Marc Verhaegen wrote:
>
> Hebrew seems very definitely to belong to the geographically
north-western group of Semitic dialects with Phoenician and other
"Canaanite" dialects such as Eblaite, Ugaritic etc. Arabic does not.
So, if the Israelites originated in south-west Arabia, why didn't
they speak a south Semitic (e.g. Sabaean) or Arabic dialect?
Also while there is evidence of the neo-Babylonian Khaldi in western
Arabia there is no evidence at all of a presence in Saba.
> If that is so, Salibi must be wrong. I always wondered why I never
saw a serious discussion of his idea.
>
> This is all a bit off-subject for this group, but if you're
interested in this kind of thing, you should check out Ahmed Osman
("The House of the Messiah", "Moses:Pharaoh of Egypt"). He basically
claims (more plausibly IMO) that Moses was Akhnaten, and the
Israelites his Egyptian followers.
Ever since James Henry Breasted claimed Akhenaton to have been a
monotheistic pharaoh there have been people linking Moses and
Akhenaton. Freud was one, Emmanuel Velikovski was another, in his
case linking Akhenaton with Oedipus (via a common association between
the Sphinx and Thebes!
There has been a recent re-evaluation of Akhenaton's monotheism. It
would appear that rather than a strict monotheist, Akhenaton was a
henotheist. He only worshipped one god, Aten, but his god was not
asserted to be the only god. Only the temple of Amon-Ra in Thebes
was
shut down, and it would appear that Akhenaton was peculiarly
anti-Amonite in his theology. Canopic jars, bearing the four divine
heads, (baboon for Thoth, falcon for Horus, jackal for Anubis and a
woman for Maat) were made for burial during the Amarna period. Maat,
as truth, continued to be venerated in the Amarna period, and Isis
(as
the throne) was also continually worshipped. Indeed, some have
declared that the monotheistic god Akhenaton really worshipped was
himself. The royal family, Akhenaton, Nefertiti and their daughters
replaced the Osirian family in royal iconography. There is also no
connection between Amarna period and Joshua's invasion of Palestine.
There is also no possible connection between Nefertiti, the daughter
of Ay and Tey, sister of Mutmodjmet, wife of Horemhab, and Moses'
wife daughter of Jethro. Akhenaton dad not been crown prince. His
brother Thutmose had predeceased him, but his mother Tiy, daughter of
Huya and Thuya, sister to Ay, were Egyptian and not Hebrew. The
evidence of the Amarna letters speak of Apiru (from whence came the
word Hebrew), but saw them as enemies of Akhenaton, rather than
allies. Aziru, the Apiru chief of Amurru in northern Syria managed
to
disconnect his state from Egyptian influence to Hittite suzerainty.
Apiru were deported from Amki, and an Egyptian governor was
established in Jerusalem to keep the Apiru at bay. There was a
plague
that may have decimated the royal family, but it probably killed
Akhenaton as well.
> On the other hand there's David Rohl ("A Test of Time") who equates
> the biblical pharaoh Shishak with Ramses II, and thereby "proves"
the
> historical accuracy of the OT. However, to do this he has to remove
> some 300 years from history, thus bringing events such as the
> Invasions of the Sea Peoples down to about 900BCE or later.
Once again, the attempt of Rohl has been to create a concordance
between his schema of the Biblical dates and the Egyptian records.
Removing 300 years from the Egyptian records not only requires a
modification of the Egyptian history, but also the Hittite,
Babylonian
and Mycenaean. It removes the Anatolian dark age altogether, and
with
the Dorian invasion 1000 BCE and the Aeolian, Ionian and Doric
settlements of Anatolian coast from 900-800 BCE, also needing major
modifications. Carbon 14 correspondences are all thrown out all over
the place too. In IE studies it effects the Urn Field and Villanovan
cultures dates which have been set at 1200 BCE, and would also need
to
be set at 900 BCE. This throws out central European Carbon 14 and
means that there is no association between Steppe movements, the
spread of the Urn Field cultures and the chain reaction of movements
leading to the Peoples of the Sea.
> I rather suspect contemporary political motives behind such
> writings.
I suspect the attempts to placate religious constituencies is rather
more involved. Rohl has particularly good credentials but is a pity
that he has gone into the Archaeological who-dunnit best seller mode.
His latest best seller "Legend", attempts to prove the accuracy of
the
whole bble and locates Eden besides Lake Van!
Regards
John Croft