological differences between the various forms.199 During the second millennium, footstools are only occasionally found in glyptic art from Anatolia; in contrast, the use of footstools became much more common during the Neo-Hittite period (Symington 1996, 117). Footstools are frequently depicted in both Egyptian and Mesopotamian art. In Egypt, footstools illustrated in New Kingdom tombs fall into two basic types: domestic (which function to elevate the king’s feet from the ground) and ceremonial (which depict the king with his 197. Ug hdm is associated with p‘n ‘feet’ several times in Ugaritic texts (KTU 1.6 i260; iii:15; 1161.14), and other times it appears parallel to either ksu' (KTU 1.3 ii:22, 37; 1.5 vi213) or kh,t_ (KTU 1.4 i124), both meaning ‘seat, throne’. 198. See Neu 1996, 242. On the realia denoted by Hurr admi-, see Schneider-Ludorff2002, 134—35. 199. Mitchell 1996, 55. Watson (2007, 43—44) derives Ug hdm and BH m’q from Hurr admi-. However, this does not adequately explain the Semitic forms’ initial h. Furthermore, Hebrew’s .holem vowel contrasts with the lack of a vowel after the d in Hurr admi-. D73, is from a presumed original *hida'm (.Cf. Bauer and Leander 1922, 473 [§68hB]), which cannot be readily derived from Hurr admi-. A derivatllon ofHurr admi- from an alleged *ad— ‘to support’ is not assured, so the Hurrian term is not necessan‘ly pnmar)’ (Cf. BGH 66; De Martino and Giorgien' 2008—, 1:26).

94

Chapter 3

feet on top of his defeated enemies) (Killen 1980—1994, 2:87—91). Mesopotamian footstools, depicted on Neo—Assyrian bas-reliefs, sculptures, and ivory plaques, are most often associated with the king (Kubba 2006, 100; Curtis 1996, 173—75). 53‘; (BH); 53:1... (BA) ‘palace, temple’ HALOT244—45, 1859; DCH 2:541—42 (1 Sam 1:9; passimzoo) [T] Sum —> Akk —) NWS (Ug; Heb; Aram); Hurr Sum EGAL PSD; Akk ekallu (OAkk, OA, OB, Mari, Alalakh, Nuzi, MA, MB, RS, SB, NA, NB) CAD E 52—61;AHw 191-93; Ug hkl DUL 33o; IA, QA, Palm, Hatra, .IA ‘73”?! DNWSI 278; DQA 64; DJPA 163; DJBA 377; Syr he'_kla' LS" 340—41; Mand hikla m 143; Hurr hvaz‘galli- BGH 117—18 Hebrew '73‘3 occurs 80 times with the meaning ‘palace’ (e.g., 1 Kgs 21:1; 2 Kgs 20:18; Isa 39:7) as well as ‘temple’(e.g., 1 Sam 1:9; 2 Kgs 18:16; Ps 5:8). In Biblical Aramaic ‘73”; occurs 13 times with the same two meanings, ‘palace’ (e.g., Dan 4:1, 26; 5:5; 6:19; Ezra 4:14) and ‘temple’ (e.g., Dan 522—3; Ezra 5:14, 15; 6:5). It has long been recognized this word is a loan from Akkadian ekallu ‘palace’, in turn a loan from Sumerian EGAL of the same meaning (literally ‘great house’),201 However, all the Northwest Semitic forms of this word have an initial h that is absent in Akkadian ekallu. This initial h points to a very early borrowing via Akkadian, one that preserves the original Sumerian pronunciation of EGAL, wn’tten E'.GAL. The Sumerogram 5', equivalent to ’a‘, can render Semitic h in Old Akkadian and both h and h_ at Ebla.202 It seems quite likely, then, that the initial h of the Northwest Semitic forms reflects the initial onset still pronounced by Akkadianspeakers at the time of borrowing. Hence, this word must have been borrowed no later than the Late Bronze Age (ALBH 52; Lipin’ski 1988, 63; AIA 27). Hurrian ,haigallig attested in a Hurro—Hittite bilingual from 'Hattus'a (KBo 32.13 i:2), also preserves the initial h and was probably borrowed from early Akkadian as well (Neu 1997,2561 Notably, Akkadian ekallu only means ‘palace’ just as Sumerian EGAL does, but the Northwest Semitic forms—with the exception of Ugaritic—can also mean ‘temple’. This includes Biblical Hebrew '7 “a and Biblical Aramaic ‘73171. Aclear pattern exists, however, conceming this word’s use in the Hebrew Bible. In most

200. 1 Sam 3:3; 2 Sam 22:7; 1 Kgs 6:3, 5, 17, 33; 7:21, 50; 21:1; 2 Kgs 18:16; 20:18; 23:4; 24:13; Isa 6:1; 13:22; 39:7; 44:28; 66:6; Jer 7:4 (3x); 24:1; 50:28; 51:11; Ezek 8:16 (2x); 41:1, 4, 15, 20—21, 23, 25: 42:8; Hos 8:14; Joel 4:5 [3:5]; Amos 8:3; Jon 2:5, 8 [2:4, 7]; Mic 1:2; Nah 2:7 [2:6]; Hab 2:20; Hag 2:18; Zech 6:12—15; 8:9; Mal 3:1; Ps 5:8 [5:7]; 11:4; 18:7 [18:6]; 27:4; 29:9; 45:9, 16 [45:8, 15]; 48:10 [48:9]; 65:5 [65:4]; 68:30 [68:29]; 79:1; 138:2; 144:12; Prov 30:28; Dan 1:4; 4:1, 26; 5:2—3, 5; 6:19; Ezra 3:6, 10; 421. 14; 5:14 (3x), 15; 6:5 (2x); Neh 6:10 (2x), 11; 2 Chr 3:17; 4:7—8, 22; 26:16; 27:2; 29:16; 36:7. 201. ALBH 51—52; Lipin’ski 1988, 65; AIA 27; FWOT 67; Zimmem 1917, 8. On the Sumen’an on‘gin of Akk ekallu, see SLOB 216—17 (#163). 202. Rubio 2006, 115—16; Gelb 1961. 25—26; Krebemik 1982, 220—21. On the existence of a phoneme h in Sumen'an, see D. Edzard 2003, 19.

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

95

if not all cases, it only means ‘palace’ when referring to structures outside the territory of Judah (Dreier 2004).

‘_‘|. (a liquid volume measure) HALOT 245; DCH 2:543 (Exod 29:40 [2X]; passimm) [D] Eg —+ Akk; Heb: Aram Akk (EA) hvina CAD H 194; AHW 347; EH, OH in DNWSI 285; IA 1n DNWSI 285; Eg hnw (since OK) A"W 1:750, 2:1565—66; GHwA" 526; WA'S’ 2:493; DLE 1:289204 The word m appears 22 times with reference to a unit of liquid measure. Its precise modern equivalent is unknown, but it was probably about 6 liters (Powell 1992, 904)This word occurs in Imperial Aramaic in addition to Epigraphic and Qumran Hebrew, but it is not native to Semitic. The donor term is Egyptian hnw, a unit of liquid measure equal to approximately 0.5 liters (cf. Dem hn and Copt hz'n: CDD H 62—65; DO 277; Crum 685).205 The Egyptian rather than Semitic origin of this word is indicated by its great antiquity in Egyptian, in which it first appears during the Old Kingdom, as well as its use in EA 14, a letter from Amenophis IV of Egypt to Bumaburias of Babylon. This letter equates a large cup made of stone (GAL ra-buu' NA4) with Egyptian hnw, transcribed as whina in cuneiform (EA I4 iii:62).206 The latter demonstrates that the w of hnw had dropped already by the mid-13th century B.C.E., so Hebrew—speakers could have adopted this word anytime after then.207 Interestingly, even taking into consideration the uncertain volume of Hebrew m, it is relatively clear that its volume is at least 10 times that of Egyptian hnw. This is unusual because loanwords for technical terms ofien preserve the referrent ofthe donor term quite closely, but even today measures differ (e. g., the American gallon differs from the Imperial gallon).

Rama ‘necklace’ HALOT 1860—61 (Dan 5:7, 16, 29) 203. Exod 30:24; Lev 19:36; 23:13; Num 15:4—10; 28:5, 7, 14 (3x); Ezek 4:11; 45:24; 46:5, 7, 11, 14. 204. Although this word occurs in Imperial Aramaic as 11., JA, SA 1‘1. occur in biblical contexts and are adopted from BH m (DJPA 163; DSA 205). Gordon (1998, 391 [§19.785]) postulates the existence of an additional related form in Ugaritic found

in KTU 1.23:75. However, as he admits, the text is fragmentary. Most likely, this particular text does not contain a Ug *hn that denotes a volume measure (Smith 2006, 123). 205. EPNL 243; Lambdin 1953b, 149; FWOT 68; Grintz 1975a, 15—17. 206. Cochavi-Rainey 2011, 252; Lambdin 19533, 365. CAD (3H 194; cf. AHw 347) interprets Akk him: as a stone. However, nearby lines contain the appellation s'a NA4 (rather than just NA4 as in EA I4 iii:62) followed by the name of the vessel. Hence, rhino is the name of a vessel rather than a stone. 207- Eg w was commonly dropped at the end of a stressed syllable, particularly in Later Egyptian. On this phenomenon, see 1. Allen 2013, 37—38, 43; Loprieno 1995, 33, 38; Peust 1999, 49—50. 142—51; Junge 2005, 33,

96

Chapter 3

6 pavm'icng, SB torques ‘necklace’; 6 hmnyk’ [Syriac form] Dan 5:7, 29, hmnyn’ ‘belt’ Dan 5:16 [D] OIran —> Aram Syr hamm‘kj LS2 346; OIran *hamya’naka- AISN 114208 Biblical Aramaic Rama appears only three times (Dan 5:7, 16, 29).209 The definition ‘necklace’ is secured by the fact that it is made of gold and is worn around the neck. In each instance, Rama refers to the necklace offered by Belshazzar as a reward for interpreting the writing on the wall. This word has no clear Semitic etymology and looks non-Semitic, indicating a foreign origin. It comes from Old Iranian *hamya‘naka-, or *hamya‘na- ‘belt’ with the suffix -ka.2‘° Old Iranian *hamya'na- can be etymologized as a shortened form of *hamya'hana- ‘that which surrounds together’, an apt description for a necklace or any other item worn around the body, such as a belt or girdle (cf. NPers hamya'n, hamaya‘n ‘girdle, belt’: CPED 1512). This Old Iranian word is also the origin of Syriac hamm'_ka' ‘necklace’. An unsuffixed form, on the other hand, led to Jewish Aramaic 1mm, 1mm, Syriac hemya'n, and Mandaic himz'ana, all meaning ‘belt’ (DJPA 166; DJBA 385; LS’ 345; AH) 145). These terms have no relationship to Greek pavra'icng ‘necklace, torc’ (cf. Arm maneak), which lacks an initial laryngeal; Greek poma'icng instead comes from Old Iranian *manyaka-.2“ 1731, my ‘appointed time’ HAL0T1865—66 (Dan 2:16, 21; 37—8; 4:33; 6:11, 14; 7:12, 22, 25; Ezra 5:3) 6 xpo’vog ‘time’ Dan 2:16; 7:12, Kaipo’g ‘time, season’ Dan 2:21; 3:7—8; 4:33; 7:22, 25; Ezra 5:3, omits Dan 6:11, 14; EB tempus ‘time’ except omits Dan 3:7; 6 zbn’ [Syriac form] except s"t’ ‘hour’ Dan 3:7—8 [D] OIran ——> Aram —> Heb; Arab; Eth BH WI, EH, Sir, OH 1731 HALOT273; DCH 3:118; DNWSI 332; QA, Nab, JA, 1731, Palm, Nab, JA, CPA 1:11 DNWSI 305, 332; DQA 72; DJPA 171, 178; DJBA 409—10; DCPA 107-8; Syr zabna' LS2 363; Mand zibna MD 165; Arab zaman Lane 1253—54; Eth zaman CDG 638—39; OIran J*'ama‘na- AISN 143

208. JA Tmn, which occurs only in I, is adopted from BA Kama (Jastrow 1903, 356). 209. The Ketiv is Ruin-:1, whereas the Qere is RD‘era. Based on the Old Iranian etymology advocated here, neither reading is entirely correct and this word should instead be read as R7333... 210. FWOT 70; F. Rosenthal 2006, 63; AAT2:60. 0n the suffix -ka, see Skjaervo 2007, 903; OPGTL 51 (§I46)211. Ciancaglini 2008, 162—64; Schmitt 1967; contra FWOT 70. The K reflects the Old Iranian suffix -ak, as does the k of the Armenian form (cf. EDG 901; DELG 640; HAB 3:252—53). Significantly, Gk uuvra'icng occurs with reference to necklaces worn by Persians (e.g., 6 1 Esdras 3:6; Plutarch, Cim. 9.3).

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

97

Aramaic my, 17;) appears relatively frequently in the Hebrew Bible—primarily in the book of Daniel but also in the book of Ezra—with the meaning ‘appointed time’ (Dan 2:16, 21; 327—8; 4:33; 6:11, 14; 7:12, 22, 25; Ezra 5:3). Hebrew 17;], which occurs only four times (Qoh 3:1; Esth 9:27, 31; Neh 2:6) and has the same meaning of ‘appointed time”, no doubt comes from Aramaic, as indicated by the reduced pretonic vowel?12 However. scholars debate the origin of the Aramaic form. Some derive it from Akkadian simanu ‘season, proper time’ (CAD S 268—71;AHw 1044).213 Others trace it back to a hypothetical Old Iranian j*'ama'naof the same meaning (cf. Pahl zama'n, ManMPers zm’n, and ManParthjm’n,jm”n: CPD 98; DMMPP 198—99, 382).214 Phonological considerations indicate that Old Iranian rather than Akkadian is the donor language. On the one hand, if the Hebrew and Aramaic forms were loans from Akkadian, they would begin with an initial s'in if borrowed from Assyrian Akkadian or samek if borrowed from Babylonian Akkadian (cf. the Hebrew month name W0, which is borrowed from Akk simanu).2l5 On the other hand, Old Iranianj regularly appears as z in Semitic and Elamite, so a loan from Old Iranian J*'ama'na- presents no phonological problems as a loan from Akkadian does.“6 Accordingly, Biblical Aramaic my, m was most probably borrowed from Old Iranian. Hebrew-speakers subsequently borrowed this word from Aramaic, hence the reduced pretonic vowel of Biblical Hebrew 1731.. Aramaic also lent this word to Arabic and Ethiopic (No"ldeke I910, 44; CDG 638—39). In some Aramaic dialects, especially later ones (i.e., Palmyrene, Nabatean, Jewish and Christian Palestinian Aramaic, Syriac, and Mandaic), the nasal dissimilated to produce a form with b rather than m.

II (BH, BA) ‘kind, type’ HALOT 274, 1866—67; DCH 3:120 (Ps 144213 [2x]; Dan 3:5, 7,10,15;2 Chr 16:14) 6 TOfiTO ‘this’ Ps 144213, yev'og ‘kind’ Dan 3:5; 2 Chr 16:14, fixog ‘noise, sound’ Dan 3:7, 10, 15; EB hoc ‘this’ and illud ‘that’ Ps 144:13, genus ‘offspring, descendants’ Dan 3:5, 7, 10, 15, meretricius ‘of a prostitute’ 2 Chr 16:14; 6 hd 212. M. Wagner 1966, 49 (#77). The Hebrew verb m, which occurs only three times (Ezra 10:14; Neh 10:35; 13:31), is denominal as indicated by its attestation in the Pual stem. 213. E.g., Zimmem 1917, 63; Schaeder 1941, 269—70. 214. E.g., AAT1:45—46; Widengren 1960, 106; Nyberg 1928—1931, 2:228; Telegdi 1935, 242. Arm z'amanak comes from Iranian (HAB 2:221—25). 215. Lipin'ski 1990, 108—9. Kaufman (AM 92, 141) proposes that the s of simanu was pronounced 11k'e [z] or [i] m" Neo—Assyn'an Akkadian due to the presence of the m. This, however, is an ad hoc explanation (cf. ALBH 55). 216. Cf. AISN142—43. Both Kaufman (AIA 91—92) and Mankowski (ALBH 55) contend that the use ofAkk simanu already in Old Babylonian and the possibility ofden'vin g simanu from asa'mu, wasa'mu ‘to be fitting, be appropriate’ demonstrate that this word is ultimately Semitic rather than Iranian. However, the early attestation of Akk simanu is disputed, as is its derivation of simanu from asa'mu, wasa'mu (Ciancaglini 2008, 169—70; Landsberger 1949, 256—57). Furthermore, Olran 7"ama'na- has a plausible etymology, namely the lndo—lranian root *gam- ‘to go’.

0mm. in nmov manm mm mm?

Chapter 3

‘one’ Ps 144:13, zn’ [Syriac form] Dan 3:5, 7, 10, 15, omits 2 Chr 16:18; 1an ‘year’ Ps 114:13, 11 [Aramaic form] 2 Chr 16:14 [D] OIran (Med) —> Heb; Aram Sir 11; IA, QA, IA 11 DNWSI 333; DQA 72; DJPA 179; DJBA 417; Syr zna‘ LS2 387; Mand zan MD 159; Olran zana- (Med) OPGTL 211; AISN 276; [AP 404 Biblical Hebrew U occurs three times with the meaning ‘kind, type’ as the equivalent of the more common 1‘73 (Ps 144:13 [2X]; 2 Chr 16:14) (cf. Rezetko 2007, 397). Biblical Aramaic 11 has the same meaning and appears four times in the phrase 55mm ‘11 ‘every kind of music’ (Dan 3:5, 7, 10, 15). Related forms occur in Aramaic, including Imperial Aramaic (TAD A6.I:3).2l7 These forms can all be traced back to Old Iranian zana- ‘human being’ (cf. Av zana- ‘humanity, human race’: A]W1660). The meaning in Old Iranian difl‘ers from that of the Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic forms, which instead mean ‘kind, type’. However, Old Iranian zana- does mean ‘kinds of people’ in various compounds, including Old Persian paruzana- ‘having many kinds of people, having many people’ and vispazana— ‘containing all kinds of people’ (OPGTL 196, 208; AIW 868, 1464; cf. OPGTL 211). Thus, it is plausible that Old Iranian zana- could also mean ‘kind, type’ even though we have no actual examples of this in extant texts (FWOT 71—72; AAT 2:59). The initial 2 (rather than a') reflects an origin from an Old Iranian dialect other than Old Persian, most probably Median.218

11;); (a type of pitch) HALOT 277; DCH 3:129 (Exod 2:3; Isa 34:9 [2X]) (5 translates 1191-31 mm- as a'mpalto'moca ‘bitumen’ Exod 2:3, n91 as m’ooa ‘pitch’ Isa 34:9; 28 pzx' ‘pitch, tar’; G, I both use their corresponding forms of this word (zbt’ and 1197, respectively) [D] Eg —* —2 Heb ——> Aram —> Akk; Arab Akk zibtu (NB) CAD Z 104; AHw 1529; Sir, QH n57; JA, SA n91 DJPA 181; DJBA 410—11; DSA 238; Syr zep'ta‘, zeb_ta' LS2 392; Arab zfzt‘ Lane 1236; Eg sft_ (since OK), sf! (NK) A"W1:1114—18, 2:2191—93; GHwA" 756; WA'S' 4:118; DLE 2:35 This word occurs only three times in the Hebrew Bible, once in Exod 2:3 and twice in Isa 34:9. In Exodus, it denotes a pitch-like substance with which Moses’ mother

217. Some scholars contend BH 11 comes from Old Iranian via Aramaic because this word occurs in van'ous dialects ofAramaic (e.g., M. Wagner 1966, 49 [#79]). However, this is insufficient evidence to postulate an Aramaic intermediary, especially because BH 1} does not definitively exhibit any Aramaic phonological or morphological features. 218. On the phonological development of Proto-Iranian }*'. see Skjatrve 2009, 51; Schmitt 2008. 84—85; Testen 1997, 575; OPGTL 33—34 (§88).

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

99

coats the reed basket in which she places her baby; in Isaiah, it appears within an oracle of judgment against Edom in which God says he will turn the land’s rivers into rig); and Wm ‘sulfur’. Related forms exist in Akkadian, various dialects ofAramaic (Jewish and Samaritan Aramaic as well as Syriac), and Arabic. However, despite the existence of these related terms, this word has no satisfactory Semitic etymology. The Akkadian and Arabic forms, furthermore, are both loans from Aramaic (CAD Z 104; AHw 1529; Frankel 1886, 151). Finally, if this word were Semitic, the Aramaic forms should have an initial (1 rather than 2. Hence, this word is most likely non-Semitic in origin. A good clue to its origin comes from Exod 2:3, which describes events set in the land of Egypt. Hebrew 11:); appears in this verse along with several Egyptian loanwords, namely nan. ‘chest’, an; (a reed 0r rush plant), and 11-10 (another reed or rush plant). In light of this use, Hebrew no; is most probably an Egyptian loan, and the likely donor term is Egyptian sft_ (c.f Dem ssz, sf, syf and Copt szf'e: CDD S 201—3; DG 429; Crum 379).219 This Egyptian term appears already during the Old Kingdom and refers to a resinous oil or pitch, which perfectly matches the meaning of Hebrew 119.1. New Kingdom texts spell sft_ as sft, demonstrating that the t_ had become I via palatal fronting.220 The use of Hebrew zayin for Egyptians is atypical and should perhaps be explained via word-initial voicing. If so, it does not indicate a direct phonological correspondence between Hebrew zayin and Egyptians. n11” ‘hand-span’ HALOT 283; DCH 3:145 (Exod 28:16 [2X]; 39:9 [2x]; 1 Sam 17:4; Isa 40:12; Ezek 43:13) (5 61:16am ‘span’; % mensura palmi ‘hand-span’ Exod 28:16; 39:9, palmus ‘palm of the hand’ 1 Sam 17:4; Isa 40:12; Ezek 43:13; 6 zrt’ [Syriac form]; ‘ 1m: [Aramaic form] [D] Eg —+ Heb; Aram QH mt; IA, JA, SA, CPA mt DNWSI 342; DJPA I83; DJBA 422—23; DSA 241; DCPA 115; Syr zarta', zirta' LS" 401; Mand zart MD 168; Eg d_r.t (since OK) A"W 1:1504—5, 2:2844—45; GHwA" 1084—85; WA'S' 52580—85; DLE 2:272 Hebrew 1111 ‘hand-span’ appears in the Pentateuch with reference to a unit of length for the construction of the tabernacle (Exod 28:16; 39:9). Outside the Pentateuch, it appears three times. It occurs as a unit of measure that describes Goliath’s height

(1 Sam 17:4) and appears parallel to WW" ‘hollow of the hand’ in Isa 40:12. The use 219. Hoffmeier 1996, 139; C‘emy' 1976, 73; Cook 1874, 484. Phonological considerations rule out a common Afroasiatic origin for BH n91 and Eg sft_ (contra Hoffmeier 1996, 139). Hoffmeier altematively compares Eg 4ft, but this is phonologically problematic, as he himself notes. To make this loan hypothesis work, one must assume that this word was borrowed very early, but Eg djj occurs only once and relatively late, during the New Kingdom. 220. On the depalatalization of Eg t_, see J. Allen 2013, 48-50; Loprieno 1995, 38; Peust 1999, I23-25; Junge 2005, 36.

100

Chapter 3

of ml}. within the context of Ezekiel’s temple, lastly, echoes its use with reference to the tabernacle (Ezek 43:13). Despite its appearance in both Hebrew and Aramaic, n11” has no apparent Semitic etymology.221 The Egyptian language provides a good place to look for a donor term because Hebrew n]; occurs in the Wildemess narratives, which contain a number of Egyptian loanwords. Indeed, 1111 is most probably a loan from Egyptian _dr.t ‘hand’, first attested during the Old Kingdom (cf. Dem d_rt and Copt tore: CDD _D 60—65; DG 643—55; Crum 425—29).222 Hebrew-speakers must have borrowed this term quite early, before the feminine ending -I dropped from the Egyptian form, before _d was depalatalized, and before stressed a (*za'rt > *zéret) became 0 (cf. the Coptic forms, which have 0 rather than a).223 An early borrowing explains the correspondence between Hebrew zayin and Egyptian _d, which is otherwise atypical. 0011': => 0,1111 191731911 ‘flint rock’ HALOT 321; DCH 3:238 (Deut 8:15; 32:13; Isa 50:7; Ps 114:8; Job 28:9) (5 ns'tpa a’xporo’pov ‘sharp rock’ Deut 8:15, orapeo‘g na'tpa ‘hard rock’ Deut 32:13; Isa 50:7, a’xporo’pog ‘sharp’ Ps 114:8; Job 28:9; 23 petra durissimus ‘hard rock’ Deut 8:15; Isa 50:7, saxum durissimus ‘hard rock’ Deut 32:13, petra ‘rock’ Ps 114:8, silex ‘flint’ Job 28:9; 6 t_rn’ ‘flint’ Deut 8:15, k’p’ ‘rock’ Deut 32:13; Isa 50:7, k’p’ s'rjyrt’ ‘firm rock’ Ps 114:8, k’p t_rnyn ‘flint rock’ Job 28:9; 51’. 'mw ‘emery’ Deut 8:15; Ps 114:8; Job 28:9, does not directly represent this word Deut 32:13, WU ‘flint’ Isa 50:7 [D] Sinaitic —+ Heb; Arab Arab ’almas Lane 2744

The term 131137.13 occurs only five times. Of these instances, three are in connection with the Israelites’ wilderness wanderings, specifically God’s provision of water out of a rock near Rephidim (Deut 8:15; 32:13; Ps 114:8; cf. Exod 17:5—7). Related to Hebrew 131737-11 is Arabic ’almas, which denotes a very hard stone. In both Hebrew and Arabic this word displays some irregularities. In Hebrew, this word exhibits an unusual morphology with doubled lamed in the absolute form (@7370) but single lamed in the construct form (117“?3713). In Arabic, the ’ and [appear to be part of the definite article but are actually part of the root. As was recognized 221. Brown, Driver, and Briggs (BDB 284—85) n'ghtly note that the Semitic etymology of 1111 iS dubious. 222. EPNL 243; Lambdin 1953b, 149—50; Grintz 1975a, 18; Bondi 1894, 132. 223. EPNL 243; Lambdin 1953b, 150. On the loss of the Egyptian feminine ending -r, see J. Allen 2013, 49, 61; Loprieno 1995, 57, 60—63; Gardiner 1957, 34; Junge 2005, 35. On the depalatalization ofd, see J. Allen 2013, 48—50; Loprieno 1995, 38,- Peust 1999, 123—25; Junge 2005, 36. On the change of stressed a to 0, see J. Allen 2013, 24—26; Lopn'eno 1995, 38—39; Peust 1999, 222-26, 250—59.

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

10]

by early Arabic lexicographers (e.g., Ali Ibn al-Athir al-Jazari; cf. Lane 2744), these irregularities and this word’s unusual quadriliteral pattern demonstrate that it is a foreign loan. Flint occurs naturally in many parts ofthe world and was readily available in the ancient Near East, but natural flint deposits can be found in south Sinai at sites such as the Tih Plateau (Sampsell 2014, 186). This observation, the fact that this word is only attested in Arabic outside of Hebrew, and the Hebrew Bible’s association of this word with the Sinai Peninsula all indicate that this “Sinaitic” word originated from the same region. vim (a type of gold) HALOT 352; DCH 3:315 (Zech 9:3; Ps 68:14 [68:13]; Prov 3:14; 8:10, 19; 16:16) (5 xpuoo'g [Greek form]; 28 aurum ‘gold’; (5 dhb’ ‘gold’; ‘1 1m ‘gold’ except does not directly represent this word Ps 68:14 [?] CW Akk hvura‘su (OAkk, OA, OB, Mari, Nuzi, MA, MB, RS, EA, SB, NA, NB) CAD 3H 245—47; AHw 343; Ug “hrs DUL 401—2; Sir 'mn; Pun r'm DNWSI 406—7; Hurr h3iyari-, hviyaruhvlje- BGH 145—46; GLH 105; LinB ku-ru-so Aura Jorro and Adrados 1985—1993, 1:409; Gk xpuoo’g LSJ 2011

Hebrew V1111 appears only six times in the Bible, most often in the book of Proverbs (Zech 923; PS 68:14; Prov 3:14; 8:10, 19; 16:16). Despite its relative rarity in Biblical Hebrew, Semitic forms also occur in Akkadian, Ugaritic, and Punic. It is perhaps possible to derive Hebrew rm and its other Semitic forms from a Semitic root .hr__d ‘to be yellow’ (cf. the rare Syriac term .hra" ‘yellow’ and Arab ’ih'rz'd ‘safflower, safflower dye’) (No"ldeke 1886, 728; cf. Huehnergard 2003, 105). However, if Hebrew V310 is genuinely Semitic, it is difficult to explain the differing morphological patterns of the Akkadian and Northwest Semitic forms.224 It is also difficult to explain Linear B ku-ru-so and Classical Greek xpvoo'g, which are clearly related but have an initial consonant cluster unlike the Semitic forms.225 Finally, further complicating the picture is Human hviyari-, hviyaruh'hveg whose relationship to Semitic and Greek is debated. If genuinely related, it cannot be a direct loan from Semitic because Hurrian hv does not correspond to Semitic 5.226 224. mu, could be explained as a passive qam‘l form. However, Akk hvuras“u is not easily explainable because there is no productive quta'lu pattern in the Semitic languages, including Akkadian (J. Fox 1996, 229—30). 225. Schrader 1911, 473; Cuny 1910, 162; contra EDG 1652; DELG 1233; Roso’l 2013, 109—11;Masson 1967, 37—38. The Linear B wn'ting system represents consonant clusters as two syllables with both taking the same vowel, so the form ku-ru-so does not necessarily point to a form *xupu'oog. This means that explaining the initial consonant cluster of Gk xpvoo’g via syncope (i.e., NWS *h'uro‘s > Gk *xupu'oog > xpvoo'g) is simply an ad hoc explanation (contra Szemere’nyi 1964, 53—54). 226. Limet 1978, 144—45. On the various etymologies given for Hurr h_iyari-, hiiyaruhvhveg see GLH I45.

l02

Chapter 3

The various forms ol'this word instead suggest dil'le'rent attempts to represent a foreign term. The geographical distribution of this word suggests that it originated somewhere in Anatolia (Limet 1978; Schrader 1911, 474; Cuny 1910, 162). It appears frequently in Old Assyrian texts as the personal name ,llura'zi (spelled jlu-ra-zi), and the attestation ol'this word in Linear B and Classical (ireek as well as llurrian demonstrate that this word was used in the north. Similar variation in vocali/‘ation occurs in other foreign loans associated with Anatolia (cf. BH 117’), Akk katinnu, and ll urr kudinni-; lill rub;- and (ik xmiw, thlriw, Know; and BH 1’79, Hurrsudinm'-, and (ik oivo"11'1v) (cl'. Limct 1978, 146 47). Accordingly, this ancient culture word mcaing ‘gold’ most probably originated somewhere in Anatolia along with the gold to which it refers. In this regard, it is significant that both ancient texts and geological surveys reveal that Anatolia was a significant source of gold in antiquity (Moorey 1999, 219—21). D010 (Bil, BA) ‘magician’ (Gen 41:8, 24; lixod 7:11, 22; 8:3, 14 15 [8:7, 18719]; 9:11 [28]; Dan 1:20; 2:2, 10, 27; 4:4, 6; 5:”) (b {finynrfig ‘interpreter’ Gen 41:8, 24, (Erramoog ‘enchanter’ Exod 7:11, 22; 8:3, 14- 15; Dan 2:2, 10, 27; 4:4, 6; 5:11, (pu'ppaicog ‘sorcerer’ Exod 9:11, oooto'rn'g ‘wise man’ Dan 1:20; I; conieclor ‘1'nterpreter’ Gen 41:8, 24, incantatio ‘charm’ lixod 7:11, male/ic-us ‘sorcerer’ Exod 7:22; 8:3, 14—15; 9:11, hariolus ‘divincr’ Dan 1:20; 2:2, 10, 27; 4:4, 6, mugus ‘sorccrer’ Dan 5:11; 6 hrs") ‘sor— cerer’ except hkym’ ‘wise man’ Dan 4:6; I W‘In ‘enchanter’ in Genesis and Exodus HALOT 352~53, 1880; DC]! 3:316 [DJ lig —o Akk; Heb; Aram Akk h'ariibi (NA) (M!) H_ I16; Allw 328; QH nmn; Eg hry—tp (since OK) AHW 12874—77, 2:1747w51; (fl/WA" 59495; WA'S' 3:140

This word appears 16 times in the Hebrew Bible, most often with reference to Egyptian magicians. In the book of Genesis, {Jinn denotes the magicians who cannot interpret Pharaoh’s dream (Gen 41 :8, 24), and in the book of Exodus it refers to the magicians who mimic the miracles that Moses and Aaron perform (Exod 7:11, 22; 8:3, 14 ~15; 9:11).227 lts form in Akkadian, h'arfibi, is likewise associated with Egypt: a list of prisoners taken from Egypt by Esarhaddon includes h'arribi among mentions ofartisans and other professionals (RINAP 4.9 1":9'), and bargibi appears in a document after three Egyptian names (AD!) 851 iv22). (iiven its association with Egypt, an Egyptian loan is expected, and the donor term is Egyptian ,hry-rp. The expression ,hrjy-tp occurs already during the Old Kingdom with the meaning ‘ehicf, head’, but by the New Kingdom it had come to be 227. Only in the book of Daniel does DlJ'm denote non-Egyptian (Mesopotamian) magicians in bolh its Hebrew (Dan 1:20; 2:2) and Aramaic (Dan 2:10, 27; 4:4, 6; 5:11) lo‘rms.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

103

used as an abbreviation for h_ry-h.b hry-tp ‘chief magician, chief lector priest’ (AuW 1:1006—14, 2:1998—2003; GHwA" 691—92; WA'S‘ 3:395; cf. Dem hr-tb ‘magician’: CDD H. 211—12; DG 321—22, 25). These priests studied magic texts—including dream-interpretation manuals—and served in temples and in the palace.228 Two phonological issues are of note. First, get. typically represents Egyptian (1 rather than 1. However, one cannot expect Hebrew- and Aramaic-speakers to consistently represent a foreign phoneme that has no exact correspondence in their languages, especially when the opposition between the Egyptian stops is sufficiently distinctive that it is not entirely understood today.229 Second, Egyptian b is represented as mem in the Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic forms. This phonological shift, a relatively common cross—linguistic phenomenon, is probably due to the accompanying u-class vowel (EPNL 245; Quaegebeur 1985, 169, 172). an (a type of cake) HALOT 353; DCH 3:317 (Gen 40:16) 6 xovbpimg ‘cake of fine grain’; SBfarina ‘flour’; 6 h_wrt’. ‘white’; 10ml 11m, 1"“- ‘pl, both ‘white’ [D] Eg —> Heb Eg h_r.t, hiyt (OK, MK, NK) A"W 1:879, 2:1755; GHwA" 598; WA'S' 3:148 This word is a hapax that occurs in the Joseph cycle: the chief baker tells Joseph how, in his dream, there were three baskets of "1h on his head (Gen 40:16). Brown, Driver, and Briggs (BDB 301) as well as Ko”hler and Baumgartner (HALOT 353) derive this word from the root ‘nn ‘to be white’ and contend that Hebrew ‘111' refers to some kind of white bread, perhaps made of white flour (cf. G. R. Driver 1957, 59—60; Segett 1956, 59—60). Such a derivation could be supported by the use of Imperial Aramaic Win, an adjective meaning ‘white’ that modifies imp ‘flour’ and mm: ‘oil’ (TAD A6923; Khalili C1215, 25, 34, 38, 4o, 42, 44, 47, 50; C55). However, the use ofan within an Egyptian context—specifically within the speech of an Egyptian—suggests that “in' is an Egyptian loanword, or at the very least a single-word switch. Additionally, the use of an Egyptian term here would fit well with the appearance ofnumerous Egyptian elements found throughout the Joseph cycle.230 228. EPNL 245; Hoffmeier 1996, 88-89; H.-P. Muller 1986; Quaegebeur 1985; J. M. A. Janssen 1955—1956, 65; Vergote 1959, 66—73. 229. Quaegebeur (1985) tries to explain the use of tel for Eg tby arguing that New Kingdom texts use th—tp and hry-idb interchangeably with reference to the same person. However, th-idb is best interpreted as a ritual performed by the lector-pn'est rather than a variant spelling of hry-tp (Goedicke 1996, 26—27). Muchiki, on the other hand (EPNL 245), tries to explain this anomaly by noting that Eg! can appear as re; between a labial and bet. There are no examples of this occurnn'g when a resonant intervenes, however. 230. On the van'ous Egyptian elements in the Joseph cycle, see Hofimeier 1996, 83—95.

104

Chapter 3

The donor term is Egyptian h_r.t, h_ry.t ‘cake’, which appears in Egyptian texts from the Old through New Kingdom?“ Hebrew-speakers presumably adopted this term afier the loss of the Egyptian feminine ending 4.232 11273111 (3 cutting implement) HALOT 355; DCH 3:319 (Deut 16:9; 23.26233) 6 Spénavov ‘sickle, reaping-hook’; flifalx ‘sickle, scythe’; 6 mg ’ ‘sickle’; 10” 7‘12: ‘sickle’ [?] CW Akk yharmis'atu (RS); Ug Vhrm_tt DUL 400 The word w’mn, occurs only twice, both times in the book of Deuteronomy. Here it refers to an instrument used for cutting standing grain (Deut 16:9; 23:26). The implement it denotes differs from the typical tool used for the regular harvest, 73?; ‘sickle’, and may refer to a small cutting tool that could be used as a reaping knife (Koller 2012, 124). This word elsewhere appears only in Ugaritic, both in syllabic texts as h,rmt_r and in Ras Shamra Akkadian as hvarmis‘atu. In the former, it occurs amidst mention of various tools used for agriculture (KTU 4.62511, 4, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15,17;4.632:4, 8, 13, 17) (cf. Sanmartin 1987, 150; J. Healey 1983, 50). In the latter, it refers to an implement used on a ship (RS 19.1123). It is difficult to determine the precise meaning of Hebrew Wang and Ugaritic hvrmrt in light of their varying uses. This word has no apparent Semitic etymology and, if genuinely Semitic, must be a quadriradical. However, the limited distribution of this word in the Semitic languages and the lack of any Semitic etymology point to a loan from some foreign source.234 Unfortunately, the ultimate source of this ancient culture word remains uncertain.235 231. EPNL 244; cf. Go"rg 1980. Dahood (1980) postulates an Eblaite origin for ‘wn'. However, his loan hypothesis is based on a mistaken understanding of Ebla hfla-ri. It does not mean ‘baker’ as Dahood contends, but instead refers to a female servant of the court (D’Agostino 1996). 232. On the loss of the Egyptian feminine ending -I, see J. Allen 2013, 49, 61; Gardiner 1957, 34; Junge 2005, 35. 233. Some scholars emend inwar) in 1 Sam 13:20 to iwmvn (C. Cohen and Klein 2001, 247—48). However, this emendation is by no means certain. Following (5 and 6, it is instead quite possible that VIVID?) should be emended to 1373 (S. R. Driver 1913, 104). 234. Cf. DRS 1029; Huehnergard 2008, 130. Ko‘hler and Baumgartner (HALOT 355) compare Arab hamasa ‘to cut’, assuming that dissimilation has occurred. This derivation, however, is entirely adhoc. For refutation of other suggestions, see Koller 2012, 115—18. 235. Assuming that 111mg?) should be emended to mum, in I Sam 13:20, Bork identifies this word as Philistine (Bork 1939—1941, 228—29). However, as already noted, there is little reason to prefer this emendation. Furthermore, a Philistine origin for wmn does not really explain the attestation of this word in Ugaritic. Koller, on the other hand, suggests that wmn refers to a straight reaping blade, introduced to Palestine dun'ng the Early Bronze Age. According to Keller (2012, 119—24), the introduction of this new technology explains why Hebrew uses both 1mm"! and 537.) with reference to reaping tools. While this is a possibility, Koller offers no explanation for the attestation of Ug 'hrmy with reference

Non-Semitic Inmurmtlr in the IIt‘lll‘t'lt' Iii/vie

[05

13-1151, om ‘earthenware vessel; potsherd‘ II.-tl.()7‘357: I)( ‘II 3:323 (Lev 6:21: puss/m“ l“) 05 frequently {impuk‘ov ‘cartheuware vessel, potsherd' or 661deth ‘made of earthenware‘; EB most often Imlu ‘earthenware vessel, potsherd’ ()r/ir'tile ‘made ol‘eurthenware‘: 6 olt‘cn p/Jr‘ ‘cluy’; I frequently I'10:”1 ‘clay’ |l)] Hill —+ lleb.‘ l’hoen; Arab OH 10111; l’un W'ln IJNWSI 408; Arab liars Lane 722; llitt h3ars'i- III/w 49 This word occurs 17 times in the Hebrew Bible. It can rcle'r to either a pottery vessel (Lev 6:21) or a sherd from that vessel ([27de 23:34; Job 228).”7 The vessel denoted by W'l‘nv. furthermore, was made of earthenware rather than a precious material. It is occasionally associated with cheap materials (Prov 26:23; Lam 4:2) and is sometimes contrasted with more valuable materials, such as bronze (Lev 6:21). The name of one ol'Jcrusalem’s gates, m’ojua WW} ‘Gate of Potsherds’ (Jer 19:2), contains an alternate term of this word, namely 0351, with samek instead of fin. Several clues indicate that twin, is not native to Hebrew and is instead a foreign loan. First, its distribution is quite limited, in that the only other Semitic languages it occurs are in are Punic(tz;1r1)23x and Arabic (bars). Second, it is difficult to derive this word from any known Semitic root. Ko"hler and Baumgartner (HALOT 357) as well as Brown, Driver, and Briggs (B08 360) associate Hebrew tan, with Arabic Vharas'a ‘to scratch’ (cf. DRS 926). It is true that potsherds could be used as scrap— ers (cf. Job 2:8). but this only accounts for the meaing ‘potsherd’ in Hebrew and does not explain how a term for a potsherd could come to refer to the vessel itself (Rabin 1963, 118; 1964, 166). Third, Hebrew s’in does not correspond to Arabic .9, so the Hebrew and Arabic terms cannot both be descended from a common ProtoSemitic ancestor. Rabin more plausibly connects Hebrew W'JL'I with Hittite Vhars'i- ‘bowl, jar’ (1963, 118—20; 1964, 166; cf. Simon 2014, 882). Hittite pottery is plain with simple and standardized shapes, cursory finishes, and little if no decoration (Schoop 2011, 241; Henrickson 1995, 82; Mu"ller-Karpe 1988). The simplicity of Hittite pottery may lie behind the low value of the vessel denoted by mm, but so may its shape and style. The Early Bronze Age adoption ofthe style known as Khirbet Kerak ware provides

to a ship‘s implement. It seems more likely that the term behind BH 1901,11 and Ug h'rmzt originally referred to a general cutting tool—not specifically a sickle or reaping blade—that could be used both for agricultural and nautical purposes. 236. Lev 11:33; 14:5, 50; 15:12; Num 5:17; lsa 30:14; 45:9 (2X); Jer 19:1—2; 32:14; Ezek 23:34; Ps 22:16; Job 2:8; 41:22; Prov 26:23; Lam 4:2. 237. In this way, the semantic range of BH Mn, is similar to that of Gk borpaicov and Lat tesla, which both mean ‘earthenware vcssel‘ as well as 'potsherd’. 238. Punic wan is attested twice, once as chirs (Plautus, Poen. 937) and once as ers (ibid. 94).

106

Chapter 3

a precedent for Palestinian borrowing of Anatolian pottery styles, demonstrating the influence that Anatolia could have on Palestinian pottery.239 'mqm ‘amber’ HALOT 362; DCH 3:333 (Ezek 1:4, 27; 8:2) 5 filexrpov, EB electrum ‘electrum’; 6 translates 5min 1‘5]? as y’k hzw’ ‘like a vision’ Ezek 1:4, 27 but with the addition d‘lh’ ‘of God’ Ezek 8:2; 2 ‘mm [Aramaic form] [?] CW Akk elme's'u CAD E 107—8; AHw 205240 This word appears only in the book of Ezekiel, where it occurs with reference to the divine being of Ezekiel’s vision (Ezek 1:4, 27; 8:2). In these contexts 5min occurs in the collocation Watt/U 1‘5); ‘like the shining of battin’, indicating that ‘mtzin denotes a shiny material. Scholars have associated 57314213 with many different terms, both Semitic and nonSemitic. However, most of these connections are unsatisfactory.241 Most probably, Hebrew 5min is related to Akkadian elme‘s’u ‘amber’. This substance was known for its gleaming color and semi-magical properties in antiquity (cf. Pliny, Nat. 37.12.47—48), which matches the Hebrew Bible’s use of 57.1%?“ Strong parallels between the above passages in Ezekiel and Akkadian texts (e.g., AO I7642:9—12) further support the connection between Hebrew ‘77MU and Akkadian elme's’u.243 239. Rabin 1963, 118—20; 1964, 166. On the adoption of the Khirbet Kerak ware style from Anatolia, see Amiran 1952, 96—97; Mazar 1992, 132—34. 240. QA, JA brawn, which occur in biblical contexts, are adopted from BH 5mm (DQA 93; Jastrow 1903, 511). 241. For Semitic, a connection with Akk es'maru‘ is sometimes postulated (e.g., von Soden 1967, 297-300; Delitzsch 1884, xii; Cooke 1937, 1:10—11). However, Akk es'maru‘ means ‘silver’, and Ezekiel could easily have used the term no.) rather than ‘mW'rJ ifhe wanted to use a word meaning ‘silver’. For this reason, many scholars instead propose a non-Semitic origin. Some of these scholars connect 'mWU with Sum *HUSMAL (e.g., Landersdorfer 1916, 70—71; Hoonacker 1914, 333—34). However, such a form is not attested, and it is unlikely on chronological grounds that Hebrew would have borrowed this word directly from Sumerian. Others derive 50% from Akk Vhas'ma'nu (e.g., Cazelles 1959, 211). However, this alleged donor term is not attested in Akkadian dialects contemporaneous with the book of Ezekiel. Still others see a connection with Elam *is—ma-[u (e.g., Cameron 1948, 129—30; Irwin 1952), but such a den‘vation must take 17:] in the expression 5014).] w; as meaning something other than ‘gleam’ as it undoubtedly does (cf. Auvray 1954), and in any case Elam *is-ma-Iu does not in fact exist. Yet another proposed donor term is Eg hsmn (e.g., Erman 1892, 115), but this word means ‘bronze’, and Ezekiel could easily have used the term nwm rather than begin. ifhe wanted to use a word meaning ‘bronze’. Finally, some scholars propose that BH 5min comes from Philistine (e.g., Bork 1939-1941, 230). However, this explanation is entirely adhoc because neither the Philistine language nor any possible Philistine donor term is known. 242. Landsberger 1967a, 190—98. Akk elme's'u corresponds lexically to Sum SUDAG‘, which is often used to designate the exceptional bn'lliance ofstones, metals, stars, and even the gods (Civil 1964, 7—3)243. Bodi 1991, 88—94; Garfinkel 1983, 81—82; Landsberger 1967a, 190—98. On AO 17642, see Nougayrol 1947, 39—40. This particular text, a hymn to Nergal, dates to the Achaemenid period and is therefore relatively close to the time ofthe book of Ezekiel.

Non-Semitic Lormwrmiv in the IIchn'w Bib/v

1o7

One could try to derive Hebrcw 5mm and Akkadian elme's'u from a common Proto-Semitic ancestor. assuming that metathesis has occurred due to the liquid and that the initial 110! ofthe Hebrew to‘rm points to an original *h,, reduced to zero in Akkadian. However. amber docs not occur naturally in Mesopotamia, and there probably was not a Proto-Scmitic term for this substance. This word should instead have originated from the place where amber was obtained. In antiquity. amber primarily came from the Baltic Sea region (cf. Herodotus, Hist. 3.115; Pliny. Nat. 37.11.42—46) (Moorey 1985, 80; Todd 1985; Grimaldi 1996, 47—61). Our evidence for the ancient languages of this region is scant, but several terms from this region preserve the ancient term for ‘amber’ (e.g., Estonian helmes244 and Livonian e] 'maz. el 'm). None of these words is native to Finno-Ugric, as indicated by the lack of related to‘rms in western Finno-Ugric languages such as Mari and Komi. Thus. the eastern Finno-Ugric languages must also have borrowed their term for ‘amber’ from a local substrate used in the Baltic Sea region (Masing 1977; Ariste 1959; Jaanits 1975). This culture word is most probably the source behind Hebrew 5mm and Akkadian elmés'u (Heltzer 1999). 7111-1"!~ ‘wool’ HALOT 363; DCH 3:334 (Ezek 30:21) (5 uak'aypa ‘emollient’; i! translates 5111-11. in ‘71n-n_ mtv‘; twice as pannus ‘cloth, garment’ and linteolum ‘linen, cloth’; (5 mlgm’ ‘salve’; 1 makes Pharaoh the subject of the verse and does not provide a direct translation of BH ‘71-1'11'1 [D] Hitt —> Heb Hitt vhutrulli— HHw 63245 The word '71nn, occurs only in Ezek 30:21, with reference to a material used for treating a wound. However, the derived feminine form amt) occurs in Job 38:9 with reference to a textile or textile material, and the denominal verb '7nt'l appears twice in Ezek 16:4 with the meaning ‘to swathe’. Evidence for a root *h,tl ‘to wrap’ in the Semitic languages is dubious, so Hebrew 5111-1] has no apparent Semitic etymology. 24" Rabin notes that the use of5111-11, in Ezek 244. Modern Estonian helmes means ‘bead' but on'ginally meant ‘amber’. The latter meaning is found in older texts and is still preserved today in some isolated dialects (Ariste 1959, 214). 245. Del Olmo Lete and Sanmartin (DUL 371) connect Ug hr] with BH 51m. However, a relationship between the two is uncertain given the difficult nature ofthe text in which hr! occurs. Ug hr! occurs only in KTU 1.12 i:19 in conjunction with the terms ksa’n and ha'g, both of unclear meaning. Ug ksa’n is commonly associated with ksri ‘seat. throne’ and defined as ‘chair’ (cf. DUL 456), whereas hdg is commonly associated with Arab hidg' ‘saddle‘ and also defined as ‘chair’ (cf. DUL 349—50). However, whether or not these definitions for ksa’n and bdg are correct, they provide little help in defining Ug [it]. Aside from general phonological similarity and the context of KTU 1.12 i219, which relates to giving bi1th as does Ezek 16:4, no clear reason exists to connect BH Win and Ug .hrl. ‘ 246. DRS 940—41; contra W. W. Muller 1985, 271. The only possible cognate is South Arabian (Shsn') ,hlal ‘to envelop’ (Johnstone 1981, 119). The word 7‘nn appears in Imperial Aramaic with the possible definition ‘string’ but it only occurs once, and its meaning is debated (DNWSI 413).

108

Chapter 3

30:21 implies a soft material such as wool as in Rabbinic Hebrew, where 511,111 refers to a soft material used for packing (Jastrow 1903, 441). Accordingly, Rabin proposes that Hebrew 2111ng comes from Hittite thttulli— ‘wool strand, wool-tufl’ (1963, 120—21; 1964, 167—68). This loan hypothesis fits the data quite well. The phonological correspondence between the Hebrew and Hittite forms is perfect.247 Furthermore, the attestation of 51m in the Pual (Ezek 16:4) shows that the verb is denominal and that the noun is primary.248 nah, 1min ‘seal, signet ring’ HALOT 300; DCH 3:180 (Gen 38:18; passz'm249) [1] Eg —> WSem (Heb; Phoen; Aram; Arab) Sir, QH nmn; Phoen unn DNWSI 413—14; IA, QA, JA, SA nnn DNWSI 413—14; DQA 93; DJBA 490; DSA 301; Syr h_a'tma‘ L32 505; Mand hatma m 128; Arab h'a'tm Lane 702; Eg Vhtm (since OK) A"W1:986, 251956; GHwA" 674; WA'S' 3:350; DLE 1.377250 The word 0011', most often written fully as main, occurs 14 times in the Hebrew Bible. It refers to a seal used for sealing documents (e. g., 1 Kgs 21:8) but can also be used metaphorically as a symbol of authority because those who sealed official documents were in positions of authority (e.g., Jer 22:23; Hag 2:23). The feminine form hprnh, which occurs solely in Gen 38:25, is a secondary derivation within Hebrew. This word has related forms in other Semitic languages, but only in West Semitic; Akkadian instead uses the word kunukku for ‘seal’ (CAD K 543—48; AHw 507—8). All the West Semitic forms come from Egyptian Vhtm ‘seal’, which is attested beginning with the Old Kingdom (cf. Dem Vhtm and Copt s'tom: CDD 'H 173; DC 372; Crum 596)?“ The a-vowel of the Aramaic and Arabic forms points to an early borrowing because a" would have shifled to o in Egyptian ca. 1300 B.C.E. Hebrew nigh probably has 0' rather than a' due to the Canaanite shift, not because of a later borrowing.252 In light of this word’s early borrowing, wide distribution, and the existence ofdenominal verb forms in Semitic (cf. BH arm ‘to seal’), it was 247. The i- rather than u-class vowel found in the first syllable presents no problems. Biblical Hebrew dislikes two consecutive u-class vowels and oflen dissimilates the first in the sequence to an i-class vowel (cf. with and 11ij as well as ran and 1mm). 248. Akk “hill/11ml, which seems to denote an item related to a garment in Old Assyrian Akkadian (TCL 20.193z7), may point to the existence of a related Hittite term (CAD _H 150; AHw 336). 249. Exod 28:11, 21, 36; 39:6, 14, 3o; 1 Kgs 21:8; Jer 22:23; Hag 2:23; Job 38:14; 41:7 [41:5]; Song 8:6 (2X). 250. The term am also appears in several Ammonite seals, although these may be forgeries (CAI 55:1; 57:1; 61:1). 251. EPNL 45, 246; Lambdin 1953b, 151; FWOT 74. 252. EPNL 246; Lambdin 1953b, 151. On the change ofa' to o in Egyptian, see J. Allen 2013, 24—26: Loprieno 1995, 38—39; Peust 1999, 222—26, 250—59.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the I lchrcw Bible

109

fl“__.

probably borrowed very early into West Semitic. Thus, Biblical Hebrew Duh is an inherited loan. Ancient Egyptian seals functioned to ensure that no one tampered with documents or containers. The seal’s exterior was incised with a unique decorative pattern or set of characters. The earliest type of seal, used from the Early Dynastic period onward and probably adopted from Mesopotamian models, was a cylinder seal hung around the owner’s wrist or neck. Seal amulets came to be used later in the Old Kingdom, and during the Middle Kingdom scarab seals were introduced. Sealing in ancient Egypt, like elsewhere in the ancient Near East, ensured that documents and the contents of containers were preserved intact. However, seals were also used as protective amulets, funerary labels, and personal ornaments, sometimes to the exclusion of their sealing function (Shubert 2001; Kaplony 1984).

“VJ-U ‘seal, signet ring’ HALOT 369; DCH 3:342 (Gen 41:42; passimm) [D] 133 -+ —» Heb; Phoen —> Aram —’ Arab Phoen mun DNWSI 420,- JA 11:20, 17:10, CPA 1730 DJPA 220; DJBA 500—501; DCPA 144; Syr t.ab_‘a", t,ib_‘a' LS2 512; Arab tia'ba" Lane 1824; Eg d_b‘.t (since OK) A"W 121502, 2:2836—37; GHwA" 1079; WA'S' 5:566254

This word occurs commonly, appearing 50 times. The book of Exodus contains the majority of these occurrences, using D1730 to denote the metal rings for the tabernacle’s accoutrements (Exod 25:12, passim). However, DVD-U also appears several times with reference to royal Signet rings (Gen 41:42; Esth 3:10, 12; 8:2, 8, 10) or to rings worn as jewelry (Exod 35:22; Num 31 :50; Isa 3:21). Other Northwest Semitic forms include Phoenician mum, Jewish Aramaic 3730, mm, Christian Palestinian Aramaic V319, and Syriac ,ta_b‘a', .ti_b‘a'.255 Despite the existence of these related forms in Semitic, this word is not native to the Semitic languages. Hebrew min-U is a loan from Egyptian _db‘.t ‘seal, Signet n’ng’, attested beginning with the Old Kingdom (cf. Dem d_br and Copt tbbe: CDD .13 31—34; D6 623; Crum 398).256 This word was probably borrowed sometime after palatal fronting occurred and Egyptian _d had become d, hence the initial t, of the Semitic forms.257 253. Exod 25:12 (3x), 14—15, 26 (2x), 27,- 26:24, 29; 27:4, 7; 28:23 (2x), 24, 26-27, 28 (3x); 30:4; 35122; 36:29, 34; 37:3 (3X), 5, 13 (2X), 14, 27; 38:5, 7; 39:16 (2X), 17, 19—20, 21 (2X); Num 31:50; Isa 3:21; Esth321o, 12; 8:2, 8(2x), 10. ' 254- Akk timbultu, which denotes a piece ofjewelry in the Amama letters (e.g., EA 25 i169, ii:2o) 15 listed as a gifi of Tusratta and is unrelated (contra Lambdin 1953b, 151; FWOT 75). 255. Arab (a'ba" comes from Aramaic (Fra"nkel 1886, 192—94). 256. EPNL 247; Lambdin 1953b, 151; FWOT 75. 257- On the depalatalization of Eg _d, see J. Allen 2013, 48—50; Loprieno 1995, 38; Peust 1999, "3‘25; Junge 2005, 36.

HO

Chapter 3

Egyptian lent this word to Northwest Semitic at least twice. The Hebrew and Phoenician forms retain the final -I, a marker lost in Egyptian by the Amama period, whereas the Aramaic forms do not; This indicates that Hebrew and Phoenician borrowed this word prior to the loss of Egyptian -t whereas Aramaic borrowed it afterward.258 Furthermore, the attestation of min-v within an Egyptian context (Gen 41:42) and its frequent association with the tabernacle, putatively made from Egyptian materials, indicate that the Hebrew form is not an inherited loan from an early borrowing into so-called Canaanite (contra Schneider 2001, 162). 11a ‘course, row’ HALOT 373; DCH 3:361—62 (Exod 28:17 [3X], 18—20; passim259) [T] Sum —> Akk —> Heb Sum DUR PSD; Akk furru, turru (OB, Mari, MA, MB, SB, NA, NB) CAD T, 164—65; AHw 1397 The word 1m occurs 26 times with reference to a course or row of jewels (Exod 28:17; 39:10 [3X], 11—13), cedar beams (1 Kgs 6:36 [2X]), pillars (1 Kgs 7:2—4, 12 [2x]), ornaments (1 Kgs 7:18, 20, 24, 42; 2 Chr 4:3, 13), or stone (Ezek 46:23). Within the Hebrew Bible it is always associated with the divine sanctuary. Like Hebrew 1h, 1113 comes from Sumerian DUR via Akkadian .turru, turru, which means ‘string, band’.260 The semantic shift from ‘string, band’ to ‘row’ is a natural semantic development. Sumerian texts describe bands, denoted with the term DUR, of stones similar to the rows of stones on the high priest’s breastplate and ornaments in the temple (e.g., Inanna and EM]; 58), and Akkadian texts describe the band of a door similar to the courses of the temple (e.g., VAB 4 ka. 21 ii:34). Akkadian I. usually appears in Hebrew as jet?“ Unlike Hebrew 1h, then, Hebrewspeakers presumably borrowed this word from the form t_urru rather than turru. m (a basket for produce) HAL0T377; DCH 3:372 (Deut 26:2, 4; 28:5, 17) (f) Ka'praMog Deut 26:2, 4, dnoen’tcn ‘storehouse’ Deut 28:5, 17; it cartallus ‘basket’ Deut 26:2, 4, horreum ‘bam’ Deut 28:5, 17; G msnt’ ‘basket’ Deut 26:2, 4, sl’ ‘basket’ Deut 28:5, 17; 210“: PM '70 ‘basket’ [D] Eg —> Heb Sir, QH um; Eg dm'.t (since OK) Ai'W 1:1478, 2:2791; GHwA" 1054; WA'S' 5:467; DLE 2:250262 258. EPNL 247; Lambdin 1953b, 151. Ro"ssler (1971, 304—5) n’ghtly notes the connection between Eg d_b‘ ‘finger’, the word on which d_b‘.t is based, and the common Semitic noun ’s.b‘ ‘finger’ (cf. BH 31338)259. Exod 39:10 (3X), 11—13; 1 Kgs 6:36 (2X); 7:2—4, 12 (2x), 18, 20, 24, 42; Ezek 46:23; 2 Chr 4:3,13. 26o. Rabin 1962, 1072; cf. Zimmem 1917, 35. See the entry for 1h below. 261. ALBH 154. The same is true ofAkkadian loanwords in Aramaic (AM 138). 262. This word may occur in Phoenician as tub in KAI 37A:10, but its attestation is debated and dubious (DNWSI426). Schneider (2001, 162) contends that IA 13 is cognate to BH x31; and that the latter

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

Ill

The word x313. appears only in the book of Deuteronomy, where it occurs four times with reference to a basket for produce (Deut 26:2, 4; 28:5, 17). The lack of any known Semitic root on which it could be based and the observation that this word is limited to Biblical Hebrew together imply a non-Semitic loan. The donor term is most probably Egyptian dni.t, which first occurs during the Old Kingdom (EPNL 247; Lambdin I953b, 152; FWOT 77). In Egyptian texts dni.t denotes a basket for holding produce as well as other objects. Notably, this is precisely the meaning of x31; in Biblical Hebrew. Hebrewspeakers presumably borrowed this word after the loss of the Egyptian feminine -t marker.263 "105m (an official) HALOT 379; DCH 3:373 (Jer 51:27; Nah 3:17) 5 Beho'owmg ‘war implement’ Jer 51:27, omits Nah 3:17; $ translates as the proper noun Thapsar Jer 51:27, parvulus ‘young one’ Nah 3:17; 6 ’bdn’ ‘loss’ Jer 51:27, kty§ ‘excited, furious’ Nah 3:17; 1 Rm “1317 ‘maker of war’ Jer 51.'27,10919 [Aramaic form] Nah 3:17 [T] Sum —> Akk —> Heb Sum DUBSAR PSD; Akk zups'arru (OAkk, OA, OB, Mari, MA, MB, Nuzi, Emar, RS, NA, NB) CAD T 151—62; AHw 1395—96264

This word occurs only twice. Both times it denotes an oflicial, specifically one who serves in the military (Jer 51:27; Nah 3:17). Hebrew 10590 has no Semitic etymology and is commonly recognized as a loan from Akkadian ,tups'arru, in turn a loan from Sumerian DUBSAR ‘scribe’.265 The latter has a perfectly good native etymology, being derived from DUB ‘tablet’ and SAR ‘to write’. At least some level of writing would probably have been expected of military officials in antiquity, and the connection between the two is therefore a natural one.266 The use of Hebrew samek for Akkadian 5' indicates that Hebrewspeakers borrowed this word from Nee-Assyrian Akkadian (ALBH 60—61).

11x: => 18:

is therefore not an Egyptian loan. However, as the initial consonant indicates, JA 13‘ is not cognate with BH Kw. Sokolofl‘(DJBA 967) more plausibly compares JA 13 with Akk se'rm ‘laden’, an adjective used ofa basket. 263. On the loss of the Egyptian feminine ending -t, see J. Allen 2013, 49, 61: Gardiner 1957, 34; Junge 2005, 35. 264. JA 1050, which occurs only in I and late literary Aramaic, is adopted from BH 199D (Jastrow 1903, 548). 265. ALBH 60—61; Lipin’ski 1988, 66; FWOT 78. On the Sumerian on‘gin of Akk n_4ps'arru, see SLOB 207—8 (#146). 266. The same semantic development is evident in BH W, which denotes a military ofiieial and is probably associated with Akk s'at_a'ru ‘to wn'te’.

“2

Chapter 3

'18:, 1187 ‘the Nile River; river’ HALOT381—82; DCH4271—72 (Gen 41:1‘2, 3 [2x], 17—18;pas.s'im2"7) [D] Eg —> Heb Sir, QH 11x1; Eg itrw (OK, MK), irw (since NK)A"W1:236, 2:441—42; GHwA" 125‘26; WA‘S' 1:146~47 Hebrew '18: (also occasionally spelled 1183) occurs 64 times and most often refers to the Nile River. However, there are several instances in which '18: more generally means ‘river’ or refers to a river other than the Nile. Isaiah 33:21 mentions the plural form 13"]8'.‘ parallel to £111.]; ‘rivers’, Job 28:10 has 18': with the meaning ‘water channel’, and Dan 1225—7 even uses '18: for the Tigris River. Nevertheless, the nearly exclusive use of fix: with reference to the Nile strongly suggests that this word comes from Egyptian. The donor term is Egyptian z'trw, z'rw, which means ‘stream, river’ but can also refer specifically to the Nile River—the river par excellence of ancient Egypt—as well as its tributaries (cf. Dem yr and Copt eioor: CDD Y 11—12; DG 50; Crum 82—83).2623 The t of itrw became a secondary glottal stop by the end of the New Kingdom, as it regularly did at the end of a stressed syllable in Later Egyptian, hence the ’alep of Hebrew.269 The lack of representation offinal Egyptian w likewise points to a borrowing afier w underwent lenition in Later Egyptian.270 Accordingly, Hebrew-speakers must have borrowed this term sometime after this sound change took place. l7”. ‘wine’ HALOT 409—10; DCH 4:206—9 (Gen 9:21, 24;passim27') G, 13, G, 1 most frequently translate this word as oivog, vinum, hmr’, and 17311 (each meaning ‘wine’), respectively 267. Exod 1:22; 2:3, 5 (2x); 4:9 (2x); 7:15, 17, 18 (3x), 19, 20 (2x), 21 (3x), 24 (2x), 25, 28 [8:3]; 8:15 7 [8:5, 9, 11]; 17:5; 2 Kgs 19:24; Isa 7:18; 19:6, 7 (3x), 8; 23:3, 10; 33:21; 37:25; Jer 46:7—8; Ezek 29:3 (2X), 4 (3x), 5, 9-10; 30:12; Amos 8:8; 9:5 (2x); Nah 3:8; Zech 10:11; Ps 78:44; Job 28:10; Dan 12:5 (2X), 6—7. 268. EPNL 247—48; Lambdin 1953b, 151; FWOT 80; Ennan 1892, 108. 269. Cf. Vycichl 1940, 81—82. On the lenition of t to i at the end of a stressed syllable, see Junge 2005, 35; Loprieno 1995, 38; Peust 1999, 152. The secondary glottal stop den'ved from r is most ofien not written. When it is, it is frequently written as 1' and only rarely appears as 1’. 270. On the lenition of -w, see J. Allen 2013, 37—38, 43; Loprieno 1995, 33, 38; Peust 1999. 49—50, 142—51;Junge 2005, 33. 271. Gen 14:18; 19:32—35; 27:25; 49:11—12; Exod 29:40; Lev 10:9; 23:13: Num 6:3 (2X), 4, 20:15.5. 7, 10; 28:14; Deut 14:26; 28:39; 29:5 [29:6]; 32:33, 38; Josh 9:4, 13; Judg 13:4, 7, 14 (2x); 19:19; 1 Sam 1:14-15, 24; 10:3; 16:20; 25:18, 37; 2 Sam 13:28; 16:1—2; Isa 5:11—12, 22; 16:10; 22:13; 24:9, 11; 28:1, 7 (2"); 29:9; 51:21; 55:1; 56:12; Jer 13:12 (2X); 23:9; 25:15; 35:2, 5 (2X), 6 (2x), 8, 14; 40:10, 12; 48:33; 51:7: Ezek 27:18; 44:21; Hos 4:11; 7:5; 9:4; 14:8 [14:7]; Joel 1:5; 4:3 [3:3]; Amos 2:8, 12; 5:11; 6:6; 9:14; Mic 2:11: 6:15:1-lab 2:5; Zeph 1:13; Hag 2:12; Zech 9:15; 10:7; Ps 60:5 [60:3]; 75:9 [75:8]; 78:65; 104:15; Job 1:13. 18; 32:19; Prov 4:17; 9:2, 5: 20:1; 21:17; 23:20, 30—31; 31:4, 6; Song 1:2, 4; 2:4; 4:10; 5:1; 7:10 [7:9]: 8:2; Qoh 2:3; 9:7; 10:19; Lam 2:12; Esth 1:7, 10; 5:6; 7:2, 7—8; Dan 1:5, 8, 16; 10:3; Neh 2:1 (2X); 5:15, 18; 13:15; 1Chr 9:29; 12:41 [12:40]; 27:27; 2 Chr 2:9 [2:10], 14 [2:15]; 11:11.

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

113

[?] CW Akk ye'nu (Can); Ug yn DUL 954—56; EH 1’, 1” DNWSI 455-56; Sir, QH 1”; Phoen 1‘ DNWSI 455—56; Ammon 1‘ DNWSI 455—56; IA 1” DNWSI 455—56; OSA wyn DOSA 127; Eth wayn CDG 623; Hatt *windu; Hitt wiyan-, wiyanaHHw 228; Luv wiyana- (HLuv) Payne 2010, 152; Lin B wo-no Aura Jorro and Adrados 1985—1993, 2:443; Gk oivog LS] 1207; Lat vinum OLD 2279; Arm gini HAB 12558—59; Georg gv'ino Rayfield 2006, 1325 The word 17: occurs [40 times in the Hebrew Bible with the meaning ‘wine’. This word also occurs commonly in Epigraphic Hebrew, especially the Samaria Ostraca. Elsewhere in the Semitic languages this word is found only in West Semitic; Akkadian kara'nu, kira‘nu instead represents the East Semitic term for ‘grape, grapevine, wine’ (CAD K 202—6; AHw 446—47).272 Outside the Semitic languages, this word is also found in Indo-European (Hittite, Hieroglyphic Luvian, Greek, Latin, and Armenian), Kartvelian (Georgian), and Hattic.273 This word’s distribution points to a non-Semitic origin, as does the lack of a convincing Semitic etymology.274 Some scholars claim that it is of lndo-European etymology, but this is unlikely given this word’s widespread distribution and great antiquity. Moreover, it is difficult to explain the spread of this term from IndoEuropean to the other languages in which it is attested, particularly the Kattvelian languages.275 The grapevine was first cultivated in the eastern Mediterranean and southern Caucasus, and wine was primarily a beverage of these regions.276 Accordingly, this ancient culture word must have originated from either the eastern Mediterranean or southern Caucasus (cf. Schrader 1911, 470).

Flaw: ‘jasper’ HALOT 449; DCH 4:339 (Exod 28:20; 39:13; Ezek 28:13) (5 o’vo'xtov ‘onyx’ Exod 28:20; 39:13, {using [Greek form] Ezek 28:13; 58 berillus ‘beryl’; G ys'ph [Syriac form] Exod 28:20; 39:13, spyl’ ‘sapphire’ Ezek 28:13; 1 ‘1’an (a precious stone, presumably one spotted like a panther) 272. A fragmentary lexical text from Late Bronze Age Aphek lists this word as ye'nu (CICAphek 32'). That ye'nu is West Semitic is indicated by its position in the third column ofthis Sumen’an—Akka— dian—West Semitic trilingual. 273. Hatt *windu occurs only in the compound windukaram ‘wine steward’ (Soysal 2004, 324, 913—14)274. Van Selms (1974) proposes a Semitic etymology for 173, den'ving it from the verb .‘IJ‘ ‘to be violent’ and contending that this verb originally meant ‘to squeeze’. However, this etymology is speculative and without any sound basis. 275. Cf. Greppin 1998. Scholars who consider this word to be Indo-European typically derive it from the Proto-Indo-European root *‘uehz- ‘to turn, twist’ (e.g., Gamkrelidze and lvanov 1994-1995, 1:557—61, 778; Beekes 1987). 276. D. Zohary and Hopf 2000, 151—59; Olmo 1996. Inhabitants of the ancient Near East adopted grapevine growing very early, perhaps as early as the fifih millennium 3.0.13. (D. Zohary 1996), but “Babylonia like Bavaria was essentially a beer drinking culture” (Powell 1996, 106).

n4

Chapter 3

[D] Hurr —> —+ Akk; Heb —> Hitt —* Gk —-> Lat Akk as'pu (SB, NA, NB), yas'pu (Bogh, EA) CAD 1—1 328; AHw 413; Hittyas'puHHw 65, 311; Hurr *iaspe-; Gk iconic; LS] 816; Lat iaspis OLD 898277 This word appears with reference to the high priest’s breastplate (Exod 28:20; 39:13) and the king of Tyre’s adornment (Ezek 28:13). In the Amama letters this word appears as yas'pu (EA 22 iv:6), but in other dialects of Akkadian (Standard Babylonian, Neo-Assyrian, and Neo-Babylonian) the form is as'pu. This word also occurs in Hittite as yas“pu-, written as an Akkadogram (KUB 15.5 i:4; ii:21). The atypical morphology of Hebrew 1.91;): points to a non—Semitic loan, and textual evidence likewise indicates a foreign origin. The substance denoted by this term is one ofthe gifis that Tusratta, the king of Mittani, gives as tribute to Pharaoh Amenophis III (BA 22 iv:6). Sargon II, moreover, refers to Zimur—located near Lake Van in Urartu—as kurZimur s“aa"z "a‘aipé ‘jasper mountain’ (TCL 3 ii:145). Textual evidence thus points to a Hurrian origin, presumably a form such as *iaspewith thematic vowel -e (cf. EA 22 iv:6).278 This loan hypothesis is supported by the geological attestations ofjasper, which are particularly concentrated in the southern Elburz and the central Zagros.279 Greek facing, the source of Latin iaspis (DELL 305), is typically assumed to be borrowed from Northwest Semitic. However, Greek {acme probably came from Hurrian indirectly, especially because the attestation of this word in Hittite demonstrates that the word was used in Anatolia. The base stem of {acute is 1"aort18- (cf. the genitive IaCMSOQ), and the -5 afformative elsewhere occurs in words that have entered Greek via Anatolia (cf. naMaKig ‘concubine’ with base stem nakkamfig opv’ptg ‘emery’ with base stem ouu'p15-, and xlapv’g ‘mantle’ with base stem flaws-)2“

277. SA new and Syr yas'pe‘h occur in biblical contexts and are adopted from BH .1914): (DSA 364; LS1 586). 278. Cf. FWOT 81; Grintz 1975a, 9. On the Hurrian thematic vowel -e, see Wegner 2007, 52; Giorgleri 2000, 199; Wilhelm 2008, 90. Brown, Dn'ver, and Briggs (BDB 448) claim that this term originated from Persian. However, this word is not attested in any Iranian language until the eighth century C.E. in a Sogdian text as ivs'ph, which is a clear borrowing from Semitic (Gharib 1995, 88; MacKenzie 1976, 2:90). NPers yas'm and yas'b, in turn, are the origin of Arab yas'm and yas'b (Asbaghi 1988, 274). 279. Moorey 1999, 98. The frequent identification of this gemstone as jasper is thus confirmed (cf. Harrell, Hoffmeier and Williams 2017, 29—30). 280. Cf. Rabin 1964, 152; contra EDG 574; DELG 436—37; Roso'l 2013, 40; Masson 1967, 65—66. If borrowed indirectly, the -6 afformative could represent the Luvian sufl‘ix -it ([-id]), 21 very productive suffix found especially on Hurrian loans (Starke 1990, 151—226; Melchert 2003, 198). Altematively, if borrowed directly, the -8 afformative could represent the Hurrian nominalizing element -idi (Wegner 2007, 59; Giorgieri 2000, 200; Wilhelm 2008, 89).

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

115

13 (a pithos or large jar) HALOT460; DCH 4:362 (Gen 24:14—18, 20, 43, 45—46; passimm) [?] CW Akk kandu (NB) CAD K 148—49; AHw 436; Ug kd DUL 424—25; EH, QH 'D DNWSI 487—88; IA 7:, JA 13,11: DNWSI 487—88; DJPA 250,- DJBA 553,Gk Ku’Sog, Ko’élov LSJ 848; Syllepr ka-to-se Hintze 1993, 28; Lat cadus OLD 273282 The word '13 occurs a total of 18 times in the Hebrew Bible. In several instances it refers to the jar with which Rebekah draws water for the camels of Abraham’s servant, implying a large vessel (Gen 24:14-18, 20, 43, 45—46; cf. 1 Kgs 18:34). Such a jar was sometimes used for storing foodstuffs (1 Kgs 17:12, 14, 16). Related Semitic forms are limited to Northwest Semitic, because Neo-Babylonian Akkadian kandu is a first-millennium loan from Northwest Semitic.283 This word also occurs in non-Semitic languages, including Greek, Syllabic Cyprian, and Latin. The Western distribution points to a Mediterranean origin for this ancient culture word, as does its early and frequent attestation in the texts from Ugarit, a Late Bronze Age trade hub for the Mediterranean. Notably, Hesychius ofAlexandria (Lex. K58) glosses Greek KuSia (the plural of Ka'fitov) as Zahuuiwor u'5p1’av, connecting this term with Salamis in Cyprus. The Northwest Semitic and Indo-European forms of this culture word may ultimately come from Cyprus as Hesychius implies, although they could just as easily stem from some other, unknown Mediterranean language.284 '13-'73, 1573 (a gemstone, perhaps a type ofjasper) HALOT 460—61; DCH 4:362 (Isa 54:12; Ezek 27:16) 6 iaomg ‘jasper’ lsa 54:12, Kopxopug (Codex Alexandrinus) and xopxop (Codex Vaticanus) Ezek 27:16; $ iaspis ‘jasper‘ Isa 54:12, chodchod Ezek 27:16; 281. Judg 7:16 [2x], 19—20; 1 Kgs 17:12, 14. 16; 18:34; Qoh 12:6. ‘282. Lrn‘B ka-ti could preserve another form of this Mediterranean culture word, although ka-ti is probably instead related to Gk metg' because Kafiog’ should have been written as ‘ka-di (Aura Jorro and Admdos 1985—1993, 1:331). 283. QA,JA1‘D and Syr kadda'na' are derived forms (DQA 110; Jastrow 1903, 614:1.S’ 600). On the Northwest Semitic on'gin of Akk kandu, attested in Neo-Babylonian, see CAD K 148—49; AHw 436. 284. See Aspesi 1983. There is no evidence for a Dravidian on‘grn,' contra Podolsky 1998, 199—200. Podolsky compares Dravidian forms such as Tamil kiwi and claims the Semitic forms on‘ginated with Dravidian. He pom'ts. moreover, to Akk kandu. suggesting that the n reflects the nasalrzed' Dravidian forms. However, Akk kandu cannot reflect the nasal1za'tion found 111' Dravidian because kandu is a loan from Northwest Semitic, which does not display any nasalization until the late period. Moreover. there is a semantic discrepancy between this term ’5 meamn'gs in Semitic and Dravidian. In Semitic, it is a large storage vessel (most frequently for water or wine), and in Dravidian, it is a small dn'nkrn'g vessel or goblet (see Burrow and Emeneau 1984, 142). There is nothing specific about this vessel that would suggest a Dravidian origin, and it is unlikely that Semitic peoples would have reason to borrow this term from Dravidian-speakers.

Chapter 3

116

6 ’yspwn ‘jasper’ Isa 54:12, ptwtk’ (a gem associated with chalcedony) Ezek 27:16; 1 “711?: ‘pearl’ [?] CW JA 7131:, 111313, r7313. 11731:, 11-13-13 DJPA 251; Jastrow 1903, 614; Syr qarkedna' LS’ 1411; Arab karkand. karkuhan Dozy 1927, 2:459; Eth karakana’, karkana’, karkande, ka'dkod, karkaa’en CDG 275, 291; Gk xalticnéw'v LSJ 1973; Lat calcedonius

This word appears only twice, both times in the Major Prophets. Isaiah 54 describes God’s promise to restore Israel, stating that Zion’s architecture will be composed of precious gems (Isa 54:11—12). The parallelism with 113m ‘338 and {‘90 ‘m in Isa 54:12 clearly indicates that this word denotes a gemstone. Ezekiel 27:16 mentions this term amidst various traded items, including ‘45): ‘turquoise’, V3378 ‘purple cloth’, mm ‘colored fabric’, V43 ‘fine linen’, and moan ‘corals’. This word can hardly be separated from several ancient terms commonly translated as ‘chalcedony’: Jewish Aramaic 1131:, War), 1‘73'13, 11131:), rims, Syriac qarkedna‘, Arabic karkand, karkuhan, Ethiopic karakand, karkand, karkande, ka'dkod, karkaden, Greek xakicnfim'v, and Latin calcedom'us (13’s translation of xahcnow'v in Rev 21:19).285 It is unlikely that these ancient terms refer to the gemstone known as chalcedony in modern times. Rather, they instead more plausibly denote a gemstone similar to jasper. (6, SB, and C5 of Isa 54:12 all understand 7373 as a kind ofjasper, Pliny (Nat. 37.37.115) associates a jasper of turbid color with Chalcedon, and Ethiopic karkaden refers to jasper. This word’s multiple renditions in Semitic and Indo-European indicate a donor term not native to either of these language families.286 The gemstone denoted by 285. Use of both [d] and [r] indicates authentic dialectal variation rather than scribal error (cf. CAL). S. Krauss (1898—1899, 2:299) connects these terms with Gk 'mpmfitbv ‘carbuncle‘. However, Gk Kapmficu'v occurs only as a proper name (‘Carthage') and never with reference to a gemstone. Furthermore, it is unlikely that these terms are connected with Arab kadkad ‘intense redness' (contra HALOT 46o; Gesenius, Thesaurus 660) or that the forms with r rather than d can be explained via dissimilation (contra "fur—Sinai 1962,: Ru°z‘icka 1909, 161). 286. In Ezek 27:16 the MT reads 1373-, but Isa 54:12 omits the dages' in' the second kap and reads 1513. Jewish Aramaic uses res' as well as dale! for this word‘s second consonant. Greek texts preserve at least three different variants of the toponym ‘Chalcedon’ (Kakxaéw'v, Kalicném'v, and Xahcnéw'v). Similar van'ation occurs in Latin, in which the toponym ‘Chalcedon‘ appears as Chalcedon as well as Calchea'on; additionally, although most manuscripts of I; read calcedom'us in Rev 21:19, a few read carcedom'us. The variant spellings in Greek and Latin seem to have led to an erroneous association ofthis gemstone with Carthage. adapted as Kapxném'v in Greek and Carthage in Latin from the Phoenician name ofthe city, nil/1n n17. ‘New City’. Pliny claims that the gemstone carchedom‘a comes from North Africa (Nat. 37.30.104), but this is probably a mistake resulting from its apparent similarity to Gk Kapxnfiw’v and Lat Carlhago. Extant manuscn‘pts of Pliny preserve several different variants (churcedonia, calcedom'a, calchedom‘a, and carchedanius), some of which are more similar to the ancient name for Chalcedon than to Carthage. It makes little sense to think that the gemstone denoted by 1373- comes from Carthage because Ezek 27:16 lists this gemstone as a product imported by Tyre from the north. Carthage was a colony ofTyre, and it would be unnecessary for Tyre to import this gem from the north when it could get it from Carthage.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

117

these terms most probably originated around the ancient city ofChalcedon (Greek Kakxn'ocov), located on the shore of the Black Sea near the mouth of the Bosporus Strait.287 The donor term behind this ancient “Chalcedonian” culture word and the transmission process by which this word reached Hebrew remains uncertain, however.288 37:13, 5731?. (a helmet) HALOT463, 1081—82; DCH 4:370, 72211 (1 Sam 17:5, 38; Isa 59:17; Jer 46:4; Ezek 23:24; 27:10; 38:5; 2 Chr 26:14) 6 nsptksoakaia ‘helmet’ except Bakofiow (pultaicn'v ‘they will set watch’ Ezek 23:24; I! galea ‘helmet’ except cassis ‘helmet’ 1 Sam 17:5; 6 snwrt’ ‘helmet’; 1 051?. ‘helmet’ except does not directly represent this word Isa 59:17 [D] Hurr —+ Heb; Aram; Arab; Eth; Hitt; Gk JA 3721.2, 5731:), SA 17:11? DJPA 478; DSA 761; DCPA 364; Syr qubb‘a‘ LS: 1323; Arab qubba‘ Dozy 1927, 2:303; Eth qob‘ CDG 418; Hitt kupahyi- HHw 94; Hurr kuvahvi- BGH 225; GLH 157; Gk Ku'uBaxog LSJ 1009

This word occurs in two different forms in Biblical Hebrew, namely 17313 (1 Sam 17:5; Isa 59:17; Jer 46:4; Ezek 27:10; 38:5; 2 Chr 26:14) and 1731710 Sam 17:38; Ezek 23:24). In each of these occurrences, Hebrew 37:13 appears in a military context and denotes a type of helmet. The alternation between kap and qop is excellent evidence for a foreign loan, as is the lack of a plausible Semitic root on which this term could be based. Scholars have long recognized that, due to its association with the Philistine Goliath in I Sam 17, this word most probably entered Hebrew from the eastern Mediterranean.289 One might suspect a Philistine origin in light of the connection with Goliath, but this word has a relatively wide distribution in the Mediterranean and the ancient Near East and is unlikely to have been borrowed directly from Philistine. Rather, it is most plausibly Hurrian. Hebrew Hwy), used to denote Goliath’s scale armor, is Hurrian in origin. Furthermore, the altemation between [b], [p], and [w] in this word’s various representations is suggestive of the Hurrian labiodental fn'cative F.290 Accordingly, the donor term behind Hebrew 1731:- is almost certainly Hurrian kuvabi- (written in cuneiform as kuwavhi-). This Hurrian term entered Aramaic, Arabic, and Ethiopic in addition to Hebrew and was also borrowed by

287. Rabin 1964, 152; cf. Zwierlein-Diehl 2007, 307. Harrell, Hoffmeier, and Williams (2017, 32—33) identify ‘15-'13 as mizzi ahmar, a reddish limestone available near Jerusalem. However, this ignores the foreign associations of this word as well as its similarity to various ancient terms that denote a type ofjasper. 288. Via Greek, this word entered Middle Iranian (cf. Pahl karke'han), through which it reentered Arabic (karkuhan) and was also transmitted to Amienian (karkehan). See CPD 50; [MB 2:555; Hu"bschmann 1897, 167; 1895, 199. 289. FWOT82; Sapir 1937; cf. Rabin 1963, 124—25; 1964, 158; Szemerényi 1974, 153. 290. On the Hurrian labiodental fricative F, see Wegner 2007, 46; Giorgieri 2000, 187; Wilhelm 2008, 84—85.

118

Chapter 3

Hittite and Greek (see HED K 257—58; Kronasser 1962—1966, 1:209; Szemere’nyi 19654—5)The description of this helmet in the Hebrew Bible is scant, although 1 Sam 17:5 does note that it was made of bronze (111011; 31:13). Ancient Near Eastern helmets from the second millennium B.C.E. were typically made from bronze—either bronze scale armor plates or hammered bronze—and could be plain or could have plumes or crests (Zorn 2010, 3—4; Dezso” 2002, 200). 013 ‘cup’ HALOT466; DCH 41376—77 (Gen 40:11 [3X], 13, 21; passimz‘”) [7] CW Sum KASU PSD; Akk ka'su (OAkk, 0A, OB, Qatna, Mari, Nuzi, MA, MB, Alal. akh, Bogh, EA, RS, NA, NB) CAD K 253—56; AHw 454—55; Ug ks DUL 454— 55; Phoen DD DNWSI 521; IA, QA, Hatra. JA, CPA 03 DNWSI 521; DQA 117; DJPA 264—65; DJBA 590; DCPA 182; Syr ka’sa' LS2 638; Mand kasa MD 199; Arab ka’s Lane 2581—82; Eg k_t GHwA" 962; WAS' 5:148; SWET 338—39 (#502); DLE 2:180; Hatt kazue, kazui, gazue, gazui Soysal 2004, 288, 559; Hitt gazi-, gazzi- HHw 85; Hurr kasi—, kazi-, kazzi- BGH 193; GLH 140 The word 013 occurs frequently with reference to a cup. Related forms appear in Akkadian, Ugaritic, Phoenician, various dialects ofAramaic, and Arabic.292 Notably, these forms exhibit a western distribution. Some of this word’s earliest occurrences in Akkadian are in peripheral dialects such as Old Assyrian, Boghazko'y, Alalakh, Mari, and Nuzi, and the sole attestation of 0: in Phoenician is found very early—the tenth century B.C.E.—in the Tekke Bowl Inscription from Crete (KAI 291). Despite Ko"hler and Baumgartner’s claim (HALOT 466) that Hebrew 0b is derived from Akkadian, there are no phonological indications that this is the case. Rather, this term is almost certainly a very ancient culture word of wide distribution (ALBH 62—63). This is indicated by the attestation of this word in Hattie (kazue, gazue, gazui, kazui), Hittite (gazi-, gazzi-), and Hurrian (kasi-, kazi-, kazzi-), which cannot conclusively be traced back to Akkadian.293 There is no clear evidence that Sumerian KASU is a loan from Akkadian, especially because this word is only spelled phonetically (00.21, KU.ZI, KA.ZI, and KA.A.SU) in Sumerian and lacks a specific logogram.294 Egyptian k1, which first appears in the Nineteenth Dynasty,

291. 2 Sam 12:3; 1 Kgs 7:26; Isa 51:17 (2X), 22 (2x); Jer 16:7; 25:15, 17, 28; 35:5; 49:12; 51:7; Ezek 23:31—32, 33 (2X); Hab 2:16; Ps 11:6; 16:5; 23:5; 75:9 [75:8]; 116213; Prov 23:31; Lam 4:21; 2 Chr 4:5. 292. Fra"nkel (1886, 171) contends that Arab ka’s is a loan from Aramaic despite the unmotivated hamza. 293. Cf. Puhvel 1984—, K 141—42; HEG A—K 549—50; Neu 1988, 29; Kassian 2010, 460. 294. Contra ALBH 63; Dietrich and Loretz 1964—1966, 237. I am grateful to Samuel Greengus for his assistance with this entry.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

119

is probably a loan from Northwest Semitic but could potentially be a loan from another source.295 This generic term for a drinking vessel can encompass several different types. It could have a distinct lip (I Kgs 7:26) or could be deep and wide, like a shallow wine bowl (Ezek 23:32). It is sometimes described as made from metal (e.g., Jer 51:7; cf. KTU 3.1:27), but ceramic types ofthis vessel also existed (Amadasi Guzzo 1990, 16—17; Kelso 1948, 19—20; Honeyman 1939, 82). 111‘; (a straight sword) HALOT 472; DCH 4:391 (Josh 8:18 [2X], 26; 1 Sam 17:6, 45; Jer 6:23; 50242; Job 39:23; 41:21 [41:29]) (5 yoioog ‘javelin’ Josh 8:18, 26, o’om’g ‘shield’ I Sam 17:6, 45, CtBu’vn ‘spear’ Jer 6:23, éyxetpiotov ‘dagger, knife’ Jer 50:42, does not directly represent this word Job 39:23; 41:21; SB Clypeus ‘shield’ Josh 8:18, 26; 1 Sam 17:6, 45; Job 39:23, scutum ‘shield’ Jer 6:23; 50:42, hasta ‘spear’ Job 41:21; 6 nyzk’ ‘spear’ except _trpns’ ‘cuirass’ 1 Sam 17:6, skr’ ‘shield’ 1 Sam 17:45; 1 mm ‘spear’ except qnon ‘visor’ I Sam 17:6, D‘Wn ‘shield’ Jer 6:23; 50:42 Hurr —> Akk; Heb Akk katinnu (Alalakh, Nuzi, MB, Emar, Munbaqa, RS) CAD K 307; AHw 466; QH 17’); Hurr kadinni- BGH 197; GLH 133 This word occurs only nine times in the Hebrew Bible. It sometimes appears amidst mentions of military armaments (1 Sam 17:6, 45; Jer 6:23; 50:42; Job 39:23), indicating that it denotes a weapon. The War Scroll from Qumran uses the term 1'03, a clear derivation from Biblical Hebrew 11'1‘3, several times. Its provided dimensions demonstrate that it refers to a long sword (IQM v:10—13)(Yadin 1962, 124—25, 129—31). Hebrew 117‘3 has no convincing Semitic etymology, but its mention in conjunction with Goliath’s weaponry (1 Sam 17:6, 45) and its association with the Anatolian term ,ha.s.sinnu ‘axe’ in Ras Shamra Akkadian (RS 19.23111) suggest a loan from the eastern Mediterranean. The donor term is almost certainly Hurrian kadirmi-, which contains the Hurrian derivational suflix -m', -nm' and is the source of Akkadian katirmu.296 The latter occurs in peripheral Akkadian dialects, including those associated with the Hurrians, and clearly refers to a weapon: at Alalakh it appears within mention of various objects, including weapons (AT 440:17), and at Emar it similarly occurs among mention of weapons (Emar 451—2).297 295. SWET 338—39. According to Hoch, any association between Eg kr_ and Copt kac'i ‘pitcher, bucket’ is unfounded (cf. Crum 134; Cemy’ 1976, 69). 296. On the Hurrian den'vational suffix -ni, -nni, see Wegner 2007, 55; Giorgieri 2000, 210—12; Wilhelm 2008, 92. 297. Vita and Watson 2002, 147—49; Heltzer 1989; Huehnergard 2008, 174, 398. Although alleged by Heltzer to occur in Amama Akkadian, EA 25 ii:42 should be read as [buI]—ri-in-na-s'u-nu (i.e., Akk bulirmu) rather than [kat]-ti-in-na-s'u-nu (i.e., Akk kalinnu). Furthermore, there is probably no relationship between Ug gin and Akk kan’nnu (Vita 1996; Huehnergard 2008, 398).

120

Chapter 3

The Hebrew form 111‘: exhibits vocalic metathesis, after which the stressed a-vowel became holem due to the Canaanite shift. Vocalic metathesis occurs in other loans associated with Asia Minor, of Hurrian origin and otherwise (cf. BH ‘rt'lg, Akk thra'gu, and Hurr hViyari-, hvz’yaruhvljeg‘ BH nah; and Gk Xitw'v. KiBw'v, Ktrw'v; and BH 1‘70, Hurr sadinm‘-, and Gk oivéco'v), and therefore the vocalization presents no problems (contra Koller 2012, 181—82). The biblical evidence is ambiguous, but the War Scroll and rabbinic literature indicate that the sword denoted by 117‘; was a long, straight sword (Koller 2012, 183—98). The passage 1 Sam 17:6 describes this weapon as slung across Goliath’s shoulders. The best parallels to this type of sword come from an eastern Mediterranean context, befitting Goliath’s origins: the Sea Peoples are depicted at Medinet Habu with swords slung across their chest, and Paris and Menelaus are said to carry swords across their chest (11. 3330-39) (Zorn 2010, 9—11; cf. Molin 1956). 11‘; (a metal vessel) HALOT472; DCH 4:392 (Exod 30:18, 28; passingg) [D] Hurr —> Heb QH 11’); Hurr *kiuri-299 This word appears 23 times in the Hebrew Bible. It almost always occurs in cultic contexts, in which it denotes a metal basin for washing in the tabernacle (Exod 30:18, 28; 31:9; 35:16; 38:8; 39:39; 40:7, 11, 30; Lev 8:11) or the temple (1 Kgs 7:30, 38, 4o, 43; 2 Kgs 16:17; 2 Chr4z6, 14; 6:13) (cf. Kelso 1948, 20; Honeyman 1939, 82). This word occurs in the Temple Scroll within similar contexts (e.g., IIQTa xxxiii25). Scholars frequently connect Hebrew ‘11”: with Neo-Assyrian Akkadian kiu'ru (CAD K 476; AHw 496) and Urartian kiri- (Arutiunian 2001, 451), both of which denote a metal vessel.300 The former occurs in the annals of the Urartian king Sarduri 11 (KUKN 241E256) and is the source of the latter, which in Neo-Assyrian texts refers to metal cauldrons taken from Urartu as plunder (TCL 3 iiiz362—63, 380, 395—96). However, neither of these terms refers to a cultic vessel, and there are additional problems with deriving Hebrew '11}:- from either Urartian or Akkadian. Conceming Urartian kiri-, it seems unlikely on historical grounds that Hebrewspeakers would borrow such a term from Urartu. Conc eming Akkadian kiu'ru, there is no evidence that this word was ever fully integrated into the Akkadian 298. Exod 31:9; 35:16; 38:8; 39:39; 40:7, 11, 3o; Lev 8:11; 1 Sam 2:14; 1 Kgs 7:30, 38 (4X), 40. 43; 2 Kgs 16:17; Zech 12:6; 2 Chr 4:6, 14; 6:13. 299. JA, SA 11‘: are adopted from Biblical Hebrew (DJPA 256; DJBA 575; DSA 386). 300. fig, J. Friedrich 1932, 66—70; ALBH 66. Albright (1968, 152—54, 216) contends that Urar kiri— comes from Sum KIUR ‘foundation’ because Akk kiu‘ru is written both syllabically (ki-u'-ri) and logographically(1(1UR)and because 11": appears with reference to a platform that Solomon stands on in 2 Chr 6:13. However, Sum KIUR has no etymological relationship with Urar kiri- (cf. J. Fn‘edrich 1932, 66-70). Furthermore, as Albright himself notes, Ugaritic and Egyptian depictions of deities standing on upside-down cauldrons could serve as a possible background for 2 Chr 6:13.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

12l

lexicon, and Neo-Assyrian tribute lists are an unlikely source for borrowing by Hebrew-speakers.“ Given Urartian’s cognate relationship to Hurrian, it is possible that this word entered Biblical Hebrew via a Hurrian form *kz'uri-. The Akkadian representation of Urartian kiri- as kiu'ri demonstrates that this term contained a dipthong in HurroUrartian, hence the glide in Hebrew 11-‘3.302 Hurrian-speakers lent a good number of vessel terms to Northwest Semitic during the second millennium B.C.E., especially vessels used in the cult (e. g., BH '79:.) and Ug Vhbr_t, Vhptr, 'hrsjh, kpsln).3°3 Postulating the existence of a Hurrian form *kiuri-, a term for a metal vessel cognate with later Urartian kiri-, best explains how this word came to be found in Palestine.304 1'17”; (an axe) HALOT472; DCH 4:392 (Jer 22:7; Ps 74:6) 6 ne'ksicug ‘axe’; 23 armum ‘weapon’ Jer 22:7, ascia ‘axe’ Ps 74:6; 6 mg’ ‘axe’ Jer 22:7, plq’ ‘axe’ Ps 74:6; I Vt ‘weapon’ Jer 22:7, atom"! D5097: ‘two-sided axe’ Ps 74:6 [?] CW Akk kalappu, kalabbu (Nuzi, MA, NA, NB), kullupinnu (OA) CAD K 66; AHw 424; JA, CPA 3713 DJPA 253; DCPA I75; Syr kulba' L52 607; Mand kulab Afl) 207; Hitt kullupi- HHw 93

This word appears in Ps 74:6, where it is mentioned along with the striking tool ’7‘W3 and the verb 05.1 ‘to hit, strike’. It also occurs in Jer 22:7, which describes the Babylonians’ destruction of the temple in terms similar to those in Ps 7426: the MT reads V73, but this should almost certainly be emended to is); (Tur-Sinai 1958—1959, 217). These two occurrences demonstrate that ‘1‘}? denotes an axe-like implement. Hebrew r173 is undoubtedly related to Akkadian kalappu, kalabbu, kullupinnu, which likewise refers to a tool like an axe. Also connected is Hittite kullupi-, which occurs in conjunction with agricultural implements for digging. The final double consonant of the Akkadian forms, the final —innu ending of Old Assyrian kullupinnu, this word’s peripheral distribution in Akkadian (Old Assyrian, Nuzi,

301. It could perhaps be argued that the association of kiu'ru with karmu ‘stand‘ (e.g., 3 kiu‘ri' eri‘ darmu'ti s'a 50-a-a i mandat me” libbas'unu sabtu adi kanm's'unu dannu'ti eri‘ [TCL 3 iii:396]) supports an Akkadian loan because the Hebrew Bible frequently associates Tl'D- and 13. However, it is only natural that this type of vessel be mentioned along with its stand, and 13 and kannu are the common, expected words for denoting this. 302. Urartian sometimes orthographically represents the diphthong iu as 1‘. See Salvini and Wegner 2014, 15. 303. LinB ki—u-ro could provide an additional form of this word, but its meaning is disputed. Its identification with the later Gk Ki'ovpog, which may be related to Hurro-Urartian *kiuri-, is in question (Aura Jorro and Adrados 1985—1993, 1:369; LS] 953). 304. I am grateful to Joseph Lam for his assistance with this entry.

122

Chapter 3

and Middle Assyrian). and its attestation in llittitc all point to an ancient culture word originating in Anatolia.305 The vocalization ol'the llcbrcw limit, which may be in error, is difficult to reconcile as a direct borrowing from either the Hittite or the Akkadian form. It is therefore likely that llebrcw-sp cakers adopted this word directly from the unknown source of this ancient culture word.” 1‘3 (an oven for cooking) HALOT 473; DCH 4:392 (Lev 11:35) 6 xurpo'rtong ‘pot, cauldron’; 8 chrimpus ‘pot’; 6 but tpv’ “household hearth‘; 30mi- 113 [Aramaic to‘rm], 1""~“"-N“"'3 ‘Dn ‘hearth’ [?] CW Sum GIR PSD; Akk kz'ru (OB, SB. NB) CAD K 415—16;AHw 484—85 The word '1? appears only in Lev 11:35, where it describes an oven or stove for cooking. Rabin (1962, 1072) associates 1‘:- with ‘11-3. which raises the important question as to whether Hebrew '11-3 and 1‘3 are indeed variations ofthe same basic term. However, the former consistently refers to a furnace for smelting or testing metals whereas the latter refers to an oven for cooking. This distinction is supported by the ancient versions, which consistently understand the two words in that way. Thus, 1‘3 should be kept separate from 113.307 At this point another important question arises, namely the possible relationship between Akkadian [rim and Hebrew 1‘3. Akkadian [rim is limited to Babylonian Akkadian and consistently refers to a bitumen or lime kiln, unlike Hebrew 1’3. which denotes an oven for cooking. Thus, the semantic differences between Akkadian kz'ru and Hebrew 113 preclude a loan relationship (see Peacock 2013, 87). This raises a final question regarding Sumerian GIR, the probable source of Akkadian kz’ru, and its relationship with Hebrew 1‘3. Sumerian GlR most ofien refers to an oven for cooking but can sometimes refer to a kiln for making bitumen. Hebrew '1‘3 shares the first of these referents but not the second. Because Akkadian kt'ru is not attested with the meaning ‘cooking oven’, no Akkadian intennediary exists between Sumerian GIR and Hebrew 1‘3 and the latter cannot be a SumeroAkkadian loanword. It is conceivable, therefore, that these terms all represent an ancient culture word for an oven that could also be used as a kiln.308 305. Dercksen 2007, 34; ALBH 66; AM 61; ct.‘ Rabin 1963, 124; 1964. 169. The form kullupi— does not seem to be native to Hittite (Puhvel 1984—, K 245: HEG A—K 630). 306. Rabin 1963, 124; 1964, 169. Mankowski (ALBH 66—67) contends that the final doubled consonant (cf. the plural form 11197:) in Ps 74:6) reflects Akk kaluppu, implying an Akkadian intemiediary. One could potentially support this argumentation by noting that 117‘:- specifically refers to Babylonian axes. However, it remains difficult to reconcile the vocalization ofBH F1713 with that ofAkk Ira/appu307. Contra ALBH 67—69; Peacock 2013. 86—88. It logically follows. then, that 1‘; must also be kept separate from Akk ku'ru ‘lu’mace’, which is cognate to BH 113. See the discussion of113 in the Appendix. 308. AM 65. Further complicating the picture is Arab kr‘r ‘bellows‘ (Lane 2639). This word looks similar enough to Sum GIR, Akk [(1711, and BH Ta, but the difference in meaning is somewhat troubling.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

123

‘73 ‘ship’ HALOT 478—79; DCH 4:420—24 (Isa 18:2) (5 e’motokn’ ‘command. message’; 58 vas ‘vessel, container’; 6 m’n’ ‘vessel, container’; 1 'mx ‘messenger’ [D] Eg ——> Heb Eg qwr, qr (NK, Ptolm), qrr (NK), kr, kwr (NK) GHwA" 921, 932, 956; WA'S' 5:21, 57, 134; DLE 2:175 The expression Rani"??— in Isa 18:2 is often analyzed as the plural of "7; ‘vessel, container’ in construct with up}, which denotes a reed or rush plant. Words of the same semantic range as Hebrew "73; can be used with reference to a container as well as a ship in other languages (cf. Modern English vessel), but there is no evidence that “‘7;— ever refers to a ship elsewhere in Biblical Hebrew. It is also unusual that the biblical author did not use Him, the common word for ‘ship’ in Hebrew, because .1315 is found elsewhere in Isaiah’s prophetic oracles (Isa 2:16; 23:1, 14; 43:14; 60:9) (Lubetski and Gottlieb 1998, 372). Isaiah 18 is an oracle against Kush, and N733, which is in construct with “‘73-, is an Egyptian loanword. Therefore, it is likely that "7;- is also borrowed from Egyptian. Indeed, a common word for ‘ship’ in Egyptian is qwr, also written as qr, qrr, kr, kwr (cf. Dem qry: CDD Q 59; D0 543). This Egyptian term provides a good phonological and semantic match to Hebrew "7.3.309 Thus, it is likely that Hebrew ‘7;- comes from Egyptian qr, especially since the Egyptians made boats and rafts out of papyrus reeds.310 The precise vocalization of Hebrew ‘73, here incorrectly pointed by the Masoretes as the construct plural of ‘7’; ‘vessel’, remains uncertain because the vocalization of Egyptian qr remains uncertain.“‘ 17:33 ‘cumin’ HALOT 481; DCH 4:429 (Isa 28:25, 27 [2x]) 6, 13, G, 1 each use their corresponding forms of the word (Ku'uivov, cyminum, kmwn’, and 1173:), respectively) [7] CW Sum GAMUN PSD; Akk kamu'nu, kamannu (OAkk, OA, OB, Mari, Nuzi, SB, NA) CAD K 131—32; AHw 434; Ug kmn DUL 441; Phoen VJ: DNWSI 515; JA, CPA 1173:: DJPA 262; DJBA 586; DCPA 180; Syr kammo'na' LS) 630; Mand kamuna MD 197; Arab kammu'n WKAS K 365; Eth kamin, kamen,

Furthermore, Fra"nkel (1886, 254) insists that ki'r is a genuine Arabic word, in part because there is no obvious Aramaic candidate to serve as an intermediary. See ALBH 68. 309. Lubetski and Gottlieb 1998, 372. Eg r can represent the lateral [1]; see J. Allen 2013, 40; Loprieno 1995, 33; Peust 1999, 127—29. Hence, the use of Iamed for Eg r presents no problems. 310. On Egyptian shipbuilding, see C. Ward 2001. 311. Unfortunately, there are no extant Coptic forms that might shed light on the correct vocahza‘tion.

124

Chapter 3

kamin, ka'min, kamun CDG 285; Hitt kappani- HHw 79; LinA ku-mi-na Consani 1999, 278; LinB ku-mi-no Aura Jorro and Adrados 1985—1993, 1:401; Gk Ku‘uwov LS] 1009; Lat cuminum, cym'num OLD 516 This word occurs only in Isa 28:25, 27. It is parallel to r139. ‘dill’ in both verses, indicating that 1733;) refers to a spice, most probably the species Cuminum cyminum, or cumin (M. Zohary 1982, 88; Moldenke and Moldenke 1952, 89; Low 1924—1934, 3345—47)Additional Semitic forms of this word can be found in Akkadian, Ugaritic, Phoenician, Aramaic, Arabic, and Ethiopic. Nevertheless, it is unlikely that this word is native to Semitic. This word is widely attested outside the Semitic languages—namely, in Sumerian, Hittite, Linear A, Greek, and Latin—as is characteristic of ancient culture words. Furthermore, the species C. cyminum is not native to the ancient Near East but originated in the eastern Mediterranean region (Pickersgill 2005, 162; D. Zohary and Hopf 2000, 206). Accordingly, this culture word must have originated from this same area.312 Remains from a variety of sites (e.g., Tell ed-Der in Syria) attest to the introduction and cultivation of cumin in the ancient Near East as early as the second millennium B.C.E. Its cultivation in ancient Palestine by the Iron Age is demonstrated by its mention as an agricultural product in Isa 28:25, 27. The seeds of this flowering plant were used as a condiment in antiquity, and it became particularly popular during the Roman period. In addition to its use as a spice, cumin was also valued for its medicinal qualities, and its oil was utilized for perfumes (Pickersgill 2005, 162; D. Zohary and Hopf 2000, 206; Borowski 1987, 98). 100' ‘pagan priest’ HALOT 482; DCH 4:429 (2 Kgs 23:5; Hos 10:5; Zeph 1:4) (5 transliterates as xwuapiu 2 Kgs 23:5, napsm'icpavav ‘they provoked’ (perhaps seeing a connection with 173: ‘to be stirred up’) Hos 10:5, Baa)» ‘Baal’ Zeph 1:4; 83 aruspex ‘diviner, soothsayer’ 2 Kgs 23:5, aedz'tuus ‘keeper of a temple’ Hos 10:5; Zeph 1:4; 6 [ ’sqwby_trws, Marat: > Iw!.s’). Cf. Butts 2013, 105. 343. Hagedom 2005; Niemeier 2001; Waldbaum 1997; Yamauchi 1970; 1981. 344. I am grateful to John Makujina for his assistance with this entry. 345. IA 03113, which occurs only in late literary texts, as well as Syr kurkma' are both borrowm'gs from Middle Persian (DJBA 566; LS’ 613; Ciancaglini 2008, 194). Akk kurka'nu‘, an aromatic medicinal plant, is almost certainly not related. This Akkadian term appears already in Middle and Standard Babylonian and has a final -u‘ that is not represented in the other allegedly related forms (Landsberger 1964—1966, 260). 346. Musselman 2012, 127; Lo"w 1924—1934, 27—25. The related Indic, Iranian, Greek, and Latin terms all clearly refer to C. sativus rather than Curcuma longa L. Unless there has been a change in referent, there is no reason to think that 0313 refers to the latter (contra Brenner 1983, 76).

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

133

This word’s quadriliteral structure suggests a foreign origin. Several scholars contend that Hebrew D311:- comes from post-Vedic Sanskrit kun'kuma- (e.g., Rabin 1962, 1079; FWOT 93). However, the latter’s late attestation argues against its originality to Indic, and the medial consonant cluster does not match the Hebrew form. Other scholars compare a hypothetical Old Iranian *kurkum- (e.g., Brenner 1983, 76—77; Dobbs-Allsopp 2005, 66), but a direct borrowing does not adequately explain the Hebrew vocalization. In any case, this word did not exist in Old Iranian and was first borrowed into Middle Persian from Indic (cf. Pahl kurkum: CPD 52).347 Lastly, one might compare Greek Kpo'Kog, the origin of Latin crocus (DELL 152), but phonological and morphological differences once again argue against a direct borrowing. Ultimately, all these terms must go back to an ancient culture word that most probably originated in the eastern Mediterranean, where the saffron crocus was first cultivated.348 Classical authors consistently locate the saffron crocus in the Aegean, from whence it spread to places such as Cilicia (e.g., Dioscorides, Mat. med. 1.26; Pliny, Nat. 21.12.31—32).349 At least two additional pieces of evidence associate the saffron crocus with the early Aegean: the CROC logogram, a clear representation of the saffron crocus, appears in Linear B tablets from the Palace of Minos at Knossos; and Minoan and Cycladic art (especially frescoes) commonly depict saffron crocus flowers. All this demonstrates that the safifron crocus plant was first cultivated in the Aegean (Negbi and Negbi 2002; D. Zohary and Hopf 2000, 207). This culture word must have originated somewhere in the Aegean because the term would have been borrowed along with the product. How, precisely, it passed into Hebrew, however, remains unclear. W313 ‘crimson’ HALOT498—99; DCH 4:462 (2 Chr 2:6, 13 [2:7, 14]; 3.14350) 03 Ko'KKwog, SB coccinus, 6 ssgwn’, I “tint all refer to a vennillion-like color [D] OInd —» Heb 01nd *k_rmila- EWA ia 1:394—95; KE WA 1:261—62 The word '7‘ij occurs three times in the book of Chronicles with reference to materials used for Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:6, 13; 3:14). Its mention along with the colors 17337:; ‘purple’ and n‘gpn; ‘blue’ indicates that it refers to a color or dye.

347. C.f Gignoux 1998—1999, 199. Notably, neither Hinz (AISN) nor Tavemier (AIP) reconstructs an Olran ‘kurkum-. 348. Cf. Schrader 1911, 469. Contrary to what is sometimes thought, the Indie languages are not the on'ginal source of this ancient culture word (EWAia 3:95; KEWA 1:219). 349. According to Strabo (Geogr. 14.5.5), the best saffron crocus flowers grew in the Corycian Cave, located at Corycus (Kw’pmcog) in Cilicia. ‘ 350. It is possible that, following Ibn Janah. and Ibn Ezra, 57913-3 in Song 7:6 should be emended to 77)):3, thus providing an additional attestation ofW313 (cf. Graetz 1871, 196).

134

Chapter 3

This word approximates, although is not necessarily precisely equivalent to, the relatively more common Hebrew terms ‘JW and 177111 (Rezetko 2007, 397—98). This word has no apparent Semitic cognate or etymology, and its quadriliteral structure suggests a non-Semitic origin. The donor term is Old Indic *,krmila- ‘cn'mson’ (cf. Skt krmilikai) (Powels 1992, 196—97). Old Indic *krmila- is an adjectival form of *kr"mi- (cf. Sktkr_'m1'—), which can refer to an insect or worm (E WA ia 1:394— 95; KEWA 1:261—62, 3:681). Old Indie *kr,mila- came to mean ‘crimson’ because a dye of this color was obtained from some of the insects denoted by this term, namely those of the genus Kermes (and especially the species K. vermilio). According to Indian texts, the coloring pn'nciple was obtained by squeezing the insect while submerged in liquid. The resulting substance was then mixed with other maten'als to produce a fast dye of excellent color, used primarily for dyeing silken and woolen materials (cf. Abhayadeva Suri’s commentary on Stha'nan'ga Su'tra 4.2.293)” 0913 ‘cotton’ HALOT 500; DCH 4:463 (Esth 1:6) (5 Kapna'otvog, B carbasinus ‘of cotton’; 6 ‘mr kwb’ ‘cotton’; 1 does not directly represent this word [D] OInd —> —> Heb —> Gk —+ Lat Gk Ku’pnuoog LS] 879; Lat carbasus OLD 302; 01nd *karpa'sa- E WAia 12317—18; KE WA 1:174—75352 This word appears only once, in the book of Esther, where it refers to a white material that adorns Attaxerxes’ palace (Esth 1:6). Its quadn'literal structure and lack of any Semitic etymology together suggest a foreign loan. Some scholars assume that, given the Persian setting of the book of Esther, Hebrew 09']:- comes from a hypothetical Old Iranian *karpas'a- ‘cotton’, in turn borrowed from Old Indic *karpas'a— (cf. Skt karpa'sa-) (Powels 1992, 189—90; FWOT94). However, this word does not occur in the Iranian languages until much later (cf. NPers karbas‘: CPED 1021), and there is little basis for reconstructing this word in Old Iranian aside from a presumed Iranian origin for Hebrew 0913.353 Greek Ka'pnaoog ‘cotton’ is a direct loan from Indie.354 The Perzp'lus of the Erythaean Sea specifically states that this product comes from India (Peripl. M. Rubr. 41), and the cotton plant is native to India (Barber 1991, 32—33; D. Zohary and 351. Roy 1978, 91—92. A completely different Indic term was used to refer to lac, or the dye produced by lac—insects (cf. Skt la‘lcsa"-). Because the term should have been borrowed along with the product, Wm probably does not refer to lac (contra Powels 1992, 197). 352. JA 0913 occurs in I and is adopted from BH 091-; (Jastrow 1903, 673). Syr krap‘sa‘ does not mean ‘cotton’ but ‘celery, parsley’ (CAL; contra LS’ 647). 353. Notably, neither Hinz (AISN) nor Tavemier (IAP) reconstructs an Olran ‘karpas‘rh 354. EDG 648; DELG 481. Lat carbasus is, in turn, a loan from Greek (DELL 99; LEW 1:165).

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible I35 W

Hopf 2000, 134—35). Thus, it is likely that Hebrew also adopted this word directly from Old lndic (Rabin 1962, 1079; AAT 1:47). The Achaemenid Empire extended as far eastward as India, and it is almost certain that Indian cotton would have been available to a ruler like Artaxerxes. m;- ‘belly, stomach’ HALOT 500; DCH 4:463 (Jer 51:34) (5 KOLMa ‘stomach, intestines’; Q3 venter ‘belly, stomach’; C5 krs’ [Syriac form]; 1min”: ‘treasury’ [7] CW Akk karsvu, karasvu (OA, OB, SB, NA), kursa‘nu, kursinnu (OA), gusa‘nu (OB, Chagar, Mari, MA), kus'a'nu (Alalakh), gusannu (Nuzi) CAD G 142—43, K 223—25, 567; AHw 299, 450—51, 1557; Ug krsu’, krs’u’, qrsu’, krsn, krs’n DUL 452—53, 701; JA, CPA 013, 0‘1: DJPA 27o; DJBA 603—4; DCPA 185—86; Syr karsa‘ LS2 655—56; Mand kras MD 201; Arab kirs“ WKAS K 129—30; Lane 2606—7; Eth kars’ CDG 294; Eg krs (NK) GHwA" 957; WA'S' 5:135; SWET 332— 33 (#483); Hitt kurs'a- HHw 95; Gk Bv'pca LSJ 333 Hebrew W13 occurs only in Jer 51:34, which colorfiilly describes Nebuchadnezzar’s defeat of Jerusalem through the imagery of devouring. Within this context, W1; is used to denote Nebuchadnezzar’s belly. This word has related forms with the meaning ‘belly’ in many other Semitic languages, including Akkadian, Aramaic, Arabic, and Ethiopic. Some of these related forms also occur with the meaning ‘sack’, a natural use for an animal’s stomach. This invites further comparison with terms found with the meaning ‘hide, skinbag’ in Akkadian and Ugaritic. Also related are New Kingdom Egyptian krs ‘sack’ (written with group writing and non-native to Egyptian) as well as Hittite kurs'a and Greek Bo'poa, both meaning ‘hide, skinbag’. In Hittite texts, the sack denoted by this term was associated with the hunt and related rituals (Gu"terbock 1989). The spelling varies greatly among these different forms: the initial consonant is most ofien k but sometimes appears as q (Ugaritic) or b (Greek and Latin), the medial consonant r is not always present, and the final sibilant varies considerably. The wide variety of spellings, this term’s wide distribution, and the lack of a plausible Semitic etymology all point to an ancient culture word. The western distribution, moreover, indicates that this culture word originated in the same region.355 This word even found its way into a number of modern languages, including French bourse and Modern English purse (via post-Classical Latin bursa, in turn borrowed from Greek Bo'poa).

355. This western Asiatic culture word may ultimately be of Pre-Greek on'gin (EDG 249; Fumée I972, 65; cf. Puhvel 1984—, K 274; Gamkrelidze and Ivanov 1994—1995, 12798).

136

Chapter 3

an; (a type of fine gold) HALOT 505; DCH 4:475 (Isa 13:12; Ps 45:10 [45:9]; Job 28:16, 19; 31:24; Prov 25:12; Song 5:11; Lam 4:1; Dan 10:5) (5 0' MBOQ 0' six 2011(pr ‘stone from Ophir’ Isa 13:12, xpuoiov ‘gold’ Ps 45:10; Job 28:16, 19; Song 5:11, M609 nokvreitn'g ‘expensive stone’ Job 31:24, oa’pétov nokurekn’g ‘precious camelian’ Prov 25:12, to‘ a’pyu'piov to‘ a’yaeo'v ‘good silver’ Lam 4:1, does not directly represent this word Dan 10:5; EB obrizus ‘pure gold’ Isa 13212; Job 31:24; Dan 10:5, translates 119m at); as diadema aureus ‘diadem of gold’ Ps 45:10, tinctus Indiae color ‘dyed color of India’ Job 28:16, tinctura mundissima ‘clean dye’ Job 28:19, margaritumfulgens ‘bright pearl’ Prov 25:12, aurum optimum ‘finest gold’ Song 5211, color optimus ‘finest color’ Lam 4:1; 6 dhb’ ‘gold’ Isa 13:12; Ps 45210; Job 28:16; 31:24; Song 5:11; Lam 4:1, k’p’ dpdt’ ‘stone of ephod’ Job 28:19, srdwn’ Ib’ ‘good sardius’ Prov 25:12, yqr’ ‘honor, glory’ Dan 10:5; 1 11072 ‘that which is pure’ Isa 13:12, 1mm ‘pure gold’ Ps 45:10, 1151919 ‘gold leaf’ Job 28:16, 19; 31:24, 713131 ‘emerald’ Prov 25:12, 3.11 Song 5:11; Lam 4:1 ‘gold’ [D] Ophirite —> Heb; Eg QH om; Eg ktm.t (since NK), k_tm.l (NK), qtm (Ptol) GHwA" 961; WA'S' 5:145; SWET 338 (#501); DLE 2:179, 181 This word occurs nine times. Based on its contexts, it is clear that it refers to a special type of gold. In four of the occurences, on“: appears in poetic bicola in the MT and occupies the second colon (Isa 13:12; Job 28:19; 31:24; Lam 4:1), which may provide indirect evidence for its relative value compared with regular gold. In at least three of its occurrences (Isa 13:12; Ps 45:10; Job 28:16), the Hebrew Bible associates nna; with Ophir', a toponym located near the southern shore ofthe Red Sea. 356 The region of Ophir was well known for its gold in antiquity, and the evidence thus points to a southern “Ophin‘te” origin for this term.357 New Kingdom Egyptian texts mention ktm. t, kt_m. t, qtm (cf. Dem ktm, qtm: CDD K 41—42, Q 104; DG 569) as a type of gold that comes from Nubia, attributing it to the same region as Ophir.358 There is no evidence of any connection between these words and Akkadian kutimmu.359 356. Daniel 10:5 may also contain the same association if 1918 013:); should be emended to flirt on} (cf. 81-15; J. J. Collins 1993, 361). On the location of Ophir, see Baker 199221. 357. Cf. FWOT 95; Lambert 2003, 132. Ophir became so associated with gold that win denotes ‘gold’ rather than the toponym ‘Ophir’ in Job 22:24. An eighth century B.C.E. inscn'ption from Tell Qasile also mentions gold from Ophir, albeit using the common Hebrew word for ‘gold’ (was I‘ll) (HAE Qas (8):2:1). 358. Like an}, Eg ktm.r refers to a special kind of gold, being preceded by nbw nfr ‘fine gold’ in a number ofoccurrences (e.g., P Harris I 138,5," 47,5). By the Ptolemaic period, however, it had broadened its referent to include gold in general. 359. Contra Albright 1934, 61; Lambdm' 1953b, 151—52; ALBH 76—77. Albn‘ght, Lambdin, and Mankowski each suggest that the source of Eg kth is an unattested form from second millennium B.C.E. Northwest Semitic (so-called “early Canaanite”) which was, in turn, loaned from Akk kutimmu ‘goldsmith’. However, there is no clear relationship between Eg ktm.t and Akk kurimmu, and Mankowski admits that little evidence exists to support the speculative series ofsemantic changes requrr'ed to move

Non-Semitic Loanwora’s in the Hebrew Bible

137

An African origin for this word coheres well with known sources of gold in antiquity. There are no known sources of gold that were exploited in ancient Mesopotamia, Syria, or Palestine, but Egypt and Nubia as well as western and southern Arabia were well known for their gold (cf. Strabo, Geogr. 16.4.18; Diodorus Siculus,Bib1. hist. 3.45.5—8) (Moorey 1999, 219—20). In ancient Egypt, gold mines were common from the Eastern Desert (roughly near the level of Qena—Quseir) as far south as the border of modern Sudan. The Egyptians themselves delimited three gold-mining regions: Koptos, Wawat, and Kush. Each of these was a significant source of the metal during different periods, beginning with the Old Kingdom. Gold objects manufactured in Egypt include bracelets and beads, and gold foil and plating were very common (Ogden 2000, 161, 165—66; Lucas 1962, 224—34; Klemm and Klemm 1994). nah-3 (an outer garment) HALOT 505; DCH 475—76 (Gen 3:21; passim360) [‘2] CW Ug km DUL 464; QH mm; IA 1113, QA 1111:), JA 1min, mm, mm: DNWSI 548; DQA 120; DJPA 272; DJBA 579; Syr kitto‘na‘, kuttz‘na’ LS2 616, 663; Mand kituna MD 216; LinB ki-to Aura Jorro and Adrados 1985—1993, 1:368; Gk xmbv, K19co’v, Kmhv LSJ 1993; Lat lunica OLD 2193361

The word run-'3; occurs 29 times in the Hebrew Bible, primarily with reference to priestly garments (e.g., Exod 28:4, 39—40). However, it also denotes Joseph’s special garment given to him by his father (Gen 37:3, 23, 31—33) and elsewhere occurs as a generic term for an outer garment (e.g., Gen 3:21; 2 Sam 13:18—19). The precise etymology of this word is obscure. One may compare a number of forms in Semitic (Ugaritic, Imperial and Jewish Aramaic, and Mandaic) as well as non-Semitic (Greek, including Linear B362 and Latin). The variant spellings and vocalizations together point to an ancient culture word. The western distribution suggests an origin from the same region. A western origin could be supported by the varying spelling of the Greek forms, thought to reflect an Anatolian origin by some Classicists.363 from ‘goldsmith' to ‘fine gold’. Hence, the similan'ty 0fthe Egyptian and Hebrew forms to that of Akk kutimmu is coincidental. 36o. Gen 37:3, 23 (2x), 31 (2x), 32 (2x), 33; Exod 28:4, 39—40; 29:5, 8; 39:27; 40:14; Lev 8:7, 13; 10:5; 16:4; 2 Sam 13:18—19; 15:32; Isa 22:21; Job 30:18; Song 5:3; Ezra 2:69; Neh 7:69 [7:70], 71 [7:72]. 361. Best (1973, 57—58) also finds this word as qi-tu-ne in the Linear A tablets from Hagia Triada (HT 7b:1,' 117b:1). However, the sign group qi-tu-ne instead seems to represent a name 01 title (Consani I999, 293)» 362. Notably, an n appears in several forms other than the nominative singular of LinB ki-to: the nominative plural is ki-Io-ne, and the accusative singular and accusative plural is ki-to-na. 363. EDG 1635; Fume’e 1972, 136; contra DELG 1216; Roso'l 2013, 105—7; Masson 1967, 27—29. Kutscher (1984, 69—70) argues that the Greek vocalization reflects the Hebrew tendency to dissimilate the first oftwo u—class vowels into an i-class vowel. While this is possible, the vocalization ofthe Greek forms could have arisen through dissimilation in Greek rather than Hebrew. Similar patterns occur in

138

Chapter 3

One may perhaps also compare the above terms with a number of similarlooking terms meaning ‘linen, flax’ (Phoen 1m, IA 1113, JA, CPA 1110, 1am, Syr ketta'na', Mand kirana, and Eth kata'n: DNWSI 547—48; DJPA 257; DJBA 579; DCPA 178; L52 663; MD 216; CDG 298). It is quite possible, moreover, that these are all ultimately connected with Sumerian GADA and Akkadian kitu‘, both of which mean ‘linen’ (PSD; CAD K 473—75; AHw 495).364 If so, the final -n of the western forms may represent an Anatolian ending absent in the Mesopotamian forms.365 Nevertheless, the exact relationship between Sumerian GADA and kitu‘ is uncertain, as is their connection to the Northwest Semitic and lndo-European forms (AM 28). The relationship between this word and Old Assyrian and Mari Akkadian kuta'nu (CAD K 607—8; AHw 930), used to denote a woolen (rather than linen) garment imported from Assyria (rather than the west), is also unclear.366 8’3‘7 ‘lion’ HALOT517; DCH 4:513 (Gen 49:9; passimm) (5 frequently mcu’pvog ‘lion’s whelp’ but sometimes Maw ‘lion’; 13 commonly leaena ‘lioness’ or leo ‘lion’; 6 almost always ’ry’ ‘lion’; 1 commonly n"? or ‘18, both ‘lion’ [?] CW Ebla labwum; Akk labbu, lab’u, la'bu (OAkk, OA, OB, Mari, SB, NA), labbatu, la'batu (OAkk, OB, SB) CAD L 23—25; AHw 524, 526; Amor lab-, labu’-, labw- Huffmon 1965, 225; Ug lbu’ DUL 486; QH x‘37', .1135; Arab labu’ WKAS L 97; Lane 2644; OSA lb’ DOSA 256; LinB re-wo Aura Jorro and Adrados 1985—1993, 2248—49; Gk Mow LSJ 1043; Georg lomi Rayfield 2006, 846 This word occurs 11 times. The masculine form appears several times in archaic Pentateuchal poetry (Gen 49:9; Num 23:24; 24:9; Deut 33:20), but most of its occurrences are in theProphets (Isa 5:29; 30:6; Hos 13:8; Joel 1:6; Nah 2:12). The feminine form occurs twice, once as the singular 833‘; (Ezek 19:2) and once as the plural 118;? (Nah 2:13).368 Both the masculine and feminine forms appear parallel to several other Hebrew terms meaning ‘lion’, including “jg (Gen 49:9; Num 23:24; otherAnatolian loanwords found in both Hebrew and Greek, but with no clear loan relationship between the two (e.g., BH rho, Akk bums—u, and Hurr _h1y'ari-, ihyiaru,h_he-; BH 1111:, Akk katinnu, and Hurr kadinm'-; and BH mo and Gk mvBco'v). 364. AM 28; cf. FWOT 96. 365. As noted by Kaufman (AIA 28), a form with final -n does not occur in Akkadian until the Neo-Babylonian pen‘od. This form is kitinnu‘, perhaps an Aramaic loan. 366. Some scholars question any connection (e.g., AIA 28; Oppenheim 1967, 251), whereas others think that BH nqhg and Akk kuta'nu are related (e.g., Fensham 1962; Landsberger 1967b, 158). 367. Num 23:24; 24:9; Deut 33:20; Isa 5:29; 30:6; Hos 13:8; Joel 1:6; Nah 2:12 [2:11]; Ps 57:5 [57:4]; Job 4:11; 38:39. 368. The MT of Ezek 19:2 need not be in error, as is evident from 4QpNah f3—4 i:4 (which cites Nah 2:13) as well as Rabbinic Hebrew an? (attested in' b. Sanh. 106a). See Strawn 2005, 317—18; Kaplan 1981, 91—92.

Nan-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

I39

24:9; Ezek 19:2; Joel 1:6; Nah 2:12—13), 1227‘? (Job 4:11; Isa 30:6), and 1:99. (Job 38:39; Isa 5:29; Ezek 19:2; Nah 2:12) (Strawn 2005, 311—19; Kaplan 1981, 78—94). This word occurs early in Eblaite as labwum, where it is equated with Sumerian PIGIR.369 It also appears already in Old Akkadian in both masculine (labbu, lab’u, la'bu) and feminine (labbatu, la‘batu) forms.370 Other Semitic forms are attested in Ugaritic and Old South Arabian, and the element lab-, labu’-, labw- also occurs in Amon'te personal names. Nevertheless, this word exhibits varying spellings, most notably an altemation between ) and w, and is not native to Semitic. It can hardly be separated from Linear B re-wo and Classical Greek ltéwv, which are not native to Indo-European and come from some source other than Semitic.” One may also compare various Kartvelian forms such as Georgian lomi. The northern distribution of all these forms indicates an ancient Asiatic culture word.372 The lion inhabited much of Africa and southern Eurasia—including Palestine, Mesopotamia, the Aegean, Anatolia, and even India—in ancient times (Gilbert 2002, 27—28, 54; 1995, 1:167; Wapnish 1997). K0"hler (1939, 121—24) contends that Hebrew 8‘3? designates the Asiatic lion (Panthera leo persica) whereas Hebrew ’18, refers to an African lion (P. leo leo). He is correct that the former is an Asiatic term whereas the latter is an Afroasiatic term. However, it is dubious that the ancients clearly distinguished between the various subspecies recognized by zoologists today (Strawn 2005, 318—19; Kaplan 1981, 82—83). WV“? (a female demon) HALOT 528—29; DCH 4:543 (Isa 34:14) (5 0’v0stwo'pa (an ape-like demon); B Iamia ‘witch’; S, 1 both use their corresponding forrns of this word (lylyt’ and NW, respectively) [T] Sum —> Akk —> Heb; Phoen; Aram Sum LIL PSD; Akk lilz'tu (OB, SB) CAD L 190; AHw 553; QH n’b‘b; Phoen ‘5‘? DNWSI 578; JA Nb“? DJBA 626; Syr le'l_zt'a' LS2 691; Mand lilit, lilita MD 236 369. Civil 1984, 90; Sanmartin 1991,192—93. Altematively, this Eblaite word could be read as Iab’um. 370. The feminine fonn is attested only as an epithet of Ishtar. 371. A Semitic on'gin for Gk Mow remains dubious (E06 854; DELG 610; Rosol' 2013, 146—48; Masson 1967, 85—87; Mayer 1960, 320). Lat leg as well as various other Indo-European forms (e.g., German L0"we, Modern English lion, and Russian Iev) all come from Greek, either directly or indirectly (DELL 352; LEW 1:785). 372. Rabin 1962, 1078; 1964, 152; cf. Blaz‘ek 2005, 83—85. Eg rby appears only once in syllabic form (r=ba=ya) during the New Kingdom and is a loan from a foreign source; Dem [by and Copt Iaboi represent its later forms. See SWET 202 (#273); CDD L 6; DO 262; Cmm 136. There is no direct relationship between BH 8‘27 and Eg rw, the latter of which means ‘lion’ and appears already during the Old Kingdom and reflects an Afroasiatic word meaning ‘lion’ found in Semitic (cf. BH “m, .1313, Ug a’rw, OAram, IA .‘I‘WN, .lA “1N, and Syr ’arya‘), Berber (ar), Chadic (e-g.,Mub1' )o'ru'wa‘), and Cushitic (e.g., Somali ar) in addition to Egyptian. All these forms begin with a vowel and contain the liquid r, unlike 8‘3‘7 and immediately related forms. See Militarev and Kogan 2000—, 2:24—26; M. Cohen 1947, 83; contra Glu"ck 1969; Lipin’ski 1999, 214—15.

140

Chapter 3

This term occurs only in Isa 34:14, within the context of God’s judgment ofEdom. It functions as the subject of the two clauses 1111?; H7 1.33m n1‘7‘7- .‘Iy‘nn ‘n‘7‘7 will lie down and find a resting place for itself’. The context mentions a number of difierent animals, all of which are associated with disorder and judgment. That these creatures, including the 0‘73 ‘desert creatures’ (cf. Ps 74:14) and the 115m) ‘ goat‘ (cf. Lev 17:7; 2 Chr 11:15), are not merely animals but also represent various evil spirits inhabiting the wasteland of Edom is apparent from their associations elsewhere (cf. Rev 18:2). The ancient versions all understand 11‘7"? as such, taking it as a reference to a female demon that came to be known in popular lore as Lilith.373 Akkadian lilz'tu, the source of Hebrew 111717, is the feminine form of lilu‘. Both refer to a demon or spirit, and the masculine form lilu‘ is a clear loan from Sumerian LIL ‘wind, spirit’ (cf. SLOB 15). Akkadian also lent this word to Phoenician, in which it is attested in the Arslan Tash amulets (KAI 27:20), as well as to Aramaic (AIA 179). 11),"; ‘1ion’ HALOT 529; DCH 4:545 (Isa 30:6; Job 4:11; Prov 30:30) 6 mcu'uvog Ae'ovrog “lion’s whelp’ Isa 30:6; Prov 30:30, uppunxokémv ‘lion’ Job 4:11; 13 [ea ‘lion’ Isa 30:6; Prov 30:30, tigris ‘tiger’ Job 4:11; 6 gwry’ d’ry’ ‘lion cub’ Isa 30:6; Prov 30:30, ’ry’ ‘lion’ Job 4:11; 1 11"1R 1: ‘lion cub’ Isa 30:6, fix ‘lion’ Job 4:11; Prov 30:30 [‘2] CW Akk ne's'u (OB, Mari, Qatna, Nuzi, Chagar, Bogh, MA, SB, NA, NB, LB) CAD N/2 193—97; AHw 783; JA, SA 11% Jastrow 1903, 710; DSA 438; Arab lay; Lane 2684; Gk Mg LS] 1053 The word W7? is rare, occurring only three times in the Hebrew Bible and only in poetic contexts (Isa 30:6; Job 4:11; Prov 30:30). Lipin’ski (1999, 218; cf. Blaz'ek 2005, 85—86) claims that this word is Semitic, noting the existence of Akkadian ne's'u, Jewish Aramaic 1117', and Arabic layt_. However, at least two observations argue against a Semitic origin. First, contrary to Lipin’ski’s claims, the variation between 11 and l is unusual and cannot be explained in terms of an early phase of Semitic in which 1, n, and r were partially allophones of the same phoneme. Second, the monophthongization of ay to z', unparalleled in Greek borrowings from Semitic, argues against a Semitic origin for Greek Mg, which is attested as early as Homer ([1. 11.239; 15.275; 18.318) and occurs elsewhere only as a dialectical van‘ant for M’mv used in Greek epic. This word is not the typical term for ‘lion’ in either Semitic or Indo-European and is almost certainly an ancient culture word, borrowed from a third source into 373. Wildberger 1991—2002, 3:335—37; Blenkinsopp 2000, 453—54; cf. Hutter 1999, 521. No clear evidence exists that n"7‘7 is personified in Isa 34:14. Rather, 11‘7"? seems to merely denote a female demon rather than “Lilith” as in later Jewish tradition.

Non-SemiIic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

141

both Semitic and Greek (DELG 617; Masson 1967, 86; contra Rosol’ 2013, 66—67). It must have been borrowed into Semitic relatively early because it displays the typical sibilant developments found in Semitic (Akk s', Heb s'in, Aram law, and Arab 1). 1‘5)? ‘torch; lightning’ HALOT533: DCH 42556—57 (Gen 15:17: passimm) [D] Luv —» Heb QH 1‘97‘; Luv *lappit-375 The tem1 occurs I3 times in the Hebrew Bible. In many of its occurrences it means ‘torch‘ (Gen 15:17; Judg 7:16, 20; 1524—5; Isa 62:1; Zech 12:6), but in other instances 1‘57 metaphorically denotes lightning (Exod 20:18; Ezek 1:13; Nah 2:5; Job 41:11; Dan 10:6). Hebrew 1‘s)?” has no Semitic cognates or known Semitic root on which it could be based. suggesting a foreign origin.376 It is unlikely that Hebrew 7’57 can be dissociated from the Indo—European root *leth- ‘to glow, shine’, so Ipropose that the donor term is Luvian *Iappit-.377 This Luvian term is formed from the verb *lap- and the suffix —it ([—id]), a very productive suffix used to create neuter nouns.378 The word *Iappit- is not presently attested in extant Luvian texts, but the verb lap- is attested in Hittite as various derived nouns (e.g., lappina- ‘flame—holder’ and lappiya— ‘fever, kindling’: CHD L—N 39—40, 44—45; HHw 102) and possibly also in Cuneiform Luvian (e.g., [apply'a— ‘heat’: CLL 126). Semitic-speakers perceived the geminated consonants of Indo-European Anatolian as voiceless when intervocalic, representing them in written texts with gemina— tion when possible (cf. Hoffner and Melchert 2008, 1:35). This explains the dages' in the pe of Hebrew T527. Furthermore, the i-vowel of the Luvian suflix —it perfectly accounts for the .hireq of Hebrew 1’97.

374. Exod 20:18; Judg 7:16, 20; 15:4 (2x), 5; Isa 62:1; Ezek 1:13; Nah 2:5 [2:4]; Zech 12:6; Job 41:11 [41:19]; Dan 10:6. The word 7'57' in Job 12:5 is best understood as the inseparable preposition Iamed plus the word 7‘9 ‘misfortune’ (Gordis 1978, 136: Pope 1965, 90). 375. QA, SA 1‘57' are adopted from Biblical Hebrew (DQA 129; DSA 442). 376. Zimmem (1917, 36) derives '1‘5'7 from Akk dipa'ru ‘torch'. However, this is highly speculative because it assumes an interchange of r and l as well as transposition of the consonants and vowels. 377. Other attempts to associate 1‘5? with the lndo-European root *Ieth- remain unconvincing. Gordon (1955, 61) and Segert (1962, 324) connect 1‘57 with Gk Muna’g. which has the form Muna'éog 1n' the genitive. However, this loan hypothesis faces several difficulties, including the lack of an i-vowel 1n‘ the second syllable of the Greek and the disappearance of the p. JA. CPA 15735 and Syr lampe'cja', which are loans from Greek but have been influenced by the vocalization of BH 1‘97, notably preserve the u. Rabin instead den'ves 1‘57 from an alleged Hitt *Iappit, the instrumental ofIappiya- (Rabin 1963, 128—29; 1964, 169—70). However, it is unlikely that Hebrew-speakers would borrow a Hittite noun in" the instrumental case, and it is not even clear that nouns of the common gender in -1‘ya form their instrumentals by monophthongization of the -1‘ya to -1' (Hofl‘ner 1968, 66). 378. On the Luvian suflix -it, see Starke 1990, 151—226; Melchett 2003, 198.

142

Chapter 3

1.31;”). Ftp-W: ‘room, chamber’ HALOT536—37: DCH 4:580, 5:778 (1 Sam 9:22; passim379) [?] CW QH rum; IA 71311;: DNWSI 765; Gk )téoxn LSJ 1040 This word occurs 48 times, most often in Late Biblical Hebrew (Chronicles and Ezra—Nehemiah) 0r transitional Biblical Hebrew (Jeremiah and Ezekiel). However, it also occurs once in the book of Samuel (1 Sam 9:22). The by-form Ftp-W: occurs several times in the book of Nehemiah (Neh 3:30; 12:44; 13:7). The varying initial consonant indicates a foreign origin, and several scholars have derived Hebrew rip-1;}? from Greek Maxi] ‘public building, hall’ (Rabin 1962, 1079; Gordon 1955, 60—61). However, this view faces several problems. First, Greek )véoxn never occurs with initial v, and no evidence exists that Greek 9» and v ever alternated in initial position for native Greek terms. If Hebrew- speakers borrowed this word from Greek, they should have maintained the initial liquid with no variance because Greek 1 was always pronounced [1], not [11].380 Second, the use of sin for Greek 0 is unusual because other languages with phonemes for [s] and [I], including Hebrew, always represent 6 by their phoneme for [s], not [1] (cf. W. S. Allen 1987, 45). Third, there is little reason to think that the verb presumed to be behind Xéoxn, *kéoxerat (supposedly from the (SK-present *M'xoicstat), ever existed (EDG 85o; contra DELG 607). Lastly, there is a slight semantic difference between the Hebrew and Greek forms. Hebrew 1.314)? refers to a room or chamber, often a private one belonging to an individual, whereas Greek Aa’oxn refers to a public building or hall used for lounging. These problems make a direct borrowing from Greek unlikely. It is more plausible that Hebrew-, Aramaic-, and Greek-speakers borrowed this culture word from a third—most probably Anatolian—source?“

379. 2 Kgs 23:11; Jer 35:2, 4 (3X); 36:10, 12, 20—21; Ezek 40:17 (2x), 38, 44—46; 41:10; 42:1, 4—5, 7 (2x), 8, 10—12, 13 (3X); 44:19; 45:5; 46:19; Ezra 8:29; 10:6; Neh 3:30; 10:38—40[1o:37—39];12:44; 1324—5, 7—9;1Chr 9:26, 33; 23:28; 28:12; 2 Chr 31:11. 380. On the pronunciation of Gk A and v, see Petrounias 2007, 563—64; Woodard 2008, 16; W. S. Allen 1987, 33, 4o. Rabin (1962, 1079) argues that the interchange of [l] and [11] indicates a borrowing via Cyprus. Presumably he is thinking of 1:11 for Gk Au’pvat‘, in line 9 of KAI 43, a Phoenician text from Lapethos. However, the use of mm rather than Iamed in this case is due to non-Greek indigenous interference; this toponym and its derived noun Mpvaé come from some non—Greek source on Cyprus (see EDG 834—35; DELG 596). There 1's, moreover, no evidence that Phoenician-speakers adopted this toponym from Greek. 381. Bremmer 2008, 164—66; Schrader 1911, 469. Little evidence exists for the contention that the Philistines mediated this word to Hebrew, especially because its origin is uncertain (contra Burkert 1993; Gordon 1955, 60—61). It is also unlikely that Semitic-speakers loaned this word to Greek because it is probably not Semitic (contra Roso’l 2008).

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

143

M—

an; ‘feldspar, amazonite’ HALOT 537; DCH 4:580 (Exod 28:19; 39:12) 6 t1y0’ptov,$ ligurius ‘Ligurian stone’; 6 anynwn’, 10”" PM “1‘31? (a precious stone) [D] Eg —) Heb Eg ns'm.t (since NK) GHwA" 459; WA‘S' 2:339—40; DLE 1:250382 Biblical Hebrew my? occurs only twice, both times in the description of the high priest’s breastplate (Exod 28:19; 39:12). It has no Semitic cognates and is not based on any known Semitic root, suggesting a foreign loan. The donor term is Egyptian ns'm.t, which is attested from the New Kingdom onward in texts such as the Book of the Dead.”3 The Berlin Amulet Board utilizes the term nsvm.t to describe scepters made of feldspar, indicating a type of blue or green feldspar, most probably amazonite (Putter and Karlshausen 1992, 102; Aufre‘re 1991, 2544—45; J. R. Harris 1961, 115). Amazonite was obtained from the Eastern Desert in the area of Wadi Higelig and Gebel Migif. The ancient Egyptians considered this mineral one of Egypt’s six most precious stones, and Egyptian texts ofien associate it with turquoise and lapis lazuli (Putter and Karlshausen 1992, 48; J. R. Ham‘s 1961, 116). Beginning with the Predynastic period, amazonite was used to make beads, and during the Middle Kingdom, it was especially popular for jewelry. The Egyptians used it for amulets as well as inlay dun'ng the New Kingdom, as the tomb of Tutankhamen attests (Aston, Harrell and Shaw 2000, 46; Putter and Karlshausen 1992, 48; Lucas

1962, 393494). ‘|x_n_'7 (a volume measure) HALOT 537; DCH 4:581 (Hos 3:2) 03 veBs)» oivou ‘wineskin’ (perhaps reading 13W" 5;} for the MT’s D‘W'W an), although Origen’s Hexapla o'oka‘ex osmpt'u follows the MT); 58 coro (a volume measure); 6 Ztk’ [Syriac form]; 1 does not directly represent this word [?] CW Sum LIDGA PSD; Akk litiktu, litku (0A) CAD L 216—17;AHw 556—57; Ug 1th DUL 501—2; EH 1n’7 DNWSI 585; JA 1n"? DJBA 629; Syr 1et_ka" LS2 699

382. JA 0W5, which occurs in 1 with reference to the biblical gemstone denoted by 0W"), is adopted from Biblical Hebrew (DJPA 287). 383. EPNL 248; Lambdin 1953b, 152; FWOT 97; Grintz 1975a, 8; Harrell, Hoffmeier and Williams 2017, 22—23. Eg n can represent both the nasal [n] and the lateral [l] (J. Allen 2013. 39; Loprieno 1995, 33) Thus, the use of lamea' for Eg n presents no problems.

144

Chapter 3

This word is a hapax that appears in Hos 3:2 as a measure of volume, mentioned along with the nph. It was probably equivalent to somewhere between 50 and 100 liters (cf. Powell 1992, 904). This word occurs in the Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls and shows up in several other Semitic languages, including Akkadian (Iitiktu, litku), Ugaritic (1th), Jewish Aramaic (Tn‘7), and Syriac (1et_ka"), as well as Sumerian (LIDGA). The variation in spelling (particularly the final h. rather than k of the U garitic form), the difference in gender, and the peripheral appearance in Old Assyrian Akkadian indicate that this word is not native to Semitic. Thus, Hebrew 1-137 and its related forms are probably not connected with Akkadian lata'ku ‘to test’ or Syriac la‘_tek ‘suitable’, but instead represent an ancient culture word.384 1173 ‘to give, give over’ HALOT 545; DCH 5:134 (Gen 14:20; Hos 11:8; Prov 4:9) 6 napafiiocoui ‘to deliver, give over’ Gen 14:20; Hos 11:8, o'rtspaom’Cu) ‘to shield’ (probably by association with 1:1,?) ‘shield’) Prov 4:9; 58 protego ‘to protect’; 6 Aphel ofs'lm ‘to give over, deliver’ Gen 14:20, ‘dr ‘to aid’ Hos 11:8, sb‘ ‘to be satisfied’ Prov 4:9; i 1073 ‘to hand over’ Gen 14:20, 131122 ‘to destroy’ Hos 11:8, does not directly represent this word Prov 4:9 [N] Hurr > Ug; Heb; Phoen Ug mgn DUL 525; OH 11?); Phoen 1m DNWSI 593; Hurr maganni- BGH 239; GLH 164 This word occurs only three times. In Gen 14:20 it has the meaning of ‘to give over’, referring to God delivering Abraham’s enemies into his hand. It has a similar sense in Hos 11:8, where it occurs parallel to the verb 1m and expresses God’s reluctance to give the northern kingdom over to destruction. Lastly, in Prov 4291113 describes wisdom giving a beautiful crown to the one who treasures her. The exclusive use in the Pie] stem indicates that up is denominal, and a nominal form must have existed even though it is not clearly attested in Biblical Hebrew.” Aside from Biblical Hebrew up, the only other verbal forms attested in Semitic are Ugaritic mgn and Phoenician 1m, and these are almost certainly denominal as well. One may presume the existence of a Hebrew noun 1313* meaning ‘gift‘, comparing Akkadian magannu, Ugaritic mgn, and Punic 11038" 384. ALBH 82—83; AM 67; contra CAD L 216—17; von Soden 1951. 164. 385. The term 1373* ‘gifi’ may occur in Hos 4:18 ifthe problematic phrase 0‘31?) 1159 is to be repointed to 3330115? ‘her gifts are shame' (cf. Rudolph 1966, 108; Rabin 1961. 389; C. Bauer 1786—1790, 1:32—33). Some scholars also find two occurrences of WV ‘gifi’ in the book of Proverbs, reading 1;?) WW, for IN 137; in Prov 6:11; 24:34 (e.g., O’Connor 1989, 28). However, the ancient versions offer no support for this understanding, and w; W‘N could just as easily mean ‘armed warrior’. literally ‘man of a shield' (M. Fox 2000, 217—18; Waltke 2004—2005, 1:327. 340—41). 386. CAD M/1 31-32; AHw 574—75; DUL 525; DNWSI 593—94. Palm. JA 1113 as well as Syr magga‘n all mean ‘gratis’ rather than ‘gifi, present” (DNWSI 593—94; DJPA 291; DJBA 641; LS’ 709—10). The

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

I45

These Semitic nouns meaning ‘gift’ are not native to Semitic. They have a relatively limited distribution and possess no evident Semitic etymology, and the final double consonant ofAkkadian magannu is indicative of a foreign loan. During the second millennium, Akkadian magannu occurs only in texts from Boghazko"y and Nuzi. Its limitation to these sites suggests a Hurrian origin, especially because a perfect donor term, maganm'-, occurs in Hurrian.387 There is no reason to think that the Northwest Semitic forms have been borrowed from Akkadian, and both the Akkadian and the Northwest Semitic forms most likely come directly from Hurrian.388 n‘m ‘sailor, mariner’ HALOT 588; DCH 5:293 (Ezek 27:9, 27, 29; Jon 1:5) 6 Kmmkdmg ‘rower’ except vatho'g ‘sailor’ Jon 1:5; 13 nauta ‘sailor’; 6 mlh.’ [Syriac form]; 1 150 ‘sailor’ [T] Sum —> Akk —> —> Heb; Phoen —> Aram —+ Arab Sum MALAHV PSD; Akk mala"h3u (OAkk, OA, OB, Mari, Nuzi, MA, MB, RS, NA, NB) CAD M/1 149—52; AHw 592—93; QB 1157:; Phoen n‘m DNWSI 632; IA, JA 1'1'7?) DNWSI 632; DJPA 309; DJBA 678; Syr malla'ha' LS2 767; Mand malaha MD 243; Arab malla'h. Lane 2733

Biblical Hebrew r1773 occurs only four times, with reference to a sailor of a ship. Although related forms exist in Akkadian, Phoenician, Aramaic, and Arabic, this word has no Semitic etymology. Scholars have long recognized that the Northwest Semitic forms originate with Akkadian mala'vhu, which in turn comes from Sumerian MALAHH, which does have a perfectly good etymology: MA ‘ship’ and LAVH

Akkadian expressions ana maga’m‘ and ina maga'm', both meaning “in vain' or ‘for nothing, gratis’, occur only in Neo-Assyrian and Nee-Babylonian and constitute Aramaisms. See AIA 67. 387. Scholars debate whether Hurr maganni—, in turn, comes from lndo-Aryan (cf. Skt magha'‘gifi’). It is possible that it does, especially because the Human derivational suffix -nm’ appears on other Hurrian nouns of foreign origin, including Indo-Aryan loans (Giorgieri 2000, 211; F. Bush 1973, 43; cf. Rabin 1970, 484—86; EWA in 2:289; ICEWA 2: 545—46). Nevertheless, an lndo-Aryan origin is not entirely certam'. 388. AIA 67; von Soden 1964; Kronasser 1958. Some scholars contend that the Hurrian word is a loan from Semitic (e.g., O’Connor 1989; Kammenhuber 1968, 222—30; Diakonoff 1972, 114). However, these scholars ignore the nearly exclusive association of this word with the Hurrians durm‘g the second millennium and overlook the denominal nature of the verbal forms, which are in any case limited to Northwest Semitic. The occurrences of magannu with the meaning ‘gratis’ during the first millennium are clear Aramaisms, and Arab mag'g'a'n is also an Aramaic loan in light of its meaning and doubled second consonant. There is little evidence, therefore, that this word is widespread in Semitic, much less native to Semitic. Accordingly, it must have been borrowed from Hurrian, the language with which it is most closely associated in its earliest attestations.

146

Chapter 3

‘to bring’.389 Therefore, as indicated by the differing vocalizations, Hebrew n77) has no etymological connection with n‘m ‘salt’. This word provides a good example of an adopted term that has been completely nativized, for it displays the typical Hebrew nominal pattern for professions (e.g., :32 ‘thief’ and 7:3 ‘hunter’) (cf. Bauer and Leander 1922, 478—79

l§§61hY—n)’])U779 (a kind of mortar) HALOT590; DCH 5:299 (Jer 4339) 6 translates 13733 19%;: as npo'Gupov ‘forecourt’; EB translates the same expression as crypra ‘crypt, vault’; 6 mlt.’ [Syriac form]; 17% ‘plaster’ [D] Gk —> Heb; Aram; Lat Syr mla‘t,a' LS2 768; Gk ua’kea, ua'ken LSJ 1077; Lat maltha, malta OLD 1176 This word occurs only in Jer 43:9, where God tells Jeremiah to take two large stones and bury them 137m (3.7.733. This expression presents some difficulties, but comparison with Syriac mla'fa' establishes the meaning of Hebrew to?) as ‘mortar’, and Palmyrene Aramaic 1:177) and Syriac malba'na‘ indicate that Hebrew 137?: here refers to the base or frame of a gate.390 Hence, Jeremiah is to take two large stones and bury them in the mortar (Um-3) at the base of the gate (137733) at the entrance to Pharaoh’s palace (rims-n”:- ring;- 1%). Ko"hler and Baumgartner (HALOT 590) derive Hebrew U72; from a hypothetical root 9573* ‘to plaster’ that is allegedly cognate with Syriac ml; ‘smear with oil, smear with chalk’. However, this etymology remains dubious, especially since Syriac mlt, may be a denominal verb from mla‘m'.391 One should instead compare Greek ua'ltea, uak’en, which can denote a variety of soft substances, such as wax for covering writing tablets or a wax—pitch mixture used for caulking ships. The substance denoted by this term could also be used for cementing, as indicated by Latin maltha, malta, a loan from Greek that denotes a particular type of mortar (DELL 380; LEW 2:17). Pliny, for example, describes maltha as a kind of cement made from limestone (Nat. 36.58.181; cf. Festus Verb. sign. 135.16; Palladius, 0p. agr. 1.17.2—4). Greek wilted, udkfln also has a plausible native etymology, namely, a number of words meaning ‘sofi’ or the like (e.g., palOouco’g).392 Because this word has a good 389. ALBH 93; Lipin’ski 1988, 69; AIA 69; FWOT 103; Zimmem 1917, 45. On the Sumerian on‘gin of Akk mala'hvu, see SLOB 384—85 (#461). As indicated by the h, rather than [1, Arab malla'h is a loan from Aramaic (Fran"kel 1886, 221). 390. 137?; elsewhere refers to a brick-mold (Nah 3:14) or brick-kiln (2 Sam 12:31), similar to Akk nalbanu. 391. Arab mila'] derives from Syriac (Fran"kel 1886, 10—11). Hence, it does not provide any additional evidence for a root *mlt, meaning ‘to plaster’ in Semitic. 392. DELG 637—38; contra EDG 898. Hesychius ofAlexandria (Lex. 11180—81) explicitly connects Gk 1161901, Men with the adjective uaMKia, a variant form of uaMJuKia meaning ‘soft, weak’.

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

I47

Greek etymology but no Semitic etymology, Hebrew 1377; most probably comes from Greek rather than vice versa.393 02: ‘conscription for corve'e labor, tribute’ HALOT603—4; DCH 52358—59 (Gen 49:15; passim394) [D] Hurr —> Akk; Heb Akk massu (Alalakh, EA) CAD M/I 327; AHw 619; QH on; Hurr "‘mese-395 Biblical Hebrew 0n occurs 23 times. It most often refers to forced labor during the time of Joshua and the judges (Josh 16:10; 17:13; Judg 1:28, 30, 33, 35) and that of David and Solomon (2 Sam 20:24; 1 Kgs 4:6; 1 Kgs 5:27—28; 9:15, 21; 12:18; 2 Chr 8:8; 2 Chr 10:18). Only once does 07; mean ‘tn'bute’ (Esth 10:1). This word has no clear Semitic etymology and occurs in place of the native Hebrew word meaning ‘conscription for corve'e labor’, 7'30 (cf. Akk sablu, attested only at Mari: CAD S 4; AHw 999). Thus, it is a likely candidate for a foreign loan.396 The only other Semitic language in which this word occurs is Akkadian, but even here it is found only rarely: it is attested as massu several times in one of the Amama letters (EA 365214, 23, 25) and at Alalakh (AT 246:6, 13; 259215; 265:7; 268214; 269:18~19; 274:25). Because the Akkadian form occurs primarily at Alalakh, and because the Hurrians exerted various cultural and linguistic influences in Late Bronze Age Palestine during the time ofthe Amama letters, Hebrew on is probably of Hurrian origin.

393. Rabin 1964, 152; contra H. Lewy 1895, 172; Mayer 1960, 330. According to Masson (1967, 8), the d1r'ection of borrowing from Greek to Hebrew in this case is obvious (cf. Roso’l 2013, 190), 394. Exod 1:11; Deut 20:11; Josh 16:10; 17:13; Judg 1:28, 30, 33, 35; 2 Sam 20:24;1Kgs 4:6; 5:27 [5:13] (2X), 28 [5:14]; 9:15, 21; 12:18; lsa 31:8; Prov 12:24; Lam 1:1; Esth 10:1; 2 Chr 8:8; 10:18. 395. JA on occurs in biblical contexts and is adopted from BH 0?) (DJPA 319). 396. Scholars have offered both Semitic and non-Semitic etymologies for this word, none ofwhich is convincing. Montgomery (1935, 267) connects it with OSA mm" and Eth mans’a". However, these terms are derived from the Semitic root ns’ ‘to lift, bear, carry’. Phonologically, both are incompatible with BH 0?); they also differ semantically in that OSA mns" means ‘musten'ng oftroops’ and Eth mans’a" means ‘gifi’ (DOSA 319; CDG 404). Tawil (2009, 217—18) instead connects on with not: of Deut 16:10, which he contends means ‘basket’. However, little evidence exists that no?) means ‘basket’ or that this alleged meaning semantically developed into “corve'e work’. Noth (1968, 212—13) derives it from Eg ms ‘to bring, present’. However, this does not adequately explain the frequent attestation of this term at Alalakh. Finally, Rabin (1964, 171—72) compares BH 0D with Hitt mazz-, which he contends means ‘to endure, bear’. Yet, Hitt mazz- does not mean ‘to endure, bear’ with respect to servitude, but ‘to withstand, tolerate, resist’ in the sense of withstanding or resistin'g someone’s powers, particularly an enemy’s military strength. Rabin admits this difliculty but contends that the bilingual Azatiwada inscn‘ption uses the Hieroglyphic Luvian term *miti- for Phoen 1:12 (Azatiwada §l,6), demonstrating the definition ‘to serve’ for Hitt *mar-, allegedly a by- form of mazz-. However, the syllabogravphic value for the Hieroglyphic Luvian logogram SERVUS is not mi, and *min'- is a ghost word. In any case, “0 bY-form *mat- exists in Hittite; the sole alleged occurrence of Hitt *mat- is based on an incorrect reading of ma—t[e—er] in KBo 3.13 vs. 18 (cf. CHD L-N 214).

Chapler 3

148

The Hurrian donor term is *mese-. Although presently unattested in Human texts, Uram'an meie- ‘obligation, tribute’ and mes'- ‘to collect’, both of which are used to refer to a foreign vassal’s obligations in Urartian texts (Arutiunian 2001. 455; cf. Diakonoff and Starostin 1986, 22), indicate the existence of this word in Hurro—Urartian and permit the reconstruction of *mese- in Hurrian. The i-class vowel of Hurrian *mese-, which is preserved in the Hebrew plural form 0‘03. has shifted to an a-class vowel in the Hebrew singular form on in accordance with Philippi’s Law.397 This institution that originated in the second millennium B.C.E. differs from other forms of conscripted labor, such as that denoted by Akkadian ilku or unus's'u. both of which refer to service obligations of landholders. Akkadian massu instead refers to conscripted labor cam'ed out by those away from their home towns. Many ofthe occurrences in the biblical text share this same meaning. Solomon conscn‘pts men to work in Mt. Lebanon (1 Kgs 5:27—28). Similarly, the Israelites conscript the Canaanites, displaced peoples because the Israelites are portrayed as the rightful inhabitants of the land, to forced labor (Josh 16:10; 17:13; Judg 1:28, 30., 33. 35: cf. Deut 20:11). By the Persian pen'od, Hebrew 07: came to mean "tribute’ instead (cf. Esth 10:1), similar to the semantic development undergone by Akkadian [1sz98 130?; ‘Indian rosewood’ HALOT 606; DCH 5:364 (Isa 40:20) (5, 23, C5 do not directly represent this word; i 111R ‘laurel’ [T] Sum ——* Akk —> Heb Sum MESMAGANA PSD; Akk musukannu (OB, Mari, SB, NA, NB) CAD M/2 237—39; MW 678 The word 13-0,]; is attested only in Isa 40:20. Traditionally, lexicographers have understood this word as a Pual participle from an alleged verb 130*, ‘to be poor‘ (HALOT 606; BDB 698). However, the parallelism with 291715 (‘3 ‘wood that does not rot’ indicates that 130]; refers to a tree. Hebrew 130,7; should instead be compared with Akkadian musukannu, a par— ticular species of tree (FWOT 106—7). This fits the contextual meaning of 130; perfectly. In further support of the relationship is the observation that Akkadian texts describe musukannu as a durable wood (1',s.su da‘ru‘), an expression similar to 397. As a “Canaanite” dialect, Amama Akkadian exhibits the same vowel change, explaining the form massu in Amama Akkadian. The use of an a-class rather than i-class vowel in Alalakh Akkadian is not detn'mental to the loan hypothesis proposed here, because Alalakh Akkadian can alternate these two vowel classes (Giacumakis 1970, 28). 398. Cf. Na’aman (2005), who argues that Israel’s conscription ofthe Canaanites for forced labor represents a distinct development in the use of this term. While it does introduce the element of foreigners being forced into conscn‘pted labor, conceptually it still relates to conscn'pted labor outside one’s land because the Canaanites are viewed as non-inhabitants. Hence, the difference in usage is not as great as Na’aman contends.

149 Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible /m

3913.21"? W (Millard and Snook 1964). Akkadian musukannu, in turn, is a loan from Sumen’an MESMAGANA ‘mes-tree from Magan’ (cf. th5 iii:2o4).399 The identity of this tree is established by an Old Persian—Akkadian—Elamite trilinglal text. Using the termyaka'-, the Old Persian equivalent ofAkkadian musukannu, Darius claims to have brought this kind of wood from Gandara and Karmara located west of modern Pakistan (API 5:24—25 // DSf 34). Assuming that this equation between Old Persian yaka‘- and Akkadian musukannu is correct, the species of this tree can be identified as sissoo, or Indian rosewood (Dalbergia sissoo) on the basis of its descendant in modern Iranian (cf. NPers jag). Sissoo wood is native to what is now India and southern Iran (cf. Arrianus, Peripl. M. Eux. 36; Cosmas, Top. 11.15), precisely the region from where Darius is said to have obtained the wood. It is also very durable, matching the characteristics of this tree as described in Akkadian texts and in Isa 40:20.400 ‘11)?) (a luxury garment) HALOT 645; DCI-I 5:520 (Ezek 16:10, 13) 6 Ipixamog ‘woven hair’; £3 subtilis ‘fine’ Ezek 16:10, polymitus ‘colorfully woven’ Ezek 16:13; 6 [21’ ‘covering, cloth’ Ezek 16:10, tklt’ ‘purple fabric’ Ezek 16:13; I 1WD! ‘dyed material’ [D] Eg —> Heb Eg msy (NK, Ptolm) GHwA" 384; WA'S' 2:143; DLE 1:204 This word appears only twice in the Hebrew Bible, both times in Ezekiel with reference to God’s provision of fine clothing for Judah (Ezek 16:10, 13). Hebrew ‘Wp lacks a plausible Semitic etymology, indicating a foreign origin. Possible donor terms include both Hittite .mas's'iya- and Egyptian msy (cf. Rabin 1963, 130; 1964, 172). Hittite mas's"1'ya- is used in New Hittite texts to denote a garment (HHw 114; CHD L—N 205—6).“01 Egyptian msy, which appears during the New Kingdom and Ptolemaic period, also refers to a garment.“2 Three loan hypotheses therefore present themselves: Hebrew Wit; is a loan from Hittite, a loan from Egyptian, or a loan from a third language that also gave rise to

399. Landersdorfer 1916, 49. Lieberman (SLOB), however, does not list Akk musukannu as a loan fi'om Sumen‘an. 400. Gershevitch 1957; Williamson 1986; Millard and Snook 1964. Thompson’s identification ([949, 316—17) ofAkk musukarmu with the mulberry tree is based on the observation that no Akkadian word is known to mean ‘mulberry tree’, as well as an alleged phonological similarity between Akk musukannu and Gk o‘uxa'uwog ‘sycomore-fig tree’. Such reasoning, however, is hardly convincing. 401. This word entered Ugaritic via Hurrian as mm, which occurs once in the alphabetic texts (KTU 4146.5) and several times in Ras Shamra Akkadian (RS 17.148 A27; 25.131211) (DUL 598). 402. Hannig (GHwAu 386) and Erman and Grapow (WA'S' 2:149) etymologically connect Eg msy with mss, which also appears in New Kingdom texts. If this is true, there would be no relationship between “1.5 Egyptian and Hittite forms. However, a connection between Eg msy and ms is not necessarily evrdent (EDE 3:580).

150

Chapter 3

the Hittite and Egyptian forms (Rabin 1963. 130: 1964. 172: EPNL :50). Given the data and this word’s sparse attestation, one cannot be too dogmatic. Nevertheless. two factors indicate that Hebrew ‘11,"7; comes from Egyptian msv and not Hittite mas's'iya—. First, in Ezek 16:10, 13 ‘0‘?) appears in conjunction with 0"‘c‘. an Egyptian loan into Biblical Hebrew. Second. the surrounding context alludes to the Exodus from Egypt by mentioning God’s covenant with Israel (Ezek 16:8). Hence. Hebrew ‘er is likely an Egyptian loan.403 WWW; ‘lamp’ HALOT 1925 (Dan 5:5) CG @031; ‘light’; 9’ laundg ‘torch, lamp’; 8 candelabrum ‘candlestick‘: G s'rg’ ‘lamp’ [D] OIran ~—> Aram Syr nab_res'ta' L52 885—86; OIran *m‘bras"ta'- AISN 175

Biblical Aramaic 813131;; is found only in Dan 5:5, where it denotes a lamp illuminating Belshazzar’s great feast. It has no convincing Semitic etymology. and already Brown, Driver, and Bn‘ggs (BDB 1102) suspected a foreign word.404 The donor term is Old Iranian *nibras"ta'— ‘lamp’ (cf. Pahl braz'is’n and NPers nibras': CPD 19; CPED 1384).405 This word does not actually occur in extant Old Iranian texts, but it has a perfectly good Iranian etymology: the prefix ni- ‘down’ (cfi OPers ni- and Av m“: OPGTL 193; A1W 1080), the root *bra‘s'- ‘to shine, glow’ (cf. Av braz‘a-z AIW 972), and the suffix -!a.4°" Syriac nab_res'ta‘ ‘lamp, fire’ can also be traced back to Old Iranian, and Arabic nibra's ‘lamp’ comes from Syriac (Ciancaglini 2008, 211; Frankel 1886, 95—96). m (BH); 1?; (BA) ‘sheath’ HALOT 674, 1926—27; DCH 5:626 (Dan 7:15; 1 Chr'21227) 0G omits, 0’ écppiéev ro‘ mau‘pa’ poo ev’ tfi éésr poo ‘my spirit shuddered in my state’, 523 hormit spiritus meus ego Daniel territus sum in his ‘my spirit 403. FWOT 109. Muchiki (EPNL 250) objects to this loan hypothesis on the basis that V"); rete‘rs to a material used for making gaments, not a garment itsel,f and on the basis that it postulates an irregular correspondence between Heb sin and Eg s (EPNL 250). However, ‘Wp can certainly refer to a garment within the context of Ezek 16:10, 13, and the sibilant correspondences between Hebrew and Egyptian are too problematic for Muchiki to be so dogmatic. 404. Millard (1987) considers Karma; a loan from Akkadian. He postulates a hypothetical Akk *nebrartu (originally mabrartu) from bara‘ru ‘to flicker’, assuming the shifi ofma to ne before a labial and further assumm’g a shifi from rt to 5!. While possible, Millard’s etymology involves a number of phonetic shifts and is quite speculative. Montgomery (1927, 255) instead derives 85%;; from an alleged root 113* ‘to be bright’. However, the root brr always has to do with being clean or pure in Semitic. not brightness, and the series ofphonetic shifis Montgomery proposes is likewise speculative. 405. FWOT 110; F. Rosenthal 2006, 63; AAT 2:59; Tisdall 1912, 366—67. 406. On the sufl‘lx -ra, see OPGTL 51 (§145).

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

151

trembled, I Daniel, was frightened at this’ both render the verse idiomatically, 6 ms’kb’ ‘bed’ Dan 7:15; (5 Koleo'v ‘sheath, scabbard’, E3 vagina ‘sheath, scabbard’, G h_lt’ ‘sheath’, ‘72. 1'15 ‘sheath’ 1 Chr 21227 [D] OIran —» Heb; Aram,‘ Elam QA, JA1'1:1 DQA 152; Jastrow 1903, 879; OIran *nida'ni- AISN 175; [AP 439; Elam nu—da—nu-ia-is', nu-da-nu-is' E W 1005“07

Hebrew 17; occurs only in 1 Chr 21:27, where the angel plaguing David’s people finally stops and returns his sword to its sheath (.‘1-17;"7__x 13111 311/31). This word also occurs in Biblical Aramaic as m, assuming that 1.17: of Dan 7:15 should be emended to 1.171, or m with a third person feminine pronominal suffix. Here, the expression an: Nil;- ‘mn 11319-1315 means ‘my spirit was troubled within me’ (more literally ‘my spirit was troubled within its sheath’). A very similar expression, 115 ’nmm 1171111, appears at Qumran (apGen 2:10) (cf. Greenfield and Shaked 1972, 38). This word is relatively rare in Semitic, occurring elsewhere only in later Aramaic, and has no apparent Semitic etymology. This suggests a foreign origin. No"ldeke was the first to suggest that the donor term is Old Iranian *m'da‘m'- ‘container’ (cf. ManParth nyy’m, ny’m and NPers niya'm: DMMPP 256; CPED 1441).408 Such a word is not directly attested in Old Iranian texts, but the Elamite texts from Persepolis (e.g., PT 1926; 21:6—7; 56:7; PFNN 1622:4—5) confirm the existence of this word in Old Iranian. Old Iranian *nida'ni- properly refers to a storage room but can also be used to denote anything that can be used for storage, such as a container (cf. Skt nidha’na-, nidha‘lna- ‘container’: E WA ia 1:772, 2:40; KEWA 2:163).409 Hence, in 1 Chr 21:27 1']; refers to a container for a sword, and 1'1; refers to Daniel’s body, the “container” for his soul, in Dan 7:15. Notably, this Old Iranian loanword appears in place of 11111;, the more common biblical word denoting a sheath for a sword. 1111: ‘power, strength’ HALOT 692; DCH 5:671 (Isa 30:30) 6 Bupo'g ‘anger, wrath’; it terror ‘dread, terror’; C5 mh_wt’ ‘force, blow’; 1 mph ‘strength’ [D] Eg —> Heb Eg nhvt (since OK) AuW 1:650, 2:1325—26; GHwA" 452; WA'S'2:316—17;DLE 1:246 This word occurs only in Isa 30:30 in the expression 117111 1'11]: ‘the 111]; of his arm’. It appears within a short oracle against Assyria (Isa 30:27—33), which, in turn, occurs within a broader condemnation of Israel’s reliance upon Egypt (Isa 30—31). 407. The variant 1‘15 also occurs in Late Jewish Aramaic (Jastrow 1903, 693). 408. No"ldeke 1884, 1022; cf. F. Rosenthal 2006, 63; AAT 2:59; Tisdall 1912, 367—68. 409- NJ, Tl; could have come from Indic rather than Iranian, but this seems less likely (contra Rabin 1962, I079; 1970, 478—79). The Iranian context ofthe book of Daniel favors an Old Iranian loan, as does the presence of other Iranian loanwords in the Genesis Apoayphon.

152

Chapter 3

Hebrew lexicographers commonly define nm as ‘lowering’, deriving it from the verb anJ (cf. HALOT692; BDB 539; Gesenius, Thesaurus 500). However, the root nm is more typical ofAramaic than Hebrew. This might suggest an Aramaism, but Hebrew hm cannot be an Aramaism because an Aramaic loan would be vocalized differently.410 The parallelism suggests that, like 'n'rl ‘majesty’, no: is a noun representing one of God’s characteristics rather than a gerund meaning ‘lowering’. Instead, Hebrew rim derives from Egyptian mm.” This word means ‘strength’ and appears as early as the Old Kingdom (cf. Dem nvhtJ and Copt nas'te: CDD N 117—18; DC 226; Crum 238). The term nhvt occurs in Egyptian texts in the expressions right Vhps' and n_h! ‘, both meaning ‘strength of arm’, with reference to gods and kings (cf. Hoffmeier 1983, 66—67; Go"rg 1986a). Coptic nas'te demonstrates that the Egyptian form contained a consonant cluster, explaining the segolate pattern of the Hebrew form. Additionally, defining Hebrew nm as ‘strength’ perfectly fits the parallelism and the broader context. As is typical of his oracles, Isaiah uses vocabulary (in this case, an Egyptian loan) appropriate to the subject matter of his oracle (in this case, condemnation of Israel’s reliance upon Egypt). In doing so, he adds to the effect of the passage: the arm of Pharaoh provides no support, but the arm of God defeats Assyria. This imagery takes on even more significance given the Hebrew Bible's frequent contrast of God’s arm (wit), a symbol of his power and deliverance, with the powerless arm of Egypt.412 mop; (BH); pop: (BA) ‘wealth, property’ HALOT 699, 1930—31;DCH 5:692 (Josh 22:8; Qoh 5:18 [5:19]; 6:2; Ezra 6:8; 7:26; 2 Chr1:11—12) (5 xpfiua ‘possessions, wealth’ Josh 22:8; 2 Chr 1:11—12, u'iroi'pxov ‘possessions’ Qoh 5:18; 6:2; Ezra 6:8, Biog ‘life’ Ezra 7:26; 23 substantia ‘goods’ except arca ‘coffer’ Ezra 6:8; 6 nksy’ [Syriac form]; 32 1‘03: [Aramaic form] [T] Sum —> Akk —> Heb; Aram Sum NIGAKAS PSD; Akk m'kkassu (OA, OB, Elam, Mari, MB, RS, Nuzi, MA, SB. NA, NB») CAD N/2 223—30; AHw 789; EH, Sir, QH moo: DNWSI 731—32; IA, Palm, SA 1‘03], JA, CPA ‘DD‘J, ’ODJ DNWSI 731—32; DJPA 351; DJBA 751; DSA 527; DCPA 264; Syr niksayya‘ L52 919 This word occurs five times in Biblical Hebrew as the plurale tantum D‘Op; (Josh 22:8; Qoh 5:18; 6:2; 2 Chr 1:11—12). The Biblical Aramaic form also occurs only in the plural as 1‘03: (Ezra 6:8; 7:26). 410. On the alleged Aramaic origin of nm, see M. Wagner 1966, 83 (#188). Comparison with Ps 38:3, which uses the verb nn: in conjunction with 73, does little to support the definition ‘lowering‘ in Isa 30:30 (contra EPNL 25o; Gesenius, Thesaurus 500). 411. F WOT 112; Go"rg 1986b. Rin (1963, 24—25) also derives BH nm from Eg n_ht. His comparison with Ugaritic, however, is mistaken because Ug nh't does not mean ‘strength’.

412. This imagery occurs in the Exodus narratives as well as the Prophets. See Hofimeier 1986: 1988.

Non-Semitic Loanwords

in the Hebrew Bible

153

M“

Related terms include Akkadian m'kkassu ‘account, wealth, property’ and various forms meaning ‘wealth, property’ in Aramaic. The Hebrew and Aramaic forms come from Akkadian nikkassu, in turn a loan from Sumerian NIG‘KAS, also meaning ‘account’. The meaning ‘wealth, property’, the same meaning that the Hebrew and Aramaic forms have, is attested only in Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian during the first millennium 13.013. Hence, this word must have been adopted by Northwest Semitic—speakers sometime during the first millennium.413 1.9: ‘turquoise’ HALOT 709; DCH 5:715 (Exod 28:18; 39:11; Ezek 27:16; 28:134‘4) G u'v6pa§ ‘dark red stone’ Exod 28:18; 39:11, omits Ezek 27:16, xpvoiov ‘gold’ Ezek 28213; SE carbunculus ‘carbuncle’ except gemma ‘gem’ Ezek 27:16; 6 .sdyd’ ‘antimony’ Exod 28:18; 39:11, omits Ezek 27:16, qrwsflws ‘crystal’ Ezek 28:13; I 111018 ‘emerald’ except 1‘3‘1311 ‘wrappings’ Ezek 27216 [D] Eg —* Heb Eg mflo’t (OK), mf?k.t (MK), mfk.t (since NK)A"W1:526—27, 221060—61; GHwA" 352; WA'S' 2:56; DLE 1:183415 This word occurs four times. It appears three times in the list of gemstones of the high pn'est’s breastplate (Exod 28:18; 39:11) and the adornment of the king of Tyre (Ezek 28:13). The fourth attestation is Ezek 27:16, which lists 1:9: as a traded item. Hebrew not has no cognates and is not based on any known Semitic root, indicating a foreign origin. It comes from Egyptian mfkfj, mf?k.t, mfk.t ‘turquoise’.‘“° By the New Kingdom, the f of the Egyptian form had dropped out, hence its lack of representation in Hebrew. Furthermore, the use of nun for Egyptian m reflects the neutralization between m and n that occurred in some environments in Later Egyptian.417 Neo-Assyrian literature refers to the Egyptian toponym Pr-.ht,hr-(nb.t)mko as “'“Pi-hVa-at-ti—hvu-ru-un-pi—ki, providing a precedent for the writing of this word with Semitic n for Egyptian m.418 The turquoise mines of the Sinai Peninsula have been a significant source of this blue-green mineral since antiquity. The two principal sources in this region were Wadi Maghara, which was mined from the Early Dynastic period through the Middle Kingdom, and Serabit el-Khadim, which was mined from the Middle Kingdom until 413. ALBH 103; Lipin’ski 1988, 69—70; AM 77; Zimmem 1917, 20. On the Sumerian origin ofAkk nildrassu, see SLOB 414—15 (#514). 414. As indicated by the contextual mention of precious stones and materials, the occurrences of 1:15 in Isa 54:11 and 1 Chr 29:2 are probably scribal errors for .191 ‘turquoise’ (Baltzer 2001, 448, 452; McKenzie 1968, 138; Rudolph 1955, 190; Kittel 1902, 102—3). 415. JA, SA 1911 are adopted from BH .19: (Jastrow 1903, 889; DSA 537). 416. EPNL 251; Lambdin 1953b, 152; Gn‘ntz 1975a, 8; Harrell, Hofl‘meier and Williams 2017, 17—18. On the substance denoted by Eg mfkiJ, mf?k.t, mfk.t, see Fuchs 1986. 417. On the elision of i, see J. Allen 2013, 40—42; Lopn'eno 1995, 33, 38; Peust 1999, 127—29, 142—51. 0n the neutralization between m and n in Later Egyptian, see Junge 2005, 37. 418. Gauthier 1925—1931, 2:118; cf. EPNL 251; Lambdin 1953b, 152.

Chapter 3

154

the Late period (Aston, Harrell and Shaw 2000, 62; Lucas 1962, 404; cf. O’Donoghue 2006d). Canaanite peoples were the primary laborers in the mines at Serabit elKhadim, and the evidence of the Proto-Sinaitic inscriptions from this site—coupled with discoveries at Wadi el-H,o‘l in Egypt—points to the origin ofthe Semitic alphabet in Egypt under the influence of Egyptian hieroglyphs (Hamilton 2006, 269—321). The long history of extensive contact between Egyptian- and Semitic-speaking peoples and the latter’s involvement in turquoise mining at Serabit el-Khadim support the plausibility of this term being borrowed into Hebrew via Egyptian. Turquoise was used primarily for jewelry as early as the Predynastic period, a use that continued into the Greco— Roman period. Contrary to popular belie,f there is no evidence that powdered turquoise was used as a cosmetic pigment, although it may have been used in powdered form for the production of glazes (Lee and Quirke 2000, 111; Aston, Harrell and Shaw 2000, 62—63). T]: ‘spikenard’ HALOT723—24; DCH 5:756 (Song 1:12; 4:13—14) (5, 23, 6 each use their corresponding forms of the word (va’poog, nardus, and nrdyn, respectively); I 711 [Aramaic form] Song 1:12, pm ‘spikenard’ Song 4313—14 [D] OInd —> —> Heb; Aram; OSA —> Gk —) Lat QA, JA, CPA 111DQA 161; Jastrow 1903, 936; DCPA 273; Syr nard'm L52 951; OSA rnd DOSA 489; Gk va’péog LS] 1160; Lat nardus, nardum OLD 1271; 01nd *narda- E WAia 2:23; KE WA 2:140—41419

This word occurs three times in the Song of Songs (Song 1:12; 4:13—14) and refers to spikenard (Nara’ostachysjatamansi). This perennial plant’s underground stems (rhizomes) are covered in spike-like hairs that can be crushed to obtain a fragrant, aromatic oil (Musselman 2012, 100—101; Lo"w 1924—1934, 3482—88). It is not surprising, therefore, that Hebrew 7']: occurs within the context ofvarious aromatics and spices. Related forms are found in Aramaic and Old South Arabian as well as Greek and Latin. The final unbroken consonant cluster, something not typically tolerated in Biblical Hebrew, indicates a non-Semitic origin. The word would have been borrowed along with the product, and the natural place to look is East Asia because spikenard is native to the Himalayan region. Already Gesenius recognized Hebrew 7']: as a loan from Old Indic *narda- (cf. Skt na’lada- and Pa‘li narada-), also the source of Greek va’p60g.42° Classical authors mention several different kinds of 419. Akk lardu, the equivalent ofSum H51R1M in lexical texts, is almost certainly not connected. It occurs already in Standard Babylonian Akkadian, significantly earlier than any of the allegedly related Semitic forms, and denotes a species of grass with a high alkali content that was used for soap (cf. CAD L 103). 420. Gesenius, Thesaurus 914; cf. Rabin 1962, 1079; Powels 1992, 193—94. Classicists ofien assume that Gk va’p809 den‘ves from Semitic (e.g., E06 996; DELG 708; Roso’l 2013, 75—76; Masson 1967, 56).

Non-Semitic Loanwora's in the Hebrew Bible

155

W“

spikenard, but they consistently associate true spikenard with India (Peripl. M. Rubr, 39, 48—49; Pliny, Nat. 12.26.45; Dioscorides, Mat. med. 1.7; Theophrastus, Hist. plant. 9.7.2) (cf. Crone 1987, 72—73). Thus, there is little reason to question an Old Indie origin for Hebrew 711.4”

W: : mall/'7 unit/'3 (BH, BA) ‘document, decree’ HALOT 732, 1935; DCH 5:782 (Ezra 4:7, 18, 23; 5:5; 7:11) 6 (popolo’yog ‘tribute collector’ except Sta'wyua ‘edict, command’ Ezra 7:11; It epz’slula ‘letter’ Ezra 4:7; 7:11, accusatio ‘accusation, indictment’ Ezra 4:18; 5:5, edictum ‘command, decree’ Ezra 4:23; 6 ’grt’ ‘letter, document’ except ptgm’ ‘message, word’ Ezra 5:5 [D] OIran —+ Heb; Aram IA 111W}: DNWSI 766; OIran *m‘svta'vana- AISN 176; [AP 409 The term 111311;] occurs five times in the Hebrew Bible, both in Biblical Hebrew (Ezra 4:7; 7:11) and in Biblical Aramaic (Ezra 4:18, 23; 5:5). In each instance it refers to an official document or decree. Elsewhere in Semitic this word only occurs in Imperial Aramaic, where it is attested as 11mm (TAD A6.1:3; Khalili A1210; A66).422 The typical word for an ofiicial document is mat-x in Biblical Hebrew and 711-18 in Biblical Aramaic, not unz-Wlfln This observation, along with the non-Semitic shape of 1mm, indicates a foreign loan. Scholars have long proposed that this word comes from Old Iranian *m's’ta'vana— (cf. Ossetic nystwan, nistawam: Abaev 1958— 1989, 22210).424 Old Iranian *m's'ta'vana- is formed from the verb *nis'ta'- ‘to order, command’ (cf. Av nis'taiia-2 AIW 1604) and the afformatives -va and -na.425 This perfectly matches the phonology, morphology, and meaning of 11131421426 However, there is little evidence for a Semitic on'gin, especially since Classical authors consistently state that nard came from India. Lat nardus, nardum comes from Greek (DELL 429; LEW 2:143). 421. Some scholars contend that 7'): comes from an alleged OIran *nardin- rather than Indie (e.g., Dobbs-Allsopp 2005. 66; Brenner 1983, 77). However, no such word is attested in Old Iranian. Neither Hinz (AISN) nor Tavemier (IAP) reconstructs an OIran *nardin-. The earliest this word occurs in' Iranian is NPers na'rd'm (CPED 1370). Proponents of an Iranian origin, moreover, offer no explanation for the omission of the -1'n ending in the Hebrew form. In any case, the -i'n ending cannot be explained in terms of Old Iranian morphology. NPers na'rd'm undoubtedly comes from Aramaic, in which this word commonly occurs as a plurale Iamum with final -I'n, via Arabic. I am grateful to John Makujina for his assistance with this entry. 422. The related form 1111:1211?! ‘good order’ occurs once in Imperial Aramaic (KAI 273:8). 423. On BH 1113:; and its Akkadian origin, see Kaufman 1977. 424. FWOT 116; F. Rosenthal 2006, 63; Ai'khenval’d 1987, 6; Tisdall 1912. 365—66. 425. OIran *m‘s'm'- means ‘to set down’, being composed of m'- ‘down’ and sla'- ‘to set’. On the sufiix we, see OPGTL 51 (§150). 0n the sufiix -na, see Skjarva 2007, 902; OPGTL 51 (§147). 426. Hinz(A1SN 176) contends that the use of 5' rather than s indicates a Median word because he thinks that ‘s'ta‘- is the Median equivalent of OPers sta'-. However, the Proto-Indo-European and Old Indie equivalents contradict his hypothesis (cf. [AP 565). Hence, the Old Iranian dialect from which 11W: comes remains unknown.

156

Chapter 3

17m. ‘natron’ HALOT 737; DCH 5:818 (Jer 2:22; Prov 25:20) (5 vitpov [Greek form] Jer 2:22, omits Prov 25:20; ‘8 m'trum [Latin form]; 6 ntr’ [Syriac form] Jer 2:22, ytr’ ‘bowstring’ Prov 25:20; if an: [Aramaic form] [13} Eg —* —> Akk; Heb; Aram; Arab; Hitt —> Gk ——2 Lat Akk m'tiru, m'tru (SB, NA) CAD N/2 299; AHw 798; IA, JA 'th DNWSI 771; Jastrow 1903, 946; Syr ne_tra‘ LS2 957; Arab naltu'r Lane 2810; Eg n_trz', ntrz’ (since OK) A"W 1:684, 2:1411—12; GHwA" 471; WA'S' 2:366; Hitt m’tri- HHw 127; Gk virpov, Mtpov LSJ 1054, 1177; Lat m'trum OLD 1300 This word occurs only twice in the Hebrew Bible. Jeremiah 2:22 uses it in conjunction with n‘jn‘ ‘soap’ used for washing, and Prov 25:30 refers to the stinging of the substance 1711; on a wound. Hence, an; refers to a chemical substance used for cleansing. Related terms are found in many languages, both Semitic (Akkadian, Aramaic, and Arabic) and lndo-European (Hittite, Greek, and Latin).427 They all come from an Egyptian word first attested as n_trz' during the Old Kingdom and later attested as ntri after palatal fronting occurred. Because the Semitic and lndo—European forms have the consonant t rather than the typical reflexes oft_, they must have adopted this term after the merging of Egyptian _t and t, which took place during the second millennium B.C.E. Furthermore, the i-class vowel in the majority of the cognates points to an original vocalization of *m‘tr and indicates a loan before the shift of Egyptian i to a, which occurred in closed accented syllables prior to 700 B.C.E. The a-vowel ofArabic naju'r, on the other hand, points to a later borrowing after this vowel shifi had occurred.428 Egyptian evidence identifies this substance with natron, a naturally occurring soda consisting of sodium carbonate and bicarbonate (Aufre‘re 1991, 2:606—36; J. R. Harris 1961, 193). There were three primary sources ofnatron in ancient Egypt, two in Lower Egypt (the Wadi Natrun and the Beheira province) and one in Upper Egypt (El Kab). Natron was obtained from deposits at the bottom of shallow lakes and rivers in these three regions. Classical authors, including Strabo (Geogr. 17.1.23) and Pliny (Nat. 31.46.109, 111) make note of these sources of natron in Egypt.429 Natron had many purposes in Egypt, including purification ceremonies, making

427. Lat nilrum comes from Greek (DELL 442; LEW 2171—72). 428. EPNL 251; Lambdin 1953b, 152—53; FWOT 117. On the depalatalization of Eg t_, see .1. Allen 2013, 48—50; Loprieno 1995, 38; Peust 1999, 123—25; Junge 2005, 36. On the change of i to a in Egyptian, see J. Allen 2013, 24-26; Loprieno 1995, 38—39; Peust 1999, 222—26, 250—59. 429. Lucas 1962, 263-66; J. R. Harris 1961, 193; Lucas 1932. Pliny also claims that smaller sources of natron existed in Media as well as Thrace and Macedonia.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

157

W

incense, cooking, medicine, bleaching linen, mummification, and the manufacture ofglass as well as glaze and other pigments (Lucas 1962, 267; Sandison 1963).

x330 => WW" me (a luxury garment) HAL0T743—44; DCH 6:121 (ludg14:12—13; Isa 3:23; Prov 31:24) 5 owfiw'v [Greek form] Judg 14:12—13; Prov 31:24, v'oucivewog ‘blue-colored cloth’ Isa 3:23; 28 sindon [Latin form]; 6 p’qrsyn ‘sheets’ Judg 14:12—13, tklyf ‘blue garment’ Isa 3:23, ktn’ ‘linen garment’ Prov 31:24; I 0"!‘79 ‘wrap , Judg 14:12—13, o‘mp ‘garment’ Isa 3:23, ma ‘ garment of mixed cloth’ Prov 31:24 [D] Hurr —> ——> Akk; Heb; Aram —> Gk —> Syr; Lat Akksaddinnu (Nuzi, EA), s'addinrzu (NA) CAD S 17; AHw 1001, 1123; JA, CPA 1’10 DJPA 368; DJBA 788; DCPA 279; Syr seda’o'na' LS" 970; Gk owfico’v LSJ 1600; Lat sindon OLD 1949; Hurr sadinm'-430 The term occurs only four times in Biblical Hebrew, each time with reference to a luxury garment: twice in Judg 14:12—13 as one of the gifts that Samson promises to the inhabitants of Timnah if they can solve his riddle, in Isa 3:23 as a luxury item alongside several other garments, and in Prov 31:24 as one of the special garments made by the industrious woman of Prov 31:10—31. Related words exist in Semitic (Akkadian, Jewish and Christian Palestinian Aramaic, and Syriac) as well as non-Semitic (Greek). Several observations indicate a non—Semitic origin: the varying spellings, particularly the different representations of the initial sibilant; the double final consonant of the Akkadian forms; and the apparent lack of any Semitic etymology. As Kaufman (AIA 94—95) notes, the -innu ending of the Akkadian forms indicates a northern, Anatolian origin. This ending frequently occurs in terminology from languages spoken in ancient Anatolia, both Indo-European and non-Indo-European (see Dercksen 2007, 39—42). In this case, the -innu ending probably represents the Hurrian derivational suffix -ni, -nm' because texts associate this word with the Hurr1'ans.43'Akkadian saddinnu, s'addz'nnu first appears in the second millennium Nuzi texts, where it denotes a piece ofapparel of specific shape and function (Oppenheim 1967, 249), and this garment is listed as a gift by Tusratta, king of Mittani, in BA 22 i:44.

430. Fra"nkel (1886, 48) rightly denies a connection between the Aramaic terms and Arab sad‘m, Which can mean ‘fal, blood’ in addition to ‘wool’. A connection with Eg s'n_dyt, first attested dun‘ng the Old Kingdom, is also unlikely. 431. On the Hurrian derivational sutfix -m', -nm‘, see Wegner 2007, 55; Giorgieri 2000, 210—12; Wilhelm 2008, 92.

158

Chapter 3

Hebrew 1‘79 cannot be a loan from Akkadian, as indicated by the Neo-Assyrian spelling with Sim This observation, along with the Hurrian associations of this word, together point to a borrowing from a Hurrian sadinni-. Greek otvfim’v exhibits dissimilation of the geminated consonant and a different vowel pattern that also occurs in loans borrowed via Asia Minor (of. BH 71-111,,Akk hvura‘slu, and Hurr Vhiyari-, Vhiyarubvheg' BH 111‘s, Akk katirmu, and Hurr kadinm'-; BH tun-g- and Gk xirw'v, Klem'v, Kitw'v).433 Syriac seddo‘na' and Latin sindon are loans from Greek (LS? 970; LE W 2:542). memo, mew ‘musical harmony’ HALOT 1937 (Dan 3:5, 10, 15) 6, E3, 6 each use their corresponding forms of the word (ovtupcovia, symphom'a, and spwny’, respectively) [D] Gk —> Aram; Lat Syr seppo'yna' LSZ 1297; Gk cuptpwvia LS] 1689; Lat symphom'a OLD 2090 The Biblical Aramaic word nubmo occurs three times within the description of Nebuchadnezzar’s orchestra (Dan 3:5, 10, 15). Furthermore, it appears with two different spellings: one with a s'ureq followed by mem in Dan 3:5, 15 (nus-mo), and another with a h_ireq-y0d and without the mem in verse 10 (nub-to). The omission of the word in Dan 3:7, which also describes the various instruments of Nebuchadnezzar’s orchestra, is probably an error; all the ancient versions use their respective terms for memo in Dan 3:7. Biblical Aramaic .‘Igta‘mo is an obvious loan from Greek o-uutpwvia, as are the related forms found in Syriac (seppo'nya') and Latin (symphom'a).434 The term oopqiwvia is first attested in Greek literature during the sixth century B.C.E. (Hippasus, Test. 12.6, 13; 13.1, 5, 8, 10), where it has the meaning ‘musical harmony‘. In later sources, Goutpmvia can also mean “band, orchestra’ (e.g., Polybius, Hist. 26.1.4; 3026.8). Throughout its attestations, this word rarely refers to a specific instrument. Some authors use Greek ouptpwvia or its Latin den'vative symphonia to denote an instrument that produces musical consonance (e.g., Pliny, Nat. 8.64.157; Isidorus Hispalensis, Orig. 3.22.14), but the typical referent of this word is ‘musical harmony’ rather than a specific instrument, as Jerome notes (Epist. 21.29) (Coxon 1973—1974, 32—33). It is unlikely, therefore, that 7133937910 denotes a specific instrument in the book of Daniel, especially since the context does not demand it. Rather,

432. ALBH 109—10; contra FWOT 121; Zimmem 1917, 36—37. There is no Sumen‘an word *SUDIN that denotes a garment, contrary to the claim of Ellenbogen. 433. Cf. Mayer 1960, 331. Although commonly taken as a direct loan from Semitic (e.g., Masson 1967, 25—26), there is little evidence for such a view. 434. FW0T122; Coxon 1973—1974, 32; AAT2258. Mitchell and Joyce (1965, 26) instead suggest that BA memo is a loan from non-Attic Gk m’pnuvov, a type of drum. Although attractive, this loan hypothesis cannot explain the final .‘13- of nusmo, and the ancient versions all identify memo with (ruptpmviu.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

I59

because 1.3191210 is followed by the phrase mm 13155] ‘and every kind of music’ it most likely means ‘musical harrnony’.435 This means there is no basis for contending, as some have done, that Biblical Aramaic 7131517910 must have been borrowed during the Hellenistic period. Rather, Greek ouuowvia could have the meaning ‘musical harmony’ both before and after the time of Alexander the Great. Thus, Biblical Aramaic 713797910 could have been borrowed at either an early or a late period (Coxon 1973—1974, 36—37). 010 ‘horse’ HALOT 746; DCH 6:130—32 (Gen 47:17; passim436) [?] CW Akk sz'su‘ (OB, MA, MB, Alalakh, Bogh, EA, NA, NB), sisa"u (0A) CAD S 328—34; AHw 1051—52; Ug s's’w DUL 760—61; EH, OH 010 DNWSI 795; Phoen 00 DNWSI 795; OAram, IA, Palm, Nab, SA 010, JA, CPA 1010 DNWSI 795; DJPA 371; DJBA 794—95; DSA 574; DCPA 283; Syr su'sya' L52 986; Mand susia MD 322—23; Eg ssm.l (since NK) GHwA" 824; WA'S' 4:276—77; DLE 2:77; Hitt azzuwa- HHw 34; Luv azzu-, azzuwa— (CLuv), asuwa-, asu- (HLuv) CLL 44; Payne 2010, 144; Gk innog LSJ 835; Lat equus OLD 675; Skt a's'va— E WAia 12139—40; KEWA 1:62; OPers asa— OPGTL 173; Arm e‘s' HAB 22117—19 This word appears 138 times in the MT, and the feminine form .1910 occurs only in Song 1:9. Yet, despite its prevalence in the Hebrew Bible and the existence of related forms in many of the Semitic languages, it is not native to Semitic. This term does not seem to be based on any Semitic root, and scholars have long connected it with Proto-Indo—European *hlekruo- ‘horse’. There is little reason to think that this word is not connected in some way with lndo-European, because it is practically universal in the Indo-European languages (Adams, Mallory and Miller 1997, 274; Gamkrelidze and Ivanov 1994—1995, 1:463). Nevertheless, the details of the word’s Indo-European connections remain uncertain. The Semitic forms could have come from one of the satem-languages or one ofthe Anatolian Indo-European languages, both of which use a sibilant rather than a velar for Proto-Indo—European k'. Either option seems possible at first glance. 435. Mitchell and Joyce 1965, 26. One might be tempted to interpret the waw as a waw explica— Iivum, translating 8'17); 11153] 713451910 as ‘musical harmony, even every kind of music’ (see Kolari 1947, 82). However, such a use of the waw is not in accordance with its use in lists elsewhere in the book of Daniel. See Coxon 1973—1974, 33—34. 436. Gen 49:17; Exod 9:3; 14:9, 23; 15:1, 19, 21; Deut 11:4; 17:16 (2x); 20:1; Josh 11:4, 6, 9; Judg 5:22; 2 Sam 15:1; 1 Kgs 5:6, 8 [4:26, 28]; 10:25, 28—29; 18:5; 20:1, 20—21, 25 (2X); 22:4 (2x); 2 Kgs 2:11; 3:7(2X); 519; 6:14—15, 17; 726—7, 10, 13—14; 9:18-19, 33; 10:2; 11:16; 14:20; 18:23; 23:11; Isa 2:7; 5:28; 30:16; 31:1, 3; 3618; 43:17; 63:13; 66:20; Jer 4:13; 5:8; 6:23; 8:6, 16; 12:5; 17:25; 22:4; 31:40; 46:4, 9; 50:37, 42; 51:21, 27; Ezek 17:15; 23:6, 12, 20, 23; 26:7, 10—11; 27:14; 38:4, 15; 39:20; Hos 1:7; 14:4 [14:3]; Joel 2:4; Amos 2:15; 4:10; 6312; Mic 5:9 [5:10]; Nah 3:2; Hab 1:8; 3:8, 15; Hag 2:22; Zech 1:8 (2X); 6:2 (2x), 3 (2x), 6; 9:10; ‘03315; 1214(2"); 14:15, 20; Ps 20:8 [20:7]; 32:9; 33:17: 76:7 [76:6]; 14710; Job 39:18—19; Prov 21:31; 26:3; 001‘ I017; Esth 6:8, 9 (2x), 10—11; 8:10; Ezra 2:66; Neh 3:28; 2 Chr 1:16-17; 9:24—25, 28; 23:15; 25:28.

160

Chapter 3

Regarding the sarem languages, several Indo-Aryan terms for hippiatrics entered the ancient Near East, perhaps supporting an Old Indic origin (cf. Mayrhofer 1951—1952, 16—17; Ungnad 1923, 90—91). As for the Anatolian languages, this word first appears in Semitic in Old Assyrian Akkadian texts, perhaps supporting an Anatolian origin (cf. Rabin 1964, 159—60; Goetze 1962, 34—35). However, both loan hypotheses leave the reduplicated s of the Semitic forms, and of Egyptian ssm.t, unexplained. Reduplication of *hlek'uog even with assibilated k], would probably not produce the required Semitic or Egyptian forms. Proto-Indo-European *s'ek’uowould explain the initial s of Semitic (as well as the initial aspiration of Greek m"1tog), but little evidence exists for a palatalized sibilant phoneme *s' in Proto-IndoEuropean (Kogan 2006, 270; contra Gamkrelidze and Ivanov 1994—1995, 12478—79). Ifnot directly borrowed from Indo-European, perhaps this word entered Semitic via the mediation of some other language. It is also possible that Proto-IndoEuropean *hlek’uo- was itself borrowed from some other source (see Blaz'ek 1998). If so, it is conceivable that the Semitic forms come from this other source—most probably the home of the domestication of the horse—rather than one of the IndoEuropean languages. In sum, while there is certainly some connection between the Semitic forms and Indo-European, the specifics remain unclear.

We (a rush or reed plant) HALOT 747; DCH 6:134 (Exod 2:3, 5; passim‘m) [D] Eg —> Heb QH mo; Eg _twfiv, rw_f(NK, Ptolm) GHwA" 1023; WA'S’ 5:359; DLE 2:227 The word PHD occurs 28 times in the Hebrew Bible, primarily in the toponym DZ mo ‘Reed Sea’ (Exod 10:19; passim). Elsewhere it appears with reference to the reeds along the riverbank where Moses was placed (Exod 2:3, 5) and to the rushes of the Nile (Isa 19:6). With the exception of Jon 2:6, where 910 more generally means ‘seaweed’ or the like, this term always occurs within an Egyptian context. This word’s Egyptian associations 1n'vites comparison with Egyptian _twfiz, _nf,v which refers to a rush or reed plant (cf. Dem dw_f and Copt c“oouf: CDD D_ 25; D6 676; Crum 795). Many scholars derive Egyptian _twjfv, rw_ffrom Hebrew q'iof” but this is unlikely on at least three counts. First, Egyptian _twfi2, tw_fis written consonantally, not syllabically, as demonstrated by the Coptic form c’oouf. The Egyptians did not write this word with group writing as if it were a Semitic loan, as they 437. Exod 10:19; 13:18; 15:4, 22; 23:31; Num 14:25; 21:4; 33:10—11; Deut 1:40; 2:11; 11:4; Josh 2:10; 4:23; 24:6; Judg 11:16; 1 Kgs 9:26; Isa 19:6; Jer 49:21; Jon 2:6; Ps 106:7, 9, 22; 136:13, 15; Neh 9:9. 438. E.g., EPNL 251—52; Lambdin 1953b, 153; Ennan 1892, 122. Semitic etymologies remain unconvincing. W. Ward (1974, 343—49) relates a hypothetical Semitic root *sp ‘to reach, am've at’ to BH no ‘bowl’ and contends that it developed semantically into BH I110 as well as Eggwfir, _rwf.' Copisarow (1962. 10—13) offers a similar etymology, connecting these terms with BH 1110 ‘end’. Despite the analogies of semantic evolution that Ward and Copisarow provide, their etymologies are speculative and without any secure basis.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

161

would be expected to do.439 Second, PHD has no cognates elsewhere in Semitic as would be expected if this word were Semitic.440 Third, the frequent biblical association of Iii-0 with Egypt strongly suggests that it is Egyptian. A word denoting an Egyptian plant should be Egyptian, not Semitic, in origin. Thus, Hebrew Pit-D should be derived from Egyptian _rwfi1, [wfrather than vice versa.441 The lack of representation offinal y indicates that Hebrew-speakers borrowed this word sometime after y was dropped during the New Kingdom.442 Notably, Egyptian tw_fi», rw_foccurs commonly in the collocation p3—tw_fi/, a toponym frequently mentioned in Egyptian texts. This usage closely parallels the collocation Fit-0 a: in the Hebrew Bible and further supports an Egyptian origin for Hebrew fit-0.443

nus-*0 : nasal-10 110 ‘shrine, sanctuary’ HALOT 753; DCH 6:150—51 (PS 42:5 [42:41) 6 ro'itog omvfig Gavuaorfig, fl; locus tabernaculi admirabilis translate 07-7-th '40; as ‘place of the wonderful tabernacle’; 6 str’ ‘hidden place’; ‘I '7'7U ‘shade’ [T] Sum —> Akk —> Heb Sum SUG PSD; Akk sukku (OB, MB, SB, NA, NB) CAD S 361—62; AHw 1055 K0"hler and Baumgartner (HALOT 753) derive the term '40 in Ps 42:5 from the root 130 ‘to block off’, taking its meaning as ‘refuge’ (cf. BH '40). 6') and ‘13, however, take mm '40;- together as a reference to the tabernacle, suggesting that '40 may not mean ‘refuge’ as traditionally understood. Adopting the readings of 6 and fl} produces nice parallelism with what directly follows, Whig nan-"1y ‘unto the house of

God’ (H.-J. Kraus 1993, 1:437, 439—40). Assuming 1:0 refers to a divine sanctuary, Hebrew '40 becomes a prime candidate for Akkadian loanword status. Akkadian sukku ‘shrine’ provides a perfect donor term semantically but also phonologically. Biblical Hebrew typically preserves Akkadian u in a closed syllable as qames,, which is precisely the vowel 0f the 439. Albright 1934, 65; contra EPNL 252. Notably, this word is not listed as a Semitic loan into Egyptian by Hoch (S WET). 440. JA mo occurs only with D‘ and is adopted from BH fit-D, as is Mand sup. Arab s_u'f, which typ— ically means ‘wool’, is used in a rare Arabic lexicon to denote reeds of the sea, but this unusual usage is probably due to the influence of Copt c'oouf(Lane 1748; Lambdin 1953b, 153). 441. Muchiki (EPNI 252) objects to the correspondence of Heb samek and Eg _t, contending that it is unexpected. However, this correspondence is the norm in loans from Northwest Semitic into Egyptian beginning with the Middle Kingdom (S WET407—8). There is, therefore, no reason to reject an Egyptian origin for BH ‘11-0 on the basis of this correspondence. 442. On the elision of final y in Later Egyptian, see J. Allen 2013, 37—38, 43; Loprieno 1995, 33, 38; Peust 1999. 49—50, 142—51;.Iunge 2005, 33. 443- Batto (1983) and Vervenne (1995) reject any identification of £110 a: with Egpf—[wfia However, there is no convincing reason to dissociate these two toponyms (Hoffmeier 2005, 85—89; Bietak 1984).

162

Chapter 3

underlying form behind no as the Masoretes have pointed it (*sakk). Hebrewspeakers must have borrowed this term from Babylonian rather than Assyrian Akkadian, as indicated by the use of initial samek instead of sin. Akkadian sukku, in turn, comes from Sumerian SUG ‘shrine’.444 Thus, Hebrew no is a Sumero-Akkadian loan. It is possible that the few instances of no that seem to refer to the divine sanctuary (Ps 27:5; 76:3) have been incorrectly pointed by the Masoretes and should be emended to no (see ALBH 112). 1179-0 (an oflicial) HALOT 759; DCH 6:167 (Jer 39:3) (6 Zauaycofl, Q} Semegar both translate as a personal name, separated from an; unlike the MT; 6 Smgdnbw (misreading uni-13.730 as urn-790), St 131-1100 also translate as a personal name but follow the MT’s division [T] Elam —> Akk —> Heb Akk simmagir (NB) CAD S 272—73; AHw 1045; Elam sin-ma-gir, si-im—ma-gir This word occurs only in Jer 3923, where the MT has grouped it with in; and taken it as part of a personal name inr‘lzpo. Both (5 and I? understand 1300 as a personal name, but they separate it from 12;, which they attach to the beginning of the following name. This results in three names, each followed by a title: '7'3'11 12-790 figs-no, ‘Nergal-Sharezar, a 1300’; 0‘10'31 magnum, ‘Nebo-Sarsekim, a chief oflicial’; and 101‘] ngg‘n'W'bm ‘Nergal—Sharezer, a military official’. This suggests that 13-79:: is also a title and not part of a personal name as suggested by the MT. Indeed, the term simmagir occurs in Nee—Babylonian texts with reference to an official. This word is first attested in the form LU' dSin-ma-gir and later attested simply as si-im—ma—gir. The Akkadian orthography indicates a foreign word, most probably Elamite, as suggested by its use with reference to an individual from Sippar (CT 55558.10) and its appearance in Achaemenid texts. Von Soden (1972) reconstructs the Elamite form as *simakir, formed from si- ‘to dedicate’, -ma— (a root augment indicating durative action), —k (the passive participle morpheme), and -r(a) (a derivational suffix used to form personal substantives, often from passive participles).445 Although not attested in Elamite texts, the related personal name Si-im-gir-na does occur (E W 1073). All this indicates that this word is a loan from Nee-Babylonian Akkadian simmagir, in turn a borrowing from Elamite *simakir. The ancient versions and f0nn of Akkadian simmagir suggest that the MT’s 12-00 should be repointed t0 120-0. 444. ALBH 112; Tawil 2009, 260; Peacock 2013, 103—5. On the Sumerian origin of Akk sukku, see SLOB 521—22 (#696). I am grateful to Michael Barre’ for his assistance with this entry. 445. On the root augment -ma-, see Khachikyan I998, 13, 36. On the passive participle morpheme -k, see ibid., 41. On the derivational suffix -r(a), see ibid., 12, 41.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

163

Thus, although the order of the elements in the list ofJer 39:3 remain uncertain, it is quite probable that this word comes from Elamite via Neo-Babylonian Akkadian (ALBH 120—21). no (a type of bowl) HALOT 762; DCH 6:176—77 (Exod12222 [2X]; 2 Sam 17:28; 1 Kgs 7:50; 2 Kgs 12:14 [12:13]; Jer 52:19; Zech 12:2) 6 a’ucpt'mnog ‘tapestry, rug’ 2 Sam 17:28, transliterates as 001(4)pr Jer 52:19; it tapete ‘tapestry’ 2 Sam 17:28, hydria ‘urn, jug’ 1 Kgs 7:50; 2 Kgs 12:14; Jer 52:19; 6 ’mr’ ‘lamb’ Exod 12:22, tsvat’ ‘bedding’ 2 Sam 17:28, mzmk’ ‘lampstand’ 1 Kgs 7:50, lqn’ ‘basin, bowl’ 2 Kgs 12:14, qtqu’ ‘incense pan’ Jer 52219; 11x73 ‘vessel’ Exod 12:22; Zech 12:2, 1.51.7 ‘pitcher’ 2 Sam 17:28; 1 Kgs 7:50; 2 Kgs 12:14; Jer 52:19446 [.9] CW Sum SAB PSD; Akk sappu (OA, OB, MB), sappu (OB), s'appatu, s'abbatu, s’apputu (MA, Alalakh, SB, NA), sappatu (NB), suppannu (OA) CAD S 166, 391-92, SV/I 477—80; AHw 1027, 1060, 1175; Ug sp DUL 753—54; Phoen, Pun r10 DNWSI 796; Eg sp.t (NK) GHwA" 746; WAOS. 4:100; Hitt zuppu- HHw 236447 This word, which denotes a type of bowl, occurs only seven times in the Hebrew Bible. It appears primarily within the context of the cult, whether related to celebration of the first Passover (Exod 12:22 [2X]) or the vessels of the temple (1 Kgs 7:50; 2 Kgs 12:14; Jer 52:19). However, it appears without any cultic association in its two other occurrences (2 Sam 17:28; Zech 12:2). Hebrew no can be compared with several related terms found in both Semitic and non-Semitic.448 The initial sibilant in the Semitic forms varies between s and s' and is inexplicable in terms of the expected developments of the sibilants; the varying gender likewise points to the possibility ofa non-Semitic origin. The attestation ofsuppannu in Old Assyrian Akkadian suggests an Anatolian orig1'n,“49 and such an origin is further supported by the association ofUgaritic sp with Anatolian proper names such as Prwsdy (KTU 4.44:24), Klnmw (KTU 4.44:25), Tgyn (KTU

446. (5 0' impa‘ m‘v ev’pav ‘what is by the door” Exod 12:22, npo'evpov ‘forecourt’ I Kgs 7:50; Zech 12:2, 06pm ‘doors’ 2 Kgs 12:14, 28 qui est in [imine ‘what is by the threshold’ Exod 12:22, superliminare ‘lintel’ Zech 12:2, 6 Ir’ ‘gate’ Zech 12:2 mistakenly read the homonym no ‘doorpost’. 447. Some argue that LinA su-pu, attested only as a superscript to the vessel *415VAS at Hagia Tn'ada (HT 31:2), also reflects this word (e.g., Stieglitz 1971, 110). However, su-pu instead seems to refer to the contents of the vessel or its function (Consani 1999, 64—65, 302). 448. There is no conclusive evidence that Eg sp.t, a vessel used for holding incense, comes from Semitic (contra W. Ward 1961, 40). Notably, Hoch (S WET) does not list it as a Semitic loanword into Egyptian. 449- Akk suppannu, attested in Old Assyrian texts, contains the -n(n)u suflix typical ofAnatolian borrowings at Ku"ltepe (Dercksen 2007, 33).

164

Chapter 3

444229), and andr (KTU 4.56:4—5), as well as Anatolian social classes such as tpnr (a Hittite dignitary) (KTU 4.56:23). Despite this evidence for an Anatolian origin, the Anatolian donor term behind all its different forms is unclear. Therefore, for the present Hebrew no remains an ancient culture word of uncertain origin.450 5.50 (a metal bowl) HALOT 764; DCH 6:181 (Judg 5:25; 6:38) (5 hatca'vn or hum'vn ‘dish, pot’; 23 phiala ‘shallow cup, bowl’ Judg 5:25, concha ‘shell-shaped bowl’ Judg 6:38; 6 ks’ ‘cup’ Judg 5:25, lqn’ ‘platter’ Judg 6:38; 1 ‘5‘!) ‘flat bowl’ Judg 5:25, 1.7'7 ‘platter’ Judg 6:38 [D] Hurr —> Akk; Ug; Heb Akk saplu (0A, Alalakh, EA, RS, MA, MB, SB, NA, NB) CAD S 165; AHw 1027; Ug spl DUL 754—55; Hurr zablz'- BGH 353; GLH 21045‘ This word occurs only twice, both times in the book of Judges. The first instance is in the Song of Deborah, where Jael is said to bring curds to Sisera in a bowl (Judg 5:25). In the second instance, Gideon squeezes the water of his wet fleece into a vessel denoted by this term (Judg 6:38). Several observations indicate that this word comes from a non- Semitic language. First, both occurrences of Hebrew 59.0 are associated with the north: Sisera was the commander of the army of Hazor in the north, and Gideon was from the northern tribe of Manasseh. Second, Ugaritic texts mention the vessel denoted by spl among the items owned by an individual named Krw (KTU 4.3853), a Hurrian name. Third, the earliest occurrences ofsaplu in Akkadian are in peripheral dialects such as Old Assyrian, Alalakh, and Amama. Fourth, the Amama letters specifically list this vessel as an item of tribute from Tus'ratta, king of Mittani (BA 22 iv:21), and the Neo-Assyrian Kurkh Monolith inscription lists it among items received as booty from the peoples of Nairi, who lived in the northern region of Nihriya (RIMA 2101.19.89). All the evidence thus points a northern on'gin for this word. The donor term is Hurrian zablz'- (Wilhelm 1996). This Hurrian term most often refers to a metal (rather than ceramic) bowl, so Hebrew 5590 probably denoted a similar type of vessel.

45o. Scholars have proposed several different Semitic etymologies (e.g., Militarev 2007, 155; W. Ward 1974, 344—46). However, these loan hypotheses cannot adequately explain the variation of the initial sibilant or the varying gender of the Semitic forms. 451. QA ‘790 and JA, CPA ‘79‘0 ,‘750 occur in biblical contexts and are adopted from Biblical Hebrew (DQA 168; DJPA 386; DCPA 286). Some scholars argue that LinA su-pas-ra, attested only as a superscn'pt to the vessel "402""S at Hagia Triada (HT 31:5), represents another form of this word (e.g., Stieglitz 1971, 111). However, supag-ra seems instead to refer to the contents of the vessel or its function (Consani 1999, 64—65, 302)

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

I65

‘7310 (a type of trousers) HALOT 1940 (Dan 3:21, 27) 0G u'rro'onuu ‘sandal’ Dan 3:21, oupa’Bapa [Greek form] Dan 3:27; 6' oapa'Bapa [Greek form]; 313 bracae ‘trousers, breeches’ Dan 3:21, sarabara [Latin form] Dan 3:27; 6 s'rbl’ [Syriac form] [D] OIran (Scyth) —> Aram; Gk; Lat JA 5110 DJBA 829—30; Syr svarba‘la' L52 1601; Mand s'aruala MD 445; Arab sirba‘l Lane 1343;452 Gk oupa’Bapa LSJ 1583; Lat sarabarae OLD 1864; OIran *saraba‘la- (Scyth) AISN 222; [AP 489—90 Biblical Aramaic 5310 occurs twice. In Dan 3:21 it appears in the list of clothing worn by Daniel’s companions along with the terms .1731; (a type of pointed cap), We (a type of leg wrappings), and Wu? (a generic term for clothing). In Dan 3:27 the clothing denoted by ‘7310 is said to be free from burns (1111‘73101 mum 8‘7) after Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah are retrieved from the furnace. This word’s quadriliteral pattern indicates a foreign origin. An Old Iranian ori— gin is likely, given the frequency of Old Iranian loans in the book of Daniel. However, this word must have come from a non-standard Old Iranian dialect because the liquids r and Z merged in most Old Iranian dialects (Schmitt 2008, 83; Testen 1997, 582; OPGTL 38 [§Io7]). Furthermore, the geographical associations ofrelated forms in other languages indicate that this word comes from the Scythian language. The fourth century B.C.E. comic poet Antiphanes calls the loose trousers worn by Scythians capa'Bapa (Com. 201), the same Greek term used by 6 for 53-10 in Dan 3:27. Latin sarabarae likewise occurs with reference to the trousers worn by Iranian peoples (Publilius Syrus, Sent. 19). Along with their caftans and tunics, the Scythians were known for wearing loose leather trousers that terminated in shoes, appropriate for their northern climate and horseback riding.453 As discussed above under the entry for Biblical Aramaic .1731}, the Scythians exerted significant influence on the clothing of the peoples of the Iranian plateau. This particular style of Scythian trousers was likely adopted in Persia, where it became part of Persian dress. The word would have been adopted along with the product, presumably in a form such as *saraba'la— (cf. Pahl salwar and NPers s'alwa'r, s'ulwa'r: CPD 79; CPED 758).454 Then, this word entered Aramaic (cf. Shaked I994, 108; Ciancaglini 2008, 265). Given their literary connections with the Scythians, the Greek and Latin forms are probably direct borrowings from Scythian (see EDG 1307; DELG 953; LEW 2:478). 452. Arab sirba'l comes from Aramaic (cf. Fra"nkel 1886, 47—48). 453. Yatsenko 1992; Widengren 1956, 229. The Apadan'a Relief depicts Scythians wearing trousers. Moreover, Classical Greek sources describe the Persians and Scythians as wean'ng trousers, albeit using the term a‘vaévptfi'sg rather than oupa’Bapa (e.g., Herodotus, Hist. 5.49; 7.61, 64; Xenophon, Anab. 1.5.8; Hippocrates, Aer. 22). 4544 Knauer 1954; cf. F. Rosenthal 2006, 63. OIran *saraba'la— may also be present in the Elamite personal name S'arbaladda, attested in PF 1947:19; PFNN 2356:12 (AISN 222; MP 489—90).

166

Chapter 3

trio => WW ,an (a chief official) HALOT 1940 (Dan 6:3—5, 7—8 [6:2-4, 6—7]) OG n'you'usvog (a title derived from the verb n’yéouou ‘to go before, lead’ used of officials and rulers) Dan 6:3, na’vreg 8"wa ééouot’av ‘all those holding authority’ Dan 6:4; 6’ IaKttKo’g ‘fit for ordering or arranging’ Dan 6:3, 5—6, na’vrsg 0i ém‘ tfig Baotheiag ‘all those over the kingdom’ Dan 6:8; it prz'nceps ‘leader, chief’; 6 svlyt.’ ‘ruler’ except klhwn ‘all of them’ Dan 6:3 [D] OIran —> Aram JA T10 DJPA 389; OIran *sa'raka- AISN 221 Biblical Aramaic 1:10 occurs five times within the span of a few verses in the book of Daniel, always with reference to a high Persian official in charge of the kingdom’s satraps (Dan 6: 3—5, 7—8). According to the book of Daniel, there were three of these officials in the kingdom, one of whom was Daniel himself. This word refers to an official in the Persian Empire. This association implies an Old Iranian origin, especially because the final kap of 7110 could represent the Old Iranian suffix -ka. Indeed, the donor term is Old Iranian *sa'raka-, which refers to a chief official and is formed from *sara- ‘head’ (cf. Av sarah- and NPers sar: AIW 1565; CPED 664) and the suffix -ka.455 Old Iranian *sa'raka- is also the source of Jewish Aramaic T10 (F. Rosenthal 2006, 62; AA T 2:60; Haug 1853, 162). no (a Philistine official) HALOT 770; DCH 6:200 (Josh 13:3; passim456) [D] Philistine —> Heb

This word occurs 21 times, exclusively in the plural form and exclusively with reference to an official of the Philistines. In several cases, it specifically denotes officials functioning in the Philistine Pentapolis, namely the cities of Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Ekron, and Gath (Josh 13:3; Judg 3:3; 1 Sam 6:4, 16, 18).457 Hebrew no has no Semitic etymology or cognates and is undoubtedly a loanword from a foreign source. The exclusive association of Biblical Hebrew no with the Philistines indicates that it comes from the Philistine language (FWOT 126—27; contra Edel 1983). Greek ro'pawog (LSJ 1836) and Hieroglyphic Luvian

455. On the suffix -ka, see OPGTL 51 (§146). 456. Judg 3:3; 16:5, 8, 18 (2X), 23, 27, 30; 1 Sam 5:8, 11; 6:4 (2x), 12, 16, 18; 7:7; 29:2, 6—7; 1 Chr 12:20 [12:19]. 457. Singer 1993, 132. For the idea that no denotes a subordinate Philistine official with mostly military authority, see V. Wagner 2008.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

167

tarwam’— (Payne 2010, 150) are also undoubtedly related, but not directly, as demon— strated by their initial dental rather than sibilant (Pintore 1983). Rather, the Greek, Luvian, and Philistine forms all seem to reflect a Pre-Greek term.458 This Pre-Greek term was adopted by Greek- and Luvian-speakers but also by the Philistines, and the Philistines subsequently lent it to Hebrew-speakers after they had migrated to the Levant.459 I119? ‘lead’ HALOT 863; DCH 6:519 (Exod 15:10; Num 31:22; Jer 6:29; Ezek 22:18, 20; 27:12; Zech 5:7—8; Job 19:24) 6 uo'hBog; SB plumbum ‘lead’; 6 ’br’ [Syriac form]; ‘1 '1th [Aramaic form] except does not directly represent this word Zech 517—8, W‘DD'D ‘lead’ Job 19:24 [.9] CW Sum AGAR PSD; Akk aba‘ru (OA, OB, Alalakh, MA, MB, NA, NB) CAD A/I 36—38; AHw 4; QH may; Pun may DNWSI 879; JA, SA, CPA wax DJPA 33; DJBA 76; DSA 5; DCPA 3; Syr ’abba’ra’ LS’ 5; Mand abara MD 1; Arab ’aba'r Dozy 1927, 1:2460 This word occurs nine times. Related to may are several Semitic and non-Semitic forms. The sole non-Semitic form is Sumerian AGAR, which appears very early in

458. EDG 1519—20; DELG 1106; Heubeck 1961, 68—70; cf. Parker 1998, 146—49. This solves the oft-cited problem of a direct borrowing from Greek or Luvian (cf. Giusfredi 2009; Maeir, Davis and Hitchcock 2016, 334—35). 459. At least two altemative reconstructions have been proposed. Garbini (1991) contends that Philistm’e *seren comes from an Indo-European Anatolian root *sar—, *ser- meaning ‘to rule’ and further alleges that the suffix —e'n creates titles of political authorities, comparing Lycian ese‘ne- and *pale‘n— as well as Phrygian bale'n. However, his argumentation is erroneous. First, there is no Anatolian root *sar-, *ser- meaning ‘to rule’. There is an adverb meaning ‘above, upon’ (cf. Hitt s'er and Luv s'arri), and Lydian serli- does seem to refer to a temple authority, but this is probably an adjective functioning substantivally (cf. Luv sarli ‘upper, superior’). Second, the suffix -e'n does not exist at all in Anatolian, much less in the specific function of creating words for political authorities. Lycian ese"ne- clearly does not mean ‘king’, and Lycian *pale‘n- is a ghost word; Phrygian bale'n does mean ‘kin'g’, but Phyrgian does not belong to the Anatolian branch of Indo—European and olfers no evidence for a suffix -e‘n in these languages. Thus, there is little reason to think that Philistine *seren comes from an Indo-European Anatolian language as Garbini contends, especially since Gk m’pawog is Pre-Greek. 1 am grateful to H. Craig Melchert for his assistance with this topic. Schneider (2011, 572) tries instead to connect BH no with Etruscan s’erona-, which is attested in lines A4 and A7 of the Lemnos Stele. However, the meaning of s’erona- is uncertain, and even if it did mean ‘magistrate’, Etruscan would be an unlikely source for 1'10. Schneider (ibid.) altematively den'ves BH no from Gk oesvapo’g ‘strong, mighty’. As he himself recognizes, however, this loan hypothesis faces several phonological difficulties. 460. This word may occur in Ugaritic as p‘rt (KTU 4.7809), but the text is fragmentary and scholars debate whether it actually occurs (DUL 172).

168

Chapter 3

Uruk Archaic and pre-Sargonic Sumerian.“ The relationship between the different Semitic forms, moreover, remains unclear. The Aramaic forms of this word could conceivably come from Akkadian aba'ru, but this is by no means certain. Hebrew 1111957 and Punic may begin with initial ‘ayin and cannot be loans from Akkadian, at least not if they were borrowed during the first millennium B.C.E. These observations suggest the possibility that this word has a foreign origin. Furthermore, the altemation between initial ’ and ras well as the difference in gender points to an ancient culture word (cf. Salonen 1952, 5—6). Anatolia was antiquity’s primary sources of lead, which was obtained from galena (lead sulphide) rather than in pure form (Moorey 1999, 293—94; Yener, et a1. 1991; Reiter 1997, 113—16). Accordingly, this culture word quite possibly originated in Anatolia. An Anatolian origin could also be supported by the early attestation of aba'ru in Old Assyrian Akkadian. Evidence of lead use as early as the Neolithic period includes beads found at Catal Hu"yu"k in Anatolia and a lead bracelet from Yarim Tepe. During the third millennium, lead was used at Ur for covering and repairing stone vessels, but by the Early Dynastic III period, production of lead vessels seems to have declined in Mesopotamia. Dun‘ng the early second millennium B.C.E., lead was commonly used to make figurines and trinkets at the Old Assyrian merchant colonies ofAlishar and Kanesh (modern Ku"ltepe). Numerous uses of lead are attested at Ashur during the latter part of the second millennium and the first millennium, including large inscribed plaques, model tools, and tokens. Lead is otherwise attested only sporadically during the Neo-Assyrian period (Moorey 1999, 294—96). The increased use of lead for castings, filling weights, and as additions to copper alloys in Egypt afier the beginning of the New Kingdom probably reflects imports of metallic lead (Ogden 2000, 168). 7ij ‘reed’ HALOT882; DCH 6:554 _ (Isa 19:7) (5 (Ext ‘reed, bulrush’; 1? nudabitur ‘to uncover, lay bare’ (associating may with the root my ‘to be bare, naked’); 6 1w0 ‘jaw’; I translates wixj‘by may as RTIJ'! 7mm W3" ‘the juice of the river will dry up’ [D] Eg —> Heb Eg ‘r (since OK) A"W 12279—80, 2:544; GHwA" 161; WA'S' 1:208; DLE 1:71 This hapax legomenon occurs in Isa 19:7 within an oracle conceming Egypt (Isa 191—15). The context demonstrates that this term denotes a plant growing on the bank of the Nile, a deduction supported by (5’s translation of ‘green rushes’ (10‘ 6x1 to‘ Xhopo‘v) (Thacker 1933, 164). The rarity of this word and the absence of any cognates elsewhere in Semitic together suggest a foreign loan. That Hebrew “1.11) is an Egyptian loan is further 461. Different spellings for this word include A.GAR5, AGAR‘, A.BA’R, E'.GAR, tours, and 00011. On the possible Sumerian origin of Akk aba'ru, see SLOB 140—41 (#35); Civil 1973a, 60. A Sumerian on'gin', however, is by no means certain.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

169

suggested by the broader context—an oracle conceming Egypt—and the presence of the Egyptian loans 18': ‘the Nile’ and 1110 (a reed or rush plant) in the immediate context.462 The donor term is no doubt Egyptian ‘r, which occurs as early as the Old Kingdom with reference to a reed or rush plant.463 Because .1112 is found within a prophetic oracle against a foreign nation, it is possible that its presence reflects addressee-switching. Addressee-switching, or the embedding of foreign language elements in the prophetic addresses to foreign nations, is a common phenomenon in the Hebrew Bible. This is especially true of First Isaiah (Rabin 1967, 304—5). Nevertheless, the use of the plural form 1111;; indicates morphological adaptation, and the existence of other Egyptian loanwords denoting reeds in the Hebrew Bible (1118, Km, and r11-0) suggests the possibility that Hebrew-speakers also borrowed this word. Thus, Hebrew 7ij is probably an actual Egyptian loanword into Hebrew, although the use of this Egyptian term in an oracle against Egypt effectively functions in the same manner as addressee-switching. '18:: ‘headwrap’ HALOT908—9; DCH 6:646 (Exod 39:28; Isa 3:20; 61:3, 10; Ezek 24:17, 23; 44:18) (5 uitpa ‘turban’ Exod 39:28; Isa 61:10, n' o‘u'veeotg r01)” Ko'ouou tfig So'éng ‘clothing of the glorious order’ Isa 3:20, Sofia ‘glory’ Isa 61:3, tpixwua ‘hair’ Ezek 24:17, 23, Kiéaptg ‘headdress’ Ezek 44:18; 38 omits Exod 39:28, discriminalis ‘headdress’ Isa 3:20, corona ‘crown’ Isa 61:3, 10; Ezek 24:17, 23, vitta ‘ribbon’ Ezek 44:18; 6 s'wbh’ dklw’ dbw,s’ ‘praise of a linen crown’ Exod 39:28, .sd" ‘temple ofthe head’ Isa 3:20, s’bh’ ‘praise’ Isa 61:3, s'byh,’ ‘praised’ Isa 61:10, m’n’ ‘garment’ Ezek 24:17, s‘r’ ‘hair’ Ezek 24:23, msnpt’ ‘turban’ Ezek 44:18; 1 1731p ‘headcovering’ Exod 39:28; Ezek 44:18, 7‘73 ‘crown’ lsa 3:20; 61:3, omits Isa 61:10, 71913119 ‘phylactery’ Ezek 24:17, 23 [D] Eg —> Heb QH 1x9; Eg pry, pyr (since NK) GHwA" 290, 304; WA'S' 1:502, 531; DLE 1:151 The term occurs seven times. It appears in the prophetic books as a status symbol representative ofjoy and contrasted with mouming (Isa 3:20; 61:3, 10; Ezek 24:17, 23). It also occurs twice with reference to the head covering of the priests (Exod 39:28; Ezek 44:18; cf. IQM vii:11). Some scholars derive this word from the root '18:: ‘to glorify, honor’, assuming that 18:)- exhibits the qetz‘l pattern sometimes found in segolate nouns from 462. Rabin 1962, 1076; EPNL 252—53; Thacker 1933. Brown, Driver, and Briggs (BDB 788) derive my from the root my ‘to be bare, naked’ and take it as a nominal form meaning ‘bare place’. However, this does not adequately fit the context. Attempts to emend the text (e.g., Reider 1952, 115—16) or propose anew Hebrew root my“ ‘to be green’ (e.g., Sacchi 1965) are unnecessary. 463. The feminine form, ‘r.t, means ‘papyrus scroll, leather scroll’ beginning with the Old Kingdom but does not occur with the definition “reed, stalk’ until the Greek period (ANW1:280. 2:544; GHwA" I61; WA"S 12208—9; DLE 1:72). It therefore provides a less likely donor term for .1111. Nevertheless, it remains possible that Hebrew-speakers borrowed the feminine rather than masculine form, especially in light of the final he of as, which could represent the Egyptian feminine ending. Cf. EPNL 253.

I70

Chapter 3

medial-’alep roots. This could be supported by the use of 135) as a status symbol in the Prophets (cf. Hausmann 2001, 464; C. J. Collins 1997, 574). However, '13:) has no cognates in any of the Semitic languages, nor do any of the Semitic languages have a cognate verb *p’r.464 The base stem of Hebrew 1x9 is the Piel, indicating that it is denominal and not primary. Hence, 189 most probably comes from 1:53 and not vice versa. Hebrew W85; first occurs in the book of Exodus within a context that contains a significant number of Egyptian loanwords. Accordingly, it is conceivable that it comes from Egyptian. Indeed, Egyptian texts contain the perfect donor term: the word pry, pyr denotes a cloth-wrapping of various sorts, including one wrapped around the head. Egyptian pry, pyr provides a perfect phonological and semantic match to Hebrew we. Hence, 135,) is almost certainly a loanword from Egyptian.465 1x19 ‘kohl, eye paint’ HALOT9I8; DCH 6:666 (2 Kgs 9:30; Jer 4230466) (5 onpiCopou ‘to paint the eyelids’ 2 Kgs 9:30, ott’Bt ‘eye paint’ Jer 4:30; 1? subium ‘kohl, eye paint’; 6 ,sdya”, Z 1‘13 ‘eye paint, antimony’ [7] CW Gk (pfiKog LSJ 1959—60; Latfircus OLD 814 The word ‘419- appears only twice. In the first instance, Jezebel puts 7119 on her eyes and beautifies herself in an attempt to avoid death (2 Kgs 9:30). In the second attestation, the prophet Jeremiah condemns Judah for its spiritual harlotry and describes Judah as enlarging her eyes with "1:19 (Jer 4:30). This word is not cognate with the typical Semitic word meaning ‘eye paint’. and no cognates exist elsewhere in Semitic. This suggests that 1-19 is a foreign loan.467 Related are Greek (poicog and Latin fucus, which often mean ‘seaweed, red algae’ but can also refer to a red rouge that was extracted from seaweed and used as a cosmetic (Theocritus, Id. 15.16; Dioscorides Mat. med. 4.99; Pseudo-Lucian, Am. 41,: Propertius, El. 2.18B.31—32) (Hu"nemo"rder 1998). Greek (pfiKog and Latinfizcus are not native to their respective languages, but it is also unlikely that they come

464. JA 1RD, attested only on a silver amulet discovered at Agabeyli in Turkey, is adopted from BH 13$ (DJPA 424). 465. Rabin 1962, 1077; cf. EDE 2:476. On the realia associated with Eg pry, pyr, see J. J. Janssen 2008, 29—31. 466. The occurrences of ms: in Isa 54:11 and 1 Chr 29:2 are probably errors for no: ‘turquoise‘. as indicated by the mention ofprecious stones and materials in both ofthese verses (Baltzer 2001. 448. 452; McKenzie 1968, 138; Rudolph 1955, 190; Kittel 1902, 102—3). 6 renders .115: as divepaé “charcoal. dark red stone’ in Isa 54:11 and M’Gog nolmreltn'g ‘expensive stone’ in 1 Chr 29:2. 467. The common Semitic word for ‘eye paint’ appears, for example. as Akk guhvlu and Arab [rub] (cf. also the denominal Hebrew verb bn: in Ezek 23:40). There is no clear evidence that 7,19 comes from the roots 119* or 135* (allegedly meaning ‘to crush’), both of which are unattested in Biblical Hebrew.

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

171

from Semitic because Biblical Hebrew does not seem to represent the meaning

‘seaweed, red algae’.468

Hebrew "+19 could be a direct loan from Greek (pfiicog or Latinfucus, but it could also have come from the language that lent this word to Greek and Latin or have been transmitted through another language. The biblical text, furthermore, does not provide any clues that Hebrew m9 came directly from Greek or Latin. Thus, Hebrew 1:19 most probably comes from the same unknown Mediterranean source that lent this word to Greek and Latin.469 Given her Phoenician royal descent (cf. I Kgs 16:31), Jezebel would have had access to luxury products acquired through Phoenician trade, which provides a plausible opportunity for borrowing this Mediterranean culture word. was ‘lot’ HALOT 920; DCH 6:670 (Esth 3:7; 9:24, 26) (5 Kkfipog ‘lot, portion’; I? transliterates as phur; 6 ps’ ‘lot’ Esth 3:7; 9:24, P_s,h’ ‘Passover’ Esth 9:26; 1 0‘!) ‘lot’ [T] Hitt —> Akk —> Heb Akkpu'ru (OA, Emar, Nuzi, MA, NA, NB) CAD P 528—29; AHw 881—82; OAram 119; Hitt pul— CHD P 373—74; HHw 150470 This word does not occur outside the book of Esther (Esth 3:7; 9:24, 26). The observation that the MT glosses 119 as 5111-, the typical Hebrew term for ‘lot’, indicates that W3 is not native to Biblical Hebrew. Long ago Jensen (1895, 339—40; cf. ALBH 126—27) suggested that Hebrew 119 is a borrowing from Akkadian pu'ru ‘lot, portion, allotment’. This makes good sense because 115 appears only in Late Biblical Hebrew and otherwise occurs in Old Aramaic as a loan from Akkadian (NTA 12:13). Akkadian pu‘ru, in turn, is most likely a loan from Hittite pul- ‘lot’. Hittite pul- appears early in Old Hittite texts, and the earliest attestation ofAkkadian pu'ru is in Old Assyrian Akkadian. This indicates a loan from Hittite to Akkadian via Assyrian traders in Anatolia. That this word has a western origin is also suggested

by its use at peripheral sites such as Emar and Nuzi.471 468. DELG 1186; DELL 258; contra EDG 1594—95; LEW 1:555. 469. Lambdin (1953b, 152; cf. Harrell, Hoffmeier and Williams 2017, 31—32) den'ves 'l-as from Eg flt“f.!, f?*k.t, fk*.t, a hypothetical shortened form of mko, ‘turquoise’, but there is no evidence that powdered turquoise was ever used as a cosmetic pigment in ancient Egypt (Lee and Quirke 2000, 111; Aston, Harrell and Shaw 2000, 62). Moreover, Eg fk": 1, f‘hkt, flr*.t never occurs in Egyptian texts, although the adjectival form flo’ti ‘made of turquoise’ without an initial m is attested. 470. JA '11:: occurs only in discussions of Esther and is adopted from Biblical Hebrew (DJBA 891; AM 84). 471. Cf. Singer 2006, 751. Other explanations for the origin of Akk pu'ru remain unconvincing. J. Lewy (1938b, 124) derives pu‘ru from the verb para"u ‘to cut’, connecting the acts of cutting and deciding one’s fate. However, this view cannot explain the absence of the final ’ in the nominal form.

172

Chapter 3

The name for the festival Purim, 0’11-5, most probably has no etymological relationship with Hebrew 119-, and the book of Esther’s connection between the two (Esth 9:26) almost certainly reflects a folk etymology. Otherwise, there would be little reason for the author of the book to use an obscure Hebrew word—so obscure as to require a gloss—to refer to a lot. The name for the festival Purim occurs with plene (um-D) as well as defective spelling (0‘19), and the former probably represents an attempt to make an association between the lot (119) and the festival (0‘119) more clear. The name for the festival Purim most likely comes from an Old Iranian festival name, as might be expected from the Persian setting of the book of

Esther.472 n9 ‘trap, bird trap’ HALOT 921; DCH 6:672—73 (Josh 23:13; passimm) [D] Eg —’ —* Heb —> Aram —> Arab QH 11:); QA, IA 119, mm, CPA 119 DQA 190; DJPA 427; DJBA 895; DCPA 326; Syr pah,h_a‘ LS’ 1177; Arab fahvhv Lane 2348; Eg phvf (NK) Gwa 308; WA'S' 1:543; DLE 1:154 The word 1151 occurs with the meaning ‘trap’ 24 times in the Hebrew Bible. Several times it refers specifically to a trap for snaring birds (Hos 9:8; Amos 325; PS 91:3; 124:7; Prov 7:23; Qoh 9:12). Related forms exist in other Semitic languages but offer no proof of a Semitic origin, especially because there is no known Semitic root on which this word could be based.474 This observation suggests that n9 comes from a foreign source.

The donor term is Egyptian p51} ‘bird trap’, first attested during the New Kingdom

Kaufman (AM 84) instead derives pu'ru from Sum BUR ‘bowl’, suggesting that this type of bowl was used in magical incantations and the casting oflots. However, texts provide no instances ofpu’ru 0r BUR with reference to cleromancy, and Akk pu'ru ‘lot’ is seemingly distinguished from Akk pu'ru ‘bowl’ by a different plural form (pu‘ranu). Notably, CAD (P 526—29) lists pu'ru ‘bowl’ and pu'ru ‘lot’ as separate lexemes. See ALBH 127. 472. Moore 1971, xlvi—xlx; cf. ALHB 127. Notably, 6 and Josephus preserve no connection between lots and the festival of Purim. The former renders 0‘75 as (Dpovpai whereas the latter uses povpata in Am. 11.183—296. The Lucianic recension, however, reads (DovaLa. Some scholars have therefore derived the name for Purim from the Persian festival of Fravard'iga'n, which coincides with the time when Purim is celebrated (e.g., Hintze I994; Lagarde 1896, 164—65). 473. Isa 8:14; 24:17—18; Jer 18:22; 48:43—44; Hos 5:1; 9:8; Amos 3:5 (2X); Ps 69:23 [69:22]; 91:3; 119:110; 124:7 (2X); 140:6 [140:5]; 141:9; 142:4 [142:3]; Job 18:9; 22:10; Prov 7:23; 22:5; Qoh 9:12. The MT reads Wt; was in Ps 11:6, but this should be emended to W8 was or something similar (BI-IS; H.-J. Kraus 1993, 1:201). 474. The verb ring in Isa 42:22 is denominal.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

I73

(th Dem ph and Copt Spas', Bphas': CDD P 153; DG 139; Crum 277).475 An Egyptian on'gin is supported by the popularity of the fowler’s trade in ancient Egypt. Egypt was a major migratory flyway for birds, which were very plentiful in Egypt and an important part of the ancient Egyptians’ diet. Egyptian tombs depict fowlers using large, rectangular clapnets to capture birds, and the importance of fowling in Egypt is described in Egyptian texts such as The Pleasures ofFishing and Fowling and The Discourse ofthe Fowler. Not surprisingly, Egypt’s reputation for fowling was well known in antiquity (Martin 1986; Houlihan 2001, 59). n9 ‘metal plating, metal foil’ HALOT 922; DCH 6:673 (Exod 39:3; Num 17:3) 6 ne'ralov ‘metal leaf, metal plating’ Exod 39:3, s’karn' ‘plate’ Num 17:3; 13 bractea ‘gold leaf’ Exod 39:3, lamina ‘metal plate, metal leaf’ Num 17:3; 6 fs’, 10m" 1’5"" 00 ‘metal plating’ [D] Eg —> Heb Egpvh} (MK, NK, Ptolm) Aj'W 2:935; GHwA" 308; WA'S' 1:543; DLE 1:154476 The word n9 occurs only twice, meaning ‘metal plating, metal foil’, both times in the Pentateuch. It refers to hammered gold or gold foil plating for the ephod (Exod 39:3) and also denotes a hammered plate used for covering the altar (Num 17:3). This word has few, if any, Semitic cognates. In addition, there is no known Semitic root on which it could be based. The Egyptian context of the Israelite tabernacle suggests the likelihood of an Egyptian loan, and a plausible donor term is Egyptian ph')’ ‘veneer, plating’.477 The ancient Egyptians were well known for their gold foil work in antiquity and were highly skilled in covering objects, particularly ones made of wood, with gold foil (Markowitz and Lacovara 2001, 36—37; James 1972, 40—42). It comes as no surprise, then, that Hebrew—speakers borrowed this term from Egyptian (cf. Hoffmeier 2005, 211—12).

70$ ‘potter’ HALOT 1956 (Dan 2:41) 0G Kapaumo'g ‘of a potter’; fifigulus ‘potter’; (5 phr’ [Syriac form] [T] Sum —> Akk —-> Aram —> Arab

475. EPNL 253; Lambdin 1953b, 153. Egpvhf is perhaps based on a common Afroasiatic root meaning ‘to close’, but BH on is probably not, as has been suggested, a descendant ofa common Afroasiatic noun meaning ‘trap’ (EDE 22498—99). Arabfagh'h comes from Aramaic (Fra'nkel 1886, 119). 476. The word 115 may occur in a Phoenician inscription from Idalion, Cyprus (RES 12098), but the text is difficult and such a reading is by no means certain (DNWSI 904). 477. EPNL 253; Lambdin 1953b, 153; FWOT 13o; Rabin 1962, 1077. Eg phi, first attested in the Middle Kingdom, can also refer to a variety of thin objects, including plates, ship decks, and planks.

I74

Chapter 3

Sum BAH'AR PSD; Akk pahva'ru (OAkk, OB, Nuzi, RS, MA, MB, SB, NA, NB) CAD P 21—23; AHw 810; IA, JA, CPA 1119 DNWSI 907—8; DJPA 428; DJBA 895; DCPA 326; Syr pah,h,a‘ra‘ LS" 1179; Mand pahara MD 360; Arabfah'hva'r Lane 2349478 Biblical Aramaic 113:) ‘potter’ appears only in Dan 2:41, where it occurs in the expression 1,119."? r1011 ‘clay ofthe potter’. Related words include Akkadian pavha‘ru and various forms in Aramaic (Imperial, Jewish, and Christian Palestinian Aramaic as well as Syriac and Mandaic). The Aramaic forms, including Biblical Aramaic Ins), have been recognized since Zimmem as loans from Akkadianpahva'ru ‘potter’ (1917, 26; cf. AIA 79; FWOT132). The latter is, in turn, a loan from Sumerian BAVHAR.479 Aramaic later lent this word to Arabic as favhvha'r (Frankel 1886, 257). .1395 (a gemstone, perhaps peridot) HALOT 924; DCH 6:679 (Exod 28:17; 39:10; Ezek 28213; Job 28:19) 6 tona'Ctov, $3 topazius ‘peridot’; 6 zrg’ ‘topaz’ Exod 28:17; 39:10, qudn) ‘agate’ Ezek 28:13, mrgnyr‘ ‘pearl’ Job 28:19; I 1171‘ ‘yellow gem’ except "71173 171' ‘yellow pearl’ Job 28:19 [D] Eg —> Heb Eg *pi’-d_d This term, which refers to a gemstone, is unusual because Biblical Hebrew typically does not tolerate two consecutive dentals in the same word.480 In addition, it has no cognates and does not seem to be based on any known Semitic root.‘81 These observations provide strong evidence for a foreign origin. Job 28:19 associates this gem with Nubia (Win-mime) and mentions it along with 013;, a type ofgold connected with Ophir near the Red Sea. This geographical association points to a loan from northern Africa rather than East Asia as is commonly supposed.482 The initial -5 of 71703 is also suggestive of the Egyptian article p3,

478. The interpretation of Ug p_hr as ‘potter’ in KTU 1.96:7, 9—10 is by no means certain (contra DUL 659). 479. On the Sumen'an on'gin of Akk pahva'ru, see SLOB 433—34 (#547). Salonen (1952, 11) instead thinks that this word can be traced back to the pre-Sumen'an substrate. 480. Cf. Koskinen 1964, 37. The letters [e1 and dale! occur together in the same word only in the noun 70$ ‘buckthorn’ and the verb 7113 ‘to drip’, but even in these lexemes the consonants 1e] and dale! are separated by at least a full vowel. 481. JA, SA 711195 are adopted from Biblical Hebrew (Jastrow 1903, 1154; DSA 678). 482. Many scholars den've 717199 from Sktpi'ra- ‘yellow’ (e.g., Rabin 1962, 1079; FWOT133; Powels 1992, 197—98). However, pt'la- only occurs with reference to a gemstone in late Sanskrit texts (EWAia 2:137; KEWA 2:292). Pope (1965, 204) instead derives 1.11951 from Skt ra'pas- ‘heat, fire’, arguing that such an etymology represents an appropn'ate description for a yellow gemstone. However, ra’pas- is not used

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

I75

rendered as 09 in some Egyptian personal names borrowed into Hebrew (cf. 011,323, borrowed from Eg P)’-nh.sy ‘the Nubian’).483 The Egyptian donor term, not attested in extant texts, was presumably something like *pi-(jd.484 65 and 23 translate Hebrew flips: as tona'Ctov and topazius, further supporting an Egyptian origin. Agatharchides of Cnidus (.M Eryth. 5.84), Pliny (Nat. 6.34.169; 37.32.107—9), and Strabo (Geogr. 16.4.6) all claim that this gem comes from the island of Zabargad (St. John’s Island) in the Red Sea. The island of Zabargad was a primary source of the greenish-yellow mineral peridot in antiquity, and this gemstone is still found there today.485 Assuming that 6 and 28 are correct in their translations, Hebrew 717199 may denote the gemstone peridot.486 However, evidence for peridot prior to the Hellenistic period is currently lacking (see Harrell, Hoffmeier and Williams 2017, 13—14). was (a type of leg wrappings) HALOT 1956 (Dan 3:21) CG, 6’ mm ‘Persian headdress’; SB tiara ‘turban, headdress’; 6121s" [Syriac form] [D] OIran (Scyth) —> Aram Syrpezs'a' LS2 1184; OIran *patis'- (Scyth) AISN 188 Biblical Aramaic We occurs only in Dan 3:21 within the list of clothing worn by Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah when they were thrown into Nebuchadnezzar’s fiery furnace. That the ancients already struggled with this word is evident from its multiple spellings in the MT, which include ii'l.‘W’1;J—5 (Qere) and "limiting-9 (Ketiv). Given the different variants preserved in extant manuscripts, its exact spelling remains uncertain.

in‘ Sanskrit texts with reference to any gemstone (EWAia 1:624; KEWA 1:477). Most problematically, neither of these Sanskrit etymologies can adequately account for the dale! of runs. 483. In other instances, the Egyptian masculine definite articlep} appears as 49 (e.g., ‘78‘1915 ‘Putiel’, a hybrid of Eg Pf—dz' and BH ‘73), 4'5 (e.g., ‘19‘0'1'5 ‘Potiphar’, from Pi—di-pB-iry), or even —9 (e.g., Dian} ‘Pathros’ or ‘Upper Egypt’, from Pf—tf-rsy). Although the Egyptian masculine definite article p3 otherwise only appears in proper nouns in Biblical Hebrew, a number ofcommon nouns in Imperial Aramaic represent it, including umons (from p)’—_h!-mm’.t),~ p9, P19 (from pf-wg), inuxnnon (from p)’-sh_-md_;’.!—nr_r), 0WD (from pf-g‘s), and 1171179 (from p>’—'r‘r). 484. Cf. Gn'ntz 197521, 8—9; contra Rabin 1974—1975. Harrell, Hoffmeier, and Williams (2017, 12—14) identify the Egyptian donor term as didi, which seems to denote hematite. However, this loan hypothesis does not adequately explain the lack of representation of Eg 1' or the presence of the Hebrew feminine ending. 485. Aston, Harrell and Shaw 2000, 47; Harrell 2014; Thoresen and Harrell 2014; O’Donoghue 2006b, 290. 486. In antiquity Gk tonaC’tov, to’nafiog and Lat topazius did not refer to the topaz. The referent ‘tOPaZ‘ is a later development that only arose by virtue of the topaz’s similarity to the pen'dot. See

Hoover 1992, 3—13; Koch 1964.

176

Chapter 3

The uncertainty regarding this word’s spelling as well as its association with the foreign loans '73-'10 (a type of trousers) and 7172-13 (a type of pointed cap) indicate a non-Semitic origin. Because both ‘7310 and 7172']:- denote Scythian items of dress, it is likely that W205 can also be traced back to the Scythian language.487 Syriac pejs'a', used by G to translate W195 in Dan 3:21, occurs elsewhere in Syriac literature with reference to leg wrappings. Notably, the Syriac exegete lshodad of Merv claims that this word refers to a kind of Persian leg covering (Comm. Dan. 3:21; cf. Theodoret 0f Cyrrhus, Comm. Dan. 3:21 [§1324]). Accordingly, this term probably refers to the leather straps the Scythians used to hold their trousers and boots together.488 This particular style of leg wrappings was almost cenainly adopted in Persia, where it became part of Persian dress along with other Scythian clothing. From here, the term for these leg wrappings entered Aramaic (see Rosenthal 2006, 63). wars => 112375

W229, W323 ‘concubine’ HALOT929; DCH 6:681—82 (Gen 22:24; passt'm489) [.9] cw QH m‘wa; Gk na’kltaé, nuMaKig LS] 1293; Lat paelex, pelex, pellex OLD 1411490 This word, which means ‘concubine’ and is also spelled W379, occurs 37 times in the Hebrew Bible. It has no Semitic etymology or cognates and is undoubtedly a foreign loan. H. Lewy (1895, 66—67) derives Hebrew 19375 from Greek 7:01AM: ‘young girl’, naMuKig ‘concubine’, and Latin paelex, pelex, pellex ‘concubine, mistress’, but it is difficult to derive the Hebrew form directly from Greek and Latin because they have no clear lndo-European etymology.491 Notably, the base stem of naMaKig is naMaKiS- (cf. the genitive naMuxiSog). The —8 afformative elsewhere occurs in words that have entered Greek via Anatolia (cf. iaomg ‘jasper’ with base stem 1"aom8-, ouv'pig ‘emery’ with base stem ouu'pl5—. xltauu'g ‘mantle’ with base stem xkapu’SJ. Thus, the Semitic and Indo-European forms probably come from a third, Anatolian source and together represent an

487. Nyberg (1931, 187) reconstructs it as ‘paynms'ag whereas Hinz (AISN 188) more plausibly reconstructs it as *paIis'-. 488. On this item of Scythian clothing, see Yatsenko 1992; Widengren 1956, 229. 489. Gen 25:6; 35:22; 36:12; Judg 8:31; 1921—2, 9—10, 24—25, 27, 29; 2024—6; 2 Sam 3:7 (2*): 5313; 15:16; 16:21—22; 19:6 [19:5]; 20:3; 21:11; 1 Kgs 11:3; Ezek 23:20; Song 6:8—9; Esth 2:14; 1 Chr 1:32; 2:46. 48; 3:9; 7:14; 2 Chr 11:21 (2x). 490. JA mb‘b occurs only in ‘I and is adopted from Biblical Hebrew (Jastrow 1903. 1177). JA '1.pr and Syr plq’ (of uncertain vocalization) are loans from Gk new (DJPA 437; LS2 1203). 491. On the etymology ofGk new, naMmag’ and Lat paelax, pelex, pellex, see EDG 1147; DELG 823;an 2008, 439; DELL 474; LEW 2:233—34.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

I77

ancient culture word.492 All these words probably imply a particular form of cohabitation, hence the borrowing of this foreign social word.493 4’75 ‘spindle’ HALOT 933; DCH 6:696 (2 Sam 3:29; Prov 31:19) 0 oicuta'kn ‘staff, crutch’ 2 Sam 3:29, étpouccog ‘spindle’ Prov 31:19; flfusus ‘spindle’; 6 mw‘zl’ ‘spindle’; ‘I 118 (error for UN ‘staff’) 2 Sam 3:29, 71713772 ‘spindle’ Prov 31:19 [?] CW Sum BALAK PSD; Ebla pi’akku VE 251 (#459); Krebernik 1983, 16; Akk pilakku, palakku, pilaggu, pilaqqu (OB, Bogh, EA, SB, NA, NB) CAD P 371—73; AHw 863; Ug plk DUL 661; Phoen 1‘79 DNWSI 915—16; JA 1525, 1.355 DJPA 436; DJBA 900—901 This word occurs only twice in the Hebrew Bible. In Prov 31:19, 47:) appears parallel to Witt/"3 ‘spindle’ within the description of the industrious woman (‘7?U‘nW8).

Although debated, 1.179 in 2 Sam 3:29 also has the meaning ‘spindle’.494

Related terms include Sumerian BALAK, Eblaite pi’akku (written as biz-a—gu and lexically equated with giSBALAK), Akkadian pilakku, pilaqqu, Ugaritic plk, Phoenician 155,495 and Jewish Aramaic 1‘7’5, 71:975. The final double consonant of Akkadian pilakku, pilaqqu is indicative of a foreign loan, but the variant spellings argue against a loan from Sumerian. Accordingly, this term almost certainly represents an ancient culture word.496 Notably, this word is associated with women in several of its occurrences in Northwest Semitic (Prov 31:19; KAI 26 A ii:6; KTU 1.4 iiz3—4). This connection reflects antiquity’s association of spinning and weaving with women (cf. Hoffner 1966, 328—29; Barber 1991, 283—98). For example, women are attributed the role

492. There is little evidence that this word came to the Levant via the mediation of the Philistines (Brug 1985, 198; contra Rabin 1974, 359—64; Bork 1939—1941, 228; Niesiolowski—Spano‘ 2016, 197—98). 493. FW0T134; J. P. Brown 1968, 166-69; Schrader 1911, 471. Rabin (1974, 357—59) den'ves 1937's from Indo—European *hiepi- ‘at, on’ and *Ieg”- ‘to lie down’. However, as Rabin himself admits, the actual Greek and Latin forms differ from the forms that would be expected if this were the case. Go"rg 097%, 10—11) instead derives W75 from a hypothetical Eg *pf—r—gs ‘the one beside’. However, this is speculative, especially because *pf—r—gs is unattested in Egyptian texts. There is, furthermore, nothing about W79 that might suggest an Egyptian origin. 494. Caquot and Robert 1994, 391; McCarter 1984, 118. Hollaway (1987) suggests that Joab’s household will be condemned to corve’e labor, den'ving ‘47:) in 2 Sam 3:29 from Akkpilku ‘work duty, corve'e’. However, the expression 1-‘793 mm is best interpreted as a curse renden'ng Joab effeminate and without descendants (S. Layton 1989; Malul 1992). 495. Phoenician 175 only occurs with the meaning ‘spindle’ in the Azatiwada Inscription from Karatepe (KAI 26 A ii:6). This meaning is supported by the presence of the hieroglyph for ‘spindle’ (FUSUS) in the Luvian version of this bilingual text (Azatiwada §XXXV,186). 496. AM 82—83; Salonen 1969, 116. Attempts to connect BH T23 and its related forms with Arab falaka ‘to be round’ are semantically unsatisfying (contra HALOT 933).

178

Chapter 3

of spinning in Exod 35:25—26, the book of Tobit says that weaving cloth is the type of work that women do (Tob 2:11—12), weaving is associated with women in an Ur III Sumerian text from the time of King S'u-Sin (RIME 3/2.I.4.3 iv:23—31), and administrative texts from Mari refer to female weavers in the palaces (ARM 9.24 iv:18; 25:38; 27 v:43; 13.21 r. 9'—16’). Ancient Near Eastern iconography likewise depicts women with spindles or other weaving instruments (Pritchard 1969, 42—43 [nos. 142—44]). The abundant remains of spindles and spindle-whorls from the ancient Near East and Mediterranean indicate their frequent use for spinning cloth in antiquity (Barber 1991, 51—65). ' 135 (a type of bread) HALOT 937; DCH 6:705 (Ezek 27:17) 5 pu’pov Kai Kaoia ‘myrrh and cassia’; if balsamum ‘balsam, balm’; 6 dhn’ ‘millet’; 1 ‘1‘717. ‘flour from grain’ [?] CW Akk pannigu, pananigu, pangu, punnigu, punnugu (Emar, MA, SB) CAD P 83—84; AHw 818; Hitt pum'ki-, punniki- CHD P 376—77; HHw 150

The word :39 occurs only in Ezek 27:17 as one of several imported foodstuffs. Akkadian panm’gu and its various forms as well as Hittite pum’ki-, punm'ki- are almost certainly related, given their phonological and semantic resemblance. Several observations, fiirthennore, suggest a foreign origin: the fact that 139 refers to an imported foodstuff, the limited distribution of this word in Akkadian, this word’s attestation in Hittite, and this term ’5 multiple spellings in both Akkadian and Hittite. The u-vowel ofthe first syllable of Hittite pum'ki-, punniki- points to a northern origin, and the -ik ending is paralleled by the pre-Hittite Anatolian bread name tum’k— (HHw 203).497 Accordingly, this ancient culture word seems to have orig— inated somewhere to the north. There are no clear phonological clues that this word entered Hebrew via Akkadian, and the Hebrew and Akkadian forms probably constitute separate borrowings from the north.498 D‘J’w ‘pearls’ HALOT 946; DCH 6:721—22 (Job 28:18; Prov 3:15; 8:11; 20:15; 31:10; Lam 4:7) (5 0' s'orbrapog ‘hidden thing’ Job 28:18, kiGog nolvtskn'g Prov 3:15; 8:11; 31:10, M009 oomrpsipov ‘sapphire stone’ Lam 4:7; 23 occultus ‘hidden thing’ Job 28:18, cunctus ops ‘all abundance’ Prov 3:15, cunctus pretiosus ‘everything 497. Hoffner 1974, 177—78; Durand 1989, 35; cf HEG L—S 648—49. 498. Rabin on'ginally (1966, 8—9) compared BH 135 with Skt bhan‘ga’- ‘hemp’. However, he later (1971, 435) changed his mind and instead associated it with Lat pam'cum ‘millet‘. There is little basis for either of these den'vations, especially in light of the word’s more plausible connection with Akk pannigu and Hitt punik1‘-, punm'ki~.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

precious’ Prov 8:11, gemma ‘gem’ Prov 20:15, ulteriorfinis ‘uttermost country’ Prov 31:10, ebur antiquus ‘old ivory’ Lam 4:7; 6 kw] mdm ‘everything’ Job 28:18, k’p’ t_bt’ ‘precious stone’ Prov 3:15; 8:11; 20:15; 31:10, srdwn’ ‘car— nelian’ Lam 4:7; 1 firm ‘pearl’ Job 28:18, :11: '1‘: ‘precious stone’ Prov 3:15; 8:11; 20:15; 31:10, ‘Wfit ‘scarlet’ Lam 4:7 [?] CW Akkpinnu (Qatna, NB) CAD P 384; AHw 864; Ug bnn DUL 226; Eg bnn (NK) Gle 270; WA'S' 1:460499 The word mm, a plurale tantum, occurs six times in the Hebrew Bible. At least two of these instances mention this term along with foreign products such as peridot and gold (Job 28:18) or lapis lazuli (Lam 4:7). Based on its occurrences, it seems to refer to some kind of precious material or luxury item. It is unlikely that Dung: derives from the alleged root 119*, which is not actually attested in Biblical Hebrew (contra BDB 819; Horsnell 1997). It should instead be compared with Akkadian pinnu, a word attested at Qatna and in Nee-Babylonian texts with reference to a bead-like object, as well as with Ugaritic bnn, a term for an object made of precious material, as indicated by the succeeding mention of z’qnu’ ‘lapis lazuli’ (KTU 4.247:27).500 It should also be compared with New Kingdom Egyptian bnn ‘pearl, bead’ (cf. EDE 2:227). The various spellings of these various forms points to an ancient culture word denoting pearls as well as other round precious objects, such as beads.501 Where it came from remains uncertain, but it most probably came from the region where the product originated. l’WUJD? 3’ l’WD‘JOfiJ FWD-:05, Home (a stringed musical instrument) HALOT 1958

(Dan 325, 7, 10, 15) G, 58 both use their corresponding forms of this word (waltrn'ptov and psalterium, respectively); 6 knr’ ‘lyre’ 499. Gk m’vn, m’va are probably not related (contra H. Lewy 1927—1928, 25). These Greek words refer to a species of bivalve and only came to mean ‘pearl’ during the late period because this particular bivalve produced pearls (L51 1405). 500. De Moor (1996, 157) suggests that Ug bnn is cognate with Arab bunmy' and Syrian Arabic benni and therefore denotes a species of carp. This, however, is unlikely because lapis lazuli (iqnzi) is listed in the very next line. De Moor’s finding of various fish species in KTU 4.427223—29 is itself fishy and relies on some highly speculative lexical work. 501. Cf. Harrell, Hoffmeier and Williams 2017, 35—36. Byington (1945, 340—41) contends that mus: refers to corals whereas m'nxj refers to pearls in Ezek 27:16. However, he does so under the incorrect assumption that these products come from India. Rabbinic tradition (e.g., Rashi) correctly recognized that this word means ‘pearls’ and not ‘red coral’. The parallelism in Lam 4:7 does not necessarily suggest a reddish color for D‘J‘J$ because the context indicates that 1318 means ‘pinkish’ rather than ‘red’ (Gault forthcoming; cf. Brenner 1981—1982).

180

Chapler 3

[D] Gk —~> Aram; Lat Gk wakm’ptov, *wavm’piov LSJ 2018; Lat psalterz‘um OLD 1662502 This Biblical Aramaic word occurs four times in the description of Nebuchadnezzar’s orchestra (Dan 3:5, 7, IO, 15). It appears with two different spellings: one with taw in Dan 3:5, 10, I5 (Pm-305;) and another with get in Dan 3:7 (r1030?) The non-Semitic morphology and variant spellings indicate a foreign loan, and it has long been recognized as a loan from Greek wakm'piov (FWOT135; Coxon 1973—1974, 31—32; AAT 2:58). Greek wakm'ptov can denote a number of different plucked instruments, but it also refers to a specific type of stringed instrument. Harps were most ofien plucked, but lyres were also plucked occasionally, so this instrument could be either a harp or lyre (Mitchell 1992, 137). Greek wall-11' ptov does not appear in extant texts until the fourth or third century B.C.E., when it appears in the writings of Chamaeleon (Frag. 34.9). However, its absence prior to the fourth century does not mean that this word did not yet exist. The verb from which wakm'plov is derived, walla), occurs already in the sixth century (Aesop, Fab. 1.3; Anacreon, Frag. 28.3; 29.1). Furthermore, the use of nun rather than lamed indicates a borrowing from an unattested non-Attic form *wavm’ptov (rather than standard Attic walm'plov) because the consonant cluster 7LT becomes VT in some non-Attic dialects.503 Non-Attic dialects gradually fell out of use as Attic and Koine Greek spread, so it is likely that Aramaic-speakers borrowed Greek walrn'piov prior to the Hellenistic era (Noonan forthcoming). Therefore it cannot be assumed a priori that it must have been borrowed during the Hellenistic period just because it is not attested earlier (cf. Kutscher 1971, 401—2; Mitchell 1992, 136—37; Kitchen 1965, 48—49). Greek also loaned this word to Latin as psalterium. 13-15 (a roofed structure) HALOT 962; DCH 6:754 (1 Chr 26:18 [2X]) 6 Btaosxouev'm ‘those who relieve guard’; 513 cellula ‘small room’; 6 prbr’ [Syriac form]; I translates 13197 as two words, N13 ‘97: ‘toward the field’ [D] Olran —> Heb; Aram; Elam IA, JA 1319 DNWSI 935; Jastrow 1903, 1213; Olran *parz‘ba‘ra- AISN 179; [AP 440; Elam ba—ri—ba—ra-um, ba-ri—ba-ra's', ba-ri—pa-ra's', ba-ri-ba-ra's' E W 148,

151

502. Sum *SALITELU, alleged by Kolari (1947, 78—79) to occur in a Seleucid Sumerian—Akkadian text, is a ghost word that should instead be read as two distinct words, SALI BiJB. Accordingly, it provides no additional attestations of this word (contra FWOT 135). 503. On the shift of it to VI in non-Attic dialects. see C. D. Buck 1955, 64—65 (§72); Lejeune 1972. 152 (§1 51). Although I and n are sometimes confused in the world’s languages, there is no evidence that Gk 9» was pronounced as [n] (cf. Petrounias 2007, 563—64; Woodard 2008, 16; W. S. Allen 1987. 33. 40)It is unlikely that Aramaic-speakers would have represented Gk A as mm, especially because they do not do so in any other loanwords from Greek.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

181

Biblical Hebrew '13-'15) occurs twice in 1 Chr 26:18 with reference to an architectural structure in the Solomonic temple. The lack of any convincing Semitic etymology and this word’s rarity indicate that it comes from a foreign source. The donor term is Old Iranian *pariba'ra-, formed from the prefix pari ‘around’ (cf. OPers pariy and Av pairi: OPGTL 195; A1W 860—61) and the noun bara- ‘bearer’ (cf. OPers, Av bara-: OPGTL 53 [§I60], 200; A1 W 943). This word has a relatively general meaning in Iranian, with its precise connotation dependent on the context. Nevertheless, each of its different meanings relates to some kind of roofed structure,504 which perfectly matches the use of '13-‘19 in Biblical Hebrew. Elsewhere, Old Iranian *pariba'ra- appears in Imperial Aramaic and Elamite. In an Aramaic—Lydian bilingual from Sardis (KAI 260:3, 5), Imperial Aramaic 1:119 denotes a structure connected with a tomb.505 In Elamite in the texts from Persepolis, it refers to a structure used for storage, such as a granary or silo (e.g., PF 107:7; 161:7—8; 586:3—4; PFNN 440:4; 1536:5—6) (cf. Hinz 1970, 436). This parallels the mention of storehouses (D‘sgg) in conjunction with the structure 1319 in I Chr 26:17—18. Although commonly thought to reflect spirantization of the labial, the form 1115of 2 Kgs 23:11 has a different origin, as explained below under its entry. Thus, the similarity between Hebrew 131,5 and Hebrew 1119 is coincidental. 0315 ‘garden’ HALOT 963; DCH 6:756 (Song 4:13; Qoh 2:5; Neh 2:8) 6 napa’fietoog [Greek form]; 28 paradisus [Latin form] Song 4:13, pomerium ‘sacred land tract’ Qoh 2:5, saltus ‘forest’ Neh 2:8; 6 prays’ [Syriac form]; I 11 ‘garden’ Song 4:13; Qoh 2:5 [D] OIran (Med) —> Akk; Heb; Aram; Gk Akk parde'su (NB) CAD P 182; AHw 833,- JA, SA, CPA 0119, 0‘71!) DJPA 444; DJBA 927—28; DSA 700—701;DCPA 326; Syrpardaysa' L82 1228; Mand pardisa, pardasa MD 363; Gk napa’éstoog, napa’fitoog LS] 1308; Olran *pardéza- (Med) AISN 179; IAP 447 This word occurs three times. In Neh 2:8 it describes a wooded area from which timber could be obtained. Elsewhere, 07-15: refers to a garden-like area. In Song 4:13 it denotes a lush area where pomegranates grow, and in Qoh 2:5 it appears in conjunction with n};- ‘garden’. The related Akkadian form parde'su means ‘garden’ and appears only in NeoBabylonian Akkadian. In several texts, Akkadian parde'su clearly refers to a Persian garden (e.g., Cyr 212:3). Similarly, Greek mpdSeroog, napa'fitooc, is first attested in the works of Xenophon (e.g., Anab. 1.2.7; 2.4.14; Cyr. 1.3.14), where it refers to the gardens of Persian kings and nobles. These specific associations with Persia Suggest that 0315 is a loan from Old Iranian, and the donor term is Old Iranian 504. Olran *pariba‘ra- does not mean ‘portico’ (AISN 179; IAP 440). 505. The Lydian equivalent is laqrisa—, unfortunately of unclear meaning.

182

Chapter 3

*parde'za-, an elided form of Old Iranian *paridaiza- (cf. Av pairidae'za- ‘wallenclosure’, Sogd préyz ‘garden’, and NPers pale‘z ‘kitchen garden’: AIW 865; DMSB 142; CPED 233).506 The sere of 0119- indicates a borrowing sometime during the Achaemenid period, when the diphthong ai monophthongized to e'.”7 In the Iranian languages this word generally refers to an enclosed region, sometimes an estate or enclosed garden, but both Semitic- and Greek-speakers adopted the latter definition. The Achaemenids inherited a long ancient Near Eastern tradition of establishing gardens, but they were the first to make it the centerpiece of their architecture. Their gardens had practical horticultural and agricultural aspects (cf. Neh 2:8) and served as a place for sensual pleasures (cf. Song 4:13), but they also carried political, philosophical, and religious symbolism: by creating a fertile garden in a barren land, the king established himself as a symbol of authority and fertility. Perhaps the best-known garden is that of Cyrus at Pasargadae, which contained dressed stone watercourses and various flora and fauna. This garden served as the locus around which the royal palaces and pavilions were located (Fakour 2001; Stronach 1989). 1115 (an enclosed area) HALOT 962; DCH 6:760 (2 Kgs 23:11) 6 transliterates as (papovptu; 23 translates as the proper noun Farurim; G prwr’ [Syriac form]; 1 1119 [Aramaic form] [D] OIran —> Heb OIran *parivaraThis word occurs only in the plural form 01111.9, found in 2 Kgs 23:11. It is often thought to be the same as Biblical Hebrew 1319, which appears twice in I Chr 26:18 with reference to a structure connected with Solomon’s temple. Those who hold to this view assume that the form 1119 reflects spirantization (e.g., Aikhenval’d 1987, 6—7; Lipin’ski 1975, 156—57; Schaeder 1930, 97), but they cannot explain adequately why spirantization has taken place. In addition, 1115) refers to a courtyard in which horses were kept, not a roofed structure as is the case with 1315). Thus, Hebrew

506. FWOT 136; Ai'khenval‘d 1987, 6; AAT 1:91; Haug 1853, 162—63. Seow (1996, 649—50) thinks that 0119 may have been borrowed via Akkadian, contending that “we should expect Old Persian d_ to appear as Hebrew z or d; Hebrew 3 should go back to Old Persian 3, not _d.” However, this word appears in Semitic texts, spelled with s, with clear reference to Persian gardens. In any case, there is no Old Persian consonant d_. Proto-Iranian 1‘“, perhaps what Seow is thinking of when he refers to “Old Persian d_,” regularly becomes d in Old Persian but 2 in all other Old Iranian dialects (Skjaervo 2009, 51; Schmitt 2008, 84—85; Testen 1997, 575; OPGTL 33—34 [§88]). Hence, this word exhibits Median phonology, as the use ofs for 2 also suggests. The Old Persian form *parde'da- appears in Elamite as bar-te-da and bar-te-tas' (EW 160). See Kli’ma 1977; Lecocq 1990, 209. 507. On the monophthongization of 01' to e‘, see Skjaerve 2009, 58; Schmitt 2008, 83.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

183

131a and Hebrew 1119 do not represent the same word, and their similarity is only coincidental.508 Hebrew 1119- comes from Old Iranian *parivara-, which is formed from pari ‘around’ (cf. OPers pariy and Av pairi: OPGTL 195; A]W 860—61) and var- ‘to protect, enclose’ (cf. OPers, Av var—z OPGTL 206; A]W 1360). Related are Avestan pairiuua'ra- ‘enclosure, surrounding protection, fence’ and Pahlavi parwa'r ‘sur— rounding area’ (AlW 866; CPD 65). Based on its etymology and on comparison with cognates, this Old Iranian term refers to a courtyard-like area enclosed by a wall or fence. This well suits the context of 2 Kgs 23:11, which describes an open courtyard where horses were kept.509

bus: => 5n: 1.3"]9 ‘pharaoh’ HALOT 971; DCH 6:774—76 (Gen 12:15 [3X], 17—18, 20; passim5'0) (5, Q, (5, I most commonly use their corresponding forms ((Dupuu), Pharao, Pr‘wn, and rum, respectively) [D] Eg —> Heb; Aram IA "(.1719 DNWSI 943; Eg pr-S’ (since OK) A"W 12450—51, 2:898; GHwA" 296; WA'S' 1:516—17 This word appears some 274 times in the Hebrew Bible with reference to the ruler of Egypt, Pharaoh. Most of these occurrences are in the Pentateuch, particularly 508. OH 7115, which denotes an architectural structure with columns (IIQT‘ xxv:9—10), does not demonstrate that 7375 and 1315 must be the same word. Old Iranian medial I) became v in later dialects, so Olran *pariba'ra-, which denotes a roofed structure, would have become *pariva‘ra- by the time of the Dead Sea Scrolls. 509. The etymology ofOlran ‘parivara- is different from that ofOlran *pariba'ra-, whose last component comes from the lndo-European root ‘b‘er- ‘to bear” rather than Indo-lranian *var- ‘to enclose”. Nevertheless, due to the change ofOld Iranian medial b to v, OIran ‘pariba‘ra- and *parivara- formally merged to become *pariva'ra-. They are both represented in Middle Iranian as Pahl parwa'r, which can mean ‘citadel, circumvallation’ as well as ‘suburb, surrounding area’. JA 11119, which follows the latter definition, is a loan from Middle Iranian (E. S. Rosenthal 1983, 509—12). I am grateful to Claudia Ciancaglini for her assistance with this entry. 510. Gen 37:36; 39:1; 40:2, 7, 11 (2x), 13 (2x), 14, 17, 19—21; 41:1, 4, 7, 8 (2X), 9—10, 14 (2X), 15, 16 (2*), I7, 25 (3X), 28 (2X), 32—35. 37—39, 41—42, 44 (2X), 45, 46 (2X), 55 (2X); 42:15—16; 44:18; 45:2, 8, 16 (2X), 17, 21; 46:5, 31, 33; 47:1—2, 3 (2x), 4-5, 7 (2x), 8—9, 10 (2x), 11, 14, 19, 20 2x), 22 (2x), 23—25, 26 (2"); 50:4, 6—7; Exod 1:11, 19, 22; 2:5, 7—10, 15 (2x); 3:10—11; 4:21—22; 5:1—2, 5—6, 10, 14—15, 20—21, 23; 6:1, 11—13, 27, 29—30; 7:1—4, 7, 9 (2x), 10 (2x), 11, 13—15, 20, 22—23, 26 [8:1]; 8:4—5 [8:8—9], 8 [8:12] (2X), 11 [8:15], 15 [8:19] (2X), 16 [8:20], 20—21 [8:24—25], 24 [8:28], 25 [8:29] (2x), 26—28 [8:30—32]; 9:1, 7 (2x), 8, 10, 12—13, 20, 27, 33—35; 10:1, 3, 6—8, 11, 16, 18, 20, 24. 27—28; 11:1, 3, 5, 8-9, 10 (2x); 12:29-30; 13:15, 17; 143$ 4 (2X), 5, 8—10, 17-18, 23, 28; 15:4, 19; 18:4, 8. 10; Deut 6:21—22; 7:8, 18; 11:3; 29:1 [29:2]; 34:11; 1 Sam 2127:616;1Kgs 3:1 (2x); 7:8; 9:16, 24,- 11:1, 18—19, 20 (3x). 21—22; 2 Kgs 17:7; 18:21; 23:29, 33—34, 35 (3X); I53191" (2X); 3022—3; 36:6; Jer 25:19; 37:5, 7, 11; 43:9; 44:30; 46:2, 17, 25 (2x); 47:1; Ezek 17:17; 29:2—3; 30:21—22, 24—25;31:2,18;32:2, 31 (2x), 32; Ps 135:9; 136:15; Song 1:9; Neh 9:10; 1 Chr 4:18; 2 Chr 8:11.

184

Chapter 3

Exodus, where runs) refers to the unnamed pharaoh of the Exodus. Only texts purported to take place later chronologically use 711719 as a title with a specific name, i.e., Apries (Jer 44:30) and Necho (2 Kgs 23:29, 33—35; Jer 4622).” Long ago Josephus claimed that Hebrew 711719- was of Egyptian origin because it occurs with reference to the ruler of Egypt (Ant. 8.155). Following in this vein, many scholars plausibly connect Hebrew 713775- with Egyptian pr-S’ ‘great house’ (cf. Dem pr—S’ and Copt rro: CDD P 69—77; D6 133; Crum 299).512 Originally, pr—S’ referred to the palace or residence of the king and his administration, but by the Twelfth Dynasty it came to be associated with the three wishes following the royal name (life, prosperity, health), by the New Kingdom it came to be used as a title for the king himself, and during the Third Intermediate Period pr—S’ became a fixed part of the king’s name. The distribution of the biblical occurrences corresponds to this development in that only texts purported to take place later chronologically use .1919 as a title with a specific name (Cazelles 2003, 102; Osing 1980b). Notably, Egyptian pr— ‘3 also appears in Imperial Aramaic 711719, specifically texts written in the dialect of Egyptian Aramaic (KAI 266:1, 3, 6 = TAD A1121, 3, 6). Given the Egyptian origin of this word, it is not surprising that it appears in such a context. 1210.215 ‘copy’ HALOT 1960 (Ezra 4:11, 23; 5:6) (5 Storm/n ‘decree, ordinance’ Ezra 4:11, translates Rum}: puma as (popoko'yog ‘tribute collector’ Ezra 4:23, Staoa’tpnotg ‘explanation’ Ezra 5:6; Q3 exemplar ‘copy, pattern’ Ezra 4:11; 5:6, exemplum ‘sample, example’ Ezra 4:23; 6 prs'gn’ [Syriac form] [D] OIran —> Aram QA, JA 11MB DQA 195; Jastrow 1903, 1243; Syr pars'agna' L52 1254; Mand pars'igna MD 365; OIran *pac'c'agnaBiblical Aramaic 1;.st occurs solely in the book of Ezra (Ezra 4:11, 23; 5:6). It shares the meaning ‘copy’ with Biblical Hebrew Lime and looks very similar with the exception of the res' in place of the law. This suggests that, like 13.11/"139, it comes from Old Iranian. The problem is that Biblical Aramaic 1111/13 cannot readily be derived from Old Iranian *patc'agna- ‘copy’, the source of Biblical Hebrew 1311/1151, because Old Iranian t should be represented with a dental, not a liquid.513 Most probably, Aramaic-speakers borrowed the alternate Old Iranian form *pac'c“agna-, in which the 511. Of its 274 occurrences, 216 are in the Pentateuch (94X in Genesis; 115x in Exodus; 7>< in Deu— teronomy). Most of the remaining occurrences are in the books of Kings (13x in 1 Kings; 8x in 2 Kings) and the Major Prophets (5X in Isaiah; 11X in Jeremiah; 13X in Ezekiel). 512. EPNL 253; Lambdin 1953b, 153; FW0T139; Rabin 1962, 1076. 513. There is scant evidence for any interchange between t and r in Iranian, so the presence of r in the Aramaic forms cannot be explained as an Iranian development. There is likewise little value

185 Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible _____'____.__—_.__________.______.____

cluster tc' had assimilated to c“c' (cf. Pahl pac'c’e‘n: CPD 62), and then dissimilated the consonant cluster c'c' after borrowing. The Aramaic languages provide several examples of rhotacism via dissimilation (e.g., OAram, IA 8013 ‘throne’ vs. BH am). It is likely, therefore, that the res” of Biblical Aramaic HIV/15> has arisen as a result of rhotacisim via dissimilation. The same process of dissimilation is attested in Qumran and Jewish Aramaic 111315, Syriac parsagna', and Mandaic pars'igna, which may also be traced back to Old Iranian *pac‘c'agnan5M 0,1119 (an official of the royal court) HALOT 979; DCH 6:789 (Esth 1:3; 6:9; Dan 1:3) 6 sv"50§0g ‘honored one’ Esth 1:3; 6:9, s’micéxrog ‘chosen one’ Dan 1:3; ‘8 inclitus ‘famous one’ Esth 1:3, princeps ‘chief, leader’ Esth 6:9, tyrannus ‘ruler’ Dan 1:3; 6 Prtwy’ ‘Parthian’; SC 1173113058 ‘general’ Esth 1:3; 6:9 [D] OIran —> Heb; Elam OIranfratama- AISN 98; [AP 405; Elam pl'r—ra—tams—ma E W 216

The Hebrew Bible uses 01319 three times, twice with reference to officials in the Persian court (Esth 1:3; 6:9) and once with reference to the exiled Jews’ royal family and administration (Dan 1:3). This word has no cognates or Hebrew etymology, and one suspects an Old Iranian derivation given the contexts in which it occurs. The donor term is Old Iranian fiatama- ‘foremost’ (cf. OPersfratama- ‘foremost’ and Avfiatama- ‘first’: OPGTL 197; A]W 979), which is composed of the prefix fra- ‘before, forth’ (cf. OPers, Avfra-z OPGTL 197; A1 W 974) and the superlative sufiix ~tama.515 This word does not actually occur as a substantive denoting an official in Old Iranian texts. The Elamite texts from Persepolis, which preserve this word as pirra-tamé-ma, are ambiguous but may preserve evidence that this word came to denote an honorific court title by the mid-fifth century B.C.E. (Tulpin 2005, 200; Eilers 1985, 29; 1955). Regardless, the prefixfra- clearly occurs in compounds for official titles elsewhere in Old Iranian, such as fr*asta'ka- and frama‘tar— (AISN 97; cf. OPGTL 198; A1W 987—88). Therefore, it is conceivable that Old Iranian fratama- could be used to denote an official connected with the royal court. .13an ‘food allowance’ HALOT 984; DCH 6:797 (Dan 1:5, 8, 13, 15—16; 11:26)

in reconstructing an Old Iranian form *paric'agna—, formed with the preposition pari instead ofpati (Ciancaglini 2008, 241; contra Widengren 1960, 97—98; Benveniste 1934, 180-85). 514. Cf. FWOT 143; Wilson-Wright 2015, 160—61. I am grateful to Claudia Ciancaglini for her assistance with this entry. 515. F WOT 140; Ai'khenval’d 1987, 6; AAT 1:51; Haug 1853, 164. On the superlative suffix -tama, see OPGTL 66 (§19o).

186

Chapter 3

(5 Ipu’nefia ‘food, meal’ except Beirwov ‘dinner’ Dan 1:16, uéptuva ‘anxiety’ Dan 11:26; 23 cibus except mensa ‘meal, feast’ Dan 1:8, pam‘s ‘bread’ Dan 11:26; 6 pfbg’ [Syriac form] except s'qlhwn ‘their portion’ Dan 1:16 [D] OIran —> Heb; Aram Syr patga'ba‘, patga'ba‘ LS’ 1180; OIran *patiba'ga- AISN 185 The word 13139 occurs only six times in Biblical Hebrew. Five times it denotes the food that Nebuchadnezzar provides for Daniel and his friends in the Babylonian court (Dan 1:5, 8, 13, 15—16). The other occurrence is found in Dan 11:26, which states that those who eat of this food will plot against the king and betray him. This word has no clear Semitic etymology, and it refers to a particular item of material culture, so a foreign loan is likely. The use of a maqqe‘p (mane) in Dan 1:5; 11:26 specifically indicates that 13,119 is a foreign compound word. The donor term is Old Iranian *patiba‘ga- ‘food allowance’. This word literally means ‘additional portion’, being formed from pati ‘thereto, again’ (cf. OPers patzy' and Av paiti: OPGTL 194; A]W 822—27) and *ba'ga- ‘portion’ (cf. Av ba’ga-, baya'-: A]W 921—22).516 Syriac pazba'ga', patba'ga' also comes from Old Iranian.“7 The use of an Old Iranian term for provisions from the royal court fits well with what is known of Persian customs. Xenophon, for example (e.g., Cyr. 8.2.3—4; cf. Anab. 1.9.25—26), notes how Persian kings provided food to honored members of the kingdom. Notably, Biblical Hebrew 1311.5) occurs with reference to food provided by the Babylonian rather than Persian court. However, it is certainly conceivable that Babylonian kings had a similar practice (of. 2 Kgs 25:29—30) and that an author writing later used a Persian term for this custom. 03139 (BH, BA) ‘decree’ HALOT984, 1961; DCH 6:798 (Qoh 8:11; Esth 1:20; Dan 3:16; 4:14; Ezra 4:17; 5:7, 11; 6:11) 6 a’vu'ppnolg ‘controversy’ Qoh 8:11, vo'uog ‘law’ Esth 1:20, émrayn' ‘commandment’ Dan 3:16, does not directly represent this word Dan 4:14; Ezra 4:17, p'fiotg ‘saying’ Ezra 5:7, p'fiua ‘word’ Ezra 5:11; 6:11; I? sententia ‘judgment’ Qoh 8:11, does not directly represent this word Esth 1:20, res ‘matter’ Dan 3:16, decretum ‘decree’ Dan 4:14, verbum ‘word’ Ezra 4:17, sermo ‘saying’ Ezra 5:7, 11, iussio ‘command’ Ezra 6:11; 6 ptgm’ [Syriac form] except tb‘t’ ‘vengeance’ Qoh 8:11; 1 mm [Aramaic form] Qoh 8:11; Esth 1:20 [D] OIran —* Heb; Aram; Elam IA, JA tuna DNWSI 948; DJPA 454; DJBA 945; Syrpe_gta'ma' LS2 1264; Mand pugdama MD 367; Ohm *patiga'ma- AISN 186; [AP 410; Elam bat-t1'-ka4-ma, bat-tz'-ka4—mas' E W 171 516. FWOT141; AAT 2:59—60. Eilers (1940, 77—80) instead suggests that me comes from *pifivaka‘meal’, supposedly formed from *piflva- and the suffix -ka. This, however, is less likely on phonological grounds, especially since OIran *p1'0va- elsewhere is represented with a final labial (cf. IA 11115 ‘ration’ and the element pitip'a- in Akk pitipabaga ‘one who apportions rations’). 517. Ciancaglini 2008, 230. The Syriac verb p_tbg ‘to feast on good food’ is denominal.

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

187

Biblical Hebrew 03139 occurs twice with the meaning ‘decree’ (Qoh 8:11; Esth 1:20). The Biblical Aramaic form of this word is identical and appears six times in the books of Daniel and Ezra (Dan 3:16; 4:14; Ezra 4:17; 5:7, 11; 6:11). Related forms exist in Aramaic, but otherwise it does not occur in Semitic, and its use in Elamite (e.g., PF 654:10—11; 659:8—9; 672113; 1795213) suggests an Old Iranian origin. The donor term is Old Iranian *patiga'ma— ‘message’ (cf. ManParth pdg’m, pdy’m and Sogd pty’m: DMMPP 269; DMSB 152).518 This Old Iranian word is formed from the preposition pati ‘thereto, again’ (cf. OPers patiy and Av paiti: OPGTL 194; A] W 822—27) and the verb gam- ‘to come’ (cf. OPers, Av gam—: OPGTL 183; A1 W 493—502). The fricative pronunciation of the gimel, indicated by the absence of a dages’, may be a reflex of the i-vowel of the Old Iranian form.519 ‘7‘1,’n.$(a luxurious garment) HALOT 989; DCH 6:810 (Isa 3:24) (5 xtrcbv peoorro'ptpopog ‘mixed purple tunic’; 13 fascia pectoralis ‘chest ban— dage’; G tklyr’ ‘purple garment’; SI mu: 1351.7: nmrl't ‘those who go about with pn'de’ [D] ?? —> Heb The word bums) is a hapax. As recognized by most of the ancient versions, and as implied by the context, it denotes some kind of garment. In light of the antithetic parallelism found throughout the verse and the contrast with W ‘sackcloth’, it seems to denote a luxurious garment.520 This word certainly does not look Semitic, and it has no apparent Semitic etymology. Accordingly, Brown, Driver, and Briggs (BDB 836) as well as Ko"hler and Baumgartner (HALOT 989) rightly suggest that it is probably a foreign loanword (cf. Bauer and Leander 1922, 485 [§61ga]). However, the context of Isa 3224 gives no indications of where Hebrew humo- comes from, and no plausible donor term presents itself. Thus, the donor language for this word remains uncertain given our present state of knowledge.521

518. FWOT 142; F. Rosenthal 2006, 63; AAT1:51—52; Haug 1853, 164. Arm patgam is a loan from Iranian (HA8 4:38). There is no connection between Olran *pariga'ma- and Gk (peey’ua, oem'ua, which means ‘voice, speech, utterance’ rather than ‘message’ and is based on the verb queen'ouou, which occurs already in Homer (cf. 506 1568—69; DELG 1154; contra Lagarde 1877, 126). 519. Sokoloff 2000, 101. This is also suggested by Syr pe_gta’ma' (Ciancaglini 2008, 62). 520. Tur—Sinai (1951, 307) suggests emendm'g the text to ’7‘; ‘91); ‘drums of jubilation’. However, this is speculative and unsupported by the ancient versions. 521. Some scholars have postulated alternative, but quite speculative, Old Iranian etymologies. Greger (1992) derives bums from *patigi‘l—, allegedly ‘master girder’. Tisdall (1911b, 214—15) instead den'ves it from *patigar-, allegedly ‘(garment) up to the throat’.

188

Chapter 3

mm ‘copy’ HALOT 991, 1960; DCH 6:813 (Esth 3:14; 4:8; 8:13) (5 a’vn’ypacpov ‘copy, transcript’; ‘13 summa ‘content’ Esth 3:14; 8:13, exemplar ‘copy, pattern’ Esth 4:8; 6 prs‘gn’ [Syriac form]; it 71mm”? ‘edict, ordinance’ [D] OIran —> Heb; Elam OIran *patc'agna- AISN 186; [AP 410; Elam bat-ti—zz’-ik-nu-s'e E W 173 This word means ‘copy’ and has two different forms in the Hebrew Bible. The Biblical Hebrew form, W09, appears in the book of Esther with reference to royal documents and decrees (Esth 3:14; 4:8; 8:13). The Biblical Aramaic form, wins, has a res’ instead of a taw and occurs three times in the book of Ezra (Ezra 4:11, 23; 5:6). Biblical Hebrew uwt'nzs does not look Semitic and undoubtedly comes from Old Iranian *patc‘agna-, an elided form of *palic'agna- ‘copy’. The latter is formed from pati ‘thereto, again’ (cf. OPerspatiy and Avpaz’tz’: OPGTL 194; A]W 822—27), the root *cvag- ‘to give’ (cf. Av cag-: A]W 576), and the suffix -na.522 Although not attested in Old Iranian texts, *patc'agna- is represented in Elamite bat-ti—zi-ik—nu—s'e (PF 231:8—9) and later Armenian patc'én (HAB 4:45—46). As noted above in its entry, Biblical Aramaic 1;st- has a separate origin from Biblical Hebrew nit/.1115. The former comes from *pac'c'agna-, a form ofOld Iranian *patc’agna- in which the t of the consonant cluster tc' has assimilated (cf. Pahl pac'c’e'n: CPD 62). :3 (a type of wagon) HALOT 994; DCH 7:64 (Num 7:3; Isa 66:20) (5 lapnn'vn ‘covered chariot’; SB tectum ‘covering, canopy’ Num 7:3, lectica ‘palanquin’ Isa 66:20; 6 mtqnn ‘prepared’ Num 7:3, qrwk’ ‘carriage’ Isa 66:20; 1 “arm ‘covered’ Num 7:3, .17’n'1 ‘sheep’ Isa 66:20 [T] Elam —> Akk —> Heb; Aram Akk sumbu, subbu (OB, SB, NB) CAD S, 244—45; AHw 1111; IA :13 Jastrow 1903, 1257; Elam zu‘-um-bu, zu-um-bu, zu‘-ub-bu523 This word occurs only twice. It denotes a wagon used by the Israelites to bring offerings to God (Num 7:3) and to transport people (Isa 66:20). In Num 7:3, furthermore, it appears in construct with Him] ‘wagon, cart’. Scholars have long recognized that Hebrew :13 comes from Akkadian slumbu, subbu ‘wagon’, which is also also the source of the rare Jewish Aramaic :13, ‘cart, palanquin’.524 Yet, Akkadian sumbu, subbu has no clear Semitic etymology, and its variation in spelling indicates a non-Semitic origin. Its earliest occurrences are in Elamite 522. On the suffix -na, see Skjmrva 2007, 902; OPGTL 51 (§147). 523. SA :3, which occurs in Sam-I Num 7:3, is adopted from Biblical Hebrew (DSA 719). 524. Zimmem 1917, 42; FWOT 144; ALBH 130—31; AIA 96,

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

189

texts from the Old Babylonian period, and Standard Babylonian and Nee-Assyrian texts use this word with reference to Elamite wagons. For example, in his annals Ashurbanipal mentions this particular wagon among the items he plundered from Elam (VAB 7.1.1 vi:22; x:85). Because the term would be borrowed with the product, Akkadian sumbu, subbu almost certainly comes from Elamite. Unfortunately, the Elamite donor term is unattested in extant Elamite texts and therefore unknown (see Salonen 1951, 62—64). Because Hebrew borrowed this word from Akkadian and because Akkadian borrowed it from Elamite, Hebrew :3 is a transmitted loan.525 It does not retain any connection with Elam, although it probably refers to a style of wagon similar to that denoted by the original Elamite donor term. If the ancient versions provide any clue, this particular wagon was a covered one. ‘3 ‘riverboat’ HALOT 1020; DCH 7:113 (Num 24:24; Isa 33:21; Ezek 30:9; Dan 11:30) (5 ééskeu'oemi ‘it will go forth’ Num 24:24 and éico’oouow ‘they will force out’ Dan 11:30 (both connecting ‘3 with the verb xx”), nloiov ‘ship’ Isa 33:21, onev'fiovrsg ‘hastening’ (misreading 0‘33 as 0‘33) Ezek 30:9; 13 trieris ‘trireme’; C5 lgywn’ ‘legion’ Num 24:24, omits Isa 33:21, msrhb’yt ‘hurriedly’ Ezek 30:9, ms'ryt’ ‘camp’ Dan 11:30; I 1.17‘0 ‘army’ Num 24:24, min ‘ship’ Isa 33:21,]1‘1‘) ‘legion’ Ezek 30:9 [D] Eg —> Heb Eg d_iy’ (since MK) A"W 2:2816; GHwA" 1067; WA'S' 5:515526 This word occurs only four times. It denotes a generic ship used in rivers (Isa 33:21), ships sent from God against Kush (Ezek 30:9), and ships of the Kittim (Num 24:24; Dan 11:30). The lack of any Semitic cognates suggests that ’3 is not native to Hebrew, and a number of scholars plausibly derive it from Egyptian d_gy’ ‘river-boat’ (cf. Dem _dy, d_iy’ and Copt 601': CDD D_ 14—15;DG 674; Crum 754).527 The latter has a perfectly good etymology in Egyptian in that it comes from the verb d_sy’ ‘to cross, go over’, which is often used with reference to going over water. The fact that Egyptian _d)’y specifically refers to a river— going ship fits quite well with Isa 33:21, where Hebrew ‘3 clearly refers to a boat that travels in rivers. An Egyptian origin also explains this word’s use in Ezek 30:9, an oracle against Egypt. The appearance of ’3 in Ezekiel’s oracle may reflect addressee-switching, a common phenomenon in the Prophets.

525. ALBH 130—31. Despite the phonological similarity, there is probably no relationship between B” 33 and Eg d_bw, which refers to a component of a wagon 0r chariot (contra HALOT 994). . 526. Copt 601' is the source of OSA 5y ‘merchant ship’, which occurs only in a sarcophagus inscn'ptron from Giza (RES 491323) (W. W. Muller 1963, 313). Hence, OSA 5y is not truly cognate with BH ‘3. 527. EPNL 253—54; Lambdin 1953b, 153—54; FW0T145; Rabin 1962, 1077; Erman 1892, 123.

190

Chapter 3

:19 (a volume measure) HALOT 1060; DCH 7:169 (2 Kgs 6:25) (5, £8, 6, I each use their corresponding forms of the word (Ka’Bog, cabus, qb’, and 3.7, respectively) ' [D] Eg —> Heb; Aram IA, JA 3p DNWSI 977; DJPA 472; DJBA 977—78; Syr qabba" LS? 1308; Mand qaba MD 398; Eg qby (MK), qb (since NK) A"W 2:2511; GHwA" 921; WA'S‘ 5:25 This word occurs only in 2 Kgs 6:25, in the context of Ben- Hadad’s siege of Samaria. The siege was so bad that, according to this verse, 3 donkey’s head was sold for 80 Shekels of silver and dove’s dung was sold for one fourth of the volume measure denoted by up. This volume measure was probably about two liters (Powell 1992, 905). K0"hler and Baumgartner (HALOT 1060) argue that this word is a noun derived from the root 33V ‘to be round’, implying that 3;? refers to a round vessel. However, such a meaning was entirely missed by the ancient versions. A much more plausible derivation is Egyptian qby, qb, which refers to a measure of volume (cf. Dem qb, qb.t and Copt Bke'bi: CDD Q 19; DC 534; Crum 99).528 This Egyptian term first appears during the Middle Kingdom with reference to a specific vessel, which soon came to denote a unit of volume associated with that vessel. Egyptian loaned this term not only to Hebrew, but also to Aramaic (Imperial and Jewish Aramaic, Syriac, and Mandaic). The adoption of this Egyptian term by Hebrew-speakers probably reflects broader Egyptian influence on Israelite administration. This influence includes the adoption of Egyptian hieratic numerals and symbols for weights, measures, and commodities. The Samaria Ostraca, for example, use Egyptian hieratic numerals in their date formulas (N. S. Fox 2000, 250—68). Such Egyptian influence would also have provided a good opportunity for Hebrew-speakers to adopt Egyptian qby, qb. 37317. 2 37:13 '11? => '17:

WP”? ‘castor-oil plant’ HALOT 1099; DCH 7:250 (Jon 4:6 [2x], 7, 9—10) (5 Koko’icoveot, EB cucurbita, 6 qr” (a type of gourd); ‘1’ WP”? [Aramaic form] [D] Eg —-> Heb; Gk Eg k3 f (MK), kyky (since NK) A"W 2:2565; GHwA" 948; WA'S' 5:109; Gk Kim LSJ 951529 528. EPNL 254; F WOT 147; Rabin 1962, 1077. 529. Possibly also related is Akk kukka‘m'tu, which appears in Standard and Nee—Babylonian texts with reference to a medicinal plant. However, the correspondence between Akk k and Heb gap is

Non-Sem1'tr'c Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible I9I {If—“m

This word occurs only in the book of Jonah, where it denotes a plant that provides Jonah with shade (Jon 4:6 [2X], 7, 9—10). It has a long history of interpretation, but many recent scholars identify 1129‘? with the castor—oil plant (Ricinus commum's). This plant was originally native to east Africa but later spread throughout the Mediterranean, ancient Near East, and India.530 This identification is supported by the likelihood that Hebrew 11?”? stems from Egyptian kik)’ ‘castor—oil plant’. This word is first attested during the Middle Kingdom, and beginning with the Nineteenth Dynasty it appears as kyky. The individualizing suffix 11- found on 11"p‘p, used elsewhere for Hebrew plant terms (of. 117338 ‘rush, reed’), is a subsequent development within Hebrew. Greek Kira, described and glossed by Classical writers as the castor—oil plant (Herodotus, His-t. 2.94; Dioscorides, Mat. med. 4.161; Pliny, Nat. 15.7.25), is also a loan from Egyptian.” The castor-oil plant is known for its relatively rapid growth and large palmate leaves, which is consistent with the biblical portrayal ofthis plant as quick-growing and able to provide shade.532 The attestation ofan Egyptian loanword in the book of Jonah, which has an Assyrian—not Egyptian—setting, demonstrates that Hebrewspeakers had completely nativized this word by the time of Jonah and also reflects the fact that this plant spread early from Africa to the ancient Near East. 01111”? (a type of lyre) HALOT 1970 (Dan 3:5, 7, 10, 15) (6,13, 6 each use their corresponding forms of the word (Ktea'pa, cithara, and

qytr’, respectively) [D] Gk —> Aram; Lat Gk KtGa'pa, Ktea'ptg LSJ 95o; Lat cithara OLD 359533 This Biblical Aramaic word occurs four times within the description ofNebuchad— nezzar’s orchestra (Dan 3:5, 7, 10, 15). Scholars have long recognized that it comes from Greek K16d’ptg.534 The final sibilant demonstrates that Aramaic-speakers unusual, and CAD (K 498) suggests that kukka'm'tu means ‘kukku-like plant’, Akk kukku being a type of bread or cake with a characteristic shape. 530. M. Zohary 1982, 193; Moldenke and Moldenke 1952, 203—4; Lo"w 1924—1934, 1:608—11. For a detailed history of this word’s interpretation, see Robinson 1985, 390—96. 531. EDG 695; DELG 510; Foumet 1989, 61. On Kira in Classical Greek sources, see Robinson 1985, 400—401. 532. M. Zohary 1982, 193; Moldenke and Moldenke 1952, 203—4. However, the text attributes the growth of the plant to divine intervention, so its characten'stics in Jonah do not provide conclusive evidence for its botanical identification. 533. JA 011117. occurs only in SI and is adopted fi'om Biblical Aramaic (Jastrow 1903, 1434). 534. FWOT 148; Coxon 1973—1974, 3o—31;AAT 2:58. The Masoretes have preserved both a Ketiv (0110’?) and Qere (011,119) reading for this word. In light of its derivation from Gk mea'ptg, it is likely that neither readm'g is entirely correct and that this word should be vocalized as CWTP, assuming a W1 in place of the waw (a very common scn'bal error). It is also possible, however, that the Keriv Preserves the correct reading because in later Aramaic the third declension nominative ending -g is often represented as oi— rather than on, on analogy with the second declension nominative ending -og

192

Chapter 3

adopted the non-Attic form KtGa’ptg as opposed to its Attic form, Ktea'pa. The former first appears in the eighth century B.C.E. (Homer, 1]. 2.600; 3.54; 0d. 1.159; 8.248), whereas the latter first appears in the fifth century (e.g., Euripides, Alc. 583) and largely supplanted KiBa’ptg with the rise ofAthens to prominence. Most likely, then, Aramaic-speakers borrowed this word from the Greek isles or Asia Minor at a time prior to the Hellenstic era. Otherwise, they most probably would have used the Attic form K19a'pa (Noonan forthcoming; cf. Coxon 1973—1974, 31). Greek loaned the Attic form of this word into Latin as cithara (DELL 123). Archaic and Classical period depictions of this particular kind of lyre represent it with a crossbar fumished with knobs and kollopes. Seven strings are wrapped around the kollopes in a figure-eight pattern, and each arm is ornamented with a scroll or volute on the inner edges. A sling allowed the player to support the instrument, which was played with a plektron (Maas and Snyder 1989, 30-34, 53—78, 171—78). nah-p (a type of cooking pot) HALOT 1102; DCH 7:255 (1 Sam 2:14; Mic 3:3) 6 does not directly translate this word I Sam 2:14, xu'tpa ‘earthen pot’ Mic 3:3; 28 011a ‘pot, jar’; 6 qrdl’ ‘pot’ 1 Sam 2:14, qdr’ ‘cooking pot’ Mic 3:3; SE '11,? .pot, [D] Eg —> Ug; Heb . Ug qlh‘t DUL 690; Eg qrh,.t (since OK) A"W 1:1339, 222528; GHwA" 932; WA'S' 5:62—63 This word is a dis legomena in the Hebrew Bible. In 1 Sam 2:14 it appears with reference to a pot that the priests used to cook meat at Shiloh, and in Mic 3:3 it refers to a pot used to cook meat. Accordingly, Hebrew nub? denotes a cooking pot ofsome sort, although it is impossible to identify it with a particular sort ofcooking pot (Kelso 1948, 31; Honeyman 1939, 90). The only other related Semitic form is Ugaritic qlh_t, which appears once in a scribal exercise (KTU 5.22:16). The rarity of this term in the Semitic languages points to a possible foreign origin, as does the lack of a known Semitic root on which it could be based.535 Several scholars plausibly argue that the donor term is Egyptian qrh,.t ‘pot, bowl’, first attested during the Old Kingdom.536 The doubling of the second radical in Hebrew nub-p probably mimics the pattern found in Hebrew vessel terms such as nah-3 ‘bowl, dish’, nus-3 ‘pilgrim flask’, and min-Q ‘cup, goblet’.

(S. Krauss 1898—1899, 1:193 [§339]). Given this possibility, and for the sake of simplicity, I have used the Ketiv throughout. 535. De Moor (1970, 317) proposes that BH 1157-9 and Ug qlhvt are connected with Akk qullu‘, qullz'tu. ‘roasted’. This etymology, however, is unpersuasive on phonological and morphological grounds. 536. EPNL 254—55, 282—83; Lambdin 1953b, 154; FWOT149; Rabin 1962, 1077.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

193

Hebrew and Ugaritic both have the feminine ending -t, and final -t was lost in Egyptian by the New Kingdom. Therefore, this word must have entered Northwest Semitic early, probably during the early second millennium B.C.E.537 That this word was borrowed early into Northwest Semitic is supported by the fact that the Egyptians borrowed this word back from Semitic as krht (cf. Copt qalaht: Crum 813) during the New Kingdom (SWET 331—32 [#481]). 117337. (a cinnamon-like plant) HALOT1114; DCH 7:271 (Exod 30:23; Prov 7:17; Song 4:14) (5, SB, 6, 2 each use their corresponding forms of the word (Kiwa’pwuov, cinnamomum, qwnmwn, and Ump, respectively) [D] —+ Heb; Gk; Lat Gk Kiwct'uwpov, Kiwauov LSJ 953; Lat cinnamomum, cinnamum OLD 346538 This word occurs only three times in the Hebrew Bible. In each of these occurrences, 117337. denotes an exotic spice with aromatic properties (Exod 30:23; Prov 7:17; Song 4:14). No productive root *qnm exists in Semitic that would lend itself to use for a cinnamon-like spice, and 11m? cannot be derived from the common Semitic word for ‘reed’ (cf. BH 71.39).539 A foreign term is therefore likely. However, its origin must not be sought in East Asia, as is commonly done.540 Hebrew 1173}? does not clearly refer to an East Asian species of cinnamon. This is especially true because no evidence exists for the presence of Cinnamon zeylanicum, or any other East Asian cinnamon species, in the ancient Near East prior to the Late Classical period. Classical authors are nearly unanimous in attributing cinnamon and cassia to the Horn ofAfrica (e.g., Pliny, Nat. 12.42.86—88) or Felix Arabia (e.g., Herodotus, Hist. 3.110—11; Dioscorides, Mat. med. 1.13—14). Furthermore, their descriptions make it clear that they cannot be describing true cinnamon or cassia (e.g., Theophrastus,

Hist. plant. 9.5.1—3; Pliny, Nat. 12.42.89—92; 12.43.95—97).541 537. EPNL 254—55. On the loss of the Egyptian feminine ending -t, see J. Allen 2013, 49, 61; Gardiner 1957, 34; Junge 2005, 35. 538. QA 0:17. and JA imp appear in biblical contexts and are adopted from Biblical Hebrew (DQA 208; DJPA 497). The same may be true of Syr qe'wna'ma'n, which occurs in similar contexts, although it could be a loan from Gk Kiwapov (LS’ 1337). 539. Cf. Cooley 1849, 168. De Romanis (1996, 103—8) derives 11793? from this word, supposing it is natural to think of cinnamon as a reed— or cane-like spice (cf. French cannelle). He argues that the 1173- ending is not a suffix, but the proper name ofthe Minaeans, a first millennium 13.C.E. Arabian tribe of ancient Yemen known for its involvement in the spice trade. However, this explanation does not adequately account for the ‘ in the Minaeans’ name (cf. BH 0‘1th and OSA Mwn). 54o. E.g., Musselman 2012, 38—39; Powels 1992, 190—92; M. Zohary 1982, 202; Low 1924—1934, 2:107—13. Brown, Driver, and Briggs (BDB 890) compare 1173;? with Malay kayu manis ‘cin'namon’, literally ‘sweet tree’ or ‘sweet wood’, but there are significant phonological differences between the Hebrew and Malay forms. 541. Crone 1987, 253—63; Raschke 1978, 652—55; Hepper I977; Hennig 1939; Laufer 1919, 541—43.

Chapter 3

I94

Accordingly, Hebrew 1105? must denote an aromatic cinnamon-like plant found in either the Horn of Africa or Felix Arabia, not the species C. zeylam'cum. Moreover, this culture word must have originated from one of these two regions because the word would have been borrowed along with the product. In support of this loan hypothesis, it is notable that the element amom also appears in the spice terms amomon and cardamom, said to originate in the same general region (cf. Pliny, Nat. 12.28.48—49; Dioscorides, Mat. med. 1.6).542 This indicates that, like the products amomon and cardamom and their corresponding terms, Hebrew 117339 and Greek Kiwa'uwuov, Kiwauov (as well as Latin cinnamomum, cinnamum) ultimately come from the Horn ofAfrica or Felix Arabia. hop ‘scribal palette’ HALOT 1116; DCH 72272—73 (Ezek 92—3, 11) (5 Cam ‘belt, waistband’; B atramentarium ‘inkstand, inkwell’; 6 iv h.s_’ ‘loin belt’; 1 0,719 or 0,7129 ‘tablet, board’ [D] Eg —> Heb; Gk Eg gsti (since OK) A"W1:1378, 2:2614; GHwA" 979; WA'S' 5:207; DLE 2:195; Gk Ka'on) LS] 882 This word appears only three times, in the book of Ezekiel, all within the same chapter (Ezek 922—3, 11). The item denoted by no? is carried by the six executioners that Ezekiel encounters. This term has no cognates or Semitic etymology. It comes from Egyptian gstz’, ‘scribal palette’, which is first attested the Old Kingdom (cf. Dem gst and Copt qost, qast: CDD G 71—72; DG 593; Crum 83.2).543 The Coptic forms and Greek m’ow demonstrate that this word originally had the shape *qast, becoming qe’set after anaptyxis occurred. This is also indicated by the segolate pattern of the Hebrew form (Eisler 1930). Along with reed pens and a leather pouch for pigment pellets and other items, the scribal palette was one of the key instruments of ancient Egyptian scribes. The typical palette was rectangular and had at least two inkwells, one for black ink and the other for red. Tomb paintings such as the Tomb of Hesyre at Saqqara (Third Dynasty) depict Egyptian scribal equipment, including the palette, and Howard Carter discovered a nearly complete set of scribal equipment in a New Kingdom tomb near the Hatshepsut temple on the Theban west bank. The hieroglyphic sign for ss“ ‘scribe’ (tug), moreover, stylistically depicts a scribal palette along with a cylindrical holder for reed pens and the leather pouch (Piacentini 2001; Helck I982). rip, nip (an African monkey) HALOT 1089; DCH 7:236 542. On the origins of amomon and cardamom, see Crone 1987, 70—71. 543. EPNL 255; Lambdin 1953b, 154; FWOT 150; Rabin 1962, 1077; W. M. Mu"ller1900.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

I95

(1 Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21) 6 omits 1 Kgs 10:22, translates 1'1"? and tan; together as m’Gmcog ‘ape’ 2 Chr 9:21; 23 simia ‘ape, monkey’; G qu’ [Syriac form]; 1 m7. [Aramaic form] [D] Eg —+ Sum; Akk; Heb; Aram; Gk; Skt Sum UGUBI PSD; Akk uqu‘pu (SB, NB) CAD U—W 204; AHw 1427; JA r117. DJPA 483; DJBA 1000; Syr qo'p'a' LS2 1338a’; Mand qupa MD 409; Eg gf,z’ gf(since OK), gwf (MK), gif’(NK)A"W1:1364, 222589; GHwA" 965—67, 969; WA'S’ 5:155, 158, 160, 166; DLE 2:185, 188; Gk KfiBOg, Kfinog LS] 946; Skt kapi- EWAia 1:300—301;KEWA 1:156 Hebrew qp’, also spelled nip, occurs alongside various trade items, including 0’3."le ‘ivory’ and ‘31); (a female African ape), that were brought by Solomon’s ships of Tarshish (1 Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21). In both occurrences, Solomon’s ships traveled at sea along with Hiram’s fleet and brought back these items once every three years. Related forms occur in a number of language families, including Semitic (Akkadian and Aramaic), Sumerian, Egyptian, and Indo-European (Sanskrit and Greek). Nevertheless, the Semitic forms come from Egyptian ng,’ gf, which was later spelled gif’or gwfand denotes a species of monkey (cf. Dem 11f, qwf: CDD K 21, Q 12; DC 562). This is indicated by the word’s African associations. The products listed originated in Africa. The mention of gold and Hiram’s fleet recalls the earlier comment that Hiram’s fleet obtained gold from Ophir, which was located near the southern shore of the Red Sea (1 Kgs 10:11; 2 Chr 9:10),544 and the associated products 013311;] and ‘31); come from Africa. Futherrnore, Akkadian texts utilize uqu'pu with reference to Egypt. A tribute list from Shalmaneser III’s reign mentions monkeys given as tribute by Egypt (RIMA 3.102.89), and a ration list from the time ofNebuchadnezzar II mentions the Egyptian Pusamiski, described as a 'u's'us'a'n sva uqupé ‘groomer of monkeys’ (Babylon 28122 r. 24).545 Scholars debate the origin of this word’s other forms. Nevertheless, Africa seems to be the place of its origin for several reasons. First, although this word does occur early in Sumerian and Vedic Sanskrit, it appears even earlier——and first—in Old Kingdom Egyptian. Second, it is easier to derive the non-Egyptian terms from Egyptian than to derive the Egyptian form from any of the non-Egyptian terms.546 Third, at least some Greek sources connect this particular species of monkey with Africa (Strabo, Geogr. 16.4.16; Agat-harchides, M. Eryth. 5.75). Almost certainly, then, this term must have spread from Africa to other regions, where it was adopted by Sumerian-, Semitic-, and Indo—European-speaking peoples (Klein 1979, 157—60; EPNL 254; Lambdin 1953b, 154). The Semitic forms were most

544. On the location of Ophir, see Baker 1992a. 545. On the ration list Babylon 28122, see Weidner 1939, 931. 546. Gk Kfifiog, Kfinog is best explained as a loan from Egyptian rather than as a native IndoEuropean term (Foumet 1989, 73; Frisk 1954—1972, 1:836). Mayrhofer argues that Skt kapi- is pn'mary and connected with Skt kapila’- ‘brownish, reddish’ (E WAia 1:300—301; KEWA 12156). However, this remains unconvincing, especially given the term‘s association with Africa.

I96

Chapter 3

probably borrowed early, prior to the shift of stressed u to e, whereas Greek icfifiog, Kfinog was borrowed after this vocalic change (Lambdin 1953b, 154). Although borrowed early, Hebrew n? is probably a direct loan from Egyptian because the Hebrew Bible preserves a connection between Africa and the monkey denoted by this term. 1.5713? (a cassia-like plant) HALOT 1122; DCH 7:281 (Ps 45:9 [4528]) (5, fix 6, 1 each use their corresponding forms of the word (Kaoia, cassia, qsy’, and TIV’XP, respectively) [D] ?? —» Heb; Gk; Lat Gk Kaoia, Kaooiu LS] 882; Lat casia, cassia OLD 30 8547 This 110an legomenon occurs in Ps 45:9. It is commonly identified with Cinnamomum cassia, a species native to East Asia and cultivated especially in southeastern China (e.g., Powels 1992, 190—92; M. Zohary 1982, 203; Low 1924—1934, 22113—14). However, there is no evidence for the existence of any East Asian cinnamon species in the ancient Near East before the Late Classical period. Classical sources unequivocally state that the spice denoted by Kaot’a and casia comes from Ethiopia and Arabia, and they clearly describe a spice other than C. cassia (e.g., Dioscorides, Mat. med. 1.13; Theophrastus, Hist. plant. 9.5.1—3; Pliny, Nat. 12.43.95—97).548 Therefore, Hebrew wisp as well as Greek Kaot'u and Latin casia must refer to a cassia-like spice found in Ethiopia or Arabia, not true cassia. Some scholars try to connect Hebrew 713723? with the root 573.7 ‘to scrape, cut otf’, etymologizing it as bark scraped off the C. cassia plant (e.g., G. R. Driver 1956, 261—62; Nielsen 1986, 65). Other scholars derive Hebrew 713713? from Chinese, a completely speculative loan hypothesis.549 Phonological plausibility aside, neither of these derivations can be correct because they wrongly assume that Hebrew ny’xp denotes C. cassia. Without doubt this word originates from Ethiopia or Arabia, exactly where Classical sources say this plant comes from.550 The contextual 547. JA .‘lV‘XP occurs only in I and is adopted from Biblical Hebrew. There is no connection between BH WW? and Sum GAZI or Akk kasu‘, which refer to mustard or licorice rather than to a cassia-like plant (Powell 2003—2005, 20). 548. Cf. Crone 1987, 253—63; Raschke 1978, 652—55; Hepper 1977; Hennig 1939; Laufer 1919, 541—43549. E.g., Powels 1992, 190-92; Lo"w 1924—1934, 22113—14. Although the common Chinese word for ‘cassia’, gui (if), is attested during the second halfofthe first millennium B.C.E., the combinations guizz' (E?) and guizht' (Eli) are not attested until the 11th and 14th centuries C.E., respectively. Neither of these combinations, moreover, became common terms for ‘cassia’ (Luo 1986—1994, 4:955—57). Assuming that guizz' and guizhr'did exist earlier, phonological reconstruction oftheir hypothetical earlier forms ( *kwes-tse?and *kwes-ke, respectively) rules out a connection between them and BH .‘IV‘XP. I am grateful to Zev Joseph Handel for his assistance with this entry. 55o. Recognizing this, De Romanis (1996, 44—45) derives .‘W‘KP from Eg _hs;y’.t, a balsam or resin obtained from a flowering plant. This, however, remains implausible on phonological grounds. Addi— tionally, the referent of Eg h_s;’y.t differs from that of BH .‘lwxp.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

I97

mention of myrrh, ivory, and Ophir (Ps 4529—10), all connected with the Red Sea region between Ethiopia and Arabia, confirms this loan hypothesis. 011ij (an axe) HALOT 1137; DCH 7:318 (Judg 9:48; 1 Sam 13:20—21; Jer 46:22; Ps 74:5) (6 a’éivn ‘axe’ except does not directly represent this word Ps 74:5; 23 securis ‘axe’; 6 nrg’ ‘axe’ Judg 9:48; Ps 74:5, kwlb’ ‘axe’ 1 Sam 13:20—21;Jer 46:22; I 351:) ‘axe’ except but]: ‘axe’ Jer 46:22 [?] CW Ebla gurdumum VE 253 (#477); Akk gura’imu (Emar) The word 07"]? occurs five times in the Hebrew Bible. It denotes tools used for cutting wood (Judg 9:48) and in farming (1 Sam 13:20—21). In both Jeremiah and the Psalter, 0-719 similarly refers to a tool used for chopping wood (Jer 46:22; Ps 74:5). The ancient versions consistently understand this word as ‘axe’ or the like. Accordingly, Biblical Hebrew m’jp most certainly denotes an axe that could be used for chopping or in farming.551 This word does not follow any typical Hebrew nominal patterns and is undoubtedly foreign.552 Furthermore, its phonology and morphology are too close to those of Hebrew 1m and its various manifestations in other languages (cf. Akk h5as.s.innu, Arab karzan, kirzin, karzam, kirzim, and Gk a’éivn: CAD 3H 133—34; AHw 332; WKAS K 125; LSJ 170) to be coincidental. Accordingly, it can probably be traced back to the same Anatolian culture word behind Hebrew 131}. If so, 0-7")? must be a different form of this culture word that was borrowed separately.553 The same alternate form of this culture word seems to be behind Eblaite gurdumum (VE 253 (#477); Krebemik 1982, 231) and Emar Akkadian gurdimu (Emar 545:345’; Civil 1989, 8; Pentiuc 2001, 54). How exactly this ancient culture word came to Palestine remains unknown.554 71ng ‘melon’ HALOT1151; DCH 7:332 (Num 11:5)

551. Koller 2012, 35—36. Rabbinic tradition states that this particular tool was a combination of axe and adze, with an axe blade on one side and an adze blade on the other (e.g., m. Kelim 13:3). However, Dr'r'jp need not mean the same thing in Biblical Hebrew. 552. Little basis exists for deriving 07.1? from a root 7'1[7* ‘to cut’. Although it is possible to explain the res' via dissimilation, this etymology does not adequately explain where the final mem comes from. 553. Albright 1934, 51; Fra"nkel 1886, 84—87. I am grateful to Aaron J. Koller for his assistance with this entry. 554. The rabbinic understanding of this tool as an adze-axe could potentially support an Aegean transmission because double tools—including adze-axes—originated in the Aegean, especially Minoan Crete (Miron 1992, 82—88). If this word was transmitted via the Aegean, the Philistines may have brought it to Palestine (cf. Bork 1939—1941, 229—30), but such an origin remains unproven.

198

Chapter 3

6 oiicuog [Greek fonn]; fl; cucumis ‘cucumber’; 6 qfw’ [Syriac form]; 10” 1‘31: ‘gourd’, SP” ‘07, [Aramaic form] [‘2] CW Sum UKUS‘ PSD; Akk qis“s“u‘ (OB, EA, SB, NA, NB) CAD Q 271—72; AHw 923; IA ‘07], IA 10?. DNWSI 1005; DJPA 485; Syr qami LS} 1349; Gk ct’icuog, 011019, 0110301 L81 1598 This word occurs only in Num 11:5 within a list of foods the Israelites ate in Egypt, including Emu-:15 ‘watennelons’, 1‘30 ‘leeks’, 0‘73; ‘onions’, and mm? ‘garlic’. Related forms occur early in Sumerian and Old Babylonian Akkadian, and later forms occur in various dialects ofAramaic as well as in Greek. Based on the use of these terms in ancient texts, Hebrew .1315}? probably refers to a variety of members of the melon family (Cucumis melo), including the chate melon, muskmelon, and sweet melon.555 Although this word appears very early in the ancient Near East, phonological differences preclude a direct loan relationship between the Sumerian and Akkadian forms (cf. Stol 1987, 81). The variation between 5' (Akkadian and Hebrew) and .1 (Aramaic), moreover, cannot be explained as a natural development of ProtoSemitic. Finally, it is difficult to explain the various Greek forms as a direct borrowing from Semitic or as a native Indo-European word (cf. EDG I330; DELG 968). All this points to a very ancient culture word that originated from the place of the melon’s original domestication. Cucumis melo is widespread, being found in the subtropical and tropical parts of Asia and Africa as well as Central Asia and the Mediterranean basin (D. Zohary and Hopf 2000, 194; Andrews 1956, 368—69). Accordingly, it could have originated from any of these regions. The melons it refers to were cultivated quickly throughout the ancient Near East, as early mention of this fruit in Sumerian and Akkadian texts indicates. Archaeobotanical evidence and Egyptian tomb paintings indicate its availability in Egypt (Murray 2000, 634~ 35), hence its association with Egypt in Num 11:5. Use of the term :1an ‘melon field’ in the Hebrew Bible reflects the eventual cultivation of the melon in Palestine (Isa 1:8; Jer 10:5). t1 (BH, BA) ‘secret, mystery’ HALOT 1980; DCH 7:457—58 (Isa 24:16 [2x]; Dan 2:18—19, 27—30, 47 [2X]; 4:6) (Y) uvom’ptov ‘mystery’ except omits Isa 24:16 (but 0’, 0' uuom'ptov ‘mystery’ Isa 24:16); EB secretus Isa 24:16, sacramentum ‘mystery, secret’ Dan 2:18, 30. 47; 4:6, mysterium ‘mystery, secret’ Dan 2:19, 27—29, 47; 6 #2 or ’rz’ [Syriac forms]; 1h [Aramaic form] Isa 24:16 [D] OIran —+ Heb; Aram 555. Musselman 2012, 44—45; Paris and Janick 2008, 45—46; Low 1924—1934, 12530—35. There is no relationship between this term and the cucumber (C. sativus L).

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

199

QH 1'1; IA, QA. JA, SA, CPA 11 DNWSI 1065; DQA 221; DJPA 520; DJBA 1067— 68; DSA 826; DCPA 396; Syr ra'za' LS2 1424; Mand raz, raza MD 420; OIran *raz‘a- AISN 203 The word tj ‘secret, mystery’ occurs in both Biblical Hebrew and Biblical Aramaic within apocalyptic contexts. The Biblical Hebrew form appears only in Isa 24:16, within the so-called “Isaiah Apocalypse.”556 The Biblical Aramaic form is relatively more common, occurring nine times in the book of Daniel with reference to a mystery that only God can reveal (Dan 2:18—19, 27—30, 47 [2X]; 4:6). This term has a relatively limited distribution in the Semitic languages, being found only in Hebrew and Aramaic, and it has no clear Semitic etymology. Thus, it is probably a foreign loan. Indeed, scholars have long recognized that all the Aramaic forms can be traced back to Old Iranian *ra'za— ‘secret, mystery’ (cf. Pahl raz' and ManParth r’z: CPD 71; DMMPP 294).557 The origins of Jewish apocalyptic literature are complex and uncertain, but Semitic-speakers probably adopted Old Iranian *ra"za- along with the concept of ‘secret, mystery’ from Iranian texts. Otherwise, there would be no reason to adopt this particular Old Iranian term and use it in place of the typical Hebrew vocabulary denoting the concepts of ‘secret’ or ‘mystery’ (e.g., 110).”8 The Iranian apocalyptic conception of ‘secret, mystery’ as denoted by 71 took on an important role in post-Exilic Jewish literature, especially for the Qumran community and New Testament. The term 1'1 occurs in several other core texts from Qumran—including Pesher Habakkuk, the Community Rule, the War Scroll, and the Hodayot—with reference to special knowledge imparted by God that is connected with creation and has various cosmic, ethical, and eschatological dimensions. According to these texts, knowledge of the mystery enables one to behave righteously in the present and to endure the evil of the present age. This theology is a clear development of the concept of ‘secret, mystery’ expressed by the term 11 in the book of Daniel. The New Testament also adapts Daniel’s concept of ‘secret,

556. Scholars debate whether the phrase "7"1'1 ‘5"11, found in Isa 24:16, contains the word 1'] ‘secret’. Some think ‘11 is a nominal form from the root 7111 ‘to dwindle, disappear’ that means ‘my dwindling’ or the like (Wildberger 1991—2002, 2:493, 498—99; Oswalt 1986—1998, 1:439, 451—52; Watts 1985, 323—24). However, this finds no support in the ancient versions, which are nearly unanimous in rendering 1'} as ‘secret’. Within the context, Isa 24:16 contrasts everyone’s expectation of future blessing with the unique knowledge that judgment is coming. The context therefore suggests that 11 means ‘secret’. The apocalyptic character of Isa 24—27 further supports the interpretation as ‘secret’, as do a number of potential parallels between Isa 24:16 and the book of Daniel, which frequently uses the term 11. Accordingly, many other scholars read “1'1 as ‘my secret’ (Blenkinsopp 2000, 353—55; Sawyer 1993, 312—13;Niehaus 1981; Kaiser 1974, 189-90). 557. FWOT 153; F. Rosenthal 2006, 63; AAT2:60; cf. Telegdi 1935, 254—55. 558. On the possible Iranian influences on Jewish apocalypticism, see J. J. Collins 1998, 29—33; Hultgérd 1998. Although later and with uncertain direction of influence, there is clear evidence that the

concept of ‘secret, mystery’ as expressed by Pahl raz‘ functioned eschatologically in Middle Persian texts (Shaked 1969, 206-13)-

200

Chapter 3

mystery’ and applies it to God’s eschatological revelation, especially as revealed through Christ.’59 11m ‘pomegranate’ HAL0T1241-42; DCH 7:496 (Exod 28:33, 34 [2X]; passim560) [?] CW Sum NURMA PSD; Akk lurmu‘, lurima"u, lurimtu, lurz’ndu, lurinnu, nurmu', nurumu (OA, OB, Nuzi, EA, SB, MA, MB, NA, NB), nurma‘nu (Qatna), nurimdu (EA) CAD L 255—56, N/2 344—47; AHw 564—65, 804-5; Ug lrmn DUL 499; QH 11m; IA 1731, JA 112m, 117m, 17m, 1mm, CPA 117m DNWS11078; DJPA 525; DJBA 1066; DCPA 403; Syr rumma'na' L52 1451; Mand rumana m 430; Arab rumma‘n Lane 1161; Eth ro'ma’n CDG 471; Eg z'nhmn, nhm (NK) GHwA" 89, 443; WA'S‘ 1:98, 2:286; SWET24—25 (#12); Hitt nurati- CHD L—N 475; HHw 128; Hurr nurandi— BGH 277; GLH 188; Pahl ana'r CPD 9; NPers ana‘r CPED 103; Arm nr'eni HAB 3:472—73 The term occurs numerous times in the Hebrew Bible. It commonly appears with reference to pomegranate fruit or pomegranate trees (Num 13:23; 20:5; Deut 8:8; 1 Sam 14:2; Joel 1:12; Hag 2:19; Song 4:3, 13; 6:7, 11; 7:13; 8:2) but can also denote pomegranate decorations such as the pomegranates adoming the fringes of the priests’ clothing (Exod 28:33—34; 39:24—26) or the pomegranate pattern inscribed on the capitals of two columns in the temple (1 Kgs 7:18, 20, 42; 2 Kgs 25:17; Jer 52:22—23; 2 Chr 3:16; 4:13).561 Numerous forms of this word exist in many different languages, including Sumerian, Akkadian, Ugaritic, Aramaic, New Kingdom Egyptian (cf. Copt Sherman, Berman: Crum 703), Hittite, Hurrian, Pahlavi, New Persian, and Armenian. Compared with these forms, the Hebrew and Aramaic forms of this word exhibit metathesis. This word’s varying spellings and wide distribution, and the absence of a plausible Semitic etymology, suggest a foreign origin. The pomegranate was first domesticated in the southern Caspian belt, so this culture word most probably

originated in this same region.562

559. Bomkamm 1967; Harrington 2000; R. E. Brown 1968; Bockmuehl 1990. 560. Exod 39:24, 25 (2X), 26 (2x); Num 13:23; 20:5; Deut 8:8; 1 Sam 14:2; 1 Kgs 7:18, 20, 42 (2X); 2 Kgs 25:17; Jer 52:22 (2X), 23 (2X); Joel 1:12; Hag 2:19; Song 4:3, 13; 6:7, 11; 7:13 [7:12]; 8:2; 2 Chr 3:16; 4:13 (2X). 561. 11-731 also occurs as a toponym (Josh 21:35; Num 33:19—20; Judg 20:45, 47; 21:13; Zech 14:10; 1 Chr 6:62) and a personal name (2 Sam 4:2, 5, 9). 562. Kaelin 2004, 114; SWET 25; Laufer 1919, 284—85. On the botanical origins of the pomegranate, see D. Zohary and Hopf 2000, 170—71; D. Zohary and Spiegel-Roy 1975, 324. Kaelin and Laufer suggest that this word comes from the Iranian languages. However, little concrete proof exists for this. Given the pomegranate’s origins, the donor language could be any ancient language spoken in the region south of the Caspian Sea.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

201

r/fl"—_—~—~—~’_‘———_'

Iconic depictions of pomegranates—particularly pomegranate-shaped jewelry, pomegranate bas reliefs, and pomegranate-shaped pottery vessels—are very common. Numerous examples are attested from Mesopotamia (Uruk, Susa, Ashur), Egypt (Thebes, Kamak, Abydos), the Levant (Ugarit, Hama, Lachish, Megiddo, Tel Miqne-Ekron, Tell Qasile, Ashdod), Cyprus (Enkomi, Lamaca, Kourion, Kition) and the Aegean (Knossos, Phaistos, Mycenae, Athens) (C. Ward 2003, 533—34; Bo"rker—Kla"hn 1957—1971, 617—24; Muthmann 1982, 13—71). The Israelite use ofthis pomegranate motif on the fringes of the priests’ clothing and the capitals of two columns in the temple reflects the pomegranate’s frequent cultic connections and symbolism in antiquity (Mulder 2004, 13:507—8; cf. Dothan and Ben-Shlomo 2007, 4—12). Ham ‘herd’ HALOT1244; DCH 7:498 (Esth 8:10) (5,13 omit; G rmk’ [Syriac form]; 5! 7m [Aramaic form] [D] OIran —> Heb; Aram IA, JA 7731 DNWSI 1078; DJPA 526; DJBA 1088; Syr ramka' LS’ 1474; Mand ramka MD 421; OIran *ramakaThe word 713,731 occurs only in the expression Dun-1n, u;- ‘members of the ODD-1i], (Esth 8:10). This verse describes Ahasuerus sending letters via different types of horses, denoted by the terms 01-0 and Wm. It can be concluded, therefore, that nap-'1 relates to horses. This word appears elsewhere as an Aramaeogram (“ideogram”) in Pahlavi (Middle Iranian) from Persia and also as a distinct lexeme in later dialects ofAramaic. Nevertheless, it does not seem to be Semitic, and Ko"hler and Baumgartner (HALOT 1244) rightly wonder whether it is a foreign word. An Old Iranian source is likely given the Iranian context of the book of Esther, as well as the word’s connection with Persia in Imperial Aramaic. The donor term is Old Iranian *ramaka— (cf. Pahl ramag and ManMPers, ManParth rmg: CPD 70; DMMPP 296).563 This Old Iranian word is formed from *ram‘herd’ (cf. Pahl ram and ManMPers, ManParth rm: CPD 70; DMMPP 296) with the suffix -ka.564 The expression 0‘30”); ‘32; therefore means ‘members of the herd’, referring to the fast-running horses to be found among Ahasuerus’ stables (AAT 1:52; Shaked 1993, 78—79; contra G. R. Driver 1922, 69). m ‘bridle, rein’ HALOT 1249; DCH 7:505

563. Ann evramak also comes from Iranian (HAB 2:37—38). 564. On the suffix -ka, see Skjaerva 2007, 903; OPGTL 51 (§I46)-

202

Chapter 3

(Isa 30:28; Ps 32:9; Job 30211565) 6 does not directly represent this word Isa 30:28, muo'g ‘muzzle’ Ps 32:9, xahvo'g ‘bit, bridle’ Job 30:11; fi3frenum ‘bridle’; 6 pgwdt’ ‘bridle’; I am ‘muzzle’ Isa 30:28; Job 30:11, ’JDWD ‘halter’ Ps 32:9 [D] IAV —} Heb IAV *ras’na- E WAia 2:440—41; KE WA 3:47566 The term occurs three times in the Hebrew Bible (Isa 30:28; Ps 32:9; Job 30:11). It does not occur elsewhere in Semitic aside from the rare Jewish Aramaic 101, which occurs in late 1 texts and is adopted from Biblical Hebrew, and Arabic rasan, a first millennium C.E. loan from Persian (Jastrow 1903, 1484; Lane 1086; Asbaghi 1988, 136). However, many comparable forms occur in Indo-Iranian (cf. Skt ras'ana"-, ras'mz'- ‘rein, bridle’ as well as Pahl rasan, NPers rasn, and Ossetic raetazn ‘rope’: EWAia 2:440—41;KEWA 3:47; CPD 71; CPED 576; Abaev 1958—1989, 2382—83). There are at least two reasons why this term must have been loaned from IndoIranian to Hebrew and not vice versa. First, the Indo-Iranian forms have a perfectly good Indo-European etymology, namely the root *rejg-, *rejg’- ‘to bind’. Second, this word is one of the many Indo-Iranian loanwords borrowed into Finno-Ugn'c (cf. Finno-Permian *res'ma") prior to the end of the fourth millennium B.C.E. This attests to its great antiquity in Indo-Iranian.567 This word must have been introduced at a very early stage along with other hippological technology and terminology, probably via Indo-Aryan influence during the second millennium B.C.E. The meaning of Hebrew 191 matches the meaning of the Indie rather than Iranian forms, further supporting an Indic rather than Iranian origin (Podolsky 1998, 203—4; Rabin 1970, 472; Rose’n 1991, 233—35). The IndoAryan donor term may be reconstructed as *ras'na- based on the Indo-Iranian and Finno-Ugric forms. Given the early borrowing of this term as well as its lack of foreign association, it is possible that this word was transmitted to Hebrew Via another language or represents an inherited loan. However, no related forms are attested in the other Semitic languages, and no evidence exists for an intermediary. The lack of foreign association could simply be due to a significant gap of time between the initial borrowing and the composition of the texts in which 19] occurs. Thus, Hebrew 191 should be considered a direct loan from Indo-Aryan until clear evidence indicating otherwise is found. 565. Following (5(1tm'éw Ow'poucog an'ton"), the phrase 1391 ‘79:;- ‘its double bridle’ in Job 41:5 [41:13] should be emended to 1‘1‘10 ‘79:; ‘its double coat of mail’ (Gordis 1978, 486; Pope 1965, 335). 566. Akk rissiltu (plural risne‘lu) occurs with reference to manufactured leather items in a few NCO-Babylonian letters, but it does not specifically refer to bridles or reins and otherwise has a wide semantic range. It comes from the verb rasa‘nu ‘to soak’, so its similarity to to) is only coincidental. 567. Koivulehto 2001, 250; Re’dei 1986—1991, 2:744; Joki 1973, 308; Collinder 1955, I36. Much later, during the first millennium C.E., the Iranian languages loaned this word to Armenian as evrasan (HAB 2:40—41).

203 Non.Sem1't1'c Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible f—_______________

gm, x330 (a stringed musical instrument) HAL0T1984 (Dan 3:5, 7, IO, 15) 6, 23 both use their corresponding forms of the word (caufiu‘m and sambuca, respectively); 6 omits [D] Gk —+ Aram; Lat Gk cauBu’icn, *oaufiu'm, QauBu'Kn LS] 1582; Lat sambuca OLD 1858 This word occurs four times in Biblical Aramaic, each time within the description of Nebuchadnezzar’s orchestra (Dan 3:5, 7, 10, 15). Most often it is spelled Rant-W (Dan 3:7, 10, 15), but it appears once as Nag-o (Dan 3:5). Lexicographers sometimes derive Rap-W from the root 73W ‘to interweave’ and compare it with Biblical Hebrew 7193147 ‘net, latticework’ (cf. HALOT 1984; BDB 1113). However, this derivation remains dubious because no musical instrument can be strung in a lattice-like fashion (Mitchell and Joyce 1965, 24; Masson 1967, 92). The variant spellings found in Biblical Aramaic, moreover, point to a foreign term. Biblical Aramaic 893W is instead connected with Greek oauBu'Kn, a triangular instrument with short strings producing a high range of pitch (Athenaeus, Dezp'n. 14633—34; Porphyrius, in Harm. 34—35).568 Classical sources contend that the instrument denoted by «pg-t1} comes from northern Syria and Asia Minor (Athe— naeus, Dez'pn. 14.633—34; Strabo, Geogr. 10.3.17), so some scholars wonder if both W and 66113610] are loans from a third, separate source (cf. Mitchell and Joyce 1965, 24—25; Rowley 1929, 146). However, the association of Rag-W with the undisputed Greek loans 011w, P131051, and 71397910 suggest that 893W also comes from Greek. Furthermore, a Greek herald denoted by the Greek loanword m; supervises the playing ofthe Nag-W along with the above-mentioned Greek instruments. Given these Greek connections, it is nearly certain that Biblical Aramaic 893-117 is a loan from Greek.569 Notably, it is unlikely that the final ’alep with a-class vowel marks the determined state. This is because all the other Greek loans in the list of Nebuchadnezzar’s instruments lack final ’alep (of. 011019, 1"]!3109, and 1.3397910), whereas the non-Greek instrument terms have it (cf. km? and unjpiwn). If the final ’alep does not mark the determined state and instead marks a final vowel, the vowel it marks is unusual in that, if borrowed from caufiv’icn with final -n, then we would expect an i-class vowel.570 The solution is to take top-W as representing a non-Attic form *oauBu'Ka because original final -a' marking the feminine nominative singular

568. Mitchell 1992, 138; Maas and Snyder 1989, 184; Landels 1966. This instrument is said to be shaped like the siege engine boat of the same name (Polybius, st't. 8.4.11). 569. AAT2: 58. Greek subsequently loaned this word to Latin as sambuca (DELL 592; LEW2:473). 570. In later Aramaic, the Greek nominative ending -n is represented as an i-c lass vowel; e-g-a 510911101 > JA, CPA “pm”! /d'zati'qi/ ‘testament, will’ and oxokn' > Syr ’skwl’l’eskole/ ‘school’ (3. Krauss 1898—1899, 1:67 [§88]; Butts 2013, 199).

204

Chapter 3

became -n in Attic-Ionic but was preserved in other Greek dialects.571 Thus, like the instruments 01m? and r1330?- of Nebuchadnezzar’s orchestra, Rag-W exhibits non-Attic features. This, in turn, implies that 833W was borrowed from Greek prior to the Hellenistic era because non-Attic dialects gradually fell out of use as Attic

and Koine Greek spread (Noonan forthcoming). l’D-W' (a type of knife) HALOT 1327; DCH 8:149 (Prov 23:2) (5 translates W7;- 1’3111‘ 13W] as Kai ém’BaMz-z m‘v xeipd 001) ‘and put on your hand’; SB culter ‘knife’; 6 skyn’ [Syriac form]; 11‘30 [Aramaic form] [?] CW IA, JA, CPA 1‘30 DNWSI 785; DJPA 377; DJBA 809-10; DCPA 287; Syr sakkz'na' LS2 1009; Mand sikin MD 326a; Arab sikkz'n Lane 1388, 3018; Lat sacena, scena OLD 1845

This word appears only in Prov 23:2 within the expression 7573-021. 'Ir.§7"7,'31"3W-D-?QW'] nag W5); ‘put a 123117 to your throat if you have a big appetite’. The definition ‘knife’ makes sense within the context, and the existence of similar forms meaning ‘knife’ in Aramaic confirms this reading. As such, Hebrew raw is a rare term roughly equivalent to 117%?) and 13713, the more common Hebrew terms for a small blade. Hebrew raw is often thought to be native to Aramaic because it occurs more commonly in Aramaic (e.g., M. Wagner 1966, 109 [#296]; Bauer and Leander 1922, 479 [§61py]). However, the Aramaic forms have no convincing Semitic etymology. Furthermore, the final ending offers no proof of a native Aramaic word because the noun is singular, not plural.572 The ending instead resembles the suffix -innu, used in terminology from languages spoken in ancientAnatolia (Dercksen 2007, 39—42). There is good evidence, moreover, that this word existed in ancient Anatolia, even if it is not attested in any extant texts. Latin sacena, scena ‘knife’ appears in Livius Andronicus’ fragmentary play Ludius ‘The Lydian’, preserved for us by the Roman grammarian Festus (Verb. sign. 318.32—34). It has no apparent Latin etymology and was unclear enough to require a gloss by Festus. Accordingly, it is probably not

571. C. D. Buck 1955, 21, 84 (§§8, 104); Thumb, Kieckers and Scherer1932—1959, 22196—97 (§285); Lejeune 1972, 234-35 (§249). The exception is in Attic, which preserves -a' afier s, 1, and p; Ionic uses -n regardless. 572. Keller 2012, 206—10. BH 130 in Qoh 10:9 means ‘to encounter danger”, not ‘to cut‘ (HALOT 755; contra Kottsieper 1986, 219—22). Furthermore, the Semitic root skk (c.f Aram 1:0 and Arab s'akka) means ‘to stick in, pierce’ rather than ‘to cut’. This root is the basis for Semitic nouns such as Akk sikkatu ‘peg, nail’ as well as BH W and Eth s'ok (both meaning ‘thom’). It is therefore an unlikely candidate for a word meaning ‘knife’, although one could perhaps compare Arab s'ikkat ‘sharp weapon’. Nevertheless, even if BH I‘DW' were based on an alleged root 13V)“ meaning ‘to pierce’, this would not explain the ending.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

205

native to Latin?73 Its association with Lydia, indicated by the title of the play in which it occurs, likewise demonstrates that it is an Anatolian term.574 This foreign Anatolian source is probably also the source of the Aramaic forms. Given its Aramaic-like morphology as well as the frequency ofAramaisms in Proverbs, Hebrew-speakers could have adopted raw from Anatolia via Aramaic (Rabin 1962, 1078; Szemere’nyi 1989, 172; Rose’n 1994). However, this is far from proven; and without good evidence for transmission via Aramaic, Hebrew PDW' must be categorized as a direct loan. Arabic sikkz'n, on the other hand, is most probably a loan from Aramaic (Fra"nkel 1886, 84). mg? (a ship) HAL0T1327; DCH 8:149, 352 (Isa 2:16) 6 680' nkoiwv ‘view of ships’, 28 visus ‘sight’, 6 dwq’ ‘observation, spectacle’, 1 .11”: ‘fortress’ all seem to mistakenly connect this word with 'I.:>W'* ‘to see’ (cf. Rabbinic Hebrew .130, mm") [D] Eg —> Ug; Heb Ug t_ktDUL 891—92; Eg skty (since OK) A"W1:1250—51, 2:2371; GHwA" 839; WA'S' 4:315; DLE 2:88 The term occurs only in Isa 2:16, where it occurs in the plural form ni-‘DW' and is poetically parallel to .1318 ‘ship’. The surrounding verses use synonymous parallelism (Isa 2:13—15, 17), indicating that 7133:; and NW" are synonyms. Accordingly, now most probably means ‘ship’ or the like. There are no forms related to Hebrew 11W aside from Ugaritic t_kt.575 Neither Hebrew n‘DW' nor Ugaritic _tkt has a good Semitic etymology, which points to a foreign origin. The donor term is Egyptian skty ‘ship’, which provides a good match phonologically and semantically even if Hebrew samek is the more common reflex of Egyptian s.576 Both the Ugaritic and the Hebrew forms represent independent 573. Lat sacena, scena is ofien derived from Proto-Indo-European *(s)ker- ‘to cut’ (e.g., DELL 585, 607—8; LEW 2:459), but this leaves the vocalization unexplained (Szemere'nyi 1989, 172; cf. Vaan 2008, 551). 574. Szemere’nyi 1989, 172. Scholars frequently also compare Gk o-mdvn, attested only in entry 02232 of Hesychius of Alexandria’s Lexicon (e.g., Rabin 1962, 1078; Kutscher 1967, 112; H. Lewy I895, 176). However, Hesychius’ text actually reads O'UKI'VT] ua'xatpa- chotpa’VIpia, demonstrating that ouxotpa'vrpla ‘swindling, unreliable’ is a gloss for o-uxivr] pa'xmpa ‘wonhless sword’. Gk outct'vog means ‘of the fig tree’ but can also mean ‘worthless’; in Hesychius it refers to a sword made offig—tree wood, i.e., a worthless sword (cf. Lat ficulnus gladius). See Rose'n 1994, 170. 575. Although Ug t_kt denotes a boat in administrative texts (KTU 4.81:4—5, 8-9; 4.366:1—14), the sole appearance of_1kt in the Baal Cycle (KTU 1.4 v:7) seems to be an error for _trt (Smith and Pitard 2009, 532, 558—60). 576. EPNL 255—56; Lambdin 1953b, 154—55; FWOT 154; Rabin 1962, 1077; Budde 1931, 197—98; Albright 1950a, 5. Egyptian texts also preserve a form skLt, primarily written as mskt.t (AuW 1:565, 251133—39; GHwA" 386; WA'S' 2:150; DLE 1:206).

Chapter 3

206

loans, rather than a common borrowing, in light of their different rendings of the Egyptian sibilant s. The form of this word as preserved by the Masoretes (m’wwj) does not represent the final -y of Egyptian skty, although how Hebrew-speakers treated the final Egyptian semivowel is unclear because the MT seems to be corrupt. Based on the Egyptian donor term, the singular Hebrew form should probably be reconstructed as new or nay/.577 1:12) (a precious stone) HALOT 1383; DCH 8:225 (Exod 28:19; 39:12) (5 (170111]; $ achates, 6 qudn’ ‘agate’; 10ml" PM ‘WU ‘turquoise’ [T] Sum —+ Akk —> NWS (Heb) —> Eg Sum sUBA PSD; Akk s'ubu‘ (SB, NA, NB) CAD SV/III 185—87; AHw 1258; Eg s'by (NK) GHwA" 879; SWET275—76 (#395)578 This word occurs only twice in the Hebrew Bible, within the description ofthe high priest’s breastplate (Exod 28:19; 39:12). Its atypical morphology, particularly the final holem-waw, points to a non-Semitic loanword. The source is Sumerian sum, in turn the origin of Akkadian s'ubu”. Via Akkadian, this word entered Hebrew, and Biblical Hebrew i311) is therefore a transmitted loan.579 Egyptian s'by, attested during the New Kingdom (P Ch Beatty IV vs. 7,12) and written with group writing, probably comes from Northwest Semitic. Ancient texts provide little help in identifying this stone because their references to it could fit any number of precious stones.580 Akkadian texts note that this gemstone was used for medicinal and ritual purposes as well as for making jewelry, cylinder seals, and signet rings, and its occurrences in Egyptian texts describe its usage for seals (CAD Sv/III 185—87; J. R. Harris 1961, 183).

19112} => 1911; WWI, WW ‘water lily, Egyptian lotus’ HALOT1454-55; DCH 82314—15 (1 Kgs 7:19, 22, 26; passim58’) [D] Eg —+ WSem (Heb; Aram; Arab) —> Gk 577. Lambdin 1953b, 154—55; Albright 19503, 5; G. R. Driver 1950, 52—53. The MT may preserve the correct consonantal spelling, but with an incorrect vocalization influenced by the parallel term ni'Jts (EPNL 255). 578. SA 1319 occurs in biblical contexts and is adopted from Biblical Hebrew (DSA 862). 579. ALBH 136-37; FWOT 155. On the Sumerian origin of Akk s'ubu‘, see SLOB 465—66 (#607). 580. Traditionally this gemstone has been identified with agate (Harrell, Hoffmeier and Williams

2017, 23—24). This is possible, but the destriptions of this gemstone in ancient texts are broad enough to permit several different identifications. 581. Ps 45:1; 60:1; 69:1; 80:1; Song 2:16; 4:5; 5:13; 6:2—3; 7:3 [7:2].

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

207

QH'I.JW1W,‘JA, SA]W1W,JA,CPAHJW1W DJPA 543,- DSA 884; DCPA 423,Syr s'aws’anta' L52 1539; Arab sausan Lane 1466; Eg ss'svn (OK), ss'n, s's'n (since MK) A"W 1:1239, 222357; GHwA" 831, 834; WA’S. 3:485—86; DLE 2:81; Gk 001)"00v LS] 1621 Hebrew WWI, also spelled as WW), occurs a number of times in the Bible with several different referents. It can refer to a flower (Song 2:16; 4:5; 5:13; 622—3; 7:3) or a flower-shaped design found on architectural components or other objects in the temple (1 Kgs 7:19, 22, 26). Lastly, it occurs several times in the superscripts of the book of Psalms, where its exact function is uncertain (Ps 45:1; 60:1; 69:1; 8021). A derived feminine form, 713191117", occurs several times in the Hebrew Bible as well as the Dead Sea Scrolls (Hos 14:6 [14:5]; 2 Chr 4:5; Song 2:1—2;IQHxviiiz31). A convincing Semitic etymology for whiz? remains elusive, and the donor term is undoubtedly Egyptian ss's'n, ss'n, s's'n ‘water lily’ (cf. Dem ssyn and Copt s'o‘s'en: CDD S 452; DG 464; Crum 608).582 During the Old Kingdom this word had the form ss's'n, but during the Middle Kingdom the two middle consonants of the Egyptian form merged, producing the form ss'n. Subsequently, both an assimilated form (s's’n) and a non-assimilated form (ss'n) continued to be used. Semitic-speakers could have borrowed the assimilated form s's“n or could have borrowed the form ss“n and assimilated the sibilants (Kitchen 1987). The various spellings of this word indicate that it is a direct rather than an inherited loanword into Biblical Hebrew. One of the West Semitic languages loaned this word to Greek, through which we know it today as the personal name Susan.583 Despite its name, there is no relationship between the water lily, also known as the Egyptian lotus, to either true lilies (family Lilaceae) or true lotuses (genus Nelumbo). Rather, Egyptian water lilies are part of the genus Nymphaea. Blue and white water lilies (N. caerulea and N. lotus, respectively) were both native to the Nile River in antiquity (Slocum 2005, 85, 99). The Egyptian lotus was known for its narcotic properties (Harer 1985) and was associated with wine in ancient Egypt, particularly during the New Kingdom and later dynasties, hence the frequent depiction of lotuses on ancient Egyptian drinking vessels. Egyptian lotuses were also commonly portrayed on tombs and coffins due to the plant’s association with rebirth in the afterlife (Harer 2001; Brunner-Traut 1980). Water lilies, moreover, were incorporated into architecture, palmette designs, and objects such as lamps like the one found in Tutankhamun’s tomb (Hepper 2009, 11—12). It is

582. EPNL 256; Lambdin 1953b, 154; FWOT 159; Rabin 1962, 1077. L0"w (1924—1934, 2:165—66) instead suggests that MM is a reduplicated form of WW ‘six’ because the lily appears to have six petals. However, this derivation does not adequately explain the phonological and morphological pattern of War). 583. Gardiner 1936, 189-90. On the probable Semitic origin of Gk oou'cov, see 506 1373; DELG 995; Rosol' 2013, 135; Masson 1967, 58—59. Greek writings do not associate 00600v with Egypt, but both Dioscorides (Mat. med. 3.102) and the late lexicographer Zonaras (Lex. 01662) explicitly state that this word comes from Syro-Palestine.

208

Chapter 3

not surprising, therefore, that Egyptian lotus imagery was adopted by the ancient Israelites for omamentation of the temple (1 Kgs 7:19, 22, 26; 2 Chr 4:5) (Hepper 1992, 182). 117131;} (a fragrant plant, probably cress) HAL0T1462; DCH 8:323 (Exod 30:34) (5 o"vv§, EB onyx ‘onycha’; 6 .lpr", 310ml 15113 ‘nail’ [‘2] CW Sum ZAHVILI PSD; Akk sahvlu‘ (OB, MB, NB), s'ehvla'tu (Mari) CAD S 62—65, 8/2 264; AHw 1009—10, 1209; Ug s’.hlt DUL 800—801; OAram #711112, JA 1151111, "bnn DNWSI 1121; DJPA 579; DJBA 1202; Syr tabla‘ L52 1638; Arab salt—hvat Lane 1404; Hitt zavhvheli- HHw 229584 This word is a hapax, in a list ofthe components of the tabernacle’s incense (Exod 30:34) (Nielsen 1986, 65—66). Related forms appear in a number of different languages, both Semitic and non-Semitic. These terms all refer to a fragrant plant, perhaps cress (cf. Low 1924—1934, 1:506—10; Stol 1983-1984, 24—29). The West Semitic forms cannot be a loan from Akkadian due to the lack of correspondence between Akkadian s and West Semitic t_. Also atypical is the correspondence ofAkkadian ,h with Ugaritic h_ rather than 311.585 The unusual consonantal correspondences, the different treatments of gender, and the word’s widespread distribution characterize it as an ancient culture word (of. AIA 154). It most probably comes from the place this plant originated.

rip-W ‘acacia wood’ HAL0T1473—74; DCH 8:332 (Exod 25:5, 10, 13, 23, 38; passim586) 6 fiu’lov donmov ‘incorruptible wood’ except m’éov ‘box-tree’ Isa 41:19; 13 transliterates as setim except spina (perhaps ‘sloe-tree’) Isa 41:19; 6 ’s'kr" ‘box-tree’; I new [Aramaic form] [D] Eg —> Akk; Heb Akk s“amt_u, samt_u (NA) CAD $71 339; AHw 1159; QH now; Eg s“nd_.t (OK), 5nd: (since MK), s’nty (NK) AnW111314, 2:2477—78; GHwA" 898—99; WA'S' 4:520—21; DLE 2:131 This word occurs almost exclusively in the book of Exodus, where it appears 26 times with reference to a type of wood used for the construction of the tabernacle 584. Comparison with Arab suba‘lat ‘grain husks, filings’ is questionable on semantic grounds (contra HALOT1462). 585. AIA 154; Falk 1966, 205. Akk s'ehyla'tu, attested at Mari, probably reflects the West Semitic form of this word, as indicated by the initial s' and the feminine ending. 586. Exod 26:15, 26, 32, 37; 27:1, 6; 30:1, 5; 35:7, 24; 36:20, 31, 36; 37:1, 4, 10, 15, 25, 28; 38:1, 6; Deut 10:3; Isa 41:19.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

209

M“—

and ark of the covenant (cf. IIQTal viii:5). The only occurrences outside the book of Exodus are in Deut 10:3, where Moses recalls the construction of the ark of the covenant, and Isa 41:19, where this term appears amidst other trees with reference to a plant found in the desert (may). In Akkadian, this word appears as s'amt,u, samt‘u. A plant list from Ashurbanipal’s library specifically connects this plant with Meluhvh'a in Africa (CT 14 pl. 21 v/vi:22).587 This observation, together with the Hebrew Bible’s nearly exclusive association of new with the construction ofthe tabernacle, points to an Egyptian origin. The donor terrn is Egyptian s'nd_. t, s'nd. t, s'nty ‘acacia wood’ (cf. Dem s'nt, s'ntyJ, hvntyj and Copt s'onte: CDD SV 184—87; DG 516; Crum 573).588 Ancient Egyptian texts associate this tree with a wide variety of applications, including roof beams (cf. Exod 26:15, 26; 36:20, 31), shipbuilding, filmiture construction, and the making of coffins, bows, dowels, and various other objects. Hebrew-speakers probably borrowed this word sometime afier the Middle Kingdom, when it had become s'nd. t, because Hebrew jet, typically reflects Egyptian d (EPNL 256; Lambdin 1953b, 154). On the basis of two assumptions, Zevit (1992, 138*—42*; cf. Feliks 1987, 1:533—34) argues that Hebrew new must denote the specific species Acacia albida. First, he contends that away in Exod 26:15 (D‘mv’ D’D-W' ’33] 13W? D‘ijgj'nx? W171) modifies arc-W" rather than Dump-:1. Second, he argues that the Io-cubit-high frames mentioned in this same passage require a tall species of acacia, namely A. albz’da. He then goes on to note that A. albida is not native to the Sinai Peninsula, where the wildemess wanderings putatively took place, and claims that no historicity can be ascribed to the construction of the tabernacle. However, one cannot assume that this term exclusively denotes this species. It is likely that it refers to several different types of acacia, not just one particular species, especially since numerous species existed in Egypt and the Sinai Peninsula (e.g., A. raddiana, A. tortilz‘s, A. m'lotica, and A. albida) (Vartavan 1997, 24—32). There is therefore no need to conclude, as Zevit does, that the use of the term rug-W in Exodus is the product of a late, uninformed writer (Hofi’meier 2005, 209—11). 127711), WV} ‘Egyptian alabaster, travertine’ HALOT I663; DCH 8:572 (Song 5:15; Esth 1:6 [2X]; 1 Chr 29:2) (5 papua'pwog ‘of marble’ Song 5:15, ita’pwog ‘of marble’ and na’pwog Meog ‘marble stone’ Esth 1:6, nu’ptog ‘Parian marble’ 1 Chr 29:2; 28 marmoreus ‘of marble’ Song 5:15, marmor ‘marble’ Esth 1:6, marmor Parium ‘Parian marble’ I Chr 29:2; 6 s'ys" [Syriac form] except mrgnyt’ ‘pearl’ I Chr 29:2; 51'. V3173 ‘marble’ except does not directly represent this word Song 5:15 [D] Eg —> Heb; Aram 587. Thompson 1949, 180—84. Although Meluh'ha was perhaps located east ofMesopotamia during Sumerian times (Heimpel 1993—1997), first millennium references to this region from the time of Esarhaddon clearly associate Meluh'ha with Africa (RTNAP 4.16:4; 4.34:7’, 15’; 4.48:29; 4.84:5; 4.85:6; 4.86:3). 588. EPNL 256; Lambdin 1953b, I54; FWOTI60; Rabin 1962, 1077.

210

Chapter 3

IA, QA, Palm, JA WW, W'W DNWSI 1196; DQA 244; DJPnA 547; DJBA 1141; Syr s'z‘s'a' LS’ 1554; Mand s'is'a MD 464; Eg s's (since OK) A W 1:1315—16, 222480; GHwA"901; WA'S' 4:541; DLE 2:134

This word occurs four times, thrice in the form my (Song 5:15; Esth 1:6 [2X]) and once in the non-monophthongized form W711} (1 Chr 29:2). The contexts in which it occurs demonstrate that it refers to a stone or mineral. Hebrew V1711} has no apparent Semitic etymology and no related forms aside from those in Aramaic. Accordingly, a foreign origin is likely. The donor term is Egyptian s's ‘Egyptian alabaster, travertine’, which appears in Egyptian texts as early as the Old Kingdom.589 Egypt’s sources of this mineral include Hatnub (located about 18 km southeast ofAmama) and Wadi Gerrawi (near Helwan). The Egyptians used it for pavements and wall-linings in temple passages and rooms (cf. Esth 1:6; I Chr 29:2) as well as statuettes (cf. Song 5:15), well suiting its use in the Hebrew Bible.590 Two phonological and morphological points are of note. First, a feminine form, s's.t (AuW 1:1316; GHwA" 901; WA'S' 41540—41), also appears in Egyptian texts dun'ng the Old and New Kingdoms, but Hebrew-speakers most probably borrowed the masculine form because there is no trace of the Egyptian feminine ending in WW“. Second, because both of the consonants in Hebrew WTW‘ are s'in, sibilant assimilation probably occurred subsequent to borrowing, just as also happened with Hebrew WW ‘Egyptian linen’. 1727' => 171mg

wary ‘emery, corundum’ HAL0T1562—63; DCH 8:443 (Jer 17:1; Ezek 3:9; Zech 7:12) (6 omits; ‘13 adamas ‘adamant’; 6 s'myr’ [Syriac form]; 1 WW [Aramaic form] [7] CW Eg z’smr (NK), smr (Ptolm) GHwA" 116; WA'S' 1:132, 4:139; Gk ouv'pig, opiptg LS] 1620591 This word occurs only three times in the Bible. Each time it appears, the context indicates that it refers to a mineral substance and that it is very hard. A clue to its referent is provided by Egyptian z’smr and Greek orw'ptg, ouiptg, both of which resemble Hebrew WW phonologically. Egyptian texts use zs’mr with reference to 589. EPNL 256—57; Lambdin 1953b, 155; Rabin 1962, 1077. 590. Aston, Harrell and Shaw 2000, 59—60. Harrell, Hoffmeier, and Williams (2017, 39-40) suggest travertm'e as a possible renden'ng of this term but prefer limestone local to Jerusalem because there is no evidence for the use of travertine in Israel. However, this lack of evidence is probably due to the m'complete archaeological record, especially since travertine suits the term 197W well otherwise. 591. JA WM and Syr s'a'mz'ra‘ are adopted fiom BH 11m} (DJPA 557; DJBA 1158; LS’ 1573). Lat smyrls' is a loan from Greek (DELL 63o; LEW 2:549).

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

211

WWW

corundum, and Classical authors such as Dioscorides (Mat. med. 5.147) note the stone ouv'ptg was used for polishing gems. This indicates that Hebrew 1th refers to a form of corundum such as emery.592 Both the Egyptian and the Greek terms difi‘er slightly from Hebrew mm}, so it is unlikely that either of the former comes from the latter. Egyptian z’smr contains an initial 1’ prior to the Ptolemaic period, which cannot easily be reconciled with the Hebrew form that lacks an initial vowel. Greek ouv'ptg, ouiptg is of uncertain origin, lacks a vowel between its first two consonants, and has a base stem with -6 that elsewhere occurs in words that have entered Greek via Anatolia (cf. towing ‘jasper’ with base stern 1"0tom§-, nontoxic; ‘concubine’ with base stem itaMQKiS-, and xlupu’g ‘mantle’ with base stem xXaun'6-). A connection with Anatolia is further supported by the geographical associations of corundum. Egyptian texts note that z’smr is imported from Syria, and the Mari texts associate Akkadian s'ammu ‘corundum’ with northern Syria (J. R. Harris 1961, 163—65; Heimpel, Gorelick and Gwinnett 1988, 198—201). Furthermore, both Turkey and Syria contain deposits of corundum and were likely sources of this mineral in antiquity (Moorey 1999, 82; Heimpel, Gorelick and Gwinnett 1988, 204). Accordingly, this ancient culture word most probably originated somewhere in the north where corundum was obtained.593 D’J-EIJWI ‘ivory’ HAL0T1602; DCH 8:504 (I Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21) (5 translates [I‘D-m mam Uta-arty as M'Bog topeu'ro‘g Kai nsmmto'g ‘worked and hewn stone’ I Kgs 10:22, o’éoo‘g e’kemavrivcov ‘tooth of elephants’ 2 Chr 9:21; 8 dens elefantorum ‘tooth of elephants’ I Kgs 10:22, ebur ‘ivory’ 2 Chr 9:21; 6 pyl’ ‘elephant’; 1 “7‘91 111] ‘teeth of elephants’ [D] Eg ——> Heb Eg {bw (OK, MK, NK) A"W1.'5, 2:12; GHwAu6; WA'S' 1:7; DLE 1:5 The term occurs only twice in the Hebrew Bible (I Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21). Both passages mention this word alongside two Egyptian loans, r1.7' (an African monkey) and ‘35 (a female African ape), as products that were imported from the Horn of Africa by Solomon.

592. Harrell, HotTmeier and Williams 2017, 37—38. WW cannot denote the diamond because the diamond’s earliest attested use in ancient Mesopotamia is in the Roman period (Moorey 1999, 82). 593. Rabin 1962, 1078; 1964, 153. Thompson (1936, 52) instead considers n‘w' cognate with an alleged Akkadian term *as'muru. Based on the variety of contexts in which the sign group ASUHAR Occurs, he argues that *as'muru, another possible reading of the signs, is a different term from asvhar. However, aside from the desire to find cognates for *as'muru in BH 1‘02?" and Eg ismr, Thompson gives no reasonable justification for reading the sign group AS._HAR as both asyhar and *as'muru. The CAD (A/2 330) and von Soden (AHw 73) rightly read only one term, as_har.

212

Chapter 3

Hebrew CID-aw can be analyzed as a hybrid loan containing Hebrew 1W ‘tooth’ and a foreign lexeme meaning ‘elephant’.594 Its geographical association with the Horn ofAfrica strongly suggests that the second element meaning ‘elephant’ comes from the same region, as does the observation that ivory was imported from the Horn ofAfrica in antiquity.595 The obvious donor term is Egyptian {bw ‘elephant’, which is attested as early as the Old Kingdom.596 Hebrew he and Egyptian f are hardly compatible phonologically, and the usage of he in CID-UM most likely reflects the compound nature of this word (cf. EPNL 257). Ivory was used primarily as a medium for sculpture in the ancient Near East, the two most important traditions of ivory-working being carvings of the human figure and plaques. A local tradition of ivory-carving developed in Late Bronze Age Palestine, most notably at Megiddo, where plaques depicting Egyptian deities, feasts, and military scenes have been found. The ninth and eighth centuries B.C.E. saw a resurgence in ivory—working, and ivories have been discovered at a number of different locations, including Nimrud and Khorsabad in Assyria, Zincirli, Carchemish, and Arslan Tash in Syria, and Samaria in Palestine.597 19W, "191!” (an instrument made from an animal horn) HALOT1447—48; DCH 8:309 (Exod 19:16, 19; passz'm598) [‘2] CW Sum S‘EG‘BAR PSD; Akk sappa'ru, sabba'ru, s'appa'ru (OB, MA, SB) CAD S 166; AHw 1027; QH 191mm

Hebrew 19127", more commonly spelled with holem-waw as 19111}, refers to a animal’s horn blown in celebration (e.g., Lev 25:9; 2 Sam 6:15) or in battle (e.g., Josh 594. This is analogous to the Akkadian expression for ivory, sinnu pz‘ri, a compound of the Akkadian words for ‘tooth’ (s'innu) and ‘elephant’ (pz‘ru). 595. Caubet 2002, 232—333; Krzyszkowska and Morkot 2000, 320—27. There were two main spe— cies of elephants in antiquity, Asian (Elephas maximus) and African (Loxodonta africana). The Asian elephant became largely extinct in Western Asia in the later part of the first millennium B.C.E.. and by the middle of the third millennium B.C.E., the African elephant no longer inhabited Egypt, although it continued to be found in other parts of Afi‘ica. The so-called “Syrian elephant” is best explained as a relict population of the Asian elephant because it is depicted just like it in ancient Near Eastern representations. See Gilbert 2002, 26, 55; Moorey 1999, 116—17. 596. FWOT 162. 0‘3an cannot be derived from Skt ibha- ‘elephant’. This Sanskrit word is not attested until the post-Vedic period, when it appears as a secondary interpretation of earlier Skt ibha‘servants, entourage’ (EWAia 1:194, 3:28; KEWA 1:90, 3:644). 597. Liebowitz 1992; Herrmann and Millard 2003; Caubet 2002, 233—34. 598. Exod 20:18; Lev 25:9 (2X); Josh 6:4 (2x), 5—6, 8 (2X), 9 (2x), 13 (3X), 16, 20 (2X): Judg 3:27; 6:34; 7:8, 16, 18(2X), 19, 20 (2X), 22; 1 Sam 13:3; 2 Sam 2:28; 6:15; 15:10; 18:16; 20:1, 22; 1 Kgs 1:34. 39. 41; 2 Kgs 9:13; Isa 18:3; 27:13; 58:1; Jer 4:5, 19, 21; 6:1, 17; 42:14; 51:27; Ezek 33:3—6; Hos 5:8; 8:1; Joel 2:1, 15; Amos 2:2; 3:6; Zeph 1:16; Zech 9:14; Ps 47:6 [47:5]; 81:4 [81:3]; 98:6; 150:3; Job 39:24—25: Neh 4:12, 14 [4:18, 20]; 1 Chr 15:28; 2 Chr 15:14. 599. JA, SA, CPA 191W all occur in biblical contexts and are adopted from BH 19W" (DJPA 541—42; DSA 883; DCPA 421).

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

213

6:4; Jer 4:5). Rabin (1962, 1074) lists this word as a loan from Sumerian s'EG‘BAR via Akkadian sappa'ru, both of which denote a horned animal.6°0 There are two problems with this loan hypothesis, however. First, the use of 0‘ for Akkadian short a and the lack of doubling of the second radical preclude a direct loan on phonological grounds.601 Second, Akkadian sappa'ru never refers to the horn of an animal. Akkadian instead reserves the form sappartu, a secondary feminine form, to denote the animal’s horn.602 Nevertheless, Hebrew 1912i cannot be completely separated from Sumerian SVEG’BAR and Akkadian sappa'ru, and these terms represent an early culture word for a horned animal.603 Sumerian and Akkadian maintained the referent of this culture word as a homed-animal, whereas in Hebrew the referent of this word became the animal’s hom—rather than the animal itself—by metonymy. 11"1117, IMO ‘scale armor, scale mail’ HALOT 769, 1655; DCH 6:197, 8:561 (1 Sam 17:5 [2X], 38; passimw“) [D] Hurr —> Akk; Ug; Heb; Eg; Hitt Akk sariam, s’iriam, svir’am, siriannu, s'ir’annu (Bogh, Nuzi, MB, EA, SB, NA, NB) CAD S 313—15;AHw 1029; Ug _tryn DUL 921; Eg pyn (NK) GHwA" 1032; WA'S‘ 5:386; SWET 366—67 (#546); Hitt svariya- CHD S“ 259; HHw I63; Hurr sarianni-, sariyanni- BGH 357—58; GLH 215—16605 This word occurs in two different forms in Biblical Hebrew: WW} (1 Sam 17:5, 38; 1 Kgs 22:34; Isa 59:17; Neh 4:10; 2 Chr 18:33; 26:14) and fine (Jer 46:4; 51:3). Each time it appears, it occurs within a military context and means ‘scale armor, scale mail’. The altemation between sin and samek indicates a foreign loan. In light of this word’s association with the Philistine Goliath, a Philistine origin is possible, but the existence of numerous related forms in other ancient Near Eastern languages indi— cates otherwise. Along with Hebrew WW), they can all be traced back to Hurrian 600. Steinkeller (1995, 50) insists that Sum SVEG‘BAR denotes a deer because this animal is commonly associated with deer and gazelles and not sheep or goats. 601. One could try to contend that Hebrew—speakers lengthened the first syllable’s vowel rather than preserve the gemination ofp in the Akkadian form. This, however, would still not explain the long 0' because the final rather than the initial syllable of 1911)" is accented; the Canaanite shifi caused accented a" to shift to 0' but not unaccented a'. 602. CAD S 165; AHw 1027. Akk sappartu occurs only in Standard Babylonian. 603. Cf. Landsberger 1934, 97—98. There is no clear evidence that Sumerian lent this word to Akkadian. Lieberman (SLOB 481—82 [#626]) lists it as a loan from Sumerian into Akkadian, whereas Civil (2007, 21) lists it as a loan from Akkadian into Sumerian. 604. 1Kgs 22:34; Isa 59:17; Jer 46:4; 51:3; Neh 4:10; 2 Chr 18:33; 26:14. Following (5 in Job 41:5 [41213] (nm’éw em'paxog (113101)"), the phrase 1:01 59;);- ‘its double bridle’ should be emended to W10 ‘79:;‘its double coat of mail’ (Gordis 1978, 486; Pope 1965, 335). 605- JA WWW, 1‘11!) and Syr s'erya‘na' are adopted from Biblical Hebrew (Jastrow 1903, 1631; LS’ 1607).

214

Chapter 3

sarz’anni-, sariyanni- ‘SCale armor, scale mail’ (FWOT163; Speiser 1950, 47—48; Brandenstein 1940, 104—5). The armor denoted by Hurrian sarianni—, sarzy'anni~ is one of the gifts given by Tus'ratta the king of Mittani (EA 22 iii237—38), and archaeological excavations reveal that it was a particularly popular item at Nuzi, confirming its Hurrian origin. Furthermore, some of the borrowings of this Human term contain the Hurrian derivational suffix -m', -nm' whereas some do not.606 The different adaptations of this word as well as the uncertainty in Hebrew regarding the initial sibilant indicate that Hebrew borrowed it directly from Hurrian.607 The scale armor denoted by this term was worn by both humans and horses. Textual and archaeological evidence from Nuzi indicates that the human scale armor was composed of 400—600 bronze scales for the cuirass and nearly as many for the sleeves. The armor’s individual bronze plates were secured in overlapping patterns to a fabric or leather base. The total weight of this type of armor could approach 25 kg, and due to the cost of materials and labor involved in making it,

it was worn only by elite chariot warriors. Armor of this type is depicted in the Egyptian tombs of Kenamun, Paimosi, and Ramesses II.608 ‘W’W‘W' ‘corporal punishment’ HALOT 2002—3 (Ezra 7:26) (5 noufieiu ‘child-rearing’; SB exilium ‘exile, banishment’; 6 by ‘life’ [D] OIran —> Aram IA ‘WTID, numno DNWSI 802; OIran *sraus'z'- AISN 227; [AP 448 This Biblical Aramaic word occurs only in Ezra 7:26, within a list of punishments

including death (m’n), confiscation of property (POpJ em), and imprisonment (11015), which Darius prescribes for not obeying his law or God’s law.609 Brown, Driver, and Briggs (BDB 1117) and Ko"hler and Baumgartner (HALOT 2002—3) connect ’WW) with the common Semitic noun s'rs' ‘root’, contending that it means ‘banishment’ (literally ‘rooting out’). This seems to be the understanding of EB, and the verb s'rs' does occasionally mean ‘to uproot’ in late Aramaic (cf. .IA WW“ and Syr s'rs'y: DJBA 1182; LS" 1613), but no noun *s'rs'w, *s'rs‘y meaning ‘uprooting’ exists in Semitic. Therefore, ‘W‘W’W is probably not connected with Semitic s'rs'. Biblical Aramaic ‘W'i'tzi occurs within the context of Darius’s decree, and several other Old Iranian loanwords appear in Ezra 7:26. Thus, ’W'W'W. undoubtedly comes from Old Iranian. The donor term is Old Iranian *sraus’zi ‘corporal punishment’ 606. On the derivational suffix -ni, —nm', see Wegner 2007, 55; Giorgieri 2000, 210—12; Wilhelm 2008, 92. The use of final m rather than n in several of the Akkadian forms reflects dissimilation. 607. Conti and Bonechi (1992) find this word in Eblaite as ’asarya’num, written as a-sar-a-nu. However, this does not prove an Eblaite on'gin. Even ifthis attestation is genuine, the strong association between this type of armor and the Hum'ans still needs to be explained. 608. Dezso” 2003—2005; 2002, 195—99; Decker 1982; Speiser 1950, 47—48. 609. The Qere is Why) whereas the Keriv is WW'W'W'. Based on the Old Iranian etymology advocated here, the Qere is most probably the correct reading.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

215

(cf. Av sraos“z'1'a‘-.‘ AIW 1637).610 The sibilants have assimilated, hence the initial s'in rather than s'in or samek. The initial [5] is preserved, on the other hand, in Imperial Aramaic, as in Who (Khalili C341) and n’vmo (TAD A6316).611 The holem of 1mg) indicates a borrowing sometime during the Achaemenid period, when the diphthong au monophthongized t0 6.612

WW ‘Egyptian linen’ HALOT1663—64; DCH 8:572 (Gen 41:42; passimm) [D] Eg —> Heb QH WW; Eg s's (since NK) GHwA" 901; WA"S 42539—40 Most, if not all, of the occurrences of WW in the Hebrew Bible are connected with Egypt. In Genesis 41:42, WW appears with reference to the garments with which Pharaoh clothed Joseph, and in Ezek 27:7, it explicitly refers to Egyptian material used for a ship’s sail. This word occurs frequently, moreover, within the descn'ption of the tabernacle (Exod 25:4; passim; cf. IQM vii:10). Only two of its occurrences in Biblical Hebrew, namely Ezek 16:10 and Prov 31:22, do not have such an explicit association with Egypt, but even these occurrences probably have an Egyptian literary context.614 This clear association with Egypt strongly suggests that Hebrew WW comes from the Egyptian language, and without doubt the donor term is Egyptian is.“ As with W711} ‘Egyptian alabaster, travertine’, sibilant assimilation probably occurred within Hebrew subsequent to borrowing. Egypt was well known for its distinctive method ofworking linen in antiquity (cf. Herodotus, Hist. 2.105), which produced a unique and valued fabric.616 It is therefore not surprising that Hebrew-speakers adopted this Egyptian term for this particular commodity.

610. F. Rosenthal 2006, 63; Rundgren 1957. The -1y'a- of Olran *sraus'iya- has contracted to -1'—, a phenomenon which tends to appear in Old Persian texts afier the time of Darius I and Xerxes I (Skjaerva 2009, 59; Schmitt 2008, 85; OPGTL 13—14, 47—48 [§§23, 140]). 611. There are two possible explanations for the final (aw in the Elephantine form. IA nvwm could be considered a feminine noun in Aramaic (Naveh and Shaked 2012, 196; Bogoliubov 1971, 18; G. R. Dn'ver 1957, 47). Altematively, IA mzmo could be interpreted as a loan from Olran *sraus'yala'-, formed from ‘sraus'ya- and the suflfix -ta’ (MP 448). 612. On the monophthongization 0f au t0 0’, see Skjazrve 2009, 58; Schmitt 2008, 83. 613. Exod 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:9, 16, 18; 2825—6, 8, 15, 39 (2X); 35:6, 23, 25, 35; 36:8, 35, 37; 38:9, 16,18, 23; 39:2—3, 5, 8, 27, 28 (3X), 29; Ezek 16:10, 13 (2X); 27:7; Prov 31:22. 614. Ezekiel 16:8—10, which describes God entering into a covenant with Israel, reflects the account of the Exodus. Proverbs 31:10—31 may have an Egyptian background as well. See Knobloch 2009, 462. 615. EPNL 257—58; FWOT 164; Rabin 1962, 1077; Grintz 1975b, 178-80. 616. Vogelsang-Eastwood 2000, 268—76. As depicted in Egyptian tombs, flax seeds were sown in the middle of November following the annual inundation of the Nile and harvested by grabbing and pulling out bundles (rather than by cutting) once the flax was full grown. Afier drying and further

preparation, linen thread was produced by spinning.

216

Chapter 3

In an influential study published in 1967, Hurvitz analyzed the usage of W and 171-3 in the Hebrew Bible. He argued that, because 1’13 is purportedly not attested in Biblical Hebrew before the sixth century B.C.E. and because r-u- is allegedly the semantic equivalent of WW, the exclusive usage of WW" in the description ofthe tabernacle points to the antiquity of the priestly source. However, nearly all the biblical uses of WW have an Egyptian connection. On the other hand, the same cannot be said of V13, which has no association with Egypt and therefore does not seem to be an exact synonym of WW.“ Thus, while the use of an Egyptian loanword may be significant for our understanding of Egyptian influence on the Priestly source, the use of W)" in the Exodus description of the tabernacle has no direct bearing on the Priestly source or the date of its composition. heigh- (a coniferous tree) HALOT1677; DCH 8:585 (Isa 41:19; 60:136‘8) (5 omits Isa 41:19, Kéépog ‘cedar’ Isa 60:13; $ buxum ‘boxwood’ Isa 41:19, pinus ‘pine’ Isa 60:13; 6 svrwyn’, 3 3mm (a coniferous tree) [D] Hitt —-> Ug; Heb Ug tz’s'r DUL 842—43; QH 111mm; Hitt tz‘es's'ar- HHw 197 The word 11198.n- occurs twice in the Hebrew Bible, both times in lists of trees (Isa 41:19; 60:13). These two occurrences are not particularly useful in determining the type of tree to which this word refers, a difficulty reflected in the variance of the ancient versions. Nevertheless, wwsn; seems to refer to a coniferous tree, perhaps juniper or cypress (Musselman 2012, 78—79; Hepper 1992, 31, 34; Lo"w1924—1934, 12316—19). At Qumran the Hoyadot alludes to both of the passages from Isaiah, using the form 111mm (IQHa xvi:5). This word occurs elsewhere in Semitic only as Ugaritic tz’s'r. The absence of any other related forms, the difficulty with basing the word on any known Semitic root. and its unusual morphological pattern all point to a foreign loan.619 The Hebrew Bible’s association of the tree denoted by 11198!)- with northern Syria in Isa 60:13 indicates an origin from the same region. As suggested by Rabin, the donor term is Hittite ties's'ar- ‘forest’.620 Northwest Semitic—speakers presumably adapted this 617. Knobloch 2009, 460—69. In fact, Ezek 27:7 mentions WW with reference to Egypt whereas ('13 appears in connection with the Levant a few verses later (Ezek 27:16). 618. The collocation nvw's-na in Ezek 27:6 should perhaps be emended to n‘jwna (Block 1997— 1998, 2:56; Greenberg 1997, 545, 549—50; Zimmerli 1979—1983, 2:44, 141—42, 149). 619. Brown, Driver, and Briggs (BDB 81) den've this term from the root 110R, which they claim means ‘to go straight’, and argue that BH ‘stn; describes an upright tree. However, the verb appearing in Hebrew as 119R is attested in Ugaritic as t_’r, not *’s’r, demonstrating that both verbs derive from _t’r. If the Ugaritic tree name were derived from this root, it should be written as *n_t’r, not tis'r. Feliks (1997. 244) instead derives BH 11149813- from the root 1112‘, ‘to be straight’. This avoids the root problem since this verb is ys'r in both Hebrew and Ugaritic. However, it creates an unusual ra’qattul-pattem noun in which the first root letter is inexplicably omitted. 620. Rabin 1964, 177; cf. Moor 1965, 362. Hitt ties's'ar— is also wn'tten logographically as “"rIR and G‘~"‘rnz.sar.

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

217

general term to denote a particular tree characteristic of forests in Anatolia when they borrowed this term.

1.;L-n ‘ark; basket’ HALOT 1677—78; DCH 8:585—86 (Gen 6:14 [2X], passz'm62‘) (5 KIBwro'g ‘box, chest’ in Genesis, GIBLQ [Greek form] in Exodus; 3 area ‘chest, box’ in Genesis,fiscella ‘wicker basket’ in Exodus; 6 qbwt’ ‘box, ark’; Swims”- um [Aramaic form] [D] Eg -+ Heb QH nan; Eg _db3.t (since OK), db.t (MK, NK), tbz’ (NK), 1b.! (Ptolm) A"W1:1500, 222774, 2834; GHwA" 993, 1046, 1078; WA'S' 5:261, 434, 561; DLE 2:203, 244, 267622 This word occurs a total of 28 times, but these instances are limited to two specific uses. Most commonly, the word .1313- refers to the ark that Noah builds to escape the flood (Gen 6:14, passim). Elsewhere, mm]- appears twice with reference to the basket in which Moses was placed (Exod 2:3, 5). This word also appears as nan in the Dead Sea Scrolls in contexts alluding to the flood narrative in Genesis (e.g., CD v:1). In the book of Exodus, the basket denoted by nan; is said to be made of avg-1 (a reed or rush plant), an Egyptian loan. This Egyptian association, the general Egyptian context of the passage, and the lack of any known Semitic root on which Hebrew .1313- could be based suggest that nan; is an Egyptian loan. The donor term is Egyptian d_b)’.t, db.t, tbz’, tb.t, attested with the meaning ‘coffin, box’ as well as ‘shrine, room’ (of. Dem tby.t, tb.t, tbi’. t, tbe)’.t, tyb.t, 02bit and Copt taibe, te'e'be: CDD T 89, 143, 145—47; DG 622; Crum 397) (EPNL 258). The form of this word is d_b;’.t in Old Kingdom Egyptian texts, but by the Middle and New Kingdoms this word came to be written as db.z, and by the Ptolemaic period it was written as tb.t. This demonstrates that _d became d and then t and that the 3 dropped out early on (EPNL 258). As already noted, the use of an Egyptian loan in Exod 2:3, 5 fits well within the broader Egyptian context. The appearance of .1311- in the Flood narrative, however, is somewhat unexpected, since there is no clear Egyptian context and because Egyptian d_b)’.t, db.t, tbz’, tb.t never refers to a boat. The usage of 71:13 in Genesis probably stems from the strong thematic links between the flood narrative and the narrative of Moses’ birth: in both cases, the item denoted by nan; is the means of deliverance of the narrative’s hero.623 win. => 1h-

621. Gen 6:15, 16 (2X), 18—19; 7:1, 7, 9, 13, 15, 17—18, 23; 8:1, 4, 6, 9 (2X), 10, 13, 16, 19; 9:10, 18; Exod 2:3, 5. 622. JA min and Gk GIBLQ are adopted from BH nan (DJPA 58o; DJBA 1203; LS] 801). 623. Hoffmeier 1996, 138; Cassuto 1967, 18—19; contra C. Cohen 1972. Propp (1999, 159—60) notes similarities between the Epic ofA trah'asis and Exod 2:1—10, further strengthening the thematic connections between the narratives of the flood and Moses’ birth.

218

Chapter 3

81,1113- (a type of leather vest) HALOT1720; DCH 8:621 (Exod 28:32; 39:23) (5, 1; do not directly represent this word but emphasize the well-woven nature of the material; 6 syrs’ ‘threads’; Ionq- 111W ‘coat of mail’, 1”5'1 WW ‘silk’ [D] Eg —> Heb Eg dh,r (since OK) A"W 1:1480, 222797; GHwA" 1058; WA'S' 5:481—82; DLE 2:254 The word xjxnn; occurs twice within the description of the high priest’s ephod (Exod 28:32; 39:23). In both instances, it appears in the expression man ’5;- ‘like the opening ofa man-3 which compares the well-stitched opening of the item firm; to the head opening of the high priest’s garment. This word’s morphology is somewhat unusual, and it does not seem to be based on any known Semitic root.624 These observations point to a foreign origin for Hebrew man, and the donor term is Egyptian dh_r ‘leather, animal hide’.‘’25 The Egyptians subsequently borrowed this word back from Northwest Semitic as tvhr (GHwA" 1010; WA'S' 5:328; DLE 2:219), applying it to the leather paneling of a carriage (SWET 363 [#538]). This establishes a terminus ante quem of ca. 1200 13.0.13. for the borrowing of Egyptian (1hr by Biblical Hebrew because Egyptian 1th is first attested m' the late Nineteenth Dynasty (P An IV 16,9). In light of its connection with Egyptian dh_r, Hoffmeier (2005, 216—17) proposes that Hebrew Rjnln; refers to a well-stitched leather vest. He compares it (2001, 2:410) t0 the collar of New Kingdom coats of armor, which consisted of a leather jacket or vest onto which small bronze or copper plates were sewn. That Canaanite peoples would have been familiar with such a garment is indicated by a relief on the chariot body of Thutmose IV (1419—1410 B.C.E.), which depicts this type of armor on Canaanite charioteers (Hoffmeier 2005, 217; Sama 1991, I82). wan (a type of Egyptian leather) HALOT1720—21;DCH 8:621 (Exod 25:5; passiméz") (5 u’akivelvog ‘dark red, dark blue’; 2; ianthinus ‘dark red, dark blue’; 6 ssgwn’, $11100 ‘verrnilion’ [D] Eg ——> Heb Eg _t.hs (OK, MK), ths (Saite) A"W 1:1456, 2:2750; GHwA" 1034; WAiS' 5:396

624. It is unlikely that man; means ‘anus’ and is derived from a hypothetical root Rfin“ meaning ‘to defecate’ (contra Tur-Sinai 1950—1955, 2:219—23). 625. W. M. Mu"ller 1893, 109; cf. Tvedtnes 1982, 218. Muchiki (EPNL 258) and Lambdin (1953b, 155) object to the correspondence of Heb law and Eg d. However, one cannot rule out this loan hypothesis purely on preconceived consonantal correspondences, especially because the opposition between Eg t and d is not fully understood. 626. Exod 26:14; 35:7, 23; 36:19; 39:34; Num 4:6, 8, 10—12, 14, 25; Ezek 16:10.

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

219

The word wnn; occurs 14 times in the Hebrew Bible. In all but two of its occurrences (Num 4:25; Ezek 16:10), Wm; occurs in construct with 1111 ‘skin, hide’. This demonstrates that it denotes a material made from animal hides (see Houtman

1993—2002, 1:145). This word occurs nearly exclusively in descriptions of the tabernacle, which are set within a literary context in which several Egyptian materials are used to build the tabernacle and its accoutrements. Even the sole occurrence of Wm elsewhere appears in conjunction with two Egyptian loanwords, WW ‘Egyptian linen’ and Wm (a garment), and in a context that alludes to the Exodus (Ezek 16:10; cf. Ezek 16:8). The contexts in which W'L'ln‘ occur, therefore, point to an Egyptian loanword. The donor term comes from Egyptian _th,s, which became ths after palatal fronting occurred.627 This verb most commonly occurs along with _hnt ‘animal hide’ and relates to the process of stretching leather across a wooden frame for oil-curing. It also appears sometimes in conjunction with _tbw ‘sandal, sole of the foot’, similar to the attestation of Wan in Ezek 16:10. It is therefore likely that Hebrew-speakers adopted an unattested nominal form of Egyptian *th.s that denotes leather prepared via stretching and oil-curing. Leather would have served as a durable, resilient material for the outer covering for the tabernacle (Exod 26:14; 36:19; 39:34; Num 4:25) and would have been the material of choice for making sandals (Ezek 16:10). vii-1m: ‘grape; fresh wine’ HAL0T1727—28; DCH 8:629—30 (Gen 27:28, 37; passimm) 627. Noonan 2012; cf. Go'rg 2001; Hoffmeier 2005, 212—13; Bondi 1897. On the depalatalization of Eg _t, see J. Allen 2013, 48—50; Loprieno 1995. 38; Peust 1999, 123-25; Junge 2005, 36. Cross (1947, 62) originally held to this loan hypothesis. Later (1984, 95—96) he changed his mind and contended that BH wnn; comes from Arab mh_as ‘dugong', claiming that the use of dugong skins for the Israelite tabernacle reflects the dolphins of El’s watery abode. However, no evidence exists that the Israelites would have used such skins for the tabernacle, and the Ugaritic texts never mention dolphins in connection with El. Other scholars try to connect BH won with Akk dus'u‘, duvhs'u'. Dalley (2000) suggests that Akk dus'u‘, duhvs'u‘ denotes faience beadwork and that 0011; means the same. Mastnjak (2017) maintains the traditional view that Akk dus’u‘, dubs'u‘ is a color term sometimes applied to textiles, arguing that the use of this textile to make tents at Mari (ARM 24.176; M10482; M.10483; M.12217) provides a functional parallel to 112011;. However, both ofthese suggestions are unable to explain why wan would use an a-class vowel to represent the u-class vowel of the Akkadian form. Furthermore, because the final diphthong of the Akkadian form is attested in all other dialects apart from Man', and because the diphthong should be represented in BH w""n_n_- if it were connected with Akk dus'u‘, duhju‘, both Dalley and Mastnjak must assume that the spelling attested at Mari is representative of a West Semitic tradition behind BH w‘nn. The Egyptian associations ofwan; in the Hebrew Bible make an Egyptian origin more plausible, even if a nominal form of_th.s, tbs is not attested in extant Egyptian texts. This is especially true because—notwithstanding West Semitic parallels with Mari—Egypt possesses the closest analogues to the Israelite tabernacle (cf. Homan 2000). 628. Num 18:12; Deut 7:13; 11:14; 12:17; 14:23; 18:4; 28:51; 33:28; Judg 9:13; 2 Kgs 18:32; Isa 24:7; 36:17; 62:8; 65:8; Jer 31:12; Hos 2:10-11[2:8—9], 24 [2:22]; 4:11; 7:14; 9:2; Joel 1:10; 2:19, 24; Mic 6:15; Hag 1:11; Zech 9:17; Ps 4:8 [4:7]; Prov 3:10; Neh 5:11; 10:38 [10:37], 40 [10:39]; 13:5, 12; 2 Chr 31:5; 32:28.

220

Chapter 3

6, EB, 6, I most frequently translate this word as or’vog, vinum, hmr’, and 1m (each meaning ‘wine’), respectively [?] CW Ebla tirz's'u; Ug trt_ DUL 867; QH Wi't’n; Phoen W'm DNWSI 1234; Luv tuwarsa(HLuv) Payne 2010, 151; Gk Gu’poog LSJ 812629 The word Wi'nn: occurs 38 times in the Hebrew Bible. It frequently appears along with 133- ‘grain’ as a commodity of the land of Canaan (e.g., Gen 27:28; Deut 7:13). It can refer to either the grape itself(e.g., Deut 7:13; 11:14; 28:51; Zech 9:17; Ps 4:8; 2 Chr 32:28) or to fresh wine (e.g., Isa 62:8; Joel 2:24).630 This word also occurs as wwn in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Elsewhere in Semitic, this word only occurs in Eblaite, Ugaritic, and Phoenician. Eblaite tiris'u appears in a pharmaceutical text and seems to mean ‘wine’ (Fronzaroli 1998, 231—32). Ugaritic trI_ occurs several times in mythological texts within the context of feasting, occurring parallel to yn ‘wine’ in at least two instances (KTU 1.11424, 16). Lastly, W111 occurs in the Phoenician portion of the Azatiwada Inscription from Karatepe, Anatolia (KAI 26A iii:7, 9; C iv:7, 9). In this text, mn is paired with 173W ‘grain’ similar to the collocation of Mum; and 373;? in Biblical Hebrew (Prov 3:10).631 Such a distribution is relatively limited, and this word has no plausible Semitic etymology.632 Accordingly, Winn. is a good candidate for a foreign loan. Related forms include Hieroglyphic Luvian tuwarsa- ‘grapevine, vineyard’ and Greek 9v’poog, which denotes a wand-staff twined with vine leaves. The primary distn'bution of this word in the north suggests an origin from this same area, which is plausible in light ofthe origin ofthe grapevine (Vztis vinfiera) in western Asia or the Caucasus (D. Zohary and Hopf2000, 151—59; Olmo 1996). Similar to 17:, therefore. Hebrew Wifi‘n; most probably represents an ancient culture word that originated in the same region where the grapevine originated.633 Notably, this Asiatic culture word is also attested as the name of an ancient Near Eastern deity found in the Ugaritic texts as Trt_ (KTU 1.39:11, 16; 1.1029) 629. The Punic homonym W111, attested in CIS 1:5522:2, is of uncertain meaning but probably does not mean ‘wine’ (DNWS11234). 63o. Naeh and Weitzmann 1994. The association of W'ifi’n with grain (133 or 17W) and fresh olive oil (133?) demonstrates the definition of ‘grape’ or ‘new wine’ because these words stand in contrast to the more aged forms, i.e., 17? ‘wine’, n70 ‘fine flour’, and my; ‘oil’. 631. Younger 1998, 20. The Hieroglyphic Luvian text reads (DEUS)BONUS-Sa (Azatiwada §Llll,3o7), supporting the rendering ‘grain’ rather than ‘plenty’ for Phoenician 17:11:} because the ‘good god‘ Kuparmas is to be identified with the Hurrian grain god Kumarbi. 632. There is no convincing evidence for the existence of a root *wrt_/_*vrt. ‘to press out, squeeze’ in Semitic. This includes the hypothetical Hebrew root W1” ‘to press out, squeeze’, allegedly attested in Mic 6215; Job 20:15 (contra Loretz 1977). Ebla warisu, equated with the Sumerogram NI.A.ENGUR of unclear meaning, does not establish the existence ofsuch a root in Semitic (contra Fronzaroli 1994. 123). 633. Rabin 1963, 137—38; 1964, 178—79; cf. J. P. Brown 1969, 168—70; Go"rg 1979a. Rabin postulates that Hieroglyphic Luvian is the source of (Viva. However, HLuv ruwarsa— has no Indo-European etymology, and a Hieroglyphic Luvian word could not have been the source of Ebla tiris'u.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

221

and in the name of Abdi-Tirs’i, a ruler of Hazor mentioned in the Amama letters (EA 22823).“34 1313- (a female African ape) HALOT 1731; DCH 8:632 (1Kg310222; 2 Chr 9:21) 6 omits 1 Kgs 10:22, translates I)? and ‘30; together as m'enxog ‘ape’ 2 Chr 9:21; El pavo, Ci .tws’, 1 one ‘peacock’ [D] Eg —> Heb Eg t3—ky.t (NK, Ptolm) GHwA" 949; WA'S' 5:110 The word "an designates an item brought along with 3.31 ‘gold’, tau-aw ‘ivory’, and m7 (an African monkey) by Solomon’s ships of Tarshish (1 Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21). As noted under the entry for Hebrew 117., the products listed in these parallel texts come from the Horn ofAfrica. This word has no Semitic cognates 0r Semitic etymology and is undoubtedly a foreign loan. However, Ellenbogen’s derivation of Hebrew am from Dravidian (FWOT 165) cannot be correct. Tamil to‘kai and Malayam to‘ka can refer to a peacock’s tail, but these words generally refer to something that hangs down, such as the tail of a peacock, a cloth, a flag, or a streamer, and not to a peacock itself (Burrow and Emeneau 1984, 311). Furthermore, no good evidence exists for contact between Palestine and East Asia in antiquity. Rather, the term ‘30; must have orig— inated from northern Africa like the terms and their products mentioned in 1 Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21. Albright plausibly derives Hebrew ’31); from Egyptian t)’-ky.t, consisting of ky.t, which denotes a species of African ape, and the feminine definite article 3.635 Hebrew-speakers borrowed tf—kyj afier the loss ofthe Egyptian feminine -t marker, considering the definite article as part of the word.636 Notably, The Tale of the Shipwrecked Sailor mentions gwf and ky (the masculine form of ky. t) together as items oftribute from Punt (ShipwreckedSailor I65), providing an excellent parallel to the association of r]? and ‘30: in I Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21. ‘73 ‘heap, ruin’ HALOT1735—36; DCH 8634—35 634. J. Healey 1999. Probably also related are the Eblaite deity Zilas‘u and the Mesopotamian deity Siras (cf. Akk siras’, siris'u, s'irisu ‘beer’), divine patrons of beer. If so, the altemation of the initial consonant further demonstrates that this word is not native to Semitic. 635. Albright 1968, 212; 1921, 144. Elsewhere in Hebrew, the Egyptian feminine definite article 13 occurs only in the personal name o‘wrlln; (probably from T;’-n.t-h..t-p;’-nsw). However, a number ofcommon nouns in Imperial Aramaic represent it, including mm (from t;’-h";.!y), immnn (from ti-mz'J-ngr), nmn (from ti—mnhwt), 1.1011 (from If-shrj), 1.37m (from ti—qu), fin (from ti-riJ), and um (from If—s'fyj). 636. On the loss of the Egyptian feminine ending -I, see J. Allen 2013, 49, 61; Gardiner 1957, 34; Junge 2005, 35. A masculine form of this noun, ky, appears beginning with the Middle Kingdom (AuW2:2567; GHwA" 948; WA'S' 5:110; DLE 2:171). However, because the feminine definite article is used, Hebrew-speakers must have borrowed the feminine form.

222

Chapter 3

(Deut 13:17 [13:16]; Josh 8:28; 11:13; Jer 30:18; 49:2) 6 a'oiicntog ‘deserted’ Deut 13:17; Josh 8:28, Kexwuattopev'og ‘that which is fortified with dirt mounds’ Josh 11:13, u"\yo OIran —> Aram IA nD’n DNWSI 1212; OIran *tzp'ti- AISN 236; [AP 431; Elam te-im—ti, te-ip-ti E W 308—9, 313 Biblical Aramaic “men; appears twice within the list of various officials whom Nebuchadnezzar summons to worship his newly set up statue (Dan 322—3). It has no apparent Semitic etymology and appears amidst a number of other Old Iranian loans, including imaging ‘satrap’, 113118, (a financial official), 13p- ‘treasurer’, and 1,3117 ‘judge’. Accordingly, ‘,-n§Jn-. is a good candidate for an Old Iranian loanword. This word’s sole attestation outside of Biblical Aramaic confirms this supposition. Imperial Aramaic nD’n occurs in a letter from Elephantine with reference to one of several Iranian officials. Similar to Dan 3:2, it follows the mention of legal officials. although the word 1‘1 is used rather than 13111 (TAD A4529). Many scholars have suggested that Biblical Aramaic men; derives from two components, *tai-, *ti- ‘to look, watch’ and *pati- ‘chie,f master’ (cf. Av paiti-z AIW 821). In this etymology, the first element *tai-, *ti- is postulated as a variant voiceless form of the more common *dai-, *di— of the same meaning (cf. OPers diand Av dai-, di-: OPGTL 191; A]W 724—26).“ However, the evidence for a variant root *tai-, *ti— in Old Iranian is slim.642 Furthermore, the Old Iranian languages do not typically form compound nouns with verbal roots as their first component. 641. AISN 236; [AP 431; Bailey 1959, 115—16. Tisdall (1911b, 216—17) also finds the presence ofthe element *pati- in ‘13-an but he implausibly den'ves the first element from an‘- ‘beyond’. Other etymologies that meet the required semantic sense include *Ia'yupa'ta'- (Henning 1937, 90; cf. F. Rosenthal 2006. 62) and *ta'yupati- (Harmatta 1965, 162—63), both of which could be interpreted as meaning ‘police chief". However, assuming that the vocalization of BA ‘09:) is correct and that the yod of [A new is a mater lectiom‘s, these options can be rejected because they assume a consonantal yod (cf. AISN 236)642. As evidence that this root could have initial 1 rather than (1', Bailey (1959, 114—16) points to Bakhtian' te' and Balochi relag, both meaning ‘eye’.

Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

225

A more plausible derivation for this Old Iranian word is found through comparison with Elamite te-ip-ti ‘lord’ (Thambyrajah 2019, 248). In Elamite texts te-zp'-ti, which has the variant form te-im-ti, frequently appears as a title for deity and is sometimes even used as a divine name (E W 308—9, 313). Aramaic-speakers could have borrowed this word directly from Elamite, but it is more likely that this word entered Aramaic via the intermediary of Old Iranian, given the presence of other Old Iranian loanwords in Dan 3:2—3 (cf. Thambyrajah 2019, 248). ah, Win ‘string’ HALOT1709; DCH 8:611—12 (Song 1:10—11) (f) Ipuycbv ‘turtledove’ Song 1:10, o'uoiwua ‘likeness, form’ Song 1:11; EB turtur ‘turtledove’ Song 1:10, murenula ‘small necklace’ Song 1:11; 6 gdwl’ ‘plaited hair, braid’; 1 does not directly represent this word [T] Sum —> Akk —> Heb; Aram Sum DUR PSD; Akk .turru, turru (OB, Mari, MA, MB, SB, NA, NB) CAD ,T 164—65; AHw 1397; JA 1111 DJBA 1199

Hebrew 1h, also spelled Win, appears with the meaning ‘string’ only in Song 1:10— 11.">43 That it refers to some kind of string with jewels is suggested by the parallelism with mg, which means ‘necklace’ (often one with jewels or some other kind of adornment) in cognate languages (cf. IA I'm, Syr herza‘, and Arab hvaraz: DNWSI 404; LS2 489; Lane 721). As noted by Rabin (1962, 1072), 'ih- is a loan from Akkadian .turru, turru ‘string, band’.644 The latter, in turn, is borrowed from Sumerian DUR of the same meaning.‘>45 In favor of this is the observation that Akkadian turru, turru occasionally occurs in expressions similar to the collocation 21.31 Win (Song 1:11), such as t_urru' s'a ,hura'lsi (VAT 16462 iv:11’) (Kocher 1957—1958, 306). Akkadian _turru, turru also appears in conjunction with necklaces, comparable to the context of Song 1:10—11 (e.g., [x] abnu’ kisa'di 8 turri‘ [SAA 7/I.85:6’]). When not written logographically as DUR, this word occurs as turru as well as turru in Akkadian texts. Sumen’an d usually appears in Akkadian as _t, and Akkadian I usually appears in Hebrew as {elf>46 Presumably, then, Hebrew-speakers borrowed this word from the form turru rather

643. BH Win and QH Tin ‘turn, sequence’ (Esth 2:12, 15; IQS vi:11; CD xivzll) represent a homonym based on a root cognate with Akk [aim ‘to tum’ (contra HALOT1709; DCH 8611—12). 644. Elsewhere, Rabin (1970, 475—76) claims that 'm comes from Skt dhzi- ‘hamess’, the Old lndic form of Proto-lndo-European *d”ur-. However, given the parallelism with Win ‘necklace’ and the existence of a potential cognate in Akkadian, this is both unnecessary and unlikely. 645. Lieberman (SLOB) does not list Akk t.urru, Iurru as a loan from Sumerian, but the CAD (T. 164) and von Soden (AHw 1397) do. The double final consonant indicates a loanword from Sumerian, as does the varying initial consonant (both I. and I). 646. ALBH 154. The same is true of Akkadian loanwords in Aramaic (AM 138).

226

Chapter 3

than rurru.647 However, Hebrew W3, which is also a loan from Sumerian DUR via Akkadian, probably borrowed the form lurru.648 arm ‘to translate’ HALOT1787; DCH 8:675 (Ezra 4:7) (5 épunveo'n) ‘to translate, interpret’; EB [ego ‘to read, recite’; G trgm [Syriac form] [N] Luv > > Heb > Aram -—> Arab; Eth JA, CPA am DJPA 591; DJBA 1231—32; DCPA 462; Syr trgm L52 1664; Arab targ'ama Lane 302; Eth targwama CDG 579—80; Luv *tarkummanm‘-, *tarkummzy'anm'- (CLuv) Biblical Hebrew arm occurs only in Ezra 4:7, where it describes Ezra’s opponents writing a letter to Artaxerxes. The letter is said to be written in Aramaic (n‘mx‘ amp) and then translated (a;-7n._7p).649 Related verbal forms meaning ‘to interpret, explain’ as well as ‘to translate’ appear in Aramaic, and no nominal form is attested in Biblical Hebrew, but Hebrew arm is probably denominal given its usage in the Pual. Indeed, many different nominal forms occur in Akkadian (targumannu, targamannu, targumyanu, turgumannu: CAD T 229—30; AHw 1329) as well as Aramaic (JA 1mm, CPA 173mm, and Syr targma'na‘, turgma'na': DJPA 578; DCPA 462; LSZ I664). The quadriliteral structure of these nouns and verbs is unusual, and there is no evidence for the root rgm meaning ‘to translate, interpret’ in Semitic.“0 The frequent distribution ofAkkadian targumannu and its various forms in peripheral dialects (Old Assyrian, Mari, Amama, Ras Shamra, and Boghazko"y) points to a foreign origin. So does their -annu ending, which is indicative ofAnatolian loanwords (cf. Dercksen 2007, 37). The donor term for all these Semitic nouns meaning ‘interpreter’ is Luvian *tarkummanm'-, *tarkummiyanni—, a nominal form of the Luvian verb tarkummi‘to report, to pass on’ attested in Cuneiform Luvian texts (CLL 213; Laroche 1959, 92; cf. Hitt tarkummai—, tarkummiya-: HHw 190). Luvian-speakers lent the noun 647, The spelling turru rather than Iurru is attested—not always consistently—in Assyn‘an Akkadian as well as peripheral dialects (including Boghazko"y, Alalakh, and Middle Babylonian Elamite). Hebrew-speakers may have borrowed this word from one of these dialects, but the data are too incomplete to be sure. 648. See above under the entry for 110. 649. Following Damp! is an additional n‘n‘m. It does not make sense to say that the letter was written in Aramaic and then translated into Aramaic, so the additional n‘mx, may be a gloss introducing the Aramaic text that follows (Ezra 428—6218). 650. Rabin 1963, 134—36; 1964, 163—64; Gelb 1968, 100—101. Akk raga'mu, for example, means ‘to prosecute, raise claim‘. Ug rgm is the only form of this Semitic verb that seems to mean ‘to speak‘. Nevertheless, many scholars continue to connect Akk targumannu and raga'mu (e.g., Levine 2009).

Nan-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

227

*tarkummanm'—, *tarkummiyanm'— to speakers of Akkadian and Northwest Semitic.651 Because nouns are more likely to be borrowed than verbs, because Hebrew mm occurs in the Pual stem, and because no related verb exists in Akkadian, the few Northwest Semitic verbal forms are almost certainly denominal. Thus, after adopting the noun'from Anatolia, Northwest Semitic—speakers subsequently created a denominal verb meaning ‘to translate, interpret’.652 Arabic Iarg'ama and Ethiopic targwama, both meaning ‘to translate’, are loans from Aramaic (Frankel 1886, 280). Din-n ‘teraphim, divinatory figurines’ HAL0T1794—96; DCH 8:679—80 (Gen 31:19, 34—35; passimw) 6 most commonly transliterates as Seputpw but sometimes translates as $6”va ‘l'mage, idol’ or yhmro'g ‘carved image’; $3 commonly idolum ‘image, idol’; 6 commonly .slm’ ‘image’; 1 frequently 13'?! ‘image’, 1n‘73 ‘image, statue’, or 1mm ‘figurines, idols’ [D] Luv —> Heb Luv tarpi- (CLuv) HHw 192; CLL 216; Laroche 1959, 93654 The word twinn- occurs only 15 times in the Hebrew Bible. In several contexts it refers to a figurine of varying size: in the Jacob cycle the teraphim are small enough for Rachel to sit on (Gen 31:19, 34—35), but in 1 Samuel this figurine is life-size (1 Sam 19:13, 16). The teraphim, moreover, have a cultic function: they are associated with Micah’s shrine and pagan ephod in the book of Judges (Judg 17:5; 18:14, 17—18, 20) and with divination in late biblical texts (Ezek 21:26; Zech 10:2). This word has no cognates in Semitic and does not seem to be based on any Semitic root.655 These observations point to a foreign loan. It probably comes from Cuneiform Luvian tarpi-, which properly means ‘strength’ but can be used with reference to a stronghold as well as a strong demon. A lexical text equates tarpiwith Akkadian s‘e'du ‘spirit, demon’ (KBo 1.44+I3.I ivz35), and at least one other context in which tarpi- occurs demonstrates that it can refer to a powerful chthonic spirit (KUB 33.66 ii:9—11). Hebrew-speakers presumably borrowed Luvian tarpi- as

651. Starke 1993; cf. Rabin 1963, 134—36; 1964, 163—64; Garcia Trabazo 2014; Singer 2006, 746; Gelb 1968. 652. West Semitic could have borrowed this word from Anatolia via Akkadian, but there is no conclusive evidence for this (AM 107). 653. Judg 17:5; 18:14, 17—18, 20; 1 Sam 15:23; 19:13, 16; 2 Kgs 23:24; Ezek 21:26 [21:21]; Hos 3:4; Zech 10:2. 654. JA u’mn, which occurs only in late literary texts, is adopted from Biblical Hebrew (Jastrow 1903, 1702). 655. Proposed Semitic den'vations, the most common of which take mun; from N91 ‘to heal’, are convincingly refuted by Hoffner (1968, 61-63). Albright correctly noted long ago (1941a) that Ug mp (KTU 1.5 i:4) does not mean ‘teraphim’.

228

Chapter 3

a monosyllabic noun *tarpi-, and when epenthesis later occurred the form became *térep, hence the plural form 00113.6“ In light of the biblical data and comparative evidence, the teraphim were probably figurines associated with deceased ancestors comparable to the ila'nu ofAkkadian sources from Nuzi and Emar, which are paired with dead spirits denoted by the terms etemmu or me‘tu. These figurines functioned most generally in divination (cf. Ezek 21:26; Zech 10:2) but more specifically played a role in necromancy (cf. 2 Kgs 23:24) (T. Lewis 1999; Toom 1990; Hess 2007, 267). WWW; (a precious stone, perhaps Spanish topaz or fool’s gold) HALOT1797—98; DCH 8:680 (Exod 28:20; 39:13; Ezek 1:16; 10:9; 28:13; Song 5:14; Dan 10:6) (5 xppoo'lteog ‘chrysolite’ Exod 28:20; 39:13, transliterates as Bapotg Ezek 1:16; Song 5:14; Dan 10:6, a”v6pa§ ‘dark red stone’ Ezek 10:9; 28:13; I? chrysolitus ‘chrysolite’ except visio maris ‘appearance of the sea’ Ezek 1:16, hyacinthus ‘hyacinth’ Song 5:14; 6 trs'ys' [Syriac form] Exod 28:20; 39:13; Ezek 1:16, 10:9, brwl’ ‘beryl’ Ezek 28:13, k’p’ dhb’ ‘stone of gold’ Song 5:14, does not directly represent this word Dan 10:6; 5! 0‘ am ‘yellow—green gem’ Exod 28:20; 39:13; Ezek 28:13, 30 tax ‘precious stone’ Ezek 1:16; Ezek 10:9, does not directly represent this word Song 5:14 [D] Tartessian —~> Heb

Biblical Hebrew WWI/1n; occurs in the description of the high priest’s breastplate (Exod 28:20; 39:13) and the adornment of the king of Tyre (Ezek 28:13). In addition, it also occurs in the context of theophanies (Ezek 1:16; 10:9; Dan 10:6) and a description of the Shulamite’s lover (Song 5:14). However, outside Hebrew this word does not occur in any of the Semitic languages.657 Furthermore, W‘an; does not look Semitic.658 Thus, a foreign origin is likely. Hebrew—speakers would have adopted the name for this precious stone from Tarshish, where it was found (Lipin’ski 2006, 791; Baker 1992b, 6:332).659 Ancient

656. Hoflher 1968, 63—68; Singer 2006, 751; contra Rouillard and Tropper 1987, 360—61; Josephson 1979, 181. Benno Landsberger was the first to compare Luv tarpi- and BH Cram. He did so in 1965 at the annual meeting of the Amen'can On’ental Society in Chicago (Hoffner 1968, 63—64). 657. SA W’W‘m and Syr tars'is" are adopted from Biblical Hebrew (DSA 966; LS2 1673). 658. Albn'ght (1941b, 21—22; 1961, 346—47) argues that W‘Wfifi; is a taqril-pattem noun from a root 1mm“ cognate with Akk ras'ar"u, which he alleges means ‘to smelt’. However, the meaning ofAkk ras'as"u instead seems to be ‘to glow, shine’ (CAD R 191; AHw 960—61). 659. Failing to recognize this, scholars have offered several less likely possibilities. Gordon (1978) compares Homer’s descn'ption of the sea as olvow ‘wine-colored’ (11. 23.316; 0d. 2.421, 5.132), propos1n'g a derivation from the supposedly Afroasiatic root *trs' ‘to be wine-red, wine-dark’. Hoenig (1979) equates W‘an; with Gk Oahoca ‘sea’, supposing an interchange of the liquids r and I. Go'rg (1981, 81—82) considers W’an- symbolic of a distant land, den'ving it from a hypothetical Eg *_dr-s's' ‘distant land of treasures’. Finally, Torr (1895, 2—3) and Barnett (1958. 226—27) derive W‘Wj-IJ from Gk m’poog, which can sometimes denote a row of oars.

Non—Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible

229

/————‘———’—'———-———'——

Tarshish, also known as Tartessos, was located in southern Iberia."60 Accordingly, Hebrew W‘mn is an adaptation of an indigenous Iberian (i.e., Tartessian) toponym. This toponym has several different fomis in ancient texts: the Phoenician Nora Stone spells it as wvrm, similar to Biblical Hebrew (KAI 46:1); one of King Esarhaddon’s inscriptions calls it Tarsisi (RINAP 4.6o.'10'—11'); Greek authors call it Tapmooo'g; and Latin writers call it Tarlesos/Turtessos and Tarresus/Tartessus.“‘ The altemation between I. s. and s' indicates different articulations of an indigenous Iberian phoneme. perhaps an interdental or palatalized sibilant, and the suffixed ending probably reflects several Iberian toponyms with a similar ending recorded in Iberian coin legends (e.g., Ar'atis, Bilbilis, Or'os’is, Otatiis’, and Segobris) (Lo'pezRuiz 2009, 262—63; Lipin’ski 2006. 792). Two possibilities for the identification of this precious stone present themselves, assuming that the ancients’ common understanding of it as a yellow-green stone is correct.662 First, W‘tzfjn; could refer to chrysolite because Spain was well known for deposits of chrysolite in antiquity (Pliny, Nat. 37.43.127).663 Second, W’Wj-n could denote iron disulphide or fool’s gold. which is well documented at Riotinto and other mines of the Iberian Pyrite Belt (Canales, Serrano and Llompart 2010, 140). Rn'vt‘jn; (a supervisor of religious matters) HAL0T1798; DCH 8:681 (Ezra 2:63; Neh 7:65, 69 [7:70]; 8:9; 10:2 [10:1]) (6 translates as the proper noun Aespouea Ezra 2:63; Neh 7:65, replaces with Nagpur ‘Nehemiah’ Neh 7:69, omits Neh 8:9; 10:2; 13 translates as the proper noun Athersatha; C5 rys” dy’sryl ‘head of Israel’ Ezra 2:63, qs'ys" dkwmr’ ‘elder priest’ Neh 7:65, 69, rys" a’kwmr’ ‘head priest’ Neh 8:9, qs“ys“ ‘elder’ Neh 10:2 [D] OIran —> Heb Biblical Hebrew Korma appears five times. The contexts make it clear that it represents a title of some sort, which is specifically applied to Nehemiah twice (Neh 8:9, 10:2) and to an unnamed individual, perhaps Nehemiah, in its other instances (Ezra 2:63; Neh 7:65, 69). In each instance, Rowan; denotes someone involved in overseeing religious matters, including judging whether potential priests could eat of holy food (Ezra 2:63; Neh 7:65), depositing resources for the temple in the treasury (Neh 7:69), declaring a day set apart for fasting before God (Neh 8:9), and 660. Day 2012; Lo’pez—Ruiz 2009; Lipin’ski 2004, 225—65; cf. Beitzel 2010. 38—42. 661. Villar 1995, 244—47. The same root found in these toponyms also appears in the names of several south Iberian peoples, including the Thersitae (e.g., Polybius, Hist. 3.33.9) and the Turdetani and Turduli (e.g., Strabo, Geogr. 3.1.6). 662: Harrell, Hoftm’eier, and Williams (2017, 25—27) instead suggest amber. However. this is already designated by the term 573220. 663. Quiring 1954, 206—8. Principal deposits of Spanish topaz include the Valle de la Serena and Me'n'da deposits in the province of Badajoz and the Lovios deposit in the province of Orense (Galan and Guinea 1984, 360—62).

230

Chapter 3

signing a covenant to follow God and his law (Neh 10:2). Hence, although ofien translated as ‘govemor’ or the like (e.g., NRSV, NJPS), NW1!)- does not have the primary sense ofa political official.664 This word has no clear Semitic etymology or cognates. Naturally, scholars have turned to Old Iranian in light of the Achaemenid setting of Ezra—Nehemiah. This is likely in light of the final ’alep of Roma, also found on a number of other Old Iranian loanwords (e.g., um, maps, amen, Karma). However, all Old Iranian etymologies suggested to date are unsatisfactory, especially because all wrongly assume that KW'm- denotes a political rather than religious official.665 Thus, the precise donor term remains unknown at present, although an Old Iranian origin remains plausible. 113-113 (an Assyrian official) HALOT1798—99; DCH 82681 (2 Kgs 18:17; Isa 20:1) (5 @apGav, QB Tharthan, 6 Tim, 1 1mn all simply transliterate this word [T] Hurr —> Akk —> Heb; Aram Akk turta‘nu, turtannu, tarta‘nu, Iartannu (MA, Emar, SB, NA, NB), tardennu, terdennu (Bogh, Nuzi, RS, NB) CAD T 225—28, 489—90; AHw 1329, 1332; OAram 1mn DNWSI 1234—35; Hurr tardenni- BGH 448

This word occurs only twice, both times with reference to an Assyrian official. In 2 Kgs 18:17 this official goes to Jerusalem as part of Sennacherib’s embassy, and in Isa 20:1 Sargon 11 sends this oflicial t0 besiege Ashdod. The only related Semitic form is Akkadian turta'nu, turtarmu, tarta'nu, tartarmu, which refers to an Assyn’an official. Scholars have long recognized that Hebrew 10-113 is a borrowing from Akkadian turta'nu, probably still considered a Fremdwort by Hebrew-speakers because it specifically refers to Assyrian officials (ALBH

664. Notably, the typical Hebrew word for governor, 71139, is used elsewhere of Nehemiah (Neh 5:14; 12:26; Hag 1:1) and Zerubbabel (Hag 1:14; 2:2, 21). 665. Perhaps the most popular loan hypothesis is that of Scheftelowitz (AAT 1:93~94), who connects Win with Olran "Iarsa- ‘to fear‘, assuming a perfect passive participle form *rrs'a'ra— meaning ‘excellency’ or the like (literally ‘feared one’). However, in Iranian texts the verb tarsa- only describes physical fear, not the awe one feels in the presence of a superior, and *rrfa'ta- should mean ‘frightened (one)’ rather than ‘feared (one)‘ (cf. Av Iars‘la- ‘frightened’). Thus, it is unlikely that 8mm comes from a hypothetical Olran ‘trs'a'ta- (Skarve 1994, 501). Second, Theis (1910, 66—67) connects mmn with NPers ra'ras ‘to cut’, assuming that Nehemiah was a ‘cut one’ or eunuch. However. there is no evidence that Nehemiah was a eunuch, and the verb ta‘ras' only occurs in modern Persian. Third, Skjaerve (1994, 501) suggests that RDW'm comes from an unattested Olran *tarsita- ‘thirsty’ (cf. Skt Initial), a title which would suit Nehemiah ‘s role as cupbearer to the Persian king. However, this does not explain why the oflicial of Ezra 2:63; Neh 7:65, 69, not a cupbearer, is also called a Win, unless this title was anachronistically applied to him. Lastly, Tisdall (1911b, 218—19)den'ves Rom-n from Olran ‘lifaiflra— ‘prefect’ (literally ‘watcher ofthe city’), assuming metathesis of the r. However, this seems unlikely on phonological grounds, and there is no evidence for the existence ofthe word *s’aifira- ‘city' in Old Iranian texts.

NoWSemiric Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible 231 M _ ___~_*\

51.52; Lipin’ski 1988, 73; FWOT 169—70). Akkadian turta'nu, in turn, appears at Nuzi as tardennu, terdennu and is a loan from Hurrian.666 Thus, Hebrew 113-113- is a transmitted loan, adopted from Hurrian by Akkadianspeakers and subsequently loaned into Biblical Hebrew. Old Aramaic mm, which occurs solely in NTA 4:15, is also a loan from Akkadian.

666. Wilhelm 1970. The derived term tardennu'ru, Ierdennu'lu, which seems to refer to the position

of the crown Prince or royal successor, occurs in Akkadian texts from Boghazko"y, RaS Sham”, and Emar (CAD T 228; AHW I329)-

Part 3: Analysis

Chapter 4 Quantitative Analysis

Chapter 3 presented 235 different loan hypotheses for Biblical Hebrew and Biblical Aramaic terms considered to be of foreign origin. Chapters 4 through 7 analyze the data for the Hebrew Bible’s 135 direct Egyptian, Greek, Hittite and Luvian, Hurrian, Old Indie, and Old Iranian loanwords with respect to four key topics: quantitative analysis, linguistic analysis, evidence for dialect of origin and date of borrowing, and contact between the inhabitants of ancient Palestine and the speakers of these languages. The rationale for examination of direct loanwords from those languages in this way is in part based on the scholarly literature, which typically treats the Hebrew Bible’s loanwords according to these categories. Loanwords borrowed directly from other languages (e.g., Philistine) are not considered in the analysis because little if anything can be said about such languages and because the present study is not concerned with interaction between ancient Palestine and the speakers of those languages. Furthermore, the Hebrew Bible’s transmitted loans, inherited loans, denominal nouns based on foreign loanwords, and culture words are not considered in the analysis in most instances because they provide no evidence for direct contact and therefore cannot be evaluated in terms of the three topics. This chapter provides a quantitative analysis of the data from chapter 3 with respect to several key items: recipient and donor language, canonical division, source critical division, typological division, part of speech, and semantic domain.

4.1 METHODOLOGY AND TERMINOLOGY All the lexeme and graphic unit1 count data used in this chapter’s analysis are drawn from BibleWorks, using the Groves-Wheeler Westminster Morphology and I. Agraphic unit groups a word with any associated inseparable parts of speech. Thus, 1mm counts as one graphic unit (one “word”) rather than four (Young, Rezetko and Ehrensvar"d 2008, 1:130).

235

236

Chapter 4

Lemma Database of the MT as preserved in Codex Leningrad.2 For the purposes of the analysis in this chapter, the MT is treated as a sample of the whole of Classical Hebrew, which is found in various other sources that are not the focus of this study (e.g., Iron Age Hebrew inscriptions, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Ben Sira, and the Samaritan Pentateuch).3 The number of loans refers to the number of lexemes that are loans in the Hebrew Bible. In corpus-linguistics terminology, this quantity (represented as a simple Arabic numeral) thus represents the number of types that occur in the Hebrew Bible. The number of loans relates to the initial impact of non-Semitic terminology on Hebrew and Aramaic. By examining the extent to which various non-Semitic languages contribute words to the lexicon, we can determine the extent to which the foreign cultures behind those non-Semitic languages influenced Hebrew- and Aramaic-speakers. Frequency refers to the number of times the lexemes that are loans in the Hebrew Bible occur. In corpus-linguistics terminology, this quantity (represented as an Arabic numeral followed by the symbol “>< 1.600% 0.386%

and

Number Frequency

of Loans

Number

All

Their

54 799X 0.640% 0.258%

Egyptian

Frequency

of Loans

of Loans Their All

8 24x 0.095% 0.008%

Greek

by Donor

135 1196>< 1.600% 0.386%

and

Language

Loans

Frequency

Hit ite/Luvian

1.255% 0.350%

97 1066>
.05: for Numbers, although 12 (fd= 5, n = 10) = 30.800, p < .05, the expected number of loans is less than five. 18. Although X2 (df= 5, n = 7) = 17.857, p < .05, the expected number of loans is less than five. 19. The van'ation in the number of loans is statistically significant when the different donor languages are compared: [2 (df= 5, n = 61) = 112.410, p < .05.

Quantitative Analysis

243

of contributors. Hittite/Luvian and Human constitute a second tier, and Greek, Old lndic, and Old Iranian constitute a third tier; both the second and third tiers have exhibited significantly less influence on the Prophets than the first tier, Egyptian. There is a good deal of overlap in the non-Semitic terminology between the Former Prophets and the Latter Prophets. 4.3.2.1 The Former Prophets The Former Prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings) contain 31 ( 141 X) of the Prophets’ 61 (304x) foreign loans (Tables 4. 5—4.6).20 Terminology belonging to the categories of Egyptian, Hittite/Luvian, Hurrian, and Old Iranian are attested. There are no Greek or Old Indic loanwords in the Former Prophets. Joshua and Judges possess 4 (9X) and 8 (21X) foreign loanwords, respectively.2| No statistically significant trends occur within either of the books. Of Samuel’s 14 (26X) foreign loans, 11 (24x) occur in I Samuel and 2 (2X) in 2 Samuel, with some terms occurring in both I and 2 Samuel.22 No statistically significant variation exists within the book of Samuel as a whole or between I Samuel and 2 Samuel.23 Nevertheless, of note is the observation that neither 1 Samuel nor 2 Samuel contains any Greek, Old Indic, or Old Iranian terminology. Kings possesses 16 (54X) loanwords. Of these, 10 (38X) occur in I Kings and 8 (16X) occur in 2 Kings, with some overlap in terminology between the two books.24 No statistically significant trends exist within the book of Kings as a whole or between 1 Kings and 2 Kings.25 Nevertheless, of note is the observation that whereas 1 Kings has no Old Iranian loans, 2 Kings possesses one, namely 1319-, which only occurs once (2 Kgs 23:11); both I and 2 Kings lack Greek and Old lndic terminology.

20. Although [7 (df= 5, n = 27) = 36.778, p < .05, the expected number of loans is less than five. 21. The variation in the number of loans is statistically insignificant when the different donor languages are compared, regardless of the expected number of loans being less than five in at least one cell: for Joshua, )(2 (df= 5, n = 4) = 8.ooo,p > .05; for Judges, 12 (df= 5, n = 8) = 8.5oo,p > .05. 22. The division ofSamuel into 1 and 2 Samuel is not original to the Jewish canon and was adopted only later. Nevertheless, it is helpful for our purposes to consider I and 2 Samuel both as individual books and as a unit. 23. Although 12 (df= 5, n = 12) = 19.000, p < .05, the expected number of loans is less than five. Comparison of the number of loans in 1 Samuel with the number of loans in 2 Samuel is statistically insignificant with respect to each donor language, regardless of the expected number of loans being less than five in at least one cell: for Egyptian, x2 (df= 1, n = 6) = 2.856, p > .05; for Hittite/Luvian, Xz (df=1,n = 1) = 0.147, p > .05; for Hurrian, X" (df= 1, n = 6) =2.856,p > .05; for Greek, Old lndic, and Old Iranian, no loans exist. 24. The division of Kings into 1 and 2 Kings is not original to the Jewish canon and was adopted only later. Nevertheless, it is helpful for our purposes to consider 1 and 2 Kings both as individual books and as a unit. 25. Although x2 (df= 5, n = 16) = 24.500, p < .05, the expected number of loans is less than five. Comparison of the number of loans in 1 Kings with the number of loans in 2 Kings is statistically insignificant with respect to each donor language, regardless of the expected number of loans being less than five in at least one cell: for Egyptian, x2 (df= I, n = 10) = 1.553, p > .05; for Hittite/Luvian, x2 (df= I, n =1) = 1.012,p > .05; for Human, x2 (df= 1, n = 6) = 0.ooo,p > .05; for Old Iranian, x2 (df= I, n =1) = 1.012,]; > .05; for Greek and Old Indic, no loans exist.

4.6 Frequency

Former Prophets Joshua Judges Samuel ISamuel 2 Samuel Kings 1Kings 2 Kings

Table

4.5

Former Prophets Joshua Judges Samuel 1Samuel 2 Samuel Kings 1Kings 2 Kings

Table

Number

4(0.352%) 8(0.683%) 12 (0.666%) 11 (0.894%) 2 (0.155%) 16 (0.873%) 10 (0.791%) 8(0.640%)

(0.156%) (0.088%) (0.210%) (0.105%) (0.178%) (0.018%) (0.210%) (0.286%) (0.129%)

All

of Loans

110>< 9X 21x 26X 24X 2X 54X 38X 16X

All

27 (0.828%)

of Loans

(0.000%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.000%)

0x 0>< o>< 0>< 0>< 0x 0>
< 1x 33X

(0.000%)

0>
< (0.012%)

11X

0x

15x

(0.021%)

3(0.092%) 0 (0.000%) 3(0.256%) 1(0.055%) 1(0.081%) 0 (0.000%) 1 (0.055%) 0 (0.000%) 1(0.080%)

Hit ite/Luvian

Hit ite/Luvian

(0.049%) (0.080%) (0.056%) (0.096%) (0.009%)

(0.065%)

I9x (0.074%) 15>< (0.113%) 4X (0.032%)

5x 8>< 14>< 13x 1x

46X

Hurrian

3(0.240%)

5(0.273%) 3(0.237%)

I(0.078%)

5(0.407%)

6(0-333%)

9(0.276%) 2 (0.176%) 3(0.256%)

Hurrian

(0.000%)

(0.000%)

(0.000%)

0x ox

0x

0X

(0.000%)

(0.000%)

(0.000%)

(0.000%)

0X (0.000%)

0>



< ox 0X 0X 1>< 0>< 1>
< 22x 18>< 13x

(0.597%) (1-147%) (0.202%) (0.126%) (0.081%) (0.163%) (0.182%) (0.089%)

(1-525%) (1.845%)

(0.154%) (0.171%) (0.076%) (1.413%) (0.100%) (0.121%)

13X 12X 1X 18>< 3X 2X

47X 1 2>

< 9>
< 0X 2x 11X 3X 8x 9>< 2x

75x (0.063%) 20X (0.102%) 6X (0.071%)

Egyptian (0.019%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.078%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.264%)

3X 1>< 1x 0x 0X 1>
< 0X 0>< 0>< 1>< 0x 0>< 0X 16x

Greek

12>< 1x 3>< 2X 0X 2>< o>< 1>< 2x 1X 0X 0>< 0>< 2X 0>< 2>< 1x 1>
< 0>< 0X 1x 1>< 0X 1>< 0>< 1>< 10X 1x 9>< 6>< 4x

(0.043%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.060%) (0.032%) (0.000%) (0.011%) (0.000%) (0.018%) (0.041%) (0.009%) (0.067%) (0.061%) (0.027%)

16X (0.014%) 0>< (0.000%) 3>< (0.036%)

Hurrian

(0.008%) (0.005%) (0.012%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.235%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.032%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.012%) (0.000%) (0.022%) (0.020%) (0.007%)

3>< 0x 0x 1x 0X 0x 0>< 0X 3x 0>< 3>< 2X 1X

Indic

9>< 1X 1x 0>< 0x

Old

(1.104%) (1.318%) (0.512%) (1-096%) (0.092%) (0.016%) (0.036%) (0.000%) (0.000%) (0.027%)

43X 5X 4>< 4X 0x 0>< 4X

0>< 0>< 0X 0x 2X 2>< 0>
.05. 64, Although 1201/: 5, n = 29) = 42.793, p < .05, the expected number of loans is less than five. 65. Compared with Isaiah and Ezekiel, the variation in the number ofEgyptian loans is statistically insignificant: for Isaiah,)(2 (df= r, n = 35) = 2.543,p > .05; for Ezekiel, [7 (fd= I, n = 31) = 3.614,p > .05. However, the relative number of Egyptian loans in DtrH is statistically significant when compared with Exodus: f (df= I, n = 41) = 21.458, p < .05. 66. Compan'son ofthe number of loans in Deuteronomy with the number of loans in Joshua—Kings is statistically insignificant with respect to each donor language, regardless of the expected number

Quantitative Analysis

259

4.4.7 Synthesis Traditionally, vocabulary has played an important role in identifying a biblical text’s source, in that differences in termonology have been attributed to different sources. However, the preceding discussion makes apparent that on the whole the Hebrew Bible’s source-critical divisions do not possess a distinctive loanword vocabulary in that the sources J, E, D, and H possess no statistically significant trends. The two exceptions are P and DtrH, which are characterized by a significant number of Egyptian loanwords (especially P). Thus, whereas vocabulary has played a significant role historically in determining the sources of the Hebrew Bible, loanwords can offer little help with respect to identifying specific sources, with the possible exception of P and DtrH.

4.5 LOANWORDS AND THE HEBREW BIBLE’S TYPOLOGICAL DIVISIONS This section surveys the types of loans found in the major typological divisions of the Hebrew Bible: Archaic Biblical Hebrew (ABH), Standard (Classical) Biblical Hebrew (SBH), and Late Biblical Hebrew (LBH) (Tables 4.13—4.14). Scholars have long recognized that the Hebrew Bible exhibits linguistic heterogeneity despite its overall homogeneity, but they have disagreed on how to explain that heterogeneity. Traditionally, many of these scholars have defined this heterogeneity in chronological terms, arguing that ABH, SBH, and LBH reflect three distinct phases in the stage of the Hebrew language: an archaic form from the late second millennium B.C.E. (ABH), a standardized or classical form from the period of the monarchy (SBH), and an Exilic and post-Exilic form influenced by Aramaic (LBH). Evidence for this three-part chronological framework involves various criteria (e.g., Kutscher 1984, 77—85; Sa’enz-Badillos 1993, 50—75, 112—60; Hurvitz 2000), including linguistic distribution (i.e., the characteristics of each period are largely limited to that period), linguistic opposition (i.e., distinct linguistic features take the place of features in other periods), extrabiblical attestation (i.e., early features are found in early extrabiblical sources such as Ugaritic whereas late features are found in late extrabiblical sources in Aramaic and Rabbinic Hebrew), and accumulation (i.e., a text may exhibit an accumulation of these features). More recently, however, some scholars have argued that the distinction between ABH, SBH, and LBH involves not primarily chronology but different scribal styles.67 These scholars dispute the traditional criteria for dating biblical texts. They contend that features alleged to belong to a particular typology do not occur of loans being less than five in at least one cell: for Egyptian, x2 (fd= i, n = 21) = 0.256, p > .05; for Hittite/Luvian, x: (df= i, n = 3) = 1.214, p > .05; for Human, X2 (fd= i, n = 11) = 0.606, p > .05; for Old 1mm, x1 (df=1, n =1) = 0.405, p > .05; for Greek and Old Indie, no loans exist. 67. E.g., Young, Rezetko, and Ehrensvar"d 2008; Davies 1999, 97-101; Cryer1994-

exclusively or even predominantly in that typology, and they likewise note that clear evidence of linguistic opposition is lacking in most cases. They also argue that we do not have an adequate corpus of extrabiblical material for comparison and that the similarities between that extrabiblical material and their connected periods are often superficial. Finally, they point out that no consensus exists regarding how much accumulation of features is necessary to classify a text typologically. The heterogeneity that the Hebrew Bible displays reflects different scribal approaches to language use that range on a spectrum from conservative (i.e., reliance on a limited core of linguistic forms) to non-conservative (i.e., an openness to a variety of linguistic forms). This disagreement is a significant one, but the difference largely lies not in accepting or rejecting the Hebrew Bible’s heterogeneity, but in explaining it. Thus, the typological divisions used here follow the traditional three-part ABH—SBH— LBH framework. I use this framework to look for trends and patterns that might exist as well as to evaluate methodology, not to argue for a particular explanation of the typology. Doing so will inform the ongoing debate regarding diachrony in Biblical Hebrew and how loanwords may or may not relate to this discussion. 4.5.] Archaic Biblical Hebrew (ABH) ABH consists of several poems found at the seams of the Pentateuch, namely Jacob’s Final Blessing (Gen 49:1b—27), the Song of the Sea (Exod I5:Ib—18), Balaam’s Oracles (Num 23:7b—Io, I8b—24; 24:3b—9, 15—24), the Song of Moses (Deut 32:1—43), and Moses’ Final Blessing (Deut 33:2—29), as well as the Song of Deborah in the book of Judges (Judg 5:2—3Ia) and the Songs of Hannah (1 Sam 2:Ib—Io) and David (2 Sam 22:2b—51) in Samuel. ABH, which makes up approx~ imately 0.784% of the Hebrew Bible, represents a notably smaller corpus than SBH and LBH. There are fewer loans in ABH than in SBH or LBH. ABH contains only 4 loans occurring a total of 5 times. Represented donor languages include Egyptian and Hurrian; there are no Greek, Hittite/Luvian, Old Indie, or Old Iram'an loans. The corpus of ABH is so small and contains so few loans overall that no statistically significant trends emerge within ABH as a whole.68 4.5.2 Standard Biblical Hebrew (SBH) SBH, also called Early Biblical Hebrew or Classical Biblical Hebrew, is the largest typological division, making up 69.262% of the Hebrew Bible. Texts traditionally belonging to SBH include the Pentateuch (excluding poems belonging to ABH), 68. The van'ation in the number of loans is statistically insignificant when the different donor languages are compared, regardless ofthe expected number of loans bem'g less than five in at least one cell: x2 (df= 5, n = 3) = 7.ooo,p > .05.

LBH

(0.687%)

(0.457%) (0.494%)

681x 264x 228x

SBH

All

of Loans

Core LBH Core

Frequency

All

of Loans

3(0.341%) 70 (1.162%) 51 (1.108%) 84 (1.883%) 74 (2.059%)

4X (0.165%) 856x (0.399%)

4.14

Number

ABH SBH

Table

SBH

ABH SBH Core LBH Core

LBH

4.13

Table

SBH,

28X

700x 564>< 46x

(0.084%)

(0.326% (0.378%) (0.086%)

3X (0.123%)

Egyptian

in ABH,

2 (0.227%) 49 (0.813%) 36 (0.782%) 18 (0.403%) 10 (0.278%)

Egyptian

in ABH,

SBH,

Core

Greek

SBH,

LBH,

ox 22X 22X

(0.000%) (0.041%) (0.066%)

0x (0.000%) 1x (0.000%)

Greek

0 (0.000%) 1(0.017%) 0 (0.000%) 6(0.134%) 6(0.167%)

SBH,

Core

LBH,

and

(0.000%) (0.032%)

52X (0.035%) 9X (0.017%) 4x (0.012%)

ox 69X

Hit ite/Luvian

LBH

Core

0 (0.000%) 6(0.100%) 4(0.087%) 4(0.090%) 2 (0.056%)

Core

Hit ite/Luvian

and

LBH

(0.043%) (0.028%) 6X (0.018%)

64x 15x

1>< (0.041%) 82x (0.038%)

Hurrian

5 (0.139%)

1(0.114%) 11 (0.183%) 10 (0.217%) 5(0.112%)

Hurrian

Indic

2X

(0.006%)

0X (0.000%) 4X (0.007%)

0X (0.000%) 1x (0.000%)

Old

2 (0.056%)

0 (0.000%) 1(0.017%) 0 (0.000%) 2 (0.045%)

Old

Indic

Iranian

0X (0.000%) 3X (0.001%)

Iranian

166>
.05; for Greek.

Quantitative Analysis

263

Accordingly, Core SBH seems to be an accurate representation of SBH with respect to its foreign terminology. 4.5.4 Late Biblical Hebrew (LBH) LBH, which makes up approximately 17.253/00 of the Hebrew Bible, consists of Third Isaiah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Qoheleth, Esther, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Chronicles. There are 84 loans in LBH occurring a total of 264 times. All donor languages contribute to LBH. By far the highest contributor to LBH is Old Iranian, which loaned 49 words occurring a total of 168 times. Making up the second tier of contributors is Egyptian, and a third tier is made up of Greek, Hittite/ Luvian, Human, and Old lndic.73 LBH contains a significantly higher number of Old Iranian loanwords than SBH but a significantly lower number of Egyptian loanwords than SBH.74 Although Greek, Old Indic, and Old Iranian loanwords appear most commonly in LBH, not all material classified as LBH contains a high number of Greek, Old Indic, or Old Iranian loans. Of the LBH books, Greek loans only exist in Daniel, Ezra—Nehemiah, and Chronicles; Esther and Chronicles are the only books to possess any Old Indic loans, and even these are few; the only books to contain a high concentration of Old Iranian terminology are Esther, Daniel, and Ezra. This demonstrates that LBH is not a homogeneous entity in terms of the lexicon, at least with respect to foreign terminology. The lack of Greek, Old Indic, and Old Iranian loanwords in some LBH material further demonstrates that a book can be late and yet not contain any Greek, Old Indic, 0r Old Iranian loans.

4.5.5 Core Late Biblical Hebrew (Core LBH) Core LBH is defined here as Esther, Ezra, Nehemiah, Daniel, and Non-Synoptic Chronicles. Because it is limited to material that most prominently exhibits the features of LBH, and because it does not contain material that might be influenced lexically by earlier texts (e.g., Synoptic Chronicles), it generally constitutes a more accurate representation of LBH. Core LBH makes up 10.709% of the Hebrew Bible, or more than half (62.073%) of LBH. There are only 80 (236x) loanwords in Core LBH.

28 (df= I, n —— I) = 0.704, p > .05; for Hittite/Luvian, xi (df= I, n = 10) = 0.044, p > .05; for Human, f (df= I, n = 21) = 0.159, p > .05; for 010 10010, x1 (d = I, n = I) = 0.764, p > .05; for 010 Iranian, X2 (4f: 1. n = 3) = 0.121, p > .05. 73. The van'ation in the number of loans is statistically significant when the different donor languages are compared: X2 (df= 5, n = 84) = 116.429, p < .05. 74- Compan‘son 0f the number of loans in LBH with the number of loans in SBH is statistically significant with respect to both Old Iranian and Egyptian: for Old Iranian, x2 (df= 1, n = 51) = 59.785, P < -°5; for Egyptian, 12(4)”: 1, n = 67) = 6.741, p < .05.

264 Chapter 4 M

Proportionally, the number of loans in Core LBH is nearly the same as in LBH; no statistically significant difl‘erence exists between LBH and Core LBH with respect to the number of loans from each donor language.75 Accordingly, Core LBH seems to be an accurate representation of LBH with respect to its foreign terminology. 4.5.6 Synthesis Traditionally, loanwords have been used to date biblical texts as early or late. The assumption has been that Egyptian, Hittite and Luvian, and Hurrian loanwords appear in biblical texts prior to the Exile whereas Greek, Old Indic, and Old Iranian loanwords only appear after the Exile; fiarthermore, the lack of loans fiom donor languages assumed to be pre-Exilic indicates a late date, whereas the lack of loans from donor languages assumed to be Exilic indicates an early date.76 Given what we know of historical contact between the ancient Israelites and non-Semitic peoples, it is logical that Egyptian, Hittite and Luvian, and Hurrian loanwords would tend to appear more frequently in earlier texts whereas Greek, Old Indic, and Old Iranian loanwords would tend to occur more frequently in later texts if the traditional understanding of the Hebrew Bible’s typology were true. However, this argumentation is subject to two critiques. First, the ancient Israelites were never obligated to adopt or reject foreign terminology at any point in time. Van'ous sociolinguistic factors—such as the need to borrow, linguistic conservatism, and a community’s relationship (whether positive or negative) to a linguistically influential group of people—determine whether or not foreign terminology is adopted, not the date of a text’s composition.77 Second, as the above data demonstrate, the distribution of loanwords in the Hebrew Bible’s typological divisions does not support a uniform distinction between SBH and LBH in terms of non-Semitic terminology. It is true that the number of Egyptian, Hittite and Luvian, and Human loans is greater in SBH than in LBH and that the number of Greek, Old Indic, and Old Iranian loanwords is greater in LBH than in SBH. However, Egyptian, Hittite and Luvian, and Hurrian loans

75. Comparison of the number of loans in LBH with the number of loans in Core LBH is statistically insignificant with respect to each donor language, regardless of whether or not the expected number of loans is less than five in at least one cell: for Egyptian, XI (df= 1, n = 28) = 0.897, p > .05; for Greek, 12 (df= 1, n = 12) = 0.141, p > .05; for Hittite/Luvian, 98 (df= 1, n = 6) = 0.309, p > .05; for Hurrian,)(2 (df= 1, n = 10) = 0.117, p > .05; for Old Indic, X2 (df= 1, n = 4) = 0.047, p > .05; for Old Iranian, xi (df= 1, n = 98) = 1.151,p > .05. 76. For example, according to Eskhult: “Whereas Akkadian and Egyptian culturally and politically could influence Hebrew from the oldest time, Persian had little possibility to do so before the sixth century B.C.E. . . . If loanwords of Persian origin are considered a strong argument when dating biblical texts, then the lack of every vestige of such loanwords ought to be considered as important evidence for a date of origin prior to the Persian era” (Eskhult 2003, 21, 23). 77. Winford 2003, 39. Cf. above §1.6.

Quantitative Analysis

265

are also attested in LBH, and several Greek, Old lndic, and Old Iranian loanwords are attested in SBH.78 Furthermore, neither SBH nor LBH possesses a uniform loanword vocabulary. SBH may be characterized overall by Egyptian, Hittite and Luvian, and Hurrian terminology, but not all SBH books possess the same relative quantities and frequencies of such vocabulary; LBH may be characterized overall by Greek, Old Indic, and Old Iranian terminology, but Greek loans are lacking in some LBH material (Esther), Old Indic loans are generally absent from most LBH material, and Old Iranian loans abound in some LBH material (Esther, Daniel, and Ezra) but are nearly absent if not completely absent in other LBH material (Nehemiah and Chronicles) (Young, Rezetko, and Ehrensva"rd 2008, 1:289, 293—95). This lack ofuniformity should be attributed to the spectrum of sociolinguistic situations in which the biblical text was produced. Thus, simply asking whether loanwords of a given type are present or absent cannot conclusively fix the date of a biblical text, especially when used as a sole criterion (Young, Rezetko, and Ehrensva"rd 2008, 12309—11). This does not mean that loanwords are completely useless when it comes to this issue, however. Two items can be useful for dating biblical texts, both of which relate to the sociolinguistic context of borrowing: the relative number of non-Semitic loans and the phonological and morphological features of foreign terminology. First, the relative number of non-Semitic loans in the Hebrew Bible can provide some evidence for the dating of biblical texts. Investigation of the relative number of loanwords in a language can lead to inferences about the circumstances of borrowing (cf. L. Campbell 2013, 72—75). Thus, if a biblical text contains a high relative number of loans from a particular donor language, then it is likely that the biblical text was significantly influenced by the culture of that donor language. This in turn suggests that the biblical text originated during a historical situation in which the ancient Israelites experienced that kind of significant influence, allowing the exploration of possible dates of composition in light of the biblical text’s selftestimony and what is known from history. Comparison with the relative number of loans from other texts—~both biblical and non-biblical—whose date of composition is known can help to narrow the possibilities: if a text contains a relative number of loans close to that of the biblical text in question, and if the date of that text’s composition is known, then it is possible that the biblical text originated under similar historical circumstances. Thus, for example, the high relative number of Old Iranian loans in the book of Daniel points to an Old Iranian setting for the

78. The presence of Egyptian, Hittite and Luvian, and Human loanwords in LBH has at least two causes. First, although Egypt exerted less influence in the ancient Near East and upon ancient Palestine in the Exilic and post-Exilic periods, there were still opportunities for contact with Egyptian-speakers during the Exile and afierward. Second, once a foreign Word entered the lexicon, it could potentially reappear at any time if sufficiently integrated. The attestation of Greek, Old Indic, and Old Iranian loanwords in SBH should not be surprising in light of the evidence for pre-Exilic contact between the inhabitants of ancient Palestine and Greek, Indie, and Iranian peoples (see above §§2.2, 5—6).

266

Chapter4

_——————————————~———————————\

book’s traditions just as the high relative number of Old Iranian loanwords in Ezra reflects an Achaemenid origin.79 Second, the phonology and morphology of the non-Semitic loans in the Hebrew Bible can shed light on the dating of biblical texts. As discussed in more detail below (chapter 6), phonological and morphological features preserved in a loanword may reflect a specific stage of the donor language’s development (cf. L. Campbell 2013, 66—68). It is therefore possible to determine when a non-Semitic term was borrowed by Hebrew- and Aramaic-speakers if that word exhibits phonological or morphological features characteristic of a particular stage of its donor language: foreign words exhibiting early phonological and morphological features must have been borrowed early, whereas foreign words exhibiting late phonological and morphological features must have been borrowed late.80 Thus, for example, several phonological and morphological features of the Egyptian loanwords in the book of Exodus point to an early origin for the Exodus tradition, and the non-Attic forms of the Greek loanwords in Dan 3 indicate that at least portions of this chapter’s narrative originated prior to the time ofAlexander the Great.81 Consideration of these two items does not conclusively prove the date of the biblical text’s composition, given the complex process by which the biblical text has come to us.82 Nevertheless, these two items can be useful forestablishing the initial time of borrowing and thereby the date of the traditions behind the biblical text.

4.6 LOANWORDS AND PARTS OF SPEECH When the loanwords are divided into parts of speech, it quickly becomes evident that the vast majority of foreign loanwords in the Hebrew Bible (95.556/o°) are nouns (Table 4.15). There are only one verb (1.1.718), three adjectives (83m, mint/Hg, mg), and two adverbs (X31178, 831506), comprising 0.741%, 2.222%, and 1.481% of the Hebrew Bible’s foreign loanwords, respectively. No other parts of speech occur as direct loans in the Hebrew Bible.83 79. Cf. above §4.3.3. 80. It is unlikely that the ancient Israelites would have used forms from an earlier stage of the donor language to give them an air of authenticity. Not only was a desire for historical ven‘similitude like this largely absent in the ancient Near East, but it is unlikely that the ancient Israelites would have been able to research the level of detail required to produce any such thing. This is especially true of the Hebrew Bible’s non-Semitic loanwords, the vast majority of which relate to particular aspects of foreign culture: such technical vocabulary presumably would be hard to come by without research, assuming that resources for such research were even available. 81. See above §§4.3.1, 3. For detailed discussion. see Noonan 2016; forthcoming. 82. Young, Rezetko, and Ehrensva‘rd 2008, 12309—11. On the one hand, a word could have been borrowed early and adopted early into the biblical tradition, yet the text containing that tradition could have been composed later; on the other hand, a word could have been borrowed late and adopted late into the biblical tradition. yet the text containing that tradition could have been composed earlier. 83. The variation in the number of loans is statistically significant when the different categon'es are compared: 1-" (df= 5, n = 135) = 611.701,}? < .05.

Quamilative Analysis

267

Hurrian

Old Indic

Iranian

6

II

4

47

000000

OONLHOO

53

Hittite/ Luvian

000000

129 0 1 3 2 o o

Greek

00000000

Egyptian

0000—0

Nouns Pronouns Verbs Adjectives Adverbs Adpositions Interjections

All

000000

Table 4.15 Distribution of Parts of Speech Old

This distribution is consistent with the observation that nouns are borrowed more frequently than other parts of speech. Cross-linguistically, nouns tend to be borrowed more ofien than verbs, which in turn tend to be borrowed more often than adjectives and adverbs. Generally speaking, this is because things and concepts are easily adopted across cultures along with the words for them, whereas verbs, adjectives, and adverbs are not. Borrowed nouns tend to represent cultural vocabulary that is more prone to borrowing, whereas borrowed adjectives and verbs tend to represent core vocabulary that is more resistant to borrowing (U. Tadmor 2009, 61—63; Matras 2009, 166—92). The few examples of borrowed adjectives and adverbs in the Hebrew Bible, which are limited to Old Iranian, undoubtedly reflect bilingual situations of intense contact with speakers of Old Iranian during the Achaemenid Empir'e that made borrowing of non-noun parts of speech more likely to occur.

4.7 LOANWORDS AND DOMAIN OF USE This section surveys the types of loans found in the Hebrew Bible according to domain of use in terms of semantic categories and categories by donor language (Table 4.16).34 4.7.1 Semantic Categories The following data summarize the semantic categories of the non-Semitic loanwords found in the Hebrew Bible. The number of items in each category is indicated first, followed by the percentage of the I35-word total.

84. At least two limitations dictate that the analysis in this section not be considered firm and absolute. First, the determination of semantic categon'es is, by its very nature, subjective. Second, not all words belong neatly to a single category; some could arguably belong to multiple categories. Cf. SWET 460—61.

& Containers

0010on ‘—

Vessels _— _ _ — — — —

& Clothing & Weaponry

(\v:

Religion Textiles Tools Topography Transportation

10

12

I—i

Egyptian

O H

Products

Non—Realia Realia

Materials

25

3 5 9 I I

All

Categories

“0‘0???”

& Plant

& Metal urgy & Organic

Terminology

of Semantic

N

Greek

Hit ite/Luvian

Hurrian

Old

lndic

Old

Iranian

ON r-A

Minerals Miscel eanous Misceleaneous Music Plants

Distribution

& Commerce & Cooking Drink,

4.16

HMOOOO

Legal—Adminstrative Measures Metals

Animals Architecture Finances Food, Furniture

Table

268

Chapter 4

OOOOOMOHMMNHOO

OOOOOOOOOONO~O~OOOO

o~ooo~oo~oooou~moo~

OOOOOOOOOOOOHMNHOOH

OOHOHHOOHOOVOOOOOOO

NNOOONOOO"MV)

MOO

Quantitative Anaylsis

Animals 3 (2.222%): rip, 71373-1, ‘D-D; Architecture 5 (3.704%): mats, 17.9.8, m, 1315, 11-19 Finances & Commerce 9 (6.667%): 11mm, ones, 13;, 111;, mg, 1313, 13-13, 133;, 11733473 Foo,d Drink, & Cooking I (0.741%): ‘jh Furniture I (0.741%): 11"‘]9N_ Legal—Administrative Technology 25 (18.519/00): 1313W03, Isj'iwg, 30,193, HUDWL‘, 1‘7" “3-, n3, 'DD'i, “Ti-U, 1137319, T113, 079, Will”, UWJ, 111.0, “37.75, iii/'19, W315, 13,179, 0,3115, 0,3175, 1.32mi), “OE, “11W, ’D'FPT‘: Measures 4 (2.963%): 1.93, m, 111;, up Metals & Metallurgy I (0.741%): n9 Minerals & Organic Materials 12 (8.889%): 71797025, oaa,1n_:-,n91, new, 0W7, um, 119.33.31.3395, WWW, WW? Miscellaneous Non-Realia 10 (7.407%).- 831178, x313, uniting, magma-1:5, 033., 1731, U, 11, no: Miscellaneous Realia 7 (5.185%): anus, '13, spam, 52731.3, Knit/jag, no, 107 Music 4 (2.963%): 71397910, min-40$, ohm, N331? Plants & Plant Products 11 (8.148%): mg, 1113, um, mm, 31;, rub, my, now, WW, nip-vi, wartimReligion 8 (5.923%): nix, tab-m, 0mg, 17.1.31, 1'}, 13, 029111;, ammuTextiles & Clothing 15 (11.111%): 19:33, 11mg, 1793-115, '13, bin-n, 717373, 0572-, W, 1‘10, 5370, 135:, thus, on, ma, wan; Tools & Weaponry 6 (4.444%): 31:13, 11'7’3, 7’59), 13;, 11;, Hwy Topography 2 (1.481%): '18:, 0315 Transportation 3 (2.222%): “79-, ’3, WW Vessels & Containers 8 (5.926%): I18, was, Win, 839, Tm, 590, nub-P, .130Overall, the three most common categories offoreign loans in the Hebrew Bible are Legal—Administrative Terminology (18.519/o°), Textiles & Clothing (II.111%), and Minerals & Organic Materials (9.630%). These numbers concern the Hebrew Bible as a whole. However, it is also useful to compare the most common categon'es with respect to the Hebrew and Aramaic portions of the Bible. In the Hebrew portions, the three most common categories are Legal—Administrative Terminology(12.371%), Minerals & Organic Materials (I2.37I%), and Textiles & Clothing (12.371%). In the Aramaic portions, on the other hand, the three most common categories are Legal—Administrative Terminology (34.211%), Miscellaneous NonRealia (18.421/00), and Finances & Commerce (13.158%).

4.7.2 Categories by Donor Language It is also instructive to investigate the most common fields with respect to the different donor languages. Certain categories tend to be associated with particular reglons. Based on the available data, one can draw general conclusions as to what

270

Chapter 4

cultural ideas and concepts were typically borrowed from different regions in the ancient Near East. Egyptian had the most influence in the realms of Minerals & Organic Materials (18.519%), Textiles & Clothing (I4.8I5%), and Plants & Plant Products (14.85%), Less significant influences are found on the categories of Legal—Administrative Terminology, particularly with respect to scribal technology (7.407%), and Vessels & Containers (9.259%). There are very few Greek loanwords in the Hebrew Bible. Greek exhibited the strongest influence in the realm of Music, with half of attested Greek loans belonging to this category (50.000%). The only other categories represented are Finances & Commerce (12.5oo%), Furniture (12.5oo%), Legal—Administrative Technology (12.5oo%), and Minerals & Organic Materials (12.5oo%). There are even fewer Hittite/Luvian loanwords in the Hebrew Bible. The categories represented are Plants & Plant Products (I6.667%), Religion (I6.667%), Textiles & Clothing (33.333/00), Tools & Weaponry (16.667%), and Vessels & Containers (I6.667/o°). Hurrian exhibited some minor influence in the realm of Tools and Weaponry (27.273%), with even less significant influences on Religion (18.182%) and Vessels & Containers (I8.I82%). Other categories represented by Hurrian include Architecture (9.091%), Legal—Administrative Terminology (9.091%), Minerals & Organic Materials (9.091%), and Textiles & Clothing (9.091%). There are very few Old Indic loanwords in the Hebrew Bible. Of the four Old lndic loanwords, two belong to the category of Miscellaneous Realia (50.ooo%), one belongs to Plants & Plant Products (25.000%), and one belongs to Textiles & Clothing (25.ooo%). Old Iranian made the most recognizable impact on the realm ofLegal—Administrative Terminology (36. 538%). Less significant influence is found on the categories of Finances & Commerce (15.385%) and Miscellaneous Non-Realia (15.385/o°).

4.7.3 Synthesis As is evident from the above data, the vast majority of foreign words in the Hebrew Bible are cultural borrowings (i.e., loans designating a new, non-native item or concept) rather than core borrowings (i.e., loans that duplicate meanings for which a native word already exists) (cf. FWOT iv). This is significant because it reflects the types of historical situations under which the Hebrew Bible’s loanwords were borrowed. As noted in chapter I, cultural borrowings arise out of necessity and can occur within either monolingual or bilingual contexts. Core borrowings, on the other hand, occur within bilingual contexts (Myers-Scotton 2002, 239—40; Haspelmath 2009, 46—49). It follows that the vast majority of loanwords in the Hebrew Bible were borrowed out of necessity. Hebrew- and Aramaic-speakers adopted foreign terminology as they encountered non-native items and concepts, both in monolingual contexts (more casual contact with foreign speakers) or bilingual contexts (more

Quantitative Analysis

271

intense contact with foreign speakers). The few examples of core borrowings, on the other hand, reflect bilingual situations of more intense contact with foreign speakers. Nearly all of these core borrowings, which include several non-nominal forms, belong to the historical circumstances of the Achaemenid Empire (firms, amt, inn-tins, meets, raj-a, my, 11, in, 5mm.“ The exceptions are rim and mm, which both constitute examples of style-switching.36

85. Other texts from the time ofthe Achaemenid Empir'e, such as the Elamite Persepolis Treasury Tablets, exhibit the borrowing of cultural as well as core vocabulary (cf. Cameron 1948, 19). 86. Notably, core borrowings usually begin life in the recipient language when bilinguals introduce them as singly-occum‘ng code-switching forms in the mixed constituents of their code-switching

(Myers-Scotton 2002, 239)-

Chapter 5 Linguistic Analysis

This chapter provides a linguistic analysis of the direct Egyptian, Greek, Hittite and Luvian, Hurrian, Old Indic, and Old Iranian loanwords from Chapter 3. First, it investigates phonological issues, including phonological correspondences, assimilation and dissimilation, and the resolution of consonant clusters in both initial and final position. Second, it analyzes the orthographic representation of vowels in the Hebrew Bible’s foreign loanwords. Finally, it summarizes how various morphological aspects of non-Semitic terminology were treated by Hebrewand Aramaic-speakers.

5.1 PHONOLOGY 5.1.1 Phonological Correspondences This section analyzes the phonological correspondences between consonantal inventories of the primary donor languages encountered in this study and the consonantal inventories of Biblical Hebrew and Biblical Aramaic. Each subsection contains a chart summarizing the consonantal correspondences and detailed discussion organized primarily by manner of articulation. 5.1.1.1 Egyptian Consonant correspondences are displayed in Table 5.1. 5.1.1.1.1 Stops The phonological oppositions between the pairs of Egyptian stops are not well understood. Egyptologists offer several different theories: voiceless vs. voiced, non-emphatic vs. emphatic, and aspirate vs. non-aspirate (Peust 1999, 80—84). It is likely that all these features come into play, because no single feature adequately explains all the data. This unusual combination of features—one of which is foreign to the Semitic languages—cautions against ruling out loan hypotheses on the 273

Chapter 5

274

Table 5.1 Consonant Correspondences with Egyptian Egyptian

Attestation

Hebrew/Aramaic

) )

wk:

v

‘

‘

v

1‘7 nil-av, my, nine ans “a 0‘

" me, ms, was, 103, m, we, D‘JJU, nvav, 3?, mam, nan; b mm 1.9x, 1:55, na, .1915 1191, 19:, mo, '17. “ mane, mg}, aw, Wm 511-05, 1.9: a was, ma, 10:, um, rm, Kw, “ms 70:, mm; b 1.0708, —l c

\I‘ '7

J '-

0W? I 1.133, in}, new, way, v-m, 10;, .1731, was, .1975, mm b "7;, nub-p ° 1‘7

.‘I n,'vb n

0:13, 0‘31”, 1‘.” a new, ~1n,nU?P, win-n, mun b was nx, aria, mm, in, ma, nm, n5

0',lIJ",WC

' no; b mutt; ° Wm, wan,0W7,1Waw,nw, WW, WW ‘ up, nn_7‘p " mg, mg; ‘ T133, ‘79-. nan, not}, “30' ” WW HP. T10? ' my, man, nn_:, nub-p, nob, nub, ~33 " baa, mm ° 18: ' '11:: b n93, 113;, wan a one, mm, Kw, new) b mun"3bnd°nV-3Dd13°n;fl

are

Da’Pb

‘00

W Pa,lb

P n=,u",x°

'kfie"

We:

mun-wra—

‘l

=§\”u

u

U

5

c-g

1

o ‘, n b to ', n b x‘,t",n°,1d,n°

basis of preconceived consonant correspondences and invites multiple representations of the Egyptian consonants in Semitic. Egyptian contains two bilabial stops, b (4—) and p (0). Their distinctive feature seems to be largely limited to voice, and voiced b and voiceless p were probably pronounced [b] and [ph], respectively (J. Allen 2013, 43; Loprieno 1995, 33—34; Peust 1999, 133—35). Egyptian b and p are commonly represented as bet and pe in the Hebrew Bible. Only in the case of Hebrew and Aramaic 0010 does Egyptian b appear as mem, most likely because of the accompanying u-class vowel. The features distinguishing Egyptian I (a) and d (3‘) are unclear but seem to be voice, emphasis, and aspiration. Egyptian t was probably a voiceless dental, sometimes aspirated, that was perhaps pronounced [ND]; Egyptian d was probably a voiced emphatic pronounced [d’]. The opposition between these two consonants was progressively neutralized in Later Egyptian}

I. J- Allen 2013, 4H0; Lopn‘eno 1995, 32—34, 38; Junge 2005, 37,- cr. SWET 427.

Linguistic Analvsis

275

Egyptian I regularly appears as raw in the present corpus but twice appears as re; (0.33, Dino). While this is unusual, Semitic-speakers cannot be expected to consistently represent a foreign phoneme that has no exact correspondence in their languages. The usage of ’alep for Egyptian t in the case of 183 represents a secondary glottal stop that arose from etymological t in accordance with its regular lenition in Later Egyptian (cf. Eg itrw, written as [M beginning with the Eighteenth Dynasty).2 Egyptian d most ofien appears as .tet in the present corpus. The exception is man, in which raw represents Egyptian d. Hebrew- and Aramaic-speakers would normally perceive Egyptian d as emphatic because voicing is phonemically irrelevant with Semitic emphatics, hence its common representation as jet, The use of raw for Egyptian d could reflect the neutralization between t and d that took place in Later Egyptian, but it could also result from the lack of a one-to-one correspondence between Egyptian d and Semitic. The features distinguishing Egyptian g (E), k (0), and q (A) are equally unclear but also seem to be voice, emphasis, and aspiration. Egyptian k was probably a voiceless velar, sometimes aspirated, that was pronounced [km]; Egyptian g was probably an emphatic velar pronounced [k’]; the Egyptian uvular q was probably an emphatic consonant pronounced [q’]. As with Egyptian t and d, in Later Egyptian the opposition between Egyptian k and g was progressively neutralized and the opposition between the Egyptian velars k and g and the Egyptian uvular q was also gradually lost.3 Egyptian g appears only twice in the present corpus, both times as qop (qi? and my). This naturally reflects the emphatic nature of Egyptian g. Egyptian k occurs as kap with the exception of 1129'9, in which it appears as qop. The reason for this exception is uncertain. Hebrew-speakers may have interpreted the aspiration as emphasis, but it could also result from the lack of a one-to-one correspondence between Egyptian k and Semitic. Egyptian q most commonly appears as qop, reflecting the emphatic nature of Egyptian q. However, in the case of was, and probably also am, it is represented as gimel.4 The use of gimel for Egyptian q could reflect the neutralization of the opposition between the Egyptian velars and uvulars that occurred in Later Egyptian, but it could also result from the lack ofa one-to-one correspondence between Egyptian q and Semitic.5

2. J. Allen 2013, 51; Loprieno 1995, 38; Peust 1999, 152; Junge 2005, 35. The secondary glottal stop den’ved from t is most ofien not wn'tten; when it is, it is frequently written as 1' and only rarely appears as 3. 3. J. Allen 2013, 46—48; Loprieno 1995, 32—34, 38; Peust 1999, 107—14; Junge 2005, 36—37; cf. SWET 428. 4. The case of up; is not entirely certain because it could come from either Eg qu or gmy. Incidentally, the spelling of this Egyptian term with both q and g demonstrates the neutralization between the Egyptian velars and uvulars. 5. It is also conceivable that in some environments Hebrew— and Aramaic-speakers heard the voicm-g 0f Eg q more than its emphatic nature, hence its representation as gimel (cf. SWET 428).

276

Chapter 5

5.1.1.1.2 Afifricates Egyptian contains two palatal affricates, _t (=) and _d (5"). Egyptian _t is probably voiceless, perhaps with aspiration ([ c“””]), and Egyptian d_ is probably emphatic ([éll" Egyptian _t appears as samek only in the case of I'11:), borrowed from Egyptian _rwfiz, _rwf. This correspondence regularly occurs in loans from Northwest Semitic to Egyptian during the New Kingdom, and Amama Akkadian represents Egyptian _t as s. Thus, there is no reason to question the equivalence of Hebrew samek and Egyptian _t in this instance. Many Semitists think that Hebrew samek was pronounced [g], a natural choice for representing Egyptian _t.7 Egyptian d_ has two different representations in the Hebrew Bible. It appears during the second millennium B.C.E. as zayin (mt).8 Later, during the first millennium, it appears as Sade (‘3); this is the typical correspondence found elsewhere in Biblical Hebrew proper names as well as in first-millennium Phoenician and Aramaic inscriptions (EPNL 317). During the second millennium, Egyptian t_ merged with t and d_ merged with d through a process ofdepalatalization called palatal fronting. The ancient Egyptians sometimes expressed the new pronunciation in writing, but often they spelled the word with _a' and _t even though the pronunciation of these phonemes had changed.9 Several loanwords in the present corpus reflect palatal fronting: Hebrew-speakers borrowed neg, In}, and Wm after Egyptian _t had become t and borrowed 13-Jun-19, and .1313 after Egyptian d_ had become d. 5.1.1.1.3 Fricatives The voiceless bilabial fricative f (ex), pronounced [t] (J. Allen 2013, 43—44; Loprieno 1995, 33; Peust 1999, 133), occurs in the present corpus as pe, the natural choice for rendering this Egyptian consonant that has no exact correspondence in Northwest Semitic. The voiceless glottal h (m), pronounced [h] (J. Allen 2013, 44; Loprien01995, 33; Peust 1999, 98), appears in the present corpus as he. Egyptian ‘ (.11), a voiced pharyngeal pronounced [‘1‘] (J. Allen 2013, 42—43; Loprieno 1995, 33; Peust 1999, 99—106), corresponds to ‘ayin. The only possible exception occurs in the case of ms, borrowed from Egyptian ‘h_. One can easily explain this via dissimilation. It is likely that the dissimilation process took place in Hebrew, but dissimilation 0f ‘ to i does take place in Egyptian and it is possible that the dissimilation process occurred within Egyptian (Osing 1980a). 6. J. Allen 2013, 48—49; Loprieno 1995, 33—34. Traditionally, Egyptologists have transliterated the hieroglyph u as _t and the hieroglyph ‘1 as d_. However, this system can be misleading, especially for those familiar with that used for the Semitic languages. Many modern Egyptologists therefore prefer to transliterate as c' and “1 as 7. Cf. SWET4o7—8; Rainey 2001, 491; contra EPNL 252. On the articulation of Heb samek, 5ee Bomhard 1988, 123—25. 8. Early borrowing during the second millennium is indicated by the preservation of the Egyptian feminine ending -t in n1}. 9. J. Allen 2013, 48—50; Loprieno 1995, 38; Peust 1999, 123—25; Junge 2005, 36.

Linguistic Analysis

277

Egyptian h. (E), a voiceless pharyngeal pronounced [h_] (J. Allen 2013, 44; Lopn'eno 1995, 33; Peust I999, 98), nearly always corresponds to het in the present corpus. The only exception is was, which renders Egyptian ,h as ‘ayin. The only difference between Egyptian .h and Hebrew ‘ayin is one of voice, and Egyptian ‘ sometimes represents Northwest Semitic h_ in New Kingdom loans into Egyptian (Hoch 1994, 413; cf. Peust 1999, 98, 103—5). Hence, this atypical correspondence presents no problems. The Egyptian voiceless uvularvh (e), pronounced [x] (J. Allen 2013, 44; Loprieno 1995,33; Peust 1999, 115—17), appears solely as ,het in the present corpus. There are no attestations of Egyptian h_ (be), a voiceless palatal pronounced [c] (J. Allen 2013, 44—45; Loprieno 1995, 33; Peust 1999, 115—17), in the present corpus.10 The Egyptian sibilant s is the phoneme represented by the hieroglyphs _,,_ (commonly transliterated s or z) and Il (commonly transliterated s or s'), which became allographs by the Middle Kingdom. Both represent the sound [5].“ In the present corpus, the Egyptian sibilant s appears in several different ways. Egyptians corresponds once to samek in the case of not? and once to s’in in the case of WW.” Both of these correspondences are expected given the pronunciation of Egyptian s as well as Hebrew samek and s'in. However, Egyptian s corresponds to s'z'n in the cases of ‘sz and Wm. This second correspondence is a longtime crux. It is true that s is the most common representation of Egyptian s in Hebrew as well as Northwest Semitic in general, but the sibilants are notoriously difficult and one cannot discount the possibility of dialectal variation (cf. Judg 1224—6). Even if one unnecessarily disregards proper names such as that of Moses (W75), Amama Akkadian renders Egyptians as s' more frequently than it does as s (cf. EPNL 310). This evidence demonstrates that Egyptians could be represented as s’ in Northwest Semitic, at least during the second millennium B.C.E. Thus, there is no reason to reject a priori the correspondence between Egyptians and Hebrew s'in.13 Egyptian s" (.=), probably pronounced as the alveo-palatal [I],14 consistently appears as sin in the present corpus. 5.1.1.1.4 Nasals and Liquids Egyptian m (k) represents a labial consonant pronounced [m] (J. Allen 2013, 43; Lopn'eno 1995, 33). It most ofien occurs in the present corpus as mem. However, 10. However, evidence from Phoenician and Aramaic not considered in the corpus indicates that Egh_ could be represented as k or ,h in Northwest Semitic (EPNL 316; Peust 1999, 117). II. J. Allen 2013, 46; Loprieno 1995, 33—34; Peust 1999, 125—26. It is conceivable that, prior to the merging of Eg s and z, s was palatalized as [51] and z was an ejective [s’]. 12. The use of Heb zayin for Eg s in the case of D9} should perhaps be explained via word-initial voicing and does not indicate a direct phonological correspondence between Heb zayin and Eg s. I3. Cf. Quack 2000, contra EPNL 266—67. Muchiki never offers any concrete proof that Heb s'in Cannot represent Eg s because he rules out any potential loans demonstrating this correspondence by claiming that Heb s'in cannot represent Eg s. This, of course, is circular.

I4. J. Allen 2013, 45; Loprieno 1995, 33. Eg s' arose from palatalization of the consonant _h (Peust I999, 115—17).

278

Chapter 5

in the cases of not; and 1x9: Egyptian m appears as nun. These examples could be attributed to the fact that in certain environments (e.g., before labials), the articulation of m and n was progressively neutralized in Later Egyptian (Junge 2005, 37). Egyptian n (__) can represent two different sounds in Egyptian: the nasal [n] and the lateral [l] (J. Allen 2013, 39; Loprieno 1995, 33). Both sounds are reflected in the Hebrew Bible. Most often, Egyptian n occurs as nun. In the two cases where Egyptian n represents the lateral [1], however, Egyptian n occurs as lamed (mints, 011/7). The consonant r (O) can also represent two different sounds in Egyptian: the vibrant [r], pronounced as an apical tapped r, and the lateral [l]. The vibrant [r] eventually lost its tapped pronunciation no later than the beginning of the first millennium 13.0.15. (J. Allen 2013,40; Loprieno 1995, 33; Peust 1999, 127—29). Given the variety of sounds to which Egyptian r can correspond, it is not surprising that it has several different representations in the Hebrew Bible. It most commonly occurs as res” in borrowings afier r had largely lost its tapped pronunciation. Hebrew 17, the only loanword that clearly preserves the original pronunciation of Egyptian r, must be an early borrowing, most likely during the Middle Kingdom (cf. Schneider 1999, 155—58; Quack 1992, 76—77). Hebrew 2‘7;- and nub-p, which use Iamed for Egyptian r, represent this consonant’s lateral pronunciation. The Egyptian vibrant 3 (k), originally pronounced as the uvular trill [R], progressively came to acquire the realization of a glottal stop [?], a process that was probably complete by the New Kingdom. It was commonly elided in both medial and final positions, although its omission is not always represented in writing. By the time of Coptic, it had dropped out entirely (J. Allen 2013, 40—42; Lopn'eno 1995, 33, 38; Peust 1999, 127—29, 142-51). Egyptian f is never represented in Biblical Hebrew, in some cases because it had elided in Egyptian (13-, 1x93, 119, ’31).” 5.1.1.1.5 Semi-Vowels The Egyptian glides w (h or 9) and y ([11] or u) are commonly dropped at the end of a syllable, particularly in Later Egyptian.16 Final Egyptian w does not appear in the present corpus except in the case of mg, borrowed from Egyptian i’h'w when the Egyptian masculine plural ending -w, -aw was still pronounced (cf. EPNL 238; Lambdin 1953b, 146). In all other cases, Egyptian w drops out in final position (191:8, 371:5, m, 183).” Egyptian y clearly appears as yod only once (1‘7) and drops out in final position elsewhere (new, 71h, 11127;, mo, ‘3, :9, watt}, $13)}8 15. The initial ’alep of 1113 (from Eg fhvw) probably represents an initial vowel rather than corresponding to Eg 1’, although it could represent a direct correspondence. Eg 3 may appear as ’alep in 801. but most likely in this case ’alep marks a final vowel. The use of he for Eg 3 in 0'33“) (3 hybn'd of BH W and Eg i’bw) does not represent phonological correspondence and instead reflects the compound nature of this word. 16. J. Allen 2013, 37—38, 43; Loprieno 1995, 33, 38; Peust 1999, 49—50, 142—51;Junge 2005, 33. 17. Omission of final w is likely in the case of man; but cannot be proven because this word only appears in the plural form tau-aw. 18. BH I??? may provide an additional example of Eg y appearing as yod, but it is not clear that the second yod represents Eg y. Omission of final y is likely in the case of Dunn, but cannot be proven because this word only appears in the plural form.

Linguistic Anaylsis

279

The Egyptian glide 1’ (Q) often has no sound of its own, simply indicating that a syllable begins or ends with a vowel in certain positions. It was lost in many environments by the first millennium 13,013., as evidence from Coptic demonstrates. However, in some instances 1' can represent a semivowel.l9 The only clear representation of Egyptian 1’ is 1R3, which uses Hebrew yod for Egyptian 1', indicating a semivowel pronunciation for the latter, at least in this instance.20 Final Egyptian 1' is dropped in several instances (11138, "113;, 110?),21 reflecting its lenition by the end of the New Kingdom. 5.1.1.2 Greek Consonant correspondences are displayed in Table 5.2. 5.1.1.2.1 Stops The ancient Greek consonantal inventory contains both unaspirated and aspirated stops. The unaspirated stops include the voiceless stops II ([p]), t ([t]), and K ([k]) and the voiced stops B ([b]), 8 ([d]), and y ([g]) (Petrounias 2007, 561—62; Woodard 2008, 16; W. S. Allen 1987, 14—17, 29—32). Of the unaspirated stops, the bilabial [3 occurs as bet; the bilabial 1: does not occur; the dental 1’ appears as both raw and get, and the dental 8 occurs as dalet; lastly, the velar K appears as both kap and qop,‘ 7 does not appear in the present corpus. Each ofthe Greek aspirated stops is voiceless rather than voiced.22 The bilabial (p, pronounced [ph], occurs as pe in medial position but is preceded by ’alep in initial position. The dental 6, pronounced [th], occurs as both _te_t and tow. Lastly, the velar x, pronounced [kh], is represented as kap. 5.1.1.2.2 Fricatives The Greek alveolar fricative 6 represents the two allophones [s] and [z] (Petrounias 2007, 562—63; Woodard 2008, 16; W. S. Allen 1987, 45—46). It appears as both samek and s'in in the Hebrew Bible. 5.1.1.2.3 Nasals and Liquids Greek contains two nasals, p. ([m]) and v ([n]) (Petrounias 2007, 563; Woodard 2008, 16; W. S. Allen 1987, 33). They appear in the Hebrew Bible as mem and nun,

19. J. Allen 2013, 37-38; Loprieno 1995, 33—35; Peust 1999, 49—50, 142—51. By the time of the New Kingdom, 1' had merged with Eg ;’ and also took on the value of a glottal stop in certain positions. 20. Several Egyptian loanwords beginning with ’alep could potentially also represent Eg 1': max (from *I'b-r.k), 111m (from idmi), and .193 (from 1p'.t). However, their initial ’alep more probably represents an initial vowel. 21. Eg 1' also seems to have dropped in the case of Kw, assuming the ’alep could simply be a vowel marker. The matter is further complicated by the fact that the Egyptian donor term, dm’.t, is a feminine noun with the feminine ending -I. 22. Although not fn'catives as in Modern Greek, q), 9, and x did eventually transition from aspirated Plosives to fricatives. The clearest evidence for the beginnings of this transition appears dun'ng the first century C.E. See Petrounias 2007, 562; W. S. Allen 1987, 18—26.

Chapter 5

280

Table 5.2 Consonant Correspondences with Greek Greek

Attestation

Hebrew/Aramaic 3

saw

Ofl-"7§-\- le's'em, and *nufka/*nufki > no'lfek). Similarly, the remaining Hebrew terms borrowed from Egyptian feminine nouns were borrowed after the loss of Egyptian feminine -t, but it is impossible to know if they were borrowed before or after the -a shifted to —i.‘7

6.1.5 Palatal Fronting As noted above (§5.1.1.1.2), during the second millennium B.C.E. t_ merged with t and _d merged with d through a process of depalatalization called palatal fronting. The ancient Egyptians sometimes expressed the new pronunciation in writing, but ofien they spelled the word with characters for d_ and t_ even though the pronunciation of these phonemes had changed.18 Hebrew mil. lacks any evidence of palatal fronting, indicating that it was borrowed during the earlier part of the second millennium B.C.E. because this word later underwent palatal fronting in Egyptian (cf. Copt tore). On the other hand, lack of evidence for palatal fronting does not always require an early loan because this phenomenon did not occur in all environments. Palatal fronting clearly did not occur in the cases of mo and ‘3 (cf. Copt cvooufand cm, respectively). Several loanwords in the present corpus reflect palatal fronting with respect to both _t (n91, 1m, W_n_n~) and _d (1-3, map, .1313) and must have been borrowed during the latter part of the second millennium B.C.E. or subsequently. 6.1.6 Reborrowings Just as the inhabitants of ancient Palestine borrowed many words from Egypt, so Egypt borrowed a number of Northwest Semitic words, especially during the New Kingdom. Occasionally, Northwest Semitic-speaking peoples borrowed a word from Egyptian and then subsequently lent it back into Egyptian in a slightly different form. In cases like these, the terminus ante quem of when a word entered Northwest Semitic can be determined by noting the reborrowed form’s earliest attestation in Egyptian. 17. BH 1‘3, 11h, and ’33- were probably also borrowed afier the loss of -t, but representation of the Egyptian feminine ending seems to be overruled by preservation of the Egyptian noun’s final vowel, and it is difficult to know whether they were borrowed pn'or to or after ca. 700 13.013. 18. J. Allen 2013, 48—50; Loprieno 1995, 38; Peust 1999, 123-25; Junge 2005, 36.

306 Chapter __—____________.__h\6

There are only two words in this category, both of which must have been borrowed into Hebrew prior to ca. 1300 B.C.E. because they are first attested in Egyp. tian texts dating to the Nineteenth Dynasty: firm, a loan from Egyptian dbr bor. rowed back from Northwest Semitic as tvhr, and 110.79, a loan from Egyptian qth borrowed back from Northwest Semitic as krh,t.

6.1.7 Attestation of Related Forms in Ugaritic Ifan Egyptian loanword in the Hebrew Bible has a related form in Ugaritic, a second millennium B.C.E. Northwest Semitic language, it is likely—although far from proven—that the loanword was also adopted by Hebrew- or Aramaic-speakers during the second millennium. There are three Egyptian loanwords that occur in both the Hebrew Bible and in Ugaritic texts that were probably borrowed dun'ng the second millennium: man, (of. Ug hbn), nub-p (cf. Ug qlhut), and Natl; (cf. Ugt_kt)_'9 A second millennium B.C.E. borrowing can be confirmed for the first two of these via other criteria already discussed: man, preserves Egyptian stressed u before it shifted to e in Later Egyptian (cf. §6.I.3), and tin-‘79 was reborrowed into Egyptian no later than the Nineteenth Dynasty (cf. §6.I.6).

6.1.8 Synthesis The date of borrowing cannot be determined for all the Egyptian loanwords in the Hebrew Bible. Nevertheless, based on the above data it is possible to roughly approximate the date of borrowing for some of them. Only a few Egyptian loans must have been borrowed prior to ca. 1300 B.C.E. Some ofthese exhibit phonology and morphology characteristic of Egyptian pn'or to that date (mg, 1’73, n11, mtg-v, nub-p), and some are attested in Ugaritic or as reborrowings in Nineteenth-Dynasty Egyptian texts (man, n’DW', x1013). A number of Egyptian loans exhibit evidence ofphonological and morphological changes that took place during the latter part of the New Kingdom, ca. 1300 B.C.E..’ some of these preserve phonological and morphological characteristics lost by the end of Late Egyptian ca. 700 B.C.E. and therefore must have been borrowed sometime between ca. 1300 and 700 (fining, .193, 10;, rip, new, nan-)3" whereas the rest could have been borrowed any time after ca. I300 (03:18, 11-08., 13, can, V‘:3,1’U, n91, eta-1n [BH], objn [BA], on, 839, 1R7, Luv/17, no}, mo, n9, up, no.9, urn-mg], 11mm). Although the date of borrowing for the latter cannot be determined more precisely on phonological and morphological grounds, there is a good chance that some of

I9. Eg hnw, the source of BH 1m, was also lent to Amarna Akkadian as him. This suggests that Eg Imw could have entered Hebrew as early as the second millennium u.c.rz, On the other hand. Akk him only occurs in EA 14, a letter from Egypt to Babylon, so there is no direct evidence of Eg hmr in Northwest Semitic during the second millennium B.C.l£. 20. BH can also preserves phonological and morphological characteristics lost by the end of Late Egyptian ca. 700 B.C.F.., but there is no evidence that it was borrowed after ca. 1300.

Evidence for Dialect ofOrigin and Date ofBorrowing

307

them entered Hebrew and Aramaic during the latter part of the New Kingdom because that is when most of their donor terms are attested in Egyptian texts.” The remaining Egyptian loanwords in the Hebrew Bible cannot be securely dated to any particular time period, at least on phonological or morphological grounds ('l-‘llh', HS, 102-. 103.. ‘7}. ‘WD, DUI, NW, 78$. 3319.5, 7'57"]5, '3, ll’P’P, WW}, W711). ‘30-). Once again. however, it is likely that some of them were borrowed during the latter part of the New Kingdom given that many of their donor terms are attested in New Kingdom texts.

6.2 GREEK Some indications of the time of borrowing can be gleaned from what is known of the Greek donor terms. With the exception of Greek deui, attested in Linear B as ka-ru-ke, there is no textual evidence that the Greek donor terms existed during the second millennium B.C.E., although they may very well have and their absence in Linear B texts is not evidence that they did not. Only Greek Spaxun', the source of ting-‘13, must have been borrowed during the first millennium B.C.E. because coinage was not invented until then.22 Clear dialectal markers are not available for all the Greek loanwords in the Hebrew Bible. Nevertheless, evidence exists that at least four of them—each found in Daniel 3, which is written in Biblical Aramaic—came from a dialect other than Attic: ' The vocalization of Biblical Aramaic mp- indicates that it is a loan from non-Attic Greek devé, attested in Aeolic and Doric, rather than Attic-Ionic icfipué. Original (1' (cf. LinB ka—ru—ke) is preserved in all Greek dialects with the exception of Attic—Ionic, in which it becomes 1] (Buck 1955, 21 [§8]; Thumb, Kieckers and Scherer 1932—1959, 2196—97 [§285]; Lejeune 1972, 234—35 [§249])° Similarly, the final ’alep of Biblical Aramaic 893W points to a non-Attic on'gin because original final -a' marking the feminine nominative singular became -n in Attic-Ionic but was preserved in other Greek dialects.23 ° Biblical Aramaic 1"m-Jo‘a uses a nun rather than lamed, indicating a borrowing from an unattested non-Attic form *tyavm'ptov rather than Attic wakm'piov. 21. Many of these Egyptian loans occur in the book of Exodus, including those that exhibit phonological and morphological features characteristic of earlier stages of Egyptian. This points to an early on'gin for the Exodus tradition. See Noonan 2016. 22. LinB do-ka-ma may mean ‘handle’ and den've from Gk Spa'ooopai ‘to grasp” just as Gk (Spawn PFObably does (Aura Jorro and Adrados 1985-1993, 1:188; Shelmerdine and Bennet 1995, 131—32). However, Gk Spawn does not occur with reference to a specific weight or coin until the seventh—sixth centun'es B.C.E. 23. C. D. Buck 1955, 21, 84 (§§8, 104); Thumb, Kieckers and Scherer1932—1959, 2:196—197(§285); Lelieune 1972, 234—35 (§249). The exception is in Attic, which preserves -a' after a, l, and p; Ionic uses -n regardless.

Chapter 6 ““

°

In some non-Attic dialects, including Arcadian and Doric, the consonant cluster kt becomes v1.24 Biblical Aramaic ohnyp represents a final -5 (§72); Lcjcune 1972, 152 (§151). Although [and n are sometimes confused in some ol‘the world‘s languages, there is no evidence that (lk l» was pronounced as [11] (cf. Petrounias 2007. 563 (14; Woodard 2008, 16; W. S. Allen 1987, 33, 40). It is unlikely that Aramaic-Speakers would have represented (ik It as mm. especially because they do not do so in any other loanwords from Greek. 25. (iiven the non-Attic origin of these three Greek loanwords. it would not be surprising ifthe remaining (ireek loanword in Dan 3, memo. also came from a non-Attic dialect. This, unfortunately, cannot be provcn because it does not exhibit any phonological te‘aturcs characteristic of a particular (ireek dialect. 20. (‘l‘. Ilagedorn 2005; Niemcicr 2001; Waldhaum 1997; Yamauchi 1981, 1970. 27. For detailed discussion. see Noonan It‘irthcoming. (‘II Kutschcr 1971, 401—2; Coxon 1973-1974‘ 37 3X-

Evidence for Dialect ofOrigin and Date ofBorrowing

309

documentation of the Neo-Hittite states, and therefore these loans probably date to the second millennium. Hebrew T49 does not come directly from Hittite and was borrowed during the first millennium B.C.E. via Akkadian (in turn borrowed from Hittite, presumably during the second millennium). There are also several loanwords from Luvian in the present corpus (7’57, D‘Q'an‘). The Luvian donor terms for these words are found in Cuneiform Luvian and therefore could have been borrowed as early as the second millennium B.C.E., although they could also have been borrowed later because Luvian continued to be spoken into the first millennium 13,013.28 It is unclear whether vat-18 comes from Hittite or Luvian because possible donor terms occur in both languages. Nevertheless, it is likely that this word entered Hebrew during the second millennium in light of the attestation ofrelated Semitic forms from that period (Akk argamannu and Ug a’rgmn, irgmn).

6.4 HURRIAN A number of Human loanwords are attested in the present corpus (Di-:3, nix, new; 37:13, pm, 1133-, nap-3‘, on, 1’70, 590, 11"1W).All have counterparts in other ancient Near Eastern languages (e.g., Akkadian and Ugan'tic) during the second millennium B.C.E. Moreover, the Hurrian language fell out of use by the end of that period. Accordingly, the Hebrew Bible’s Hum'an loanwords were undoubtedly borrowed then. Hebrew 13-8., borrowed from Hurrian via Aramaic, can be compared with a number of other ancient Near Eastern terms from the second millennium B.C.E. (e. g., Akk agannu, Ug a’gn, Eg z’kn, and Hitt aganni-) and probably originated during the same time, although it is conceivable that it was borrowed from Aramaic during the first millennium B.C.E. Hebrew 13113, on the other hand, was borrowed from Akkadian (in turn borrowed from Hurrian, presumably during the second millennium) during the first millennium B.C.E. because it specifically refers to an Assyrian official in the Hebrew Bible.

6.5 OLD INDIC Very few Old Indie loanwords are attested in the Hebrew Bible. Although little evidence exists for their dialectal classification, they fall into two basic categories related to their time of borrowing. 28. Luv *lappit— is not presently attested in extant texts, but related verbs and nouns exist in Hittite and possibly also in Cuneiform Luvian. Hence, it is plausible that *lappit- existed already during the second millennium 13.0.15. Luv *tarkummanni-, *tarkummzy'anm'—, the basis for a presumed but nonexistent Hebrew noun from which the denominal verb mm comes, derives from the verb tarkummi-, attested only in Cuneiform Luvian texts from the second millennium. Luv *parzilli—, the source for the inherited loans BH '71'13 and BA 5115, must have been borrowed during the second millennium as indicated by the attestation of related Semitic forms that clearly date to that period (Akk parzillu and Ug brd_l).

310

Chapter 6

First, there are only a few loanwords from Indo-Aryan of the Ancient Near East (Indoarisch im Allen Vorderasien). These words were borrowed during the second millennium B.C.E., when Old lndic influence on the ancient Near East is apparent. They left linguistic traces elsewhere in the ancient Near East and even Europe. There is only one example of a direct loan from this source (to-'1').29 Second, there are several Old Indic loans that were borrowed during the first millennium B.C.E. (‘2‘?)13, 0913, 7-1:). Unlike the loans from Indo-Aryan of the Ancient Near East, there is no evidence of these words in the ancient Near East or Europe prior to the first millennium. Moreover, they denote products not obtained from the east until the latter part of the first millennium. Hence, although no concrete linguistic proof exists for dating their adoption to the first millennium, they were almost certainly borrowed during this time. The lndo-Aryan of the Ancient Near East loans reflect an older stage of Old Indie, whereas the first-millennium loans represent a later stage. Beyond this obvious fact, however, the precise dialectal differences between these two types ofOld lndic loanwords remain uncertain. There is no evidence that these words were borrowed directly from Sanskrit: in fact, the reconstructed Old Indic forms occasionally differ from attested Sanskrit forms, indicating that they come from some Old lndic language other than Sanskrit.

6.6 OLD IRANIAN Although Iranian-speaking peoples probably entered the ancient Near East pn'or to 1000 B.C.E., the Iranian loanwords in the Hebrew Bible almost certainly come from the first millennium B.C.E., when the Medes and Persians exhibited significant influence in the ancient Near East. The Hebrew Bible’s Iranian loanwords can safely be located within the time of the Achaemenid Empire: in other words, they are specifically Old Iranian. This is supported by the existence of many of the donor terms in Old Iranian texts as well as in the collateral tradition, or Nebenu"berlieferungen (the preservation of Old lranian vocabulary in borrowed form in non-Iranian languages influenced by the Achaemenids, including Elamite, Akkadian, Aramaic, Egyptian, and Greek). Given the presumed circumstances of borrowing, the vast majority of the Hebrew Bible’s Old Iranian loans should come from either Old Persian or Median. Because Old Persian and Median differ phonologically in several key ways, it is sometimes possible to distinguish between Old Persian and Median loanwords in the Hebrew Bible:30 29. BH 719th represents an inherited loan that may ultimately be traced back to lndo-Aryan via Hurrian. Hurr mugumiI'-, the basis for a presumed but nonexistent Hebrew noun from which the denominal verb 1m comes, may also derive from lndo-Aryan of the Ancient Near East. However, as noted above under its entry. scholars dispute its lndo-Aryan origin (cf. Giorgieri 2000, 211). 30. The reconstructed nature of many of the Hebrew Bible’s Old Iranian loanwords does not prevent identification ofdialectal markers. Several factors permit reliable reconstruction: a plausible Old Iranian

Evidencefor Dialect ofOrigin and Date ofBorrowing

311

o

Proto-lranian *j became d in Old Persian but 2 in Median.31 Thus, words that use 2 for 7*' must be borrowed from Median (1311/4313, raj/31131, 11m, 11, 0319”), whereas 1371;, which uses d for *j, must be from Old Persian. - Proto-Iranian *9r remained 0r in all dialects but Old Persian. where it became c.” Hence, the forms 1$1~7Wn_,8/191-7Wn_§ and Vin-WEIR, reflect Median rather than Old Persian phonology. - Proto-Iranian *c' became s everywhere in Iranian except in Old Persian, where it became 6.34 Thus, the preservation of s in 1'0395, which contains the Old Iranian rootfras- (< _*frac’-), points to a Median form.

A few Old Iranian terms probably come from a language other than Old Persian or Median. The term mg contains z rather than d for etymological j*', but it is probably not Median because it does not belong to the typical sphere of Median terminology. It quite possibly comes from Scythian, especially since the geographical region inhabited by the Scythians was home to the walnut in antiquity. The terms 1.7313, 53-70, and Wig-5), all of which refer to items of clothing, are probably also Scythian in origin. As noted above (§5.1.1.6.4), Old Iranian l merged with r in most dialects, and its presence in 1.7313 and $310 therefore indicates a dialect other than Old Persian or Median. Ancient texts link these two words with the Scythians, suggesting a Scythian origin, and because @199 is associated with these two terms it is probably also Scythian. This is consistent with the fact that the Scythians exerted significant influence on the Achaemenid Empire in terms of material culture, including dress. Old Iranian gave way to Middle Iranian during the fourth century B.C.E. with the collapse of the Achaemenid Empire. A number of distinctive phonological changes occur between Old and Middle Iranian.35 These phonological changes are not observable in the Hebrew Bible’s Iranian loanwords, indicating that they were borrowed from Old Iranian (i.e., prior to ca. 300 B.C.E.): °

Voiceless stops in intervocalic position or after voiced continuants (i.e., m, n, r, and I) become voiced, causing p, t, and k to become b, d, and g, respectively.36 When applicable, voiceless intervocalic stops are always preserved in

etymology, the collateral tradition (Nebenu"berlieferungen), or a later descendant of the hypothetical Old Iranian term found in Middle Iranian (e.g., Pahlavi or Parthian) or New Iranian (New Persian). 31. Skjatrve 2009, 51; Schmitt 2008, 84—85; Testen 1997, 575; OPGTL 33~34 (§88). 32. BH 0315 is unique in that it represents Med 2 by samek, rather than the expected zayi‘n. However, the difference is only one of voicing, and it remains clear that BH 01319 reflects Median phonology. 33. Skaerve 2009, 51; Schmitt 2008, 83; Testen 1997, 581; OPGTL 31 (§78). 34. Skjaerva 2009, 51; Schmitt 2008, 84—85; Testen 1997, 575; OPGTL 33 (§87). 35. Similar to the case with dialect, the reconstructed nature ofmany of the Hebrew Bible's Iranian loanwords does not prevent identification of any chronological markers. 36. Pisowicz 1984, 17—22; Hale 2008, 126-27; Weber 1997, 613. Voiceless p, t, and k remained voiceless in initial and final positions. Voiceless intervocalic stops also appear under certain condi— tions, including loanwords from Avestan and non—Iranian languages and in positions of morphemic boundaries.

312

Chapter 6

the Hebrew Bible’s Iranian loanwords: 1973-W‘n_,tf,’ see 1317 gf, see gft' ng3 8/, 8% gwf, I95, 221 gmy, see qm)’ gstz', 194, 291 gwf, see 317 hbny, 90 hdm, hdmw, 93 hdmw, 93 hnw, 95, 306 h.bs, 73 .hnyJ, 329 km, _hry.t, 103, 104 h_ry.t, see h,r.t h_ry-z’db, 103 hry—tp, 102, 103 .hsb, 330 ,hsmn ‘to be clean’, 331 hsmn ‘natron’, 330, 331 hsmn ‘bronze’, 106, 330 h,smn ds'r, 331

.Hfrw, 27, 39 ,hnmJ, 9, 15, 49 him, 17, 108

h_nt, 2I9 th-hb M41), 103 _hs:y.t, 196 *1'b-r.k, 12, 36, 37, 279 I’b-r. tn, 37 1th2, 75 z'bhty, 74, 75, 303 t’dmi, 51, 52, 279 l'dmij, 52 ft’d, 59 z’kn ‘to draw water’, 39 z'kn ‘ladle, cup’, 39 z’kn ‘large vessel’, 39, 309

I'm’q, 56 l'nhmn, 200 1p’.t, 60, 279 irgbs, see irqbs t'rqbs, [2ng, 53 irw, see z'trw t'smr, smr, 210, 211 isp. t, see 1s'pt z'spt, t'spJ, 69, 70 z'trw, z’rw, 112, 275, 303 3k}, kyky, 190, 191 kmr, 124 km’wr, 126 kr, kwr, 123 krhj, 193, 306 krs, 135 km. t, k_tm.t, qtm, 136 kt_, 118, 119 kt_m.t, see ktm.t kwpr, see qur kwr, see kr ky, 221

ky.t, 221 kyky, see k1’k,’ mdb, see md_h. ‘headband’ md_h_ ‘to hew, construct’, 335 m_d,h, mdb ‘headband’, 335, 336 mflkJ, see mfln’J mflcJ, see mflo’J mflo’J, mf’JkJ, mflu, 153, 171, 303 "In". 337 Wk, 338 mr_h.t, 338 ms, 147 msktJ, see skty ms, 149 ms)” I49, 150 MM, 77 nb, nb.t, 304 nb.t, see nb nbw nfi, 136

Index of Words

476 nhm, 200 mm, 151, 152, 291 nvht ‘, 152 nhyt h_ps“, 152 ns'm.t, 143 ntrz', see n_trz' n_tr1’, ntrr’, 156 pi, I74, I75, 299 pf-g‘s, 175,299 pf-‘r‘r, 175,299 Pf-dz’, 175, 299 Pf-dz’-pf-iry, 175, 299 *p>’-_dd, I74, I75 p)’-_hI-mm’.t, 175, 299 P’)"my 5 I75 *pf-r-gs, I77 p;’-sh_-ma'_i.t- n_tr, 175, 299 Pf-zsirsy, 175, 299 p))-_thj}, I61 p’)'wga I75, 299 pg)’, 349 pvh; ‘trap’, 172, 173 p'h; ‘veneer plating’, I73 pr, 61, 184 pr—S’, 183, 184 Pr-_ht.hr-nb.t-mfk;’.t, 153 pmpyr, I69, I70 psi, 349 pss“ ‘to divide’, 351 pss' ‘portion’, see pss'.t ps'.t, see pss’.t pss'. t, pit, pss', 351 pyr, see pry

qwr, qr, qrr,123

rby, 139 R_tnw, 329 rw, 139 ry.t, 87, 302 ss’ss’, 341 sft, see sf_t

qby, qb, 190 mi gmy, 83, 275, 293 qr, see qwr qrd_n, 86 qrh_.t, 192, 306 qrr, see qwr qtm, see ktm.t qur, kwpr, 128, 129

tnr, 222 trr, 222, 223

sf.t,sft,98,99 58, 353 shr. t, 75

t_bw, 219 t_h,s, tbs, 218, 219 _tryn, 213

*s.hr.t, 75 skt.t, see skty skty, skt.t, mskt.t, 205, 206 smr, see z’smr

Is m_d.h, 335 rw_f, see tw_jj2 rw_fi1,_twf, 160, 161, 276

smwa 345 snh.m, 344, 345 sp. t, 163 srsz’, 355 ssm.t, 159, 160 ss', 194 ss'n, see ss's'n ss's'n, ss'n, s's'n, 207, 289 Elm, 354 s'by, 206 s'nd. t, see s'nd_.t s'nd_.t, s'nd.t, s'nty, 208, 209 SM)”, I57 s’nty, see s'n_d.t s“s ‘alabaster’, 210

Wit] 2 w‘b, 358 wk, 338 1.5 Semitic ’by, 322 ’dm, 52 ’s.b‘, 110 _t’r, 216

b_hn, 76 *bnt,, 36 brq, 328 brr, 150 *bura'_tu, 77

gm, see gzr gzr, grz, 86

is ‘linen’, 215 s's'.t, 21o s's'n, see ss's'n

qb, see qby th.w, 79, 8o thyJ, 80

t)’-s';y’.t, 221, 300 tb.t, see _db)’.t tbz’, see d_b)).l lbs ‘to stretch’, see _t,hs *t_hs ‘leather’, 219 t_hr, 218, 306

11’, 221, 299, 300 [j-vhfly, 221, 300 If-ky. t, 221 t:’-mz'.t- nt_r, 221, 300 ti-mnvhl, 221, 300 Tf-n. t-h. t— pf-nsw, 221, 299 tf-qb. t, 221, 300 tf-rz’J, 221,300 tf-shr. t, 221, 300

.hnw, .hny, 329 _hny, see ,hnw h.rd_., 101 ht], 107 klb, see krb *kmr ‘to be hot’, 125 *kmr ‘to trap’, 125 krb, klb, 334 *ksz‘, 127

*mlf, 146 my, 338

477 of words Index ’/____——— ns’. 147 nwr, 223

*p’r. 170 paid, 349 pss, 351

*ann, 193 qwm, 356 rgm. 226 sgr, skr, 343 skk, 204 skr, see sgr *sp, I60 spr, 346

aplu, 338, 340, 352 appada'nu, 59, 291 appittimma, 63 017m, 59 aptumu, 62, 63 “P”, 45 atgamannu, 64, 65, 309 asa'mu, see wasa'mu asvhar, 211 as"1'pu, was"ipu, 325 as'la'ku, 68 *as'muru, 211 as'pu, 114 as'ru, 7O *as'urru‘, 7o atmu‘, 93 atu‘nu, see utu‘nu

elme's'u, 106, 107 epattu, 58, 59 ere'nu, erinnu, url'nu, 66, 67 erirmu, see ere'nu eru‘, 121 esigu, 41 es'maru”, 106 etammu, see e_temmu etemmu, egammu, ilemmu, 52, 228 eze'hvu, 336 galla‘bu, 328 game'su, 53 ganzabaru, 81 gibarbarru‘, see gibaru‘ gibaru‘, gibarbarru‘, 85

s'rs', 214 *s'rs'w, *s'rs'y, 214 *s'rq", see *s'rs'w *w‘b, *y‘b, 358 *‘wr_t, 220

‘j/‘b, see W‘b *yr_t, 220

bara‘ru, 150 barraqtu, 327 bit abusati, 34 bidurbu, see budulhyu biltu, 63 buddar'hu, see budulyhu budulvhu, bidur_hu, buddar'hu, 73 buras"u, 77 butirmu, 119

1.5.1 Akkadian abarakku, 36 aba'ru, I67, I68 abnu, 225 abrikku, see abriqqu abriqqu, abrikku, 36 abus'u, 17, 34 adu'gu, see utu'nu agammu, 38, 39 agannu, 39, 309 ahsv'adrapa'nu, 50, 288

dannu, 121 dappinnu, see tappinnu da'ru‘, 148 da'tabara, 89, 90 da‘tu, 89 dipa'ru, 141 du'du, 328 duhs_’u‘, see dus'u‘ dus'u‘, duhsv'u‘, 219

abu, 48, 49 algames'u, algamls"u,

edu‘, 41 ekallu, 9, 15, 94 elammaggu, see elammakku elammavhbi, see elammakku elammakku, elammaggu, elammavhvhi,

53, 54 algamis'u, see algames'u alkabas'u, 53 am maga'm', ina maga'm', 145 annaku, 56, 57

54, 55

Gimirri, I30 guhvlu, 17o gula'nu, see gule'nu gule'nu, gula‘nu, 82 gura'imu, 86, 197 gusannu, see gusa'nu gusa'nu, gusannu, kursa’nu, kus'a'nu, kursirmu, 135

wharmis'atu, 104 Vharjibi, 102 _h.as.sinnu, 86, 119, 197 yhas'ma‘nu, 106, 330, 331 Vhatlunu, 108 yhina, 95, 306 Vhinuta, 329 thyha'ru, 334 _huprus'3hu, 70 vhuras'u, 101, 120, 138, 158, 225 Hvuraz'i, 102 h'usma‘nu, 331 ikkaru, 53 ikkibu, 358 ila'nu, 228 ilku, 63, 148 ina maga'm', see ana maga'ni

Index of Words

478

Ip'rasakku, 61, 62 iptu, 63 12514, 148 iivhiulu, 79 I'S‘karu, 67 iS‘padallu, is'pandallu, 79 is'pandallu, see is'padallu is'patu, 69, 70 itu'nu, see utu'nu igemmu, see etemmu

kunukku, 108 kurka'nu', 132 kurru, 129 kursa'nu, see gusa'nu kursinnu, 135

mu“, 121 musukannu, 148, I49

km, 122, 333, 334 kussf’u, see kussu‘ kussu‘, kussz"u, kissu,

nakmaru, nakamaru,

127. 338, 340, 352 kuS‘a‘nu, see gusa‘nu kuta‘nu, 138 kutimmu, 136, 137

na‘qidu, 338, 340, 352

nakamaru, see nakmaru nalbanu, 146 nakuaru, 336 nakuaru, see nakmaru *nebrartu, 15o ne's"u, 14o m'kkassu, 152, 153 m'tiru, nitru, 156, 291

kabdu, 54

la‘batu, see labbatu

m'tru, see nitiru

kalabbu, see kalappu

lab’u, see Iabbu

nizbu, 339

kalappu, kalabbu, 121,

labbatu, la'batu, 138, 139

nurimdu, 200

Iabbu, lab’u, la'bu, 138,

nurma‘nu, 200 nurmu‘, nurumu, 200

kama'ru, 336

I39 la'bu, see labbu

kamiru, 124

lardu, 154

kamu’nu, kamannu, 123

lata'ku, 144

padallu, 79

kandu, 115

Iibbu, 121

kannu, 121 kunukku, 108

Iilt'Iu, 139, 140

kara'nu, kira'nu, 113

litiktu, 143, 144

karas'u, see kars’u

litku, 143, 144

karballatu, karballutu,

Iurima"u, see lurmu‘

puba'm, I74 palakku, see pilakku pananigu, see pannigu pangu, see pannigu pannigu, panam'gu, pangu, punm'gu, punnugu, 178 para"u, 171 parakku, 351, 352 parde'su, 181, 289 parzillu, 78, 282, 309 pilaggu, see pilakku pilakku, palakku, pilaggu, pilaqqu, 177 pilaqqu, see pilakku pilku, 177 pinnu, I79 pz'ru, 212 pinp'abaga, 186 punnigu, see pannigu punnugu, see pannigu pu'ru ‘lot’, 171,172 pu'ru ‘bowl’, 171

122 kamannu, see kamannu

13o

Iilu‘, 14o

lurimtu, see lurmu‘

karballutu, see

lurindu, see lurmu‘

karballatu

Iurinnu, see Iurmu‘

kars'u, karas'u, 135 kasu‘, 196 kas'u, 118

lurmu‘, Iurima"u, Iurimtu, lurindu, Iurinnu, 200

katinnu, 102, 119, 138, 158 kilu‘bu, 334 kinna'ru, 16, 126 kira'nu, see kara'nu km, 122, 333, 334 kIs‘su, see kussu‘ kzs"a'du, 225 kitinnu‘, 138 kitu‘, 138 kiu'ru, 120, 121 kukka'm'tu, 190, 191 kukku, 191 kullupinnu, 121 kumru, 124, 125

mabrartu, 150 maddattu, 63 magannu, 144, 145 mabaz'u, 335 mala'vhu, 145, 146 mandattu, 65 "1an 337, 333, 340, 352 massu, 147, 148 ma‘tu, 338, 340, 352 me'tu, 228 me'zehvu, 336 midddatu, 121 mz'lu, 41

nurumu, see nurmu‘

qabu'tu, 8o

40’1"", 352, 353 qamu, 16

W ofWords ’/————-——_~_-

q1ssu, 198 qull'ztu, see qullu‘ qullu‘, quIIitu, 192 rabu‘, 95 raga'mu, 226 rasa'nu, 202 ras'as"u, 228 ras'u', 69 ns'sittu, 202 sabba'ru, see sappa‘ru saddinnu, s'addirmu, 157 svahlu', 13, 208 salahv'u, 344 samfu, see s'amtu_ saplu, 164 sappartu, 213 sapparu', sabba'ru, s'appa‘ru, 212, 213 sappatu, see s'appatu sappu, 163 5044”, 353 sarzam‘, s'iriam, s'ir‘am, sinannu', s'ir’annu, 213 sigaru, see s'igaru sikkatu, 204 simanu, 97 simmagir, 162 Stp'pu, 345, 346 szras, sznsu, s'irzs'u, 221 sina‘nnu, see sariam 51’rLs"u, see siras' s1s'a’"u, see szs'u‘ mu", s15'a’"u, 159 sukku, 161, 162 supparmu, 163 512114, 340 sabtu, 121 sarru, see .serru Jenu‘, 111 sen-u, 51W, 352 WWW, see _sumbu Sumbu, subbu, 188, 189

s'abbatu, see s'appatu

_. ..

479

s'addinnu, see saddinnu s'adu‘, 114 s'a'libu, see s'e'lebu s'ammu ‘corundum’, 211

taS‘ltK'u, 356

s'ammu ‘herb’, 345 s'amtu, samt,u, 208, 209 s'appa'ru, see sappa'ru s'appatu, s'abbatu, s'apputu, sappatu, 163 s’appu, 163 s'apputu, see s'appatu s'atu‘, 357 s'a_ta'ru, 111 s'e'du, 227

terdennu, sec tardennu

s'ehJa'tu, 13, 208 s'e'labu, see s'e'lebu s'e'lebu, s'e'labu, s'ellebu, s’a'libu, 355 s'ellebu, see s'e'lebu s'ibirru, 354 s'igaru, sigaru, 342, 343 s'ikru, 342 s'innu, 212 s'innu pz‘ri, 212 s'ir’am, see sariam s'ifannu, see sariam s'iriam, see sariam s'irls'u, see siras' s'ubu‘, 41, 206 s'uburru, 169 s'us'a'nu, 195

turtannu, see turla'nu

Iartarmu, sec turtu’nu tarta'nu, scc Iurlu'nu Mm, 225 terdermu'tu, sec tardermu'tu tillu, 222 timbullu, 109 tinu‘ru, 222, 223 tuppinnu, see Iappinnu turgumannu, sec targumannu turru, sec [urru turta'nu, turtannu, tarta'nu, tartannu, 11, 230, 231 [up.s'-arru, 11 1 turru, turru, 110, 225, 226 umma‘nu, umménu, ummia‘nu, 55, 56 umménu, see umma‘nu ummia'nu, see umma‘nu unus's'u, 70, 148 uqnu’, 346 uqu'pu, 16, 195 urz'nu, see ere'nu urnu, 66

tamkaru, 338, 340, 352 tappinnu, dappinnu, tuppinnu, 223, 224 tardennu, terdennu, 230, 231 tardennu'lu, terdennu'tu, 231 targamarmu, see targumannu targumarmu, targamannu, targumyanu, turgumannu, 226 targumyanu, see targumannu Tarsw'i, 229 ta‘ru, 225

us'a'ru, 69 utu'nu, atu‘nu, itu'nu, adu'gu, 71 wasa'mu, 97 waj'ipu, see as"ipu wizza’ena, 333

yas'pu, 114 ye'nu, 113 zarmaru, 126 zibtu, 98 Zimur, 114

ziqqu, 346 zu"pu, 46

480

Index of Words

1.5.2 Ammonite am, 108

1‘, “3 1.5.3 Amorite Iab-, labu’-, labw—, 138 labu’-, see lablabw-, see lab-

s'pr, 346 1.5.4 Arabic ’a‘ba, 45 ’aba’r, 167 ’ag'ama, 38, 39 ’akka‘r, 53 ’almas, 100 ’alwa, see ’uluwwa ’anuk, 56 ’as'ara, 70 ’attu'n, 71 ’ig'g'anat, 39, 4o ’ihyrz'd, 101 ’uluwwa, ’alwa, 43, 44

band, 329 .hasaba, 33o .hidg“, 107 humid, 347

h_aras'a, 105 hyaraz, 225 Vhars, 105 MW, 17, 108,304 kadkad, 116 kammu’n, 123 karaba, 334 karkand, 116 karkuhan, 116 karzam, kirzim, 86, 197 karzan, kirzin, 86, 197 ka’s, 118 kz'r, 122, 123 kirs’, 135 kirzim, see karzam kirzin, see karzan kuh,l, 170 Mr, 333 kurr, 129 kursz‘, 127

‘a‘ba, 358 budd, 72 badda, 72

labu’, 138 1% I40

baht. 74, 75 batt, 73 batta, 73

mag'g'a'n, 145

ba.tt.z'h., 35 benm‘, 179 budd, 72 bunmy', 179

maravha, 338 min], 146

malla‘h, 145, 146 mana', 337

naqqa'd, 340 nat_u'r, 156, 304 nibras', 150

sadan, satan, 357 sad'm, I57 safara, 346 sa'g'u'r, 342 salz'h‘at, 208 samm, 345 satan, see sadan sausan, 207 sawqam, 356 sikkz'n, 204, 205 sirba'l, 165 suba'lat, 208 s,a"irat, slyy'a'rat, 352 stf'r. 3 5,1’Wa'rat, see s,a"irat 161 s'akka, 204 s'ikkat, 204 tall, 222 tannu‘r, 222 targ'ama, 226, 227 luflhas, 219

.ta'ba", 109 lam)”, 332 .Iama', 332

.tu‘a'l, 355 _tu‘a'lat, 355 _ta‘lab, 355 wada'a, 333 yas'b, 114 yas'm, 114

fad.d_a, 349 fabh.’ I72, I73 fah.h.a‘r, I74 falaka, 177 fula'd., 350

qana', 352 qarn, 16 qubba‘, 117

g'awz, 37

rasan, 202

1.5.5 Aramaic

rumma'n, 200

1.5.5.1 Biblical Aramaic

hamasa, 104 sa’sa’, 341

za‘atar, 46 zaman, 96

zftt'. 98 zummurud, 328

.1318, 155

481

Index of Words

/’._______—_~—~_—.—____

111-113, 41, 42, 81, 89, 224, 239, 269, 288, 289, 292, 298 2111118, 43, 239, 266, 269, 271, 288, 290, 293 1131846,“, 230, 239, 266, 269, 271, 288, 292, 293 15111208., 50, 81, 89, 224, 239, 269, 288, 290, 298,311, 312 1.1843 1108, 214 KNEW, 57s 230, 239, 266, 269, 271, 288, 289, 293 10198, 19,61, 62, 239, 269, 288, 298, 311, 312 111.0195, 19,62, 239, 269, 288, 298, 312 un‘gzg, 19, 62, 63, 239, 269, 288, 292, 312 113115, 64 1,113, 65, 66, 239, 266, 269, 288, 292, 312 118*, 65 1%, 325 WWW, 70, 71, 239, 269, 288, 292, 298, 312 111131;):5, 325, 326 mg, 71

7'37, 70 n1, 19,89, 239, 269, 288, 298, 312 1207, 81,89, 224, 239, 269, 288, 298, 312 131a, 91, 92, 239, 269, 288, 298, 312 um, 92, 239, 269, 271, 288 5311., 60, 94 117:1, 63 83:39.71, 95, 96, 230, 239, 269, 288, 289, 293, 312 1721, 111,96, 97, 239, 269, 271, 288 101, see 1721 1791, 98, 159 11, 97, 98, 159, 239, 253, 269, 271, 288,311 .1111, 65 ‘77n_, 131 HOG, 174 1313111, 102, 239, 269, 274, 275, 278, 302, 306 “[111, 165 min, 330

CW, 43, 7O

W137, 130, 165 .1373, 63 m'n, 214 717-9, 47 m 63, 65 m 337 nm, 63 19111170, 132, 203 33133, 339 80-14733, 150, 230,239, 269, 288, 293 111, 150, 151, 239, 253, 269, 288, 298

1511, “'71:, 92 ‘71}, see 1‘7]; VOW, 152, 2I4 1111/1, I9, 155, 184,239, 269, 288, 289, 312, 339 x930, see 893W nusmo, 1.3910, 132, 158, I59, 203, 239, 269, 280, 289, 290, 292, 293, 295, 308 7131513, see .1:;§7;1-o 5310, I30, 165, I76, 239, 269, 288, 289, 311, 312 111;, 166, 239, 269, 288, 298, 312

’3, 7o, 92 1‘53, 63

’10“ 325

7357, 43, 92 my, 214

.113, 70 113*, 150

'75-, 43, 98, 159 5'73, 70 113;, 61 13, 129 717313, 130, I65, I76, 239, 269, 288, 289,

my, 65

1:11;, 42, 80, 81, 82, 239, 269, 298,311, 312 13, 151 1311, 19, 81,82, 89, 224, 239, 269, 288, 298, 311, 312 11%, 19,83, 84, 239, 253, 269, 288, 291, 298, 311

293, 3XI .113, 151 1113, 131, 132, 203, 239, 269, 2802 292, 2959 307, 308 113, 131

709, I73, I74 was, 130, 165,175, I76, 239, 269, 311 I‘WJW, see I’m-30$ 110-102 WWW, I32, 179, 180, 203, 204, 239, 269, 280, 293, 295, 307, 308 5115, 78, 183, 281, 282, 309

Index ofWords

482

111/15. 16, 19, 184.185, 188, 239, 269, 288,

290, 291, 312 was, 19 186,239,269, 288, 312 0111139, 132, 191, 203, 204, 239, 269, 280, 292, 295, 308 mp, 131 11?, I32, 203 mm 91 [11-1, 151 11, 198, 199,239,245, 269, 288

1312*, 203 “NW, R330, 203, 204, 239, 269, 28o, 289, 295, 307, 308 W, 70, 92 T111), 326 mu), 92 17W} 43 WW, 19, 214, 215, 239, 269, 288, 289, 290, 312 mm, 81, 89, 224, 239, 269, 288, 293, 298 1.5.5.2 Extra-Biblical Aramaic

ax, 36 mm, see man 1311, 228, 346 138, 167 1111311, mm, 136, 348 m1, 177 um, 38 UN, 39 111-1111, 42 mm, 42 3111, 45 1mm, see 111138 1811877311, 55

11111, 34 mm, 324 1118, 148 um, see 111m 1111, 47 mm, see 211111 rm, see r1 mum, see mm m, 48 111118, 48 19111111111, 50 111211311111, 123 mm, mm, 46 13m, see 1311 01'7‘19100’8, 50 1173119018, 185 mm, see 715m 131m, see 131px um, um, 53 1913:0711, 53 81511, 43, 44 ’11103'78, 80 1113711, 54 max, 38 1M, see mm 1111, 56 0191011, 46 119011, 57 1911, see 71911 I198, 59 "max, 1911, mm, 58 1mm ‘ropx, 43 11111-111, see 111211 11118, 1811111, 64 1mm, 64 ‘18, 138, 139, 140 1.218, 139 T18, 65, 66 mm, 38 m, 66 mm, 324 1311711, 'DW‘R, 67 117211211, 216 111mm, 326 am, 68 mm, 70 um, 71 wnx, 222

1:1, 72 n’ma, see 1171: n‘m, nbm, 73, 74 1’13, 73 mm, 198 1111:, 189 111:, 76 112193, 11119311, 35 1.11:, 205 1131111, TRWD, 53 ’3, 334 pm has, 135 112-1773 nu, 69 1117.73 m, 93 13, 330 71173, 326 .1212, 38 1: ‘son’, 140 '1: ‘field’, 180 nm, see nm 1pm, 77 nm, nx'u, 1m, 77 711:, 86 P'D, 327 mu, see n11: 17*:11, 80 u, 151, 324 nu, 187 m, 37 1111, 82 81:11, see Rm mm, 47 11, see 111 1:11, 1:111, 81 mm, 89 m, see 111 nu, 340 2‘71 ‘razor’, 328 37:1 ‘barber’, 328 W71, 82 8731, mm, m, 83 ‘13:, see Km 11, 181 m, u, m, 83 1311;, see 1:111 1111, 85

483

Index of Words

/—-———-——~——-—~——-————————

11111, 83 31.1, 101, 136, 348 111, 328 11111, 67

515111, 86 11730111, 330 11111, 103

111.13, 111313, 93 1:, 11:, 115 111313, see 111313

3111, 326

111313, see 11131:: 1131:, see 111313

17W, 333 1911, see n111 113112111, see 173111111

on, 330 1an, 112, 220 P112111, 105

100121, 121 n111,1:111, 87 113111111, 1.7310111, 188 111, 56, 224 7,1111, 203 111731, 227 1m, 80 1121111, see 112111 111111, 1111111, 332 1113311, 87

11311, 86 11m, 225 112111, 52, 102 311211, 330 Lmum, 106 1911111211, 50, 288 ‘711111, 107 mm; 17, 108

WI 339 n1, 89 11111, 89, 90, 224 1:11., 92 11.1, 187 11mm, 155 5311., 60, 94 11111.1, see 1131. 137,13, 95 15.1, 187 11131., see 1131. 1113.1,1111311, 111231., 35, 96 11113.1, 96 1.1, see 111. 1111.1, 42

131, see 1731 111.11, 11.11, 133, 179 11.11, see 1111.1 111, 87 P1, 1111, 69, 121, 322, 323 n51, 344 am, 202 101,131, 96 111131, 11113111, 136, 153 IT, 98 n91, 98 n11, 99

:112, 179, 228, 346, 348 17:12, 1711112, 109 0111:, see 0113 .190112, 169 0113, 01119, 90, 221 1911:, see 1912 17:11:, see 1731: 11113, 100 5‘70, 161 112312, 17212 ‘to be unclean’, 332 117312, 17312 ‘unclean’, 332 .1111312, 332 17319 ‘to be unclean’, see 111313 ‘to be unclean’ 1m: ‘unclean’, see 8731: ‘unclean’ 01:1, 173 ‘7150, 146 10913, 111 1512, 19112, 208 171W, 34I 117113, 206 11231, 168 3.11, 324 1”, 113 1:1, 161, 228 173’, 333 171’, 174 1177’, 174 71:11:21, 114

113, 115 17:11:, see 11:11.7 3'713, 121, 197 17313, 11:13, 124 15:13, see 1193 113, 13 (a dry measure), 129 11: ‘furnace’, 122, 333 13311:, 43, 132 10113, 1101:, 127, 185 111121:), 83 19:13, see 10:13 111:, 120 111:, see 11: '1’3, I79 11111”), see 1n: ‘linen, flax’ 11m), see 11m 1111:, see my ‘linen, flax’ mm), 137 11‘73, 79 515:, 169 1517:1, 180 1113:, 123 113:, see 1131: 11:, see 1: 11:, 111:, 126 03, 80, 118 119:), 151:, 128 151:, 128 '13, see ‘11: (a dry measure) 1.5313, 130 1113, 131 D113, 228 11:), 131 0113, see 013 11131:, 111313, 11131:), 1131:,111313, 116 111313, see 11131:: 11112313, 167 013, 011:, 135

Index of Words

8013, see 1011:: 0913,134 51129, 197 11111111113, 1m, 137 film), 137 1n: (an outer garment), see 7111: 7119, mm, 1111: ‘Iinen, flax’, 138 wuv‘, 73 11115, 189 117‘, see 113 1117‘17', 139 m5, 138, 140 11115, see 111': 1995, 141

“173, 340 11317:, 209 mm, 103 $17.11»), 326 13:, 339 n“: 13:, 339 ml, 339 mm, 339 111,115, 151

1:11, 111

11.1, 168 1911, 153

11:11, 354 7’31), 326

W, 47, 324 nm, 152 109‘], see 1199: '09:, see 11091

7117 1‘11, 49 my, 74 1:11, 41

1717‘,I64 D195, 143 111111115, 143, 144

110.11, 1031:, 1091, 152 1.73, 103 113, 154 1.9112], 142 mm, 151 mm, 155 111:, 156

1m 163, 334, 349 51?), 104 1173, 144 7.11m, 132

xxo, see 1.110 1.110, xxo, m0, 340, 341 ND, see nxo no, 347

P'WJ, 39 mm, 335 19m), 188 11mm, 75 11173, 68 113, 80 1359, 146 11713, 145 151:, 36 run, 337 on, 147 E11199, 119 1309, 136 109, 144 1511113, 177 v1‘70973, 121 .1131), 336 mm, 332 “7111:, 116, 174, 179 1117:, 338

1‘70, I57 010, see 1010 1019, 010, 159 mo, 161 1.1110, 189 To, see 90 5910, see 590 1290, 204 1:10, 204 ‘70, 110, 328

1*nbvv‘,343 ‘97, 358 1‘9“), 141

190, I45 .70, see .7112 5:110, 165 11/110, n1m10, 214, 215, 289 11111110, see 111110 1910, 338 119, 166

‘50,347 00, 345 1:11-1:90, 162

1'119720, see 11311910 11111910, 1‘119799, 347 11100, 218 1110,1110, 350 11:70, see 1170 10,1*o,346 ‘790, 5919, 164

p111, 48 nx9, see 119 1x9, 170 119, 171 ‘71119, see ’7119 ~119, see r119 r119, 1119, 60 19, 1‘9, 349 m9, 348 r19, nx9, 172 ~Jmon9, 175, 299 1119, 174 .1109, 174 9129, 334 19, see 19 1151919, 136 ‘5“9, see “7‘9 W719, 176 119, W9, 164,350 1‘79, 177 07119, 97119, 194 0’9, I71, 35] .719, 99, 175, 299 7231119, see 1131113 0179, 157 n59, 124 .1379, 177 .1959, 176 0.719, sec 9.719 111119, 113 09, 351 111113731109, 175,299

of Words

485

Index "—_________—___._____________—___—_______—___—__

009, 351 05109, 351

n737., 103 11.7, 11.7. 352

177.1151. 175. 299 1111179, 175. 299 .79, see .7151 117.9, 324 1:19, 180, 181 0119, 01119, 181, 289

117., see .117. 111717., 143

0119, see 01151 11119, 183 13711151, 202

7111.7, 40 £117., 51 117., 16 011117., 191

1119, 182 7119, 71119, 78 11151, see 1151 119,119, 352 1.1115, 183, 184 1111719, 184, 185 1115, see 1115 E11119, 186 11151, 11151, 157 111151, 186 :3, 188 11117311, 149 11111, 170 1111, 352 £173, 227 11373, 227 1:1, 110, 111

11731.7, 1311.7, 193 1171217., 196 117., 111 011917., 157

211, 168 1117311, see 17:11 117311, 119 17311, 1117311, 1731, 200 11, 198, 199 .1‘7n1, 188 1171111, see 11731 11731, 117311, 200 17:11, 201 1731, see 17311 101, 202

11w1,344 .7w1,154 1:117, 206

1111117, 346 1111‘, 332

:1.7, 190

191117, 212

11.7,1'117, 192, 328

13.7111}, see 1.737.111

0111.7, 85

11111111, 207

1111.7, 60

11111111, 207

11:17., 11:17, 117, 169 1.717., 163

117nm, see 1171111

11717., 178

7111111, 144

0717., 117

111111, 218

1717., 342

1171117, 111117, 210

0117., see 11731.7

7:11.171), 324

'11P, I6, I95 1111.7, 67

1173111, 100, 210

1.19111, 208

77511111, 211

11011.7, 84 111.7, 113.7, 198

1.1111, 98

‘1317, see 1137.

17W, 710, 353

“7‘71, see 117. 11’71’71, 190 TM, 335

19117, 346

' £17.11), see 1.737.112

1737.111, £17.11”, 071117, 356 11117, 326

1111111, see 111111 111111, 1111117, 213, 218 11111), 214 W111, see 117111) ‘DW, 357

71311111, 358 175111, 223 1111, 225 1:1111n, 336 mm, 221, 300 17nn, see 1171111 1171111, 11711117, 171111, 13, 208 13111, 63, 217 5’11, see 711 mm, 224 7.111, 69 172111111, see 17311111 ‘711, 71h, 222 117117n, 153 1711, 68 11111117311, 221, 300 man, 221, 300 11m, 222 1.1011, 221, 300 71n,354,355 1:111, 122 1.3.7n, 221, 300 1117.11, 1.711, 151, 222, 334, 335 17.11, see 1117.11 1111, 221, 300 131111, 226 1771111, 173111711, 226 017m, 119 1317111, 227 11111111, 228 1n111, 230, 231 11111, 221, 300

1.5.6 Eblaite ’asarya'num, 214 baras'um, 77 gurdumum, 86, 197

Index of Words

_ha-rz’, 104 ’zp‘dum, 58 i-tu'm, 41 kinna‘rum, 126 Iab’um, see Iabwum labwum, lab’um, 138, I39 na'qidum,‘ 340

karabo, 334 karakand, karkand, karkande, 116 karkaden, II6 karkand, see karakand karkande, see karakand kars’, 135

136, 76. II6 1913153336, 239, 269, 274, 278, 290, 292, 302, 306 03R, 34

kawr, 333 kamin, kamen, kamin, ka'min, kamun, 123—124 kata'n, 138

11115, 37, 38, 239, 251. 269, 288,292, 311, 312 um, 38, 39 1173.18, 39, 19I 138, 15, 39, 40, 309 51913134941 1771318, 155 '18, see 1'78 1'13, '13, 41 11115, 66 0111, 116 113118, 88 111331113, 500111331]-

pi’akku, 177 tirzs"u, 220

ma"zer1, 323 mans’a", 147

urgubasu, 53, 54

na"k, 56

warzs'u, 220

qannot, qarmot, 352 qarn, 16 qannot, see qannot qob‘, 117

1.5. 7 Ethiopic (Ge ‘ez) ’alaw, see ‘alwa' ’alaw, see ‘alwa‘ ’azab, see ’aza'b ’aza'b, ’azab, ’azo'b, 46 ’azo'b, see ’aza'b ’aton, 71 ‘a'law, see ralwa' ‘alwa‘, ‘a'lwa', a'Iaw, ’alaw, ’alaw, 43, 44 ‘a'lwa‘, see ‘alwa' ‘aygan, 39 gm, 37 game‘, 83

ro'ma'n, 200

sanper, 347 sofor, 347

s’ok, 204 s'aqq, 353 targwama, 226, 227 wayn, 113 zalh.a, zallah,a, 344

hasaba, 33o

zallah,a, see 2th0 zaman, 96

basin, 86 ka'dkod, 116 kamen, see kamin kamin, see kamin ka'min, see kamin kamun, see kamin karaba, 334

1.5.8 Hebrew 1.5.8.1 Biblical Hebrew 71:11, 322 0133, 17, 34, 239, 269, 283, 292, 297, 309 max, 35, I98 W38, 322

11:8, 12, 36, 37, 239, 266, 271, 274, 279, 292, 307

538, 43, 59 111503. mm 43, 44, 52, 132 wing, see m'bag nix, 44, 45, 52, 125, 239, 269, 283,292, 309 19113, 136 119121, 55, 136 131:1, 84 :13, 31115, 46 311$, see 313 118, 322, 323 118, 323 7W, 174 D‘U-X, 45, 52 ns, 9, 47, 48, 239, 245’ 269, 274, 276, 290, 292, 307 111:1, 48, 49, 83, I69, 239, 269, 274, 278, 292, 295, 299, 302, 306 1.79708, 9, 15, 49, 239’ 269, 274, 278’ 292’ 293, 304, 305, 306

487 of Words Index //————-—————_—————_—_—_ 15732208., 19, 50, 51, 239, 269, 287, 288, 290, 298, 311, 312 11.-nwua,sl,239.266, 269, 271, 287, 288, 290, 311, 312 11138, 51, 52, 239, 269, 274,278,279,29o, 292, 301, 302, 306 ‘778, 43 1.9%, see .193 W, 144 138., 53 '78, I75, 299 w~3378,w‘n,53 02231373, see 0231373 02.1525, 161 115-5, 43, 66 171-78, 323 57‘8,52 02,2278, 1mm, 54 328,40 11738, 55 1798, 55 .1338, 123, 205, 206 -138,56,57,326 1108, 181 758,58,59,73 7'328,53,59 1728,59,6I,239,269, 288, 291, 298, 312 max, 223 .193, 71913, 8, 60, 239, 248,269,274,279, 292,304,305,306 11'1'398, 6o, 61, 239, 251, 269, 280, 290, 292, 293, 295 173-38, 110 mm, 116 “31%, 344 11318, 56610518 11318, 65 1:78, 63, 64 19:18,11318,64,65,II6, 133, 239, 269, 281, 292, 309 11.18, 64

mm, 27 T1$,43,55,66,67 ’7§,I38,I39 3218, 139 nmg, 226 na, 66, 67 1:18, 27 1‘18, 41, 350, 355 W, 172, 324, 350 MW, 89, 324 -WWN.,177 '19'W,67 191128, 67, 68 “MS, 325 .1598, 68, 69, 310 WIN, 216 733:, 335 73 ‘pole’, 71, 72, 239, 269, 274, 276, 278, 303,305,306 '1:- ‘linen’, 72, 73, 239, 269, 274, 276, 278, 303,305,306 71:1, 72 2172-,326,327,349 512,327,349 “273-,73,74 n.1_:-,74,75,239,269, 274, 275, 291, 302, 303, 306 m, 116, 216 1m, 76 102-,75,76,239,269, 274, 291, 307 103-,76,239,269,274, 291, 307 man, 35 n73, 146, 161 05:, 356 1a, 201 .113, 357 5173-, 204 :17v:-,45 533-,198 PEI-P3, 349 23, 350, 35I '13, 68

1911;, mm, 55, 77, 252 11113, see 1811;!5113-, 78, 79, 86, 281, 282, 309, 326 W13, 77 ma, 156 nm, see 1m;NW, “P73, 327, 328 “3', 334 was, 79, 8o, 239, 269, 274,275,277,278, 292, 301, 302, 306 1:12:13, see 923378 1721, 80 mm, 80 51'13,75 '7‘11'3, 171 1313, 19, 81, 82, 239, 269, 288, 298,311, 312 111,111, 86 5’3, 187 272-, 328 015;, 82 0‘71, 82 803,48,83,99,123, I69, 217, 239, 245, 269,274,275,278, 291, 293, 301, 307 :33, 13, 146 7131, 181 T15,83 151,83,84,85,239, 253, 269, 288, 291, 298, 311 TIDE, 84, 85, 239, 252, 253, 269, 288, 298, 311, 312 191-, 85 Wm, 99 111, see 71:1

1115, 85, 86, I97 133, 220 rm, 161 1-1-7, 328, 329

Index of Words

1186.87. 239. 269. 274. 278. 293. 302. 304, 305. 306 T1, 75 13')?» 104 1111.87 1113313. 1103178,, 87. 88. 239, 252. 253. 269. 280. 290. 292. 295. 307 “3. 19‘ 89‘ 239. 269‘ 288. 298,312,324 mum-1,90. 239, 269. 274~27812931302. 304- 306 run. 341 mu. 93 1171, 152 13311., 27 71271, 322, 335, 340. 350 53111.9,15.I6.94 1‘3. 95. 239, 269, 274. 278, 292, 302, 306 1.30573, 42 135.1, 121 TIL, 351

3111*, 358 31,3, 40, 221, 225, 326, 346,348 1731, 97 101,97 11.97.98.239,253, 269,271, 288,311 T191, 98. 99, 239. 269. 274.2761277,291, 305, 306 7171'. 4I 111-11, 151. 152 1171, 99, 100, 239, 269, 274.276.291.304. 305,306

m, 103

11-19, 110, 226

11m. 330. 331 1311111, sec 131311 .1111, 77 pm, 177 1113191]. 52 771]. 177 11m, 108. 290 0511.49 11211370, 100

mm, 331, 332

17-13-0155 00.n1336 7011., 98 17911. 60, 129, 144

why, 7111:, 112, 168, 169,

WU» 329. 34L 342 1’90. 116 12311,, 198 8111*, 218

334 1187, see '18:

3W. 1511 337 am. 344 11111, 225 711:1. 101, 120, 138, 158 130111, 102, 239,269, 274, 275. 278, 302, 306 1111. 103. 104, 239, 269, 274, 278. 293, 302, 304.305.306 11mm, 104. 105 0'10, see W151 q'm, 323 W7“..°UU.I%,239.269, 281. 291, 296, 308. 348 mm, 329, 330 $9120, 106, 107. 229 WM 330, 331 $1110, 107, 108,239, 269, 281, 290, 292, 296, 308 ’7nn, 107, 108 -17~an,lo7 am, 17, 108 131,111, min, 17, 108, 109, 292, 304, 306 11191311, 17. 108

NW, 332 NW.» 332 1131;, 110, 111, 239, 269, 274, 2791 291. 303, 304.3051306 1000, 111 T113, 174

239,245.2691274, 275, 273. 279, 292, 302, 303, 304, 306,

7.”. 55, I52 ‘JW. 45. 52 17_~,1o,15,112,113.220 r110 1:13, 160, 161 .111, 113 “110:, 76 '10". 325 :17”, 358 NS”, 189 '11.,37, 220 V1331 332. 333 V3”, 333 w, 38 1'13. 55 11/1“, 220 311)”, 323 “NW, 1'3! 1141 239) 269,283,2931297, 309 111)”, 216 11:13, 322 523*,130 '13-. 115 1:17;, 7:173, 115, 116, 117 1573, see 73-73 1.33, 125 17:13.,1131'0, 14, 117, 118, 239, 252, 269, 283,

33”” 344 m. 335 run, 108, 323

111730, 109, 110, 239,

284, 285, 292,309

269, 274, 276, 291,

013, 80, 118

304,305,306

11-3, 122, 333, 334

489

Index of Words W13, 174 5:13, 170 11‘1:’-,102,II9,120,I38, 158, 239, 269, 283, 290, 292, 309 m, 120, 121, 239, 269, 283a 293, 309 r1773, 121, 122 1’3, 122, 334 11120, 177 2-15.-2,334 3‘73; ‘utensil, vessel’, 121, 123, 336 ‘79-‘sh1'p’,83,123,239, 245,269,274,278, 293, 307 163, 123, 124 183, 124 173-5, 124, 125, 239, 269, 291, 309 13, 121 1133, 125 NOD, 126, 127, 128, 185 non, 323 393:, 40, 106, 326, 347, 348 1199-, 40 7’53, I39 79;, 202, 213 793, 128 ‘19:- ‘henna’, 128 195- ‘pitch’, 128 13', 129 7:13, 130 ’19-’24 05-7-3, 43, 132, I33 D1,9-,78 5’013',I33,134,239, 253, 269, 271, 286, 290, 292, 297, 310 5013-,78,133 0513, 134, 239, 269, 286, 297, 310 wia‘,135 n13, 337 5‘8’3, 121 In), 226 D.“~D‘,136,I74

nah-73;, 73, 102, 120, I37, 138, 158

I170, 13, 145, 146 117?), 146 1.79070, 326

8‘27,138,139 N33), 138 n337,4344 111'37,351 114727, 139, 140 W75, 139, 140 32"7, 204 755* ‘to arrange’, 357 ’9'7* ‘to climb, ascend’, 358 1’57, 141, 239,269,281, 292, 296, 309 nag/‘7, .1303, 142 DW.'5.,I43,239,269, 274,278,29I,304, 305, 306 x1n..b,143,IM

U?¢,I46,I47,239,245, 262, 269, 280, 291,

0mm, 34 11,173,872, 204 531.n,75 mm, 86 53-73, 104 1173, 144, 310 W), 144, 342 1379*, 144 10173, 76 “179’ 77 nm [allegedly ‘shipymdl’,334,335 nm, U‘m ‘belt, waistband’, 335, 336 11:17), see nm ‘belt, waistband’ "1'79, 335 mtg/107:, 104 rug-n, 60 W7), 4I um, 68 1*n,98 1099,1bvn,N1.0?n,336 1729?), see 179;?) numb, see '17,);72 -I'1:n,336 12~7n,146

295 '130,337,338 13117;, 140 my», 67, 223 07;, 147, 148,239,269, 283,309 new, 147 1397?, 148 mm, 193 “Wm 55 mm, 140 V379, 333 ann, 198 7b, 43, 44 “W73, 338, 339 71%, 277 “(’73, I49, 150, 219, 239, 269,274,277,278, 293, 302, 307 1WD, 209 0230-1123:}, 162 53,143,348 m, 150, 151, 239, 252, 253, 269, 271, 288, 298 13;, 112 112711;, 106, 118, 326 nm, 152 nm, 151, 152, 239, 245, 269, 271, 274, 291, 307 1212:, 59, 66 0303;, 152 1.9:, 116, 153, 170, 239, 269, 274, 278, 291, 301, 303, 304, 305, 306 199;, 204 1P3, 339, 340 133-112-5213, 162 713, 43, 154, 155, 239, 251, 269, 286, 291, 297, 310

Index of Words

1.9-Wl,see1.;‘07

'10 ‘threshold’, I63,

110.571, 19, 155, 239, 269, 288, 289, 312 n11,144 ‘01, 156, 239, 269, 274, 276, 279, 291, 302, 304, 305, 306

345, 346 1‘50, 346, 347 7:10, 121, 164, 239, 269, 283, 291, 309 1090*, 347, 348 11110, see 117-111) 000, 8, 162 1'10, 166, 167, 252

1:80.810, 341 .18080, 341 7:0, 147 NP, 9 “110, 342 720*, 341, 342 ‘39, 341, 342 ‘19, 341, 342 1’70, 102, 120, 138, 157, 158, 239, 269, 283, 290, 292, 297, 309 1110, 342, 343 710, 199 010, 159, 201 .1010, 159 I110, 160 I110, 99, 160, 161, 169, 239, 245, 269, 274, 276, 278, 292, 302, 305, 306 “111°, 75 1‘0, 347, 348

717117, 188 1117, 219 .1017, 335 1717, 106 711, 323 .1717, 41 my, 209 1199, 60 5937, 75 7W, 346 11-1912, 167, 168, 326 11,85, 148, 149,209 71:71], 209 my ‘to be bare’, 168, 169 my“ ‘to be green’, 169 my, 168, 169, 239, 245,

269, 274, 293, 307 7112217, 209

W0, 97 10, 161, 162

189, 169, 170 185, 169, 170, 239, 269,

710, 161 1:0, 161 130 ‘to encounter danger’, 204 130* ‘to be poor’, 148

274a 292, 307 .19, 218 788315, 175, 299 “102019, 175, 299 110*, 170 .115, 153, 170, 171 119, I71, I72, 309 027119, 0713, 172 15, 348, 349 K19 ‘trap, bird trap’, 172, 239, 269, 274, 278, 303, 306 na ‘metal plating’, 173,

779, 343 1170, 344 1770*, 344 0770, 344, 345 1170, 220 15790, 162 110-0, 162 90, 345 r10 (a type of bowl), 160, 163, 164

239, 269, 274, 278, 303, 306 115, 348

71,119, 230 r1119, 172 011,5, 172 "W5, 13, 14,174,175, 239, 269, 293, 299, 307 7‘9, 141 0179, see W75 0010, 175,299 1'5, 349 130*, I70 W175, W170, I76, 177 .7777, 350 179, I77 139, 178 “’15, 178, I79 119*, 179 7:95, 350, 351 000*, 351 081$, 27 1315, 180,181,182, 183, 239, 243, 262,269, 288, 312 0719, 8, 20,181,182, 239, 251, 269, 288, 289, 311 1110, 181, 182,183,239, 252, 253, 269,288, 289, 312 ’73, 350, 351 002, see 0015 “9‘15, 351, 352 .1915, 146, 183,184, 239, 245, 269, 274, 293, 307 mm, 185, 239, 269, 288, 290, 298, 312 711179, 351 115, 223 13-719, see 1305 1311-51, 13179, 185, 186, 239, 269, 288,312 03135, 186, 187, 239, 269, 288, 312 1105, 146 7111.5, 187 011135, 175,299

Index of Words

49I

M

Was, 16, 184,188, 239, 269, 288, 290,

291, 312 1.83, 323 :3, 188, 189 2:; ‘riverboat’, 189, 239, 269, 274, 276, 278, 293, 302, 303, 305, 307 1:: ‘desert creature’, 140 133, 13, 146 1‘3, 352 nah-3, I92 .133, 342 1153, 61, 290 MW, 192

22, I90, 239, 269, 274, 278, 302, 306 3:.7*, 190 11173-2, 80, 192 1171*, 197 37:17,, see 11:11":W, see ‘17 11‘P’PJ90, I91, 239, 269, 274, 275, 278, 292, 307 1151, 144 111379, 192, 239, 269, ’

274, 278, 291, 304, 305, 306

“JP, 193, 352, 353 11W, 44, 52, I32, I93, 194 “W, 194, 239, 269, 274, 275, 277, 279, 291, 302, 306 WP, 11171, I4, 16, I94, I95, 196, 211, 221, 239, 269, 274, 275, 292, 304, 306 1139, 124 .‘W‘XP, 44, 196 173.7, 196 any, 86, 197 HP, 16 mp, 209

am, 197, I98 m’mq, 116, 179 mm, 108, 351 111081, 61, 108,290 :11, 162 5n, 93 1111, 140 711, 189 n, 198, 199,239,245, 262, 269, 288 7111, 199 3‘1, 341 113*, 88 P“, 342 33.1, 51, 350 via"), 51, 201 1173‘} ‘pomegranate’, 200 11731 (a proper name), 200 rim-'1 (a toponym), 200 nap-'1, 201, 239, 269, 288, 293, 312 101, 13, 201, 202, 213, 239, 262, 269, 286, 291, 297, 298, 310 “217-1, 350 Wm, 351 am, 227 37.1, 148, 149 mm, 116 INT", 228 "WW, 203 1731p, 220 0112), 107, 204 W], 204 nail)“, 205 PW, 204, 205 nvaty, 205, 206, 239, 269, 274, 277, 278, 302, 306 1312*, 204 npw, 206 13171;], 140 mm), 143 PW, 187, 353, 354

1:11, 41,206 73% 354 3111}, 151, 323 mam), 198 517119354355 1911!}, see 3911) Mitzi, see W111) WW, 111/112}, 206, 207, 239, 269s 274, 289, 292, 307 .‘IWW, 207 n‘mw, 13, 208 .101), 208,209, 239, 269, 274. 289, 293, 304, 305, 306 WW, 111 W}, 77 WW7, WV}, 74, 75, 209. 210, 215, 239, 252, 253, 269, 274, 289, 293, 307 1‘23} ‘snow’, 68 173) (an alkaline substance), 68 r1512), 341 WM, 355, 356 W, 40, 355 1739‘, 210, 211 17W, 220 w, 10, 212, 278 tau-aw, 10, 14, 195, 211, 212, 221, 239, 269, 274, 278, 293, 302, 306 W, I34 511127, 99 mm, 355 1511?, 105 191», 346 190, 19W, 212, 213 70119356 WW, 11210, 117, 202, 213, 239, 269, 283, 285, 292, 297, 309 WV} ‘six’, 207 W) ‘Egyptian linen’, I50, 210, 215, 216,

Index of Words

494

M

mm, 109 m0, 110

1911 39, 4o, 79 ’grt’, 155 Jkr)’

1‘, 113 17:3, 123 173:, 124 0:), 118 110:, 127 111:, 138

7’7’7, 139 7173 ‘to give’, 144 1173 ‘gifi’, 144 n‘m, 145 ‘73, 74

’lh’, 106 ’lw’, see ‘lwy ’mr’, 163 ’nk’, 56, 326 p’dn’, 59 p’qrs’, 157 ’pwd’, 58 Jrbn’, 48, 83 ’rgdy, 42 ’rgwn’, 64 ’rgzt’, 63, 64 ’ry’, 138, 139, 140 ’rz’, see r’z’ ’skwl’, 203 ’spry, 62

111:, 142

’sqp’, 79 ’sqwbytrws, 132

OD, 159

’s1’, 194, 335 ’stqf’, 43 ’swry’, 328 ’s'kr", 67 ’s'kr", 54, 208

39, 163 7:17, 147 MW, 167, 168 mnwv, 358

119, 173 779, I77 WP, 352 W1, 16 13111711 mp, 116

11:12, 220 m, 222 nnvn, 358 112111, 220 mm, 229 1.5.14 Syriac ’b’, 36 ’bdn’, 111 ’br’, 167 ’dmws, 56 ’glwkwn, 44 ’gm’, 38, 83

’S'Wp’, 325 ’tr’, 59 ’rwn’, 71 ’wmn’, 55 ’WW’, 34 ’wtr’, 339 y’qr’, 73, 339 y’r’, 328 y’spwn, 116 ’ysryl, 229 ’yzgd’, 330 ‘b’, 66 ‘bwr’, 354 ‘dr, 144 ‘lwy, ’Iw’, 43, 44 ‘mr’, 134 (rq), 83’

by‘r’, 354 bgbwg’, 349 Mn, 76 bh,yr, 76 b1_hwdw, 41 brq, 341 brq’, 327 brwl’, 228 brwlh’, 73 brwt’, 77 bw_s’, 73, 169

byt’, 75, 122, 339 dhb’, 101, 136,228,348 d,hn’, 178 61M, 334 dhr’, 53 drykwn’, 87 ds'n’, 339 dt’, 89 dwd’, 329 dwq’, 205 aywt’, 87

g’r”, 69 gdwl’, 225 ggrt’, 69 glb’, 328 glym’, 82 gr", 328 grbdy, 80 gwp’, 336 gwry’, 140 mi 37 321 83 gzbr’, 81 hdm’, 92 hmnyk’, 96 hmnyn’, see hmyn’ hmyn’, hmnyn’, 35a 96 hykl’, 94

rrs’, 332 ‘wl’, 326

had 97 h,kym’, 102

W ‘gl’, 49

M 149 h,lt’, 151

b‘gl, 57

.thS.wt’, 335

495 hmr’, 112, 220 hwy, 329 .hr‘, 101 hrs", 102 .hrz’, 225 115.3, I94, 335 hsnyn’, 86 .hs'b, 330 htm’, 108, 304 hwrf, 103 .hy’, 214 hyl’, 50 hzw.’, 106 k’p’, 76, 100, 136, 179, 228, 348 kdn’, 115 khn’, 124 k1, I66, I79 klw’, 169 kmwn’, 123 kmyr, 336 km’, 126, 179 krblt’, 130 krps’, I34 krs’, 135 krwz’, 131 kn, 131 ks’, 118, I64 kssfrwn’, 84 km’, 138, 157 ktwn’, 137 ktys’, 111 kwb’, 134 kwbs", 93 kwlb’, 121, 197 kwlbs'y, 334 kwmr’, 124, 229 kwpr’, 128 kwr’, 129, 333 kwrkm’, 43, 132 kwrsy’, 127 kwtyn’, I37 kyn’, 336

Firm, 343 lbwnt’, 9o lgywn’, 189

lmpyd’, 141, 350 lqn’, 39, 163 ltk, 144 ltk’, 143, 144 lw", 168 lwp’, 46 les’, 132 lylyt’, I39 Iyt, 334 m’n’, 39, 82, 123, 169 mbw", 41 ' mdm, 179 mgdl’, 6o mgl’, 104 mgn, 144 mgws", 52, 325 mgzr’, 85 mhwt’, 151 mhwz’, 335 mlbn’, 146 mlgm’, 107 mlh,’, 145 mlk’, 50 ml}, 146 mlf, 146 mny’, 337 mrg’, 48 mrgnyt’, 174, 209, 327 msn’, 328 msnt’, 110 msrhby’t, 189 msnpf, 169 mSydt’, 336 msvbh’, 348 msvkb’, 151 ms'ryt’, 189 mtr’, 66 mw‘zl’, 177 my’, 68 myr’, 354 mzmk’, 163 nbrs't’, 150 nh.t’, 13o nksy’, 152 nmrt’, 342 nmws’, 89

nqd’, 34o nrdyn, 154 nrg’, 85, 121, 197 ntr’, 156 "WV, 47, 350

nys", 334 nyzk’, 119 pdt’, 58, 136 pgwdt’, 202 1711’, I72 phf, 105, I73, I74 plq’ ‘axe’, 121 plq’ ‘concubine’, I76 ppyrwn, 83 Pr‘wn, I83 prbr", 180 prdys’, 181, 289 prk’, 352 prs'gn’, 184, 185, 188 Prtwy’, 185 prwr’, I82 prywn, 60 przl’, 78, 85 ps’, 351 P55, 35I psyq, 66 psi I71 Psh’, 171 ptbg’, see pfbg’ ptgm’, 155, 186, I87 ptwtk’, 116 pfbg ‘to feast’, I86 ptbg’, ptbg’ ‘royal food’, 186 pts", I75, I76 p.tyh.’, 35 pwld, 35o pwqdn’, 89 pwrs'n’, 326 pyl’, 211 qb’, 190 qbwt’, 217 qdr’, 192 qu’, 328 qlwby’, 334 q.ms’, 344

496

Index of Wards M qmyn’, 47 anynwn’, 143 wt 352 qr”, 190 qrdl’, 192 qudn’, 116, 174, 206 qrm’, 51 mt 349 qrfl’, 4o qrwk’, 188 qrwsflws, 153 qswt’, 54 wt I96 qs'ys", 229 qtfq’, 68 quwq’, I63 th’, I98 qwb", 117 qwnmwn, 193 mi 195 qwrbn’, 67 mi 54, 66 qytr’, 191 r’z’, ’rz’, 198, 199 rb’, 5o, 91 rby, 66 rmk’, 201 rwmn’, 200 rys", 229

mi 347 s’t’, 340, 341 s‘r’, 169 sb‘, 144 sdwn’, 157, 158 skr’, 119 skyn’, 204 sl’, 110 slq’, 336 sly’, 347

mi 345 Smgdnbw, 162 smyd’, 223 snwrt’, 117 snyn’, 348 wt 346 spyl’, H3, 346, 347

spyr’, 347 sq’, 353 srdwn’, I36, I79 ssgwn’, I33, 218 str’, I61 swg”, 350 swgr’, 342 swm, 338 swsy’, 159 symt’, 83 syrs’, 218

,sd", I69 s.dyd’, 153, I70 s_lm’, 227 ,spwny’, 158

tklyt’, 157, 187 1163357 tktws", 325 tl’, 222 tlg’, 68 tnwr’, 222 tpty’, 224 pty’, 122 tqn, 55, 188 tr’, I63 trbdy, 89 trgm, 226 trgmn’, 226 trs’ys’, 228 ts'wyt’, 74, 163, 332 rwb, 334

.syrt’, 352 s" ’, 96 s'bh’, 169 s'byhfl 169 s'kyn’, 93 s'lhbyt’, 69 s'lm, 144 s'ly_t’, 36, 166 s'myr’, 210 s'pr, 346

16 I36, I79, 348 Ib", 109 tm’, 332 .tmy, 332 t,pr’, 208 frn’, 100 ,trpns), 119 Is’, I73 tw,s’, 221

SW, 59 s'ql’, 185 s'qm’, 356 s'rbl’, 165 s'rg’, I50 s'rs'y, 214 s'rwyn’, 216 s'ryn’, 213 s'ryr, 47, 100

yqr), I36 ys'ph, 113, 114 ytr’, 156

s'ty’, 357 s'wbh’, I69

mi, 174 zrt’, 99 zwp’, 46 zyn’, 322, 323

s'wpr”, 75 s'wr’, 7O svws'nt’, 207 s'ys", 74, 209, 210

T’rtn, 230 1‘11 354, 355 tb‘t’, 186 thly’, 13, 208 tklt’, 149

zbn’, 96 zbt’, see zpt’ 21h, 344 zn’, 98 zpt’, zbt), 98

1.5.15 Tigre ka“rba, 334 1.5.16 Ugaritic ’_tr, 216

a’bynt, 322

Index of Words /”_—_————_______org", 39, 309 db, 48 a‘lgbl, 53a 54 a’lgm, 54, 55 airgmn, i’rgmn, 64, 65, 309 a’rW. I39 p‘rt, 167 ‘rgz, 38 brm, I79 brd_1, 78, 282, 309

krs'n, see krsn krsu', krs'u’, 135 krs'u', see krsu’ Krw, 164 ks, 118 ksa’n, 107 ksu’, ks’u’, 93, 107, 127 ks’u’. see ksu’ km, 137

§br, 69 s'_hlt, 13, 208 *s'mrgt, 338 S‘mrhit, 338 Tgyn, 163 tis'r, 216 II, 222 *mr, 222 (nrr, 222

Ibu’, 138 lrmn, 200

tpnr, 164

1111.. I43, I44

Trt_, 220

trz, 220 ttrp, 227

dd, 329

mgn ‘to give’, 144 mgn ‘gifi’, 144

gd, 128

WI, 337 Wk, 338

hbn, 90, 306 hdm, 93 hkl, 94 *hn, 95

my", 149 tht, 152 mid, 340 nr, 222

Mg. 107 M. 347 ,htI, 107 h_brz_, 70, 121 hp”, 121 'Hndr, I64 'hrm_tt, 104, 105 _hr,s, 101 ihrs'hv, 121

ibsn, 17, 34 zp’d, 58 irgmn, see a’rgmn iqnu’, I79 kd, 115 kh._t, 93 Klnmw, I63 kmn, 123 knr, 126 Knr, 126 kpr, 128 kpsln, 121 krsn, krs’n, 135

12‘", 93 pd, 349 pbr, I74 pld, 350 plk, 177 Prwsdy, I63 qb‘t, 8o qlvht, 192, 306 (In, 352 qrn, 16 qrsu’, 135 qtn, 119 rgm, 226 rh_, 128 rsyy, 69

Ikt, 205, 306 .14, 354 t_rt, 205 t_ryn, 213

u’lp, 323 u’n_t, 70 u's'r, 69 u’t_pt, 69 u’zb, 46 yn, 10, 113, 220 yrd, 38 ys'r, 216 2. CHINESE guz‘, 196 guizht', 196 guizz', 196 3. DRAVIDIAN 3.1 Mayalam to'ka, 221 3.2 Tamil k1'_n.naram, 126 kimi, 115

sp, 163 spl, 164 spr, 347 spsg, 347, 348 s's'w, 159

to‘kai, 221 4. ELAMITE ba-ri-ba-ra's“, 180 ba-ri-ba—ra-um, I80

497

_-_.

498

Index of Words

ba-ri-pa-ras", I80 bar-(e-da, 182 bar-te-tas', 182 bat-ti-karma, 186 bat-tz'-ka4-mas', 186

zu‘-ub-bu, 188 zu-um-bu, 188 zu‘-um-bu, 188

bat-ri-zi—ik-nu-s'e, 188

5. ETRUSCAN s'erona-, 167

da—tams, 89 da-ud—da-bar—ra, 89

6. GEORGIAN gv'ino. 113

ha-ba-da~na, 59, 291 ha-za-ir-na-um, 7o ha-za-ra-an-na, 7o *is-ma-lu, 106 ka4-an-za, 83 ka4-an-za-ba-ra, 81 ka4-in-za-ba-ra, 81 ka4-in-za-um, 83 ka4-za-ba-ra, 81 ka’n-da-bar-ra, 8o, 81 ka'n-za-ba-ra, 81 ka'n-za-bar-ra, 81 ka’n-za—um, 83

Iomi, 138, 139

pt'r-ra-is'-s'a'-ik-ka4, 61 pz'r-ra-tamg-ma, 185 Sarbaladda, 165

hyaigallig 94 Vhiyari-, “hiyaru'h'heg 101, 120, 138, 158 h'iyaruh'h'ea see _hiyari_hubrus(3hi)-, 7o *iaspe-, 114 ispadi-, see ispandiispandi-, ispadi-, 69

t'one, 222, 223 7. HATTIC gazue, see kazue gazui, see kazue hvunzinar, 126 ippzz‘inar, 126 kazue, kazui, gazue, gazui, 118 kazui, see kazue kusim, kus'im, 127, 128

nu-da-nu-ia-is', 151 nu-da-nu-is', 151

irimpi-, see erippiirippi-, see erpipi-

kadinni—, 102, 119, 138, 158 kasi-, kazi—, kazzi-, 118 kazi—, see kasikazzi-, see kasi*kinari-, 126 kinnaruvhulig 126 kirenzi-, 131, 132 *kirezzi-, 131 *kiuri-, 120, 121 kumri-, 124, 125, 291 kumurse-, 125 kuvavhi-, 117, 284

kus'im, see kusim maganni-, 144, 145,310

*windu, 113 windukaram, 113

*mese-, 147, 148 nurandi—, 200

zinar, zinir, 126 zim'r, see zinar

sadinm'-, 102, 120, 157, 158

si-, 162 Si-im-gir-na, 162 si-im-ma-gir, 162 *simakir, 162 Sin-ma-gir, 162

8. HURRO-URARTIAN *kiuri-, 121

sarianni-, sarty'anni-, 213, 214 sarly'anni-, see sarianni-

8.1 Hurrian abi-, 45

tardenni-, 230

abuzi-, 34 te-im-ti, 224, 225

*ad-, 93

te-zp‘-ti, 224, 225

admi-, 93

*u'-is'-bar-na, 57 u'-is'-bar-na-is'-be, 57 u'-is'-pz'r—na-is’-be, 57, 58

za-a-na, 322

0g", aganml, 15, 39,40

unussi-, 70 wizzaena-, 333

zain-, 164, 291

erippi-, irippi-, irimpi-, 66, 67

8.2 Urartian kiri-, 120, 121

Index of Words

/’_—————————_—__

mes'—, I48 mes'e-, 148 9,1NDO-EUROPEAN *b”ena"-, 36 *b"er-, 183

duddu-, 329

tappinu-, 223, 224 tarkummai-,

gazi-, gazzi-, 118 gazzi-, see gazi-

tarkummiya-, 226 tarkummiya-, see

banal, 105, 291 bum/[11, 107, 108

tarkummai— tieK's‘ar-, 216 tum‘k-, 178

*dhur—, 225

*hxeku’Ou 159, I60 *hlepi-, I77 *hlerk-, 65

*hzer'gl, 65 *hzerk- , *ke’r-, 16 ‘lq*'-n-, 16 *Iegh-, 177 *Ieth-, 141

*rejg-, *rejg'-, 202 *rfleigl, see *rejg*sar-, *ser-, I67 *ser—, see *sar— *(s)ker-, 205

ipantu-, 58 1'.{-_hu-, 71 ii‘.panti—, see “patii§pati-, is‘pami-, 69 kappani-, 124 kar1'u11i-, 130, 131 *kinir-, 126 kim’rtalla-, 126 kullupi-, 121, 122 kumra-, 124, 125 kupavhi-, 117, 284 kurs'a-, 135 kurtaI-, kurtaIi-, kurtalIi-, 41 kurta11'-, see kurtalkurtalli-, see kurtal-

lap-, 141 lappina-, 141 *Iappit, 141 1appiya-, 141

wiyan-, wiyana-, 10, 113 wiyana-, see wiyan-

yaS‘pu-, 114

zahybelig 208 zapzagi-, 347. 348 zuppu-, 163 zu'pu-, 46 9.1.2 Luvian a'pi!-, 45 arkamman-, 64, 65 asu-, asuwa-, 159 asuwa-, see asuazzu-, azzuwa-, 159 azzuwa-, see azzuBONUS, 220

DEUS, 220 FUSUS, 177

*s'eku'0-, I60 mas's'iya-, 149, 150

*uaehzg 113 9.1 Anatolian 9.1.1 Hittite aganni—, 39, 309 anda, 18 apt" api§i-, 325 apuzzi-, 34 arimpa-, 66, 67 arkama-, arkaman-, 64, 65 arkaman-, see arkamaarkamman-, 64, 65 azzuwa-, 159

*mat-, I47

irimpil-, irippil—, 66, 67

mazz-, 147

irippit-, see irimpil-

nitri-, 156, 291

*Iap-, 141 *lappit-, 141, 309 lappiya-, 141

nurati-, 200

para" tarnumar, 132 pul-, 171 puniki-, punniki-, 178 purmiki-, see pum’ki-

*miti-, 147 parzagulliya, 79 parzaS‘S‘a, 79

s'alIi-, 355 s'allis', 355 s'ariya-, 213 .s‘er, 167

*parzilli-, 78, 79, 281, 282, 309

sarli, 167 SERVUS, 147

500

Index of Words

s'arri, 167 *tarkummanni-, *tar— kummiyanni—, 226, 227, 309 tarkummi-, 226, 309 *tarkummiyanni-, see *tarkummannitarpi-, 227, 228, 291 tarwani-, I67 tuwarsa-, 220

k 'nar, 126 k 'urm, 125

peuple, pople, 3 pople, see peuple

maneak, 96

shou, 341

nr‘em’, 200 patc'e‘n, 188 patgam, 187 polpat, see polvat polvat, polpat, 350

9.5 German Lo"we, 139

schu, 341 9.6 Greek 9.6.1 Greek

wiyana-, 113

9.1.3 Lycm’n ese”ne-, 167

*pale'n-, 167 Xssadrapa-, 50 9.1.4 Lydian 1aqrisa-, 181 serli—, 167

t'onir, 222, 223 zén, ze‘an, 322 ze‘an, see ze‘n

z'amanak, 97 9.3 English chocolate, 8

genizah, 84 hound, 44 hundred, 44

9.2 Armenian ac'ar', awc'ar', 7O awc'ar', see ac“ar'

lion, 139

anag, 56

people, 3 purse, 135

ana'r, 200 andam, 92

dat, 89 datawor, 9o

sack, 353 sapphire, 346 shoo, 341 Susan, 207

ankuwz, 38 2‘5, 159

vessel, 123

evramak, 201 evrasan, 202

wine, 10

ganj, 84 ganjanak, 84 ganjawor, 81, 82

zero, 3 9.4 French

gini, 113

bourse, 135

kac 'in, 86 karkehan, 117

cannelle, 193

afiatog, 222 a’yaBo’g, 136 a’ytmoxov, see a’ya’koxov 617004101, 52 a’yak’oxov, a’ycmoxov, 44 6116409, 324 61109, 39, 334 011090161469, 354 a’fiapa'vnvog, 56 a‘éa'nag, 56 a‘Capanang, 42 AGepoaGa, 229 a1"ps