Biblical Hebrew Forum

[MarianneLuban AT aol.com]

In a message dated 8/26/2004 9:48:25 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
peterkirk AT qaya.org writes:


> 
> >...
> >
> >"Beginning  since the Aamu were in the midst of the Northland [Delta] [in] 
> >Avaris, vagrants among them, toppling what had been made, they ruled in 
> >the 
> 
> >absence of Re, not by divine command down to the time of my Majesty"
> >
> >H3  Dr   definitely means "beginning since" and not "from the time", as 
> some 
> >scholars have put it--with prejudice.  Even though "n  rf  m wDw nTr"  is 
> >clearly there, some have arbitrarily changed "rf" to "iri=f" [he does or 
> did] 
> >coming up with "and he did not act by divine decree" [meaning Re did not], 
> which 
> >makes no sense.  "rf" is merely an emphatic, best left untranslated, 
> >emphasizing the notion that there was no "wDw ntr" [best translated by the 
> German 
> >"Gottesgebot"] i.e., complete godlessness going on in that Delta right up 
> to the 
> >time of Hatshepsut.  Then she goes on to say something to the effect that 
> now she 
> >is on the throne,  the snake on her brow spitting fire at her enemies, she 
> >has "banished the abomination of the gods"--meaning those Aamu.  No doubt 
> about 
> >it--she claims the credit.
> >  
> >
> 
> Marianne, could this be understood as meaning that the Hyksos, by 
> destroying the temples in the delta, made the whole area completely 
> godless, and that (in her worldview) it remained godless, even after the 
> Hyksos had left, because there were no temples there? Could "banished 
> the abomination of the gods" mean not banishing remaining Aamu but 
> banishing ungodliness by reestablishing temples?
> 

Perhaps you had better ask that of a person in whose expertise you have 
faith--like David Rohl.  I have an idea no response of mine, giving any 
opinion, 
will satisfy you.