Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Amalek

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Banyai AT t-online.de (Michael Banyai)
  • To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Amalek
  • Date: 06 Jul 2004 09:14 GMT

Hallo Yigal,

I have not published any part of the paper yet. Checking the whole data down
to the last point is an immensely painfull work, since this is a panorama of
the history over literally the whole ANE.

I give you right concerning the arabic mentions of Amalek, they can be
followed down to the Koranic mentions. Mohammed should have had much to deal
with the Amalekites turned to Jewishness, which he later expelled out of
Mekka and Medinah toward Syria. We of course have no older mention of them in
arabic literature, since this is the very oldest existing.

However we can link these mentions with the ones in the roman and greek
sources (for example Claudius Ptolemeus) pertaining to the same geographic
region and slowly make thus the link to the Assyrian, and Biblical ones. It
appears they were known to the Assyrians as the Meluhha, while at the same
time known as the Amalek to the biblical writers.

I´ll take your papers under sight. Of course you are right that the biblical
Cush here has to be understood as the babylonian Kish. I place here no doubt.
I however beleave there could be a link between the babylonian Kish, first
seat of an all babylonian kingdom, and these widely dispersed semitic
kusithes all around the fringes of this fabulous kingdom. THIS is of course
just a supposition, while the Kish=Cush equation is certain.

All the best,

Bányai Michael





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page