10732Re: [ANE-2] Re: Yanoam in Transjordan? (was: Seti I and Yanoam)
- Jun 14, 2009Dear Frank,
Thank you for your fuller explanation. It seems to me that the only weakness in the identification of Pehel as Pella which you identify is that it is included in an odd place in the Thutmose list. (Yet, is the list in strict geographical progression, anyway?) But the great strength of the identiication is that Pehel appears together with Beth-Shean, Rehob and Yanoam on a few lists (including one from Beth-Shean itself) - the conjunction of which provides fairly strong evidence for placing them in the area of Beth-Shean, south of the Sea of Galilee. So unless some very strong evidence for placing these place-names to the north of the Sea of Galilee is provided, I don't see any good reason for accepting such a suggestion.
When you refer to Hammath as the "major centre", you don't mean Hammath which is to the north of Qedesh, or what site?
Na'aman ("Yeno'am." Tel Aviv 4 (1977): 168-177) doesn't place Yanoam north of the Sea of Galilee, but south, on the Yarmuk - that is, on the other side of the Jordan from Beth-Shean.
> Dear Deane - the question about the Seti inscription is where were these cities? Hammath, as a major centre, was located to the north of the Sea of Galilee. If Na'aman is correct, then Yenoam was located somewhere in the Bashan region - north east of the Sea. The next questions are where was Pehel and where was Rehob? Scholars assume Pehel was Pella and Rehob was Tel Rehov just a couple of miles south of Beth-shean. However, I think that question should be open to discussion. When you look at the Thutmose list of cities, there seems to be a line of cities running south past Dan, Hazor and to Chinnereth. Then the list seems to divide into two roads - one running along ghte northern side of the Jezreel Valley and another running along the southern edge of the same valley and both end at Megiddo. There is one name that seems to be out of place - Pehel. In the list, it is placed just before Chinnereth. If it refers to Pella, then that is an odd place tofind that name. The way the list of names runs north to south along an important ancient road, Pehel should be north of the Sea of Galilee somewhere. As for the name Rehob, we have any number of places with this name - including one in the region north of the Sea of Galilee. If we assume that Hammath simply wanted to control the territory around the city and along the trade routes, then the Hazor/Dan region would be a very good area to control and to support. Cities south of Beth-shean and at Pella are too far south to provide good military and other support. In addition, the wings of Seti's army could easily reach and control this region and his military might would not be so divided if all the wings were operating in the same region - north of the Sea.
> I hope that explains my position a little better. Frank Clancy
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>