Jannes and Jambres: Hyksos Pharaohs of the Fifteenth Dynasty?

by Leolaia 17 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • JCanon
    JCanon

    Hi Leolaia!

    Very interesting. You are very well read and more than capable of putting various research into perspective, so I'll just add this NEW information for you. it would affect precisely when the Exodus was and the pharoah/s ruling at the time.

    Rohl who has is own chronology for Egypt called "New Chronology" (NC) uses an eclipse reference which could be dated to the 12th of Akhenaton. Akhenaton's sudden conversion and focus on monotheism and dismissal of the other gods of Egypt as nothing is very consistent with the trauma he might have experienced during the 10 plagues. Further he was already pegged by early chronologists, such as Sir Isaac Newton as being the traditional pharoah at the time of the Exodus.

    Traditional dating has Akhenaton dated as early as 1379BCE which is the date given in Collins Atlas of the Bible (page 18), which has a timeline chart comparing various areas. At any rate, there isn't a huge chronology issue when you date the 1st of Akhenaton to 1386BCE as his first year, the year his father would have allegedly died in the Red Sea using Critical Biblical Chronology (CBC). This chronology is cross-referenced throughout the Bible, and dates the 1st of Cyrus in 455BCE and the Exodus 19 jubilees prior to that date (19 x 49=931, 931+455BCE=1386BCE). As you can see, again, 1386BCE is very close to 1379BCE.

    ROHL'S ECLIPSE, KTU1.78: What is new is a second look at the interpretation of the KTU1.78 eclipse text which is dated to year 12 of Akhenaton. Rohl interprets this text inadequately, in my opinion, not understanding Egyptian timing or metaphor.

    The text itself is below and perhaps you can weigh in on it based upon your own references:

    btt.ym.hdt.hyr

    ----------------------

    rbt shph tgrh rsp

    There is a line between the two parts of the text.

    btt means "six" or "to shame". Rohl couldn't figure out how "six" or "sixth" was relevant to an eclipse if it referred to the hour of the day, so he prefers "put to shame" and thus translates this as : put to shame-day-new moon-Hiyarru.

    But the Egyptians began their day at Midnight and so 6 as a reference to an eclipse would mean it occurred between 5 and 6 am. Thus a better translation as far as an astronomical text which would give in the first lime the BASIC statistics of an eclipse event, the hour, day and month, etc. would be: 6, day, new moon, Hiyarru, the six being a reference to hour six.

    The next line is also interesting. "rbt" is a reference to "to enter". If somone enters a dwelling it could be said they "go into" as well. But Rohl has taken that alternative parallel to imagine that "go into" means to "go down" as in the sun going down. Thus the last line for him is at the going down of the sun Rashap was her gatekeeper. "Rbt" converted from "to enter" into "sunset" is inadquate to contraindicated when you consider how the text reads with the original wording which would be: entering, sun, her gate, Rashap. The entering of the sun throuh "her gate" is more likely a reference to the Egyptian metaphor of the sun entering the sky in an act of copulation through Hathor's gate, the sun's rays impregnating the sky. Thus entering into Her Gate, would be a reference to sunrise. That's pertinent if the ecilpse occurred at hour 6, between 5 am and 6 am in the morning, thus an eclipse already in progress.

    The reference to Rashap is to the adopted Syrian god of weather and war and is easily understood as a reference to the zodiac sign of Taurus, the bull. In Egyptian documents he is called the "Lord of Heaven" which is exchangeable for "Bull of Heaven" (Bel=bull=Lord), the formal name for Taurus. Of course, you have to be able to confirm this astronomically if this is a zodiac reference which is the format for the second line, the line that gives the zodiac position of the sun at sunrise. The second line simply would relate to the sun rising in Taurus at the time of the eclipse which it would anyway during the month of Hiyyaru.

    Bottom line, you have a rather specific eclipse reference now for year 12 of Akhenaton in 1375BCE where there was a solar eclipse which happened during the 6th hour (5:15am). If we use this eclipse to better-date the rule of Akhenaton's 12th year to year 1375BCE then you'll note his first year falls in 1386BCE, the very year the Bible critically dates the Exodus.

    So in the end, you not only have traditional history associating Akhenaton with the Exodus (Sir Isaac Newton), but you have the Biblical dating of the Exodus in 1386BCE now matching an eclipse-based dating of Akhenaton's first year that very same year. Again of note, even though the 1386BCE dating of the Exodus is based upon revisionist theories for Babylon and Persia, the independent dating of Akhenaton's reign was very close to the original dating anyway, so there would be little revision of the Egyptian timeline in this case, simply moving the Exodus closer to the reign of Akhenaton.

    Because of this, though, the date of the Exodus and the connection with the Egyptian timeline and Akhenaton and his father, Amenhotep III more or less confirms precisely which pharoah was ruling at the time of Moses.

    From this perspective, it would be suggested if Jannes and Jambores were of Hyksos origin that they simply remained attached to the Egyptian courtyard down to the 18th Dynasty where they confronted Moses during the reign of Amenhotep III.

    Because of the Biblical, historical and now astronomic parallels to this part of history, it is not longer considered that optional to have a naming convention or association preempt the timeline at this period, particularly since this is post the Hyksos era, when they could have already had their influence and we're simply seeing continued influence of that now. Thus Jannes and Jambores could be of Hyksos origin but that association would not DATE the Exodus to that earlier period, only reflect their influence was continuing into later times. The Exodus was not during the time of the Hyksos, but specifically at the end of the reign of Amenthop III in 1386BCE, during the co-rulership of his son, Amenhotep IV (Akhenaton). Not only is Akhenaton chronologically the Exodus pharoah along with Amenhotep III, his radical reaction by becoming a montheist is easily understood under the circumstances of experiencing the ten plagues!!!

    YHWH wanted to show that the Egyptian gods were worthless and so challenged them. He won, proving the God's of Egypt were nothing. Didn't somebody in Egypt get that message? Apparently the next pharoah did, since he seeing frist hand these gods of Egypt brought to nothing, declared them so and even later outlawed those gods in Egypt, calling them "worthless".

    Thanks, again, for your references regarding Jannes and Jambores. I see no problem with them being Hyksos in origin as long as you don't presume to use that as a general dating reference, which we know from more direct sources would not be the case.

    If you need further information, please let me know.

    JC

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    It would appear that Albright adjusted his view. Thanks for pointing it out. What about Jambres meaning opposer?

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    About a possible Hebrew derivation for the names Jannes and Jambres, there are postulated Hebrew models but they do not easily fit because the Hebrew forms are so variable. In the case of Jannes, the Greek forms include Iannes in 2 Timothy and Numenius and Ianne in Pliny the Elder. The Targum Yer. I. has ynys, which closely resembles the Greek forms and betrays its Hellenistic origin with -s ending. This strongly suggests that the name was borrowed directly from the Greek. Then there are forms that more closely resemble Hebrew words. The Babylonian Talmud attests ywchn' which strongly resembles ywchnh (Yochanah), except for the final 'aleph. The form in the Dead Sea Scrolls is ychnh (CD 5:17-19), which again resembles ywchnh except this time the /w/ is omitted. These forms appear to assimilate the name to the more familiar Yochanah but do it in different ways. If the name was originally Hebrew and originally Yochanah, why so many forms? On the other hand, the Qumran form with a little metathesis would be a dead ringer for Khyan (e.g. chynh "Chyanah"). As for Jambres/Mambres, the form Iambres is attested in Numenius, 2 Timothy, and the Book of Jannes and Jambres, while Mambres occurs in Quaest. Barth. (L) 2, 4:50 and numerous patristic sources. Rabbinical sources give the form as mmbr' and mmr' (Babylonian Talmud and haggadaic sources). Although mrd "rebel, oppose" and mrh "bitter, rebellious" certainly contributed to the haggadaic interpretation of Mambres, they were not the etymological source of mmbr' and mmr' since the last consonant is 'aleph, and not [h] or [d]; moreover they do not explain the doubled [m]. The situation is thus similar to the Jewish folk etymology for nmrd "Nimrod" which is actually not of Hebrew origin and such derivation fails to explain the initial consonant. The name (in both forms) however is identical to mmr' "Mamre" which is rendered as Mambre in the LXX (cf. Genesis 13:18). But this name is not Hebrew, of unknown origin, and occurs only as a toponym (cf. Genesis 13:18; 23:17, 19; 25:9; 49:30; 50:13), except in one instance as an Amorite name and in this instance a clear doublet of the Abraham toponym tradition (Genesis 14:13). Since the name is unknown as an Israelite or Jewish name, with no Hebrew etymon, its use in the Moses tradition is explainable as either (1) the direct recruitment of Mamre from the Abraham cycle into the Exodus traditions, or (2) an origin as a foreign word that was identified with "Mamre" because of phonetic resemblance. It is hard to imagine the circumstances that would have led to (1), since Mamre was a highly venerated holy site in Judea and the vague personification of Mamre as an Amorite warrior in Genesis 14:13 is entirely positive, casting him as a loyal partner of Abraham. However, if the name had a foreign origin but closely resembled Mamre, the pre-existing and more familiar name could have had an influence on the phonetic form. The throne name of Sheshi, m'ybr' "Maaybre", is one name that resembles mmbr'. If Mambres had an Egyptian Greek origin, and entered Hellenistic Jewish tradition under the influence of LXX Mambre, that would explain why we find both mmbr' and mmr' in Hebrew, with the former containing a vestige of the name's Greek origin.

    For all I know, I could be wrong (enthusiastic amateur that I am), but all I was basically pointing out was the interesting coincidence of the Hyksos Sixteenth Dynasty, which Manetho and Josephus both connected with the Israelites (whether incorrectly or not), that two of the kings related by descent to a pharaoh named Jacob, bore names strikingly similar to Jannes and Mambres.

  • funkyderek
    funkyderek

    It's interesting that Paul mentioned Jannes and Jambres just a few verses before making the claim that "all scripture is inspired of God". Presumably he was including whatever writings refer to these two men in his definition of scripture

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    funkyderek....Do you like irony? It was the explicit use of an apocryphal text in 2 Timothy that led some to dispute 2 Timothy as genuine scripture. Origen (early III cent.) wrote:

    Paul's statement, "As Jannes and Mambres withstood Moses" is not found in the public scriptures, but in a secret book entitled the Book of Jannes and Mambres. For this reason some reject (repellere) this Epistle to Timothy, just as [they reject] the secret text itself." (Origen, in Matth. ser. 117)

    Curious too how the Pastorals condemn "Jewish myths" (Titus 1:14), "myths and endless genealogies" (1 Timothy 1:4), and "old women's myths" (1 Timothy 4:7), yet 2 Timothy explicitly refers to a Jewish legend otherwise unknown in the OT.

  • *lost*
    *lost*

    bumped

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    Lost

    You must be inebriated, the way you are bumping into everything;) You'll have a sore head, tomorrow.

    S

  • Witness My Fury
    Witness My Fury

    Lars didnt sound 'quite' so schizophrenic in 2001.

    Leo is missed for sure.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit