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

"his seed is not"

Expand Messages
  • Lisbeth S. Fried
    Dear All, The Mernepthah stele says about Israel that his seed is not. I always thought it referred to Israel s progeny, that there won t be future
    Message 1 of 62 , Feb 25, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear All,

      The Mernepthah stele says about Israel that "his seed is not."

      I always thought it referred to Israel's progeny, that there won't be future
      generations.

      Now I read that it refers to grain silos!

      Which is correct?

      Thanks,

      Liz





      Lisbeth S. Fried, Ph.D.
      Department of Near Eastern Studies
      and the Frankel Center for Judaic Studies
      University of Michigan
      202 S. Thayer -- Room 4111
      Ann Arbor, MI 48104
      <http://www.lisbethfried.com> www.lisbethfried.com

      I sent (too much) rain on one city, and sent no rain on another city; and
      still you did not return to me, says YHWH. (Amo 4:7-8 )





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • frankclancy
      Dear Yigal - I knew about Albright but I did not know about Rainey. Honestly, I do not find the Tell el-Hammah identification credible. The inscription
      Message 62 of 62 , Mar 4, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Yigal - I knew about Albright but I did not know about Rainey. Honestly, I do not find the Tell el-Hammah identification credible. The inscription indicates Hammath was the leader of the revolt which involved other cities - all of them larger and more important. It is Hammath that threatens the Egyptian garrison of Beth-Shean while it is Pehel who beseiges Tell Rehov. Also, if Hammath revolted against Rehob, then I would expect Rehob to attack Hammath - not the other way around. Also, if it were an inter-city squabble, why attack the Egyptian garrison? That is a revolt against Seti! Seti sent 3 arms of his troops to the cities which suggests more than a few soldiers to deal with these cities. Were it about a squabble between cities, then when Seti arrived at Beth-Shean I would expect these cities to appeal to him and there would be no need for troops to go to these cities.

        You may be correct about Hammath but I find it difficult to believe that story.

        Frank Clancy
        Kitchener, Ontario

        --- In ANE-2@yahoogroups.com, Yigal Levin <yigal.levin@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hi again,
        >
        >
        >
        > Once more according to Rainey (Sacred Bridge p. 93, citing Albright from
        > 1926), the Hamath involved was the small site of Tell el-Hammah, 16 km south
        > of Beth-shean, which would make it about 10 km south of THAT Rehob. Rainey's
        > reconstruction is that Hamath was a vassal of Rehob (which is a much larger
        > site), and rebelled, encouraged by Pehel, Rehob's rival. Pehel and Hamath
        > first neutralized the Egyptian "police post" (Raney's words) at Beth-shean
        > and then attacked Rehob, at which point Seti intervened. We have no way of
        > knowing what Yenoam's role in the story was, only that Seti sent a force
        > there as well.
        >
        > It makes much more sense to read this as a minor squabble between rival
        > cities, all within a 20 km radius of Beth-shean, than as a major war
        > involving such far-away places as the north-Syrian Hamath. Remember that the
        > victory stele was set up at Beth-shean, and no mention of this has been
        > found in Egypt itself.
        >
        >
        >
        > Yigal
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.