Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Yanoam in Transjordan? (was: Seti I and Yanoam)

Expand Messages
  • Miller, Robert
    You need to have good arguments to dismiss Tell el-Hamma as Hamath. The Tell el-Hamath excavated by Cahill is SW of Beth Shean, a good deal closer to Tel Rehov
    Message 1 of 24 , Jun 12, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      You need to have good arguments to dismiss Tell el-Hamma as Hamath. The Tell el-Hamath excavated by Cahill is SW of Beth Shean, a good deal closer to Tel Rehov than any of the other Hamaths. Is there reason to believe the Hamath of the B.S. Seti I stele is other than the Hamath of the other Seti I inscriptions? If not, then we have to take account of the location of Hamath on those inscriptions, as well. Tell el-Hamath fits all of them quite well. Check out the following:

      Cahill, J. M., Lipton (Lipovich), G., and Tarler, D., 1988. Tell el-Hammah. IEJ 38:191-94.
      Cahill, J. M., Tarler, D., and Lipton (Lipovich), G., 1989a. Tell el-Hammah. ESI 9:134-35.
      ----------, 1989b. Tell el-Hammeh in the 10th Century BCE. Qadmoniot 22:33-38.

      Bob Miller
      Catholic University





      From: Deane Galbraith
      Sent: Thu 6/11/2009 6:41 PM
      To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: RE: [ANE-2] Re: Yanoam in Transjordan? (was: Seti I and Yanoam)






      > Frank Clancy wrote:
      > I asked Anson Rainey by e-mail about Yanoam and he insists it was located in the Jordan Valley/Yarmuk River region south of the Sea of Galilee. If he is correct, then "Israel" homeland is west and and slightly south of this location so no adjustment should be made - if "Israel" is located in the Samaria/Shechem region. On the other hand, Nadav Na'aman ("Yenoam" Tel Aviv 4. 1977: 168-177) argued that Yanoam should be located north east of the Sea of Galilee at the edge of the Bashan region.

      Deane:
      In that article, doesn't Na'aman contend that Yano'am is probably *south* east of the Sea of Galilee? "Tell esh-Shihab, situation west of Edrei on the Yarmuk River"

      > Frank Clancy wrote:
      > If Hamath was responsible for stirring up problems for Seti, then the region north of the Sea of Galilee makes more sense to me.

      Deane:
      Why?

      > Jon Smyth
      > it seemed to me Na'aman's opinion on the location of Yanoam
      is influenced by the stela portion found at tell esh-Shihab in
      Transjordan.

      Deane:
      Yes, but to be fair, the main evidence Na'aman adduces is the topographical lists which locate Yeno'am in Bashan or southern Syria. (And there is conflicting evidence on this, as he notes.)

      Tell esh-Shihab seems to be a little too far away from a plausible site of Yano'am, given the close proximity of Beth-Shean, Rehob, Hammath, and Pehel in the Beth-Shean/Jordan valley, as per the Beth-shean stele. Is it even within a day's journey and military engagement, as the Beth-shean stele requires?

      As for the Merneptah Stele, if Yano'am is closer to Beth-shean than Tell esh-Shihab, then the Cisjordan highland is as likely as the Transjordan for locating 'Israel'.

      Mind you, if Merneptah went through Megiddo to get to Beth-shean-Yano'am, maybe Ya-si-r-'-l refers to the people of the Jezreel Valley? The towns along there were a recognized group which the determinative could have referred to, don't you think?

      And how much logical geographical flow can you conclude from the mention of two Philistine towns and one town somewhere in the region of Beth-shean (Yano'am)? Not too much. The Merneptah stele is not helpful for locating 'Israel' when it comes down to it, apart from it being in 'Canaan'.

      Deane Galbraith,
      Antipodes





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • arenmaeir
      Frank, Rehov is not suitable for the ID, since there is virtually no MB on the site after more than a decade of excavation. Jabesh Gilead should be situated in
      Message 2 of 24 , Jun 12, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Frank,
        Rehov is not suitable for the ID, since there is virtually no MB on the site after more than a decade of excavation.
        Jabesh Gilead should be situated in the highlands, not in the valley, at the top of W. Yabis!
        Goren et al is the volume on the petrography of the Amarna texts.

        Best,
        Aren
      • arenmaeir
        For the most updated report and extensive on the excavations of Tell el-Hammah, see: Cahill, J. 2006. The Excavations at Tell el-Hammah: A Prelude to Amihai
        Message 3 of 24 , Jun 12, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          For the most updated report and extensive on the excavations of Tell el-Hammah, see:

          Cahill, J. 2006. The Excavations at Tell el-Hammah: A Prelude to Amihai Mazar's Beth-Shean Valley Regional Project. Pp. 429–60 in "I Will Speak the Riddles of Ancient Times": Archaeological and Historical Studies in Honor of Amihai Mazar on the Occasion of His Sixtieth Birthday, eds. A. Maeir and P. de Miroschedji. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.


          Aren Maeir
        • Deane Galbraith
          Dear 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
          Message 4 of 24 , Jun 14, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear 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.

            Deane Galbraith
            Antipodes




            > 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 to
            find 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
          • eliot braun
            Has anyone considered the small size of Tell el Hamath as an impediment to the identification of the site? I always wondered about that myself. Eliot Braun, Ph
            Message 5 of 24 , Jun 16, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              Has anyone considered the small size of Tell el Hamath as an impediment to the identification of the site? I always wondered about that myself.

              Eliot Braun, Ph D
              Sr. Fellow WF Albright Institute of Archaeological Research, Jerusalem
              Associate Researcher Centre de Recherche Français de Jérusalem
              PO Box 21, Har Adar 90836 Israel
              Tel 972-2-5345687, Cell 972-50-2231096

              --- On Fri, 6/12/09, Miller, Robert <millerb@...> wrote:


              From: Miller, Robert <millerb@...>
              Subject: [ANE-2] Yanoam in Transjordan? (was: Seti I and Yanoam)
              To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
              Date: Friday, June 12, 2009, 3:11 PM








              You need to have good arguments to dismiss Tell el-Hamma as Hamath. The Tell el-Hamath excavated by Cahill is SW of Beth Shean, a good deal closer to Tel Rehov than any of the other Hamaths. Is there reason to believe the Hamath of the B.S. Seti I stele is other than the Hamath of the other Seti I inscriptions? If not, then we have to take account of the location of Hamath on those inscriptions, as well. Tell el-Hamath fits all of them quite well. Check out the following:

              Cahill, J. M., Lipton (Lipovich), G., and Tarler, D., 1988. Tell el-Hammah. IEJ 38:191-94.
              Cahill, J. M., Tarler, D., and Lipton (Lipovich), G., 1989a. Tell el-Hammah. ESI 9:134-35.
              ----------, 1989b. Tell el-Hammeh in the 10th Century BCE. Qadmoniot 22:33-38.

              Bob Miller
              Catholic University

              From: Deane Galbraith
              Sent: Thu 6/11/2009 6:41 PM
              To: ANE-2@yahoogroups. com
              Subject: RE: [ANE-2] Re: Yanoam in Transjordan? (was: Seti I and Yanoam)

              > Frank Clancy wrote:
              > I asked Anson Rainey by e-mail about Yanoam and he insists it was located in the Jordan Valley/Yarmuk River region south of the Sea of Galilee. If he is correct, then "Israel" homeland is west and and slightly south of this location so no adjustment should be made - if "Israel" is located in the Samaria/Shechem region. On the other hand, Nadav Na'aman ("Yenoam" Tel Aviv 4. 1977: 168-177) argued that Yanoam should be located north east of the Sea of Galilee at the edge of the Bashan region.

              Deane:
              In that article, doesn't Na'aman contend that Yano'am is probably *south* east of the Sea of Galilee? "Tell esh-Shihab, situation west of Edrei on the Yarmuk River"

              > Frank Clancy wrote:
              > If Hamath was responsible for stirring up problems for Seti, then the region north of the Sea of Galilee makes more sense to me.

              Deane:
              Why?

              > Jon Smyth
              > it seemed to me Na'aman's opinion on the location of Yanoam
              is influenced by the stela portion found at tell esh-Shihab in
              Transjordan.

              Deane:
              Yes, but to be fair, the main evidence Na'aman adduces is the topographical lists which locate Yeno'am in Bashan or southern Syria. (And there is conflicting evidence on this, as he notes.)

              Tell esh-Shihab seems to be a little too far away from a plausible site of Yano'am, given the close proximity of Beth-Shean, Rehob, Hammath, and Pehel in the Beth-Shean/Jordan valley, as per the Beth-shean stele. Is it even within a day's journey and military engagement, as the Beth-shean stele requires?

              As for the Merneptah Stele, if Yano'am is closer to Beth-shean than Tell esh-Shihab, then the Cisjordan highland is as likely as the Transjordan for locating 'Israel'.

              Mind you, if Merneptah went through Megiddo to get to Beth-shean-Yano' am, maybe Ya-si-r-'-l refers to the people of the Jezreel Valley? The towns along there were a recognized group which the determinative could have referred to, don't you think?

              And how much logical geographical flow can you conclude from the mention of two Philistine towns and one town somewhere in the region of Beth-shean (Yano'am)? Not too much. The Merneptah stele is not helpful for locating 'Israel' when it comes down to it, apart from it being in 'Canaan'.

              Deane Galbraith,
              Antipodes

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



























































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • stefanjakobwimmer
              ... On the article Aren mentioned, see ANE2 Message # 10517. The article is online as pdf: http://www.stefan-jakob-wimmer.de/3ICAANE_wimmer.pdf (I suggested
              Message 6 of 24 , Jun 23, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                >
                > Also, if I recall, Stefan Wimmer has recently published a short article on and additional Egyptian stela from SE Syria, and mentioned an additional one that just came out. Right now I can't access my bibliography, but it is somewhere out there.
                >
                > Aren Maeir
                > Still-no-Egyptian-Stelae-at-Gath
                >


                On the article Aren mentioned, see ANE2 Message # 10517.
                The article is online as pdf:
                http://www.stefan-jakob-wimmer.de/3ICAANE_wimmer.pdf
                (I suggested there that the newly found stela from at-Turra, near Tell esh-Shihab, might strengthen the latter's option for being identified with Yenoam.)

                In the postscriptum to this article I announced that I would prepare a note on an even newer Ramesside inscription from near Damascus. Upon request by the Director of Antiquities and Museums of Syria, I have withdrawn that paper from the upcoming issue of "Goettinger Miszellen", pending the publication of the new inscription. (I do hope, though, that my draft has reached the person entrusted with the publication - I sent it to Director Dr. Bassam Jamous - and that it might prove useful to her/him.)

                Stefan Wimmer
                University of Munich
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.