Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Ian Hutchesson <mc2499 AT mclink.it>]

At 16.56 22/02/99 +0200, Jonathan D. Safren wrote:
>Perhaps, Ian, you would like to re-indicate why the Biblical info on the
>Hittites (or the Hurrians/Horites/Hivites) is misguided,

Hi Jonathan.

I must first admit that I have difficulty understanding why you have strung
together Hurrians/Horites/Hivites.

If I glean the prevailing learned guess, the Hivites were probably the
Achaiwaya, an Indo-European group (Achaeans) which moved into Palestine
with the Philistines.

The Horites are mentioned three times in the OT/HB each related with Mount
Seir.

The Hurrians were a group living in eastern Anatolia/north-west
Mesopotamia. Their leaders, Indo-Europeans, formed the controlling class of
the Mitanni empire, a state that was in conflict with the Hittites from
about 1500 to 1370 BCE when it was eventually carved up between Assyria and
the Hittites.

>especially in
>view of the fact that the 14th-century BCE Tell El Amarna texts are full
>of Indo-European and Hurrian names (Shuwardata, Puti-Heba, Biridiya),
>the person from whom David bought the Temple Mount is an ewir (Hurrian),
>and Shamgar ben Anat can also be interpreted as a Hurrian name.

While it is only to be expected that Hurrian names would be found mentioned
in El-Amarna letters dealing with Syria, it is there that their influences
met. Naturally, it's also not particularly strange that the Egyptians did
maintain correspondence with the Hittites as the other major player at the
Egyptians' northern border. I don't see what this has to do with Judah.

I did not comment about the Hurrians, so I can't see what they particualrly
have to do with my statement about the Hittites. (I'd be interested in the
exact reference to this "ewir", if you could supply it!)

The Hittites did have a brief hold over northern Syria during the reigns of
Hattushilish and Murshilish, but lost control to the Mitanni under
Khantilish. Given the geopolitical situation, the Hittites never made it
south beyond northern Syria -- at least there is no record in Hatti or any
temporal opportunity: Hattushilish after taking northern Syria (Yamkhad)
turned north again to deal with other Hittite borders. Murshilish was more
interested in Babylon and was responsible for the collapse of the Hammurabi
dynasty when he sacked the city. Khantilish had to deal with the Mitanni
problem, eventually losing his holdings in northern Syria to the latter.

The Hittites were an Indo-European group, not Semitic as the connection
with the Canaanite groups would suggest. While there is nothing to
*directly* contradict the notion of the Hittites having been a Canaanite
population at some stage, it is so unlikely that it must be discounted --
given what we know of them -- until something from the period can sustain a
Hittite population in Palestine. As things stand there is nothing we can
show to make the biblical references to the Hittites have any historical
sense.


Ian

I: Tell me, Ringo, have you ever seen Frankenstein?
R: Frankenstein... um... No, but I knew his sister, Phillis.