Biblical Hebrew Forum

[barre AT access1.com]

How could Lab'aya give up the land of Shechem if he did not reside there?  
How did he get 
the cooperation of it alleged ruler?  No, the direct conclusion is that he 
gave it up because it 
was his to give.  Why are you predisposed against this conclusion held by 
many if not all?  
What's wrong with the identification?  Lab'aya clearly threatened Megiddo, 
his neighbor to 
the north.  Do you have any reason whatsoever to think that he came from 
elsewhere?  He 
gave up the land of Shechem.  Why conclude that it was not his home to give?  
Why 
postulate possession from afar?  Are you not being obscurant?

LMB


> ** Original Subject: RE: Evidence
> ** Original Sender: Niels Peter Lemche <npl AT teol.ku.dk>
> ** Original Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 08:50:24 -0800

> ** Original Message follows... 

>
> Barre forgets that also Gezer is mentioned a number of times. Lab'aya
> himself--who seems to nothing about a second name of his--mentions himself
> to be at Gezer. Hinnatunna in Galilee is also mentioned. Furthermore the
> ruler of Gitti Padalla also mentions Lab'aya. The only safe thing to say is
> that his sun Mut-Ba'lu ruled Pella east of the Jordan. Did Lab'aya also
> belong to that part of the area? We cannot know as Lab'aya is never put into
> any safe and undisputed connection with any city of the time. And as to the
> internal logic of the Amarna letters, it is hardly as easy as envisaged by
> Barre. As to archaeology, I indicated that the results so far published are
> likely to need a severe revision by new excavations at tell balata, but I
> will leave that part to some archaeologists of the future. 
> 
> Barre has mailed a longish answer to my position, but privately. I have
> asked him to come out in the open.
> 
> 
> NPL
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:       barre AT access1.com [SMTP:barre AT access1.com]
> > Sent:       Tuesday, 08 February, 2000 17:07
> > To: Biblical Hebrew
> > Subject:    Evidence
> > 
> > The two identifiable cities from the El Amarna letter that speak of
> > Lab'aya are Megiddo, 
> > located about 30 miles north of Shechem and Jerusalem, located about 30
> > miles south.  How 
> > could Lab'aya relinquish the land of Shechem if he was not in fact its
> > vassal king?  No, we 
> > can go with Tooms and everybody else that Lab'aya was indeed at home in
> > Shechem.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ---------------------------
> > L.M. Barre
> > http://www.angelfire.com/ca2/AncientIsrael
> > Point Loma, California
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: npl AT teol.ku.dk
> > To unsubscribe, forward this message to
> > $subst('Email.Unsub')
> > To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.


>** --------- End Original Message ----------- **

> 




---------------------------
L.M. Barre
http://www.angelfire.com/ca2/AncientIsrael
Point Loma, California