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

Re: ABH Chronology of the Sabeans and the Minaens/Coquest of Haubas by Wadd

Expand Messages
  • Holly Aldahir
    George: The Arabian view is that the most ancient Arabs, the Qahtani Arabs who lived on the southern coast of the Arabian Peninsula, pre-dated the Adnani Arabs
    Message 1 of 8 , Apr 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      George:
      The Arabian view is that the most ancient Arabs, the
      Qahtani Arabs who lived on the southern coast of the
      Arabian Peninsula, pre-dated the Adnani Arabs who were
      descendants of Ismail. Ismail was an "Arabacized
      Arab", in other words, not from Qahatan, but descended
      from northern Semites (who probably originated in the
      south but settled in the north). According to Arabian
      history, these Qahtani Arabs intermarried with the
      Adnani Arabs when Ismail married into the tribe of
      Jurhum, who had settled in the Meccan Valley.
      According to Arabian history, the Qahtan Arabs were
      known as the Ad of Iram. Iram is mentioned in the
      Eblaite tablets which date to around 2300BC. The
      ancient Ad were succeeded by the ancient Thamud, who
      were mentioned by Sargon around 700BC. These ancient
      Qahtani tribes were known as the "first or orignial Ad
      and the first or original Thamud" and they are not to
      be confused with their successors, the "Second" Ad and
      the "Second" Thamud, which became extinct around 300
      and 400 AD.
      According to the Quran, the original Ad and Thamud
      were thought to have existed around the time of the
      Old Kingdom and were known to the Egytptians who
      hosted Moses. (This is not impossible as the Old
      Kingdom kings were already importing frankincense for
      mummification). Since the Quran names Haman
      (Hemon/Hemiunu) as the master builder to the Pharaoh
      of Moses, this puts Moses under the Pharaoh Kufu or
      around 2550BC. According to the Quran, both Ad and
      Thamud had experienced some kind of cataclysmic
      disaster sometime prior to or during the reign of
      Kufu. But this does not mean that these tribes were
      extinct, only temporarily crippled.
      The second Ad were known to the Quraish as having
      inhabited Iram or a territory on the southern coast of
      Arabia. Ubar, one of their stops on the caravan route,
      collapsed around 300AD. According to the Quraish, the
      second Thamud were equated to the Nabaetean Arabs who
      were devastated by an earthquake in Petra around
      300/400AD.
      Now we must quetion whether the First and Second Ad
      and the First and Second Thamud were actually
      ascendant/descendant. According to tribal tradition,
      the answer would have been definitely in the
      affirmative, but then we must understand tribal
      traditions and tribal confederacies (ahzab). The
      tribal federations were always changing as new
      alliances were made. It would not be uncommon for a
      lesser tribe to adopt the eponymous ancestor of the
      controlling tribe while retaining something of their
      own identity, perhaps making their eponymous ancestor
      a lesser god or a god related to the god of the
      controlling tribe. By the continuous adoption of a
      common eponymous ancestor by tribes coming into a
      confederation, a confederation with the name Ad or
      Thamud could continue for thousands of years while
      continuously changing language, location and even
      culture as in the case of the Nabateans or the Second
      Thamud.
      The upshot of all of this is that I am sure a similar
      history happened in the case of the original Mineans
      and Sabeans and their later successors. Modern
      historians would view them as a distinct people but
      the successors would view themselves as having a
      common eponymous ancestor with the more ancient tribe.
      Anyway, this is how I understand it.
      Which brings me to my second point concerning
      Jebus/Dwd. Can we supposed that the conquest of Jebus
      by Dwd really means the conquest of Haubas (Sabean
      god) by Wadd (Minean god). This would make the story
      of Shelomo/Yedidaih with Saba a cessation of
      hostilities and a tribal alliance in which Wadd/El
      becomes ascendant over Habuas.
      Thoughts????
      Take Care Holly

      --- George <historynow2002@...> wrote:

      > An interesting point is made about the Minaean
      > inscriptions!
      >
      > http://www.answers.com/topic/afro-asiatic-languages
      >
      > [Minaean is a branch of "WESTERN Semitic"!]
      > West Semitic Division
      >
      > The principal subdivisions of the West Semitic group
      > are
      > Canaanite,
      > Aramaic (which embraced many dialects in the course
      > of its long
      > history, including Syriac),
      > Arabic, and the unrelated
      > Old and Modern South Arabian [i.e., "Old South
      > Arabian" is
      > not related to the "Modern South Arabian"].
      >
      > "Both classical Arabic and the modern Arabic
      > dialects, as well as
      > the ancient and modern South Arabian languages are
      > also classified
      > as West Semitic tongues."
      >
      > [The Two Dialects of Western Semitic Old South
      > Arabian]
      > "Ancient South Arabian had two principal dialects,
      > Sabaean
      > and Minaean."
      >
      > 1] "...the Sabaean inscriptions are of a later date
      > [older
      > than 700's BCE]."
      >
      > 2] "... The earliest Minaean inscriptions belong to
      > the 8th cent.
      > B.C. or even earlier [more recent than 700's
      > BCE]..."
      >
      > [And finally we read about Modern languages in
      > Arabia:]
      > "The Modern South Arabian dialects spoken today in
      > parts
      > of S Arabia are classified separately from both
      > modern
      > Arabic and Old South Arabian."
      >
      >
      > What does all this mean? Let's read this item from
      > Briannica online:
      >
      >
      > [Britannica]
      > Minaeans
      > ... from the Britannica article "Arabia, history of"
      >
      > "The Minaean kingdom (Ma'in) lasted from the 4th to
      > the
      > 2nd century BC and was predominantly a trading
      > organization
      > that, for the period, monopolized the trade routes."
      >
      > CONCLUSION?:
      > It may be premature to emphasize the connection
      > between
      > the Sabaeans and the Minaeans. The Minaean culture
      > and
      > inscriptions are far more recent than the Sabaeans.
      >
      > And both languages don't go back much further than
      > the 700's or 800's. The idea that these West
      > Semitic
      > languages go back to 1000+ BCE years is not
      > demonstrated.
      >
      > And since the Minaean inscriptions are more recent,
      > it may well be that Minaean is in fact a Sabaean
      > off-shoot influenced by the ever-present Aramaic.
      >
      > Holly frequently describes the VERY ancient period
      > of Arabia, with this conventional view of Arabian
      > chronology:
      >
      > [While Holly starts before 1000 BCE, let's start
      > there.]
      > "From about 1000 BC this region of the Southern
      > Arabian
      > Peninsula was ruled by three successive
      > civilisations
      > -- Minean, Sabaean and Himyarite."
      >
      > But this is deceptive (not deliberately so... it
      > just
      > is). As we have read above, "Himyarite" is the term
      > used for "Old South Arabian". And "Old South
      > Arabian"
      > is conventionally divided into "Minaean" and
      > "Sabaean".
      >
      > Clearly, the "Minaean" which is not older than the
      > 600's/700's is ***not*** the same "Minaean" culture
      > as
      > the one that preceded the Sabaean (which has
      > inscriptions
      > OLDER than the Himyarite "Minaean".
      >
      > The unique qualities of each of these hegemonies
      > demonstrate
      > what I mean:
      >
      > http://www.stainmedia.com/yca/yemen.html
      >
      > "The chief incense traders were the Minaeans, who
      > established
      > their capital at Karna (now known as Sadah), before
      > they were
      > superseded by the Sabaeans in 950 BC."
      >
      > "The Sabaean capital was Ma'rib, where a large
      > temple was
      > built. The mighty Sabaean civilisation endured for
      > about
      > 14 centuries and was based not only on the spice
      > trade,
      > but also on agriculture."
      >
      > "The Himyarites [the *NEW* Minaeans!] established
      > their
      > capital at Dhafar (now just a small village in the
      > Ibb
      > region) and gradually absorbed the Sabaean kingdom."
      >
      > "They were culturally inferior to the Sabaeans and
      > traded
      > from the port of al-Muza on the Red Sea."
      > [END OF TEXT]
      >
      > While we are all mesmerized by the term "South
      > Arabia",
      > the Yemeni side of South Arabia was VERY accessible
      > via
      > the Red Sea .... a straight shot from the Sinai to
      > the
      > end of Arabia.
      >
      > Regards,
      >
      > George
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > CONTACT ABH MODERATOR:
      > AncientBibleHistory-owner@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > ABH GROUP PAGE:
      >
      http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/AncientBibleHistory
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AncientBibleHistory/
      >
      > AncientBibleHistory-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • George
      Holly, I m not quite sure what your conclusion is here. But I think my own point still stands. The Minaeans, as known via texts not much older than the 600 s
      Message 2 of 8 , Apr 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Holly,

        I'm not quite sure what your conclusion is here.
        But I think my own point still stands.

        The Minaeans, as known via texts not much
        older than the 600's BCE, are not the same people
        as the Minaeans an eon before.

        The language used by the more recent Minaeans
        are apparently in the WESTERN semitic family...
        like Aramaic is as well.

        Regards,

        George

        --- In AncientBibleHistory@yahoogroups.com, Holly Aldahir <gmrf@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > George:
        > The Arabian view is that the most ancient Arabs, the
        > Qahtani Arabs who lived on the southern coast of the
        > Arabian Peninsula, pre-dated the Adnani Arabs who were
        > descendants of Ismail. Ismail was an "Arabacized
        > Arab", in other words, not from Qahatan, but descended
        > from northern Semites (who probably originated in the
        > south but settled in the north). According to Arabian
        > history, these Qahtani Arabs intermarried with the
        > Adnani Arabs when Ismail married into the tribe of
        > Jurhum, who had settled in the Meccan Valley.
        > According to Arabian history, the Qahtan Arabs were
        > known as the Ad of Iram. Iram is mentioned in the
        > Eblaite tablets which date to around 2300BC. The
        > ancient Ad were succeeded by the ancient Thamud, who
        > were mentioned by Sargon around 700BC. These ancient
        > Qahtani tribes were known as the "first or orignial Ad
        > and the first or original Thamud" and they are not to
        > be confused with their successors, the "Second" Ad and
        > the "Second" Thamud, which became extinct around 300
        > and 400 AD.
        > According to the Quran, the original Ad and Thamud
        > were thought to have existed around the time of the
        > Old Kingdom and were known to the Egytptians who
        > hosted Moses. (This is not impossible as the Old
        > Kingdom kings were already importing frankincense for
        > mummification). Since the Quran names Haman
        > (Hemon/Hemiunu) as the master builder to the Pharaoh
        > of Moses, this puts Moses under the Pharaoh Kufu or
        > around 2550BC. According to the Quran, both Ad and
        > Thamud had experienced some kind of cataclysmic
        > disaster sometime prior to or during the reign of
        > Kufu. But this does not mean that these tribes were
        > extinct, only temporarily crippled.
        > The second Ad were known to the Quraish as having
        > inhabited Iram or a territory on the southern coast of
        > Arabia. Ubar, one of their stops on the caravan route,
        > collapsed around 300AD. According to the Quraish, the
        > second Thamud were equated to the Nabaetean Arabs who
        > were devastated by an earthquake in Petra around
        > 300/400AD.
        > Now we must quetion whether the First and Second Ad
        > and the First and Second Thamud were actually
        > ascendant/descendant. According to tribal tradition,
        > the answer would have been definitely in the
        > affirmative, but then we must understand tribal
        > traditions and tribal confederacies (ahzab). The
        > tribal federations were always changing as new
        > alliances were made. It would not be uncommon for a
        > lesser tribe to adopt the eponymous ancestor of the
        > controlling tribe while retaining something of their
        > own identity, perhaps making their eponymous ancestor
        > a lesser god or a god related to the god of the
        > controlling tribe. By the continuous adoption of a
        > common eponymous ancestor by tribes coming into a
        > confederation, a confederation with the name Ad or
        > Thamud could continue for thousands of years while
        > continuously changing language, location and even
        > culture as in the case of the Nabateans or the Second
        > Thamud.
        > The upshot of all of this is that I am sure a similar
        > history happened in the case of the original Mineans
        > and Sabeans and their later successors. Modern
        > historians would view them as a distinct people but
        > the successors would view themselves as having a
        > common eponymous ancestor with the more ancient tribe.
        > Anyway, this is how I understand it.
        > Which brings me to my second point concerning
        > Jebus/Dwd. Can we supposed that the conquest of Jebus
        > by Dwd really means the conquest of Haubas (Sabean
        > god) by Wadd (Minean god). This would make the story
        > of Shelomo/Yedidaih with Saba a cessation of
        > hostilities and a tribal alliance in which Wadd/El
        > becomes ascendant over Habuas.
        > Thoughts????
        > Take Care Holly
        >
        > --- George <historynow2002@...> wrote:
        >
        > > An interesting point is made about the Minaean
        > > inscriptions!
        > >
        > > http://www.answers.com/topic/afro-asiatic-languages
        > >
        > > [Minaean is a branch of "WESTERN Semitic"!]
        > > West Semitic Division
        > >
        > > The principal subdivisions of the West Semitic group
        > > are
        > > Canaanite,
        > > Aramaic (which embraced many dialects in the course
        > > of its long
        > > history, including Syriac),
        > > Arabic, and the unrelated
        > > Old and Modern South Arabian [i.e., "Old South
        > > Arabian" is
        > > not related to the "Modern South Arabian"].
        > >
        > > "Both classical Arabic and the modern Arabic
        > > dialects, as well as
        > > the ancient and modern South Arabian languages are
        > > also classified
        > > as West Semitic tongues."
        > >
        > > [The Two Dialects of Western Semitic Old South
        > > Arabian]
        > > "Ancient South Arabian had two principal dialects,
        > > Sabaean
        > > and Minaean."
        > >
        > > 1] "...the Sabaean inscriptions are of a later date
        > > [older
        > > than 700's BCE]."
        > >
        > > 2] "... The earliest Minaean inscriptions belong to
        > > the 8th cent.
        > > B.C. or even earlier [more recent than 700's
        > > BCE]..."
        > >
        > > [And finally we read about Modern languages in
        > > Arabia:]
        > > "The Modern South Arabian dialects spoken today in
        > > parts
        > > of S Arabia are classified separately from both
        > > modern
        > > Arabic and Old South Arabian."
        > >
        > >
        > > What does all this mean? Let's read this item from
        > > Briannica online:
        > >
        > >
        > > [Britannica]
        > > Minaeans
        > > ... from the Britannica article "Arabia, history of"
        > >
        > > "The Minaean kingdom (Ma'in) lasted from the 4th to
        > > the
        > > 2nd century BC and was predominantly a trading
        > > organization
        > > that, for the period, monopolized the trade routes."
        > >
        > > CONCLUSION?:
        > > It may be premature to emphasize the connection
        > > between
        > > the Sabaeans and the Minaeans. The Minaean culture
        > > and
        > > inscriptions are far more recent than the Sabaeans.
        > >
        > > And both languages don't go back much further than
        > > the 700's or 800's. The idea that these West
        > > Semitic
        > > languages go back to 1000+ BCE years is not
        > > demonstrated.
        > >
        > > And since the Minaean inscriptions are more recent,
        > > it may well be that Minaean is in fact a Sabaean
        > > off-shoot influenced by the ever-present Aramaic.
        > >
        > > Holly frequently describes the VERY ancient period
        > > of Arabia, with this conventional view of Arabian
        > > chronology:
        > >
        > > [While Holly starts before 1000 BCE, let's start
        > > there.]
        > > "From about 1000 BC this region of the Southern
        > > Arabian
        > > Peninsula was ruled by three successive
        > > civilisations
        > > -- Minean, Sabaean and Himyarite."
        > >
        > > But this is deceptive (not deliberately so... it
        > > just
        > > is). As we have read above, "Himyarite" is the term
        > > used for "Old South Arabian". And "Old South
        > > Arabian"
        > > is conventionally divided into "Minaean" and
        > > "Sabaean".
        > >
        > > Clearly, the "Minaean" which is not older than the
        > > 600's/700's is ***not*** the same "Minaean" culture
        > > as
        > > the one that preceded the Sabaean (which has
        > > inscriptions
        > > OLDER than the Himyarite "Minaean".
        > >
        > > The unique qualities of each of these hegemonies
        > > demonstrate
        > > what I mean:
        > >
        > > http://www.stainmedia.com/yca/yemen.html
        > >
        > > "The chief incense traders were the Minaeans, who
        > > established
        > > their capital at Karna (now known as Sadah), before
        > > they were
        > > superseded by the Sabaeans in 950 BC."
        > >
        > > "The Sabaean capital was Ma'rib, where a large
        > > temple was
        > > built. The mighty Sabaean civilisation endured for
        > > about
        > > 14 centuries and was based not only on the spice
        > > trade,
        > > but also on agriculture."
        > >
        > > "The Himyarites [the *NEW* Minaeans!] established
        > > their
        > > capital at Dhafar (now just a small village in the
        > > Ibb
        > > region) and gradually absorbed the Sabaean kingdom."
        > >
        > > "They were culturally inferior to the Sabaeans and
        > > traded
        > > from the port of al-Muza on the Red Sea."
        > > [END OF TEXT]
        > >
        > > While we are all mesmerized by the term "South
        > > Arabia",
        > > the Yemeni side of South Arabia was VERY accessible
        > > via
        > > the Red Sea .... a straight shot from the Sinai to
        > > the
        > > end of Arabia.
        > >
        > > Regards,
        > >
        > > George
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > CONTACT ABH MODERATOR:
        > > AncientBibleHistory-owner@yahoogroups.com
        > >
        > > ABH GROUP PAGE:
        > >
        > http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/AncientBibleHistory
        > >
        > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > >
        > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AncientBibleHistory/
        > >
        > > AncientBibleHistory-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
      • Holly Aldahir
        George: The Mineans are a lot older than 600 BCE. Read the following site: http://ancientneareast.tripod.com/Arabia.html Iron Age Period Onwards From circa
        Message 3 of 8 , Apr 1, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          George:
          The Mineans are a lot older than 600 BCE. Read the
          following site:
          http://ancientneareast.tripod.com/Arabia.html

          Iron Age Period Onwards

          From circa 1200 BC the region of the Southern Arabian
          Peninsula was ruled by three successive civilisations.
          The (1)Mineans (1200-650 BC) -- (2)Sabeans (Sheba)
          (1000 BC - 570 AD) -- (3)Himyarite (2nd to 6th
          centuries AD) brought with them the rudiments of what
          was to become the highly developed civilization of
          Southern Arabia. These three kingdoms all depended for
          their wealth on the spice trade. Aromatics such as
          myrrh and frankincense were greatly prized in the
          ancient civilised world and were used as part of
          various rituals in many cultures including Egypt
          Greece and Roman ...

          In the 11th century BC land routes through Arabia were
          greatly improved by using the camel as a beast of
          burden and frankincense was carried from its
          production centre at Qana to Gaza in Egypt. The camel
          caravans also carried gold and other precious goods
          which arrived in Qana by sea from India ...

          The chief incense traders were the Minaeans who
          established their capital Karna before they were
          superseded by the Sabeans in 950 BC. The Sabean
          capital was Marib where a large temple was built. The
          mighty Sabean civilization endured for about 14
          centuries and was based not only on the spice trade
          but also on agriculture. The impressive dam built at
          Marib in the 8th century provided irrigation for
          farmland and stood for over a millennium. Some Sabean
          carved inscriptions from this period are still extant
          ...

          The Himyarites established their capital at Dhafar and
          gradually absorbed the Sabean Kingdom. They were
          culturally inferior to the Sabeans and traded from the
          port of Muza on the Red Sea. By the first century BC
          the Romans had conquered the area ...
          end quote
          In addition, sediments from the irrigation ditches
          around Marib (the capitol of Saba) indicate that the
          irrigation system dates to at least 3000 BC.
          These ancient people are the ones referred to as Ad.
          The ancient Ad are Qahtani Arabs. They later formed
          alliances with Arabs from the North and it is these
          people that became known as Saba, Qataban, Mineans
          etc.
          According to this site:
          http://observe.arc.nasa.gov/nasa/exhibits/ubar/ubar_4.html,
          Syrian pottery shards dating to 2,000 BC were found at
          Ubar which is now thought to be Iram or an outpost of
          Iram. Iram trade with the Canaanite city of Ebla goes
          back to at least 2300 BC.
          According to this site, the Maeen or Mineans date from
          3,000 BC:
          http://www.yemeninfo.gov.ye/ENGLISH/GENINFO/background.htm
          So you see George, the Qahtan or Ad are not recent at
          all. They are very ancient. It was these ancient
          tribes that integrated with the northern tribes to
          form the great kingdoms of Maeen, Saba and the
          Qataban.
          Ok, now what I was proposing is that if the names Dwd
          and Yddiah are connected to Wadd, a Minean god, do you
          think that it is probable that Dwd's defeat of
          Ybs/Haubas (Sabean god) represented the victory of the
          Mineans over the Sabeans?
          Take Care
          Holly









          --- George <historynow2002@...> wrote:

          > Holly,
          >
          > I'm not quite sure what your conclusion is here.
          > But I think my own point still stands.
          >
          > The Minaeans, as known via texts not much
          > older than the 600's BCE, are not the same people
          > as the Minaeans an eon before.
          >
          > The language used by the more recent Minaeans
          > are apparently in the WESTERN semitic family...
          > like Aramaic is as well.
          >
          > Regards,
          >
          > George
          >
          > --- In AncientBibleHistory@yahoogroups.com, Holly
          > Aldahir <gmrf@...>
          > wrote:
          > >
          > > George:
          > > The Arabian view is that the most ancient Arabs,
          > the
          > > Qahtani Arabs who lived on the southern coast of
          > the
          > > Arabian Peninsula, pre-dated the Adnani Arabs who
          > were
          > > descendants of Ismail. Ismail was an "Arabacized
          > > Arab", in other words, not from Qahatan, but
          > descended
          > > from northern Semites (who probably originated in
          > the
          > > south but settled in the north). According to
          > Arabian
          > > history, these Qahtani Arabs intermarried with the
          > > Adnani Arabs when Ismail married into the tribe of
          > > Jurhum, who had settled in the Meccan Valley.
          > > According to Arabian history, the Qahtan Arabs
          > were
          > > known as the Ad of Iram. Iram is mentioned in the
          > > Eblaite tablets which date to around 2300BC. The
          > > ancient Ad were succeeded by the ancient Thamud,
          > who
          > > were mentioned by Sargon around 700BC. These
          > ancient
          > > Qahtani tribes were known as the "first or
          > orignial Ad
          > > and the first or original Thamud" and they are not
          > to
          > > be confused with their successors, the "Second" Ad
          > and
          > > the "Second" Thamud, which became extinct around
          > 300
          > > and 400 AD.
          > > According to the Quran, the original Ad and Thamud
          > > were thought to have existed around the time of
          > the
          > > Old Kingdom and were known to the Egytptians who
          > > hosted Moses. (This is not impossible as the Old
          > > Kingdom kings were already importing frankincense
          > for
          > > mummification). Since the Quran names Haman
          > > (Hemon/Hemiunu) as the master builder to the
          > Pharaoh
          > > of Moses, this puts Moses under the Pharaoh Kufu
          > or
          > > around 2550BC. According to the Quran, both Ad and
          > > Thamud had experienced some kind of cataclysmic
          > > disaster sometime prior to or during the reign of
          > > Kufu. But this does not mean that these tribes
          > were
          > > extinct, only temporarily crippled.
          > > The second Ad were known to the Quraish as having
          > > inhabited Iram or a territory on the southern
          > coast of
          > > Arabia. Ubar, one of their stops on the caravan
          > route,
          > > collapsed around 300AD. According to the Quraish,
          > the
          > > second Thamud were equated to the Nabaetean Arabs
          > who
          > > were devastated by an earthquake in Petra around
          > > 300/400AD.
          > > Now we must quetion whether the First and Second
          > Ad
          > > and the First and Second Thamud were actually
          > > ascendant/descendant. According to tribal
          > tradition,
          > > the answer would have been definitely in the
          > > affirmative, but then we must understand tribal
          > > traditions and tribal confederacies (ahzab). The
          > > tribal federations were always changing as new
          > > alliances were made. It would not be uncommon for
          > a
          > > lesser tribe to adopt the eponymous ancestor of
          > the
          > > controlling tribe while retaining something of
          > their
          > > own identity, perhaps making their eponymous
          > ancestor
          > > a lesser god or a god related to the god of the
          > > controlling tribe. By the continuous adoption of a
          > > common eponymous ancestor by tribes coming into a
          > > confederation, a confederation with the name Ad or
          > > Thamud could continue for thousands of years while
          > > continuously changing language, location and even
          > > culture as in the case of the Nabateans or the
          > Second
          > > Thamud.
          > > The upshot of all of this is that I am sure a
          > similar
          > > history happened in the case of the original
          > Mineans
          > > and Sabeans and their later successors. Modern
          > > historians would view them as a distinct people
          > but
          > > the successors would view themselves as having a
          > > common eponymous ancestor with the more ancient
          > tribe.
          > > Anyway, this is how I understand it.
          > > Which brings me to my second point concerning
          > > Jebus/Dwd. Can we supposed that the conquest of
          > Jebus
          > > by Dwd really means the conquest of Haubas (Sabean
          > > god) by Wadd (Minean god). This would make the
          > story
          > > of Shelomo/Yedidaih with Saba a cessation of
          > > hostilities and a tribal alliance in which Wadd/El
          > > becomes ascendant over Habuas.
          > > Thoughts????
          > > Take Care Holly
          > >
          > > --- George <historynow2002@...> wrote:
          > >
          > > > An interesting point is made about the Minaean
          > > > inscriptions!
          > > >
          > > >
          > http://www.answers.com/topic/afro-asiatic-languages
          > > >
          > > > [Minaean is a branch of "WESTERN Semitic"!]
          > > > West Semitic Division
          > > >
          > > > The principal subdivisions of the West Semitic
          > group
          > > > are
          > > > Canaanite,
          > > > Aramaic (which embraced many dialects in the
          > course
          > > > of its long
          > > > history, including Syriac),
          > > > Arabic, and the unrelated
          > > > Old and Modern South Arabian [i.e., "Old South
          > > > Arabian" is
          > > > not related to the "Modern South Arabian"].
          > > >
          > > > "Both classical Arabic and the modern Arabic
          > > > dialects, as well as
          > > > the ancient and modern South Arabian languages
          > are
          > > > also classified
          > > > as West Semitic tongues."
          > > >
          > > > [The Two Dialects of Western Semitic Old South
          > > > Arabian]
          > > > "Ancient South Arabian had two principal
          > dialects,
          > > > Sabaean
          > > > and Minaean."
          > > >
          > > > 1] "...the Sabaean inscriptions are of a later
          > date
          > > > [older
          > > > than 700's BCE]."
          > > >
          > > > 2] "... The earliest Minaean inscriptions belong
          > to
          > > > the 8th cent.
          > > > B.C. or even earlier [more recent than 700's
          > > > BCE]..."
          > > >
          > > > [And finally we read about Modern languages in
          > > > Arabia:]
          > > > "The Modern South Arabian dialects spoken today
          > in
          > > > parts
          > > > of S Arabia are classified separately from both
          > > > modern
          > > > Arabic and Old South Arabian."
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > What does all this mean? Let's read this item
          > from
          > > > Briannica online:
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > [Britannica]
          > > > Minaeans
          > > > ... from the Britannica article "Arabia, history
          > of"
          >
          === message truncated ===
        • George
          HOlly, I believe you have completely missed the point I made in an earlier post. I believe you and I used the very same URL, but I used others as well. ...
          Message 4 of 8 , Apr 1, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            HOlly,

            I believe you have completely missed the point I made
            in an earlier post.

            I believe you and I used the very same URL, but I used
            others as well.

            Quoted text reads:

            > http://ancientneareast.tripod.com/Arabia.html
            >
            > Iron Age Period Onwards
            >
            > From circa 1200 BC the region of the Southern Arabian
            > Peninsula was ruled by three successive civilisations.
            > The (1)Mineans (1200-650 BC) -- (2)Sabeans (Sheba)
            > (1000 BC - 570 AD) -- (3)Himyarite (2nd to 6th
            > centuries AD) brought with them the rudiments of what
            > was to become the highly developed civilization of
            > Southern Arabia.


            This is a matter of semantics. The idea that a people
            called the "Mineans" persisted from 1200 BCE to 650 BCE
            is actually quite misleading.

            The OLDEST "Minean" texts are no older than the 600's BCE
            (maybe the 700's BCE).

            The Mineans are said to have "flourished in southern
            Arabia as early as 1200 BCE", but without inscriptions,
            it is difficult to confirm that this is the same group
            as the Mineans of northern Arabia (with the oldest texts).

            The language of the NORTHERN Mineans are categorized as
            WESTERN semitic (like Hebrew and Aramaic). No such
            categorization is possible with the southern "Mineans".

            We do not have their alphabet.

            Regards,

            George
          • Holly Aldahir
            George: I think there are other ways of confirming the existence of a people without uncovering their written records as pottery and other artifacts. Take Care
            Message 5 of 8 , Apr 2, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              George:
              I think there are other ways of confirming the
              existence of a people without uncovering their written
              records as pottery and other artifacts.
              Take Care
              Holly

              --- George <historynow2002@...> wrote:

              > HOlly,
              >
              > I believe you have completely missed the point I
              > made
              > in an earlier post.
              >
              > I believe you and I used the very same URL, but I
              > used
              > others as well.
              >
              > Quoted text reads:
              >
              > > http://ancientneareast.tripod.com/Arabia.html
              > >
              > > Iron Age Period Onwards
              > >
              > > From circa 1200 BC the region of the Southern
              > Arabian
              > > Peninsula was ruled by three successive
              > civilisations.
              > > The (1)Mineans (1200-650 BC) -- (2)Sabeans (Sheba)
              > > (1000 BC - 570 AD) -- (3)Himyarite (2nd to 6th
              > > centuries AD) brought with them the rudiments of
              > what
              > > was to become the highly developed civilization of
              > > Southern Arabia.
              >
              >
              > This is a matter of semantics. The idea that a
              > people
              > called the "Mineans" persisted from 1200 BCE to 650
              > BCE
              > is actually quite misleading.
              >
              > The OLDEST "Minean" texts are no older than the
              > 600's BCE
              > (maybe the 700's BCE).
              >
              > The Mineans are said to have "flourished in southern
              > Arabia as early as 1200 BCE", but without
              > inscriptions,
              > it is difficult to confirm that this is the same
              > group
              > as the Mineans of northern Arabia (with the oldest
              > texts).
              >
              > The language of the NORTHERN Mineans are categorized
              > as
              > WESTERN semitic (like Hebrew and Aramaic). No such
              > categorization is possible with the southern
              > "Mineans".
              >
              > We do not have their alphabet.
              >
              > Regards,
              >
              > George
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > CONTACT ABH MODERATOR:
              > AncientBibleHistory-owner@yahoogroups.com
              >
              > ABH GROUP PAGE:
              >
              http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/AncientBibleHistory
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AncientBibleHistory/
              >
              > AncientBibleHistory-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
            • andrej1234au
              Holly ... The following is taken from a post from last October-: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AncientBibleHistory/message/47935 1) The name Chenephres
              Message 6 of 8 , Apr 2, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Holly

                > According to the Quran, the original Ad and Thamud
                > were thought to have existed around the time of the
                > Old Kingdom and were known to the Egytptians who
                > hosted Moses. (This is not impossible as the Old
                > Kingdom kings were already importing frankincense for
                > mummification).

                The following is taken from a post from last October-:

                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AncientBibleHistory/message/47935

                "1) The name Chenephres closely resembles that of the founder of the
                4th dynasty, Snofru. Although placing an historical Moses this far
                back in history is not something I have heretofor contemplated, it
                does run parallel with the statement found at Koran Sura 28.38, which
                states that the master-builder of those things which Pharaoh had the
                Israelites construct was one Haman, whom Holly suggests is to be
                identified with Hemiunu, nephew/cousin and prince, master-builder,
                chief-of-works and vizier to Khufu, Snofru's son and successor."

                As stated, Snofru was the Pharaoh immediately preceeding Khufu (was
                his father, infact). Chenephres was the name given by Artapanus for
                Moses' adoptive father-in-law. This places Moses in the same
                generation as Khufu.

                aj
              • Holly Aldahir
                AJ: Thanks for the info. I have often thought that Moses was adopted by Snofru but expelled by Khufu. They were probably brought up as brothers from whence
                Message 7 of 8 , Apr 2, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  AJ:
                  Thanks for the info. I have often thought that Moses
                  was adopted by Snofru but expelled by Khufu. They were
                  probably brought up as brothers from whence came the
                  rivalry. According to the Quran, Moses was forced to
                  leave Egypt when he killed an Egyptian who was engaged
                  in a physical altercation with a fellow Hapiru. The
                  fellow Hapiru was found to have falsely accused the
                  Egyptian when the Hapiru was caught in a similar fight
                  the next day. Moses begged forgiveness, but Khufu used
                  this incident to expel Moses. This is the Quranic
                  version of events. Moses then fled to Midian.
                  Also, the idea that Moses lived under Khufu is
                  supported by the fact that Joseph lived under a king
                  who had a dream about a seven year famine.
                  Interpretation of the dream is attributed to Imhotep
                  and to Medir, the governor of certain territories in
                  upper Egypt. Medir means administrator in Arabic and
                  could easily refer to Yusuf who, according to the
                  Quran, was made administrator of the grainaries. This
                  dream is recorded on the Famine Stele on the Island of
                  Sehel and is attributed to Djoser by Ptolemy V who
                  recorded the then current version of the event.
                  Also the pharaoh who hosted Moses is referred to in
                  the Quran as "faraun al awtad" or the pharaoh of the
                  logs. Both Snofru and Khufu were famous for importing
                  tons of cedar logs from Lebanon for their fleet of
                  ships. I read that Khufu's name is actually recorded
                  at Byblos.
                  Interesting, don't you think.
                  Take Care
                  Holly

                  --- andrej1234au <andrej1234au@...> wrote:

                  > Holly
                  >
                  > > According to the Quran, the original Ad and Thamud
                  > > were thought to have existed around the time of
                  > the
                  > > Old Kingdom and were known to the Egytptians who
                  > > hosted Moses. (This is not impossible as the Old
                  > > Kingdom kings were already importing frankincense
                  > for
                  > > mummification).
                  >
                  > The following is taken from a post from last
                  > October-:
                  >
                  >
                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AncientBibleHistory/message/47935
                  >
                  > "1) The name Chenephres closely resembles that of
                  > the founder of the
                  > 4th dynasty, Snofru. Although placing an historical
                  > Moses this far
                  > back in history is not something I have heretofor
                  > contemplated, it
                  > does run parallel with the statement found at Koran
                  > Sura 28.38, which
                  > states that the master-builder of those things which
                  > Pharaoh had the
                  > Israelites construct was one Haman, whom Holly
                  > suggests is to be
                  > identified with Hemiunu, nephew/cousin and prince,
                  > master-builder,
                  > chief-of-works and vizier to Khufu, Snofru's son and
                  > successor."
                  >
                  > As stated, Snofru was the Pharaoh immediately
                  > preceeding Khufu (was
                  > his father, infact). Chenephres was the name given
                  > by Artapanus for
                  > Moses' adoptive father-in-law. This places Moses in
                  > the same
                  > generation as Khufu.
                  >
                  > aj
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > CONTACT ABH MODERATOR:
                  > AncientBibleHistory-owner@yahoogroups.com
                  >
                  > ABH GROUP PAGE:
                  >
                  http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/AncientBibleHistory
                  >
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AncientBibleHistory/
                  >
                  > AncientBibleHistory-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.