The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and BabyloniaPinches, Theophilus G. (Theophilus Goldridge)
Religion
The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and Babylonia
Pinches, Theophilus G. (Theophilus Goldridge)
Bible. Old Testament -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.
The successor of Rameses, Meneptah II., is hardly the son which one would
expect to follow such a father. According to Brugsch, he does not rank
with those Pharaohs who transmitted their remembrance to posterity by
grand buildings and the construction of new temples. And the monolith
found by Petrie in 1896 seems to imply that his lists of conquests were
not always so trustworthy as could be wished. Nevertheless, the reign of
Meneptah is one of the greatest importance, for it was he, to all
appearance, who was the Pharaoh of the Exodus, as seems also to be proved
by the same document. As this is a text of the very first importance, a
translation of the concluding lines is given here—
“Kheta (the land of the Hittites) is in peace, captive is Canaan and full
of misery, Askelon is carried away, Gezer is taken, Yennuamma is
non-existent, Israel is lost, his seed is not,(75) Syria is like the
widows of Egypt. The totality of all the lands is at peace, for whoever
rebelled was chastised by king Meneptah.”
Now the statement concerning Israel has given rise to a considerable
amount of discussion. Naville regards the reference to the condition in
which the Israelites were as indicating that they had left Egypt, and were
wandering, “lost” in the desert. There is also some probability that the
expression, “his seed is not,” may be a reference to the decree of the
king, who commanded the destruction of the male children of the Hebrews,
which command, he may have imagined, had been finally carried out. The
question also naturally arises, whether the last phrase, “whoever rebelled
was chastised by king Meneptah,” may not have a reference to the
Israelites, who, from their own showing, were sufficiently peremptory in
their demands to be allowed to proceed into the wilderness to sacrifice to
their god, to bring down upon themselves any amount of resentment.
Exceedingly noteworthy, and in many respects startling, however, are the
researches and statements of Dr. Edouard Mahler. Following Spiegelberg as
to the meaning of the phrase containing the name of the Israelites,
“Jenoam has been brought to naught; Israel, the horde, destroyed his
crops”—a statement which hardly seems worthy of the honour of being
inscribed on the memorial stele of a king of Egypt—is the rendering he
suggests. The translation of the word _feket_ (which is rendered by other
Egyptologists as “annihilated, lost,” or in some similar way) by “horde,”
allows the learned chronologist to suggest, that the ideographs
accompanying the word Israelites indicate that they had already entered
the Holy Land, and were trying to obtain a foothold there.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account