â®×Ö¸×Ö²×Ö¹×â¬â YÄhÄlÅm

Ephraim S. Ayil

Jump to Content

ChapterÂ 8 â®×Ö¸×Ö²×Ö¹×â¬â YÄhÄlÅm

In: Identifying the Stones of Classical Hebrew

Author:

Ephraim S. Ayil

Ephraim S. Ayil
Search for other papers by Ephraim S. Ayil in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed

Type:: Chapter

Pages:: 86â88

DOI:: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004678002_009

Access via:

Dar Hadith al Hassania

Download PDF

The identity of yÄhÄlÅm remains elusive because there is not enough known about this stone to suggest any identification with integrity. Despite the dearth of positive information that could contribute towards clinching a particular identification, it is worthwhile correcting previous proposals to avoid contaminating future publications. What is known is presented here.

Two slightly different vocalizations of â®××××â¬â appear in the Masoretic codexes, differing in the length of the first vowel. The standard form â®×Ö¸×Ö²×Ö¹×â¬â is found in most masoretic manuscripts (Bomberg), but the Leningrad codex preserves the form â®×Ö·×Ö²×Ö¹×â¬â.

In Israeli Hebrew, â®×Ö¸×Ö²×Ö¹×â¬â yÄhÄlÅm designates diamond. Diamonds are not a plausible identification for the biblical references. In the ancient world, diamonds were unknown in Ancient Egypt and Israel because they occurred only in India.¹ The Book of Exodus describes that the stones of the priestly breastplate inscribed, which would have been done using corundum (refer to ChapterÂ 15 â®ï¬ªÖ¸×Ö´××¨â¬â Å ÄmÄ«râEmery). Diamond has an absolute hardness of 1500, so is impervious to abrasion by corundum (Å¡ÄmÄ«r) which has an absolute hardness of 400.² The identification with diamond in Israeli Hebrew came about by folk etymologizing â®×Ö¸×Ö²×Ö¹×â¬â yÄhÄlÅm, as if it was from the root â®×-×-×â¬â h-l-m âto hammer down, strikeâ.

Despite numerous proposed cognates from other ancient languages, no true cognate for â®×Ö¸×Ö²×Ö¹×â¬â yÄhÄlÅm has been identified. In older literature, â®×Ö¸×Ö²×Ö¹×â¬â yÄhÄlÅm is occasionally connected with Akkadian elmÄÅ¡u and Arabic â®Ø£ÙÙØ§Ø³â¬â Ê¾almÄs. But this resemblance is superficial, as Akkadian elmÄÅ¡u and Arabic â®Ø£ÙÙØ§Ø³â¬â Ê¾almÄs actually correspond to Hebrew â®×Ö·ï¬¼Ö¸×Ö´×ï¬ªâ¬â á¸¥allÄmÄ«Å¡ âflintâ (refer to ChapterÂ 18 â®×¦Ö¹×¨â¬â á¹¢År & â®×Ö·ï¬¼Ö¸×Ö´×ï¬ªâ¬â á¸¤allÄmÄ«Å¡âFlint/Obsidian for more information). Similarly, Heinrich Quiringâs proposed connections with Akkadian á¸«ulÄlu and elallu³ are phonologically and semantically difficult. These are not two words, but two forms of single word which refers to an attractive limestone employed in the construction of monuments and carved into vessels,⁴ not a precious stone. The Septuagint and Vulgate translate â®×Ö¸×Ö²×Ö¹×â¬â yÄhÄlÅm with á¼´Î±ÏÏÎ¹Ï iaspis, which is found metastasized in Antiquities of the Jews and Jewish War with the entry for â®×¡Ö·ïÖ´××¨â¬â sappÄ«r. Pliny informs us that iaspids are a category of blue-green stones composed of a great number of mineral species. As a consequence, this translation does little to narrow the provenance or possible identity of this stone.

Given the lack of cognates outside of Hebrew, it is a last resort to concoct a Hebrew-internal etymology. One such etymology claimed by some scholars, despite the obvious semantic difficulties involved, posits â®×Ö¸×Ö²×Ö¹×â¬â yÄhÄlÅm to be a Hebrew innovation from the âimperfect or yiqtol form of the verbal root â®×-×-×â¬â [h-l-m âto hammer down, strikeâ]â.⁵ This etymology is impossible for several reasons. A nominal stem is required for a noun, such as the name of a precious stone. The âimperfect or yiqtolâ is a verbal, not nominal, stem. The inability of those who cite this etymology to reasonably explain it speaks for itself.

There is some variation in the Aramaic targums as to the identity of â®×Ö¸×Ö²×Ö¹×â¬â yÄhÄlÅm. Pseudo-Jonathan (Yerushalmi) to Exodus, Jerusalem Neofiti Targum Onkelos, and Pseudo-Jonathan (Yerushalmi) to Numbers render â®×Ö¸×Ö²×Ö¹×â¬â yÄhÄlÅm with â®×¡Ö·×Ö°×Ö²××Ö¹×â¬â sabÌ hÄlÅm (some manuscripts: â®×¡Ö´×Ö°×Ö²××Ö¹×â¬â sibÌ hÄlÅm). However, no other cognate has been identified. The variation between -â®×Ö¸â¬â in Hebrew and -â®×¡Ö·×Ö°â¬â in Aramaic may signify two reflexes of a cluster *sw-. In Proto-Northwest Semitic, initial *w- shifted to y-. Aramaic preserved the initial sibilant, which protected the *w-, and it may have interpreted medial *-w- as -b-. Assuming the Aramaic word is not merely the first two consonants of the preceding word â®×¡Ö·ïÖ´××¨â¬â sappÄ«r reduplicated and corrupted, this positively indicates that both Hebrew yÄhÄlÅm and Aramaic are loans from a third source, probably a non-Semitic language. This is, however, speculative.

There overwhelming majority of Hebrew lithonyms are loanwords, and without a reasonable Hebrew-internal derivation, â®×Ö¸×Ö²×Ö¹×â¬â yÄhÄlÅm probably adheres to this general trend. Which language it is loaned from is unclear. Due to a paucity of usages in the Hebrew Bible, ambiguous identifications offered by the ancient translations, and a lack of known cognates, proposing any particular identification would be baselessly speculative. There simply is not enough information about this stone to suggest any identification with integrity. However, this overview was successful at ruling out many of the existing proposals in circulation.

Amar, Zohar, & Lev, Efraim. (2017). Most-cherished gemstones in the medieval Arab world. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 27(3), 377â401.

Mukherjee, Swapna (2012). Applied Mineralogy: Applications in Industry and Environment. Springer Science & Business Media. 373.

Quiring, Heinrich. (1954). Die Edelsteine im Amtsschild des jÃ¼dischen Hohenpriesters und die Herkunft ihrer Namen. Sudhoffs Archiv fÃ¼r Geschichte der Medizin und der Naturwissenschaften, (H. 3), 193â213.

Dole, George F, & Moran, WilliamÂ L. (1991). A Bowl of allalu-stone. Zeitschrift fÃ¼r Assyriologie und vorderasiatische ArchÃ¤ologie, 81(1â2), 268â273.

Harrell, JamesÂ A., James K.Â Hoffmeier, and Kenton F.Â Williams. (2017). Hebrew gemstones in the Old Testament: A lexical, geological, and archaeological analysis. Bulletin for Biblical Research, 27(1), 1â52.

Citation Info

Save
Cite
Email this content

Share link with colleague or librarian

You can email a link to this page to a colleague or librarian:
Email this content
or copy the link directly:

https://brill.edhh.ma/display/book/9789004678002/BP000008.xml
The link was not copied. Your current browser may not support copying via this button.

Link copied successfully

Collapse
Expand

Identifying the Stones of Classical Hebrew

A Modern Philological Approach

Series:Â Ancient Languages and Civilizations, Volume: 7

Cover Identifying the Stones of Classical Hebrew

E-Book ISBN:: 9789004678002

Publisher:: Brill

Print Publication Date:: 16 Aug 2024

Subjects

Front Matter

Back Matter

Metrics

	All Time	Past 365 days	Past 30 Days
Abstract Views	0	0	0
Full Text Views	948	118	17
PDF Views & Downloads	137	50	4

African Studies	Education	Media Studies
American Studies	History	Middle East and Islamic Studies
Ancient Near East and Egypt	Human Rights and Humanitarian Law	Musicology
Art History	International Law	Philosophy
Asian Studies	International Relations	Religious Studies
Biblical Studies	Jewish Studies	Slavic and Eurasian Studies
Biology	Languages and Linguistics	Social Sciences
Book History and Cartography	Life Sciences	Theology and World Christianity
Classical Studies	Literature and Cultural Studies

Subjects

Authors

Open Access

Product Information

Company

Contact

ChapterÂ 8 â®×Ö¸×Ö²×Ö¹×â¬â YÄhÄlÅm

Citation Info

Share link with colleague or librarian

Identifying the Stones of Classical Hebrew

A Modern Philological Approach

Table of Contents

Metrics

Metrics

ChapterÂ 8 â®×Ö¸×Ö²×Ö¹×â¬â YÄhÄlÅm