BBS Six Chambered Gates
Introduction
It is unlikely that David built the
City of David: the biblical record maintains that he occupied an existing
castle or fortress, which is consistent with the 14C dating. Nor is it likely that Solomon designed or
built six chambered gates, other than the one at Gezer. The claim leading up to this debate is that
Jerusalem is an insignificant cow town. However,
Israelite influence and prominence are not dependent on the City of David or on
six chambered gates. We found an excellent
indication of Solomon’s fame in massive hoards of hacksilber found in Cisjordan.
We also approached a realistic
assessment of Israel’s size, since that seems to be in dispute, by comparison with
contemporary world population, by evaluation of census decline, and by observation
of spiritual condition.
Finally, we extended our study of Egyptian-Israelite
convergence to include Shoshenq I. Here
we found an excellent fit for the destruction of Gezer, alliance between Israel
and the Meshwesh, and a reasonable connection
for Solomon’s wife.
Script[1]
Six
Chambered Gates (time 1:10:00)
N: The Bible credits David with conquering
the kingdom. But it’s Solomon, his son,
who is the great builder.
R: “This was the purpose of the forced labor which Solomon
imposed. It was to build the House of
YHWH … and the wall of Jerusalem, Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer.” — 1 Kings 9:15
N: Here in Hazor Amnon Ben-Tor, director of
excavations, believes this may be evidence of Solomon’s building campaign. Archaeologist’s call it a six chambered gate,[2] a massive entryway
fortified with towers and guard rooms.
Ben-Tor’s predecessor Yigael
Yadin[3] first
uncovered this structure.[4]
Ben-Tor: It turned out to be a six chambered
gate. And Yigael Yadin immediately remembered that a very,
very similar gate was excavated at Gezer.
Then, Chicago University excavated this gate here at Megiddo.[5]
N:
Stunned by the similarity of these three gates, Yadin recalled the passage in
the Bible.
Ben-Tor: There we have a wonderful connection
of the biblical text as it shows up in archaeology.
N: Three monumental gates, all based on the
same plan, would seem to be powerful evidence; not only of prosperity, but also
of a central authority. Throughout its
history, the Israelites had been divided into tribes. Then into kingdoms: north and south. The locations of these strikingly similar
gates in both regions suggests a single governing authority throughout the
land. But how can we be sure that this is
the kingdom of David and Solomon? The
answer, once again lies in Egypt.
Decline
It is easy to overestimate or
underestimate the size and glory of Israel.
There are several reasons for this.
First, in the grand scheme of
things, Israel was never large. A census
estimate of two-million people, give or take,[6] is not a horde or a
multitude in comparison to the scale of population in Egypt, Anatolia, or
Mesopotamia; Israel makes a significant ethnic group, or a good sized city. Yet the Israelites were not city dwellers:
they were semi-nomadic shepherds, most of whom did not own houses, but rather
lived in tents. Moreover, they were not
all Israelites; some of them came from other ethnicities: they were a mixed
multitude. Spread out over the entire
Promised Land there would be less than one person in five acres, 20 acres per
family. If city dwellers, such as administrators,
regular military, and scribes are removed from the distribution, the population
density gets even smaller. This is simply
not large on a world scale; it does ripple the water: even so, the Israelites
are not empire builders; it doesn’t ripple the water very much. One estimate gives the world population as 27
million in 2000, and 50 million in 1000 (7 M in Africa, 33 M in Asia, 9 M in
Europe, 1 M elsewhere).[7] This estimate makes Israel about 5% of the world
population of 40 M in 1406-1366. Not
exactly Thebes, but not a cow town either: at least not a small cow town.
In the 1406 census Israel numbered
603,550 men who were older than 20, excluding the Levites.[8] The firstborn males over 1 month numbered
22,273.[9] In the 1366 census Israel numbered 601,730.[10] In the Judges census Israel numbered around
423,700 except for the absent men from Jabeshgilead.[11] In Saul’s first census Israel numbered 670,000.[12] In Saul’s second census Israel numbered 600;[13] third, 430,000.[14] In David’s census Israel numbered 1,300,000.[15] In Solomon’s era there were too many people
to take a census.[16] In Ahab’s census Israel numbered 60,230
without the Judah tribes.[17] With simple 1% growth we would expect to see a
census of 31 M by the end of David’s reign; and 46 M by the end of Solomon’s
reign. From any perspective of
evaluation the Israelites are not thriving, they are declining. They declined throughout Judges. They made a minor recovery during the early
part of Saul’s reign, but sank again with heavy losses overall. Allowing 30,000 for the Judah tribes, Ahab’s
census amounts to an 85% loss of population.
This isn’t much on an annual average; even so, the Israelites are slowly
bleeding to death because of sin.[18] Had we not examined these census figures we
would have surely overestimated the size and glory of Israel. Israel is dying. This decline could be the result of actual
fatalities; or it could include multitudes who have abandoned faith in Yahweh,
to live as practicing Canaanites.
The third, and most important factor
in understanding Israel’s size and glory is that it is a spiritual, not a
physical commodity. Yahweh does not care
how many citizens He has; He only cares how many love and obey Him. Yahweh sees reality, even though we fail to
see it. The person who does not love and
obey Him, cannot be a healthy person, cannot be traveling on a safe path, and cannot
possibly reach good goals. The Father loves
His child and has the child’s best interests at heart. The Father knows His child better than the child
can possibly know herself or himself.
Whether we view Israel from the
perspective of worldly stature, internal population, or spiritual growth, Israel
is a rapidly sinking ship. Israel is
living out a death wish.
We cannot reasonably evaluate the
greatness of David and Solomon without trying to grasp the size of David’s
heart and the immensity of Solomon’s wisdom.
We will not find these things at the City of David in Jerusalem or at
Hazor in Six Chambered Gates. The moral
of this story is that we ought not make claims about Israel’s size and glory
that are not directly substantiated from either science or Scripture.
City
of David
In the previous segment we dated
Mazar’s palace walls as most likely belonging to the Jebusite stronghold, prior
to David; from there until 586 and beyond.
The point of tangency which must be met in David’s life, is found in 2
Samuel 5, which says nothing about David building the City. There is little doubt remaining that the City
of David has been found: it was built, possibly circa 1050-1155, before David
was born.[19]
“David was thirty years old when he began to reign,
and he reigned forty years. He reigned
over Judah seven years, six months from Hebron: and he reigned thirty-three
years over all Israel and Judah from Jerusalem.
The king and his men went to Jerusalem to the Jebusites, the inhabitants
of the land, who told David, “You will not come in here: for even the blind and
the lame are able to repel you.” Nevertheless
David took the stronghold of Zion, and renamed it the City of David. David said on that day, “Whoever gets up the water
conduit, and strikes the Jebusites, even the lame and the blind who hate David’s
soul, he will become chief and captain. So
the proverb began, “The blind and the lame will not come in the house.” So David lived in the fort, and called it the
City of David. And David built all around
[the City] inside the earthworks and ramparts.”[20]
We saw that claims about David’s
glory are easily overestimated or underestimated. So we returned to Scripture for a bigger
grasp of the picture. We also verified
the science for ourselves, and found the reports to fall short of expected
reasonable standards.
Hazor
Similarly we already know that Hazor
was a continuously occupied city for long periods of time, primarily because of
its strategic location.[21] It was likely an important part of Egyptian
northern defenses against the Nuhašše and Hatti. Other strategic pieces of the Egyptian
northern defenses may have been positioned to the south along the Valley of
Jezreel and over to Pella. After the
Battle of Megiddo (1465-1464)[22] and the victory of Thutmose
III (1487-1433)[23] this
area ceases to be a Nuhašše stronghold.
Since Kadesh is far north in Nuhašše territory, we prefer to think of
this as a distinct culture from Canaanite culture. Since the Canaanites have a long standing
history as Egyptian allies we think it more likely that the Nuhašše and Hatti
were driven out of Megiddo and Hazor, and Canaanite forces installed as an
Egyptian vassal city-state. This fits
well with fires dated to 1450 at Hazor.
Both Megiddo and Hazor would have been more easily supplied from harbors
at Acre and Tyre. We believe that this
is the case because of Egyptian references to sailing, involvement on
Mediterranean islands,[24] and a presence at Acre.[25]
One possible timeline, consistent
with the data, would be: Prior to 1450
Hazor is occupied as a Nuhašše and Hatti stronghold, limiting Egyptian access
further north. In 1464 after a one year
journey Thutmose III attacks Megiddo.
After the Battle of Megiddo a seven-month siege takes place.[26] A “Fifth Campaign” raids Canaan (1458), on the
way south, returning from Tunip.[27] A “Sixth Campaign” attacks Kadesh (1457).[28] A “Seventh Campaign” is led against Ullaza
(1456), a Phoenician town with strategic harbors.[29] An “Eighth Campaign” is carried far north
against the Naharin (1454).[30] The “Ninth Campaign” (1453) concerns the
harbors of Phoenicia; Keftiu, Byblos, and Sektu ships; as well as timber. Thutmose III could have captured Hazor In
1450 after the Battle of Megiddo; yet there is no extant record of such a
battle.[31] Hazor is burned (1450). Thutmose III dies (1433). Amenhotep II dies (1406). Joshua attacks Hazor (after 1406). Seti I is involved at Hazor (1298-1287),
which may explain Hazor’s revival. Hazor
dominates Israel (1212-1193). Barak
attacks and defeats Hazor (1193).
Solomon builds at Hazor (970-930).
Shishak attacks Jerusalem, but not Hazor (925). There is no Egyptian involvement found in
known Egyptian records at Hazor from 1287 onward.
Scripture
Since Yigael Yadin immediately recalled 1 Kings 9:15, we
wonder why he did not also remember Ezekiel 40 which has a detailed
architectural description of six chambered gates. We’re also curious to know if they match the dimensions of the gates
at Hazor, and Megiddo, and Gezer.
What we need to know is if
the gates are distinctive to Israelite design.
Ezekiel might help us with that question. We also need to know that no such gates are built
outside of Israel. Finally, we need to know that
the six chambered gates all date 970-730; yet, of course stone walls are
impossible to date.[32]
Ezekiel seems to
describe the six chambered gate as the main entrance of a new temple, one that
had not yet been built. This raises the
question, why was such a gate not found at Jerusalem; or if it was razed by
Nebuchadnezzar, why is there no surviving record of it? We are left with a bit of a puzzle; there is
no evident way to connect these gates with Solomon with absolute
certainty. What does the Bible say?
And this is the reason for
the labor force which King Solomon raised; to build the house of the Lord, his own house, the earthworks, ramparts,
and the wall of Jerusalem, Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer. For Pharaoh, king of Egypt had gone up, and
taken Gezer, and burnt it with fire, and slain the Canaanites that dwelt in the
city, and given it for a present unto his daughter, Solomon’s wife. And Solomon built Gezer, and lower Beth-Horon,
Baalath, and Tadmor in the wilderness of the land, and store cities that
Solomon had: for his chariots, for his horsemen, and whatever Solomon desired
to build in Jerusalem, in Lebanon, or anywhere in the land of his dominion.[33]
The first thing we notice is that
these verses say nothing about Solomon designing or building six chambered
gates at any of these locations. The
second thing we notice is that verses 15-25 do not even exist in the other three
main Greek Old Testament manuscripts. As
far as we can tell, only one Greek manuscript attests to the existence of these
verses at all. So they are a sort of
evidence, but there is some doubt whether they are biblical evidence or the
invention of a later scribe.
If these texts are genuine they
still say nothing about Solomon designing or building six chambered gates. Having said that, they introduce even greater
questions. Solomon was allied with a pharaoh,
which one? Pharaoh has broken trust with
Canaanite-Egyptian allies, why would he do this? Solomon’s wife is Egyptian, how can he do
this; since marriage of an Egyptian princess to a foreigner is an abomination
to the Egyptians?
Influence
How influential was Israel? We really don’t know. If every word of biblical evidence requires
archaeological support, we cannot provide it: such archaeological support is
not known to exist.
We previously showed that the idea
of a minor/major Canaanite evolution into Israelites is scientifically
unlikely. None of the evidence adduced
is sensible: the calculations are simply incorrect, the archaeological methods
are suspect, the 14C dating is incorrectly applied, and the
dependence on migrating Canaanites associating with or being the Shasu in Yhw
dies without evidence. There is no good
statistical reason to disregard the biblical record of Israel’s influence. Neither is there any reason to dramatize or
exaggerate it.
Without needing to know exactly what
David and Solomon built we can be reasonably sure that they had considerable
influence.
We can be sure that David was able
to bring the nation together, take the Jebusite stronghold, suppress the
Philistines, and return the Ark: four things which neither Saul, nor anyone
else had been able to accomplish since Joshua.
It seems to us that we need not be
concerned about matters concerning Jerusalem and Hazor: the onus is on
archaeology to prove or disprove them.
Failing such disproof, they must be allowed to stand. Granted, it would be nice to find David’s
brass plaque at Jerusalem, and Solomon’s brass plaques at Hazor, Megiddo, Gezer, and several dozen other locations. Because of the greatness of the antiquity, we
would be surprised if any such artifacts turned up; yet, their absence does not
constitute a disproof.
A strange piece of
evidence turned up today.[34] Psalm 48:7 says “You break the ships of
Tarshish with an east wind.”[35] Other than as a display of raw physical
power, why should that be important to the topic, “The City of God?”[36] The location of Tarshish, it turns out, is
not absolutely known.[37] Nevertheless, these things are clear:
Tarshish was distant, linked with Phoenician trade in silver, and possibly
gold. Both “William F. Albright[38] (1941) and Frank M. Cross[39] (1972)” held opinions
about the identity of Tarshish; opinions they would not
have entertained had not Tarshish held some archaeological importance. The silver has “lead isotope ratios that match ores in Sardinia
and Spain.” This latter piece of
evidence is very objective and is almost impossible to mismanage or
mistake. Finally, “Christine M. Thompson[40] (2003) identified a
concentration of hacksilber hoards dating between c. 1200 and 586 BC in Israel
and the Palestinian Territories (Cisjordan).”[41] This combined evidence is consistent with the
statistical inference that Israel most likely held worldwide prominence, as
evinced by Tarshish-Phoenician silver trade
involvement, during the reign
of Solomon, but not during the reign of David.
Alliances
If it can be established that Solomon
had political alliances with other world class nations and empires, we would be
well down the road to establishing Israel’s national stature. Ethiopian tradition has no trouble with such
a claim.[42]
Egyptians
We left our last discussion of Egypt
and her pharaohs with Psusennes I (1052-1001).
Since then Amenemope (1001-992),[43] Osorkon the Elder
(992-986), who was “the first pharaoh of Libyan extraction,”[44] Siamun (986-967), who was
ostensibly allied with Solomon,[45] and Psusennes II
(967-943)[46]
have all come and gone without much record of involvement in the Promised Land,
Nuhašše, Anatolia, or Shankhar.
Egypt has ceased to be a world power.
The twenty-first dynasty fades from history without much notice, other
than the confusion it leaves behind.
The one name that does not belong in
this list is Osorkon. Osorkon was a
member of the Meshwesh or Ma[47] tribe of the ancient
Berber[48] ethnic group. Given the strong Mizraim prejudices against
most things non-Egyptian, it is decidedly strange to find a Meshwesh pharaoh
surrounded by Mizraim. Mizraim
prejudices were rather one sided. A
pharaoh might take a foreign wife; yet no foreigner would be permitted to marry
a Mizraim princess. In spite of this scruple,
both Abraham and Joseph had Mizraim wives[49] Moreover, the Meshwesh were enemies, specifically
listed as such on the Merneptah Stele and elsewhere. The Mizraim evidently went to great lengths
to keep all Berbers out of Egypt.[50] Consequently, we believe that the most likely
explanation for the presence of Osorkon’s name in the list of pharaohs
is that the Mizraim have lost
the power struggle and Berbers, specifically the Meshwesh now have complete control of the
Nile Delta and possibly much, much more.
This makes Siamun and Psusennes II into puppets, mere figureheads, veils
hiding a real Meshwesh power center. Does this mean that Osorkon lives and
reigns until 943? We do not know.
Shoshenq I (943-922): engages: Ham,[51] Negeb, Raphia (Gaza), Beth-Tappuah,[52] Adummim,[53] Field of Abram,[54] Aijalon,[55] Aruna,[56] Beth-Horon,[57] Socho, Yehem, Gibeon, Hapharaim,
Megiddo, Taanach, Shunem, Beth-Shan, Emeq, Rehob, Beth-Anath, Jordan, Mahanaim
(Pella?), Rabbah, Kadesh, Tunip (Nuhašše or Syria), Hatti, Arzawa (Hittite in western Anatolia), Naharin
(Mitanni or Assyria), Assyria, Shankhar, Beth-Olam (unknown),[58] Hand of the King (unknown),[59] Migdol (unknown),[60] and Shasu.[61]
Israelites
David (1010-970)
Solomon (970-930)
Rehoboam (930-914)
Jeroboam I (930-908)
Convergence
Solomon was allied with Pharaoh,
which one? We can only identify one
pharaoh who would have the means, motive, and opportunity to be allied with
Solomon. This pharaoh cannot very likely
be Osorkon the Elder (992-986), simply because his dates are too early. Even if Osorkon the Elder lives to 943, he
would be around seventy years old or older, and unlikely to be engineering
peace treaties with Israel. His children
would also be mature. This pharaoh
cannot very likely be either Siamun (986-967), the proposed alliance builder;
or Psusennes II (967-943): for both, being staunch twenty-first dynasty
pharaohs, would seem to have overwhelming reasons to oppose any such
alliance. Moreover, Siamun’s dates are
also too early. That leaves a single
visible candidate: namely, Shoshenq I (943-922), who is only a few years younger
than Solomon. Unless an invisible candidate,
not yet known to modern scholars, is discovered, Shoshenq I wins by default.
Pharaoh has broken trust with
Canaanite-Egyptian allies, why would he do this? The Meshwesh have no trust relationships with the Kinaḫḫu or Ka-na-na
and Mizraim: they are, in fact, long standing enemies and now the Meshwesh have
conquered and subdued Mizraim; even, evidently, taking its name, priesthood,
and all their titles. There is no
impediment whatsoever in Shoshenq I attacking a Kinaḫḫu town like Gezer, and killing all its inhabitants:
it was probably on Shoshenq’s, “Strategic cities to defeat or destroy,”
list anyway. To complete his domination
of all things Mizraim, Shoshenq
needs a way to control all of the Kinaḫḫu. Not only is this not a breach of trust, it is
a strong positive step in Meshwesh world progress.
Solomon’s wife is Egyptian, how can
he do this; since marriage of a princess to a foreigner is an abomination to
the Egyptians? Simply not a problem for
the Meshwesh; the problem for us is
that we don’t know who she is. It is not
even clear that Shoshenq has a marriageable daughter. What does seem clear is that the Meshwesh may have had strong Nubian relationships;
that this daughter may have been swarthy, possibly even black; that she was in
all respects, Solomon’s first and beloved wife; that she may be the specific
heroine of Song of Solomon; and that she would have been Queen of Israel,
except for her religion.[62] Who she is will remain a mystery: she may not
have been Shoshenq’s personal daughter, she may have been a
granddaughter, or other important family member we do not know. In any case, we have no scientific reason to
doubt the biblical record. As far as Shoshenq
is concerned, this is a strong political move giving him effective control of
all Kinaḫḫu territories up to the boarders of Nuhašše.
“Libyan
concepts of rule allowed for the parallel existence of leaders who were related
by marriage and blood. Sheshonq and his
immediate successors used that practice to consolidate their grasp on all of
Egypt. Sheshonq terminated the
hereditary succession of the high priesthood of Amun. Instead he and his successors appointed men
to the position, most often their own sons, a practice that lasted for a
century.”[63]
Conclusion
It is unlikely that David built the
City of David: the biblical record maintains that he occupied an existing
castle or fortress, which is consistent with the 14C dating. Nor is it likely that Solomon designed or
built six chambered gates, other than the one at Gezer. The claim leading up to this debate is that
Jerusalem is an insignificant cow town. However,
Israelite influence and prominence are not dependent on the City of David or on
six chambered gates. We found an excellent
indication of Solomon’s fame in massive hoards of hacksilber found in Cisjordan.
We also approached a realistic
assessment of Israel’s size, since that seems to be in dispute, by comparison with
contemporary world population, by evaluation of census decline, and by observation
of spiritual condition.
Finally, we extended our study of Egyptian-Israelite
convergence to include Shoshenq I. Here
we found an excellent fit for the destruction of Gezer, alliance between Israel
and the Meshwesh, and a reasonable connection
for Solomon’s wife.
[1]
What is for the most part an exact copy of the script follows. There are a few places where individual
speakers could neither be heard nor understood: for this we apologize. Every effort was made to be precise: there
were just spots that defeated us. Since
this is a quote in its entirety it seemed unnecessary to mark it with quotation
marks. The notation for each speaker is
tedious enough: Narrator, Reader, etc.
If you discover bothersome errors please reply to this Blog and point
them out. You may verify the script more
easily by starting to replay it where the “time” stamps indicate discussion
begins. The second of these links is
free from advertising and thus easier to use.
This blog is found at:
http://swantec-oti.blogspot.com/
[2]
Six chambered gates:
Tel Megiddo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Megiddo
Tel Hazor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Hazor
Tel Gezer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gezer
A fairly detailed architectural discussion
of six chambered gate layout is found in Ezekiel 40. It would be more constructive if we could
prove that six chambered gate designs were not used or found in other
civilizations of the era. If six
chambered gate design is unique to Israelite culture it goes a long way toward
establishing how advanced and powerful Israel may have been at the time.
[3] Yigael Yadin (1917-1984), Israeli archaeologist. Works: Qumran Caves, Masada, Hazor, Tel
Megiddo, Dead Sea Scroll translation.
[4] So
here at Hazor, which BBS originally dated at 1250, we have evidence from the
same site which, if Solomon’s, must be dated to 970-930, with strong evidence
from two distinct lines of provenance to establish the point: both the biblical
and the Egyptian provenance. Now we must
find ways to make accurate distinctions between neighborhoods: for their dates
must necessarily range from 1250-925 or wider.
It is equally evident that Hazor was in continuous habitation, and never
abandoned, not until the Assyrian invasion.
This makes the vulnerability to scavenging within the city and resultant
distorted dating a distinct possibility.
[5] In
1980 David Ussishkin presented strong
evidence that this hypothesis had failed at Megiddo. Whatever Solomon’s building program was, it
may not be tied to the six chambered gates with any certainty. Gezer is likely Solomon’s. Megiddo is almost certainly not
Solomon’s. Hazor, more like Megiddo than
Gezer in construction, is left in doubt.
The glory and extent of Solomon’s kingdom does not stand or fall on the
basis of six chambered gates.
[6]
The actual 1406 census is 603,550 of men over 20. We estimated that there were also 185,974
male children under 20. This gives a
population of 789,524 males, which grows at 1.06% a year to 1,205,280 in 40
years. At this point the original 603.550
all die leaving a 1366 census of 601,730 over 20 and another 371,994 under 20,
leaving a total male population of 973,697.
We estimated the female population to mirror this number exactly,
resulting in a total population of 1,947, 358, just under two million. Thus we have revised our previous estimates
downward from 2.4 to 2.0 M. Their total
number could be even smaller than this; we don’t see how it could possibly be
larger.
[8]
Exodus 38:26 [39:3]; Numbers 1:46; 2:32
[9] The
total number of male children would be larger than this, Numbers 3:43
[10] Numbers
26:51
[11] MT
has 426,700, Judges 20:2, 15, 17; 21:9
[12] MT
has 330,000, 1 Samuel 11:8
[13] 1
Samuel 13:15 [14]
[14] MT
has 210,000, 1 Samuel 15:4
[15] 2
Samuel 24:9
[16] 1
Kings 3:8; 8:5
[17] MT
has 7,232, 1 Kings 20:15 [21:15]
[18] –
0.37% per year
[19] Here
is another opinion,
2 Samuel 5:4-9
[22] According
to “The Armant Stela”, Thutmose III proceeded immediately to Megiddo, “His
majesty made no delay in proceeding to the land of Djahi,” which seems to favor
a sea invasion over a death march by land (ANET: page 234). Another report indicates a land invasion
through Aruna (Wadi Ara). This article is fanciful and does not provide
sources. It uses a word, haibrw, which
is suspicious because it sounds like the words Habiru or Hebrew. Also, one has to wonder how it is even
possible to get 1000 chariots through single-file terrain. Everything sounds like an exaggerated or
falsified account, which, without references, cannot easily be verified. However, Wilson has a similar account of a
march lasting a year (ANET: pages 234-238, “The Annals of Karnak”). “I had many ships of cedar built … near
Byblos (ANET: page 240, “The Barkal Stela”).”
[23]
This adjusts the Thutmose III dates by adding eight years to them. Reasons for this adjustment are found at http://swantec-oti.blogspot.com/2015/07/bbs-tel-dan-stele.html
“Convergence”, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thutmose_III
[24]
Both Keftiu (Crete) and Isy (Cyprus), ANET: pages 242-243
[25]
ibid
[26]
ANET: page 238, “The Barkal Stela”
[28]
ANET: page 239
[29]
ibid
[30]
Anatolia “after sailing” ANET: pages 239-241
[31]
The only reference relating Thutmose III to Hazor in any way, appears to be
Wilson’s list. ANET: page 242
[32] Ussishkin, David, “Was the ‘Solomonic’ City
Gate at Megiddo Built by King Solomon?” Bulletin of the American Schools
of Oriental Research, No. 239 (Summer, 1980), pp. 1-18 (JSTOR), http://www.jstor.org/stable/1356752
Based on strata and
related evidence quoted from the Ussishkin article:
·
The stratum IVA gate is “later than Solomon.” Solomon’s ordinary gate is beneath it in
“stratum VA-IVB.”
·
A “radical change took place between strata VA-IVB and stratum IVA.”
·
The “square” gate at Gezer, versus the “rectangular” gates at Hazor,
and Megiddo are not identical in plan and size.
·
The Gezer gate is most likely Solomon’s.
·
Six chambered gates are also found at Ashdod, Lachish.
·
“Six chambered gates [appear to be] popular throughout the tenth and
ninth centuries,” and not exclusively used “in royal cities.”
·
“The gates at Hazor and Megiddo were constructed at different times.”
·
A cartouche of Ramesses III found at Megiddo, stratum VIIB dates that
stratum and everything above it to post 1193-1162.
·
A Shoshenq I stele found at Megiddo, fixes the destruction of stratum
VA-IVB to 925. Since the gate was not
destroyed, it was likely built later.
·
Because the span of strata from VIIB to VA-IVB includes the life of
Solomon he probably has more artifacts here.
·
Megiddo's six chambered gate does not attest to the glory of Solomon’s kingdom.
·
With Megiddo in doubt, there is good reason to doubt Hazor, as well.
[33] 1
Kings 9:15-19
[34]
July 21, 2015
[35]
Tarshish is a descendent of Japheth, through Javan (Genesis 10:4; 1 Chronicles
1:7). See also 2 Chronicles 9:21; 20:36,
37; Esther 1:14; Psalm 72:10; Isaiah 2:16; 23:1, 6, 10, 14; 60.9; 66:19; Jeremiah
10:9; Ezekiel 27:12, 25; 38:13; Jonah 1:3; 4:2.
[36]
Clearly, “The City of … God,” is the topic or theme of the Psalm since it is
mentioned three times explicitly, and more obliquely referred to in other
places. Nor should we miss the
possessive; this is “The City of Our God.”
This Psalm, written by Korah for public worship, reveals that monotheism,
the specific monotheism of Israel was not always so rare in Israel as BBS
claims.
[40] The
University of Akron, Akron, Ohio, no other biographical data at this time. One paper: Thompson, C., and Skaggs, S.
(2013). King Solomon's Silver? Southern Phoenician Hacksilber Hoards and the
Location of Tarshish. Internet Archaeology, (35). http://dx.doi.org/10.11141/ia.35.6
One book review: http://www.ajaonline.org/online-review-book/1526
[42]
Evaluating the credibility of Ethiopian tradition is well beyond the scope of
this paper; yet, it seems to us that this is a necessary task if we are to cast
doubt on Solomon’s worldwide influence. One
wonders if the Haile Selassie I
blood line can be verified as Israelite from a simple DNA test.
We have a few questions about the Dakhla Oasis.
Is the Dakhla Oasis Egyptian or Libyan territory in 1052-943? Is the Dakhla Oasis ethnically Egyptian or
ethnically something else during the period 1052-943? What is the relationship between the people
of the Dakhla Oasis and the Berbers and Egyptians?
[48] Sometimes
generically called Tjeḥenu by
the Egyptians
[49]
They are Hagar (Genesis 16:3) and Asenath the daughter of Potipherah priest of
On (Genesis 41:45).
[50]
Indeed, the “concentration camps” of Ramesses III, may have set the stage for the rise of Meshwesh power in
Egypt. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meshwesh
[51]
Ham may be elsewhere; still, it is also a term for Egypt: or possibly Ammonite
territory.
[52]
Joshua 15:53
[53]
Joshua 15:7; 18:17
[54]
Very likely this is the Cave of Machpelah.
For those looking for historicity for Genesis, this may be the oldest
reference to Abram outside of the Bible.
[55] A
valley town, Joshua 21:24; Judges 1:35; 12:12; 1 Samuel 14:31; 1 Chronicles
6:69; 8:13; 2 Chronicles 11:10
[56]
Most likely Araunah, 2 Samuel 24:16,
18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24
[57]
Joshua 10:10, 11; 16:3, 5; 18:13, 14; 21:22; 1 Samuel 13:18; 1 Kings 9:17; 1
Chronicles 6:68; 7:24; 2 Chronicles 8:5; 25:13
[58]
Since this is such a commonly used name for Jewish cemeteries, we wonder if it
could attest to an Israelite burial ground or early synagogue. It means house of eternity or eternal house
or home.
[59]
This may not be a place at all. It may
speak to the Egyptian practice of amputating the right hands of vanquished
enemies. Rehoboam’s sin may have cost
him his right hand: this may have been too shameful to mention in the Bible. In this context and medical era, the loss of
a hand probably meant loss of life. It
indicates more than loss of power. It
indicates total humiliation, and even in death, removal of standing or status before
the pantheon of which the king (pharaoh) was usually considered a member. Far worse than emasculation, the removal of
the hand symbolizes the total annihilation of personhood: consignment to
Hell. Psalms 76:5; 78:42, 61; 80:17 ANET, “Amen-em-heb”: pages 240 f, 242
[60]
Migdol means tower. There are many of
them. Perhaps the most prominent of them
is located in the eastern Nile Delta.
[61]
ANET: pages 242, 246, 263, 294
[62] 1
Kings 7:7-9; 2 Chronicles 8:11
[64] If you have been blessed or helped by any of these meditations,
please repost, share, or use any of them as you wish. No rights are reserved. They are designed and intended for your free
participation. They were freely
received, and are freely given. No other
permission is required for their use.
No comments:
Post a Comment