Cave-Dwelling Troglodytes: A Scholarly Perspective on חרי
One might think that in the Patriarchal narratives, the Hebrew word חרי would mean “Hurrian”, not “cave-dwelling troglodyte south of the Dead Sea” [see scholarly quotations below], since the scholarly community readily admits that the best possible way to spell “Hurrian” in Biblical Hebrew is חרי. Yet today’s mainstream scholars, having dropped only the “troglodyte” element (but not the “cave” element) of the foregoing traditional view, rush to assure us that, not to worry, חרי in the Patriarchal narratives has no historical content whatsoever, but rather (i) in chapters 14 and 36 of Genesis refers to fictional “Horites” south of the Dead Sea, or (ii) at Genesis 40: 16 means “white bread”, “wicker”, etc.
Though there are few caves south of the Dead Sea [as de Vaux pointed out in 1967, per the Frolov quotation below, yet Frolov himself still keeps the “cave” idea intact], many scholars still adhere to the old view that חרי in chapters 14 and 36 of the Patriarchal narratives allegedly means “cave-dwellers”:
“These Horites are not to be identified with the well-known Hurrians…. Speiser and Westermann favor the old etymological explanation of Horite as ‘cave-dweller’, but this is uncertain.” Gordon Wenham, “World Biblical Commentary: Genesis 16-50” (1994), p. 338.
Other scholars take the newer view that חרי has no known underlying meaning. But most all mainstream scholars today agree that in the Patriarchal narratives חרי definitely, but definitely, has no historical meaning, and in particular does not mean “Hurrian”:
1. “[T]he Biblical Horites could hardly be Hurrians…. As to the ethnonym ḥōrî,…E.A. Speiser’s suggestion [a view he originally referenced in 1930] to derive this ethnonym Heb. ḥōr (or ḥôr), ‘a hole, a pit’, and thus to understand it as ‘cave dwellers, troglodytes’ was rejected by R. de Vaux [in 1967 in “Les Hurrites de l'histoire et les Horites de la Bible”], who pointed out, inter alia, that south of the Dead Sea caves are rare.” S. Frolov, “Merneptah’s Israel and the Horite Genealogy in Gen 36: 20-30”, Aula Orientalis, No. 13, vol. 2 (1995), pp. 206-207.
Believe it or not, Frolov then basically adopts Speiser’s 1930 idea, and rejects de Vaux, by accepting much of the “cave” portion of Speiser’s view, while rejecting the “troglodyte” portion: “aves, ravines, and all kinds of holes in the ground may serve as natural fortifications and traps, not merely as dwellings.” P. 207.
2. “The Horites…can hardly have any association with the Hurrians of northern Mesopotamia or Syria. The resemblance in names is strictly accidental.” Anson F. Rainey, R. Steven Notley, “The Sacred Bridge” (2006), p. 114.
3. “[T]he OT references to ‘Horites’ do not fit what we know about the Hurrians, a non-Semitic people.” “Zondervan Illustrated Bible Dictionary” (2011), p. 622.
On this thread, let’s examine whether university scholars have a tenable position in insisting, on a virtually unanimous basis no less, that in the Patriarchal narratives חרי allegedly has no historical meaning whatsoever, but rather, instead of meaning “Hurrian”, allegedly refers to either (i) a completely fictional people, the “Horites”, who are fictionally portrayed as living south of the Dead Sea, or (ii) (at Genesis 40: 16) “white bread” or “wicker”.
Isaac Fried wrote: “Even mice are not called in Hebrew חוֹרִי XORIY, 'hole-dweller’.”
But on this thread we are exploring the scholarly view of חרי/ḫry. In this post, let’s compare Genesis 36: 21 to the Ugaritic heroic myth of Keret as to this issue.
Both Genesis 36: 21 and the Ugaritic heroic myth of Keret associate חרי/ḫry with אדום /Udm/Udumu. Those two names appear in close proximity at Genesis 36: 21. Here’s a 1-sentence micro-summary of the myth of Keret by a leading expert: Keret goes to the land of “Ủdm to acquire Ḫry, the daughter of its king, as his new wife….” John Huehnergard, “An Introduction to Ugaritic” (2012), p. 120.
As an ethnic group name (as opposed to the personal name above), “Hurrian” is spelled in Ugaritic ḫry. That’s the same spelling as we see at Genesis 36: 20-22, 29-30: חרי/ḫry.
1. Is Ḫry [or Ḥry] a cave-dwelling troglodyte? No, she’s the most attractive Hurrian bride on earth.
2. Do the people of Ḫry use caves, tunnels and all manner of holes in the ground to escape from Egyptian troops? No, they’re a sophisticated Hurrian people, and Egyptian troops weren’t present in northwest Gilead anyway.
3. Are the people of Ḫry located south of the Dead Sea, where some 800 years after the Keret Ugaritic myth the mid-1st millennium BCE state of Edom would arise? No, the people of Ḫry are located in one of the places where חרי : ḫry : Hurrians were located in the Late Bronze Age -- in northwest Gilead near the Sea of Galilee. Baruch Margalit, as the leading expert on the geographical location of Udm in the Ugaritic myth of Keret, sees Udm as being located close to the Sea of Galilee. At p. 474 of “The Ugaritic Poem of Aqht: Text, Translation, Commentary”, Baruch Margalit places the locale of the Ugaritic heroic myths (including Keret) at “Bashan/Golan”, that is, in the northern Transjordan, near the Sea of Galilee. More specifically, Margalit equates the Udm of the Keret epic to the Udumu of Amarna Letter EA 256, at p. 222 of “The Legend of Keret”, in “Handbook of Ugaritic Studies”, editors W.G.E. Watson and N. Wyatt (1999); that would place Udm : Udumu east or southeast of the Sea of Galilee.
4. Does anything at Genesis 36: 21, including חרי/ḫry or אדום/’Udm/Udumu, have anything to do with a geographical locale south of the Dead Sea or the mid-1st millennium BCE state of Edom or caves? No. Where do university scholars get such ideas? Neither the geographical locale south of the Dead Sea, nor the mid-1st millennium BCE state of Edom, ever had חרי/ḫry : Hurrians or cave-dwelling troglodytes or cave-using “Horites”, either Biblically or historically. Indeed, as I noted in my prior post on this thread, caves themselves are rare south of the Dead Sea.
Rather, Genesis 36: 21 is giving us accurate information about northwest Gilead, and the historical Hurrians : חרי/ḫry there, and the historical Hurrian princelings : אלוףחרי/ulp.ḫry there, in the Late Bronze Age (the Patriarchal Age), using bona fide Late Bronze Age nomenclature. Genesis 36: 21 is not talking about cave-dwelling troglodytes in the mid-1st millennium BCE state of Edom south of the Dead Sea.
Language can express the negative only in terms of the positive. English: nothing = no-thing; first there is a thing, then there is a no-thing (a nano-thing).
The Hebrew חוֹר XOR, appears to me to be an inward, or downward, הוֹר HOR. So, possibly, חוֹרִי=חוֹר-היא are (tall?) people of the mountains, like the גבעונים GIBONIYM.
I should add that XORIY may also mean 'free, loose, spread-out', as is the בן-חורין of later Hebrew.
In Isaiah 19:9 we read עֹבְדֵי פִשְׁתִּים שְׂרִיקוֹת וְאֹרְגִים חוֹרָי
where חוֹרָי is possibly related to the תחרא=אתה-חרא of Ex. 28:32 שָׂפָה יִהְיֶה לְפִיו סָבִיב מַעֲשֵׂה אֹרֵג כְּפִי תַחְרָא יִהְיֶה לּוֹ לֹא יִקָּרֵעַ
and to the קוּר QUR, 'thread, fiber, strand, filament', of Isaiah 59:5-6 וְקוּרֵי עַכָּבִישׁ יֶאֱרֹגוּ ... קוּרֵיהֶם לֹא יִהְיוּ לְבֶגֶד
KJV: "and weave the spider's web ... Their webs shall not become garments"
Also to the סַלֵּי חֹרִי, 'knitted or intertwined basket', of Gen. 40:16.
Isaac Fried wrote: “Also to the סַלֵּי חֹרִי, 'knitted or intertwined basket', of Gen. 40:16.”
No, that’s a חרי : ḫry : Hurrian basket.
And t-h-a-t explains why the chief baker is executed three days after telling to Joseph his dream of a “Hurrian” basket.
Gordon Wenham uses a translation of “white bread” for חרי/ḫry, but notes: “ ‘White bread’. Since the term [חרי/ḫry] is found only here [at Genesis 40: 16], its meaning is uncertain.” Wenham, “Genesis 16-50”, p. 384. In fact, however, חרי/ḫry is found 5 times at Genesis 36: 20-22, 29-30, where it has the same meaning that it always has throughout the Patriarchal narratives: “Hurrian”. E.A. Speiser [similar to Isaac Fried] uses a translation of “wicker” for חרי/ḫry: “[Genesis 40: ]16. wicker. This interpretation of Heb. ḥōrî is favored by Arabic; see also Rashi and Ehrl.” Speiser, “Genesis”, p. 307. But why look to “Arabic…Rashi and Ehrl”, when many ancient languages, including Ugaritic, spell “Hurrian” as חרי/ḫry?
In fact, חרי/ḫry means “Hurrian” and has no other meaning in the Patriarchal narratives. Linguistically, a translation of “Hurrian” is objectively demanded. The reason why that is never done is precisely because historically, such a translation makes sense only in the context of Year 13, in the Late Amarna time period.
In a Year 13 context, the chief baker’s dream of a “Hurrian” : חרי/ḫry basket implies that the chief baker treasonously opposed Akhenaten’s controversial recent decision to cut off all relations with the Hurrian great power state of Mitanni (on the eve of the Great Syrian War, when Egypt and Mitanni should have been allied against the mighty, conquering Hittites). Three days later, as correctly predicted by Joseph upon hearing this dream of a “Hurrian” : חרי/ḫry basket, Pharaoh (Akhenaten, acting properly) has the chief baker executed (Genesis 40: 18-22).
This is a direct parallel to what seems to have happened at Amarna in Year 13: all work on high officials’ rock tombs at Amarna seems to have stopped in Year 13, and when work was resumed after Year 13, no further work was done on the non-completed tombs of most of those pre-Year 13 high officials; that implies that a purge of high officials at Amarna had been carried out in Year 13. The immediate impetus for such a wide-ranging purge of high officials at Amarna in Year 13 was likely that they had “treasonously” opposed Akhenaten’s controversial decision early that year to cut off all relations with the country that had been Egypt’s best ally under his father: the Hurrian great power state of Mitanni in eastern Syria.
“Year 13” is referenced directly at Genesis 14: 4. Furthermore, “Year 13” is referenced indirectly in the Joseph-in-Egypt segment of the Patriarchal narratives: Jacob is stated age 13 tenfold archaic shaneh/שנה when he takes the awkward (though necessary) step of moving all of the Hebrews out of beloved Canaan and into Egypt (Genesis 47: 9).
In the historical context of Year 13 at Amarna, a dream of a “Hurrian” : חרי/ḫry basket was considered treasonous by Pharaoh (Akhenaten).
Scholars tell us that the text does not tell us w-h-y the chief baker was executed. But it does! The chief baker’s dream of a “Hurrian” : חרי/ḫry basket meant that he was one of several top officials who opposed pharaoh Akhenaten’s controversial Hurrian policy of cutting off all relations with the Hurrian great power state of Mitanni, which he did on the very eve of the Great Syrian War no less. Both historically and Biblically, that was a kiss of death in Year 13.
All of these various stories in the truly ancient Patriarchal narratives make perfect, historical sense in the historical context of Year 13, while not making good sense in any other context. In the Patriarchal narratives, חרי/ḫry a-l-w-a-y-s has only one meaning: “Hurrian”.
Isaac Fried wrote: “The Hebrew חוֹר XOR, appears to me to be an inward, or downward, הוֹר HOR. So, possibly, חוֹרִי=חוֹר-היא are (tall?) people of the mountains, like the גבעונים GIBONIYM.”
In order to make that argument, you have to change heth/ח to he/ה. That’s similar to the scholarly approach below, where in order to try to find some west Semitic names at Genesis 36: 20-30 for חרי/ḫry individuals, mem/ם and nun/ן in final position are switched. But what if we don’t change any letters? T-h-a-t is the way to determine and appreciate the pinpoint linguistic accuracy of Genesis 36: 20-30 in a Late Bronze Age historical context.
Scholars have advanced two separate reasons as to why, pursuant to the unanimous scholarly view, the Hebrew word חרי in the Patriarchal narratives allegedly does not mean “Hurrian”. One reason is based on geography. But before returning to that key issue, in this post we will address the other reason advanced by scholars as to why the Hebrew word חרי in the Patriarchal narratives allegedly does not mean “Hurrian”, namely the scholarly contention that 26 names of חרי individuals at Genesis 36: 20-30 supposedly are west Semitic names:
“ ‘Horite’. These Horites [at Genesis 36: 20-30] are not to be identified with the well-known Hurrians, for these Horites have Semitic names….” Gordon Wenham, “World Biblical Commentary: Genesis 16-50” (1994), p. 338.
Is Prof. Wenham’s claim tenable that the חרי at Genesis 36: 20-30 allegedly are “Horites” who “have Semitic names”? Let’s take a look.
Being conversant with the scholarly literature on the subject, as shown by his wide-ranging scholarly citations (and, needless to say, carefully avoiding ever considering a Hurrian basis for any of these names), Wenham considers the following to be the best etymologies out there (all but one of them west Semitic) for the 26 individuals who are identified as being חרי/ḫry at Genesis 36: 20-30:
1. “Seir” : שעיר. Genesis 36: 20-21, 30. Wenham gives no etymology of this name.
2. “Lotan” : לוטן. Genesis 36: 20, 22, 29. P. 339: “ ‘Lotan’ may [be] a longer form of the name Lot.” In his earlier volume on the first 15 chapters of Genesis, Wenham at p. 272 says: “ ‘Lot’: the meaning and etymology of his name are unknown. Some would connect it with ‘Lotan’, 36: 20, 22, 29, but this is uncertain.”
3. “Shobal” : שובל. Genesis 36: 20, 23, 29. P. 339: “Noth (Personennamen, 226) rather improbably suggests that ‘Shobal’ means ‘basket’.”
5. “Anah” : ענה. Genesis 36: 20, 24-25, 29. P. 337: “ ‘Anah’…could be the name of an Anatolian deity….” [Why would a person whom Wenham views as living south of the Dead Sea have “the name of an Anatolian deity”?]
6. “Dishon” : דשון. Genesis 36: 21, 25, 26, 30. P. 339: “ ‘Dishon’ is a kind of antelope….”
7. and 8. “Ezer” : אצר and “Dishan” : דשן. Genesis 36: 21, 27, 28, 30. P. 339: “The meanings of ‘Etzer’ and ‘Dishan’ are unknown.”
9. “Hori” : חרי. Genesis 36: 22. Wenham gives no etymology of this name as a personal name. (As a group name, Wenham suggests, as noted previously, that this name may mean “cave-dwellers”.)
10. “Hemam” : הימם. Genesis 36: 22. P. 339: “The meaning of ‘Heman’ [which is actually spelled ‘Hemam’ at Genesis 36: 22] is uncertain.”
11. “Timna” : תמנע. Genesis 36: 22. Wenham gives no etymology of this name.
12. and 13. “Alvan” : עלון and “Ebal” : עיבל. Genesis 36: 23. P. 339: “The meanings of ‘Alvan’ and ‘Ebal’ are uncertain.”
14. “Manahath” : מנחת. Genesis 36: 23. P. 339: “ ‘Manahat’ possibly means ‘resting place’….”
15. “Shepho” : שפו. Genesis 36: 23. P. 339: “ ‘Shepho’ = ‘bald’ according to Gispen.”
16. “Onam” : אונם. Genesis 36: 23. P. 339: “ ‘Onam’ may mean ‘vigorous’ (cf. the similar ‘Onan’ in 38: 4).” [That etymology assumes that the final M can be treated the same as a final N.]
17. “Aiah” : איה. Genesis 36: 24. P. 339: “ ‘Ayyah’ is the name of an unclean bird of prey….”
[“Aholibamah” : אהליבמה. Omitted here as being the name of one of Esau’s wives. Appears at Genesis 36: 2, 5, 14, 18, 25. Wenham gives no etymology of this name.]
18. and 19. “Hemdan” : חמדן and “Eshban” : אשבן. Genesis 36: 26. Wenham II, p. 339: “The meanings of ‘Hemdan’ and ‘Eshban’ are uncertain.”
20. “Ithran” : יתרן. Genesis 36: 26. P. 339: “t is possible than Yitran has the same meaning as Yeter (‘remainder’, according to Gispen).”
21. “Cheran” : כרן. Genesis 36: 26. P. 339: “ ‘Keran’ may mean ‘vineyard’….” [That etymology assumes that the final N can be treated the same as a final M,]
22. “Bilhan” : בלהן. Genesis 36: 27. P. 339: “The meaning of ‘Bilhan’ is uncertain….”
23. and 24. “Zaavan” : זעון and “Akan” : עקן. Genesis 36: 27. P. 339: “The meanings of ‘Zaavan’, and ‘Akan’ are uncertain.”
25. “Uz” : עוץ. Genesis 36: 28. Wenham gives no etymology of this name.
26. “Aran” : ארן. Genesis 36: 28. P. 339: “ ‘Aran’: KB suggests ‘ibex’; cf….Akk. armû ‘gazelle’.” [That etymology assumes that the final N can be treated the same as a final M.]”
For 15 of these 26 names, Wenham sees no west Semitic etymology as being realistically possible. For another 3 names, Wenham can identify a west Semitic etymology only by changing a final M to a final N or vice versa. The remaining 8 names are given highly implausible meanings: “basket”, “hyena”, “Anatolian deity”, “antelope”, “resting place”, “bald”, “unclean bird of prey”, “remainder”. Of the 26 names, only one has a divine reference in Wenham’s view (and that one is incongruously to an Anatolian deity).
The scholarly view is simply untenable that the חרי/ḫry individuals at Genesis 36: 20-30 allegedly have west Semitic names. They don’t. Rather, all 26 such names are Hurrian : חרי : ḫry names. How could only one name out of 26 be thought to have a divine reference? Is that plausible? Also, note that half of these 26 names end with -N, which is commonplace for Hurrian names, where this is a frequently-used Hurrian suffix that means “the”. That is a much less common ending for a west Semitic personal name (as opposed to a geographical place name); for example, none of Ishmael’s 12 sons listed at Genesis 25: 13-15 has a name ending with -N. Finally, for a clear majority of these names (15 of 26), Prof. Wenham himself admits that there is no plausible west Semitic etymology.
There in fact is no legitimate linguistic argument that חרי in the Patriarchal narratives does not have a Bronze Age historical meaning of “Hurrian”. The 26 above-named individuals are not west Semitic-speaking cave-dwelling troglodytes south of the Dead Sea. Is there a single person on the b-hebrew list who can accept Prof. Wenham’s argument as being compelling regarding the foregoing 26 names above that, allegedly, “these Horites [at Genesis 36: 20-30] have Semitic names”? Not.
Names are not words and need not have an "etymology". Among other things, שׁפוֹ $PO of Gen. 36:23, may mean 'healthy, fleshy, of good stature', from the root שפה SPH, $PA, (related to דף, זף, טף, יף, סף, צף, שף, דב, זב, טב, סב, צב, שב) or the initial ש may be the contracted theophoric איש. $PO himself did not have the wherewithal to write down his name. Much later scribes decided how spell it.
The בל BL in the name בלהן BILHAN, may be an evocation of the בעל BAAL, or be אב-אל AB-EL, and so in the name בלהה BILHAH of Gen. 29:29.
1. Isaac Fried wrote: “Names are not words and need not have an "etymology". Among other things, שׁפוֹ $PO of Gen. 36:23, may mean 'healthy, fleshy, of good stature', from the root שפה SPH, $PA, (related to דף, זף, טף, יף, סף, צף, שף, דב, זב, טב, סב, צב, שב) or the initial ש may be the contracted theophoric איש. $PO himself did not have the wherewithal to write down his name. Much later scribes decided how spell it.”
At Job 33: 21, שפה has a negative meaning, something like “laid bare”. At Isaiah 13: 2, שפה seems to mean “scraped bare (by wind)”. Those west Semitic meanings are not suitable for the divine epithets we would expect in a nobleman’s name.
Yes, שפע at Deuteronomy 33: 19 means “abundance”, but that word ends with ayin/ע, whereas this name ends in vav/ו.
Moreover, why would “שׁפוֹ $PO of Gen. 36:23” be thought to have a west Semitic name that “may mean 'healthy, fleshy, of good stature' “? Shouldn’t this nobleman’s name praise the divine? And why would his name be west Semitic? Genesis 36: 29 says that his father is a אלוףחרי. That phrase is used at Ugarit to refer to a “Hurrian princeling”.
At Nuzi, 30% of the names of ḫry : Hurrians were Akkadian names. So let’s ask if this Hurrian princeling’s son has an Akkadian name.
“Shepho” : שפו : Šu-pu-u or Šu-pū. “Greatness [of God]”. Akkadian. In an Akkadian hymn to Ištar, šu-pu-u is used as praising the “greatness” of the goddess. Cf. Šu-pu-ia (Gelb and Purves, "Nuzi Names", p. 139).
2. Isaac Fried wrote: “The בל BL in the name בלהן BILHAN, may be an evocation of the בעל BAAL….”
Yes! Now we’re talking.
The Hurrian version of Baal is the Akkadian loanword bêlu. Cf. Bêlu ("Nuzi Names", p. 114). The Hebrew rendering of that will be: בל. Good start.
In fact, two other names at Genesis 36: 20-30 likewise feature bêlu : Baal : בל, as follows: (i) “Shobal” : שובל : Še-wi-be-lu, meaning: “Great [is the] Lord”, at Genesis 36: 20, 23, 29; and one of his sons, (ii) “Ebal” : עיבל : E-a -- be-lu, meaning “E-a [is] Lord”, at Genesis 36: 23.
But returning now to “Bilhan” : בלהן, after starting out with bêlu : Baal : בל, we need to add two Hurrian suffixes for the name of this חרי : ḫry : Hurrian nobleman. First comes the Hurrian divine suffix; it is spelled -gi in Hurrian, but that is rendered in Hebrew by ה-. Then add the Hurrian individuating suffix, -ni, and we’ve got it:
“Bilhan” : בלהן : Be-lu-gi-ni. “[Devoted to] The Divine Lord”.
3. Note how all four of these names praise the divine: “Greatness [of God]”, “Great [is the] Lord”, “E-a [is] Lord”, and “[Devoted to] The Divine Lord”. There’s no way that today’s scholars can be right in claiming that the חרי at Genesis 36: 20-30 are cave-people (whether cave-dwelling troglodytes or not) who have west Semitic names with meanings like “basket”, “hyena”, “Anatolian deity”, “antelope”, “resting place”, “bald”, “unclean bird of prey”, “remainder”. Not.
A אלוףחרי is n-o-t a cave-person, is not a troglodyte, and is not a “Horite”. No, אלוףחרי is authentic Late Bronze Age nomenclature for “a Hurrian princeling”. Most Hurrian princelings : אלוףחרי and their sons had names -- whether Hurrian-based Hurrian names or Akkadian-based Hurrian names -- that praise the divine.
In Isaiah 13:2 it is עַל הַר נִשְׁפֶּה שְׂאוּ נֵס
KJV: "Lift ye up a banner upon the high mountain"
Luther: "Auf hohem Berge werfet Panier auf"
I don't know where later translators got this " bare" for נִשְׁפֶּה.
The name שוֹבל $OBAL may indeed be from the root שבל, 'raise, extend', of which we have the שׁוֹבֶל, 'flap', of Isaiah 47:2, and the שׁבִיל, 'path, trail', of Jer. 18:15; or it may be the theiphoric איש-הוא-בעל or איש-הוא-אב-אל. Compare ישראל=איש-ר-אל.