Is El Amarna’s “Son of Zuchru” Biblically Identifiable?

by

 Damien F. Mackey

 

The revision of Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky (Ages in Chaos, I, 1952), with its multiple biblico-historical identifications, cannot be easily brushed aside. A further striking correlation that he discovered between the Old Testament and El Amarna [EA], revised, is the identification of King Jehoshaphat of Judah’s captain, “son of Zichri”, with EA’s “son of Zuchru”.

 

 

Jehoshaphat of Judah, a king much blessed by Yahweh, was able to boast a formidable army, about which we read in 2 Chronicles 17:12-18:

 

Jehoshaphat became more and more powerful; he built forts and store cities in Judah and had large supplies in the towns of Judah. He also kept experienced fighting men in Jerusalem.  Their enrollment by families was as follows:

From Judah, commanders of units of 1,000:

Adnah the commander, with 300,000 fighting men;

 next, Jehohanan the commander, with 280,000;

next, Amasiah son of Zichri, who volunteered himself for the service of the Lord, with 200,000.

From Benjamin:

Eliada, a valiant soldier, with 200,000 men armed with bows and shields;

next, Jehozabad, with 180,000 men armed for battle.

 

 

In the Velikovskian archive we read this (http://www.varchive.org/ce/assuruballit.htm):

 

ONE VS. MANY LINKS

But if it were only a matter of evaluating my dating of the el-Amarna letters contra the conventional dating, we would use names alone. The list of identified persons in the el-Amarna letters in chapters of the Scriptures of the time of the middle of the ninth century, as presented in Ages in Chaos, is imposing. Among those names mentioned in both the letters and in the books of Kings and Chronicles are such unusual ones as Jehozabad, Adaja, Ben Zichri, Biridri, and many more. And is it little that, from five generals of king Jehoshaphat named by the Scriptures, four of them signed their letter by the very same names and one is referred to by his name?

Captains of Jehoshaphat	el-Amarna correspondents
Adnah (II Chr. 17:14)	Addudani (EA 292)
Son of Zichri (II Chr. 17:16)	Son of Zuchru (EA 334, 335)
Jehozabab (II Chr. 17:18)	Iahzibada (EA 275)
Adaia (II Chr. 23:1)	Addaia (EA 285, 287, 289)

Not only personal names, but dozens of parallels are found between the texts of those tablets and the scriptural narrative in the books of Kings and Chronicles, and also between them and the Assyrian texts of the ninth century. Events—down to the smallest details—were illuminated in the chapters dealing with el-Amarna: actions, wars, sieges, a seven-year famine, and geographical names were compared.

Although the el-Amarna correspondence covers only a few decades at the most, the many details that could be and have been brought to comparison lend an unshakeable support to the reconstruction of the larger period covering the time from the end of the Middle Kingdom to the time of the Ptolemies in Egypt, a span of twelve hundred years. Therefore, a single name, even were it to appear in the king lists and in the letters, would not amount to much without any support from the entire sum of evidence.

[End of quote]

 

Regarding Velikovsky’s intriguing connections for this era, I wrote in:

 

Bible Bending Pharaonic Egypt.

Part Two B: Rehoboam to Jehoram

 

https://www.academia.edu/11358194/Bible_Bending_Pharaonic_Egypt._Part_Two_B_Rehoboam_to_Jehoram

 

Velikovsky had discovered other striking correspondences as well between the supposed C14th BC history and the C9th BC biblical history, none more stunning, perhaps, than the “Son of Zuchru” [EA 334, 335] and the “Son of Zichri” (2 Chronicles 17:16).

Indeed, Velikovsky thought that the EA letters actually listed three of the military captains of king Jehoshaphat of Judah as given in vv. 14-18, namely, Addudani/Addadani = Adna [and Ada-danu mentioned by Shalmaneser III]; son of Zuchru; and Iahzibada = Iehozabad.

The fact that revisionists have since been able to establish such a host of convincing parallels between EA and the Divided Kingdom of Israel is sure proof, I think, of the correctness of Velikovsky’s radical re-setting of the conventional C14th BC era, even though Velikovsky’s actual theses therein have often needed to be modified, or, in some cases, thrown out.

[End of quote]

 

Whilst the accuracy of Velikovsky’s equating of the various captains of King Jehoshaphat with similarly-named EA officials may yet require further critical examination, one cannot but be struck by the singularity in the case of :

 

Son of Zichri (II Chr. 17:16)

Son of Zuchru (EA 334, 335)