Archaeologica.org

apart from his name

That's exactly what I meant. We've already decided that the "deeds" are horseshit.

Well, not exactly 'horse shit'.

They're constructed the way they are very deliberately and for a reason.

But the main point about Ahmose is that he was a big persecutor of the Hyksos (Canannites). Others in his line before him had persecuted them, but no-one had actually managed to get rid of them before him.

So surely they wouldn't want to him as their national hero. If anything, in the myth, he would play the antagonist's role. He would be the Pharaoh going under the waves in the Reed Sea.

There are multiple destruction layers at Troy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy_VII

The city was built following the destruction of Troy VIh, probably by an earthquake, in about 1300 BC. Its oldest part, Troy VIIa, lasted for about a century, with a destruction layer at ca. 1190 BC, which is most often associated with the legendary Trojan War. Troy VIIa is speculated to correspond to Assuwan Wilusa known from Hittite sources dating to the period of roughly 1300–1250 BC.

1190 BC is right at the time that the Sea People were running wild. Just too much of a coincidence.

Minimalist wrote:There are multiple destruction layers at Troy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy_VII

The city was built following the destruction of Troy VIh, probably by an earthquake, in about 1300 BC. Its oldest part, Troy VIIa, lasted for about a century, with a destruction layer at ca. 1190 BC, which is most often associated with the legendary Trojan War. Troy VIIa is speculated to correspond to Assuwan Wilusa known from Hittite sources dating to the period of roughly 1300–1250 BC.

1190 BC is right at the time that the Sea People were running wild. Just too much of a coincidence.

But could the mythological Trojan Wars not be based on their real life battles with the Sea People? (I appreciate that's probably a dumb question! )

Ishtar wrote:Well, not exactly 'horse shit'.

They're constructed the way they are very deliberately and for a reason.

But the main point about Ahmose is that he was a big persecutor of the Hyksos (Canannites). Others in his line before him had persecuted them, but no-one had actually managed to get rid of them before him.

So surely they wouldn't want to him as their national hero. If anything, in the myth, he would play the antagonist's role. He would be the Pharaoh going under the waves in the Reed Sea.

But, again, we don't really know what the Canaanite stories were because we don't have them All we have is the later OT story.

BTW, there is an interesting echo in the Ahmose story. There's a tomb inscription of another Ahmose ( an officer in his army...not the pharaoh) who reported that while the Egyptians were besieging Avaris (the Hyksos capital) Ahmose himself was called away to deal with a revolt somewhere. While he was gone his general's agreed to grant what would be in European terms during the 18th century, the 'honors of war.' By that, the garrison departs the besieged city and marches out with the flags and arms and the city falls.

Supposedly, when Ahmose I heard of this he went ballistic, renounced the agreement by his generals, and went after the Hyksos, chasing them back to Canaan. An echo of the "pharaoh hardened his heart" story? Who can say.

Ishtar wrote:

Minimalist wrote:There are multiple destruction layers at Troy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy_VII

The city was built following the destruction of Troy VIh, probably by an earthquake, in about 1300 BC. Its oldest part, Troy VIIa, lasted for about a century, with a destruction layer at ca. 1190 BC, which is most often associated with the legendary Trojan War. Troy VIIa is speculated to correspond to Assuwan Wilusa known from Hittite sources dating to the period of roughly 1300–1250 BC.

1190 BC is right at the time that the Sea People were running wild. Just too much of a coincidence.

But could the mythological Trojan Wars not be based on their real life battles with the Sea People? (I appreciate that's probably a dumb question! )

No, I think that's a natural....especially since there seems to have been a significant ethnic Greek (Doric) element in the Sea People alliance anyway. How much better to portray your ancestor's as gods and heroes rather than a rag tag bunch of pirates? Again, the Homeric tales were written about 4 centuries after the events in question and show the same "mythic expansion" as the bible.

Minimalist wrote: But, again, we don't really know what the Canaanite stories were because we don't have them All we have is the later OT story.

That's not quite true. Agreed we don't have a Canaanite story for Moses (or even Ahmose!), which is telling in itself. But we do have quite a lot of their myths, and El and Yahweh have starring roles in them.

http://www.northernway.org/fathergod.html

We also find great similarities in these Canaanite stories in their ideas about covenant, the Divine Warrior, the 'god of the fathers' and their relationship to Yahweh. The Song of Sea, the oldest story in the Bible upon which the crossing the Reed Sea is based, is also thought to be pure Canaanite.

Reading between the lines, I think Frank Moore Cross has detected an almost unbroken link between Canaanite mythology and the stories in the OT:

The epic cycle of the Israelite league was taken up into the prose Epic (JE) sources in the course of the early monarchy. The Pentateuch itself may be described as a baroque elaboration of these Epic sources. The Deuteronomistic History (Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Judges, Samuel and Kings) and the Chronicler’s work (Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah) in effect extended the Epic, interpreting the later history of Israel in Epic patterns.

Epic was, of course, a well-known literary genre in ancient Canaanite (Ugaritic) religious literature albeit of marginal interest as compared with the Canaanite myth cycle which provided the libretto to primary rites of the cult. Israel’s choice of the epic form to express religious reality, and the elevation of this form to centrality in their cultic drama, illustrates both the linkage of the religion of Israel to its Canaanite past and the appearance of novelty in Israel’s peculiar religious concern with the historical.

So I think that we have a lot of Canaanite writings to go on, but I don't know how early the actual manuscripts date to.

Supposedly, when Ahmose I heard of this he went ballistic, renounced the agreement by his generals, and went after the Hyksos, chasing them back to Canaan. An echo of the "pharaoh hardened his heart" story? Who can say.

OK, but he didn’t go under the waves. And also why then make him the national saviour hero? It doesn’t make sense to me. And I know myths are made up stories, but they’re not just made up willy nilly. They do have a rationale behind them. They’re actually quite tightly structured. Heroes and heroes and villains are villains. It's usually that black and white.

I told you. I consider the whole story to be a load of crap. But the fact that Ahmose I was the pharaoh who really booted the Hyksos out and "Moses" is the later hero of the story is just to coincidental to ignore.
I think I know where they got the name from.

Interesting exchange between Ish and Min. Bearing in mind that there are few coincidences in history, having the Trojan War occur at the same time as the Sea Peoples' activities puts some truth int the epic by Homer. Of course, he embellished the tale for the "Home Team", making them gods in the process.

Ahmose as the fall guy for the evil pharaoh in the OT Exodus tale comes as close to the truth as anything. He liberates Egyptians from the despised Hyksos and of course comes off as the villain to those who were displaced. You two are on a roll.

BTW, the Canaanites were writing in cuneiform until about 1200bc (there goes that date again) when their brethryn, the Phoenicians, implemented their alphabet. Another BTW, Phoenicians were Canaanites with boats (a yDNA mix of J2 with J1 for those here who are haplotype enthusiasts). Unfortunately, most Phoenician texts have been lost to time.

BTW, the Canaanites were writing in cuneiform until about 1200bc

Right. But there are those darn Sea People again, washing over the area and overrunning the whole region.

By the time they needed writing again they simply adopted the Phoenecian alphabet, much as they had done with cunieform, and adapted it to their own purposes. Why reinvent the wheel?

Minimalist wrote:I told you. I consider the whole story to be a load of crap. But the fact that Ahmose I was the pharaoh who really booted the Hyksos out and "Moses" is the later hero of the story is just to coincidental to ignore.
I think I know where they got the name from.

We'll have to agree to differ then!

Cognito wrote: Ahmose as the fall guy for the evil pharaoh in the OT Exodus tale comes as close to the truth as anything. He liberates Egyptians from the despised Hyksos and of course comes off as the villain to those who were displaced. You two are on a roll.

Cogs, the Hyksos were the Canaanites. The Canaanites were the Israelites. Ahmose persecuted and chucked them out. There's absolutely no resemblance to Moses apart from Ahmose being his name.

Cognito wrote:
BTW, the Canaanites were writing in cuneiform until about 1200bc (there goes that date again) when their brethryn, the Phoenicians, implemented their alphabet. Another BTW, Phoenicians were Canaanites with boats (a yDNA mix of J2 with J1 for those here who are haplotype enthusiasts). Unfortunately, most Phoenician texts have been lost to time.

I think they were writing in cuneiform because they originally came from Sumeria/Akkad.

Ishtar wrote:

Cognito wrote: Ahmose as the fall guy for the evil pharaoh in the OT Exodus tale comes as close to the truth as anything. He liberates Egyptians from the despised Hyksos and of course comes off as the villain to those who were displaced. You two are on a roll.

Cogs, the Hyksos were the Canaanites. The Canaanites were the Israelites. Ahmose persecuted and chucked them out. There's absolutely no resemblance to Moses apart from Ahmose being his name.

Absolutely right, Ish. But there is also no part of the Exodus story which matches any known historical reality anyway. It had to have been made up.

I could write a story and use the name "Luke Skywalker" which makes him out to be a pimp in a pink Cadillac from Brooklyn. Unless you know about the Star Wars anthology would you think anything of it? Skywalker sounds like a good name for a pimp.

Minimalist wrote: Absolutely right, Ish. But there is also no part of the Exodus story which matches any known historical reality anyway. It had to have been made up.

Of course, so why go casting around looking for a real historical figure for his name? Especially when a) it doesn't really match and b) the guy was the flipping villain of a Canaanite expulsion that bears absolutely no similarity to the story of Moses leading the CofI into Israel!

The story of the baby Moses in the bulrushes is very similar to that of Sargon of Akkad, where the Canaanites originated from. Sargon lived in 2333 to 2279 BC. So it's more likely that the story dates back to then, and is nothing to do with the Hyksos.

Minimalist wrote: I could write a story and use the name "Luke Skywalker" which makes him out to be a pimp in a pink Cadillac from Brooklyn. Unless you know about the Star Wars anthology would you think anything of it? Skywalker sounds like a good name for a pimp.

Yeah...I can feel another sock coming on!