Chavoux Luyt: You wrote: “I see no reason why not, but I also see no difference in meaning
between "the 13th year" (according to most modern translations) and "year 13" (your translation). Year 13 of Queen Elizabeth's rule was also the 13th year of Queen Elizabeth's rule... what I cannot see from the text is the far-ranging historical and archaeological claims you make from such a small difference (which might just as well be a transmission error in the text).” In 5,000 years of human history, there was only one time when 5 rebellious princelings formed a league that was utterly destroyed the next year by forces led by a man who had seized the Hittite throne by the dastardly expedient of murdering his own older brother named ‘Tidal’ [and hence could be referred to by the nasty Patriarchal nickname ‘Tidal’]: Year 13 [of Akhenaten’s 17-year reign]. That is based on the general consensus that the Great Syrian War in western Syria was probably fought in Year 14, with the league of 5 rebellious princelings having formed the previous year, in Year 13. [Scholars split as to whether the Hittites were the head of a 4-party coalition that smashed the league of 5 rebellious princelings in Year 14.] Now look at Genesis 14: 4. Can it be a mere “coincidence” that the second half of Genesis 14: 4 seems to reference “Year 13”? Genesis 14: 4 may be giving us an actual, absolute date for this key event in the Patriarchal narratives. If so, then the Hebrew grammar of Genesis 14: 4 may be the key to solving one of the greatest Biblical mysteries of all time: the dating of the Patriarchal Age. Jim Stinehart Evanston, Illinois _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
