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

Re: [ANE-2] Origins of the Book of Kings

Expand Messages
  • RUSSELLGMIRKIN@aol.com
    Victor, It is unfortunate that the Babyloniaca has not survived intact, but archaeologists, biblical and classical scholars deal with fragmentary
    Message 1 of 67 , Jul 2 11:37 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Victor,

      It is unfortunate that the Babyloniaca has not survived intact, but
      archaeologists, biblical and classical scholars deal with fragmentary
      inscriptional, manuscript or literary sources all the time, and it is not necessary to
      possess an entire original text to draw reasoned inferences.

      I find the image of an unpaid Jewish scribe wandering through the smoke
      and ashes of a fallen city to record the names of foreign functionaries
      somewhat unconvincing, but this may be a subjective evaluation. The name lists
      we see in Jer. 39 appear to be the product of a functioning bureaucracy
      rather than what you suggest, and the Babylonian Chronicle style points to the
      records of the victorious party. The Assyrian examples you mention also
      come victorious parties with functioning bureaucracies.

      The temple at Babylon had survived essentially intact from ancient times
      into the Hellenistic period, and Berossus had a trove of detailed ancient
      records at hand dating back to the period under consideration, moreso than
      even the Jews in the immediate aftermath of the tragic fall of Jerusalem and
      its temple. So why must we assume that an account of the Babylonian sack of
      Jerusalem, written in Babylonian Chronicles historical style, was written
      using Jewish rather than Babylonian sources on these events?

      Best regards,
      Russell Gmirkin

      Russell,
      And what about Yehoyakhin and Amel-Merduk? Also in Berossus?
      And what about Nebuzaradan rav hattabahim = Nabu-zer-iddin rab
      nuhatimmu? Also in Berossus.

      And who knows better than you how fragmentary what we have of Babyloniaca
      is, and how it is known only in secondary and tertiary sources dating as
      late as the Middle Ages.

      Your claim "I see no reason why they could not
      have found X there" which is a claim used extensively in your book is not
      very convincing. Find me an autograph copy of Babylonaica and we'll be
      able to start arguing about what is in it and what is not. Hold your use
      of Berossus to the same evidentiary standards some would hold the Bible.

      As for Bel-etir, I don't know how minor an official he was. (My copy of
      Glassner is in the office and the Delitzsch I have here at home just
      gives hatchmarks for his title (Bel-etir //// Babili). But He was
      important enough to be subject of two literary
      texts - a pseudoautobiography and an incantation (see SAA III no. 29, 30).

      "Of what possible interest would it have been to a non-Babylonian that
      etc.?" Why not? If I were a Judaen going into captivity I might be
      interested knowing the name of the man who just sent me packing and had
      just burnt my city and temple. I might especially be interested in his
      identity were I a literate man who would write an account of the
      events.
      And don't the Mesopotamian annals name minor characters among
      their enemies? I'm thinking of, at the moment Nabu-gata-isbat, the
      sinmagir of Shamash-shum-sinmagir of Shamash-shum-<WBR>ukin whom Assurbanipa
      the skull of Nabu-bel-shumati. So if Assurbanipal would care about
      Shamash-shum-Shamash-shum-<WBR>ukin's Sinmagir, why should a Judean scribe n
      in a man of the same rank in the Babylonian army?
      Best,
      Victor Hurowitz
      BGU

      **************Dell Summer Savings: Cool Deals on Popular Laptops – Shop
      Now!
      (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222696924x1201468348/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Faltfarm.mediaplex.com%2Fad%2Fck%2F12309%2D81939%2D1629%2D1)


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • RUSSELLGMIRKIN@aol.com
      The episodes you mention predate the Babylonian Chronicles and do not involve the Mesopotamian empires. Russell Gmirkin There may be historical material in
      Message 67 of 67 , Jul 17 7:34 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        The episodes you mention predate the Babylonian Chronicles and do not
        involve the Mesopotamian empires.

        Russell Gmirkin

        There may be historical material in Kings not derived from the Babylonian
        chronicles.

        Ahab was described as going to fight the King of Aram in Ramath Gilead
        east of the Jordan River (Ramath Gilead was supposed to be the birthplace of
        Elijah the Tishbite). This would have been near the land of the Moabites.
        Ahab was killed in the battle.

        The Moabite stela claimed Mesha killed the son of Omri and took land from
        Israel. Mesha of Moab may have sided with Aram at Ramath Gilead and used
        the Aramaen victory to temporarily displace Israel as claimed in his stela.

        2Kings 1:1 After Ahab's death, Moab rebelled against Israel.

        In Kings 3 Israel claimed Mesha and Moab who used to be subservient had
        rebelled and afterward Israel entered Moab with a large force attacking from
        the direction of Edom to the south instead of Aram to the north put down
        the rebellion.

        Was this history in Kings II not from Berossus?

        David Q. Hall




        **************Can love help you live longer? Find out now.
        (http://personals.aol.com/articles/2009/02/18/longer-lives-through-relationships/?ncid=emlweu
        slove00000001)


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.