MULEK: Difference between revisions
m (Uto-Aztecan Paragraph) |
(Entry redone) |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
|} | |} | ||
''' | '''Etymology''' | ||
''' | This entry will treat the two most likely spellings of this name, '''M<small>ULEK</small>''' and [[Mulek / Muloch Variants|M<small>ULOCH</small>]], independently, even though the spellings may not represent different individuals, but simply spelling variants of the same name. The texts actually contain four slightly different spellings: The city name, found only in the books of Alma and Helaman, is consistently spelled ''Mulek''. The descriptor of the ''Land Northward'', a hapax that occurs only in [https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/hel/6.10?lang=eng Helaman 6:10], is written ''Mulek'' in the printer’s manuscript through the 2013 edition. The only deviation from the current standard spelling, ''Mulek'', occurs with the three occurrences of the PN. The first time it occurs in the Book of Mormon, in [https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/mosiah/25.2?lang=eng#1 Mosiah 25:2], it is spelled ''Muloch'' in the printer’s manuscript. In the 1830-1852 printings, and in all RLDS editions, ''Mulok'' appears. The spelling was changed in the 1879 LDS edition to ''Mulek'' and has remained ''Mulek'' through the 2013 LDS edition. When the PN occurs again, in [https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/hel/6.10?lang=eng#9 Helaman 6:10] (the second occurrence), the printer’s manuscript originally had ''Muleh'' but the ''h'' is overwritten with a ''k'' (probably immediately), producing the correction ''Mulek'', followed by the 1830 through the 2013 editions. In [https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/hel/8.21?lang=eng#20 Helaman 8:21], the third and final appearance of the PN, it is spelled consistently ''Mulek'' in the printer’s manuscript through the 2013 edition. | ||
As [[Royal Skousen]] has noted, “It is, of course, theoretically possible that the Book of Mormon is referring to two different individuals: Muloch, an ancestor of Zarahemla, in the book of Mosiah; and Mulek, a son of king Zedekiah, in the book of Helaman.”<ref>''ATV'' 3:1464.</ref> Therefore, in the interest of completeness this onomasticon entry will treat the two most promising spellings, '''M<small>ULEK</small>''' and MULOCH, as different names belonging to two different persons, even though it is more likely that they are textual variants of one and the same PN. | |||
The | The common Semitic root ''mlk'', which in West Semitic means “to reign (''malāk''), king (''melek''),” and in East Semitic, “to counsel (''malāku''), counselor (''malku''),” provides the most likely etymology for '''M<small>ULEK</small>'''.<ref>This suggested has been made long ago; see [[Ariel L. Crowley|Ariel Crowley]], “The Escape of Mulek,” ''Improvement Era'', May 1955, p. 324; and [[Janne M. Sjodahl|Sjodahl]], ''Authenticity of the Book of Mormon'', p. 11.</ref> '''M<small>ULEK</small>''' was the son of [[ZEDEKIAH|Z<small>EDEKIAH</small>]] ([https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/hel/6.10?lang=eng Helaman 6:10], [https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/hel/8.21?lang=eng#20 8:21]), the king in [[JERUSALEM|J<small>ERUSALEM</small>]] when [[LEHI|L<small>EHI</small>]] left.<ref> '''M<small>ULEK</small>''' came with a party of people to the New World, disembarking in the Land Northward ([https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/hel/6.10?lang=eng Helaman 6:10]). At least some of the descendants of that group migrated southward to found [[ZARAHEMLA|Z<small>ARAHEMLA</small>]] ([https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/mosiah/25.2?lang=eng#1 Mosiah 25:2]), where Mosiah<sub>1</sub> and his people found them.</ref> | ||
It is very tempting to read '''M<small>ULEK</small>''' as a shortened form, perhaps a hypocoristicon, of a longer name. For example, from the same time period, the days of Zedekiah, the name ''Malchiah'' in [https://www.lds.org/scriptures/ot/jer/38.6?lang=eng#5 Jeremiah 38:6], reads in Hebrew ''malkiyahû'' and means “Yahweh is (my) king.” It has been proposed by some scholars that ''Malchiah'' may have been the son of Zedekiah,<ref>Aharoni, ''BASOR'' 197:22. Others have disputed the connection. See Lundbom, ''Jeremiah 37-552'', Anchor Bible 21 C (Doubleday, 2004), 64 (regarding Jeremiah 38:6).</ref> which, if it is correct, has been obscured by the King James translation. That is, the Hebrew, ''malkiyahû ben hammelek'', can be translated most readily, as the Septuagint does, as “Malchiah the son of the king,” rather than the King James rendering, “Malchiah the son of Hammlech.” | |||
The form '''M<small>ULEK</small>''', if it is a hypocoristicon of a name similar to ''Malchiah'', would be from the noun pattern for a diminutive, ''puʿail'' (''fuʿayl'' in Arabic), meaning “little king.”<ref>For examples in Arabic see Karin C. Ryding, ''A Reference Grammar of Modern Standard Arabic'' (Cambridge, England: Cambridge, 2005), p. 90. See also Gesenius, note to §86g, “Diminutives in Semitic languages are, however, most commonly formed by inserting a y after the second radical.” Already in 1894, Morris Jastrow, “Hebrew Proper Names Compounded with יה and יהו,” ''Journal of Biblical Literature'' 13 (1894):117, mentions the use of the diminutive “Arabic ''fuʿail''” form as the explanation of the biblical PN ''Obadiah'', as opposed to the biblical PN ''Abdiel'' ([https://www.lds.org/scriptures/ot/1-chr/5.15?lang=eng#14 1 Chronicles 5:15]).</ref>The diphthong –''ai''- can shorten to /e/.<ref>See the diminutive Arabic PN ''Husein''.</ref> Given that '''M<small>ULEK</small>''' was the son of King Zedekiah (see [https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/hel/8.21?lang=eng#20 Helaman 8:21]), then a PN based on a diminutive of the Semitic root ''mlk'' would seem appropriate.<ref>Hugh Nibley first made the suggestion that '''M<small>ULEK</small>''' derived from the Arabic diminutive ''mulik'', “little king” ([[Hugh W. Nibley|Hugh Nibley]], "Two Shots in the Dark," in ''Book of Mormon Authorship: New Light on Ancient Origins'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1982), 119.), which would make sense if '''M<small>ULEK</small>''' had been little when he escaped the Babylonian siege of [[JERUSALEM|J<small>ERUSALEM</small>]], or if he had been derisively called '''M<small>ULEK</small>''' by those who did not recognize him as king. (Some get references have suggested that Malchiah in Jeremiah 38:6 might be '''M<small>ULEK</small>'''. The context seems to indicate that Malchiah was at least of age, and not a small babe or child. Therefore, if '''M<small>ULEK</small>''' is Malchiah, then the name may be a term of endearment or derision.)</ref> | |||
Another possible etymology for '''M<small>ULEK</small>''' involves the fairly common West Semitic word ''mlk'', “a type of sacrifice.” As is indicated by Latin terms derived from Punic (e.g., ''molchomor'', probably from ''mlʾk ʾmr'', “sacrifice of a lamb”<ref>''DNWSI'' 642.</ref>), it would appear to have the requisite vowels. '''M<small>ULEK</small>''' would then be a hypocoristicon with a meaning similar to “(the divine) sacrifice.” The meaning “sacrifice” seems to derive from the meaning “vow”<ref>''DNWSI'' 634.</ref> or Arabic mulk “power.”<ref>''DNWSI'' 640.</ref> Alternatively, the meaning sacrifice may derive from the West Semitic DN ''Molk''.<ref>[[Abbrevations|HALOT]] ''molek''. See [[William F. Albright|Albright]] ''YGC'', 205–210; and [[Janne M. Sjodahl|Sjodahl]] Improvement Era 24:140–141. ([[Robert F. Smith|RFS]], [[Jo Ann Hackett|JH]]).</ref> If '''M<small>ULEK</small>''' is to be derived from ''mulk'' or ''molk'', then the preferred etymology would be a hypocoristic form involving the verb ''to vow''. | |||
A less likely possibility is to derive '''M<small>ULEK</small>''' from the common Semitic root ''hlk'', “to go, walk,” which has been suggested by some as the root of the divine name Molech. If so, '''M<small>ULEK</small>''' would mean “traveler, sojourner” ([[Jo Ann Jackett|JH]]). But there is no Hebrew form that would produce '''M<small>ULEK</small>''' from the root ''hlk''. Nevertheless, “sojourner” may be attractive for metonymic reasons (befitting an individual who had traveled a great distance from his homeland), and could therefore add to the growing evidence of metonymy being a factor in the determination of Book of Mormon names ([[John A Tvetdnes|JAT]]). | |||
The (possibly independent) name MULOCH could also derive from the common Semitic root ''mlk'', as described above, though the form is not readily transparent. MULOCH looks very much like a participle from a hollow verb in an oblique conjugation. However, no Hebrew root matches the form MULOCH. There is a South-west Semitic root, ''lwḥ'', that appears to mean “shine,” and would work with MULOCH.<ref>See E. W. Lane, ''Arabic—English Dictionary'', 2679, for ﻻﺡ,ﻟﻭﺡ </ref> | |||
Cf. Book of Mormon [[MULOKI|M<small>ULOKI</small>]], [[MELEK|M<small>ELEK</small>]], [[AMALEKI|A<small>MALEKI</small>]], [[AMALICKIAH|A<small>MALICKIAH</small>]], [[AMLICI|A<small>MLICI</small>]], [[AMULEK|A<small>MULEK</small>]], [[MELCHIZEDEK|M<small>ELCHIZEDEK</small>]]. | Cf. Book of Mormon [[MULOKI|M<small>ULOKI</small>]], [[MELEK|M<small>ELEK</small>]], [[AMALEKI|A<small>MALEKI</small>]], [[AMALICKIAH|A<small>MALICKIAH</small>]], [[AMLICI|A<small>MLICI</small>]], [[AMULEK|A<small>MULEK</small>]], [[MELCHIZEDEK|M<small>ELCHIZEDEK</small>]]. | ||
Revision as of 10:13, 11 April 2014
| Mulekite PN | 1. | Son of ZEDEKIAH, king of JUDAH, ca. 590 BC (Mosiah 25:2; Helaman 6:10; 8:21) |
| 2. | Name of all of the land northward, originally settled by colony which included No. 1 (Helaman 6:10) | |
| 3. | City east of ZARAHEMLA by the seashore and near the cities of GID and BOUNTIFUL, ca. 67 BC (Alma 51:26; 52:2, 16, 17, 19, 20, 22, 26, 28, 34; 53:2, 6; Helaman 5:15) |
Etymology
This entry will treat the two most likely spellings of this name, MULEK and MULOCH, independently, even though the spellings may not represent different individuals, but simply spelling variants of the same name. The texts actually contain four slightly different spellings: The city name, found only in the books of Alma and Helaman, is consistently spelled Mulek. The descriptor of the Land Northward, a hapax that occurs only in Helaman 6:10, is written Mulek in the printer’s manuscript through the 2013 edition. The only deviation from the current standard spelling, Mulek, occurs with the three occurrences of the PN. The first time it occurs in the Book of Mormon, in Mosiah 25:2, it is spelled Muloch in the printer’s manuscript. In the 1830-1852 printings, and in all RLDS editions, Mulok appears. The spelling was changed in the 1879 LDS edition to Mulek and has remained Mulek through the 2013 LDS edition. When the PN occurs again, in Helaman 6:10 (the second occurrence), the printer’s manuscript originally had Muleh but the h is overwritten with a k (probably immediately), producing the correction Mulek, followed by the 1830 through the 2013 editions. In Helaman 8:21, the third and final appearance of the PN, it is spelled consistently Mulek in the printer’s manuscript through the 2013 edition.
As Royal Skousen has noted, “It is, of course, theoretically possible that the Book of Mormon is referring to two different individuals: Muloch, an ancestor of Zarahemla, in the book of Mosiah; and Mulek, a son of king Zedekiah, in the book of Helaman.”[1] Therefore, in the interest of completeness this onomasticon entry will treat the two most promising spellings, MULEK and MULOCH, as different names belonging to two different persons, even though it is more likely that they are textual variants of one and the same PN.
The common Semitic root mlk, which in West Semitic means “to reign (malāk), king (melek),” and in East Semitic, “to counsel (malāku), counselor (malku),” provides the most likely etymology for MULEK.[2] MULEK was the son of ZEDEKIAH (Helaman 6:10, 8:21), the king in JERUSALEM when LEHI left.[3]
It is very tempting to read MULEK as a shortened form, perhaps a hypocoristicon, of a longer name. For example, from the same time period, the days of Zedekiah, the name Malchiah in Jeremiah 38:6, reads in Hebrew malkiyahû and means “Yahweh is (my) king.” It has been proposed by some scholars that Malchiah may have been the son of Zedekiah,[4] which, if it is correct, has been obscured by the King James translation. That is, the Hebrew, malkiyahû ben hammelek, can be translated most readily, as the Septuagint does, as “Malchiah the son of the king,” rather than the King James rendering, “Malchiah the son of Hammlech.”
The form MULEK, if it is a hypocoristicon of a name similar to Malchiah, would be from the noun pattern for a diminutive, puʿail (fuʿayl in Arabic), meaning “little king.”[5]The diphthong –ai- can shorten to /e/.[6] Given that MULEK was the son of King Zedekiah (see Helaman 8:21), then a PN based on a diminutive of the Semitic root mlk would seem appropriate.[7]
Another possible etymology for MULEK involves the fairly common West Semitic word mlk, “a type of sacrifice.” As is indicated by Latin terms derived from Punic (e.g., molchomor, probably from mlʾk ʾmr, “sacrifice of a lamb”[8]), it would appear to have the requisite vowels. MULEK would then be a hypocoristicon with a meaning similar to “(the divine) sacrifice.” The meaning “sacrifice” seems to derive from the meaning “vow”[9] or Arabic mulk “power.”[10] Alternatively, the meaning sacrifice may derive from the West Semitic DN Molk.[11] If MULEK is to be derived from mulk or molk, then the preferred etymology would be a hypocoristic form involving the verb to vow.
A less likely possibility is to derive MULEK from the common Semitic root hlk, “to go, walk,” which has been suggested by some as the root of the divine name Molech. If so, MULEK would mean “traveler, sojourner” (JH). But there is no Hebrew form that would produce MULEK from the root hlk. Nevertheless, “sojourner” may be attractive for metonymic reasons (befitting an individual who had traveled a great distance from his homeland), and could therefore add to the growing evidence of metonymy being a factor in the determination of Book of Mormon names (JAT).
The (possibly independent) name MULOCH could also derive from the common Semitic root mlk, as described above, though the form is not readily transparent. MULOCH looks very much like a participle from a hollow verb in an oblique conjugation. However, no Hebrew root matches the form MULOCH. There is a South-west Semitic root, lwḥ, that appears to mean “shine,” and would work with MULOCH.[12]
Cf. Book of Mormon MULOKI, MELEK, AMALEKI, AMALICKIAH, AMLICI, AMULEK, MELCHIZEDEK.
See also Mulek / Muloch Variants
Variants
Deseret Alphabet: 𐐣𐐆𐐅𐐢𐐊𐐗 (mɪuːlʌk), 𐐣𐐆𐐅𐐢𐐇𐐗 (mɪuːlɛk), 𐐣𐐆𐐄𐐢𐐇𐐗 (mɪoʊlɛk)
Notes
- ↑ ATV 3:1464.
- ↑ This suggested has been made long ago; see Ariel Crowley, “The Escape of Mulek,” Improvement Era, May 1955, p. 324; and Sjodahl, Authenticity of the Book of Mormon, p. 11.
- ↑ MULEK came with a party of people to the New World, disembarking in the Land Northward (Helaman 6:10). At least some of the descendants of that group migrated southward to found ZARAHEMLA (Mosiah 25:2), where Mosiah1 and his people found them.
- ↑ Aharoni, BASOR 197:22. Others have disputed the connection. See Lundbom, Jeremiah 37-552, Anchor Bible 21 C (Doubleday, 2004), 64 (regarding Jeremiah 38:6).
- ↑ For examples in Arabic see Karin C. Ryding, A Reference Grammar of Modern Standard Arabic (Cambridge, England: Cambridge, 2005), p. 90. See also Gesenius, note to §86g, “Diminutives in Semitic languages are, however, most commonly formed by inserting a y after the second radical.” Already in 1894, Morris Jastrow, “Hebrew Proper Names Compounded with יה and יהו,” Journal of Biblical Literature 13 (1894):117, mentions the use of the diminutive “Arabic fuʿail” form as the explanation of the biblical PN Obadiah, as opposed to the biblical PN Abdiel (1 Chronicles 5:15).
- ↑ See the diminutive Arabic PN Husein.
- ↑ Hugh Nibley first made the suggestion that MULEK derived from the Arabic diminutive mulik, “little king” (Hugh Nibley, "Two Shots in the Dark," in Book of Mormon Authorship: New Light on Ancient Origins, ed. Noel B. Reynolds (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1982), 119.), which would make sense if MULEK had been little when he escaped the Babylonian siege of JERUSALEM, or if he had been derisively called MULEK by those who did not recognize him as king. (Some get references have suggested that Malchiah in Jeremiah 38:6 might be MULEK. The context seems to indicate that Malchiah was at least of age, and not a small babe or child. Therefore, if MULEK is Malchiah, then the name may be a term of endearment or derision.)
- ↑ DNWSI 642.
- ↑ DNWSI 634.
- ↑ DNWSI 640.
- ↑ HALOT molek. See Albright YGC, 205–210; and Sjodahl Improvement Era 24:140–141. (RFS, JH).
- ↑ See E. W. Lane, Arabic—English Dictionary, 2679, for ﻻﺡ,ﻟﻭﺡ
Bibliography
- Albright, William F., Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan: A Historical Analysis of Two Contrasting Faiths. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1968. Pagination differs from London edition. YGC
- Chadwick, Jeffery R. "Has the Seal of Mulek Been Found?" Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12, no. 2 (2003): 72-83.
- Ariel L. Crowley About the Book of Mormon. Idaho City, ID: Deseret News, 1961.
- Royal J. Skousen History of the Critical Text Project of the Book of Mormon found in Gerald M. Bradford and Alison V. P. Coutts' Uncovering the Original Text of the Book of Mormon. Provo, UT: FARMS, 2002.
