Asa and Baasha: Mysterious Names

[Jim Stinehart]

Asa and Baasha: Mysterious Names

I Kings 15: 16 says: “And there was war between Asa [king of Judah] and Baasha king of Israel all their days.”

“Asa” is )S) [aleph-samekh-aleph]. That’s the good Hebrew king of Judah.

“Baasha” is B($) [bet-ayin-shin-aleph]. That’s the evil Hebrew king of Israel.

What do those names mean? What is their etymology? The scholarly sources I have found to date always seem to say something like: “etymology uncertain”. Why would two contemporary Hebrew kings have names whose meanings and etymologies seem inexplicable? Isn’t that suspicious? Is it a “coincidence” that the names of these two rival Hebrew kings seem to sound quite a bit alike, though their spellings are entirely different?

Is the root of “Asa” )S : aleph-samekh [where the final aleph /) is an ending]? Is the root of Baasha ($ : ayin-shin [where the bet/B is a prefix, meaning “in” [as in the name Baana : B‘NH at I Kings 4: 12], and with the aleph/) being an ending]?

To me, in comparing the name of the good Hebrew king of Judah to the name of the evil king of Israel, we seem to be looking at )S : aleph-samekh [good] vs. ($ : ayin-shin [evil], where the sound is somewhat similar, yet the spelling is completely different.

Consider now the two cuneiform signs A $A, as used in the Amarna Letters. (Yes, I know that the Amarna Letters were long before the days of Hebrew Kings Asa and Baasha, but I’m trying to figure out where these ultra-mysterious names may be coming from. Perhaps the names themselves are much older than the time of the Hebrew kings who bear those names.) Those two cuneiform signs A $A are inherently ambiguous as used in the Amarna Letters. On the one hand, they could be rendering )S : aleph-samekh, which is the root of the name “Asa”. But on the other hand, those same two ambiguous cuneiform signs could just as easily be alternatively rendering ($ : ayin-shin, which may be the root of “Baasha”. At Genesis 41: 45, it may have been those two ambiguous cuneiform signs that originally rendered the first half of the name “Asenath” [if that Biblical Egyptian name was originally recorded in cuneiform, which is my novel theory of the case]. If so, then when those two cuneiform signs were transformed into alphabetical Hebrew under King Josiah [which is when many scholars see I Kings as taking shape, by the way (before being significantly edited in post-exilic times)], just look at what happens regarding the name “Asenath”. The first two letters of that name in the received alphabetical text of the Biblical Egyptian name “Asenath” were interpreted to be )S : aleph-samekh, which is the root of the name of the good king of Judah, “Asa”, while not having been interpreted [perhaps by the same people in Jerusalem who were then pulling together I Kings] to be ($ : ayin-shin, which is the root of the name of the evil king of Israel, “Baasha”. That is so, even though in Egyptian ($ : ayin-shin would have been the better choice. Is all of that a “coincidence”? Are the names “Asa” and “Baasha” of two rival Hebrew kings related to the first half of the Biblical Egyptian name “Asenath”? If so, that would nicely explain why the names “Asa” and “Baasha” seem to be generally viewed as being utterly inexplicable, both as to etymology and meaning.

Any help anyone can give me on the names “Asa” and “Baasha” would be greatly appreciated.

How do you guys teach these two names to your students? What is the “standard” view of the names “Asa” and “Baasha”? Those two names sure seem mysterious to me.

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois

[Jim Stinehart]

Since scholars have been unable to come up with any west Semitic etymology for the name “Baasha” : B - ($ - ), which is the name of the evil king of Israel whose rival in I Kings was Asa, the good king of Judah, perhaps we should ask if the name “Baasha” : B - ($ - ) is a play on the name “Esau” : ($W. Baasha is evil, and Esau is traditionally viewed as being evil for allegedly wanting to kill his younger twin brother Jacob/“Israel”. Although that may not be completely fair to Esau, nevertheless Esau would not have been viewed favorably by the author of I Kings.

The sibilant in both names could be sin/% or shin/$. The Masoretic pointing was not done until the Middle Ages, and there do not seem to be underlying west Semitic words here, so we probably should not rely on the late pointing. In this post I am provisionally assuming that the sibilant is the same in the two names, being shin/$ in both cases. Since neither name makes sense in west Semitic, we really don’t know whether the sibilant is sin/% or shin/$ in either or both names.

There is no west Semitic etymology of the name “Esau” : ($ - W. So if the name “Baasha” : B - ($ - ) is based on the name “Esau”, there won’t be any west Semitic etymology for the name “Baasha” either. As I noted in my prior post, the root of the name “Baasha” : B - ($ - ) may be ($ : ayin-shin, where (i) the bet/B is a west Semitic prefix, meaning “in” [as in the name Baana : B‘NH at I Kings 4: 12], and (ii) the aleph/) is an ending. Somewhat similarly, the root of the name “Esau” : ($ - W might have been construed in the 1st millennium BCE as being ($ : ayin-shin [exactly the same root as for the name “Baasha”], where the vav/W is an ending.

If so, then the names of these two evil characters in the Bible have the same root: ($ : ayin-shin. The name “Baasha” would then mean “In Esau”, presumably implying: “An Evil Man Like Esau”.

As against the foregoing view, which sees the name “Baasha” as being a play on the name “Esau” [with both characters being viewed as evil by Biblical authors], does anyone have a west Semitic etymology to offer for the name “Baasha” : B - ($ - )?

Is it relevant in the above connection that outside of the Bible, there is no attestation whatsoever of an evil king Baasha of Israel, or of the name “Baasha” : B - ($ - ), or of anyone in that time period who did anything remotely like what Baasha is portrayed as doing in I Kings? Is it likewise relevant that the name “Esau”, with that spelling, is never attested as a proper name outside of the Bible?

Israel [ruled by evil king Baasha] was older and stronger than Judah [ruled by good king Asa], just like [evil] Esau was older and stronger than [good] Jacob, and in both cases the two were lifelong sibling Hebrew rivals [where the states of Israel and Judah are viewed as being Hebrew sibling states]. Isn’t that comparison suspiciously strong? Baasha seems to play the role of Esau, and linguistically, the name “Baasha” seems to be a play on the name “Esau”.

The name “Baasha” : B - ($ - ) sure is mysterious. Is it a play on the name “Esau” : ($ - W, with the root in both cases viewed as being ($, with neither name making sense in west Semitic, and with both characters being viewed as evil persons who were lifelong rivals against a younger sibling who was a good Hebrew? Is Baasha vs. Asa a replay of Esau vs. Jacob, with the name “Baasha” literally meaning “In Esau”?

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois

[Jason Hare]

I, for one, do not understand your transliterations at all. Could you deal with this in Hebrew Unicode, please?
Thanks!

Jason

[Isaac Fried]

The name אסא ASA appears to me to be a variant of UZAY (Neh. 3:25), עדוא IDO (1Ki. 4:14), עדה (Gen.4:19), עודד ODED (2ch. 15:1), עוזא, עוזה UZA (2Sam. 6:6), עזז AZAZ 1Ch. 5:8), and more.

These names are of the roots D, Z, S, extended to OD and עוז OZ 'stamina, vigor', as in Jud. 5:21, and Prov. 8:28.

There is in Israel a Hospital named (אסותא (= עזותא ASUTA, after the Aramaic for health.
.
Isaac Fried, Boston University

[Jim Stinehart]

Jason Hare:

Here are the three names in Hebrew script. (I hope this works.)

1. עשו
[($ - ) : Esau, at Genesis 25: 25]

2. בעשא
[B - ($ - ) : Baasha, at I Kings 15: 16]

3. אסא
[)S - ) : Asa, at I Kings 15: 16]

For #1 and #2, Esau and Baasha, the root appears to be the same: ayin-shin : עש

Note that in I Kings, Baasha plays a role similar to the role that Esau plays in the Patriarchal narratives: each is the evil older brother with a lifelong rivalry with his younger Hebrew sibling. That’s literally the case for Esau, and is figuratively the case for Baasha, where Baasha is the evil king of Israel, the older of the sibling Hebrew states, as compared to Judah [whose king is good Asa], the good, younger Hebrew state. Not only does Baasha seem similar to Esau in playing the role of evil older Hebrew brother, but also neither of the names of these two Hebrews makes sense in west Semitic, and both such names seem to have the same inexplicable root!

What’s going on here? Why is Baasha so much like Esau, both as to the role each plays and, linguistically, as to their very names?

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois

[Jim Stinehart]

Isaac Fried:

You wrote: “The name אסא ASA appears to me to be a variant of UZAY (Neh. 3:25)….”

1. The closest match you found to “Asa” : )S -) : aleph-samekh -aleph is: “Uzai” : )WZ -Y : aleph-vav-zayin-yod. The first letter in both cases is an aleph, but after that the letters are different. “Uzai” starts with aleph-vav, not just aleph, and “Uzai” has zayin, not samekh. [The fact that the last letter doesn’t match likely is not terribly important, as in each case the last letter is probably an ending, as you seem to agree.]

2. But now consider a perfect match: the first half of the name Ase-nath [Genesis 41: 45]. The first half of the Biblical Egyptian name “Ase-nath” is )S : aleph-samekh : אס. Likewise, the root of the name “Asa” [leaving off the ending] is just the same: )S : aleph-samekh : אס.

3. Although Uzai is Jewish [whereas Ase-nath is Egyptian], nevertheless it’s hard to understand Uzai’s name. Why would )WZ-Y come from (ZY, meaning “strong”? In particular, why would aleph-vav/)W interchange with ayin/(? And as to comparing the strange name “Uzai” with the even stranger name “Asa”, why would zayin/Z be thought to interchange with samekh/S?

Meanwhile, we have an e-x-a-c-t match of the root of the name “Asa” with the first half of the Biblical Egyptian name “Ase-nath”, being )S : aleph-samekh : אס in both cases. The letters in the received text match exactly.

Was the author of I Kings peeking a glance at the Patriarchal narratives in coming up with the names of Hebrew kings “Asa” and “Baasha”? If not, then why are those two names of rival Hebrew kings otherwise inexplicable? “Asa” looks like the first half of “Ase-nath”, and if the initial bet/B in “Baasha” is viewed as being the Hebrew preposition “in” used as a prefix, then “Baasha” looks like a play on the name “Esau”, with n-o-n-e of these four names looking like Hebrew names! What’s going on here? Why on earth wouldn’t rival Hebrew kings have vintage Hebrew names? Why is there no non-biblical attestation of either Asa or Baasha or of the names “Asa” and “Baasha”?

Isaac Fried, please give us a believable Hebrew etymology for the names “Asa” and “Baasha”. We’re looking for aleph-samekh : אס in the first case, and ayin-shin : עש in the second case.

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois

[Isaac Fried]

Appears to me that BAASA is a variant of בועז BOAZ = BO-AZ, 'full of vigor', the hero of the book of Ruth.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

[Jim Stinehart]

Isaac Fried:

You wrote: “Appears to me that BAASA is a variant of בועז BOAZ = BO-AZ, 'full of vigor', the hero of the book of Ruth.”

1. But gosh, Boaz is, as you aptly phrase it, a “hero”. Boaz is a good guy. By stark contrast, Baasha is the evil Hebrew king of Israel, who is the lifelong rival of the good Hebrew king Asa of Judah. How could hero and villain, Baasha and Boaz, share a name? Is that likely, in the Bible?

2. I’m not following your spelling. There’s no vav/W in the Biblical name Boaz. Rather, the spelling is: בעז : B(Z : bet-ayin-zayin.

By contrast, the spelling of “Baasha” is: בעשא : B - ($ - ) : bet – ayin-shin – aleph.

On the other hand, per #5 below, I think you have correctly figured out the meaning of the name “Boaz”, which to me seems like a good Hebrew name. That’s all fine and good as to “Boaz”.

But I’m not seeing the match between “Boaz” vs. “Baasha”. The letters don’t match. Shin/$ and zayin/Z don’t interchange within Biblical Hebrew, do they?

3. As I recall the story, old Boaz greatly enjoyed having his “toes” fondled in bed by young Ruth. Ruth 3: 7. There are no charming stories like that told about evil Hebrew king Baasha of Israel.

4. You definitely seem to be going my way in effectively seeing the bet/B at the beginning of the name “Boaz” as being a prefix/preposition. But if you’re willing to go that route, then why not interpret the bet/B at the beginning of the name “Baasha” the same way, and then you’ve got a great match to the name “Esau”! Now we’re talking. Each of Esau and Baasha, so unlike Boaz, is an older, stronger, evil Hebrew man who is a lifelong rival of his good Hebrew younger brother: literally for Esau, and figuratively for Baasha, where Israel is viewed as being the older, stronger brother of the younger Hebrew state of Judah. Baasha fits Esau perfectly, both as to their role in the Bible and linguistically as well. By sharp contrast, Boaz has nothing to do with Baasha, whether as to the completely different Biblical roles the two men play or as to linguistics.

5. But now consider that same name בעז : B(Z : bet-ayin-zayin : “Boaz” as the name of one of the two main pillars of Solomon’s Temple at I Kings 7: 21. [That’s only a little while before the captivating tale is told at I Kings 15 of evil Hebrew king Baasha of Israel vs. good Hebrew king Asa of Judah.] Please note that there is respectable scholarly opinion that “Boaz” as the name of one of the pillars of Solomon’s Temple does indeed mean “in strength”. [S. Ottli, per BDB at p. 127a.] Hey, that’s exactly what you said, come to think on it. And both Boaz in the Book of Ruth, and the pillar of Solomon’s Temple named “Boaz”, are viewed positively [as opposed to evil Hebrew king Baasha of Israel].

Of critical importance on the linguistic front, note that all these analyses are seeing the bet/B at the beginning of the name “Boaz” as being a Hebrew prefix/preposition meaning “in”. Yes! Now simply apply that same view of the initial bet/B to the name “Baasha”, and we’ve got it. Just as “Boaz” literally means “In Strength”, so also “Baasha” literally means “In Esau”! There’s no need to try to equate Hebrew shin/$ to Hebrew zayin/Z. Why go that route? Instead, the name “Baasha” seems to be a straightforward play on the name “Esau”. And neither of their names is west Semitic.

I keep on asking the same question, but I’m not getting any convincing answers. Why on earth would two rival Hebrew kings have names that don’t seem to be Hebrew/west Semitic? What’s going on here? Why does the name “Baasha” seem to make linguistic sense only as meaning “In Esau”, where King Baasha seems to play a suspiciously similar role to Esau in the Bible? And why does the name “Asa” seem to make sense only as the first half of the Biblical Egyptian name “Ase-nath”? Are those exact linguistic matches that I have identified merely “coincidences”? If so, then why don’t, by coincidence or otherwise, the names of Hebrew kings “Asa” and “Baasha” make sense in Hebrew?

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois

[Isaac Fried]

The names in the book of Ruth are allegorical:

אלימלך ELIYMELEK=EL-IY-MELEK, 'like a god-king'
נעמי NAAMIY, 'the pleasant one'
מחלון MAXLON, 'the sickly one'
כליון KILION, 'the doomed one'
ערפה ARPAH, 'turned her back, or nape עורף OREP, on NAAMIY'. See Jos. 7:8 הפך ישראל ערף לפני איביו
רות RUT, 'the hastening one, the follower'. From רוט or רוץ RUC, 'run'.
בעז BOAZ = BO-AZ, 'full of vigor'.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

[Jim Stinehart]

Isaac Fried:

“The names in the book of Ruth are allegorical: ...בעז BOAZ = BO-AZ, 'full of vigor'.”

I agree completely.

And let me add that if I, like Boaz, as an old man had had my “toes” uncovered and fondled in bed by lovely young Ruth [Ruth 3: 7], I would probably have found it within myself to be “full of vigor” too. But my name ain’t “Boaz”. So I guess I'll just have to stick to analyzing the mysterious names "Asa" and "Baasha", and forget about all that other stuff in the Book of Ruth. Yes, I like your analysis of the name "Boaz".

Jim Stinehart