Biblical Hebrew Forum

["K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Just out of curiosity:

On 11/11/07, Tory Thorpe <torythrp AT yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I think we can safely rule out Danuna, a kingdom thought to have been
> situated in eastern Cilicia. It is mentioned, for example, in the
> Amarna letter EA 151. Then again, the location of Danuna, and at
> least the origin of the people Danuna, is a subject of debate. I
> suppose it is not impossible for there to have been a well-known
> settlement of Danunites in northern Canaan during the time of the
> Patriarchs.
>
> Tory Thorpe

Why do you assume that just because there is a name to a geographical
location, that there was a settlement there?

To give an example, the description in Genesis of Beersheva at the
time of Abraham was that there was only a well there, with the only
settlement the occasional temporary tent of a nomad. There was no
town. That came later, much later. Yet it was a named place. How many
other named sites mentioned at the times of the patriarchs were merely
wells at good camping places?

Karl W. Randolph.