Haram was site of god Mars

“In biblical times the Haram was not a sacred place. Instead it was the place that Orthodox Jews considered defiled and the most despised place in the world. Within these walls were found no remnants of any of the earlier temples but rather an image of Mars, the Roman god of war”. George Wesley Buchanan In August, 2011, professor George Wesley Buchanan wrote this extraordinary piece, Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, Pages 16, 64: Misunderstandings About Jerusalem's Temple Mount Misunderstandings About Jerusalem’s Temple Mount While it has not been widely published, it assuredly has been known for more than 40 years that the 45-acre, well-fortified place that has been mistakenly called the “Temple Mount” was really the Roman fortress—the Antonia—that Herod built. The Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa Mosque are contained within these walls. The area is called the Haram Al-Sharif in Arabic. The discovery that this area had once been the great Roman fortress came as a shock to the scholarly community, which had believed for many years that this ancient fortress was the place where the temple had been. This news was preceded by another shock, when the English archaeologist Kathleen Kenyon discovered in 1962 that the entire City of David in the past had been only that little rock ridge on the western bank of the Kidron Valley. Less than 10 years later the historian Benjamin Mazar learned that the Haram had undoubtedly been the Roman fortress. In biblical times the Haram was not a sacred place. Instead it was the place that Orthodox Jews considered defiled and the most despised place in the world. Within these walls were found no remnants of any of the earlier temples but rather an image of Mars, the Roman god of war. The 1st century Jewish Roman historian Titus Flavius Josephus said the Romans always kept a whole legion of soldiers (5,000-6,000) there, and that there were stones in its walls that were 30 feet long, 15 feet thick, and 71/2 feet high. While excavating the area, Mazar found these very stones there in the Haram—not in the temple. He and the local Muslims also discovered there three inscriptions, honoring the Roman leaders in the war of A.D. 66-72—Vespasian, Titus, and Silva—and Hadrian in the war of A.D. 132-135 [sic], for their success in defeating the Jews in the wars. Mackey’s comment: But see my proposed identifications and time location of Hadrian: Time to consider Hadrian, that ‘mirror-image’ of Antiochus Epiphanes, as also the census emperor Augustus (3) Time to consider Hadrian, that 'mirror-image' of Antiochus Epiphanes, as also the census emperor Augustus George Wesley Buchanan continues: Appropriate inscriptions for a Roman fortress, but impossible for a temple that had been destroyed in A.D. 70—65 years before the inscriptions had been made. Mazar shared these insights freely with other participants in the excavation, such as … Ernest Martin. Mazar also knew at once that the temple instead was stationed 600 feet farther south and 200 feet lower in altitude, on Mount Ophel, where the Spring of Siloam poured tons of water under the threshold of the temple every minute (Ezek 47:1), after which the water was distributed wherever it was needed. This marvelous little City of David was unique in having running water 3,000 years ago. Aristeas, Tacitus and 1 Enoch tell of the inexhaustible spring water system that was indescribably well developed, gushing tons of water into the temple area for sacrifices. Hezekiah's tunnel directed water under Mount Ophel to the Pool of Siloam. Herod’s fortress, on the other hand, was unequipped for sacrifices, because it had only 37 cisterns to provide water in the Haram. After two violent wars with Rome, the City of David was so completely destroyed that it could not be recognized as a city. … people forgot what a marvelous little city this had once been. They simply guessed where strategic locations in the City of David must have been in the Upper City. Of course, this was a normal mistake. Now, 50 years after Kenyon's discovery, scholars like Leen Ritmeyer, Eilat Mazar and Hershel Shanks have recently written books as if no one knew that the Haram was the Roman Fortress and that Solomon's, Zechariah's … temples all were located near the Spring of Siloam. Tourists are still mistakenly told that the Haram is the Temple Mount, that David’s citadel is near the Jaffa Gate, and that Mount Zion and the place where the Last Supper was held are all in the Upper City. Israel’s antiquities authority has been digging a tunnel from under homes in the Arab East Jerusalem neighborhood of Silwan to the Western Wall Plaza. According to a recent “60 Minutes” interview, Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat wants to create King’s Garden, a Bible-themed tourist park “adjacent to the City of David,” which requires demolishing 22 Arab homes in Silwan. The purpose of archeology is to provide archeological insights, of course, but excavations between the City of David and the old Roman fortress (the Haram) also have an anti-Arab political agenda. It is not likely that a fourth [sic?] temple will ever be constructed, either in the City of David or in the Haram. Israel already has diverted the water formerly used for sacrifices away from the former temple area and is making the City of David into a park. Orthodox Jews would oppose having a temple in Herod’s hated fortress. Jews had no interest in the Haram until after the Crusades, when they misunderstood that it was the Temple Mount. If the temple were ever built, it would have to be placed somewhere in the Upper City or a suburb of Jerusalem—not in its former site or in the old Roman Fortress. Because innocent Evangelical Christians in America, under the guidance of Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and John Hagee, have not been informed of these facts, they have thought there was some biblical or religious reason why it was necessary to destroy Islam’s third most sacred building in the world, together with the al-Aqsa mosque. It is my hope that, once Christians learn of this mistake, they will stop following Mars and Phineas (Num 25; Ps 106:30-31) and work as zealously for peace, following the teachings of Abraham, the 8th century prophets (Mica 6:8), Jesus, and Paul, as they once worked to promote war in the Middle East. This would make a tremendous difference to Jerusalem—and to the world. ________________________________________ George Wesley Buchanan has been a United Methodist minister since 1944 and a professor at a theological seminary since 1960, emeritus since he retired in 1991.

Communist China still, after 36 years, trying to erase Tiananmen Square massacre

“The preemptive crackdown on Tiananmen Massacre commemorations is a stark reminder of China's ongoing repression of dissent and its continued violations of the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly”. Human Rights Watch We read at: China Urged to Address Tiananmen 36 Years Later | Mirage News China Urged to Address Tiananmen 36 Years Later 03 Jun 2025 5:42 pm AEST Human Rights Watch Thirty-six years after the killing of countless peaceful pro-democracy protesters in Beijing, the Chinese government still seeks to erase the memory of the June 1989 Tiananmen Massacre, Human Rights Watch said today. The authorities should cease censorship of the crackdown, allow commemorations, provide compensation to the victims' families, and hold accountable officials responsible for abuses. As in previous years, as the June 4 anniversary approaches, authorities across China are making a preemptive crackdown on commemorations, notably those by members of the Tiananmen Mothers, a group of relatives of Tiananmen Massacre victims. One prominent member, Zhang Xianling (张先玲), 87, told Radio Free Asia that even though she could barely "walk 200 meters without a wheelchair," the authorities continue to subject her and others to strict surveillance and restrictions on her movement. "The Chinese government has never owned up to the Tiananmen Massacre, much less provided redress for victims and their families," said Yalkun Uluyol, China researcher at Human Rights Watch. "Beijing's enforced amnesia has deepened authoritarian rule in China, yet it has not extinguished demands for the truth, democracy, and respect for human rights." The preemptive crackdown on Tiananmen Massacre commemorations is a stark reminder of China's ongoing repression of dissent and its continued violations of the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. The Tiananmen Massacre was precipitated by the peaceful gathering of students, workers, and others in Beijing's Tiananmen Square and other Chinese cities in April 1989, calling for free expression, democratic reform, and an end to corruption. The government responded to the intensifying demonstrations in late May 1989 by declaring martial law. On June 3-4, People's Liberation Army soldiers fired upon and killed numerous protesters and bystanders in Beijing. The government's ban on commemorations has extended from mainland China to Hong Kong since mid-2020, when it imposed the draconian National Security Law over the city. Authorities first banned the annual Tiananmen Massacre vigil on Covid-19 grounds in 2020 and 2021, and in 2021 also forced the vigil organizer, the Hong Kong Alliance, and its June 4 Museum to close. The authorities accused the Hong Kong Alliance and its three former leaders - Lee Cheuk-yan, Albert Ho, and Chow Hang-tung - of "inciting subversion" under the National Security Law, which carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. The three have been in pretrial detention for more than three years; their trial is scheduled for November 2025. Chow and four other former Hong Kong Alliance members were also convicted of failing to comply with a national security police information request; their three- to four-and-a-half-month sentences were quashed in March 2025. Some people in Hong Kong have persisted in their attempts to commemorate the Tiananmen Massacre near Victoria Park, where the annual vigil was held. Police have arrested dozens. On June 4, 2024, police warned a man whose phone flashlight was on while he sat alone on a park bench that this may constitute "sedition" under the National Security Law. Police arrested four people on ambiguous grounds that day; one was sentenced in December to ten weeks in prison for "assaulting police officers." Censorship and self-censorship about the Tiananmen Massacre have become commonplace in Hong Kong. In November 2024, Hong Kong authorities changed the label of a lamppost, FA8964, as it contained an accidental reference to the date of the crackdown. In December 2024, Hong Kong airline Cathay Pacific apologized for including content in its inflight entertainment system that featured a scene from the Tiananmen Massacre. While the Chinese government enforces silence inside mainland China and Hong Kong, many have continued the legacy of the 1989 pro-democracy protesters. Most prominently, in 2022, a lone protester named Peng Lifa (彭立发) unfurled protest banners on a busy Beijing bridge, inspiring others and sparking the White Paper protests a few months later. Peng has been compared to the symbol of defiance, the "Tank Man" of the Tiananmen Massacre, who was famously captured on film blocking a column of tanks the morning after the crackdown. Outside of China and Hong Kong, diaspora groups and anonymous social media accounts around the world have in recent years held public discussions, exhibitions, gatherings, and published essays to commemorate the crackdown. This year, 77 events in 40 cities in 10 countries have been planned. Following the Tiananmen Massacre, the Chinese government carried out a nationwide crackdown and arrested thousands of people on "counterrevolution" and other criminal charges, including arson and disrupting social order. The government has never accepted responsibility for the massacre or held any officials legally accountable for the killings. It did not investigate the events or release data on those who were killed, injured, forcibly disappeared, or imprisoned. Tiananmen Mothers documented the details of 202 people who were killed during the suppression of the movement in Beijing and other cities. The government has continued to ignore international and domestic calls for justice for the Tiananmen Massacre. Sanctions that the US government imposed in response to the massacre have over the years been weakened or evaded. The lack of meaningful international sanctions following the massacre and ensuing crackdown partly explains Beijing's brazen human rights violations in the ensuing decades, including crimes against humanity targeting Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang and the erasure of basic freedoms in Hong Kong, Human Rights Watch said. …. See also video: https://youtu.be/tRnW1Xs7asM Tiananmen Square Massacre Tiananmen Square, in the heart of the Chinese capital Beijing, has been a place of enormous significance in modern Chinese history. For seven weeks in the spring and early summer of 1989, it was the focus of unparalleled protests by students and workers against the political and economic system, leading to a brutal government crackdown and international condemnation of the communist regime. ….

Confucius says … well whatever Communist China wants him to

“Concerns have also mounted regarding the institutes’ alleged involvement in intellectual property theft, surveillance of Chinese and Hong Kong students, espionage, and the suppression of academic freedoms”. Dominika Urhová We read at: The Demise of Confucius Institutes: Retreating or Rebranding? – chinaobservers The Demise of Confucius Institutes: Retreating or Rebranding? Dominika Urhová September 5, 2024 Education and student exchanges have long been central to the West’s engagement with China, with hundreds of thousands of Chinese students studying in Western institutions each year. In parallel, China has actively sought to engage overseas institutions and students through initiatives like Confucius Institutes (CIs). However, as tensions between the United States and China have intensified in recent years, suspicion toward academic collaboration with Beijing, particularly concerning the CIs, has grown. In response, China has initiated a rebranding exercise to mitigate rising concerns while shifting its focus to more receptive regions, including, to a certain extent, Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and the Western Balkans. Confucius Institutes function as nonprofit public institutions and are a flagship of China’s cultural soft power. The institutes are usually found at universities or colleges, nonprofit organizations, and occasionally at K-12 schools (i.e. the educational system that includes kindergarten, elementary, middle and high schools). The CIs are a collaborative initiative between a host institution, a Chinese organization (mainly universities), and, until recently, the Office of Chinese Language Council International (Hanban). Since their inception, CIs have been operated and funded by Hanban, a branch of China’s Ministry of Education. The number of CIs worldwide has increased rapidly since 2004, with China aiming to set up 1,000 institutes by 2020. Though this goal has not materialized, by 2023, China had established and maintained 496 Confucius Institutes and 757 Confucius Classrooms (CCs) in over 160 countries. However, following a series of scandals in the 2010s, Beijing has faced a global backlash over the alleged use of CIs as tools of Chinese propaganda. In recent years, growing national security concerns and fears of China’s influence campaigns penetrating host societie shave pushed the issue of Confucius Institutes higher up the political agenda. Growing Suspicions As tensions between the United States and China have intensified, CIs have faced growing criticism for their role in shaping the narrative through which China is depicted and perceived abroad. Accusations have surfaced that CIs censor discussions on issues sensitive to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), including the Tiananmen Square massacre, the Cultural Revolution, and human rights abuses in China, Tibet, and Taiwan. Concerns have also mounted regarding the institutes’ alleged involvement in intellectual property theft, surveillance of Chinese and Hong Kong students, espionage, and the suppression of academic freedoms. A statement by Li Changchun, a former head of CCP propaganda, who in 2009 described CIs as “an important part of China’s overseas propaganda setup,” has fueled these fears and lent credibility to accusations that CIs are a tool of China’s propaganda apparatus. The Crackdown Begins The United States has led the charge against Confucius Institutes, with the Trump administration adopting a particularly hardline stance. During his tenure, President Trump signed a defense bill prohibiting the Department of Defense from funding Chinese language instruction by CIs or any institution hosting a CI. In 2020, the State Department designated the Washington-based Confucius Institute US Center as a “foreign mission” of China, requiring the center to report its activities and operations to the US government. The Trump administration also pushed for colleges and universities to publicly disclose their financial ties and contracts with CIs, partly in response to a 2019 Senate subcommittee report revealing that nearly 70% of institutions receiving over $250,000 from Hanban had failed to report it to the federal government. Although the Biden administration later withdrew this proposal, Trump’s crackdown resulted in 104 of the 118 CIs in the US being shut down or in the process of closing by 2023. Rebranding for Influence Despite international efforts to close down Confucius Institutes, Beijing has found new ways to maintain its influence over educational institutions.According to a report by the National Association of Scholars (NAS), many of the 104 CIs that reportedly closed in the US have not entirely disappeared. Instead, most have either rebranded their CIs or entered into new agreements with their former Chinese partners, often replicating the original CI model with similar, if not identical, issues. In mid-2020, in response to the growing international backlash and as part of China’s efforts to conceal CIs’ close connection to the government, Hanban rebranded itself as the new Ministry of Education Center for Language Exchange and Cooperation (CLEC). It also established a nongovernmental organization, the Chinese International Education Foundation (CIEF), that now funds and oversees CIs including their replacements. CLEC is supervised by China’s Ministry of Education and receives funding from the Chinese government, thus remaining closely linked to the CCP. The rebranding extended to the CIs themselves. NAS research indicates that many universities replaced their CIs with similar partnerships involving the same Chinese universities, opening new centers operated and staffed by the same personnel and funded by Hanban, now known as CLEC or CIEF. Some universities maintained existing CIs but relocated them to different host organizations, while others continued their partnerships with Chinese counterparts outside of the CI framework. On a geopolitical level, education has traditionally served as a confidence-building measure between China and the United States, helping to manage tensions as their relationship ebbs and flows. A crackdown on educational cooperation, however, signals growing suspicion and escalating tensions. Notably, at the summit between US President Biden and Chinese leader Xi Jinping in San Francisco in November 2023, education cooperation featured prominently on the list of deliverables. Yet, while much of the experts’ and politicians’ attention has centered on the closure of Confucius Institutes in the West and China’s superficial rebranding efforts, Beijing has increasingly redirected its focus to more receptive regions. This strategic shift includes expanding influence in countries across Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East. ….

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.

Horrible Histories: Tropological Trojans

by Damien F. Mackey “As a result, the evidence for the Trojan War of Homer is tantalizing but equivocal. There is no single “smoking gun”.” Dr. Eric H. Cline While scholars are prepared to expend time trying to prove the historicity of Homer’s The Iliad and The Odyssey, which are replete with gods and goddesses, and demi-gods, they would generally, I suspect, be far less interested in the biblical (Catholic) books of Judith, Job and Tobit, based on real historical people and events. The life of holy Tobit, who served the mighty Assyrian king, Shalmaneser, in highest level office: Tobit may have been King Shalmaneser’s ‘rab ekalli’ (3) Tobit may have been King Shalmaneser's 'rab ekalli' coursed through a succession of 3 real neo-Assyrian kings, according to Tobit 1:2-21: “Shalmaneser”; “Sennacherib”; “Esarhaddon”. In fact, the Book of Tobit actually corrects the conventional neo-Assyrian succession. Apart from its failing to situate a Sargon (II) between Shalmaneser and Sennacherib - and that is because Sargon II was Sennacherib - it, when forensically examined, necessitates a merging, as well, of Shalmaneser with Tiglath-pileser. While the Book of Tobit, therefore, corrects ancient history, what does Homer do with the biblical data (say, Tobit, Job and Judith)? Before answering that question, who was this Homer, anyway?: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/d8c7ix/who_was_homer/ “In Greek works written hundreds of years later, we get all sorts of fanciful stories about Homer's origins, his life, his afflictions (including crippling poverty and alleged blindness), and the era in which he supposedly lived. But none of this seems to have any basis in reliable historical knowledge. With the Homeric epics so central to the education of every Greek and to the formation of Greek identity, it was only natural that their author should become an almost mythical figure about whom many wise men claimed to know things that hadn't been known before. It is fair to say that the Greeks actually knew nothing about Homer from any local tradition or historical documentation”. “… including crippling poverty and alleged blindness …”. Interesting. Old Tobit experienced crippling poverty (Tobit 1:20) and he also went blind for a time (2:9-10). What does the so-called “Homer” - or what do the Greco-Romans - do with the books of Tobit, Job and Judith? Well, they appropriate large portions of them: Similarities to The Odyssey of the Books of Job and Tobit (3) Similarities to The Odyssey of the Books of Job and Tobit even introducing the goddess Athena (Athene) into their appropriations. In that article on The Odyssey, I gave these comparisons: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The resemblance of Tobit to the Odyssey in particular was not lost on that great student of literature [Saint] Jerome …. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This combined biblical influence upon Homer is, I think, more intelligible in light of my article: Job’s Life and Times (4) Job’s Life and Times in which I have identified Job with Tobit’s son, Tobias. Some Compelling Comparisons I need to point out right at the start that it sometimes happens that incidents attributed to the son, in the Book of Tobit, in Job, might, in The Odyssey, be attributed to the son's father, or vice versa (or even be attributed to some less important character). The same sort of mix occurs with the female characters. These are some of the parallels that I have picked up: The two chief male characters Tobit and his son, Tobias/Job, equate approximately to Odysseus and his son, Telemachus. Unlike the pious Tobit, though, Odysseus was a crafty and battle-hardened pagan, with a love of strong drink and an eye for women {goddesses}. But he nevertheless pined for his true wife, Penelope. The Suitors These unpleasant and self-serving characters are especially prominent and numerous in Homer’s The Odyssey. In the Book of Tobit, “seven” suitors in turn meet an unhappy fate in their desire for Sarah. The Sought-After Woman In The Odyssey, she is Penelope. She is Sarah in the Book of Tobit. The 'Divine' Messenger From whom the son, especially, receives help during his travels. In the Book of Tobit, this messenger is the angel Raphael (in the guise of ‘Azarias’). In The Odyssey, it is the goddess Athene (in the guise of ‘Mentes’). Satan, or Adversary (Book of Job) He is Poseidon in The Odyssey, the god who hounds down the story’s hero. He is Asmodeus in the Book of Tobit. According to the following, this Asmodeus is to be identified with the Iranian, Aeshma Daeva (http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-02-036-f): Bearing just as obvious a connection with non-biblical literature, I believe, is the demon Asmodeus (Tobit 3:8), who is doubtless to be identified, on purely morphological grounds, with Aeshma Daeva, a figure well known in ancient Iranian religion …. The Friends Whereas, in the Book of Tobit, the young man’s journeying takes him amongst kindred folks (e.g. Raguel and Gabael), in The Odyssey, it is to the homelands of certain Greek returnées from Troy (e.g. Nestor and Menelaus) that young Telemachus travels. The Dog Yes, even a dog, or dogs, figure in both stories. P. Reardon, commenting upon this particular parallel in The Wide World of Tobit, follows the typical pattern of thought according to which the pagan mythology has precedence over the Hebrew version: The Larger World …. The resemblance of Tobit to the Odyssey in particular was not lost on that great student of literature, Jerome, as is evident in a single detail of his Latin translation of Tobit in the Vulgate. Intrigued by the literary merit of Tobit, but rejecting its canonicity, the jocose and sometimes prankish Jerome felt free to insert into his version an item straight out of the Odyssey—namely, the wagging of the dog’s tail on arriving home with Tobias in 11:9—Tunc praecucurrit canis, qui simul fuerat in via, et quasi nuntius adveniens blandimento suae caudae gaudebat—“Then the dog, which had been with them in the way, ran before, and coming as if it had brought the news, showed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail.”16 No other ancient version of Tobit mentions either the tail or the wagging, but Jerome, ever the classicist, was confident his readers would remember the faithful but feeble old hound Argus, as the final act of his life, greeting the return of Odysseus to the home of his father: “he endeavored to wag his tail” (Odyssey 17.302). And to think that we owe this delightful gem to Jerome’s rejection of Tobit’s canonicity! [End of quote] There is space here for only a few more of the many further parallels that I have observed between Tobit/Job and The Odyssey: Further Comparisons Only Son Tobias was the only son of Tobit and Anna (cf. Tobit 1:9 and 8:17). So was Telemachus the only son of Odysseus and Penelope: '[Telemachus] ... you an only son, the apple of your mother's eye...' (II, 47). Likewise Anna referred to her son, Tobias, as 'the light of my eyes' (Tobit 10:5). And Telemachus’s uncle will use that identical phrase: 'Telemachus, light of my eyes!' (XVI, 245). Longing for Death The aged Tobit, in his utter misery of blindness, longed for death, and thus he prayed to God: 'Command that I now be released from my distress to go to the eternal abode; do not turn Thy face away from me' (Tobit 3:6). This theme is treated even more starkly, and in more prolonged fashion, in the Book of Job (esp. Ch. 3). In The Odyssey, it is said of Laërtes that "every day he prays to Zeus that death may visit his house and release the spirit from his flesh" (XV, 239). And Odysseus, after having learned from Circe about the wretched existence of the dead in Hades, said: 'This news broke my heart. I sat down on the bed and wept. I had no further use for life, no wish to see the sunshine any more' (X, 168). The Suitors "On the same day" that Tobit had prayed to be released from this life, Sarah - back home in Midian "was reproached by her father's maids, because she had been given to seven husbands, and the evil demon Asmodeus had slain each of them before he had been with her as his wife" (Tobit 3:7, 8). In the Vulgate version of Tobit, we are informed that these seven suitors had lustful intentions towards Sarah (6:17). The Odyssey also tells about Penelope, who is tormented by the suitors who have invaded Odysseus’s home and are squandering the family's wealth. Penelope has to resort to the ruse of weaving a winding-cloth - ostensibly intending to make the decision to marry once she has completed it. But each night she undoes the cloth, in order to keep the suitors at bay (I, 28-33; II, 38-39). The prediction early in the story, that "there'd be a quick death and a sorry wedding for ... all [the suitors]", once Odysseus returned home (I, 32), was to be fulfilled to the letter when he dealt them all a bloody end. And indeed these words, a "sorry wedding" and a "quick death", might well have been spoken of Sarah's suitors as well, once the demon Asmodeus had finished with them. This Asmodeus is eventually overcome by Tobias, with great assistance from the angel. Asmodeus then "fled to the remotest parts of Egypt, and the angel bound him" (cf. Tobit 7:16 and 7:8:3). Even this episode might have its 'echo' at the beginning of The Odyssey, when the violent god, Poseidon (legendary father of the Athenian hero Theseus - born of two fathers: Poseidon and Aegeus, king of Athens), is found amongst "the distant Ethiopians, the farthest outposts of mankind ..." (I, 25). Ethiopia could indeed be described as "the remotest parts of Egypt". Heavenly Visitor ... she [Athene] bound under her feet her lovely sandals of untarnished gold, which carried her with the speed of the wind.... Thus she flashed down from the heights of Olympus. On reaching Ithaca she took her stand on the threshold of the court in front of Odysseus' house; and to look like a visitor she assumed the appearance of a Taphian chieftain named Mentes… (I, 27-28). The reader will quickly pick up the similarities between this text and the relevant part of the Book of Tobit if I simply quote directly from the latter: The prayer of [Tobit and Sarah] was heard in the presence of the glory of the great God. And Raphael was sent (3:16,17). Then Tobias ... found a beautiful young man, standing girded, as it were ready to walk. And not knowing that he was an angel of God, he saluted him.... 'I am Azarias, the son of the great Ananias' (5:5, 6, 18). The Questioning Tobit had interrogated the angel about the latter's identity, asking: 'My brother, to what tribe and family do you belong? Tell me ...', etc., etc. (5:9-12). Raguel exhibited a similar sort of curiosity: 'Where are you from brethren? .... Do you know our brother Tobit? .... Is he in good health?' (7:3, 4). In The Odyssey, too, this pattern (but with a Greek slant - e.g. the mention of ships) is again most frequent - almost monotonous. Telemachus, for instance, asks Athene: 'However, do tell me who you are and where you come from. What is your native town? Who are your people? And since you certainly cannot have come on foot, what kind of vessel brought you here?' (I, 29). (For further examples of this pattern of interrogation in The Odyssey, see pp. 72; 118; 164; 175; 208; 220). Athene replied to Telemachus, using a phrase that I suggest may have come straight out of the Book of Tobit - where towards the end of the story Raphael says: 'I will not conceal anything from you' (12:11). Thus: 'I will tell you everything', answered the bright-eyed goddess Athene. 'My father was the wise prince, Anchialus. My own name is Mentes, and I am a chieftain of the sea-faring Taphians'. Delaying One’s Guests Another noticeable tendency in these Israelite writings, as well as in The Odyssey, is for hosts to insist on their guests staying longer than the latter had intended, or had wished. This was perhaps the customary hospitality in ancient Syro-Mesopotamia, because it is common also in Genesis (24:25-26; 29:21-31:41). And it happens in The Book of Tobit, and indeed all the way through The Odyssey as well. For example, Telemachus says to Athene (I, 29): 'Sir, .... I know you are anxious to be on your way, but I beg you to stay a little longer, so that you can bathe and refresh yourself. Then you can go, taking with you as a keepsake from myself something precious and beautiful, the sort of present that one gives to a guest who has become a friend'. 'No', said the bright-eyed goddess. 'I am eager to be on my way; please do not detain me now. As for the gift you kindly suggest, let me take it home with me on my way back. Make it the best you can find, and you won't lose by the exchange'. (Cf. IV, 80; XV, 231-232). In like manner, Tobias was impatient to leave the sanguine Raguel and return home: At that time Tobias said to Raguel. 'Send me back, for my father and mother have given up hope of ever seeing me again'. But his father-in-law said to him, 'Stay with me, and I will send messengers to your father, and they will inform him how things are with you'. 'No, send me back to my father'. So Raguel arose and gave him his wife Sarah and half of his property in slaves, cattle, and money. (10:7, 8-10). The Dog(s) (a) The Leaving "... Telemachus himself set out for the meeting-place, bronze spear in hand, escorted ... by two dogs that trotted beside him" (II, 37). Also "[Tobias and the angel] both went out and departed, and the young man's dog was with them" (Tobit 5:16). (b) The Returning When Telemachus returned home: "The dogs, usually so obstreperous, not only did not bark at the newcomer but greeted him with wagging tails"(XVI, 245). The dog in the Book of Tobit was equally excited: "Then the dog, which had been with [Tobias and the angel] along the way, ran ahead of them; and coming as if he had brought the news showed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail" (Tobit 11:9). The Iliad, for its part, does some heavy lifting from the Hebrew Bible. See e.g. The Jewish Bible Quarterly (2016): LITERARY PARALLELS BETWEEN HOMER’S EPICS AND THE BIBLICAL PHILISTINES https://jbqnew.jewishbible.org/jbq-past-issues/2016/443-july-september-2016/literary-parallels-homers-epics-biblical-philistines/ See also my articles: Joshuan Miracle of the Sun absorbed into Homer’s Iliad https://www.academia.edu/122576373/Joshuan_Miracle_of_the_Sun_absorbed_into_Homers_Iliad ‘Homeric’ borrowings from life of King Saul https://www.academia.edu/75749605/Homeric_borrowings_from_life_of_King_Saul King Ahab and Agamemnon (6) King Ahab and Agamemnon Book of Judith’s impact upon Greco-Roman and Arabic myths https://www.academia.edu/83801583/Book_of_Judith_s_impact_upon_Greco_Roman_and_Arabic_myths Judith the Jewess and “Helen” the Hellene https://www.academia.edu/24417162/Judith_the_Jewess_and_Helen_the_Hellene And that is just the tip of the iceberg. Influence of the Book of Tobit Getting back to the Book of Tobit itself, it refers to other known historical events, too: the assassination of Sennacherib (see below); the destruction of Nineveh (14:15); the Jewish return from the Babylonian Captivity; and the rebuilding of the Temple (14:5). Ahikar (Ahuqar) And the Book of Tobit also introduces us to the most influential Ahikar, who became “second-in-command” to the potent Esarhaddon in the kingdom (Tobit 1:21-22): But not forty days passed before two of Sennacherib’s sons killed him, and when they fled to the mountains of Ararat, his son Esar-haddon reigned after him. He appointed Ahikar, the son of my brother Hanael, over all the accounts of his kingdom, and he had authority over the entire administration. Ahikar interceded for me, and I returned to Nineveh. Now Ahikar was chief cupbearer, keeper of the signet, and in charge of administration and accounts under King Sennacherib of Assyria, so Esar-haddon appointed him as second-in-command. He was my nephew and so a close relative. In the Book of Tobit we learn of - {paralleling Judith’s Achior and “Holofernes” [Achilles and Agamemnon?]} - Ahikar’s close association with Sennacherib’s oldest son, Ashur-nadin-shumi, called “Nadin” (Nadab) in the Book of Tobit: “Nadin” (Nadab) of Tobit is the “Holofernes” of Judith (3) "Nadin" (Nadab) of Tobit is the "Holofernes" of Judith This Ahikar is a verifiable historical figure in ancient Assyria, as Aba-enlil-dari: http://www.melammu-project.eu/database/gen_html/a0000639.html “The story of Ahiqar is set into the court of seventh century Assyrian kings Sennacherib and Esarhaddon. The hero has the Akkadian name Ahī-(w)aqar “My brother is dear” …. The latest entry in a Seleucid list of Seven Sages says: “In the days of Esarhaddon the sage was Aba-enlil-dari, whom the Aramaeans call Ahu-uqar” …”. The great man, and his writings, became widely influential, having a profound impact even on Islam. On this, see e.g. my articles: Ahiqar, Aesop and Loqmân (4) Ahiqar, Aesop and Loqmân and: Tobit’s nephew, Ahikar, carelessly projected into [the] Islamic Golden Age (5) Tobit’s nephew, Ahikar, carelessly projected into Islamic Golden Age Dr. Eric H. Cline has asked the question (2013): https://blog.oup.com/2013/05/trojan-war-fact-or-fiction/ The Trojan War: fact or fiction? The Trojan War may be well known thanks to movies, books, and plays around the world, but did the war that spurred so much fascination even occur? The excerpt below from The Trojan War: A Very Short Introduction helps answer some of the many questions about the infamous war Homer helped immortalize. By Eric Cline The story of the Trojan War has fascinated humans for centuries and has given rise to countless scholarly articles and books, extensive archaeological excavations, epic movies, television documentaries, stage plays, art and sculpture, souvenirs and collectibles. In the United States there are thirty-three states with cities or towns named Troy and ten four-year colleges and universities, besides the University of Southern California, whose sports teams are called the Trojans. Particularly captivating is the account of the Trojan Horse, the daring plan that brought the Trojan War to an end and that has also entered modern parlance by giving rise to the saying “Beware of Greeks bearing gifts” and serving as a metaphor for hackers intent on wreaking havoc by inserting a “Trojan horse” into computer systems. But, is Homer’s story convincing? Certainly the heroes, from Achilles to Hector, are portrayed so credibly that it is easy to believe the story. But is it truly an account based on real events, and were the main characters actually real people? Mackey’s comment: Yes, indeed, Achilles and Hector, complete fictions in themselves, were “based on” real (generally biblical) characters. Would the ancient world’s equivalent of the entire nation of Greece really have gone to war over a single woman, however beautiful, and for ten long years at that? Mackey’s comment: No. Could Agamemnon really have been a king of kings able to muster so many men for such an expedition? Mackey’s comment: No. And, even if one believes that there once was an actual Trojan War, does that mean that the specific events, actions, and descriptions in Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey, supplemented by additional fragments and commentary in the Epic Cycle, are historically accurate and can be taken at face value? Is it plausible that what Homer describes actually took place and in the way that he says it did? Mackey’s comment: No. Virgil’s story of the Trojan Horse has, in its essence, been lifted out of the Book of Judith. See Part One: “Cunning Sinon deceiving the Trojans”, of my article (above): “Book of Judith’s impact upon Greco-Roman and Arabic myths”. In fact, the problem in providing definitive answers to all of these questions is not that we have too little data, but that we have too much. Mackey’s comment: Really! The Greek epics, Hittite records, Luwian poetry, and archaeological remains provide evidence not of a single Trojan war but rather of multiple wars that were fought in the area that we identify as Troy and the Troad. As a result, the evidence for the Trojan War of Homer is tantalizing but equivocal. There is no single “smoking gun.” According to the Greek literary evidence, there were at least two Trojan Wars (Heracles’ and Agamemnon’s), not simply one; in fact, there were three wars, if one counts Agamemnon’s earlier abortive attack on Teuthrania. Similarly, according to the Hittite literary evidence, there were at least four Trojan Wars, ranging from the Assuwa Rebellion in the late 15th century BCE to the overthrow of Walmu, king of Wilusa in the late 13th century BCE. And, according to the archaeological evidence, Troy/Hisarlik was destroyed twice, if not three times, between 1300 and 1000 BCE. Some of this has long been known; the rest has come to light more recently. Thus, although we cannot definitively point to a specific “Trojan War,” at least not as Homer has described it in the Iliad and the Odyssey, we have instead found several such Trojan wars and several cities at Troy, enough that we can conclude there is a historical kernel of truth — of some sort — underlying all the stories. …. In 1964, the eminent historian Moses Finley suggested that we should move the narrative of the Trojan War from the realm of history into the realm of myth and poetry until we have more evidence. …. Mackey’s comment: Hear, hear!

Tobit’s nephew, Ahikar, carelessly projected into Islamic Golden Age

Part One: Ahikar, a real historical person, embellished by Damien F. Mackey “Ahikar the son of my brother Anael, was appointed chancellor of the exchequer for the kingdom and given the main ordering of affairs”. Tobit 1:21 Ahikar’s contemporary the heroine Judith, whom Ahikar (as Achior) met shortly after she and her maid had carried the head of “Holofernes” in a basket back to “Bethulia”, has likewise been projected into a supposed AD time, c. 900 AD, as Gudit (or Judith): Judith the Simeonite and Judith the Semienite (6) Judith the Simeonite and Judith the Semienite | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu How does this happen? And, what a story Ahikar (or Ahiqar) has to tell! He (as Achior) had been left for dead by “Holofernes” for having dared to suggest that an Israel with the aid of the Lord would be irresistible. So “Holofernes” had him tied up within close proximity of Judith’s town of “Bethulia” (Shechem), there to die with the people whom he had just verbally defended. Achior was taken in by the Bethulians, whose leader at the time was the Simeonite Uzziah, the great prophet Isaiah. Then, after Judith with her maid had returned triumphantly from the Assyrian camp, she asked to see Achior (Judith 14:6-7): So they summoned Achior from the house of Uzziah. When he came and saw the head of Holofernes in the hand of one of the men in the assembly of the people, he fell down on his face in a faint. When they raised him up he threw himself at Judith’s feet and did obeisance to her and said, ‘Blessed are you in every tent of Judah! In every nation those who hear your name will be alarmed. Now tell me what you have done during these days’. This famous Israelite pair, Judith and Ahikar, who appear in the Catholic Bible for the era of c. 700 (conventional dating), have been recklessly projected into a c. 900 AD, and later, time – a shocking time warp of more than a millennium and a half! How does this happen? (See also Part Two) Seleucids/Ptolemies divinised ancient heroes The Ptolemies re-presented some famous characters of Egyptian history as ‘saints’. Ancient notables of Egyptian history, such as Imhotep and Amenhotep son of Hapu, became, in the hands of the later Ptolemies, thaumaturgists and quasi-divine. Thus Dietrich Wildung wrote of this pair as ‘becoming gods’ (Imhotep und Amenhotep. Gottwerdung im alten Ägypten, Münchner Ägyptologische Studien, 36, 1977). The Seleucids did the same with - to give one example - the legendary King Solomon, who became, in their hands, the temple building Sumerian notable, Gudea: Prince of Lagash (6) Prince of Lagash | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu The Seleucids greatly embellished the talents of these, admittedly already striking, ancient celebrities. And I suspect that the same must have been done with Ahikar (Achior), already a significant person in his own right, to whom has artificially been added encyclopædic wisdom and magical skills as one might read of in a fantastic Arabian Nights legend. Hence we now find, as I have often quoted: “The story of Ahikar is one of the most phenomenal in the ancient world in that it has become part of many different literatures and has been preserved in several different languages: Syriac, Arabic, Armenian, Greek, Slavonic, and Old Turkish. The most ancient recension is the Aramaic, found amongst the famous 5th-cent. BC papyri that were discovered … on Elephantine Island in the Nile. The story worked its way into the Arabian nights and the Koran; it influenced Aesop, the Church Fathers as well as Greek philosophers, and the OT itself”. Of particular interest for this study is the influence of Ahikar upon the Koran (Qur'an). Indeed, the sage Koranic character, Luqman (Lokman), is thought by some to have been taken from Ahikar himself: Ahiqar and Aesop. Part Two: Ahiqar, Aesop and Lokman (13) Ahiqar and Aesop. Part Two: Ahiqar, Aesop and Lokman | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu 1. The real Ahikar (a) Kingdom of Assyria The young Ahikar (Achior) had a stellar career in the kingdom of Assyro-Babylonia, somewhat akin to that of the prophet Daniel. According to his uncle, Tobit (1:22): “… when Sennacherib was emperor of Assyria, Ahikar had been wine steward, treasurer, and accountant, and had been in charge of the official seal”. When the Assyrians first successfully invaded Jerusalem, Ahikar, the Rabshakeh, was King Sennacherib’s mouthpiece, he being eloquent and, apparently, multi-lingual. When King Hezekiah’s envoys implored him to speak in Aramaïc rather than Hebrew, before the walls of Jerusalem, the Rabshakeh (“field commander”) refused to comply (Isaiah 36:11-21): Then Eliakim, Shebna and Joah said to the field commander, ‘Please speak to your servants in Aramaic, since we understand it. Don’t speak to us in Hebrew in the hearing of the people on the wall’. But the commander replied, ‘Was it only to your master and you that my master sent me to say these things, and not to the people sitting on the wall—who, like you, will have to eat their own excrement and drink their own urine?’ Then the commander stood and called out in Hebrew, ‘Hear the words of the great king, the king of Assyria! This is what the king says: Do not let Hezekiah deceive you. He cannot deliver you! Do not let Hezekiah persuade you to trust in the LORD when he says, ‘The LORD will surely deliver us; this city will not be given into the hand of the king of Assyria.’ ‘Do not listen to Hezekiah. This is what the king of Assyria says: Make peace with me and come out to me. Then each of you will eat fruit from your own vine and fig tree and drink water from your own cistern, until I come and take you to a land like your own—a land of grain and new wine, a land of bread and vineyards. ‘Do not let Hezekiah mislead you when he says, ‘The LORD will deliver us’. Have the gods of any nations ever delivered their lands from the hand of the king of Assyria? Where are the gods of Hamath and Arpad? Where are the gods of Sepharvaim? Have they rescued Samaria from my hand? Who of all the gods of these countries have been able to save their lands from me? How then can the LORD deliver Jerusalem from my hand?’ But the people remained silent and said nothing in reply, because the king had commanded, “Do not answer him”. There is nothing to suggest from any of this, so far, that Ahikar was anything more than a competent military commander and loyal servant of the Great King of Assyria. But, in the Book of Tobit, we learn that Ahikar was the mentor of Nadin (or Nadab) - and his “uncle” (presumably through marriage) - who was Sennacherib’s oldest son, Ashur-nadin-shumi, and who was to become the ill-fated “Holofernes” of the Judith drama. We also learn that Ahikar was kind, he having looked after Tobit during his blindness, before being commissioned to govern the land of Elam (Elymaïs) (Tobit 2:10): I [Tobit] went to physicians to be healed, but the more they treated me with ointments the more my vision was obscured by the white films, until I became completely blind. For four years I remained unable to see. All my kindred were sorry for me, and Ahikar took care of me for two years before he went to Elymais. Ahikar and Nadin were present at the wedding of Tobias (Tobiah) and Sarah after the elderly Tobit had been miraculously cured of his blindness by the angel Raphael. These were no ordinary times (Tobit 11:17-18): That day there was joy for all the Jews who lived in Nineveh. Ahiqar and his nephew Nadin were also on hand to rejoice with Tobit. Tobiah’s wedding feast was celebrated with joy for seven days, and many gifts were given to him. Ahikar will also intervene with king Esarhaddon, enabling for Tobit to return home after his desperate flight from the now-deceased Sennacherib (Tobit 1:21-22): But not forty days passed before two of Sennacherib’s sons killed him, and they fled to the mountains of Ararat, and his son Esar-haddon reigned after him. He appointed Ahikar, the son of my brother Hanael over all the accounts of his kingdom, and he had authority over the entire administration. Ahikar interceded for me, and I returned to Nineveh. Now Ahikar was chief cupbearer, keeper of the signet, and in charge of administration of the accounts under King Sennacherib of Assyria; so Esar-haddon reappointed him. He was my nephew and so a close relative. From the Judith drama we learn that Ahikar, or Achior, was now leader of a foreign contingent in the Assyrian army, wrongly called “Ammonite”, but should read Elamite. This mistake is one of the main reasons why the Book of Judith has not been accepted into the Jewish canon (Deuteronomy 23:3): “No Ammonite or Moabite or any of their descendants may enter the assembly of the LORD, not even in the tenth generation”. For, as we read in Judith 14:10: “When Achior saw all that the God of Israel had done, he believed firmly in God. So he was circumcised and joined the house of Israel, remaining so to this day”. Presumably Achior was, like most of his tribe in those days, neglectful of Yahwism. As Tobit recounts (1:4-6): When I lived as a young man in my own country, in the land of Israel, the entire tribe of my ancestor Naphtali broke away from the house of David, my ancestor, and from Jerusalem, the city that had been singled out of all Israel’s tribes that all Israel might offer sacrifice there. It was the place where the Temple, God’s dwelling, had been built and consecrated for all generations to come. All my kindred, as well as the house of Naphtali, my ancestor, used to offer sacrifice on every hilltop in Galilee to the calf that Jeroboam, king of Israel, had made in Dan. But I alone used to go often to Jerusalem for the festivals, as was prescribed for all Israel by longstanding decree. A dying Tobit will praise Ahikar to his son Tobias for Ahikar’s “almsgiving”, contrasting his nephew with the treacherous Nadin/Nadab (Tobit 14:10-11): ‘See, my son, what Nadab did to Ahikar, who had reared him. Was he not, while still alive, brought down into the earth? For God repaid him to his face for this shameful treatment. Ahikar came out into the light, but Nadab went into the eternal darkness because he tried to kill Ahikar. Because he gave alms, he escaped the fatal trap that Nadab had set for him, but Nadab fell into it himself and was destroyed. So now, my children, see what almsgiving accomplishes and what injustice does—it brings death!’ Ahikar/Achior also appears as “Arioch” in a gloss in the Book of Judith (1:6): “… King Arioch of Elam”. The glossator had obviously failed to realise that this was Tobit’s “Ahikar [who] … went to Elymaïs [Elam]”. Now, before we proceed to consider the fantastically embellished Arabian Nights version of Ahikar, we need to add yet an extra dimension to the real person. This will have huge ramifications for the Golden Age of Islam – my focus there being on the intellectual aspect of that so-called Golden Age. (b) Kingdom of Chaldea (Babylonia) The lives of the Tobiads (Tobit, Tobias, Ahikar) passed through the tumultuous reign of Sennacherib and on into the far more benign (for the Tobiads) reign of Esarhaddon. Now, Esarhaddon, called a “son” of Sennacherib in Tobit 1:21, was not Sennacherib’s actual biological son, nor was he an Assyrian. Esarhaddon was a Chaldean, whose reign marks the beginning of the Chaldean dynasty. Esarhaddon was none other than Nebuchednezzar ‘the Great’: Esarhaddon a tolerable fit for King Nebuchednezzar (12) Esarhaddon a tolerable fit for King Nebuchednezzar | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu That makes it quite possible that Ahikar (Arioch) was the “Arioch” of Daniel 2:24-25, a high official of King Nebuchadnezzar. But far more importantly for this study is my identification of a sage official of Nebuchednezzar due to my folding, in my university thesis (2007), of Nebuchednezzar so-called I (c. 1100 BC, conventional dating) with II (c. 600 BC, conventional dating). The famous official, Esagil-kinni-ubba, will become vital for explaining the intellectual Golden Age of Islam. This is what I wrote about Esagil-kinni-ubba (of various spellings) in my thesis: A Revised History of the Era of King Hezekiah of Judah and its Background AMAIC_Final_Thesis_2009.pdf I believed that I may have found - over and above some very compelling Babylonian-Elamite parallels - a connection between a ‘Middle’ kingdom vizier of great wisdom and a similarly celebrated ‘Neo’ kingdom sage. I wrote about this as follows, then wrongly suspecting that Nebuchednezzar so-called I was the same ruler as my composite king Sargon II-Sennacherib (Volume One, pp. 185-187): A Legendary Vizier (Ummânu) Perhaps a further indication of a need for merging the C12th BC king of Babylon, Nebuchednezzar I, with the C8th BC king of Assyria, Sargon II/ Sennacherib, is that one finds during the reign of ‘each’ a vizier of such fame that he was to be remembered for centuries to come. It is now reasonable to assume that this is one and the same vizier. I refer, in the case of Nebuchednezzar I, to the following celebrated vizier: … “The name Esagil-kini-ubba, ummânu or “royal secretary” during the reign of Nebuchednezzar I, was preserved in Babylonian memory for almost one thousand years – as late as the year 147 of the Seleucid Era (= 165 B.C.) …”. Even better known is Ahikar (var. Akhiqar), of Sennacherib’s reign, regarding whose immense popularity we read: …. The story of Ahikar is one of the most phenomenal in the ancient world in that it has become part of many different literatures and has been preserved in several different languages: Syriac, Arabic, Armenian, Greek, Slavonic, and Old Turkish. The most ancient recension is the Aramaic, found amongst the famous 5th-cent. BC papyri that were discovered … on Elephantine Island in the Nile. The story worked its way into the Arabian nights and the Koran; it influenced Aesop, the Church Fathers as well as Greek philosophers, and the OT itself. According to the first chapter of [the Book of Tobit]: “Ahikar had been chief cupbearer, keeper of the signet, administrator and treasurer under Sennacherib” and he was kept in office after Sennacherib’s death. At some point in time Ahikar seems to have been promoted to Ummânu, or Vizier, second in power in the mighty kingdom of Assyria, “Chancellor of the Exchequer for the kingdom and given the main ordering of affairs” (1:21, 22). Ahikar was Chief Cupbearer, or Rabshakeh … during Sennacherib’s Third Campaign when Jerusalem was besieged (2 Kings 18:17; Isaiah 36:2). His title (Assyrian rab-šakê) means, literally, ‘the great man’. It was a military title, marking its bearer amongst the greatest of all the officers. Tobit tells us that Ahikar (also given in the Vulgate version of [the Book of Tobit] as Achior) was the son of his brother Anael (1:21). Ahikar was therefore Tobit’s nephew, of the tribe of Naphtali, taken into captivity by ‘Shalmaneser’. This Ahikar/Achior was - as I shall be arguing in VOLUME TWO (cf. pp. 8, 46-47) - the same as the important Achior of [the Book of Judith]. Kraeling, whilst incorrectly I believe suggesting that: …. “There does not appear to be any demonstrable connection between this Achior [of the Book of Judith] and the Ahikar of the [legendary] Aramaic Story”, confirms however that the name Achior can be the same as Ahikar …. …. I had suggested above that Adad-apla-iddina, ruler of Babylon at the time of Tiglathpileser I, may have been the same person as Merodach-baladan I/II. I may now be able to strengthen this link to some degree through the agency of the vizier just discussed. For, according to Brinkman: …. “… Esagil-kini-ubba served as ummânu … under Adad-aplaiddina…”. [End of quote] One further matter of importance regarding “The real Ahikar” is that his Assyrian name was Aba-enlil-dari “whom the Aramaeans call Ahu-uqar [Ahiqar]”: http://www.melammu-project.eu/database/gen_html/a0000639.html This name will also become important in the context of the Islamic Golden Age. 2. The fantasy Ahikar We read of the “Ahiqar story”, “of great popularity”, at: http://www.melammu-project.eu/database/gen_html/a0000639.html The story of Ahiqar is set into the court of seventh century Assyrian kings Sennacherib and Esarhaddon. The hero has the Akkadian name Ahī-(w)aqar “My brother is dear”, but it is not clear if the story has any historical foundation. The latest entry in a Seleucid list of Seven Sages says: “In the days of Esarhaddon the sage was Aba-enlil-dari, whom the Aramaeans call Ahu-uqar” which at least indicates that the story of Ahiqar was well known in the Seleucid Babylonia. The oldest form of the story of Ahiqar itself is available in the Old Aramaic fragments from the end of the fifth century BCE and were discovered in the ruins of Elephantine in Egypt. The story of Ahiqar was incorporated into Greek legendary life of Aeseop - the adventures and maxims of the Assyrian sage were transferred to his Greek counterpart. The Syriac Ahiqar book is of non-Christian character and belongs to the oldest period of Syriac literature, to the first two centuries CE. Later versions in Armanian, Arabic, and Old Church Slavonic are all closely related to the Syriac version. From the Armenian the story of Ahiqar was translated into Kipchak-Turkish and into another Turkic language, while the Romanian translation is related to the Church Slavonic text. A selection of the precepts of Ahiqar, but not his story, was included in an Arabic Christian anthology which was later translated into Ethiopic. There is another Ethiopic version which is shorter and also clearly translated into Arabic. There are references to Ahiqar in Tobit and also other quotations from his maxims in various other books of the Bible, especially in the book of Sirach. Also a set of the Middle Persian (Pahlavi) didactic books which were associated with the name Ādurbād, a historical person of the fourth century CE Zoroastrianism, reveal strong affinities with the Akkadian-Aramaic story of Ahiqar. The Admonitions of Ādurbād contains many parallels to the Ahiqar maxims in several languages. Given the great popularity of the Ahiqar story in the first centuries of the Christian era and the long symbiosis of Iranian and Aramaic civilisation, there is certainly nothing wrong with the assumption that Persian authors of the Sasanian period may have been familiar with it. [End of quote] From a sober military governor and administrator of the highest level for the kingdoms of Assyria and Babylonia, a wise and kindly man who practised almsgiving, Ahikar will be transformed through later legend into a sage of enyclopædic knowledge - an ancient Leonardo da Vinci, so to speak - especially as we trace him in Part Two through his ‘Islamic’ guises. Ahikar transformed Here is the fantastic Story of Ahikar: https://sacred-texts.com/bib/fbe/fbe259.htm Ahikar, Grand Vizier of Assyria, has 60 wives but is fated to have no son. Therefore he adopts his nephew. He crams him full of wisdom and knowledge more than of bread and water. THE story of Haiqâr [Ahiqar] the Wise, Vizier of Sennacherib the King, and of Nadan, sister's son to Haiqâr the Sage. 2 There was a Vizier in the days of King Sennacherib, son of Sarhadum [Esarhaddon?], King of Assyria and Nineveh, a wise man named Haiqâr, and he was Vizier of the king Sennacherib. 3 He had a fine, fortune and much goods, and he was skilful, wise, a philosopher, in knowledge, in opinion and in government, and he had married sixty women, and had built a castle for each of them. 4 But with it all he had no child by any. of these women, who might be his heir. 5 And he was very sad on account of this, and one day he assembled the astrologers and the learned men and the wizards and explained to them his condition and the matter of his barrenness. 6 And they said to him, 'Go, sacrifice to the gods and beseech them that perchance they may provide thee with a boy.' 7 And he did as they told him and offered sacrifices to the idols, and besought them and implored them with request, and entreaty. 8 And they answered him not one word. And he went away sorrowful and dejected, departing with a pain at his heart. 9 And he returned, and implored the Most High God, and believed, beseeching Him with a burning in his heart, saying, 'O Most High God, O Creator of the Heavens and of the earth, O Creator of all created things! 10 I beseech Thee to give me a boy, that I may be consoled by him that he may be present at my heath, that he may close my eyes, and that he may bury me.' 11 Then there came to him a voice saying, 'Inasmuch as thou hast relied first of all on graven images, and hast offered sacrifices to them, for this reason thou shalt remain childless thy life long. 12 But take Nadan thy sister's son, and make him thy child and teach him thy learning and thy good breeding, and at thy death he shall bury thee.' 13 Thereupon he took Nadan his sister's son, who was a little suckling. And he handed him over to eight wet-nurses, that they might suckle him and bring him up. 14 And they brought him up with good food and gentle training and silken clothing, and purple and crimson. And he was seated upon couches of silk. 15 And when Nadan grew big and walked, shooting up like a tall cedar, he taught him good manners and writing and science and philosophy. 16 And after many days King Sennacherib looked at Haiqâr and saw that he had grown very old, and moreover he said to him. 17 'O my honoured friend, the skilful, the trusty, the wise, the governor, my secretary, my vizier, my Chancellor and director; verily thou art grown very old and weighted with years; and thy departure from this world must be near. 18 Tell me who shall have a place in my service after thee.' And Haiqâr said to him, 'O my lord, may thy head live for ever! There is Nadan my sister's son, I have made him my child. 19 And I have brought him up and taught him my wisdom and my knowledge.' 20 And the king said to him, 'O Haiqâr! bring him to my presence, that I may see him, and if I find him suitable, put him in thy place; and thou shalt go thy way, to take a rest and to live the remainder of thy life in sweet repose.' 21 Then Haiqâr went and presented Nadan his sister's son. And he did homage and wished him power and honour. 22 And he looked at him and admired him and rejoiced in him and said to Haiqâr: 'Is this thy son, O Haiqâr? I pray that God may preserve him. And as thou hast served me and my father Sarhadum so may this boy of thine serve me and fulfil my undertakings, my needs, and my business, so that I may honour him and make him powerful for thy sake.' 23 And Haiqâr did obeisance to the king and said to him, 'May thy head live, O my lord the king, for ever! I seek from thee that thou mayst be patient with my boy Nadan and forgive his mistakes that he may serve thee as it is fitting.' 24 Then the king swore to him that he would make him the greatest of his favourites, and the most powerful of his friends, and that he should be with him in all honour and respect. And he kissed his hands and bade him farewell. 25 And he took Nadan. his sister's son with him and seated him in a parlour and set about teaching him night and day till he had crammed him with wisdom and knowledge more than with bread and water. [End of quote] There follows a list of maxims, some of which are straight out of Tobit 4. We read more about the Story of Ahikar from professor Susan Niditch at: https://www.thetorah.com/article/joseph-interprets-pharaohs-dreams-an-israelite-type-922-folktale …. In brief, the story tells about an Assyrian [sic] wise man named Ahiqar, who served at the courts of Sennacherib and his son Esarhaddon. As Ahiqar has no son, he adopts his nephew Nadan and treats him as his own son, and asks Esarhaddon to accept Nadan as his counselor upon Ahiqar’s retirement. Nadan, however, deals treacherously with his uncle, accusing him of disloyalty to the king. Esarhaddon orders an officer by the name of Nabu-šuma-iškun to find Ahiqar and execute him, but as Ahiqar had once saved Nabu-šuma-iškun’s life in the past, he asks for reciprocity in return. Nabu-šuma-iškun agrees, kills one of his own slaves to fake Ahiqar’s death, and hides Ahiqar in a makeshift prison, where he lives as a castaway or outcast. …. News of the great wise man Ahiqar’s “death” reaches the ears of the Pharaoh of Egypt, who sees an opportunity to hurt his Assyrian rival. The Pharaoh challenges Esarhaddon with a riddle-like trial or wager: Egypt would like to build a castle in the air. If Esarhaddon can send him someone who knows how to do this, Egypt will pay three years of taxes to Assyria, but if Assyria cannot send Egypt someone with this knowhow, Assyria must pay three years’ taxes to Egypt. The story continues in a classic Type 922 fashion: Esarhaddon is furious with Nadan, since he cannot solve the riddle, and bemoans his rash decision to have Ahiqar executed. Nabu-šuma-iškun hears this, and, in a manner reminiscent of the cupbearer in the Joseph story, tells the king that he can produce Ahiqar, who will certainly know the answer. Ahiqar appears before Esarhaddon, and the king sends him to Egypt. After a long session of answering riddles, Pharaoh tells Ahiqar to build the castle in the air. Ahiqar sends two boys up on eagles, who call down to the Egyptians that they should hand them some bricks and they will start building. Pharaoh says it is impossible to get bricks to people all the way up in the sky, to which Ahiqar replies that if he can’t even get the bricks to his builders, how are they supposed to build the castle. The story ends with Pharaoh paying the tribute to Assyria, Esarhaddon reinstating Ahiqar as advisor, and Nadan dying a cruel death. …. Part Two: Polymathic scholars of Golden Age based upon Ahikar In the history of Islam, the history of philosophy and science, we encounter a handful of polymaths of the Golden Age (c. 800-1300 AD), who, I believe, are simply based upon a greatly embellished and legend-enhanced Ahikar. As we read in Part One, Ahikar has been transformed by legend and embellishment from being a sober military governor and administrator of the highest level for the kingdoms of Assyria and Babylonia, a wise and kindly man who practised almsgiving, into a sage of enyclopædic knowledge - an ancient Leonardo da Vinci, so to speak - and a wonder worker. Islamic Golden Age polymaths In the history of Islam, the history of philosophy and science, we encounter a handful of polymaths of the Golden Age (c. 800-1300 AD), who, I believe, are simply based upon a greatly embellished and legend-enhanced Ahikar. In the same sort of fashion has Ahikar’s c. 700 BC contemporary, the Simeonite Judith, been chronologically projected forward so as to become a supposed Ethiopian queen of c. 900 AD, Gudit (or Judith). The handful of presumed Islamic scholars of the Golden Age to whom I refer are the polymathic Al-Kindi (c. 800); Al-Razi (c. 850); Al-Farabi (c. 900); Avicenna (c. 1000); Averroes (c. 1150); and Ibn Khaldun c. 1300). In these famous names is largely encompassed Islamic philosophy, science, astronomy, cosmology, history, demography, medicine and music for the Golden Age. Now, I find in four of these six names elements of Ahikar’s Assyro-Babylonian names: Esagil-kinni-ubba and Aba-enlil-dari. Thus: Al-Kindi – Esagil-Kinni; Al-Farabi – Enlil-Dar-Ab(i); Avicenna – Ubb-kinni(a); Averroes – Aba-(d)ar(i) This now becomes a huge extension of the already over-stretched Ahikar of legend and pseudo-history, including his influence upon the Koran. If I am correct in identifying Ahikar with at least four of these famed six intellectuals of the so-called Islamic Golden Age, then this will have enormous ramifications for the history of philosophy and science, and, indeed, for the authenticity of Islam.

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.).