By Charles Halton on Friday, 7 December 2007 at 11:50 am
Names in the Study of Biblical History
David, YHWH Names, and the Role of Personal Names
Buried History Monographs – BHM 2
by Francis I. Andersen and Richard S. Hess
Australian Institute of Archaeology, 2007
iv + 20 pages, English
Paper, 8 x 12
ISBN: 9780980374704
Your Price: $19.00
www.eisenbrauns.com/wconnect/wc.dll?ebGate~EIS~~I~ANDNAMESI
While I was looking around the Eisenbrauns booth at SBL James Spinti alerted me to a new monograph produced by the Australian Institute of Archaeology: Francis I. Andersen and Richard S. Hess, Names in the Study of Biblical History: David, YHWH Names, and the Role of Personal Names (Buried History Monograph 2; Melbourne: Australian Institute of Archaeology, 2007). It is a grand total of 20 pages but it is packed with information and very valuable bibliography–they provide extensive bibliography for personal names in the languages/geographic areas Akkadian, Ammonite, Amurrite, Aramaic, Ebla, Emar, Hebrew, Hittite, Hurrian, Phoenician, 2nd Millennium names from Palestine and vicinity, Ugaritic, and other West Semitic names.
In this monograph Andersen and Hess survey the historical and literary distribution of the spellings of YHWH elements in names as well as the spelling of David. For instance, here are a couple of charts:
Although there are supporting supplementary comments, here is their conclusion:
The books of the Old Testament present accurately the changing fashions in Hebrew names. The long forms of names ending with the name of God (-yhw) were prominent during the monarchy, and were completely replaced by -yh forms after the Exile. The short spelling of David was in vogue before the Exile, the longer form after. The Bible and the archaeological evidence are the same. If the material in Genesis-Kings was largely concocted after the Exile, as some scholars now claim, and the invented characters were given the names current in their own day, we would expect the popular -yh names to be used throughout. Genesis-Kings accurately preserves the changes in Hebrew names corresponding to linguistic and cultural changes in the Israelite communities. The authenticity of the Bible in this specific matter is established by external evidence.
What do you think of evidence of this kind when used to date the composition of biblical books? How should we view spelling conventions with respect to literary provenance?
Comments (6)
Category: All,Biblical Hebrew Language,Epigraphy,Hebrew Bible,Hittite,Hurrian,Northwest Semitic Inscriptions,Ugaritic
- Add this post to
- Del.icio.us -
- Digg
Comment by John Hobbins
Made Wednesday, 12 of December , 2007 at 9:43 pm
The way to test the hypothesis is to chart the distribution of -yhw and -yh names in epigraphic finds. That’s the chart I want to see.
I don’t think dwd / dwyd is attested often enought outside the Bible to test that, though of course the hypothesis is reasonable enough even if we lack hard and specific evidence to back it up.
Thnaks, Charles, for bringing this volume to our attention.
But I’m really hoping someone will go through all of R. Zadok’s publications scattered here and there, and present the data he collects in a convenient and rational matter (he does not0. That’s a project for a budding Assyriologist.
Comment by Charles Halton
Made Wednesday, 12 of December , 2007 at 11:27 pm
John,
I would like to have seen the epigraphic stratification as well. Thanks for the tip about Zadok’s work, maybe in a few years I’ll have time for it 
Comment by Uri Hurwitz
Made Monday, 3 of March , 2008 at 8:12 pm
Judging by the evidence of extra-biblical evidence, that is theophoric Hebrew names in epigraphic material — yahu/yw endings dominate. Indeed it seems exclusive for that period if one checks the Hebrew names in Shmuel Ahituv’s Handbook of Ancient
Inscriptions etc. (second Heb. edition ), 2005.
In biblical texts , the clear direction is the gradual shift from -yahu to yah in
Comment by Uri Hurwitz
Made Monday, 3 of March , 2008 at 8:13 pm
the later books. Compare Yirmiyahu to Obadyah.
Uri Hurwitz
Comment by Charles Halton
Made Monday, 3 of March , 2008 at 11:10 pm
Thanks for this Uri, very interesting.
Pingback by Awilum.com » Review: Holmstedt’s Ruth: A Handbook on the Hebrew Text
Made Tuesday, 27 of July , 2010 at 3:16 pm
[...] the book he discusses orthographic conventions of spelling the name David (22) he does not mention Rick Hess’s very good study on this topic nor does Hess appear in the bibliography even though I consider him to be the foremost expert on [...]
