Searching Israel in precious stones
Introduction
Archaeological evidences usually confirm remnants of specific aspects such as ancient civilizations, kingdoms and kings; however apart from these, records are less common to reveal history of other locally known persons such as state rulers, scribes, priests or spiritual leaders, … etc. Archaeological efforts have played not far more from this fact in the Israel land. As long as Biblical history of Israel is concerned there are many significant persons having prominent place in the history of Israel that need to be traced, i.e. the patriarchs and other important persons, such as Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Joshua, the twelve patriarchs. . . etc. As indispensable as it is, the latter for instance links to almost all strata of history of Israel, and throughout Biblical history of Israel almost every historic event had an association with the tribal names (e.g. if we consider the word ‘Judah’, the word in combined form with other terms appears as follows: tribe of Judah, house of Judah, land of Judah, king of Judah,… etc., like so the tribal name occurs everywhere in the whole book).
Means of restoration for such issue of long of interest was developed in this article by etymological relation with names of precious stones; and nothing like the names of precious stones would become an extra Biblical testimonies of vestige of Israelite people. It can be claimed at least fifty percent of the ancient names of precious stones would be traced to the names of Israelites of the first four generations when counted from the progenitor tribes, and including names of other Biblical persons. Which in time that these names became as universal terms used in almost all languages. However, most ancient names of precious stones, especially those mentioned in the Bible, have persisted for millennia lacking their original verbal and also their original significance. Either via trading or as local natural resources gemstones could be known to people, however it is clear that all-inclusive way of naming varieties of stones requires some civilized culture, and on evidential grounds attributed to the Jews and Greeks.
Much of the names in Hebrew and Greek which survive in the present have passed through different generations of radically different tongues, and known to us in corrupted forms. For any attempt of comparisons, it creates a difficulty that not easily jumping out at the memory. For instance no one would swiftly give account for the Persian “zumrud”, the English “emerald”, the French “émeraude” and the Greek “smaragdos” that all these as equivalents, where the latter is thought as the base. Or the English “diamond”, the Latin “adamas”, the Arabic “almas” and Hebrew “odem”; yet again there may be stated even a more strange equivalence, the Greek “topaz” and Hebrew “pitdah”. This and other reasons creates obscurity for the origin of the names, and difficult to retrieve them down to their respective names of Israelites and other Bible persons. But some names are quite familiar can easily be related.
For the sake of avoiding confusions, it should be noted beforehand that there are also other major problems regarding the origin of the names of the stones. One basic problem is, as it is mentioned often, interpretations on Bible stones requires observant account as to which a Greek or Hebrew name was used at the time when the word was written. Otherwise it is common to see identical names, one used in ancient and the other in modern, referring to different kinds of stones. Another related case is, names with different origins are appeared to indicate same stones; for example “yahlom”, “admant”, and “shamir” could be traced their roots to the names of three persons but usually they serve as substitutable terms indicating for diamond. Generally to say that our effort will be in vain if we try to set a kind of view based on the assumption of our present day knowledge of mineralogy. For these reasons the etymological works made in this article essentially focus on the survived names irrespective of the above existing confusions.
Stones as representations of names of Patriarchs
Generally gem lore had significant role in human cultures; which it had a long history that stretches even beyond recorded history, with its place of origin owes to the Eastern people. Usually precious stones in the mind of the ancients were perceived as a symbol of supernatural power, medicinal, magic, protection… etc. However stones for memorial purpose to represent great persons or patriarchs should be treated as especial issue, and in this context we credit only to limited people, and which we would able attest for the Sumerians and Israelites. It would be confirmed for the former case in the following detailed discussions.
Theophrastus, in his De Lapidibus, categorizes the source of the things formed on the earth, as from water and earth; all metals formed from water, whereas stones correspond to the earth. Theophrastus’s reference for this conceptions was probably the Sumerian mythology of Enki, the Mesopotamian earth god. Since the concept appears allegorically in the common depictions of Enki with his chief feature springing water. In these materials we simply notice that the way the springing water depicted is typically shown in two scenes, one form is flowing out from his shoulder and the alternative is from the vase he holds. Where Enki in these scenes would represent as a sign for the earth, and the outflow water could be interpreted symbolically the idea “generating”. Thus the spring from his vase shows for things generated from the water, and from his shoulder merely mean directly from the earth. In many cases, in turn these Enki’s myths seem to owe the Genesis creation story, the Bible tells that out of the earth and waters that all creatures were brought forth. The parallelism reemphasized in the Enki’s figures depicting the flowing water accompanied by the swimming fishes; the Biblical account in accord declares that marine creatures evolved from waters. For the cases of the flowing from his shoulder, the swimming fishes may possibly stand for the mythical fish “goatfish”, Enki’s major symbol.
Similarly man also was made out of the earth-dust. Diverse skin colors of human races sprung from the loins of this first man who was made up out of earth-dust. I propose that it seems in their view this earth-dust was a composite of fine fragments of different stones, so that these becoming the factor for the diverse skin colors of human races who later sprung from Adam. In this case the stones becoming the ancestry ingredient of the physical part of man. The pun existing between these two similar Sumerian words wouldn’t be a coincidence, “abum” father and “abnu” stone (The idea is more highlighted in Tigrigna terminology where both forms used alternatively “abni” & “emni”, meaning stone; containing ab ‘father’ and em ‘mother’). Returning to the Enki’s portrayals, and let’s observe also the Akkadian bā and mu (māmū), both render as water. There seems any pattern for these two Akk. with Ab “father” and ummu “mother”, and proving the relation between the springing water and the idea generate. Coherent to this assertions, sex distinction was used for varieties of stones by the Greeks and Assyrians (Robert J. Forbes, 1955), e.g. as Theophrastus noted, the ruddier sard called ‘male’, and the darker variety of it called ‘female’.
Similarly in more systematized way the custom had gained a special place in ancient Israel; which the spectrum of the different colors of stones used as distinguishing features for the different tribes. As it is stated in the following that the stones in the High Priestly breastpiece are set to represent twelve tribes. Ex 28:17-20 states:-
“And thou shalt set in it settings of stones, even four rows of stones: the first row shall be a sardius, a topaz, and a carbuncle. And the second row shall be an emerald, a sapphire, and a diamond. And the third row a ligure, an agate, and an amethyst. And the fourth row a beryl, and an onyx, and a jasper: they shall be set in gold in their inclosings. And the stones shall be with the names of the children of Israel, twelve, according to their names, like the engravings of a signet; every one with his name shall they be according to the twelve tribes.”
Here, in line with the above assertion, the further complexity of stone tradition, presented in different colors, may be required for one reason to stand for the composite traits hidden within the common ancestor. Elsewhere in the Bible we find for thrice that the twelve tribes of Israel are represented by twelve ordinary stones; interestingly in all these three Biblical passages the stones have got association with water. In addition, in Isa 51:1 the rock is expressed as a symbol that a living child hewn out of it. Furthermore, William Jones explained in his History and Mystery of precious stones, 1880, “Jews as more credulous people on the interpretations of the stones”, secondly he mentions “particular prodigies ascribed to King Solomon”. Furthermore, we will see in the next discussions that agreeably no metal such as the most important ‘gold’ or ‘silver’, those formed from water, was used as a symbol for any of those forefathers.
Colors of the High priest breastplate stones
Interestingly, the blue, scarlet (red), purple and fine linen (yellow-tan to white), the four colors of the fabrics of tabernacle equipment, can serve as good reference to talk about the type of colors for the above breastplate gemstones. Though this will offer little help to become as factor of gemstone distinction. Because colors are not unique characteristics with respect to stones, plus some gemstones which exist in varieties encompass many color variations. It seems quite reasonable that these four colors may have been the determining factor for dividing the breastplate stones into four rows. Blue means therefore, seeing blue as broad category the set will comprise all ranges of blues including greenish blue. For the type of set comprising red group; all types of red and also deep browns. For purple, both violet and reddish pink. And yellow, light orange, light brown and white that all these together as one row, in the color designated as fine linen.
The issue of these colors make a great logical sense when we see it in connection to the process of creation of the physical form of man that we already raised in the above. They could also represent for the different colors of the body parts. In this account the color red is the ingredient for the blood, and purple is for the flesh. Note: linen may play as twofold role here; the additional significance is from the idea ‘twined’, a word usually described along with it, and probably it employs as figurative role to imply mixture of colors, of these individual colors: white, yellow & light brown. White colored ingredients forms the parts of the body such as the bone, teeth, eye . . .; the none-dark skin and hair categorized either in the other colors of linen or the product resulted from the mix of the constituents. Analyzing Solomon’s passage (Song1:6) the emergence of black is peculiar from the other colors that determine appearance of body parts, from morphological change due to environmental influence rather than innate feature (NKJV – Song1:6, “do not look upon me, because I am dark, Because the sun has tanned me… “. The color blue represents muscles and blood veins.
Identification of the names of the stones
Comparison of the precious stones is not made here to any name of Israelite found in Bible, for reasonable grounds, as stated above restricted to the names found within the first four generations. There needs always attention in treating the issue of the exact number of generations. On the basis of long chronology (430 or 400 years) for the Israelite Sojourn in Egypt, in oppose to the shorter one (215 year), the span covered by these specified generations is far too short to equalize with 400 or 430. However this can’t make us hastily conclude that Biblical mention of Jacob’s descendants as partial genealogy. Most probably the successive ages of descendants (of average lifespan 100) were simply added here. Such arithmetic values would be devised rather to inform only successive generations. It must be noted Jews culture is quite strict in listing genealogies, we should deny any hesitation regarding unspecified generations. For this reason let’s apprehend the case ‘four generations’ in its absolute implication.
For the twelve progenitors it is straightforward issue why their names can be located amongst the names of stones, just as stated already – the twelve breastplate stones were made to represent them. And the designations of these particular stones by the names of the tribes began likely after descriptions of Ex28:20. As such at this first beginning there might have a stone named after each of one of them. The fourth generation belonged to Moses’s cohort and the tradition of labeling stones by names of representative persons became significant to them just for definite reason, i.e. the breastpiece was established in their time. If the tradition can apply to these cohorts, logically there is no way for the middle two generations to disregard them in this account. It should be clear that in this etymological identifications only few are identified out of the complete original sets, particularly for the twelve stones. In the course some of these names became inexistent either because of the problems stated above, or renamed by different names as they pass across the ages.
Names of Israelite tribes of the fourth generation
1. Qeraḥ
One of the stones identified amongst the names of Israelites is the Heb. qeraḥ, the word occurs once in the whole Old Testament (Eze1:22). According to Septuagint translations the word rendered as “krustallos”; similarly the Vulgate translates it as “crystallum”; all these are the equivalents of the English “crystal”.
Owing to the natural corruption of the names, there is no surprise at all to suppose that the Greek root word “Krust” came from qeraḥ, in the Targum reads as qrt. Even the German “quartz”, the base for the English word, may be stretched its derivation further to this Hebrew or Greek word, since crystal and quartz are not widely different issues. The precious stone’s name can be perfectly related to “Qoraḥ”, the great-grandson of Levi (its lineage is – Ex6:21 – Levi > Kohath > Yitshar > Qoraḥ). Since the word qeraḥ “ice” literally bears a matching idea with the glassy substance (ice imparts a figurative expression of glass), this will create some confusions and seems to distract our view. The problem can be handled simply, the etymological view must be seen reversely that qeraḥ as a sketch of the idea “ice” is only the effect after the glassy character of the stone.
2. Nophekh
Nophekh is one of the stones included in the Hebrew description of the breastplate, and it occurs four times in the Bible (Ex28:18; 39:11, Eze27:16; 28:13). Regarding the Heb. “nophekh” there exists uncertainty as to which stone exactly refers, for it is observed that the word have diverse translations. Whichever the translation is correct, the word “nophekh” would certainly be equated with brother of Qoraḥ “Nepheg” (Ex6:21 – Levi > Kohath > Yitshar > Nepheg).
3. Shamir
Shamir is found in Old Testament in Jer17:1, Eze3:9, and Zec7:12, and in any version except in Septuagint corresponds to diamond, the difference is only written in varieties forms, adamantinus, adamas, adamant, or diamond. For the case of Septuagint, the International Bible Encyclopedia describes, it omits in Jer17:1, and in the other two verses either periphrases the word or had a different text. One concrete fact about this stone is, as the passages in these verses allude that the stone is a hard mineral effective of carving. Though diamond may seem the proper translation of “shamir’; in realty, however, the expression ‘hardness’ cannot be taken as exclusive property of diamond, it would also possibly ascribed to one of the sapphire varieties or the smaragdos. The latter would be even more convincing, simply if we treat the term in split form “samar-gdos”, then the word can suitably equated with the “smeris”, a Greek equivalent of shamir, where the “gdos” element here could be an external merging.
The name shamir would find its root to the name, who is contemporary to the above two Israelites, “Shamer” the great-grandson of Asher (1Ch7:32– Asher > Beriah > Ḥeber > Showmer (Shemer)). Since we have constituted a better logical framework for comparisons, we can assuredly disregard the general assumption on the etymological origins of the name of the gemstone that accounts from Heb. shamar “to hedge about”; while the name of the Israelite likened with Heb. shemer “the settling of wine”.
4. Tershyish
Tershyish is also mentioned as one of the twelve stones in the Hebrew description of the breastplate, and the name of the stone occurs six times in the Bible (Ex 28:20; 39:13; Song 5:14; Eze 1:16; 10:9; 28:13; Da 10:6). Its usual identifications fluctuate between chrusolithos and berullion, but besides these favorites there are many alternatives translations. The term without any alteration due to corruption appears to preserve perfectly the name of the Israelites “Tharshyish”, a fourth descendant in the Benjamin lineage (1Ch7:10 – Benjamin > Yedia‘e’l > Bilhan > Tarshyish).
5. Yahalom
Yahalom (Ex 28:18; 39:11; Eze 28:13) is also described as a breastplate stone. The Hebrew word yahalom as to which the Greek equivalent corresponds lacks certainty; various Greek names of stones are conjectured as possible equivalents such as chrusolithos, berullion, onuchion, sardonyx … etc. English Versions of the Bible translation renders as diamond, but the rendering has little acceptance, since engraving on diamond was not known at the time when this breastplate was made.
The base word for “Yahalom” is usually explained as “halam”, the term holds a sense of ‘hardness’. A Later morphological event for the initial ‘ya’ is supported even when examined from the view point of Maskelyne’s suggestion, he claims the Hebrew “yahalom” and the Greek “hualos” as kindred words. The root word is therefore appropriate to be compared to Israelite Helem (1Ch7:35 – Asher > Beriah > Heber > Helem).
6. Ramoth
Septuagint translates in one place as meteora (Job 28:18) and in another place as ramoth (Eze 27:16), whereas English Versions of the Bible translates “coral”. As a name of a person only have credit in our discussions if the reading taken by some manuscripts for the name of man found in the verse Ezra 10:29 is correct, which attempted to read “Ramoth” instead of “Jeramoth”. Otherwise there is no Israelite named by this name elsewhere, importantly speaking in our target generations.
Ramoth is a kind of descriptive word always found in the Bible together with the place name “Gilead”. The explanation usually offered for this description attempts to refer the type of landform “heights of Gilead”. One can analyze the expression instead as the exaltation of the man Gilead, because the Hebrew root verb “rum” also renders as “the height of rank”. Thus two possible reasons would be offered to the case why ramoth may have been taken to represent for Gilead, this is either it was generally assumed as an epithet expressive word or an eventually shorten form of the compound. All our attempt is to come to Gilead, the fourth descendant from Joseph (1Ch7:17– Joseph > Manasseh > Machir > Gilead).
7. Sapphire
Sapphire (Heb. sappir) is one of the stones of the breastplate, occurs several times in the Bible (Ex 24:10; 28:18; 39:11; Job 28:6, 16; Song 5:14; Isa 54:11; La 4:7; Eze 1:26; 10:1; 28:13). The modern sapphire encompasses all varieties of colors except red, however the sapphire under discussion is identified usually with the deep blue colored stone lapis lazuli. The term would be compared to Zipporah, Moses wife. In one hand the woman’s importance is not totally an absurd incidence particularly in our reconstruction; probably adopted in some kind of fashion of tradition that basis to the story mentioned in Ex4:25, where the stone “sapphire” here means nothing but stone selected for cutting off foreskins during the ritual of circumcision. In another hand, the tradition of naming stones in association to the name of a woman according the above explanation is possible.
Names of Israelite tribes of the second generation
1. Sardion or Sardius
Sardion (Re 4:3; 21:20) is the foundation stone of the New Jerusalem, according to the common view that the modern day sard and carnelian both are thought as equivalents of sardion. Most of the Bible versions consider sardion as the Heb. odhem; however the rendering disagrees with the explanation offered in this article’s discussions, that these two terms appear to have been developed independently from different original words, i.e. odhem is more strongly related to the Latin adamas as stated at introductory part, whereas sardion would be identified with the name Sered, son of Zebulun (Ge46:14).
2. Jacinth
Jacinth is mentioned as one of the foundation stones, also known “Huakinthos” by the King James translation. St. Epiphan, in De duodecim gemmis, P.G XLlII, equates with Heb. ligurius. The term jacinth can be linked to Jachin (Ge46:10 – Simeon > Jachin). Having this view in mind, one can explain the names of two pillars at the gate of the sanctuary “Jakin and Boaz” as names of two stones, i.e. better to say at least decorated by some precious stones that now Solomon uses them as the name of pillars. It is clear to all that there is no reason that the pillars are wanted to be named by these two who are less famous Israelites. There are many well-known men who had a great contribution in Israel history, like the father of faith Abraham, the Great prophet Moses, the High Priest Aaron, the warrior Joshua, the hero David, the wisdom man and also temple builder Solomon himself . . . etc. Nevertheless there is no stone named by Boaz, yet there is reason that we tend to compare with “ ‘achlamah”, which can be a more corrupt form of the name “Elimelech”, a Boaz’s kinsman, that Boaz took his son’s wife. Perhaps it was designated in this way simply to reflect their historical relation. In this case Boaz could be an alternate name traditionally used.
The sequential order of Huakinthos and Amethyst (‘achlamah) in the foundations of the New Jerusalem strengthens our suppositions. The couplings set in the one case the major pillars, and in the other the deeper most foundations, affirming the relation of some significance. It is important to note that seeing the breastplate stone ‘achlamah in connection to Elimelech is problematic assertion, a man who lived in much later time from the Exodus. The problem would be resolved, if we think that the precious stone had been renamed later by this name.
In connection to our discussion another key fact to include is, that mythical Huakinthos indicates some ties with the pillar name Jachin. Notably the stone with other two stones traced in the famous Greek myth, which involves Hyacinthus, Apollo and Zephyrus. Taking all considerations in mind, it is hardly a coincidence for the etymology of these three names collectively related with Jacinth, Opal, and Sapphire (note: for Opal we are going see it in the following discussions). It is not questionable issue for the former that it gets immediate link with the mythical Laconian youth Hyacinthus; according to the myth after killed by Apollo, from the blood of Hyacinthus there sprang the flower hyacinth, a lily family flower. For the other counterparts despite the previous suggestions there is another good reference that lead us to look their derivation alternatively. We don’t totally ignore the suggestions, we will establish the working hypothesis yet depending somewhat on them. The name “zephyrus” is thought to have come from the Greek zophos “west”. As for the Apollo, among the several there is one theory that equates the name with Appaliunas, an Anatolian god whose name supposedly meaning “father lion” or “father light”.
The collective impact is here, “west”, “lion, as well as sun god”, and “the flower”. All these elements appear to coincide with the Egyptian notion “Akhet”, a mythical horizon (note: further Akhet is classified as Bakhu and Manu, eastern and western horizon resp.). Akhet is symbolized as sundisk with pillars (peaks of mountain) usually accompanied with the double lions of Egyptian god Aker; and in addition the Egyptians associate their sacred flower, blue lotus, with sun-god Ra. An entirely parallel of this notion appeared in the pillars of Solomon’s Temple. Considering the roofless front portico of the Solomon’s Temple, the architectural form of the capitals are made in the form of lily shape. In this architectural designs, the pillars have similar functions with the two peaks of the Egyptian mountain, and the lily element corresponds with the sun. In conclusion, the background from which this myth composed would be ascribed to that of Egyptians or Solomon’s. Most importantly the explanation confirms that the term “hyacinthus” took its ultimately derivation from the name of the pillar Temple, Jachin.
3. Shlm
It was the Catholic Encyclopedia, in the article “Precious Stones in the Bible” Souvay, Charles (1912), stressed separately the variety Heb. word “shlm” which is translated as onyx. The breastpiece stone “leshem” (Ex 28:19; 39:12) can be explained as a wrong reading of “shlm”. Akin to this term in the Israelites ancestry is Shillem son of Naphtali (Ge46:24).
4. Fairuz, Jumana, Manizeh
There are also three other names outside the Greek and Hebrew texts, one from Persian and two from Arabic, on the basis of facts their further origins wouldn’t be totally ignored to correspond them to Israelites names. These are fairuz, jumana, and manizeh; the former fairuz is an Arabic name for “turquoise”; jumana is also an Arabic word meaning “pearl”. The Persian name manizeh was commonly called “jewel of lady”. But there is no any explanation for this literal deduction, except in the Persian epic of love story manizeh is female, the wife of Bizhan.
In the light of the extensive linkage to the names of Israelites, I want to relate fairuz to Judah’s son Pharez; whereas jumana might equate with Yamin son of Simeon (Ge46:10) or Yimnah son of Asher (1Ch7:30). For the third case manizeh, despite of feminine usage in the Persian literature, it merely corresponds to Manasseh son of Joseph. Ferdowsi (the author of Shahnameh, the epic of kings) perhaps strategically chose the names of those gemstones for his poem compositions, just because of the values of romantic significance given by people. Bizhan may then contrast either to boaz or Benjamin. Persia along with Babylon have long been known by their systemized application of gem magianism (William Jones, 1880).
5. ‘Apher
The term ’aphar rendered as dust or earth in Semitics. Dust is somehow odd to our discussion. The rational for its inclusion here is, just the trend of derivation appears to have developed in the same way with patriarch-stone relation. The symbolism from the Biblical point of view used to refer “seed multiplications” (e.g. in Gen28:14 “thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth”). The name of the Israelite “Ephraim” could possibly be the base for apher, since the word ephraim generally describe fruitfulness. Observe the verse in Nu23:10, it says “the dust of Jacob or the fourth of Israel”; and let’s analyze to whom these appellations particularly describe. The fourth of Jacob generally refers to one of the four, who stands each for three tribes, which are placed in the four directions when the Israelites formed their camp in the wilderness. One of these four who takes the position in the west side is the camp of Ephraim, representing all Rachel’s children. Incorporate with the term’s similarity with the word “apher”, there can be no doubt to conclude that the description “the dust of Jacob” would refer to Ephraim.
Names of Israelite tribes of the first generation
1. Yashepheh (Jasper)
The stone yashepheh is also among the twelve stones in High priest’s breastpiece, with this Heb. form occurs in three places (Ex 28:20; 39:13; Eze 28:13). It is commonly accepted that yashepheh is the Heb. word for Greek iaspis or English jasper. It is found in red, yellow, brown and green varieties. However the Biblical jasper is described as the green one, Pliny discussed about this, he writes “iaspis as being green and often transparent”. It looks reasonable to accept because Pliny the Elder lived in around the same time as the date of writing of the book of Revelation. There is no room for doubt that the word yashepheh stand for the son of Jacob, Joseph (Heb. Yoseph).
2. Ruby
The King James Version margin translate ruby for the Heb. ‘odhem; the Heb. peninim in the English Versions of the Bible, and Heb. kadhkodh in the Revised Version translation. Ruby and sapphire both are belong to the same mineral family (corundum), they differ only in color. While ruby is the red variety, sapphire consists all other colors except red. The term ruby used only in English versions, there is no in such verbal form in our earliest versions, in Septuagint or Vulgate. What we have from the current sources for any information regarding the etymological derivation offer very little help. All suggest ruby came from Medieval Latin rubinus lapis “red stone”, the root meaning supposed ruber, further traced to an old root word of Proto-Indo-European. However, if the term ruby is evidentially illustrated as a Hebrew origin then the root to all akin derivatives is definitely derived from this name ruby. Moreover, as already explained, the familiarity of gemstone culture is so great among the ancients than color awareness, thus normally color names take the names of gemstones than the reverse, like cyan from cyanus.
Let’s try to explain from Solomon’s book, the Verse in Song5:10 states “My beloved is white and ruddy, the chiefest among ten thousand”. Here the passage even in its allegoric level of expression is too confusional to grasp that may lead us to conclude a wrong translation. Therefore I suggest the Heb. rababah, translated before as “ten thousand”, stands in deed in some way for the word ruby. The words used in the places of ‘white’ and ‘ruddy’ in the Hebrew Bible translation are tsach and ‘adom. The latter visibly represent the precious stone “odem”; as for the Heb. word tsach, it can be explained from its alternate significance, that in other occasions can also translate “bright” or “clear”, which are appropriate designations of gemstone. Therefore according this modified idea it should be read, “my beloved is like (gemstones) tsach and ‘adom better in quality than ruby”.
Again the view of pre-Western origin for term ruby would be verified from the three very common titles designated for classes of spiritual leader in the sect of Jews, Cephar, Rabbi and Pharisee. I argue that it is not matter of simple coincidence that the derivation of these three names to have any link with the names of precious stones sapphire, ruby, and fuiruz respectively. However the manner of adoption may have happened not directly from the names of stones but from the engraving pens made of such stones. The logic behind is clear that the pens are used as means of emblematic tradition to symbolically categorize the different literate classes. Now we are able to explain the origin of the word “ruby” or “rubinus” in correspond with Rueben.
3. Jade
Jade is also none Biblical term, even its name like ruby not easily understood as a direct Semitic origin. The opinion usually offered as to its origin, from Spanish piedra de ijada “flank stone” (first recorded in 1565), it was thought to cure pains in the side. Probably there may have misinterpretation for the expression, the term flank in general sense shows the left or right side of a military formation. In this respect the idea as a lore would have reached to the Western from the ancient Hebrews. Just from the Biblical fact that the camp of Yahudah” (Judah), among the four principal sons of Israel, placed on the east side. It can be claimed now ‘jade stone’ refers to Judah stone.
A question may be raised that it appears quite improbable for the Semitic form of the stone name that to have complete lost in time, since Judah has prominent place in history of Israel. Two reasons may be given to this problem. Above all, the chief problem in studying the names of these stones is, our witness to the early stones in Hebrew text is only the Old Testament; the only alternate sources are those Greek literature, and Hebrew loanwords of Greek names are too limited. Secondly, the stone may have had epithet in Hebrew, and the case for alternative name could be paniym “forefront”, the description originally may stand for Judah, for whose place is at the front in the order of marching company (Nu10:14). And there is not much separating paniym from peninim.
4. Shoham (Soom)
The breastplate stone “shoham”, occurs in the verses (Ge2:12; Ex25:7; 28:9,20; 35:9,27; 39:6,13; 1Ch29:2; Job28:16; Eze28:13), was translated in more than one time both in Septuagint and Vulgate; however “onyx” is commonly found in most Bible versions. According Maskelyne and Sayce, it was suggested that the stone called ‘siamu by the Assyrians. Our supposition to this name therefore contends to the Israelite Simeon, one of the twelve sons of Jacob.
Genesis Patriarchs
There are also other important names of stones as far as the patriarch-stone relation is concerned, the following three are recorded in the treatise of Pliny; “adamas, cyanus and opal”. The ultimate origins for these stone names may adequately relate to the three quite closely interrelated persons who are described in Genesis, Adam, Cain and Abel respectively. For the former we can have some referential sources; in some ancient traditions there is a precious stone well-associated with Adam the first man. Additionally some argue that “odem”, Heb. form of adamas, is cognate with the name Adam. The etymological origin of the Greek cyanus is not known certainly, sometimes supposed with doubt as akin to the Hittite kuwannan; whilst for the third case “opal” it has been suggested that from the Sanskrit upala “gemstone”. No matter what any credit given to the last two cases, these three terms cannot be treated separately, and at any rate the cognation to the names of related persons found in Genesis wouldn’t be coincidental. In connection to Genesis history, it is important to take consider the Heb. pitdah which in some measure can link to the one of rivers in Eden “Pison”, there it was mentioned that a land of minerals “Havilah” was encompassed by this river.
Let’s observe another pattern, amber and hashmal; where the names are usually served in translation works as exchangeable words. The Heb. hashmal found in three verses (Eze 1:4, 27; 8:2), the word was translated “amber”, from the Arabic ‘anbar, by the English Revised Version and the American Revised Version margin. It seems that amber is a corrupt of the Biblical Abraham (more suitable to the form Abram), and hashmal corresponds simply to his son Ismael.
Conclusion: Most importantly the article would sufficiently provide the evidence for the existence of the people mentioned by the Bible, who lived in different eras. This has been the area where there have been little proof before. In the Bible many things are written about Adam, and his two sons Cain and Abel, and etymological works in this study effectively affirms that some names of stones demonstrate remarkable consistency with these three Biblical names. It assures again an important patriarch in the Biblical account “Abraham” along with his son Ismael, and to a certain extent the relation between them. Finally it assures heavily for many names of Israel forefathers who built the Israel people; this can play as the indirect tool for the verification of the emergence of Jewish patriarch in the land.
Reference:
Hodder M. Westropp (1874): A manual of precious stones and Antique of gems
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia; Lazarus Fletcher “Stones Precious” (1979)
James A. Harrell (2011); Old Testament Gemstones: A Philological, Geological, and Archaeological Assessment of the Septuagint
Julius Wodiska (1909): A Book of precious stones
Pliny the elder, Natural History 37
Robert J. Forbes Volume 1 (1955): Studies in Ancient Technology,
Souvay, Charles. “Precious Stones in the Bible.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 14. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1912. 29 Aug.
Theophrastus (D. E. Echholz, 1965): De Lapidibus
William Jones (1880): History and Mystery of precious stones
Copyright@2016, Yosief Haile
Comments are currently closed.