John Leake:
We agree as to many things. But as to the most important point, you and I
are in total disagreement, when you write:
“I don't see a fourteenth-century text. A lot of the features you cite as
signs of an author I see as signs of storytelling within an oral tradition.”
Let me list a few of the many features of the Patriarchal narratives that
were written down in Akkadian cuneiform in the Amarna Age regarding Years
12-14, and which could not possibly, under any circumstances, be “
storytelling within an oral tradition”.
1. Genesis 47: 28 says that Jacob was an early semi-monotheistic leader
of his people in Egypt for 17 shanah. Historically in the Amarna Age,
Akhenaten was an early semi-monotheistic leader of his people in Egypt for 17
years.
2. In Years 12-13, with “Year 13” being specifically referenced at
Genesis 14: 4, the ruler of the “valley” [Genesis 37: 14] that was the
opposite
of “east” of Bethel [Genesis 13: 9, 11], namely the valley of ia-lu-na
[the spelling of “Ayalon” at Amarna Letter EA 287: 57 by IR-Heba’s scribe:
Biblical )-L-N at Genesis 13: 18, 14: 13, 18: 1] west of Bethel and
Jerusalem, was Mamre the Amorite [Genesis 14: 13]. Historically in the Amarna
Age,
the Amorite princeling Milk-i-Ilu ruled the Ayalon Valley through Year 13,
and [per the Amarna Letters] was notoriously allied with tent-dwellers
[habiru], as well as Canaanite and Hurrian princelings. Genesis 14: 13
expressly says that Mamre the Amorite was allied with tentdwellers [the
Hebrews],
Canaanite “brothers”/princelings [Eshcol], and Hurrian “brothers”
/princelings [Anir]. Moreover, the historical name “Milk-i-Ilu”, coming
straight
out of the Amarna Letters as the name of the princeling who dominated the
Ayalon Valley from Gezer through Year 13, is honored at Genesis 46: 17,
where two of the Hebrews who move to Egypt with Jacob are named XBR, being the
root of XBR-WN/“Hebron”, and immediately following that MLK -Y- )L/“
Milk-i-Ilu”.
3. But as good as things were for the first Hebrews in Years 12-13, it
all went bad in Year 14 when Milk-i-Ilu, against the advice of the first
Hebrews, unfortunately picked as his successor his firstborn son, Yapaxu, who
hated tentdwellers, instead of his younger son who soon broke from Yapaxu
and allied with the tentdwellers, per Amarna Letter EA 298. Firstborn son
Yapaxu was a bona fide threat to drive the first Hebrews out of their beloved
homeland in the northeast Ayalon Valley. T-h-a-t is why the Patriarchal
narratives portray 7 out of 7 firstborn sons as properly getting the shaft:
(i) Haran, (ii), Lot, (iii) Ishmael, (iv) Esau, (v) Reuben, (vi) Er,
(vii) Manasseh. The Amorite Yapaxu represents the “iniquity of the Amorites”
that is darkly referenced at Genesis 15: 16, so soon after Abram had been
in a glorious covenant relationship with his father, the Amorite
Mamre/Milk-i-Ilu, at Genesis 14: 13. Things were moving fast, and they were
going
straight downhill now for the first Hebrews in Year 14. In desperation, the
first Hebrews planned to ask Akhenaten to do what Jacob is portrayed as doing
in chapter 48 of Genesis: overrule the wishes of Pharaoh’s fine servant
[Joseph; historical Milk-i-Ilu] and insist that a younger son [Ephraim;
the historical younger brother of hated Yapaxu] be given the finer
inheritance to succeed such fine servant of Pharaoh, not the favored firstborn
son.
4. In order to show empathy with Akhenaten’s Year 14 problems [so that
Akhenaten might be bestirred to remove hated Yapaxu from power in the Hebrews’
homeland of the Ayalon Valley], each Patriarch is portrayed as having a
terrible time siring a son by his favorite main wife. Historically in the
Amarna Age, Akhenaten had a terrible time trying to sire a son as his
proper heir by beloved Nefertiti.
5. In order to show further empathy with Akhenaten’s Year 14 problems,
Abraham’s nephew/“brother” Lot is portrayed at Genesis 19: 30-38 as being
able to carry on his line [in order to “preserve life”] by means of siring
sons/grandsons by his own daughters, and the son of Jacob whom Jacob will
later anoint as the new leader of the Hebrews at Genesis 49: 8-10, namely
Judah, is portrayed at Genesis 38: 12-30 as siring sons/grandsons by his own
daughter-in-law Tamar, one of whom, Perez, is fated to become the leader of
the next generation of the Hebrews [per Genesis 38: 29 and Genesis 46: 12].
Historically in the Amarna Age, Akhenaten tried to sire sons/grandsons by
his own daughters to be his proper heir, since he had no luck siring a son
as his proper heir by formerly beloved Nefertiti.
6. It was Year 13 when pharaoh Akhenaten had his vizier confiscate a
great deal of valuable land along the Nile River at firesale prices for the
royal household. Shortly after Jacob is stated to be age 13 tenfold shanah
at Genesis 47: 9, which is intended to signify Year 13, Joseph as Pharaoh’s
vizier [later in that same chapter 47 of Genesis] confiscates a great deal
of valuable land along the Nile River at firesale prices for the royal
household.
7. Per the Amarna Letters, it was Year 13 when the strongman ruler of
Shechem was assassinated under bizarre circumstances on behalf of, but without
the prior approval of, the early semi-monotheist Akhenaten. Per the
Patriarchal narratives, it was 13 tenfold years after Abraham’s birth when the
strongman ruler of Shechem was assassinated under bizarre circumstances on
behalf of, but without the prior approval of, the early semi-monotheist
Jacob in chapter 34 of Genesis.
Do you see the p-i-n-p-o-i-n-t historical accuracy of the Patriarchal
narratives in recalling every minute detail of Years 12-14? There’s no way
that that level of detail, regarding three historical years, could under any
circumstances be the product of “storytelling within an oral tradition”.
Not.
I know that university professors teach you that the Patriarchal
narratives are late and fictional, but they’re wrong. The Patriarchal
narratives in
fact are incredibly ancient, having been composed and written down in
Akkadian cuneiform [a la the Amarna Letters, except using Akkadian cuneiform
to
write Canaanite/pre-Hebrew words, not Akkadian words] in late Amarna. The
Patriarchal narratives have p-i-n-p-o-i-n-t historical accuracy in
recalling every jot and tittle of what actually happened in Years 12-14 under
Akhenaten’s unfortunate reign, most all of which we can confirm with certainty
by reference to the Amarna Letters.
The Patriarchal narratives are n-o-t an oral tradition, as you’re taught
at school. Rather, the Patriarchal narratives were written down at the
very beginning, right after Akhenaten’s death [with the scribe who was
retained by the first Hebrews for the task likely being the former scribe of
IR-Heba of Jerusalem, who had been living only a day’s walk east of where the
first Hebrews tenuously were sojourning in the northeast Ayalon Valley in
the second half of the Amarna Age]. In an attempt to show empathy with
Akhenaten’s Year 14 problems [so that Akhenaten might be bestirred to remove
hated Yapaxu from power in the Hebrews’ homeland in the Ayalon Valley], great
Patriarch #1 features in the middle of his name one of Akhenaten’s favorite
divine references: resh/R, here being, via the Egyptian divine name ra, a
generic reference to the divine. )B R HM: father [)B], by divine Will
[R], of a multitude [HM], just as Genesis 17: 5 accurately tells us the
meaning is. You can’t get it more straightforward than that. But only in
Year
14 [when there was still a semi-realistic chance that Akhenaten might help
the first Hebrews] would a Hebrew author ever have come up with, and written
down, an Egypt-friendly name like that for the most beloved Hebrew
Patriarch.
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
