Re: Persians, Essenes, and Biconsonantal Roots

Steg wrote:

"I remember learning when i learned Second Temple period Jewish History
that the Jews most of the time supported the Persians, especially when
there was a chance that during Persian-Roman fighting the Persians could
conquer Judea."

   Yes, that's certainly true, and that is why there was still risk during
that period (at least, until the defeat of the Sassanians by the Arabs in
the seventh century) that the Jews might assimilate to them.  After all, the
Jews and the Persians were far from enemies (and it is far from likely that
anyone would assimilate to their enemies) but they were always uneasy allies
-- and every once in a while, a real monster like Kerdir would come along
and start persecuting everything that moved (did the Jews, in fact, escape
Kerdir's clutches?  I don't think so, although BP Jonsson might know better
than I).
   The Sassanians supported religious tolerance nominally, at least in
Mesopotamia where there was such a complicated mix of religious groups -- by
granting them freedom of religion, they ensured that these groups wouldn't
defect over to the Romans in time of war.  Nevertheless, there was sporadic
persecution even in Mesopotamia - some of the more gruesome details come
from the Syriac histories of that time period (such as the Martyrdom of
Narsay bar Qayma).

"I seem to remember reading somewhere that there's a reconstruction of
either Proto-Semitic or Proto-AfroAsiatic which works on a biconsonantal
root system.  The later three-consonant roots would be an elaboration on
that, and helps explain relationships between similar roots."

    I've seen that reconstruction, too, and I think that it is very elegant.
  The reconstruction would have it that two consonants define a basic
concept, and that the addition of a third consonant to the root defined the
concept further.  Almost like a constructed language (let's call it
"Semipük"); the problem with this reconstruction is, having defined a group
of roots with the same basic meaning, presuming that they are composed of
biconsonantal roots with a suffixed consonant, one must then define what the
suffixed root consonant means.
     IIRC, one of Jerzy Kurylowicz's rules of analogy stated that similar
words tend to contaminate each other in meaning.  Thus, a large group of
roots of similar meaning and form in Hebrew (I believe the largest example
is the group that begins P-R-*) might possibly arise through contamination.

     Nevertheless, those biconsantals are there.  They're there in every
Semitic language, they are included among the most common words in each
language, and, interestingly enough, they are often the words that have
cognates in the rest of the Afro-Asiatic family...

-Chollie

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com