The Bible and the Hittites, Exploding another 'Biblical Archaeology' Myth.

Mark Twain when told his obituary was published in a newspaper is reported to have said, "The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated." Now as far as the "archaeology myth" being "exploded" I would say the report of the explosion was greatly exagerrated.The author of this string wrote:"To claim that the biblical Hittites are the same Hittites that were found at Boghazkoy in Turkey is simply untrue, they are NOT the same people...""I think it is time that that misinformed people stopped spreading this untruth and that this misconception was finally laid to rest."I will agree that many people are not as informed as they could be regarding the Hittites but it seems as though the author has neglected to do a thorough search through the available literature and web resources himself or has merely looked for data to support his position.I would say that there seems to be evidence against there being an "archeological myth...explosion" in terms of the archaeology and other disciplines. For one we must remember that Bible archaeology has its limitations at this point in time. A website provides the following useful commentary:"Most of the great Near Eastern archives were destroyed in antiquity through wars, looters, natural disasters or the ravages of time. To this we must add the limitation that less than 2% of sites in Israel have been excavated and hundreds more will never be excavated due to lack of access or resources and destruction through building projects, military maneuvers, and pillaging by Bedouins."taken from: imja.com - This website is for sale! - imja Juin Resources and Information.Given the information offered in the above paragraph, I would say there is some uncertainty regarding the Hittite migrations in regards to Israel.Here is a relief that the Israel Museum in Jerusalem says is Hittite art and it is dated at 1700 B.C. according to Professor Humble:http://www.knls.org/English/trascripts/humble03.htmWe must also consider the data that Forrer provided that would indicate that the Hittites that were found at Boghazkoy in Turkey may also have been the Biblical Hittites given at a website below:"Migration of Hittites: In 1936 Forrer interpreted a Hittite inscription from the 14th century B.C. by King Mursilis II that spoke of a migration into Egyptian territory as the origin of Palestinian Hittites. Although this referred to a much earlier time when Palestine was Egyptian territory, it was not likely as early as the Abraham. However, there is nothing that would have prevented another undocumented immigration to Palestine at an earlier date."taken from:
Free Website Building Software | Create a Website - HomesteadGiven the lion and dog relief in the Israel Museum in Jerusalem which Professor Humble mentions perhaps the above paragraph should at least be considered.The Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia states that the scholars Lehman and and Tucker "detected traces of Hittite real estate procedure in the transaction between Ephron and Abraham" (Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia, Moody Press, 1983, page 800).In addition, a website offers some commentary readers may wish to consider regarding this matter:Archaeology and the Old TestamentThe Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia also states the the Indo European Hittites who entered Anotolia received their name by accident by virtue of settling in territory previously held by a non-Indo-European group called the Hatti-people. I mention this not to support a Indo European Hittite migration to Palestine but to explain how they got their name.Now it is true that the Wycliffe Bible Encylopedia states that usually the references to Hittites in the Bible refer to the sons of Heth which a "relatively unimportant group living in Palestine since the days of the Partriarchs." (Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia, Moody Press, 1983, page 799) it is clealy not as dogmatic as the author of this string was and offers evidence that may indicate that Indo-European Hittites who entered Anotolia may have immigrated to central Palestine. It does seem the Hittites play a more minor role in the Bible than some groups (Wycliffe calls them "relatively unimportant") because my Strong commentary had 20 plus references to the word Hittites whereas the word Amorites had 70 plus references. Now given the current fragmentary nature of the archaeological evidence mentioned above plus the other information I mentioned, I do believe Wycliffe is being judicious in regards to their stated views on the subject.So while it may be true that the "sons of Heth" may usually be the Biblical Hittites there is not enough certainty in my opinion and the opinion of the Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia to make categorical statements.Sincerely,Ken[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 02-29-2004]

To: BrianRe: "could you perhaps make sure that a reply is in its final form before you post it?"I have no problem with this request. I have decided to be more reliant on the preview function and compose my material when I have all my resources available. Although I did edit this post, I assure you this post will be the exception that proves the rule.Sincerely,Ken[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 03-01-2004]

Dear Brian:It is absolutely true that Professor Humble said it may be Hittite art. But is Professor Humble alone in his estimation? According to Professor Humble, absolutely not. I think you are being very selective in your response to the website information. Please read the quotes below from this website: http://www.knls.org/English/trascripts/humble03.htm"The Israel Museum has labeled the relief Hittite art."Here is the specific Museum plus information where the artifact was discovered:"I’ve visited the Israel Museum in Jerusalem many times, and I have often stopped to look at a relief carved in stone that was discovered at Beth Shan, about 20 miles south of the Sea of Galilee."Plus you fail to give the reasons why Professor Humble is of the opinion of why it is Hittite art:"Then archaeologists discovered the Hittite city of Hattusas in Turkey, and now we know that the Hittites were a powerful people around 1500 BC. But back to the stone relief of the lion and dog. Remember that it was discovered at Beth Shan near the Sea of Galilee and goes back to about 1700 BC. And it may be Hittite art. It looks very much like Hittite relief's that I have seen in the museums in Istanbul and Ankara. And lions are often pictured in Hittite art."And again, according to Professor humble the Israel Museum in Jerusalem concurs:"The Israel Museum has labeled the relief Hittite art."I just see your response as more indication that you do not want to address information that is contrary to your stated views. It comes to no surprise to me that it is reflected in the type of research you did.Lastly, I see these as strawman:"To suggest that archaeology is used by itself to undermine the bible is a misrepresentation of the facts."Because of what I said later:"The Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia states that the scholars Lehman and and Tucker "detected traces of Hittite real estate procedure in the transaction between Ephron and Abraham" (Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia, Moody Press, 1983, page 800)."I believe the above section of my post at least partly deals with textual analysis in regards to scholars.Here is the second strawman:"The archaeological evidence in relation to the Hittites of Boghazkoy is not fragmentary,"I never said it was fragmentary. There is a lot of data in Turkey for example. I was pointing to the possible migration and possible existence in Palestine as far as the fragmentary nature of archeology in many cases. I also clearly gave evidence which you never found due to the type of research efforts you made.Also, Wycliffe gives diverse views regarding the presence of Indo European Hittites in Palestine. I clearly said this.I do agree with this statement though:"So, while your source may well be correct in his estimation of the percentage of possible archaeological sites,"If you want to know where his 2% figure comes from then I suggest regarding the sources given in the authors endnotes or you can write to office@imja.com .Lastly, Re: "I have no idea why Forrer arrives at this conclusion, I have no idea what particular inscription you are talking about or what it says. These are the sort of things that you need to present in your argument, if you do not have the explanation of why Forrer comes to his conclusions you could at least provide bibliographical details so I can have a look for myself. Do you even know Forrer's Christian name?"Please use the endnotes the website author provided.SUMMARYI see a lack of willingness to address the information I provided. I think the total avoidance of the Israel Musuem in Jersusalem concurring opinion according to Professor Humble is great evidence of this. I offer no further commentary as the author of the string is posting a voluminous response without really truly addressing what I posted plus he is setting up strawmen.[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 03-02-2004]