Copyright © 1956 by Westminster
Theological Seminary, cited with permission.
THE HA-BI-RU -KIN OR FOE
OF
MEREDITH
G. KLINE
FIGURING
in near eastern history for something over
a millennium of Old Testament times was an
enigmatic
entity called the
ha-BI-ru.1 Successful of old in capturing the
spoil in biblical lands, they have in modern times
been even
more successful in capturing the attention of
biblical scholars.
More
than half a century of general scholarly interest cul-
minated in a united effort to
identify the ha-BI-ru
at the fourth
Rencontre assyriologique
internationale held in
summer of 1953. But that gathering did not succeed in
alter-
ing the previous state of
the question which has been described
in the terms: quot capita tot sententiae.2 The ha-BI-ru, there-
fore, continue an enigma, and the curiosity which
has
prompted the present study may be forgiven though
its con-
sequence be to confound yet worse the confusion
with yet
another conclusion.3
Of particular attraction to those concerned with
biblical
history and faith has been the apparent identity
in name
between the ha-BI-ru and the Hebrews.4 This has spawned
a variety of theories sharing as a common nucleus
the idea
1 The syllabification of ha-BI-ru
represents the cuneiform orthography
and the capitalization of the second syllable
designates a particular
cuneiform sign without prejudice to the question
of which of the two most
common values of it, namely bi and pi, is to be
adopted.
2 J. Bottero, Le Probleme des Habiru (
presents a collection of the known ha-BI-ru texts
and a compendium of
notes contributed by various scholars in connection
with the
along with Bottero's own
interpretation of the problem.
3 This study was undertaken in
the preparation of a doctoral disserta-
tion under Cyrus H. Gordon
at the Dropsie College of Hebrew and Cognate
Learning. In its present revised form it gives
greater prominence to the
biblical aspects of the problem in view of the
particular interests of the
majority of the readers of the Westminster Theological Journal.
4 The questions of the proper
normalization of ha-BI-ru and of its sup-
posed phonetic equivalence with yrib;fi, "Hebrew", will be reserved in this
study until Ha-BI-ru-Hebrew relations are under consideration.
1
2
that the biblical Hebrews originated as an offshoot
of the
ha-BI-ru of the extra-biblical texts. It is recognized
by all
that a complete identification of ha-BI-ru and
Hebrews is
impossible since their historical paths do not for
the most
part coincide.5 In the Amarna Age,6 however, their paths
do converge in
and has further encouraged the theory that the
Hebrews
stemmed from the ha-BI-ru. This theory has moreover proved
a dominant factor in shaping reconstructions in
the vital
area of the origins of Hebrew religion, when it has
been
adopted by scholars who, discarding the prima facie biblical
account, would locate those religious origins as
late as the
Amarna Age.7
There are then two problems to be investigated.
First,
the identity of those denominated ha-BI-ru.
Second, the
relation of the ha-BI-ru to the Hebrews.
I. THE IDENTITY OF THE Ha-BI-ru
What is the identifying mark of the ha-BI-ru--the specific
quality which distinguishes them among the
manifold elements
of ancient near eastern life? Is it racial or
ethnic or national?
Or
does ha-BI-ru
denote membership in a particular socio-
economic class or professional guild, either
inter-ethnic or
super-ethnic' in composition?
5 The ha-BI-ru are mentioned in texts
originating everywhere from
Asia
Minor to
of roughly the 2nd millennium B. C.
6
This term denotes the period of the 15th and 14th centuries B. C.
when Amenophis III and IV
ruled in
Amarna in
the official diplomatic correspondence of these
pharaohs with Asiatic
rulers. They are of great importance for the present
study because of
their frequent references to the disturbing
activities of the ha-BI-ru in
that first introduced the ha-BI-ru to modern historians.
7 Cf., e. g., the elaborate
hypothesis of H. H. Rowley in From Joseph
to
Joshua (
8
fugitives or hupsu) or composed of several
ethnic units (as e. g., the general
category of nomadic tribes).
HA-BI-RU 3
A.
The Word Ha-BI-ru.
A clue to the identification of the individuals
designated as
ha-BI-ru has naturally been sought in the word itself.
There
are three avenues by which the signification of the
term
ha-BI-ru can be approached: its etymology, its
ideographic
equivalent (SA-GAZ), and its morphology.
1. The
Etymology of Ha-BI-ru. On the assumption that
the word is Semitic the following etymological
explanations
have been ventured:9 The root is the verb
'br in the
sense of
"pass (from place to place)", i. e., a nomad10 or in the sense of
"cross (the frontier) ", i. e., a foreigner.11 The meaning "one
from the other side (of the river)" is obtained
if ha-BI-ru
is
derived from the preposition 'br.12 The root 'apar,
"dust",
has been cited with the supposed secondary meanings
"man
of the steppe lard"13 or "dusty
traveller”.14 Also suggested is
a hypothetical Semitic *'pr, "provide", with verbal-adjective,
epirum, "one provided
with food".15
9 Since it is now certain that the
first radical is 'Ayin (see below) early
explanations based on a root hbr may be
ignored.
10 So e. g., E. A. Speiser, Ethnic
Movements in the
Millennium B. C. (1933), p. 41. W. F.
Albright, Journal of the American
Oriental Society (hereafter, JAOS) 48, 1928, pp. 183 ff., held it was
an
intransitive participle meaning
"nomad" originally, though it was later
used in the sense, "mercenary."
11 So J. Lewy,
Hebrew Union College Annual (hereafter,
HUCA) XIV,
1939,
p. 604; cf. his note in Bottero, op. cit.,
p. 163.
12 So Kraeling,
American Journal of Semitic Languages and
Literatures
(hereafter, AJSL)
58, 1941, pp. 248 ff.
13 R. DeVaux,
Revue biblique
(hereafter, RB) 55, 1948, p. 341, n. 2:
"Cependant R. DeLanghe juge certain son rattachement a rpf 'poussibre'
(Les Texts
de Ras Shamra-Ugarit II,
p. 465).
On pout en etre moms assure
mais s'il
avait raison, les Habiri-Apiri
seraient les 'hommes de la
steppe'
comme Enkidu,
le saggasu, le SA-GAZ".
14 E. Dhorrne, Revue historique CCXI, avril-juin,
1954, pp. 256-264.
The
ha-BI-ru were "des 'poussiereux', autrement dit: ceux qu'on appelait
jadis les 'peregrins' et qu'on appelle aujourd'hui ... les personnes 'depla-
cees'. Ce
sont des emigrants que se refugient a l'etranger". For criticism
of this approach see Greenberg, The Hab/piru
(New Haven, 1955), p. 91,
n.
25.
15 So Goetze
in Bottero op.
cit., pp. 161-163. It appears from Akk.
eperu, "provide"
and Eg. 'pr, "equip", that 'pr is Hamito-Semitic. The
4
There is the further possibility that the root
of ha-BI-ru
is non-Semitic.16 Landsberger now
holds that the word is
Hurrian or belongs to some other substratum of
the languages
of our documents17 and in meaning is a
synonym of munnabtu,
"fugitive".18 The Egyptian 'pr, "equip"19 and the Sumerian
IBIRA, "merchant",20 have also been noted.
2.
SA-GAZ, The
Ideographic Equivalent of Ha-BI-ru.21 In
some passages SA-GAZ is to be read habbatum,22 but that this
lack of a West Semitic equivalent need not surprise
for it is not uncommon
for Akkadian to stand
alone among the Semitic languages in matching
Egyptian.
16 That ha-BI-ru is not Akkadian
has been maintained on these grounds:
It
begins with an 'Ayin; there are no Akkadian roots hpr or hbr that yield
a suitable sense; and the word is preceded in one
Amarna letter, J. Knudt-
zon, Die El-Amarna-Tafeln (hereafter, EA) 290:24, by the diagonal mark
used to designate glosses and non-Akkadian words. That ha-BI-ru is not
West
Semitic has been argued on the grounds that no West Semitic root
'pr (assuming the certainty
of the p) provides a plausible
meaning and that
the verb hab/paru (regarded as a denominative from ha-BI-ru) is
found
at Kultepe where a loan
from West Semitic was not possible. On this
last text see Bottero, op. cit., pp. 10, 11.
17 Agreeable to a Hurrian derivation would be the Nuzu
personal names
ha-BI-ra and ha-BI-ir-til-la, if these represent the same word as our
ha-BI-ru and if Purves, in Nuzu Personal Names (1943), p. 214, is correct
in his assumption of a Hurrian
base (hapir)
for them.
18 Thus, in Bottero, op. cit.,
pp. 160, 161.
19 So Albright, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental
Research
(hereafter, BASOR)
125, 1952, p. 32, n. 39.
20 Bottero
mentions this view of E. Forrer in the article "Assyrien",
Reallexikon der Assyriologie (
21 The cuneiform orthography of
many Sumerian words was carried
over with the cuneiform system of writing into Akkadian texts to represent
(ideographically) the corresponding Akkadian
words.
22 For the texts see Deimel, Sumerisches Lexikon 11:1, 260; Greenberg,
op. cit., pp. 54, 55, nos.
145-154; Bottero,
op. cit., nos. 157, 168-180. In
the lexical texts the consistent equation with habbatu is
obvious, while in
the omen texts the reading habbatu is required by phonetic
gloss (as in
Bottero, ibid., nos. 173, 175) or by play on words (as in i., no. 168,
cf.
170). Landsberger (in ibid., p. 159) states that though
habbatu is
the
proper reading in these Akkadian
texts and is normally so in Sumerian
legal and literary texts, everywhere SA-GAZ appears
in Old Babylonian,
Hittite
or Syro-Palestinian texts it is to be read "hapiru".
This conclusion
is rendered dubious by certain Amarna
data: EA 318:11-13 reads
LU.MESSA-GA-A[ZM]ES
LU.MESha-ba-ti u LU.MESSu-ti-i and the gram-
HA-BI-RU 5
ideogram is frequently to be read as ha-BI-ru is no
longer
seriously questioned.23 If then ha-BI-ru is a
proper name, its
matical relation of the first
two is apparently epexegetical apposition;
cf.
the parallel in EA 195:27. EA 299:26 reads LUSA-GAZMES.tum (c f.
EA 207:21, [i-na L]UGAZMES\ha ...). The phonetic determinative, tum,
almost certainly requires the reading habbatu (or
plural, habbatutum).
Bottero, op.
cit., p. 110, n. 2, suggests the possibility of reading a plural
"habirutum"
but it is most unlikely.
23 This is so even though Akkadian lexicographers, so far as known, never
use ha-BI-ru as an equivalent of SA-GAZ. The equation first
became
apparent in the alternating use of the terms in
the god lists of the Hittite
treaties and in the Amarna
letters. In line with it was the appearance in
the administrative texts of SA-GAZ and ha-BI-ru in
the same role at
Larsa
during the reigns of Warad-Sin and his successor
Rim-Sin.
More
recently confirmation has been found at
LU.MESSAG-GAZ with Hlb 'prm and in
the use of the phonetic deter-
minative ru
(?) after LU.MESSA-GAZ twice in the unpublished no. 1603
of the Collection of tablets found at Ras Shamra (hereafter, RS) (cf.
Bottero, ibid., no.
158). The interchange of the terms in the Alalah
tablets
is further proof. Even where habbatu is to be read, the ha-BI-ru may
be
in view. This is illustrated by the appearance of
"ha-bi-ri-is-as"
in the
Hittite
text, Keilschrifturkunden aus Boghazkoi (hereafter, KUB) VIII,
83:9.
For this text is the Hittite version of an Akkadian summa izbu text
where it is clear, as observed in the preceding note,
that habbatu
is the
proper rendering of SA-GAZ, and ha-bi-ri-ia-as occurs in precisely the
place where SA-GAZ is usually found in the formula.
The Hittite text,
moreover, is earlier than the Akkadian
omen texts. That the ha-BI-ru
are in view everywhere that SA-GAZ might be used
does not follow neces-
sarily, though it may be the
case in all the texts at our disposal, even the
earliest Sumerian texts, leaving out of view the
lexical texts. Greenberg
(op. cit., p. 86, n. 1) argues that the ha-BI-ru are
in view wherever SA-GAZ
is used (even if habbatu be read) but he falsely
shifts the burden of proof
to those who would dissociate the two. The very
existence of a general
term like habbadtu (whichever meaning be in view) as an alternate
reading
to the specific ha-BI-ru, and especially its exclusive
employment as a
lexical equivalent of SA-GAZ would put the
burden of proof on Greenberg's
position. Beyond this the existence of homonyms
of habatum,
the equiv-
alence of SA-GAZ with more
than one of these (which some dispute but
Greenberg
accepts), and the extreme improbability that any other reading
of SA-GAZ like ha-BI-ru (either as appellative or proper name) covered
exactly the same semantic range makes it almost
certain that SA-GAZ
was used at times without the ha-BI-ru being in view. It is, therefore,
a
question whether the SA-GAZ of a given text, like
one of the Ur III
texts or the Sumerian literary and legal texts of the
Isin-Larsa age, are the
ha-BI-ru. That the ha-BI-ru may be in view in some or all of these is
suggested by the reference to the ha-BI-ru in
the 19th century Cappadocian
6
ideographic equivalent, SA-GAZ, will provide a
significant
characterization of the ha-BI-ru
people or possibly (if the
ideogram was originally applied to them by
enemies) a
calumnious caricature. If ha-BI-ru is an appellative, it might,
but not necessarily, be equivalent in meaning to
SA-GAZ.
The
Sumerian SA means "cord, tendon" and GAZ means
"strike, kill". The meaning "strangler" or
"murderer", there-
fore, is suggested for the combination SA-GAZ.24
Or if SA
is a variant here for SAG the meaning will be
"strike the head"
or simply "smite".25
Possibly, SA-GAZ is a pseudo-ideogram. Such was
formerly
the position of Landsberger
who said it was formed from
saggasum as RA-GAB from rakkabum.26 It has been
argued
texts. Some support could be found for reading SA-GAZ
as ha-BI-ru if
SA-GAZ
should turn up even in Dynasty of Akkad texts since
the Old
Hittite
translation of the Naram Sin epic may accurately reflect
the original
situation in its mention of ha-BI-ru either as prisoners or guards,
and the
proper name ha-bi-ra-am is found on a text from Tell Brak
(F 1159, cf.
Bottero, ibid., p. 1)
contemporary with the dynasty of
24 So Albright in Journal of Biblical Literature
(hereafter, JBL) 43, 1924,
pp.
389 ff. Commenting on the Hittite translation of the Naram-Sin
inscription, he then held that SA-GAZ is the
ordinary Hittite equivalent
for "Semitic nomad". Ungnad,
Kulturfragen,
I, 1923, pp. 15 ff., inter-
preted SA-GAZ as
"slinger".
25 Landsberger
(in Bottero, ibid., p. 160) has now adopted this view
suggested long ago by Langdon (see note 30). He
would render it as a
substantive, "frappeur
de tete" and regard this as equivalent to simply
"brigand". SAG-GAZ is indeed found twice at
nos. 154 and 157), once certainly as the
designation of the ha-BI-ru.
Moreover,
in an astrological omen text (ibid., no. 170) one of the woes
predicted is: LUSA-GAZ qaqqada inakkisis,
"the SA-GAZ will cut off the
head". This is surely a pun, but whether on the
sound or on the sense
(whether partially or wholly) is the question. Landsberger's approach is
uncertain for as Bottero
observes (ibid., p. 148), "le
SAG-GAZ qu'en-
registrent les vocabulaires
connus paraissant marquer d'abord un verbe
mahasu, 'frapper',
dont la specification nous echappe". The common
spelling GAZ is understandable then for GAZ=daku which is
broadly
synonymous with mahasu=SAG-GAZ. The reading
SA-GA-AZ (found,
however, only once) would be problematic since
it divides the essential
element.
26 Keilschrifttexte aus Assur verschiedenen Inhalts (hereafter, KAV) 1,
1930, pp. 321 ff. So also Goetze, BASOR 79,
p. 34, n. 14 (cf. less certainly
in Bottero, ibid., p. 163) ; and DeVaux,
RB 55, 1948, p. 340. In rejecting
this view now, Landsberger
cogently observes (in Bottero, ibid., p. 199,
HA-BI-RU 7
that the variant spellings like SA-GA-AZ and,
especially,
SAG-GAZ
confirm this view,27 while the objection
has been
leveled against it that the Amarna
spelling of GAZ alone would
then be inexplicable.28 If SA-GAZ is a
pseudo-ideogram
formed from saggasu it would probably mean "murderer".29
Further
light may be sought from the other equivalent of
SA-GAZ, habbatum. The qattal form from the root habatu,
"plunder", would mean "robber".30 There are, however,
homonyms of habatu which require attention.31
From habatu,
"borrow, obtain, receive", Goetze
suggests a nomen professio-
cf.
147, 159 ff.), "Ware SA-GAZ=saggasu/u musste dieses auch in der
akkad. Kolumne der
Vokabularien erscheinen".
27 So Goetze,
op. cit., and De Vaux,
op. cit. Cf. Deimel,
op. cit., p. 115,
no. 42. In the spelling SA-GAZ-ZA (found once at
Amarna) the ZA would be a sort of phonetic complement.
28 So Dhorme,
Revue de l'histoire
des religions 118, 1938, p. 173, n. 3,
while Bottero, ibid., p. 149, says, "il faut tenir
GAZ pour une licence
graphique".
29 Another possibility lies in
the fact that in the Gilgamesh Epic (1:4:7)
saggasum is used for Enkidu, describing him as an uncivilized native of the
wild steppe-lands. It has also been suggested that saggasu may have
been
colored with the connotation of West Semitic *sgs and so meant "disturber"
or "one who is restive". (So Greenberg, op. cit., pp. 89, 90).
30 Such a pejorative
meaning clearly attaches to SA-GAZ in the early
Sumerian
literary and legal texts and this is preserved in the later Akkadian
omen texts, as we might expect in this conservative
genre of literature.
The
meaning "brigand" is required in a Ras Shamra word list (Bottero,
ibid., no. 157) where it
appears between IM-ZU "thief" and LUGAN.ES,
"malefactor", and in the unpublished RS 17341 (cf. Bottero,
ibid., no. 162),
and elsewhere. Indeed, Landsberger,
in ibid., p.
199 insists that "LU(SA-
GAZ)
signifie partout et toujours ‘Rauber' ".
S. H. Langdon, Expository Times 31, 1919-20, pp. 326-7, reasoned that
habatu meant originally
"smite with violence" (cf. Code of Hammurapi,
Law
196) and was used exclusively with a military signification and,
therefore, the idea of plundering was a natural
nuance (since Asiatic
armies customarily plundered defeated foes). Habbatu then meant "fight-
ing man" and this was
translated into Sumerian correctly as SA-GAZ =
SAG-GAZ,
"smite the head, slay".
It is perhaps significant that habdtu in this sense is conjoined with the
ha-BI-ru in EA
286:56: LU.MESha-BI-ru ha-bat gab-bi matatHA sarri.
31 Stamm,
"Die akkadische Namengebung",
in Mitteilungen der Vorder-
asiatisch-aegyptischen Gesellschaft 44, 1939, pp. 318 ff. ;
cf. Goetze, Journal
of Cuneiform Studies I, 1947. p. 256, n. 21; von Soden,
Zeitschrift fur
Assyriologie 49, 1949, p. 174 and in
Bottero, op.
cit., p. 143, n. 1; The
Assyrian Dictionary (
8
else, works for his livelihood, i.
e., without wages, merely for
board and keep";32 and Albright,
"mercenaries”.33 Habatu,
"move across, make a razzia into
enemy territory", would
yield a gattal meaning
"raider" or "migrant".34
How did SA-GAZ become an ideographic equivalent for
ha-BI-ru? The simplest explanation, if both terms are
not
proper names, would lie in a semantic equation of the
two.
Such
would be the case, for example, if SA-GAZ signified
habbatu in the sense of
"one who receives support" and
ha-BI-ru meant "one provided for". A less
direct semantic
relation might also account for the interchange,
as, for example,
if SA-GAZ be understood as "thug" and ha-BI-ru as
"nomad”.35 Or,
the usage might be explained on historical
grounds quite apart from semantic
considerations. If, for
32 So in Bottero,
ibid., p.
162; cf. Greenberg, op. cit., p. 89.
For the root
cf. The Assyrian Dictionary, habatu B. From this root apparently derives
the habbatum found in association with ag-ru, "hired laborer",
and e-si-du,
"harvester", in the lexical occupation lists (
the Babylonian Section V, no. 132; Tablets
found at Kouyoundjik, British
Museum
(hereafter, K) 4395; cf. Bottero, ibid., nos. 177 and 180;
Greenberg,
ibid., nos. 150-152). The Akkadian legal text, Babylonian
Inscriptions in
the Collection of J. B. Nies VII, no. 93, also
mentions two ha-ab-ba-ti-i
who appear to be engaged in peaceful employment.
33 Cf. Deimel,
Sumerisches Lexikon, III,
2, for habatum,
"interest-free
loan, loot"; and hubtu, "tax exempt". Albright (JAOS 48, 1928,
pp.
183-185)
deduced from hubutati
and hubuttu,
which he translated "tax-
free property" and "the condition of being
tax-free", respectively, that
the habbatu received hubutati in return for their services and were thus
mercenaries who were rewarded with a grant of
rent-free land, i. e.,
condottieri. He also suggested that
when the Aramean nomads, the
"Habiru", became known throughout
their name replaced the original habbatu as the term for
"mercenary".
34 See habatu D, in The Assyrian Dictionary. Note the
lexical datum
(ha-ba-tu) sa a-la-ki (K 2055) and cf. Greenberg's remarks, op.
cit. p. 89.
Lewy (in Bottero, op. cit. p. 163) identifies habatu with
Arabic habata,
"to wander about".
35 Albright (JBL 43, 1924, pp. 389-393) supports this
combination on
the grounds that there was no clear distinction
between bands of robbers
and bands of Bedouin, the same word meaning "Bedawi" in Egyptian
(sose)
and "robber" in Hebrew (soseh). Cf. Bohl, Kanaander and Hebraer,
1911, p. 89, n. 2. Albright adds that the
similarity in sound between
habbatum and ha-BI-ru as
pronounced by the Akkadians likely suggested
the use of SA-GAZ for ha-BI-ru.
HA-BI-RU 9
example, the SA-GAZ were of mixed character but
were
predominantly ha-BI-ru, a secondary equivalence of the
terms might arise.36 Or, if the ha-BI-ru were
generally dis-
liked, they might have received as a name of
opprobrium,
SA-GAZ,
"thugs".37
3. Morphology
of Ha-BI-ru. Is ha-BI-ru an appellative or
a proper name?38 The spelling ha-BI-ru could
be the gentilic
shortened from ii-um
to u.39 But the fact that
the feminine
is found at Nuzu as ha-BI-ra-tu40 rather than the
feminine
gentilic ha-BI-ri-i-tu would suggest that the
ambiguous ha-
BI-ru
is also
non-gentilic. The situation is, however, compli-
cated by several instances of
both earlier and later varieties
of the gentilic forms, i. e., ha-BI-ru-u41
and ha-BIR-a-a42
36 So Albright. See note 33.
37 So J. Lewy,
HUCA 14, p. 605, n. 90, who argues
that in the early 2nd
mi