Göbekli Tepe is “just down the road” from where Noah’s Ark came to rest

by Damien F. Mackey “Göbkeli Tepe is in southeast Turkey, about 30 km from Karacadağ”. Asle Rønning Thanks to the wonderful research of Kenneth Griffith and Darrell K. White, we can now say, so I think, that Karaca Dağ, in the region of the spectacular Göbekli Tepe, is: Noah’s Ark Mountain (9) Noah's Ark Mountain In that article acknowledging their find, I wrote: The combined research of Ken Griffith and Darrell White has caused me … to move away from my former acceptance of Judi Dagh for the Mountain of Noah’s Ark Landing in preference for their choice of Karaca Dagh in SE Turkey. The pair have strongly argued for the validity of this latter site in their excellent new article: A Candidate Site for Noah’s Ark, Altar, and Tomb. (2) (PDF) A Candidate Site for Noah's Ark, Altar, and Tomb. | Kenneth Griffith and Darrell K White - Academia.edu My main reason for entertaining this switch is that the latter site appears to have been the place, unlikely as it may look, for the world’s first agriculture, including grapes, and for the domestication of what we know as farmland animals. For example, Ken Griffith and Darrell White write: This mountain, Karaca Dag, is where the genetic ancestor of all domesticated Einkorn wheat was found by the Max Planck Institute.1 The other seven founder crops of the Neolithic Revolution all have this mountain near the centre of their wild range.2 This was so exciting that even the LA Times remarked how unusual it is that all of the early agriculture crops appear to have been domesticated in the same location: “The researchers reported that the wheat was first cultivated near the Karacadag Mountains in southeastern Turkey, where chickpeas and bitter vetch also originated. Bread wheat—the most valuable single crop in the modern world—grapes and olives were domesticated nearby, as were sheep, pigs, goats and cattle.”3 …. Manfred Heun was the botanist who followed the DNA of domesticated wheat back to its source on Karaca Dag: “We believe that the idea is so good—the idea of cultivating wild plants—that we think it might be one tribe of people, and that is fascinating,” said Manfred Heun at the University of Norway’s department of biotechnological sciences, who led the research team. “I cannot prove it, but it is a possibility that one tribe or one family had the idea [emphasis added].”3 A 2004 DNA study of wild and cultivated grapevine genetics by McGovern and Vouillamoz found the region where grapevines were first domesticated. Vouillamoz reports: “Analysis of morphological similarities between the wild and cultivated grapes from all Eurasia generally support a geographical origin of grape domestication in the Near East. In 2004, I collaborated with Patrick McGovern to focus on the ‘Grape’s Fertile Triangle’ and our results showed that the closest genetic relationship between local wild grapevines and traditional cultivated grape varieties from southern Anatolia, Armenia and Georgia was observed in southern Anatolia. This suggests that the headwaters of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in the Taurus Mountains is the most likely place where the grapevine was first domesticated! ... . This area also includes the Karacadağ region in the northern part of the Fertile Crescent.” …. [End of quotes] Another fascinating article on virtually the same subject is this one, entitled: https://www.sciencenorway.no/agriculture--fisheries-archaeology-forskningno/on-the-track-of-the-worlds-first-farmer/1448265 On the track of the world’s first farmer Agriculture may have originated in this landscape in the southeastern corner of Turkey. This view of the highlands is from the archaeological site Göbekli Tepe. (Photo: Manfred Heun) The very first farmer may have lived in a barren mountain landscape in Turkey over 10,000 years ago. Asle Rønningjournalist __________________________________________________________ PUBLISHED 31 JANUARY 2012 - 05:00 When and where did humankind first start cultivating the soil? The experts haven’t formed a single chorus on that issue, but a very good candidate for the site is found near the Mountain Karacadağ in Anatolia − in southeastern Turkey. This is where the first humanly modified grain was developed − einkorn [literally: single grain] wheat. The grain is now being more closely linked to one of archaeology’s major puzzles – the mysterious and ancient site Göbekli Tepe with its limestone megaliths decorated with bas-reliefs of animals. Nobody has been able to satisfactorily interpret their full significance. Göbkeli Tepe is in southeast Turkey, about 30 km from Karacadağ. T-shaped pillars with carved bas-relief animals at Göbekli Tepe. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons) Could hunter-gatherers have been the people who constructed this site 7,000 years before Stonehenge and the Great Pyramids of Egypt, and also become the first people to start cultivating the soil? Plant genetics can help answer that question. Damien Mackey’s comment: I do not accept the over-inflated dating for Göbekli Tepe at 10,000-12,000 BC. The article continues: A significant find Professor Manfred Heun at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB) is an expert on cereals. Along with Italian and Turkish colleagues in 1997 he determined that Karacadağ could be the original home of the cultivated form of einkorn. He’s returned time and again ever since. “It feels great being there. This is a mountainous area − Karacadağ has an elevation of over 1,900 metres. But it doesn’t look like a high mountain, it’s more like a Norwegian mountain plateau,” says Heun. The people who currently dwell in the region are stationary Kurds and Turks as well as nomadic Arabs who making a living off herding sheep, cows and goats. The primal wheat View of site and excavation at Göbekli Tepe (Photo: Wikimedia Commons) Evidence indicates that einkorn is our first cereal. It’s a kind of wheat which is much older than spelt, the grain so many health-conscious people now swear by. Einkorn was essential for humanity for several millennia but is now only commercially grown a few places in the world. The cultivated or domesticated variety of einkorn stems from a wild einkorn that still grows in mountain areas of the Middle East. We say a species of grain has been domesticated when it has undergone changes due to human influence. Domestication is a key term that unites archaeologists and geneticists who are striving to find the origin of agriculture. Professor Manfred Heun at UMB thinks he located the site where human beings initially cultivated einkorn wheat in 1997. Now he has pioneered his own einkorn beer, probably being drunk for the first time in Norway since the Bronze Age. (Photo: Asle Rønning) Just as the dog evolved from the wolf, and pigs evolved from boars, our cereals have been significantly altered by human cultivation. Silent witnesses These changes can be detected and read in the genes of modern crops as tales linked to the first farmers’ experiments. They are witnesses that speak to us nonverbally. In addition to einkorn, emmer wheat and barley are two major cereals that were domesticated very early in the Middle East. They share a primitive and natural trait: when mature the grain of the wild varieties falls to the ground so it can be spread with the winds. Those who wish to harvest these grains either have to tediously pick up the grains one by one after they fall to the ground or cut the stem with a scythe before it ripens. Mutations However, in wild populations now and then a natural mutation occurs in individual plants: the straw that supports the cereal doesn’t bend and break when the grain is mature. The cradle of agriculture could be placed in southeastern Turkey, 10,000 years ago (Map: Per Byrhing) Damien Mackey’s comment: The cradle of agriculture after the Flood, that is. The original cradle of agriculture was in the Garden of Eden (site of Old Jerusalem), a good millennium and a half earlier than the SE Turkey initiatives. The article continues: If someone is careful to only use these specimens as seed grain they can pass this genetic trait on to new generations of the plant. This is exactly what the first farmers have done. Other preferable traits were large grains, an evenly distributed ripening period and a reduction of the inedible chaff that protects the seed kernels. Any set of these and other preferable traits tells us that we are dealing with a domesticated variety of cereal. Archaeologists look for these indications of domestication when they find cereals during excavations of Stone Age settlements in the region. Like CSI The task that Heun and his colleagues assigned themselves was to find out where einkorn was originally domesticated. The region where wild einkorn wheat grows is large, covering parts of Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran. Wild einkorn is also genetically diverse. The challenge was to make a genetic match between different varieties of einkorn and today’s domesticated variety. Heun says this is somewhat akin to the work of forensic medical experts on CSI. Wild einkorn, Karadag, central Turkey (Photo: Wikimedia Commons) The difference is that they weren’t looking for a murderer, but rather a “crime scene” that was 10,000 years old. Help received from immigrants The results were achieved after cultivating an einkorn from seed samples and investigating the DNA from no less than 1,362 wild varieties that came from large areas of the Middle East and Europe. At this point Heun was working at the Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research in Cologne and the team hung up a giant map of Turkey and the Middle East with the origins of the enormous number of einkorn varieties marked off. Many of the cleaners at the institute were immigrants from the region and they enjoyed finding their home birthplaces on the map. They also helped the scientists now and then when they were having trouble figuring out where to pin the grain types to spots on the map. “They often helped us by locating their towns,” says Heun. The grain varieties seemed to home in on the area around Karacadağ. This conclusion prevails today even though arguments can be made that einkorn developed at more than one spot; so the debate continues in international research circles. Three grains of rye After the einkorn study was published the origin of emmer wheat has also been traced to the same area. The lab results from geneticists are confirmed by archaeologists, who have found the oldest specimens of domesticated einkorn and emmer wheat from this very area, dated at 10,200 – 10,500 years ago. These can be traces of the earliest cultivation of cereals in the world. A settlement site at Abu Hureyra in Syria previously gained plenty of attention because of a discovery of a domesticated rye, dated at 12,000 to 13,000 years old. But the archaeological evidence for this site is rather skimpy – just three grains of rye – and in any case there is no proof that a tradition of rye cultivation occurred here. Might disappear When Heun visited Karacadağ the first time he found wild einkorn plants. The last time he was there he found none. He thinks overgrazing of sheep could be the problem and fears that precious stocks of wild grains might disappear forever because nomads run their livestock there. “The nomads are poor – nobody can blame them. But the Turkish State ought to do something to preserve the area,” says the UMB professor. Karacadağ is near Diyarbakir, which is the largest city in the Kurdish dominated southeastern region of Anatolia in Turkey. It’s close to the borders of Syria and Iraq. …. Mystical figures But the area has a much older history. In 1994 Göbekli Tepe was discovered. Its multi-tonne T-shaped pillars and megaliths decorated with mystical animal figures including, lions, hyenas and spiders are still being excavated from the sands. The oldest finds there are estimated to be 11,000 years old, from the time just prior to the Neolithic Revolution – the start of agriculture. This baffles the researchers, who cannot explain exactly what kind of place this was. But it’s believed that it was a large religious temple complex in use for hundreds of years, before it for reasons unknown were deliberately buried. However, new discoveries, which haven’t been published yet, link the cultivation of einkorn at Karacadağ more closely to the puzzling place. Maybe there is a common denominator between why the stone pillars were built and why the cultivation of einkorn commenced. Perhaps the answer is beer. Come on over for some beer? Erecting the Göbekli Tepe megaliths demanded an enormous amount of work. But what do you do if you want to get several hundred people to work together for weeks and months at a time, cutting, carving, dragging and lifting tonnes of rock? But of course, you offer them beer! Beer would probably have been a prestigious and rare commodity, both nutritious and healthy. In one of the archaeological layers at Göbekli Tepe, from a period designated as PPNB, tubs have been found that could have been used for making malt and brewing beer. “Tubs have been found that could have held 150 litres of water. These probably weren’t used for storing grain,” says Heun. Beer can only be made from grain and to be ensured access to such cereal it’s a good idea to plant a field of it. This could have been a motivation for growing cereals instead of finding them in the wild. These new findings correspond in time to domesticated grain species. But no discoveries of cultivated grain have been made in the oldest and best known parts of Göbekli Tepe. So hunter-gatherers are still thought to have first built and used the site. Garden of Eden? Whatever their initial impulse, the first farmers in the Middle East developed a package of plant species and domesticated animals that had an enormous impact and formed the basis of agriculture in Mesopotamia, Egypt and the Indus Valley in Pakistan. The gift of agriculture was passed on to the great civilizations in the fertile river valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates, the Nile and the Indus from barren areas of the same region. The most important plant species were einkorn and emmer wheat, barley, chickpeas (garbanzos), peas and lentils. Tubers were also domesticated just like the cereals. If one were to search for a single spot where all the wild varieties of all these domesticated plant species grew, the place to go would be just here – in southeastern Turkey and northern Syria. …. Fastest changes in genetic traits Now we have a lot more data from excavations further north. We cannot be certain that agriculture in the Middle East originated in just one place. Some propose that people in settlements all over the region tried out local plant species and hence, there were multiple cradles of agriculture in this part of the world. Some scientists stress that a lot of time would pass from the initial cultivation of wild grains until noticeable genetic changes start turning up. Manfred Heun disagrees. He points out that einkorn is self-pollinating. This makes it much easier for new genetic traits to pass from one generation to the next. On the other hand it is less likely to regress back to the initial wild traits than it is for species that are cross-pollinating. Found edible plants in nature Heun thinks that 20-30 years of cultivation could have been enough to establish the essential trait of stems that don’t break when the grain is ripe. So the first farmer could have experienced the results of his or her genetic selection efforts in the course of a lifetime. Damien Mackey’s comment: Especially if that “first farmer” was, who the first farmer actually was, the long-lived Noah! With all of the incessant rain-flooding in Sydney at present (around 21st August, 2025), BOM declaring a La Nina alert, it is not hard to harken back to the great Deluge in the days of Noah. Now, turning our attention to Karaca Dağ’s near neighbour, Göbekli Tepe, we read the following by Christoper Eames: https://armstronginstitute.org/304-g-ouml-bekli-tepe-stone-age-zoo-in-the-book-of-genesis somewhat similar to what Jim Corsetti has been on about: Could Gobekli Tepe Be Noah’s Altar? The Hidden Link to the Flood Myth - Joe Rogan & Jimmy Corsetti Göbekli Tepe, ‘Stone Age Zoo,’ in the Book of Genesis A ‘Stone Age zoo,’ Aboriginal Australians, booze and worldwide calamity at the earliest temple ever found—discoveries at this fantastical Turkish site parallel a peculiar early biblical setting. By Christopher Eames • January 2, 2021 Sumer is often noted as man’s “first civilization,” situated on the Mesopotamian plains at the edge of the Persian Gulf. This location, and the cities that emerged from it, are a perfect match for the biblical Shinar (a parallel name), described in the biblical account as the first civilization to emerge following the Flood. Genesis 11:1-2 state: And the whole earth was of one language and of one speech. And it came to pass, as they journeyed east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. Damien Mackey’s comment: No, no, no. The sooner we dismiss Sumer: “The Sumerian Problem” – Sumer not in Mesopotamia (9) “The Sumerian Problem” – Sumer not in Mesopotamia Christoper Eames now gets rather more interesting: Göbekli Tepe In the early 1960s, peculiar stone circles were noted in an archaeological survey in the southeastern Anatolia region of Turkey. They were initially dismissed as unimportant, until German archaeologist Klaus Schmidt began excavating the site, known as Göbekli Tepe (“Potbelly Hill”) in 1995. What he uncovered was utterly unexpected. …. The circular, 20-acre site was evidently of a religious nature. It was made up of several layers, the earliest of which were carbon-dated as far back as circa 10,000 b.c.e. (more on this dating further down). This shocking date put the creation of the site during the so-called Paleolithic, hunter-gatherer era—long before mankind was supposed to have settled into established, pastoral communities. Mankind wasn’t supposed to have been united and able to construct such monuments for thousands of years. Indeed, no evidence was discovered of a settled community. Yet this giant cultic area, sporting the world’s oldest-known megaliths (up to 60 tons in weight), had been built by the region’s inhabitants. What’s more, the builders of Göbekli Tepe exhibited an understanding of geometry—three of the main stone circles at the site were arranged in a precise equilateral triangle (a stunning discovery to scientists—a “grand geometric plan” that was only realized earlier this year). One of the standout things about Göbekli Tepe has to be the animals. It boasts numerous carvings of different animals. It also has the remains of multiple dozens of different species. Animals depicted on the stone pillars include snakes, foxes, boars, cranes, aurochs, sheep, donkeys, gazelles, leopards, lions, bears, spiders, scorpions, various insects, vultures and numerous other bird species—to name a few. Nearly 100 animals are depicted on the largest of the monoliths alone. And among the identifiable animals, there were numerous other unidentifiable creatures. The animal remains include the bones of various deer species, sheep, cattle, goats, donkeys, boars, wolves, foxes, leopards and various other wildcats, weasels, badgers, hamsters, hedgehogs, numerous gerbils and various other rodents, and dozens of bird species including geese, owls, magpies, eagles, quails, ducks and thrushes. One study examined some 40,000 animal remains. As Schmidt described it, this truly was a “Stone Age zoo.” Conversely, among the thousands of animal remains and depictions, only two fish were discovered. Not two sets of species—just two fish (a catfish and an unidentifiable cyprinid). And bizarrely, adorning some of the megaliths were a number of peculiar designs closely matching those found among the Aboriginal Australian community, as well as parallel objects at the site and depictions of Australian animals—leading to a flurry of articles speculating on some kind of Aboriginal connection to this location. Finally (as if the site couldn’t be any more odd), certain carvings at Göbekli Tepe apparently depict “massive global climate shifts,” according to a paper by University of Edinburgh researchers. They described a “cataclysmic event” related to the end of the Ice Age period. Among some of the carvings appeared to be observations of comets. What on Earth was this site? What were humans doing here? …. The Bible describes Noah, after leaving the ark, building “an altar” and sacrificing “of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl” on the altar. Göbekli Tepe stands testament to a form of ritual worship in relation to a multitude of animals. “First came the temple, then the city,” quipped Schmidt. Such is the account presented by archaeology—and such is the account presented in the Bible. …. Of Predators and Men As for the specific cultic function of Göbekli Tepe, scientists are left to speculate. A high proportion of the animals carved into the megalithic stones are predatory—as such, it has been wondered if these were some kind of religious talisman-gargoyle equivalent to ward off predators. A peculiar predator hunts his prey, as carved onto one of the Göbekli Tepe megaliths. Here again is a match for the pre-Shinar account. Nimrod is the infamous early leader and tyrant of the Bible, who brought together the early post-Flood civilization in Shinar. “He was a mighty hunter before [in place of] the Lord” (Genesis 10:9). Extra-biblical traditions assert that before gathering together in Shinar, mankind had been scattered and vulnerable among the wild animals—at the mercy of vicious predators. Among them, Nimrod became a “savior”—a “mighty hunter” who defended the population and rose up as a “mighty one in the earth” (verse 8), eventually gathering mankind together as one civilization in the plains of Shinar. This assessment, then, of an early mankind especially plagued by wild animals (a prevalence of different creatures that had survived aboard the ark) would fit the picture of Göbekli Tepe—a religious effort by the earliest, scattered communal generations to ward off wild animals. Another Parallel Another parallel between ancient Göbekli Tepe and the post-Flood-yet-pre-Shinar biblical account is that the earliest traces of an alcoholic beverage have been discovered at the site. Researchers in 2012 discovered what appeared to be chemical traces of beer being produced in limestone basins—demonstrating just how far back our thirst for grog goes. The same is also described in the Bible: The earliest account of alcohol is found in Genesis 9, which describes wine-making and overindulgence, and an ensuing incident related to drunkenness. …. Karaca Dağ and Göbekli Tepe provide us with a perfect landscape for the Ark landing, the earliest worship, the menagerie of animals, the first agriculture and viniculture, this being the very cradle of post-Flood civilisation from whence humankind would set forth to fill the entire world. There are many more biblical riches to be uncovered in the region if the WEF gets right out of the way.

God sends Moses back to Egypt

by Damien F. Mackey “Moses was eighty years old and Aaron eighty-three, when they spoke to Pharaoh”. Exodus 7:7 Forty years ago, back in Egypt, Moses had thought himself ready to lead his people to freedom, but had found them squabbling amongst themselves, and not interested. Nor was Moses himself yet an apt instrument for the gargantuan task. Was he even circumcised? He would need to be fully de-paganised, his heart taken out of Egypt, so that he could ultimately lead his people out of the heart of Egypt. Even so, for many of them, their hearts would remain in Egypt, so it is said: “You can take Israel out of the heart of Egypt, but you cannot take the hearts of Israel out of Egypt”. Providence would so arrange it that Moses would now experience forty more years living amongst a culturally more compatible, Semitic people, the Midianites. These, too, were descendants of Abraham, though not through Sarah, but Keturah. Many of their customs would have been like those of their fellow Hebrews, whilst some were different. Unlike the Israelite practice of circumcision on the eighth day after birth, as mandated by God, the Midianites may have delayed circumcision until later. But Moses never forgot that he was something of an alien amongst this desert people. Had not Jethro’s daughters referred to him initially as “an Egyptian” (Exodus 2:19)? And did he not name his first born child, “Foreigner” (Exodus 2:22): “Zipporah gave birth to a son, and Moses named him Gershom [גֵּרְשֹׁ֑ם], saying, ‘I have become a foreigner in a foreign land’.” (The couple would later have another son, Eliezer). It would not be surprising, though, if Moses, who had grown somewhat comfortable with his family in Midian, had deferred to his Midianite wife, Zipporah, regarding certain different customs - the Midianite attitude to circumcision being one of them. This would almost cost Moses his life – or would it be his firstborn son, Gershom, who would be in mortal peril? Moses would also undergo a profound metaphysical and spiritual conversion in Midian, especially the theophany experience at the Burning Bush near Mount Horeb. Despite all the work that Yahweh had put into preparing Moses for the job at hand, the Lord now found his servant reluctant, making excuses. For instance (Exodus 4:10): “Moses said to the Lord, ‘Pardon your servant, Lord. I have never been eloquent, neither in the past nor since you have spoken to your servant. I am slow of speech and tongue’.” St. John of the Cross took this as indicating that Moses was experiencing the mystical dark night of the senses, when speech can become difficult. But Moses here claims this always to have been the case with him. That was just how he naturally was. Moses was now playing with fire, and the Divine volcano was about to erupt. But, for the moment (4:11-12): “The Lord said to him, ‘Who gave human beings their mouths? Who makes them deaf or mute? Who gives them sight or makes them blind? Is it not I, the Lord? Now go; I will help you speak and will teach you what to say’.” In one of a multitude of biblical appropriations by Islam, the Prophet Mohammed, interestingly at the age of forty (Moses had fled Egypt at forty) - who, note, was illiterate - is told (not to speak, but) to read. And he is similarly admonished when, Moses-like, he demurs: https://www.islamicity.org/11380/when-an-illiterate-man-was-asked-to-read/ “When Prophet Muhammad (صَلَّىٰ ٱللَّٰهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ) received his first revelation in the Cave of Hira' through the angel Jibril (Gabriel), he was asked to read (iqra'). However … he was astounded, replying both with fear and astonishment: "I am not literate (I cannot read)". He was asked two more times to read, but after each time he answered that he was not literate and so, couldn't read. After that, the angel conveyed the intended first revelation: "Read in the name of your Lord Who created; created man from a clinging substance. Read, and your Lord is the most Generous Who taught by the pen; taught man that which he knew not" (al-'Alaq, 1-5)”.” Cf. Jeremiah 1:6: “‘Alas, Sovereign Lord’, I said, ‘I do not know how to speak; I am too young’.” Also, Jeremiah refers to a “23 years” prophetic span (25:3). And Muslims believe that the Qu’rān (Koran) was verbally revealed from God to Mohammed through the angel Gabriel gradually over a period of approximately 23 years. Moses, for his part, was now begging the Lord (Exodus 4:13): ‘Pardon your servant, Lord. Please send someone else’. Vv. 14-16: Then the Lord’s anger burned against Moses and he said, ‘What about your brother, Aaron the Levite? I know he can speak well. He is already on his way to meet you, and he will be glad to see you. You shall speak to him and put words in his mouth; I will help both of you speak and will teach you what to do. He will speak to the people for you, and it will be as if he were your mouth and as if you were God to him. But take this staff in your hand so you can perform the signs with it’. How did Aaron know to where Moses had fled? Perhaps Moses had told him just before his rude departure from Egypt, or, maybe, had sent a message to Aaron later, say, via Midianite caravans. (Cf. Genesis 37:28) Finally, Moses was ready to return to Egypt. Or, was he? For, what about that critical matter of circumcision? Exodus 4:18: Then Moses went back to Jethro his father-in-law and said to him, ‘Let me return to my own people in Egypt to see if any of them are still alive’. Jethro said, ‘Go, and I wish you well’. Moses ‘a bridegroom of blood’ ‘Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me’, she said. So the Lord let him alone. Moses, ever a type of Jesus Christ, was called by his wife Zipporah ‘a bridegroom of blood’. Exodus 4:19-23: Now the Lord had said to Moses in Midian, ‘Go back to Egypt, for all those who wanted to kill you are dead’. So Moses took his wife and sons, put them on a donkey and started back to Egypt. And he took the staff of God in his hand. The Lord said to Moses, ‘When you return to Egypt, see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders I have given you the power to do. But I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go. Then say to Pharaoh, ‘This is what the Lord says: Israel is my firstborn son, and I told you, “Let my son go, so he may worship me”. But you refused to let him go; so I will kill your firstborn son’.” Will the Lord now go after Moses’s own firstborn son? Clement Harrold has written well on this: https://stpaulcenter.com/posts/why-does-god-try-to-kill-moses-in-exodus-4?srsltid=AfmBOooi3-yMqddlAM1l-M0jUDFlyV3vjagk8jDpN8ogb9RMMNdJ3BaM Chapter 4 of the Book of Exodus contains one of the strangest passages in all of Sacred Scripture. Verses 18-26 describe how Moses, living in exile in the land of Midian, goes to his father-in-law Jethro to request permission to return to his own people back in Egypt. Jethro consents, and so Moses sets off together with his wife, Zipporah, and their sons. Then comes the weird part. We are told that, "At a lodging place on the way the Lord met him and sought to kill him" (v. 24). In a bizarre display of quick thinking, Zipporah responds by hastily circumcising her son, and holding the foreskin to his feet. Stranger still is the fact that this unorthodox tactic actually works! God allows the family to continue on their way. How are we supposed to understand this perplexing episode? We must acknowledge from the outset that the passage in question is one of the most obscure texts in the whole Bible. Modern commentators and ancient rabbis alike have wrestled with its meaning, and various different theories have been proposed over the centuries. Here we shall offer just one such theory - not with an eye to solving all of the difficulties, but simply to offer a few pointers that might render it a little more intelligible. The emphasis on circumcision in the passage suggests that Moses was guilty of failing to circumcise his son. The implication is that the family had lapsed into the Midianite custom of delaying circumcision until shortly before marriage. This was in direct contravention of the Abrahamic covenant, in which God commanded that all male newborns be circumcised on the eighth day after birth (see Gen 17:9-13). Moses, it seems, had become overly acquainted with the cultural customs of his in-laws, even to the point of disobeying the edicts of the God of Israel. This is a risky business because, as the passage reveals, the divine patience may be considerable, but it doesn't last forever. Having appointed Moses as His chosen deputy to lead His people out of Egypt (see Ex 4:1-17), God now calls him to account for failing to keep his own house in order. It's at this juncture that we confront the first of several major ambiguities in the text. When verse 24 recalls that "the Lord met him and sought to kill him," it actually isn't clear whether the "him" in the passage refers to Moses or, alternatively, to his son Gershom. In a number of respects, assuming that the target of the attack is Gershom makes the whole passage easier to understand, and so that is the interpretation we will adopt here. …. [End of quote] This particular interpretation of a difficult passage makes perfect sense, I believe. Surely, Moses himself would have been attended to in this regard (circumcised) when, as a child, he was weaned by his Hebrew mother, Jochebed (Exodus 2:8-9; cf. 6:20). There is a tradition that she was the influential midwife, Shiphrah, whom Pharaoh had commanded to slay the male Hebrew babies (1:15-16). (We learned that the name Shiphrah also appears in the famous Brooklyn Papyrus for this approximate era of Egyptian history: Twelfth/Thirteenth dynasties). The likely scenario is that Zipporah had in this, what we would call a ‘mixed marriage’, influenced Moses towards Midianite custom. She would have learned from Moses that the Hebrews circumcised babies much earlier. And that would explain why it is she who acts quickly and circumcises Gershom, thereby saving the firstborn child’s life. Egyptian (Moses) names While Moses was safely tucked away in Midian, the oppressive Twelfth Dynasty of Egypt would fade out, and, now, a Thirteenth Dynasty ruler was seated upon the throne of Egypt. He was NEFERHOTEP KHASEKHEMRE. It should be noted, though, that so-called Thirteenth Dynasty high officials had already been serving the two mighty (Book of Exodus) Oppressor Pharaohs, and even that these latter two figures also emerge historically in the Thirteenth Dynasty lists. Such are the complexities of Egyptology! Now, not so unexpectedly, linguistic scholars have determined that some of the major Book of Exodus characters had Egyptian names: https://academic.oup.com/book/36060/chapter-abstract/313145992?redirectedFrom=fulltext “A surprising number of personal names of the exodus-wilderness generation bore Egyptian etymology, including Aaron (possibly), Ahira, Assir, Hur, Merari, Miriam, Moses, and Phineas”. An important Sixth Dynasty governor, exactly contemporary with Moses, bore the name Harkhuf, which may possibly suggest, again, Hur. The Egyptian names given to the two stand-out biblical heroes, Joseph and Moses, have proven most difficult for commentators to unravel. Joseph was given the grand name of Zaphenath paneah by Pharaoh (Genesis 41:45), while it was a later Pharaoh’s daughter who devised the name, Moses (Exodus 2:10): “She named him Moses, saying, ‘I drew him out of the water’.” The historical Moses, I have multi-identified across supposedly three dynasties of the Old Kingdom and one of the so-called ‘Middle’ Kingdom. Do any of these manifestations of Moses have a Moses-like name? Let us try to determine if such be the case. Moses was, as we have recently found, an actual Pharaoh, though of short reign length due to his having abdicated - a fact which appears to harmonise with the Scriptures (e.g. Hebrews 11:24). As Pharaoh He was Djedefre (var. Djedefhor, Djedefptah) (Fourth Dynasty); and Userkare (Sixth Dynasty). As Userkare, his name/reputation was later trashed by the oppressive and jealous pharaoh Pepi, so we found, who relegated Userkare’s kingship to “the desert” (Midian?): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Userkare “Egyptologists thus suspect a possible Damnatio memoriae on Pepi I's behalf against Userkare”. As Vizier and Chief Judge He was Kagemni (Fourth and Sixth dynasties); Ptahhotep (Fifth Dynasty); Weni (Uni) (Sixth Dynasty); Mentuhotep and (the semi-fictitious) Sinuhe (Twelfth Dynasty). As an intellectual and writer Under the famous guises of Kagemni and Ptahhotep, again, Moses was an intellectual and a sage, a writer of Maxims and Instructions. As Weni, he produced a brilliant Autobiography. The versatile Hebrew, Moses, was also the travelling trader and warrior (like Weni), Iny (Sixth Dynasty), and was General Nysumontu (Twelfth Dynasty). No wonder the ancients considered this Moses to have been a genius! Some of the above names connect, e.g. Djedefre (var. Djedefhor, Djedefptah); also Djedefptah and Ptahhotep; Mentuhotep and Nysumontu. And so do all of the Weni-type names. For these, just remember: Ini, Weni, Iny, Moses (2) Ini, Weni, Iny, Moses And I have added another recently-discovered guise for Moses, again as a Pharaoh: Niuserre Ini (Fifth Dynasty). I consider it to be most encouraging for my rather complex revision of the Era of Moses - in Egypt’s Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Twelfth dynasties - that the Egyptian name for the historical Moses, Weni (Uni), looking like a diminutive name, or hypocoristicon, is common, in its variant forms, Ini, Iny, for my Moses through the Old Kingdom: Niuserre Ini (Fifth); Weni (Uni) (Sixth); Iny (Sixth). Niuserre Ini (var. Iny) Regarding pharaoh Niuserre Ini, I wrote in my recent article: Moses in Egypt’s Fifth Dynasty (2) Moses in Egypt’s Fifth Dynasty This re-working of my article under the same title, “Moses in Egypt’s Fifth Dynasty”, has become necessary due to my brand new recognition of Moses as the Fifth Dynasty pharaoh, Niuserre Ini, to accompany his pharaonic alter egos of Djedefre-Djedefhor (Fourth Dynasty) and Userkare (Sixth Dynasty). …. As we found with the pharaonic Moses in his Fourth Dynasty guise (as Djedefre-Djedefhor), and in his Sixth Dynasty guise (as Userkare), so might we expect that he, in his Fifth Dynasty guise - if as Niuserre Ini - to be compatible, should reveal himself to have been a ruler of short duration, highly competent, having a profound influence upon Egypt, and much revered down through time as a saint and a thaumaturgist. Excitingly, as a very good start, in the name Ini, we appear to get an immediate clue. For I have already identified Moses, as a high official of Pharaoh, as Weni (Uni) of the Sixth Dynasty, and as Iny of the Sixth Dynasty – whatever that name may mean. So, the name (Niuserre) Ini fits beautifully here alongside these names. Thus: INI; WENI; UNI; INY …. The king's power slowly weakened as the bureaucracy expanded … although he remained a living god in the eyes of his subjects. My comment: He was virtually deified, “a living god in the eyes of his subjects”, like Imhotep (Joseph). …. This cult was most active until the end of the Old Kingdom but lasted at least until the Twelfth Dynasty during the Middle Kingdom … at which point is the latest known mention of a priest serving in Nyuserre's funerary complex. …. But, getting back to our question: Do any of these manifestations of Moses have a Moses-like name? - it appears that the majority of names listed above have no appreciable likeness to Moses. Before investigating any further, it needs to be noted that Moses was something of a secret name. Amongst the Egyptians only Pharaoh’s daughter, Meresankh (“Merris”), knew who Moses really was. Pharaoh presumed that he was a royal child. Thus the scribes, not being cognizant of the secret, and who had difficulty with unusual and foreign names, would not have been able to form the name into properly etymological hieroglyphs. They would simply have to represent the name phonetically. Most tentatively, I take the name Moses, Hebrew Moshe to have been derived from the Egyptian words for water, mw (mu) 𓈖 and son s3 Thus: Mw-sa, ‘Son (Child) of the Water’ (Water Baby). And I suspect that this name has been captured in the name of the semi-fictitious ‘Moses’, Sinuhe (or Sanehat), with the first element (si, sa) representing “son”, as according to Sir Flinders Petrie, and the second element (nu, like mu) representing “water”. The only two possible Moses name from above, then, would be Niuserre, again perhaps intending those two elements: Nu (Niu) and sa (se) elements, and very like Sinuhe: Si nu he Se niu Re and Nysumontu, structured just like Niuserre: Ni (Ny) Se (Su) and god name (theophoric) Re (Montu). Before Pharaoh Neferhotep “Moses was eighty years old and Aaron eighty-three, when they spoke to Pharaoh”. Exodus 7:7 Joseph, by contrast, had been only thirty when he had entered the service of Pharaoh (Genesis 41:46): “Joseph was 30 years old when he stood before Pharaoh king of Egypt”. That seemingly benign ruler was Horus Netjerikhet of Egypt’s Third Dynasty, Old Kingdom, whom I have equated with Horus Netjerihedjet (Mentuhotep) of Egypt’s Eleventh Dynasty, so-called ‘Middle’ Kingdom. More recently, I have added a further dimension to this ruler, as Djet (presumably an abbreviation of Netjerihedjet) of the First Dynasty, during whose reign, wrote Manetho, ‘a great famine seized Egypt’. Far less benign than Horus Netjerikhet of old would prove to be this Neferhotep of Egypt’s Thirteenth Dynasty. He obviously had no particular historical grudge against Moses (cf. Exodus 4:19). Approximately half a century would have elapsed since Moses himself had ruled Egypt. Was Neferhotep even alive, then? Did he know that an earlier Pharaoh has proscribed this man standing before him, who, with his brother, had already succeeded in unifying “all the elders of the Israelites” (Exodus 4:29-31). And now this intruding pair was demanding that Pharaoh release the Israelite slaves (Exodus 5:1-2): Afterward Moses and Aaron went to Pharaoh and said, ‘This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: ‘Let my people go, so that they may hold a festival to me in the wilderness’. Pharaoh said, ‘Who is the Lord, that I should obey him and let Israel go? I do not know the Lord and I will not let Israel go’. The Lord was about to declare war, to “bring judgment on all the gods of Egypt” (Exodus 12:12), including Pharaoh, the presumed divine Son of Ra (the Sun God).

Ecbatana and Rages in Media

Part One: Clearing away the various misconceptions by Damien F. Mackey Whereas the journey from Tobit’s Ecbatana to Rages normally took “two full days”, the almost 200-mile journey from the conventional Median Ecbatana to Rhages would have taken significantly longer. In fact it took the army of Alexander the Great 11 days at full gallop to march from the one to the other. Rightly then does Jan Simons observe (according to a conventional context) that the journey referred to in the Book of Tobit “would be a forced ‘journey of two days’ even for an express messenger”. Introduction According to critics of the Book of Tobit, the author(s) of the book had a very poor knowledge of both history and geography. However, the Book of Tobit is an inspired book of the Bible, at least from a Catholic point of view, and it has the capacity to confound the critics and the conventional context to which they adhere. Far from the author(s) of the Book of Tobit having been historically ignorant - in this case, with regard to the kingdom of Assyria - we find on closer examination that: [The] Book of Tobit corrects the textbook history (5) Book of Tobit corrects the textbook history Read also my related article: Book of Tobit and the Neo-Assyrian Kings (5) Book of Tobit and the Neo-Assyrian Kings And, far from the author(s) of the Book of Tobit having been geographically ignorant - in this case, with regard to the location of the land of Media - we find on closer examination that it was we who have been abysmally ignorant on this score: Search for the Median empire (3) Search for the Median empire The travelling party in the Book of Tobit was always heading in the right direction: that is, westwards, from: (i) Nineveh (possibly meaning Calah here); to (ii) the Tigris River; to (iii) Charan (Haran/Harran); to (iv) Media (in Anatolia), in which country lay (v) Ecbatana; and (vi) Rages. I had been critical in articles such as: [The] Geography of the Book of Tobit presents a fascinating challenge (5) Geography of the Book of Tobit presents a fascinating challenge of exegetes such as Fr. D. Dumm, who had shown scant respect for the Book of Tobit -I having expected a Catholic priest, at least, to seek to defend, rather than to ridicule, a biblical text: … The Jerusalem Bible says that “the geography is inexact”, and … Fr. D. Dumm (article, “Tobit”) in The Jerome Biblical Commentary, exclaims that: “[The angel] Raphael knows the journey of life far better than the route to Media!” Unfortunately, though, Fr. Dumm just leaves it at that, without being willing, or able, to defend the accuracy of the Bible with a proper explanation of what is happening here. But, as I confessed in my “Geography of … Tobit” article (above), I, too, was confounded - even though I was actually trying to ‘save’ the geography of the book. ‘Go West, young man’ I had it half right, having the travelling party heading westwards, unlike the critics’ eastwards, and correctly (so I think) identifying 3 of the 6 locations: Nineveh = Nineveh (Calah?) River Tigris = River Tigris Charan = Haran But I, as well, had taken for granted the conventional location of Media, Ecbatana and Rages (in the east), and so felt myself forced to seek for alternatives - wrong ones. Thus: Media = Midian Ecbatana = Bashan Rages = Damascus Even after Royce (Richard) Erickson had (in 2020) saved the geographical situation by re-locating Media to Anatolia (see above articles), I had still persisted with these last 3, faulty identifications. * * * * * The sad fact is that we, in our fallen humanity, can often be groping in the dark and in need of divine enlightenment from One who knows, when, often, we don’t. This situation was recognised by John the Baptist, who proclaimed (John 3:30-31): ‘He must increase, but I must decrease. He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all’. Part Two: A possible location for Tobit’s Ecbatana ‘Yes’, he replied, ‘I have been there many times; I am acquainted with it and know all the roads. I have often traveled to Media, and would stay with our kinsman Gabael who lives in Rages of Media. It is a journey of two days from Ecbatana to Rages; for it lies in a mountainous area, while Ecbatana is in the middle of the plain’. Tobit 5:6 In terms of the name, Royce (Richard) Erickson appears to have chosen very well for his identification of Ecbatana in Media, opting for Abadaniye (see his Figure 1 below). In his brilliant (2020) article: A PROBLEM IN CHALDAEAN AND ELAMITE GEOGRAPHY (3) A PROBLEM IN CHALDAEAN AND ELAMITE GEOGRAPHY | Royce Erickson - Academia.edu Royce Erickson wrote on this: …. Introduction – A Geographic Anomaly Herodotus attempted to describe the origins of the Median and Persian nations in the 8th and 7th centuries BC while both were still intermittently subject to Assyrian domination. He described how a man named Deioces became king, unified the Medes and founded Agbatana, their first capital city: “Thus settled upon the throne, he (Deioces) further required them to build a single great city, and, disregarding the petty towns in which they had formerly dwelt, make the new capital the object of their chief attention. The Medes were again obedient, and built the city now called Agbatana (Ecbatana), the walls of which are of great size and strength, rising in circles one within the other. The plan of the place is that each of the walls should out-top the one beyond it by the battlements. The nature of the ground, which is a gentle hill, favours this arrangement in some degree, but it was mainly effected by art. The number of the circles is seven, the royal palace and the treasuries standing within the last. The circuit of the outer wall is very nearly the same with that of Athens.” (Herodotus …. Agbatana (variant version Ecbatana) no longer exists. Its ruins and location have never been positively identified. Modern scholars believe they are on a tell near Hamadan, Iran, based on the similarity of names and assumptions about the location of ancient Media. There is a small town in central Tukey north of Konya called Abadaniye, very similar phonetically to Agbatana. A little more than 100 years ago its Armenian name was Egdavama. Next to it lies a barren, gentle hill with a circumference of about 6 miles, very much like the circuit wall of classical Athens, 5.25 miles. its gentle slope would favor the arrangement of seven concentric walls rising one above the other, just as Herodotus describes the walls of Agbatana. According to Greek tradition, other Median major cities were Laodicea, Rhages ,and Apamea, all three not far from Ecbatana. These are their later classical Greek names; their original Median names are unknown. Modern scholars tentatively locate these sites near Tehran, based on the assumption that Agbatana was in Iran, but with admittedly very sparse historical or archaeological support. Strangely enough in south central Turkey very near modern Abadaniye described above, lie the modern towns of Dinar and Ladek, previously named Apamea and Laodicea by the Greeks. Thus there is strong circumstantial evidence that the core of the ancient Median Empire around 700 BC was not in Iran, but in central Turkish Anatolia, over 600 miles to the West. This could be written off as an absurd concept supported by astounding coincidence, so allow me add a few more facts to strengthen the case. Early Persians were closely intertwined with the Medes geographically and historically. Originally Median vassals, the Persians later ousted the Median king Astyages by means of a coup d’etat aided by the defection of most of the Median army, and established the Persian Empire under Cyrus the Great, incorporating the entire Median Empire. The original capital of the Persian Empire was founded by Cyrus II on the site of his victory over Astyages, known to the ancients as Pasargadae. Until today its location remains unknown, but is assumed by experts to be somewhere in southwest Iran, based once again on historical deduction without strong material archaeological support, despite numerous attempts to find any. Once again, we find in central Anatolia today two towns with the modern Turkish names of Pazarkaye and Khorasi not far from Abadaniye. I propose that Pazarkaye is the modern site of ancient Persian Pasargadae, and Khorasi (pronounced Khorashi) is on the site of a proposed Persian town named after either Cyrus I or Cyrus II, Persian kings whose names were pronounced “Kurush.” Finally, detailed Neo-Assyrian military campaign records mention several other towns that they specifically connect with Persia and Media. These towns are supposed by modern scholars to be located somewhere in Iran, where they cannot be found. Their Assyrian names are Amadi, Urak, Allabria, and Bustus. The first two are associated by the Persians with Media and the second two with Persia. The names of all four of these towns are very closely matched by four modern sites in Turkish Anatolia, very close to the proposed Median and Persian town sites already discussed. …. Assyrian Name Variants Modern Turkish Name Associated With Matching Rationale Amadi Kar-Amadazi, Karamadazi Çubuklu, Konya Media Kar-Amadazi is the variant Assyrian name of Amadi. Recent previous name of Turkish Cubuklu was Karamadazi Bit-Matti Matiana Goreme, Nevsehir Media Recent previous historical name of Turkish Goreme was Matiana. Located close to Abadaniye (Agbatana) and Ladek (Laodiceia) Allabria Alabag, Konya Persia Name very similar to Turkish Alabag (-ag is a common Turkish word ending). Location in close proximity to Pazarkaya (Pasargadae) and Khorasi (Khurush). Bustus Bushtu, Push, Pusutu Pusat, Konya Persia Clear name similarity with Turkish Pusat, located close to Pazarkaya and Khorasi Table 1 - Cities with Persian and Median Names in Anatolia …. [End of quote] My problem, though, with Royce’s choice of Abadaniye, north of Konya - now that I am trying to take more seriously than hitherto the Book of Tobit’s geographical indicators - is that it could not really enable for Charan (Haran) to be, as according to Tobit 10:13: “… in the midway to Ninive …”. Though, admittedly, his Abadaniye is far better situated in this regard than was my own poor choice of Bashan (Batanaea) for Ecbatana. And I am now fully realising just how inappropriate my choice was. For Bashan, unlike the Ecbatana of the Book of Tobit, was a land, not a city. Nor was Ecbatana a plain, but lay ‘in the middle of the plain’. This is how the angel Raphael will describe the geography and topography of Median Ecbatana and Rages (Tobit 5:6): ‘Yes’, he replied, ‘I have been there many times; I am acquainted with it and know all the roads. I have often traveled to Media, and would stay with our kinsman Gabael who lives in Rages of Media. It is a journey of two days from Ecbatana to Rages; for it lies in a mountainous area, while Ecbatana is in the middle of the plain’. Adana An important city, with an Ecbatana-like name, and which does, indeed, lie in the middle of a plain, is “Adana …. Situated in the middle of the Cukurova Plain (Cilician Plain) ….”: https://www.allaboutturkey.com/adana.html And a glance at the next map will show that Adana (given there as Adanya) - rather than Royce Erickson’s Abadaniye - appears to fit rather well with regard to Charan’s (Haran’s) being “… in the midway to Ninive …”. (Map: Adanya … Harrān … Ninive) With Konya some 345 km to the NW of Adana, hence going further away from Haran, then Abadaniye to Konya’s north would be located too far westwards, I should think, for it to fit the geography of the Book of Tobit concerning its location of Ecbatana. Adana may possibly be the Abdadana of neo-Assyrian (the era of Tobit and Tobias) inscriptions: https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/bdadana-region-in-western-media/ “In 716 B.C. Sargon II during his eighth campaign received tribute from Bīt-Abdadāni, Namar, Sangibutu, and the country of the “mighty Medes” (see F. Thureau-Dangin, Une relation de la huitième campagne de Sargon, Paris, 1973, line 39)”. Adana was a city of great administrative importance and it was centrally located: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adana Adana … is a large city in southern Turkey. The city is situated on the Seyhan River, 35 km (22 mi) inland from the northeastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea. It is the administrative seat of the Adana province, and has a population of 1,816,750 (Seyhan, Yuregir, Cukurova, Saricam) … making it the largest city in the Mediterranean Region of Turkey. Adana lies in the heart of Cilicia, which some say, was once one of the most important regions of the classical world. …. Home to six million people, Cilicia is an important agricultural area, owing to the large fertile plain of Çukurova. Adana is a centre for regional trade, healthcare, and public and private services. Agriculture and logistics are important parts of the economy. The city is connected to Tarsus and Mersin by TCDD train. The closest public airport is Çukurova International Airport. Etymology The name Adana (Turkish pronunciation: [aˈda.na] …; Armenian: Ադանա; Greek: Άδανα) has been used for over four millennia. …. …. History Hittite warrior in Adana Archaeological Museum Bronze Age Inhabited by Luwians and Hurrians, Kizzuwatna had an autonomous governance under Hittite protection, but they had a brief period of independence from the 1500s to 1420s BC. [sic] According to the Hittite inscription of Kava, found in Hattusa (Boğazkale), Kizzuwatna was ruling Adana, under the protection of the Hittites, by 1335 BC. With the collapse of the Hittite Empire around 1191–1189 BC, native Denyen sea peoples took control of Adana and the plain until around 900 BC. …. Iron Age Then Neo-Hittite states were founded in the region with the Quwê state centred on Adana. Quwê and other states were protected by the Neo-Assyrian Empire, though they had periods of independence too. After the Greek migration into Cilicia in the 8th century BC, the region was unified under the rule of the Mopsos dynasty … and Adana was established as the capital. …. The Assyrians took control of the regions several times before their collapse in 612 BC. …. [End of quote] Of potential significance for Adana’s (as Ecbatana) connecting to Rages in the mountains (‘… for it lies in a mountainous area, while Ecbatana is in the middle of the plain’), is this piece of information from Britannica (emphasis added): https://www.britannica.com/place/Adana-Turkey Adana, city, south-central Turkey. It is situated in the plain of Cilicia, on the Seyhan River (the ancient Sarus River). An agricultural and industrial centre and the country’s fourth largest city, it probably overlies a Hittite settlement that dates from approximately 1400 bce [sic], and its history has been profoundly influenced by its location at the foot of the Taurus Mountain passes leading to the Syrian plains. …. Part Three: A possible location for Tobit’s Rages For what need we now to be looking in relation to Tobit’s Rages? Well, if Adana is Tobit’s Ecbatana, then Rages must needs be - as according to Tobit 5:6 - two days’ distance from Adana in the plain, and Rages must be situated in the (presumably Taurus) mountains. Moreover, according to the Book of Tobit, two camels were employed on the trip (9:5): “So Raphael with the four servants and two camels went to Rages in Media and stayed with Gabael”. That potential mode of transport likely needs to be taken into account with regard to the time needed to cover the distance. I am no expert on camels - had a nervous ride on one in 1990 to the Giza pyramids. But I would estimate that Rages ought not to be much in excess of, say, 100 km from Ecbatana (Adana). Ancient conditions, topography, tracks, etc., would also need to be factored in. Perhaps some generous, informed reader will help out here. Anyway, after much consideration, I have picked out Karatepe as the best candidate for ancient Rages that I can come up with at this stage. And this, despite none of its known names having any likeness to Rages. Karatepe, like Rages, was in the mountains: https://www.bibleplaces.com/karatepe/?srsltid=AfmBOoqbrVR5uWGJa_Jon1b8YAI1QG0WGM4NHJRU9bQpT5TA7F3_AEiT “Karatepe is situated in the foothills of the Taurus Mountains, on the west bank of the Ceyhan River in the northeast corner of the Cilician Plain” It was prominent in the neo-Assyrian (Tobit’s) century: “It is a single-period, hilltop fortress that was built by a local ruler named Azatiwata at the end of the 8th century BC”. Karatepe is about 115 km distance from Adana (by car). 1 hr 26 min (115.4 km) via O-52/E90 The distance may be stretching those two camels! And it was under the rule of Adana (Ecbatana): “… a local ruler named Azatiwata … was a dependent of Wariku/Awariku, king of Que, whose capital was at Adana”. 15th August, 2025

Horrible Histories: Ludicrous Luwians

by Damien F. Mackey My guess (and that is all it is at this early stage) is that the Luwians, or Hurrians, were one of those Philistine enclaves in other peoples’ lands. A reader, properly appreciating the ramifications of a radically revised Anatolian geography, as laid out in my article: Search for the Median empire (3) Search for the Median empire has well anticipated the need for further identifications: Dear Damien, relocation of Media to central&south Anatolia would place it smack in Luwite territory. Take it from there. …. My response: The Luwians, it seems to me … are one of those languages-without-a-people sorts of scenarios. Like the Hurrians. Now, given Brock Heathcotte’s letter w(a) and r interchange - thus Assuwa becomes Assyria: Mitanni and Urartu the same place: Heathcotte (3) Mitanni and Urartu the same place: Heathcotte - and given the variation of the first consonant, thus the Luwians were also called Nuwians, then it is not hard to make that actual connection, Luwian = Hurrian: NLuw(r)ian = Hur(r)ian. But who were the Hurrians? My guess (and that is all it is at this early stage) is that the Luwians, or Hurrians, were one of those Philistine enclaves in other peoples’ lands. Another of the many guises of the Philistines (or related peoples): An early study of Philistine origins (4) An early study of Philistine origins

Geography of the Book of Tobit presents a fascinating challenge

by Damien F. Mackey Introduction Upon finishing my most recent article: Search for the Median empire (8) Search for the Median empire with its radical re-location of the land of Media (based on Royce Erickson), I thought to reconsider my geography of the Book of Tobit and its troublesome “Media”, as discussed in a now old article, “A Common Sense Geography of the Book of Tobit”. Having done that, I came to realise that I must now put aside the latter article and attempt to create a new and (hopefully) more accurate one. This one. Here, firstly, I shall recall what I wrote at the beginning of “A Common Sense Geography of the Book of Tobit”, in which the geographical problem is plainly set out, followed by my first attempt at a solution. After that, I can proceed with a new, and hopefully more satisfactory, account of the geography of the Book of Tobit. The Problem In my “A Common Sense Geography of the Book of Tobit” article, I began: To a good friend who wrote this about the geography of the Book of Tobit: Tobias and the Tigris. Several possibilities exist here. It is not unknown for several streams to bear the same name, nor is it impossible that the swiftest road into Media was a highway which was accessed by Tobias traveling to the real Tigris River to connect with this route. …. I would reply: What I have often argued with early Genesis, especially the Six Days and the Flood, is that a ‘surface’ reading of a biblical text may sometimes lead one to a conclusion that is far from what the original scribe(s) intended, and often far also from common sense. Such I believe to be the case, too, with standard versions of the Book of Tobit with regard to its geography. If we would believe the text as it currently stands, the angel Raphael was leading young Tobias (my prophet Job) a merry dance inasmuch as, with a starting point at Assyrian Nineveh, and with the aim of arriving at Rages near Ecbatana in Media – Ecbatana being some 185 miles east of Nineveh – the angel brings Tobias in the evening to the river Tigris, directly west of Nineveh. No wonder then that, on this basis, The Jerusalem Bible says that “the geography is inexact”, and that Fr. D. Dumm (article, “Tobit”) in The Jerome Biblical Commentary, exclaims that: “[The angel] Raphael knows the journey of life far better than the route to Media!” Unfortunately, though, Fr. Dumm just leaves it at that, without being willing, or able, to defend the accuracy of the Bible with a proper explanation of what is happening here. My previous solution But we need to go to other versions of the Book of Tobit to find the solution. [See above map for the standard locations of Nineveh, Tigris, Medes, Ecbatana] There is no geographical support in the Book of Tobit for an eastwards journey, from Nineveh to the classical Media (Ecbatana and Rhages): For one, the River Tigris is west of Nineveh; And, whilst the Median Rhages is in the plain, with Ecbatana being in the mountains, the Book of Tobit has Ecbatana in the plain and Rages in the mountains (see below); And again, Charan (Haran), in Syria, is, according to the Douay version of Tobit, ‘midway’ between Nineveh and ‘Media’; And furthermore, whereas the journey from Tobit’s Ecbatana to Rages normally took “two full days”, the almost 200-mile journey from the Median Ecbatana to Rhages would have taken significantly longer. In fact it took the army of Alexander the Great 11 days at full gallop to march from the one to the other. Rightly then does Jan Simons observe (according to a Median context) that the journey referred to in the Book of Tobit “would be a forced ‘journey of two days’ even for an express messenger”. Thankfully, however, there are versions of the Book of Tobit that set us aright, with Ecbatana becoming “Bathania” (the Roman province of Batanaea), that is, the fertile Bashan, east of the River Jordan in Palestine, and Media becoming “Midian”. Thus the angel Raphael knows exactly what he is doing. Why, did he not inform the anxious Tobit that he knew the way thoroughly (as an angel would know)? So we find that the real angel Raphael was escorting the young Tobias, not eastwards, but westwards from Nineveh, to the Tigris crossing, then to Haran, and on to Bashan (where the angel then leaves on an early flight for Damascus). I discussed all of this in Volume Two of my thesis [2007], A Revised History of the Era of King Hezekiah of Judah and its Background http://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/handle/2123/5973 (Chapter 2, pp. 38-40), where I had specifically claimed that “Rages”, a city in the mountains, must be the city of Damascus that dominated the province of Batanaea” (p. 39). Damascus, almost 700 m above sea level, is actually situated on a plateau. Secondly, I gave there very specific geographical details in order to identify this “Rages” in relation to “Ecbatana” (Tobit 5:6), which I had in turn identified (following the Heb. Londinii, or HL, fragment version of Tobit) with “Bathania”, or Bashan (possibly Herodotus’ Syrian Ecbatana as opposed to the better known Median Ecbatana). According to Tobit, “Rages is situated in the mountains, two days’ walk from Ecbatana which is in the plain”. Now Damascus is precisely two days’ walk from Bashan in the Hauran plain, as according to Jâkût el-Hamawi who says of Batanaea’s most central town of Nawâ …: “Between Nawa and Damascus is two days’ journey” (as quoted on p. 39). What further consolidates the fact that Tobit’s ‘Ecbatana’ was in a westerly direction, rather than an easterly one, is that his son Tobias, leaving Nineveh, arrived at the Tigris river in the evening; an impossibility were he heading for Median Ecbatana in the east. And, according to the Vulgate version of Tobit, Charan, that is, Haran, is situated “in the halfway” between Nineveh and Ecbatana. The traveller is clearly journeying towards the west. Whilst Bible scholars today tend to dismiss the whole geography of the Book of Tobit as nonsensical, a simple adjustment based on a genuine version (Heb. Londinii), makes perfect – even very precise (“two days walk”) – sense of it. …. The testimony of Jâkût el-Hamawi here was an absolute clincher for me … when trying to make sense of the geography of the Book of Tobit …. [End of quotes] Was I completely happy with this attempt to restore, in the face of criticism, the geography of a book of the Bible, depicting it as a westward, not an eastward, journey? Nineveh = Nineveh River Tigris = River Tigris Charan = Haran Media = Midian Ecbatana = Bashan Rages = Damascus Well, yes I was, basically, although there were still a few little knots and niggling points that I thought perhaps could be considered later. The time has now come to consider these knots and niggles. A new assessment The positives What is still patently clear to me is that the travelling party, Raphael and Tobias, could not possibly have been, as the commentators think they were, heading eastwards from Nineveh to the traditional land of Media because of the fact that the travellers arrived at the Tigris river in the evening, and that, later, they came to Charan (Haran/Harran). Therefore, I am completely happy with my first three of these six name identifications: Nineveh = Nineveh River Tigris = River Tigris Charan = Haran Media = Midian Ecbatana = Bashan Rages = Damascus It is quite possible (without hurting my reconstruction in the slightest) that “Nineveh” here was actually Calah (Nimrud), that is, Nineveh in the Genesis and Jonah sense of “the great city” complex (Genesis 10:11-12): “From that land he went forth into Assyria, and built Nineveh and Rehoboth-Ir and Calah, and Resen between Nineveh and Calah; that is the great city”. Cf. Jonah 3:3: “So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh, according to the word of the Lord. Now Nineveh was an exceeding great city of three days’ journey”. For Tobit and his wife were taken into captivity by the Assyrian king, “Shalmaneser”, who, given that the family was Naphtalian, must also have been king Tiglath-pileser (2 Kings 15:29): “Tiglath-Pileser king of Assyria came and took Ijon, Abel Beth Maakah, Janoah, Kedesh and Hazor. He took Gilead and Galilee, including all the land of Naphtali, and deported the people to Assyria”. To where did Tiglath-pileser remove (deport and resettle) his Israelite captives? Why, to “Calah” (greater Nineveh) and, most interestingly, to “the cities of the Medes” (2 Kings 18:11): “The king of Assyria exiled the Israelites to Assyria and settled them in Halah [Calah], in Gozan by the Habor River, and in the cities of the Medes”. The negatives Here begin the knots and niggles as referred to above. Media, Ecbatana, Rages It had occurred to me that, if Tobit’s Ecbatana was actually Bashan, as I thought it was, then why were not his relatives, Raguel and family, too (presumably also Naphtalians), in captivity away from Israel? And, whilst Bashan (Bathania) was a pretty good linguistic fit for Ecbatana - and ancient writers have, indeed, testified to more than one Ecbatana - Midian was not totally convincing for the Bashan region; though it was far more fitting for there than was the traditional land of Media (and its Ecbatana). While the name Rages (Rhages Raghai) did not fit at all for Damascus (as I had identified it), the topography and distance (as according to Jâkût el-Hamawi) seemed to me to be a perfect fit. Finally, Charan (Haran/Harran) was not really midway between Nineveh and Bashan. I had taken Tobit 10:13: “And as they were returning they came to Charan, which is in the midway to Ninive …”, as being like a casual observation of a traveller, without being meant to be geographically precise. Even after reading Royce (Richard) Erickson’s mind-blowing (2020) article: A PROBLEM IN CHALDAEAN AND ELAMITE GEOGRAPHY (3) A PROBLEM IN CHALDAEAN AND ELAMITE GEOGRAPHY with its own Tiglath-pileser-like ‘deportations’ of the lands of Chaldea, Elam, Media and Persia hundreds of kilometres to the NW of where they are conventionally situated, I had persisted with my article, “A Common Sense Geography of the Book of Tobit”, without making any alterations, thinking that it was essentially correct - whilst being aware that it might eventually need to undergo some degree of tweaking. The truth is that Royce Erickson’s article makes all the difference to the geography of the Book of Tobit, showing that the angel Raphael knew perfectly well to where he was leading young Tobias, and that the book’s Media, Ecbatana and Rages do not stand in need of special interpretation. Thanks to Royce Erickson, an ancient may now do once again as the travelling party had done in the Book of Tobit, head westwards from “Nineveh” (Calah?) to the Tigris river, and on to Haran, and then on to Ecbatana and Rages in the land of Media. And Haran can once again be, as old Tobit had known it, “in the midway to Ninive”. Royce Erickson’s Figure 1 here shows his proposed identification of Ecbatana as Abadaniye in his (revised) land of Media: Funnily, the occasional map will show a land of Media much, much further westwards than would conventionally have been expected. Now, whether Royce Erickson’s version of Ecbatana, as the admittedly very like-named Abadaniye, is the correct one remains to be determined. If one is to take seriously the information in the book of Tobit, then Ecbatana, in a plain, must be within two days’ walk of a place called Rages, in the mountains. And Haran must be midway between Ecbatana and Nineveh. Regarding this last point, Abadaniye would appear to be perhaps a bit too far westwards to enable Haran to qualify as a midway point. Just a thought for further consideration.

Search for the Median empire

by Damien F. Mackey “The very existence of a Median empire, with the emphasis on empire, is thus questionable” (H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, “Was there ever a Median Empire?”, in Kuhrt, H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, eds., Achaemenid History III. Method and Theory, Leiden, 1988, p. 212). There is an outstanding reason why the Median empire has been so hard to pinpoint, and that is because archaeologico-historians do not know the true location of Media. And that must necessarily mean, in turn, that they are unable to investigate Media archaeologically. This has led to scholars questioning the very existence of the Median empire. For, as I observed in my article: Medo-Persian history has no adequate archaeology (2) Medo-Persian history has no adequate archaeology [Professor Gunnar] Heinsohn, in his far-reaching “The Restoration of Ancient History” (http://www.mikamar.biz/symposium/heinsohn.txt), refers to the results of some conferences in the 1980’s pointing to difficulties regarding the extent of the Medo-Persian empires: In the 1980’s, a series of eight major conferences brought together the world’s finest experts on the history of the Medish and Persian empires. They reached startling results. The empire of Ninos [pre-Alexander period (3)] was not even mentioned. Yet, its Medish successors were extensively dealt with - to no great avail. In 1988, one of the organizers of the eight conferences, stated the simple absence of an empire of the Medes [pre-Alexander period (2)]: “A Median oral tradition as a source for Herodotus III is a hypothesis that solves some problems, but has otherwise little to recommend it … This means that not even in Herodotus’ Median history a real empire is safely attested. In Assyrian and Babylonian records and in the archeological evidence no vestiges of an imperial structure can be found. The very existence of a Median empire, with the emphasis on empire, is thus questionable” (H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, “Was there ever a Median Empire?”, in A. Kuhrt, H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, eds., Achaemenid History III. Method and Theory, Leiden, 1988, p. 212). Two years later came the really bewildering revelation. Humankind’s first world empire of the Persians [Pre-Alexander Period (1)] did not fare much better than the Medes. Its imperial dimensions had dryly to be labelled “elusive” (H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, “The quest for an elusive empire?”, in H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, A. Kuhrt, eds., Achaemenid History IV. Centre and Periphery, Leiden 1990, p. 264). [End of quote] I did, however, qualify my point about the apparently inadequate archaeology by going on to explain that the underlying problem was one of geography: Now, I think that there are two compelling reasons why Medo-Persian archaeology does not appear to manifest itself adequately in Mesopotamia. The first reason is huge and is hugely controversial: Medo-Persia was actually located nowhere near Mesopotamia. This is according to a recent (2020) geographical correction by retired Naval Officer, Royce (Richard) Erickson, in his ground-breaking article: A PROBLEM IN CHALDAEAN AND ELAMITE GEOGRAPHY (3) A PROBLEM IN CHALDAEAN AND ELAMITE GEOGRAPHY | Royce Erickson - Academia.edu I fully accept, at least, Royce Erickson’s radical NW re-location of Chaldea and Elam, and so would broadly agree with him that the related Medes and Persians must also be correspondingly shifted. The second reason is due to the fact (my belief, that is) that: Some of the so-called Persian Kings were semi-legendary, and composite The mighty king, Xerxes, favoured by various commentators to represent “Ahasuerus”, the Great King of the Book of Esther, is most likely a composite character, a mix of real Assyrian and Medo-Persian kings. The name ‘Xerxes’ is thought by historians to accord extremely well linguistically with “Ahasuerus”, the name of the Great King of the Book of Esther. There are several kings “Ahasuerus” in the (Catholic) Bible: in Tobit; in Esther; in Ezra; and in Daniel. As Cyrus The “Ahasuerus” in Esther I have identified as Darius the Mede/Cyrus. The names, Xerxes, Ahasuerus, Cyaxares and Cyrus are all fairly compatible. …. Some revisionist scholars have boldly embarked upon a radical type of solution to ‘save’ the Medo-Persian empire. My article continues: Professor Gunnar Heinsohn had put forward a most controversial ‘solution’ to account for the problems of Medo-Persian archaeology by attempting to identify the Persians with the Old Babylonian Dynasty of Hammurabi – Darius ‘the Great’ being Hammurabi himself. More recently (2002) Emmet Sweeney, who has been a supporter of Heinsohn, has sought to fuse the Persians with the neo-Assyrians and neo-Babylonians, so that, for instance, Cyrus the Great is to be identified with Tiglath-pileser III; Xerxes with Sennacherib; and Artaxerxes III with Nebuchednezzar ‘the Great’. …. Clever - but the proper solution is, I suggest - following Royce Erickson - to re-locate Medo-Persia geographically. If that be done correctly, then a flourishing new archaeology awaits the hopeful spade. A somewhat pessimistic, understandably, view of the “Medes” (2020) is given here at: https://www.livius.org/articles/people/medes/ Media poses a problem to the scholar who tries to describe this ancient empire: the evidence is unreliable. It consists of the archaeological record, several references in Assyrian and Babylonian cuneiform texts, the Persian Behistun inscription, the Histories by the Greek researcher Herodotus of Halicarnassus, the Persian history by Ctesias of Cnidus, and a couple of chapters in the Bible. The trouble is that the archaeological record is unclear, that the oriental texts offer not much information, that the Greek authors are unreliable, and that several Biblical books appear to have been influenced by Herodotus. But let's start with a description of the landscape itself. Mackey’s comment: No, the Herodotean account is far more complex than is the biblical data which can be boiled down to just the one major Median king: “Darius the Mede namely [even] Cyrus the Persian” (Daniel 6:28). Daniel in the den of lions during the reign of Darius the Mede (Daniel 6:16-23), even the reign of Cyrus (Daniel 14:31-42: Bel and the Dragon), is just the one, same incident: Was Daniel twice in the lions’ den? (3) Was Daniel Twice in the Lions' Den The livius.org article continues, dishing up the conventional archaeology for Media which is so hopelessly misplaced. The Country Although the boundaries of Media were never completely fixed, it is more or less identical to the northwest of modern Iran. Its capital Ecbatana is modern Hamadan; its western part is dominated by the Zagros mountains and border on Assyria; to the south are Elam and Persis; in the arid east, the Caspian Gate is the boundary with Parthia; and Media is separated from the Caspian Sea and Armenia by the Elburz mountains. The country was (and is) dominated by the east-west route that was, in the Middle Ages, known as the Silk road; it connected Media to Babylonia, Assyria, Armenia, and the Mediterranean in the west, and to Parthia, Aria, Bactria, Sogdia, and China in the east. Another important road connected Ecbatana with the capitals of Persis, like Persepolis and Pasargadae. Mackey’s comment: See above map (Royce Erickson’s Figure 1) for this Pasargadae newly identified with Pazarkaya: Pasargadae (5C) Pazarkaya Identical Persian and modern Turkish name. Modern site fits Assyrian list of Persian and Median towns correlated with Anatolian sites and also Greek History Persia Media controlled the east-west trade, but was also rich in agricultural products. The valleys and plains in the Zagros are fertile, and Media was well-known for clover (which is still called medicago), sheep, goats, and the horses of the Nisaean plain. The country could support a large population and boasted many villages and a few cities (Ecbatana, Rhagae, Gabae). The Greek author Polybius of Megalopolis correctly calls it the most powerful of all Asian countries, and it was generally recognized as one of the most important parts of the Seleucid and Parthian Empires. Mackey’s comment: See same map for Ecbatana newly identified with Abadaniye: Bit-Matti Matiana Goreme, Nevsehir Media Recent previous historical name of Turkish Goreme was Matiana. Located close to Abadaniye (Agbatana) and Ladek (Laodiceia) Royce Erickson has written regarding Agbatana/Ecbatana potentially as Abadaniye (I do not necessarily accept his account here of Cyrus and Persian history): …. There is a small town in central Tukey north of Konya called Abadaniye, very similar phonetically to Agbatana. A little more than 100 years ago its Armenian name was Egdavama. Next to it lies a barren, gentle hill with a circumference of about 6 miles, very much like the circuit wall of classical Athens, 5.25 miles. its gentle slope would favor the arrangement of seven concentric walls rising one above the other, just as Herodotus describes the walls of Agbatana. According to Greek tradition, other Median major cities were Laodicea, Rhages , and Apamea, all three not far from Ecbatana. These are their later classical Greek names; their original Median names are unknown. Modern scholars tentatively locate these sites near Tehran, based on the assumption that Agbatana was in Iran, but with admittedly very sparse historical or archaeological support. Strangely enough in south central Turkey very near modern Abadaniye described above, lie the modern towns of Dinar and Ladek, previously named Apamea and Laodicea by the Greeks. Thus there is strong circumstantial evidence that the core of the ancient Median Empire around 700 BC was not in Iran, but in central Turkish Anatolia, over 600 miles to the West. This could be written off as an absurd concept supported by astounding coincidence, so allow me add a few more facts to strengthen the case. Early Persians were closely intertwined with the Medes geographically and historically. Originally Median vassals, the Persians later ousted the Median king Astyages by means of a coup d’etat aided by the defection of most of the Median army, and established the Persian Empire under Cyrus the Great, incorporating the entire Median Empire. The original capital of the Persian Empire was founded by Cyrus II on the site of his victory over Astyages, known to the ancients as Pasargadae. Until today its location remains unknown, but is assumed by experts to be somewhere in southwest Iran, based once again on historical deduction without strong material archaeological support, despite numerous attempts to find any. Once again, we find in central Anatolia today two towns with the modern Turkish names of Pazarkaye and Khorasi not far from Abadaniye. I propose that Pazarkaye is the modern site of ancient Persian Pasargadae, and Khorasi (pronounced Khorashi) is on the site of a proposed Persian town named after either Cyrus I or Cyrus II, Persian kings whose names were pronounced “Kurush.” …. Early History Media is archaeologically poorly understood. Often, researchers have simply called those objects Median that were discovered under the stratum they had identified as Achaemenid. It would have been helpful if we could establish that certain types of archaeological remains (like house forms, ornaments, pottery, and burial rites) in the entire area of Media constantly recurred together, but until now this definition of a material culture has not been possible. Mackey’s comment: Recall what I have written above regarding Median geography: Still, it is reasonably clear that in the first quarter of the first millennium, nomadic cattle-herders speaking an Indo-Iranian language infiltrated the Zagros and settled among the native population. (The language of the newcomers can be reconstructed from loan words, personal names and toponyms.) The tribal warriors are mentioned for the first time in the Assyrian Annals as enemies of Šalmaneser III (858-824). KURMa-da-a ("the land of the Medes") …. and although the Assyrian kings were able to subdue several of them, they never conquered all of Media. In fact, it is likely that the Assyrians were themselves responsible for the unification of the Median tribes. …. Empire? If we are to believe Herodotus, Media was unified by a man named Deioces … the first of four kings who were to rule a true empire that included large parts of Iran and eastern Anatolia. Their names sound convincingly Iranian: a Daiaukku and a Uksatar (Deioces and Cyaxares) are mentioned in texts from the eighth century. Using the number of regnal years mentioned by the Greek researcher and counting backward from the year in which the last Median leader (who is mentioned in the Babylonian Nabonidus Chronicle) lost his throne, we obtain this list: Deioces 53 years 700/699 to 647/646 Phraortes 22 years 647/646 to 625/624 Cyaxares 40 years 625/624 to 585/584 Astyages 35 years 585/584 to 550/549 Unfortunately, there are several problems. In the first place, Ctesias offers another list of kings. Secondly, there is something wrong with the chronology: according to Assyrian sources, the Daiaukku and Uksatar mentioned above lived in c.715. Even worse, Daiaukku lived near Lake Urmia, not in Ecbatana. Besides, the story of Deioces looks suspiciously like a myth or saga about the origins of civilization. Finally, Herodotus' figures are suspect: (53+22) + (40+35) = 75+75 = 150 years. There is no need to doubt the existence of the two last rulers, who are also mentioned in Babylonian texts, but we may ask what kind of leaders they have been. One clue is a little list that Herodotus inserted in his Histories, in which he states that Deioces "united the Medes and was ruler of the tribes which here follow, namely, the Busae, Paretacenians, Struchates, Arizantians, Budians, and Magians". …. But was Deioces the only leader to unite several tribes? It is not a strange or novel idea to interpret the various personal names we have as an indication of a fluid, still developing central leadership. Herodotus' list can be seen as an attempt to create order in a confused oral tradition about earlier leaders; his description of Median history probably projects back aspects of the later, Achaemenid empire upon a loose tribal federation. He took the stories told by his Persian informers about the early history of Iran a bit too literally. Which does not mean that the leaders of tribal federations were not capable of exercising great political influence. Mackey’s comment: Ha, ha. The author here shows about as much confidence in the reliability of Herodotus as an historian as I do. Although an Arbaces may have united several Median tribes too, Cyaxares and Astyages are generally recognized as the two last rulers of the federation of tribes. According to the Fall of Nineveh Chronicle, Cyaxares (called Umakištar) destroyed the Assyrian religious center Aššur in the summer of 614: The Medes went along the Tigris and encamped against Aššur. They did battle against the city and destroyed it. They inflicted a terrible defeat upon a great people, plundered and sacked them. The king of Babylonia and his army, who had gone to help the Medes, did not reach the battle in time. From this moment on, Cyaxares and the Babylonian king Nabopolassar joined forces, and two years later, the Assyrian capital Nineveh was captured by the allies: The king of Babylonia and Cyaxares [...] encamped against Nineveh. From the month Simanu [May/June] until the month Âbu [July/August] -for three months- they subjected the city to a heavy siege. On the [lacuna] day of the month Abu they inflicted a major defeat upon a great people. At that time Sin-šar-iškun, king of Assyria, died. They carried off the vast booty of the city and the temple and turned the city into a ruin heap. [...] On the twentieth day of the month Ulûlu [10 August 612] Cyaxares and his army went home. Mackey’s comment: Here, in my opinion, Sennacherib (“Nabopolassar”) (c. 700 BC) has become inter-mixed with a somewhat later time, when Sin-shar-ishkun, the son of Ashurbanipal, was killed (c. 612 BC, conventional dating). Aššur-etil-ilāni, the supposed brother of this Sin-shar-ishkun, was actually his father, as Esarhaddon/Ashurbanipal. See my article: Esarhaddon, re-named Ashur-Etil-Ilani-Mukin-Apli, and then duplicated by historians as Ashur-Etil-Ilani (2) Esarhaddon, re-named Ashur-Etil-Ilani-Mukin-Apli, and then duplicated by historians as Ashur-Etil-Ilani Then, moving all of this into synch with its Chaldean parallel, Ashurbanipal’s ill-fated son, Sin-shar-ishkun, the last ruler of Assyria, re-emerges as the same king as Nebuchednezzar’s ill-fated son, Belshazzar, the last Chaldean ruler. …. Anyhow, Cyrus took over the loosely organized Median empire, including several subject countries: Armenia, Cappadocia, Parthia, and perhaps Aria. They were probably ruled by vassal kings called satraps. In 547, Cyrus added Lydia to his possessions, a state that had among its vassals the Greek and Carian towns in the west and southwest of what is now Turkey. Mackey’s comment: Notice the largely western geography here: Armenia; Cappadocia; Lydia; Greek and Carian towns. Royce Erickson has, in connection with his new, revolutionary geography, made the following intriguing comment on the Median and Persian languages: [Darius the Great] established a new capital at Persepolis in 515 BC and carved a monumental inscription, accompanied by numerous illustrations, on the nearby cliff of Behistunstan, describing and glorifying his victory in the civil war. The inscription was written in Persian (Iranian), Akkadian and Elamite – the three most important languages of the Empire. I would suggest that the Iranian language currently identified as Persian was actually Median and that the language currently identified as Elamite was the actual Persian language, as spoken at that time. Exactly how the geographic and ethnic transformation of Persians into Iranians occurred, before or after the founding of Persepolis, or even whether it occurred at all, is a worthy subject for study and debate. …. Whatever about that, there is no doubt that many startling discoveries (archaeological, geographical, cultural, linguistic, and so on) await us as a result of Royce Erickson’s: More geographical ‘tsunamis’: lands of Elam and Chaldea (2) More geographical ‘tsunamis’: lands of Elam and Chaldea

The Iliad and The Odyssey - comparisons with the Bible

“Of all the books in the Bible, First Samuel has the largest number of references to the Philistines and their dealings with the Israelites. It also contains a considerable number of similarities to the writings of Homer, particularly on the issue of warfare”. Jewish Bible Quarterly We read in this excellent article (2016), LITERARY PARALLELS BETWEEN HOMER’S EPICS AND THE BIBLICAL PHILISTINES, at: https://jbqnew.jewishbible.org/jbq-past-issues/2016/443-july-september-2016/literary-parallels-homers-epics-biblical-philistines/ …. If the biblical Caphtor indeed refers to the region of the Aegean Sea, and if the Philistines were truly of Caphtorite origin, then it might be expected that evidence corroborating the Caphtorite/Aegean origin of the Philistines could be found in a comparison of the Bible to Homer’s great epics, the Iliad and the Odyssey, with their settings in the ancient Aegean world. In Judges, the first biblical book in which the Philistines play a significant role, we find at least two occasions in which contact between the Philistines and the Israelites finds remarkable parallels in the Homeric epics. The first instance describes Shamgar son of Anath, who slew six hundred Philistines with an ox- goad (Judg. 3:31). This unique choice of weaponry finds an astonishing parallel in the Iliad, where the Achaean warrior Diomed, upon being accosted by the Trojan Glaucus, reminds him that even the son of Dryas, mighty Lycurgus, lived not long, seeing that he strove with heavenly gods – he that on a time drave down over the sacred mount of Nysa the nursing mothers of mad Dionysus; and they all let fall to the ground their wands, smitten with an ox-goad by man-slaying Lycurgus (Il. 6.130-134 [emphasis added: all biblical and Homeric emphases in this paper have been added by the author]). In an ironic twist, Shamgar’s unusual taste in weaponry seems to have been borrowed from the very people against whom he wielded it. The second example involves Samson. To the chagrin of his parents, the youthful and headstrong Israelite opts to marry a Philistine woman (Judg. 14:2); during the nuptial feast at Timnah, he strikes a deal with his Philistine hosts in the following manner: Let me propound a riddle to you. If you can give me the right answer during the seven days of the feast, I shall give you thirty linen tunics and thirty sets of clothing; but if you are not able to tell it to me, you must give me thirty linen tunics and thirty sets of clothing (Judg. 14:12-13a). This use of sumptuous6 clothing as economic barter finds its counterpart in the Iliad, where a despondent Priam uses gorgeous apparel, along with precious metal, to ransom the body of his son Hector from an unforgiving Achilles, who is still enraged over Hector’s slaying of Patroclus. Homer states that the Trojan monarch opened the goodly lids of chests, wherefrom he took twelve beauteous robes and twelve cloaks of single fold, and as many coverlets, and as many white mantles, and therewithal as many tunics (Iliad 24.229-230). A similar situation, in which sartorial finery is held on par with jewels and precious metals, appears in the Odyssey: For Antinous he brought a large and beautiful robe, richly broidered, and in it were golden brooches, twelve in all, fitted with curved clasps (Odyssey 18.293-294). It appears that Samson, well versed in Philistine/Aegean custom, knew precisely how to arouse his opponents’ venality. Of all the books in the Bible, First Samuel has the largest number of references to the Philistines and their dealings with the Israelites. It also contains a considerable number of similarities to the writings of Homer, particularly on the issue of warfare. For example, when the Philistine soldiers cower before the power of the Ark of the Covenant, which the Israelites have brought into battle, they exhort each other to ‘be men, O Philistines! Or you will become slaves to the Hebrews as they were slaves to you. Be men and fight!’ (I Sam. 4:9). In a comparable Homeric scene, Ajax exhorts his fellow Achaeans, whose resolve is weakening in the face of a Trojan onslaught, to “be men, my friends, and bethink you of furious might” (Iliad 15.734). A more striking parallel between the Homeric epics and First Samuel occurs slightly later in the book: . . . as Samuel was presenting the burnt offering and the Philistines advanced to attack Israel, the Lord thundered [va-yarem] mightily against the Philistines that day. He threw them into confusion, and they were routed by Israel (I Sam. 7:10). The Israelite God is portrayed as knowing precisely which miraculous intervention would have the greatest effect on the Philistine descendants of Achaean soldiers. According to Homer, there was nothing quite as effective as a peal of ominous thunder from Zeus to take the fight out of the Achaeans: Then himself [Zeus] thundered aloud from Ida, and sent a blazing flash amid the host of the Achaeans; and at sight thereof they were seized with wonder, and pale fear gat hold of all (Iliad 8.75). In an example that mirrors the biblical episode even more closely, Zeus took his tasselled aegis, all gleaming bright, and enfolded Ida with clouds, and lightened and thundered mightily, and shook the aegis, giving victory to the Trojans, but the Achaeans he drave in rout (Iliad 17.594ff.). At the close of the Odyssey, when the eponymous hero and his companions are about to slaughter their enemies, who have dropped their weapons in terror, Athena entreats them to desist. All but Odysseus obey, and it is only the literally thunderous intervention of Zeus that induces him to relent: And now would they have slain them all, and cut them off from returning, had not Athena, daughter of Zeus, who bears the aegis, shouted aloud, and checked all the host, saying: ‘Refrain, men of Ithaca, from grievous war, that with all speed you may part, and that without bloodshed.’ So spoke Athena, and pale fear seized them. Then in their terror the arms flew from their hands and fell one and all to the ground, as the goddess uttered her voice, and they turned toward the city, eager to save their lives. Terribly then shouted the much-enduring, goodly Odysseus, and gathering himself together he swooped upon them like an eagle of lofty flight, and at that moment the son of Cronos cast a flaming thunderbolt, and down it fell before the flashing-eyed daughter of the mighty sire (Odyssey 24.528-545). Thus, in both epics Homer makes it clear that thunder from the king of the gods is the necessary divine manifestation to cause the Achaeans to desist from hostilities. On numerous occasions, the biblical tradition credits God with miraculous intervention to defend Israel from its military enemies: He drowns the Egyptian army in the Red Sea (Ex. 14), rains hailstones upon the Amorite forces (Josh. 10:11), uses a plague to annihilate the Assyrian army besieging Jerusalem (II Kgs. 19:35), creates the illusion of a huge army of chariots against the Aramaeans (II Kgs. 7), and so forth. However, on no occasion does the God of the Israelites use the sound of thunder, as did Zeus in Homer’s tales, except against the Philistines, almost as if the biblical authors knew perfectly well what the Philistine warriors feared the most. The most famous episode involving the Philistines and Israelites is of course the clash between David and Goliath. The central theme of this classic encounter is that each army, facing the other on opposite sides of the battlefield, produces a single champion to fight as a representative of his side: . . . the Philistines [were] stationed on one hill and Israel [was] stationed on the opposite hill; the ravine was between them. A champion of the Philistine forces stepped forward; his name was Goliath of Gath . . . .He stopped and called out to the ranks of Israel, and he said to them: ‘Why should you come out to engage in battle? I am the Philistine, and you are Saul’s servants. Choose one of your men and let him come down against me. If he bests me in combat and kills me, we will become your slaves; but if I best him and kill him, you shall become our slaves and serve us.’ And the Philistine ended, ‘I herewith defy the ranks of Israel! Get me a man and let’s fight it out!’ (I Sam. 17:3-4, 8-10). This motif of a single champion from each opposing army engaging in hand-to-hand combat to determine the outcome of the battle betrays an Aegean origin of the biblical Philistines.7 It is found frequently in the Iliad, and is in fact a highly important element of the tale. In one example, when Paris is stung by Hector’s rebuke of his cowardice in battle, he states: [I]f thou wilt have me war and do battle, make the other Trojans to sit down and all the Achaeans, but set ye me in the midst and Menelaus, dear to Ares, to do battle for Helen and all her possessions. And whichsoever of us twain shall win, and prove him the better man, let him duly take all the wealth and the woman, and bear them to his home (Iliad 3.68-72). In a later battle, Apollo and Athena conspire to induce Hector to come forth as Troy’s single champion: [Thus] spake king Apollo, son of Zeus: ‘Let us rouse the valiant spirit of horse-taming Hector, in hope that he may challenge some one of the Danaans in single fight to do battle with him man to man in dread combat. So shall the bronze-greaved Achaeans have indignation and rouse some one to do battle in single combat against goodly Hector.’ So he spake, and the goddess, flashing-eyed Athene, failed not to hearken. And Helenus, the dear son of Priam, understood in spirit this plan that had found pleasure with the gods in council; and he came and stood by Hector’s side, and spake to him, saying: ‘Hector, son of Priam, peer of Zeus in counsel, wouldst thou now in anywise hearken unto me? for I am thy brother. Make the Trojans to sit down, and all the Achaeans, and do thou challenge whoso is best of the Achaeans to do battle with thee man to man in dread combat’ (Iliad 7.38-52). When Goliath harangues the Israelite ranks to produce a champion to contest him, he almost seems to be saying, “Don’t you Israelites know how we Philistines conduct our battles? Where is your champion to fight me?” The implication here is evidently that the Philistines were well known, even to their enemies, for this Aegean method of combat.8 In addition to his distinctive fighting tactic, Goliath is described as wearing armor and bearing weaponry that find unmistakable echoes in Homer’s world: He had a bronze helmet on his head, and wore a breastplate of scale armor, a bronze breastplate weighing five thousand shekels. He had bronze greaves on his legs, and a bronze javelin [slung] from his shoulders. The shaft of his spear was like a weaver’s bar, and the iron head of his spear weighed six hundred shekels (I Sam. 17:5-7). This is highly reminiscent of Homer’s depictions of Trojan and Achaean soldiers, particularly in the wearing of greaves, the enormous size of the spear, and the use of two spears by a single warrior (in Goliath’s case, a spear and a javelin): “The greaves first he [Achilles] set about his legs” (Iliad 19.369); as for Hector, “in his hand he held a spear of eleven cubits” (Iliad. 6.318-319). Odysseus carried a “helmet and shield and two spears” (Odyssey 1.256); elsewhere the same hero declares, “I had put on my glorious armor and grasped in my hand two long spears” (Odyssey 12.228-229); still later “he took two mighty spears, tipped with bronze” (Odyssey 22.125). Down to nearly every detail, Goliath is depicted as an Aegean warrior par excellence. When the Israelite forces finally manage to produce their own representative champion in the person of David, Goliath hurls the following threat at the youth: ‘I will give your flesh to the birds of the sky and the beasts of the field’ (I Sam. 17:44). This expression finds parallels in the Iliad, where Achilles, exulting over the death of Hector, boasts that “dogs and birds shall devour thee utterly” (Iliad 22.354), while earlier, Athena predicts that “of a surety many a one of the Trojans shall glut the dogs and birds” (Iliad 8.378-379). Ironically, before dispatching Goliath, David speaks to his adversary in nearly identical terms: ‘I will give the carcasses of the Philistine camp to the birds of the sky and the beasts of the earth’ (I Sam. 17:46b). This is not the only instance in which David adopts Philistine/Achaean conventions of warfare. Upon dispatching the towering braggart with a well-aimed slingstone, David uses Goliath’s sword to decapitate his fallen foe (I Sam. 17:51); then David took the head of the Philistine and brought it to Jerusalem; and he put his weapons in his own tent (I Sam. 17:54). This morbid deed was actually something practiced by the Philistines themselves – as well as by Homer’s Achaean warriors. When Goliath’s countrymen subsequently defeat the Israelites at Mt. Gilboa, King Saul is slain. The next day, First Samuel 31:8-10 recounts: the Philistines came to strip the slain, and they found Saul and his three sons lying on Mount Gilboa. They cut off his head and stripped him of his armor. . . .They placed his armor in the temple of Ashtaroth, and they impaled his body on the wall of Beth-shan. The Philistine custom of stripping a fallen opponent’s corpse of its armor appears with great frequency in the Iliad (4.466; 5.48-49, 163-164; 6.27-28; 13.550-551; 15.343; 16.500, 545, 560ff.; 22.367-368, etc.). In fact, Book 17 focuses on Hector’s stripping Patroclus’ corpse of its armor (125ff.) and the Achaeans’ overwhelming desire to avenge this effrontery. Further, the gruesome habit of decapitating the defeated soldier’s corpse after stripping it of its armor, as David did to Goliath and the Philistines did to Saul, finds parallels in Homer’s Aegean world: Now Hector, when he had stripped from Patroclus his glorious armour, sought to hale him away that he might cut the head from off his shoulders with the sharp bronze, and drag off the corpse, and give it to the dogs of Troy… (Iliad 17:125ff.).