Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Harold R. Holmyard III" <hholmyard AT ont.com>]

Dear MIchael and Yigal,

This is somewhat out of my realm, but it seems I 
may have just read Kenneth Kitchen saying that 
Kushu was an Egyptian name for the Edomites, a 
name reflected in the Bible as Kushan:

Hab. 3:7 I saw the tents of Cushan in distress, 
the dwellings of Midian in anguish.

                                        Yours,
                                        Harold Holmyard

> 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.
> From Banyai AT t-online.de  Tue Jul  6 09:09:40 2004
Return-Path: <Banyai AT t-online.de>
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from mailout04.sul.t-online.com (mailout04.sul.t-online.com
        [194.25.134.18])
        by happyhouse.metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EF2D20080
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Tue,  6 Jul 2004 09:09:40 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from fwd04.aul.t-online.de by mailout04.sul.t-online.com with smtp
        id 1Bhphb-0008Lj-00; Tue, 06 Jul 2004 15:09:39 +0200
Received: from 192.168.2.100
        
(XRsSuoZBQeuZpX1G6hVCEjkForXaKmLDSO06xxPubLoUUWwJpJNyY9@[217.94.138.100])
        by fwd04.sul.t-online.com
        with smtp id 1Bhph8-1ntnvs0; Tue, 6 Jul 2004 15:09:10 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Amalek
From: Banyai AT t-online.de (Michael Banyai)
References: <1Bhb2I-0WP1Jg0 AT fwd07.sul.t-online.com>
        <003501c46306$f8ce74d0$2a664684@levin>
        <1Bhm2C-0e9go40 AT fwd04.sul.t-online.com>
        <a06020405bd105019ec6d AT 205.242.61.119>
In-Reply-To: <a06020405bd105019ec6d AT 205.242.61.119>
To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
X-Mailer: T-Online eMail 5.00.0021
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
Charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
Date: 06 Jul 2004 13:08 GMT
Message-ID: <1Bhph8-1ntnvs0 AT fwd04.sul.t-online.com>
X-Seen: false
X-ID: XRsSuoZBQeuZpX1G6hVCEjkForXaKmLDSO06xxPubLoUUWwJpJNyY9
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2004 13:09:40 -0000

Hallo Harold,

while I would not accept the judgement of Kitchen on the whole (the 
Midianites/Kushites where dwelling among the Edomites as we well know - so he 
might err in the fine detail) I am interested about the context of the 
statement.

Habakuk is exactly one of the sources to identify Midian with Kush/Kushan.

Best regards,

Bánai Michael
Stuttgart


> Dear MIchael and Yigal,
>
> This is somewhat out of my realm, but it seems I 
> may have just read Kenneth Kitchen saying that 
> Kushu was an Egyptian name for the Edomites, a 
> name reflected in the Bible as Kushan:
>
> Hab. 3:7 I saw the tents of Cushan in distress, 
> the dwellings of Midian in anguish.
>
>                                         Yours,
>                                         Harold Holmyard
>
> >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.
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew