Biblical Hebrew Forum

["James Spinti" <JSpinti AT Eisenbrauns.com>]

 Karl,

I, too, grew up in academia, and am still in academia 50+ years later. I
am saddened that you had so many negative experiences and that they
color your interpretation of the data. Certainly, there is some of what
you describe--heaven knows I've kicked against the consensus at times.
But, you must bring data that supports your claims and
listen--carefully--to the critics and their reasons for rejecting your
interpretation. Chances are pretty good they might be right. Even if
they aren't, you can learn why they are objecting and dig deeper in
those areas. 

Unless you read the Akkadian (and bad Akkadian, at that) of the Amarna
letters, don't be too quick to date them later. They are definitely LBA,
in my opinion. 

James

________________________________
James Spinti
Marketing Director, Book Sales Division
Eisenbrauns, Good books for more than 30 years
Specializing in Ancient Near Eastern and Biblical Studies
jspinti at eisenbrauns dot com
Web: http://www.eisenbrauns.com
Phone: 574-269-2011 ext 226
Fax: 574-269-6788 

-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of K Randolph
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 1:03 PM
To: B-Hebrew
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] 1 Kings 20:14 Who are the young men,princes of
the districts?

George:

On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 2:14 PM, George Athas
<George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>wrote:

> Well, we definitely will not agree on this one, Karl. Akhenaton was
> definitely 14th century BC,


That is what is disputed, and has been disputed by trained historians
for
decades. However, because they were not of the herd, they were denied
professorships and scholarly publications, even degrees. (See Thomas
Gold's
description of herd politics within academia and research. Having grown
up
in academia, I have observed some of what he describes.)


<snip>

> Time and again I have observed that when an academic challenges the
reigning consensus in his field, that he does so at the peril of his
job.
That is true even if he is a tenured professor (there are ways to get
rid of
a troublesome tenured professor, they just take a little longer than a
simple firing). I have seen data deliberately falsified to bring it in
line
with a consensus. I don't always agree with the challenge, but even
those
challenges with which I disagree should be heard without fear of losing
a
career.

I have no career as a historian, nor do I desire one, therefore I can
call a
spade a spade without fear of losing my job. In this case, the spade is
that
archaeology contradicts the claim that the Amarna period was the 14th
century BC.

Which brings us back to the thread, namely were these men of the princes
of
the districts an Egyptian squad stationed in Samaria? I noticed that the
meaning of "prince" refers to a person whose job it was to keep people
in
line, sort of like a policeman or sheriff, not necessarily a hereditary
prince as in western culture. Even the sons of kings were "princes" in
that
they were to enforce the edicts of their fathers. Thus these "princes"
could
have been Egyptian officials assigned to keep certain districts under
Egyptian control in line, and their men were a squad of Egyptian
soldiers
under their authority. That makes linguistic sense out of what is to me
an
otherwise puzzling verse.

Karl W. Randolph.
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew