Ramases, was [b-hebrew] Amalekites!
kwrandolph at email.com
Thu Aug 12 02:28:53 EDT 2004
Shortly after the Tower of Babel, when Egypt was settled, there werent enough pharaohs to name all the cities and areas after. Therefore, many places were named after the first settler, farmer, town founder, whatever, at the place. True, before a pharaoh was named Rameses, it was an uncommon name, but it is Egyptian. With the way the records are so fragmentory, we cant rule out a place name named after the first farmer in the district.
Karl W. Randolph.
----- Original Message -----
From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk at qaya.org>
> On 10/08/2004 06:46, Karl Randolph wrote:
> >Rameses in Genesis 47 is a place name, probably not referring to a city, not a personal name. Who says that a place had to be named after a pharaoh?
> Well, maybe not, but the name Rameses was almost unknown in Egypt until
> the time of Rameses I, and then became very popular because two
> important Pharaohs carried the name, and many things (and nine more
> Pharaohs) were named or renamed after them, including a major city in
> just the region described in Genesis, previously known as Avaris.
> This is as if we read in a 19th century account of early settlement in
> America that a certain group settled in the 17th century on the Potomac
> river in the Washington area. Now we can't rule out the possibility that
> there was an otherwise unknown place name Washington near the Potomac in
> the 17th century, named after the small place of that name in northern
> England. But it is far more likely that the author was referring
> anachronistically to the US capital city.
> The same place name Rameses is also found in Exodus 1:11, where it is
> often assumed not to be anachronistic and so to prove that the Exodus
> occurred no sooner than the time of Rameses II. But then if the name is
> anachronistic in Genesis, it may just as well be in Exodus.
> And there is a problem even then if the biblical dates are taken
> literally. If the city Rameses was named after Rameses I after he became
> Pharaoh (or after he died soon afterwards) before Exodus 1:11 and so
> before Moses was born, that puts the Exodus at least 80 years later and
> so at the very earliest at the very end of the long reign of Rameses II.
> Another 40 years for the Exodus wanderings, and puts the Conquest well
> into the 12th century which causes other chronological problems.
> Peter Kirk
> peter at qaya.org (personal)
> peterkirk at qaya.org (work)
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
More information about the b-hebrew