Biblical Hebrew Forum

[MarianneLuban AT aol.com]

In a message dated 8/19/2004 10:53:42 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
Banyai AT t-online.de writes:


> Thuthmosis III is clear in this retrospect. "But it happened in later times 
> as the garrison was (came?) there in the town Of Sharuhen, that from Jurza 
> to the outer ends of the earth (every man) had become rebellious against 
> his 
> majesty" This means from Jurza southwards was all under controll. There is 
> no 
> place for a rebellious Awaris between the period of Ahmose and Thutmosis 
> III.

Oh, yes, there is.  First off, you know that what you quoted is broken and 
only variously reconstructed by philologists.  So there is no real way to 
know 
exactly what Sharuhen had to do with anything.  Secondly, Manetho wrote that 
the king "Tethmosis" first made a siege on Avaris and ultimately made a pact 
with the inhabitants to leave WITHOUT BLOODSHED.  I put this in caps because 
it 
is very important IMO and certainly does not coincide with the bloody battles 
indicated in texts from the time of Kamose and Ahmose--let alone their 
predecessor, Seqenenre, whose mummy shows that he had his head bashed in by 
both 
Hyksos mace and battle-axe.  For some reason, Egyptologists want Ahmose to 
have 
been highly successful, making Egypt "Hyksos-rein" and are not inclined to 
believe anything that Hatshepsut said on account of the way she treated their 
"darling" Thutmose III.  But they were not there--and if you call one ruler a 
liar, 
you may as well call them all liars, too.