From: tgpedersen
Message: 34130
Date: 2004-09-13
>point of
> > Yes, I can imagine that. So, as far as I can understand your
> > view, all the languages that borrowed the numeral from theSemitic
> > source, and that can have had their own expressions for itbefore that
> > adoption, shared the concept of the numeral seven, being divine,thus,
> > this happened due to a taboo, right? Could this imply certaincultural,
> > economic, trading superiority of the Semitic people?exchange
>
> Yes. I do think that this is part of a cultural and economic
> from the Near and Middle East outwards, but 'superiority'? And ofthe
> Semitic people specifically? No. I think that it's clear thatAnatolia
> in general, whether it be from Semites, Hattians, Hurrians or whatmaybe
> have you, were the major influence on northern peoples. However,
> I'm mad but I get the overall impression that the EasternMediterranean
> was the source of the neolithic economy that would seed the laterland
> 'civilisations'.
>
> Waterways would be an excellent way to haul goods rather than by
> and, while I'm no sea captain, I'd imagine you can get fromPalestine to
> the north coast of the Black Sea without too much trouble.But what about all the sea monsters?
>It would justdesert,
> take time, but not as much time as dragging the goods across
> forest and tundra :)for 'seven'
>
> Perhaps the reason for the adoption of the _Semitic_ word
> per se is a) because the Semites would have been well connected tothe
> Eastern Mediterranean at the time and b) because they might be thesource
> of the numerological cult that perhaps stems from somethingagricultural.
> (I'm thinking a lot lately about how old the concept of thecalendar is
> and whether it has bearing on this symbol of seven.)As is my habit, I will mention
>