| KINGS OF THE NORTH
Genesis Chapter XIV
1 And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch
king of Ellasar, Kedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of nations;
2 (K) That these made war with Bera king of Sodom, and with Birsha
king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, and Shemeber king of Zeboim, and
the king of Belah, which is Zoar.
3 All these joined forces together in the valley of Siddim, which is
the Sea of Salt.
4 Twelve years they served Kedorlaomer, and in the thirteenth year
they rebelled.
5 And in the fourteenth year came Kedorlaomer, and the kings who were
with him, and defeated the Raphaim in Ashteroth-Karnaim, and the Zuzim
in Ham, and the Emim in Shaveh-Kiriatayim,
6 And the Horites in their Mount Seir, to Elparan, which is by the
wilderness.
7 And they returned, and came to Ein-Mishpat, which is Kadesh, and
struck all the country of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites, who
lived in Hazezon-Tamar.
8 (K) And there went out the king of Sodom, and the king of Gomorrah,
and the king of Admah, and the king of Zeboim, and the king of Belah,
the same is Zoar, and they joined battle with them in the valley of
Siddim;
9 With Kedorlaomer the king of Elam, and with Tidal king of nations,
and Amraphel king of Shinar, and Arioch king of Ellasar; four kings with
five.
Good friends, scholars all, generally supportive of my work in
general and my revised chronology in particular have never been shy in
taking our their long knives when they thought my research was taking a
wrong direction.
Last week was something different. With tolerance and good humor,
slight sarcasm and resigned patience, they let me know in no uncertain
terms that :-
a) I was losing it,
b) I was playing an April fool's joke at Christmas to relieve the
seriousness of the expeditions
c) I was testing them to see if they were paying attention.
Michael, they chorused. "Nobody thinks that Shinar is Sumer any more,
it is accepted that it is an area around Babylon and confirmed to be so
by other passages in the Bible"
One goes on:-)
4. On the other hand, when Ezekiel has his famous vision on the
BiQë`aH in the vicinity of the "river Chebar", it is quite clearly set
on the great plain of Babylon, which city boasted the Canal Kabaru
(literally, the "Grand Canal"). It's also "in the province of Babylon"
that we find the "plain of Dura" in which Nebuchadnezzar sets up his
"image of gold" (Daniel 3:1. This passage uses the equivalent Aramaic
word, BiQë`âA).
B: Plain of SHINAR
===================
1. With regard to Shinar (SiN`aR), I note that Isaiah 11:11 locates it
between Persia and Hamath on the Orontes, i.e., exactly where Babylonia
lay. Zechariah 5:11 equates Shinar with the land of the Israelite
captivity. And, as already observed, Daniel 1:2 reads, "And Yahweh gave
Yehoyaqim. king of Judah, into his [Nebuchadnezzar's] hand, with part of
the vessels of the house of God, and he bore them to the land of Shinar,
to the house of his God."
2. Are you proposing that all these events, normally linked with
Babylon,
also took place in the vicinity of Lake Van, Mike?"
How could I take Targum Yonathan (Jonathan) seriously and worse post
the finding on my site for all the world to see? Were there two
Babylons, two Shinars, two of everything :-).
Well, the short answer is probably. When tribes moved, they took the
names of their original areas with them. Dan of the Bible is the best
known but we continue with the practice today. People from the North of
England would be surprised to learn that they lived in a town called
Durham, North Carolina for example.
To prove the point, I will analyze the passage in the Bible that has
caused great debate and consternation to all Biblical scholars but which
should be resolvable because it contains many familiar geographical
names.
Professor Michael Avi-Yonah, was professor of art and archaeology at
Hebrew University in Jerusalem and a well respected expert in the field
called the four Kings who attacked the cities of the Plain, "The Kings
of the North" and yet one of them was from Elam who we all know was a
great territory to the East where Iran is today. But do we? Let us
analyze the above passage carefully and see if the accepted wisdom is
not so wise after all.
1) Amraphel king of Shinar
2) Arioch king of Ellasar,
3) Kedorlaomer king of Elam,
4) Tidal king of Goiim.
I will quote mainly from E. A. Speiser, Chairman of the Department of
Oriental Studies at the University of Pennsylvania, and author of
Genesis in the Anchor Bible Series.
1) We have already discussed Shinar as being the area around Babylon,
But also identified by Targum Jonathon as the area of Pontus
2) From Speiser:- The name of the ruler Arioch is "transparently
clear". It is linguistically the same as Arriwak, the name of a vassel
of Zimri Lin of Mari, a contemporary of Hammurabi, and perhaps also Nuzi
Ariukki. The linguistic background is Hurrian. "ITS APPEARANCE IN THE
PRESENT CONTEXT THUS PRESUPPOSES AND ANCIENT AN AUTHENTIC TRANITION. NO
LATE HEBREW WRITER WOULD BE LIKELY TO INVENT SUCH A NAME AND ASSIGN IT
CORRECTLY TO A NEIGHBOR OF BABYLONIA."
However, the Genesis Apocryphon (from the Dead Sea Scrolls)
identifies Ellasar with kptwk evidently "Cappadocia" which is
exactly where Pontus lies just south of the Black Sea.
Click for a view of the 1660 map of
Cellarius showing among other very interesting features, Cappadocia in
Pontus.!
3) Chedorlaomar, King of Elam is evidently leader of the invaders and
it is taken for granted that we all know where Elam is, at the head of
the Persian Gulf now Iran.
4) Tidal, King of Goiim. Goiim is usually translated "nations" i.e. a
confederation. "Scholars are agreed that Tidal represents in cuneiform
Tudhalya. There were in fact no fewer than 5 Hittite Kings of the name."
To sum up: We are asked to believe that there was a confederation of
Kings, from the Persian Gulf to and including Anatolia who took the
trouble to attack the 5 little Cities of the Plain. An empire as large
as Assyria or Babylon or Persia, not ruled by one country or one King
but a confederation, defeated by Abraham and 318 of his household.
And yet we see that an alternative (excluding Elam) would consist of
a number of city states, quite similar to the Cities of the Plain but
located in quite a small area of Anatolia banding together to forage
South.
Click for map of the Ancient World at
the time of the Patriarchs!
1) The Area "Kashka" on the map is approximately where PONTUS would
have been. 2) Note how in the conventional scenario, Abram leaves the
main route from Ur in Mesopotamia and makes a detour North to Haran. How
much more logical if he in fact came South from say Urmia.
We will of course next week discuss the possible alternative location
of Elam and the original home of Abram and a good homework task for the
subscribers would be to beat us to it :-)
Any Questions?
Michael S. Sanders
December 25, 1998
Irvine California
Bibliography
-
Genesis: A New Translation....commentary: E. A. Spicer
(ISBN: 0385008546)
-
The Soncino Classics Collection (ISBN: ) The
Tanakh, Talmud, Midrash Rabbah and Zohar, all in English on CD an
efficient search feature etc. Can be obtained through us at $595
including postage. E-mail for full details
|
