|
Why don't we start with the CW that Moses, Hofni,
Phineas, perhaps Aaron (and according to one set of opinions in a recent
discussion on the ANE List, Miriam as well; but I suggested an Amorite or
Canaanite etymology) are Egyptian names? Moses is a hypocorisitc of an
Egyptian
theophoric name, like Ra--mses, Thoth-mes. I don't remember the suggested
etymologies of the other names.
Add to this the anonymous prophet's words to Eli in
1 Sam. 2:17: "Did I not reveal Myself your father's house when they were in
Egypt [belonging to/serving] Pharaoh's house?" The story there may be fictional;
but this detail, serving as motivation for Divine punishment, would be a strange
thing indeed to invent.
It's things like these that lead me to the
conclusion that the Exodus traditions have some sort of historical kernel in
them, however much it may have been distorted by later accretions and theology.
Exactly what sort of kernel? It's a matter of conjecture, like that cited below
(and which is as good, or as bad, as any other conjecture).
Sincerely,
Jonathan D. Safren
Chairman
Dept. of Biblical Studies
Beit Berl
College
44905 Israel
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2001 9:08
AM
Subject: Out of Egypt
Some among us hold to a
very literal understanding of the BH (and the NT)
while others, including
myself, do not. I do not write this to attack the
views of those who
hold the historicity of these accounts as fundamental to
their faith.
I am simply pointing out for the sake of understanding what I
am
proposing that I do not agree with their position. Nevertheless, the
accounts do not seem to be simply made up out of whole cloth.
Beneath them
there usually seems to lie a kernal of fact which has
been transmogrified
into its present form. It was customary for
kings to give grandiose
descriptions of their reigns and accomplishments
-- are the accounts of David
and Solomon perhaps no different in this
respect? But the accounts of David
and Solomon are not my concern
here. It has been fairly well established
that Israel grew out
of a people indiginous to Palestine. Why then do we
have an account
of the entrance of the patriarchs into Egypt and the
subsequent exodus
many years later under Moses?
I have been reading Redford's _Egypt,
Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times.
While I do not hold to the
view presented in the Torah of the patriarchs
going to Egypt with the
subsequent exodus therefrom under Moses as literal
history, something
struck me regarding what Redford says.
1) Redford speaks of
certain cultural factors which seems to have been
acquired by Egypt from
mesopotamia. He maintains that this must have been
transmitted by
actual persons rather than simply through cultural borrowing.
He
also posits a northern route for this cultural infusion (by sea).
2) The Egyptian god Seth is presented as a boar who slays Osirius.
Osirus'
consort Isis flees to the marshes to seek safety. Her
child (Horus -- the
falcon) is there hidden in a nest (she is portrayed as
a kite).
3) Redford also speaks of a "Seth: Peribsen" who (like
Akhenaten?) who may
have been a "heretic king" who replaced the the Horus
symbol with that of
Seth. His name is attested in contemporary
inscriptions but is left out of
the king list. His successor
Kha'sekhem changed his name to Kha'sekhemwy
Nebwy-hotpimef. Redford
explains this as "The Two Powerful Ones have arisen,
the Two Lords (i.e.
Horus and Seth) are at peace in him." Perhaps this
symbolizes some
rapprochement between the two factions.
In view of the well-known
proscription of pork among Jews, the nest (ark?) in
which the child is
hidden. and Redford's surmise that mesopotamian culture
was transmitted to
Egypt by PEOPLE, is it possible that this is the basis for
the exodus
myth? Might the Israelites be the descendents of some who fled
the
"heretic king" who attempted to establis the worship of Seth? Might the
aversion to pork be explained as a result of their aversion to this god
who
was represented by the boar? The eagle and kite were also
prohibited. Cf.
Lev. 11.13-18
13The following you shall
abominate among the birds—they shall not be eaten,
they are an
abomination: the eagle, the vulture, and the black vulture; 14the
kite,
falcons of every variety; 15all varieties of raven; 16the ostrich, the
nighthawk, the sea gull; hawks of every variety; 17the little owl, the
cormorant, and the great owl; 18the white owl, the pelican, and the
bustard;
19the stork; herons of every variety; the hoopoe, and the bat.
(TaNaK, Jewish
Publication Society, 1985)
Might the prohibition of
eating the eagle, kite, etc. also be explained by
this originally being
the representation of their own God? Cf. Deut. 32.
7-12
7Remember the days of old,
Consider the years of ages past;
Ask your father, he will inform you,
Your elders, they will tell you:
8When the Most High gave nations their homes
And set the divisions of
man,
He fixed the boundaries of peoples
In relation to Israel’s
numbers.
9For the Lord‘s portion is His people,
Jacob His own
allotment.
10He found him in a desert region,
In an empty howling
waste.
He engirded him, watched over him,
Guarded him as the pupil of
His eye.
11Like an eagle who rouses his nestlings,
Gliding down to his
young,
So did He spread His wings and take him,
Bear him along on His
pinions;
12The Lord alone did guide him,
No alien god at His side.
(TaNaK, Jewish Publication Society, 1985)
After considerable
time these fugitives would have become acculturated to
their Palestinian
home so that in many respects the would seem to be
indigenous.
During this time the mythology could have developed to the
accounts
we now possess.
Perhaps this would be better submitted to the ANE
list, but I was interested
in comments from those interested specifically
in the HB. BTW: Don't be
confused by my use of the TaNaK -- I
am a Christian)
gfsomsel ---
You are currently subscribed to
b-hebrew as: [yonsaf AT beitberl.ac.il]
To unsubscribe, forward this message
to $subst('Email.Unsub')
To subscribe, send an email
to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.
|
