▪ Jeffery1938, 111 (s.v.
ḥikmaẗ): »The root √ḤKM is of wide use in Sem, but the sense of ‘wisdom’ appears to be a NSem development,
1
while the SSem use of the word is more in connection with the sense of ‘govern’. […] Thus [Ar]
ḥikmaẗ and
ḥakīm seem undoubtedly to have been formed under Aram influence.
2
[…] It is possible that the word came into use from SArabia, for we find
ḥkm in a Qat inscription […] which Nielsen
3
)] takes to be an epithet of the moon-god.«
▪ Kogan2015, 82-83 (#ḤKM
ḥakam-): »The status of this isogloss as a protWSem feature is undermined by several circumstances which, in view of the cultural significance of the root, deserve to be mentioned in full: (1) The autochthonous vs. borrowed status of Akk
ḫakāmu ‘to know, to understand’ has been hotly debated by several generations of Assyriologists and Semitists (v. Kogan 2011:111 for a select bibliography). Personally, we tend to favor the borrowing hypothesis (especially if several waves of WSem influence are assumed), but no complete certainty in this respect is possible. – (2) The Gz verb is attested only once in Pr 17:28. The semantic link between ‘se cohibere, continere’ (LLA 112) and ʻto be wise’ is far from trivial, but fits well the sapiential context of ʻrestraining one’s lips in order to look wise’. All other representatives of *ḤKM in EthSem are borrowed from Ar (Leslau 1990:341). – (3) Most of the meanings associated with this root in modSAr are almost certainly due to Ar influence. This is, however, much less evident as far as the meaning ʻto be old’ is concerned: while also attested in Ar (
ḥakam ‘a man advanced in age to the utmost degree,’ Lane 617), it seems to be too marginal there to be considered a reliable source of borrowing. – (4) As reasonably argued by A. Jeffery (1938:111), the genuinely Ar meanings of
ḥkm are “more in connection with the sense of
govern” whereas the meaning ʻto be wise’ is likely due to Hbr and Aram influence.«
▪ For our own hypothesis (*ʻto contain, restrict, etc.’ as original value – see above, section CONC), cf. Lane ii 1865 where the entry on
ḥakama (vn.
ḥukm) starts with the value ‘to prevent\restrain\withhold s.o. from acting in an evil\corrupt manner; to pull (a horse) by the bridle and bit to stop it; to curb, restrain it’, suggesting that this is the primary meaning; cf. also BAH2008 where the overview over the semantic spectrum in ClassAr starts with ‘bit of a bridle; to curb, restrain; …’. Cf. also some older values given, among others, by Hava1899:
†ḥakama ‘to practice fencing; to overtake s.o. (rain, mishap)’,
†ʔaḥkama ‘to check (a horse) with a curb-bit; to put a ring to a horse’s bridle’,
†ḥakam ‘fencing’,
†ḥakamaẗ ‘martingale; bridle’,
†ĭstiḥkamāt,
mustaḥkamāt (pl.), ‘fortifications’. – With this hypothesis in mind, the suggestion made by Orel&Stolbova1994 (Ar
ḥakam‑ ‘to take’ < Sem *
ḥ˅kum‑ ‘to take’, with prefix *
ḥ˅‑ from AfrAs *
kum‑ ‘to take, get’) is not completely unconceivable.
4
Kogan2015: 84 (fn. 240), too, finds that »[t]he meaning ʻto restrain, withhold’ [found in Gz, but] also rather prominently attested in Ar, opens an interesting possibility of comparsion between protWSem *
ḥkm and Akk
ekēmu ʻto take away’, otherwise with no WSem etymology.«
5
▪ Nevertheless, Orel&Stolbova’s analysis of protSem *
ḥkm as being the result of the addition of a prefix *
ḥ˅‑ to the hypothetical AfrAs *
kum‑ ‘to take, get’ sounds highly speculative.
▪ …