[b-hebrew] Amalekites (evidence for)
peterkirk at qaya.org
Mon Aug 9 06:36:55 EDT 2004
On 08/08/2004 12:12, Walter R. Mattfeld wrote:
>As you may be aware, many proposals have been made for the siting of Mount
>Sinai (over a dozen), but to date, ALL have been rejected because NONE have
>the _required pottery debris_ evidence of the Late Bronze Age (1560-1200
>BCE) in which the Exodus is understood to have occured. ONLY HAR TIMNA
>(Arabic: Gebel Mene'iyeh) has the REQUIRED Late Bronze Age evidence of
>Amalekite, Midianite and Egyptian pottery- I have thus argued that this site
>is Mount Sinai. ...
But what if the Exodus took place late in the Middle Bronze Age, as
postulated by David Rohl?
>... However, it does not have the shattered stone tablets- that
>site is Serabit el Khadim in the southern Sinai, which was ALSO occupied in
>the Late Bronze and Ramesside period. ...
This is a ridiculous example of the argument from silence taken to an
absurdity. According to the Exodus account, there were only two
shattered stone tablets, small enough that one person could carry both.
If their remains haven't been found at any proposed site for Sinai, that
proves only that they haven't been found. And anyone who has been to the
traditional site as I have will realise how easy it would be for such
fragements to be lost forever in the rocky mountains or among the scree,
alluvium and sand which fills the valleys - or for that matter
underneath St Catherine's monastery or any other ancient site which has
not been excavated. In fact such places could easily hide not only two
broken stone tablets but also large amounts of broken pottery. The whole
thing is an argument from silence.
peter at qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk at qaya.org (work)
More information about the b-hebrew