It seems most websites talking about the idea that Sinai was in Yemen
aren't giving a specific Mountain. Just referring to Teman of Habakkuk
3:3 paralleling Deuteronomy 33 with Teman in place of Sinai. And how Teman was a
Jewish name for Yemen. And mentioning the Kadesh-Barnea as Mecca theory
and how that involves identifying the first Meribah, Exodus 17, with
Ma'rib in Yemen.
Teman is also often translated South and Jesus called the Queen of Sheba the Queen of The South. And that Kingdom we know was in Yemen.
First I want to mention how all the Tribes of Arabia were wandering nomads, so it doesn't surprise me that many place names may repeat in both Northern Arabia/Jordan and Southern Arabia/Yemen. Like with Teman or Midian/Medan, or Seir, or Paran. And there is no doubt there was more then one Kadesh and Meirbah in the Wandering account.
Jebel El-Lawz supporters like to emphasize how Josephus called Sinai the tallest Mountain in the area. And I agree that it is in Arabia. Well it seems to me unclear whether he meant just where ever he meant by Midian, or all of Arabia. So I've decided maybe we should start our search by looking for the tallest mountain in Arabia.
Well the tallest Mountain on the Arabian Peninsula happens to be in Yemen. And the second tallest is very near by it. It's name is Jabal an Nabi Shu'ayb, the second tallest is Jabal Tiya. Both are located on opposite sides of the city of Sana'a. And a district in Sana'a is called Madina. They are part of or near a mountain range called Jabal Haraz. And another linked location is Tihamah. And there is also near to Yemen's north the Asir region.
Some of those names sound awfully familiar don't they? Yet they don't seem to come from local traditions claiming any such Biblical connection. Since the Israelites were traveling towards the Promised land when they
went from Sinai to Kadesh-Barnea. If Barnea is Mecca and Sinai was in
Yemen, then the Asir Mountains would be the Mountains of Seir between
Sinai and Kadesh. Doesn't mean the traditional location of Seir isn't the place in mind in other references to Seir. There is actually no doubt that The Bible refers to more then one Seir since there is also a Seir near Hebron in Joshua 15.
BTW, the only two mountains in the entire middle east that are taller don't
come close to even fitting the loosest definition of Arabia,
one's in Lebanon and the other in Iran.
The tallest mountain in Arabia is named after Shu'ayb. A Midianite Prophet mentioned in the Quran, who is linked to Mt Sinai and often either identified with Jethro or viewed as a predecessor of Jethro's priesthood. Yet this mountain which bears his name isn't where current Islamic traditions say he lived, no the Northern Arabia/Jordan assumption is the basis for the official site of his tomb.
I then Google searched and found at least one person had came to this conclusion before I did.
Sana'a is the Capital of modern Yemen, while we're used to thinking of Sinai as being away from civilization. But Sana'a wasn't always the capital, and the city, even the old city, is barely older then Islam, first popping up around 530 AD. The very tall Mountain was always there, but the City was not.
I also want to talk a little more about the name of Sheba.
I obviously disagree with the premise of The Bible Came from Arabia. I think Jerusalem was always what we today call Jerusalem, and Beth-El to the north of it. Likewise with Hebron and Galilee ect.
But I do think in some senses what God promised to Abraham did extent further south then we usually think. Especially since the sons of Keturah were totally South of what God gave Abraham according to most traditional maps of the Abrahamic covenant.
Beersheba is often given as a southern border of Israel. But it's not a boundary marker included in Ezekiel 40-47. It is usually contrasted with Dan, and since I think what is meant by Dan can extend pretty far North of the proper tribal allotments (Dan's proper allotment wasn't in the North at all), perhaps Beersheba as a southern border includes in a sense the sons of Keturah. And thus lands that David ruled as Tributaries rather then directly. Elijah stopped at Beersheba on the way to Horeb.
Linked to Beersheba is a place called Shebah (Genesis 26:33) and Sheba (Joshua 19:2). They're in land allotted to the Simeonites, but remember from Genesis 49 the Simeonites ultimately lost their own land to be absorbed into the other tribes. But one clan of Simeon was the Yamin (Jamin in the KJV) clan.
Now the Strongs lists those references to Sheba as totally separate words from the Genesis 10 Shebas and the Queen of Sheba. But the variation is really rather small, involving a letter that sometimes gets used as a vowel. And interestingly for the Queen, only Genesis 26 uses the name in a Feminine form.
Perhaps Beersheba is the border between Peleg and Joktan? And king Abimelech of Genesis 20 and 21 was a Joktanite King? And the Philistines of Genesis 26 had not yet fully migrated to the Gaza Strip from Caphtor? 2 Chronicles 14 refers to Cushites in Gerar, which is interesting given my Cushites in Arabia observations. Abimelech was probably a title not a personal name.
The Yam Suf clearly refers to the Red Sea, as that is where Solomon had his port. But perhaps the Red Sea crossing was at Bab-el-Mandeb? It is called that because in some traditions early migrations to Africa from Babel crossed there. So it would make sense to lead the Israelites there, going the opposite direction. And Afro-centrists sometimes claim this is where men first left Africa.
Update June 12th 2017: Goshen's location.
In conjunction with the Bab-el Mandeb aspect of this theory. I feel like questioning the traditional location of Goshen in the Delta. It's largely dependent on thinking Exodus mentions Ramses II's capital, but we in revised Chronology know that is wrong.
But first I should note, Exodus tells us Yahuah went out of his way to make sure their path to the Promised didn't run into the Philistines. So I think it makes sense that He would avoid the "Sinai" Peninsula altogether.
That Joshua conquered all the way to Goshen normally makes one think it can't be too deep into Egypt. But if Joshua was during the Second Intermediate period, as the Hyksos were establishing themselves. Or maybe even the First Intermediate period. Then the idea of him briefly conquering all of Egypt isn't so out there. Especially for those who think the River of Egypt used as a boundary marker for the Covenant is The Nile. Identifying Yaqub-Har
with Jacob as some like to clearly doesn't work. But maybe Yacub-Har
was a name the Egyptians call Joshua? As a leader of the descendants of
Jacob. Or Joshua could have conquered a different Goshen.
The Migdol of Eygpt may not always be the same place, Migdol just means any Tower or fortification. But interestingly many interpret Ezekiel's reference to Migdol in Egypt as being in the South near Syene/Aswan. And I've seen Jeremiah's Migdol in Egypt interpreted as being an Island in The Nile Isrealites settled on, from what we know outside The Bible that best fits Elephantine, in the South/Upper Egypt.
Genesis 45:10 says Goshen was near Joseph. I have become convinced Joseph's Pharaoh was a Second Dynasty one due to the Second Dynasty having an ancient account of a somewhat similar Famine during the reign of Neferkasokar. (The more Popular Imhotep Famine story is a Ptolemaic ea invention, not ancient enough, and is less similar then this to the Biblical story anyway.) The office of Grand Vizer seems to not show up in exiting Egyptian Records till later then the 2nd Dynasty. It could be it was basically invented for Joseph. The 2nd Dynasty Pharaohs ruled from an Upper Egypt capitol. So at this time that description makes an Upper Nile location for Goshen more logical.
I before and many others got confused by exactly what Velikovsky was claiming in his Kadesh-Barnea theory, he wasn't placing Sinai in Yemen, he was saying Mar'ib wasn't in Yemen. He actually did place Sinai in the traditional Helena selected location, and argued how Mecca could be 11 days from there. In that context needing around 20 days for Israel to get from Southern Egypt or Northern Sudan to Bab-el Mandeb is perfectly feasible. As said above Sinai being north of Barnea doesn't fit because they were traveling to the Promised Land when they traveled from Sinai to Barnea.
I've seen people suggest that the Slavery of the Israelites in Egypt maybe wasn't the kind of Slavery we usually picture, but perhaps almost a kind of Serfdom, or like the Helots were to Sparta. I'm not sure what I think of that in general, but it could arguably fit Egypt's relationship with Kerma. Also Kerma first appears in Egyptian records after the 2nd Dynasty and thus after my placement for Joseph.
The continuity between Kerma of the Old and Middle Kingdoms and even early 18th Dynasty, with the Nubian civilization that appeared at Napata during the Third Intermediate Period and went on to spring the 25th Dynasty, is a subject of controversy. It's unclear to me whether or not the Egyptians called anyone Kush before the 18th Dynasty. Some depictions of the Kermites seemingly show them as not quite as dark as the later Nubians, but that could be misleading, and how they looked works with my argument here either way. I'm fine with thinking the Israelites were once very Dark Skinned. And I certainly believe many Black people groups today have Israelite Ancestry, the Aksumites, the Lemba and the Igbo to name a few.
But I've also wondered. What if Goshen and Cushan can be the same name? Both have distinct Hebrew spellings in the Hebrew Bible. But Egypt used a different Alphabet and Goshen could come from attempting to represent what the Egyptians called this area. The same Hebrew name, Yeshua, can become in English Bibles both Joshua and Jesus depending on if Greek is a middle man in the Transliteration process. Goshen and Cushan could be the same kind of thing here.
This theory can still have Kerma exist after the Exodus. Just as many Egyptians and other gentiles who placed Blood on their Doorpost left with the Israelites, thus them being called a mixed multitude. Likewise Hebrews who didn't place their faith in the Passover Lamb were left behind. And to begin with Israelites may not have been the only people in Kerma. And when Joshua conquered all the way to Goshen he may have left some settlers there. And perhaps some Hyksos settled there, ones with Edomite or Ishmaelite ancestry may have felt a kinship. The Hyksos mainly based their power in the Delta, but one Hyksos ruler was named "The Nubian".
Wednesday, January 18, 2017
Velikovsky argued that Kadesh-Barnea was Mecca.
I've come to agree with Velikovsky less then I used to on some matters. But this is an example of one of his lesser known ideas that I've come to find compelling.
The "Great and Terrible Wilderness".
Some corresponding identities I'm not sold on, like Medina with the Midian of Jetho, I think that Midian was probably the usual Midian, but shouldn't his theory be looking for it in Yemen? And while I've contemplated the idea of Sinai in Yemen, I'm annoyed by the logic that goes into trying to make it a Volcano. And I've already talked about where I agree and disagree concerning the Amalekites.
I have already explained on this blog why I believe Sinai was in Arabia, even if I'm not so solid on Jebel El Lawz anymore. And on the Ishmael tag of my Prophecy Blog, I discus further reasons I see some truth in the Islamic claims about Ishmael, even though I would never endorse Islamic Theology, Christolgoy or Soterology. Including possibly agreeing that Baca of the Psalm 84:6 refers to the Bakkah of Mecca.
Others taking aspects of Velikovsky's argument have tied it into other totally off base theories, like all of Israel was in Arabia, or that the Mizraim of the Hebrew Bible was just an Arab tribe.
One thing that I'm not sure Velikovsky knew, was there were probably two places called Kadesh visited during the wandering. The place where Miriam died was not Barnea. I do think Barnea is meant by some unqualified references to Kadesh, and this theory requires all three Kadesh of Genesis to be Barnea. But the Kadesh that marks a Southern/Eastern boundary of Israel in Ezekiel 47 and 48 I do not think was Barnea but was somewhere near Aqaba or Petra, where Miriam died, and a location near Patra is traditionally where Aaron was buried. There were likewise two places called Meribah.
Lots of people I know disagree about there being two places called Kadesh in the wandering. But reading of the narrative that assume them to be the same have Israel in the same place for like 38 years. Deuteronomy 2:14 defines this 38 years as the time they were traveling from Kadesh-Barnea to the Brook of Zered. So they were at Barnea only at the start of that time-frame. And in this case the sources Veiikvosky is drawing on say Mozaikiya and his tribe stayed in Mecca only a few years then traveled North. BTW, the "Mountain of Moses" in the Masudi quote Velikovsky talked about could be Nebo where Moses was buried and died, rather then Sinai.
The Kadesh of Numbers 13, which is Barnea, is in the Wilderness of Paran. In Numbers 20 they arrive at a Kadesh in the wilderness of Zin, no references to Paran apply to the Kadesh where Miriam died. In Numbers 13:21 Zin is referenced not as being where that Kadesh is located, but as a southern border of the Promised Land that the 12 spies surveyed.
What interests me in particular is how this is one of the places where The Tabernacle had been erected, and some Arab historians do say a Tent existed where the Kaaba is first. I have become intrigued by the argument that the Tabernacle was actually Dome shaped. And there is a Dome shaped structure near the Kaaba. I don't think any building there now goes back to the time of Moses, but it's interesting.
Every time it's called Barnea it's called that in retrospect. It's just called Kadesh when Israel is there in the present in Numbers 13. It's in references back to those events in Numbers 32 and 33, and in Deuteronomy and Joshua that it's called Kadesh-Barnea. That makes me wonder what Barnea means?
Update May 2017: I made some mistakes up above.
I'm not alone in this mistake I made, lots of other people talking about what Velikovsky wrote on Kadesh-Barnea and Mecca seem to miss that he was suggesting Mar'ib wasn't in Yemen.
Velikovsky did not place Sinai in Yemen or in Arabia at all, he based this on a Sinai Peninsula Sinai view and said it fit the 11 day journey requirement by arguing a day's journey could be 40 Kilometers. With that math you could also made Mecca as Barnea consistent with Jabal el-laws or Jebel al-Madhbah.
However I have a problem with placing Sinai north of Kadesh-Barnea, since the account of Israel traveling from Sinai to Kadesh implies they were heading in the direction of the Promised Land. If Mecca is Kadesh-Barnea then Sinai is south of it, between them is a mountain range called Seir which could refer to the Asir mountains. So it being in Yemen fits best.
I think the Kadesh in the Wilderness of Zin where Miraim died is Petra or someplace very near there. The Mountain near Petra believed to be where Aaron was buried I think is where Aaron was buried.
The story Velikvosky was drawing on I think is itself a confused mixture of traditions. Partly based on Moses but also mingled with how the Banu Khuza'a came to Mecca around the second century AD. Or sometimes as early as the 6th Century BC.
One of the guilt by affiliation tactics used by enemies of Sinai in Arabia is a fear it would somehow vindicate Islam. Muhammad's failures as a Prophet are sufficient to discredit Islam, Muslim traditions about Ishmael derive from what Jews and Christians of Arabia already believed.
Jerome and Eusebius both well before Muhammad placed the Wilderness of Paran in Arabia Deserta.
It is true that for most of Biblical History Ishmaelite tribes lived further north, mostly in Jordan and Syria. But Jeremiah foretells Kedar being scattered by Nebuchadnezzar. Which I talked about in my post showing that Muhammad descended from Ishmael.
But the Islamic traditions agree that for a long time after Ishmael himself others controlled Mecca until the Kedarites came. The Jurhum (who are sometimes identified as Amalekites), and then the Banu Khuza'a.
Update October 2017: Alternatively, Mecca as Sinai.
Another theory out there is that Mt Sinai was Jabal al-Nour (Mount of Light or Illumination), a mountain near Mecca, where supposedly Muhammad had his first revelation, in the Hira cave. A lot of evidence for that theory could overlap with Mecca as Kadesh, so I figured I'd talk about it here.
If that theory is true, the Hira cave could also be Elijah's Cave. And the Kaaba could be where the Tabernacle of Moses was first pitched, the original Holy of Holies. And the Zamzam Well could be the Well of Exodus 2:15, where Moses met Zipporah. And perhaps also identify the city of Midian with Medina, also named Yathrib, a name possibly derived from Jethro.
Another nearby Mountain is Jabal Thawr, meaning Mountain of the Bull, perhaps linked to the Golden Calf incident.
And that could be consistent with a more usual location for Kadesh-Barnea, in southern Israel or Jordan. Possibly near Petra.
What's curious is how Wikipedia and some other sites will mention that Charles Beke in 1873 suggested Jabal al-Nour as Mt Sinai, but without mentioning it's close association with Muhammad or Mecca, and even misrepresent where it is making it sound closer to the Gulf of Aqaba.
Even going off the account Velikovsky based his Kadesh as Mecca theory on. It has this family/tribe going from Meri'b right to Mecca, no stopping at a separate Sinai analogue in between. So maybe even that account Velikovsky had miscalculated and was really associating Mecca with Sinai?
Now this gets into some authors theories that the Ark of the Covenant is in the Kaaba now, and was placed there by Muhammad, and that till then it was in Sinai. And citing the Quran, Sura 2 verse 248. As well as Second Maccabees saying the Ark wound up hidden in Sinai by Jeremiah.
I still have reasons for favoring Sinai being in Yemen. But this possibility is interesting. Though I of course don't think the Ark is in Mecca.
It's interesting then that in Galatians 4:24 Paul links Mount Sinai to Hagar and Ishmael.
Update April 2019: Forget the Mecca as Sinai theory for now. I've become aware of a theory that the Mecca of Muhammad was not originally modern Mecca but Petra, which Josephus seems to have identified with Kadesh-Barnea. That could make Velikovsky's theory right in a way he didn't expect.
https://solascripturachristianliberty.blogspot.com/2018/07/could-islam-have-had-nestorian-origins.html
Though if the two Kadesh are separate, Petra is more likely the second Kadesh, where Miriam and Aaron died and where the second getting water form a rock miracle happened.
The "Great and Terrible Wilderness".
Some corresponding identities I'm not sold on, like Medina with the Midian of Jetho, I think that Midian was probably the usual Midian, but shouldn't his theory be looking for it in Yemen? And while I've contemplated the idea of Sinai in Yemen, I'm annoyed by the logic that goes into trying to make it a Volcano. And I've already talked about where I agree and disagree concerning the Amalekites.
I have already explained on this blog why I believe Sinai was in Arabia, even if I'm not so solid on Jebel El Lawz anymore. And on the Ishmael tag of my Prophecy Blog, I discus further reasons I see some truth in the Islamic claims about Ishmael, even though I would never endorse Islamic Theology, Christolgoy or Soterology. Including possibly agreeing that Baca of the Psalm 84:6 refers to the Bakkah of Mecca.
Others taking aspects of Velikovsky's argument have tied it into other totally off base theories, like all of Israel was in Arabia, or that the Mizraim of the Hebrew Bible was just an Arab tribe.
One thing that I'm not sure Velikovsky knew, was there were probably two places called Kadesh visited during the wandering. The place where Miriam died was not Barnea. I do think Barnea is meant by some unqualified references to Kadesh, and this theory requires all three Kadesh of Genesis to be Barnea. But the Kadesh that marks a Southern/Eastern boundary of Israel in Ezekiel 47 and 48 I do not think was Barnea but was somewhere near Aqaba or Petra, where Miriam died, and a location near Patra is traditionally where Aaron was buried. There were likewise two places called Meribah.
Lots of people I know disagree about there being two places called Kadesh in the wandering. But reading of the narrative that assume them to be the same have Israel in the same place for like 38 years. Deuteronomy 2:14 defines this 38 years as the time they were traveling from Kadesh-Barnea to the Brook of Zered. So they were at Barnea only at the start of that time-frame. And in this case the sources Veiikvosky is drawing on say Mozaikiya and his tribe stayed in Mecca only a few years then traveled North. BTW, the "Mountain of Moses" in the Masudi quote Velikovsky talked about could be Nebo where Moses was buried and died, rather then Sinai.
The Kadesh of Numbers 13, which is Barnea, is in the Wilderness of Paran. In Numbers 20 they arrive at a Kadesh in the wilderness of Zin, no references to Paran apply to the Kadesh where Miriam died. In Numbers 13:21 Zin is referenced not as being where that Kadesh is located, but as a southern border of the Promised Land that the 12 spies surveyed.
What interests me in particular is how this is one of the places where The Tabernacle had been erected, and some Arab historians do say a Tent existed where the Kaaba is first. I have become intrigued by the argument that the Tabernacle was actually Dome shaped. And there is a Dome shaped structure near the Kaaba. I don't think any building there now goes back to the time of Moses, but it's interesting.
Every time it's called Barnea it's called that in retrospect. It's just called Kadesh when Israel is there in the present in Numbers 13. It's in references back to those events in Numbers 32 and 33, and in Deuteronomy and Joshua that it's called Kadesh-Barnea. That makes me wonder what Barnea means?
Update May 2017: I made some mistakes up above.
I'm not alone in this mistake I made, lots of other people talking about what Velikovsky wrote on Kadesh-Barnea and Mecca seem to miss that he was suggesting Mar'ib wasn't in Yemen.
Velikovsky did not place Sinai in Yemen or in Arabia at all, he based this on a Sinai Peninsula Sinai view and said it fit the 11 day journey requirement by arguing a day's journey could be 40 Kilometers. With that math you could also made Mecca as Barnea consistent with Jabal el-laws or Jebel al-Madhbah.
However I have a problem with placing Sinai north of Kadesh-Barnea, since the account of Israel traveling from Sinai to Kadesh implies they were heading in the direction of the Promised Land. If Mecca is Kadesh-Barnea then Sinai is south of it, between them is a mountain range called Seir which could refer to the Asir mountains. So it being in Yemen fits best.
I think the Kadesh in the Wilderness of Zin where Miraim died is Petra or someplace very near there. The Mountain near Petra believed to be where Aaron was buried I think is where Aaron was buried.
The story Velikvosky was drawing on I think is itself a confused mixture of traditions. Partly based on Moses but also mingled with how the Banu Khuza'a came to Mecca around the second century AD. Or sometimes as early as the 6th Century BC.
One of the guilt by affiliation tactics used by enemies of Sinai in Arabia is a fear it would somehow vindicate Islam. Muhammad's failures as a Prophet are sufficient to discredit Islam, Muslim traditions about Ishmael derive from what Jews and Christians of Arabia already believed.
Jerome and Eusebius both well before Muhammad placed the Wilderness of Paran in Arabia Deserta.
It is true that for most of Biblical History Ishmaelite tribes lived further north, mostly in Jordan and Syria. But Jeremiah foretells Kedar being scattered by Nebuchadnezzar. Which I talked about in my post showing that Muhammad descended from Ishmael.
But the Islamic traditions agree that for a long time after Ishmael himself others controlled Mecca until the Kedarites came. The Jurhum (who are sometimes identified as Amalekites), and then the Banu Khuza'a.
Update October 2017: Alternatively, Mecca as Sinai.
Another theory out there is that Mt Sinai was Jabal al-Nour (Mount of Light or Illumination), a mountain near Mecca, where supposedly Muhammad had his first revelation, in the Hira cave. A lot of evidence for that theory could overlap with Mecca as Kadesh, so I figured I'd talk about it here.
If that theory is true, the Hira cave could also be Elijah's Cave. And the Kaaba could be where the Tabernacle of Moses was first pitched, the original Holy of Holies. And the Zamzam Well could be the Well of Exodus 2:15, where Moses met Zipporah. And perhaps also identify the city of Midian with Medina, also named Yathrib, a name possibly derived from Jethro.
Another nearby Mountain is Jabal Thawr, meaning Mountain of the Bull, perhaps linked to the Golden Calf incident.
And that could be consistent with a more usual location for Kadesh-Barnea, in southern Israel or Jordan. Possibly near Petra.
What's curious is how Wikipedia and some other sites will mention that Charles Beke in 1873 suggested Jabal al-Nour as Mt Sinai, but without mentioning it's close association with Muhammad or Mecca, and even misrepresent where it is making it sound closer to the Gulf of Aqaba.
Even going off the account Velikovsky based his Kadesh as Mecca theory on. It has this family/tribe going from Meri'b right to Mecca, no stopping at a separate Sinai analogue in between. So maybe even that account Velikovsky had miscalculated and was really associating Mecca with Sinai?
Now this gets into some authors theories that the Ark of the Covenant is in the Kaaba now, and was placed there by Muhammad, and that till then it was in Sinai. And citing the Quran, Sura 2 verse 248. As well as Second Maccabees saying the Ark wound up hidden in Sinai by Jeremiah.
I still have reasons for favoring Sinai being in Yemen. But this possibility is interesting. Though I of course don't think the Ark is in Mecca.
It's interesting then that in Galatians 4:24 Paul links Mount Sinai to Hagar and Ishmael.
Update April 2019: Forget the Mecca as Sinai theory for now. I've become aware of a theory that the Mecca of Muhammad was not originally modern Mecca but Petra, which Josephus seems to have identified with Kadesh-Barnea. That could make Velikovsky's theory right in a way he didn't expect.
https://solascripturachristianliberty.blogspot.com/2018/07/could-islam-have-had-nestorian-origins.html
Though if the two Kadesh are separate, Petra is more likely the second Kadesh, where Miriam and Aaron died and where the second getting water form a rock miracle happened.
Tuesday, January 17, 2017
Sixth Dynasty Exodus models tend to be inspired by the so called Jasher
The Book of Jasher I have dedicated a post to discrediting on another blog.
When you see people arguing for a Sixth Dynasty Exodus, they inevitably cite Jasher.
Jasher Chapter 77, says that Melol, the father of the Pharaoh of the Exodus, and thus Pharaoh under whom Moses birth and exile would have happened, reigned 94 years. Only one Pharaoh comes even close to matching this reign length and that was Pepi II. Generally the third to last of the 6th Dynasty.
That this Pharaoh had this reign length was not some fact lost to History until modern Egyptology however. The transcribers of Manetho (though Josephus didn't discus this part of it) refer to Pepi II and give him 94 years. (Many modern Egyptologists give Pepi a couple years less then that.) So this information would have been available to the Medieval Jews who wrote the Book of Jasher.
From identifying Melol with Pepi II, comes identifying Adikam with Merenre Namtyemsaf II. There the reign lengths don't quite match anymore, leaving room to doubt that Jasher just copied Manetho.
Because our transcribers of Manetho have a female as the last ruler of the 6th Dynasty, Nictrotis. These theories go and identify her with Gedudah of Jasher 76:55. But nothing in Jasher implies Gedudah was ever queen. Of course most modern Egyptologists do not anymore think the last Pharaoh of the 6th Dynasty was a female. But since we don't have that Pharaoh's Mummy I feel we can't even be certain what gender they were assigned at birth.
In-spite of my distaste for Jasher, I have recently developed my own reasons for considering a Sixth Dynasty Exodus. The impact of the events related to the Exodus probably make it the end of a Kingdom. And I think Solomon was contemporary with Tuthmosis III at the latest. Yet I'm growing more and more skeptical of the usual arguments for a longer Hyksos period.
Especially given the potential very late date for the 18th Dynasty I've considered. And my reasons to want to see Esau as contemporary with Pre-Dynastic Egypt. The Exodus ending the Old Kingdom seems increasingly attractive. Esau was born in 2237 BC by my current main model, 49 years before Ussher's date for the founding of Egypt.
However for now this is just a thought I'm throwing out there. I'm going to need to investigate more. And the Chronology of Ken Johnson in Early Post Flood History is totally nonsensical.
When you see people arguing for a Sixth Dynasty Exodus, they inevitably cite Jasher.
Jasher Chapter 77, says that Melol, the father of the Pharaoh of the Exodus, and thus Pharaoh under whom Moses birth and exile would have happened, reigned 94 years. Only one Pharaoh comes even close to matching this reign length and that was Pepi II. Generally the third to last of the 6th Dynasty.
That this Pharaoh had this reign length was not some fact lost to History until modern Egyptology however. The transcribers of Manetho (though Josephus didn't discus this part of it) refer to Pepi II and give him 94 years. (Many modern Egyptologists give Pepi a couple years less then that.) So this information would have been available to the Medieval Jews who wrote the Book of Jasher.
From identifying Melol with Pepi II, comes identifying Adikam with Merenre Namtyemsaf II. There the reign lengths don't quite match anymore, leaving room to doubt that Jasher just copied Manetho.
Because our transcribers of Manetho have a female as the last ruler of the 6th Dynasty, Nictrotis. These theories go and identify her with Gedudah of Jasher 76:55. But nothing in Jasher implies Gedudah was ever queen. Of course most modern Egyptologists do not anymore think the last Pharaoh of the 6th Dynasty was a female. But since we don't have that Pharaoh's Mummy I feel we can't even be certain what gender they were assigned at birth.
In-spite of my distaste for Jasher, I have recently developed my own reasons for considering a Sixth Dynasty Exodus. The impact of the events related to the Exodus probably make it the end of a Kingdom. And I think Solomon was contemporary with Tuthmosis III at the latest. Yet I'm growing more and more skeptical of the usual arguments for a longer Hyksos period.
Especially given the potential very late date for the 18th Dynasty I've considered. And my reasons to want to see Esau as contemporary with Pre-Dynastic Egypt. The Exodus ending the Old Kingdom seems increasingly attractive. Esau was born in 2237 BC by my current main model, 49 years before Ussher's date for the founding of Egypt.
However for now this is just a thought I'm throwing out there. I'm going to need to investigate more. And the Chronology of Ken Johnson in Early Post Flood History is totally nonsensical.
Saturday, January 7, 2017
The Sea Peoples and Lost Tribes speculation
I already did one post on The Tribe of Dan and the Sea Peoples. This shall retread some of that while also being a follow up. I've also already noted that my mind has changed on what I said about Ethiopia there in my post on Cush and Africa.
Of the nine peoples mentioned in Egyptian texts who we today group together as Sea Peoples, only five were called that by the Egyptians. The Denyen were instead the people of the Isles or Islands. The Lukka appear to be Lydia (Biblical Lud) in modern Turkey, but it could also refer to the Lycia on the Mediterranean coast of Asia Minor. The Prrst are popularly identified as the Philistines but we know they were the Persians. And the Tjekker are the most enigmatic. None of those four were called Sea Peoples.
The Ekwesh and Weshesh are never both mentioned at the same time. The Ekwesh are mentioned only by Merneptah. And the Weshesh by 20th Dynasty and later texts. With the common Wesh element in their names, I feel it's safe to make a "Clark Kent is never around when Superman shows up" observation. So we thus can narrow the Sea Peoples down to four people groups.
The Weshesh being identified with Asher is well known, as are theories connecting the Shekelesh to either Isshachar or Shechem. I've mentioned before my theory for connecting the Sherden to the Sardite clan descended from Sered of the Tribe of Zebulun mentioned in Numbers 26:26, and Joshua 19:10-12 associates a location called Sarid with Zebulun. And I also think the Teresh could come from Tirzah, a city of Western Manasseh. As a final minor note the Tjeker are linked in one text to Dor, a coastal city of Manasseh, but also near both Asher and Zebulun, and who's Governor under Solomon was married to a Daughter of Solomon.
On my other blog I did a Lost Tribes follow up post where I showed it was only the Trans-Jordan Tribes, Naphtali, and part of Ephraim (mainly Samaria) who were deported by Assyria. And I believe they were taken East of the Euphrates and so can't be linked to Europe. And I made a point of how Western Manasseh, Asher, Zebulun & Isshachar, and some of Ephraim still existed in their allotments at the time of Hezekiah's Passover.
Of those, Western Manasseh, Asher, Zebulun & Issachar I feel can also be labeled the North Western Coastal Tribes, who between Genesis 49 and Deuteronomy 33 seem to have a bit of a Sea Faring destiny foretold for them. So identifying the Sea Peoples with these tribes I feel does not conflict with with Velikovsky's Ionian identifications for them, as I believe they would have traveled by sea to that region, and perhaps both founded colonies there and intermingled with the descendants of Javan and Lud who already dwelt there. Also Joel 3 described Israelites being sold into Slavery to Greeks.
In my post on Gog and Magog I talk about Gyges of Lydia and his role in the history of the Sherden.
One of the most important Ionian cities was Miletus. I agree with Bill Cooper who in After The Flood argued that people from Miletus migrated to Ireland as the Milesians about 510 BC. But I also feel other migrations of Galiac peoples to Ireland from Ionia happened around 300 and 100 BC since I also see some truth to O'Rahilly's Model. Earlier the list of Sea Powers has Miletus as the dominant Sea Power when the Northern Kingdom fell.
So I think the Irish and possibly other peoples of the British Isles, and maybe Gauls of France also, partly descend from the North Western Coastal Tribes. While the Scandanavians and Gemranic peoples (including Angl-Saxons and maybe Franks) partly come from Dan. Thus meaning there is some truth in the Britam Model (I also agree with Britam on Edom being Rome, and Moab & Amon being Spain & Portugal, but not so much identifying Edom with Germany or Japan).
I have also looked into the claims of those who believe many "Negroes" are the "True Israelites". Like a Video on YouTube called Hidden History of Blacks in The Bible. This video supports garbage like the Kazzar myth, and just generally agrees with the "Race" concept rather then rejecting it as I do. And supports Legalism which I don't like, and a very Ethnocentric view of The Gospel.
On it's claims about History though. First I should note while it throws around the phrase "Lost Tribes" a few times, it does not claim Negros descend from the Assyrian Captivity or even Babylonian, but rather the Roman Captivity. And it doesn't claim all Black Africans are Israelites, but mainly those specific tribes targeted by the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, of which the Igbo are the most notorious. I find that argument quite compelling, we know via the Prophetess Anna mentioned in Luke that some of these same Tribes I was just discussing had a remnant still in Israel during the Time of Christ. Plus what happened to the remaining Ephraimites I haven't explained yet.
However the specific Tribal Identity theory this video promoted makes African Americans Judah, while I now think the Judahites in Africa would be Aksum Ethiopia (not to be confused with Biblical Ethiopia). The main reason the Ethiopian Beta Israel claims aren't considered as Genetically verified as other Jewish groups is because they don't seem genetically distinct from the Gentiles of Ethiopia. Two of the three major Haplogroups associated with Jews are present in that part of Africa. The one missing is the one I think most likely to have entered Jewry via European Jews intermingling with Europeans.
I think the Gentiles of Ethiopia are of Judean ancestry as well. The Christians are probably descended from Jews who converted to Christianity, and while I don't think the Menelik Dynasty descends from Solomon and Sheba. I do think they might descend from King Jehoahaz who was last seen being taken to Egypt by Necho, and/or from the Daughters of Zedekiah who came to Egypt later mentioned in Jeremiah. Then later maybe some Judeans who came to Africa after the Roman conquest joined them.
The Pagans of Ethiopia are according to the oral traditions of one of them descended from Canaanite tribes. Yet I have made an important point out of how there is no Biblical Basis for connecting Canaan to Africa. However Ezekiel 16 talks about Jews who worship the Canaanite gods, or worship Yahuah in a Canaanite fashion, as being spiritually children of Canaanites. So I think these Pagan Pseudo-Canaanites of Ethiopia are really Jews who fell into Idolatry. Interestingly these tribes do seem to practice a Monotheistic form of Paganism.
But going back to the Enslaved Western Africans being Israelites. The video I mentioned uses the Bondage in Egypt, and Joel 3's reference to Israelites being sold into Slavery, and the various Captivities, and the Books of Maccabees alluding to Jews being Enslaved by Antiochus Epiphanes, all as Prophetic evidence that being Enslaved is itself evidence of Israelite heritage.
Well Africans weren't the only people enslaved by the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. Many Native Americans were as well. But also going back to what I argued above, so were many of the Irish. Also both Ashkenazim Jews and Japanese people (and others) were Enslaved in Concentration Camps during WWII.
Of the nine peoples mentioned in Egyptian texts who we today group together as Sea Peoples, only five were called that by the Egyptians. The Denyen were instead the people of the Isles or Islands. The Lukka appear to be Lydia (Biblical Lud) in modern Turkey, but it could also refer to the Lycia on the Mediterranean coast of Asia Minor. The Prrst are popularly identified as the Philistines but we know they were the Persians. And the Tjekker are the most enigmatic. None of those four were called Sea Peoples.
The Ekwesh and Weshesh are never both mentioned at the same time. The Ekwesh are mentioned only by Merneptah. And the Weshesh by 20th Dynasty and later texts. With the common Wesh element in their names, I feel it's safe to make a "Clark Kent is never around when Superman shows up" observation. So we thus can narrow the Sea Peoples down to four people groups.
The Weshesh being identified with Asher is well known, as are theories connecting the Shekelesh to either Isshachar or Shechem. I've mentioned before my theory for connecting the Sherden to the Sardite clan descended from Sered of the Tribe of Zebulun mentioned in Numbers 26:26, and Joshua 19:10-12 associates a location called Sarid with Zebulun. And I also think the Teresh could come from Tirzah, a city of Western Manasseh. As a final minor note the Tjeker are linked in one text to Dor, a coastal city of Manasseh, but also near both Asher and Zebulun, and who's Governor under Solomon was married to a Daughter of Solomon.
On my other blog I did a Lost Tribes follow up post where I showed it was only the Trans-Jordan Tribes, Naphtali, and part of Ephraim (mainly Samaria) who were deported by Assyria. And I believe they were taken East of the Euphrates and so can't be linked to Europe. And I made a point of how Western Manasseh, Asher, Zebulun & Isshachar, and some of Ephraim still existed in their allotments at the time of Hezekiah's Passover.
Of those, Western Manasseh, Asher, Zebulun & Issachar I feel can also be labeled the North Western Coastal Tribes, who between Genesis 49 and Deuteronomy 33 seem to have a bit of a Sea Faring destiny foretold for them. So identifying the Sea Peoples with these tribes I feel does not conflict with with Velikovsky's Ionian identifications for them, as I believe they would have traveled by sea to that region, and perhaps both founded colonies there and intermingled with the descendants of Javan and Lud who already dwelt there. Also Joel 3 described Israelites being sold into Slavery to Greeks.
In my post on Gog and Magog I talk about Gyges of Lydia and his role in the history of the Sherden.
One of the most important Ionian cities was Miletus. I agree with Bill Cooper who in After The Flood argued that people from Miletus migrated to Ireland as the Milesians about 510 BC. But I also feel other migrations of Galiac peoples to Ireland from Ionia happened around 300 and 100 BC since I also see some truth to O'Rahilly's Model. Earlier the list of Sea Powers has Miletus as the dominant Sea Power when the Northern Kingdom fell.
So I think the Irish and possibly other peoples of the British Isles, and maybe Gauls of France also, partly descend from the North Western Coastal Tribes. While the Scandanavians and Gemranic peoples (including Angl-Saxons and maybe Franks) partly come from Dan. Thus meaning there is some truth in the Britam Model (I also agree with Britam on Edom being Rome, and Moab & Amon being Spain & Portugal, but not so much identifying Edom with Germany or Japan).
I have also looked into the claims of those who believe many "Negroes" are the "True Israelites". Like a Video on YouTube called Hidden History of Blacks in The Bible. This video supports garbage like the Kazzar myth, and just generally agrees with the "Race" concept rather then rejecting it as I do. And supports Legalism which I don't like, and a very Ethnocentric view of The Gospel.
On it's claims about History though. First I should note while it throws around the phrase "Lost Tribes" a few times, it does not claim Negros descend from the Assyrian Captivity or even Babylonian, but rather the Roman Captivity. And it doesn't claim all Black Africans are Israelites, but mainly those specific tribes targeted by the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, of which the Igbo are the most notorious. I find that argument quite compelling, we know via the Prophetess Anna mentioned in Luke that some of these same Tribes I was just discussing had a remnant still in Israel during the Time of Christ. Plus what happened to the remaining Ephraimites I haven't explained yet.
However the specific Tribal Identity theory this video promoted makes African Americans Judah, while I now think the Judahites in Africa would be Aksum Ethiopia (not to be confused with Biblical Ethiopia). The main reason the Ethiopian Beta Israel claims aren't considered as Genetically verified as other Jewish groups is because they don't seem genetically distinct from the Gentiles of Ethiopia. Two of the three major Haplogroups associated with Jews are present in that part of Africa. The one missing is the one I think most likely to have entered Jewry via European Jews intermingling with Europeans.
I think the Gentiles of Ethiopia are of Judean ancestry as well. The Christians are probably descended from Jews who converted to Christianity, and while I don't think the Menelik Dynasty descends from Solomon and Sheba. I do think they might descend from King Jehoahaz who was last seen being taken to Egypt by Necho, and/or from the Daughters of Zedekiah who came to Egypt later mentioned in Jeremiah. Then later maybe some Judeans who came to Africa after the Roman conquest joined them.
The Pagans of Ethiopia are according to the oral traditions of one of them descended from Canaanite tribes. Yet I have made an important point out of how there is no Biblical Basis for connecting Canaan to Africa. However Ezekiel 16 talks about Jews who worship the Canaanite gods, or worship Yahuah in a Canaanite fashion, as being spiritually children of Canaanites. So I think these Pagan Pseudo-Canaanites of Ethiopia are really Jews who fell into Idolatry. Interestingly these tribes do seem to practice a Monotheistic form of Paganism.
But going back to the Enslaved Western Africans being Israelites. The video I mentioned uses the Bondage in Egypt, and Joel 3's reference to Israelites being sold into Slavery, and the various Captivities, and the Books of Maccabees alluding to Jews being Enslaved by Antiochus Epiphanes, all as Prophetic evidence that being Enslaved is itself evidence of Israelite heritage.
Well Africans weren't the only people enslaved by the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. Many Native Americans were as well. But also going back to what I argued above, so were many of the Irish. Also both Ashkenazim Jews and Japanese people (and others) were Enslaved in Concentration Camps during WWII.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)