Jim
You wrote:
"As you probably know, we have more information about Canaan in Year 12 (if
it?s Year 12 of Akhenaten?s 17-year reign) than virtually any other year in
ancient history. We know who was ruling Shechem, Jerusalem and the Ayalon
Valley, and we know how each of those rulers operated."
I am puzzled by this statement because scholars I've read report the
opposite. In the "Chronology of the Amarna Letters" by the reknowned EF
Campbell he writes the most famous figures of that era, Labayu, Miliku and Abdi
Heba were long dead by the time the Egyptian Maya became commissioner of Gezer
which he says can be conclusively placed in Year 8-9 of Akhenaten. Yet you
claim they were alive in Year 12 and somehow play a part in the story of
Abraham, Lotand Melchezidek. Scholars I've read agree Labayu died before both
the deaths of Amenophis lll and Abdi Ashirta... (incidentally, K.A. Kitchen in
his book "Suppilulima and the Amarna Pharaohs" states, rather emphatically Abi
Milki abandoned Tyre no later than Year 14 of Akhenaten.) In short, according
to scholars,there are no records of Jerusalem or the Hill Country in the second
half of Akhenaten's rule.No replacement was named after the death of Abdi
Hebaand and according toscholars Milkilu is dead before the captu
re of Labayu's son's just as Akhenaten's reign begins and could not have been
alive as late as Year 12. This is not personal opinion but is according to
Campbell, Na'aman, Kitchen and Redford. Please be kind enough to provide
documented sources for your assertions which clearly contradict theirs..
Perhaps I can get Mr Na'aman or someone of that stature to respond to
information that so opposes mainstream researchers.
Rob Acosta
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
