Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Banyai AT t-online.de (Michael Banyai)]

Peter Kirk wrote:

> > This seems a good argument for Abraham's Pharaoh's first name being 
> > Nebkaure. But there is another possibility put forward by David Rohl, 
> > that he was Nebkaure Khety of the 10th (or 9th?) dynasty (whose father's 
> > name is unknown or uncertain). Is there a good reason to prefer one 
> > Nebkaure to the other, except that Amenemhet II is better known?

There is of course no argument pro or con Amenemhet II or Khety except 
Plinius calling his Nenchoreus a Sosiidis filius, thus a son of some 
Sesostris. There is however, now discussing not about, what the sources may 
have meant, a high probability to identify Amenemhet II with the pharaoh 
contemporary with Abraham on several historical reasons.

The probable appearence on the historical stage of Retenu during exactly this 
period, I mean, reign of Amenemhet II, first time in the story of Sinuhe. 
Destructions just several decenia before in the region of Chabur (nota bene 
Urkesh is Uru Kasdim). Attribution of the reign of Abraham by the people of 
the age of Joshua to 1944 BC (that means dedication of Schechem temple 
attributed to Abraham - thus conceived to have been a 7-daru period before 
the similar later activities of Joshua in Schehem).  etc etc. 

Best regards

Bányai Michael
Stuttgart