The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and BabyloniaPinches, Theophilus G. (Theophilus Goldridge)
Religion
The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and Babylonia
Pinches, Theophilus G. (Theophilus Goldridge)
Bible. Old Testament -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.
In any case, we may take it that the consensus of opinion favours the
supposition that the name in question refers to Babylonia, and if this be
the case, Abraham, the father of the Hebrew nation, as well as of other
peoples, was really, as has been supposed, of Babylonian or Chaldean
origin. This is also implied by the statement in Gen. xi. 28, that Ur of
the Chaldees was the land of the nativity of Haran, Abraham’s brother, who
died in the country of his birth before the family of Terah went to settle
at Haran, on the way to Canaan. The theory of the identity of Arpachshad
is moreover important, because it is contended that Ur of the Chaldees was
not in Babylonia, but is to be identified with the site known as Urfa, in
Mesopotamia.
Concerning the names of Shelah, Eber, Peleg, Reu, Serug, and Nahor, there
is not much that can be said. To all appearance they are not Babylonian
names, or, rather, they receive little or no illustration from Babylonian
sources. Nothing is recorded concerning these patriarchs except their ages
at the time their eldest sons were born, and at what age they died. The
question whether the Hebrews derived their name from their ancestor Eber
is not set at rest by any passage in the Bible, nor is there any statement
in secular literature which would enable this to be decided. To all
appearance, it is needful to keep the name of Eber distinct from that of
the Hebrews, notwithstanding that they are from the same root. If,
however, the Hebrews were “the men from beyond,” then Eber may well have
been “the man from beyond,” indicating for his time a migration similar to
that of Abraham. In this way, if in no other, the names may be connected.
We have seen that in many cases the names of these “genealogical tables”
are regarded as nationalities, and, indeed, there is sufficient
justification for such a theory on account of many of the names appearing
as those of well-known nations. This being conceded, it would probably not
be too much to regard the names of the patriarchs from Shelah to Serug as
indicating ethnical historical events. Thus Shelah might mean “extension,”
indicating the time when the Semitic race began to go beyond its ancient
borders. Treating the other names in the same way, Eber would mean the
period when that race crossed some river into another district; Peleg
would mean that, at the time referred to, that race, or a portion of it,
was divided into small states, as Babylonia was at the period preceding
that of the dynasty of Amraphel; whilst Reu would mean “friendliness,”
denoting the time when those states were united under one head, and the
old dissensions ceased. Serug would then mean something like
“interweaving,” perhaps referring to the time when the various races (? of
Babylonia) intermingled. These explanations of the names receive a certain
amount of confirmation from the parallel list in Gen. x. 25, where to the
name Peleg the note is added, “for in his days was the earth divided.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account