Rev. Bryant J. Williams III:
1. You wrote: “You are making the mistake of making "Mamre" to refer to
something in the environs of Bethel by using the names of other cities near
Bethel. There is no Biblical evidence for doing so.”
(a) The Biblical evidence is clear that Mamre is located west of Bethel.
At Genesis 13: 9, 11, Abram says he will go the opposite of whatever
direction Lot goes from Bethel, and then Lot goes “east”. Abram went the
opposite
of east, which is west, and proceeding west from Bethel, Abram soon came to
the region that was controlled by the princeling ruler Mamre, whose name
was used to describe such place.
(b) The non-biblical evidence is that the most important Amorite
princeling in the southern half of Canaan in the Amarna Age was Milk-Ilu, the
Amorite
princeling ruler of Gezer in the western Aijalon Valley, who controlled the
entire Aijalon Valley. Milk-Ilu had Amorite allies and a Hurrian ally
named Tagi. That fits beautifully with the fact that Abram allies with two
Amorite princeling rulers and one Hurrian princeling ruler at Genesis 14: 14.
As to whether there were tent-dwellers like the Biblical Patriarchs in the
Aijalon Valley, Milk-Ilu/Mamre himself refers to “the power of the Apiru” at
Amarna Letter EA 271: 9-16.
2. You wrote: “The "oaks of Mamre" are always presented to be near Hebron.
”
Yes. I see XBRWN as being xa-vur-u-ne, and as being a Patriarchal nickname
for the Shephelah. The place to find (i) an Amorite princeling ruler whose
ideal nickname would be “Mamre”, and (ii) oak trees, and (iii) villages
whose names refer to oak trees, all of which were dominated by Mamre, is
definitely the Aijalon Valley, west of Bethel. Both the “oak trees of Mamre”,
and the “Allons/Elons of Mamre”, are located in the northeast Shephelah, in
the Patriarchs’ XBRWN.
3. You wrote: “Hebron is NOT in the north or central Israel either.”
The Patriarchs’ XBRWN is portrayed in Genesis as being west of Bethel, in
the northern Shephelah. The Hebrews may, centuries later, have re-named the
site 20 miles south of Jerusalem as XBRWN in honor of the Patriarchs, or at
least the King David stories could adopt that point of view. But in the
Patriarchal Age, we can be absolutely certain that the site 20 miles south of
Jerusalem was n-o-t called XBRWN. In the Early and Middle Bronze Ages,
that site was a massive fortress, and so would definitely be on the Egyptian
Execration Lists. There is no XBRWN, or anything similar, on the Egyptian
Execration Lists. In the Amarna Age, that site was called Qiltu. There’s no
XBRWN, or anything similar, in the Amarna Letters. So the best way to
determine the locale of the Patriarchs’ XBRWN is to pay close attention to what
the text of the Patriarchal narratives says about it. It’s west of Bethel, at
a locale where there are oak trees and villages called “oak tree place”
and a dominant Amorite ruler, and where the situation is ideal for having a
huge flock of sheep and goats. That’s the eastern Aijalon Valley.
4. You wrote: “Regarding the finds of the LMLK seals found in the
Shephelah and in Hebron. Hebron was the seat of government of David for his
first
seven years. It was one of the major royal cities of the Israelite monarchy.
It would also make sense for the LMLK seals to be more in number in the
Shephelah because of its closeness to Jerusalem and also to the Northern
Kingdom as well.”
(a) Since so few XBRN lmlk seals were found in southern hill country, there
’s no reason to conclude on the basis of the XBRN lmlk seals that the
mountainous site 20 miles south of Jerusalem was called XBRWN in the 8th
century
BCE, much less in the Patriarchal Age. There’s no other non-biblical
support for the site northwest of the Judean Desert being called XBRWN or XBRN
by
the local inhabitants prior to the common era.
(b) Although later books in the Bible portray young King David as
establishing his first capital at a site 20 miles south of Jerusalem, and with
its
name being XBRWN, (i) there’s nothing in non-biblical sources to support that
whatsoever, and (ii) as to Biblical sources, most would view the King David
stories as having been composed long after the composition of the
Patriarchal narratives. As such, the authors of the King David stories could
have
chosen to use XBRWN as the name of King David’s first capital city in order to
link him to the Patriarchs.
Importantly as to Biblical evidence, nowhere in the Bible is it stated that
King David’s first capital is where the Patriarchs of old had sojourned.
Thus the likelihood is high that the XBRWN of the King David stories and the
XBRWN of the Patriarchal narratives are two entirely different places. For
purposes of analyzing the Patriarchal narratives, I simply ask that people
not assume that XBRWN in Genesis is automatically referring to a site just
northwest of the Judean Desert. Rather, the only proper way to determine the
geographical locale of the Patriarchs’ XBRWN, as opposed to King David’s
XBRWN, is to look to see what the Hebrew text of the Patriarchal narratives
says about XBRWN.
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
