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.
If there are but few letters from the father, there is a sufficient
number, and of considerable extent, from the son. He, too, is the faithful
servant of the Pharaoh, and he writes also to Dûdu (a form of the name
David) and Ḫâi, telling of the difficulties which he had with regard to
the king of the Hittites. It is apparently this prince to whom the Pharaoh
writes in the letter translated on pp. 300-302, a circumstance which leads
to the belief that the complaints of Rib-Addi with regard to Abdi-Aširti
and his son Aziru were well-founded. That the king of Egypt asks therein
for the delivery to him of certain persons whom he names, implies that he
had trustworthy information as to who the intriguers were, and though
apparently willing to give Aziru the benefit of the doubt, he certainly
did not hold him blameless.
It will probably be long ere the true order of these letters is known, and
until this be found, much of the history of the period to which they refer
must necessarily remain uncertain.
Hittites.
Another nationality which took a predominant part in the politics of
ancient Palestine is the Hittites. To all appearance they were a later
power than the Amorites, as their name does not occur in the inscriptions
of Babylonia and Assyria until a comparatively late date, whilst the
Amorites are mentioned 2200 years before Christ, and their name had become
the common Assyro-Babylonian expression for “the west.” That the Hittites
were nevertheless of considerable antiquity, however, is implied by the
presence of the sons of Heth at Mamre in the time of Abraham, who
purchased from Ephron the Hittite the cave of Machpelah in that place. It
is difficult to assign to these people any definite limits, especially in
early times, but it seems certain that they began to act far in the north,
and gradually extended their power southwards. In the times of Joshua, the
tract between the Lebanon and Euphrates is described as theirs, and their
domain was, in fact, the country to the north of Palestine. It was no
doubt due to their predominating power that the Assyrians of later days
called the whole of Palestine “the land of Ḫatti,” a designation not
altogether correct, but sufficient for their purpose, namely, that of
indicating the position of the nationalities enumerated. Nevertheless, it
had some justification, several colonies of these people inhabiting that
district, as is indicated by Gen. xxiii. 3, xxv. 10; Numbers xiii. 29,
etc. The statement in Ezekiel xvi. 3, that the father of Jerusalem was an
Amorite and its mother a Hittite, shows what was the opinion of the more
learned Jews of the time in the matter.
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