Editing Aramaic (section)

==Name==
[[File:Carpentras Stela, in CIS II 141 (cropped).jpg|thumb|The [[Carpentras Stele]] was the first [[Canaanite and Aramaic inscriptions|ancient inscription ever identified as "Aramaic"]]. Although it was first published in 1704, it was not identified as Aramaic until 1821, when [[Ulrich Friedrich Kopp]] complained that previous scholars had left everything "to the Phoenicians and nothing to the Arameans, as if they could not have written at all".<ref>{{cite book|last=Kopp|first=Ulrich Friedrich|author-link=:de: Ulrich Friedrich Kopp|title=Bilder und Schriften der Vorzeit|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Tng9AAAAYAAJ|year=1821|chapter=Semitische Paläographie: Aramäische ältere Schrift|pages=226–27}}</ref><ref name="Caputo Lougovaya 2020 p. 147">{{cite book | last1=Caputo | first1=C. | last2=Lougovaya | first2=J. | title=Using Ostraca in the Ancient World: New Discoveries and Methodologies | publisher=De Gruyter | series=Materiale Textkulturen | year=2020 | isbn=978-3-11-071290-2 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=SK8HEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA147 | quote= The earliest of the Aramaic finds known to us is the so-called "Carpentras stele"... | page=147}}</ref>]]

The connection between Chaldean, Syriac, and Samaritan as "Aramaic" was first identified in 1679 by German theologian [[:de:Johann Wilhelm Hilliger|Johann Wilhelm Hilliger]].<ref>{{cite journal |last=Schmidt |first=Nathaniel |title=Early Oriental Studies in Europe and the Work of the American Oriental Society, 1842–1922 |journal=Journal of the American Oriental Society |volume=43 |year=1923 |pages=1–14 |doi=10.2307/593293 |jstor=593293 |quote=Hilliger first saw clearly the relation of the so-called Chaldee, Syriac, and Samaritan (1679)}}</ref><ref name="Hilliger1679">{{cite book|author=Johann Wilhelm Hilliger|title=Summarium Lingvæ Aramææ, i.e. Chaldæo-Syro-Samaritanæ: olim in Academia Wittebergensi orientalium lingvarum consecraneis, parietes intra privatos, prælectum & nunc ... publico bono commodatum|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=NgrgAAAAMAAJ|year=1679|publisher=Sumtibus hæred. D. Tobiæ Mevii & Elerti Schumacheri, per Matthæum Henckelium|quote= [Partial English translation]: "The Aramaic language name comes from its [[gentile]] founder, [[Aram, son of Shem|Aram]] (Gen 10:22), in the same manner as the Slavic languages Bohemian, Polish, Vandal etc. Multiple dialects are Chaldean, Syrian, Samaritan."; Latin Original: Linguae Aramaeae nomen à gentis conditore, Aramo nimirum (Gen. X 22) desumptum est, & complectitur, perinde ut Lingua Sclavonica, Bohemican, Polonican, Vandalicam &c. Dialectos plures, ceu sunt: Chaldaica, Syriaca, Samaritana.}}</ref> In 1819–1821 [[Ulrich Friedrich Kopp]] published his {{Lang|de|Bilder und Schriften der Vorzeit}} ("Images and Inscriptions of the Past"), in which he established the basis of the [[Palaeography|paleographical]] development of the Northwest Semitic scripts.<ref name="Lemaire 2021 pp. 5–29">{{cite book |last=Lemaire |first=André |title=An Eye for Form |date=2021-05-25 |publisher=Penn State University Press |isbn=9781575068879 |pages=5 |chapter=A History of Northwest Semitic Epigraphy |doi=10.1515/9781575068879-007 |quote=In his Bilder und Schriften der Vorzeit, Ulrich Friedrich Kopp (1819–21) established the basis of the paleographical development of the Northwest Semitic scripts... |access-date=2022-10-05 |chapter-url=https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781575068879-007/html |doi-broken-date=1 November 2024 |via=De Gruyter}}</ref> Kopp criticised [[Jean-Jacques Barthélemy]] and other scholars who had characterized all the [[Canaanite and Aramaic inscriptions|then-known inscriptions and coins]] as Phoenician, with "everything left to the Phoenicians and nothing to the Arameans, as if they could not have written at all".{{sfn|Kopp|1821|p=226-227 (§168–169)|ps=: "Irre ich nicht, so hat man die Benennung "phönicische Schrift" bisher etwas zu freygebig gebraucht, den Phöniciern alles gegeben, und den Aramäern nichts gelassen, gleichsam, als ob diese gar nicht hätten schreiben können, oder doch von ihnen nicht ein einziges Denkmal aus ältern Zeiten sich sollte erhalten haben. Selbst Schriften, in welchen sich die aramäische Mund-Art gar nicht verkennen läßt, nennen die Orientalisten phönicisch (§. 195), bloß weil sie noch nicht geahndet haben, daß eine Verschiedenheit vorhanden seyn könne. Ein Haupt-Unterscheidungs-Zeichen – So weit man, ohne auch dasjenige gesehen zu haben, was etwa noch entdeckt werden könnte, vorjetzt durch bloße Induction schließen kann – scheint in den Buchstaben ב, ד, ע und ר zu liegen. Denn so viele phönicische Denkmäler ich auch betrachtet habe; so sind mir doch in keinem einzigen ächt phönicischen diejenigen Gestalten vorgekommen, welche sich oben öffnen (§. 100). Nur bey dem einzigen ע finden sich, wie ich schon erinnert habe, jedoch höchst seltene Ausnahmen, die zuweilen bloß von der Uebereilung des Schreibers herrühren (z.B. im ersten ע der oxforder Inschrift (B.I. S.207). Wir haben sogar oben (§. 159) gesehen, daß selbst noch 153 Jahre nach Christi Geburt, als schon die Schrift in Phönicien sehr ausgeartet war, und in dem ganzen Zeit-Raume vorher, nie ד und ר mit von oben geöffneten Köpfen erscheinen. Dagegen haben diejenigen Denkmäler, auf welchen man sie antrifft, wie ich glaube, auch keinen Anspruch an Pönicier, als Urheber. §. 169 Unter solche gehört vor allen die Inschrift von Carpentras, welche ich hier um so lieber vornehme, als ihre Aechtheit über allen Zweifel erhoben ist... §. 195 Die Schrift darauf nannte man ehemals ägyptisch, welches freylich, weder in Vergleichung mit der ägyptischen Buchstaben-Schrift eine angemessene Benennung, noch der Sprache wegen eine zu wagende Vermuthung war. Schwerlich richtig ist aber auch die bey neuern Gelehrten (Gessenii Gesch. d. hebr. Spr. 139. Bibl. der alt. Literat. VI. 18. Hammer Fund-Grub. V. 277 °°) aufgekommene Benennung "Phönicisch". Ja Hartmann (II. II. 540) nennt sogar unmittelbar nach der ersten malteser diese "eine andere phönicische Inschrift". Schon die Mund-Art, welche nicht phönicisch, sondern aramäisch ist, würde uns vermuthen lassen, daß die Schrift den Aramäern ebenfalls gehöre; wenn nicht in dieser sich zugleich auch Merkmale einer Verschiedenheit von der phönicischen zeigten (s. oben §. 100. 168). Ich habe daher mit gutem Vorbedachte unser Denkmal von Carpentras aus meiner kleinen Sammlung phönicischer Inschriften (B. I. 195) ausgeschlossen. §. 196 Es scheint, als ob zur Zeit des oben (§. 193) mitgetheilten babylonischen Denkmals Aramäer und Phönicier eine und dieselbe Schrift gehabt hätten. Gegen 300 Sahre vor unserer Zeit-Rechnung war aber meiner Vermuthung nach schon eine Trennung eingetreten. Ich sage Vermuthung: denn mein Schluß gründet sich nur auf die einseitige Auslegung folgender Münze, bey welcher man mir vielleicht mehr als einen Einwurf zu machen im Stande ist.."}} Kopp noted that some of the words on the [[Carpentras Stele]] corresponded to the Aramaic in the [[Book of Daniel]], and in the [[Book of Ruth]].{{sfn|Kopp|1821|p=S. 182–185|ps=: "Es gehört nicht viel dazu, um einzusehen, daß die Mund-Art, welche in dieser Inschrift herrscht, aramäisch sey. Schon de Wörter עבדת קדם ,ברת ,אמרת, u. s . w. verrathen sie. Allein rein Chaldäisch kann man sie nicht nennen; man müßte denn mit O. G. Tychsen zu manchen Vorausseßungen und Uenderungen seine Zuflucht nehmen wollen. [ ] ist nimmermehr chaldäisch; sondern entweder äthiopisch hic, hoc loco, oder das hebräische Demonstrativum. Denn man bemerkt auch ben [ ] die Orthographie, nach welcher [ ] statt [ ] gefegt wird. Ich war einmal in Versuchung das Relativum der Zabier darinnen sinden zu wollen, weil ich [ ] wirklich gedruckt fand. Als ich aber die Handschrift selbst verglich, say' ich bald, daß es ein Druckfehler, statt [ ], war…  [ ]. Oyngeachtet die Endigung nicht gewöhnlich im Chaldäischen ist, so findet sich doch in der Ueberseßung des Buches Ruth (III. 10) dieses Wort grade so geschrieben. [ ] Daß dieses Zeit-Wort hier nicht perfectus fuit, wie gewöhnlich, heißen könne, lehrt der Zusammenhang. Es hat aber auch transitive Bedeutung, wie die Wörter-Bücher lehren (Simonis und Gesenius n. 2) und auch das arabische [ ] tamam wird für perfecit, complevit gebraucht. Ich habe mir daher um so weniger ein Gewissen daraus gemacht, ihm die transitive Bedeutung hier beyzulegen, als in dieser Anschrift, in welcher [ ], [ ] und dergleichen an keine Regeln gebundene Wörter vorkommen, es eine Recheit reyn würde, den Sprach-Gebrauch vorschreiben zu wollen. Daß übrigens in [ ] das [ ] für [ ] stehe, siehet man selbst aus dem Chaldäischen der Bibel (Dan. IV. 15. V. 8)."}}

[[Josephus]] and [[Strabo]] (the latter citing [[Posidonius]]) both stated that the "Syrians" called themselves "Arameans".{{sfn|Andrade|2013|p=7}}<ref>Josephus, [[Antiquities of the Jews]], 1.144: "Aram had the Aramites, which the Greeks called Syrians" ({{langx|el|Ἀραμαίους δὲ Ἄραμος ἔσχεν, οὓς Ἕλληνες Σύρους προσαγορεύουσιν}}</ref><ref>Strabo, [[Geographica]], 1.2.34: "But it would seem that the view of Poseidonius is best, for here he derives an etymology of the words from the kinship of the peoples and their common characteristics. For the nation of the Armenians and that of the Syrians and Arabians betray a close affinity, not only in their language, but in their mode of life and in their bodily build, and particularly wherever they live as close neighbours. Mesopotamia, which is inhabited by these three nations, gives proof of this, for in the case of these nations the similarity is particularly noticeable. And if, comparing the differences of latitude, there does exist a greater difference between the northern and the southern people of Mesopotamia than between these two peoples and the Syrians in the centre, still the common characteristics prevail. And, too, the Assyrians, the Arians, and the Aramaeans display a certain likeness both to those just mentioned and to each other. Indeed, Poseidonius conjectures that the names of these nations also are akin; for, says he, the people whom we call Syrians are by the Syrians themselves called Arimaeans and Arammaeans; and there is a resemblance between this name and those of the Armenians, the Arabians and the Erembians, since perhaps the ancient Greeks gave the name of Erembians to the Arabians, and since the very etymology of the word "Erembian" contributes to this result".</ref><ref>Strabo, [[Geographica]], 16.4.27: "Poseidonius says that the Arabians consist of three tribes, that they are situated in succession, one after another, and that this indicates that they are homogeneous with one another, and that for this reason they were called by similar names – one tribe "Armenians," another "Arameans," and another "Arambians." And just as one may suppose that the Arabians were divided into three tribes, according to the differences in the latitudes, which ever vary more and more, so also one may suppose that they used several names instead of one. Neither are those who write "Eremni" plausible; for that name is more peculiarly applicable to the Aethiopians. The poet also mentions "Arimi,"by which, according to Poseidonius, we should interpret the poet as meaning, not some place in Syria or in Cilicia or in some other land, but Syria itself; for the people in Syria are Arameans, though perhaps the Greeks called them Arimaeans or Arimi".</ref> The [[Septuagint]], the earliest extant full copy of the Hebrew Bible, a Greek translation, used the terms ''Syria'' and ''Syrian'' where the [[Masoretic Text]], the earliest extant Hebrew copy of the Bible, uses the terms ''Aramean'' and ''Aramaic'';{{sfn|Wevers|2001|pp=237–51}}{{sfn|Joosten|2008|pp=93–105}}{{sfn|Joosten|2010|pp=53–72}} numerous later bibles followed the Septuagint's usage, including the [[King James Version]].<ref name="Joseph2000">{{cite book|last=Joseph|first=John|title=The Modern Assyrians of the Middle East: A History of Their Encounter with Western Christian Missions, Archaeologists, and Colonial Powers|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=79wj2hj4wKUC&pg=PA10|year=2000|publisher=Brill|isbn=9004116419|pages=9–10|quote=The designations Syria and Syrian were derived from Greek usage long before Christianity. When the Greeks became better acquainted with the Near East, especially after Alexander the Great overthrew the Achaemenian empire in the 4th century B.C., they restricted the name Syria to the lands west of the Euphrates. During the 3rd century B.C., when the Hebrew Bible was translated by Jewish scholars into the Greek Septuagint for the use of the Hellenized Jews of Alexandria, the terms for 'Aramean' and 'Aramaic' in the Hebrew Bible, were translated into 'Syrian' and 'the Syrian tongue' respectively. [Footnote: "The Authorized Version of the Bible continued to use the same terms that the Septuagint had adopted. In 1970, the New English Bible, published by Oxford and Cambridge University presses, and translated by biblical scholars drawn from various British universities, went back to the original Hebrew terms, using Aram and Arameans for Syria and Syrians respectively."] In Palestine itself, according to Noldeke, the Jews and later the Christians there referred to their dialect of Aramaic as Syriac; in Babylon, both Greeks and Persians called the Arameans Syrians. The second-century B.C. Greek historian Posidonius, a native of Syria, noted that 'the people we [Greeks] call Syrians were called by the Syrians themselves Arameans….for the people in Syria are Arameans'."}}</ref> This connection between the names Syrian and Aramaic was discussed in 1835 by [[Étienne Marc Quatremère]].<ref name=TN/><ref>{{cite journal|last=Quatremère|first=Étienne Marc|author-link=Étienne Marc Quatremère|title=Mémoire Sur Les Nabatéens|journal=[[Journal asiatique]]|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=C9CfsXJEvRsC&pg=PA122|year=1835|publisher=Société asiatique|pages=122–27|language=French|quote= Les livres du Nouveau Testament furent immédiatement traduits dans fa langue du pays. Or ces livres étaient écrits dans la langue des Grecs, et offraient par conséquent les expressions et les dénominations en usage chez'ce peuple. Or les noms de Syrie, de Syriens se trouvaient souvent employés dans les livres fondamentaux du christianisme. Les habitants des pays situés entre la Méditerranée et l'Euphrate, se voyant désignés par une dénomination qui leur était étrangère, mais qui se trouvait en quelque sorte consacrée par l'autorité des livres qu'ils vénéraient à tant de titres, ne crurent pas sans doute pouvoir rejeter ce nom, et l'adoptèrent sans répugnance. Ils se persuadèrent que, régénérés par un nouveau culte, ils devaient sous tous les rapports devenir un peuple nouveau et abjurer leur nom antique, qui semblait leur rappeler l'idolâtrie à laquelle le christianisme venait de les arracher. Cette conjecture est, si je ne me trompe, confirmée par un fait que je crois décisif. Dans la langue syriaque ecclésiastique, le mot armoïo, ܐܪܡܝܐ, qui ne diffère du nom ancien, ormoïo, ܐܪܡܝܐ, que par une seule voyelle, désigne un païen, un idolâtre. Ainsi s'intrôduisit le nom de Sourioïo, Syrien. Quant à la dénomination Orom, Aram, ou le pays des Araméens, elle fut appliquée de préférence à la contrée que les Grecs et les Latins appelaient Assyrie.}}</ref>

In historical sources, Aramaic language is designated by two distinctive groups of terms, first of them represented by [[endonymic]] (native) names, and the other one represented by various [[exonymic]] (foreign in origin) names. Native (endonymic) terms for Aramaic language were derived from the same [[word root]] as the name of its original speakers, the ancient [[Arameans]]. Endonymic forms were also adopted in some other languages, like ancient [[Hebrew language|Hebrew]]. In the [[Torah]] (Hebrew Bible), "Aram" is used as a proper name of several people including descendants of Shem,<ref>{{bibleverse|Genesis|10:22|KJV}}</ref> Nahor,<ref>{{bibleverse|Genesis|22:21|KJV}}</ref> and Jacob.<ref>{{bibleverse|1 Chronicles|7:34|KJV}}</ref><ref name="Aram">{{cite web |url=http://www.abarim-publications.com/Meaning/Aram.html |title=The name Aram in the Bible |work=Abarim Publications |access-date=10 October 2018 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180929233320/http://www.fsmitha.com/h1/ch03-hyk2.htm |archive-date=29 September 2018}}</ref> Ancient [[Aram (region)|Aram]], bordering northern Israel and what is now called Syria, is considered the linguistic center of Aramaic, the language of the Arameans who settled the area during the [[Bronze Age]] {{circa|3500 BC}}.

Unlike in Hebrew, designations for Aramaic language in some other ancient languages were mostly exonymic. In [[ancient Greek]], Aramaic language was most commonly known as the "Syrian language",<ref name=TN>Nöldeke, 1871, p. 115: "Die Griechen haben den Namen "Aramäer" nie eigentlich gekannt; ausser Posidonius (dem Strabo folgt) nennt ihn uns nur noch ein andrer Orientale, Josephus (Ant. 1, 6, 4). Dass Homer bei den 'Ερεμβοι oder in den Worten eiv 'Αρίμοις an sie dächte, ist sehr unwahrscheinlich. Die Griechen nannten das Volk "Syrer"".</ref> in relation to the native (non-Greek) inhabitants of the historical [[Syria (region)|region of Syria]]. Since the [[name of Syria]] itself emerged as a variant of Assyria,{{sfn|Frye|1992|pp=281–85}}{{sfn|Frye|1997|pp=30–36}} the biblical [[Assur|Ashur]],<ref>{{Cite web|title=Strong's Hebrew: 804. אַשּׁוּר (Ashshuwr) – Asshur|url=https://biblehub.com/hebrew/804.htm|access-date=2020-07-31|website=biblehub.com}}</ref> and Akkadian Ashuru,<ref>{{Cite web|title=Search Entry|url=http://www.assyrianlanguages.org/akkadian/dosearch.php?searchkey=1505&language=id|access-date=2020-07-31|website=www.assyrianlanguages.org}}</ref> a complex set of [[semantic]] phenomena was created, becoming a subject of interest both among ancient writers and modern scholars.

The [[Koine Greek]] word {{lang|grc|Ἑβραϊστί}} (''Hebraïstí'') has been translated as "Aramaic" in some versions of the Christian [[New Testament]], as Aramaic was at that time the language commonly spoken by the [[Jews]].{{sfn|Köstenberger|2009|p=350}}{{sfn|Hamp|2005|p=4}} However, {{lang|grc|Ἑβραϊστί}} is consistently used in Koine Greek at this time to mean Hebrew and {{lang|grc|Συριστί}} (''Syristi'') is used to mean Aramaic.{{sfn|Buth|Pierce|2014|pp=107–109}} In Biblical scholarship, the term "Chaldean" was for many years used as a synonym of Aramaic, due to its use in the book of Daniel and subsequent interpretation by [[Jerome]].<ref>{{cite journal |last=Kautzsch |first=Emil Friedrich |author-link=Emil Friedrich Kautzsch |jstor=527111 |title=The Aramaic Language |journal=Hebraica |volume=1 |issue=2 |date=1884 |pages=98–115 |doi=10.1086/368803 |quote=The author of Daniel uses the word as a title for the members of the Babylonian guild of priests, as already Herodotus regards oi Xardalot as a designation of the priests of Baal, and the name was subsequently the customary one for the Magians, Astrologers, Soothsayers, etc., of the East. Jerome, however, and those who followed him, confused therewith the use of o'yu, as name of the people; and since, in Dan. II., 4, the “Chaldeans” speak Aramaic, so “Chaldaic” and “Aramaic” were held to be identical. And the matter has stood thus in the “Chaldee grammars” and the "Hebrew and Chaldee lexicons," in spite of all protests,3 up to this day. [Footnote 3: Cf. already Schloezer in Eichhorn's Repertorium, viii. (1781), p. 118 sq.; the correct distinction of East-Aramaic (Syriac) and West-Aramaic (Biblical Aramaic and the language of the Targums) was expressly drawn again by Geiger ZDMG, xviii., 654, and Noeldeke, ibid. xxi., 183 sq,, and particularly xxv., 113 sq. (die Namen der aram. Nation und Sprache.)]}}</ref>