Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Akhenaten and the Hebrew Religion

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>
  • To: "Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Akhenaten and the Hebrew Religion
  • Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 05:41:53 -0500


----- Original Message -----
From: MarianneLuban AT aol.com

> In a message dated 7/22/2004 8:26:02 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> dwashbur AT nyx.net writes:
>
>…
>
> The Sheshonq/Shishak identification has not been "seriously called into
> question" at all. And there would be no good reason linquistically and in
> terms of
> time. "Shishak" is a very good approximation of Sheshonq because Egyptian
> /n/ was a notoriously weak phoneme that often even disappeared in the
> writing of
> the Egyptians, themselves, for that very reason. Like /m/, /b/ and /p/, it
> often elided into the following consonant in pronunciation.
>
> Suffice to say that stating such things as if they were >
> > absolute fact shouldn't be done. The "conventional wisdom" THINKS it's
> > the
> > case, but again, we're not certain.
> >
> >
> By that logic, everything can be questioned that is not absolutely written
> in
> stone. However, the conquest of Judah of Sheshonq I *is* written in
> stone--and can still be seen in Egypt.
>
> And apparently you didn't read my final >
> > paragraph below, because in it I said I don't really see the need to find
> > a
> > "better candidate." It's clear that I'm not going to get through, so I'm
> > out
> > of this topic.
>
>
> In order to "get through" you are going to have to do better than just
> argue
> from cryptic negativity--on any topic. My guess is that you have been
> reading
> David Rohl.
> Have you?

Marianne:

This discussion is off topic, so I will limit myself to this one comment.

Many of us are linguists, not historians, so I decided to take a few hours
and look up some of what this is discussing. So I looked up an Egyptian
pharaoh list just to see what was claimed: one of the first things I noticed
was the number of question marks, mostly as to dates, but also even to
identities of who were pharaohs. And this was from a list that agrees with
you for the most part.

Sheshonq I’s record of attacking Judea is based on an interpretation of one
name, and in the record that I read, that one name was identified in 1821 and
it is in dispute. It does not match the picture given in Kings and Chronicles
of Sheshak.

I never heard of David Rohl before, but now I find that he’s just one of many
who give different answers to what they percieve as difficulties with
traditional dating.

For me, my reading of Exodus gives clues that at that time, Israel was living
under the heel of a Hyksos pharaoh, not a native Egyptian one. Not proof,
just clues. But it’s enough for me to say that we don’t know enough to say
conclusively.

Karl W. Randolph.
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page