b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
[b-hebrew] Amalekites exist OUTSIDE the scripture sources???
- From: Banyai AT t-online.de (Michael Banyai)
- To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: [b-hebrew] Amalekites exist OUTSIDE the scripture sources???
- Date: 09 Aug 2004 13:15 GMT
Beg your pardon Yigal, but I can not see how you replyed the evidence for the
Amalekites, I brought in my paper.
The only point you have made was that any arabic (not to say islamic) sources
concerning the Amalekites postpones our biblical literature by a millenium.
I pointed you to the fact that this evidence is only the youngest showing the
Amalekites as a people dwelling in the same region later islamic reference
had them. See for example the position of the Malichae (of Ptolemaios) on the
map reconstruction of Arabia by Groom - once more in the region Mekka/Medinah
- as in the arabian and kuranic lore. Taking a place by Iathrippa (Medina)
and Macoraba (Mekka). One must add, the reason for the scarce references to
the Malichae (by Plinius - para-Malacum that is a Greek beyond the Malichae -
in the same position like the Malichae of Ptolemy) during the late antiquity
is the obviously very little known geography of Arabia. Arabia was during all
the helenistic and roman time a big mystery.
I furthermore pointed you to the fact that the coeval mention of Meluhha in
Assyrian and Akkadian sources parallels that of Amalek in biblical ones,
being used for a country in Arabia, ocasionally stretching into the Sinai,
anyway filling the Arabian desert till to the Euphrates by the bridge of Bazu
(probably Zeugma=Greek bridge). See for Bazu both the geography of Sargon of
Akkade and the inscription of Sfire.
You could have take notice that a further name given to Meluhha was Musri,
the same name as later used for Egypt. See for example Sfire and the coeval
Assyrian inscriptions speaking of BZ, and M$R.
The reason is the identity of the Meluhha/Amalekites with the Hyksos. The
Hyksos labelled the name of their polity onto the conquered Egypt. For all
this there exists a huge and detailed argumentation.
Now, I can not remember in which point you have tried to correct me till now.
Should this have happened, than I will politely excuse myself not having
answered your objections.
Best regards,
Bányai Michael
Stuttgart
-
[b-hebrew] Amalekites exist OUTSIDE the scripture sources???,
wattswestmaas, 08/08/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Amalekites exist OUTSIDE the scripture sources???,
Yigal Levin, 08/08/2004
-
Message not available
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Amalekites exist OUTSIDE the scripture sources???,
Yigal Levin, 08/08/2004
-
[b-hebrew] Amalekites exist OUTSIDE the scripture sources???,
Michael Banyai, 08/09/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Amalekites exist OUTSIDE the scripture sources???,
Yigal Levin, 08/09/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Amalekites exist OUTSIDE the scripture sources???, Brian Roberts, 08/09/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Amalekites exist OUTSIDE the scripture sources???,
Yigal Levin, 08/09/2004
-
[b-hebrew] Amalekites exist OUTSIDE the scripture sources???,
Michael Banyai, 08/09/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Amalekites exist OUTSIDE the scripture sources???,
Yigal Levin, 08/08/2004
-
Message not available
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Amalekites exist OUTSIDE the scripture sources???,
Yigal Levin, 08/08/2004
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: [b-hebrew] Amalekites exist OUTSIDE the scripture sources???, Michael Banyai, 08/09/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.