Thursday, December 11, 2014

The great fish that swallowed Jonah, a Whale or a Dinosaur?

Jonah 1:17 says "Now the LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights." The word for great is Gadowl (gaw-dole'); , Strong #: 1419, which can mean great, or high, or mighty. But can also simply mean large in size. The word translated fish is Dag (dawg); Noun Masculine, Strong #: 1709 It is always translated fish. But to the ancient Hebrews is meant any water dwelling animal.

In the KJV of Matthew 12:40 Jesus says "For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth".

Now critics of The Bible love to go on here about Whales being Mammals. And Christians respond very correctly by saying it's absurd to impose modern animal classifications on ancient people.

While I'm in no way disagreeing with making that argument. I feel the need to point out that in the Greek the word used is Ketos, which is often transliterated Cetos or Cetus. The Greek Septuagint text of Jonah likewise calls the creature a Mega Ketos.

This is the name of the mythical sea monster of Greek mythology that tried to devour Andromeda and was killed by Perseus. It's not a coincidence either, that myth like the story of Jonah is linked to the ancient port city of Joppa/Jaffa/Japha in the territory originally allotted to Dan. Which is today part of modern Tel-Aviv.

Interestingly, while the most common version of the story has Perseus simply slaying the sea monster, Lycophron, in the Alexandra (834-42), records a variant version where Perseus is swallowed by the monster and kills it from the inside out:
" And he shall visit the towers of Cepheus and the place that was kicked by the foot of Hermes Laphrios, and the two rocks on which the petrel leapt in quest of food, but carried off in his jaws, instead of a woman, the eagle son of the golden Sire – a male with winged sandals who destroyed his liver. By the harvester’s blade shall be slain the hateful whale dismembered…"
 Some bones found at Joppa in ancient times were identified as the animal of the Perseus legend. Pliny (Natural History 9.4) records that they were taken to Rome in 58 BC, and from his description of them it seems that they were very likely the bones of a whale:
" M. Scaurus, in his ædileship, exhibited at Rome, among other wonderful things, the bones of the monster to which Andromeda was said to have been exposed, and which he had brought from Joppa, a city of Judæa. These bones exceeded forty feet in length, and the ribs were higher than those of the Indian elephant, while the back-bone was a foot and a half in thickness."
 This well known account may be the reason it became popular during the Proto-Enlightenment times of King James to translate the word Ketos as whale. However I feel it is highly unlikely the Perseus legend was really originally inspired by a whale. But it doesn't surprise me that the first time bones of a large sea animal were found in or near the city in question people made the assumption it was the same creature.

I should note the three occurrences in the KJV of Whale in the OT (Genesis 1:21, Job 7:12 and Ezekiel 32:2) the Hebrew word is Tanniyn (tan-neen'); Noun Masculine, Strong #: 8577 a word elsewhere translated Serpent and once Sea Monster, but most commonly Dragon, including elsewhere in the same portions of Ezekiel, the series of Prophecies about Egypt that began with Chapter 29.

In fact every time you see Dragon in the Old Testament it's either this or a clearly etymologically related word like Tan or Tannah. Including Isaiah 27:1 "In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea." Where Isaiah's poetic style clearly uses it as synonymous with Leviathan. While here this creature is being used symbolically of Satan, setting the stage for Revelation 12. Leviathan is definitely a real Animal described in zoological terms in Job 41.

I think Tanniyn is a broader term for various animals we'd today call Dinosaurs and/or Plesiosaurs, both ones that are purely Sea Based, Amphibious and purely Land Based. And Leviathan is a specific animal or kind of animal. From here I'd recommend studying various other Creationists theories on what exactly Leviathan is, I haven't made up my mind yet.

So Jonah may have been swallowed by Leviathan, or a different Dinosaur, or perhaps a Plesiosaur. But I've decided I don't think it was likely a whale, though I know the most absolutist of my fellow KJV onliers will object to that.

On a humorous ending note. I find myself now thinking of one of my favorite lines from one of my favorite movies. And the scene surrounding it.

 Star Wars Episode I:The Phantom Menace
"There's always a bigger fish"-Qui-Gon Jin

Thursday, November 6, 2014

On the Amalekites and Hyksos

I'm going here to disagree with things I've said before (like some of what I said on how the Saul connection works), as I've studied Velikovsky's arguments more closely.  But I'll also repeat some of what I've said before that I still stand by.  There are certain areas where I don't want to go over again what others have already said, so this is perhaps best understood by someone who's already read Ages in Chaos.  It can be bought on Amazon pretty cheap.

On the Hyksos-Amalekites connection I first want to say I feel it's not quite that simple. The Hyksos were many tribes of Asiatic peoples. They included the Amalekites and possibly other Edomite tribes, I think they had a Midianite element too (Hor II of the 13th Dynasty I think was the Midanite king Hur mentioned in The Bible). Archaeology clearly shows they had an Amorite element as well.  Ishmaelite and Aramean tribes could have contributed also to help explain some of the confusion of the Arabian historians.

I agree with Ages in Chaos about Agag being Apep.
The early Hebrew written signs as they are preserved on the STELE OF MESHA show a striking resemblance BETWEEN THE LETTERS G (GIMEL) AND P (PEI). NO OTHER LETTERS are so much alike in shape as these: each is an oblique line connected to a shorter, more oblique line, and is similar to the written number 7, THE SIZE. OF THE ANGLE BETWEEN THE TWO OBLIQUE LINES CONSTITUTES THE ONLY DIFFERENCE.

Nevertheless, it seems that not the Hebrew reading but rather the EGYPTIAN MUST BE CORRECTED....Almost EVERY hieroglyphic consonant [Egyptian] stands for MORE THAN ONE SOUND, and only empirically are all the sounds symbolized by a consonant found.
There wasn't more then one known Agag though, Balaam is giving a Prophecy of the days of Saul.  Though it's certainly not impossible more then one Amalekite King had that name including one contemporary with Balaam.   The claim of there being more then one Apepi is also spurious and exists because of how Josephus's copy of Manetho is likely confused, but it's still not impossible more then one Hyksos ruler used that name.  In both cases it is the latter one at the end of this period who certainly existed.

Velikovsky and others are wrong in citing Genesis 14 as proving the Amalekites existed already before Esau/Edom. The reference to them there is an editorial note from Moses, telling his readers where on the Map of their day he's referring to. Like how we often say "near modern _____".   The Arabs didn't have an Arabic translation of The Bible until well after the Koran, so they got Amalek's genealogy confused just as they did how the Amalekite pharaohs relate to the history of Joseph and Moses.

Since Velikovsky's time Archeologists are inclined now to consider the location of Avaris indisputable.  And thus his Al-Arish theory useless.

It could be the Hyksos used more then one city as their Capital (like the later Persian Empire, or Assyrian Empire), each of which could have been known as "ḥw.t wr.t", which means "Great House".  And Velikovsky's model certainly does not preclude that they'd have some regional capital in the Delta.

Velikovsky's theory on the location of Sharuhen is probably wrong.  This would have been the city they operated from when they attacked Ziklag.  Judges 19:6 places Sharuhen in the allotment of Simeon.  But the Edom-Seir region is indeed where Simeonites would wind up much later as we see in 1 Chronicles 4.

On the subject of Psalm 78:49 and "Evil Angels".  I do not believe there is a scribal error here, I believe God's Word is preserved.  But the idea that it's a Hebraic Pun on "Shepard Kings" is possible.

So I think I've covered everything on this subject I might disagree with Velikovsky on.  I now want to talk about Greek Mythology.

Based on dating information from Eusebius, 1484 or 1470 BC is the date of Danaus leaving Egypt to found Argos.  Revised Chronology places that during the Hyksos period, since the latest possible date for the Exodus is 1492 B.C. (Ussher's date).

Danaus (ancestor of the Spartan and Macedonian Royal houses according to mythology via Perseus and Herakles) is frequently identified with the Tribe of Dan by various theories.  While I definitely consider the name evidence of Semitic origin, the D-n element does exist in Semitic languages independent of The Tribe of Dan, in names like Dinah and Dannah and Dedan and Daniel.  But most relevant here is Dinhabah, the city of the first King of Edom in Genesis 36.  (And some sources say the Ugarit story of Aghat and Pighat gives a Donatiya as the wife of Danel.)  Later on I do believe a Danite intermarriage with this line happens via Andromeda daughter of Cephus of Joppa/Jaffa and Perseus.

Josephus's account of the correspondences between the Spartan King and the High Priest Onais about the Spartans having descent from Abraham refereed to the Spartan seal as being an Eagle clutching a Serpent.  Extra-Biblical sources like the Targums are appealed to for evidence to make the Eagle a symbol of Dan.  But Biblical evidence links the Eagle with Edom in Obadiah 4 and Jeremiah 49:16&22.

The Serpent is indeed linked to Dan, maybe the Eagle clutching a Serpent in part represents an intermingling of Edom and Dan?

The Sabine Tribe of Ancient Italy claimed descent from a Spartan colony according to Plutarch.  Perhaps this can add to the Edomite heritage of Rome.  Rome's second King was a Sabine.

The father of Danaus was Belus.  Belus could come from Bela son of Beor, an Ancient Edomite King mentioned in Genesis 36, or maybe Baalhanan.  The Amalekites were an Edomite tribe.  Genesis entered it's finale form in the days of Moses, so 36 could include Edomite Kings contemporary with The Exodus.

If one of the two Hadad/Hadars who was a King of Edom in Genesis 36 is also the ruler deified as the Semitic god Hadad, then his name would also be linked to Baal/Bel.  The last King of Edom listed here is Hadar in Genesis 36 but Hadad in Chronicles.  His city Pau/Pai is unidentified and has been speculated by some scholars to be an Egyptian city, and that his wife Mehetabel is Egyptian in origin.  Maybe Pau/Pai is Al-Arish/Avaris.

Belus was a King of Egypt, but that Danaus's brother(Aegytpus)'s name became the Greek name for Egypt is largely due to confused Greek geography.  Like I discussed elsewhere with Aethiopia(Ethiopia).

Apollodorus ( 2.1.4-5)

"Belus remained in Egypt, reigned over the country, and married Anchinoe, daughter of Nile, by whom he had twin sons, Aegyptus and Danaus, but according to Euripides, he had also Cepheus and Phineus. Danaus was settled by Belus in Libya, and Aegyptus in Arabia."

Marrying a daughter of the Nile is likely a reference to him marrying a Native Egyptian (possibly of Royal or Nobel blood) for political reasons.  Whether or not the Hyksos historically ever did that I don't think we know for certain.

Because I support the Arabian view of Mount Sinai, I'm aware that what Arabia meant to Ancient Greek Writers (Modern Jordan south of the Dead Sea and north western Saudi Arabia) is where the Israelite wondering was, this included ancient Edom.  Some scholars think classical Arabia could have included parts of southern Israel (south of Beersheba) and the north eastern Sinai Peninsula, which would include Al-Arish.

So it sounds like Belus may have put his Heir Apparent in charge of the Amalekites original homeland.  Like how the Welsh in origin Tudors monarchs of England began making the Crown-Prince the Prince of Wales.

Greek myths go on to tell us that Aegytpus conquered a people called Melampodes.  Malampodes means "black footed" and could make sense as a term for former slaves who made mud bricks with their feet.  So I think they're the wandering Israelites and that this is a reference to not the first post Exodus Amalekite encounter, but when the Amalekites were victorious over them in Numbers 14:45.

In Peoples of The Sea on pages 84&85, Velikovsky argues for Temeh or Temehu being a name the Egyptians used for the Spartans or Lacedaemonians.  Teman is in Genesis 36 the name of a grandson of Esau (brother of the grandson Jasher links to Rome, and Amalek was their half brother), and later in The Bible a region in Edom.  The same basic Hebrew word is sometimes used and translated South, and the Teman in Edom is possibly one of it's more southern locations.  So perhaps Edomites who colonized the Peloponnesian peninsula used a word similar to Teman for the southern most region of the Peloponnese, where Sparta/Lacedaemonia was?

Monday, October 27, 2014

Alexander The Great and Candace of Meroe

As someone who's been fascinated by Alexander The Great since I was very young, one of the most fun parts of the third volume of Ages in Chaos (Peoples of The Sea) for me is the material on Alexander The Great.

I agree entirely that the so called 21st Dynasty should be placed during the transition from the Persian to Hellenistic periods.  And that the The Maunier Stela is depicting Alexander's visit to the Siwa Oasis.  As I've said before the Specialtyinterests site is informative but also has ideas I disagree with.  (And now that site is gone entirely, meaning I have to find a new online summery of the argument).

I'm also very fascinated by Velikovsky questioning the traditional assumption that Alexander never traveled further South then Siwa.  He points out how the amount of time Alexander spent in Egypt (half a year, from fall of 332 to spring of 331 BC) seems absurd if he only ever visited three places.  And that travelling to Thebes down the Nile would be a much quicker and easier journey then the travel to Siwa through the Desert was.

He cites Curtius referring to how Alexander had a strong inclination to see Thebes and Ethiopia.  Alexander generally did whatever he felt compelled to do, Bible Prophecy says of him that he will "do According to his Will" Daniel 11:3.

There is even a possible piece of evidence for Alexander going to Thebes that Velikovsky overlooked.  In Josephus, Antiquities of The Jews, Book 11, Chapter 8, Section 6.  While dealing with Alexander's interaction with the Samaritans, at the end he says "And in this manner he took leave of the Shechenlites; but ordered that the troops of Sanballat should follow him into Egypt, because there he designed to give them lands, which he did a little after in Thebais, when he ordered them to guard that country. "

So his going into evidence from the 21st Dynasty information for Alexander going to Thebes is very interesting.  I have thought of another piece of the puzzle however.  Curtius also said Alexander wanted to see Ethiopia.  

So the idea entered my mind that maybe the Alexander Romance legend of Candace of Meroe has more historical basis then we thought.  The Legend says she defeated Alexander.  Maybe that's exactly why the main Classical Greeco-Roman historians are silent on his going further south.  They wanted to censor that this modern mythical Hero they're Deifying did have a defeat.

And indeed the quote on the Stele Velikovsky sites as referring to "his majesty" going to Thebes also refers to him seeking to defeat enemies.

The first known historically confirmed ruling Queen/Kandake of Nubia is much later then Alexander's time, Shanakdakhete (177 BC–155 BC) who was interestingly contemporary with the Hasmonean revolt.  But the word Kandake was affiliated with all Nubian Queens.

From Nubian records it seems that Nastaden was king at the time Alexander took Egypt. He reigned from 335 BC to 315 or 310 BC.  Nubian records do say he thwarted an attempted invasion of Nubia by a King of Upper Egypt refereed to as Kambasuten.  That there was a failed conquest of Nubia from Egypt during this period is usually not mentioned when historians write off the Candace of Meroe legend.

Kambasuten is usually identified with Khabash, a native king of Egypt who rebelled against The Persians just before Alexander came to Egypt.  Alexander and his successors kept him around, he was given the throne name of Senen-setep-en-Ptah in a decree by Ptolemy I

 Kambasuten could have been a name given to Alexander.  Or Maybe Khabash accompanied Alexander on his attempted campaign against Nubia.

As for why a Queen is mentioned in the Romance?  The oldest written account we have is from the 3rd Century AD.  So it could have been influenced by the Greeco-Roman world's experiences with later Kandakes they interacted with.  Most of our surviving Alexander Romance texts come through Christina scribes, so they may have wanted to connect Alexander to Acts 8.

We do know however that Nastasen had both a wife and a mother who were Queens.  The Dongola Stela names them both, implying his mother was still around during some of his reign.  His mother was Queen Pelkha and his wife was Queen Sakhmakh.

Some versions of the romance however separate his encounter with the Queen from the attempted conquest of Ethiopia.  His brief Romance with Candace is placed not during the time he was in Egypt but after his conquests when he is in Babylon, she comes to Babylon to visit him.  So there remains a lot of confusion.

Thursday, October 23, 2014

Delilah was an Israelite not a Philistine

Traditionally it is assumed that Delilah was another Pagan Philistine woman that Samson got involved with.  In fact The Bible never says that.

Samson had two earlier relationships with Philistine women, the one he married early on, and the harlot in Gaza at the start of chapter 16.  Neither of them are named, in fact I don't think any male Philistine characters are named at any-point in the Samson narrative either.  But Delilah has a name.  Critics of The Bible starting with the assumption that we're supposed to think of Delilah as a Philistine like to point out that her name isn't a Philistine name.

It seems in fact perfectly Hebrew deriving from the Hebrew word for night Layil (Strong number 3915, the same root as Lilith interestingly) and/or Dalah (Strong number 1809) meaning to fail, to bring low or to empty, from which the Strongs interprets the name Delilah to mean "languishing".  It's similar to Strong number 1808 Daliah which means branch.

She's from a valley (not a city) called Sorek.  This location is never mentioned (not by the same name at least) again in Scripture.  We have no solid geographical clues to it's location.  Which means I'm inclined to be skeptical of the archeological site traditional identified with Sorek.  All we do know is the last place Samson was before coming here was Hebron, which is in the heart of Judah.

I think Samson went to Gaza to sow his wild oats, but after that his thing for Philistine women was done.

In the movies Delilah is always sent to seduce Samson from the start.  In The Bible it's not like that, the Philistines come to her after they've been involved for awhile.

The amount of Silver paid is debated.  Is it really 1100 pieces from each lord as the KJV translation clearly leads us to assume?  Or is that the total they all pulled together?  I don't know, either way works fine for me.

It's interesting that again we see betrayal linked with being paid in Silver, just like Judas with Jesus and Judah with Joseph.

I mentioned in an earlier post how there is disagreement of if Judges 17-18 actually follows 16.  Now I believe they do follow 16.

Judges 17 begins with a story involving Micah's mother having 1100 shekels of Silver, the exact same amount Delilah was paid (either once or multiple times).  I don't think that's a coincidence, I think this is Delilah.

Others who've noticed that possible connection then assume Samson is Micah's father, but I don't think so.  Judges tends to note when a key character it's following is conceived out of wedlock, and Samson and Delilah were never married.  Also, if Samson was his father Micah would be a Danite, and in chapter 18 Micah doesn't think of the Danites as his kin.  But maybe I'm wrong and he is the son of Samson.

Maybe she married someone afterwards, or perhaps she was a widow when she and Samson began their relationship.  Which leads back to my thoughts on our common assumptions, that Samson's relationship with Delilah was bad to begin with.  The text of Judges doesn't to me seem to say that, Evil enters the relationship when The Philistines bribed Delilah.

The notion that all Sex outside marriage is a Sin isn't Biblical.  The Law of Moses only addresses adultery, virginity, and prostitution (what Fornication meant in 1611).  Nothing at all says it'd be wrong for a Man and a Widow to have an extra martial relationship.

Micah's never called an Ephraimite, they're just living in Ephraim when Judges 17 happens.  They could be from Judah originally.

Basically, the whole narrative of Samson subverts expectations in a way.  He's kind of a failed Messianic Archetype.  The reader judges his foolishness in those relationships with Philistine women.  But then we learn an Israelite woman can be a traitor too.  In fact Delilah didn't have also being threatened as Samson's Philistine Wife did to make her more sympathetic, she was just paid the money.

Friday, April 25, 2014

Hatshepsut was not the Queen of Sheba

This is my most unique quality as a supporter of the basic Velikovsky model starting with Tuthmosis III as Shishak.  I seem to be the lone voice in the wilderness on this particular pairing of beliefs.

If the Queen of Sheba was an Egyptian queen The Bible wouldn't have obscured that, it dealt with Solomon's interactions with Egypt unambiguously both before and after this. Also since Tuthmosis I must be the Pharaoh who's daughter Solomon married (Nefrubity is my hunch on that), Hatshepsut was her full blooded Sister. If this Queen was Solomon's sister in law that is a strange thing to overlook.

Shishak is Tuthmosis III, his invasion of Retenu that corresponds to Shishak's taking Jerusalem was in the first year of his sole reign (21st year total).  Which means over 5 years earlier when Jeroboam fled to Egypt was while Hatshepsut was still alive.

The visit of the Queen of Sheba I believe is meant to be understood as taking place very near the events of the previous chapter, 1 Kings 9.  Which opens about 24 years into Solomon's 40 year reign.  Which means timing wise it's either before Tuthmosis II died or very early in Hatshepsut's reign.  The reigning Pharaoh of Egypt is mentioned in the prior chapter, it might seem the Kings narrative isn't consistent with this being no longer the same Pharaoh who's daughter Solomon married, but I don't think that's a big deal.  The Biblical authors I think weren't always concerned with distinguishing different Pharaohs.  But a Pharaoh of Egypt they always refereed to as Pharaoh.

Hatsheput like other Egyptian Queens ruled as if she were a man.  And the term Pharaoh that the Bible uses was actually to the Royal Palace.  So I really would not expect The Bible to refer to Hatsheput any differently then it would a male Pharaoh.

The Punt expedition was in Hatsheput's Eight year.  So it's too late.

Jesus calls her the "Queen of The South" in Matthew 12:42 and Luke 11:31.  Daniel 11 is cited where the "King of The South" is consistently Egypt.  So this correlation is the start of attempts to argue she was an Egyptian queen.

South in Biblical geography is south of Israel/Jerusalem, in the context of Alexander's successors only Ptolemy is south of Israel, and Egypt was the core of his Kingdom though not all of it. But without that context South by no means always means Egypt, and usually refers to further south then that.  In Jesus' time I'm inclined to think South of anything Rome ruled might have been the context.  And Rome ruled Egypt at that time.

The word translated South in Daniel 11 (Negev) isn't the only Hebrew word used to communicate the idea of the South, there at least three others.   Jesus I believe was actually speaking the above quote in Hebrew, but we have no idea if he used the same word.  And I argued in one Bible study that it's used of Egypt there only when the Ptolemies ruled the Negev desert.

Another Hebrew word for South is Teman, which is interesting since Temani is also a name used of Yemenite Jews, not unlike Germanic Jews being Ashkenazim after Ahskenaz ben Gomer.  In fact there is an argument to be made for the name Yemen itself coming from Teman/Teyman.  Espically given the tendency of Hebrew naming to treat the Y/I/J and T as interchangeable, examples Yeshua/Teshua, Yerekh/Terekh, and Judas/Thadeus.  And another word for South used in Yamen, derived from Yam.

Velikovsky unintentionally argued once that Mount Sinai was in Yemen.  What's interesting about that is Habbukah 3:3 is a verse that parallels the reference to Seir and Sinai in Deuteronomy 33, that possibly justifies using Teman as a name for where Sinai is.

Then Josephus (Antiquities of The Jews Book 8 Chapter 6 Section 5) is cited.  I'll address why I think Josephus was mistaken on this later.  But the point here is that Josephus is a good source for history near contemporary to himself.   But before the Hellenistic era he screws many things up (including the Persian King Esther married).  The farther back he goes the more he's basing his Extra-Biblical information on legends of questionable reliability.  In fact this very section of Josephus is totally absurd and he admits dependence on Herodotus.  He acts like Pharaoh was an actual name the Pharaoh's used like Caesar.

There are three Shebas in the Table of Nations, Two in Genesis 10 and another being Abrahamic (of Keturah). The two in Genesis 10 are one Hamitic/Cushite and the other Semitic/Joktanite. But in both I Kings 10 and II Chronicles 11 the Queen of Sheba narrative is linked to Ophir another Joktanite name.  I think Bill Cooper's biggest mistakes in After The Flood's appendices are in how he dealt with the repeat names.

Serious Archaeologists all know that Sheba was the name of a Kingdom in southern Arabia, modern Yemen. ( Israel Finkelstein, Neil Asher Silberman, David and Solomon: In Search of the Bible's Sacred Kings and the Roots of the Western Tradition p. 167).

Do not think that the Ancient Yemenite kingdom who's capital was Ma'rib is called Sheba only because of a desire to put that Biblical identification on it.  They are known by that name independent of Biblical or Judeo-Christian influences.

Res Gestae Divi Augusti paragraph 26.5, (a funeral inscription of Augustus).
"By my command and under my auspices two armies were led at about the same time into Ethiopia and into Arabia, which is called the Blessed [?]. Great forces of each enemy people were slain in battle and several towns captured. In Ethiopia the advance reached the town of Nabata, which is close to Meroe; in Arabia the army penetrated as far as the territory of the Sabaeans and the town of Ma'rib."
This reference could interestingly make Ma'rib as far South as Roman armies ever went.

They were a seafaring people and were known to have had significant trade with the Northeast African kingdom of Dʿmt, across the Red Sea in Somalia, Eritrea, the only other source of both frankincense and myrrh.  But the desire to use that African connection to make Axum or Nubia part of what's defined as Sheba is horribly flawed, those kingdoms were no where near those coastal lands.

The Yemen region was a place many Jews fled to following the fall of the Northern and Southern Kingdoms in the 8th-6th centuries BC.   The Lemba tribe used to live in Yemen according to their oral history.

Very early on in Church History the Gospel came to this region.  Among those who became Christians were the Ghassanids, who later migrated north and became a significant Arab-Christian Kingdom in roughly modern Jordan.

The famous Arabic proverb “They were scattered like the people of Saba” refers to them and other tribes of the Yemen region leaving after the destruction of the Ma'rib Dam.

The ancient Nubian city of Saba (which was later renamed Meroe during the time of Cambyses) I feel probably got that name not from a Sheba but from Cush's son Seba/Sebah.  In English that name looks very similar to Sheba, and they could also transliterate into African languages similarly, but in Hebrew they begin with a different letter.  Isaiah 43 refers to "Seba and Ethipoia" after mentioning Egypt, in a context where by Seba it could mean a city or region in Ethiopia.  And Ethipoia/Cush linked to Egypt in this way always means the Nubian civilization just to the south of Egypt.

Seba and Sheba are mentioned next to each other in the Messianic Kingdom Psalm 72 verse 10.  "The kings of Tarshish and of the isles shall bring presents: the kings of Sheba and Seba shall offer gifts."  The point here I think is nations that Israel's contact with was by Sea bringing gifts to The Messiah.  Tarshish and it's isles (British isles) to the west, and Seba and Sheba are both through the Red Sea port, in that context Yemen or India could work for Sheba while Seba is Nubia.

The Cushite Sheba of Genesis 10 I believe settled in Ancient India where he was deified as Shiva and his father Ramaah as Rama an avatar of Vishnu.  Rama and his wife Sita had two sons just like Ramaah.  One of those sons was named Kush.  So the Indian mythology has confused the genealogy over the ages, but I believe that's where Ramaah and his sons went.

The Sheba and Dedan of Keturah I think probably lived in northern Saudi Arabia like the other Keturite tribes.  They are probably the Sabeans who are mentioned in Job.

I do believe the Ark of the Covenant came to Ethiopia. But the Menelik legend is propaganda created by the Christian Auxomite kings to give them a Biblical lineage. I believe Graham Hancock and Bob Cornuke's theory for how it got there. First being at Elephantine island from sometime after King Manasseh's reign to the time of Cambyses, then was on Tana Kirkos until the Auxomite Kingdom took it.  The Menilik legend was invented by the Auxomite Kings as propaganda do give them a Biblical;y significant Royal lineage (making them Davidic kings).  The Jews of Ethiopia do not believe that story at all.

The Arabic traditions of Balqis/Bilqis/Bilquis did exist in Pre-Islamic times (Mohammed didn't really come up with much of anything new) and so have good reason to be viewed as more ancient and valid then the purely invented Ethiopian legend.  However the details of the Bilqis legend as presented in the Koran and other surviving Arabic sources do not seem credible.  I would not bet on that actually being her original real name.  But if I wrote any fiction based on this I'd probably use something like it.

 I do believe Hatshepsut probably visited Solomon also. The Bible says many rulers came to visit Solomon and witness his Wisdom. The Queen of Sheba is singled out NOT because she's the most important by secular standards, but because she became a Saved individual.  Which is why Jesus cited her as such alongside the "men of Nineveh" who believed the message of Jonah.

That's the biggest problem to me actually, Hatshepsut was a faithful worshiper of the Egyptian gods to the end, no evidence she responded to Solomon how the Queen of Sheba did.

Actually, back to Psalm 72.  It's also called a Psalm of Solomon, because Solomon foreshadowed the Messianic Kingdom.  So the Sheba and Sebah reference could show both Ethiopia and Sheba had rulers visit Solomon, but they were distinct from each other.

Strictly speaking, what we call the Nubian civilization was kind of born around 800 BC.  During the Old and Middle Kingdom as well as early 18th Dynasty, the civilization in that region was Kerma.  During the reign of Tuthmosis I Kerma was conquered by Egypt, and campaigns further south were carried out during the reign of Hatshepsut.  So yes, the logic for saying Hatshepsut could be called a Queen of Ethiopia is justifiable.

 I don't think the similarity between Make-Ra (A name of Hatshepsut) and Makeda (The name of the Queen of Sheba in the Ethiopian traditions) is a coincidence. I think various Egyptian Jews, first at Elephantine and then later in Alexandria and the Onias colony (and maybe much later Coptic Christians), drew the same conclusion Velikovsky thinks they did, and began giving The Queen of Sheba that name (adjusting it to remove the pagan god). And this may have influenced Josephus who was very familiar with Alexandrian Jewish traditions.

I can't make up my mind if I feel the Punt expedition was her visit to Solomon.  The arguments for it being synonymous with or part of Retenu (the Egyptian name for Canaan) are valid, but so are plenty of arguments for it being in the South. Maybe there was more then one land called Punt and "God's Land", after all the Egyptians believed in more then one god.  Maybe even her specific Punt expedition was to more then one place.

The fact that Parahu and Ati (of the Punt expedition) are often refereed to as King and Queen is based on creative assumptions.  Breasted translated Parahu's title as "Chief" and refereed to Ati only as his wife.

Velikovsky saw Parahu as being Paruah father of Jehosophat governor of Issachar from 1 Kings 4:17.  Numbers 26:23 dealing with the offspring of Issachar says "Of the sons of Issachar after their families: of Tola, the family of the Tolaites: of Pua, the family of the Punites:"  So maybe the Punite clan has something to do with where the name Punt came from.

But there are also Pre-Islamic Arabian legends that say the Sheba kingdom of Yemen once had a ruler named Phar’an or "Pharaoh" who annexed Ophir and Havilah.  But after that King Sheba was ruled only by Women.

Genesis 10:30 referring to the sons of Joktan including Sheba, Ophir and Havilah settling near a mountain called Sephar. That mountain is Mount Zafar in the hear of Yemen, where the Capital of the Himyarite kingdom was.  Also the Kingdom of Hadramaut came from Joktan's son Hazarmaveth.

The idea of Punt being the same as Sheba is suggested in Nicholas Clapp's book about Sheba.

Tuthmosis III had three mysteries foreign wives.  Menhet, Menqi and Merti.  All three seem to have been Semitic.  Two are said to be West Semitic, the idea that they could be daughters of Solomon or Rehoboam or Jeroboam I find interesting.  I have also read it suggested that one could have been from Sheba, and thus used to support the idea of Punt being Sheba.

Also, while this is mostly irrelevant to the actual study here.  I feel like saying that I also disapprove of the desire to interpret Solomon and Sheba as Romantically and/or Sexually involved with each other.  The Bible gives no hints of that, the fact that it nearly universally happens in Extra-Biblical expansions just speaks the problems society has with gender relations.

Update: A follow up I did about the Magi.

Tuesday, April 22, 2014

About Ahab, Labaya, Mesha and the Amarna era.

I agree with Velikovsky's argument on Jehoshaphat as Ebed-Tov/Abdi-Heba King of Jerusalem and Mesha King of Moab with the Mesh of the Amarna letters. The Amarna letters also list 3 of the Captains of Jehoshaphat from II Chronicles 17:14-19. Addudani/Addadani=Adna and Ada-danu mentioned by Shalmaneser in 825 BC, "Son of Zuchru" = "son of Zichri", Iahzibada=Iehozabad/Jehozabad.

One objection to the proposed model is that during the Amarna period Burnaburiash, king of Karduniash and Assur-uballit, king of Assyria, are already identified as Burnaburiash II, a Kassite king, and Assur-uballit I, King of Assyria, who lived in the 14th century. Unfortunately, this synchronism is just coincidental and has hampered the uncovering of the true situation. The identification Of Burnaburiash as a Kassite has great difficulties. Amarna Burnaburiash, proclaimed himself to be a 'Great King', and claimed Assyrians were his subjects (Letter 9). Burnaburiash II, the Kassite king, never ruled over Assyria nor referred to himself as 'Great King'. The identification of Amarna Assur-uballit has equal difficulties. The Armana Assur-uballit's father was Assur-nadin-ahhe but no ancestor of King Assur-uballit I of Assyria was known by that name. Furthermore, Assuruballit's role as spoiler of Shuttarna II, the Mitanni King is doubtful. The Mitanni king forced his vassals to pay him tribute to give to an unnamed Assyrian king.  According to Roux "Without shooting an arrow, Assur-uballit I not only freed his country from the Mitanni domination but brought about the downfall of the kingdom to which his fathers had paid tribute" [Roux, G. p260]. History shows that Assur-uballit I was a vassal of the Hurrians who ruled Nuzi and Arraphka only a few miles from Asshur. His inscriptions never mentioned any tribute from Khanigalbat, nor did he use the title 'Great King' or 'King of the Universe' as his Amarna namesake did. Gadd has to admit that it is strange history to receive rewards for rebellion -"the wealth, the princes and even the territory of his former sovereign" - instead of punishment [Gadd, 1975, p. 27].

Who, then, is Burnaburiash? The Burnaburiash of the el-Amarna letters ruled Babylon sometime in 910-880 RC. When Babylonian king, Nabu-apla-iddina, died about 910 BIC, his son, Marduk-zakir-shumi, ascended the throne. His brother Marduk-Bel-usate rebelled against him and he was forced to call on Shalmaneser III to help him. Shalmaneser defeated Marduk-Bel-usate and then "joined Babylonia and Assyria together". Thus, Shalmaneser III was the king of Babylon during the Amarna era. This agrees with Velikovsky's identification [Velikovsky, 1952]. Many kings who conquered foreign lands took another name. It is possible that Shalmaneser took the name Burnaburiash as king of Babylon. Shalmaneser III also took the titles 'Great King', 'King of the Universe' [Oppenheim, 1969a, p.233]. Thus he meets the conditions necessary for the Amarna king, Burnaburiash.

A seal of Kidin-Marduk, son of Sa-ilima-damqa, 'the Great Official of Burnaburiash', the 'King of All', was found in Mycenaean strata at Thebes Greece [Bacon, 1971, p.87]. This stratum is Mycenaean. Its Burnaburiash belongs to the Amarna era and per RC must be Shalmaneser III. Archaeologists found lapis lazuli and agate cylinder seals in the same strata [Platon, N. 1964. p.859-61]. The seals were classified as Mycenaean, Kassite/Babylonian of the 14th century and older Babylonian. One was classified as Mitannian and another was Syro-Hittite. According to the RC model, the Mitannian, Syro-Hittite and Mycenaean era is the 10th and 9th century but the Kassite and older Babylonian seals are dated to the 14th and 15th century. But, Sa-ilima-damqa is a very rare name. It is found in Assyria during only one reign, that of Assurnasirpal. He is the eponym for year 880 GAD. His son Kidin-Marduk is the same generation as Shalmaneser III. Thus, the Kassite and older Babylonian seals are not a product of 14th century Babylon but the 9th century.

In Shalmaneser's 6th year, he faced a coalition of forces headed by a commander named Biridri. The coalition included Aduni and Matinu-Baal and the Prince of Asu [Oppenheim, 1969a]. Velikovsky identifies Biridia in the Amarna period as the Commandant of Meggido. He notes a King Aduni mentioned in Letter 75; a Mut-Baal sender of Letter 255; and in Letter 150, Abimilki, King of Tyre, mentions Uzu [Velikovsky, 1952, pp. 310-11]. Hittite King, Suppilulimas I wrote a congratulatory letter to Pharaoh Tutankhamun who could be Saplel, King of Hattina, mentioned in Shalmaneser's annals [Oppenheim, 1969b] These Syrian rulers appear both in the Amarna letters and the 9th century annals of Shalmaneser III. Lastly, in Letter 55 to Akhenaten, Abimilki, king of Tyre, refers to himself three times as the "servant of Shalmatiata". The fall of Tyre to Shalmaneser in year 18, 897 BIC, agrees with the date of the Letter 155 in the reign of Akhenaten is 898-882 RC.

Burnaburiash's Amarna (Letter 9) complained of Egypt's reception of the Assyrian king because he had asked Egypt to stop trade with him in a prior letter [Oppenheim, 1967, p. 116]. Burnaburiash's claim that Assyrians were his subjects and his objection to Egypt's recognition of the Assyrians are consistent only if Assyria was in revolt against him at that time. It was led initially by Assur-danin-apli, son of Shalmaneser. Shalmaneser was forced to seek refuge in Babylon. After his death, his son, Shamsi-Adad V, fought for several years to quell the rebellion. During that time, a non-canonical Assur-uballit could have claimed the throne of Assyria, as 'King of All'.

I agree about the Habiru being bandits or mercenaries, not an ethnic term.

In an earlier post I said I disagreed with Velikovsky's identification for the Northern Kingdom ruler and went along with many others who insist Labaya must be the Northern Kingdom ruler. But I've gone over the arguments again and changed my mind.  Gubla is used of Byblos but also of other cities too. So now Rib-Addi king of Sumur and Gubla the Northern Kingdom Omrid ruler of Jezreel and Samaria I do agree with.

But I disagree on that being Ahab, since the Rebellion of "The people of Mesh" (Mesha and his Moabites) is going on right from the beginning of this period, we're in the reign of Jehoram not Ahab.

The whole Jezebel-Nefertiti connection suggested by SpecialtyInterests I don't like.

Who is Labaya then?

Labaya and his questionable behavior seems to have some link to the "people of the rebel Mesh".  2 Chronicles 20 says Ammonites were allied with Mesha's rebellion.  "It came to pass after this also, that the children of Moab, and the children of Ammon, and with them other beside the Ammonites, came against Jehoshaphat to battle".  Shalmaneser records that at the Battle of Qargar "King Ba'asa, son of Ruhubi, of the land of Ammon sent 100 soldiers."  Note, "son of Ruhubi" here could mean "House of Ruhubi".  Labaya's son Mutbaal ruled in the Transjordan region, the geographical clues for Labaya himself are unclear and possibly misleading, Shechem was not his Capital as some have assumed for example.

On the other hand Labaya's role seems too duplicitous to be an obvious ally like the Amonites.   But I'm still leaning towards a Transjordan location.

On further thought I feel that's unlikely to.  Those who want to make Labaya a northern Kingdom ruler like to minimize the references to Shechem in the Labaya letter, saying they don't make Shechem his capital city but only that he's responsible for it.  But in my current view, I'm coming to think Maybe this is simply telling us Labaya is a governor entrusted with the city of Shechem, and maybe also areas around Shechem like Mount Gerizim and Ebal.

Velikovsky did NOT believe in the infallibility of Scripture. Which of course is an assumption many critics of revised chronology make about all revised chronologists. This fact about him is most apparent in the part of Ages in Chaos about the Death of Ahab. He takes it from what he saw as a contradiction between this verse.

The Tel Dan Stele discovered since Veilikovsky's time confirms Jehoram existed, but creates other confusion.

II Kings 1:17 "So he died according to the word of the LORD which Elijah had spoken. And Jehoram reigned in his stead in the second year of Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah; because he had no son."

And these two verses.

II Kings 3:1 "Now Jehoram the son of Ahab began to reign over Israel in Samaria the eighteenth year of Jehoshaphat king of Judah, and reigned twelve years."

II Kings 8:16 "And in the fifth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel, Jehoshaphat being then king of Judah, Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah began to reign."

There is no contradiction here however, he'd have known this if he'd studied Ussher's chronology. Jehoshaphat made his son a co-ruler for the latter years of his reign, this is why the 18th year of Jehoshaphat can also be the second year of Jehoram.

As for the fact that Ahab did Repent after Elijah rebuked him over the Naboth business. That was negated when Ahab sinned again believing the False Prophets over Micaiah.

But Velikovsky creates a whole convoluted theory that Ahab survived the battle of Ramoth-Gilead and lived another 9 years.

Mesha of Moab's rebellion was right after Israel's defeat at Ramoth-Gilead, Velikovsky sees the Moabite stone documenting this event as saying it was in the Middle of Ahab's reign, not after he died. First off the stone sounds like Mesha's relating a Prophesy made by a Prophet of Chemosh, who's Prophecy may have came true but not completely accurately. But also if it was made immediately at the start of the rebellion he may not have heard of Ahab's death yet.  At any rate Ahab is not named on the Stone.

Regardless of those arguments, not all readings of the Mesha Stele even agree with the one Velikovsky used to support his theory.

As for his argument that Rib-Addi refers to himself as an old man?  Solomon is called an old man when he died, but he never lived to see 60.  We don't know how old Jehoram was when he took the throne, but I think it likely all three of Ahab's named children where born before Omri died.  The context of the letter is mainly that he was in too poor health to travel to visit Pharaoh.  He could have been lying/making excuses and just didn't want to go to Egypt, or he could have had any number of illnesses or injuries.

As for his argument about there being not even enough time according to the Assyrian inscriptions of the reign of Shalmaneser between Qarqar (where an Ahab of Israel or Jezreel is mentioned) and when Jehu gave his tribute.  A few possibilities.

1. The two inscriptions could have been counting his reign differently, his becoming King of Babylon presents one excuse for different starting points.

2. Some have argued that Jehu is just an incomplete inscription of Jehoram.  Based on Jehu not being a son of Omri as the inscription says, and a purely conjectural opinion that Jehu wouldn't give tribute to Shalmaneser.  The latter argument however is a naive interpretation of Jehu's character.  And for the former, the Assyrians called the Northern Kingdom in general the "House of Omri" well after his dynasty ended.

3. The leaders Shalmaneser fought at Qargar he refers to in general as Sars (princes) and refers to no individual one by a specific title.  The Bible in this period uses Sars frequently of City governors, Assyrians never used Sar this way strictly, but this refers to foreign leaders here, who knows how accurate their info on their enemies even was.

Ahab had at least 70 sons we're told, only two are named, and probably neither of those even included in the referenced 70 who Jehu massacred at Jezreel.  Kings especially back then usually named at least one son after themselves.  And when you have that many your bound to run out of original ideas.  So I think the Ahab at Qarqar may actually have been a brother of the reigning King and son of Ahab who was appointed Sar of Jezreel and entrusted with some key military authority and thus also been the General sent to command Israel's contribution to the Qargar war.

Or maybe this Israelite Sar was simply refereed to as "Ben Ahab" (Son of Ahab)  but some poor communication caused the Assyrian record to only hear the Ahab part.

But also, I don't think Jehoram was that king's original birth name, Jezebel would not likely have given her Son a Yahweh theophoric name.  We are told Jerhoram broke with her Mother's religion and returned to the religion of Jeroboam (which I believe was never a non Yahweh religion, but simply worshiped him in an Idolatrous fashion).  So he may have taken the name Jehoram when he did that, but was at birth Ahab II.

Leaving Amarna now, lets go to other Egyptian material from the same period.

Shasu is a term used in the Soleb Temple built by Amenhotep III and latter copied by Seti I and Ramesses II.  The 19th Dynasty Pharaohs may not have accurately known what the various Shasus originally refereed to.

They're all in the Transjorabn region, the list mentions six groups of Shasu: the Shasu of S'rr, the Shasu of Rbn, the Shasu of Sm't, the Shasu of Wrbr, the Shasu of Yhw, and the Shasu of Pysps.  And there are also refrences elsewhere to a Shasu of Edom,  Since Seir was the holy mountain of Edom they're likely the same group.  The Shasu of Rbn I think is likely the tribe of Reuben.

 The "Shasu of Yhw" is popularly speculated as having something to do with the Biblical YHWH, and I indeed believe there were Yahweh worshipers in the Transjordan region at this time.  But this would be the only occasion where the name after Shasu refers to a deity they worship rather then a tribal or regional name.

I then thought, "Yhw is just as similar to Yhwo (Jehu) as it is to YHWH".  And Jehu was in Rammoth-Giliead, a Transjordan region, before he was anointed King and given his mission to overthrow the Omrids.  Maybe the Shasu of Yhw are the Shasu of Jehu, maybe Jehu was not his personal name but the name of a Clan he was the leader of?

For a different perspective you can read Amarna Names.  The least credible claim made there is Labaya as Mesha, but the argument for the name actually meaning "The Moabite" is interesting.  Now I have agreed here that Labaya was in cahoots with Mesha.  Maybe he was called the Moabite because he was ethnically Moabite or half Moabite?

Thursday, April 3, 2014

The refrence to Chaneferre in Artapanus

Artapanus of Alexandria, was a Hellenistic Jewish writer who's works haven't survived directly, we know them form Eusebius and Clement of Alexandria quoting Alexander Polyhistor's quotations of him.

Sites on the subject of revised chronology make much of him referring to a Chaneferre as a Pharaoh linked to the life of Moses.  The name Chaneferre is very rare and can only be linked to 1 known Pharaoh,  Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV

While other facts far more solid then a much later Jewish writer reciting Extra-Biblical legends lend credence to looking for Moses in this period of the Thirteenth Dynasty, there is a major Problem with taking what we're told Artapanus said as face value.

Clement of Alexandria Stormata Book 1 Chapter 23.
And so Artapanus, in his work On the Jews, relates that Moses, being shut up in custody by Chenephres, king of the Egyptians, on account of the people demanding to be let go from Egypt, the prison being opened by night, by the interposition of God, went forth, and reaching the palace, stood before the king as he slept, and aroused him; and that the latter, struck with what had taken place, bade Moses tell him the name of the God who had sent him; and that he, bending forward, told him in his ear; and that the king on hearing it fell speechless, but being supported by Moses, revived again.
Eusebius  of Caesarea Praeparatio Evangelic Book 9 chapter 27
'AND Artapanus says, in his book Concerning the Jews, that after the death of Abraham, and of his son Mempsasthenoth, and likewise of the king of Egypt, his son Palmanothes succeeded to the sovereignty.
'This king behaved badly to the Jews; and first he built Kessa, and founded the temple therein, and then built the temple in Heliopolis.
'He begat a daughter Merris, whom he betrothed to a certain Chenephres, king of the regions above Memphis (for there were at that time many kings in Egypt); and she being barren took a supposititious child from one of the Jews, and called him Mouses (Moses): but by the Greeks he was called, when grown to manhood, Musaeus.
'And this Moses, they said, was the teacher of Orpheus; and when grown up he taught mankind many useful things. For he was the inventor of ships, and machines for laying stones, and Egyptian arms, and engines for drawing water and for war, and invented philosophy. Further he divided the State into thirty-six Nomes, and. appointed the god to be worshipped by each Nome, and the sacred writing for the priests, and their gods were cats, and dogs, and ibises: he also apportioned an especial district for the priests.
'All these things he did for the sake of keeping the sovereignty firm and safe for Chenepbres. For previously the multitudes, being under no order, now expelled and now set up kings, often the same persons, but sometimes others.
'For these reasons then Moses was beloved by the multitudes, and being deemed by the priests worthy to be honoured like a god, was named Hermes, because of his interpretation of the Hieroglyphics.
'But when Chenephres perceived the excellence of Moses he envied him, and sought to slay him on some plausible pretext. And so when the Aethiopians invaded Egypt, Chenephres supposed that he had found a convenient opportunity, and sent Moses in command of a force against them, and enrolled the body of husbandmen for him, supposing that through the weakness of his troops he would easily be destroyed by the enemy.
'But Moses with about a hundred thousand of the husbandmen came to the so-called Nome of Hermopolis, and there encamped; and sent generals to pre-occupy the country, who gained remarkable successes in their battles. He adds that the people of Heliopolis say that this war went on for ten years.
'So Moses, because of the greatness of his army, built a city in this place, and therein consecrated the ibis, because this bird kills the animals that are noxious to man. And he called it Hermes' city.
'Thus then the Aethiopians, though they were enemies, became so fond of Moses, that they even learned from him the custom of circumcision: and not they only, but also all the priests.
'But when the war was ended, Chenephres pretended to welcome him, while in reality continuing to plot against him. So he took his troops from him, and sent some to the frontiers of Aethiopia for an advanced guard; and ordered others to demolish the temple in Diospolis which had been built of baked brick, and build another of stone from the quarries of the neighbouring mountain, and appointed Nacheros superintendent of the building.
'And when he was come with Moses to Memphis, he asked him whether there was anything else useful for mankind, and he said the breed of oxen, because by means of them the land is ploughed: and Chenephres having given the name Apis to a bull, commanded the troops to found a temple for him, and bade them bring and bury there the animals which had been consecrated by Moses, because he wished to bury the inventions of Moses in oblivion. 'But when the Egyptians were alienated from him, he bound his friends by an oath not to report to Moses the plot which was being contrived against him, and he appointed the men who were to kill him.
'When however no one would obey him, Chenephres reproached Chanethothes, whom he had especially addressed; and he, on being thus reproached, promised to make the attempt when he found an opportunity.
'And Merris having died about this time, Chenephres professed to give the body to Moses and Chanethothes to carry it over into regions beyond Egypt and bury it, supposing that Moses would be slain by Chanethothes.
'But while they were on the way, one of those who were cognizant of the plot reported it to Moses; and he being on his guard buried Merris himself, and called the river and the city thereby Meroe. And this Merris is honoured by the people of the country not less highly than Isis.
'Then Aaron the brother of Moses, having learned about the plot, advised his brother to flee into Arabia; and he took the advice, and sailed across the Nile from Memphis, intending to escape into Arabia.
'But when Chanethothes was informed of the flight of Moses, he lay in ambush intending to kill him; and when he saw him coming, he drew his sword against him, but Moses was too quick for him, and seized his hand, and drew his sword and slew Chanethothes.
'So he made his escape into Arabia, and lived with Raguel the ruler of the district, having married his daughter. And Raguel wished to make an expedition against the Egyptians in order to restore Moses, and procure the government for his daughter and son-in-law; but Moses prevented it, out of regard for his own nation: and Raguel forbidding him to march against the Arabs, ordered him to plunder Egypt.
'About the same time Chenephres died, having been the very first person attacked by elephantiasis; and he is said to have incurred this misfortune because he ordered the Jews to wear linen garments and not to wear woollen clothing, in order that they might be conspicuous, and be punished by him.
'But Moses prayed to God now at last to put an end to the sufferings of the tribes. And God being propitiated, fire, it is said, suddenly blazed up out of the earth, and went on burning though there was no wood nor any other fuel in the place. And Moses was frightened at the occurrence and took to flight; but a divine voice spake to him, to march against Egypt, and rescue the Jews and lead them into their old country.
'So he took courage and determined to lead a hostile force against the Egyptians: but first he came to his brother Aaron. And when the king of Egypt heard of the arrival of Moses, he called him before him, and asked what he had come for: and he said, Because the Lord of the world commanded him to deliver the Jews.
'And when the king heard this, he shut him up in prison. But when it was night, all the doors of the prison-house opened of their own accord, and of the guards some died, and some were sunk in sleep, and their weapons broken in pieces.
'So Moses passed out and came to the palace; and finding the doors opened he went in, and the guards here also being sunk in sleep he woke up the king. And he being dismayed at what had happened bade Moses tell him the name of the God who sent him, scoffing at him: but Moses bent down and whispered in his ear, and when the king heard it he fell speechless, but was held fast by Moses and came to life again.
'And he wrote the name in a tablet and sealed it up; and one of the priests who made light of what was written in the tablet was seized with a convulsion and died.
'Also the king told him to work some sign for him, and Moses threw down the rod which he held and turned it into a serpent; and when they were all frightened, he seized it by the tail and took it up, and made it a rod again.
'Then he went forth a little, and smote the Nile with the rod, and the river became flooded and deluged the whole of Egypt, and it was from that time its inundation began: and the water became stagnant, and stank, and killed all living things in the river, and the people were perishing of thirst.
'But when these wonders had been wrought, the king said that after a month he would let the people go, if Moses would restore the river to its proper state; and he smote the water again with his rod, and checked the stream.
'When this was done, the king summoned the priests from above Memphis, and said that he would kill them all, and demolish the temples, unless they also would work some wonder. And then they by some witchcraft and incantations made a serpent, and changed the colour of the river.
'And the king, being puffed up with pride at what was done, began to maltreat the Jews with every kind of vengeance and punishment. Then Moses, seeing this, both wrought other signs, and also smote the earth with his rod, and brought up a kind of winged animal to harass the Egyptians, and all their bodies broke out in boils. And as the physicians were unable to heal the sufferers, the Jews thus again gained relief.
'Again Moses by his rod brought up frogs, and besides them locusts and lice. And for this reason the Egyptians dedicate the rod in every temple, and to Isis likewise, because the earth is Isis, and sent up these wonders when smitten by the rod.
'But as the king still persisted in his folly, Moses caused hail and earthquakes by night, so that those who fled from the earthquake were killed by the hail, and those who sought shelter from the hail were destroyed by the earthquakes. And at that time all the houses fell in, and most of the temples.
'At last after having incurred such calamities the king let the Jews go: and they, after borrowing from the Egyptians many drinking-vessels, and no little raiment, and very much other treasure, crossed the rivers on the Arabian side, and after traversing a wide space came on the third day to the Red Sea.
'Now the people of Memphis say, that Moses being acquainted with the country waited for the ebb, and took the people across the sea when dry. But the people of Heliopolis say, that the king hastened after them with a great force, having also with him the consecrated animals, because the Jews were carrying off the property which they had borrowed from the Egyptians.
'There came, however, to Moses a divine voice bidding him to smite the sea with the rod [and that it should divide]: and when Moses heard it, he touched the water with the rod, and so the stream divided, and the force passed over by a dry path.
'But when the Egyptians went in with them and were pursuing them, a fire, it is said, shone out upon them from the front, and the sea overflowed the path again, and the Egyptians were all destroyed by the fire and the flood: but the Jews having escaped this danger spent forty years in the wilderness, God raining down meal for them like millet, similar in colour to snow. And Moses they say was tall and ruddy, with long white hair, and dignified: and he performed these deeds when he was about eighty-nine years old.'
 Khaneferre Sobekhotep only reigned about 10 years according to what we can gather from Archeological information.  Also his capital was the Fayum region, so saying he ruled only above Memphis doesn't work.  So maybe Artapanus knew something helpful that's since been lost, but his narrative is clearly exaggerated. 

Wednesday, April 2, 2014

Abraham was from Urkesh not Sumeria.

It's a pretty controversial position to take, that the Ur Kassadim "Ur of the Chaldeans" Abraham came from wasn't Ur in Southern Mesopotamia, but a city in modern Turkey.
First I'll copy this information from the Urkesh Wikipedia Talk page.
The gratuitous polemic "There seems to be a need to prove that Urkesh was not Ur of the Chaldees" has no place in this article, since no such link can be proven or disproven. While there may indeed be no link between Urkesh and the Biblical "Ur Kasdim", the obsessive and repeated attempts by archeologists, historians, and scholars to force an identification of Ur Kasdim with Sumerian "Ur" have proven groundless, and none of the aforementioned seems to have the courage to simply admit that the link is tenuous at best. The following are worth bearing in mind: 1. Sumerian "Ur" is a pure misnomer. In Sumerian cuneiform, it is called "Urima", and in Accadian "Uriwa", and the root of both names URI, is demonstrably of different form from the Hebraic name Ur. 2. The "Chaldees" is not the name of a country in the Bible, but of a tribe, Chaldeans. They are depicted in later books of the Bible as conquerors from outside Mesopotamia who conquered the area and took control of Babylon. However, there is no mention of the Chaldeans as a tribe anywhere in the Pentateuch, only the refererence to "Ur Kasdim". The name Kasdim may be ethymologically related to a relative of Abraham, Kesed, who, together with Aram, are descendants of Abraham's brother Nahor based in the vicinity of Harran, in Upper Mesopotamia. This region, known in Genesis as Aram Naharaim, is very clearly and repeatedly referred to as the place of origin of the Hebrew patriarchs, NOT Sumeria (which is referred to in Genesis as the 'Plain of Shinar'). There is no mention of Chaldeans active in this region until the late Israelite monarchy, more than 1000 years later, and their is no precedent in the Pentateuch for an anachronism on a scale of this magnitude. After the Exodus from Egypt, in Deuteronomy 26, the Hebrews are asked to recite a passage to recall their patrimony: "A wandering Aramean was my ancestor; he went down into Egypt and lived there as an alien, few in number, and there he became a great nation, mighty and populous." It is clear that the association of their patrimony was with rustic pastoralism, and not with the settled urbanised city life characteristic of the bustling urban metropolis and port city of Sumerian "Ur". The lifestyles of the early patriarchs simply cannot be tallied with those of the cityfolk of the Sumerian metropoli. It is evident from the Biblical narratives that the patrimony of the Hebrews is placed in the vicinity of Harran. I do not believe that Urkesh was Ur Kasdim, and in my opinion, a far more likely candidate for it is Urfa, AKA Edessa, which is regarded in Islamic tradition as the birthplace of Abraham. Such a tradition is not a recent invention, but stemmed from ancient Syriac Christian tradition linked to the city, which in turn must have come from the very ancient Jewish community there (one of the ancient Greek names for the town was reputedly Αντιόχεια της Ιουδαίας , i.e. Antioch of the Jews.) In fact, one of the earliest known Hellenistic Greek names of the city, was Ορρα (ORRA, Romanized form Orrha). Such a link cannot be made with certainty, but it is the certainty with which sholars identify Sumerian "Ur" with Ur of the Chaldees when not a shred of evidence exists to justify such a link that ought to raise eyebrows. --Jacob Davidson
Urkesh also had a King named  Te'irru . He's probably not the same person as Terah the Father of Abraham, but often people are named after Kings, or Kings are named after famous people.

I agree with the Specialtyinterests site's argument for the Kassites and the Kassadim/Chaldeans being the same people.  They connect the etymology very well.  But I'm not sure I agree with moving down the Kassite period.
The point is that identification verifies that the Kassadim where NOT in Mesopotamia until well after the time of Abraham, at the soonest the Kassites came to Shinar at the start of the Hycsos/Judges period.  They originally migrated from a mountain region in modern Turkey, which one is uncertain, the Zargos mountains are popular , but the Taurus mountains where Urkesh is are also possible.  They may have inhabited more then one range.

I enjoy Velikovsky's article on Hammurabi.

Saturday, March 29, 2014

Ham, Mizraim and the origin of Egypt

I want to make a quick post about what I think on the very beginning of Egypt's history.

First I want to explain that that the Tale of Nations (Genesis 10) is not necessarily listing all of Noah's grandchildren and even less so all the great grandchildren.  It's listing the founders of the earliest nations.  So I don't think Ham stopped reproducing at only 4 or 5 male children and a daughter to marry each.  And I certainly don't think all Egyptians need to go back to one of the 7 offspring listed of Mizraim, in fact strictly speaking I think none of them do, those are tribes that broke off from Mizraim's main nation and helped Phut populate the rest of North Africa.  Josephus says these off shoot nations were wiped out during a mysterious ancient Ethiopic War which was ended by Moses.  Whether or not there is any truth to that, the Philistines descend from an intermingling of two of them, they're NOT the prst of the Ramses III inscriptions and have nothing to do with Crete or the Agean, they were in Caanan already in the days of Abraham.

The Bible refers to Egypt as "the land of Ham" in Psalms 78:51; 105:23,27; 106:22; 1Ch 4:40.  The Egyptian word Kmt or Kem is another word the Egyptians used for themselves, and it looks like it could be related to the name of Ham, which in the Hebrew is Cham or Kham or Khem.  Claims that the Egyptians worshiped a Horned god named something like Khum of Chum have actually not stood up under scrutiny.  Based on the above observation however, I shall conjecture that Egypt is the land were Ham himself settled after the dispersion.

The name of Mizraim ends in the dual suffix -āyim, perhaps referring to the "two Egypts", and has also been interpreted to mean "the two straits".  I've seen it suggested that Mizraim is really a term that implies a set of Twins.

Egypt was a dual kingdom, Upper Egypt (the south) and Lower Egypt (the North).  The myth of brothers Osiris and Seth/Set in Egyptian mythology was not simply a matter of Osiris is Good and Set is evil, Many traditions about Set also affiliate him with being a Hero who defeats Apep (not to be confused with the name of Apepi the latter Hycsos king, however similar they seem to us their distinct in how their written in Egyptian) a chaotic deity.  And before the Second Intermediate period it wasn't uncommon for there to be sects of the Egyptian religion that favored Set over Osiris.  The vilification of Set seems to have happened largely in response to the Hycsos occupation as they favored worshiping Set.   The key distinction here is that Set had his seat in Lower Egypt and Osiris in Upper Egypt. 

I think it's possible Osiris and Set were the Mizraim twins, and that Isis and Nephthys were daughters of Ham they married.  Ham divided Egypt between them before he died, but they inevitably fought a war with each other.

Horus was the son of Osiris and his successor who defeated Set.  That is well known but what isn't as well known is that the Turin Papyrus lists a second Horus reigning at the end of the dynasty of the gods, between the two are Thoth and Maat.  Even less well known is that Horus's wife Hathor is depicted in the Dendera Temple as bearing him a son named Ihy who is also called Hor-seme-tawy.

The earliest known ruler of Pre-Dynastic Egypt that archeology has uncovered is Iry-Hor in Upper Egypt.
I think he is Ihy/Horus the Younger.

Another theory I'd considered in the past was started with the fact that Bill Cooper in Chapter 6 of After The Flood, argues that the name Seth in place of Sceaf in some genealogies could justifiably come from Japheth.  I instantly thought of the Egyptian Seth/Set but didn't make much of it till I read on the Wkipedia page for Red Hair that that the Egyptian considered Red Hair a sign of Descent from Set, and Red Hair is today at least most common among certain Japhethite people like the Irish and some Scandinavians (Thor was usually depicted with Red Hair unlike Marvel Comics and the MCU).

Adding to that that Seth and Osiris like Iapetos in Greek mythology are made the direct offspring of Heaven and Earth (but Egypt switched the genders).  I thought about identifying Osiris with Ham and Japheth with Set.

But I now know better then to simplistically think such ethnic features tell us for certain who someone descends from.   The Bible arguably identifies Red Hair with Esau/Edom and David, showing it's not limited to Japheth.  Maybe Set was a twin born with Red Hair like Esau was?

And I'm uncomfortable with any theory that vilifies Ham due to their ties to Racism.  Canaan and Canaan alone sinned in Genesis 9.

It's possible I think that Satan inspired Egyptian mythology to give the name Seth to fratricide not originally named Seth in order to plant a seed for perverting Genesis 4 to say it was Seth who killed his Brother.

Additional note.  You can read my view on The Great Pyramid here.

Tuesday, March 25, 2014

The Tribe of Dan and the Sea Peoples inscirptions.

I agree with Velikovsky on Ramses III being the Nektenbos of Greek historians who revolted against Persia.  The 30th Dynasty according to conventional chronology.

I agree also about the Prstt being the Persian Empire and "Peoples of the Sea" as Ionian Greeks.  But I do feel his desire in the question of the Sardan/Sherdan/Shardana to prove Sardis over Sardinia is unnecessary, Sardinia was colonized by Sardis, their having a similar name isn't a coincidence.  And Herdotus refers to Sardinians of this time period serving as pirates and mercenaries.

But his identification of the "Peoples of the Islands" the Denyen, as Athens I think is silly. The Denyen are also in the Amarna letters where they are in northern Syria, very northern, by the modern Turkish border. Associated with Hammath. They're also identified with Adana is Cilicia.

"And of Dan he said, Dan is a lion's whelp: he shall leap from Bashan." Deuteronomy 33:22

The Tribe of Dan originally settled just north of the Philistine Lands, around the port city of Joppa/Jaffa modern Tel-Aviv. The books of Joshua and Judges both record events when Danites left their allotted land, traveled north, conquered a city and renamed it Dan.

"And the coast of the children of Dan went out too little for them: therefore the children of Dan went up to fight against Leshem, and took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and possessed it, and dwelt therein, and called Leshem, Dan, after the name of Dan their father." Joshua 19:47

The longer Judges 18 account, where the City is Laish, is often assumed to be the same event. There are however key differences between the two accounts:

1. In the Book of Joshua the children of Dan had received an inheritance in the south but it was insufficient for them and so they went to fight against Leshem. In Judges however the Danites were in the region of Zorah and Eshtaol (in the south) they had not taken possession of their own.

2. In Judges, at least at first, only six hundred went forth after receiving the report of a reconnoitering mission: on the other hand, the Book of Joshua may be understood to say that all (or nearly all) of Dan went to fight.

3. In the Book of Joshua the city taken is called Leshem: In Judges the city is called LAISH. Some Commentators have tried to state that "Leshem" and "Laish" are different forms of the same word but "leshem" in Hebrew is a type of precious stone (maybe amber) while "laish" means a young male lion.

The Joshua account refers to the Dan that is frequently used as an idiom of the Northern Border of the Kingdom, where Jeroboam built one of his Calf Idols, and which on the map of modern Israel is in the Golan heights on the Lebanon border.

The Judges event is clearly much further north. They encountered Sidonians, but those Sidonians are also implied to be far from home. Laish is also known as Luash and the Danites who migrated there became known as Dananu.

"The king of Sma'al in the valley north of ASI (Orontes embouchemont) on the edge of LUASH (LIASH) called himself "KING of the DANIM" i.e. of the Danes of Dan. The Danes (Dananu) also controlled the neighbouring area of Cilicia and at one stage their capital was Adana by Tarsis of Cilicia and their suzerainity reached as far north as Karatepe. A bi-lingual inscription of theirs found at Karatepe employs a Phoenician type of Hebrew and a version of Hittite. Branches of the Hittites in Anatolia neighboured the Dananu of Cilicia. This northern portion of Dan is referred to variously as Dananu, Danau, Denye, Denyen, Danuna. "

Above I've borrowed a great deal from Britam's "Dan and the Serpent Way" study. I don't agree with all of Britam's premise obviously, or any other form of British Israelism, but Dan does have a unique history.
Secular scholars agree on connecting the Denyen to the Tribe of Dan, you can read about it on Wikipedia's Denyen and Dan pages, but the sequence is reversed.  They believe the Denyen traveled south and became incorporated into the Hebrew confederation. This supports their desire to claim that the various Tribes of Israel didn't even really have a common origin. Traditional chronology makes that argument easy for them but still doesn't make the Biblical picture impossible. But revised chronology makes it indisputable that The Bible's Dan came first.

The connection Dan has to Greece, is Biblically alluded to in Ezekiel 27. But that hardly means I take all the Greek myths about the Danoi/Danaans at face value.  The connection of Andromeda to Joppa is interesting, but I feel the true origins of the Agrid royal houses was Edom, and that this is a factor in how they got to Rome.

I've been reading articles on another website by an individual who believes Shishak was Ramses III.  His arguments do not beat out the argument for Tuthmosis III any more then Rohl's for Ramses II do, but once again I learned some new things studying a wrong theory.

Eldad ben Mahli ha-Dani commonly known as ELDAD THE DANITE was a 9th century Jewish traveler and philologist. The Encyclopedia Britannica describes him thus :-

"Probably originally from southern Arabia, Eldad visited Mesopotamia, Egypt, North Africa, and Spain and caused a stir by his account of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel. He himself claimed to be a descendant of the Danites, who, together with the tribes of Naphtali, Asher, and Gad, were said to have established a Jewish kingdom in Cush (Kush), variously interpreted as Ethiopia or, roughly, present-day Sudan."

He was probably of the Ethiopian Beta-Israel community who claim Danite descent.  Biblical Kush/Cush rendered Ethiopia in the Septuagint and KJV as well as New Testament usually refers broadly to all Black Africa and specifically to Nubia, but there are exceptions and I believe Isaiah 18 is among them.
It is how and when the tribe of Dan got to Ethiopia which is fascinating for our chronology.

The account can be found in Louis Ginzberg's monumental work "The Legends of the Jews".

Eldad recounts that at the time of Jeroboam after his return from Egypt and the breakup of the Kingdom into two parts (Judah and Benjamin under Rehoboam in the South and the rest of the tribes under Jeroboam in the North) the Northern King had a plan to attack Judah and once again have a United Kingdom. Jeroboam put that plan to the elders of the 10 tribes.

The elders suggested that the job of attacking the south should be placed in the hands of the Tribe of Dan who were referred to as "the most efficient of their warriors".

The tribe of Dan however refused the request to attack the South believing it a sin to attack and shed the blood of their fellow Children of Israel. They actually threatened to attack Jeroboam instead, according to Eldad.

This was averted only because "God prompted the Danites to leave the promised land" ....their destination, Egypt!
They tie this into their believing Jeroboam was contemporary with Ramses III.  I think Eldad's legend had pushed back the date of their migration to Egypt.  Likewise I believe the Ark is in Ethiopia, but the Solomon-Sheba-Menelik legend is a Christian Auxumite invention.  Gram Hancock (not a Christian) and Bob Cornuke (who is a Bible believing Christian) have argued a different rout for how The Ark came there.

First it was removed from the Temple when it was violated by King Manasseh.  Then was in the Elephantine Jewish Temple until it was destroyed in the time of Cambyses son of Cryus king of Persia.  Then it was on the Island of Tana Kirikos (a source of the Nile) until it was taken by the Auxumite kingdom in the 4th Century A.D.

The thing about the Elephantine Jewish colony is, it was created by Israelite mercenaries hired by Psammetichus who like his Ionian mercenaries helped him liberate Egypt from Assyria.  He gave them the colony as a reward and let them build a Temple there.  Thanks to Velikovsky we know Psammetichus is actually Seti The Great, and among those Ionian mercenaries were the Sherden/Sardan/Shardana and possibly Denyen.  Israelites could have easily come to help Seti out also, survivors of the Northern Kingdom wanting revenge on Assyria.

Attempts to connect other Sea Peoples (casual usage forgets the Denyen were not called Sea Peoples) with other Tribes have been made as well, from both Atheist and Christian viewpoints.  Weshesh has been argued to have a strong etymological connection to Asher.  Shekelesh has been argued to derive from both Issachar (Rabbinic tradition says the sea faring Zebulonites always had scholars of Issachar with them on their boats) and Shechem.  While most attempts at an Israelite origin for the Sherden make them also Danites, I feel like pointing ot that Numbers 46 lists a clan of Sardites as coming from Sered son of Zebulun, a Tribe that Genesis 49 seems to foretell a sea faring or port city destiny for.

The tale of Wenamun who was an elder in the Temple of Amun probably at the time of the Pharaoh Smendes of the XXIst Dynasty. He was sent to obtain timber and this is the only other reference to the Tjekker in the Egyptian annals besides the time of Ramses III.  supporters of Velikovsky's model know this was the later Persian period.

""And I arrived at Dor, a Tjekker-town, and Beder its Prince caused to be brought to me 50 loaves..............". (Egypt of the Pharaohs: Sir Alan Gardiner p. 307)"  Dor was a port town of the Tribe of Manasseh but was often actually inhabited by Asher.  1 Kings 4:11 says Solomon appointed Abinadab who was married to his daughter Taphath a prince over Dor. 

These theories need not conflict with Velikovsky's emphasis on their Ionian nature.  The list of Sea Powers (Thalassocracies) preserved by Eusebius from Diodorus has the dominant Sea Power when the Norhtern Kingdom fell as the Milesians (725-707 B.C.) and a generation or two later the Mileasian philosophers become the first Monotheists of ancient Greece.  The city is also known to have had a Phoenician element to their population.  The Milesians invaded Ireland around 509 B.C. displacing the Tutha de Danann who arrived in 701 B.C. from northern Europe.

 I date the invasions of Ireland based on Bill Cooper's dates from After The Flood.
 701 BC in our terms, the Firbolgs were subdued in their turn by the returning colony of Tuatha de Danaun.

The last colonisation of Ireland is then recorded under Anno Mundi 3500 (i.e. ca 504 BC):

    'The fleet of the sons of Milidh came to Ireland at the end of this year, to take it from the Tuatha de Danann, and they fought the battle of Sliabh Mis with them on the third day after landing.'
But his flaw is accepting other attempts to give the Tuatha Dé Danann descent from the Nemed led colony by making them the Fir Domnann. The Fir Domnann became the Dumnonii of Britain.

I believe the Denyen sometime after the Amarna era continued migrating, sometimes by Sea (Song of Deborah and Ezekiel 27 imply a Sea Faring nature for Dan).  Inspired the Danavas of Sanskrit mythology, but ultimately wound up in northern Europe, giving their name to rivers like the Danube and locations like Denmark. 

I think they sometimes maintained a loose trade and connection with the Danites in the Northern Kingdom, perhaps when Samaria's fall was drawing near many Danites fled to their far northern brethren, and brought Four sacred relics with them.  Then in 701 BC the Danites in Northern Europe came to the British isles and became the Tuatha De Danann of Irish legend and the Children of Don of Welsh legend.

In 504 BC Ireland was taken by those fleeing Miletus, but might have maintained strongholds on other islands for a few centuries.  Many eventually travailed west to Tir na nOg, being among the pre Colombian travelers to the new world.

Going back.  The modern Ethiopian Jews may not be the only African Jews to descend from this population.  But the Lemba are separate.

Eithiopia, from the Greek Aethiopia, often used to translate the Hebrew Kush, became during the Classical and Hellenistic era a word for Africa south of Egypt in general but specifically Nubia.  But the references to this land in Greek mythology don't seem to fit that.

Joppa/Jaffa that Andromeda came from is also refereed to as Aethiopia.  But also Memnon an ally of Troy during the Trojan war was a King of Aethiopia.  But the statements in geography about his Kingdom and ethnicity are also contradictory, and he was said to have a brother Emathon who was King of Arabia, which in classical sources refers mainly to parts of modern Jordan and north-western Saudi Arabia. And these Arabians mostly descended from brothers of Isaac, most prominently Ishmael.  Though Edom also fits in the Classical Greek definition of Arabia.

People disagree on whether the Judges 18 account of Dan's migration should be set chronologically before the rest of the book, or after the time of Samson.  Either way Samson's story shows some Danites remained in their original region around Joppa/Jaffa all through the Judges period.  Also the Danites who "remain in ships" in the Song of Deborah (Judges 5:17) were likely Danites living in this region, they had a port city in Joppa/Jaffa that would have served this sea faring nature far better.

Traditional dates from Greek writers for the time of Perseus place him in the middle of the Judges period Biblically.  What if Aethiopia originally refereed to Dan's original allocation? and the Greeks later started using it for where a certain portion of Dan settled south of Egypt, and in time forgot the real reason?

Memnon is a name can easily be explained by a Hebrew origin, since it's basically two letter of the Hebrew Alphabet spelled out phonetically and put together.  Mem and Nun.  Non/Nun is also the name of Joshua's father, both spellings appear in the KJV.  It's also not impossible the name comes from Amnon.  Emathon or Hemathon probably comes from the Hebrew name Mattan (Strong number 4977) with a He (the Hebrew definite article) at the beginning which often happens in Hebrew for emphasis.

Cepheus could come from Kefa (Hebrew Strong number 3710), which means rock and was a name Simon Peter was also known by (Greek Strong number 2786) since it's the Semitic equivalent of the Greek Petros.  Cephalus/Kephalos could derive from that same Hebrew word also, who could be interpreted as the grandfather of Memnon and Emathon via Tithonios.  Cepheus's brother Phineus is an obviously Semitic name, appearing as Phinehas in the KJV.  Phoenix could also come from the same name as a more corrupt form.

Perses is the name of one of the sons of Perseus and Andromeda, the one who stayed in the East and was believed to be ancestral to the Persians.  Perses and Perseus both could come from the Hebrew name Pharez.  I do believe deported northern Israelites possibly contributed to the ancestry of various peoples of Persia/Iran.

To my own surprise even Cassiopia could have a Hebrew origin, from Kasheph (Strong number 3784-3786) the word for Sorcerer.  Putting a Heh on the end would make it feminine, and transliterated into Greek that often results in ending with an Alpha.

Andromeda alone of the Aethiopian dynasty has a clearly Greek and not Semitic name, it could be originally that was a name she took only after marrying Perseus.  The Hebrew word for Woman/Wife is unlike the Greek a feminine form of the word for Man/Husband, Andros.  And I've read conflicting claims of what the other part of the name is supposed to mean.

A similar name is Adromache, the last part of that name does occur in Hebrew (Strong number 4347) with virtually the same meaning.  Makhe in Greek means to fight, and Makkah in Hebrew means blow, wound or slaughter.  And in Hebrew it is grammatically feminine.  So maybe the -meda part of Andromeda comes from Madon, or Madai or Medan.  Which could mean stature or discord or strife.

Agenor could derive from Aggan (Strong number 101) the Hebrew word for Goblet.  Cadmus could derive from Kedem (East Strong number 6930) or Kedemah, Kedemoth, Kadimiel or Kadmonites.

Cillicia is part of the region I have above affiliated with Dan.  Cilix was a mythical progenitor of the inhabitants of that region in Greek mythology.  And he is also variantly a son of Agenor of Phoenix.  A Hebrew name that could come from is Kelal (Chelal in the KJV).

The Prose Edda says Memnon fathered a Thor with a daughter of Priam from whom descended Sceaf and then Geat and then Woden and from him all the royal houses of the Anlgo-Saxon chronicles and of Denmark and Norway.  Fitting Britam's identification of Denmark with Dan.  I disagree with Bill Cooper on Sceaf being Japheth.

I think DNA Y Chromosome Haplogroup I indicates Pater-Lineal descent from Dam.

Saturday, March 22, 2014

More evidence for Shishak being Tuthmosis III

The Tablets of Ras Shamra of Ugarit are contemporary with the 18th Dynasty. This is agreed by Conventional and Revised chronology. The Amarna letters record Ugarit's destruction (Letter 151). So none of them could be referring to any 22nd dynasty Pharaoh.

One of the Ugarit tablets uses the name. "Le mot swsk semble, un nom propres, a rapprocher peut-etre de l'egyptien Sosenq, hebreu Sosaq, et Sisag." Dhorme, Revue biblique, XL (1931),55.

This is definitive proof on top of everything cited before that Shishak should be looked for in the 18th Dynasty.

I argued before for trying to find Shishak among Egyptian names of Tuthmosis, but I now mostly reject that.

Shishak is a Hebrew name that means "greedy of fine linen"-Strong# 7895. It's similar to Sheshach Strong # 8347 which is an Atbash encryption for Babylon and means "thy fine linen". It's possible referring to conquerors who pillage the Temple as something about fine Linen is a pattern.

Shishak actually has two different spellings across it's various appearances in the Masoretic text of Kings and Chronicles.  Shin-Yot-Shin-Qoph and Shin-Vav-Shin-Qoph, it's numbering in the Strong's is based on the Yot version being the presumed default, the latter spelling would be pronounced Shushak.  Yot and Vav have in common that they started being used as Vowls once later Hebrew scribes become more concerned with representing vowels.  So that they are interchangeable in regards to this name suggests to me that originally neither was there.  And Shin-Shin-Qoph is the spelling of Strong's number 8349, which is the Hebrew name Shashak, the name of a Benjamite mentioned in 1 Chronicles 8:14&25.

The Hebrew root it comes from in Shesh, Strong's number 8336, which means Linen.  The only difference between 8347 and 8349 is Jeremiah's ends with Kaph rather then Qoph.  Those two represent similar sounds, but I think Jeremiah used a different letter only to fit his Atbash.

So the name is not Egyptian and not the Pharaoh's actual name, period.

Velikovsky's source for proving that Ahmose had a wife named Tahpenes or Tanthap/Tanthape (to tie in with 1 Kings 11:19-20) isn't in English so I can't verify it.  The source in question is Gauthier, Le Livre des rois d'Egypt.  Wikipedia doesn't list a wife with that name for Ahmoses, nor for Khamose, Amenhotep I or Tuthmosis I.

The relevant passage of 1 Kings seems weird regardless of chronology.  That Pharoh's wife would wean her sister's son for her.  But hardly impossible.

On checking The Hebrew, I noticed the word for Queen used here, isn't really a word for Queen, it's not a feminine form of Melek or Sar.  It means Mistress.  So this is probably a lesser wife of his Harem and not an actual Queen or Royal wife.

The source for the claim that Genubath is mentioned by name in 18th dynasty Egyptian records of Tuthmosis III as Gebybatye is Breasted Records Volume II Section 474.

The Ugarit Poem of Keret refers to an army of Tereh, who parallels both the Biblical Zerah the Ethiopian of the days of King Asa, and the Egyptian campaigns in this region during the reign of Amenhotep II. As I said before I equate Zerah with User-tatet, Amenhotep's Nubian (Ethiopian) commander.

Menhet, Menwi and Merti were three minor foreign-born wives of pharaoh Thutmose III who were buried in a lavishly furnished rock-cut tomb in Wady Gabbanat el-Qurud. Two of their names are West-Semitic in origin though none are Hurrian. ( Christine Lilyquist, The Tomb of Thutmosis III's foreign wives: A survey of Architectural Type, Contents and Foreign Connections in Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of Egyptologists, Cambridge 3–4 September 1995; ed. C.J. Eyre, Uitgeberij Peeters, Leuven, 1998. pp.679-680).

The possibility of them being connected to either the House of David or Jeroboam I find interesting.