Paran vs. midbar vs. “forest”
The first use of the Hebrew word יער in the Bible, which of necessity means “forest” or “woods” (or, per Elizabethan English, “wood”) [or it can alternatively refer to “a piece of wood”], occurs at Deuteronomy 19: 5. Yet in the Patriarchal Age, much of Canaan was covered by “forests”. The Hebrew Patriarchs did not live in cities, but rather lived in tents, and moved around quite a bit. Although the Patriarchs would of course choose pastureland (not forest) for where they would maintain their flocks of sheep and goats, the Patriarchs would presumably often live near to a forest. Here are two likely examples of that. First, when Ishmael supports himself and his mother Hagar by being an archer after being exiled by his father Abraham (Genesis 21: 20-21), logically Ishmael took up living in the forest (in or near גרר), where big game would abound. Secondly, and likely involving the very same forest (in גרר), when Esau routinely bags big game for his father Isaac, Esau likely does his hunting in a forest, where big game abounds. Genesis 25: 27-29. In both cases, Abraham and Isaac presumably lived on nearby pastureland (but were very familiar with the forest).
At Genesis 21: 20, instead of using the Hebrew word that must mean “forest”, the text uses a more ambiguous word that could mean “forest”, but does not necessarily mean “forest”, depending on the context. That word is מדבר : midbar. A phrase in the following verse, Genesis 21: 21, is translated by KJV as “the wilderness [מדבר : midbar] of Paran”.
At Genesis 25: 27, 29 regarding Ishmael being a successful “hunter”, the Biblical text uses an even more ambiguous word, שדה, which KJV translates there as “field”. שדה can be a “field” or “meadow” or “countryside”, or “a place where wild beasts roam”, or a “plain”, but also it often means “a cultivated field”, which is the opposite of a “forest”.
My point is that the Hebrew Patriarchs are portrayed as often being near a “forest”, yet Genesis never once uses the word that of necessity means “forest”, namely יער. Rather, the Patriarchal narratives use either (i) a word that could easily mean “forest”, but could alternatively mean “desert” or even “pastureland”, namely מדבר; that word of necessity merely means “land that is not a cultivated field”; or (ii) a word that usually means “field”, and can even mean “a cultivated field” (the exact opposite of a “forest”), and that only rarely would be used to mean “forest”, namely שדה.
My initial point on this thread is that the closest one comes to a word that means “forest” in the Patriarchal narratives is מדבר : midbar. Thus if “Paran” is consistently associated with מדבר : midbar in the Patriarchal narratives, then as will be discussed in subsequent posts on this thread, “Paran” may well be referencing a “glorious” forest. If one objects that the word that of necessity means “forest”, namely יער, is never paired with “Paran” in the Patriarchal narratives, the answer to that is as follows: (i) the tent-dwelling Patriarchs were intimately familiar with “forests” throughout Canaan; but, nevertheless, (ii) the word that of necessity means “forest”, namely יער, is never used a single time in the Bible prior to Deuteronomy.
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois
Paran vs. midbar vs. “forest”
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
-
Jim Stinehart
- Posts: 352
- Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:33 am
Re: Paran vs. midbar vs. “forest”
For the most part, I agree with the standard west Semitic analysis of the word transliterated by KJV as “Paran”. This post will focus solely on linguistics. However, in a later post we can discuss whether the conventional geographical analysis of the name “Paran” as it applies to the Patriarchal narratives may be in error.
“Paran” is פארן. This name appears in the Patriarchal narratives in two places: (i) as part of the phrase “the wilderness of Paran” at Genesis 21: 21; and (ii) as part of a geographical place name at Genesis 14: 6, where KJV transliterates such place name as “Elparan”, while others render it as “tree of Paran”, presumably meaning “oak tree of Paran”.
I agree that “Paran” : פארן is a west Semitic Hebrew noun/name that derives from פאר, which root word usually functions in Biblical Hebrew as an adjective. In a majority of cases (all occurring in Isaiah), KJV translates פאר as “glorified”. Isaiah 44: 23; 49: 3; 55: 5; 60: 9, 21; 61: 3. Other translations or meanings are “ornamented”, “adorned”, “gleaming”, “beautiful”. Gesenius suggests: “abounding in foliage”. That definition by Gesenius definitely suggests that “Paran” : פארן may be a “forest”.
When describing an aspect of nature, “glorified” is not the right word (at least not in modern English). I would suggest that the primary meaning of פאר, when it is being applied to an aspect of nature (as is the case at both Genesis 21: 21 and Genesis 14: 6), is: “glorious”.
Other words with a similar meaning and import in such context would be: “magnificent”, “notable”, “spectacular”. In other words, פאר as applied to an aspect of nature means not only that the phenomenon is “beautiful”, but also that it is very notable, even spectacular, in a word: “glorious”.
At Genesis 21: 21, “the wilderness [מדבר] of Paran” must be referring to a “glorious, spectacular”, very large tract of land that is not suitable for farming. A “glorious” forest would fit the bill nicely. By contrast, a true “desert” would not be “glorious”. Nor could Ishmael survive by hunting in a true “desert”. Genesis 21: 20. Rather, hunting fits perfectly with a very large, “glorious” forest. A huge forest, at a high elevation, would truly be “glorious”, “spectacular”, “notable”, “beautiful”, “abounding in foliage”, in a word: פאר.
As I pointed out in my prior post, the word that of necessity means “forest”, namely יער, is never used in the Patriarchal narratives. Rather, prior to Deuteronomy, the only Biblical word used that could easily mean “forest” is the somewhat ambiguous word, מדבר (a word which could alternatively mean “desert” or even “pastureland”; that word of necessity merely means “land that is not a cultivated field”).
At Genesis 14: 6, upon reaching the “oak tree of Paran”, the invaders turn back north. Invaders would not travel through a dense, huge, “spectacular”, “glorious” forest. Rather, as soon as invaders came to the outer edge of such a forest, to the “oak tree of Paran”, the invaders would change course and turn back north, so that they could continue proceeding along a road fit for horses and chariots, rather than getting bogged down in an impenetrable forest.
The word מדבר : midbar, which KJV translates as “wilderness”, appears 7 times in the Patriarchal narratives, including at Genesis 14: 6; 21: 20-21 in connection with “Paran”. Out of context, all that we know from the word מדבר itself is that such territory is not fit for agriculture. But we need to be alert to the fact that, depending on the context, מדבר : midbar in Canaan in the Patriarchal narratives could easily be referring to what we would today call a “forest”.
To me, the words פאר and פארן fit perfectly a “glorious”, huge forest. In a later post, we can ask if such a meaning fits the “Paran” referenced at Genesis 21: 21 and at Genesis 14: 6.
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois
“Paran” is פארן. This name appears in the Patriarchal narratives in two places: (i) as part of the phrase “the wilderness of Paran” at Genesis 21: 21; and (ii) as part of a geographical place name at Genesis 14: 6, where KJV transliterates such place name as “Elparan”, while others render it as “tree of Paran”, presumably meaning “oak tree of Paran”.
I agree that “Paran” : פארן is a west Semitic Hebrew noun/name that derives from פאר, which root word usually functions in Biblical Hebrew as an adjective. In a majority of cases (all occurring in Isaiah), KJV translates פאר as “glorified”. Isaiah 44: 23; 49: 3; 55: 5; 60: 9, 21; 61: 3. Other translations or meanings are “ornamented”, “adorned”, “gleaming”, “beautiful”. Gesenius suggests: “abounding in foliage”. That definition by Gesenius definitely suggests that “Paran” : פארן may be a “forest”.
When describing an aspect of nature, “glorified” is not the right word (at least not in modern English). I would suggest that the primary meaning of פאר, when it is being applied to an aspect of nature (as is the case at both Genesis 21: 21 and Genesis 14: 6), is: “glorious”.
Other words with a similar meaning and import in such context would be: “magnificent”, “notable”, “spectacular”. In other words, פאר as applied to an aspect of nature means not only that the phenomenon is “beautiful”, but also that it is very notable, even spectacular, in a word: “glorious”.
At Genesis 21: 21, “the wilderness [מדבר] of Paran” must be referring to a “glorious, spectacular”, very large tract of land that is not suitable for farming. A “glorious” forest would fit the bill nicely. By contrast, a true “desert” would not be “glorious”. Nor could Ishmael survive by hunting in a true “desert”. Genesis 21: 20. Rather, hunting fits perfectly with a very large, “glorious” forest. A huge forest, at a high elevation, would truly be “glorious”, “spectacular”, “notable”, “beautiful”, “abounding in foliage”, in a word: פאר.
As I pointed out in my prior post, the word that of necessity means “forest”, namely יער, is never used in the Patriarchal narratives. Rather, prior to Deuteronomy, the only Biblical word used that could easily mean “forest” is the somewhat ambiguous word, מדבר (a word which could alternatively mean “desert” or even “pastureland”; that word of necessity merely means “land that is not a cultivated field”).
At Genesis 14: 6, upon reaching the “oak tree of Paran”, the invaders turn back north. Invaders would not travel through a dense, huge, “spectacular”, “glorious” forest. Rather, as soon as invaders came to the outer edge of such a forest, to the “oak tree of Paran”, the invaders would change course and turn back north, so that they could continue proceeding along a road fit for horses and chariots, rather than getting bogged down in an impenetrable forest.
The word מדבר : midbar, which KJV translates as “wilderness”, appears 7 times in the Patriarchal narratives, including at Genesis 14: 6; 21: 20-21 in connection with “Paran”. Out of context, all that we know from the word מדבר itself is that such territory is not fit for agriculture. But we need to be alert to the fact that, depending on the context, מדבר : midbar in Canaan in the Patriarchal narratives could easily be referring to what we would today call a “forest”.
To me, the words פאר and פארן fit perfectly a “glorious”, huge forest. In a later post, we can ask if such a meaning fits the “Paran” referenced at Genesis 21: 21 and at Genesis 14: 6.
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois
-
Jim Stinehart
- Posts: 352
- Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:33 am
Re: Paran vs. midbar vs. “forest”
My prior two posts on this thread showed that “Elparan” or “the oak tree of Paran” at Genesis 14: 6 could well, depending on the context, be referring to a “glorious”, vast “forest”. The word midbar, which can mean “forest”, appears at the end of Genesis 14: 6.
In trying to pin down the geographical location of “Elparan” at Genesis 14: 6, let us now note that in Biblical times, especially in the Patriarchal Age, most of Upper Galilee (all except the west coast, and the eastern edge near the Sea of Galilee) was heavily forested, boasting a truly “glorious” forest:
1. “Although we can only guess about the extent of the forests in 1200 BCE, it is likely that the central core of Upper Galilee was completely forested (remains of the ancient forest can still be found here).” Philip R. Davies, John William Rogerson, “The Old Testament World” (2005), p. 14.
2. “Galilee consisted essentially of an upland area of forests and farmlands.” Ronald F. Youngblood, “Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary: New and Enhanced” (2014), p. 424.
3. “[T]he mountains of upper Galilee are considerably higher than those of lower Galilee. …The upper hills were covered with evergreen oak forest, remnants of which remain between Meron and Sasa….” John William Rogerson, “The Bible” (1991), p. 130.
4. “Upper Galilee receives more rain than any other region in the country and still has many tracts of natural forest.” Rivka Goren, “Biblical Holy Places: An Illustrated Guide” (2000), p. 87.
5. “n antiquity these hills [of Galilee] held a very substantial maquis forest cover.” Abraham J. Malherbe, “The World of the New Testament” (1967), p. 140.
* * *
For Genesis 14: 6, let me now set forth first the KJV translation, followed by my own suggested paraphrase. My changes in the wording of the first half of Genesis 14: 6 are per issues I have discussed on recent prior threads. My changes in the wording of the second half of Genesis 14: 6 are per the issues discussed on this thread.
KJV translation: “And the Horites in their mount Seir, unto Elparan, which is by the wilderness.”
My suggested paraphrase: “And the Hurrians in the hill country of northwest Gilead [Še-e-ri], [and then later proceeded] to the oak tree that marks the edge of the glorious forest [of central Upper Galilee].”
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois
In trying to pin down the geographical location of “Elparan” at Genesis 14: 6, let us now note that in Biblical times, especially in the Patriarchal Age, most of Upper Galilee (all except the west coast, and the eastern edge near the Sea of Galilee) was heavily forested, boasting a truly “glorious” forest:
1. “Although we can only guess about the extent of the forests in 1200 BCE, it is likely that the central core of Upper Galilee was completely forested (remains of the ancient forest can still be found here).” Philip R. Davies, John William Rogerson, “The Old Testament World” (2005), p. 14.
2. “Galilee consisted essentially of an upland area of forests and farmlands.” Ronald F. Youngblood, “Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary: New and Enhanced” (2014), p. 424.
3. “[T]he mountains of upper Galilee are considerably higher than those of lower Galilee. …The upper hills were covered with evergreen oak forest, remnants of which remain between Meron and Sasa….” John William Rogerson, “The Bible” (1991), p. 130.
4. “Upper Galilee receives more rain than any other region in the country and still has many tracts of natural forest.” Rivka Goren, “Biblical Holy Places: An Illustrated Guide” (2000), p. 87.
5. “n antiquity these hills [of Galilee] held a very substantial maquis forest cover.” Abraham J. Malherbe, “The World of the New Testament” (1967), p. 140.
* * *
For Genesis 14: 6, let me now set forth first the KJV translation, followed by my own suggested paraphrase. My changes in the wording of the first half of Genesis 14: 6 are per issues I have discussed on recent prior threads. My changes in the wording of the second half of Genesis 14: 6 are per the issues discussed on this thread.
KJV translation: “And the Horites in their mount Seir, unto Elparan, which is by the wilderness.”
My suggested paraphrase: “And the Hurrians in the hill country of northwest Gilead [Še-e-ri], [and then later proceeded] to the oak tree that marks the edge of the glorious forest [of central Upper Galilee].”
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois
-
Jim Stinehart
- Posts: 352
- Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:33 am
Re: Paran vs. midbar vs. “forest”
The KJV of Genesis 21: 20-21 reads as follows regarding Ishmael, after he is exiled by his father Abraham:
“20 And God was with the lad [Ishmael]; and he grew, and dwelt in the wilderness [מדבר], and became an archer. 21 And he dwelt in the wilderness [מדבר] of Paran [פארן]….”
As we have seen previously on this thread, (i) midbar [מדבר] can mean “forest”, and (ii) “Paran” [פארן] can mean “glorious [forest], abounding in foliage”.
Where is Ishmael when he hunts big game successfully, feeding himself and his mother on a regular basis? The Hebrew wording, as quoted above, would be consistent with Ishmael being in a “glorious forest, abounding in foliage”. But where would that be, given that, per Genesis 21: 31, Abraham is living at a Beersheba at the time he exiles Ishmael?
Everyone would agree that the text tells us that Abraham is living (i) in Gerar, (ii) near princeling Abimelek, (iii) at Beersheba.
Unfortunately, all three of those names have been misunderstood:
(i) Instead of “Gerar” : גרר being an unattested name for a place near Gaza, “Gerar” : גרר is in fact attested as meaning “Galilee”, per item #80 on the mid-15th century BCE Thutmose III list of places in Canaan.
(ii) Instead of Abimelek being a classic Philistine who impossibly has a classic west Semitic name, Biblical Abimelek in chapters 20-21, 26 of Genesis is in fact one and the same person as princeling Abimelek of Tyre in the Amarna Letters. He is the only person in the Bible or the Amarna Letters who is constantly complaining about contested access to valuable water wells. Biblical Abimelek is not himself an ethnic Philistine; he is king only by virtue of relying on foreign mercenaries from Anatolia, the “Philistines” of the Patriarchal narratives, namely Phicol as his military commander.
(iii) Most importantly for this post, the Beersheba where Abraham is staying is not the famous Beersheba of the Negev, but rather is Beersheba of Upper Galilee.
Consider now the topography of Beersheba of Upper Galilee. At that spot in the foothills, there was nice pastureland, which extended a bit west of there. But immediately east were the towering mountains of Upper Galilee, which at that time were covered by dense forest (as I noted in a prior post). The following two stories, while being impossible at the desert-like Beersheba of the Negev, are perfectly suited for Beersheba of Upper Galilee. Shortly before the binding incident at Mount Moriah, Ishmael had been exiled into the “glorious forest abounding in foliage”, midbar Paran, translated by KJV as “the wilderness of Paran”. Genesis 21: 21. That’s the dense forest of mountainous Upper Galilee. Ishmael feeds himself and his mother by hunting big game, being an “archer”. Genesis 21: 20. Note how it all makes perfect sense, where Ishmael has been exiled into the mountainous dense forest east of Beersheba of Upper Galilee, where the hunting was great. Similarly, in the next generation Esau will routinely bag big game, while his younger twin brother Jacob stays at home and tends the large flock. That perfectly describes life at Beersheba of Upper Galilee, which featured both good pastureland to the west, and a mountainous dense forest to the east, while not being possible at Beersheba of the Negev.
Living at Beersheba of Upper Galilee, immediately west of the towering mountains that are a southern extension of Mount Lebanon, and which were covered by dense forest in the Late Bronze Age, those two stories about Ishmael and Esau practically tell themselves.
Genesis 21: 21 tells us that Ishmael “dwelt in the wilderness [מדבר] of Paran [פארן]….”
That should be understood/paraphrased as follows:
“Ishmael dwelt in the forest [מדבר], the glorious forest, abounding in foliage [Paran : פארן] [, in the densely forest-covered mountains of central Upper Galilee, where wild game was abundant in the Late Bronze Age].”
Jim Stinehart
“20 And God was with the lad [Ishmael]; and he grew, and dwelt in the wilderness [מדבר], and became an archer. 21 And he dwelt in the wilderness [מדבר] of Paran [פארן]….”
As we have seen previously on this thread, (i) midbar [מדבר] can mean “forest”, and (ii) “Paran” [פארן] can mean “glorious [forest], abounding in foliage”.
Where is Ishmael when he hunts big game successfully, feeding himself and his mother on a regular basis? The Hebrew wording, as quoted above, would be consistent with Ishmael being in a “glorious forest, abounding in foliage”. But where would that be, given that, per Genesis 21: 31, Abraham is living at a Beersheba at the time he exiles Ishmael?
Everyone would agree that the text tells us that Abraham is living (i) in Gerar, (ii) near princeling Abimelek, (iii) at Beersheba.
Unfortunately, all three of those names have been misunderstood:
(i) Instead of “Gerar” : גרר being an unattested name for a place near Gaza, “Gerar” : גרר is in fact attested as meaning “Galilee”, per item #80 on the mid-15th century BCE Thutmose III list of places in Canaan.
(ii) Instead of Abimelek being a classic Philistine who impossibly has a classic west Semitic name, Biblical Abimelek in chapters 20-21, 26 of Genesis is in fact one and the same person as princeling Abimelek of Tyre in the Amarna Letters. He is the only person in the Bible or the Amarna Letters who is constantly complaining about contested access to valuable water wells. Biblical Abimelek is not himself an ethnic Philistine; he is king only by virtue of relying on foreign mercenaries from Anatolia, the “Philistines” of the Patriarchal narratives, namely Phicol as his military commander.
(iii) Most importantly for this post, the Beersheba where Abraham is staying is not the famous Beersheba of the Negev, but rather is Beersheba of Upper Galilee.
Consider now the topography of Beersheba of Upper Galilee. At that spot in the foothills, there was nice pastureland, which extended a bit west of there. But immediately east were the towering mountains of Upper Galilee, which at that time were covered by dense forest (as I noted in a prior post). The following two stories, while being impossible at the desert-like Beersheba of the Negev, are perfectly suited for Beersheba of Upper Galilee. Shortly before the binding incident at Mount Moriah, Ishmael had been exiled into the “glorious forest abounding in foliage”, midbar Paran, translated by KJV as “the wilderness of Paran”. Genesis 21: 21. That’s the dense forest of mountainous Upper Galilee. Ishmael feeds himself and his mother by hunting big game, being an “archer”. Genesis 21: 20. Note how it all makes perfect sense, where Ishmael has been exiled into the mountainous dense forest east of Beersheba of Upper Galilee, where the hunting was great. Similarly, in the next generation Esau will routinely bag big game, while his younger twin brother Jacob stays at home and tends the large flock. That perfectly describes life at Beersheba of Upper Galilee, which featured both good pastureland to the west, and a mountainous dense forest to the east, while not being possible at Beersheba of the Negev.
Living at Beersheba of Upper Galilee, immediately west of the towering mountains that are a southern extension of Mount Lebanon, and which were covered by dense forest in the Late Bronze Age, those two stories about Ishmael and Esau practically tell themselves.
Genesis 21: 21 tells us that Ishmael “dwelt in the wilderness [מדבר] of Paran [פארן]….”
That should be understood/paraphrased as follows:
“Ishmael dwelt in the forest [מדבר], the glorious forest, abounding in foliage [Paran : פארן] [, in the densely forest-covered mountains of central Upper Galilee, where wild game was abundant in the Late Bronze Age].”
Jim Stinehart