Sunday, July 15, 2012

The connection between St Elijah and the Carmelites


 
In Rome, in the Basilica of St. Peter, we find statues of the founders of many Religious Orders. Under the statue of Elijah we read: “The entire Carmelite Order erected [this statue] to it’s founder”.

Elijah is not the founder of the Order in a historical sense. However in the biblical story of Elijah we find all the foundation stones on which the Traditions and Spirit of Carmel are built. He is the prophet of prayer and the true worship of God. He is single minded in his “zeal” for God. He is sent by God to do God’s work. He must depend upon God for everything. He experiences God in stillness and silence. In the new testament story of the transfiguration Elijah is a witness before all of us to the true identity of Jesus. Carmelites from the beginning have felt called to live in the “spirit and power” of Elijah.

....

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Sirach Praises Prophet Elisha [Eliseus]



Sirach Chapter 48

....

12 Elias it was, who was covered with a whirlwind: and Eliseus was filled with his spirit: whilst he lived, he was not moved with the presence of any prince, neither could any bring him into subjection.

13 No word could overcome him; and after his death his body prophesied.

14 He did wonders in his life, and at his death were his works marvellous.

15 For all this the people repented not, neither departed they from their sins, till they were spoiled and carried out of their land, and were scattered through all the earth: yet there remained a small people, and a ruler in the house of David:

16 Of whom some did that which was pleasing to God, and some multiplied sins.

....


Monday, June 18, 2012

Story of Naboth's Vineyard Perceivable in Shakespeare's Macbeth



Taken from: http://home.ptd.net/~msteen/benintende_macbeth.htm

....

Shakespeare's primary source of inspiration for Macbeth came from Holinshed's Chronicles; however, he altered history and many aspects of the story fictionalized to gain the interest and favor of King James. Shakespeare's secondary source, inspiring many details of the tragedy, was the Christian Bible. Adding an interesting human element to Macbeth was the interaction between Macbeth and his wife, Lady Macbeth. Despite, and perhaps because of his genius, Shakespeare did not create his characters and their interactions without drawing from an outside source, notably the Bible. One of the similarities between these works can be traced from Macbeth and his �fiendlike� lady back to Ahab and Jezebel. In the book of Kings, Ahab desires the vineyard of Naboth. At the urging of his wife, Jezebel, the two frame Naboth, having him stoned to death in order to seize his lands. In comparison, Macbeth desires the throne of Scotland. Just as Jezebel urged Ahab, Lady Macbeth schemes and encourages a treasonous plot to allow her husband to assume the power he craves (Burgess 87-88). Following the acquisition of their desired ends, (Ahab�s vineyards of Naboth, and Macbeth�s crown of Scotland), both men are haunted by similar prophetic truths. The Lord told Elijah to warn Ahab that �In the place where dogs licked the blood of Naboth shall dogs lick thy blood� The dogs shall eat Jezebel by the wall of Jezreel�(1 Kings 22:19, 23). Macbeth realizes himself that ��blood will have blood./Stones have been known to speak./Augurs and understood relations have�/Brought forth�The secret�st man of blood� (3.4.125). Both men are doomed to pay for their misdeeds from the time they are committed, and they realize their eventual demise. Ahab is killed and left for �the dogs� as Naboth was, and Macbeth is aware that the murders of Duncan and Banquo will only lead to more bloodshed, ending with his own. In the action following both stories remain true to the foreshadowing. Ahab is betrayed in battle, and Macbeth is murdered by his own Scotsmen. As Jezebel, once a strong female figure, was hurled from her chamber window; Lady Macbeth who also began her story as a strong influence over Macbeth ends her own life by hurling herself from a window (Burgess 90).
 ....


Saturday, June 16, 2012

The Fiery Prophet Elijah



Sirach 48


Elijah

1 Then there arose the fiery prophet Elijah, whose words blazed like a torch.2 He brought a famine on the people, and many of them died because of his persistence.3 Speaking in the name of the Lord, he kept the rain from coming, and on three occasions he called down fire.4 Elijah, your miracles were marvelous! No one else can boast of such deeds!5 In the name of the Most High, you brought a dead man back to life.6 You brought a famous king down to sickness and death.7 At Sinai you heard the Lord rebuke you and declare his determination to punish his enemies.8 You anointed a king to be the instrument of that punishment, and a prophet to take your place.9 You were taken up to heaven in a fiery whirlwind, a chariot drawn by fiery horses.10 The scripture says that you are ready to appear at the designated time,[a] to cool God's anger before it breaks out in fury; that you
will bring parents and children together again, and restore the tribes of Israel.11 Fortunate are those who live to see you come, as well as those who have already died in love, for we too shall live.[b]

Elisha

12 When Elijah was hidden by the whirlwind, Elisha was filled with his spirit. As long as he lived, he was not afraid of rulers, and they could not make him do as they wished.13 Nothing was too hard for him. Even when he was dead, his body worked a miracle.14 In life and in death he performed amazing miracles.
15 But in spite of all this, the people did not abandon their sinful ways until they were taken from their land as prisoners and scattered all over the world. This left the nation few in number, but those who remained were still ruled by the descendants of David.16 Some of the people did what was pleasing to the Lord, but others committed sin after sin.

....


Wednesday, May 23, 2012

El Amarna [Akhetaten]


 

by

Jimmy Dunn



What we call Amarna, or el-Amarna today was the city of Akhetaten (The Horizon of the Aten). It was created by Egypt's heretic king, Akhenaten for his revolutionary religion that worshiped Aten during the Amarna Period.

The ancient capital of Akhetaten lies some 365 miles south of Cairo in a natural amphitheater between inhospitable cliffs. This narrow opening exists for some twelve kilometers along the Nile River and has a half rounded depth of about five kilometers.

This is the place where, in about the fifth year of the king's reign, we are told that by divine inspiration, Akhenaten build his capital.

The History of Discovery

The site was unknown to the European travelers other than its name, which was a village called Et Til el-Amarna. Early visitors misunderstood its name, so it became to be known as Tell el-Amarna, though there are not a single tell, or great mound marking the ancient site.

Even though John Gardner Wilkinson initially investigated the site in 1824, and soon returned with James Burton to further examine the tombs located at el-Amarna, they had at that time no idea of the its significance. It was only during this general time frame that Champollion made his initial discoveries on Egyptian writing, and so the two early explorers were unable to read the names and inscriptions they encountered on this expedition. In fact, they identified the site as Roman Alabastronopolis from a nearby alabaster quarry.


A Robert Hay drawing of one of the Boundary  Stela


Later, Robert Hay investigated the site not only examining all the open tombs, but clearing others from beneath extensive drifts of sand. However, as was the work of Wilkinson and Burton before him, was never published. Others would also come to el-Amarna, and would also fell to publish their work, though most of their efforts are available in various museums today.

Nevertheless, due to the unique decorations in the tombs at el-Amarna, many showing the activities of the royal family not in the formal attitudes of worship repeated so often in other tombs, but in intimate and vivid detail as human beings engaged in everyday domestic affairs, scholars continued to visit the site. There was also a prevailing mystery. In fact, because of the depictions that we know understand represent Akhenaten and Nefertiti, these early explorers wondered whether this was not the home of two queens, because of the almost feminine physique of the king.

Even as the ability to read hieroglyphics spread amongst the early Egyptologists, discovering the nature of this site remained elusive. So thoroughly had the ancient Egyptians, aided afterwards by the early Christians, destroyed this place that it was not easy to find an intact cartouche bearing the name of the king or queen for whom it was built. Even when they did find cartouches, they were larger than those of other pharaohs, and surrounded by a double border. Furthermore, the signs within these were complex and difficult to interpret, but were evidently the same as those which accompanied a representation of the Sun god, Re-Horakhty found on a few monuments elsewhere.

It was finally Richard Lepsius, a disciple of Champollion and doubtless the foremost Egyptologists of his day, who came to el-Amarna to record inscriptions and take paper squeezes of the reliefs and afterwards, publish his work. This work allowed scholars to finally make advances in their understanding of the city and its king, who they initially read as Khuenaten. Now, more than a century of study has given us this king's correct name, Akhenaten, as well as revealing many of the mysteries that once surrounded the site.

The General Area


The plan of the area of el-Amarna
The plan of the area of el-Amarna


Located on the eastern side of the Nile River, El-Amarna, like all other ancient Egyptian capitals, was made up of temples, government establishments, utilitarian facilities such as grain silos and bakeries, palaces and common mudbrick homes, several necropolises, as well as a number of zoos, gardens and other public buildings. In fact, the scope of this city is somewhat amazing if one considers that it was founded in about 1350 BC [AMAIC: we would date this some 500 years later] and abandoned only some twenty years later. The population of the city has been estimated to have been between twenty and fifty thousand inhabitants.

The area of the city and its surrounding property was fixed by copies of decrees carved on fourteen tablets embedded in the cliffs on either side of the river. Hence, these stone slabs are known by Egyptologists as boundary stelae. They not only encompass the city itself, but also fields and villages on the west bank. The most impressive of these today is Stela U, which measures about 7.6 meters from top to bottom and occupies almost the entire height of the cliff in a little bay to the north of the entrance to the Royal Wadi. At the base of this Stela on both sides are the remains of a group of carved statues of the Royal Family.


El Amarna


These stelae give a vivid account of the king's selection and dedication of the site for his capital, following instructions from his father Aten when he illuminated a certain spot on the desert at sunrise. Much of the western side of the area, including houses, harbors and the main palace of the king, was obscured under the modern cultivation. However, there are a large number of structures that have been preserved in the desert to the east, and in general, most of the layout is discernable from foundations.

The area is divided into suburbs, with the so-called "central city" housing the Royal Palace and The Great Temple (The Per-Aten), as well as various buildings archaeologists have labeled official (police, taxes...). It is here in one such building, the 'records office', that the Amarna Letters were found by a peasant woman. This area of Amarna was completely excavated in the 1930s. The other residential areas consist of the North City or Suburb, the Main or South City, and the worker's village.

The central City was apparently carefully planned, while the other residential zones where not. In these other areas, the spaces between the earliest large houses was gradually filled up with smaller clusters of homes.

The Central City

Prospective of the Central City


There was an ancient road that led in from the north to the Central City, which took an identical path to the modern road of today. It is the central city that the scenes in the North Tombs depict, though the layout of this part of the area requires time and patience to follow now due to decay. Within a generation of Akhenaten's reign, most of the building material was removed, leaving mud brickwork that is now mostly gone.

The chronology of the buildings here can be fairly well determined. The Chapel in the Great Temple and the royal estate were built first, followed closely between year six and nine by the temenos wall of the Great Temple and its sanctuary, replacing the earlier chapel. The palace was begun but never completed.

The main street here is the Royal Road which is a modern name. It comes from the south and passes through the old South City moving into the Central City between the official palace and the royal estate, where it is spanned by a bridge and broadens into a square in front of the entrance facade of the Great Temple. To the east runs the West Road, continuing the High Priest Street of the South City and passing by the Records Office and stopping at the temple magazines.


Layout of  the Central City
Layout of the Central City


The city was dissected by two east-west streets that met the West road. The southern one stretches between the king's house and the small temple and then the records office and the clerks' houses to the south and reaches the army headquarters. The second street passes to the north of the royal estate along the southern side of the magazines. This entire district was deserted in the third year of Tutankhamun's reign.

The Temples

Here, we find the Great Aten Temple as well the Small Aten Temple. Temples at Amarna are considerably different then most cult temples of ancient Egypt. They were, of course, solar temples, with the essential elements consisting of a small obelisk on a high base and an altar. Though solar temples had been built during the Old Kingdom, the worship of the Aten did not require the equipment and architectural elements found in these older establishments, with the exception of the altar. There was no need for a naos because there is no deity to be sheltered.

However, some temple elements are essential. These attributes include a general rectangular plan enclosed within a tremenos wall which is symmetrically about a longitudinal axis and orientation with the facade facing the west. There are also the pylons as entrance fronts to courts together with a circuitous entrance to conceal the interior from the eyes of the uninitiated. There must also be a slaughter court, the altar and trees flanking the entrance approach. Most of these features, which had been characteristic of Egyptian Temples since Archaic Period, could not easily be absent even at Amarna.

The most basic element of an Aten temple is the altar, to which a ramp or stairway ascends from the west in the middle of the court, surrounded by a temenos wall. The altar platform could occasionally be surrounded by a wall and fronted with a porch. Some also could be abutted by four ramps oriented toward the cardinal points. The altar was usually surrounded by rows of offering tables. The court housing the altar could also be preceded by another court or more.



A recreated view of the sanctuary of the Great  Aten Temple


The Great Temple of the Aten

The Great Aten Temple is on the northern edge of the Central City. It is partly covered over by the modern cemetery of el-Till. The enclosure wall for this temple extended back from the modern road for some 750 meters, and is now represented by a low, straight ridge. Within, the sanctuary was very similar to that in the Small Aten Temple and is marked by a group of isolated rubble heaps near the back.

Bakeries

There is a long, low mound to the south of the temple running east-west with visible broken pottery. This pottery is actually broken bread moulds, and the line marks the site of the central bakeries.

The Bridge

At the end of this ridge is the massive foundations for a bridge that crossed the so called Royal Road in front of the King's House by means of brick piers. There remains some ancient timbers that once bound the brickwork together. On the far side of the road was the Great Palace, consisting of a complex of courts and halls of which only foundations remain.

The Small Temple of the Aten

In recent years, some consolidation and restoration has been carried out at the Small Aten Temple. This included the erection of a replica column. A prominent brick enclosure wall also remains, which was once strengthened by towers on the outside. There are brick pylons at the entrance, and others which subdivided the interior of this building. In the back of the temple stood the sanctuary originally built of limestone and sandstone.

This temple had a foundation layer of gypsum that is now covered over by sand. However, modern stone blocks have been laid atop the sand in order to provide the basic outlines of this temple.

A circular walk beginning at the middle of the north side of this small temple's enclosure wall reveals other parts of the Central City. There is a tall ridge of sand and some rubble that runs northward from across the street through the middle of a small palace built of mud brick. Known as the King's House, it probably accommodated the Royal Family on their visits from their North Palace. Behind the King's House and the Small Aten Temple (further from the Nile River) were a group of government buildings built of mud brick. This is actually where the famous Amarna Letters were discovered by a peasant lady in 1888.

The Main City Sometimes Known as the South Suburb


A view into the ruins of the house of Nakht


Southwards from the Small Aten Temple is The Main City, which was the principal residential area of the ancient city that ran south to the vicinity of the modern village of el-Hagg Qandil. It was the part of the city occupied by the most important people (other than the king), including the vizier Nakht, the high priest Panehsy, the priest Pawah, General Ramose, the architect Manekhtawitf and the sculptor Tuthmosis (Thutmose). Probably connected to this quarter was a river temple, still in use under Ramesses III and even later through perhaps the 26th Dynasty.

It was probably laid out just after the Central City. There is a platform here built in order to allow visitors to view the interior of one of the private houses which has been cleared and repaired in recent years. Though probably a senior official, the owner of the house is unknown. Here, there are also the ruins of grain silos.

Further south, roughly half way between el-Hagg Qandil and the desert edge of the site on the edge of the Main City, the famous bust of Nefertiti was discovered in Thutmose's workshop.

Elsewhere the city has grown up, as cities will, in an irregular haphazard way, as citizens erected buildings where they felt it was convenient. Some suggest Akhenaten lacked the resources to control the rapid growth of his new city and regulate its plan (other Egyptian cities are much more carefully laid out).

North Suburb

The North Suburb is separated from the Central City by a depression. It was apparently dominantly inhabited by essentially a middle-class including a strong mercantile component. It was not begun until the middle of Akhenaten's reign and was abruptly abandoned, apparently at the end of his reign. Afterwards, apparently the houses were re-inhabited by those who could not afford to travel back to Thebes after the end of the Amarna Period.

There were large estates built here initially between the West and East roads, and subsequently middle class houses and slums which apparently even blocked the streets were added.

The North Palace (Palace of Nefertiti)


Still further north is the North Palace that the locals call "The Palace of Nefertiti" (Kasr Nefertiti). This was a self contained residence built along three sides of a long open space, which itself was divided by a wall and pylon. The residential part had gardens and reception rooms with columns along its rear. In the northeast corner is the most famous part of this residence, consisting of a garden court. A central chamber on the north side, known as the "Green Room", was painted with a continuous frieze representing the natural life of the marshes. Each room has a window from which the sunk central garden could be viewed. In recent years, the walls have been somewhat restored and some of the missing column bases have been replaced with modern replicas. There were animal pens further to the west on the north side and also a court containing three solar altars, of which nothing now exits but their foundations. This palace was probably originally built for one of Akhenaten's major queens, but was later converted for use by Princess Meritaten.

The North City



A model of  an Amarna Estate

Farther to the north where the cultivation ends at the cliffs there is also a North City, which was a separate residential area that served a major palace known as the North Riverside Palace. The palace itself is located just north of the residential area. This was probably the main residence for Akhenaten's family. Most of this is now gone, but there is a length of a massive brick enclosure wall pierced by a huge gateway at the palace.

The Desert Altars


On the road to the North Tombs, one passes a watchmen's house, and a short distance to the west and north of this lie the remains of three large mud-brick solar altars in the form of square platforms with ramps that are known as the Desert Altars. The northernmost of these had four ramps of well-rammed sand and probably an altar in the center.

The Necropolises

The necropolis consists of more than twenty-five tombs facing the base of the cliff front that is located on the east side of the desert plain, which reaches a height of about eighty-five meters and south of the Royal Wadi Six tombs are located at the north side near Darb El-Malik and known as the North Tombs. These were probably tombs owned by fairly high officials, while nineteen more tombs are located in the south and known as the South Tombs. These southern tombs were owned by a mix of officials.

These tombs are built to be highly complicated to ensure that they are protected from thieves. Most of them start with an open court that leads to three chambers. Within these chambers there are papyrus columns that meet in the rear end. There a statue of the dead would have been placed looking toward the entrance.

The North Tombs were once encroached upon by an ancient Coptic Christian settlement, and groups of little stone huts on the hillside below the tombs belong to these people, who converted tomb number six into a Church. From these tombs, there is an excellent view of the valley below.

The South Tombs are the larger of the two groups of tombs. They are cut into the flanks of a low plateau in front of a major break in the cliffs, where the rock is of poor quality. However, here one finds tomb number 25 which was built for the "God's Father", Ay, who would later become pharaoh. Though often not as imposing as the tombs in the north, they do have their charm, as well as more variety. On the other hand, many of the South Tombs contain little or no decoration and some had barely been started before the city was abandoned. Some of these tombs were also used for later burials, and amongst them are pot shards mostly dating from between the 25th and 30th Dynasty.

The Workers (or Eastern) Village


To the east in a little valley on the south side of a low plateau that runs out from the base of the cliffs between the Royal Wadi and the southern tombs there is an interesting settlement dubbed "the workmen's village". It is a walled enclosure of very regular houses along several parallel streets. Archaeologists believed it housed workers working on the rock tombs nearby (which, incidentally, though built for the royalty and courtiers, were mostly never occupied). However, this walled town had a guard house at the only exit, and it seems more likely to have been to keep the workers in than anything out (the main city was protected by no such wall, for the whole site, including the workmen's village, is enclosed by high cliffs).

The Royal Tomb


The Royal Tomb built for Akhenaten lies in a narrow side valley leading off of the Royal Wadi some six kilometers form its mouth. Its basic design and proportions are not unlike those of the royal tombs in the Valley of the Kings on the West Bank at Thebes (modern Luxor). However, it was intended for several people, including the king, a princes and probably Queen Tiy so there are additional burial chambers. There is also an unfinished annex that may have been intended for Nefertiti. Here, the quality of the rock is poor, and so the decorations of the tomb were cut into a thin layer of gypsum plaster. Hence, most of the decorations have not survived and most of what is left is in the chambers of princess Meketaten.

Other Ruins

At Kom el-Nana, south of the main city and east of the modern village of el-Hagg Qandil is an enclosure thought to have surrounded another of Akhenaten's sun temples. Recent excavations have revealed brick ceremonial buildings and the foundations of two stone shrines. The northern side was occupied by a Christian monastery during the 5th and 6th centuries, AD. There is also far south of the city an unusual cult center known as the Maru-Aten. While it has completely disappeared under the cultivated land, this appears to have been a special function cult structure. Amarna is unique in Egypt. Even cities built up by foreign rulers did not suffer its fate. It was established most probably from scratch, and appears to have been completely abandoned a short time after Akhenaten's death. Today, considerable research continues at this location that should eventually uncover more of the secrets of the most interesting pharaoh's reign.

References:


TitleAuthorDatePublisherReference Number
Akhenaten: King of EgyptAldred, Cyril1988Thames and Hudson LtdISBN 0-500-27621-8
Amarna LettersForbes, Dennis C.1991KMT CommunicationsISBN 1-879388-03-0
Art and History of EgyptCarpiceci, Alberto Carlo2001BonechiISBN 88-8029-086-x
Chronicle of the Pharaohs (The Reign-By-Reign Record of the Rulers and Dynasties of Ancient Egypt)Clayton, Peter A.1994Thames and Hudson LtdISBN 0-500-05074-0
Conceptions of God in Ancient Egypt: The One and the ManyHornung, Erik1971Cornell University PressISBN 0-8014-8384-0
Dictionary of Ancient Egypt, TheShaw, Ian; Nicholson, Paul1995Harry N. Abrams, Inc., PublishersISBN 0-8109-3225-3
Dictionary of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses, AHart, George1986RoutledgeISBN 0-415-05909-7
Egyptian ReligionMorenz, Siegfried1973Cornell University PressISBN 0-8014-8029-9
Egyptian Treasures from the Egyptian Museum in CairoTiradritti, Francesco, Editor1999Harry N. Abrams, Inc.ISBN 0-8109-3276-8
History of Ancient Egypt, AGrimal, Nicolas1988BlackwellNone Stated
Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, TheShaw, Ian2000Oxford University PressISBN 0-19-815034-2
Private Lives of the Pharaohs, TheTyldesley, Joyce2000TV Books, L.L.C.ISBN 1-57500-154-3
Thebes in Egypt: A Guide to the Tombs and Temples of Ancient LuxorStrudwick, Nigel & Helen1999Cornell University PressISBN 0 8014 8616 5
Tutankhamun (His Tomb and Its Treasures)Edwards, I. E. S.1977Metropolitan Museum of Art; Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.ISBN 0-394-41170-6

....


Taken from: http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/amarna.htm

Thursday, April 12, 2012

Distancing Oneself from Velikovsky


In answer to a reader's comment on Velikovsky:

.... I think [Velikovsky] is appreciated because he thought of the idea of re-jigging the Egyptian chronology but seems to be rather crazy overall. Sounds as though these fellows are wise to distance themselves from him. ....

I wrote:
Distancing Oneself

from Velikovsky

by 
 
Damien F. Mackey
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------
…. the point of this little article is that revisionists, even if now they have adopted quite a different system, owe their beginning to Immanuel Velikovsky. For whatever reason, God allowed him, and him only, a man who may not even have believed in God, to be the one to determine that 18th dynasty Egyptian history needed to be brought down the time scale by a multiplicity of centuries.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Let us get one thing very clear. The revision of ancient history as pursued by groups such as the Society for Interdisciplinary Studies (UK) and Catastrophism and Ancient History (Los Angeles, CA), and now by many other individuals and groups using various forms of social media, would never have seen the light of day but for the efforts of Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky, a Russian Jew. Even Dr. Courville’s worthy early effort, The Exodus Problem and its Ramifications, I & II (Loma Linda Ca, 1971), though largely an original contribution, based itself on Velikovsky’s important 500-year shift of the 18th Egyptian dynasty to the time of the kingdom of Israel (Saul, David and Solomon).
Here I am interested only in Velikovsky’s historical revision, not his scientific interpretations, which involve some dramatic planetary catastrophism supposedly affecting the biblical Exodus and the destruction of Sennacherib’s Assyrian army of 185,000. These, which I do not personally favour, make for some terrific reading, nevertheless, and would be exciting movie viewing.
Whilst some still follow Velikovsky slavishly, both his history and his science, it was the UK branch, including some very talented individuals, who, as early as the late 70’s, tended to watch critically his historical outputs, finally rebelling outright - as well they should, I think - when confronted with his location of the 19th Egyptian (Ramesside) dynasty: Ramses II and His Time and Peoples of the Sea.
But it needs to be noted that, until that time, the UK revisionists were ‘Velikovskian’ in their acceptance of the important 500-year downward shift of Egyptian history, with the talented ‘Glasgow School’ slightly modifying Velikovsky (as we shall read) and bringing the revision to something of a peak. From that happy moment in time it has generally been a free-fall down the mountain.
So the point of this little article is that revisionists, even if now they have adopted quite a different system, owe their beginning to Immanuel Velikovsky. For whatever reason, God allowed him, and him only, a man who may not even have believed in God, to be the one to determine that 18th dynasty Egyptian history needed to be brought down the time scale by a multiplicity of centuries.
But the UK (in particular) revisionists, aware that Velikovsky was regarded with contempt by the conventional scholars, whose system they themselves were completely undermining - though perhaps also seeking some academic respectability - and aware that Velikovsky’s latter phase revision, e.g. the 19th dynasty of Egypt, was archaeologically untenable (though loyal Velikovskians have clung to it), sought to distance themselves from Velikovsky completely, they hardly at all, or at least very scarcely, even mentioning him in their later books and publications. And when they did mention him, they laughed him off as a “wayward polymath”, or “maverick”. Now, whilst these epithets can be appropriate in the right context, they are mean and miserable when revisionists fail to admit their owing a debt to Velikovsky.
The most arrogant example of this, which is not only unjust to Velikovsky but which demeans all those others who have put a lot of effort into a revision of ancient history - as well as the writings of ‘Creationists’ - was this piece in the flyleaf introducing David Rohl’s The Lost Testament (Century, 2002) as if the revision recognizing the over-extension of chronology by modern researchers had begun with him in 1995 (forgetting Velikovsky’s beginnings in the 1940’s):
The earliest part of the bible is recognised as the foundation-stone of three great religions – Judaism, Christianity and Islam – yet over the last century archaeologists and historians have signally failed to find any evidence to confirm the events described in the ‘book of books’. As a consequence, many scholars took the view that the Old Testament was little more than a work or fiction. The testimony of biblical history had, in effect, been lost.
Then, in 1995, this scholarly skepticism over the historicity of the Bible was suddenly challenged when Egyptologist and historian, David Rohl, burst onto the scene with a new theory. He suggested that modern researchers had constructed an artificially long chronology for the ancient world - a false time-line which had dislocated the Old Testament events from their real historical setting. The alternative ‘New Chronology’ - first published in A Test of Time: The Bible From Myth to History - created a world-wide sensation and was fiercely resisted by the more conservative elements within academia. Seven years on, however, the chronological reconstruction has developed apace and numerous new discoveries have been made.
Now, in his new book, The Lost Testament, David Rohl reveals the entire story of the Children of Yahweh - set in its true historical context. An astounding number of references in the literature of neighbouring civilizations are shown to synchronise with the Old Testament accounts, confirming events which had previously been dismissed as mythical. In addition, this contemporary literature - combined with the archaeological record - reveals new information and new stories about personalities such as Enoch, Noah, Nimrod, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, Sau1, David and Solomon.
The Bible has at last been recovered from the ruins of the ancient past as the ‘when’, ‘where’ and ‘who’ are explained - throwing unforeseen and fascinating new light on the world's most treasured book.
[End of quote]
Rohl was one of those more talented and qualified UK revisionists, along with Dr. John Bimson and Peter James, the latter two being an integral part of the ‘Glasgow School’ which included Martin Sieff. Rohl is a brilliant presenter and good writer and his books are sumptuously and colourfully presented. And I strongly recommend his account of Nimrod in Chapter Four of The Lost Testament. And I also recommend, for its work of exposing the conventional chronology and archaeology, but not for its rebuilding efforts, Peter James’s (et al.) Centuries of Darkness, which has become something of a classic. But I personally believe that the so-called ‘New Chronology’ of Rohl, somewhat similar to James’s, which has come to dominate the revision, lying halfway between convention and Velikovsky, fails at virtually every point despite the optimistic advertisements. It is far inferior to Courville’s and Sieff’s respective revisions, with Sieff tending to persevere with the promising ‘Glasgow’ line, but with modifications of his own.
Sieff, in fact, adopted the perfect approach to Velikovsky, by building upon his solid foundations, but also, in the best ‘Glasgow’ fashion, modifying where there were problems, and rejecting outright Velikovsky’s glaring mistakes. He even wrote by far the best account of the psychology of Velikovsky (who was a psychiatrist), the fascinating “Velikovsky and His Heroes” (SIS Review, vol. v, no. 4, 1980/81, pp. 112-120).
I, in my 1993 university thesis,
A Revised History of the Era of King Hezekiah of Judah and its Background
(accessible at: http://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/handle/2123/5973)
once again paid my dues to this amazing and enigmatic scholar, Velikovsky, right at the beginning in my Preface (but in many other places as well).
‘You are the glory of Jerusalem!
You are the great pride of Israel!
You are the highest honour of our race!’
(Judith 15:9)
Preface
This thesis, as it stands, would most definitely never have seen the light of day had it not been for my having come across, in the early 1980’s, the revised historical systems of Drs. Immanuel Velikovsky and Donovan Courville (published between the early 1950’s to 1970’s), with their proposed radical lowering of the important 18th Egyptian dynasty by 500 years on the time scale, and their subsequent stratigraphical realignments. After that, the work was continued in the U.S. and Canada with some genuine developments, and certain necessary modifications, by the contributors to Pensée, founded by David Talbott - a journal important for, amongst other things, its scholarly treatment of Sothic dating, including specialized pieces by Velikovsky - and Kronos, edited by Professor Lewis M. Greenberg, and spanning thirteen years (1975-1988), with its highly important contributions towards bringing art history into a proper perspective. The Associate Editor of Kronos, Ev Cochrane, would go on (since 1988) to publish the important journal Aeon, still functioning today, with its relevant publications in history, comparative mythology, and archaeoastronomy; whilst Dwardu Cardona, the founder of the Canadian Society for Interdisciplinary Studies, would become Aeon’s senior editor. The Los Angeles based journal of the later 1970’s and early 1980’s, Catastrophism & Ancient History, edited by Marvin Luckerman, featured some useful and wide-ranging contributions - particularly of an historical nature - from both the U.S. and the U.K.
In the U.K, the Velikovskian-based (initially, at least) revision was championed especially by the Society for Interdisciplinary Studies, particularly by what became known as the ‘Glasgow School’, in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s, some of whose modifications of Velikovsky I think have been highly impressive.
There have also arisen, in the more recent decades, certain fine individual contributions of a multidisciplinary (or transdisciplinary) nature from members of some of the abovementioned journals and/or schools, who may have decided to branch out on their own and develop their idiosyncratic systems of revision.
Overall, I have endeavoured to take into account what I consider to be the best and most historically plausible contributions of this growing body of scholarship, always with due acknowledgement, and to synthesise these, as far as possible, into a coherent whole: historical, stratigraphical (including art history) and archaeo-astronomical.
Apart from the absolute chronological factor of the Velikovskian (taken up by Courville) downward shift in time of 500 years, as referred to above, there is another more specific aspect of Velikovsky’s revision upon which I shall be most heavily dependent throughout chiefly VOLUME ONE of this thesis, A Revised History of the Era of King Hezekiah of Judah and its Background. I refer to Velikovsky’s identification - one formerly approved and supported by competent revisionists from the ‘Glasgow School’ - of two successive ‘Amorite’ kings in the el-Amarna correspondence (conventionally dated to the C14th BC) with successive ‘Syrian’ (biblical) kings of the C9th BC: namely, Velikovsky’s identification of el-Amarna’s Abdi-ashirta and Aziru, with, respectively, Ben-Hadad [I] and Hazael.
Whilst, on the one hand, fully embracing this particular cross-identification by Velikovsky of these two ‘Syrian’ kings (i.e. their el-Amarna and C9th BC alter egos) - with the added support of the ‘Glasgow School’ - I shall, however, also be significantly expanding them:
(i) by tracing their origins back to foreign immigrants (‘Indo-Europeans’) to the region, and
(ii) by even further multi-identifying them.
It will in fact be owing to the results obtained from my filling out of these two kings that I shall be able to, as I see it, propose a solution to ‘The Assuruballit Problem’: that is, the historical bottleneck that has arisen, particularly in neo-Assyrian chronology, due to Velikovsky’s re-locating of el-Amarna’s “king of Assyria”, Assuruballit, to the precise time of the mid-C9th BC king of Assyria, Shalmaneser III. But these two ‘Syrian’ kings will be, despite their major importance in the context of any Velikovskian-based revision, serving in this thesis mainly as a firm and well-established starting-point for my attempted reconstruction of the background to the era of Hezekiah. ….

[End of quote]


The bottom line?
Out of a sense of justice - give credit where credit is due.

Easter 2012 (“He is risen!”)



Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Elijah and Elisha: Polemics against Baal

Prophet Elijah
 

Taken from:



....

In her outstanding comparison of the canonical Elijah/Elisha texts and the ANE Baal texts, Leah Bronner makes the point that the Elijah/Elisha stories are polemics against Baal and his minions. Here is a summary in her own words. “The writer of these episodes about the lives of these prophets wrote them as deliberate polemics against Canaanite mythology, as we can now appreciate by comparing them to Ugaritic literature. Throughout the narrative polemical parallelism is evident. The author by telling these tales aimed to make it clear to his contemporaries that everything the pagans might expect from Baal is in reality a gift of the God of Israel. They are a protest against paganism as represented by the Baal cult.” In this Brill monograph, Bronner translates and discusses Ugarit Baal literature, and notices how close the language is to some biblical phrases and images. For example, in these texts, Baal is the one who “gives life,” who “drives out sickness,” who is the “rider of the clouds” and the “prince of life.” He makes the heavens rain oil so that people know that he exists, that “the Prince of the Lord of the Earth exists.” To repeat the above, Bronner says the writer of the Elijah/Elisha stories utilizes this same language (and action) to show that Baal is no god at all. This proves Yahweh is the only true God. Though this book is very difficult to find (and costly!), it is a valuable assistant for studying/preaching the Elijah/Elisha narratives. Above quotes taken from Leah Bronner, The Stories of Elijah and Elisha as Polemics Against Baal Worship (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1968).