Benjamin J. Noonan, «Hide or Hue? Defining Hebrew #x$ At%A», Vol. 93 (2012) 580-589
The word #$xAtA% has long puzzled Hebrew lexicographers. The present paper evaluates the most common definitions for this elusive Hebrew word, focusing particularly on Stephanie Dalley’s recent consideration of this term. Dalley’s proposal that #$xAtA%A% is derived from Akkadian dušû and means «faience beadwork» falls short linguistically as well as contextually. More plausibly, Hebrew #$xAtA% originates with Egyptian ths, a term used with reference to leather. This well suits the contexts in which #$xAtA% occurs and reflects Egyptian influence on the tabernacle and its terminology.
06_Biblica_2_AM_A_Noonan_Layout 1 30/01/13 13:17 Pagina 587
587
HIDE OR HUE?
tool. Tomb scenes from many different periods depict this process 26. Ad-
ditionally, Egyptian ṯḥs can appear in conjunction with ṯbw (“sandal, foot
soleâ€), denoting the process of stretching leather for making sandals.
Phonologically, Egyptian ṯḥs matches Hebrew #$xAtA % well. After the Old
Kingdom, Egyptian ṯ and t frequently merged; hence by the New Kingdom
ṯ tends to be pronounced more like t 27. During the Late period, moreover,
texts explicitly write ṯḥs as tḥs, demonstrating that ṯ had indeed become t for
this word 28. Correspondence of Egyptian ḥ and Hebrew x is, of course, as
expected 29. Lastly, one might contend that usage of Hebrew #$ for Egyptian
s is problematic, but the name of Moses (Hebrew h#m, derived from Egypt-
ian msi) demonstrates that they could be phonetically equivalent 30. More-
over, Egyptian borrowings from West Semitic frequently use Egyptian Å¡ to
render Semitic Å¡, but they also sometimes use s 31, and Amarna Akkadian
similarly renders Egyptian s as both s and Å¡ 32. Thus, although Hebrew s
seems to be the most common representation of Egyptian s 33, #$ is also a
possible correspondent.
As noted above, a good number of Egyptian loanwords as well as other
Egyptian elements appear in the wilderness wandering narratives 34. The
tabernacle’s design, moreover, finds its best parallels in Egyptian struc-
tures 35. It is significant that #$xA tA% occurs in close conjunction with several
C. VAN DRIEL-MURRAY, “Leatherwork and Skin Productsâ€, Ancient Egyp-
26
tian Materials and Technology (eds. P.T. NICHOLSON ‒ I. SHAW) (Cambridge
2000) 303; D.A. STOCKS, “Leatherâ€, The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt
(ed. D.B. REDFORD) (Oxford 2001) II, 282-283; R. DRENKHAHN, Die Handwer-
ker und ihre Tätigkeiten im alten Ägypten (Ägyptologische Abhandlungen 31;
Wiesbaden 1976) 7-17; IDEM, “Leder, -arbeiter, -bearbeitungâ€, Lexikon der
Ägyptologie (eds. W. HELCK ‒ E. OTTO ‒ W. WESTENDORF) (Wiesbaden 1972-
1992) III, 959-960.
C. PEUST, Egyptian Phonology. An Introduction to the Phonology of a
27
Dead Language (Monographien zur ägyptischen Sprache 2; Göttingen 1999)
123-125; J.P. ALLEN, Middle Egyptian. An Introduction to the Language and
Culture of Hieroglyphs (Cambridge 22010) 20.
A. ERMAN – H. GRAPOW, Wörterbuch der ägyptischen Sprache, V, 396.
28
MUCHIKI, Egyptian Proper Names and Loanwords, 267.
29
J.F. QUACK, Review of Yoshiyuki Muchiki, Egyptian Proper Names
30
and Loanwords in North-West Semitic, RBL (April 24, 2000) online:
http://www.bookreviews.org.
J.E. HOCH, Semitic Words in Egyptian Texts of the New Kingdom and
31
Third Intermediate Period (Princeton, NJ 1994) 410.
MUCHIKI, Egyptian Proper Names and Loanwords, 310.
32
Cf. MUCHIKI, Egyptian Proper Names and Loanwords, 266-267.
33
HOFFMEIER, Ancient Israel in Sinai, 209-221, 223-226.
34
HOFFMEIER, Ancient Israel in Sinai, 203-208; M.M. HOMAN, To Your
35
© Gregorian Biblical Press 2012 - Tutti i diritti riservati