TWoolley named it the "Ram in the Thicket" in reference to the Biblical story of Abraham, although he acknowledged the fanciful nature of the name and recognized the animal as a goat his link is to a webpage about the two rams in a thicket statues found at Ur that predate the life of Biblical Abraham by almost a millenia http://www.museum.upenn.edu/new/exhibit ... tion.shtml
Woolley named it the "Ram in the Thicket" in reference to the Biblical story of Abraham, although he acknowledged the fanciful nature of the name and recognized the animal as a goat
It doesn't sound like the name is meant to be a reference to Abraham.
No one disputes Ur was an important capital of ancient Sumer at various times its history. The biblical reference is to Ur Kasdim which is translated Ur of the Chaldeans but this may be an erroneous or misleading translation even if there is a remote possibility that a later redactor specified a Chaldean Ur as opposed to some other Ur but why - and which Ur? Other cities in the period are not specified as to the country in which they stood.
According to some hebrew traditions, Ur refers to the founder of the city who was the son of Kesed which is equivalent to Kasdim. Another possibility lies with the knowledge that Kasdim in ancient Babylonian was "kasdu" and referred to the Babylonians themselves.
So several possibilies exist for this unusual name but no one has any definitive answers.
Stephen Knapp in his Origins of Vedic Society, says the link through trading with the Jews was via the Parthians:
"We can see some of the affect of this spread out of India in regard to the term aryan. The name Harijana or Aryan evolved into Syriana or Syrians in Syria, and Hurrians in Hurri and Arianna or Iranians in Iran. This shows that they were once part of Vedic society. A similar case is the name Parthians in Partha, another old country in Persia. Partha was the name of Krishna's friend, Arjuna, a Vedic Aryan, and it means the son of King Prithu. So the name indicates those who are sons of King Prithu. Parthians also had relationships with the early Jews since the Jews used to buy grain from the Parthians. The Greeks referred to the Jews as Judeos, or Jah deos or Yadavas, meaning people of Ya or descendents of Yadu, one of the sons of Yayati. It is also regarded that the basis of the Kabbalah, the book of Jewish mystical concepts, is linked with Kapila Muni, the Indian sage and incarnation of Krishna who established the analytical sankhya-yoga philosophy....."
In "The Bible Unearthed" Finkelstein tells us that the returning exiles from Babylon settled in the Persian province of Yehud from whence the term "Jews" was derived. Prior to that he uses the term Judahites to refer to the Southern Kingdom, so, yes. There seems to be a connection to Persia....although the "Parthian" form of the empire came later.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.
Deuteronomy 26:5: "A wandering Aramean was my father...." referring to Abraham.
From Wikipedia:
The origin of the Aramaeans is still uncertain, arising from the limited amount of evidence regarding the mention of Aramaeans in Mesopotamian inscriptions. An inscription of Naram-Sin of Akkad (c. 2250 BC) provides the earliest reference to "Aram" as a place name, but scholars have disagreed as to its actual location and significance. Other early references to a place or people of "Aram" have appeared at the archives of Mari (c. 1900 BC) and at Ugarit (c. 1300 BC).
The indisputable appearance of the Aramaeans is retraced to two different dates: the 14th and the 12th centuries, depending upon the acceptance of some kind of relationship between the Aramaeans and the Ahlamû. The Arameans are believed to have originated in Syria and Upper Mesopotamia.
Aram - was a past name for Syria but in the context of Abraham may have referred to his ancestor, named Aram who was an offspring of Shem, the son of Noah. There is also this region which contains Ur Kasdim already discussed:
Aram-Naharaim or "Aram of Two Rivers," is a region that is mentioned five times in the Hebrew Bible. It is commonly identified with Nahrima mentioned in three tablets of the Amarna correspondence as a geographical description of the kingdom of Mitanni. It was the land in which the city of Haran lay. According to one rabbinical Jewish tradition, Ur Kasdim, said to be the birthplace of Abraham, was also situated in Aram-Naharaim.[1]
Aram-Naharaim or "Aram of Two Rivers," is a region that is mentioned five times in the Hebrew Bible. It is commonly identified with Nahrima mentioned in three tablets of the Amarna correspondence as a geographical description of the kingdom of Mitanni. It was the land in which the city of Haran lay. According to one rabbinical Jewish tradition, Ur Kasdim, said to be the birthplace of Abraham, was also situated in Aram-Naharaim.[1]
Forum Monk wrote:Did one of Brahma's brothers die fairly young and possibly in a fire?
I'm fairly certain that the answer to that is 'no'. But bear in mind that if Abraham is Brahman, the Brahman story is much much older, thousands of years in fact, and so these stories can get embellished and just downright changed as they travel and grow older.
This is one version (not so old) of Abram and his brothers from the Book of Jubilees -
And in the fortieth jubilee, in the second week, in the seventh year thereof, [1925 A.M.] Abram took to himself a wife, and her name was Sarai, the daughter of his father, and she became his wife.
And Haran, his brother, took to himself a wife in the third year of the third week, [1928 A.M.] and she bare him a son in the seventh year of this week, [1932 A.M.] and he called his name Lot.
And Nahor, his brother, took to himself a wife.
And in the sixtieth year of the life of Abram, that is, in the fourth week, in the fourth year thereof, [1936 A.M.] Abram arose by night, and burned the house of the idols, and he burned all that was in the house and no man knew it.
And they arose in the night and sought to save their gods from the midst of the fire.
And Haran hasted to save them, but the fire flamed over him, and he was burnt in the fire, and he died in Ur of the Chaldees before Terah his father, and they buried him in Ur of the Chaldees.
And Terah went forth from Ur of the Chaldees, he and his sons, to go into the land of Lebanon and into the land of Canaan, and he dwelt in the land of Haran, and Abram dwelt with Terah his father in Haran two weeks of years.
n.b.
The Book of Jubilees is based on the anno mundi (A.M.) dating system and sets the time of events according to the Jubilee calendar in which one week = 7 years; 7 weeks = 49 years and then the 50th year is a Jubilee year.
Ishtar wrote:
There is a Mitanni treaty somewhere (I'll dig it out) that evokes, at the beginning, the Rig Vedic gods.
Here it is: This is an essay by Subhash Kak. It's actually about a Mitanni royal family marrying into that of Akhenatan of the 18th Egyptian dynasty, but it shows that the Mitanni kings all had Sanksrit names, such as:
Sutarna (good sun)
Baratarna 1 (great sun)
Parasuksatra (ruler with an axe)
The Mitannis ruled northern Mesopotamia, including Syria, for about 300 years from about 1600 BC.
From WikipediaThe indisputable appearance of the Aramaeans is retraced to two different dates: the 14th and the 12th centuries, depending upon the acceptance of some kind of relationship between the Aramaeans and the Ahlamû. The Arameans are believed to have originated in Syria and Upper Mesopotamia
The Mittanis also signed a treaty with the Hittites (another Indo-European speaking race) in which they invoked the main gods of the Rig-veda: Varuna, Mitra, Indra and the Asvins.
He believes that Akhenatan was influenced to change Egypt's religion to sun worship by his Vedic wife.
I am not very conversational with non Biblical religious books (not that I am all that conversational with the Bible for that matter) but I do remember that there are numerous cases where the writer refers to places by their current (at the time) names rather then the names they had at the time of the story being told.
This was just so the audience of the time could relate to the location.
So “Ur of the Chaldeans” may not have had any “Chaldeans”
in it when Abram left.
And its location may have only been in the general neighborhood.
