7/28/2019 Theophoric Personal Names in Ancient Hebrew (2).pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/theophoric-personal-names-in-ancient-hebrew-2pdf 1/3

Theophoric Personal Names in Ancient Hebrew: A Comparative Study by Jeaneane D. Fowler

Review by: Dana M. PikeJournal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 111, No. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 1991), pp. 817-818Published by: American Oriental Society

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/603430 .

Accessed: 19/05/2013 20:04

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of 

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

 American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of 

the American Oriental Society.

http://www.jstor.org

7/28/2019 Theophoric Personal Names in Ancient Hebrew (2).pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/theophoric-personal-names-in-ancient-hebrew-2pdf 2/3

Reviews of Books 817

into Philo in the future by examining writers who approached

the text with the same resources as he did, and by dividing the

history of early Old Testament exegesis along Graeco-Latin

and Semitic rather than Jewish and Christian lines.

In the second part of the work, Grabbe has done students of

Philo a useful service. Here he provides in alphabetical order

brief paragraphson each of the 166 Hebrew names which are

given an etymology in Philo. He gives the Hebrew and Greek

forms of the names, the Philonic renderings, and a selection of

other material from various sources: Josephus, rabbinic litera-

ture, and the later onomastical lists. Some notes: Philo renders

the name "Abel"with the words, anapheron epi theon. Grabbe

suggests that this may be derived from bw'(hifil), 'bring', plus

'el, 'to', plus 'el, 'God' (p. 125). Yet it is also possible that the

verbal component of this renderingis yhb, which in root form

is closer to the name (see also the manner in which the root

yhb is translated in the LXX version of Ps. 29:1, 96:7). With

reference to "Barad," he Latin wordgrando means 'hail', andrepresents an accurate rendering of the Hebrew name, not a

derivation based on b- and rab, 'great', as Grabbe suggests

(p. 140). Philo provides not only a formal rendering of the

name Zaphenath-paneah, but also a paraphrase, omitted by

the author (p. 221), according to which the name is derived

"from the art of dream interpretation"(Jos. 121). The impor-

tance of this statement is that it is much closer than the formal

rendering to the etymologies found in Josephus and the later

onomastical lists.

This book will serveas an excellent tool for furtherstudy of

etymology in Philo. Some minor errors, however, should be

corrected. The word "paronomasia" s consistently misspelled;

the authenticity of Jerome's Quaestioneshebraicae in Genesimhas never been seriously questioned, as the author implies

(p. 15);and on occasion Greekwords are accented incorrectly

(pp. 151, 179, 220). Finally, a helpful index to name inter-

pretation in rabbinic literature, which should be added to the

bibliography in section 1.2.3.3, is D. M. Harduf, Dictionary

and Key to the Exegesis of Biblical Proper Names in the

Talmudand Midrash (in Hebrew) (Tel Aviv, 1960).

ADAM KAMESAR

HEBREW UNION COLLEGE

Theophoric Personal Names in Ancient Hebrew: A Compara-

tive Study. By JEANEANE D. FOWLER. JSOT Supplement

Series 49. Sheffield: SHEFFIELD ACADEMIC PRESS, 1988.

Pp. 410.

A revision of the author's doctoral dissertation (University

of Liverpool, 1980), the main purpose of this volume "is to

discover what concepts of the deity are revealed in Hebrew

personal names, and to find out to what extent Hebrew ideas

concerning the deity are distinct from those of other Semitic

religions" (p. 19). The work is divided into two main sections.

The first, and major part of this study, is an analysis of the

theophoric elements in and the grammatical structureof He-

brew personal names, both Biblical and extra-Biblical (ch. 2).

It concludes with a summaryof the "concepts of deity"(i.e., of

YHWH) contained in the names (ch. 3). The second part is an

analysis of theophoric personal names from Ugaritic, Phoeni-

cian, Amorite, Aramaic, Old Akkadian, Akkadian, and Pal-

myrene sources (ch. 4). Concepts of deities in these names are

compared and contrasted with the evidence of the Hebrew

names. Besides affirming the obvious relationships between

the onomastica of various groups of ancient Semites, Fowler

concludes that "there are sharp distinctions between the

religious thought discernible in Hebrew theophoric names

and other ancient Semitic names, distinctions which claim for

Hebrew an individualityamongthe Semitic

nomenclatures....Indeed, far from speaking of a general 'Semitic piety' dis-

cernible from the corpus of ancient Semitic theophoric names,

it is possible to claim a degree of individuality for each ono-

masticon"(p. 317). Summaryremarksin the conclusion (chap-

ter 5) highlight the differences between Hebrew and other

ancient Semitic personalnames. Several appendixes and tables

are included at the end of the book. Since the "Select Bibli-

ography" (pp. 383-88) contains only six citations from the

years 1980-1983 and none later, it is evident that this revision

was meant to incorporate few new ideas and interpretations.

The fairly thorough index of names cited in the text is a

necessary and important tool for the use of this book.

Fowler has clearly gathered and organized a great deal ofonomastic material, and her book provides a convenient com-

pendium of the semantic content of the Hebrew and, to a

lesser extent, other ancient Semitic onomastica. In general, I

agree with the main points of her approach and conclusion.

Though it is somewhat removed from her main thesis, Fowler

also includes (pp. 21-29) a needed critique of G. B. Gray's

methodology in his Studies in Hebrew Proper Names (1896)

and accurately notes (in appendixes 1 and 2) the lack of

criteria, including the divine name YHWH, to consistently

identify Jews in non-Hebrew post-exilic sources such as the

Elephantine papyri and the Murashu documents.

By more closely adhering to her main thesis, Fowler would

have produced a more cogent work. On one hand, the author

tries, unsuccessfully, to cover topics that are only indirectly

related to herproposal. For example, her review of theophoric

elements in personal names that reveal the nature of YHWH

includes several, such as bl and mik, that also functioned as

divine names. This leads her into a brief discussion of divine

names other than YHWH in Hebrew (pp. 63-69; cf. p. 318),

apparentlyto justify her underlying assumption that Israelites

were monotheists. While she rightly concludes that relatively

few "foreign" divine names are contained in Hebrew personal

This content downloaded from 204.152.149.5 on Sun, 19 May 2013 20:04:28 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

7/28/2019 Theophoric Personal Names in Ancient Hebrew (2).pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/theophoric-personal-names-in-ancient-hebrew-2pdf 3/3

818 Journal of the American Oriental Society 111.4 (1991)

names, Fowler has not considered all the available evidence.

She discusses "names compounded with foreign deities,"

but never mentions the Biblical names barq6s, yere/im6t,

merem6t, and 'azmdwet ('dhim&t is mentioned elsewhere,

p. 78; -m6t is interpreted as "death"). Because she only lists

compound names, several short forms such as 'cndt ('cndt6t

is included as a "compound name"),gad, bacal (borne by two

Israelites in the Bible), and resep are not even included in her

review. Other possible examples are mentioned but implicitly

dismissed elsewhere in her book. While there are alternative,

"non-pagan" explanations for some of these names, they at

least deserve mention. Also, the amount of space Fowler

devotes to such topics as the status of the personal names in

Chronicles, the distribution of certain theophoric elements,

and the grammatical structure of Hebrew personal names

seems excessive. Conversely, the concluding chapter would

benefit from further development. Fowler's demonstration of

the differencesbetween the conceptions of deity in the Hebrewand other Semitic onomastica produces a factor that is never

adequately addressed: the majority (almost 60%)of concepts,

elements and semantic equivalents listed in the conclusion as

different from the Hebrew onomasticon involves only Akka-

dian names. This situation deserves furthercomment, since it

may demonstrate West Semitic vs. Akkadian (East Semitic)

onomastic differences. Perhaps the Hebrew onomasticon is

not as "different" rom its West Semitic relatives as Fowler's

conclusion suggests. More distinction between the relative

value of elements (words) as opposed to concepts is also in

order.

On a number of occasions Fowler's review of scholarly

literature appears less than complete:

The parallel forms hidday/liray (pp. 158, 342) are con-

nected, as is often the case, with hwd, "splendor." However

the Phoenician name hdy, which is probably the original of

both of these Biblical forms, is never mentioned (see Avigad,

BASOR 230 [1978]: 67).

Re 'dbfisa', yMh6?ia',and so on (p. 114), Fowler rejects

the sense of the Hebrew noun siua'and the adjectives6at,

preferring a vague "connectionwith the idea of deliverance

in the root yC*'." The studies of Greenfield (Eretz Israel 9

[1969]: 60-65 [English], especially p. 61 n. 11) and Sasson

(Ugarit Forschungen 14[1982]: 201-8, especially p. 203), in

which Hebrew?6acand Ugaritic Care discussed, and which

include comments on the meaning of szacin Hebrewnames,

are not mentioned.

Following Noth's outdated opinion that ?m = Elephan-

tine 31m= Phoenician 'Egmun(Die israelitischenPersonen-

namen, 123-25), Fowler cites the Biblical name Mmidacas

one containing the name of a "foreign deity" (p. 65). The

element s'm (*gum) in the name M~mijl is explained as

"name" (p. 119). Although several non-Hebrew names

containing gm are noted, such parallels as Su-mu-i-la

(Amorite), Sum-mu-dl (Akkadian), ?mwl (Palmyrene) are

not cited. Neither does the author mention that sm in these

names may mean "posterity,offspring,"which allows her to

conclude that "totally absent in Hebrew names is the con-

cept of a male child as a 'son of' or offspring of the deity,

although it is evident in all other languages"(p. 299). This is

an inaccurate overstatement. Fowler lists Akkadian gumu,

"name,"as an element which implies "offspringof the deity"

(p. 299), but elsewhere "Heb[rew] sm 'name"' is cited as

cognate to gm in Ugaritic, Phoenician and Amorite [sm]

(p. 281). The distinction is not clear. While gmin Mmida'is

most likely an epithet, "name," and possibly in Mmiel and

9myh as well, the latter two names are better understood as

"offspring of God/YHWH." The name smyh is cited by

Fowler (pp. 167, 363), but she classifies it as an "abbrevia-

tion," resorting to ?m' or ?mr for an explanation. The

element gm in ?myh is never connected with *sum, "name,

offspring,"as noted by A. F. Rainey (Tel Aviv 4 [1977]: 97;cited by Fowler).

Other points in Fowler's presentation that raise questions

include:

Fowler states that the Yahwistic"suffixyw is only attested

in extra-biblical names" (p. 37), although according to the

Masoretic text the personal name 'ahy6 was borne by three

Israelites. While some of the versions provide alternate

readings and other interpretations have been suggested for

this form, it is likely that it is Yahwisticin one if not all of its

occurrences, parallel to the form 'hyw known from epi-

graphic evidence.

In her conclusion Fowler states that there is an "absence

of the idea of a male child as a 'brother of' the deity. This,too, seems to be a type of a male relationship which was not

acceptable to Hebrew thought" (p. 314). How can this be

true in light of the names 'dhiydh(iu), hyw, and y63dh (all

cited by Fowler), which signify that YHWH is the divine

brother of the name-bearer?The grammarmay be different,

but is the sense?

Typographical errors are too numerous, especially in the

transliteratedHebrew material. I noted at least two dozen.

These various deficiencies diminish Fowler's work and en-

gender the feeling, "what else am I missing?"Unfortunately,

the reader must beware. Otherwise, and on the whole, Fow-

ler's volume is a worthwhile statement on the conceptions of

YHWH contained in the Hebrew onomasticon, in comparison

with the conceptions of deities in other Semitic personal

names. Used with care, it can function as both an interesting

overview and a helpful resource.

DANA M. PIKE

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA

This content downloaded from 204.152.149.5 on Sun, 19 May 2013 20:04:28 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions