Biblical Hebrew Forum

[James Read <J.Read-2 AT sms.ed.ac.uk>]

Thanks for that. That was interesting. I haven't gotten around to  
touring Isreal and the archaeological sites yet but it's definitely on  
my to do in the very near future list. I've done Sinai and Greece and  
learned a lot from the trip. I was hoping to do Turkey next but Isreal  
is definitely a contender.

James Christian.



Quoting K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>:

> Yitzhak:
> For once your famed ability to find sources has failed. And for me, again
> the pitfalls of going from memory—I got it largely right, but slightly
> wrong. I said no mention, while the article says only a bit player, not
> major.
>
> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Yitzhak Sapir   
> <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 12:30 PM, K Randolph wrote:
> >
> > > A recent BAR article about the EA Letters mentions that there seems to be
> > a
> > > contradiction between the findings of archaeology and claims in the
> > letters.
> > > Strangely, the only major city found in Canaan was Hazor, which was never
> > > mentioned in any of the letters. Ever heard of Judges 4? I, as well as
> > > others, find the synthesis proposed by BAR to be less than satisfactory.
> >
> > Karl, I have other issues with your letter, but I must ask:  Where did you
> > get
> > that "A recent BAR article about the EA Letters mentions .... the only
> > major
> > city found in Canaan was Hazor, which was never mentioned in any of the
> > letters"?  Is that from BAR?  If so, could you please provide a full
> > citation of
> > the relevant BAR article?  If not, could you provide a citation of the
> > relevant
> > source that tells you this?  (I never realized Hazor was not mentioned in
> > the
> > EA letters, and I'm all for learning new things).
>
>
> Biblical Archaeological Review, January-February 2009, p. 56. After
> documenting that several sites mentioned as major cities in the EA Letters
> were found by archaeologists either to be uninhabited, unwalled villages or
> at best minor cities, the article states,
>
> “The last site we will look at is Hazor—where the situation is somewhat
> reversed. Excavations at Hazor have revealed a city of some 210 acres,
> encompassing an upper city and a large lower city, most of which was
> inhabited during the Late Bronze
> Age. It is vastly bigger than any other site in Canaan … Hazor is a minor
> player at best, however, in the Amarna letters. Only two letters from the
> rulers of Hazor were found in the Amarna archive, and they shed no light on
> the status of the city. … But if we had to deduce Hazor’s status from the
> Amarna documents (and Egyptian royal inscriptions), we would have assumed it
> was just one of numerous, relatively small Canaanite city-states. …”
>
> The thesis of the whole article is that the EA letters provide a corrective
> to the contradictory archaeological data, But the archaeological data far
> better fits with the book of Judges—after the invasion of Canaan by Israel,
> in the process destroying the wealthy Canaanite culture that existed prior
> to the invasion, was in the Late Bronze Age repeatedly invaded in turn by
> other nations and repeatedly stripped of wealth. One of those invaders was
> wealthy and prosperous Hazor itself. The EA Letters describe an Egyptian
> ruled Canaan through vassal kingdoms, best fitting post Solomon times.
>
> > Yitzhak Sapir
> >
> > P.S.  Jim (Stinehart), while I appreciate your interest in the EA letters,
> > I
> > would appreciate hearing Karl's take on this particular issue.
>
>
> I don’t think Jim Stinehart is interested in this aspect of the EA Letters,
> as it contradicts his conspiracy theories.
>
> Karl W. Randolph.
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew



--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.