Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Possible meaning of the name Abraham


Riaan

Recommended Posts

The name "Israel" can be found on the stela of Merneptah, who ruled near the end of Dynasty 19.  In fact, the writing does most closely respond to "Israel" but I am not totally certain it is not "Jezreel" there because the hieroglyphic text adds "it's seed is no more" and Jezreel means "seed of God" in Hebrew.  The ancient Egyptians loved puns and all kinds of clever rhyming, especially noticeable in the section where the toponyms are given.  Still, "Israel" is actually "Yisrael" in Hebrew and it was writtten by the Egyptians with a /y/ on the stela. Regardless, even if a group of people were called "Israel", the name does not mean the Hebrews were not called something else, too.  In the Book of Exodus, you can see that Moses always refers to his people as "Hebrews" when addressing the king of Egypt, even though "Children of Israel" is written elsewhere.  That is because this is a name the Pharaoh understood and that is "Apiru", mentioned in various New Kingdom documents.  Josephus wrote that once the Israelites were known as the "Ermuth" and then as the "Hebrews".  Indeed, in some texts, a foreign people were known as the "Aamw" as far back as Dynasty 12.  I think the writing of "aAmw" can have been vocalized as "aramu" due to an old value of the grapheme /A/.  Here are the Aamu as shown in the tomb of khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan.  Their leader is called "Abisha" and is given the title of "HqA XAst" or "ruler of a foreign land".  You can see the writing of "aAmw" above his head.  It ends with the figure of a bound captive and the number of people [37] who came to present eye paint to Khnumhotep.

Ancient-Egyptian-Military-Campaigns-immigrants.jpg

Edited by Aldebaran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
5 hours ago, Aldebaran said:

.  In the Book of Exodus, you can see that Moses always refers to his people as "Hebrews" when addressing the king of Egypt, even though "Children of Israel" is written elsewhere.  That is because this is a name the Pharaoh understood and that is "Apiru", mentioned in various New Kingdom documents.  

Actually, we don't know this.

In the Masoretic version of the Book of Exodus, the term is "`Ibriy" - and it's what the people themselves called themselves at the time this book was written.  The diplomatic lingua franca (to judge from the el-Amarna letters and others) seems to have been Akkadian and I doubt that the Hebrews would have called themselves 'apiru' since it means "robber" in Akkadian.

To cite Wikipedia:

Quote

Anson Rainey has argued that "the plethora of attempts to relate apiru (Habiru) to the gentilic ibri are all nothing but wishful thinking." The Zondervan Illustrated Bible Dictionary states that Habiru is not an ethnic identification and is used to refer to both Semites and non-Semites, adding that "the connection, if there is any, remains obscure."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habiru

Hebrews are usually identified as the "Shasu of Yhw (YHWH)"

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You misunderstood me.  I said that when Moses spoke to Pharaoh he referred to Hebrews because that was the designation the Egyptians used--not what the people of Moses called themselves.  The Apiru are definitely mentioned in Egyptian texts in the context of people in Canaan and in Egypt, as well.  The term "Hebrew" must come from somewhere.  Even the Bible suggests it is from the name "Eber" but that is an obviously false etymology.  And the Greeks did not call the Jews "Hebraios" for no reason.  Other languages leave off the the initial "H".  The King James Bible follows the Greek designation as it was taken from the Septuagint. Can you suggest a better etymology than "Apiru"?  As for the meaning--I would not say "robbers" but "wanderers".  Whoever the Shasu were, you must admit their appellation does not much resemble "Hebrew".  Here can be found some Egyptian usages of the term "Apiru":  http://www.israel-a-history-of.com/ancient-egyptian-literature.html

 

Edited by Aldebaran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aldebaran said:

.....I said that when Moses spoke to Pharaoh he referred to Hebrews because that was the designation the Egyptians used--not what the people of Moses called themselves.  The Apiru are definitely mentioned in Egyptian texts in the context of people in Canaan and in Egypt, as well.  The term "Hebrew" must come from somewhere.   

......Here can be found some Egyptian usages of the term "Apiru":  http://www.israel-a-history-of.com/ancient-egyptian-literature.html

 

I agree that Moses's discussions with Pharaoh used the term 'pr.w (Hebrews) because that was a term the Egyptians used.  Here is another link that says the (Hebrew language) name Hebrew comes from Egypt.

 
 In the Old Testament Israelites were Israelites, not Hebrews, except, rarely, when viewed in relation to external peoples. The one possible exception to this is the ‘Hebrew servant’, of which more later (Exodus 21.2; Deuteronomy 15.12 compare Jeremiah 34.9, 14).

Apart from this latter use, and a single use related to Abram, the term is limited to three sections, two relating to servitude in Egypt and one relating to dealings with the Philistines who were non-Semites. There is one further exception to this and that is the use by Jonah to describe himself to foreign sailors.

The description Abram ‘the Hebrew’ - in Genesis 14.13 - is contained in a covenant narrative confirming the covenant between Abram and Melchizedek. Abram is called ‘Abram the Hebrew’ as a (potential) leader of a military force who is part of a confederation. As Abram was stateless (contrast ‘Amre’ who is called ‘the Amorite’) this method of identifying him may be seen as of some significance, as it ties in with the use of the terms ‘apiru and habiru elsewhere of stateless military leaders. In adminstrative texts in Southern Mesopotamia the SA.GAZ or ‘Hapiri’ are independent soldiers under a chief who receive supplies of food, as Abram does in Genesis 14, as are the ‘Hapiru’ from texts from Mari (to the West of Babylonia). Melchizedech may well therefore have seen him as an Hapiru.

Joseph the Hebrew The next use of the term is in Genesis 39.14, 17; 41.12 where Joseph is called ‘an Hebrew’ or a ‘Hebrew servant’ by Egyptians. And Joseph himself uses the term when identifying himself to Egyptians when he says ‘I was stolen from the land of the Hebrews’ (Genesis 40.15). The ‘land of the Hebrews’ is ‘the place of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites’ (Exodus 3.8), a land without political unity.

The Hebrews in Egypt

Again in Exodus 1.15, 16, 19; 2.6, 7, 11, 13; the term ‘Hebrew’ is used in a context of those who are slaves to the Egyptians in relation to the Egyptians. In Exodus 3.18; 5.3; 7.16; 9.1, 13; 10.3 God is called ‘the Lord God (once ‘God’ only) of the Hebrews’ having dealings with Pharaoh in view. Pharaoh would be thinking of the slaves as Hapiru.

Thus the term is constantly used as a way of describing foreign slaves to Egyptians, especially slaves from what was known Biblically as ‘the land of Canaan’ which was known by the Egyptians to be filled with disparate peoples including the ‘prw, mentioned in the Amarna letters as Hapiru.

Like Abram these people were basically stateless for they were not identified with any city state, but, as far as outside peoples were concerned, were part of those peoples who had no specific identification. In other words the children of Israel saw themselves as ‘Israel’, but outsiders saw them as ‘prw or Hapiru.

The ‘prw are mentioned in a number of Egyptian texts and range from fighting men in Canaan to captives employed as servants to strain wine, to prisoners given to the temples, to workers in the quarries of the Wadi Hammamat. (The ‘prw are identified with the SA.GAZ in Ras Shamra texts, a term often used of the Hapiru). Above all they are foreigners. It is therefore increasingly certain that the Israelites in Egypt would be seen as ‘prw.

endquote

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact remains that we seem to be engaged in a long-running game of Lego linguistics with the Habiru. This is certainly not the same as, nor is it the origin of, the term Hebrew. The designation Habiru originally appears in the 18th century BCE and disappears from the historical record by the 11th century BCE, so the origin of the term emerged long before the Hebrews even existed. "Habiru" can be traced back to an Akkadian origin with the meaning of "migrant," although "refugee" is also cited.

The Habiru definitely appear in Egyptian records, and most notably the Amarna Letters (more commonly transliterated 'apirw in Egyptian records). They also appear in records in Canaan, Nuzi, and Syria. The Habiru were not a cultural or ethnic entity but rather a widely heterogenous collection of cast-offs from society. It was only around the time of the Amarna Letters that the term Habiru began to take on the distinctly negative connotation of outlaw. As seen in the Amarna Letters, the Habiru were bandits and raiders causing constant upset and disruption to the cities and trade routes of Canaan.

The Nuzi tablets are an important source for gaining a better understanding of the Habiru. Recorded mainly as slaves on these tablets, Habiru personal names tell us they came from Babylon, Assur, Akkad, the Mitanni, and others. Now, it's altogether possible that toward the end of the 13th century and into the 12th century BCE, when the Hebrews first emerged, that some Habiru were composed of Hebrews.

But to be certain, the Habiru and Hebrews are two separate entities.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On November 5, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Aldebaran said:

The name "Israel" can be found on the stela of Merneptah, who ruled near the end of Dynasty 19.  In fact, the writing does most closely respond to "Israel" but I am not totally certain it is not "Jezreel" there because the hieroglyphic text adds "it's seed is no more" and Jezreel means "seed of God" in Hebrew.  The ancient Egyptians loved puns and all kinds of clever rhyming, especially noticeable in the section where the toponyms are given.  Still, "Israel" is actually "Yisrael" in Hebrew and it was writtten by the Egyptians with a /y/ on the stela...

I would stick with "Israel" as the meaning on Merneptah's stela. I'm aware not all scholars agree with this, but the vast majority do. I'm not sure of the Egyptian word for "Jezreel" but it's more than just the name Israel itself on the inscription. You can refer to this handy graphic I stole from some web page.

You see the word Israel spelled in hieroglyphs at far right. What's significant is the determinative at the end of the word: a squatting man and woman surmounting three strokes. This informs the Egyptians' meaning of Israel. Had it been Jezreel the valley you'd likely see the three-hills glyphs, or Jezreel the city the city glyph. What we see instead with the plurality of the man and woman is simply "people." In other words the Egyptians viewed Israel not as a kingdom or city or geographical location, but as a tribe of people. This melds quite well with the archaeology of the Holy Land, which reveals the Hebrews were only just starting to emerge on the scene when this stela was cut (c. 1208 BCE).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

You see the word Israel spelled in hieroglyphs at far right. What's significant is the determinative at the end of the word: a squatting man and woman surmounting three strokes. This informs the Egyptians' meaning of Israel. Had it been Jezreel the valley you'd likely see the three-hills glyphs, or Jezreel the city the city glyph. What we see instead with the plurality of the man and woman is simply "people." In other words the Egyptians viewed Israel not as a kingdom or city or geographical location, but as a tribe of people. This melds quite well with the archaeology of the Holy Land, which reveals the Hebrews were only just starting to emerge on the scene when this stela was cut (c. 1208 BCE).

The determinatives on the stela would be more reassuring of they were consistently employed.  Alas, they are not  and one can see a people, the Libu, written with a toponym determinative.  However, I wouldn't argue against Israel being there.  I would strongly disagree that the Hebrews were just emerging on the scene during the reign of Merneptah.  For me, the conquest of Caanan began with the Apiru during the reign of Akhenaten, when this pharaoh was informed that all the princes loyal to Egypt had been killed by them.  All this stela indicates for me is that the name of these people was now acknowledged as "Israel".  And, of course, the demise of this group was grossly exaggerated.  This entire section was one big play on words, fancy writing.  

Edited by Aldebaran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

But to be certain, the Habiru and Hebrews are two separate entities.

I don't think the matter is as settled as all that and so would prefer to keep an open mind.  Until, of course, someone comes up with a convincing etymology for "Hebrews" that has nothing to do with the Apiru.

Edited by Aldebaran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like the beginnings of a radical Muslim "push"

No thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/7/2016 at 8:45 AM, Kenemet said:

 

2 hours ago, pallidin said:

Seems like the beginnings of a radical Muslim "push"

No thanks.

Nothing like adding a little casual bigotry in a thread where it's absolutely unwarranted. Thanks for bringing down the tone of the whole site.

--Jaylemurph

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

........The Habiru definitely appear in Egyptian records, and most notably the Amarna Letters (more commonly transliterated 'apirw in Egyptian records). They also appear in records in Canaan, Nuzi, and Syria. The Habiru were not a cultural or ethnic entity but rather a widely heterogenous collection of cast-offs from society. It was only around the time of the Amarna Letters that the term Habiru began to take on the distinctly negative connotation of outlaw. As seen in the Amarna Letters, the Habiru were bandits and raiders causing constant upset and disruption to the cities and trade routes of Canaan.

...............But to be certain, the Habiru and Hebrews are two separate entities.

kmt,

You can correct me if I am wrong.  But I believe the Amarna Letters, for northern regions near Egypt's administrative town Beth Shan, used the ideogram SA.GAZ (but not the Egyptian word  'prw). 

That region around Beth Shan was where Amenhotep II, in his year 9 campaign, claimed to have deported 3600 'prw (a little less than a century before the Amarna Letters were written).  It seems likely that Egypt's record keepers thought all the original 'prw had been removed from the region around Beth Shan, by Amenhotep II.  If so, then using the ideogram SA.GAZ in Amarna Letters would aim to distinguish a second type of 'prw.  

However, I believe Amarna letters for places near Jerusalem were using the Egyptian word 'prw (but not SA.GAZ).  This might have been intentionally separating the two categories of 'prw.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, atalante said:

You can correct me if I am wrong.  But I believe the Amarna Letters, for northern regions near Egypt's administrative town Beth Shan, used the ideogram SA.GAZ (but not the Egyptian word  'prw). 

Both SA Gaz and Habiru appear in the Amarna letters. They are likely interchangeable.  See here:  http://www.israel-a-history-of.com/amarna-letters.html

It's also interesting that the ancient city of Jericho, consisting of several layers, had a cemetery in which the graves contained Egyptian scarabs--but none later than  those of Amenhotep III.  No Amarna letter from a prince of Jericho, either.

Edited by Aldebaran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
On 11/6/2016 at 7:38 AM, atalante said:

I agree that Moses's discussions with Pharaoh used the term 'pr.w (Hebrews) because that was a term the Egyptians used.  Here is another link that says the (Hebrew language) name Hebrew comes from Egypt.

 
 In the Old Testament Israelites were Israelites, not Hebrews, except, rarely, when viewed in relation to external peoples. The one possible exception to this is the ‘Hebrew servant’, of which more later (Exodus 21.2; Deuteronomy 15.12 compare Jeremiah 34.9, 14).
(etc)

I have no idea who wrote that page, but the forcing of "Hebrew" onto Egyptian language just doesn't work.

These books were NOT written at the time when the presumed events occurred.  They probably didn't refer to themselves as "the Hebrews" unless "Hebrew" happened to mean something like "the ones" "the one true people" or "the people of (whatever)" or "the people who are under (whomever)".  

Just as we call John Smith (of Pocahontas fame) an American - but he would not have thought of himself as an American (because he came here as a British citizen and under the rule of the British empire.)

We don't know what he would have said to Akhenaten...because Akhenaten probably wouldn't have received him.  He didn't spend much time answering messengers of his client kings (and they complained that he made them wait in hot courtyards and they fainted from heat exhaustion.)  

The Bible is not history - it's the mythic origin story of a people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Kenemet said:

The Bible is not history - it's the mythic origin story of a people.

Let's not get carried away.  However the exodus story is presented [and there likely was even more than one in pharaonic times] the Jews would not have been commemorating it since antiquity as a watershed event in their history had they had no firm belief in it.  Nor did Egyptian historians of the Late Period attempt to deny it, albeit some were anti-Semitic to be sure.  Yes, even Jesus celebrated Passover.   And yet that does not mean every detail in the Book of Exodus must be fact.  Once the point of the Book of Kings is reached, myth and legend [which can still contain elements of truth] begins to give way to history--as corroborated by archaeology.  Although the Samaritan people always knew where Ahab's palace had been, it took an excavation to discover that the designation "House of Ivory" was the truth, as much had been decorated with that material.  Ahab is also mentioned in an Assyrian text [his enemy] and the man who killed his sons, Jehu, is even depicted kneeling to Assyrian might.   

220px-Jehu-Obelisk-cropped.jpg

Edited by Aldebaran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking about the name of Abraham on my own without this thread not too long ago, within the past few weeks.  I thought, Ham, in hebrew means charred, or black, as the 3 sons of Noah, Shem, Ham and Japeth.  Wheras, some people believe that these are the three root races of white, red, and black. Since, Shem means like the dusk, which is red, and Japeth is to enlarge its borders.  Anyway, Noah cursed Canaan, the son of Ham because of Ham revealing the nakedness of him while he was passed out drunk, and blessed Shem and Japeth. 

Abraham, is a descendent of Shem, and his original name was Abram, but God changed it later as he blessed him to Abraham.  I'm guessing it has something to do with the Israelites joining with Canaanites, as the curse on Canaan would be that they would serve Shem as servants of servants.  As the story goes, the sons of Abraham, conquered the Canaanites and took all their things, but wouldn't obey God all the way in destroying them, and thereby corrupted themselves when they were too afraid to take some of the Caananite cities, and intermarried the remaining Caananites.  So, Abraham, who was Shem, did become some of Ham about 400 years later.

Edited by Opus Magnus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Opus Magnus said:

  So, Abraham, who was Shem, did become some of Ham about 400 years later.

I can play this game, too, with characters from Greek tragedies, which are every bit as useful and practical guides to history as the Bible.

--Jaylemurph

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, jaylemurph said:

I can play this game, too, with characters from Greek tragedies, which are every bit as useful and practical guides to history as the Bible.

--Jaylemurph

Well, play the game then and reply to me in this thread http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/300277-the-seven-daughters-of-eve-and-the-greek-myth/?page=3#comment-5984391

Because, I replied to this post in that thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/8/2016 at 0:38 AM, Kenemet said:

I have no idea who wrote that page, but the forcing of "Hebrew" onto Egyptian language just doesn't work.

These books were NOT written at the time when the presumed events occurred.  They probably didn't refer to themselves as "the Hebrews" unless "Hebrew" happened to mean something like "the ones" "the one true people" or "the people of (whatever)" or "the people who are under (whomever)".  

....The Bible is not history - it's the mythic origin story of a people.

In regard to the name Hebrews, and to the Egyptian 'prw social class -- if there was any "forced" connection, it was arranged by the biblical J source.  Very likely, the connection was voluntary, early, and intentional.
 
The J source was applying theological grounds that forbade the J narrative to use the word "Israelites".  And so J chose to use the name of an Egyptian social class into which the Israelites had become embedded.
 
I presume that the earlest versions of the Genesis and Exodus themes were not trying to evoke all the international connections for cognates of the Egyptian term 'prw.  (But international connections for 'prw  throughout the ancient world are now understood, through modern archaeology.)      
 
 
"In sum, ivri serves as the only possible ethnicon for proto-Israelites in the patriarchal narratives, and thereafter, as an ethnicon -- bereft of the honorific associations of "Israel" -- to set off Israelites from foreigners." 
 
"From the contrast between ivri-mizri in Gen 43:32, Ex 1:19, 2:11, it follows that, like mizri "Egyptian", the term ivri is an ethnicon denoting Jacobites/Israelites."   
endquote
 
My Greenberg quote, above, is pointing out that the term Israelites would only apply to human descendents of the legendary man Israel, who took all of his descendents into Egypt.  Thus the ethnicon "Israelites" could not include Abram or any other biblical patriarchs before Israel.  On the other hand, the biblical ethnicon "Hebrew" could reach farther back in time to "Abram the Hebrew" (based on Genesis 14:13). 
 
 
 
But Greenberg did not delve into source criticism of the Hebrew bible. 
 
I recommend the book Who Wrote the Bible, by Richard Elliott Friedman (1987), for an entertaining explanation of how biblical source criticism has reached its current status. 
 
Two main narrative sources (a J source, and an E source) were merged together in the bible, when  discussing the legendary period before David's kingdom.
 
It is well-known that the J source avoided theophoric "El" names.  (J used "Iah" theophoric names, and YHWH as the deity name.)  But "Israelites" was a theophoric name.   The name Israel meant "the El god prevails".   https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?t=KJV&strongs=H3478 
 
Thus on "theological" (theophoric) grounds, the J source needed a different ethnicon instead of Israelites  --  to stand for the group of people headed by legendary Jacob/Israel, who moved his entire family into Egypt to become 'prw servants. 
 
The J source obviously did not use the word Jacobites (even though the bible points out that Jacob = Israel).
 
The J source chose the ethnicon "Hebrew/ibri/ivri" as a synonym to replace the word "Israelites".  J was using a more neutral word; i.e. a cognate of the Egyptian social class 'prw (into which the unmentionable Israelites had merged).  
 
Exodus 12:38 says that a "mixed multitude" of people accompanied the "sons of Israel" on the Exodus.
http://biblehub.com/exodus/12-38.htm  Thus the "mixed multitude" was originally intended to express both the descendents of Jacob/Israel, and also other Egyptians (presumably including some other Egyptian 'prw people) who went on the Exodus. 
 
 
 
(Judea's leader David lived a lifestyle of resembling a habiru, by leading a band of ex-patriot guerilla warriors in service to the Philistines.  These (habiru-like) descriptions about David's career occur at a time of more sophistication -- a time when Judeans began to recognize that the Egyptian 'prw class of servants had some connections to the much earlier habiru people in other Near Eastern nations.)   
 
 
 
 
Edited by atalante
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.